#Ajax with post methods | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

indeedcaptain · 2 years ago

Text

Spirktober 2023, day 11: Telepathy

HOO BOY HERE IS A MONSTER OF A CHAPTER. This is Chapter 4 of "all i want for christmas." I did, in fact, get the job that I wanted (!!!!!!!!) so I may not finish Spirktober until December lol, but I'm going to write as much as I can in the meantime.

Also posted on AO3 here.

Warnings: explicit telepathic sex :)

☆☆☆

Despite the faint blush that never quite left her cheeks when she looked at Spock, Winona Kirk was kind and welcoming. She and George --- both insisting to Spock that he call them by their first names --- raised the ta’al to him, and he raised it in return. They asked about their trip back East, about Spock’s family, and James asked them about their travels in return. Spock learned that both Winona and George served on the U.S.S. Ajax: George as the captain, and Winona as chief engineer.

Eventually, as Spock had predicted with 96.7% surety, Winona turned to James and said, “Son, when you told us you were bringing Spock home for Christmas, I must say we didn’t realize in what capacity!”

James flushed beautifully pink as Winona continued, “Now, how long have you boys been together?” Spock clasped his hands behind his back and looked at James. James looked from his mother to Spock and back again. He cleared his throat. He looked back at Spock. Spock raised one eyebrow.

“Do you want the true answer or the appropriate answer?” James eventually asked, after much hemming and hawing.

Winona’s smile curved wickedly, and her eyes sparkled as she said, “The true one, always.” Spock was beginning to see from where James had inherited some of his humor.

James checked the clock on the stove. “Twelve hours.”

“Eleven hours and thirteen minutes,” Spock offered. There was a beat of silence, and then Winona roared with laughter, slapping the countertop. George choked gently on his coffee, his face turning red.

“You always did have a flair for the dramatic,” Winona eventually sighed, looking affectionately at her son. “Planned this one well, didn’t you?”

“I planned nothing,” James said, avoiding eye contact.

“And isn’t that evident,” she said, winking at Spock. He made up his mind: he liked James’s family very much, and was glad, again, of allowing James to dismantle his plans.

☆☆☆

“We’ll be gone for five hours,” Winona said as she and George bundled into coats and scarves by the door. “Five. We’ll be back around four, and then we ought to have dinner together.”

“It would be a pleasure, ma’am,” Spock said, standing with James in the foyer. Winona flicked James on the shoulder.

“Five hours,” she repeated.

“I understand, Mom,” James said, and Spock saw in him the child he had been. “Have a good trip. Don’t let Dad bully the bartenders.”

“I can only do so much,” she said, sighing, and when the door shut behind her the silence echoed in her absence.

“I believe we have five hours without my parents at home, if I’m remembering correctly,” James said, planting his hands on his hips. “What would you like to do?”

Spock, who had been utilizing all of the control available to him to keep his hands from James’s skin while his parents were in their presence, wrapped himself around his James and spun them. He walked James backwards until James’s back hit the door, protecting the back of his head with one hand, and inhaled deeply at the crook of his neck. He felt James nodding.

“Me too,” James whispered. Spock kissed him, both hands coming up to cradle his face, and pressed his thigh in between James’s legs. He felt James shift to accommodate him. He opened his mouth to Spock, and his hands slipped under Spock’s sweater. Then they slipped under his second sweater. James’s lips and tongue lost their rhythm as he started to laugh.

“How many layers, exactly, are you wearing?”

“I am cold,” Spock said stiffly. James pressed his forehead against Spock’s cheekbone and chuckled as he methodically dug his way to Spock’s skin and slid his hands beneath the fabric. James wrapped his arms around Spock’s waist, lifting him onto his toes.

“Let’s go upstairs and I’ll warm you up,” James promised.

“I will hold you to that promise,” Spock said, and James pinched his bottom from behind as they went back up the stairs.

☆☆☆

They kissed lazily beneath the covers, divested of clothing until they were pressed skin-to-skin, no barrier between them. James’s stomach was warm against his, and Spock could not help himself from grazing the back of his hands against the hair on James’s chest.

“I’ve thought frequently about your hands,” James said. “I wanted to know how sensitive they really were.”

“Very,” Spock said, and allowed James to run his fingers over his palm.

��Last night,” James said, and closed his eyes rapturously. “It was better than I had ever dreamed. The way you came was amazing.” He closed his hand around Spock’s and pulled it to his mouth, brushing his lips against his knuckles, the backs of his fingers. His mouth drifted dangerously close to his fingertips, and Spock felt his cock stiffen slightly.

“I have never done any of that before,” Spock said, and James smiled against his hand. “Do you always take the penetrative position?”

James hummed. “No,” he said eventually, thoughtfully. Spock could feel, through their clasped hands, his emotions flickering as he considered his response. He felt, to Spock, like a bird: his thought pattern so quick and intuitive that sometimes Spock found it hard to follow. Watching him think was like seeing a puzzle come together without having a hand in its construction. “I had preferences, before,” he said. Spock prevented himself from physically reacting to the idea that there had been others before. James smiled at him, like he knew what Spock was thinking. And maybe he did. He had always been far more perceptive than other humans that Spock knew. “But somehow I don’t think that those preferences will remain as strong as they were.” He kissed Spock’s fingertips, and smiled again when he felt Spock’s penis twitch against him. “I want to do everything, as long as it’s you.”

Spock suddenly understood the human phrase ‘to eat one alive.’ He understood it specifically as it applied to James. He pulled his hand from James’s, as much as it pained him to do so, and used it to pull James closer to him. James rolled on top of him, pressing against him and kissing him deeply. Spock traced one hand over the cleft of his ass, and James shivered as he ghosted his fingers over his hole.

“Do you have preferences, Spock?” James whispered, and the warmth of his breath against the point of Spock’s ear triggered his pilomotor reflex. James laughed, rubbing his hand over the bumps on Spock’s arm, as Spock said, “I want to do everything. As long as it is with you.”

“Everything, huh?”

“Yes, ashayam. Everything.”

“You called me that this morning, too. What’s it mean?”

“Beloved,” Spock said. James’s hazel eyes shone above him in the late-morning sun.

“Two years, we could have had this,” James whispered, shaking his head. Spock brushed his hair away from where it fell in his face.

“There is no logic in mourning what cannot be changed. Kaaidth,” Spock said. “But I do not intend to spend any more time parted from you.”

“Then don’t be parted from me,” James said, and Spock shivered at how close he came to saying the marriage vow without realizing. James dipped his head, and when he sighed into Spock’s mouth and brushed his tongue against his, Spock resolved that, as long as James willed it, they would be bonded before they departed from this place.

With the decision to pursue James until the end of his life finalized (as if he had ever had any real plans to the contrary) and the knowledge that he only had four hours and twenty-three minutes to bring as much pleasure to his lover as he could physically tolerate, Spock rolled them both over. He had developed a hypothesis that he wanted to test, and James was nothing if not a willing participant.

Spock pinned James beneath him and started at his chest. He braced his knees on either side of James’s hips and licked at James’s nipple. James moaned, low in his throat, so he applied suction, and flicked at it with his tongue, and James arched up against his mouth, hands grasping at his shoulders. Spock kissed across his chest to his other nipple, and when they were both peaked with stimulation and shining with his saliva he kissed James on the mouth again, sliding his tongue against his.

“Quick study, huh?” James asked, and scratched his blunt nails up Spock’s back. Spock arched against him, bringing his cock into contact with James’s, who grinned shamelessly and bucked up to grind on him. “You don’t have to be so careful with me, Spock. I’m not going to break.”

“Would you like me to be more aggressive with you, James?” Spock let his voice drop into his deeper register, and tentatively dragged his teeth against James’s ear.

“Jesus. Yes,” he said, and Spock felt a flush of want from him.

“Please inform me if I do anything that you do not want, or that hurts you,” Spock said. He brushed his hand over James’s face, gliding his thumb over his cheekbone. James nodded. Spock let more of his weight sink down onto James’s hips, and was rewarded when James ground up against him. He returned his teeth to James’s ear, worrying the lobe between his incisors and licking the rounded shell. He dropped his mouth to James’s neck and applied his teeth, sucking on the skin under his jawline as James gasped softly.

James reached up to card his hand through Spock’s hair. Curious about what his lover meant by aggressive, he let his control slip for just a second and let his instincts take over. He caught James’s wrist in one hand before it reached him, pinned it to the pillow above his head, and growled, “No,” in James’s ear.

Instant arousal blasted through their contact. James hardened to fullness beneath his weight, arching up off the bed with a stifled groan.

“Holy shit,” James gasped. “Yes, please.” Spock kissed the skin behind his ear and returned to leaving his mark on the sensitive skin beneath James’s jawline, and he allowed himself to apply more pressure than he had before. James moaned outright, grinding up against Spock, and Spock reached between them to wrap his hand around James’s cock. He passed a thumb over his slit, feeling the first drops of precome leak over his skin. He made eye contact with James and raised his finger to his mouth to taste.

“Fuck, Spock,” James said, watching him with wide eyes. “If you keep going like this I’m not going to last much longer.”

“I do not want you to.” Spock slid down the bed, pushed his arms under James’s thighs to wrap his hands around them, and yanked James across the bed to him, taking his cock into his mouth. James swore as Spock knelt at the foot of the bed and pulled his legs over his shoulders. The previous night, Spock had been more concerned with his general technical proficiency. This morning, with hours ahead of them and James writhing beneath him, he was entirely focused on learning, specifically, what James liked. He seemed to like it when Spock ran his tongue flat along the vein underneath, and when he let the head of his penis hit the back of his throat. He liked it when Spock flattened his cheeks against his cock and pulled almost all the way off before returning as close to the base as he could manage.

He seemed to especially like it when Spock reached one hand up to experimentally touch his ballsack, and he levered his hips off the bed. “Spock, please, I can’t--- I won’t---,” James panted. Spock pulled off to look at him. His eyes were half-open, lids heavy, and his cheeks, neck, and chest were flushed with the sweet pink to which Spock was rapidly becoming partial. His lips were swollen from kisses and his breath came rapidly. His cock was flush against his stomach, leaking prodigiously over himself. He was exquisite.

“You do not want to orgasm?”

“No, it’s not---” James struggled to catch his breath. “I don’t want this to be over yet.”

“I may be able to assist in facilitating a second round.”

James came up on his elbows. “What do you mean?” Spock reached out from between James’s legs and tapped his fingers against his psi-points without pressing into his mind. James’s eyes widened.

“You want that? You want to do that with me?”

Spock kissed the inside of James’s thigh, and then bit him. “More than I desire anything else, my James.” James let out a shuddering breath.

“Yes. Yes. Okay, yes, I want that.” He reached down for Spock, but Spock caught both his hands and pressed them to the bed next to his hips; not his full strength, but enough to suggest that James would not move until permitted. Again Spock was rewarded with the same flash-bang sensation of arousal from James.

“Not yet,” Spock said. “I would like you to climax first.” He pulled James’s penis back into his mouth, and the string of words that fell from James’s lips were neither logical nor polite but did make Spock’s own cock throb. Where his hands were clasped with James’s he was inundated with feeling: lovelustlovelustlovelustawejoyrelieflovelovelove. James’s breaths grew ragged, with a keening moan every time the head hit the back of Spock’s throat.

“Please, Spock, I---” His hips bucked. Spock squeezed his hands and pushed James’s cock as deep as he could to the back of his throat, hollowing his cheeks and sucking. James’s climax was explosive and spectacular: sound and taste and scent and emotion, flooding over him, into him. James’s thighs squeezed around his head before relaxing, falling open. Spock released his cock from his mouth, and James watched him with dazed eyes as he swallowed.

“You’re incredible,” James said hoarsely, and this time when he reached out for Spock he acquiesced. He extricated himself from James’s legs before sliding one arm beneath his knees, the other beneath his shoulders, and lifted James back to the center of the bed before laying down beside him. James rolled over, pressing his face into Spock’s shoulder, and hummed happily.

Spock watched him and smoothed his hair away from his face. The clear, distinguishable emotions he had felt from James had melted away, replaced by a warm afterglow that Spock drank in. After a few minutes, before James had even opened his eyes, he groped down Spock’s body with one hand to wrap his fingers around his cock. His eyes flew open at the hardness.

“You’re ready to go,” he said, marveling. Spock nodded. “What about you? How many rounds can Vulcans go a day?”

“Vulcans do not have a refractory period.”

“You don’t have--- what? So you could go forever?”

“Ostensibly.”

James laughed and passed a hand over his face. “Lucky me,” he murmured. “So tell me. What did you have planned next?”

Spock reached into the drawer where he had seen James find lubrication and brought the familiar bottle out. “I would like to penetrate you, if you will have me.”

“God,” James ground out, covering his face with his hands. “The way you talk is so sexy. I’m never going to be able to listen to you talk about anything without thinking of sex ever again.”

“That was my intention, James,” Spock said, and he was rewarded with James’s laughter. “I would like to prepare you, the way you did me, and then I will meld us. The meld will allow you to experience orgasm again, even if your body is not ready.”

“I love it,” James declared. “How does it work?”

“When we are melded, you will climax with me as if it were your own.” Spock felt James shudder in anticipation, and he nodded, his forehead rocking against Spock’s shoulder. Spock applied lubricant to his finger and settled on one elbow, reorganizing James’s legs as he had done last night. Slowly he traced his fingertip along the tight ring of muscle, feeling James shiver at the feeling. “Tell me if I cause you pain,” Spock said.

“I don’t think you could,” James said, and he took Spock’s other hand and lifted his fingertips to his mouth. As Spock slowly pressed his finger in up to the first knuckle, James sucked the equivalent finger into his mouth. Agonizingly slow, he slid his finger further in, and James swirled his tongue around Spock’s finger. Having the fingers of both hands inside James at the same time was driving Spock closer to orgasm long before he was ready. Through gritted teeth, Spock said, “You are making it hard to focus.”

“I was curious if you could get off with just this,” James said, and he bit gently on the pad of Spock’s finger. Spock’s hips rocked involuntarily against James, grinding his cock into the muscle of his thigh. In retaliation, Spock crooked his finger inside James, and James gasped. His cock twitched. “You can keep going,” James said, breathless. Spock applied more lubrication and started to slide the second finger in. James relaxed into it. He was able to insert the second finger in more quickly, allowing James time to breathe, with no flashes of hurt through their contact. The sensation of James’s muscle against his fingertips was delicious. He felt James’s heartbeat, his emotions, and when he bent his fingers he felt James clench around him. The third finger was easier, and James ground his hips down against Spock’s hand.

“Okay, I’m okay, please, Spock,” James panted. His chest heaved, and Spock felt his walls flutter around his fingers. He pulled his fingers out, James gasping at the removal, and he slicked himself with the lubrication and prepared to enter. James’s eyes flickered to Spock’s penis, and for the first time he seemed to reckon with the Vulcan size.

“Maybe go slow,” James said, and Spock lowered himself to press kisses over James’s jaw, cheekbone, forehead, lips.

“I will not hurt you, ashayam.” He braced one hand by James’s head and used the other to steer himself. The first thing that surprised him was the heat. The second thing that surprised him was James’s eyes rolling back into his head immediately.

“James?” he asked, uncertain. “Are you… what do you need?” James’s eyes opened, and he said, “I need you.” He pressed his ankles into Spock’s thighs, wantwantwantwant flowing between them, and pushed him forward. Spock resisted only a little, fearing damage to fragile skin, but it seemed James knew what he was doing more than Spock did. Spock slid in, James relaxing to accommodate him, until he was fully sheathed within James’s body. He leaned over, breathing in James’s scent, kissing his cheek and neck as James adjusted.

“You feel amazing,” James whispered. “Can I…?” He reached for Spock’s face and tapped places that were almost his psi-points. “I want to feel you.”

Spock settled his hand along James’s psi-points, and watched his lover’s hazel eyes close in anticipation. “My mind to your mind, my thoughts to your thoughts.”

James was golden, as he ever was, effervescent and glimmering and warm. Spock was deep blue, the night sky, and everywhere they touched created sparks. With James’s hands on his shoulders, his back, his ankles locked behind him, Spock began to move slowly, rocking forward into James. James arched up against him. They swirled around each other, concentric rings like a whirlpool, as inevitable as riptide, and James glowed brighter and brighter. Spock braced his forearms on either side of James’s head, pressing their faces together, James panting against his ear as Spock sucked another mark into the skin of his neck. Spock increased his pace. In the meldspace, they melted into each other, no longer two separate entities but one whole: something in between the warmth of day and the midnight sky, something like twilight. Spock slid one arm under James’s hips to angle him upward, and when he thrust into him again James cried out. His head tipped back, his mouth open, eyebrows pulling together, and Spock kissed the moans out of his mouth even as he aimed for that same spot, over and over. James had given up on trying to match Spock’s pace and wrapped his arms around Spock’s back, over his shoulders, one hand in Spock’s hair. Spock kept one hand on James’s meld points and reached between them with the other, wrapping his fingers around James’s cock. Every additional point of contact made them glow, and every thrust and grasp made them both throb. In the space where they could not tell where one began and the other ended, he thrust into him while he grasped his penis, fingers sliding through slick, hands on shoulders and back and ass and cock and face, lips on lips and chest and ears and neck.

“James,” Spock said, voice rumbling in his ear. “Are you ready?”

“Yes,” James gasped, open-mouthed against Spock’s cheek. “God, yes.” The whirlpool of them tightened. Spiraling upwards, radius diminishing until they were one thread, one tight line of lust and love and desire and thought. Spock drove deeper into James, feeling his orgasm approach, and through the meldspace through the thread between them he thought, “I love you,” and the tension snapped. Spock came, emptying himself into James. James came with him, spilling come over both of their chests and Spock’s hand, clenching around Spock. Spock kissed his mouth as James gasped, futilely attempting to catch his breath. His hands scrabbled uselessly over Spock’s back, fingernails lightly scratching. Spock pulled himself out of James, who whimpered at the loss. He lowered himself to lay next to him, and pulled him onto his chest, wrapping his arms around James securely. Through the remnants of the meld he felt the same warm afterglow as before, tinged with awe and a bone-deep, satisfied exhaustion.

James was silent for nine minutes and thirty-seven seconds. Then he said, “Is it going to be like that every time?”

“If you wish it to be. If we were bonded.”

James was silent for a moment as he considered. “I think you’ve ruined me for anyone else,” he said.

Spock willed his breathing to remain regulated. His voice was more controlled than it had been as he asked, “Are you considering others?”

James lurched up immediately, eyes opening for the first time since their climax, hand coming to rest against Spock’s cheek. “No, Jesus, never. That’s not what I meant.”

“Then what did you mean, my James?”

James skimmed his fingertips over Spock’s cheekbone, the line of his eyebrow, the tip of his ear. “Before this, before yesterday… I had been telling myself that eventually I would get over you. That someday I wouldn’t feel like this, and I could be with someone else.” He shook his head and laughed softly. “I knew I was kidding myself, of course, but last night, and now, it just proves… there’s no one else for me. I could never be with anyone else without wishing it were you.”

“Then do not be parted from me,” Spock said, and James smiled as he recognized his own words.

“Okay,” James agreed easily. Spock captured James’s roaming hand with his own and kissed his fingertips. “Wait, go back to what you said earlier. If we were bonded.”

“Yes, my James. If we were bonded, there would be no need for a meld. We would be connected like that always.” The same half-hopeful, half-frightened look from the night before passed over James’s face. Spock kissed his fingertips again.

“Bonding is permanent, right?”

“Yes,” Spock said. “The link between bondmates is sacred above all. To break it is excruciatingly painful, with high risk of death to one or both bonded.” He caught James’s eye and squeezed his hand, to ensure his attention. “It is all-encompassing, possessive, and primal. It is not like a human relationship.”

Spock felt the hummingbird flutter of James’s thoughts as he considered and discarded ideas rapidly. He let the warm wave of James’s emotions wash over him, and told himself that hope was illogical. James would make his decision, and Spock would abide by it either way. James considered for two minutes and forty-five seconds.

“I don’t want a human relationship,” he said, and the steel in his tone reminded Spock that before James was his lover he was his captain. “I want primal, and possessive, and sacred. I want it with you.” He leaned down to kiss Spock, and he folded his fingers against Spock’s to press the ozh’esta against him at the same time. Human and Vulcan, the two irreconcilable halves of his soul, held safely in two broad and steady hands.

“Then I will bond us,” Spock said against James’s lips, and he felt the answering smile.

“I can’t fucking wait,” James breathed. Then he sighed. “But my mom is going to want us to have a human wedding, too.”

#spock #spirk #kirk #tos #my writing #spirktober #spirktober2023 #k/s #kirk/spock #k/s fan fiction #spirk fan fiction

11 notes · View notes

narwhalandchill · 11 months ago

Text

okok so ya know that post i mentioned i was writing on some of the harbinger related leaks that cropped up recently and then mobile fucked me over by publishing the post early by gaslighting me with a "post" button that Clearly read "save" (draft) so i deleted it but managed to rescue the text that was there and promised to finish it and post it later and then its been 12 years anyway? yeah right 😭 Oh well.

BUT. finally. might as well do the thing now in honor of childes bday at the very least KJWJKWDJK. sorry it took this long lmao

jsyk these leaks predate our current natlan beta datamines and some of the questionable story leaks floating around so like, natlan plot wise they dont have shit to do w em there & not bringing up any that ive seen. but ya

(so . attempt 2: recent lazzo VA character direction leaks for the harbingers mostly in relation to childes role in the overall plot. bit ranty and gets Long but idek what yall expected. + ig just potential long term plot implications from these leaks given its the harbingers beware)

aka: mostly concerning the faction stuff + pulcinellas directions for now . if u havent seen em uhhhh

basically tldr: according to (and assuming its not outdated) some information accessed by leakers recently originally provided for the VAs applying to voice the harbingers in lazzo, the group is allegedly split between two factions of "conservatives" and "radicals" . like thats the first thing

now as to what those labels rly mean ppl were overall speculating that it might be sth along the lines of. conservatives as the tsaritsa loyalists who stand united and for the organization and her majestys goals above all (OR alternatively just like. a more cautious take on How to approach the toppling celestia deal) VS those whose true ambitions, loyalty and methods they are willing to turn to are more of a wild card situation . and their allegiances are equally volatile in turn . & i will say imo the radicals are also most likely much less of an united group compared to the conservatives given uhhhhhhh. well you will see

so conservatives are: capitano, columbina, pulcinella, sandrone

radicals are: dottore, arle (see the "radicals might not like each other that much"), pantalone

pierro is neutral, childe is unknown/undecided according to the leaks HOWEVER. his positioning next to the radicals in the shot of lazzo with the harbingers standing around signoras coffin split along those same faction lines found in the leaks may indeed suggest something Interesting regarding his penultimate choice . if it Indeed is intended to be meaningful that he as an "unknown" just happened to take That side of the coffin alongside the 3 confirmed radicals according to this info . like how Curious

And i just. okay okay i have to be Honest theres like. SUCH a toxic childish taking-fandom-grievances-too-seriously part to me eyeing the possibility of ajax turning out to be a radical thats just like. dawei lets this happen and i WILL be the WORLDS most obnoxious fucking bitch about it bc . Listen

i. Have. ALWAYS. thought it obvious as FUCK . that a guy whose ambition WILL NOT stop until it is the very WORLD that lies defeated at his feet. will NEVER be satiated by what the fatui can offer him . like if he really is a radical. i can CONFIDENTLY state that i saw that shit coming in TWENTY FUCKING TWENTY and that Every single doubter owes me So much fucking money 💀💀💀💀💀💀 jkjk but. Duuuude. ever since this faction stuff dropped.... i cant stop thinking abt it

like i just. cannot stand the way its been turned into this . INDOMITABLE 100% factual absolute Truth that CANNOT be challenged. in the fandom. that childe is a tsaritsa fanboy loyalist devout worshipper who couldnt even fuckimg FATHOM leaving his allegiance to her behind . when its been . SPELLED OUT to yall in his fucking profile SINCE 1.1 .

bc like. Listen up. Repeat after me. ik its scary and new after 4 years of Exclusively hearing takes where like childe would rather spontaneously combust to the beat of snezhnayas national anthem while begging for repentance than ever stop taking orders from uhhhh a god. Who he definitely worships devoutly as a god despite 0 evidence on any religious piety on his part Trust (like. ive. Always thought his voiceline for her has been the opposite? its very much. Not how youd speak of divinity. his regard for her is Personal and relates to the tsaritsa as an individual, not a god inherently deserving of worship)

like ik this is a big thing and scary but just. Say the words with me here. It only stings once .deep breaths. okay 1 2 3

"But becoming Tartaglia was far from his end goal. To someone who sought to conquer the world, this was but a tiny step in his journey."

YUP.

BECOMING TARTAGLIA. BECOMING A HARBINGER. SWEARING AN OATH OF LOYALTY TO THE TSARITSA. A TINY. STEP. A TINY FUCKING STEP. AND HES BEEN AWARE OF IT BEING LIKE THIS THE ENTIRE TIME.

THIS HAS BEEN TEXT FOUND IN GAME THERE FOR NEARLY FOUR FUCKING YEARS NOW . AND PPL STILL THINK AJAX ISNT CAPABLE OF SURPASSING AND ABANDONING THE TSARITSA THE SECOND THE BENEFITS THEY OFFER HIM FALL SHORT OF THE EXPONENTIAL GROWTH OF HIS POWER AND AMBITION AND WHAT IT TAKES TO SATIATE HIM .

like im SORRY contrary to maybe popular belief and despite my persistent frustrations w this fandoms approach to ajax sometimes i Do in fact feel actively mean and unreasonably harsh calling 97% of childe "fans" functionally illiterate or at the very least intentionally obtuse to the point its beyond fucking parody in how ridiculous it gets but like. if THIS isnt what a complete and utter failure of basic reading comprehension is I DONT KNOW WHAT IS . like. DUDE 😭😭😭😭😭😭 what IS IT with these people its like genuinely fucking incomprehensible to me how CRITICAL shit about his character like this goes COMPLETELY ignored as if it hasnt been established since Day fucking one its unreal . Unreal 💀

and like. i get bitchy and snappy abt it i know its not the best look always but man its sth thats genuinely upsetting to me too bc . THIS is the fucking dude thats possessed me for the last 4 years THIS is what i love about him his potential to surpass Every Single Boundary that he has begun his journey confided within. that he will transcend it all and surpass his own limits with sheer fucking willpower over and over again until even the few he truly idolized and respected like the tsaritsa and capitano are suddenly so distant and irrelevant compared to the heights He has reached out for in his hunger....... its so peak like THIS is whats had me in a death grip for all this time

and like. for THAT guy that mr childe ajax tartaglia the REAL thing to barely even. Exist. in the minds of such a majority of the fandom its just fucking crushing sometimes. like i wanna appreciate all this abt him man i wanna share all my brainrot abt him and how this dude consumes my every waking thought but then borderline every single comment i see and popular take on him is just oh my pookie wookie babie girl would Never be able to betray tsaritsa ever etc etc etc and just.... Sigh

anyway overshare over sorry for that. yeah my ADHD makes me irrationally attached to my hyperfixations its kinda cringe .

do catch me kissing this man on the mouth Immediately the second his ambition surpasses the fatui and he goes beast mode fr fr on Everyone tho 🥰🥰 dyke license lost forever but itll be worth it

also real talk im like fairly convinced at least like 78% of the omgggg hes forever loyal to the tsaritsa gang are mostly like stuck in this mindset of like. omgggg hed Never Betray Her bc he doesnt like those who break promises uwu and its like. since when did the possibility of ajax outgrowing the stage where the fatui offer him anything worthwhile automatically equate to him betraying her wholesale and completely dropping any and all respect he had for her or sth. like yeah i do agree to an extent that it could end up p uncharacteristic (at least w/o proper plot setup or reasoning) for him to pull off like a complete disney twist villain backstab out of nowhere there but??? thats not rly whats going to automatically happen either???

(nvm that like a considerable portion of these same ppl were prolly writing "omgg ajax my poor victim MUST betray the evil tsaritsa" fics in 1.1 when everyone had the idea in their heads that he hates his job and is only doing it bc his family is held hostage and is also 17 bc of certified english localization moment. but i digress this is just unreasonably petty and im being a loser by not letting this shit go 2 this day💀💀)

bc like. if you ask me. the Interesting thing abt ajax and the possibility of being a radical IS that if hes going to refuse to follow an order or step out of line to follow his own path however it goes. its Not going to be personal. its not gonna be this big dramatic edgelord turncoat villainous moment to him. itll be straightforward. matter of fact. easy as breathing. because if he has moved past each and every benefit the fatui can even fathom offering him. its only natural that he progresses beyond them. thats just how his unquenchable ambition Works. how his black hole of a never-ending desire to devour and crush all in his path operates. its not personal. its not something you can change. its inevitable. he is a force of nature when it comes to the drive burning at the core of his soul.

like i Really dont think hes ever going to backstab the tsaritsa in some dirty play fashion??? if anything its only fitting that hes going to look her In the eye and go. oh my bad. i dont think our agreement serving a mutual benefit really holds ground anymore. apologies. like ofc its going to be something he handles while staying true to the person hes been all this time. kind of a bad guy and perfectly willing to own up to it. selfish and arrogant and with his sights set steadfast on a goal No one will get him to sway from.

and then he elopes with the narwh-------------- yes kill me

basically i just. dont get this whole perceived and persistent incompatibility between the idea of. ajax being a radical (whatever that ends up meaning in the story. IF these lazzo materials remain accurate) yet remaing the same guy we know and love. like guys. ARLE. is a radical. and has all but directly confessed to considering the survival of the house her greatest priority over any loyalty to the fatui and her majesty. yet she STILL regards her with respect and continues to fulfill her duties as a harbinger as expected for the time being. despite her full awareness of this loyalty being on shakier ground and surely making contingencies on the side for the future for When she sees it is time for her organization to sever the ties to the tsaritsa.

like Thats what i mean when i say its always been completely reasonable and even predictable to me that ajax would outgrow the fatui and how that has jack shit to do with his character suddenly doing some wild 180 in order to do so. and why this potentially significant visual alignment he has with the radicals in lazzo isnt surprising at all. bc if it doesnt fundamentally change who arle is (and doesnt make her a dottore fan) that she is ultimately someone whose loyalty to the organization comes second to her house. why would childe be any different lmao.

but like yes if he turns out to be a radical i will be soooooo obnoxious over it jkwjkawdjkwajkwdakjwdjkwdjkdwjk bc like im NOT lying this has been one of the Clearest trajectories ive expected from his arc All This Time . no matter which form it might eventually take in terms of. is it him and His growth initiating the split. or is it a betrayal from or a loss of faith in the tsaritsa herself that kickstarts it. if its canon? yeah i Saw that shit coming and you should all be scared of who ill become if dawei proves me right Again ill be the Worst

Phew that sure went way overboard but yes radical ajax advocacy group in here 100% . and overall even tho i mostly care abt him i Do think this faction split is inherently v fucking interesting and ajax being unknown is just. i wonder if itll end up being significant at some critical moment that his faction leanings are unknown slash undefined at the moment............... where the scales are about to tip and its by his hand that some key moment gets its turning point......... hmmmmmmm

(also its just. before these leaks we got "columbina is conservative" as an out of context statement Before the faction stuff and its still so fucking funny bc ppl were just like. wow i cant believe shes homophobic)

now. pulcinella time

so among the VA direction cards that leaked was his. and like if u didnt see them urself (not gonna post any here. hoyo lawyers love striking Any hoyo copyrighted media in all posts that have leaks in em even if its not an actual leak which this is lol) the setup is basically. theres a few overall notes on each of the harbingers like age, demeanor, characterization and then 3 sample lines of dialogue as well as notes further elaborating when & why this is being said and with what sort of vibe.

and his are. Well. you know how i started this post out being like on god dawei if you go and fatten my ego any further by Specifically vindicating me myself and i & the kinda things id prefer in genshins story and childes role going forward . Personally????

Anyway funny thing as it happens. IF (and admittedly thats a major if.) this VA direction doc from pulcinella holds up. and there isnt like a hidden scheming menacing side to him that wasnt brought up in the lazzo files. in that case . it sure is looking like pulcinella is just. a bit over the top in public but privately genuinely an overworked well-meaning pragmatic guy who deeply cares for and is truly protective of those important to him. INCLUDING. yes you know who and his family. NOTHING in the doc whatsoever implying anything sinister to it. nor wrt pulcinellas character overall.

and i just. nothing personal to scara fans yall are cool and ur guy is too i just simply. Cannot. guys can you IMAGINE being so much of an edgelord cynical embarrassment puppetfailure that ur own mommy issues make you physically incapable of Not assuming the worst of pulcinella caring for childes family leading to YEARS of ppl being CONVINCED hes gonna be this major fucking villain for ajax in the snezhnaya arc i . LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

(my scara liker indulgence Ends the second hat guy speaks shit abt My man if you havent noticed. yeah WHO called who naive and stupid???)

like. if the Plot twist in the snezhnaya arc is setting pulcinella up to be this ominous figure that has ulterior motives w childes family and him overall????? only for him to be just. genuinely well-intentioned. oh my fucking god PLEASE let it happen PLEASE bc the entire concept of that whole plotline existing without said plot twist is just soooooo bland and fucking boring to me lol subverting it is just chef kiss

& sure this leak is. very limited in scope it doesnt automatically eliminate pulcinella manipulating childe and/or limiting what information he gets and all. and i genuinely have made my peace with the probable existence of this plot thread w arles SQ already before this whole thing happened but MAN ill be SO fucking happy if this means they might abandon/subvert it altogether like. let him just have a nice supportive mentor figure in his life in the fatui man 😭😭😭

pulcinella if u really just are a nice person ultimately. you TRULY are my goat o777 saving my man from bland family-is-hostage-waa storylines i have Such respect

anyway u could say its not possible for pulcinella to be like. fully a good guy since arles SQ already showcased him being unreliable w information regarding arle but honestly. i kinda disagree. bc like Especially with the faction thing in mind its not unreasonable at all in my eyes that given the Facts of what peruere did. that pulcinella despite not being this scheming schemer brainwashing ajax or whatever. would Genuinely hold a very negative opinion of arlecchino. and convey that to childe. bc like. pulcinella as stated above is in the conservative side of the harbingers. and arlecchino to the outside eyes rly did like. murder a harbinger and her own "mother" and siblings of the house. like do we even know that the harbingers are Aware of how crucabena ran her hunger games death tournament situation to begin with? and Why peruere killed her????

like. if we assume pulcinella doesnt know those things. and that crucabena in all likelihood was if nothing else then presumably a harbinger that was very loyal to the tsaritsa and very consistent. then from that position. of COURSE. youd consider arle a complete downgrade in terms of reliability . she IS a wild card she IS not someone a careful politician like pulcinella would regard highly At All. So like. i dont think when he gives childe the impression that arle is batshit insane and tells him of her (VERY REAL) murderous deeds. i dont think that would automatically equate to pulcinella Knowingly lying and misleading ajax . bc it seems fairly reasonable that pulcinella just genuinely thinks that lowly of her and thus would OBVIOUSLY want his protege not to involve himself with such people.

bc like thats the other thing. its not just arle. in pulcinellas VA notes and the line he has on ajax there. its very clear that he is actively trying to keep him away and shield him from ALL the harbingers . as he still has to mature and grow into someone who will have a chance at gaining their respect proper on his own. so like. if pulcinella thinks its best for ajax to remain away EVEN from the harbingers he himself considers GOOD to NEUTRAL influences and reliable colleagues. of COURSE hed make Extra sure that ajax is staying away from the knave whom pulcinella Actively considers a shitty fit for the job and an unreliable flight risk of a harbinger 💀💀💀💀

(nvm the way arle actively BOTH confirms pulcinellas distrust to be justified by saying the tsaritsa isnt a priority to her and the house is AND actively admits that he prefers other people believe misleading shit about her. so like fym pulcinella thinking the worst of her is surprising)

so like is pulcinellas pov of her at best Highly biased and lacking critical context on Why she merked so many of her sibs and crucabena??? and thus served as an inherently misleading insight on her character when he conveyed it to ajax??? absolutely. but i also dont think hes necessarily lying at all when it comes to perceiving arle in such a negative way so its less. oh i want ajax to remain in the dark forever so he is easy 2 manipulate. more just. thats his Opinion dude and ofc he wants his protege to follow in his stead and not get any poor influences from people like her. it still makes for interesting development & possible tension that childe Is questioning his views on things by making his own judgements about arle but. ya know. its not black and white.

but yeaaaa to be clear me vastly preferring the possibility of scara just being a cringelord unreliable narrator and this whole pulcinella-is-masterminding-dubious-things getting subverted & hes just a guy is just a personal thing lmao. this is pretty old material and far from all-encompassing in terms of Who hoyo wants pulcinellas character to be and all the layers he might hide. im just really 👁️👁️👁️ at the way this particular description of his character seems to be giving off vibes that they in fact Arent actually going all the way into the ulterior motives bad bad ajax watch out pulcinella and its just. listen theres way more interesting shit for ajax to be doing in the endgame plot than some generic plot like that!!!!!!!11! sorry!!!1 so id 1000% want it this way instead lmao

but we shall see where it goes. at the very least if this desc of pulcinella holds Any ground at all then it does disqualify the most extreme version of hes just basically evil manipulator mastermind so like. im already super happy with that lmao

but ya . sorry this took me forever to actually finish jwjkwdjkawjkwd these leaks r kinda old news by now rip .

#man.................................. when will i ever learn to say things in a concise manner abt this man................#imagine the post output i could have. The consistency . yet JWJKJKWDAJKWDJKWDJKWDKJWKJWA #oh also. capitanos sample dialogue from the same group was like. metal as shit i Cannot wait for him in natlan #columbinas desc was the kind where its like. hmmm. depending on VA direction it will be hit or miss for me personally i expect #but if they handle that energy well she will definitely be a Presence for sure #Also i Will say. even if itd put pulcinella in a way more morally questionable and grey light 100% . i STILL think #that even w him and the harbingers Aware of crucabenas antics . it mightve been sth hed consider a means to an end situation #where pulcinella would STILL regard crucabena as the more reliable and better harbinger despite the fuck em kids parental style #bc as Long as she was unquestionably loyal and reliable. hed prefer her as the knave over peruere who very Clearly already demonstrated #her willingness to 'bite the hand that feeds' so to speak. EVEN if the HotH was a dystopian shitshow. so like #idt even pulcinella knowing at least some of the truth abt the house under crucabenas leadership would necessarily just #stop seeing arle in negative light. but like him being aware of it would def make him more morally grey. in an interesting way but ya #i mean he has to tolerate dottore being in the organization. tolerating crucabena as long as she brought results rly isnt a stretch yaknow #even if he despised her methods overall. so theres that too.#genshin #rambles #childeposting

4 notes · View notes

contactform7toanyapi · 1 month ago

Text

Top Ways to Send Form Data to Any REST API Instantly

In today's fast-paced digital landscape, businesses rely on real-time data to drive decisions, automate workflows, and stay competitive. One of the most common—and often overlooked—data entry points is the humble contact form. But what if you could instantly send that data to any REST API, CRM, or business tool without writing a single line of code?

In this guide, we'll break down the top ways to send form data to any REST API instantly, whether you're a marketer looking to sync leads with HubSpot, a developer integrating with a third-party service, or a startup founder automating lead routing.

Why Send Form Data to a REST API?

Forms are the gateway to lead capture, support tickets, user feedback, and countless other business operations. Traditionally, form submissions are emailed to inboxes or stored in local databases. But modern businesses need more than static email notifications—they need automation.

Benefits of Sending Form Data to an API:

✅ Instant lead routing to sales CRMs

✅ Real-time notifications in tools like Slack or Discord

✅ Dynamic updates to Google Sheets, Notion, or Airtable

✅ Task creation in platforms like Asana or Trello

✅ Workflow automation via Zapier, Make, or custom APIs

Now, let’s look at the top methods to make this happen.

1. Use a No-Code Tool Like ContactFormToAPI

If you want the fastest, most flexible way to connect a contact form to any REST API, tools like ContactFormToAPI are ideal.

How It Works:

Create an endpoint using the platform

Add a form or use your existing one (e.g., Contact Form 7, WPForms, Webflow)

Map form fields to the API request

Instantly POST data to any REST API with custom headers, tokens, or JSON payloads

Key Features:

No coding or backend setup required

Supports authentication, headers, and retries

Works with any form builder (WordPress, Framer, custom HTML, etc.)

Best For: Non-technical users, marketers, and teams needing fast setup.

2. Connect Your Form with Webhooks

Webhooks are the go-to option for real-time communication between your form and an API. Most modern form builders support webhooks.

How It Works:

Add a webhook URL to your form settings

When the form is submitted, the data is sent (usually via POST) to the API endpoint

Customize headers and payloads depending on the API spec

Supported By:

Contact Form 7 (with Flamingo or webhook add-ons)

Gravity Forms (via webhook add-on)

Typeform, Jotform, and others

Example Use Case:

Send new form submissions to a custom CRM endpoint or a third-party lead processing API.

Pros:

Native in many platforms

Flexible and fast

Secure (especially with token-based auth)

Cons:

Requires some technical knowledge to configure headers and payloads

Error handling and retry logic must be managed separately

3. Zapier or Make (Integromat) Integrations

Zapier and Make are automation platforms that bridge your form and any REST API using visual workflows.

How It Works:

Connect your form app as a trigger (e.g., Webflow form submitted)

Use HTTP modules in Zapier/Make to send the data to your desired REST API

Customize payloads, authentication, and error handling visually

Great For:

Teams already using Zapier for other automations

Integrating multiple services in a chain (e.g., form → CRM → Slack)

Pros:

Visual editor makes the setup easier

Supports delays, conditions, and filters

1000s of integrations built-in

Cons:

Monthly cost based on task volume

Latency (not always instant on free plans)

Less flexible than custom code or backend solutions

4. Use JavaScript Fetch/AJAX in the Front-End

If you're building your own form and want to send data instantly to an API, you can do it directly using JavaScript.

Sample Code:

CopyEdit

document.getElementById("myForm").addEventListener("submit", async function(e) {

e.preventDefault();

const formData = new FormData(this);

const data = Object.fromEntries(formData.entries());

const response = await fetch("https://api.example.com/leads", {

method: "POST",

headers: {

"Content-Type": "application/json",

"Authorization": "Bearer YOUR_API_KEY"

body: JSON.stringify(data)

});

const result = await response.json();

console.log(result);

});

Pros:

Full control over how data is sent

Great for SPAs or static sites

Cons:

No fallback or retry logic

Exposes API keys unless properly protected

Not suitable for non-technical users

5. Build a Serverless Function or Backend Proxy

For more secure and robust form handling, use a serverless function (e.g., AWS Lambda, Vercel, Netlify Functions) or a backend API that proxies requests.

Flow:

Front-end form submits data to your serverless function

The function processes the data and calls the third-party REST API

You can log, sanitize, validate, and authenticate safely

Pros:

Secure: keeps tokens and logic server-side

Scalable and powerful

Supports retry and error handling

Cons:

Requires development time

Hosting knowledge needed

Use Case Example:

A startup that routes leads from multiple landing pages through a backend proxy to distribute them to various API endpoints based on rules.

6. Use Built-In API Integrations from Form Builders

Some advanced form builders include direct integrations with REST APIs or offer HTTP Request functionality.

Examples:

WPForms: With Webhooks or Zapier add-ons

Forminator (WPMU Dev): Built-in webhook support and API customization

Jotform: Can send submissions to any API endpoint via webhook

Best For: Users already using these platforms who don’t need additional tools

Final Thoughts

Sending form data to a REST API instantly doesn't have to be complicated. Whether you're a solo founder, growth marketer, or developer, there’s a method that fits your stack and your skill level.

If you're looking for the easiest and most flexible way to connect forms to any API, tools like ContactFormToAPI make it incredibly simple—no code, no backend, no hassle. With the right setup, your forms can become the starting point of fully automated, efficient business workflows.

#ContactForms #APIIntegration #AutomationTools

0 notes

milanusgrill · 1 month ago

Text

A Taste of Tradition: Authentic Indian Catering in the Heart of Pickering, Greater Toronto Area (GTA)

Milanu’s Tandoori Grill — Indian Catering for Every Occasion

When it comes to celebrating life’s biggest moments — whether it’s a wedding, birthday, corporate event, or a simple get-together with friends — food is always at the heart of the experience. In the culturally rich city of Pickering, nestled within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), one name stands out when it comes to delivering authentic, flavourful, and memorable Indian cuisine Milanu’s Tandoori Grill.

Bringing Authentic Indian Flavors to Every Event

Indian cuisine is known worldwide for its bold spices, regional diversity, and comforting warmth — and Milanu’s Tandoori Grill is proud to bring that authenticity to your table. Our catering services are rooted in traditional recipes passed down through generations, ensuring that every bite is rich in culture and flavor.

Whether you’re craving the smoky richness of Tandoori Chicken, the creamy indulgence of Butter Chicken, or the tangy perfection of Paneer Tikka, Milanu’s menu is a celebration of India’s culinary heritage.

We don’t just serve food — we create an experience. Our dishes are:

Made fresh using high-quality, locally sourced ingredients

Fully customizable to match dietary needs, including vegetarian, vegan, halal, and gluten-free options

Designed to suit everything from intimate dinners to grand banquet-style events

Catering for Every Occasion — Big or Small

🥳 Private Parties & Celebrations

Hosting a birthday party, anniversary dinner, or a casual get-together? We offer curated menus tailored to your guest list, preferences, and budget. Whether it’s appetizer platters, buffet-style meals, or live tandoor stations, we bring restaurant-quality food to your doorstep.

💼 Corporate Events

Milanu’s is a favorite among local businesses in Pickering and throughout the GTA. We cater for meetings, conferences, employee appreciation lunches, and more — always delivering on time and with professionalism. Our corporate clients trust us for:

Efficient service

Flavor-packed, mess-free meal boxes or buffet spreads

Custom branding and menu labeling when needed

💍 Weddings & Cultural Celebrations

Weddings are a once-in-a-lifetime event, and Indian weddings in particular are all about vibrancy, tradition, and of course — feast-worthy food. Milanu’s Tandoori Grill works closely with couples and event planners to craft wedding menus that reflect both heritage and personal taste.

From multi-course dinners and sangeet snacks to mehndi night thalis and post-wedding brunches, our catering team ensures every detail is perfect. With experience serving hundreds of guests, we handle everything from on-site cooking to decorative food presentation.

🎓 Graduations, Festivals & Community Events

We’re proud to be a part of the Pickering community. Whether it’s Diwali, Eid, Christmas, Canada Day, or a school celebration, we offer flexible event packages that make large-scale catering easy and affordable.

Why Choose Milanu’s Tandoori Grill for Indian Catering in the GTA?

There are plenty of catering options out there — but Milanu’s stands apart for a few key reasons:

✅ Authenticity

Every dish is prepared using traditional Indian cooking methods, including charcoal tandoor grilling, slow simmering, and handmade spice blends. Our chefs understand the nuances of Indian cuisine and bring passion to every platter.

✅ Local Focus, GTA-Wide Reach

Located in the heart of Pickering, we cater throughout the Durham Region and GTA, including Ajax, Whitby, Scarborough, Markham, and beyond. We’re a local business with a regional reputation for excellence.

✅ Flexible, Personalized Menus

Our catering is never “one size fits all.” We work with you to build a menu that fits your theme, budget, and dietary preferences. Need Jain meals or no-onion-no-garlic dishes? We’ve got you covered.

✅ Professional Service

Let’s Plan Your Next Event

Whether you’re planning a once-in-a-lifetime wedding or a casual weekend dinner for 20 guests, Milanu’s Tandoori Grill is here to bring authentic Indian flavors to the table. From Pickering to across the GTA, we deliver not just food — but unforgettable experiences.

📞 Ready to book your Indian food catering? Call us today or visit our website to view sample menus, pricing, and availability.

Stay connected for catering tips, seasonal menu specials, and behind-the-scenes fun:

https://www.instagram.com/milanustandoorigrill/?hl=en

📞 905–837–7888 | 🌐 https://milanustandoorigrill.ca/

#indian food #indian restaurant #indian veg food #catering services #online food ordering #north indian food

0 notes

fromdevcom · 1 month ago

Text

JQuery is open-source software which was first released in January 2006 and it is used most of the top visited websites. There are several books offered online which can be used by JQuery programmers to effectively use the features of the language and create plug-ins for JavaScript library. It is very easy to learn jQuery and to be proficient in the language using some of the acclaimed JQuery books. These books can also be used as a reference for advanced jQuery projects. Some of the most widely used JQuery books are listed below. (including free ebooks at the end of the post) JavaScript & jQuery: The Missing Manual The book provides a reference to create animated interactive WebPages having visual effects for web designing and collecting data from web pages in a simple way, which not only provides great information but saves a lot of our effort and time. Moreover, the language is so simple that even a nonprogrammer can understand it. The book teaches some basic ways of development in JavaScript and JQuery. The initial two parts are about JQuery and JavaScript. The third part informs about the images and navigations, and the fourth is on AJAX. In the end, the tips and tricks have been added. jQuery in Action, Second Edition The book provides expert guidance and minute details related to writing code of JQuery and JavaScript. At the outset, a number of downloadable learning tools have been added. This is a book for both novice and experienced programmers. However, there are certain JQuery codes for which the book does not provide a straightforward explanation. There are many variations of examples in AJAX. What’s more, the book helps to transverse HTML documents, render animations and handle events. jQuery Pocket Reference The book is a great help designed for the purpose of write-less-do-more. The chapters are backed by highly interesting explanations which serve as a great reference in JQuery development. It is a powerful reference book which eases the developmental process as well. It is portable, has a convenient size and provides an easy understanding of JQuery code. Additionally, it provides many examples to support the information. Developers who want to learn the language from the ground level can get all information from this book, as it provides all fundamental information related to jQuery. jQuery Cookbook: Solutions & Examples for jQuery Developers (Animal Guide) The book provides in-depth guidance about the rich web-fonts in an easy manner, providing learning patterns of 19 leading developers in jQuery to ensure convenient and high-performance UI development for websites, component development, and application development. The book is also a good source of information for newcomers in jQuery. Furthermore, it provides numerous examples which can be used for developmental purpose mainly for entry-level developers. The chapters start from the basics and cover large projects at the end. jQuery UI 1.8: The User Interface Library for jQuery The book has 14 chapters and 400 pages on JQuery. It gives easy methods of development and helps to speed up writing in JavaScript. It is highly helpful to people working in web development projects in JQuery, CSS, and JavaScript as it provides a step-by-step guide for the implementation and customization of library components, and the related resources to help the readers to learn a lot about JQuery. The example code in UI widgets section is backed by screenshots and visual help as well. The method given to design the user interface, questions related to the widgets and styling is highly revealing too. jQuery: Novice to Ninja The book offers downloadable source code from a website and there are around 200 examples of creating CSS, JS, and HTML codes. These are short files which provide information from the basics to cover the higher levels. The book offers you a few free chapters as well, providing a sneak peek into the contents of the book. +3 Bonus Free jQuery eBooks

Essential JavaScript And jQuery Design Patterns It is amazing that users can even get free books on JQuery. This book provides fantastic literature about the design pattern and it can be downloaded in ePub format and PDF formats; what’s more, the link provides you free download of this book! jQuery Fundamentals The book offers a number of chapters and code examples for the front-end developer. It gives an overview of jQuery JavaScript library and there are several code examples from basic to higher levels. There are eleven chapters in all and the examples help to strengthen your jQuery fundamentals. You can download the free book from the above link. Official jQuery Documentation The official jQuery documentation is a good starting point for you to learn jQuery. It also contains a lot of reference links for you to get to speed and find community help. The above-given list of JQuery books is some of the most widely used reference books which are designed with the purpose to make the lives of developers easy through a range of code examples and references. Check out More Recommended Books for reading Most Influential Software Books Agile Development Books Web Design Books Good HTML5 Books Recommended jQuery Books Awesome JavaScript Books

0 notes

pentesttestingcorp · 2 months ago

Text

Prevent CSRF Attacks in Symfony Framework

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) is a common web application vulnerability that tricks users into executing unwanted actions on web applications in which they’re authenticated. In this blog post, we'll explore how CSRF affects Symfony, demonstrate how to exploit it, and walk through how to defend your applications effectively.

