|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One can hardly speak of a minimum or maximum length for a Greek musical performance. It might be a tiny song of two lines, or at the other extreme an open-ended epic recitation going on for hours or days. But irrespective of scale, the music had to obey some principle of form if it was to give satisfaction. What kinds of principle come into question? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To a large extent form, like rhythm, is reflected in metrical structure, and useful inferences can be drawn from our whole corpus of Greek poetry (insofar as it was sung), even without knowing anything of the melodies. First we can make a basic distinction of three structural types: stichic, where a line of more or less fixed metrical form is repeated indefinitely, with no grouping into larger units; strophic, where a longer and more complex structure, usually analysable into smaller components, is the repeating unit; and free astrophic, where there is continuous development and no principle of repetition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prime example of stichic form is Homeric epic: thousands of lines of unchanging length and rhythm, differentiated only by the varying incidence of word-ends and pauses and by the haphazard alternation of feet of the form  with feet of the form  . We know it was all sung to the lyre, following a brief instrumental introduction, and probably with some instrumental notes between the verses.43 But how was it sung? Does the stereotyped hexameter metre betoken a stereotyped melodic line, repeated over and over again? This is more or less what happens in the epic singing of many countries, from Mongolia to Iceland. Sometimes, however, the bard uses more than one melody, alternating them in different types of context. And although the melodies are often characterized as 'repetitive' or 'monotonous', they are capable of accommodating many minor variations. There is reason to believe that the Homeric singer, within the framework of a repeating melodic scheme, was able to take account of the word accents, and that in this way many archaic accentuations were preserved.44 Yugoslav epic songas in many respectsprovides an interesting parallel: |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
43 See JHS 101 (1981), 122f.; ZPE 63 (1986). 42-4. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44JHS 101. l 13 if.; cf. Georgiades, 123 f.; G. Danek, Wiener humanistische Blätter 31 (1989), 5ff. |
|
|
|
|
|