jueves, 27 de agosto de 2026

THE CITY OF GOD AND HUMAN PEACE

 

K. Cronick

INTRODUCTION

The objectives of this essay[1]

In this essay I want to begin to explore the cultural problem of peace, and I intend to follow it later with other approaches like the legal dispositions and the existence of international agreements. For now, I will do it from an historical/cultural perspective, mostly with reference to the writings of Saint Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo.

I call the culture of peace a problem because, since the beginning of recorded history, the concept and the practice of power has been closely aligned with conquest and war. There have been, however, three cultural developments to challenge these ideals of war.

First, the teachings of Siddharta Gautama (Buddha, (6th or 5th century BCE) began to influence Far Eastern thought. Buddhism has offered teachings on achieving peace -both spiritually and politically. It teaches compassion and non-violence, and promotes the ideal of community harmony.

Secondly, in the first millennium BCE in what was to become Greece, there were disperse reflections regarding the brutality of war. The poet Homer in the Iliad offered a thoughtful and concerned examination of the motivations and personalities of the participants that took part in the Trojan war. This poem is not a patriotic paean, because the bard sympathizes with the fates of both the Greeks and Trojans. From the beginning of his poem he warned his listeners that it would all end tragically and there would be nothing left. That there would be no winners in the sense of a lasting peace and prosperity.

Still in the context of ancient Greek reflections, some centuries later in Athens, Aristotle considered that military action was a natural means of acquiring merchandises: "War itself is, in a way, a natural means of acquiring [goods...] it is a battle that nature itself has made legitimate" (2017, p. 17-18). But other Greeks mourned its destruction and death. For example, in "The Trojan Women" Euripides (V century B.C./ 2015) lamented the loss of Troy and the sad fate of its women who become the slaves of the conquering Greeks. The author does so by arousing the empathy of the audience when they hear the women’s laments in the voices of the performers in his play. There were other approaches, also, for questioning military heroism. In Aeschylus’ cycle of plays, “The Oresteia”  in 458 B.C.E. (n.d. B) King Agamemnon’s life and legacy were questioned, together with those of his whole family. It was a formidable expression of critical thinking to be able to question a powerful king’s motives and actions in Athens at that time; even though he had been a Spartan, he was one of the founding fathers of Greek identity.

Thirdly, in the first century of the CE, Christianity appeared in Western Culture with its ideals of compassionate love and charity. It formed a community of belief that did not always share a physical territory. As Saint Augustine said, “For the blessedness of a community and of an individual flow from the same source; for a community is nothing else than a harmonious collection of individuals” (City of God, B. 1, Ch. 15, p 50).

In these reflections I will concentrate on the cultural importance of Christian influence, specifically the writings of Saint Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo, with regard to Western ethics and power structures. I will examine his thoughts about the tenets of war and the nature of both divine and earthly power structures. I will consider how his writings have influenced historical and existing practices, their effects on the rhetoric of those times, and how they have continued to exist as shadow-values ever since.[2]

It will be necessary first of all to consider how his ideals (and those of early Christianity in general) found a place in the Roman culture of his times.

 

The new cultural mandate: love

With the advent of Christianity, the mandate to love one’s neighbor was compelling, but not entirely new. In the Old Testament it appears as an ethical directive to treat “one’s neighbors” with compassion and respect. In Leviticus (19:18) we find this mandate:

“‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.

The context in which this was formulated was the liberation of the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery and the beginning of the nation of Israel as a social and political entity. It was important for these people to see each other as “neighbors”, that is, people belonging to one cultural heritage. There was a strong need to create a cohesive society based on a sense of justice and community. It is not clear whether this sense of belonging extended beyond their own cultural borders. Later, when King Saul and King David became monarchs, they did engage in some rather brutal wars.

Centuries later the Christian guidelines were wider. In the New Testament, in the Gospel according to Mathew, Jesus is quoted as saying something similar to the Old Testament mandate:

´Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.' (Matthew 22:37-39)

For Christians, the mandate to love one another is equivalent to theological law: “Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law.” (Romans 13:10). And this requirement goes beyond the love one has for one’s own nationals; it extends to one’s enemies as well: “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).

These were new ways of looking at community and even humanity as a shared experience. Again, this new worldview did not stop wars of extermination or local atrocities even among Christian kingdoms. But it did plant new seeds, and new ways of looking at society.

 

The culture of war and despotism before and after Augustine

The exercise of power throughout the millenniums has often implied brutal repressions. From the conquest of Troy by the Greeks, to the destruction of Thebes by Alexander the Great, to the siege of Carthage by the Romans, winning warriors have looted, destroyed, and enslaved their enemies.

Saint Augustine’s message was different: he opens his “City of God” with the Christian idea that mercy should be extended to one’s enemies, and all people should be sheltered from violence, even military violence.

It had already happened that conquering armies had respected the lives of the vanquished, although not because of a belief in charity. The motives were more related to the monetary and economic benefits that defeated populations could have. Refugees could be useful for dominant kingdoms: their populations could be incorporated into the local workforce, the farming population, and even into the army as foot soldiers.

With the advent of Christianity there was a brand-new, comprehensive value being transmitted through a religious ideal: this innovative value was universal love, which was being preached by this recently organized religion. It was not related to either a new model of citizenship or to economic benefits. It was an abstract ethical standard. Augustine observes how innovative this new morality was, and he challenges his readers to find even one example of similar behavior before Christian times:


[…There is not even] one instance in which, when a city had been taken by foreigners, the victors spared those who were found to have fled for sanctuary to the temples of their gods;  or one instance in which a barbarian general gave orders that none should be put to the sword who had been found in this or that temple (City of God, B1, Ch.2, p. 23).

 

This happened -for the first time, in Augustine’s appreciation, during the capture of Rome by the Goths in the fifth century, when the invaders spared the Roman refugees in Christian temples. I will refer to this below.

The Christians have not always lived up to their ideal. One of the first and most famous infractions of their own principle happened when they burned the remnants of the Library at Alexandria together with its curators. It is believed the main library had ben already destroyed -unintentionally- by a fire set by Julius Cesar in 48 CE to facilitate his escape from the city. Later, the “sister library” of the city, housed in a pagan temple called Serapeum, was burned on purpose by Christian fanatics.

This happened In the year 391 CE. The motives were both fanatical and political: in 380 CE, when the emperor Theodosius I had declared that Christianity would be the official religion of the Roman Empire, he ordered the destruction of the remaining pagan temples. Following this order Theophilus, the bishop of Alexandria, led an attack on the Serapeum. “His frenzied followers ran amok in the temple, destroying and plundering. When the destruction was complete, Theophilus ordered a church to be built on the site” (Abbadi, 2026).

