Structure and Stories
Reading Iliad 6
This post is a basic introduction to reading Iliad 6. Here is a link to the overview of book 5 and another to the plan in general. As a reminder, these posts will remain free, but there is an option to be a financial supporter. All proceeds from the substack are donated to classics adjacent non-profits on a monthly basis.
Book 6 of the Iliad may be one of the most carefully structured, most dynamic books of the epic. (And likely one of the most read books as well.) It is also crucial for fleshing out the world within which the Iliadic conflicts unfolds: it provides a rare view into the city of Troy, lets us hear the voices of the women in the city, and takes “man-slaughtering” Hektor out of combat and close to his home. There are three major scenes to consider: (1) the scenes of violence prior to Hektor’s return to the city; (2) the famous exchange between Glaukos and Diomedes that runs while Hektor is going to Troy; (3) the exchanges between Hektor and the people in the city, including Hekuba, Paris, Helen, and Andromache.
Interlocking Themes and Structures in Iliad 6
One of the things that makes this sequence really effective is how moments in each scene anticipate the contents of what follows. For instance, the catalogue of deaths to start the book provide “obituaries” of Trojan warriors that contain some curious detail and Agamemnon’s promise to kill even male Trojans in the womb echoes poignantly when we see (and hear about) Hektor’s son Astyanax at the end of the book. Consider as well, the narrative Diomedes provides at 6.130-140. He explains that it is dangerous to rival gods, but uses a strange narrative of how Lykourgos opposed an infant Dionysus and drove the baby god to the sea. Zeus punishes Lykourgos with blindness.
In this tale, Dionysus is rescued by Thetis, and summarizes that no one lasts long, “once they have become hateful to the gods” (ἦν, ἐπεὶ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀπήχθετο πᾶσι θεοῖσιν, 6.140). This theme is echoed later when Glaukos summarizes the later days of Bellerophon, wandering the Aleian plain after he also “became hateful to the gods” (6.200). And details from this scene may also anticipate what follows: Christos Tsagalis has argued that the invocation of the Maenads and Dionysus in Diomedes’ speech foreshadows Andromache being compared to a mad-woman in Troy and the odd inclusion of an infant Dionysus, saved here and only here by Thetis, may also prime audiences to think about infants on the coast of Asia Minor who survive and those who don’t.
These thematic interconnections are joined by a surprising structure in book 6. Hektor’s brother, Helenos, instructs him to go tell the Trojan women to sacrifice to Athena. Hektor leaves to do so at 6.116 but he does not arrive there until 6.237. As an audience, we are supposed to imagine that the intervening conversation between Glaukos and Diomedes takes place while Hektor travels through Troy. This is interesting in part because it is fairly unique in Homer, although it is not entirely strange. Often actions are delayed to create suspense, as when Patroklos waits several books to return to tell Achilles who is wounded (from book 11 until 16). But at this scale, this scene has interesting consequences for thinking about Homeric narrative structure.
There is an phenomenon described by “Zielinski’s Law” that suggests that Homeric poetry can only move forward and does not have flashbacks or show simultaneous action. The structure of this book certainly complicates this observation. At one level, it is clear that in real time performance, a poet cannot literally depict two scenes at the same time (although two poets could!). But, at another, the “law” (which really isn’t binding) implies a misunderstanding of the limits of epic art. Homeric poetry tends not to show simultaneous action, but it is certainly capable of doing so. Book 6 has multiple instances of simultaneous action: pay close attention as well to Paris’ departure from his abode and when Hektor catches up with him.
Homeric ‘Obituaries’
As you can observe from the catalogue of deaths that tends to accompany the aristeia of individual heroes, there’s a connection between the glory attached to a hero and ‘fame’ or at least naming of his victim. Indeed, as Hektor puts it in book 7, there is some connection between the fame of the victor and the vanquished:
Homer, Iliad 7.89-91
“…They will heap up a mound [sêma] on the broad Hellespont
And someone of the men who are born in the future may say
As he says over the wine-faced sea in his many-benched ship:
This is the marker [sêma] of a man who died long ago,
A man whom shining Hektor killed when he was at his best”
So someone someday will say. And my glory will never perish”σῆμά τέ οἱ χεύωσιν ἐπὶ πλατεῖ ῾Ελλησπόντῳ.
