We are reading the Inferno together! Dcn. Harrison Garlick is joined by Dr. Jeremy Holmes of Wyoming Catholic College to give an introduction to Dante's Inferno and discuss the first canto.

Visit thegreatbookspodcast.com for more information.

Reading Schedule for Lent 2025:

Introduction & the Dark Woods

1. Intro & Canto 1 (3.4.25) with Dr. Jeremy Holmes (Wyoming Catholic)

Vestibule of Hell, Limbo & Lust

2. Cantos 2-5 (3.11.25) with Dr. Jennifer Frey (TU) and Dr. Jessica Hooten Wilson (Pepperdine).

Gluttony, Spendthrift/Hoarders, Wrathful/Acedia & Heretics

3. Cantos 6-11 (3.18.25) with Dr. Jason Baxter of Benedictine College.

Violence: Against Neighbor, Self & God

4. Cantos 12-17 (3.25.25) with Fr. Thomas Esposito, O. Cist., of the University of Dallas.

Simple Fraud: Pits 1-7

5. Cantos 18-25 (4.1.25) with Noah Tyler, CFO of CLT, and Gabriel Blanchard, Staff Writer for CLT.

Simple Fraud: Pits 8-10

6. Cantos 26-31 (4.8.25) with Dr. Donald Prudlo (TU)

Complex Fraud: The Traitors

7. Cantos 32-34 (4.15.25) with Evan Amato.

Questions from our Reader's Guide:

What is the Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri?

The Divine Comedy (or the Comedy as Dante called it) tells the story of Dante the Pilgrim’s penitential journey through hell, purgatory, and heaven in three volumes or canticles: Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. It is called a comedy in the classical sense of ending well, as opposed to tragedy which ends poorly. Dante the Poet masterfully weaves together Holy Scripture, Greco-Roman mythology, Aristotle, Roman history, St. Thomas Aquinas, and more to present the reader an excellent map of the human soul and its loves. “It is the Summa Theologiae in poetry,” says Dr. Prudlo, “and I think it's one of the greatest, greatest achievements, single achievements by a human being that's ever been attained.”

What is the Inferno?

The Inferno tells of Dante’s pilgrimage through hell alongside his pagan guide, the Roman poet Virgil. The Inferno is less an eschatological treatise attempting to explain the actual geography of hell and more a moral tale on the reality of human desire and the soul. It not a mystical vision akin to St. John’s Revelation or the ecstasies of St. Teresa of Avila. As such, Dante the Poet will place mythological characters in hell, like the three-headed dog Cerberus or the Roman god of the underworld, Pluto. The purpose is not literal but pedagogical. In a similar fashion, the placement of a soul in hell, like a Pope Nicholas III or Helen of Troy, is not a eschatological claim of who is actually in hell but a moral one. Everything in the Inferno is intended to instruct us in virtue and the proper rectitude of the soul.

Why should we read Dante’s Inferno?

The Inferno is an invitation to examine your soul. Dante the Poet is a master of the soul and its loves. He tears away the acceptable veneer on human desire and exposes the ugly reality of sin and its transformative effect upon the human soul into something imploded and bestial. And Dante the Poet invites the reader to contemplate his or her soul and its loves within an ordered whole. As stated, the Divine Comedy is St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae is poetic form, and Dante the Poet weaves together Holy Scripture, Aristotle, mythology, astronomy, and more into one intelligible cosmos. Reality is intelligible and holds lessons for our sanctification and salvation. We are invited to become...

Dcn. Harrison Garlick is joined by Dr. Frank Grabowski and Mr. Thomas Lackey to discuss the end of the Oresteia, the second part of the Eumenides.

Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com.

Check out our guide to the Oresteia.

The first half of the Eumenides demonstrates Aeschylus’ ability to dramatize philosophical questions. The old system of justice, bound to the Furies’ blood-soaked vengeance, has proven incomplete. The Olympian purity rituals are not a sufficient answer either.

