“My dear comrade’s dead—
Patroclus—the man I loved beyond all other comrades,
loved as my own life—I’ve lost him…
[…]
My spirit rebels—I’ve lost the will to live,
to take my stand in the world of men—unless,
before all else, Hector’s battered down by my spear
and gasps away his life, the blood-price for Patroclus…”


Etching by Pietro Testa.

Of course, the Iliad is a story of violence and valor. It famously begins with the “rage of Achilles,” and there are stabbings, beheadings, and crushing blows on almost every page—which is why I find it funny (and slightly disturbing) that I was completely swept up in the beauty of its language, endlessly rereading the lines, in absolute awe, where an eye would be gouged out by a spear or a severed head would roll in the dust. It was all overwhelming. I wish I could memorize every word.

Ha sido difícil terminarlo. No tengo ninguna duda de que es el libro más denso que he leído aún así algo me animaba a continuar. He aprendido mucho de los dioses griegos y el lenguaje que usa Homero de por si es precioso cuente lo que cuente pero encima hay escenas súper emotivas. Lo recomiendo , eso sí, hay que cogerlo con ganas.

Homer needed a better editor. Eleven pages listing soldiers' names? Really?

At least I'm done.

There is something I want to address right off the top. Me giving the Iliad 4 stars instead of 5 is not meant as a way of diminishing or detracting from its classification as a classic of Western literature. I fully endorse it as a classic, and as an important work that contributed significantly to Western civilization. That said, I cannot in good conscience give it a top rating when it comes to its content as a whole. I will explain why.

This work glorifies violence, death and destruction on almost every page. Homer was not shy about providing graphic and gratuitous detail when describing death. I, of course, do realize that he was a poet of his time and that glory in battle, bravery, honor, etc, were all valued more highly than almost anything else. Me acknowledging the former doesn't make the content any less disturbing; nor does it make it any more beautiful. One also should take into account that this was originally considered a religious work. In all probability, the violence was considered glorious and an acceptable spectacle for the deities of ancient Greece (i.e. blood offering/human sacrifice). The Achaeans and the Trojans are not even the main actors, really; they are simply the pawns in a divine game of chess: from Paris' stealing of Helen, to Agamemnon's stealing of Briseis from Achilles, to Achilles' resentment and refusal to fight, to Hector's blood lust, vainglory and eventual death, etc etc--all are laid at the feet of the will of the Greek deities. The Greek deities are of course incredibly capricious and egomaniacal (one can understand why some Greek philosophers thought that Homer was guilty of blasphemy); they are suspicious of one another and all secretly jealous of Zeus. They often conspire against Zeus when they happen to favor a certain side in the war. Zeus is also not omniscient, nor omnipresent; he does get tricked by other deities and does not always have full control over events. At first, one is lead to believe Zeus favors the Trojans, but as I hinted at above, he capriciously turns against them in the end. One is left to extrapolate that the deities' favoritism is tied in with how many sacrifices and offerings they received, but certain actions that they take offense at can also cause them to abandon a side or a particular fighter. In some cases, it isn't really clear why Zeus or the other deities do what they do or allow what they allow.

One notices a theme with two notable epics of polytheistic religion: like the Mahabharata, the Iliad is a kind of mytho-theological work set within the backdrop of a war. Like the gods of the Iliad, Krishna is also notably capricious. There must be some lesson in futility that polytheistic religions meant to get across by making death and destruction the springboard for theology. It also could be that fate/karma is best illustrated through human suffering and death. That is only a guess; as a Christian I reject such things as fatalism.

I couldn't find anyone I identified with in the Iliad. I didn't like Hector or Achilles. I certainly didn't like Agamemnon or Menelaus. I also found the Greek deities to be rather repugnant. I was left with thinking that the whole story is rather more like a tragedy. People fighting over things that really seem trivial. They are being influenced by a bunch of numinous beings that have their own agenda for what they do, and the best interests of the human players is not foremost on their lists of concerns. I suppose I am biased as a Christian, but I am incredibly glad that works like this lost their religious significance.

This translation was done in the 19th century. The translator opted for the Latin equivalent of Greek divine names, e.g. Jove instead of Zeus, Minerva instead of Athena, etc. The translation was good as far as I could tell, so I don't have any criticisms as far as that goes. As I said, I recognize that this work is a classic. I could only read it as a work of tragedy to honestly appreciate it. Life and religion in ancient Greece was tragic.

IM FREEEEEE WORST EXPERIENCE OF MY LIFEEEEEEEE

”The true hero, the true subject, the center of the Iliad, is force. Force as man’s instrument, force as man’s master, force before which human flesh shrinks back. The human soul, in this poem, is shown always in its relation to force.” - Simone Weil (L’Iliade ou le poème de la Force)

***SPOILERS AHEAD (If it's possible to spoil arguably the best-known story in history, 3000 years after its creation... You can never be too careful)***

Hear me fellow bookworms, children of Zeus whose shield is thunder, lords of the war cry, noble charioteers, those who are a match for Ares! Readers of words, flippers of pages, inserters of… of bookmarks! For I, breaker of chains, Father of Dragons, straddler of donkeys, purveyor of nonsense; have a few words of laughably little importance to say about this cornerstone of Greek Mythology.

The Iliad was most likely composed somewhere between the late 8th and early 7th centuries BC (725-675 – They lose track of evidence around 700BC). The first known printed version dates back to 1488 meaning it was likely passed on orally and then copied by hand for about 2200 years! Bernard Knox, the man responsible for the introduction in Robert Fagle’s translation, covers some interesting historical questions about the text. Offering several different standpoints, in a respectably objective manner, Knox discusses opposing views on the original nature of the poem: Was it written or oral? Was Homer illiterate? Was it an individual effort at all or, in fact, the sewing together of many smaller works from different authors into one cohesive whole? Much of the Chinese philosophical texts were believed to have gone through a similar process of compiling and editing over time with the existence of the great Lao Tzu often met with scepticism and the Analects of Confucius of course not being the writings of the man himself but of his pupils. Knox himself draws parallels to other patchwork epics like the Finnish Kalevala and the French medieval epic, La Chanson de Roland.

Readers who are particularly new to classic epic poetry may note (Read: do note; established by reading a number of GR reviews) the long, epic titles at every introduction of an important character (“ornamental epithets”), as in my first paragraph. These are hallmarks of oral epic poetry. The heavy repetition of such epithets, along with repeated analogies (looking at you Lion/Wolf/Defenceless Goatherd) cannot be justly criticised as it was a deliberate mechanism allowing the poet to improvise, with choice of epithet dictated by the meter. Recurring passages gave poets time to focus on the upcoming scene. I’m unsure whether the quirky 2-line obituaries following even the most irrelevant character’s deaths can be included here as they tended to be specific to each character. It’s almost as though it was an attempt to get you to care about a character despite their death being the first time you’d ever heard of them. I’d put this down more to the importance placed on lineage than any poetic strategy. In any case, if you compare ‘The Iliad’ to something like ‘The Epic of Gilgamesh’, the verbatim repetition is actually not remotely as severe and has a much wider variation.


War, war and more war is what you can expect to find in the pages of the Iliad. At surface level you could be forgiven for thinking it might’ve been written by two brothers, in their early adolescence, trying to outdo each other with the addition of blood, gore and masculine bravado. Characters exchange blustering taunts, the likes of which you’d find on a football field; 70% of the book is just brothers-in-arms haranguing one another for their perceived cowardice; there are spears penetrating skulls, cut off tongues, disembowelment, it’s all very OTT and not in the least bit pretty, but then again, neither’s war!

