Find supplemental material on the Iliad here.
Listen to the audio version here.
Order my book Revenge and its Discontents on Amazon. Electronic and paperback versions are available. The book contains my posts on all 24 books of the Iliad, the final essay, and a cast of characters section. Everything was further edited for mistakes, formatted to be more like a chapter book, and in some cases content was taken out or added.
Part 1: Introduction
The Iliad is the first stepping-stone in the road on my journey through the Western Canon.
Since the first time I read the Iliad in 2004, I was fascinated with the implications of its worldview. The issue of fate, the behavior of the gods, the seeming helplessness of the mortals… I also noted the brutal fight scenes scattered throughout and was amazed something like this was in an ancient text (I was so naive back then).
It wasn’t until much later in life that I realized the Iliad was about the anger of Achilles. I also began to scrutinize the personalities and actions of the main characters and began to notice that, perhaps, the Iliad has something to say about war—or the Trojan War in particular.
This final essay will provide a full summary of the Iliad and wrap up my thoughts about it. I will pick out what I believe are the major themes; or, perhaps more realistically, the themes that stood out to me the most.
Remember: I am not a scholar, nor an academic. I’m not an expert on ancient Greek history and culture, nor can I read ancient Greek. I’m just someone who wants to read the classics and write about them. If you’re looking for an expert, Edith Hamilton’s books are a great place to start.
I’m not familiar enough with academia, nor do I know ancient Greek culture enough, to know whether my reactions to the Iliad are common or unique, informed or misinformed, or whether anything I say would have been in the minds of the ancient Greek audience. I have a bias that is 21st century, American, Christian, right-wing, Baconian, Newtonian, Aristotelian—I could go on and on, but you get the idea—and I stand on a foundation built by many over thousands of years. The foundation Homer and his audience stood on, one for which they laid down a few bricks, was far different than the one we stand on today.
The foundation can be debated ad nauseam, but what can’t be debated is that it will color our reactions to the Iliad. For example, was it the intention of Homer to have commentary about war in his poem? Did his audience think there was? Did future generations of Greeks think there was? I don’t know.
Is my bias about war coloring my reading of the Iliad? Am I selectively picking out lines and passages and reading in a tone that isn’t there? Most likely. However, that’s what I’ve observed, and so that’s what I’ll write about.
At the end of the day, the Iliad tells a gripping, entertaining, and timeless story. You don’t have to figure out if there is social commentary, or whether we’re suppose to learn something, or whether it’s making a theological statement. You can just enjoy the story and pick out your favorite characters, decide which characters you like the least, pump your fist at every graphic death scene and think how they would look in a movie, mourn with characters who lose loved ones, laugh at the antics of the gods, etc. etc.
I chose to both enjoy the story and pick it apart for social commentary—with an emphasis on the latter.
Part 2: A Full Summary of the Iliad
For a list of the major characters, with Greek and Latin names, go here.
A priest of Apollo approaches the Achaean army as a suppliant and asks for his daughter back. Chyseis, the priest’s daughter, was captured in a raid and made a war prize to Agamemnon, the commander of the Achaean army. Agamemnon responds harshly to the priest and drives him away.
The priest prays to Apollo for justice. Apollo sends a plague on the Achaean army which kills livestock, animals, and eventually warriors. Achilles calls for a war council and it is revealed through a prophet that the plague is a result of Agamemnon’s harsh treatment of the priest of Apollo. If he wants the plague to end, he has to give back Chryseis. Agamemnon is angered by this revelation, but agrees to give Chryseis back if he can be compensated immediately. Achilles rebukes Agamemnon and tells him to wait until they sack Troy. Agamemnon is unsatisfied with this and decides to take Briseis, a woman Achilles won from an earlier raid.
This begins the feud between Achilles and Agamemnon. Agamemnon returns Chryseis to her father and takes Briseis away from Achilles. Achilles responds by withdrawing himself and his army from the siege on Troy. Distraught, Achilles calls on his mother, the sea goddess Thetis, and asks her to petition Zeus to make the war miserable for the Achaeans until Agamemnon realizes he made a big mistake humiliating him.
Zeus agrees to Thetis’ petition and sends a deceptive dream to Agamemnon to get him to attack Troy prematurely. The Achaeans march on Troy and are greeted by the Trojan army. Hector, the Trojans’ best warrior, heckles his brother Paris about cowering behind the army since this war is all his fault to begin with. Paris responds that he will agree to duel Menelaus, the brother of Agamemnon, and the winner will get Helen. Helen is Menelaus’ wife who ran away with Paris and the reason the Trojan War is being fought. Hector is relieved to hear this and calls for a truce with Agamemnon and explains the duel and the terms. Agamemnon and Menelaus agree to this.
Throughout the duel it is clear that Menelaus is the better fighter. He almost kills Paris three times, but each time Aphrodite protects Paris and eventually whisks him away. Agamemnon declares Menelaus the winner, but the goddess Athena entices one of the Trojan archers to shoot Menelaus. Though Menelaus survives, Agamemnon is enraged by the attack and rallies his army. The Trojans and Achaeans then clash for the first time in the Iliad. The Achaeans gain the advantage, with Diomedes, one of their best warriors, dominating the battlefield.
After a ceasefire is called to collect and bury the dead, there is a brief duel between Hector and the towering Telamonian Ajax. Even though Ajax has the advantage, the duel ends in a draw as the sun sets.
When the fighting resumes, Hector dominates the battlefield and the Trojans slowly gain the upper hand over the Achaeans. Agamemnon regrets the feud he started with Achilles and attempts to reconcile with him by sending him gifts, a promise to marry one of his daughters, and also a promise to return Briseis. Noticeably absent in the reconciliation is an apology. Achilles rejects the offer.
Afterward, Diomedes and Odysseus go on a night reconnaissance mission to gather information about the Trojans and cause a little mayhem. Even though they kill the Thracian king and twelve of their best warriors, it is not enough to make a difference. The Trojans continue to dominate and they even manage to breach the ramparts of the Achaean camp. Hector even sets one of the ships on fire. One of Hector’s advisors tells him to return to Troy rather than camp outside the Achaean base, but Hector ignores him.
While all of this is happening, Achilles watches one of the field medics being carried back to camp wounded. He sends out his close friend Patroclus to see what’s going on. While checking up on the field medic, Nestor, who is taking care of the medic, implores Patroclus to convince Achilles to reenter the war. If Patroclus can’t convince Achilles to do that, at least try to convince him to allow Patroclus to march out with the Myrmidon army instead.
After witnessing all of the chaos at the Achaean camp, Achilles realizes him and his army are in danger. He listens to Patroclus’ pleas and lets him go on the battlefield with the Myrmidon army. Achilles gives Patroclus his armor and chariot to use, and warns him not to leave the Achaean camp once the Trojans are driven out.
Patroclus charges in with the Myrmidon army and the Achaeans manage to push the Trojans out. Ignoring Achilles’ warning, Patroclus and the Achaeans push the Trojans all the way back to the gates of Troy. It is here that Hector kills Patroclus and strips Achilles’ armor off his body.
The Trojans and the Achaeans now begin to fight over Patroclus’ body. Hector wants to put Patroclus’ head on the walls of Troy and throw his body to the dogs while Menelaus wants to bring Patroclus’ body back for burial. A messenger tells Achilles that Patroclus is dead. Grieved and angered, Achilles steps in view of the two armies and screams in rage. This scares the Trojans and gives the Achaeans the advantage they need to secure Patroclus’ body. Achilles vows revenge even though, according to a prophecy, it will cost him his life.
Thetis, Achilles’ mother, visits Hephaestus and commissions him to make a new set of armor for Achilles. Hephaestus agrees and makes Achilles an incredible set of bronze armor and the famous Shield of Achilles—a shield with lifelike images depicting human civilization.
When Achilles receives the armor he publicly reconciles with Agamemnon. The next day the Achaean army marches out and Achilles ravages the Trojan army. He splits it in two, with one half running back to Troy and the other half running into a nearby river. Achilles chases the half that ran into the river, killing so many Trojans the corpses clog it. Afterward, Achilles seeks out Hector.
Hector stays outside Troy and ushers what’s left of the army inside its walls. He feels guilty for the turn of events and decides he’s going to confront Achilles. After a great chase around the outside of Troy, Achilles kills Hector, ties up his body to his chariot, and drags it all the way back to camp.
Achilles buries Patroclus, and holds funeral games in his honor, while leaving Hector’s body out to rot. The gods send their messenger Hermes to King Priam in order to help him petition Achilles for the return of his son’s body. Hermes conceals Priam until he is inside Achilles’ tent and Priam begs Achilles to give back Hector so he can bury and mourn him. Achilles is moved by the act and agrees, promising to give the Trojans twelve days to mourn and bury Hector before resuming the war.
Part 3: Musings
3.1 – That Hideous Rage
The central focus of the Iliad is Achilles—specifically, his anger.
Sing, O goddess, the anger of Achilles son of Peleus, that brought countless ills upon the Achaeans.
Iliad, Book 1; Samuel Butler translation
This is despite the fact that, excluding the gods, the characters that appear the most in the poem are Agamemnon and Hector. The Trojan War is merely the setting. The feud between Paris and Menelaus over Helen, the very reason for the war, takes a back seat.
Other translations use words like “wrath” or “rage” instead of anger. I think those words more closely evoke the dread that is weaved into the story. The events of the Trojan War carry on, but the anger of Achilles works its way through like venom. The toxic bite occurs when Achilles and his army withdraws from the fighting and Achilles petitions Zeus to harm the efforts of the Achaeans. And then, slowly, unimpeded, the poison begins to course through. The unthinkable begins to occur: the Achaeans fight to a stalemate with the Trojans.
This shouldn’t be. The Achaeans are battle-hardened warriors. The Trojans are city dwellers and bureaucrats. Hector is the Trojans’ best warrior. However, for example, Telamonian Ajax almost kills Hector multiple times throughout the story—and he’s not the best the Achaeans have.
The disparity between the two armies is clear. And yet, the Achaeans can’t get an advantage over the Trojans. None of them can seem to take Hector down.
The antidote is clear.
“Achilles and I are quarrelling about this girl, in which matter I was the first to offend; if we can be of one mind again, the Trojans will not stave off destruction for a day.”
Agamemnon; Iliad, Book 2; Samuel Butler translation
However, Agamemnon will not administer it. And so, the venom continues its course until it paralyzes the Achaean army.
But when the sun had reached mid-heaven, the sire of all balanced his golden scales, and put two fates of death within them, one for the Trojans and the other for the Achaeans. He took the balance by the middle, and when he lifted it up the day of the Achaeans sank; the death-fraught scale of the Achaeans settled down upon the ground, while that of the Trojans rose heavenwards. Then he thundered aloud from Ida, and sent the glare of his lightning upon the Achaeans; when they saw this, pale fear fell upon them and they were sore afraid.
Iliad, Book 8; Samuel Butler translation
It’s fitting that thunder and lightning were used to rout the Achaeans. Loud and destructive, they strike terror into anyone unfortunate enough to be close by. Thunder and lightning are perfect as manifestations of anger and wrath.
Agamemnon’s leadership completely collapses under the weight of Achilles’ rage. It was him who prematurely sent the Achaeans into battle. As a result, the Achaeans gradually lose ground until they’re pushed up to their ships. Twice, Agamemnon has to be talked out of giving up and going home. Several leaders, including Agamemnon himself, are wounded and have to withdraw from the fighting. Achaeans everywhere, disgruntled with their commander, simply refuse to fight.
“Alas! Others of the Achaeans, like Achilles, are in anger with me that they refuse to fight by the sterns of our ships.”
Agamemnon; Iliad, Book 14; Samuel Butler translation
And then it happens: a ship is set on fire. Another manifestation of rage strikes the Achaeans.
The siege of Troy is on the verge of collapse. The anger of Achilles has accomplished its goal.
Patroclus sees the plight of the Achaeans and is upset. “You’re a cruel man,” he says to Achilles. “If you won’t help them, then let me.”
Achilles reluctantly agrees. He will give Patroclus his armor, his chariot, and his army. On the one hand, it may trick the Trojans into believing Achilles has returned to the battlefield and give the Achaeans enough advantage to push them away from the camp. On the other hand, Patroclus will be protected from harm.
A new issue arises though: Patroclus now carries the weight of everything Achilles stands for. His reputation as a warrior, his status as more god than man, his uncompromising demand for honor and respect, and his vengeance on those who would do otherwise.
And Patroclus is crushed under that weight. The gods act on a mere man who bears what belongs to him who is more than a mere man. It is something Patroclus can’t handle. He’s rendered dazed and vulnerable, giving Hector the perfect opportunity to kill him.
Achilles’ anger, that cruel venom, claims the one man he didn’t want in its clutches.
“I would die here and now, in that I could not save my comrade. He has fallen far from home, and in his hour of need my hand was not there to help him.”
Achilles; Iliad, Book 18; Samuel Butler translation
If Achilles hadn’t wanted revenge against Agamemnon, if he hadn’t made that petition to Zeus, if he hadn’t stepped out of the war and given the Trojans the chance to threaten the Achaeans’ destruction, Patroclus might still be alive.
The anger of Achilles transforms. It is no longer about Achilles’ honor. It is no longer about being treated like a subordinate by someone as pathetic as Agamemnon. The anger of Achilles is now about revenge for his best friend. That revenge will be directed at Hector—the man who killed Patroclus. That revenge will also be directed at himself—the man who allowed Patroclus to die. Achilles had the chance to walk away from the war, live a quiet life, and die in obscurity. However, he will not allow himself to do that now. He must pay the price for Patroclus’ death as much as Hector should.
This transformation is accompanied by a new set of armor crafted by the god of the forge himself. A fitting accompaniment for one who is more than mortal. The Shield of Achilles depicts the various aspects of human civilization. I theorized elsewhere why these pictures were put on an instrument of war and self-defense. My three main theories were: 1) The shield depicts that which must be protected; 2) It depicts that which can be destroyed by the very actions and events where a shield is necessary; and 3) It serves as a distraction for the bearer’s enemies.
In writing this essay, I came up with a fourth theory: What is depicted on the shield is the very thing Achilles is forsaking in his revenge. Achilles will die on the battlefield and not partake of human civilization again. The shield is a reminder of the price Achilles is paying. It is a reminder of what Achilles could have had if he had given up his revenge and warring ways and went home.
Achilles then goes onto the battlefield, wielding a spear only he can use, and mercilessly slaughters every Trojan he comes across. He becomes an embodiment of violence. The most graphic death scenes in the Iliad happen during Achilles’ rampage. Achilles single-handedly splits the Trojan army in two and sends them all scrambling for safety wherever they can find it. It becomes clear that, indeed, Achilles could have ended this war sooner and Agamemnon was a fool to alienate him.
Aside from his anger toward Hector and anyone related to him, Achilles has a sort of detachment from the war. Killing Trojans left and right is nothing personal for him. Much like an encounter with a wild animal, they just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
“Idiot,” said [Achilles], “talk not to me of ransom. Until Patroclus fell I preferred to give the Trojans quarter, and sold beyond the sea many of those whom I had taken alive; but now not a man shall live of those whom heaven delivers into my hands before the city of Ilius—and of all Trojans it shall fare hardest with the sons of Priam. Therefore, my friend, you too shall die. Why should you whine in this way? Patroclus fell, and he was a better man than you are. I too – see you not how I am great and goodly? I am son to a noble father, and have a goddess for my mother, but the hands of doom and death overshadow me all as surely. The day will come, either at dawn or dark, or at the noontide, when one shall take my life also in battle, either with his spear, or with an arrow sped from his bow.”
Achilles; Iliad, Book 21; Samuel Butler translation
Achilles has come to terms with his death and finds anyone else who hasn’t absurd. It’s just how it is. It’s a cold logic only a man bent on revenge could have.
That same cold logic also causes Achilles to pass up a grand opportunity. Achilles has slaughtered many Trojans. What’s left of their army is cowering inside the walls of Troy. Achilles has his desired encounter with Hector and kills him without much effort. Under these circumstances, with the Trojan army terrified and their best warrior dead, it’s the perfect opportunity to attack Troy, sack it, and end the war.
However, that’s not what happened. That’s because the Iliad is about the anger of Achilles, not the prophesied doom of Troy.
Achilles completely ignores Troy, hitches the body of Hector up to his chariot, and drags it all the way back to camp. He gives Patroclus a proper funeral complete with funeral games. He desecrates Hector’s corpse over and over again in his anger and despair. Sacking Troy, recovering Helen, fulfilling the prophecy—all of that is forgotten. None of it matters to Achilles.
That is, until Achilles has a surprise encounter with the last man anyone would expect to meet him—Priam, king of Troy and Hector’s father.
