Journal of Hellenic Studies 126 (2006) 1-35

DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC*

"cm uev oyjkxkia epyoc 9eoi

aXka Siicnv Ticruai m i ai'oina epy' avGpamcov."
Horn. Od. 14.83-4
Abstract: This article examines the ethical and theological universe of the Homeric epics, and shows that the patterns
of human and divine justice which they deploy are also to be found throughout the wider corpus of early Greek hexa-
meter poetry. Although most scholars continue to stress the differences between the Iliad and Odyssey with regard to
divine justice, these come not (as is often alleged) from any change in the gods themselves but from the Odyssey's
peculiar narrative structure, with its focus on one hero and his main divine patron and foe. Indeed, the action of the
Iliad embodies a system of norms and punishments that is no different from that of the Odyssey. Values such as jus-
tice are shown to be socially constituted in each epic on both the divine and human planes, and each level, it is argued,
displays not only a hierarchy of power (and the resulting tensions), but also a structure of authority. In addition, the
presentation of the gods in the wider hexameter corpus of Hesiod, the Epic Cycle and the Homeric Hymns is analysed,
revealing a remarkably coherent tradition in which the possibility of divine conflict is combined with an underlying
cosmic order. Finally, consideration of Near Eastern myths relating cosmic order to justice brings out the distinctive-
ness of the Greek system as a whole and, in particular, of the way it uses the divine society under Zeus's authority as
a comprehensive explanatory model of the world.

IT was once popular to trace in early Greek thought a fundamental change in beliefs about the
nature and values of the gods. The resulting cultural history detected a moral 'progress' in the
evolution of early Greek literature itself, from the amoral powers of the Iliad, through the gods
of the Odyssey with their concern for righteous conduct, to the moral certainties of the Hesiodic
Zeus. This model was exploded many years ago by Hugh Lloyd-Jones in The Justice of Zeus.'
Nevertheless, it remains a commonplace of Homeric scholarship that the Iliad and Odyssey dif-
fer in their presentation of the gods, especially with regard to divine justice. Thus, in his
Introduction to the major modern commentary on the Odyssey, Alfred Heubeck argues that 'Zeus
himself has changed in the poet's vision. His actions are no longer directed by irrational impuls-
es and emotions, and he no longer has any need to boast of his superior power ... With per-
ceptiveness and wisdom Zeus now directs the fate of the world according to moral principles,
which alone create and preserve order. The father of the gods has only a little way to go to
become the just ruler of the world.'2 Indeed, Lloyd-Jones himself, despite his demolition of the
developmental model of divine justice, accepts that the Odyssey's 'theology is in some impor-
tant ways different from that of the Iliad', and he remarks upon the 'unquestionable difference
between the moral climate of the two Homeric poems'.3 By contrast, this article will aim to
show that the two poems share the same moral and theological universe and, furthermore, that
the patterns of human and divine justice which they deploy are also to be found throughout the
wider corpus of early Greek hexameter poetry.4
Part I argues that divine justice is not absent from the Iliad. The still popular notion of amoral
gods is shown to be flawed: the gods have human favourites and are sensitive to their honour,
but that does not make them 'amoral'. Morality is essentially a system of norms and protocols
governing relationships between individuals, and a similar system is shown to apply on both the

3
* The Iliad and Odyssey are cited from the editions of Lloyd-Jones (1983) 28, 30.
4
M.L. West, Homerus: Ilias (2 vols, Stuttgart, Leipzig and Kullmann (1985) is perhaps the fullest exposition
Munich 1998-2000) and H. van Thiel, Homeri Odyssea thus far of the Iliad and Odyssey's alleged differences in
(Hildesheim 1991). 1 am indebted to Douglas Cairns, their depiction of the relationships between gods and
Andrew Ford, Adrian Kelly, Mary Lefkowitz, Hugh mortals. He seeks to establish'the incompatibility of the
Lloyd-Jones, Ruth Scodel and the journal's two anony- religious conceptions of the two epics' (p. 14). The pres-
mous referees for much helpful discussion and advice. ent article, however, argues not only for their compatibil-
1
Lloyd-Jones (1983), first published in 1971. ity but also for their essential similarity.
2
Heubeck (1988) 23.
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
Odyssey and challenges the prevalent idea that it represents, to use Heubeck's terms, 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 opening speech in the Odyssey is often misunderstood in that
respect.) The similarities between the poems with regard to divine justice will be detailed: each
explores the gods' self-interest and their clashing wills, and both do so within the overarching
system of Zeus's authority. But despite their similarities, it is also possible to show, by treating
the poems individually, how each epic is trying in its own way to deepen the audience's con-
ception of divine justice. For while each poem reflects what one might call the 'simple' view -
namely, that human wrongs will be punished more or less immediately by the gods - they also
explore the complexities and problems inherent in such an account of divine justice. Part III
traces similar patterns of divine and human interaction in the wider hexameter corpus of Hesiod,
the Epic Cycle and the Homeric Hymns, where (as in the Iliad and the Odyssey) the gods' self-
interest and clashing wills function within the overarching system of Zeus's authority.6

I
(a) Iliad versus Odyssey?
It remains a standard view of the Homeric epics that the gods of the Iliad, in contrast to those of
the Odyssey, are little interested in human morality. A recent treatment of the Homeric gods
speaks of 'ethical considerations, which though not absent from the Iliad are not a major con-
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 not just in any ordinary sense of the word.'8 Yet, as we
shall see, close attention to the text shows that the gods are intimately concerned with matters of
right and wrong throughout the Iliad. E.R. Dodds famously found 'no indication in the narra-
tive of the Iliad that Zeus is concerned with justice as such'.9 However, despite Lloyd-Jones's
compelling criticisms of this view,10 the opposition between divine frivolity {Iliad) and concern
for justice {Odyssey) persists. The central aim of this paper is to suggest that such a dichotomy
is mistaken, since it neglects the ways in which the narrative of the Iliad itself (and not merely
the pious appeals of its characters) displays a basic pattern of justice (defined as a coherent sys-
tem of social norms and sanctions), and, conversely, exaggerates the extent to which the gods of
the Odyssey embody a more 'advanced' theodicy."
A closer analysis reveals a single and consistent form of divine justice shared by both epics.
Yet far from endorsing a simple model of justice where the good are rewarded and the wicked
punished (a pattern often assigned to the Odyssey), each poem shows a more complex system of
norms and punishments in action and explores its disturbing implications for the human agents
involved. Both the Iliad and the Odyssey are, therefore, theologically challenging works since
each shows the simple model of divine justice to be in various ways both problematic and naive.

5 9
Heubeck (1988) 23. Dodds (1951) 32.
6 10
Rosen (1997) 484 rightly notes that the Works and Lloyd-Jones (1983) 1-7.
Days is not unique in its concern with Sdcn: 'In the " An alternative model is offered by Winterbottom
broadest sense, the Iliad and Odyssey tell one grand story (1989) esp. 33, 40, who challenges the gods' concern for
about how dike operates throughout all stages of human justice in both epics, calling them 'amoral' in the Iliad
relations, from the interpersonal to the international.' and then seeking to extend this description to the gods of
However, he does not show how this works in any detail the Odyssey. It will be argued here, by contrast, that there
in the texts. is a coherent system of divine (and human) 8iicr| in both
7
Kearns (2004) 67. epics and that it is no stronger in the Odyssey than in the
8
Mueller (1984) 146. Iliad.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 3

Moreover, the form of justice that is shown to regulate the world of the poems is simultaneous-
ly cosmic and personal: cosmic in that it embraces divine as well as human society and is con-
nected to the maintenance of order on both levels; personal (and therefore volatile) in that it is
intended to control individual conduct and self-interest (whether of gods or humans) and
depends for its ultimate sanction on the personal authority of Zeus himself.

(b) Trojan wrongs

Though the Iliad poet is less prone to moral judgements than the narrator of the Odyssey, he nev-
ertheless shapes his narrative so that a clear pattern of norms and consequences emerges. He
deliberately includes scenes which emphasize the Trojans' role in starting and prolonging the war
and their culpable misjudgements during it. Yet unlike the Odyssey, where only one of the suit-
ors, Amphinomus, is presented in any detail as a sympathetic figure (see §II(h) below), the
Trojan people are seen to suffer disproportionately for the errors of their leaders, making their
destruction, as an expression of divine justice, the more disturbing. The first of such scenes
comes just after the duel between Paris and Menelaus. As Helen and Paris go to bed with each
other, Paris recalls their first sexual encounter:

' aye Srj <piA6xr|xi xpcOTetouEv e\)VT|9evie-

ov ydp neb jtoxe n ' d)8e y' epcoq (ppevou; du(peicdA.ij\|/ev,
0-68' oxe oe rcpcoxov AaiceSodnovcx; e^ epaxeivfji;
enXzov apTid^ai; ev 7tovxo7i6potm veeooiv,
VT|acn 8' ev Kpavaf^i euiyriv (pikoxr\xi KCU Eiivfji,
u>q CEO v\iv epochal KCU (xe yA-UKtx; '{(lepoq cupsT" (//. 3.441-6)

'But come - let us take our pleasure in the bed of love. For never before has desire so enfolded my
mind, not even when I first snatched you away from lovely Lacedaemon and sailed off with you in my
seafaring ships, and slept with you in the bed of love on the island of Cranae - that was nothing to how
I desire you 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:

"dAAric; uev taop-nc, xe Kai al'oxeoi; OIJK e7cv5eu£i<;,

r\v eue XaffiaaaQi;, KaKal mvzq, ovM xi Gtincot
Zr\vbq eptPpEuixECo xctA,E7tTiv ESSEIOOCXE ^fiviv
^civioi), oq XE 7iox' •u(j.|ii 8ia(p0epoei noXiv atTiriv •
01 (xeo Koupi5{r|v ctkoyov Kal Kxr|uaxa noXXa
Ha\|/ ol'/eoG' dvdyovxeq, enel <pikieaQe nap' aiixfji." (//. 13.622-7)

'There's no lack of outrage and shame on your part - that outrage you did me, you shameless bitches,
with no fear in your hearts for the harsh anger of loud-thundering Zeus, god of host and guest, who
will one day destroy your lofty city. For you made off with my wedded wife and many possessions
besides, for no reason at all, since you were given a friendly welcome by her.'

Menelaus' speech has been described as 'a picture of men attributing to gods the enforcement of
laws of which those gods are shown to be quite unaware'.12 Yet the limited perspective of human
characters such as Menelaus is confirmed by the wider narrative of Troy's fall which is sanc-
tioned by Zeus himself (cf. §I(c)). Nor is it solely the Greeks who disapprove of Paris' actions:
Hector describes them as worthy of stoning (//. 3.56-7) and wishes he would die at once
(6.281-2), while the narrator describes the ships that took Paris to Sparta as 'the source of
12
Winterbottom (1989) 33.
4 WILLIAM ALLAN

evils' (dpxeKaKotx;) for all the Trojans and for himself, 'since he knew nothing of the gods'
decrees' (dp^eicdKoix;, ou Ttaoi KOCKOV Tpcoeaai yevovxo I ol T' avion, ETtei ox> xi Gecbv etc
GecHpaxa ei'8r|, 5.63-4).13
The Iliad's pattern of reciprocal justice is seen most clearly in the poet's decision to include,
and to elaborate at great length, the account of the oath-breaking in Book 4 and Priam's disas-
trous reaction to 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
Trojans call upon Zeus to punish the side that breaks the oath (3.298-301).14 Yet despite the truce
ratified by the oath, the Trojan Pandarus attempts to kill Menelaus, and his crime serves as a
recapitulation of Trojan guilt. Of course, Athena and Hera have promoted this goal with Zeus's
consent (4.64-73), but the familiar epic principle of 'double motivation' means that Pandarus'
liability is not diminished: 'he is tempted, not compelled to shoot his arrow at Menelaus; he is
"foolish"' (4.104).15 Nor does it efface the guilt of the Trojans, which is underlined by the deci-
sion of Pandarus' comrades to hide him with their shields from the eyes of the Greeks as he pre-
pares to shoot (4.113-15). When Agamemnon says that Troy will pay for this treachery and
invokes Zeus as the protector of oaths (4.155-68; cf. 4.235-6),16 there is certainly an ironic dis-
junction between his perspective (shared by all the Achaeans, cf. 4.268-71) and that of the audi-
ence, since they know that Zeus, far from enforcing the oath in this case, has consented to its
being broken. Scholars focus on this aspect repeatedly,17 and in doing so often overlook the fact
that Zeus sanctions the oath-breaking for an ulterior purpose, and one less exclusively personal
than that of Hera and Athena, who are eager to avenge the Judgement of Paris (cf. §I(f)). For
besides his personal debt to Thetis and his promise to honour her son's wishes by favouring the
Trojans in battle (1.394-412, 503-30), Zeus has a further reason to encourage the breaking of the
truce: the wider narrative indicates that he approves of Troy's fall, both because of the Trojans'
errors and because it is part of a larger cosmic order which is his to enforce.18 Thus Hera and
Athena's personal hatred of Troy operates within a larger moral framework that extends through-
out the narrative and the universe it creates.19
The Trojans' responsibility for the broken truce is compounded by Priam's personal failure to
return Helen after the duel. The advice given by 'wise Antenor' not only constitutes an admis-
sion of Trojan guilt but also highlights Priam's imminent misjudgement:20

13
Cf. Kirk (1990) 61 ad loc. 'The scholia invoked for a world-order that is not merely a matter of his own
two different prophecies of doom (if Paris went overseas, subjective preferences, as when, for example, he realizes
or if the Trojans pursued seafaring) to give a special ref- that he must relinquish the idea of saving his son
erence to "he knew nothing of the divine decrees" - Sarpedon if that world-order is to remain intact (//.
which need mean no more than his ignoring the rules of 16.431-61).
19
hospitality.' Yet the narrator's stress on the divine origins Pandarus the truce-breaker is killed by Diomedes,
of these social norms is itself significant. the Iliad's exemplary Greek warrior (for Diomedes' role
14
It is also made clear that both Achaeans and rank- in his death, see Andersen (1978) 53-7), and Athena
and-file Trojans want Paris to lose the duel (3.320-3). guides his spear so that it cuts off Pandarus' tongue (II.
The Trojans all hated Paris 'like black death' (3.454). 5.290-6). The audience will naturally view Pandarus'
15
Cairns (2001a) 16. death as punishment for his crime; the moral emerges
16
Oaths are central instruments of justice in Homeric from the story and there is no need of a speech from
(and historical Greek) society, but this is obscured by either a hero or Zeus himself to point it out. Diomedes,
those who deny the importance of justice in the Iliad, as however, does go on to interpret the Trojans' refusal to
does Havelock (1978) 123-92, a strong supporter of the hand over Helen, in defiance of their oath: yvcoxov §e, tcai
developmental model; cf. esp. 'Between Greeks and oq \iaXa VTITIIOI; EOTIV, I «<; fi8r| Tpcbeaaiv oXiQpov
Trojans, "justice" cannot exist, only the inaction of peace rceipaT.' etpfjjtxca ('It is obvious - even a very fool can see
or the activity of war' (p. 138). it - that now the coils of destruction have been fastened
17
Cf, e.g., Zanker (1994) 7: 'But Agamemnon's onto the Trojans', 7.401-2).
20
view of Zeus'justice is notoriously out of kilter with the Antenor has already been characterized as a good
god's real attitude at this juncture, for he is ambivalent adviser in his account of Odysseus and Menelaus' earlier
and aloof, at least as far as the oath is concerned.' embassy to Troy, when he gave the Greeks hospitality
18
As we shall see (cf. §I(c)), Zeus must take thought and formed a careful evaluation of their skills as orators
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC

"8et>x' ccyex', 'Apyeuiv 'E^ivr|v m i Kxn.ua0' au' auxfji

Scbouev 'Axpet5r|iaiv ayeiv. vuv 8' opKia 7iiaxd
ye-uoduevoi ua%6uecr0a- TOO OU VI> TI KepSiov r|uiv
eKxe^.eeo0ai, iva un. pe^ouev a>8e." (//. 7.350-3)

'Come on now, let us give Argive Helen and all her possessions with her to the sons of Atreus to take
away. Now we are fighting after cheating over our sworn oaths; so I do not see any good outcome for
us, unless we do as I say.'

When Paris declares himself willing to return only the goods taken from Sparta (yovaiKa uev
OIJK catoScoaco, 7.363), Priam's complicity is culpable. The Trojan herald Idaeus, charged with
relaying the response of the Trojan dyopn,, which is no more than the uuGoq 'AX,e^dv5poio
(3.374, 388), underlines the king's egregious error in denying his son's guilt:

ev, b o ' 'AA.e^av5poi; KOIA.T|IC; evi vr|i)aiv

riydyexo Tpoir|v5' - wq rcplv tiqizKk' ctJio^.ea9ai -
raxvx' E0eA,ei Souevai, Kal ex' O'I'KOGEV aKk' erciOetvai-
KoupiSiriv 8' aA-oxov Mevetaxou K-uSa^iuoio
ov (prioiv 8a>oeiv • r\ uev Tpcoe<; ye KeA-ovxai." (//. 7.389-93)

'The possessions that Alexander brought in his hollow ships to Troy - if only he had died before that!
- all these he is willing to give back and to add yet more from his own stores. But the wedded wife of
glorious Menelaus he says he will not give back, though the Trojans in fact urge him to do precisely that.'

