Abstract
The paper reassesses the role and function of the Iliadic ἵστωρ (Il XVIII 490-508; XXIII 448- 508) by focusing on previously overlooked narrative and linguistic details and drawing parallelisms between both scenes. The paper argues that the most fundamental cognitive operation performed by the ἵστωρ entails confining to memory and recording the ‘particulars’ of words spoken at a given time and in a specific context. This social function is closely connected to the centrality of memory in the early Greek world, oath-taking and the psychodynamics of orality, as evidenced by invocations to the Gods in the Homeric poems as well as later uses of the word in the context of oaths and solemn vows.
Highlights
If the ἵστωρ is capable of acting as an ‘arbiter’ in a dispute or as a ‘judge’ in determining the truth of a matter at stake, it is only as a result of his primal ability to confine to memory and record the ‘particulars’ of words spoken at a given time and in a specific context
This social function performed by the ἵστωρ in the Homeric scenes is closely connected to the centrality of memory in the early Greek world and to the psychodynamics of orality
If post-Homeric uses of the word ἵστωρ are sparse and designate some kind of knowledge or skill in general, the occurrence of the word in contexts that have to do with oaths may stand as a vestige of this inherent, fundamental cognitive function impinging on the religious domain
Summary
The Iliadic ἵστωρ (Il XVIII 501; XXIII 486) has long remained at the forefront of scholarly debates regarding both the production and circulation of knowledge in the early Greek culture and the examination of proto-legal practices of dispute settlement. The social role performed by the ἵστωρ in the Iliad is often invoked by experts in early Greek law as literary evidence of the existence of public, formal means of settling disputes before laws began to be written down.3 These two lines of inquiry have generally been pursued independently of each other and have been hampered by both the dearth of textual evidence and the inconsistencies in the extant material. Three main interpretations of the word ἵστωρ have been put forward (‘knowing /expert’, ‘witness’ or ‘arbiter/ judge’) based on the general understanding of the scenes and the etymological connection between between the term ϝίστωρ, οἶδα (‘to know’) and ἰδεῖν (‘to see’).4 It is the aim of this paper to reassess the role of the inscrutable ἵστωρ as depicted in these two often-quoted and much-discussed passages in Homer’s Iliad (XVIII 490-508; XXIII 448-508). The second section posits that this specific role of the histor is connected to oath-taking by tracing certain invocations to the Gods in the Homeric poems and later uses of the word in the context of oaths in the archaic and classical periods
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Cuadernos de Filología Clásica. Estudios griegos e indoeuropeos
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
