forked from gregorycrane/Homerica
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy pathpharr-ocr.txt
26702 lines (19201 loc) · 945 KB
/
pharr-ocr.txt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
A BOOK FOR BEGINNERS
BY
CLYDE PHARR
Ph.D., Yale University
PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN SOUTHWESTERN
PRESBYTERIAN UNIVERSITY
To love Homer, as Steele said about loving a
fair lady of quality, “ is a liberal education.”
— Andrew Lang
D. C. HEATH & CO., PUBLISHERS
BOSTON NEW YORK CHICAGO
<pb/>Copyright, 1920, by
Clyde Pharr
All rights reserved
2 <pb n="10"/>THE MEMORY OF
THOMAS DAY SEYMOUR
PROFOUND SCHOLAR
SYMPATHETIC AND INSPIRING TEACHER
LOVER OF HOMER
AND OF ALL THINGS TRUE AND
BEAUTIFUL
<pb/>PREFACE
This book, now offered to the public, is the fruit of seven years
of experimentation and of much counsel with those interested in
the plan which it embodies.
It has already gone through four mimeographed editions, and
has been used for several years: in Ohio Wesleyan University,
in Oberlin College, and in Southwestern Presbyterian University.
In all these cases it has had marked success in creating and sustaining
interest in beginning Greek, where the crux of the whole
problem of the future of Hellenic studies lies.
The reasons which have conyinced the author of the necessity
for basing the work of beginners on Homeric instead of on Attic
Greek will be found in a paper, entitled “A Year—or more —
of Greek,” published in the Classical Journal for February, 1918,
and in a second paper, “Homer and the Study of Greek,” which
is printed in this book, following the table of contents. To all
who may be interested in the subject, from the standpoint of
humanistic studies, the author would heartily commend the reading
of Andrew Lang’s delightful little essay, “Homer and the Study
of Greek,” published in his collection of Essays in Little.
It is hardly to be hoped that a book of this kind, which seeks to
establish a new path to our common goal, will be so free from minor
errors as would one along the old established lines. Hence the
author will be profoundly grateful to those who will be generous
enough to make suggestions looking toward the betterment of the
work as well as to those who will be kind enough to point out any
errors. Naturally, in a work of this nature, there is the constantly
recurring problem of how to reconcile most successfully effective
pedagogy and scientific accuracy of statement.
The book does not pretend to be a text where the advanced
Homeric scholar will find catalogued every stray Homeric form, or
v
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
supposedly Homeric form, but its first object is to teach beginners
to read Greek intelligently and with pleasure.
It is not intended that the ordinary student shall master all the
grammar found in this text: much of it is for reference only. But
certainly every teacher should have at least this much Homeric
grammar thoroughly at command and be overflowing with it, not,
however, to the extent of attempting to teach all of it. The prime
object of first year work, as so admirably stated by Prof. Gildersleeve,
is “a maximum of forms, a minimum of syntax, and early
acquaintance with Greek in the mass.” To gain this object, it
is necessary to read, read, read Greek.
In the paradigms and vocabularies, both simple and compound
forms of verbs are used to supplement each other, and a free use
of analogy is employed, as is commonly done in books of this
kind. In the verbal forms, the augment is regularly supplied when
missing. t
Those opposed to the employment of prose sentences in Homeric
language will find it easy to omit these; but the author is convinced
that a better grasp of Homeric forms can be secured by
their use.
After this book is completed successfully, any one of several
roads is open for a continuation of the Greek course:
(1) Probably the most satisfactory method is to continue for
some time with Homer, reading copious extracts from the Iliad
and Odyssey. The student is now well prepared to handle successfully
the standard school editions of these.
(2) The passage from Homer to the Attic Drama is an easy one,
and is the most satisfactory introduction to the Attic dialect.
This is the course which the author would strongly recommend, as
most likely to be of the greatest value and as having probably the
strongest appeal to the most students. Euripides furnishes the
easiest reading, and several of his plays have been published in
convenient form with vocabularies (Longmans, Green & Co.),
and with both vocabularies and notes (Macmillan & Co.). This
could be followed by any one of several possibilities, some more
drama, Plato, or the New Testament.
vi
<pb/>PREFACE
(3) Some Herodotus could now be read with not much difficulty,
and his work would admirably supplement the Homeric stories.
