Saturday, August 30, 2025

PREVIEW OF UPCOMING ARTICLES

 PREVIEW OF UPCOMING ARTICLES


·         The Bards in Homer                           

·         Humour in Homer

·         The Telemachy & the Odyssey

·         Odysseus – A Character Analysis

·         Nausicaa & Telemachus - Kids will be kids!

·         The Wine-Dark Sea

·         The Use of Bronze in Ancient Greece

·         Homer’s Flowers & Trees

·         Crime & Punishment in Homer

·         The Shield of Achilles

·         Sex in Homer

·         Eumaeus – A Country Gentleman

·         Are Homer’s Epics Unfinished?

·         What are you drinking?

·         The Homeric Question

Thursday, August 28, 2025

Who Was Agamemnon?

 

   Who Was Agamemnon?

Simply stated, Agamemnon was the King of Mycenae and leader of the Greek forces during the Trojan War. Homer refers to him as anax andron, king of men, high king, or king of kings. The term signified a ruler who had dominion over other local chiefs and kings. The term is an ancient one of the Bronze Age Mycenaean period and pre-dates Classical Greece. Originally the spelling was wanax and this archaic term was used to designate the one who controlled lower level kings called basileis. This latter word itself came to signify the rank of king in later times. There is no doubt that Agamemnon was the absolute supreme ruler of the Greek invasion army and Homer paints him as such, with all the strengths and flaws that one might expect to find in someone in such a position.

King Agamemnon of Mycenae and his brother Menelaus, the king of nearby Sparta, are many times referred to by Homer as the sons of Atreus. It is important to understand the background of the Greek leader in order to be able to fully appreciate all the events that took place before, during and after the Trojan War. Agamemnon and Menelaus were the sons of King Atreus of Mycenae and Aerope, the daughter of the king of Crete. The family background was filled with murders, intrigue, treachery and incest. The House of Atreus had been cursed as a result, and many of the catastrophes that were visited upon the family were viewed as being a consequence of that curse.

The two sons of Atreus married two sisters, Helen and Clytemnestra, daughters of the Spartan king Tyndareus. Menelaus succeeded his father-in-law and then assisted his brother in retaking the throne of Mycenae. Agamemnon was a great conqueror and soon became the most powerful king in Greece, the wanax. Helen was a most beautiful woman and there had been many suitors for her. Menelaus was the chosen one and he married Helen, only after a pact was signed by all the suitors that they would respect the choice and would take up arms if anyone attempted to destroy the marriage. The peace treaty had been negotiated by King Odysseus of Ithaca.

Of course we know the story of the famous beauty contest, the Judgement of Paris and the promise of the delivery of the most beautiful woman in the world to the Trojan prince. While on a diplomatic mission to Sparta, Paris spirited Helen and her wealth away and it is uncertain whether she went willingly or was kidnapped. In any case, the peace treaty was invoked and King Agamemnon ordered an invasion of Troy, in an attempt to assist his brother Menelaus in getting his wife and treasure back. Modern scholars believe that the Trojan invasion had little to do with settling the score over a stolen wife and more to do with economics. Troy was highly considered as a very wealthy nation and was situated in a strategic location for controlling trade. Agamemnon the conqueror likely adopted any excuse he could to justify a full-scale invasion of this land of plenty across the Aegean. Helen’s was the face that launched 1,000 ships, or 1,186 to be more precise.

We get some insight into the character of Agamemnon and his arrogance and ruthlessness. The local leaders and lesser kings reluctantly consented to the mission to Troy and did so, more because of the treaty that they had agreed to rather than for the somewhat ignoble purpose of the invasion. Odysseus, however, made it plain that he had no intention of going to Troy. He feigned madness in an attempt to avoid service and Agamemnon had his ambassador Palamedes threaten to kill Telemachus, the infant son of Odysseus, if he did not comply. In the epic, Agamemnon is pictured alternatively as impetuous, thoughtless, foolish, rash, arrogant, imperious, irreverent, insulting, inept and unconvincing. Despite all this, he remained the king of kings and a warrior with great physical prowess.

But there was another problem right from the start. The fleet was gathered at Aulis in Boeotia and was prepared to set sail for Troy. They languished there for weeks and perhaps a month waiting for favourable winds that did not come. Finally it was determined that the goddess Artemis was angry and kept back the winds because Agamemnon had killed one of her sacred stags. In order to appease the goddess and to see the return of the winds, Agamemnon had to agree to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia. She and her mother Clytemnestra were lured to Aulis under the pretext that the princess was to be married to the warrior Achilles. Instead, the girl was led to the altar and sacrificed and the favourable winds came. Clytemnestra would not forget this outrage.

Once the Greek fleet had arrived in Troy, the army set about the task of taking the citadel and accomplishing their stated goal. Things did not go exactly as planned and they were still at it almost ten years later. Well-fortified Troy seemed impregnable and the action and killing had gone on for years on the battlefield plains between the sea coast and the fortress. Of course the Greek army had to be fed in the meantime and this was accomplished by conducting raids on all the cities and towns that were in the region. Fields and stockyards were emptied, local men were slain and their wives and children were either killed or taken into slavery. The pretty young maidens of the neighbourhood were brought back to the Greek camp for the sexual pleasure of their conquerors.

One of these young girls was called Chryseis and she was the daughter of Chryses, a priest of Apollo. Chryses approached Agamemnon and plead with him for the return of his daughter, offering a great ransom as compensation. The king’s response was an indication of his brutish arrogance and irreverence.

Then indeed all the rest of the Achaeans shouted their agreement to show reverence to the priest and to accept the shining ransom, but their decision was not pleasing to the heart of Agamemnon, son of Atreus. He ordered Chryses off with harsh words and laid a stern command on him. “Old man, do not let me find you again near the hollow ships, neither now nor later. Your staff and the wreaths of the god will not protect you.  I will not set her free and before I did so, she would sooner grow old in our home in Argos, far from her homeland, working away at the loom and pleasuring me in my bed. So depart now and do not anger me so that you may leave in safety.”

            After Chryses called down a horrendous plague on the Greeks, Homer tells us that finally Agamemnon agreed to return the girl but that he was filled with black thoughts and his eyes blazed with fire and that evil threats emanated from him. Contrary to standard practice and fair play, he made the petty decision to confiscate the war prize Briseis who had been awarded to Achilles. The slighted hero’s responses were condemnations of the king of kings and once again gave further insight into his character.

Looking sternly at him, the swift-footed Achilles replied, “Ah me, you greedy one garbed in shamefulness, how could any one of the Achaeans now obey you readily or go on a voyage for you or willingly fight for you with force?”

