The Iliad

The Iliad presents not a self-contained story but a network of stories, a tradition of oral storytelling, and an ancient value system. In addition to understanding the ancient contexts alluded to in the source text, readers of the Iliad in English must also negotiate the translator’s interpretation of that text and its world, which have been mediated by more than 2,000 years of reception. Readers of the Iliad in translation are not reading the communal voice of “Homer”—a pastiche of different ancient Greek regional and period dialects that make up the text passed down through history—but an individual interpretation of that voice. How to navigate these complex issues is vigorously debated. Should the translator write in poetic verse to create a beautiful, rhythmic poem like source text? Or is it more important to capture the meaning as closely as possible with line-by-line translation? Fagles opts for a poetic translation that does not follow the Greek line-by-line but that nevertheless attempts to capture the mood, vigor, and scope of the original.

The Iliad begins toward the end of the Trojan War, named for the city at which it is fought, Troy, also known as Ilium after its legendary founder Ilus. The larger ancient story includes that the seeds for the war were sown at the wedding of Achilles’s parents: Peleus, a mortal king of Phthia in Thessaly, and Thetis, a sea goddess who was forced into the marriage. Angry that she was left off the guest list, Eris, goddess of discord, tossed a golden apple into the crowd bearing the message “for the most beautiful.” Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite each assumed the apple was meant for them. Zeus was asked to decide, but he deferred to Paris, a Trojan who had previously judged a difficult contest fairly. Each goddess attempted to sway Paris with gifts relevant to her domains and powers, and Paris chose Aphrodite’s offer of the most beautiful woman in the world. This was Helen of Sparta, already the wife of Menelaus, whose older brother Agamemnon was king of Mycenae.

So many suitors had sought Helen’s hand that her father feared an uprising among those who were rejected. As a result, they were all compelled to swear an oath to abide by the final choice and to defend that marriage if threatened. After Paris visited Sparta on a diplomatic mission and abducted Helen, Menelaus was called to sail to Troy and reclaim Helen and her treasure. Agamemnon had two reasons for putting the expedition together. The allied forces were bound by the sacred oath they had sworn; they could not refuse Agamemnon’s request without violating that oath. In addition, by stealing Helen, Paris violated a sacred law that guests should not abuse hosts who welcomed them kindly.

This backstory reveals elements of the value system at play in the mythological world of the Iliad, such as gods and mortals freely intermixing and producing children, god-sworn oaths serving as the correlate to a legal system, and gods offloading their problems onto mortals. The phenomena of a goddess, in this case Aphrodite, offering one mortal man’s wife to another man hints that the gods may float above the systems to which mortals are bound. A degree of antagonism and competition—such as that among Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite—exists, at times fueled by gods’ relationships with mortals. Zeus recusing himself from judging their competition speaks to his wish to avoid involving himself in the quarrels of the gods over whom he rules to maintain the stability of his rule. Paris’s decision to award Aphrodite the apple may also explain why Hera and Athena harbor animosity for the Trojans.

As is indicated from the beginning of the Iliad, the gods’ laws and oaths are binding; breaking them promises consequences possibly from the gods but more immediately from the mortals directly involved. The responsibilities between guests and hosts are an example of these sacred laws. There exists an implicit understanding that, to establish alliances that protect all involved, guests and hosts will not harm or abuse one another. Thus, Paris’s violation of those laws sparks the Achaean expedition to wage war on Troy. Oaths, such as those demanded by Menelaus before his duel with Paris, also set expectations and empower mortals to seek retribution if broken. Thus, Agamemnon can call for battle when Paris disappears from the duel, even though the agent of his disappearance is the goddess Aphrodite.

While gods oversee the binding power of oaths, they do not themselves experience the consequences of broken oaths. Breaking them may incur Zeus’s wrath or not, depending on his personal whims and desires in the moment. Zeus decides how the war will progress because he accepts Thetis’s prayer and owes her a favor. Aphrodite whisks Paris away, causing the war to resume, with no resistance from Zeus or the other Olympians. Gods and goddesses serve as an inverted mirror for mortals. The gods are subject to the same volatility, fickleness, conflict, and character flaws that afflict mortals, but they bear none of the consequences of their behavior, which sometimes renders them comic foils to mortals and their tragic fates.

From the beginning, the poem draws parallels and contrasts between Zeus, the figurative (and sometimes literal) father and most powerful of the Olympians, and Agamemnon, the leader of the allied Achaean armies and elder brother to Menelaus. Agamemnon derives his sense of authority from organizing the expedition and contributing the largest number of ships and warriors. His status as older brother also plays an important role: It was Menelaus who was directly offended, yet he repeatedly defers to his older brother in the poem. As the narrative unfolds, issues of birth order and the authority granted elders become evident among both gods and mortals. Seasoned warrior Nestor often tells long stories of his past exploits to extract wise counsel for the moment. Poseidon complains that he and Zeus have the same parentage, and their inheritance (the sky, sea, and underworld) was distributed equally among himself, Zeus, and their brother Hades, yet Zeus assumes the lead position due to being the oldest.

The conflict between Agamemnon and Achilles opens the poem with a challenge to the established concept of leadership (status as preeminent), inviting questions about what makes an effective leader. Agamemnon acts unilaterally when he refuses Chryses’s ransom for his daughter and when he appropriates Briseis. In both cases, leaders directly under him object. Outrage is piled upon outrage when Agamemnon seizes Briseis, first because one of the leader’s roles is to distribute prizes appropriate to the recipient’s status, and second because these prizes serve as physical manifestations of that warrior’s honor. As the leader, all praise or blame will ultimately fall on Agamemnon’s shoulders, as Diomedes points out. Thus, if Achilles were to continue fighting for Agamemnon and ensure Troy falls to his forces, Achilles would be contributing to Agamemnon’s honor. It is not in Agamemnon’s interest to dishonor his best warrior, yet he does just that. Neither Achilles nor Agamemnon can stand to be without a physical token of their excellence, but which kind of excellence is more important, being socially superior (i.e., Agamemnon, the expedition leader) or heroically superior (i.e., Achilles, the best warrior)? It is an unanswerable question within the poem, since both are necessary to achieve success.

An important element of the war between the Trojans and Achaeans is that it is not portrayed as a battle between good and evil. Both sides worship the same gods and goddesses and have champions and even parents or grandparents among them. Achaeans and Trojans do not struggle to communicate, suggesting that there is a common language between them. As becomes increasingly evident as the poem unfolds, both sides’ warriors are worthy of admiration according to the values of their society, and they battle courageously to defend their lives and the lives of their loved ones. The poem holds warriors from both sides in high esteem, humanizing and empathizing with both Achaeans and Trojans. Within the poem, the war effort’s score is a source of awe and the warriors’ willingness to face death is admirable, but the poem also repeatedly illustrates that it is a tragedy for all the mortals involved, on and off the battlefield.