There are a number of bizarre occurrences and non-sensical events. At one stage, Aeneas and Achilles stop, in the middle of a battlefield, for a prolonged d and m, and a leisurely exchange of life stories. In at least two cases, that of Diomedes/Glaucus and Hector/Ajax, two enemy fighters are set to engage in battle but instead end up discussing each other’s lineages, exchanging gifts and agreeing to a pact of friendship! I was left thinking, “I don’t wanna spoil this lovely moment guys, but your respective comrades are literally tearing each other to pieces all around you!!”
Equally, the idea that Menelaus and Paris could’ve settled the dispute between themselves is absurd. The Achaeans and their allies travelled 10 years to get to Troy! Regardless of the result of one-on-one combat, they’re not exactly just going to turn around and go home are they! It’s kind of a “Well, we’re here now so may as well sack the city!” type scenario.


Peculiarities aside, The Iliad hits a sound note with its contrast between reality (the ugly brutality of war) and delusion (the glorification of war) . Courage and Bravery are most coveted traits by Achaeans and Trojans alike (how easily stupidity and recklessness can be misinterpreted) and its through brave acts and courageous deeds that heroes are born, a God’s favour is found, and names are written into the history books. This foolish glorification of War, however, is at odds with the ugly narrative of the Trojan War in which men can often seem inherently cowardly and Gods pull all the strings. We’re led to question whether supposed “heroes” are ever acting of their own free will or if their courage and power (force) is all just a matter of divine intervention; Zeus and his dysfunctional family playing just another trivial game of ‘Risk – Trojan War Edition’. Homer’s opinion seems clear, we’re all most certainly subject to the whims of the Gods/the Forces at play. Any individual excellence is stripped from men as the God’s bless who they will with skill and strength, those they have fathered/mothered, those that offer the largest and most prolific sacrifices in their names, those they pity; while condemning those that have slighted them, however mildly, or perhaps those who remind them of their own partner’s infidelity (*cough* Hera).

In the end, I think Hector is the greatest example of the role the Gods play in Homer’s Iliad. The “bravest” of the Trojans by far throughout the poem, the breaker of horses, dripping head to toe in glory, an unstoppable force with Gods always at his side, whispering words of encouragement; but in the end, when all the Gods, even Zeus, are nowhere to be found and he must stand to face the mighty Achilles man-to-man, mano-a-mano, he loses his nerve (the nerve clearly instilled by the Gods) and runs for his life, 3 times around Priam’s walls!

”My son stood and fought for the men of troy and their deep-breasted wives with never a thought of flight or run for cover.” - Hecuba
….Um? Yeah, ok…


One last point I’d like to touch on is the Friends/Lovers “controversy” regarding Achilles and Patroclus. I don’t feel particularly strongly about it either way but having now completed it and read reviews of both ‘The Iliad’ and ‘The Song of Achilles’ I’m a bit taken back by some of the aggressive reactions towards any adaptation of the Iliad, screen or print, that portray them as heterosexual. I’m left scratching my head and wondering, seeing as the heavily opinionated reviews are for ‘The Song of Achilles’, how many of these people have actually read ‘The Iliad’ and how many just enjoy getting on board the outrage train! I just really dislike this modern pandemic that is false public displays of self-righteousness by uninformed people! The irony of that is that I may be historically uninformed myself however, to me, there is nothing in this text that suggests, unequivocally, that they are in a romantic relationship. It is most definitely open to that interpretation, and I welcome it (I look forward to reading TSOA myself), but could we perhaps not unjustly (in my opinion) villainise those who don’t interpret it the same way?


In closing, I very much enjoyed my reading of this seminal classic; it took me a while to get through but that’s nothing to do with the quality of the text (even if it was, who am I to say?), but more to do with a little baby girl suddenly appearing in my house! Hoping to get through, at the very least, ‘The Odyssey’, ‘The Homeric Hymns’ and ‘Hesiod’s Theogony’ in 2022 and then I’ll take it from there. Happy reading!


n  ”Like the generations of leaves, the lives of mortal men.
Now the wind scatters the old leaves across the earth,
Now the living timber bursts with the new buds
And spring comes round again. And so with men:
As one generation comes to life, another dies away.”n

This is a story of battles. It begins with a battle of principles between Achilles and Agamemnon, and as stubborn as they both are, I could sympathize with both views. I enjoyed that.

