?In the book under review, almost the entire poem and most of the important issues related to it (ethical outlook, historical context, the relationship to the Il.) pass in review. Much attention is paid to matters of narrative technique (characterisation, order and rhythm of narration, scenery, the function of embedded narratives). H.?s book differs, however, from other general books on the Od. in that his analyses and discussions are undertaken in the light of two leading questions: 1) what are the characteristics of the Od. as ?Großepos? as against the ?einfache Gedichte? - H.?s collective term for fairy tale, folktale, legend, fable - from which it (partly) must have drawn its material?; 2) in what ways does the Od. prefigure the later genre of the novel (both ancient and modern)?? H. gives a lot of examples [ND]. H.?s method here is inspired by the work of H. Props; he compares motifs or sequences of motifs (structures) of related fairy tales from all over the world with the version of the Od. His purpose is not to reconstruct the original ?Odysseus story?, but to understand the form of the Od. as a ?Märchen? transformed into epic. At the same time, this approach allows H. to shed light on well-known Odyssean problems, e.g. that of the status of the Telemachy. (?). The second leading question (the Od. as predecessor of the novel) occupies far less space in H.?s book. Some examples are: interest in realistic detail, lower social milieus (Eumaeus) and sentimental themes (?), Odysseus? false tales as the first examples of fiction, the deceiving of the reader?s expectations. Again H. offers alternative approaches to analytic problems. (?) Both H.?s leading questions have been discussed by others before, but his treatment of the fairy tale / folktale background of the Od. is the most exhaustive until now. Despite the vastness of his theme H. has succeeded in writing a readable, and for the non-specialist, highly informative book.? (IRENE J.F. de JONG in Mnemosyne, 1991, pp.449-450).