[153] Iliad, xxii. 487-500. Hesiod dwells upon injury to orphan
children, however, as a heinous offence (Opp. Di. 330).
[154] Iliad, xxii. 371. οὐδ᾽ ἄρα οἵ τις ἀνούτητί γε παρέστη.
Argument of Iliad. Minor. ap. Düntzer, Epp. Fragm. p. 17; Virgil,
Æneid, vi. 520.
Both Agamemnôn and the Oiliad Ajax cut off the heads of slain
warriors, and send them rolling like a ball or like a mortar
among the crowd of warriors (Iliad, xi. 147; xiii. 102).
The ethical maxim preached by Odysseus in the Odyssey, not to
utter boastful shouts over a slain enemy (Οὐκ ὁσίη, κταμένοισιν
ἐπ᾽ ἀνδράσιν εὐχετάασθαι, xxii. 412), is abundantly violated in
the Iliad.
[155] Herodot. ix. 78-79. Contrast this strong expression from
Pausanias, with the conduct of the Carthaginians towards the
end of the Peloponnesian war, after their capture of Selinus in
Sicily, where, after having put to death 16,000 persons, they
mutilated the dead bodies,—κατὰ τὸ πάτριον ἔθος (Diodôr. xiii.
57-86).
The different manner of dealing with homicide presents a third test,
perhaps more striking yet, of the change in Grecian feelings and
manners during the three centuries preceding the Persian invasion.
That which the murderer in the Homeric times had to dread, was, not
public prosecution and punishment, but the personal vengeance of
the kinsmen and friends of the deceased, who were stimulated by the
keenest impulses of honor and obligation to avenge the deed, and were
considered by the public as specially privileged to do so.[156] To
escape from this danger, he is obliged to flee the country, unless
he can prevail upon the incensed kinsmen to accept of a valuable
payment (we must not speak of coined money, in the days of Homer)
as satisfaction for their slain comrade. They may, if they please,
decline the offer, and persist in their right of revenge; but if
they accept, they are bound to leave the offender unmolested, and he
accordingly remains at home without farther consequences. The chiefs
in agora do not seem to interfere, except to insure payment of the
stipulated sum.
[156] The Mosaic law recognizes this habit and duty on the part
of the relatives of the murdered man, and provides cities of
refuge for the purpose of sheltering the offender in certain
cases (Deuteron. xxxv. 13-14; Bauer, Handbuch der Hebraïschen
Alterthümer, sect. 51-52).
The relative who inherited the property of a murdered man was
specially obliged to avenge his death (H. Leo, Vorlesungen über
die Geschichte des Jüdischen Staats.—Vorl. iii. p. 35).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account