This week we’re starting to work with the primary source readings. For the one you picked, what moment stood out to you? What do you think the author was trying to impress on their audience?

Take some time to read through your chosen text and get a feel for the mood, the intent, the people. How does this connect with what we’re saying about the Greeks in class?

I picked The Death of Patroclos as it was the most interesting and covered a battle between the Trojans with the Lycians against the Greek led by Patroclos. In this battle the gods intervene suepposedley breaking Patroclos armor and spear. In the battle the gods had much interest as the mortal son of Zeus of the Lycian army Sarpedon was killed as well. One passage that really stuck out to me was this, "“When you have cleared them away from the ships, come straight back. If after that the loud-thundering lord of Hera gives you a chance of triumph, never think of fighting on your own account without me, you will steal my honours in that way. Don’t be excited by fighting and victory so as to lead our men as far the city walls, or one of the Olympian gods may meddle; Apollo Shootafar is very fond of them. You must turn back as soon as you have saved the ships, and let them ravage the plain.…”" This text to me is shocking as it is essentially talking about preserving patroclos's honor if he dies and to me he seems quite cocky and demanding giving a whole speech. I think the author was trying to communicate the importance of the battle and the significance of the people with gods being brought in and i think this specifically depicts essentially how they are better than everyone else. Its telling us about them outcome of an important battle and the figures involved as well as for shadows later deaths. I believe this backs up the proudness of the greeks however I also believe the gods intervening is unlike them. I believe that it is interesting that the gods have so much interest in this battle and would like to know why.

The reading that I chose this week was Nausicaa and the Stranger by Homer. There are two main characters in their story, Nausicaa and Odysseus. Nauiscaa is a young princess who went to spend her day doing laundry with her maids when she met Odysseus, who was sleeping in the woods as the girls were doing laundry. One of the things that this document lets us know about this time period is the acceptable relationship between men and women at the time. Near the end of the story, after Nausicca decides to bring Odysseus home with her, so that he can ask for help from her father to get back home. However, she has to create an elaborate plan to get him to her house without the townspeople noticing because it would be considered improper for her to be spending time with a stranger, or they would assume that she would marry him. This story also lets us see how the Greeks valued xenia, or hospitality, because even though at first the mermaids were afraid of Odysseus, they still chose to help him in their interactions with strangers. I would like to learn more about why the royal household was depicted as more of a middle-class family than what is typically considered a royal family. 

I picked Odysseus and the Suitors. What jumped out to me was the Odysseus disguising himself as a beggar. I think the author was trying to communicate the lack of integrity of people who covet what another person has. Their willingness to possess it the first chance they get proves their lack of loyalty and even proves their willingness to kill for it. I think it also shows that when there is no power to possess it, they try to conceal the truth that is exposed to protect themselves. What relates this document to Agamemnon’s Insult is their prayer to Apollo to conquer and seek vengeance. I would like to find out more about Apollo and what gives him the power to answer these prayers of vengeance. I wonder how a hectatomb could cease Apollo’s wrath and what the significance of a hectatomb is to Apollo. 

The reading I chose was “Odysseus and the Suitors” by Homer. The reason I was interested by this particular reading was because it reminded me of a “warrior returning alive” type trope I see in a lot of other media, and I thought that it would be a good read. The particular section that jumped out at me from this particular reading was when Odysseus returns, and his first arrow that flies kills Antinoos. His disguise drops, and the suitors realize that the king of Ithaca has returned to see them in his house after having lived off the fruits of his land and accosting his wife while he was away at war. It screamed like a reversal of fate, where the men thought that they could easily take the throne and Penelope only to see that the king has returned, and very soon they would all die. I think Homer meant for this reading to highlight man’s hubris. In many cases, we take advantage of others without thinking about the way it affects them or the people around us. A chief example in this text is that, although it isn’t mentioned in this excerpt, Antinoos is fully committed to seizing the throne at whatever cost and even goes as far as to plot Telemachus’ murder in order to forcefully claim both the throne and Penelope. In my opinion, this document gives us an insight into the type of society Ithaca was. Perhaps when a ruler or person of importance presumed dead, they held some sort of open courtship events in order to fairly select a new ruler. Granted, in the case of this reading, the event in question led to the massacre of all the suitors in Odysseus’s home at his own hand. I personally think that this document heavily relates to “Agamemnon’s Insult”. In both readings, you have strong male figures that attempt to circumvent the protagonist for petty reasons, but chief among them being to claim the other’s wife, which can be seen as a gross disregard for sacred tenets and values the Greeks held about marriage at the time. I would like to learn more about how the Greeks managed ruling lineages, since the suitors were so eager to court Penelope for the throne, I wondered if this was the case in many other regions across the Aegean.

I selected Nausicaa and the Stranger from Homer’s Odyssey because it depicts an essential human interaction between strangers who experience fear and curiosity while showing hospitality. The passage focused more on human conduct during vulnerable encounters than it did on divine intervention or military conflicts. Nausicaa demonstrated both wariness and courtesy toward Odysseus by giving him clothes and directions yet maintaining a safe distance. The scene demonstrated how hospitality served as a fundamental social obligation while revealing the existing gender norms and reputation systems in her community. The passage demonstrates that people follow established behavioral rules when they encounter uncertainty during their interactions with others. The practice of hospitality functioned as both a social obligation and a method to establish connections between unfamiliar people. The text demonstrates that xenia or hospitality functioned as a fundamental social principle which ancient Greek society deeply respected. The scene demonstrates how women in ancient Greek society needed to maintain caution when interacting with men outside their family because their behavior directly affected their family's reputation. The scene presents a combination of generous behavior together with rigid social norms that people needed to follow. The scene demonstrates Greek cultural values through its depiction of honor codes and hospitality practices, yet it contrasts with other texts which show violent outcomes when these rules fail to be respected. I am interested in understanding the public conduct expectations for young women like Nausicaa and their level of independence when compared to male behavior. I am interested in understanding how ancient Greek viewers interpreted this scene because they might have seen it as a romantic moment or as an illustration of correct behavior.

The article I chose to read this week is Odysseus and the suitors. Initially, I was interested because I’ve heard the name Odysseus before so, I was curious about him. After reading what the reading is about I thought I may enjoy it because it’s dramatic and about betrayal. I think the parts of the reading that stood out to me the most were when Odysseus made his dramatic entrance and killed Antinoos, when Eurymachos told Odysseus the plans Antinoos had to kills his son and become king of Ithaca, and when Eurymachos tried to fight Odysseus but got striked instead. I think these three screened in my opinion were what really illustrated the betrayal and anger Odysseus felt. I think Homer was trying to highlight and dramatize the strength and fearlessness of leaders in Greek culture. I think he may have also wanted to emphasize the importance of respecting leaders and that there would be consequences for living without morale and disrespecting a leader or scheming. The article may be telling is that during this time the consequences for justice were very brutal and extreme. I would like to find out more of what Greek culture valued.

For this week’s discussion response, I have selected The Beginnings of Things by Hesiod. I picked this initially entirely on the notion of the title alone (not knowing who Hesiod himself was.) I was drawn by the biblical record of the Genesis account of creation. Therein it is expressed, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (NWT) This personal connection drew me further into the Greek mythological and theological references found in Hesiod’s writings.  

In Hesiod’s The Beginning of Things, he draws on the origin of mankind from the ‘creators’—The Greek gods (particularly Zeus)—and the ‘relationship’ that exists between them as mortals and immortals. Hesiod further addresses the hierarchy of man as explained in his discussion around ‘The Five Generations’ of mankind. From the ‘Gold generation’ to The Iron Age.  

However, specifically during The Bronze Age, Hesiod identifies ‘The Bronze Generation’ which were “terrible and strong”…and violent. The people living at this time incorporated bronze into nearly every aspect of their lives; building homes, weapons, and even their work centered around working as “bronzesmiths.” Hesiod described people’s attitudes and actions resulting in ‘nameless death’ (“moldering domain of cold Hades”), where no light would exist; placing one beneath the hands of the other. It was not a prominent or thriving time period for man.  

Overall, Hesiod was trying to reveal to us the ‘fall of man’ from the standpoint of the gods. As a ‘simple’ farmer, Hesiod trusted in the gods (primarily Zeus) to help mankind come out of this dark period—The Bronze Age—leading to The Iron Age. However, we learn through Hesiod that the gods focused on their successes and left mankind to revel in their own vices and consequences.  

Perhaps I would like to know more as to why Hesiod seemed to have more faith in the gods (Zeus) than he did in his own fellow man. Why did he not want to live during The Iron Age? Did he see no hope or rescue from the gods through this time period of mankind’s weakened state? Did he perhaps feel that mankind at this point was completely lost?

For this week I chose Homer's The Death of Patroclos because it shows a huge turning point in the Iliad. Which part stood out to me is when Patroclos begs Achilles to come back to the fight knowing how many Greek leaders were hurt. He says, “but there's no curing you, Achilles!” This is powerful to me because it shows that Achilles' anger is almost like an injury itself which is one that can hurt the entire Greek army. I feel Homer is trying to convey that with pride they are dangers. With Achilles refusing to fight it caused suffering for his people, and with the death of one of his closest companions to bring him right back to the fight. This shows how personal emotions such as grief and loyalty can mold the larger course of war. This document also reveals what values mattered in Homer’s time: honor, loyalty, and glory on the battlefield. At the same time, it warns about how destructive unchecked anger can be. It connects to other Greek texts that also deal with pride and fate, but here the focus is on how deeply personal relationships drive heroic actions. I would like to explore how the Greeks understood the relationship between Achilles and Patroclos since their bond carries so much meaning in the story.

I picked Odysseus and the Suitors. It stood out to me because it’s a dramatic moment of justice and revenge, and it shows a lot about Greek values like loyalty, strength, and honor. The part that really grabbed me was when Odysseus, disguised at first, suddenly reveals himself and takes action against the suitors. It felt powerful because it shifted the balance completely—from the suitors taking advantage of his home to Odysseus taking back control. I think Homer wanted to highlight themes of justice and rightful order. The suitors had disrespected Odysseus’ household and culture’s values, so their punishment was meant to show that dishonor and greed would eventually face consequences. This story shows how much importance ancient Greek society placed on hospitality, family honor, and loyalty. Violating someone’s household wasn’t just a personal insult—it was seen as a violation of sacred values. It also reflects a society where strength and cunning were celebrated traits. It connects to the other Homeric readings like The Death of Patroclos because both highlight honor and loyalty as central values. It also supports Hesiod’s The Beginnings of Things in the sense that both show a world guided by divine order and consequences for human actions. I’d like to learn more about how hospitality (xenia) worked in Greek culture, since it seems like such a strong theme that comes up again and again in Homer’s stories.

The reading that I pick for the reading was Agamemnon’s Insult, and the reason why it interested me was because I saw that it mentioned Achilles and I always heard his name when it comes to wars. A detail that stood out to me was seeing how their idea of honor is so crucial to them including having war prizes. The author was communicating the idea of honor and how important it is to the spartans. The timing can certainly interpreted since this is the opening of Homer’s Iliad and basically starts the epic. This document really highlights the idea of honor as it shown when Agamemnon demanded to take Briseis as a direct attack to Achilles’s honor knowing it can really hurt his reputation. What I would like to find out more is how this affected their perspective as an after effect of this event. 

I picked Homer’s Odyssey, the story of “Nausicaa and the Stranger,” because it shows a different side of Greek life than the usual battles, kings, and bloody wars. The part that stood out most to me was when Odysseus comes out of the bushes, dirty, weak, and in need of help, and has to beg Nausicaa for mercy. Even though he appears frightening, Nausicaa stays calm while the other girls run away. She listens to him, shows courage, and offers food, clothes, and guidance. I think Homer wanted his audience to see how important kindness and hospitality were to the Greeks, especially since they believed strangers were under the gods’ protection. This moment also shows Odysseus in a new light, not just as a powerful warrior, but as someone vulnerable and dependent on the goodwill of others.

This reading tells us a lot about the time and culture it came from. The way Homer describes Nausicaa’s family life, her father leaving for council, her mother spinning wool, and Nausicaa doing laundry with her maid, gives the royal household more of an ordinary, middle-class feel than a palace filled with luxury. This matches what we’ve talked about in class: that bards in the Dark Age pictured the Bronze Age through the lens of their own daily experiences. Compared to other readings, this primary source highlight more family roles, social expectations, and 'hospitality' rather than wealth or war. It makes me curious about how much of what Homer describes reflects real traditions and how much is just his society’s values placed onto the past. I’d like to learn more about how daily Greek life mixed with myth in these kinds of stories.

I picked the reading named "The Beginning of Things" by Hesiod, and what was interesting to me was how Hesiod described how the gods made different generations of "men" from the "golden" to the "age of iron" generation, and he explains how each generation lives and what they do. The detail that jumped out to me was how, in every instance, when Hesiod describes a generation, he goes from a glorious description of what the golden generation is to the harsh, dirty description of the age of iron generation. The author was trying to communicate how life was from the high, glorious days of Greece to the present, which in this case is the age of iron, when everything went downhill. What this document was trying to say, according to the time and place this was written, most people, especially those of higher power, think that life as a normal person like him is nothing hard, but in reality, it is the most excruciating thing ever. This document supports the other readings that we have seen because this passage is addressing the harsh realities of what life really is, and this time, not from the perspective of a person in a high position, but one in a low, looked-down-upon position as a farmer.