Retrieving and preparing the dead; The Suppliant Women, Euripides

 

Why you might read The Suppliant Women?

This play gives greater insight into supplication in the ancient Greek world. It also reminds us of the procedure that is normally followed in ancient Greece. How personal rulers would take that process being disallowed. Even if only by one of the warring factions.

In my self-education project, it also serves to complete the Theban war. We saw this start with the sack on Thebes' seven gates. It also highlights the autonomy of different Greek cities. As well as how politics was debated between them.

The Story of The Suppliant Women

We find Aethra, mother of the king of Athens, as a supplicant to Demeter at Eleusis in Athens' jurisdiction. She is surrounded by the chorus of supplicants and they have ritually bound her there to hear their plea.

Theseus, her son, comes looking for her, as she has not returned, and finds her trapped so. He enquires of Adrastus what they are supplicant for. He is told of Argos' defeat at Thebes. They attacked to try and recapture his son-in-law's inheritance. He did this even though the gods through an oracle warned him not to. He pleads with Theseus to go and retrieve their dead for burial as the Thebans will not allow them to have them. This is a point of common Greek law that the dead can be removed even by the losers to be buried. Theseus at first refuses, chastising Adrastus for such an ill-thought-through war. His mother rebukes him and reminds him that his honour is based on doing what is right. She also reminds him that to not do it would be called a coward. 

Theseus takes the problem to the council and wins approval. He is just charging a herald to go to Thebes when one arrives from Thebes. The herald demands that they turn Adrastus out and do not come to his aid. There is then a short side track as the herald and Theseus argue about forms of government. Contrasting absolute monarchy of the Thebans with the elected office of the Athenians. He sends the message back to Thebes to give up the dead or they will go to war.

War is announced and the menfolk go to fight. A messenger returns with news that the Athenians are victorious. He tells of how they won the battle. The Thebans retreated to the wall. Theseus did not chase them as he had recovered the bodies. And their recovery was his only goal. Adrastus asks the messenger where the dead are to be buried. Their preparation is assured and everything is in hand.

The bodies arrive and are eulogised about before the decision is made to make on pyre and tomb for Capaneus. Shortly after Capaneus' widow arrives. She contrives to throw herself on his pyre and be with him in death. Her father Iphis pleads with her not to but is helpless to stop her. After she dies he laments his age and childless state.

The sons of the seven dead from Thebes enter carrying the urns of the fathers' bones. Their grandmothers are with them. Theseus goes to let them leave but Athene appears. She tells him not to let them leave until Adrastus swears and Oath. This oath is that Argos will never again attack Athens and will come to her aid in times of trouble. 

Reflections on The Suppliant Women

It is interesting to see the funeral process played out as part of a play. It shows us that the most common form of burial was that of the bones after the funeral pyre. And that before the funeral pyre the body was reassembled into its proper places. This suggests that it was not uncommon for a body to be at least partially dismembered. It is also interesting that there is no comment about decomposition. When you consider that the bodies were lying out in the field for a while. For as long as it took the supplicants to get to Athens and for the Athenian army to march to Thebes and back. Then again this is entertainment for the masses and maybe it was seen as unnecessary detail for a play. It is far to easy for me to slip back into thinking of these as history and forgetting the audience aspect.

It is amazing the difference having the gods on your side is seen to give. The king of Argos goes to war against the will of the gods. Due to this, he loses badly. This is given as a fact and nothing is said about the size of his army or the quality of his men. He is also the instigator in this war, and so has all the time he wants for planning and preparation. Then the king of Athens goes to war against the same opponent with the blessing of the gods. Even if this blessing is only by implication. He is defending the practice of allowing the dead to be removed from the battlefield even by the losers. With this blessing, he wins. Again nothing is said about the number or quality of his men. Nothing is said either of the fact that both sides agreed to and knew about the war. There was no surprise attack here. There would not have been much time for the Athenians to prepare. It would have just been calling together the army and marching. All this and yet the outcome is seen to come down to the gods blessing.

Athene's inclusion in the play is a little odd. She reminds Theseus of the best course of action. She does not add any knowledge that the mortals present did not know. As such the recommendation could have come from anyone already present. Theseus could have required that oath without prompting.

The interlude between Theseus and the herald from Thebes is quite interesting. The herald is quite strident in his opinion and almost combative with Theseus. Theseus on the other hand while just a strident is a lot more laid back in his answers to the herald. He does reprimand the herald for bringing it up at all as it is not his place to comment. 

What others have to say about The Suppliant Women

From Classical Literature "Funeral rites were very important to the ancient Greeks and the theme of not allowing the bodies of the dead to be buried occurs many times."

"It does add to the myth surrounding the defeat of the Argives at Thebes." From Ancient history encyclopedia

Comparisons with other texts

Like the Children of Heracles, we start the play with supplicants. Unlike the children of Heracles, these are not our main characters for the rest of the play. They rather they bring into view and affect the main character, Theseus. We also see his mother ceremonially trapped at the alter by the other supplicants. This seems to be an effort to gain her ear personally as much about gaining the ear of the god in question. It is interesting that Theseus' mother was on her way to pay tribute to the gods about another matter. It is also interesting that there was a way to keep her there. It must have been well established across the ancient Greek world. For it is foreigners from Argos that knew enough to bind her.

This is the first time we have seen, in direct action, the grief of a wife. It has not been unusual to see the grief of mothers. This we even see in this play as well, but the grief of this wife is severe and new to us. She is said to have run from home, presumably Argo's, to die on her husbands funeral pyre. It is interesting to note the way the play is set out. If they had not had to have fight for the bodies she may not have arrived in time.

Unlike Euripides Electra, the story is not one predominately of revenge. Rather this is wanting a proper burial for their sons, in the case of the suppliants. For Theseus, it is about protecting the values of the time. Though it is like Antigone where we see a sister desperate to bury her brother. The two plays are based on the same events the attempted sack of Thebes by seven champions. This play details the burial of the champions. Whereas Antigone deals with the burial of the son of Oedipus who lost at the head of Argos' army. 

Conclusion

We have looked at how important burial of the dead after battle was to the Greeks. As well as the interesting universality of supplication in the Greek world. We have also discussed what we can glean about the burial rights in ancient Greece. 

This play also sits after and alongside the plays Antigone and Seven against Thebe. It serves to complete the picture of Athens involvement in the war. Which is otherwise a war between Argos and Thebes.

Have you read The Suppliant Women? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The Suppliant Women but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of The Suppliant Women. 

A play of two parts; Andromache, Euripides

 Why you might read Andromache?

Andromache adds another aspect to the Orestes story. We find Orestes dotted about in the Greek plays. Together they give us a fairly complete picture of the important parts of his life. Well, those after he returns to avenge his father, we have yet to see his growing years. 

While this is one of Euripides' less well-known plays I have included it for two reasons. First, is that of completion. I decided with this project that covering the breadth of an author is of more value than touching the highlights. This gives me a broader view and focus.

Second, is that of completing some stories that would otherwise be less than complete. In this example, we only see what Orestes does in his second exile because of this play.

The Story of Andromache

 We find Andromache at the altar of Thetis in Phthia as a supplicant. She is trying to save her life from Hermione, the King's wife. Hermione is desperate to kill Andromache. Andromache was the king's concubine before he married Hermione. She has also born him a son, while Hermione is barren. Hermione blames Andromache for both her barrenness and her husband's disregard of her. Neoptolemus, the King, is away on business and so is not there to protect Andromache. Andromache has sent her son away, for his own protection. She has also sent for Peleus, the King's father to stop this plan coming to fruition. On her side, Hermione has sent for her father, the King of Sparta.

Menelaus is Hermione's father. He arrives and convinces Andromache to leave the altar or he will kill her son. He has retrieved the son from where she sent him away. After she submits to being bound, he informs her that Hermione will kill her son anyway. Menelaus makes preparations for the killing but Peleus arrives. He challenges Menelaus' authority to kill a slave he does not own. He also asks why there has been no trial and concludes that this is murder. Menelaus concedes to Peleus who unbinds Andromache. She is wary that the two will overtake them and ambush them somewhere. Peleus tells her not to worry, that he may be old but he is still capable.