The meeting is tense. It was only his reverence for the gods, who commanded Achilles to release Hector’s body were Priam to ask for it, that keeps him from killing. And even then, the Iliad makes it clear that one wrong move, one wrong word, and Priam would have died. Achilles has to go out of his way to make sure certain things don’t happen to keep his anger from getting the best of him.
Priam’s surprise visit brings Achilles back to reality. He can’t live in his little world of anger, grief, and revenge forever. He’s Achilles, the son of Peleus, and the greatest warrior in the Achaean army. He tells Priam that he has twelve days to mourn and bury Hector, and then the fighting will resume. With Achilles thinking about the war again, we know he’s back to normal.
That’s where Homer chooses to end the Iliad—at the point where the anger of Achilles runs its course. Achilles is still an emotional and violent demigod. However, that venomous anger, that unnatural force, is gone and will no longer cripple the Achaeans. It will no longer give the Trojans victory. It will no longer crush Agamemnon’s leadership. It will no longer seek revenge.
3.2 – The Many Facets of War
“The Many Facets of War” was originally a title I came up with for my blog post on Book 6 because of everything that happened just in that book:
Menelaus almost spares the life of a Trojan until Agamemnon steps in. He tells Menelaus they are out for nothing short than the destruction of Troy and kills the man. Imagine being that Trojan who gets a glimmer of hope that his life will be spared, only to have that hope dashed at the last second.
Diomedes kills a Trojan who was a very hospitable man and had many friends, “howbeit not one of his guests stood before him to save his life.” War will claim good men. War doesn’t care about your past good deeds—only what you can do in the moment someone comes to claim your life.
Religious observance during war like praying for victory or protection.
The back and forth in war. Sometimes one side gets the advantage only to lose it just as quickly.
The scenes with Hector and his mother, wife, and son. Most of the time, the men fighting just want to make sure their families are safe and their children have a future to look forward to.
Hector’s resolve to protect Troy. “No one can hurry me down to Hades before my time, but if a man’s hour is come, be he brave or be he coward, there is no escape for him when he has once been born.”
The feeling that something is not quite right with the war and a desire to make it right after it is over. [Hector to Paris]: “Let us be going, and we will make things right hereafter, should Jove vouchsafe us to set the cup of our deliverance before ever-living gods of heaven in our own homes, when we have chased the Achaeans from Troy.”
It’s a good showcase, in one book, some of the different sentiments and tragedies that may occur in war.
I was asked not too long ago whether I thought Homer was more in favor of the Achaeans or the Trojans. After giving it some thought, I answered that I thought Homer favored the Achaeans—but not by much.
On the one hand, the Trojan leader Hector is a noble character. Homer shows us a lot about his life, more than any other character in the Iliad. We see his interaction with his troops, his advisors, his wife and son, and the rest of his family. He is seen in a mostly positive light. He’s a man who, above all, just wants to protect his family, but also carries the burden of leading his troops and protecting the city he lives in.
In this way, many of us can relate to him. The most famous line in the Iliad, a line that resonated with generations of Greeks and continues to resonate today, is spoken by Hector:
“There is one omen, and one only—that a man should fight for his country.”
Hector; Iliad, Book 12; Samuel Butler translation
By contrast, Agamemnon, the commander of the Achaean army, is petty, tyrannical, and poor under pressure. The only thing to his credit, in my opinion, is that he’s a very capable fighter (as seen in Book 11). Their strongest warrior, Achilles, while a tragic character in his own right and the main focus of the Iliad, is nevertheless not much better. To satisfy his hurt pride, he’s willing to drag everyone, even people who support him, into suffering further in the war if it means getting back at Agamemnon.
It also becomes clear the Trojans are dragged into this war because of political corruption. Hardly any of the Trojans, especially the rank and file, want this war. They despise Paris for what he’s brought upon them.
And were it not for Paris buying off council members, the war could have either ended early or not have happened at all.
It was Antimachus who had been foremost in preventing Helen’s being restored to Menelaus, for he was largely bribed by Alexandrus…
Iliad, Book 11; Samuel Butler translation
On the other hand, far more Achaeans get the positive spotlight. Diomedes, Telamonian Ajax, Odysseus, and Idomeneus have their flaws, but are generally good warriors. They more closely resemble what we would call “heroes” or “role models.” They take up the slack when Agamemnon’s leadership fails and Achilles is off sulking in a corner.
By contrast, multiple Trojans bring harm upon their own efforts. Pandarus, who shoots Menelaus and breaks the truce between the Trojans and Achaeans (Book 4). Dolon, who foolishly went to spy on the Achaeans, gets caught, and gives up precious intel to Diomedes and Odysseus without much resistance (Book 10). Asius, who refuses to follow Hector’s lead and goes off to another front of the war and gets himself killed (Books 12 & 13). Aeneas, who almost gets himself killed multiple times and is later on seen having a pity party for himself (Books 5, 13, & 20).
Another detail to note is that most of the graphic deaths happen to the Trojans. This could either be because Homer didn’t want to see many Achaeans get brutally killed, or it’s to show how much more aggressive and warlike the Achaeans were compared to the Trojans.
I added all of this up and concluded the Achaeans are seen just a little bit more favorably.
Why do I bring this up? I want to make the point that Homer is a storyteller, not a propagandist. He’s not going to demonize the Trojans for the sake of patriotism or satisfy the bias of his audience. He’s also not going to paint the Achaeans as these seekers of justice who just want what’s right. This is not a clear good vs. evil war. He makes the “opposing side” people you can sympathize with. How would you react to a foreign invader? How would you react if your family was being threatened harm? Would you be able to do any better in the face of political corruption and a clearly stronger enemy? Would you be able to do better with allies who are not quite competent?
Yes, Paris committed the grievous offense by seducing another man’s wife and running off with her, but the Trojans aren’t standing up for Paris and making excuses for him. Quite the opposite. As I mentioned earlier, most of the Trojans despise Paris.
If they had seen him they were in no mind to hide him, for they all of them hated him as they did death itself.
The Trojan army about Paris; Iliad, Book 4; Samuel Butler translations
“It grieves me to the heart to hear the ill that the Trojans speak about you, for they have suffered much on your account.”
Hector to Paris; Iliad, Book 6; Samuel Butler translation
Because this bozo couldn’t keep it in his pants, they and their families are being threatened with ruin. And worse, the leaders are doing nothing about it. Their choices are to fight the foreign invader or submit to them. At least fighting will give their families a chance to not be killed or made into slaves.
This same logic applies to Homer’s treatment of war, or perhaps the Trojan War specifically. He’s a storyteller, not a propagandist. You see the heroic feats. You see the honor, wealth, and prestige these warriors can win. You see the warriors relishing in the thrill of battle, the elation of victory over an opponent, and the relief when the war effort goes in their favor.
You also see the ugly side of war. Men dying in graphic and unflattering ways. Men of good deeds getting killed. Men losing their composure in their final moments alive. Poor decision and strategy. Terrible leadership. Selfish actions that hurt one’s own side and helps the other. Petty squabbles. Political corruption.
However, a number of statements scattered through the Iliad stood out to me. Here are the most notable:
And now no man would have made light of the fighting if he could have gone about among it scatheless and unwounded, with Minerva leading him by the hand, and protecting him from the storm of spears and arrows. For many Trojans and Achaeans on that day lay stretched side by side downwards upon the earth.
Iliad, Book 4; Samuel Butler translation
Iron indeed must be his courage who could take pleasure in the sight of such a turmoil, and look on it without being dismayed.
Iliad, Book 13; Samuel Butler translation
Not Mars himself the lord of hosts, nor yet Minerva, even in their fullest fury could make light of such a battle. Such fearful turmoil of men and horses did Jove on that day ordain round the body of Patroclus.
Iliad, Book 17; Samuel Butler translation
These statements could be for dramatic effect. Homer is a master storyteller after all. They could also show that war, or the Trojan War specifically, is not something Homer wishes to glorify. Homer does not want to celebrate this event and raise the patriotic spirit of his audience. It’s possible Homer wants to show that war, or the Trojan War specifically, is a sobering, brutal, and cruel event that drags many into its clutches and acts on them without bias and without compassion.
3.3 – The Gods as a Punchline (to a Dark Joke)
If the modern man were to picture his ideal pantheon of gods, I imagine they would picture gods who each oversee a domain of existence. These gods would ensure their domains function properly so that human civilization can flourish. They would favor devotees of their particular domains, especially if they paid respect to those gods, and show disfavor toward those who would try to diminish or destroy their domains. They would give guidance to their devotees, appear to them on occasion, and only intervene directly when necessary. These gods would act responsibly because to do otherwise would violate the laws of nature, undo human agency, disrupt the consequences of actions and events, or make the natural world too dependent on them.
Perhaps, I am just speaking for myself. However, I think I can safely say that hardly anyone today would picture their ideal pantheon of gods as the ones presented in the Iliad. Gods who are selfish, vindictive, prone to throwing tantrums, aloof, nearsighted, and see the mortals as pawns for their pleasure and entertainment. These gods are like children with cosmic powers.
The Iliad shows a sharp contrast between the gods and the mortals. The mortals are toiling and dying in the war. Their lives are threatened. Their families’ lives are threatened. They’re losing wealth and comfort. They don’t know what tomorrow will bring.
Meanwhile, the gods are up in their abode throwing parties and complaining about how much the mortals give them a hard time. They interfere in the war to help their favorite sides while oblivious or apathetic to the fact that their interference is just causing the mortals more suffering. When the gods do confront each other, it amounts to nothing more than comedy. It seems to be more for themselves and their entertainment than to be helpful to the mortals.
They fell on one another with a mighty uproar – earth groaned, and the spacious firmament rang out as with a blare of trumpets. Jove heard as he was sitting on Olympus, and laughed for joy when he saw the gods coming to blows among themselves.
Iliad, Book 21; Samuel Butler translation
The gods can’t even leave the mortals alone when they have a moment’s reprieve from the war. While the mortals have funeral games for their fallen comrade, the gods can’t help themselves but to jump in, give victory to the men they like, and dole out defeat to the ones they don’t.
Hera and Athena are among the worst portrayed in the Iliad for their pettiness and vindictiveness. Based on their behavior, you would hardly believe that Hera is the queen of the gods and Athena is the goddess of wisdom and war. They have pathological levels of hatred for the Trojans. They have no problems watching the Trojans suffer, but as soon as the Achaeans start losing they’re throwing tantrums and accusing Zeus of being heartless for not sympathizing with their plight. Hera trades her favorite cities to Zeus in exchange for the destruction of Troy like they’re playing cards. Hera and Athena both refuse to help Aeneas who is fated to live and rebuild with the Trojan survivors. Poseidon is the one that helps Aeneas even though he hates the Trojans—showing that Poseidon is not completely overcome with vindictiveness. Hera and Athena even refuse to put any effort into helping Priam get Hector’s body back from Achilles.
Even worse, Hera and Athena refuse to let the Trojan War end when it’s clear both the Achaeans and the Trojans want it to. They interfere to keep the Achaeans from leaving the shores of Troy. When a truce is decided and Menelaus becomes the de facto winner of a duel between him and Paris, Athena intervenes to make sure the war erupts again. She tempts one of the Trojans into shooting Menelaus. Think about that: the goddess of wisdom and war uses temptation to get a Trojan to become an oath breaker, all because her and Hera hate the Trojans and don’t want the war to end.
