Book I, The Rage of Achilles

Non-Homeric legend of the Trojan War:

Homer's audience knew the legend of the Trojan War in its entirety: the golden apple, Paris' s decision of who was the fairest of them all, Athena, Aphrodite, Hera; the abduction (kidnapping) of Helen; the sacrifice of Iphigenia; the Wooden Horse; the Greek victory, the burning and sacking of Troy.

And there were other epics, other poets that dealt with these aspects of the legend, otherwise these stories wouldn't have passed into mythology. But they have been lost. We have only a few written fragments, literally a few hundred lines; mostly we have second hand references to these other epics on the Trojan War from people writing in the third century B.C. referring to these older legends. So we know they existed; they haven't survived because they weren't as good as Homer's? We don't know; certainly, we don't know these stories from Homer who doesn't bother to tell them, probably because his audience knew these stories so well, Homer felt to retell them would have been old hat, so he decided to concentrate on other aspects of the war, frankly,less dramatic incidents, but Homer in any case, decided to start his epic in the midst of the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon. It seems a curious place, really. After all the war has been going on almost 10 years; the abduction of Helen seems an interesting place to begin; that's where it all started. Or even closer to the end; Homer's ending doesn't even include the Greek victory, the actual taking of Troy, the burning of Troy. That would seem an exciting part of the legend to include in your epic. Or how about the sacrifice of Iphigenia? To me, the most heart-wrenching aspect of the whole legend.

So why does Homer begin during the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon? We have to remember that Homer is working with a vast and ancient material, these legends of the Trojan War have been around for at least three hundred years and are about a group of people, living in the 12th, the 14th centuries whose civilization has been destroyed; Homer is writing in the eighth century; his culture is different. To start and end where he does is to call attention to specific events, that have relevance to the 8th century, more than the 12th century. That's our job as readers, to try and figure out what Homer is trying to get us to notice.

The beginning of the Iliad, the Quarrel:

First of all, what is the nature of the quarrel? They are fighting over slave girls, who are a part of their treasure, their treasure is their reward for fighting.

The normal mode is this: the Greeks set out from Mycenae, from the coast of the Peloponese where they all gathered preparatory to starting out together, and they've got to get all the way to Troy; they can't carry enough food and drink in their tiny sail boats for such a campaign. So what do you do? You stop at every place, every island on the way to Troy and loot and pillage: that is, you kill all the men, steal all the valuables and food, rape and enslave the women. Then -- and this is the important part, what a good king, a good leader does -- you divide up the booty based on merit. The best warrior gets the greatest part of the spoils. Bear in mind, looting and pillaging are a great part of their economy; the Mycenaeans were great traders, it's true, but they were also great raiders. This was standard practice. It wasn't just the Mycenaean Greeks, but the practice of every powerful empire. In the Ancient World, war was a fact of life. War was not a choice you made. There was no dishonor in starting a war because if you didn't attack , someone was definitely going to attack you, that is, if you had anything worth while to steal. That's the basis of the Iliad. Why Homer is still read today and still considered the greatest expert on war. Homer looks at war dispassionately; he analyzes it coldly; he doesn't sentimentalize it. He describes war to us and makes us understand a people for whom war was a way of life.

These people lived with the Heroic or Warrior Code; they were very literal, very practical people. Here's how they thought: you are going to die, that's a given; there are two ways to die, one is to die of old age or illness, but this is dying in shame as we've already had Enkidu explain to us. The other way to die is gloriously, as a hero; the only way to die a hero is to do something heroic, for that you need a war; so war is not only a fact of life it's a necessity. Perhaps the idea of heroism comes from making a virtue of a necessity; we have to fight, so let's make the best of it; let's die like heroes. Before you die, they way you know you're doing a good job as a hero is from the respect of your peers; this respect is very literally, it comes in the form of treasure, booty. The Greeks wouldn't have been happy with a slap on the back and a "Well done." No, treasure was the measure of your success as a hero until you died, of course, and then the mark of your heroism was to become the subject of legends and songs. Of course, you wouldn't be around hearing the stories of how great you were when you slayed Humbaba, but before you died, you could fantasize about how great these stories of you would be.

O. K. so the problem between Achilles and Agamemnon is that Agamemnon has become too fond of a slave girl picked up on the way to Troy; her name is Chriseis; she is part of his treasure, so he's not going to give her up for nothing. But under the ancient way of doing things, it was perfectly acceptable to accept a handsome ransom for a human you have enslaved. Every man, woman, and child has a price. If you studied Beowulf in high school you will probably remember the Anglo-Saxon concept of Wergild (man-gold). This practice was not unique to Germanic tribes; other civilizations accepted a man-price as a way of settling arguments and avoiding long-running feuds. That's what's happened here: Chryseis's father, Chryses, who unfortunately for the Greeks, is a priest to the god, Apollo has offered Agamemnon a large sum of money for his daughter. Agammenon says no: I,33.

The father complains to Apollo; Apollo gets mad and unleashes a horrible plague against the Greeks; they are dying in droves. all because Agamemnon is so unreasonable. Now I said the Greeks were practical; no one in his right mind would hold on to a slave girl, who is just a woman after all, just property, instead of accepting treasure, especially when it means losing greater treasure, the fabulous riches of Troy.

But because of Apollo's anger, the Greeks are losing the war.

Achilles gets involved and asks Calchas, the seer to explain what's happened. Calchas explains they must give the girl back without the ransom, then and only then can they appease the god, Apollo.

Ag. agrees: I, 129-41

Notice in these speeches between Achilles and Ag. the words, shame, disgrace. Ag. says he will be disgraced if he gives back his treasure; Achilles says he will be disgraced if Ag. takes his treasure, Briseis.

Why do both men think they will be disgraced if they have to give up their treasure. What does this treasure really mean to them?