I give permission for public access to my Honors paper and for any
copying or digitization to be done at the discretion of the College Archivist
and/or the College Librarian.
Amy Nicole Hendricks
Similes and Narrative Structure in the Iliad Amy Nicole Hendricks Department of Greek and Roman Studies Rhodes College Memphis, Tennessee 2014 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Bachelor of Arts degree with Honors in Greek and Roman Studies This Honors paper by Amy N. Hendricks has been read and approved for
Honors in Greek and Raman Studies.
Dr. Susan B. Satterfield
Project Advisor
~~---Dr. Kenneth S. Morrell
Second Reader
Dr. James M. Boswell
Extra-Departmental Reader
Dr. David H. Sick
Department Chair
CONTENTS Signature page ii Contents iii Abstract iv Similes and Narrative Structure in the Iliad 1 Bibliography 31 ABSTRACT Similes and Narrative Structure in the Iliad by Amy Nicole Hendricks The Homeric simile functions on several levels in each of its appearances throughout the Iliad, creating emphasis and indicating the importance of a scene, character, or moment to the audience. Approaching the Iliad from an oral traditional perspective and accepting the idea of composition in performance, I take a close look at several sequences of similes in the poem, observing how the various sequences and patterns lend a degree of narrative structure to the poem and direct the audience’s attention to a particular thematic idea. I primarily focus on the similes repeatedly used to describe deaths on the battlefield and explain how the development of this pattern becomes familiar to an audience. I examine the absence of the anticipated death simile in the cases of both Patroklos and Hektor and interpret what implications this has for each of the characters and the larger narrative. In order to fully understand the context surrounding both of these scenes, I closely analyze the simile sequences in Books 16 and 22 that lead up to the respective deaths of Patroklos and Hektor, arguing that in exempting the simile at the moment of death, the narrator actually places a larger emphasis on the characters themselves, which becomes all the more powerful for an audience sensitive to the normal occurrence of the death simile. I. Introduction
The Homeric simile, shaped by centuries of revision and reinvention, continues to impact
Western literature. Faced with this living and growing tradition, scholars have struggled to clear
away the accretions of time to uncover its original meaning. They have dedicated volumes to the
various aspects of Homeric similes: whether their appearance in the Homeric texts we have today
is authentic and original, the ways that they function in the text by introducing different themes,
the simile as a traditional feature of oral poetry, and the relationship between simile and narrative
have all been the subjects of much discussion.1
The repetition of similes and sequences of similes in the Iliad creates a sense of
anticipation for an audience familiar with the performance of oral poetry. Of particular interest,
therefore, are the places where the poet breaks free of this expected rhythm through the
intentional lack of a simile. As demonstrated most thoroughly by M. Coffey and W.C. Scott, it is
possible to organize the passages that most often feature similes into a number of categories
based on theme and subject matter.2 In this study, I will examine the similes that lead up to and
describe death in battle, which are thematically central to the narrative. Arguably, the most
significant moments in the Iliad concern death.3 While particular types of similes accompany
many of the more important deaths, a few of the most critical death scenes in the poem break the
G. P. Shipp (1953) has argued that many of the similes in the Iliad and the Odyssey are late, both
linguistically and in terms of subject matter. Michael Coffey (1957) suggests that the similes herald the
beginnings of different type-scenes and indicate a central thematic action or idea. W.C. Scott (1974) takes
a detailed look at the simile as a particularly oral component of Homeric poetry, cataloguing them based
on subject matter and theme. Many scholars have undertaken the task of understanding how the similes
relate to the larger narrative; most recently, Jonathan Ready (2011) has approached the similes as
instances of competition between characters for a greater presence within the narrative.
2 Coffey’s work divides the similes based on their function, separately examining those that describe
movement, appearance, sound, measurement, situations, and psychological characteristics (1957:118).
Scott (1974) categorizes similes based on placement (e.g., themes of specific emotions, the withdrawal of
the hero, similes joining two scenes) and subject matter (e.g., lion similes, tree similes, river similes).
3 See L. Slatkin (1995) for a more complete discussion of theme in the Iliad.
1
established patterns. The absence of similes in significant death scenes, along with other
aberrations from the anticipated appearance of the simile, have interpretive significance not just
for the scene in question, but also for the entire poem.
In recent years, a few scholars have shifted their focus to specific similes rather than
Homeric similes as a whole, investigating how an individual comparison functions in relation to
its analogue in the story and what implications this can have for the surrounding context.4 W.C.
Scott shows that the similes of the Iliad and the Odyssey stem from an equally active tradition of
formulaic oral poetry, and that the simile itself does not find its origin in the Iliad or the Odyssey.
He suggests, “Consistency in analyzing components of oral poetry demands that the repeated
similes be treated as units which were as traditional and as autonomous, but also as adaptable as
the basic arming and banquet scenes.”5 Each appearance of the simile in Homer represents a
larger wealth of possible formulae to fit into the narrative framework, and yet each simile on its
own conveys something particular and unique about its subject.
As the Iliad is central to this project, it seems necessary at the outset to address the
question of authorship. Many people have spent years investigating what the name “Homer”
truly ought to mean, but the debate over single authorship versus a collaborative tradition still
continues.6 Ultimately, the uncertainty over this overarching Homeric question will not greatly
affect my study, as long as the reader keeps in mind the idiosyncrasies of oral performance and
the reciprocal relationship between the singer and the audience. The Iliad as a whole, including
the similes that it contains, is at its core an oral poem, and this means that it is grounded in
performance. The type-scenes, the speech-acts, and formulae all betray the oral performative
See especially L. Muellner (1990) and K. L. Gaca (2008).
Scott 1974:136.
6 Most modern classicists seem to agree that the oral traditional aspects of the Homeric epics, as
established by Milman Parry and Albert Lord, are valid. The concept of a collaborative tradition has been
addressed by many, but most notably by Lord (1960 ), Foley (1995), and Nagy (1992).
4
5
essence of the Iliad, allowing the poet a great deal of fluidity within a certain set of expectations
created and maintained by the audience. The poem in performance is shaped nearly as much by
the audience as it is by the poet; the poet manipulates the poem in response to and for the
enjoyment of his audience, tailoring it to their reactions and desires with each new performance.
The similes of the Iliad echo that sense of performance. Each simile resonates both within the
moment of its delivery as well as throughout the entire narrative. Thus it is necessary to examine
not only a simile’s own meaning and the immediate context of its occurrence, paying close
attention to each word and each line, but also its impact upon the work as a whole.
II. Typical Approaches to Similes
Modern readers often assume that one of the main functions of the simile in the Iliad is to
break up monotonous scenes, especially the lengthy battle-scenes that can grow tedious to a
reader unfamiliar with the perspective of the poem’s original audiences. This interpretation of
the similes seems to make sense; the battle-heavy books get the highest concentration of similes,
and the images of one obscure warrior after another fighting and dying might grow tiring to a
modern reader. While it is true that similes in the Iliad appear most often in the middle of long
battle scenes, however, they rarely function merely as a means of punctuating the lengthy
descriptions of fighting.7 When a brief passage from the Iliad is excerpted and examined, the
similes certainly tend to jump out from the surrounding lines through their sudden transition and
the introduction of metaphorical imagery. They may appear as breaks amidst the expanse of
war, but this assessment largely ignores the fact that the battles contain many of the most
In descending order, the books with the highest concentration of similes in the Iliad are 17, 12, 16, 11,
15, 13, 22, and 4. Of these, all eight are focused largely on the conflict between the Trojans and the
Achaeans, or on events that take place in the midst of the fighting. For the detailed analysis of the
occurrence of the similes, see The Shield of Homer: Narrative Structure in the Iliad, Stanley (1993).
