What do you think?
Rate this book
The Iliad of Homer, The Odyssey
Copyrighted 1986, 28th Printing. Pages are clean and crisp. Binding is tight. Solid Book. Book has a gilt colored top edge and has multi-colored spine coloring with gold embossed lettering. Attractive boards composed of dual material with imitation leather around spine and part of board with the rest of the board in cloth.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 801
4 people are currently reading
1 person want to read
About the author
Samuel Butler
682 books205 followersFor the author of Hudibras, see Samuel Butler.
Samuel Butler was an iconoclastic Victorian author who published a variety of works, including the Utopian satire Erewhon and the posthumous novel The Way of All Flesh, his two best-known works, but also extending to examinations of Christian orthodoxy, substantive studies of evolutionary thought, studies of Italian art, and works of literary history and criticism. Butler also made prose translations of The Iliad and The Odyssey which remain in use to this day.
See also: Samuel H. Butcher, Anglo-Irish classicist, who also undertook prose translations of Homer's works (in collaboration with Andrew Lang.
Samuel Butler was an iconoclastic Victorian author who published a variety of works, including the Utopian satire Erewhon and the posthumous novel The Way of All Flesh, his two best-known works, but also extending to examinations of Christian orthodoxy, substantive studies of evolutionary thought, studies of Italian art, and works of literary history and criticism. Butler also made prose translations of The Iliad and The Odyssey which remain in use to this day.
See also: Samuel H. Butcher, Anglo-Irish classicist, who also undertook prose translations of Homer's works (in collaboration with Andrew Lang.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 10, 2024
This was my second reading of Homer, and my perspectives changed, a lot. Originally I hoped to read this a second time in poetic form, but I decided to submit to the chosing of Britannica, and read Samuel Butler's prose translation again. The language is good. I completely understand why some find it stuffy or dated, but as a well versed KJV reader I didn't find it difficult.
The Illiad really surprised me. A first reading can be overwhelming, with lots of seemingly mindless scenes of slaughter, and genealogical stories that are really hard to care about. This time around, I was able to pay more attention to the characters I knew mattered, and got lots of new insights. The Illiad is a story of heroes, and even more heroic heros. Which can feel redundant. But all the characters are finely woven together, foiling and supporting each other in surprisingly sophisticated ways. There isn't character development per say, more like character revelations, as each hero finds his fate. The story is told interwoven with a narrative of the gods on Mount Olympus, who often behave more humanly than the heroes. I really enjoyed The Illiad a second time.
The Odyssey was a little less enthusing. I think its overall plot is much more accessible, which is maybe why it yields less to a second reading. The story of Odysseus making his way home through might and craft it a good mythological thriller, but left me with less reflection. In summary. I look forward to reading Homer again in maybe another decade or so, and hope it will satisfy again
The Illiad really surprised me. A first reading can be overwhelming, with lots of seemingly mindless scenes of slaughter, and genealogical stories that are really hard to care about. This time around, I was able to pay more attention to the characters I knew mattered, and got lots of new insights. The Illiad is a story of heroes, and even more heroic heros. Which can feel redundant. But all the characters are finely woven together, foiling and supporting each other in surprisingly sophisticated ways. There isn't character development per say, more like character revelations, as each hero finds his fate. The story is told interwoven with a narrative of the gods on Mount Olympus, who often behave more humanly than the heroes. I really enjoyed The Illiad a second time.