(4) It is quite possible to read some Plato now, using a good
edition of one of the dialogues, with vocabulary and notes, such as
that of Seymour and Dyer.
(5) Many will find a strong appeal in the Lyric Poets, which
are very easy after a fair amount of Homer and contain some of the
choicest gems in all Greek literature.
(6) Some may want to read Hesiod, who is the easiest of all
authors after Homer. His' importance has not always been
recognized, and he has been entirely too much neglected in our
colleges.
(7) The New Testament could be studied to good advantage
after Homer, and is recommended to those intending to enter the
ministry.
(8) Those who are wedded to Xenophon, who teach him with
success, and who feel that he must come early in the course, will
find Homer a much better preparation for Xenophon than Xenophon
is for Homer. There are a number of good school editions,
and students can now read rapidly considerable quantities of the
Anabasis, or of any of the other works of Xenophon.
Other things being equal, the teacher should of course select
the author in which he has the greatest interest and for which he
has the most enthusiasm. He will find the work not only much
easier, but more successful as well.
To all who have assisted, directly or indirectly, in the production
of the present book, the author would here express his sincerest
appreciation and gratitude. Lack of space prevents giving a
complete list of names, but the author feels that special mention
is due to Prof. Francis G. Allinson of Brown University, for generously
reading the whole of the manuscript and for making many
helpful suggestions; to Prof. Samuel E. Bassett of the University
of Vermont, and to Prof. Edward Fitch of Hamilton College, who
also went over the manuscript and made many valuable criticisms ;
to Prof. Walter Petersen of Bethany College, whose help on a number
of grammatical problems has been invaluable; to Miss Mabel
vii
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
Drennan of the Swanton, Ohio, High School, for making the whole
of the two general vocabularies; to Prof. Shirley Smith of Oberlin
College and Mr. Joseph Adameç, graduate student at Yale, for
checking up the vocabulary; to Mr. W. J. Millard, student at
Southwestern Presbyterian University, for verifying the Biblical
quotations; to Prof. Wilmot Haines Thompson of Acadia University,
for reading the manuscript, making a number of valuable suggestions,
and for much valuable assistance in reading proof; to Prof.
Leigh Alexander of Oberlin College, who has generously placed
at the disposal of the author the results of two years of experience
with the book in his classes, who has read all the proof and has
saved the book from a number of errors; to the Boston Museum of
Fine Arts, for the loan of some unusually fine photographs for
illustrations; to D. C. Heath & Co., for the use of illustrations from
Webster’s Ancient History, one of their texts; to Prof. Frank E.
Robbins of the University of Michigan, and to the Classical
Journal, for permission to use Prof. Robbins’s valuable statistics
on Greek verb forms, which appeared in the Classical Journal,
15, 2; to Dr. Alice Braunlich of the Davenport High School, to
Prof. G. B. Waldrop of the Westminster School, and to Dr. D. W.
Abercrombie, recently of Worcester Academy, for help in reading
the proof; and to the J. S. Cushing Company (The Norwood
Press) for their very careful and painstaking typographical work.
If this book will contribute to the value and interest of the study
of beginning Greek, the author will feel that his seven years of
work upon it have not been spent in vain. The time has come
when lovers of the humanities everywhere must join hands in
the promotion of the common cause. If anything seems to be of
mutual advantage, we must first test it carefully and then hold
fast to it if we find it good. Then, to all teachers of Greek and
every true friend of humanistic studies and of culture in its best
sense, the author would say in conclusion:
<cit><quote><l>Vive, vale. Si quid novisti rectius istis,</l>
<l>Candidus imperti; si non, his utere mecum.</l><bibl n="Horace, Epistles I :6, 67–68"/></cit>
<pb/>CONTENTS
SECTION
Preface ........
Table of Contents ......
Homer and the Study of Greek
Introduction.................
