Stephanie W. Jamison, H. Craig Melchert, and Brent Vine (eds.). 2014. Proceedings of the 25th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference. Bremen: Hempen. 57–74. Wheel Composition in Greek and Indic Poetry ALEXANDER S. W. FORTE AND CALEY SMITH Harvard University In two important studies Jamison has analyzed the structural features of Vedic hymns characterized by an omphalos structure, following the terminology of Watkins in his discussion of Pindaric verbal syntax. 1 This omphalos structure can be schematized as a pattern that runs throughout the hymn in the following form: A 1 — B 1 — X — B 2 — A 2 Term X contains the riddle or the solution to the hymn as a whole, and the sur- rounding elements constitute a series of parallels/antitheses. What results are concentric circles of vocabulary, prosodic sequences, and narrative content that emphasize the conceptual and positional centrality of X. This paper will examine instances of early Greek and Indic poetry in which X consists of a lexical element that represents the midpoint or turning point of a spatial representation that the poem describes. Therefore the central term of the structure represents a central point in the spatial narrative of the poem. To express the dynamism that this coincidence of form and function represents, we will describe it as a “wheel composition” rather than ring composition. This is an attempt to emphasize that the center element functions as the metaphorical hub or turning-point around which the poem revolves, and that poems of this structure frequently represent a circular journey. Structures in oral poetry are only static in textual representation; they were necessarily dynamic in recall and performance. 2 In Vedic poetics we find cognates to archaic Greek poetry, not merely in inherited lexicon and mor- phology, but in theme, style, and discursive structure. We will argue that Pindar, 1 For a detailed treatment of this structure, see Jamison 2004 and 2007:80–9, specifically dis- cussing R ̥ V X.28 and I.105. For its application to Pindaric syntax, see Watkins 2002. Hymn I.105 seems to be an example of the wheel composition; see below for further discussion. 2 This figure’s relationship to ring composition and the aesthetic/cognitive analysis of the larger question of compositional structure is fascinating, but ultimately beyond the scope of this pa- per. In an important recent work on ring composition and orality (with bibliography), Nimis (1999) emphasizes the “process” of Homeric ring composition rather than the “structure,” which is contextualized by Foley 1999:18. For convenience we will use “text” to refer to the recorded forms of oral poetry whose earlier form only existed in cognitive and acoustic con- texts.