Customer Reviews

Chapman's Homer: The Iliad

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Keats made it famous, but few today read George Chapman's masterful translation of the Iliad. It is to be hoped that this Princeton edition will make this elegant translation more accessible. As in the works of Shakespeare, the archaic brand of English utilized by Chapman takes some getting used to. It is well worth the effort, however. This translation has a music and vitality missing from many later efforts. The introduction to this edition gets it right in advising readers to move fast through the text. It will prove surprisingly easy to comprehend if one avoids slogging through, and though many of the words are oddly spelled, their pronunciation is the same as in contemporary English. Highly recommended.

George Chapman created many hundreds of words (mainly from Latin and Greek, and some from the Romance languages) that we still use today, like abet, fume, respectful, surprised, hearers, thirsted, opposed, savage, shady, shrill (etc, etc, etc), and some we do not, like revoluble, scoptical, ruffinous, superficies, unrac't. His accomplishment stands atop the pile of English epic poetry as Shakespeare's stands atop the pile of dramatic works, as greatest in its domain. No other rendering of Homer's poems in English is as rich and full of poetic artifice. He is the Vergil of English Homeric translators! (Hahaha - this comment would insult all three poets I'm quite sure!) His work was massively important in its day, for a century and a half, until Pope's version arrived on the scene. Unfortunately, Chapman is overshadowed nowadays by Spencer and Shakespeare, in surveys of Early Modern English literature, since their works are wholly original, and his are based on old Greek originals. But, this is unfair, since he makes great poems better, and Homer's work is already of the very best order to begin with - so you can only guess where this places Chapman's rank! (Better than best???) Spectacular stuff! Is there something wrong with me that I am so in love with Chapman's particular rendering of the Iliad? Well, if it's sinful, I'll take my risks! His verse is absolutely addictive!

Chapman's rendition of the Iliad was done at a time when life was not very much different from Homer's time. The chief pleasure - after his powerful iambic heptameter rhythm, sonorous accented alliteration (resembling or descended from Old and Middle English alliterative verse), internal line rhyme, homonyms, and the guaranteed heroic coupled end-of-line rhyme, which poetic qualities I love more than those of any other translator of Homer - in reading Chapman's translation rather than a more recent rendering is its utter lack of any terms or turns of phrase that conjure up the modern world. Keep in mind that Pope, Chapman's great rival, wrote in a much more modern age.) Chapman's diction and grammar take us back to the pre-industrial world. Soldiers in Chapman's day (including himself, as he was a soldier who fought in the Netherlands) like those of Achilles' still used shields, spears, helmets, swords and even bows. Another great pleasure in reading Chapman's Iliad is its foundational influence on our language and thought as English speakers. It was only at his time that reading was becoming an activity that a significant part of the population engaged in. Due to enthusiasm for books in English, and I don't doubt that the defeat of the Spanish in 1588 gave impetus for nationalism in literature the way that the victory over the Persians at Thermopylae did for the Greeks, we see authors rising to fill the need: Chapman, Shakespeare, Spencer, the Bible translators and so forth. What the King James Bible is to English prose, Chapman's Iliad is to English poetry. It is the first and arguably best full translation into English of the Western world's arguably first and best poem. And, what marks this book off as fashionable, even today, is the fact that the tale of the Iliad is still as well known in our own time as it was in Chapman's.

This is a truly great work that can only be experienced in our own language. You can't read Chapman's Homer in any language but English. And it IS Chapman's Homer. Chapman, like every poetic translator, cannot merely translate, but rather improves upon and interprets, and as such he takes Greek warriors and turns them into early 17th Century English ones. I happen to find the English Renaissance period fascinating, and I don't mind at all when archer's casques become morion helmets or when logs become footballs. Mixing one great classical period with another's (Greece's with Elizabethan England's) is just beautiful. The poem reminds me of the 16th and 17th Century tapestries hung in famous castles in Europe depicting scenes from classical literature but where the clothing and items shown betray their makers' time and place. It is like the cannons firing in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. Chapman moralizes Achilles. This is fascinating, since perhaps the violent Dark Ages of Greece would have indeed seen the selfish, brooding and brutal Achilles as a hero worthy of emulation; in their system of morality, a star. Many ancient commentators whom Chapman had read (and translates the relevant passages of some of) agree. Chapman tries to excuse the more repulsive actions of Achilles with margin glosses. Chapman of course expands even further on this moralizing by toning up the passages that hint at the promotion of temperance and moderation and toning down those that seem to show extremes of passion in those characters he feels are not supposed to show them. But this is all part of the charm of the poem Chapman has written for us. Crying tearfully and wailing meant things different to Dark Age Greeks than they did to Elizabethan and Stuart Gentlemen and Ladies. To the Ancient pre-Classical Greeks, apparently, tears, at least among heroic characters, were ways of displaying emotional sincerity and concern, whereas to the polite society of Chapman's time they represented weakness and lack of self-control. I don't mind one bit that Chapman has translated the poem culturally too, and not only linguistically. Do we not even do this with holy scripture in our own day? Are not Biblical and Quranic (and other holy books') passages reinterpreted to do away with ancient customs we can no longer tolerate? It is to Chapman's salubrious credit that he is able to paraphrase and interpret to make Homeric life fit English mores. Thus, we have a poem for our enjoyment that is both Classical Greek and Classical English at once!