We’ll also showcase real examples, testing methods, and results using our Free Website Security Scanner tool to help you detect CSRF and other vulnerabilities in live web applications.

💡 What is a CSRF Attack?

A CSRF attack forces an authenticated user to submit a malicious request to a web application without their knowledge. It typically exploits session-based authentication (like cookies) to perform actions as the user without their consent.

For instance, if a user is logged into a Symfony-based admin dashboard and visits a malicious website in another tab, that site could make a forged request to change their email or password—without them ever knowing.

🔥 Real-World CSRF Attack Example in Symfony

Symfony, by default, includes CSRF protection in its forms. But when developers use raw HTML forms, or create custom APIs or AJAX-based requests, CSRF protection can be easily missed.

Here’s an insecure example of a form in a Symfony controller:

// src/Controller/UserController.php public function updateEmail(Request $request): Response { if ($request->isMethod('POST')) { $newEmail = $request->request->get('email'); // CSRF protection is missing here! $this->getUser()->setEmail($newEmail); $this->getDoctrine()->getManager()->flush(); return new Response('Email updated!'); } return $this->render('user/update_email.html.twig'); }

❗ Vulnerable Form (update_email.html.twig)

<form method="POST" action="/update-email"> <input type="email" name="email" required> <button type="submit">Update Email</button> </form>

Without CSRF tokens, any third-party site can craft a similar request and hijack the session of the authenticated user.

✅ Secure Symfony CSRF Protection Example

Symfony provides an easy way to integrate CSRF tokens into forms. Here’s how to implement it properly:

✅ Secure Controller with CSRF Token

use Symfony\Component\Security\Csrf\CsrfTokenManagerInterface; public function updateEmail(Request $request, CsrfTokenManagerInterface $csrfTokenManager): Response { if ($request->isMethod('POST')) { $token = $request->request->get('_csrf_token'); if (!$csrfTokenManager->isTokenValid(new CsrfToken('update-email', $token))) { throw new AccessDeniedHttpException('Invalid CSRF token'); } $newEmail = $request->request->get('email'); $this->getUser()->setEmail($newEmail); $this->getDoctrine()->getManager()->flush(); return new Response('Email updated!'); } return $this->render('user/update_email.html.twig', [ 'csrf_token' => $csrfTokenManager->getToken('update- email')->getValue(), ]); }

✅ Secure Twig Template

<form method="POST" action="/update-email"> <input type="hidden" name="_csrf_token" value="{{ csrf_token }}"> <input type="email" name="email" required> <button type="submit">Update Email</button> </form>

This ensures that only legitimate requests with the correct CSRF token will be processed.

🧪 Testing CSRF with Our Free Tool

You can test your Symfony application for CSRF and other vulnerabilities using our Website Vulnerability Scanner tool. It’s fast, easy, and provides a detailed vulnerability report in minutes.

Screenshot of the free tools webpage where you can access security assessment tools.

📋 Real Report: CSRF Vulnerability Found

We ran a test against a vulnerable Symfony application and received the following result from our tool to check Website Vulnerability:

An Example of a vulnerability assessment report generated with our free tool, providing insights into possible vulnerabilities.

This confirms that the CSRF vulnerability exists and needs to be patched immediately.

🛠️ Other CSRF Protections in Symfony

Besides token-based CSRF protection, here are some best practices:

Use HTTP-only cookies for session tokens.

Validate request origins (with Origin or Referer headers).

Avoid GET requests for state-changing actions.

Implement SameSite cookie attributes (Strict or Lax).

Use Symfony’s FormBuilder, which handles CSRF tokens automatically.

🔗 Related Posts & Resources

Check out more articles on securing your Symfony apps on our blog: 👉 Pentest Testing Corp.

✍️ Final Thoughts

CSRF vulnerabilities in Symfony applications can be devastating if left unchecked. By properly implementing CSRF tokens and validating requests, you can prevent attackers from hijacking user actions and protect your web application from silent threats.

We highly recommend running a free scan on your Symfony-based application to uncover hidden vulnerabilities. Visit https://free.pentesttesting.com/ to get started today!

#cyber security #cybersecurity #data security #pentesting #security #php #coding #symfony

1 note · View note

futuremind-ai · 7 months ago

Text

#artificial intelligence #jquery #css

1 note · View note

fururemindai · 7 months ago

Text

jQuery Ajax get and post methods

The jQuery Ajax get() and post() methods are used to request data from a server with an HTTP GET or POST request, respectively. The difference between the two methods is that GET requests retrieve data from a server, while POST requests send data to a server. Here is an example of how to use the jQuery get() method to request data from a server: $.get(“ajax_info.txt”, function(data)…

#jquery #method #post #JavaScript #programming #Python #technology #web-development

1 note · View note

babyrdie · 8 months ago

Note

What do you think of complaints about Pat being mistakenly remembered as "soft"? More specifically, about him being more warlike than gentle

Oh, dear, you're making me talk about something significant to me. Get ready for a long text! I know it took me a while to respond (more than a month), but life was busy and since this is a topic I like, I didn't want to respond without due attention.

First of all, a few details:

I'm not an academic! This is a hobby!

I tried to bring the academic interpretations I found regarding Patroclus' kindness, especially those I agree with. After all, the post is about what I think, right? It is not necessary to agree with all of them, interpretations are interpretations. The intention was just to show how this characteristic was exploited by people. Likewise, my interpretation is also ONLY my interpretation.

There are some moments where Greek texts (The Iliad and scholia bT) were used and there was a kind of translation of words. Note that I obviously don't know any form of Greek! The method used to arrive at the result will be explained. In any case, it's just to get an IDEA of what was said, it isn't a super serious translation. Please don't quote me on this. If you have any corrections on this aspect, I'm open to them!

Homeric epithets

First of all, what is an epithet? Anyone who reads Homer has probably read/heard this word a considerable number of times, but what is the explanation for this term? Speaking very simply, the term came from Greek and basically refers to a characteristic of the character. This characteristic can refer to the character's appearance, personality, ability, function, ancestry or place of origin. Among the possible reasons for the use of epithets, it has been suggested that they are ornamental resources, that they seek to complement the structure of the poem (in the sense of quantity and organization of the verses) and that they have literary relevance in the development of the character — information taken from Frederico Loureço's introductory text of The Iliad in Portuguese, with the third case being his suggestion. They’re considered formulaic in the sense that they have a ready-made structure that can be fitted into the poem, and the idea of formulas in Homeric epic is generally accepted as a result of oral tradition because it facilitates oral recitation without losing the poetic quality. Even if you had never heard this word before, if you read Homer you certainly noticed its existence. For example, perhaps you noticed how many times Menelaus is emphasized by the color of his hair (in Greek, xanthus. In English translations, it varies). This is because this is one of Menelaus' epithets, in this case referring to his appearance. Some other examples are:

Their appearance (ex: Ajax with aka “giant/gigantic”)

Their abilities (ex: Achilles with “swift-footed” as an example of physical ability and Odysseus with “tactician” as an example of intellectual ability)

Their role (ex: Agamemnon with "lord of men/shepherd of people" because he’s the leader of the Achaean army)

Their ancestrality (ex: Diomedes with aka "Tydeus' son")

The gentle epithet in The Iliad

Regarding epithets, Patroclus was portrayed as gentle by Homer. He may not be what we see as "gentle" today because a soldier isn't exactly the picture of gentleness in modern times, but by the standards of the time and even among Homeric characters, Patroclus was considered gentle. This isn't an interpretive case, it's something that is evident in the text of The Iliad.

When Menelaus announces the death of Patroclus, this is how he describes him:

Much he enjoined on Meriones and the Aiantes: “Aiantes, leaders of the Argives, and Meriones, now let you each be mindful of gentle, unhappy Patroclus, for to all men he knew to be kind while he was alive; and now death and fate have swallowed him.”

The Iliad, 17.698-672. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

In Greek, the sentence in which Menelaus refers to Patroclus as kind is:

Αἴαντ' Ἀργείων ἡγήτορε Μηριόνη τε νῦν τις ἐνηείης [gentle/kind] Πατροκλῆος δειλοῖο 670 μνησάσθω: [gentleness/kindness] πᾶσιν γὰρ ἐπίστατο μείλιχος εἶναι ζωὸς ἐών: νῦν αὖ θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κιχάνει.

The Iliad, 17.669-672.

When thinking about the fate of mortals, this is how Zeus describes Patroclus:

And as from afar Zeus who gathers the clouds saw him arrayed in the armor of the godlike son of Peleus, shaking his head he addressed his own heart: 200 “Ah, poor wretch, death troubles your heart not at all, death which is now close by you; you are putting on the immortal armor of a noble man, before whom all others tremble. His companion you have slain was both strong and gentle, and you were not right to take the armor from his head and shoulders. But yet I will hand you now great victory, compensation for this—that Andromache will not receive you safe-returned from fighting, nor the famous armor of the son of Peleus.”

The Iliad, 17.198-209. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

In Greek, the sentence in which Zeus refers to Patroclus as kind is:

τὸν δ' ὡς οὖν ἀπάνευθεν ἴδεν νεφεληγερέτα Ζεὺς τεύχεσι Πηλεί̈δαο κορυσσόμενον θείοιο, κινήσας ῥα κάρη προτὶ ὃν μυθήσατο θυμόν: 200 ἆ δείλ' οὐδέ τί τοι θάνατος καταθύμιός ἐστιν ὃς δή τοι σχεδὸν εἶσι: σὺ δ' ἄμβροτα τεύχεα δύνεις ἀνδρὸς ἀριστῆος, τόν τε τρομέουσι καὶ ἄλλοι: τοῦ δὴ ἑταῖρον ἔπεφνες ἐνηέα [gentle/kind] τε κρατερόν τε, τεύχεα δ' οὐ κατὰ κόσμον ἀπὸ κρατός τε καὶ ὤμων 205 εἵλευ: ἀτάρ τοι νῦν γε μέγα κράτος ἐγγυαλίξω, τῶν ποινὴν ὅ τοι οὔ τι μάχης ἐκνοστήσαντι δέξεται Ἀνδρομάχη κλυτὰ τεύχεα Πηλεί̈ωνος.

The Iliad, 17.198-207.

When mourning the death of Patroclus, Briseis said:

“[...] So now I mourn your death — I will never stop — you were always kind."

The Iliad, 19.355. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

In Greek, the sentence in which Briseis refers to Patroclus as kind is:

ἐς Φθίην, δαίσειν δὲ γάμον μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσι. τώ σ' ἄμοτον κλαίω τεθνηότα μείλιχον αἰεί. [always gentle/kind]

The Iliad, 19.299-300.

One of Priam's sons, Lycaon, when begging to be spared by Achilles appeals to the memory of Patroclus and describes him thus:

“[...] I will escape your hands, since some divine force has brought me to this place. Yet I will say one other thing to you, and put this within your heart; do not kill me, since I am not born of the same womb as Hector, who slew your strong and gentle comrade.”

The Iliad, 21.93-96. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

In Greek, the sentence in which Lycaon refers to Patroclus as kind is:

ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ' ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσι: μή με κτεῖν', ἐπεὶ οὐχ ὁμογάστριος Ἕκτορός εἰμι, ὅς τοι ἑταῖρον ἔπεφνεν ἐνηέα [gentle/kind] τε κρατερόν τε. ὣς ἄρα μιν Πριάμοιο προσηύδα φαίδιμος υἱὸς

The Iliad, 21.94-97.

The narrator also describes him as kind, most notably when he says that the Achaeans are mourning Patroclus:

So he spoke, and the men obeyed the swift-footed son of Peleus. And first they extinguished the pyre with dark-gleaming wine, everywhere the flame reached and the ash had fallen deep; and, weeping, they gathered up the white bones of their gentle comrade [...]

The Iliad, 23.249-252. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

ὣς ἔφαθ', οἳ δ' ἐπίθοντο ποδώκεϊ Πηλεί̈ωνι. πρῶτον μὲν κατὰ πυρκαϊὴν σβέσαν αἴθοπι οἴνῳ ὅσσον ἐπὶ φλὸξ ἦλθε, βαθεῖα δὲ κάππεσε τέφρη: κλαίοντες δ' ἑτάροιο ἐνηέος [gentle companion/kind comrade] ὀστέα λευκὰ

The Iliad, 23.249-252.

And Achilles:

[...] “Son of Atreus and you other strong-greaved Achaeans, these prizes are set down in assembly and await the horsemen. If we Achaeans were now contending in honor of any other man, I myself would surely carry these to my shelter after coming first; for you all know by how much my horses are superior in speed. For they are immortal, and Poseidon gave them to my father Peleus, and he in turn gave them into my hands. But as it is I will stay here, as will my single-hoofed horses; for such was the charioteer whose noble strength they lost, so kind, who many a time poured limpid oil upon their manes, after washing them with shining water. They both stand grieving for him, and their manes hang upon the ground, they both stand grieving in their hearts. But the rest of you throughout the army, ready yourselves, whoever of you trusts his horses and his bolted chariot.”

The Iliad, 23.272.-286. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

ἀλλ' ἤτοι μὲν ἐγὼ μενέω καὶ μώνυχες ἵπποι: τοίου γὰρ κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἀπώλεσαν ἡνιόχοιο ἠπίου [gentle/kind], ὅς σφωϊν μάλα πολλάκις ὑγρὸν ἔλαιον χαιτάων κατέχευε λοέσσας ὕδατι λευκῷ.

The Iliad, 23.279-282.

Achilles, Menelaus, Briseis, Lycaon, Zeus and the narrator related Patroclus to kindness. So I highly doubt that Patroclus being described as kind is just an opinion, it really does seem like a character trait to me. In the case of conventional epithets of male characters, they're big, they're fast, they have an important lineage, they play a big role. Patroclus has epithets like these too. He is "descendent of Zeus” (διογενές), he is "Menoetius' son" (Μενοιτιάδης), he is "great-hearted" (μεγαλήτωρ). And yet he’s the only one who has the epithet "gentle". It’s common for characters to receive personality-related epithets regarding their smartness or their courage, but Patroclus also receives “gentle”. This actually caught some attention in academic circles!

Scholia bT of The Iliad

First, why not start with the Greek scholia of Homer? More specifically, an ancient scholia, currently untranslated. Even earlier, the emphasis on the gentleness of Patroclus was noted in the scholia written by Greeks, it isn't an emphasis that only emerged with non-Greek scholarship. It's also interesting because some of the modern scholars I'll mention have used these texts as references, you will notice this when they cite things like Scholia bT.

For the Greek text, I consulted the Scaifer Viewer. For those interested, I'll list the sections of this website from which I took the excerpts. This scholia doesn't have a complete translation, only some parts were translated in specific contexts and (for those who read lost fragments of authors, you have probably already read part of it; for example, in the fragments attributed to Hesiod). For those that I was able to find translations, I used the translation and gave credit. For those that I didn't find translated, I “”“translated””” in a very improvised way with the help of dictionaries, automatic translators and academic texts that summarized the excerpt. Although I tried to capture the general idea of the excerpt (that is, what is being explained), this doesn't even remotely attempt to be a faithful translations in terms of grammar and language.

Taken from section 5.1.192.

〈Μενοιτιάδῃ⟩] εἰκότως τῷ Ἀχιλλεῖ θυμικῷ ὄντι ἤπιος ὢν [*] Πάτροκλος πάρεστι πρὸς τὸ τὸν θυμὸν αὐτοῦ μαλάσσειν. ὅτι δὲ πρᾷός ἐστι, δῆλον ἐξ ὧν οἰκτείρει τοὺς Ἀχαιούς· Εὐρύπυλον ἰᾶται, καὶ Μενέλαος περὶ αὐτοῦ φησι νῦν τις ἐνηείης Πατροκλῆος—μεμνή σθω” (Il. 17. 670)· κατʼ ἐξοχὴν δὲ ἰδιαζόντως εἶπε περὶ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα ἀξιόχρεως ᾖ, τελευτῶν ἐγείρειν αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν μάχην. Patroclus, the son of Menoetius, being gentle, is fittingly present beside Achilles, who is prone to anger, in order to soothe his spirit. That he’s gentle is clear from the fact that he feels pity for the Achaeans, he heals Eurypylus and Menelaus speaks about him saying, “remember the gentle Patroclus” (Il. 17.670). He spoke about him in a particularly distinct and personal way, so that he might be worthy, ending with the exhortation to rouse him into battle.

[Improvised translation, don't quote me for this if the subject is complete accuracy]

General idea: The schoalist argues that Patroclus having kindness as a personality trait is clear and he gave as argumentative examples Patroclus' compassion for the Achaeans (note: this is especially demonstrated at the beginning of Book 16, but had already been portrayed in Book 11. Probably hinted in Book 9 as well, given Phoenix's story about Meleager in which Cleopatra is parallel to Patroclus), the way he heals Eurypylus (note: see Book 11) and the way Menelaus encourages the Greeks by reminding them that Patroclus was kind (note: see Book 17). He also interprets that Patroclus being shown in scenes alongside Achilles is appropriate, as his kindness is supposed to soften Achilles' anger.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

Taken from section 5.1.205.

Πάτροκλος δὲ φίλῳ] τὸ ἤπιον αὐτοῦ διὰ τῆς σιωπῆς τῆς νῦν τε κἀν ὅλῃ τῇ στάσει κἀν τῷ μηνιθμῷ δείκνυται· καὶ νῦν δὲ οὐ φθέγγεται, ἵνα μὴ ἢ παροξυντικός. Patroclus, however, shows his gentler nature through the silence both now and in the entire situation and in the month; and now he does not speak, so as not to be provocative.

[Improvised translation, don't quote me for this if the subject is complete accuracy]

General idea: The scholiast interprets Patroclus being silent as a sign of his gentle nature. This part is specifically about Book 1, where while Achilles is visibly angered by the situation Patroclus is a silent figure and his only role in this part is to obey Achilles' order to bring Briseis. Apparently, the idea is that Patroclus doesn't speak in front of the men sent by Agamemnon so as not to be provocative; perhaps it refers to him not making any comment about the situation so as not to incite Achilles's anger even more.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

Taken from section 5.11.390

ληίδα δʼ ἐκ πεδίου] αἰδήμων ὁ Πάτροκλος· ἐπειγόμενος 〈γὰρ〉 ἀνέχεται τοῦ γέροντος μακρολογοῦντος· οἰκονομικῶς δὲ πέπλασται τῷ ποιητῇ ἡ μακρὰ διήγησις, ἵνα ὁ Εὐρύπυλος ἐκ τῆς μάχης φθάσας ἐλθεῖν περιτύχῃ Πατρόκλῳ, καὶ παρὰ τούτῳ 〈αὐτοῦ〉 ἐμβραδύνοντος δεινὴ γένηται ἡ τειχομαχία· εἰ γὰρ ταχέως ἐπανῆλθε πρὸς Ἀχιλλέα καὶ ἐκπεμφθῆναι ἑαυτὸν ἔπεισεν εἰς τὴν μάχην, ἀνῃρέθη ἂν ἡ τιχομαχία, δι’ ἣν ἐπλάσθη τὸ τεῖχος. Patroclus is respectful: for, although he is in a hurry, he puts up with the old man when he is speaking for such a long time. The long narration is crafted economically by the poet, so that Eurypylus, who returns early from the battle encounters Patroclus, and slows down in his presence on account of the wall-fight. For if he had returned quickly to Achilles and had persuaded him to send him to the battle, the wall-fight, for which the wall has been introduced, would have been taken away.

[Translation by Jonas Grethlein]

General Idea: In Book 11, Patroclus encounters Nestor, who is as verbose as ever, although Patroclus is impatient given the circumstances. The schoalist interprets Patroclus as being particularly respectful because, although he's in a hurry, he entertains Nestor for a long time in his conversation. The schoalist later comments on the economy of the narrative in the way it is structured.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

Taken from section 5.11.385

[...] §. ἔστι δὲ μείλιχος Πάτροκλος· διὸ ἱστάμενος αἰδεῖται τὸν γέροντα (649). [...] Patroclus is indeed gentle; therefore, standing there, he feels shame before the elder."

[Improvised translation, don't quote me for this if the subject is complete accuracy]

General idea (parts cut in [...] for reasons of uncertain translation on my part): this part is about the interaction between Nestor and Patroclus in Book 11. The scholiast initially (in the cut part) appears to comment on Nestor's advising speeches, eventually interpreting that Patroclus is kind in the way he behaves because he demonstrates humility and respect in front of an older person.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

Taken from section 6.16.2

δάκρυα θερμά] εἰκότως ὁ πρᾶος Πάτροκλος κλαίει, τὰ μὲν [*] ἀκοῇ τὰ δὲ αὐτοψεὶ τῶν δεινῶν ἐπισκοπήσας. διὸ οὐδὲ φθέγξασθαί τι οἷός τε ἐστὶ συγκεχυμένος ὑπὸ τῶν δακρύων, ἀλλὰ σιωπῶν ἵσταται διὰ τοῦ σχήματος τὸν ἔλεον ἐπαγόμενος. καὶ ἐν ταῖς Λιταῖς (Il. 9.433) ὁ Φοῖνιξ “δάκρυʼ ἀναπρήσας· περὶ γὰρ δίε νηυσὶν Ἀχαιῶν.” *μελάνυδρος] ἡ βαθύυδρος, ᾗ κατὰ τοὺς φυσικοὺς μέλαν ἐστὶ [*] τὸ ὕδωρ. The gentle Patroclus laments appropriately, since he has both heard and seen terrible things. So he is not able to cry out, being overwhelmed by his tears, but stands in silence, bringing pity upon himself because of his appearance. Similarly in the Litai (Iliad 9.433) Phoenix “burst into tears, for he feared greatly for the Greek ships” Melanidros] the deep water, in which according to the naturalists is black water.

[Translation from British Library]

General Idea: In Book 16, Patroclus runs crying to Achilles after hearing more news about the horrific events happening to his companions. He, however, says nothing until Achilles asks him why he is crying, at which point Patroclus explains the situation and begs Achilles to have compassion. The schoalist interprets this scene as Patroclus's initial silence occurring because he is overwhelmed by his own emotions, associating his empathy with his kindness. He compares this to the scene in Book 9 where Phoenix is concerned about the way the Trojans are increasingly advancing on the Greek ships. Furthermore, he notes that the term used in Greek refers to dark water in the sense of symbolizing deep water, indicating that Patroclus's tears are deep.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

Taken from section 6.16.5

[...] οἱ μὲν σκληροὶ τοὺς ἐπιεικεῖς καὶ πρᾴους γυναιξὶν εἰκάζουσιν, οἱ δὲ ἐπιεικεῖς τοὺς στερεοὺς ἀγρίους καὶ ἀνημέρους φασίν. καὶ νῦν ὁ μὲν Ἀχιλλεὺς τὸν Πάτροκλον ὡς κόρην, ὁ δὲ Πάτροκλος τὸν Ἀχιλλέα ὡς πετρῶν παῖδα (35). [...] The harsh/hard/severe ones liken the gentle/kind and mild to women, while the gentle/kind ones say the harsh/hard/severe ones are wild and untamed. And now, Achilles regards Patroclus as a girl, while Patroclus sees Achilles as a child of stone.

[Improvised translation, don't quote me for this if the subject is complete accuracy]

General idea, including the part I removed (where it says [...]) because I couldn't find a sufficiently comprehensible translation: the scholiast discusses the scene in Book 16 in which Patroclus begs Achilles to be more compassionate, to which Achilles responds by comparing Patroclus to a little girl begging for her mother's attention because he is crying. Patroclus, in turn, says that Achilles is not the son of either Thetis or Peleus, but of the sea and rocks. The scholiast interprets this dialogue as portraying the idea that a man who behaved compassionately was sometimes compared to a woman because this type of compassion was associated with femininity, while gentle people saw harsh people as so hard-hearted that they seemed to distance themselves from a certain idea of humanity. Therefore, the scholiast's interpretation is that when Achilles compares Patroclus to a little girl, he is thus mocking his compassionate tears by saying that he sounds effeminate. When Patroclus says that Achilles was born of the sea and rocks, he is thus saying that Achilles at this point has so little compassion that it is as if he had not been generated by people. Achilles then criticizes Patroclus's gentle behavior (note: ironically, Achilles later praises this trait in Patroclus when he comments about the horses missing their kind caretaker. Whether this was a case of "giving value after losing" or whether Achilles only said it in the first place because he was hot-headed, it's up to each person's interpretation).

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁

Taken from section 4.21.44:

ἐνηέα ] ἐν τῷ ἐπιθέτῳ τοῦ φίλου μαλάσσειν αὐτὸν οἴεται , διδάσκων ζηλοῦν τὴν σήνειαν τοῦ φίλου . Gente/kind: with this epithet of Akhilleus' friend he thinks he may soften him, by teaching him to emulate his friend's kindness.

[Translation by Nicholas Richardson]

General idea: this is a scene from Book 21 in which the Trojan Lycaon begs Achilles to show mercy and mentions Patroclus, characterizing him as kind. In the scholiast's interpretation, this was an attempt by Lycaon to bring out in Achilles a feeling of trying to emulate the kindness of his deceased friend.

Patroclus “gentle” epithet in The Iliad in modern analyse

Cambridge University has published The Iliad: A Commentary Series, a 6-volume series of books that aims to analyze all the books of The Iliad in detail. The volumes are:

Volume 1: Analysis of Books 1-4 by George S. Kirk.

Volume 2: Analysis of Books 5-8 by George S. Kirk.

Volume 3: Analysis of Books 9-12 by Bryan Hainsworth.

Volume 4: Analysis of Books 13-16 by Richard Janko.

Volume 5: Analysis of Books 17-20 by Mark E. Edwards.

Volume 6: Analysis of Books 21-24 by Nicholas Richardson.

Some of these volumes contain analyses of Patroclus's kindness! I will list them here, and the notes in “[]” are my additions, that is, they aren't from the original text. This is because the original text sometimes uses Greek (obviously), but without necessarily indicating what the Greek term means, which can be confusing. The meanings I gave were based on online Greek dictionaries and the translations that I know of the scenes mentioned.

While analyzing Book 9 of The Iliad, Bryan Hainsworth mentions how the scholia bT emphasizes Patroclus' kindness in scenes from this moment. In case you don’t remember, this is the book where we have the embassy sent by Agamemnon (consisting of Odysseus, Big Ajax and Phoenix) visiting Achilles in an attempt to convince him to return. Patroclus is largely a silent presence in this book — he is shown listening to the music that Achilles plays, he prepares food for Achilles and the guests, he silently listens to each of their arguments, he obeys Achilles when he asks Patroclus to prepare a place for Phoenix to sleep, and finally he is shown sleeping. According to Hainsworth:

205 Patroklos makes no reply. bT make this a point of characterization, cf their remark at 11.616, σιωπηλὸς ἀεὶ καὶ ἐνηὴς Πάτροκλος. His self-effacing and gentle nature (ἐνηείη, 17.670) is often praised by the exegetical scholia (bT at 1.307, 337, 345). Kindliness, like other co-operative virtues, is appropriate between friends, but there is no reason why it should be shown to enemies; Patroklos displays his mettle in book 16. In spite of his disapproval of Akhilleus' present attitude towards his friends, which surfaces at 16.29-35, respect for his superior in rank keeps Patroklos silent at this point. His silence is, of course, necessary if Akhilleus is to maintain his present stance.

The Iliad: A Commentary - Volume V: Books 9-12 pg 90.

While analyzing Book 17 of The Iliad, Mark W. Edwards refers to Patroclus' kindness as unique in the entire poem. But note that he is talking about language; he isn’t implying that there are no other kind characters (Menelaus, for example, is constantly used as an example of Homeric kindness and is even compared to Patroclus in academic circles), but rather referring to how Patroclus is explicitly referred to as kind. This book, in case you don't remember, shows the Achaeans (especially Menelaus and Ajax) trying to recover Patroclus while Hector encourages the Trojans and allies to recover the body because he wants to feed the corpse to the dogs. According to Edwards:

669-73 On 669 see 507-8n. The two Aiantes were fighting side by side at 531-2. TIS (670) refers to all the Greeks, not just the three leaders he addresses. ἐνήης [Note: kind/gentle] is used of Patroklos by Zeus at 204 21.96 and 23.252; otherwise only by Nestor of himself in proximity to a reference to Patroklos (23.648, cf. 646), and of Athene disguised as a friendly Phacacian (Od. 8.200). The usages suggest that it may have been a conventional epithet for ἑταῖρος [Note: hetaîros. This word has more than one meaning, but in translations into English they generally use "companion"], in the II. restricted to Patroklos for artistic reasons. Similarly, the form δειλοῖο [Note: miserable/wretched/poor, but in a compassionate sense] is used only in this formula for Patroklos (here and 3 × in book 23), and he is the only person to whom μείλιχος [Note: meílikhos. Gentle/kind] is applied, here and when Briseis says that he was μείλιχος aiɛí [Note: always gentle/kind] (19.300; it is used with a negative for Hektor by Andromakhe, 24.739). Patroklos' gentleness is unique in the language of the poem, and seems to be recognized in the unusual number of direct addresses to him by the narrator. [...]

The Iliad: A Commentary - Volume V: Books 17-20, pg 127.

In his analysis of Book 21, Nicholas Richardson again cites the scholia bT to point out that Lycaon, by referring to Patroclus as kind, was trying to remind Achilles of his friend's kindness as a way for Achilles to follow Patroclus' example. Ironically, the mention of Patroclus didn’t make Achilles kinder, but rather made him angrier. According to Richardson:

96 ἐνηέα [gentle/kind]: 'with this epithet of Akhilleus' friend he thinks he may soften him, by teaching him to emulate his friend's kindness' (bT). Ironically, the reference to Patroklos' death only sparks off Akhilleus' bitter reply. The verse echoes 17.204, in the speech by Zeus prophesying Hektor's death, when he puts on Akhilleus’ armour after killing Patroklos, and the epithet is nearly always applied to Patroklos in the poem (see on 23.252).

The Iliad: A Commentary - Volume VI: Books 21-24, pg 61.

Richardson, while analyzing passages from Book 23 of The Iliad, also emphasizes Patroclus' epithets. In particular, he notes the combination of "gentle", only applied to Patroclus, with "companion", thus forming "gentle companion" (ἑτάροιο ἐνηέος), even more restricted to Patroclus. This part, in case you don't remember, refers to the funeral. In addition, he also analyzes the part in which Achilles describes Patroclus' treatment of the horses. According to Richardson:

973-86 Akhilleus' speech appropriately introduces the first and most important contest, by referring to the supremacy of his own horses (cf.2.770), and to the loss of Patroklos, their driver. This reference is developed pathetically with the reminiscence of his gentle care for them and of their grief for him, a motif which recalls 17.426-56 and 19.400-24.

The Iliad: A Commentary - Volume VI: Books 21-24, pg 205.

252 ἑτάροιο ἐνηέος [note: gentle companion] almost exclusively of Patroklos in Il.; cf. 17.204, 21.96 ἑταῖρον [note: hetaîros. companion] . . . ἐνηέα [note: gentle], 17.670 ενηείης Πατροκληος [note: gentle Patroclus. The “Πατροκληος” is his name], and once of Nestor at 23.648, just after a reference to Patroklos (see comment).

The Iliad: A Commentary - Volume VI: Books 21-24, pg 199.