 In a related incident in 415 a group of Christians killed the philosopher Hypatia who was associated with the Neoplatonic school of philosophy at Alexandria. She was accused of heresy. Both the hoards that did the killing and the leader who ordered it were Christians, and the motives were related to the eradication of heresy. But there were other probable political motives as well, such as: a) her friendship with the traditional aristocracy of Alexandria, and b) her anger with Theophilus because of the destruction and plunder of the library at Serapeum before in the year 391.

After the Romans, with the appearance of the Christian kingdoms and empires in Europe, there were wars either between Christian kings, o with organized Christian armies that fought kingdoms that worshipped other dogmas, as happened during the Crusades. Sometimes different Christian cults attempted to destroy each other, as in the "Huguenot Wars" or the “Thirty-years War” that affected the Holy Roman Empire in the XVII century. Again, Christianity chose to ignore its central values of love and mercy, even though their churches were full of paintings and allusions to the love predicated by Christ and of images of the Virgin, often tenderly holding her baby, or exhibiting a red heart on her breast. 

This sociopolitical complexity continues today. The chief declared religions of modern Europe and the American states are Christian, and nevertheless, wars are waged with the declared purpose of exterminating each side’s enemies.

In this essay I will try to examine the emergence of Christian love as an historical achievement by reviewing some of Augustine’s writings.

 

SAINT AUGUSTINE


Saint Augustine embraced Christianity in the year 386 of the CE, shortly after Theodosius I declared Christianity to be the only acceptable religion for the Roman Empire in the year 380.  In 395 he became full Bishop at Hippo and remained in that position until his death in 430. It was a traumatic time for the Romans that still worshiped their Pantheon of traditional gods. The Eternal City had changed and a belief structure that had lasted centuries had collapsed.

In the year 410, during his tenure as the bishop of Hippo, the “barbarian” Goths under Alaric their king, were invading Rome, and the Roman citizens were panicked, looking for shelter wherever they might find it. The Christian churches were open to these refugees, even when the victims did not share their beliefs. And the invaders, some of whom were also Christian -including Aleric himself-, respected these places.

It was historically unheard of. Augustin described these efforts to save the Roman citizens, pagan or Christian. He distinguished between the city of God and the earthly cities, and said that the latter should emulate divine regency by assuming divine goals. Later when the traditional Romans would complain about Christian dominance, he reminded them that they had been saved from the invaders by the churches and cloisters that had taken them in and protected them. Later, when the pagan Romans were complaining about the loss of their Eternal City and their old culture, he admonished them:


For to this earthly city belong the enemies against whom I have to defend the city of God. Many of them, indeed, being reclaimed from their ungodly error, have become sufficiently creditable citizens of this city; but many are so inflamed with hatred against it, and are so ungrateful to its Redeemer for His signal benefits, as to forget that they would now be unable to utter a single word to its prejudice, had they not found in its sacred places, as they fled from the enemy’s steel, that life in which they now boast themselves. Are not those very Romans, who were spared by the barbarians through their respect for Christ, become enemies to the name of Christ? The reliquaries of the martyrs and the churches of the apostles bear witness to this; for in the sack of the city they were open sanctuary for all who fled to them, whether Christian or Pagan. To their very threshold the blood-thirsty enemy raged; there his murderous fury owned a limit. Thither did such of the enemy as had any pity convey those to whom they had given quarter, lest any less mercifully disposed might fall upon them (City of God, B.1, Ch. 1, p.21).

 

The City of God

Augustine cites numerous Old Testament references to a City of God to show how the Hebrews were aware of its existence even before the birth of Christ. It was based on love as its main tenet.

From these and similar testimonies, all of which it were tedious to cite, we have learned that there is a city of God, and its Founder has inspired us with a love which makes us covet its citizenship (City of God, B. 10, Ch. 12, p. 568).

 But Augustine was raised in the context of the Roman culture and loved the city as it always had been. He lamented its conquest. Like most of his Christian compatriots he did not see the Gothic conquest as a liberation. After all, Rome was already a Christian city. He admired the long tradition of Roman government and culture. He developed the idea that there might be two simultaneous cities, one in which there are customs, laws, physical constructions, economies, and political organizations, and another, the City of God that spiritually hovers over these artifacts, products and ruins.

If the old social system was crumbling away, in its place he saw the creation of a pure Christendom. In this spiritual city there are profounder views of history. For him it was possible from this perspective to understand how the community of God’s people has coexisted with the world’s kingdoms. He considers that in this spiritual city there exists a superior morality. He attributed the antagonism of these two grand communities, that is, the earthly city and God’s city, to the fall of the angels. For Augustine the city of God is an attempt to produce a valid philosophy of history and to develop the spiritual idea of the Kingdom of God under both the Jewish and Christian interpretations, in contrast with the declining kingdoms of this world.

This conception was profoundly comforting in rapidly changing world.

The City of God is, in his conception immaterial, but contains angels. It was an extension of the Christian God himself, although He was composed of three parts, a trinity.

Augustine is arguably a one-self trinitarian. For him, the one God is the Trinity. And this one God is almost always addressed and described using singular personal pronouns. He is an object of our love, as much as our neighbors and ourselves, and he […] is a simple, timeless, and perfect self, a subject of complete knowledge, who freely creates all other things, and who exists in a truer or deeper way. (Augustine, Trinity, 227 [VII.3.9]; cf. City 425 [X.24], 462 [XI.10]) One must say “three persons”, but for Augustine these are not three selves (Tuggy, 2025).

 Augustine tells how God’s will became known to earthly people in their earthly cities. It was dictated, as it were, by God Himself, and, after having passed through the minds of his profits, apostles, and saints, it was written down in sacred texts:

This Mediator, having spoken what He judged sufficient first by the prophets, then by His own lips, and afterwards by the apostles, has besides produced the Scripture which is called canonical, which has paramount authority, and to which we yield assent in all matters of which we ought not to be ignorant, and yet cannot know of ourselves (City of God, B 11, Ch 3, p. 572).

 Thus, accepting heaven’s complexities, and the intricacies of God’s own nature, the main distinction for Augustine is between the City of God, and the earthly cities each with its own characteristics and people. This distinction eased the transition from Rome’s traditional identity to a Christian one.   

Wickedness

Augustine devotes continued reflections to the topic of sin. It is a logical and ecclesiastical problem, because God created everybody, even the sinners. And He also dictated that there should be universal love among all mankind.

And since no one is evil by nature, but whoever is evil is evil by vice, he who lives according to God ought to cherish towards evil men a perfect hatred, so that he shall neither hate the man because of his vice, nor love the vice because of the man, but hate the vice and love the man 8City of God, B.14, Ch. 6, p. 741).  

 

Furthermore, in a world created perfectly by a perfect God, how is sin to be explained? In Augustine’s writings, indeed in all of Christian literature, free will is a problem. God created all things, including wickedness, the fallen angels, the unbelievers, and even the Devil himself.

"This leviathan whom Thou hast made to be a sport therein," that we may see that, even while God in His goodness created him good, He yet had already foreseen and arranged how He would make use of him when he became wicked (City of God, B 11, Ch17, p. 596, Augustine is quoting Psalm 104:26).

 This is a problem because if God has even created the sinners, and those who ignore His mandates for love and mercy, how can these sinners be responsible for their acts? They have no real free will if part of their creation included the capacity for sin. Sin is not a blemish on the beauty of God’s creation, it is a “shadow” in a beautiful painting (City of God, B. 11., Ch 23, p. 605).

Nevertheless, Augustine holds on to the idea of human will; God can be defied, even by creatures of His own creation. Evil has “deficient causes” even though it is part of the expression of free will which was a divine creation. Evil will be punished:

This I do know, that the nature of God can never, nowhere, nowise be defective, and that natures made of nothing can. […,] but in so far as they are defective in being, and consequently do evil (for then what is their work but vanity?) they have deficient causes. And I know likewise, that the will could not become evil, were it unwilling to become so; and therefore its failings are. justly punished, being not necessary, but voluntary. (City of God, B. 12, Ch. 8, p. 642).

 “Goodness” must be tested. Evil in Augustine is considered part of a natural process of constant recreation, and free will becomes a sort of an antibody against infection, or an evolutionary process that leads to perfection. This is an interesting idea; it is the acceptance of a process of cultural change, an optimistic view of the future. It is also appropriate in a world of rapid change such as Augustine and his fellow Christians were experiencing in Rome after its abandonment of the ancient Parthenon of Greek and Roman deities, and the invasion of the Goths.

It is He who gave to this intellectual nature free-will of such a kind, that if he wished to forsake God, i.e., his blessedness, misery should forthwith result. It is He who, when He foreknew that certain angels would in their pride desire to suffice for their own blessedness, and would forsake their great good, did not deprive them of this power, deeming it to be more befitting His power and goodness to bring good out of evil than to prevent the evil from coming into existence (B 22, Ch1 1, p. 1301).

Christian charity in government and times of war

Love, or charity, and its synonyms in the Augustine’s writings are demanded of those who rule a Christian nation. The despot does not rule, he benefits his own “pride” and avarice.

He who resolves to love God, and to love his neighbor as himself, not according to man but according to God, is on account of this love said to be of a good will; and this is in Scripture more commonly called charity, but it is also, even in the same books, called love. For the apostle says that the man to be elected as a ruler of the people must be a lover of good (City of God, B. 14,  Ch. 7, p. 742).

 The two kinds of rulers, the self-serving one, and the godly, loving one, represent the two cities, in the sense that the one that obeys the dictates of God does not love to power; he extends divine love toward his subjects as a relationship and even as a policy. He rules as though he would like to imitate the divine city. The worldly lover of power exists only on Earth.

In the one, the prince sand the nations it subdues are ruled by the love of ruling; in the other, the princes and the subjects serve one another in love, the latter obeying, while the former take thought for all. The one delights in its own strength, represented in the persons of its rulers; the other says to its God (City of God, B. 14, Ch. 28, p. 788).

 Augustine also decried the traditional culture of cruelty in war. He made a special point of condemning Greek practices, and he even mentions Cesar’s treatment of his vanquished foes as part of a deplorable “Universal Custom of an Enemy When Sacking a City” (City of God, B.1, Ch. 5, p. 30). He mentioned how Marcus Marcellus, before conquering Syracuse, lamented what he knew was going to be “it’s coming ruin […] before he spilled its blood” (ibid, p. 31). In this account we can see a growing discrepancy between the ideals of war and its practice, even in (pagan) Roman times.

In his writings Augustine makes a point of contrasting, on one hand, the Greek treatment of the conquered Trojans, and the pre-Christian Roman rules of war, to the way all the Romans were respected in the Christian temples during the invasion by the Goths. The big change was due to Christian doctrine: Augustine says “That the cruelties which occurred in the sack of Rome were in accordance with the custom of war, whereas the acts of clemency resulted from the influence of Christ’s name” (ibid, B. 1, Ch. 7. p.33).

But there is a paradox: men must forgive each other and show mercy. But God punishes, even the righteous among his flock by inflicting disasters on everyone. Augustine attributes all men’s hardships to God’s punishment for their eventual “wickedness”.

First of all, they must humbly consider those very sins which have provoked God to fill the world with such terrible disasters; for although they be far from the excesses of wicked, immoral, and ungodly men, yet they do not judge themselves so clean removed from all faults as to be too good to suffer for these even temporal ills. For every man, however laudably he lives, yet yields in some points to the lust of the flesh. Though he do not fall into gross enormity of wickedness, and abandoned viciousness, and abominable profanity, .yet he slips into some sins, either rarely or so much the more frequently as the sins seem of less account (ibid, Ch. 9, p. 36).

 Augustine even thinks that “good” men are at fault when they do not denounce the sins of other men. It is also blameful to value wealth more than virtue. On the other hand, men carry their faithfulness with them even when they have been made captive, even “He who did not abandon the prophet in the belly of a monster” (ibid, B.1, Ch 16, p.48). Likewise, women captives are not dishonored when they have been sexually abused:

[…] that the virtue which makes the life good has its throne in the soul, and thence rules the members of the body, which becomes holy in virtue of the holiness of the will; and that while the will remains firm and unshaken, nothing that another person does with the body, or upon the body, is any fault of the person who suffers it […] (Ibid, B.1, Ch 16. p.51).


The rape of the Sabine women

In Chapter 17, book 2 of the City of God, Augustine opens himself to an onslaught of possible criticism from any modern reader. Moral appreciations have changed since he wrote, and it is unfair to appraise his views from the vantage point of the twenty-first century. Nevertheless, and following his own appreciation, that it is wrong not to question error, it becomes obligatory to comment on his comprehension of the rape of the Sabine women.

Until the beginning of the twentieth century, that is, until very recently, women had few rights. The choice of their husbands was their fathers’ responsibility, and later their places of residence, their economic situation, and many other things were decided by their husbands. Thus, to look back at the beginnings of the Roman empire with modern eyes is risky. Nevertheless, it is impossible to discuss the Rape of the Sabine women with historical impartiality.

The abduction of Sabine women occurred recently after the founding of Rome in the eighth century (BCE) when Romulus became worried that his mostly-male population would not be able to sustain the city for more than one generation. They made overtures to the surrounding regions in search of wives with whom they could establish families. The Romans were not successful in their negotiations, including with the Sabines, who populated a neighboring area. The Sabines refused to allow their women to marry the Romans.

