C. Watkins,The Name of Meleager

Calvert Watkins

The name of Meleager

Seit den allerdings erst viel zu spät bekannt g e w o r d e n e n U n t e r s u c h u n g e n von M i l m a n Parry (1928) sieht auch das P h ä n o m e n der epischen D i c h t u n g anders aus.

Ernst Risch (1973)

I have set forth elsewhere the evidence for a common Indo-European ver-bal formula expressing the central act of an inherited theme, the serpent or dragon-slaying myth.1 The theme or semantic structure may be presented as

HERO SLAY SERPENT (WEAPON)

The formula which is the vehicle for this theme frequently exhibits marked word order (Verb-Object), and typically lacks an overt hero sub-ject. The marginal weapon is optional; thus the boxed

HERO SLAY SERPENT (WEAPON)

The 'purpose' of this central theme and its formulaic expression is pre-dication: it is a definition of the HERO.

Compare Vedic ahann ahitn (RV I 32.1, etc.) 'he slew the serpent', νά-

dhid vrtram vajrena (IV 17.3) 'he slew Vrtra with his cudgel', or Greek επεφνεν τε Γοργόνα (Pind. P. 10.46) 'he slew the Gorgon', κτεΐνε ... οφιν (Pind. P. 4.248) 'he killed the serpent', or Avestan yd janat azitn dahäkdm

(Υ. 9.8) 'who slew Azi Dahäka', all with Verb-Object order. With unmarked Object-Verb order, note Vedic . . . vajram ... yad ahim han

1 'How to kill a dragon in Indo-European,' Studies in memory of Warren Cowgill (1929-1985), Berlin [to appear]. See in much greater detail my book Aspects of Indo-European Poetics, currently in preparation.

Brought to you by | Penn State - The Pennsylvania State University (Penn State - The Pennsylvania State University)Authenticated | 172.16.1.226

Download Date | 7/1/12 7:35 PM

The name of Meleager 321

(V 29.2) ' . . . cudgel . . . when he slew the serpent', or Avestan + vc&am1 ... yat azis dahäköjaini (Yt. 19.92) 'weapon . . . when A.D. was slain', or Hit-tite illuyankan kuenta (KUB XVII 5 117) 'he slew the serpent', or Greek ενθα δράκαιναν/κτεΐνεν άνας, Διός υιός, από κρατεροιο βιοΐο (Η. Apoll. 300 f.) 'there the lord, son of Zeus, slew the she-dragon with his strong bow'. With nominalization of the verb, Old Norse orms einbani (Hym.22) 'the serpent's single bane', a kenning for the god Thor.

The semantic constituents of the basic theme may undergo paradig-matic (commutational) variants: for the HERO's name there may appear an epithet (e.g., SLAYER); for SLAY we may find KILL, SMITE, OVER-COME, BEAT, etc.; for the SERPENT (ADVERSARY) we may find MONSTER, BEAST, but also H E R 0 2 or A N T I - H E R O . The constituents may undergo syntagmatic variants: The Verb Phrase may be passivized as in Greek πέφαται .. . Πάτροκλος (Ρ 689f.) 'slain is P.', Vedic hato rajä krminäm (AV II 32.4) 'slain is the king of the worms', Pahlavi kirm özat (Kärnämak IX) 'slew the dragon', historically 'anguis occisus'. H E R O and ADVERSARY may switch grammatical roles, as in Greek τον . . . πέφνεν .. . δράκων (Bacchyl. 9.13) 'whom the dragon slew', or Hittite MUSilluyan-kas Ό\Μ-αη tarhta (KBo III 7 I 11) 'the serpent overcame the Storm God'. The WEAPON may be promoted to direct object and the ADVERSARY assigned a marginal role in the utterance as in Vedic jaki vddhar (IV 22.9, etc.), Avestan vadara ja&i (Y. 9.30), both 'strike the weapon'. The WEA-P O N may also be promoted to grammatical subject of the verb SLAY or equivalent, as in Vedic so asya vdjro hdrito yd äyasdh ... tuddd ah im hdrisipro yd äyasdh (X 96.3-4) 'This is his golden yellow weapon, the brazen . . . the golden yellow (weapon), the brazen, smote the serpent.'

