previous next

[217] κέρδεα ‘devices,’ see 14. 31.

218-224. These seven lines were rejected by Aristarchus, and have been generally condemned, mainly on the ground that they do not fit the context. The case of Helen, it is argued, is not really parallel to that of Penelope, and the excuse which is made for her—that she acted under the compulsion of Aphrodite—is especially out of place, since it makes her incapable of being deterred by the consequences of her acts. Moreover the close connexion of l. 215 “αἰεὶ γάρ μοι θυμὸς . . . ἐρρίγει” with l. 225 “νῦν δ᾽ ἐπεὶ κτλ.” (‘I was always in fear—but now &c.’) is seriously interrupted by so long a parenthesis. Recently, however, an ingenious defence of the passage has been put forward by Mr. Platt (Class. Rev. xiii. 383). He pleads the absence of any motive for the interpolation, and insists upon the beauty of the lines themselves, especially l. 224. In his view the aim of the poet was to bring out once more, almost at the end of his story, the noble prudence and faithfulness of Penelope, by contrasting her with the opposite type of character seen in Helen. Such a contrast, Mr. Platt shows, is quite in the manner of the Odyssey, and has been already made between Penelope and Clytaemnestra ( Od.11. 432 ff., cp. 24. 198 ff.). And the finishing touch is added to the picture by the words in which Penelope makes an excuse—the only possible excuse—for the enemy whose ‘blind folly’ had wrought so much woe.

The explanation is attractive, but somewhat fanciful, as Mr. Platt is ready to admit, and it supposes an obscurity in the thought which is not at all like Homer. It may be doubted whether Penelope's readiness to forgive an enemy would have appealed to hearers in primitive times. The excuse, too, is hardly one that would have been accepted in an age when almost every human thought and feeling was ascribed to the gods. And what is it that the example of Helen is cited to prove? The points dwelt upon are (1) that she would not have gone with Paris if she had known what would follow: but (2) that she was not a free agent. The lesson taught would seem to be that men do wrongly from their ignorance of the future, and because they are led astray by higher powers. But this is not applicable in any way to Penelope. Probably therefore it belongs originally to a different context.

The argument from style is difficult to estimate, since it depends almost entirely upon individual judgment. But it must be evident that the manner as well as the matter of the verses is didactic rather than epic (in the strict sense). With the possible exception of l. 224, they do not rise above the level of similar passages in Hesiod. They may have been suggested by the passage in Od.3. 265 ff. where it is related that Clytaemnestra at first would not listen to the suggestions of Aegisthus—“φρεσὶ γὰρ κέχρητ᾽ ἀγαθῇσι”—till the decree of the gods obliged her to give way. If a conjecture may be ventured, the most obvious source is the post-Homeric epic known as the Cypria, the main subject of which is the unfaithfulness of Helen, brought about and directed by the agency of Aphrodite. The poem is one in which the progress of moral reflexion in early post-Homeric times may be very plainly traced. It need hardly be added that the interpolation of didactic passages is not uncommon (see Od.14. 228. Od., 15. 74. Od., 19. 109 ff.).

Homer's Odyssey. W. Walter Merry. James Riddell. D. B. Monro. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1886-1901.

The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide References (5 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (5):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: