,transcriber's ,note3  ,this lecture was
 taken from ,volume ,,iii of ,the       
,complete ,works of ,friedrich          
,nietzsche1 ,dr4 ,oscar ,levy1 ,ed41 ,j4
 ,m4 ,kennedy1 ,translator1 #aiaj       
,,homer ,,and ,,classical ,,philology4  
7,inaugural ,address delivered at ,ble  
,university1 #bhth of ,may #ahfi47   ,at
 the present day no clear and consistent
 opinion seems to be held regarding     
,classical ,philology4 ,we are conscious
 of this in the circles of the learned  
just as much as among the followers of  
that science itself4 ,the cause of this 
lies in its many-sided character1 in the
 lack of an abstract unity1 and in the  
inorganic aggregation of heterogeneous  
scientific activities which are         
connected with one another only by the  
name ,philology4 ,it must be freely     
admitted that philology is to some      
extent borrowed from several other      
sciences1 and is mixed together like a  
magic potion from the most outlandish   
liquors1 ores1 and bones4 ,it may even  

be added that it likewise conceals      
within itself an artistic element1 one  
which1 on sthetic and ethical grounds1  
may be called imperatival--an element   
that acts in opposition to its purely   
scientific behaviour4 ,philology is     
composed of history just as much as of  
natural science or sthetics3 history1 in
 so far as it endeavours to comprehend  
the manifestations of the               
individualities of peoples in ever new  
images1 and the prevailing law in the   
disappearance of phenomena2 natural     
science1 in so far as it strives to     
fathom the deepest instinct of man1 that
 of speech2 sthetics1 finally1 because  
from various antiquities at our disposal
 it endeavours to pick out the so-called
 classical antiquity1 with the view and 
pretension of excavating the ideal world
 buried under it1 and to hold up to the 
present the mirror of the classical and 
everlasting standards4 ,that these      
wholly different scientific and         
sthetico-ethical impulses have been     

associated under a common name1 a kind  
of sham monarchy1 is shown especially by
 the fact that philology at every period
 from its origin onwards was at the same
 time pedagogical4 ,from the standpoint 
of the pedagogue1 a choice was offered  
of those elements which were of the     
greatest educational value2 and thus    
that science1 or at least that          
scientific aim1 which we call philology1
 gradually developed out of the         
practical calling originated by the     
exigencies of that science itself4      
,these philological aims were pursued   
sometimes with greater ardour and       
sometimes with less1 in accordance with 
the degree of culture and the           
development of the taste of a particular
 period2 but1 on the other hand1 the    
followers of this science are in the    
habit of regarding the aims which       
correspond to their several abilities as
 the aims of philology2 whence it comes 
about that the estimation of philology  
in public opinion depends upon the      

weight of the personalities of the      
philologists6  ,at the present          
time--that is to say1 in a period which 
has seen men distinguished in almost    
every department of philology--a general
 uncertainty of judgment has increased  
more and more1 and likewise a general   
relaxation of interest and participation
 in philological problems4 ,such an     
undecided and imperfect state of public 
opinion is damaging to a science in that
 its hidden and open enemies can work   
with much better prospects of success4  
,and philology has a great many such    
enemies4 ,where do we not meet with     
them1 these mockers1 always ready to aim
 a blow at the philological moles1 the  
animals that practise dust-eating ex    
professo1 and that grub up and eat for  
the eleventh time what they have already
 eaten ten times before4 ,for opponents 
of this sort1 however1 philology is     
merely a useless1 harmless1 and         
inoffensive pastime1 an object of       
laughter and not of hate4 ,but1 on the  

other hand1 there is a boundless and    
infuriated hatred of philology wherever 
an ideal1 as such1 is feared1 where the 
modern man falls down to worship        
himself1 and where ,hellenism is looked 
upon as a superseded and hence very     
insignificant point of view4 ,against   
these enemies1 we philologists must     
always count upon the assistance of     
artists and men of artistic minds2 for  
they alone can judge how the sword of   
barbarism sweeps over the head of every 
one who loses sight of the unutterable  
simplicity and noble dignity of the     
,hellene2 and how no progress in        
commerce or technical industries1       
however brilliant1 no school            
regulations1 no political education of  
the masses1 however widespread and      
complete1 can protect us from the curse 
of ridiculous and barbaric offences     
against good taste1 or from annihilation
 by the ,gorgon head of the classicist4 
,whilst philology as a whole is looked  
on with jealous eyes by these two       

