The Iliad discussion

Achilles is lauded as the great hero of the Iliad, and ultimately triumphs over Hector. But Hector's sacrifices and love for his family, plus the fact that he is mortal and an immensely skilled warrior, surely make him the better hero?

Jo wrote: "Achilles is lauded as the great hero of the Iliad, and ultimately triumphs over Hector. But Hector's sacrifices and love for his family, plus the fact that he is mortal and an immensely skilled war..."

I agree. But I see Hector as an in-between Archilles and Paris.

It's an interesting point. The Iliad is one of my very favorite books and for years I used some variant of Achilles as my nickname online. Over time though, I find myself identifying more with Odysseus.

Ultimately, it might not be about who is the most heroic, but rather which aspects of heroism each possess.

Brian wrote: "It's an interesting point. The Iliad is one of my very favorite books and for years I used some variant of Achilles as my nickname online. Over time though, I find myself identifying more with Od..."

An interesting take! Ive always thought that when one reads a novel, one should highlight more on the symbolism the writer is trying to convey.

Very true.

As for good old Odysseus, he fights with his sharp mind and he outlives Achilles, Hector and Paris, so what does that tell us?!

Hector for reason, integrity and honour, Achilles for heroism and valour and Odysseus for cunning.

Personaly I really feel for Ector, the older I get the more I appreciate his character.

As Christos did, I found that as I've matured, my appreciation of Hector has increased. There is still a part of me that admires the strength and courage of Achilles the Great Warrior, but the endurance and integrity of Hector has grown on me.
Judy, South Africa

That's interesting that you might admire one more than the other depending on what stage you're at in life. I read The Iliad shortly after having my first child. Maybe this is why I bypassed Achilles completely and felt drawn more to Hector.

In using this device, Homer will have been guaranteed an attentive audience of all ages.

I have heard that War and Peace does the same thing. I have only read it once, but people tell me to reread it at different stages of life and you will find yourself focusing on very different things.

Frankly, it warms my heart to be participating in a discussion on the Iliad. I just became active on this site a few days ago and this is exactly the kind of thing I was seeking.

I've always thought that Achilles was arrogant and lacking in wisdom. Hector is definitely my favorite.

Brian wrote: "I have heard that War and Peace does the same thing. I have only read it once, but people tell me to reread it at different stages of life and you will find yourself focusing on very different thin..."

Welcome to the Club then!

I dont know; I think this selective reading based on your stage or cycle of life is a must do with all great literature. For example, I thought Samuel B was stupid when I read Waiting for Godot the first time. I was 19 then and now realized I was the stupid one not Samuel B.

I think it's common to see or highlight different things at different phase.

Achilles is like a great surgeon or chess master...he's very, very good at one thing. He is a savant and is fairly pish at everything else apart from killing. And he's childishly self centred. You'd want him by your side in battle (well, he'd run into the breach and leave you rather than stay with you...but you know what I mean), but I don't think he'd make a good dinner guest...unless you talked about him all the time.
Hector, and many others in the tale, have much more in the way of human qualities so easier to sympathise with. I find even Ajax more human.

I find even Ajax more human.

Finally, a mention for my beloved Ajax. His suicide after Achilles death is heartbreaking. All heroes suffer tragedy or faults that define them as human. It is easy to see Achilles as self-centered, but to have your test be the loss of those you love (Troilus, Patroclus and Penthesilea)is pretty harsh. And a wonderful illustration of the three types of love relationships. This isn't merely Hercules' rage issues.

Vivian wrote: "I find even Ajax more human.

Finally, a mention for my beloved Ajax. His suicide after Achilles death is heartbreaking. All heroes suffer tragedy or faults that define them as human. It is easy t..."

There's the incident with the sheep killing as well...a bit of PTSD?

Madness and rage are not the same. Off to reread the sheep incident.

I don't remember the sheep incident. I'm intrigued. What happens, Barbarossa?

Ahhh, sorry folks. The sheep thing might not be in the Iliad. But then again it only covers a wee bit of the war doesn't it, just the "rage of Achilles" bit really. So much more of the tale in other sources like the actual fall of Troy, the horse, the death of Achilles etc.
Can't remember the full story off the top of my head, but Ajax gets hoodwinked by Odysseus over something (the auctioning of armour rings a bell) and gets a bit angry, goes completely postal and kills all the sheep in the supply train while thinking they are the Argive leadership...so no more mutton chops for Nestor and pals.

