Gender, Power, Deity, Magic
Important Information

Source and Citation Exercise

Purpose: The purpose of this exercise is to have practice (and get feedback from me) on how to argue a point from both primary and secondary sources, and how to cite primary sources in particular.  Your goal: to use two primary source passages (you may use others if you like) and one secondary source to argue a specific point; use quotes and specific references to all sources. 

Length: 2 pages (more or less), double spaced

Due date: Tuesday, Sept. 27

Topic: Good wives in Homer: Andromache and Penelope.  What are the characteristics of these good wives in Homer?  Are they the same, or are there differences?  If differences, why/to what effect?  We will work with the central characters of Andromache in the Iliad, and Penelope in the Odyssey.  NOTE: Because this exercise is limited in scope, focus only on these two characters, even if there are other examples that would aid your point: this exercise is partly about your ability to form and argue a thesis, but centrally about your ability to use primary and secondary source passages and quotes, so its scope is limited.

Primary source passages: 

Andromache:

• Iliad 6: Scene with Andromache and Hektor meeting when he takes a break from battle

• Iliad 22: Andromache’s concern about Hektor and her response to his death

• Iliad 24: Andromache’s lament at Hektor’s funeral

Penelope:

• Odyssey 2: The suitors’ description of Penelope’s trick and Penelope herself

• Odyssey 19: The extended scene where Penelope meets Odysseus in his beggar disguise

Secondary source: Women in the Poems of Homer (This will be linked as soon as it is scanned)

• Blundell, Sue.  1995.  Women in Ancient Greece.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  (or alternate citation:)

• Blundell, Sue, Women in Ancient Greece  (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995).

Thesis: You should form a thesis to arrange your arguments.  Some possibilities:

• Good wives (as exemplified in Andromache and Penelope) share similar characteristics despite very different circumstances

• The circumstances (war, waiting, fulfillment, status) determine what characteristics will appear in different good wives (as exemplified in Andromache and Penelope)

• The good wife conforms to her husband’s needs and character as portrayed in Homer

• The characteristics of a good wife are related to the characteristics of good men

• The characteristics of a good wife are the opposite of those that characterize good men

• Identify one central value that these two good wives share and explore its manifestation

• Any other approach that seems to you to emerge from the passage or passages you shoose to work with.

 Procedure:

• Review the primary sources in the light of the prompt and collect your own impressions.

• Read through the Blundell excerpt and see if there are points of view that seem to you particularly helpful in casting light on Andromache and Penelope in the primary source passages that are most interesting to you.  (Some possible arguments are listed above).

• Determine what point (of those above, or your own) will be your thesis statement, and begin with that.

• Use specific quotes from the sources to support the point.

Essay

Assignment description: A 2-3 page response to one of the prompts below, incorporating the required primary sources and two secondary sources.  You may write on one of the two topics below.  The topic descriptions contain more questions than you can possibly address in one essay, so look at these descriptions as guides for a take on the topic that your own interests, insights and preferences will determine.

Goal: To discuss your own thoughts and interpretations of primary sources, with the assistance of secondary sources in forming and supporting your argument.  (This is "step 2" in building to the research paper.)  What I want to see you do here is engage with the literature as well as supporting primary sources that you have found and/or chosen yourself.  Also central is using secondary sources more extensively, and exercising judgment about which ones work best for your purposes.  This is an essay rather than a research paper, so the research (choice of articles/book chapters) is more to find material to develop your perspective than to go deeply into a field that requires you to learn things that extend into a special field beyond the concerns of the class.

Length: 2-3 pages; I will take more if you get into it.

Due date: Tuesday, Nov. 1

Some possible resources

Topic 1: The Nature of Helen

Helen appears in a number of different texts and times, and does not always fulfill the femme fatale expectations of the “Helen of Troy” who is (in contrast to Penelope and Andromache) an unfaithful wife and destructive woman.  Compare the depictions of Helen in the Iliad, the Odyssey, and Euripides’ Helen.  Does she show consistent characteristics in these very different portrayals? Are there significant differences?  In what ways does she shape the narrative of each (i.e. how does the story change or develop when she is in it)?  Do you get a sense of the “nature of Helen” from these different portrayals?  In what ways do these three portrayals work together to form a vision of Helen, contradicions and all?  And a speculation: what does it mean when a character such as Helen is rewritten?

Materials:

For this essay, you should use:

• The texts of the Iliad, Odyssey, and Euripides’ Helen

• Two articles or book chapters, one that deals with Helen in one of the works above (centrally, or as part of a broader discussion), and another that deals with Helen in Greek society (again, centrally, or as part of a broader discussion).

