Document 4: Pedro de Villegas

How dare they accuse me of acting against God? I come from Old Christian lineage from both my mother and father’s side; who has the right to doubt my faith?! For my entire life I have upheld the utmost of holy actions only to have them be called into question for such a minor shortcoming.

Yes, I may have eaten meat, but only due to illness. Since when has being ill of health shameful? How can they call themselves noble people when they bash me for something I cannot control? However, everything else I have been accused of is complete blasphemy, made up to tarnish my good name!

I have absolutely no recollection of consuming unleavened bread. I am currently severely injured, as my witnesses surely will affirm. My job of cloth making impaired me, forcing me to eat meat during certain Lenten seasons to nourish my recovery. Good diet and rest are critical to me now.

I do not follow Mosaic law, I do not even talk to Jews! Adorning my house for a feast on a Saturday is no evidence that I follow Mosaic law; I could host a feast any day of the week. I am a God-fearing man with a wife and family who serves the community through cloth making. I only identify myself as a loyal Catholic Christian and anything else is an insult. I demand that I be affirmed!

“Voyant Tools.” Voyant Tools, Stéfan Sinclair & Geoffrey Rockwell, https://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=f833f0841c92d42eab529373f4afd3eb

I decided to change my old title of “Hailey’s Personal Idea Generator” to “The Power of Power” because I realized it better fit my blog posts. I decided to take out my name in the title because I realized the blog posts were more of my literary arguments and less of my feelings and ideas. It focused less on my emotions and more of the texts themselves, so I felt I needed to place emphasis on the content of what we are reading instead. As I put my blog posts in Voyant Tools, a website to track the frequency of words, I realized two of my most-used words are “culture” and “control”. As I looked through my writings, I realized I tended to focus on which characters tended to pull or want to pull control and power towards themselves and how culture encourages or discourages this pull. The structure of society enabling power to certain people or the motivations of main characters toward gaining power are very evident in what I argue, but also in the importance of borders themselves. Borders can be expressions of power, and when I talk about the crossing of borders, this action pushes and pulls power to different people. Because readers of my blog would find much emphasis on the effect of culture on who control is given to, I felt it fitting to make my title all about power. The power, or influence, of power in literature is so important and necessary to analyze in order to better understand the society and its time within the text. To better represent the main idea behind each blog post and find a common link between all posts, I decided “The Power of Power” is a better title.

“Voyant Tools.” Voyant Tools, Stéfan Sinclair & Geoffrey Rockwell, voyant-tools.org/?corpus=809cddde543c8f5048b2e0832c27afb9.

In Professor Pasupathi’s lecture on “The Alexiad, Up Close and From a Distance” on November 20, 2018, she emphasized the need to value women’s voices, such as through this text, written by a female author. The Alexiad is the first history written by a woman in Western Europe and reveals a different perspective of the society of the text’s time. In Book 6, Chapter 8 of the text, portraying the female author’s birth and introduction into the story, it revealed this different perspective clearly. When I inputted this part of the text into Voyant Tools, a website to map the frequency of words, the most-used words that popped out were “acclamations”, “child”, “mother”, and “parents”. These words make sense to be used most frequently since this text describes the birth of Anna Komnene, but they also reveal that the part of the text solely about a female character is directly linked not to war, like most of what the text is about, but to family and familial ceremonies. Even though the text describes Anna’s acclamation, which is her sharing the throne with her father and Constantine, Anna is not given heritage to the throne or real power, rather her little brother does. This shows how even age is less of a factor than the sex of the child in who inherits the throne. Preference to men in power is clearly shown in her society, especially when the text says, “When a second daughter was born, very like her parents and at the same time showing clear signs of the virtue and wisdom which were to distinguish her in later years, they longed for a son and he became the object of their prayers” (6.8.168). Even though the parents birthed two daughters, both with clear signs of wisdom, they still longed for a boy. Anna does not appear to be upset by her and her sister’s dismissal, but rather states it matter-of-factly, appearing like this was normal for her society at the time. Anna later describes the parents as wanting to appoint the son as rank of emperor, with Anna describing him as a “universal delight” and “lively spirit” (6.8.168-169). The daughters are mostly described as having love and loyalty to their parents and family, a much different description than the son. Anna also says, “Naturally my parents wanted to promote the little one to rank of emperor…” (6.8.169).  By using the word “naturally” and “universal”, she shows how the society expects a son to gain power and a daughter to remain loyal to family.

“’Great Women of Literature’ Poster By Geeksweetie.” Redbubble, Redbubble, http://www.redbubble.com/people/geeksweetie/works/13676068-great-women-of-literature?p=poster.

Professor Pasupathi argues in her lecture that women need to be more representative in literature, media, and film so that voices can be diverse and unique from many different points of view. Because this novel is written by a woman, clear bias of the society towards men is evident. Even when the novel does not explicitly fight the society’s patriarchy or discuss the need for female empowerment, a woman author makes evident her silent suffer in a way that a man’s perspective excludes. While this part of the text discussed might seem biased against women when it ties Anna to family but her little brother to power, it is more indicative of the society’s pressure at the time. Understanding patriarchy in the text’s society is better understood through a female lense, and this uncovering can extend to many other voices in literature and the media. Professor Pasupathi argues that women must have more of a voice because more things can be discovered and learned in a way that men’s voices cannot always provide.

Works Cited

Komnene, Anna. The Alexiad. Translated by E.R.A Sewter, Penguin Books, 2009.

Pasupathi, Vimala. “The Alexiad, Up Close and From a Distance.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 20 Nov. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

“Voyant Tools.” Voyant Tools, Stéfan Sinclair & Geoffrey Rockwell, voyant-tools.org/?corpus=809cddde543c8f5048b2e0832c27afb9.

Davies, Daniel. “The Secret of the Ma’aseh Merkava According to Maimonides.” TheTorah.com, TheTorah.com – A Historical and Contextual Approach, thetorah.com/secret-of-the-maaseh-merkava-according-to-maimonides/.

In Professor Singer’s lecture on “Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed” on November 13, 2018, he pointed out that Maimonides attempts to reconcile philosophy, or the natural sciences, with religion. I know many people in the world struggle to find a balance between the two. Professor Singer states in his lecture that Maimonides purposefully instructs others to read the bible allegorically, not literally, in order to gain its true meaning. Professor Frisina later states in his discussion class that allegories, like Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, are extended metaphors to help explain something that one does not understand. For example, Maimonides states, “I shall interpret to you that which was said by Ezekiel the prophet, peace be on him, in such a way that anyone who heard that interpretation would think that I do not say anything over and beyond what is indicated by the text” (Guide 416). Ezekiel describes the chariot in such complex ways that it is impossible to fully visualize what he is saying. Maimonides purposefully includes this example in order to show that this description, among many others in the bible, is meant to be taken allegorically or symbolically, not literally.

In another example about the use of allegories, in Professor Karofsky’s lecture on Augustine on October 25, 2018, she discusses Augustine tackling another unclear description. God is said to have made the world in seven days, and yet if he hasn’t created time yet or if the sun wasn’t made yet, how can those days be measured? Augustine, much like Maimonides, says that this is due to a loose interpretation. What is said in the scripture is true, but has been interpreted differently by others. Maimonides argues that examples like these in the bible must be taken allegorically.

“Intellect on The Noun Project.” The Noun Project, thenounproject.com/term/intellect/782799/.

But, saying there can always be a way to interpret things allegorically not only makes things very complicated, but also allows any contradictions that critics might point out to not be accounted for. If any contradiction like the seven days example can just be rewritten as a loose interpretation, then anything can be written off as needed to be analyzed allegorically. I think this unfairly lets the Bible, or religion in general, off on many of its mistakes. In addition, saying that anything can be interpreted allegorically makes things very complicated. A reader might not know which saying should be taken literally and which should be taken allegorically. This opens up many different interpretations, and it would be very hard to know which is right, or which should be followed. I understand where Maimonides is coming from, that he wants followers to make deeper meanings instead of ignoring parts of the text they do not understand, but it also raises many problems. Professor Singer states that Maimonides believes that only the elite, those born with strong faculties of the mind (active intellect, imagination, rationality), can interpret the text allegorically while ordinary people would only be capable of reading religious texts literally. I disagree with Maimonides because it unfairly limits the exploration of religion to certain people while excluding others out. The main arguments by Maimonides might not be wholeheartedly agreed by me, but his attempt to bring both the natural sciences and religion together tackles an issue many people struggle with, both in the past and present day.

Works Cited

Karofsky, Amy. “Augustine.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 25 Oct. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

Maimonides, Moses. Guide of the Perplexed. Translated by Shlomo Pines, II, Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1963.

Singer, Ira. “Maimonedes, Guide of the Perplexed.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 13 Nov. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

“Bridges.” Woolwich Township, Woolwich Township, http://www.woolwich.ca/en/discover-us/Bridges.aspx.

In Professor Karimov’s lecture, titled “Sufism and Sufi Poetry”, on November 6, 2018, I was initially confused about what he was teaching. It wasn’t until further thinking and Professor Frisina’s later discussion class that I gained a better understanding of what Sufi is. Professor Frisina in his lecture on St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians on Oct. 23, 2018, described how Christianity puts Jesus as the bridge between God and humans, Judaism puts scripture/law, and Platonism puts the mind. However, Sufi is so different from these religions and other ones because it believes that there is no bridge. For example, Rumi says in one of his poems, “Remember God so much that you are forgotten. Let the caller and the called disappear; be lost in the Call” (Be Lost in the Call). Rumi is instructing that one can connect with God directly by forgetting all earthly ties and only thinking about God. This is why Sufi is considered a mystical religion (mysticism defined as a direct relationship or experience with God), because it believes a human can directly be one with God, with no bridge necessary, while existing in the temporal, physical world. This is so fascinating to me because every religion that has been discussed before in lectures has always had a bridge. There have always been some distinction or separation between humans in the temporal world and the divine in the intelligible, non-temporal world. This separation of Sufi and other mystical religions with all of the other religions is why there is so much violence. Professor Karimov, at the beginning of his lecture, talked about misunderstanding against the Sufis leading to attacks and bombs all around the world that kill hundreds of people. He pulled up many examples of news articles, but he never really explained why there was so much misunderstanding or what was the root of all of this anger. On further thinking, I realized that it is because Sufi is so different from other religions.

Monks, Kieron. “Lord of the Dance: The Sufi Mystic Who Has Got the World Whirling.” CNN, Cable News Network, 30 Nov. 2016, http://www.cnn.com/travel/article/rumi-revival/index.html.

Even religions like Hinduism and Buddhism, which believe in a cycle of rebirth and death, emphasize a divide or separation between humans and the divine (or a place of eternal contemplation). These religions, in addition to Christianity and Judaism and many others, use societal rules to dictate ways of living life because of this separation. They use the incentive of one day becoming one with the divine, of crossing this separation, in order to control people and lay out rules that society needs to function. However, a mystic religion like Sufi has no separation. It disregards societal rules and commands from God because it believes humans can already be one with God. In this way, Sufi challenges the underlying societal structure that many other religions have worked hard to build up. People find this very threatening and in turn, try to stamp out Sufis through many horrific acts well-documented in the news. After realizing this, I now understand better Professor Karimov’s video of the Sufi Dance Ritual. The men appear in a trance and dazed because they ignore everything on Earth, all of their humanly worries, and focus on just God. When I watched this, I didn’t understand much, so I disregarded its importance. Like the people upset and violent towards Sufis, I did not try to understand. I think in a time of much misunderstanding, it is important to remain open and willing to learn. I now have a much deeper appreciation and respect for the Sufi religion, and I believe that this willingness to understand can help bridge the gap and violence between the many religions around the world.

Works Cited

Frisina, Warren. “St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 23 Oct. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

Helminski, Kabir. “Poems by Rumi.” Poems by Rumi, Threshold Books, 1993, http://www.khamush.com/poems.html#I%20died.

Karimov, Elyor. “Sufism and Sufi Poetry.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 6 Nov. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

Lamkin, Virginia. “Campfire Story: Vinder Viper | Ghost Stories for Children | Pinterest | Camping, Campfire Stories and Fire.” Pinterest, Pinterest, http://www.pinterest.com/pin/331929435009129235/.

In Professor Lay’s lecture—”Gold and Riddles, Books and Bread: Reflections on ‘The Dream of the Rood’”—on October 30, 2018, I gained a much better understanding of the portrayal of Jesus in Anglo-Saxon storytelling. Unlike the Gospel where Jesus is depicted as a peacemaker or a wise shepherd, he is depicted here in Old English poems as fierce and strong. For example, The Dream of the Rood says, “Then I saw, marching toward me, mankind’s brave King; He came to climb upon me” (38.32-33). By describing Jesus as marching, he is compared to a warrior, fighting his personal battle to be crucified. Jesus is specifically depicted this way, not as peaceful or stoic like in other texts that describe him, because of the Old English tradition of orally telling stories over a campfire. In order to entertain people, one needs a story that is fierce and draws the listeners in. Telling a story where Jesus is just a calm character makes the story boring, especially when told out loud. In addition, Professor Lay described the culture of the Anglo-Saxons as binding together kingship, kinship, and treasure. The value of these things mean Anglo-Saxons admire heroes who are triumphantly strong and fight for glory. The culture shapes the literature and interpretations of religion greatly, as shown here. Because of this warrior culture, Jesus is changed into a mighty hero.

Cleaveland, Adam Walker. “Warriors for Jesus? Fight Club for Jesus? I Don’t Think so.” Pomomusings, WordPress, 18 Mar. 2011, pomomusings.com/2011/03/18/fight-club-for-jesus/.

Because he is heroic here, he encourages his suffering, as shown when it says, “I shook when His arms embraced me but I durst not bow to ground, stoop to Earth’s surface” (38.40-41). His characterization directly influences his actions. While the plot of Jesus mounting the cross is the same for all interpretations, how he feels about it is very different. The reason why his emotions are different here in this poem than in the Gospel or even St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians is all due to the writer’s purpose. The intent of the Anglo-Saxons were to glorify Jesus as a hero, since their culture is based in glory to the king. Their history at the moment was filled with the idea of war, as shown by the Comitatus ideal, in which the Comitatus fights for the Chieftain and the Chieftain fights for glory. The intent of those who write the Gospel, however, is to bring peace to readers, to accept and convert them to the Christian faith by emotionally offering them peace and salvation. For example, the Gospel says, “Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid” (John 14:27). Here, Jesus is a tranquil, accepting character who encourages peace, a very different characterization than a warrior would have. This Jesus does not seem like the Jesus to march to his death and accept his suffering encouragingly. This Jesus seems like the Jesus to mournfully accept that he must die in order to save humankind. Jesus is depicted this way because the intent of the Gospel was not to bring triumph to Jesus, but to take away the troubles and emotional perils of the readers. Each story is set in such a different context and is told for very different purposes that Jesus himself changes. In this way, there is a crossing of borders between culture to culture that makes The Dream of the Rood so fascinating.

Works Cited

Alexander, Michael. The First Poems in English. Penguin Books, 2008.

Lay, Ethna D. “Gold and Riddles, Books and Bread: Reflection on the ‘Dream of the Rood.’” Culture & Expression. 30 Oct. 2018.

The Gospel. Gateway Press, 1988.

Aiken, Ainyne. “The Gender Equality Problem & Societies’ Beauty Ideals.” The Digital Voice, The Digital Voice, 2018, wordpress.philau.edu/thevoice/the-gender-equality-problem-societies-beauty-ideals/.

In Professor Frisina’s lecture on St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians on October 23, 2018, I realized many things I had misinterpreted the first time. I had originally thought Paul to be very strict with all of his rules he lists out and very rooted in patriarchal beliefs. However, after understanding Professor Frisina’s lecture, I realize that Paul’s crossing of many borders allowed him to be progressive. He actually promotes tolerance and equality in a religion that can be harsh, but he himself champions acceptance. This is because his core values that he stresses all come from the idea that everyone is equal under God, whether you are a gentile or a Jew, a woman or a man, or a poor person or a rich person. This is shown in his core message where he says, “Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman; but all things come from God” (Corinthians 11:11-12). There are many patriarchal beliefs that represent women as inferior to men, since women came from men but men came from God, but Professor Frisina argues that this is because interpolations were mixed into the text. Other people inserted their own ideas into Paul’s letter that weren’t originally there in order to spread a different kind of message. However, Paul himself believes in an equal sexual relationship between men and women and an equal relationship to God and the Church.

Popjes, Jack. “Jesus and Gender Equality.” Jack’s INsights & OUTbursts, 14 May 2015, http://www.jackpopjes.com/jesus-and-gender-equality/.

His idea that all things come from God is why he chooses to teach and instruct the Gentiles, not just the Jews and Christians. He is considered the Apostles to the Gentiles because he believes that Jesus is the Messiah for everyone. He finds importance in non-believers or God-fearers in ways that strict Jewish customs did not, and for this reason, he can be considered a progressive leader who tries to change the minds of others. Paul strays from the Jewish idea that scriptures and law is the bridge connecting humankind to God because he knows that no one is able to follow every single rule. He believes that rules were just there to reveal our sinful state and that humans cannot be expected to do everything that the scriptures instruct. Instead, he is much more philosophical in his teachings, which is why Professor Frisina says that Paul’s Christianity incorporates Judaism, Stoicism, and Platonism. Paul combines the Stoic belief that happiness can come from anywhere in his teachings to show how whether or not you are rich or poor, prejudiced against or not, God gives you the same happiness. This is why Paul can be considered a religious leader for all people, not just the Jewish/Christian followers. Paul also argues that Jesus is actually the center between humankind and God because Jesus is part of the non-temporal world that tries to pull us from the temporal/material world to the non-temporal/heaven world. In this philosophical way, he crosses another border besides ethnic, religious, and gender borders: the metaphysical border between the physical world and the divine world. Through his ideas of equality under God and through his philosophical teachings, Paul crosses many borders that can be considered progressive and bold for his time.

Works Cited

Frisina, Warren. “St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 23 Oct. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

St. Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians. New Testament, Laurence L. Welburn, 1999.

Epictetus’ reliance on cups is in itself a way to seek happiness or acceptance with things you cannot control. You do not love specific things because they are that specific thing, but because they represent something. You love a specific cup because you love cups. Since logic is the basis of everything, you can therefore reason that you love your family because you love humans. So if they die, you should not be sad, because you don’t love them for being that specific human, but because they are humans. This seems very unreasonable in our society, that you should not be sad if your family dies, but in the larger picture of stoicism, it does show how you have no control over death and should not be sad by it. You are not powerful enough to say that you want control over death, so you have to let it go. In addition, if you are not upset by someone else’s cup or vessel breaking, instead understanding that things will happen, then when it comes to your own cup, you should apply the same logic instead of being wretched and sad. The concept of cups/containers/vessels itself is an example of how to seek happiness in times where most people would be sad. Epictetus uses these items to prove a simple point and then expands and generalizes it to more complicated concepts.

This concept of what you can control and what you can’t is used similarly with two-handled items. The same way with cups, he compares difficult concepts to simple, tangible items so that we better understand what he is saying. Much like the concept of control/letting things go, a two-handled item is the same way: one handle you can hold onto, the other you cannot. You shouldn’t focus on the fact that you cannot hold onto that one handle or control it in anyway, but instead change the things you can control (the handle you can hold onto). If someone acts in ways that you do not agree with, you cannot control their actions and should not spend time frustrated that you cannot control that person. Instead, you should understand that your relationship to that person, like if you were brought up with your brother, is what allows you to hold onto that person, or that two-handled item. Epictetus uses this concept of two-handled items as an analogy to the struggle between what is in your control and what is not. He better explains the idea of stoicism by using this comparison, because if you agree his argument on the two-handled item or the cup or the vessel is true, then you must agree that this same argument can apply to humans/your sadness of death or what you cannot control. I think Epictetus uses purposefully tangible items that you can personally hold onto to represent control. You can hold onto that cup because that cup or vessel is completely in your control. A cup is such a simple concept and holds such meaning to the idea of control, that when he compares it to the idea of grief of death or trying to control the uncontrollable, you are more likely to agree with what he is saying.

Epictetus also argues on the concept of sharing to present stoicism. You can only change your own attitude and not the things or people around you. The affairs of others are their business and not yours, so the concept of sharing in itself does not agree. If you share with friends at the expense of your own “greatness of mind” (part 24) so that they gain what is not good, then that exchange is not good. If you share with another person who shares the preservation of honor and fidelity while you yourself can hold onto that fidelity, then neither are useless to the thing you are sharing. If both benefit from the sharing and neither’s minds or attitude are negatively affected, then sharing can become your business. This, again, might be hard to understand in the eyes of society, but he uses this concept of sharing to explain stoicism’s true nature: that in order to be happy anywhere, you have to accept what you can control and leave what you cannot control alone.

All of these items he uses in his argument is to express stoicism in a way that makes sense to the reader, so that he or she can accept things that society might find hard to accept.

“Old Faithful Stock Vectors, Clipart and Illustrations.” 123RF Stock Photos, 123RF, http://www.123rf.com/clipart-vector/old_faithful.html?sti=n8b0uy5gqrjjqfk2v6%7C.

I found Professor Lay’s lecture on October 4th, 2018 of Chaucer’s Man of Law’s Tale in The Canterbury Tales to be fascinating. I had originally found Constance to be such a passive person who just gets manipulated around from place to place, always under the power of men. However, through this lecture, I realized how active of a hero Constance really is. Like her name itself, she remains constant to who she is and what she believes in, regardless of the men who dominate her. It is actually the men around her who change and lose a part of themselves when they convert to Christianity while she stays the same of her beliefs: “For the sultan, with his whole baronage, And all his subjects also, were to be Christened, and Constance given in marriage” (Chaucer 122). Constance is an active agent, both because men change for her but also because she spreads religion actively. Wherever she goes, she converts people through the appeal of her virtue. Because of this, she can be compared to the successful version of the Crusades. She does not exert purposeful effort to convert like the Crusades do, yet is successful in converting others to Christianity because of her devotion to faith. Her character alone allows her to win the battle.

“The Very Dark History of ‘Friday the 13th.’” SnowBrains, SnowBrains, 13 July 2018, snowbrains.com/history-friday-the-13th/.

In Professor Karimov’s lecture on Arabian Nights on September 25th, merchants are described as the agents of change, but in this tale, Constance herself is that agent. Much like a warrior, she travels from place to place bringing and fusing culture wherever she goes. Because she remains constant while others around her change, this is why she is allowed to live (but Sultan and other recent converts die). The text explains this as a miracle of God, but it argues a larger meaning that consistency and staying true to your beliefs reward you. Constance is able to convert those around her four times. She converts the sultan, Dame Hermengyld, the Constable, and finally King Alla. These conversions become successively more important, where by the end of the story, she is able to convince even a king to convert his whole kingdom. She gains more and more power, getting more successful at convincing others to cross into another religion. She not only appears more resolute throughout the story but creates an influence that grows with each character she converts. These conversions are fascinating because she is able to re-work the societal expectations of female passivity around her to gain control. 

Works Cited

Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Translated by David Wright, Oxford University Press Inc., 2011.

Karimov, Elyor. “Arabian Nights.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 25 Sept. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

Lay, Ethna. “Man of Law’s Tale.” Crossing Borders in the Ancient & Medieval Worlds, Hofstra University’s Honors College Culture and Expression, 4 Oct. 2018, Monroe Lecture Center, Hempstead, NY. Lecture.

Here is the link to my group’s Storymap project on StoryMapJS. This analyzed the power of music throughout The Odyssey.

https://uploads.knightlab.com/storymapjs/9519fb2ddfd381c57c7fab4f92daf637/storymap-project-2/index.html