#some changes might happen

[rodentcompetition]

Rodent Competition 2023

Round 1

full list below!

Long-tailed chinchilla / Southern viscacha

Common degu / Horned gopher

Common gundi / Guinea pig

Josephoartigasia monesi / Pacarana

Patagonian mara / South African springhare

Spix's yellow-toothed cavy / Capybara

Central american agouti / Lowland paca

Laotian rock rat / Dassie rat

Least chipmunk / Eastern chipmunk

Thirteen-lined ground squirrel / California ground squirrel

Japanese dwarf flying squirrel / Tufted pygmy squirrel

Calabrian black squirrel / Red squirrel

Indian giant squirrel / Red and white giant flying squirrel

Yellow-bellied marmot / Groundhog

Cape mole-rat / Cape dune mole-rat

Naked mole rat / Big headed African mole rat

House mouse / Mongolian gerbil

Black rat / Brown rat

Rakali / Gambian pouched rat

Northern Luzon giant cloud rat / Maned rat

Cairo spiny mouse / Eurasian harvest mouse

Hungarian birch mouse / Striped grass mouse

Great jerboa / Baluchistan pygmy jerboa

Hazel dormouse / Kangaroo rat

Grasshopper mouse / Winter white dwarf hamster

Hatt's vesper rat / Syrian hamster

Norway lemming / Florida Mouse

European water vole / Townsend’s vole

Northern mole vole / Muskrat

Bristle-spined rat / Mountain beaver

North American beaver / Palaeocastor

Crested porcupine / North American porcupine

[aarghone]

He's just a gunky goopy lil guy

[twinstxrs]

so much happened in this whole episode but i’m still on fig infiltrating ruben’s dream, making it look like the place where his friend was murdered, and then disguising herself as kipperlilly & repeatedly saying different variants of “somebody needs to take the fall for this, and it’s not going to be me. it’s going to be you.” while adaine as the elven oracle shows up next to her. can you imagine waking up from that, the idea of a horrible truth being pinned on you by your friend to save her own skin while the personification of fate and destiny stands there, almost as a promise that this is GOING to happen to you. we don’t even know if this kid is guilty. my god.

[birdricks]

the final phrase of my last sentence / hangs in the air, sounding stupider and stupider

[iizuumi]

Side effects of wearing your Kaiju suit too often ,,,, Part 2

[moonstandardtime]

lil thing from my fic TRY IT AGAIN, CHEATER! nothing to see here just fantasizing about normal things

(Reblogs are VERY appreciated!! <3)

[l-in-the-light]

Trafalgar Law: fear of closeness and touch part 2, the extended edition

Writing another post about it, because I have a lot of thoughts I need to organize for myself. This time it will be more like my interpretation about Law and his relationships with people than about the touch itself. And also I forgot one of the most crucial scenes about the topic (because ofc I would forget something so important), so I will start with it:

The last touch he remembers from Flevance is hiding under the pile of corpses, cold dehumanized bodies, treated like trash. No one wanted to touch them, just like no one wanted to be touched by Law. How poetic that Law escaped Flevance with a death sentence while hiding among the dead, because he will be treated like he's dead to the world from now on.

This reminds me of a manga I once read, Shigeshoushi (The Embalmer). It's about a guy whose job is embalming the dead, and he is ostracized, feared and refused by people as a result. Contact with death and dead bodies is taboo in Shinto and folk culture of Japan in general. If you think it's a thing of the past, I reccommend to watch Okuribito (Departures), it's really good and this topic is at the heart of the movie.

Anyway, back to the manga, warning for spoilers. Situation escalates to the point when the only human touch the guy can get is that of him handling the corpses for his job and that really messes up with his mental health. His despair leads him to engage himself in risky situations just to get by, casual sexual encounters with strangers become the only form of intimacy he can get and he soon gets addicted to it, but it still lacks the emotional warmth and love he desperately craves, so it's never enough for him. Of course to even get those encounters he has to lie about his job and whenever his lie gets exposed and he is confronted about it, forced to listen to all those women blaming him, feeling disgusted by what he forced on them (it was never forced, but suddenly it's unwanted after they learn he embalms dead bodies every day), and it just triggers and deepens his trauma.

