The Suitors, the Crew and the Slaves

Groups standing between Odysseus and home

Homer’s Odyssey follows Odysseus’ return to Ithaca after the Trojan War. His crew share the dangers of the journey in Books 9 and 10. Later, in Books 19, 21 and 22, the suitors occupy his palace while seeking to marry his wife, Penelope. The loyalties of his household slaves become crucial to his recovery of his home.

These groups reveal different problems of leadership and trust. The crew are companions whose decisions can endanger their shared homecoming. The suitors exploit an absent man’s household. The slaves face the question of how to act while their master’s future remains uncertain, within a relationship in which they lack freedom. Their actions, rather than their social standing alone, help establish the contrasts between them.

The suitors exploit hospitality

The suitors’ offence is not simply that they wish to marry Penelope. They consume the household’s wealth without respecting the family that sustains them. In Book 19, Penelope explains that they ‘squander’ Telemachus’ inheritance. In Book 21, she accuses them of ‘eating and drinking endlessly’ and using their desire to marry her as an excuse.

This behaviour violates xenia, the obligations of hospitality and guest-friendship. A guest should respect a host’s household, not impoverish it. The suitors therefore obstruct Odysseus’ nostos, or homecoming: even after reaching Ithaca, he must regain control of his home before his return is complete.

Homer also exposes a gap between their aristocratic status and their conduct. Penelope addresses them as ‘Noble Suitors’, but their behaviour is anything but generous or honourable. Similarly, the epithet ‘godlike Eurymachus’ does not make his actions morally admirable. Judgements about character must rest on what he actually says and does.

Antinous: aggression and overconfidence

Antinous repeatedly tries to dominate others. When Eumaeus and the cowherd weep at the sight of Odysseus’ bow in Book 21, he calls them ‘Stupid yokels’ and tells them to stop. Their grief expresses attachment to their absent master; his contempt makes their loyalty appear more sympathetic by contrast.

He also angrily rejects Leodes’ warning that many suitors will fail to string the bow. He orders Melanthius to bring a fire and tallow so that they can warm and grease it. His confidence survives the failures of others, even though he admits that no man present equals Odysseus. Later, he proposes postponing the contest because it is Apollo’s feast day. Coming after the unsuccessful attempts, this can be read as a convenient way to avoid further humiliation, rather than simply religious concern.

When the disguised Odysseus asks to try the bow, Antinous insults him as a ‘Wretched beggar’. He threatens violence and removal to King Echetus, ‘the maimer of men’. Rather than honouring a guest’s rights, he treats someone apparently poor and powerless as a person he can intimidate.

The scene uses dramatic irony: Antinous does not know that the beggar is the household’s returning master. Homer also announces that Antinous will be the first struck by Odysseus’ arrow. His attempts to control the contest therefore build towards his own destruction.

In Book 22, Antinous is raising a golden cup to drink when Odysseus shoots him through the throat. The moment links his death to the feasting through which the suitors have exploited the household. His confidence that one man could not threaten so many proves disastrously misplaced.

Eurymachus: reputation and self-preservation

Eurymachus reveals a different priority. After failing to string the bow in Book 21, he says that the greatest humiliation is not losing Penelope but falling so far below Odysseus’ strength. He fears that future generations will hear of their disgrace.

When Penelope supports the stranger’s request, Eurymachus explains that the suitors fear gossip: people might say that a wandering beggar succeeded where they failed. His concern is therefore how others judge their strength and status, rather than whether they have treated the household justly.

Penelope exposes the contradiction. Men who ‘ruin and dishonour a King’s house’ already have a bad reputation. Their anxiety about one further embarrassment does not repair their existing misconduct.

In Book 22, after Antinous’ death and Odysseus’ revelation of his identity, Eurymachus changes his approach. He acknowledges wrongdoing but claims that Antinous was responsible for everything. He says Antinous wanted to become king and planned to murder Telemachus. These are Eurymachus’ claims in a plea for survival, not a reason to excuse the other suitors’ participation.

He offers compensation for the food and drink consumed, with each suitor contributing the value of twenty oxen in bronze and gold. His offer recognises the household’s material losses, but Odysseus refuses to treat their offences as something money can settle.

When negotiation fails, Eurymachus urges the suitors to use tables as shields and attack together. He then charges Odysseus with his sword and is killed by an arrow. This shows that he is not merely a persuasive speaker: he can organise resistance and fight. Nevertheless, his shift from bargaining to violence also exposes how closely his words serve his own survival.

