This was my third or fourth time through the Iliad, this time with a translation by William Cowper from 1791. Although it is in blank verse, I found it to be both more poetic and better put-together as a piece for study than the modern translations which I’ve read before.
For starters, each book in the poem comes with a synopsis, so it becomes a whole lot easier to remember what’s going on without going to an external reference. It took a little adjustment for me to remember all the Roman names for the Greek gods (I couldn’t remember who Vulcan was), but once that was done, I could enjoy it properly.
This is going to be a bit more of a personal post, because I assume most of you have been assigned the Illiad at one point or another by your school.
A good understanding of the Iliad is core to understanding many of the other works in the Western canon. The various references that show up in speeches, novels, plays, and artwork are generally not going to make any sense to you if you are not very familiar with the poem, the characters, and the actions contained within it. Christianity also makes no sense whatsoever unless you understand something of what the Greco-Roman culture was actually like.
At the heart of the poem’s plot is the affirmation of patrimony and property. Paris makes off with Helen and boats full of treasure besides, and the Greeks sail off to Troy to avenge the insult. This is not a story in which sensitivity, understanding, and effeminacy win the day. It was virtù:
Thus they, throughout all of Troy, like hunted fawns
Dispersed, their trickling limbs at leisure cool’d,
And, drinking, slaked their fiery thirst, reclined
Against the battlements. Meantime, the Greeks
Sloping their shields, approach’d the walls of Troy
And Hector, by his adverse fate ensnared,
Still stood exposed before the Scaean gate.
It is also easier to understand the historical importance of culture if you start to understand that the Greeks and the Romans crushed many of their competitors because they were better at transmitting historical lessons relating to military excellence across their own culture and down through the generations. Homer’s poems came down from the preliterate time, but maintaining them through literacy is one of the reasons why Alexander and the Romans were able to both conquer so much territory.
It also helps to explain why, by comparison, the culturally shallow Mongols wound up absorbed by the cultures which they had conquered only a generation or two after that empire reached its territorial peak.
Modern pedagogues tend to break down the Iliad into sections and try to teach each book while ‘testing’ for memorization without really demanding much comprehension at all. It is probably being taught less now because it is such a problematic poem by social justice standards.
Women are, after all, taken and passed around as slaves, and one of the central conflicts of the first portion of the poem is a dispute between Achilles and Agamemnon and demands Briseas as compensation.
When Vulcan forges a set of armor for Achilles, it may seem like it doesn’t matter all that much in a European context, but consider that entire continents full of people, even with rather sophisticated agricultural civilizations (like the Mayans, Aztecs, and various minor African empires) never figured out advanced metal armor or complex metalworking. Considering that — even that a culture would have a god associated with metalworking as well as untamed natural fire — is significant and rather relevant to that culture’s ability to develop powerful technology.
[Ed: Jay Fivekiller notes that iron smelting and metallurgy was known in ancient West Africa among various kingdoms.]
It is sometimes said that the Greeks and Trojans in the Iliad are foreign to how we are today, but I would rather feel more at home with the Greeks and more alienated against the pseudo-people that we have today. To the extent that more people identify with the classical heritage and feel disdain and revulsion for the contemporary ‘last man’ is the extent to which we will be on our way back to excellence.
The consequence of abandoning the lineage of the Greeks is total annihilation — not metaphorical ‘annihilation,’ but physical destruction; the machete to the neck. People who fear the physical and spiritual West do what they can to suppress this culture because it is so vastly superior to most of its competitors, at an almost incomprehensible relative scale. It is the difference between the rocket ship and the rain dance, the steel cuirass and the cotton jaguar warrior costume.
This is perhaps why relative numbers don’t bother me so much. Being outnumbered was a problem for Cortez when he landed in the new world, but it wasn’t insurmountable.
The compulsive deference and obsequious respect that many Westerners have for inferior cultures might go away once again if we spend some more time and effort emphasizing the cultural heritage of military and artistic excellence.
The Mongols were very small in number, much smaller than the Greeks. They suffered the same fate in strange places like East Europe, the Middle East, China and the Caucasus as the Greeks did in their Afghan, Persian and Indian colonies: assimilation. In places that were culturally and geographically closer, like Tibet and Central Asia, the Mongols left a very deep mark upon the landscape.
