homer/not homer simpson

[sun-star]

Agamemnon and Menelaus deserve the blame IMO, self-important war-mongerers both. I kind of feel sorry for Helen, because although she did behave badly she's punished enough for it, almost more than anyone. The women suffer so much more than the men - poor Andromache and Hecuba in particular!

[rohirrim TR]

well Agamemnon was arrogant but not really evil and its kind of unfair to call any one of them "war mongerers" they were a warrior society, that was how they lived almost a part of their culture.

Menelaus was pretty much provoked, he may have been vengeful but I still think it might be stretching it to call him a war monger.

It had a really easy solution, the trojan war, send Paris and Helen on a cruise and then the greeks could have had a nice sea battle some afternoon and be done with it.

[sun-star]

Well, even in a warrior society it's possible to distinguish between different motives for fighting. Menelaus' motive was revenge, but Agamemnon had no such reasons and yet prolonged the siege for ten years.

[rohirrim TR]

misplaced sense of honor perhaps?

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by sun-star

Well, even in a warrior society it's possible to distinguish between different motives for fighting. Menelaus' motive was revenge, but Agamemnon had no such reasons and yet prolonged the siege for ten years.

There was the oath, if I have my myths lined up correctly. Since so many men wanted to marry Helena and obviously only one was going to, her family feared it would lead to war. So they had all the suitors swear to aid the future-husband. I believe Agammemnon also swore that oath. In any case, he also was Menelaos's brother.

[sun-star]

You're right, I'd forgotten about the oath (though I don't think Homer mentions it).

[Earniel]

No indeed, Homer doesn't mention it, since I believe the Ilias starts when the Greeks are already camped near Throy, the ninth year of the war or something? But I checked with my mythology encyclopedia and it mentions the oath too, so it must be mentioned in classical texts somewhere.

Similarly, Homer neither mentions the famous horse, IIRC. Something which frustrated me to no end when I was younger because I couldn't get my hands on any text that told the whole tale of the fall of Throy.

[rohirrim TR]

I know I was wondering about that after reading it, my copy ended with the death of Hector and it kinda seemed incomplete.

[Earniel]

Ditto on my copy. I take it the Iliad itself just doesn't go any further. The tale about the horse I eventually found in Vergillius' Aenaes. But I can't remember whether that included Achilles' demise as well.

[rohirrim TR]

I'll have to check that one out.

[Willow Oran]

Time to bump this.

No indeed, Homer doesn't mention it, since I believe the Ilias starts when the Greeks are already camped near Throy, the ninth year of the war or something? But I checked with my mythology encyclopedia and it mentions the oath too, so it must be mentioned in classical texts somewhere.

He does sort of mention it whe he says that Helen has marriage ties to many of the Achaeans.

I found it interesting to see just how strong family ties are portrayed. Half the deaths in the battle scenes come about as vengence for somebody's cousin/brother/son etc.
It was also interesting to see just how maternal so many of the battle metaphors were. Lots of warriors defending their comrades as a mother lion/wolf defends her cubs and similar images.

And it was very odd the way the mentions of iron were distributed. Given that the Iliad is supposedly set in the Bronze Age we wouldn't expect any, and through the first 18 chapters at least there appear only two,which can easily be written off as slips made by later performers. But in then during the Funeral Games, Achilles offers lumps of iron as prizes and both he and Priam are described in the last few chapters as having hearts of iron. To me this increase seems to indicate that the ending pieces of the Iliad were more heavily 'edited' over time than the earlier parts.
Did anybody else catch this or other interesting anomalies/trends?

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Willow Oran

It was also interesting to see just how maternal so many of the battle metaphors were. Lots of warriors defending their comrades as a mother lion/wolf defends her cubs and similar images.

After reading, I sort of had an image of the war on the battle field as mainly consisting of a tug of war over dead bodies and hitting those who were pulling on the other side of the body. Rather disturbing way of fighting.

And it was very odd the way the mentions of iron were distributed. Given that the Iliad is supposedly set in the Bronze Age we wouldn't expect any, and through the first 18 chapters at least there appear only two,which can easily be written off as slips made by later performers. But in then during the Funeral Games, Achilles offers lumps of iron as prizes and both he and Priam are described in the last few chapters as having hearts of iron. To me this increase seems to indicate that the ending pieces of the Iliad were more heavily 'edited' over time than the earlier parts.
Did anybody else catch this or other interesting anomalies/trends?

Does the iron gets mentioned particularly in relation to weapons? My knowledge of the exact historic time frame is weak, but could it be possible that iron was known at least a little while before it could be properly used? I always was taught that the first iron known to men likely came from meteorites. It would definitely be more accessible then mined and processed iron. Hmm, that could mean Achilles actually offered up two meteorites at the funeral games. Cool.

But then again Homer is considered to be born far later after the Trojan War. Could iron be more integrated by Homer's time? It'll be difficult to establish, considering there is still uncertainty about when Homer lived.

[Willow Oran]

At one point the tug-of-war image goes literal, it's like the kill wasn't complete unless you got the guy's armor as well. Nevermind that it would have had holes in it...

