"If the world becomes pagan and perishes, the last man left alive would do well to quote the Iliad and die."
“Homer’s poetry is, in an unusual degree, believable. There is no use in disputing whether any episode could really have happened. We have seen it happen.”
Scholarly opinion on the authentic authorship of great ancient works seems to have gone through a bit of a cycle. Roughly 100 years ago, it was the fashion to use textual criticism to determine the 'real' origin of a text. Not only Homer's existence was called into question, but the Gospel writers, and even Shakespeare might not be the author of their works. Now, concessions are being made that Shakespeare wrote his plays, there probably was a writer named Luke who wrote his Gospel in the first century A.D., and maybe Homer did exist after all.
As a Bible-believing pastor, textual criticism of this nature has always bothered me, and I'm glad the pendulum seems to be swinging the other way. Textual criticism has a lot of flaws based on a lot of assumptions, not to mention the critical scholars biases against the past and tradition and Christianity. But, they know better, right?
Looking back, what seems odd (and may seem odder in the future) was the dead certainty of generations of scholars that the Iliad and the Odyssey are the product of multiple hands and multiple editors, and that these modern scholars could determine the precise point of an 'interpolation' by a new hand. It was all an extraordinary game played in the common rooms of British, German and American univerisities. I knew a somewhat tragic fellow, who persisted in writing Homer criticism long after his Classics department had been abolished by our University. He spent years working on a paper which argued that the scene between Andromache and Hector in the Iliad must be an interpolation because no where in Greek literature does a woman give a man military advice. No one called out the extraordinary a priori character of this Victorian glass bead game - the scholars were scholars, they had the languages and the expertise, and anyone else with an opinon was simply an ignoramus.
Thanks for the review. I read this book earlier this year after reading two translations of The Iliad and Robin Lane Fox’s commentary was very helpful. I recommend the book.
My own favorites to read are Robert Fagles and Richmond Lattimore. Lane Fox praises Peter Green's more recent translation but unfortunately I haven't read that yet.
Thanks for a very nice review. I was teaching excerpts of the Iliad just a week or so ago, and I always feel obliged to be sure students are at least aware of the "Homeric question." But I also like to tell them that my own gut sense has always been to think that there really was a single Homer who wrote both poems. Glad to hear of this book making that argument--it sounds like one I would enjoy reading.
Thank you for this. I have been a Homeric unitarian for most of my life, but I recently converted away from that faith. It'll be a good thing to read this book and see if there's more to the journey.
Fantastic article. Some epic quotes here:
"If the world becomes pagan and perishes, the last man left alive would do well to quote the Iliad and die."
“Homer’s poetry is, in an unusual degree, believable. There is no use in disputing whether any episode could really have happened. We have seen it happen.”
I’m going to have to get this book. Thank you for such a thought provoking review.
Scholarly opinion on the authentic authorship of great ancient works seems to have gone through a bit of a cycle. Roughly 100 years ago, it was the fashion to use textual criticism to determine the 'real' origin of a text. Not only Homer's existence was called into question, but the Gospel writers, and even Shakespeare might not be the author of their works. Now, concessions are being made that Shakespeare wrote his plays, there probably was a writer named Luke who wrote his Gospel in the first century A.D., and maybe Homer did exist after all.
As a Bible-believing pastor, textual criticism of this nature has always bothered me, and I'm glad the pendulum seems to be swinging the other way. Textual criticism has a lot of flaws based on a lot of assumptions, not to mention the critical scholars biases against the past and tradition and Christianity. But, they know better, right?
Looking back, what seems odd (and may seem odder in the future) was the dead certainty of generations of scholars that the Iliad and the Odyssey are the product of multiple hands and multiple editors, and that these modern scholars could determine the precise point of an 'interpolation' by a new hand. It was all an extraordinary game played in the common rooms of British, German and American univerisities. I knew a somewhat tragic fellow, who persisted in writing Homer criticism long after his Classics department had been abolished by our University. He spent years working on a paper which argued that the scene between Andromache and Hector in the Iliad must be an interpolation because no where in Greek literature does a woman give a man military advice. No one called out the extraordinary a priori character of this Victorian glass bead game - the scholars were scholars, they had the languages and the expertise, and anyone else with an opinon was simply an ignoramus.
Thanks for the review. I read this book earlier this year after reading two translations of The Iliad and Robin Lane Fox’s commentary was very helpful. I recommend the book.
Interesting post. Any thoughts on what is the best English translation of the Iliad?
My own favorites to read are Robert Fagles and Richmond Lattimore. Lane Fox praises Peter Green's more recent translation but unfortunately I haven't read that yet.
Thanks very much, Jordan. I have the Fagles, but I haven't read it yet. Better get started!
Super interesting.
Everything you say checks out, since I of course knew him personally.
Thanks for a very nice review. I was teaching excerpts of the Iliad just a week or so ago, and I always feel obliged to be sure students are at least aware of the "Homeric question." But I also like to tell them that my own gut sense has always been to think that there really was a single Homer who wrote both poems. Glad to hear of this book making that argument--it sounds like one I would enjoy reading.
Thank you for this. I have been a Homeric unitarian for most of my life, but I recently converted away from that faith. It'll be a good thing to read this book and see if there's more to the journey.
But what about Ossian?