He only appears once in a pre-Troic legend. This appearance, too, is

beyond the borders of Greece. In Lycia he, or, it may be, simply

warlike passion which he represents, slays Isander, the son of

Bellerophon and uncle of Glaucus, in battle with the Solymi. Still he

is the father by Astyoche, of Ascalaphus and Ialmenus, somewhere in the

neighbourhood of the Minyeian Orchomenus, or else farther towards the

north of Greece.

The Homeric indications, on the whole, as well as the general

conceptions of the character, represent Mars as neither a deity

indigenous to the country, nor one belonging to the Hellenic

traditions: while the Poet perhaps intends us to understand that he

had points of contact or affinity with Greece, which are represented

in his wavering attitude between the two parties to the war. It is

probable that the Poet himself may have been a principal agent in the

introduction of Mars to Hellenic worship. The machinery of the Iliad

required him to find an array of gods, who should be champions on each

side respectively. It also required that these gods should be united

round a centre, which he provided for them in Olympus and in its Court,

under the presidency of Jupiter. Both Mars and Venus may thus have made

good a title, which before was doubtful and imperfect, through the

place to which they were promoted in the Iliad, combined with the place

which the Iliad itself won for itself in the national understanding and

affections.

_Mercury._

~_The Mercury of Homer._~

The Homeric signs respecting Mercury are sufficient to fix his

character and origin. The small part, which this deity plays in the

poems, is indeed in remarkable contrast with the extended popularity to

which at a later period he attained: but his character in Homer is one

which accounts in a natural manner for the subsequent increase in his

importance.

He is the son of Maias, Od. xiv. 435; and of Jupiter, Od. viii. 335.

He is the man of business for the Olympian deities, διάκτορος. Od.

viii. 335. v. 28[439].

[439] Döllinger, Heid. u. Jud. p. 74.

He is the giver of increase, δῶτορ ἐάων. Od. viii. 335. Il. xiv. 490.

He is the most sociable of deities, Il. xxiv. 334. σοὶ γάρ τε μάλιστά

γε φίλτατόν ἐστιν ἀνδρὶ ἑταίρισσαι.

The extraction of Mercury stands somewhat obscurely in Homer: his

mother Maias is but once mentioned, and then without any clue. But,

in the ancient hymn to Mercury, she is declared to be the daughter of

Atlas: and if this be so, we shall be justified in considering him as

the child of a Phœnician tradition[440]. This is also clear on Homeric

grounds. Although Homer does not expressly connect him with Atlas, he

makes Calypso, the daughter of that personage, address him as αἰδοῖός

τε φίλος τε. These expressions are usually applied by him where there

is some special relation of consanguinity, affinity, or guestship:

as between Jupiter and his adopted child[441] and particular friend

Thetis. It is therefore probable that Homer took Mercury’s mother Maias

to be, as the after-tradition made her, the sister of Calypso, and the

daughter of Atlas. All the other Homeric signs of him are in complete

harmony with this hypothesis of a Phœnician origin for Mercury.

[440] See sup. Ethnology, sect. iv.

[441] Il. xxiv. 111.

We thus understand how he becomes the general agent for the gods:

because the Phœnicians supplied the first and principal means of

communication between the several nations in the heroic age: they were

the men-of-business for the world[442].

[442] Od. ix. 124.

It thus becomes plain, again, how he can with propriety be called the

giver of comforts or blessings; because the basis of commerce is this,

that each person engaged in it parts with something which he does not

want, and receives what he does want in return.

The apparent anomaly, which makes the god of increase also the god of

thievery, is thus explained: because, from its nature, commerce is ever

apt to degenerate partially into fraud; and because, in days of the

strong hand, force as well as intelligence would often make it easy for

the maritime merchants to change their vocation, for the occasion, into

that of plunder[443].

[443] Od. viii. 161-4. and xv. 416.

His proper office in regard to the ἔργα of men seems not to be

industry, nor skill in production or manufacture; but handiness and

tidiness in the performance of services. He, says Ulysses, gives to the

ἔργα, which may mean both the deeds and the industrial productions of

men, their χάρις and κῦδος, their grace and credit or popularity[444].

[444] Od. xiv. 319.

~_Mercury the god of increase._~

This idea of increase forms the common or central element of the

various attributes assigned to Mercury. It takes two principal

forms, one that of increase in material goods, the other that of the

propagation of the race. This latter, which was elsewhere grossly

exhibited, is veiled by Homer with his almost unfailing sense of

delicacy, and may not, indeed, have been fully developed in his time.

It is perhaps however traceable in two passages of the poems: first,

that of the Sixteenth Iliad, where we are told that he corrupted the

virgin Polymele[445], though she belonged to the train of Diana. The

other is in the episode of Venus and Mars, where Apollo selects him as

the deity to whom to put the question, whether he would like to take

the place of the adulterer, and he replies in the affirmative[446].

Each of these incidents seems to appertain to something distinctive in

his character.

[445] Il. xvi. 179-86.

[446] Od. viii. 334-42.

That character, again, imports the extended intercourse with mankind,

and the knowledge of the world, which causes him to be chosen, in the

Twenty-Fourth Iliad, for the difficult office of conducting Priam to

the abode of Ulysses. Moreover, the great balance of material benefit

which commerce brings gives him, its patron, as a general rule, a

genial and philanthropic aspect. In Homer we have nowhere any sign of

his vengeance, anger, or severity. He neither punishes, hates, nor is

incensed with any one. A passionless and prudent deity, he not only

declines actual fighting with Latona, as she is a wife of Jupiter, but

spontaneously gives her leave to boast among the gods that she has

engaged and worsted him.

~_Mercury Hellenic and Phœnician._~

The Phœnician origin of Mercury will also account for his position in

the poems, in relation to the Trojans and Greeks respectively. Not

simply is he one of the five Hellenizing deities: for his talents would

naturally with Homer tend to place him on that side. But he appears

almost wholly unknown to the Trojans. The abundance of the flocks of

Phorbas is indeed referred to his love (Il. xiv. 490): and he reveals

himself to Priam by his name (Il. xxiv. 460): but it is remarkable, and

contrary to the general rule of the poems, that Priam, notwithstanding

his great obligations, takes no notice whatever of his deity, either

upon his first revelation and departure, or when a second time he

appears, and afterwards quits him anew (682-94).

On the other hand, we have abundant signs of his familiarity with the

Greeks. He conveys the sceptre from Jupiter to Pelops: he carries the

warning of the gods to Ægisthus: sacrifice is offered to him in Ithaca:

and he is liberally treated with sacrifices by Autolycus in Parnesus,

where he repays his worshipper by bestowing on him the arts of perjury

and purloining[447].

[447] Od. xiv. 435, and xix. 394-8.

Now it is plain, from many places in the poems, that the Greeks had

much intercourse with the Phœnicians. On the other hand, the Trojans,

wealthy by internal products and home trade, seem to have known little

or nothing of maritime commerce. Their intercourse with Thrace, the

fertile Thrace that furnished a contingent of allies, required no

more than that they should have the means of crossing the Straits of

Gallipoli. We nowhere hear that they had a port or harbour. A Phœnician

deity would therefore, of course, be on the Achæan side during the war.

Independently of such an origin, he might, in his usual capacity of

agent, have been with perfect propriety sent to Calypso: but his

mythical relationship to her as a nephew, and her evident connection

with Phœnician traditions, give a peculiar propriety to his employment

on this errand.

Another passage of the Odyssey seems, however, to place this

relationship beyond doubt. Ulysses, in the Twelfth Book, recounts

to Alcinous the transaction that occurred in the Olympian Assembly

after his crew had slain the oxen of the Sun. On that occasion, the

offended deity declared that, unless he got compensation, he would

go down and shine in the realm of Aides; upon which Jupiter at once

promised to destroy the ship of Ulysses. ‘This,’ adds Ulysses, ‘I

heard from Calypso, and she told me that she had herself heard it from

Mercury[448].’

[448] Od. xii. 389, 90.

Now this was no affair of Calypso’s; none, that is, on which the gods

could make a communication to her in regard to Ulysses: but it was

one in which, from her passion for the hero, she would take a natural

interest, and on which she might well obtain information from a deity

who was her relative. Nor does it appear on what other ground Mercury

should be named, as the person who brought her this extra-official

report.

Again, it is probably on account of his Phœnician connection, that

the intervention of Mercury is employed in the Tenth Odyssey[449], to

supply Ulysses with the instructions that were necessary, in order to

enable him to cope with Circe.

[449] Od. x. 275-307.

For we are here in the midst of a cluster of traditions, which we have

every reason to presume to be wholly Phœnician[450]. It is the cluster,

which occupies the outer circle of the geography of the Odyssey: and

it is severed from the Grecian world and experience, not only by a

geographical line, but by an entire change in mythological relations.

