Homer Iliad 14.154

View: By Book
Meantime Saturnia from Olympus' brow,
High-thron'd in gold, beheld the fields below;
180
With joy the glorious conflict she survey'd,
Where her great brother gave the Grecians aid.
But plac'd aloft, on Ida's shady height
She sees her Jove, and trembles at the sight.
Jove to deceive, what methods shall she try,
185
What arts, to blind his all-beholding eye?
At length she trusts her power; resolv'd to prove
The old, yet still successful, cheat of love;
Against his wisdom to oppose her charms,
And lull the lord of thunders in her arms.
190

Iliad. Homer. London. 1863.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Current edition Experimental

English (Alexander Pope, 1720, ed. Watson, 1857) (OCR draft) (English) (English (Alexander Pope, 1720, ed. Watson, 1857))

Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.

Editions (1)
Ἰλιάς Perseus (Homer. Homeri Opera, Volumes 1-2. Monro, D. B. (David Binning), editor; Allen, Thomas W. (Thomas William), editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908-1920.) — 14.154 focus
Translations (8)
Iliad Perseus (Homer. The Iliad, Volume 1-2. Murray, A. T. (Augustus Taber), translator. London: William Heinmann; New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1924-1925.) — 14.154 focus
Iliad Perseus (Homer. The Iliad of Homer, rendered into English prose for the use of those who cannot read the original. Butler, Samuel, 1835-1902, translator. London: Longmans, Green, and Co, 1898.) — 14.133 focus
English (Butler, rev. Nagy et al., 2020) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Butler, rev. Nagy et al., 2020)) — 14.154 focus
Hera of the golden throne looked down as she stood upon a peak of Olympus and her heart was gladdened at the sight of him [155] who was at once her brother and her brother-in-law, hurrying hither and thither amid the fighting. Then she turned her eyes to Zeus as he sat on the topmost crests of many-fountained Ida, and loathed him. She set herself to think how she might trick his thinking, [160] and in the end she deemed that it would be best for her to go to Ida and array herself in rich attire, in the hope that Zeus might become enamored of her, and wish to embrace her. While he was thus engaged a sweet and careless sleep might be made [165] to steal over his eyes and senses.
English (William Cullen Bryant, 1870) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (William Cullen Bryant, 1870)) — 14.154 focus
Now, Juno of the golden throne beheld
English (Thomas Hobbes, 1667, ed. Molesworth 1843) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Thomas Hobbes, 1667, ed. Molesworth 1843)) — 14.154 focus
English (George Chapman, 1611, ed. Hooper 1857) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (George Chapman, 1611, ed. Hooper 1857)) — 14.154 focus
English (William Cowper, 1791, ed. Southey) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (William Cowper, 1791, ed. Southey)) — 14.154 focus
English (F. W. Newman, 1856) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (F. W. Newman, 1856)) — 14 focus

New Alexandria Commentaries

Douglas Frame

evidence for the description of D.B. Monro’s understanding of the verb anései, as a compound verb meaning “to place” or “set upon”

source

in the context of analyzing the anomaly of Apollo’s journey from Olympus in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo

source
Gregory Nagy

The momentum of the attacking Trojan warriors gets stalled here, since Hērā interrupts the ongoing Plan of Zeus. The goddess seduces the god, and the setting for their divine sexual encounter is the spectacular landscape of Mount Ida, which is the private abode of the thundering almighty. During the tryst of the god and the goddess, the Achaeans regain the upper hand in the fighting. But this new momentum is soon headed for a downturn. The divine interruption, despite all its cosmic sexual energy, becomes retrospectively a mere interlude in the narrative arc of the Iliad—once the tryst is over and the Plan of Zeus resumes its relentless course of action.

draft js image errorJuno and Jupiter. Detail from “Loves of the Gods,” fresco by Annibale Carracci (1560–1609). Annibale Carracci [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carracci_-_Jupiter_et_Junon.jpeg.

source

As Hērā readies herself for her sexual encounter with Zeus, her cosmetic self-adornment is pictured here as a cosmic ‘arrangement’, kosmos, of beauty.

