Rage. So begins the Iliad, calling on the Muses to sing of the “murderous [and] doomed” rage of Achilles (1:2). The Iliad begins and ends with Achilles’ Rage. But it also includes scenes of the exact opposite. Brotherhood. Humanity. Family. Contrasting and extreme emotion is but one of many ideas the Iliad explores. The duality between the elements is seen everywhere. The concepts of good and evil are not completely clear or unambiguous. The gods and mortals, while on two different extremes, are eerily similar. White and black are replaced with shades of grey. It is with this same perspective Homer looks upon War.
Homer’s ultimate attitude toward war is ambiguous. War is presented as a spectrum of thought and emotion. No extreme can encapsulate it. Just as War is barbaric, it is also beautiful. Just as it is inevitable and fated, it is also flawed and avoidable.
The Iliad does not shy away from graphic descriptions of death in War. Warriors are disemboweled and skewered. Victors vaunt as their weapons cut through veins, arteries, tendons, and bones. Both armies are callous and indifferent to the men they kill. While the barbarity astonishes modern readers, their battle-lust is even more frightening. Amidst the blood-soaked field, men are “mad for war and struggle” and their “lust for battle ris[es]” with each victim (2:536, 14:520). War is barbaric and exalting because of that. The brutality of War is especially apparent in Hector’s defilement. In dragging Hector’s body, Achilles treads on the fine line of humanity. Even the Gods speak in outrage –– asking “What good will it do [Achilles]? What honor will he gain?” (24:62). Despite the brutality of war, there is a humanity that must be preserved. Contrasting the scenes of messy death are the raw, vibrant passions of War. Family is central. One of the Iliad’s most tragic scenes is Hector playing with his son. Achilles agrees to wait until dawn before leaving after Phoenix’s request. However, more common in the Iliad than familial bonds are bonds of friendship. The brotherhood of War –– shared memories of slaughter and death –– resonates among warriors. Ajax pleads with Achilles to remember “his comrades’ love” and consider the request of his “closest, dearest friends” (9:769, 9:785). Patroclus yearns to fight upon seeing Eurypylus’ injuries, claiming the “persuasion of a comrade has its powers” (15:474). The greatest example of brotherhood is Achilles’ agony after Patroclus’ death. Achilles is inconsolable, having “lost the will to live” and determined to die for the brother he loved (18:105). Achilles’ agony is palpable –– his rage the essence of the epic. Occasionally, the shared brotherhood of War also transcends enemy lines. Achilles and Priam sob together, acknowledging the “pain to break the spirit!” that deaths in War cause (24:605). For a brief, and fleeting, moment shared grief bonds the two men. The consequences of War are not unique to one side. Death in War is horrific and brutal. But the shared bonds of brotherhood are only found in shared pain.
If the consequences of War are beautiful and barbaric, its causes are fated and preventable. Free will exists in Homer’s Iliad –– until the Gods and Fate say otherwise. Gods influence the affairs of humanity and men are bound by the decision. As Agamemnon claims, “A god impels all things to their fulfillment,” driving madness into the hearts and actions of men (19:105). In this, he is not wrong. The fate of mortals is destined by the whims of Gods. The War begins when Paris steals Helen away, challenging Menelaus and the Greeks. Yet Helen is one of many “lovely gifts/of golden Aphrodite” Paris receives (3:77-78). As Paris recognizes, “the gods give of their own free will,” and men cannot refuse their gifts. He cannot refuse Aphrodite’s will, and his acceptance causes the War. The Gods enthusiastically continue their interference and favoritism throughout the War. As Apollo reflects, the skirmishes of men break an otherwise monotonous immortal life. He compares mortals to “leaves, no sooner flourishing, full of the sun’s fire, /feeding on earth’s gift, than they waste away and die,” finding no value in them except as pawns in the Gods’ game (21:529-530). All Gods demonstrate a similar indifference toward man. Aphrodite prevents a decisive truce, disregarding the future loss of life. The daily tides of War are dictated by the whims of Zeus. The ending –– Hector’s death and Priam’s request –– is decided callously by the Gods. War is a choice of the Gods, preventable if they choose otherwise. However, despite their otherworldly power, the Gods are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. Even Zeus, the most powerful, is bound by a higher power. In deciding the fate of Achilles and Hector, Zeus uses “his sacred golden scales [… and …] places two fates of death” (22:249). With this, Homer implies a limit on the powers of the Gods. Some unknown force –– Fate –– can dictate their actions. Even if Zeus’ “heart grieves for Hector… a man [he] love[s]” (22:201, 202), the decision of Fate requires Zeus to act decisively. The “father of men and gods” is not alone in acknowledging the presence of a higher power (22:200). Apollo entertains the question “what if the Argive forces stormed [the city’s sturdy walls] today – / against the will of fate?” acknowledging Fate as an entity beyond the Gods (21:594-595). He subsequently fights in the battle to execute the will of Fate. Within the Iliad, Homer never clarifies the powers of Fate. It is a power beyond the Gods, yet it can be defied by man. If the whims of Gods make War preventable, then Fate makes it inevitable.
Homer’s ultimate attitude toward War is not clear. In some cases, it is brutal and inevitable. In others, beautiful and preventable. Characters are rarely only good or evil. Free will exists until it does not. However, it is this equivocal interpretation that makes the Iliad a masterpiece. The audience is called to examine the duality of life. It is asked to understand how without one extreme, there is no other.