I always was incredibly fond of Hector, he's my favorite Greek hero by far. I think it has to do with the scene where he says goodbye to Andromache and his son, and his son cries because he's afraid of Hector's helmet.

I had to translate that in Greek class, and it made me cry, because doing the honorable thing can be so sad.

Old-Barbarossa wrote: "Ahhh, sorry folks. The sheep thing might not be in the Iliad. But then again it only covers a wee bit of the war doesn't it, just the "rage of Achilles" bit really. So much more of the tale in othe..."

It was Achilles armour...after he died it was up for grabs to the most deserving of the Argives. Odysseus and Ajax were the 2 that it had boiled down to and Odysseus blagged it. Ajax had a wee breakdown and went on the rampage and thought he had killed all the Greek leaders/kings...but the lords he'd killed were actually sheep.

We've all been there.

Seriously though, it seems a good metaphor for striking out in a rage, thinking we are hurting one party, when we are actually hurting "the sheep" (innocent bystanders).

Old-Barbarossa wrote: "Ahhh, sorry folks. The sheep thing might not be in the Iliad.

Glad I wasn't losing it completely. I think it is Sophocles "Ajax" and no I haven't read that one, yet.

I'm reading the Iliad properly for the first time (instead of bits and pieces) but took a sideways step last week and read David Malouf's "Ransom

It focuses on Priam's decision and his journey to beg Achilles for Hector's body, and is rendered in a very lovely poetic style.

So pleased to find this discussion!

Jan - I could cry over Hector too. For such a good man he is treated so badly after his death instead of being honoured as he should be. It's the ultimate insult, and completely undeserved.

Joanne - I've put Ransom down as a 'to read'. I've never read one that focuses on this part of the Iliad before.

Jo wrote: "...he is treated so badly after his death ..."

Is this the 1st recorded example of desecration of the dead post battle?
It certainly is a common enough thing in (total) war and seems to always have been. Examples abound throughout Hx...but there is something even more unsavoury in the dragging of Hectors body and the frequency it is done.
This act really damages the arguement for Achilles as ultimate hero.

I guess I never considered Achilles as the ultimate hero. I saw him more as the ultimate warrior. _Nearly_ invincible, unafraid, single minded, and willing to go out in a blaze of glory.

The older brothers in the story are the ones who made a decision (which ultimately cost each of them their life) to assist their sibling. Agamemnon chases his sister-in-law. Hector defends his city rather than turning over Paris. To me, as a modern reader, heroism seems tied to the decisions we make and the actions we take. I always have to remind myself that, in many cultures, heroism can be doing one's duty and acting one's role in the society (like being a fantastic warrior).

See what you've made me do now???
Had to pick it up for a re-read, have the Robert Fagles and the Robert Graves trans. Have gone for the Fagles...
Then I'll have to read:
In Search of the Trojan War
Helen of Troy: Goddess, Princess, Whore
The War That Killed Achilles
Then I'll have to dig out The Odyssey...where will it all end? Back to James Joyce?
See what you've done???

Fil wrote: "You might also like: "Greek Epic Fragments: From the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries BC". It has most, if not all, of the surviving fragments of the Epic Cycle..."

Noooooo!!!
That's it, I've fallen down the rabbit hole now...where will it end?
Thanks for the hint Fil, will try and hunt it down...unless it's in Greek...can't read Greek...Doric yes, Greek no (sorry, auld Scots joke).
Also added: The Trojan War: A New History
Forgot how much gore was in this tale, brutal...

Read 'The Iliad' a few weeks ago. Very interested in tje comments on here, excellent discussion.

I suppose because Achilles is meant to be half-god he has godlike (and therefore, unsympathetic) qualities?
Rage beyond human comprehension, and pride, too, and ferocity? I read the comment in an essay recently that he doesn't fit in anywhere, because he is half immortal, and that makes him a very tormented being.

I think as a modern women I find that they were all rapists to a man hard to take and find them sympathetic,and when they took war prizes of course the woman had no choice but to submit.I think modern readers tend to play down how the opinion of the slave Briseis' opinon of her captivity was seen as no more relevance than that of a horse, say...

