2. Original and translation. In addition, for the Russian reader, the problem of language and translation arises - who knows ancient Greek among us. Previously, it was studied in classical gymnasiums, but classical education was severely stung in Tsarist Russia, and rightly so: it was necessary to free up teaching time for modern languages and for disciplines necessary in real life - physics, chemistry, biology, to expand mathematics. Latin remained in law and medical universities, and ancient Greek - only in universities at the classical departments of philological faculties. So it's a translation.
It goes without saying that an artistic poetic work requires an artistic poetic translation. We all know that it is very difficult, but still possible. There are excellent translations of Shakespeare's sonnets - translations by S. Marshak and A. Finkel. There are good translations of poems by Goethe and Heine. Translation of poetry is especially successful when great poets do it. Why don't the Iliad and the Odyssey in translation give the impression of real poetry, the music of the word?
The ancient Greeks undoubtedly derived aesthetic pleasure from listening to the Homeric epic. The few modern classical philologists who are fluent in ancient Greek get the same pleasure from reading the Iliad and the Odyssey. For those who use the translation, this is completely inaccessible.
Meanwhile, there are many Russian poetic translations of the Homeric epic (see the list in the book: Yegunov 1964), and there are very good translations into Russian. Gnedich's translation, made in the time of Pushkin, is solemnly slow, full of archaisms (words of the Church Slavonic language) and this is close to the original. Moreover, Gnedich invented new words for the Homeric epic. His charioteers are "horse butters". This is from the word "bodets", which in Old Russian meant a goad. Now even "goad" is already an incomprehensible word. This term denoted a sharp stick, which was driven by horses from a chariot instead of reins - they pricked the right side of the croup or the left. Horses at Gnedich are supplied with the epithet "sound-footed", the hero Hector is "helmet-shiny", and there are many more such compound epithets.
This violation of the ease of understanding is not an omission of the translator, but a transfer of the properties of the original. After all, Homer’s speech is not everyday ancient Greek speech, but an “artificial language” (more precisely, a dialect) formed among the Aeds (epic singers) from different Greek dialects, with a fair amount of archaisms, foreign words, rare expressions (Meister 1921). In this way, the singers created a "high calm". After all, in the Russian epic something similar. In Russian everyday life, the expressions “and he will speak ...” or “oh, you are a goy ...” are not used. Gnedich's translation is undoubtedly a masterpiece Russian literature. This is how the beginning of the poem by Gnedich looks like:
Anger, goddess, sing to Achilles, the son of Peleus,
Terrible, who did thousands of disasters to the Achaeans:
Many mighty souls of glorious heroes cast down
In gloomy Hades and spread them themselves for the benefit of carnivorous
To the surrounding birds and dogs (Zeus's will was performed) -
From that day on, as those who raised a dispute, flared up with enmity
The shepherd of the peoples Atrids and the noble hero Achilles.
More than a hundred years after Gnedich, the writer V.V. Veresaev took up the translation - his translation into a completely modern language is livelier, more understandable, but devoid of grandeur. The same beginning looks like this for Veresaev:
Sing, goddess, about the wrath of Achilles, the son of Peleus,
The cursed anger that brought countless suffering to the Achaeans,
Many strong souls of heroes sent to Hades,
Who gave them as prey to the greedy
Birds of the neighborhood and dogs. This was done by the will of Zeus.
Since the first time, quarreling, parted hostilely
The son of Atreus, the lord of men, and Pelid the many-lighted.
There are also translations by N. Minsky, A. Shuisky and others. But despite their undoubted merits, all these translations suffer from several common shortcomings.
The first drawback is in the choice of poetic size. All Russian translators translate both poems in hexameter, following the Greek original. But the Greek hexameter is fundamentally different from the artificially created Russian hexameter. Russian hexameter is, in fact, six-foot dactyl. A dactyl is a three-beat foot with the stress on the first syllable. Here are six such stops in a line - this is a hexameter.
^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~
In some places, Gnedich diversified the hexameter, replacing the dactyl in some feet with a two-part meter - a chorea or a sponde. This detail can be neglected here.
But in Greek, just like in German or English, there are long and short vowels. For example, in English "beet" (beat) is "hit" and "beat" (bit)- this is a “crumb”, “a small piece”. German: "kaan" (Kahn)- this is a "shuttle", and "kan" (kapp)- it may". The Greek letter "this" (η) stands for a long "e", and the letter "epsilon" (ε) - short, "omega" (ω) - long "o", and "omicron" (o) - short, etc. So the Greek verse was based on the alternation of long and short syllables.
_.._.._.._.._.._..
In Russian, however, there is no division into long and short, therefore the Russian copy of the hexameter is based on the alternation of stressed and unstressed, as is usual for Russian verse. Therefore, the Greek foot of the hexameter turns out to be four-parted (a long syllable is equal to two short ones), and the Russian foot is three-parted. That is a different rhythm. The difference is like between a tango (or, say, a solemn march) and a waltz. This is first. And secondly, the Greek verse is about one and a half times longer than the Russian one. This creates the impression of a much greater length, slowness. It's a different breath.
With all the perfection of the translation of the one-eyed Gnedich, Pushkin met him with an evil epigram, which he did not print and carefully blacked out in the manuscript, realizing that its publication would be unfair. Literary critics have restored its text. There he is:
Kryv was Gnedich the poet, defrauder of the blind Homer,
Side by side with the sample is similar and its translation.
And Belinsky was against the "Russian hexameter". He said that Homer should be translated in "measured prose", that is, free verse or something like that.
Further, for all translators, the Iliad is designed for recitation or reading. But in fact it is in antiquity nelassto the accompaniment of a lyre. It should be sung, like Russian epics. None of the currently existing translations can be sung or even proclaimed in recitative to the accompaniment of any stringed instrument, it does not work.
