- Book 15
-
Merry says:εὗρε δὲ Τηλέμαχον καὶ Νέστορος ἀγλαὸν υἱὸν
5. εὕδοντ᾽ ἐν προδόμῳ Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο,
ἦ τοι Νεστορίδην μαλακῷ δεδμημένον ὕπνῳ:
But I don't see that the text should imply that she found *both*There is an apparent contradiction: ‘she found both sleeping... but
Telemachus was not sleeping.’ It may remind us of the famous
contradiction about Zeus, between Il.1. 611 and 2. 2. In both places
the difficulty lies in the epic style of narration.
sleeping, but just Antilochus (εὕδοντ᾽ = acc. singular). -
This portent happened just the moment after Telemachus uttered to160. ὣς ἄρα οἱ εἰπόντι ἐπέπτατο δεξιὸς ὄρνις,
αἰετὸς ἀργὴν χῆνα φέρων ὀνύχεσσι πέλωρον,
ἥμερον ἐξ αὐλῆς: οἱ δ᾽ ἰΰζοντες ἕποντο
ἀνέρες ἠδὲ γυναῖκες: ὁ δέ σφισιν ἐγγύθεν ἐλθὼν
δεξιὸς ἤϊξε πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων: οἱ δὲ ἰδόντες
165. γήθησαν, καὶ πᾶσιν ἐνὶ φρεσὶ θυμὸς ἰάνθη.
Nestor his wish of finding his father. I don't see why is there the
pluperfect ἐπέπτατο, instead of an inchoative imperfect. (But I know Paul
will have some use of the pluperfect for here that will make me happy ). -
214. κεχολώσεται
I don't remember any other case of reduplication in a future tense. -
Should I read τόσον as an adverb?νῆσός τις Συρίη κικλήσκεται, εἴ που ἀκούεις,
Ὀρτυγίης καθύπερθεν, ὅθι τροπαὶ ἠελίοιο,
405. οὔ τι περιπληθὴς λίην τόσον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαθὴ μέν,
εὔβοτος, εὔμηλος, οἰνοπληθής, πολύπυρος. -
I'd expect the future instead of the optative here.‘ὑμεῖς μὲν νῦν ἄστυδ᾽ ἐλαύνετε νῆα μέλαιναν,
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἀγροὺς ἐπιείσομαι ἠδὲ βοτῆρας:
505. ἑσπέριος δ᾽ εἰς ἄστυ ἰδὼν ἐμὰ ἔργα κάτειμι.
ἠῶθεν δέ κεν ὔμμιν ὁδοιπόριον παραθείμην,
δαῖτ᾽ ἀγαθὴν κρειῶν τε καὶ οἴνου ἡδυπότοιο.’
Book 16
Look! Another questioning of Penelope's moral!μητρὶ δ᾽ ἐμῇ δίχα θυμὸς ἐνὶ φρεσὶ μερμηρίζει,
ἢ αὐτοῦ παρ᾽ ἐμοί τε μένῃ καὶ δῶμα κομίζῃ,
75. εὐνήν τ᾽ αἰδομένη πόσιος δήμοιό τε φῆμιν,
ἦ ἤδη ἅμ᾽ ἕπηται Ἀχαιῶν ὅς τις ἄριστος
μνᾶται ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἀνὴρ καὶ πλεῖστα πόρῃσιν. -
How it is used ἐπὶ in ἀνηνύστῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ?βουλοίμην κ᾽ ἐν ἐμοῖσι κατακτάμενος μεγάροισι
τεθνάμεν ἢ τάδε γ᾽ αἰὲν ἀεικέα ἔργ᾽ ὁράασθαι,
ξείνους τε στυφελιζομένους δμῳάς τε γυναῖκας
ῥυστάζοντας ἀεικελίως κατὰ δώματα καλά,
110. καὶ οἶνον διαφυσσόμενον, καὶ σῖτον ἔδοντας
μὰψ αὔτως, ἀτέλεστον, ἀνηνύστῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ. -
Again, I don't get the meaning of ἐπὶ here.ἡ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι νεῦσε: νόησε δὲ δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς, -
That was the transformation of Odysseus by Athena before seeing hisἦ καὶ χρυσείῃ ῥάβδῳ ἐπεμάσσατ᾽ Ἀθήνη.
φᾶρος μέν οἱ πρῶτον ἐϋπλυνὲς ἠδὲ χιτῶνα
θῆκ᾽ ἀμφὶ στήθεσσι, δέμας δ᾽ ὤφελλε καὶ ἥβην.