Leodes and the limits of a single group portrait

The suitors are not interchangeable. In Book 21, Homer says that Leodes, their seer, ‘alone despised the Suitors’ acts of wantonness’. His disapproval distinguishes him from Antinous, who encourages abuse.

Leodes is also physically unsuccessful: his ‘smooth and delicate hands’ quickly lose strength when he attempts the bow. He advises unsuccessful suitors to seek other women and woo them with gifts. This offers an alternative to their endless occupation of Odysseus’ palace.

Nevertheless, he remains one of the suitors. In Book 22, his appeal for mercy fails and Odysseus kills him. The distinction between Leodes’ disapproval and his continued membership of the group makes the punishment more troubling than a simple story in which every victim behaves identically.

Nor are the suitors wholly incapable of courage. In Book 22, Eurymachus and Amphinomus attack, while other leading suitors coordinate spear throws. Their military resistance does not make their earlier conduct honourable, but it prevents ‘cowardly’ from being a complete description of them.

As the battle turns against them, Homer compares the fleeing suitors to cattle driven by a gadfly, then to smaller birds attacked by vultures. These comparisons reverse their earlier dominance: men who intimidated others become frightened, vulnerable prey. The imagery presents Odysseus’ victory as overwhelming while also making the violence vivid.

The crew at Ismarus: disobedience and costly indulgence

At Ismarus in Book 9, Odysseus and his men sack the city of the Cicones and divide the captives and riches. Odysseus says that he gives everyone an equal share and orders a quick departure. His followers refuse to listen. Instead, they drink wine and slaughter sheep and cattle for a feast.

Their fault is therefore more specific than simply losing a battle: they ignore a warning and allow enjoyment of victory to take priority over safety. While they linger, the Cicones gather stronger reinforcements from inland. The crew do fight, holding off the larger force through the morning, but are eventually driven back. Six companions from each ship die.

This episode combines indiscipline with fighting ability. The men are not incapable warriors, but their refusal to leave creates an avoidable danger. Odysseus calls them ‘foolish followers’, directing blame towards them. Since he is recounting these adventures to Alcinous, his judgement is also the surviving leader’s account of what went wrong.

The crew and Polyphemus: caution alongside cooperation

The crew can work effectively together. Before the encounter with Polyphemus, they divide into groups to hunt goats. When Odysseus orders his crew to embark for the neighbouring shore, they board swiftly and row in organised ranks. These practical actions show that they are not always unwilling to follow orders.

At the Cyclops’ cave, however, their desire to leave contrasts with Odysseus’ wish to remain and test the inhabitant’s hospitality. His curiosity exposes them to capture and death. Here, the followers’ caution is better judgement than their leader’s decision to stay.

Once trapped, the men make an essential contribution to survival. They smooth the length of olive wood that Odysseus cuts from Polyphemus’ club; he sharpens and hardens its point. Four men, chosen by lot, then help him blind the sleeping Cyclops. They hold and thrust the heated stake into the eye while Odysseus applies his weight and twists it. Their courage and coordinated effort turn his plan into action. The surviving men escape beneath rams, concealed under the middle animals in groups of three, while Odysseus clings beneath a single ram.

During the escape, their caution again contrasts with their leader’s pride. Odysseus’ first taunt provokes Polyphemus to throw a rock, whose backwash drives the ship towards the shore. The crew row to safety, then beg Odysseus not to provoke him again, warning that another rock could crush them. He ignores their appeals and reveals his name. This enables Polyphemus to direct his prayer to Poseidon against Odysseus, asking that he lose his companions and return late, in distress. The crew’s warnings show sound judgement: their leader’s boasting endangers the escape they have helped achieve.

This matters when assessing later disagreements. The crew have experienced danger resulting from Odysseus’ choices as well as their own. Their doubts about him cannot all be dismissed as irrational disloyalty.

Aeolus’ wind bag: suspicion destroys the homecoming

In Book 10, Aeolus gives Odysseus a sealed bag containing the winds, while the West Wind carries the ships towards Ithaca. On the tenth day, home is close enough for them to see people tending fires. Odysseus falls asleep after managing the ship’s sails without handing over to anyone else.

The men imagine that the bag contains gold and silver. They complain that Odysseus brings home riches from Troy and receives further gifts, while they have shared the journey but supposedly return empty-handed. Their suspicion centres on unequal reward: they believe their leader is benefiting at their expense and want to inspect the supposed treasure.

They open the bag, releasing the winds. The resulting storm carries the ships away from Ithaca and back to Aeolus. Their mistrust therefore destroys the homecoming they all want. The irony is painful: what they take to be private wealth is actually assistance for the whole group.