The Indo-European expressions for these semantic constituents can be reconstructed without difficulty. Basic to the theme is the Verb Phrase, the boxed formula above; basic to the Verb Phrase is the Verb, typically *gwhen-, *uedh-, *terh-2, *uag-, in Greek *dken- (κτεν-). It is characteristic that the same root may appear in different semantic slots, with the approp-riate derivational and inflexional morphology, as subject, verb, object, instrument: thus Vedic vrtra-ha, dhan ... vadhena (1.32.5), but also vadhit ... ghanena (I 33.4), both 'SLEW with the WEAPON' .

These various phrases may legitimately be looked on as formulas in the sense of contemporary theory of oral or traditional literature. The varia-tions rung on them constitute a virtually limitless repository of literary expression in archaic Indo-European societies, and their careful study can

2 Corrected by my colleague Jochem Schindler from vaeSam, by anticipation of the fo l -lowing word vaejö 'swinging.'



322 Calvert Watkins

cast light in unexpected places, and bring together under a single explana-tion a variety of seemingly unrelated, unconnected text passages.

In Bacchylides' f i f th victory ode, Herakles in Hades meets the shade of Meleager (68-70):

ταισιν δέ μετέπρεπεν εϊδω-λον θρασυμέμνονος έγ-χεσπάλου Πορθανίδα

'Clear showed among them the shade of the brave spirited wielder of spears, (Meleager),

descendant of Porthaon'

Meleager is here the formulaically prototypical H E R O , who μεταπρέπει by the spear like Hektor (Π 834-5), is θρασυμέμνων like Herakles (Ε 639, λ 267), and έγχέσπαλος like Ares (Ο 605), Polydamas (Ξ 449) and the nameless Trojan allies (B 131). On seeing and being addressed by Meleager, Herakles' reply is the recognition of a hero (86—9):

"τις αθανάτων ή βροτων τοιούτον ερνος θρέψεν έν ποίαι χθονί ;

τις δ'εκτανεν;"

"What god or man reared such a scion as this, and where? Who slew him?"

He knows: marvelous birth, semi-devine lineage, and extraordinary death, a Heldentod, τις δ'εκτανεν is a formulaic topos: cf. πώς εθαν' Άτρείδης; (248), 'how was Agamemnon slain?,' τίνες Κύκνον, τίνες "Εκτορα πέφνον; (Pi., 1.5.30), 'who killed Kuknos, who Hector?'

In the narration of Meleager's greatest exploit, killing the Calydonian boar, he and the other Aitolians are called by Bacchylides Έλλάνων άρισ-τοι 'best of the Hellenes' (111), a characteristic formulaic index of the HERO. 3 The formula is indexed by phonetic figures and homoioteleuton in the immediately following στασάμεθ' ένδυκέως/εξ άματα συν(ν)εχέως; note the iconic length of υ in the last. The monster boar is itself subject of the verb SLAY in Bacchylides 5, 115-6 ους κατέπεφνεν/σΰς 'whom the boar slew', with the reciprocal of the basic formula, as discussed above.

3 On the notion see G.Nagy, The Best of the Achaeans (Baltimore, 1979), passim, who happens not to note this passage, nor the recurrence of the figure outside Greece: Beowulf is also secg betste 'best of men' (947).




We find another formulaic Homeric reminiscence in a metrical feature of this ode of Bacchylides: the placement of the name in verse final posi-tion at the close of a dactylic unit, with muta cum liquida making position, in all three of its occurrences: 5.77 ψυχά προφάνη Μελεάγρου, 93 τον δε προσέφα Μελέαγρος, 171 ψυχά προσέφα Μελεά/γρου.

While postverbal position is what we expect with such formulas intro-ducing quoted speech, Bacchylides' placement of the name echoes that of line-final Β 642, θάνε δε ξανθός Μελέαγρος, I 543 τον . . . άπέκτεινεν Με-λέαγρος, or Hes. fr . 25.10 [ . . . κρατερ]όν Μελέαγρον. It is probably signif-icant that once the line-final name is preceded by a verse with the line-final verb μέλει 'has as a care' (92-4)

( ( \ ο /

τα δε που Παλλάδι ξανθαι μέλει."

τον δέ προσέφα Μελέαγρος We would have an etymological figure, as well as an echoic link of ξαν-

θαι μέλει to Homer 's θάνε δέ ξανθός Μελέαγρος (Β 692) 'fair-haired Meleager died' and the phonetically related, common Homeric ξανθός Μενέλαος.

Note finally that in the same victory ode the final exploit of 'spear-wielding' έγχέσπαλος Meleager, the slaying of his mother's brothers, also involves thrown weapons like spears: τυφλά δ εκ χειρών βέλη (132) 'bolts thrown blind f rom our hands.'

The tale of Meleager is told by Phoinix to Achilles in the mission in Iliad nine, as an exemplum. Here as in Bacchylides we find the reciprocal of the basic formula, with the Calydonian boar as subject, this time of the exceedingly rare Greek reflex of *uedh-, the participle εθων.4 I 540 f. σΰν άγριον άργιοδόντα . . . (note the phonetic figure indexing the name Μελέ-αγρος) / δ ς κακά πολλ' ερδεσκεν εθων Οίνηος άλωήν 'a wild boar white of tusk . . . / t h a t wrought much ill, wasting the garden land of Ο. ' I 543 con-tinues τον . . . άπέκτεινεν Μελέαγρος 'him . . . Meleager killed,' thus reestab-lishing the usual grammatical role of the constituents of the basic formula, but with the name of the H E R O in line-final position, and no mention of a WEAPON.

The other Homeric occurrence of the ancient participle ( / )έθων is in a simile in Iliad sixteen (Π 259 ff.), where the Myrmidons pouring forth into

4 This analysis of the word is rightly upheld by Manu Leumann, Horn. Wörter. Basel 1950, p. 212-3, with literature, and followed by Chantraine and Frisk. Note also H.Craig Melchert, Three Hittite etymologies. KZ 93 (1979), p.262-71, on uizzai, •.wiwidäi.



324 Calvert Watkins

battle with Patroklos are likened to a swarm of wasps that boys in their foolishness (παίδες ... νηπίαχοι) smite and goad into fury (έριδμαίνωσιν έΦοντες). Here too we have a variant of the basic formula: the foolish boys are ANTI-HEROES, who SMITE (*uedh-) the 'HERO'-WASPS to whom the Myrmidons are compared.

Now we find just such a theme and variant of the basic formula in another and instructive Iliadic simile in A 558ff. The Greek hero Ajax slowly giving ground before the Trojan onslaught is likened to 'a donkey, stubborn and hard to move, who goes into a cornfield in despite of boys (παίδες), and many sticks have been broken upon him (ώι δή πολλά περί £όπαλ' άμφίς έάγηι line-final) but he gets in and goes on eating the deep grain, and the children beat him with sticks (οί δέ τε παΐδες/τύπτουσιν φοπάλοισι) but their strength is infantile (βίη δέ τε νηπίη άυτών) . . . ' (tr. R.Lattimore). The weak boys are again ANTI-HEROES, who BEAT the 'HERO'-ASS ( = Ajax) with WEAPONS (ροπάλοισι); we have the full version of the basic formula. And in ώι . . . ρόπαλ' . . . έάγηι we have the variant with WEAPONS promoted to grammatical subject of the intransi-tive verb έάγηι, IE *uag-. Compare RV IV 41.4 (astnin) ni vadhistam vaj-ram 'strike down the weapon on him', with the WEAPON promoted to grammatical object of the transitive verb vadhistam, IE *uedh-.

The word ρόπαλον occurs only here in the Iliad; as in the Aesop tales, it is just a stick to beat with, but it occurs in a definable locus of a formulaic nexus. In the Odyssey the word has more legendary associations, and in the same formulaic nexus: the WEAPON. In ρ 195 it is the staff requested by Odysseus from Eumaios, which in 236 is potentially a deadly weapon. In i319-20 it is the great club of the M O N S T E R Polyphemos, which Odysseus will use to blind him: μέγα ρόπαλον ... χλωρόν έλαΐνεον 'of yel-low-green olive wood'. Elsewhere it is the club of the H E R O Herakles: Soph. Track. 512 (lyr.), Aristoph. Ran. 47, 495, and Pindar fr. 111, with the epithet τραχύ 'rough, jagged'.

But the most interesting is the final attestation of ρόπαλον in the Odys-sey, in book eleven, the Nekuia (λ 572-5). "After him I was aware of gigantic Orion/ in the meadow of asphodel, rounding up and driving together/ wild animals (·ίΗίρας) whom he himself had killed (κατέπεφνε) in the lonely mountains/ holding in his hands a brazen club, forever unbroken" (tr. Lattimore).

χερσίν εχων ρόπαλον, παγχάλκεον, αίεν άαγές.

We observe not only another instance of the basic formula

H E R O SLAY BEAST (WEAPON)




but another collocation of the W E A P O N and the root *uag-, this time as an epithet άαγής, hapax in Homer.

Orion's cudgel here is the most fully described in early Greek literature. There can be no doubt that this is an ancient and inherited thematic nexus, for the same features recur in the description of Indra's cudgel in Vedic, and Mitra's mace in Avestan. And the word for the W E A P O N in both lan-guages is a derivative of the root *uag- (Mayrhofer, KEWA s.v. with ref-erences, also Nachträge): Ved. vajrah = Av. vazrö, IE uagros.

With χερσίν εχων ρόπαλον . . . άαγές compare Vedic vajrahasta- 'having the bolt in his hand', 17x of Indra; for Avestan, Yt. 10.96 vazram zastaiia drazamnö 'holding his mace in his hand'. With παγχάλκεον compare RV I 80.12 vajra äyasdh 'cudgel of bronze' as well as X 96.3-4 cited above, and Yt. 10.96 zaröis aiiayhö frahixtam 'cast in yellow bronze'. With the χλωρόν cudgel of Polyphemus note RV III 44.4 harim ... vajram 'the yellow cud-gel', as well as X 96.3-4 and the Avestan epithet just cited. For the τραχύ cudgel of Herakles, the studded club familiar in Greek iconography, cf. Ved. sahasrabhrstih 'with 1000 studs' (I 80.12 above), or Av. satafitanam 'with 100 bosses'. Such was the Indo-European * uagros.

It is well-known that both the verb form έάγηι and the adjective άαγές in the above passages show 'metrical lengthening', and that the other Homeric instances of έάγη (3x II., Ix Od. repeated) do not. The participle ( /)αγνυμενάων occurring (at verse-end) once in each epic (Π 769, κ 123) requires a digamma, and a short vowel.5 H o w is this metrical lengthening generated? έάγηι and άάγές have the same metrical position (verse-final) as Μελέαγρος in Β 642 and I 543; Hesiod's εαγε the same position (before feminine caesura) as Μελέαγρος in I 550, 553, 590. The long syllable in (w) w - c # and (w) is primary in (Μελε)αγρος, secondary in έάγηι, άάγές, έάγε. I suggest the latter three are based on the former.

The hiatus in Μελέαγρος is most easily explained by a lost f . If a line or hemistich-final *(Μελε-)/αγρος ( w w ) - c # is responsible for the lengthen-ing in *έ/άγη, *ε/αγε, *ά/αγές then the link must be semantic, and therefore *(-)_Ραγρος must have been perceived as containing fay- 'break'. If so, then *(-)/αγρος either forms an equation with Vedic vajrah/Avestan vazrö 'WEAPON' or is wholly independent. In view of the clear associa-tion of the Greek root f α γ - with the W E A P O N in these contexts, variants of the basic formula (ρόπαλ' . . . έάγηι, ρόπαλου . . . άαγές), and in view of

5 Rolf Hiersche has suggested in Glotta 44 (1966), p. 1-5 that the perfect in Hes. Op. έπί νώτα εαγε and Sappho 31.9 (2.9 D2.) γλώσσα έδγε reflect an Aeolic poetic tradi-tion outside Homer with lengthening (and digamma), whence Ionic εηγε. The two traditions with lengthening are I think one and the same.