But the son of Peleus again attacked the son of Atreus with hateful words and in no way diminished his spite towards him. “You drunken cowardly son of a bitch, never have you had courage enough to dress for battle or to go forth to fight along with the chiefs of the Achaeans. You are so afraid of dying you sluggard. You prefer to wander through the sprawling camp of the Achaeans and to just confiscate the prizes of anyone who has the temerity to speak against you. You are a king who devours his own people.”

            From the mouth of Thersites the troublemaker came another condemnation of the leader Agamemnon, and in his words we can assume that he spoke for the common people. One would think from his remarks that the king’s rule was tenuous, but this was not the case. He continued to lead and the Greeks continued to follow him. Thus he spoke and no one disobeyed Agamemnon the lord of men.

“Son of Atreus, what are you craving now and casting blame about? Your tents are full of bronze and likewise your tents house many women whom we Achaeans have given you when we have sacked a citadel. Are you in want of gold, for many horse-taming Trojans bear ransoms to you for their captured sons whom we Achaeans have bound and held? Or is it a new young girl you want for you to dally with and keep separate for yourself? Truly it is not fitting for you as a ruler to be bringing evil upon the sons of the Achaeans.”

One of the reasons for Agamemnon’s enduring leadership was his prowess in battle and his stature on the battlefield. The king of kings was considered one of the most formidable warriors among the Greeks.

And among them strode great King Agamemnon with eyes and head like Zeus the lover of lightning, girdled like Ares and with the chest of Poseidon. Like a great bull stands distinguished among a herd of bulls and cows, so also did Zeus place the son of Atreus that day in a position superior to all the other heroes present there.

These sent a hundred ships under the command of powerful King Agamemnon, son of Atreus. His force was the finest and the largest among all the peoples. In their midst stood the king himself, flashing gloriously in his armor of gleaming bronze. He was the leader among all the heroes because he was the best warrior and he led the greatest number of men.

King Priam of Troy and Helen of Sparta met on the walls of Troy and the old king asked his new daughter-in-law about the Greek troops that were massed on the plains below them.

“Tell me the name of that huge warrior of the Achaeans, that most handsome and great one. He is taller by a head than all the others and the most majestic man that I believe I have ever seen. To a man he appears to be a king.”

“But I have an answer to the question that you are asking. That man indeed is King Agamemnon, the son of Atreus. He is a good king as well as being strong, mighty and a great warrior. He was my husband’s brother, whore that I was.”

Thus she spoke and the old man gazed on him with wonderment and answered. “O blessed son of Atreus, born of good fortune with a happy fate. Truly many sons of the Achaeans bear homage to you.”

            But we also see Agamemnon as a loving brother who shuddered and grieved when his brother Menelaus was wounded in battle. He swore a solemn oath that if his brother died, his death would be avenged by him personally.

“O my dear brother, have I now made an oath which will be the death of you, having set you alone to battle for the Achaeans with the Trojans, and the Trojans shot at you and trampled on the sacred oath? Indeed, that oath shall not become fruitless, nor the blood of the lambs and pure libations offered, nor the right hands extended by us. For even if the great Olympian has not yet brought it about, they will indeed be forced to pay a great price with their heads, their women and their children. I know this to be true in both my heart and my soul. The day will come when the sacred city of Ilium will be destroyed and Priam and the people of Priam, so good with the ashen spear, will likewise die.”

            Agamemnon called for the doctors to treat his brother and returned to the fighting,

While they were occupied treating Menelaus, along came the shield-bearing Trojans with a great battle cry and the Achaeans once more armed themselves and rose up eager for war. But even then you did not see the divine Agamemnon sleeping or cowering in fear or holding back from fighting, but rather he was quickly speeding toward the battle which brings men glory.

We know from Homer’s narrative that the Greeks were ultimately successful and that King Agamemnon led them on to victory, despite being wounded himself along the way. He and Achilles managed the differences between them and the great hero from Phthia returned to the battlefield where he ultimately triumphed over Hector. Agamemnon continued to lead his army and slaughtered scores on the field of battle. Homer describes Agamemnon’s own personal day of glory in battle in Book XI of the Iliad. It is safe to say that the king’s character was flawed and that at times his leadership was questionable but he does demonstrate personal growth as the narrative progresses and he learns how to become a better leader.

            After Troy had fallen and most of its royal family had been slaughtered, Cassandra, the daughter of King Priam, was awarded to Agamemnon as a war prize. She accompanied him back to his home in Mycenae and we learn from the account in the Odyssey and from legend what happened next. As indicated previously, Agamemnon’s wife Clytemnestra never forgot the horror and the outrage that the king caused in offering their daughter Iphigenia as a human sacrifice to the goddess Artemis on the shores of Aulis some ten years beforehand. During his absence, Clytemnestra had taken on Aegisthus as a lover. When Agamemnon returned to Mycenae, weary and soiled from the war and his journey home, his wife suggested that he take a soothing bath to relax. The story goes that Clytemnestra and Aegisthus took this opportunity to slay Agamemnon in his bathtub and to likewise dispose of Cassandra. The curse of the House of Atreus was fulfilled once again but was in no way finished, for ultimately Orestes, the son of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra, with the help of his sister Electra, kills his mother and Aegisthus. The two murdering children are then driven into insanity by the Furies.

            Agamemnon was a complicated person and over the ages, from ancient times to modern, his character has been explored in literature and the arts. As many as six ships of the British Royal Navy have been named HMS Agamemnon. He was a man of power and was also somewhat corrupted by that power. He was a leader but he made questionable leadership decisions. He was a family man but the curse on his family led to all sorts of tragedies, including ultimately his own demise. He was the king of kings, but used that power for his own selfish purposes at times. He was physically strong but many times showed mental weakness. In the final analysis, he was something of a bully who met his end at the hands of a woman who was driven by hatred and revenge.

Wednesday, August 27, 2025

Greek & Trojan Armour

                                                             Greek & Trojan Armour

The common field soldier in ancient Greek times was called a hoplite and he entered the battle usually armed with just a shield, a helmet and a spear and most often protected with only linen armour. Leaders, nobles, royalty and the very wealthy, on the other hand, wore armour that provided them with the utmost protection in battle, and in addition, served to identify them and to symbolize their status and their martial prowess. Only the wealthiest individuals could afford to be protected with bronze armour, including a cuirass or corselet or breastplate for shielding the upper body and greaves for the legs. For these elite fighters, bronze was the material of choice for armour construction, with gold, silver, enamel and tin used for embellishment.