classes of opponents1 there are numerous
 and varied hostilities in other        
directions of philology2 philologists   
themselves are quarrelling with one     
another2 internal dissensions are caused
 by useless disputes about precedence   
and mutual jealousies1 but especially by
 the differences--even                  
enmities--comprised in the name of      
philology1 which are not1 however1 by   
any means naturally harmonised          
instincts4  ,science has this in common 
with art1 that the most ordinary1       
everyday thing appears to it as         
something entirely new and attractive1  
as if metamorphosed by witchcraft and   
now seen for the first time4 ,life is   
worth living1 says art1 the beautiful   
temptress2 life is worth knowing1 says  
science4 ,with this contrast the so     
heartrending and dogmatic tradition     
follows in a theory1 and consequently in
 the practice of classical philology    
derived from this theory4 ,we may       
consider antiquity from a scientific    

point of view2 we may try to look at    
what has happened with the eye of a     
historian1 or to arrange and compare the
 linguistic forms of ancient            
masterpieces1 to bring them at all      
events under a morphological law2 but we
 always lose the wonderful creative     
force1 the real fragrance1 of the       
atmosphere of antiquity2 we forget that 
passionate emotion which instinctively  
drove our meditation and enjoyment back 
to the ,greeks4 ,from this point onwards
 we must take notice of a clearly       
determined and very surprising          
antagonism which philology has great    
cause to regret4 ,from the circles upon 
whose help we must place the most       
implicit reliance--the artistic friends 
of antiquity1 the warm supporters of    
,hellenic beauty and noble              
simplicity--we hear harsh voices crying 
out that it is precisely the            
philologists themselves who are the real
 opponents and destroyers of the ideals 
of antiquity4 ,schiller upbraided the   

philologists with having scattered      
,homer's laurel crown to the winds4 ,it 
was none other than ,goethe who1 in     
early life a supporter of ,wolf's       
theories regarding ,homer1 recanted in  
the verses--       ,with subtle wit you 
took away        ,our former adoration3 
,the ,iliad1 you may us say1        ,was
 mere conglomeration4      ,think it not
 crime in any way3        ,youth's      
fervent adoration      ,leads us to know
 the verity1        ,and feel the poet's
 unity4  ,the reason of this want of    
piety and reverence must lie deeper2 and
 many are in doubt as to whether        
philologists are lacking in artistic    
capacity and impressions1 so that they  
are unable to do justice to the ideal1  
or whether the spirit of negation has   
become a destructive and iconoclastic   
principle of theirs4 ,when1 however1    
even the friends of antiquity1 possessed
 of such doubts and hesitations1 point  
to our present classical philology as   
something questionable1 what influence  

may we not ascribe to the outbursts of  
the realists and the claptrap of the    
heroes of the passing hour8 ,to answer  
the latter on this occasion1 especially 
when we consider the nature of the      
present assembly1 would be highly       
injudicious2 at any rate1 if ,i do not  
wish to meet with the fate of that      
sophist who1 when in ,sparta1 publicly  
undertook to praise and defend          
,herakles1 when he was interrupted with 
the query3 ,but who then has found fault
 with him8 ,i cannot help thinking1     
however1 that some of these scruples are
 still sounding in the ears of not a few
 in this gathering2 for they may still  
be frequently heard from the lips of    
noble and artistically gifted men--as   
even an upright philologist must feel   
them1 and feel them most painfully1 at  
moments when his spirits are downcast4  
,for the single individual there is no  
deliverance from the dissensions        
referred to2 but what we contend and    
inscribe on our banner is the fact that 

classical philology1 as a whole1 has    
nothing whatsoever to do with the       
quarrels and bickerings of its          
individual disciples4 ,the entire       
scientific and artistic movement of this
 peculiar centaur is bent1 though with  
cyclopic slowness1 upon bridging over   
the gulf between the ideal              
antiquity--which is perhaps only the    
magnificent blossoming of the ,teutonic 
longing for the south--and the real     
antiquity2 and thus classical philology 
pursues only the final end of its own   
being1 which is the fusing together of  
primarily hostile impulses that have    
only forcibly been brought together4    
,let us talk as we will about the       
unattainability of this goal1 and even  
designate the goal itself as an         
illogical pretension--the aspiration for
 it is very real2 and ,i should like to 
try to make it clear by an example that 
the most significant steps of classical 
philology never lead away from the ideal
 antiquity1 but to it2 and that1 just   

when people are speaking unwarrantably  
of the overthrow of sacred shrines1 new 
and more worthy altars are being        
erected4 ,let us then examine the       
so-called ,homeric question from this   
standpoint1 a question the most         
important problem of which ,schiller    
called a scholastic barbarism4  ,the    
important problem referred to is the    
question of the personality of ,homer4  
,we now meet everywhere with the firm   
opinion that the question of ,homer's   
personality is no longer timely1 and    
that it is quite a different thing from 
the real ,homeric question4 ,it may be  
added that1 for a given period--such as 
our present philological period1 for    
example--the centre of discussion may be
 removed from the problem of the poet's 
personality2 for even now a painstaking 
experiment is being made to reconstruct 
the ,homeric poems without the aid of   
personality1 treating them as the work  
of several different persons4 ,but if   
the centre of a scientific question is  

rightly seen to be where the swelling   
tide of new views has risen up1 i4e4    
where individual scientific             
investigation comes into contact with   
the whole life of science and           
culture--if any one1 in other words1    
indicates a historico-cultural valuation
 as the central point of the question1  
he must also1 in the province of        
,homeric criticism1 take his stand upon 
the question of personality as being the
 really fruitful oasis in the desert of 
the whole argument4 ,for in ,homer the  
modern world1 ,i will not say has       
learnt1 but has examined1 a great       
historical point of view2 and1 even     
without now putting forward my own      
opinion as to whether this examination  
has been or can be happily carried out1 
it was at all events the first example  
of the application of that productive   
point of view4 ,by it scholars learnt to
 recognise condensed beliefs in the     
apparently firm1 immobile figures of the
 life of ancient peoples2 by it they for

 the first time perceived the wonderful 
capability of the soul of a people to   
represent the conditions of its morals  
and beliefs in the form of a            
personality4 ,when historical criticism 
has confidently seized upon this method 
of evaporating apparently concrete      
personalities1 it is permissible to     
point to the first experiment as an     
important event in the history of       
sciences1 without considering whether it
 was successful in this instance or not4
  ,it is a common occurrence for a      
series of striking signs and wonderful  
emotions to precede an epoch-making     
discovery4 ,even the experiment ,i have 
just referred to has its own attractive 
history2 but it goes back to a          
surprisingly ancient era4 ,friedrich    
,august ,wolf has exactly indicated the 
spot where ,greek antiquity dropped the 
question4 ,the zenith of the            
historico-literary studies of the       
,greeks1 and hence also of their point  
of greatest importance--the ,homeric    

question--was reached in the age of the 
,alexandrian grammarians4 ,up to this   
time the ,homeric question had run      
through the long chain of a uniform     
process of development1 of which the    
standpoint of those grammarians seemed  
to be the last link1 the last1 indeed1  
which was attainable by antiquity4 ,they
 conceived the ,iliad and the ,odyssey  
as the creations of one single ,homer2  
they declared it to be psychologically  
possible for two such different works to
 have sprung from the brain of one      
genius1 in contradiction to the         
,chorizontes1 who represented the       
extreme limit of the scepticism of a few
 detached individuals of antiquity      
rather than antiquity itself considered 
as a whole4 ,to explain the different   
general impression of the two books on  
the assumption that one poet composed   
them both1 scholars sought assistance by
 referring to the seasons of the poet's 
life1 and compared the poet of the      
,odyssey to the setting sun4 ,the eyes  

of those critics were tirelessly on the 
lookout for discrepancies in the        
language and thoughts of the two poems2 
but at this time also a history of the  
,homeric poem and its tradition was     
prepared1 according to which these      
discrepancies were not due to ,homer1   
but to those who committed his words to 
writing and those who sang them4 ,it was
 believed that ,homer's poem was passed 
from one generation to another viva     
voce1 and faults were attributed to the 
improvising and at times forgetful      
bards4 ,at a certain given date1 about  
the time of ,pisistratus1 the poems     
which had been repeated orally were said
 to have been collected in manuscript   
form2 but the scribes1 it is added1     
allowed themselves to take some         
liberties with the text by transposing  
some lines and adding extraneous matter 
here and there4 ,this entire hypothesis 
is the most important in the domain of  
literary studies that antiquity has     
exhibited2 and the acknowledgment of the

 dissemination of the ,homeric poems by 
word of mouth1 as opposed to the habits 
of a book-learned age1 shows in         
particular a depth of ancient sagacity  
worthy of our admiration4 ,from those   
times until the generation that produced
 ,friedrich ,august ,wolf we must take a
 jump over a long historical vacuum2 but
 in our own age we find the argument    
left just as it was at the time when the
 power of controversy departed from     
antiquity1 and it is a matter of        
indifference to us that ,wolf accepted  
as certain tradition what antiquity     
itself had set up only as a hypothesis4 
,it may be remarked as most             
characteristic of this hypothesis that1 
in the strictest sense1 the personality 
of ,homer is treated seriously2 that a  
certain standard of inner harmony is    
everywhere presupposed in the           
manifestations of the personality2 and  
that1 with these two excellent auxiliary
 hypotheses1 whatever is seen to be     
below this standard and opposed to this 

inner harmony is at once swept aside as 
un-,homeric4 ,but even this             
distinguishing characteristic1 in place 
of wishing to recognise the supernatural
 existence of a tangible personality1   
ascends likewise through all the stages 
that lead to that zenith1 with          
ever-increasing energy and clearness4   
,individuality is ever more strongly    
felt and accentuated2 the psychological 
possibility of a single ,homer is ever  
more forcibly demanded4 ,if we descend  
backwards from this zenith1 step by     
step1 we find a guide to the            
understanding of the ,homeric problem in
 the person of ,aristotle4 ,homer was   
for him the flawless and untiring artist
 who knew his end and the means to      
attain it2 but there is still a trace of
 infantile criticism to be found in     
,aristotle--i4e41 in the naive          
concession he made to the public opinion
 that considered ,homer as the author of
 the original of all comic epics1 the   
,margites4 ,if we go still further      

backwards from ,aristotle1 the inability
 to create a personality is seen to     
increase2 more and more poems are       
attributed to ,homer2 and every period  
lets us see its degree of criticism by  
how much and what it considers as       
,homeric4 ,in this backward examination1
 we instinctively feel that away beyond 
,herodotus there lies a period in which 
an immense flood of great epics has been
 identified with the name of ,homer4    
,let us imagine ourselves as living in  
the time of ,pisistratus3 the word      
,homer then comprehended an abundance of
 dissimilarities4 ,what was meant by    
,homer at that time8 ,it is evident that
 that generation found itself unable to 
grasp a personality and the limits of   
its manifestations4 ,homer had now      
become of small consequence4 ,and then  
we meet with the weighty question3 ,what
 lies before this period8 ,has ,homer's 
personality1 because it cannot be       
grasped1 gradually faded away into an   
empty name8 ,or had all the ,homeric    

poems been gathered together in a body1 
the nation naively representing itself  
by the figure of ,homer8 ,was the person
 created out of a conception1 or the    
conception out of a person8 ,this is the
 real ,homeric question1 the central    
problem of the personality4  ,the       
difficulty of answering this question1  
however1 is increased when we seek a    
reply in another direction1 from the    
standpoint of the poems themselves which
 have come down to us4 ,as it is        
difficult for us at the present day1 and
 necessitates a serious effort on our   
part1 to understand the law of          
gravitation clearly--that the earth     
alters its form of motion when another  
heavenly body changes its position in   
space1 although no material connection  
unites one to the other--it likewise    
costs us some trouble to obtain a clear 
impression of that wonderful problem    
which1 like a coin long passed from hand
 to hand1 has lost its original and     
highly conspicuous stamp4 ,poetical     

works1 which cause the hearts of even   
the greatest geniuses to fail when they 
endeavour to vie with them1 and in which
 unsurpassable images are held up for   
the admiration of posterity--and yet the
 poet who wrote them with only a hollow1
 shaky name1 whenever we do lay hold on 
him2 nowhere the solid kernel of a      
powerful personality4 ,for who would    
wage war with the gods3 who1 even with  
the one god8 asks ,goethe even1 who1    
though a genius1 strove in vain to solve
 that mysterious problem of the ,homeric
 inaccessibility4  ,the conception of   
popular poetry seemed to lead like a    
bridge over this problem--a deeper and  
more original power than that of every  
single creative individual was said to  
have become active2 the happiest people1
 in the happiest period of its          
existence1 in the highest activity of   
fantasy and formative power1 was said to
 have created those immeasurable poems4 
,in this universality there is something
 almost intoxicating in the thought of a

 popular poem3 we feel1 with artistic   
pleasure1 the broad1 overpowering       
liberation of a popular gift1 and we    
delight in this natural phenomenon as we
 do in an uncontrollable cataract4 ,but 
as soon as we examine this thought at   
close quarters1 we involuntarily put a  
poetic mass of people in the place of   
the poetising soul of the people3 a long
 row of popular poets in whom           
individuality has no meaning1 and in    
whom the tumultuous movement of a       
people's soul1 the intuitive strength of
 a people's eye1 and the unabated       
profusion of a people's fantasy1 were   
once powerful3 a row of original        
geniuses1 attached to a time1 to a      
poetic genus1 to a subject-matter4      
,such a conception justly made people   
suspicious4 ,could it be possible that  
that same ,nature who so sparingly      
distributed her rarest and most precious
 production--genius--should suddenly    
take the notion of lavishing her gifts  
in one sole direction8 ,and here the    

thorny question again made its          
appearance3 ,could we not get along with
 one genius only1 and explain the       
present existence of that unattainable  
excellence8 ,and now eyes were keenly on
 the lookout for whatever that          
excellence and singularity might consist
 of4 ,impossible for it to be in the    
construction of the complete works1 said
 one party1 for this is far from        
faultless2 but doubtless to be found in 
single songs3 in the single pieces above
 all2 not in the whole4 ,a second party1
 on the other hand1 sheltered themselves
 beneath the authority of ,aristotle1   
who especially admired ,homer's divine  
nature in the choice of his entire      
subject1 and the manner in which he     
planned and carried it out4 ,if1        
however1 this construction was not      
clearly seen1 this fault was due to the 
way the poems were handed down to       
posterity and not to the poet           
himself--it was the result of           
retouchings and interpolations1 owing to

 which the original setting of the work 
gradually became obscured4 ,the more the
 first school looked for inequalities1  
contradictions1 perplexities1 the more  
energetically did the other school brush
 aside what in their opinion obscured   
the original plan1 in order1 if         
possible1 that nothing might be left    
remaining but the actual words of the   
original epic itself4 ,the second school
 of thought of course held fast by the  
conception of an epoch-making genius as 
the composer of the great works4 ,the   
first school1 on the other hand1 wavered
 between the supposition of one genius  
plus a number of minor poets1 and       
another hypothesis which assumed only a 
number of superior and even mediocre    
individual bards1 but also postulated a 
mysterious discharging1 a deep1         
national1 artistic impulse1 which shows 
itself in individual minstrels as an    
almost indifferent medium4 ,it is to    
this latter school that we must         
attribute the representation of the     

,homeric poems as the expression of that
 mysterious impulse4  ,all these schools
 of thought start from the assumption   
that the problem of the present form of 
these epics can be solved from the      
standpoint of an sthetic judgment--but  
we must await the decision as to the    
authorised line of demarcation between  
the man of genius and the poetical soul 
of the people4 ,are there characteristic
 differences between the utterances of  
the man of genius and the poetical soul 
of the people8  ,this whole contrast1   
however1 is unjust and misleading4      
,there is no more dangerous assumption  
in modern sthetics than that of popular 
poetry and individual poetry1 or1 as it 
is usually called1 artistic poetry4     
,this is the reaction1 or1 if you will1 
the superstition1 which followed upon   
the most momentous discovery of         
historico-philological science1 the     
discovery and appreciation of the soul  
of the people4 ,for this discovery      
prepared the way for a coming scientific

 view of history1 which was until then1 
and in many respects is even now1 a mere
 collection of materials1 with the      
prospect that new materials would       
continue to be added1 and that the huge1
 overflowing pile would never be        
systematically arranged4 ,the people now
 understood for the first time that the 
long-felt power of greater              
individualities and wills was larger    
than the pitifully small will of an     
individual man2#a they now saw that     
everything truly great in the kingdom of
 the will could not have its deepest    
root in the inefficacious and ephemeral 
individual will2 and1 finally1 they now 
discovered the powerful instincts of the
 masses1 and diagnosed those unconscious
 impulses to be the foundations and     
supports of the so-called universal     
history4 ,but the newly-lighted flame   
also cast its shadow3 and this shadow   
was none other than that superstition   
already referred to1 which popular      
poetry set up in opposition to          

individual poetry1 and thus enlarged the
 comprehension of the people's soul to  
that of the people's mind4 ,by the      
misapplication of a tempting analogical 
inference1 people had reached the point 
of applying in the domain of the        
intellect and artistic ideas that       
principle of greater individuality which
 is truly applicable only in the domain 
of the will4 ,the masses have never     
experienced more flattering treatment   
than in thus having the laurel of genius
 set upon their empty heads4 ,it was    
imagined that new shells were forming   
round a small kernel1 so to speak1 and  
that those pieces of popular poetry     
originated like avalanches1 in the drift
 and flow of tradition4 ,they were1     
however1 ready to consider that kernel  
as being of the smallest possible       
dimensions1 so that they might          
occasionally get rid of it altogether   
without losing anything of the mass of  
the avalanche4 ,according to this view1 
the text itself and the stories built   

round it are one and the same thing4  #a
 ,of course ,nietzsche saw afterwards   
that this was not so4--,,tr4  ,now1     
however1 such a contrast between popular
 poetry and individual poetry does not  
exist at all2 on the contrary1 all      
poetry1 and of course popular poetry    
also1 requires an intermediary          
individuality4 ,this much-abused        
contrast1 therefore1 is necessary only  
when the term individual poem is        
understood to mean a poem which has not 
grown out of the soil of popular        
feeling1 but which has been composed by 
a non-popular poet in a non-popular     
atmosphere--something which has come to 
maturity in the study of a learned man1 
for example4  ,with the superstition    
which presupposes poetising masses is   
connected another3 that popular poetry  
is limited to one particular period of a
 people's history and afterwards dies   
out--which indeed follows as a          
consequence of the first superstition ,i
 have mentioned4 ,according to this     

school1 in the place of the gradually   
decaying popular poetry we have artistic
 poetry1 the work of individual minds1  
not of masses of people4 ,but the same  
powers which were once active are still 
so2 and the form in which they act has  
remained exactly the same4 ,the great   
poet of a literary period is still a    
popular poet in no narrower sense than  
the popular poet of an illiterate age4  
,the difference between them is not in  
the way they originate1 but it is their 
diffusion and propagation1 in short1    
tradition4 ,this tradition is exposed to
 eternal danger without the help of     
handwriting1 and runs the risk of       
including in the poems the remains of   
those individualities through whose oral
 tradition they were handed down4  ,if  
we apply all these principles to the    
,homeric poems1 it follows that we gain 
nothing with our theory of the poetising
 soul of the people1 and that we are    
always referred back to the poetical    
individual4 ,we are thus confronted with

 the task of distinguishing that which  
can have originated only in a single    
poetical mind from that which is1 so to 
speak1 swept up by the tide of oral     
tradition1 and which is a highly        
important constituent part of the       
,homeric poems4  ,since literary history
 first ceased to be a mere collection of
 names1 people have attempted to grasp  
and formulate the individualities of the
 poets4 ,a certain mechanism forms part 
of the method3 it must be               
explained--i4e41 it must be deduced from
 principles--why this or that           
individuality appears in this way and   
not in that4 ,people now study          
biographical details1 environment1      
acquaintances1 contemporary events1 and 
believe that by mixing all these        
ingredients together they will be able  
to manufacture the wished-for           
individuality4 ,but they forget that the
 punctum saliens1 the indefinable       
individual characteristics1 can never be
 obtained from a compound of this       

nature4 ,the less there is known about  
the life and times of the poet1 the less
 applicable is this mechanism4 ,when1   
however1 we have merely the works and   
the name of the writer1 it is almost    
impossible to detect the individuality1 
at all events1 for those who put their  
faith in the mechanism in question2 and 
particularly when the works are perfect1
 when they are pieces of popular poetry4
 ,for the best way for these            
mechanicians to grasp individual        
characteristics is by perceiving        
deviations from the genius of the       
people2 the aberrations and hidden      
allusions3 and the fewer discrepancies  
to be found in a poem the fainter will  
be the traces of the individual poet who
 composed it4  ,all those deviations1   
everything dull and below the ordinary  
standard which scholars think they      
perceive in the ,homeric poems1 were    
attributed to tradition1 which thus     
became the scapegoat4 ,what was left of 
,homer's own individual work8 ,nothing  

but a series of beautiful and prominent 
passages chosen in accordance with      
subjective taste4 ,the sum total of     
sthetic singularity which every         
individual scholar perceived with his   
own artistic gifts1 he now called       
,homer4  ,this is the central point of  
the ,homeric errors4 ,the name of       
,homer1 from the very beginning1 has no 
connection either with the conception of
 sthetic perfection or yet with the     
,iliad and the ,odyssey4 ,homer as the  
composer of the ,iliad and the ,odyssey 
is not a historical tradition1 but an   
sthetic judgment4  ,the only path which 
leads back beyond the time of           
,pisistratus and helps us to elucidate  
the meaning of the name ,homer1 takes   
its way on the one hand through the     
reports which have reached us concerning
 ,homer's birthplace3 from which we see 
that1 although his name is always       
associated with heroic epic poems1 he is
 on the other hand no more referred to  
as the composer of the ,iliad and the   

,odyssey than as the author of the      
,thebais or any other cyclical epic4 ,on
 the other hand1 again1 an old tradition
 tells of the contest between ,homer and
 ,hesiod1 which proves that when these  
two names were mentioned people         
instinctively thought of two epic       
tendencies1 the heroic and the didactic2
 and that the signification of the name 
,homer was included in the material     
category and not in the formal4 ,this   
imaginary contest with ,hesiod did not  
even yet show the faintest presentiment 
of individuality4 ,from the time of     
,pisistratus onwards1 however1 with the 
surprisingly rapid development of the   
,greek feeling for beauty1 the          
differences in the sthetic value of     
those epics continued to be felt more   
and more3 the ,iliad and the ,odyssey   
arose from the depths of the flood and  
have remained on the surface ever since4
 ,with this process of sthetic          
separation1 the conception of ,homer    
gradually became narrower3 the old      