Athena commits, I believe, the cruelest act of all the gods in the Iliad. In Book 22, while Hector is being chased by Achilles, she comes to Hector in the form of one of his brothers, whom he says “you have always been dearest to me of all my brothers,” and she promises to help Hector take on Achilles. As soon as Hector confronts Achilles though, Athena disappears and Hector is left alone.
Athena takes on the form of someone Hector is close to, someone he respects and trusts, tricks him into his doom, and abandons him to the bloodthirsty Achilles.
Who needs the Devil when you have Athena?
Anyway, you never find out why Hera and Athena hate Troy until the final book. It’s there you learn they were “disdained” by Paris who preferred another goddess. You have to look outside the Iliad to find out Paris was forced to be a judge in a beauty contest between Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite. They had to resort to bribing him and he chose Aphrodite. For losing this beauty contest, Hera and Athena hated the Trojans so much they wanted to see them destroyed and enslaved.
I’ve read somewhere (I don’t remember where unfortunately) that this statement in Book 24 alluding to the beauty contest may have been added later to the poem. If this is true, then the Iliad provides zero explanation why Hera and Athena hate Troy. Every time Zeus asks the goddesses why they hate Troy so much, they evade the question. We know why the other gods and goddesses like one side and/or hate the other, and we know that Athena and Hera favor some of the Achaeans, but apart from that statement in Book 24 the Iliad is silent as to why Athena and Hera hate the Trojans so much.
Aside from the pettiness, the gods throughout the Iliad serve as comic relief. Hera seducing Zeus in Book 14 and the gods fighting each other in Book 21 (if you want to call it that) can only be comedic breaks in an otherwise heavy story. Sure, the mortals have their comedic moments, like old Nestor constantly going off about his past exploits and the pitiful Thersites being reduced to crying like a little baby, but the gods provide far more comedic relief. These comedic moments not only serve as breaks from the drama, but they sharpen the contrast between the gods and the mortals. The gods can sit back, act like spoiled brats, play pranks on one another, get laid, go about their day with no cares in the world—all the while the mortals toil in war and hardship.
The only serious role they play, aside from pushing the Trojan War forward, are being the keepers of Fate. I’ll explore that in the next section.
Seeing the gods portrayed as they are in the Iliad, I’ve always wondered why Homer portrayed the gods this way. The gods are not presented in a very flattering light. I don’t know about anyone else, but if I want to tell a story and my gods are involved somehow, I wouldn’t want to portray them anywhere close to how Homer did. I would certainly not want a work like the Iliad in existence if I wanted to show other peoples how great my gods are.
Is this really how Homer and his audience viewed their gods? Is the Iliad making a theological statement of some kind? Is he compiling all of the absurdities of the gods from past stories and putting them up on display? In other words, is the display of the gods in the Iliad a logical conclusion from the stories that preceded it?
Or, is it more of a literary choice? Comedies and satyr plays from the ancient Greeks lampooned the gods—however, the gods were still revered. For example, in Aristophanes’ comedy The Frogs, Dionysus is the butt of many jokes in the beginning—and it’s hilarious. However, as soon as he takes his place as a judge in a contest between two Greek poets, he’s no longer the joke. He’s now a god whose position must be respected.
Is something similar going on in the Iliad? The gods are like characters out of a dark comedy… until they’re fulfilling their role as the executors of Fate. Then they are serious—deadly serious.
3.4 – The Peculiar Role of Fate
Fate is presented in an interesting way in the Iliad. I have two observations regarding it.
The first is that Fate is taken for granted. It is never questioned. No one is able to go against it. No one shakes their fist at it. Why does Fate exist? Why do the gods enforce Fate? What is the ultimate goal of Fate? These questions are left unanswered. These questions are not even asked. It’s just how things are.
The second is that the Iliad presents Fate as a law that must be obeyed—and the gods are the law enforcement. There is no discussion of what may happen if Fate is defied, only that it must not be defied.
If anyone in the Iliad threatens to defy Fate, the gods come down and make sure that doesn’t happen. They prevent the Achaeans from leaving because they haven’t sacked Troy. They prevent the Achaeans from sacking Troy until the appointed time. They keep certain men from being killed at all (like Aeneas, Paris, and Menelaus) or only until it’s their time (like Hector and Patroclus).
This raises an interesting implication: do the mortals have the ability to defy Fate were it not for the gods’ intervention? This would set the mortals apart from the gods. This would mean that mortals have agency. However, it would also mean that that agency has to be suppressed by the gods for whatever reason. Is it because the gods are jealous or resentful of the mortals? The gods do seem to have a level of resentment toward them. They question throughout the story why they’re suffering or going through so much hardship for the mortals. It’s like they’re reluctant—or, perhaps, they are like employees complaining about work. Could it be that if the mortals defy Fate there will be dire consequences and that’s why the gods go through so much to keep Fate from being defied? Those questions are not answered, nor asked, either.
Perhaps, though, this ability to defy Fate only applies to these men fighting the Trojan War (and perhaps the generations before them). The only reason I could think of why is that many of them are descendants of the gods themselves—whether it’s a parent, grandparent, etc. It’s implied that the gods could simply refuse to enforce Fate—such as when Zeus considers keeping his son Sarpedon from dying and has to be checked by Hera.
Think about it. The enforcers of this law called Fate produce children. And those children have children. They are offspring of both those who have the power to enforce Fate and those whom Fate rule over. These men then begin acting in history.
What do you think would happen if they were left unchecked? They would probably defy Fate. And for some reason, that simply can’t happen. So, the gods intervene and make sure Fate is carried out.
