Homer Iliad 9.374

A. T. Murray (Translator)

Iliad. Homer. A. T. Murray (Translator). London. 1924-1925.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The Annenberg CPB/Project.

Current edition Perseus

Iliad (English) (Homer. The Iliad, Volume 1-2. Murray, A. T. (Augustus Taber), translator. London: William Heinmann; New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1924-1925.)

Editions (1)
Ἰλιάς Perseus (Homer. Homeri Opera, Volumes 1-2. Monro, D. B. (David Binning), editor; Allen, Thomas W. (Thomas William), editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908-1920.) — 9.374 focus
οὐδέ τί οἱ βουλὰς συμφράσσομαι, οὐδὲ μὲν ἔργον·
ἐκ γὰρ δή μʼ ἀπάτησε καὶ ἤλιτεν· οὐδʼ ἂν ἔτʼ αὖτις
375
ἐξαπάφοιτʼ ἐπέεσσιν· ἅλις δέ οἱ· ἀλλὰ ἕκηλος
ἐρρέτω· ἐκ γάρ εὑ φρένας εἵλετο μητίετα Ζεύς.
ἐχθρὰ δέ μοι τοῦ δῶρα, τίω δέ μιν ἐν καρὸς αἴσῃ.
οὐδʼ εἴ μοι δεκάκις τε καὶ εἰκοσάκις τόσα δοίη
ὅσσά τέ οἱ νῦν ἔστι, καὶ εἴ ποθεν ἄλλα γένοιτο,
380
οὐδʼ ὅσʼ ἐς Ὀρχομενὸν ποτινίσεται, οὐδʼ ὅσα Θήβας
Αἰγυπτίας, ὅθι πλεῖστα δόμοις ἐν κτήματα κεῖται,
αἵ θʼ ἑκατόμπυλοί εἰσι, διηκόσιοι δʼ ἀνʼ ἑκάστας
ἀνέρες ἐξοιχνεῦσι σὺν ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν·
οὐδʼ εἴ μοι τόσα δοίη ὅσα ψάμαθός τε κόνις τε,
385
οὐδέ κεν ὧς ἔτι θυμὸν ἐμὸν πείσειʼ Ἀγαμέμνων
πρίν γʼ ἀπὸ πᾶσαν ἐμοὶ δόμεναι θυμαλγέα λώβην.
κούρην δʼ οὐ γαμέω Ἀγαμέμνονος Ἀτρεΐδαο,
οὐδʼ εἰ χρυσείῃ Ἀφροδίτῃ κάλλος ἐρίζοι,
ἔργα δʼ Ἀθηναίῃ γλαυκώπιδι ἰσοφαρίζοι·
390
οὐδέ μιν ὧς γαμέω· ὃ δʼ Ἀχαιῶν ἄλλον ἑλέσθω,
ὅς τις οἷ τʼ ἐπέοικε καὶ ὃς βασιλεύτερός ἐστιν.
ἢν γὰρ δή με σαῶσι θεοὶ καὶ οἴκαδʼ ἵκωμαι,
Πηλεύς θήν μοι ἔπειτα γυναῖκά γε μάσσεται αὐτός.
πολλαὶ Ἀχαιΐδες εἰσὶν ἀνʼ Ἑλλάδα τε Φθίην τε
395
κοῦραι ἀριστήων, οἵ τε πτολίεθρα ῥύονται,
τάων ἥν κʼ ἐθέλωμι φίλην ποιήσομʼ ἄκοιτιν.
ἔνθα δέ μοι μάλα πολλὸν ἐπέσσυτο θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ
γήμαντα μνηστὴν ἄλοχον ἐϊκυῖαν ἄκοιτιν
κτήμασι τέρπεσθαι τὰ γέρων ἐκτήσατο Πηλεύς·
400
οὐ γὰρ ἐμοὶ ψυχῆς ἀντάξιον οὐδʼ ὅσα φασὶν
Ἴλιον ἐκτῆσθαι εὖ ναιόμενον πτολίεθρον
τὸ πρὶν ἐπʼ εἰρήνης, πρὶν ἐλθεῖν υἷας Ἀχαιῶν,
οὐδʼ ὅσα λάϊνος οὐδὸς ἀφήτορος ἐντὸς ἐέργει
Φοίβου Ἀπόλλωνος Πυθοῖ ἔνι πετρηέσσῃ.
405
ληϊστοὶ μὲν γάρ τε βόες καὶ ἴφια μῆλα,
κτητοὶ δὲ τρίποδές τε καὶ ἵππων ξανθὰ κάρηνα,
ἀνδρὸς δὲ ψυχὴ πάλιν ἐλθεῖν οὔτε λεϊστὴ
οὔθʼ ἑλετή, ἐπεὶ ἄρ κεν ἀμείψεται ἕρκος ὀδόντων.
μήτηρ γάρ τέ μέ φησι θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα
410
διχθαδίας κῆρας φερέμεν θανάτοιο τέλος δέ.
εἰ μέν κʼ αὖθι μένων Τρώων πόλιν ἀμφιμάχωμαι,
ὤλετο μέν μοι νόστος, ἀτὰρ κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται·
εἰ δέ κεν οἴκαδʼ ἵκωμι φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν,
ὤλετό μοι κλέος ἐσθλόν, ἐπὶ δηρὸν δέ μοι αἰὼν
415
ἔσσεται, οὐδέ κέ μʼ ὦκα τέλος θανάτοιο κιχείη.
Translations (8)
Iliad Perseus (Homer. The Iliad of Homer, rendered into English prose for the use of those who cannot read the original. Butler, Samuel, 1835-1902, translator. London: Longmans, Green, and Co, 1898.) — 9.334 focus
English (Butler, rev. Nagy et al., 2020) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Butler, rev. Nagy et al., 2020)) — 9.374 focus
As for me, hound that he is, he dares not look me in the face. I will take no counsel with him, and will undertake nothing in common with him. [375] He has wronged me and deceived me enough, he shall not cozen me further; let him go his own way, for Zeus of the counsels has robbed him of his reason. His presents are hateful [ ekhthra] to me, and for him I care not a bit. He may offer me ten or even twenty times [380] what he has now done, or, more than that, all that he has in the world, both now and ever in the future. He may promise me the wealth of Orkhomenos or of Egyptian Thebes, which is the richest city in the whole world, for it has a hundred gates through each of which two hundred men may drive at once with their chariots and horses; [385] he may offer me gifts as many as the sands of the sea or the dust of the plain in multitude. But even so he shall not move me till I have been revenged in full for the bitter wrong he has done me. I will not marry his daughter; she may be fair as Aphrodite, [390] and skillful as owl-vision Athena, but I will have none of her: let another take her, who may be a good match for her and who rules a larger kingdom. If the gods spare me to return home, Peleus will find me a wife; [395] there are Achaean women in Hellas and Phthia, daughters of kings that have cities under them; of these I can take whom I will and marry her. Many a time was I minded when at home in Phthia to woo and wed a woman who would make me a suitable wife, [400] and to enjoy the riches of my old father Peleus. 401 My life [ psūkhē] is worth more to me than all the wealth 402 that was once possessed, so they say, by that well-situated citadel of Ilion, 403 back when it was still at peace, before the coming of the Achaeans, 404 or than all the treasure that is stored inside when you enter the stone threshold of the one who shoots, [405] Phoebus Apollo, at rocky Pytho [= Delphi]. 406 Cattle and sheep can be rustled in a raid, 407 and one can acquire both tripods and horses with their golden manes if he wants them, 408 but a man’s life [ psūkhē] can never come back—it cannot be rustled in a raid 409 and thus taken back—once it has passed through the barriers of his teeth.
English (William Cullen Bryant, 1870) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (William Cullen Bryant, 1870)) — 9.374 focus
I will not join in council or in act
With him: he has deceived and wronged me once,
465
And now he cannot wheedle me with words.
Let once suffice. I leave him to himself,
To perish. All-providing Jupiter
Hath made him mad. I hate his gifts; I hold
In utter scorn the giver. Were his gifts
470
Tenfold, - nay, twenty-fold, the worth of all
That he possesses, and with added wealth
From others, - all the riches that flow in
Upon Orchomenus, or Thebes, the pride
Of Egypt, where large treasures are laid up,
475
And through whose hundred gates rush men and steeds,
Two hundred through each gate; - nay, should he give
As many gifts as there are sands and dust
Of earth, - not even then shall Atreus' son
Persuade me, till I reap a just revenge
480
For his foul contumelies. I will wed
No child of Agamemnon. Even though
She vied with golden Venus in her charms,