material meaning of the name ,homer as  
the father of the heroic epic poem1 was 
changed into the sthetic meaning of     
,homer1 the father of poetry in general1
 and likewise its original prototype4   
,this transformation was contemporary   
with the rationalistic criticism which  
made ,homer the magician out to be a    
possible poet1 which vindicated the     
material and formal traditions of those 
numerous epics as against the unity of  
the poet1 and gradually removed that    
heavy load of cyclical epics from       
,homer's shoulders4  ,so ,homer1 the    
poet of the ,iliad and the ,odyssey1 is 
an sthetic judgment4 ,it is1 however1 by
 no means affirmed against the poet of  
these epics that he was merely the      
imaginary being of an sthetic           
impossibility1 which can be the opinion 
of only very few philologists indeed4   
,the majority contend that a single     
individual was responsible for the      
general design of a poem such as the    
,iliad1 and further that this individual

 was ,homer4 ,the first part of this    
contention may be admitted2 but1 in     
accordance with what ,i have said1 the  
latter part must be denied4 ,and ,i very
 much doubt whether the majority of     
those who adopt the first part of the   
contention have taken the following     
considerations into account4  ,the      
design of an epic such as the ,iliad is 
not an entire whole1 not an organism2   
but a number of pieces strung together1 
a collection of reflections arranged in 
accordance with sthetic rules4 ,it is   
certainly the standard of an artist's   
greatness to note what he can take in   
with a single glance and set out in     
rhythmical form4 ,the infinite profusion
 of images and incidents in the ,homeric
 epic must force us to admit that such a
 wide range of vision is next to        
impossible4 ,where1 however1 a poet is  
unable to observe artistically with a   
single glance1 he usually piles         
conception on conception1 and endeavours
 to adjust his characters according to a

 comprehensive scheme4  ,he will succeed
 in this all the better the more he is  
familiar with the fundamental principles
 of sthetics3 he will even make some    
believe that he made himself master of  
the entire subject by a single powerful 
glance4  ,the ,iliad is not a garland1  
but a bunch of flowers4 ,as many        
pictures as possible are crowded on one 
canvas2 but the man who placed them     
there was indifferent as to whether the 
grouping of the collected pictures was  
invariably suitable and rhythmically    
beautiful4 ,he well knew that no one    
would ever consider the collection as a 
whole2 but would merely look at the     
individual parts4 ,but that stringing   
together of some pieces as the          
manifestations of a grasp of art which  
was not yet highly developed1 still less
 thoroughly comprehended and generally  
esteemed1 cannot have been the real     
,homeric deed1 the real ,homeric        
epoch-making event4 ,on the contrary1   
this design is a later product1 far     

later than ,homer's celebrity4 ,those1  
therefore1 who look for the original and
 perfect design are looking for a mere  
phantom2 for the dangerous path of oral 
tradition had reached its end just as   
the systematic arrangement appeared on  
the scene2 the disfigurements which were
 caused on the way could not have       
affected the design1 for this did not   
form part of the material handed down   
from generation to generation4  ,the    
relative imperfection of the design must
 not1 however1 prevent us from seeing in
 the designer a different personality   
from the real poet4 ,it is not only     
probable that everything which was      
created in those times with conscious   
sthetic insight1 was infinitely inferior
 to the songs that sprang up naturally  
in the poet's mind and were written down
 with instinctive power3 we can even    
take a step further4 ,if we include the 
so-called cyclic poems in this          
comparison1 there remains for the       
designer of the ,iliad and the ,odyssey 

the indisputable merit of having done   
something relatively great in this      
conscious technical composing3 a merit  
which we might have been prepared to    
recognise from the beginning1 and which 
is in my opinion of the very first order
 in the domain of instinctive creation4 
,we may even be ready to pronounce this 
synthetisation of great importance4 ,all
 those dull passages and                
discrepancies--deemed of such           
importance1 but really only subjective1 
which we usually look upon as the       
petrified remains of the period of      
tradition--are not these perhaps merely 
the almost necessary evils which must   
fall to the lot of the poet of genius   
who undertakes a composition virtually  
without a parallel1 and1 further1 one   
which proves to be of incalculable      
difficulty8  ,let it be noted that the  
insight into the most diverse operations
 of the instinctive and the conscious   
changes the position of the ,homeric    
problem2 and in my opinion throws light 

upon it4  ,we believe in a great poet as
 the author of the ,iliad and the       
,odyssey--but not that ,homer was this  
poet4  ,the decision on this point has  
already been given4 ,the generation that
 invented those numerous ,homeric       
fables1 that poetised the myth of the   
contest between ,homer and ,hesiod1 and 
looked upon all the poems of the epic   
cycle as ,homeric1 did not feel an      
sthetic but a material singularity when 
it pronounced the name ,homer4 ,this    
period regards ,homer as belonging to   
the ranks of artists like ,orpheus1     
,eumolpus1 ,ddalus1 and ,olympus1 the   
mythical discoverers of a new branch of 
art1 to whom1 therefore1 all the later  
fruits which grew from the new branch   
were thankfully dedicated4  ,and that   
wonderful genius to whom we owe the     
,iliad and the ,odyssey belongs to this 
thankful posterity3 he1 too1 sacrificed 
his name on the altar of the primeval   
father of the ,homeric epic1 ,homeros4  
,up to this point1 gentlemen1 ,i think  