All throughout the Iliad the gods, by both helping out the Trojans and the Achaeans, drag out the war and the fighting. Why can’t the war end with another outcome other than the sacking of Troy? Why does the war need to take ten years? If one of the Achaeans have the advantage and ability to sack Troy, why are they stopped? Why does Zeus honor Achilles’ petition to give the Trojans a temporary advantage over the Achaeans? Why does Zeus wait until Patroclus kills more Trojans before having Apollo intervene to get him killed? Why does Zeus prolong the fighting over Patroclus’ body? Why does Zeus stop paying attention to the war even though he should know the other gods, especially Hera and Athena, will try to intervene?
And let’s not forget about the fact that this whole war is being fought over the return of a single woman. It would be one thing to put a lot of pressure on Troy. It’s another to go to war where many men die in combat and many men, women, and children die in raids and sackings.
My theory, which is based on the theories of other ancient Greeks, is that the Trojan War was a means of population control—specifically, to reduce the number of men who were descendants of the gods.
And that’s all I’m doing: theorizing. The Iliad is just a story after all. However, the story could have been told without the gods intervening in the way they did. It could have been told without all of these statements peppered throughout about how something was or wasn’t fated, or that someone would have defied fate were it not for a god stepping in.
It leads me to think that, perhaps, Homer is both telling a great story and exploring some theological and philosophical ideas. Perhaps, as I mentioned above, he is bringing ideas to their logical conclusion for one purpose or another.
3.5 – The Character of the Characters
I don’t know why, but in my recent readings of the Iliad I was tripped up over the idea that the Iliad was some text the ancient Greeks looked to in order to find role models and moral guidance—as if the Iliad was a sacred text on the level the Bible is to many people today.
After looking into this a little, it doesn’t seem that was the case. The Iliad does explore different themes, of which I’ve touched on some in this essay, but otherwise it’s just an epic poem that brought entertainment to the masses.
This is a relief, personally, because, of the characters that get the most focus—Achilles, Agamemnon, and Hector—only Hector is a good role model. Achilles and Agamemnon are primarily examples of what not to do.
This is how I generally view the primary and supporting characters in the Iliad. Some are examples of what not to do, some are examples of good character, and some are a mixture of both. Here are my brief impressions of the more prominent characters:
Achilles: His story shows the unintended consequences of revenge and being unable to control your emotions. He’s an example of the famous lesson popularized by the Spiderman story: With great power comes great responsibility. Achilles had great power, but he was not very responsible with it, and many suffered and died as a result—including his best friend.
Agamemnon: He’s the perfect example of what not to do as a leader. He was made commander of the Achaean army and let that privileged position get to his head. For the most part, he cared only for himself and what he could get. He thought he could just throw his authority around and get his way. By the time Achilles reenters the war, the Achaean expedition is on the verge of collapse, many Achaeans are unhappy with Agamemnon, and he almost gives up and goes home.
Menelaus: He’s too reliant on Agamemnon, though this may be at least partially Agamemnon’s fault. Agamemnon appeared to be overprotective of Menelaus—simultaneously keeping Menelaus from making his own decisions while lamenting that Menelaus relied on him too much. Menelaus also appears to be indecisive which may also have to do with his reliance on Agamemnon. However, when Agamemnon is out of the picture, Menelaus thrives—not just on the battlefield, but also in leadership. He also seems to be a man of compassion. Multiple times throughout the Iliad he feels bad for dragging his fellow Achaeans into this war. He seems to have a strong sense of justice—preferring to settle the score with Paris only as well as being frustrated that, from his perspective, the Trojans are protecting a man who took his wife. Menelaus is an example of what someone is capable of doing when there are no more excuses for their shortcomings and it’s do or die.
Paris: He’s one of those “don’t hate me because I’m beautiful” types. He’s the one who has looks, money, and influence that people suck up too in order to share in the benefits that come with those perks. However, all of that is superficial, as Helen learned the hard way. Below the surface he’s a coward, selfish, and conniving. He’s the perfect example of “beauty is only skin deep.”
Hector: He is the noblest of all the characters in the Iliad. If it weren’t for the anger of Achilles being the primary focus, the Iliad could have easily been a poem about the tragic hero Hector. He exemplifies leadership by rallying his troops and pushing them to fight even though he’s aware Troy is doomed to fall (either because he knows of the prophecy or because he knows the Achaeans are a superior fighting force). He exemplifies patriotism in his willingness to fight and die for his city against a foreign invader threatening his and his people’s families. He exemplifies nobility in his willingness to be fair and his frustration with the political corruption of Troy (which allows Paris to keep Helen without punishment). Lastly, he exemplifies familial responsibility in his interactions with his mother, wife, and son. Hector is basically the standard for masculinity. He doesn’t really become a tragic character until toward the end of the story. He gets carried away in the victories the Trojans win and it gets to his head. He refuses to listen to his advisor when he tells Hector to head back to Troy rather than camp outside the Achaeans’ base. He dons Achilles’ armor which he won after killing Patroclus—something even Zeus considered wrong. He also wanted to retrieve Patroclus’ body and display his head like a trophy—something that contradicted his earlier attitude about the dead (see Book 7). When all of this backfires due to Achilles entering the war, Hector’s honor and pride prevents him from retreating within the walls of Troy. He doesn’t want to face the inevitable blame he would receive for his blunder in leadership. Hector may also be aware that, if he did go inside Troy, Achilles would sack it just to get to him. It may be that Hector’s final act was a sacrifice for the sake of Troy and his family.
Odysseus: He should have been the commander of the Achaean army, not Agamemnon. Over and over again, he showed great leadership by keeping the army in line, rebuking Agamemnon for his poor leadership, and even keeping Achilles reigned in. Odysseus is also adept in rhetoric—using words to his advantage to get a desired outcome. Odysseus is both someone you should learn from in terms of seeing the benefits of mastering oratory, but also be wary of because that oratory could be used on you if you let your guard down.
Nestor: He played a more advisory role in the army due to his advanced age, but he was always willing to go out into battle and lead his army. He’s an example of someone who doesn’t let his infirmities and shortcomings prevent him from doing what he can. However, the advice he gave was either not listened to, like when Agamemnon ignored his advice to not provoke Achilles; or, produced disastrous results, such as advising Agamemnon to listen to Zeus’ deceptive dream which led to disaster or when he advised Patroclus to go out and fight which ultimately led to his death. Age does not always mean wisdom. It could be argued though, that his advice was disastrous only because the gods intervened. Also, Nestor is a reminder that if you have a lot of good stories to tell, wait for the appropriate times to tell them. You will be tuned out otherwise.
Diomedes: He is a great example of courage. While the whole army was running away after Zeus sent his lightning bolts onto the battlefield, Diomedes ran into the fray to get Nestor out of a bad situation. It was only when Nestor advised him to retreat that he did—the few times Nestor’s advice was not only listened to but also did not produce worse results. And even then, when Hector shamed him for running, Diomedes turned back around to fight and only retreated when a well-placed lightning bolt by Zeus stopped him. When the Achaeans launched a counterattack, Diomedes was the first out the gate. However, Diomedes also felt he stood in the shadow of his father, the great warrior Tydeus who died in the famous siege of Thebes. Diomedes is not only compared to his father by others, but he constantly does it to himself. He’s a reminder that you shouldn’t stress out over the accomplishments of your ancestors—and that you yourself shouldn’t stress out others by comparing them to their ancestors. Use their accomplishments to motivate you to your own greatness, but don’t let it be a chip on your shoulders.
Idomeneus: He is a capable warrior in own right, although he is hindered a bit by his age. Idomeneus is one the older Achaean warriors, but not so old that he can’t fight. Like Nestor, he shows that despite his shortcomings due to age he does what he can to help in the war. Idomeneus also shows great courage and level-headedness. He knows when he can fight and he knows when he has to retreat or go on the defensive. Unlike Diomedes, he doesn’t rush out into battle to prove himself or defend his honor. Idomeneus also seems to be pious toward the gods—perhaps to the point of superstition. Piety is good until it makes you second guess every action you want to make to the point of inaction. Or, until it makes you too afraid to do what’s right or necessary because it might not be “God’s will.”
Telamonian Ajax: He is another Achaean warrior who showed undaunted courage as well as incredible perseverance. Ajax is most known for the huge shield he carried around that he could hide himself and others behind. He used this shield to get warriors out of bad situations. He could be relied upon to get things done—even in the direst of situations. He defended one of the ships with an eighteen foot sea-pike, to the point of exhaustion, until the spearhead was cut off and he was forced to retreat. The shield is not a flashy tool in war unlike the sword or the spear or the bow and arrow. Ajax showed that even something like a shield can win you renown and respect and make you a reliable asset to others. Ajax picked something that worked for him, that helped him stand apart from the rest, and it paid off.
Sarpedon: He is a Trojan ally who showed great leadership and was a capable warrior in his own right. His speech in Book 12 is remarkable for its insight. A leader shouldn’t take all the rewards and benefits that come from leadership, sit back, and grow fat on them. He should live up to the honors and accolades he receives from those he leads and prove to them that he is worthy of those accolades. A leader accepts the responsibility of leadership—even if it means hardship or worse. Not everyone can or should be a leader.
Part 4: Final Impression
So, is the Iliad worth reading?
Absolutely, yes.
Don’t be intimidated by the fact that it’s a 2800 year old work. You can read it and understand it and enjoy it without needing a degree or a credential or a college course. You don’t even need to read a book or article about the Iliad before diving in.
There are plenty of modern translations into English that are easy to follow (such as the Fagles translation, which I highly recommend). A handful of the public domain translations are even easy to follow with some effort. If you can read Tolkien, or Robert E. Howard, or C. S. Lewis, or Edgar Allen Poe, you can read the Butler, Murray, or Lang translations. If you want to challenge yourself, read the Chapman or Cowper translations.
The Iliad is simply a timeless story about war, revenge, and defending your home. Whether you’re reading it for yourself, reading it for a book club, or going through it in the classroom as a student or a teacher, that’s all you have to keep in mind.
You don’t need to, like me, get hung up in the implications of the gods’ actions or the role of fate. I was doing that for fun.
You don’t need to make the mistake I made initially in believing this is a story of good guys vs. bad guys or that everyone on one side is noble while the other side is dishonorable. It isn’t, and they aren’t.
The Iliad is not the modern novel where the protagonist has some flaws, and probably a dark past, but is otherwise a good person with traits we can admire. The Iliad has larger-than-life characters—many of them are related to the gods after all—and that means their good traits and their bad traits stand out.
Just pick up the poem and read it. Be approving of the characters or be disappointed with them. Be horrified or fascinated at the gruesome deaths. See the glorification of war or see a cautionary tale about it. Just read it.
Homer is a master storyteller. He paints pictures you can visualize, he’s graphically detailed, he knows how to put in those subtle touches to raise the drama and tension and unpleasantness of the story; and, even though he reveals whole plot points beforehand, he uses these revelations to enrich the story rather than spoil it. Would that there were more good storytellers like Homer today.
Homer’s other surviving work, the Odyssey, is an even better story in my opinion. It’s faster paced, it’s more focused, and the fantastic elements better enhance the story compared to the divine elements of the Iliad. And, while the Iliad is focused on a pertinent topic like war, a topic that needs to be discussed and argued about more than ever in the wake of the 20th century and the botched wars of the 21st, the Odyssey focuses on a topic much closer to home. Literally.
Look forward to it. I’m certainly looking forward to the next step in my journey through the classics of the Western Canon.
May your days be filled with grace.
-Andronikos