The Project Gutenberg EBook of Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age, Vol. 2 of 3, by W. E. Gladstone This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. Title: Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age, Vol. 2 of 3 Olympus Author: W. E. Gladstone Release Date: September 2, 2015 [EBook #49858] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF-8 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK STUDIES ON HOMER *** Produced by Henry Flower and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive) The eBook cover was created by adding text to the original cover and is placed in the public domain. cover [i] STUDIES ON HOMER AND THE HOMERIC AGE. BY THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, D.C.L. M. P. FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD. IN THREE VOLUMES. VOL. II. Plenius ac melius Chrysippo et Crantore.—Horace. OXFORD: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. M.DCCC.LVIII. [ii] [iii] STUDIES ON HOMER AND THE HOMERIC AGE. OLYMPUS: OR, THE RELIGION OF THE HOMERIC AGE. BY THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, D.C.L. M. P. FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD. Plenius ac melius Chrysippo et Crantore.—Horace. OXFORD: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. M.DCCC.LVIII. [The right of Translation is reserved.] [iv] [v] THE CONTENTS. OLYMPUS: OR THE RELIGION OF THE HOMERIC AGE. SECT. I. On the mixed character of the Supernatural System, or Theo-mythology of Homer. Homer’s method not systematic Page 1 Incongruities of his Theo-mythology point to diversity of sources 2 Remnants of primitive tradition likely to be found in the Poems 3 Extra-judaical relations between God and man 6 With tradition it combines invention 9 It is a true Theology corrupted 9 It has not its basis in nature-worship 10 It could not have sprung from invention only 13 Sacrifices admitted to be traditional 15 Tendency of primitive religion to decay 17 Downward course of the idea of God 18 Decline closely connected with Polytheism 20 Inducements to Nature-worship 21 The deterioration of religion progressive 23 Paganism in its old age 25 The impersonations of Homer 26 The nature of the myths of Homer 29 Tradition the proper key to many of them 30 He exhibits the two systems in active impact 32 Steps of the downward process 33 Sources of the inventive portions 35 Originality of the Olympian system 37 SECT. II. The traditive element of the Homeric Theo-mythology. The channels of early religious tradition 39 Some leading early traditions of Scripture 40 As to the Godhead 42 As to the Redeemer 42 As to the Evil One 43 Their defaced counterparts in Homer 43 Deities of equivocal position 46 Threefold materials of the Greek religion 48 Messianic traditions of the Hebrews 49 To be learned from three sources 49 Attributes ascribed to the Messiah 51 The deities of tradition in Homer 54 Minerva and Apollo jointly form the key 55 Notes of their Olympian rank 56 [vi] Of their higher antiquity 57 The Secondaries of Minerva 59 The Secondaries of Apollo 60 Argument from the Secondaries 63 Picture of human society in Olympus 64 Dignity and precedence of Minerva 66 Of Apollo 69 Minerva’s relations of will and affection with Jupiter 70 Those of Apollo 71 Apollo the Deliverer of Heaven 72 Power of Minerva in the Shades 73 These deities are never foiled by others 74 The special honour of the Trine Invocation 78 They receive universal worship 79 They are not localized in any abode 82 They are objects together with Jupiter of habitual prayer 83 Exempt from appetite and physical limitations 86 Their manner of appreciating sacrifice 88 Their independent power of punishment 90 They handle special attributes of Jupiter 94 They exercise dominion over nature 98 Relation of Apollo (with Diana) to Death 101 Exemption from the use of second causes 104 Superiority of their moral standard 105 Special relation of Apollo to Diana 108 Disintegration of primitive traditions 108 The Legend of Alcyone 111 Place of Minerva and Apollo in Providential government 113 It is frequently ascribed to them 115 Especially the inner parts of it to Minerva 117 Apollo’s gift of knowledge 119 Intimacy of Minerva’s personal relations with man 121 Form of their relation to their attributes 122 The capacity to attract new ones 124 Wide range of their functions 125 Tradition of the Sun 126 The central wisdom of Minerva 129 The three characters of Apollo 130 The opposition between two of them 131 Minerva and Apollo do not fit into Olympus 133 Origin of the Greek names 133 Summary of their distinctive traits 134 Explanation by Friedreich 138 Treatment of Apollo by Müller 141 After-course of the traditions 142 The Diana of Homer 143 [vii] Her acts and attributes in the poems 144 The Latona of Homer 147 Her attributes in the poems 149 Her relation to primitive Tradition 153 Her acts in the poems 154 The Iris of Homer 156 The Atè of Homer 158 The ἀτασθαλίη of Homer 162 Other traditions of the Evil One 162 Parallel citations from Holy Scripture 165 The Future State in Homer 167 Sacrificial tradition in Homer 171 He has no sabbatical tradition 171 SECT. III. The inventive element of the Homeric Theo-mythology. The character of Jupiter 173 Its fourfold aspect.—1. Jupiter as Providence 174 2. Jupiter as Lord of Air 178 Earth why vacant in the Lottery 179 3. Jupiter as Head of Olympus 181 His want of moral elements 183 His strong political spirit 185 4. Jupiter as the type of animalism 186 Qualified by his parental instincts 189 The Juno of Homer 190 Juno of the Iliad and Juno of the Odyssey 191 Her intense nationality 192 Her mythological functions 193 Her mythological origin 197 The Neptune of Homer 199 His threefold aspect 200 His traits mixed, but chiefly mythological 201 His relation to the Phœnicians 205 His relation to the tradition of the Evil One 206 His grandeur is material 209 The Aidoneus of Homer 210 His personality shadowy and feeble 211 The Ceres or Demeter of Homer 212 Her Pelasgian associations 213 Her place in Olympus 215 Her mythological origin 215 The Proserpine or Persephone of Homer 217 Her marked and substantive character 218 Her connection with the East 220 Her place in Olympus doubtful 223 Her associations Hellenic and not Pelasgian 224 [viii] The Mars of Homer 225 His limited worship and attributes 226 Mars as yet scarcely Greek 229 The Mercury of Homer 231 Preeminently the god of increase 233 Mercury Hellenic as well as Phœnician 235 But apparently recent in Greece 237 His Olympian function distinct from that of Iris 238 The poems consistent with one another in this point 241 The Venus of Homer 243 Venus as yet scarcely Greek 244 Advance of her worship from the East 247 Her Olympian rank and character 249 Her extremely limited powers 249 Apparently unable to confer beauty 251 Homer never by intention makes her attractive 252 The Vulcan of Homer 254 His Phœnician and Eastern extraction 255 His marriage with Venus 257 Vulcan in and out of his art 259 The Ἠέλιος of Homer 260 In the Iliad 261 In the Odyssey 262 Is of the Olympian court 263 His incorporation with Apollo 264 The Dionysus or Bacchus of Homer 266 His worship recent 266 Apparently of Phœnician origin 267 He is of the lowest inventive type 269 SECT. IV. The Composition of the Olympian Court; and the classification of the whole supernatural order in Homer. Principal cases of exclusion from Olympus 271 Case of Oceanus 273 Together with that of Kronos and Rhea 274 The Dî majores of the later tradition 275 Number of the Olympian gods in Homer 275 What deities are of that rank 277 The Hebe and the Paieon of Homer 278 The Eris of Homer 280 Classification of the twenty Olympian deities 282 The remaining supernatural order, in six classes 283 Destiny or Fate in Homer 285 Under the form of Αἶσα 286 Death inexorable to Fate or Deity alike 287 Destiny under the form of Μοῖρα 290 Under the form of μόρος 293 [ix] [x] General view of the Homeric Destiny 294 Not antagonistic to Divine will 297 The minor impersonations of natural powers 298 The Ἁρπυῖαι of Homer 300 The Erinues of Homer 302 Their office is to vindicate the moral order 305 Their operation upon the Immortals 306 Their connection with Aides and Persephone 308 Their relation to Destiny 310 Their operation upon man 310 Their occasional function as tempters 312 The translation of mortals 313 The deification of mortals 314 Growth of material for its extension 316 The kindred of the gods (1) the Cyclopes 318 (2) The Læstrygones 319 (3) The Phæacians 320 (4) Æolus Hippotades 322 SECT. V. The Olympian Community and its Members considered in themselves. The family order in Olympus 325 The political order in Olympus 326 Absence of important restraints upon their collective action 327 They are influenced by courtesy and intelligence 328 Superiority of the Olympian Immortals 330 Their unity imperfect 331 Their polity works constitutionally 332 The system not uniform 333 They are inferior in morality to men 334 And are governed mainly by force and fraud 335 Their dominant and profound selfishness 337 The cruelty of Calypso in her love 339 Their standard of taste and feeling low 340 The Olympian life is a depraved copy of the heroic 341 The exemption from death uniform 342 The exemption from other limitations partial 345 Sometimes based on peculiar grounds 346 Divine faculties for the most part an extension from the human 348 Their dependence on the eye 350 Their powers of locomotion 352 Chief heads of superiority to mankind 353 Their superiority in stature and beauty 354 Their libertinism 355 Their keen regard to sacrifice and the ground of it 357 Their circumscribed power over nature 358 Parts of the body how ascribed to them 359 [xi] Examples of miracle in Homer 361 Mode of their action on the human mind 363 They do not discern the thoughts 365 SECT. VI. The Olympian Community and its Members considered in their influence on human society and conduct. Lack of periodical observances and of a ministering class 367 Yet the religion was a real power in life 368 The effect of the corruption of the gods was not yet fully felt 369 They show little regard to human interests 371 A moral tone is occasionally perceptible 373 Prevalent belief as to their views of man and life 374 It lent considerable support to virtue 377 Their course with respect to Troy 378 Bearing of the religion on social ties 380 And on political relations 382 The Oath 383 Bearing of the religion on the poems 385 As regards Neptune’s wrath in the Odyssey 387 As regards the virtue of purity 388 As regards poetic effect 388 Comparison of its earliest and latest form 390 Gloom prevails in Homer’s view of human destiny 392 The personal belief of Homer 394 SECT. VII. On the traces of an origin abroad for the Olympian Religion. The Olympian deities classified according to local extraction 397 Their connection as a body with the Æthiopes 399 Confirms the hypothesis of Persian origin 402 Herodotus on the Scythian religion 402 His report from Egypt about the Greek deities 404 Four several bases of religious systems 405 Anthropophuism in the Olympian religion 406 Nature-worship as described in the Book of Wisdom 406 Its secondary place in the Olympian religion 407 In what sense it follows a prior Nature-worship 409 The principle of Brute-worship 410 Its traces in the Olympian religion 411 Chief vestige: oxen of the Sun 412 Xanthus the horse of Achilles 414 SECT. VIII. The Morals of the Homeric Age. The general type of Greek character in the heroic age 417 The moral sense in the heroic age 418 Use of the words ἀγαθός and κακός 421 Of the word δίκαιος 423 [xii] Religion and morals were not dissociated 425 Moral elements in the practice of sacrifice 427 Three main motives to virtue. 1. Regard to the gods 427 2. The power of conscience 428 3. Regard for the sentiments of mankind 430 The force and forms of αἰδὼς 431 Other cognate terms 435 Homicide in the heroic age 436 Eight instances in the poems 437 Why viewed with little disfavour 440 Piracy in the heroic age 442 Its nature as then practised 443 Mixed view of it in the poems 444 Family feuds in the heroic age 446 Temperance in the heroic age 447 Self-control in the heroic age 448 Absence of the vice of cruelty 450 Savage ideas occasionally expressed 451 These not unfamiliar to later Greece 453 Wrath in Ulysses 454 Wrath in Achilles 455 Domestic affections in the heroic age 456 Relationships close, not wide 459 Purity in the heroic age 460 Lay of the Net of Vulcan 461 Direct evidence of comparative purity 465 Treatment of the human form 466 Treatment of various characters 467 Outline of Greek life in the heroic age 468 Its morality, and that of later Greece 471 Points of its superiority 472 Inferior as to crimes of violence 475 Some effects of slavery 476 Signs of degeneracy before Homer’s death 477 SECT. IX. Woman in the heroic age. The place of Woman generally, and in heroic Greece 479 Its comparative elevation 480 1. State of the law and custom of marriage 481 Marriage was uniformly single 483 2. Conceived in a spirit of freedom 483 Its place in the career of life 485 Mode of contraction 486 3. Perpetuity of the tie of marriage 487 Adultery 488 Desertion 489 [xiii] 4. Greek ideas of incest 489 5. Fidelity in married life 492 Treatment of spurious children 494 Case of Briseis 495 Mode of contracting marriage 496 Concubinage of Greek chieftains in Troas 497 Dignity of conjugal and feminine manners 499 Social position of the wife 500 Force of conjugal attachments 502 Woman characters of Homer 503 The province of Woman well defined 505 Argument from the position of the goddesses 506 Women admitted to sovereignty 507 And to the service of the gods 509 Their household employments 511 Their