The Romans planned a subterfuge to solve their problem; they announced a festival of games to attract people from all the nearby towns. During these games they had a plan to abduct the Sabine women and fight off their men. They carried out this plan and took a number of women by force. Then the Sabine men then went to war to avenge this insult. The battle was vicious, and many Sabine men were killed.

The abducted Sabine women threw themselves into the center of the battle. They implored both their fathers and their new husbands to stop fighting, and to allow the marriages to continue. The men ended the battle, and finally agreed to unite both communities into one nation. The Sabine Titus Tatius jointly ruled with the Roman Romulus for some five years, and the nation maintained its unity after Tatius's death.

Augustine has strong, male-biased, and imperial judgement of this event. He suggests that maybe the Sabines were wrong to deny the Roman request for their daughters in marriage. He even suggests that war might have been a more honorable response for the Romans than abduction. He, of course, has no concern for the women’s own opinions. He asks:

If the Sabines were wrong to deny their daughters when the Romans asked for them, was it not a greater wrong in the Romans to carry them off after that denial? The Romans might more justly have waged war against the neighboring nation for having refused their daughters in marriage when they first sought them, than for having demanded them back when they had stolen them (Ibid, B. 2, Ch. 17, p. 111).

 The problem boils down to what is more blameworthy -war or rape? If Augustine has already condemned war, this is clearly wrong. If rape is also wrong, then it becomes a choice between two evils, which a morally untenable solution.

The holiness of all life

               Augustine developed an ethic of respect for life, considering all life to be divine. He said that “trampling” life is a desecration of God himself: “whatever one may trample, he must trample a part of God, and in slaying any living creature, a part of God must be slaughtered? (Ibid, B. 4,  Ch. 12, p. 216).

 The ideal state

Agustine offers a musical metaphor for his idea of the ideal state. He has lamented what he considers a licentious and corrupt state in Rome, almost from its beginnings. But he imagines the possibility of a State that might be described in this way:

As among the different sounds which proceed from lyres, flutes, and the human voice, there must be maintained a certain harmony which a cultivated ear cannot endure to hear disturbed or jarring, but which may be elicited in full and absolute concord by the modulation even of voices very unlike one another; so, where reason is allowed to modulate the diverse elements of the state, there is obtained a perfect concord from the upper, lower, and middle classes as from various sounds; and what musicians call harmony in singing, is concord in matters of state (Ibid, B. 2, Ch. 21, p. 119).

 He is imagining a republic in which different classes and kinds of people interact peacefully. It would be an ideal earthly city. But reverence to God is the supreme value: it must be a sacrifice of a person’s individual will, given voluntarily to the Christian God. Even “mercy”, an ethical value of a worldly, civic, interpersonal nature, only has value in reference to the dictates of Christian morality.


Thus a true sacrifice is every work which is done that we may be united to God in holy fellowship, and which has a reference to that supreme good and end in which alone we can be truly blessed. And therefore even the mercy we show to men, if it is not shown for God’s sake, is not a sacrifice. For, though made or offered by man, sacrifice is a divine thing, as those who called it sacrifice meant to indicate (Ibid, B. 10, Ch.6. p.514).

 Augustine distinguishes the physical world from the spiritual world, even the body from the soul of each person. The spiritual world is totally distinct from the physical one, but when a person’s spirit follows the Christian example given by the City of God, it serves that City:

If, then, the body, which, being inferior, the soul uses as a servant or instrument, is a sacrifice when it is used rightly, and with reference to God, how much more does the soul itself become a sacrifice when it offers itself to God, in order that, being inflamed by the fire of His love, it may receive of His beauty and become pleasing to Him, losing the shape of earthly desire […] (Ibid, B. 10, Ch.6, p. 514).

CLOSING THOUGHTS

In this essay I have reviewed some of the philosophical and religious questions that were being posed in Rome in the fourth century after its conversion to Christianity and after the invasion of the Goths. They included: a) the historical antecedents for respecting peace, b) the mandate to love “one’s neighbor” and even one’s enemies, c) the relationship between the exercise of power and charity, d) Augustine’s idea of the city of God and the Roman transition to Christianity, and e) the contradiction between the perfection of creation and free will.

I have called the Christian values of shared love and charity “shadow values”. Since they were introduced by Biblical sources and philosophers and by clerics like Augustine, they have never been completely forgotten.  Even so, they have seldom been practiced. They were important in the thinking of some of the protestant reformists and for the enlightenment writers. They reappeared in the ideology of human rights proponents, and in the twentieth century they were certainly present in the founding charters of both the European Union (officially established on 1st of November, 1993), and the United Nations (June 26, 1945). The preamble of the United Nations’ Charter begins with these words:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, AND FOR THESE ENDS to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples… (n.d.).

 Both charters have been respected in the sense that they continue to be political and cultural resources for all of humanity. Slavery was abolished legally by the United Nations on December, 2, 1949, although it still practiced illegally in many places.

But the tendency to solve both domestic and international difficulties by means of armed repression and war continues. Many community and non-governmental organizations promote peace, wellbeing, community understanding, even in the face of declared repression. Those who denounce abuses have many outlets to do so, even though this often involves personal risk.

We can say that the slow elimination of the violence of war and tyranny has been, and is a social mandate with a long history. It has never been abandoned, even when it has been ignored.

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aeschylus (458 B,C /n.d. B).  The Oresteia. BooKey.  https://cdn.bookey.app/files/pdf/book/en/the-oresteia.pdf

Aristotle (Fourth century B.C. /31-10-2017) Politics. https://www.textos.info/aristoteles/politica/descargar-pdf

Augustine of Hippo (426/n.d.). The city of God.  Academia. Translated by Marchs Dods, St. William B. Eerdmans publishing company. Edinburgh and Gran Rapids, Michigan. https://www.academia.edu/49353573/City_of_God_Augustine_of_Hippo_426_A_D_COMPLETE_RARE_ENGLISH_VERSION_1381_Pages_NEW_included_long_Footnotes_References

Colaboradores de Wikipedia. (2026, August 21). Hipatia. Wikipedia, La Enciclopedia Libre. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipatia

El-Abbadi, Mostafa (2026, August 5). The fate of the Library of Alexandria.  Britanica AI. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Library-of-Alexandria/The-fate-of-the-Library-of-Alexandria

Constitution of the European Union (2020). EuropeanConstitution.eu – Fundamental rights, freedoms, and responsibilities  https://europeanconstitution.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/European-Constitution-Full-Text.pdf

Euripides (V century BC /2015). The Trojan Women. Alianza Editorial. ISBN 9788491040866. Available in: http://www.dominiopublico.es/libros/E/Euripides/Eur%C3%ADpides%20-%20Las%20Troyanas.pdfHistory Plus (2026, May 28). How the Ancient world handled refugee crises. History Plus+. https://historyplus.net/article/how-the-ancient-world-handled-refugee-crises/

General Assembly, of the United Nations Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others (2024, December 2). Resolution 317 (IV) of 2 December 1949). ttps://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/slavery/sr/statements/statement-international-day-slavery-20241202.pdf

Homer. (Siglo VIII B.C. /1989). The Iliad of Homer. The Guttenberg Project. Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6130. Retrieved on 6/30/2020Ministry Voice (n.d.). ¿Qué significa “ama a tu prójimo como a ti mismo” en el Antiguo Testamento? Minstry Voice.   https://www.ministryvoice.com/es/understanding-love-your-neighbor-as-yourself-in-the-old-testament/

Tuggy, Dale, "Trinity", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2025 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2025/entries/trinity/>. (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/trinity-history.html#Aug).

