|
|
|
|
|
CorrespondenceIn both Beowulf and The Odyssey there is the common thread of a hero on a quest; in Beowulf's case it is to slay evil and defend his home and people. As in the case of Odysseus from The Odyssey he is struggling to return to his home, to rid it of evil and restore both his lands and people. For the following quotes, note how well they fit into being a plausible conversation:"Anyone with gumption and a sharp mind will take the measure of two things: what's said and what's done. I believe what you have told me: that you are a troop loyal to our king. So come ahead with your arms and your gear, and I will guide you. What's more, I'll order my own comrades on their word of honour to watch your boat down there on the strand-- keep her safe in her fresh tar, until the time comes for her curved prow to preen on the waves and bear this hero back to Geatland. May one so valiant and venturesome come unharmed through the clash of battle." (Beowulf 21) "However keen his mind may be, it's hard for any mortal man to know that he is meeting you, Athena: you can take so many shapes. But this I do know well: You favored me in days gone by, through all the war that we Achaens waged at Troy." (The Odyssey 267) Of course one must replace certain identifying features, such as names and places, but if rendered in a neutral capacity there is definite correspondence to be seen between the two. Odysseus I personally do not consider an 'epic hero,' but as history and Homer defines him as such, I will utilize that status. Beowulf is, without a doubt, an epic hero of legendary proportions. Slayer of dragons and of monsters like Grendel, (which we would refer to as a troll), he wages one-on-one wars with various threats. In a sense, Odysseus also fits that bill, more so if he had, say, beheaded Scylla or obliterated Charybdis. As he did not (and likely could not) it is by simple encounter that Odysseus is comparable to Beowulf. However, Odysseus fights his own wars when he returns to Ithaca, and as all who have read The Odyssey knows, the death of the suitors is a lengthy and rather drawn-out affair. In my personal opinion, I think Odysseus took too great of lengths in the attempt to over-glorify his natural cunning, and also was slightly excessive in his maneuvres of determining loyalties. Yet this is another comparison to be drawn with Beowulf, in the way that the Geat is sometimes overly cautious in his predictions, possibly to impress the various men of importance he meets throughout his life. This line can be struck next to Odysseus' try for 'extra' glory. Beowulf also is too quick for hand-to-hand, no-weapons, combat- also in the name of pride and vanity. His fight with the first vicious monster that assaults the Danes is portrayed to be an act of 'fair trial,' but with every other encounter he endures it is the same. To me, it hardly seems fair trial to wrestle with a dragon who has the advantage of iron-like talons with bare human hands. Fair fight, or overinflated ego? Female view and treatment similarities is nearly always a given in epics- they're either idiotic (occasionaly given a 'smart' regard) damsels in distress, or they're simply left at home. The women are either waiting to be shipped off to a husband across the sea, (in the case of Beowulf), or they are stranded in a mournful state, continuously hounded, also at home. (Clearly in the case The Odyssey.) Weapons can also be compared, though the time periods of the epics are several centuries apart. Beowulf, written sometime between the 9th and 11th century, maintains the use of soft metals for their weapons, as 'rusting swords and axes' is a common mention in Beowulf. One can assume rather naturally it is weaker metals used to manufacture such tools, as a steel sword would not rust after 6 years in a dry cave or in a dusty bawn. At least, by modern standards it would not. That and when struck against chain mail a few too many times the sword broke off at the hilt. Shoddy smithing is something a 13th century and later-minded person would most likely assume, as stronger metals were being used at that time. Even so, poor craftsmanship was not the explanation. Scandinavian and other northern nations of the region created the finest weapons and tools available in that time period. The Odyssey does not go into great detail about the weapons and tools of that time, but it does often mention the godly weapons. Namely the Aegis, the infamous shield of Zeus. Going by that simple fact, it can be taken that Homer was either biased in favor of the Greeks' weapons prowess, or the Greeks were genuinely excellent smiths. There are no reliable references to the Greek, Athenian, or Trojan metal-working abilities- mostly what I found was opinion labeled as fact. Either way, the axes were fashioned much the same, from what I discovered from both book's depictions of axes and swords. Jewelled hilts or pommels, as well as the weight, size, and general length and shape. The main notable difference is the material used- Scandinavians used their natural ores, which was said to be iron, but it seems illogical for iron to break under such pathetic circumstances like chain mail abuse. So after digging a little more, I found that it was some sort of zinc (though that too seems rather illogical) imbued with a little bit of iron ore. I believe it can be said with fair accuracy and judgement that few if anybody precisely knows what the Scandinavians of that era used in weapons-making. That goes for the Greeks' materials as well. Other mentionable (and further elaborable) points of correspondence: Please continue on to the Visuals menu to view generally-accepted portrayals of afore-mentioned characters, book covers if you would like to hunt down these books, (if you don't already have them I recommend them), and other characters noteworthy in both. """""""
| |||||||||||