Özet:

For a long time the premise has been dominant among Homerists that the Iliad and also the Odyssey were the outcome of an oral tradition which was handed down by singers. This premise is often accompanied by the notion that the performances of the singers took place at the court of aristocrats or even kings. It is also assumed that the posited oral compositions were, formally and in content, part of a long tradition going back in a far distant past. Against this concept it was argued that it has never been defined what tradition is. Therefore the presupposed tradition seems to be a reification (R. Scodel). The doubts about its existence are enhanced by the fact that the epics themselves offer a different picture. They know various narrators within the narration who tell different publica stories at different places. That makes the question ‘Who is the audience of Homer’ change into the question ‘What makes a narration attractive to the listeners?’ To give a convincing response to this question presupposes insights into the intention of the epics. Obviously, the stories of the Iliad and the Odyssey revolve around various forms of strife and negotiations to resolve them. As the first half of the 7th century BC as date of the epics is increasingly accepted, these topics seem easily to be connected with the ‘real’ world of the emerging urban settlements (A. Duplouy, M. Mohr) where conflict and the complex processes of negotiations must have been daily experience. The narratological analysis of how the gods of the Iliad came to terms with each other and established the Olympian order supports this argument as does the embedding of the Homeric art of narration (D. Elmer) and narrative motives (T. Itgenshorst) in the context of the formation of political consent.

Anahtar Kelimeler: