¹ This appears to be the least conventional version of the formula: πατήρ occurs 418 times in Homer in its various forms, and in many positions in the dactylic hexameter verse, but only here does it fill this metrical space; πατήρ here is also a rare case of a two-syllable word with an iambic shape and an acute accent on the second syllable occurring in this metrical space. On the latter, see A. Abritta, ‘On the role of accent in ancient Greek poetry’, Mnemosyne 71 (2018), 539–54, at 551–2; Abritta’s contention that the verse is also metrically unusual inasmuch as it violates ‘Hermann’s Bridge’ is not very pertinent in this case, as the feminine caesura in the fourth foot is accompanied by a masculine caesura in the same foot, as happens many hundreds of times in Homer. The verse apparently puzzled ancient scholars as well: a scholium on Od. 17.111 (W. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam, Volume II [Oxford, 1855], 686) observes that Zenodotus recorded at the end of the verse an unmetrical ἑὸν παῖδα.

² The formula is not used of Odysseus’ Ithacan friend Mentor, although he too appears to function as a surrogate father while Odysseus is abroad. Odysseus had apparently turned over to him complete responsibility over his house (2.225–7). On Mentor as a father figure see S. Dova, ‘“Kind like a father”: on mentors and kings in the Odyssey’, in D. Elmer, D. Frame, L. Muellner and V. Bers (edd.), Donum Natalicium Digitaliter Confectum Gregorio Nagy Septuagenario a Discipulis Collegis Familiaribus Oblatum (Washington, DC, 2012), https://chs.harvard.edu/stamatia-dova-kind-like-a-father-on-mentors-and-kings-in-the-odyssey/.

³ On Athena as a doublet of Odysseus in this scene, see A.J. Podlecki, ‘Some Odyssean similes’, G&R 18 (1971), 81–90, at 81–2. The close relationship between Athena and Odysseus throughout the Odyssey is traced by M. Müller, Athene als göttliche Helferin in der Odyssee (Heidelberg, 1966), 36–7, who discusses this passage briefly, noting that the presence, and inspiration, of Odysseus is detectable in the scene, even in his physical absence.

⁴ Many modern commentators have observed the irony of the situation in this scene: C. Moulton, Similes in the Homeric Poems (Göttingen, 1977), 132–4, 141–5; R.B. Rutherford, ‘The philosophy of the Odyssey’, JHS 106 (1986), 145–62, at 157; I.J.F. de Jong, ‘Between word and deed: hidden thoughts in the Odyssey’, in I.J.F. de Jong and J.P. Sullivan (edd.), Modern Critical Theory and Classical Literature (Leiden, 1993), 27–50, at 37; G. Wöhrle, Telemachs Reise: Väter und Söhne in Ilias und Odyssee (Göttingen, 1999), 133–5; I.J.F. de Jong, A Narratological Commentary on the Odyssey (Cambridge, 2001), 388–9; T.P. Wright, ‘Eumaeus as Odysseus’ double in the Odyssey’, QUCC 121 (2019), 11–31, at 25–7; D. Beck, The Stories of Similes in Greek and Roman Epic (Cambridge, 2023), 39–41; J.S. Clay and D. Mendelsohn, ‘Three Homeric puzzles’, in M. Aloumpi and A. Augoustakis (edd.), Lux: Studies in Greek and Latin Literature in Honor of Lucia Athanassaki (Berlin, 2024), 1–22, at 7–8. On the reversal in the simile in this passage (it is the son rather than the father who is described returning from abroad in the tenth year), see Podlecki (n. 3), 89; H.P. Foley, ‘Reverse similes and sex roles in the Odyssey’, Arethusa 11 (1978), 7–26, at 7.

⁵ 20.390–4; 21.428–30; 23.129–51. As in the scene of Eumaeus and Telemachus in Book 16, there is a reverse simile in this passage, inasmuch as it is once again the son in the simile who is returning from abroad after a long time, while in the external narrative it is the father who has been long absent. Although not using the term ‘reverse simile’, Podlecki (n. 3), 82 suggests that the poet’s use of the simile goes against the audience’s expectations here, introducing an element of surprise, thereby raising interest in the development of the story. Abritta (n. 1), 551–2 also observes that the simile reverses the situation of Odysseus and Telemachus. Foley (n. 4), 7–26 does not mention this simile.

⁶ The handbook has been edited by L. Spengel, Rhetores Graeci, Volume III (Leipzig, 1856; reprinted Frankfurt am Main, 1966), 191–206, at 205 and more recently by M.G. Sandri, Trattati greci sui tropi (Berlin and Boston 2023), 156–211, at 192–3.

⁷ The Περὶ τρόπων attributed to Cocondrius (or Concordius) has been edited by Spengel (n. 6), 230–43, at 235 and more recently by Sandri (n. 6), 92–117, at 102–3. The Περὶ τρόπων attributed to Gregory of Corinth has been edited by M.L. West, ‘Tryphon De Tropis’, CQ 15 (1965), 230–48, at 243. The Περὶ Ὁμήρου attributed to Plutarch has been edited by J.F. Kindstrand, [Plutarchi] De Homero (Leipzig, 1990), 7–117, at 35.

⁸ So H. Fränkel, Die homerischen Gleichnisse (Göttingen, 1921), 90–1; A.F. Dekker, Ironie in de Odyssee (Leiden, 1965), 208–10; Moulton (n. 4), 144; J. Russo, M. Fernández-Galiano and A. Heubeck (edd.), A Commentary on Homer’s Odyssey, Volume III (Oxford, 1992), 39; Clay and Mendelsohn (n. 4), 10.

⁹ S. Reece, The Stranger’s Welcome: Oral Theory and the Aesthetics of the Homeric Hospitality Scene (Ann Arbor, 1993), 189–206.

¹⁰ On the resonance and symbolism of this sequence of throws, as well as of the increasingly assertive responses to them by Telemachus, see Reece (n. 9), 176–9.

¹¹ So S. Reece, ‘Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey: from oral performance to written text’, in M. Amodio (ed.), New Directions in Oral Theory (Tempe, AZ, 2005), 43–89, at 54–6.