Well, it didn't go well. I appreciate its worth but It was a chore to read and I had to stop after pages or so. No more epic poems for me. View all 4 comments. After reading The Illiad I faced a quandary- how do you review one of the most important and enduring works of creativity in human history? What can you say that hundreds of thousands of others haven't? My answer to this question is that I must join the chorus of those who have come before me and sing the praises of what is one of the best stories I have ever read, as fascinating and gripping now as it no doubt was when it was penned nearly three millennia ago.
There are many reasons why this book After reading The Illiad I faced a quandary- how do you review one of the most important and enduring works of creativity in human history? There are many reasons why this book has endured.
It is a story of love, hate, vengeance, fate, pettiness, grief and war, bloody and prolonged war - a microcosm of human life and the furies that drive us to excess. You know the story. Paris steals Helen away to Troy. Agamemnon and the Greeks raise and army and lay seige to that great city.
Achilles, the greatest warrior history has ever seen, fights and dies, a poison arrow embedded in his ankle. The Greeks roll a massive wooden horse up to Troy's gates, and the war ends in trickery and massacre. You know all this, but trust me, you don't know it the way The Illiad tells it.
This is a glorious read, the brutal blows and shrieks of war leap from the page, and the human passions that drive the protaganists are vivid and compelling. You will read this book and wonder at how something from another time, translated from it's original tongue, can so totally enthrall a modern reader. It's powerful, heady stuff. So many images from this story are carved into my synapses.
Hector and Achilles stalking the battlefield like avatars of death, scything down opponents in their tens. Priam begging Achilles for the return of his son's mangled body. Heroes cut down mid-fight, their souls headed for the underworld, their deaths mourned even by the gods on Olympus, who watch and guide the battle from above. There are a handful of books that every reader must experience - books that are milestones in human culture.
The Illiad is one of these books. I don't know how I lived more than three decades before I read it, and it makes me nostalgic for a time I never lived through, when a high school education in the classics was something that everyone received. View all 15 comments. The original Marvel movie? What struck me most about The Iliad on this first read is that it has so much more in common with whichever blockbuster is showing at your nearest multiplex, than it does with novels as we know them today.
Even the tedious parts make more sense when you view the whole thing as a movie told in words. Homer is very partial to extended similes involving lions, dogs and wild boar for some reason: As when in the midst of dogs and hunting men a wild boar or lion wheels about, reveling in his strength, and the men arraying themselves like a wall of defense stand to face him and hurl from their hands volleys of spears; but never does his noble heart feel fear, nor does he flee—and his courage will kill him— and relentlessly he wheels about testing the ranks of men, and wherever he charges, there the ranks of men give way; so Hector going along the battle throng turned and twisted All this talk of lions and boars is a little clunky on the page, and it breaks up the flow of the story.
That we humans have relied on the same methods to tell a gripping story for over 3, years is a joy to me. Our direct connection through story to the past, to people of antiquity, The Iliad and other works like it serves as a reminder that those people were more like us than we tend to recognise.
Not to mention it is just a bloody good yarn. View all 13 comments. It's definitely worth reading duh but you need to brace yourself for a slow-paced, overly detailed writing.
Like all the classics. There's so much description and I found the dialogue pretty complex and long. Again like all the classics. Agamemnon is unlikable and the only reason I hate Hector is because he killed Patroclus and he was my favourite. Achilles and Patroclus were meant as a couple, I've never been more convinced. The Song of Achilles had it right. The whole thing reminded my of an Ancient Greek version of The Desperate Housewives or literally any other reality Tv show.
Also, on a side note the gods reminded me of myself whenever I play The Sims. View all 14 comments. The Iliad is an ancient Greek epic poem by Homer, which presents his interpretation of the events that took place during a few weeks of the tenth and final year of the Trojan War.
Homer's tale of the Trojan War runs from the time of Achilles's falling out with the Greek King, Lord Agamemnon, and shunning from the war to the time when he re-enters it and kills the Trojan hero, Hector, to avenge the death of his friend and companion, Patroclus. After my reading of The Odyssey , I felt I need to re The Iliad is an ancient Greek epic poem by Homer, which presents his interpretation of the events that took place during a few weeks of the tenth and final year of the Trojan War.
The thought that I might not have fully appreciated it kept on nagging me. I first read a prose version, but this time I resorted to the poetic translation done by Alexander Pope. And I have to confess that the result was surprising. Not only I understood it well, but I also came to fully appreciate the extent of Homer's artistry.
In this new light, I'm obliged to amend my former review to express my truest thoughts on this amazing classic. In my first read, I've misunderstood the role of Gods. I thought that they dictated and interfered unjustly in the men's war and hindered their valor. But after my reread, I now understand it was fate that governed it all, and that the Gods' role was to facilitate the course of fate. Of course, the Gods supported their chosen camp, some siding with the Greeks, who they believed to have been injured by the treachery of Paris of Troy, and others siding with the Trojans, for their faithful reverence of mighty Olympian Gods.
But not any of them, not even the all-powerful Zeus could alter what the fate decreed on the mortal men. When I understood fully the role of God, men, and fate, I was able to view the whole thing through new eyes and appreciate and enjoy the tale for its true worth. The Iliad is a tragedy. The main themes of this tragic tale are honour, loyalty, glory, and revenge. It was not the pleasantest read. Too much importance is given to the descriptions of gruesome details of war. The dramatic quality with which Homer has knitted his poem made so vivid a portrayal of battle scenes and horrific deaths that I found many passages hard to stomach.
At the same time, I couldn't help admiring the ability of Homer to draw such realistic pictures through his finesse writing. And even more, I could sense the fury of men of both camps as they lunged at each other with their weapons drawn; I could hear their war cries.
I could also hear the sound of the wheels of the chariots taking the warriors to the battle, the clanging of the weapons, and the groans and moans of the dead.
It was truly more than a reading experience. The narrator of the tale, while taking us through the present events, also fills in the gaps of the past and makes predictions for the future. This method of recounting the story gives a complete picture of the tale, although in the strictest sense the poem only describes a few weeks of the final year of the Trojan War. The writing is quite descriptive.
Whether it is a battle scene, weapons, the general setting, or characters both men and God , nothing has escaped Homer's minutest scrutiny. Even the pedigree of each of the characters is described! Although these details are quite overwhelming at times, they nevertheless are helpful to understand the story better. It is amazing that how this epic poem, which is said to have written in the 7th or 8th centuries BC or BCE , has fascinated and keep on fascinating generations of readers.
That in itself is proof of the true mastery of its author. When all things are considered, it is a little wonder that Homer is regarded as the pioneer of the Western Classic. A word must be said about the translation. Personally, I think it is one of the best. As the translator himself has said, the essence of a translation is to capture the true spirit of the work which he translates without being too much burdened with the strict accuracy of the meaning.
When compared the first translation I've read and my respective response with my present perception, I quite see the wisdom of Pope. It is the spirit that matters.
View all 3 comments. Jun 13, Madeline rated it really liked it Shelves: poetry. I don't know why I read this. It isn't on The List I guess because it's technically a poem, not a novel , and it wasn't assigned reading or anything. But for whatever reason, reading The Iliad has been on my mental to-do list for a while now, and last week I finally picked it up. My first reaction: dude, this epic is epic. The battle sequences are long and action-packed, everybody is Zeus's kid or nephew, the men are men and the women are decoration.
It's pretty awesome, is what I'm saying. Second big reaction: I was surprised at how small the scope of this poem actually is. At the beginning, the Trojan War has already been going on for ten years, and the poem really only covers the last month or so. It's really interesting, because the poem seems to be about how the stupid actions of a few powerful people can have far-reaching and horrible consequences.
The whole driving force in The Iliad is this: Menelaus takes Achilles's favorite chick Briseis who, thanks to Movies in Fifteen Minutes , will always be known as Temple Babe in my head for his own, and Achilles throws a massive snit fit and refuses to fight in the Trojan War until the king stops raping Achilles's girlfriend and lets Achilles go back to raping her instead. Because of this, loads and loads of people die, and the gods are no help whatsoever because they're all on different sides and keep messing things up.
That's the whole story: a bunch of guys who are fighting a war because of some guy stealing somebody's girlfriend all die horrible deaths because some other guys are having a fight over somebody's girlfriend.
The lesson, of course, is that women ruin everything. Normally this would be cause for me to get out my Feminist Rage Hat, except for the fact that the goddesses in this story kick so much ass I can't even get that angry about how lame Helen and Briseis are.
I'm glad I took the time to read it. View all 7 comments. Jun 16, James rated it liked it Shelves: 1-fiction , 3-written-preth-century. Ah The Trojan War. We all know of the horse, but how did it come together? Who was at war? And why?
I still found the story fascinating and enjoyed the read. But it's a lot to digest. It's amazing when you realize these works are almost years old. Such beauty in his words. And to think about everything we've learned over the years There are some valuable lessons in this work.
If only more would give it a chance! About Me For those new to me or my reviews I write A LOT. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by. View 1 comment. Jul 21, Settare on hiatus rated it really liked it Shelves: classical-antiquity , poetry , wishlist , classics , epics , greco-roman , translated , penguin-classics-wishlist , mythology-legends , translation-wars. I was surprised by how much I enjoyed reading The Iliad. Many parts of it are bizarre and horrifying to the modern reader, but it can certainly be enjoyed within its context.
A study guide that offers historical, cultural, and literary context to the ancient epic can significantly enhance the reading experience. I simply would not have enjoyed The Iliad if it weren't for the insight and information she offers about the historical, cultural, and literary nuances of the book.
Plot Summary for the Modern Reader: On the surface, the story is pointless and simple: Achilles gets too angry and it doesn't do anyone any good. Everyone, Trojans and Greeks alike suffer the consequences of this grotesque manchild's unreasonable anger, including himself.
Lots of men die in gory bloodshed. Throw a fair amount of plotting and scheming by a bunch of ridiculous gods and a lot of misogyny in the mix and there you have it. To sum up the whole book in one phrase: toxic masculinity in full force.
Themes, Differences and Similarities with our world: But. The thing is that this story, wild and distant as it sounds to our times, has striking similarities to the modern world. War, bloodlust, and misogyny have been inseparable from humankind for all of history.
This book has survived millennia because it continues to resonate with generations of humans. And it's not all bad, there are lots of amazing things about this book: beautiful poetry, gorgeous language and similes, a lot of relatable humanity throughout, touching moments, vivid characters who are relatable and nuanced, brilliant narrative that's exciting and full of suspense, and all the fun of Greek mythology. Misogyny and the Situation of Women Entering this world, I had to come to terms with the fact that Homeric society functions very differently from what I would consider agreeable.
The most disturbing difference is that no one, ever, questions the validity of slavery and the inferiority of women. The whole book starts because Achilles is angry that Agamemnon took Briseis a woman, Achilles' sex slave for his own and dishonored him in doing so. Not to mention that the war itself started just because Paris abducted Helen or they ran off together, depending on whom you ask , and Helen is usually blamed for all of it.
She even calls herself "whore that I am" , more than once, while accusing herself of having started the war. Which is ridiculous, stop calling yourself a slut, Helen! This amount of sexism is infuriating, and it's precisely why I'm not rating the book 5. If I wanted to denounce every book that mistreats women, I'd have to denounce almost the entirety of literature from all cultures.
I've decided that in order to approach ancient texts, I'll accept them as they are, read them within their context and I won't let myself get enraged over every single act of misogyny. Gore and Violence: The descriptions of the book are extremely brutal.
The battles are described in gory, vivid, almost cinematic detail as warriors slaughter each other by chopping each others' heads off or stabbing the weirdest body parts imaginable with "beside the nipple of the right breast" being a repeated favorite. I confess that it is not, in any way, enjoyable to read hundreds of verses on such disgustingly gory imagery. There are long descriptions of armor and warriors putting on armor as well, which aren't that interesting, and they're almost always the same.
I did not enjoy reading those parts in the slightest. Not at all. The Greek gods are so grotesque that they're almost comic.
The reason why I like Greek mythology to begin with is that I can laugh at these gods and their childish actions the whole time. They can be terrifying, but even that's somehow comic.
They call each other names, they bicker, they scheme, they're vain, but they're fun to read about. Glory, Honor, Death The other cultural-historical difference that I perceive as a striking similarity is the concept of Kleos. As Vandiver explains in her lectures, Kleos is also "reputation", as in "what is said about you, by other people, especially after you die".
She stresses that in the pre-literate society that Homer depicts, this concept of Kleos is the only form of immortality available to warriors and men in general. In a society where there can be no written record of who you were and what you did, the only chance you have at being remembered and live on in the collective memories of the society is to win glory, Kleos.
If you die with Kleos, people will talk about you with honor and respect, thus immortalizing you through tales and epic stories they will tell about you long after you're dead. That is strikingly similar to the way we live today. Maybe our way of gaining a good and lasting reputation is not by raiding cities, war and manslaughter anymore, but the concept hasn't changed much: We die, we are inevitably bound to die, so we desperately try to do good, do something to live on in the collective memory of future generations after we've died.
Some people can claim they don't live like that, but that's a fairly modern idea and you get my point. The warriors themselves don't even want to fight. They don't enjoy it, and they wish they could have just gone back and lived their lives in peace. Both sides feel that way. This unwillingness and futility is stressed many times throughout the book.
Agamemnon, leader of the Greeks, no fewer than three times says "we should pack up and go back to Greece, this is pointless". Most major characters at some point contemplate giving up the fight because it's just ridiculous to fight over nothing. But now a thousand shapes of death surround us, and no man can escape them, or be safe. Let us attack—whether to give some fellow glory or to win it from him.
Which is very sad. If you think about this statement for a moment, you'll realize how desperate, how unfortunate, how pitiable this situation is that these warriors are stuck in. They don't want to fight, but they can't bring themselves not do. Both sides are human. The war is pointless. That's a very realistic depiction of war, and it's a sad reality. You can't help but feel sad for all of them. I didn't like all of the characters, but I could sympathize with them and pity them in their futile attempt to immortalize their memory.
This concept of mortality, the inevitability of death, the desperate urge to make a name for oneself during their short life is the main theme of The Iliad and what it has in common with human life through the centuries. This concept, this meditation on the mortality of humans is alongside the favorite marketing tools of violent fights and sex what, I think, has kept The Iliad alive through the centuries.
It's fascinating. Hating and Liking the Characters: On a less stuffy note, I want to add that a lot of characters in The Iliad are likable, even though almost all of them are misogynist vicious warriors. Patroclus is gentle and kind-hearted and he weeps for the dead the warriors and the ugliness of war. The Ajaxes there's two of them for some reason are brave and they never give up, they rush to help their fellow warriors.
Odysseus, Aeneas, Priam, even Diomedes all have some deeply human moments. Homer doesn't villainize and alienate the Trojans at all, either. They're supposed to be the enemy, but the Trojans are very human, most of them are more sensible and gentler than the Greeks.
I really like the fact that they're not treated as "the savage, filthy, less-than-human enemy" at all. To me, they seemed like the actual "good people" in the whole story, especially since they're fighting to defend their city not to attack the Greeks.
The hero of the Trojans and in my opinion, the hero of the whole book , crown prince Hector, is by far the most human, most relatable, most responsible, and best character among all warriors. He sounds like any normal modern man that's been forced to go to war and does so merely out of responsibility, not bloodlust. He rushes to battle even though he most certainly would rather stay home with his wife Andromache and their infant son. On the other side, Achilles, the man who's supposed to be the hero of all heroes, is despicable.
