Homer Iliad 2.320

Samuel Butler (Translator)

Iliad. Homer. Samuel Butler (Translator). London. 1898.

Current edition Perseus

Iliad (English) (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.)

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.) — 2.336 focus
Translations (8)
Iliad Perseus (Homer. The Iliad, Volume 1-2. Murray, A. T. (Augustus Taber), translator. London: William Heinmann; New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1924-1925.) — 2.336 focus
English (Butler, rev. Nagy et al., 2020) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Butler, rev. Nagy et al., 2020)) — 2.336 focus
Nestor, charioteer of Gerenia, then addressed them. “Shame on you,” he cried, “to stay talking here like children, when you should fight like men. Where are our covenants now, and where the oaths that we have taken? [340] Shall our counsels be flung into the fire, with our drink-offerings and the right hands of fellowship wherein we have put our trust? We waste our time in words, and for all our talking here shall be no further forward. Stand, therefore, son of Atreus, by your own steadfast purpose; [345] lead the Argives on to battle, and leave this handful of men to rot, who scheme, and scheme in vain, to get back to Argos before they have learned whether Zeus be true or a liar. [350] For the mighty son of all-powerful Kronos surely promised that we should succeed, when we Argives set sail to bring death and destruction upon the Trojans. He showed us favorable signs [ sēmata] by flashing his lightning on our right hands; therefore let none make haste to go [355] till he has first lain with the wife of some Trojan, and avenged the toil and sorrow that he has suffered for the sake of Helen. Nevertheless, if any man is in such haste to be at home again, let him lay his hand to his ship that he may meet his doom in the sight of all. [360] But, O king, consider and listen to my counsel, for the word that I say may not be neglected lightly. Divide [ krinein] your men, Agamemnon, into their several tribes and clans, that clans and tribes may stand by and help one another. If you do this, and if the Achaeans obey you, [365] you will find out who, both chiefs and peoples, are brave, and who are cowards; for they will vie against the other. Thus you shall also learn whether it is through the counsel of the gods or the cowardice of men that you shall fail to take the town.”
English (William Cullen Bryant, 1870) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (William Cullen Bryant, 1870)) — 2.336 focus
English (Alexander Pope, 1720, ed. Watson, 1857) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Alexander Pope, 1720, ed. Watson, 1857)) — 2.336 focus
Then Nestor thus: 'These vain debates forbear: 1
'Ye talk like children, not like heroes dare.
English (Thomas Hobbes, 1667, ed. Molesworth 1843) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Thomas Hobbes, 1667, ed. Molesworth 1843)) — 2.336 focus
English (George Chapman, 1611, ed. Hooper 1857) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (George Chapman, 1611, ed. Hooper 1857)) — 2.336 focus
English (William Cowper, 1791, ed. Southey) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (William Cowper, 1791, ed. Southey)) — 2.336 focus
English (F. W. Newman, 1856) (OCR draft) Experimental (English (F. W. Newman, 1856)) — 2 focus

New Alexandria Commentaries

Douglas Frame

commentary on Odysseus’ restraining and Nestor’s inciting the Achaeans, corresponding to the contrast between them on their nostos (as the mortal and immortal twins, respectively)

source

comment on the formulaic language of Zeus’ promising and nodding in assent in response to prayer (of returning from Troy) and the variation on it in this passage

source

in the context of discussing the contrast between Odysseus and Nestor in terms of their referring to signs from gods (Odysseus recalls one interpreted by Calchas, Nestor one he saw for himself)

source

in the context of discussing the contrast between Odysseus and Nestor in terms of their referring to signs from gods (Odysseus recalls one interpreted by Calchas, Nestor one he saw for himself)

source
Gregory Nagy

The narrative of Rhapsody 2 now follows up on the dire consequences of the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon as narrated in Rhapsody 1. Achilles has already withdrawn from the war because of his anger. So, now that this greatest hero of the Achaeans is out of the picture, what will happen next? How will the absence of Achilles affect the story of the Trojan War? Many new doubts and fears set in, and the resolve of the Achaeans is harshly tested. There is negative talk, and there are omens. Thus the story of the Trojan War, as told and retold countless times in the distant past, must now be retold yet again, and Rhapsody 2 will set the terms for the retelling still to come. For setting the terms, Rhapsody 2 will need a new Catalogue of Ships, now happening in the tenth year of the war, as a replacement for any old Catalogue that would have logically happened already in the first year. This new Catalogue is of course not really new: rather, it is the oldest possible Catalogue that is now being renewed for the newest possible retelling of the Trojan War, reconsidered in the glaring light of the grim consequences facing the Achaeans now that Achilles has withdrawn from the war. With these consequences in view, the Catalogue will reassess all the Achaean heroes involved in the Trojan War. Of special interest will be the role of Protesilaos, who had been the first Achaean to die in the war, as a model for Achilles. As the Master Narrator notes most ruefully, Protesilaos is now terribly missed by his fellow warriors. So too will Achilles be missed.

draft js image errorOn the reverse side of the coin: Inscription: ΘΗΒΑΙΩΝ. Pictured: the Greek hero Protesilaos, the first Achaean to step on Trojan soil and, according to the myth, the first to die in the Trojan War. The myth is retold in Iliad 2.695–709.

source

Here in the Iliad, the telos or ‘fulfillment’ of the plot is being realized only in the form of a prophecy—by contrast with the epic Cycle, where the conquest of Troy is the ultimate telos. On the epic Cycle, see the inventory of Words and Ideas. There are comparable themes in Virgil Aeneid 8.615-629, 729-731, featuring the Shield of Aeneas.

source

The expression kleos oupot’ oleitai ‘its glory [kleos] will never perish’ (κλέος οὔποτ’ ὀλεῖται), as here at I.02.325, is parallel with kleos aphthiton estai (κλέος ἄφθιτον ἔσται) at I.09.413, which can be translated ‘the glory [kleos] will be imperishable [aphthiton]’. This parallelism shows that aphthito- at I.09.413 and elsewhere was understood to be not just long-lasting, as some have thought, but eternal. As for the interpretation ‘the glory [kleos] will be imperishable [aphthiton]’, we will see in the comment on I.09.413 that an alternative interpretation is also possible: ‘and there will be a glory [kleos] that is imperishable’.

source

The petrified serpent is equated with the story of Troy, and the word teleîn ‘reach an outcome’ here conveys the inevitable outcome of that story. The prophecy expressed by teleîn reveals a poetics of unchangeability in narrating the story. And the concretization of such unchangeability is visualized as the petrifaction of the serpent. The imperfective aspect of the verb teleîn ‘reach an outcome’ here is referring to the story of Troy as it is still being told, as it is still in progress.

source
Leonard Muellner

among examples of formal divergence between phrases which are functionally parallel but occur in spoken dialogue as against narrative (transformations of (A) paralleled in a secular series, of which this verse is an example)

source
Richard Martin

Odysseus' speech to the Achaeans in Book 2, recalling the divine sign at Aulis, is introduced by Athena herself restraining the audience so that he may speak the elaborate muthos at 2.284-332 (Martin 1993:63-64). One could score the speech by noting the shifts in genres of muthos within it: Odysseus begins with flyting, comparing the troops to children or women anxious to get home; memory takes over, noting it is the tenth year at Troy; a command intrudes ("Bear up, friends," 2.299-300); and this triggers a long rendition of an earlier prophecy by Kalkhas at Aulis, when the sign of the snake who ate the swallows appeared (Martin 1993:81).

Precise details—the altar and the springs near it, the snake's color, the number of birds and their cries—are remembered in the service of dramatic rhetoric intended to convince the Achaeans of the authenticity of the event, but also to raise the status of the one who remembers it. For Odysseus, in recalling the words of Kalkhas, exhibits a seerlike ability to describe and interpret what is not present. Memory bestows a mantle on its practitioners (Martin 1993:81-82).

The crucial difference between this type of performance and that of Nestor in his long narrative in Book 2 (656-803) has to do with the self-presentation of the speaker. Odysseus foregrounds himself as performer, explicitly quoting another authority—Kalkhas—whom he then can be seen to overcome in the contest of speaking: Kalkhas, as we saw in Book 1, does not even cite his own previous acts, whereas Odysseus remembers all, apparently. Nestor, on the other hand, presents himself not as a speaker but as a heroic performer of both words and deeds. His narrative of personal experience is convincing because it calls for emulation, even challenge (Martin 1993:82).

References

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

source

Odysseus' description in Book 2 of the divine sign at Aulis (2.308-29) provides one of the most important parallels for Achilles' bird simile in Book 9. In the augury passage, a blood-red snake devours eight sparrows while their mother, soon to be eaten herself, hovered nearby. Odysseus calls the nestlings phila tekna—an example of the pathetic fallacy consistently applied by Homeric augurs—and says the mother was grieved. This description in the discourse of augury is compared by Kalkhas on purely numerical grounds; the Trojan Polydamas similarly combines sentiment with advice in his allegorical reading of a bird-sign (12.209-22). Both augurs draw a prospective moral from the bird image. Achilles, before comparing himself to a bird and drawing conclusions from the equation, uses a phrase similar to Polydamas' preface (autar egōn ereō hōs moi dokei einai arista, 9.314; cf. nun aut' exereō hōs moi dokei einai arista, 12.215). Like Odysseus, Achilles fills out his description of the parent bird in the pathetic manner. But his individual shaping of this piece of description consists in pointing the moral toward himself and toward the past: "So, too, I slept sleepless nights," says Achilles. The fall of Troy, and the outcome of battle, are not his concern, as they are in the other, similar bird auguries (Martin 1993:203-4).

For the bird simile itself and its context in Achilles' speech, see the comment on Iliad 9.323-326. For the broader analysis of Achilles' speech, 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