The Madman Fights a River

 The Madman Fights a River

One of the most unusual events in Homer’s Iliad takes place in Book XXI when Achilles took on the Scamander/Xanthus River in one-on-one combat. Achilles had been overcome with a fit of uncontrollable rage caused by the death of his dear friend Patroclus at the hands of the Trojan Hector. Achilles chased half the enemy fighters across the plain back towards their city and the other half he trapped in the Xanthus River.

They came to the ford of the fair-flowing river, the eddying Xanthus that Zeus had created and there Achilles cleaved them asunder, one half of them he drove across the plain towards the city where the Achaeans had fled in great fear the day before when glorious Hector was raging about. A number of them poured forth to take flight and Hera spread before them a thick mist to help restrain them. The other half of them he trapped in the deep-flowing silver-eddying river. They flung themselves into the river with a great crash and the banks of the river resounded with noise and with much noise they thrashed around swimming this way and that in the whirling eddies. Just like when locusts flee on the wing to escape the onrush of a fire and fly into a stream and it scorches them with its sudden coming and they shrink into the water, even so in front of Achilles was the roaring stream of the deep-eddying Xanthus filled in utter confusion with both chariots and men.

He took time out from his slaughter of the Trojans to capture 12 of their young men and had them bound and sent back to the Greek encampment so that they could later be sacrificed on the funeral pyre of Patroclus. Also in a cold-hearted fashion, he slew Lycaon, who was a son of Priam, and threw then his body into the river so that it could be swept away and the Trojan prince would be denied the privilege of a solemn and ritual funeral. Asteropaeus, the son of Pelegon, suffered the same ignoble fate at the hands of Achilles. Achilles killed so many Trojans that the river became clogged with corpses to the extent that the Xanthus (Scamander) begged him to stop.

Swift Achilles would have slain more of the Paeonians, had the deep-eddying river not got angry and called out to him in the guise of a man, sending forth a voice from out the deep eddy. “O Achilles, you are stronger than most men and you do more harm than them for surely the gods always help you. If that is so, the son of Cronos has given you the power to slay all the men of Troy for you drive them all from my waters and you do your baneful work on the plain. My lovely stream is now full of corpses and my waters are unable to flow to the bright sea, being choked with the bodies of all those whom you have slain so ruthlessly. That is enough O leader of the people for I am filled with horror.”

In desperation the river mounted an attack against Achilles and unleashed its massive waves and torrents against the hero in an attempt to drown him.

As many times as the swift-footed Achilles tried to make a stand against him and to find out if all the gods in heaven were trying to put him to rout, just as many times would the divine-born river beat on his shoulders with its great flood. He would spring up on high with great vexation in his heart and the river kept tiring his knees beneath him with its great flow and kept on taking his feet from under him.

The hero fought the water itself and nearly lost to the divine forces of nature. Achilles invoked the gods of heaven to come to his aid and to prevent him from suffering the ignoble death of drowning:

Looking up to the wide heavens, the son of Peleus uttered a loud cry. “Father Zeus, how is it that not one of the gods takes pity on me and comes to rescue me from the river? Thereafter, let whatever is to happen to me take place. I do not blame any of the other gods of the heavens so much, only my dear mother who deceived me by saying that I would die under the wall of the well-armoured Trojans having been cut down by the swift missiles of Apollo. It would have been better if Hector had killed me, he who is the best man here, for then a brave man would have been the killer and a brave man would have been killed. But now a sad death awaits me, cut off and drowned in a great river like a young swineherd who is swept away by the torrent as he tries to cross the river in the wintertime.”

            The goddess Hera intervened as she watched him struggle with the river from her vantage point on Mount Olympus. She sent her son Hephaestus, the god of fire, to combat the river. Hephaestus burned the banks of the river and boiled its water until the river god agreed to give up his efforts to aid the Trojans.

The mighty river was set ablaze as well and he called out to the god by name. “Hephaestus, there is no god who is strong enough to be able to contend with you and I have no wish to fight against you, all ablaze as you are. Stay your strife and permit the godlike Achilles to drive the Trojans out of their city. What part do I play in fighting or in offering assistance?”

Thus he spoke burning with fire and his fair streams were boiling over, just like when a cauldron boils when set on a fierce flame and it melts the lard of a fattened hog and bubbles away on all sides and dry kindling is set beneath it, so did the fire burn in his fair streams and the water seethed. Nor was he of a mind to flow forward but was stayed back for the blast of the inventive Hephaestus oppressed him.

            Achilles doing battle with the River Xanthus was an unusual event, to say the least. Its real significance lies in the fact that it underscored a peak moment in the wrath of Achilles, showing him as a force so powerful that he disrupted the natural order. When he faced the elements that warred against him, he was reminded of his own mortality and begged the gods to be allowed the kind of death that was worthy of a hero.

