[464] Il. ii. 820.

[465] Il. iii. 400.

[466] Il. iii. 418; also 395, where ὀρίνω, as most commonly in Homer,

means to excite with fear.

[467] Il. v. 422-5.

[468] Il. iii. 402.

~_Venus as yet scarcely Greek._~

The negative evidence, then, thus far tends to the belief that Venus

was not yet established among the regular deities of the Poet’s

countrymen: and it is supported by positive testimony. For some of

the functions, that must in the post-Homeric view of her office have

belonged to her, Homer studiously makes other provision. Of this

there is a most remarkable case in the Odyssey. He designs that the

Suitors, before they are put to death, shall be made to yield of their

substance to the house of Ulysses, in the form of gifts to Penelope.

For this purpose he arrays her in all her charms, and brings her forth

in appearance like Diana, or golden Venus[469]. It is not a common

practice with Homer to compare a beautiful Greek woman to Venus;

especially when it is one so matronlike as Penelope. On the other hand,

the comparison of Cassandra to Venus[470] is entirely in keeping with

the Asiatic character of the deity. But the intention of the allusion

here is manifest: for when the Suitors see her, it is passion which

prompts them to vie with one another in courting her favour through the

medium of costly gifts. How, then, came the sad Penelope thus to deck

herself? It was not her own thought: it was the suggestion of a deity,

and if Venus had been recognised by Homer as an established object of

worship in Greece, Venus would most properly have made the suggestion:

for she, says Achilles, is supreme in beauty, as Minerva is in industry

and skill[471]. But it is Minerva who instils this suggestion into

the mind of Penelope; though in a form which conveys no taint to her

mind[472]. She goes, however, beyond this: for she sends Penelope to

sleep, and then, to enhance her beauty, applies to her face a wash,

of the kind that Venus herself uses when she goes among the Graces.

Yet this is not procured from Venus, as Juno in the Iliad procures the

_cestus_ from her on Mount Olympus; nor is her agency or aid in any

manner employed. Thus she is not allowed, as it were, to have to do

in any manner with Penelope; a clear indication, I think, that though

known, she was not yet worshipped in Greece proper.

[469] Od. xvii. 37. xix. 54.

[470] Il. xxiv. 699. I think the case of Hermione (Od. iv. 14.) is an

exception.

[471] Il. ix. 389.

[472] Od. xviii. 158-68.

She appears, indeed, in the legend of the daughters of Pandareus[473]:

but the scene of this legend is not stated by Homer to be in Greece,

and by general tradition it is placed in Crete or in Asia Minor.

[473] Od. xix. 67, 73.

Again, the predicaments in which she is exhibited in the poems are

of a kind hardly reconcilable with the supposition, that she was an

acknowledged Greek deity at the time. In the lay of Demodocus, the Poet

seems to intend to make the guilty pair ridiculous, from his sending

them off, when released, so rapidly and in silence. It is true that

he exhibits to us in the Iliad the sensual passion of Jupiter: but he

has wreathed the passage where it is described in imagery, both of

wonderful beauty, and rather more elaborate than is his wont[474].

But whatever may be thought of the Eighth Odyssey, the Fifth and

Twenty-first Iliad seem, so far as Venus is concerned, only to permit

one construction. In the former, she is, after being wounded, both

menaced and ridiculed by Diomed[475]. In the latter, for no other

offence than leading the battered Mars off the field, she is followed

by Minerva, and struck to the ground by a blow upon the breast. As

in the case of Mars, so and more decidedly in the case of Venus, it

appears as if the ignominious treatment in the Theomachy was difficult,

and the wounding and treatment by Diomed quite impossible, to reconcile

with the idea that it could have been devised by a Poet, and recited

to audiences, for whom the personages so handled formed a part of the

established objects of religious veneration. Even Helen is permitted

to taunt her bitterly: to recommend her becoming the wife, or even the

slave, of Paris, and her ceasing to make pretensions to play the part

of a deity:

[474] Il. xiv. 346-51.

[475] Il. v. 335, 348.

