Homerizon Conference – Landing

Homerizon: Conceptual Interrogations in Homeric Studies

The Homerizon: Conceptual interrogations in Homeric Studies

June 27-July 1, 2005
back to Past Conferences main page

Classics @ Issue 3: The Homerizon: Conceptual Interrogations in Homeric Studies is now available here as an Online Publication.

This colloquium  had as its twin goals: 1) the serious interrogation of cherished assumptions about Homeric “culture” and “texuality” and 2) the exploration of the wider cultural significance of the perennial Homeric Question(s). These two goals were linked in that the explorations outlined for 2) quite often led to the serious interrogations of 1). For example, when we look into the influence of a particular scenario of Homeric composition — that of the illiterate bard who speaks/sings for his entire people — we immediately hit upon   a set of assumptions about the unity of the Homeric corpus, the unity of its   supposed “national culture,” the nature of its style and composition, the organic links between the narrative of the poems and the history of the Hellenic peoples, and the paradigmatic or foundational status of this Homer for other national cultures. The organizers’ assumption was that questions of reception draw vitally upon the most essential questions posed by the text, and help to recalibrate one’s sense of the Homeric textual horizon —  what we have called the Homerizon, deliberately invoking the Greek active participle homêrizôn, “doing Homer.” In plainer language, we   wanted to investigate quite simply: throughout history,  what does it mean   to “do Homer”? The scholars who attended were openly invited to take a broader view of the issue of Homer than that fought out in the usual philological and  archaeological venues. Abstracts of their papers appear below. Papers have been published in their entirety as Issue 3 of Classics@, the online journal of the Center for Hellenic Studies. To access the full-text versions, please click here.


Ellen Aitken, “An Early Christian Homerizon? Decoy, Direction, and Doxology.”

Richard H. Armstrong, “From Huponoia to Paranoia: On the Secular Co-optation of Homeric Religion in Vico, Feuerbach, and Freud.”

Jonathan Burgess, “Tumuli of Achilles.”

Casey Dué, “The Invention of Ossian.”

Mary Ebbott, “Butler’s Authoress of the Odyssey: Gendered Readings of Homer, Then and Now.”

Douglas Frame, “The Homeric Poems after Ionia: A Case in Point.”

Barbara Graziosi, “Homer and the Definition of Epic.”

Constanze Güthenke, “The Philhellenic Horizon: Homeric Prolegomena to the Greek War of Independence.”

Johannes Haubold, “Homer between East and West.”

Richard Martin, “Cretan Homers: Tradition, Politics, Fieldwork.”

Leonard Muellner, “Discovery Procedures and Principles for Homeric Philological Research.”

Cashman Kerr Prince, “Poeta sovrano? Horizons of Homer in Twentieth-Century English-Language Poetry.”

Tom Walsh, “Cretan Homer’s Fragment of Tradition.”