7
important moments in the Iliad. Scott asserts that “The simile lengthens and colors the passage
and, thereby, gives emphasis to a scene which the poet feels is important for his story…In this
case a series of similes is effective in making noteworthy and memorable a situation which is
otherwise without particular distinction.”8 He suggests that each simile in and of itself is not as
important as its context; it serves to emphasize notable moments in the story.
Within the Iliad, similes most often present images from the natural world or common
life that presumably would have been familiar to an audience in the Greek-speaking world.
Because of the way that similes have evolved in modern literature, many readers assume that the
primary role of similes in the Iliad was to explain something difficult to understand or something
with which it was hard to empathize. The picture of a child crying to its mother or a man
narrowly avoiding stepping on a snake is simple and evocative: one can immediately sense the
dismay and helplessness of the little girl or the sick feeling of panic presumably felt by the man.9
These similes build a level of emotional depth into whatever event in the Iliad they are
describing while also simplifying each moment into something easy to grasp in a few short lines.
In the context of the Iliad, however, the idea that the similes seek to make the strange relatable
assumes that it was difficult for an audience to understand the concept of war, which is clearly
not the case. I want to suggest that the similes simplify events not in the sense that they explain
something complicated to understand, but in that they point directly to whatever element the poet
is trying to stress. This is especially true for the death similes in the Iliad: when the poet chooses
a simile to illustrate a death, he avoids describing the actual event by describing something that
captures it. The simile functions as an intermediary between the death and the audience,
conveying what is happening without asking the audience to interact with the physicality of the
8
9
Scott 1975:14-15.
Iliad 16.7-10 and 3.33-36.
death itself. Instead of describing the gore and violence, the simile evokes the sense of
permanence or the hopelessness that the death carries. The simile allows the poet to bypass the
physical description and access the emotional or contextual implications.
III. Simile Patterns
Throughout the narrative, similes regularly appear in descriptions of recurring action or
within mirrored sequences; in fact, repeated events or event-patterns in the Iliad are so often
accompanied by parallel similes that the comparisons come to be expected by the audience, to
the point that the similes create their own rhythm. In “Similes and Performance,” Richard
Martin proposes a marriage of the two traditional approaches to analyzing Homeric similes,
which he calls rhetorical and thematic. He suggests that scholars take a third, “rhythmic”
approach, noticing and examining the ways in which the similes “work to focus the audience on
one event as they propel the narrative forward.”10 Martin’s description of this approach as
“rhythmic” captures the sense of motion that the similes lend to the story and echoes the idea that
the similes form their own pattern within the narrative. As an audience unfamiliar with the
nuances of oral performance, however, we must be careful not to view this rhythm as dull, which
would miss the richness offered by the formulaic nature of the Iliad. The audience familiar with
the narrative patterns of oral epic and with the story itself would not have been surprised by the
similes but instead would have anticipated the arrival of each one. The familiar listener hears
that a major character is entering the battle: he or she expects a simile to complement this point
in the narrative.11 The simile reminds the audience that this is an important moment, but it does
10
11
Martin 1997:147.
See Scott 1974:38-41.
so by confirming something they already know, and when they hear the simile that they
expected, they are able to experience the moment even more fully.
The category of similes that complement opening battle sequences is merely one of a
dozen types of action typically accompanied by a simile in the Iliad. Gods leaving Olympus or
Ida, the aristeia of an individual warrior on the battlefield, the actions of a group of men as they
gather before battle: all of these images, central elements of the Iliad narrative, most often go
hand in hand with a simile, and similes that accompany similar actions and events often resemble
each other in significant ways. In the midst of all of these expected sequences, it becomes most
intriguing when similes do not adhere to these established patterns, either by a failure to appear
when expected or a sudden shift in narratological perspective indicated through the simile itself.
These exceptions to the general rule provide a striking and noteworthy insight into the greater
narrative, but in order to appreciate the full implications of the similes that break from the
pattern, it is important to examine the recurring simile pattern in the Iliad.
Book 4 features the first scene in which the Greeks and Trojans clash in battle, and with it
comes the first images of individuals dying. Book 4 is important: within the text of the Iliad, this
is the first encounter between the full armies (minus Achilleus and the Myrmidons).
Immediately after they reach each other, the poet describes the action thus:
ἔνθα δ' ἅµ' οἰµωγή τε καὶ εὐχωλὴ πέλεν ἀνδρῶν
ὀλλύντων τε καὶ ὀλλυµένων, ῥέε δ' αἵµατι γαῖα.12
And then at once the wailing and prayers grew, of men
destroying and being destroyed, and the ground flowed with blood.13
On its own, this description is gruesome and vivid enough, and it is perhaps the most violent
image so far in the narrative. In addition to this, however, the armies are depicted with a simile:
12
13
All Greek text is taken from the Chicago Homer.
Iliad 4.450-51. All translations are my own.
ὡς δ' ὅτε χείµαρροι ποταµοὶ κατ' ὄρεσφι ῥέοντες
ἐς µισγάγκειαν συµβάλλετον ὄβριµον ὕδωρ
κρουνῶν ἐκ µεγάλων κοίλης ἔντοσθε χαράδρης,
τῶν δέ τε τηλόσε δοῦπον ἐν οὔρεσιν ἔκλυε ποιµήν:
ὣς τῶν µισγοµένων γένετο ἰαχή τε πόνος τε.
Just as when rivers, swollen by rain and melted snow, rushing down the mountains
into the meeting of the waters, cast their mighty waters together,
out of the great springs into the hollows of the mountain streams,
and far off the shepherd hears the roar in the mountains;
such was the shout and the struggle that came from the joining.14
The clash of two mighty armies is an occasion for a particularly dramatic illustration, but rather
than paint the picture with more direct description, the poet allows the simile to complete the
image for him. This is the moment in the Iliad where the quarrel between Paris and Menelaus
becomes more than simply a disagreement between two men over a woman. The meeting of the
armies finally establishes the fact that this is a conflict not only between individuals but also
between entire nations. The simile focuses the audience’s attention on the significance without
lessening the impact, pushing the narrative along towards a larger goal while highlighting an
important moment. At the same time, it reminds the audience that this meeting is wholly
inevitable for the Greeks and the Trojans, just as the meeting of two rivers, pushed together by
gravity when the winter ice melts down a mountain, is unavoidable. This moment will define the
rest of the Trojan War as experienced by the audience, and the simile indicates the significance
of this occurrence while also carrying the narrative along through the progression of the conflict.
Almost immediately after, the audience learns that the Trojan Echepolos is the first to
die: “ἤριπε δ' ὡς ὅτε πύργος ἐνὶ κρατερῇ ὑσµίνῃ” (“and he fell just like a tower in the mighty
battle”).15 This simile is initially somewhat surprising, in that the description of Echepolos
falling like a tower is the entirety of his death. Echepolos is not a major character, and the
14
15
Il. 4.452-56.
Il. 4.462.
audience knows little about him. However, it does not ultimately matter that it is about
Echepolos; especially without the simile, it is unlikely that his name would be particularly
memorable. The presence of the simile, though, indicates that it is larger than the death of one
character. In one brief line of poetry, the death of one minor character takes on the significance
of a falling tower. Despite the unimportance of Echepolos himself, this is a major event for the
Trojans, and in this moment Echepolos becomes a stand-in for all of the warriors who will
eventually die in the fighting, as well as the city itself. His death gains importance because of
what it symbolizes in the moment—the reality of battle, the actual cost of this war—but also
because of how it resonates throughout the whole narrative, prefiguring the death that will
pervade the Iliad, the disaster for the Trojan forces, and even the way that, like Echepolos, the
tower of Troy will fall.
As the Echepolos drops to the ground, the Greeks and the Trojans fight furiously to strip
his armor or preserve his lifeless body:
ὣς τὸν µὲν λίπε θυµός, ἐπ' αὐτῷ δ' ἔργον ἐτύχθη
ἀργαλέον Τρώων καὶ Ἀχαιῶν: οἳ δὲ λύκοι ὣς
ἀλλήλοις ἐπόρουσαν, ἀνὴρ δ' ἄνδρ' ἐδνοπάλιζεν.
Thus his spirit left him, and the troublesome work was fought
over him by Trojans and Achaians: just as wolves, they
leapt upon one another, man wrapping around man.16
The idea of men tearing off the armor of one of their fallen companions is not alien to anyone
familiar with the Homeric tradition, but it is still a disturbing image. In many ways, this simile
actually makes the description even more jarring. The image of wolves ripping apart their prey
is hard to reconcile outside of the pure brutality of nature, and yet the poet chooses this simile to
convey the struggle over Echepolos’s armor. The simile shifts the cruelty away from the men
fighting over the armor and onto the wolves, who are simply adhering to their role in nature as
16
Il. 4.470-72.
perceived by the audience. In becoming wolves, the men have crossed a natural boundary, and
the simile intensifies their and shifts the audience’s attention away from the struggle over
Echepolos’s armor and onto the greater agonistic theme of the larger narrative.
In this sequence of similes, detailing the onrush of battle, the first man to die, and the
struggle over his body, the conflict shifts from the personal to the national and back again.
These similes appear to come right on the heels of one another, and yet they are able to address
such a wide range of emotion and action. In just twenty lines of Book Four, the audience
experiences three separate moments that will come to define the Iliad: battle, death, and the
constant fight for glory and remembrance. The reappearance of this pattern of similes in Book
13, therefore, is important, and it is worth examining the second set closely. First the Trojans
head for the Achaeans:
Τρῶες δὲ προὔτυψαν ἀολλέες, ἦρχε δ' ἄρ' Ἕκτωρ
ἀντικρὺ µεµαώς, ὀλοοίτροχος ὣς ἀπὸ πέτρης,
ὅν τε κατὰ στεφάνης ποταµὸς χειµάρροος ὤσῃ
ῥήξας ἀσπέτῳ ὄµβρῳ ἀναιδέος ἔχµατα πέτρης:
ὕψι τ' ἀναθρώσκων πέτεται, κτυπέει δέ θ' ὑπ' αὐτοῦ
ὕλη: ὃ δ' ἀσφαλέως θέει ἔµπεδον, ἕως ἵκηται
ἰσόπεδον, τότε δ' οὔ τι κυλίνδεται ἐσσύµενός περ:
The Trojans pressed forward in throngs, and Hektor came
against them eagerly, like a boulder from a rock face
that a winter-swollen river thrusts from its crater,
having torn it out from te unyielding rock hold with endless rain;
it flies from on high, springing into the air, and the forest resounds beneath it;
it runs on, steadfast and without rest, until it comes
to level ground and, however impetuous, does not roll any longer…17
It is easy to see the parallels between this simile and the one at 4.452. In addition to the fact that
the similes are describing extremely similar events, the images in this simile echo the rushing
rivers of the simile at 4.452. The closeness of the two similes helps establish their narrative
pattern, and the parallels in the similes suggest a shared significance for the events being
17
Il. 13.136-142.
described. This battle takes place after what at first seems like a turning point for the Trojans.
Zeus has given them an opportunity to destroy the Achaean ships, Hektor is leading the Trojans
with mighty force, and by all accounts, things are looking up for the Trojans. But the audience
quickly begins to get the feeling that all is not well, beginning with the way that the stone in the
first simile that eventually slows to a stop. Although the simile portrays Hektor as a strong
leader, the movement of the stone suggests his dominance may be short-lived. Meriones tries to
kill the Trojan Deïphobos, who narrowly escapes, and the fighting continues around them.
Suddenly, Imbrios of Troy is the first to die:
…ὃ δ' αὖτ' ἔπεσεν µελίη ὣς
ἥ τ' ὄρεος κορυφῇ ἕκαθεν περιφαινοµένοιο
χαλκῷ ταµνοµένη τέρενα χθονὶ φύλλα πελάσσῃ:
…and he fell like an ash tree
which, on the top of a mountain visible from afar on every side, being cut down
with bronze lowers its delicate leafage to the ground;18
Initially, Imbrios’s death appears insignificant. Imbrios has had little mention thus far in the
narrative; almost all the description occurs within the ten lines preceding his death simile. To the
casual listener, he is simply the first person to die in this particular context, and like Echepolos in
Book Four, he gets a simile to mark his passing but little emotional development. But more
importantly, Imbrios’s death serves to further solidify the feeling that the Trojans are not going
to be as successful as they originally thought, and the fact that there is a simile describing his
death prevents it from going unnoticed.
The poet makes this even more evident in the ensuing struggle over his armor. Despite
Hektor’s efforts to intervene, the Greeks eventually take control of his body:
Ἴµβριον αὖτ' Αἴαντε µεµαότε θούριδος ἀλκῆς
ὥς τε δύ' αἶγα λέοντε κυνῶν ὕπο καρχαροδόντων
ἁρπάξαντε φέρητον ἀνὰ ῥωπήϊα πυκνὰ
18
Il. 13.178-80.
ὑψοῦ ὑπὲρ γαίης µετὰ γαµφηλῇσιν ἔχοντε,
ὥς ῥα τὸν ὑψοῦ ἔχοντε δύω Αἴαντε κορυστὰ
τεύχεα συλήτην:
And the Aiantes, striving in the strength of war,
just as two lions snatch up a goat from hounds
with saw-like teeth and bear it into the dense brush,
holding it high above the ground in their jaws,
thus the two Aiantes holding the helmeted warrior on high
were stripping off his armor…19
This simile suggests the same brutality implied in the simile at 4.470, and this helps link the two,
but the simile’s real importance lies in its solidification of the sense that the Trojans have been
slowed to a stop at the hands of the Achaians. This simile encompasses the theme of the entire
simile sequence and propels the narrative forward in describing the overall tone of the conflict at
this moment through the stripping of Imbrios’ armor.
The two sets of similes from Books 4 and 13 are not identical, and they do not even
describe identical action. The similarities between the two sets of similes suggest a certain
formulaic pattern to the description of how conflict begins in an epic context. The repetition
implies the audience’s familiarity with and appreciation for such a description, and it is therefore
likely that this type of sequence was common in oral performance. Though this particular
succession of all three similes does not appear again in the Iliad, its separate elements (the
similes that complete the images of armies or forces heading for one another, warriors falling in
battle, and men fighting over their opponents’ corpses) occur frequently throughout the narrative,
often to the extent that certain similes become an expected part of the overarching rhythm to the
audience.20
Il. 13.197-202.
Other than the aforementioned similes that describe Echepolos and Imbrios, notable death similes can
be found at various points throughout the Iliad. Simoeisios falls “like some black poplar” (4.482-87),
Orsilochus and Krethon fall “as if they were two tall pine trees” (5.560), Hippolochos falls “spinning like
a log down the battle” (11.147), Epikles drops “like a diver from the high bastion” (12.385-86), Asios
19
20
We have examined several of the deaths that come at significant moments and are
accompanied by similes; these figures are often the first warrior to die in a major conflict or men
killed during a major character’s aristeia. For the most part, however, each character whose
death the poet chooses to embellish with a simile is fairly minor. Imbrios and Echepolos are not
well-known characters from the Homeric tradition; many of the characters who share comparable
similes are mentioned only in the context of dying, and that is conveyed through the similes.
One noteworthy exception is Sarpedon, who is a clearly a more important figure. It is interesting
that the poet describes Sarpedon’s death with not one but two similes, and this certainly
emphasizes his significance. First, the poet describes Sarpedon in much the same way as
Echepolos and Imbrios:
ἤριπε δ' ὡς ὅτε τις δρῦς ἤριπεν ἢ ἀχερωῒς
ἠὲ πίτυς βλωθρή, τήν τ' οὔρεσι τέκτονες ἄνδρες
ἐξέταµον πελέκεσσι νεήκεσι νήϊον εἶναι:
And he fell just as when some oak falls, or a poplar,
or a stately pine, which carpenters cut down in the mountains
with sharpened axes to be a ship’s timber.21
After he has fallen, the poet tells how Sarpedon lay in the dust, just as
ἠΰτε ταῦρον ἔπεφνε λέων ἀγέληφι µετελθὼν
αἴθωνα µεγάθυµον ἐν εἰλιπόδεσσι βόεσσι,
ὤλετό τε στενάχων ὑπὸ γαµφηλῇσι λέοντος,
when a lion, having come into the herd, slays a bull,
fierce and great of spirit with a rolling cow-like gait,
and groaning he is destroyed by the jaws of the lion...22 Sarpedon’s death is one of the more emotional death-scenes in the Iliad, and therefore it seems
appropriate that the poet spends so much time describing it. Still, in the moment of his death
falls “as when an oak goes down or a white poplar / or like a towering pine tree” (13.389-391), and
Kebriones drops “to earth like a diver” (16.742). The poet also describes the struggle between Patroklos
and Hektor for Kebriones’s armor with two similes (16.751-54 and 16.756-58).
21 Il. 16.482-84.
22 Il. 16.487-89.
Sarpedon himself is overshadowed by both his relationship with Zeus and the greatness of
Patroklos, and the similes add to the magnitude of the surrounding context more than they add to
the development of Sarpedon as a character. Leading up to the actual event of Sarpedon’s death,
Zeus struggles to accept the death of his son but eventually realizes that he cannot justify saving
his life. The similes achieve a sense of generalization for the character of Sarpedon and indicate
to the reader that even the son of Zeus has to die just like the other dozen men who have died in
parallel similes. As in the case of Echepolos or Imbrios, Sarpedon’s death is not significant
because of Sarpedon; it is meaningful because of what it means for Zeus and the war as a
whole.23 The similes allow the narrator to emphasize this aspect of the scene and focus the
audience’s attention on its significance while still providing an appropriate description of
Sarpedon’s death.
IV. Stepping Outside the Pattern
As the story progresses, the audience becomes more and more accustomed to the similes
surrounding death, coming to expect these comparisons in place of a more direct description of
death. Once an audience or reader becomes aware of the patterns and rhythms that the death
similes form throughout the Iliad, it becomes especially surprising when such a comparison does
not occur in an expected place. It is particularly striking, given the pattern that the poet has
established throughout, that the two most important deaths in the Iliad are not accompanied by
similes that follow the established pattern. The deaths of Patroklos and Hektor are two of the
most central episodes to the narrative, and they help link together the thematic undertones of
death, vengeance, and glory that pervade the story. However, there are no similes that
Because it contributes to the formation of the similes’ rhythm, it is worthwhile to note that as with
Echepolos, Imbrios, and Kebriones, the poet describes the fight over Sarpedon’s armor with a simile
(16.641-44).
23
correspond directly to their deaths and adhere to the existing model. Because of their
consequence for the larger narrative, this absence is surprising and puzzling.
In order to better understand this, it will be useful to take a closer look at the similes in
Book 16 and 22 that lead up to the respective deaths of Patroklos and Hektor. These two books
have a remarkably high concentration of similes, featuring extensive simile sequences describing
specific warriors and their interactions with other figures. Because these books are two of the
most significant in the progression of the narrative, it is no accident that the number of similes is
so high. Like the two we have already examined, these simile sequences work to move the
narrative along toward a specific goal, and they do so by drawing the audience’s attention to
numerous details of character and action at once. It is therefore important to carefully consider
how each of these similes affects the narrative and suggests something about the characters it
describes, and we will begin by looking at Book 16.24
V. The Similes of Book 16.406-828
As Patroklos enters the fighting with the Myrmidons and begins to demonstrate his
excellence on the battlefield, we will see that the similes that describe him exhibit some of the
typical images of a warrior during the development of his aristeia.25 However, there are
suggestions in some of the similes of something more than simply Patroklos’ prowess as a
fighter. Through the similes, Patroklos fluctuates between several different descriptors, and
While the question of Homeric book divisions has been thoroughly debated by B. Heiden (1998) and
R. Nünlist (2006), they have proven beneficial for my project in that they generally correspond with the
grouping of simile sequences, and I have therefore chosen to make use of them for this paper.
25 Lions and birds of prey are only two examples of animals consistently used to describe attacking
warriors within the world of Homeric similes (Scott 1974:58-62 and 78-9). As we will see in examining
this sequence and the one in Book 22, the repeated use of these descriptions establishes this context
firmly in the minds of the audience and indicates that these warriors are indeed in the middle of
demonstrating their martial excellence.
24
these help indicate his various successes and eventual failure. When Patroklos begins to attack
Thestor, he finds him cowering in his chariot, afraid to move. The simile states that Patroklos
spears Thestor
…ὡς ὅτε τις φὼς
πέτρῃ ἔπι προβλῆτι καθήµενος ἱερὸν ἰχθὺν
ἐκ πόντοιο θύραζε λίνῳ καὶ ἤνοπι χαλκῷ:
…just as when some man
sitting upon a jutting rock drags a strong fish
out of the sea with a line and glittering bronze…26
Although Patroklos in this simile is clearly the more powerful of the two, Thestor is not exactly
presented as a formidable opponent. The match between the fisherman and his catch seems
especially unfair, and it is evident that Patroklos is preying on a challenger who actually presents
little to no challenge at all. In addition, the simile seems somewhat atypical for a combat
sequence in that it involves a human figure. While most of the encounters between two warriors
on the battlefield are rendered as a natural conflict between two animals, this one is different.
The simile gives the audience the sense that the action is easy, which lessens the emphasis on
Patroklos’ power; though he is clearly the more powerful figure in the simile, Patroklos does not
appear to be a particularly gifted warrior in this interaction. As the opening for Patroklos’ most
important episode in the narrative, the fisherman simile indicates that, while the better fighter in
relation to some lesser men, Patroklos is not actually a warrior with the skills necessary to
become truly dominant on the battlefield.
Only a few lines later, Patroklos finds a more formidable opponent in Sarpedon. As the
two engage in combat, the narrator tells how
οἳ δ' ὥς τ' αἰγυπιοὶ γαµψώνυχες ἀγκυλοχεῖλαι
πέτρῃ ἐφ' ὑψηλῇ µεγάλα κλάζοντε µάχωνται,
ὣς οἳ κεκλήγοντες ἐπ' ἀλλήλοισιν ὄρουσαν.
26
Il. 16.406-8.
As two vultures with crooked talons and hooked beaks
fight above a high rock with great shrieking,
just so they rushed at one another, screeching.27
In describing both Patroklos and Sarpedon as vultures, the simile suggests that the two are
equally matched. Patroklos has embraced the fighting spirit he needs for victory, leaving behind
the less impressive qualities implied in the fisherman simile. In doing so, however, he has
transformed from the fisherman of lines 406-409 to a vulture, losing the more human aspects of
his fighting style and simply flying at Sarpedon with reckless abandon. Additionally, the simile
makes it clear that Sarpedon and Patroklos are opponents of equal caliber; in the end, it is not
Patroklos’ excellence that allows him to triumph over Sarpedon but rather the shifting of fate.
