The term ‘Strong’ traverses the depth-psychology corpus along several distinct axes that resist easy synthesis. In the Indo-European philological tradition, as Benveniste exhaustively demonstrates, ‘strong’ is not a single concept but a cluster of overlapping roots — kratos, alkē, sthenos, sūra — each bearing a different phenomenological weight: physical force, endurance, magico-political authority, vitality as swelling. The I Ching commentarial tradition, represented across Wilhelm, Wang Bi, Liu I-ming, and Huang, treats ‘strong’ (yang, firm lines) as a structural principle in constant dialectical relation with yielding weakness, its value entirely contextual: a strong line in the wrong position is inauspicious, while the paradox of the Ch’ien hexagram — that ‘true strength’ is hidden and concentrated rather than displayed — challenges any naïve equation of strength with dominance. Homer, as read by Snell, Sullivan, and the Homeric Dictionary, distributes strength across multiple psychic organs (thymos, psyche, menos) that receive their potency from divine intervention rather than autonomous will. Benveniste’s etymological archaeology further reveals that ‘strength’ in the Indo-European horizon consistently derives from notions of swelling, hardening, and sovereign authority — making it a fundamentally political and cosmological category rather than merely a physical one. The tension between visible, externalized power and inward, concealed force constitutes the central hermeneutic challenge this term poses.
true strength is that strength which, mobile as it is hidden, concentrates on the work without being outwardly visible.
Wilhelm’s I Ching commentary articulates a paradoxical definition of genuine strength as inward, hidden creative activity that refuses outward display — the antithesis of dominant power.
, The I Ching or Book of Changes, 1950thesis
true strength is that strength which, mobile as it is hidden, concentrates on the work without being outwardly visible.
Baynes and Wilhelm’s translation reproduces the same pivotal formulation, identifying true strength with concealed, mobile concentration rather than visible authority.
, The I Ching or Book of Changes, 1950thesis
Both in Indo-Iranian and in Greek there is an evolution of sense from ‘swelling’ to ‘strength’ and ‘prosperity.’ Thus ‘strength,’ defined by the adjective
Benveniste establishes that the Indo-European semantic root of ‘strength’ is biological swelling and growth, making it etymologically inseparable from vitality, sovereignty, and prosperity.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973thesis
an adjective meaning ‘hard’ represented by Gr. kratús, etc., and Got. hardus; (2) a substantive denoting ‘power,’ ‘superiority’ which is represented by I-Ir. kratu- and by the Greek krátos.
Benveniste distinguishes two originally separate Indo-European roots that converge in Greek — one meaning physical hardness, the other denoting sovereign power — producing the multivalence of ‘strong’ in the Western tradition.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973thesis
‘You are very kartерós, a goddess gave you birth’ says Nestor to Achilles (Il. 1, 280), that is to say, ‘you will be superior to other men (in strength or in valor)’
Benveniste demonstrates through Homeric usage that kartерós denotes a relational superiority over other men rather than an intrinsic physical quality, linking strength to divine origin and social hierarchy.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973supporting
It is some kind of ‘force’ to be sure, but not physical force, the word for which is sthénos. To understand its nature we must take note of the utterance itself
Benveniste carefully differentiates alkē from sthenos, arguing that true Homeric ‘strength’ in the political-martial sense is a moral-volitional perseverance rather than brute physicality.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973supporting
whereas the other Greeks ‘soften’ (hapalúnousi) the feet of their children by giving them shoes, the Spartans ‘harden’ (kratúnousi) the feet of their own children by making them walk barefoot
Benveniste illustrates through Xenophon’s testimony how kratúnein (‘to harden’) operates as a physical and cultural discipline, grounding the political concept of strength in somatic practice.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973supporting
physical strength, the flower of youth, which is krátos. We may conclude that in this logical formula ‘the x which is krátos,’ in which x stands for different things, the predicate ‘which is…’ does not imply identity but the necessary condition.
Benveniste argues that krátos names a relational condition of superiority whose foundations vary by circumstance — age, valor, divine favor — rather than a fixed essence.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973supporting
Apollo heard his prayer, soothed his pain, and ‘cast strength in his thymos’. As in many other passages in which Homer refers to the intervention of a god, the event has nothing supernatural, or unnatural, about it.
Snell demonstrates that in Homeric psychology strength is not self-generated but divinely infused into the thymos, making individual power ontologically dependent on divine action.
, The discovery of the mind; the Greek origins of European, 1953supporting
the holding together of a strong, i.e., an incorrect line in the fourth place with a yielding ruler is generally unfavorable… it is usually a humble ruler (a weak line in the fifth place) who reveres a strong sage (a strong line above)
Wilhelm’s structural analysis of hexagram lines reveals that the auspiciousness of ‘strong’ is entirely positional — strength in the wrong place is harmful, while strength in service to wisdom is ‘naturally very favorable.’
, The I Ching or Book of Changes, 1950supporting
the holding together of a strong, i.e., an incorrect line in the fourth place with a yielding ruler is generally unfavorable
Wilhelm’s commentary establishes that ‘strong’ in the I Ching system is a relational rather than absolute value, its fortune dependent entirely on positional correctness within the hexagram structure.
, The I Ching or Book of Changes, 1950supporting
Those with strength of mind and robust energy, who are plain and sincere in treading the Path, are able to tread it with confidence in their steps.
Liu I-ming’s Taoist commentary internalizes ‘strong’ as a quality of mind and energy directed toward the Path, linking robust vitality to sincerity and purposeful spiritual advance.
, The Taoist I Ching, 1986supporting
When firm strength is in proper balance and correct orientation, the path is completed and one is full of virtue; before there was no one who was the same, but afterward there will surely be those who will emulate.
Liu I-ming identifies firm strength as transformative only when joined with correct balance and orientation, making virtue and community the fruit of properly directed strength.
, The Taoist I Ching, 1986supporting
the ‘anger’ of Achilles ‘cast many strong (iphthimos) psychai of heroes into Hades’. These psychai, present in the living, are clearly destined to become shades of the dead.
Sullivan’s reading of Homer shows that ‘strong’ (iphthimos) qualifies the psyche itself in the living body, establishing that vitality and strength are attributes of the soul prior to death.
, Psychological and Ethical Ideas What Early Greeks Say, 1995supporting
The yang element at the fourth place is firm and strong. It is close to the yang element at the fifth place, which is also firm and strong… A strong person following a strong leader should be extremely cautious.
Huang’s commentary treats the coincidence of two strong yang elements as a situation demanding heightened caution, illustrating the I Ching principle that strength meeting strength requires virtue and transparency.
, The Complete I Ching: The Definitive Translation, 1998supporting
Krátos, Kártos, toe: superior strength, might, power, then mastery, victory… Kreísswn, ov: stronger, superior in Strength or might, better
The Homeric Dictionary lexical entry documents the semantic field of krátos as encompassing superior strength, might, mastery, and victory — a cluster confirming Benveniste’s structural analysis.
, Homeric Dictionaryaside
kúdos does not depend on men but is the exclusive possession of the gods and forms part of the apanage of these gods. It is a magic power the possession of which confers superiority in certain circumstances, often in battle
Benveniste’s analysis of kúdos as divine magical strength bestowed situationally reveals a distinct Indo-European category of strength as sacred charisma rather than innate human capacity.
, Indo European Language and Society, 1973aside