ἧσο παρ’ αὐτὸν ἰοῦσα, θεῶν δ’ ἀπόεικε κελεύθου[476].

[476] Il. iii. 406.

~_Her advance from the East._~

In entire harmony with these suppositions is, first, the side taken

by her in the war; and secondly, the geographical indications of her

worship. It appears to have moved from the East along that double

line, by which we have found it probable that the Pelasgians flowed

into Europe: one the way of the islands at the base of the Ægean, the

other by the Hellespont. We know, from other sources, that the East

engendered at a very early date creations of this kind. Under the names

of Astarte, Mylitta, Mitra, and the like, we seem to encounter so many

separate forms or versions of the Greek Venus. We may indeed observe

that Astarte was commonly associated with the Moon, and it would be a

matter of interest to know the original relation between the popular

or promiscuous Venus (πάνδημος), and the celestial one. In Homer we

find them completely severed: we perceive Artemis with many traces of

the older, and Aphrodite fully representing the more recent and carnal

conception. There still remains one sign of correspondence; it is the

standing epithet of χρυσέη for Aphrodite, compared with the cluster

of golden epithets[477] applied to Diana. We may not unreasonably, I

think, take Artemis as the probable prototype; and Aphrodite as the

sensual image, into which the old and pure conception had already

degenerated, before the time when the two fell, as poetic material,

each for its own purpose, into the moulding hand of Homer. While such a

source is every way probable, our reference to it is the more natural,

because it is not very easy to attribute to the Greeks of the heroic

age the original conception of such a divinity as Venus. For though

they were of social and therefore somewhat jovial habits, and though

they were a race of ready hand, given to crimes of violence, yet they

were not, on the whole, by any means a sensual race, in relation to the

standard which seems to have governed the Asiatic nations, whether we

estimate these latter the Trojans, the Assyrians, or the Jews.

[477] Sup. sect. ii. p. 146.

The marriage with Vulcan, and the relation to a mother Dione, invented

apparently for the purpose of maternity, are marks of recency. If I

have rightly referred Vulcan to the Phœnician order, this marriage may

be an indication that Venus likewise had a place in it: and again,

considering her station in Troas, it seems not impossible that the

worship of Vulcan may have been introduced there the more readily,

because of his being reputed to be her husband.

Like Maias the mother of Mercury, Dione, the mother of Venus, is

excluded from the list of Jupiter’s amorous or matrimonial connections

in the Fourteenth Iliad (312-28). This leads to the conclusion, either

that the tradition respecting her was known only as a foreign one, or

else that it was recent, slight, and as yet unauthenticated in popular

belief. In either view it coincides with the other indications as to

Venus.

~_Her rank and personal character._~

The primary function of Venus, apart from Asia, appears to lie among

the Olympian deities. That she was, as a member of that family,

in actual exercise of her prerogatives, we see plainly from the

application made by Juno to her in order to obtain the grace and

attractiveness, by which she hoped to act upon the mind of Jupiter. As

a mythological conception, she exhibits to us on the page of Homer the

union of the most finished material beauty with strong sensuality, and

the entire absence of all traces of the ethical element. She represents

two things, form and passion; the former refined, the latter not so. In

her character, as conceived by Homer, we see how that which is divine,

when it has ceased to be divine, becomes, not human, but something

much worse and baser: as he that falls from a height cannot stop

half-way down the precipice at his will, but must reach the ground.

Even feminine tenderness does not cling to the character of Venus. She

is effeminate, indeed, for when wounded she lets her son Æneas fall:

but gentle she is not, for in the scene of the Third Iliad with Helen

her conduct is harsh even to brutality, and she drives the reluctant

princess into sensuality only by the cruel threat of violence and

death[478].

[478] Il. iii. 414-7.