175. ἂψ δὲ μελαγχροιὴς γένετο, γναθμοὶ δὲ τάνυσθεν,
.κυάνεαι δ᾽ ἐγένοντο γενειάδες ἀμφὶ γένειον
son. Merry says:
But I don't see the contradiction. I have taken κυάνεαι as aκυάνεαι must mean ‘dark.’ The poet forgets that Ulysses had
‘yellow’ hair before: see Od.13. 399 Od., 431.
predicative adjective: taking it so, his beards were not κυάνεαι
before, but Athena made them κυάνεαι (she was dressing him up
to look like a god). -
Why has Telemachus reacted in that way when he saw his fatherἡ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ὣς ἔρξασα πάλιν κίεν: αὐτὰρ Ὀδυσσεὺς
ἤϊεν ἐς κλισίην: θάμβησε δέ μιν φίλος υἱός,
ταρβήσας δ᾽ ἑτέρωσε βάλ᾽ ὄμματα, μὴ θεὸς εἴη,
180. καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα:
disguised as a god? Is it because of the ancient fear fo seeing a god,
I suppose? But Odysseus didn't react in that way when he saw
Athena for the first time. Was it because of his κυάνεαι γενειάδες? -
Which was the purpose of Athena transforming Odysseus with the186. τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς:
‘οὔ τίς τοι θεός εἰμι: τί μ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν ἐΐσκεις;
ἀλλὰ πατὴρ τεός εἰμι, τοῦ εἵνεκα σὺ στεναχίζων
πάσχεις ἄλγεα πολλά, βίας ὑποδέγμενος ἀνδρῶν.’
appearance of a god, if immediatly then he revealed his identity to his?
Am I missing something here? -
Odysseus orders Telemachus to not confront the suitors in the caseεἰ δέ μ᾽ ἀτιμήσουσι δόμον κάτα, σὸν δὲ φίλον κῆρ
275. τετλάτω ἐν στήθεσσι κακῶς πάσχοντος ἐμεῖο,
ἤν περ καὶ διὰ δῶμα ποδῶν ἕλκωσι θύραζε
ἢ βέλεσι βάλλωσι: σὺ δ᾽ εἰσορόων ἀνέχεσθαι.
ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι παύεσθαι ἀνωγέμεν ἀφροσυνάων,
μειλιχίοις ἐπέεσσι παραυδῶν: οἱ δέ τοι οὔ τι
280. πείσονται: δὴ γάρ σφι παρίσταται αἴσιμον ἦμαρ.
that they throw him out of his house. I don't get the meaning of the
last verse: what explains γάρ? -
Telemachus says to his father that he should evaluate the fidelity ofἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοί σε γυναῖκας ἐγὼ δεδάασθαι ἄνωγα,
αἵ τέ σ᾽ ἀτιμάζουσι καὶ αἳ νηλείτιδές εἰσιν:
ἀνδρῶν δ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἐγώ γε κατὰ σταθμοὺς ἐθέλοιμι
ἡμέας πειράζειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὕστερα ταῦτα πένεσθαι,
320. εἰ ἐτεόν γέ τι οἶσθα Διὸς τέρας αἰγιόχοιο.’
the women of the house. But he proposes something different for men, which
I don't understand: ἀλλ᾽ ὕστερα ταῦτα πένεσθαι. Is he referring to
the suitors?
Book 17 -
[Context: Telemachus has just given Penelope the order of making aὣς ἄρ᾽ ἐφώνησεν, τῇ δ᾽ ἄπτερος ἔπλετο μῦθος.
ἡ δ᾽ ὑδρηναμένη, καθαρὰ χροῒ εἵμαθ᾽ ἑλοῦσα,
εὔχετο πᾶσι θεοῖσι τεληέσσας ἑκατόμβας
60. ῥέξειν, αἴ κέ ποθι Ζεὺς ἄντιτα ἔργα τελέσσῃ.
sacrifice to Zeus.]
How do you understand the use of ἄπτερος μῦθος? It seems the opposite
of ἔπεα πτερόεντα, but I don't know what it means that curious
expression neither, so... -
I understand the meaning as a whole, but I don't know what to do with218. ὡς αἰεὶ τὸν ὁμοῖον ἄγει θεὸς ὡς τὸν ὁμοῖν
the second ὡς. -
Thus ends the description made by the goat-herd of Odysseus whichὃς πολλῇς φλιῇσι παραστὰς θλίψεται ὤμους,
222. αἰτίζων ἀκόλους, οὐκ ἄορας οὐδὲ λέβητας
renders his master as an undesirable beggar. I don't understand that
of "asking for ἀκόλους instead of ἄορας or λέβητας". Why he should ask
for swords or basins?