326 Calvert Watkins

the formal identity of Greek *(-)/αγρος and Indo-Iranian *ua/ras 'WEA-PON, ' we are led to conclude-as the simplest hypothesis to account for the f ac t s - tha t Greek *(-)f αγρός meant 'WEAPON, ' and made a word equation with the Indie and Iranian forms.

The metrical evidence indicates that the original locus of the root fay-in the Greek version of the basic formula was verse-final (w) (w) —w +F or hemistich-final (w)(w)-w||, and that the only form apt to fit that slot was */αγρο-, the nominal derivative 'WEAPON' . A tendency to verse and clause-final position is also characteristic for the position of the instru-mental W E A P O N in the (boxed) basic formula in Vedic,

notably when the verb is clause-initial.6

If the original locus of */αγ-ρο- in the Greek formula was the WEA-P O N , the other cases show transference of the root to other semantic con-stituents. Given in our myth

the (VERB intr έάγη) shows 4 ^ 2 , while (ADJECTIVE άαγές + WEA-P O N ) shows 4 NP[x + 4]. At a certain time in the hexameter tradition (or its ancestor) these constituents underwent semantic 'movement' in the underlying structure, but remained metrically static; their position in the metrical line remained unchanged. The necessary consequence was the deformation we know as 'metrical lengthening.'

The final semantic 'movement' was simply 4 1: the W E A P O N becomes the name of the H E R O , or a constituent of it. This transference could be the more favored by the existence of the thematic and formulaic variant

with the W E A P O N promoted to grammatical subject, as discussed and illustrated above. The Maruts ' bolt is a goha (IE *gwou-gwhen-) nrha va-dhah 'cattle-slaying, man-slaying weapon' in RV VII 56.17, just as Mitra's weapon is aspa.vtraja 'horse and man-slaying' in Yt. 10.101. That such a semantic structure was profoundly rooted in early Greek culture is proved by a curious feature of the ancient Athenian ritual of the Bouphonia (IE *gwou-gwhon-), the sacrifice of an ox to Zeus of the city: the sacrificial axe

H E R O SLAY SERPENT (WEAPON)

H E R O KILL 1 2

M O N S T E R 3

(WEAPON) 4

W E A P O N KILL M O N S T E R

6 See the works referred to in note 1.




is ritually tried fo r murder.7 The creation of the compound name Μελέ-_Ραγρος 'having the care of the *|Γαγρος' 'he who cares for the *^αγρος ' could have been at the outset a nonce-formation; P N N in Μελε- (var. Μελι-) are infrequent but do occur. See Bechtel, Personennamen, who notes that the type was first analyzed already by August Friedrich Pott.8

That the H E R O of such a mythological episode in the basic formula may owe his name to a (synchronically no longer perceived) transference of the W E A P O N can be exactly paralleled in Vedic. For as Stanley Insler will show in a for thcoming paper,9 the Hindu god Visnu himself was orig-inally only the name of Indra's cudgel, his vajra. Compare the clear basic formula in RV VI 20.2

ahim ydd vrtmm ... hann ... visnunä sacänah 'when he slew . . . the serpent Vrtra . . . together with Visnu'

Etymologically the W E A P O N *(-) /αγρος was the 'breaker ' in Greek (^άγνυμι).10 T h e root *uag- - otherwise not found in Indo- I ran ian- recurs in Tocharian AB wäk- 'split, open (intr.),' pres. Β wokotär < *uag-o,n and in the Hittite hi-verb wäki 'bites.' The weapon might have been originally the 'biter'; fo r the semantics compare IE *bheid- in Germanic {bite, bei-ßen) and its association with the W E A P O N in Germanic legend. Beo-wulf's sword Hrunt ing was useless against Grendel 's mother: bitan nolde (1523) 'would not bite'. T h e weapon with which Beowulf finishes off the Worm in the final, fatal conflict is biter ond beaduscearp (2704) 'biting ("bitter") and battle-sharp': *bhid-ro- is formed just like *uag-ro-.n

Formally *uag-ro- suggests a Caland adjective in -ro-, with substativa-tion and accent shift to vajra-. The stative *uag-e- in Gk. έάγη is likewise

7 See the penetrating analysis of Walter Burkert, Homo Necans. Translated by Peter Bing. Berkeley 1983, p. 136 ff.

8 KZ 6 (1857), p. 129: 'Er [Μελέαγρος] bedeutet cui curae cordique est (μέλει) venatio (αγρα).' But the second member (so etymologized already by Euripides, v. infra) will not account for the hiatus.

