The first essay for Epic: From Homer to Star Wars where I compare the Iliad and the Odyssey’s treatment of heroism in the characters of Achilles and Odysseus.
Both ancient and modern commentators now agree that the Odyssey was composed after the Iliad and with that poem very much in mind. Pick an encounter, episode, or narrative strategy in the Odyssey that you see as revisiting or revising a parallel aspect of the Iliad. How does the Odyssey look back on the Iliad? What conversations is the poet of the Odyssey having with the poet of the Iliad?
For all the death and destruction brought by war, warriors in the Iliad and Odyssey nonetheless charge headlong into battle. They fearlessly engage their enemies, driven by the heroic code and the prospect of priceless plunder and immortal glory. This honorable, materialistic mindset of the various heroes and combatants of the Iliad exists beyond the scope of the Trojan War. War, fighting and heroics are held in the highest regard in the Homeric narratives. Thus, Achilles, who, in the Iliad, questions the merits of waging war, contrasts sharply from all the other fighters, Achaean and Trojan alike. Achilles is the only hero who weighs the costs and benefits of war. This deliberation, though brief and unresolved, is fundamentally important to the Iliad’s narrative resolution. Additionally, Achilles’s unanswered question is bestowed to the Odyssey to explore and answer. The narrative sequel explores the aftermath of the Trojan War and its effects on the various characters central to the Iliad. By examining the diverse array of fates that befall various Achaean heroes, the Odyssey weighs the risks and benefits of war and determines that war, despite its prominence in the heroic code, is rarely worth the consequences to those involved.
As a war narrative, the Iliad offers an intimate perspective of war from the warriors on the frontlines. It is immediately clear that glory and honor are held to high esteem on the battlefield. Similarly, suggestions of retreat, even the most reasoned, are ignored and castigated. When Thersites taunts Agamemnon and suggests that the remaining Achaeans return home, all of the soldiers laugh as Odysseus cracks his scepter across his back (Iliad 107). After Zeus sends a sign for the Trojan army, Hector is advised to retreat but he charges forward, unwilling to display wisdom and risk cowardice (332). Additionally, the act of waging war is also held to high regard. The Achaeans plundering of multiple cities on route to Troy is evidence of this. Similarly, Achilles’s conquering of land is mentioned in high esteem. Thus, it is unmistakable that waging war and displaying courage to the point of death is admired and rewarded.
Because this culture of war is assumed in the beginning of the Iliad, it is unexpected that Achilles questions this culture when no other hero does so. Between the onset of his personal feud with King Agamemnon and his vengeful return to the battlefield, Achilles struggles to decide whether to return to the battlefield. He tells Odysseus, “No, what lasting thanks in the long run / for warring with out enemies, on and on, no end?” (262). Though Achilles expresses his decision to abandon the battle in terms of fairness, glory, and honor, Achilles does so because the language of war limits him. This is evident because Achilles cannot express his decision consistently. At first, he cites the unfair crime Agamemnon has committed against him, stealing Briseis from his tent (263). But later, he exclaims, “I say no wealth is worth my life! Not all they claim / was stored in the depths of Troy, that city built on riches” (265). In fact, Achilles may not even be primarily concerned about Briseis, claiming that he can find a wife with ease (265). This second line of reasoning not only contradicts the essence of his first, but it also expresses Achilles’s main grievance. That is, he is unable to make a decision between life and glory.
While Achilles’s argument that war is not worth his life, Achilles is not actually able to decide which is more important. Achilles is given the unique agency to choose between death and immortal glory or life and no glory, the cause of his dilemma, but he in unable to choose. Despite telling Odysseus that he values his life above all else, several facts indicate the contrary. The first is that Achilles has not left for home. Instead, Achilles observes the battle from far. The second is that he still holds a grievance against Agamemnon, who has wounded his honor and taken his glory. This duality between life and glory is apparent in the inconsistency of Achilles’s speech to Odysseus. Embedded in Achilles’s exchange with Odysseus is the question of what war and glory is worth. For Achilles, his life is at stake. However, Achilles later realizes that not only is his life at stake, but the lives of his family, father and others are affected by his decision.
The Iliad does not have an answer to Achilles’s question. Achilles goes on to charge into battle after Patroclus’s death and slaughter Hector and the Iliad ends before the resolution of the Trojan War. Instead, the Odyssey takes on Achilles’s question. Most notably, the Odyssey offers Achilles’s answer to his own question. In Odysseus’s tour of the Kingdom of the Dead, he happens upon the Achaean hero who says, “By god, I’d rather slave on earth for another man— / some dirt-poor tenant farmer who scrapes to keep alive— / than rule down here over all the breathless dead” (Odyssey 265). Additionally, Achilles expounds on his reasoning. He is concerned about the repercussions his death has had on his family, father and son. He asks about his father’s honor and his child’s outcome. This conversation, which harkens back to the meeting between Odysseus and Achilles in the Iliad, effectively answers Achilles’s narrative dilemma. Achilles values his life higher than the glory gained from battle. However, this encounter does not fully resolve the larger issue, what war is worth. Instead, it contributes by helping frame and direct the overall conversation. It is clear from Achilles’s statement that war is not worth everything but it is also clear that honor and glory have their place in society. The narrative no longer unanimously views the decision to fight to the death as correct, as Hector and others did. Additionally, the nature of the suggestions made by Thersites may be viewed as having some merit, despite the back-breaking criticism given by the other warriors. The Odyssey uses Achilles to establish that losing one’s life is not worth waging war. Thus, the Odyssey has begun to reevaluate the glory-centered war culture displayed in the Iliad just as Achilles attempted to do. As the Odyssey explores and examines the outcomes of other heroes, the Odyssey begins to narrow in on war and glory’s exact value.
In the same journey to the underworld, Odysseus speaks with Agamemnon, who was killed by his wife and her lover. As a result of the war and his absence, Agamemnon lost his wife and as a result, his life. Thus, in addition to life and glory, the Odyssey evaluates war’s entire array of consequences such as those on families and communities. For Agamemnon, the war should have brought him glory, fame and fortune. Instead, the war split his family. Though Agamemnon makes no direct judgment of the merits of war, it is clear that the loss of family is devastating. This is evident in Pylos, where Telemachus meets with Nestor. Nestor and his family bemoan the death of Antilochus (107). The cost of the war is not lost on Nestor. When Telemachus goes to Sparta he speaks with Menelaus. Although Menelaus is the most glorious victor of the war, having won Helen back, he is deeply unhappy. He says, “And still, / must as I weep for all my men, grieving sorely, / time and again, sitting here in the royal halls, / now indulging myself in tears, now brushing tears away— / the grief that numbs the spirit gluts us quickly—” (127). Because of the war, Menelaus has lost his brother and many fellow men. Because of his grief, he and Helen take drugs to dull the pain (131). The aftermath of the war has not been kind on any of these three men, all of whom survived the war and were handsomely rewarded as a result. Winning the war is weighed against losing a son for Nestor. Winning the war is weighed against losing his wife and life for Agamemnon. Winning the war and Helen is weighed against the loss of his brother and fellow men for Menelaus. In all three of these circumstances, all three are hard pressed to forget the war, despite the rewards they may have received as a result.
Finally, at the conclusion of the Odyssey, there is perhaps only one clear victor. That is Odysseus, who, in contrast to Agamemnon, comes home to a faithful wife. In contrast to Nestor, Odysseus comes home to a son. Ultimately, unlike Achilles, he comes home with his life. Thus, Odysseus may be considered the ultimate victor of the Trojan War, returning home having lost nothing, but perhaps time. However, Odysseus’s story is not so simple. Upon his return, Odysseus slaughters numerous suitors and unfaithful servants. As a result of Odysseus’s destruction, family members of the fallen threatened to kill him. Only divine intervention from Athena is able to stop all out conflict. Thus, the war’s toll on Odysseus is slight in comparison to his ally Achaeans, but it is not unfelt. As a result, Odysseus retains his life, his family and gains the honor and plunder of war. Odysseus is the true winner of the Trojan War and finishes the analysis of war’s worth. Compared alongside the four other heroes described in the Odyssey, it is clear that war’s worth is not small, but it is not on the level of life or family.
It is clear from the Iliad and the Odyssey that glory and honor have an important role in the culture and lives of these warriors. It is also clear that war offers a clear and often revered method of obtaining wealth and honor. However, because the Iliad only concentrates on the ongoing war’s second to second interactions, it is unable to effectively address Achilles’s question of what war and its rewards are ultimately worth. Instead, it leaves the question to be examined by the Odyssey. As Achilles and Agamemnon demonstrate, war is not worth death or fractured families. Nestor and Menelaus show that war may not be worth broken families despite both surviving the war. Finally, only Odyssey, who emerges from the war the least harmed, shows that war’s worth is just below life and family. The honor and glory won from war are thus important, but are not valued above family and life. Though the Trojan War is unique in its length and consequences, the costs and benefits of war are likely to be very similar. The Odyssey, by answering Achilles’s question from the Iliad, effectively makes a claim of war’s worth, regardless of the size and scope of war.
Here are some points to consider: