on behalf of the classical association of the atlanticburkert, the orientalizing revolution: near...

Homeric Warriors and Battles: Trying to Resolve Old ProblemsAuthor(s): Kurt A. RaaflaubSource: The Classical World, Vol. 101, No. 4 (Summer, 2008), pp. 469-483Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press on behalf of the Classical Association of the AtlanticStatesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25471969 .

Accessed: 09/10/2013 06:33

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Johns Hopkins University Press and Classical Association of the Atlantic States are collaborating withJSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical World.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 2.100.60.119 on Wed, 9 Oct 2013 06:33:24 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classaas

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classaas

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25471969?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Homeric Warriors and Battles: Trying to Resolve Old Problems

To the Memory of Walter Donlan

ABSTRACT: Homeric battle descriptions have long eluded satisfactory

interpretation. Major problems include the mode of fighting, the role of com

moners in battle, the extraordinary duration of battles lasting entire days, and

the use of chariots. A better understanding is possible by taking the poet's narrative techniques seriously (such as alternation between panoramic and

scenic perspectives or common use of formulaic or type scenes). The latter,

for example, help explain the "epic overextension" of battles by stringing

together "normal battles, "

corresponding to a familiar reality, and chaotic

fantastic flight and aristeia scenes, where gods and chariots are much more

prominent than elsewhere.

I.

Walter Donlan pursued a lifelong quest: to understand fully what kind of society is reflected in Homer's epics?a historical society, the

product of poetic fiction, or a mixture of both??and, if this society is historical, when to date it.1 He and I were fellow-explorers on this

path.2 After Moses Finley, nobody has contributed more than he did to clarifying social concepts in the world of the epics. Unlike Finley, Donlan often started with a careful examination of the meaning and uses of specific words and concepts, and then tried to explain such

usage by applying historical and anthropological insights. The recent

republication of The Aristocratic Ideal (by now a classic and still most valuable) contains a number of his articles;3 whether dealing with the elite, authority, power, the relations between chiefs and followers,

1 This is a slightly revised version of a paper offered on October 28, 2006, in Irvine at a Memorial Conference for Walter Donlan. Parts of this paper were pub lished in a more detailed version in German in K. Raaflaub, "Homerische Krieger, Protohopliten und die Polis: Schritte zur Losung alter Probleme," in B. Meissner, O.

Schmitt, and M. Sommer, eds., Krieg, Gesellschaft, Institutionen. Beitrdge zu einer

vergleichenden Kriegsgeschichte (Berlin 2005) 229-66. Translations of Homer are by R. Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer (Chicago 1951), and S. Lombardo, Homer, Iliad, with an introduction by S. Murnaghan (Indianapolis 1997).

2 K. Raaflaub, "Homeric Society," in I. Morris and B. Powell, eds., A New

Companion to Homer (Leiden 1997) 624-48; "A Historian's Headache: How to Read 'Homeric Society'?" in N. Fisher and H. van Wees, eds., Archaic Greece: New Ap

proaches and New Evidence (London 1998) 169-93; "Historical Approaches to Homer," in S. Deger-Jalkotzy and I. S. Lemos, eds., Ancient Greece from the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer (Edinburgh 2006) 449-62. See also M. I. Finley, The World of Odysseus, 2nd ed. (London 1977; new ed., with an introduction by S. Hornblower, London 2002); C. Ulf, Die homerische Gesellschaft. Materialien zur analytischen Beschreibung und historischen Lokalisierung (Munich 1990); H. van Wees, Status Warriors: War, Violence, and Society in Homer and History (Amsterdam 1992). These all, though in differing degrees, share with Donlan a belief in the overall historicity of "epic society." Others disagree (see below, n.l 7).