Definitely more often in lump form, though one of the earlier mentions gives Pandarus an iron tipped arrow. I think I agree with Achilles having set out meteorites. One of the pieces is described as "a rough lump of iron that mighty Eetion used to hurl." Implying that if it was used as a weapon it was of the "warrior smash!" variety.

I can't help but wonder if parts of the story told in the Iliad are even older than we think. While there are many lengthy descriptions of bronze/silver/gold armor and weapons, there's also quite a lot of rock throwing going on, with the combatants often throwing rocks before throwing their spears. It just struck me as odd.

And is "god given gold" a different metal from normal gold? An early passage ridicules a warrior for "wearing gold like a girl" and then later we've got Achilles stopping spears with the gold layer of his shield. If it were just one I'd put it just to poetic license, but it's not and they must surely have known that gold is too soft and too heavy to be effective as armor.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Willow Oran

At one point the tug-of-war image goes literal, it's like the kill wasn't complete unless you got the guy's armor as well. Nevermind that it would have had holes in it...

Indeed, the body tugging just struck me as rather disturbing. But it is a sign of all times, I suppose. The high war lords and kings got the lands to carve up when they won, but each soldier saw war fare too as a 'business' opportunity to amass some treasure themselves. When Odysseus and Diomedes go after the wagon and horses of a troyan-supporting king, they waste no time grabbing a few little somethings for themselves along the way, if I recall correctly.

I can't help but wonder if parts of the story told in the Iliad are even older than we think. While there are many lengthy descriptions of bronze/silver/gold armor and weapons, there's also quite a lot of rock throwing going on, with the combatants often throwing rocks before throwing their spears. It just struck me as odd.

Interesting point, now that you mention it, there were quite a few rocks being thrown around. I suppose that maybe at the time, forged weapons were considerably expensive, so if you could take out an opponent with a well-aimed, cheap rock, so much the better.

As for the story's age, I believe some say that Homer drew heavily on already existing oral stories and myths to write the Illiad. Some story elements may this way be very old indeed.

And is "god given gold" a different metal from normal gold? An early passage ridicules a warrior for "wearing gold like a girl" and then later we've got Achilles stopping spears with the gold layer of his shield. If it were just one I'd put it just to poetic license, but it's not and they must surely have known that gold is too soft and too heavy to be effective as armor.

The 'wearing gold like a girl' might have referred to a very fashionable way of wearing gold objects, something the other very virile-feeling men would look down on.

I think that the 'god given gold' was only different in the way that a devine smith would be higher skilled than ordindary mortal ones, so the armour made by Hephaistos would probably be considered as better made and offering more protection.

The gold layers mentioned is probably only gilting. As you said it is far too soft, and probably also too expensive to use in large qualities for armour, even for high-ranking warriors. More likely the second layer of metal, or cured skin below the gold, did most of the stopping.

[Willow Oran]

See, I thought the gold was just gilding too, but here are the passages:

"Aeneas' war spear broke through
two layers of the shield, but the gold layer,
Hephaestus' special gift, stopped it.
And there were still two more, for the lame god
had welded five: two bronze, two tin,
and the gold that stopped the ash-wood spear."

then later

"One [spear] hit Achilles shield but did not penetrate,
stopped by the layer of god-given gold."

If it were just gilding, it's placement in the middle of the shield makes no sense. Possibly the other layers slowed the spear down enough that it just looked like the gold layer stopped it, but that shouldn't have been a consistent effect.
Could also be that he's trying to imply that the divine favor stopped the spear when metal wouldn't, that might make the most sense.

[Earniel]

Oooh, sneaky Hephaistos, a gold layer within, now that I never thought about. You're right, it can't be simple gilting then. Could the gold layer be an alloy with some other metal, so that it looks golden but is was in fact sturdier? Maybe I rather should see if I can check what and how the ancient greeks' shields were actually made of. A gold layer within the different layers of a shield just doesn't make much sense to me.

[Willow Oran]

Yeah, if it's hidden it can't just be decorative, and gold is both too soft and too heavy to be very practical for anything but decoration on a shield.

Now, the emphasis placed on it being a special gift from Hephaestus could mean that it was imbued with divine spear repellent or something, or it could refer to an alloy, possibly made using new technology that at the time seemed godlike. Only I don't know of any such advances in metalwork around that time period. So it's a puzzle. Sneaky gods indeed!

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I have to say, I prefer the Aeneid. Sure, Virgil majorly rips off Homer, but one of the biggest additions he makes is genuinely gripping drama. The death of Priam in book II cut me to the core, as did the whole Dido story.

[Earniel]

For some reason I didn't quite like Aenaes. Not in the Illiad (and Colleen McCullough's novelisation 'the Song of Troy' that I read later only confirmed that opinion) and it carried over to the Aeneid. All that drama with Dido and all I could think of was 'Silly woman, he's so not worth it....'

[Willow Oran]

It's cause Aeneas is a jerk. And a pansy. The guy had to rescued from battle with Diomedes by Aphrodite.

Now, of the Aeneid, I've only read Chaucer's take, but because that brought it into the english tradition I was able to do a comparative analysis of Aeneas and Aragorn in order to explore the nature of heroism and romance. Aeneas would be the bad example.