Herder, Heyne, and F.A. Wolf: An Homeric Controversy and its Relevance Today

Abstract

Herder, Heyne, and F.A. Wolf: an Homeric Controversy and Its Relevance Today Statement of Purpose: The goal is to reconstruct and evaluate a contentious moment in the history of late 18th century Homeric scholarship in which F.A. Wolf, C.G. Heyne, and J.G. Herder made and responded to accusations of plagiarism regarding the originality of Wolf’s Prolegomena ad Homerum. First I recapitulate the chronology and terms of the vitriolic controversy, an affair that seems nearly forgotten today – Grafton’s comprehensive article (1981) on Wolf does not mention it, Wilamovitz (1959) barely alludes to it, and Sandys (1908) gives a mere sketch – though it gripped Homeric philology and German literary figures alike in its time. Next, I provide a re-analysis of the claims and outcomes of the controversy, taking Wagner’s unpublished German dissertation (1960), Volkmann’s discussion (1874), and the letters of Herder, Heyne, Schiller, and Wolf as starting points. Finally, I demonstrate that the debate turns on issues still relevant to contemporary Homeric scholarship: contested interpretations of (1) origin and originality (2) aesthetic quality (3) Homeric unity, and (4) the performance of folk epic. Abstract: By the end of the 18th century, perhaps no conjunction would have been more suggestive for the study of Homer than that of F.A. Wolf, whose Prolegomena ad Homerum (with its argument based on oral rhapsodic transmission and the absence of Homeric literacy) altered Homeric research for a century, and Johann Gottfried Herder, champion of oral folk poetry since the 1770s (viz., the Auszug aus einem Briefwechsel uber Ossian und die Lieder alter Volker of 1773 and the Volkslieder collection of 1778/79). But it was not to be. In the same year that Wolf’s Prolegomena appeared (1795), Herder published an article, “Homer, ein Gunstling der Zeit” (in Schiller’s journal Die Horen), in which Herder discussed the rhapsodic transmission of Homer, the unity of the poems, and even mentioned having seen Villoison’s scholia during a visit to Italy (Herder/Suphan 1967). The article received a bitter response from Wolf, who claimed among other things a sort of plagiarism by Herder, in the Intelligenzblatt der Allgemeinen Literatur-Zeitung on October 24, 1795 (Wagner). Heyne, after a failed appeal from Wolf, in turn accused Wolf of plagiarizing his own ideas concerning Homeric transmission. The controversy took place in journals, newspapers, pamphlets, and letters, and so must be reconstructed, which I do in this talk. My presentation lays out the terms and chronology of the debate, and shows how the controversy turned on mistaken chronology, ambiguous philological disputes, and subjective claims to the paternity of ideas. I conclude that no plagiarism occurred and argue for the relevance of the controversy for Homeric research in the 21st century, and in conclusion offer a piece of evidence hitherto unknown to Homeric scholarship: on March 26, 1819, the Austrian Empire’s renowned Slavic scholar, Jernej Kopitar, argued in a letter to Wolf that “today there is no better match for your Homeric ‘Homerids’ than in Serbia and Bosnia” (my trans.; Vasmer 1938), and directed Wolf to read recently published (in 1818) German translations, made by Kopitar, of Vuk Karadžic’s Serbo-Croatian oral epics – a suggestion met by silence from Wolf, a scholar no longer interested in comparisons inspired by Herder’s legacy of Homeric and folk poetry. Bibliographical Matter for APA Abstract 2010 Grafton, Anthony. 1981. “Prolegomena to Friedrich August Wolf,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 44 (1981):101-129. Herder, J.G. Aus Herders Nachlas. 1856/1857. Hrsg. von H. Duntzer und F. G. von Herder., 3 Bde., Frankfurt a. M. Herder, Johann Gottfried. 1861-2. Von und an Herder. Ungedruckte Briefe aus Herders Nachlass, ed. H. Duntzer and F. G. von Herder, II, Leipzig: Dyk. Herder, J.G. “Homer, ein Gunstling der Zeit.” 1932. In: Gegenwart und Altertum, 160-182=Dt. Lit. Reihe Klassik, Bd. II, bearb., von W. Muschg, Leipzig. Herder, J.G. Ed. Bernhard Suphan. 1967. Samtliche Werke, vol. XVIII. Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung Hildesheim. Heyne, Christian Gottlieb. 1802. Homeri Carmina, Leipzig. Pattison, M. Essays, vol. I. 1889. Oxford, Clarendon Press. [Wolf essay = pp. 337-414]. Sandys, John Edwin. 1908. A History of Classical Scholarship, vol. III. Cambridge UP. Schiller, Fr. Schillers Briefe. 1892. Stuttgart, Leipzig, Berlin, Wien. Vasmer, M. 1938. Bausteine zur Geschicte der deutsch-slavischen geistigen Beziehungen I. Abhandlungen der Preusischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Jahrgang 1938, Philosophisch- Historische Klasse (esp. pp.112-113). Volkmann, R. 1874. Geschichte und Kritik der Wolfschen Prolegomena zu Homer, Leipzig. Wagner, Fritz. 1960. Herders Homerbild, seine Wurzeln und Wirkungen. Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Philosophischen Fakultat der Universitat Koln. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von. 1998 (orig.1959). Geschichte der Philologie, mit einem Nachwort und Register von Albert Henrichs. Stuttgart:Teubner. Wolf, Fr. A. Prolegomena ad Homerum. 1795. Halle. Wolf, Fr. A. Ein Leben in Briefen. 1935. Hrsg. von S. Reiter, Stuttgart.