3 W. Donlan, The Aristocratic Ideal and Selected Papers (Wauconda, 111., 1999).

469



470 KURT A. RAAFLAUB

pre-state communities, and economic aspects, or explaining specific

episodes in the epics, they remain unsurpassed in their thoroughness,

originality, and judicious conclusions. Other articles, not included in

that collection or more recent, are equally important; I think of an

early piece on "Reciprocities in Homer," resumed in a more recent

study on "Political Reciprocity in Dark Age Greece," a paper on

"The Social Groups of Dark Age Greece," a chapter on "Homeric

Economy," or one on "Achilles the Ally," among many others.4 Nor

should we forget Donlan's crucial contributions to the two successful

Greek history textbooks he co-authored with three colleagues.5 Another article, on "Kin-Groups in the Homeric Epics," was

not published during his lifetime. The conference volume in which

it was to appear contains only a two-paragraph summary.6 I presume

it would have become an important component as well of the book

on which Donlan was working for many years: From Tribe to Polis, in his latest curriculum vitae retitled as Society and Culture in Dark

Age Greece. He was not trained as an anthropologist but, like Finley, felt that such a book could not be written without profound famil

iarity with this discipline.7 So he worked his way into the relevant

literature and produced one important article after another?but, sadly, the book remains unfinished.

One of the issues in "epic society" with which I have been strug

gling partly overlaps with Donlan's interests. It concerns Homeric

warfare. The present paper offers, in honor and memory of my fel

low-warrior, some insights that I hope will advance our understanding

of at least some aspects of this thorny complex of problems.8 More

4 Donlan's publications up to 1999 are listed in Donlan (above, n.3) 359-64.

His 2002 article ("Achilles the Ally," Arethusa 35 [2002] 155-72) and the 2004 book

cited in the next note are the only publications not mentioned there. 5 S. Burstein, W. Donlan, S. Pomeroy, and J. Roberts, Ancient Greece: A Politi

cal, Social, and Cultural History (New York and Oxford, 1999); A Brief History of

Ancient Greece: Politics, Society, and Culture (New York and Oxford, 2004). 6 Deger-Jalkotzy and Lemos (above, n.2) 111. A minimally revised version of

Donlan's conference paper, "Kin-Groups in the Homeric Epics," was published in the

centennial issue of Classical World (CW 101.1 [2007]) 29-39. 7 On Finley and anthropology, see M. I. Finley, "Anthropology and the Clas

sics," in Finley, The Use and Abuse of History (London and New York, 1975) ch. 6;

and the editors' introduction in Finley, Economy and Society in Ancient Greece, ed.

B. D. Shaw and R. P. Sailer (New York 1982) xxiv. On the application of anthropol

ogy to elucidate Homer's world, see Finley (above, n.2) 9: The World of Odysseus

(above, n.2) offers "a picture of a society, based on a close reading of the Iliad and

Odyssey, supported by study of other societies to help elucidate obscure points in the

poems. The social institutions and values make up a coherent system, and, from our

present outlook, a very alien one, but neither an improbable nor an unfamiliar one in

the experience of modern anthropology." See also Hornblower's comments, in Finley

(above n.2) xvi-xxii: "Above all, it was . . . the first really sophisticated application

of scientific modern Anthropology ... to the ancient world" (xvi). 8 On Homeric warfare, see esp. J. Latacz, Kampfpardnese, Kampfdarstellung

und Kampfwirklichkeit in der Ilias, bei Kallinos und Tyrtaios (Munich 1977); van

Wees, Status Warriors (above, n.2); van Wees "The Homeric Way of War: The Iliad



HOMERIC WARRIORS AND BATTLES 471

specifically, I will discuss Homer's battle descriptions and try first to clarify the role of the masses of commoners in such battles and then to explain the battles' extraordinary duration. The latter in turn

helps us understand the role of chariots in Homeric battle. I deliberately ignore here the aspects of outside influences and

possible Indo-European traditions. Interminable battles between im mense armies, of course, are standard components of heroic epic all

over the world.9 My questions today concern the way the poet actu

ally describes these battles (whatever influences or traditions stand behind them) in order to make them palatable to audiences in his

specific time and world.10

II.

To begin with some preliminary remarks on methodology,11 we need to take seriously that the epics are heroic songs that focus on the deeds and conflicts of heroes who supposedly lived in a "Heroic

Age." This age, visible as well in Hesiod's "Myth of the Ages,"12 was conceptualized as distant in time and different in character: for

example, humans interacted directly with the gods and were much taller and stronger than they were in the singer's or poet's present.

