The Unity of Homer

by John Adams Scott (Creator)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

296 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 1921

Reviews

[Alvaro de Menard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obviously this book is completely outdated at this point. In fact it was highly heterodox even at the time of its writing. So if you're purely looking for some information on the Homeric Question, you should look for something more recent.

However, I found it highly entertaining. It is a fiery polemic for a minority viewpoint that scores many goals for its side and is very well put together. A fun counterpoint to Wolf.

Bergk found a great contradiction here and wrote:

''Later, when the suitors are slain, Amphinomus does not appear, a proof either of a poetic error or that the description of the death of the suitors has been changed in transmission."

One wonders that when Bergk wrote this sentence he did not have sufficient curiosity to re-read the Homeric account of the slaughter of the suitors. If he had done so, he would have found eight verses wholly given to the description of the death of this very Amphinomus at the hands of Telemachus. These eight verses are in every standard edition of the Odyssey; if Bergk had a copy of the Odyssey, they were in that copy.

[Mac · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the post-Enlightenment era, literary critics began digging beneath the surface of classic texts to find layers of language. What was original and what was added on by later, spurious authors? It happened to the Bible and it happed to Homer. By the early 20th century, it was commonly accepted among scholars that there was no "Homer," no single author who composed the Iliad and the Odyssey.

This was the context in which John Adams Scott delivered the lectures, and later this book, on "The Unity of Homer." Scott pokes holes in the arguments of the "chorizontes," those who would separate the poems into a million little pieces. If one critic said that a given book of the Iliad, suspected of being later than the core of the poem, had a large number of particular word forms, Scott is able to show that actually so do many other books, which are considered essential to the original poem. In many cases, he hoists his opponents by their own petard.

However, Scott goes too far at times in making the chorizontes look ridiculous. These were serious-minded scholars, not fools. Even without reading the original arguments that he is reacting to, one gets the sense that he is being unfair.

Still, I found this to be a rewarding book. I imagine it took a great deal of courage to stand up against the prevailing currents of the time as Scott did. Though there is still much discussion about Homeric authorship, he made it respectable again to be a "unitarian."