Iliad through Book 6

[Everyman]

The battle continues, back and forth, Greeks advancing and Trojans retreating, then Trojans advancing and Greeks retreating. Seems to me very much the way the battle would have gone.

The episode of Glaukos and Diomedes is one of the most famous and, to me, interesting episodes in the Iliad. Approaching an enemy he is about to fight, Diomedes asks his name! In ten years of war he has probably seen, and knows the names of, many of the pre-eminent Trojan warriors, but here’s a new face, and he wants to know who this person is before he kills him. So we get this wonderful vignette about the history (legend?) of Bellerophontes, after which Diomedes realizes that there is a past host-guest relationship between their families and they agree not to fight. They even exchange armor, which is greatly to Diomede’s profit (his bronze for Glaukos’s gold; some commentators have suggested that Zeus must have addled Glaukos’s sense temporarily to get him to agree to the exchange).

And in this book we also get another very famous moment in the Iliad, the meeting and parting of Hector and Andromache and their infant son. We will certainly want to discuss this touching moment, and why Homer gives perhaps the most poignant and tender moment of the poem to the Trojans. It is a stark reminder that while the Greeks are fighting for glory and plunder, this is home for the Trojans, and it is not just their lives at issue; their families and loved ones are at risk, perhaps of a fate even worse than death.

[Silver]

I have been rather enjoying Homer's portrayal of Hector, and I agree that his family scene is I think one of the best moments within Book 5. Though I myself do enjoy reading the battle scenes. I acutally love the way battles were fought prior to gunpowder. I am something of an enthusiastic for ancient weaponry.

But not to stray from the point, for some reason I have always felt partial towards Hector, and even though the Greeks were the wronged party, and I do not agree with the actions of Pairs, I have always been inclined to "root" for Troy (yes knowing what the ultimate outcome is destined to be).

Part of this is becasue of Hector, whom I tend to prefer over the Greek heroes, for while I enjoy thier stories, I have to admit often times I don't like the heroes themselves particuarly well.

And also I think that it is in some ways easier to be sympathetic towards the ones whom I defending thier homelands, opposed to the invading force. Even if the Greeks were indeed provoked and have good reason for starting the war.

[Laurel]

Let's admit it, girls: Hector is a hunk.

[toria (vikz writes)]

Laurele wrote: "Let's emit it, girls: Hector is a hunk."

I second that. I think that this book is one of the most enjoyable books, so far. If you were to make this into a film, who would you get to play Hector?

[Bill]

Yes, and Helen of Troy is quite the babe. :-)

[Silver]

Amanda wrote: "Hector is ESPECIALLY hunky when compared to his brother. Even HELEN gets a bit "seriously, dude, go spear some Greeks."

I'm enjoying the family drama within the pantheon more than the war scenes (..."

Hahah! I always do enjoy the scenes when Hector goes out to fight. A part of me always starts cheering from him, like go Hector, kick some Greek arse.

[Silver]

Everyman wrote: They even exchange armor, which is greatly to Diomede’s profit (his bronze for Glaukos’s gold; some commentators have suggested that Zeus must have addled Glaukos’s sense temporarily to get him to agree to the exchange)"

Though practically speaking, I do not think gold is going to stop very many spears. If I am fighting a war, I would take the bronze armor myself.

[Everyman]

Silver wrote: "I have been rather enjoying Homer's portrayal of Hector, and I agree that his family scene is I think one of the best moments within Book 5. Though I myself do enjoy reading the battle scenes. I ac..."

I also have a sneaking affection for Troy. But I think Homer has a problem here. The Greeks are just camped out without their wives and families, with the only softening influence of the female gender being slave women. I think it's a real challenge to present such people as whole, complete people with lives worth admiring. Whereas the Trojans are there in their city, are fawned over by the goddess of love, have the leisure but also the stress of watching their sons and husbands and fathers go out on the plain and risk their lives defending their homes. There's a very different dynamic, and it's all to the benefit of the Trojans.

I would love to have a scene with Achilles and his wife and infant child, see his softer side, but that's not to be.

[Everyman]

Amanda wrote: "I LOVED Ares' temper tantrum to Zeus, who basically told him to suck it up. "

Yes, that was great. You're right, the interactions of the gods are every bit as fun to eavesdrop on as those of the humans. And, as a teaser, not a spoiler, there's more to come that's even more fun than that!

[Everyman]

I was struck last night as I read along by the vast difference between the civilian/fighter relationship in Homer's day and ours, particularly for those of us in relatively save Western countries. The idea of standing in a tall building and watching your husband or brother or son go out and watching him in hand-to-hand combat to the death is almost appalling to think of.

On the other hand, except for the death and the horrible consequences, which I agree is quite an exception, is it all that much different from going out watching your city's football team pummel another city's football team?

[Silver]

Everyman wrote: "Silver wrote: "I have been rather enjoying Homer's portrayal of Hector, and I agree that his family scene is I think one of the best moments within Book 5. Though I myself do enjoy reading the batt..."

To a certain extent that is true. We are given a much more humanizing portrait of the Trojan's than of the Greeks. But speaking personally, some of my opinions have to do with other stories relating to them which I am familiar with revolving around them particularly Agamemnon and Odysseus, I have just never particularly liked either them. Though I have found the earlier portrayal's of Odysseus within this story more favorable than I found him to be in The Odyssey. I am somewhat neutral on Achilles, there are some things about him which I like, but others I am not so certain about.

[Thomas]

Everyman wrote: "The idea of standing in a tall building and watching your husband or brother or son go out and watching him in hand-to-hand combat to the death is almost appalling to think of.
..."

Your comment reminds me of the Battle of First Manassas, when it was thought the Civil War would be over with in a day, or a few weeks at most. Citizens went with their picnic baskets to watch the fight, as if it were a sporting event. By the end of the battle the Union soldiers had been routed and their retreat back to Washington was impeded by all of the citizens who were also running back, clogging up the roads with their horses and carriages.

Admittedly it's not an entirely apt comparison, but the "spectacle" of battle has been with us a very long time.

[Bill]

Thomas,

And for a very long time public executions where a great way to spend some time. Let's go see the hanging! Before that there were gladiatorial fights in the arena.

I don't know whether is was the equivalent of a date movie though.

[Thomas]

Bill wrote: "Thomas,

And for a very long time public executions where a great way to spend some time. Let's go see the hanging! Before that there were gladiatorial fights in the arena.

I don't know whether i..."

Precisely my point. I guess the question is... why?

[Silver]

Thomas wrote: "Bill wrote: Precisely my point. I guess the question is... why?

It is a way to vicariously act out our own aggressions. For people who could not fight, or were not inclined to do so, can watch the war, or the fights in the Colosseum as a way to live in that moment from a safe distance, to play out their own fantasy, release there own anger by rooting for the death and destruction of others. It is similar with sports today. It taps into a primal need within us. The fact that at root we really just animals, and those needs, the needs to assert our dominance, thump our chests, and physically dominate still lies within us in one form of another. There is a certain among of exhilaration in violence, and in having the power of life and death over another.

[Thomas]

Silver wrote: "It is a way to vicariously act out our own aggressions. For people who could not fight, or were not inclined to do so, can watch the war, or the fights in the Colosseum as a way to live in that moment from a safe distance, to play out their own fantasy, release there own anger by rooting for the death and destruction of others."

I think you're right, and it's one of the things that makes the scene between Diomedes and Glaucus so different. It's a reversal of sorts -- instead of the glorious fight that we expect, we get a recognition scene. The naming of individual soldiers (mentioned by Bill and Eman in another thread) has the effect of humanizing them. It's harder to dissociate or abstract oneself from the violence when the contestants have names and families. And in the Diomedes-Glaucus scene they discover a shared family history. That ends the fight.

