^{page no 19 note 1} Page, Homeric Odyssey, 142.

^{page no 19 note 2} Notopoulos (see p. 17 n. 3) and Lord, Singer, 30 ff., use the structural criterion, but distinguish the formula proper, a verbal repetition, from the formula by analogy or formular phrase, whose nature is revealed by its structure: Russo, J.A., ‘A closer look at Homeric Formulas’, TAPA 94 (1963), 235-47Google Scholar, and ‘The Structural Formula in Homeric Verse’, YCS 20 (1966), 219-40, drops the distinction. Criticism by Minton, W.W., ‘The Fallacy of the Structural Formula’, TAPA 96 (1965), 241-53Google Scholar, , Hainsworth, ‘Structure and Content in Epic Formulae’, CQ 14 (1964), 155-64CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Rosenmeyer, T.G., ‘The Formula in Early Greek Poetry’, Arion 4 (1965), 295–311 Google Scholar. Nagler, M.N., ‘Towards a Generative View of the Oral Formula’, TAPA 98 (1967), 269–311 Google Scholar, sees the formula as essentially a pre-verbal association of sound and idea.

^{page no 20 note 1} Page, Homeric Odyssey, 139, in a characteristically lucid description of the theory; cf. Parry, , HSCP 41 (1930), 77 Google Scholar, and 43 (1932), 7.

^{page no 20 note 2} See Goold, G.P., ‘Amatoria Critica’, HSCP 69 (1965), 1-107Google Scholar; C. Conrad, ‘Traditional Patterns of Word-order in Latin Epics from Ennius to Vergil’, ibid., 195-258.

^{page no 20 note 3} YCS 20 (1966), 236 n. 27.

^{page no 20 note 4} As was shown by O’Neill, E.G., ‘The Localisation of Metrical Word-types in the Greek Hexameter’, YCS 8 (1942), 105-78Google Scholar.

^{page no 21 note 1} More examples in Bowra, Heroic Poetry, 223.

^{page no 21 note 2} L’ Épithète traditionnelle dans Homère (Paris, 1928); ‘Homer and the Heroic Style’, HSCP 41 (1930), 73-147: summaries in my The Flexibility of the Homeric Formula (Oxford, 1968) and Pope, M.W.M., ‘The Parry–Lord Theory of Homeric Composition’, Acta Classica 6 (1963), 1–21 Google Scholar.

^{page no 21 note 3} Many examples and excellent discussion in Page, History and the Homeric Iliad (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1959), 266 ff.

^{page no 22 note 1} Acta Classica 6 (1963), 11.

^{page no 22 note 2} Parry, HSCP 41 (1930). 77.

^{page no 22 note 3} Witte, K., s.v. ‘Horneros: Sprache’ in Pauly—Wissowa, , RE viii, coll. 2213 ff.Google Scholar; Meister, K., Die homerische Kunstsprache (Leipzig, 1921 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, repr. 1966).

^{page no 23 note 1} HSCP 43 (1932), 43 ff., cf. Ruijgh, C.J., Mnemosyne 14 (1961), 214ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page no 23 note 2} So K.Strunk, , Die sogennanten Aeolismen der homerischen Sprache (Köln, 1957)Google Scholar; cf. Webster, From Mycenae to Homer, 159 ff.

^{page no 23 note 3} Cf. Chadwick, J., ‘Mycenaean Elements in the Homeric Dialect’, Minoica (Berlin, 1958), 116-22Google Scholar (= Language and Background, 119 ff.); Ruijgh, C.J., L’élément achéen dans la langue épique (Assen, 1957)Google Scholar. Chadwick’s word-list was criticized by Shipp, G.P., Essays in Mycenaean and Homeric Greek (Melbourne, 1961), 1-14Google Scholar (= Language and Background, 126 ff.).

^{page no 23 note 4} But the new view (expounded by Chadwick, , ‘The Greek Dialects and Greek Prehistory’, Greece & RomeN.S. 3 [1956], 38–50 CrossRefGoogle Scholar [= Language and Background, 106 ff.]) has been impugned by Palmer, L.R., The Interpretation of Mycenaean Greek Texts (Oxford, 1963), 60ffGoogle Scholar.: see also Studia Mycenaea (Brno, 1968), App. i, ‘Dialectal classification of Mycenaean in the opinion of various scholars’.

^{page no 23 note 5} Parry, , ‘The Homeric Gloss’, TAPA 59 (1928), 233-47Google Scholar. But a gloss may be a (contemporary) dialect word, e.g. Aeolic ревоѕ misunderstood at X 68 according to Snell, B., The Discovery of the Mind (trans. Rosenmeyer, Cambridge, Mass., 1953), 10fGoogle Scholar.

