THE GIFT. ή μεγάλα χάρις How much more precious doth a treasure seem To shine in grace and beauty more complete, And 'mid affection's treasures there to shine. And oft as I with happy steps repair To the sweet calm of sober memory's cell, So when to ruder scenes I hear thee call, Σ. HELEN OF ARGOS. THE modern conceptions of Helen of Argos are much distorted by the post-Homeric representations of her character. If we mistake not, the common idea of her is, that she was nothing better than a beautiful, but wicked voluptuary, an utterly worthless and abandoned woman. She is regarded as far inferior in virtue to the unresisting victim of David's passion; deserving of severer condemnation than that which Mr. Froude passes on Mary, Queen of Scots; more wicked than Guinevere, Queen of Arthur of Britain. And certainly, if she is looked upon as she is represented (or rather mis-represented) by those authors who followed Homer, and who handled his beautiful creations so sacrilegiously, she can only fill the mind with disgust. But if she is taken as Homer has drawn her, we venture to think she will appear in a far different light, and that her character, as depicted by the father of Epic Poetry, will be seen to be (as Mr. Gladstone proudly writes)* "a production never surpassed by the mind or hand of man. We need scarcely apologise for the introduction of such a subject (uninteresting as it may appear to some) to the readers of The Eagle. "The pride and ample pinion" of the gallant bird who can look with undazzled eye On that fierce light which beats upon a throne will not fail him when he hears the thunder of the flood of music of him "who, for us at least, is no shadowy symbol; but a man of flesh and blood, endowed with individual character, all-embracing sympathies and surpassing genius."‡ Homer and the Homeric Age, vol. 1., p. 571. † See the first article of the last number, p. 193. Worsley's Translation of the Odyssey, vol. 1., Preface. Let it be noted broadly in the outset that Homer, when he gives a distinguishing epithet to the name of Helen, generally uses one that is honourable. This fact, combined with the interpretation of her very name, Helen, furnishes the key to the general estimation which he wishes to be formed of her character. Although Eschylus, with a scathing play on her name, calls her ἑλέναυς ἑλεπτόλις, yet the more honourable signification of "attractive" may with far more justice be derived from it. Then, to say nothing of the titles of highborn,' daughter of Zeus,' excellent or flower of women,' 'white-armed'' with beautiful figure,' &c., the epithet of the Argive' is given to her in the Iliad no less than thirteen times. Is it, we would ask, too much to infer that, by this epithet, the bard wished to express the unanimous sympathy and the national pride felt by all the Greeks for her? Could she be a worthless and abandoned woman, "an unprincipled votary of sensual enjoyment, selfwilled and petulant," who could draw to her the hearts as the heart of one man," of all " and be the Lode-star of the warriors of Hellas? It must have been something more than her divine beauty which could make jealous states unite to undertake her rescue, and to endure the horrors of a ten years' siege in a foreign land, Only to avenge the longings and the groans of Helena.* Let us not be misunderstood. We are not contending that Homer represents her as, by any means, a perfect character; but that he does not make her that wicked and heartless creature which later writers generally regard her. We say, generally: for there is one who panegyrises her; but the encomium of Isocrates is more dishonouring than the curses of Euripides, or the blind injustice of Virgil. The Helen of Homer is a sinner doubtless, but a victim more sinned against than sinning;" a penitent, though not a saint; a noble, but weak woman: who, like two at * Τίσασθαι Ελένης όρμήματα τε στοναχάς τε. "According to the direct and natural construction, the Greeks made war to avenge the wrong she had suffered, and the groans which that wrong had drawn from her. And it is to be observed that this line (Iliad, ii. 590) is put into the mouth of Menelaus, whom it is very natural to represent as most eager to avenge the wrongs of his wife, but somewhat far-fetched to represent as thinking of revenge for the trouble of the expedition he had so keenly promoted."-Gladstone, Homer and the Homeric Age, vol. III. least of her parallels in history, bitterly atoned for the one "most unhappy act of a most unhappy life."* And it is no slight commendation of an author who represented his deities as prone to every evil lust and injustice, to acknowledge that, though far removed from the light of Revelation, he drew a character which approached most nearly to the Christian penitent. Evidently, then, the poet intended to entrust his lovely creation to the sympathies and interest of his readers; and it is to be remarked that she committed her sin under the influence of a preternatural power: an influence to which Homer never refers any deliberate crime or wickedness. Aphrodite, or some other divine agent, is always said to have led,' or 'borne,' or 'snatched,' or 'taken' her away; she never appears as a willing fugitive. Priam, Menelaus, Penelope, all acquit her, and either accuse Paris, the real cause of the unhappy war, or acknowledge the divine agency. Doubtless she might have resisted with more constancy; but she is not, as Homer draws her, faultless; and although the vanity of the young and beautiful girl in an evil hour listened to the seductive flattery of the tempter, yet it was the selfishness of the latter (the common failing of men) which caused the ruin and death of heroes, in comparison with whom he was utterly worthless. In Troy she was treated with respect, as the lawful wife of the prince; and although she complains of abusive treatment, and speaks of herself as the object of general abhorrence, yet this is, doubtless, due to, the exaggeration of her self-accusing penitence. Next, let it be noticed that she always meekly upbraids herself as the cause of all the misery. In her conversation with Priam on the walls of the city; in her reproach against Aphrodite; in her sharp but modest rebukes of Paris; in her womanly occupations and hospitality, she appears as the deeply repentant sad and noble woman; the unwilling and passive victim, the deceived but chaste wife. Who can read with indifference her beautiful lament over the body of Hector, or say that the sorrower was the worthless woman which all later writers represent her? Third among the wailing mourners fair-haired Helen took her part: "Hector, thou of all my brethren wert the dearest to my heart. The Abbot, chap. XXII. Godlike Alexander, he who brought me to the Trojan shore, Thou with stern rebukes didst chide them, dear protector, soothing me With thy gentle loving spirit and thy words breathed lovingly. Do we seem to have said too much in vindication of Helen's character? Hear the immortal lines of one assuredly entitled to all attention and veneration, on this Her loveliness with shame and with surprise Spoke slowly in her place. 'I had great beauty; ask thou not my name: 'No marvel, sovereign lady: in fair field But she with sick and scornful looks averse, To her full height her stately stature draws; My youth,' she said, "was blasted with a curse; * Whereto the other with a downward brow, I would the white cold heavy-plunging foam, |