Lesson
1. Introductory ...... 1-4
2. Syllables, accents, elision, punctuation,
and transliteration .... 5-7
3. Nouns of the first declension. . . 8-12
4. Noun's of the first declension (continued) 13-17
5. The present active indicative of verbs
in -ω............................18-22
6. The second declension . . . . ' 23-27
7. Review.............................28-32
8. Second declension (continued) . . . 33-39
9. The imperfect of verbs in -ω . . . 40-44
10. The future and aorist of verbs in -ω . 45-49
11. Masculine nouns of the first declen-
sion, compound verbs .... 50-54
12. Review.............................55-57
13. Nouns of the third declension; Iliad
1-5..................................- 58-64
14. Prosody, the Greek hexameter; Iliad 1-5 65-77
15. Third declension (continued); Iliad 1-10 78-84
16. Present and future, middle and passive of
verbs. Deponent verbs; Iliad 11-16 . 85-91
17. The imperfect, middle and passive, and
the aorist middle of verbs ; Iliad 17-21 92-98
18. The perfect and pluperfect active of
verbs.......................' . . 99-103
19. The infinitive; Iliad 22-27 . . . 104-110
20. Participles, active; Iliad 28-32 . . 111-117
21. Middle and passive participles; Iliad
33-37 ................................. 118-124
22. The perfect, pluperfect, and future per-
fect of verbs ; Iliad 38-42 . . . 125-131
PAQE
V
ix
xiii
xxix
1
3
3
4
6
7
9
11
13
14
16
18
21
24
27
30
33
36
37
40
44
47
IX
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
SECTION
23. The subjunctive mode of verbs ; Iliad
43-47 .................................. 132-139
24. Imperative verbs, active; Iliad 48-52 . 140-146
25. Middle and passive imperative of verbs;
Iliad 53-58 147-153
26. The optative mode ; Iliad 59-63 . . 154-161
27. The passive voice ; Iliad 64-69 . . 162-169
28. Adjectives of the third declension ; Iliad
70-75 .................................. 170-177
29. Demonstrative pronouns; Iliad 76-80 . 178-184
30. Personal and possessive pronouns ; Iliad
81-85 . 185-191
31. Relative, interrogative, and indef-
inite pronouns ; Iliad 86-92 . . . 192-198
32. Regular verbs in -μι; Iliad 93-100 . . 199-205
33. Regular verbs in -μι (continued), Iliad
101-108 .............................. 206-212
34. Review of regular -μι verbs, Iliad 109-117 213-219
35. Irregular verbs in -μι, ιΐμΐ, and en-
clitics ; Iliad 118-125 .... 220-227
36. Irregular verbs ; Iliad 126-132 . . 228-237
37. Prepositions; Iliad 133-141 . . . 238-244
38. Comparison of adjectives; Iliad 142-151 245-251
39. Formation and comparison of adverbs;
Iliad 152-157 252-258
40. Numerals; Iliad 158-164 .... 259-265
41. Present, future, and first aorist system
of verbs ; Iliad 165-172 .... 266-272
42. The second aorist, and first and second
perfect systems of verbs; Iliad 173-181 273-279
43. The perfect middle system of verbs ; Iliad
182-192 280-286
44. First and second passive systems of verbs ;
Iliad 193-200 287-293
45. Present, future, and aorist systems of
-μι verbs ; Iliad 201-211 .... 294-300
46. First and second perfect systems of -μι
verbs ; Iliad 212-222 .... 301-307
47. The middle and passive of -μι verbs ; Iliad
223-232 308-314
48. Review of nouns ; Iliad 233-239 . . 315-321
49. Review of adjectives ; Iliad 240-244 . 322-328
50
53
57
59
62
67
69
72
74
77
81
83
87
91
95
98
101
104
107
109
112
115
118
121
124
127
129
X
<pb/>CONTENTS
50. Review of pronouns ; Iliad 245-249 SECTION 329-335 PAGE 131
51. Review of participles and Iliad 250-259 INFINITIVES ; 336-342 134
52. Review of verbs in the active 260-268 Iliad 343-349 137
53. Review of verbs in the middle 269-289 Iliad 350-356 140
54. Review of verbs in the passive 290-303 Iliad 357-361 144
55. Review of irregular verbs conjugation ; Iliad 304-314 OF THE -μι 362-366 147
56. Iliad 315-333. . 367-370 149
57. Iliad 334-347 , , 371-374 151
58. Iliad 348-358 375-378 153
59. Iliad 359-379 , , 379-382 157
60. Iliad 380-400 383-386 160
61. Iliad 401-412 . 387-390 163
62. Iliad 413-424 , , 391-394 165
63. Iliad 425-435 . 395-398 168
64. Iliad 436-449 , , 399-402 169
65. Iliad 450-461 403-406 171
66. Iliad 462-470 , , 407-410 173
67. Iliad 471-479 , 411-414 174
68. Iliad 480-489 415-418 176
69. Iliad 490-499 419-422 178
70. Iliad 500-516 , 423-426 180
71. Iliad 517-527 . , 427-430 182
72. Iliad 528-535 431-434 184
73. Iliad 536-550 . . 435-438 187
74. Iliad 551-572 439-442 189
75. Iliad 573-589 443-446 192
76. Iliad 590-598 , . 447-450 194
77. Iliad 599-611 451-454 197
Introduction to Attic Greek . • r 456-500 198
Grammar of Homeric Greek , « 501-1192 207
Greek-English vocabulary , , 343
English-Greek vocabulary 380
<pb/>HOMER AND THE STUDY OF GREEK
In an article entitled “A Year—or more— of Greek,” contributed
to the February, 1918, number of the Classical Journal,
the author sets forth a few of the more important reasons why
the present system of teaching beginners in Greek should be
revised to meet modern conditions. The sum and substance of
the article was a plea for the abandonment of Xenophon for beginning
work, something which should have been done years ago,
and the substitution of Homer in his place. The paper embodied
the results of several years of experimentation; and the primary
reason urged for the change was based on the comparative literary
value of the two authors and their appeal to beginning students.