It could not be clearer that Priam has made a disastrous mistake, allowing Paris to defy the oath
and doing so in the face of popular disapproval. 21 No less than Paris, Priam is responsible for
the destruction of Troy, his city. He acts wrongly, and he - and everyone else who depends on
him - must suffer the consequences. 22
As the poem progresses there are several more indications of Trojan deceit. During
Agamemnon's major aristeia in Book 11 he comes upon two sons of Antimachus,

oq pa \xaXiGia
Xpuaov 'A^.e^dv5poio 8e8ey|j.evo<;, aytaxa 8wpa,
OIJK ei'aax' 'E^.evr|v Souevai ^avGcoi MeveA,dcoi. (//. 11.123-5)

who in expectation of gold from Alexander, splendid gifts, was most opposed to giving Helen back to
fair-haired Menelaus.
Paris' bribery of his fellow Trojans brings disgrace on his entire community, but Antimachus'
own conduct emerges as particularly blameworthy, for as Agamemnon says:
"ei |i,ev 5f| 'Avxiud^oio Sauppovoq uieeq eoxov,
oq nox' evi Tpcocov dyopfji MeveXaov avcoyev,
dyyeA,iT|v eX.06vxa avv dvxi0ecoi '08-uafi'i,
a\)0i KaxaKxeivai UT|8 ' e^euev d\|/ iq 'Axaiovq,
\vv uev Sn. xou rcaxpoq deiKea xeioexe A.a>Pr|v." (//. 11.138-42)

21
(3.203-24). The audience may also have known of the Priam may also be faulted for not remaining on the
story (attested in Sophocles' Antenoridae, cf. Strabo battlefield to deal himself with the outcome of the duel.
13.1.53; Soph. fr. 11 Radt) that Antenor's family was The narrator draws attention to his absence (3.304-9).
22
spared at the fall of Troy (cf. Pind. Pyth. 5.83-5). If so, One recalls Hector's prediction (6.448-9): eaaetou
they may have construed it as Antenor's reward for his riuocp bY avTOT'6A.cbA.r|i "IA.IO<; ipr| I Kal Flpiauo^ Kal
wise advice here in favour of the Greeks. hxbc, eiiuueWco Flpiduoio ('The day will come when
sacred Ilios will be destroyed, and Priam, and the people
of Priam of the fine ash spear').
6 WILLIAM ALLAN

'If you are indeed the sons of wise Antimachus, who once in the Trojan assembly, when Menelaus had
come on an embassy with godlike Odysseus, urged them to kill him on the spot and not let him go back
to the Achaeans, now you will pay for your father's abominable outrage.'

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:

'IKU6XOXO<; 8' dnopouae- TOV ax> xaual e^evdpv^ev,

Xeipocq oaio £{<pei nXrfeaq dno x' oa>xeva icoyai;'
o^uov 8'w<; saaeue KrAivSeaGcu Si'ouiXou. (//. 11.145-7)

Hippolochus leapt down, and him he killed on the ground, slicing off his arms and head with his sword,
and sent him rolling through the throng like a log.23

The pattern of Trojan deceit and punishment is also shown to extend back beyond the current
generation. Poseidon, puzzled by Apollo's continuing support for the Trojans, reminds him of
how Laomedon had cheated them both of proper payment after they built a wall around Troy and
tended the king's cattle (21.441-57). Though Poseidon sent a sea-monster to punish the Trojans,
Heracles destroyed it, yet he in turn was defrauded of his reward by Laomedon24 and took his
revenge by sacking Troy (5.648-51, 20.144-8). Nevertheless, Poseidon's anger against Troy
remains unappeased, so that 'here we have a case of divine anger extending over more than one
generation'.25 The descendants of Laomedon pay for his crimes as well as their own, and the
narrative shows that divine justice is not always instantaneous, an idea that is often treated as if
it first surfaced in Hesiod and Solon (e.g. Hes. W&D 282-4; Solon fr. 13.29-32 W).26

(c) Zeus and the fall of Troy

In trying to determine Zeus's own attitude to Troy, scholars are often misled by the fact that Zeus
nowhere expresses explicit anger at the city or happiness at its fall. Thus, with regard to
Agamemnon's prediction that Troy will be destroyed by Zeus in anger at the Trojans' deceit
(4.160-8), a recent discussion observes that 'we, unlike Agamemnon, can see Zeus's "real" atti-
tude. When this Zeus brings about the fall of Troy it will be with sorrow and not with righteous
indignation.'27 Yet such a formulation risks confusing two very different ideas, for Zeus's pre-
sumed feelings of pity at the city's destruction and his conviction that the fall of Troy is right are
not mutually exclusive. Zeus speaks on one occasion as if he wants to save Troy, but his real
motive is evidently to annoy Hera and Athena and so facilitate the breaking of the truce (4.5-19).
He also makes clear in the same context his strong affection for the Trojans, because they offer
him lavish sacrifices (4.44-9), but this does not change the fact that he approves of Troy's fall.

23
There are nine fatal arm wounds in the Iliad (see reason to be furious with the Trojans; cf. 13.185-209,
the tables in Saunders (2004) 14-15), but this is the only ending o t p w e w v Aavaovx;, Tpcbeaai 8e icr|5e' eteuxev
time in the poem that a corpse is mutilated by having its ('[Poseidon] urged on the Danaans, and was preparing
arms cut off. The act is in line with Agamemnon's disaster for the Trojans').
26
extremely violent aristeia {cf. Segal (1971) 10, 20), but Kullmann (1985) 20 n.45, for example, remarks:
also serves to underline his fury at the treachery of the 'It is interesting to see how the theodicee concept of the
Trojans. Odyssey is mitigated in Hesiod and Solon. Both authors
24
Laomedon is said to have been deceived himself by allow that the justice of the gods is not always executed
Anchises, who secretly bred his mares with Laomedon's immediately.' Yet this is doubly misleading, since it
outstanding horses (5.265-72). Diomedes captures their posits a false dichotomy between the Iliad and the
offspring when he defeats Aeneas (5.319-27). Odyssey, and overlooks the presence of delayed punish-
25
Lloyd-Jones (2002) 2. Hector's killing of his ment in the Iliad itself,
27
grandson Amphimachus gives Poseidon an additional Kearns (2004) 69 n.14.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 7

Thus one scholar seeks to connect the fact that '[Zeus] makes no attempt to conceal his love of
Troy' with the god's alleged 'ambivalence' about the punishment of the oath-breakers.28 Yet this
is to create a false opposition, since Zeus can love Troy and still think it right that the Trojans be
punished. It is therefore irrelevant that Zeus does not express any happiness at Troy's fall, since
his approval is not only implicit in the narrative itself29 but also integral to the larger cosmic
order of which Zeus himself is the anthropomorphic manifestation and ultimate enforcer.
This emerges most clearly in Zeus's major prophecy concerning the course of the war in Book
15. Addressing Hera, he bids her tell Poseidon to stop aiding the Achaeans, then continues:

" "Eicxopa 8 ' OTpuvrioi (idxr|v eq 4>oi(3o(; '

avm<; 8' enTWEixxnai UEVOC;, A.e^.d0T|i 8 ' oSuvdcov
a t vuv utv xeipouat m i d cppsvaq, rxuxdp 'A%aiouq
d7iooxpev(rri(nv dvdXiaSa qyu^av evopaaq,
8' ev vnuai ;io?u)KA,r|iai niawai
'AxiA,fjo<;. o 8' dvoxrioei ov exatpov
ndxpoK?tov • xov 8e KXEVEI eyxei (paiSiuot; "Exxcop
'iA-iou 7ipo7idpoi9e, noXsiq o^eoavx' ai£r|oi><;
xovq aAAout;, UExd 8 ' mov EUOV Iap7rr|86va 8vov •
xot> 8e xoA,cood|xevo(; KXEVET "Eicxopa 8io<; 'AxikXevq.
EK xov 8' av xoi ETieixa naXiw^iv jrapd VTJCOV
OUEV Eyw x£\)xoi(ii ?>ia\inepeq, eiq o K' 'Axaioi
aiTi-u E^OIEV 'A9r|va{T)<; 8id pou^-di;." (//. 15.59-71)

'And let Phoebus Apollo spur Hector into battle, and breathe strength into him again and make him
forget the pains that now wear out his heart. Let him drive the Achaeans back again when he has raised
in them a cowardly panic so that they flee and fall among the many-benched ships of Achilles, son of
Peleus. And Achilles will send out his companion, Patroclus; but glorious Hector will kill him with
his spear in front of Ilios, once Patroclus has slaughtered many of the other young fighting men, and
among them my own son, godlike Sarpedon. Enraged for Patroclus, godlike Achilles will kill Hector.
And from that time on I shall bring about a counter-attack from the ships, constant and continuous,
until the Achaeans take steep Ilios through the designs of Athena.'

Zeus impels Hector to his death, knowing that this means the fall of Troy. Thus to doubt that
Zeus approves of Troy's destruction would 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 order cannot be
separated from his power. Moreover, Zeus's desire that Troy should fall (15.69-71) is predicat-
ed upon his belief that it is right.
The importance of cosmic order is highlighted when one considers the issue of fate, and par-
ticularly its relation to the will of Zeus. In Book 8 Zeus prophesies to Hera the death of Patroclus
and Achilles' subsequent return to the fighting, coq yap Oempaxov eaxi ('for so it is decreed',
8.470-7). The formulation is vague, and intentionally so, since the narrator here reflects and
deploys a standard Greek conception of Zeus's will and his superior knowledge of future events
in which there is little difference between 'Zeus knows x' and 'x must be'. However, when Zeus
considers sparing Sarpedon and Hector, though each is Jidtaxi Ttertpcouevov ai'oT|i ('long since
doomed by fate', 16.441, 22.179), the narrator exploits the idea that there is a power beyond

28
Zanker(1994) 7; cf. n.17 above. with a further omen that the Greek army will not be
29
Calchas had interpreted the omen of the sparrows defeated (8.242-52). The narrator marks the limits of
and the petrified snake at Aulis as a sign from Zeus that Zeus's assistance to the Trojans: he will honour Thetis
Troy will fall in the tenth year of the war (2.323-32). and Achilles' request, but will not destroy the Achaean
Zeus responds to Agamemnon's prayer for help, in the army totally (13.347-50) - his will is that Troy shall fall,
midst of unprecedented Trojan success, by confirming 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,31 these 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
because it would destroy an order of which he not only approves, but of which he is both the ulti-
mate guarantor and 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
human mortality. For as well as defining a hierarchy of gods and mortals,33 it also marks out the
structure of power among the gods themselves, since cosmic order is closely connected through-
out early Greek thought to the status and power of Zeus, which are in turn defined by his per-
sonal relations with other gods. No less than Hesiod, the Homeric epics reflect the fact that the
evolution of the cosmos is a violent process,34 and that its maintenance may involve further vio-
lence or at least the threat of it.35 The stability of the universe rests therefore upon a balance of
power that is vulnerable to the turbulence of competing divine wills. Yet the structuring of the
Olympians as a divine family creates a hierarchy of power that goes some way to resolving the
rivalries of the gods. Poseidon is portrayed in the Iliad as especially sensitive about his status:
as the younger brother, he is careful to support the Achaeans covertly, lest he offend Zeus
(13.354-60). He insists indignantly on his equal status as son of Kronos and Rhea, with an equal
domain as his portion, and it takes Iris' tactful warning against sparking Zeus's anger to 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 human justice 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 phrase is used in each case (twice by Iliad poet alludes to the myth that Zeus forced Thetis to
Hera, once by Athena): ep8'- c h a p ox> xoi jcdvxe<; marry Peleus because of a prophecy that her son would
e7taiveouev9EOiaAAoi('Doit;butbesure we other gods be stronger than its father, this would be a peculiarly
will not all approve', 4.29, 16.443, 22.181). striking example of Zeus's superior force directed
31
Cf. Erbse (1986) 288: 'Die Moglichkeit, sich der towards the maintenance of his power (see, however,
uoipa zu widersetzen, gesteht der Dichter seinem Zeus Edwards (1991) 196 on //. 18.429-35 and Cairns (2001a)
also nur scheinbar zu, lediglich urn die Tiefe seines 46-7 for the alternative explanation of Thetis' enforced
Schmerzes zu beleuchten.' marriage as due to her rejection of Zeus's sexual
32
The most important human limit being death, as advances out of respect for Hera). In any case, Zeus's
Hera makes explicit when she warns of the consequences potential overthrow by such a son (first securely attested
of sparing Sarpedon: the other gods would seek to spare in Pind. Isthm. 8.26-48 and [Aesch.] PK764-8, 907-27) is
their own mortal offspring (16.445-9); cf. n.18. part of a wider pattern of myths depicting Zeus's control
33
This aspect is well expressed by Graziosi and over female deities and their fertility; cf. §III(b), esp.
Haubold (2005) 9 1 : 'harmony among the gods ... can only n. 134.
35
be ensured if all mortals are abandoned to their own fate'. //. 8.7-27 (Zeus threatens to strike with lightning or
34
Cf. //. 1.396-406 (Hera, Poseidon and Athena's throw into Tartarus any god w h o disobeys him; his
attempt to depose Zeus), 14.200-10 (Oceanus and Tethys, strength is supreme), 8.397-408 (Zeus will blast Hera and
the parents of the gods, quarrel; Zeus imprisons Kronos Athena from their chariot if they continue their journey to
beneath the earth), 1.590-4, 14.256-62, 15.18-30 (Zeus, aid the Achaeans), 15.14-17 (Zeus threatens to whip Hera
angered by the treatment of his son Heracles, hurled gods if she continues to deceive him).
36
from heaven and hangs Hera in the sky with anvils For the role of divine rivalry and Zeus's authority
attached to her feet). If, as Slatkin (1991) argues, the in the Odyssey, see §II(c) below.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 9

communal appraisal.37 Moreover, the stability and regulation of human society as a whole is
based on a system of norms which are thought to derive their authority ultimately from Zeus
himself. Achilles speaks of Achaeans 'who give judgements and preserve the ordinances that
come from Zeus' (SiKaarcoAm, 01 xe 0£|j.ioxac; I npbq Aibq eipuaxoa, //. 1.238-9), while Nestor
says to Agamemnon that 'Zeus has entrusted to you the sceptre and the ordinances, to make
judgements for your people' (Kai xoi Zevc, eyyudA,i^ev I aicfJ7rr.p6v x' fi5e 6e|noxa<;, ivd aqnai
(3o\)A,et)T|io0a, 9.98-9). Thus Zeus is both source and patron of human justice, which is dis-
pensed both by kings and by the elders of the community (for the latter, cf. 18.503-8 and §I(e)
on 16.384-93).38 Most importantly, justice, like all forms of value, is socially constituted, both
among the gods and among mortals.39
This emerges most clearly in the poem's depiction of the crucial mistakes made by
Agamemnon and Achilles, whose decisions are measured against the evaluative beliefs of their
community and found to be unjustified.40 Moreover, both men make a similar error, pushing their
personal status and demands for xiur| to the detriment of the common good:41 Agamemnon's con-
duct is repeatedly criticized from a communal perspective (cf., e.g., 1.22-3, 161-2, 231, 275-84,
355-6, 9.109-11, 19.181-2), while Achilles' rejection of Agamemnon's offer of compensation,
described by Nestor as one that 'could no longer be faulted' (8copa |j.ev OUKEX' ovoaxd 5i5oi(;
'A%iA,fiiL avaKxi, 9.164), shows his obduracy to be both selfish and destructive, as Achilles effec-
tively subordinates the social process of reparation to his own will.42

(e) Judgements and sanctions (human and divine)

Thus, insofar as compensation, as an instrument of justice, is defined by the evaluative beliefs
and practices of his society, Achilles' attitude towards it reveals the limitations and dangers of
his self-obsession. Yet the fact that norms of human behaviour are socially constituted does not

37
Zeus's supreme strength (of which he threatening- well argued by Morris (2001), even if he shares the ten-
ly boasts: 8.18-27) marks an important difference dency of some recent scholarship (e.g. Crielaard (2002)
between gods and humans which the poet has made a cat- 239: 'we could almost speak of a historical Homeric soci-
alyst of his plot, since Agamemnon's authority does not ety') to collapse the past and place more and more fea-
rest on his superior strength or pre-eminence as a fighter. tures in the eighth century. Given the lack of other writ-
Cf. Nestor's words of restraint to Achilles: ei 5e cri) ten evidence, the desire to use Homer as a historical
Kapxepoi; e a a i , 9ea 8e a e yeivaxo ut|XT|p, I aXk' o8e source for the Archaic period is understandable, but
<pepTEpo<; eaxiv, inei nXeoveaaw d v d a a e i ('But even if should be treated sceptically, especially when it brushes
you are strong, and a goddess mother bore you, he is still over the many 'anachronisms' in the text (e.g. features
more powerful, since he rules over more', 1.280-1). that archaeology would place in the late Bronze Age; for
38 a brief overview, cf. Osborne (2004) 217-18).
In rebuking the rank-and-file soldiers for their rush
41
to the ships, Odysseus foregrounds the role of the leaders The importance of other-regarding behaviour and
and commands: e'n; KOipavoi; eaxw, I ei<; ftaaikzvq, wi communal interests in the Homeric economy of values is
55>K£ Kpovoi) nak, dyKiAourixea) aKTJ7ixp6v x' T]8E stressed by Cairns (2001b), who shows that 'No sharp
Geutaxai; ivd acpiai pVoA-evmiaiv ('Let there be one dichotomy exists between competitive and co-operative
leader, one king, to whom the son of crooked-minded values' (p. 216). Cairns's incisive demolition of the (still
Kronos has given the sceptre and the ordinances so that widely canvassed) view that honour is a 'zero-sum' game
he may make judgements for his people', 2.204-6). will, one hopes, put an end to the myth of exclusive
39
For the social creation of value in modern soci- Homeric individualism.
42
eties, cf. Raz (1999) 202-17, esp. 203-7. Similarly, when Achilles relishes the prospect of
40
From the perspective of Homeric ethics, it matters the Achaeans (including Agamemnon) 'standing about
little that Homeric society itself is a fiction. Fiction, that my knees in supplication' ( v w oi'co jtepl y o w a x ' eud
is, not only in the obvious sense of 'existing within a axr|aea9ai 'AXOUOVK; I Xiaaouivoui; • ZP e i ( ^ Y<*P iKave-
work of literature', but also in the stronger sense that it xai OWKEX' dveKxoi;, 11.609-10), the absurdity of his
does not track a particular historical society. Like the demands, from a collective viewpoint, is emphatically
epic Kunstsprache, Homeric society has developed to underlined, since for Agamemnon to act thus would be to
suit the purposes of generations of bards. Nonetheless, place himself in Achilles' power, and recognize Achilles
the fundamental point that the past is also constantly as his superior, in a way that would destroy the entire
remodelled in the light of contemporary understanding is social structure of the Achaean army.
10 WILLIAM ALLAN

mean they are of no interest to the gods or operate without them. This fundamental idea is made
most explicit in the simile used to describe the rout of the Trojans as they flee from Patroclus'
onslaught in Book 16:

mq 8' (mo Xaikam Jtaaoc KEAXXIVTI (iePpiGe %9(ov

r|uax' 67icopwGn, OXE Axtppoxocxov ^eev uScop
Zettq, oxe 5r| ocvSpeocn KOXEGoduevoi; xaXznr\vr\i,
oi pini siv dyopfii OKoA.id<; Kpivaxu GEUIOXOCI;,
EK 8e Aiicr|v iXaoaai, 9ea»v oittv OUK d^Eyovxeq,
xwv 8e xe 7tdvxe<; (xev Ttoxanol 7c^.r|Go'uoi peovxei;,
noXkaq 8e K^eixuq xox' d7ioxun,yo"uai %apd8pou,
iq 8' ixka TioptpupEnv (xeydXa axevdxouoi peouoai
it) opecov ejiiKap, uivuGei 8e XE epy' dv6pcQ7tcov,
caq i'jt7ioi Tpanal \ieyaXa oxEvdxovxo Geouoou. (//. 16.384-93)

As the whole dark earth is drenched by a storm on an autumn day, when Zeus pours down the most
violent rain, in furious anger at men who force through crooked judgements in the assembly and drive
out justice, with no regard for the vengeful gaze of the gods; then all their rivers flow in spate, and the
torrents cut away many slopes as they rush with a mighty roar headlong from the mountains into the
swelling sea, and the cultivated fields of men are ruined - so mighty was the roar of the Trojan horses
as they hurtled on.

One scholar remarks that the Zeus found here 'is hard to reconcile with the Zeus we know so
well from Homer's scenes on Olympus'.43 Yet while it is true that explicit statements of Zeus's
interest in justice are far less conspicuous in the Iliad than in the Odyssey, we should be wary of
taking too narrow a view of Zeus's concerns in the former,44 since he is clearly concerned to
maintain order at a cosmic level, while the audience's knowledge that Troy will fall gives the
Achaeans' appeals to a punishing Zeus considerable force.45 Indeed, the manner in which the
simile links justice (Siicn,) to Zeus and the other gods is entirely consistent with the rest of the
poem. Moreover, the simile's equation of justice with the making of correct judgements or deci-
sions illustrates an important pattern. For as Zeus's decisions determine justice (or order) on a
cosmic level, so the decisions of human judges establish social norms. Thus Sucn, (qua 'justice')
is essentially the revelation of particular decisions.46 In the human realm these are based on
social customs (acting as precedents); in the divine realm on the inscrutable will of Zeus.

43
Redfield (1994) 76. main narrative'. Yet most similes, as here, are presented
44
As does Mueller (1984) 147, for example, who, from the narrator's (authoritative) viewpoint. They are
having noted the theme of 'social justice' in the Odyssey no less significant for not being part of the 'story'. And,
and Hesiod, claims that when the Iliadic Zeus 'punishes as always, the simile's context is crucial to its impact (cf.
the wicked with a flood, not unlike the Old Testament Minchin (2001) 132-60): since the surrounding narrative
god, the sentiment and language of the passage stick out describes the Trojans being driven back by a Greek
like a sore thumb'(16.384). assault which is supported by Zeus, the audience is
45
The accounts typically given of this simile are encouraged to relate the bad judgements punished by
revealing in their own way. Dodds (1951) 32 took it to Zeus to those of the Trojans themselves (cf. Moulton
be 'a reflex of later conditions which, by an inadvertence (1977) 37). The narrator suggests divine punishment of
common in Homer, has been allowed to slip into a simi- the Trojans even more explicitly in the simile used to
le'. But the notion that the similes represent a 'later' describe Achilles' onslaught at 21.522-5, where the suf-
stage, whether of thought or of language (as in, e.g., fering of the Trojans is compared to that of a city set in
Shipp (1972)), is no longer convincing (even Janko flames because of the anger of the gods.
46
(1982) 192, who is generally sympathetic to Shipp's Cf. Benveniste (1973) 386, who defines 8iicn i i t -
method, remarks that ' w e cannot expect a high degree of erally as "the fact of showing verbally and with authority
precision from a dating technique of this nature). Kearns what must be", in other words it is the imperative pro-
(2004) 69 n.14, by contrast, notes Zeus's anger with nouncement of justice'. A s Benveniste (1973) 379-80
injustice, then adds 'but this is a simile, not part of the notes, Siicn and 9eui<; (cf. Geuiatai;, //. 16.387) represent
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 11

The importance of Zeus's judgements can be seen most clearly in Hera's response in Book 8
after she and Athena have been warned that Zeus will destroy their chariot with a lightning bolt
if they do not stop helping the Achaeans:
rj UEV ap' an; eurcrua' 6c7repT| 7i68a<; cbicea "Ipvq •
onkap 'A0r|vaiTiv 'Hpnrcpoi;ut>9ov eeutev
"cb Jiojioi, aiytoxoio Aio<; XEKOC;, OTJKEX' eycb ye
van em Aux; avxa ppoxcbv eveKa TUOXEUI^EIV.
xcov akXoq (iev d7io90{o9co, aAAoi; 8E picbxco,
oq KE x-uxni. KEivoq 8E xoc a (ppovEtov EVI 9"uua>t
Tpcooi t£ Kal AavaoTai Stra^Exco, ac, Ejtieiice^." (//. 8.425-31)

So speaking swift-footed Iris departed, and Hera addressed Athena, 'Oh now, daughter of Zeus who
holds the aegis, I can no longer allow us to fight against Zeus for mortals' sake. Let them die or live
as their luck will have it. But as for Zeus, let him have his own ideas and judge between Trojans and
Danaans as is fitting.'

Confronted by Zeus's certain opposition, Hera concedes immediately. Her resigned

which might be translated as 'let him pursue his judgements' (8.431), underlines the formative
role of Zeus's will in the outcome of the war (cf. §I(c) above). The human parallels to divine
8iicr| as both 'decision' and 'justice/order' are well illustrated by the judgement scene in the city
at peace depicted on Achilles' new shield (18.497-508). When a dispute arises over the correct
restitution for a man's death, public opinion is divided and a solution is sought from the elders
of the city:
oi 8' cc|i<poTEpoiaiv EOTITTUOV ducplq dpcoyor
8' apa Xabv Eprixvov. oi 8E y£povx£<;
ei'ax' EJil ^EOTOTOI A-IGOK; ispon EVI KV)KA.(OI,
aicf|JCTpa 8E KTIPUKCOV EV %kpc' z%ov riEpocpcovcov•
TOIOIV ETTEIX' Tiiooov, ccuoipr|8i<; 8' ESIKOC^OV.
KEIXO 8' a p ' EV uiaaoun Suco xp^croio xdA,avxa,
xcoi 86UEV, oq UEXCI xoToi SIKTIV iGuvxaxa ei'noi. (//. 18.502-8)

The people were cheering on both men, showing support for each, while the heralds tried to restrain
them. And the elders sat on polished stone seats in the sacred circle, taking the speaker's staff in their
hands from the loud-voiced heralds, with which they then sprang up and gave their judgement, each in
turn. And in the middle lay two talents of gold, to be given to the one who among the elders spoke the
straightest judgement.

As in the simile of Book 16, justice is practised (or, in the former case, abused) eiv dyopfji
(16.387, 18.497). Moreover, the elders'judgements are themselves subject to public approval
(which determines who is to receive the prize), making their Sdcn, a truly communal decision.
Thus the 'straightest judgement' (cf. 18.508) is that which best expresses the shared evaluative
beliefs of the people, yet the gods' interest in human justice is equally prominent, since the arbi-
tration takes place 'in the sacred circle' (18.504), and so under the protection of Zeus.47

different aspects of the concept of order 'which governs In fact, 6{KT| is often best translated as 'order' since this
also the orderliness of the universe, the movement of the avoids the intellectual and ethical baggage of 'justice';
stars, the regularity of the seasons and the years; and fur- see §I(f)-
41
ther the relations of gods and men, and finally the rela- As Janko (1992) 366 comments on 16.388 (EK
tions of men to one another' (emphasis added). The idea 8e Adcnv iXaomai, 6e(bv oniv ot)K dXeyovxeq): 'the
of order is also present in the root meaning of 8{KT| as formula "gaze of the gods", Gewv omq, already connotes
'point to' (~ 8eiicvu|ii) or 'point out a way' (cf. Schmidt "punishment"'. Cf. also Burkert (1981) 199.
(1991); Chantraine (1968) 284; Frisk (1954-73) 1.393-4).
12 WILLIAM ALLAN

(f) Moral anthropomorphism, order and the will of Zeus

It has been argued above that the prevalent view of the Homeric gods, which treats the gods of
the Iliad (in contrast to those of the Odyssey) as immoral or amoral, is mistaken (cf. esp. §I(a)).
Nevertheless, insofar as the standard view implies that there is something different and more
overtly disturbing about the Iliad's presentation of the gods, it does reflect a genuine feature of
the poem, namely the more striking moral anthropomorphism of its gods. It is misleading, how-
ever, to interpret the Iliad's moral anthropomorphism (as many scholars do) as if it were incom-
patible with the gods also being (as the characters themselves view them) enforcers of justice.
This distortion often stems from a false view of divine justice itself, which assumes that because
the gods are not perfect moral exemplars they cannot therefore enforce or care about basic issues
of right and wrong. Yet the two notions are no more incompatible than the idea that a human
being should act with 8{KT|. And although the idea that selfish and all-too-human gods are prob-
lematic (and perhaps not worthy of veneration) may well have preceded Xenophanes, the gods
of early Greek epic still enforce a basic form of justice which is no more and no less than the
characters themselves demand.48 There is therefore no fundamental contradiction between the
gods' personal projects and the system of reciprocal justice that they sanction. Thus, for exam-
ple, one scholar considers Zeus's punishment of Hera (//. 15.18-33; cf. n.34) to be irreconcilable
with his patronage of justice, and remarks 'Zeus often seems far more concerned with his honor
than with the rights and wrongs of his relations with gods and men.'49 Yet these two facets of
Zeus's role - his concern for his own xiur| and his concern for justice - are far from being irrec-
oncilable (and only become so if one operates with an inappropriate conception of justice).
Moreover, it is a basic feature of the moral universe of the poems that justice is closely tied to
sensitivity about one's own honour as well as respect for the honour of others.
Though the same pattern of justice operates in both Homeric epics, the Iliad poet makes his
narrative more problematic, not only through the presence of sympathetic Trojan characters, but
also by having a number of gods fighting on their behalf. The suitors of the Odyssey, by con-
trast, though not all wicked (cf. §II(h)), are far less sympathetic and enjoy no divine support. It
is right that the Trojans should be punished for their conduct, not least because a Trojan started
the war, but the narrative draws attention to the disproportionate suffering involved, since the
foreshadowing of Troy's destruction means that many innocent Trojans will pay for the mistakes
of Paris and Priam.50 Such harsh and disproportionate punishment may be a traditional idea (cf.
Hes. W&D 240-7),51 but is no less disturbing for being so. The poet makes the imbalance par-
ticularly emphatic in his only explicit allusion to the Judgement of Paris:

ev9' aXkox^ (iev n a o i v erivSavev, cruSe 7io9' "Hpr|i

OTJ8E FIocjEiSdcov' ot>Se YXcruKamiSi Koi>pr|i,
aXk' £%ov, &c, a<piv Ttpcikov ounixQeTO "iA-ioq ipt|
KCU Upiayioq rat Xabq 'Ata^dvSpcru EVEK' CCTTH;
oq veiKeooe Sedq, oxe oi ueooauA,ov IKOVTO,
TTIV 8 ' fiivrio', r\ oi 7iope naxA.ocruvnv dtayeivriv. (//. 24.25-30)

48
Even if the human characters' limited knowledge sequences of what the narrator calls Paris' 'ruinous randi-
means that they may doubt whether the justice they ask ness' (24.30), is considered below. The narrator applies
for will come about, as when Agamemnon doubts Zeus's a similar judgement to a Greek error (Achilles' rejection
promise that he will sack Troy (//. 9.19-20). of the Embassy and the sufferings it brings upon the
49
Zanker (1994) 4. Achaeans) when Thetis' prayer to Zeus is condemned as
50
The pattern of misdeed and (disproportionate) pun- e^a(aiov ('disastrous', 15.598).
51
ishment is starkly underlined by the narrator when Hdt. 2.120.5 takes the death of innocent Trojans to
Agamemnon's command that all the Trojans should be show that the gods mete out great punishments for great
annihilated, even the children in the womb, is described crimes,
as aioiuxt ('justified', 6.62). A further example, the con-
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 13

This [sc. to steal the body of Hector] was pleasing to all the other gods, but not to Hera or Poseidon or
the bright-eyed maiden. They hung on to the hatred they had from the first for sacred Ilios and Priam
and his people, because of the folly of Alexander, who had found fault with the goddesses when they
came to his farm's inner courtyard, and approved of her who offered him ruinous randiness.

As Macleod comments, 'There is a powerful antithesis between the accumulated "IXIOC, ipn, I
m l Flpiauo^ KOUtaxo<;and the single 'A?ie2;dv8poi). The gods' anger with one citizen and his
folly affects the whole city.'52 Macleod well compares //. 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 5{KT| that dominates the poem is in some measure ruthless, it is also impartial,
since it governs the Achaeans no differently from the Trojans.53 Thus the entire Achaean army
must endure the plague that results from Agamemnon's mistake (1.43-52), while Achilles' rejec-
tion of the Embassy ensures the Trojans' further success, 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 to Thetis make clear:

"cci\(ra (xdA,' £<; crr.pcrr.6v EA.0E m i mei ocoi ETUT

(jioj^ecGou oi Eine 0EOIK;, EUE 8' E^oxct rcdvxcov
dSavdxcov K£%o^.6c>a9ai, OTI <pp£ai uaivouevniaiv
"EKTOP' EXEI rcapd vn-uoi Kopcovloiv o\)5' anzkvozv,
ai' KEV 7tco<; euiTE SEICJTII ano 0' "EKtopa Xx>or\i." (II. 24.112-16)

'Go at once to the camp and give this message to your son: tell him that the gods are angry with him,
and that I above all the immortals am filled with wrath, because he in his madness is keeping Hector
by the beaked ships and has not given him back. Perhaps he will then in fear of me give Hector back.'

52
Macleod (1982) 88 on 24.27-8. Indeed, the TI<; ueXXei Ppoxoi; d v 8 p l xeXeaaai, I 05 nep GvriTot; T '
emphasis on Paris himself is even more pointed insofar as ecszi teal oi> xoaa u n S e a oiSev (18.362-3).
the position of 'AA.e£;dv5pou EVEK' emu; ' s otherwise 55
Apollo's protest against Achilles' maltreatment of
taken up by eiJuueXico flpi&uoio (c/! 4.47, 165, 6.449). Hector's corpse is a striking instance of divine pity.
53
This is a fundamental point, since impartiality is, Indeed, it is important to stress that Apollo acts out of pity
as Elster (1999) 339 observes (cited by Cairns (2001b) rather than an impartial concern for human morality, for
219 n.45), ' a necessary feature of any view that wants to such impartial concern is not the domain of the Homeric
be taken seriously as a conception of justice'. gods. The scene is an excellent illustration of how the
54
However, despite this impartiality, there is a fun- tensions inherent in the Homeric theodicy, driven by a
damental disparity between gods and mortals, since the range of individual desires and relationships, produce an
gods enjoy the privilege of being able to punish mortals appropriate resolution, just as the quarrelling among the
in a way that mortals cannot so easily do if wronged by a gods eventually results in the destruction of Troy. It is a
god: as Achilles says to Apollo after the god has deceived messy system, but w e should resist the temptation to
him and lured him away from the Trojans: v w 5 ' eue|j.Ev impose moral certainty and neatness on it. For such
\iiya KtiSoq d<peiA.eo, TO\)<; 8 ' eaawcaq I pni'Siax;, ereel ov messiness is not necessarily incompatible with what we
xi xioiy y' eSSeiccxi; orciaaco. I f) a ' a v xeiaayrnv, ei uoi would term a 'moral' outcome. Indeed, if it were other-
8juyaui5 ye TtapeiT) (//. 22.18-20). Speaking to Zeus, wise, the Homeric gods would have no normative (a bet-
Hera craftily exploits the superiority of the gods in order ter term in this context than 'moral') force at all.
to justify her right to punish the Trojans: m i |iev 8r| KOX>
14 WILLIAM ALLAN

Like Apollo, Zeus expresses his indignation at non-burial in direct speech (this is not a case of
character-speech attributing human values to the gods), and he above all the gods is angry at
Achilles' excessive behaviour. Moreover, Zeus's solution to the dispute between the gods who
pity Hector and the stubborn haters of Troy (Hera, Poseidon and Athena) expresses a desire to
uphold a basic human good (respect for the dead and their right to burial).56 Zeus's proposal thus
takes account of the competing claims of the gods, yet ensures that order is restored, mirroring
the start of the poem, where Zeus was able to incorporate his obligation to Thetis within the
wider plan of Troy's fall.
It has been well observed of Apollo's condemnation of Achilles' conduct that 'this is the only
place in the Iliad where nemesis is used of the attitude of the gods toward human beings who
have broken the moral code' (jj.fi dyaGcoi nep eovxi veiieaariGecouiv oi fijieii;, 24.53); yet the
same scholar continues, 'But it is also true that this notion of god as the guarantor of norms is
introduced here only to be rejected. Hera protests that Achilles is not human in the ordinary
sense; he is a member of the divine community ... Zeus agrees with Hera ... Achilles must be
drawn into the divine community' (emphasis added).57 However, this overlooks Zeus's promi-
nent role as the guarantor of a moral and social order which is ensured by the fulfilment of ritu-
al acts (in this case burial).58 Nor is it clear that Achilles is 'drawn into the divine community'
(this argument is part of Hera's rhetorical strategy and a sign of her ulterior motives). It is
Achilles' choice whether he releases Hector's body or not, and he is influenced both by fear of
Zeus's anger and by a desire for the rich compensation offered by Priam at the suggestion of Zeus
(cf. 24.112-19, 592-5). Neither reason draws Achilles 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 thoroughly human response, encouraged by Zeus, whose insistence upon
Hector's burial recognizes (and restores) the values of social and ritual order. Thus Zeus's deci-
sion at the end of the poem embodies the same principle of divine concern for human order that
has operated throughout.59
As we have seen, what counts as 8iicn ('justice') among the human characters of the Iliad is
closely related to 5{icn or 'order' at a cosmic level, since the will of Zeus extends to both.
Moreover, Zeus's maintenance of order is linked to his own power, as the several reminders of
his rise to supremacy make clear (n.34). Yet Zeus cannot ignore the competing plans of the other
gods, and this leads to a narrative pattern which we can trace throughout early Greek hexameter
poetry (cf. esp. §ll(e) and III(b)), whereby Zeus's will is realized through the actions and reac-
tions of others, including other gods. In short, the competing wills of the gods are seen to result

