13

The Iliad starts at kind of an odd spot. It starts by describing the argument between Agamemnon and Achilles (Akhilleus in my translation) over the women they have acquired from raids. It mentions off-hand that they have been there for nine years. Why is nothing about those nine years described at the beginning to introduce the story?

  • 8
    In our age of spoiler alerts, we tend to think of narrative as pitched to the reader who is reading it for the first and perhaps only time; but oral-traditional narratives, right down to The Three Little Pigs, are pitched to an audience that already knows the story and delights in its very familiarity. The Homeric precedent of starting an epic narrative in the midst of things was followed by secondary (literate) epic poets including Virgil and Milton, and influentially endorsed by Horace in his Ars Poetica, where the phrase is in medias res. – Brian Donovan Aug 12 '17 at 16:14
10

Whether the Iliad starts in the middle depends on what the subject of the poem is. If the subject is the whole Trojan War, then certainly the poem starts in the middle, and finishes well before the end. But is that really the subject? The opening line of the poem is:

μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος

That is, “sing, goddess, the rage of Peleus’ son Achilles”. If the subject of the poem is the rage of Achilles (and μῆνιν, rage, is the very first word) then the Iliad begins at the beginning, with the cause of Achilles’ rage (the quarrel with Agamemnon over the captive Trojan women Chryseis and Briseis), continues with its consequences (Achilles sulks; the battle goes poorly for the Achaeans; Patroclus impersonates Achilles and is killed by Hector), and ends with its resolution (Agamemnon returns Briseis to Achilles; Achilles kills Hector; Priam begs the return of his son’s body).

  • 1
    Well, I learned something new today about the Iliad. (Never read anything close to the original text, only major retellings.) – Rand al'Thor Aug 12 '18 at 18:33
8

There was a whole cycle of poems detailing the Trojan war and its aftermath. See Wikipedia. Of these, only the two attributed to Homer have survived intact.

So you could think of it as starting in the middle, or you can think of it as being one installment in a long series, most installments of which have now been lost.

Much of the audience would have known the outlines of the whole story already, so there was no need to start it with a summary of "what has gone before".

  • I think your last sentence hits the mark. The context of Greek literature (consisting as it did of its mytho-historical underpinnings) was ever-present and available to the audiences of the day. Professor Kitto suggests that this relieved writers of the need for lengthy exposition. They could jump into a story at any point with the confidence that the audience would be right with them. – Robusto Aug 13 '18 at 18:41
  • @Robusto: Exactly. But if there hadn't been another epic poem describing those nine years, how would the audience have known about them? – Peter Shor Aug 13 '18 at 19:00
  • The oral tradition would certainly have been there, and don't forget how much the mythology and its Olympian internecine warfare pervades the work. – Robusto Aug 13 '18 at 21:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.