            With this event, we find Achilles at the zenith of his uncontrollable rage and grief over the death of Patroclus. These were not the actions of a normal human in normal circumstances. His actions depicted a character driven by trauma to the extent that he abandoned mortal norms and attempts to defy divine limits. Achilles had become dysfunctional, a madman. He had been consumed by grief and lashed out at nature itself. We have a picture in our minds of a madman beating his head against a wall, but Achilles lacked a wall. He did however have a river and in a complete lack of self-control, he attacked it as if it were a mortal enemy. With his complete disregard for social and heroic norms, he demonstrated a psychopathic abandonment of empathy and respect for human life and reverence for the dead. He broke the traditional heroic code and became a destructive force that the gods had to contain. In a blind and berserk rage, and likely suffering what today we would call PTSD, this mortal took on an immortal foe, an impossible task and one which almost led to his demise. Only divine intervention could save him.

            The madman Achilles fighting the river symbolized the hero’s total surrender to raw emotion, an emotion that changed his grief over the death of his friend into a destructive and shameful force that, for a time, rendered him less than human. In his fall from grace, the wrath of Achilles turned him from super-hero to anti-hero. It would take the tears of Priam to bring him back from this brink of shamefulness. 

Civility in Warfare

 

 Civility in Warfare

It is difficult to conceive of putting the words ‘civility’ and ‘warfare’ in the same sentence, because it stretches the bounds of reason to imagine anything civil or humane about war. In modern times we look upon The Hague Regulations and The Geneva Conventions as attempts to bring some semblance of humanity or civility to the organized and armed belligerency of warring parties. But we are hard-pressed to consider that such protocols may have existed in ancient Greece and that they may have played a part in the fabled war between the Greeks and the Trojans. But a careful reading of Homer’s Iliad shows us that, contrary to our beliefs, war was conducted in a surprising and somewhat ‘gentlemanly’ way by the two sides in the conflict. There are several examples of such civility in the narrative.

In fact, in ancient Greece, truces and ceasefires were common in warfare and ranged from temporary halts in the fighting to recover the bodies of the dead for burial or cremation, to more formal and wider suspensions of conflict. The most famous example in Greek history is the Olympic Truce (Ekecheiria) which began with the first Olympic Games in 776 BCE. The word ‘Ekecheiria’ means ‘holding back one’s hands’. The first instance of such a truce was a treaty between the kings of Elis, Pisa and Sparta that allowed athletes, spectators and pilgrims to travel safely and without attack to and from Olympia in the Peloponnese, where the games were being held. It started as a one month truce beginning seven days before the games and ending seven days after their conclusion, but was extended to three months by the 5^th century BCE. Hostilities were not permitted in the region, no arms could be carried into Olympia, death penalties were suspended for the duration of the games and heavy fines were levied for any violations, all of which were considered direct offences against Zeus himself.

In addition to the Olympic Truce, there were several other examples of peace or diplomatic treaties that were undertaken in ancient Greece. The Thirty Years Peace was signed in 445 BCE to halt the war between Athens and Sparta. The Peace of Nicias in 421 BCE was supposed to be a 50 year peace designed to end the first half of the Peloponnesian War but there were many violations that rendered it largely ignored. The Common Peace (Koine Eirene) was a concept that was developed in the 4^th century BCE to foster a lasting peace among the various Greek city-states and to recognize their autonomy and equality.

The establishment of a truce was generally carried out following a series of specific steps. First a proposal was made and an agreement was reached. A separate third party was appointed to observe the truce and the pact itself was sealed with solemn religious oaths and was often accompanied by sacrifices and the pouring out of libations. These rituals served the purpose of invoking the gods to witness the truce and in so doing, established the fact that a violation of the truce would bring divine punishment upon the offender and their children. Agreed-upon truces were considered to be very serious matters and were deeply rooted in religious practice.

Early in Book III of the Iliad we find an example of such a truce. Hector had been chiding Alexander (Paris) about his behaviour with Helen and the guilty party made a proposal to end the ongoing war. Hector then proclaimed it to both sides seeking their approval.

“Listen to me my Trojans and well-greaved Achaeans and I will tell you what Alexander has said, he on whose account all this trouble has arisen. He exhorts the other Trojans and all the Achaeans to put down their arms onto the bounteous earth while he and war-loving Menelaus fight alone for Helen and all her possessions. Whichever of the two is mightier and prevails, he shall take away the woman and all her goods. All of the others will then share oaths of love and friendship towards each other.”

            Menelaus ratified the agreement, proposed the ritual sacrifices and libations necessary for its adoption, and the appointment of Priam as the oath-taker. All of these steps were required for an official truce and this undertaking of a one-on-one battle to end the war.

Menelaus, good with the war-cry, addressed them. “Listen to me now for sorrow has visited my spirit. I believe that the Argives and the Trojans must be separated from one another for you have all suffered terribly on account of my fight and the trouble which Alexander has initiated. So for whichever of the two of us fate and death has been ordained, then let him die and let all the others be separated quickly. So bring forth two lambs, one white and one black, one for Tellus and one for Helios and also bring another one for Zeus. And bring forward mighty Priam himself to make an oath lest anyone break the promises made to Zeus, since Priam’s children are deceivers and cannot be trusted. For the hearts and the minds of young men are unstable, but when an old man acts, he looks both forward and backwards, and that will ensure the best outcome for all concerned.”