From the time when Ulysses enters that circle in the beginning of the

Ninth Book, until his appearance near Scheria, on the outskirt of the

known familiar sphere, his ancient friend Minerva nowhere attends him:

and there are four whole books without even a mention of the goddess,

who, except for this interval, stands prominently forth in almost

every page of the Odyssey. The divine aid is given to him, during this

period, through Circe and Calypso; while Mercury is appointed to

command the latter, and to enable Ulysses to overcome the former. Both

the company and the traditions, amidst which Mercury is found, thus

invite us to presume that he is a deity of Phœnician importation into

Greece.

[450] See ‘Achæis, or Ethnology,’ sect. iv.

~_Mercury recent in Greece._~

There is one other point connected with him, which, tending to mark

that he had somewhat recently become known to the Greeks, agrees with

other indications of his introduction from beyond sea. He figures,

indeed, in legends as old as Hercules and Pelops[451]; and we do not

receive any account of his infancy, as we do of the infancy of Dionysus

and of Vulcan. But we may observe that, whenever he assumes human form,

it is the form of one scarcely emerging from boyhood. In the last

Iliad, he is a πρῶτον ὑπηνήτης, in the fairest flower of youth[452].

And in the Tenth Odyssey, where he makes his second and only other

appearance to a mortal, the same line is repeated in order to describe

his appearance, as if it were an established formula for himself, and

not merely adapted to a particular occasion. Indeed it may reasonably

be questioned, whether such adaptation exists at all. A very young

person was not the most appropriate conductor for Priam, on such an

errand as that which he had undertaken: nor the best instructor in the

mode of coping with the formidable Circe. Therefore, without laying

too much stress upon the point, the meaning of the youthful appearance

seems to be, that he was young in the Greek Olympus.

[451] Il. ii. 104. Od. xi. 626.

[452] Il. xxiv. 348. Od. x. 279.

There is yet another sign by which I think we may identify Mercury

as, in the estimation of Homer, a deity known to be of foreign

introduction. The list given by Jupiter in the Fourteenth Iliad of

his intrigues, includes no reference to Maias, the mother of Mercury,

or to Diana the mother of Venus. Yet it is a large and elaborately

constructed list, ending with Juno herself: and the question arises,

on what principle was it constructed? I think the answer must be that,

as it was addressed to Juno, the most Hellenic of all the Olympian

deities, with whom he wished to be on good terms at the moment, so also

it was intended, if not to give a full account of his Greek intrigues,

yet at any rate that no tradition should appear in it, except such as

Homer considered to be either native, or fully naturalized. It contains

no reference, for example, to the mother of Sarpedon, the mother of

Dardanus, the mother of Amphion and Zethus, the mother of Tantalus,

(whom we have however only presumptions for reckoning as by Homeric

tradition a son of Jupiter,) or even the mother of Æolus; whom it is

possible that Homer may have regarded as Hellic, rather than properly

Greek, though the father of illustrious Greek houses. If this be the

rule, under which the Poet has framed the list, then the exclusion of

Maias and her son remarkably coincides with the other evidence that

tends to define his position as a deity of known and remembered foreign

origin.

~_His Olympian office and that of Iris._~

It may be convenient to notice in this place the statement which is

commonly made, that Iris is the messenger of the gods in the Iliad,

but that Mercury, except only in the Twenty-fourth Book of that Poem,

is confined in this capacity to the Odyssey: a statement, on which

has been founded a standing popular argument against the unity of

authorship in the two poems, and also against the genuineness of the

Twenty-fourth Iliad itself.

The statement, however, appears to rest upon a pure misapprehension;

for it assumes the identity of the character of Iris and Mercury

respectively as messengers. Whereas there is really a difference,

corresponding with the difference in dignity between the two deities:

and Homer is in regard to them perfectly consistent with himself.

