The Running of the Horses

  The Running of the Horses

In ancient Greece, horses were symbols of wealth, power and status and were fully integrated into elite society, warfare, mythology and athletics. Only the very wealthy could afford the expense of owning, feeding and training horses. They were used in warfare for pulling chariots in battle. A two-wheeled chariot normally carried a charioteer and one warrior and became common in the Mycenaean age from about 1600-1100 BCE. Mounted cavalry appeared around 900 BCE, but did not form a large part of the fighting force until the time of Phillip of Macedon and his son, Alexander the Great and his legendary steed Bucephalus. Horses were prevalent in Greek mythology and were most often associated with the gods. Equestrian competitions were popular in ancient Greek festivals and games and horses were often given as prizes to the winners. A chariot race was a featured event at the funeral games of Patroclus. In religious rituals and funeral practices, horses were sometimes sacrificed because of their value and their connection to the divine. Achilles placed four horses on the funeral pyre of Patroclus. Horses were also used for breeding donkeys as beasts of burden and there is one story about a search being mounted for 12 missing mares that were all bearing donkeys. For the social elite of the time, a horse was considered a vital necessity and marked one’s position in society.

Because of the nature of the story and the fact that it takes place mainly upon the sea, there are relatively few references to horses in the Odyssey, as you might expect. Most comments regarding horses are found in descriptive epithets, applied either to people or to places. For example, King Nestor of Pylos is most often referred to as the Gerenian horseman or as the horse-tamer Nestor. Diomedes is referred to as the son of Tydeus, the tamer of horses. Likewise Castor, the brother of Helen, is called a tamer of horses. Ilios is noted as being famous for its horses, and Argos is always referred to as horse-grazing or horse-nurturing Argos. Warriors are depicted as wearing helmets featuring plumes of horse hair.

The most famous horse mentioned in the Odyssey is not a living beast but rather the legendary Trojan wooden horse. It was devised by the crafty Odysseus and became the tool which led to the ultimate downfall and defeat of the besieged city. Still another reference to horses in the second epic includes the scene where Telemachus is given horses and a chariot by King Nestor of Pylos so that the boy can safely and quickly make his way to Sparta to ascertain news of his missing father. Interestingly enough, Telemachus says that he will leave the horses behind and not take them to his home in Ithaca because his land is not suitable for raising horses. He says that the island contains no wide fields or meadowlands and is more suitable for raising goats than horses.

Near the end of the Odyssey we find the tender scene where Odysseus and Penelope, at long last, nestled in their olive-wood marriage bed and shed tears of joy on account of their reunion. The image of Rosy-Fingered Dawn has always been one of my favourites and in this instance we are treated to the mention of the two steeds that draw the chariot of the goddess across the sky. Homer paints a perfect picture for us with his magical words.

And rosy-fingered Dawn would have risen on their weeping, had not the flashing-eyed Athena made other plans. The long night she held back from its normal course and likewise she held back the golden-throned Dawn from the streams of Oceanus and she would not put the yoke on her swift-footed horses who bring light to mankind, namely Lampus and Phaethon, the foals who bring the Dawn.

As one would expect, because of the nature of its narrative, the Iliad is an entirely different matter when it comes to references to horses. There are few such passages in the Odyssey, but there are literally hundreds in the Iliad because of its land-based and war-based story. We find all the usual formulaic epithets describing horses, people and places. Horses are always loud-sounding, sure-footed, swift-footed, solid-hoofed, strong-hoofed or single-hooved. There are untold references to horse-taming Trojans, horse-goading Cadmeans, horse-rearing and horse-feeding Argos and horse-nurturing Trica. We once again find Nestor the Gerenian horseman, as well as the horse-tamers Hector, Peleus, Antenor, Castor, Diomedes, Menesthaus and Orestes the horse-wrangler. In one horrible scene, Homer described how Nestor’s horse was wounded and how the old man put the beast out of its misery.

Gerenian Nestor, the guardian of the Achaeans, stood alone but not of his own doing, for his horse had been wounded because the divine Alexander, husband of the fair-haired Helen, had struck it on the top of the forehead with an arrow, just where the mane begins to grow out of a horse’s head, the worst place for it to be hit. Suffering great pain, it reared up with the arrow having penetrated its brain and it spooked the other horses as it writhed around with the bronze missile in its head. The old man quickly cut the reins from the horse with a swipe of his sword.

There are many comments in the Iliad about horses being used in war. Homer tells us that the plains thundered under the feet of warriors and horses. Horses were used for pulling chariots and we find detailed comments about how they were double-yoked for the task. Sometimes two horses were used and sometimes four. The chariot carried two men, one being the charioteer and the other being the armed warrior. Most times the warrior did not fight from the chariot but instead dismounted to fight on the ground. The chariot’s sole purpose was for transporting the heavily armed warrior who would have no doubt been tired out if he was required to walk to the battlefield. Homer tells us that the horses responded best to the voice of a charioteer with whom they were already familiar. There is no indication that warriors were actually mounted on horseback like cavalry, but King Priam did mention to Helen that he encountered horsemen in Phrygia.

In days of yore I entered vine-clad Phrygia and saw the largest army of Phrygian horsemen, the people of Otreus and godlike Mygdon, all encamped on the banks of the Sangarius.

It appears that horses and chariots were richly decorated and that horse hair was used as a helmet decoration. There are numerous references to warriors wearing helmets featuring plumes or crests of horse hair. We are told that the Hera had golden-bridled horses and that the god Ares also had a similar team, the ultimate in decoration and certainly fitting for the horses of a god or goddess. Zeus himself had a team of swift-flying bronze-hoofed horses with golden manes.  In a comment about the battle wounds that Menelaus bore, we get an indication about how the horses of mortals were dressed up in their finery.

Like as when some woman from Moenia or Caria stains ivory with purple dye to adorn the cheeks of horses and it lies in her bed-chamber and many charioteers wish to have it for their own, a treasure fit for a king and worthy of being an ornament for the horse and a glory to the charioteer, so also Menelaus are your thighs stained blood-red as well as your shapely legs and your handsome ankles beneath them.

Troy had a long history of horse raising and we are given some insight into how it all came about.

Dardanus begat a son and this was King Erichthonius who became the richest of all mortal men. He had three thousand horses grazing in the marsh meadow, all of them mares rejoicing in their gamboling foals. The North Wind lusted after them as they grazed and he appeared to them as a dark-maned stallion. Some became pregnant and he begat twelve foals. When they leaped and bounded over the fields of grain, they would skim the top and not break a stalk and when they frisked and jumped over the wide sea, they would just merely touch the surface of the foamy waves.

It would appear that the best horses in the Trojan camp belonged to Aeneas and they were described as follows:

For they are of that type which wide-eyed Zeus gave to Tros for the sake of his son Ganymede and indeed they are the best of horses under the east and indeed under the sun. From this breed of horses, Anchises the lord of men stole their lineage without the knowledge of Laomedon, and put them to stud with some mares he had supplied and from these there descended six horses for his royal court. Four of these offspring he kept and reared in his stables and two of them he gave to Aeneas and both of them knew how to engender terror.

There were other famous horses in the Trojan camp and Hector himself tells us about his four horses and how they were raised and the love and attention that they received.