And with the blue-eyed Pallas in her skill,
I would not wed her. Let him choose among
485
The Greeks a fitter husband, - one whose rule
Is wider than my own. For if the gods
Preserve me, and I reach my home again,
My father, Peleus, will bestow on me
A consort. Many are the Achaian maids,
490
Daughters of chiefs who hold our citadels
In Hellas and in Phthia, and of these,
Her who shall most delight me I will make
My well-beloved wife. My soul has longed
Earnestly, with a fitting spouse betrothed
495
Duly, to make my dwelling there, and there
Enjoy the wealth which aged Peleus won;
For not to be compared with life is all
The wealth which, as men say, was treasured up
In Ilium's populous town in time of peace,
500
Ere the Greeks came, nor all the stores contained
Within the stony threshold of the god
Who bears the bow, Apollo, on the coast
Of rocky Pytho. We may gather spoil
Of oxen and of fatling sheep, and bring
505
Tripods from war, and yellow-manèd steeds:
The breath of man no force can seize or hold,
And when it leaves the enclosure of the teeth
It comes not back. My mother said to me—
The goddess, silver-footed Thetis, said -
510
A twofold fate conducts me to my death; -
If I remain to fight beneath the walls
Of Ilium, my return will be cut off,
But deathless my renown; if I return
To the dear land in which my fathers dwell,
515
My glory will be nought, but long my life,
And late will come to me the stroke of death.
English (Alexander Pope, 1720, ed. Watson, 1857) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Alexander Pope, 1720, ed. Watson, 1857)) — 9.374 focus
'Tell him, all terms, all commerce I decline,
'Nor share his council, nor his battle join;
490
'For once deceiv'd, was his; but twice, were mine.
'No--let the stupid prince, whom Jove deprives
'Of sense and justice, run where frenzy drives;
'His gifts are hateful: kings of such a kind
'Stand but as slaves before a noble mind.
495
'Not though he proffer'd all himself possess'd,
'And all his rapine could from others wrest;
'Not all the golden tides of wealth that crown
'The many-peopled Orchomenian town;
'Not all proud Thebes' 1 unrivall'd walls contain,
500
'The world's great empress on th' Egyptian plain,
'(That spreads her conquests o'er a thousand states,
'And pours her heroes through a hundred gates,
'Two hundred horsemen and two hundred cars
'From each wide portal issuing to the wars;)
505
'Though bribes were heap'd on bribes, in number more
'Than dust in fields, or sands along the shore;
'Should all these offers for my friendship call;
''Tis he that offers, and I scorn them all.
English (Thomas Hobbes, 1667, ed. Molesworth 1843) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Thomas Hobbes, 1667, ed. Molesworth 1843)) — 9.374 focus
English (George Chapman, 1611, ed. Hooper 1857) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (George Chapman, 1611, ed. Hooper 1857)) — 9.374 focus
English (William Cowper, 1791, ed. Southey) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (William Cowper, 1791, ed. Southey)) — 9.374 focus
English (F. W. Newman, 1856) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (F. W. Newman, 1856)) — 9 focus

Notes on the current edition

Iliad

1. 409.1

New Alexandria Commentaries

Douglas Frame

Example of Achilles’ indecision about remaining in Troy for to achieve kléos or to achieve his nóstos. Issue of free will and fate is ambiguous when compared to Il. I.352 and Il. XVIII.89-96

source
Gregory Nagy

The Master Narrator now approaches what can surely be seen as the highest point so far in the narrative arc of the Homeric Iliad. Achilles has not spoken since Rhapsody 1. Now, in Rhapsody 9, he will speak again. And what he says will define what can and cannot happen in the rest of the Iliad.

draft js image errorThe embassy to Achilles, featuring Phoenix and Odysseus in front of Achilles. Attic red-figure hydra, circa 480 BCE. Public domain image via Wikimedia Commons.

source

Whereas the Master Narrator did not use formal wording to introduce the speech of Odysseus at I.09.225–306, he does use formal wording both to introduce at I.09.307 the speech of Achilles and then to conclude it at I.430

source

The response of Achilles to the speech of Odysseus continues. The passion intensifies even further.

source

In the Iliad and Odyssey, Apollo at Delphi is mentioned only here at Ι.09.404–405 and at O.08.079–081.

source

From the standpoint of its etymology, derived as it is from the verb keirein ‘cut, slice’, the noun kḗr in the sense of a ‘cut’ or a ‘slice’ or a ‘portion’ need not convey the negative idea of a ‘fated death’. When a hero chooses between two alternative kêres or ‘fates’, one of the two alternatives may be death but the other may be life. Thus when Achilles here speaks of two alternative kêres or ‘fates’ that may await him, namely, either the kleos or ‘glory’ that he will get if he dies young in the Trojan War or the nostos or ‘homecoming’ that will be his if he abandons that war, I.09.413, the second alternative is not really a ‘fated death’ for Achilles as is the first alternative. Instead, a nostos ‘homecoming’ would give him life. But this life would be limited. It would last only until the hero’s age runs out of time, just as the age of a plant will surely run out of time. Conversely, the kleos ‘glory’ that the hero would get from dying young in the Trojan War would have an unlimited life of its own, because this kleos is conferred by poetry, and this poetry is held to be imperishable.

source

The kleos ‘glory’ of the song that glorifies Achilles will be aphthiton ‘imperishable, unwilting’, I.09.413. The analysis here will focus first on the general sense of ‘imperishable’ and then on the specific sense of ‘unwilting’. The Greek combination of the adjective áphthiton ‘imperishable’ with the noun kléos ‘glory, fame’ here at I.09.413 is parallel to the Indic combination of the adjective ákṣita- ‘imperishable’ with the noun śrávas ‘glory, fame’ at Rig-Veda 1.9.7 (full argumentation in GMP 123–126). From the standpoint of the formulaic system inherited by Homeric diction, the function of the adjective áphthiton in combination with the noun kléos ‘glory, fame’ in the expression kleos aphthiton estai (κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται) at I.09.413 can be not only predicative, ‘the glory will be imperishable’, but also attributive, ‘there will be a glory that is imperishable’. An attributive syntax is indicated by the shorter expression kleos estai (κλέος ἔσται), as at I.07.458, meaning ‘there will be a glory’. There is also the comparative evidence of the attributive syntax that we see at work in the cognate wording of Sappho Song 44.4, … kleos aphthiton (… κλέος ἄφθιτον) ‘imperishable glory’ (line-final), and of Ibycus S151.47, … kleos aphthiton hexeis (… κλέος ἄφθιτον ἑξεῖς) ‘you will have imperishable glory’ (line-final). On the other hand, the expression kleos aphthiton estai (κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται) at I.09.413 seems to be coefficient with the expression kleos oupot’ oleitai (κλέος οὔποτ’ ὀλεῖται) as at I.02.325, ‘the glory will never perish’. See the comment on I.02.325. The syntax of kleos oupot’ oleitai ‘the glory will never perish’, if we compare it to the syntax of kleos aphthiton estai at I.09.413, may point to a predicative use of the adjective aphthiton: ‘the glory will be imperishable’. It has been suggested that the expression kleos oupot’ oleitai (κλέος οὔποτ’ ὀλεῖται) ‘the glory will never perish’ could have been used instead of kleos aphthiton estai (κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται) even at I.09.413 if it were not for the fact that the word ōleto (ὤλετο) ‘perished’ (the subject is nostos ‘[safe] homecoming’) is already used at the beginning of the same verse. It does not follow, however, that the wording kleos aphthiton estai (κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται) instead of kleos oupot’ oleitai (κλέος οὔποτ’ ὀλεῖται) at I.09.413 must be some kind of a reactive innovation: on the contrary, this wording can be an archaism that survives precisely for the stylistic purpose of avoiding an awkward duplication of wording in the same verse. As a general approach to poetics, I suggest that allowance should regularly be made for the possibility that older forms can be activated in situations where a more innovative equivalent form might create a poetically awkward side-effect (GMP 122–123). That said, my focus of analysis now shifts from the general sense of the adjective aphthito- as ‘imperishable’ to its specific sense as ‘unwilting’. This sense has already been noted in the comments on I.01.155, I.02.046, I.02.325. Unlike a plant that runs out of time, the kleos of poetic ‘glory’ is like an imperishable flower that will never wilt, never lose its vibrant color and aroma. Accordingly, the kleos aphthiton of Achilles will be like an unwilting flower. And the way for a hero to be adorned with such an unwilting flower is to experience a fated death. That is why the alternative of death in a choice between kēres ‘fates’ is the desired choice for the hero to make. And that is why the meaning of kḗr defaults to ‘a fated death’ as desired by heroes in the epic world of heroes. See again the overall comment on I.09.410–416. For Achilles, the kleos aphthiton ‘unwilting glory’ that he chooses is really an alternative form of life, while the nostos ‘homecoming’ that he ultimately rejects is an alternative form of death, since the name of his homeland is Phthiē, a “speaking name” (nomen loquens) that means literally ‘the land of wilting’. See the comment on I.01.155. See also HPC 168n67 on the ritualized idea of wearing garlands that are ‘unwilting’ in a Thessalian ritual that honors Achilles. By contrast with the hero Achilles, however, who chooses kleos or poetic ‘glory’ instead of a nostos ‘homecoming’, the hero Odysseus does not need to make a choice. In fact, as we will see in a future comment, Odysseus cannot even make such a choice, since he needs a nostos ‘homecoming’ to achieve his own kleos or poetic ‘glory’, which will be ‘a song of homecoming’.

source
Leonard Muellner

analysis of Achilles’ response to Odysseus’ speech in terms of his alienation, mēnis, desire to realize his heroic identity and win kleos, as well as the hostility between Achilles and Odysseus

source

analysis of Achilles’ response to Odysseus’ speech in terms of his alienation, mēnis, desire to realize his heroic identity and win kleos, as well as the hostility between Achilles and Odysseus

source

analysis of the goal of Agamemnon’s offer of gifts and the questions of relative status (rank) involved, specifically Agamemnon’s offer of gifts as an assertion of the giver’s prestige (potlatch) and Achilles’ responses

source

analysis of Achilles’ statement of the value of his life’s breath in light of the relative value system of the society represented in epic

source

analysis of Achilles’ statement of the value of his life’s breath in light of the relative value system of the society represented in epic

source

analysis of Achilles’ response to Odysseus’ speech in terms of his alienation, mēnis, desire to realize his heroic identity and win kleos, as well as the hostility between Achilles and Odysseus

source

analysis of Achilles’ choice of destiny (nostos or kleos) in connection with his response to Ajax

source

adaptation of kleos aphthiton originally in the cadence of a lyric meter to the dactylic hexameter as in this verse, in the context of analyzing the relationship of genos eukhomai einai # and eukhomai einai #

source

analysis of Achilles’ response to Odysseus’ speech in terms of his alienation, mēnis, desire to realize his heroic identity and win kleos, as well as the hostility between Achilles and Odysseus