The description of King Agamemnon’s armour at the beginning of Book XI of the Iliad gives us a fine example of the type of armour and weaponry used by the very wealthy and someone of such high royal status as the king of Mycenae and leader of the Achaeans.

The son of Atreus rejoiced and commanded the Argives to gird themselves for battle and amongst them he clothed himself with his flashing bronze. First he put his greaves on his shins and then fitted together his beautiful silver leg guards. Secondly he wrapped his breast with his corselet that once upon a time Cinyras had given him as a host gift. He had heard from afar in Cyprus that the Achaeans were about to sail forth in their ships for Troy, and he wanted the pleasure of giving the breastplate to their king as a gift. On the corselet were ten bands of dark blue enamel, twelve of gold and twenty of tin. Serpents of dark enamel reached toward the neck on both sides, three on each side like rainbows that the son of Cronos fixed in the masses of clouds like a portent for mortal men. He slung his sword on his shoulders, shining with studs of gold while its scabbard was of silver fitted with gold chains. Then he seized his richly-wrought beautiful shield that covered the whole man and which around it had ten bands of bronze and twenty bosses of bright shining tin and in the centre one of dark blue enamel. On there was set a crown that featured the grim looking Gorgon who was glaring terribly and around her were set Demos and Phobus. From the shield there hung a broad strap of silver and on it a serpent writhed made of dark enamel and it had three heads that turned this way and that all of them springing from the one neck. On his head he placed his helmet, one with two horns and four bosses and a plume of horsehair that nodded terribly from above. In his hand he placed two spears with sharp bronze tips that shone brightly into the heavens. Athena and Hera roared greatly at this, showing reverence to the great Mycenaean king who was rich in gold.

            The armour was made of bronze plates which were first cast and then hammered into the desired shape that was either decorative in nature or fashioned to replicate the muscled bodily contours of the wearer. There were two large bronze plates which protected the chest and the back and they were hinged on one side to allow them to be easily put on and removed. The armour included shoulder guards and a neck guard as well as a protective belt around the waist in the front and back. A full complement of bronze armour could weigh upwards to 70 pounds. When one adds on the weight of a full bronze helmet, greaves for the legs and a scabbard and sword, it is easy to see why such a kitted-out warrior would have to be transported to the fight by chariot instead of going there by foot.

            In Book IV of the Iliad we witness the scene where the goddess directs the arrow that has been launched at King Menelaus so that it strikes him in a place where the least amount of damage can be done. This passage gives us a further description of what the armour of a high-ranking person looked like.

Nor did you escape the notice of the blessed and immortal gods Menelaus, chief of whom was the plundering daughter of Zeus, who standing before you, warded off the sharp missile from you. She flicked it off your body, much likes a mother does to a fly on her child when it has been laid down in sweet sleep. She steered it toward the place where the golden buckles of the warrior’s belt meet the doubled breastplate. The arrow was driven through the well-fitted belt and then went through the plates and the guard that he wore to protect his loins and to block spears. It pierced even this greatest defence and the tip of the sharp arrow grazed the man’s skin. At once a stream of black blood started to flow from the wound.

            Achilles loses his armour after his beloved Patroclus enters the battle dressed as the hero and is slain by Hector. Hector strips the armour of Achilles from the body of Patroclus and claims it as his war prize. The goddess Thetis prevails upon Hephaestus to fashion a new set of armour for her son and he does so. The centre piece of the new armour is the famous shield of Achilles which Homer describes at great length in his narrative. But Hephaestus makes a full set of beautiful armour for Achilles, armour befitting a hero and his prowess. We witness Achilles dressing himself in this armour before battle.

In fierce anger towards the Trojans he armed himself with the gift from the god which Hephaestus had created for him. First he placed the greaves on his legs, beautifully made with ankle guards fashioned of silver. Secondly he put on the corselet to protect his breast. About his shoulders he cast the silver-embossed sword of bronze and immediately seized with his hand the sturdy shield which set off afar a beam of light like the moon. Just like when over the sea the sailors catch a glimpse of a blazing fire and they see it burning in a lonely place on a high hill, but against their will the stormy winds on the fish-laden sea bear them away far from their friends, even so from the beautiful and richly-wrought shield of Achilles there went up a shining gleam into the heavens. He lifted up his mighty helmet and placed it on his head and the crest of horse hair on it shone like a star and around it there waved plumes made of gold that Hephaestus had fashioned for the neck. And the godlike Achilles made the best of his new armour. His glorious limbs moved freely in it and became like wings to him and lifted on high the shepherd of the people.

            Trojan armour is believed to be not that much different than Greek, although perhaps somewhat lighter. But we know that Hector stripped the armour of Achilles from the body of Patroclus after he had killed him and claimed it as his spoils of war. Stripping the armour from one’s enemy was an act of pride and its deeper purpose was to transfer the honour and glory of the defeated one to the victor. The more noble the vanquished one, the greater the honour bestowed on the winner. In addition to wearing the armour of Achilles, we do know that Hector wore a helmet with a large horse-hair plume on it, because this is the helmet that frightened his son Astyanax when Hector visited him and his mother before returning to the battlefield. But that act of pride on his part, wearing the other hero’s armour, led to his ultimate downfall. Achilles knew the weak spot of his own armour and it is there that he thrust his weapon when fighting Hector. Capitalizing on this vulnerability allowed him the opportunity to deliver the fatal blow and to regain his initial set of armour from Hector’s corpse.

            Helmets varied in design and Homer most often depicts them as being made of bronze. We typically think of the Corinthian style helmet when we talk about bronze helmets. This type of helmet was made of one piece of bronze and was shaped like the head, extending from the top of the head down to the base of the neck and covering the cheeks and jaw. It had a flange over the nose and cut-outs for the eyes and mouth. It was simply slipped over the head to put it on. Homer often talks about such helmets as having crests of waving horsehair and elaborate decorations. However modern scholars believe that Homer’s references to bronze helmets is anachronistic, because such helmets were more often found in the Archaic and Classical periods of Greek history rather than the Mycenaean Age of the Trojan War.

            The more usual head protection of the Mycenaean period was just a leather helmet or the boar’s tusk helmet. Both are featured in Book X of the Iliad when Odysseus and his partner go out on a night-time spying mission.