56
For burial as the yepaqGavovtcov, cf. Hera's words 15.372-6 makes the reciprocity clear; cf. also 8.236-41),
to Zeus on the death of Sarpedon (16.456-7), which are and neither would be the most desirable outcome for any
repeated by Zeus in his instructions to Apollo (16.674-5). god (or mortal).
57
Achilles speaks in the same terms of mourning Patroclus Redfield (1994) 213.
58
(23.9). Yet although burial is a basic human good, it As with their protection of strangers and suppli-
would not be true to say that, because Hector is dead and ants, the gods' supposed care for the dead may be viewed
can no longer sacrifice to them, the gods have nothing to as a projection of human anxiety about the vulnerability
gain by it. For like the gods' interest in oaths, guest- of the defenceless in their communities, extending suc-
friendship and supplication, all of which impinge on their cour to those individuals (e.g. outsiders, the helpless and
own Tiur), divine anger at non-burial is directed to the dead) whose condition weakens their ability to assert
upholding a principle wherein their own interests are at their customary claims to respect and justice,
59
stake. All relationships are reciprocal, and the gods The re-establishment of order coincides with the
require honours, temples and sacrifices, since that is their resolution of Achilles' wrath and its consequences, creat-
yEpctc;. If the gods were simply to let terrible things (such ing a strong and satisfying narrative closure, even if the
as non-burial) happen continuously to those who honour audience remains aware that Achilles' anger could flare
them, those honours would end or the community would up again,
cease to exist (Nestor's complaint to 'father Zeus' at //.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 15

in a fixed order which is identified with the will of Zeus.60 Thus, as Achilles prepares to re-enter
battle, Zeus assembles the gods and encourages them to assist the side of their choice, so that
Achilles may not sack Troy 'beyond what is fated' (20.23-30); but it is clear that Apollo and the
other pro-Trojan gods will eventually have to give way, since Troy must fall. The fall of Troy is
itself presented as part of an impartial system of divine justice in which both Trojans and
Achaeans face the consequences of their misdeeds. This pattern is overlooked by those who
claim that a concern for justice is the preserve of the gods of the Odyssey, as if the fall of Troy
were not justified within the Iliad itself.61 Moreover, as we shall see, the pattern of justice and
cosmic order embodied in the Iliad is also found throughout early Greek hexameter poetry.
Thus, to single out the Iliad as presenting merely 'a theodicy of sorts'62 obscures not only the
poem's comprehensive and compelling depiction of what the gods stand for in relation to human-
ity, but also its essential continuity in this respect with the wider tradition of early Greek epic.

II

(a) The Odyssey: a new divine world?

It is still widely believed that the divine world of the Odyssey is substantially different from that
of the Iliad.63 Thus studies of the Odyssey abound with such claims as 'the nature of the gods
has changed',64 a transformation that is often said to result in 'a "purer" conception of god'.65
This theological difference is, in turn, frequently presented as being most acute in the sphere of
divine justice, since, it is alleged, the gods of the Odyssey are more moralistic in their attitude to
human wickedness.66 Even Lloyd-Jones, who otherwise stresses the continuity of religious and
moral ideas throughout early Greek literature, endorses the standard view of the Odyssey, name-
ly, 'that its theology is in some important ways different from that of the Iliad'.61 By contrast,
the foremost aim of this section is to challenge the orthodox view: firstly, by showing that, for
all its characteristic themes and ideas, the Odyssey does not differ substantially from the Iliad in
its presentation of the gods or their interest in justice; and secondly, by complicating the
familiar picture of the Odyssey as a tale of clear-cut crime and punishment. Through a close
analysis of Zeus's opening speech (the locus classicus for moral interpretations of the poem), and
by focusing on the role of divine rivalry and anger, reciprocal justice and the will of Zeus, this
section aims to show the essential continuity of religious attitudes and social values in the
Homeric epics.68

60 62
Despite his privileged access to 'great Zeus's will' So Mueller (1984) 147, exemplifying a widespread
via Thetis (r\ ol ditayyeAAEaKe Aioq ueyaA.oio voriua, view of the Iliad vis-a-vis the Odyssey.
63
17.409), Achilles does not know that Patroclus will be Cf, e.g., Keams (2004) 67-9, entitled 'The gods in
killed (cf. 18.9-11). Yet even the gods themselves cannot the Odyssey: differences between the epics'.
M
know all of Zeus's plans in advance. The narrator, by Burkert (1997) 259; cf, e.g., Griffin (1980) 5 1 :
contrast, can, and so connects Patroclus' death to the 'The gods who preside over this world have also changed
'mind of Zeus' (16.688-91). Similarly, characters often their nature.'
65
refer to 'the gods' in general, but the narrator can name Burkert (1997) 262.
66
the actual god responsible. E.g. Mueller (1984) 147: 'These differences are
61
Cf, e.g., Kirk (1962) 291: 'The gods of the Iliad, most marked when it comes to justice. The Odyssey is a
indeed, are almost wholly indifferent to this concept [i.e. model tale of poetic justice.'
67
justice], and determine events like the fate of Troy from Lloyd-Jones (1983) 28.
68
motives of their convenience.' Yet this approach ignores Contrast, for example, Finley (1977) 140: 'The
the multiple causes of the fall of Troy within the Iliad (the Olympian religion could not stand still and yet survive.
Judgement of Paris, the rape of Helen, the broken truce, The intellectual revolution reflected in the Iliad required
the will of Zeus), all of which have nothing to do with still another revolution, a moral one, in which Zeus was
'convenience', but much to do with justice and cosmic transformed from the king of a heroic society to the prin-
order. 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 uncomplicated tale of villains punished and the righteous rewarded. 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 it 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'.10 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.11 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:

"oo 7167:01, oiov 8r| vu Bzohq ppoxol CUTIOCOVTOCI.

e^ f|uicov yap <pacn raic' EUfievai- 01 8e KCCI auxoi
o^fjunv daacSaA-vnioiv imep uopov ixkye' exouoiv,
foe, m l v w A'iyioQoq..." (Od. 1.32-5)

'Oh, how these mortals blame the gods! They say their troubles come from us, and yet they too them-
selves, through their own reckless acts, have sorrows beyond their destined share, as does Aegisthus.'

Zeus criticizes mortals for failing to recognize that their suffering is compounded by their own
outrageous behaviour. This is certainly a strong condemnation of human folly, but it should not
be taken to imply (as is often the case) that responsibility for human suffering lies with human-
ity alone, or that the gods of the Odyssey will be more concerned with proper human behaviour
per se than are the gods of the Iliad.
Scholars are certainly right to stress the importance of Zeus's complaint (which in itself
makes for an arresting opening), since reckless behaviour and its punishment will be central to
the narrative, but no less significant for the theology of the poem as a whole is Zeus's acknowl-
edgement that much of humanity's suffering is due to the gods.73 In other words, while Zeus

69
Cf., e.g., Eumaeus on the gods' attitude to the suit- ity ... [The Odyssey poet] is presenting the beginning of
ors (Od. 14.83-4; quoted above as an epigraph to this art- the idea that men are responsible for their own misfor-
icle). However, there is no mention of divine punishment tunes' (emphasis added).
72
for the Phoenician traders who conspired to abduct See n.5.
73
Eumaeus as a child and then sold him into slavery Scholars and translators often fail to give the Kai
(15.403-84). of line 33 its full force, since it implies '[they suffer
70
Kearns (2004) 69. because of their own wickedness] in addition to the trou-
71
Cf, e.g., Edwards (1987) 130: 'In the Odyssey, bles sent by us [i.e. the gods]'. As Tsagarakis (2000) 47
however, the gods are much more concerned with moral- n. 163 notes, 'The Kai makes all the difference here.'
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 17

foregrounds human disregard of divine warnings,74 the subsequent narrative also makes clear the
role of the gods as a source of human suffering (cf. esp. §II(d) and (g) on Poseidon and Helios).75
And since these are both central aspects of the interaction of gods and mortals in the Iliad as well,
it is misleading to speak of a 'radical shift' in the theodicy of the Odyssey.

(c) Divine rivalry and anger

Those who detect a different theology at work in the Odyssey often elide the role of divine rival-
ry and anger, both as a catalyst of the poem's plot and as a central element of the gods' attitudes
to one another and to humanity.76 Yet the focus in the second half of the poem on Odysseus' pun-
ishment of the suitors, which is uncontested at the divine level, does not annul the clash of divine
wills that dominates the first half. Athena takes advantage of Poseidon's absence from the divine
assembly on Olympus in order to raise the issue of Odysseus' delayed return {Od. 1.22-7, 45-
62).77 When Poseidon realizes what has been done behind his back, he becomes 'even angrier'
(o 8' excbaato xrnpoGi uaAAov, 5.284). For Athena has in effect exploited his absence in order
to undermine the concomitants of his superior status. Thus she later defends her tardy assistance
by saying to Odysseus, 'But you see I was unwilling to fight Poseidon, my father's brother'
(aXXa xov o\)K e0e?inaa rioaei8dcovi udxeoGou I jiatpoKaavyvrixcoi, 13.341-2).78 And it is only
after securing Zeus's approval for Odysseus' homecoming that Athena acts to bring it about.79 In
short, as in the Iliad, Athena's plans must operate within a divine society whose rivalries and
hierarchies produce not only tensions but also a structure of authority.
It is often claimed that the gods of the Odyssey have 'changed their nature'.80 Yet although
fewer gods are individualized in the narrative (compared to the Iliad), it is clear that they retain
their typical characteristics, of which the most prominent are their loyalties to human favourites
(Athena and Odysseus) or family (Poseidon and Polyphemus) and their ruthless punishment of
those who anger or offend them (cf. Poseidon's punishment of the Phaeacians, Athena's killing

74 77
The gods' warning enhances Aegisthus' folly (and Athena's ingenuity extends to helping Odysseus'
prepares for that of Odysseus' companions and the suit- son as well. Disguised as Mentor, she prays to Poseidon
ors, who similarly ignore divine signs). Yet the fact that to grant Telemachus a safe homecoming from Pylos, thus
Hector, too, ignores omens sent by Zeus (//. 12.217-43, invoking the god even as she is working against him
13.821-32) reminds us that the Odyssey poet could have (3.55-61). The narrator adds pointedly, as if to explain
told Aegisthus' story in a less negative way, i.e. as a this unique combination of invocation and deception,'so
revenge narrative, taking into account what she prayed, and she herself was bringing it all to fulfil-
Agamemnon's father had done to Aegisthus' father. ment' (coq otp' erceix' fipaxo Koci OOJTTI jtdvxa xeXeuxa,
75
This tells against the tendency to treat the gods of 3.62).
78
the Odyssey as more distanced from human affairs: e.g. In the Iliad Poseidon is particularly insistent on his
Lesky (2001) 190: 'Zeus emphatically dissociates him- rights within the divine family; cf. //. 15.185-99.
79
self and the world of the gods from the activity of men.' Indeed, Athena is careful not to challenge Poseidon
Cf. Graziosi and Haubold (2005) 76: 'The overall thrust openly even after Zeus has given his approval: thus she
of the first Olympian scene in the Odyssey is an insis- grants Odysseus' prayer that he be well received by the
tence on the separation between gods and mortals ... The Phaeacians, auxcoi 8 ' ox> nto (pouvex' Evavxvn, • ai'6exo yap
gods, then, become dispensers of justice ... in order to p a I naxpoKacriyvrixov ('but she did not yet appear to him
enforce a distinction between the human and the divine face to face, since she respected her father's brother', Od.
plane.' The impression of distant gods is rather a product 6.329-30). One might compare Poseidon's own conduct
of the nature and scope of the story; see §II(i). As with in the Iliad, where he recognizes Zeus's authority (since
Kai (1.33), weep uopov in line 34 is important, since it he is 'mightier'; cf. 8.209-11) and therefore takes care to
expresses the traditional idea that no human life is free of aid the Achaeans covertly (13.354-7); cf. also Apollo's
suffering dispensed by the gods (cf. //. 24.527-33). So refusal to come to blows with his uncle Poseidon at //.
while it may be true that the Odyssey's tale of errors and 21.461 -9.
80
consequences is less complex and less tragic than the See n.64; cf. Chantraine (1954) 79: 'Dans Ylliade
Iliad's, there is no question of the gods being disassociat- le divin ... reste, au mauvais sens du mot, profondement
ed from human life and suffering. humain, passionne, trompeur et rancunier ... Dans
76
E.g. Griffin (1980) 54: 'we are generally given the VOdyssee l'idee divine se relie a la morale.'
impression of one undivided and righteous divine will'.
18 WILLIAM ALLAN

of Amphinomus: §II(d) and (h)). Poseidon's persecution of Odysseus is motivated by kinship

and personal vengeance, not by any abstract (or un-Iliadic) sense of morality. The narrator
underlines from the start the importance of Poseidon's anger to his account of Odysseus' return:

Geol 8' eAicupov cbiavxe;

voa(pi rioaeiSdcovcx; • o 8' do7iepxe<; u£veouvev
dvxiOewi 'OSuafji Jidpoq iiv yaiav iKeaGai. {Od. 1.19-21)

All the gods pitied him except Poseidon; he raged ceaselessly against godlike Odysseus until he
reached his own land.

Although Odysseus' actions have not offended the other gods, it would be a mistake to ignore
the wrath of Poseidon, or treat it as aberrant.81 As Clay observes, 'Interpretations that try to force
the destruction of Odysseus' companions and the sufferings of Odysseus himself at the hands of
Poseidon into the moral pattern of Aegisthus and the suitors must be recognized for what they
are: Procrustean attempts to regularize and make uniform the morality of the Odyssey.'*2 No less
misleading are those approaches which seek to treat instances of divine anger as relics of a more
'primitive' mentality or cosmos.83 Indeed, the story of Odysseus' return is itself only one of
many Greek nostoi disrupted by divine anger, as the poet often reminds us (1.325-7, 3.130-66,
4.499-511, 5.108-11).84 Moreover, the poet sees no contradiction between Athena's destruction
of the returning Greeks for their failure to punish Locrian Ajax's attempted rape of Cassandra
and her desire to save Odysseus from Poseidon's anger (cf. 1.325-7, 3.134-5, 4.502, 6.323-31).
Her positive and negative roles spring from typical divine concerns, namely to punish sacrilege
(the attempted rape took place in her temple at Troy) and to support her human protege (cf. esp.
13.291-310).

(d) Spheres of power and punishment: Poseidon and the Phaeacians

The continuity of religious thought in the Homeric epics is well illustrated by Poseidon's pun-
ishment of the Phaeacians. Critics who presume a more 'moral' theodicy in the Odyssey
inevitably detect in this episode a range of (illusory) problems and tensions. Thus one scholar
argues that 'there is a deep-seated disjuncture: one of the Odyssey's best known incidents does
not conform to its dominant ethical categories, as exemplified by the suitors' fate and the
paradeigma of Aigisthus. This is surprising at the least, and calls for an explanation. Why is
Poseidon's anger not brought into closer conformity with the prevailing religious and moral

81 83
Cf. S. West (1988) 6 1 : 'Though the wrath of Cf, e.g., Segal (1992) for an attempt to bracket off
Poseidon is repeatedly mentioned, it has little effect; the 'less moral, more "primitive" divine behavior in a well-
poet deliberately avoids conflict between Poseidon and demarcated section of the poem, the fabulous realm
Athena over Odysseus (cf. xiii 341ff.).' Yet while it is a between Troy and Ithaca in books 5 - 1 3 ' (p. 490).
typical theme of the Iliad that gods should avoid fighting Graziosi and Haubold (2005) 79 claim that 'Poseidon and
one another ppotwv EVEKO: (cf. 1.573-5, 8.427-30, Polyphemus are exceptions which serve to highlight, by
21.357-60, 462-7), it is not true of either poem (nor of contrast, the progressive thrust of the story.' They also
Poseidon in the Odyssey: cf. §II(d)) that the gods' per- describe Poseidon and Polyphemus as 'rather primitive
sonal alliances or anger have 'little effect'. A striking figures who hark back to modes of behaviour which pre-
exception is Od. 4.502, where it is said that Locrian Ajax vailed in the earlier history of the cosmos' (p. 92). Yet
could still have survived, despite Athena's wrath (KOU VU Poseidon's wrath and revenge, far from being 'excep-
KEV EKipvye icfjpa, KOU E^Gouevoi; nep' 'A8r|vT|i), had he tions', are in fact typical features of the universal order
not offended the gods with his boasting (like his greater under Zeus, and Zeus himself sanctions Poseidon's pun-
namesake: cf. Soph. Aj. 764-77) and been destroyed by ishment of the Phaeacians; see §ll(d).
84
Poseidon. For the importance of (divine) anger to both
82
Clay (1983) 218. Homeric epics, see Woodhouse (1930) 29-40; Holscher
(1988)268-9.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 19

ethos of the Odyssey, the one which is categorically enunciated at the beginning, and which
informs the central action?'85 The implicit assumptions of this approach are clear: Zeus's proem
presents a radically different moral world, to which the rest of the Odyssey should 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
viewpoint of Zeus represent two conflicting patterns of justice is mistaken.86
The positions adopted by Zeus and Poseidon are entirely consistent; they are also familiar
from the Iliad. Nevertheless, Poseidon's punishment of the Phaeacians, with Zeus's approval,
remains - from a human perspective - disturbing. For as Alcinous makes clear, the Phaeacians
offer to help Odysseus because of their concern for strangers and suppliants (8.544-7); yet Zeus,
the patron of strangers and suppliants, allows them to be punished.87 Indeed, Zeus not only
approves of Poseidon's plan to smite the Phaeacians' ship as it returns from Ithaca,88 and to
envelop their city behind a mountain,89 but also suggests turning the ship to stone, making it a
permanent memorial of the Phaeacians' punishment (13.154-8).90 By human standards of justice
Zeus's collaboration may appear vindictive,91 but it embodies a basic feature of his maintenance
of divine order, since even Zeus cannot interfere constantly in other gods' spheres of influence;
thus a god's decision to exercise his authority in his own sphere may take precedence over Zeus's
general protection of the helpless and vulnerable. It is made clear that the Phaeacians, who have
a privileged relationship with the gods (ox> xv KocTaKpimi;ot>Giv, ercei ocpvoiv eyyuBev eiuev, says
Alcinous: 7.205), are particularly close to Poseidon: they are outstanding seafarers and their
devotion to sailing and the sea is underlined by the 'speaking names' of the youths who compete
in the games (Akroneos, Okyalos, Elatreus, Nauteus, Prymneus, Anchialos, etc.: 8.111-17).
Moreover, Alcinous and Arete are both descended from Poseidon (grandson and great-grand-
daughter respectively: 7.56-66).92 But while Polyphemus, the son of Poseidon, exploits his kin-
ship to punish his enemy, the Phaeacians suffer from their proximity to the god. Zeus recognizes
that the other gods have spheres where their authority is paramount, so that his role is to maintain

85
Fenik (1974) 211-12. Achaean wall (seen in the latter passage explicitly from
86
As Reinhardt (1996) 84 notes, this supposed dis- the perspective of one looking back on the age of f|u{9eoi
tinction was once used by Analysts to justify the distinc- (12.23)). Depictions of the fjuiGecov yevo<; dv8pwv as a
tion between two poets: 'an older one who would have separate race in early Greek and Near Eastern myth are
written about the wrath of Poseidon and a more recent well discussed by Scodel (1982).
90
one who dealt with the intervention of Zeus'. In the case of the Achaean wall, whose fame,
87
Hence O d y s s e u s ' suspicious curse of the Poseidon fears, will eclipse that of the walls of Troy built
Phaeacians, spoken as he wakes on Ithaca, is doubly iron- by Apollo and himself, a potential clash between the will
ic: & Jtojtot, OT!)K a p a ravxa vof|uove<; o\>8e S k a i o i I of Zeus and the claims of Poseidon is similarly avoided
rjoav $airiKcov riynxopei; T)8e ue8ovxE<;, I oi a ' ei<; aXkr)v when Zeus urges Poseidon to obliterate the wall after the
y a i a v dnTiyayov f| XE u ' Ecpavxo I a^eiv ei<; 'iGaicnv Achaeans have returned home (cf. //. 7.446-63).
91
e-uSeie^ov, ov>8' iiiXzaaav. I Ze-uc a p e a c x i q a i x o T h e gap between the Phaeacians' deeds and their
IKETTIOIOS, oq xe KOCI a^Aou? I av0pw7tov<; ecpopai KOU fate is underlined by the wording of Zeus's agreement:
x i v u t a i , 6<; xii; d u d p r n i (13.209-14). dv8pa>v 8 ' ei' nip xiq a e Pirn K « i xapxe't EIKMV I ox> xi
88
In ending the Phaeacians' ability unfailingly to xiei, a o i 5 ' eaxi m i E^OTUOCO TICK; a i e i . I ep^ov 6nco<;
convey travellers by sea (cf. 13.151-2, 180-3) Poseidon is eOeXeii; KOU XOI cp{Ax>v 'inXexo Guuwi (13.143-5). T h e
not only defending his own prerogatives (for the sea as phrase pirn KOU Kdpxe'i EIKCOV is hardly appropriate to the
his domain, cf. esp. //. 15.185-93 on the division of xiuou placid Phaeacians (its only other occurrence comes in
between Zeus, Poseidon and Hades), but also reinforcing Odysseus' warning to the decent suitor Amphinomus,
the distinction between human and divine, since such where it is used to justify the beggar's god-sent misfor-
exceptional privileges as that enjoyed by the seafaring tune: 18.139).
92
Phaeacians are (from the audience's point of view) a Acusilaus took the passages to imply that all the
thing of the past. Phaeacians were descended from Poseidon: "Ouripoq 8e
89
For the negative aitiology here, explaining the (Od. 5.35, 7.56ff.) o k e i o u i ; xovx; <i>aiaKoi(; xoiq Geoi;
absence of the Phaeacians from the world of the audi- <?T\G\ 8 i d xf|v drto rioaeiScovoi; yeveaiv (fr. 4 Fowler =
ence, cf. //. 7.459-63, 12.3-33 on the n o w vanished FGrHistl? 4).
20 WILLIAM ALLAN

a balance between them. This principle of divine non-interference, combined with Zeus's role as
ultimate guarantor of order, is part of a theological pattern that runs throughout Greek epic.93

(e) Athena and the will of Zeus

The role of Athena well illustrates how similar the Homeric epics are in the way they explore the
gods' self-interest and clashing wills within the over-arching system of Zeus's authority. As we
saw (§II(c)), Athena is sensitive to the hierarchy of the divine family, and despite her readiness
to deceive Poseidon, she needs Zeus's agreement before she can set in motion the final stage of
Odysseus' return. As Hermes reminds Calypso,

"6Xku udA.' ox> nwq ecm Awq voov aiytoxoio

9eov oi)0' aki&oai." (Od. 5.103-4)

'But there is no way for any other god to elude or bring to nothing the purpose of Zeus who holds the
aegis.'
Once Zeus has agreed to Athena's request to bring Odysseus home, which he does at the very
start of the narrative (1.64-79), the audience know that Poseidon's anger (however legitimate)
will not be allowed to frustrate the will of Zeus and the other gods. The narrator tells us that 'all
the gods pitied him except Poseidon' (1.19-20),94 yet it is appropriate that Athena, Odysseus' tra-
ditional patron, should take the lead in securing his return.95 Moreover, Athena's protection of
Odysseus and Telemachus is paralleled by her support for another pair of father and son proteges,
Tydeus and Diomedes (e.g. //. 4.387-90, 5.116-17, 5.800-13, 10.284-90; note especially 5.835-
59, where Athena acts as Diomedes' charioteer and enables him to wound Ares).
Most strikingly, both epics connect Athena at a number of crucial moments with the will of
Zeus. In his major prophecy of Hector's death and Troy's fall, Zeus predicts that the Achaeans
will sack Troy 'A0nvoun<; 8ia poiAdg (//. 15.71). The narrator reinforces this idea as Hector
finally breaks through the Achaean defences and reaches their ships:

ocikoq ydp oi an' aiSepoi; T)ev duwxcop

Zevq, oq utv Jitaoveaat uex' dv8pdoi uouvov eovra
Tiua Kai icuSaive- utvuv0d8io<; yap eueM-ev
eaoeoG'- T^STI yap oi erccopvue uopctuov riuap
'A&nvaiTi {mo nT|A.ei8ao pincpt. (//. 15.610-14)

His defender from heaven was Zeus himself, who was giving honour and glory to him alone among
the many other fighters, for his life was about to be cut short: even now Pallas Athena was hurrying on
the day of his fate at the hands of the mighty son of Peleus.

93
It also underlies the turbulent divine world of there divine unanimity, nor is partisan feeling absent.'
tragedy, as is best expressed by Artemis' comforting (or For Hector's burial as a symbol of divine concern for
so she hopes) words to Theseus: 8eo!ai 8 ' <b8' exei humanity, see §l(f) above.
95
vouoi;-1 oi)5ei<; anavxav PouA.etai npoOuniai I tfii xov Cf., e.g., //. 2.169-82 (Athena urges a despondent
QiXovxoq, aXX' dqnaTdueoQ' de(. I enei, adcp' i'a0i, Odysseus to restrain the Achaeans from flight), //. 10.245
Zfivot ufi (pofkyuuevri I OVK a v TCOT' r|X0ov iq T 6 6 ' (Diomedes chooses Odysseus to accompany him to the
aiaxbvr\c, eym I coat' d v 8 p a icavxcov (pitaatov Ppoxcov Trojan camp because 'Pallas Athena loves him'), II.
euoi I Gaveiv e a a a i ( E u r . Hipp. 1328-34). 11.437-8 (Athena saves Odysseus' life when he is
94
As with the return of Hector to Troy (albeit as a wounded by Socus' spear), //. 23.770-83 (Athena makes
corpse), divine pity (//. 24.23) is coupled with a recogni- Ajax trip so that Odysseus can win the foot race; Ajax
tion of human piety (the question 'How could I forget his complains that she 'always stands by Odysseus' side like
sacrifices to the gods?'underpins Zeus's decision in both a mother and helps him'). At Od. 11.548 Odysseus
cases: //. 24.66-70, Od. 1.65-7). As Rutherford (2001) regrets his victory over Ajax to win the arms of Achilles,
131 observes, 'Both actions demonstrate the belated but 'and the judges were the sons of the Trojans and Pallas
real generosity and justice of the gods: in neither case is Athena' (11.547).
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 21

Thus although Athena has her own reasons to hate Troy (//. 24.25-30), her actions are also pre-
sented as part of Zeus's larger plan for the city's fall. Her closeness to Zeus is evident when she
restrains Ares from seeking vengeance for his dead son Ascalaphus; like her father elsewhere,
she acts here to preserve order on Olympus (//. 15.121-41). Athena alone is called 6(Jpiuo7taTpr|
('the mighty-fathered goddess'), and always in contexts where the will of Zeus is foregrounded,
whether in the destruction of Troy or the nostoi of the Achaeans.96 Athena thus works again and
again as an extension of the will of Zeus,97 and her crucial role in the preservation of cosmic
order is best illustrated by Hesiod's account of her birth, where Zeus swallows Metis, Athena's
mother, and so ends the generational conflicts of the gods in his favour (Hes. Theog. 886-900;
cf. §III(a)). Zeus has his most important children (Apollo, Artemis, Dionysus, Hermes, Athena)
by other, less powerful, goddesses in order to prevent Hera posing too great a threat to his
supremacy.98 Moreover, Athena's birth from the head of Zeus symbolizes their peculiarly close
relationship, which is embodied in her interventions in support of Zeus's will and cosmic order.99

(f) Odyssean seriousness versus divine frivolity?

Returning to the Odyssey and its alleged theological differences from the Iliad, we are now in a
better position to consider the episode that is frequently said to highlight (by contrast) the poem's
ethically more serious divine world: Demodocus' song of Ares' and Aphrodite's adultery (Od.
8.266-366). According to Burkert, 'Demodocus' song makes an unbridgeable contrast with the
conception of the gods in Odyssey Book 1 as well as with the sublimity of the gods of the
Iliad.'1m Yet such an analysis of the scene is misleading, since it assumes too rigid a model of
divinity in the Odyssey and implies that Zeus's opening speech denies the gods their traditional
moral anthropomorphism (see, however, §II(b) above). On Burkert's influential reading, the
Odyssey poet composed his work in the light of the Iliad, 'but with a new ethico-religious atti-
tude, [and] saw that in his model there remained a vacuum in his own far-too-serious image of
the world and its gods'.101 There is, however, no such vacuum, nor is the Odyssey poet's pres-
entation of the gods excessively serious: for, as in the Iliad, the gods are seen to be deeply con-
cerned with proper human behaviour (so that Zeus's programmatic speech is not aberrantly
solemn), while at the same time ready to assert their interests and desires at the expense of oth-
ers (so that there is no lack of anthropomorphism).
Scholars often describe the gods' display of moral anthropomorphism in Demodocus' song as
an instance of divine 'frivolity', which is (on the model of the Iliad, e.g. the quarrel on Olympus

96
Cf. //. 5.747 (Zeus commands Athena to attack Hera bore renowned Hephaestus without union with
Ares), 8.391 (Athena's disobedience angers Zeus); Od. Zeus, as she was furious and quarrelled with her hus-
1.101 (Athena makes for Ithaca, having secured Zeus's band', Hes. Theog. 927-8); or, if fathered by Zeus, he is a
agreement to Odysseus' return), 3.135 (Zeus and Athena cripple and a cuckold (//. 1.578, 599-600, Od. 8.308-12).
plan painful nostoi for the Achaeans), 24.540 (Zeus and Ares is a lesser doublet of Athena the warrior goddess
Athena restrain Odysseus from killing the suitors' rela- (cf. esp. //. 5.846-63), and hated by Zeus as much as
tives). Athena is loved by him (//. 5.887-97), to Ares' great
97
Athena's role in the fall of Troy is paralleled by her resentment: aKk' dviei, iitei onitoi; eyeivao jtouS'
support for Tydeus and Diomedes at Thebes, which was &i8nA.ov ('no, you incite her, since you yourself gave
eventually sacked with Zeus's approval (cf. //. 4.381, birth to this destructive daughter',//. 5.879). Theantipa-
390, 408). Nestor recalls how Zeus and Athena helped thy between Zeus and Ares is extended to their sons, as
the Pylians to rout the deceitful Epeians (//. 11.714-17, Heracles kills Cycnus and wounds Ares himself with help
721, 727-9, 736, 753, 758, 761). from Athena (cf. [Hes.], Shield of Heracles 325-471).
98 99
Hera's subordinate role is embodied in the myths Hera's hatred of Zeus's offspring by other women
surrounding the birth of her own two children, is clearest in the case of Heracles (cf, e.g., //. 14.252-66,
Hephaestus and Ares. Hephaestus is the product of 19.96-133). Significantly, Zeus is said to have helped his
parthenogenesis, conceived by Hera in anger at Zeus: son many times by sending Athena (//. 8.362-5).
10
"Hpt| 8 ' "Hipaiaxov KAAJXOV oii tpiA.6xr|xi uiyeiaa I ° Burkert (1997) 261.
101
yeivaxo, Kai ^auevTiaeKaliipiaev <bi TtapaKoirni ('but Burkert (1997) 262.
22 WILLIAM ALLAN

at the end of Book 1, the Theomachia of Books 20-1) intended to contrast with the seriousness
of the action on the human level. There is some point to this, since 'that the divine action
[Aphrodite's adultery] should echo in tones of fun what is deeply serious among men [Penelope's
potential adultery] is typical of the Iliad'.m Yet the 'unquenchable laughter' (Od. 8.326)103 of
the (male) gods as they look upon Ares and Aphrodite caught in Hephaestus' trap should not be
allowed to obscure the more serious aspects of the scene itself. For Hephaestus draws attention
to his humiliation and demands proper compensation (8.306-20), which he is solemnly promised
by Poseidon (8.355-6), should Ares fail 'to pay all that is right in the presence of the immortal
gods' (xmeiv cci'aiua rcdvxa uex' dGavdxoiai Geotavv, 8.348). The scene thus underlines the
importance of justice (qua reparations) among the gods - OTJK EOX' o\)8e eoiKe xeov ercoq
dpvr|oaa0ai is Hephaestus's response to Poseidon (8.358) - even as it revels in the bawdy
humour of Apollo and Hermes (8.335-42). The combination fits other Olympian scenes in both
epics, and is neither out of step with the rest of the Odyssey, nor does it prove Iliadic influence,
since there was humorous potential in many divine myths and these can scarcely have been lim-
ited to the Iliad and Book 8 of the Odyssey (cf., e.g., Horn. Hymn Herm., discussed below:

(g) Errors and consequences: Odysseus and his men

The idea that the Odyssey poet aims to present a clear-cut tale of crime and punishment is belied
not only by the narrative of Odysseus' revenge,104 but also by Odysseus' own account of his wan-
derings. For Odysseus describes both himself and his men committing disastrous errors and
ignoring warnings, but only Odysseus survives and the audience perceive the crucial difference
made by divine protection.105 Though his comrades urge him to depart, Odysseus insists on
meeting the Cyclops, with horrific results for them, as Odysseus himself admits:

' eycb cm niGonnv - f\ T' civ no\x> KepStov f)ev -

oq>p' CXV>TOV xe i'5oiui, m i ei' uoi ^eivict 8o(r|.
ov)8' a p ' eueAA' exdpoioi cpaveiq epaxsivoq eoeoGai." (Od. 9.228-30)

'But I would not listen to them - it would have been far better if I had! - since I wanted to see the man,
and whether he would give me gifts of friendship. But in fact when he appeared he would not prove
a lovely host to my companions.'

Having escaped from the Cyclops' cave, Odysseus cannot resist boasting of his victory and
thereby revealing his name, despite his comrades' warning that they should get away without
notice (9.492-505). As a result Polyphemus is able to pray to Poseidon that if Odysseus reach-
es Ithaca, he will do so after losing all his comrades (9.528-35).
Although it is his companions' own decision to kill Helios' cattle which ensures their destruc-
tion (the narrator in the proem calls them 'fools' for doing so: 1.7-9), it is clear that Odysseus'
own mistakes have endangered those around him, and that his men are caught up in the curse
laid upon their return by the Cyclops. And while it may be too extreme to say that 'the men are
actually driven to the act by the very gods who punish them for it',106 it makes no difference to
Helios or his vengeful response that the men's fatal error is the product of exhaustion and star-

102 l04
Macleod (1982) 3. See §II(h) below on the killing of the suitors.
103 105
This phrase (aafkaxoi; ytXcoc,) is also found in the Cf. 10.277-301, where (despite Poseidon's wrath)
divine quarrel of Iliad 1 (1.599), a less serious counter- Hermes' gift of the plant moly saves Odysseus from being
part to the human one among the Achaeans: the shared transformed into a pig by Circe.
106
contrast of divine and human supports the view that the Fenik (1974) 213. The men's crucial mistake is to
song of Ares and Aphrodite is replicating an Iliadic tech- insist on landing on the island of Thrinacia in the first
nique without necessarily drawing attention to the differ- place, thereby ignoring the warnings of Teiresias and
ence between the Odyssey and the Iliad. Circe that the island be completely avoided (12.271 -94).
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 23

vation. For as with Poseidon's anger (whether at Odysseus' blinding of his son or at the
Phaeacians' assistance to Odysseus), Zeus respects Helios' right to punish those who offend the
god or transgress in his domain. Moreover, Helios' threat to descend to Hades and shine among
the dead (if Odysseus' men are not punished) threatens the cosmic order (12.382-3). Zeus's
response is immediate:

', f|xot ^iev ax> uex' dGocvdxoun cpdeive

Kai 8VT|XOIOI ppotoioiv enl ^ei8a>pov apoupav
xrav 8e K' eyo) xd%a vf]a 0or|v dpyfixi Kepawan
xuxGd pataav icedaaiui neaan evi oi'vo7ti TIOVXGH." (Od. 12.385-8)

'Helios, keep shining among the immortals and among mortal men upon the grain-giving earth. As for
these men, I shall soon strike their swift ship with a flashing thunderbolt and shatter it in small pieces
in the midst of the sparkling sea.'

