dicating some quality or attribute regarded as characteristic of the person or thing described, (2) a significant appellation." (This significance rests upon the extent to which it characterizes its object.) All adjectives tend to describe characteristics, but this is more true of those applied to things than of those applied to persons. The latter, being human, are subject to change, and adjectives may catch mere phases. Thus, Jones, usually a coward, may be brave once; Smith may be brave by nature. Then should one say "bold Jones," bold would be an adjective; should one say "bold Smith," it would be an epithetic adjective according to the New English Dictionary. This seems to be a real and a fair distinction. Therefore in the work which follows epithet will have the meanings assigned to it by the New English Dictionary, “(1) an adjective indicating some quality or attribute regarded as characteristic of the person or thing described, (2) a significant appellation." (The second may be a noun or phrase.)

The theses here proposed are: that Vergil in writing the Aeneid was deliberate in his use of personal epithets, especially so when he repeated one with a particular character; that this deliberateness made him consider in his choice of each personal epithet the traditional qualities and attributes of the character concerned, and the relation of these qualities and attributes to the plot or action of the poem; that where the character concerned was created by him the choice of epithets was made in relation to plot or action; that where metrical convenience or metrical effect made the use of any epithet expedient it was, nevertheless, not allowed to be unrelated to plot or action.

The dissertation attempts to establish these propositions, first, by contrasting briefly the use of personal epithets in Homer, Apollonius Rhodius, and Catullus, all of whom influenced Vergil, with the use of personal epithets in the Aeneid; secondly (after a necessary discussion of the use of antonomasia and of complex epithets), by considering the more striking repeated personal epithets; finally, by considering in detail the characters Dido, Juno, Venus, Aeneas, and Ascanius, attempting to discover the poet's reasons for the choice of the epithets applied to them, and to substantiate these

reasons.

The striking feature of Homer's use of personal epithets is his repetition of particular epithets with special characters, a repetition so marked that it has given rise to the term "fixed epithets,"1 and even "Homeric epithets." For instance, in the Iliad (where the name Achilles occurs approximately four hundred times) the combination Stos Axiddeus occurs fifty-seven times, and the combination ποδάρκης διος Αχιλλεύς an additional twenty-one times. Also various changes are rung on the яоdáρкηs theme. The combination módas ὠκὺς ̓Αχιλλεύς occurs at least thirty times, ̓Αχιλήα πόδας ταχύν four times, and ποδώκεα Πηλείωνα twelve times. The epithets of the other heroes and of the divinities are repeated in a similar manner, and to such an extent that the repetition strikes every reader of either the Iliad or the Odyssey.

The reasons behind this repetition cannot all be definitely determined. The manner of composition of the poems may be responsible for much of it. Whether one bard or many worked on the poem it is certain that a

1

1 Cf. E. Krah. De fixis quae dicuntur deorum et heroum epithetis, p. 1.

stock of set phrases was largely drawn on, with the result that we find within the poems many parallel passages.1 That part of the repetition of epithets is due to this is witnessed by their occurrence in the formulae used to introduce speeches. For example, of the thirty times πόδας ὠκὺς ̓Αχιλλεύς is used, twenty-four are in the formula προσέφη πόδας ώκὺς ̓Αχιλλεύς.

There may also be a skilful purpose behind some repetitions of personal epithets. Such seems to be the case with éris apyvрóñela used in Iliad XVIII, 369, and repeated twelve lines later, XVIII, 381. In the first instance the goddess is shown on her way to the house of Hephaestus to ask arms for Achilles. There follows a detailed account of the fire god's workshop, an account which takes the reader's mind away from the purpose of Thetis' visit. It is recalled by the repetition of the goddess' name in line 381, a recollection that is made more immediate and more certain by the vividness which the epithet ȧpyvpónela adds and which its repetition emphasizes.

Regardless of how much such repetition is due to chance and how much to deliberate purpose on the part of the poet, it has two definite and important effects; it contributes to the reader's sense of the unity of the poem and to his feeling that here is poetry distinct from prose. It accomplishes the former by maintaining a consistent idea of the characters, for the repeated epithet takes one back to its previous occurrence and so on in a continued chain throughout the poem. The second result is due to the fact that repeated epithets are not a part of everyday life or its prose, a difference which the reader must feel. Also there is a formality about them which

1 See the lists in C. E. Schmidt, Parallel Homer.

seems to contribute to that nobility which Matthew Arnold1 finds in Homer without impairing the simplicity which he says must be combined with nobility to make great poetry.

Apollonius Rhodius wrote his Argonautica at Alexandria sometime in the third century B.C., a time when "epic poetry was out of fashion, and we find many epigrams of this period-some by Callimachus-directed against the 'cyclic poets,' by whom were meant at that time those who were always dragging in conventional and commonplace epithets and phrases peculiar to epic poetry." (R. C. Seaton, in his introduction to the Loeb Library edition of Apollonius.) Even if Apollonius wrote the Argonautica "out of bravado, to show that he could write an epic poem," he avoided the accusations made against the "cyclic poets" by his contemporary critics. So far is he from "dragging in conventional and commonplace epithets" that he seems to be deliberately avoiding them. In the poem he uses the name 'Inowv forty-one times, only once (II, 122, dpntos) using an epithet with it. To stand for 'Inowv (that is, in antonomasia) he uses his patronymic Aloovions fifty-eight times, a frequency accounted for by the dislike of hexameter poets to use bacchiac words such as 'Inowv (--) except in the last place in the line, which is the only place where the nominative form 'Inowv occurs. With Alcovions he four times uses the epithet npws which was his common appellation for all of the Argonauts. "Ηρως is also used once with the phrase Αίσονος vios, which is itself used six times. The only similarity to Homer is that in four of the six times it is used Aloovos 1On Study of Celtic Literature and on Translating Homer, New York, Macmillan, 1903, p. 149.

Cf. Vergil's use of Ascanius and Iulus, p. 66.

2

vios introduces speeches. This one point of contact shows by its very slightness how widely divergent the two poets are in their use of personal epithets.

Catullus, a poet essentially of the Alexandrine school, in the Peleus and Thetis, his short epic, mentions thirtysix characters. Only twenty of these have epithets with their names, and only one epithet is repeated, ferox being used twice with Theseus.1 The four hundred and eight lines of the Peleus and Thetis do not afford extensive material, but the poem is almost as long as some books of the Iliad and may serve as a contrast. It certainly shows that of the immediate predecessors of Vergil the one who influenced him most was not prone to "drag in conventional and commonplace epithets."

Vergil's use of personal epithets in the Aeneid may be illustrated by those used with Aeneas and Venus. The name Aeneas occurs in the poem two hundred and thirteen times, seventy-eight of these times with epithets. Pius accounts for twenty and pater for nineteen of the seventy-eight. Dardanius (used four times) is the only other having more than three occurrences. The name Venus occurs fifty-three times, eleven of these with epithets. Dea accounts for three of the eleven and alma for two. This is not a great frequency or a large repetition of epithets, especially when we consider that, because the subject-matter of the Aeneid is essentially Homeric, literary tradition and good taste compelled the author to follow the Homeric manner.

This manner, in so far as it is concerned with epithets, was probably modified by Vergil's study of

1 Pater, Jupiter's traditional title, is used for him in antonomasia three times.

2 These figures do not include antonomasia, which is discussed in detail. PP. 7-10.