Maybe one of the purposes of this chapter is to humanize the warriors and give them depth. They aren't merely anonymous actors playing a role for the vicarious enjoyment of the spectator (though in the larger scheme of the epic, as fictional characters, this may still be the case.) Diomedes and Hector are both seen in a different light at the end of this chapter.

[Bill]

Oh yes, no question about acting our aggressions. One of the key things about sports is that is that they become very boring (for most people most of the time, I think) if you have no one to root for. People look for a reason to root.

[Juliette]

Bill wrote: "People look for a reason to root..."

Yep, which is why fantasy football is so popular. We should have a fantasy Trojan/Greek battle based on a point system for kills and injuries while we read the book.

My first round pick is Achilles....

[Thomas]

Juliette wrote: "Bill wrote: "People look for a reason to root..."

My first round pick is Achilles....


Smart pick, but I hear that he's holding out for a contract extension...

[Juliette]

Juliette wrote: ...which is why fantasy football is so popular. We should have a fantasy Trojan/Greek battle based on a point system for kills and injuries whi..."

While I wrote this tongue in cheek, I wonder how many Gods are in this position, where they don't actually have sides between the Trojans or the Greeks, but are rooting for a particular person or persons on either or both sides.

[[deleted user]]

At 9 Everyman wrote: "I also have a sneaking affection for Troy. But I think Homer has a problem here. The Greeks are just camped out without their wives and families"

True. Personally, I favor Achilles, but I also have great sympathy for Hektor, defending his city and family. I think you made good points.

Then, too, we see the Trojans defending hearth and home...and it's easier to feel sympathy for someone defending the lives of their loved ones who are in danger in the here and now, as opposed to feeling sympathy for someone who is defending an abstract right that was violated 10 years previously.

Homer may have given a couple of hints that the word of the Trojans couldn't be trusted (therefore insisting on Priam sealing the oath; the breaking of the oath by Pandarus), but Hektor is so admirable. I even grudgingly admire him for defending the brother he despises, who brought this woe to Troy.

Yet...the Trojans aren't above rape themselves. Fagles 6.about 30:

"Bucolion, son himself to the lofty King Laomedon,
first of the line, though his mother bore the prince
in secrecy and shadow. Tending his flocks one day
Bucolion took the nymph in a strong surge of love
and beneath his force she bore him twin sons."

I don't know whether Homer himself is making a judgement ... perhaps such actions were standard and acceptable.

[[deleted user]]

I don't know why, but I appreciated the manner in which Homer wrote the deaths, sometimes first using very graphic, very factual descriptions...and then ending with a soft simile alluding to death:

"...the bronze point
stuck in Acamas' forehead pounding through the skull
and the dark came swirling down to shroud his eyes"
(Fages 6.about 12)

"drove beneath the earth"

[[deleted user]]

"shadows"

In early books, as well as in Book 6, there are frequent foreshadowings of coming death:

"his spear's long shadow looming" (Fagles 6.52)

"daring to face the flying shadow of my spear" (6.145)

"His spear's long shadow flew" (3.405)

Etc.

And as we know that the dead live in a land of shadows, shades, then it only makes sense that the shadow would be traveling so closely behind the spear.

[Lily]

Adelle wrote: "...I appreciated the manner in which Homer wrote the deaths..."

I agree. To me, the comparisons with darkness and black night and stripping life and shrouded eyes and... all have a certain dignity about them that respects death.

[[deleted user]]

??? At Fagles 6.about 72-73:

As Adrestus was able to move Menelaus to mercy, but not Agamemnon, I can understand that Menelaus was, in effect bronze, but his harder hearted brother was "the iron warrior"

But I don't understand "rough justice, fitting too"

Does anyone have a take on that? Why Agamemnon's hard-hearted, no-ransom, kill-the-babies, too, position was "fitting" justice?

[[deleted user]]

Homer manages to remind us of Achilles twice: He's not in the action, but Homer keeps him in our thoughts:

"Never once did we fear Achilles so,
captain of armies, born of a goddess too"
(Fagles 6.about 115)

"And Dionysus was terrified, he dove beneath the surf
where the sea-nymph Thetis pressed him to her breast"
(Fagles 6.about 157)

[[deleted user]]

Might a man's home reflect his personality?

Hektor "came to Priam's palace, that magnificent structure" (Fagles 6.288)

Hektor "approached the halls of Paris, sumptuous halls
he built himself with the finest masons of the day"
(Fagles 6.368)

But Hektor himself...
Hektor "quickly reached his sturdy, well-built house" (Fagles 6.440).

That is Hektor, isn't it? sturdy, well-built. an honest home serving it's purpose...not putting on any airs

[[deleted user]]

Fagles 6.570:

"Zeus, all you immortals! Grant this boy, my son,
may he be like me, first in glory among the Trojans,
strong and brave like me, and rule all Troy in power
and one day let them say, 'He is a better man than his father!--"

And that speach makes me admire Hektor.

Nestor is constantly reminding the Achaeans that they are not and never will be as good as their fathers and their fathers' fathers,

Zeus, etc., arrange for Thetis to marry Peleus so that her son won't be stronger than themselves,

but Hektor, Hektor prays, "let them say, 'He is a better man than his father!'"

Just have to love that.

[[deleted user]]

What a lovely, beautiful line, Fagles 6.590:

"And his loving wife went home, turning, glancing
back again and again and weeping live warm tears."

Glancing back at what was worthy.

"live warm" and I immediately thought "cold and dead"

[[deleted user]]

Just thoughts...mere supposition...

Fagles 6.about 394:

Paris speaks:

"Ah Hector, you criticize me fairly, yes,
nothing unfair, beyond what I deserve. And so
I will try to tell you something. Please bear with me,
hear me out"

I suddenly start to rethink Paris.
Is it possible, I wonder, that for most of his life, even prior to Helen, that Hektor had been unwilling to listen to Paris? Priam had 50 sons. Might Hektor have been the favorite son of the favorite wife? Might Paris wanted Priam to look on him with equal favor? Might Paris wanted to have caught up with or overtake Hektor in esteem.

When I finished Book 6, I was wondering whether Paris might not have acquired Helen and her treasure in an effort to make Priam think more highly of him. And maybe Priam did. And with Priam thinking better of Paris, and with the treasure that Paris brought back, Paris, to "show" everyone his new stature, Paris--literally---had stature added to his rooms:

"They'd raised his sleeping chamber, house and court
adjoining Priam's and Hector's aloft the city heights"
(Fagles 6.about 370)

3, you know, is a number with significance, and 3 times Homer speaks of Paris overtaking Hektor.

Paris: "So come, wait while I get this war-gear on,
or you go on ahead and I will follow--
I think I can overtake you" (Fagles 6.403-5).


Hektor: "And let him hurry himself along as well,
so he can overtake me (Fagles 6.433-4).

Regarding Paris: "Quickly he overtook his brother, noble Hector" (Fagles 6.613)

Is it possible that Paris DID overtake Hektor in the eyes of Priam? The raised living quarters? The fondness Priam shows towards Paris's wife, Helen? Paris's glittering armor? The hatred Hektor holds for Paris? Might it be because Paris displaced him in the eyes of his father? At least until the Achaeans came to the shores of Troy?

And there is sarcasm is Paris's remark to Hektor (Fagles 6.616-19):

"Magnificent Paris spoke first: 'Dear brother,
look at me, holding you back in all your speed--
dragging my feet, coming to you so late,
and you told me to be quick!'"

There had been no speed in Hektor. He had lingered with his wife and child. So why did Paris speak to Hektor of "holding you back in all your speed"???

Hektor snaps at him. But says that anyone fair (and Hektor is fair) would have to admit that Paris is a good soldier.

I'm not certain where matters between Hektor and Paris stand at the close of Book 6.

[Lily]

I like your analysis of sibling relationships, Adelle. To me, it is part of the grandeur of The Iliad that such ambiguity about complex human (and human-god) relationships is embedded within it.

Probably my favorite lines in the entire epic are:

"So speaking glorious Hektor held out his arms to his baby,
who shrank back to his fair-girdled nurse's bosom
screaming, and frightened at the aspect of his own father,
terrified as he saw the bronze and crest with its horse-hair,
nodding dreadfully, as he thought, from the peak of the helmet.
Then his beloved father laughed out, and his honoured mother,
and at once glorious Hektor lifted from his head the helmet
and laid it in all its shining upon the ground. ... taking
up his dear son he tossed him about in his arms, and kissed him,...."

Lattimore, 6.466-473

"...Hektor held out his arms
to take his baby. But the child squirmed round
on the nurse's bosom and began to wail,
terrified by his father's great war helm--
the flashing bronze, the crest with horsehair plume
tossed like a living thing at every nod.
His father began laughing, and his mother
laughed as well. Then from his handsome head
Hektor lifted off his helm and bent
to place it, bright with sunlight, on the ground.
When he had kissed his child and swung him high
to dandle him, he said this prayer:..."

Fitzgerald, 3.541-552

"In the same breath, shining Hector reached down
for his son--but the boy recoiled
cringing against his nurse's full breast,
screaming out at the sight of his own father,
terrified by the flashing bronze, the horsehair crest,
the great ridge of the helmet nodding, bristling terror--
so it struck his eyes. And his loving father laughed,
his mother laughed as well, and glorious Hector,
quickly lifting the helmet from his head,
set it down on the ground, fiery in the sunlight,
and raising his son he kissed him, tossed him in his arms..."

Fagles, 6.556-565

Thus having spoke, the illustrious chief of Troy
Stretch’d his fond arms to clasp the lovely boy.
The babe clung crying to his nurse’s breast,
Scared at the dazzling helm, and nodding crest.
With secret pleasure each fond parent smiled,
And Hector hasted to relieve his child,
The glittering terrors from his brows unbound,
And placed the beaming helmet on the ground;
Then kiss’d the child, and, lifting high in air,
Thus to the gods preferr’d a father’s prayer:

Pope

Note how Homer gives the listener the perspective of a small child.

And among the most double-edged of quotations:

No, no,
let the earth come piling over my dead body
before I hear your cries, I hear you dragged away"

Fagles 6.553-555

It is almost as if Hector foresees his own fate. Even as one of the bravest of Trojan leaders, he has a premonition of what will happen to his wife and child and, for all his courage, bravery and sense of honor, would rather be dead than witness that day.

[[deleted user]]

Excellent quotes. Rather amazing, or so it seems to me, that in the middle of this great epic filled with the clash of shields, the cries and screams of war, there is this touching scene.

A husband and wife and the product of their love.... Laughing.

Maybe it is meant to touch on the question What do men fight for?

That fighting for time is important. But that fighting to protect one's people is ALMOST as important. Was Menelaus fighting, in part, to keep HIS family?

Also, from the quotes you posted, if we read between the lines, we might come to the conclusion that domestic life cannot florish in war: the baby draws back until the helmet is removed...and THEN there is laughter.

[[deleted user]]

At 25 Lily wrote: "To me, the comparisons with darkness and black night and stripping life and shrouded eyes and... all have a certain dignity about them that respects death..."

I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but yes, that's exactly what is being done. Similar to when Achilles gives the warriors he kills a proper, respectful ceremony, Homer is giving the deaths a proper respectfulness.

Thank you for articulating that.

[Erika]

This was a great chapter, for all of the reasons that have already been well articulated. I am fascinated by Diomedes (in both Book 5 & 6). Suddenly the fiery, death-defying, killing machine, Diomedes, exhibits respect and humanity when he faces Glaukos on the battlefield. I wondered about the importance of the guest/host (xenia? or philoxenia?) relationship. Obviously, the whole war was started by Paris' violation of the guest/host relationship. So it makes me think that the Diomedes/Glaukos encounter is more than an interesting anecdote. I thought the juxtaposition of the Glaukos/Diomedes encounter and the confrontation between Adrestos/Agamemnon (& Menelaos) was interesting as well. When and why is it appropriate to NOT kill your enemy. Would the Greeks have thought Agamemnon was brutal or cruel for killing Adrestos after he begged for his life and offered his family fortune in return for his life, or not? Does honor enter into it? How did Greeks regard the concept of honor? Hector seems very honorable to me.

I'm with Laurele: Hector's a hunk. :)

[Thomas]

Erika wrote: "This was a great chapter, for all of the reasons that have already been well articulated. I am fascinated by Diomedes (in both Book 5 & 6). Suddenly the fiery, death-defying, killing machine, Diome..."

This really is an amazing scene. It reminds us that the Greeks and the Trojans are not enemies by nature, and that they have been friends before. This, along with Hector's disgust with his brother Paris, puts the meaning of the war in a different light. Is all the death and misery really necessary?

What is so glorious about killing the enemy who was once your friend (or the son of your father's friend)? There is an element of self-preservation for the Trojans, but it seems more a burdensome necessity than a glorious undertaking.

In any case, I think the Greeks appear less honorable for their pursuit of "honor" in this book. Agamemnon's lack of mercy is striking, and as is Nestor's call to the Greeks keep fighting because they are stopping to plunder the enemy corpses. Does Homer mean for us to question the nature of honor here?

[[deleted user]]

Regarding Nestor. Musings.

You know, I had initially viewed Nestor as a character along the lines of Polonius in Hamlet...a bit pompous, going on and on about how much better men were in his day...how great he himself had been...

LOL...maybe he HAD been quite exceptional. After all, he is older than everyone else, still alive and kicking and taking part in a military action. And...modesty was not, I read, considered a virtue. If you had bragging rights you were expected to brag.

I was thinking last night that Nestor with his stories and admonitions was very probably providing a positive in the lives of the Greeks there on the Troad.

'Cause there wouldn't have been any written records of role models; the gods certainly don't make good role models.

Thousands of men bivouac together with only a few structural rules shared (because the men were there under their own various leaders)... How does one go about encouraging the men to behave in [what was then] a civilized way? Upholding the values of society? How would one motivate the men to go beyond what is easy and comfortable? To "Be all you can be?"

There's that passage in one of the earlier Books: "Be men! "

And the (enhanced) stories of their fathers and fathers' fathers would provide examples the men could aspire to.

[Erika]

I wonder if anyone is enemies by nature? This scene brings to mind the Christmas Truce of 1914.

I'm not sure that Homer intended us to question the nature of honor, only because I don't know enough about the context of honor in his society. But for the modern reader it is hard to avoid thinking about it, especially in this chapter.

[Thomas]

Adelle wrote: "Regarding Nestor. Musings.

You know, I had initially viewed Nestor as a character along the lines of Polonius in Hamlet...a bit pompous, going on and on about how much better men were in his day...."

Nestor seems to pick up the slack left by Agamemnon's weak leadership. He has the wisdom and experience that the Atreids lack -- where Ag creates strife and division, Nestor is respected by all and can unite the forces when they need it most.

[Lily]

In our age with its short lifespan of much of knowledge, I think it is easy to lose a sense of the value of wisdom that can come with a lifetime of experience to some individuals, which appears to have been true of Nestor. I have mentioned before a ritual in which I once participated in which we formed a winding and unwinding spiral of about one hundred women between ages 18 and 90. That simple exercise has always helped remind me of the roles of age in the journey we all take. And, as Polonius and Nestor remind us, the paths taken can be very individual. (Thanks, Adelle, for bringing the comparison to our attention.)

[Silver]

Erika wrote: "I wonder if anyone is enemies by nature? This scene brings to mind the Christmas Truce of 1914.

I'm not sure that Homer intended us to question the nature of honor, only because I don't know enou..."

I am not certain if it is natural for particular individuals to be enemies with each other, but I think it is a natural instinct for man to have some kind of adversary/conflict. The animal wold is rife with struggles, conflicts, fighting in the name of survival. In prior primitive times, nature itself, the elements, other animals were set against man and every day was a struggle to survive and live, combating the land itself.

As man began to gain more control over the natural world, and better able to fend themselves agasint it, they began creating conflicts among each other. I think it is natural for man to need some kind of trial or test in life, something to prove his own manhood, his existence. He needs to assert his dominance and power, and feel he has overcome something.

I think in creating and adversarial relationship with others, in creating enemies, thee does come a certain amount of satisfaction. I think one can define themselves more though thier adversaries than through thier friends and allies.

[Aparajita]

The idea of sibling rivalry is certainly interesting; though I don't know if he retained Priam's favour by plunging the whole country into war- then again, maybe Priam did look upon him with favour, because he hasn't told Paris as yet to return Helen, apologise etc.
Agamemnon is not SUPPOSED to be likeable character if you consider his back story:)at least to modern sensibilities, and he comes from particularly unstable stock (taking the myths about the house of Atreus and the Oresteia into consideration) Menelaus seems slightly more placable, and probably therefore doesn't come through as such a great hero but more of a figurehead( he wasn't allowed to fight Hector, not just because he was their leader but because there were better warriors) probably didn't fit in with the Greek conception of honour. The Greeks as a whole seem brutal and bent on killing, I suppose physical courage defined honour.
I get slightly bored by the full on descriptions of the war scenes, so the domestic scenes of both the mortals and the immortals provide a lot of relief. I think Homer, KNOWING the Trojans were going to lose, probably brings in scenes of poignancy (and makes Hector a much more attractive character by presenting his soft domestic side than the spoilt Achilles sulking because he couldn't get a particular girl)It's very unbiased. The Greeks on the other hand don't seem to have much humanity, apart from a few scattered scenes.(that's why the scene between Glaucus and Diomedes was a surprise, but then, I guess it was all part of some strict social code) They don't really talk about the families they have left behind, and Menelaus seems to be more motivated by pride rather than any love for Helen. Wish I could read a book written from the POV of the women witnessing the war, Helen, Andromache, Cassandra and Hecuba; and what the three latter thought of the first.

[Silver]

Aparajita wrote: "The idea of sibling rivalry is certainly interesting; though I don't know if he retained Priam's favour by plunging the whole country into war- then again, maybe Priam did look upon him with favour..."

I think you bring up a good point. In considering the fact that Homer does already known the outcome, and the fact that Troy in the end falls, makes it far easier to write about Troy with a more sympathetic eye. To "vilify" the Trojans so to speak, after knowing that in the end they are brought to their knees, could be seen like kicking a dog when it is done. They have grievously lost the way that in itself should be suffering and punishment enough and so this does I think make one more inclined to view Troy with something more akin to tender sentimentality.

While on the other hand, knowing that the Greeks in the end come out victorious opens up the door to be much more critical of them. It is a lot easier to begin to find fault with the winners, than to be seen to further ground the losers into dust, which would just appear to be petty and vindictive.

[Everyman]

Silver wrote: "But speaking personally, some of my opinions have to do with other stories relating to them which I am familiar with revolving around them particularly Agamemnon and Odysseus, I have just never particularly liked either them."

When you know about his sacrifice of his daughter, Agamemnon is indeed very hard to like. Odysseus, on the other hand, I have soft spot for, probably in large part because I totally love Tennyson's poem Ulysses (Latin name for Odysseus).

http://www.portablepoetry.com/poems/a...

[Everyman]

Adelle wrote: "Excellent quotes. Rather amazing, or so it seems to me, that in the middle of this great epic filled with the clash of shields, the cries and screams of war, there is this touching scene. "

It is part of what makes the Iliad such a powerful poem. It merges the great and the small, the clash of armies and the kiss of a baby son or the retreat to the soft bed, the moments of courage and those of fear,... He is so magnificent at encompassing all the scope of human experiences.

[Everyman]

Lily wrote: "Adelle wrote: "...I appreciated the manner in which Homer wrote the deaths..."

I agree. To me, the comparisons with darkness and black night and stripping life and shrouded eyes and... all have a certain dignity about them that respects death."

Very nice point. Homer seems to honor every soldier even as he dies.

[Silver]

Everyman wrote: When you know about his sacrifice of his daughter, Agamemnon is indeed very hard to like. Odysseus, on the other hand, I have soft spot for, probably in large part because I totally love Tennyson's poem Ulysses (Latin name for Odysseus)"

I take issue with some of Odysseus' behavior in The Odyssey. Plus I think he comes across as being all around too arrogant. I know that is a common trait among many Greek heroes, but it is one of the things which I find irksome. Plus I do have a tendency to identify more with the monsters in mythology than the heroes. What can I say I have strange ideas so I do find a man eating cyclops more sympathetic than Odysseus.

[Everyman]

Silver wrote: "Plus I do have a tendency to identify more with the monsters in mythology than the heroes."

LOL!! Maybe we'll get to read the Odyssey here someday, and we can delve into your psyche!

[Silver]

Everyman wrote: "Silver wrote: "Plus I do have a tendency to identify more with the monsters in mythology than the heroes."

LOL!! Maybe we'll get to read the Odyssey here someday, and we can delve into your psyche!"

I would love the opportunity to reread that book. Though deviling into my psyche could prove frightening.

[Erika]

Silver wrote: "I am not certain if it is natural for particular individuals to be enemies with each other, but I think it is a natural instinct for man to have some kind of adversary/conflict. "

I agree that humans have a natural inclination toward growth and survival and that often does not come without conflict. I would also agree that dominance seems to be a primal trait of humans (over environment, other species, or each other). But I guess I was wondering if groups or individuals can be enemies by nature or if it's that people become enemies by circumstance. And are enemies ultimately created or constructed (as you hint at in your last statement) out of a given circumstance or set of circumstances?

Your last statement is provocative. I'm not sure I agree, but it's got me pondering. Originally, I was thinking Diomedes' truce with Glaukos (a family friend) shows a depth of character that we don't get in his fiery march against the enemy. But, perhaps I am mistaken about how do to categorize Glaukos. Friend, because of the strong host/guest relationship historically established? Or foe, as a member of the Trojan military force? (And, of course, Diomedes is not defining himself (to himself) through this encounter. Homer is using this incident to illustrate Diomedes character for the reader.)

[Silver]

Erika wrote: "Silver wrote: "I am not certain if it is natural for particular individuals to be enemies with each other, but I think it is a natural instinct for man to have some kind of adversary/conflict. "

I..."

I am inclined to think that specific groups of people become enemies with each other through their circumstances, so I would not for instance say that the Greeks and Trojan's had a natural disposition to dislike each other but the stealing of Helen gave the Greeks a good excuse to have a war to fight. And if had not been Troy and Helen, it would eventually have been something and someone else.

In regards to the scene with Dimedes and Glaukos, I think that may serve for couple of different purposes. For one I think that among all this war, violence, brutality, it is a very humanizing episode. It also shows the way in which the individuals themselves truly are not enemies with each other, do not independently dislike each other but are caught up in this war, and made to fight each other because of circumstances, politics etc... and that in a different set of circumstances they could have genuinely been friends with each other. They do not in fact dislike each other as human beings but have been played against each other by the gods and other reasons. It also it serves to stress how strong and imperative the host/guest relationship was in Greeks, such that even in the middle of war they respect that to the point that they decline to fight each other because this bond which held almost as something sacred and to disrespect the host/guest relationship is looked upon as a grave offence.