Thus Zeus's promise to see to the men's destruction is motivated not only by a respect for Helios'
demand to punish dishonour but also by Zeus's own role as the guarantor of universal order. As
the god prepares to unleash the storm that will kill Odysseus' men, the poet draws attention to
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' authority as a narrator (like the poet himself) of the gods'justice.

(h) The killing of the suitors

Odysseus' vengeance on the suitors is regularly treated as the archetypal embodiment of the
Odyssey's peculiarly moral pattern. One scholar even remarks that 'the punishment of the suit-
ors is more than an example of reciprocal vengeance: it is an enactment of absolute and timeless
justice'.107 Yet such a distinction risks creating a misleading scale of values (as if vengeance
were inferior to some abstract principle of justice), since reciprocal vengeance is (qua divine jus-
tice) an 'absolute and timeless' principle and the central story pattern of both Homeric epics (and
much Greek myth). However, although the punishment of the suitors is unquestionably demand-
ed by the honour-based ethics of Homeric society,108 the Odyssey poet complicates the initial pic-
ture of the suitors as a gang of insolent reprobates. The simple moral paradigm that equates all
the suitors with Aegisthus, the murderous adulterer, is first proposed by Athena (disguised as
Mentes), as she encourages Telemachus to plot their death (1.294-302). Yet this assertively
moralistic viewpoint becomes less clear-cut as the narrative develops. For we get a more par-
ticularized view of the suitors, revealing that not all of them are wicked, which emerges with
greater clarity, significantly, as the vengeance draws closer.
We first hear of Amphinomus, one of two decent suitors, in Book 16, where we are told that
'his speeches were the most pleasing to Penelope, since he had a sensible mind' (\iaXvaia 8e
nr|ve?iO7ie{rii I f|v8ave uvBoicr (ppeal yap Kexpr|x' ayaGfuaiv, 16.397-8). He persuades the
suitors to reject Antinous' 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

107 l09
Clarke (2004) 88. Amphinomus' role as a wise adviser is underlined
108
It is prophesied approvingly by Halitherses by the speech introduction o aipiv ex> cppovewv
(2.161-76; cf. 24.454-62) and endorsed by Nestor (3.211- dyopriaoiTO KOU uexeeutev ('in good will he addressed the
24), Menelaus (4.333-46), Eumaeus( 14.80-92), Penelope assembly and said', 16.399), which 'always introduces
(23.63-7) and Laertes (24.351-2), among others. speeches which the narrator approves o f (de Jong (2001)
54 on 2.157-60, w h o compares 2.228 (Mentor), 7.158
(Echeneus), 24.53 (Nestor), 24.453 (Halitherses)).
24 WILLIAM ALLAN

remaining any longer with the suitors and even to pray that some god may save him from
Odysseus' vengeance (18.122-50). Yet the narrator immediately contrasts Odysseus' attitude to
Amphinomus with that of Athena:

cujtctp o (if] Katcc 8a>u.a cpiXov xexir|u.evo<; f|top,

Dv KecpaXfji- Sn. yap KCCKOV OOGETO ftuucoi.
' OTJ5' coq cpuyE icf|pa- rceSnaE 8E Kal xov 'A0T|VTI
Tr|A,£|i&xo'u •uno %zpa\ Kcd eyxev i(pi 8aun.vcu. (Od. 18.153-6)

Amphinomus went back through the hall with a troubled spirit, shaking his head; for his heart was full
of foreboding. Even so, he could not escape his doom, as Athena had bound him too to a violent death
by the hands and spear of Telemachus.

Indeed, Athena's determination to kill all the suitors, regardless of their individual conduct, is
already clear:

auxdp
Jtapioxauevri AaepxidSn.v '
c8xpv>v', ax; av rcijpva KOCXOC uvT|<yrfjp(x<; dyeipoi,
•yvotn 0 ' oi xiveq eioiv evaiaiuoi oi i ' dSeuioxoi-
aXk' OIJ8' 6iq x w ' e|j.eA.X' d7ca^,e^rioeiv KaKOTnxot;. (Od. 17.360-4)

Now Athena came and stood close by Odysseus, son of Laertes, and urged him to go among the suit-
ors begging bits of bread so that he would know which of them were decent men and which lawless;
but even so she was not going to save any of them from their doom.

Athena's intervention simultaneously separates the suitors into the good and the bad and under-
lines her indifference to their decency. Thus the audience know Amphinomus' fate even as he
offers the disguised Odysseus protection and urges the suitors to stop abusing both the beggar
and the servants of Odysseus' household (18.394-5, 414-21). The disjunction between charac-
ter and fate is even clearer in the case of the suitor Leiodes, whom the narrator introduces as the
first to attempt to string Odysseus' bow:

AeicbSnc; 8ercparax;dvurcaio, OivoTtoi; moq,

6 aqn GUOGKOO; EOKE, Ttapa Kpnxfipa 8e KaXbv
i^e ut>xoixaxo^ aiei • dxaoGaXiai 8e oi oi'co
e^Gpal eoav, naaw 8e veueaoa uvnoxripeaaiv (Od. 21.144-7)

Leiodes was first to rise, the son of Oenops, who was their augur and always sat in the farthest corner
beside the beautiful mixing bowl. Their acts of reckless folly were hateful to him alone, and he was
full of indignation at all the suitors.

The narrator's comment on Leiodes' decency is expanded by Leiodes himself in his appeal to
Odysseus (22.312-19), yet Odysseus rejects the supplication and cuts off Leiodes' head while he
is still speaking (22.326-9). Thus both goddess and human protege kill the two more virtuous
suitors with equal ruthlessness.110 The parameters of reciprocal vengeance among both gods and

110
Cf. Holscher (1988) 268: 'die Unverhaltnis-
mafiigkeit der Rache tritt gegen Ende kraB hervor, und
eben dadurch, da(3 der Dichter fur diese Opfer
[Amphinomus and Leiodes] Sympathie erweckt hat'.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 25

mortals are seen to be similarly imprecise, and guilt by association is enough to bring about dis-
aster for Amphinomus and Leiodes (as for the Phaeacians) 'beyond their destined share' {cf
1.33-4; §II(b) and (d)).
Thus although Odysseus presents himself as merely the agent of divine justice (22.411-18),
and the death of the suitors is greeted as a divine act (by Penelope: 23.63-7) and as proof of the
gods' power (by Laertes: 24.351-2), the killing of the suitors can only be said to constitute 'an
enactment of absolute and timeless justice'111 in a very particular sense, which recognizes the
rough and ruthless reciprocity of divine justice as it is embodied in the text of the Odyssey (as
well as the Iliad).'' 2 Furthermore, it must take account of the clear risks to communal well-being
posed by Odysseus' vengeance, which sparks a civil war when the suitors' kinsmen seek to
avenge their deaths (a danger foreseen by Odysseus himself: cf. 23.117-22). The poem ends as
it began with Athena and Zeus reaching an agreement in Odysseus' favour (24.472-86; cf. 1.44-
79), and the narrator again underlines the importance of the gods' intervention. For Odysseus
and his men are on the verge of wiping out the suitors' kinsmen before they are checked by
Athena (24.528-36). Moreover, Odysseus ignores Athena's command and has to be restrained,
first by Zeus's thunderbolt and then by a warning from Athena not to incur Zeus's anger (24.537-
44). Odysseus thus acts with typically heroic impetuosity and would have killed his fellow
Ithacans had not the gods intervened. The cycle of violence is ended only by a divinely spon-
sored settlement with the suitors' families. As at the end of the Iliad, divine concern for human-
ity helps resolve a profound crisis, and Zeus's decision restores the communal values of social
order.113

(i) The scope of Homeric justice

A central part of the argument so far has been that the common view of the gods of the Odyssey
as peculiarly moralistic is mistaken, and that the poem's picture of divinity and of human respon-
sibility and punishment is no different from that of the Iliad.m With this in mind, let us consid-
er two further claims regarding the gods of the Odyssey which are no less influential: the first
may be summed up in the statement that 'The different conception of the gods in the Odyssey
implies a greater remoteness of man from the deity, i.e., greater independence and responsibili-
ty';115 the second in the observation that the Odyssey's gods are 'less colourful and less clearly
individualised'.116 Yet the gods of the Odyssey are neither more remote nor less individualized,
and seem so only if one disregards the different type and scope of story narrated in the Odyssey
(compared to the Iliad) and its smaller cast of characters, both human and divine. Unlike the
Iliad, whose wider narrative (the Trojan War) constitutes an event of cosmic proportions (mark-
ing the end of the age of heroes: cf. //. 12.9-33; Hes. W&D 161-5), the Odyssey confines itself
for the most part to one of many nostoi (albeit an eventful one). However, there is no difference

111
See n.107. entirely typical of early Greek hexameter poetry, pace,
112
Though the Iliad poet has chosen to present the e.g., Schein (1996) 10: 'One function of the much
Trojans as far more sympathetic than the suitors (it is maligned twenty-fourth book is to insist on the correct-
obvious, but still notable, that the Iliad presents individ- ness of this new kind of justice' (emphasis added).
ual Trojan characters, whereas we get only one side of the " 4 Pace, e.g.. Griffin (1980) 77: 'The Odyssey ...
story in its account of the Argives attacking Thebes and has a different conception of the gods and heroism. Gods
the Pylian narrative), there is a parallel insofar as both the and heroes alike need and receive moral justification, of a
Trojans and the suitors face indiscriminate vengeance, sort much closer to our ideas.' Cf. also Griffin (2004) 44
The poet of the Odyssey could have presented the suitors on 'this anxiously moral poet'; yet the Odyssey poet is no
as a whole more positively (see Danek (1998) 41-2 for more 'anxious' about moral responsibility and punishment
traces of alternative versions in the Odyssey itself), but than is the poet of the Iliad; see §1, esp. (a), (b) and (0-
their story remains sufficiently nuanced to explore the " 5 Kullmann (1985) 10.
ethical implications of reciprocal justice. " 6 Kearns (2004) 67.
113
Thus Book 24 is both the clearest expression of
the Odyssey's vision of social justice and at the same time
26 WILLIAM ALLAN

in the depiction of divine and human interaction, and the narrator's narrower scope explains the
apparent moral 'shift', which is in fact no more than the contrast between a narrative that con-
tains many heroes and conflicting gods and one that contains far fewer of both. The basic con-
tinuity is striking nonetheless. And while it is true that in the second half of the Odyssey 'the
Gods form a united front',117 insofar as there is no deity who protests the killing of the suitors,
this cancels neither the troubling aspects of their punishment nor the clash of divine wills pre-
sented in the first half of the poem (see §ll(c) and (h) above).
Thus the Odyssey's vision of divine justice may appear narrower than the Iliad's, but the same
morality and theology underlie both epics. In each the gods regularly pursue their personal inter-
ests with little regard for human ideals of divine justice, and the 8(KT| (or 'order') enforced is
often a harsh one.118 Moreover, as in the Iliad (e.g. 18.497-500), the mechanisms of justice
which operate in the Odyssey are embodied both in particular social institutions, such as com-
pensation settlements119 or judicial assemblies,120 and in the cosmos as a whole.121 Thus the
Homeric epics display a fundamental continuity that tells against models of early Greek epic or
intellectual culture which continue to be premised upon their difference. For although develop-
mental models of early Greek thought (especially those of Snell and Frankel)122 are no longer
overtly influential, and despite Lloyd-Jones's criticisms of Dodds's view that the Iliadic Zeus is
not concerned with justice (cf. n.10), the full extent of the ethical and theological continuities,
not only between the Homer epics themselves but also between those works and the rest of early
Greek epic, continue to be underestimated or obscured. In a stimulating recent account of
Homeric epic the developmental model is applied to cosmic history itself, but the project is ham-
pered by the assumption that 'the portrayal of the gods in the Odyssey is different from that in
the Iliad'.123 However, the essential continuity is particularly evident in the fact that the Greeks
themselves seem not to have perceived any such difference between the poems: Aristotle, for
example, locates a number of differences between the epics with regard to structure and plot (cf.
esp. Poet. 1459bl3-16), but none pertaining to the gods or their morality,124 while Herodotus
famously treats Homer and Hesiod as equals in their presentation (and definition) of divinity
(2.53.1-3).125 Their analysis of early Greek poetry should guide ours, not least because Zeus's

117
Kearns (2004) 69. However, when Kearns adds drawn from civilized life and relating the restraint of vio-
'And this unity, it is strongly implied, is founded on a lence through law, underlines the indiscriminate cruelty
moral basis: personal favouritism apart, it is simply right of the divine whirlpool.
121
that Odysseus should triumph over his enemies and be Including Hades; cf. Od. 11.568-71, where Minos
reinstated as ruler of Ithaca', the implied contrast with the dispenses justice among the dead.
122
Iliad is misleading, since the Iliad poet also makes clear Their view of the Odyssey as morally circum-
the 'moral basis' of Troy's fall. scribed (compared to Hesiod), but still an advance on the
118
It is therefore misleading to claim, as Griffin Iliad (cf. esp. Frankel (1975) 85-93), was foreshadowed
(1995) 12 does, that 'generally speaking the divine is on by Jacoby (1933), e.g. 188-9: 'Wir sind noch sehr in den
its best behaviour in the Odyssey', since this flattens out Anfangen des ethischen Bildungsprozesses ... denn als
the complexities and turbulence of the narrative. Ford Hiiter der sittlichen Weltordnung bilden die Gotter eine
(1996) points to analogous faults in Cook's attempt to Einheit; auch das ist ein "Fortschritt" von den
present 'a perfectly consistent theodicy in which virtuous gegeneinander und jeder fur sich handelnden Iliasgottern
self-restraint is rewarded and injustice punished'. zu "der Gottheit" der Philosophie.'
119 123
Cf. Od. 22.54-64, where Odysseus rejects Graziosi and Haubold (2005) 75.
124
Eurymachus' offer of communal compensation from the Although, one should add, Aristotle says very lit-
suitors; and contrast Hephaestus' agreement to accept a tie about the gods even in tragedy.
125
fine from Ares (or Poseidon: 8.344-59). The status of Homer and Hesiod as cultural
120
Cf. Od. 12.439-41: T)UOI; 5 ' en\ Soprcov dvf|p 'authorities'(on the gods and much else) is used cogent-
dyopii9ev dvearn. I Kpivcov VEIKECX noXXa 6iKa^ouevcov ly by Ford (1997) 98 to explain the 'high-handedness' of
ai£r|(ov, I xf)|io<; Sr| xd ye 8oupa Xap\>p8io<; e^ecpadv&n, later appropriations of their poetry (by Pindar and Plato
('At the time when a man rises from his seat in the mar- among others): 'it was the pragmatic practice (a long
ket-place for dinner, when he has settled many disputes poem is more widely useful in small pieces) of people for
between young men who seek justice, then it was that the whom Homer was more important as an authority than as
timbers reappeared out of Charybdis'), where the simile, an author of an aesthetically unified text'.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 27

power is presented in both Homeric epics (as in Hesiod) within a cosmic context, and in such a
way that his decisions and actions combine a recognition of each god's interests and honour with
a concern for social norms of justice among mortals {cf. §II(c), (e) and (h) above).