As we will see with both Hektor and Achilleus, the equality suggested within this simile is
essential to the success of a warrior; without facing one enemy of equal skill, the warriors of the
Iliad cannot truly achieve the excellence that they seek, and therefore this comparison is key to
Patroklos’ development within this simile sequence.
Eventually, Zeus accepts the fortune of Sarpedon and he dies at the hand of Patroklos,
just as
ἠΰτε ταῦρον ἔπεφνε λέων ἀγέληφι µετελθὼν
αἴθωνα µεγάθυµον ἐν εἰλιπόδεσσι βόεσσι,
ὤλετό τε στενάχων ὑπὸ γαµφηλῇσι λέοντος,
And just as a lion, having come into the herd, slays a bull,
fierce and great of spirit among the cows with rolling gait,
and groaning, he is destroyed by the jaws of the lion…28
Sarpedon’s death allows Patroklos to gain his full status as a warrior, and in doing so he
surpasses the vulture of the previous simile and becomes a lion, proving his dominance over
Sarpedon. Scott suggests, “because the slaughtering lion is the strongest simile of the [lion
27
28
Il. 16.428-430.
Il. 16.487-489.
simile] family, it is used when there is need of an especially impressive or bloody tone to a
scene.”29 Although the match between bull and lion seems unfairly weighted in Patroklos’ favor,
an audience familiar with the similes of the Iliad will recognize that the bull is still a strong
figure in its own context, and this contributes to the idea that Sarpedon is still a worthy opponent
for Patroklos. The defeat of Sarpedon is central to the establishment of Patroklos’ kleos, and the
appearance of the lion simile signifies the importance of this moment.
After Patroklos kills Sarpedon, however, his excellence begins to diminish once more as
he again faces less formidable opponents. After fighting over Sarpedon’s body, Patroklos
ἴθυσεν δὲ διὰ προµάχων ἴρηκι ἐοικὼς
ὠκέϊ, ὅς τ' ἐφόβησε κολοιούς τε ψῆράς τε:
went straight through the front row of fighters, like a swift
hawk who puts to flight the jackdaws and the starlings.30
Against Sarpedon, Patroklos must take up the characteristics of a lion; against the group of
lesser, unnamed Trojans, he becomes a hawk, tearing through a flock of specifically nonpredatory birds. This pursuit of unworthy opponents suggests an unnecessary level of
aggression, and it is clear to an audience that Patroklos, who has already been warned not to go
too far, is nearing dangerous territory.31 The simile here indicates that Patroklos has become
overly aggressive against opponents who, as suggested by their characterization as daws and
starlings, offer no real threat.
As Patroklos continues to glory in his own abilities, the similes begin to suggest that his
pride is growing exceedingly great. After he fells Cebriones, he mocks him and leaps to strip his
armor,
οἶµα λέοντος ἔχων, ὅς τε σταθµοὺς κεραΐζων
Scott 1974:60.
Il. 16.582-3.
31 See Il. 16.83-96.
29
30
ἔβλητο πρὸς στῆθος, ἑή τέ µιν ὤλεσεν ἀλκή:
having the spring of a lion, who, ravaging the farmsteads,
has been struck on the chest, and his own strength destroys him.32
In The Artistry of the Homeric Simile, Scott suggests,
The mocking tone about another’s death…seems inappropriate at the moment when
Patroklos should most remember the warning of Achilleus, the signs of his limited
ability, and the danger to which he is exposing himself. But boasting is the prerogative of
a warrior, and Patroklos is now one and will soon play the full role to its end.33
As Scott argues, Patroklos’ development into a warrior is clear through his comparison to a lion,
but here his pride is driving his fight for the armor of Cebriones. Patroklos’ rush to strip the
armor of a more minor warrior suggests his insatiable desire for total dominance, and this is what
ultimately leads him to his death. Although Patroklos will not die until nearly a hundred lines
later, the narrator indicates through the simile that Patroklos’ strength is already leading him to
ruin.
The penultimate simile in this sequence at long last suggests that Patroklos has truly
achieved something like excellence. The narrator describes how Patroklos and Hektor fight over
the body of Cebriones like lions,
ὥ τ' ὄρεος κορυφῇσι περὶ κταµένης ἐλάφοιο
ἄµφω πεινάοντε µέγα φρονέοντε µάχεσθον:
who among the mountain peaks, both hungry
and strong of mind, fight over a slain deer.34
As in the simile describing Patroklos and Sarpedon as vultures, the narrator equates the two
warriors here by likening them to the same animal. Continuing from the previous simile,
however, Patroklos has surpassed the vulture and fully assumed the dominance and strength of a
Il. 16.752-53.
Scott 2009:165.
34 Il. 16.757-58.
32
33
lion. But unlike Cebriones, Hektor is an opponent with equal fierceness and power, and the
narrator evidences this equality by portraying him as a lion in the simile as well.
As he reaches the peak of his strength against an appropriate adversary, Patroklos again
exhibits the strength of the previous simile. This is Patroklos’ highest expression of his warrior
status, yet the narrator reminds the audience in the middle of his prowess that this courage has
finally proved too great. At this point, Patroklos and Hektor are equally matched, but Patroklos
should not be fighting him at all. Rather than heed the warnings of Achilleus, Patroklos has
brought the fighting all the way back to the city, and this excess of confidence has led him to his
fateful encounter with Hektor:
Πάτροκλος δ' ἵπποισι καὶ Αὐτοµέδοντι κελεύσας
Τρῶας καὶ Λυκίους µετεκίαθε, καὶ µέγ' ἀάσθη
νήπιος: εἰ δὲ ἔπος Πηληϊάδαο φύλαξεν
ἦ τ' ἂν ὑπέκφυγε κῆρα κακὴν µέλανος θανάτοιο.
ἀλλ' αἰεί τε Διὸς κρείσσων νόος ἠέ περ ἀνδρός:
But Patroklos, having called to his horses and Automedon,
followed after the Trojans and the Lykians, a very reckless
child: if he had guarded the words of Peliades,
he might have fled away from the evil doom of a black death.
But the mind of Zeus is always mightier than the minds of men.35
Patroklos’ pride has led him too far in his fight against Hektor, and it therefore merits a mention
in one of the final similes describing his journey as a warrior. Even when the two warriors
involved are evenly matched, this repeated mention of Patroklos’ strength indicates to the
audience that his excellence will be short-lived; however, the lions in this simile are not attacking
each other directly but rather quarrelling over a deer, and this relationship is not a fitting end to
the Patroklos sequence.
As Patroklos goes beyond the boundaries established by Achilleus, cutting down Trojans
left and right, Apollo at last decides that it is time to check the hero’s strength, stripping away
35
Il. 16.684-88.
pieces of his armor and leaving him open for attack. With his body vulnerable and his senses
dazed by the god’s swift attack, Patroklos is an easy target for the spear of Euphorbos, and this
wound leaves him even more tempting for Hektor. The narrator describes the final encounter
between Hektor and Patroklos thus:
ὡς δ' ὅτε σῦν ἀκάµαντα λέων ἐβιήσατο χάρµῃ,
ὥ τ' ὄρεος κορυφῇσι µέγα φρονέοντε µάχεσθον
πίδακος ἀµφ' ὀλίγης: ἐθέλουσι δὲ πιέµεν ἄµφω:
πολλὰ δέ τ' ἀσθµαίνοντα λέων ἐδάµασσε βίηφι:
ὣς πολέας πεφνόντα Μενοιτίου ἄλκιµον υἱὸν
Ἕκτωρ Πριαµίδης σχεδὸν ἔγχεϊ θυµὸν ἀπηύρα…
Just as when a lion overpowers a tireless boar in the joy of battle
as they fight among the mountain peaks, both strong of will,
over a little spring of water, both wishing to drink ,
and the lion overpowers the gasping boar with force, so
Hektor, son of Priam, striking with a close spear, took the life
from the brave son of Menoitios, who had killed many…36
This is not the simile that should complete the sequence, based on the recurring pattern that we
have already identified throughout the Iliad. As we have already seen, there are numerous death
similes that convey the falls of warriors vastly less important than Patroklos; however, as the
young Achaean dies, the only simile that marks his passing is one that primarily describes
Hektor. The simile here conveys the dominance of the Trojan hero as he strikes down Patroklos.
Hektor’s lion-like nature has continued from the previous simile, but Patroklos is a lion no
longer. Scott argues that “in this family of similes lions are freely interchanged with boars,”
citing the fact that numerous similes actually do not make a distinction between the two
animals.37 In this simile, however, there appears to be an important difference between Hektor as
lion and Patroklos as boar. While there is no doubt that boars in similes demonstrate exceptional
36
37
Il. 16.823-28.
Scott 1974:58-60.
strength and aggression, the boar in this simile is clearly the weaker of the two animals,
indicating that Patroklos is the weaker warrior in his fight with Hektor.
To an audience that has just witnessed the transformation of Patroklos throughout the
entirety of Book Sixteen, this seems a somewhat anticlimactic way for his life to end. It is
startling to find a simile describing the dominance of Hektor as Patroklos dies, and for a moment
it appears that Patroklos will simply join the list of other characters whose deaths are
experienced only through similes. Although the lack of a proper death simile for Patroklos is
initially jarring, this element of surprise actually calls even more attention to the passing of this
hero and causes the audience to listen more closely. After such a detailed characterization of
Patroklos, the narrator invites the audience into his death directly, presenting it just as it happens
and through the hero’s own voice. The narrator asks the audience to engage in his death through
the action itself, instead of experiencing the death of Patroklos through the mediation of a simile,
and this is what becomes remarkable about his death in the end.
VII. The Similes of Book 22.93-311
We have seen how the similes of Book 16 present Patroklos’ quick rise in martial
prowess and the beginning of Hektor’s even more sudden dominance. During books 17-21,
Hektor continues to demonstrate his considerable ability on the battlefield while Achilleus learns
of Patroklos’ death and prepares his revenge on Hektor. At the start of Book 22, Hektor, anxious
but determined, awaits Achilleus’ retribution:
ὡς δὲ δράκων ἐπὶ χειῇ ὀρέστερος ἄνδρα µένῃσι
βεβρωκὼς κακὰ φάρµακ', ἔδυ δέ τέ µιν χόλος αἰνός,
σµερδαλέον δὲ δέδορκεν ἑλισσόµενος περὶ χειῇ:
Just as a serpent in his hole in the mountains waits for a man,
stuffed with evil poisons, with the grim bile sunken inside him,
terrible and gleaming, wound around his hole…38
Ignoring the pleas of his parents and disregarding Patroklos’ final warnings, Hektor has decided
to face Achilleus.39 Despite his decision to stand as a warrior against Achilleus, Hektor is not the
fierce hunter presented by the similes of Book 16, but rather a snake, waiting in his hole. The
simile here suggests that Hektor is a deadly creature, but does not cast him as a predator. This
simile is in direct contrast to the first description of Achilleus:
σευάµενος ὥς θ' ἵππος ἀεθλοφόρος σὺν ὄχεσφιν,
ὅς ῥά τε ῥεῖα θέῃσι τιταινόµενος πεδίοιο:
speeding just like a prize-bearing horse with his chariot
who runs lightly, stretching across the plain.40
Achilleus is clearly the aggressor within these similes, while Hektor simply awaits his arrival,
and this characterization sets the tone for their interaction throughout the rest of this book.
As soon as Achilleus comes upon Hektor, the Trojan hero’s resolve and courage leave him
and he begins to flee around the city. Immediately the narrator describes Achilleus’ attack:
ἠΰτε κίρκος ὄρεσφιν ἐλαφρότατος πετεηνῶν
ῥηϊδίως οἴµησε µετὰ τρήρωνα πέλειαν,
ἣ δέ θ' ὕπαιθα φοβεῖται, ὃ δ' ἐγγύθεν ὀξὺ λεληκὼς
ταρφέ' ἐπαΐσσει, ἑλέειν τέ ἑ θυµὸς ἀνώγει:
ὣς ἄρ' ὅ γ' ἐµµεµαὼς ἰθὺς πέτετο, τρέσε δ' Ἕκτωρ
τεῖχος ὕπο Τρώων, λαιψηρὰ δὲ γούνατ' ἐνώµα.
Just as a hawk in the mountains, lightest of fling creatures,
swoops readily after a timorous dove, who is put to flight
under and away and the hawk rushes after it close at hand,
shrieking keenly and close by, and the heart commands him to seize the dove;
thus Achilleus flew straight for him eagerly, but Hektor
fled under the Trojan wall, moving his nimble knees.41
Il. 22.93-95.
“But surely now you yourself will not live long, for already / death and might fate stand near you, /
overpowered by the hands of excellent Achilles, son of Aiakos” (16.852-54).
40 Il. 22.22-3.
41 Il. 22.139-44.
38
39
Hektor has transformed from a deadly snake to a frightened dove in fewer than fifty lines. This
simile distinctly presents Achilleus and Hektor as predator and prey, respectively, and this
characterization remains throughout the rest of their interaction. It recalls the simile of Book 16
describing Patroklos as hawk and the Trojans as peaceful starlings. Even more so than Patroklos
in Book 16, however, Achilleus is presented as not simply an aggressive bird but one specifically
hunting another.
This is a somewhat atypical example of the Homeric bird simile. Scott maintains that bird
similes usually describe two situations: either a god or goddess taking a form other than their
original shape, or a warrior attacking a group of the enemy, as seen at 16.582. The simile here,
though, features one warrior attacking a single other warrior, a situation more frequently
represented by lions or boars. Scott does not discuss the uniqueness of this simile, but it is worth
noticing that Achilleus’ aggression against one opponent takes the same form that is often used
to describe one warrior against many. Achilleus is attacking with enough force to drive off a
group of attackers, yet he is facing only Hektor, and the simile here lends a level of severity to
his wrath.
Achilleus and Hektor begin their course around the city of Troy, with Hektor running for
his life and Achilleus determined to avenge the death of Patroklos. As they run, the poem
describes their interaction:
ὡς δ' ὅτ' ἀεθλοφόροι περὶ τέρµατα µώνυχες ἵπποι
ῥίµφα µάλα τρωχῶσι: τὸ δὲ µέγα κεῖται ἄεθλον
ἢ τρίπος ἠὲ γυνὴ ἀνδρὸς κατατεθνηῶτος:
ὣς τὼ τρὶς Πριάµοιο πόλιν πέρι δινηθήτην’
Just as when competing single-foot horses gallop exceedingly lightly
around the endposts: the great prize is laid,
a tripod or a woman, for a man’s funeral-games;
thus these whirled thrice around the city of Priam…42
42
Il. 22.162-65.
There is very little within this simile that describes Hektor or Achilleus specifically; instead, it
focuses on the characterization of their interaction at this particular moment. This is an
interesting comparison to draw, given that Hektor’s life is, in fact, the prize for which they are
competing. It is also strange to think of the two warriors as competitors in a race when one of
them is specifically attacking the other. The simile presents this struggle not as a direct attack but
as a kind of rivalry among equals, despite the preceding simile and Achilleus’ infamous speed.
The reference to funeral games is also intriguing, as this race occurs after the death of Patroklos.
