CLAS2700: Homer Iliad6: Detailed structure (books 18-24)

1. Introduction
Nestor fails to foresee Achilles need for armour - other versions make Achilles
invulnerable
Book 18 brings third days day fighting (started in book 11) to an end, and sets
agenda for following books: complex multi-strand narrative gives way to single
trajectory towards Achilleus-Hektor showdown, held back to book 22 (classic
Homer making the audience wait).
Increased supernatural element used to delay outcome, add diversity, enhance
significance:
book 18: Hephaestus makes Achilleus new armour; - lots of detail on the face of
the shield
book 19: Achilleus puts on divine armour; one of his (immortal and divine) horses
prophesies his death; - abnormally one of the horses gains power of speech
book 20: Zeus permits divine intervention reflects the dramatic importance
of what is about to happen (reverses policy on the last two days): low-level
intervention helps pace the narrative (encouraging and rescuing heroes) leads
to teasingly, last-minute avertion of Hektor-Achilleus showdown;
book 21: Achilleus killing spree (throws victim into the river scamanda) fights
river god god of the river objects to dead body pollution; escalating divine
intervention; gods fight each otherand give up (humans arent that important
why fight for the sake of wretched humans: Apollo in 21.462-7); comical
outcome contrasts carefree gods (Hera boxing Artemis ears) with humans, for
whom things like war matter. Gods not totally frivolous, but aside from a few
parental connections, it often appears to be a trivial inclusion
Book 21 ends with Trojan headlong retreat into city due to Achilles slaughterbut
Hektor stays outside (22.5f.). Confrontation imminent: trajectory to it determined by
decisions in book 18.
2. Achilleus
Now only avenging Patroklos matters: No question of what he must do not even
his own life matters (Book 9 talking about his two fates short and legacy, long and
boring)
choice between short, glorious life and long life (cf. 9.410-416) not now in doubt
note how his lament for Patroklos (18.22-35) elicits Thetis lament for him as
early as Book 18.35-64. Achilleus self-blame: 18.98-104 (note expressive
incoherence of language feels pointless waiting by the ships) unique rambling
sentence loss of control of the way Achilles speaks,
Achilles ignores role of unpredictable contingencies (e.g. Nestor coming
back to camp) and Patroclus failure to follow instructions can argue that
Achilles were not to blame. Achilles self-blame = natural. Does not care about his
own life any more. Also
no longer interested in quarrel (19.56-73) or compensation (19.146-53)
rejects Agamemnons offer. Odysseus stubbornly opposes this. He insists on
formal reconciliation (19.171-83)sensibly wanting to secure it in the long-term
long-term security so as not to return after the war. But Achilleus does not have
a long term: cf. horses prophecy (astonishing portent) supernatural importance
of the days events. Achilleus reply I know well myself it is my fate to die here
(19.404-421).
Although Achilleus sees no longer interested in food (19.205-14): impractical
(19.155-70, 206-37), even for Achilleus Zeus has to provide supernatural
sustenance for him (19.340-54). Although food seems trivial, his rejection
shows Achilles irrationality at this point.
no longer willing to take and ransom prisoners: see killing of Tros (20.463-72) and
Lykaon (21.34-135). In latter case Achilleus is reflective and self-controlled
now there is no-one who would escape death (21.99-113)but goes on to make
 gloating, vindictive speech, kicks body into river (will be eaten by the fish),
provokes and tries to fight river-god (an almost fatal mistake wins only
through divine intervention survives not through good sense or foresight).
After Hektors death combines passionate extreme and calm rationality: degrades
and mutilates Hektors body and sacrifices 12 Trojan prisoners to burn on
Patrokless body Hektors body for the dogs (23.179-83)but in funeral
games defuses a quarrel (23.473-98); treats Nestor with thoughtful respect
gives Nestor a prize despite being too old (23.615-52); tactfully protects
Agamemnon from possibly embarrassing defeat (awards prize to Agamemnon
straight away) shows paradigm shift from the first books quarrel (23.884-97: or is
this implicitly insulting, as some argue carries implication that Agamemnon
would lose? If so, still rational and controlled). shows how contradictory Achilles
state of mind is at this point.
3. Hektor
Terrified Trojans (fearful of Achilles) hold assembly in book 18: Poulydamas advises
retreat. Poulydamas sound tactical advice has been accepted (12.60-80), rejected
angrily (12.210-50), accepted (13.723-53). Long-standing resentment of restraint
exercised by cautious counsellors: I wanted to fight by ships 15.719-23 (for Trojan
tactics before Achilleus withdrawal see 5.788-91, 9.352-5); resentment of cautious
counsellors themselves: 12.211-4 (Poulydamas (cautious advisor opposite to
Hektors aggressive tactics). successful Trojan defensive strategy throughout the
Trojan war.
Fatal rejection of Poulydamas advice: 18.243-313Hektor does not display a
rational attitude. In the showdown, his boast itll be worse for Achieans if he tries
anything (18.305f.) is exposed in the fight by his panic and flight not a tactical
view of the situation: but Achilleus is formidable; Hektor fights skilfully; His own
spear hits the target but Achilles spear misses him. Divine armour and Athenes
trickery thwart him. Hektor is at a disadvantage but still has over-confidence
(Achilles has another spear, Hektor reduced to a sword)
Hektors chronic overconfidence: 5.472-4 (Sarpedon you say only you (Hektor)
and your brothers could hold the city); 8.493-541: sound tactics plus excessive
confidence about following day (in book 11 Hektor is beaten by Diomedes;
Greeks gain initial advantage).
Hektor is frightened when Aias accepts his challenge, but stands his ground
(7.214-8): contrast Paris (3.30-37). Paris and Hektor both issue challenges that
prove beyond their capacity: both overconfident, act without forethought
drives many Trojans as well as Hektor himself, to his death.
Hektors remorse: 22.99-110 (n.b. reference to going against advice of Poulydamas
recognises error): cannot face the community he has failed, but his death will
be worse for the community (personal requests from family to return, but also cf.
Priam mentions citys needs: 22.56f.). Is Hektor the victim of societys
contradictory demands? would rather die than face the antipathy of the city
4. Closure?
Neither Trojans (Hektor dead, his body in enemy hands) nor Achilleus (still
obsessive at beginning of book 24 even after funeral, Achilles is still relentlessly
pursuing the punishment of an already dead Hektor) have achieved closure: then
ransoming of the corpse allows Trojans to mourn and hold funeral for Hektor,
Achilleus to recover relationship with enemy other than hatred and rage. Priam
evokes Peleus for Achilleus (24.50): perceives shared human misery (24.507-51)
bond of sympathy: you have endured many sorrows but sympathy co-exists with
passionate instability: anger is barely under control (24.552-71) do not now
provoke me more, old man the old man was afraid; reconciliation-scene avoids
sentimentality. Closure in some way is achieved for both.

Is there narrative closure?

 Plot: sequence of events initiated in book 1 comes to natural point of rest. No
loose ends
Broader perspective (see lecture 3): Poem ends where it begun fighting will
resume; Achilleus will die; Troy will fall (4.163-5 = 6.447-9). Not a happy ending,
but an opening onto an unhappy future.

This week: seminars

Next week (Week 7): reading week no lecture
Lecture 7 (Week 8): Gods, heroes and divine power
.