Jessica

Jessica wrote: "Read 'The Iliad' a few weeks ago. Very interested in tje comments on here, excellent discussion.

I suppose because Achilles is meant to be half-god he has godlike (and therefore, unsympathetic) ..."

The women had no choice but to submit until recently.

The most common thing to do during war campaigns thousand of years ago was to slay the men or drive them to slavery then take the women and impregnate them. This way they believed they destroy a tribe/race/nation and give their seed over.

The more a society was based on muscle power the less important was a woman. For the ancient greeks women were not educated and did not participate in the commons.

however there were priviledged roles of women in the ancient greek society.

Motherhood was not viewed lightely. In fact once a battle stopped because a woman bared her breasts to the warriors. The naked female breasts was a symbol of motherhood.

Priests: Women priests of gods was a priviledged place in society (in fact they had roles in Thesmophoria were men were specificaly excluded).

In Athens women could own land, property, money and slaves. However they could not conduct their dealings without a man medium. In Sparta the women own more than a third of the land, and had much more influence over daly dealings and were more free to conduct buisness than their Athenian sisters.

Oracles: the oracle in Delpi for one was always a woman.

and many many more...

I know this is not a justification but something you have to deal with when you read ancient script or anything written before the soufragettes and the feminist movement. When human society was closer to the animal type women were having a more supportive role.

In ancient greek history there are women that excelled and men of that time admired them and listened to them. women who through their position influenced political decisions and shared the marvel of the men they stood by, such as Aspasia. The vast majority (men too but a little less because they had access to basic education and it was demanded that they took part in commons) were uneducated and accepted their role, which was solely that of marrying as soon as they reached puberty and help men to father successors.

Modern readers do not tend to think in playing down or are not guilty of displaying unsympathetic notions towards slaves and women of the time. You prepare yourself before you read something that dates in 1190 BC! Think about it that is 3000 years old. Yet in there you find qualities that humans value and feel as strong about them today as they did then, three millenia ago, when all you could achieve you had to do it on sheer muscle power. Where the average life expectancy was no more than 40 years maybe less. Where kids at the age of 5 joined the army, where education included myths and humans were like animals constantly afraid of the horrible unknown. Yet there is sense of duty, valour, justice, honour...

Very interesting comments, Khristos. This is certainly an intriguing discussion.

One must always take into account the views of the times, but they can be distressing, nevertheless...Such as exposure of babies, etc.

Of course, (though this is an issue of great contention at the moment, Cynthia Ellers et al) many societies may well have been matriarchal in prehistory.

Jessica

It's strange, Jessica, but I always make the switch when I'm reading older literature without thinking about it. Your comment about the way women used to be treated made me really think about how very lucky we are today.

I used to live in Switzerland - women got the vote in 1971 there!!! Now I am in New Zealand, the first country to give women the vote in 1893. That's an incredible 100+ years difference. So if The Iliad was written 3000 years ago, there's an awful lot of history between the Iliad and the modern day reader.

As Christos says, it's quite amazing that, despite the differences, we still find those characters so very human in their emotions and actions. We can still relate to them as people much like us, but just with a different set of rules.

There's a great book called 'Who Cooked the Last Supper' and the first part is all about how we changed from a matriarchal to a patriarchal society. Very interesting.

JO, I'm going to have to put that on my reading list for sure, and fancy that, about the vote!

About modern writers/readers 'playing down' the bad treatment of women I didn't mean people aware of ancient history and the views of the times, more I meant the general reader often coming new to the Greek myths and having a romanticised view of the relations between characters them and in The Iliad in particular of relations between Achilles and and the slave girl Briseis.

It's interesting that there is some sort of debate about words Achilles utters to 'the embassy' in book nine when he is giving some sort of arguement about Agamemnon's abduction of his slave being like Paris' absuction of Helen and there is some reference to Clytemnestra and while I don't know Greek so couldn't express an opinion on this, it seems there is a disagreement about precisely what he means, whether he is referring to his slave girl as 'the wife of my heart' but uses a term used only for official wives or whether he may be referring to Clytemnestra, but apparently this has given rise to a 'romantic' interpretation that others dispute? All very interesting, I wish I had been taught Greek...