I appreciated the depiction of the gods and goddesses. They were a dysfunctional family, deeply flawed, and yet human lives were subject to their whims. And although the gods could choose to ignore a prophecy, they’d usually adhere to one with respect. It made for an integrated unfolding of free will and fate.

I could also see clearly how classic story structure was built in this poem, each action causing a reaction that created an inevitable outcome or conclusion. I appreciated how neither the Trojans nor the Greeks were depicted as evil or wrong (each had their reasons), and in the end I grieved their losses equally.

But so much of the text read like a list and felt very much like The Bible’s section “begat begat begat.” For example, Homer names every man from each ship on both sides of the battle. And most pages describe battle after battle, death after death, without giving the reader enough of character to care. The description of the woundings felt like they were written with the glee and remove of children in a school yard - lots of heads popping off bodies, and eyes popping from heads, which made them kind of fun. I imagine those who listened to these stories back then had prior knowledge of the personalities, and so were invested in their origins and fates. I probably should have done more research.

In the end, the story felt too impersonal to me, unlike The Odyssey, which I enjoyed. I also highly recommend Madeline Miller’s The Song of Achilles, which tells the story of The Iliad within the larger context of the tender and complex relationship between Patroclus and Achilles.

Konačan review: naučih da koristim re-read opciju na časnom Gudridsu, pa sada sa uživanjem mogu da kažem - pročitala sam najzad celu Ilijadu kako treba, bez potpomaganja prepričanom verzijom, što je bio slučaj u školi, kada je ova knjiga bila na programu za lektiru. I iskreno, ako mi neko kaže da je stigao sve ovo da pročita za lektiru kao 15-togodišnjak koji ima još lektira + učenje ostalog gradiva, laže i ništa mu ne verujem i neka se uvredi ako želi, couldn't care less.

..............................................................................................

Neka za večni svedok ostane pisani trag,
Da koristit' časni Gudrids ne znam tupava,
Niti podesit' datum re-reada knjige ove,
O plavokosom vojskomori Ahilu Bredu Pitu.

طوری که خدایان رو توصیف میکرد، جالب بود، خوشم میاد:
زئوس که تندر در دستان اوست و سپر دارد;
هرا که بازوان سفید و مرمری دارد
آکلیس که پاهای چابک و زیبا دارد
آتنا که چشمانی آسمانگون دارد...
ایلیاد داستان کاملی از بازیچه و اسباب بازی خدایان بودن آدمهاست. آدمهایی که به محضر خدایانشون دعا میکردن، قربانی میدادن، دلاوری و رشادتها میکردن...ولی همه ش برای هیچی...درواقع جنگ بین مردم یونان و تروا، جنگ بین خدایان بود. زئوس و آرس و آفرودیت یه طرف، هرا و آتنا طرف دیگه...و این وسط، پهلوانها قربانی میشدن...آکلیس، هکتور، منلائوس، پاتروکلس و آژاکس و ...
از خوندنش لذت بردم. انگار واقعا توی جنگ با اونا بودم و حتی صدای جنگ رو هم میشنیدم...توصیفاتش عالی بود، به خصوص صحنه کشته شدن پاتروکلس، چقدر عجیب توصیف کرده بود: احساس میکردم دارم این صحنه از فیلم رو با دور کند نگاه میکنم...وقتی فوبوس جوشن و زوبینشو ازش گرفت...وقتی اوفوب آدمیزاد از پشت بهش نیزه زد و وقتی هکتور با شمشیرش پهلوشو درید...رجز خوندن ها و تهدید ها و حرفهای قبل از مرگشون خیلی قشنگ بود...
چقدر کتاب با فیلمش فرق میکنه...چقدر قشنگ و حماسی نوشته...دوستت دارم شاعر نابینای یونان
به زودی میام به سرزمینت