A short word is needed about using rhyme in translating Homer when Homer didn't use it himself. In my opinion, Greek and Latin were both filled with sonorous rhyme anyways as a fundamental part of their language. They used vowel sounds to represent grammatical meanings, so rhyme was part and parcel of every phrase. English is much more consonantal and thus perhaps to an unappreciative ear, much more dissonant or less melodious. If you look at Beowulf, you will notice the great dependence on consonantal alliteration to generate congruence of sound. This shows the desire to do artificially what the Greek and Latin languages did naturally. The human ear likes consonance in sound. Interestingly, Chapman too makes very much use of alliteration and where he can makes play of homonyms, internal rhymes, and consonance (whether alliterative or rhyming) expanding through two or several lines. Given that the line used is heptameter, the rhymes function as sonorous cadences in our reading and do not feel overused at all, unlike the way they may sound in poems of shorter line. Chapman remarks in his commentary on his work that English is a noble language in its own right with its own poetic forms and charms, the best of modern European languages for poetry. With this confidence in his quarrel he deftly chooses his words and their order like the finest craftsmen of other arts. This poem is one of our cultural icons as English speakers, reprinted continuously since first written, and, like the works of Shakespeare, will always remain at the forefront of our consciousness.

A note on reading it: I recommend reading it aloud, pausing at the end of each line, and feeling the iambic rhythm gently, without putting any extra emphasis on it (since it already is quite powerful as is.) Notice and enjoy the vast array of poetic decoration he weaves into the poem's beautiful tapestry. Thank goodness this poem is written in modern English and it is still fully comprehensible! If our language had changed significantly since his time, we wouldn't be able to enjoy it to the same extent. Although, it is in great part because of the enduring popularity of Chapman and his Elizabethan-Jacobean contemporaries' works that our language has not changed much - their works have remained models for writing and speech ever since. Since this book is a poem, it is re-readable over and over. As well as you may get to know the story, the intricacy of the poetic artistry will keep you enthralled forever.

My favorite line in Chapman's translation of the ILIAD: '...they saw the powre of beautie in the Queene ascend.' This was when Helen came to the wall to see the battle and was approaching the elders who were, despite their age, left a little breathless... The line not only demonstrates the poetry of the Chapman translation but it also demonstrates that much of the poetry is Chapman's own and not Homer's. You'll not find that line (or anything like it) in other translations. Perhaps it was there 'between the lines' in the original.....in which case great, poetic translations of Homer's epics (read Pope, Chapman) would be mandatory for anybody who wants to experience all of Homer in English (to the extent, obviously, that that's possible...) Now for an edition of Chapman's ODYSSEY...

I can't compare this edition to other editions of Chapman. Having read Pope and Rouse, I will say that neither is like Chapman. He lacks Pope's refinement of language, eschews the couplet, and is bluntly merciless in his views of earlier translators (expressed in copious translator's notes). Pope displays the mantle of civilization; Chapman reveals the gut and muscle that propels it. And Rouse is prose not poetry, so conveys the plot and the air of epic, but not the force that must have been evident in the original. So if you went to the trouble of finding this book here, and are not burdened with numerous other editions, you will enjoy it. At the price, it's real cheap entertainment.

With many books, translations are negligible, with two obvious exceptions, one is the Bible, and surprisingly the other is The Iliad. Each translation can give a different insight and feel to the story. Everyone will have a favorite. I have several.

For example:

"Rage--Goddess, sing the rage of Peleus' son Achilles,
Murderous, doomed, that cost the Achaeans countless losses,
hurling down to the House of Death so many souls,
great fighters' souls. But made their bodies carrion,
feasts for dogs and birds,
and the will of Zeus was moving towards its end.
Begin, Muse, when the two first broke and clashed,
Agamemnon lord of men and brilliant Achilles."
-Translated by Robert Fagles, 1990

"Sing, O Goddess, the anger of Achilles, son of Peleus, that brought countless ills upon the Achaeans. Many a brave soul did it send hurrying down to Hades, and many a heroes did it yield a prey to dogs and vultures for so were the counsels of Zeus fulfilled from the day on which the son of Atreus, king of men, and great Achilles first fell out with one another."
-Translated by Samuel Butler, 1888

