The Iliad: Traditionally a Heroic Epic - Essay Example

?The Iliad is traditionally regarded as a heroic epic, and as such, it is worth examining what its concept of heroism is. The characters of Achilles,Hector, Agamemnon, Priam, and the rest are not presented as perfect, but they are presented as exemplars, as heroic figures whose deeds are worthy of being retold. What makes them exemplars is an interesting question, and one that leads us to the curious values of classical Greece. Central to the motivations of every character is the concept of honor, but somewhat confusingly, honor comes in many different forms. One of the most common concepts of honor is time, or the worldly honor gained in battle. In many scenes, the warriors or the narrator declare that this is what they are fighting for, not victory but personal honor (VII, 290; XVI, 731). There is often an oddly subtle tone in Homer’s words, implying that while the war is terrible and ugly, it is the only way for this honor to be won, and therefore it is regrettably necessary. Perhaps the clearest single example of this is Priam’s famous declaration to his son Hector that the spear-mangled corpse of a young man, certainly an unpleasant image, is nonetheless by their lights “seemly” (XXII, 71). A closely-related concept is the honor of obligation, what it is right and proper to do in a given situation. One of the most obvious examples of this is the central falling-out between Achilles and Agamemnon that leads Achilles to go on strike in the first place. Achilles feels that he is entitled to claim Briseis as spoils of war, but Agamemnon says that if he is to be deprived of Chryseis, as king he has the right to claim another woman lest he not have any spoils at all (I, 120). To modern eyes, questions of protocol over who gets to rape whom don’t seem honorable at all, but at the time, it was a vital enough question that Achilles is ready to kill Agamemnon on the spot over it (I, 191) until Athena intervenes. Fifteen books later, Achilles is still maintaining that Agamemnon’s crime was failure to respect Achilles’ proper rights, and thus he is justified in continuing to sit out the war (XVI, 59). Similarly, there are very strict protocols for the handling of death, the punctilious observance of which is vital at many points in the story. Hector prefigures his eventual fate when he makes his challenge to the Achaeans, making them swear that whoever slays him can keep his armor, but must convey his body back to his family (VII, 80). He repeats this principle as his dying words to Achilles (XXII, 338). Book XXIII is given over entirely to the funerary rites and games for Patroclus, who at that point has been dead since the end of book XVI. It might seem odd, from a standpoint of dramatic structure, to devote nine hundred lines to what amounts to sports commentary when one is nearly at the end of the story. What the inclusion of book XXIII shows us, though, is the pious and correct observance of full funerary rites. Those nine hundred lines of racing and archery and so on are meant as a demonstration of the Achaeans doing the right and proper thing. The two moral wrongs of Achilles, as presented by Homer, are his abandonment of the pursuit of glory (Books I-XVII) and his failure to do the right and honorable thing, particularly in regard to Hector’s body. When Hector begged with his dying breath for decent and honorable treatment of his corpse, Achilles instead spends quite a long time mangling the corpse. This is directly contrary to the will of the gods, as demonstrated by Apollo’s keeping the corpse intact and inviolate (XIV, 20). This makes it both dishonorable and impious, two sins that ensure that Achilles is on the downhill slope to his long-prophesied death. At the juncture of time and the death observances we encounter the concept of kleos, or the glory after death. This is what is promised to Achilles if he chooses a short but glorious life, it is what Hector offers the man who will face him in battle (VII, 90), it is what every Greek hero hopes to win. To be esteemed not only by one’s contemporaries but by those not yet born, this is the greatest achievement of personal honor. One of the constant sources of tension in the story is the desire to win everlasting glory versus the desire not to die. Hector faces this when he remains outside the walls to face Achilles, who he doubts he can defeat, but who he feels he must face (XXII, 110). Another trait presented as heroic is the ability to create fear. Hector possesses it in great measure, his very appearance intimidating the Achaeans (XV, 280). His “flashing helm” is referred to nearly as often as Achilles’ swift feet, and as with Achilles, his armor is presented as very important to his aura of fear. Indeed, it his is helmet that frightens his small son Astyanax, implying that when the helmet is removed, the impression of terror is removed with it (VI, 470). Similarly, when Patroclus begs Achilles’ permission to wear his armor, it is not presented as due to the armor’s particular protective capabilities, but because the sight of it will terrify the Trojans and perhaps induce them to surrender (XXII, 40). Again, we in modern times might regard the ability to terrify others as a dubious personal quality, but for Homer, it was the unquestioned mark of a great Greek hero. Of course, no one is more feared than the gods, but the gods of the Iliad are rather curious to modern eyes. They are presented as essentially human in nature; they eat, drink, sleep, are wounded by human weapons, and most of all, they have the emotional reactions of humans. They’re petty, argumentative, grudge-bearing, and conflicted. Their superiority to humans seems to derive from their supernatural powers, not from any moral advantage. Different gods take different sides at various points in the war, and their actions do not lend any moral weight to either the Achaean or Trojan cause. It has been said that every army in history has believed god to be on their own side, but this is demonstrably untrue in the Iliad, where the gods are both sides and neither. One does not encounter the “problem of evil” in Greek writing—squaring the suffering and confusion of human experience with a universe ordered by an omnipotent and loving being is difficult, but squaring it with a universe ordered by a pack of limited, petty-minded, incestuous superhuman adolescents is very easy indeed. Many characters are referred to with the epithet “godlike,” but it is so often repeated, and to so many characters of dubious moral character, that it becomes clear that it refers only to competence and prowess, and is not a moral approbation. This makes sense, as the gods of the Iliad are powerful, but not entirely admirable. Nevertheless, to defy the will of a god is a grave sin indeed in Homer’s world, and one which invariably carries dire consequences. The initial falling-out between Achilles and Agamemnon begins when Agamemnon must give up Chryseis in deference to the will of Apollo (I, 99). Recall that in other tellings of the tale of the Trojan War, the last time Agamemnon drew the ire of a god, he had to sacrifice his own daughter. While not directly part of the Iliad, that story, well-known in Homer’s time, helps place Agamemnon’s decision in context. Agamemnon is very faithful to the gods in most cases, eager to obey all prophecies, omens, and dreams that might reveal their will to him. This allows Zeus to manipulate him by giving him a false dream indicating that the gods are all with the Achaeans, and none still side with Troy(II, 5). Agamemnon obeys this dream immediately, with unfortunate consequences. Achilles, by contrast with obedient Agamemnon, has ongoing problems obeying the gods. The first book of the Iliad finds him being offended by Agamemnon’s obedience to Apollo, and the last one has him continuing to defy Apollo’s will with regard to Hector’s body. In between he engages in multiple arguments with divine will, notably when he defies the river-god Xanthus and continues slaughtering Trojans after the death of Patroclus (XXII, 122). It might seem odd that in a time when obedience to the gods was such a high and important virtue, that Achilles, godlike Achilles, the best of the Achaeans, would demonstrate such frequent impiety. During Achilles’ curious dialogue with his horse (XIX, 405), his conflict becomes clear: he has defied the will of the gods and will by the gods be destroyed, even as Patroclus was. Achilles says clearly that he doesn’t care, that he chose this death long ago, and that he will not be satisfied until he has defeated the Trojan army personally. In other words, his sins and his virtues come together at the climax of the story. He is impious and defiant of the gods, but his pursuit of the virtues of time and kleos is once again singleminded. He will win eternal glory in battle though the gods themselves bar his way. He is, in this respect, the first tragic hero of Western literature: the man whose heroic and admirable qualities come into conflict with his fatal character flaws, leading him to a terrible fate. Works Cited Homer. The Iliad. Trans. E.V. Rieu. London: Penguin, 2003. Read More