Complete Summary of the Iliad
Fred Spierings
Book I
Iliad = story of disharmonies, some of which are introduced in book I:
- Between Achilles and Agamemnon
- Between the gods
- Between Greeks and the Trojans
Functions of Book I:
- Introduce the conflicts mentioned above
- Portray narrative causes of these conflicts
- Introduction of Themes
- Book I does not set the scene of the Iliad, it simply lays the foundation for its plot -> Book I is
a thematic and causal introduction to the Iliad, not a contextual one.
Structure of Book I
- the proem
- the argument between Achilles and Agamemnon
- counsel of the gods
Themes:
Wrath of Achilles
In the Iliad. μῆνις takes on the form of especially destructive anger, mainly of Achilles. μῆνις
isn’t used of mortals other than Achilles, creating a contrast -> Of the mortals, only Achilles’
anger has destructive properties of divine proportions.
‘χολος’ is used for more regular anger of other mortals
Note that μῆνις is often considered the ‘main theme’ of the Iliad
HOWEVER, be cautious in ascribing a main-theme. μῆνις may be considered the ‘narrative-
driving theme’: conflict: between Achilles and Agamemnon initiates the plot, and the plot is
structured around the causes, results and different phases of Achilles’ anger ->
- Achilles’ withdrawal from battle
- Achilles allowing Patroclus to enter the battle
- Achilles’ revenge in killing Hector
Note that the divine cause of the Trojan War the anger of Hera and Athena
Not mentioned until XXIV.27-30: Hera and Athena feel resentment towards Paris + Troy
because of the judgement of Paris.
I.1-2: ‘μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος
οὐλομένην’:
both ‘μῆνιν’ and ‘οὐλομένην’ are placed at the emphatic position at the beginning of the line
-> emphasis of the destructive effect of Achilles’ anger
First 7 lines announce the anger of the son of Peleus, which ‘μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε’ (I.2.)
referring to the losses of the Greeks enlarged by Achilles’ withdrawal from battle.
This withdrawal is the result of his conflict with Agamemnon, introduced in line 6: ‘διαστήτην
ἐρίσαντε’:
- I.188-94: Achilles draws his sword considering to kill the son of Atreus out of rage
, - Although in XVI.60 Achilles states that he will let his conflict with Agamemnon be a thing of
the past, his absence will keep inflicting the ‘ἄλγεα᾽ until he himself, by the death of
Patroklos, becomes a victim of his own anger -> XVIII.111-3: Achilles states again that his
conflict with Agamemnon will be a thing of the past and the hero adds that anger has been
replaced by grief.
Redfield (2001): from this moment onwards, the poem focusses on the death of two
heroes, Patroklos and Hektor, and the fate of their bodies: ‘in its structure, the proem
shows a parallel development, as it traces the consequences of the menis from
suffering (algea) to death to defilement’:1
o I.1: mention of menis
o I.4-5: mention of ‘algea’ + bodies being thrown into Hades, a metaphor for death.
o I. 5-6: mention of animals feeding on their corpses -> defilement of bodies
reminiscent of the fate of Patroklos’ and Hektor’s bodies, which dominates the final
books
Although Patroklos’ body is not being defiled
However, BOTH anger AND the algea remain an important theme throughout the
last books:
o Although grief prevails over anger in book XVIII, Achilles’ immediate
revengefulness suggests that the latter emotion is not quenched by the first.
o XVIII.334-7: Achilles states that besides bringing the head of Hektor, he will
sacrifice twelve Trojan youths out of anger.
o XIX.15-17: Achilles’ anger is invigorated by the sight of the new armour,
fashioned by Hephaistos, which Thetis brings him.
o Book XXI: Achilles’ anger seems to reach a climax while he is fighting first in
and thereafter against the river Scamander/Xanthus, brutally slaying
defenceless and supplicating Lycaon.
Wrath of immortals
I.44.: Apollo comes down mount Olympus χωόμενος κῆρ’ (1.44) -> Apollo is driven by Anger
Role of the Divine
Evocation of a goddess -> poem is not a merely human creation but the product of divine inspiration.
In the Odyssey, Demodokos plays the role of the ‘θεῖον ἀοιδόν’ divine bard -> stresses the
relationship between the poet and the divine
The relationship between the worlds of the divine and the mortal:
The narrative of book I is split between the world of mortals and Olympus -> introduction of a
tension between the mortal and immortal spheres that will permeate the rest of the story.
5-7: ‘Διὸς (…) βουλή’ was accomplished from the moment of the conflict between Achilles
and Agamemnon -> influence of divine will + intervention on the actions of mortals:
Book I itself: 3x divine intervention:
- I.8-22: Apollo afflicts a plague onto the Achaeans.
- I.188-222: Athena, sent by Hera, descends onto Achilles to quell his anger and prevent him
from killing Agamemnon.
1
Redfield (2001) ‘The proem of the Iliad: Homer’s Art’ in Oxford Readings in Homer’s Iliad (D. L. Cairns ed.), p.
467. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
, - I.505-10: Thetis entreats Zeus to put strength into the Trojans so that Agamemnon might
realise that Achilles is an indispensable fighter and restore his honour.
Distance between gods and morals in emphasised
o Apollo inflicting plague on the Achaeans = first divine intervention -> emphasis on
distance: 4x epithet ἑκηβολος (14, 21 96, 370, 373), once ἑκατηβελεταο (75), and once
ἑκατοιο (385) introduction of notion of distance between mortals and immortals
o I.195: Athena comes from οὐρανοθεν (195)
o I.359: Thetis rises up from the πολιης ἀλος (359)
Both heaven and the sea are realms which men cannot enter -> distance
Achilles complains to Thetis -> transmission of worldly conflict to Olympus -> reverse divine
intervention
Assembly of Gods: parallels with the mortal assembly
Quarrel between Agamemnon and Achilles, mediated by Nestor, is paralleled by the quarrel
between Zeus and Hera, mediated by Hephaistos
Whereas Nestor fails to bring an end to the mortal quarrel, the divine quarrel is arrested by a
wine-pouring by which Hephaistos initiates the feast
distinction between the petty and domestic world of the immortals and the real world in
which quarrels are not so easily resolved.
End of Book I: gods who have not ended the conflict, neither between mortals, nor among
themselves
Book IV starts with the Zeus stating that they should end the conflict
At the beginning of book XXIV, the gods end the discord among themselves -> ring
composition
Gods get distracted and start feasting -> it seems as if the gods don’t care about the
mortals
However, throughout the rest of the Iliad the gods are obsessed with the mortals
The gods need drama to not get bored, such as presented to them in the Trojan War
Διὸς (…) βουλή
5-7: ‘Διὸς (…) βουλή’ suggests a Divine Will, or omnipotent deity which steers the course of events.
However, instead of altering the course of events towards some telos, gods help mortals in
return for honour -> Zeus does not seem to have a clear telos.
discord between the gods is being played doesn’t put forth the notion of a plan of Zeus at all.
There is a great element of negotiation, rather than a dios boule which determines all actions:
- Zeus promises to help the Trojans not because it’s part of his divine plan but because he
owes Thetis a favour.
- Zeus’ hesitation in making this promise stems from his fear of conflict with Hera who
troubles him with ‘ὀνειδείοις ἐπέεσσιν’ (I.519).
Transactional relationship between gods and mortals:
Gods, when considering intervention, base this on sacrifices.
- XXIV.66-70: Hector’s generous offerings are the main reason given by Zeus for the gods love
for him
When mortals pray they remind Gods of past honours and promise future honours
- I.39-41: Chryses states: ‘if ever I roofed over a temple to your pleasing, or if ever I burned to
you fat thigh-pieces of bulls and goats, [40] fulfil this prayer for me’
- IV.119-21: Pandaros prays to Apollo before shooting his arrow against Menelaos and
promises him a grand sacrifice if he were to return home.
, - VIII.238: Agamemnon claims he has never failed to sacrifice to Zeus in his distress at the
failure of his army
- XXIII.193: Achilles promises sacrifices to Zephyros and Boreas if they let Patroklos’ pyre burn
- VII.442ff.: Poseidon is upset by the Greeks’ failure to sacrifice to the gods after building their
wall
After describing the woes which are inflicted upon the Greeks by Achilles’ anger, Homer
adds almost as if an afterthought, Διος δ᾽ἐτελειετο βουλη (1.5), “the plan of Zeus was
fulfilled” -> 2 questions:
To what does ‘Διὸς (…) βουλή’ refer? The fact that the fulfilment of the Will of Zeus is
mentioned immediately after the suffering of the Greeks, suggest that this fulfilment
constitutes in this suffering.
Ambiguous chronology:
(…) Διὸς δ᾽ ἐτελείετο βουλή,
ἐξ οὗ δὴ τὰ πρῶτα διαστήτην ἐρίσαντε
Ἀτρεΐδης τε ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν καὶ δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς – I.5-7.
Interpretations:
a) The Will of Zeus is fulfilment beyond the narrative and the narrator asks the Muse to
tell about the fulfilment of Zeus’ Wil from the time when Agamemnon and Achilles
first stood in opposition in strife
b) The will of Zeus was fulfilled from the time that Agamemnon and Achilles stood in
opposition in strife
COMBINED: did Zeus have the intention of Greek suffering from the start or developed it
after the conflict between Agamemnon and Achilles?
Authority of Zeus
I.591-2: Hephaestus tells Hera that the last time he tried to help Hera, Zeus threw him from the
magic threshold after which he fell all long -> underscores Zeus’ dominance over the other gods.
Edwards: Thetis’ visit to Zeus represents ‘acknowledgement that nothing happens without
Zeus’ general agreement’
Note, HOWEVER, that Thetis is a minor deity (not the same conception of Zeus as the
Olympians
HOWEVER, by the Olympians Zeus authority is contested:
o I.565-9: Zeus is only able to silence Hera by threatening to strangle her
o VIII.402 ff.: Zeus makes Iris report to Athena that he will lame her horses’ legs, smash her
chariot and strike her with lightening
Zeus needs to resort to threats to impose this authority -> his authority over the other
gods is not self-evident
Honour
Honour of mortals
Agamemnon takes Briseis, once given to Achilles as his reward (expression of honour) ->
violation honour -> Achilles’ anger.
I.160: Achilles states that he came to Troy to win back the honour of Agamemnon and
Menelaos (NOTE that Achilles merely IMPLIES the abduction of Helen here) -> Agamemnon
drags the whole of Greece into a ten-year war to restore the honour of his brother – but also
to win glory for himself.