            It was quite clear to all concerned what the penalty would be if the agreement was breached in any way:

And members of both the Achaeans and Trojans spoke. “O Zeus most glorious and greatest and all the other immortal gods, whichever of these two before you breaks this sacred oath, let his brain flow down upon the ground like this wine flows. Be it done to him and to his children and let his wife be overpowered by others in her bed.”

The people prayed to the gods and lifted their hands up high and someone of both the Achaeans and the Trojans spoke. “O father Zeus ruling from Ida most glorious and great, whichever of these two brought such evils upon us, let him be destroyed and cast into the abode of Hades, but let friendship and faithful oaths come unto the rest of us.”

            But we know that Aphrodite could not bear to see Alexander slain, he who had chosen her as the fairest at the Judgement of Paris. She intervened in the fight, prevented Menelaus from killing Alexander and then spirited the Trojan away and returned him to his wife’s bedchamber. The truce was officially broken when Pandarus was convinced by the goddess to shoot an arrow at Menelaus. He did so and wounded the Spartan king. His brother Agamemnon then encouraged the Achaeans to return to the battle for the sacred oath had been broken.

“Argives do not hold back on your great courage to fight for our father Zeus will not aid those Trojans who were deceitful. Indeed vultures will consume the soft flesh of those who were the first to break a sacred oath. We will indeed carry off in our ships not only their wives but also their infant children once their citadel has been destroyed.”

            We witness a different kind of truce in Book VI of the Iliad. Diomedes and Glaucus were about to do battle with one another and started a conversation about their backgrounds and families. It came to light that their fathers had known one another and had visited in the past. Under the customs associated with Xenia, this type of guest-friendship was deemed to pass from one generation to another. That being the case, these two warriors recognized that they were prohibited from fighting with each other.

“So I am indeed a dear guest friend of yours in the middle of Argos, as you are of me in Lycia whenever I would come there. But let us avoid the spears of each other within the fray, for there are many Trojans and renowned allies for me to overrun and kill and by the same token, there as many Achaeans around as you can kill. So let us exchange armour with one another so that everyone will know that we are ancestral mutual friends.” Having spoken thus, they leaped down from their horses, seized the hands of each other and pledged their mutual faith.

            Likewise in Book VII, we find another example of an unusual truce. Hector and Ajax had been fighting and night came upon them. With great civility they agreed to cease fighting for the day, to exchange gifts of friendship and to withdraw from the battlefield until another day.

Then Hector with the swift-glancing helmet spoke to him. “Ajax, since god has granted you size and strength and wisdom, and since you are the best of the Achaeans with the spear, then let us indeed do cease our hostilities for today only. We will fight again later, at least until this divine one separates us and gives victory to one of us. Night is coming on and it is good to obey the night and for you to have an opportunity to gather and rejoice with all the Achaeans near the ships, especially your relatives and comrades. I myself will go through the great city of Priam and give cheer to the Trojans and to the women carrying the peplum for the goddess and going into her temple to pray on my behalf. Come now and let us both give lovely gifts to one another, so that people of both the Achaeans and the Trojans might say that, though we both fought in gut-wrenching battle, still we reconciled and parted as friends.”

            At the end of the Iliad we witness the dissipation of the wrath of Achilles as he agrees to withhold his forces from the fighting for as long as King Priam needs for the funeral of his son Hector. He agrees to enforce a twelve day ceasefire.

“But come now and tell me the whole truth. For how many days are you planning to hold funeral rites for the godlike Hector, so that I know how long it will be that I have to keep back the throng from you?”

Thereupon the old man, the godlike Priam, answered him. “If you are willing that we hold funeral rites for the godlike Hector, then in doing so you will be acting as I so wish. You know that we are locked up within the city and it is a long way to go to the mountains to collect wood and the Trojans are very afraid. For nine days we will mourn for him within the city and on the tenth day we will honour him with funeral rites and hold a banquet for the people and on the eleventh day we will erect his funeral mound and on the twelfth day we will wage battle, if indeed we are required to do so.”

Then the swift-footed godlike Achilles answered him. “This will all happen as you so desire aged Priam and I will hold us back from battle for as long as you have outlined to me.”

            In a great tribute to Homer, Irish poet Michael Longley wrote his poem entitled “Ceasefire” to try and convince the leaders of the IRA to make peace during the “troubles” in his land. It was his firm belief that poetry makes things happen.

Ceasefire by Michael Longley

I

Put in mind of his own father and moved to tears

Achilles took him by the hand and pushed the old king

Gently away, but Priam curled up at his feet and

Wept with him until their sadness filled the building.

 

II

Taking Hector's corpse into his own hands Achilles

Made sure it was washed and, for the old king's sake,

Laid out in uniform, ready for Priam to carry

Wrapped like a present home to Troy at daybreak.

 

III

When they had eaten together, it pleased them both

To stare at each other's beauty as lovers might,

Achilles built like a god, Priam good-looking still

And full of conversation, who earlier had sighed:

 

IV

'I get down on my knees and do what must be done

And kiss Achilles' hand, the killer of my son.'

 

            In ancient Greek warfare, ‘civility’ was a mixture of gentlemanly conventions and religiously-based practices. But brutal total-war efforts were also undertaken with the slaughter of all enemy warriors and civilian men and boys and the enslavement of all others. Cities were totally razed in the aftermath of war and homes, crops and orchards were destroyed. Any civilized conventions regarding ceasefires, truces and peace treaties usually only applied to wars involving other Greeks and did not apply to conflicts with non-Greeks.

           

            Warfare was somewhat ritualized and was viewed as a contest by the ancient Greeks. Armies faced off against each other at an appointed time and in a designated place. Battles were generally short because, other than for Sparta which had a professional army, most Greek armies were composed of farmers and citizens who had to return to their jobs after the battle. There were protocols in place for deciding which side was the winner. The loser was expected to accept the defeat and to pledge not to fight again immediately. Religion and divine law dictated many of the practices of warfare, for example the sacred duty to allow both sides to recover and bury their dead. Heralds were considered sacred messengers and temples were off limits for fighting. Many of these rules were cast aside in the foe was considered to be non-Greek barbarian.

 

            War was considered as an economic opportunity in many cases, as is suggested for the real reason behind the Achaean invasion of Troy. It was also looked upon as a means to achieving peace. But on a personal level, war was viewed by the participants as a means to gain Kleos or everlasting glory. In summary, ‘civility’ in Greek warfare was less about granting mercy to the foe and more about maintaining a cultural, religious and tactical framework in ancient society. Over the centuries however, that ambition was abandoned in favour of simply attaining a total victory over the enemy. ‘Civility’ was cast aside as the Greeks took on the position that the end justified the means in warfare.

What’s in a Name?

  What’s in a Name?

“What’s in a name?” – the question posed by Shakespeare’s Juliet to her beloved Romeo:

Juliet:

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.

Romeo:

I take thee at thy word:
Call me but love, and I'll be new baptized;
Henceforth I never will be Romeo.

Like the Montagues and Capulets of Verona, the ancient Greeks took their names rather seriously. They followed fairly rigid conventions when naming their children. Names were deeply symbolic and were often designed to influence a person’s destiny or to reflect a family’s social status. Names were likely to follow a three-part structure with a personal or given name, a patronymic that reflected the father’s name, and sometimes a demotic that indicated a person’s city of origin or their occupation. Children were generally named on the 7^th or 10^th day following their birth in a ceremony called the amphidromia.

Many ancient Greek names were derived from a connection to the divine and are referred to as Theophoric names. These names are usually in a form which describes the person as being a “gift” from a god or “belonging” to a god. Commonly used suffixes for such names included:

-doros (gift of), -dotos (given by), -phanes (appearing), -phon (voice of)

Examples of such names include Apollodoros, Theodoros, Demetrios, and Artemidorus.

In addition to deriving names from divine sources, the ancient Greeks also took names from nature, mythology and references to beloved and revered heroes. Names were also used to describe the qualities or the nature of an individual, sometimes combining two elements to form what is known as a Dithematic name. Several of the names of key players among the Achaeans in the Iliad provide us with some excellent examples of these naming conventions.

Achilles – derived from achos (pain) and laos (people) – “pain or grief of the people” – a reference to the hero’s sorrow or suffering.

Antilochus – derived from anti (against) lochus (place or ambush) – “one who lies in wait”.

Other famous Achaeans included Agamemnon (steadfast), Diomedes (advised by the gods), Idomeneus (one from Idomene), Nestor (a traveler or returner i.e. Nostos), Odysseus (angry man or one who causes pain, Calchas (a seer or dark man), Aias (strength or of the earth), Menelaus (wrath of the people), Patroclus (glory of the father i.e. Kleos), and Teucer (archer).

We can find a number of Dithematic names among the Trojan warriors and other personages. For example, Alexandros combines alexein (to defend) and aner (man), meaning “defender of the people”. Antenor means to be “against a man” or a “combatant”. The name Aeneas could be derived from ainos, meaning “glory or praise” or from ainon, meaning “terrible grief”. Hector means “steadfast” and Helen means “shining bright”. Astyanax means “lord of the city”.

It is interesting to note that many of the Trojan heroes and characters had Greek names and that they were able to communicate with the Achaeans without the need of translators. We know that historically the people of Troy were part of a large international trade network and had wide connections in the region, but we also know that they likely spoke the Luwian, Arzawan or Hittite languages and not Greek. Homer is using a little poetic licence when he portrays the Trojans as fluent Greek speakers bearing Greek names. Homer calls the leader of the Trojans Priam, but more than likely his Luwian name was Pariya-muwa, meaning “exceptionally courageous”. The name Paris is a Greek rendering of the Luwian Parizitis and the names Aeneas (Ainiya in Hittite), Anchises, Pandarus and Sarpedon are all thought to have Hittite, Luwian or Anatolian roots.

Sometimes it appears that Homer has made up a name just to suit the character in his narrative. For example, Anticleia the mother of Odysseus is rarely mentioned in the story and her name means “of little fame”. Eurycleia, the nurse who recognizes Odysseus on his return and who plays a vital role in the story has a name that means “of great renown”. The faithful swineherd Eumaeus, who raised Odysseus like a son, has a name that means “wonderful step-father”. Melantho, Penelope’s unfaithful servant is a “dark flower”. Though he is now in his old age and is about to die, the patiently waiting dog Argos has a name that means “swift or agile”, a reflection of his younger days. Then there are examples where the name does not make any sense at all. For example, the name Andromache means “battler of men”. Another example is the Phaeacian princess Nausicaa who has a name that means “the burner of ships”. Women in ancient Greece were often identified by their father’s name, or upon marriage, by their husband’s name. How Nausicaa came to be named is uncertain, to say the least. Some scholars suggest the alternative meaning of “a passion for ships”. This makes more sense since the Phaeacians were known for their prowess at ship-building and sailing.

There are well over 1,000 named characters in the Iliad, with barely 100 of them having any significant role in the narrative, and only 78 of them have speaking  parts, with only 19 of them having in excess of 100 lines of dialogue. The Odyssey is likewise well-populated with a wide array of gods, nymphs, monsters, suitors, royalty and crew members. It makes one wonder why there are so many people referred to in Homer’s stories. One must remember that the epics were products of an oral tradition and that wandering bards roamed the countryside reciting the stories to wide and varied audiences. The recitation of familiar names was one way to engage the audience and to capture and maintain its attention. Hearing one’s family name mentioned or that of a familiar character must have been an exciting moment for a listener. It’s like when my dear wife’s eyes light up when I point out a castle during one of our journeys and tell her that it used to belong to her 44x great-grandfather, and the connection is made.

The following is an AI-generated (Google) summary of the importance of the family name in ancient Greece and why people of the period worked so diligently to protect its integrity.

 

Maintaining the reputation of the family name in ancient Greece was of paramount importance, functioning as a foundational element of social structure, legal standing, and personal identity within a "collectivist" society. In a world dominated by an "honor-shame" culture, an individual's worth was not based on internal, individualistic metrics but on public perception, with the family unit (the oikos) bearing the collective weight of honor. 

 

Key aspects of the importance of family reputation in ancient Greece include:

 

·         Foundation of Identity and Social Standing: A person's reputation, status, and honor were directly tied to their family background. The family was the primary unit of social and economic support, and upholding its dignity was a major duty.

·         The "Honor-Shame" Dynamic: Reputation was paramount, and honor was seen as the ultimate asset, while shame was the ultimate deficit. Maintaining a good name required demonstrating virtuous actions and avoiding any public scandal that could shame the household.

·         Collective Accountability: Actions were viewed as reflecting on the entire household, not just the individual. A scandal involving one member brought disgrace upon the entire lineage.

·         Protection of Lineage and Legitimacy: Preserving the family's honor was crucial for ensuring the legitimacy of the male line. This was particularly true for women, who were expected to be faithful to their husbands to guarantee that children belonged to the oikos.

·         Impact of Gender on Reputation: Women’s reputation was directly tied to their modesty and fidelity, which protected the family's honor. Any deviation could lead to severe social consequences or, in the case of infidelity, allow a husband to take drastic actions against the lover.

·         Role of Patronymics and Ancestry: Although not using modern surnames, Greeks often used patronymics (deriving the name from the father) to maintain family heritage, honor their lineage, and distinguish themselves within the community.

·         Legacy and Continuity: The family name was a living entity that linked individuals to their past, often with a focus on continuing the fame and fortune of ancestors. 

Insults to an individual were interpreted as slurs on their entire family, and it was expected that members would dispute any criticism to prevent discredit.  

Continuity Issues in Homer

 

Continuity Issues in Homer

It is not unusual to catch technical or continuity errors and slip-ups in literary works or in visual entertainment features like movies. The famous Vinegar Bible, printed by John Baskett at Clarendon press in 1717, has a misprint at the beginning of Luke 20 which gives the title of “The Parable of the Vineyard” as “The Parable of the Vinegar”. From 1939 there is the scene on the Yellow Brick Road in The Wizard of Oz where Dorothy’s ruby red shoes are replaced with a pair of black ones. What about the electrical cords and light bulbs in Gone with the Wind, also from 1939? Then there is the chariot race scene in Ben Hur from 1959 where one of the charioteers is sporting a fancy wrist-watch. Let’s not forget the countless cowboy movies where jet contrails are seen in the western sky. So it stands to reason therefore, that we might be able to pick up the odd inconsistency or anachronism in two works the length of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey.

The most notable errors in Homer are those which can be classified as anachronisms and historical discrepancies. Many of these centre on the fact that Homer composed his works in the Iron Age or early Archaic period and was describing events which supposedly took place in the Late Bronze Age of Mycenaean Greece more than 400 years before his time. Many of the most noted historical inconsistencies are Homer’s repeated references to the use of iron for armour, tools and implements in his Bronze Age setting. For example, while preparing to take part in the Trojan battle, the goddess Hera readied her chariot and we learn from the bard that various metals were used in its construction. However, we know that it is historically inaccurate for a chariot of that particular time and place to have had axles made from iron. The use of iron for such purposes was just at its infancy at the time of the Late Bronze Age and this was definitely a Homeric slip-up.

And Hebe immediately fastened round eight-spoke bronze wheels to the iron axles on both sides of the chariot. The hubs were made of imperishable gold and the rims above were of bronze, a wonder to behold. The round naves on both sides were of silver and the chariot board itself was held in place with gold and silver thongs and there were two circular edges from which extended a silver chariot pole.

Homer also tells us about the godlike hero Ereuthalion who was called the ‘mace-bearer’ because he fought with a club made of iron rather than a bow or a long spear. Such a weapon was highly unlikely in the Bronze Age, as were the iron gates of Tartarus that Homer describes. He also mentions the ‘din of iron’ erupting from the battlefield, another obvious anachronism. At the funeral games of Patroclus, Achilles offered a prize of iron to the winner of one of the contests and noted that the recipient would have enough iron for making farm implements for five years.

Then the son of Peleus offered a mass of rudely cast iron which in time past the great might of Etion threw, he whom the godlike swift-footed Achilles killed and then carried this and his other possessions away on his ships. Then he stood up and spoke in the midst of the Argives. “Come now and try to win these prizes. Though his rich fields may be in a place far off, the winner of this prize will have enough iron to serve his needs for at least five years and his ploughmen and shepherds will not have to go to the city to find more for they will have enough to serve them well.”

The twelve axe heads through which Odysseus shot his arrow during the contest with the suitors were supposedly made of iron as well, and there are several other references to iron weapons in the Odyssey. On more than one occasion Homer cautions about drinking and drunkenness and tells us that men are drawn to iron when drunk and that iron draws out the worst in men. Clearly the bard is mixing up his timeframes with these historical inaccuracies.

However, iron was beginning to play a role in Bronze Age Greece, but was viewed as more of a precious metal rather than component of weapons and implements. There are several times when Homer talks about treasure troves consisting of bronze, gold and finely-wrought or richly-wrought iron. There is a reference to the Achaeans buying wine from Lemnos and using iron as currency for the transaction.

Then the long-haired Achaeans bought wine from them, some with bronze, some with shining iron, others with hides or oxen or slaves and they prepared an abundant feast.

In addition to wrongly placing iron weapons on a Bronze Age battlefield or iron tools in a Bronze Age barn, Homer also errs when talking about how chariots were employed in battle. In the Iliad, Homer describes chariots being used like taxicabs to ferry warriors to the front lines. He describes a chariot as being manned by a charioteer as well as one warrior who steps from the cart to battle on foot when he reaches the fighting. This may have indeed been the case in Homer’s time, but in the Mycenaean period, the chariot was used as a highly mobile fighting platform, rather than as a vehicle for carrying a warrior to the front.

Another of Homer’s historical inconsistencies deals with his references to temples, as for example when the priest Chryse prays to the god Apollo:

If I ever roofed a temple that was pleasing to you or provided you with the burnt offering of the fat thigh pieces of bulls and goats, then answer my prayer and let the Danaans pay the price for my tears with your arrows.

There is a reference to the temple of Athena in Athens, the temples of Apollo in Ilium and Pergamus and that of Ares in Troy. Hector is told to direct his mother to go and worship at the temple of Athena in the Trojan capital.

But you Hector, go into the city and speak to your mother and mine and have her gather together all the matrons and go with them to the temple of the shining-eyed Athena on the top of the citadel.

Indeed they came to the temple of Athena on the high citadel and the fair-cheeked Theano, the daughter of Cisseis who was the wife of Antenor the tamer of horses, did open up the gates for them. The Trojans had installed her as a priestess of Athena. With a loud cry they all raised up their hands to Athena and the fair-cheeked Theano, having taken the robe in her hands, spread it on the knees of the lovely-haired Athena.

The difficulty here is that, at the time of the Mycenaean Greeks, there were no large temples built to honour the gods. Such structures were a fact of life in Homer’s age, but not in the period covered by his epics. There were some very small shrines or altars in cult centres, but nothing like the large free-standing temples of later ages.

One of the most glaring anachronisms is Homer’s description of funerary and burial practices. Elaborate funeral pyres are created for Homer’s dead heroes and the deceased are cremated in highly ritualized ceremonies. Sometimes cremation was a matter of expediency, such as when the corpses of the dead burned constantly while the plague waged against the Achaeans for nine days. But for major heroes, being cremated was viewed as a supreme honour and one which every hero felt he deserved. Hector begged Achilles for the right to be honoured in such a way as he lay dying.

“I beg you by your life, your knees and your parents not to allow the dogs to devour me by the ships of the Achaeans. Instead, take the gifts of bronze and gold that my father and queenly mother shall give to you to return my body back to my home so that the Trojans and their wives may give me the right of a funeral pyre in my death.”

Homer provided great detail about the funeral pyre of Patroclus, telling us that, those who were in charge waited behind and gathered wood and made a huge pyre a hundred feet each way and on the top they laid the dead man’s corpse and their hearts were full of sorrow. Large jars of homey and oil were placed on his pyre and numerous animals were slaughtered along with 12 Trojan youths. After the cremation, the remaining ashes and bones of the deceased were gathered and placed in richly crafted vessels for subsequent burial.

The basic problem with these descriptions of funeral pyres and cremations is that the Mycenaean Greeks did not cremate their dead. Deceased heroes and those of royal rank were buried in elaborate tombs, archaeological evidence of which can still be viewed today in the form of tholos or beehive tombs in places like the citadel of Mycenae or other Late Bronze Age settlements in the Peloponnese. Homer was referring to funerary practices that were more akin to his time rather than to the time of the Trojan War.

Finally from an historical point of view, the description in Homer’s Catalogue of Ships of the 1,186 vessels and the tens of thousands of warriors who went to Troy from various parts of mainland Greece and the islands seems to portray a political structure that outlines a collection of independent city-states. That indeed would have been the case in the later Archaic period but not in the Late Bronze Age. At that time there would have been a palace-based society with a Wanax or king of kings in charge of several locations in a region and a loose confederacy of allies. The city state did not start to emerge as the fundamental independent unit of Greek civilization until after the Dark Ages between the 8^th and 6^th centuries BCE.

In addition to the various historical inconsistencies and anachronisms mentioned above, there are several writer’s factual errors or slip-ups found in the texts as well, perhaps better referred to as memory lapses. For example, in Book 5 of the Iliad we are told of the fate of Pylaemenes, the leader of the Paphlagonians:

Then they killed Pylaemenes who was equal to Ares, rule of the great-hearted shield-bearing Paphlagonians. Menelaus the son of Atreus, who was famous for his skill with the spear, hit him in the collar-bone with his spear while he was standing there.

Later on in Book 13, the son of Pylaemenes, who was called Harpalion, was killed by the fierce Achaean Meriones after he had attacked Menelaus. But his father was reported as alive and well and mourning the loss of his son.

The great-hearted Paphlagonians took charge of the situation and placed him in a chariot bearing him to sacred Ilios, mourning as they did so. His father went with him and his tears poured forth, but there was no blood-price paid for his dead son.

            Homer reports that Agamemnon, Menelaus and Odysseus all received rather serious wounds at various points in the battle, but later on in the narrative the three of them appear hale and healthy. Agamemnon was wounded by a spear to the extent that he had to withdraw from the fighting because of the severe pain. Menelaus was hit in the hip by an arrow shot by Pandarus and was treated by Machaon. Odysseus was wounded in the chest by Sokos and had to be rescued by Menelaus and Ajax after he had killed his attacker. As indicated, either all three miraculously recovered or else Homer forgot that he had reported that they had been wounded.

There are other such inconsistencies in both texts, but these minor plot contradictions are generally attributed to the fact that the Iliad and the Odyssey both stem from an oral tradition, rather than from a single written text, and that different authors contributed to the narratives over time. These variances are minor in nature compared to the rather more serious inconsistencies and poetic lapses caused by confusing and mixing Late Bronze Age facts with much later Iron Age and Archaic period conditions.

I suppose the fact that he was writing over 400 years after the events were thought to have taken place, and was relying on several sources from an oral tradition, and writing narrative of such extensive length, provides us with enough leeway to forgive Homer for any of the minor inconsistencies or anachronisms that we find in the Iliad and the Odyssey.

Odysseus’ Ithaca

 

Odysseus’ Ithaca

Where Mycenaean Ithaca was precisely located has been the subject of great debate among classical scholars for some considerable time. In his Catalogue of Ships in the Iliad, Homer named those who had travelled to the Trojan War under the leadership of the great Odysseus and in the Odyssey, the hero described his homeland.

Odysseus led the brave young Kephallenians from Ithaca, well-forested Neriton, Crocyleia, the jagged hill of Aegilips, Samos and Zakynthos and the lands opposite it. These were led by Odysseus, the equal of Zeus in counsel, and with him there came twelve ships bearing red prows.

I live in clearly-seen Ithaca where Mount Neriton is, all covered with quivering foliage and seen from far off, and around it are many islands close together, Dulichium and Same and wooded Zacynthus.