Having spoken thus, he urged on his horses and called aloud. Xanthus and Podargus and Aethon and you noble Lampus, now is the time for you to repay me for the care that Andromache, the daughter of generous Eetion, has lavished upon you. First she gave you sweet barley and drink mixed to your liking, even before she served me, who boasts about being a loyal and dedicated husband to her.

The captured spy Dolon tells us about the horses belonging to an ally of the Trojans, King Rhesus of Thrace. He has the most beautiful and biggest horses I have ever seen, white as snow and as fast as the wind.

Homer asked the Muse to tell him who had the best horses among the Danaans and this was her response:

When it comes to horses, those of the son of Pheres were by far the best. They were driven by Eumelos and were as swift as birds. They were of the same age and color and perfectly matched in height. Apollo with the silver bow had raised them in Perea. They were both mares and bore the terror of Ares. Of the men, Ajax the son of Telamon was by far best as long as Achilles remained angry. For Achilles, the blameless son of Peleus exceeded him greatly and he had also better horses.

We know that Achilles raised horses in Pythia and that he brought his own steeds to Troy. Very early in the epic he told Agamemnon that the Trojans had never done any harm to his cattle, horses or crops back in his home region of Pythia. His horses are famous and Odysseus makes reference to the fact that only Achilles can control them - the horses of the battle-wise son of Aeacus, for they are almost impossible for mortal men to master or drive except for Achilles whose mother was an immortal.

We learn more about the horses of Achilles when Patroclus has them harnessed for his foray into the battlefield wearing the armour of Achilles.

He ordered Automedon to quickly harness the horses, he whom he honoured most after Achilles, breaker of the ranks of men and trusted most to obey his commands in battle. At his urging, Automedon harnessed the horses, Xanthus and Balius, they that flew as swiftly as the wind and were born by the Harpy Podarge to the West Wind as she grazed in the meadow beside the stream of Oceanus. In the side traces he harnessed the goodly Pedasus that Achilles had brought away when he sacked the city of Eetion, but being a mortal horse, it followed after the immortal steeds.

            While Patroclus was doing battle with Sarpedon, Achilles’ horse Pedasus was struck and killed.

But Sarpedon missed him with his shining spear when he caught up to him but hit with his spear the horse Pedasus on the right shoulder. The horse shrieked aloud as he gave up his life and he fell down onto the dust with a moan as his soul departed. The other horses in the team reared up and the yoke creaked and the reins got all tangled where the horse lay in the dust. But the famous spearman Automedon found a solution and drawing his long thick sword from the scabbard on his thigh, he sprang forth and quickly cut the tangled reins where the horse was laying and the two fighters came together again in heart-vexing battle.

            The remaining horses of Achilles show great emotion at the death of Patroclus and stood there weeping over his body. Homer imbues them with human emotions as they mourn.

The horses of the son of Aeacus were far off and were wailing for they had learned that their charioteer was lying in the dust, having fallen under the hands of Hector the man-slayer. In truth, Automedon the brave son of Diores was whipping at them with his swift lash and was talking at them with honeyed words and sometimes with threats. But the two of them were not willing to go back to the ships at the wide Hellespont, nor into the battle with the Achaeans. They remained firmly set like a block of stone that stands on the grave of a dead man or woman and stood there immovable with their heads down beside the beautiful chariot. Hot tears flowed from their eyes and trickled onto the ground as they stood there weeping for their lost charioteer. Their beautiful manes were stained and begrimed under the yoke pad, streaming down from the yoke.

            Xanthus, the favoured horse of Achilles, was even given the power of speech by Hera and thereafter predicted the death of Achilles.

Then Automedon shouted out to his father’s horses with a great cry. “Xanthus and Balius, renowned children of Podarge, remember in some way to bring your charioteer back safely to the host of the Danaans when we have had our fill of war and do not leave him out there dying as you did with Patroclus.” Then from under the yoke, the swift-footed horse Xanthus spoke to him and straightway bowed down his head and all of its mane drooped down freely from the yoke and touched the ground and the white-armed goddess Hera gave him a human voice with which to speak. “We will assuredly save you this time mighty Achilles even though your day of doom is nigh at hand, but we will not be the cause of that for that will happen because of a mighty god and overpowering Fate. It was not because of our laziness or sluggishness that the Trojans were able to strip the armour from the shoulders of Patroclus but rather the supreme one of the gods, even he whom fair-haired Leto gave birth to kill him among the foremost fighters and gave the glory to Hector. The two of us can run as fast as a blast of the west wind, which is well-known to be the swiftest of all winds, but you are appointed by fate to be killed in battle by a mortal and a god.”

            The fact that Homer tells the story of horses that can display human emotions and can weep at the death of a fallen hero and even talk is an indication of the high regard that he had for these noble animals. That high regard is a mirror of the feelings that the ancient Greeks had about horses. In the same way that human heroes fought to achieve Kleos, such horses as these achieved their own Kleos or immortality through their actions. Proof of this rests in the fact that we are still talking about them today and that their fame has truly been immortalized. Horses have become the stuff of myths and legends and they played a vital role in Homer’s epics. 

The Late Bronze Age Collapse

  The Late Bronze Age Collapse

What historians and archaeologists refer to as the Late Bronze Age Collapse was a period of societal upheaval and collapse that impacted much of the Eastern Mediterranean and the near east. The most affected regions included modern day Greece, Turkey, Egypt, the Balkans, Cyprus, Syria, the Levant and Mesopotamia. The collapse was sudden, violent and swift and is generally thought to have occurred between the years 1200-1100 BCE. Prominent societies were destroyed and virtually every fortified and walled city in the entire region was levelled. We are particularly interested in knowing more about this Mediterranean apocalypse because of its impact on the major cities that Homer described in the Iliad. Gone were the cities of Agamemnon, Mycenae in 1250 BCE and 1190 BCE and Tiryns, levelled by an earthquake in 1200 BCE. Pylos of King Nestor was hit by a major fire around 1180 BCE and Argos of Diomedes suffered a similar same fate, as did the lofty walled city of Troy itself, destroyed at least twice and forgotten about until Roman times. Thebes was destroyed and Athens was abandoned. Elsewhere in the near east, the Hittite capital Hattusa was burned, evacuated and never reoccupied. Sites in Cyprus met the same fate, as did Ugarit in Syria, destroyed in 1178 BCE.

Scientists tell us that earthquakes tend to occur in sequence and that a major quake above 6.5 on the Richter Scale can set off a storm of earthquakes along a weakened fault line. The entire eastern Mediterranean is a known earthquake zone with fault lines running throughout the region. When a map of quake occurrences is superimposed on a map of the places destroyed in the Late Bronze Age Collapse, there is a strikingly close correspondence. It is safe to say that earthquakes likely played some role in the overall collapse and the destruction of the region’s walled fortresses, but they do not tell the whole story. It is more likely that they provided the coup de grace for cities and societies already weakened by other causes.

The late Bronze Age was a period of heavy migration, with hordes of people arriving in the eastern Mediterranean by land from the northern parts of Europe, and by sea from the western Mediterranean from places like Sardinia and Sicily. We can compare those sweeping down from the north to Attila’s Huns or Genghis Khan’s Mongols. Those who arrived by sea were similar to the Vikings of later history and are most often referred to by historians as the Sea Peoples. Whatever they were called or wherever they originated from, the fact remains that the Late Bronze Age Collapse coincided with the appearance in the region of many new ethnic groups, all of whom thought, lived and acted quite differently than the established societies that they fought with and displaced.

It is thought that these migrants were fleeing drought conditions and worsening weather in their homelands and had taken to the roads and the waves out of desperation and sheer necessity. It is further conjectured that they were successful in overcoming the local inhabitants whom they encountered because they were better armed. The people of northern Europe had gradually moved away from a reliance on bronze for weaponry and had turned to iron. Iron was inferior to bronze for making weapons in the early days until the addition of carbon allowed for the production of steel, but iron was in more plentiful supply. In the north, in what is modern day Romania and Bulgaria, iron-working had been going on since the 13^th and 12^th centuries BCE. Larger armies were capable of being furnished with iron weapons and this meant that they could more easily overcome those armed with bronze. The collapse of international trade routes meant that copper and tin were less available and this led to an arms shortage of bronze weapons.

Throughout the region, there was at this time a general collapse of a multitude of systems. The impact of volcanoes, migration, invasion, drought, new weaponry, overpopulation, political revolt, disruption of supply chains and trade, and the collapse of longstanding alliances all had a bearing on the Late Bronze Age Collapse. Taken on their own, none of these factors could have caused the Mediterranean apocalypse by itself. But collectively, they could have indeed done so. However, all of these factors were slow in their onset and development and fail to explain the speed at which the collapse happened. There must have been a dramatic and catastrophic event that kicked off the entire cycle of collapse and destruction. For that cause, we must look farther afield than the affected region.

In fact, we have to look almost 4,000 miles away to find the catalyst for the Late Bronze Age Collapse. The Hekla 3 volcanic eruption in Iceland that occurred in 1159 BCE, was on a massive scale and released a vast amount of ash and sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere. The enormous ash cloud blocked out the sun, dropped temperatures and created a volcanic winter in northern Europe for years. Colder summers, more frigid winters and disrupted weather patterns led to widespread drought, crop failures, famine and social disruption. People had no other choice than to migrate south in search of warmer temperatures and food. Desperate hordes from the northern reaches of Europe came by land and still others, the Sea Peoples, travelled by water, all intent on reaching the eastern Mediterranean and the fertile lands of the near east.

We cannot be totally certain, but the environmental catastrophe caused by the eruption of Hekla 3 is believed to have been the final blow to an already stressed system. Indeed, there were multiples factors that contributed to the Late Bronze Age Collapse, but a sudden and catastrophic event, like a major volcanic eruption, is certainly the very answer that we are looking for to explain the rapidity of the collapse events that took place. The collapse was a perfect storm of interconnected factors, either kicked off by a major event that started the ball rolling, or else one that guaranteed that the destruction would become a certainty in very short order. 

Gone to the Dogs

 

  Gone to the Dogs

The Homer who wrote the Iliad did not care much for dogs and most often associated them with death, destruction and sacrilege. References to dogs often appear in formulaic phrases that describe the horrible fate of the unburied dead on the battlefield and are common in a recurring motif of death and decay. We find such a reference at the very beginning of the Iliad.

Let wrath be your song O Goddess! 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, thereby bringing to final fulfillment the plan of Zeus.

Indeed, the most prominent role that dogs play in the Iliad is that of the wild scavenger feasting on the unburied bodies of the fallen. In the words of the goddess Athena, For certain some one of the Trojans will fill the bellies of the dogs and the birds with his fat and his flesh when he falls at the ships of the Achaeans. For the ancient Greeks, a proper burial was essential for a soul to be able to pass into Hades, guarded by Erebus the hateful dog of the underworld. To have one’s corpse mauled and desecrated by wild dogs was considered a fate worse than death itself.

Another link between dogs and death is found in Homer’s description of the plague that struck the Achaean camp when he tells us that the first victims of the pestilence were the mules and the dogs. Agamemnon also warns those who linger by the ships and are reluctant to fight bravely that things will not turn out well for them.

But to those who wish to remain apart from the fighting and linger near the curved-hull ships, I declare that you will not escape from becoming carrion for the dogs and the birds of prey.

When he saw him, the stout brave son of Menoetius had pity on him and lamenting, he spoke to him with winged words. O you cowards, leaders and lords of the Danaans, so you were destined, far from your dear ones and native land, to satiate the swift dogs of Troy with your gleaming fat.

Homer also uses references to dogs to cast aspersions on various people. Comparing a person to a dog was a powerful insult that most often signified shamelessness and cowardice and less often referred to a person’s physical prowess or temperament. An example of the latter was when Teucer, the son of Telamon, advised Agamemnon that he was having trouble striking Hector with his arrows. I have let go eight long-pointed arrows and all of them have entered the bodies of warlike and vigorous men, but I am not skilful enough to throw an arrow into this raging dog. But most often, as indicated, calling someone a dog was considered a huge insult, as when Iris told Hera,  But you are a most horrible and fearful dog, if you dare raise a mighty lance against Zeus. On several occasions, Hera herself refers to Aphrodite as a dog-fly and calls Artemis a shameless bitch of a dog. The Achaeans were referred to as those dogs fallen upon us by fate. Achilles compares Agamemnon to a dog in his perceived cowardice and shame. He wouldn’t dare look me in the eye though he has the face of a dog. Even Helen, when she is distraught with remorse over her actions and the devastation that she has caused, calls herself a bitch. As he is about to slay Hector, Achilles calls him a dog, the worst insult imaginable.

In the Iliad Homer many refers to dogs in many hunting scenes or in the protection of flocks from wild beasts, but we never witness him talking about dogs as loyal and friendly human companions. He describes dogs acting in hunting and guarding capacities exactly how we would expect them to behave, but we find no dogs with personality or individuality or a real presence in the narrative and in most cases, any references made to dogs is either as part of a formulaic phrase or as a symbolic insult. Rushing after him with his spear, the mighty Diomedes shouted to him. Like a barking dog you run away from death though great evil came near to you. There is one slight reference to dogs being kept as companions as we note the actions of Achilles as he prepares the body of Patroclus for burial. The prince had nine dogs that fed at his table and he cut the throats of two of them and cast them on the pyre.

In his conversation with Achilles in the camp of the Achaeans, King Priam summarizes perfectly Homer’s thoughts about dogs. Priam describes domestic dogs behaving in a manner similar to wild ones and this is even a more disturbing image. His words are typical of the comments made about dogs throughout the Iliad and we know for certain that they were animals not held in high regard by the bard.

Finally me, at the entrance to my home, will ravenous dogs tear my flesh after some man has taken the life from my limbs with his sharp bronze, those very dogs who fed at my table and who I raised in my house to guard my doors, who after sating themselves with my blood in the madness of their hearts, will lie down and rest in that very doorway. It is only right that a young man, who is killed in battle and lies there cut up by the sharp bronze, though he is dead, is honourable to behold. But when dogs go to work and disfigure the grey head and beard and the body of an old man who has been slain, then this is the most piteous thing that can ever happen to wretched mortals.

            But the Homer who wrote the Odyssey had a different mindset about dogs entirely. There are a few of the usual references to the ignominy that the unburied experience, like when Nestor tells Telemachus what would have happened to Aegisthus if Menelaus had come home and discovered his brother’s murderer close at hand.

You can guess yourself what would have happened if the fair-haired Menelaus, the son of Atreus, had come home from Troy and found Aegisthus alive in the palace. For not even in death would they have erected a funeral barrow for him, for the dogs and the birds of prey would have torn him apart and devoured him as he lay in the plain apart from the city and the Achaean women would not have lamented his death for such was the scope of the evil deed that he had planned. We did our part over there in Troy, carrying out our many deeds, but he lazed about in a corner of horse-grazing Argos, making a play with pretty words for the wife of Agamemnon.

His murderous companion Clytemnestra is treated in a similar insulting fashion.

It is true that there is no woman who is more shameless or dog-like than one who takes it into her heart to do such deeds, even as she determined in her heart to plan death for her own wedded husband.

Certainly dogs are sometimes used as insults in the Odyssey, as when Hephaestus refers to his unfaithful wife Aphrodite as a dog-eyed girl, but in the main, dogs are presented by the bard in this epic in a much more favourable light and more in keeping with how humans have come to regard these companionable beasts over time. At the home of Circe, the crew encountered a number of fierce wolves kept by the sorceress and even they acted tamely.

They did not attack my men, but wagged their long tails and fawned around them. Just like when dogs nuzzle around the top dog when he comes from a feast, because he brings them tidbits to sooth their natures, so all the wolves with sharp claws and the lions fawned around my men.

Even the savage dogs that live with the swineherd Eumaeus are tame enough to sleep at his bedside. Beside them slept four dogs, as savage as wild beasts, which the swineherd had raised, the leader of men. But we know that they are savage when they rush at Odysseus, however they are obedient to the commands of the swineherd.

All of a sudden the howling dogs caught sight of Odysseus and they rushed at him barking fiercely. But crafty Odysseus sat down and the staff fell from his hands. Then he would have been injured on his own property, had not the swineherd rushed quickly after them through the gateway with the ox-hide falling from his hands. He quickly called the dogs this way and that to himself and pelted them with stones and then addressed his master. Old man, surely those dogs would have torn you quickly to pieces and you would have poured down reproach upon me.

The same dogs welcomed Telemachus with wagging tails, a sight that we would never have witnessed in the Iliad. When Telemachus arrived, the ever-howling dogs did not bark at him but fawned over him wagging their tails. The author of the Odyssey certainly sees dogs very differently than the author of the Iliad. Just look at how the bard described the dogs when they saw Athena in disguise approach Odysseus at the palace. But Odysseus saw her as well as the dogs, but they did not bark at her, but instead were put to flight to the other side, whining and whimpering as they went.

The most poignant dog story in either epic is the story of Argos, the aged dog Odysseus who waited faithfully for his master to return home and then died in happiness when he finally arrived. The passage is worth quoting in its entirety because it is the most touching account of the love between a man and his dog.

Thus they spoke to one another and a dog that was laying there raised its head and lifted its ears, Argos the hound of the stout-hearted Odysseus, whom he had raised since it was young, but had not cared for since he had gone away to Ilios. In the old days the young lads used to take the hound hunting for wild goats and deer and rabbits, but now, with its master gone off, it just lay there neglected in the dung heap of the mules and cattle that was piled up waiting for the slaves of Odysseus to take it out and fertilize the fields with it. Argos the hound lay there, full of fleas and ticks, but when he saw Odysseus standing nearby, he wagged his tail and dropped his ears, but he did not have the strength to move any closer to his master. Then Odysseus looked aside and wiped away a tear, hiding his action from Eumaeus, and straightaway he questioned him.

“Eumaeus, it is a great marvel that this dog lays here on the manure heap for he seems to be in good shape but I do not know if he is as swift as he appears or if he is the type to just hang around the tables of men and looks good because his masters groom him well.”

Then the swineherd Eumaeus responded to him. “Truly this is the hound of a man who died in a far off land. If he were in the same shape as he was when Odysseus left him and went to Troy, his swiftness and strength would amaze you if you saw them. No animal that he chased in the depths of the woods could escape from him that he put to flight and he was very good at tracking. Now evil has beset him and his master has died far away from his homeland and women take no care of him or groom him. Slaves, when their masters are no longer in charge of things, are no longer willing to work faithfully because wide-eyed Zeus takes away half a man’s value when he is pressed into slavery.”

So he spoke and immediately went into the dwelling house and joined on with the throng of noble suitors. As for the dog Argos, the fate of a dark death overcame him on the spot, soon after he had seen Odysseus who had been gone for twenty years.

Though very old and neglected by most around him, Argos immediately recognized his master Odysseus and he showed his love and loyalty by wagging his tail and dropping his ears. He was too weak to stand and in this moment of silent recognition, the old dog passed away, happy to have seen his master for one last time. Odysseus was unable to acknowledge Argos openly because he was in disguise but he secretly shed a tear for his old companion. The scene of the meeting between man and dog has become an enduring symbol of loyalty and devotion. The dog’s unwavering loyalty, even when humans failed to recognize Odysseus, highlights the ancient Greek value of loyalty and the profound bond that existed between humans and animals in ancient Greece. For many centuries the story of Argos has been portrayed as the ideal of a dog’s unconditional love and loyalty, and many scholars see Argos as a metaphor for Odysseus. Both man and beast have been diminished, one by neglect and the other by the hardships of his voyage, but both are full of inner strength and a love for family above all.

In the Iliad, dogs are often mentioned in a dehumanizing or insulting manner or in a metaphorical way as symbols of baseness. Dogs are also used in similes or formulaic phrases to describe death and violence on the battlefield. There are a few similar references in the Odyssey, but in contrast, the later epic features the famous dog Argos who is a complex character and a powerful symbol of loyalty, love, and the passage of time. The Odyssey portrays a more lively and vivid picture of dogs, making them more like individual characters compared to the Iliad's more abstract and formulaic use of the animal. We are familiar with the dogs of the Odyssey. These are the dogs who beg scraps from our tables, curl up beside us when the television is on and sleep at the foot of our bed at night.

Helen – Victim or Harlot?

 

  Helen – Victim or Harlot?

For centuries the debate has waged on as to whether Helen of Sparta, more famously known as Helen of Troy, was an innocent victim who was kidnapped against her will by Prince Paris of Troy, or a willing participant, harlot, adulterer and thief who helped rob the royal treasury of Sparta and went off willingly with Paris as his co-conspirator and sexual partner. The ambiguity surrounding her status is central to the legend of Helen, the face that launched a thousand ships, or 1186 ships, to be more exact. Whether she went willingly or by force, her departure was used as the impetus for the start of the Trojan War, although many scholars now believe that the conflict was more about economics and the spoils of war than wounded dignity and revenge.

Helen was a legendary figure in Greek mythology and had a most interesting profile. She was born as a result of a violent sexual assault on her mother Leda by the god Zeus, who had taken on the form of a swan. Helen was the sister of the twins Castor and Pollux and was also reported to be the sister of Clytemnestra who was married to King Agamemnon of Mycenae. As a child she was abducted by Theseus of Athens, but was rescued by her brothers and returned to Sparta. She was married to Menelaus, the king of Sparta and brother of Agamemnon, and had a daughter named Hermione. In the famous story of the Judgement of Paris, she was offered as a bribe, as the most beautiful woman in the world, to the Trojan prince, if he chose the goddess Aphrodite instead of Hera or Athena as the winner of the golden apple of discord that had been inscribed “To the fairest”. His decision in favour of Aphrodite led Paris to abduct Helen and sparked the decade-long Trojan War between the Greeks and the Trojans, as Menelaus and Agamemnon, the two sons of Atreus, put together an invasion force bent on returning Helen to Sparta and to her husband.

The questions at hand are whether Helen went willingly or was abducted, whether she fell in love with Paris either before or after she went to Troy, or whether she just feigned affection for the Trojan prince for self-preservation purposes, and whether she returned to Sparta after the war as a warm and loving spouse, or just saw the handwriting on the wall and decided to cast her lot with the winners of the long conflict. Was Helen a victim or a scheming and deceitful harlot? She had the looks, but did she also have the brains to play fast and loose?

One of the arguments in favour of Helen being an unwilling victim of abduction is the fact that her departure from Sparta was divinely ordained and out of her control. She had been awarded as the prize to Paris of Troy for his selection of Aphrodite in the beauty contest, and as a result, she did not willingly elope with the Trojan, but was a victim of a forced or divinely manipulated kidnapping. Aphrodite had made her promise to Paris and there was nothing that Helen could do to prevent it happening. Helen was the unwitting pawn of an immortal goddess.

Commentators also look to Helen’s own words and actions for proof that she was an unwilling participant in the affair. In the Iliad Homer portrayed her as regretful and filled with self-loathing and lamenting the bloodshed and death that she had either caused by running away with Paris, or had been waged on her behalf after she had been abducted. Her actions appear to be more in line with those of a victim rather than a perpetrator, but perhaps she had just had a change of heart. Helen was found seated at the loom weaving a tapestry that told the story of the battles that the Greeks and the Trojans had fought and we learn that,

The goddess placed in her mind tender thoughts about him who had been her husband, her city and her parents. Quickly she covered herself with a soft white linen shawl and hastened from her chamber, shedding great tears as she did so.

The Trojan elders were certain that she was to blame for the conflict and spoke out against her:

What an indignity that the Trojans and well-greaved Achaeans should suffer such hardships because of that woman. But wondrously she is like an immortal goddess to look upon. But even if she is, it would be better for her to leave here in her ships so that she will no more be a problem for us or our children.

But Helen did have an ally in old King Priam who blamed the gods for the war and not the woman whom he addressed as his dear child. He viewed Helen as nothing more than a mere pawn on a divine chessboard.

Come here dear child and sit with me so that you may gaze upon him who was your husband, your kinsmen and your friends. I do not blame you, but I do blame the gods who have riled up the Achaeans in terrible war against me.

But Helen’s response to Priam sounds more like a woman expressing regret for actions that she had willingly taken, rather than one who was caught up in circumstances beyond her control.

You are both friendly and fearful to me my father-in-law. I wish that a wretched death had been my destiny when I followed your son here, having left my marriage bed, my brothers, my blessed daughter and the lovely companions of my own age. But this did not come to pass and so I melt down in weeping.

What follows the battle between Alexander and Menelaus is a series of very conflicting events and statements. Athena plucked the Trojan from the battlefield and deposited him in the bedroom which he shared with Helen. Athena told Helen that Paris awaited her and Helen became sexually aroused at the news.

Come hither for Alexander calls you to return home. He is in the bedroom on the turned-down bed, radiant in both his beauty and his garments. You would not think that he has just come from a battle, but rather from a dance, having just taken a break from the dancing. Thus the goddess spoke and indeed she did arouse feelings within her.

            But Helen railed at the goddess and put aside her feelings, telling Athena to mate with him herself because she would never return to the Trojan’s bed, choosing instead to protect her reputation, or what was left of it.

But I will never go there again and attend to his bedside for it would cause indignation if I were to do so. The Trojan women would sprinkle blame on me forever, but I have constant grief in my soul.

            Helen bowed to the pressures and the threats that the goddess hurled at her and finally complied, returning to her bedroom and the waiting Alexander.

Then the much provoked Aphrodite called out to her. Do not anger me you wretched woman lest being provoked, I hate you and I abandon you to the same degree that I have heretofore loved you. Yet I can contrive to create a great hatred against you in the middle of the Trojans and the Danaans so that your black fate is sealed. Thus she spoke and Zeus-born Helen feared greatly.

            Helen upbraided Paris and told him that it would have been better if he had died on the battlefield at the hands of Menelaus, but curiously ended up in bed with him again, after he told her that he loved her more than he ever had before. Surely not the actions of a helpless victim or of one totally overcome by remorse – the slut who launched a thousand ships!

Thus he spoke and he led the way to the bed with his wife following him and the two of them made love in the well-carved bed.

            When Hector returned to Troy from the battlefield, Homer portrayed Helen in such a way as to answer once and for all the kind of woman that she was and whether she was a victim or a scheming harlot. She invited Hector to sit down beside her on the bed, mouthed some empty words of remorse about what had happened and then made a play for him. Basically she told him that she had been infatuated with his loser brother, but instead fancied Hector because he was a real man.

My brother-in-law, wretched and shameless bitch am I, and that day would have been more advantageous to me, when my mother first gave birth to me, had a stormy wind borne me into the mountains or into the waves of the loud-roaring sea, where the swollen waves would have swept me away before these deeds came to pass. But since the gods have ordained this evil then indeed it would be better if I were the spouse of a braver man who has come to understand the scorn and indignation of many men. But this man is not of sound spirit nor do I think he will ever be and he will harvest the results of that. But come in now my brother-in-law and sit yourself down, since all this hard work has tired you out, all because of me, bitch that I am, and on account of the infatuation of Alexander. On him Zeus has placed an evil destiny, so that we will be the subject of song for future mankind.

            Ever the diplomat, in a very polite way Hector told her to go screw herself and get her husband up off his ass and back into the fight, and that he had a nation and a family to look out for.

Do not ask me to sit down lovely Helen and do not try to persuade me. My spirit urges me on to provide assistance to the Trojans, those who regret that I am not now among them. But you urge on this man of yours so that he may hurry and catch up to me in the city. As for me, I am going to my house so that I may see the people of my house along with my beloved wife and my infant son.

            Even at Hector’s funeral it sounded like Helen was still carrying a torch for Hector and would have preferred being with him rather than with his brother Paris.

Hector, you were the dearest in my heart of all my husband’s kinfolk. Truly my husband is the godlike Alexander who brought me here to Troy and would that I had died before that. It is now the twentieth year that I have been gone from my beloved homeland and in all that time I never heard an evil or spiteful word from you and if any other in the hall tried to reproach me, a brother or sister of yours or a brother’s fair-robed wife or your mother, but your father was ever gentle to me as if he were my own, then you would have turned them aside with your words and restrained them with your gentle manner and your gentle speech. So I weep for you and for me with luckless grief in my heart for no longer do I have a friend in the broad land of Troy, but all men gaze upon me and shudder.

            What I really find interesting is the fact that Helen said that this was the twentieth year that she had been gone from her homeland. We know that the Trojan War was ten years long, so what was she doing for those other ten years? Why did the Greeks wait ten years before launching an invasion to get Helen back? If she had been kidnapped by Paris, surely the Greeks would have set off in pursuit of her immediately. Paris and Helen had all the money they needed since they had robbed the Spartan Treasury on the way out, and it seems that they cavorted their way around the seas for ten years before going to Troy. Paris the bad boy must have thought that the statute of limitations would have expired by that time and that it was safe for him to return with few repercussions. Before going to Troy, different versions of the story have the pair consummating their affair on the island of Cranae, visiting Sidon in Phoenicia and making their way eventually to Egypt. Sounds rather like the wealthy Greek shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis travelling around with Jackie Kennedy, the Queen of Camelot. The Egyptian version of the legend has the king of Egypt condemning Paris, restraining Helen and holding the treasure until Menelaus could visit after the war and reclaim his wife and his property. In that version, Helen did not make it to Troy at all, with a phantom version of her being substituted by the gods.

            If Helen fell in love or in lust with Paris and willingly left Sparta, abandoning her husband, her only child, a daughter named Hermione, her entire family and nation, then truly she was following her heart. However, in doing so she displayed a selfish disregard for her family responsibilities, which audiences in ancient Greece would have seen as a major character failing. The elders and the women of Troy did not hold her in high regard, as she tells us herself, and the bard’s listeners would have concurred with this judgement and vilified her.

            We are presented with a different side of Helen when we meet her in the Odyssey. Telemachus had come to Sparta seeking news of his father and had interrupted a wedding feast in the palace of Menelaus and Helen. A bard started to sing about Odysseus and the Achaeans and Helen is reported to have wept at the story. She mixed a potion to ease the minds of the listeners and told her own story about events that had taken place during the Trojan War. She told how Odysseus had entered Troy disguised as a beggar and how she had recognized him. She bathed and anointed him and clothed him in better garments and he revealed the Greek war plans to her. He then went on to slay a number of Trojans before returning to the Achaean camp. Now to me this sounds like a very intimate encounter between Helen and Odysseus and one cannot help but read between the lines about what actually went on. Helen summarized the event with the following words:

Then the other Trojan women wailed aloud, but my soul was gladdened, for already my heart was turned to go back to my home, and I groaned for the blindness that Aphrodite gave me, when she led me here from my dear native land, leaving behind my baby and my bridal chamber and my husband, a man who lacked for nothing, whether in wisdom or in looks.

Were these the words of a penitent or someone who knew how to play her cards right? How do we reconcile Helen’s overt contrition and the loyalty that she apparently showed to the Achaeans when we hear Menelaus tell of her trying to entice the hidden Greeks out from the Trojan horse by imitating the voices of their wives?

Then you came there and it was like you were destined to do so by some god who wanted to grant glory to the Trojans and the godlike Deiphobus followed along behind you. Three times you circled the hollow ambush, touching it and calling out the names of the noble Danaans, making your voice sound like the voices of all the Argive wives.

Eumaeus, the noble swineherd of Odysseus, expressed a wish that all the tribe of Helen would be destroyed because of the havoc that she caused. Odysseus, on the other hand, seems to have been more forgiving and placed the blame for Helen’s actions at the feet of the gods, even though he was convinced that she knew what she was doing. His words appear to indicate that she was more of a willing participant than just a hapless victim.

Even Argive Helen, who was the daughter of Zeus, would not have laid and had sex with a stranger, if she had known beforehand that the warlike sons of the Achaeans would bring her back again to her dear native land. In her case, some god encouraged her to commit such a sin and up until that point, she did not think about how foolish it was and from that grievous and foolish deed, our first sorrow arrived as well.

My personal opinion is that Helen was no victim, other than being a victim of her own love or lust. She selfishly abandoned her family and her people, robbed the royal treasury and went off on a lark with a handsome prince. She was an adventure-seeker who knew what she was doing and chose the playboy over the dour Menelaus who languished in his brother’s shadow. When it looked like the tide was turning in favour of the Greeks in the war, she spoke hollow words of remorse and managed to fool Priam. Ever the harlot, she made a play for Hector, the stronger brother of Paris, and was rebuffed by that hero. Late in the game she threw herself at the feet of Menelaus and managed to gain his forgiveness and return to Sparta as the queen. While there the cunning side of her character was revealed as she and Menelaus spoke about her role in the war. One legend has it that after the death of Menelaus, Helen was driven from Sparta by the king’s sons and fled to Rhodes where she was hanged by Queen Polyxo to avenge her husband who was killed in the Trojan War. Sounds to me like a fitting end for her!

Seven Years in Calypso’s Love Nest

 

  Seven Years in Calypso’s Love Nest

As is the case with most things, there are two sides to every story and usually the truth is found somewhere in the middle. Such is the case with the story of Odysseus and Calypso. Was the hero a willing participant in a seven year tryst in Calypso’s love nest, or was he a reluctant captive who desperately wanted to escape? Let us consider both sides of the argument.

Scholars and commentators are always going on about the trials, tribulations and hardships suffered by Odysseus during his 10 year long journey home from Troy to Ithaca. What nonsense! Odysseus spent less than 2 years at sea and the other 8+ years he spent snuggled up in the beds of Calypso and Circe. More a case of ‘hardness’ rather than ‘hardship’, methinks. While his faithful wife Penelope was back home fending off 108 suitors and trying her best to preserve his livelihood, this adulterous scallywag was getting his rocks off and living the life of Riley with whatever floozy would take him on, feed him and bed him. It sounds like his nostos and his oikos were just afterthoughts to his peos.

On the other hand, there are those who say that Odysseus reluctantly endured the nymph’s forced attentions for seven years and though he physically complied with her nightly demands, he spent his days weeping miserably on the shore, gazing out over the deep and longing for Penelope and Ithaca.

He was sitting down weeping by the seashore, as was his wont, groaning and weeping and with his soul overcome with grief as he gazed over the barren sea shedding tears.

There are some who even make the argument that Odysseus was not an adulterer in the strictest sense of the word, since he was just obeying the commands of a divine being, and not to have complied would have been considered sinful for a mortal. The good doctor (PhD Classics) to whom I am married suggests that this is the type of argument that only a man could make.

So who was this seductive and alluring creature named Calypso who managed to keep our wandering hero in her thrall for 7 years? In Greek mythology, Calypso, whose name means ‘she who conceals’, was a powerful and beautiful nymph who lived on the paradise island of Ogygia, thought by many commentators to be the island of Gozo, Malta. She is said to be the daughter of the Titan Atlas and Pleione, the mother of the Pleiades. Other references suggest that she was a Nereid, one of the Oceanid nymphs and the daughter of Tethys and Oceanus, but Homer indicates that she was indeed the daughter of Atlas. Homer described Calypso’s island and home as being so beautiful and luxurious that, there even an immortal god might come and gaze and marvel and be joyful at heart.

We learn from the lips of the goddess Athena what happened to Odysseus and how he fared at the hands of his captor:

He suffers great pain and lives on the island in the halls of the nymph Calypso and she restrains him there and he is unable to return to his fatherland for he has no ships with oars and no comrades to help him make his way over the broad expanse of the sea.

But what was Calypso’s motivation in restraining Odysseus and keeping him captive on the island of Ogygia? Simply stated, Calypso fell in love with Odysseus and treated him as her husband. She made a deal with him that he would retain his youth and achieve immortality if he stayed with her forever. She was highly possessive of her mortal lover and voiced her displeasure when the god Hermes told her that Zeus had ordered her to allow Odysseus to return home. She complained about the double standard that allowed male gods to have mortal lovers without interference, but female goddesses were not granted the same rights. She offered several examples as proof.

You gods are cruel and jealous of all others, seeing that you disapprove of goddesses mating with men openly and taking a dear friend as a bedfellow … and now you are jealous of me you gods, that I should take a man to my side.

Calypso was powerless to resist Zeus and so she consented to Odysseus leaving, although she said that she was limited in the kind of help that she could provide.

But since it is not possible for any god to slip past or avoid the will of the aegis-bearing Zeus, let that man go on his way over the restless sea if that is what Zeus urges and commands. But I cannot help him on his way for I have no ships with oars or companions to send him over the broad back of the sea. But I will freely counsel him and not conceal anything so that he may return unharmed to his native land.

But Calypso, saddened in her heart, did point out to him how he might construct a ship from the trees in her forest and indicated that she would do her best to outfit him for his journey home and bend to the will of the gods.

Do not cry any longer here, unhappy man, and do not let your life slip away in grief, for I am now willing in my heart to send you on your way. Go now and cut tall beams with an axe and make a broad raft and fashion a half-deck above it so that it can carry you across the dark sea. On the raft I will place bread and water and red wine to satisfy you and keep hunger away. I will dress you in garments and I will send a fair wind behind you, in order that you may return home unhurt to your native land, if it is indeed the will of the gods who rule the wide heavens, for they are stronger than me in what they plan and what they can do.

But Odysseus suspected that the nymph was simply laying a trap for him and that things would turn out disastrously if he followed her suggestions. Much to her dismay, her lover extracted a solemn oath from her that all was on the up and up. It was obvious that she loved him dearly and was indeed sorry to see him leave. She wished him only the best.

You are a wicked man and your thoughts are never idle that you would have thought of such a thing as that. So let the earth be my witness and the broad heavens above and the descending flow of the River Styx, which is the greatest and most dreaded oath of the blessed gods, that I am not planning any new mischief that will be hurtful to you. I have plans in my mind and will advise you in such a way as I would advise myself if I were in your position. I have a righteous mind and compassion in my heart, not a heart made of iron.

Calypso told him that it was not fair for a goddess to compete with a mortal and therefore she would not compare herself to Penelope. Given his response, it seems that Odysseus was reluctant to leave, but we do not know if his reluctance stemmed from abandoning this ravishing beauty or giving up on eternal youth and immortality. In any case, returning home seems to have been more important to him that getting back to his wife. He and Calypso had one last go in bed before he left, the randy old bastard! (And the two of them went into the innermost part of the hollow cave and took pleasure in their love, cuddled up beside each other.)

Mighty goddess, do not be angry with me for I know that Penelope is not as pretty to behold as you are, for she is but a mortal and you are a goddess and immortal. But in spite of this, I long every day to see my home and to see the day of my return there. And if some god will strike me again while I am on the wine-dark sea, then I will accept that, because I have in my breast a heart which bears much grief. Before this time I have suffered many woes in war and upon the sea, so let this just be added to that list.

Despite the good times that Odysseus spent with Calypso on Ogygia, his loyalty to his wife and to Ithaca ultimately prevailed. His choice reaffirmed a major theme in the epic that a mortal life, even with all its challenges and eventual death, is much more meaningful than a boring immortality spent alone and without loved ones. By choosing a mortal life with his family over eternal youth with a goddess, Odysseus affirmed his humanity. His steadfastness proved his heroic virtue and in the same vein, the fact that Penelope was steadfast throughout, perhaps rendered her even more heroic than her husband. When they reconnected in their olive-wood marriage bed, we know that Penelope had forgiven him for his transgressions, and perhaps we can too.

Homer & Gilgamesh

  Homer & Gilgamesh

The Epic of Gilgamesh is an ancient epic from Mesopotamia based on Sumerian poems that date as far back as 2100 BCE. These poems were later combined into an epic written on clay tablets in the Akkadian language that date to the 18^th century BCE, with only a few fragments surviving. The standard Babylonian version, that we are familiar with today, dates to somewhere between the 13^th and the 10^th centuries BCE and approximately two thirds of the 12 tablets have been recovered. Some 15,000 fragments written in Assyrian cuneiform were discovered in the early 1850’s. Analysis and translation of the work continues with new versions being published or added to on a regular basis. Advances in artificial intelligence software have resulted in great strides being made in understanding many fragments dispersed and unread in museums around the world.

The question has long been asked as to whether Homer was influenced or inspired by the Epic of Gilgamesh when he composed the Iliad and the Odyssey. On the one hand, the argument states that Homeric Greek culture was familiar with Eastern and Mesopotamian cultures, and scholars have identified numerous shared themes, episodes, and character types, such as a hero's journey, heroic camaraderie, monsters, and the quest for immortality. Gilgamesh serves as a potential prototype for later epic heroes like Achilles and Heracles. On the other hand, though it is not impossible that Homer was aware of Gilgamesh, the likelihood is slim that he referred to the work while composing his own epics. The clay tablets themselves had long disappeared from sight and in fact were not rediscovered until the early 1850’s. The more plausible argument is that the themes and prototypes mentioned above were more likely common to story-telling in the oral tradition, regardless of nationality. From Scandinavia to Patagonia, if one is asked to tell a story that starts with Once upon a time…, there is every likelihood that it will include heroes, gods, love, war, epic journeys, danger, life, death and the quest for immortality. These are all essential elements of the human imagination and it is not beyond reason to assume that they can be found in all stories from mythology and the oral tradition around the world. Norse mythology for example, contains common themes of violence, fate, order versus chaos, bravery, heroism, deception, death and the afterlife. Hindu, Maori, Mayan and Incan mythology all contain similar themes.

But what is the story told in the Epic of Gilgamesh? The mighty king of Uruk, Gilgamesh, abuses his power and oppresses his people. The gods create a wild man named Enkidu to oppose Gilgamesh and to set him straight and the two of them become friends after they have fought together. Later Gilgamesh proposes an adventure – a journey to the far-off Cedar Forest to fight a fearsome wood demon named Humbaba, who is the guardian of the forest. Together they kill Humbaba and Enkidu and Gilgamesh cut down the forest to celebrate their victory. After the two of them return to Uruk, Gilgamesh rejects the advances of the amorous goddess Ishtar, who retaliates by having her father send down a bull to destroy the royal city. Enkidu takes the lead in killing the bull and in further retaliation, the gods decree vengeance on Enkidu, who falls ill and dies. Gilgamesh is devastated. He mourns the loss of Enkidu and builds him a monument. In his desolation, Gilgamesh decides to embark on a journey to the Underworld to seek the meaning of life and death and how to achieve immortality. Gilgamesh encounters and surmounts various obstacles on his journey – scorpions, mountains and frightening dreams. But he finally meets a wise innkeeper Siduri, who tries to dissuade him from his journey, but eventually tells him how to proceed. He presses on in his travels until he meets Utnapishtim (the Noah figure) and his wife, the only survivors of the Great Flood and unique recipients of the reward of eternal life. Gilgamesh hears his story and fails a seven night sleep test put to him by Utnapishtim and learns that the gods have not granted immortality to mortal men, other than himself and his wife. Gilgamesh travels wearily back to the city of Uruk with only the story of his adventures to comfort him, and later see the errors of his ways, and becomes a good and loving ruler of his people.

As stated, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Homer had direct access to the story of Gilgamesh and mirrored the same themes in his epics, but the likelihood is indeed slim that he used Gilgamesh as his inspiration. But the fact remains that some very similar themes and topics are covered in Gilgamesh, the Iliad and the Odyssey, and many scholars feel that it is worthwhile to explore these similarities, so that those interested can draw their own conclusions.

Gilgamesh and Enkidu set out on an epic and heroic journey of adventure to the Cedar Forest to gain everlasting fame, to conquer its guardian Humbaba, and to bring back the bounty of the forest to Uruk, in much the same way as the Achaeans set out to conquer Troy and to bring its riches back to the Greek mainland. Later Gilgamesh travels on another epic journey to meet with Utnapishtim and to visit the Underworld, in order to find the meaning of life and to gain immortality. His journey, fraught with a multitude of trials and tribulations, is mirrored by the 10 year journey and struggle of Odysseus as he attempts to make his way back home to Ithaca. Both Gilgamesh and Odysseus set out on quests filled with danger and challenge that take them to distant lands and involve facing horrid monsters and interference from the gods.

The interplay between gods and mortals plays a vital role in all three epics. The gods are all powerful but they tend to act in capricious mortal-like ways. They frequently intervene and interfere in human affairs and do not take kindly to any mortals who appear to counteract their wishes or meddle in divine actions. Mortals who display pride or hubris are severely dealt with, as one might expect, but sometimes the gods appear to punish mortals just for their own selfish reasons. Even mortals who bear some divine ancestry are treated harshly by the gods and divine retribution plays a key role in both Homer and Gilgamesh.

All three epics display heroes who undergo a complete change of heart because of the things that happen to them. Gilgamesh is first introduced to us as a terrible king who treats his subjects poorly. His is desolated by the death of his friend Enkidu and sets out to find the meaning of life and how to achieve immortality. By the end of the epic, he has come to realize the true nature of life and becomes a warm and loving leader to his people. Achilles is a petulant whiner who puts his fellow Achaeans at risk by withdrawing from the fighting and then re-enters the fray, acting like a madman after the death of his beloved Patroclus. By the end of the epic he has reconciled with King Priam and becomes the type of mortal whom we can revere. Through the trials and challenges of his journey, Odysseus changes from being a free-booting whore-monger to becoming a man who truly appreciates the love of his family and the security of his home. The nature of kingship is explored by Homer and Gilgamesh. The king of Uruk begins as a tyrant but becomes a wise king through his experiences, and the king of Ithaca is shown to us in direct contrast to the usurpers and suitors who abuse their power of leadership by ravaging his home in his absence.

The nature of a deep friendship and the depth of despair created by the loss of that friendship are integral parts of the Homeric epics as well as Gilgamesh. The loss suffered by Gilgamesh by the death of Enkidu is mirrored precisely by the loss that Achilles suffers at the death of Patroclus. The pain and grief experienced by Odysseus by his separation from Penelope and Telemachus is only outdone by the emotions that the two of them feel being separated from husband and father. The deep emotions tied up with friendship and losses are essential to the narratives of the three epics.

Each of the epics features the hero struggling with and overcoming a monster or a force that is almost insurmountable. Gilgamesh and Enkidu battle with and destroy Humbaba, the guardian of the Cedar Forest. In the Iliad, we find Achilles doing battle with the river god Xanthus at the Scamander River. When the river attempted to drown Achilles, the goddess Hera intervened by having her son Hephaestus send his flames to battle Xanthus who then relented. In the Odyssey we find Odysseus waging his own battle with a monster, this time the Cyclops Polyphemus whom he ultimately blinds. From ancient times to Harry Potter and modern video games, books and movies, we can find stories of heroes battling monsters. It is a common theme in all mythologies and world literature, and the fact that it is found in Gilgamesh and Homer is no clear proof that the Greek bard copied his Mesopotamian predecessor.

The three epics also deal with the subjects of life, the fear of death and the search for immortality. Gilgamesh travels far and wide to learn about how to become immortal, only to discover that this privilege is not available to mortals. Odysseus travels to the Underworld in an attempt to discover his fate, and learns the grim truth about human mortality and the emptiness that follows death. The shade of Achilles tells him that he would rather be alive and unknown as opposed to being the king of the Underworld. Achilles, along with all the other epic heroes, struggled diligently to achieve kleos or lasting fame. These heroes knew that life after death did not exist and that the only immortality that they could achieve was to have their fame and glory, achieved through heroic fighting and a glorious death, live on after them in the hearts and minds of men. Achilles himself was presented with the choice of living a long life in obscurity or dying heroically in battle at a young age and thereby achieving kleos.

There is no visit to the Underworld by a living person narrated in the Iliad. However, the ghost of Patroclus does visit Achilles in a dream after his death to encourage his heroic friend to hold funeral games in his honour. In the Epic of Gilgamesh we find a detailed description of the journey of Gilgamesh to the Underworld and his encounter with Utnapishtim, the only mortal who has achieved immortality after surviving the great flood. Book XI of the Odyssey is almost entirely taken up with a description of the journey to the Underworld that Odysseus makes, at the encouragement of Circe, to confer with the blind prophet Tiresias about how to get home to Ithaca. Odysseus visits with many phantom shades, including his mother Anticleia, his shipmate Elpenor who died falling from the roof of Circe’s house, as well as Tiresias. The blind prophet warns him about the dangers involved in harming the cattle of Helios on the island of Thrinacia, but we learn later that this warning goes unheeded by the hero’s crew with dire consequences. Through their visits to the Underworld, both Gilgamesh and Odysseus find out about the frailty of life, the inevitability of death and the impossibility of immortality. We do learn however that legacy is an alternative to immortality. Gilgamesh returns to Uruk knowing that his lasting fame will come from the good deeds that he does for his people and from the strong walls that he builds for his city. They will be his legacy. Achilles earns his immortality in the form of eternal glory or kleos by dying heroically in battle. Odysseus creates his legacy through his nostos, or return home, and the preservation of his oikos, or household.

There is no question about the fact that the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Iliad and the Odyssey share common themes, but this by itself does not provide us with proof that Homer copied or was inspired by Gilgamesh. The telling of stories that include such themes is common to mankind and every child who utters the words, “Tell me a story Daddy”, is bound to hear some version of, “Once upon a time there was an ugly troll who lived under a bridge and was in love with a beautiful princess who lived in a nearby castle.” We might be better off looking at what is not contained in Homer’s epics to answer the question as to whether Gilgamesh played a role in the Greek bard’s stories.

The one story in Gilgamesh, whose fame has literally reached Biblical proportions, is the story of the Great Flood. The tale of Utnapishtim and his wife surviving the flood is mirrored precisely in the Book of Genesis in the Bible, and is also found in many other cultures and mythologies around the world. We know for certain that the flood story from Gilgamesh was familiar to the Greeks of Homer’s time, because it is referenced in a fragment from The Catalogue of Women, a work composed by Hesiod, who was a contemporary of Homer. Had Homer been familiar with Gilgamesh and used his story as a source work to copy many of his key themes, then certainly he would have included some reference to the flood story in the Iliad or the Odyssey. It would have been too great a story for him to have passed up or ignored. The fact that Homer did not include it is, in my opinion, proof of the fact that he acted independently from Gilgamesh.