#2: The Iliad: Compiled by Matthew Phan, edited by Brook Griffin  

Fate and human choice

1. Unforeseen circumstances lead to people being or not being directly involved in events. This is evident when one considers those WTC workers who came late to work on the day of the attack and how they too could have been victims.

2. What does human choice mean when we do not know the implications of our actions? No matter how much we plan, our plan's consequences are never within our control, and in fact may be more out of control than we imagine.

3. Major decisions are made in the Iliad, but the resolve to carry a plan through to its final consequence may be bent in the face of fate, or the god's intervention. E.g. Menolaos and Paris duel, and Menolaos wins but is shot at by Pandaros under Athene's influence. The course of events, and the onset of tragedy, was brought on by a decision made outside human scope. Thus, humans seem like tools in the hands of the gods. Diomedes also says how he would not dare challenge a god and only attacks Aphrodite because of Athene's direction.

6. Both Achaians and Trojans seem to believe Troy will fall, but circumstances and time are unclear, which gives Hektor the space for false hope, in wishing to see his son grown up.

The gods

1. Are the gods subject to fate or are they above fate? Do gods have a part to play whereby they facilitate and precipitate human fate? Are gods players in this story themselves and thus subject to fate? Many of the lesser gods are on either the Achaian or Trojan side, suggesting that they are players. However, other heroes are saved countless times by Athene or Apollo. Why is it permissible in some circumstances but not in others? Does that suggest a destiny for each person, something the gods are must not disturb?

3. Fate has a different meaning for gods and men. For men it is the unknowable future, the irrational and inexplicable, for e.g. when someone lives who reasonably should have died. They attribute this to gods and fate, thus equating gods and fate on the same unknowable plane. Fate is personally irrelevant to the gods, since they are immortal and there can be no lasting consequences on their lives.

4. The Greek concept of gods is very different from the concept of the biblical God. Greek gods are supernatural, immortal, but still passionate, with particular character traits, etc. Yet they are immortal and wield immense power. Ethics are also below gods in Greek culture; gods not held to moral behavior. The ethical code is one established by humans, although it pleases the gods.

5. Plato wrote that no one intentionally does evil; one's actions depend on one's value system. The gods take sides, and believe they are on the right side. However, this is according to their personal grievances or liking for particular characters e.g. Athene and Odysseus. Many times the gods do take pity on the mortals, and Zeus himself is aware of the suffering that would be caused by honoring Achilleus and protecting the Trojans, but nonetheless they act according to what they believe is right for them personally.

7. However, Zeus does not tell Hera she is wrong, there is no moralizing, she is wrong because she is against him. Since he is more powerful, his will becomes the right course.

Human Character

1. Even when an unknowable future, we make plans, regardless of whether they are fulfilled. Are the concepts of kleos and philia created out of a need to find an expression of the self in permanent form either in battle-glory and song or by human relationship and love? Hope is the fuel that drives us to look forward and plan. But why do we choose particular actions? What really matters to us, that keeps us living, or acting, and in the case of the Achaians and Trojans, fighting? Conversely, the gods are driven by the need for worship and sacrifice, threatening, punishing, promising and rewarding in turns. Hence Zeus must safeguard the gods' future by resisting the temptation to save Sarpedon and prevent chaos from breaking out, for that might jeopardize human worship of the gods.

2. Philia? Hektor's brief reunion with his family in Bk 6, and his being unable to bear the thought of what might happen to Andromache suggests its importance, as does Achilleus' decision to fight only when Patroklos dies. Hektor's reunion with his family reminds us that all the Trojans are fighting for the right to live with their families as well. For e.g. when Lykaon pleads mercy before Achilleus, part of the appeal is that he has been reunited only 12 days with his family Bk 20, ln 73-96.

3. Action, or work? We do not think people should fail to act; there is value in the act of trying. Once they have decided against going home, there is nothing for the Achaians to do but fight. There would be no sense in standing around weeping all day, they must decide upon a course of action, and follow it through. Similarly, the Trojans must constantly fight to defend their city, for any slack would be fatal. Thus when their friends die, we read that sorrow sweeps through them, but they continue to fight, save the body, etc.

