I wouldn’t worry too much about falling into error – especially on Textkit’s only Vacation Reading thread – language errors are self-correcting and commentary errors are self-perpetuating.
433: Ah, “wife” makes more sense. When I read it, I thought that he was avoiding the “bile of the woman” by not sleeping with her, though he otherwise treated her like a lawful wife. It had me wondering if she was going to turn evil in later chapters.
When you look at a word like φιλέω, I’d argue that it has almost always also a nuance of “treating kindly”, which doesn’t quite exactly correspond to our “love”, which is primarily a mental process.
Yes, this rings true. There is hiding of feelings in Homer, but usually they are like big children (especially the gods) in how their outward emotion matches their inner selves. Maybe it’s a reflection of a rustic society, or Homer’s dramatic technology? I’d argue that this isn’t as noticeable in Herodotus.
Reading Greek tends to be a solitary, and often very lonely activity for most, even though historically it was most certainly not. The only opportunity for most people to read Greek in a group is in a college class, in which you’re constrained by the fact that most people there are just taking the class for credit and will only do the bare minimum to keep up. On top of that, once all those students graduate they have to go off and have jobs and lives which doesn’t leave time to regroup and read Greek together. Perhaps a modified version of what Joel is attempting could be tried - i.e., a thread where everyone does a blind translation of a few passages by themselves and then regroups to discuss what issues they had, what they found interesting, and what other questions they might have.
I was out hiking most of the day, but made it through β in the evening. Telemachus’ speeches were fairly clear, but I didn’t entirely understand all of the suitors’ arguments at the assembly and will have to re-read eventually. I understood the bit about Penelope making the promise about the weaving and undoing it at night because I knew the story, but all of those textile terms would have been too much for me otherwise.
It mentions at around that point, that the suitors have only been doing this 3-4 years total? I realize that we’re at year 20 in the story, but are there any chronology irregularities in the story? We’re clearly not meant to imagine Penelope as an old lady. And Telemachus says something like “now that I’m μεγας” later. I suppose 19 years old fits well for him. Almost capable, but not quite. But we’d probably make him 15 or 16 in a modern story of the same type.
Athena the divine babysitter was wearing on me, but by the time the ship was outfitted and she joined the crew, I think that I’ve accepted it.
Do we know at what age girls/women tended to be given for marriage in Homeric society? I believe that in Classical times a girl would be married at 14 or perhaps even younger. That would mean Penelope is in her mid-30s.
What you suggest is a good idea, and such projects have already been done.
One such still active thread about Odyssey 6 is here: Odyssey 6 Reading Group.
Thanks for the link to the video. Very atmospheric, and Bach is always welcome. I once went to a modern Greek class but it was full of women who were learning Greek so that they could work out what their Cypriot mother-in-laws were saying. My classical pronunciation and their Cypriot accent did not make for a happy union. Perhaps one day I will try again.
An interesting point, although I have difficulty with the way you have formulated it. I don’t see that avoiding someone’s anger and not wanting to hurt someone’s feelings are alternative ways of expressing the same thing. Perhaps that’s not what you meant.
I wonder, however, if Laertes is motivated by not wanting to hurt his wife’s feelings? Seeking to avoid an angry reaction seems to me to be about self-preservation rather than concern for someone else’s feelings. If he were concerned about her feelings perhaps he wouldn’t have bought and brought a female slave home, giving her equal status to his wife. Perhaps because what Laertes does is such an unusual course for a homeric hero it implies he does have conflicting feelings of care for his wife on the one hand and satisfying his appetite on the other. Perhaps it’s a mixture of both feeling care and fear of wrath. The feeling of care is rather oblique.
At line 420 we do have an example where Telemachus says one thing but thinks another which gives some hint to his emotional state. So homeric characters do have an interior life which we can sometimes glimpse.
That’s a legitimate question, and I can’t tell you for sure. There is no doubt that the characters have an interior life, as for example line 420 testifies. But I meant something different: I challenge you to find one single instance in Homer where a character says or does something to another character just in order to provoke an emotional response without immediate external repercussions. It seems to me that Homer simply has no way to say “he didn’t want to hurt her feelings”.
In the same way I don’t think there are many instances where the inner sentiments of a character towards another character are described without an outward expression of those sentiments, or at least contemplated expression. φιλέω doesn’t qualify, because it usually if not always means “treat with affection” rather than just “love” (hence the meaning “kiss”, though I’m not sure if it exists in Homer). Phrases like κεδνὰ ἰδυῖα (Od. 1.428), ἀνάκτεσιν ἤπια εἰδώς (Od. 15.557) might qualify though. But even there it is question of loyalty, and the point is that these servants can be trusted should the need arise, it’s not so much about their interior life.
In γ, what exactly are Menelaos and Agamemon arguing about in Nestor’s account? I don’t know ερυκακεειν in βουλετο γαρ ρα / λαον ερυκακεειν ρεξαι θ ιερας εκατομβας, but it sounds like the difference is that Agamemnon wants to sacrifice before he goes to appease (? - εξακεσαιτο) the δεινον χολον of Athena. But it’s not going to persuade her since the immortal gods don’t change their minds easily ου γαρ τ αιψα θεων τρεπεται νοος αιεν εοντων.
And then Zeus εστορεσεν ποντον. The verb makes me think “darken” for some reason, but I don’t actually know it – did he send a storm?
Menelaus wants to go home and Agamemnon wants to delay the departure to make a sacrifice to Athena to appease her (ἐξακέομαι heal completely - make amends). ἐρυκακέειν is aor inf of ἐρύκω curb, keep back.
Good, that’s what I understood for the context. I had gotten used to breezing through lately, but the description of the return took me at least 5 times through, if not more.
The “blind translation” is the operative part of the suggestion, and I’m not aware of its being tried as a thread.
As fun and rewarding as they are, the Iliad and Odyssey have had far more secondary literature written about them than they really deserve, and it makes sense to think of tricks to keep threads text-focused.
Well, you can never have too much good secondary literature on the foundation for the Western literary tradition, I should think. But anything which generates a lot of good scholarship will also attract bad, and that we could do without.
Funny, I’ve actually read a scholarly article about the quarrel of Agamemnon and Menelaus, about which there is no mention anywhere else – I didn’t tell you about it because of the casual nature of this thread. Anyway, I don’t remember the gist of the argument any more but I would have found the piece.
Are you insinuating that when I bought the Lexikon des Frühgriechischen Epos and “forgot” to tell my wife about the price, it was all for nothing?
This articles advances a theory that this quarrel points to a different tradition where Menelaus is not the same mild-mannered fellow as we see him in the Iliad, always subordinate to Agamemnon.
I have thought about this but I am having difficulty in understanding the point you are making. Assuming you don’t exactly mean “just in order” which implies a rather gratuitous provocation, are you saying that Homeric characters always react explicitly and in a concrete way to interactions with other characters? If you are saying that doesn’t the example I quoted at 420 provide a counter example? Telemachus keeps his true thoughts to himself.
I am sure I have not understood you properly but it sounds like you are making an interesting point about Homeric psychology. Could you elaborate? Maybe this deserves its own thread?
Actually what I was suggesting that a member could simply start a thread about a “blind” reading of a passage. Like, who wants to join me in reading, say, a Homeric hymn, without any aids whatsoever (except the dictionary, of course)? [BTW, this is NOT a suggestion to be taken seriously from me!]
Anyway, I don’t remember the gist of the argument any more but I would have found the piece.