The Literature Network
Authors: 260
Books: 2,712
Poems & Short Stories: 3,817
Forum Members: 50,380
Forum Posts: 577,669
Subscribe for ad free access & additional features.
Teacher Accounts with student management and more.
Teacher Accounts with student management and more.
The Iliad
Fan of this book? Help us introduce it to others by writing a better introduction for it. It's quick and easy, click here.
Quizzes on The Iliad
No quizzes available to take yet.
Please submit a quiz here.
Recent Forum Posts on The Iliad
Post a New Comment/Question on The Iliad
Attention Bookworms:
Buying from Amazon.com? Check out the Amazon Coupons first so you get the best deal.
Shakespeare wrote over 150 sonnets!
Join our Sonnet-A-Day Newsletter and read them all, one at a time. As Seen In: USA Today "Hot Sites"
Join our Sonnet-A-Day Newsletter and read them all, one at a time. As Seen In: USA Today "Hot Sites"
Favorite Translation?
What is your favorite translation of the Iliad / Odyssey? ...It's hard to beat Alexander Pope's rhyming couplets for iambic pentametric perfection (if you will), but he's not the only one out there. Thoughts?
Posted By Literary_Cat at Mon 27 Aug 2007, 8:06 PM in The Iliad || 2 Replies
Hesitation of Achilles
This came up in another thread, and I thought I'd make it the subject of a new thread. Hopefully other lit-net members will join in because I'm pretty sure Klaus Peter is tired of hearing from me! One problem I´m trying to solve at this moment is when Achilles wants to kill Agamemnon, but "his heart was divided in counsel, whether he should draw his sharp sword from his side and break up the assembly and kill Agamemnon, or whether he should check his wrath and curb his spirit". Achilles is not the dubious, undecided Hamlet type, but a rather impetuous warrior. Why the sudden doubts? What is the message the author is trying to convey? What is your opinion? Please leave the gods are out of the problem. The quote is from Book 1, around line 190 of the Iliad. Even though Klaus Peter has stated his preference for leaving the gods out of the problem, I think the gods are an important enough part of the Iliad that it should be fair game to talk about them. Here are some of my thoughts to start things off: I think this episode is consistent with Achilles' character. We see other examples of him backing off of intentions formed in excessive anger in Book 9 and in Book 24. In Book 9, he angrily makes up his mind to leave for home the next morning in response to Odysseus' speech, but that determination is relaxed first, after the speech of Phoenix, to deciding the next morning whether or not to leave, and finally, after the remarks of Ajax, to staying put but refraining from fighting until his own ships are threatened. In Book 24, Achilles relents and allows Priam to ransom the body of Hector, even though he originally meant to disgrace Hector's corpse by exposing it to scavengers. I think the remarkable thing isn't that Achilles hesitated, but rather that he was so bold and so angry as to seriously consider murdering Agamemnon. Achilles' angry and vague threat that Agamemnon will be sorry was enough to provoke Nestor to chastise him (Achilles) for not giving Agamemnon his due respect. In fact, I can't think of any instance in the Iliad of a Greek warrior killing another Greek warrior. As for the author's purpose, besides providing a heightened moment of tension and highlighting the magnitude of the offense that Achilles felt, it gives a glimpse of a part of Achilles' character which, as I said, will manifest itself in crucial ways later in the poem. This part of Achilles' behavior can even be seen as the Iliad in a nutshell: the Greeks come close to destruction because of the wrath of Achilles, but this wrath is quenched and the Greeks escape destruction.
Posted By bluevictim at Fri 3 Aug 2007, 5:09 PM in The Iliad || 1 Reply
Iliad Survey.