I mean that's just the way I read the story, but Achilles is horrible, insufferable, disgusting. He's impulsive, irresponsible, he has serious anger management problems! Even though he has some profoundly human issues, I can't forgive him for what he did to Hector. As a person who takes fictional characters rather seriously, I just had to mention this.
I hate Achilles. A Note on Translations: I act a bit obsessively about translations. I am never content with the one I'm reading, I always have the uneasy feeling of "what if there's a better translation out there", so I just have to check every translation I can get my hands on to see which one I like best.
For reading The Iliad, I raided the library and all sources available to collect as many translations as I could and read them alongside each other for comparison. I must give a disclaimer that I am not a translator, not a classicist, and I do not know Greek. This is by no means an expert's opinion, but merely my personal impressions based on reading and consulting four English translations alongside each other.
It's beautiful, but the language isn't too outdated. It has tried to keep the poetic segmented lines format. It's very readable and I liked it much more than other translations. It also has a foreword which is informative and I enjoyed reading it. The excerpts I quoted in this review are from this translation. The language is beautiful and more heavy-handed than the rest, it attempts to keep the poetic structure as much as possible, and it's simply beautiful.
But for me, it took a bit longer to read from it because of the rather dated language. I would normally read from the Fitzgerald, mark the beautiful similes and passages and check them in the Lattimore translation afterward. The foreword, again, is very good.
Rieu Translation : This one is in prose The line numbers are marked. It's readable, it's easy, and it's the most humorous one by far. I don't know if Rieu intended to make it comical, but he's phrased the bizarre dialogues in a way that came across as funny to me. Whenever I arrived at a phrase that I found hilarious when the gods were calling each other names, for example I'd look at the Rieu translation and I wouldn't be disappointed Hera calling Zeus an arch-deceiver and Hector calling Paris Paris, you parody were two of my favorites.
It also has a short plot summary with line numbers before each book chapter starts which is very useful. The introduction is really good, too. If you want to read a prose version, this is the one for you. It has a very good and informative foreword. It's fairly readable and has attempted to keep the poetic format.
I don't have anything against it, but it just doesn't stand out compared to Fitzgerald or Lattimore. I read the first two books from it and then I gave it up, occasionally consulting it on interesting sections. You can choose whichever translation you like. If you're more comfortable with prose, go with Rieu.
If you like the "poetic" format, I'd say try Fitzgerald. It is worth mentioning that none of the "poetic" translations are actual poems in English. Translation inevitably sacrifices the true poetic quality of the original. None of these translations have a noticeable rhyme and rhythm, let alone a standard meter.
But that's just something we have to accept whenever reading something in translation. Whichever edition you choose is fine, they're all by experienced scholars. But please read the introduction because they are all very well-written, informative, and insightful. I've been rambling long enough.
I just want to conclude by saying that The Iliad is well worth reading. It's interesting and exciting and bizarre and stupid and beautiful all at the same time, and I definitely enjoyed it and learned a lot from it. View all 19 comments. Foolish me. I thought I was going to look at the different editions of The Iliad and choose the one most readable but did not reckon with the overwhelming beauty of the language and story.
The truth is, it does not matter which edition you choose, so long as you read at least one. It is inevitable that you will find yourself drawn to the question of the most beautiful and complete rendition but you may wisely concede defeat at the beauty of each. The Homeric epics are said to be the greatest s Foolish me.
The Homeric epics are said to be the greatest stories, martial stories, ever sung or written of all time , so if for some reason they did not resonate for you in high school, you may want to revisit what your teachers were talking about. When they describe the death of a man in the full bloom of his strength looking like an flower in a rainstorm, head and neck aslant, unable to withstand the beating rain, we understand.
It is argued by some, including British scholar M. West, that The Iliad has had pieces added to it over the years. It is also the shortest. Mitchell also shortens the lines in English so that they have speed and momentum for an impressive delivery. The recent Peter Green translation, begun when Green was nearly 90 years old, is similarly easy to read; Green tells us that he began in a relaxed attitude for diversion and completed the whole within a year.