In Venus we see the power of an Immortal reduced to its minimum. Even

the faculty of self-transformation seems to have been in her case but

imperfectly exercised[479]. She does not pretend to give strength or

courage to her son Æneas, but is represented simply as carrying him off

in her arms. It is here worthy of remark, that she has not even the

ability, like the greater deities, to envelop him in cloud: she has

no command over nature, only over the corrupt and rebellious impulses

of man: she has power to carry Æneas away, but he is folded in her

mantle[480]. In fact, her privileges in general appear to be like those

of the inferior orders of deity, held and used for her own enjoyment;

but they do not carry the power of acting upon man or nature, except

in a particular and prescribed function. Her capacity of locomotion

is limited in a peculiar degree. Mars, though no great deity, went,

when wounded, up to heaven on the clouds. But Venus required to borrow

the disengaged chariot of Mars for the purpose, when in the same

predicament[481].

[479] Il. iii. 396.

[480] Il. v. 311-18.

[481] Il. v. 355-64. 363.

It is no wonder that the ancient, probably the earliest Greek, account

of her origin which is given by Hesiod[482], should mark her as of

entirely animal extraction.

[482] Theog. 188-98.

Another peculiarity in the case of Venus is, that she already takes

her name, and not only receives mere epithets, from two particular

spots where she is worshipped. Cyprus makes her Κύπρις in the Iliad,

and from Cythera she is also Cytherea in the Odyssey. She thus stands

distinct from Juno: to whom the Argeian name is simply an appendage,

though one of a most characteristic force, and one involving important

inferences as to her origin. Nor is she less distinct from Minerva,

whose name is not derivative in form when she is called Ἀθήνη, and whom

we must consider as the eponymist of Athens, and not its namesake. No

indication could be of greater force, than this marked localism, in

stamping the ideas about Venus as purely human in their origin.

~_Venus unable to confer beauty._~

It would be an error to consider the Venus of Homer as even the goddess

of beauty. She was endowed with it personally, and she possessed the

_cestus_ of fascination and desire: but she had no capacity to make

mortals beautiful, such as Minerva exercised upon Penelope and Ulysses,

and Juno upon the virgin daughters of Pandareus. She is there passed

by in such a manner as to make it plain that she did not possess any

power of imparting this gift. Her δῶρα, in Il. iii. 65, do not appear

to include it; or Paris would not say, ‘no one would spontaneously seek

them.’ For beauty of person was among the recognised and highly valued

gifts of heaven[483].

[483] Od. viii. 167-77.

We are told, in the Twentieth Odyssey, that Venus fed the orphan girls

of Pandareus with cheese, honey, and wine; and, continues the passage,

Juno gave them extraordinary beauty and prudence, Diana lofty stature,

Minerva industrial skill. Afterwards, they being thus equipped, Venus

went up to Olympus to pray Jupiter that he would make arrangements for

their marriage[484]. Thus her operations in a work of good are wholly

ministerial and inferior: and not only does she not confer beauty

herself, but she sees it conferred by Juno. This again shows that the

Venus of Homer, except for evil, has no power to work upon the body or

mind of man.

[484] Od. xx. 66-75.

But we must not omit to mark that sign of the real chastity of Homer’s

mind which he has given us by his method of handling the character of

Venus; a deity whom the nature of his subject in the Iliad would have

led almost any other heathen, and many Christian, poets to magnify.

In not a single instance does Homer exhibit this divinity to us in an

amiable or engaging light, or invest her with the attractions of power,

glory, and success.

When Minerva advises Diomed in the Fifth Iliad[485], she says, Do _not_

attack any of the immortals; but if you happen to see Venus, her you

may wound. We seem to have a clear indication, that Homer introduced

this passage simply in order to throw contempt on Venus; because

afterwards, when Mars is in the field, and Diomed pleads the inhibition

he had received as a reason for his inaction, Minerva at once removes

it, and bids the warrior assail that god without scruple[486].

[485] Il. v. 131. cf. 330.

[486] Il. v. 818, 27.

Again, when Diomed wounds Mars, it is because Minerva invisibly directs

and impels his lance[487]: but he wounds Venus without any aid. In the

Theomachy, she appears upon the list of deities enumerated as taking

the Greek and Trojan side respectively; but when the Poet comes to

match the others for fight, she disappears from his mind; as though it

would have been an insult to any other member of the Olympian family to

be pitted against her effeminacy. Accordingly, no antagonist is named

for her.

[487] Il. v. 856.

She is sometimes made contemptible, as in the foregoing instances. She

is at other times silly and childish, as under the bitter taunt of

Minerva and the admonition of Jupiter[488], and again, when she falls

into the trap cunningly laid by Juno[489]. Odious in the interview with

Helen in the Third Book, she is never better than neutral, and never

once so handled by the Poet as to attract our sympathies.

[488] Il. v. 421-30.

[489] Il. xiv. 190-224.

~_Never made attractive in Homer._~

Again, there is not, throughout the Odyssey or Iliad, a single

description of the beauty of Venus, such as Homer has given us of the

dress of Juno, or the arms of Minerva. It is never, either directly or

indirectly, set off for the purpose of creating interest and favour.

One exception may perhaps be alleged: but, if it is such, at least it

affords the most marked illustration of the rule. Once he does praise

the exceeding beauteous neck, the lovely breast, the sparkling eyes of

Venus; but it is when he has clothed her in the withered form of the

aged spinstress that had attended upon Helen from Sparta, and through

whose uninviting exterior such glimpses of the latent shape of Venus

are caught by Helen as to enable her, but no one else, to recognise the

deity.

How different is this from the case of Virgil, who has introduced a

most beautiful and winning description of her in the Second Æneid[490],

just when he brings her into action that she may acquit both Helen

and Paris of all responsibility for the fall of Troy. It would have

been not only natural for Homer, but, unless he was restrained by some

strong reason, we may almost say it would have been inevitable, that he

should have done for Venus what has been done in our own day, with very

high classical effect, by Tennyson in his Œnone:

[490] Æn. ii. 589-93.

Idalian Aphrodite beautiful,

Fresh as the foam, new bathed in Paphian wells,

With rosy slender fingers backward drew

From her warm brows and bosom her deep hair

Ambrosial, golden round her lucid throat

And shoulder: from the violets her light foot

Shone rosy-white, and o’er her rounded form

Between the shadows of the vine-branches

Floated the glowing sun-light as she moved.

Upon the whole, I should confidently cite the treatment of Venus in the

poems as being among the most satisfactory indications of the state of

heroic Greece, and one of the most honourable tokens of the disposition

of her Poet.

_Vulcan._

~_The Vulcan of Homer._~

Besides Juno and Bacchus, Hephæstus or Vulcan is the only Homeric

deity who bears upon him this unequivocal, or at least significant,

mark of novelty, that we are supplied with a distinct tradition of his

childhood[491]. In his youth he was rickety and lame. His mother Juno

wished to conceal him, and she let him fall into the sea. Here Thetis

and Eurynome received him, and reared him in a submarine cave, not,

however, under the Mediterranean, but the Ocean; and in that cave for

nine years the boy-smith employed himself in making ornaments for women.

[491] Od. viii. 311: and Il. xviii. 395.

He is thus associated by his traditions with the two opposing elements

of water and fire; with water by the history of his childhood, and

with fire as the grand instrument and condition of his art. The latter

was by much the stronger association, for it was continually fed by

the history and progress of the art itself; so that he became the

impersonation of that element itself, and in the phrase φλὸξ Ἡφαίστοιο

it is his name which gives the distinctive force; for φλὸξ in Homer

seems to mean the flame or light of fire[492], and is not used to

signify fire proper, except with some other word in conjunction to it

or near it. But the explanation of the seeming contrariety is probably

to be found in the hypothesis, that his worship was of Phœnician

introduction; as the Phœnicians seem to have made the Greeks acquainted

with the use of fire in working metals. If they made the deity known

to the Greeks, this will account for his association with the idea of

fire: and as accounts and traditions, which they had supplied, were

evidently the source of all the more remote maritime delineations of

Homer, (since they alone frequented Ocean and the distant seas,) this

is the natural and easy explanation for the tradition of his childish

arts in the oceanic cave. That he is thus, like the Phœnicians, for

Homer, the meeting point of fire and water, appears clearly to stamp

him as Phœnician or oriental in his origin, relatively to Greece.

[492] Thus, in Il. xviii. 206, it means that blaze without heat, as

from shining armour, with which Minerva invested Achilles when he went

forth unarmed. The name Ἥφαιστος also stands alone for fire in Il. ii.

426.

Accordingly, true to the association between Phœnician and Hellenic

elements, he is one of the five Hellenizing deities in the Trojan war;

in which, as the element of fire, he opposes and subdues the river

Xanthus. He was not, however, unknown to the Trojans; for Dares, his

priest, had two sons in their army. His introduction to Troas may have

been due to his conjugal connection with Venus; or it may have been

due to the neighbourhood of Lemnos, the island on which, when hurled

from Olympus by Jupiter, he fell, and which thenceforward formed his

favourite earthly habitation. With Lemnos and other isles Troy was in

communication, at least from the time of Laomedon, for that prince

threatened to seize Apollo and to sell him, νήσων ἔπι τηλεδαπάων[493].

A regular commerce was established between Lemnos and the camp during

the Trojan war[494].

[493] Il. xxi. 453.

[494] Il. vii. 467.

Among the deities of Vulcan’s generation we find but one married

couple, and they are a strangely assorted pair, Vulcan himself and

Venus. Neither character nor occupation will account for this singular

union: on the contrary, there is no case in which the extremes of

repugnance must so decidedly be supposed. It is questionable whether

the hypothesis, that Venus represents the beauty which gives perfection

to works of art, is in entire keeping with the tone of the Homeric

system. Indeed Venus with Homer represents absolutely nothing, except

sensual passion in a fine exterior form which can hardly be severed

from it. One explanation, and one only, may suggest itself as more

natural. It is this: that the worship of Vulcan and that of Venus

came in, not distinctly connected with those of any other deity, at

about the same time, and from the same quarter. We have already seen

upon Venus those marks of comparative modernism, and of an eastern

extraction, which we now find in Vulcan; and here probably is to be

found, either wholly or in part, the actuating suggestion of their

ill-starred wedlock.

Though we find the works of Vulcan scattered promiscuously abroad,

there is no notice of his worship, or of any site or endowment

belonging to him in the Greece of Homer. He was available to the Poet

for embellishment, but he probably had not become for the Greek nation

a regular object of adoration.

I think we may trace the tokens of his eastern origin in the legend of

his infancy. It was into the sea that he was thrown: but, as we have

seen, the cave in which he was reared was a cave of Ocean[495].

[495] Il. xviii. 402.

περὶ δὲ ῥόος Ὠκεανοῖο

ἀφρῷ μορμύρων ῥέεν ἄσπετος·

Also, by a rather singular arrangement, there are two deities, not one

only, employed in taking him up and watching over his childhood. Nor

are the two naturally associated together: for Thetis is a daughter of

Nereus, and belongs to the Thalassian family; Eurynome is a child of

Ocean. The connection with Thetis and the sea is appropriate enough in

the case of any child of Juno, for the wife of Peleus, as his nurse,

seems to give him an Hellenic character: but it seems hard to explain

the appointment of a colleague belonging to the race of Ocean, and for

the situation of the cave in its bed, except as having been due to the

eastern origin of the divinity, of which the mark had not yet been

effaced.

~_His marriage with Venus._~

The marriage of Venus and Vulcan, metaphysically interpreted,

represents the union of strength and skill in the production of works

of art: but though this may have been a Greek application of eastern

traditions originally independent, there is no distinct trace of it in

Homer; while it may seem strange that, if the Poet had had such an idea

before his mind, his only picture of their conjugal relation should

have been the one given in the Eighth Odyssey. Still, he may have had

that idea.

Vulcan’s other wife, Charis, represents an exactly similar conception;

and here there is a more obvious probability that the combination was

Greek, and was one intended, or even devised, by Homer.

It is common to treat the handling of this subject in the Iliad as in

contradiction with that of the Odyssey; and to use the assumption of

discrepancy either in support of the doctrine of the Chorizontes, or in

proof that the Olympian lay of Demodocus is spurious.

Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age, Vol. 2 of 3 Olympus; or, the Religion of the Homeric Age · 第 18 / 38 段