Richardson (yes, the same Richardson), in a critical study of the exegetical scholia of the Iliad (the bT scholia is part of this) published in The Classical Quarterly in 1980, notes how scholiasts viewed the text as a whole and analyzed it with the idea that even the smallest details had a purpose. To illustrate this, Richardson uses the scholastics' interpretations of Patroclus' role in the narrative, including his kindness:

This is an elaboration of the Aristotelian view which the Scholia follow, and they do not put it so explicitly. But they do assume that the poet has a clear idea from the beginning of the direction in which his narrative is moving. It is particularly illuminating to see how they comment on the role of Patroclus in the poem. He is first mentioned at 1.307, when Achilles returns with him and his companions to their tents after the quarrel. Here they note that his introduction at this early point in the narrative already prepares the way for his later intervention to plead with Achilles to return to the battle. Again the fact that Achilles entrusts Briseis to him (337) indicates their closeness, and his silence here (345) is picked up in the Embassy by the way he remains in the background, which suggests his gentleness (BT 1.307, 337, 345). The Scholia compare his healing of Eurypylus, his distress at the Greek misfortunes, and the description of him as 'gentle' by Menelaus (17.670). When we come to the series of events leading up to Patroclus' intervention, they are fully aware of the careful way in which this is prepared. The wounding of the heroes in Book 11 leads to the Greek rout and battle by the ships (BT 11.318, 407, 598). Machaon goes back to the ships in his chariot when wounded, and so passes Achilles' view rapidly: Achilles therefore sends Patroclus to find out what has happened (BT 11.512; cf. ABT 11.604). Achilles has been watching the battle from his ship, clearly longing for the moment when he can return (BT 11.600). Patroclus goes to Nestor, and this ensures that Nestor's eloquence will succeed where the Embassy had failed (AB 11.611). Nestor's long story is designed οἰκονομικῶς, i.e. as part of the poet's plan, because this gives time for Eurypylus to return and meet Patroclus. This delays Patroclus and allows the poet to introduce the battle at the wall which follows (BT 11.677-8, 809). Patroclus is respectful (αἰδήμων), and so he listens politely, in spite of the urgency of the situation. The wounding of Machaon has removed the doctor who could have treated Eurypylus, and so Patroclus does so instead (T 11.833; cf. also BT 11.813). His kindness leads him to stay with Eurypylus after treating him (BT 12.1). Finally, we return to Patroclus and Eurypylus at 15.390, when great battle has made the Greek plight far more desperate and P sympathy for them all the greater (BT 15.390 and 12.1). Later, death, Hector drags his body in order to cut off his head and gi the dogs (17.125-7). This barbaric intention is often overlooked observe that it helps to justify Achilles' mistreatment of Hector’s body (BT 17.126-7). Whether or not Achilles is justified the motif surely to his retaliation.

Literary Criticism in the Exegetical Scholia to the Iliad: A Sketch, pg 268-269.

When addressing how scholiasts seemed to interpret each character, Richardson once again highlights their tendency to emphasize Patroclus' gentleness, while commenting that this contrasts with the portrayal of Paris, who is not violent but is cowardly (something Patroclus is not), and Agamemnon, who is noble but has an arrogant personality (also not so typical of Patroclus, although here I should remember that in Book 16 Patroclus does indeed display arrogance. However, we will address this separately). In turn, Menelaus is seen as a similar figure to Patroclus in the narrative. He also mentions the apostrophes, which is an interesting point, but I'll address this separately as well.

[...]They are quick to observe points of characterization of the individual heroes. Patroclus' gentleness has already been noted (cf. also BT 11.616, 670, 677-8, 814, 12.1, 19.297). The poet's sympathy for him is shown by his use of apostrophe, addressing him in the vocative (BT 16.692-3, 787; cf. Eustathius 1086.49). He uses the same device for Menelaus: προσπέπονθε δὲ Μενελάῳ ὁ ποιητής (ΒΤ 4.127; cf. 146, 7.104, Τ 13.603). The Scholia regard him as a moderate and gentle character (BT 6.51, 62), who evokes the sympathy of his companions (BT 4.154, 207, 5.565, 7.122). He is called a 'soft fighter' (17.588), but this is said by an enemy and is not the poet's own view (ABT). His φιλοτιμία is displayed in his dispute with Antilochus after the chariot-race (BT 23.566). Paris is contrasted with him, as cowardly, effeminate, and disliked by his own people (BT 3.19, AB 3.371, Porphyry ap. B 3.441 quoting Aristotle, fr. 150, BT 4.207, 5.565, 6.509, etc.). Agamemnon is also contrasted, as noble and commanding, but arrogant and brutal: the Scholia reflect attempts to defend him from criticism, as he is the Greek leader and so ought to be a model of kingship, but they cannot whitewash him entirely (cf. especially BT 1.225, and T 1.32, ABT 2.478, BT 6.58, 62). His defeatist speeches to the army, suggesting return home, are interpreted as having a covert intention which is the opposite of their apparent one (Porphyry ap. B 2.73, BT 2.110 ff., 9.11, 14.75). This may be true of 2.110 ff., but fails to convince us that Agamemnon is not being portrayed as a weak and vacillating leader later.

Literary Criticism in the Exegetical Scholia to the Iliad: A Sketch, pg 272-273.

In a 1972 Harvard Studies in Classical Philology journal, Adam Parry wrote Language and Characterization in Homer, where at one point he emphasized how the language of The Iliad seems to highlight Patroclus’s gentleness. He mentions the use of apostrophes (again, I’ll get into this later) and mentioned how the descriptive μείλιχος (gentle) appears in the text, but in terms of the character only Patroclus receives such a description (at other times, it’s used to describe things and not people). The word ἐνηής, which Parry translates as “goodness,” appears 5 times in The Iliad, 4 of which are about Patroclus.

The case of apostrophe must be more complex than either the traditional or the modern view suggests. Let us consider the three characters with whom apostrophe is especially associated. Before book 16, Patroclus plays a part in books 1, 9, 11, and 15, being mentioned by name or patronym in those books twenty-one times. Apostrophe, however, is used for him only in book 16, where it occurs six times, always at significant points of the action. The special place Patroclus occupies in the organization of the poem scarcely needs comment. This place, in our poem, depends on his character. He is the sweetest and most compassionate of the Homeric warriors. We see this most clearly in the moving lament for him spoken by Briseis in 19.282-300, where she says of him: “When Achilles slew my husband, you would not let me cry. You promised to make me Achilles’ wedded wife, to bring me back to Phthia, and to give me a marriage feast there, among the Myrmidons. And so now with all my heart I weep for your death, for you were always sweet” ---τῶ σ᾽ ἄμοτον κλαίω τεθνηότα μείλιχον αἰεί. μείλιχον is in this sense a word reserved for Patroclus in the Iliad. Elsewhere it is used almost entirely to mean “‘gentle words” as opposed to “harsh” (10 times), the other two occurrences being ironic — ‘“‘he was no gentle fighter in battle.’’ Only Patroclus as a man is μείλιχος, and the distinctive word defines that quality in him which ensures his death and with it the tragic plot of the poem.

Menelaus also signals this quality when in 17.669 he calls for help in protecting the body of Patroclus: “Ajax, you and your brother, and Meriones, let us remember the goodness of unhappy Patroclus; he was able to be sweet (μείλιχος) to everyone, while he was alive; now death and doom have found him.” The word I translate as “goodness” is ἐνηής. Of its five occurrences in the Iiad, four refer to Patroclus. The single exception is in 23.648 where the egotistical Nestor speaks of himself, and here the adjective occurs immediately after Nestor has himself spoken of Patroclus, so that some process of association appears likely. To Patroclus is attributed in the poem a distinct character: kind, easily moved to pity, remarkably free from the sort of heroic self-assertion which many, and recently Professor Adkins, have sought to define for us. This character is manifested in the poem not only by his actions, but also by a distinct vocabulary.

Language and Characterization in Homer, pg 10-11.

BONUS: James P. Holoka, in his edition of Simone Weil’s The Poem of Force, not only follows Edwards’s idea that Patroclus’s gentleness is linguistically unique but also emphasizes his duality as a kind person yet a formidable warrior. He mentions this because Weil, the author of the poem he is commenting on, at one point considers Patroclus the only soldier who showed any restraint regarding strength, describing him as “knowing how to be sweet to everybody” in a likely reference to Menelaus’s description of Patroclus in Book 17. Holoka says:

“[...] Only Patroclus is an exception in the Iliad. Though a most formidable warrior, he also has the capacity for kindness; cf. Edwards (1991): “he is the only person to whom μείλιχος [“gentle”] is applied, here [17.671] and when Briseis says that he was μείλιχοναἰεί. [“always gentle”] (19.300; it is used with a negative for Hektor by Andromakhe, 24.739). Patroklos’ gentleness is unique in the language of the poem...

Simone Weil’s The Iliad or The Poem of Force: A Critical Edition, pg 94.

This is a bonus because I haven't read Simone Weil's entire text, so I can't say I agree with her. It's different from the more pointed analyses of others here, it's a text with a very interconnected context. I only read the text around the Patroclus part and didn't quite agree with the thinking there, but that could very well be because I didn't read it with the complete context.

Apostrophes in The Iliad

Homer intentionally emphasized this characteristic of Patroclus and never treated it as a weakness, but rather as a quality. Gentle or kind only appears describing Patroclus after his death — Menelaus and Briseis feel affected by Patroclus' death because he was kind to them, Zeus talks about how Hector is destined to die for having killed Patroclus while associating Patroclus with kindness and strength, Lycaon tries to win Achilles' mercy by remembering that Patroclus was kind, Achilles speaks of his horses' grief at losing a kind charioteer, the Acheans mourns a lost companion who was kind. The preserved memory of Patroclus by those who mourn or speak of his death isn’t just his strength or his courage, but his gentleness. This makes me think that the choice to make Patroclus the only hero to receive this type of epithet is precisely to aggravate the tragedy of his destiny — Achilles was the most affected, but he wasn’t the only one to mourn between the characters and even the listener/reader.

This seems even more the case given the number of times Homer uses apostrophes with Patroclus. And again, even if you don't know what the term apostrophe means, you've certainly noticed its presence in the text just as you did with epithets. Depending on the situation, you may have even thought about it! At least, I've seen posts where people talked about it without knowing the specific term, but they remarkably understood the spirit of the thing. This is great because I think that getting the spirit of the thing without knowing what the thing is called is preferable to knowing what the thing is called but not understanding it. Basically, this word is the name for when the poet refers directly to the character, almost as if he were talking to him instead of narrating in the third person as he did throughout the entire poem. Menelaus and Patroclus are the characters in which this narrative device was used the most, with Menelaus it was 7 times and with Patroclus it was 8 times. In particular, this draws the reader's sympathy to the character being referred to.

In a text published in The Center of Hellenic Studies, entitled Revisiting the Apostrophes to Patroclus in Iliad 16, Emily Allen-Hornblower conceptualizes the narrative use of apostrophes:

Apostrophes in Homeric poetry—those instances where the poet addresses a character directly in the vocative—are “embarrassing” for the reader and critic. The apostrophe disrupts the flow of the third-person narrative by bringing the poet, performer, and audience in direct contact with one of the characters. To what end? In the Iliad, the overwhelming majority of apostrophes are addressed to Patroclus (8 times, all of them in book 16) and Menelaus (7 times). Much like a historical present, they take the listener into the here-and-now of the scene, creating a sense of greater proximity with the character being thus addressed. Scholars since Antiquity have interpreted these apostrophes as expressions of particular concern on the part of the poet for the characters in question. The fact that the majority of apostrophes are principally directed at Patroclus and Menelaus is seen as a reflection of the fact that these are the two heroes that the poem represents as “unusually sensitive and worthy of the audience’s sympathy.” No doubt the large number of apostrophes directed at Patroclus, all confined to book 16, contributes to heighten the pathos and overall emotional effect of his excruciatingly slow and horrible death at the hands of Apollo at the end of the book.

Thus, Allen-Hornblower is theorizing through the idea that apostrophes seek to induce sympathy in the reader. When we think of the characters in which this device is most used, Menelaus and Patroclus, this really makes sense. Menelaus is the one who wants to be reunited with his wife after many years, we should sympathize with the pain of a husband who is so desperate that he has reached the point of putting himself at excessive risk even knowing the consequences (an example of this is when Menelaus readily offers to duel Hector in Book 7, even though Hector's martial superiority is known. He has to be stopped by Agamemnon). Patroclus is the character whose death is extremely important and is the catalyst for one of the climaxes of the war. We should sympathize with the empathy that made him want to fight alongside his companions and sympathize with Achilles' pain so that we can understand why this death made him act when nothing else did.

It's also no coincidence that Menelaus and Patroclus are by far the most sympathetic characters in the Achaean army. I have already given enough evidence for Patroclus, but there are also clues for Menelaus and I will illustrate them here as a way to try to make the Allen-Hornblower concept even more understandable. For example, although Menelaus in theory is the one who should feel the most negative feelings towards Troy, in a scene in Book 6 Menelaus is willing to spare a Trojan and the Trojan would have lived if it were not for the interference of Agamemnon, who is much less “soft” than Menelaus in the Homeric text. In Book 23, despite being angry with Antilochus’s trickery, he easily forgives him. This characterization of Menelaus as a person we should sympathize with continues in The Odyssey. In a text where hospitality is a big theme, Menelaus is portrayed as the perfect host. He is quick to provide gracious hospitality, unlike Polyphemus and Circe, but is also quick to allow his visitor to leave if that is what he wishes, unlike Calypso. Still someone we can empathize with, Menelaus is portrayed as mourning his brother, Agamemnon. Although the characterization of Menelaus has changed in other Greek texts, the Homeric Menelaus, at least to my mind, is a kind and sympathetic character given the social context.

Allen-Hornblower argues that, in the case of Patroclus, the apostrophes help to build the impending tragedy of his aristeia. For contextualization purposes, aristeia is when a character proves himself to be an aristo, that is, the best. For example, Achilles' aristeia is his return to battle after Patroclus' death, and Diomedes' aristeia includes his clash with Ares and Aphrodite. Patroclus' aristeia is sometimes called Patrocleia/Patrokleia. Allen-Hornblower's idea can be seen through the moments in which the device is applied. The first of these appears at the beginning of Book 16, when Homer writes “Then groaning deeply you addressed him, rider Patroclus” (16.20) and they only increase throughout the narrative of Patrocleia. More specifically, they become even more evident the closer Patroclus is to death and begin precisely with his request to Achilles, since the request is the catalyst for his death. They are an emotional element that makes the audience sympathize with the character because they are warnings that precede the tragic event that will turn his desired aristeia into a destructive aristeia.

Finally, Allen-Hornblower concludes:

It has been suggested that the apostrophes to the dying in Homeric poetry may be connected with the ritual practice of apostrophizing the dead. Whether or not the connection with ritual is there, it remains true that every address to Patroclus in the vocative throughout the Iliad following book 16 is uttered by Achilles in lament for his philos; the last occurrence is an address to Patroclus’ ghost. The apostrophes punctuating the scene of Patroclus’ death thus gesture toward Achilles’ later, mournful invocations to Patroclus. Through the apostrophes, the poetry anticipates Achilles’ excruciating grief to come by initiating his transition from ignorance to painful knowledge on a poetic level, before Achilles has actually been informed of Patroclus’ fate. The scene of Patroclus’ death has a profound impact on us because it generates a sense of Achilles’ emotional reaction to it. It is a perfect example of the way in which the Homeric epic acquires its tragic nature, aptly described by Bassett (1938) as follows: “… both Attic tragedy and the Homeric poems show clearly that action is only, as it were, the skeleton of the organism, whose life is most deeply revealed by the effect of the incidents upon the persons. In Attic tragedy we witness only the psychological “reaction” to off-scene occurrences. In Homer, “father of tragedy,” it is less the actions than their dramatized effect upon the persons which makes the deepest impression of the finality of great lives…” Bassett goes on to cite the laments for Patroclus and Hector as examples. I would add that the apostrophes to Patroclus (and the Achillean focalization they reflect in the scene of his death) are crucial tools in the poet’s arsenal that convey the “dramatized effect” of Patroclus’ death on his nearest and dearest philos—an effect which, in turn, guides the audience’s response as well. By expressing the sympathy of the poet and merging the poet’s voice with that of Achilles, the apostrophe plays an important role in foregrounding the tension that lies at the heart of the scene of Patroclus’ death, between the necessity that Patroclus (and, subsequently, Achilles) die in order for them to receive kleos, and the cost at which this kleos comes.

[Philos = friend, in this context a very dear friend. Kleos = glory, in this context martial glory usually won through war]

I have summarized the text immensely here. Personally, I recommend that you read it for yourself! It isn't long and is available for free here. Seriously, Allen-Hornblower wrote something super interesting. Anyway, I agree with the interpretation that, through the sympathy invoked by this device, Homer warns us of Patroclus' imminent and immutable death. Every time the poet refers directly to the character, we know that fate is approaching. However, part of the reason that Patroclus works so well as a character used to elicit empathy from the audience is because he has, until now, been portrayed primarily as a calmer, wiser, and gentler person compared to the other characters. The moment he wasn't like that in The Iliad was when his death arrived. I think it's no coincidence that Menelaus and Patroclus are the characters with whom these devices are most used, especially when they share the similarity of being seen as the gentlest male Homeric characters on the Achaean side.

Shared Identity in The Iliad

While the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus, regardless of how you view it (family, friend, lover, whatever), is interesting as a unique type of relationship, it's also interesting in telling us about the character of Patroclus. At this point, many academics have written their analyses of this relationship, especially from Book 9 of The Iliad onwards. Here, I'll also address how Patroclus’s personality in Book 16 is possibly related to Achilles.

Gregory Nagy, in his text “Achilles and Patroklos as Models for the Twinning of Identity,” seeks to argue that Achilles and Patroclus may represent a model of twin identities in mythology. This is, for example, expressed in how they both die on Apollo's plan and how epithets usually attributed to Achilles are attributed to Patroclus in Book 16, precisely while Patroclus personifies him by wearing his armor. According to Nagy, Achilles and Patroclus represent similarities while still maintaining individualities, one of the forms of individualization being the fact that Patroclus isn't the one who must fulfill the task of killing Hector, while Achilles is. It's also argued that the moment in which the term therapon is used by Achilles to refer to Patroclus is precisely while he is making libations to Zeus, asking Zeus to protect him while Homer says that Zeus won't protect him. For Nagy, there is a link between Patroclus's death and the fact that he is therapon, a trait that Nagy defines succinctly as Patroclus being responsible for caring for Achilles while becoming a secondary hero to the primary hero Achilles (although he himself argues that there is long more than this). His central point is that therapon also possibly has Anatolian origins, particularly Hittite origins, which link the term to the idea of ritual substitute, in which a victim was sacrificed while symbolizing another being. Patroclus, then, as a ritual substitute for Achilles dies while impersonating Achilles. There are, in fact, many more arguments than this, for example exploring the idea of death by Ares and Apollo, Hittite rituals, other Greek texts, etc, but it would be too much. Personally, if you want to know more about Nagy's theory, I recommend simply reading the entire text here. As a summary of Nagy's idea, I have chosen the following excerpts:

Twinning in myth is a way to think about identity. As Douglas Frame shows in his essay, which is a twin to this one, mythical twins share one identity, but this identity is differentatiated. That is, the fused identity of mythical twins is at the same time a split personality. In this essay, I will argue that the epic heroes Achilles and Patroklos are paired off in the Homeric Iliad in such a way as to resemble and even to duplicate such a model of twinning in myth. Two ancient Greek words that will figure prominently in my argument are therapōn, conventionally translated as ‘attendant’, and philos, meaning ‘friend’ as a noun and ‘near and dear’ or ‘belonging to the self’ as an adjective. The uses of these two words, as we will see later on, are interconnected in shaping the plot of the Iliad, since Achilles and Patroklos care for and about each other, and they care more for each other than for anyone else. Such caring, as we will also see, is at the root of the meaning of both words, therapōn as well as philos. To say it another way, such caring determines the identification of Patroklos as the virtual twin or body double of Achilles in Homeric mythmaking.

[...] Such a meaning, ‘ritual substitute’, must be understood in the context of a Hittite ritual of purification that expels pollution from the person to be purified and transfers it into a person or an animal or an object that serves as a ritual substitute; the act of transferring pollution into the victim serving as ritual substitute may be accomplished either by destroying or by expelling the victim, who or which is identified as another self, un autre soi-même. According to the logic of this Hittite ritual of substitution, the identification of the self with the victim serving as the other self can take on a wide variety of forms: the victims range from humans to animals to figurines to ceramic vessels [...] Having said this much about therapōn, I turn to the other of the two words that I intended to analyze in this essay. That word, as I noted at the beginning, is philos, meaning ‘friend’ as a noun and ‘near and dear’ or ‘belonging to the self’ as an adjective. By contrast with my lengthy analysis of therapōn, however, I can confine myself here to the shortest of summaries, since I have already analyzed this word philos at some length in my earlier work. Here I attempt to summarize all that work in a single nested paragraph:

Patroklos as the personal therapōn of Achilles is thereby also the nearest and dearest of all the companions of Achilles. This closeness is measured in terms of the word philos in the sense of being ‘near and dear’ to someone. Achilles considers Patroklos to be the most philos ‘near and dear’ of them all. Or, if we were to express this idea in terms of the noun philos, meaning ‘friend’, instead of using the adjective philos, meaning ‘near and dear’, we would say that Patroklos is the very best friend of Achilles. This word philos defines identity by way of measuring how much you can identify with someone else: the more you love someone, the more you identify with this special someone – and the closer you get to your own self. That is why Patroklos is truly the alter ego of Achilles. In his essays on morality, Aristotle defined a true friend as an allos egō ‘another I’ – and this terminology helps explain the use of the pseudo-scientific Latin term alter ego in English-language translations of the works of Freud. Such an idea of Patroklos as the other self of Achilles is surely parallel to the idea of twinning, and this parallelism helps explain other features of Achilles and Patroklos that they share with the Dioskouroi, such as the power to heal. The therapeutic powers of Achilles and Patroklos are analyzed in this light by Douglas Frame in his twin essay. The time has come for me to conclude. As the other self who is ready to die for the self that is Achilles, Patroklos achieves an unsurpassed level of intimacy with the greatest hero of the Homeric Iliad. This intimacy is sacral, thus transcending even sexual intimacy. But this sacred intimacy has an uncanny other side to it, which is a kind of sacred alienation. As we saw in the case of the Hittite prisoner, about to be expelled into an alien realm, he must wear the clothing of the king, thus becoming ritually intimate with the body of the king. So too Patroklos wears the armor of Achilles when he dies, and he wears something else that is even more intimately connected with his best friend. Patroklos wears also the epic identity of Achilles, as expressed by the epithets they share. These heroic epithets, such as the one that makes them both ‘equal to Ares’, will predestine both of them to live and die the same way. And the sameness of their shared life and death can be seen as an uncanny mix of intimacy and alienation that only twins will ever truly understand.

Thus, in Book 16, Patroclus's shocking personality is a sort of side effect of being the therapon, that is, the ritual substitute for Achilles. Having to be a sacrifice representing Achilles, Patroclus needs to take on his characteristics. He wears the same armor, has the same epithets, has great achievements, displays the same arrogance. He isn't only Patroclus, he is Achilles. However, he is still Patroclus, for he can never truly be the equal of Achilles. This is why he dies fighting Hector while Achilles doesn't. This is why Patroclus the warrior dies while Automedon his charioteer doesn't, although in The Iliad it is quite common for the charioteer to die before the warrior. This is all because Patroclus isn't Achilles, even though he is his ritual substitute. Nagy doesn't mention this in the text as far as I can remember, but other academics have suggested that this is already indicated by the time Patroclus is putting the armor. Although he fits easily into Achilles' armor, Patroclus leaves Achilles' spear behind because he is unable to lift it. More specifically, no one but Achilles can. This is made explicit in the text, and more than once Homer emphasizes that Achilles' spear can only be lifted by Achilles. Patroclus cannot fully become Achilles, and this is represented by the fact that he cannot lift his spear. This, however, isn't a demerit of Patroclus: no one can become Achilles, as represented by the fact that not only Patroclus but no one else can lift the spear. Finally, the fact that Patroclus dies more because of Apollo than because of Hector reflects the fact that Achilles' death is more Apollo's responsibility than Paris's. For Nagy, this makes the connection between Patroclus and Achilles practically sacral. Several other texts explore Patroclus' impersonation of Achilles in Book 16 and even in the aspects of the death (for example, the ghost of Patroclus knowing that Achilles will die soon and wishing that they will be one in death through the ashes, the horses warning Achilles that he will die soon and there is also the possible interpretation that Achilles while preparing Patroclus' funeral is almost preparing his own death. But, anyway, a topic for another post perhaps), however I will only stick with Nagy's text here because I feel it exemplifies the point sufficiently.

Now we have Celsiana Warwick. Honestly, when I decided to read it I was hesitant because I had already read something by Warwick. It was an interpretation of Lycophron's Alexander and the interpretation presented had interesting parts, more specifically those around the (romantic) relationship between Achilles and Iphigenia in the poem, but the general proposal and the way Achilles was fitted into it...it wasn't something that really convinced me. However, I have to admit that I was convinced by her text “We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad”. As the title suggests, the focus is on analyzing the marital and homoerotic contexts, but that's not the part I'll be dealing with here, so if you're interested read the article. The part that I must admit that I agree with Warwick and that is useful for this post is her analysis of Patroclus' personality.

Achilles and Patroclus can also be shown to share a kind of unique like-mindedness specifically with regard to shared characteristics, although previous scholars have often portrayed them as opposites. This perception results from the fact that Patroclus’s most commonly repeated epithet in the Iliad is ἐνηής (gentle, Il. 17.204, 670; 21.96), and he is portrayed as being strongly compassionate, as when he stops to help the wounded Eurypylus at Il. 11.807–848, or when he begs Achilles to have mercy on the dying Greeks at Il. 16.1–100. Achilles, on the other hand, is extremely wrathful and violent throughout most of the Iliad, with his destructive rage directed first towards Agamemnon and the Greek army, and then towards Hector. It must be noted, however, that Patroclus is not exclusively gentle, nor is Achilles exclusively wrathful. At the climax of the Iliad in Book 24, Achilles forgoes his rage and performs an astonishingly compassionate act when he not only assents to Priam’s supplication, but also weeps with him in shared pain for their lost loved ones and attempts to console him by emphasizing the universality of human suffering (24.475–670). Nor is this the only time that Achilles displays compassion. In Iliad 1 he calls the assembly out of concern for the Greeks dying from Apollo’s plague (1.54), and in 6.16–28 we learn that before the events of the poem he ransomed Andromache’s mother and buried her father with honor.

Similarly, Patroclus displays a ferocity seemingly at odds with his previous actions when he goes into battle in Book 16, slaughtering dozens of Trojans in a reckless charge and cruelly mocking his fallen enemies. But although scholars are willing to grant Achilles a complex characterization as a man capable of both great violence and great compassion (Schein 1984, 98), the consensus regarding Patroclus is that he becomes violent only when he plays the role of Achilles and fights in Achilles’ armor, and that these actions are alien to his true character. Cedric Whitman writes: The gentlest man in the army becomes a demon-warrior, who drives the Trojans headlong from the ships, slays the redoubtable Sarpedon, utters proud, insulting speeches over his fallen enemies, and sets foot on the ramparts of Troy itself . . . Patroclus is playing the role of Achilles. For the moment, he has become Achilles, and acts much more like the great hero than like himself. (1958, 200) Dale Sinos (1980, 75) agrees: “[Patroclus] sacrifices himself by acting out of character, by becoming a warrior in order to provide the correct model for Achilles.”

An alternate reading of Iliad 16, however, is that Patroclus behaves like a violent and wrathful Achilles because he already possessed the capacity to do so and had simply not displayed it up to that point in the poem. Support for this interpretation comes from the speech of Patroclus’s ghost in Book 23, in which he reveals that he came to live with Achilles in Phthia when they were both boys because he had gotten angry and accidentally killed another child (23.85–88): εὖτέ με τυτθὸν ἐόντα Μενοίτιος ἐξ Ὀπόεντος ἤγαγεν ὑμέτερόνδ’ ἀνδροκτασίης ὕπο λυγρῆς, ἤματι τῷ ὅτε παῖδα κατέκτανον Ἀμφιδάμαντος, νήπιος, οὐκ ἐθέλων, ἀμφ’ ἀστραγάλοισι χολωθείς·’ “When Menoetius brought me, still little, from Opus To your country on account of baneful manslaying, On the day when I killed the son of Amphidamas, Foolish and not intending it, angered over a game of dice.” From this passage, we see that Patroclus is, like Achilles, capable of experiencing impulsive, destructive anger in his own right. It is therefore most accurate to say that Achilles and Patroclus are similar in that they both possess a temperament prone to unusual extremes of compassion and violence which sets them apart from other heroes in the poem, although this similarity is partially disguised because within the relatively narrow time-frame of the Iliad Achilles appears as predominantly wrathful and Patroclus appears as predominantly compassionate. Thus, the combination of wrath and compassion which has been described as one of Achilles’ defining characteristics can be shown to be shared by Patroclus alone out of all other characters in the Iliad. In this way, Achilles and Patroclus can be said to have homophrosynē. This like-mindedness does not bring them the happy ending of Odysseus and Penelope, but it underscores the unique and exclusive nature of their relationship.

We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad, pg 126-128.

Notably, since the subject of Warwick’s article is marital subtext, this part was meant as a way of drawing a parallel with Odysseus and Penelope, but that’s not my point here. My point here is that, yes, Patroclus is kind, but I genuinely believe that he was always capable of the violence he demonstrated in Book 16 since it's after all because of an attitude of exaggerated violence that he was sent to Phthia. I don’t think Patroclus and Achilles are opposites, but I also don’t think they are “link-minded” like Odysseus and Penelope exactly. I think they're complementary, that is, they aren't similar enough in thought to have something like the term homophrosyne attached to them, but they are also not so opposite that the only possible explanation for Patroclus’ violence in Book 16 is that it's entirely an imitation of Achilles’ violence. To be clear: I don't consider the idea that Patroclus naturally resembles Achilles in certain respects to be inherently exclusive to the idea that Patroclus impersonates Achilles in The Iliad, as I also believe in the popular interpretation of the personification in Book 16.

Patroclus and the Dices

That Patroclus killed a child, usually called Clysonimus, is known and acknowledged in multiple sources.

“[...] And I will say and charge you with another thing, if you will be persuaded; do not lay my bones apart from yours, Achilles, but together, even as we were raised in your house, when Menoetius brought me, when I was little, out of Opoeis to your home, because of an evil murder, on the day when I killed the son of Amphidamas— I was a child, it was not intentional—in anger over a game of knuckle-bones. Then the horseman Peleus received me in his house and reared me with kindness and named me your companion; so let the same urn enclose the bones of us both, the golden amphora, which your lady mother gave you.”

The Iliad, 23.82-92.Translation by Caroline Alexander.

[...] At Opus, in a quarrel over a game of dice, Patroclus killed the boy Clitonymus, son of Amphidamas, and flying with his father he dwelt at the house of Peleus [...]

Library, 3.13.8. Translation by J.G. Frazer.

VINEDR: [...] They also sing of how, while young herdsmen were playing dice around the altar of Achilles, one would have struck the other dead with a shepherd's crook, had not Patroklos scared them away, saying, "One shedding of blood on account of dice is enough for me." But it is possible to find out about these things from the cowherds or anyone living in Ilion. [...]

Heroica, 686. Translation by Jennifer K. Berenson Maclean and Ellen Bradshaw Aitken.

In a version given by Strabo of a local tradition of the Locrians, the boy's name is extremely different, as it’s Aeanis.

[...] Now Homer says that Patroclus was from Opus, and that after committing an involuntary murder he fled to Peleus, but that his father Menoetius remained in his native land; for thither Achilles says that he promised Menoetius to bring back Patroclus when Patroclus should return from the expedition. However, Menoetius was not king of the Opuntians, but Aias the Locrian, whose native land, as they say, was Narycus. They call the man who was slain by Patroclus "Aeanes"; and both a sacred precinct, the Aeaneium, and a spring, Aeanis, named after him, are to be seen.

Geography, 4.4.2. Translation by H. L. Jones.

The scholia of The Iliad also comments on this, giving two possible names for the dead boy.

Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱός] Πάτροκλος ὁ Μενοιτίου τρεφόμενος ἐν ᾿Οποῦντι τῆς Λοκρίδος περιέπεσεν ἀκουσίωι πταίσματι· παῖδα γὰρ ἡλικιώτην ᾿Αμφιδάμαντος οὐκ ἀσήμου Κλ<ε>ισώνυμον, ἢ ὥς τινες Αἰάν<ην>, περὶ ἀστραγάλων ὀργισθεὶς ἀπέκτεινεν· ἐπὶ τούτωι δὲ φυγὼν εἰς Φθίαν ἀφίκετο, κἀκεῖ κατὰ συγγένειαν Πηλέως ᾿Αχιλλεῖ συνῆν. φιλίαν δὲ ὑπερβάλλουσαν πρὸς ἀλλήλους διαφυλάξαντες ὁμοῦ ἐπὶ ῎Ιλιον ἐστράτευσαν. ἡ ἱστορία παρὰ ῾Ελλανίκωι. Menoitios’ son Patroklos grew up in Opos in Locris but was exiled for an involuntary mistake. For he killed a child his age, the son of the memorable Amphidamas Kleisonumos, or, as some say, Aianes, because he was angry over dice. He went to Phthia in exile for this crime and got to know Achilles there because of his kindship with Peleus. They cemented a deep friendship with one another before they went on the expedition against Troy. This story is from Hellanicus.

[Translation from here].

While the accidental murder of Clysonimus is often remembered as a way of arguing for the idea of Patroclus as a violent person (because really, what kind of child accidentally kills another in an argument? Was he the aggressive type? He was SO angry? We never get enough details about this), it's rarely remembered as a way of demonstrating Patroclus as someone who regretted this unrestrained violence. I'm not saying that Patroclus isn't capable of violence, he very obviously is. I mean, he's a soldier! And one of the best! He IS capable of violence. But, for the context of ANCIENT GREECE (we're not talking about modern contexts), Patroclus could exert a controlled type of force. In his aristeia, his lack of control over his actions indirectly leads to his death, because it is his recklessness in wanting to conquer Troy allows him to be an easy victim of Zeus and Apollo's plans. The accident with Clysonimus, similarly, demonstrates no control: It was an accident and therefore unplanned and it was caused by an extremely trivial reason (dices game) and therefore wasn’t rational. Although we don’t have details of the exact way in which Patroclus killed Clysonimus, we can assume that it was probably in a more “brute” way and not with more “professional” force. Something like punching or pushing someone because he is very angry instead of using trained techniques.

Furthermore, I feel that Homer didn’t write ghost Patroclus using the last words he could offer Achilles with trivial information. In The Iliad, it’s said that Patroclus is supposed to be an example to Achilles (Book 11, where Nestor repeats Menoetius' words to Patroclus that, as strong and godlike as Achilles is, Patroclus is older and wiser). And in a way, that is what the characters try to do. Nestor (Book 11) and perhaps Phoenix (Book 9, through the story of Meleager and Cleopatra), who are characterized as wise characters, both seem to have come to the same reasoning that convincing Patroclus to show empathy is, in turn, guaranteeing Achilles' empathy. Even Lycaon seems to think that there is a chance of making Achilles merciful by talking about Patroclus' kindness (Book 21). It seems fitting, therefore, that Patroclus would use his last words to try to influence Achilles, as he is expected to do from the beginning.

While describing how he came to grow up with Achilles, Patroclus says that he was responsible for an “evil murder” while contextualizing the situation by claiming that “I was a child, it was not intentional—in anger over a game of knuckle-bones.” To Patroclus, his actions were reprehensible, regardless of whether they were intentional or not. To him, they were “evil.” He also emphasizes that the accident happened because he was motivated by anger. Extremely angry over the dice, Patroclus accidentally caused an unintended consequence: the death of Clysonimus. He wasn't thinking, and his lack of rationality resulted in a greater evil. Not only did Clysonimus die for such a silly reason, but Patroclus lost what he had: his home, Opus. By allowing his anger to get the better of him, Patroclus lost something important to him because he was too busy being irrational to think about taking a more mature approach. He was then exiled and sent to Phthia, where, he says, Peleus not only received him but raised him with kindness.

But this, of course, is Alexander's translation. I was curious to know if perhaps in Greek the words might give me clues to the thought I am trying to explain here. In Greek, this passage goes as follows:

[...] ἀλλ' ὁμοῦ ὡς ἐτράφημεν ἐν ὑμετέροισι δόμοισιν, εὖτέ με τυτθὸν ἐόντα Μενοίτιος ἐξ Ὀπόεντος 85 ἤγαγεν ὑμ��τερόνδ' ἀνδροκτασίης ὕπο λυγρῆς, ἤματι τῷ ὅτε παῖδα κατέκτανον Ἀμφιδάμαντος νήπιος οὐκ ἐθέλων ἀμφ' ἀστραγάλοισι χολωθείς: ἔνθά με δεξάμενος ἐν δώμασιν ἱππότα Πηλεὺς ἔτραφέ τ' ἐνδυκέως καὶ σὸν θεράποντ' ὀνόμηνεν: ὣς δὲ καὶ ὀστέα νῶϊν ὁμὴ σορὸς ἀμφικαλύπτοι χρύσεος ἀμφιφορεύς, τόν τοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρ.

The Iliad, 23.84-93.

We have that in the sentence “ἤγαγεν ὑμέτερόνδ' ἀνδροκτασίης ὕπο λυγρῆς” (23.86), where Patroclus explains the reason for having been exiled (that is, he is saying that he murdered someone), ἀνδροκτασία can be translated as “slaughter of men” and λυγρῆς can be translated as “sore, baneful, mournful”, etc. In “νήπιος οὐκ ἐθέλων ἀμφʼ ἀστραγάλοισι χολωθείς” (23.88), Patroclus recounts the accident that occurred, where νήπιος can be translated as “thoughtless, foolish, childish” or even as “child” and χολόω is “anger”. In “ἔτραφέ τ' ἐνδυκέως καὶ σὸν θεράποντ' ὀνόμηνεν:” (23.90), Patroclus is describing Peleus’s attitude toward him, where ἐνδυκέως can be translated as “friendly carekindly, attentively, considerately" (addendum: some people disagree that this is the exact meaning of this word. However, in this particular passage it is generally understood this way.). These are meanings based on the Cambridge Greek Lexicon. Overall, the meaning is still that Patroclus described himself as a child whose immaturity caused him to lose himself in anger to the point of causing a regrettable death, but who was fortunately kindly taken in by someone else. Peleus not only took care of him kindly but also named him Achilles' companion. That is, Peleus entrusted his son to Patroclus. Despite having lost his home (Opus) because of his anger, it's the kindness that someone (Peleus) showed him that allowed him to build something new (a home in Phthia, a position as Achilles' therapon).

I interpret the idea here to be that Patroclus, in his words, is also giving a warning: “I lost everything when I allowed anger to overcome me, but the kindness of another saved me. Don't allow anger to overcome you, for it won't bring me back.” It wasn't anger that allowed Patroclus to gain what he had lost, it was kindness. And while Achilles cannot literally resurrect Patroclus in the same way that Patroclus could build a new home, he can at least allow himself to be healed. The proof that anger really won't get you what you want is the moment when Achilles tries to embrace Patroclus but fails. Patroclus isn't alive, he's a ghost and ghosts don't embrace. Achilles' revenge didn't change that.

And answering him swift-footed Achilles spoke: “Dear friend, why have you come to me and laid each of these injunctions on me? For you I will surely accomplish everything and obey you, as you bid. But stand near me, even for a little time let us embrace each other and take solace in painful lamentation.” So speaking he reached out with his arms, but did not take hold of him; and the shade departed beneath the earth like smoke, with a shrill cry. And Achilles started up in astonishment and clapped his hands together, and spoke in lament: “See now! There is after all even in the house of Hades some kind of soul and image, though the power of life is not altogether there; for night long the shade of poor Patroclus stood by shedding tears and weeping, and enjoined on me each thing to do; wonderful was the likeness to him.” So he spoke; and in the hearts of all he stirred desire for weeping.

The Iliad, 23.93-109. Translation by Caroline Alexander.

The ending of The Iliad exemplifies this idea even more powerfully. After all the anger he felt, the way we get closure to the story of Achilles' grief is when he and Priam interact. As he watches Priam grieve over the death of his son Hector, Achilles sees in Priam his own father, Peleus, who he will never see again. For the first time in a long time, Achilles puts himself in someone else's shoes, just as Patroclus begged him to do in Book 16. They talk, they eat together, and Priam even sleeps there, while Achilles hides him from the other Achaeans. The two agree to a truce so that Priam and the other Trojans can have time to mourn Hector properly. And then, Priam returns and the Trojans can mourn. Achilles realizes that keeping Hector there wasn't making him feel any less empty. On the other hand, keeping Hector there was causing Priam a pain similar to that which Peleus would later feel. Not only did his anger cause suffering for many (as the famous opening of Book 1 so aptly describes), but in the end it didn't help him overcome the pain he felt. On the other hand, showing Priam a gesture of mercy brought him a kind of fulfillment that Hector’s death didn't. As with Patroclus and his dice, it was a gesture of mercy that truly made the difference, not a gesture of anger. This is further emphasized in Heroica, where Philostrathus has Patroclus’ ghost appear and stop a fight, fearing that it will result in death. He says: “one shedding of blood on account of dice is enough for me". And I think it is a very Patroclus attitude.

Other Greek sources (not Homeric)

The duality of Patroclus' personality was even mentioned by Plutarch in Moralia. While commenting on how a man can praise himself without, for example, appearing arrogant, he uses The Iliad as example. Plutarch comments that although Homer wrote Patroclus as someone "in the happinesses of his life as smooth and without envy", he still had courageous attitudes and died with his last words praising himself. The phrase mentioned refers to that at the time of his death in Book 16, Patroclus tells Hector that he would have killed 20 of him if not for Hector having help from Apollo and Zeus.

Now talking after an high and glorious manner proves advantageous, not only to persons in danger of the law or such like eminent distress, but to those also who are clouded in a dull series of misfortunes; and that more properly than when they appear splendid in the world. For what addition can words make to those who already seem possessed of real glory, and do lie indulging and basking in her beams? But those who at present are incapable of ambition, if they express themselves loftily, seem only to bear up against the storms of Fortune, to undergird the greatness of their souls, and to shun that pity and commiseration which supposes a shipwrecked and forlorn condition. As therefore those who in walking affect a stiffness of body and a stretched-out neck are accounted effeminate and foppish, but are commended if in fencing and fighting they keep themselves erect and steady; so the man grappling with ill fortune, if he raise himself to resist her, Like some stout boxer, ready with his blow," and by a bravery of speech transform himself from abject and miserable to bold and noble, is not to be censured as obstinate and audacious, but honored as invincible and great. So, although Homer described Patroclus in the happinesses of his life as smooth and without envy, yet in death he makes him have something of the bravo, and a soldier's gallant roughness: Had twenty mortals, each thy match in might, Opposed me fairly, they had sunk in fight." So Phocion, though otherwise very mild, after the sentence passed on him, showed the greatness of his mind in many respects; particularly to one of his fellow-sufferers, who miserably cried out and bewailed his misfortune, What, says he, is it not a pleasure to thee to die with Phocion?

How A Man May Inoffensively Praise Himself Without Being Liable To Envy, 5. Translation by William Watson Goodwin.

In Heroica, Patroclus is constantly described as a formidable warrior. At one point, he is even called an "excellent fighting machine” by Palamedes. And yet, he still stars in the scene where his ghost asks two men not to fight because one bloodshed over dices is enough (I already showed this part in this post). Again, a kind of duality. This is interesting because Heroica doesn’t entirely follow the most well-known version of the myth, as Philostrathus was more focused on representing the cult figures in the way he judged faithful. For example, Patroclus never wears Achilles' armor. And yet, he still maintains the duality of Patroclus.

This one is entirely my personal opinion. While Plutarch makes the duality obvious and in Heroica you can notice this duality yourself, the example here will be Sophocles' Philoctetes and this is entirely my impression. I don't even know if any commentator found this relevant, for example. But something I found curious is the way Philoctetes remembers the Achaean warriors while talking to Neoptolemus, who is lying about supposedly being despised by the Achaeans to the point that even Achilles' armor was denied to him (the reason being that he is following the orders of Odysseus, who is trying to capture Philoctetes because of Helenus' prophecy).

PHILOCTETES: You've sailed here carrying your grief, pain like my own, a certain guarantee. You and your story harmonize with mine, so I can recognize how those men act, the sons of Atreus and that Odysseus, a man who, I know well, would set his tongue to every evil lie or debased act to get the unjust end he's looking for. No, what you've said does not surprise me, though I do wonder how great Ajax, if he was there, could bear to witness it. NEOPTOLEMUS: My friend, Ajax was no longer living — had he been alive, they'd not have robbed me. PHILOCTETES: What's that you say? Did death get Ajax, too? NEOPTOLEMUS: He's dead and gone. Imagine Ajax no longer standing in the sunlight. PHILOCTETES: No, no. It's dreadful. But Diomedes, son of Tydeus, and that Odysseus, son of Sisyphus (so people say), sold to Laertes still in his mother's womb, they'll not die, for they don't deserve to live. NEOPTOLEMUS: No they won't. That's something you can count on. In fact, right now within the Argive army those two are really thriving. PHILOCTETES: And Nestor? What about that fine old friend of mine from Pylos? Is he alive? He's the one who with his prudent counsel often checked the nasty things that those two men would do. NEOPTOLEMUS: Right now he's not doing well. That son of his, Antilochus, who stood by him, is dead. PHILOCTETES: That's more bad news. Those two men you mention — I really didn't want to hear they'd died. God knows what we should look for in this world, when such men perish and Odysseus lives, and at a time when we should hear the news that he was dead instead of those two men. NEOPTOLEMUS: He's a slippery wrestler, Philoctetes, but even clever schemes are often checked. PHILOCTETES: Now, for the gods' sake, what of Patroclus? On that occasion where was he? Tell me. Your father loved him more than anyone. NEOPTOLEMUS: He was also dead. I can tell you why in one brief saying — given the choice, war takes no evil men. It always wants to seize the good ones.

Phiclotetes. Translation by Ian Johnston.

When referring to the Achaean warriors, Philoctetes characterizes Ajax as “great”, Diomedes and Odysseus as malicious (context: he resents them for having been left on Lemnos), Nestor as prudent in giving advice and Patroclus as loved by Achilles (I didn’t ignore the description of Antilochus! But it was Neoptolemus who gave it, not Philoctetes). Earlier in the text, Neoptolemus had said that Apollo killed Achilles, to which Philoctetes said “both noble beings, the killer and the killed”, although he was saddened by the news (at least in this play, he likes Achilles. This is precisely why Odysseus uses Neoptolemus, Achilles’ son, to get closer to Philoctetes). In Philoctetes' opinion:

Ajax is great

Diomedes and Odysseus aren’t trustworthy

Nestor is prudent and a good advisor

Achilles is noble

Patroclus is dear to Achilles

You've probably noticed that there's something different about the way Patroclus is characterized. All the other heroes are given their own characteristics, but Patroclus is recognized for the value that Achilles places on him. Interestingly, they're all recognizable characteristics. You remember “great” when thinking of Ajax, Nestor is the advisor, Achilles was indeed considered noble by the standards of the time and Diomedes and Odysseus as a duo were generally indeed somewhat cunning (examples: discovering Achilles' disguise in Skyros, death of Palamedes, invasion of the Trojan camp, recovering the statue inside Troy surreptitiously, etc.). Like it or not, Patroclus is really mostly known for his relationship with Achilles, regardless of how you interpret that relationship. He could have described Patroclus as a warrior, as wise or something like that because it would be true, but him being loved by someone was a more memorable characteristic of the character. I find that interesting! This reinforces my idea that the image of Patroclus, which includes his personality, in popular culture at the time was made to make it understandable why someone would see him as a beloved person.

Conclusion

In my opinion, just as it's frustrating when people make it seem like Patroclus was a saint (he wasn't!), it's annoying when people purposefully pretend that the idea of Patroclus being seen as kind is a modern problem. It's not modern, folks, it's old news. Very old! And that's okay! Why are some people so desperate to pretend that Patroclus is just a bloodthirsty warrior who spends 24 hours a day bathed in blood and making scary looks? That would make him an extremely boring character, he would be just another good warrior among many other warriors. For the love of god, let him have some nuance!

Personally, I think that Patroclus was this kind in comparison to the other characters and it was intentional. More specifically, Patroclus is supposed to be a role model for the younger Achilles (as said by Nestor in Book 11). It makes sense, then, that Patroclus is supposed to be wiser and kinder than Achilles since these are the characteristics that Achilles has less of than Patroclus (which doesn't mean that Achilles doesn't have them). Patroclus doesn't need to be a warrior example for Achilles, Achilles is already better at it than him. However, Patroclus being kinder or more mature than Achilles doesn't mean that he isn't capable of recklessness and violence. As a young boy, Patroclus accidentally killed a boy over a silly game of dice… even though it was accidental, it's at least something to think about. What kind of child, when so angry over a game, ends up accidentally killing another child? Furthermore, Patroclus was portrayed as a good warrior in the ancient sources, and in Book 16 of the Iliad in particular he kills countless people. If I'm not mistaken, he has the highest death count in a single book! (not in the entire Iliad, but within a single book).

However, I also agree with the idea that the deconstruction of Patroclus' personality in Book 16 has to do with him impersonating Achilles. That's not to say that this wasn't Patroclus being himself, I think he was, but I also think it has a lot to do with him resembling Achilles at the time of his aristeia. I'm not a fan of the interpretation that Patroclus and Achilles should represent opposites, I'm more of the idea that they are complementary. They have very different characteristics (patience, for example), but they're also similar deep down (violence, for example). Patroclus is the perfect match for Achilles not because he is everything that Achilles isn't, but because he is similar to Achilles while still having different characteristics to add.

In The Iliad, the narrative elements point to Patroclus as a kind and sympathetic character. He has the epithet gentle, although no one else does. A term that alludes to kindness and that is associated most of the time with things and not people in The Iliad (μείλιχος) is only used with one person, which is Patroclus (at one point it is used of Hector by Andromache, but it's in the sense of absence. She says that he wasn't kind on the battlefield as a way of emphasizing his heroic aspect. That is, she doesn't state that he was, but rather that he wasn't. The only human character who is stated to be kind while this specific Greek term is used is Patroclus). The number of apostrophes and the way they're constructed indicate that Patroclus must be tragic. The bT scholia notably portrays him as gentle. Although the dice episode represents how he was violent even before Achilles, it also represents how Patroclus regrets his uncontrolled violence. The only time he engages in such uncontrolled violence in The Iliad, he dies. When Phoenix tells the story of Meleager and Cleopatra, Meleager is a parallel to the furious Achilles while Cleopatra is a parallel to the empathetic Patroclus (also, Cleopatra is the feminine version of the name Patroclus). Not only Achilles, but several characters (Menelaus, Zeus, Briseis, Lycaon) throughout the text see him as a calm and gentle presence compared to him. More than one character (Nestor, Phoenix, Lycaon) thinks that he can win Achilles' mercy by having Patroclus influence him positively. In other sources, Patroclus' duality remains (Plutarch and Philostrathus) and his characteristic of being a beloved person too (in the latter case, I only showed Sophocles' Philoctetes, but there are several other example texts).

Anyway, sorry for taking so long, but I wanted to make my point as clear as possible! I hope my response has answered your questions!

#Ask #Anon #Patroclus #Achilles #(kind of I guess?)#Birdiethings #Birdie.txt

33 notes · View notes