source
Richard Martin

The reply of Achilles to Odysseus in Book 9 (9.307-429) has been the focus of a long debate about the "language of Achilles," originating with Adam Parry's argument that Achilles, "bound by the formulaic nature of his diction, has no language with which to express his disillusionment" and yet succeeds by "misusing the language he disposes of." M. D. Reeve persuasively challenged this view, pointing out that "neither an unanswerable question nor an impossible demand is by its nature a misuse of language." The approach that best illuminates Achilles' speech is to compare every expression in his reply with similar expressions elsewhere in the Iliad, treating deviation from that norm as the site of characterization. The resulting analysis operates at the level of discourse—the full stretch of a speech—rather than at the level of particles, verb moods, or metrical features, which would not be perceptible to a listening audience (Martin 1993:152-53, 159-60).

For this analysis, formulas are divided into two types: syntagmatic (regularly repeated phrase groups—Parry's original definition) and paradigmatic (single words in regular metrical positions). A close reading of Chart 1, the full formulaic breakdown of Achilles' speech (9.307-429), produces the following finding: almost all of the speech consists of formulas, either paradigmatic or syntagmatic. Achilles' speech is thus traditional, in terms of the Iliad itself. But the number of paradigmatic formulas far outweighs the number of syntagmatic: Achilles uses very small, unconnected bricks for his edifice, choosing rather to rely on the ready-made longer phrase only occasionally. Each choice of word in a given place in the line is one that can be paralleled elsewhere, but the effect is one of tone: one seems to hear a man searching laboriously for the right word at every turn (Martin 1993:165-66).

Achilles generally employs familiar formulas in new ways; at the same time, what seem like new and innovative uses can in fact be explained as reworkings of familiar expressions paralleled elsewhere within the poem. His idiosyncrasy in formula use consists in his use of syntagmatic expressions elsewhere used exclusively by gods in speeches, or by the narrator in diegesis. There is a cohesiveness to these "deviations" (Martin 1993:169).

The key innovation that characterizes Achilles' speech over all other heroic discourse is what will be demonstrated as the "expansion aesthetic": an ability to ornament by expansion. Only Achilles, for example, asks essentially the same rhetorical question three times in succession (9.337-39). What is not conventional is the expanded form he gives to this strategy; and it is this expansion aesthetic that explains the dozens of fine deviations from the norm that a close reading of the speech reveals. Ultimately, it is this expansion aesthetic that shows the motivations for Homer's own poetry (Martin 1993:204).

For the analysis of kleos aphthiton as the speech's most marked formula, see the comment on Iliad 9.413. For the expansion aesthetic in full development, see the comment on Iliad 9.308-429 in Chapter 5.

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

source

The phrase kleos aphthiton ("unwithering fame") at Iliad 9.413 is the most marked formula in Achilles' reply: it does not appear elsewhere in Homeric poetry, and its metrical shape has been shown through comparative work to presuppose a common Indo-European prototype representing within Greek "a fragment of Indo-European versification" (Nagy). Despite this heritage, some scholars have labeled the phrase a chance innovation, since it occurs only here in Homeric poetry and employs the adjective as a predicate, with estai. Yet the single attestation of the phrase is actually the best proof that kleos aphthiton is not an accident of composition. Instead, the phrase is used just once, at the most important moment in the most important speech of the Iliad, and I believe it is used knowingly, as an heirloom from the poet's word-hoard (Martin 1993:182-83).

We can detect similar thematic importance in other combinations that are foregrounded in Achilles' speech by virtue of their unique occurrence in the Iliad. Line 341 gives us an opportunity to see how a new combination can spring from older, more usual phrases. The adjective agathos frequently appears in the slot following the hephthemimeral caesura, from its use in the formulas agathos Diomedes and boēn agathos. Similarly, anēr appears frequently in its slot, yet is never qualified by an adjective defining "goodness." In this case, the new juxtaposition of two ordinary words implies an equally unparalleled way of looking at human behavior: Achilles breaks through to the abstract language of philosophical ethics (Martin 1993:182-83).

