VOX POPULI 2022

Acceptance in Iliad. 24
Although Homer’s final book of his
Iliad fixes into a neat ring-like
structure, reflecting the beginning of
the poem, it equally serves as an
independent text within a greater
holistic skeleton. Indeed, Colin
Macleod believed that the book
specifically defined the tragic nuances
of the poem. Although I will not be
able to give appropriate justice to the
book’s deep sincerity, I hope to show
its existential significances, which seek
to explain the human condition and
the necessity of endurance amongst
the inevitable suffering embedded in
life.
Notwithstanding the futile
protestations of his wife, the Trojan
elder Priam sets out to ransom the
mutilated corpse of his favourite son,
Hector, from the best warrior of the
Greeks, Achilles. Immediately, Priam’s
lack of self-worth is apparent: despite
the evident threat from the Greek
warriors, he values the salvation of his
son’s body more than his own and,
therefore, is willing to risk his life. On
his way, he is accosted by an
anonymous young traveller (unknown
to Priam, it is the god, Hermes), who
leads the elderly man through the
camp similarly to a young son guiding
his old father. The primary function of
this event, in my opinion, is to prepare
the audience (as it would have been in
eighth-century oral performances) for
the importance of the father-son
relationship, which is the premiss of
Priam’s demands as he enters Achilles’
hut.
Priam’s supplication of Achilles reveals
his desperation and accentuates his
lack of self-worth: he is willing to yield
completely to his son’s murderer for
the sake of this ransom. By alluding to
Peleus, Achilles’ father, Priam vibrates
the heartstrings of the Greek as both
characters join in their profuse
lamentations for their deceased
relatives. Here, one sees a more
humane side to Achilles’ personality:
he banishes his leonine pugnacity,
acknowledges his impending death,
and commends Priam’s audacity, while
empathising with the old man’s
situation. Both are struck by
admiration and pity as they gaze into
each other’s eyes: in an emphatic
moment, and it is just a moment, Priam
forgets that Achilles killed his son and
Achilles forgets that Priam has
orchestrated a ten-year war against
the Greeks. Instead, they perceive
each other as vulnerable mortals, who
are forever punished by the capricious
machinations of the Gods and, more
specifically, their lot cast upon them at
birth.
Amongst the pity, which embodies
this meeting, Homer grants Achilles a
philosophical voice, as if the poet
incarnates into his literary successors,
Plato and Aristotle. Within the poem’s
very claustrophobic setting, the bard
provides a cosmological reading for
this scene. He describes the myth, like
Pandora’s box, of two jars in Zeus’s
palace, one with ills and the other with
both ills and blessings. Scholars have
been universally divided by this
conundrum, varying from Nietzsche’s
nihilistic opinion that hope is the
greatest evil to West’s more optimistic
viewpoint that the hope is separate
from the evil and, therefore, acts as a
positive force for good. In my opinion,
Homer wishes to prove, through the
mouth of his reformed protagonist,
that suffering is an inevitable course of
life. Even if one’s life is filled with
blessings and utmost joy, the ill of
death, which looms over all helpless
mortals, renders this happiness to an
inevitable end.
Despite their grief, Achilles
encourages Priam to eat, citing the
myth of Niobe, who ate after the
slaughter of her children owing to her
hubris. This has a three-fold
significance: firstly, it adds an
articulate edge to Achilles’ persona,
almost meta-poetically elevating the
son of Peleus to the form of the poet.
This proffers more gravitas to his
speech and, as such, its contents.
Secondly, it confirms Achilles’ return to
humanity as he provides customary
food and drink to a guest, albeit a foe.
Thirdly, and most importantly, it
teaches one the value of
perseverance: the presence of grief
should not distract one from the
necessities of survival and endurance.
On the contrary, one should learn to
live with these emotions, comprehend
one’s inability to contain a world
pervaded with uncontrollable forces,
and accept that suffering, injustice,
and inequality are inescapable
courses of life.
However, ultimately, the most
profound element of this book is its
brevity: the scene is a short hiatus
from the trauma of war, where
partialities are absolved, and the
meaning of life can be perceived
objectively. Indeed, ironically, and
rather poignantly, it is the hope that a
resolution between the sides will be
formed, which encapsulates the
tragedy within the text. After twelve
days of mourning, the fighting will
resume, Priam will be slaughtered in
his palace, Troy will be consumed by
fire and, crucially, Achilles will meet his
premature end. The death of the
Greek hero, the quasi-philosopher of
Iliad. 24, proves the inescapability of
one’s fate; his conscious decision to
choose an early but glorious death,
outlined earlier in the poem, shows
that he accepts this inevitability. He
accepts that a short but heroic life is
better than a long but insignificant
one.
Iliad. 24 offers a pause for reflection
where, amongst the acrimony of war,
sufferer and sufferer can unite in their
grief, caused by divine will and human
pride. I believe that Iliad. 24 teaches
one that complete happiness is
unattainable; in fact, I would argue
that such a disposition indicates one’s
obliviousness to the harsh realities of
existence. Instead, by learning to
accept the fickle tendencies of a
mortal life, to value those cherished
friendships and relationships, and to
endure those inevitable hardships will
facilitate a life of self-contentment.
Achilles and Priam provide an
exemplum of this acceptance: they are
aware of these existential injustices
and, in a didactic way, teach us to live
our lives to the full before we
ourselves succumb to death.
Mr E Baker
~10~ ~11~