,i have been able to put before you the 
fundamental philosophical and sthetic   
characteristics of the problem of the   
personality of ,homer1 keeping all minor
 details rigorously at a distance1 on   
the supposition that the primary form of
 this widespread and honeycombed        
mountain known as the ,homeric question 
can be most clearly observed by looking 
down at it from a far-off height4 ,but  
,i have also1 ,i imagine1 recalled two  
facts to those friends of antiquity who 
take such delight in accusing us        
philologists of lack of piety for great 
conceptions and an unproductive zeal for
 destruction4 ,in the first place1 those
 great conceptions--such1 for example1  
as that of the indivisible and          
inviolable poetic genius1 ,homer--were  
during the pre-,wolfian period only too 
great1 and hence inwardly altogether    
empty and elusive when we now try to    
grasp them4 ,if classical philology goes
 back again to the same conceptions1 and
 once more tries to pour new wine into  

old bottles1 it is only on the surface  
that the conceptions are the same3      
everything has really become new2 bottle
 and mind1 wine and word4 ,we everywhere
 find traces of the fact that philology 
has lived in company with poets1        
thinkers1 and artists for the last      
hundred years3 whence it has now come   
about that the heap of ashes formerly   
pointed to as classical philology is now
 turned into fruitful and even rich     
soil4#b  #b ,nietzsche perceived later  
on that this statement was1             
unfortunately1 not justified4--,,tr4    
,and there is a second fact which ,i    
should like to recall to the memory of  
those friends of antiquity who turn     
their dissatisfied backs on classical   
philology4 ,you honour the immortal     
masterpieces of the ,hellenic mind in   
poetry and sculpture1 and think         
yourselves so much more fortunate than  
preceding generations1 which had to do  
without them2 but you must not forget   
that this whole fairyland once lay      

buried under mountains of prejudice1 and
 that the blood and sweat and arduous   
labour of innumerable followers of our  
science were all necessary to lift up   
that world from the chasm into which it 
had sunk4 ,we grant that philology is   
not the creator of this world1 not the  
composer of that immortal music2 but is 
it not a merit1 and a great merit1 to be
 a mere virtuoso1 and let the world for 
the first time hear that music which lay
 so long in obscurity1 despised and     
undecipherable8 ,who was ,homer         
previously to ,wolf's brilliant         
investigations8 ,a good old man1 known  
at best as a natural genius1 at all     
events the child of a barbaric age1     
replete with faults against good taste  
and good morals4 ,let us hear how a     
learned man of the first rank writes    
about ,homer even so late as #aghc3     
,where does the good man live8 ,why did 
he remain so long incognito8 ,apropos1  
can't you get me a silhouette of him8   
,we demand thanks--not in our own name1 

for we are but atoms--but in the name of
 philology itself1 which is indeed      
neither a ,muse nor a ,grace1 but a     
messenger of the gods3 and just as the  
,muses descended upon the dull and      
tormented ,boeotian peasants1 so        
,philology comes into a world full of   
gloomy colours and pictures1 full of the
 deepest1 most incurable woes2 and      
speaks to men comfortingly of the       
beautiful and godlike figure of a       
distant1 rosy1 and happy fairyland4  ,it
 is time to close2 yet before ,i do so a
 few words of a personal character must 
be added1 justified1 ,i hope1 by the    
occasion of this lecture4  ,it is but   
right that a philologist should describe
 his end and the means to it in the     
short formula of a confession of faith2 
and let this be done in the saying of   
,seneca which ,i thus reverse--         
,philosophia facta est qu philologia    
fuit4  ,by this ,i wish to signify that 
all philological activities should be   
enclosed and surrounded by a            

philosophical view of things1 in which  
everything individual and isolated is   
evaporated as something detestable1 and 
in which great homogeneous views alone  
remain4 ,now1 therefore1 that ,i have   
enunciated my philological creed1 ,i    
trust you will give me cause to hope    
that ,i shall no longer be a stranger   
among you3 give me the assurance that in
 working with you towards this end ,i am
 worthily fulfilling the confidence with
 which the highest authorities of this  
community have honoured me4