allan, william_divine justice and cosmic order in early greek epic_2006_jhs, 126, pp. 1-35

7/28/2019 Allan, William_Divine Justice and Cosmic Order in Early Greek Epic_2006_JHS, 126, Pp. 1-35

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/allan-williamdivine-justice-and-cosmic-order-in-early-greek-epic2006jhs 1/36

Divine Justice and Cosmic Order in Early Greek EpicAuthor(s): William AllanReviewed work(s):Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 126 (2006), pp. 1-35

Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30033397 .

Accessed: 27/03/2012 02:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenic

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30033397?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/30033397?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenic



Journalof Hellenic Studies 126 (2006) 1- 35

DIVINEJUSTICEAND COSMICORDERIN EARLYGREEKEPIC*

"o0Cv oxtct pya e oi g6iCHmap.sOPdh.t1.3v,&XXx iicirjviouotaia xio~

m.py'd.vp14ov."orn. Od. 14.83-4

Abstract: This articleexamines the ethical andtheologicaluniverse of the Homericepics, and shows that the patternsof humanand divinejusticewhich theydeployare also to be foundthroughouthe widercorpusof earlyGreek hexa-

meterpoetry. Althoughmost scholarscontinueto stress the differencesbetween the Iliad andOdysseywithregard o

divinejustice, these come not (as is often alleged) fromany change in the gods themselves but from the Odyssey's

peculiarnarrative tructure,with its focus on one hero and his main divinepatronand foe. Indeed,the action of the

Iliad embodies a system of normsandpunishments hat is no differentfrom that of the Odyssey. Values such asjus-tice areshown to be sociallyconstituted n eachepic on both the divine and humanplanes,and eachlevel, it is argued,

displaysnot only a hierarchyof power(andthe resulting ensions),but also a structureof authority.In addition, he

presentation f thegods in the wider hexametercorpusof Hesiod,the Epic Cycle and the HomericHymnsis analysed,

revealinga remarkably oherenttradition n which the possibilityof divine conflict is combined with an underlying

cosmic order. Finally,considerationof Near Easternmyths relatingcosmic order o justice bringsout the distinctive-ness of the Greeksystem as a whole and,in particular, f the way it uses the divine societyunderZeus'sauthorityas

a comprehensiveexplanatorymodel of the world.

IT was once popularto tracein early Greekthoughta fundamental hangein beliefs about the

natureand values of the gods. The resultingculturalhistorydetected a moral 'progress' n the

evolutionof earlyGreek literaturetself, from the amoralpowersof the Iliad, through he godsof the Odysseywith theirconcernforrighteousconduct,to the moralcertaintiesof the Hesiodic

Zeus. This model was exploded many years ago by Hugh Lloyd-Jones n TheJustice ofZeus.1

Nevertheless,it remains a commonplaceof Homericscholarship hatthe Iliad andOdysseydif-

fer in their presentationof the gods, especially with regardto divine justice. Thus, in his

Introduction o themajormodemrnommentaryon the Odyssey,Alfred Heubeckargues hat 'Zeus

himselfhas changed n thepoet'svision. His actions are no longerdirectedby irrationalmpuls-es and emotions, and he no longerhas any need to boast of his superiorpower ... Withper-

ceptivenessand wisdom Zeus now directs the fate of the world accordingto moralprinciples,which alone create and preserveorder. The father of the gods has only a little way to go to

become thejust rulerof the world.'2 Indeed,Lloyd-Joneshimself, despitehis demolitionof the

developmentalmodel of divinejustice, acceptsthat the Odyssey's 'theology is in some impor-tantways differentfrom that of the Iliad', and he remarksuponthe 'unquestionabledifference

between the moral climate of the two Homericpoems'.3 By contrast,this article will aim to

show thatthe two poems share the same moral andtheologicaluniverseand, furthermore,hat

the patternsof human and divinejustice which they deploy are also to be foundthroughouthe

widercorpusof earlyGreek hexameterpoetry.4PartI argues hat divinejustice is not absent rom theIliad. The stillpopularnotion of amoral

gods is shown to be flawed: the gods have human favourites and are sensitive to theirhonour,but that does not make them 'amoral'. Morality s essentiallya systemof norms andprotocols

governingrelationshipsbetweenindividuals,and a similarsystemis shown to applyon both the

* TheIliad andOdysseyare cited from the editions of

M.L.West,Homerus:Ilias (2 vols, Stuttgart,Leipzigand

Munich 1998-2000) and H. van Thiel, Homeri Odyssea

(Hildesheim 1991). I am indebted to Douglas Cairns,Andrew Ford, Adrian Kelly, Mary Lefkowitz, Hugh

Lloyd-Jones,Ruth Scodel and the journal'stwo anony-mous refereesformuchhelpfuldiscussion andadvice.

1Lloyd-Jones(1983), firstpublished n 1971.2 Heubeck(1988) 23.

3 Lloyd-Jones 1983) 28, 30.

4 Kullmann(1985) is perhapsthe fullest expositionthus far of the Iliad andOdyssey's alleged differencesin

their depiction of the relationshipsbetween gods andmortals. He seeks to establish 'theincompatibilityof the

religious conceptionsof the two epics' (p. 14). Thepres-ent article,however,arguesnot only for theircompatibil-

ity but also for their essentialsimilarity.



2 WILLIAM ALLAN

divine and human levels. The action of the Iliad in fact embodies a system of social norms and

punishments that is no different from that of the Odyssey. Part II accordingly turns to the

Odysseyandchallengestheprevalent dea that it represents, o use Heubeck'sterms,an 'ethical

transformation of the gods'.5 Both poems are marked by divine interventions and favourites, so

that to see the Odyssey as dominated by morally unambiguous and distanced gods is mistaken:

the gods too are part of human suffering, as in the Iliad, and it is not merely humans who are to

blame. (As we shall see, Zeus's openingspeech in the Odysseyis often misunderstood n that

respect.) The similaritiesbetween the poemswith regard o divinejustice will be detailed:each

exploresthe gods' self-interest and theirclashingwills, and both do so within the overarching

systemof Zeus's authority.But despitetheirsimilarities, t is also possible to show,by treatingthe poems individually,how each epic is tryingin its own way to deepenthe audience's con-

ceptionof divinejustice. Forwhile eachpoem reflectswhat one mightcall the 'simple'view -

namely,that humanwrongswill be punishedmore or less immediatelyby the gods - they also

explore the complexities andproblemsinherent n such an account of divinejustice. PartIIItracessimilarpatternsof divine and human nteractionn the wider hexametercorpusof Hesiod,

the Epic Cycle and the HomericHymns,where(as in the Iliad and the Odyssey)the gods' self-

interestandclashingwills function within the overarching ystem of Zeus's authority.6

I

(a) Iliad versusOdyssey?Itremainsa standard iew of the Homericepics that the gods of theIliad, in contrast o those of

the Odyssey,are little interested n humanmorality. A recent treatmentof the Homeric gods

speaks of 'ethical considerations,which thoughnot absent from the Iliad are not a majorcon-

cern of its Gods'.7 Another scholar claims that 'The reader who ... looks in the Iliad for theod-

icy will be disappointed. The gods are notjust in any ordinary ense of the word.'s Yet, as we

shallsee, close attention o the text shows that the gods areintimatelyconcernedwithmattersof

rightandwrong throughout he Iliad. E.R. Dodds famouslyfound 'no indicationin the narra-

tive of the Iliad that Zeus is concerned withjustice as such'.9 However,despite Lloyd-Jones's

compelling criticismsof this view,'0Ohe oppositionbetween divine frivolity(Iliad)and concern

forjustice (Odyssey)persists. The centralaim of thispaperis to suggestthat such a dichotomyis mistaken,since it neglects the ways in which the narrativeof the Iliad itself (andnot merely

thepious appealsof its characters)displaysa basic patternof justice (definedas a coherentsys-

tem of social norms andsanctions),and,conversely, exaggerates he extentto which the gods of

the Odyssey embodya more 'advanced' heodicy."A closer analysisreveals a single and consistentform of divinejustice sharedby both epics.

Yet far fromendorsinga simple model of justice where the good arerewardedandthe wickedpunished(a patternoftenassignedto the Odyssey),eachpoem shows a morecomplex systemof

norms andpunishments n actionandexplores its disturbing mplicationsfor the humanagents

involved. Both the Iliad and the Odysseyare, therefore, heologically challengingworks since

each shows the simple model of divinejustice to be in variousways bothproblematicand naive.

5 Heubeck(1988) 23.6 Rosen (1997) 484 rightlynotes that the Works nd

Days is not unique in its concern with8i"r:

'In the

broadestsense, the Iliad andOdyssey ell one grandstory

about how dike operatesthroughoutall stages of humanrelations, from the interpersonalto the international.'

However,he does not show how this works in any detailin the texts.

7 Kearns(2004) 67.8 Mueller(1984) 146.

9 Dodds(1951) 32.

o10loyd-Jones(1983) 1-7.11An alternativemodel is offered by Winterbottom

(1989) esp. 33, 40, who challengesthe gods' concern for

justice in both epics, calling them 'amoral'in the Iliadand thenseekingto extendthis description o the gods of

theOdyssey. It will be arguedhere,by contrast, hatthere

is a coherentsystem of divine (andhuman)6irm in both

epics and that it is no stronger n the Odysseythan in the

Iliad.



DIVINE JUSTICEAND COSMICORDER IN EARLYGREEKEPIC 3

Moreover, he form of justice thatis shownto regulatethe world of thepoems is simultaneous-

ly cosmic andpersonal:cosmic in thatit embracesdivine as well as humansociety and is con-

nected to the maintenanceof order on both levels; personal(andthereforevolatile) in thatit is

intended to control individual conduct and self-interest (whether of gods or humans) and

dependsfor its ultimate sanctionon the personal authorityof Zeus himself.

(b) Trojanwrongs

Though heIliadpoet is less proneto moral udgementsthanthenarrator f the Odyssey,he nev-erthelessshapeshis narrative o that a clear patternof norms and consequences emerges. He

deliberatelyncludes sceneswhichemphasize heTrojans' 61e n startingandprolonging he war

and theirculpable misjudgementsduring t. Yetunlike the Odyssey,whereonly one of the suit-

ors, Amphinomus, is presentedin any detail as a sympathetic figure (see II(h) below), the

Trojanpeople are seen to sufferdisproportionatelyor the errorsof their leaders,makingtheir

destruction,as an expressionof divine justice, the more disturbing. The first of such scenes

comesjust after the duel between ParisandMenelaus. As Helen and Parisgo to bed with each

other,Parisrecalls their first sexual encounter:

6chhe 6i1plX~trIlp tpnEioJLev101),7dXp7cO) CotE i (O& y' (0 pp~v(X dlPKc~lhZ lfEV,

oi~6'6-reoe:irp~yrovaKE~&xijiovo5 i~px~tcvij

~icXheovir~i~cx;~av rovtoir~~potr~Eroov,v1:joo6' i~vKpavxiji~giyv cp~XtiClt~ioA Vtijrooiv ~pxgcdaci jir yhu~ict YirCLpo;xiPEi"Ii. 3.441-6)

'But come - let us take ourpleasurein the bed of love. For neverbefore has desire so enfoldedmy

mind,not even whenI firstsnatched

you awayfrom

lovelyLacedaemonand sailed off with

you in myseafaringships,andsleptwithyou in thebed of love on the island of Cranae thatwas nothingto how

I desireyou now and sweet longing seizes me.'

The original offence, the abduction of Helen, is re-enacted within the narrative. Menelaus links

this crime to the eventual destruction of the Trojans:

"~iXhr1;JAVXO)J3rltE K(XLC'iXroS013)K 6ZE

iiv Ejie Xopriaixoee,aXKW.UVCS, oj~ 1&ti.L~j

Ziiv6; ~p4PIPPrZO Xritii~v ~6&~ioxtr~IjVv

oYji~oKo13PlGilV ~ihXoov KO(iK~il

XtO7t~oXX~

'There's o lackof outrage ndshameonyourpart thatoutrage oudidme,youshameless itches,with no fear n yourhearts ortheharshangerof loud-thunderingeus,godof host andguest,whowill oneday destroy our oftycity. Foryoumadeoff withmyweddedwifeandmanypossessionsbesides, orno reason tall,sinceyouweregivena friendlywelcomebyher.'

Menelaus'speechhas been describedas 'a pictureof menattributingo gods the enforcementoflaws of whichthosegods areshown to be quiteunaware'.12Yetthe limitedperspectiveof human

characters uch as Menelaus is confirmedby the wider narrativeof Troy's fall which is sanc-

tionedby Zeus himself (cf I(c)). Nor is it solely the Greekswho disapproveof Paris'actions:Hector describes them as worthy of stoning (II. 3.56-7) and wishes he would die at once

(6.281-2), while the narratordescribes the ships that took Paris to Spartaas 'the source of

12Winterbottom1989)33.



4 WILLIAMALLAN

evils' (OpsnsKex6oug)or all the Trojansand for himself, 'since he knew nothing of the gods'decrees' (&pXEKdXKog);,

OoPpaxtxta 5.63-4).13The Iliad's patternof reciprocal ustice is seen most clearlyin thepoet's decision to include,

and to elaborateat great length,the accountof the oath-breakingn Book 4 and Priam's disas-

trous reactionto it in Book 7. As the head of his community,Priam swears the oath on the

Trojans'behalf (3.105-10, 250-2). Following a solemn sacrifice both the Achaeans and the

Trojanscall uponZeus to punishthe side thatbreaks he oath(3.298-301).14Yetdespitethe truce

ratifiedby the oath, the TrojanPandarusattemptsto kill Menelaus,and his crime serves as a

recapitulation f Trojanguilt. Of course,Athena andHera have promoted his goal with Zeus's

consent (4.64-73), but the familiarepic principleof 'double motivation' means that Pandarus'

liabilityis not diminished: he is tempted,not compelledto shoot his arrowat Menelaus;he is

"foolish"' 4.104).15Nor does it efface the guilt of theTrojans,which is underlinedby the deci-

sion of Pandarus' omrades o hide himwith their shields from theeyes of the Greeksas he pre-

pares to shoot (4.113-15). WhenAgamemnonsays that Troy will pay for this treacheryand

invokes Zeus as the protectorof oaths (4.155-68; cf 4.235-6),16 hereis certainlyan ironic dis-

junctionbetween his perspective(sharedby all theAchaeans,cf 4.268-71) andthatof the audi-

ence, since they know thatZeus, far from enforcingthe oath in this case, has consentedto its

being broken. Scholarsfocus on this aspectrepeatedly,17ndin doing so often overlookthe fact

that Zeus sanctions the oath-breakingor an ulteriorpurpose,and one less exclusively personalthan thatof Hera andAthena,who are eagerto avenge the Judgementof Paris(cf cI(f)). For

besides his personaldebtto Thetis and his promiseto honourher son's wishes by favouringthe

Trojans n battle(1.394-412, 503-30), Zeus has a further easonto encourage hebreakingof the

truce:the wider narrative ndicatesthat he approvesof Troy'sfall, both because of the Trojans'errorsand because it is partof a largercosmic order which is his to enforce.18Thus Hera and

Athena'spersonalhatredof Troyoperateswithina largermoral framework hat extendsthrough-out the narrativeand the universe it creates.19

TheTrojans' esponsibility or the broken ruce s compoundedby Priam'spersonalfailureto

returnHelen after the duel. The advice given by 'wise Antenor'not only constitutesan admis-

sion of Trojanguiltbut also highlightsPriam's mminentmisjudgement:20

13Cf Kirk (1990) 61 ad loc. 'The scholia invoked

two differentpropheciesof doom(if Paris wentoverseas,or if the Trojanspursuedseafaring) o give a specialref-

erence to "he knew nothing of the divine decrees" -

which need mean no more thanhis ignoringthe rules of

hospitality.'Yet thenarrator'stress on the divineoriginsof these social normsis itself significant.

14It is also made clearthat both Achaeans and rank-

and-file Trojanswant Paris to lose the duel (3.320-3).TheTrojansall hated Paris'like black death'(3.454).

15Cairns(2001a) 16.16 Oathsare central nstruments fjustice in Homeric

(and historicalGreek) society, but this is obscured bythose who deny the importanceof justice in the Iliad, as

does Havelock (1978) 123-92, a strongsupporterof the

developmental model; cf esp. 'Between Greeks and

Trojans,"justice" annotexist, only the inactionof peace

or the activityof war' (p. 138).17Cf, e.g., Zanker (1994) 7: 'But Agamemnon's

view of Zeus'justice is notoriouslyout of kilterwith the

god's real attitudeat this juncture,for he is ambivalent

andaloof, at least as faras the oath is concerned.'18As we shall see (cf e1(c)),Zeus must takethought

for a world-order hat is not merely a matterof his own

subjectivepreferences,as when, for example,he realizes

that he must relinquish the idea of saving his son

Sarpedon if that world-order is to remain intact (II.

16.431-61).19Pandarus he truce-breakers killed by Diomedes,

the Iliad's exemplaryGreekwarrior for Diomedes' rOle

in his death, see Andersen (1978) 53-7), and Athena

guides his spearso that it cuts off Pandarus' ongue (II.

5.290-6). The audience will naturallyview Pandarus'

death as punishmentfor his crime; the moral emergesfrom the story and there is no need of a speech from

eithera hero or Zeus himself to point it out. Diomedes,

however, does go on to interpret he Trojans'refusalto

hand overHelen,indefianceof their oath:yvootbv , Kc'

Setiphut' ('It is obvious- even avery fool can see

it - that now the coils of destructionhave been fastenedonto the Trojans',7.401-2).

20Antenor has alreadybeen characterizedas a goodadviserin his accountof OdysseusandMenelaus' earlier

embassy to Troy,when he gave the Greeks hospitalityand formed a careful evaluationof their skills as orators



DIVINEJUSTICEAND COSMICORDERIN EARLYGREEKEPIC 5

86Co0ievApEpi8ttovYv.

viv 8'6ptta

i ncto

eao61,tvot paxrp6eoa"

-r ot vi zt K~pitov ijitv

hiogat KzaehcoOc~t,'vxpih~ oiEv b&E." (II. 7.350-3)

'Comeonnow, etusgive ArgiveHelenandall herpossessionswithherto thesons ofAtreusotakeaway.Nowwe are ighting fter heating verourswornoaths; o Ido not seeanygoodoutcome orus,unlesswe do as I say.'

When Parisdeclares himself willing to returnonly the goods taken from Sparta yuvacKaLitv

o0Kduo1&bao7.363), Priam'scomplicityis culpable. The TrojanheraldIdaeus,chargedwith

relaying the response of the Trojan&yopil,which is no more than the gii)o; 'AX6v6vioto(3.374, 388), underlines he king's egregiouserror n denyinghis son's guilt:

"wrijtaxtpiv, 6o' 'AXigavipo;KoiXtj; Avi ivoAv

irlyeroTpoirjv' - 6og piv 6SpXX'dxofoOoat -

xt6vt' O,t 66jievat,Ka At' o1KOOCvX' ktOrivat.Ko)ptiyrlv6'

,XoyovMevrAoi

Klv CijLOtOot prlotvG6ostvy

~!~iv Tp(iSgy7

KIXovrat." (II.7.389-93)

'ThepossessionshatAlexanderroughtnhishollowships oTroy if onlyhehaddiedbefore hat!- alltheseheis willing ogivebackand oaddyetmore romhis ownstores. But heweddedwife of

gloriousMenelaus esayshe will notgiveback,houghheTrojansn facturgehim o dopreciselyhat.'

It could not be clearer hat Priamhas madea disastrousmistake,allowingParisto defy the oath

anddoing so in the face of populardisapproval.21No less thanParis,Priam is responsiblefor

the destructionof Troy,his city. He acts wrongly,and he - andeveryoneelse who dependson

him- must suffer the consequences.22As the poem progresses there are several more indications of Trojandeceit. During

Agamemnon'smajoraristeia in Book 11he comes upontwo sons of Antimachus,

Xpubv'AhE,vrpoto

66E8Eypvo;,dya& 6&ip,oi)i E'iacTXa'EXViv86gievaoav8e&tMEvEX6W1..II. 11.123-5)

who inexpectationf goldfromAlexander,plendid ifts,wasmostopposedogivingHelenback ofair-hairedMenelaus.

Paris'briberyof his fellow Trojansbrings disgraceon his entirecommunity,butAntimachus'own conductemergesas particularly lameworthy, or as Agamemnonsays:

"cEirlv6i1

'Avttglyoto &iiPpovog iAtE;g trov,i;q ot' Avi

Tpdxov &yopiptMcv,aov

ivoiyev,

yyesirlv,i06voa

otbvd6vzti~ot '06uoi ,

aWOOKa'aK,'cEivattj6'tEV

&NJ'Axato~G,

vivti:v

6i1 oi rtaxp6;&xEtraEroiae Xt3riv."(//. 11.138-42)

(3.203-24). The audiencemay also have known of the

story (attested in Sophocles' Antenoridae, cf Strabo

13.1.53; Soph. fr. 11 Radt) that Antenor's family wassparedat the fall of Troy (cf Pind.Pyth. 5.83-5). If so,

they may have construedit as Antenor'srewardfor hiswise advice herein favour of the Greeks.

21Priammayalso be faultedfor notremainingon thebattlefieldto deal himself with the outcomeof the duel.

Thenarrator rawsattention o his absence(3.304-9).22 Onerecalls Hector'sprediction 6.448-9): (EoXtI

i,apZt'v

xvot'6Xd)it "IoItogpil IKaIHpfaxog Kat

,abg i3pjtLeChi,o Iptduoto('The day will come when

sacred Ilios will be destroyed,andPriam,andthe peopleof Priamof the fine ash spear').



6 WILLIAM ALLAN

'If you are indeed the sons of wise Antimachus,who once in the Trojanassembly,when Menelaushad

come on an embassywithgodlike Odysseus, urged hem to kill him on the spotand not let himgo back

to theAchaeans,now you will pay for yourfather's abominableoutrage.'

Antimachus' reception of the embassy contrasts strongly with that of Antenor (cf n.20), but the

pattern of Trojan crimes calling forth punishment is re-enforced. Agamemnon kills Antimachus'

sons, one of them in a peculiarly brutal manner:

'I8Iur6oXov'&i6pooe .

ivocuxcaC

0c0Sv(ptIEV,

o;Lpov ' ico AocEZ&Eicu&Voeaot 6t' bpiLo. (II. 11.145-7)

Hippolochuseaptdown,andhimhe killedon theground, licingoff his arms ndheadwithhissword,andsenthimrolling hroughhethrongike a log.23

The patternof Trojandeceit andpunishment s also shown to extend back beyond the current

generation. Poseidon,puzzled by Apollo's continuing support or the Trojans,reminds him of

how Laomedonhad cheatedthem both of properpaymentaftertheybuilt a wall aroundTroyand

tended theking'scattle(21.441-57). ThoughPoseidon sent a sea-monster o punishtheTrojans,Heraclesdestroyedit, yet he in turn was defraudedof his rewardby Laomedon24 nd took his

revenge by sacking Troy (5.648-51, 20.144-8). Nevertheless,Poseidon's anger against Troyremainsunappeased, o that 'here we have a case of divineanger extendingover more than one

generation'.25The descendantsof Laomedonpay for his crimes as well as theirown, and the

narrative hows that divinejustice is not always instantaneous,an idea that is often treatedas if

it first surfaced n Hesiod and Solon (e.g. Hes. W&D282-4; Solonfr. 13.29-32 W).26

(c) Zeus and the all of TroyIntryingto determineZeus'sown attitude o Troy,scholars are often misledby the fact thatZeus

nowhere expresses explicit anger at the city or happiness at its fall. Thus, with regardto

Agamemnon's predictionthat Troy will be destroyed by Zeus in anger at the Trojans'deceit

(4.160-8), a recentdiscussion observes that 'we, unlikeAgamemnon,can see Zeus's "real"atti-

tude. When this Zeus bringsabout the fall of Troyit will be with sorrowand not with righteous

indignation.'27Yet such a formulationrisksconfusingtwo very different deas, for Zeus's pre-sumedfeelings of pity at the city's destructionand his conviction thatthe fall of Troyis rightare

not mutuallyexclusive. Zeus speakson one occasion as if he wants to save Troy,but his real

motive is evidentlyto annoyHeraandAthena and so facilitatethebreakingof the truce(4.5-19).He also makesclearin the same contexthis strongaffection for the Trojans,becausethey offer

him lavish sacrifices(4.44-9), but this does not change the fact that he approvesof Troy'sfall.

23 There are nine fatal armwounds in the Iliad (seethe tables in Saunders 2004) 14-15), but this is the onlytime in the poem that a corpseis mutilatedby having its

arms cut off. The act is in line with Agamemnon's

extremelyviolent aristeia (cf Segal (1971) 10, 20), but

also serves to underlinehis fury at the treacheryof the

Trojans.

24 Laomedon s saidto have beendeceived himselfbyAnchises,who secretlybred his mares with Laomedon's

outstandinghorses (5.265-72). Diomedescaptures heir

offspringwhen he defeatsAeneas(5.319-27).25 Lloyd-Jones (2002) 2. Hector's killing of his

grandson Amphimachus gives Poseidon an additional

reason to be furious with the Trojans;cf 13.185-209,

ending otpuvov AavaoiS, Tpd~eot &5KiGE'~EZXEv('[Poseidon] urged on the Danaans,and was preparingdisasterfor the Trojans').

26 Kullmann(1985) 20 n.45, for example, remarks:

'It is interesting o see how the theodicdeconceptof the

Odysseyis mitigated n Hesiod and Solon. Both authors

allow that thejustice of the gods is not always executedimmediately.' Yet this is doubly misleading, since it

posits a false dichotomy between the Iliad and the

Odyssey,and overlooks the presence of delayed punish-ment in the Iliad itself.

27 Kearns(2004) 69 n.14.



DIVINE JUSTICEAND COSMICORDERIN EARLYGREEKEPIC 7

Thusone scholar seeks to connectthe fact that '[Zeus]makesno attempt o conceal his love of

Troy'with the god's alleged 'ambivalence'aboutthepunishmentof the oath-breakers.28 et this

is to create a false opposition,since Zeus can love Troyand still thinkit rightthat theTrojansbe

punished. It is therefore rrelevant hatZeus does not express any happinessatTroy'sfall, since

his approval s not only implicit in the narrative tself29 but also integralto the largercosmic

orderof which Zeus himself is the anthropomorphicmanifestationand ultimateenforcer.

Thisemergesmostclearlyin Zeus'smajorprophecyconcerning hecourse of the war in Book

15. AddressingHera,he bids hertell Poseidon to stop aidingtheAchaeans,thencontinues:

""EKtop 6' 6tpAvrlotwiXrlv'

oi43o;'AEr6Apov,

taiot6' Lrpvorpotrntvo;, XrXlt 6'

o6vvowv

rovv&ktoCjiou 6' 6vbv vap, nbyxpAXiov

ro00 kyokeoxigpvo; KTEVeL EK-ropx6io; 'AxXrtie;.t"ItoviopkilotwvAdvair th oA ."

(II,.15.59-71)

<p0s37ovEsq' v vrluoi7cohuv.il'otnooaot

nl-qei6Eo3 'A~th~oS.

a 8' dvoz-ilost [v ta'tpov

H6~2po~ov" t bv 687VEEvs ypsi qx{St~o "Ewroo'Ihiou xJPOxTldPOteE,:ohEsigkkavt' ot{qo)qtobgCihhouS, LEsth' Zvlbv ~LaVapTr16vo ov"

tog i Xohxood~ClvoSsvE "E:topa 'i~oSAzt,Eag.to 8' iv tot irsetta 7cai~o5v xnaph 7qjv

aiiVkyt 2;XOtCtt 6taC1t;pSpkEiS i :' 'A~atoi

"Ihtov otini, i[otsv 'A~qvoirlS 8th [5ouhdg." (//. 15.59-71)

'And et PhoebusApollospurHector ntobattle,andbreathetrengthnto himagainandmakehim

forgethepains hatnowwearouthis heart.Lethimdrive heAchaeans ackagainwhenhehasraisedin thema cowardly anic o that heyflee and allamonghemany-benchedhipsofAchilles, on of

Peleus. AndAchilleswill sendouthiscompanion, atroclus;utgloriousHectorwill kill him withhisspearn frontof Ilios,once Patroclus asslaughtered anyof the otheryoung ightingmen,and

amonghemmyownson,godlikeSarpedon.EnragedorPatroclus,odlikeAchilleswill killHector.And from hat imeon I shallbringabouta counter-attackrom heships,constant ndcontinuous,

until theAchaeans take steepIlios through he designs of Athena.'

Zeus impels Hector to his death,knowing that this means the fall of Troy. Thus to doubtthat

Zeus approvesof Troy'sdestructionwould be to imply that he is not the most powerful god, a

point on which Zeus is especially sensitive (cf n.34), not least because cosmic ordercannot be

separated rom his power. Moreover,Zeus's desirethatTroyshould fall (15.69-71) is predicat-ed uponhis belief that it is right.

The importanceof cosmic order s highlightedwhen one considers the issue of fate,andpar-ticularly ts relation o the will of Zeus. In Book 8 Zeusprophesies o Herathe deathof Patroclus

and Achilles' subsequentreturn o the fighting, iA;y&P0ocpacr6vtxot ('for so it is decreed',

8.470-7). The formulation s vague, and intentionallyso, since the narratorhere reflects and

deploysa standardGreekconceptionof Zeus's will and his superiorknowledgeof futureevents

in which there is little differencebetween 'Zeus knows x' and 'x must be'. However,when Zeus

considerssparing SarpedonandHector,thougheach is ciAt epptoipkvov'orlt 'long since

doomedby fate', 16.441, 22.179), the narrator xploits the idea that there is a power beyond

28Zanker 1994) 7; cf n.17 above.29 Calchas had interpretedhe omen of the sparrows

and the petrifiedsnake at Aulis as a sign from Zeus that

Troy will fall in the tenth year of the war (2.323-32).Zeus respondsto Agamemnon's prayerfor help, in the

midst of unprecedentedTrojansuccess, by confirming

with a further omen that the Greek army will not bedefeated (8.242-52). The narratormarks the limits of

Zeus's assistance to the Trojans:he will honour Thetis

andAchilles' request,but will not destroythe Achaean

armytotally (13.347-50) - his will is thatTroyshall fall,but there is no need to spell it out.



8 WILLIAM ALLAN

Zeus's will, and does so in relation to cosmic order. For Zeus is warned (as he was when he con-

sidered sparing Troy itself) that such a decision will cause upheaval among the gods.30 While

not wishing to deny that Zeus's paternal love for Sarpedon and sympathy for Hector are impor-

tant features of his attitude to mortals,31these scenes are no less striking for the way they raise

the possibility that Zeus could bring about a radically different outcome, yet chooses not to

becauseit woulddestroyan orderof which he not only approves,but of which he is both the ulti-

mate guarantorand main beneficiary. Thus besides deploying a powerful narrative trope - things

do not normally happen 'contrary to fate', so to raise the very possibility creates tension - these

scenes reveal the poem's central tenets of cosmic order and human limits.32

However, Zeus's decision to maintain cosmic order is not only presented as re-enforcing

humanmortality.For as well as defininga hierarchyof gods andmortals,33t also marksout the

structure f power amongthegods themselves,since cosmic order s closely connectedthrough-

out earlyGreekthoughtto the status andpower of Zeus, which are in turn definedby his per-sonal relationswith othergods. No less thanHesiod, the Homericepics reflect the fact that the

evolution of the cosmos is a violentprocess,34 nd that its maintenancemay involve furthervio-

lence or at least the threatof it.35The stabilityof the universe rests thereforeupon a balance of

powerthat is vulnerable o the turbulenceof competingdivine wills. Yet the structuring f the

Olympiansas a divine familycreatesa hierarchyof powerthatgoes some way to resolvingthe

rivalriesof the gods. Poseidon is portrayedn the Iliad as especially sensitive abouthis status:

as the younger brother,he is careful to supportthe Achaeans covertly, lest he offend Zeus

(13.354-60). He insists indignantlyon his equalstatusas son of Kronos andRhea,with anequaldomain as his portion,and it takes Iris' tactfulwarningagainst sparkingZeus's angerto make

him leave the battlefield; yet he does so with a threat that failure to destroy Troy will create

massive disorder among the gods (15.184-217).36

(d) Divine and humanjustice as social practices

There is a striking isomorphism not only between the divine and human societies themselves

but also between their methods of determining and practising justice. Zeus's authority may be

challenged by other gods if they disagree with his decisions; and similarly Agamemnon's

temporal power rests upon his success as a leader, in which capacity he is subject to public and

30 The same phraseis used in each case (twice by

Hera, once by Athena):i~p6i'.

dip oit tot advreAnTXtvo~oIEVeooiiot ('Do it;but be sure we othergodswill not all approve',4.29, 16.443, 22.181).

31 Cf Erbse(1986) 288: 'Die M6glichkeit,sich der

goipa zu widersetzen,gesteht der Dichter seinem Zeus

also nur scheinbar zu, lediglich um die Tiefe seinesSchmerzes zu beleuchten.'

32 The most importanthuman limit being death, as

Hera makesexplicitwhen she warns of the consequencesof sparing Sarpedon: he othergods would seek to sparetheir own mortaloffspring(16.445-9); cf n.18.

33 This aspect is well expressed by Graziosi and

Haubold 2005)91: 'harmony mong hegods ... canonlybe ensured f all mortalsare abandonedo theirown fate'.

34 Cf. II. 1.396-406 (Hera, Poseidon and Athena's

attempt o deposeZeus), 14.200-10(OceanusandTethys,the parentsof the gods, quarrel;Zeus imprisonsKronos

beneaththe earth), 1.590-4, 14.256-62, 15.18-30 (Zeus,

angeredby the treatment f his son Heracles,hurledgodsfrom heaven and hangs Hera in the sky with anvils

attachedto her feet). If, as Slatkin (1991) argues, the

Iliad poet alludes to the myth thatZeus forced Thetis to

marryPeleus because of a prophecythat her son would

be strongerthan its father,this would be a peculiarly

striking example of Zeus's superior force directed

towards the maintenanceof his power (see, however,Edwards 1991) 196 on II. 18.429-35 and Cairns 2001a)46-7 for the alternativeexplanationof Thetis' enforced

marriage as due to her rejection of Zeus's sexual

advancesout of respect for Hera). In any case, Zeus's

potentialoverthrowby such a son (first securelyattested

in Pind.Isthm. 8.26-48 and[Aesch.]PV764-8, 907-27) is

partof a widerpatternof mythsdepictingZeus's control

over female deities and their fertility; cf III(b), esp.n.134.

35II.8.7-27 (Zeusthreatens o strikewith lightningor

throw into Tartarusany god who disobeys him; his

strengths supreme),8.397-408 (Zeuswill blastHeraandAthena from theirchariot f theycontinuetheir ourneyto

aid theAchaeans),15.14-17(Zeusthreatens o whipHera

if she continuesto deceive him).36 For the rble of divine rivalryand Zeus's authority

in the Odyssey,see II(c) below.




communalappraisal.37Moreover,the stabilityand regulationof humansociety as a whole isbased on a system of normswhich are thoughtto derive theirauthorityultimatelyfrom Zeushimself. Achilles speaksof Achaeans 'who give judgements andpreservethe ordinances hatcome fromZeus' (&tKo76Xot, oY' te6gitoc~a InpbgAtb; eipxzcat, II. 1.238-9), while Nestor

says to Agamemnonthat 'Zeus has entrusted o you the sceptreand the ordinances,to make

judgements for yourpeople' (Kai -cotZsb &yy,.tiXesvIa'i ap6v t' i18& tCitoag,6 ocptot]ovisktoa , 9.98-9). Thus Zeus is both source and patronof humanjustice, which is dis-

pensed bothby kings andby the elders of the community(for the latter,cf 18.503-8 and I(e)on 16.384-93).38Most importantly,ustice, like all formsof value, is socially constituted,both

amongthe gods andamongmortals.39

This emerges most clearly in the poem's depiction of the crucial mistakes made byAgamemnonandAchilles, whose decisionsare measuredagainstthe evaluativebeliefs of their

communityandfoundto be unjustified.40Moreover,bothmenmake a similarerror,pushingtheir

personalstatusanddemands orztj~il o thedetriment f thecommongood:41Agamemnon'scon-duct is repeatedlycriticizedfroma communalperspective(cf, e.g., 1.22-3, 161-2, 231, 275-84,

355-6, 9.109-11, 19.181-2), while Achilles' rejectionof Agamemnon'soffer of compensation,describedby Nestor as one that 'could no longerbe faulted'(86pa Ct o1)Kt' 6vo-&r &t6oig'AzXilif ivozt, 9.164), showshis obduracy o be bothselfish anddestructive,as Achilles effec-

tively subordinates he social processof reparationo his own will.42

(e) Judgementsandsanctions (humananddivine)

Thus, insofar as compensation,as an instrumentof justice, is definedby the evaluative beliefsandpracticesof his society,Achilles' attitude owards it reveals the limitations and dangersofhis self-obsession. Yet the factthatnorms of humanbehaviouraresocially constituteddoes not

37Zeus's supremestrength of whichhe threatening-ly boasts: 8.18-27) marks an important differencebetweengods and humanswhich thepoethas made a cat-

alyst of his plot, since Agamemnon'sauthoritydoes not

rest on his superior trengthorpre-eminenceas a fighter.Cf Nestor's words of restraintto Achilles: ei 8& cb

Kaptep6g~ot, Oec 8&as yeivxzo jiiljrlp, I &X,' 688

qp~pxp6;aatv,

ici nhe6veootv d~voost ('But even if

you arestrong,anda goddessmotherboreyou, he is stillmorepowerful,since he rules over more', 1.280-1).

38Inrebuking herank-and-file oldiers for theirrush

to the ships, Odysseusforegroundsher61eof the leadersand commands:EiSgoipavog itzo, I ci; pacthkeg, cbt&tiKEKp6vo. indrigd&yicuhjinze oKlfxtp~v t' i1liO nlttco3ag rPtat PvoiZEntotV ('Let there be one

leader,one king, to whom the son of crooked-mindedKronos has given the sceptreand the ordinancesso that

he may makejudgementsforhis people', 2.204-6).39 For the social creation of value in modem soci-

eties, cf Raz (1999) 202-17, esp. 203-7.40Fromthe perspectiveof Homericethics, it matters

little thatHomericsociety itself is a fiction. Fiction,that

is, not only in the obvious sense of 'existing within awork of literature',but also in the strongersense that itdoes not track a particularhistoricalsociety. Like the

epic Kunstsprache,Homeric society has developed tosuit the purposesof generationsof bards. Nonetheless,the fundamentalpoint that the past is also constantlyremodelled n the lightof contemporary nderstandings

well arguedby Morris(2001), even if he sharesthe ten-

dency of some recent scholarship e.g. Crielaard 2002)239: 'we could almostspeakof ahistoricalHomericsoci-

ety') to collapse the past andplace more and more fea-

turesin the eighth century. Given the lack of otherwrit-ten evidence, the desire to use Homer as a historical

source for the Archaic period is understandable,but

should be treatedsceptically,especially when it brushesover the many 'anachronisms' n the text (e.g. featuresthatarchaeologywould place in the lateBronzeAge; fora briefoverview,cf Osborne(2004) 217-18).

41 The importanceof other-regarding ehaviourandcommunal nterests n the Homericeconomyof values isstressed by Cairns(2001b), who shows that 'No sharpdichotomyexists between competitiveand co-operativevalues'(p. 216). Cairns's ncisive demolitionof the (stillwidely canvassed)view thathonour s a 'zero-sum'gamewill, one hopes, put an end to the myth of exclusiveHomericindividualism.

42 Similarly,when Achilles relishes the prospect ofthe Achaeans (including Agamemnon) 'standing about

my knees in supplication' (viv o'(o sepi yo~vau' jth

oatioeotat 'Axatoig IXt ot~ovoug Xpetbyxp iadve-

tat o~KcZr'vEKt6g,11.609-10),the

absurdityof his

demands, from a collective viewpoint, is emphaticallyunderlined, ince forAgamemnon o act thus wouldbe to

place himself in Achilles' power,andrecognizeAchillesas his superior, n a way that would destroy the entiresocial structure f the Achaeanarmy.



10 WILLIAMALLAN

meantheyare of no interest o the gods or operatewithout them. This fundamental dea is made

most explicit in the simile used to describe the rout of the Trojansas they flee from Patroclus'

onslaught n Book 16:

6);6' i~lbXaixiaw XCY(XKLX(alvfl Pk~3pteEXO(OV

iiwxtz'itw~ptv6)t, te Xhi4pp~txov x~c1 ij~&oPZcu;, otc. 6j ~Xv6pLactlKOt ~YojlevoS xXu~n'ilvrii,

6i PiTU~iVOlYOP11tKOhlct; KPiVOK~clLtz S

~1Ke:AiicqVXiroxn,Oc6)v nttv 0K~dx~yovtc;S,

t6)v & t ir(7dVtE; gL~V0a1icorn~~~)tor)~~~x ovtE;,

7toXX&;6i: Kheltt; tC~'d~cziryooto xap66Gpcu,i~;' &Xhxnopqnpuprvie~y6Xxt z~~oixtioiacxio~5Op&DvA7LiKdxP,tiV1)E~I6~tCE PY'&lVBP6)tV,L~'ir~toi Tpwuxi C~ey6Xx rtevcsXov~toOt~ouxtu. Ii. 16.384-93)

As the whole dark earth is drenchedby a storm on an autumnday,when Zeus poursdown the most

violentrain,nfurious ngeratmenwho force hroughrookedudgementsn theassembly nddriveout ustice,withnoregardorthevengefulgazeof thegods; henall their ivers low inspate,and hetorrentscut away many slopes as they rush with a mightyroarheadlongfrom the mountains nto the

swelling sea, and the cultivatedfields of men areruined so mightywas the roar of theTrojanhorses

astheyhurtled n.

One scholar remarks hat the Zeus found here 'is hardto reconcile with the Zeus we know so

well from Homer's scenes on Olympus'.43Yet while it is true thatexplicit statementsof Zeus's

interest njustice are far less conspicuous n the Iliad thanin the Odyssey,we should be waryof

taking too narrowa view of Zeus's concerns in the former,44ince he is clearly concerned to

maintainorder at a cosmic level, while the audience'sknowledgethatTroywill fall gives theAchaeans'appealsto a punishingZeus considerableforce.45 Indeed,the manner n which the

simile linksjustice (86icri)o Zeus and the othergods is entirelyconsistentwith the rest of the

poem. Moreover, he simile's equationof justicewith themakingof correct udgementsor deci-

sions illustratesan importantpattern. For as Zeus's decisions determine ustice (or order)on a

cosmic level, so the decisionsof human udges establish social norms. Thus6icrI(qua 'justice')is essentially the revelationof particulardecisions.46 In the human realm these are based on

social customs(actingas precedents);n the divine realm on the inscrutablewill of Zeus.

43Redfield(1994) 76.

44 As does Mueller (1984) 147, for example, who,havingnoted the theme of 'socialjustice' in the OdysseyandHesiod, claims that when the Iliadic Zeus 'punishesthe wicked with a flood, not unlike the Old Testament

god, the sentiment andlanguageof the passagestick out

like a sore thumb'(16.384).

45 The accounts typically given of this simile are

revealingin their own way. Dodds (1951) 32 took it to

be 'a reflex of laterconditionswhich,by an inadvertence

common in Homer,has been allowed to slip into a simi-

le'. But the notion that the similes representa 'later'

stage, whether of thought or of language (as in, e.g.,

Shipp (1972)), is no longer convincing (even Janko(1982) 192, who is generally sympatheticto Shipp's

method,remarks hat 'we cannotexpect a high degreeof

precisionfrom a dating techniqueof thisnature). Kearns(2004) 69 n.14, by contrast,notes Zeus's anger with

injustice,then adds 'but this is a simile, not partof the

main narrative'. Yet most similes, as here,arepresented

from the narrator's authoritative)viewpoint. They areno less significantfor not being partof the 'story'. And,

as always,the simile's context is crucial to its impact(cfMinchin(2001) 132-60): since the surrounding arrative

describes the Trojansbeing driven back by a Greek

assault which is supported by Zeus, the audience is

encouraged to relate the bad judgements punished byZeus to those of the Trojansthemselves (cf Moulton

(1977) 37). The narrator uggests divine punishmentof

the Trojanseven more explicitly in the simile used to

describe Achilles' onslaughtat 21.522-5, where the suf-

feringof the Trojans s comparedto that of a city set in

flames because of the angerof the gods.46 Cf Benveniste(1973) 386, who defines 6iirj 'lit-

erallyas "the fact of showing verballyandwith authoritywhat must be", in other words it is the imperativepro-nouncement of justice'. As Benveniste (1973) 379-80

notes,6ilcrland0jiLg (cf O0uttCu, II. 16.387) represent




The importanceof Zeus'sjudgementscan be seen most clearlyin Hera'sresponsein Book 8

after she and Athena have been warned that Zeus will destroytheir chariotwith a lightningbolt

if they do not stop helpingtheAchaeans:

71 gLvap' o ';[t8in0ua ( lFTP'9o, (x; KFaIpt;"

altjcp 'AOlvairlv "Hprltpb; P50ov etrtev"J Rn7oto, iYti6oto Atb; ;cKO;,OKET1 0)yqo yC

A t p o r ( ' E ' V R ' r o X h ' g ' e F - t v~ j i ~ h o S N c 7 ~ 0 i k k o ; p t ( O , , r o ,

T)V OckXo;opiv 6rpotp'i01w 6Xpov 3I6v)tw,0

o6;KC Ol. KIvEovO;

Tp~oxiirFKoclxvaoitat86uaxCrw, 6);F'itwucKF;."Ii.8.425-31)

So speaking wift-footed risdeparted,ndHeraaddressed thena, Ohnow,daughterf Zeuswho

holds heaegis,I cannolongerallowus to fightagainstZeusformortals' ake. Let themdieorlive

as their uckwillhave t. Butas forZeus, et himhavehisownideasand udgebetweenTrojansndDanaans s is fitting.'

Confrontedby Zeus's certainopposition,Hera concedes immediately. HerresignedI8tCaxto,

which mightbe translatedas 'let him pursuehis judgements'(8.431), underlinesthe formative

r61eof Zeus's will in the outcome of the war (cf tI(c) above). The humanparallelsto divine

86crls both 'decision'and'justice/order'are well illustratedby thejudgementscene in the cityat peace depictedon Achilles' new shield (18.497-508). When a disputearises over the correct

restitution or a man's death,public opinion is divided and a solutionis sought fromthe elders

of the city:

hxoi 6' &8 po-rpotiotyvt uinv 6ciS; &poyoif

KilPJKE8'ipa kabvEpITuov.oi 6EyEpovte;

EUXTCIrin tO( 0i oi; W cpOvLKOK(Ot,

rcirpcpa 8&IqCp)KC0VVXpo ExOV 9epoqxoV0)Vy

oCtotv'T 7t' fivooov, got~p8 oi ' '86czov.

KEltIo 8' Cp' V gCloot(Yt 81() Xp(Yoo"(o XdOaVaa,

ttSt86g0,v, 00& to11oiiK8V V-owctztt'iot. (Il. 18.502-8)

Thepeoplewerecheering nbothmen,showing upportoreach,while theheralds ried o restrain

them. Andthe elders atonpolishedtoneseats nthe sacred ircle, akinghespeaker'staff n their

hands rom he oud-voicederalds,withwhich hey hensprang pandgavetheirudgement,ach nturn.And n themiddleaytwo talents f gold,to begiven o theonewhoamongheelders poke he

straightestudgement.

As in the simile of Book 16, justice is practised(or, in the formercase, abused)eiv&yopitr

(16.387, 18.497). Moreover,the elders'judgements are themselves subjectto public approval

(which determineswho is to receive the prize), makingtheir86iiqa trulycommunal decision.

Thus the 'straightestudgement'(cf 18.508) is that which best expressesthe sharedevaluative

beliefs of thepeople, yet the gods' interest n human ustice is equally prominent, ince the arbi-

tration akesplace 'in the sacred circle' (18.504), andso underthe protectionof Zeus.47

differentspectsftheconceptf orderwhichovernsalso heorderlinessftheuniverse,hemovementf the

stars,he

regularityfthe easons nd he

years;nd

ur-ther the relationsof gods and men, andfinally the rela-

tionsof men to one another'(emphasisadded). The idea

of order is also presentin the root meaningof 8(6ic as

'pointto' (- 8eincv6upt)r 'point out a way' (cf Schmidt

(1991);Chantraine1968) 284; Frisk(1954-73) 1.393-4).

In fact, 8(icrl s often best translatedas 'order' since this

avoids the intellectualand ethical baggage of 'justice';see

fI(f).47 As Janko (1992) 366 comments on 16.388 (6K&8Aiwlv Xxkoot, O v8evintv o'lc &uryovtzr): 'the

formula"gazeof the gods",OE(ov6itg, alreadyconnotes

"punishment"'.Cf also Burkert 1981) 199.



12 WILLIAMALLAN

() Moralanthropomorphism,rder and the will of ZeusIt has been arguedabove that theprevalentview of the Homericgods, which treatsthe gods of

the Iliad (in contrast o those of the Odyssey)as immoralor amoral, s mistaken(cf esp. I(a)).Nevertheless, insofar as the standardview implies that there is somethingdifferent and more

overtly disturbingabout the Iliad's presentationof the gods, it does reflect a genuine featureof

thepoem, namelythe morestrikingmoralanthropomorphismf its gods. It is misleading,how-

ever,to interprethe Iliad's moralanthropomorphismas manyscholarsdo) as if it were incom-

patiblewith the gods also being (as the characters hemselves view them) enforcersof justice.Thisdistortionoften stemsfrom a false view of divinejustice itself, which assumes that because

thegods are notperfectmoralexemplars heycannotthereforeenforceorcare aboutbasic issues

of rightandwrong. Yet the two notionsare no more incompatible hanthe idea that a human

being should act with 6icr. Andalthough he idea that selfish and all-too-humangods areprob-lematic(andperhapsnot worthyof veneration)may well have preceded Xenophanes,the godsof early Greekepic still enforce a basic form of justice which is no more and no less than the

characters hemselves demand.48There is thereforeno fundamental ontradictionbetween the

gods' personalprojectsand the system of reciprocal ustice thatthey sanction. Thus, for exam-

ple, one scholar considersZeus's punishmentof Hera(II. 15.18-33;cf n.34) to be irreconcilable

with his patronageof justice, andremarks Zeus often seems farmore concernedwith his honor

than with the rightsandwrongsof his relations with gods and men.'49 Yet these two facets of

Zeus's r61e his concern forhis own"ttgil

nd his concern forjustice- are far frombeing irrec-

oncilable (and only become so if one operateswith an inappropriate onception of justice).

Moreover, t is a basic featureof the moral universe of the poems thatjustice is closely tied to

sensitivityabout one's own honour as well as respectfor the honourof others.

Thoughthe same patternof justice operates n both Homericepics, the Iliad poet makes his

narrativemoreproblematic,notonly through hepresenceof sympatheticTrojancharacters,but

also by having a numberof gods fightingon their behalf. The suitors of the Odyssey,by con-

trast,thoughnot all wicked (cf II(h)), are far less sympatheticandenjoyno divine support. It

is rightthat the Trojansshould be punishedfor theirconduct,not least because a Trojanstarted

the war,but the narrativedraws attentionto the disproportionate ufferinginvolved, since the

foreshadowingof Troy'sdestructionmeans thatmanyinnocentTrojanswill pay for the mistakes

of Paris andPriam.50souch harshanddisproportionateunishmentmay be a traditional dea(cfHes. W&D240-7),51but is no less disturbing or being so. The poet makes the imbalancepar-

ticularly emphatic n his only explicit allusion to the Judgementof Paris:

~vO' iXho~;L~Vr&~lViiv&av~v,o~i~&~oO' "Hprlt

oi6&Hooct6&~ow'U&~yXUa)KO)7t6lco~prlt,dh' ixx'ov,S acpiv inp~tjov&ccin~xOE~toIXtoSp~j

KaiHpiajio;KixiXab;'AXe~S6v~poxiv~K tri;

aSVEiKECY(YCEd4,jtEij~t~rc(cAZ~ovicovto,

djlv6' iitv~', ijoiit6p~wlxXhon~vimX~ytv~ijv.II.24.25-30)

48 Even if the humancharacters' imited knowledgemeans thatthey may doubtwhether thejustice they ask

for will come about,as whenAgamemnondoubts Zeus's

promisethat he will sack Troy(II.9.19-20).

49Zanker 1994) 4.50Thepatternof misdeed and(disproportionate) un-

ishment is starkly underlined by the narrator when

Agamemnon'scommand that all the Trojansshould be

annihilated,even the children n the womb, is described

as o'ilga ('justified', 6.62). A further xample,the con-

sequencesof what the narrator alls Paris' 'ruinousrandi-

ness' (24.30), is considered below. The narrator ppliesa similar udgementto a Greek error(Achilles' rejectionof the Embassy and the sufferings it brings upon the

Achaeans)when Thetis'prayer o Zeus is condemnedasgairnov ('disastrous',15.598).

51Hdt.2.120.5 takes the deathof innocentTrojans o

show that the gods mete out great punishments or greatcrimes.



DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 13

This [sc. to steal the body of Hector]was pleasingto all the othergods, butnot to Hera orPoseidonor

the bright-eyedmaiden. They hungon to the hatred hey hadfrom the firstfor sacred Ilios andPriam

and his people, becauseof the folly of Alexander,who had found fault with the goddesseswhen they

came to his farm's nnercourtyard,andapprovedof her who offered him ruinousrandiness.

As Macleod comments, 'There is a powerful antithesis between the accumulated "Ikto; ipI

cal Hpi-.to; xal xa6; and the single 'Aevi6poo.

The gods' anger with one citizen and his

folly affects the whole city.'52 Macleod well compares II. 6.55-60, 'where Agamemnon's vin-

dictive words against Troy are said to be just (62), but are also felt to be terrible'. Yet although

the pattern of 6iKic that dominates the poem is in some measure ruthless, it is also impartial,

since it governstheAchaeansno differentlyfrom the Trojans.53Thus the entireAchaeanarmymust endure the plague that results from Agamemnon's mistake (1.43-52), while Achilles' rejec-

tion of the Embassy ensures the Trojans' furthersuccess, decimating the Achaean army and lead-

ing to Patroclus' death.54

As agents of such retribution, the Homeric gods can appear disturbingly cruel, but other

scenes reveal a basic concern for humanity. One of the strongest signs of this is the gods' ulti-

mate approval of Hector's burial. It is clear that in supporting Hector's claim Apollo is acting,

as he typically does, out of support for Troy and antipathy to the Achaeans, yet the specific

details of his argument reveal a further concern. For while Hera cares only which of the two

(Achilles or Hector) is more the philos of the gods (24.55-63), Apollo concentrates on Achilles'

lack of pity and human respect and on the futility and excessiveness of his conduct (24.33-54).55

Moreover, it is Apollo's rather than Hera's argument which finds wider support, as Zeus's

instructions o Thetis make clear:

"xixa IlXlh k; Gtpertov kX0k Kcai )~i yG1~tritEihov'

o6or~oai oiEi7nEO~o)S, 6' ioxa 7ndlvx0v

&Ocavd~ixovKCXoXXocot, lrtcppeoi C/otvoCL/Vrltatv"EKrop'iAAet aph vrluol Kopoviotv oti ' x1vXOaev,

ai'Kivio; At

re &icnV.t &n60' "EKxopa oXiti." (II.24.112-16)

'Go at once to the campandgive this messageto yourson: tell him that the gods areangrywith him,

and thatI above all the immortalsam filled with wrath,because he in his madness is keepingHector

by the beakedshipsand has not given himback. Perhapshe will thenin fearof me give Hectorback.'

52 Macleod (1982) 88 on 24.27-8. Indeed, the

emphasison Parishimself is even morepointed nsofaras

the position of 'Ahe,&vipoi Eve~' &trln;s otherwise

takenup by k6iijieio Hpti6joto (cf 4.47, 165, 6.449).

53This is a fundamentalpoint, since impartialitys,as Elster (1999) 339 observes (cited by Cairns(2001b)219 n.45), 'a necessaryfeatureof anyview thatwantsto

be takenseriouslyas a conceptionof justice'.

54 However, despite this impartiality,here is a fun-

damentaldisparitybetween gods and mortals,since the

gods enjoy the privilegeof being able to punishmortals

in a way thatmortalscannot so easily do if wronged by a

god:as Achilles says toApollo afterthe god has deceived

him and luredhimaway from theTrojans: yv 6' ~i AvjihyaKlS0 dwpEiheo,rot; 6'iodoagox t6io;, bexioii

ti 'oiv y' i866etoaq6iriooo. Ii1

o' &vretornV,

C' ot

w6cvaxlite irapeirl (II. 22.18-20). Speaking to Zeus,

Heracraftily exploits the superiorityof the gods in order

to justify herrightto punish the Trojans:KaitXiv i5 o6

tciLWeXt3porb;Avpi

ei out,

I

q niep Overl6 'ko-diioi

-Ib6oaItl6eaolGEv 18.362-3).

55 Apollo's protest againstAchilles' maltreatment f

Hector's corpse is a striking instance of divine pity.

Indeed, t is importanto stress thatApolloacts outof pityrather han an impartialconcern for humanmorality, or

such impartialconcern is not the domain of the Homeric

gods. The scene is an excellent illustrationof how the

tensions inherentin the Homeric theodicy, drivenby a

rangeof individualdesires andrelationships,producean

appropriate esolution, ust as the quarrellingamongthe

gods eventuallyresultsin the destructionof Troy. It is a

messy system, but we should resist the temptationto

impose moral certaintyand neatness on it. For suchmessiness is not necessarily incompatiblewith what we

would term a 'moral' outcome. Indeed,if it were other-

wise, the Homericgods would have no normative a bet-

ter termin this context than 'moral')force at all.



14 WILLIAMALLAN

LikeApollo, Zeus expresseshis indignationat non-burial n directspeech (this is not a case of

character-speech ttributinghuman values to the gods), and he above all the gods is angryat

Achilles' excessive behaviour. Moreover,Zeus's solutionto the disputebetween the gods who

pity Hector and the stubbornhaters of Troy(Hera,Poseidon andAthena) expresses a desire to

upholda basic humangood (respectfor the dead and theirrightto burial).56Zeus's proposal hus

takes account of the competingclaims of the gods, yet ensuresthatorder s restored,mirroringthe start of the poem, where Zeus was able to incorporatehis obligationto Thetis within the

widerplanof Troy'sfall.