United Nations. (n.d.). United Nations Charter (full text) | United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



[1] There are certain clarifications I must make from the beginning: a) the quotes to Augustin’s City of God employ the three identifiers: a) the book citied, the chapter and the page numbers that appear on the left margin of the copy I have employed; the citings appear as B, Ch, and p, each with its appropriate number; b) I have not cited all the Internet sources I have used to obtain the dates of the events I have described. They usually have been obtained through Google questions. c) I often refer to human beings as “men”; I recognize that this is a problem, but my sources, being classical and medieval, do so, and I am following their texts.  

[2] I call the “shadow-values” because they have seldom been salient, and they have had little influence the generation of political policy.

lunes, 24 de agosto de 2026

Black belts in the living room

 

K. Cronick

 

I saw them gamboling,

almost swimming

past the door,

two black belts

slowly blocking, swaying,

practicing approaches,

swinging in slow motion,

long-bowed arms and legs,

a martial meeting

in the living room,

a dance so slow,

a waltz of martial rhythms

on a cloud of silence,

a hushed and gracious grapple

with the Master,

his father, and his dueling mate,

gliding round the furniture

 of life.

lunes, 17 de agosto de 2026

The Iliad and the Odyssey

 

Karen Cronick

In recent years I have been reading about the Trojan experience. I call it an “experience” because it was a founding event for the entire Greek civilization that followed, but it comes to us through the lens of unwritten traditions, through the songsters, their memories and their interpretations. The two main sources, both from the poet Homer, are the Iliad and the Odyssey, and they couldn’t be more different.[1]

These poems were foundational for the Greek culture that began afterward some six hundred years later. And they are still read as core myths for Western civilization. They tell about the Greek siege of Troy and the return of the Greeks to their homelands.

I have examined the Iliad in Cronick (2026). I found it to be a coherent, reflective, principled, and concerned examination of the participants’ motives and characters. It is not a patriotic paean, because in it Homer sympathizes with both the Greeks and Trojans. In fact, in the end it is more sympathetic to Hector, the Trojan prince who defends his city and tries to find a peaceful outcome, than it is with Achilles, the Greek warrior who kills him. It does not take us up to the end of the war; rather it just warns us that the end will be tragic and there will be nothing left. That there will be no true winners. The Trojans will disappear and the surviving Greeks will go home, many to difficult circumstances, each to their own kingdoms.

The Odyssey, on the other hand, is a hymn to the Greek warrior Ulysses. He is described as strong, eloquent, beautiful, seductive, invincible, courageous, brutal, rapacious, and cruel. All these characteristics appear as praiseworthy, as signs of rank and heroism. All are requirements for the ancient kings who participated as commanding warriors. Ulysses was the leader of a small army of patriots that got smuggled through the walls of Troy in the famous wooden horse, and that emerged later in the night to kill and destroy most of the remaining Trojan people there. This legend does not appear in the Iliad and is only suggested near the beginning of the Odyssey. It is elaborated later by one of the main characters, Helen.

Much of the of the Odyssey is a description of Ulysses’ attempts to return to his own kingdom of Ithaca after the war. After killing the remaining Trojans, he fills his boats with his countrymen, the spoils of Troy, and the captives that now will be his slaves. He sails first to Ismarus, City of the Ciconians. He deals with that city straightaway: he says simply “them I slew…” (p 166). Again, he fills his boats with loot and slaves, and heads on.

As he travels on, he loses all the Trojan loot, his boats and even his countrymen. He faces storms, monsters, seductive goddesses, and he even visits the underworld of the dead where he is able to talk to some of his fallen comrades like Achilles, and to see legendary figures like Sisyphus, still pushing his boulder up the same hill. He even gets to talk to his dead mother.

But through it all, Ulysses main motives are glory, plunder and revenge. And for the Homer of the Odyssey these are admirable qualities. There is not a single instance in which Ulysses gives up a possible benefit for himself in order to save someone else. It is hard to believe that the Iliad and the Odyssey were composed by the same poet.

Furthermore, Ulysses is a liar, or at least a inventive narrator. The goddess Pallas (here called Minerva)[2] admonishes him:

“Canst thou not cease, inventive as thou art

And subtle, from the wiles which thou hast lov’d

Since thou wast infant, and from tricks of speech

Delusive, even in thy native land?” (p. 259).

 

Gifts, pillage, and offerings

Wealth is very important to Homer’s characters. Obtaining and displaying it is perhaps their chief motive. The opulence of their palaces is deemed a virtue. The desire for loot is the undercover reason for the Trojan war, and the Greeks fight on for ten years until they can sack this city. Generosity is usually class-limited, and members of each social order are generous with their own kind, in a sort of reciprocal understanding. Visiting princes are treated with opulence. The swine herder Eumæus is generous and kind with the unknown old man who appears at his door, not realizing that he is Ulysses, disguised but finally at home in Ithaca. The only open appeal to a shared ideal of generosity may be Telemachus’ appeal to the suitors in his court to accept the apparent beggar (also Ulysses in disguise) who appears at the banquet hall. When one of the suitors, Antinoüs, complains about the beggar’s presence, Telemachus replies: “thou lov’st not to impart To others, but to gratify thyself” (p. 337).

I have already described how Ulysses first act on leaving Troy was to plunder the kingdom of Ismarus. From then on, he either loots the kingdoms he visits, or he is received as a recognized monarch and friend, and given ostentatious and costly gifts when he leaves. In friendly kingdoms he and his sailors are offered vast banquets of the best meats and wines for as long as they remain there. The food is described in detail.  The same is true for his son Telemachus when he visits Nestor at Pylus, or Menelaus and Helen in Sparta, asking for news about his father. Menelaus gives him a:

“wrought elaborate, a cup Itself all silver, bound with lip of gold.

 It is the work of Vulcan, which to me

The Hero Phædimus imparted, King Of the Sidonians…” (p. 87).

 

Often the gifts include food, wine, and elegant clothing.

 

Material offerings are also made to the gods: for example, Nestor offers the goddess Pallas:

the “sacrifice [of] an heifer of the year,

Broad-fronted, one that never yet hath borne

The yoke, and will incase her horns with gold” (p. 60).

