EMJ on The Iliad vs The Epic of Gilgamesh: "Because of its psychological realism and because of its attempt to explain, however incompletely, 'the aetiology of evil,' The Iliad marks a significant advance in logos over The Epic of Gilgamesh.

(cont.)

The gods whom Homer describes in his epics are no longer cosmological, as Voegelin correctly recognizes. . . . The Epic of Gilgamesh takes place in the dim twilight of cosmological myth.

The Iliad is full of gods, but their motivation, from a psychological, if not theological, point of view, is clearly human. Gilgamesh becomes involved in all sorts of strange adventures, but it is invariably the god from the deux es machina which determines his fate.

His quest for eternal youth is thwarted not by his own hubris, but by a snake who steals the magic coral which will confer it while Gilgamesh is bathing.

Gilgamesh's destiny, in other words, is 'ultimately decided by arbitrary forces or accidental events,' depriving his story of any psychological or moral depth. . .

By comparison, The Iliad takes place in the broad light of day, where gods debate their course of action like the human beings upon whom they are clearly modeled. There is nothing divine about the gods of The Iliad.

They can determine the course of human events within the bounds allowed by fate or Moira, 'the god behind the gods,' whose power overruled the gods, who could delay what was fated but not 'prevent its accomplishment.'

The Greek gods are powerful superhuman beings who can determine the course of human events, but no logos, not even the rudimentary principles of practical reason, is discernible in their behavior.

Man wins the favor of the gods, 'by obedience to rules that had no connection with morality.'

Eventually, the concept of logos would mature until it stood in judgment over the behavior of the gods themselves, provoking a religious crisis which would eventuate in the death of Socrates and bring an end to that phase of history."
- Logos Rising