The Odyssey was a little less enthusing. I think its overall plot is much more accessible, which is maybe why it yields less to a second reading. The story of Odysseus making his way home through might and craft it a good mythological thriller, but left me with less reflection. In summary. I look forward to reading Homer again in maybe another decade or so, and hope it will satisfy again
September 4, 2025
The Iliad by Homer
One of the surprising points is that this story of the battle between the walls of Troy and the sea ends before the Trojan Horse leads to victory and before the death of Achilles. This Great Books version is not in Greek and not in verse, so the greatness of the poem as poetry is not something I can comment on. I found it quite interesting for its picture of how the Greek world thought about war and the values it ascribed to its heroes and its gods. I suppose today someone would label the ethos of the work as unmixed toxic masculinity. The heroes in the work, i.e. the leaders of the tribes, are motivated to fight by such things as plunder of the dead, renown for their fighting ability, revenge for slights to friends or honor, and the honor of being first. The greatest of the heroes, as Homer tells it, is Achilles. Achilles who goes off in a sulk and refuses to fight because Agamemnon took his war prize, the beautiful Briseis. Later Agamemnon needs Achilles, who is the best fighter, to have any chance of success against Hector and the fighters of Troy. Achilles returns to the fight to revenge a friend who died while he sat out. Many Greeks died while Achilles stayed in his tent. Finally, he comes out and kills the clearly more noble Hector, dragging his body back and forth in front of the walls of Troy. (Later he returns the body to Priam, Hector's father and promises to mourn for 12 days, noble Hector.) Involved in the battle as wild cards and fickle forces of fate--from the human perspective--the gods pick sides in the battle and some support the Greeks and others the Trojans. Sometimes Gods even join the fight, but mostly they offer support or hinderance to each side as part of the politics among themselves. The gods were not any better in intelligence (though crafty) or morals than the humans. They are just as motivated by such emotions as pride and revenge as the humans. The gods take sides in the war and support one side or interfere with the other as suits their whims. They have favorites among the humans and some of the fighters are half-god/half-humans, like Achilles, and some of the gods even take the field in the battle. The portrait of heroism offered in the Iliad is quite different from the heroes of today. In some ways the themes are themes we will see, but the sense of what is admirable is quite different. We are looking at a culture that was pre-Christian, and we can see how very different it was, at least in the values of those who were involved with reading and writing sagas of battle circa 750 BCE.
One of the surprising points is that this story of the battle between the walls of Troy and the sea ends before the Trojan Horse leads to victory and before the death of Achilles. This Great Books version is not in Greek and not in verse, so the greatness of the poem as poetry is not something I can comment on. I found it quite interesting for its picture of how the Greek world thought about war and the values it ascribed to its heroes and its gods. I suppose today someone would label the ethos of the work as unmixed toxic masculinity. The heroes in the work, i.e. the leaders of the tribes, are motivated to fight by such things as plunder of the dead, renown for their fighting ability, revenge for slights to friends or honor, and the honor of being first. The greatest of the heroes, as Homer tells it, is Achilles. Achilles who goes off in a sulk and refuses to fight because Agamemnon took his war prize, the beautiful Briseis. Later Agamemnon needs Achilles, who is the best fighter, to have any chance of success against Hector and the fighters of Troy. Achilles returns to the fight to revenge a friend who died while he sat out. Many Greeks died while Achilles stayed in his tent. Finally, he comes out and kills the clearly more noble Hector, dragging his body back and forth in front of the walls of Troy. (Later he returns the body to Priam, Hector's father and promises to mourn for 12 days, noble Hector.) Involved in the battle as wild cards and fickle forces of fate--from the human perspective--the gods pick sides in the battle and some support the Greeks and others the Trojans. Sometimes Gods even join the fight, but mostly they offer support or hinderance to each side as part of the politics among themselves. The gods were not any better in intelligence (though crafty) or morals than the humans. They are just as motivated by such emotions as pride and revenge as the humans. The gods take sides in the war and support one side or interfere with the other as suits their whims. They have favorites among the humans and some of the fighters are half-god/half-humans, like Achilles, and some of the gods even take the field in the battle. The portrait of heroism offered in the Iliad is quite different from the heroes of today. In some ways the themes are themes we will see, but the sense of what is admirable is quite different. We are looking at a culture that was pre-Christian, and we can see how very different it was, at least in the values of those who were involved with reading and writing sagas of battle circa 750 BCE.
March 10, 2024
I appreciate it for what it is
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews