Constantine P. Kavafy

Intro for the next poem:

200 B.C.: The poem is set at the time of the full development of the hellenistic era and the start of its decline, shortly before the rise of Rome.

Shortly after his victory at Granicus (334 B.C.), Alexander the Great sent the spoils to Athens, with this inscription: "Alexander son of Philip, and the Greeks except the Lacedaemonians, from the barbarians that inhabit Asia." The poem is from the viewpoint of a Greek in 200 B.C. who is reading that inscription. Issus (333 B.C.) and Arbela (331 B.C.) were two other great victories of Alexander.

In 200 B.C. (1931)

"Alexander son of Philip, and the Greeks except the Lacedaemonians--"

We can very well imagine
that they were utterly indifferent in Sparta
to this inscription. "Except the Lacedaemonians",
but naturally. The Spartans were not
to be led and ordered about
as precious servants. Besides
a panhellenic campaign without
a Spartan king as a leader
would not have appeared very important.
O, of course "except the Lacedaemonians."

This too is a stand. Understandable.

Thus, except the Lacedaemonians at Granicus;
and then at Issus; and in the final
battle, where the formidable army was swept away
that the Persians had massed at Arbela:
which had set out from Arbela for victory, and was swept away.

And out of the remarkable panhellenic campaign,
victorious, brilliant,
celebrated, glorious
as no other had ever been glorified,
the incomparable: we emerged;
a great new Greek world.

We; the Alexandrians, the Antiocheans,
the Seleucians, and the numerous
rest of the Greeks of Egypt and Syria,
and of Media, and Persia, and the many others.
With our extensive territories,
with the varied action of thoughtful adaptations.
And the Common Greek Language
we carried to the heart of Bactria, to the Indians.

As if we were to talk of Lacedaemonians now!

At first it seems that in the above poem Kavafy critisizes (or even being ironic to) the Spartans for not following Alexander. I believe, however, that he understands the Spartan' decision and he is being ironic to those who don't. Your thoughts?? 

------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------

Waiting for the Barbarians (1904)

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum?

The barbarians are to arrive today.

Why such inaction in the Senate?
Why do the Senators sit and pass no laws?

Because the barbarians are to arrive today.
What laws can the Senators pass any more?
When the barbarians come they will make the laws.

Why did our emperor wake up so early,
and sits at the greatest gate of the city,
on the throne, solemn, wearing the crown?

Because the barbarians are to arrive today.
And the emperor waits to receive
their chief. Indeed he has prepared
to give him a scroll. Therein he inscribed
many titles and names of honor.

Why have our two consuls and the praetors come out
today in their red, embroidered togas;
why do they wear amethyst-studded bracelets,
and rings with brilliant, glittering emeralds;
why are they carrying costly canes today,
wonderfully carved with silver and gold?

Because the barbarians are to arrive today,
and such things dazzle the barbarians.

Why don't the worthy orators come as always
to make their speeches, to have their say?

Because the barbarians are to arrive today;
and they get bored with eloquence and orations.

Why all of a sudden this unrest
and confusion. (How solemn the faces have become).
Why are the streets and squares clearing quickly,
and all return to their homes, so deep in thought?

Because night is here but the barbarians have not come.
And some people arrived from the borders,
and said that there are no longer any barbarians.

And now what shall become of us without any barbarians?
Those people were some kind of solution.

More of his work (in Greek and translated into English) here

I don't know if disturbed is the right term, but I see what you mean.

Kavafy had I difficult time till his 20s (at least) and he lived a low-profile social life. His homosexuality and the fact that he received little recognition in Greece didn't help either.

Here is a part of his bio that I found on the net:

From the outline of his sparse history, it would seem that Cavafy's richest life had to be the inner life sustained by his personal relations and his artistic creativity. Yet what little is known of the poet's social life suggests an image that is equally undramatic. There is now some reason to question the traditional view of Cavafy as an isolated figure hiding behind the dim candlelight of a stuffy, book-lined room (Sareyiannis' memoir indicates that the poet received visitors often and was known to be a stimulating, loquacious host when the mood struck him). At the same time, the bare facts of his biography suggest an unusually restricted circle of personal relations. He lived with his mother until her death in 1899, then with his unmarried brothers, and for most of his mature years, alone. The poet himself identified only two love affairs, both apparently transitory (see the comment on "September, 1903" and "December, 1903" in C.P. Cavafy: Passions and Ancient Days). A number of personal notes - largely unpublished - reveal that Cavafy was tormented until his middle forties not by complications resulting from his homosexual relationships (as a number of his erotic poems might lead one to think) but by guilt over what he felt to be a relentless autoeroticism. His one intimate, long-standing friendship, so far as is known, was with Alexander Singopoulos, whom Cavafy designated his heir and literary executor some ten years before his death, that is, when the poet was sixty years old.

Full bio and other stuff here