Epic in the Cups: Sympotic Performance and the Songs of Achilles and Patroclus

The scene in Iliad 9 (186-191) in which Achilles sings klea andron to or with Patroclus is a well-known locus for scholarly interest in performance of song in the Homeric epics. Chiefly relying on linguistic evidence related to ancient citations of the so-called “Panathenaic Rule,” Nagy (1996, 2009) posits that Achilles and Patroclus are engaging in “rhapsodic sequencing,” a technique of “leaving off” and “taking up” of song thought to be employed by rhapsodes in their performances of the epics. I argue that these techniques can be shown to have analogous connections with the performance of poetry in a more private arena, namely the symposium, and that recognizing the sympotic context of the passage, as was demonstrated by Pellicia (2002) for Iliad 6, is critical for decoding the poetics underlying the scene. The techniques of rhapsodic and sympotic singing are not dissimilar (Collins 2004). Testimonia which refer to the supposed “Panathenaic Rule” identify a system in which rhapsodes “start up” and “leave off” according to a specific order (D.L.1.57.6, [Ps.-Plato] Hipparch.228b-c). The poetic gaming of the symposium involves analogous practices. In Aristophanes’ Wasps, for example, Bdelycleon instructs his father Philocleon on the technique of the game of skolion and advises him to “take up” the song well as the poetic gaming circulates around the room at a symposium (1222, cf. 1224-1226, 1242-1243). Linguistic parallels between the description of the singing in Iliad 9 and testimonia for the “Panathenaic Rule” have led scholars to infer that techniques of rhapsodic sequencing are embedded in the poetics of the narrative. But these techniques are also evident in symposia, offering an alterative interpretation. The description of Patroclus in Iliad 9 incorporates language distinctly designated for the trading of sympotic song. The solitary, non-professional setting of singing of song is not typical of poetic performances in the epics which showcase the aoidos and his skills. Furthermore, when the embassy arrives, Achilles orders Patroclus to set out a larger krater, mix stronger wine, and bring out cups for each man (9.202-203). These are precisely the utensils for a wine-party, and the terminology used suggests that wine and cups were present at Achilles and Patroclus’ storytelling. When the implements are laid out, Odysseus compliments his host’s provisions as is appropriate to the symposium (cf. Wasps 1212-1215, Ford 1999) and thus initiates sympotic ground rules for the series of speeches to follow. Thus the concurrence in technique between certain sympotic and rhapsodic performances invites us to explore the possibility that Achilles and Patroclus are engaged in sympotic performance. These sympotic undertones of the passage serve to heighten the tension of what is already a precarious situation: Achilles is not always well behaved at banquets. He has already quarrelled with Odysseus at one (Od. 8.73-77; cf. Sophocles, Syndeipnoi) and may have killed Thersites at a drinking party according to the Aethiopis (cf. Rosen 2003). In light of Achilles’ past behaviour, we encounter the Iliadic embassy scene with greater anxiety as to whether Achilles will curb his anger—which is repeatedly referred to by each speaker—or whether on this occasion he will again violate the rules of the drinking party.