 

Pallas is pleased and even appears at the sacrifice.

 

Vengeance

Vengeance is also a cultural value. Every insult and damage must be punished. But often the punishments are new offences; this leads to the need for renewed vengeance, and the chain is eternal.

Ulysses is aware that his city -and his wife- are besieged with visiting princes who want to take charge of the kingdom themselves. They are the “suitors”, the unwelcome visitors who take advantage of Ulysses’ absence, and compete for his Queen Penelope’s hand in remarriage.  When Ulysses finally arrives in Ithaca, after a first incredulity that he has at last been able to get there, the goddess Pallas comes to help him. One of the first requests he makes of the goddess is:

 “Come then—

Devise the means; teach me, thyself,

The way to vengeance, and my soul inspire

With daring” (p. 263).

 

She offers her help, saying,

 

“Many, as I judge,

Of those proud suitors who devour thy wealth

Shall leave their brains, then, on thy palace floor (p. 263).

 

She advices him to go first to Eumæus’ house. He is the swine herder,

“…he, alike, intends

Thy good, and loves, affectionate, thy son

And thy Penelope; thou shalt find the swain

Tending his herd” (p. 263).

 

She disguises Ulysses as an old man, and he goes, asking for help. While conversing with Eumæus he eats his dinner and fantasizes with his wish for revenge against the suitors:

“meantime Ulysses ate and drank

Voracious, meditating, mute, the death

Of those proud suitors” (p. 269).

 

Eumæus asks him who he is. He tells Eumæus a lengthy lie, but within it is a true self-description: he says that for him:

“…household toils

Sustain’d for children’s sake, and carking cares

T’ enrich a family, were not for me.

My pleasures were the gallant bark, the din

Of battle, the smooth spear and glitt’ring shaft” (p. 273).

 

Even Ulysses’ wife Penelope dreams of revenge. Before she knows that her husband is, in fact, back home, she declares:

“But might he

Revisit once his native shores again,

Then, aided by his son, he should avenge,

Incontinent, the wrongs which now I mourn

[….] oh might it prove

A presage of inevitable death

To all these revellers! may none escape!” (p. 342).

 

Helen

Women have limited options in the Odyssey, mostly in relation to their sexual desirably and fidelity.

Helen was the supposed cause of the Trojan war. One interesting aspect of the Odyssey is how almost all the characters cling (publicly) to this pretext for the war. The Greeks all know that they stayed in Troy all those years to be able to sack the city. It was one of the wealthiest kingdoms in antiquity. But somehow this excuse is necessary. Homer gives numerous accounts of the Greek kings’ open pillage in a number of different places, but in Troy everyone clings to this pretext.

Another motive was Agamemnon’s desire for personal power, and although in the Iliad Homer made it clear that Achilles had his doubts about the prolonged conflagration, whose declared purpose he considered "private" and not Hellenic, he wanted to participate, and traveled without coercion from his native town Pythia to Troy, as the poem also tells us, "voluntarily". He never sailed home, even after his dispute with Agamemnon. He fully understood the real reason for the siege of Troy (Homer, 1989).

In the Iliad Agamemnon called on the disperse Hellenic princes and kings to bring their soldiers to fight Prince Paris and his kingdom to get his sister-in-law back. We have said that we suspect that he may have had other hegemonic and imperial interests, and that he was attracted by the possibility of plunder. But the given reason for sailing off to Troy was to “rescue” his brother Menelaus’ wife.

In both the Iliad and the Odyssey Helen is called beautiful. Paris was so infatuated with her that he caused the total destruction of his kingdom Troy when he brought her home.

In the Odyssey we are told how, after the war, when Ulysses’ son Telemachus reaches Sparta in search of news about his father, he is attended by both Menelaus and Helen. The couple seems to have been reconciled after her recapture at the end of the war. The text has several interpretations. Menelaus becomes nostalgic, remembering Ulysses in the old Trojan battles, and his listeners, Telemachus and Helen, “weep”:

“Argive Helen wept

Abundant, Jove’s own daughter; wept as fast

Telemachus and Menelaus both” (p. 71).

 

But Helen is cautious. When her husband and Telemachus go off to supper, to talk about the war, she slips a some sort of concoction, a herbal antidepressant, into their drinks to keep things calm:

“But Jove-born Helen otherwise, meantime,

Employ’d, into the wine of which they drank

A drug infused, antidote to the pains

Of grief and anger, a most potent charm

For ills of ev’ry name.

Whoe’er his wine

So medicated drinks, he shall not pour

All day the tears down his wan cheek, although

His father and his mother both were dead,

Nor even though his brother or his son

Had fall’n in battle, and before his eyes” (p.74).

 

She clearly is worried about the still-compelling emotions that the memories of war -and her role in it- may revive. She offers her own interpretation of the war’s final events after the Greeks use the wooden horse to sneak into Troy and overtake it. She describes her encounter with Ulysses inside the city, which she describes as a collaboration. She says she helped him in his conquest of the city and laments having left Menelaus:

… Ulysses … took

A tatter’d garb, and like a serving-man

Enter’d the spacious city of your foes.

So veil’d, some mendicant he seem’d, although

No Greecian less deserved that name than he. …

Oh what wailing then

Was heard of Trojan women! but my heart

Exulted, alter’d now, and wishing home;

For now my crime committed under force

Of Venus’ influence I deplored, what time

She led me to a country far remote,

A wand’rer from the matrimonial bed,

From my own child, and from my rightful Lord

… me alone he not deceived

Who challeng’d him, but, shrewd, he turn’d away.

At length, however, when I had myself

Bathed him, anointed, cloath’d him, and had sworn

Not to declare him openly in Troy

Till he should reach again the camp and fleet,

He told me the whole purpose of the Greeks.

Then, (many a Trojan slaughter’d,) he regain’d

The camp, and much intelligence he bore (p.74-75).

 

This is a clearly self-serving speech. Helen is cordial, but careful. She accepts that she was a “wand’rer” but declares that she was instrumental for Ulysses’ success in the attack inside Troy. She undoubtedly needs to justify her actions and wants to be acceptable to the Greeks. Anyway, Menelaus has forgiven her.

But when Ulysses finally reaches his own kingdom, Ithaca, and before revealing his true identity, he approaches Eumæus, his swine herder to get information about his realm. Disguised as an old man, he tells him about some of his voyages. In this conversation he refers to Helen as the cause of the war and all the deaths at Troy:

“[…] my companions, in the end destroy’d; […]

Victims of a pernicious woman’s crime (p. 221).

 

And Eumæus shares this negative opinion about Helen:

 

“…I would

That the whole house of Helen, one and all,

Might perish too, for she hath many slain

Who, like my master, went glory to win

For Agamemnon in the fields of Troy” (p.267).