The phrase thumalgea lōbēn (9.387) involves another kind of uniqueness. The adjective thumalgea is regularly used with another noun, kholos, in a formula that has primary reference in the poem to Achilles' own anger. The other occurrences of the adjective are placed on either side of Achilles' speech in Book 9: Odysseus reminds him of Peleus' admonition to put aside the "soul-paining anger" (9.260), and Phoinix includes in his paraenetic tale the detail that Meleager nursed this kind of wrath (9.565)—which is equivalent to calling Achilles' own anger "soul-paining." When Achilles uses thumalgea with lōbēn, "disgrace," the poet is characterizing him as rhetorician once more. Achilles' displacement of the adjective is an implicit answer to his elders, which asserts that his anger is not without an equally grievous motivation in the treatment accorded him (Martin 1993:183-84).

For the broader framework of the formulaic analysis of Achilles' reply, see the comment on Iliad 9.307-429.

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

source

The mention of great wealth at home (9.364-65), gold, bronze, and iron, belongs to the conventions of battlefield supplication. When the sons of Antimakhos plead before Agamemnon for mercy (11.130-35), their promise of ransom begins: "Many possessions lie in the house of Antimakhos, bronze and gold and much-enduring iron." Adrestos, appealing to Agamemnon, cites the identical objects (6.47-48); Dolon refers to the precious metals with which his father will buy his freedom (10.378-79). The reference to a rich father, a store of goods at home, gold, bronze, and iron—all these are features of Achilles' words at 9.364-400. But there is a change in context: instead of begging for his life, Achilles is rejecting the supplication being made by the Achaeans. A second genre of discourse has been called on to fill out Achilles' words, as a portion of this section (9.366) also seems to have been imported from the discourse associated with raiding boasts. The hero uses the conventional routine for a new purpose: isolated from the fray, he speaks as though in the thick of battle, his private life taking on the tone of the public conflict (Martin 1993:202-4).

For the raiding boast genre and its deployment in Achilles' speech, see the comment on Iliad 11.677-705. For the broader analysis of Achilles' reply, see the comment on Iliad 9.307-429.

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

source

Only Achilles speaks of the "soul" and of his "self" in the same breath within the Iliad, both at 9.322 and 9.401 (emēn psukhēn, emoi psukhēs antaxion). Reminders of the quarrel scene in Book 1 occur at 9.401: Achilles uses antaxion, a word not employed elsewhere in the context of recompense except at 1.136, where Agamemnon had demanded a gift "fitting in return." There is a point to the repetition: whereas Agamemnon had demanded a gift antaxion, Achilles asserts that there is nothing to exchange for his psuchē. These repeated phrases create meaning by providing a sense of the consistency of Achilles' view of the world, telling us his hatred of Agamemnon remains ever fresh. Furthermore, Achilles' final words ou ti min axō (9.429) are surely to be contrasted with Agamemnon's threat to take Briseis by force (1.139): Achilles refuses to use compulsion to detain Phoinix (Martin 1993:173-74).

For the broader analysis of Achilles' reply and the typology of repetition, see the comment on Iliad 9.307-429.

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

source

Achilles' hyperbolic denial at 9.379—"Not even if Agamemnon gives ten and twenty times as much will he persuade me"—is part of a tripartite structure, each section of which is also triplex. Form contrasts with context in the expression: although the limits of wealth are considered and refused, the expression of refusal itself is hyperbolic, verbally full, "excessive." This rhetorical auxēsis adds weight to Achilles' verbal defeat of his adversary, as he simply outtalks Agamemnon. The strategy of auxēsis—magnification at every point, usually accomplished by doubling and tripling of expressions—is what I call the "expansion aesthetic," and it characterizes Achilles' speech in contrast to the rhetoric of all other Iliadic heroes. The ultimate result of this repetition is the construction of a cohesive and forceful speech: the narrative attests to the power of Achilles' discourse, as his audience is silent in amazement at the muthos (9.431) (Martin 1993:220-22).

The parallel with Homer's recusatio at 2.488-92 furnishes the most important evidence that this strategy belongs to Homer himself. See the comment on Iliad 2.488-492.

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

source