Here and some fifty lines later (23.193) are the only two occurrences in the Iliad of the ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ἐνόησε (“then he/she thought of other things”) formula, which occurs with much greater frequency in the Odyssey. In that poem, the formula functions as a marker of a more or less significant discontinuity: a change of scene or a turn of the plot in a substantially new direction (see Odyssey 2.382). In this instance, there is no such discontinuity, at least in terms of the scene or the forward movement of the action. Instead of a sudden departure in a new direction, we find a ‘zooming in’ on the goal of the action, from the Myrmidons as they march in Patroklos’ funeral procession to Achilles standing at the pyre. The discontinuity consists rather in the transition to a ritual act of special significance: Achilles’ dedication of the lock of hair that Peleus had vowed would be offered to the river Sperkheios on Achilles’ return to Phthia. The subsequent occurrence of the formula likewise marks the shift to an especially significant ritual act, namely, the lighting of Patroklos’ funeral pyre. The formulaic marker of discontinuity thus serves to highlight the most critical ritual moments in the otherwise continuous narrative of Patroklos’ funeral. Comparison with the usage of the formula in the Odyssey suggests further layers of possible meaning. At Odyssey 23.242, a variant of the formula occurs in a context in which, again, there is no immediately apparent discontinuity. And, again, this occurrence is followed by another a short while later (23.344). These two instances enclose what is arguably the most significant moment in the Odyssey: the reunion of Odysseus and Penelope, which Aristophanes of Byzantium and Aristarchus identified as the poem’s τέλος (see Odyssey 23.242). One might similarly view the ritual act enclosed by the Iliad’s two occurrences of the formula as the τέλος of that poem, for, by shearing the lock of hair he had saved for Sperkheios, Achilles ritually formalizes his destiny to die at Troy. In the Odyssey, furthermore, the ἄλλ᾽ ἐνόησε formula, which is used most often with Athena as subject, serves as an index of narrative control: it highlights the fact that Athena prompts and guides the action (see Odyssey 2.382). In Iliad 23, Achilles emerges as a comparable director of the action. Not only does he dictate the ritual procedures of Patroklos’ funeral; during the subsequent games he directs contests that restage, in various ways, many of the poem’s principal themes. Finally, it is tempting to draw some connection between the fact that, in the Odyssey, the formula is restricted to female subjects (Athena, Helen, Nausikaa, Penelope) and the fact that, in the Iliad, it refers exclusively to Achilles’ involvement in funerary ritual. As a mourner, Achilles participates in a sphere of action that is typically dominated by women (see Alexiou 2002 and Dué 2006: ch. 1). The application to Achilles of a formula that is otherwise associated with female actors may serve to highlight his assumption of a very different social role than he has hitherto occupied.
Bibliographical References
Alexiou, M. 2002. The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition. Rev. ed. Lanham, MD.
Dué, C. 2006. The Captive Woman’s Lament in Greek Tragedy. Austin.