As we view the situation to-day, we are compelled to confess that
in the hands of the average teacher, when applied to the average
student, Xenophon and all his works are all too often found to be
tedious and dreary. This leaves out of count the exceptional
teacher, who has large and enthusiastic classes in the Anabasis
year after year, for such teachers could make any subject fascinating.
Homer on the other hand possesses those qualities which
make him especially interesting, as well as of permanent value, to
the majority of students who still take Greek.
In this connection the author may be permitted to quote from
the article just mentioned:1 “The reasons which make Homer
so desirable are apparent when once the question is seriously
considered. His work is homogeneous in vocabulary, in literary
style and idioms employed, and in metrical form; so that when
students once get a fair start in him, further progress becomes
easier and more accelerated. He employs all three persons, with
all modes and tenses of the verb, so that all forms that are learned
1 C. J. 13, 5.
XXIX
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
are used enough to be kept fresh in the students’ mind and do not
have to be learned again when they begin anything which is in
dialogue form. His vocabulary is fairly limited, enough so in
fact that it does not present any special difficulty to the beginner.
His sentences are short, simple, and clear-cut, having none of the
involved structure which makes so much of Xenophon really too
difficult for first-year work. The verse, which has been considered
a bar, is an actual help, as it is quite easily learned and is a marked
aid in memorizing considerable portions of Greek, which is important
at this stage. Furthermore, the rules of quantity are a
considerable help in simplifying and illustrating the principles of
accent. As he uses only one type of verse, and that the simplest
— the dactylic hexameter — the ordinary student usually becomes
quite adept at reading this before the end of the first year’s work.
“The prose composition for the first year’s work may be based
upon Homer, the students using Homeric forms and constructions,
without knowing of the existence of any other kind. This may be
done without the slightest fear of blunting their sense of discrimination
between poetic and prose diction and style, a sense
which cannot possibly be developed until they have had several
years’ work and have read a considerable amount of Greek in both
prose and poetry. Homer is so straightforward and simple in
what he has to say, with nothing obscure, mystical, or far-fetched
in any way, that he is quite intelligible to the average high-school
freshman; and at the same time he possesses the qualities of high
literary art in such a marked degree that he appeals strongly to
the oldest and most advanced members of any college class.
"Furthermore, Homer is the best possible preparation for all
later Greek literature, much of which is unintelligible without
a fair knowledge of him. He was to Greek literature what the
Bible has been to English, and a great deal more as well. He leads
us somewhere, not merely into a blind alley as does Xenophon,
both with reference to later Greek literature and to much of the
best in later European literature as well, where his influence has
been incalculable and perhaps greater than that of any other
single writer. In him are the germs of so many things. We have
xiv
<pb/>HOMER AND THE STUDY OF GREEK
the narrative highly developed, the beginning of the drama,
oratory, statecraft, seamanship, war, adventure, and religion —
in fact, life as it was to the old Greeks in its manifold aspects.
“ Then the student who has taken only a very little of beginning
Greek, even if he has progressed no farther than the end of the
first book of the Iliad, has come into vital contact with the magic
and the music of the Greek language, used in one of the most
beautiful, one of the most varied, and one of the most influential
literary compositions of all ages; and though he may have devoted
considerable labor to mining the gold, he cannot, truthfully say,
and probably will not want to say, that Greek for him has been a
waste of time.”
To begin the study of Greek with Homer, it would be necessary
to substitute Homeric for Attic Greek for the work of the first year:
the student would be taught Homeric forms and constructions as a
basis for future work, and would devote to the study of Homer
the time which is now occupied by Xenophon. It is the purpose
of the present paper to develop more in detail some of the most
important reasons which make such a change not only desirable
but imperative if Greek is to be saved as a vital factor in our educational
system.
The idea of such a plan first suggested itself to the writer several
years ago, when, full of boundless enthusiasm Ύογ his subject
and for all things Greek, he was attempting to teach first-year
work and Xenophon, and was compelled to admit to himself that
his efforts were not meeting noth what might be called success.
Too many good students refused to take Greek in the first place,
and of those who did enlist, too many, even of the better ones, were
discouraged by the unending round of grammatical forms, leading
up to an author whose works are not of a nature to fire the imagination
and stir the hearts in the breasts of our youth, as can be,
and is, done by the great masterpieces of Hellas such as the Iliad
and the Odyssey.
The writer would like to make it plain that he is not a hater of
Xenophon, but that he greatly enjoyed his first year of Greek,
taken in the old way, as well as his Xenophon, later. The same
xv
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
is probably true of most classical scholars. This goes a long way
toward explaining why they are now teaching Greek and Latin
instead of sociology or mechanical engineering. It would be distinctly
misleading however for those who have a special taste
for linguistic work and who enjoyed reading the production of
such authors as Caesar and Xenophon to infer therefrom that
their case is at all typical of the mass of students who take these
subjects. Although the description in Andrew Lang’s essay,
“Homer and the Study of Greek,” is probably too highly colored,
the account that he gives of his own experience and that of his
fellows in the study of beginning Greek and Xenophon ought to
have a lesson and a warning for every one who is still a friend of
the classics. He makes it quite plain that they found Xenophon
anything but inspiring, and that most of them thoroughly hated
him, an experience of many good students, which is too common
to be ignored.
It is only fair to state that although this idea of beginning Greek
with the reading of Homer is original with the writer, it is not
new. This was the regular method employed by the old Romans
in teaching their boys Greek, and it was highly commended by
that capable and judicious old schoolmaster, Quintilian, as the
best possible plan. Since that time it has been used now and then
by some of the world’s ablest educators and scholars. It was thus
that Joseph Scaliger (de la Scala), one of the most brilliant
names in the whole history of classical scholarship, taught himself
Greek at Paris; and many more of the great scholars of the past
learned their Greek through Homer. It was tried also by Herbart,
who began a series of experiments in Switzerland, in 1797, where he
employed this method with marked success in private tutoring.
Later he continued his experiments on a larger scale in the teachers’
training college at Koenigsberg, with such good results that he
was thoroughly convinced that this was the only suitable method
of teaching beginning Greek. At his suggestion it was tried by
Dissen, by Ferdinand Ranke, and by Hummel, all of whom were
hearty in its praise; and, most important of all, by Ahrens, at
Hanover, where it was used for thirty years (1850-1881), with
xvi
<pb/>National Museum, Athens
These beautiful objects were found in 1888 A.D., within a "bee-hive” tomb at Vaphio in Laconia. The two cups are of beaten gold, ornamented with
designs in repousse work. The first scene represents a wild-bull hunt. The comp-mion piece pictures four tame bulls under the care of a herdsman
<pb/>HOMER AND THE STUDY OF GREEK
great success, but was finally abandoned because of the lack of
suitable text books and because of the opposition of other Gymnasia
which refused to adopt such a revolutionary plan. It has also
been recommended occasionally, but without success, by other
scholars and humanists, notably by Goethe, by Andrew Lang,
and by Wilamowitz, in Europe; while in America it has been
advocated in one form or another by Seymour, Bolling, Shorey,
Lane Cooper, and others. But hitherto no systematic series of
text books has been issued which are so well adapted to carry the
students through Homer and introduce them to Attic Greek as the
ones which have been worked out in connection with Xenophon.