Hello, everyone. I am creating a survey about the question of heroism in The Iliad. Basically, I want to know about your opinions on the warriors of The Iliad - heroic or lucky? For example, we hear all about the talented archers and strong warriors but when the gods are against them they don't appear so talented or strong; in fact, they appear dead. If you want more information I will attach the rough draft of my essay in order to clarify my idea. Also, tell me why you chose your answer. Thank you in advance. -- Essay More Gods, More Problems Now and probably since the birth of religion, people have struggled with the thoughts of supernatural existence, divine presence, and similar ideas pertaining to their faith. Those who choose not to believe often base their decision off of a lack of empirical evidence or divinely-inspired symbols; on the other side, those who do believe can only put their faith into mere beliefs. However, imagine a world where those mere beliefs are true beliefs, not only because the gods abundantly show signs to their people, but they also have the ability to control every aspect of these peoples’ lives if they so pleased. From great events in history to trivial matters, and even including the precise details of one’s own life, the gods are in control. Such is the world of the inaptly titled heroes of The Odyssey and The Iliad, those men who are played like chess pieces and strung like puppets. Besides the limited free-will of humans, it’s evident that the gods are in control of the world. The funeral games of Patroclus show how the gods intervene in even the minutest of matters, favoring those who chose to respect them rather than those who possess true, innate ability. Also, the Trojan War illustrates how the gods can shape and mold history; Athena deceived Pandarus, one of innate ability and good choice, in order to revive the battle she sought. Lastly, the man of Odysseus, one devoid of choice and the ability or means to save himself, appears as a hero by the will of an admiring goddess. Humans may have a choice or say in such events, but the final say is always that of the gods. As previously stated, the funeral games show that one who prays well will conquer one that plays well. Funeral games are contests where humans test their skills against another in order to win rewards; however, it develops into a contest between who can kiss up the most to the powerful gods. The first example is shown during the chariot race, when Apollo caused Diomedes to drop his whip, giving Eumelus the lead. Athena, being angered at this, causes Eumelus’ chariot to break, throwing Eumelus into the dirt and granting victory to Diomedes. Shortly after the chariot race, the three runners: Odysseus, Ajax, and Antilochus took their marks. Ajax was the clear favorite of the people, but not of the goddess Athena. Subsequently, Ajax was tripped and lost to Athena’s precious Odysseus. Lastly, the great archer, Teucer, met the archery challenge against Meriones. Once again, the favorite of the men was not the favorite of the god. Teucer, the best archer in the army missed the target by Apollo’s bidding, angered due to Teucer’s forgetfulness of praying to him and offering him glorious sacrifices. On the contrary, Meriones promised Apollo a wealth of sacrifices, ensuring that his arrow would strike the target. It seems that even a man’s innate ability falls short to the will of the gods. In addition to the small matters of the world, the gods shape and mold the history of the world as well. A well-reinforced example of this is Athena’s deception during the 9th year of the Trojan War. The goddess Athena, who championed the Argives, would not remain a spectator while her favored men were whipped like a chariot team. In order to provoke the Argives and stir within them a rage that could match even Achilles’, Athena devised her deceptive ploy. Transforming to that of a Trojan spearman, Athena sought the expert archer of Lycoan, Pandarus. Arousing the ambitious archer with thoughts of fame, glory, and honor, his hand moved towards the bowstrings; his aim was fixed on Menelaus. However, even with good choice—following the counsel of a goddess—and innate ability—expert archery skills—Pandarus could not hit his mark. Athena deceived poor Pandarus and swept away his arrow along with his dreams and aspirations. The enraged Argives took up arms and the war was revived; this revival ultimately led to Pandarus’ death at the hands of Diomedes. Innate ability and good choice were not enough to save poor Pandarus from the will of the gods. Aside from the events of the world, the gods can control something even more important—your life. It is indeed true that Odysseus was a man of tactful thinking and honed combat skills; however, he was also a man of great fortune. The goddess Athena had favored him; subsequently, many blessings and similar benefits had come his way. As previously mentioned, Odysseus, at one point in his journey, became a man devoid of choice and the ability to save himself, contrarily to Pandarus. Ironically, as he frantically clung onto a wooden plank in the middle of the sea during a raging storm, Odysseus had no need to worry because his watcher Athena sought to rescue him. Not only did she drag Odysseus by the strings to the safety of the beach, but also she made him appear as a hero among men to Princess Nausicaa, thus ensuring him the means to finally journey homewards. Odysseus was raised in height, the build of his body firmed, and his face and body became shining. Even in times when one lacks ability and choice, a god’s favor can still make one a hero With such a god-influenced world it is hard to imagine that the humans are in control. As stated before, the gods decide the events of the world and how they unfold. Instead of the gods being the spectators, the humans are the ones watching while the gods play their game of life. They can not fight it and they can not escape it, they can only suffer it. Rather than calling one “swift runner” or “brilliant,” it may be wiser to just call them lucky or god-favored.
Posted By Jer at Tue 24 Apr 2007, 7:08 PM in The Iliad || 10 Replies
Pope's Translations Outshines the Genius of Homer?
I am not a speaker of Greek. So I have not read the original Iliad and Odyssey, But I have been reading several translations of Iliad and Odyssey, along with the poems of Lord Alfred Tennyson (Ulysses, Idylls of the King, Lotus Eaters). But we should bear in minds that the age when Homer comes out with his work (We should also consider that at those times, Epics, were meant to be sung, remembered and passed down orally, not only in Greece, but in many cultures and Civilizations, eg. Norse, Indian, etc.) and the Age when Pope and Tennyson writes their works, there is huge gap in terms of the civilizatoin development. One can roughly say that Homer's Iliad and Odyssey comes at the Dawn of the Civilization Day and Pope and Tennyson's works come in the Afternoon of the same day. So comparing and making statements like Pope or Tennyson Outshines Homer, does not make sense. Each is truely a genius and a master poet and epic maker in his own way. But what remains same with Homer or Pope or Tennyson or Maestros is that their works are ever the same, everwhere, anywhere, at any time, and at all times (till doomsday or eternity).
Posted By Outis at Sat 16 Dec 2006, 3:19 AM in The Iliad || 1 Reply
Weaving help
Hi, I need references to weaving (or spinning) in the Iliad, both metaphorical and literal uses. And is there some consistent correlation between the metaphorical and literal uses of the word? And What symmbolic function does theis imagery serve within the context of the scene and in what ways is it suggestive of soem larger themes of the epic?