' Referred to by permission, for which I am grateful. 10 Burrow, Sanskrit Language 26, Thieme, Kratylos 3 (1958) 139 = Kl.Schr. 765,

Mayrhofer, KEWA 126 and 790. I leave to others to consider whether the Germanic name of history and legend Odoacer, Odovacar, OEng. Eadwacer, Gmc. *Auda-wak-raz might still contain our WEAPON (*uagros) rather than the apparent uogros of O N vakr, OE wacor, German wacker. See M. Schönfeld, Wörterbuch der altgerm. Pers.- und Völkernamen 174 f.

11 Jay Jasanoff, Stative and Middle in Indo-European. Innsbruck 1978, p.41, 120. 12 The following line forwrat Wedra heim wyrm ort middan (2705) '(B.) cut open the

belly of the Worm' also recalls RV I 32.Id pra vaksanä abhinat parvatänäm '(Indra) split the belly of the mountains', or IV 17.3 bhinid girtm 'he split the mountain'.



328 Calvert Watkins

at home in a Caland-system, as is the s-stem *uag-es- of the Hesychean gloss άγος - κλάσμα, θραΰμα 'fragment', and its internal derivative άαγής 'unbroken'.

Hidden in the name of Meleager, but recoverable by the techniques of formulaic analysis, we have a Greek word *^αγρος which makes an exact word equation, both linguistically and in its poetic deployment, with Vedic vajrah and Avestan vazrö. That word and its associative poetic semantics and formulaics must go back directly to the period of community of Greek and Indo-Iranian, to the period of both linguistic and poetic com-munity. The explanation of the name of Meleager is only a by-product of the understanding of the nature and extent of that Indo-European poetic tradition.

Jochem Schindler points out that the analysis of the name of Meleager is not new, but was published over a century ago.13 H e referred me to Her-mann Osthoff , who wrote in 1878 of Μελέαγρος, 'besser ist aus lautlichen Gründen diejenige Etymologie, auf dessen Urheber wir uns aber leider nicht besinnen, nach welcher in dem mythologisch zu deutenden Namen das Schlußglied Skr. vajra- m. n. 'Donnerkeil', Abaktr. vazra- m. 'Keule' enthalten sein soll'.14 The etymology in fact was made by none other than Berthold Delbrück, at the age of 23.15 He quite correctly saw the figure of Meleager in the framework of what I term the basic formula. Nihil novi sub sole. But Delbriick's etymology, based explicitly on a long-antiquated view of mythology as a reflection of phenomena of nature, failed to con-vince the few Hellenists who knew of it. I believe it is the formulaic anal-ysis alone which can demonstrate the correctness of the equation, and explain the genesis of the name.

13 Schindler also notes Euripides' etymology in Meleager fr. 521 Nauck: Μελέαγρε, μελεαν γάρ ποτ' άγρεύεις αγραν with a double figura etymologica (αγραν ήγρευκότες recurs at Bacchae 434). As Nauck notes, the paronomasia was castigated already in antiquity: ϊνα μή τον Μελ. ώσπερ Εύρ. κακώς έτυμολογήσηι . . .

14 Das Verbum in der Nominalkomposition. Jena 1878. p. 140n. 15 Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft 3 (1865), pp. 266-99, esp.

282-3, as can be learned from van der Kolf, Pauly-Wissowa RE 29 (1931), col. 446 (who however remained unconvinced).



C. Watkins,The Name of Meleager

Documents

Transcript of C. Watkins,The Name of Meleager