What A Dangerous Thing to Say!
Politics and Absurdity in Iliad 14
This post is a basic introduction to reading Iliad 14. Here is a link to the overview of book 13 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 14 is right in the middle of the longest day in the Iliad that stretches from the renewal of hostilities at the onset of book 11 and lasts through the struggle over Patroklos’ body in book 17. Compared to the jam-packed action of books 11-13, book 14 offers a bit of a respite from the slaughter, but no break from Homeric intrigue. The book begins with a despairing Agamemnon proposing a thoroughly disastrous plan to take the wounded captains out to sea until things calm down at night and culminates in the so-called Dios Apate, or the afternoon delight of Hera and Zeus.
While these two events may seem to be radically different in their nature, both feature kings at less than their best and provide an opportunity to reflect on the weaknesses of an autocratic model. At the same time, they pair human and divine folly in a short space, allowing audiences to compare the stakes and consequences of their choices. The big difference is that the Achaeans end up having multiple leaders to make up for their king’s folly while the gods need to wait for Zeus to flex his strength and make more threats to put their world back in order.
Of course, this is not all about failed leaders! The deception/seduction of Zeus is legitimately fascinating and funny to modern readers, interweaving what we see as comic elements with potential ritual and religious allusions. At the same time, the fight keeps flaring up and mortals struggle as the gods engage in some less than clandestine carnal relations. Accordingly, the plot of this book engages critically with the major themes I have noted to follow in reading the Iliad: (1) Politics, (2) Heroism; (3) Gods and Humans; (4) Family & Friends; (5) Narrative Traditions, but the central themes I emphasize in reading and teaching book 13 are Politics, Gods and Humans and Narrative Traditions.
Book 14 continues with the Achaean crisis that became clear in book 11: all of the major leaders were injured resulting in a book 12 that saw Idomeneus and Ajax rallying the troops and a book 13 that centered around the leadership of the Cretan captains Ajax and Meriones. At the beginning of book 14, Agamemnon looks at the unfolding events in despair and suggests that running away might be the best option. His plan is for the captains to pull out to sea in a ship and wait out the danger there until nightfall (14.65-81). Odysseus’ response is, well, memorable.
Iliad 14.82-102
‘Son of Atreus, what kind of plan has escaped the bulwark of your teeth?
Ruinous one, I wish that you would order some other unfit army,
that you didn’t rule us, those for whom Zeus has assigned
work over harsh wars from youth right up
to old age, until each of us perishes.
Do you really desire to abandon in this way
the wide-wayed city of the Trojans, for which we have suffered many evils?
Silence! Lest any one else of the Achaians hear this idea
which no man, at least, would ever lead through his mouth,
a man who knows how to utter fit things in his thoughts,
a scepter-bearing man and one to whom the host assents,
the size of the host you rule over among the Achaians.
Now I question your thoughts altogether, what sort of thing you have spoken,
you who call us, when the war and strife have been joined,
to drag the well-benched ships to the sea, so that more still
to boast over might occur for the Trojans who have already overpowered us,
and harsh ruin might fall over us. For the Achaians will not
withstand the war while the ships are dragged to the sea,
but they will look back at us and forget their battle-lust.
There, then, leader of the host, your plan will destroy us.’
Odysseus, famous bestower of abuse, hits Agamemnon about as hard as Atreus’ son gets struck in the epic. This speech is all the more impactful because it echoes and puts a cap on a pattern we have seen since book 2: Agamemnon expresses–or feigns–defeat and despair, his seconds/captains intervene to come up with a better idea and to rally the troops. In this case, however, Agamemnon is speaking to the council of elders and not the full assembly of the Achaeans as he does in book 2 and book 9. Where book 2 was clearly marked as a ‘test’ and book 9 seemed a bit melodramatic even as it still functioned as an opportunity to recreate Achaean unity despite Achilles’ dissent, book 14 seems more earnest and potentially disastrous.
Odysseus’ words directly address this: he expresses clear frustration with Agamemnon, going so far as to wish he didn’t rule them, and reprimands him for the foolishness of his plans. His closing statement–your plan will destroy us–thematically echoes the repeated concern of Homeric poetry that leaders ruin their people through recklessness.
And yet, Agamemnon does not respond with ire or condemnation. Instead, he allows that Odysseus’ words sting, but that he wasn’t planning on forcing anyone to retreat. In what seems to be a moment of desperation, Agamemnon says he’s ready for anyone to give them a good plan, no matter how old they are. With that cue, Diomedes prepares to speak.
Iliad 14.109-34
Then among them spoke Diomedes, good at the war-cry:
‘The man is near, let us not waste any more time; if you wish
to consent, then may each of you do not entertain anger
because I am indeed the youngest by birth among you.
I also claim to be the offspring of a noble father,
Tydeus, whom the heaped-up earth covers in Thebes.
For, three blameless children were born to Portheus
and in Pleurôn and steep Kalydon lived
Agrios and Melas, and the third child was the horseman Oineus
the father of my father—and he was conspicuous among them for virtue.
Although he remained there, my father lived in Argos,
driven there, for this, I guess, is how Zeus and the other gods wished it.
He married one of Adrêstos’ daughters, and inhabited a house
rich for living—he had sufficient grain-bearing ploughlands
and around these there where many orchards full of fruit,
and he possessed many flocks. He surpassed all the Achaians
with the spear—you all must have heard these things, if they’re true.
Hence, do not, by claming that my birth, at least, is low and cowardly,
disregard the speech that is shown forth, the one I will speak.
Let us go again to the war, even though we are wounded by necessity.
But, when there, let us keep ourselves out of the strife
of the missiles, lest anyone somehow receive a wound on top of a wound.
Let us rally the others and send them into battle, even those who before
gave into their impulse to hang back and not fight.’
So he spoke and they especially heard him and consented;
They got up to go and Agamemnon, lord of men, led them.
I have written on several occasions (see below) about Diomedes as the replacement Achilles in books 2-15. This speech marks his last significant action in the epic, but it brings to culmination a plot arc that others like David Elmer and Elton Barker have seen as the exploration of the limits of dissent and popular consensus. In a few publications (listed below), I have suggested that Diomedes is a stand-in for someone learning how to engage in a political group like the Achaeans following these primary steps:
Diomedes’ Story of Speech (from Christensen 2008 below)
(1) Diomedes (implicitly) witnesses the actions and speeches of Iliad 1-3
(2) Diomedes shows he knows the appropriate parameters for political and martial speech (Il. 4).
(3) Diomedes practices public speech and is acclaimed by all the Achaians in his refusal of Paris’ offer to return the gifts but not Helen (7.400-2). Acclamation (7.403-4).
(4) Diomedes practices public speech in criticizing Agamemnon and is acclaimed by all (9.50-1) but is criticized by Nestor for not reaching the télos múthôn (9.53-62). Acclamation (9.50-1)
(5) Diomedes practices public speech in reaction to Achilles’ rejection of the assembly (9.697-709) and is acclaimed by all the kings. Acclamation (9.710-11).
(6) Diomedes volunteers to go on a nocturnal spying mission during the council of kings and is encouraged by Agamemnon to choose any companion he wants regardless of nobility (10.219-39)
(7) Diomedes executes public speech at a critical moment and offers a plan (14.110-32). He is obeyed by all the kings and departs from the epic as a speaker. Acclamation (14.133).
Book 14 is a moment of crisis that follows upon 13 books of crisis, each one of which could have meant the end of the Achaean coalition against Troy. The Iliad portrays the Greeks succeeding without Achilles–even despite his wish that they perish for not honoring him–because they have a structure that allows multiple people to speak with authority and give good advice. This contrasts with the Trojans but it also shows a different possibility from the world of the gods, the comic absurdity of which is visited at the end of book 14 with the seduction of Zeus.
Book 14
How does Agamemnon’s response to the battle (and his plan) interact with similar themes in books 2 and 9?
What does the plan to seduce Zeus (the so-called Dios apatē) contribute to the plot and our impressions of the gods?
How does Zeus’ use of stories from the past during the Dios apatē shape the way we understand the use of mythological examples in the past?
Bibliography on Politics and Iliad 14
n.b this is not an exhaustive bibliography. If you’d like anything else included, please let me know.
Barker, Elton T. E. 2004. “Achilles’ Last Stand: Institutionalising Dissent in Homer’s Iliad.” PCPS 50: 92–120.
—,—. 2009. Entering the Agôn: Dissent and Authority in Homer, Historiography and Tragedy. Oxford.
Burrage, Dwight G. “Education in the Homeric Age.” CJ: 147–152.
Christensen, Joel P. 2008. “The End of Speeches and a Speech’s End: Nestor, Diomedes, and the telos muthôn.” in Reading Homer: Film and Text. Kostas Myrsiades (ed.). Farleigh Dickinson University Press. 136–162.
—,—. 2015a. “Trojan Politics and the Assemblies of Iliad 7.” GRBS 55: 25–51.
—,—. 2015b “Reconsidering ‘Good’ Speakers: Speech-Act Theory, Agamemnon and the Diapeira of Iliad 2.” Gaia, 18: 67–81.
—,—. 2018. “Speech Training and the Mastery of Context: Thoas the Aitolian and the Practice of Múthoi” for Homer in Performance: Rhapsodes, Narrators and Characters, Christos Tsagalis and Jonathan Ready (eds.). University of Texas Press, 2018: 255–277.
Dickson, Keith. 1995. Nestor: Poetic Memory in Greek Epic. New York: Garland.
Donlan, Walter.. 2002. “Achilles the Ally.” Arethusa 35: 155–172.
Elmer, David. 2013. The Poetics of Consent: Collective Decision Making and the Iliad. Baltimore.
Frazer, Richard McIlwaine. “The crisis of leadership among the Greeks and Poseidon's intervention in Iliad 14.” Hermes, vol. CXIII, 1985, pp. 1-9.
Gottesman, Alex. 2008. “The Pragmatics of Homeric Kertomia,” CQ 58: 1–12.
Haft, Adele J.. “Odysseus' wrath and grief in the Iliad. Agamemnon, the Ithacan king, and the sack of Troy in Books 2, 4, and 14.” The Classical Journal, vol. LXXXV, 1989-1990, pp. 97-114.
Hammer, Dean. 1997. 2002. The Iliad as Politics: The Performance of Political Thought. Norman.
Haubold, Johannes. 2000. Homer’s People: Epic Poetry and Social Formation. Cambridge.
Knudsen, Rachel Ahern. 2014. Homeric Speech and the Origins of Rhetoric. Baltimore.
Martin, Richard P. 1989. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.
Nagy, Gregory. 1979. The Best of the Achaeans. Baltimore.
Roisman, Hannah. 2005. “Nestor the Good Counsellor.” CQ 55: 17–38.
Roochnik, David. 1990. “Homeric Speech Acts: Word and Deed in the Epics.” CJ 85: 289–299.
Rose, P. W. 1988. “Thersites and the Plural Voices of Homer.” Arethusa 21: 5–25.
Sale, William M. 1994. “The Government of Troy: Politics in the Iliad. GRBS 35: 5–102.
Stensgaard, Jakob. 2003. “Peitho in the Iliad: A Matter of Trust or Obedience?” Classicalia et Medievalia 54: 41–80.
van Wees, Hans. 1996. “Growing up in Early Greece: Heroic and Aristocratic Educations.” In Alan H. Sommerstein and Catherine Atherton (eds.). Education in Greek Fiction. Nottingham: 1–20.
Wilson, Donna F. 2002. Ransom, Revenge, and Heroic Identity in the Iliad. Cambridge.