It has become highly important that this lack be supplied, if possible,
in order that this plan, which has been tried by several
with such good success, may be tested on a wider scale, so that we
may see whether or no it will succeed in the hands of the average
teacher of beginning Greek. Thus students should be prepared
to strike immediately into the heart of Greek literature, instead
of having to go a long way around, as at present.
As to the superiority of Homer over Xenophon, from the standpoint
of literary values, and of interest for the average student,
there can be no quarrel. It remains for us to investigate the
relative advantages and demerits of each as mediums for teaching
the language.
In the first place it is essential that we disabuse our minds of the
once prevalent notion, long since exploded, but still more or less
consciously held by many, that the Attic dialect is the norm by
which all other Greek is to be judged. The language of Homer is
earlier and naturally differs from it in many essentials; therefore
it was long maintained that Homeric Greek is irregular, crude and
unfinished. Hellenistic Greek, which represents a later development
of the language, has its differences; therefore Hellenistic
Greek must be degenerate. Such an idea is utterly unscientific
and ignores completely the modern historical point of view of the
development and growth of languages. Any period which has
given birth to literary productions of surpassing merit and artistic
excellence is justified by its own works; it contains its own lin-
xvii
<pb/>HOMEEIC GKEEK
guistic standards, and will richly repay those who take the trouble
to study it. To call Homeric Greek anomalous and irregular,
because it differs in some particulars from the Attic dialect, is as
misleading as it would be to say that the language of Shakespeare
is immature and eccentric because he does not write the same type
of English as does George Ade or Stephen Leacock. As a matter
of fact, the language of the Homeric poems is quite as finished, has
quite as many virtues, and is quite as much of a norm for its
period and style of composition as Xenophon is for his; and the
different forms in Homer are no more aberrations on his part than
those of Xenophon are marks of degeneracy for him. And Attic
Greek, after all, is but one of a number of dialects, coming at neither
end but in the middle of the development of the Greek language.
It is rarely found pure in any of the great authors, and in none
which are suitable for beginners.
According to our present system, students are taught a smattering
of Attic Greek. Then they are given a smattering of Homer,
who represents a period several centuries earlier. Then again
comes some more Attic Greek, and if the student continues in his
work he usually gets some Doric, with sometimes a little Lesbian,
and the Ionic of Herodotus, to which is commonly added a dash
of the Koine for further confusing variety. All of this comes at
such times and at such points in his development that it is practically
impossible for the ordinary student to obtain a clear conception
of what the Greek language is like and what are the fundamental
processes of its development. As a result grammar becomes
a nightmare to be dreaded instead of an opportunity to study the
structure of one of the most interesting and instructive languages
in existence. This has reference to the linguistic features, apart
from its literary value. If on the other hand we begin with Homer
and obtain a good grounding in his language, the transition from
that to later Greek is simple and natural and in accordance with
well-established laws, so that a student who once gets a grasp
of the processes involved not only has acquired a valuable scientific
point of view, but he might be untrue enough to the traditions of
countless students of the past to find Greek grammar interesting.
xviii
<pb/>HOMER AND THE STUDY OF GREEK
Furthermore, since most of us learned our Attic Greek first,
when we came to Homeric Greek and found so many different
forms, the feeling very naturally arose with many that Homer has
many more forms than Attic Greek, and that they are more difficult.
On the contrary, the Homeric forms are not only simpler and more
transparent than the Attic and as a consequence more easily
learned — many Attic forms have to be explained hy a reference
to the Homeric ones — but the Homeric forms are considerably
fewer in number. This is best seen by a reference to the declensional
endings, as exemplified in the two tables, 479, 649.
From these tables we see that there are, all told, 86 Homeric
forms of the noun and adjective to be learned as against 108 Attic
forms. But this is not all. Many forms in both Attic and
Homeric Greek are so rare that it would be manifestly absurd to
compel first-year students to memorize them. For our purposes,
then, we must omit the unusually rare forms from both tables.
