and lost the art of writing for several centuries. During this preliterate dark age, storytellers chanted heroic adventures similar to those in Homer but preserved and conveyed their tales orally. Homer thus wrote about other aoidoi like Demodocus and Phemius, who lived during the oral, preliterate period.
Throughout the rise of Greek literature, the works of Homer maintained their popularity. The desire of listeners to hear the ancient, correct pronunciation of Homer’s works also endured—despite the influence of several dialects and foreign languages (Pfeiffer 11). Classical Greeks saw writing as a means to facilitate oral communication, and the fifth century BCE Pre-Socratic philosopher Kritias even claimed that the “Phoenicians invented writing as an aid to speaking” (Kritias, DK 88.B.2). This is a point of no small significance, for as the rest of the language went through the natural process of simplifying its structure, numerous Homeric terms became increasingly rare and obsolete (γλῶσσαι) and needed to be recorded so that their “proper” meaning and pronunciation would be insured for future listeners. Consequently, an everwidening gap emerged between the fixed language preserved in the works of Homer and the constantly changing Greek tongue.
Despite the linguistic changes that took place in the Greek language from the eighth to the fourth centuries BCE (Maas 1), the desire to preserve the euphony of the Homeric tongue encouraged individual Rhapsodes to record, and thus preserve, the almost sacrosanct interpretation (Plato Ion 530C, D ff.; Pfeiffer 10–11). Pindar claimed that even in his time audiences required individuals who could explain and preserve literature (Olympian Odes 2.83–85; Pythian Odes 1.93–94; Isthmian Odes 7.16–19). In the twilight of this oral, preliterate period, Homeric interpreters relied strongly on memory, and their reputation for reciting entire sections of Homer was widespread (Pindar Nemean Odes 7.14–16; Isthmian Odes 6.98–110; Plato Ion 537A, B). Rudolf Pfeiffer argues that there is “no evidence for book production on a large scale, for the circulation of copies, or for a reading public in the lyric age. The power of memory was unchallenged, and the tradition of poetry and early philosophy remained oral” (25). Even the term rhapsody, in its earliest sense, came to mean the chanting of an entire book of Homer—or about five hundred lines at a single session (Liddell and Scott 1566; Kirk, Songs 306–307n2). In this respect, the Iliad and Odyssey are actually stories woven together with formulaic transitions. Moreover, the emergence of writing facilitated attempts to preserve Homeric literature and pronunciation, for interpreters were able to use texts or copies of passages to aid their memories.
The efforts to stabilize the Homeric tongue, particularly through writing, enable us to view Rhapsodes with more precision. During the purely oral period, aoidoi entertained listeners and related heroic stories with an emphasis on creative improvisation as well as the transmission of familiar stories. Rhapsodes began to appear during the literate period. Herodotus was the first known writer of the fifth century BCE to use the term “rhapsode” (ῥaψῳδόus) as an individual who chanted Homeric poems (5.67; cf. Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus 391). Thus, somewhere between the late sixth and early fifth centuries BCE the term came into common usage. By the late fifth and early fourth centuries BCE of Plato’s Athens, it meant a professional interpreter who recited almost exclusively the works of Homer (Plato, Ion 530C; Leges 658B). In fact, a work in the corpus of Homerica, which is dated as early as the fourth century BCE, even refers to Homer as a “ῥaψῳδοὑτα” or “sort of rhapsode” ([Homerica], Of the Origin of Homer and Hesiod, and Their Contest 315; Hesiod Fragmenta Dubia 3; Plato Leges 658B). In brief, G.S. Kirk claims that somewhere between 625575 BCE there was a “progressive eclipse of the aoidos with his kitharis [κἱθαρις], and the firm establishment of the trained reciter, the rhapsode” (Kirk, Epic 314; cf. Hayman 150; Patzer 324). During the seventh and sixth centuries BCE the alphabet and writing became more pervasive; appreciation for literature became more widespread; the Iliad and Odyssey were popular, but the pronunciation of Homeric Greek was virtually lost. At this time, Rhapsodes began to establish themselves as professionals who not only claimed expertise as Homeric scholars but also as Homeric philologists and phoneticians who functioned as linguistic “guardians” of Homeric pronunciation.