I suspect that swords and basins are objects that would allow him to
earn money by himself? Because he says just below:
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν δὴ ἔργα κάκ᾽ ἔμμαθεν, οὐκ ἐθελήσει
ἔργον ἐποίχεσθαι[...] -
[Context: the insolent goat-herd answering to Odysseus (which is by the248. ‘ὢ πόποι, οἶον ἔειπε κύων ὀλοφώϊα εἰδώς,
moment just a beggar for him, of course).]
I don't know if this is a typo in my edition, but should not be οἷον?
I am reading it as "How this dog talks!".
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... card%3D247 -
How do you take ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερ᾽ ἐστίν in this description of the houseΕὔμαι᾽, ἦ μάλα δὴ τάδε δώματα κάλ᾽ Ὀδυσῆος,
265. ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἀρίγνωτ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ ἐν πολλοῖσιν ἰδέσθαι.
ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερ᾽ ἐστίν, ἐπήσκηται δέ οἱ αὐλὴ
τοίχῳ καὶ θριγκοῖσι, θύραι δ᾽ εὐερκέες εἰσὶ
δικλίδες: οὐκ ἄν τίς μιν ἀνὴρ ὑπεροπλίσσαιτο.
of Odysseus? "One after another"? One after another what? Which would
be the antecedent? -
γνοίη...ἀθέμιστοι is an indirect clause depending on ὤτρυν᾽, so I362. ὤτρυν᾽, ὡς ἂν πύρνα κατὰ μνηστῆρας ἀγείροι,
γνοίη θ᾽ οἵ τινές εἰσιν ἐναίσιμοι οἵ τ᾽ ἀθέμιστοι:
would expect that εἰσιν should be in the past, since the main verb is
in the past and the verb of the indirect clause in the optative mode. -
[Telemachus biding Antinous to share the food with the400. δός οἱ ἑλών: οὔ τοι φθονέω: κέλομαι γὰρ ἐγώ γε
beggar/Odysseus.]
I have this question about the use of the participle on imperative
sentences: should I take the participle as part of the order given
("Take it from me and give it to him") or should I take it as
establishing a fact ("Since you have take it [from me], then share it
with him now"). Does it depends of the context, I suppose?
Book 18 -
How should I read ὀρώρῃ here (with the knees as the subject)?130. οὐδὲν ἀκιδνότερον γαῖα τρέφει ἀνθρώποιο,
πάντων ὅσσα τε γαῖαν ἔπι πνείει τε καὶ ἕρπει.
οὐ μὲν γάρ ποτέ φησι κακὸν πείσεσθαι ὀπίσσω,
ὄφρ᾽ ἀρετὴν παρέχωσι θεοὶ καὶ γούνατ᾽ ὀρώρῃ: -
[αἱ = the dmwai]‘δμῳαὶ Ὀδυσσῆος, δὴν οἰχομένοιο ἄνακτος,
ἔρχεσθε πρὸς δώμαθ᾽, ἵν᾽ αἰδοίη βασίλεια:
315. τῇ δὲ παρ᾽ ἠλάκατα στροφαλίζετε, τέρπετε δ᾽ αὐτὴν
ἥμεναι ἐν μεγάρῳ, ἢ εἴρια πείκετε χερσίν:
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ τούτοισι φάος πάντεσσι παρέξω.
ἤν περ γάρ κ᾽ ἐθέλωσιν ἐΰθρονον Ἠῶ μίμνειν,
οὔ τί με νικήσουσι: πολυτλήμων δὲ μάλ᾽ εἰμί.’
320. ὣς ἔφαθ᾽, αἱ δ᾽ ἐγέλασσαν, ἐς ἀλλήλας δὲ ἴδοντο.
But why they laughed? I don't know if I'm missing something here, I
didn't understand neither why Odysseus was wanting to carry the
torches himself. -
Why ἑστήκειν is infinitive? Is it because it goes with βὰν (asβὰν δ᾽ ἴμεναι διὰ δῶμα, λύθεν δ᾽ ὑπὸ γυῖα ἑκάστης
ταρβοσύνῃ: φὰν γάρ μιν ἀληθέα μυθήσασθαι.