service about the bath 512 Explanation of the presumed difficulty 515 Proof from the case of Ulysses in Scheria 517 Subsequent declension of Woman 518 SECT. X. The Office of the Homeric Poems in relation to that of the early Books of Holy Scripture. Points of literary resemblance 521 Providential functions of Greece and Rome 523 Of the Early records of Holy Scripture 524 The Sacred Books are not mere literary works 525 Providential use of the Homeric poems 527 They complete the code of primitive instruction 529 Human history had no visible centre up to the Advent 531 Nor for some time after it 532 A purpose served by the whole design 533 [xiv] [1] Extended relations of God to man. OLYMPUS, OR THE RELIGION OF THE HOMERIC AGE. SECT. I. On the Mixed Character of the Supernatural System, or Theo-Mythology, of Homer. Though the poems of Homer are replete, perhaps beyond any others, with refined and often latent adaptations, yet it may be observed in general of the modes of representation used by him, that they are preeminently the reverse of systematic. Institutions or characters, which are in themselves consistent, probably gain by this method of proceeding, provided the execution be not unworthy of the design. For it secures their exhibition in more, and more varied, points of view, than can possibly be covered by the more didactic process. But the possession of this advantage depends upon the fact, that there is in them a harmony, which is their base, and which we have only to discover. Whereas, if that harmony be wanting, if in lieu of it there be a groundwork of fundamental discrepancy, then the conditions of effect are wholly changed. The multiplied variety of view becomes a multiplication of incongruity; each new aspect offers a new problem: and the more masterly the hand of the artist, the more arduous becomes the attempt to comprehend and present in their mutual bearings the pictures he has drawn, and the suggestions he has conveyed. Thus it has been with that which, following German example, I have denominated the Theo-mythology of Homer. By that term it seems not improper to designate a mixture of theology and mythology, as these two words are commonly understood. Theology I suppose to mean, a system dealing with the knowledge of God and the unseen world: mythology, a system conversant with the inventions of man concerning them. In the Homeric poems I find both of these largely displayed: but with this difference, that the first was in visible decline, the second in such rapid and prolific development, that, while Homer is undoubtedly a witness to older fable, which had already in his time become settled tradition, he is also in this department himself evidently and largely a Maker and Inventor, and the material of the Greek mythology comes out of his hands far more fully moulded, and far more diversified, than it entered them. Of the fact that the Homeric religion does not present a consistent and homogeneous whole, we have abundant evidence in the difficulties with which, so soon as the literary age of Greece began, expositors found themselves incumbered; and which drove them sometimes upon allegory as a resource, sometimes, as in the case of Plato, upon censure and repudiation[1]. I know not whether it has been owing to our somewhat narrow jealousies concerning the function of Holy Scripture, or to our want of faith in the extended Providence of God, and His manifestations in the world, or to the real incongruity in the evidence at our command, or to any other cause, but the fact, at least, seems to me beyond doubt, that our modes of dealing with the Homeric poems in this cardinal respect have been eminently unsatisfactory. Those who have found in Homer the elements of religious truth, have resorted to the far-fetched and very extravagant supposition, that he had learned them from the contemporary Hebrews, or from the law of Moses. The more common and popular opinion[2] has perhaps been one, which has put all such elements almost or altogether out of view; one which has treated the Immortals in Homer as so many impersonations of the powers of nature, or else magnified men, and their social life as in substance no more than as a reflection of his picture of heroic life, only gilded with embellishments, and enlarged in scale, in proportion to the superior elevation of its sphere. Few, comparatively, have been inclined to recognise in the Homeric poems the vestiges of a real traditional knowledge, derived from the epoch when the covenant of God with man, and the promise of a Messiah, had not yet fallen within the contracted forms of Judaism for shelter, but entered more or less into the common consciousness, and formed a part of the patrimony of the human race[3]. But surely there is nothing improbable in the supposition, that in the poems of Homer such vestiges may be found. Every recorded form of society bears some traces of those by which it has been preceded: and in that highly primitive form, which Homer has been the instrument of embalming for all posterity, the law of general reason obliges us to search for elements and vestiges belonging to one more primitive still. And, if we are to inquire in the Iliad and the Odyssey for what belongs to antecedent manners and ideas, on what ground can it be pronounced improbable, that no part of these earlier traditions should be old enough to carry upon them the mark of belonging to the religion, which the Book of Genesis represents as brought by our first parents from Paradise, and as delivered by them to their immediate descendants in general? The Hebrew Chronology, considered in connection with the probable date of Homer, would even render it difficult or irrational to proceed upon any other supposition: nor if, as by the Septuagint or otherwise, a larger period is allowed for the growth of our race, will the state of this case be materially altered. For the facts must remain, that the form of society exhibited by Homer was itself in many points essentially patriarchal, that it contains, in matter not religious, such, for instance, as the episode of the Cyclops, clear traces of a yet earlier condition yet more significant of a relation to that name, and that there is no broadly marked period of human experience, or form of manners, which we can place between the great trunk of human history in Holy Scripture, and this famed Homeric branch, which of all literary treasures appears to be its eldest born. Standing next to the patriarchal histories of Holy Scripture, why should it not bear, how can it not bear, traces of the religion under which the patriarchs lived? The immense longevity of the early generations of mankind was eminently favourable to the preservation of pristine traditions. Each individual, instead of being as now a witness of, or an agent in, one or two transmissions from father to [2] [3] [4] Sufficiently proved from Holy Scripture. The question one of history. son, would observe or share in ten times as many. According to the Hebrew Chronology, Lamech the father of Noah was of mature age before Adam died: and Abraham was of mature age before Noah died. Original or early witnesses, remaining so long as standards of appeal, would evidently check the rapidity of the darkening and destroying process. Let us suppose that man now lived but twenty years, instead of fourscore. Would not this greatly quicken the waste of ancient traditions? And is not the converse also true? Custom has made it with us second nature to take for granted a broad line of demarcation between those who live within the pale of Revelation, and the residue of mankind. But Holy Scripture does not appear to recognise such a severance in any manner, until we come to the revelation of the Mosaic law, which was like the erection of a temporary shelter for truths that had ranged at large over the plain, and that were apparently in danger of being totally absorbed in the mass of human inventions. But before this vineyard was planted, and likewise outside its fence, there were remains, smaller or greater, of the knowledge of God; and there was a recognised relation between Jehovah and mankind, which has been the subject of record from time to time, and the ground of acts involving the admonition, or pardon, or correction, or destruction, of individuals or communities. The latest of these indications, such as the visit of the Wise Men from the East, are not the most remarkable: because first the captivity in Babylon, and subsequently the dissemination of Jewish groups through so many parts of the world, could not but lead to direct communications of divine knowledge, at least, in some small degree. From such causes, there would be many a Cornelius before him who became the first-fruits of the Gentiles. Yet even the interest, which probably led to such communications from the Jew, must have had its own root in relics of prior tradition, which attested the common concern of mankind in Him that was to come. But in earlier times, and when the Jewish nation was more concentrated, and was certainly obscure, the vestiges of extra-patriarchal and extra-judaical relations between God and man are undeniable. They have been traced with clearness and ability in a popular treatise by the hand of Bishop Horsley[4]. Let us take, for instance, that case of extreme wickedness, which most severely tries the general proposition. The punishment of Sodom and Gomorrah for their sins was preceded by a declaration from the Most High, importing a direct relation with those guilty cities[5]; and two angels, who had visited Abraham on the plains of Mamre, ‘came to Sodom at even.’ Ruth the Moabitess was an ancestress, through king David, of our Lord. Rahab in Jericho, ‘by faith,’ as the Apostle assures us, entertained the spies of the Israelites. Job, living in a country where the worship of the sun was practised, had, as had his friends, the knowledge of the true God. Melchizedek, the priest of On, whose daughter Joseph married, and Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, are other conspicuous instances. Later in time, Nineveh, the great Assyrian capital, received the message of the prophet Jonah, and repented at his preaching. Here the teaching organ was supplied from among the Jews: but Balaam exhibits to us the gift of inspiration beyond their bounds. Once more; many centuries after the Homeric manners had disappeared, and during the captivity, we find not only a knowledge of God, but dreams and signs vouchsafed to Assyrian kings, and interpreted for them by the prophet Daniel. We have, in short, mingling with the whole course of the Old Testament, a stream of evidence which shows the partial remnants of the knowledge of God, apart from that main current of it which is particularly traced for us in the patriarchal and Mosaic histories. Again, many centuries after Homer, when all traces of primitive manners had long vanished, still in the Prometheus of Æschylus, and in the Pollio of Virgil, we have signs, though I grant they are faint ones, that the celestial rays had not even then ‘faded into the light of common day’ for the heathen world. It would really be strange, and that in a high degree, if a record like that of Homer, with so many resemblances to the earliest manners in other points, had no link to connect it with them in their most vital part. The general proposition, that we may expect to find the relics of Scriptural traditions in the heroic age of Greece, though it leads, if proved, to important practical results, is independent even of a belief in those traditions, as they stand in the scheme of revealed truth. They must be admitted to have been facts on earth, even by those who would deny them to be facts of heavenly origin, in the shape in which Christendom receives them: and the question immediately before us is one of pure historical probability. The descent of mankind from a single pair, the lapse of that pair from original righteousness, are apart from and ulterior to it. We have traced the Greek nation to a source, and along a path of migration, which must in all likelihood have placed its ancestry, at some point or points, in close local relations with the scenes of the earliest Mosaic records: the retentiveness of that people equalled its receptiveness, and its close and fond association with the past made it prone indeed to incorporate novel matter into its religion, but prone also to keep it there after its incorporation. If such traditions existed, and if the laws which guide historical inquiry require or lead us to suppose that the forefathers of the Greeks must have lived within their circle, then the burden of proof must lie not so properly with those who assert that the traces of them are to be found in the earliest, that is, the Homeric, form of the Greek mythology, as with those who deny it. What became of those old traditions? They must have decayed and disappeared, not by a sudden process, but by a gradual accumulation of the corrupt accretions, in which at length they were so completely interred as to be invisible and inaccessible. Some period therefore there must have been, at which they would remain clearly perceptible, though in conjunction with much corrupt matter. Such a period might be made the subject of record, and if such there were, we might naturally expect to find it in the oldest known work of the ancient literature. If the poems of Homer do, however, contain a picture, even though a defaced picture, of the primeval religious traditions, it is obvious that they afford a most valuable collateral support to the credit of the Holy Scripture, considered as a document of history. Still we must not allow the desire of gaining this advantage to bias the mind in an inquiry, [5] [6] [7] [8]