Hermione's nurse enters and tells of Hermione's regret. She has regrets for the actions that have passed to the point of attempting suicide. Hermione enters and pleads with the nurse to let her kill herself. Lest her husband comes home and throws her out of the house, or worse, kill her.

Orestes arrives and Hermione tells him her troubles. Orestes resolves to take her away and to take him as his own wife as was promised to him before the war on Troy. He tells of going to Neoptolemus and pleading with him to give her as his wife but to no avail. He also tells of a plot he has to kill Neoptolemus for that very slight at the Oracle. Orestes and Hemione flee together.

Peleus returns to hear that Hermione has fled with Orestes. He also hears that Orestes has a plan to kill Neoptolemus at the shrine. A messenger enters and tells Peleus that Neoptolemus is dead. He requests the story: Orestes stirred up the people of Delphi. He did so by telling them that Neoptolemus had come to rob the temple again; with this deception, Orestes gathers a group of men to fall on them as they enter the temple. It is here that Neoptolemus dies.

Peleus laments his age and how he is childlessness. He is visited by Thetis, a goddess and his once wife, she tells him where to take Andromache and her son. She promises that the line will live on through that son. She also tells him to take Neoptolemus' remains back to Delphi and bury him there as a sign to the people of Delphi. Finally, she tells him to wait for her in a seaside cave. From there she will come and get him and make him a god and that he will live with her. 

Reflections on Andromache

This is a play of two parts, it turns rapidly about halfway through. It starts as a play about jealousy and taking that to extremes. It then switches to being about Oreste's revenge on Neoptolemus for taking his wife. He does so by taking both his wife and his life. 

These parts are both rather discrete but also very intertwined. The jealous one is none other than that double promised wife. The first half of the play is a cautionary tale of having two lovers under the same roof. This is true, even if one is a concubine and the other a wife: this causes major strife. The wife is filled with jealousy about the concubine having given her husband a son when so far she has not. We assume from the text that he is no longer sleeping with the concubine. Rather, had her before he was married and yet that is not enough to forestall the jealousy.

Peleus' lament as the play starts to draw to a close is timely. The response of Thetis is both a reminder of the truths of the situation and a promise of the fantastical. It reminds Peleus there is an illegitimate heir even if there are not legitimate ones. If he follows instructions the line can continue through that illegitimate heir. He is also reminded that this is also a continuation of the Trojan line at the same time through the child's mother. Becoming a god is rather fantastical. We only see it mentioned in the play and we assume it comes to fruition later. It does give otherwise poor and lonely Peleus a good ending.

It seems more likely that Orestes hears of the problems with Hermione. He then comes to town at Andromache's request.  That is on his way to the Oracle, seems less likely. He must have already planned to put to death Neoptolemus and his escape with Hemione. The act he puts on that he will take her out of her circumstances is far more self-serving than altruistic. 

What others have to say about Andromache

"As with most of the plays written during this time, the audience was well aware of the myth concerning Andromache and her life after the Trojan War." Comments Ancient history encyclopedia

Greek Legends and Myths notes ​"Andromache was described as being loving, loyal and dutiful, all characteristics of the perfect wife to the Ancient Greeks." about Andromache herself.

Comparisons with other texts

Andromache begins with a supplicant at the altar of a god. This is seen in the beginnings of both Heracles and The children of Heracles., though with those plays we see the supplicant's prayer answered in the form of a defender. By contrast, Andromache is tricked into removing herself from the position of supplicant. This happens before help arrives. Thankfully, it does still arrive and is in time to keep her from being killed with her son. Heracles also involves deaths as we see in Andromache with the death of Neoptolemus. But Andromache feels a lot less like a tragedy as Neoptolemus is not cast as the hero; that being said, neither is he cast as the villain until the second half of the play. We end with the almost triumphant end of his grandfather, Peleus.

Like Euripides' Electra, we again see the vengeful side of Orestes. In Electra, he falls on his father's murderers and kills both his mother and his mother's new husband. Here in this play, we see him killing Neoptolemus for denying him a wife that had been promised to him. You could say that in both plays we also see his softer side in how he interacts with the women. In Electra, he gives hope and love to his sister by giving her to be married. This is after he kills Neoptolemus, while he himself goes to exile. We see this care again in his taking away Hermione from her troubles and taking her as his wife. This, as I have said is a little self-serving.

The Medea is exactly the kind of story that Hermione is afraid of. She is scared that a slave woman who used to be a queen would attack her - or even usurp her position as queen: unlike the Medea. It is this that drives Hermione to such lengths as to plot Andromache's death. She does so while her husband is not around to stop her.  

Conclusion

Andromache is a play of two parts. First, the plotting of the jealous Hermione. Second, the fear of Hermione for the consequences of the failed plot. We have looked at how these two halves intertwine. As well as how Orestes showing up being overly serendipitous. 

There are parallels to be drawn with other Greek plays like Medea or Electra. But these are no carbon copies but rather similar themes or situations. In all Andromache tries to tie off some of the loose ends after the battle of Troy and is an interesting read.

Have you read Andromache? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read Andromache but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of Andromache. 

Refuge; The children of Heracles, Euripides and why it deserves a place in your Self Education

Why you might read The children of Heracles

If you have any interest in the true Greek story of Heracles then this play is an integral part. It is important because it deals with what happens to his family after his death. And from this, we see the start of Heracles' legacy. It's on my Self Education list for exactly this reason. I've stated earlier that these plays about and around Heracles life have been eye-opening for someone who only knew the Disney version.

The Story of The children of Heracles

 The story starts with Heracles' young sons and their guardian Iolaus as supplicants to the Altar of Zeus at Athens (though the scene direction says Marathon, Athens is what is in the text, though it may be that Marathon is the town and Athens is the ruling city, considering their locations.). Iolaus laments Heracles' death and lays out the desperation of his position with the boy. We later find out they also have their sisters and Heracles' mother in tow. They have been tossed out of every city they have approached. A messenger arrives from Argos demanding them be surrendered or the army of Argos will set upon them.

Copreus, the herald from Argos arrives. After a short discussion moves to take them bodily
from the altar. Iolaus calls out against the injustice against the gods. The chorus of locals arrive and start discussing the situation. Demophone son of Theseus and current king of Athens arrives. He is quickly petitioned by the herald for the ability to take the sons and Iolaus as prisoners. Demophone gives Iolaus the right to put forward his cause as well. Iolaus lays out the injustice to the gods if they are taken from the altar. She lays out the boy's kinship to Demophone. She also explains their exile from Argos and thus how they do not come under that king's sway. Demophone rules in favour of Iolaus and the children of Heracles. Stating that the decision had more to do with the reputation of Athens. That it is free and that they do not dishonour the gods. Copreus threatens Athens with war but Demophone stands firm. Demophone leaves to prepare for war with Argos.

The army of Argos arrives but does not move down to the plains. Demophone returns and announces he has seen the oracles. And that they have said to win he must sacrifice a princess to Persephone. But he is not willing to sacrifice one of his own or one of his citizens. They are at an impasse that suggests they cannot win the coming war. Then from inside come one of Heracles' daughters, Macaria. She simplifies the whole problem by offering herself up as that sacrifice. She states that it is better for her to die and for her brothers to live. But if they lose her brothers die and even if she survives what sort of life would it be. Macaria exits to be the sacrifice.

A runner arrives and tells of the arrival of an army to join their side lead by one of Heracles' elder sons. Iolaus insists on accompanying the runner back to the army to join the fight. The runner tries to dissuade him because of his age but to no avail.

Another servant appears announcing that they have won the fight. Miraculously Iolaus is young again. They all rejoice and Heracles' mother states that now she believes he has become a god. She has been told this before but has not believed it. The servant then relays the story of the battle. How Iolaus had jumped in a chariot and pursued Eurystheus king of the army from Argos. And how he had overtaken him and overcome him and that he had taken him, prisoner.

Eurystheus is bought to see Heracles' mother and she orders him killed. But the Athenians will not as he is a prisoner and no longer on the battlefield. They discuss this back and forth and eventually decided on killing him. To do so they must bury him in Athens so that he is still in the Athenians custody. 

Reflections on the Children of Heracles

Macaria's strength of will in this play is astounding. It is not that she is asked to die for the victory and thus her brothers. But that she willingly puts herself into the position of the sacrifice. This is true love but also her duty. She knows that the continuation of the house is part of her duty in life and in the telling of this story she lives up to it.
It is interesting to see the convention used here to bypass time. We see the arrival of the enemy army immediately after the exit of the herald who has threatened it. In some ways, there is no convention to hold to. Euripides just jumps from one moment to the next without the change of scene. We do not see changing of scenes in the Greek plays so far, or even a comment about time passing by the chorus. That being said we have seen the chorus used to pad time between when a character leaves and returns. The chorus is also used when something is happening off stage. In some ways, this time skip is just an extrapolation of the ways the chorus has already been used. It does make it hard to tell how much time has passed, though.

We tend to think of the ancient Greeks as a homogeneous group, which they weren't. We see that here with the rules of Athens around prisoners after a battle or war. In Athens, you cannot kill prisoners. Instead, they must be returned to their people after the hostilities have ceased. This is clearly not the case with Argos. Heracles' mother desperately wants to kill Eurystheus. Being from Argos she sees nothing wrong with doing so.
The miracle of Iolaus' regained youth is, as you would expect from a miracle, fantastical. It is though a great pay off for the character that has insisted on taking part in the battle despite his old age. To give Iolaus, and not Heracles' older son, the victory over the Eurysthes is interesting. We would expect Heracles' oldest son to take the throne of Argos. For his to take the throne of his father, following this victory would be fitting. Surely it would do more for the legacy of Heracles if his older son took Argos. And in doing so take out the despot who had overthrown his father and sent him on his labours. 

What others have to say about the Children of Heracles

 GreekMythology.com has this to say, "The problem is that after Heracles’ death, Eurystheus, the King of Argos and Heracles’ archnemesis, decided to kill all the remaining members of Heracles’ family."

"Like other playwrights of the era, Euripides makes reference to Greek mythology, and, in this case, it’s the hero Heracles." from Ancient History Encyclopedia

And finally "“Heracleidae” is usually considered to be essentially a patriotic piece by Euripides, written to the greater glory of Athens, during a period of great instability and uncertainty, as it came under repeated attacks from Sparta in the early stages of the Peloponnesian War." from Classical Literature

Comparisons with other texts

Like Helen, we have a positive ending, but unlike Helen, we do not see that same wish fulfilment. Or the retconning of the events that have happened prior, by the author. Helen is positive from beginning to end with little conflict. But this play has the sacrifice of a daughter to give a bit more balance to the plot points.

This is the second time we have seen sons of Heracles sitting as supplicants to an altar. The first was in Heracles by Euripides. Here his first wife and sons sitting at the altar in their own city while a tyrant threatens to kill them. Unfortunately by the end of the play, they are dead at their father's hand. In this play we see his second set of sons sitting at an altar in a foreign land. All the while a king, through his messenger, tries to get them thrown out so they can arrest them and put them to death. This time Heracles is not alive to save them. Their salvation instead comes from the ruler of the city and the willingness to die of one of his daughters.

In the chronology of Heracles does not seem to follow after Euripides Heracles. Instead, it seems to follow the events of his death in Sophocles' Woman of Trachis. The first tells the story of the destruction of Heracles' first family. Whereas the second deals with his second wife and Heracles death. In this play, Heracles both has sons, which I'm going to assume come from that second marriage, and is himself dead. This is also the first of the plays with Heracles that has a rather happy, or at least positive ending. Though it does still end with death it is the death of the enemy rather than that of one of the families of Heracles.

Conclusion

The children of Heracles deals with the fate of the family of Heracles after his death. This makes it important to a broad Self Education and a better understanding of the Heracles Mythos. It covers the attempts of the tyrant of Argos to capture and kill Heracles' family. This is prevented by the king of Athens where the family have travelled to. The main themes are supplication to the altar and sacrifice. We see this through the sacrifice of Heracles' daughter for the survival of her family. Finally, we have looked at how it compares to other works both by Euripides and by other Greek authors.

 

Have you read The children of Heracles? If so what did you think of it?

Want to read  The children of Heracles but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of  The Children of Heracles.

Christ's Church and Eternity; Augustine, City of God (2B) A quickish guide

Why you might read the City of God?

The City of God is one of the oldest well known Christian theological works outside the Bible. Augustine is considered one of the church fathers. His work helps to expand on the Bible. In doing so he sets the foundation for theologians to come after him.

As history, it gives a snapshot of the Roman empire. It does this by reacting to what is going on in the empire. It also gives us a snapshot of early Christian Theology. Thus, we can compare to modern-day examples.

The Story of the City of God

Book XVII:

This book covers, from the establishment of the kingship to the minor and major prophets. Augustine is focused on the prophecies of Christ and his bride, the Church. He starts with David and his reign and what the prophets said to and about David and his son Solomon. 

He then sidesteps and spends some time in David's own prophetic works, the Psalms. He attributes all 150 psalms to David. He then picks a few out for specific treatment.  In an aside, he apologises to those of his readers who know more about the psalms. This aside explains why he is not more thorough in his dealings with the psalms, that this explanation does not fit into his purview of this work.

He finishes up with the works of Solomon, both of the canon and deuterocanonical. From these works, he pulls the prophecies of Christ and his church.

Augustine does not spend much time on the prophets themselves. He sees the prophets as more straight forward. Simpler in the understanding of their allegory and simpler to discern where there is an allegory. Where there is historical fact and where there is both. It brings us to the New Testament but does seem to leave quite a bit lacking. 

Book XVIII:

The first half of this book is dedicated to going through biblical times and placing the Kings of Israel. Then, matching those Kings with their Assyrian and Roman counterparts. The translation notes say that only some of these are correct but they were correct at the time Augustine wrote them. Augustine then moves onto the prophets. His main point is, to show how the prophets prophesied Christ. He continues to give a list of kings of Isreal and Judah, as well as every prophet in the scriptures.

Augustine spends the tail end of this book discussing and refuting some pagan heresy. These are around the length of Christianity's survival. He also deals again with heresy inside the church. He discusses the accepted, even today, idea that some in the church are not true disciples.

Book XIX:

This book starts with a secular look at the Supreme Good and the Supreme Evil. Augustine defines the Supreme Good as what is to be desired and the Supreme Evil as what is to be avoided. He first discusses the philosopher's definitions of good and evil. Though they do differ, they can be distilled down to the two ideas of virtue and pleasure. 

He continues in the following chapters to contrast this with the Christian view. This is the view that the Supreme Good is to praise and worship God. As well as that, all other things (like virtue) flow out of this, rather than being things to pursue in their own right. 

The rest of the book flutters through a range of topics from friendship to allegiances. From war, to slavery, to sin. Finally, from hope to oracles about Christ, from those worshipping other "gods".

Augustine finishes off this book with a discussion of eternal life. For believers the felicity with God. And for non-believers in eternal separation and the "second death". 

Book XX:

This book deals with the final judgement and the resurrection of the body, as part of the final judgement. Augustine starts with the book of Revelations, then progresses on to support his view with the Old Testament books of Daniel, Isaiah and Malachi. His view is centred around the idea that Christ will come again to judge the living and the dead. He spends some time discussing whether those living will die and then be resurrected. He concludes that this is most likely as the prophecy's all talk about the resurrection of all humans. He explains that being caught up in the air is the death phase for those still alive at the time of the resurrection.

He also spends some time on the 1000 years that the devil is bound. He questions whether that is the same as the 1000 years that the church and Christ reign before the final judgement. Finally, he weakly concludes that they must be the same: that the three and a half years the devil is loosed must be either included or directly after the 1000 years but that the 1000 years cannot be precise. This is because scripture says that no one knows the day or time of the second coming but God himself. We see 1000 years used approximately in other parts of scripture as well.

Book XXI:

This book is focused on the eternal damnation of those who are not Christians. As well as the various heresies that had come up against the eternal nature of the fire. Also, whether God in his mercy could ever leave someone in the fire.

First, Augustine combats the non-believers' objections to the eternal fires of hell. In doing this, he goes off on a seeming tangent into the wonders found in the world. The eventual point of this tangent is that the pagans are quick to believe those wonders. Even though they seem to be contrary to nature and logic. How can they then refuse to believe in hell and its conditions? When their objection is that its existence is illogical and unnatural.

Then he gets into the meat of his argument. He is against the idea that eternal damnation would be escapable for unbelievers. But that through a raft of possible avenues they would only serve some time in the fires. If this is true of unbelievers, would God's grace not extend to the demons and to Satan himself? He counters this with scripture which describes hell as both eternal and going on forever and ever. He concludes that these other ideas are heretical, that is contrary to scripture. He also concludes that there is no basis for them.

Book XXII:

Augustine wanders a little bit in this book. But his main focus is the fate of Christians and what eternal life will look like. 

Miracles are dwelt on at some length. Augustine first spends a large amount of time recounting miracles. These were miracles he had either known about or heard about. His point was to show that miracles of God were still evident in his time and that their purpose is to point people towards Christ. He contrasts these miracles of God with the work of the demons. The demon's works are always of lesser impact and often not being a full blessing. He points to the Egyptian magicians in the Exodus account. How there "miracles" were of lesser scale. As well as the possible use of trickery in their ability to replicate the plagues.

He then returns to the question of bodily resurrection. He refutes the Platonists who argue that something physical can not be made eternal as well as those who deny we will have a any physical body after the Resurrection. He then spends some time talking through what exactly our bodies will look like. Will we all be made equal? Do we take the idea literally of being made like His son? Is there still male and female?

He concludes that we will have our own bodies, that there will be male and female and that we will be fully formed and adult in our prime.

He finishes with a short discussion of eternal life as the perpetual sabbath for man and God's good.

What others have to say about the City of God

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says "The monumental apologetic treatise De civitate dei (City of God) argues that happiness can be found neither in the Roman nor the philosophical tradition but only through membership in the city of God whose founder is Christ."

And from Columbia College, "To do this, Augustine puts forth two main arguments in City of God. The first speaks directly to those who had criticized the Christian God for failing to protect Rome and its citizens."

Reflections on the City of God

Book XVII:

It struck me that Augustine believed all the Psalms to be written by David though he remarked carefully that others disagreed with him. The rebuttal he offered for known challenges was uncharacteristically weak.  He uses the prophetic nature of some to try and pass off the uses of names from later periods. In modern times the first half of Psalms is generally attributed to David. While the second half to an author or authors unknown.

It seems at times in Augustine's writing that he is grasping a little. Grasping to call sections prophetic of Christ and the Church. He seems to be of the opinion that every piece of the Old Testament can be interpreted as prophetic. While some modern scholars agree, there is also a lot who would say that it is stretching. 

Book XVIII:

 Augustine argues that the Septuagint is divinely inspired in its translation. It was ascribed to 72 translators that translated separately.  Yet they came to the exact same version of the translation. This has been debunked in more modern times. Found to be unsupported by the historical evidence. He tries to explain the differences between the two translations of the day. These being the Septuagint and the Vulgate. The Vulgate was, in Augustine's time, recently translated from the Hebrew. The Septuagint by contrast was translated through two languages. He tries to show both being true even though they were different. He seems to not want to discredit the older translation. It is more commonly acknowledged now, that there were errors in the Septuagint. These errors mainly arose from double translation. It is also acknowledged that the Vulgate was more accurate to the original Hebrew texts.

Augustine also spends some time refuting the 10 persecutions theory. This theory was common in his day. He does so by pointing out that it makes little sense to start from the Roman persecutions. Because the martyrdom of the early church needs to be taken into account. This is an interesting heresy around when Christ will return. It is not one we would tend to be taken in by today. Not because we are any smarter or more Godly. But rather that we have the evidence of many, many persecutions all around the world to look to. 

Book XIX:

The hard thing about this book has been a plethora of topics. This time I'm struggling to see a central connecting thread. It's not the first time that Augustine has spanned a huge amount of topics. But, previously, I found it a little easier to see his central topic.

Augustine's comments on the Oracles about Christ from outside the Hebrew scriptures. This is quite interesting to me and I'll do a little more research into it at a later date. It would be interesting to know if they were actually written before the time of Christ. I wonder if, with a modern understanding, they are now seen to be retrospective of that time. The other possibility is that Augustine has overreached. The Oracles may not be about Christ but are just that normal level of vague that we see from ancient world Oracles.