αὐτὰρ ὁ πὰρ λαμπτῆρσι φαείνων αἰθομένοισιν
ἑστήκειν ἐς πάντας ὁρώμενος: ἄλλα δέ οἱ κῆρ
345. ὥρμαινε φρεσὶν ᾗσιν, ἅ ῥ᾽ οὐκ ἀτέλεστα γένοντο.
ἴμεναι)? It would surprise me, because both verbs are very far from
each other and there is also a sentence between them (I have always see the infinitive
accompanying bainw very close).
Could διώκω have being used by Telemachus in a double sense? I supposeἀλλ᾽ εὖ δαισάμενοι κατακείετε οἴκαδ᾽ ἰόντες,
ὁππότε θυμὸς ἄνωγε: διώκω δ᾽ οὔ τιν᾽ ἐγώ γε.’
that since this is a courteous invitation to leave his house, it
should mean "I will not press you [to go]". But, since he is talking
to the suitors, I would not surprise if he is really saying "I will
not pursue you [to bring you back]". Both senses are valid for διώκω,
or am I wrong?
Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:19 pm
- Location: Argentina
Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
Hello everybody, I hope you can help me with these questions that I've being accumulating on my notes. Thanks for the help, as always.
Last edited by huilen on Wed Nov 12, 2014 7:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- Paul Derouda
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2292
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
Hello again, huilen! Let me begin with book 15...
You're technically right, but I think it's regular in Homer that in this sort of situation a participle or adjective might be "attracted" to the number of the the word that comes closest. Thus, εὕδοντ᾽ would still normally mean both Telemachus and Peisistratus.huilen wrote:Hello everybody, I hope you can help me with these questions that I've being accumulating on my notes. Thanks for the help, as always.
- Book 15
Merry says:εὗρε δὲ Τηλέμαχον καὶ Νέστορος ἀγλαὸν υἱὸν
5. εὕδοντ᾽ ἐν προδόμῳ Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο,
ἦ τοι Νεστορίδην μαλακῷ δεδμημένον ὕπνῳ:
But I don't see that the text should imply that she found *both*There is an apparent contradiction: ‘she found both sleeping... but
Telemachus was not sleeping.’ It may remind us of the famous
contradiction about Zeus, between Il.1. 611 and 2. 2. In both places
the difficulty lies in the epic style of narration.
sleeping, but just Antilochus (εὕδοντ᾽ = acc. singular).
I don't think it's a pluperfect (although Perseus apparently does), but rather an aorist of ἐπιπέτομαι.
[*]
This portent happened just the moment after Telemachus uttered to160. ὣς ἄρα οἱ εἰπόντι ἐπέπτατο δεξιὸς ὄρνις,
αἰετὸς ἀργὴν χῆνα φέρων ὀνύχεσσι πέλωρον,
ἥμερον ἐξ αὐλῆς: οἱ δ᾽ ἰΰζοντες ἕποντο
ἀνέρες ἠδὲ γυναῖκες: ὁ δέ σφισιν ἐγγύθεν ἐλθὼν
δεξιὸς ἤϊξε πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων: οἱ δὲ ἰδόντες
165. γήθησαν, καὶ πᾶσιν ἐνὶ φρεσὶ θυμὸς ἰάνθη.
Nestor his wish of finding his father. I don't see why is there the
pluperfect ἐπέπτατο, instead of an inchoative imperfect. (But I know Paul
will have some use of the pluperfect for here that will make me happy ).
It's a future perfect. A perfect is a state resulting from a preceding event or action, so a future perfect is a state situated in the future that results from a preceding event or action. "Will be angry". Perfect, because to BE angry you first have GET angry.
[*]
214. κεχολώσεται
I don't remember any other case of reduplication in a future tense.
Yes.[*]
Should I read τόσον as an adverb?νῆσός τις Συρίη κικλήσκεται, εἴ που ἀκούεις,
Ὀρτυγίης καθύπερθεν, ὅθι τροπαὶ ἠελίοιο,
405. οὔ τι περιπληθὴς λίην τόσον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαθὴ μέν,
εὔβοτος, εὔμηλος, οἰνοπληθής, πολύπυρος.
I think it's a matter of politeness. "Tomorrow I would like to offer you a reward for the journey (or whatever ὁδοιπόριον means)"[*]
I'd expect the future instead of the optative here.‘ὑμεῖς μὲν νῦν ἄστυδ᾽ ἐλαύνετε νῆα μέλαιναν,
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἀγροὺς ἐπιείσομαι ἠδὲ βοτῆρας:
505. ἑσπέριος δ᾽ εἰς ἄστυ ἰδὼν ἐμὰ ἔργα κάτειμι.
ἠῶθεν δέ κεν ὔμμιν ὁδοιπόριον παραθείμην,
δαῖτ᾽ ἀγαθὴν κρειῶν τε καὶ οἴνου ἡδυπότοιο.’
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2090
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm
Re: Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe400. δός οἱ ἑλών: οὔ τοι φθονέω: κέλομαι γὰρ ἐγώ γε
[Telemachus biding Antinous to share the food with the
beggar/Odysseus.]
I have this question about the use of the participle on imperative
sentences: should I take the participle as part of the order given
("Take it from me and give it to him") or should I take it as
establishing a fact ("Since you have take it [from me], then share it
with him now"). Does it depends of the context, I suppose?
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2090
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm
Re: Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
22.
= ἐπένευσε
Not infinitive. Pluperfect.αὐτὰρ ὁ πὰρ λαμπτῆρσι φαείνων αἰθομένοισιν
ἑστήκειν ἐς πάντας ὁρώμενος:
Why ἑστήκειν is infinitive?
ἐπὶ is a verbal prefix, not a preposition.ἡ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι νεῦσε: νόησε δὲ δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς,
Again, I don't get the meaning of ἐπὶ here
= ἐπένευσε
- Paul Derouda
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2292
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
Yes. Penelope doesn't seem to be always described consistently. We wonder whether this is some psychological finesse by Homer (this displays Telemachus' feelings at the moment of speaking), or whether Homer just didn't pay attention. The old analysts claimed that it's because different passages had different authors.huilen wrote:Book 16
Look! Another questioning of Penelope's moral!μητρὶ δ᾽ ἐμῇ δίχα θυμὸς ἐνὶ φρεσὶ μερμηρίζει,
ἢ αὐτοῦ παρ᾽ ἐμοί τε μένῃ καὶ δῶμα κομίζῃ,
75. εὐνήν τ᾽ αἰδομένη πόσιος δήμοιό τε φῆμιν,
ἦ ἤδη ἅμ᾽ ἕπηται Ἀχαιῶν ὅς τις ἄριστος
μνᾶται ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἀνὴρ καὶ πλεῖστα πόρῃσιν.
"on a business that will never be done", according to the Oxford commentary. The suitors are never going to bring their feasting to an end. Monro explains differently, "with no end to the business", where ἐπὶ = "with, in presence of"; ἀνηνύστῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ would then explain ἀτέλεστον.[*]
How it is used ἐπὶ in ἀνηνύστῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ?βουλοίμην κ᾽ ἐν ἐμοῖσι κατακτάμενος μεγάροισι
τεθνάμεν ἢ τάδε γ᾽ αἰὲν ἀεικέα ἔργ᾽ ὁράασθαι,
ξείνους τε στυφελιζομένους δμῳάς τε γυναῖκας
ῥυστάζοντας ἀεικελίως κατὰ δώματα καλά,
110. καὶ οἶνον διαφυσσόμενον, καὶ σῖτον ἔδοντας
μὰψ αὔτως, ἀτέλεστον, ἀνηνύστῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ.
[/quote]
[*]
Again, I don't get the meaning of ἐπὶ here.ἡ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι νεῦσε: νόησε δὲ δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς,
[/quote]
I think it's ἐπινεύω in tmesis.
I don't see the contradiction either. First of all, ξανθός probably doesn't mean "yellow" but "brown, tawny". I think brown hair can be called dark, no? And anyway, the point is that Odysseus hair had been turned gray by Athena (if I remember the story correctly), and now she gives him back his youthful beard color - dark is meant as an opposition to gray. And anyway, I don't think the Greek color terms map quite the same way as ours do.[*]
That was the transformation of Odysseus by Athena before seeing hisἦ καὶ χρυσείῃ ῥάβδῳ ἐπεμάσσατ᾽ Ἀθήνη.
φᾶρος μέν οἱ πρῶτον ἐϋπλυνὲς ἠδὲ χιτῶνα
θῆκ᾽ ἀμφὶ στήθεσσι, δέμας δ᾽ ὤφελλε καὶ ἥβην.