 

The only desirable feminine attributes in the Odyssey are beauty and chastity. There are two other feminine models that we can compare to Helen. The first is Clytemnestra, Agamemnon’s wife and Helen’s half-sister. Before the play begins, and before she and Agamemnon are married, he has already killed her son from a first marriage, throwing him against a rock so that her only children will be his own (Aeschylus (458 B,C /n.d. B). Later, also before the Odyssey begins, he has sacrificed their daughter Iphigenia to appease the gods before he sailed off with his army to Troy (Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides, written in 405 b.C.). Clytemnestra has every reason to hate him. After he has left, she rules his kingdom Mycenae together with her lover Aegisthus. When her husband finally returned, she and Aegisthus kill him in his sleep. If Helen is a model for unwise loving, Clytemnestra is a model for resentful grief and loathing.

The other model is Penelope. She is represented as both beautiful and utterly faithful. For over twenty years she has actively mourned her husband´s absence, and cries constantly, alone in her chambers, although she is besieged by numerous suitors. Her grief is featureless, flat, and without nuance.

There are other important feminine characters but they are goddesses, like Athena (also known as Pallas and Minerva), Calypso, and Circe. Athena is Ulysses’ constant guide, divine friend, and protector. Clalypso and Circe want to control him and both fall in love with him.  Circe is a witch who likes to turn men into animals. When Ulysses arrives at her island, she uses her magic to convert some of his sailors into pigs. He was able to get them back, again as humans, but she kept him with her for a whole year. Finally, she facilitated his departure and gave him advice about how to sail on. Especially she warned him about how to avoid being trapped by the sirens who lure vulnerable sailors to their doom.

 

Agamemnon

Agamemnon is a shadow figure in the Odyssey and his presence is a fascinating literary devise. His history is known to all the characters, and we, as readers (listeners) also know him to be complex, power-hungry, and incapable of love. But to understand this influence it is necessary to refer to other sources. Once we know about him, we have to accept the underlying specter of his presence throughout the whole Odyssey.

He was the son of King Atreus, and the brother of King Menelaus of Troy (Helen’s rejected husband), Clytemnestra’s second husband, and the father of Iphigenia, Iphianassa, Electra, Laodike, Orestes and Chrysothemis. He was the king of Mycenae or Argos.

And he was also the commander of the fleet of disperse Achaean princes (much later called “Greeks”) that answered his call to the siege of Troy in order to “rescue” Helen from Paris’ abduction of her.

There are many legends regarding Agamemnon, beginning with Homer’s Iliad (1989) and centuries later, theatrical works such as Aeschylus’ trilogy The Oresteia (n.d. B) that was presented 800 years afterward in Athens in the year 458 b.C. It described how Agamemnon was murdered by his wife Clytemnestra and her lover Aegisthus when he returned home from the war. It later recounts how his son Orestes’ killed both his mother and her lover in revenge for his father’s assassination. Orestes goes mad afterward, pursued by the furies. It was not a happy family.

I have already mentioned Agamemnon’s lust for power. He sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia to the goddess Artemis in order to get enough wind for his army to sail off to Troy, as we know from the play Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides (1997). Once in Troy he was a weak leader and wrangled with prince Achilles, thus causing this warrior to refuse to participate for a long time in the war. Little of this is mentioned in the Odyssey, but it is a supposed background, and the characters are aware of it.

When in the Odyssey Ulysses visits the underworld of the dead, Hades, and converses with some of the deceased, he also encounters Agamemnon who continues to express his old resentments. He continues to accuse his wife Clytemnestra: he considers her to be:

“Detestable […]  

The murther[3] of the husband of her youth[4].

I thought to have return’d welcome to all,

To my own children and domestic train;

But she, past measure profligate, hath poured

Shame on herself, on women yet unborn,

And even on the virtuous of her sex” (p. 223).

 

He goes on to advise Ulysses not to trust any woman, and begrudges him for having a living (and loving) son who will embrace him on his return to Ithaca. Agamemnon never mentions why his wife might have rejected him. In his own eyes he was heroic and blameless.

Ulysses comes home

Ulysses has finally returned to Ithaca. He has been disguised as an old beggar by the goddess Pallas who tells him to look for the swine herder Eumæus´ house because this man will be loyal to him. There he is received and hospitably entertained although his host does not recognize him. Ulysses spends the night there and makes up a story about who he is. He hears more about how the suitors have depleted his fortune eating and drinking at his expense, and demanding that Penelope declare herself a widow and marry one of them. Eumæus tells Ulysses learns how she has accepted the obligations of a hostess, but that she has refused all matrimonial offers. Eumæus stops talking, but Ulysses goes on fantasying about how to get rid of the suitors.

He ceas’d, meantime Ulysses ate and drank

Voracious, meditating, mute, the death

Of those proud [suitors]. (p. 269).

 

His son Telemachus is still in Sparta with Menelaus. But some sort of action is urgent. Minerva (Pallas, Athena) goes to him and tells him he must return urgently because even Penelope’s own father is taking one of the suitors seriously. She tells Telemachus:

“ Thy spotless mother, whom her brethren urge

And her own father even now to wed

Eurymachus, in gifts and in amount 

Of proffer’d dow’r superior to them all.” (p. 285).

 

Telemachus must elude the suitors that are waiting to kill hm and get back to Ithaca. As soon as he lands, she says, he must also look for Eumæus, the faithful swine herder, who will help him as he has Ulysses.

In Book XIX Penelope still does not know that the old beggar that her son and Eumæus have brought to their palace is Ulysses, although she finds a certain resemblance to him in this guest. She tells him about a dream she had, and he says, somewhat deceptively (p. 383):

Thy dream’s plain import, since Ulysses’ self

Hath told thee […]; thy suitors all

Must perish; not one suitor shall escape.

 

She doesn’t believe him. And Ulysses still doubts his capacity to get rid of the many intruders. He still has made a only four alliances, and only he and his son are trained as warriors. After all, it is just he, his son Telemachus, the poet Eurymachus, the swine herder Eumæus, and the cow herder Philoetius, against a multitude. He tells Minerva:

But, not without anxiety, I muse

How, single as I am, I shall assail

Those shameless suitors who frequent my courts

Daily; and always their whole multitude.

This weightier theme I meditate beside;

Should I, with Jove’s concurrence and with thine

Prevail to slay them, how shall I escape,

Myself, at last? (p. 387).

 

Minerva answers him:

I tell thee plainly. Were we hemm’d around

By fifty troops of shouting warriors bent

To slay thee, thou should’st yet securely drive

The flocks away …. (p. 388).