4,5 балла, округлено до 5.
Я никоим образом не принижаю и не недооцениваю огромное историческое и культурное значение «Илиады» Гомера, рассказывающей о 50 днях осады Трои, конечно, с неизменным вмешательством богов Олимпа, но это произведение мне понравилось намного меньше, чем «Одиссея» в силу того, что главным действующим лицом в этой поэме является война, распря и, соответственно, много боев, много смертей, много слез, трагедий и при том при всем, война эта – бессмысленна, бестолкова и ее цели совершенно непонятны ни богам, ни участникам сражений. Эта война, как способ доказать свою правоту или права с помощью силы. И все равно никто никому ничего не доказал. Заканчивается поэма мольбами старого Приама, чтобы забрать тело своего возлюбленного сына Гектора, чтобы его достойно похоронить.
Было интересно узнать, что в Древней Греции было такое большое количество народов и вождей, описанных во второй Песне, которая создает ощущение, что это полноценный исторический труд, с детальным и тщательным описанием всех принимавших участие в войне. В поэме поводом к войне послужило похищение Елены Парисом, а было бы интересно узнать, что послужило поводом к Троянской войне в действительности? Существовала ли Елена и кем она была?
В поэме Олимпийские боги активно участвуют в войне, имеют своих любимцев, за кого они «болеют» и помогают. Немного напоминает, как будто они, боги, участвуют в сетевой компьютерной игре, каждый за своего героя или объединяясь против кого-то. Боги обладают человеческими чертами характера – они совсем не величественны. Они могут смошенничать, проявить коварство, они пытаются друг друга перехитрить, они вожделеют и занимаются сексом.
Гомеровские поэмы должен прочитать каждый, поскольку это тот исток, откуда пошла литература, хотя, я все же склоняюсь к мнению, что и литература, и музыка все таки имеют своим истоком фольклор – народное творчество. Илиада существовала и до Гомера, как эпос, созданный народом. Он нам донес ее.

This was a terribly hard read for me. I struggled to finish it, but finish it I did.

A Heroic And Human Tragedy

The Iliad is a story of passion. In its sweep lies war and death, honor and pettiness, mortality, domesticity, gods and men.

In his excellent introduction to this edition and translation by Robert Fagles, Bernard Knox writes that the Iliad probably was written down between 725 and 675 B.C. It tells a story that was archaic even for its time that is set around 1200 B.C. The story of the Iliad covers a matter of days in the tenth and final year of the Trojan War. It is allusive to the entire mythology of that ancient struggle. The tale is deliberately mythical, with characters and emotions that, Homer tells us many times, are larger than those of men today. For too many, the Iliad comes encrusted as a "classic". People read it, or portions of it, in high school or college and inevitably miss much of the grandeur and wisdom of the work.

When I came back to the Iliad recently (after not having read the work in many years) in this translation by Fagles, I was swept away. I accompanied my reading of the Iliad with an excellent series of lecture tapes on the poem and its background. I thought the translation, written in a modern colloquial free verse helped me to understand and read the poem. The translation, for me, gives the reader a sense of the repetitions, formulas and phraseology of the original. It has a sweep to it, and the style and translation does not get in the way of understanding the work. This is important in a modern translation of an ancient work. The translation was easy to follow and got me involved in the tale. I am sure the poem works differently in the ancient Greek than in this translation. But this is largely irrelevant to the virtue of Fagles's work which makes the Iliad come alive and roar in a manner which encourages the nonclassicist modern reader to approach it.

There are a multitude of themes in the Iliad. At the beginning of the work, Homer invokes his muse and announces that the work will deal with the "rage of Achilles." The work is about human anger and rage on a grand scale and about the waste, but strange grandeur of war. In his introduction, Bernard Knox quotes approvingly from Simone Weil, writing in France during World War II, who described the Iliad as the West's leading work on the use and nature of Force. The Iliad speaks deeply about the human condition, about the tragedy and heroism that human mortality makes possible, and about how people may learn to change and to understand others.

I found Bernard Knox' introduction and notes helpful in understanding the controversies surrounding the writing of the Iliad and in giving the reader some of the basic tools to think about the work. Whether the reader is approaching the Iliad for the first time or after many times, there is much to be gained from reading this basic text of the West. Fagles' translation will help bring the reader to the Iliad.

Robin Friedman