which the dialogue mainly consists. The author makes (perhaps wilfully) all the mistakes about the family of Peisistratus which Thucydides notices in a well-known passage (vi. 54- 59). In one point, however. the writer's testimony IS valuable. He tells us that the law required the rhapsodises to recite “ taking each other up in order (éf l>1|'0X7)p€0.)S édaeijfys), as they still do.” This recurs in a different form in the statement of Diogenes Laertius (1. 2. 57) that Solon made a law that the poems should be recited “with prompting ” (Q 151ro5o)?7s). The question as between Solon and Hipparchus cannot be settled; but it is at least clear that a due order of recitation was secured by the presence of a person charged to give the rhapsodises their cue (l-§ 7FOB(iAA6Ll/). It was necessary, of course, to divide the poem to be recited into parts, and to compel each contending rhapsodise to take the part assigned to him. Otherwise they would have chosen favourite or show passages.

The practice of poets or rhapsodises contending for the prize at the great religious festivals is of considerable antiquity, though apparently post-Homeric. It is brought vividly before us in the Hymn to Apollo (see the passage mentioned above), and in two Hymns to Aphrodite (v. and ix.). The latter of these may evidently be taken to belong to Salamis in Cyprus and the festival of the Cyprian Aphrodite, in the same way that the Hymn to Apollo belongs to Delos and the Delian gathering. The earliest trace of such contests is to be found in the story of Thamyris, the Thracian singer, who boasted that he could conquer even the Muses in song (Il. ii. 594 ff.). Much has been made in this part of the subject of a family or clan (fyéz/os) oi Homeridae in the island of Chios. On the one hand, it seemed to follow from the existence of such afamily that Homer was a mere “eponymus, ” or mythical ancestor; on the other hand, it became easy to imagine the Homeric poems handed down orally in a family whose hereditary occupation it was to recite them, possibly to add new episodes from time to time, or to combine their materials in new ways, as their poetical gifts permitted. But, although there is no reason to doubt the existence of a family of “ Homeridae, " it is far from certain that they had anything to do with Homeric poetry. The word occurs first in Pindar (Nem. 2. 2), who applies it to the rhapsodlsts ('O;.mpi5aL bafrnbv é-/réwv 6.oL6oi). On this a scholiast says that the name “ Homeridae” denoted originally descendants of Homer, who sang his poems in succession, but afterwards was applied to rhapsodises who did not claim descent from him. He adds that there was a famous rhapsodise, Cynaethus of Chios, who was said to be the author of the Hymn to Apollo, and to have first recited Homer at Syracuse about the 69th Olympiad. Nothing here connects the Homeridae with Chios. The statement of the scholiast is evidently a mere inference from the patronymic form of the word. If it proves anything, it proves that Cynaethus, who was a Chian and a rhapsodise, made no claim to Homeric descent. On the other hand our knowledge of Ch1an Homeridae comes chiefly from the lexicon of Harpocration, where we are told that Acusilaus and Hellanicus said that they were so called from the poet; whereas Seleucus pronounced th1s to be an error. Strabo also says that the Chians put forward the Homeridae as an argument in support of their claim to Homer These Homeridae, then, belonged to Chios, but there 15 no indication of their being rhapsodises. On the contrary, Plato and other Attic writers use the word to include interpreters and admirers-in short, the whole “ spiritual kindred ”-of Homer. And although we hear of “ descendants of Creophylus ” as in possession of the Homeric poems, there is no similar story about descendants of Homer himself. Such is the evidence on which so many inferences are based

The result of the notices now collected is to show that the early history of epic recitation consists of (1) passages in the Homeric hymns showing that poets contended for the prize at the great festivals, (2) the passing mention in Herodotus of rhapsodxsts at Sicyon, and (3) a law at Athens, of unknown date, regulating the recitation at the Panathenaea. Let us now con1pare these data with the account given in the Homeric poems. The word “ rhapsode ” does not yet exist; we hear only of the “singer” (éoulés), who does not carry a wand oi laurel-branch, but the lyre (¢6p, ul/YS), with which he accompanies his "song" In the Ilzad even the epic “singer” is not met with. It is Achilles himself who sings the stories of heroes (xhéa dx/5p&w) in h1s tent, and Patroclus is waiting (respond ere paralus), to take up the song in his turn (Il. ix. 191). Again we do not hear of poetical contests (except in the story of Thamyris already mentioned) or of recitation of epic poetry at festivals. The Odyssey gives us pictures of two great houses, and. each has its singer. The song is on a subject taken from the Trojan war, at some point chosen by the singer himself, or by his hearers. Phemius pleases the suitors by singing of the calamitous return of the Greeks; Demodocus sings of a quarrel between Ulysses and Achilles, and afterwards of the wooden horse and the capture of Troy.

It may be granted that the author of the Odyssey can hardly have been just such a singer as he himself describes. The songs of Phemius and Demodocus are too short, and have too much the character of improvisations. Nor is it necessary to suppose that epic poetry, at the time to which the picture in the Odyssey belongs, was confined to the one type represented. Yet in A several respects the conditions under which the singer finds himself in the house of a chieftain like Odysseus or Alcinous are more in harmony with the character of Homeric poetry than those of the later rhapsodic contests. The subdivision of a poem like the Illad or Odyssey among different and necessarily unequal performers must have been injurious to the effect. The highly theatrical manner of recitation which was fostered by the spirit of competition, and by the example of the stage, cannot have done justice to the even movement of the epic style. It is not certain indeed that the practice of reciting a long poem by the agency of several competitors was ancient, or that it prevailed elsewhere than at Athens; but as rhapsodises were numerous, and popular favour throughout Greece became more and more confined to one or two great works, it must have become almost a necessity. That it was the mode of recitation contemplated by the author of the Ilzad or Odyssey it is impossible to believe. The difference made by substituting the wand or branch of laurel for the lyre of the Homeric singer is a slighter one, though not without significance. The recitation of the Hesiodic poems was from the first unaccompanied by the lyre, Le. they were confessedly said, not sung; and it was natural that the example should be extended to Homer. For it is difncult to believe that the Homeric poems were ever “ sung” in the strict sense of the word. We can only suppose that the lyre in the hands of the epic poet or reciter was in reality a piece of convention, a “ survival ” from the stage in which narrative poetry had a lyrical character. Probably the poets of the Homeric school-that which dealt with war and adventure-were the genuine descendants of minstrels whose “ lays ” or “ ballads ” were the amusement of the feasts in an earlier heroic age; whereas the Hesiodic compositions were non-lyrical from the first. and were only in verse because that was the universal form of literature. It seems, then, that if we imagine Homer as a singer in a royal house of the Homeric age, but with more freedom regarding the limits of his subject, and a more tranquil audience than is allowed him in the rapid movement of the Odyssey, we shall piebably not be far from the truth.

T lme and Place of H ome1'.-The oldest direct references to the Iliad and Odyssey are in Herodotus, who quotes from both poems (ii. 53). The quotation from the Ilzad is of interest because it is made in order to show that Homer supported the story of the travels of Paris to Egypt and Sidon (whereas the Cyclic poem called the Cypria ignored thenl), and also because the part of the Iliad from which it comes is cited as the “ Aristeia of Diomede.” This was therefore a recognized part of the poem. The earliest mention of the name of Homer is found in a fragment of the philosopher Xenophanes (of the 6th century B C., or possibly earlier), who complains of the false notions implanted through the teaching of Homer. The passage shows, not merely that Homer was well known at Colophon in the time

of Xenophanes, but also that the great advance in moral and