We read in the Odyssey that Telemachus had no sooner reached man’s estate than he set out from Ithaca for Pylos and Lacedæmon, in order to seek news of his father from Nestor and Menelaus, the two most eminent survivors of the expedition against Troy. But he learned only that Odysseus had vanished from the known world. The disappointment was severe, even to tears, notwithstanding that the banquet was already spread in the radiant palace of the Spartan king. The remaining guests, including the illustrious host and hostess, caught the infection of grief, and the pleasures of the table were over-clouded. Then Helena the child of Zeus strange things Devised, and mixed a philter in their wine, Which so cures heartache and the inward stings, That men forget all sorrow wherein they pine. He who hath tasted of the draught divine Weeps not that day, although his mother die And father, or cut off before his eyne Brother or child beloved fall miserably, Hewn by the pitiless sword, he sitting silent by. Drugs of such virtue did she keep in store, Given her by Polydamna, wife of Thôn, In Egypt, where the rich glebe evermore Yields herbs in foison, some for virtue known, Some baneful. In that climate each doth own Leech-craft beyond what mortal minds attain; Since of Pæonian stock their race hath grown. She the good philter mixed to charm their pain, And bade the wine outpour, and answering spake again.[309] Footnote 309: _Odyssey_, iv. 219-32 (Worsley’s translation). Such is the story which has formed the basis of innumerable conjectures. The name of the drug administered by Helen signifies the negation of sorrow; and we learn that it grew in Egypt, and that its administration was followed by markedly soothing effects. Let us see whither these scanty indications as to its nature will lead us. Many of the ancients believed nepenthes to have been a kind of bugloss, the leaves of which, infused in wine, were affirmed by Dioscorides, Galen, and other authorities, to produce exhilarating effects. It is certain that in Plutarch’s time the hilarity of banquets was constantly sought to be increased by this means. But this was done in avowed imitation of Helen’s hospitable expedient. It was, in other words, a revival, not a survival, and possesses for us, consequently, none of the instructiveness of an unbroken tradition.