Untitled - Get a Free Blog

Book Nine
draw attention to the fact that Agamemnon does not propose to accompany
his gifts with prayers, but |J6V solitarium is too regular to require such an
inference.
165 Agamemnon spoke throughout in the first person as was fitting,
since he had proceeded against Akhilleus OCUTOS airoupas (1.356, etc.). We
are presumably to think of his offer as being relayed by his heralds. Nestor
is now made to suggest an embassy of the highest rank. That honours
Akhilleus, but it also widens the issue and potentially makes it one between
him and the rest. So Odysseus can appeal to Akhilleus' pity for his comrades
at 300-3, but Akhilleus can then make the point that Agamemnon dare not
face him in person (372-3).
167 TOUS dv eyco E-rnoyoiJiai, 01 8e TTIGECJOCOV: it is easiest to take TOVJS as
relative (as dv requires) and so 8e is 'apodotic'. The article is a referential
pronoun, however, and as a relative should follow its antecedent, see
Chantraine, GH 11 167. emoyoiioa, 'will choose', is a defective verb <
*OTT- cf. Lat. optare. The same form, with the same sense, recurs at Od. 2.294,
but is not confined to the epic. With respect to the construction, dv + future
indicative, Leaf observes (on 5.212) 'There is no valid reason against regarding
[the verb] as fut. indie, except that such a constr. is not Attic' For
other examples see Chantraine, GHn 223—4.
168-9 The poet does not explain why he chose Phoinix, Odysseus, and
Aias as the Achaeans' emissaries, but it is not difficult to guess why the
last two are designated. Diplomatic business in the Iliad is conducted by
Odysseus alone (as in the return of Khruseis, 1.311) or by Odysseus and an
appropriate or interested party (as with Menelaos in the formal demand for
Helen mentioned at 3.205-6 and 11.139-40). We have been reminded of
his oratorical talents at 3.221-4. Odysseus therefore is professionally wellqualified;
however, the personalities attributed to Odysseus and Akhilleus
do not encourage us to think of them as easy companions (in spite of the
dyavo9poCTUvr| attributed to Odysseus by his mother, Od. 11.203), and it is
appropriate that Akhilleus should be made to evince impatience (3096°.).
Still, Odysseus is a 91A0S dvfjp (197) to Akhilleus at this point and the
obscure passage, Od. 8.73-82, probably invented for that occasion, which
suggests an enmity between them, should not be pressed for the interpretation
of this Book, see also 223n. Aias was not only dpioros (2.768, Od.
11.550-1) after Akhilleus himself and Kf|8iC7TOS KCCI cpiATaTos (9.642) to him,
but also excelled in !8peir| (7.198) in his own estimation. Agamemnon
thought him a possible alternative to Odysseus at 1.145. The Iliad, however,
never makes a point of the fact that their genealogies make both Aias
and Akhilleus grandsons of Aiakos and therefore cousins. (It is a question
whether Homer knew that genealogy: the patronymic AiaKi8r|S always refers
to Akhilleus.) On the other hand Phoinix is an unknown quantity. If we
81