There is also the chapter on an Oracle of Apollo. A man asks the Oracle what should he do about his wife being Christian. The Oracle advised that he should leave her because of the Christian faith. He is quoted as saying "let her go as she pleases, persisting in her vain delusions." This gives us an interesting view of how Christianity was seen by the Greeks in antiquity. It would also be very interesting to know Augustine's source. 

Book XX:

Augustine believed the 1000 years that the Devil was bound had started. This, in the bible, is directly before the last judgement.  We can see now, in modern times, that one of two things is true due to the final coming not having come yet. One that he was wrong and we will see this binding of the devil at a later date. Two that 1000 years is a very approximate time in this part of scripture. In saying that the bible does also say that a day is like a thousand years to the Lord. So who knows how long in absolute terms the 1000 years in the text is. But to take most of the bible literally you can't pick and choose too much on what is and isn't literal. I tend to think he was mistaken in thinking that the 1000 years had begun.

Book XXI:

Augustine's conclusions in this book are correct about these heresies. He does not deal with the grief and disbelief that goes with the formulations of those heresies. That those unbelievers are destined for suffering in the fires of hell for all eternity is hard to grasp. For the unbeliever, it can bring him to faith with fear of that eternity. But for the Christian, it holds fear for others. We want there to be a way for those who do enough good or those who are loved by us to still go to eternal bliss with God. And being fundamentally lovers of God we try to wrestle with not seeing them again in eternity. This can feel that God is being too harsh or unmerciful. We must remember that God's mercies are for this life and that we as believers have a duty to help others into belief. This is the time of opportunity not after they have fallen to the first death. If we hold instead to these heresies, we will miss the opportunities now. 

Book XXII:

The sheer amount of miracles recalled and written by Augustine is astounding. The great thing is that he does not lose sight of the purpose of those miracles, to bring people to faith. His discussion on whether we would have physical bodies was an eye-opener. I had not considered any reason that they wouldn't be. That is the simplest reading of the text. The views he disputed brought the discussion back to that simple reading of the text. 

While I do not think the Ages of Revelation and the Church is analogous to the 7 days of the week.  I especially do not think the Sabbath holds as much weight as Augustine thinks it does. It is still interesting to look at the Resurrection as a perpetual sabbath. That is as the perpetual Day of the Lord. A perpetual time of being with and praising God in all His goodness and majesty. I don't remember there being anything in the scriptures about the week being done away with. That would suggest that work 6 days and rest one as the Sabbath would continue. Work would be fulfilling and with our eyes fixed on God.

Comparisons with Other Texts

Again I will only be comparing this book to itself. This is due to my lack of peripheral knowledge due to starting this list before finishing my BC list. 

Augustine continues in dealing more with scripture as we have seen in the first half of this Part. Again he does occasionally reference Plato or other philosophers. He does spend more time focused on Heaven and Hell.  Which to my way of thinking is more of what he has said he is setting out to do. 

Unlike Dante's Divine Comedy, Augustine's versions of heaven and hell are more in line with the bible. He does not posit a Purgatory which is an idea that came to rise in the Church between Augustine's and Dante's times. Augustine is a Bishop of the Church in his own time. Dante is a layman with an over-inflated sense of his own place in the world and history. It is no wonder their views on heaven and hell differ. For more on the works of Dante have a look at some of my earlier posts. Have a look at the discussion on the first book of the divine comedy,  The Inferno.

Conclusion

We have finally finished the City of God, thanks for sticking with me. We have looked at the final six books of this text. This is where Augustine finally gets into describing Heaven and Hell. He spends time dealing with heresies. These heresies are ones he sees around him, and some we still see today. Augustine has been focused and unfocused at different points in the work. His main point through the whole book has been, join the city of God. That is, join with Christ.

Have you read The City of God? If so what did you think of it? 
 
Want to read The City of God but haven't? Please leave me a comment and let me know why you want to read it.

Hopefully, this post inspires you to take the time to look into it on your own journey of Self Education.

Get a copy of the City of God