The Iliad and the Odyssey

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.Note: I wrote the above review 10 years ago about Chapman's Iliad specifically. His Odyssey continues the tale of Troy but through the adventures of Odysseus (rather than Achilles) in a fascinating drama of returning home under disguise to retake his kingdom by stealth from usurpers! The Odyssey was written, we figure, when Homer was about a quarter of a century older and wiser, and this seems to be reflected in the more introspective and deeper life-reflective nature of the tale he tells. Interestingly, Chapman switches to iambic pentameter (the metre preferred by Chaucer and Shakespeare) for this one. Just like as for Homer himself, Chapman was "older and wiser" when making his translation of the Odyssey, and so there is a parallell maturization that happens in the translator to that which happened in the original composer of the Greek poem. Chapman's Odyssey reads to me a lot like a play... which is probably not to be marvelled at since Chapman was a successful playwright, and the original Odyssey was written to be performed in front of an audience. I do read Ancient Greek by the way, and have read both of Homer's poems in the original language for my own enjoyment. I prefer reading Chapman's versions. Why? As I have read said of other translators of other works, Chapman "has made a classic of a classic!" As far as I am concerned Chapman's Homer is the best work of literature written in our language during the entire Renaissance period! He adds value to the original poems with added craftsmanship and decoration.This last point may seem a bit random, but as a big fan of Norse and Anglo-Saxon literature, I am also enthralled by Champan's extensive use of what I think I could call kennings, being little riddles, a kind of circumlocution, to replace more direct, simpler expressions or words. He was aware that readers might take notice of this, and that it does mark a departure from the directness of the original - this is indicated in his own commentary on his translations. He defends this by mentioning that others have done this too. The reason for using these circumlocutions (which I'm happy to call kennings myself!) is to satisfy the demands of metre, of rhyme, and to make more use of literary devices than would otherwise be the case; in other words for exactly the same kind of reasons as for the old Norse and Anglo-Saxon use of kennings. These circumlocutions are fun little puzzles to solve as you read the poem, and definitely encourage multiple readings to truly master them!

Arrived in good conditionIt's a great bookChapman's verse translationBuy itIt worth the price

The only down side to these books is it use the Roman names for the gods but otherwise great book. And a shout out to the seller book depository been buying from them a long time.

seiten sind leider nicht alle fest im buch und fallen raus

Chapman's translation of Homer is unique in my experience. I've read Homer translated into modern English, and while it was an equally good translation to this it had none of the rhyme and fluidity that this has. You feel more connected to the original feel of the story. This is strongly recommended for anyone who enjoys reading classical literature.