source

Janko’s 1992:180 comments on the verses and GN’s comments on them

source

Hērā’s wording here rationalizes her initiating a sexual encounter with Zeus. The idea of such an encounter is conventionally known as hieros gamos—in the sense of ‘sacred sexual intercourse’ (as in Theocritus 17.131). From the dramatic standpoint of the immediate narrative context, Hērā is making up what she is saying; in the comments that follow, however, it is argued that the wording of the goddess here derives from genuine theogonic traditions centering on the idea of sacred intercourse as an act of cosmogonic creation.

source

Highlighted in the comments so far on the cosmic river Ōkeanos is the role of this world-encircling fresh-water stream as a boundary delimiting light from darkness, wakefulness from sleep, life from death. Such delimitations, as we have seen, are elaborated poetically in contexts that picture the rising of the sun out of the waters of the Ōkeanos at sunrise—after its setting into these same waters at sunset. See the comments on I.07.421–423 and I.08.485–486. And now, in the context of a scene that evokes the themes of hieros gamos ‘sacred sexual intercourse’, we find that the role of Ōkeanos evokes also the themes of theogony and cosmogony. These themes are conveyed by wording that points to the role of Ōkeanos as a personified god who combines with a personified goddess Tēthus in prototypically initiating a genesis ‘generating’ of gods, as we see here at I.14.201, and even a genesis ‘generating’ of all things, as we will see at I.14.245–246–246a.

source

The goddess Hērā promises to commission the making of a beautiful thronos ‘throne’, I.14.238. The maker will be the divine artisan Hephaistos, son of Hērā, I.14.239–240. This throne made by the god will be aphthito- ‘imperishable’, and this imperishability will last aiei ‘forever’, I.14.238. Also, this throne will be khrūseo- ‘golden’, I.14.239. On the combination of aphthito- ‘imperishable’ and khrūseo- ‘golden’ in symbolizing the artificial continuum of immortality, see BA 179. The Greek combination of the adjective áphthito- ‘imperishable’ with the adverb aieí ‘always’ here is comparable to the Indic combination of the adjective ákṣita- ‘imperishable’ with the adjective viśvā́yur ‘lasting for all ages’ at Rig-Veda 1.9.7: the form viśvā́yur is the neuter of viśvā́yus-, agreeing with śrávas ‘glory, fame’. (Full argumentation in GMP 123–126 for interpreting viśvā́yur as a neuter and not masculine adjective in this context: it goes with śrávas ‘glory, fame’ and not, as some have argued, with the name of the god Indra.) The element ā́yus- in this Indic form is cognate with Greek aiṓn ‘life-force, lifetime’, the original locative singular of which became the adverb aieí, meaning ‘forever’. See the note on I.01.052. The formulaic combination áphthiton aieí is attested elsewhere as well in Homeric diction, at I.02.046 and at I.02.186. And there is even an instance of the combination kléos áphthiton aieí ‘a glory that is imperishable forever’ in an archaic piece of poetry inscribed in the seventh century BCE: κλεFος απθιτον αιFει, DGE no. 316. This combination brings us back to the wording κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται = kléos áphthiton éstai ‘there will be an imperishable glory’ at I.09.413. To be noted again is the parallelism between the Greek combination of the adjective áphthiton ‘imperishable’ with the noun kléos ‘glory, fame’ at I.09.413 and the Indic combination of the adjective ákṣita- ‘imperishable’ with the noun śrávas ‘glory, fame’ at Rig-Veda 1.9.7 (full argumentation in GMP 123–126).

source

Our source for this set of verses, I.14.245–246–246a, is Plutarch On the face in the moon 938d, whose narrative provides a context for including verse 246a in such a set. Without the testimony of Plutarch, we would not know about this verse, since it does not survive in the medieval manuscript tradition. But it had survived, as we know from Plutarch, in the text of the Homeric Iliad as edited by Crates of Mallos, Director of the Library of Pergamon (see under Crates in the inventory of Words and Ideas). In that text, verse 246 of Iliad 14 was followed by another verse, labeled as 246a in modern editions:

I.14.246 Ὠκεανός, ὅσπερ γένεσις πάντεσσι τέτυκται

I.14.246a ἀνδράσιν ἠδὲ θεοῖς, πλείστην <τ᾿> ἐπὶ γαῖαν ἵησιν

Taken together, these verses can be translated this way:

I.14.246 … Ōkeanos, who has been fashioned as genesis for all

I.14.246a men and gods, and he flows over the Earth in all her fullness.

What is said about Ōkeanos in the “plus-verse” I.14.246a as attested here by Crates is closely related to what we find in poetic traditions attributed to Orpheus. The existence of such Orphic traditions is clearly attested in relevant quotations and paraphrases made by Plato, especially in Cratylus 402a-c regarding the role of Ōkeanos as a primordial source of creation. Details in HPC 2§§128–147. As for Crates (F 20 ed. Broggiato 2001), he cited the “plus verse” I.14.246a as evidence in arguing for his theory that the Ōkeanos was a salt-water Ocean covering a spherical Earth. For Crates, then, these verses at I.14.245–246–246a about the Ōkeanos were an essential part of an allegory about the cosmos. According to this theory of Crates, the earth was a sphere, located at the center of a universe that was likewise spherical. Crates evidently interpreted in a modernizing sense the expression at I.14.246a: ‘[which flows] over most of the earth’ (πλείστην … ἐπὶ γαῖαν). In other words, the salt-water ocean covers most of the spherical Earth. This theory was opposed by Aristarchus, Director of the Library of Alexandria (see under Aristarchus in the inventory of Words and Ideas), who viewed the Homeric Ōkeanos as a fresh-water river surrounding an Earth that is circular and flat (HC 2§150). See further my comment at HC 2§153 about this dispute between Crates and Aristarchus. What was at stake, as I say in my comment there, was no trivial matter. In this case, in fact, the stakes were of cosmic proportions. Both sides of the dispute were attempting to establish their theories of the cosmos by way of deciding the rightness or wrongness of different variants in the text of Homer. I find it ironic, I went on to say, that I am describing this ancient state of affairs in an era when it appears fashionable to dismiss Homeric textual variations as “trivial,” “banal,” and even “boring.” There will be more to say in my comment on I.18.478–609, in the context of the Shield of Achilles in Iliad 18, about the conceptualization of Ōkeanos as some primordial work of art as suggested by the verb tetuktai (τέτυκται) ‘has been fashioned’ here at I.14:244. For more on the narrative that is taking shape at I.14.245–246–246a, see the comment on I.14.301–302.

source

the Homerus Auctus as not an editorial conflation of incompatible texts but as a preedited corpus of undifferentiated oral traditions that later became differentiated into distinct textual traditions

source
Leonard Muellner

analysis of the use of eukhesthai in sacral contexts (formulas concluding prayers) and deletion of the verb in parallel expressions in secular contexts

source
Richard Martin

When Hera describes her plan to reconcile Okeanos and Tethys she uses the vocabulary of epea: "If persuading them with words (epeessi paraipepithousa) in the dear heart I might manage to unite them in affection" (14.208-10). To carry out Hera's project, Aphrodite grants her parphasis, the sort of speech characterized as "soft," "gentle," and "sweet." It is personal appeal, not authoritative performance, that generates speech denoted as epea (Martin 1993:38).

source

Aphrodite's host formula when addressing her visitor Hera at 14.195-96—auda ho ti phroneeis; telesai de me thumos anōgen / ei dunamai telesai ge kai ei tetelesmenon estin—provides a model for Achilles' words at 9.310. The same couplet is addressed by Hephaistos to Thetis at the start of another visit type-scene (18.426-27). In this formulaic opening, the negative element ("do not conceal") is omitted, perhaps because gods are assumed to speak truthfully to each other; in addition, there is a different focus, on the speaker's willingness to complete the action which the addressee has in mind. The verb phroneō occurs in the same slot in 9.310 as phroneeis in the formulaic lines, and the second half of 9.310 reproduces, with slight changes, the second half of the second line in the formulaic couplet used by the hosts. Achilles' use of this host formula is deviant: instead of saying "speak what you think and I shall fulfill it," Achilles reflects back on himself—"I must deny the offer in the way that I think and the way it will be fulfilled." This conglomeration of motives—the perfect host, the man in crisis who must speak his refusal—produces the expanded, seemingly incoherent opening to Achilles' great reply (Martin 1993:210-12).

For the splitting expansion at 9.310-314 and the model from Zeus' rebuke to Ares (5.889-90), see the comment on Iliad 9.310-314.

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

source