Jessica

Jessica wrote: "Very interesting comments, Khristos. This is certainly an intriguing discussion.

One must always take into account the views of the times, but they can be distressing, nevertheless...Such as exp..."

True a number were, in Crete the Minoans were a matriarch society, good point. I would definately check Jo's suggestion.

Yes once you take a pause it makes you wonder and yes it is not easy. However when I think of places on earth where women struggle a great deal it makes me wonder even more on how advanced humanity really is. Male dominant societies, cultures which promote male promiscuity, women suffering war crimes and so on and so forth...

I guess to say that it makes me feel uneasy is an understatement.

Khristos

You are so right about 'how far have we advanced'...

Jessica

I've always liked Hektor more, as far as I can remember. Achilles at times appears as a 'one issue guy', doing not that much throughout the war, save annoying Agamemnon (which is a good thing) and avenging his fallen friend. He blames hector for Patroklos' death, while Hektor 'only' give the killing blow, because Patroklos was already mortally wounded by Apollo and Euphorbos(?). Achilles did not check his sources, or simply wanted to kill Hektor either way.
His main motives in the war still are revenge and glory. He does prove himself a hero at times, but the majority of his, let's say non-heroic/evil, actions outnumber the good ones.

Hektor on the other hand fights for his city, to protect the ones he loves, not for his own glory. Not only this makes him the better hero, but also that he was usually more humane towards his opponents (as far that's possible in a war) than Achilles.

I was actually wondering.. do women usually chose Hektor over Achilles as the better hero more often than men?

As a contrast to Achilles "live fast die young" thing I've just noticed Sarpedon (in Book 12 around line 370) say to his crony that given the chance he'd rather live forever and quite happily give up glory...but sure, since we're here anyway let's get to work.
A very human, and heroic, approach to things I thought.
Also noted so far that just because your da is a god doesn't mean you're going to walk away from the carnage...so Achilles divine parentage matters less than him being nails in a square go.

I suppose Achilleas' ambitions with regard to everlasting fame have to do with the Ancient Greek notion of excellence and yes, his having his slave, his 'war prize' taken from him would be a public insult. Her feelings aren't mentioned, of course! When she walks away with the others, 'reluctant, every step' it might be a case of 'better the devil you know'...
I feel sympathy for Achilleas, because he is uneasy in the world, being half human, with the intense passions, capacity for rage, violence, etc, of the Gods. It is interesting that he is the only character who performs human sacrifice, but he isn't criticised for this by the other Greek leaders. I read somewhere that that didn't contradict their moral code, and nor did withdrawing from the fighting, or maltreating Hektor's body, which is interesting.
I wonder if the contrast between Hektor,the family man, part of the community, and Achilleas, a lonely sort of character, is deliberate? If so its very cleverly done.

Jessica

Fil wrote: "I do have one thing to say about Achilles' motivation, a small point but an important one. Achilles does not fight for glory, he fights for the immortality of his name, which is a subtle difference..."

Interesting comments Fil and Jessica picking on Hysterophemy.

However it appears that everybody is in Troy for that. There is not a single greek leader who does not want it, even Patroklos wants it. It is the ancient Greek immortality hook!

Certainly Achilleas was a very troubled man, half divine with an awful temper, the roots of his troubled nature and temperament remains a mystery to me, there is a darkness in his character.

Achilleas is damaged goods, interesting but damaged, I am sympathetic to him but I value Hector (although he did run a few times around the city walls).

Fil wrote: "Hektor is a valiant soldier (or was he only a valiant leader... ?) but he was duped into confronting Achilles, by a goddess no less, and when he realised he was alone against the mightiest of warri..."

I know I would!

Christos, You'll have to translate that word for me, not in any of my dictionaries, but I'm glad I picked up on it lol!

Poor old Hektor, I did feel sorry for him when he realised. The lonliness of that moment...
I felt sorry for Achilleas,too, as above, because he doesn't fit into the world, and when he goes and weeps by the shore and complains to Thetis, it shows a vulnerable side, quite a childlike one, and when the river tries to drown him he complains of how he will die in an inglorious way, not according to the promises made to him...

Jessica

The word consists of hystera meaning after and phemi meaning fame and translates to fame after (death). It was a big thing in ancient greek culture.

