Question

Read the following passage regarding the composition of the Homeric epics, and then match each of the claims to the individual or group to whom the author attributes that view.

In the mid-twentieth century, Milman Parry and Albert Lord revolutionized Homeric studies with their oral-formulaic theory. They asserted that the *Iliad* and *Odyssey* were composed entirely through traditional, improvisational techniques utilizing formulaic language, rather than through deliberate literary design. For Parry and Lord, this meant that the epics were the collective product of generations of bards, effectively rendering the search for a singular, creative genius named "Homer" obsolete.

Subsequently, a group of scholars known as the "Neo-Analysts" forcefully objected to this strict oralist paradigm. They argued that the epics exhibit sophisticated structural unities, subtle character development, and intricate cross-references that could only have been achieved through the deliberate intervention of a masterful, literate poet who was physically writing down a pre-existing oral tradition.

While the Neo-Analysts correctly highlight the profound structural complexities that strict oral-formulaic theory struggles to explain, their insistence on a fully literate, singular author underestimates the remarkable cognitive capacities of highly trained oral bards. A more plausible framework suggests that the epics represent a unique transitional phase: they are fundamentally oral in their composition, relying on traditional formulas, yet they were likely dictated to a scribe by an exceptionally gifted, non-literate bard. This bard would have utilized the slower pace of the dictation process to construct the intricate architectural unities that define the monumental poems, achieving structural complexity without requiring personal literacy.