Odysseus’ earlier account of equal shares at Ismarus also complicates their accusation. Their complaint reveals their belief, not proof that he has kept every reward for himself. At the same time, the incident exposes a failure of trust between leader and followers. His determination to manage everything himself has left him exhausted, while their suspicions turn into a disastrous action.

Eurylochus at Circe’s house: fear with understandable reasons

By the time they reach Circe’s island in Book 10, the men remember the violence of the Cyclops and the Laestrygonians. Their tears and fear reflect repeated losses, not simply a lack of courage.

Eurylochus leads a scouting party. Polites, described as a trusted friend and ‘a man of initiative’, encourages the men to call to the woman singing inside the house. When Circe invites them in, they enter innocently. Eurylochus alone suspects a trap and stays outside. His caution allows him to return to the ship when no one reappears.

He is so distressed that he initially cannot speak. His grief shows concern for the missing men. When Odysseus asks him to lead the way back, Eurylochus begs not to return and urges escape with the survivors. This would abandon the missing companions, but his motive is also to prevent further deaths: he believes a rescue attempt will destroy those who remain.

After Odysseus returns safely, Eurylochus again objects to visiting Circe. He warns that she will turn them into animals and recalls the deaths in Polyphemus’ cave, blaming ‘reckless Odysseus’. His challenge is harsh and, at this stage, fails to recognise that circumstances have changed. Yet the earlier disaster gives his distrust an understandable basis.

Odysseus considers killing him. The other men intervene with soothing words and suggest leaving Eurylochus to guard the ship. Their cooperation restrains their leader’s anger and protects a companion. Eurylochus eventually follows, fearing Odysseus’ rebuke: his outward obedience does not necessarily mean that his doubts have disappeared.

Companionship and the shared desire for home

The crew’s affection for Odysseus is especially clear when he returns from Circe’s house. They crowd around him weeping, feeling as though they have reached Ithaca. Homer compares them to calves gathering around their returning mothers. The comparison makes their dependence and relief vivid: he represents security and the hope of home.

They also ask about their missing friends. When the two groups reunite at Circe’s house, they weep together in recognition. Their attachment is to one another as well as to their leader.

After a year enjoying Circe’s hospitality, it is the crew who remind Odysseus to think of his native country and resume the journey. He accepts their advice. Their judgement helps restore the shared purpose of the expedition.

A balanced interpretation therefore considers the relationship between leader and followers. Their disobedience and mistrust contribute to disaster, but they can also cooperate, care for companions and offer better judgement than Odysseus. They are vulnerable human companions, not merely obstacles to an otherwise flawless hero.

Eumaeus and Philoetius: loyalty becomes action

Eumaeus is Odysseus’ swineherd and Philoetius his cowherd. In Book 21, both weep at the sight of their master’s bow. Their loyalty begins as an emotional attachment to someone who has been absent for many years.

Odysseus does not rely on emotion alone. Outside the courtyard, he asks whether they would fight for him if he returned. Both pray for his homecoming. Only then does he reveal himself and show the boar-hunt scar as proof of his identity. Their embrace and tears make the reunion affectionate, while his careful testing makes it strategically important.

He assigns them specific tasks. Eumaeus must place the bow in his hands and arrange for the women’s doors to be shut. Philoetius must bar and secure the courtyard gate. Their loyalty helps turn an apparently hopeless situation into a prepared confrontation.

Eumaeus briefly drops the bow when the suitors threaten him. This does not erase his loyalty: fear shows the danger he faces, and he ultimately carries the bow to Odysseus. Courage here means acting despite intimidation, not being incapable of fear.

In Book 22, the two herdsmen put on armour and fight beside Odysseus and Telemachus. They also capture Melanthius when he supplies weapons to the enemy. Their loyalty is therefore practical and dangerous, not merely a matter of affectionate words. They are essential participants in recovering the household.

Odysseus promises each man a wife, goods and a house nearby, and says he will regard them as friends and brothers of Telemachus. These are promised rewards, not completed outcomes at this point. The language shows how highly he values their support, although the relationship remains unequal: Odysseus controls both the commands and the rewards.

Eurycleia: affection, recognition and secrecy

Eurycleia is the elderly nurse who cared for Odysseus from infancy. In Book 19, she washes the disguised stranger’s feet and recognises the scar left by a boar. Her recognition grows out of her long personal connection with him, rather than his clothing or apparent social position.

She is overwhelmed by joy and grief and tries to draw Penelope’s attention to him. Her impulse is affectionate, but it threatens the secrecy on which his plans depend. Odysseus restrains her and threatens punishment if she reveals his identity. Even a loyal slave is vulnerable to her master’s power.