Thus he spoke and the two of them clothed themselves in their terrible armour. To the steadfast Thrasymedes the son of Tydeus was given a two-edged sword, for he had left his by the ship, and a shield. On his head was placed an ox-hide cap without a horn or a crest, usually call a leather helmet and worn by sturdy young men. Meriones gave Odysseus a bow, a quiver and a sword and on his head he placed a helmet made of strong hide and made solid with leather straps on the inside. On the outside were the bright teeth of a white-tusked swine, close set together on one side and the other and lined with a felt of soft wool. This was the helmet that Autolycus once stole out of Eleon when he had broken into the well-built house of Amyntor, son of Ormenus, and he gave it to Amphidamas from Cythem to take to Scandeia, and Amphidamas gave it to Molus as a present, but he gave it to his son Meriones to wear, and now it rested there, covering the head of Odysseus.

            I recently had the opportunity of seeing a boar’s tusk helmet that was discovered in Mycenae. It is housed in the Archaeological Museum in nearby Nafplio and it is indeed a work of art. (See Footnotes & Fancy Free July 17, 2025). You can tell from looking at it that it might be suitable for warding off or deflecting an arrow or a stone hurled from a sling, but it would do little to protect the wearer from a direct blow from a sword or spear. However, neurosurgeons who have studied the Iliad have pointed out that most helmets, bronze or otherwise were pretty ineffective when it came to preventing head trauma. Traumatic head injury was a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Homer's epic poem. One study showed 54 total references to head and neck injury, typically resulting in death in the epic.

            One notable thing about bronze armour was the sound that it made when a warrior fell to the ground. In Book V of the Iliad alone we find three separate examples and there are many others throughout the text.

First King Agamemnon, the leader of men, threw from his chariot Hodius, the commander of the Halizonians. He had turned in flight and was struck in the back between the shoulders with a spear that went right through to his chest. He fell down with a heavy sound and his armour crashed about him.

Menelaus the son of Atreus who was famous for his skill with a spear wounded Scamandrius in the back as he was fleeing from him and drove his spear between his shoulders and through into his chest. He fell down flat on the ground and his weaponry clattered around him.

Having spoken thus, he hurled his spear and Athena straightened its path so that it struck his nose near the eyes and passed through his white teeth. Indeed the finely-worked bronze cut the base of his tongue and was driven through the bottom of his chin. He fell from his chariot and his resplendent armour clattered around him as his horses were startled and shied away in fear. His life force and his strength were dissolved in death.

            To Homer, armour signifies a hero’s power, fighting prowess, his social status and his very identity. For the Homeric hero, his armour is used to inspire his own troops and allies and to terrify his enemies. The armour of Achilles is a notable example. When Patroclus puts on his friend’s original set of armour and appears on the battlefield, on seeing it, both the Achaeans and the Trojans know that the end of the war is in sight, because Achilles has returned to the field. When Achilles appears in the beautiful armour forged by Hephaestus, his position among mortals and immortals is made secure, as is his ability to achieve kleos as a conquering hero. For Homer, armour is more than just protection. It is a symbol of all things great.

Tuesday, August 26, 2025

War & Peace in Homer

                                                              War & Peace in Homer

War is most often viewed as a state of organized, prolonged and often widespread armed conflict between two or more opposing parties and is generally characterized by extreme violence, disruption of the social order, destruction of physical property and harm rendered to individuals and entire populations. Peace, on the other hand, is a state of harmony and calm in the absence of such violence and hostilities, and the word is commonly used to designate a lack of conflict such as war, as well as freedom from the fear of violence between individuals and groups. Although those participating in war can experience and feel personal rage and animosity towards the enemy, war is a collective entity and is not considered personal in nature. In contrast, peace is a complex concept that encompasses both inner tranquility as well as the absence of violent conflict in the outer world. For true peace to occur, not only does conflict have to cease, but participants must also personally experience a sense of harmony, justice and security. In other words, peace is more than just the absence of war.

One might form an initial impression that Homer glorifies war, since this subject appears to be the main focus of the narrative of the Iliad. Heroes who bear nicknames like Man-Slayer, Master of the War-Cry and City-Sacker seem to be placed on a pedestal and Homer’s grand warriors seek to attain their kleos or long-lasting fame and glory through heroic deeds and glorious death on the battlefield. But the bard indicates early on that war is a brutal and all-consuming force. The personal wrath of Achilles is served up as an example of all-out warfare and its consequences are clearly spelled out at the very beginning. Sing of the accursed rage of Achilles, son of Peleus, which brought untold woes to the Achaeans and banished to Hades many stalwart souls of heroes, turning them into carrion for dogs and birds of prey. Heroes may indeed be glorified in the epic, but the results of their actions are exposed for all to see and to abhor. The bravery and fighting ability of warriors like Achilles are contrasted with the extreme and profound human cost that is exacted by war and the narrative becomes a treatise on the loss and suffering that war and violence occasions. Our initial impression that Homer glorifies war vanishes in the light of understanding the Iliad as an anti-war poem.

As stated, Homer positions war as a stage upon which a hero can achieve kleos. This is especially true in scenes which depict the one-to-one combat of enemy warriors. In this case it is not war which Homer glorifies, but rather the heroic deeds and displays of courage of the fighters. These actions and displays are glorified for the opportunity for kleos that they present to each of the combatants. The hero is driven by his need for everlasting fame and renown and we remember the life choice that was presented to Achilles himself by his mother Thetis. He had the choice of returning home to Phthia in Thessaly and living a long life in obscurity, or choosing to stay and fight in Troy, dying an early and glorious death in battle and being remembered forever as a heroic warrior. For a hero seeking kleos, his choice was obvious, and the stage upon which he performed was the battlefield.

War is also depicted as noble to a degree because it provides an opportunity for warriors to display their intense camaraderie, loyalty and respect for each other. There are tremendous bonds of friendship forged between comrades and allies in the face of all the danger and hardships that they face. We see this displayed in the way that they protect one another in battle and how they desperately fight to protect the integrity and dignity of a fallen companion. The most famous example of the depth of such friendship is the relationship between Achilles and his dearly beloved Patroclus. We witness the depth of this relationship when Patroclus is slain in battle and Achilles attacks and kills Hector and then submits his body to utter desecration in an almost sub-human response. In this case, violence breeds more than violence as a come-back. The love which Achilles bears for Patroclus is lost in the frenzy of his horrid answer and in the depths of his violation of the standard norms of humanity and morality. War creates more than violence when it creates a monster.

One has to envision the bard singing his tale by a blazing fire at night before a spellbound audience of listeners, sometimes common folk and sometimes nobles. In this context, we can see Homer using his vivid language and his riveting imagery to build the excitement of his audience and to have them experience the adrenaline rush of combat themselves. They aren’t there wielding swords themselves or hurling spears, but through his words, Homer can have them feel the swoosh of an arrow as it passes them by. In the story of the Iliad, warfare appears to be appealing and almost intoxicating to the combatants involved and Homer also seeks to make it so for those who listen to his narrative. In other words, warfare is not being glorified by Homer, but rather it is being presented for its pure entertainment or perhaps educational value.

Whether we believe that Homer is glorifying war or not, the fact remains that he goes out of his way to depict the most gruesome realities of the conflict. We read graphic descriptions of arrows, swords and spears piercing and penetrating bodies in every conceivable manner, decapitated heads rolling in the dust and the ground beneath the feet of the warriors soaked with blood. Hardly a page goes by without the telling of a dismal wound, a wretched suffering or an agonizing death. Women are violently raped, old men are run through with swords and spears, infants are dashed to the floor and thrown from citadel walls, and their mothers are bound into slavery.

Homer’s physical descriptions of the gruesome reality of war is so over the top that we can reach the valid conclusion that he presents it this way for one very obvious reason, and that is to condemn war, not to glorify it. The Iliad is indeed an anti-war poem and Homer, I believe, is the inspiration for poets who followed him, poets like Wilfred Owen and Siegfried Sassoon who broadcast the same anti-war message in WW1. They, like Homer, expressed a rejection and a condemnation of war by highlighting its devastation, futility, suffering and disillusionment. The concept of “Dulce et Decorum est” is just patriotic bullshit in Wilfred Owen’s mind. Despite what the originator of the phrase, the Roman poet Horace said, there is nothing sweet or fitting in coughing up one’s lungs for one’s country, and Owen held that those who witness such things firsthand would agree that war, or death within war, can never be viewed as glorious..

In addition to these horrid physical acts, the psychological toll of war is also explored by the author and Homer ensures that we fully appreciate the human cost of warfare. In addition to watching the mourning of fallen heroes like Patroclus, we also see the devastating effect of war on families. The interplay between Hector and Andromache, with her begging him not to return to battle for fear that she be left a widow and their son an orphan, and him vowing to fight on because he recoils at the thought of her becoming enslaved by an Achaean warrior. The fright shown by their son as he sees his father’s war helmet, and the love demonstrated by the father is one of the most poignant scenes in the epic. We watch as Priam and Hecuba stand on the citadel walls and agonize over the fate of their son Hector, and look on as Helen expresses her regret and self-hatred for her actions. The women of Troy gather for the funeral of Hector and his praises are sung in sorrow by his wife Andromache, his mother Hecuba, and his sister-in-law Helen. His family’s despair is palpable.

Homer also presents war as being the destroyer of values and in particular how it can bring out the worst in people. We see this demonstrated in the character of the demeaning bully Agamemnon, he who is king and supposed to be the epitome of leadership. We see women dismissed as objects and relegated to the role of war prize and sex slave. We watch in horror as the wrath of Achilles overpowers the hero entirely and reduces him to a raving maniac who abandons all his principles of decency and violently desecrates the corpse of his fallen enemy. At every turn, Homer’s narrative presents us with a picture of rage, revenge, violence and loss of human values in the context of ongoing warfare. War is the stage for violence and warriors become its instruments. In the Iliad, war seems to be an inevitable component of the human experience and though it does provide the hero with an opportunity for kleos, it does so by delivering devastating consequences for all who are involved in it.

If we view the Iliad as an anti-war poem, then we must look for peace as the alternative. Peace is harder to find in Homer’s narrative but it does come through in very subtle ways. There is no clearer presentation of peace as a counterpoint to war than in the description of the war shield that Thetis commissions Hephaestus to make for her son Achilles. On the shield is depicted a city at peace and it is contrasted with one that is under siege. In the peaceful city we see people reveling at festivals and marriages and taking part in legal affairs. Fields are being cultivated and harvests are being gathered and grapes are being picked. All of the wonderful aspects of life are shown on the shield and we are presented a picture of what life should and could be without warfare. The irony of course is that this aspiration for a peaceful life is presented on a weapon of war.

We have to turn to the Odyssey to find a true picture of what this world of peace might look like in real life. On Scheria, King Alcinous and Queen Arete rule over the Phaeacians in a land of peace and plenty. There is not a hint of war or strife and the people are proud and happy. There is abundance everywhere and a beautiful young princess like Nausicaa and her handmaidens can roam freely without fear of molestation, not even from the likes of a naked stranger who washes up on their shore. The peaceful city and land shown on the shield of Achilles can indeed be achieved, and the proof of that is found in the land of the Phaeacians in the Odyssey.

Returning to the Iliad, Homer presents Hector to his listeners as a peace-loving man. Despite being a great warrior and the leader of the Trojan forces, we learn that Hector is a reluctant fighter who looks on war with disdain and has a preference for peace. He is shown as a loving and thoughtful husband and father who says, on the one hand, that he puts his family above the well-being of his city, and yet in the next breath tells Andromache that it is his duty to leave her and to return to the battlefield. But unlike Achilles, who returns to the battle out of rage and revenge and a search for kleos, Hector fights out of a sense of loyalty and duty rather than for personal glory.

It is interesting to note that at the end of the Odyssey, we see the hero Odysseus evolve from being a glory-seeking warrior, stalwart adventurer and vengeful protector of his oikos, to a peace-loving king who succumbs to divine intervention at the end of the story and is happy enough to settle down with his faithful wife and establish peace with the other inhabitants of Ithaca. The Iliad tells us that war is bad and that peace is possible. The Odyssey demonstrates that peace can indeed happen.

Of course we cannot conclude a discussion of War & Peace in Homer without referencing Leo Tolstoy and his own War and Peace. He was very much influenced by Homer and the Iliad with its themes of war, mortality and the human condition provided a model for Tolstoy’s seminal piece. Tolstoy was so taken by Homer that he also used many of the Greek bard’s literary techniques like formulaic epithets, repetitive phrases and highly realistic descriptions to build his own literary style. Like Homer, Tolstoy presents the violence of war as a deeply impactful event for those participating in it and affected by it and he explores in great depth the psychological effects of war on people. In particular, Tolstoy mirrors Homer’s approach by demonstrating how those who are facing imminent death can experience honourable and profound moments. The heroic and Homeric epic was a constant source of inspiration for Tolstoy.

In summary, my conclusion is that the Iliad is an anti-war poem and while the work features war prominently, the subtle presence of peaceful themes and characters leads us to consider peace as the alternative to war and holds it out to us as hope for social order and harmony in the world.

