2. Marked personal vigour; and

3. _Either_, _a._ Considerable territorial possessions, as in the case

of Idomeneus and Oilean Ajax;

_b._ Extraordinary abilities though with small dominions,

as in the case of Ulysses; or, at the least,

_c._ Preeminent personal strength and valour, accepted in

like manner as a compensation for defective political

weight, as in the case of Telamonian Ajax.

Although the condition of commanding considerable forces is, as we

see, by no means absolute, yet, on the other hand, every commander of

as large a force as fifty ships is a βασιλεὺς, except Menestheus only,

an exception which probably has a meaning. Agapenor indeed has sixty

ships; but then he is immediately dependent on Agamemnon. The Bœotians

too have fifty; but they are divided among five leaders.

Among the bodily qualities of Homeric princes, we may first note

beauty. This attribute is not, I think, pointedly ascribed in the

poems to any person, except those of princely rank. It is needless to

collect all the instances in which it is thus assigned. Of some of

them, where the description is marked, and the persons insignificant,

like Euphorbus and Nireus[72], we may be the more persuaded, that Homer

was following an extant tradition. Of the Trojan royal family it is the

eminent and peculiar characteristic; and it remains to an observable

degree even in the case of the aged Priam[73]. Homer is careful[74]

to assert it of his prime heroes; Achilles surpasses even Nireus;

Ulysses possesses it abundantly, though in a less marked degree; it is

expressly asserted of Agamemnon; and of Ajax, who, in the Odyssey, is

almost brought into competition with Nireus for the second honours; the

terms of description are, however, distinguishable one from the other.

[72] Il. xvii. 51. ii. 673.

[73] Il. xxiv. 631.

[74] Il. ii. 674. Od. xvi. 175. Il. iii. 224, 169, 226, and Od. xi. 469.

Again, with respect to personal vigour as a condition of sovereignty,

it is observed by Grote[75] that ‘an old chief, such as Peleus and

Laertes, cannot retain his position.’ There appears to have been some

diversity of practice. Nestor, in very advanced age, and when unable to

fight, still occupies his throne. The passage quoted by Grote to uphold

his assertion with respect to Peleus falls short of the mark: for it

is simply an inquiry by the spirit of Achilles, whether his father

is still on the throne, or has been set aside on account of age, and

the question itself shows that, during the whole time of the life of

Achilles, Peleus, though old, had not been known to have resigned the

administration of the government. Indeed his retention of it appears

to be presumed in the beautiful speech of Priam to Achilles (Il. xxiv.

486-92).

[75] Hist. vol. ii. p. 87.

~_Custom of resignation in old age._~

At the same time, there is sufficient evidence supplied by Homer to

show, that it was the more usual custom for the sovereign, as he grew

old, either to associate his son with him in his cares, or to retire.

The practice of Troy, where we see Hector mainly exercising the

active duties of the government--for he feeds the troops[76], as well

as commands them--appears to have corresponded with that of Greece.

Achilles, in the Ninth Iliad, plainly implies that he himself was not,

as a general, the mere delegate of his father; since he invites Phœnix

to come and share his kingdom with him.

[76] Il. xvii. 225.

But the duties of counsel continued after those of action had been

devolved: for Priam presides in the Trojan ἀγορὴ, and appears upon the

walls, surrounded by the δημογέροντες, who were, apparently, still its

principal speakers and its guides. And Achilles[77], when in command

before Troy, still looked to Peleus to provide him with a wife.

[77] Il. ix. 394.

I find a clear proof of the general custom of retirement, probably

a gradual one, in the application to sovereigns of the term αἴζηοι.

This word is commonly construed in Homer as meaning youths: but the

real meaning of it is that which in humble life we convey by the term

able-bodied; that is to say, those who are neither in boyhood nor

old age, but in the entire vigour of manhood. The mistake as to the

sense of the term has created difficulties about its origin, and has

led Döderlein to derive it from αἴθω, with reference, I suppose, to

the heat of youth, instead of the more obvious derivation form α and

ζάω, expressing the height of vital power. A single passage will, I

think, suffice to show that the word αἴζηος has this meaning: which is

also represented in two places by the paraphrastic expression αἰζήιος

ἀνήρ[78]. In the Sixteenth Iliad, Apollo appears to Hector under the

form of Asius (716):

[78] Il. xvii. 520. Od. xii. 83.

ἀνέρι εἰσάμενος αἰζηῷ τε κρατερῷ τε.

Now the Asius in question was full brother to Hecuba, the mother of

Hector and eighteen other children; and he cannot, therefore, be

supposed to have been a youth. The meaning of the Poet appears clearly

to be to prevent the supposition, which would otherwise have been a

natural one in regard to Hector’s uncle, that this Asius, in whose

likeness Apollo the unshorn appeared, was past the age of vigour and

manly beauty, which is designated by the word αἴζηος.

~_Force of the term αἴζηος._~

There is not a single passage, where this word is used with any

indication of meaning youths as contra-distinguished from mature men.

But there is a particular passage which precisely illustrates the

meaning that has now been given to αἴζηος. In the Catalogue we are told

that Hercules carried off Astyoche[79]:

[79] Il. ii. 660.

πέρσας ἄστεα πολλὰ Διοτρεφέων αἰζηῶν.

Pope renders this in words which, whatever be their intrinsic merit,

are, as a translation, at once diffuse and defective:

‘Where mighty towns in ruins spread the plain,

And saw their blooming warriors early slain.’

Cowper wholly omits the last half of the line, and says,

‘After full many a city laid in dust’....

Chapman, right as to the epithet, gives the erroneous meaning to the

substantive:

‘Where many towns of princely youths he levelled with the ground.’

Voss, accurate as usual, appears to carry the full meaning:

‘Viele Städt’ austilgend der gottbeseligten Männer.’

This line, in truth, affords an admirable touchstone for the meaning

of two important Homeric words. The vulgar meaning takes Διοτρεφέων

αἰζήων as simply illustrious youths. What could Homer mean by cities

of illustrious youths? Is it their sovereigns or their fighting

population? Were their sovereigns all youths? Were their fighting

population all illustrious? In no other place throughout the Iliad,

except one, where the rival reading ἀρηιθόων is evidently to be

adopted, does the Poet apply Διοτρεφὴς to a mass of men[80]. If,

then, the sovereigns be meant, it is plain that they could not all be

youths, and therefore αἴζηος does not mean a youth. But now let us

take Διοτρεφὴς in its strict sense as a royal title only; then let us

remember that thrones were only assumed on coming to manhood, as is

plain from the case of Telemachus, who, though his father, as it was

feared, was dead, was not in possession of the sovereign power. ‘May

Jupiter,’ says Antinous to him, ‘never make you the βασιλεὺς in Ithaca:

which is your right,’ or ‘which would fall to you by birth[81]:’

[80] Nor is it applied in the Odyssey to any bodies more numerous

than the thirteen ‘kings’ of Scheria, Od. v. 378; and to them in the

character of kings.

[81] Od. i. 386.

ὅ τοι γενεῇ πατρώϊόν ἐστιν.

When Telemachus answers, by proposing that one of the nobles should

assume the sovereignty. Lastly, upon declining into old age, it

was, for the most part, either as to the more active cares, or else

entirely, relinquished. Then the sense of Il. ii. 660 will come out

with Homer’s usual accuracy and completeness. It will be that Hercules

sacked many cities of prince-warriors, or vigorous and warlike princes.