The lineage of the Greeks died out before the Greeks themselves. You can imagine what the Greeks of Homer’s time would have thought about the Greeks of the 1st century CE, who were good for pedagogues and that was about it. Subsequent “Greeks” like the Byzantines had about as much in common with Homer as today’s hipsters have with the writer of Beowulf.
If it’s principles and honor for which you admire the Greeks, well, that was largely gone by the end of the Pelopponesian War. Mostly demagogues and pederasts, with a few very notable exceptions.
I would say that the West owes more to the Central Eurasian tribes of the volkswanderung than to the Greeks. The Greeks get a lot of hype because of the Renaissance. But the Renaissance was well underway before Hellenizing became popular, and was itself preceded by many centuries of notable achievement. The place most affected by the Renaissance, Italy, ended up most resembling ancient Greece at its worst.
The Mongolian cultural impact is shallow and confined, whereas the impacts of the Greeks, the Romans, the Renaissance Italians, and the others have been profound and lasting.
>Mostly demagogues and pederasts, with a few very notable exceptions.
…which did not go unnoticed by the medieval Christians, or our own American founding fathers.
I think the Renaissance earned its hype, and I’m not alone in thinking so.
This post contains very interesting insights from the Hindu ‘reactionary’ (to use a weird term) viewpoint on the Renaissance (CTRL-F for renaissance) https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2013/02/10/the-end-of-the-heathens/
Let me know if you don’t understand some cryptic Sanskritisms.
I am not sure about the Mongols specifically, but the impact of Central Asian culture on Eastern Europe, Russia and the Far East is huge.
If you ask me about the iconic figure of the Renaissance, who best embodied it, and whose existence in the preceding period was unimaginable, I’d say Pietro Aretino. Who would not have been out of place in Alcibiades’ or Roissy’s circles.
assimiliated
I go with Pico Della Mirandola –
Who would not admire man…….Considering that we are born with this condition, that is, that we can become whatever we choose to become, we need to understand that we must take earnest care about this, so that it will never be said to our disadvantage that we were born to a privileged position but failed to realize it and became animals and senseless beasts. Instead, the saying of Asaph the prophet should be said of us, “You are all angels of the Most High.” Above all, we should not make that freedom of choice God gave us into something harmful, for it was intended to be to our advantage. Let a holy ambition enter into our souls; let us not be content with mediocrity, but rather strive after the highest and expend all our strength in achieving it.
The Dark Enlightenment guys seem to be continually looking back to see where the rot started. They have gone from the 1960s to the 1760s. Maybe they should start with this guy. All downhill from here.
Sorry, wrong quote from Pico, this is the ‘You go girl’ quote –
The nature of all other creatures is defined and restricted within laws which We have laid down; you, by contrast, impeded by no such restrictions, may, by your own free will, to whose custody We have assigned you, trace for yourself the lineaments of your own nature ..We have made you a creature neither of heaven nor of earth, neither mortal nor immortal, in order that you may, as the free and proud shaper of your own being, fashion yourself in the form you may prefer. It will be in your power to descend to the lower, brutish forms of life; you will be able, through your own decision, to rise again to the superior orders whose life is divine
B
I understand you are just focusing on the warrior ethos and in that way I suppose you are right, the Greeks were pretty much done after being conquered by Alexander.
But there is more to life – the philosophers, the artists, the historians and the playwrights. They had an enormous effect on western culture. To slight the Greeks in favour of the Mongols is simply laughable.
But the Renaissance was well underway before Hellenizing became popular, and was itself preceded by many centuries of notable achievement.
There was a big Hellenic influence on western culture well before the Renaissance. Clement of Alexandria quoted the Odyyssey.
We probably agree that the Germanic culture of the mis-named Dark ages gets a bad rap, but the Greeks were key. I prefer the Romans myself, but the Greeks were key.
I would say that the West owes more to the Central Eurasian tribes of the volkswanderung than to the Greeks.
If by that you mean the Germans then sure, as good northern WNs we would all like to believe this but what exactly is the evidence ?
Henry – you’re a big self improver – ever done much Teaching Company/Great Courses ? Lib to a tee but good for the basics. The Iliad course is good. Woman who does it also does the courses on the Greek playwrights which are very good.
Cool discussion.
One thing I’d recommend to people who find Homer’s poetics somewhat vexing is to learn a bit about the strengths/limitations of oral poetry. It’s important to recognize that Homer is not an individual artistic genius (in the romantic sense) who has produced ‘a text’ — he’s a chronicler of an entire encyclopedic record of history passed down from generation to generation.