Neither the writing or the reading of this version is anguished or tortured, and Burrow points out that Green was a historian but didn't allow that to obfuscate or weigh down the poetry.
And later, as the blow-by-blow of the battle proceeded, one imagines each region cheering when mention of their leader is declaimed, though some died horrible deaths. This is another reason to read this ancient work: We live and die not unlike one another, we who lived so far apart in time, and perhaps the ardor young men of today have for the sword and for fame will be doused by the utterly desolate manner of death recounted here, one in particular that I cannot forget: a spear through the buttock and into the bladder meant a painful and ugly death.
Caroline Alexander, after a lifetime of her own research into the Homeric epics argues in The War That Killed Achilles: The True Story of Homer's Iliad and the Trojan War that the work certainly required days to recite, and may have been performed in episodes. The length of the piece suggests the piece was once short enough to be memorized, leaving room for invention and modification as befits the oral tradition.
I wonder now which European language has the most translations, and do they sometimes dare to attempt translations from ancient Greek to, say, French, and then to English? It seems we have enough scholars understanding ancient Greek to give us satisfactory versions without resorting to piggybacked translations.
An attempt was made by John Farrell in the Oct 30, edition of the Los Angeles Review of Books to untangle the English translations and sort them for clarity and poetry. Those of us who love this work will read them all, especially the fascinating introductions to each in which the scholars themselves wax eloquent about what they loved about it.
Mitchell's introduction is especially accessible and impelling: I could hardly wait to get to the story. Daniel Mendelsohn "graded" four translations in the article discussing Mitchell's translation. In the end, whichever edition gives you the greatest access for your first attempt to breach the ramparts of this ancient work is the one to choose for a first read. The other editions will naturally come later, once you have the sense of the story, a few names nailed down, and have that deepening curiosity about the poetry and the beauty.
One last observation is that the men in this epic were mere playthings of the gods, gods that could be cruel, petty, jealous, and vengeful. There was striving among men, but most of the time human successes or failures had less to do with who they were than with who they knew.
Was it ever thus. View all 24 comments. The story of the siege of Troy is one of heroism and tragedy. There are so many unforgettable characters here - both gods and heroes - that it is like watching an old black and white movie with those incredible crowds like in Ben Hur. You can see the vast encampment of Greeks around Troy, you can smell the cooking fires and hear the laughter in the camp - the jeers at the wall and the frustration on both sides as the siege goes on and on.
The epic battles near the end the claim the lives of some The story of the siege of Troy is one of heroism and tragedy. The epic battles near the end the claim the lives of some of mythologies greatest heroes - Achilles and Hector - are beyond description. The Rouse translation is a bit dry but still does a great job of bringing this classic tale to life. I would love to hear from commenters on alternate translations, but this one which is a bit of a classic is the only one I have tried.
My very best experience with the Iliad. In fact, one of my best audio book experiences. After that, the Greeks had arrived in the Mediterranean and started to create a civil society.
Before that, they were essentially tribes from the steppes between the Black Sea and the Caspian—nomadic, male-dominated, violent. That's the essential drama of Homer: this beautiful city trying to defend itself against these increasingly lawless, violent warriors outside. That's what The Iliad is about. Bernard Knox , the renowned Homer scholar, says that 3, years haven't changed the human condition.
We're still lovers and victims of violence, and as long as we are, Homer will be read as the truest interpretation of humankind. Can we love Homer without loving violence? I think Homer does not love violence in the end. Homer dramatizes violence as one of the aspects of the human condition, but he doesn't celebrate it.
It's a grave misunderstanding to think that Homer is about how beautiful the violent warrior is. The key to that comes at the end of The Iliad. You've had these terrible scenes where Achilles, the great Greek warrior, has killed Hector, the prince of Troy, and tied him to the back of his chariot and dragged him round the walls of Troy with his whole family looking down from the ramparts.
It's not some elegant funeral procession. It's a hectic, brutal moment, and we can only read that with horror in our minds. Michael Longley , the great Irish poet, calls The Iliad "an ocean of sadness.
You say these are essentially authorless works. Are there any manuscripts? Tell us about Venetus A. Homer's works were orally transmitted and orally performed poems, ever changing in the mouths of the different people who learned them and told them again. The Iliad survived for hundreds, if not thousands, of years as a spoken poem and was eventually written down, around to B.
But no manuscripts survive from that time. The earliest that survive were found rolled up under the heads of mummified Greek Egyptians in the Egyptian deserts from about to B. But they're just fragments, not the whole Iliad. The oldest complete Iliad is a manuscript found in the doge's library in Venice. A French scholar discovered it at the end of the 18th century, which is why it's called the Venetus A. It had come to Venice from Constantinople-Byzantium, where it had probably been made in about A.
More importantly, it contained all kinds of marginal notes, the so-called scholia, which had been made by the great editors of The Iliad in the Greek city of Alexandria sometime between the first century B. So what you have in Venetus A is not only the text of The Iliad but also what these ancient commentators thought about it. One of the exciting things that emerge from that is that in the early days it seems there was no such thing as a single Iliad, no one fixed text, but this wild and variable tradition of the stories, with many different versions in different parts of the Mediterranean, endlessly interacting with itself, like a braided stream in the mountains.
That's a very exciting idea for me—that texts are not fixed, unitary objects but like the mental bloodstream of a whole people. You say Homer tells us who we are. There's not much in it for women, though, is there? Does your wife like Homer? And for me, it wasn't easy to spend a few years writing a book about Homer, because it basically shuts you out from the female world. There are wonderful women in Homer, like Odysseus's queen, Penelope. The word Homer uses for her means her prime quality is her wise governance—that she knows how to organize things and maintain the state for 20 years while Odysseus is away.
He deeply admires women like that. On the other hand, in the Greek camp, after chariot races, prizes are given. You either get a slave girl or a couple of oxen. So there's no doubt that the Homeric world is not one in which, on the whole, women are hugely empowered. You write that "a man is his ancestry. To what extent has your noble ancestry shaped your love for Homer? I don't love Homer because it's about warriors striding the world in a manly, baronial way. I love Homer because Homer dramatizes the shared human condition of struggle and competitiveness and pain.
The incredible honesty and courage with which Homer looks at those aspects of life is what makes it exciting. And the only reason I have that title, which I never use by the way, is because my great grandfather was a civil servant and ended up head of a British government department.
In those days they gave people peerages for that kind of thing. I'm not from some ancient, knightly world. I'm from a professional world. It's just a weird chance of history. Tell us about the poets of the Scottish Hebrides and how they may hold the key to the composition of Homer's work. We have a modern assumption that something only has meaning if it's written down.
But the counterattack soon falters. Fighting then breaks out as both sides try to lay claim to the body and armor. Hector ends up with the armor, but the Achaeans, thanks to a courageous effort by Menelaus and others, manage to bring the body back to their camp. When Achilles discovers that Hector has killed Patroclus, he fills with such grief and rage that he agrees to reconcile with Agamemnon and rejoin the battle. Thetis goes to Mount Olympus and persuades the god Hephaestus to forge Achilles a new suit of armor, which she presents to him the next morning.
Achilles then rides out to battle at the head of the Achaean army. Meanwhile, Hector, not expecting Achilles to rejoin the battle, has ordered his men to camp outside the walls of Troy. But when the Trojan army glimpses Achilles, it flees in terror back behind the city walls. Achilles cuts down every Trojan he sees. Strengthened by his rage, he even fights the god of the river Xanthus, who is angered that Achilles has caused so many corpses to fall into his streams.
Finally, Achilles confronts Hector outside the walls of Troy. Ashamed at the poor advice that he gave his comrades, Hector refuses to flee inside the city with them. In a dramatic duel, Achilles kills Hector.
He then lashes the body to the back of his chariot and drags it across the battlefield to the Achaean camp.
0コメント