Iliad through Book 24

[Everyman]

Time for the final book and the wrap-up of the Iliad.

[Everyman]

At 156, Zeus says that Priam will be safe with Achilles, because

"he is neither sinful, thoughtless, nor mad,
and will honor his duty to spare a suppliant."

But back in Book 21 at about 75 he didn't spare Lycaon, who begged

"By your knees, Achilles,
I beg you to respect me as a suppliant.
Have pity on me. I claim that sacred right,
my lord, because it was at your table
I first ate Demeter’s grain the very day
you seized me in that well-built orchard."

Achilles didn't honor the supplication, but killed him brutally, and went further, flinging him into the river and saying

“Lie there, among the fish.
They’ll lick blood from your wound with no respect.
Your mother won’t set you on your funeral bed,
lamenting over you. "

It led me to think about supplication and to wonder whether sparing a supplicant was on the same level as the host-guest relationship in terms of social importance. I need to do some looking into that, but does anybody have knowledge on this?

[Juliette]

I don't know anything about it, but he's already spared Lycaon in the past. The way I saw it was 'Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me'. How many times do you spare someone only to find his ransome paid and you come upon him in battle again? Maybe there is a rule on how many times you can be a supplicant to the same person.

[[deleted user]]

Juliette wrote: "I don't know anything about it, but he's already spared Lycaon in the past. The way I saw it was 'Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me'. How many times do you spare someone only t..."

Hey! I just reading about this this morning!

Read page 57 and 58.

http://books.google.com/books?id=h_19...Sanctified Violence in Homeric Society: Oath-Making Rituals in the Iliad

[Everyman]

Patrice wrote: "What a finale! "

Indeed.

And isn't it fascinating how it ends, almost abruptly,

"Such was the burial of Hector, breaker of horses."

Why end with Hector? I find that fascinating.

[[deleted user]]

Patrice, I can scarce beileve you're going to do that. (because you seemed firm in your position) But, cool. Let me know what you think when you finish. I hope to re-read book 24 tomorrow, and Monday, hope to write up thoughts on what I thought about Achilles (regarding fierce fighting after funeral, am leaning more and more toward Juliette---that there is anger involved....still mulling over "pride") and Hector.

[Thomas]

Everyman wrote: "At 156, Zeus says that Priam will be safe with Achilles, because

"he is neither sinful, thoughtless, nor mad,
and will honor his duty to spare a suppliant."

But back in Book 21 at about 75 he di..."

I think the only reason Achilles gives up Hector's body is that Zeus demands it, and even then he threatens Priam that he is not above breaking his promise:

Take care that you do not cross me again,
old man, or else I will end your long life
despite Zeus's command and all your prayers. 24.567

But Priam resumes the role of supplicant and Achilles obeys the will of Zeus.

I've been wondering why the Iliad ends this way, and it occurred to me that maybe it's meant to contrast with the way it starts: it begins with Agamemnon defying the will of Apollo, which results in the strife between Agamemnon and Achilles. It ends with Achilles obeying the command of Zeus, which results in an act of mercy. I like the contrast, and the sense of closure that it creates, despite the fact that we know the story isn't over yet.

[Laurel]

I like that, Thomas.

[Everyman]

Laurele wrote: "I like that, Thomas."

I'm tempted to like it too, but I'm not sure the parallel is that exact. Thomas says "it begins with Agamemnon defying the will of Apollo," but actually it begins with Agamemnon denying the request of Apollo's priest, which is a somewhat different thing.

I am inclined to think that it ends as it does because it shows Achilles beginning, at least, to return to the proper behavior of a Greek warrior. The journey is certainly not complete, and may never be, but Achilles at least takes the first step away from his earlier apparently total rejection of all that his life to that point had stood for.

[Thomas]

Patrice wrote: "Line 425

"My child surely it is good to give the immortals their
due gifts; because my own son, if ever I had one, never forgot in his halls the gods who live on Olympos. Therefore they remembered him even in death's stage."

Could this be the moral of the story? "

I think it probably is, but not only to give the immortals their due gifts, but to give mortals their due as well. Isn't it nice that the last image we have of Achilles, after all his rage, is of him going to sleep next to his "due gift"?

[Thomas]

Patrice wrote: "But it's really more than that, isn't it? But it's a start! ;-) "

Socrates had a couple of quibbles with Homer, if memory serves. ;) But, yes, it's a start. And what a start!

[[deleted user]]

Patrice wrote: "I seemed firm in my position? I am never firm in any position! If i were I wouldn't need the discussion.
If nothing else I want to understand why people think differently than I do."

;)

[[deleted user]]

@ 6 Patrice wrote: "I can't read/listen to this last book without getting choked up. ."


I re-read the Book this afternoon, thinking of what you wrote here. And it was more heart-touching on the 2nd read through. Thank you.

[[deleted user]]

"The games were over now. The gathered armies scattered,
each man to his fast ship, and fighters turned their minds
to thoughts of food and the sweet warm grip of sleep" (Fagles 24.1)

I thought those opening lines set the emotional feel of the last chapter. I probably feel that way, at least in part, because I feel that the beauty, the part of Achilles which is to be admired, is his having the courage and the conjones to leave the group, to make a stand for what he thought was right...to become an individual.

So for me, the last Book is about individuals. Achilles. An individual. Priam journeys to Achilles as an individual--not as a king.

And here are the once gathered armies...each man to his own ship. And as a metaphor for life, each of us must, in the end, battle alone.

And I liked, too, the affirmation of life. Every man there must know that on the morrow they will be fighting Troy, and that many who join the assault on Troy won't be coming back. And yet....here they are....thinking of food, thinking of sweet sleep... embracing life while they live.

And I suppose they should. If they die, that is their fate over which they have no control. And then, too, with death all around them....they would realize how precious life is.

[[deleted user]]

Here in Book 24 is the only reference to the Judgment of Paris. And my translation seems to say that is wasn't the aduction/seduction of Helen which caused the war. It went back way further. (LOL. It always does. And so little...nothing? could change the outcome after that event.)

"Hera, Poseidon...the girl with the blazing eyes [Athena].
The clung to their deathless hate of sacred Troy,
Priam and Priam's people, just as they had at first
when Paris in all his madness launched the war.
He offended Athena and Hera--both goddesses.

When they came to his shepherd's fold he favored Love
who dangled before his eyes the lust that loosed disaster" (Fagles 24.30)

[[deleted user]]

I found the lines starting about 50 to be quite intriquing.

Apollo says (and note, I don't necessarily believe Apollo's rant against Achilles...all those gods took sides)... Apollo says there is no shame in Achilles,

"shame that does great harm or drives men on to good."

And there does seem to some truth in those words---some of it only surface truth, I think. Somtimes, when a person is shamed, sometimes the shaming WILL do great harm. Especially great harm in someone who is shame-based. Because that person will ... absorb ... that shameful labeling of themselves... they will believe that just because the others told him he's shameful, that he must be. And if he thinks he is a shameful person, why would he strive to be better. He's already been told who is and he believed it, internalized, "I'm a crappy shameful person."

Yet Apollo's words say that shame sometimes drive men on to good. Meh... not so much, it seems to me. I'm kinda thinking that this is only a surface truth...and only "truth" as a control issue.

Sometimes when a person is shamed, and they don't want to be shamed anymore, they change their behavior. So they are "good" on the surface... their behavior is "good" in the eyes of the person doing the shaming, ie, the shamed person is now behaving they way the shamer (Apollo?) desired.

But inside of that shamed person must always remain a abjectness...that shamed person knows that ... in effect ... they are like a controled horse, or mule... they are doing the desired behavior... in order to avoid the whip, the shame... because that's the easier way... and they really know all the time that they aren't living a man.


And I absolutely ADORE Achilles on this count. "No shame in the man."
(See remarks still to be written and posted regarding Achilles in the tent with Priam.)

[[deleted user]]

Again regarding Achilles -- an individual:

Fagles 24.60:

Long. (view spoiler)[

Apollo: "But this Achilles--first he slaughters Hector
...
then he lashes him to his chariot, drags him round
his beloved comrade's tomb. But why, I ask you?
What good will it do him? What honor will he gain?"

Achilles. The only man with the capaility of choosing his own fate. (A model for the rest of us. We don't want to live in a pre-determined/fate-decreed world. We, took, want to have the ability to make our own decisions.)

But Apollo, as I read it, has only had experience with regular run-of-the-mill mortals. Mortals who have no control over their fates. And so he cannot understand Achilles. Apollo still views the world of men as one of trade/ of time-oriented behavior. Apollo still views men as basing their actions on what they will gain or on how other men will view them. Hence, "What good will it do him? What honor will he gain?"

But Achilles has choice in his life AND he knows he has choice. How is a man changed when he realizes that he can make a difference in his own life? And, eventually, he realizes that the choices he makes will make a difference in the lives of others as well?

Achilles has struggled with this, I think. Initially, he chose to go to Troy and fight for glory. But even as he was aware that he could choose, he was still playing by the rules of his time: he was fighting for the glory that others would give him; also, he accepted that the lives of others were determined by fate: paraphrasing here: "It was Patroclus's fate to die here."

Those two weeks in relative isolation in his tent and the trauma of losing Patroclus who he loved as himself has transformed Achilles.

First, even though he's not able to articulate it clearly, Achilles is breaking away from the other-oriented concept of time---he's no longer basing his actions, ie, fighting or not fighting, totally on what others think: The Embassy: Fight now or "your fame will flag, no longer the same honor." Achilles: "What do I need with such honor as that?"

Achilles, I think, a man with skills so far beyond those of other men, a man so unconditionaly loved by his mother...whose love was ALWAYS available to him whenever he needed it, this man, Achilles, was able to begin believing --WITHIN HIMSELF/ without affirmation from others--in his own worth. !!!

I have to love that. A man who can believe in his own worth. No debating on the battlefield: What will the others think if I don't fight. No asking himself or basing his choices on what the men and what the women with their long trailing gowns might think of him.

And Apollo, never having seen such a man, cannot understand him. "What good will it do him?" But Achilles is no longer looking for material payoff.

Second, I think eventually, though he has to struggle to reach this point, and a part of him has to "die," (Patroclus, who he loved as himself---and who firmly adhered to the concept of acting for others), Achilles eventually comes to see that HIS actions can affect the lives of others.

IF he is making his own choices, and by the end of the Iliad he is, and IF his choices are not fated, and by the end of the Iliad he doesn't believe they are---indeed, he is willing to go against Zeus if need be so strongly does he now see himself as an autonomous indvidual, then he comes to see that his actions affect the lives of others...

You know, since what Achilles does is NOT fated, then how his actions affect others is NOT fated.

What a weight! To have gone through one's life believing that when unpleasant things (like death even) happen to other people... it was because of their fate. And that you yourself bear no responsibility for it.

What a sorrowful, heavy burden to come to think/to realize that your own actions really do affect other people! And for all of this change in thinking to come about in about a month's time. The man who talks with Priam in Book 24 is not the man from Book 1.

And don't we all, as individuals carry this as well. Believing that the choices we make are "right"/ and at the same time recognizing that those choices are going to bring sorrow to those we love. But making those choices nonetheless...because we realize that we ARE individuals...we HAVE to live our own lives...We don't have the comfort as palming off responsibility to Fate.

(hide spoiler)]

[[deleted user]]

@ 28 Patrice wrote: The way i think of it, the shame works before the act to stop the shameful act. that's how it does good.

"Good." I agree with you that from a societal perspective it is "good" in that it brings about the behavior that society wants.

But I disagree in that... Long. (view spoiler)[

I don't believe it does any "good" for the individual. That's where these Greeks were stuck, it seems. They did what their society shamed them into doing/ or they didn't do what their society shamed them into not doing. They weren't asking themselves, "Is this the right thing to do?" So they weren't growing and becoming "better individuals."

I won't bring up the Nazis. I shall restrain myself there. But I'll bring up slavery pre-Civil War. The "good" action, according to the majority of the population and according to society's law, was to accept that southern states were within their rights to own slaves. Don't object. Go along with society has decreed to be the greater "good." Don't think for yourself. Don't ask yourself, Do I as an individual think this is the right thing/ the "good."

Shaming people into behaving "properly" IS good, at least in the short termk, for society. Then society runs more smoothly. For a societal point of view, Achilles "should" have gone along with what the rest told him was "good."


But social sanctions have always kept people in line and still do to a certain extent.
And i don't think that's bad.

"

Exactly. It keeps people in line. Like the Achaeans wanted to keep Achilles in line. And, that IS to a large degree the job of society. To say, hey, here are our rules, these are the actions that we deem to be "good," follow them.

But, remember, when the policeman (society)(the others) is the one who has to enforce societal norms---if people only behave "good" when someone is looking---then you are going to need an awful lot of policemen.

But when the individual has developed from within a sense of what is "right" or "wrong" and therefore can police himself, then society is better (it won't have to hire as many policemen, won't have to shame people into behaving) AND, more importantly, the individual is better....Because they become someone who weighs and considers their actions and asks whether they themselves believe what they are doing is "right" or "good" instead of peaking through the curtains to see if anyone is outside watching them.... and basing their behavior on whether there is anyone out there to see them and to shame them.

The ring of Gyges.

But...my thoughts. Yours, of course, may be different. And since I respect you as an individual, more power to you.

(Ha Ha. Write a post. Do half an hour of housework. Write a post. Housework. Repeat as needed. And, oh my, so much is needed.) (hide spoiler)]

[[deleted user]]

Nice paragraph at Fagles 24.65+ on the power of preferring one's own.

"But white-armed Hera flared at him in anger:"

yes...there's some merit in what you say
IF
you think that Achilles and Hector are equal.
But they/re not.

"Achilles sprang from a goddess [like me].
one I reared myself: [I have an close tie to this one]"

Zeus: "Now, Herea, don't fly into such a rage at fellow gods"

Connections. Does Achilles grieve so deeply over Patroclus because he "loves him as himself"? Can't get much closer than that.

I just thought this was a passage that reminded me of how much easier it is to "see" one's own interests, to "see" the side of my own people...of myself...

And I have to give a nod here to Achilles. He did speak up for the army when the men were dying of the plague even though he knew (as Calchus? the priest knew... as probably all the men there knew) that Agamemnon, would not take kindly to his authority being questioned.)

[[deleted user]]

Another comment on individuality.

This isn't my own thought--I read it somewhere or other the line that pointed out that Agamamnon asked for a woman OF EQUAL VALUE--but it lends support to my view of Achilles as an individual.

Agamemnon (Book 1) demands that if he returns Chrysis to her father that he [Agamemnon] be given another woman of equal value. Any woman of a certain value is interchangable with another woman of that certain value. But Achilles, his heart wants not a woman of a certain value, but rather he wants a certain woman, an individual.

Granted, Priam honors Hecuba...but Hecuba is also of worthy birth---more or less of his own class-- and she is the wife of the king. The other women who gave birth to his children don't have names.

And the scene with Hector and Andromache is touching. But she, too, is more or less a woman of his class. Like him.

But Achilles has managed to cross class lines in his love for Briseis, a slave woman. Was Patroclus correct when he told Briseis that Achilles would take her back his own land and marry her? Would Priam or Hector have considered marrying a slave woman they had captured?

[[deleted user]]

at 29 Patrice wrote: "The ending In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war fathers bury their sons.

..."

Yes, I think there IS that message.

But I don't think it is an anti-war epic.
Hope to return to this point at end.
Am jotting down the post numbers I hope to find time to return to.

[[deleted user]]

@ 32 Patrice wrote: "Maybe what you are pointing out is that the values of the society have to be good, whether it is guilt or shame that supports them.


.."

Mmmm....interesting. Have now added #32 to my list.

[[deleted user]]

I with you Patrice in thinking those are terrible shows. Personal story follows. (view spoiler)[

I think I told you once that the default channel on my television is Channel 2. What this means for me is that I can be watching Book TV ... loudly, because I'm trying to do housework at the same time.... and if the cable "burps" I'm suddenly listening to Channel 2... often Jerry Springer. (hide spoiler)]

[[deleted user]]

Rights.

Zeus do it.
Hera do it.
Even god-like Achilles do it.

Let's do it.
Let's establish some rights.

Fagles 24.80+:

Zeus says that while Hector lived "never once did my alter lack its share of victims...these are the gifts we claim--these are our rights."

Godlike Achilles, too, asserts that he has rights.
Agamemnon said that honor was due him [due Agamemnon][due to his position].
Achilles, in Fagles, uses the word "right(s)"
Rights due him as an individual.
Next thing you know mere mortal men will be thinking they have rights too.

We hold these rights to be self-evident.

[[deleted user]]

LOL...maybe the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

As posted earlier, the only person I ever seen talking back or questioning the gods has been Achilles. (No time to look up quotes.)


For some bizarre, unfathomable reason, Agamemnon did the opposite of the Zeus directives given in the dream told him to do. But he didn't question the command. Achilles has questioned.

Thetis, too. I've seen goddesses disobey...because they didn't like the way Zeus was doing things. But did they question?

Thetis, when Iris quickly delivers the summons from Zeus: "Why...what does the great god want with me?"

One doesn't break from the mores of one's culture simply by ignoring the rules and doing what one wishes to do for oneself. In that case, the rules still exist...and the rules are simply being disregarded ---usually on the sly. I realize that doesn't explain Agamemnon. His ordering his men the opposite of the dream?? I don't get it.

But to BREAK from the mores, one must question their validity. Achilles, I hold, came to question the validity of the rules. So here, too, I see flashes of Achilles becoming an individual.

[[deleted user]]

Trade.

Zeus trading with Thetis. (Does he still harbour some love for her?)

"I will grant Achillies glory
and so safeguard / your awe and love of me
for all the years to come."

[[deleted user]]

Does Zeus already have doubts concerning whether or not Achilles will obey him?

Zeus doesn't send a dream or Iris to Achilles with an order to relinquish the body of Hector. He sends the order to Thetis to deliver. Does he think Achilles might be more likely to obey/or, if not "obey" then at least relinquish the body because his mother asked... And in that way, might Zeus have hoped that Achilles wouldn't come to a complete break ? Is it that if Achilles does as his mother asks---because his mother asked... and if this action is the same action that Zeus "orders" ... then it would look on the surface that Achilles is "obeying" Zeus.... Even if Achilles is NOT obeying Zeus...but only acceding to the wishes of his mother.

(Think on Burke's argument to Parliment regarding the Stamp Act.)

Because look. Zeus doesn't seem certain that Achilles will "obey" him. Zeus says, "perhaps in fear of me he'll give him [Hector] back at once" (Fagles 24.140).

AND, note, he's not simply sending an order. Maybe he thinks an order alone won't be enough to get Achilles to comply. Zeus is also sending a message to Priam, "to go to Achaea's ships,
bearing gifts to Achilles, gifts to melt his rage."

[[deleted user]]

Individual. Since I'm on this kick.

Regarding Priam. "But let him go alone."

[[deleted user]]

I liked that Priam "asked" his wife for her opinion. Regarding going alone to retrieve Hector's body: "Tell me, what should I do? What do YOU think?"

He doesn't follow her advice--she tells him not to go, she tells him to not even consider this action ("Where have your senses gone?").


I don't know if Priam's mind was made up before he spoke with her or if he decided after speaking with her, "the old and noble answered firmly, 'I will go. My mind's made up.'"

Still, I really liked that he talked with his wife about such a decision.

[[deleted user]]

Mothers.

And then, too, Hecuba, she loves her son Hector. She doesn't see his faults. She says of Hector, "my son stood and fought for the men of Troy and their deep-breasted wives [that seems to have been true, and bless Hecuba for giving Hector praise]"

and then she adds, "with never a thought of flight or run for cover!" This she says, despite the fact that he ran from Achilles three times around the walls of Troy.

[[deleted user]]

Harsh words/ Priam regarding his sons.

This hurt me. The words that Priam spoke to his sons. Cruel. Cruel.

"So he lashed out at his sons,
cursing the sight of Helenus, Paris, noble Agathon...

'Get to your work! My vicious sons--my humiliations!"

Priam tells them he doesn't have any sons left, "not a single one is left, I tell you....

...Ares killed them all
and all he left me are these, these disgraces--liars,
dancers, heroes only at beating the dancing-rings..."
(Fagles 24. about 295+)

[[deleted user]]

Worldly treasures/ Achilles and Priam

Each has come to realize the negliable worth of treasures when compared to the lives of those they love.

Achilles, generously providing prizes at the funeral games of Patroclus. He had enjoyed winning prizes and sharing them with Patroclus. Patroclus is gone now, Achilles won't ever see his own father again and be able to care for him in his old age, and he knows that he himself will soon be dead. What value in such treasures?

Priam, gathering up the remaining gold and fine cloth of Troy to exchange for the body of his beloved son Hector. What value to Priam, now, is such treasure.

Both have come, too late, to treasure the people they love over the worldly items they previously held as important.

Oh! There is Hecuba. She cares. She cares about Priam!

"Here, quickly--pour a libation out to Father Zeus!
Pray for a safe return from all our mortal enemies"

And who knows? Maybe her plea helped save Priam's life. Priam had not made a sacrifice. But on the urging of his wife, "Dear woman, surely I won't resist your urging now. It's well to lift our hands and ask great Zeus for mercy."

And he prays that Achilles will receive him with kindness and mercy and Zeus heard that prayer.

[[deleted user]]

ISN'T it just too wonderful!

Some of the best, most rewarding books I've read are books I heard recommended on Book Tv.

;) outside of books recommended on Western Canon, eh?

[[deleted user]]

Death.

Patroclus is dead.
Hector is dead.
Achilles knows he himself will soon be dead.
Priam leaves Troy for Achilles' shelter "as if he went to his death" (Fagles 24.285ish).

How appropriate then, that Hermes serves as his guide.
Hermes, who of whose tasks is to guide souls to the Underworld. Hermes and Priam don't cross the River Styx on their journey, but they do cross a river. And "the two drove past the great tomb of Ilus," where "a sudden darkness had swept across the earth."

from wikipedia: Ilus (Ilos in Greek) is in Greek mythology the founder of the city called Ilios or Ilion (Latinized as Ilium) to which he gave his name. When the latter became the chief city of the Trojan people it was also often called Troy, the name by which it is best known today.

Perhaps foreshadowing the death of Troy?

Also, in googling around, I found Hermes called the god of boundaries, which is appropriate, since Achilles and Priam need to cross beyond ordinary boundaries [psychological] in order to speak to one another.

I also saw Hermes somewhere called the god of peace. Also appropriate.

[[deleted user]]

@ 7 Everyman wrote: "Patrice wrote: "What a finale! "

Indeed.

And isn't it fascinating how it ends, almost abruptly,

"Such was the burial of Hector, breaker of horses."

Why end with Hector? I find that fascinating."

I liked the ending myself. Very much. Long. (view spoiler)[

I thought that even though Hector wasn't the man Achilles was, for his times and culture he was a decent man and as I reader I did want to see him buried decently, properly honored and mourned by his people.

Achilles is too large to mourn properly. And Troy, we know, is going to be too sorrowful. Achilles, loving Patroclus as himself, has had, in effect, his own funeral, the grieving of the army increased in strength by Thetis, knowing that this is the honor ceremony for her much loved son.

Perhaps Achilles body was never recovered and properly mourned. We wouldn't want to know that. It would be too sad. Better to mourn him while we mourn Patroclus.



Also, as posted in Resources, the funeral of Hektor provides a symetry with the beginning of the Iliad. Very near the beginning of Book 1 were the verbal images of the bodies being burned. Here at the close, we also have an image of a funeral pyre. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust? A visual reminder that throughout life there is the constant of death?

I liked the ending on a couple of other levels, too.

There is the implication that even surrounded by death, life must go on. A few pages prior to the ending, there is Achilles, who knows that death is almost on him, yet has taken to heart his mother's advice...eat...love:

"And deep in his sturdy well-built lodge Achilles slept
with Briseis in all her beauty sleeping by his side" (Fagles 24.794)j.

And Homer returns Hector, too, to life through those closing words:

"And so the Trojans buried Hector breaker of horses."

There was a description of Hector in one of the beginning books of the Iliad to the effect that "Hector learned warfare," and I thought perhaps it had meant that Hector wasn't by nature a fighter, but that he knew he was needed and learned to become a great warrior for Troy.

Found it: "I've learned it [battle] all too well. To stand up bravely, /
always to fight in the front ranks of Trojan soldiers, /
winning my father great glory and glory for myself" (Fagles 6.525ish).

And look, Hector's fervent hope has been fulfilled:

Speaking to his wife, Andromache,
"let the earth come piling over my dead body
before I hear your cries, I hear you dragged away!"

Truly Hector was loved by the gods and they have answered his prayer. Hector no more wants to see the dishonor of Andromache than I want to see the death of Achilles. Homer has spared us both.


We know Hector was a pious man, never forgetting proper offerings to the gods. And he was, I think, a decent man at heart until the necessities of war forced him to the fore. Oft times, you'll remember, Hector has been referred to as man-killing Hector. Yet long before he was man-killing Hector he was Hector breaker of horses.

Homer has laid to rest the man killer, and the man he has returned to our memories is the pious, decent man.

(hide spoiler)]

[Juliette]

Adelle wrote: "Does Zeus already have doubts concerning whether or not Achilles will obey him?

Zeus doesn't send a dream or Iris to Achilles with an order to relinquish the body of Hector. He sends the order to Thetis to deliver...."

I saw this as a comfort that Zeus was sending to Achilles, not that he doubted he woule comply, but that it would be easier for Achilles to hear it from his mother than from Zeus. Who would you rather get an order from?

OR

Like Agamemnon (before Pat died, and Agamamnon tried to make peace by sending his friends), Zeus doesn't want to lower himself to Achilles level and talk to him (I kinda doubt it, but it's an interesting idea).

[[deleted user]]

@ 52 Juliette wrote: "I saw this as a comfort that Zeus was sending to Achilles..."

You know, I can see that that could be a valid view. I do think Zeus had doubts, but I can also see him sending the message thru Thetis as a comfort. Especially as Achilles was well loved by Zeus. And Zeus might very well want to make it easier for Achilles to release the body...so that Achilles wouldn't feel that he was having to obey orders; he could instead feel as though he were doing one last thing for his mother.

But, lol, it you are going to bring in the parallel with Agamemnon sending Achilles' friends (which I didn't spot; nice observation), then I would argue that Agamemnon didn't send them to comfort Achilles, but because Achilles might view them in a better light and agree because they were his friends.

[Everyman]

Thomas wrote: "Patrice wrote: "But it's really more than that, isn't it? But it's a start! ;-) "

Socrates had a couple of quibbles with Homer, if memory serves. ;) But, yes, it's a start. And what a start!"

There is a reason the Iliad has survived as the foundational work of Western literature.

[Everyman]

I like that Homer has Achilles ambivalent about whether Priam will get home safely or not. It avoids a "sicky-sweet" unrealistic ending of Achilles turning all mushy. That's not Achilles. I love the fact that he battles with himself between the dualities of continued wrath and a touch of kindness. Sometimes one seems to prevail, sometimes the other. Isn't that so very human?

[Everyman]

Patrice wrote: "When all is said and done, I have to see this as an anti-war poem. I don't mean in a flower power way. Just exposing the incredible pain and suffering of war.
It may be a necessary evil at times , it may have it's moments of glory and exhiliration, but as Herodotus says, all men have to hate it.
"

And yet, 2,500 years after Homer, we still haven't manged to get rid of it, and in fact have made it even more prevalent, even more brutal, even more destructive.

To the extent that the Iliad may have been intended as an anti-war poem, it has been a total failure.

Sigh.

[Everyman]

Adelle wrote: "Agamemnon (Book 1) demands that if he returns Chrysis to her father that he [Agamemnon] be given another woman of equal value. Any woman of a certain value is interchangable with another woman of that certain value. But Achilles, his heart wants not a woman of a certain value, but rather he wants a certain woman, an individual. "

A very nice point.

[[deleted user]]

Everyman wrote: "Isn't that so very human?


."

It is.

[Everyman]

We can keep going on the Iliad as long as people want to, though it's also time to open the Trojan Women thread. But that doesn't mean that the Iliad discussion has to end!

[[deleted user]]

@ 11 Thomas wrote: "I think the only reason Achilles gives up Hector's body is that Zeus demands it, and even then he threatens Priam that he is not above breaking his promise:

'Take care that you do not cross me again,
old man, or else I will end your long life
despite Zeus's command and all your prayers' 24.567
..."

That's very possible, I think. A main support for that position, I would imagine, is that it would reinforce the "proper" concept that the gods were in charge. Achilles would have seen the error of his ways and is again properly honoring the gods. And that might well have been a message that Homer would have wanted to send.


I see it differently, though. (view spoiler)[

It seems to me that the very fact that Achilles threatens to renege on his acquiesce to Zeus shows that Achilles is not giving the body back only because Zeus demands it.

I think it shows that Achilles has established himself as an individual strongly enough that though he DOES release Hector's body, he does so primarily due to his seeing Priam in a similar light in which he would have viewed his own father. So that although Achilles DOES do as Zeus orders, he doesn't do it BECAUSE Zeus order it, but rather does it of his own volition.

I go back to Book 3 in which the concept of free will was introduced. Paris is speaking to his brother Hector, telling Hector not to disparage the gifts of the gods.

"Not to be tossed aside,
the gifts of the gods, those glories...
whatever the gods give of their own free will--
how could we ever choose them for ourselves? (Fagles 3.80).

And yet, oddly enough, that’s exactly the gift that Achilles was given: the ability to choose for himself....first his fate, and later his own actions. Was this a blessing or a curse? I couldn’t help but think of the gift jars of Zeus: “There are two great jars that stand on the floor of Zeus’s halls/ and hold his gifts, our miseries one, the other blessings” (Fagles 24.615ish).

There are reasons I don’t think that Achilles gave up the body due to the demand of Zeus.

(1) Again, because it seems to me that Zeus isn’t sure that Achilles WILL return the body despite Zeus’s insistence (“perhaps in fear of me he’ll give him back at once”);

(2) Even though Priam didn’t follow the directives which Hermes gave him, Achilles STILL gave the body back. Hermes had instructed Priam, “…you go in yourself and clasp Achilles’ knees, implore him by his father, his mother with lovely hair, by his own son—so you can stir his heart!” Priam never mentioned Achilles’ mother or son…and yet…he stirred the heart of Achilles. Which leads me to believe, that as only 1/3 of that counsel was followed, that 2/3s of Achilles’ action originated in his own great heart.

(3) I think that the genuine boldness of Priam in journeying to Achilles evoked something of Achilles’ youth, some emotional memory of his own father. Priam has apparently traveled through the Achaean camp, and walked right up to Achilles. Achilles found that action “Awesome—as when the grip of madness seizes one/ who murders a man in his own fatherland and flees/ abroad to foreign shores, to a wealthy, noble host…”

That is the very story of Achilles’ father. (As young men, Peleus and his brother Telamon—sons of Aeacus, king of the island of Aegina—killed their half-brother Phocus and had to flee.)

(4) With Achilles already thinking of his father, Priam says, “remember your own father!”

And the heart of Achilles WAS soften. Achilles’ anger only flared up because Priam started talking about how Achilles would have this king’s ransom and how Achilles could “enjoy it” and “return to your own native land.” What bitter, bitter words those must be to Achilles precisely at the moment when he has let his emotional guard down and is thinking of his father...and knowing he will never see him again.

Achilles is on the edge of anger. “Don’t stir my raging heart…” And Achilles informs Priam that he “may break the laws of Zeus.” I believe him. I believe that Achilles was quite capable of breaking the laws of Zeus. So I don’t think it was Zeus order in and of itself that motivated Achilles.

(5) Achilles goes so far beyond what Zeus had directed.

[A] Zeus had only told Thetis he wanted the body returned to Priam. Yet Achilles calls his serving-woman, “Bathe and anoint the body.” He didn’t have to do that.

[B] “…then Achilles lifted Hector up in his own arms.” He didn’t have to do that.

[C] Then Achilles alters the story of Niobe in order to induce Priam to eat. (“Even Niobe with her lustrous hair remembered food.”) He didn’t have to do that.

[D] Achilles has his people prepare beds for Priam and his herald with “heavy purple throws … and warm coverings laid on top.”) He didn’t have to do that.

[E] And Achilles asks Priam, “How many days do you need to bury Prince Hector? He didn’t have to do that.

[F] He says, “I will hold back myself and keep the Argive armies back that long.” He didn't have to do that either.

It just seems to me that Achilles goes so far beyond what Zeus’s had message had conveyed that I have to believe that Achilles returned Hector’s body to Priam for his own reasons [probably thoughts of his far-away aging father].

(hide spoiler)]

[Thomas]

Adelle wrote: "@ 11 Thomas wrote: "I think the only reason Achilles gives up Hector's body is that Zeus demands it, and even then he threatens Priam that he is not above breaking his promise:

'Take care that y..."

Good points, all of them. But what I meant was that Achilles would not have even considered giving Hektor's body to Priam were it not for the demand of Zeus. The gods are aghast at what Achilles is doing to Hektor's body, especially Apollo:

Phoebus Apollo spoke among the gods:
"You gods are stubborn, harsh! You must recall
Hector's sacrifices-- oxen and goats --
yet now you lack the heart to rescue his corpse
so that his wife amy see him, his son, his mother,
his father Priam, all his army, who then
would hold funeral rites and give him a pyre.
Instead you continue to aid Achilles
whose heart contains no temperance or hint
of mercy...
Achilles has lost pity, also respect,
and so also has lost the mortal virtue of shame."

At this point Zeus steps in, and Achilles relents. It is pretty clear that this is not Achilles' will, as you point out. But he relents anyway, and in doing so he recovers some of his humanity -- his pity, respect, and "the mortal virtue of shame."

[[deleted user]]

Sorry I misread you. Yes, i agree, if Zeus hadn't sent word to Achilles, Achilles wouldn't have considered releasing the body.

Since you mention Apollo, a bit strange, I thought... Hector only killed Patroclus with the help of Apollo, and I read this evening that Paris killed Achilles only with the help of Apollo.

[Everyman]

Patrice wrote: "Yet, Achilles does say that he would defy Zeus if he cared to. I thought that was interesting. He was still calling his own shots, to the end. But was that considered virtuous? "

But did it matter to Achilles? He knew he was fated to die very soon. Zeus couldn't accelerate or delay his death, and Zeus has no power in the underworld, so where's the downside in cocking a snoot at Zeus? He didn't, of course, but he easily could have without really suffering any downside.

[Everyman]

Patrice wrote: "Nothing matters to Achilles but Achilles..and Patrocluos.
But I was wondering how Homer felt about it. What was he saying about Achilles?"

That's a good question, especially since the Iliad (and Odyssey) were important teaching texts for Greek culture.

[Thomas]

Patrice wrote: "Nothing matters to Achilles but Achilles..and Patrocluos.
But I was wondering how Homer felt about it. What was he saying about Achilles?"

What about Thetis (and Peleus, probably)? And the gods? I think these things matter to Achilles as well, though they are on a different level than his love for Patroklos. In fact, I think they keep him grounded -- maybe they are the only things that keep him grounded after the death of Patroklos.

[Thomas]

Patrice wrote: "My impression of his relationship to his mother, which is not uncommon in grown sons, is that he cared about her when he needed her. "

I hadn't thought of it that way, but you're right. On the other hand, Zeus doesn't send Iris or Hermes to Achilles, he sends... MOM.

So... Is Achilles a Mama's Boy? I'm not sure, but Mama does seem to have a greater share of influence over him.