There are a few important books that help to explain some of the excesses and abnormalities within the poetry (stuff that modern audiences would say detracts from its plot) if people don’t enjoy reading this sort of stuff:
Here is just one, though, and probably the best: The Singer of Tales, Albert Lord
This book definitely helped me to appreciate Homer more than I did before from the standpoint of pure artistry (leaving aside the metapolitics), and it helped me to understand why Homer has produced such a huge diversity of translations.
I reread the Iliad at least once a year, and try to read it much of it out loud with a group like-minded people, and young people who are hearing it for the first time.
One thing that you really have to keep in mind is that Homer’s version of the story appears 400 years after the events it describes. So, the social and political conditions in Archaic Greece are very different from the conditions in Homeric Greece, and yet the epic becomes the central text in later period.
The reason for this is that, unlike the Homeric Greeks, in the Greece of the polis (Archaic and Classical Greece), every citizen must be a soldier (a hoplite) who takes his place in the line of battle. Poli are small in size and every man is needed if a city wishes to maintain its independence.
Doesn’t matter if you’re a tanner, potter, or a farmer, when the polis is threatened you must don you armor, pick up your shield and spear and become like Achilles. And the dilemma of Achilles, between duty and honor, is one that you may face. So, Homer’s story of an ancient war is suddenly pertinent.
A lot comes out of this every man a warrior, principally the notion that every man should have a say in governing, as every man risked his life for the polis.
One more point, the Homeric Greeks of Achilles and Agamemnon had an entirely different system from the post Dark Age Greeks. One major difference is that the Homeric Greeks had a partially matrilineal system, in which to become the “king” of a city one married a royal heiress. Hence, taking Helen away delegitimates Menelaus’s right to rule, which is a much bigger problem than getting cucked by Paris.
(The debate about the matrilineal question is not settled, and the documentary evidence isn’t there, and relies heavily on the epics. The arguments are nicely summed up in this discussion:
http://www.judithstarkston.com/articles/guest-post-by-laura-gill-mycenaean-kingship-matrilineal-succession-and-female-power/ )
Anyway, good stuff all around.
Thanks for contributing your experience and bringing this issue of the matrilineal Greek house to light.
What edition do you read out loud?
I’m a huge fan of the Fagles translation. It’s easy enough for young people to understand and accurate enough for old pedants like me.
Jay
Interesting theory – never really heard much about it (other than that the Knossos culture was theorised to be matrilineal).
As you say Menelaus got Sparta through Helen (I didn’t actually know this until I checked just now).
Is there any support for this in the text of the Iliad ? I don’t remember any. It kind of undercuts a lot of the main themes doesn’t it ? ie women are simply war booty to be divvied up, or else devoted baggage (Andromache), the basis of the leaders’ kingship is never questioned, Helen is not really portrayed as having any independent power, the discussions of the reasons for the war really focus on the honour aspect rather than any practical reasoning.
Just to clarify, Cowper dedicated the translation to Earl Cowper, but the poet was not himself an Earl.
There’s a great series of essays and discussions between Matthew Arnold and Cardinal Newman here – `On Translating Homer`
https://archive.org/stream/essaysbymatthewa00arnorich#page/n7/mode/2up
Ancient schoolboys would have been required to memorise chunks of Homer, if not both books in their entirety. It was quite common for Roman boys to learn Greek by going through an interlinear translation of the Illiad, or by doing it line by line with a master.
Oops — that’s probably the fifth or sixth error in this post that I found since I hit ‘schedule.’ Thanks.
The only problem I find with studying the poetic art behind works in languages I can’t read is that the translation can never be solid. Even the best translation won’t convey the same meaning and every language possesses words and expressions others don’t and lacks words integral to other languages. Having read English copies, Spanish copies and French copies of various old texts and translations of Spanish texts into English versus their original, I wouldn’t feel confident in appreciating the craft behind something such as Homer’s works without first learning Greek. So that’s on my to-do list after German and Latin.
The content is a little easier provided you have margins with any relevant cultural, historical or linguistic notes to draw your attention to double meanings, metaphors or jokes. But for some reason that sort of translation is more popular with Shakespeare and Chaucer (which I find easily readable) than with ancient Greek and Roman texts (where I think we need them more).