Ill

(a) Hesiodic justice and/as universal order

Just as one should avoid treating the Odyssey's presentation of the nature and values of the gods
as if it were different from the Iliad's, so one should resist attempts to interpret the gods of
Hesiod as if they were different from those of Homer. For despite Lloyd-Jones's demonstration
of the essential continuity in early Greek theology, one still meets with accounts of Hesiod's cos-
mos which treat it as a moral 'advance' on what has gone before. Thus one scholar writes of the
Theogony: 'Die gottliche Welt entwickelt sich hin zur aufgeklarten Herrschaft des Zeus; dabei
iiberwindet Hesiod die amoralische Dimension der homerischen Gotten Bei ihm sind die Gotter
tatsachlich die Garanten der Gerechtigkeit und vergelten das Gute und Bose, das die Menschen
anrichten.'126 However, as we shall see, the divine world that Hesiod presents is no more 'devel-
oped' than that of Homer, nor is the rule of Zeus portrayed by Hesiod any more 'enlightened'.127
In Hesiod, as in the Iliad and Odyssey, the narrator focuses on Zeus's power and on the per-
sonal quarrels of the gods. For in Hesiod's eyes the current world-order is the consequence of
internecine strife between Zeus and Prometheus, son of the Titan Iapetus. In other words, Zeus's
order is equal to the way things are, and the way things are (for example, that men must work to
survive because Zeus has hidden 'the means of life': W&D 42-7) is caused by Zeus's quarrel
with Prometheus, who poses a threat to Zeus's regime. Indeed, a similar pattern of stasis lead-
ing to order informs the background to the Iliad: Zeus's favour to Thetis arises from his power
struggles on Olympus (//. 1.396-406), and so (as in Hesiod's picture of the world) a dispute over
divine supremacy leads to the status quo: the death of Achilles, the fall of Troy, the end of the
heroic age. The very structure of the Theogony expresses Zeus's supremacy:128 the Muses sing
the history of the cosmos culminating in the ascendancy of Zeus, a song that Zeus naturally likes
to hear.129 And although Hesiod lavishes great detail on the defeat of the Titans by the new gods
(Theog. 617-735), the narrative of Zeus's victory over his father Kronos is strikingly brief:

126
Degani (1997) 178. I have underlined the notions (epic, didactic, catalogue poetry, etc.), w e should recog-
that are most mistaken. nize the poet's ability to combine elements from different
127
Hesiod is best seen not as an actual historical fig- stories, styles and genres (Ford (1992) 13-56 offers a bril-
ure (pace, e.g., West (1978) 55: ' T h e autobiographical liant analysis of Archaic epic as a genre, though I would
passages [in the Works and Days] are of course authen- venture to stress the continuity and fluidity of epos even
tic'), but as a poet who has chosen to perform particular more than he does; cf. his pp. 29-30 on the Works and
genres of song in a particular persona (his paraenetic and Days, which he would set apart from Homer and the
didactic persona being especially prominent in the Works Theogony on the grounds of 'epic objectivity').
and Days). The poet reminds us that he could sing, if he Consider, for example, the 'Catalogue of Women' narrat-
wished, different kinds of song, when he boasts of his ed by Odysseus (Od. 11.225-332; for its relationship with
victory in the poetic contest at Chalcis (W&D 654-7): he the Hesiodic Catalogue, cf. Osborne (2005) 16-17) or the
crosses to Euboea from Aulis, alluding to Homeric epic paraenetic verse deployed by Homer in the Iliad (esp.
(650-3), which he too could sing, it is implied, since the 9.434-605); in the latter case there is a particularly strik-
Muses can inspire various 'paths of song' (658-9; for the ing continuity with the techniques deployed by Hesiod,
metaphor, cf, e.g., Od. 8.72-5, 479-81, 22.347-8). the difference being that 'Hesiod' is overtly inside his
Hesiod also connects the Muses' inspiration with his abil- poem and his use of the paraenetic persona is on a (rela-
ity to relate 'the will of aegis-bearing Zeus' (W&D 661- tively) larger scale.
128
2), reminding us that this is fundamental not only to Cf. Thalmann (1984) 39-41.
129
Homeric epic but to his style of epos too. Thus rather Similarly, the hymn to Zeus that opens the Works
than thinking in terms of historical personalities (the and Days stresses his supreme power over mankind and
Hesiodic T is as constructed as, e.g., Archilochus' his role as an enforcer of order (3-8).
Lothario persona://-. 196a West) and sealed-off genres
28 WILLIAM ALLAN

Kronos is 'defeated by the wiles and strength of his own son' (vncnGelq le^v-nun fKncpi xe
7tou56<; eoto, Theog. 496). Hesiod does not explain how Kronos was overcome, not because he
is reluctant to present a god attacking his own father, but because the poem's focus is less on how
Zeus comes to power as on how he succeeds in maintaining his power, since that is the basis for
the current world-order.
The maintenance of Zeus's supremacy relies upon his careful distribution of powers and priv-
ileges among the other gods after deposing Kronos. Unlike Ouranos and Kronos, Zeus is elect-
ed by the other gods to be their king (Theog. 883-5); he avoids his father's and grandfather's mis-
take of not sharing power, but makes sure to keep it close by apportioning it chiefly among his
sons and daughters.130 When Zeus appeals for help against the Titans, he promises the older gods
that, if they assist him, their privileges will remain undiminished, and that those whom Kronos
ignored will be given honours in his new regime (Theog. 390-6). Yet Zeus's respect for the older
gods serves merely to support his own dominance:

&q 5' aikax; Jtavxeooi 8iaujiepE<; coqrcepvneazr]

' • avibq Se ueya Kpoaei r\5e avdaaei. (Theog. 402-3)

In the same way he fully carried out his promises to all, while he himself is mighty
in his power and rule.

Hesiod is especially emphatic about the honours given to Hecate (Theog. 411-52). But rather
than seeing this as the expression of 'her evangelist' and 'zealot',131 we should see the passage
in terms of the structure of the world-order according to Hesiod: Hecate is dwelt upon not
because Hesiod had a personal cult of the goddess, but because she is made to stand for the gen-
eral process of Zeus's canny negotiations with the gods who preceded him.
Hesiod's Zeus is no more 'advanced' in moral terms than Homer's. Both poets present a
series of decisions made by a powerful and unknowable god. In Hesiod's account, Zeus pun-
ishes mankind with Pandora to get back at Prometheus (Theog. 561-612, W&D 54-105).132
However, to dwell on the morality of Zeus's motives or his treatment of humanity would be mis-
leading, since the point of Hesiod's narrative is to display Zeus's power and its connection to
cosmic order, which is a direct result of Olympian power politics. Nevertheless, as in Homer,
there is, as far as humans are concerned, a positive value to the world-order established by the
gods. For Zeus has given humans the gift of justice, which sets them apart from animals (W&D
276-80).133 And Hesiod, like Homer, reflects the process of personifying and allegorizing such
positive social norms: both Alien (W&D 256-62) and the Arcou (//. 9.502-14) are daughters of
Zeus, who seek redress from their father when they are abused or refused by mortals. Moreover,
the basileus who is just is favoured by the gods, whether by Zeus (W&D 280-1; cf. //. 1.237-9),
the Muses (Theog. 81-93) or Hecate (Theog. 429-30). Finally, if we ask ourselves what social
functions Hesiod's poetry might have fulfilled, we find that it communicates the same basic ideas
and values as Homeric epic: Zeus's order is supreme; his will is inscrutable to mortals but
inescapable; humans should avoid excess and respect legitimate claims to honour and justice.

130 132
Zeus's election by the other gods underlines the The punishment is typically disproportionate: it is
importance of his need to rule by consensus. It is also Prometheus' trick, but all men suffer for it {Theog. 550-
significant that Zeus is depicted requiring the aid of the 2); cf. W&D 240-7, §l(f). Moreover, when Zeus ends
supremely strong Hundred-Handers (Briareus, Cottus Prometheus' torment, he does so not out of pity, but to
and Gyges) in order to overcome the Titans {Theog. 148- boost the kleos of his son, Heracles {Theog. 526-34).
l33
53, 617-735); cf. //. 1.402-6, where Briareus is said to Cf. Clay (2003) 83: 'It is precisely Dike, daughter
have defended Zeus's supremacy when it was challenged of Zeus and Zeus's gift to mankind, that renders the
by some of his fellow Olympians. heroes better than both the races of bronze and silver that
131
West (1966) 277-8 on Theog. 404-52. preceded them.'
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 29

(b) The Homeric Hymns, or, the world according to Zeus

A central theme of the major Homeric Hymns, as of Homer and Hesiod, is the role played by
Zeus's supremacy in the evolution of divine and human history, and, in addition, how his power
operates so as to maintain cosmic order. The hymns to Demeter (2) and Aphrodite (5) focus in
particular on how that order is established through Zeus's control of female deities, as Zeus
determines the extent to which Demeter and Persephone can play the roles of eternal mother and
daughter, and curbs Aphrodite's (sexual) power by turning it back on the goddess herself. Zeus
sets in train the plots of both hymns, approving Hades' abduction of Persephone {Horn. Hymn
Dem. 3, 30, 77-80; cf. Theog. 913-14) and making Aphrodite fall in love with the mortal
Anchises (Horn. Hymn Aph. 45-57).
The Hymn to Demeter reflects the pervasiveness of Greek gender ideology, as the fertility of
gods, humans and nature itself are interlinked under the patronage of Zeus, who controls not only
the sexual maturation of his daughter Persephone but also the division of the agricultural year
(via his reconciliation with Demeter; cf. 445-7, 470-3). Since girls must be made useful by mar-
riage and child-bearing {cf, e.g., W&D 695-705), Persephone cannot remain a virgin forever.
Moreover, Demeter has not asked Zeus for eternal virginity for Persephone,134 and so she must
accept her daughter's inevitable progress to marriage and motherhood. Demeter's fixation on
her own maternal role is no less problematic than her hostility to her daughter's, since she is not
only resistant to Persephone's maturation but acts as a 'bad' mother even in her grief at
Persephone's absence. For she seeks to make the baby Demophon immortal (231-41), as if to
create a divine surrogate to replace her own child, yet her actions are once more doomed to fail-
ure, since she acts (as in the case of Persephone) without the permission of Zeus, whose agree-
ment to the crossing of the boundary between mortal and immortal is essential. Finally,
Demeter's 'dreadful wrath' (350, 410) puts the nascent Olympian regime in jeopardy since it
threatens to destroy humanity and so end the Tiuoa paid to the gods (352-4). Zeus's solution is
to confirm and expand Demeter's own status and privileges (441-4). The hymn ends with both
Demeter and Persephone joining Zeus on Olympus, and with their enhanced powers confirming
his (483-6; cf. 364-71).
In the Hymn to Aphrodite (5) the goddess' ability to 'lead astray even the mind of Zeus' poses
a threat to his supremacy {cf 36-8). As soon as Aphrodite has slept with Anchises, under Zeus's
influence (45-57, 166), she regrets the resulting diminution of her power (247-55). Similar pat-
terns of rivalry, hierarchy and control are found in the hymns to Apollo and Hermes. In the Hymn
to Apollo (3), Hera delays the new god's birth out of jealousy (91-101) and, in anger at Zeus's
production of Athena from his own head, gives birth by herself to the monstrous Typhoeus, 'a
bane to the gods' (rcfjua Geoiovv, 352).135 In the Hymn to Hermes (4), the conflict between old
and new gods is transposed to older and younger Olympians {cf 375-6, 386), as Zeus's own chil-
dren, Apollo and Hermes, bring their dispute to trial before their father.136 Once Zeus reconciles
them (396, 506-7), the baby Hermes is able to secure his rightful tiuou and place among the
gods, impressing Apollo with the newly invented lyre and a song that, ingeniously and appro-
priately, celebrates the divine order that he is about to enter (423-33). Thus the major Homeric
Hymns display the same conception of the cosmos and the gods as the rest of early Greek hexa-
meter poetry, as Zeus's plans are realized through the actions and reactions of others, and the
competing wills of the gods result in a fixed order that is identified with the will of Zeus.
134 135
In the Hymn to Aphrodite permament virginity is Cf. nn.98-9.
136
granted to Athena, Artemis and Hestia. As their father, Hermes' challenge is accepted: 86<; 8e Siicnv Kal
Zeus's control over his daughters Athena and Artemis is hzLp Ttotpa Znvi Kpovicovi (312); cf. 324: Ket9i yap
implicit (cf. 7-20), while Hestia is presented as requesting aucpotepoiai Siicni; KateKeito xdA.avta.
such an exceptional status as a privilege (yepaq) from
Zeus, acknowledging his control even over the sexual
lives of his sisters (21-32).
30 WILLIAM ALLAN
(c) Greek cosmic order and its Near Eastern contexts
Recent comparative studies (and particularly the pioneering works of Walter Burkert and Martin
West) have greatly enriched our understanding of the interaction between Greece and the vari-
ous cultures of the ancient Near East.137 Yet even if one accepts that (in the very broadest terms)
'Greek literature is a Near Eastern literature',138 it remains to ask (in the case of each specific
myth, story-pattern or idea) how the Greeks have transformed these Near Eastern 'influences' -
or rather, to ask how a common inheritance has been given a particular articulation and meaning
in Greek culture. For while scholars can point to many striking 'parallels',139 they do not always
consider how the Greek example has been made uniquely and specifically Greek, that is, how it
has been changed and assimilated to a wider, pre-existing and distinctively Greek world-view.
Yet such a process of assimilation is a fundamental aspect of all cultural transmission, and its
importance emerges very clearly if we consider how the Greek view of cosmic order (as embod-
ied in early Greek epic) differs from its Near Eastern congeners. Thus, even if we accept that
(say) the stories of the divine succession found in Hittite and Akkadian literature had a profound
influence on Homer and Hesiod,140 we should also ask what a comparison of the Greek and the
Near Eastern material reveals about each of these cultures in and of itself.141

137
Cf. esp. West (1966) 20-31, (1997); Burkert extremely strong Bronze Age contacts between western
(1991), (1992; German orig. 1984), (2004); for a brief Asia Minor and Greece, which could well have left their
overview of recent work on such cultural transmission mark on Greek myth and poetry (it is hardly a coinci-
from the perspective of a Near Eastern specialist, see dence that many figures of Greek myth come from for-
Bryce (2002) 257-68. eign lands, including Cadmus, Pelops, Cecrops and
138
West (1966) 3 1 . Danaus). O f course, this letter (and others like it: cf.
139 Niemeier (1999)) attest to political rather than literary
Haubold (2002) offers a useful critique of the
unreflective methodology of Hellenists who merely cata- contacts. Yet although w e do not possess Mycenaean
logue 'parallels' that are said to 'speak for themselves'. Greek texts reflecting the literary or mythological tradi-
Yet while he praises archaeologists w h o have 'long tions of the Near East, it is not unlikely that myths, story-
appreciated the Eastern Mediterranean as a connected patterns and other ideas were carried via trading routes,
landscape of mutual influences' (p. 5), he himself offers diplomatic channels and the migration from the late
no account of how such literary and cultural 'influences' Bronze Age onwards of 'healers, seers, and singers or
are meant to operate. Indeed, it may be more helpful to poets' (Bryce (2002) 259, who compares Od. 17.382-5).
think in terms of 'interaction' rather than 'influence', For Bronze Age bards in Greece, cf. West (1973) 187-92,
wherein 'interaction' refers to a continuous process of (1988) 156-65; S.Morris (1989).
cultural contact and borrowing that operates in both 140
For the Akkadian Atrahasis and H o m e r ' s
directions ('influence', by contrast, suggests a one-way 'Deception of Z e u s ' , cf. Burkert (1992) 88-96; for
process) and over a long period of time. Though Burkert Gilgamesh and the Homeric epics, cf. West (1997) 336-
(2004) 23 continues to speak of the eighth and seventh 47, 402-17; Bryce (2002) 261-3. George (2003) 1.3-70
centuries as the high-point of the 'orientalizing revolu- presents a detailed literary history of The Epic of
tion', he also recognizes that 'contacts of all sorts were Gilgamesh from the third millennium onwards. Csapo
continuous'. It is likely that many 'oriental' features may (2005) 67-79 offers an illuminating analysis of the Greek
have dated from earlier periods, since (as Bryce (2002) and Hittite myths of divine succession, tabulating the
267 observes) 'throughout this period [i.e. from the late main parallels between them (pp. 74-5), but also asking
Bronze Age to the eighth century] there was regular com- fundamental questions about what (in terms of cultural
mercial and political contact between the Greek and Near transmission) such parallels actually show.
Eastern worlds (allowing perhaps for a hiatus of 100 141
In addition, though literary interaction could (and
years or so in the eleventh century BC)'. Moreover, evi- did) occur, caution is required when comparing similar
dence of such early cultural interaction is growing {cf. phenomena in different cultures, especially with regard to
Koenen (1994) 25-6), the most spectacular recent discov- chronology. Most (1997), for example, analyses the
ery being a cuneiform letter from the king of the alleged Near Eastern 'sources' of Hesiod's five races of
Ahhiyawa to the Hittite king Hattusili III (c. 1267-1237 men (W&D 106-201), noting that 'In fact we do not pos-
BC). In this letter the king of the Ahhiyawa supports his sess any oriental sources older than Hesiod from which
claim to some disputed islands in the northern Aegean by he could have derived his version' (p. 120). He goes on
asserting that his ancestor ('Kagamunas') received the to ask 'How much of the whole myth of the races in the
islands from the king of Assuwa (i.e. the dominant power Works and Days could have been derived from a thor-
in the Troad until the end of the fifteenth century) as part ough familiarity with the tradition of Greek epic? The
of a marriage alliance; cf. Latacz (2004) 243-4; Kelly answer is: a surprisingly large amount' (p. 121; for
(2006). The letter offers further testimony to the details, see his pp. 121-6).
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 31

Let us therefore (as a test case) consider the Babylonian Enuma Elish, or Epic of Creation
(composed in the twelfth century BC at the latest),142 and compare the roles of Marduk and Zeus.
Like Hesiod's Zeus, Marduk is elected by the other gods to be the leading deity (though this hap-
pens before he has dealt with the threatening Tiamat and her monstrous allies: Tablet III),143 and,
once crowned king of heaven, Marduk orders the universe and apportions among the gods their
various roles and privileges.144 However, unlike the Greek model centred around Zeus and his
family, none of the other gods is Marduk's child. Burkert remarks: 'One might say that the ori-
ental assembly of the gods is more a kind of senate, whereas Homer introduces a family, includ-
ing current family catastrophes such as mutual scolding of parents and blows for the children.'145
But, it is important to add, the divine family has a far wider significance within the more sys-
tematic Greek model, where the family structure is used to emphasize Zeus's supreme authority
and to dramatize his eternal balancing act with the competing wills of the other gods. Moreover,
even if it is the case that Hesiod, for example, presents a model of the universe, many of whose
parts can be paralleled in other Near Eastern literatures (e.g. myths of divine succession, a
supreme god apportioning powers, the dangerous consort of the chief god, and so on), it is yet
more striking that all these elements have been combined into one coherent system. To put it
rather baldly, even if Hesiod gets many of his parts from elsewhere, the system itself is still
unique. And the world-order that we find in early Greek epic is distinctively different from that
found in contiguous cultures, since it is based on the all-embracing order and power of Zeus; fur-
thermore, it presents a level of analysis of the repercussions of Zeus's position which is peculiar
to the Greek tradition.146 Thus, when considering intercultural contacts, we should bear in mind
(to a greater degree than is often the case) the distinctiveness of the Greek model,147 which is
exemplified with particular vividness both in the power of Zeus's will and in the prominence of
the Aibq ^ovXr\ as a narrative pattern in early Greek poetry and myth.148