In the first table (479) we shall omit a number of forms which
many would include, and count only those not inclosed in brackets
which are regularly included as essential by the standard beginners’
books based on the Attic dialect. We shall not count the very
rare Homeric forms, but shall be liberal enough to include a few
which are too rare to be learned in reading Homer but are important
for students intending to read Attic Greek later. We
find then that students who' begin with Homeric Greek need to
learn only 55 forms as against 80 (88 according to some) of
the Attic. This means that it is necessary to memorize about
fifty per cent more forms in order to be able to read the first
four books of the Anabasis than it would be to read the first
six books of the Iliad. Furthermore, in the pronouns, by not
compelling the student to memorize any form which does not
occur on an average of at least once every two or three thousand
verses, there would be fewer Homeric forms to be learned here
also. The same is true of the verbs. The reflexive pronoun, for
example, and the future passive and future optative of verbs are
not found in Homer; the middle voice regularly retains the uncontracted
forms of the endingS and not in a part only as in Attic
xix
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
Greek; and in many other ways the forms are simpler and more
easily learned. In fact many books for beginners find it easier to
teach Attic Greek by a constant reference to the earlier forms,
which in many cases are the Homeric.
The occasional irregular forms, which are omitted from the
ones to be learned, should be grouped in some convenient way for
reference, but need not be memorized, as they are regularly given
in their alphabetical place in the vocabulary of any good school
edition and in the ordinary lexicons. Thus the student need
not be required to memorize the five forms of the present infinitive
of ειμί, or the five forms of the genitive of iyu>, e.g., but could
learn one of each and not burden his memory with forms which
are found in every vocabulary.
Many Atticists have maintained that the great number of
irregularities in Homeric Greek would be an added difficulty to the
beginner. It is true that they are troublesome, but not so troublesome
as the considerably greater number of irregularities in Attic
Greek. Any one who will take the trouble to count them will
find that the irregular formations in Attic Greek considerably
outnumber those in Homer. There is not space here to catalogue
the various irregularities, heteroclites, metaplastic forms, etc., of
Attic Greek, but the lists given in Kuehner-Blass, or any other of
the more elaborate Greek grammars, are enough to convince the
most skeptical.
If we leave aside the irregularities and look at a few regular
formations which must be memorized, the evidence is none the less
conclusive. For example, the “regular” declensions of such words
as πόλις, βασιλεύς, νανς, τέηχνς, αστν, comparatives in -ιων, and other
forms which will readily occur to any one who has studied Attic
Greek, are so complicated that they are not ordinarily mastered by
students of beginning Greek, and it would be rather remarkable
if they were. Or let us consider a single class, such as typical
words of the third declension in νς, as πηχνς, δίπηχνς, ηόνς, ίγχελνς,
Ιχθύς. If the student learned the declension of any one of these,
and attempted to decline the rest accordingly, he would go far
astray; for of these five words, all of the third declension, and all
xx
<pb/>HOMER AND THE STUDY OF GREEK
ending in vs in the nominative, no two are declined alike
throughout. A comparison of the declensions of lyxcXvs (eel) with
that of Ιχθνs (fish) will illustrate the point. It seems that the old
Athenians were never able to decide definitely whether an eel
was a fish or a serpent. Accordingly, we find that they declined
lyXcXvt the first half of the way like Ιχθνs, while the other
half was different. What a pity that there are not a few more
such convenient mnemonic devices to help the student keep his
bearings on his way through the maze of Greek morphology!
If a student finally learned to decline such a word as raCs, he would
not know how to begin the declension of another word formed in
the same way, such as ypavi; nor would a student who had
learned the declension of βονς in Attic Greek know the declension
of the next word like it, χονς, and he might be led
very far astray by such a simple and common word as voCs.
All of these forms, and many more which could be cited, are highly
interesting to philologists, as they illustrate so beautifully certain
abstruse principles in Greek phonology and morphology. Unfortunately
they do not usually have the same strong appeal to
the beginner who is trying very hard to learn how to read
Greek.
The whole system of contraction, which is regular at times, and
the variations caused by it in the general rules- of accent and
quantity, all of which are so confusing and so difficult to the
ordinary beginner, are so little used in Homer that they can very
profitably be omitted, or else touched quite lightly, and the time
saved can be invested elsewhere to much greater advantage.
In the field of syntax Homer is so much simpler than Xenophon
that students ordinarily find him a great deal easier. Tlius
Homer lacks the articular infinitive; long and involved passages
in indirect discourse never occur, as well as many other strange
and foreign characteristics of Attic Greek and Xenophon, all of
which give a great deal of trouble to the ordinary beginner.
These elements all contribute to a quicker and an easier learning
of Greek through Homer, as has been abundantly proved by experiments
also. Thus students who begin with Homer regularly read
xxi
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
more Greek in the time devoted to him than do those who begin
with Xenophon and spend this time on the Anabasis.
It has long been a commonly accepted myth that Homer has
such an enormous vocabulary that students would have more
than ordinary trouble with it. In fact the vocabulary of the first
six books of the Iliad is no larger than that required for reading the
Anabasis, and one can read the whole of the Homeric poems, including
the hymns, without having to learn many more words
than to read Xenophon, and without having to learn so many
words as are necessary for the reading of Plato.
There are, it is true, a great number of words in Homer which are
used only once (απαξ λεγάμενα).1 The Iliad has 1097 of these,
while the Odyssey has 868, making a total of 1965. However,
this is not nearly so large as the number used by Xenophon, who
has 3021 απαξ λεγάμενα,2 of which 433 are in the Anabasis, as compared
with 266 (238 if we omit the Catalogue of Ships) in the first
six books of the Iliad.
It is highly important too in gaining a vocabulary to learn words
which will be used in other authors read later in the course, and to
acquire so far as possible the more fundamental meanings of words
from which their later uses are derived. Ahrens, who made a
careful study of this problem, gives the palm to Homer here without
question. According to' him, the words in Homer are much
nearer their fundamental meanings, and take on different shades of
significance in the various later authors. If one wishes to obtain
a clear grasp of Greek onomatology and semasiology, he should
begin with Homer by all means and would thus be prepared to
see more readily the later turns in the meanings of words and
phrases, which in many cases vary considerably in authors of the
same period, and sometimes even in the same author. Thus there
are over 400 words in the Anabasis which either do not occur
at all in Xenophon’s other works, or else with a different signification.
Rutherford (The New Phryn., 160 if.) says: “It did not
1 L. Friedlander, Zwei hom. Wörterverzeichnisse.
2 G. Sauppe, Xen. Op. V, 298.
xxii
<pb/>HOMER AND THE STUDY OF GREEK
escape the notice of later Greeks that Xenophon’s diction was very
different from that of pure Attic writers, and there are still extant
several remarks upon this point. ... A busy man, living almost
wholly abroad, devoted to country pursuits and the life of the
camp, attached to the Lacedaemonian system of government, and
detesting the Athenian, Xenophon must have lost much of the
refined Atticism with which he was conversant in his youth. It is
not only in the forms of words that he differs from Attic writers,
but he also uses many terms — the ονόματα γλωσσηματικά of
Galen — altogether unknown to Attic prose, and often assigns to
Attic words a meaning not actually attached to them in the
leading dialect.”
When it comes to the actual number of words of Xenophon and
Homer which enter into the vocabulary of other Greek writers,
the following tables will show their relation to some of the most
important authors read in college.
The following table indicates the authors whose vocabularies
have more words in common with Homer than with Xenophon, the
figures showing the excess.
Author Words Pages
Hesiod . . . 904 87
Pindar . . . 485 236
Bacchylides . . 347 73
Elegiac and Iambic
Poets . . 514 160
The following table indicates the authors whose vocabularies
have more words in common with Xenophon than with Homer, the
figures showing the excess.
Author Words Pages Author Words Pages
Herodotus . 100 799 Isocrates. . . 371 514
Thucydides . 371 645 Lucian . . . 119 1301
Plato . . . 90 2442 Plutarch . . . 19 5639
Demosthenes 366 1379 Menander . . 176 102
Lysias. . . 362 246 New Testament 209 543
xxiii
Author Words Pages
Aeschylus . 524 309
Sophocles 400 365
Euripides Τ’ 428 916
Aristophanes 148 612
Theocritus . 466 93
<pb/>HOMERIC GREEK
The vocabularies of Xenophon and Homer, which are compared
in these lists, are: Xenophon’s Anabasis entire, and Homer’s
Iliad, books I-VL The pages as given above are according to
the Teubner texts. The number of words in Xenophon’s Anabasis
is approximately the same as that of Homer’s Iliad, books I-VI.
In these lists, words which are closely enough related to others
that ordinary students who know the meaning of one may infer
the other are counted but once, as θάνατο·;, αθάνατοί; βαίνω, Ζκ-
βαίνω, καταβαίνω, αναβαίνω, etc. Proper names are also omitted.