καί ποτέ τις εἴπῃσι καὶ ὀψιγόνων ἀνθρώπων
νηῒ πολυκλήϊδι πλέων ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον·
ἀνδρὸς μὲν τόδε σῆμα πάλαι κατατεθνηῶτος,
ὅν ποτ’ ἀριστεύοντα κατέκτανε φαίδιμος ῞Εκτωρ.
ὥς ποτέ τις ἐρέει· τὸ δ’ ἐμὸν κλέος οὔ ποτ’ ὀλεῖται.=
Peter Gainsford has done an analysis of all of the named killings in the Iliad and it provides two really important observations: first, far more Trojan dead are named than Achaean and, second, despite that imbalance, Hektor kills the most named people in the Iliad, followed closely by Patroklos and Achilles. The ‘obituaries’ of these heroes, how they die and who they are, can be said to increase the glory or at least magnify the accomplishments of the chief warriors.
But I think there’s more to it than that. Book 6 starts with a series of Trojan Deaths at the hands of the Achaeans. The stories increase in length and provide interesting detail
Homer, Iliad 6.20-28
“Euryalos killed Dresos and Opheltios.
Then he went after Aisēpos and Pēdasos, whom once
The water nymph Abarbareē bore to blameless Boukolion.
Boukolion was a son of noble Laomedon,
The oldest by birth, but his mother gave birth to him in secret.
He had sex with the nymph while shepherding the sheep.
She became pregnant and gave birth to twin boys.
Euryalos, the son of Mekistes, undid their lives and shining limbs
And then stripped the weapons from their shoulders.”
Δρῆσον δ' Εὐρύαλος καὶ ᾿Οφέλτιον ἐξενάριξε·
βῆ δὲ μετ' Αἴσηπον καὶ Πήδασον, οὕς ποτε νύμφη
νηῒς ᾿Αβαρβαρέη τέκ' ἀμύμονι Βουκολίωνι.
Βουκολίων δ' ἦν υἱὸς ἀγαυοῦ Λαομέδοντος
πρεσβύτατος γενεῇ, σκότιον δέ ἑ γείνατο μήτηρ·
ποιμαίνων δ' ἐπ' ὄεσσι μίγη φιλότητι καὶ εὐνῇ,
ἣ δ' ὑποκυσαμένη διδυμάονε γείνατο παῖδε.
καὶ μὲν τῶν ὑπέλυσε μένος καὶ φαίδιμα γυῖα
Μηκιστηϊάδης καὶ ἀπ' ὤμων τεύχε' ἐσύλα.
In their commentary on book 6, Barbara Graziosi and Johannes Haubold write on the Boukolion passage:
“The poet provides recondite information on Boukolion's family and draws attention to this fact: Boukolion and his sons are born in obscure circumstances and marginal settings…Commentators debate whether the genealogy should be considered ‘conscious fiction’ or whether it reflects a local tradition…. The text, however, does not encourage us to view these options as alternatives: the poet tells us about a family that would otherwise remain obscure, and its history has a strong local flavour, rather than enjoying Panhellenic fame. ”
As they put it, just as with the catalogue of ships and other seeming digressions, the death scenes provide an opportunity for acknowledging local traditions by integrating their stories into the Homeric narrative. Given some of the details of this passage, however, such as the names “Cowherd” (Boukolion) and “Mud-woman” or “Not-foreigner” (Abarbareē), this passage could be seen as “improvised” for the context.