IV

In conclusion, our discussion has sought to explore the moral and theological universe of the
Homeric epics. Furthermore, it has tried to show that the patterns of human and divine justice
which they deploy are also to be found throughout the wider corpus of early Greek hexameter
poetry. All such poetry, as we have seen, is concerned in various ways with the exploration of
divine power and its politics. Poets seek to show how Zeus's power operates in the world, and
the polytheistic and anthropomorphic facets of their religious conceptions have important impli-
cations for the system of divine power that they develop. Although the similarities between the
early Greek texts are striking, they should not surprise us, for as one scholar has observed,
'Poems, after all, come not from the gods but from other poems, and if Homer was at all like the
poets we know from other traditional oral societies, his true teachers were the poets he heard and

142 145
Van De Mieroop (1997) 4 7 favours the twelfth Burkert (2004) 25.
146
century, though Dalley (1991) 229 finds such a date too Consider, for example, h o w Zeus ends inter-gen-
late. The end of the twentieth century BC is a secure ter- erational conflict through his self-interested methods of
minus post quern, since only then did Babylon and its family planning and female control; cf. §II(e). It is
patron god Marduk achieve the prominence and hegemo- notable that the basic pattern o f a chief god who learns
ny which are narrated and celebrated in the poem itself. from the mistakes of the divine succession before him, as
143
Contrast Hes. Theog. 881-5, where Zeus's elec- Zeus does, is in itself a further novel and distinctive
tion takes place only after the Olympian gods have aspect of the Greek model.
147
defeated the Titans. For example, when West (1988) 169 remarks i t is
144
In the Sumerian story of cosmic order, by con- hardly going too far to say that the whole picture o f the
trast, Enki organizes the universe and assigns the gods gods in the Iliad is oriental', the individuality of the
their powers but derives the authority to do so from Enlil, Greek world-order is unfortunately elided.
148
who remains the chief god; cf. Black et al. (2004) 215-25 Cf. Aicx; 8 ' exetaiexo p<njA.f|, //. 1.5 = Od. 11.297
('Enki and the world order'). = Cypria fr. 1.7 Bernabe/Davies.
32 WILLIAM ALLAN

the poets they had heard.'149 As well as being concerned with power politics among the gods,
each text treats the gods, and Zeus in particular, as deeply concerned with the social norms of
justice, both human and divine. Moreover, while each of the poems presents characters who
maintain the 'simple' view - namely, that human wrongs will be punished more or less immedi-
ately by the gods - they also explore the problems inherent in such an account of divine justice.
The inadequacy of the simple view is seen to generate theological problems, which are only par-
tially allayed by presenting the competing divine wills within a moral pattern governed by
Zeus.150
The discussion of the Iliad in Part I aimed to show that the popular picture of 'amoral' or
'frivolous' Homeric gods is misleading. Thus, simply to say of 'divine justice' in the Homeric
poems that 'this seems an unlikely role for the rime-seeking Olympians'151 risks creating a false
dichotomy, since the gods can be (and are) interested both in their own TIUT) and in wider issues
of justice. Indeed, it emerged that any attempt to separate matters of tiur| from wider issues of
justice, whether among gods or humans, represents in itself a false dichotomy; cf. §l(d), (f); also
§II(d). This is particularly true of such institutions as the oath and guest-friendship, where the
gods' concern for their own TIUT] is simultaneously a concern for justice (cf. §I(b), esp. n.16).
We saw the basic continuity between divine and human values: as social beings shaped by the
relations among themselves, the gods value justice as much as humans do and are equally ready
to assert a basic entitlement to honour and fair treatment, and to support the sanctions that ensure
justice and punish its violation. Thus values such as justice are shown to be socially constituted
on both the divine and human planes, and each level displays not only a hierarchy of power (and
the resulting tensions), but also a structure of authority.152 In addition, we saw that the moral and
theological world of the two Homeric epics is the same, since the Iliad reflects a system of social
norms and punishments that is no different from that of the Odyssey.
The presentation of the gods in the wider hexameter corpus of Hesiod, the Epic Cycle and the
Homeric Hymns reveals a remarkably coherent tradition in which the possibility of divine con-
flict is combined with an underlying cosmic order. The consideration of Near Eastern parallels
made clear that the idea of cosmic order as 'the paradigm of justice'153 is not unique to Greek
thought; yet it also brought out the distinctiveness of the Greek system as a whole and, in par-
ticular, of the way it uses the divine society under Zeus's authority as a comprehensive explana-
tory model. For, as one scholar has expressed the matter, Zeus's authority 'embodies the demand
for an underlying unity, not chaos, in experience'.154 Finally, while it has not been my intention
to deny the differences between the poets, whose various kinds of story entail distinct emphases,
it emerged that it has not been sufficiently stressed to what extent the poets, despite their indi-
vidual approaches, are all drawing on essentially the same model of divine society and authori-
ty on the one hand, and divine-human interaction on the other. Thus whereas Hesiod, for exam-
ple, places more emphasis on stasis among the gods as the foundational aition of Zeus's order in
the world, the wider cosmic frame is also present in Homer. And within Hesiod's works them-
selves, the Works and Days is more concerned than the Theogony to relate events on the divine

149 152
Ford (1992) 90. The importance of socially created forms of value
150
Despite some of the arguments used by those who in the epics is often neglected, even by classically trained
see the Odyssey as a morally more 'advanced' text, it is philosophers, who still present a rather narrow view both
prima facie unlikely that any major epic would endorse of Homeric society and its ethical conceptions; cf, e.g.,
the simple model of 'good always rewarded and sinner Lucas (1993) 5: 'The concept of responsibility is one that
always punished', for this would not be a particularly has developed and grown over the ages. We take it for
useful or credible theodicy, since it is obviously contrary granted, but the Homeric heroes had little use for that
to what one might presume to have been the case in the concept, centring their moral vocabulary on merit and
actual world of the audience. kudos instead.'
<51 Adkins (1997) 711. 153
Burkert (2004) 60.
154
Gould(1985)25.
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 33

plane to everyday human life, yet many of its elements (e.g. farming and sea-faring) are con-
ventional epic features which one also finds in Homer. And although many have stressed the dif-
ferences between the Iliad and Odyssey with regard to divine justice, these (we saw) are merely
apparent and come not from any change in the gods themselves but from the Odyssey's peculiar
narrative structure, with its focus on one hero and his main divine patron and foe. Homer and
Hesiod may not have gone unchallenged as authorities on matters of religion and ethics (e.g.
Xenophanes^r. 11, Heraclitusyh 42 DK), but as subsequent Greek literature shows, their depic-
tion of the gods, and particularly of Zeus as the focal point of cosmic order and justice (both
human and divine), proved to be a remarkably enduring and productive model for making sense
of the world.
WILLIAM ALLAN
University College, Oxford

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adkins, A.W.H. (1997) 'Homeric ethics', in I. Morris and B. Powell (eds), A New Companion to Homer
{Mnemosyne Suppl. 163, Leiden) 694-713
Andersen, 0 . (1978) Die Diomedesgestalt in der Mas (Symbolae Osloenses Suppl. 25, Oslo)
Benveniste, E. (1973) Indo-European Language and Society, trans. E. Palmer (London)
Black, J., Cunningham, G., Robson, E. and Zolyomi, G. (eds) (2004) The Literature of Ancient Sumer
(Oxford)
Bryce, T. (2002) Life and Society in the Hittite World (Oxford)
Burkert, W. (1981) '0EQN OI1IN OYK AAErONTEZ: Gotterfurcht und Leumannsches Missverstandnis',
Mus. Helv. 38 (1981) 195-204 [= Kleine Schriften I: Homerica (Gottingen 2001) 95-104]
— (1991) 'Homerstudien und Orient', in J. Latacz (ed.), Zweihundert Jahre Homer-Forschung. Riickblick
undAusblick (Stuttgart 1991) 155-81 [= Kleine Schriften I: Homerica (Gottingen 2001) 30-58]
— (1992) The Orientalizing Revolution. Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic
Age (Cambridge, MA)
— (1997) 'The song of Ares and Aphrodite: on the relationship between the Odyssey and the Iliad\ in
G.M. Wright and P.V. Jones (eds and trans.), Homer. German Scholarship in Translation (Oxford) 249-
62 [= 'Das Lied von Ares und Aphrodite: Zum Verhaltnis von Odyssee und Ilias', Rhein. Mus. 103
(1960) 130-44]
— (2004) Babylon, Memphis, Persepolis. Eastern Contexts of Greek Culture (Cambridge, MA)
Cairns, D.L. (ed.) (2001a) Oxford Readings in Homer's Iliad (Oxford)
— (2001b), 'Affronts and quarrels in the Iliad', in Cairns (2001a) 203-19
Chantraine, P. (1954) 'Le Divin et les dieux chez Homere', in Entretiens Hardt I (Geneva) 47-94
— (1968) Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue grecque. Histoire des mots (Paris)
Clarke, M. (2004) 'Manhood and heroism', in Fowler (2004) 74-90
Clay, J.S. (1983) The Wrath of Athena. Gods and Men in the Odyssey (Princeton)
— (2003) Hesiod s Cosmos (Cambridge)
Crielaard, J.P. (2002) 'Past or present? Epic poetry, aristocratic self-representation and the concept of time
in the eighth and seventh centuries BC\ in F. Montanari and P. Ascheri (eds), Omero tremila anni dopo
(Rome) 239-84
Csapo, E. (2005) Theories of Mythology (Oxford)
Dalley, S. (1991) Myths from Mesopotamia (Oxford)
Danek, G. (1998) Epos undZitat. Studien zu den Quellen der Odyssee (Wiener Studien Beiheft 22, Vienna)
Degani, E. (1997) 'Griechische Literatur bis 300 v. Chr.', in H.-G. Nesselrath (ed.), Einleitung in die
griechische Philologie (Stuttgart) 171-245
de Jong, I.J.F. (2001) A Narratological Commentary on the Odyssey (Cambridge)
34 WILLIAM ALLAN
Dodds, E.R. (1951) 77ie Greeks and the Irrational (Berkeley)
Edwards, M.W. (1987) Homer. Poet of the Iliad (Baltimore)
— (ed.) (1991) The Iliad. A Commentary 5: Books 17-20 (Cambridge)
Elster, J. (1999) Alchemies of the Mind. Rationality and the Emotions (Cambridge)
Erbse, H. (1986) Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Gotter im Homerischen Epos (Berlin)
Fenik, B. (1974) Studies in the Odyssey (Hermes Einzelschrift 30, Wiesbaden)
Finley, M.I. (1977) The World of Odysseus (2nd edn, London)
Ford, A. (1992) Homer. The Poetry of the Past (Ithaca)
— (1996) Review of I.F. Cook, The Odyssey in Athens. Myths of Cultural Origins (Ithaca 1995), BMCR
96.04.27 [http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/1996/96.04.27.html]
— (1997) 'The inland ship: problems in the performance and reception of Homeric epic', in E. Bakker and
A. Kahane (eds), Written Voices, Spoken Signs. Tradition, Performance, and the Epic Text (Cambridge,
MA) 83-109
Fowler, R. (ed.) (2004) The Cambridge Companion to Homer (Cambridge)
Frankel, H. (1975) Early Greek Poetry and Philosophy. A History of Greek Epic, Lyric, and Prose to the
Middle of the Fifth Century, trans. M. Hadas and J. Willis (Oxford 1975)
Frisk, H. (1954-73) Griechisches etymologisches Worterbuch (Heidelberg)
George, A.R. (ed.) (2003) The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform
Texts (2 vols, Oxford)
Gould, J. (1985) 'On making sense of Greek religion', in RE. Easterling and J.V. Muir (eds), Greek
Religion and Society (Cambridge) 1-33 [= Myth, Ritual, Memory, and Exchange. Essays in Greek
Literature and Culture (Oxford 2001) 203-34]
Graziosi, B. and Haubold, J. (2005) Homer. The Resonance of Epic (London)
Griffin, J. (1980) Homer (Oxford)
— (ed.) (1995) Homer: Iliad IX (Oxford)
— (2004) Homer: The Odyssey (2nd edn, Cambridge)
Haubold, J. (2002) 'Greek epic: a Near Eastern genre?', PCPS 48, 1-19
Havelock, E. (1978) The Greek Concept of Justice. From its Shadow in Homer to its Substance in Plato
(Cambridge, MA)
Heubeck, A. (1988) 'General introduction', in A. Heubeck, S. West, and J.B. Hainsworth (eds), A
Commentary on Homer's Odyssey 1: Introduction and Books I- VIII (Oxford) 3-23
Holscher, U. (1988) Die Odyssee. Epos zwischen Mdrchen und Roman (Munich)
Jacoby, F. (1933) 'Die geistige Physiognomie der Odyssee', DieAntike 9 (1933) 159-94 [= Kleinephilol.
Schriften 1 (Berlin 1961) 107-38]
Janko, R. (1982) Homer, Hesiod and the Hymns (Cambridge)
— (ed.) (1992) The Iliad. A Commentary 4: Books 13-16 (Cambridge)
Kearns, E. (2004) 'The gods in the Homeric epics', in Fowler (2004) 59-73
Kelly, A. (2006) 'Homer and history: Iliad 9.381-84', forthcoming in Mnemosyne
Kirk, G.S. (1962) The Songs of Homer (Cambridge)
— (ed.) (1990) The Iliad. A Commentary 2: Books 5-8 (Cambridge)
Koenen, L. (1994) 'Greece, the Near East, and Egypt: cyclic destruction in Hesiod and the Catalogue of
Women', TAPA 124, 1-34
Kullmann, W. (1985) 'Gods and men in the Iliad and the Odyssey', HSCP 89 (1985) 1-23 [= idem,
Homerische Motive. Beitrdge zur Entstehung, Eigenart und Wirkung von Iliad und Odyssee, ed. R.J.
Muller (Stuttgart 1992) 243-63]
Latacz, J. (2004) Troy and Homer. Towards a Solution of an Old Mystery (Oxford)
Lesky, A. (2001) 'Divine and human causation in Homeric epic', in Cairns (2001a) 170-202
Lloyd-Jones, H. (1983) The Justice of Zeus (2nd edn, Berkeley)
— (2002) 'Curses and divine anger in early Greek epic: the Pisander scholion', 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 Resources of Memory. Some Applications of Cognitive Theory to the
Iliad and the Odyssey (Oxford)
Morris, I. (2001) 'The use and abuse of Homer', in Cairns (2001a) 57-91
 DIVINE JUSTICE AND COSMIC ORDER IN EARLY GREEK EPIC 35
Morris, S. (1989) 'A tale of two cities: the miniature frescoes from Thera and the origins of Greek
poetry', AJA 93,511-35
Most, G. (1997) 'Hesiod's myth of the five (or three or four) races', PCPS 43, 104-27
Moulton, C. (1977) Similes in the Homeric Poems {Hypomnemata 49, Gottingen)
Mueller, M. (1984) The Iliad (London)
Niemeier, W.-D. (1999) 'Mycenaeans and Hittites in war in Western Asia Minor', in R. Laffineur (ed.),
Polemos. Le contexte guerrier en Egee a I'age du bronze (Eupen) 141-56
Osborne, R. (2004) 'Homer's society', in Fowler (2004) 206-19
— (2005) 'Ordering women in Hesiod's Catalogue', in R. Hunter (ed.), The Hesiodic Catalogue of
Women. Constructions and Reconstructions (Cambridge) 5-24
Raz, J. (1999) Engaging Reason. On the Theory of Value and Action (Oxford)
Redfield, J. (1994) Nature and Culture in the Iliad. The Tragedy of Hector (expanded edn, Durham, NC)
Reinhardt, K. (1996) 'The adventures in the Odyssey', trans. H.I. Flower, in Schein (ed.) (1996) 63-132
Rosen, R.M. (1997) 'Homer and Hesiod', in I. Morris and B. Powell (eds), A New Companion to Homer
{Mnemosyne Suppl. 163, Leiden) 463-88
Rutherford, R.B. (2001) 'From the Iliad to the Odyssey', in Cairns (2001a) 117-46
Saunders, K.B. (2004) 'Frolich's table of Homeric wounds', CQ 54. 1-17
Schein, S.L. (1996) 'Introduction', in idem (ed.), Reading the Odyssey. Selected Interpretive Essays
(Princeton) 3-31
Schmidt, M. (1991) 'Siicn.', in B. Snell et al. (eds), Lexikon des fruhgriechischen Epos 2: B-L (Gottingen)
cols 302-5
Scodel, R. (1982) 'The Achaean wall and the myth of destruction', HSCP 86, 33-50
Segal, C. (1971) The Theme of the Mutilation of the Corpse in the Iliad (Mnemosyne Suppl. 17, Leiden)
— (1992) 'Divine justice in the Odyssey: Poseidon, Cyclops, and Helios', AJP 113, 489-518 (reprinted in
idem, Singers, Heroes, and Gods in the Odyssey (Ithaca 1994) 195-227)
Shipp, G.P. (1972) Studies in the Language of Homer (2nd edn, Cambridge)
Slatkin, L. (1991) The Power of Thetis. Allusion and Interpretation in the Iliad (Berkeley)
Thalmann, W.G. (1984) Conventions of Form and Thought in Early Greek Poetry (Baltimore)
Tsagarakis, O. (2000) Studies in Odyssey 11 (Hermes Einzelschrift 82, Stuttgart)
Van De Mieroop, M. (1997) The Ancient Mesopotamian City (Oxford)
West, M.L. (ed.) (1966) Hesiod: Theogony (Oxford)
— (1973) 'Greek poetry 2000-700 B C , CQ 23, 179-92
— (ed.) (1978) Hesiod: Works and Days (Oxford)
— (1988) 'The rise of the Greek epic', JHS 108, 151-72
— (1997) The East Face of Helicon. West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth (Oxford)
West, S. (1988) 'Introduction: Books I-IV, in A. Heubeck, S. West and J.B. Hainsworth (eds), A
Commentary on Homer s Odyssey 1: Introduction and Books I-VIII (Oxford) 51 -66
Winterbottom, M. (1989) 'Speaking of the gods', G&R 36, 33-41
Woodhouse, W.J. (1930) The Composition of Homer's Odyssey (Oxford)
Zanker, G. (1994) The Heart of Achilles. Characterization and Personal Ethics in the Iliad (Ann Arbor)