• Additional primary sources from Theoi.com that will provide background material and other illumination for your treatment of the main texts

Topic 2: Being an Becoming a Man (Or Not)

We have read a number of texts in which young men feature: Telemachos in the Odyssey, Hippolytos in Euripides’ play, Pentheus in the Bacchae (and even Dionysos in the same play).  Telemachos has a successful “coming of age,” but the other humans do not survive to achieve maturity and/or balance.  So: Are there consistent difficulties young men face when they are at the verge of adulthood, or are the differences dominant in these three?  Clearly they are in very different situations – to what extent does this determine their path to maturity/failure to reach it?  What distinguishes Telemachos from the other two?  Why does he succeed where they fail?  Are there underlying “lessons” about coming of age in these different stories, or are the situations so specific that the “lessons” are more varied than united?  (If you want to add Dionysos into the mix, go ahead.)

Materials: 

For this essay, you should use:

• The texts of the Odyssey, Hippolytos, and Bacchae

• Two articles and/or book chapters, one that deals with one of the specific works studied, and one that deals with another or with ideas of coming of age (in Greek literature, literature as a whole, or human societies in general, i.e. literary or anthropological or specific to Greek culture).

• Additional materials on the three young men, or on others suggested by the secondary sources, from Theoi.com, for comparison and context

General Requirements:

• An opening paragraph that contains an effective thesis statement and some indicaiton of how and/or with what perspectives you will argue it

• Quotes from the primary source texts under consideration, integrated into the text, and/or quotes at a little more length and interpreted

• References and/or quotes from the secondary sources you use

• A conclusion that fulfills the thesis statement, in which the arguments you have used throughout the paper come together to make an ultimate point.  A breeze, of course.

Research Paper

Assignment Description: A 5-6 page paper, with a topic on or centrally involving  works of Greek and/or Roman literature.  It should incorporate research that goes beyond the material of the class.  It should show awareness of and ability to apply as interpretive tools the ideas and perspectives covered in class.

Goal: To explore an aspect of Greek and/or Roman  literature in a way that delves into such elements as its central themes and vartiations, culural background, relation to other literatures, using research skills in primary and secondary sources to ground your observations.  This assignment is aimed at develping your ability to frame a topic effectively, pursue its potentials into a series of "questions" and points your can make in depth and effectively integrate in 5-6 pages, and support your points with both primary and secondary sources.

Draft due date: Tuesday, Nov. 22.  Drafts are optional, but I have observed that students who turn in a draft and incorporate my critique are typically able to raise their grade by 1/2  to 1 1/2 letter grades.  Drafts turned in by Nov. 22 will receive a detailed critique and be returned by Nov.  29.  I will be happy to look at or discuss drafts or partial drafts after Nov. 22 but don't promise a detailed critique.  At any time prior to the paper's due date, I am willing to discuss framing the topic, research resources, arguing your thesis, and so on.  I strongly advise students to consult me  in person (before or after class, during office hours, or in appointments) for guidance about the topic they intend to work on.

Due date: Thursday, Dec. 8 (Reading day) by 5:00 pm; turn in papers to LH 273 (my office, to me or under the door if I am not there) or in my mailbox (go through the Foreign Languages and Literatures main office upstairs in LH, go through the back door, adn turn to the left, where the faculty mail boxes are).

Topic:  Of your choosing.  The stipulations are:

• It should be on a topic that includes use of some (or at least one) of the texts we have studied this semester

• It should include primary sources that we have not specifically studied this semester

• It should incorporate ideas specific to Greek and/or Roman culture that we have discussed this semester (e.g. hubris, katharsis, etc.)

• It should include at least three academic secondary sources

NOTE:  In writing this paper, assume a level of familiarity with the course material and concepts that your fellow students have.  You do not need to narrate plots at length; you can allude to plot structures in an introductory way, and bring in/contextualize details in the course of your arguments.

Examples:

All of these have more questions than a research paper of this length can possibly answer, but they provide a range of ideas that might go into a more focused project, and suggest the ways in which you could make connections with ideas and literature that we have been working with.  They’re models for where you might begin in seeking the connections and issues that would allow you to make an original and interesting approach to issues in Greek and Roman literature.  Note: these are not prompts but if they get you thinking on the topic, feel free to run with it. 

• Expressions of love in lyric poetry.  We have seen Sappho and Archilochos – what about other poets?  Is love always romantic?  In what ways does it reflect conflict, and the idea of pursuer and pursued?  To what extent does hostility play into expressions of love?   Additional reading would be in other Greek lyric poets and the secondary sources you might use would be on love and sexuality in the Greek world, lyric poetry in Greece, and/or specific poets and their treatment of love.  If you wanted, you could look at love poetry in Roman culture and rather than focus only on Greek, compare the two, and/or focus on a Greek and a Roman poet.

• Hubris in drama and history.  Herodotus describes a hubristic person in Croesus, and we have seen this theme in various plays.  What other instances of hubris are there in Herodotus?  Are there any in Thucydides?  Are there some dramas that parallel these particularly well (esp. one of the ones we have read)?  Are the ideas and playing out of hubris in history the same as those of drama? Some secondary sources you might consult are works on this theme in Greek literature in general, or in one or several of the primary sources, or comparisons of the shared themes of history and drama, or comparisons of history and drama more generally.

• Suicide in Greek and Roman life and literature.  We have seen the suicide of Aias in Greek tragedy, which is uncharacteristic as a man does it.  There are any number of suicides by women (we’ve read Phaedra’s, and there are many others).  There are also the Roman suicides of Antonius and Cleopatra.  What are the cultural differences between Greek and Roman views of suicide?  How do these play out in the literature of both cultures (including history) and how do the genres of literature affect the ways in which suicide is portrayed?  How do gender differences play into it?  Some primary sources might be other plays in which suicide plays a role, or Roman literature desribing other suicides.  Secondary source readings might discuss the issue of suicide in one or more of the primary sources, discuss suicide as a theme in Greek and/or Roman cultures, or look at suicide as a cross-cultural phenomenon.

Using Quotes

This example is part of a discussion of the relationship of Akhilleus and Partoklos (i.e. it has a thesis statement but the argument is only begun).

Comment: The ideas in both examples are essentially the same.  The second example, though, uses quotes to illustrate central points, which makes the narrative more complex and evocative, and brings out specific ways of stating and understanding the issues that are not as clear in a simple narrative.  The second example also contains an analysis of the longer quote, pointing out specific ideas and images that the passage raises, which is far more effective than expecting the passage to speak for itself.

Example 1

The relationship of Akhilleus and Patroklos in the Iliad seems to have a number of different aspects, but central to all of them is the way in which each provides something the other lacks.  When we see Patroklos in the Embassy to Akhilleus in Iliad 9, they compliment each other in ways that show Patroklos in a passive, secondary status.  He serves the visitors dinner and stays silent, only providing moral support for whatever Akhilleus wants.  On the other hand, Akhilleus is obviously the leader and decision maker, and his concerns and status are clearly primary, as Akhilleus speaks about his hurt pride, lack of natural enmity toward the Trojans, and longing to be home.  In addition to their leader/supporter roles, they also have opposite (and complementary) personalities: While Akhilleus appears self-involved, concerned primarily with his honor and power in warfare, we see Patroklos as kind-hearted and popular, as when he helps the wounded Machaon or when he is mourned by Briseis for his kindness to her.    After his death, we learn that he was actually sent to Troy as a stabilizing supporter for Akhilleus, as an older, steadier guide for a headstrong young warrior.  On the other hand, we also see him as a fierce warrior in book 16, one who could (under other circumstances) be a fitting companion for Akhilleus in heroic warfare, though even there you could assume they would be complimentary, with Patroklos following Akhilleus’ lead.

Thomas van Nortwick suggests that Patroklos should really be seen as Akhilleus’ alter ego, a "second self,"  defining the second self as "a vehicle for exploring the pain and rewards of knowing and learning to live with our imperfect selves [and achieving] a more integrated existence"  (ix). In this reading, Patroklos would be seen as a manifestation of what Akhilleus lacks -- the things that would complete him as a person.   This idea gives insight into why Akhilleus is so devastated when Patroklos is killed.  He has lost a part of himself, and it is the kind and merciful part.  Even before he goes on his killing frenzy, he loses all perspective: 

I’d send our soldiers into action now

unfed and and hungry.  Have a feast, I’d say,

at sundown, when our shame has been avenged! 

Before that, for my part I will not swallow

food or drink – my dear friend being dead,

lying before my eyes … Y

our concerns are none of mine. 

Slaughter and blood are what I crave, and groans

of anguished men!

So it is no surprise that with his kinder half gone, he loses all mercy in his killing spree.