Thus, then, it was requisite that the Homeric βασιλεὺς should be a

king, a _könig_, a man of whom we could say that actually, and not

conventionally alone, he _can_, both in mind and person. Such was the

theory and such the practice of the Homeric age. There is not a single

Greek sovereign, with the honourable exception of Nestor, who does

not lead his subjects into battle; not one who does not excel them

all in strength of hand, scarcely any who does not also give proofs

of superior intellect, where scope is allowed for it by the action of

the poem. Over and above the work of battle, the prince is likewise

peerless in the Games. Of the eight contests of the Twenty-third Book,

seven are conducted only by the princes of the armament. The single

exception is remarkable: it is the boxing match, which Homer calls

πυγμαχίη ἀλεγεινὴ[82], an epithet that he applies to no other of the

matches except the wrestling.

[82] Il. xxiii. 653.

But his low estimation of the boxing comes out in another form, the

value of the prizes. The first prize is an unbroken mule: the second,

a double-bowled cup, to which no epithet signifying value is attached.

But for the wrestlers (a contest less dangerous, and not therefore

requiring, on this score, greater inducement to be provided,) the first

prize was a tripod, worth twelve oxen; and the second, a woman slave,

worth four. What, then, was the relative value of an ox and a mule not

yet broken? Mules, like oxen, were employed simply for traction. They

were better, because more speedy in drawing the plough[83]; but, then,

oxen were also available for food, and we have no indication that the

former were of greater value. Without therefore resting too strictly on

the number twelve, we may say that the prize of wrestling was several

times more valuable than that of boxing. Again, the second prize of the

foot-race was a large and fat ox, equal, probably, to the first prize

of the boxing-match[84]. Epeus, who wins the boxing-match against the

prince Euryalus, third leader of the Argives, was evidently a person

of traditional fame, from the victory he obtains over an adversary of

high rank. But Homer has taken care to balance this by introducing

a confession from the mouth of Epeus himself, that he was good for

nothing in battle[85];

[83] Il. x. 352.

[84] Il. xxiii. 750.

[85] Il. xxiii. 670.

ἦ οὐχ ἅλις, ὅττι μάχης ἐπιδεύομαι;

an expression which, I think, the Poet has used, in all likelihood,

for the very purpose of shielding the superiority of his princes, by

showing that this gift of Epeus was a single, and as it were brutal,

accomplishment.

~_Accomplishments of the Kings._~

As with the games, so with the more refined accomplishments. There

are but four cases in which we hear of the use of music and song from

Homer, except the instances of the professional bards. One of these is

the boy, who upon the Shield of Achilles plays and sings, in conducting

the youths and maidens as they pass from the vineyard with the grapes.

It is the bard, who plays to the dancers; but his dignity, and the

composure always assigned to him, probably would not allow of his

appearing in motion with such a body, and on this account the παὶς may

be substituted; of whose rank we know nothing. In the other cases, the

three persons mentioned are all princes: Paris is the first, who had

the lighter and external parts of the character of a gentleman, and

who was of the highest rank, yet to whom it may be observed only the

instrument is assigned, and not the song. The second is the sublime

Achilles, whose powerful nature, ranging like that of his Poet through

every chord of the human mind and heart, prompts him to beguile an

uneasy solitude by the Muse; and who is found in the Ninth Iliad[86] by

the Envoys, soothing his moody spirit with the lyre, and singing, to

strains of his own, the achievements of bygone heroes. Again, thirdly,

this lyre itself, like the iron globe of the Twenty-third Book, had

been among the spoils of King Eetion.

[86] Il. ix. 186.

But the royal and heroic character must with Homer, at least when

exhibited at its climax, be all comprehensive. As it soars to every

thing above, so, without stooping, must it be master of every thing

beneath it. Accordingly, the Poet has given it the last touch in the

accomplishments of Ulysses. As he proves himself a wood-cutter and

ship-builder in the island of Calypso, so he is no stranger to the

plough and the scythe; and he fairly challenges[87] Eurymachus the

Suitor to try which of them would soonest clear the meadow of its

grass, which drive the straightest furrow down a four-acre field.

[87] Od. xviii. 366-75.

So much for the corporeal accomplishments of the Greek kings and

princes; of their intellectual powers we shall have to treat in

considering the character of the governments of the heroic age.

~_The Kings as Gentlemen._~

But these accomplishments, mental and bodily, are not vulgarly

heaped upon his characters by Homer, as if they were detailed in a

boarding-school catalogue. The Homeric king should have that which

incorporates and harmonizes them all: he should be emphatically a

gentleman, and that in a sense not far from the one familiar to the

Christian civilization of Europe. Nestor, Diomed, Menelaus, are in a

marked manner gentlemen. Agamemnon is less so; but here Homer shows his

usual discrimination, for in Agamemnon there is a sordid vein, which

most of all mars this peculiar tone of character. It is, however, in

the two superlative heroes of the poems, that we see the strongest

development of those habits of feeling and action, which belong to the

gentleman. It will be admitted that one of these traits is the love of

that which is straightforward, truthful, and above-board. According to

the vulgar conception of the character of Ulysses, he has no credit

for this quality. But whatever the Ulysses of Virgil or of Euripides

may be, the Ulysses of Homer, though full of circumspection, reserve,

and even stratagem in dealing with enemies and strangers, has nothing

about him of what is selfish, tricky, or faithless. And, accordingly,

it is into his mouth that Homer has put the few and simple words,

which rebuke the character of the informer and the tale-bearer, with

a severity greater perhaps even than, under the circumstances, was

necessary. When he is recognised by Euryclea, he strictly enjoins upon

her the silence, on which all their lives at the moment depended. Hurt

by the supposition that she could (in our homely phrase) be likely to

blab, she replies that she will hold herself in, hard as stone or as

iron. She adds, that she will point out to him which of the women in

the palace are faithful, and which are guilty. No, he replies; I will

observe them for myself; that is not your business[88]:

[88] Od. xix. 500-2.

μαῖα, τίη δὲ σὺ τὰς μυθήσεαι; οὐδέ τί σε χρή·

εὖ νυ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐγὼ φράσομαι καὶ εἴσομ’ ἑκάστην·

ἀλλ’ ἔχε σιγῇ μῦθον, ἐπίτρεψον δὲ θεοῖσιν.

~_Achilles as a Gentleman._~

As Homer has thus sharply exhibited Ulysses in the character of a

gentleman with respect to truth[89], so he has made the same exhibition

for Achilles with respect to courtesy: protesting, as it were, in this

manner by anticipation against the degenerate conceptions of those

characters, which were to reproduce and render current through the

world Achilles as a brute, and Ulysses as a thorough knave. But let us

see the residue of the proof.

[89] In Od. xxii. 417, he applies to Euryclea for the information,

which he had before declined. This is after the trial of the Bow: the

other was before it was proposed, and when the Chief probably reckoned

on having himself more time for observation than proved to be the case.

In the first Iliad, when the wrath is in the first flush of its heat,

the heralds Talthybius and Eurybates are sent to his encampment, with

the appalling commission to bring away Briseis. On entering, they

remain awe-struck and silent. Though, in much later times, we know that

The messenger of evil tidings

Hath but a losing office,

he at once relieves them from their embarrassment, and bids them

personally welcome;

χαίρετε, κήρυκες, Διὸς ἄγγελοι, ἠδὲ καὶ ἀνδρῶν·

ἆσσον ἴτ’[90]·

[90] Il. i. 334.

And he desires Patroclus to bring forth the object of their quest. More

extraordinary self-command and considerateness than this, never has

been ascribed by any author to any character.

Again, when in the Ninth Book he is surprised in his seclusion by the

envoys Phœnix, Ulysses, and Ajax, though he is prepared to reject every

offer, he hails them all personally, without waiting to be addressed

and with the utmost kindness[91], as of all the Greeks the dearest to

him even in his wrath; he of course proceeds to order an entertainment

for them. But the most refined of all his attentions is that shown

to Agamemnon in the Twenty-third Book. Inferior to Ajax, Diomed, and

Ulysses, Agamemnon could not enter into the principal games, to be

beaten by any abler competitor, without disparagement to his office:

while there would also have been a serious disparagement of another

kind in his contending with a secondary person. Accordingly, Achilles

at the close makes a nominal match for the use of the sling--of which

we never hear elsewhere in the poems--and, interposing after the

candidates are announced, but before the actual contest, he presents

the chief prize to Agamemnon, with this compliment; that there need be

no trial, as every one is aware already how much he excels all others

in the exercise.

[91] Il. ix. 197.

Yet these great chiefs, so strong and brave and wise, so proud and

stern, so equipped in arts, manners, and accomplishments, can upon

occasion weep like a woman or a child. Ulysses, in the island of

Calypso daily pours forth his ‘waterfloods’ as he strains his vision

over the sea; and he covers up his head in the halls of Alcinous,

while Demodocus is singing, that his tears may flow unobserved. And so

Achilles, fresh from his fierce vengeance on the corpse of Hector,

yet, when the Trojan king[92] has called up before his mind the image

of his father Peleus, at the thought now of his aged parent, and now

of his slaughtered friend, sheds tears as tender as those of Priam

for his son, and lets his griefs overflow in a deep compassion for

the aged suppliant before him. Nor is it only in sorrow that we may

remark a high susceptibility. The Greek chieftains in general are

acutely sensible of praise and of blame. Telemachus[93] is delighted

when Ægyptius commends him as a likely looking youth: and even Ulysses,

first among them all in self-command, is deeply stung by the remark of

the saucy Phæacian on his appearance, and replies upon the offender

with excellent sense, but with an extraordinary pungency[94]. A similar

temper is shown in all the answers of the chieftains to Agamemnon when

he goes the round of the army[95].

[92] Il. xxiv. 486.

[93] Od. ii. 33, 5.

[94] Od. viii. 159. and seqq.

[95] Il. iv. 231 and seqq.

~_Rights of Hereditary Succession._~

The hereditary character of the royal office is stamped upon almost

every page of the poems; as nearly all the chiefs, whose lineage we are

able to trace, have apparently succeeded their fathers in power. The

only exception in the order, of which we are informed, is one where,

probably on account of the infancy of the heir, the brother of the

deceased sovereign assumes his sceptre. In this way Thyestes, uncle to

Agamemnon, succeeded his father Atreus, and then, evidently without any

breach of regularity, transmitted it to Agamemnon.

And such is probably the reason why, Orestes being a mere child[96],

a part of the dignity of Agamemnon is communicated to Menelaus. For

in the Iliad he has a qualified supremacy; receives jointly with

Agamemnon the present of Euneus; is more royal, higher in rank, than

the other chieftains: we are also told of him[97], μέγα πάντων Ἀργείων

ἤνασσε; and he came to the second meeting of γέροντες in the Second

Book αὐτόματος, without the formality of a summons.

[96] Od. i. 40.

[97] Il. x. 32.

In a case like that of Thyestes, if we may judge from what actually

happened, the uncle would perhaps succeed instead of the minor, whose

hereditary right would in such case be postponed until the next turn.

The case of Telemachus in the Odyssey is interesting in many ways,

as unfolding to us the relations of the family life of the period.

Among other points which it illustrates, is that of the succession

to sovereignty. It was admitted by the Suitors, that it descended to

him from his father[98]. Yet there evidently was some special, if not

formal act to be done, without which he could not be king. For Antinous

expresses his hope that Jupiter will never make Telemachus king of

Ithaca. Not because the throne was full, for, on the contrary, the

death of Ulysses was admitted or assumed to have occurred[99]; but

apparently because this act, whatever it was, had not been performed in

his case.

[98] ὅ τοι γενεῇ πατρώϊόν ἐστιν, Od. i. 387.

[99] Od. i. 396. ii. 182.

Perhaps the expressions of Antinous imply that such a proceeding

was much more than formal, and that the accession of Telemachus to

the supreme dignity might be arrested by the dissent of the nobles.

The answer too of the young prince[100] (τῶν κέν τις τόδ’ ἔχῃσιν)

seems to be at least in harmony with the idea that a practice,

either approaching to election, or in some way involving a voluntary

action on the part of the subjects or of a portion of them, had to

be gone through. But the personal dignity of the son of Ulysses was

unquestioned. Even the Suitors pay a certain regard to it in the midst

of their insolence: and when the young prince goes into the place of

assembly[101], he takes his place upon his father’s seat, the elders

spontaneously making way for him to assume it.

[100] Od. i. 396.

[101] Od. ii. 82.

~_Rights of primogeniture._~

It may, however, be said with truth, that Telemachus was an only son,

and that accordingly we cannot judge from his case whether it was the

right of the eldest to succeed. Whether the rights of primogeniture

were acknowledged among the Greeks of the heroic age, is a question of

much interest to our own. For, on the one hand, there is a disposition

to canvass and to dispute those rights. On the other hand, we live

in a state of society, to which they probably have contributed more

largely than any other specific cause, after the Christian religion,

to give its specific form. Homer has supplied us with but few cases

of brotherhood among his greater characters. We see, however, that

Agamemnon everywhere bears the character of the elder, and he appears

to have succeeded in that capacity to the throne of Atreus, while

Menelaus, the younger, takes his inheritance in virtue of his wife.

Tyro, in the Eleventh Odyssey, is said to have borne, on the banks of

the Enipeus, the twins Pelias and Neleus. In this passage the order

in which the children are named is most probably that of age[102].

We find Pelias reigning in Iolcus, a part of the original country of

the Æolids: while Neleus emigrates, and, either by or before marrying

Chloris, becomes king of Pylos in the south of Greece[103]. Of the

two brothers Protesilaus and Podarces, the former, who is also the

elder, commands the force from Phylace. He was, however, braver, as

well as older. This statement of the merits, ages, and positions of

the two brothers raises a question applicable to other cases where two

brothers are joined without ostensible discrimination in command. Of

these there are four in the Catalogue. The first is that of Ascalaphus

and Ialmenus, whom their mother Astyoche bore clandestinely to Mars,

ὑπερώϊον εἰσαναβᾶσα. The expression seems to imply, that it was at a

single birth. But even by this supposition we do not get rid of the

idea of seniority in this case; nor can we suppose all the pairs to

have been twins. We naturally therefore ask, whether this conjunction

implied equality in command? We may probably venture to answer,

without much doubt, in the negative. On the one hand, there is nothing

unlikely in the supposition that the first named of two brothers was

the eldest, and had the chief command. While on the other hand it is

certain, that there is no case of two coequal commanders except it be

among these four, which are all cases of brothers; and which, under the

interpretation which seems the most natural one they can receive, would

bear fresh testimony to the prevalence of the custom of primogeniture.

Again, among the sons of Nestor, who are exhibited to us as surrounding

him in the Third Odyssey, we may perhaps find, from the offices

assigned to them at the solemn sacrifice and otherwise, decisive signs

of primogeniture. Pisistratus steps forward to greet Telemachus on

his arrival, and leads him to his seat[104], sleeps near him under

the portico, and accompanies him on his journey. But these functions

appertain to him because he was the bachelor (ἠΐθεος) of the family,

as we are appropriately told in reference to his taking a couch near

the guest, while the married persons always slept in some separate

and more private part of the palace[105]. Pisistratus, therefore, was

probably the youngest son. But it is also pretty clear that Thrasymedes

was the eldest. For in the sacrifice he strikes the fatal blow at the

ox: while Stratius and Echephron bring it up, Aretus holds the ewer

and basin, Perseus holds the lamb, Pisistratus cuts up the animal and

Nestor performs the religious rites of prayer and sacrifice[106].

[102] Od. xi. 254, 6.

[103] Od. xi. 281.

[104] Od. iii. 36.

[105] Od. iii. 402. Il. vi. 242-50.

[106] Od. iii. 439-46 and 454.

And again, when Pisistratus brings up Telemachus and the disguised

Minerva, he places them, evidently as in the seat of honour, ‘beside

his brother Thrasymedes and his father.’

This is in perfect consonance with our finding Thrasymedes only,

together with Antilochus who fell, selected for service in the Trojan

war.

Upon this question, again, an important collateral light is cast by

Homer’s mythological arrangements. They are, in fact, quite conclusive

on the subject of primogeniture among the Hellenes. The Olympian order

is founded upon it. It is as the eldest of the three Kronid brothers,

and by no other title, that Jupiter stands at the head of the Olympian

community. With respect to the lottery, he is but one of three. His

being the King of Air invests him with no right to command the King of

Sea. In the Fifteenth Book, as he is of nearly equal force, Neptune

declines to obey his orders until reminded by Iris of his seniority.

The Erinues, says the Messenger Goddess, attend upon the elder. That

is to say, his rights lie at the foundation of the moral order. Upon

this suggestion, the refractory deity at once succumbs[107]. And,

reciprocally, Jupiter in the Thirteenth Odyssey recognises the claim of

Neptune to respect as the _oldest_ and best (of course after himself)

of the gods[108].--

[107] Il. xv. 204-7.

[108] Od. xiii. 141.

Thus exalted and severed in rank, thus beautiful in person, thus

powerful in hand and mind, thus associated with the divine fountain of

all human honours, the Greek Βασιλεύς of the Iliad has other claims,

too, to be regarded as representing, more nearly perhaps than it has

ever been represented by any other class of monarchs, a benignant and

almost ideal kingship. The light of these great stars of heroic society

was no less mild than it was bright; and they might well have supplied

the basis of that idea of the royal character, which has given it so

extraordinary a hold over the mind of Shakspeare, and led him to adorn

it by such noble effusions of his muse.

~_Function of the King as Priest._~

The Homeric King appears before us in the fourfold character of Priest,

Judge, General, and Proprietor.

It has already been remarked, that no priest appears among the Greeks

of the Troic age; and, in conformity with this view, we find Agamemnon

in the Iliad, and Nestor in the Odyssey, charged with the actual

performance of the rite of sacrifice; nor is it apparently committed to

any other person than the head of the society, assisted by his κήρυκες,

officers who acted as heralds and as serjeants, or by his sons.

But while this was the case in regard to what may be called state

sacrifices, which were also commonly banquets, we likewise learn,

as to those of a more private character, that they must have been

performed by the head of the household. To slay an animal for food

is in every case to sacrifice him (ἱερεύειν) whether in the camp, the

palace of Nestor, the unruly company of the Suitors, or the peaceful

cottage of Eumelus; and every animal ready for the knife was called an

ἱερήϊον[109].

[109] Od. xiv. 74. 94.

~_As Judge and as General._~

The judicial office of the king is made known to us, first, by the

character of Minos. While on earth, he had direct communications from

Jupiter, which probably referred to the administration of justice;

and, in the Shades beneath, we find him actually exercising the office

of the judge. Nothing with which we become acquainted in Homer has

the semblance of criminal justice, except the fines for homicide; and

even these have no more than the semblance only. The punishment was

inflicted, like other fines, as an adjustment or compensation[110]

between man and man, and not in satisfaction of the offence against

public morality, peace, or order.

[110] Il. xviii. 498.

In the Second Iliad, the remonstrance of Ulysses with the commonalty

declares that it is the king, and to the king alone, to whom Jupiter

has committed the sceptre and the administration of justice, that by

these he may fulfil his regal office[111]:

[111] Il. ii. 204.

εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω,

εἷς βασιλεὺς, ᾧ ἔδωκε Κρόνου παῖς ἀγκυλομήτεω

σκῆπτρόν τ’ ἠδὲ θέμιστας, ἵνα σφίσιν ἐμβασιλεύῃ.

Now the sceptre is properly the symbol of the judicial authority, as we

know from the oath of Achilles[112]:

[112] Il. i. 237.

νῦν αὖτέ μιν υἷες Ἀχαιῶν

ἐν παλάμῃς φορέουσι δικασπόλοι, οἵτε θέμιστας

πρὸς Διὸς εἰρύαται.

From the combined effect of the two passages it is clear that the

duties of the judicature, the determination of relative rights between

the members of the community, constituted, at least in great part, the

primary function of sovereignty. Still the larger conception of it,

which includes the deliberative office, is that presented to us in the

speech of Nestor to Agamemnon, on the occasion of the Council which

followed the Night-assembly[113].

[113] Il. ix. 98.

καί τοι Ζεὺς ἐγγυάλιξεν

σκῆπτρόν τ’, ἠδὲ θέμιστας, ἵνα σφίσι βουλεύῃσθα.

The judicial function might, however, even in the days of Homer, be

exercised by delegation. For in the Assembly graven on the Shield,

while the parties contend, and the people sympathize some with one

and some with the other, it is the γέροντες, or elders, who deliver

judgment[114]. Of these persons each holds the sceptre in his hands.

The passage, Il. i. 237, seems to speak of one sceptre held by many

persons: this scene on the Shield exhibits to us several sceptres.

In the simile of the crooked judgments, a plurality of judges[115]

are referred to. But as we never hear of an original and independent

authority, like that of Il. ii. 204, in the senators or nobles, it

seems most likely that they acted judicially by an actual or virtual

delegation from the king.

[114] Il. xviii. 506.

[115] Il. xvi. 386.

The duty of the king to command his troops is inscribed on every page

of the Iliad; and the only limit to it seems to have been, that upon

the approach of old age it was delegated to the heir, or to more than

one of the family, even before the entire withdrawal of the sire from

public cares. The martial character of the sovereign was indeed

ideally distinguishable from his regal one; for Agamemnon was[116]

[116] Il. iii. 179.

ἀμφότερον, βασιλεύς τ’ ἀγαθὸς, κρατερός τ’ αἰχμητής.

Still, martial excellence was expected of him. When Hippolochus

despatched his son Glaucus to Troy, he enjoined him always to be

valiant, and always to excel his comrades in arms[117].

[117] Il. vi. 207.

Lastly, the king was a proprietor. Ulysses had very large landed

property, and as many herds and flocks, says Eumæus in a spirit of

loyal exaggeration, as any twenty chiefs alive[118]. And Homer, who

always reserves his best for the Lycians, has made Sarpedon declare,

in an incomparable speech, the virtual condition on which estates like

these were held. He desires Glaucus to recollect, why it is that they

are honoured in Lycia with precedence at banquets, and with greater

portions than the rest, why looked upon as deities, why endowed with

great estates of pasture and corn land by the banks of Xanthus; it is

that they may the more boldly face the burning battle, and be great

in the eyes and in the minds of their companions. So entirely is the

idea of dignity and privilege in the Homeric king founded upon the sure

ground of duty, of responsibility, and of toil[119].

[118] Od. xiv. 98.

[119] Il. xii. 310-28.

What Hippolochus taught, and Sarpedon stated, is in exact

correspondence with the practical part of the narrative of Glaucus in

the Sixth Book. When Bellerophon had fully approved himself in Lycia by

his prowess, the king of the country gave him his daughter in marriage,

together with one half of his kingdom; and the Lycians presented him

with a great and fertile demesne.

~_As proprietor; the τέμενος._~

This estate is called τέμενος; a name never applied in Homer but to the

properties of deities and of rulers. He uses the word with reference to

the glebe-lands of

Spercheius, Il. xxiii. 148.

Venus, Od. viii. 362.

Ceres, Il. ii. 696.

Jupiter, Il. viii. 48.

Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age, Vol. 3 of 3 I. Agorè: Polities of the Homeric Age. II. Ilios: Trojans and Greeks Compared. III. Thalassa: The Outer Geography. IV. Aoidos: Some Points of the Poetry of Homer. · 第 14 / 85 题