Thanks for the explanation. I believe great heros went to the Isle of the Blessed (I think that was the name)as Achilleus does eventually, presumably after his meeting with Odysseus in Hades and that was an inducement, too, to be a great hero, as everyone seemed to detest the shadow life in Hades.
I assume they avoided fighting each other at the Isle of the Blessed!

I suppose that everyone in modern day society, whether religious or not - whether Christian, Buddhist or whatever, has picked up to some extent on later humane values and also pride is seen as sinful in Christianity at least, and I would guess the other world religions, too. That is a thing the Ancient Greek heroes would have considered bizarre, no doubt.
I do find the 'artistocratic' bias of 'The Iliad' intriguing; the only common Greek (though I think he was later given artistocratic parentage) is Thersites, who is depicted as contemptible and everyone laughs when he is beaten by Odysseus for insolence to Agamemnon as a shoking act of subversion. All the leaders are of course, authoritarian in their views. Agamemnon, Hektor and Achilleus would have that in common...

Jessica

Jessica wrote: "...I do find the 'artistocratic' bias of 'The Iliad' intriguing..."

I think the aristos gave bards patronage so that's who they sang about...the folk songs would have been more likely to be about everyone else (and to satirise the aristos) and since they weren't written down we don't have them anymore.
But that's always been the case, it's rare for any non-aristo tales outside folk culture.
The aristos had land and men and disposable wealth to arm them and build ships...and gifts to reward the singers of songs about their ancestors.
Can't think, off the top of my head, of any old songs/poems/tales apart from the Icelandic sagas that have commoners as heroes...OK, The Arabian Nights is probably another. I'm ignoring the hagiographies etc of religion. Not until the 18th cent and later folk tale collections start appearing on the scene.

Jo wrote: "...I could cry over Hector too. For such a good man he is treated so badly after his death instead of being honoured as he should be. It's the ultimate insult, and completely undeserved..."

Just re-read the book last week and noticed that as nasty as the treatment of Hector's body is it isn't too far from the threat he makes to Patroclus once he kills him...to put his head on a spike on the walls of Troy and feed him to the dogs.
I think that's one of the great things in the Iliad...that everyone is moraly a shade of grey...even Hector of the shiny hat.

Completely off at a tangent, I moved to New Zealand in Feb and was talking to a lovely Maori guy at his marae a few weeks ago. He said that, in Maori warrior culture, one of the worst insults is to eat the flesh of an enemy because it means he has become your sustenance. But the ultimate insult is to take the jawbone of your enemy and fashion it into a fish-hook. Then your enemy is feeding you and your family for years to come.

I made sure I was very nice to him, just in case!

...a shade of grey ... even Hector of the shiny hat.

:) I suppose that's the crux of it. All the characters (and all readers) are capable a great acts of heroism, acts of savagery and many things in between. That's why, after all this time, we still turn to, contemplate and discuss works like The Iliad.

In college, I considered Achilles to be too self-involved and whiny to be the hero many believed him to be. I favored Hector. Now, I consider his wife's words after Hector's death, "...and the boy only a baby, the son we bore together, you and I so doomed. Hector, what help are you to him, now you are dead?" His hat has definitely lost some of it's shine.

If I had to pick a hero today, I might go for "staunch" Polydamas, who with "...a clear head ... saw what lay in the past and what the Trojans faced." I have to admire a man who has a clear head and can see the past and its ramifications on the future. Not only that, he had the courage to argue an unpopular point. Again, though, I'm sure even his character contained shades of grey.

Yes, isn't that an awful threat? Perhaps this is because the men in question (and even half-gods) are brutalised by war?

Jessica

Oh, just seen previous post, that is interesting, Old Barbarossa. I wish we had access to those folk tales...It is interesting how Thersites gets beaten by Odysseus for critcising Agamemnon, and everyone laughs...

Yes,that is a horrible threat from Hector, and I wonder if it is meant to show that all men (even half-gods) are to some extent brutalised by war?

Jessica

Yes, war does nasty things to people, but yet again, I have to side with Hector (I'm so predictable). The war has been brought to his very door. His family are directly affected, unlike those of the Achaeans, far far away. If the same thing was happening to my own precious family, I'd be making plenty of threats of my own. Grrrr.