Modern day Ithaca is a Greek island in the Ionian Sea, located just northeast of the larger island of Kefalonia and west of mainland Greece, in an area known as the Ionian Islands. Not to be confused with Samos, an island in the eastern Aegean off the coast of Turkey, the Samos (Same) mentioned by Homer in this context, was a city on the coast of Kefalonia. Mount Neriton is located on Ithaca and Aegilips and Crocyleia have both been placed on the present-day nearby Ionian island of Leucas (Lefkada), situated close to modern Ithaca. Wilhem Dorpfeld the archaeologist held that Leucas was Ithaca because it was closer to the mainland and also suggested that Aegilips was actually the island of Meganisi. One ancient story had Dulichium located about two miles off the coast of Kefalonia, but subsequently sunk by an earthquake and yet others reported it as being a city on the island of Kefalonia itself. With all of his various references taken into account, it seems obvious that Homer’s location for Odysseus’ Ithaca was somewhere near to where we find it situated in modern times in the Ionian Sea.

But not everyone agrees that Ithaca was one of the Ionian Islands off the coast of Greece. In his 1897 work, The Authoress of the Odyssey, Samuel Butler places Ithaca on Favignana, one of the Aegadian Islands situated about 18 kilometers off the west coast of Sicily between Trapani and Marsala. In the Odyssey, Homer makes reference to the Harbour of Phorcys on Ithaca and Butler suggests that the Bay of Trapani fits this description. Butler’s rationale for his theory is that the Odyssey was not written by Homer, but by a young Sicilian woman. He postulated that the entire narrative of the Odyssey was located in and around Sicily, and that the authoress wrote herself into the story in the character of Princess Nausicaa, the daughter of King Alcinous and Queen Arete of Phaeacia.

Laura Coffey takes up Butler’s suggestion in her Enchanted Islands, but moves Ithaca even further west in the Aegadian Islands. Homer described Ithaca as being the farthest west island, toward the dusk, and that all others were facing Dawn and the rising sun. To accommodate that description, Coffey places Ithaca on the Aegadian island of Marettimo, some 45 kilometers off the coast of Sicily and farther to sea than Favignana, in fact the westernmost island in the archipelago. Coffey did not find Marettimo particularly welcoming and moved on to Favignana, which to her felt like Circe’s island. “Felt like” are the operative words, as there is no literary evidence that can be pointed to for making her case, only feelings. Homer, on the other hand, was very specific in placing the whereabouts of Ithaca and his location coincides with modern geography.

There are those who make the case that Homer’s Ithaca was not the island known by that name today, but rather the Paliki Peninsula found on the western coast of the nearby island of Kefalonia. Emily Hauser takes up this position in her book Mythica. The theory is that the modern peninsula was once an island and that the channel between it and Kefalonia has since silted over, or that island became a peninsula after an earthquake. Being the furthest west point of the Ionian Islands would fit with Homer’s description of the location of Ithaca being the last point of land facing the setting sun. However, Paliki does not fit with Homer’s description of a channel of water situated between Ithaca and Samos on the east coast of Kefalonia, where the suitors anchored in ambush for the returning Telemachus.

But come now and give me a ship and twenty men so that I can lie in wait and ambush him as he ferries between Ithaca and rugged Samos.

The best of the suitors lie in wait to ambush you in the strait between Ithaca and rugged Samos and they are eager to kill you there before you can return to your native land.

I think that we can safely assume that the Ithaca described as Odysseus’ homeland in the Iliad and the Odyssey is definitely the present-day island of Ithaca in the Ionian Sea. Other proposed locations are pure speculation and have no basis in the literature and have no real geographical foundation. But what did Ithaca look like? Homer often described it as sea-surrounded and clearly seen. He said that it was well-forested and had jagged hills and used terms like rocky and rugged in his descriptions. When King Menelaus of Sparta offered to give horses to Telemachus as a parting gift, Odysseus’ son provided the following description of his homeland.

Whatever gift you wish to give, let it indeed be a treasure, but I will not take horses to Ithaca but will leave them here for you to enjoy, for you are the lord of an extensive plain where a lot of lotus grows and galingale and wheat and spelt and wide-eared barley. But in Ithaca there are no wide fields or meadow-lands. It is a pasture-land that is better for goats than horses, because none of the islands that touch upon the sea are fit for driving horses or rich in meadows, and Ithaca least of all.

The description provided by Telemachus is confusing because it does not jibe with other references to Ithaca made in the Odyssey. There are times when the island is pictured as being rich, fertile and well-tilled. We know that both Eumaeus the swineherd and Odysseus’ father Laertes had extensive gardens. We likewise know from the legends that Odysseus farmed the land. He was plowing his fields and feigning madness when Palamedes visited him to recruit him for the Trojan War at the request of Agamemnon. Was Ithaca rich and fertile, or barren and rocky? Ithaca today is mountainous and rugged, but does contain olive and cypress groves, so perhaps it was both.

The island’s exact location and physical characteristics notwithstanding, the fact remains that Ithaca symbolizes the ultimate destination in the Odyssey and represents the overwhelming longing for home and family and the completion of an arduous challenge. Ithaca is the symbol for the hero’s journey home, his Nostos. It is a powerful metaphor for the struggles often involved in life’s journey. Ithaca is a small island, but it plays a huge role in the story of the Odyssey and serves as a powerful cultural and spiritual symbol for homecoming and perseverance.