Everyone translated Homer as a literary poet, a writer, albeit an ancient one. And it was a folk singer, an akyn, a gusliar, who did not know how to read and write. Maybe he really is blind. His element is folklore. He remembered many folk songs about epic heroes and he himself composed new songs about the same heroes, improvising each time. But his improvisations went with tried and tested moves, varying traditional plots. He has the typical characteristics of a folk singer - this was discovered by Milman Parry and Elbert Lord. These signs are: constant epithets, as if frozen to objects (like the Russians “hot arrow”, “red girl” and “good fellow”). These are also traditional formulas-expressions (like the Russians “what to say in a fairy tale, not to describe with a pen”, “I was there, I drank honey-beer”, etc.). After almost every speech of one of the heroes - "So he said ...". After a description of almost every detachment, the standard conclusion: “Forty ships under the squad rushed black behind him.”
The singer has many repetitions (whole lines and "stanzas" - up to a third of the entire text). He uses these memorized formulas and pieces of text like a book poet uses words. This allows him to freely develop the narrative without thinking about what words and phrases to use. Immediately inserts a finished sentence from memory reserves. In his speech, there are a lot of particles and conjunctions in the role of particles - as in the Russian epic (such as Russian “yes”, “after all”, “yes how”, etc.) - they fill in rhythmic gaps, making speech greedy, but not so economical, like a literary one.
The translators involuntarily “improve” it, clean it up, smooth it, turn its popular speech into literary, bookish. They remove repetitions, diversify the language, choose more expressive expressions, vivid images. Instead of "so said" different options: now “he rivers”, then “thus he called out”, then “the word passed away”. Of course, all this does not mean that it is necessary to liken the translation to Russian epics, to equip the speech with the expressions “oh yes you”, “goy thou”, etc. You should not start the poem purely in Russian: “You must sing anger, goddess, like Achilles, the light of Peleevich ... "There is no need to create" Homer in a zipun.
But there was such a translation - this is the translation of "Baron Brambeus" - O. I. Senkovsky, an orientalist, journalist and writer of the first half of the 19th century. Here is how the beginning of the Iliad sounds in his translation:
Sing, goddess, about the rabies of Peleevich Achilles,
Cursed that the darkness of kruchins was thrown on the Greeks.
It threw many strong souls into Hell
Bogatyrsky, dogs treated them with corpses
Yes, all the ravens (Jupiter's will was done! ..)
Since then, that is, since the first time they parted, quarreling,
Atreich, king of men, and divine Achilles!
Atreich is best left for parodies, but the nationality and chant should be felt.
At every step in the translations there are semantic violations. From the very first words. In Gnedich: “Anger, goddess, sing, Achilles, Peleev’s son ...” In the original Greek, the first word is Μηνιν “offense”. It was necessary to sing about resentment, and not about anger. Anger stemmed from resentment. With an explanation of what Achilles (Achilleus) was offended by, the poem began. Moreover, the poem does not glorify the wrath of Achilles, but condemns. In the original, “sing about resentment” (Veresaev is closer to the original: “sing about anger”), and since this is the beginning, it’s better to “sing about resentment”, but so as not to be too familiar - “start a song about resentment”.
Greek hero Achilleus (Ἀχιλλεύς), whose name was not included in the Russian size, was named Achilles by Gnedich (and this became traditional), later he became Achilles. But in Homer's speech, he is included in a whole system of similarly named heroes, who form the ancient generation in the epic. All of them are in -eus, but they are always translated into -e (the endings -us, -os are cut off in Russian): Odysseus, Idomeneo, Neleus, Peleus, Eurystheus, Menestheus, Theseus, Erechtheus. Usually one should not deviate from the literary tradition, but in the case of Achilles, it is necessary: he is a representative of a whole generation of heroes and, therefore, he is Achilles.
So, closer to the original, both in sound and in meaning, would be something like this translation of the beginning of the poem:
Start, goddess, a song about the insult of the damned Achilles,
What is the son of Peleus, because she brought great disasters to the Achaeans,
How she cast down the mighty heroes of the soul at once into the underworld,
And the surrounding dogs themselves plunged into a dashing torment
Let the birds of prey feast. The will of Zeus has already come true
From the day when fierce enmity flared up among themselves
The son of Atreus, the ruler of men, and the brightest hero Achilles.
This, of course, is not a sample of a poetic translation, not a competition to Gnedich or Veresaev, but only a hint of how, in my opinion, the Russian text of the epic should sound, as close as possible in phonetic effect to the sound of the original and more accurate in meaning.
Further, the Homeric epic, due to its antiquity (almost three thousand years) and colossal volume, is a real encyclopedia of ancient Greece - so much information about Greek culture, language, art, life, economy, social system! Another thing is that the Trojan War is separated from the time of Homer himself by half a millennium, and the folk singer knew the time he describes in approximately the same way as Russian storytellers know the events described in epics, that is, the time of Kievan Rus. In the Trojan War, as it is presented by Homer, the realities of different centuries are mixed - from the XIII century BC to the present. e. (the supposed time of the Trojan War) and even the 16th century to the 8th-7th centuries BC. e. (estimated lifetime of Homer himself). This is for scientists to understand, and much has already been distributed over the centuries. But one way or another, this information is in the Iliad, and they cannot be obtained anywhere in such completeness, except in the Iliad. The Iliad is the richest historical source.
And this imposes additional requirements on the translation: it must be detailed and impeccably accurate. No speculation, no gag. But let us turn to Gnedich's translation. Appearing to Agamemnon to ask for a ransom for his captive daughter, the priest of Apollo holds out to the king a crown on a golden rod. Gnedich added "red" (I, 15). The crown of the Greeks was indeed tied with a red ribbon, but in this place Homer did not indicate the color in the original. You can, of course, enter additional words from yourself if the size requires it, but neutral, and not adding new information.
When the gods discussed how Priam could get the corpse of Hector from Achilles, Zeus, according to Gnedich, says:
The immortal gods of Hermes incline to steal the body;
On the contrary, I want to bestow that glory on Achilles...
(XXIV, 109-110)
In Homer's original, Zeus intended to give Achilles not "glory", but a worthy "honor", that is, a ransom. The ancient gods and heroes were not as disinterested as the 19th century translator imagined them to be.
In general, we need a literal (albeit prosaic) translation. There are such translations into English (by W. X. D. Rouse, also by Andrew Lang, Walter Leaf, and Ernest Myers), but there are no modern ones in Russian. There are very outdated ones (Petra Evdokimov - 1776-1978, Ivan Martynov - 1823-1925).
The Homeric epic is folklore of a special kind: it stood out for its perfection from folk epics. He owes this perfection to the Greek spirit of competition, realized in the custom of the annual pan-Greek competitions of folk singers on the island of Delos. Preparing for this prestigious competition, the singers memorized huge texts, improved them in every possible way, so that the most talented of them had folklore as close as possible to literature.
But it is certainly clear that most of us cannot and will not read Homer in the original, and a translation, even the best one - by Gnedich or Veresaev - does not give a complete impression and will not bring that enjoyment of the beauties of the verse that captivated the ancients, and is now accessible to a few connoisseurs. . Why read the Iliad?
INTERPRETER FOREWORD
We have two complete translations of the Iliad that are still being read. One
old (tenth-twenties of the last century) - Gnedich, another more
new (the end of the past - the beginning of our century) - Minsk.
Gnedich's translation is one of the best translations in world literature
"Iliad". It vividly conveys the courageous and cheerful spirit of the original,
full of that inner movement, pathos and energy that the poem breathes. But
The translation has a number of shortcomings that make it difficult to accept for
modern reader.
The main drawback is the archaic language of translation. For example:
He, like a lion fighter, who found horned youths,
Of which they graze in a wet meadow with extensive blat
Thousands; a shepherd with them; but young, still does not know how
To fight with the beast in order to protect the steep-horned kravu...
The translation is oversaturated with Church Slavonic words and expressions,
replete with such words as "daughter", "rivers", "broadcast", "zane", "packs", "tuk",
up to such words, completely incomprehensible to the modern reader, as
"skimen" (young lion), "sulitsa" (spear), "glezna" (shin), etc.
syllable. Instead of "horse" he writes "horse", instead of "dog" - "dog", instead of
"lips" - "mouth", instead of "forehead" - "brow", etc. He does not at all consider
it is possible to transmit inviolability quite rude sometimes expressions
Homer. Achilles scolds Agamemnon: "A drunkard, a dog!" Gnedich
translates: "a wine-drinker, a dog-like man!" Elena repentantly calls herself
before Hector "bitch", "shameless dog". Gnedich bashfully translates,
"me, unworthy."
Minsky's translation is written in modern Russian, but extremely gray
and does not convey the spirit of the original at all. Minsky is more or less successful
still purely descriptive places, but where does Homer have fiery pathos or soft
lyrics, there Minsky is sluggish and prosaic.
When a new translator takes on the task of translating a classic
works, then his first concern and main concern is, as it were,
to be in something similar to one of the previous translators.
Some expression, some verse or couplet, let's even say -
the whole stanza is transmitted from his predecessor in the best and most accurate way. All
equals! Property is sacred. And the translator gives his own translation,
translators are crossed out, and everyone starts all over again.
Such an attitude seems to me fundamentally wrong. home
everything that justifies and covers everything - the most accurate and most
artistic translation of the original. If we allow collective
cooperation, so to speak, in space, then why do we not allow such
the same collective cooperation and in time, between the whole chain of the following
one by one translators?
Everything good, everything successful, the new translator must take by the handful
from previous translations, of course, with one condition: not transferring them mechanically
into your own translation, but organically reworking it into your own style,
more precisely, in the style of the original, as it is perceived by this translator.
To ignore the achievements of Gnedich when translating the Iliad means
refuse in advance a translation more or less worthy of the original.
I base my translation on Gnedich's translation wherever it is successful,
wherever it can be stored. The Iliad, for example, ends with Gnedich
with this verse:
So they buried the body of the horse-riding Hector.
You better not say. Why, like Minsky, strain your efforts to say
even worse, but otherwise, and give an ending like this:
Thus was Hector, the horse-tamer, buried by the Trojans.
I reworked many of Gnedich's poems based on his translation. For example:
Long, while Apollo held the aegis motionless,
Arrows equally flew between the armies, and howled fell;
But as soon as the Argives in the face he looked up, aegis
Stormy shook and exclaimed and loudly and menacingly, embarrassed
Souls in their Persians, the Argives forgot their seething courage.
New translation:
For a long time, while Apollo held the aegis motionless,
Clouds of spears and arrows flew, hitting the people.
But only, looking into the faces of the Danes, he shook his aegis,
Terrible and screaming himself at this time - in the chest of the Achaeans
The spirit weakened, and they forgot about the seething courage.
The overwhelming majority of the poems, however, are written anew, in such
for example, genus. Priam at the headquarters of Achilles begs him to give him the body of the murdered
Brave, you are almost gods! Have pity on my misfortune
Remembering Peleus parent! I'm even more pathetic!
I will experience what no mortal has experienced on earth:
Husband, murderer of my children, I press my hands to my lips!
New translation:
Have pity, Pelid, over me, show respect to the immortals,
Remember your father! I deserve more pity!
I do what no mortal would dare:
I press the hands of the killer of my sons to my lips!
I considered it possible to include in the translation also individual successful verses and
turns of Minsky. And if the quality of the translation improves from borrowing, then
it will all be justified.
The question of the degree of accuracy with which one should translate is very difficult.
a poem written three thousand years ago. In general, it seems to me that the former
translators were too afraid of excessive, in their opinion, proximity to
original, deviating from our usual turns of speech. Homer, for example:
"What kind of words have you flown through the fence of your teeth!" Translators prefer;
"What words came out of your mouth!" Prefer "anger in the chest is not
holding back" instead of Homer's "not containing", "only then would you saturate
malice" instead of "healed her malice".
The word thymos (spirit) and psyche (soul) are indifferently translated either "spirit" or
"soul". Meanwhile, in Homer these are two completely different concepts. "Thymos"
(spirit) - the totality of all the spiritual properties of a person, "psyche" (soul) is
the shadow enclosed in a person, a ghost that flies away after the death of a person in
kingdom of Hades. sad likeness of a man, devoid of vitality,
so deprived that, for example, the soul of Patroclus, who appeared in a dream to Achilles,
able to express her sadness at parting with a friend only by squeaking (XXIII,
Greeting each other, the Hellenes said: "chaire - rejoice, be
joyful", where we say "hello, be healthy." How to translate this
word - "rejoice" or "hello"? When the Hellenic messengers come to
Achilles, he greets them with the word "chairete - rejoice!" But the Achaeans
broken, Hector at their ships, Achilles does not want to help, what is there
rejoice? Nevertheless, in my opinion, you still need to translate "rejoice."
Let the ignorant learn from the note that "rejoice" corresponds to our
"hello". But it is too typical for the Hellenic life relationship that when
meetings, they wished each other joy, and to erase this dash in translation
it is forbidden. The same is with Homer's favorite word "philos - dear". "Dear
grieving in his heart", "his dear legs got tired" and even: "my dear
heart". As a matter of fact, the word "philos" here simply means "one's own,
own". However, in the post-Homerian time, the word in this sense no longer
was used, and for the Homeric time this shade is characteristic:
your heart is a sweet heart, like cities are blessed, your body is beautiful,
chariot - skillfully made, etc.
And in general, it seems to me that you can stay closer to the original much more often,
than the former translators do, no matter how alien and
unusual epithets and turns of Homer. He often, for example, uses
the expression "one-hoofed horses", as if there are two-hoofed horses; "had seen
eyes"; the gods make the hero light "legs and hands above them." Homer sometimes
uses a technique called "hysteron - proteron" (later -
earlier). The hero, having risen from sleep, puts on a cloak and tunic, although, of course, he
puts on a chiton (shirt) first, and then a cloak. Nymph Calypso puts on
Odysseus puts on a new dress and gives him a bath. Of course, she takes a bath before.
When we read in some story: "Ivan Petrovich went up to
table. He was very cheerful" - we feel compelled to ask - "Who was
cheerful - a table?" Homer very often uses the words "he", "she", "they" when
it is clear in meaning who is being discussed, although one who wishes can ask a question like
table question. In this case I considered it possible to follow Homer.
However, I did not dare to go to the end with the accuracy of the translation. For Homer,
for example, the seat of all the spiritual and mental properties of a person is not
the brain, and the heart, even more precisely, the abdominal obstruction (phrenes). May be,
this is the lack of the necessary audacity, but my hand did not rise to translate:
"anger seized his chest-abdominal barrier" or: "I rejoice with all my
chest obstruction".
About the transcription of proper names. In general, I tried to transfer them to
according to the original, but names that have already acquired the right of citizenship from us
and become common to everyone, I left in the previous transcription: Achilles (and not
Achilles), Hecuba (not Hekaba), Ajax (not Ayant), Calchas (not Kalhant). So
but in the prepared translation of the Odyssey: Circe (and not Kirk), Cyclops (and not
cycle), etc.
The same with accents. It would be correct: Apollo, Dionysus, Priam, Menelaus,
Paris, etc. I retained the accents that have already become customary for us.
TO UNDERSTANDING THE EVENTS ABOUT WHICH THE "ILIAD" AND "ODYSSEY" TELL
The gods had a wedding feast: they gave out the "silver-footed" goddess Thetis, daughter
sea elder Nereus, for the mortal man Peleus, who reigned over the people
Myrmidons in Phthia, in northern Greece. The case is completely unusual. At the gods
and goddesses were not uncommon fleeting love affairs with mortal women and
men. But for a goddess to be given in marriage to a mortal man - this is not
happened. However, there were good reasons for this. Thetis was carried away by himself
the king of the gods, the Thunderer Zeus, and his brother Poseidon, the lord of the seas.
There was a prediction that the son born from Thetis would be many
stronger than his father. The Greek gods were far from omnipotent. Above them stood
dark, impersonal fate, and the gods could not undo its decisions.
In order to make the future son of Thetis safe for themselves, they gave her away
marry a mortal. A being only stronger than mortal man,
the gods were not dangerous. And they had a strong god very solid
reasons to be afraid. Zeus himself reigned over the world, overthrowing with the help of his brothers and
sisters of his father Kron and imprisoning him in the underground Tartarus. Kron in his
turn reigned, overthrowing his father Uranus, the original ruler of the world.
All the gods were invited to the wedding feast, with the exception of Eris, the goddess
enmity and discord. The reason is clear. Eris was offended. In the middle of a feast suddenly
the door opened, and from the threshold Eris rolled a golden
apple with the inscription: "the most beautiful." There was a fierce dispute over the apple between
three goddesses: Queen Hero, wife of Zeus, Pallas-Athena, goddess
wisdom, and Aphrodite, goddess of love and beauty. Each wanted an apple
yourself as the most beautiful. Could not get along and asked for a solution
a dispute with the handsome prince Paris, son of the Trojan king Priam. He is into it
time pastured herds on Gargar, one of the peaks of Mount Ida near Troy. Both sides
got the job done right away. Hera promised Paris power and wealth, Athena
Wisdom and glory, Aphrodite - the love of the most beautiful woman in the world. Paris
I found this method of resolving the dispute quite natural and began to weigh not
which of the goddesses is the most beautiful, and which of the promises is the most
tempting. And awarded the apple to Aphrodite.
In the south of Greece, in the later famous Sparta, Menelaus reigned
Atrid (that is, the son of Atreus). He was married to Elena, daughter of Leda. Elena's father
was the king of the gods Zeus himself, who appeared to Leda in the form of a beautiful swan. This something
Helena, the wife of Menelaus, was the most beautiful woman in the whole world. Paris
came as a guest to Menelaus. Aphrodite ignited Helen with passion for Paris,
and he took Helen on his ships, along with all her treasures, to his
Troy. Troy (or Ilion) was the capital of a wealthy Trojan country, located
at the northwestern tip of the Asia Minor peninsula, at the confluence
Hellespont (now the Dardanelles) to the Aegean Sea.
The abduction of Helen by Paris led, according to Greek legends, of which
scooped Homer, to the long war of the Greek peoples with Troy,
ended with the destruction of Troy. The Trojan War is not fiction, it was
indeed, but it was, of course, not caused by the abduction of a beautiful woman.
The reason for the war of the Greek peoples against Troy lay in a favorable trade
position of Troy on the routes from Europe to Asia, a position that greatly slowed down
Greek trade. It was this that prompted the numerous small states of Greece,
constantly at war with each other, unite in a common army and go
trip to Troy. The Greek attack, in turn, prompted neighboring
Three states - Lycia, Thrace, Paphlogonia, Miseia, etc. - join
allies to Troy and together with her fight the invading Greek army.
By the way, it should be noted that at that time the Greeks were not yet called Greeks. Homer
calls them Achaeans, Danaans or Argives.
The brother of Menelaus was Atrid Agamemnon, the king of the "multi-golden" Mycenae, the most
powerful and wealthy of all the Achaean kings. He warmly responded to
the offense inflicted by Paris on his brother. Other kings also responded. After
long fees, the Achaean army gathered at the port of Aulis in the amount of about a hundred
thousands of people. The militia of each kingdom was commanded by its king, and
Agamemnon was elected commander-in-chief. Of the other leaders, especially
the following were issued: Diomedes Tidides (son of Tydeus), king of Argos, the most
attractive of all the Achaean gerae, generous, knightly noble,
always rushing to the most dangerous places, not afraid to fight even with
gods; "Great Ajax", son of Telamon, king of Salamis, huge,
monstrous strength. His brother Teucer was the best archer in the army.
There was another Ajax, the son of Oileus, the leader of the lightly armed Locrians,
who fought with bows and slings, quick on their feet. Often both Ajax fought
side by side, shoulder to shoulder. The wisest and most experienced military adviser was the elder
Nestor, king of sandy Pylos. His son Antilochus shone among the youth
my distance. He brought eighty ships with fighters from "hundred-graded" Crete
mighty spearman Idomeneo. In the Achaean army there was a glorious shooter from
luka Fyaloctet, friend of Hercules (Hercules); dying, Hercules gave Philoctetes
his bow with deadly poisoned arrows. One of the most prominent
among the leaders of the Achaean army was the "much cunning" Odysseus, son of Laertes, king
small rocky island of Ithaca, west of the Greek mainland,
"persistent in trouble", a brave warrior and a smart, resourceful leader, capable of
the most ingenious inventions.
Thus, the army was numerous, its leaders were brave and experienced.
But the oracle predicted that the Achaeans would not take Troy if there was no
Achilles, the son of Peleus and Thetis, the very ones at whose wedding
There was a quarrel between three goddesses for a golden apple. Thetis knew that
the fate of Achilles is destined to choose: either to live in old age
full well-being and tranquility in his native Phthia, or die in battle
young, but get great fame. To save my son from an early death,
Thetis hid Achilles on the island of Skchros among the daughters of the king there.
Lycamed dressed in a woman's dress. The cunning Odysseus undertook to find
Achilles. Disguised as a merchant, he arrived at Skyros, laid out before his daughters
Lycamed various women's jewelry, and among them - a shield and a spear. Suddenly under
fighting cries, the sound of weapons, groans were heard through the windows. This Odysseus instructed his
satellites to play out under the windows as if attacking enemies. The girls jumped up
and fled, and Achilles grabbed a shield, a spear and rushed into battle. So, he
was recognized; It was not difficult for Odysseus to persuade him to join
There is some chronological inconsistency in the legend here. Paris kidnapped Helen
very, of course, soon after the sentence he pronounced, when Achilles even
has not yet been born. And Achilles went to war already fully formed
warrior, superior in strength, courage, speed in running and other military
the virtues of all Achaeans and Trojans. It turns out that the fees of the Achaeans in the Trojan campaign
continued for at least twenty years. A little long. Achaeans set sail
from Aulis to Troy in one thousand one hundred and eighty-six ships. Troy lay
five kilometers from the sea coast, on the site of the present Turkish
the town of Hissarlik. The Achaeans pulled the ships onto land and encamped at
seas. There was no siege of the city. The Trojans came out of the city and fought with
Achaeans on a wide plain stretching from Troy to the coast. the Achaeans did
frequent raids on neighboring cities and nearby islands, plundered and devastated them.
They fought with copper weapons. Spears, swords, shields, armor, helmets - everything was
from copper. Iron was already known, but they still did not know how to melt and forge it, and
processed in a cold way: drilled, polished. Homer calls iron
"difficult to make". Ordinary soldiers fought on foot. leaders and in general
noble people - on chariots. The chariots were two-wheeled, open at the back, with
handrails along the front. The driver ruled, but it was not a "servant", not
"coachman", but a comrade and usually a close friend of a soldier. Fighter fought with
chariots, but often for the fight he jumped down and fought on foot, and the charioteer
with a chariot, waited at a distance in case of pursuit of enemies or flight from
them. Pikoy fought hand-to-hand, but more often they threw it at the enemy from some
distances. They also threw large stones picked up from the ground, shot from
bows and slings. From the dead, the winner immediately, in the middle of the battle, hurried to remove
as a trophy, his weapons and often fell at that time himself under blows
comrades of the slain.
The king of Troy was Priam, son of Laomedont. He was already very old. commanded
Trojan troops, his eldest son Hector, the most powerful and brave warrior
among all Trojans. Next to him was Aeneas, the son of Anchises and the goddess
Aphrodite, king of Dardania, near Mount Ida. Among the Trojan allies stood out
the Lycian kings Sarpedon, the son of the king of the gods Zeus from a mortal woman, and Glaucus,
his cousin. Paris, the kidnapper, was an excellent archer
Helena; he killed many Achaean heroes with arrows, including Achilles himself.
His brother Pandar was also an outstanding archer.
The supreme gods also took an active and passionate part in the war.
They inhabited the snowy Mount Olympus north of Greece and were therefore called
"Olympic". Some gods stood for the Achaeans, others for the Trojans. side
the Achaeans were held, of course, by Hera, the wife of the king of the gods Zeus, and the goddess of wisdom
Pallas-Athena, both severely offended by the sentence of Paris. For the Achaeans were god
Poseidon of the sea, brother of Zeus, "earth shaker"; "benefactor" Hermes,
messenger of the gods, god of merchants and thieves; Hephaestus, son of Zeus and Hera, god of fire
a skilled master blacksmith, limping on both legs, with a powerful body and weak
feet, the only one of the gods, always hard at work; them, by the way,
built all the palaces of the gods on Olympus.
On the side of the Trojans stood the mighty god Phoebus Apollo, the son of Zeus and
lush-haired Leto, one of the most revered celestials, the god of harmony,
order, light, Far-bearer, without a miss falling from his silver
bow to the intended target; his sister Artemis, goddess of the hunt, also
long-range; their mother Leto; Apec, son of Zeus and Hera, stormy and bloodthirsty
god of War; Aphrodite, daughter of Zeus and Dione, goddess of love and beauty,
patroness of Paris.
A more or less neutral position was occupied by Zeus himself, the king of the gods.
The war between the Achaeans and the Trojans lasted more than nine years. On the tenth
year, an episode played out that served as the plot for the Iliad. Agamemnon selected
Achilles has the beautiful captive Briseis, received by Achilles during the division
stolen booty. Enraged by the arbitrariness of Agamemnon, Achilles
refused to fight the Trojans and through his mother, the goddess Thetis, begged
Zeus to give victory to the Trojans in battle until Agamemnon confesses to
his fault and will not return Briseis. Zeus heeded the pleas of Thetis. Mighty Hector
at the head of the Trojans defeated the Achaeans, broke through to the Achaean ships and started them
burn. Achilles' beloved friend Patroclus with difficulty begged Achilles to let him
Patroclus, put on the armor of Achilles and lead the fresh troops of Achilles
reflect Hector. He drove the Trojans away from the ships, but, carried away by the battle,
disregarded Achilles' stern warning not to pursue his enemies to Troy.
Hector killed Patroclus under the walls of Troy. Achilles cast aside his anger, broke into
the head of the Trojans and in single combat killed Hector. Old king Priam, father
Hector, with the permission of Zeus, arrived at Achilles' headquarters at night and begged
him to bury the corpse of his son. Description of the funeral of Hector and ends
The war continued. New allies came to the aid of the Trojans. It's come
an army of brave Amazons led by the mighty queen Penthesilea, daughter
god of war Ares. Achilles mortally wounded her in a duel, took off her helmet and,
amazed by the beauty of the Amazon, he fell in love with a dying woman. From Africa to the rescue
The Ethiopian hero Memnon, the son of the goddess Dawn, led his army to the Trojans. His
also killed Achilles, but soon he himself was killed by the arrow of Paris, directed
Apollo.
The war had no end in sight.
One morning, the Trojans were amazed to see from the walls of the city that the Achaeans
the ships are all launched and, full of warriors, spreading their sails, move away from
Trojan coast in the sea. The Trojans rushed to the shore. Among the abandoned camp
they saw with bewilderment a huge, from a mountain, horse, skillfully crafted from
tree. A straggler captured in a swamp reported that the Achaeans, having despaired
in victory, sailed home, and this horse was built in honor of Athena and on purpose
built it in such a size that it could not be dragged into the city, since
if he finds himself in Troy, then Asia will defeat Europe. The gods confused the Trojans
intelligence. Ignoring the warnings, the Trojans dismantled at the gate
the city wall, they brought the horse into the city and placed it in the acropolis. At night
a secret door in the belly of the horse opened, and a rope descended from it
land all the bravest Achaean heroes: Odysseus, Menelaus, son of Achilles Neoptolem
and others. They opened the gates to the army returning from behind the island of Tenedos. Troy
was plundered and burned, men, including the old king Priam,
killed, women, including the widow of Hector Andromache, were captured into slavery.
(Andromache, according to later legends, was taken as a concubine by a fierce son
Achilles Neoptolemus, who killed her young son Astyanax and the elderly
father-in-law of Priam). Troy was wiped off the face of the earth.
Of the Achaean heroes, very few returned home quickly and safely:
Nestor, Diomedes, Idomeneo. Ajax "the Great" perished shortly after the death of Achilles.
As the most outstanding hero of the Trojan War, the Achaeans awarded weapons
Achilles to Odysseus. Offended, Ajax committed suicide. Another Ajax, son
Oilea, was shipwrecked at sea. Having climbed onto the rock, he boastfully
declared that he escaped against the will of the gods. Poseidon struck the rock with his trident,
split it and brought down the fragment with Ajax into the raging sea. Agamemnon, immediately
on his return home, he was killed at a feast by Aegisthus, his wife's lover
Clytemnestra. Menelaus returned home with Elena only after long
wanderings. The greatest trials fell on the lot of Odysseus. He just got home
ten years after sailing from Troy and twenty years after leaving for
war from the native island of Ithaca. At home he left his wife Penelope and
young son of Telemachus. His house was filled with noble young people with
Ithaca and neighboring islands. Deciding that Odysseus had already died, they urged
Penelope to choose a new husband from among them, and in anticipation of an answer they feasted
from morning to evening in the house of Odysseus, they ate his cattle and devastated wine
cellars. Chaste and faithful Penelope with all sorts of tricks delayed
response to grooms. The long wanderings of Odysseus, his return home and
reprisals against impudent suitors are the subject of another poem by Homer -
Hello, dear readers of the Sprint-Answer website. Today we have 10.10.2017 on our calendars, which means tomorrow the printed version of the next issue of the Argumenty i Fakty newspaper will be released. While there is an electronic version of the newspaper, it is already possible to print all the correct answers to the crossword puzzle No. 41 in the Argumenty i Fakty newspaper for 2017. All correct answers to the crossword can be found at the end of the article, they are printed in a compact form immediately after the questions of the crossword. The answers will be published as you solve the crossword puzzle No. 41 in AiF for 2017.
Horizontally:
1. Some wildness!
6. "Courier" from the hospital.
9. The croupier on the sweepstakes.
10. Services of a gigolo.
11. "Collected Works" fashion designer.
14. Root crop against laryngitis.
16. What is hung in the house of the hero of the film "Nameless Star"?
17. What art was never taught anywhere by Elvis Presley?
18. Retail ... over wholesale.
19. Sidelets on nails.
20. Who made the first poetic translation of the Iliad into Russian?
21. What kind of grain is interred?
23. Kingdom of Uranus.
25. Whose flowers are brewed to take from the nerves?
29. Book award based on online magazine.
31. Who is married to your son?
32. The largest dormitory in the zoo.
34. Aura from icons.
37. Which of his films did film director Andrei Tarkovsky reshoot three times, changing three cameramen?
38. What brand of watch did James Bond wear in nine films?
40. In which of the Italian cities was the first anatomical theater in Europe created?
42. Dry ... from tourists.
44. "Bishop's Stone".
45. Which god protected the Roman herds from wolves?
46. Mokruha during bad weather.
47. Leonid Ilyich "at the head of the stagnation."
48. Where is Amedeo Modigliani from?
49. “I love your lake melancholy to joy and pain.”
50. Who initiated the invitation of Oleg Efremov to the Moscow Art Theater?
51. Which president was acquitted in the "case" of Monica Lewinsky?
52. Imperative.
53. Prankster from Melmak.
54. The richest in the world, Bill.
Vertically:
1. What region is associated with the early childhood of the poet Andrei Voznesensky?
2. River from Siberian paintings by Vasily Surikov.
3. Convoy in music.
4. Planet of people.
5. In what fairy tale is everyone “pulling, pulling, but they cannot pull it out”?
7. Flash in the brain.
8. "Mute examiner."
10. Who dreamed of building a Hollywood branch in the vicinity of Chisinau?
12. "Start thinking ...".
13. The patriarch of Soviet cinema, who preferred books to all luxury items.
15. To which instrument did Ennio Morricone assign the main theme in the soundtrack to the movie "Mission"?
16. Weights for an athlete.
19. County with a personalized pudding.
22. "Chimney nozzle".
24. What quality is never worth a few words?
26. World Museum on Rivoli Street.
27. Old weather habits.
28. "Hobby" with causing grievous bodily harm to "our smaller brothers."
30. What kind of stone is inside the Gur-Emir mausoleum?
33. Under whose personal guarantee was Sergei Yesenin released from the Cheka, who was accused of counter-revolution?
34. The most "ambulance".
35. "For show's sake."
36. Which marshal "pulled the singer Lidia Ruslanova out of the camp dust"?
39. Line screw.
40. What creaks in an old mattress?
41. "Shy forest."
43. "All-night service ..." on the eve of Easter.
46. Excess on the basis of hooliganism.
48. "Housekeeper" among the lifts.
Amedeo (Jedidia) Clemente Modigliani (Italian Amedeo Clemente Modigliani; July 12, 1884, Livorno (Livorno (Italian: Livorno) is the largest port of Tuscany, the administrative center of the province of the same name. Located on the eastern coast of the Ligurian Sea in a natural bay, a few miles south of the mouth of the Arno River, surrounded by the low Livorno Hills. The city's patron saint is Julia of Carthage. May 22 city holiday. ), Kingdom of Italy - January 24, 1920, Paris, French Third Republic) - Italian artist and sculptor, one of the most famous artists of the late XIX - early XX century, a representative of expressionism.
"Stalker"- Soviet science fiction film-parable directed by Andrei Tarkovsky, filmed at the Mosfilm studio in 1979 based on the story "Roadside Picnic" by the Strugatsky brothers.
One of the most significant works in the work of Andrei Tarkovsky, who said that in it he "legally touched the transcendent." The production of the film was accompanied by many problems and took about three years. During the development of the film, the first version was almost completely lost, and the picture was re-shot three times, with three different cameramen and production designers.
Those who wish to study Homer must, of course, begin by studying the text itself. Those who do not speak Greek should start studying Russian translations, which, by the way, are of high quality, so that Russian literature can rightly be proud of them.
The Iliad was completely translated for the first time by the famous Russian writer and representative of the Pushkin school N. I. Gnedich in 1829. The last editions of this translation appeared already in Soviet times. These are: Homer, Iliad, translation by N. I. Gnedich. Edition and commentary by I. M. Trotsky with the participation of I. I. Tolstoy. Articles by F. Preobrazhensky, I. M. Trotsky and I. I. Tolstoy, Academia. M.-L., 1935. In the same 1935, this edition appeared in the same publishing house in a large format and improved form. Recently, Gnedich's translation appeared entirely in the collection of his own poems by this translator in the large series "poet's library": N. I. Gnedich, Poems. Introductory article, preparation of the text and notes by I. N. Medvedeva, L., 1956. Gnedich's translation caused a great deal of literature, since at one time it was a wonderful example of translation art and has not lost its significance to this day. Gnedich managed, with sufficient closeness to the original, to reproduce the vigorous Homeric cheerfulness and heroism, which are combined here with high and magnificent, although at the same time light solemnity. The modern reader of Gnedich will be repelled, perhaps, only by the abundance of Slavonicisms, which, however, with a deeper historical approach, reveal a high artistic style that does not in the least interfere with the ease and mobility of the speech technique of translation. The fact that Gnedich's translation is based on Winckelmann's assessment of antiquity and on the poetics of the Pushkin school, the reader can be convinced by reading A. Kukulevich's special work "The Iliad" translated by N. I. Gnedich in "Scientific Notes of the Leningrad State University", No. 33, series of philological science, issue 2, L., 1939. Philological and stylistic characteristics of Gnedich's translation in comparison with the Greek original are given by I. I. Tolstoy in the article "Gnedich as a translator of the Iliad", published in the above edition of Gnedich's translation in 1935. , pages 101–106 (in the notes to Gnedich's translation in this edition, Gnedich's discrepancies with the original are indicated).
Unfortunately, the newest edition of Gnedich does not contain those Gnedich annotations for each song of the Iliad, without which the study of the poem is very difficult. These annotations were compiled by Gnedich very carefully, even with a note of the numbers of verses for each individual topic. Therefore, one has to recommend and bear in mind also the old edition of Gnedich. Such is Homer's Iliad, translated by N. I. Gnedich, edited by S. I. Ponomarev, edition 2, St. Petersburg, 1892. This edition also contains useful articles by Ponomarev and Gnedich himself. The same translation - M., St. Petersburg, 1904, St. Petersburg, 1912.
Since the translation of Gnedich by the end of the 19th century. already turned out to be obsolete, then there was a need to give a translation of the Iliad in a simplified form, without any Slavicisms and on the basis of only the modern Russian literary language. Such a translation was undertaken by N. I. Minsky in 1896. The last reprint of this translation: Homer, Iliad, translated by N. I. Minsky. Edition and introductory article song by F. Preobrazhensky, M., 1935. Minsky's translation is distinguished by its prosaic character and often gives the impression of an interlinear translation. Nevertheless, for those who do not understand or do not like the Slavicisms of Gnedich, this translation is of great importance and played a significant role in its time. A scientific analysis of this translation can be found in the review by S. I. Sobolevsky in the Journal of the Ministry of National Education, 1911, No. 4 (section 2), pages 346–360.
Finally, a third complete Russian translation of the Iliad has recently appeared: Homer, the Iliad, translated by V. Veresaev, M.-L., 1949. Veresaev's translation went even further than Minsky. Having used many successful expressions of Gnedich and Minsky, Veresaev nevertheless understands Homer too folklore and tries to use all sorts of folk and pseudo-folk expressions, partly not even entirely decent. True, the too lofty and too solemn style of the Iliad is now a great exaggeration. But numerous naturalistic and even abusive expressions, which abound in Veresaev's translation, met with criticism from S. I. Radtsig in his review in "Soviet Book", 1950, No. 7. compare also the review of M. E. Grabar-Passek and F. A Petrovsky in "Bulletin of Ancient History", 1950, No. 2, page 151–158.
As for the Odyssey, its classical translation belongs to V. A. Zhukovsky and was made in 1849. Its last reprints date back to the Soviet era: Homer, Odyssey, translation by V. A. Zhukovsky. Article, edition and commentary by I. M. Trotsky with the participation of I. I. Tolstoy. Asademia, M.-L., 1935. The same edition was repeated in a large format. There is also another edition: Homer, Odyssey. Translation by V. A. Zhukovsky, editions and introductory article by P. F. Preobrazhensky, GIHL, M., 1935. Most recently, a luxurious edition has appeared - Homer, Odyssey, translated by V. A. Zhukovsky, M., 1958 ( preparation of the text by V.P. Petushkov, afterword and notes by S.V. Polyakova). This edition was made according to the last lifetime edition of V. A. Zhukovsky and verified with the manuscript and proofreading of the translator. In addition, in the text of V. A. Zhukovsky, a transliteration was made according to the modern pronunciation of Greek names, since in the translation of Zhukovsky himself, many names were written in an archaic way. This edition must be considered the best of all editions of the Odyssey after the death of V. A. Zhukovsky. It is also very important that in this edition, before each canto of the poem, detailed annotations compiled by V. A. Zhukovsky are printed, which greatly facilitate the study of the poem. Of the new editions of this translation, the annotations are preserved only in the edition - "Odyssey" by Homer in the translation of V. A. Zhukovsky, edition "Enlightenment", St. Petersburg. (year not specified).
Until very recently, this translation was the only one, since its high artistic merit has never been questioned. Everyone knew that this translation reflected the style of sentimental romanticism. But everyone forgave Zhukovsky for this feature of his translation, since everyone was captivated by his bright colorfulness and expressiveness, his easy and understandable Russian language, his constant poetry and accessibility. Nevertheless, Zhukovsky allowed too much inaccuracy in his translation, introducing epithets that did not belong to Homer, various expressions, and even entire lines, and reducing others. A scientific understanding of the features of Zhukovsky's translation can be obtained from the article by S. Shestakov "V. A. Zhukovsky as a translator of Homer", published in "Readings in the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature in Memory of A. S. Pushkin", XXII. Kazan, 1902. Compare also the article by I. I. Tolstoy "The Odyssey" translated by Zhukovsky, published in the above edition, 1935.
But in Zhukovsky's translation there was also something that began to be clearly understood only in Soviet times, namely the ideology and pictures of the old Moscow boyars and a weak understanding of genuine Homeric and purely pagan heroism. Taking into account all these features of Zhukovsky's translation, P. A. Shuisky for the first time in almost 100 years decided to compete with Zhukovsky, after which no one dared to translate the Odyssey again: Homer, Odyssey, translation (original size) by P. A. Shuisky, edited by A I. Vinogradova. Sverdlovsk. 1948. Indeed, Shuisky avoided the mentioned features of Zhukovsky's translation; however, striving for a literal transmission of the original, Shuisky constantly falls into excessive prosaism, and from a poetic point of view, the technique of his verse also suffers greatly. Shuisky's translation found a negative assessment for itself in the review of F. A. Petrovsky and M. E. Grabar-Passek in the Bulletin of Ancient History, 1950, No. 3, pages 151–158. A little less severely judges the translation of Shuisky by A. A. Takho-Godi in the article "On the new translation of the Odyssey" in "Uchen. notes of the Moscow Regional Pedagogical Institute", vol. XXVI, pages 211–225. M., 1953. This author points to Shuisky's merits in comparison with Zhukovsky. However, he also notes prosaism, unsuccessful versification, and most importantly, the translator's orientation towards an outdated text, which is now being corrected beyond recognition by the latest editors in connection with the progress of philological science.
Finally, there is another translation of the Odyssey, which belongs to the above-mentioned V. Veresaev and has the same features as his translation of the Iliad: Homer, Odyssey, translation by V. Veresaev. Edition of I. I. Tolstoy, M., 1953.
The edition also matters: Homer. Poems, abridged edition. Preparation of the text of the poems, retelling of the myths of the Trojan cycle, notes and dictionary by A. A. Takho-Godi, introductory article and scientific edition by A. I. Beletsky, Detgiz, M.-L., 1953. This edition, created for youth, has the advantage , which is just important for beginners. In addition to the excellent article by A. I. Beletsky, here is a retelling of all the main myths about the Trojan War, without which it is impossible to understand the plot of the poems. And, besides, the text of the Iliad and the Odyssey is not arranged here in the order of the poems themselves (this order, as mentioned above, is rather confusing), but in the order of the course of the events themselves that found their image in these poems. Therefore, beginners in the study of Homer receive here, as it were, a single and integral, completely consistent unfolding of the plot.
Thus, there are a sufficient number of Russian translations of Homer, and each of these translations in its own way has all the features of a great translation culture. Those who do not speak Greek should use the above reviews of these translations. These reviews will undoubtedly help him both to orientate himself in the style of these translations and in the degree of their closeness to the Greek original.