Mercury is sometimes a messenger in the proper sense, and sometimes

an agent, or an agent and messenger combined. It is not true that, so

far as the Iliad is concerned, he only appears in the last Book in

one of these capacities. For in the Second Book[453] we find, that he

carried the Pelopid sceptre from Jupiter to Pelops: which may mean

either simply, that he was the bearer of it, or that by a commission

he assisted Pelops in acquiring, or rather in founding, the Achæan

throne in the Peloponnesus. In the Twenty-fourth Iliad, Mercury is

not really a messenger at all[454]; but he is an agent, intrusted

by Jupiter on the ground of special fitness with the despatch of a

delicate and important business, the bringing Priam in safety to the

presence of Achilles, and afterwards the withdrawing him securely from

a position of the utmost danger. This is an office like that undertaken

by Minerva in the Fourth Book, when, as she was commissioned to bring

about a breach of the Pact by the Trojans, she repaired to Pandarus

for the purpose. But the function of Iris is simply to carry messages,

and chiefly from one deity to another; she is not only ἄγγελος, but

μετάγγελος[455]; she is not intrusted in any case with the conduct of

transactions among men, or responsible for their issue, although in the

Fifteenth Book she spontaneously advises the god Neptune in the sense

of the message she has brought. It is not for Jupiter only that she

acts: she also conveys a message, and a clandestine one, for Juno[456].

Nay, on one occasion, without any divine charge, hearing the prayer

of Achilles to two of the Winds, she spontaneously carries it to the

palace, where they were all feasting together[457].

[453] Il. ii. 104.

[454] Il. xxiv. 334.

[455] Il. xxiii. 199.

[456] Il. xviii. 165-8.

[457] Il. xxiii. 199.

Only in the Odyssey do we find Mercury unquestionably and simply

discharging the duty of a messenger; and this on two occasions: the

first, when he brought to Ægisthus the warning that his crimes, if

committed, would be followed by retribution from the hand of Orestes;

the second, when he communicated to Calypso the command to release

Ulysses.

But there is in reality no discrepancy whatever between the two poems:

inasmuch as Mercury and Iris, though both messengers, act in different

characters. Iris is in one case the spontaneous messenger, who carries

a hero’s wish to subordinate deities; but she uniformly has this

mark, that she never rises higher than to be the personal messenger

of Jupiter. On the other hand, Mercury in the Odyssey is the official

messenger, not of Jupiter individually, but in both cases of the

Assembly of the gods: and the care, with which the distinction seems

to be drawn, is very remarkable. It is true, the message to Calypso is

called Ζηνὸς ἀγγελίη: but it became the message of Jupiter, because it

was a proposal made by Minerva in the Olympian Assembly, and made on

the part of all in the plural number, which was then duly adopted by

Jupiter as the executive head of the body[458]:

[458] Od. i. 84.

Ἑρμείαν μὲν ἔπειτα, διάκτορον Ἀργειφόντην,

νῆσον ἐς Ὠγυγίην ὀτρύνομεν.

The message in the case of Ægisthus is equally well defined[459]:

[459] Od. i. 38.

πρό οἱ εἴπομεν ἡμεῖς

Ἑρμείαν πέμψαντες.

It would have been out of keeping, therefore, with the character

and rank of the Homeric Iris, to give her the charge of the messages

carried by Mercury. The only case at all analogous in the Iliad is that

of the decision in the Fourth Book: and there not Iris, but Minerva

is employed. It is not, however, true that we have in the Odyssey no

recognition of the character of Iris as a messenger. We find one,

and that the plainest of all, in the etymology of the name of Ἶρος

the beggar. His proper name was Arnæus[460]; and he was called Irus,

because he was a messenger:

[460] Od. xviii. 6.

Ἶρον δὲ νέοι κίκλησκον ἅπαντες,

οὕνεκ’ ἀπαγγέλλεσκε κιὼν, ὅτε πού τις ἀνώγοι.

There is yet another illustration of the view which has here been

given. In the Assembly of the Twenty-fourth Iliad, Jupiter, in order

to give effect to the general desire of the gods, has occasion to wish

for the presence of Thetis: and it has at first sight an odd appearance

that he does not, as in other cases where he is acting singly, call

Iris and bid her go: but he says, with a mode of expression not found

elsewhere,

ἀλλ’ εἴ τις καλέσειε θεῶν Θέτιν....

And Iris, hearing him, sets forth without being personally designated.

The peculiar language seems as if it had been employed for the especial

purpose of keeping Iris within her own province, and of preventing the

possibility of the confusion between her office and that of deities

superior in rank, which might have arisen if she had regularly received

an errand in the midst of the Olympian Court.

Thus, then, it would appear, that the apparent discrepancy between the

various parts of the poems, when closely examined, really yields to us

fresh evidence of their harmony. Nor let it be thought unworthy of

Homer thus minutely to preserve the precedence and relative dignity

of his deities. With our views of the Olympian scheme, it may require

an effort to assume his standing-ground: but when he was dealing

with the actual religion of his country, it was just as natural and

needful for him to maintain the ranks and distinctions of the gods,

as of men in their various classes. Mythology might, indeed, afford

ample scope to his fancy for free embellishment and enlargement of the

established traditions; but these processes must always be in the sense

of harmonious development, not of discord.

Another question may indeed be asked: whence came this idea of twofold

messengership, higher and lower? and would it not have been more

natural if the whole of this function had been intrusted to one deity?

This question is, I believe, just, and requires that a special account

should be given of an arrangement apparently anomalous. Such an account

I have endeavoured to supply in treating of Iris, by shewing that she

owes her place to a primeval tradition, while Mercury owes his to an

ideal conformity with the laws of the Olympian system.

And in truth there is no single deity, on whom the stamp of that system

has been more legibly impressed. It might be said of the Homeric

Mercury, that he exceeds in humanism (to coin a word for the purpose)

the other Olympian gods, as much as they excel the divinities of any

other system. His type is wholly and purely inventive, without a trace

of what is traditional. He represents, so to speak, the utilitarian

side of the human mind, which was of small account in the age of Homer,

but has since been more esteemed. In the limitation of his faculties

and powers, in the low standard of his moral habits, in the abundant

activity of his appetites, in his indifference, his ease, his good

nature, in the full-blown exhibition of what Christian Theology would

call conformity to the world, he is, as strictly as the nature of

the case admits, a product of the invention of man. He is the god of

intercourse on earth; and thus he holds in heaven by mythological

title, what came to Iris by primitive tradition. The proof must, I

think, be sufficiently evident, from what has been and will be adduced

piecemeal and by way of contrast, in the accounts of other and, for

that period at least, more important divinities.

_Venus._

~_The Venus of Homer._~

There is no deity, except perhaps Dionysus, of whom the position and

estimation in Homer are so vividly contrasted with those, to which he

or she attained in later paganism, as Venus. The Venus of Virgil, the

Venus of Lucretius, are separated by an immeasurable interval from the

Aphrodite of Homer. And the manner in which she is treated throughout

the Iliad and Odyssey is not only curious, as indicating the nature and

origin of her divinity, but is of very high interest as illustrative of

the great Poet’s tone of mind and feeling.

There is no act of worship or reverence, no sign of awe or deference,

shown to her in any part of either of the poems. Yet her rank is

indisputably elevated. It is beyond doubt that she belongs to the

Olympian family. She appears in Olympus, not as specially sent for, but

as entitled ordinarily to be there: she takes a side in the war: she

makes the birth of Æneas more glorious on the mother’s side than that

of Achilles, who was sprung from Thetis, the daughter of Nereus, and a

deity of inferior dignity to hers. Not only is Jupiter her father, but

her mother Dione is an Olympian goddess. Yet her Olympian rank is ill

sustained by powers and prerogatives: and she probably owed it to the

poetical necessity, which obliged Homer to have an array of divinities

on each side in the war, with some semblance of equality at least

between the rival divisions.

The indications of the poem may lead us to believe that her name and

worship were of recent origin. That a worship of her had begun is

obvious: for in Paphos, a town of Cyprus, and the only one named by

Homer, she had both an altar, and a τέμενος, or dedicated estate;

and she bears the name of Cypris[461]. But we have only the very

slightest mention of her, or of any thing connected with her, in

Greece proper. We have seen much reason to assume that Cyprus was

essentially Pelasgian, and ethnically more akin to Troy than to

Greece. In Troy we find various signs of her influence. She sent to

Andromache the marriage gift of her κρήδεμνον[462]. She made to Paris

the fatal present of his lust[463]. She fell in love with Anchises,

and became the mother of Æneas[464]. She led Helen away from the roof

of Menelaus[465], and was an object of dread to her when in Troy[466].

Minerva, in taunting her bitterly about her wound, supposes she may

have got it by a scratch from a golden buckle, in undressing some

Greek woman that she had persuaded to elope with one of the Trojans

whom she so signally loves[467]. Again, it appears from a speech of

Helen, that she was worshipped in Phrygia and Mæonia[468]. The only

token of her influence in Greece is, that she is twice in the Odyssey

called Κυθέρεια. Thus we see her not strictly within Greece, but rather

advanced some steps on her way to it. And it is easy to suppose that,

in the race of corruption, her worship would run among the fastest.

[461] Il. v. 422 _et alibi_.

[462] Il. xxii. 470.

[463] Il. xxiv. 30.

Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age, Vol. 2 of 3 Olympus; or, the Religion of the Homeric Age · 第 17 / 38 段