^{page no 23 note 6} Homerische Wörter (Basel, 1950). The more persuasive examples are explained by Webster, From Mycenae to Homer, 94 ff., 125 ff. A syntactical parallel would be the misunderstanding of the dual Αϊαντε ( = Ajax and his brother) at N 201, etc. ( = the two Ajaces), cf. Page, History and the Homeric Iliad, 236 f.

^{page no 23 note 7} Details in Kirk, Songs, 179 ff.

^{page no 24 note 1} Numerous examples are given by Page, History and the Homeric Iliad, 218 ff. and Webster, From Mycenae to Homer, 97 ff. and 160 ff. For a sceptical appraisal see Kirk, , ‘Objective Dating Criteria in Homer’, Museum Helveticum 17 (1960), 189–205 Google Scholar, esp. 200-1 (= Language and Background, 174 ff.). Lee, D.J.N., ‘Some vestigial Mycenaean Words in the Iliad’, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, London 6 (1959), 6-21CrossRefGoogle Scholar, seeks to remove metrical difficulties by translating certain formulae into Mycenaean. It is sometimes thought the poetical speech had a very remote, even Indo-European, ancestry; cf. Durante, M., ‘Ricerche sulla preistoria della lingua poetica greca’, Rendiconti Lincei 17 (1962), 25–43 Google Scholar (= Indogermanische Dichtersprache, ed. Schmidt, R. [Darmstadt, 1968], 291 ff.)Google Scholar.

^{page no 24 note 2} Hoekstra, A., Homeric Modifications of Formulaic Prototypes (Amsterdam, 1965)Google Scholar.

^{page no 24 note 3} Flexibility of the Homeric Formula, 110 ff.

^{page no 25 note 1} Nagler, M.N., ‘Towards a Generative View of the Oral Formula’, TAPA 98 (1967), 269–311 Google Scholar.

^{page no 25 note 2} Die typischen Szenen bei Homer (Berlin, 1933). See also Parry’s review, CP 31 (1936), 357-60.

^{page no 25 note 3} As shown by Armstrong, J.I., ‘The Arming Motif in the Iliad’, AJP 79 (1958), 337-54Google Scholar.

^{page no 25 note 4} Singer, 68 ff.

^{page no 26 note 1} Minton, W.W., ‘Invocation and Catalogue in Hesiod and Homer’, TAPA 93 (1962), 204-15Google Scholar.

^{page no 26 note 2} Gisela, Strasburger, Die kleine Kämpfer der Ilias (Frankfurt, 1954)Google Scholar; Friedrich, W., Verwundung und Tod in der Ilias (Göttingen, 1956)Google Scholar; Fenik, B., Typical Battle Scenes in the Iliad (Wiesbaden, 1968)Google Scholar, developing Kirk’s summary treatment, Songs, 75 ff.

^{page no 26 note 3} As explained by Beye, C.R., ‘Homeric Battle Narrative and Catalogues’, HSCP 68 (1964), 345-73Google Scholar.

^{page no 26 note 4} Hence the term ‘ conceptual formulas’, cf. Ross, J., Modern Philology 57 (1959-60), 4 f.Google Scholar, yet another sense for ‘formula’.

^{page no 26 note 5} Schroeter, R., Die Aristie als Grundform epischer Dichtung (Marburg, 1950)Google Scholar.

^{page no 26 note 6} ‘Joining Battle in Homer’, Greece & Rome 13 (1966), 158-66.

^{page no 27 note 1} Bowra, Companion, 19 ff. Literature is listed by Dale, A.M., Lustrum 2 (1957), 29 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page no 27 note 2} Republished in Wege und Formen frühgriechischen Denkens (2nd edn., Munich, 1960), 100-56.

^{page no 27 note 3} Kirk, , ‘The Structure of the Homeric Hexameter’, YCS 20 (1966), 76–104 Google Scholar, has the best recent discussion.

^{page no 27 note 4} See Kirk, , ‘Verse-structure and Sentence-structure in Homer’, YCS 20 (1966), 105-52Google Scholar, and the earlier papers cited, to which add Edwards, M.W.’s extensive study, ‘Some features of Homeric craftsmanship’, TAPA (1966), 115-79Google Scholar.

^{page no 27 note 5} Kirk, op. cit., 136.

^{page no 28 note 1} Bassett, S.E., ‘The So-called Emphatic Position of the Runover Word in the Homeric Hexameter’, TAPA 57 (1926), 116-48Google Scholar, was very positive on this point. Rossi, L.E., ‘Estensione evalore del Colon nell’esametro omerico’, Studi Urbinati 39 (1965), 239-73Google Scholar, argues that short cola may bear emphasis.