Posted By Googly at Thu 12 Oct 2006, 9:52 PM in The Iliad || 1 Reply
Critique of the work
Could someone supply me with a link or links to some scholarly critiques of the Iliad? I am having difficulty finding any critiques...and I feel that my internet searching capabilities are rather good. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Posted By nunya at Mon 26 Jun 2006, 11:59 AM in The Iliad || 1 Reply
Iliad discussion help
I have to identify an "unavoidable issue" in this poem which I felt is the essence for me as a reader and I have to cite the text which best presents this issue. The problem is I'm just not getting it. Any thoughts, hints, suggestions?
Posted By GabrielNYC at Thu 6 Apr 2006, 5:38 PM in The Iliad || 0 Replies
The Aeneid Vs. The Illiad
I need to compare two ideas in the Illiad and the Aeneid. I was thinking that i would do hector and aenaes but i can't think of enough to say about him in my paper. Please help!
Posted By onlylol at Thu 29 Sep 2005, 6:13 PM in The Iliad || 1 Reply
No Subject
I think it is fine to use Roman names for the heroes. It is fashionable nowadays to become very nationalistic about literature; Poe is firmly seen as American, Verne as French, Shakespeare as English et cetera. We must look beyond national boundaries and embrace the person, and their structural purpose, not their name. Odysseus is "antitheou" whether one calls him Ullyses, Odysseus, or Norman the Nipple. It is a flimsy argument that Homer wrote the Odyssey and the Illiad in the Homeric Greek we are presented as "His". We must not become obsessed and revere these works as the voice of the gods, they have been evidently changed over the course of time. If the only thing the Romans altered is a name, we must be grateful indeed.
Frankly, i think Ulysses sounds more heroic to ears that demand the English tongue anyway, and as Homer was so interested in euphony, it would be surely callous to not carry that through, if it does not change the plot...
"Romeo and Juliet", Act 2 Scene 2. Roundabout line 80.
Posted By willy the pigeon at Tue 24 May 2005, 6:07 PM in The Iliad || 1 Reply
Homer Translations
Every single translator has and will fail miserably at translating Homer. Many say this, but for the wrong reasons. My reasons are not that his Greek elegance is inimitable, nor that we are too remote in time and culture, nor even that his genius cannot be surpassed. I shall explicate why these are not valid reasons, and then give my reason for why all translations fall short of the mark.
Many scholars (including some distinguished translators) make the claim that the Odyssey can only be truly appreciated in Greek. Nonsense, the elegance of many of the epithets is capturable in english (contrary to what many thhink.) Where Homer refers to ροδοδακτuλος 'Ηώς Lattimore gives us rosy-fingered daw, which, I agree, falls short of the mark. Fitzgerald, on the other hand, uses "young dawn with finger tips of rose." This is prosodically and poetically equivalent to ροδοδακτuλος 'Ηώς. Also "when primeval dawn spread on the eastern sky her fingers of pink light" is a fine translation, perhaps even more so by assigning a gender to dawn in imitation of the Greek Ηώς who was also a goddess.
As for the many claims that we are too remote in time and culture to fully appreciate Homer, this would be true if the culture of Homer's Greece were utterly alien to the average person as, say, the culture surrounding that of Gilgamesh. This is not the case however, almost all of us remember being schooled in Hellenic and/or Roman mythology in our school days and thus we can, to a satisfactory extent, connect with Homer's world.
Homer's genius, while great, is not entirely unmatchable. There have been poets and translators whose native talent far outshone Homer's. Fitzgerald is one such and so was Pope. Many poets, in my opinion, such as Zhukovsky, Pushkin, Goethe, Nims and others have or had a genius that could blow Homer's out of the proverbial water.
Yet all translations of the Odyssey and Iliad have failed.
They are boring for the same reason why many scholars of ancient Greek find the original Greek to be boring. The two mega-epics were originally oral entertainment to be heard, not read. Think about our conventions in writing. 22 monotontous mentionings of a "rosy-fingered dawn" and 6 of a "wine-dark sea" and 11 of a "sweet day of return" would definitely resound as cliché in any piece of contemporary literature. Not so to Homer's own contemporaries whose poetic nerves and lexical triggers were used to something very different in an oral illiterate culture. Yet tape-recorded versions of the Odyssey are no more inspiring or useful than a lullabye to lull a child to sleep. This is because another key ingredient is missing. Homer not only recited his poems but used a κίθαρις, a sort of stringed instrument similar to a lyre. Homer did not sing his poems however, but he used the κίθαρις to mark rhythm, to play a musical interlude while he was thinking of something (let us not forget there was a certain amount of improvisation involved) and to indicate tone, pitch, and even mood (playing in a major chord to begin a thought, heightening it to a minor as the action or suspense rises, and resolving into major after some climax.) This musical accompaniment was indispensable to Homer and his contemporaries. The Homeric Epics must not be read, for that would drain them of their power, but recited, with the aid of some instrument, if not the κίθαρις then at least some instrument capable of polytonics such as a piano. If a tape of this caliber were made, I am confident that the English-speaking world would see new virtue in Homer.
Posted By Sasha at Tue 24 May 2005, 6:07 PM in The Iliad || 0 Replies