Although the specific time during which the evolution from aoidos to rhapsode occurred is uncertain, there can be little doubt that the change from a preliterate to a literate Hellenic culture was a dominant force influencing the development of a rhapsodic tradition. Prior to the eighth and seventh centuries BCE, individuals relied upon their memories as the primary means for transmitting literature. Even a cursory reading of the Iliad and Odyssey reveals numerous formulae that were mnemonic aids in recalling passages. With the emergence of writing, however, Rhapsodes began to construct texts of Homeric literature to aid their oral presentations (Xenophon, Memorabilia 4.2.10; Symposium 3.6). A series of passages cited from ancient sources that support the notion of writing being used to aid memory can be found in Pfeiffer (26). Frederic George Kenyon and Colin Henderson Roberts explain: “Long after poems and other literary works were written down as a matter of course, the normal method of publication was oral. Books were essentially aides-memoire for the author or performer, not a primary means of communication to an audience. This view of the book as a hypomnema or substitute for recital persists until Plato, if not later” (OCD 173). Similarly, George Miller Calhoun offers a very informative presentation on the relationship between oral and written litigation (177–93).
Rhapsodes played an important part in the development of oral and written expression, for their texts of Homer not only facilitated memory but also codified and thus stabilized the literature (Kirk, Songs 309). Clearly, divergent copies existed, and corrected copies were undoubtedly numerous. During the dawning of the literary period, Rhapsodes shifted from preliterate improvisers to experts at codifying, preserving, and orally interpreting Homerica for listeners. Athens became the leader in booktrade, but up to the sixth century BCE no single authoritative text was compiled. On the contrary, considerable confusion must have resulted because of the numerous swatches and variant rhapsodic texts that existed (Pfeiffer 25). To resolve this confusion, a single text presenting the “entire” Iliad and Odyssey was needed and the Rhapsodes played a leading role in this ambitious project.
The opportunity for Rhapsodes to canonize Homer’s works came in the sixth century BCE during a Panathenaic contest under Pisistratus. Contests were an integral aspect of Greek life; they included athletic events as well as cultural performances. At the Pythian Games, for example, crowds of musicians actively competed for honors alongside athletes. These festivals, which were centered on religious themes, were a natural arena in which Rhapsodes practiced their art. By the eighth century BCE, the concept of Pan-Hellenic festivals drew competitors from major Greek states (Pfeiffer 5). Hellenic interest in art and athletics may account for the frequency of such contests (Isocrates, Panegyricus 43–46), and the deference that all Greeks shared toward the Iliad and Odyssey offered a universal bond.
Until the sixth century BCE, there was not a suitable Pan-Hellenic text that could function as a standard, authorized copy. By this time, Homeric readings were a recognized part of Panathenaic festivals (Kirk, Songs 302–03). In an attempt to resolve textual difficulties, the Athenian tyrant Pisistratus ordered the scattered readings of Homeric literature to be collected and assembled. The orator Lycurgus adds support to the contention that Rhapsodes were individuals chosen to stabilize the works of Homer when he said to the Athenians: “Your fathers held the poet [Homer] in such regard that they established a law so that at every five-yearly Panathenaea his epic works alone, of all the poets, would be chanted by the Rhapsodes” (Contra Leocratem 102). Plato argues that Hipparchus, not Pisistratus, ordered the canonization of the Iliad and Odyssey by Rhapsodes (Hipparchus 228B) while Diogenes Laertius (1.57) claims that the codification took place under Solon, a position supported by Hayman (144). T. W. Allen argues for a different date and locale for the canonization of Homer’s works but does not attack ancient references that credit Rhapsodes for their efforts (40, 48–49). Lastly, Josephus reinforced the testimony of Lycurgus by claiming that up to the time of Pisistratus such works were transmitted only orally (Contra Apionem 1.12).
While it is clear that arguments about locale, time and authority exist concerning the literate standardization of the Iliad and Odyssey, there is no disagreement