 

Ulysses hatches a plan to get rid of the numerous suitors. First, he has his son tell Penelope to declare a contest in which the winner will be chosen as her next husband. The contestants must use Ulysses´ bow, that has been stored all these years of his absence, and using it they must be able to shoot one arrow all the way through twelve sequentially mounted rings. Penelope accepts this, but is terribly sad because she thinks the contest is a real one, and she will have to marry the winner.[5] After the competition there will be a feast with lots of food and wine, and they will all be together, mostly unarmed and unsuspecting.

She declares the contest and many of the suitors try to win it. Of course, none of them has strength enough to even bend the string of Ulysses’ bow. They all fail. At the end Ulysses picks up his bow, and without even standing up, gets his arrow through all the rings.

With such facility Ulysses bent

His own huge bow, and with his right hand play’d

The nerve, which in its quick vibration sang

Clear as the swallow’s voice. Keen anguish seized

The suitors, wan grew ev’ry cheek, and Jove

Gave him his rolling thunder for a sign

[…] True he lodg’d

The arrow on the centre of the bow,

And, occupying still his seat, drew home

Nerve and notch’d arrow-head; with stedfast sight

He aimed and sent it; right through all the rings

From first to last the steel-charged weapon flew

Issuing beyond, and to his son he spake.

Thou need’st not blush, young Prince, to have received

A guest like me; neither my arrow swerved,

Nor labour’d I long time to draw the bow;

My strength is unimpair’d (p. 316)

 

And then he waits. He has not tried to use that bow for 20 years, and still he has had the strength and dexterity to do it. And he never doubts his ability.

A terrible battle ensues, with four armed men against many opponents. Ulysses and his three accomplices kill all the suitors, many of whom plead for mercy. For example:

Then flew Leiodes to Ulysses’ knees,

Which clasping, in wing’d accents thus he cried.

I clasp thy knees, Ulysses! oh respect

My suit, and spare me! (p. 429).

 

But all die. The dining hall is a ghastly mess and has to be cleaned up before they call Penelope and tell her that Ulysses has, in fact returned, and has freed her from the suitors. At first she doesn’t believe that this man is really Ulysses. She finally accepts him when he can describe the chamber they once shared. Their joy is great and finally:

The chambers appertain’d,[…]

transported they

To rites connubial intermitted long,

And now recover’d, gave themselves again (p. 446).

 

They make love, they talk about everything that has happened in their twenty years of separation, and regain their marital bliss. Then Ulysses goes off to find his father, and tell him what has happened.

But to the woodlands go I now—to see

My noble father, who for my sake mourns

Continual; (p. 449).

 

Meanwhile, the townspeople that were allied with the suitors begin to rebel against Ulysses. A brief battle ensues, but Pallas convinces most of the populace to go home, and she tells Ulysses that from then on there must be peace. This is the only instance in the whole Odyssey that a battle ends in such a way. The Odyssey ends with these words.

Laertes’ noble son[6], for wiles renown’d!

Forbear; abstain from slaughter; lest thyself

Incur the anger of high thund’ring Jove.

So Pallas, whom Ulysses, glad, obey’d.

Then faithful covenants of peace between

Both sides ensued. (p. 470).

 

 

 

Final reflections

The Iliad and the Odyssey are two very different poems, both are attributed to the blind poet Homer who was said to live in the VIII century b.C. Together they tell about the first time that the disperse Hellenic kingdoms collaborated in a joint effort. There are many characters, each with their own motives, and a many different cultural values, some of which are conflictive. But the main message has to do with cultural identities: all were Hellenic and shared dialects of the same language, and beliefs in the same deities.

The Iliad’s main message laments the loss of life and the final end of the kingdom of Troy. The Odyssey’s message is one of conquest and regal majesty, at least until the very last verse when the goddess Pallas asks for peace at the end of the poem.

Ulysses is brave and brutal, handsome and persuasive. He was an ideal for Hellenic masculinity. His trip home is a long adventure, which he really has no need to hurry. He even visits Hades, the abode of the dead, and is able to confer with the residents there.

The political world that Ulysses travels through is very different from the one that will be founded by the Athenians three centuries after Homer’s life. The only suggestions of this new world lie in Homer’s lamentations about death and war. But even though the Athenians finally establish the first constitutional democracy eight hundred years after the seige, they never stop going to war. They become a colonial kingdom, and later when Alexander the Great conquered Athens, they participate with him in conquests that remind us of the values that led the Hellens to Troy.

From then on the world has had to wait for the 20th century of our modern era to find concrete, global, and structural attempts to negotiate world peace.

The values of vengeance and domination are still with us. Military might is still highly desired, and capable soldiers are heroes.

 

 

 

References

Aeschylus, Agamemnon. Theoi, e-texts library. Available in: http://www.theoi.com/Text/EsquiloAgamemnon.htmlESQUILO (458 bC/sf). Retrieved on 6/12/2020.

Aeschylus (458 BC /n.d A.). Agamemnon. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14417/14417-h/14417-h.htm

Aeschylus (458 B,C /n.d. B).  The Oresteia. BooKey.  https://cdn.bookey.app/files/pdf/book/en/the-oresteia.pdf

Cronick, Karen(2026) The ancient Greeks and  us. Blog: Reflexiones4-Karen.  https://reflexiones4-karen.blogspot.com/2026/07/the-ancient-greeks-and-us-english.html

Homer. (Siglo VIII B.C. /1989). The Iliad of Homer. The Guttenberg Project. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6130. Retrieved on 6/30/2020

Homer (2022). The Odyssey by Homer. Pixabay. Pressbooks (https://pressbooks.com). [This work has been adapted from The Odyssey, a title from the eCampusOntario Public Domain Core Collection. This work is in the Public Domain.]

Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides | Open Library. (405 b.C./1997). Open Library. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL668998M/Iphigenia_in_Aulis

Historiae (n.d.). Greek tragedy:, Sophocles and Euripides: https://historiaeweb.com/2018/05/12/tragedia-griega/

Sophocles (442 BC / n.d.). Antigone. EXLIBRIS. https://omegalfa.es/autores.php?letra=&pagina=22#



[1] The Iliad and the Odyssey, are among the major cultural corner stones of Western literature. They were likely being sung by diverse troubadours between 1100–800 a.C.). The versions attributed to Homer probably were composed in the VIII c. b.C. They may have been written down finally somewhere around the V century b.C., or even later. Before that they existed only as oral traditions.

[2] Pallas has several names that are used indiscriminately: Pallas, Minerva and Athena.

[3] “Murther” is murderer.

[4] He is referring to himself, Agamemnon.

[5] This solution motivates me to make another commentary about women’s place in the ancient Hellenic world. Penelope cannot either choose a husband that appeals to her, or remain a (supposed) window if she wants to. She believes that she must remarry, and she that she must choose her husband on the basis of his dexterity in battle.

[6] Laertes’ noble son is Ulysses.

 
Locations of visitors to this page