"Rage:
Sing, Goddess, Achilles' rage,
Black and murderous, that cost the Greeks
Incalculable pain pitched countless souls
Of heroes into Hades' dark,
And let their bodies rot as feasts
For dogs and birds, as Zeus' will was done.
Begin with the clash between Agamemnon--
The Greek Warlord--and godlike Achilles."
-Translated by Stanley Lombardo, 1997

"Anger be now your song, immortal one,
Akhilleus' anger, doomed and ruinous,
that caused the Akhaians loss on bitter loss
and crowded brave souls into the undergloom,
leaving so many dead men--carrion
for dogs and birds; and the will of Zeus was done.
Begin it when the two men first contending
broke with one another--
the Lord Marshal Agamémnon, Atreus' son, and Prince Akhilleus."
-Translated by Translated by Robert Fitzgerald, 1963

"Sing, goddess, the anger of Peleus' son of Achilleus and its devastation, which puts pains thousandfold upon the Achains,
hurled in the multitudes to the house of Hades strong souls of heroes, but gave their bodies to be the delicate feasting of dogs, of all birds, and the will of Zeus was accomplished since that time when first there stood the division of conflict Atrecus' son the lord of men and brilliant Achilleus."
-Translated by Richmond Lattimore, 1951

"Sing, goddess, of Peleus' son Achilles' anger, ruinous, that caused the Greeks untold ordeals, consigned to Hades countless valiant souls, heroes, and left their bodies prey for dogs or feast for vultures. Zeus's will was done from when those two first quarreled and split apart, the king, Agamemnon, and matchless Achilles."
-Translated by Herbert Jordan, 2008

"An angry man-there is my story: the bitter rancor of Achillês, prince of the house of Peleus, which brought a thousand troubles upon the Achaian host. Many a strong soul it sent down to Hadês, and left the heroes themselves a prey to the dogs and carrion birds, while the will of God moved on to fulfillment."
-Translated and transliterated by W.H.D. Rouse, 1950

"Achilles' wrath, to Greece the direful spring
Of woes unnumber'd, heavenly goddess, sing!
That wrath which hurl'd to Pluto's gloomy reign
The souls of mighty chiefs untimely slain;
Whose limbs unburied on the naked shore,
Devouring dogs and hungry vultures tore.
Since great Achilles and Atrides strove,
Such was the sovereign doom,
and such the will of Jove!"
-Translated by Alexander Pope, 1720

"Achilles sing, O Goddess! Peleus' son;
His wrath pernicious, who ten thousand woes
Caused to Achaia's host, sent many a soul
Illustrious into Ades premature,
And Heroes gave (so stood the will of Jove)
To dogs and to all ravening fowls a prey,
When fierce dispute had separated once
The noble Chief Achilles from the son
Of Atreus, Agamemnon, King of men."
-Translated by William Cowper, London 1791

Achilles' baneful wrath - resound, O goddess - that impos'd
Infinite sorrow on the Greeks, and the brave souls loos'd
From beasts heroic; sent them far, to that invisible cave*
That no light comforts; and their limbs to dogs and vultures gave:
To all which Jove's will give effect; from whom the first strife begun
Betwixt Atrides, king of men, and Thetis' godlike son*
-Translated by George Chapman, 1616

You will find that some translations are easier to read but others are easier to listen to on recordings, lectures, Kindle, and the like. If you do not see information on specific translators, it is still worth the speculation and purchase.

Our story takes place in the ninth year of the ongoing war. We get some introduction to the first nine years but they are just a background to this tale of pride, sorrow and revenge. The story will also end abruptly before the end of the war.

We have the wide conflict between the Trojans and Achaeans over a matter of pride; the gods get to take sides and many times direct spears and shields.

Although the more focused conflict is the power struggle between two different types of power. That of Achilles, son of Peleus and the greatest individual warrior and that of Agamemnon, lord of men, whose power comes form position.

We are treated to a blow by blow inside story as to what each is thinking and an unvarnished description of the perils of war and the search for Arête (to be more like Aries, God of War.)

Troy - The Director's Cut [Blu-ray]

Chapman's 1611 translation of Homer is probably the best that's been done into English, and this edition is well designed and printed. BUT Chapman can't be read without a glossary -- he invented literally hundreds of words and has special meanings for hundreds more. The academic num-nums that put this stupid Bollingen edition together gave absolutely no indication in 600 pages of text as to which words are defined in the glossary -- not a footnote, not an asterisk, nothing. Your choice is to look up virtually every one of the hundreds of thousands of words of text to see if it's in the glossary, or just to read blindly on knowing that you're probably missing 50 percent of the meaning of the text. Someone should have lost their job over this piece of university nonsense.