Athena’s brilliance is found in pushing the concept of justice forward into a more dispassionate, procedural affair while also discovering how to incorporate the ancient powers. As Lackey notes, “Justice here becomes communal—rooted in reason but enriched by tradition.” The second half of the Eumenides promises a trial that will decide not only Orestes’ fate but that of justice itself.

The second half of Eumenides begins with a dramatic shift in scene. Athena elects to conduct the trial at the Areopagus also known as the “Crag of Ares” or the “Hill of Ares.” It is a mythical place of justice, as it bears its name from when Ares was accused of murder and tried there by the gods. It is a place of divine judgment. It was also said to be an ancient place of council for the Athenians. As such, Aeschylus bridges mythology and Athenian politics to create a new myth on the maturation of justice.

Overall, the trial allows Aeschylus to bring the contrasts he’s been making throughout the Oresteia into explicit dialogue. The trial begins, and Apollo serves as an advocate for Orestes (582). One wonders whether Agamemnon is helping his son as well (604).

Notice the questions from the Furies are reductive and without nuance (591). The Furies again do not recognize the murder of a spouse as meriting their vengeance (611). Apollo appeals to the authority and power of Zeus (626), and one wonders whether justice here is reducible to the will of he who has the most power. The Furies makes the clever argument that even Zeus shackled his own father, Cronos (648), and Apollo retorts that Cronos could be unchained—he was not murdered (655).

Next up we are reading Dante's Inferno for Lent!

Then we'll return to the Greek plays to read Prometheus Bound by Aeschylus.

Dcn. Harrison Garlick is once again joined by Dr. Frank Grabowski and Mr. Thomas Lackey to discuss the first part of the Eumenides, the third play in Aeschylus' Oresteia.

Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for more information.

Check out our written guide to the Oresteia.

The final play of Aeschylus’ Oresteia, The Eumenides, sets forth the transformation of justice from the familial mechanics of the blood avenger to a more mature procedural justice set within the polis. It is a story of civilizational maturation. Whereas Agamemnon and the Libation Bearers dealt with the house of Atreus, the Eumenides deals with Athens—a movement from family to polis in consideration of justice.

The first half of the Eumenides establishes the groundwork for the plays central conflict: the trial of Orestes with the Furies and Apollo vying against each under with Athena as the judge. The play seeks to find a resolution between two warring worldviews: the more primordial justice of the Furies and the more rational Olympian sensibilities represented by Apollo. What is brought forth by Athena is a new answer to the question: what is justice? To the degree her answer is new, however, is a topic to discuss.

Lean more by checking out our guide!

Dcn. Harrison Garlick, Mr. Thomas Lackey, and the Adam Minihan come together to discuss the second part of the Libation Bearers, the second play in Aeschylus' Oresteia.

Visit thegreatbookspodcast.com for guides and more information.

Support us on Patreon and get access to guides!

The second half of the Libation Bearers moves decisively toward the climax of Orestes’ role as blood avenger, culminating in the deaths of Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. He will enact the justice that is demanded, and in turn be guilty of murdering his own blood—his mother. As Adam observed, “Orestes is both hero and victim.” This tangled question of justice—whether Orestes can fulfill his father’s demand without succumbing to his mother’s curse—creates the tension from which Aeschylus will bring forth a narrative not in Homer—the third part of the triad, the Eumenides.

I. Orestes’ Plan: Vengeance Under the Guise of Guest Friendship (634)

Orestes arrives at the house of his father disguised as a stranger (634). Notice, however, that the dynamics of xenia in this scene are subtly off-kilter from the start. First, no one is answering the door (636). Second, the porter asks the stranger for his name (639), an immediate breach of Homeric norms in the Iliad and Odyssey where hospitality was always extended before the host asks who the guest is. The cultural norm of guest-friendship being poorly shown by the house of Clytemnestra and Aegisthus is a subtle sign that the house is disordered and unhealthy. Like Odysseus, Aeschylus has Orestes come home in disguise and lie about his identity (556). Thomas noted the complexity and methodical planning of Clytemnestra’s murder of Agamemnon juxtaposed with the simplicity of Orestes’ plan of revenge.

A key part of this deception is his claim that he, Orestes, has died, a declaration that seems unnecessary for his mission (665). Why does Orestes tell them he’s dead? One answer could be another parallel Aeschylus is making with the Odyssey: like Odysseus the beggar testing the loyalty of those in Ithaca prior to his reveal, so too is Orestes using news of his death to test those in the palace at Argos. In other words, he can observe who shows true despair at the news of his death—those are his friends in this mission of vengeance.

Check out our written guide for more information!

This week Dcn. Garlick is joined by Mr. Thomas Lackey and the Adam Minihan to discuss part one of the Libation Bearers, the second play in Aeschylus' Oresteia.

Check out thegreatbooksdpodcast.com for more resources.

Check out our Patreon for a written GUIDE to the whole Oresteia.

From our guide:

The Libation Bearers presents Orestes as both the hero and the victim. The cycle of violence will both demand his action and condemn it. “The one who acts must suffer,” as Aeschylus observes. The play builds an incredible tension within the current mechanics of justice and primes the audience to desire some lasting resolution—a resolution that will only come in the Eumenides.

Aeschylus’ Libation Bearers, the second play in the triad of the Oresteia, places Orestes within the moral tension of lex talionis and its cycle of violence. He is the son who, to avenge his father, must kill his mother, Clytemnestra. Aeschylus presents us with fundamental questions on justice—a primitive justice that demands blood for blood, an eye for an eye. The cycle of violence both demands action and condemns it.

What makes the Libation Bearers such an essential and resonant part of the Oresteia is its relentless focus on the mechanics of justice and its interplay between violence and fate. Aeschylus "pushes us to think not only about the relationships in play but about larger moral questions.” Through Orestes’ struggle to fulfill his divine obligation as blood avenger, and through Electra’s own crisis of prayer, the play asks profound questions about the nature of justice. Aeschylus’ beautiful line, "The anvil of justice stands fast... fate beats out her sword" (628), is arguably the moral heart of the play. A tale of pain, justice, and fate.

I. Orestes Returns Home (1)

The story begins several years after the murder of Agamemnon, when Orestes, now a young man of eighteen or so, secretly returns home from exile.[1] Much of the tragedy lies in understanding Orestes’ difficult situation: to be a blood avenger for his father, he must kill his own blood, his mother.

Orestes’ opening monologue invokes Hermes—who fittingly serves as the bridge between the living and the dead (1). The opening invocation to the divine was seen in Agamemnon as well and will be seen again in the Eumenides. The relationship between the living and the dead is a key theme in this play and a perennial question that makes this a great book. It will contain both prayers on behalf of the dead and the intercession of the dead for the living.

It is notable that in the absence of having a father, Orestes is presented as a confident, determined figure ready to do the unthinkable. In the Odyssey, he served as the role model for Telemachus, and here we see him lack the timidity and self-doubt that plagued the fatherless Telemachus. It raises the question, however, of who or what shaped Orestes into a character ready to face this grave moral burden? To use a phrase, who was his Mentor? As we will see in the text, as Telemachus had Athena, Orestes had Apollo....

Keep up the good work!

[1] Fagles,...

We are reading Aeschylus' Oresteia. This week Dcn. Garlick, Adam Minihan, Thomas Lackey, and Dr. Frank Grabowski discuss part two of Aeschylus' Agamemnon, the second part of the first play of the Oresteia.

Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for more sources.

Check out our written guide to the Oresteia.

I. Clytemnestra and Agamemnon: Murder, Manipulation & Denial (795)

Clytemnestra dominates Agamemnon as a complex figure of cleverness, rage, and manipulation. Upon Agamemnon’s return, she denies him a true homecoming by rolling out the red tapestries and inviting him to walk on them (901). Two main observations on the red tapestries. First, Clytemnestra is literally denying Agamemnon the satisfaction of setting his foot on Argos’s soil. It is a denial of him truly coming home. Compare this denial to the herald who praises the soil of Argos upon his return (493).

Second, walking on the tapestries is an act of hubris and impiety. Even Agamemnon states it is an act reserved for the gods (915). It said that the dye needed to make these tapestries would have been incredibly laborious and expensive—and upon walking upon them, they would be ruined. Note also their comparison to streams of blood (903). Clytemnestra is inviting Agamemnon to a prideful, impious, and prodigal act. The invitation should be compared to Agamemnon’s opening lines that praise and give gratitude to the gods (795).

Clytemnestra hatred is profound. Her actions reflect years of planning, deep-seated hatred, and extraordinary control over the narrative surrounding the king’s return. She is leading Agamemnon into impiety so that he will die at odds with the divine. It is akin, in Catholic parlance, to leading someone into mortal sin prior to murdering them. It is a supernatural cruelty similar to Achilles intentionally throwing bodies in the river to deny them their burial rites in the Iliad.

Agamemnon's behavior in this moment reflects his characteristic weakness. He is effeminate, weak-willed, and impressionable. Clytemnestra is clever and dominative (935). He even states that Clytemnestra is treating him “like a woman” (912). His inability to assert himself as either husband or king leaves him vulnerable to Clytemnestra's intellectual superiority. She remarks: “The power is yours, if you surrender your free will to me,” underscoring how she undermines his authority on every level (939). One should recall the wife of Odysseus, Penelope, the “matchless queen of cunning,” who through her wit and fidelity preserved King Odysseus’ kingdom and herself until his return. One may see Clytemnestra as an evil Penelope—a queen whose wit is turned against her king to his destruction.

II. The Chorus and the Tragedy of Cassandra (977)

The old men of Argos, the chorus, “huddle in terror” as Agamemnon and Clytemnestra enter the palace. They are afraid and inept. Notice the imagery of a man’s blood wetting the earth and whether it can then sing (1017). It is difficult not to think of the story of Cain and Abel, and how Abel’s blood cried out to God (Genesis 4:10). Clytemnestra reemerges from the palace and attempts to coax Cassandra, the Trojan princess, into the palace. Cassandra is silent, which is expected, as it was tradition only two persons would speak on the stage at a time—and here Clytemnestra and the leader of the chorus are both speaking....

Dcn. Garlick, Dr. Frank Grabowski, and Thomas Lackey are reunited to discuss the first part of Agamemnon, the first play in Aeschylus' Oresteia.

Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for more information.

From our written guide available to our supporters:

The first play of the Oresteia tells of the homecoming of Agamemnon and is predominately animated by revenge. Aeschylus presents us with questions concerning the legitimacy of the Trojan war, how Argos has suffered without its king, and why Clytemnestra has plotted to murder her husband. Though chronologically Odysseus has not return home yet, one should compare this text to the Odyssey and Odysseus’ own homecoming – written almost three hundred years prior by Homer. Aeschylus draws heavily from Homer but changes small but significant details, which creates a narrative that presents a profound lesson on the weaknesses of lex talionis as enacted by the blood avenger model. Throughout Agamemnon and into Libation Bearers, we are invited to consider whether a new model of justice is needed.

I. The Opening: Unease and Gender Inversions (1)

The play begins with an invocation to the gods, as will the following two plays. Through the watchman, Aeschylus communicates the time and setting to his audience in a manner typical of Greek drama. The watchman’s opening monologue conveys a disquieting mood of fear and quiet dread. As observed, Lackey describes the opening as “a little eerie and a little bit off.” Notably, the watchman yearns for the return of Agamemnon, his king, and we note the king’s absence has left the kingdom, Argos, in suffering (24, 37). One thinks here of the suffering of Ithaca without Odysseus in the Odyssey. The opening passages invites us to ask: “What has life been like in Argos over the past decade during the king’s absence?” and “What is the effect of the empty throne of Argos upon its people?”

From the outset, Aeschylus will play with gender roles and descriptions. Notice Clytemnestra, Agamemnon’s wife, “maneuvers like a man” (13), while Agamemnon himself will be presented as effeminate. This thematic inversion invites readers to examine Aeschylus’ pedagogical purpose for such language. As Dr. Grabowski observes, the toying with gender traits parallels Shakespeare’s Macbeth, wherein Lady Macbeth similarly exhibits masculine qualities of ambition and dominance.

As the play progresses, readers gain insight into life in Argos during Agamemnon’s ten-year absence. The people long for an end to their suffering, for “an end to their pain” (23). Notably, Aeschylus allows us to see how Argos viewed the Trojan war (44), which is largely presented, at first, as a just war in which Agamemnon was the “great avenger” of Zeus punishing Troy for its violation of guest-friendship (45), i.e., Prince Paris absconding with Menelaus’ wife, Helen. The reader should note whether Agamemnon’s return starts to adjust this narrative....

Check out our whole guide on the Oresteia.

Dcn. Harrison Garlick and Adam Minihan are reunited to intro Aeschylus, the Father of Greek Tragedy.

Aeschylus (b. 525 BC) was a warrior, statesman, and the father of Greek tragedy. Born into nobility, he grew up in Athens during its pivotal transition from tyranny to democracy. Furthermore, he famously fought in the Battle of Marathon (490 BC), defending a nascent Western civilization against Persian invasion. Aeschylus died in 456 BC, leaving behind a legacy that shaped the foundation of Greek drama.

Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for more information.

From our guide on the Oresteia:

1. What is the Ionian Revolt?

To understand Aeschylus, we must first understand the Greco-Persian War (c. 499 BC to 429). In sum, what is called the “First Persian Empire,” founded by Cyrus the Great around 550 BC, stretched from modern-day Iran, Asia Minor, modern day Israel, and Egypt. In Asia Minor, this Persian empire ruled over Hellenistic city-states. One may recall that Troy, a polis with both Hellenistic and eastern traits, was also located in Asia Minor. In 499 BC, the city-states rebelled against their Persian overlords with the support of Athens in what is known as the “Ionian Revolt.” The revolt failed and the Persians retained control of Asia Minor; however, King Darius of the Persian Empire believed Athens should be punished and elected to invade Greece.

2. What was the first invasion in the Greco-Persian Wars?

The Ionian Revolt sparked the larger Greco-Persian Wars and led to King Darius’ invasion of ancient Greece in 492 BC. Athens led the federation of city-states against the Persians, and Aeschylus fought for the Athenian army. Notably, Aeschylus and his brother both fought at the famous Battle of Marathon in 490 BC at which the first Persian invasion was defeated.[1] Aeschylus’ brother, however, died in the conflict.[2] The Battle of Marathon is often held as a watershed moment in the birth of Western culture. The battle is also the namesake of running a marathon, as the legend has it that an Athenian runner ran the twenty-six miles from Marathon to Athens to tell them of the Athenian victory.

3. What was the second Persian invasion in the Greco-Persian Wars?

Ten years later, a second Persian invasion was headed by King Darius’ son, King Xerxes. This is the setting for the famous Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC), in which the smaller Spartan force of approximately 7000 men under King Leonidas held off 120,000-300,000 Persian invaders. The word Thermopylae means “hot gates” and takes its name from the hot springs in that area—it is also fittingly one of the mythological entrances to Hades. After Thermopylae, the Athenians won a great naval battle against the Persians at Salamis in 480 BC. Notably, Aeschylus is said to have fought in this battle as well and wrote his play The Persians about the conflict. The Greeks, led by the Athenians and Spartans, would eventually expel the Persians and bring peace in 449 BC.

4. What do we know about Aeschylus’ writings?

Aeschylus is...