Eurycleia promises to keep the secret, describing her firmness through a comparison with stone or iron. She also offers to identify which serving women have dishonoured him and which are innocent. Odysseus initially says he will judge them himself. Her loyalty combines emotional attachment, discretion and detailed knowledge of the household.

In Book 21, Eumaeus passes instructions to her about shutting the women’s doors and keeping them inside despite any shouting. In Book 22, she identifies twelve of the household’s fifty serving women as disloyal. Her knowledge helps distinguish between household members rather than treating them all alike.

Her loyalty has a harsh side. Seeing the dead suitors, she wants to shout in triumph, but Odysseus restrains her, saying it is impious to rejoice over dead men. Affection for her master does not make every response she has beyond criticism.

Melanthius and Melantho: support for the suitors

Melanthius, the goatherd, sides with the suitors. In Book 21 he promptly supplies the fire and tallow for their attempts at the bow. His opposition becomes unmistakable in Book 22 when he obtains shields, spears and helmets from Odysseus’ storeroom and gives them to the suitors. This materially strengthens their resistance and makes Odysseus fear that the battle has turned against him.

When Melanthius returns for more armour, Eumaeus spots him. Eumaeus and Philoetius capture him, bind his hands and feet behind his back and suspend him near the roof-beams on Odysseus’ orders. Loyal and disloyal household workers now act directly against one another. Eumaeus’ mocking promise of a ‘soft bed’ is bitterly ironic: Melanthius is being held in painful bonds, not offered comfort.

Melantho, a disloyal maid associated with the suitors, shows her hostility through her treatment of the disguised Odysseus in Book 19. She accuses the stranger of roaming the house and spying on the women, calls him a ‘wretch’ and orders him out. She threatens to drive him away with a blazing torch.

Her abuse contrasts with Eurycleia’s compassionate treatment of the same apparently poor stranger. It also undermines the welcome Penelope gives him. The dramatic irony sharpens the scene: Melantho thinks she can expel a powerless beggar, but she is insulting the returning master of the household.

The disloyal women: offences and execution

In Book 22, Eurycleia accuses twelve serving women of behaving shamelessly and showing no respect for Penelope or herself. Telemachus later says that they have poured scorn on him and his mother and slept with the suitors. Within the household’s judgement, their sexual relationships and contempt for the family constitute betrayal.

Odysseus first forces these women to help remove the corpses and clean the hall. He then orders Telemachus and the herdsmen to take them outside and kill them with swords. Telemachus deliberately changes the method: saying that they shall not die ‘cleanly’, he hangs them using a ship’s cable in the narrow space between the round house and the courtyard wall.

Homer compares the women to thrushes or doves caught in a snare. The image emphasises helplessness and describes their deaths as pitiable. It gives the punishment an emotional force beyond simply announcing that disloyalty has been punished.

Melanthius’ punishment follows a different sequence. His suspension during the battle keeps him captive and in torment; afterwards, he is dragged into the yard and mutilated. His nose and ears, genitals, hands and feet are cut off. This is not the same punishment as the women’s hanging, and it expresses the victors’ intense anger at his active assistance to their enemies.

Loyalty, coercion and the severity of revenge

These punishments mark Odysseus’ restoration of authority, but their severity also invites questions about revenge and justice. Loyalty operates within slavery: these workers do not have the freedom or equal bargaining power of modern employees.

There is also a tension in how the women’s relationships are described. At the beginning of Book 22, Odysseus accuses the suitors of having ‘forced my maids’. Later, the punished women are condemned for sleeping with the suitors. The accusation of coercion makes it unsafe to assume that every woman’s circumstances or freedom to choose were identical, even though the household condemns the twelve as disloyal.

The treatment of Phemius, the singer, provides another important contrast. He is spared after Telemachus speaks for him, because he had been compelled to perform for the suitors. Coerced service is therefore distinguished from willing support. When evaluating loyalty, consider not only whom someone appears to serve, but also what choice they had and what they actually did.

The ending also restores affection. The remaining household women embrace and kiss Odysseus in welcome, moving him towards tears. Their response contrasts with Melantho’s hostility and shows that the household contains lasting attachments as well as betrayal.

Across these groups, Homer explores the difference between status and conduct. Noble suitors can abuse hospitality; frightened slaves can act courageously; a crew can make disastrous choices yet sometimes offer better judgement than its leader. A convincing evaluation preserves those differences rather than dividing every character into a simple category of good or bad.