Untitled - Get a Free Blog

Book Nine
what consumes it is Ipis (5X ). Akhilleus switches the source of his torment
from his heart to its cause. Aco|3r| expresses the construction put upon an
action by the one that suffers from it, cf. 7.97-8 and the verb Aco(3douai at
1.232, and so complements oaaxea and oveiSea ('reproaches'), which express
the judgement and reactions of others. It hurts because the image a
hero has of himself is that presented to him by his peers; Agamemnon's act
and the others' acquiescence has reduced the 'best of the Achaeans' to a
nonentity. — For the shape of the verse cf. 1.98 Trpiv y' OCTTO Trcrrpl cpiAco
SOUEVCCI eAiKGOTriScc Kouprjv, but the comparison makes the obscurity of the
present verse all the darker. Literally the meaning is 'pays me back all
the heart-grieving outrage' (not, or not literally, 'pays me back^/br all the
outrage', which is expressed by TIVEIV Aco(3r|v, 11.142). Akhilleus appears to
mean that he has 'paid' as it were a measure of humiliation to Agamemnon
who must now 'pay' back an equivalent measure; Agamemnon at the
moment is thoroughly alarmed, but he has not yet undergone the humiliation
of total defeat. The objects of dcTTo5i8co|ii are normally material objects
or such terms as duoipf), XP^°S> £nnf a j an d OTTIS, and the subject is the
avenger, e.g. Hesiod, Theog. 222 TTpiv y' caro TCO 8cbcoai [K-qpes] KOCKT^V OTTIV,
6s TIS au&pTT). Neither Aias (628ff), nor Odysseus (678-9), nor Diomedes
(699-700) refer directly to this demand, but characterize the whole section
(378-87) as obduracy. Comparative evidence of 'shame cultures' (e.g.
Peristiany, Honour and Shame 193-241) makes it clear that in making amends
both parties must save face; to insist on unconditional submission invites
condemnation. It is likely therefore that the obscurity is intentional: if
Akhilleus were to state his terms in clear language we should want a reason
why the Achaeans did not meet them, or, alternatively, we should see that
Akhilleus' terms were unacceptable to one of Agamemnon's rank and temper.
As it is the clash of heroic wills continues, both sides locked into what
Diomedes (700) calls ccynvopirj.
388 For the possible word-play oy yocuECO 'Ayocueuvovos see vol. v 59.
392 |3aaiAeuTepos: a sneer at Agamemnon's obsession with rank, cf.
1.186, 1.281, and (though it has not been reported to Akhilleus) 9.161.
393-400 In order to underline his rejection of Agamemnon's material
offers Akhilleus affirms that he will marry a woman of his own station and
that the house of Peleus has wealth enough to satisfy him. This noble
rhetoric stands in contrast with the materialism elsewhere attributed to the
heroes, e.g. emphasis put on the KTrjuorra that Paris stole with Helen,
3.282ff, and on £EIVICC in the Odyssey, 11.178, 13.40-2, 13.215-16, 24.283-
6, and is indeed in contrast with Akhilleus' own concern for his lost yepocs.
394 ywaiKoc yaueaaETOci is the reading of all MSS and must represent the
Hellenistic vulgate. The broken rhythm of the fourth foot ('Hermann's
114