The simile seems to suggest that this contest is in itself a sort of funeral games for Patroklos, but
the prize at stake is each warrior’s life, rather than a woman or trophy of some kind.
Closely following the racehorse simile, the narrator shifts the relationship back into the
world of hunting:
ὡς δ' ὅτε νεβρὸν ὄρεσφι κύων ἐλάφοιο δίηται
ὄρσας ἐξ εὐνῆς διά τ' ἄγκεα καὶ διὰ βήσσας:
τὸν δ' εἴ πέρ τε λάθῃσι καταπτήξας ὑπὸ θάµνῳ,
ἀλλά τ' ἀνιχνεύων θέει ἔµπεδον ὄφρά κεν εὕρῃ:
ὣς Ἕκτωρ οὐ λῆθε ποδώκεα Πηλεΐωνα.
As when a dog chases a deer’s fawn in the mountains,
urging it out of its lair throw hollow and glen;
and the fawn may escape notice, having cowered under a bush,
but the hound tracks it and runs after it without fail in order that he might find it:
so Hektor could not escape the notice of swift-footed Peleion.43
In a sharp contrast from the competing equals of the previous simile, here Hektor is cast as a
fawn fleeing a dog on the hunt. The choice of dog and fawn is intriguing, and each animal
implies something significant about its correlative character. As Scott suggests about deer
similes generally, “each suggests a frightened, dazed, and cringing group of men” (71). While
this is certainly an apt description, it also ignores the implication in this simile that Hektor is
43
Il. 22.189-92.
actively trying to avoid his encounter with Achilleus. Portraying Hektor as a fawn attempting to
escape his hunter is not merely a new way of considering the power dynamics between the two
warriors. The fawn is not simply a weaker animal; it is weak to the extent that it actually stands
no chance of surviving the dog’s attack, and this sense of helplessness influences the
characterization of Hektor as well.
The depiction of Hektor as a fleeing fawn suggests that he is not only weak but also
cowardly. This is a very different version of Hektor from the warrior of Book 16, and it is an
important development to notice. Against the threat of Achilleus, Hektor is running away
instead of standing his ground, which is clearly a dishonorable way to face an opponent in battle.
Hektor’s dismay at confronting Achilleus also implies that he knows he will not win, and rather
than accept his fate he does everything he can to avoid it. This simile is essential to the
audience’s perception of Hektor because it indicates his own flaw as a hero and makes it clear
that Hektor will not survive this fight.
It is important to consider not only Hektor’s portrayal in this simile but that of Achilleus
as well. It is clear that the dog is one specifically trained for the hunt, and just as this dog has
been bred and readied for this particular purpose, Achilleus’ own sense of purpose and intent
resonates throughout his entire characterization. The determination of the hunting dog in the
simile suggests that Achilleus, too, is single-minded in his pursuit of Hektor. The death of
Patroklos has become the primary motivation for Achilleus’ return to battle, and this drive for
revenge leads Achilleus to pursue Hektor with unswerving dedication. It is during this
interaction with Hektor that Achilleus at last seizes the opportunity to demonstrate his famous
speed and fighting skill, and the dog in the simile serves as a multi-faceted point of comparison
for Achilleus in evoking these various aspects of his character.
As their chase continues, the narrator describes Achilleus and Hektor in a simile unlike
any that we have seen thus far in the Iliad:
ὡς δ' ἐν ὀνείρῳ οὐ δύναται φεύγοντα διώκειν:
οὔτ' ἄρ' ὃ τὸν δύναται ὑποφεύγειν οὔθ' ὃ διώκειν:
ὣς ὃ τὸν οὐ δύνατο µάρψαι ποσίν, οὐδ' ὃς ἀλύξαι.
As in a dream, when one is unable to pursue a man fleeing,
neither is one able to flee the man who pursues:
so he was unable to take hold of him on foot, as the other was unable to flee.44
This simile presents Achilleus and Hektor as runners in a dream, which seems a more direct
comparison than most Homeric similes in that it compares two sets of runners. Accepting this
similarity, then, we must consider that it is not the running that provides this simile’s
significance but rather the dream element. Unlike the extreme physicality of most of the Homeric
similes, this one feels intensely psychological, asking each audience member to recall a personal,
mental experience. The idea of two runners in a dream invokes a sense of frustration and
impossibility that is echoed by the inability of the two figures to catch or evade one another.
Scott claims that all of the similes of Book 22, with the exception of the dream-running simile,
present Achilleus and Hektor as unequally matched opponents:
[A]s soon as Hektor begins to run, acknowledging both his doubts of defending Troy and
Achilleus’ tremendous power, his role in the similes becomes that of a vulnerable
competitor, often the weaker and lesser victim in a threatening situation. The two
champions are described in a series of similes with two actors: at 162 they are like
racehorses contending for a prize in funeral games; at 189 Hektor is like a deer fleeing a
hunting dog; and at 262 he is cast as a man or a lamb opposed by a lion or a wolf. The
only simile in which Hektor is presented as an equal is that of the two men in a dream in
199: the pursuer cannot catch his victim and the victim cannot get away—but, in fact, this
equality is only a dream.45
While this is clearly a very different description, it does evoke the same sense of equality that I
suggested previously about the racehorse simile at line 162, contrary to what Scott suggests. This
44
45
Il. 22.199-201.
Scott 2009:73.
simile and the simile of the racehorses present the two warriors as equals and depict Hektor as a
worthy opponent for Achilleus. Unlike the simile at 162-165, the dream simile features one
runner chasing another, and it is clear that Hektor is the one being pursued. It is apparent within
the simile, however, that the chaser is unable to catch his prey while the fugitive is unable to
escape, implying that they are running at the same general pace. The narrator makes no mention
of any kind of power stratification within this simile and this comparison therefore temporarily
halts the progression of Achilleus’ dominance. After the fawn/dog simile we examined
previously, this expression of equality is especially surprising. Throughout this book of the Iliad,
Hektor has been largely figured as the inferior of the two warriors, but in this simile as well as
the racehorse simile Hektor and Achilleus are characterized not only as equally quick but also as
the same figures (horses and runners). Both of these similes suggest a certain sameness about
Hektor and Achilleus, and this is extremely important for the significance of Book 22 as a whole.
While it is clear from the other similes that Achilleus is the more dominant warrior, the racehorse
and runner similes indicate that Hektor is still a worthy opponent, which will become an essential
component of Achilleus’ glory. Just as in the case of Patroklos against Sarpedon46 and Hektor
against Patroklos47, the defeat of a creditable warrior like Hektor is necessary for Achilleus to
avenge the death of Patroklos and regain his place as the best of the Achaians. This pattern is a
critical element of the Iliad, and it is through the similes that the narrator demonstrates the
equality necessary for a warrior to establish his aristeia. Without facing a worthy opponent, it is
impossible for a warrior to achieve the ultimate form of success, and the simile allows the
narrator to portray the two individuals as equals. After the simile has established that the two
warriors are of a similar caliber, the more powerful one is able to assert his dominance over the
46
47
Il. 16.428-30.
Il. 16.756-58.
weaker. This simile is therefore an essential part in the simile sequence, and in this case it allows
Achilleus to demonstrate that he is the stronger warrior at last.
In his final attempt to make a stand against Achilleus, Hektor is likened to an eagle in a
surprising reversal of roles:
οἴµησεν δὲ ἀλεὶς ὥς τ' αἰετὸς ὑψιπετήεις,
ὅς τ' εἶσιν πεδίονδε διὰ νεφέων ἐρεβεννῶν
ἁρπάξων ἢ ἄρν' ἀµαλὴν ἤ πτῶκα λαγωόν:
ὣς Ἕκτωρ οἴµησε τινάσσων φάσγανον ὀξύ.
