THE SCAR OF ULYS SE S
421
between desperate rebellion and hopeful expectation; his silent
obedience is extremely problematic, multi-dimensional. Such a situa–
tion as this is inconceivable for any of the Homeric heroes, whose
destiny is clearly defined and who wake every morning as if it were
the first day of their lives: their emotions, though strong, are simple
and find expression instantly.
How "of the background," in comparison, are characters like
Saul and David ! How entangled and stratified are such human re–
lations as those between David and Absalom, between David and
J oab! Any such "entanglement" of the psychological situation as
that which the story of Absalom's death and its sequel (II Samuel
18 and 19, by the so-called J ahvist) rather suggests than expresses, is
unthinkable in Homer. Here we are confronted not merely with the
psychological processes of "background"- indeed of "abysmal"–
characters, but with a purely geographical background also. For David
is absent from the battlefield; but the influence of his will and his feel–
ings continues to be effective, they work even on Joab in his rebel–
lion and disregard for the consequences of his actions; in the magni–
ficent scene with the two messengers both the physical and psycholog–
ical "background" is fully manifest, though the latter is never ex–
pressed. With this, compare, for example, how Achilles, who sends
Patroclus first to scout and then into battle, loses practically all
"presentness" so long as he is not physically present. But the most
important thing is the "many-Iayeredness" of the individual char–
acter; this is hardly to be met with in Homer, or at most in the form
of a conscious hesitation between two possible courses of action;
otherwise, in Homer, the complexity of the psychological life is
shown only in the succession and alternation of emotions; whereas the
Jewish writers are able to express the simultaneous existence of
various layers of consciousness and the conflict between them.
The Homeric poems, then, though their intellectual, linguistic,
and above all syntactical culture appear to be so much more highly
developed, are yet comparatively simple in their picture of human
beings; and no less so in their relation to the real life which they
describe in general. Delight in physical existence is all to them, and
their highest aim is to make that delight perceptible to us. Between
battles and passions, adventures and perils, they show us hunts, ban–
quets, palaces and shepherds' cots, athletic contests and washing