Ithas been well observedof Apollo's condemnationof Achilles' conduct that 'this is theonly

place in the Iliad where nemesis is used of the attitudeof the gods towardhumanbeings who

have broken the moral code' (il y~xya0t;ep6vzt vECtEoGrl0otav il iEg, 24.53); yet the

same scholarcontinues, 'But it is also true that this notion of god as the guarantorof norms is

introducedhere only to be rejected. Heraproteststhat Achilles is not humanin the ordinary

sense;he is a memberof the divine community ... Zeus agreeswith Hera ... Achilles must be

drawn nto the divine community'(emphasisadded).57However,this overlooks Zeus's promi-

nentr6le as the guarantor f a moral andsocial orderwhich is ensuredby the fulfilment of ritu-

al acts (in this case burial).58Nor is it clear that Achilles is 'drawn nto the divine community'

(this argument s partof Hera's rhetoricalstrategyand a sign of her ulteriormotives). It is

Achilles' choice whether he releasesHector'sbody or not, and he is influenced bothby fear of

Zeus's angerandby a desire for the richcompensationofferedby Priamatthesuggestionof Zeus

(cf 24.112-19, 592-5). Neither reason drawsAchilles closer to the gods (nor does his compas-

sion for Priam,whose plight reminds him of his own father:24.486-512); on the contrary,Achilles' decision is a thoroughlyhumanresponse, encouragedby Zeus, whose insistenceuponHector's burialrecognizes(and restores) he values of social and ritualorder. ThusZeus'sdeci-

sion at the end of thepoem embodies the sameprincipleof divine concernfor humanorderthat

has operated hroughout.59As we have seen, whatcountsas 8iicrl 'justice') amongthe humancharactersof the Iliad is

closely related to 8iicr or 'order' at a cosmic level, since the will of Zeus extends to both.

Moreover,Zeus's maintenanceof orderis linked to his own power,as the several remindersof

his rise to supremacymake clear(n.34). Yet Zeus cannot gnorethecompetingplansof the other

gods, and this leads to a narrativepatternwhich we can tracethroughout arlyGreekhexameter

poetry(cf esp. II(e) andIII(b)),wherebyZeus's will is realizedthrough he actions and reac-

tions of others,includingothergods. In short,the competingwills of the gods are seen to result

56 For burialas theypaq Oav6vtwov,f Hera'swords

to Zeus on the death of Sarpedon 16.456-7), which are

repeatedby Zeus in his instructions oApollo (16.674-5).Achilles speaksin the same terms of mourningPatroclus

(23.9). Yet althoughburial is a basic human good, it

would not be true to say that,because Hector s dead and

can no longersacrifice to them,the gods have nothingto

gain by it. For like the gods' interestin oaths, guest-

friendshipandsupplication,all of whichimpingeon their

own tijtuL, divine anger at non-burial is directed to

upholdinga principlewhereintheir own interests are at

stake. All relationshipsare reciprocal,and the godsrequirehonours, emplesandsacrifices,since that is their

y~,ppa.If thegods were simplyto let terrible hings(such

as non-burial)happencontinuously o those who honour

them,those honourswould end or the communitywould

cease to exist (Nestor's complaintto 'father Zeus' at II.

15.372-6 makes the reciprocityclear;cf also 8.236-41),and neitherwould be the most desirableoutcomeforany

god (or mortal).

57Redfield(1994) 213.58As with their protectionof strangersand suppli-

ants,the gods' supposedcare for the deadmaybe viewed

as a projectionof humananxietyabout the vulnerabilityof the defenceless in their communities,extending suc-

cour to those individuals e.g. outsiders,the helpless and

the dead)whose conditionweakens theirabilityto assert

theircustomaryclaims to respectandjustice.

59 The re-establishmentof order coincides with theresolutionofAchilles' wrathand its consequences,creat-

ing a strongand satisfyingnarrativeclosure, even if the

audienceremains awarethat Achilles' angercould flare

up again.




in a fixed orderwhich is identifiedwith the will ofZeus.60 Thus,as Achilles prepares o re-enter

battle,Zeus assembles the gods and encouragesthem to assist the side of theirchoice, so that

Achilles may not sackTroy 'beyondwhat is fated'(20.23-30); but it is clear thatApollo and the

otherpro-Trojan ods will eventuallyhaveto give way, since Troymust fall. The fall of Troyis

itself presentedas part of an impartialsystem of divine justice in which both Trojansand

Achaeans face the consequencesof their misdeeds. This pattern s overlookedby those who

claim that a concernforjustice is the preserveof the gods of the Odyssey,as if the fall of Troywere notjustifiedwithin the Iliad itself.61Moreover,as we shall see, the patternof justice and

cosmic order embodied in the Iliad is also found throughoutearly Greek hexameterpoetry.

Thus, to single out the Iliad as presentingmerely 'a theodicy of sorts'62 bscuresnot only the

poem's comprehensiveandcompelling depictionof what thegods standfor in relation o human-

ity,but also its essentialcontinuity n this respectwith the wider traditionof earlyGreekepic.

II

(a) TheOdyssey.:a new divine world?

It is still widely believed that the divine world of the Odyssey s substantiallydifferent rom that

of the Iliad.63 Thus studies of the Odysseyaboundwith such claims as 'the natureof the godshas changed',64 a transformation that is often said to result in 'a "purer"conception of god'.65

This theologicaldifferenceis, in turn,frequentlypresentedas being most acute in the sphereof

divinejustice, since, it is alleged,the gods of the Odysseyare more moralistic n their attitude o

humanwickedness.66 Even Lloyd-Jones,who otherwise stresses thecontinuityof religiousand

moralideasthroughout arlyGreekliterature, ndorses the standard iew of the Odyssey,name-

ly, 'thatits theology is in some importantways differentfrom that of the Iliad'.67 By contrast,

the foremost aim of this section is to challengethe orthodox view: firstly, by showingthat,for

all its characteristic hemes andideas,the Odysseydoes not differsubstantiallyromtheIliad inits presentation of the gods or their interest in justice; and secondly, by complicating the

familiar pictureof the Odysseyas a tale of clear-cut crime andpunishment. Througha close

analysisof Zeus'sopening speech(thelocusclassicus for moral nterpretationsf thepoem),and

by focusing on the r61eof divine rivalryandanger, reciprocal ustice andthe will of Zeus, this

section aims to show the essential continuity of religious attitudes and social values in the

Homericepics.68

60 Despitehis privilegedaccess to 'greatZeus's will'via Thetis (ii ot wnxayy~XXsaKetbo EeydXotoo6rlLja,17.409), Achilles does not know that Patrocluswill be

killed (cf 18.9-11). Yet even the gods themselves cannot

know all of Zeus's plans in advance. The narrator,bycontrast,can, and so connects Patroclus' death to the

'mind of Zeus' (16.688-91). Similarly,charactersoften

refer to 'the gods' in general,but the narrator an name

the actualgod responsible.61 Cf, e.g., Kirk(1962) 291: 'The gods of the Iliad,

indeed,arealmostwholly indifferent o this concept[i.e.

justice], and determineevents like the fate of Troyfrom

motives of their convenience.' Yet thisapproach gnoresthemultiplecauses of the fall of Troywithin the Iliad (the

Judgementof Paris,the rapeof Helen, the brokentruce,the will of Zeus), all of which have nothingto do with

'convenience', but much to do with justice and cosmicorder.

62 So Mueller(1984) 147,exemplifyinga widespreadview of the Iliad vis-a-vis the Odyssey.

63

Cf.,e.g., Kearns 2004) 67-9, entitled 'Thegods in

the Odyssey:differencesbetween the epics'.64 Burkert(1997) 259; cf, e.g., Griffin (1980) 51:

'Thegods who presideover thisworldhavealso changedtheir nature.'

65Burkert 1997) 262.66 E.g. Mueller (1984) 147: 'These differences are

most markedwhen it comes to justice. The Odysseyis a

model tale of poetic justice.'67Lloyd-Jones 1983) 28.

68 Contrast,for example, Finley (1977) 140: 'TheOlympian religion could not stand still and yet survive.

The intellectualrevolutionreflected in the Iliad requiredstill anotherrevolution,a moralone, in which Zeus was

transformed rom the king of a heroicsociety to theprin-

ciple of cosmic justice.'



16 WILLIAM ALLAN

For just as scholars continue to underestimate the extent to which the Iliad depicts a pattern

of norms and punishments, so they still exaggerate the moral simplicity of the Odyssey, present-

ing it as an uncomplicatedtale of villains punished and the righteousrewarded. There is no

denying the more explicit ethical tone of the Odyssey, evident from the very first scene on

Olympus onwards, but this does not mean that the theology of the Odyssey is in any way differ-

ent from that which dominates the Iliad. Both poems explore the problems inherent in divine

justice, and while the Odyssey often foregrounds a straightforward vision of the gods' concern

for moral standards,69 t also presents the reality of divine intervention in a manner no less dis-

turbing than the Iliad. The Homeric epics inhabit the same moral and theological world, and

both ask similar questions of the gods and the extent to which their actions are connected to

social norms of justice.

(b) The Odyssey: a new moral world?

Zeus's opening speech in Book 1 of the Odyssey is regularly interpreted as constituting 'a radi-

cal shift from the divine attitudes displayed in the Iliad'.70 This shift is, furthermore, said to be

an ethical one, as if Zeus's assertion that humans are responsible for their own sufferings repre-

sented a moral idea alien to the Iliad.71 Zeus's speech is certainly programmatic for what fol-

lows in the work; but that it represents an 'ethical transformation of the gods'72 iS demonstrably

false. Let us first consider Zeus's actual words. Recalling Aegisthus' death at the hands of

Orestes, Zeus addresses the other gods:

0).tO7,O, olov 6iTuVEi.) OhPPto\1 (5zO(0Vt(X

k~ fClJ~OVYeXPpaYid~K ~EVat' 01 K~X#ai toi

ocpipotv t 0ctahirjisobix~rp1t~poviyr'~oov&;S alvi~vA'yuao;..." (Od. 1.32-5)

'Oh,how thesemortals lame hegods! Theysaytheir roublesomefromus,andyet they oo them-

selves,throughheirown reckless cts,havesorrows eyondheirdestined hare,as doesAegisthus.'

Zeus criticizes mortals for failingto recognizethat theirsufferingis compoundedby theirown

outrageousbehaviour. This is certainlya strongcondemnationof humanfolly, but it shouldnot

be taken to imply (as is often the case) thatresponsibility or humansufferinglies with human-

ity alone,or that the gods of the Odysseywill be moreconcernedwith properhumanbehaviour

per se than are the gods of the Iliad.

Scholars are certainly right to stress the importanceof Zeus's complaint(which in itself

makes for an arrestingopening),since reckless behaviourand its punishmentwill be centraltothe narrative,butno less significantfor the theology of the poem as a whole is Zeus's acknowl-

edgementthatmuch of humanity'ssufferingis due to the gods.73 In otherwords, while Zeus

69

Cf.,e.g., Eumaeuson the gods' attitude o the suit-

ors (Od. 14.83-4;quotedabove as an epigraph o this art-

icle). However,there s no mentionof divinepunishment

for the Phoenician traders who conspired to abductEumaeus as a child and then sold him into slavery

(15.403-84).70Keams (2004) 69.71 Cf, e.g., Edwards(1987) 130: 'In the Odyssey,

however,the gods are much more concernedwith moral-

ity ... [The Odysseypoet] is presenting he beginningof

the idea that men are responsiblefor their own misfor-

tunes' (emphasis added).

72See n.5.73Scholarsand translators ften fail to give the Ki

of line 33 its full force, since it implies '[they suffer

becauseof theirown wickedness]in addition to the trou-

bles sent by us [i.e. the gods]'. As Tsagarakis 2000) 47

n. 163 notes, 'The Kai makesall the difference here.'




foregroundshumandisregardof divinewarnings,74he subsequentnarrative lso makes clear the

r6le of thegods as a source of humansuffering(cf esp. II(d) and(g) on Poseidon andHelios).75And since these are both centralaspectsof the interaction f gods and mortals n the Iliad aswell,it is misleadingto speakof a 'radicalshift' in the theodicy of the Odyssey.

(c) Divine rivalryand angerThose who detecta different heology atworkin the Odysseyoften elide therrle of divine rival-

ry andanger,both as a catalystof the poem's plot and as a centralelement of the gods' attitudes

to one anotherand to humanity.76Yet the focus in the second half of the poemon Odysseus'pun-ishmentof the suitors,which is uncontestedat the divinelevel, does not annulthe clash of divine

wills that dominates he first half. Athenatakesadvantageof Poseidon's absence from the divine

assemblyon Olympus in orderto raise the issue of Odysseus' delayedreturn Od. 1.22-7, 45-

62).77 When Poseidon realizes what has been done behind his back,he becomes 'even angrier'

(' 8' kXcy~oro crlp6O0tov, 5.284). For Athena has in effect exploitedhis absence in order

to undermine he concomitantsof his superior tatus. Thus she laterdefends hertardyassistance

by saying to Odysseus, 'But you see I was unwilling to fight Poseidon, my father's brother'

(6d16 tot oir MOloa looEtS66ovt ld~XeoOttcapoatyvifllt, 13.341-2).78Andit is onlyaftersecuringZeus's approval orOdysseus'homecomingthatAthena acts to bring t about.79 n

short,as in the Iliad, Athena'splans must operatewithin a divine society whose rivalries and

hierarchiesproducenot only tensions but also a structure f authority.It is often claimed that the gods of the Odysseyhave 'changedtheirnature'.o80Yet although

fewer gods are individualized n the narrative compared o the Iliad), it is clear thatthey retain

theirtypicalcharacteristics, f which the most prominentare theirloyaltiesto humanfavourites

(AthenaandOdysseus)or family (PoseidonandPolyphemus)and their ruthlesspunishmentof

those who angeror offend them (cf Poseidon's punishmentof the Phaeacians,Athena'skilling

74The gods' warningenhancesAegisthus' folly (and

prepares or that of Odysseus' companionsand the suit-

ors, who similarly ignoredivine signs). Yet the fact that

Hector,too, ignores omens sent by Zeus (1. 12.217-43,

13.821-32) remindsus that the Odysseypoet could have

told Aegisthus' story in a less negative way, i.e. as a

revenge narrative, taking into account what

Agamemnon'sfatherhad done to Aegisthus'father.

75This tells againstthe tendencyto treatthe gods of

the Odysseyas more distanced from human affairs:e.g.

Lesky (2001) 190: 'Zeus emphaticallydissociates him-self and the world of the gods from the activityof men.'

Cf Graziosi and Haubold(2005) 76: 'The overall thrust

of the first Olympianscene in the Odysseyis an insis-

tence on the separationbetweengodsand mortals ... The

gods, then, become dispensersof justice ... in order toenforce a distinctionbetween the human and the divine

plane.' Theimpressionof distantgods is rathera productof the natureand scope of the story;see II(i). As with

KXi(1.33), btp ~t6povn line 34 is important, ince it

expressesthe traditional dea that no human ife is free of

suffering dispensed by the gods (cf. II. 24.527-33). So

while it may be true that the Odyssey'stale of errorsandconsequences is less complex and less tragic than the

Iliad's, there s no questionof the gods being disassociat-

ed from human ife and suffering.76 E.g. Griffin(1980) 54: 'we aregenerally given the

impressionof one undivided andrighteousdivine will'.

77Athena's ingenuityextends to helping Odysseus'son as well. Disguisedas Mentor,she praysto Poseidon

to grantTelemachusa safe homecomingfromPylos, thus

invoking the god even as she is working against him

(3.55-61). The narrator dds pointedly,as if to explainthisuniquecombinationof invocationanddeception,'so

she prayed,and she herself was bringingit all to fulfil-

ment' (&;&p'nnret' ~lp&toKL'aOi andvtoaltEhX,3.62).

78In the Iliad Poseidonis particularlynsistenton his

rightswithin the divine family;cf. Il. 15.185-99.79Indeed,Athena s carefulnot to challengePoseidon

openly even after Zeus has given his approval: hus she

grantsOdysseus' prayerthat he be well receivedby the

Phaeacians,ac&ot6' ot no pcq{ive~t'vxvtiil a&i'ydp

a Irxporaoiyvryuov ('butshe did notyetappear o him

face to face, since she respectedher father'sbrother',Od.

6.329-30). One might comparePoseidon's own conduct

in the Iliad, where he recognizesZeus's authority sincehe is 'mightier'; cf 8.209-11) and therefore akes care to

aid the Achaeans covertly (13.354-7); cf also Apollo'srefusal to come to blows with his uncle Poseidon at II.

21.461-9.80See n.64; cf Chantraine1954) 79: 'Dans l'lliade

le divin ... reste,au mauvais sens du mot,profond~menthumain, passionn6, trompeur et rancunier ... Dans

l'Odyssdel'idre divine se relie & a morale.'



18 WILLIAMALLAN

of Amphinomus:II(d) and (h)). Poseidon'spersecutionof Odysseus is motivatedby kinshipand personal vengeance, not by any abstract(or un-Iliadic) sense of morality. The narrator

underlines romthe start he importanceof Poseidon'sangerto his account of Odysseus'return:

0eooi' xLiatpovr~xavte

v6mcptooetS6ovog 6' dorepy~;jtevxivev&vtrt0o

'O86it id~pogjvy^tav iKOut. (Od. 1.19-21)

All the gods pitiedhimexceptPoseidon;he ragedceaselesslyagainstgodlike Odysseusuntil hereached is own land.

Although Odysseus'actions have not offended the othergods, it would be a mistake to ignorethe wrathof Poseidon,or treat t as aberrant.81 s Clayobserves,'Interpretationshattryto force

the destructionof Odysseus' companionsand the sufferingsof Odysseushimself at the hands of

Poseidon into the moralpatternof Aegisthusand the suitors must be recognizedfor what they

are:Procrustean ttempts o regularizeand make uniform hemoralityof the Odyssey.'82NO ess

misleadingare those approacheswhich seek to treat nstancesof divine angeras relics of a more

'primitive' mentalityor cosmos.83 Indeed, the story of Odysseus'return s itself only one of

many Greeknostoi disruptedby divine anger,as the poet often reminds us (1.325-7, 3.130-66,

4.499-511, 5.108-11).84Moreover, he poet sees no contradictionbetween Athena's destruction

of the returningGreeksfor their failure to punish LocrianAjax's attemptedrapeof Cassandra

and her desire to save Odysseusfrom Poseidon'sanger(cf 1.325-7, 3.134-5, 4.502, 6.323-31).Herpositive andnegativer6les springfromtypicaldivine concerns,namelyto punish sacrilege

(the attempted apetookplace in hertempleat Troy)and to supporther humanprot6ge(cf esp.

13.291-310).

(d) Spheres ofpower andpunishment:Poseidon and the Phaeacians

The continuityof religious thoughtin the Homericepics is well illustratedby Poseidon'spun-

ishment of the Phaeacians. Critics who presume a more 'moral' theodicy in the Odyssey

inevitablydetect in this episode a rangeof (illusory) problemsandtensions. Thus one scholar

arguesthat 'there is a deep-seateddisjuncture: ne of the Odyssey'sbest known incidentsdoes

not conform to its dominant ethical categories, as exemplified by the suitors' fate and the

paradeigmaof Aigisthus. This is surprisingat the least, and calls for an explanation. Why is

Poseidon's anger not broughtinto closer conformitywith the prevailing religious and moral

81Cf S. West (1988) 61: 'Though the wrath of

Poseidon is repeatedlymentioned, t has little effect; the

poet deliberatelyavoids conflict between Poseidon and

Athena over Odysseus (cf. xiii 341ff.).' Yet while it is a

typicaltheme of the Iliad thatgods should avoid fightingone another p3porfv EvEa

(cf 1.573-5, 8.427-30,

21.357-60, 462-7), it is not true of eitherpoem (nor of

Poseidon in the Odyssey:cf II(d)) that the gods' per-sonal alliances or anger have 'little effect'. A striking

exceptionis Od.4.502, where it is said that LocrianAjaxcould still have survived,despiteAthena's wrath(iaf vi

KEv'zpxyE Icipa', cxi X~O6~ev6;ep' 'AOilvrjt),ad henot offended the gods with his boasting(like his greaternamesake:cf Soph. Aj. 764-77) and been destroyedbyPoseidon.

82Clay (1983) 218.

83Cf, e.g., Segal (1992) foran attempt o bracketoff

'less moral,more "primitive"divine behaviorin a well-

demarcated section of the poem, the fabulous realm

between Troy and Ithaca in books 5-13' (p. 490).GraziosiandHaubold 2005) 79 claim that 'Poseidon and

Polyphemusare exceptionswhich serve to highlight,by

contrast,the progressivethrustof the story.' They also

describe Poseidon and Polyphemusas 'ratherprimitive

figureswho harkback to modes of behaviourwhich pre-vailed in the earlierhistoryof the cosmos' (p. 92). Yet

Poseidon's wrath and revenge, far from being 'excep-

tions', are in fact typical features of the universal orderunderZeus, and Zeus himself sanctions Poseidon'spun-ishment of the Phaeacians; ee II(d).

84 For the importanceof (divine) anger to both

Homericepics, see Woodhouse(1930) 29-40; H6lscher(1988) 268-9.




ethos of the Odyssey,the one which is categoricallyenunciated at the beginning, and which

informsthe centralaction?'85The implicit assumptionsof this approachare clear:Zeus'sproem

presents a radicallydifferent moral world, to which the rest of the Odysseyshould conform;

where it does not conform,the theodicy of the poem is inconsistent.Yet, as we have seen, the

(still influential) idea that Poseidon's personal revenge and the supposedly more enlightened

viewpointof Zeus represent wo conflictingpatternsof justice is mistaken.86

The positions adopted by Zeus and Poseidon are entirelyconsistent;they are also familiar

from the Iliad. Nevertheless,Poseidon'spunishmentof the Phaeacians,with Zeus's approval,remains- from a humanperspective- disturbing. For as Alcinous makesclear,the Phaeacians

offer to help Odysseusbecause of theirconcernfor strangersandsuppliants 8.544-7); yet Zeus,the patronof strangersand suppliants,allows them to be punished.87Indeed, Zeus not only

approvesof Poseidon's plan to smite the Phaeacians'ship as it returns from Ithaca,88 nd to

envelop theircity behind a mountain,89ut also suggests turningthe ship to stone, makingit a

permanentmemorialof the Phaeacians'punishment 13.154-8).90By humanstandards fjusticeZeus's collaborationmay appearvindictive,9'but it embodies a basic featureof his maintenance

of divine order,since even Zeus cannot interfereconstantly n othergods' spheresof influence;

thus a god's decision to exercise his authorityn his own spheremaytakeprecedenceover Zeus's

generalprotectionof thehelpless andvulnerable.It is madeclear thatthe Phaeacians,who have

a privilegedrelationshipwith the gods (ot ztKaotaKp1otv

otv, ~iei ocptotv8yy0jev

Eil4v, says

Alcinous: 7.205), are particularlyclose to Poseidon: they are outstandingseafarers and their

devotionto sailingand the sea is underlinedby the 'speakingnames'of the youthswho competein the games (Akroneos, Okyalos, Elatreus,Nauteus, Prymneus,Anchialos, etc.: 8.111-17).

Moreover,Alcinous and Arete are both descended from Poseidon (grandsonand great-grand-

daughterrespectively: 7.56-66).92But while Polyphemus,the son of Poseidon,exploitshis kin-

shipto punishhis enemy,the Phaeacians ufferfrom theirproximity o thegod. Zeusrecognizesthat the othergodshave sphereswhere theirauthoritys paramount,o that hisr61e s to maintain

85Fenik(1974) 211-12.86As Reinhardt 1996) 84 notes, this supposeddis-

tinction was once used by Analysts to justify the distinc-

tion between two poets: 'an older one who would havewrittenabout the wrath of Poseidon and a more recent

one who dealtwith the interventionof Zeus'.

87 Hence Odysseus' suspicious curse of the

Phaeacians, pokenas he wakes on Ithaca, s doublyiron-ic: ) inrot, oim &ipa 6vta vofjgovcq oi& iiiatot I

jcoav OQlil yiVlryitope 1i8i kovwe, Ioi' I' Ei; iXhrlvyaiav &iilyayov" z1 ' iWpavwo i5Etv ei; 'IOdTicvEcuEicEov, oi6' tXcloaiv. I ZEi opCTEaqtiooto

cKTGo;O,q zt Iai Xlou; I &vOpdrnou;pop&t aiztivvrzat,q ti &ldjpprltr13.209-14).

88 In ending the Phaeacians'ability unfailingly to

convey travellersby sea (cf 13.151-2, 180-3)Poseidon is

not only defendinghis own prerogatives(for the sea as

his domain,cf esp. II. 15.185-93 on the division of ztixibetweenZeus, Poseidon andHades),but also reinforcingthe distinction between human and divine, since such

exceptional privileges as that enjoyed by the seafaringPhaeacians are (from the audience's point of view) a

thingof the past.89 For the negative aitiology here, explaining the

absence of the Phaeaciansfrom the world of the audi-

ence, cf. II. 7.459-63, 12.3-33 on the now vanished

Achaean wall (seen in the latterpassage explicitly from

theperspectiveof one lookingback on theage oflit0eot

(12.23)). Depictions of the ilatewovyivo; &viplovas a

separaterace in early GreekandNear Easternmyth are

well discussedby Scodel (1982).90 In the case of the Achaean wall, whose fame,

Poseidonfears,will eclipse that of the walls of Troybuilt

by Apollo andhimself,a potentialclash between the willof Zeus andthe claims of Poseidon is similarlyavoided

when Zeus urgesPoseidonto obliterate he wall afterthe

Achaeans have returnedhome (cf. II.7.446-63).91 The gap between the Phaeacians'deeds and their

fate is underlinedby the wording of Zeus's agreement:

dv6plov 8' ei' 7ip tig ocrintu K)pci

E'i'cov ot tdci, coi 8' tift ici kgoiiow tio; aici. I Eptov 61tn)

et Icai{ xotpikov iirtrho 0iloj.t13.143-5). The

phraseP1iltKai dCpt~e 'i(wovs hardlyappropriateo the

placid Phaeacians(its only other occurrence comes in

Odysseus' warning to the decent suitor Amphinomus,where it is used to justify the beggar's god-sent misfor-

tune: 18.139).92 Acusilaus took the passages to imply that all the

Phaeacianswere descended from Poseidon:"Otrlpo;8i

(Od. 5.35, 7.56ff.) oiceiou; "tot; 4Quiauoi; OEoi;

prlot8thr

ilv d Hboostacivog y7veotyv fr. 4 Fowler=

FGrHist2 F 4).



20 WILLIAMALLAN

a balancebetween them. Thisprincipleof divinenon-interference,ombinedwith Zeus'sr6le as

ultimateguarantor f order, s partof a theological pattern hat runsthroughoutGreekepic.93

(e)Athena and the will of Zeus

Therl61ef Athena well illustrateshow similarthe Homericepics are in theway they explorethe

gods' self-interestandclashingwills within the over-arching ystem of Zeus's authority.As wesaw (II(c)), Athena is sensitive to the hierarchyof the divine family,anddespiteher readiness

to deceive Poseidon,she needs Zeus's agreementbefore she can set in motion the final stage of

Odysseus'return.As Hermes remindsCalypso,

"doXX&i6V' i5 0tw; 0 1.tAtb(v6ov .ai5t6oto

ott8 caxPESX0hivXhov cbv tO'&Xti&oat."

Od.5.103-4)

'But here s nowayforanyothergodto eludeorbring onothinghepurposef Zeuswho holds he

aegis.'

Once Zeus has agreedto Athena'srequestto bring Odysseus home, which he does at the verystart of the narrative 1.64-79), the audience know that Poseidon's anger (however legitimate)will not be allowed to frustrate hewill of Zeus and the othergods. The narratorells us that 'all

thegods pitiedhimexceptPoseidon'(1.19-20),94yet it is appropriatehatAthena,Odysseus'tra-

ditionalpatron,should take the lead in securinghis return.95Moreover,Athena'sprotectionof

OdysseusandTelemachus s paralleledby hersupport or anotherpairof fatherand sonprot~g~s,TydeusandDiomedes (e.g. II. 4.387-90, 5.116-17, 5.800-13, 10.284-90; note especially 5.835-

59, where Athenaacts as Diomedes' charioteerand enableshim to woundAres).Most strikingly,both epics connect Athena at a numberof crucial moments with the will of

Zeus. In his majorprophecyof Hector's death andTroy'sfall, Zeus predictsthat the Achaeans

will sack Troy 'AOvvaicdgu' pov gAII. 15.71). The narrator einforces this idea as Hector

finallybreaksthrough he Achaean defences and reaches theirships:

actbgydpoi &n' i94po;tev

ApvwopZe6g, s vty7ch6ve~oot et' &vSp6ot obvov A6vta

tiL~ Kti K1 xlatvr" Ltvuv0(c3too y9p cX-ev20qy0'"

i6 ydp oi Exapvieli6po~tov oap

FahIht, 'A64vaion {ma In-i{ao Pirtpt. (I/. 15.610-14)

His defender from heaven was Zeus himself, who was giving honour andglory to him alone among

the manyotherfighters,for his life was aboutto be cut short:even now Pallas Athena was hurryingonthe day of his fate at the handsof the mightyson of Peleus.

93 It also underlies the turbulent divine world of

tragedy,as is best expressed by Artemis'comforting(orso she hopes) words to Theseus: 6eoot 6' J6' het

v0toS"Io~5ei; &av&v

po-,j'etatpoOutiia Itrit toi

0iXovro;, iXX' dWPwvrd6co9'lEi. I hi1ei, odWP'T1,

Zijva 1i p~ooSuojtiv o iv itot' (X6ov 268''

aCoX)vvrlgy Ioit' iv6pa ivrtov 9ipczacovppoztv

AgolI0aveiv i&d t (Eur.Hipp. 1328-34).

94As with the returnof Hector to Troy (albeit as a

corpse),divine pity (II. 24.23) is coupledwith a recogni-tion of humanpiety (the question'How could I forgethis

sacrifices to the gods?' underpinsZeus's decision in both

cases: II. 24.66-70, Od. 1.65-7). As Rutherford 2001)131 observes, 'Both actions demonstrate he belatedbut

real generosityandjustice of the gods: in neither case is

there divine unanimity,nor is partisan feeling absent.'

For Hector's burial as a symbol of divine concern for

humanity, ee I(f) above.

95 Cf, e.g., II. 2.169-82 (Athenaurgesa despondent

Odysseusto restrain he Achaeans fromflight),II. 10.245

(Diomedes chooses Odysseus to accompanyhim to the

Trojan camp because 'Pallas Athena loves him'), II.

11.437-8 (Athena saves Odysseus' life when he is

woundedby Socus' spear),II. 23.770-83 (Athenamakes

Ajax trip so that Odysseus can win the foot race;Ajaxcomplainsthat she 'alwaysstandsby Odysseus'side like

a mother and helps him'). At Od. 11.548 Odysseus

regretshis victoryoverAjax to win the arms of Achilles,

'and thejudges were the sons of the Trojansand Pallas

Athena'(11.547).



DIVINEJUSTICEAND COSMICORDER IN EARLYGREEKEPIC 21

Thus althoughAthena has her own reasons to hateTroy(II.24.25-30), heractions are also pre-sentedas partof Zeus's largerplanfor the city's fall. Her closeness to Zeus is evident when she

restrainsAres from seeking vengeance for his dead son Ascalaphus; ike her fatherelsewhere,she actshere to preserveorderon Olympus(II.15.121-41). Athenaalone is called63pt41ondtpr('the mighty-fathered oddess'), andalwaysin contexts where the will of Zeus is foregrounded,

whether n the destructionof Troyor the nostoi of theAchaeans.96Athenathus worksagainand

again as an extension of the will of Zeus,97 and her crucialr61e n the preservationof cosmic

orderis best illustratedby Hesiod's account of herbirth,where Zeus swallows Metis,Athena's

mother,and so ends the generationalconflicts of the gods in his favour(Hes. Theog.886-900;

cf III(a)). Zeus has his most important hildren(Apollo,Artemis,Dionysus,Hermes,Athena)

by other, less powerful, goddesses in order to preventHera posing too great a threat to his

supremacy.98Moreover,Athena's birth from the head of Zeus symbolizestheirpeculiarlyclose

relationship,which is embodied n her interventions n supportof Zeus's will and cosmic order.99

(f)Odysseanseriousness versus divine rivolity?

Returning o the Odysseyand its alleged theologicaldifferences from theIliad, we arenow in a

betterpositionto consider heepisodethat s frequently aid to highlight(by contrast) hepoem's

ethicallymore serious divine world: Demodocus'song of Ares' andAphrodite'sadultery Od.

8.266-366). Accordingto Burkert, Demodocus'song makes an unbridgeable ontrastwith the

conceptionof the gods in OdysseyBook 1 as well as with the sublimityof the gods of the

Iliad.'100ooet such an analysisof the scene is misleading,since it assumestoo rigid a model of

divinity in the Odysseyandimplies that Zeus's opening speech denies the gods theirtraditional

moral anthropomorphismsee, however, II(b) above). On Burkert's nfluentialreading,the

Odyssey poet composedhis work in the light of the Iliad, 'but with a new ethico-religiousatti-

tude, [and]saw that in his model there remaineda vacuum in his own far-too-seriousmage of

the world and its gods'.o101 hereis, however,no such vacuum,nor is the Odysseypoet's pres-entationof the gods excessively serious:for,as in theIliad, the gods areseen to be deeplycon-

cerned with properhuman behaviour(so that Zeus's programmatic peech is not aberrantly

solemn),while at the same timereadyto asserttheirinterestsanddesires at the expenseof oth-

ers (so that there is no lack of anthropomorphism).Scholarsoftendescribethegods' displayof moralanthropomorphismn Demodocus'songas

an instance of divine 'frivolity',which is (on the model of theIliad, e.g. the quarrelon Olympus

96 Cf. II. 5.747 (Zeus commands Athena to attack

Ares), 8.391 (Athena'sdisobedienceangersZeus); Od.1.101 (Athenamakes for Ithaca,having securedZeus's

agreement o Odysseus' return),3.135 (Zeus andAthena

plan painfulnostoi for the Achaeans),24.540 (Zeus and

Athena restrainOdysseus from killing the suitors' rela-

tives).

97Athena'sr61e n the fall of Troy s paralleledby her

support or Tydeusand Diomedes at Thebes,which was

eventually sacked with Zeus's approval (cf. II. 4.381,

390, 408). Nestor recalls how Zeus and Athenahelpedthe Pylians to rout the deceitful Epeians(II. 11.714-17,

721, 727-9, 736, 753, 758, 761).

98Hera's subordinater61e s embodiedin the mythssurrounding the birth of her own two children,

Hephaestus and Ares. Hephaestus is the product of

parthenogenesis,conceived by Hera in anger at Zeus:

"Hpr 8' "Hpactoov Khutv oi cp6tiarlt ~ttyetoa I

yeivao, xito

ivrlcwIri iiptomev iptflpxKoiztll ('but

Hera bore renowned Hephaestus without union with

Zeus, as she was furious and quarrelledwith her hus-band',Hes. Theog. 927-8); or, if fatheredby Zeus,he is a

crippleand a cuckold(II. 1.578, 599-600, Od. 8.308-12).Ares is a lesser doublet of Athena the warriorgoddess

(cf esp. II. 5.846-63), and hated by Zeus as much as

Athena is loved by him (II. 5.887-97), to Ares' greatresentment: 6iX' dviet, iT&tEl

an6 ~yivao iux'

&{&riiov 'no, you incite her, since you yourself gavebirth o thisdestructivedaughter', I.5.879). Theantipa-

thy betweenZeus and Ares is extended to theirsons, as

Heracleskills Cycnusand woundsAres himself withhelpfromAthena(cf [Hes.], Shieldof Heracles 325-471).

99Hera'shatredof Zeus's offspringby other womenis clearest n the case of Heracles(cf, e.g., II. 14.252-66,

19.96-133). Significantly,Zeus is said to have helpedhis

son manytimes by sendingAthena(II. 8.362-5).

100Burkert 1997) 261.

o101urkert 1997) 262.



22 WILLIAMALLAN

at the end of Book 1, the Theomachiaof Books 20-1) intendedto contrastwith the seriousness

of the action on the human level. There is some point to this, since 'that the divine action

[Aphrodite'sadultery] hould echo in tones of fun what is deeplyseriousamongmen[Penelope's

potential adultery] s typicalof the Iliad'.102Yet the 'unquenchable aughter'(Od. 8.326)103ofthe (male) gods as they look uponAres andAphroditecaughtin Hephaestus' rapshould not be

allowed to obscure the more seriousaspectsof the scene itself. ForHephaestusdraws attention

to his humiliationand demandspropercompensation 8.306-20), which he is solemnly promised

by Poseidon(8.355-6), should Ares fail 'to pay all that is rightin the presenceof the immortal

gods' (tioetv a'ioCtgativtza ge'dOavyrtoot

0eo^ov, 8.348). The scene thus underlinesthe

importance of justice (qua reparations) among the gods - ob) Et' oi5 iotE ZEb6vTog

&pvloaox0at is Hephaestus's response to Poseidon (8.358) - even as it revels in the bawdyhumourof Apollo and Hermes(8.335-42). The combination its otherOlympianscenes in both

epics, and is neitherout of stepwith the rest of the Odyssey,nordoes it prove Iliadicinfluence,since there was humorouspotential n manydivine mythsand these canscarcelyhave been lim-

ited to the Iliad and Book 8 of the Odyssey(cf, e.g., Horn.HymnHerm., discussed below:

III(b)).

(g) Errors and consequences: Odysseusand his men

The idea that the Odysseypoet aims to presenta clear-cut ale of crime andpunishment s belied

notonly by thenarrative f Odysseus'revenge,104ut also by Odysseus'own accountof his wan-

derings. For Odysseus describes both himself and his men committingdisastrous errors and

ignoring warnings,butonly Odysseussurvives and the audienceperceivethe crucial difference

made by divine protection.10oshoughhis comradesurge him to depart,Odysseus insists on

meetingthe Cyclops,with horrificresults for them,as Odysseushimself admits:

"&o,'pcoie

rttl61prlv-

1pa' Ap1to evic.pd.ov v)-

o&pp'ziXt6vtr 'i'Oiu, ei soi~eivox o oirl.

o366' p'4t)XX'~tipotit

cpavri; xz~tvb; oeaot." (Od. 9.228-30)

'But I would not listen to them- it would have been farbetter f I had!- since I wanted to see the man,

and whether he would give me gifts of friendship. But in fact when he appearedhe would not provea lovelyhosttomy companions.'

Having escaped from the Cyclops' cave, Odysseus cannot resist boasting of his victory and

thereby revealinghis name, despitehis comrades'warningthat they should get away without

notice (9.492-505). As a resultPolyphemus s able to prayto Poseidonthat if Odysseusreach-

es Ithaca,he will do so afterlosing all his comrades(9.528-35).Although t is his companions'own decision to kill Helios' cattle which ensurestheirdestruc-

tion (the narrator n the proemcalls them 'fools' for doing so: 1.7-9), it is clearthatOdysseus'own mistakes have endangered hose aroundhim, andthat his men are caught up in the curse

laidupontheir returnby the Cyclops. Andwhile it may be too extremeto say that 'the men are

actuallydriven to the act by the very gods who punishthem for it',106t makes no difference to

Helios or his vengeful responsethat the men's fatal error s the productof exhaustion and star-

102Macleod(1982) 3.103 Thisphrase iope3zo; yoog) is also foundin the

divine quarrelof Iliad 1 (1.599), a less serious counter-partto the human one among the Achaeans: the shared

contrastof divine and humansupports he view that the

song ofAres andAphrodite s replicatingan Iliadic tech-

niquewithoutnecessarily drawingattention o the differ-

ence between the Odysseyand the Iliad.

104See II(h) below on the killing of the suitors.105Cf 10.277-301,where(despitePoseidon'swrath)

Hermes'gift of theplantmolysaves Odysseusfrombeingtransformed nto a pig by Circe.

106Fenik(1974) 213. The men's crucialmistake s to

insist on landing on the island of Thrinacia n the first

place, thereby ignoring the warnings of Teiresias and

Circe that the island be completelyavoided(12.271-94).




vation. For as with Poseidon's anger (whether at Odysseus' blinding of his son or at the

Phaeacians'assistance to Odysseus),Zeus respectsHelios' rightto punishthose who offend the

god ortransgress n his domain. Moreover,Helios' threat o descend to Hades and shine amongthe dead (if Odysseus' men are not punished) threatensthe cosmic order(12.382-3). Zeus's

responseis immediate:

"'HI~h,pt'otv

ompC oEAvo'votot

nv ." (P.3Etv8

iaccOvlltoin [poxoiotv idi ri6Opov&poopxv"

Kv y )',xXax OV

o &v'ylt K~~pav

ti'rOtxX6v KE iuttt r;oot vi o'ivoit 7ut6vton." (Od. 12.385-8)

'Helios,keepshining monghe mmortalsndamongmortalmenupon hegrain-givingarth.Asfor

thesemen,I shallsoonstrike heir wiftshipwitha flashing hunderboltndshattert in smallpiecesin themidstof thesparklingea.'

ThusZeus'spromiseto see to the men's destruction s motivatednotonly by a respectfor Helios'

demand o punishdishonourbut also by Zeus's own r6le as the guarantor f universalorder. As

the god prepares o unleash the storm that will kill Odysseus'men, the poet draws attention o

Odysseus' unusual knowledge of Zeus's motivation (he heard of the divine council from

Calypso, who heard it from Hermes: 12.389-90), a unique qualification that underlines

Odysseus' authorityas a narratorlike thepoet himself) of the gods' justice.

(h) Thekillingof the suitors

Odysseus' vengeance on the suitors is regularlytreated as the archetypalembodimentof the

Odyssey'speculiarlymoralpattern. One scholareven remarks hat 'the punishmentof the suit-

ors is more than anexampleof reciprocalvengeance: t is an enactmentof absolute and timeless

justice'.107Yet such a distinction risks creatinga misleadingscale of values (as if vengeancewereinferior o some abstractprincipleof justice), sincereciprocalvengeanceis (quadivinejus-

tice) an 'absoluteand timeless'principleandthe centralstory patternof both Homericepics (and

much Greekmyth). However,although hepunishmentof the suitors s unquestionablydemand-

edby the honour-based thicsof Homericsociety,'os08he Odysseypoet complicates he initialpic-

ture of the suitors as a gang of insolentreprobates.The simplemoralparadigm hatequatesall

the suitors with Aegisthus, the murderousadulterer,s first proposedby Athena (disguisedas

Mentes), as she encouragesTelemachus to plot their death (1.294-302). Yet this assertivelymoralisticviewpointbecomes less clear-cutas the narrativedevelops. For we get a morepar-ticularized view of the suitors,revealingthat not all of them arewicked, which emergeswith

greaterclarity,significantly,as the vengeancedraws closer.

We firsthearof Amphinomus,one of two decent suitors, n Book 16, where we are told that

'his speeches were the most pleasing to Penelope, since he had a sensible mind' (ia'toza

1-rlve~o7eirI ivyave

C)Olotot"

-ppe&Atap KiXprat'&y(0fyatotv,16.397-8). He persuades the

suitors to rejectAntinous' proposal that they try once more to ambush and kill Telemachus

(16.400-406).109 And his kind words to 'the beggar' prompt Odysseus to warn him against

107Clarke(2004) 88.

108 It is prophesied approvingly by Halitherses(2.161-76; cf 24.454-62) and endorsedby Nestor(3.211-

24), Menelaus(4.333-46), Eumaeus 14.80-92), Penelope

(23.63-7) and Laertes(24.351-2), amongothers.

109Amphinomus'r6le as a wise adviser s underlined

by the speech introductionoptv ~it ppovwov

&,yopiloaaoKzai Eiset~ev('in good will he addressed he

assembly and said', 16.399), which 'always introduces

speecheswhich the narrator pprovesof' (de Jong (2001)54 on 2.157-60, who compares2.228 (Mentor), 7.158

(Echeneus),24.53 (Nestor),24.453 (Halitherses)).



24 WILLIAMALLAN

remaining any longer with the suitors and even to pray that some god may save him from

Odysseus' vengeance (18.122-50). Yet the narratormmediatelycontrastsOdysseus'attitude o

Amphinomuswith that of Athena:

cxotxp0 i KaXt~ &o~ic~piov tZ1ji~VO; i~top,

vE1JzYt~o)vK~qxXX11v5i1yixpccucv6avr~o&'UCt~n.d~XX'~i~6'j; cp~Sycfjpomc6Srje iKicibv 'A~-i~vrj

T1X~~i~oI)Jt CG q1~'~ fv~ (Od. 18.153-6)

Amphinomuswent backthrough he hall with a troubledspirit, shakinghis head;for his heartwas full

of foreboding. Evenso, he couldnot escapehis doom,as Athena hadbound him too to a violent death

by the hands andspearof Telemachus.

Indeed,Athena's determination o kill all the suitors,regardlessof their individualconduct, is

alreadyclear:

cxirzxp A0-ivrl&XXto6pt w'4IX&rvtTcAaKptttlOrlv'(d1.6i0

yvoirl 0' oi' ztvkg Ei(3V kVomaitCOt.iYZ'd~latgt~~ot"

O 6' 6 ry tk,' zasfit cctt (Od. 17.360-4)

Now Athena ameandstoodcloseby Odysseus,on of Laertes, ndurgedhim to go among he suit-orsbeggingbitsof bread o thathe wouldknowwhichof themweredecentmenandwhich awless;butevenso she was notgoing o saveanyof them rom heirdoom.

Athena's intervention imultaneouslyseparates he suitors into the good and the bad andunder-

lines her indifferenceto theirdecency. Thusthe audience knowAmphinomus'fate even as he

offers the disguised Odysseus protectionandurges the suitors to stop abusingboth the beggarand the servants of Odysseus'household(18.394-5, 414-21). The disjunctionbetween charac-

ter and fate is even clearer n the case of the suitorLeiodes,whom the narratorntroducesas the

first to attempt o string Odysseus'bow:

Atcirj; &Sir p~vro;&vioatczo, ~voiro;iA6,0a pi uo)OGK~oS3KE, itcapcxKpJ1T11p(&iK(XXOv

t~ wZ)xtX~t~aO; i ct~t'aoahical & oi o'io~XOpci coxv, r~coiv ~veji~oacy iviati-ijpec~~a (Od.21.144-7)

Leiodeswas first orise,the son of Oenops,who was theiraugur ndalways at inthe farthest orner

beside he beautifulmixingbowl. Theiractsof reckless ollywerehateful o himalone,andhe was

fullof indignationtall the suitors.

The narrator's omment on Leiodes' decency is expanded by Leiodes himself in his appeal to

Odysseus (22.312-19), yet Odysseus rejectsthe supplicationand cuts off Leiodes' head while he

is still speaking(22.326-9). Thus both goddess and humanprot6g6kill the two more virtuous

suitorswithequalruthlessness.110 heparameters f reciprocalvengeance amongbothgods and

110Cf Hdlscher (1988) 268: 'die Unverhilltnis-

mil3igkeitder Rache tritt gegen Ende kraflhervor,und

eben dadurch, daB der Dichter fiir diese Opfer

[AmphinomusandLeiodes] Sympathieerweckt hat'.




mortalsare seen to be similarly imprecise,andguilt by association s enoughto bringaboutdis-

aster for Amphinomusand Leiodes (as for the Phaeacians) 'beyond their destined share' (cf

1.33-4; II(b) and(d)).Thus although Odysseus presentshimself as merelythe agentof divinejustice (22.411-18),

and the death of the suitorsis greetedas a divine act (by Penelope:23.63-7) and as proofof the

gods' power (by Laertes:24.351-2), the killing of the suitors can only be said to constitute 'an

enactmentof absolute and timeless justice'l in a very particular ense, which recognizes the

roughand ruthlessreciprocityof divinejustice as it is embodied in the text of the Odyssey(as

well as theIliad).112Furthermore,t must takeaccountof the clear risks to communalwell-being

posed by Odysseus' vengeance, which sparksa civil war when the suitors' kinsmen seek to

avenge their deaths(a dangerforeseenby Odysseushimself:cf 23.117-22). Thepoem ends as

it beganwith Athena and Zeus reachingan agreement n Odysseus'favour(24.472-86; cf 1.44-

79), andthe narrator gainunderlinesthe importanceof the gods' intervention. For Odysseusand his men are on the verge of wiping out the suitors' kinsmen before they are checked byAthena(24.528-36). Moreover,Odysseus ignoresAthena's command and has to be restrained,

firstby Zeus's thunderbolt nd thenby a warning romAthenanot to incurZeus'sanger(24.537-

44). Odysseus thus acts with typically heroic impetuosityand would have killed his fellow

Ithacanshad not the gods intervened. The cycle of violence is endedonly by a divinely spon-sored settlementwith the suitors'families. As at theend of theIliad, divine concern forhuman-

ity helps resolve a profoundcrisis, and Zeus's decision restores the communalvalues of social

order.113

(i) Thescope of Homeric usticeA centralpartof the argument o far has been that the common view of the gods of the Odysseyas peculiarlymoralistic s mistaken,and thatthepoem's pictureof divinityand of humanrespon-

sibility andpunishment s no different rom that of theIliad."14With this in mind, let us consid-

er two furtherclaims regarding he gods of the Odysseywhich are no less influential: he first

may be summedup in the statement hat 'The differentconceptionof the gods in the Odyssey

implies a greaterremoteness of man from the deity,i.e., greater ndependenceandresponsibili-

ty';l"s he second in the observation hat the Odyssey's gods are 'less colourful and less clearlyindividualised'.116Yet the gods of the Odysseyare neithermore remote nor less individualized,and seem so only if one disregards he different ype andscope of storynarratedn the Odyssey

(comparedto the Iliad) and its smaller cast of characters,both human and divine. Unlike the

Iliad, whose wider narrative theTrojanWar)constitutesan event of cosmic proportionsmark-

ing the end of the age of heroes: cf. Il. 12.9-33; Hes. W&D161-5), the Odysseyconfines itself

for the most partto one of manynostoi (albeitan eventfulone). However,there s no difference

lll See n.107.112 Thoughthe Iliad poet has chosen to presentthe

Trojansas far more sympatheticthan the suitors (it is

obvious,but still notable,that the Iliad presents ndivid-

ualTrojan haracters,whereas we get only one side of the

story in its account of the Argives attackingThebes and

thePyliannarrative),here s a parallel nsofaras both the

Trojansand the suitors face indiscriminatevengeance.Thepoet of the Odysseycould have presented he suitors

as a whole more positively (see Danek (1998) 41-2 fortraces of alternativeversions in the Odyssey itself), but

their story remains sufficiently nuanced to explore the

ethicalimplicationsof reciprocal ustice.113 Thus Book 24 is both the clearestexpression of

theOdyssey'svision of socialjusticeand at the same time

entirely typical of early Greek hexameterpoetry, pace,

e.g., Schein (1996) 10: 'One function of the much

malignedtwenty-fourthbook is to insist on the correct-

ness of this new kindofjustice' (emphasisadded).

114Pace, e.g.. Griffin (1980) 77: 'The Odyssey ..has a differentconceptionof the gods and heroism. Gods

and heroes alike need and receive moral ustification,of a

sort much closerto our ideas.' Cf also Griffin(2004) 44

on 'thisanxiouslymoralpoet'; yet the Odysseypoet is no

more'anxious'aboutmoralresponsibility ndpunishmentthan is thepoet of theIliad;see I, esp. (a), (b) and(f).

115Kullmann 1985) 10.116Kearns(2004) 67.



26 WILLIAMALLAN

in the depictionof divine and human nteraction,and the narrator's arrower cope explainsthe

apparentmoral 'shift', which is in fact no more than the contrastbetweena narrative hatcon-

tainsmanyheroesandconflicting gods and one that containsfar fewer of both. The basic con-

tinuity is strikingnonetheless. And while it is truethat in the second half of the Odyssey'the

Gods form a unitedfront',"7 nsofar as there is no deity who proteststhe killing of the suitors,

this cancels neither the troublingaspectsof theirpunishmentnor the clash of divine wills pre-sentedin the first half of the poem (see rII(c) and(h) above).

Thus the Odyssey'svision of divinejustice may appearnarrower hantheIliad's,butthesame

moralityandtheologyunderliebothepics. In each the gods regularlypursue heirpersonal nter-

ests with little regardfor human ideals of divinejustice, and the 8aicr (or 'order')enforcedis

often a harshone."18Moreover,as in the Iliad (e.g. 18.497-500), the mechanisms of justicewhich operatein the Odysseyare embodiedboth in particular ocial institutions,such as com-

pensationsettlements'l9or judicial assemblies,120nd in the cosmos as a whole.'21 Thus the

Homericepics displaya fundamental ontinuitythat tells againstmodels of earlyGreekepic or

intellectualculturewhich continueto be premisedupontheirdifference. Foralthoughdevelop-

mental models of early Greekthought(especially those of Snell and Frfinkel)122re no longer

overtlyinfluential,anddespiteLloyd-Jones'scriticismsof Dodds's view that the Iliadic Zeus is

not concernedwith justice (cf n.10), the full extent of the ethical andtheological continuities,not only between the Homerepics themselves but also between thoseworks and the rest of earlyGreek epic, continue to be underestimatedor obscured. In a stimulatingrecent account of

Homericepic thedevelopmentalmodel is appliedto cosmic history tself, but theproject s ham-

pered by the assumption hat 'the portrayalof the gods in the Odysseyis different from thatin

the Iliad'.123However,the essentialcontinuity s particularly videntin the fact thatthe Greeks

themselves seem not to have perceivedany such difference betweenthe poems:Aristotle, for

example,locatesa numberof differencesbetweenthe epics withregard o structure ndplot (cf

esp. Poet. 1459b13-16), but none pertaining o the gods or theirmorality,124 hile Herodotus

famously treatsHomer and Hesiod as equals in theirpresentation and definition) of divinity

(2.53.1-3).125Theiranalysisof early Greekpoetryshould guide ours,not least because Zeus's

117Kearns(2004) 69. However, when Kearnsadds

'And this unity, it is strongly implied, is founded on a

moralbasis:personalfavouritismapart, t is simply rightthat Odysseus should triumphover his enemies and be

reinstatedas rulerof Ithaca', he impliedcontrastwith the

Iliad is misleading,since the Iliad poet also makes clear

the 'moral basis' of Troy'sfall.

118It is therefore misleading to claim, as Griffin(1995) 12 does, that 'generally speakingthe divine is on

its best behaviour n the Odyssey',since this flattensout

the complexities and turbulenceof the narrative. Ford

(1996) points to analogous faults in Cook's attemptto

present'a perfectlyconsistenttheodicyin which virtuous

self-restraints rewardedandinjusticepunished'.119 Cf. Od. 22.54-64, where Odysseus rejects

Eurymachus'offer of communalcompensationfrom the

suitors;and contrastHephaestus'agreementto accept a

fine fromAres (or Poseidon:8.344-59).120Cf. Od. 12.439-41: iaog 8' ikni86pnov &vilp

dyopifOevA&vcXrlKpivovvEiKEgOVoReXX&ytrhctolvoa'.r~lv, Irlo;g 8i1Tye 6oiopa Xap6i8tog e(paw

('At the time when a man rises fromhis seat in the mar-

ket-placefor dinner,when he has settled many disputesbetweenyoungmen who seekjustice, thenit was thatthe

timbersreappeared ut of Charybdis'),wherethe simile,

drawnfrom civilized life andrelating he restraint f vio-

lence through aw, underlines the indiscriminatecrueltyof the divine whirlpool.

121IncludingHades;cf. Od. 11.568-71,where Minos

dispensesjustice amongthe dead.122Their view of the Odyssey as morally circum-

scribed(compared o Hesiod),butstill an advanceon the

Iliad (cf esp. Frdinkel1975) 85-93), was foreshadowedby Jacoby(1933), e.g. 188-9: 'Wirsind noch sehrin den

Anflingendes ethischen Bildungsprozesses ... denn als

Hiiterder sittlichenWeltordnungbilden die G6ttereine

Einheit; auch das ist ein "Fortschritt" von den

gegeneinanderundjeder fir sich handelndenIliasg6ttemzu "derGottheit"derPhilosophie.'

123Graziosiand Haubold 2005) 75.124Although,one shouldadd,Aristotlesays very lit-

tle aboutthe gods even in tragedy.125The status of Homer and Hesiod as cultural

'authorities' on the gods and much else) is used cogent-

ly byFord

(1997)98 to

explainthe

'high-handedness'of

laterappropriations f theirpoetry (by Pindarand Plato

among others): 'it was the pragmatic practice (a long

poem is morewidely useful in smallpieces) of people for

whom Homerwas moreimportant s anauthority han as

an authorof an aestheticallyunifiedtext'.



DIVINEJUSTICEAND COSMICORDER IN EARLYGREEK EPIC 27

poweris presented n both Homericepics (as in Hesiod)within a cosmic context,andin such a

way thathis decisions and actionscombine a recognitionof eachgod's interestsand honourwith

a concern for social norms of justice amongmortals(cf iII(c), (e) and(h) above).

III

(a) Hesiodicjustice and/as universalorder

Justas one should avoidtreating he Odyssey'spresentationof the natureand values of thegodsas if it were different from the Iliad's, so one should resist attemptsto interpret he gods of

Hesiod as if they were different rom those of Homer. Fordespite Lloyd-Jones'sdemonstration

of the essentialcontinuity n earlyGreektheology,one still meets with accountsof Hesiod'scos-

mos whichtreat t as a moral 'advance'on what has gone before. Thus one scholarwrites of the

Theogony: Die g6ttlicheWelt entwickelt sich hin zur aufgeklartenHerrschaftdes Zeus; dabei

ilberwindetHesiod die amoralischeDimensionderhomerischenG6tter:Bei ihm sind die G6ttertatsaichlich ie GarantenderGerechtigkeitundvergeltendas GuteundB6se, das die Menschen

anrichten.'126However,as we shallsee, the divine worldthat Hesiodpresents s no more 'devel-

oped' thanthat of Homer,noris the rule of Zeusportrayedby Hesiodanymore'enlightened'.127In Hesiod, as in theIliad andOdyssey,the narratorocuses on Zeus's powerand on the per-

sonal quarrelsof the gods. For in Hesiod's eyes the currentworld-order s the consequenceof

internecine trife between ZeusandPrometheus, on of the TitanIapetus. Inotherwords,Zeus's

order s equalto the way thingsare,and theway thingsare(for example,that men must workto

survive because Zeus has hidden 'the means of life': W&D42-7) is causedby Zeus's quarrelwith Prometheus,who poses a threat o Zeus's r6gime. Indeed,a similarpatternof stasis lead-

ing to order nforms the background o the Iliad: Zeus's favourto Thetis arisesfromhis power

struggleson Olympus(RI.1.396-406), and so (as in Hesiod'spictureof theworld)a disputeover

divine supremacy eads to the statusquo: the deathof Achilles, the fall of Troy,the end of theheroicage. The very structureof the TheogonyexpressesZeus's supremacy:128he Muses singthehistoryof the cosmos culminating n the ascendancyof Zeus,a songthat Zeusnaturallyikes

to hear.129AndalthoughHesiod lavishesgreatdetailon thedefeat of the Titansby thenew gods

(Theog. 617-735), the narrativeof Zeus's victory over his father Kronos is strikinglybrief:

126Degani(1997) 178. I haveunderlined he notions

thatare most mistaken.127 Hesiod is best seen not as an actual historicalfig-

ure (pace, e.g., West (1978) 55: 'The autobiographical

passages [in the Works nd Days] are of course authen-

tic'), but as a poet who has chosen to performparticular

genresof song in aparticular ersona(his paraeneticand

didacticpersonabeingespeciallyprominent n the Works

andDays). The poet remindsus thathe could sing, if he

wished, differentkinds of song, when he boasts of his

victoryin the poetic contestat Chalcis(W&D 654-7): he

crosses to Euboea fromAulis, alludingto Homericepic

(650-3), which he too could sing, it is implied,since the

Muses can inspirevarious'pathsof song' (658-9; for the

metaphor, cf, e.g., Od. 8.72-5, 479-81, 22.347-8).Hesiod also connects theMuses' inspirationwith his abil-

ity to relate 'the will of aegis-bearingZeus' (W&D661-2), remindingus that this is fundamentalnot only to

Homericepic but to his style of epos too. Thus rather

than thinking in terms of historical personalities (theHesiodic 'I' is as constructed as, e.g., Archilochus'

Lothariopersona: r. 196a West) and sealed-off genres

(epic, didactic,cataloguepoetry,etc.), we shouldrecog-nize thepoet's abilityto combine elements from different

stories,stylesandgenres(Ford 1992) 13-56 offers a bril-

liantanalysisof Archaicepic as a genre, thoughI would

venture to stressthe continuityandfluidityof epos even

more than he does; cf his pp. 29-30 on the Worksand

Days, which he would set apartfrom Homer and the

Theogony on the grounds of 'epic objectivity').Consider, or example,the 'Catalogueof Women'narrat-

ed by Odysseus(Od. 11.225-332;forits relationshipwith

the HesiodicCatalogue, cf Osborne 2005) 16-17)orthe

paraeneticverse deployed by Homer in the Iliad (esp.

9.434-605); in the lattercase there is a particularly trik-

ing continuitywith the techniquesdeployedby Hesiod,the difference being that 'Hesiod' is overtly inside his

poem and his use of the paraeneticpersona s on a (rela-

tively) largerscale.128Cf Thalmann 1984) 39-41.129 Similarly, he hymnto Zeus thatopens the Works

and Days stresses his supremepowerover mankindand

his rOleas an enforcerof order(3-8).



28 WILLIAMALLAN

Kronos is 'defeatedby the wiles and strengthof his own son' (vtlreig t~Xvrlt~ot firltpi se7rx~at6goo, Theog.496). Hesiod does not explainhow Kronos was overcome,not because he

is reluctant o presenta god attackinghis own father,but because thepoem's focus is less on how

Zeus comes to poweras on how he succeeds in maintaininghis power,since that is the basis forthe currentworld-order.

The maintenanceof Zeus's supremacy eliesuponhis careful distribution f powersandpriv-

ileges amongthe othergods afterdeposingKronos. Unlike OuranosandKronos,Zeus is elect-

edby the othergods to be theirking (Theog. 883-5);he avoids his father'sandgrandfather'smis-

take of not sharingpower,butmakessureto keep it close by apportioning t chiefly amonghis

sons anddaughters.130When Zeusappealsforhelp againsttheTitans,he promisesthe oldergods

that,if they assist him, theirprivilegeswill remainundiminished,andthatthose whom Kronos

ignoredwill be given honours n his newregime (Theog. 390-6). Yet Zeus'srespectfor the older

gods servesmerelyto supporthis own dominance:

ij;6'caiiztw;dvtroaa6uxac~npi~6; CEp7r3~arrl

rtEzc~a' txdzt6;& Ci~yxKpxtri "i16 aa&1~3E.Theog. 02-3)

Inthe samewayhefullycarried ut hispromiseso all,whilehehimself s mightyin hispowerandrule.

Hesiod is especially emphaticaboutthe honoursgiven to Hecate (Theog. 411-52). But rather

thanseeing this as the expressionof 'her evangelist'and 'zealot',131we shouldsee the passagein terms of the structureof the world-orderaccordingto Hesiod: Hecate is dwelt upon not

because Hesiodhad a personalcult of the goddess,but because she is made to stand for the gen-eralprocessof Zeus's canny negotiationswith the gods who precededhim.

Hesiod's Zeus is no more 'advanced'in moral terms than Homer's. Both poets presenta

series of decisions made by a powerfuland unknowablegod. In Hesiod's account,Zeus pun-ishes mankind with Pandora to get back at Prometheus(Theog. 561-612, W&D54-105).132

However,to dwell on themoralityof Zeus'smotives or his treatment f humanitywould be mis-

leading, since the point of Hesiod's narrative s to displayZeus's power and its connection to

cosmic order,which is a direct result of Olympianpowerpolitics. Nevertheless,as in Homer,thereis, as far as humans areconcerned,a positive value to the world-orderestablishedby the

gods. For Zeus has given humans he gift of justice, which sets themapart rom animals(W&D

276-80).133And Hesiod, like Homer,reflectsthe processof personifyingandallegorizingsuch

positive social norms: both

Aicrl

W&D256-62) and the Atzai (II. 9.502-14) are daughtersof

Zeus, who seek redress rom their fatherwhen theyare abused or refusedby mortals. Moreover,the basileus who is just is favouredby the gods, whetherby Zeus (W&D280-1; cf. II. 1.237-9),the Muses (Theog.81-93) or Hecate (Theog.429-30). Finally,if we ask ourselves what social

functionsHesiod'spoetrymighthavefulfilled,we find that t communicates he same basic ideas

and values as Homeric epic: Zeus's order is supreme;his will is inscrutable to mortalsbut

inescapable;humans should avoid excess andrespect legitimateclaims to honour andjustice.

130Zeus's election by the othergods underlinesthe

importanceof his need to rule by consensus. It is also

significantthatZeus is depicted requiring he aid of the

supremely strong Hundred-HandersBriareus, CottusandGyges) in order o overcome the Titans(Theog. 148-

53, 617-735); cf. II. 1.402-6, where Briareusis said to

have defended Zeus's supremacywhen it was challenged

by some of his fellow Olympians.131West(1966) 277-8 on Theog.404-52.

132Thepunishments typically disproportionate:t is

Prometheus' rick,but all men sufferfor it (Theog.550-

2); cf. W&D240-7, I(f). Moreover,when Zeus ends

Prometheus' orment,he does so not out of pity, but toboost the kleos of his son, Heracles(Theog. 526-34).

133Cf Clay (2003) 83: 'It is preciselyDike, daughterof Zeus and Zeus's gift to mankind,that renders theheroes better han both the races of bronze and silver that

precededthem.'




(b) The HomericHymns,or, the worldaccordingto Zeus

A central theme of the majorHomericHymns, as of Homer andHesiod, is the r6le played byZeus's supremacy n the evolution of divine andhumanhistory,and,in addition,how his power

operatesso as to maintaincosmic order. The hymnsto Demeter(2) andAphrodite(5) focus in

particularon how that order is establishedthroughZeus's control of female deities, as Zeus

determines he extent to which DemeterandPersephonecanplay ther6les of eternalmotherand

daughter,and curbsAphrodite's sexual)powerby turning t back on the goddessherself. Zeus

sets in train the plots of both hymns, approvingHades' abductionof Persephone(Hom.HymnDem. 3, 30, 77-80; cf. Theog. 913-14) and making Aphrodite fall in love with the mortal

Anchises (Hom. HymnAph. 45-57).TheHymnto Demeter reflects thepervasivenessof Greekgender deology,as the fertilityof

gods,humansand nature tself are interlinkedunder hepatronageof Zeus,who controlsnotonlythe sexual maturationof his daughterPersephonebut also the division of the agricultural ear

(via his reconciliationwithDemeter;cf 445-7, 470-3). Sincegirlsmust be made usefulby mar-

riage and child-bearing cf, e.g., W&D695-705), Persephonecannot remain a virgin forever.

Moreover,Demeterhas not asked Zeus for eternalvirginityfor Persephone,134ndso she must

accept her daughter's nevitableprogressto marriageand motherhood. Demeter's fixation on

her own maternal ble is no less problematic han herhostilityto herdaughter's, ince she is not

only resistant to Persephone'smaturationbut acts as a 'bad' mother even in her grief at

Persephone'sabsence. For she seeks to make the baby Demophonimmortal(231-41), as if to

create a divine surrogate o replaceher own child,yet her actions are once more doomed to fail-

ure, since she acts (as in the case of Persephone)without the permissionof Zeus, whose agree-ment to the crossing of the boundarybetween mortal and immortal is essential. Finally,Demeter's 'dreadfulwrath'(350, 410) puts the nascent Olympianr6gime in jeopardysince it

threatens o destroy humanityand so end theztiaic paid to the gods (352-4). Zeus's solution is

to confirmandexpandDemeter'sown status andprivileges (441-4). Thehymn ends with bothDemeter andPersephone oining Zeus on Olympus,and with their enhancedpowers confirminghis (483-6; cf 364-71).

In theHymntoAphrodite 5) the goddess' abilityto 'leadastrayeven the mind of Zeus'posesa threat o his supremacy cf 36-8). As soon asAphroditehas sleptwithAnchises,underZeus's

influence(45-57, 166), she regretsthe resultingdiminutionof herpower (247-55). Similarpat-

ternsof rivalry,hierarchyand controlare found in thehymnstoApollo and Hermes. In theHymnto Apollo (3), Heradelays the new god's birth out of jealousy (91-101) and, in angerat Zeus's

productionof Athena from his own head, gives birthby herself to the monstrousTyphoeus,'a

bane to the gods' (n3tifa0eootv, 352).135 In the Hymnto Hermes(4), the conflictbetween old

and new gods is transposedo older andyounger Olympians cf 375-6, 386), as Zeus's own chil-dren,Apollo andHermes,bringtheirdisputeto trialbefore their father.136Once Zeus reconciles

them (396, 506-7), the baby Hermes is able to secure his rightfulzty{

and place among the

gods, impressingApollo with the newly inventedlyre and a song that,ingeniouslyandappro-

priately,celebratesthe divine orderthat he is about to enter(423-33). Thusthe majorHomeric

Hymns displaythe same conceptionof the cosmos andthe gods as therestof earlyGreekhexa-

meterpoetry,as Zeus's plans are realizedthroughthe actions and reactions of others,andthe

competingwills of the gods resultin a fixed orderthat is identifiedwith the will of Zeus.

134In the Hymnto Aphroditepermamentvirginityis

grantedto Athena,Artemis and Hestia. As their father,Zeus's control over his daughtersAthena andArtemis is

implicit(cf 7-20), while Hestia is presentedas requestingsuch an exceptional status as a privilege (ypaq) from

Zeus, acknowledginghis control even over the sexual

lives of his sisters(21-32).

135 Cf nn.98-9.

136

Hermes' hallenges accepted:66&bi iv ci6bio nap& Zlvi Kpovi{ovt(312); cf 324: KEi0ty6p

dcpoTpotot 6iKrl KUOTCKEtoZoayVIm.



30 WILLIAMALLAN

(c) Greekcosmic order and its Near Eastern contexts

Recentcomparative tudies(andparticularlyhepioneeringworks of WalterBurkertand Martin

West)have greatlyenrichedourunderstanding f the interactionbetween Greece and the vari-

ous culturesof the ancientNearEast.137Yet even if one acceptsthat(in thevery broadest erms)

'Greek literature s a Near Eastern iterature',138t remains to ask (in the case of each specific

myth, story-pattern r idea)how the Greeks have transformedhese Near Eastern influences'-

or rather, o ask how a common nheritancehas been given a particular rticulationandmeaningin Greekculture. For while scholarscanpointto many striking parallels',139hey do not alwaysconsider how the Greekexamplehas been madeuniquelyandspecificallyGreek, hatis, how it

has been changedandassimilated to a wider,pre-existinganddistinctivelyGreek world-view.

Yet such a process of assimilation is a fundamentalaspect of all culturaltransmission,and its

importance merges very clearlyif we considerhow the Greekview of cosmic order(as embod-

ied in early Greekepic) differsfrom its Near Easterncongeners. Thus, even if we acceptthat

(say) the stories of thedivinesuccessionfound in Hittite andAkkadian iteraturehad a profoundinfluence on Homer andHesiod,140 e should also ask what a comparisonof the Greek andthe

Near Easternmaterialreveals about each of these cultures n and of itself.141

137 Cf esp. West (1966) 20-31, (1997); Burkert

(1991), (1992; Germanorig. 1984), (2004); for a briefoverview of recent work on such cultural transmission

from the perspective of a Near Easternspecialist, see

Bryce (2002) 257-68.

138West(1966) 31.

139Haubold (2002) offers a useful critique of the

unreflectivemethodologyof Hellenists who merelycata-

logue 'parallels'that are said to 'speak for themselves'.

Yet while he praises archaeologists who have 'longappreciatedthe Eastern Mediterraneanas a connected

landscapeof mutual influences'(p. 5), he himself offers

no account of how such literaryand cultural influences'are meant to operate. Indeed,it may be more helpfulto

think in terms of 'interaction'rather than 'influence',wherein 'interaction'refers to a continuous process of

cultural contact and borrowing that operates in both

directions('influence', by contrast,suggests a one-way

process) and over a long period of time. ThoughBurkert

(2004) 23 continues to speak of the eighth and seventh

centuriesas the high-pointof the 'orientalizingrevolu-

tion', he also recognizes that 'contacts of all sorts were

continuous'. It is likelythatmany'oriental' eaturesmayhave dated from earlierperiods, since (as Bryce (2002)267 observes) 'throughout his period[i.e. from the late

BronzeAge to the eighth century] herewas regularcom-

mercialandpoliticalcontactbetween the Greekand Near

Eastern worlds (allowing perhaps for a hiatus of 100

yearsor so in the eleventhcenturyBC)'. Moreover,evi-

dence of such early culturalinteraction s growing (cfKoenen(1994) 25-6), the most spectacular ecentdiscov-

ery being a cuneiform letter from the king of the

Ahhiyawato the Hittiteking HattusiliIII (c. 1267-1237

BC). In this letter the king of theAhhiyawa supportshis

claimto some disputed slands in thenorthernAegean byassertingthat his ancestor ('Kagamunas')received the

islands from the kingof Assuwa(i.e. thedominantpowerin the Troaduntil the end of the fifteenthcentury)as partof a marriagealliance; cf Latacz (2004) 243-4; Kelly

(2006). The letter offers further testimony to the

extremely strongBronzeAge contacts between westernAsia Minor andGreece, which could well have left their

mark on Greek myth and poetry (it is hardlya coinci-

dence that many figures of Greek myth come from for-

eign lands, including Cadmus, Pelops, Cecrops and

Danaus). Of course, this letter (and others like it: cfNiemeier (1999)) attest to political rather than literarycontacts. Yet althoughwe do not possess MycenaeanGreek texts reflectingthe literaryor mythologicaltradi-

tions of the NearEast,it is not unlikelythatmyths,story-patternsand other ideas were carriedvia tradingroutes,

diplomatic channels and the migration from the late

Bronze Age onwards of 'healers, seers, and singers or

poets' (Bryce (2002) 259, who comparesOd. 17.382-5).For BronzeAge bards n Greece,cf West(1973) 187-92,

(1988) 156-65;S. Morris(1989).140 For the Akkadian Atrahasis and Homer's

'Deception of Zeus', cf Burkert (1992) 88-96; for

Gilgameshand the Homericepics, cf West (1997) 336-

47, 402-17; Bryce (2002) 261-3. George (2003) 1.3-70

presents a detailed literary history of The Epic of

Gilgameshfrom the third millenniumonwards. Csapo

(2005) 67-79 offersan illuminatinganalysisof the Greek

and Hittite myths of divine succession, tabulatingthe

mainparallelsbetween them (pp. 74-5), but also askingfundamentalquestionsabout what (in terms of cultural

transmission) uchparallels actuallyshow.141Inaddition, hough literary nteraction ould (and

did) occur, caution is requiredwhen comparingsimilar

phenomena n differentcultures,especiallywithregard o

chronology. Most (1997), for example, analyses the

alleged Near Eastern'sources' of Hesiod's five races of

men (W&D 106-201), notingthat 'In fact we do not pos-sess any orientalsources older than Hesiod from which

he could have derivedhis version' (p. 120). He goes onto ask 'How much of the whole mythof the races in the

Worksand Days could have been derived from a thor-

ough familiaritywith the traditionof Greek epic? The

answer is: a surprisingly large amount' (p. 121; for

details, see his pp. 121-6).




Let us therefore(as a test case) consider the BabylonianEnumaElish, or Epic of Creation

(composedin the twelfthcenturyBC at the latest),'42 ndcompare her6lesof MardukandZeus.

Like Hesiod'sZeus,Marduk s electedby the othergods to be the leadingdeity(thoughthishap-

pens beforehe has dealt with thethreateningTiamatand her monstrousallies:TabletIII),143nd,

once crownedking of heaven,Mardukordersthe universe andapportionsamongthe gods their

variousr6les andprivileges.144However,unlike the Greekmodel centred aroundZeus and his

family,none of the othergods is Marduk'schild. Burkert emarks: Onemight say that the ori-

entalassemblyof the gods is morea kind of senate,whereasHomer ntroducesa family,includ-

ing current amily catastrophes uchas mutualscoldingof parentsandblows for thechildren.'45

But, it is important o add, the divine family has a far wider significancewithin the moresys-tematic Greekmodel,wherethe family structure s used to emphasizeZeus's supremeauthorityandto dramatizehis eternalbalancingact with the competingwills of the othergods. Moreover,

even if it is the case thatHesiod, for example, presentsa model of the universe,manyof whose

parts can be paralleledin other Near Eastern literatures e.g. myths of divine succession, a

supremegod apportioningpowers, the dangerousconsort of the chief god, andso on), it is yet

more strikingthat all these elements havebeen combined into one coherentsystem. To put it

ratherbaldly, even if Hesiod gets many of his partsfrom elsewhere, the system itself is still

unique. And the world-order hat we findin earlyGreekepic is distinctivelydifferent rom that

found in contiguouscultures,since it is based on theall-embracingorderandpowerof Zeus;fur-

thermore, t presentsa level of analysisof the repercussionsof Zeus's positionwhich is peculiar

to the Greek tradition.'46Thus,when considering nterculturalontacts,we should bear in mind

(to a greaterdegree than is often the case) the distinctivenessof the Greekmodel,147which is

exemplifiedwith particular ividness both in the powerof Zeus's will andin theprominenceof

the Atb; poui as a narrativepattern n earlyGreekpoetryandmyth.'48

IV

In conclusion, our discussionhas sought to explore the moral and theologicaluniverse of the

Homericepics. Furthermore,t has tried to show that the patternsof human and divinejusticewhich they deploy are also to be foundthroughout he wider corpusof early Greek hexameter

poetry. All such poetry,as we have seen, is concerned n variousways with the explorationof

divine powerand its politics. Poets seek to show how Zeus's power operates n the world, and

thepolytheisticandanthropomorphicacets of theirreligious conceptionshave importantmpli-cations for the systemof divinepowerthatthey develop. Althoughthe similaritiesbetween the

early Greek texts are striking, they should not surpriseus, for as one scholar has observed,

'Poems,afterall, come not from the gods but from otherpoems, and if Homerwas at all like thepoetswe know fromothertraditional ralsocieties,his true teacherswere thepoetshe heardand

142Van De Mieroop (1997) 47 favours the twelfth

century, hough Dalley (1991) 229 finds such a date too

late. The end of the twentiethcenturyBC is a secure ter-

minuspost quem, since only then did Babylon and its

patrongod Mardukachieve the prominenceandhegemo-

ny which are narrated nd celebrated n the poem itself.

143ContrastHes. Theog. 881-5, where Zeus's elec-

tion takes place only after the Olympian gods have

defeated the Titans.144In the Sumerianstory of cosmic order,by con-

trast,Enki organizesthe universe and assigns the godstheirpowersbut derivestheauthority o do so fromEnlil,who remains he chiefgod; cf Black et al. (2004) 215-25

('Enki andthe worldorder').

145Burkert 2004) 25.146Consider, or example,how Zeus ends inter-gen-

erational conflict throughhis self-interestedmethodsof

family planning and female control; cf II(e). It is

notable that the basic patternof a chief god who learns

from the mistakesof the divine succession beforehim, as

Zeus does, is in itself a further novel and distinctive

aspect of the Greek model.

147Forexample,when West(1988) 169remarksIt ishardly going too farto say that the whole pictureof the

gods in the Iliad is oriental', the individualityof the

Greek world-orders unfortunately lided.148 Cf Ati6;8~xeEieEi

o POki', II. 1.5= Od. 11.297= Cypriafr. 1.7 Bernab6/Davies.



32 WILLIAMALLAN

the poets they hadheard.'149As well as being concernedwith power politics amongthe gods,each text treats the gods, andZeus in particular, s deeply concernedwith the social norms of

justice, both humanand divine. Moreover,while each of the poems presentscharacterswho

maintain he 'simple' view - namely,that humanwrongswill be punishedmore or less immedi-

ately by the gods - they also exploretheproblems nherent n such an accountof divinejustice.

Theinadequacyof thesimpleview is seen to generate heological problems,which areonly par-

tially allayed by presentingthe competing divine wills within a moral patterngoverned byZeus. 150

The discussion of the Iliad in PartI aimed to show that the popular pictureof 'amoral' or

'frivolous' Homericgods is misleading. Thus, simply to say of 'divinejustice' in the Homeric

poems that 'this seems anunlikelyrole for the timd-seekingOlympians'is1 iskscreatinga false

dichotomy,since the gods can be (andare)interestedboth in their own"ti~ij

ndin wider issues

of justice. Indeed,it emergedthatany attempt o separatemattersoftilup

rom wider issues of

justice, whetheramong gods orhumans,representsn itself a false dichotomy;cf I(d), (f); also

II(d). This is particularlyrue of such institutionsas the oath andguest-friendship,where the

gods' concernfor their own -tnnl s simultaneouslya concern forjustice (cf I(b), esp. n.16).

We saw the basiccontinuitybetween divine and humanvalues: as socialbeings shapedby the

relationsamongthemselves,the gods valuejustice as much as humansdo and areequally readyto assert a basic entitlement o honourand fairtreatment, ndto support he sanctions hatensure

justice andpunishits violation. Thus values such asjustice are shown to be socially constituted

on boththe divine and humanplanes,and each level displaysnotonly a hierarchyof power(andtheresulting ensions),butalso a structure f authority.152naddition,we saw thatthe moral and

theologicalworld of the two Homericepics is the same,since the Iliad reflects a systemof social

normsandpunishments hatis no differentfrom that of the Odyssey.Thepresentationof thegods in the wider hexametercorpusof Hesiod,the Epic Cycle and the

HomericHymnsreveals a remarkably oherenttradition n which the possibilityof divine con-flict is combined with an underlyingcosmic order. The considerationof Near Easternparallels

made clear that the idea of cosmic orderas 'the paradigmof justice'"53s not uniqueto Greek

thought;yet it also broughtout the distinctiveness of the Greeksystem as a whole and, in par-

ticular,of the way it uses the divine society underZeus's authorityas a comprehensiveexplana-

torymodel. For,as one scholarhasexpressedthematter,Zeus'sauthority embodies the demand

for anunderlyingunity,not chaos, in experience'.'54Finally,while it has not beenmy intention

to denythe differencesbetween thepoets,whose various kinds of storyentail distinctemphases,it emergedthat it has not been sufficientlystressed to what extent the poets, despite theirindi-

vidual approaches,are all drawingon essentiallythe same model of divine society and authori-

ty on theone hand,and divine-human nteractionon the other. Thus whereasHesiod, forexam-ple, places moreemphasison stasisamongthegods as the foundationalaition of Zeus's order n

the world,the widercosmic frame is also presentin Homer. And within Hesiod's works them-

selves, the Works ndDays is more concernedthanthe Theogony o relate events on the divine

149 ord 1992)90.150Despitesome of the argumentsusedby thosewho

see the Odysseyas a morallymore 'advanced'text, it is

prima facie unlikely thatany major epic would endorse

the simple model of 'good always rewardedand sinner

always punished', for this would not be a particularlyuseful or credibletheodicy,since it is obviously contraryto what one might presumeto have been the case in theactual world of the audience.

151Adkins(1997) 711.

152Theimportanceof socially createdforms of value

in theepics is oftenneglected,even by classicallytrained

philosophers,who still presenta rathernarrowview both

of Homericsociety and its ethical conceptions;cf., e.g.,Lucas(1993) 5: 'Theconceptof responsibility s one that

has developed and grown over the ages. We take it forgranted,but the Homeric heroes had little use for that

concept, centring their moral vocabularyon merit andkudos instead.'

153Burkert 2004) 60.

154Gould(1985) 25.



DIVINEJUSTICEAND COSMICORDER IN EARLYGREEKEPIC 33

plane to everydayhumanlife, yet many of its elements (e.g. farmingand sea-faring)are con-

ventionalepic featureswhich one also findsin Homer. And althoughmanyhavestressed hedif-

ferences between the Iliad andOdysseywith regard o divinejustice, these (we saw) aremerely

apparentand come not fromany changein the gods themselves butfrom the Odyssey'speculiar

narrative tructure,with its focus on one hero and his main divine patronand foe. Homer and

Hesiod may not have gone unchallengedas authoritieson matters of religion and ethics (e.g.

Xenophanesfr. 11,Heraclitusfr. 42 DK), but as subsequentGreek iterature hows,theirdepic-tion of the gods, andparticularlyof Zeus as the focal point of cosmic order andjustice (bothhumananddivine), provedto be a remarkably nduringandproductivemodel formakingsenseof the world.

WILLIAM LLAN

University College, Oxford

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adkins,A.W.H.(1997) 'Homericethics', in I. MorrisandB. Powell (eds),A New Companion o Homer

(MnemosyneSuppl. 163, Leiden)694-713

Andersen,0. (1978) Die Diomedesgestaltin der Ilias (SymbolaeOsloenses Suppl.25, Oslo)

Benveniste,E. (1973) Indo-EuropeanLanguageand Society,trans.E. Palmer(London)

Black, J., Cunningham,G., Robson, E. and Z61yomi,G. (eds) (2004) TheLiteratureof Ancient Sumer

(Oxford)

Bryce, T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World Oxford)

Burkert,W. (1981) 'OEQNOHINOYKAAEFONTEL: itterfurchtund LeumannschesMissverstindnis',Mus.Helv. 38 (1981) 195-204 [= Kleine SchrifienI:Homerica(Gattingen2001) 95-104]

- (1991) 'HomerstudienundOrient', n J. Latacz(ed.), Zweihundert ahreHomer-Forschung.Riickblick

undAusblick(Stuttgart1991) 155-81 [= KleineSchriftenI: Homerica(Gdttingen2001) 30-58]- (1992) The OrientalizingRevolution.Near EasternInfluenceon Greek Culture n the EarlyArchaic

Age (Cambridge,MA)- (1997) 'The song of Ares andAphrodite:on the relationshipbetween the Odysseyand the Iliad', in

G.M.WrightandP.V.Jones(eds andtrans.),Homer.GermanScholarship n TranslationOxford)249-

62 [= 'Das Lied von Ares undAphrodite:Zum Verhiiltnisvon Odyssee und Ilias', Rhein. Mus. 103

(1960) 130-44]- (2004) Babylon, Memphis,Persepolis. Eastern Contextsof GreekCulture Cambridge,MA)

Cairns,D.L. (ed.) (2001a) OxfordReadingsin Homer's Iliad(Oxford)- (2001b), 'Affrontsandquarrels n theIliad', in Cairns(2001a) 203-19

Chantraine,P. (1954) 'Le Divin et les dieux chez Hombre', n EntretiensHardtI (Geneva)47-94- (1968) Dictionnairectymologiquede la langue grecque.Histoire des mots (Paris)

Clarke,M. (2004) 'Manhoodandheroism', in Fowler (2004) 74-90

Clay,J.S. (1983) The Wrath fAthena. Gods and Men in the Odyssey (Princeton)- (2003) Hesiod's Cosmos(Cambridge)

Crielaard, .P.(2002) 'Past orpresent?Epicpoetry,aristocratic elf-representationnd the conceptof time

in theeighthand seventhcenturiesBC', in F.Montanari nd P.Ascheri(eds), Omero remilaannidopo

(Rome) 239-84

Csapo,E. (2005) Theoriesof Mythology Oxford)

Dalley, S. (1991) Myths rom Mesopotamia(Oxford)Danek,G. (1998) Epos und Zitat.Studienzu den Quellender Odyssee (WienerStudienBeiheft22, Vienna)

Degani, E. (1997) 'GriechischeLiteraturbis 300 v. Chr.', in H.-G. Nesselrath (ed.), Einleitung in die

griechische Philologie (Stuttgart)171-245

de Jong,I.J.F.(2001) A NarratologicalCommentary n the Odyssey (Cambridge)



34 WILLIAM ALLAN

Dodds, E.R. (1951) The Greeksand the Irrational(Berkeley)

Edwards,M.W.(1987) Homer.Poet of the Iliad(Baltimore)- (ed.) (1991) TheIliad.A Commentary : Books 17-20 (Cambridge)

Elster,J. (1999) Alchemies of the Mind.Rationalityand theEmotions(Cambridge)

Erbse,H. (1986) Untersuchungenur Funktionder Gotter m HomerischenEpos (Berlin)

Fenik,B. (1974) Studiesin the Odyssey(HermesEinzelschrift30, Wiesbaden)Finley, M.I. (1977) The World f Odysseus (2nd edn, London)

Ford,A. (1992) Homer ThePoetry of the Past (Ithaca)- (1996) Review of I.F.Cook, TheOdysseyin Athens.Myths of CulturalOrigins (Ithaca 1995), BMCR

96.04.27 [http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/1996/96.04.27.html]- (1997) 'The inlandship: problems n theperformance ndreceptionof Homericepic', in E. Bakkerand

A. Kahane eds), WrittenVoices,SpokenSigns. Tradition,Performance,and theEpic Text Cambridge,

MA) 83-109

Fowler,R. (ed.) (2004) TheCambridgeCompanion o Homer(Cambridge)

Frinkel, H. (1975) Early GreekPoetry andPhilosophy.A History of GreekEpic, Lyric,and Prose to the

Middleof theFifth Century, rans.M. Hadas and J. Willis (Oxford1975)

Frisk,H. (1954-73) GriechischesetymologischesWorterbuchHeidelberg)George,A.R. (ed.) (2003) TheBabylonian GilgameshEpic. Introduction,Critical Edition and Cuneiform

Texts 2 vols, Oxford)

Gould, J. (1985) 'On making sense of Greek religion', in P.E. Easterlingand J.V. Muir (eds), Greek

Religion and Society (Cambridge)1-33 [= Myth,Ritual, Memory,and Exchange. Essays in Greek

Literatureand Culture Oxford 2001) 203-34]

Graziosi,B. andHaubold,J. (2005) Homer TheResonanceof Epic (London)

Griffin,J. (1980) Homer(Oxford)- (ed.) (1995) Homer.: liad IX (Oxford)- (2004) Homer: TheOdyssey (2ndedn, Cambridge)

Haubold,J. (2002) 'Greekepic: a Near Easterngenre?',PCPS 48, 1-19

Havelock,E. (1978) The GreekConcept ofJustice. From its Shadowin Homerto its Substance in Plato(Cambridge,MA)

Heubeck, A. (1988) 'General introduction',in A. Heubeck, S. West. and J.B. Hainsworth (eds), A

Commentary n Homers

Odyssey 1:IntroductionandBooks I-VIII(Oxford)3-23

Hd1scher,U. (1988) Die Odyssee. Epos zwischen Marchen undRoman(Munich)

Jacoby,F. (1933) 'Die geistige PhysiognomiederOdyssee', Die Antike9 (1933) 159-94 [= Kleinephilol.

Schriften1 (Berlin 1961) 107-38]

Janko,R. (1982) Homer,Hesiod and the Hymns (Cambridge)

-(ed.) (1992) The Iliad.A Commentary : Books 13-16 (Cambridge)

Kearns,E. (2004) 'The gods in the Homericepics', in Fowler(2004) 59-73

Kelly,A. (2006) 'Homerandhistory:Iliad 9.381-84', forthcoming n Mnemosyne

Kirk,G.S. (1962) TheSongs of Homer(Cambridge)- (ed.) (1990) TheIliad.A Commentary : Books5-8 (Cambridge)

Koenen,L. (1994) 'Greece, the Near East,andEgypt: cyclic destruction n Hesiod and the Catalogue of

Women',TAPA 24, 1-34

Kullmann,W. (1985) 'Gods and men in the Iliad and the Odyssey', HSCP 89 (1985) 1-23 [= idem,

Homerische Motive.Beitrdige ur Entstehung,Eigenartund Wirkung on Iliad und Odyssee, ed. R.J.

Miller (Stuttgart1992) 243-63]

Latacz,J. (2004) Troyand Homer Towards Solutionof an OldMystery Oxford)

Lesky,A. (2001) 'Divine andhuman causation n Homericepic', in Cairns(2001a) 170-202

Lloyd-Jones,H. (1983) TheJustice ofZeus (2ndedn, Berkeley)- (2002) 'Cursesanddivine angerin earlyGreekepic: the Pisanderscholion', CQ 52, 1-14

Lucas,J.R.(1993) Responsibility Oxford)Macleod,C.W.(ed.) (1982) Homer: Iliad XXIV(Cambridge)

Minchin,E. (2001) Homer and the Resourcesof Memory.SomeApplicationsof CognitiveTheoryto the

Iliad and the Odyssey (Oxford)

Morris,I. (2001) 'The use and abuse of Homer', in Caimrns2001a) 57-91



DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 35

Morris,S. (1989) 'A tale of two cities: the miniature rescoes from Theraand the originsof Greek

poetry',AJA93, 511-35

Most, G. (1997) 'Hesiod's mythof the five (or threeor four)races',PCPS 43, 104-27

Moulton,C. (1977) Similes in the Homeric Poems (Hypomnemata 9, Gdttingen)

Mueller,M. (1984) The Iliad(London)

Niemeier,W.-D. (1999) 'Mycenaeansand Hittitesin war in WesternAsia Minor', in R. Laffineur ed.),Polemos. Le contexteguerrieren Egdea l'dge du bronze(Eupen) 141-56

Osbomrne,. (2004) 'Homer'ssociety', in Fowler(2004) 206-19- (2005) 'Orderingwomen in Hesiod's Catalogue', in R. Hunter(ed.), The Hesiodic Catalogueof

Women. Constructionsand Reconstructions Cambridge)5-24

Raz, J. (1999) EngagingReason. On the Theoryof Valueand Action(Oxford)

Redfield,J. (1994) Nature and Culture n the Iliad. TheTragedyof Hector (expandededn, Durham,NC)

Reinhardt,K. (1996) 'The adventures n the Odyssey',trans.H.I. Flower,in Schein (ed.) (1996) 63-132

Rosen, R.M. (1997) 'Homer andHesiod', in I. Morrisand B. Powell (eds), A New Companion o Homer

(MnemosyneSuppl. 163, Leiden)463-88

Rutherford,R.B. (2001) 'FromtheIliad to the Odyssey',in Cairns(2001a) 117-46

Saunders,K.B. (2004) 'Frdlich'stableof Homericwounds', CQ 54. 1-17Schein, S.L. (1996) 'Introduction', n idem (ed.), Reading the Odyssey. Selected InterpretiveEssays

(Princeton)3-31

Schmidt,M. (1991) 'h6icr', n B. Snell et al. (eds),LexikondesfriihgriechischenEpos2: B-L(Gattingen)cols 302-5

Scodel, R. (1982) 'The Achaeanwall and the mythof destruction',HSCP 86, 33-50

Segal, C. (1971) The Themeof theMutilationof the Corpsein the Iliad(MnemosyneSuppl. 17, Leiden)- (1992) 'Divinejustice in the Odyssey:Poseidon,Cyclops,andHelios', AJP 113,489-518 (reprintedn

idem, Singers,Heroes, and Gods in theOdyssey (Ithaca 1994) 195-227)

Shipp,G.P.(1972) Studiesin theLanguage of Homer(2nd edn, Cambridge)

Slatkin,L. (1991) The Power of Thetis.Allusion andInterpretationn the Iliad (Berkeley)

Thalmann,W.G.(1984) Conventionsof Formand Thought n Early GreekPoetry (Baltimore)Tsagarakis,O. (2000) Studies in Odyssey 11 (HermesEinzelschrift82, Stuttgart)

Van De Mieroop,M. (1997) TheAncientMesopotamianCity(Oxford)

West,M.L. (ed.) (1966) Hesiod: Theogony(Oxford)- (1973) 'Greekpoetry2000-700 BC', CQ23, 179-92- (ed.) (1978) Hesiod: WorksandDays (Oxford)- (1988) 'The rise of the Greekepic', JHS 108, 151-72- (1997) TheEast Face of Helicon. WestAsiatic Elements n GreekPoetryand Myth(Oxford)

West, S. (1988) 'Introduction:Books I-IV', in A. Heubeck, S. West and J.B. Hainsworth(eds), A

Commentary n Homers Odyssey 1:Introductionand BooksI-VIII Oxford)51-66

Winterbottom,M. (1989) 'Speakingof the gods', G&R36, 33-41

Woodhouse,W.J.(1930) TheCompositionof Homer' Odyssey (Oxford)Zanker,G. (1994) TheHeart ofAchilles. Characterization nd Personal Ethics in the Iliad(AnnArbor)

allan, william_divine justice and cosmic order in early greek epic_2006_jhs, 126, pp. 1-35

Documents