4. Are they fighting for Kleos, or battle glory, to be part of something, to make their mark if but for a day? Ref B12, ln 322-328, Sarpedon suggests to Glaukos that since "no man can turn aside nor escape" the "spirits of death", let them "go on and win glory for ourselves". This also shows that the warriors fight with an acute sense of death. The reminder that one is mortal reminds one that time spent on one thing is time sacrificed from another. For e.g., one could argue that the pain of Patroklos's death turns Achilleus back to remembering philia, and reconciling with the Achaians and Agamemnon, as demonstrated by the games in Bk 23.

5. George Eliot wrote about the "bonds of suffering" unite humans. Not everyone is happy in life, but everyone has faced suffering and death. Priam's sorrow reminds Achilleus of his father, and of his recent loss of Patroklos, and this mutual grief allows Achilleus to have pity on Priam and to return Hektor's body.

Agamemnon's leadership

1. Agamemnon seems weak because he never has any good ideas, and instead his ideas like to test the Achaians, turn out with the opposite effect of that intended. Diomedes tells him that he has the outward glory and ships, but no heart. It is Achilleus who calls the first meeting, and later it is usually Nestor, Odysseus, etc, who determine the course of action by the Achaians.

2. However, at least he has good counselors and listens to them. Although this comes after an initial disastrous self-centered decision to take Briseis.

Achilleus rejection of Achaians' embassy

1. Agamemnon offers Briseis back to Achilleus, untouched, and even includes his own daughter in marriage. However he also wants Achilleus to defer to him as the kinglier. Achilleus seeks rather reparation to honor, and Odysseus, knowing this, omits some of Agamemnon's words in his speech, B9, ln160-162.

2. Odysseus tries to remind Achilleus of what his father would have done, Bk9, Ln 252-258. He tries to tell Achilleus to rethink his priorities, but Achilleus rejects philia and filial piety and points to violated code of honor.

3. Phoinix describes how he had been Achilleus's nanny, demonstrating their closeness. Phoinix also tells a parable that listening to Prayers will bring healing to community and advantage to the person, and that the Prayers must be reached out to and sought, unlike Ruin. Achilleus invites Phoinix to stay, recognizing the bond, but only within the limits of his honor, he rejects also his plea to fight once more for the Achaians.

4. Aias is straightforward, accusing Achilleus of being "Pitiless" Bk 9, ln 632, having no respect and remembrance for his friends. He says that even one who as lost a child would accept a blood price, and here the crime against Achilleus is not so serious.

5. For Achilleus, honor has been wounded and he is not looking for just physical reparation, he wants Agamemnon to "make good this heartrending insolence" Bk 9, ln 387, but it is not clear how Agamemnon can do this. Although in Greek culture giving gifts as reparation is demonstrating a sentiment, Achilleus feels that Agamemnon is trying to buy him back. While Agamemnon may in fact be presenting himself that way, which leads to Diomedes commenting, "I wish you had not supplicated (Achilleus) with gifts. He is a proud man without this, and now you have driven him far deeper into his pride" Bk 9, lns 699-700, and while Agamemnon also refuses to admit his wrong, Achilleus in rejecting the offer shows himself to be stubbornly nursing his wounded pride, rather than maturely accepting reparation. His stubbornness reflects his youth.

Father-Son relationship

1. Hektor's son fails to recognize him because of this helmet. Astyanax recognizes only the father in Hektor, once Hektor has lost the image of his father, Astyanax cannot recognize him. There is no recognition of other aspects of Hektor. This is different from other father-son relationships which focus more on the deeds and the esteem the individual garners for being son or father of a man who has done great deeds.

2. Father-son relationship in other books always a manly respect, not an intimate laughing and playing.

3. The scene in Bk 6 plays out in microcosm the conflicting desires of kleos and philia. Andromache recognizes Hektor as warrior but wants him to fulfil his other roles as husband and father. Hektor on the other hand is torn by the thought of Andromache being enslaved, but decides that he must return out of duty, and also because he has "learnt to be valiant and to fight always in the foremost ranks" Bk 6, lns 444-445.

4. The constant mention of individual's as their father's son shows that part of who you are is who your family is. Thus the three are shocked that Achilleus has rejected pleas to remember not just friends but family and his father.