iv. 798), on the only two occasions when he uses the nominative without

a title annexed. He only puts it at the end of the verse in order to couple it with ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν, and with κρείων (Il. xxiii. 288, 354). So far then from being a metrical convenience, this phrase rather forces him out of his way in order to introduce it. So it is with Æneas. Homer uses his name very many times, but never once places it at the end of a verse, except in the single case in which he attaches it to the title ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν. Again, then, the phrase compels him to adopt a position which he is uniformly careful to avoid elsewhere for Æneas, and this in little short of forty instances.

_Persons to whom it might have been applied._

2. Besides the names to which Homer applies the phrase, he employs a great number of names, of persons having high or the very highest rank, which possess exactly the same metrical value as one or another of the six names above quoted; but yet to none of these does he at any time give the title of ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν. Of such names I have observed the following: and I exclude from the list the merely local characters of the Odyssey, and all persons in inferior station.

(1) Of the same metrical value with Eumelus:

Patroclus. Pheidippus. Euneus. Eudorus. Euphemus. Ægisthus. Admetus. Amphius. Euphorbus.

And of the dead,

Isandros. Adrestus.

(2) Of the same metrical value with Augeias, Euphetes, Æneas, Anchises:

Antenor. Sarpedon. Pyræchmes. Hercules (Heracles). Eurystheus.

(3) Of the same metrical value with Agamemnon:

Diomedes. Polypœtes. Megapenthes. Thrasymedes. Eteoneus. Agapenor. Euphenor. Prothoenor. Hyperenor.

(4) Of the same metrical value with Agamemnon, except having the last syllable short:

Menelaus. Echepolus. Melanippus. Polydorus.

And of the dead,

Rhadamanthus. Meleagros.

Here are thirty-five names as susceptible of conjunction with the phrase ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν as the six to which he attaches it. How comes it to be attached, significant as it is _primâ facie_, to the six, and never to the thirty-five? Did it come and go by accident, or had Homer a meaning in it?

Moreover, I would by no means be understood to admit, that metrical obstacles would have sufficed to prevent Homer from applying almost any title to almost any name: such were the resources of his genius and his ear, and such the freedom that the youthful elasticity of the language secured to him.

It must be remembered too that he has given us an instance (in Il.