Example 2

The relationship of Akhilleus and Patroklos in the Iliad seems to have a number of different aspects, but central to all of them is the way in which each provides something the other lacks.  When we see Patroklos in the Embassy to Akhilleus in Iliad 9, they compliment each other in ways that show Patroklos in a passive, secondary status, serving the guests, as Akhilleus tells him,  “put out an ampler wine-bowl … Patroklos did as his companion bade him”  (Il. 9:245-248).  He stays silent, only providing moral support for whatever Akhilleus wants.  On the other hand, Akhilleus is obviously the leader and decision maker, and his concerns and status are clearly primary, as Akhilleus speaks about his hurt pride, lack of natural enmity toward the Trojans, and longing to be home.  In addition to their leader/supporter roles, they also have opposite (and complementary) personalities: While Akhilleus appears self-involved, concerned primarily with his honor and power in warfare, we see Patroklos as kind-hearted and popular.  Although he is on his way to give Akhilleus counsel from Nestor, he cannot turn his back on the wounded Machaon: “Not for all that would I neglect or fail you, badly hurt as you are” (Il. 11: 960-961).  After his death, Briseis mourns him: “Patroklos, very dear, most dear to me …Now I must mourn your death forever, who were ever gentle” (Il. 19: 317-318, 329-330).  Menelaus urges his friends to remember Patroklos and his “warmth of heart.  He ahd a way of being kind to all in life” (Il. 17: 757-759).  As Nestor reminds Patroklos in Il. 11: 907-912, “He [Akhilleus] is more powerful, but your part should be/to let him hear close reasonaing and counsel, even commands.  He will be swayed by you/ for his good.”  On the other hand, we also see Patroklos as a fierce warrior in book 16, one who could (under other circumstances) be a fitting companion for Akhilleus in heroic warfare, though even there you could assume they would be complimentary, with Patroklos following Akhilleus’ lead.

Thomas van Nortwick suggests that Patroklos should really be seen as Akhilleus’ alter ego, a "second self,"  defining the second self as "a vehicle for exploring the pain and rewards of knowing and learning to live with our imperfect selves [and achieving] a more integrated existence"  (ix).  In this reading, Patroklos would be seen as a manifestation of what Akhilleus lacks -- the things that would complete him as a person.   This idea gives insight into why Akhilleus is so devastated when Patroklos is killed.  He has lost a part of himself, and it is the kind and merciful part.  Even before he goes on his killing frenzy, he loses all perspective:

I’d send our soldiers into action now

unfed and and hungry.  Have a feast, I’d say,

at sundown, when our shame has been avenged! 

Before that, for my part I will not swallow

food or drink – my dear friend being dead,

lying before my eyes …

Your concerns are none of mine. 

Slaughter and blood are what I crave, and groans

of anguished men! (Il. 19:227-228;234-6)

He doesn't even acknowledge what other people need (food and drink); he is focusing on the shame he feels for Patroklos’ death, which he knows is his fault; he is completely focused on vengeance to the exclusion of everything else.  Just as when he withdrew from battle, he is thinking of his own loss and his own honor, and when he denies that the Greeks’ concerns are not his, he shows the same focus on his own necessities that caused him to withdraw from battle.  At the same time, he is completely focused on revenge.  He does not even care about his own physical needs.  With Patroklos’ death, he has lost the part of himself that makes him a full person, and all that is left is his single-minded focus on revenge.  So it is no surprise that with his kinder half gone, he loses all mercy in his killing spree.

Citing Sources

In work done for this class, you may use the method of citing sources that is used in your primary discipline (1.e. footnotes or parenthetical citiations).  Both are used in Classical Studies, although parenthetical citations are becoming more common.  BUT:

There is a standard way of citing Classical primary sources parenthetically, unlike other forms of citation, which you must follow when you use them in your paper.  This method is detailed at UNC-Chapel Hill's IAM site.

For a general guide on citing this and other kinds of sources, see Haverford College's Guide to Citing Sources in Classics.

Some specifics:

• Theoi.com:  In the text of your paper, parenthetically cite the author, work, and location of the quote/reference in the ancient text (provided with each entry).  In the Works Cited, list the ancient author and work, then add “Quoted at [URL].  Accessed [date].”  (Obviously, you insert the URL and the date  J. )

•  Complete texts online: In the text, cite the ancient author and work, and to the best of your information, the location of the quote/reference in the ancient text.  In the Works Cited, list the author and text.  Add, “Trans. [translator’s name].  [URL].  Accessed [date].”

Rubric For Papers

This is an extensive rubric, but it expresses the elements I use in assessing papers.  Some of the elements are more for research papers (the last 2 especially) but most apply to all three written assignments.  Every paper is not the same and excellence can be achieved in different ways, so the rubric is primarily a guide for what I consider excellent, unaccaptable, and everything in between.  For the Source and Citation Exercise and the Essay, you will receive detailed comments that reflect the concerns of the rubric rather than the rubric itself.  Because it is so near the end of term, for the Research Paper, you will get only the rubric with a few comments, though if you request them, I will give you detailed comments.   (If you want them, leave me a copy of the paper and an email request for comments and I will email you the comments).