I think the somewhat legendary story here–a herdsman having a tryst with a divine woman–both echoes other Trojan stories (like the affair of Aphrodite and Anchises) while also preparing us for the actions of book 6 that, in sequence, show us (1) Agamemnon threatening to kill even infants in the womb; (2) Diomedes and Glaukos finding common ground across the war because of their genealogical narratives; and (3) the women and families of Troy, centered around a warriors brief return home. There’s a kind of anticipation in the themes of the initial deaths in this book, differing in an important way from the theomachy of book 5.
Some guiding questions for Book 6
What is the effect of the exchange between Diomedes and Glaukos on book 6 and on the whole?
How do Hektor’s conversations with Helen, Hecuba, and Andromache serve to characterize him and what impact do they have on the larger narrative?
What is Andromache’s advice for Hektor and why doesn’t he take it?
On Zielinski’s Law and Book 6 in general
n.b this is not an exhaustive bibliography. If you’d like anything else included, please let me know. I will have a separate list for posts on Agamemnon’s violence and the Diomedes/Glaukos episode
Arthur, M. B.. “The divided world of Iliad VI.” Reflections of women in antiquity. Ed. Foley, Helene Peet. New York: Gordon & Breach Science Publ., 1981. 19-44.
Bowie, Angus. “Narrative and emotion in the « Iliad »: Andromache and Helen.” Emotions and narrative in ancient literature and beyond: studies in honour of Irene de Jong. Eds. De Bakker, Mathieu, Van den Berg, Baukje and Klooster, Jacqueline. Mnemosyne. Supplements; 451. Leiden ; Boston (Mass.): Brill, 2022. 48-61. Doi: 10.1163/9789004506053_004
Carbon, Jan. Mathieu. “Zielinski’s Law and Its Validity.” Diss. 2003.
Frazer, Richard McIlwaine. “Hesiod's Titanomachy as an illustration of Zielinski's law.” Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, vol. XXII, 1981, pp. 5-9.
Barbara Graziosi, Johannes Haubold, Homer. Iliad, Book VI. Cambridge Greek and Latin classics. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Griffin, Jasper. “Homeric Pathos and Objectivity.” The Classical Quarterly 26, no. 2 (1976): 161–87. http://www.jstor.org/stable/638263.
Nünlist, René. “Der Homerische Erzähler Und Das Sogenannte Sukzessionsgesetz.” Museum Helveticum 55, no. 1 (1998): 2–8. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24821098.
Pratt, Louise Harrison. “The parental ethos of the « Iliad ».” Constructions of childhood in ancient Greece and Italy. Eds. Cohen, Ada and Rutter, Jeremy B.. Hesperia. Supplement; 41. Princeton (N. J.): American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2007. 25-40.
Purves, Alex C. “HOMER AND THE ART OF OVERTAKING.” The American Journal of Philology 132, no. 4 (2011): 523–51. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41415775.
Scodel, Ruth. “Zielinski’s Law Reconsidered.” Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-) 138, no. 1 (2008): 107–25. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40212076.
Slater, W. J. “Lyric Narrative: Structure and Principle.” Classical Antiquity 2, no. 1 (1983): 117–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/25010788.
Tsagalis, Christos. 2008. The Oral Palimpsest: Exploring Intertextuality in the Homeric Epics. Hellenic Studies Series 29. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies.
Vergados, Athanassios. “Rethinking Zieliński’s law and its application on Hesiod’s « Theogony ».” Paideia, vol. 74, no. 2, 2019, pp. 1239-1257.
Preparatory Posts
Five Major Themes to Follow in the Iliad
Book-by-book posts
The Plan: Zeus’ Plan in the Iliad
Prophet of Evils: Reading Iphigenia in and out of the Iliad
Speaking of Centaurs: Paradigmatic Problems in book 1
Thersites’ Body: Description, Characterization, and Physiognomy in book 2
Heroic Appearances: What Did Helen Look Like?
Sources for Helen in Early Greek Poetry
Long Ago, Far Away: Iliad and the Epic Cycle
Introduction to Iliad 5