I wonder if you can tell where I'm going with this comparison. Law is definitely as starved for touch and love as the main protagonist is. Still, I don't believe Law would become hypersexual (tho that's just my personal impression, especially after he so blatantly refused Monett), but most importantly unlike the main character Law would definitely not desperately beg for the touch. It's just not how Law is, he doesn't like to impose himself on others if he absolutely doesn't have to. Not to mention he can't bear asking openly for help or for anything really, not after the Vergo incident. It was the last time he ever begged for something.

Law seems to be the type to neglect his own needs to the point that he makes stupid and reckless decisions based on his fear of losing people (callback to Wano and imprisoned Hearts). When people dear to him are in danger, his first instinct is to rush and help them unless he's completely immobilized. That's the level of "prioritizing other people's safety and needs" he believes in, he would do it every time, but he hates when people do it for him. Mostly because he deeply believes Corazon got hurt because of him, and Corazon gave him all that love Law was starving for. And Law believes Cora-san finally died for it.

Add his trauma of expecting people to not want to be touched by him into the equation. That's why he has problems expressing his own need for love (and touch) from that point onward. He acts so tough, doesn't allow himself to show weakness and will definitely never ask for love, he learned his lesson on that.

But what about Heart Pirates? They love him! He clearly protects and deeply cares for them, but in each scene he is with them, not counting Bepo, he keeps them at a distance. I do believe Law treats his crew more or less on equal terms, he favours freedom after all, but their relationship is restricted by his fear and makes it significantly more asymmetrical than the one Luffy has with his crew. I do think Penguin and Shachi are more important to Law than the rest of his crew, they're best friends, they've formed the Heart Pirates together, but he doesn't allow them to be on touchy feely basis with him. That's reserved for Bepo. Bepo is basically the last safe haven Law allowed himself to have up until Strawhats happened.

Law at Sabaody creates three new bonds with people: with two supernovas and Jean Bart. The latter he takes into his crew and I believe it's because Jean Bart has no other place to go, especially with Marines and Pacifistas running around the island. It's possible Law does it all the time and his crew (beyond the original four) got expanded because of that.

Law's bond with Kid started on a wrong foot, not only Kid judges Law based on prejudice and "bad rep" flying around about him, he also accussed him of lack of manners (triggering a flashback to Vergo), all in Law's hearing range. It's not really surprising later on Law doesn't want to owe Kid a favour by letting Kid take care of the Marines. Law clearly doesn't want to be indebted to someone who feels disgust towards him (I don't think Kid is disgusted by him, but that's what Law thinks at this point). And even after Wano it seems Law made sure that they're even, none is indebted to the other. For Law it was just a temporary alliance, he kept his distance, they didn't end up becoming friends.

Last new bond Law created was with Luffy. It started indirectly at first, Luffy was defending his fishman friend. Things said about Hatchan triggered a trauma response in Law ("Don't come closer! Disgusting! He will spread diseases!"), in my headcanon freezing him in the spot. But Luffy defended his friend and indirectly also Law by punching the Celestial Dragon, in similar fashion to Corazon defending Law by punching the doctors spouting similar prejudice about amber lead syndrome.

Law thanked Luffy for that and he felt safe doing so, after all what Luffy did was never directed at Law himself, but the gratitude must have confused Luffy to no end (Why is that guy thanking me? I didn't do anything for him!). Law didn't mind this bond at this moment exactly because it was so indirect, as a result he allowed himself to interact with Luffy and even took the first step, probably thinking it will lead to nothing. But he would never do it if not for Luffy's indirect impact on Law. If that's the expected level for casual bonds Law has set up, I doubt many occassions appeared for that before. It just shows he avoids people as a general rule, period.

But things changed after they left the auction house. Law is displeased with Kid, only telling him not to order him around and refusing to even talk with him, but his dynamic with Luffy is completely different, he doesn't feel bad about it despite being treated like accomplice in the whole Celestial Dragon incident.

He even allows himself to tease him a bit. There's no bad air between them. It almost feels like Law feels more emotionally available despite them being strangers, or rather exactly because they're strangers here and Law thinks they will also leave as strangers, which gives him the freedom to be more open.

They fought together, mostly by accident, but for Luffy that's enough to already feel a bit attached to Kid and Law. He declares he's after One Piece, implying from now on they will be rivals.

That doesn't earn him any response from Law. In fact, he just smirks and retreats without a word.

There are multiple possible reasons for his reaction here, but one of them is important right now: if Law said anything, he would acknowledge that bond, that of being a rival to Luffy. He didn't want it, in fact he wanted them to remain strangers, with no lingering attachments. That's why, when he got offered Luffy's friendship (disguised as rivalship, mind you), he turns back and retreats.

That's his answer. Later in Amazon Lily he also ends up retreating without even waiting for Luffy to say his thanks.

And how ironic that the next time they see each other it's Law who ends up extending his hand, not once, but twice: first by saving Luffy's life by risking his own, and second time by proposing alliance. I can only imagine Luffy's surprise: he got rejected before, but now it's Law himself proposing it! And what a funny guy he is, he doesn't need to offer friendship, because for Luffy they're already friends, after all didn't Law save his life? Law though just needed help, but wouldn't ask for it directly, because we know he never does that anymore, so instead he offered a bait. Frankly he didn't need to, Luffy would do anything he wanted him to anyway. Luffy ofc thought the alliance is a fun idea, but in the end he accepted it because it's Law who needed it to be an alliance, he wouldn't accept help otherwise. Also alliance felt impersonal and safe, without the need to be emotionally open.

There's so many seperate frames of Law just staring and thinking upon their reunion. He's conflicted. Also at this point their relationship changed, whether Law wanted it or not. He was there when Luffy lost Ace, saw him breaking down, definitely thought they now share something in common: they both lost people who were the dearest to them. I'm also sure he could see through Luffy's smile, he knew there's no way he would be already "okay" after just two years.

Unusual whimsical frame of Luffy. He closed his eyes, not listening to the words spoken, but instead listening to his own heart. He knows he needs to kidnap Caesar, that's what Law asked him to do, but Luffy doesn't just want to do what he's told, he wants to make sure the person he is doing it for is happy. It's a callback to Luffy's deepest regret: leaving Sabo with his family, assuming things would be better this way, without making sure first if that's something that would make Sabo actually happy.

Ever since Luffy does this double-check-for-no-regrets for all of his friends and crewmates. He follows Nami to Arlong Park and waits patiently in case she actually needs help. She questions Kyros' choice and goes to all the way to Rebecca to the castle just to ask her if she's really fine with staying seperated from her dad. And he does it here as well. Would kidnapping Caesar make Law actually happy, Luffy wonders. And probably thinks back to their previous encounter, in Sabaody, and Law's mysterious line after Luffy punched the Celestial Dragon: "Thanks Strawhat, you showed me something interesting". And Luffy found his answer and it's this:

Punching Caesar. Apparently Luffy did something right in Sabaody and he thinks it was about the punching, so he does it again now as well. Ofc he wants to punch Caesar anyway, but he does pause before doing that, he actually doesn't jump for it straightaway, it's AFTER he thinks about it. Luffy decided this is what would make Law actually happy, despite going against the plan. Luffy didn't believe following Law's plan will actually make Law happy, but punching his enemies will.

And yet Law doesn't look happy, but let's look more closely to his body languague. He turns around, doesn't declare his unhappiness directly to Luffy's face, he's making an emotional retreat again despite shouting. He's giving mixed signals. So was Luffy wrong?