…and he swooped like a high-flying eagle,
who breaks out of the dark clouds over the plain,
snatching a soft lamb or a cowering hare;
so Hektor swooped, shaking his sharp sword.48
The Hektor we see here echoes the qualities of Achilleus in the simile from lines 139-144, a
marked difference from the previous group of similes. At this point in the narrative, Hektor has
depleted his stamina, and is making one final effort to stand his ground. This is a particularly
important simile for a number of reasons: in the first place, this simile confirms Hektor’s hero
status and redeems the weakness and cowardice suggested throughout the earlier similes. Despite
his initial resolve to face Achilleus with honor and courage, Hektor has been fleeing in
desperation, a characterization that is especially tangible in the similes. The simile here allows
Hektor to redeem his status as the great hero of Troy, and it is significant that he takes this
opportunity to reestablish his own excellence. The audience knows that Hektor will not survive
this battle; even a listener wholly unfamiliar with this story can feel through the similes that
Achilleus is the superior warrior.49 The simile, however, allows him to present himself as a hero
one final time, and this is essential to the overall characterization of Hektor. In reestablishing the
character of Hektor, however, this simile also serves to augment Achilleus’ own excellence.
Il. 22.308-11.
For additional evidence see 17.200-208. For an audience listening to this episode independent of the
narrative context, the similes provide plenty of indication that Achilleus will win in the end.
48
49
Until Hektor’s worth is reconfirmed by his final stand against Achilleus, he is not an important
enough opponent to result in Achilleus’ martial aristeia, and this simile enables him to do so. In
killing a warrior like Hektor in a face-to-face battle, Achilleus demonstrates his superiority even
more clearly than he has throughout his pursuit of Hektor.
VIII. Conclusion
Throughout the Iliad, the narrator makes frequent use of simile sequences in order to
direct the audience’s attention toward key thematic ideas and patterns. The sequences in Books
16 and 22 help to focus the emphasis on the characters and the actions taking place during
particularly noteworthy battle scenes. They continually draw the focus back to the development
of Patroklos, Hektor, and Achilleus as warriors, leading up to two of the most significant
moments in the Iliad. The similes in each sequence highlight central aspects of these characters
and alert the audience to crucial changes in the relationships between them. Both of these
sequences take the simile pattern for a warrior in the middle of his aristeia to an extreme, and
given the inundation of similes, it is logical for the audience to expect each sequence to
culminate in the normal death simile form.
I would like to suggest that it is precisely through this lack of comparison that the poet
conveys the extreme gravity of these deaths. In the typical death simile, the character dies, drops
like a tree or a diver or a tower, and simply exits the story. When we hear the final word about
the deaths of Patroklos and Hektor, however, it is through each man’s own voice. As we have
seen in the cases of Echepolos, Imbrios, and even Sarpedon, the use of the simile actively
transfers the significance of the death away from the individual character and onto the more
contextual import within the sequence. This is not to suggest that Patroklos’ and Hektor’s deaths
are contextually insignificant; in fact, the appearance of the simile at 16.823 indicates how
seriously Patroklos’ death will affect the larger narrative, but it does not completely separate his
identity from the situation like the more typical death similes. By choosing not to make use of
the more common death simile form, the poet temporarily transfers the narrative authority to the
dying man, and in doing so signals the importance of these deaths. Because the audience has
grown accustomed to the normal pattern, these two examples are all the more startling, and the
poet asks his audience to engage directly with all of the emotion and description of the deaths
themselves, without the mediation of a simile. In these scenes, the only portrayal of each man’s
death is the direct description, and that takes on a degree of finality because the characters are
permitted to speak their last words. The death similes provide an appropriate and meaningful
end for several characters in the Iliad, marking the importance of their passing and drawing the
audience’s attention to the greater significance; in leaving the similes out of the two deaths most
thematically central to the story when they are expected by the pattern-sensitive audience,
however, the poet urges a direct reflection on these two episodes through not his own voice, but
the voices of Patroklos and Hektor as they depart from the narrative.
Bakker, Egbert J. Written Voices, Spoken Signs. Harvard University Press, 1997. Print.
Ben-Porat, Ziva. “Poetics of the Homeric Simile and the Theory of (Poetic) Simile.” Poetics
Today 13.4 (1992): 737. CrossRef. Web. 10 Sept. 2013.
Beye, Charles Rowan. The Iliad, the Odyssey, and the Epic Tradition. Garden City, N.Y.,
Anchor Books, 1966. Print.
Clark, Matthew. “The Concept of Plot and the Plot of the ‘Iliad’.” Phoenix 55.1/2 (2001): 1–8.
JSTOR. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
Coffey, Michael. “The Function of the Homeric Simile.” The American Journal of Philology
78.2 (1957): 113–132. JSTOR. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
Edwards, Carol L. “The Parry-Lord Theory Meets Operational Structuralism.” The Journal of
American Folklore 96.380 (1983): 151–169. JSTOR. Web. 22 Apr. 2013.
Foley, John Miles. The Singer of Tales in Performance. Indiana University Press, 1995. Print.
---. The Theory of Oral Composition: History and Methodology. Indiana University Press, 1988.
Print.
Fowler, Robert Louis. The Cambridge Companion to Homer. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Print.
Heiden, Bruce. “The Placement of ‘Book Divisions’ in the Iliad.” The Journal of Hellenic
Studies 118 (1998): 68–81. JSTOR. Web. 15 May 2014.
Homer. The Iliad of Homer. Trans. Richmond Lattimore. Chicago; London: University of
Chicago Press, 2011. Print.
---. The Odyssey of Homer. Trans. Richmond Lattimore. N. p., 2007. Print.
“JSTOR: Poetics Today, Vol. 13, No. 4 (Winter, 1992), Pp. 737-769.” Web. 10 Sept.
2013.
Kathy L. Gaca. “Reinterpreting the Homeric Simile of Iliad 16.7–11: The Girl and Her Mother In
Ancient Greek Warfare.” American Journal of Philology 129.2 (2008): 145–171.
CrossRef. Web. 10 Sept. 2013.
Keith, Arthur Leslie. Simile and Metaphor in Greek Poetry from Homer to Aeschylus. G. Banta,
1914. Print.
Lee, D. J. N. The Similes of the Iliad and the Odyssey Compared. [Parkville] Melbourne
University Press on behalf of the Australian Humanities Research Council, 1964. Print.
Lord, Albert B., and Marie Louise Lord. The Singer Resumes the Tale. Cornell University Press,
1995. Print.
Muellner, Leonard. “The Simile of the Cranes and Pygmies a Study of Homeric Metaphor.”
Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 93 (1990): 59–101. JSTOR. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.
Nünlist, René. “A Neglected Testimonium on the Homeric Book-Division.” Zeitschrift für
Papyrologie und Epigraphik 157 (2006): 47–49. Print.
Peradotto, John, and J. John Patrick Sullivan. Women in the Ancient World: The Arethusa
Papers. SUNY Press, 1984. Print.
Rambo, Eleanor F. “On Homer’s Similes.” The Classical Journal 28.1 (1932): 22–31. Print.
Ready. Character, Narrator, and Simile in the Iliad. Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print.
Scott, William C. The Artistry of the Homeric Simile. Dartmouth College Library and Dartmouth
College Press, 2009. Print.
---. The Oral Nature of the Homeric Simile. BRILL, 1974. Print.
Shipp, G. P. Studies in The Language of Homer. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Print.
Slatkin, Laura M. The Power of Thetis: Allusion and Interpretation in the Iliad. University of
California Press, 1995. Print.
Watson, Janet. Speaking Volumes: Orality and Literacy in the Greek and Roman World. BRILL,
2001. Print.