Friday, August 22, 2025

Samuel Butler – Cat Among the Pigeons

 

   Samuel Butler – Cat Among the Pigeons

It took me a total of seventeen months to translate the Iliad and only seven months to complete the Odyssey. After being away from ancient Greek for almost 60 years, things got easier as I went along and additionally, the writing style of the second epic seemed simpler to me. Perhaps simpler is not the correct word, but I did find the Odyssey very different from the Iliad. In fact, by the time I had reached line 20, I had come to the conclusion that they were penned by different authors. I have often said that the Iliad was written by an artist and the Odyssey by a news reporter.

English writer Samuel Butler (1835-1902) decided that the world needed a very readable prose translation of the Iliad and the Odyssey that would appeal to a broad modern audience who could not read the original Greek, and he set about this task late in his life. As he translated Homer’s stories, as I did, Butler also came to the conclusion that the Iliad and the Odyssey were by different hands, but he went one step further, and a big step at that. Butler concluded that the Odyssey had been written, not by the singing bard who wrote the Iliad, but by a woman. In 1897 he published his theory in his book The Authoress of the Odyssey, and there he set the cat among the pigeons.

Butler went much farther than simply proclaiming female authorship of the epic. He even suggested that this female author was a young girl who lived in Sicily and who wrote herself into the story in the character of the Princess Nausicaa, daughter of King Alcinous and Queen Arete of Scheria in the land of the Phaeacians. He discounted entirely the notion that the journey of Odysseus was a pelagic voyage to the ends of the Aegean and the Mediterranean, and instead was just a circumnavigation of the island of Sicily. He postulated that Ithaca was not an island off the west coast of Greece, but rather was one of the Egadi Islands off of Trapani in Sicily. In fact, he positioned all of the stops that Odysseus made during his journey as taking place on the island itself or just off its shores.

It is not my intention to repeat Butler’s arguments in an attempt to either support or refute what he has suggested. Read his book if you are interested and make up your own mind, for it is a fascinating study and a real head-scratcher. What I do find very interesting are two intense arguments that he makes about the acceptance of his premise or, at the very least, the notion about keeping an open mind about scholarship. Butler makes the point that he has outlined his arguments about female authorship, author identification and locale, and has received no counter-arguments to refute his position. He proposes that if his position is so totally off the mark, then the classical scholars of his day would have said something to argue a different opinion. But Butler heard nothing from any scholars to critique his position. His conclusion was that since no one objected, there was no objection and that therefore his position was a correct one. The counter-argument of course was that everyone thought that he was a fool and that they just chose to ignore him, instead of giving him any credence by commenting on his work.

The second concluding point that Butler made was that his position was incapable of being considered by scholars, because doing so would call into doubt 2,000 years of classical scholarship that was based on the premise of a single authorship of the Iliad and the Odyssey by a blind poet named Homer. Too many people would have to admit that they had been wrong and a world of prefaces and introductions to various Homeric translations would have to be rewritten. Butler concludes his book by saying that he does not care whether the Odyssey was written by a man or a woman or where it was written or where the story is centered. His only care is that scholars take a sensible approach in how they consider arguments and theories and how they come to their conclusions in a reasonable manner. As scholars we need to keep an open mind and approach any and all new information with care and reason. Sensible advice indeed!

Wednesday, August 20, 2025

The Penelope Story

 The Penelope Story

While the faithful Penelope waited for twenty years in Ithaca for the return of her wandering husband Odysseus, the hero spent his time cavorting and canoodling for a total of eight years with a couple of sexy ladies somewhere in the Mediterranean. These were no one-night stands. He spent a full year with Circe and seven years with Calypso. But did Odysseus actually cheat on his wife Penelope? Well technically he did not, because all the sex that happened on his journey home to his faithful wife came as a result of him being summoned to the beds of two goddesses. Circe and Calypso issued him divine commands and these were considered sacred and compelled to be obeyed by any god-fearing human. The gods do not look favourably upon those mortals who do not obey their wishes, and so we can argue that Odysseus just did as he was commanded. As they say in the old song, “I don’t like it but I guess things happen that way.” I bounced this idea off my own good and faithful wife (PhD Classics) and she suggested that it sounded like an argument concocted by a man.

So cheated on or not, who was Penelope and why is she important to the story? Penelope was the wife of Odysseus and the mother of their son Telemachus. She was the queen of Ithaca and the daughter of the Spartan king Icarius. Penelope was the cousin of Helen, the wife of King Menelaus of Sparta, and of Clytemnestra, the wife of King Agamemnon of Mycenae. Penelope is always portrayed as being the direct opposite of her two cousins. Helen was considered to be the most beautiful woman in the world and her unfaithfulness with Paris was the root cause of the Trojan War. She abandons her daughter and robs the royal treasury to flee with her paramour and on account of her are launched 1,186 ships. Clytemnestra is pictured as harsh and unforgiving and she and her lover Aegisthus assassinate her husband in his bathtub on the day that he returns from the war. In contrast, Penelope is always seen as less beautiful, more faithful, always loving, a devoted wife and mother, and ever forgiving. She is also very cunning and very wise.

To appreciate fully the character of Penelope, one must first understand the role played by women, and especially wives, in ancient Greece. The primary role of a wife was focused on managing the house and bearing children. In addition to making sure that all family members were well cared-for, the wife also supervised the household slaves and servants and controlled the budget. Men were out and about, engaged in social, public, political or military activities, while wives were generally confined to the home and seldom participated in public affairs, other than religious ones. They were discouraged from interacting with men from outside their immediate families and had few legal and property rights.

Managing the household usually centered on meal preparation, the production and repair of clothing, supervising and engaging in spinning and weaving, and looking after the upkeep of the home and property. Any slaves or servants that the family had who helped with household duties needed to be directed, supervised and sometimes punished. As far as financial management was concerned, the wife also controlled the family budget, managed foodstuffs and stock, planned expenditures and ensured that all resources were used wisely.

Bearing children and raising them was a critical part of a wife’s overall responsibilities. Sons were especially important to families in ancient Greece, because sons would carry on the family line and bring further prosperity to the family. Boys were better educated than girls and received both a formal education as well as training in both physical and military matters. Girls were raised to be copies of their mothers and their education consisted mainly of training in domestic affairs. Girls were also viewed as bargaining chips for their ability to attract suitable partners as potential brides. The duties of a wife and the way her children were raised depended greatly on the social standing and wealth of her husband. Wealthy women, who had more slaves, did less of the household work themselves and their children received a broader education. Women in poorer households were forced to do more of the mundane tasks, and her children were more apt to be helping her rather than to be learning the finer aspects of life.