175. ἂψ δὲ μελαγχροιὴς γένετο, γναθμοὶ δὲ τάνυσθεν,.κυάνεαι δ᾽ ἐγένοντο γενειάδες ἀμφὶ γένειον
son. Merry says:
But I don't see the contradiction. I have taken κυάνεαι as aκυάνεαι must mean ‘dark.’ The poet forgets that Ulysses had
‘yellow’ hair before: see Od.13. 399 Od., 431.
predicative adjective: taking it so, his beards were not κυάνεαι
before, but Athena made them κυάνεαι (she was dressing him up
to look like a god).
I suppose the point is to show how formidable Odysseus is. It makes us wait impatiently for the moment when the suitors get their just deserts.[*]
Why has Telemachus reacted in that way when he saw his fatherἡ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ὣς ἔρξασα πάλιν κίεν: αὐτὰρ Ὀδυσσεὺς
ἤϊεν ἐς κλισίην: θάμβησε δέ μιν φίλος υἱός,
ταρβήσας δ᾽ ἑτέρωσε βάλ᾽ ὄμματα, μὴ θεὸς εἴη,
180. καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα:
disguised as a god? Is it because of the ancient fear fo seeing a god,
I suppose? But Odysseus didn't react in that way when he saw
Athena for the first time. Was it because of his κυάνεαι γενειάδες?
[*]
Which was the purpose of Athena transforming Odysseus with the186. τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς:
‘οὔ τίς τοι θεός εἰμι: τί μ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν ἐΐσκεις;
ἀλλὰ πατὴρ τεός εἰμι, τοῦ εἵνεκα σὺ στεναχίζων
πάσχεις ἄλγεα πολλά, βίας ὑποδέγμενος ἀνδρῶν.’
appearance of a god, if immediatly then he revealed his identity to his?
Am I missing something here?
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 4791
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am
Re: Odyssey, Book 15, 16, 17 and 18
Picking up the residue:
11. 16.280 ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι παύεσθαι ἀνωγέμεν ἀφροσυνάων,
μειλιχίοις ἐπέεσσι παραυδῶν: οἱ δέ τοι οὔ τι
280. πείσονται: δὴ γάρ σφι παρίσταται αἴσιμον ἦμαρ.
γάρ is elliptical. It gives the reason not for the suitors’ anticipated refusal to listen to Tel, but more for Od’s prediction or confidence that they won’t. The poet allows Od this insight, instead of foretelling the outcome himself; the insight is later narratorially confirmed (17.364). Such foreshadowing is typically Homeric. The more important the event, the further ahead we’re told of it. (The oppositie of suspense.)
This elliptical use of γάρ is fairly common: “(I say this) because …”
12. ἀνδρῶν δ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἐγώ γε κατὰ σταθμοὺς ἐθέλοιμι
ἡμέας πειράζειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὕστερα ταῦτα πένεσθαι,
320. εἰ ἐτεόν γέ τι οἶσθα Διὸς τέρας αἰγιόχοιο.’
Tel is suggesting that Od should deal with things in the palace (i.e. the suitors, and the disloyal women) before going around testing the loyalty of his workers outside in the palace grounds. He proposes that they “work at this later” (υστερα predicative). Tel knows the situation better than his father, and action is urgent. There are also considerations of plot, of course. (But there’s a good deal of narrative incoherence or inconsistency hereabouts.)
13. 17.57 ὣς ἄρ᾽ ἐφώνησεν, τῇ δ᾽ ἄπτερος ἔπλετο μῦθος.
An ancient puzzle. Scholars gave various interpretations, according as they took the α- as privative (negative) or intensive. Many words in α- were subject to a similar variety of interpretations.
14. 218. ὡς αἰεὶ τὸν ὁμοῖον ἄγει θεὸς ὡς τὸν ὁμοῖον
Another puzzle. With non-accentuation of the second ὡς it will mean “to” (“as god always brings like to like”, in accordance with 217 κακος κακον ἡγηλιζει). That’s how Plato took it, and most other exegetes, but this use of ὡς is otherwise non-Homeric. It’s odd.
15. 222. αἰτίζων ἀκόλους, οὐκ ἄορας οὐδὲ λέβητας
This continues the goatherd’s mockery. Swords and cauldrons (λεβητες are big bronze prestigious objects) are gifts suitable for a noble ξενος, not a wretch such as the pigman’s companion. It’s a sneer.
16. Yes.
17. Εὔμαι᾽, ἦ μάλα δὴ τάδε δώματα κάλ᾽ Ὀδυσῆος,
265. ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἀρίγνωτ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ ἐν πολλοῖσιν ἰδέσθαι.
ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερ᾽ ἐστίν, ἐπήσκηται δέ οἱ αὐλὴ
Referring to Od’s δωματα. We’re to imagine added-on buildings, a set of extensions, one after the other.
18. 17.362. ὤτρυν᾽, ὡς ἂν πύρνα κατὰ μνηστῆρας ἀγείροι,
γνοίη θ᾽ οἵ τινές εἰσιν ἐναίσιμοι οἵ τ᾽ ἀθέμιστοι.
Verbs in secondary sequence sometimes take primary form. Some scholars think it’s more vivid.
19. 17.400. δός οἱ ἑλών: οὔ τοι φθονέω: κέλομαι γὰρ ἐγώ γε
“I have this question about the use of the participle on imperative sentences: should I take the participle as part of the order given ("Take it from me and give it to him") or should I take it as establishing a fact ("Since you have take it [from me], then share it with him now"). Does it depends of the context, I suppose?”
Here, as normally, part of the imperative (“Take and give him”). But yes, more generally speaking it’s context alone that determines the force of participles (temporal, circumstantial, causal, concessive, whatever).
20. 18.132 οὐ μὲν γάρ ποτέ φησι κακὸν πείσεσθαι ὀπίσσω,
ὄφρ᾽ ἀρετὴν παρέχωσι θεοὶ καὶ γούνατ᾽ ὀρώρῃ:
“and his knees bestir themselves, rise, move” Intransitive use.
21. οὔ τί με νικήσουσι: πολυτλήμων δὲ μάλ᾽ εἰμί.’
320. ὣς ἔφαθ᾽, αἱ δ᾽ ἐγέλασσαν, ἐς ἀλλήλας δὲ ἴδοντο.
”But why they laughed? I don't know if I'm missing something here, I didn't understand neither why Odysseus was wanting to carry the torches himself.”
Laughing at him for not behaving as a beggar should? Cf. Melantho’s rebuke. And there’s the question of just what γελάω means.
As for Od himself tending the fire, he’s keeping up his act, but here he is home, at his hearth, in control. We know it, they don’t.
22. 344 αὐτὰρ ὁ πὰρ λαμπτῆρσι φαείνων αἰθομένοισιν
ἑστήκειν ἐς πάντας ὁρώμενος
Not infin., indic. εστηκειν = εστηκει, he stood, he was standing.
<23.> ἀλλ᾽ εὖ δαισάμενοι κατακείετε οἴκαδ᾽ ἰόντες,
ὁππότε θυμὸς ἄνωγε: διώκω δ᾽ οὔ τιν᾽ ἐγώ γε.’
“Could διώκω have being used by Telemachus in a double sense? I suppose that since this is a courteous invitation to leave his house, it should mean "I will not press you [to go]". But, since he is talking to the suitors, I would not surprise if he is really saying "I will not pursue you [to bring you back]". Both senses are valid for διώκω, or am I wrong?”
No double meaning, I think. That’s not Homer’s way. It’s just amplifying the first half of the line, as the second half so often does. (δε almost = γαρ.)
The end approaches. You'll never get to read the Odyssey for the first time ever again!
11. 16.280 ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι παύεσθαι ἀνωγέμεν ἀφροσυνάων,
μειλιχίοις ἐπέεσσι παραυδῶν: οἱ δέ τοι οὔ τι
280. πείσονται: δὴ γάρ σφι παρίσταται αἴσιμον ἦμαρ.
γάρ is elliptical. It gives the reason not for the suitors’ anticipated refusal to listen to Tel, but more for Od’s prediction or confidence that they won’t. The poet allows Od this insight, instead of foretelling the outcome himself; the insight is later narratorially confirmed (17.364). Such foreshadowing is typically Homeric. The more important the event, the further ahead we’re told of it. (The oppositie of suspense.)
This elliptical use of γάρ is fairly common: “(I say this) because …”
12. ἀνδρῶν δ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἐγώ γε κατὰ σταθμοὺς ἐθέλοιμι
ἡμέας πειράζειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὕστερα ταῦτα πένεσθαι,
320. εἰ ἐτεόν γέ τι οἶσθα Διὸς τέρας αἰγιόχοιο.’
Tel is suggesting that Od should deal with things in the palace (i.e. the suitors, and the disloyal women) before going around testing the loyalty of his workers outside in the palace grounds. He proposes that they “work at this later” (υστερα predicative). Tel knows the situation better than his father, and action is urgent. There are also considerations of plot, of course. (But there’s a good deal of narrative incoherence or inconsistency hereabouts.)
13. 17.57 ὣς ἄρ᾽ ἐφώνησεν, τῇ δ᾽ ἄπτερος ἔπλετο μῦθος.
An ancient puzzle. Scholars gave various interpretations, according as they took the α- as privative (negative) or intensive. Many words in α- were subject to a similar variety of interpretations.
14. 218. ὡς αἰεὶ τὸν ὁμοῖον ἄγει θεὸς ὡς τὸν ὁμοῖον
Another puzzle. With non-accentuation of the second ὡς it will mean “to” (“as god always brings like to like”, in accordance with 217 κακος κακον ἡγηλιζει). That’s how Plato took it, and most other exegetes, but this use of ὡς is otherwise non-Homeric. It’s odd.
15. 222. αἰτίζων ἀκόλους, οὐκ ἄορας οὐδὲ λέβητας
This continues the goatherd’s mockery. Swords and cauldrons (λεβητες are big bronze prestigious objects) are gifts suitable for a noble ξενος, not a wretch such as the pigman’s companion. It’s a sneer.
16. Yes.
17. Εὔμαι᾽, ἦ μάλα δὴ τάδε δώματα κάλ᾽ Ὀδυσῆος,
265. ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἀρίγνωτ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ ἐν πολλοῖσιν ἰδέσθαι.
ἐξ ἑτέρων ἕτερ᾽ ἐστίν, ἐπήσκηται δέ οἱ αὐλὴ
Referring to Od’s δωματα. We’re to imagine added-on buildings, a set of extensions, one after the other.
18. 17.362. ὤτρυν᾽, ὡς ἂν πύρνα κατὰ μνηστῆρας ἀγείροι,
γνοίη θ᾽ οἵ τινές εἰσιν ἐναίσιμοι οἵ τ᾽ ἀθέμιστοι.
Verbs in secondary sequence sometimes take primary form. Some scholars think it’s more vivid.
19. 17.400. δός οἱ ἑλών: οὔ τοι φθονέω: κέλομαι γὰρ ἐγώ γε
“I have this question about the use of the participle on imperative sentences: should I take the participle as part of the order given ("Take it from me and give it to him") or should I take it as establishing a fact ("Since you have take it [from me], then share it with him now"). Does it depends of the context, I suppose?”
Here, as normally, part of the imperative (“Take and give him”). But yes, more generally speaking it’s context alone that determines the force of participles (temporal, circumstantial, causal, concessive, whatever).
20. 18.132 οὐ μὲν γάρ ποτέ φησι κακὸν πείσεσθαι ὀπίσσω,
ὄφρ᾽ ἀρετὴν παρέχωσι θεοὶ καὶ γούνατ᾽ ὀρώρῃ:
“and his knees bestir themselves, rise, move” Intransitive use.
21. οὔ τί με νικήσουσι: πολυτλήμων δὲ μάλ᾽ εἰμί.’
320. ὣς ἔφαθ᾽, αἱ δ᾽ ἐγέλασσαν, ἐς ἀλλήλας δὲ ἴδοντο.
”But why they laughed? I don't know if I'm missing something here, I didn't understand neither why Odysseus was wanting to carry the torches himself.”
Laughing at him for not behaving as a beggar should? Cf. Melantho’s rebuke. And there’s the question of just what γελάω means.
As for Od himself tending the fire, he’s keeping up his act, but here he is home, at his hearth, in control. We know it, they don’t.
22. 344 αὐτὰρ ὁ πὰρ λαμπτῆρσι φαείνων αἰθομένοισιν
ἑστήκειν ἐς πάντας ὁρώμενος
Not infin., indic. εστηκειν = εστηκει, he stood, he was standing.
<23.> ἀλλ᾽ εὖ δαισάμενοι κατακείετε οἴκαδ᾽ ἰόντες,
ὁππότε θυμὸς ἄνωγε: διώκω δ᾽ οὔ τιν᾽ ἐγώ γε.’
“Could διώκω have being used by Telemachus in a double sense? I suppose that since this is a courteous invitation to leave his house, it should mean "I will not press you [to go]". But, since he is talking to the suitors, I would not surprise if he is really saying "I will not pursue you [to bring you back]". Both senses are valid for διώκω, or am I wrong?”
No double meaning, I think. That’s not Homer’s way. It’s just amplifying the first half of the line, as the second half so often does. (δε almost = γαρ.)
The end approaches. You'll never get to read the Odyssey for the first time ever again!