Law is trying to hide his smile. Making sure no one notices. He's trying to maintain the distance and remain cold, but seems it's working less and less efficiently.

I will let you decide it for yourselves whether Luffy was right or wrong in the end.

There is more nuance about this I didn't even touch yet, for example the drastic gap between Marines fearing Law and calling him a monster, and Stawhats (minus Luffy), at first fearful and suspicious of Law, but it took them like 5 minutes to change their mind and trust him just like Luffy did.

In Dressrosa Law declares that, deep in his heart, he actually also wants to kick Doflamingo's butt. Luffy doesn't even act surprised upon hearing that. Of course, he knew already, Law didn't even have to say it.

While in Dressrosa Law attempts to break the alliance, send off half the Strawhats to safety and despite barely being able to move himself he takes care of Luffy in the final countdown. Almost like he already treats them like his own crew, keeping them safe. If you ask me, someone got attached. And the pinnacle of it is when Law shares with us that he aims to either live or die with Luffy (not die for him, unlike Luffy's own crew declaring in this arc). That's the best he could offer and he knows how much it's painful when someone dies *for you*, he wouldn't inflict that pain on Luffy again, not when he knows Luffy thinks of him as a friend.

And finally in Wano Law finally opens up more and lashes out at Strawhats, just like he did at Corazon. He no longer feels the need to emotionally distance himself all the time, or keeping it all bottled up behind a stoic cold facade and impersonal "alliance". That's how he shows his worry and affection, he considers them his responsibility in Wano.

He also admits for the very first time his fear of losing people. "The plan isn't worth anyone dying" (in this case - Zoro dying). He allows himself to trust and to be vulnerable.

If you think Law is torn about his growing connection with Strawhats, then you're thinking the same as me. He allowed himself to get attached and he didn't want to initially.

Is it really alright if I touch you too…? (ready to retreat his hand at any moment he senses it's unwanted after all)

His words are often rough and cold, but his actions speak for themselves. He trusts the Strawhats by this point, they're his second crew, and he would do the same for them he would do for his Hearts.

And now he has a problem, he gained more people he is afraid of losing. New friends.

[ganondoodle]

(zelda comic rough draft)

im still unable to draw anything ... except for really slowly getting the chapter 2 rough draft further for some reason, another screenshot from page 59

[ask--invaderzim]

dib give us an info dump / rant

[chraustinjesse]

Hero - Champion - Herald

Yarren Mahariel - Fior Hawke - Adhas Lavellan

More versions under the cut

[myrkulitescourge]

imo karlach’s soul coin usage seems like it should have been a little more significant than it was.

she only ever really stops to consider the magnitude of burning through a person’s soul for power during an origin playthrough—otherwise she rationalizes to the player that they’re doomed anyway, and if using them gives her an edge in combat, why not use them for good instead of leaving them to be used by evil? the dialogue with lann tarv in act 2, where he tells the story of each soul he's handing over to her, tries to humanize each soul coin, and still she doesn’t really budge and disapproves pretty heavily if she's told no in regards to using them.

it just seems like something that could have caused some kind of conflict between her and wyll, given he sold his soul to a devil in dire circumstances and takes issue with the player for sleeping with mizora, because she 1) is mizora, and 2) similarly expends tormented souls during her romance scene, even if for a different purpose. but it just... never really comes up?

i love karlach. but that seems like it should have gone Somewhere, from a writing standpoint? karlach values wyll as a person but is willing to use currency forged from souls like his for the sake of a temporary power up. she knows the soul is consumed when she uses them. that whole exchange with lann tarv is there to emphasize that every soul coin she destroys was a person once. but it all kind of loses narrative purpose if this combination of factors doesn't mean anything? karlach doesn't change at all in her willingness to use soul coins, no matter what the player says or how much she cares for wyll.

idk. missed opportunity that wyll doesn't have any dialogue about this, of all things.

[icarrymany]

the mh comics open up such an interesting narrative for our few surviving characters. to them, what happened in the videos was real, but to everyone else its a cool creative web series. when all of that is viewed as fiction, fans have a freedom to speculate about and invade the lives and privacy of real people. and that would be so uncomfortable and terrifying. imagine someone irl having headcanons about YOU. writing fan fiction about you and your real friends. assuming things about you PUBLICLY ! IN MASS!

wouldnt it be so cool to see a character grapple with that in like a self-reflective way? fans asking questions the muse is too afraid to ask themselves. of course, theyre the only person the answer matters to.

[mizzyislost]

there's someone in my head, but it's not me

[joons]

This may be a prickly subject, and I'm sorry if so. But I'm trying to learn more about Elvis, and every time I bring him up to people I know, they try to tell me he was this terrible person, and point me toward Priscilla's book, the movie made on it, and the discourse. Idk if you've talked about it on here (I tried searching your blog but couldn't find anything on it). If you're willing, I'd love to hear your take on it so I can see a more nuanced view.

The film Priscilla was greenlit roughly a month after Priscilla herself was informed that she was close to becoming financially insolvent in 2022. With a business partner, Brigitte Kruse, who allegedly helped broker the film deal, she established a limited liability company called Priscilla Presley Partners that was supposed to use her image and likeness to create several lines of merchandise to coincide with the film's release. That business partner is now suing Priscilla because she did not have the rights to her image or likeness, or any ability to use the Presley name, because she had already sold all of those rights and was no longer considered in good standing with Graceland or Elvis Presley Enterprises. The entire business deal, then, according to the lawsuit, was built on her misrepresentation of how much her image was worth.

The deal between the two of them fell apart after Riley Keough, Lisa Marie's daughter and Priscilla's granddaughter, settled with Priscilla to give her a lump sum of $1 million from Lisa Marie's estate and yearly amounts of $100,000. Priscilla sued very shortly after Lisa Marie's death because she thought Lisa Marie's signature on a will had been forged because Priscilla was not included in it. All of the assets were supposed to go directly to Lisa Marie's son, Benjamin Keough, who died in 2020, and her three daughters, two of whom are still teenagers. Now, part of those assets have been claimed by Priscilla and her other son, Navarone, who has no connection to the Presley family and has stated he is glad Lisa died.

Four months before Lisa's death, Lisa wrote to Sofia Coppola and made it clear she had strong concerns about the Priscilla film and was suspicious of the intentions behind it:

"As his daughter, I don’t read this and see any of my father in this character. I don’t read this and see my mother’s perspective of my father. ... I will be forced to be in a position where I will have to openly say how I feel about the film and go against you, my mother and this film publicly."

Lisa was enormously grateful for efforts put into 2022's Elvis to find her father's soul and to restore his dignity in a world that often turns him and his family into a joke:

"You can feel and witness Baz’s pure love, care, and respect for my father throughout this beautiful film, and it is finally something that myself and my children and their children can be proud of forever."

It is such a strong and powerful statement, to see how much Lisa valued family, not just her father but her own children and their legacy, and how willing she was to speak up no matter what was going on in her personal life to say what was right. On this and many other things, Lisa and Priscilla's values have rarely been in alignment. A friend and EPE business associate, Joel Weinshanker, said of her, "Lisa couldn't be bought, she couldn't be pushed. If she felt that something wasn't in Elvis' best interest, it was never about money. And she really is the only Presley that you could say that about."

Priscilla, though, has adjusted her stories about her time with Elvis almost every time she discusses it. For a quick example, she said in her book, which was released in 1985, that Elvis insisted she do her hair and makeup a certain way, that he had control over her look and would get upset if she didn't dress how he wanted. But in an interview with Ladies' Home Journal in 1973, she said that she made a deliberate choice to attend makeup school so that she could learn how to style herself, and that it was her idea to wear big, black hair and big, black eyeliner. She said she was embarrassed for going overboard. She said, "I wish that Elvis had said something, but he must have liked it because he never commented." This lines up with recollections from Patti Parry, a platonic friend of Elvis' and a hairstylist, who said Priscilla always wanted Patti to do her hair in a "big boombah," but that Priscilla would then get upset when Elvis didn't notice or didn't like it.

These changes are impossible not to notice if you follow her for any length of time. At the film premiere, she said it felt just like watching her life and said she was consulted on everything, since she was an executive producer. After the film came out, she said she couldn't understand why Coppola had changed so much about the story and misrepresented events. In the '70s, she said she and Elvis lived almost totally separate lives, that she came and went as she pleased, and that she loved this freedom. Later, she said she felt completely stifled and trapped and never left the house, even though she had friends she went out with all the time. In 2019, she tweeted a forceful denial about a National Enquirer story: "This is the Enquirer folks... please don't believe everything you read. ... Never planned on being buried next to Elvis. What will they come up with next?" But part of her settlement demands in her lawsuit against Riley in 2023 asked "to be buried next to Elvis." This year, she said in two separate interviews that Lisa was with her when Elvis died and that Priscilla had to break the news to her, despite the fact that Lisa was at Graceland when it happened. She has said she gave Elvis the idea to wear belts on his jumpsuits, to have a lightning bolt as his logo, to sing "An American Trilogy," though none of that is true. She retells the story about forcing Elvis to burn all of his spiritual books to prove he loved her as an almost funny anecdote about debrainwashing him, while Elvis later said it was the worst thing he ever agreed to, a desperate attempt to make her happy by giving up the things he valued the most. (For the record, this is my opinion about their relationship on both sides: thinking they could change themselves and each other to make it work. It never did.)

Every secondhand Elvis account has to be treated lightly and only valued for its consistency with known facts and other witnesses. I try to give enormous benefit of the doubt to anyone in the Elvis world because they often only have partial knowledge of what Elvis may have been thinking at any given time, and there are numerous examples of people who were taken advantage of by unscrupulous journalists who changed the story they wanted to tell. But Priscilla's stories sometimes are not even consistent with her own statements, which makes them very poor options indeed to base anything on. However careful we are about noting potential biases and inaccuracies in other memoirs, we have to be triply, quadruply careful with anything in which Priscilla involves herself because she has a vested interest in generating discourse today in order to make money. Unfortunately, Priscilla has a habit of stifling other accounts or making sensationalized statements each time there is a possibility that she will lose some of the cachet that comes with being an Elvis Source—after Elvis' death, when she believed she was going to inherit his airplane and disinvited everyone that Vernon said could fly in it to his funeral; when she sued the parents of one of Elvis' ex-girlfriends after he died because he had allowed them to live rent-free in a house he bought for them; when she claimed that Elvis wanted to reunite with her before his death, despite the fact that he was engaged to someone else and told many people he couldn't see a reunion ever happening with her; before Vernon's death, when she convinced him to make her an executor of the Presley estate until Lisa came of age; after Lisa came of age, when she convinced Lisa to let her stay on as partner; when Lisa accused Priscilla of misspending Lisa's money, during which time anonymous sources cropped up to say Lisa was in debt and drug-addled; when Priscilla was removed from her position as an EPE spokesperson but kept collecting $900,000 a year from the company; when Lisa died, and Priscilla sued once she learned she wasn't in the will; when Priscilla was no longer associated with EPE and decided to do another adaptation of a book that she has since recanted parts of and has contradicted before and after its release.

When Priscilla thinks there is a threat to her image and position, she does new interviews and projects to muddy the waters and stir public interest, whether it is true or false, positive or negative, laudatory or defamatory. She gets corrected by Elvis' surviving family members, girlfriends, friends, and fans, but these stories do not get the same reach no matter how much they are backed by contemporaneous documents and witnesses, or how many resources there are to educate the public on how Elvis' and Priscilla's attitudes about marriage and relationships changed—along with the rest of society—between 1960 and 1970.

I think almost any single-source project is not going to advance our understanding of Elvis in any way because no one individual can speak for him, and we are kind of obligated to include all the context we can in order to appreciate his character, his successes and failures, flaws and virtues—and to treat both himself and those around him as fully three-dimensional people who have their own blind spots. Priscilla is far too aware of her own image, and far too willing to change it to suit the audience, to be particularly valuable here.

She is next scheduled to appear at the Lexington (Kentucky) Comic & Toy Con.

[blaithnne]

The first Heron design I showed off was from before Confidential Casefiles, so I thought I’d show you guys her look after she gets her new arm. Plus a few changes I made to her character for this AU! Just realised the way I placed my signature makes it look like I’M her worst enemy, whoops.

Meet the Cast!

╰┈➤ Canon ☄. *. ⋆

→ Scrooge McDuff → Matilda McDuff → Hortense McDuff → Qalhata Duiker → Goldie O'Gilt → Jack Duckworth → Bentina Beakley → LÙ Huifen (pre-caseflies) → Ludwig Von Druska → Bradford Butcher

╰┈➤ OCs ☄. *. ⋆

→ Lucrais NicRiada

.ೃ࿐

[lyculuscaelus]

How easy it was to blame all these misadventures the Achaeans suffered upon their homecoming on a man in revenge for his son.

Yes, we know what Palamedes did, and we know that he deserved it. We know that the disaster near Cape Caphereus did happen, and Nauplius was the one behind this. But we have not learned of anything else about the other part of Nauplius’s revenge from any sources earlier than pseudo-Apollodorus’s Epitome (and we know that the entire chapter 6 of Epitome is very likely tampered by Tzetzes already). Since, to be fair, Homer wasn’t the only one who neglected all this resettlement of Achaean heroes.

There was no mention of the name “Nauplius” in Proclus’s summary of the epic Nostoi, and the only chance for him to show up is in “the description of the storm around the Capherian rocks”. We know that Nauplius would make an appearance in the Nostoi through, again, pseudo-Apollodorus. But nothing more. The corruption of Argive wives did not happen in the Epic Cycle, and both the Nostoi and the Odyssey did not elaborate on any exile of any Achaean leader especially Diomedes.

And Aegialeia was still a steadfast wife of Diomedes in Homer’s epics. And Clytemnestra could still find her justice in her lament for Iphigeneia in Aeschylus’s and Euripides’s plays. Any role Nauplius could play in this would be redundant—prudent Aegialeia simply wouldn’t comply, and Clytemnestra wouldn’t need him to convince her.

So, why the attribution then? A likely explanation would be the attempt to connect the hero with those foundation myths in places outside the Mainland Greece like Magna Graecia. And what better way to get the hero there than exile? And what better way to exile a hero than the betrayal of their wife if they had one? (Well there are better ways but you know what I mean) The thing is, why did it have to be Nauplius? I mean, the tragedy at Cape Caphereus was infamous indeed. I could totally see people blaming Nauplius the Wrecker for more things than simply lighting a false beacon and throwing rocks. So now we have our avenger Nauplius traveling around Greece contriving the corruption of Argive wives and causing shipwreck for the returned fleet and in some versions even bringing false news to Anticleia which led to her suicide (again, not the version in the Odyssey)…Nauplius just seemed to be such a convenient device to connect these events.

But does that have to be the only case for their nostoi? I mean, Homer certainly did not include anything about this exile in his epics, and we could totally have our Nauplius simply causing shipwreck, without messing up with other heroes’ families. Is it tragic? Certainly. But in the meantime, it is cathartic. Heroes like Diomedes, Idomeneus, Philoctetes still get to stay in their homeland, even if it’s just in a few versions—one of them being Homer’s version.