The expectation was that a wife would be totally faithful to her husband. Men, on the other hand, had a much freer life when it came to sex outside of marriage. Men generally married later in life, so it was not unusual for them to frequent prostitutes when they were younger. Likewise, men were often away from home fighting wars, and prostitution was not disapproved in such cases. In fact, prostitution was not seen as a clandestine practice, but was out in the open and state regulated. There were even state-run brothels where costs were controlled and taxes were paid in what was considered a socially acceptable occupation. Sex outside of marriage was certainly not acceptable for women. Chastity was expected before marriage and during widowhood and adultery during marriage was considered a crime, and the husband was allowed to take the law into his own hands and mete out punishment for the infraction.

When we look at all these factors, we come to the conclusion that Penelope was portrayed by Homer as the epitome of the perfect wife in the Odyssey. She bore and raised his child, managed all the household affairs, did some of the work herself, supervised the servants, and most importantly, remained faithful to a husband who had been absent for twenty years. In addition, she showed wisdom, strategy and cunning at every step along the way. The story of the Odyssey highlights Penelope’s intelligence, loyalty and resilience in the face of a number of adversities and is as much a story about Penelope, as it is about her husband’s journey, cunning, return and eventual triumph in regaining his throne.

Telemachus sets the stage for us when he speaks to the visiting goddess and gives us an indication of the situation in which his mother Penelope finds herself.

All the nobles who rule over the islands, Dulichium and Same and wooded Zacynthus and those who are lords of rocky Ithaca, all of these are courting my mother and consuming our household. She does not refuse this terrible marriage nor can she make it end. They are totally consuming my livelihood and it will not be long before they destroy me as well.

After a twenty year absence, Penelope still misses her husband dearly and mourns the fact that she is without him. As the bard Phemius sings about the return of the Achaeans from Troy, she confronts him and asks that he sing about more pleasant things.

Phemius, you know many things that are charming to mortals, the deeds of men and gods that you make famous in song. Sing about one of these as you sit here and let them drink their wine in silence. Cease this baneful song for it distresses my dear heart and above all other women it brings me sorrows that cannot be forgotten. It reminds me so much of that dear head, my husband, whose fame is so well known in Hellas and throughout the middle of Argos.

Penelope even accepts the rebuke of her son and in so doing she paints us a picture of the subservient role that women played in ancient Greece. But we know that Penelope is anything but subservient and this will be borne out by her future actions in the narrative.

For yourself, submit your heart and your mind to what you hear, for not only Odysseus lost the day of his return home in Troy, but many other men were also destroyed there. So go to your room and busy yourself with your work at the loom and the distaff and bid your handmaidens to be busy at their tasks. Speaking shall be the realm of men only and especially for me, since I am the lord of this domain.

But for now, Homer tells us that she went back to her chamber, seized with bewilderment for she was conscious in her heart of the wise words of her son. The next morning it is revealed that Penelope has deceived the suitors with a cunning ruse. Telemachus is told by the suitor Antinous,

It is not the Achaeans suitors who are to blame, but your own mother for she profits all around. It has now been three years and the fourth is coming that she has been maltreating the hearts in the breasts of the Achaeans. To all men she sends hope and has promises for each of them and sends them messages of encouragement but her mind eagerly desires other things. In her mind she has devised another cunning trick. She set up a large loom in her great hall and set upon weaving on a wide web with fine thread and straightaway she spoke to us about it.

She told them that she was weaving a funeral shroud for the noble Laertes and that she could not possibly even think about marriage until the shroud was finished. For over three years she wove by day and then at night she snuck back to her loom and unraveled the work that had been done that day. Eventually one of her handmaidens discovered her trick and reported it to the suitors and they increased their pressure on her to marry one of them.

Telemachus agreed that it was time for his mother to choose a suitable husband but pleaded for one last chance to find out about the fate of his father. He planned a trip to Pylos and Sparta to question their leaders about what they might know about the demise of Odysseus but asked that information about his trip be kept from his loving mother until he was safely away and distant from Ithaca. From his conversation with his nurse, we get an insight into Penelope’s role as a loving mother.

Then the wise Telemachus answered her, “Take heart dear nurse for I do not act without a plan from the gods. But I swear that I will reveal none of this to my mother before the eleventh or twelfth day shall come or until she misses me or hears of my going so that her dear skin is not marred by her weeping.”

When she at last discovers that Telemachus has left in search of his father and that the suitors are planning to kill him when he returns, she is beyond consoling.

Over her there poured life-destroying grief and she could not bring herself to sit down on one of the many seats in the house but she sank down on the threshold of her beautifully fashioned chamber with pitiable wailing and around her all her handmaidens wept, all who were in the house, both young and old.

And now my well-loved son has gone aboard a hollow ship, just a lad who knows little about the works and gatherings of men. For him I grieve, even more than for the other one and I fear and tremble in case something happens to him, either in the land where he has gone or upon the sea. There are many who are hostile towards him and wish to slay him before he returns to his native land.

This action takes place in Book IV of the Odyssey and we do not see Penelope again until she reappears in Book XVI. Her lengthy absence is unusual for a character who is so central to the entire story. It is almost as if Homer sandwiched the story of Odysseus and his journey between the two bookends of the story of Penelope. Penelope’s story at the beginning and the end of the Odyssey is set in the present tense, and the story of Odysseus is set in the past tense, relating things that have already happened. Her story wraps around his and gives the hero’s story a framework.

When Penelope learned that her son has returned to Ithaca, her strength came to the forefront and she confronted Alcinous, the leader of the suitors.

Now it is his house that you seek to dishonour and to marry his wife and to slay his son and on me you bring great distress. I urge you to put an end to this and to command the others to cease as well.

Eurymachus voiced his support for her and Telemachus and she was comforted by his words, little realizing that he too was plotting the death of her son. But Penelope gained new hope that all would turn out well when Theoclymenus told her that he had spotted a large bird of prey that was indeed an omen signifying that Odysseus had returned. Her response to him was, O stranger, how I wish that what you declare would come to pass and then you would receive such affection and gifts from me that all who met you would call you blessed.

            The cunning Penelope then hatched a plan to deceive the suitors even further. She appeared before them in her loveliest manner and advised them that she was preparing to accept a marriage proposal from one of the group. In fact she was using this clever ruse to motivate them to heap gifts upon her in anticipation of being the chosen one, and in so doing increase the bounty of her own household and that of Odysseus. The hero saw through her plan and was pleased.

The night approaches when a hateful marriage shall be thrust upon me, one so cursed whose happiness has been taken away by Zeus. For such grief and pain has come upon my heart for the suitors have not behaved like this before. Those who wish to court a noble lady and the daughter of a wealthy man and compete with one another, usually bring cattle and fat flocks, hold a banquet for the friends of the girl and give her lovely gifts. But what they do not do is eat up the livelihood of another man without paying the price for doing so.

Thus she spoke and the much-enduring godlike Odysseus rejoiced because she was able to wangle gifts from them and she bewitched their minds with gentle words, but her own mind eagerly desired something else.

We see Homer’s deep regard for Penelope when we listen to Odysseus compare her to a blameless king. The bard actually places her on a pedestal that is higher than the hero’s, because we know from his actions that he is a king who is anything but blameless.

My Lady, no man living on earth could find fault with you for your fame rises to the highest heaven, just like the fame of some blameless king, who with the fear of the gods in his heart, rules over many strong men, dispensing justice, and the black earth bears wheat and barley and the trees are heavy with fruit and the flocks bear young without end and the sea offers up its bounty, all under his good leadership and the people prosper under him.

The noble and wise Penelope reveals more of her character to us when she describes the nature of a good man to the disguised Odysseus and then later when she talks about the significance of dreams. In both passages we see Homer’s high regard for the heroine as well as her insight and wisdom.

Men come into being and are short-lived. If a man is cruel and has a cruel heart, all men will curse him while he is alive and mock him after he is dead. But if a man is blameless and has a noble heart, then his fame will be carried far and wide by all men and they will all regard him as a good man.

Stranger, dreams are very confusing and of unclear meaning and they do not always find their fulfillment among men. For there are two gates in shadowy dreams, one built of horn and one of ivory. Those dreams that enter through the gate of sawn ivory are deceptive and bear no fulfillment. But dreams that pass through the gate of well-polished horn will find fulfillment when seen by mortals.

            The cunning Penelope then set up the contest with the bow and the twelve axes, knowing that success for any of the suitors would be nigh on impossible. This was another of her cunning ruses that bought her additional time.

Listen to me you heroic suitors, you who have decided to eat and drink in this house endlessly, since the man of the house has been gone for such a long time and you have not been able to find any other pretext for doing so other than the fact that you want to marry me and take me for your wife. But come now suitors, since this has been revealed as your prize. I will put before you the great bow of the godlike Odysseus and whoever can string the bow in the palm of his hands and shoot an arrow through all twelve axes, then he I will follow and turn my back on the house of my wedding, a most beautiful place and filled with life and one that I will forever remember in my dreams.

But once more Penelope was rebuked by her son and she dutifully returned to her chamber and was not in the great hall when Odysseus took up the challenge of the axe handles. Telemachus knew what was about to happen and neither he nor his father wished for Penelope to witness the coming destruction of the suitors.

Go now to your own room and keep busy with your work at the distaff and the loom and order your handmaidens to do their own work. The bow shall be for men and for all and mostly for me, since I am the head of this household.”

Seized with amazement, she went back into her chamber, full in her heart with the words that her son had spoken. She went up into her chamber with her handmaidens and immediately started mourning for Odysseus, her dear husband, until the flashing-eyed Athena cast sweet sleep upon her eyelids.

When she eventually sees the slain suitors and the unfaithful handmaidens in the great hall, Penelope is not fully convinced that the beggar who stands before her with her son Telemachus is actually Odysseus who has returned home. In her wisdom she tells her son,

My child, my heart is astonished in my breast and I am not strong enough to be able to speak, to ask questions or to look him in the face. But if indeed this is Odysseus and he has come home, then the two of us can determine that with ease, for we have certain secret signs between us that are hidden from all others.

She then sets up the cunning trick of the great olive-wood marriage bed and Odysseus passes the test to her satisfaction.

Thus he spoke and her knees buckled under her where she sat and her dear heart melted for she knew full well the secret sign that Odysseus had revealed to her. Then straight away she burst into tears and rushed to him and threw her arms around the neck of Odysseus and kissed his head.

The two long-separated lovers fell into each other’s arms, returned to their marriage bed, made love and spent the night regaling each other with their stories. All’s well that ends well.

When the two of them had had their fill of love-making, they delighted themselves with talking and speaking to each other. The fair lady told him about everything that she had put up with in the great hall, looking upon the throng of destructive suitors who had slaughtered many beasts, cattle and fat sheep they had killed and many draughts of wine had been taken from the wine jars. Then Zeus-fostered Odysseus described the many woes that he had inflicted on men and all the lamentable evils that he had suffered and she was gladdened to hear his stories and sweet sleep did not fall upon her eyelids before he had had a chance to recount all his tales to her.

In his article “Penelope: The Odyssey’s Creative Thinker”, published in 2016 in The Thinker, Michael Grenke of St. John’s College summarizes Penelope’s character and gives us an interesting take on her clever weaving trick.

The Odyssey’s Penelope is a thinker, a person who is effective in facing her world and its problems by thinking her way out of them. She is, perhaps, even more of a thinker than her much-devising husband, as he is still, occasionally, given to “solving” his problems with brute force. It is in Penelope that Homer more purely explores the possibilities and limitations of Odyssean cleverness.

The emblem of Penelope’s cleverness is the device by which she tricks her suitors for three years, her weaving. She uses the weaving to buy herself time, but the weaving is itself an image of time. Time is a weaving and unweaving; it makes and unmakes beings and relations.

            As I indicated previously, it would not be too far off the mark, in my opinion, to say that the Odyssey is as much a story about Penelope as it is about Odysseus. The hero Odysseus and the heroine Penelope are on equal plains and the story of one is not complete without the story of the other. The story of Odysseus is the story of his journey home and his arrival there using his wiles and his wisdom. The story of Penelope is the story of the home to which he is traveling and how it has been made secure by her own wiles and wisdom.

It has taken a wait time of almost three millennia, but finally the Odyssey story has been retold in the voice of Penelope in Margaret Atwood’s Penelopiad. Her book retells the story of the Odyssey from the perspective of Penelope and her twelve maids. The story is told in retrospect, with Penelope and the Maids in the afterlife reflecting on the events that occurred centuries before. Penelope's first person narrative is a mostly chronological account starting at her birth, while the Maids provide commentary on her narrative. It is well worth a read because it gives us a new perspective on one of Homer’s most important characters and a true heroine of the epic. 

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 enterta...