Hence he stylizes them as "superhuman" by various means of "heroic

exaggeration." He equips them with all those items that historical

and the Hoplite Phalanx," G&R 41 (1994) 1-18, 131-55; van Wees, "Heroes, Knights and Nutters: Warrior Mentality in Homer," in A. B. Lloyd, ed., Battle in Antiquity (London 1996) 1-86; van Wees, "Homeric Warfare," in Morris and Powell (above, n.2) 668-93; van Wees, Greek Warfare: Myths and Realities (London 2004); see also

W. K. Pritchett, "The Pitched Battle," in his The Greek State at War, vol. 4 (Berkeley 1985) 1-93; H. Bowden, "Hoplites and Homer: Warfare, Hero Cult, and the Ideology of the Polis," in J. Rich and G. Shipley, eds., War and Society in the Greek World

(London 1993) 45-63; S. Mitchell, "Hoplite Warfare in Ancient Greece," in Lloyd, Battle (this note) 87-105; Raaflaub, "Citizens, Soldiers, and the Evolution of the

Early Greek Polis," in L. Mitchell and P. J. Rhodes, eds., The Development of the Polis in Archaic Greece (London 1997) 49-59; "Archaic Greece," in Raaflaub and N. Rosenstein, eds., War and Society in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds (Washington 1999) 129-61; O. Hellmann, Die Schlachtszenen der Ilias (Stuttgart 2000); J. P. Franz,

Krieger, Bauern, Burger. Untersuchungen zu den Hopliten der archaischen und klas sischen Zeit (Frankfurt am Main 2002); J. E. Lendon, Soldiers and Ghosts: A History of Battle in Classical Antiquity (New Haven 2005) ch. 1.

9 C. M. Bowra, Heroic Poetry (London 1952). Near Eastern influences: W. Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the

Early Archaic Age (Cambridge, Mass., 1992); Burkert, Babylon, Memphis, Persepolis: Eastern Contexts of Greek Culture (Cambridge, Mass., 2004); M. L. West, The East Face of Helicon: West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth (Oxford 1997); see also C. Penglase, Greek Myths and Mesopotamia: Parallels and Influence in the

Homeric Hymns and Hesiod (London 1994). Indo-European traditions: G. Nagy, Greek

Mythology and Poetics (Ithaca, N.Y, 1990) ch. 1. 10

Comparison, for example, with the Mahabharata might prove greatly useful here.

11 Additional methodological principles will be discussed below (at n.26 and n.40).

12 Hes. Op. 156-173.




memory vaguely remembered as typical of a long bygone era, such as bronze weapons, the use of chariots in battle, the famous boar's tusk helmet.13 And he places them in events (especially the Trojan

War) that the ancients generally considered historical and which, as the mighty ruins of Troy and Mycene suggested, also belonged to a distant era of greatness.14

Exaggerated and fantastic elements are a firm component of he roic poetry. Ajax's shield, for example, covers the whole person from head to toe, is round, thick, covered with several layers of oxhide and bronze. Clearly, such a shield cannot have existed, for a man

high shield cannot be round and covered by bronze: it would be far too wide and heavy. As van Wees suggests, it is to be explained not, as is usually assumed, by an amalgamation of the Mycenaean tower shield with the round hoplite-shield, but by the poet's description of

fantastically large and heavy arms of fantastically large and strong heroes. We remember that even Patroklos is unable to handle Achilles' tree-like spear.15 Such heroic exaggeration is visible in many areas: the heroes' fantastic wealth, the huge numbers (of fighters at Troy, of slaves or herds belonging to the leaders), and the "epic" time frames

(ten years of war at Troy, ten more of Odysseus' nostos). These ele ments can usually be identified rather easily and lifted off without loss of substance. Combined with a marked archaizing tendency, their

purpose is to create "epic distance," the illusion of a heroic world that is clearly separated from the poet's present.16

For my purposes it is important that similar effects are visible also in the battle descriptions: in the numbers of fighters, in the amazing aristeiai (extended brilliant solo-performances) of individual heroes, and in the duration of battles that last with undiminished intensity from morning to evening.

Now, such heroic exaggeration affects only the description of the major heroes, the leaders. Their qualities, deeds, and conflicts

13 I. M. Shear, Tales of Heroes: The Origins of the Homeric Texts (Crestwood, N.Y., 2000) has a very different view on all this.

14 The debate about the historicity of the Trojan War, never completely settled

despite strong arguments against it (e.g., by M. I. Finley et al., "The Trojan War," JHS

84 [1964] 1-20; F. Hampl, "Die Ilias ist kein Geschichtsbuch," in Hampl, Geschichte

als kritische Wissenschaft, II [Darmstadt 1975] 51-99; see also Raaflaub, "Homer, the

Trojan War, and History," CW 91 [1997-1998] 386-403), has been rekindled by J.

Latacz, Troy and Homer: Towards a Solution of an Old Mystery, tr. K. Windle and R.

Ireland (New York and Oxford, 2004; orig. German ed. 2001); for responses, see, e.g., J. Cobet and H.-J. Gehrke, "Warum um Troia immer wieder streiten?" GWU 53 (2002)

290-325; C. Ulf, ed., Der neue Streit um Troia. Eine Bilanz (Munich 2003). From a

Hittite perspective: T. Bryce, The Trojans and Their Neighbours (London 2006). 15

Huge shields and spears: //. 6.117-118; 7.222-223, 245-246; 11.485, 527;

13.803-804; 16.140-144. Strength of the heroes: 12.445-449. See van Wees, Status

Warriors (above, n.2) 17-21. 16

Raaflaub, "Historian's Headache" (above, n.2) 175-77 with more bibliography in n.34; "epic distance": J. M. Redfield, Nature and Culture in the Iliad: The Tragedy

of Hector, expanded ed. (Durham, N.C., 1994) 35-39.



Homeric Warriors and Battles 473

are foregrounded and strongly emphasized. Yet they are not iso lated from their social environment. Hence we can correct heroic distortion by focusing on the background, the social context in and

against which the heroes act and react, excel and fail. As Donlan demonstrated impressively, the poetic depiction of this background is sufficiently consistent and realistic to permit the reconstruction of an historical society which we can fit into the social development of early Greece:

The society depicted in Homer may be, as some

maintain, a fictional construct; if so, it is an internally logical one, whose complexities, throughout 28,000 lines of epic verse, form an intelligible and coherent

pattern. To that extent Homeric society is "real"; and it is more likely that such a social structure existed in space and time than that it was made up, or that it is an amalgam of institutions concocted from bits and pieces of social background extending over a

period of four (or more) centuries.17

Donlan initially followed Finley in dating this society early, well in the Dark Ages. Most scholars now prefer the eighth or, at the

latest, early seventh century. As Hermann Strasburger observed, such a realistic background is indispensable to enable the poet's audiences to identify with the dilemmas of the otherwise superhuman heroes.18 Similarly, it is helpful to pay attention to issues that are not emphasized or foregrounded but mentioned in passing, as side remarks or in etiological stories. Presumably, these were taken for

granted by singers and audiences.19

17 This is Donlan's conclusion in his 1981-1982 article, "Reciprocities in Homer," CW 75 [1981-1982] 137-75, at 172. This article was an inspiration to me when I first tried to make historical sense of Homer. Finley's conclusion (above, n.7) is similar. Some scholars disagree: e.g., A. A. Long, "Morals and Values in Homer," JHS 90 (1990) 121-39; A. M. Snodgrass, "An Historical Homeric Society?" JHS 94 (1974) 114-25; E. S. Sherratt, '"Reading the Texts': Archaeology and the Homeric Question," Antiquity 64 (1990) 807-24; R. Osborne, Greece in the Making, 1200-479 B.C. (London 1996) ch. 5; "Homer's Society," in R. Fowler, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Homer

(Cambridge 2004) 206-19. P. Cartledge, "The Birth of the Hoplite: Sparta's Contribution to Early Greek Military Organization," in Cartledge, Spartan Reflections (London and

Berkeley, 2001) 153-66, 225-28, at 157, is worth quoting: "In short, arguments for the existence of a genuinely historical, single and uniform Homeric 'society' or 'period' or more vaguely 'world' seem monumentally unpersuasive. My own view, which the mountain of recent investigation has merely reinforced, is that Homer's fictive uni verse remains immortal precisely because it never existed as such outside the poet's or poets' fertile imagination(s)-?in much the same way as Homeric language was a

Kunstsprache never actually spoken outside the context of an epic recital." 18 H. Strasburger, "Der soziologische Aspekt der homerischen Epen," Gymnasium

60 (1953) 105. 19

E.g., the story of Odysseus' bow (Od. 21.11-21); see Raaflaub, "Politics and Interstate Relations in the World of Early Greek Poleis: Homer and Beyond," Antich thon 31 (1997) 1-27, at 3-4.



474 Kurt A. Raaflaub

Using these methods, I have tried to demonstrate elsewhere that the world of Homer is a world of early poleis that are firmly em bedded in the heroes' thoughts and actions.20 Besides the leaders and councils of elders, in these poleis the assembly plays a communally indispensable role as well.21 Whether it consists of all free men or only part of them, and if the latter, what criteria determine inclusion and exclusion, we do not know. But epic assemblies, although lacking initiative and dominated by the leaders, take place not only in peace (as on Ithaca or among the Phaeacians) but also in war (whatever its form and purpose).22 Whenever a decision needs to be made, the

men involved convene for an agore. Given the assembly's importance in communal life, its members cannot have been insignificant either.

What was the foundation of their communal significance? Two answers

suggest themselves: they were free landowning farmers and they were soldiers. Both aspects are evident about a century later in the first

polis-constitutions in Sparta (the "Great Rhetra") and Athens (Solon's "timocracy").23 Unfortunately, Homer says nothing about the social

background of his nonelite fighters, and he largely ignores aspects of the agrarian economy?probably because such matters were not

heroic enough. Hesiod's focus on the world of small farmers could have balanced this if he had not in turn paid little attention to war.24 Hence we need to examine the role of nonelite masses in Homeric warfare.

III.

For a long time scholars maintained that epic battles were de cided almost exclusively by the heroes with their superior equipment, training, and strength, while the masses stayed in the background and mostly served as victims of elite heroics. If so, why were they mobilized at all? This raises three questions. Can we demonstrate the

20 Raaflaub, "Homer to Solon: the Rise of the Polis. The Written Evidence," in

M. H. Hansen, ed., The Ancient Greek City-State (Copenhagen 1993) 41-105. 21 K.-J. Holkeskamp, "Agorai bei Homer," in W. Eder and Holkeskamp, eds.,

Volk und Verfassung im vorhellenistischen Griechenland (Stuttgart 1997) 1-19; Raaf laub (above, n.l9); F. Ruze, Deliberation et pouvoir dans la cite grecque de Nestor a Socrate (Paris 1997) pt. 1.

22 Hence in the Iliad both Achaians and Trojans meet frequently for assemblies; so do Odysseus and his companions on their way home from Troy in the Odyssey.

23 See recently Raaflaub, "Athenian and Spartan eunomia, or: What to Do with Solon's Timocracy?" in J. H. Blok and A. Lardinois, eds., Solon of Athens: New

Historical and Philological Approaches (Leiden 2006) 390-428; and, for the agrarian background of the Greek hoplites, V. D. Hanson, The Other Greeks: The Family Farm and the Agrarian Roots of Western Civilization (New York 1995).

24 War is a fact (e.g., in the "Myth of the Ages" or the description of the just and unjust cities in Op. 99-201, 227-247 or in the list of the offspring of Eris in

Theog. 226-232), but not part of the Hesiodic farmer's primary concerns; see H. T.

Wade-Gery, "Hesiod," Phoenix 3 (1949) 91-92, who observes that this is as remark able as if a modern author omitted love.




presence of the masses in the battle (and not only on the battlefield)? Do they matter, that is, do they influence the outcome of the battle?

And, if they do matter, does this have any impact on battle forma tions and tactics? Thanks to insights gained by research over the last

thirty years, most scholars?although not necessarily accepting this as historical reality?now agree that Homer, while focusing on the elite and heroic "front-fighters" (promachoi), indeed depicts a form of mass fighting in which nonelite soldiers participate in a significant role.25 The poet alludes to this only occasionally, but these allusions suffice to remind the audiences of the larger picture.

To explain this, I refer to one of Homer's narrative principles: a

frequent change of position and perspective. As Latacz and van Wees have shown, in a typical battle narrative panoramic overviews or

summaries (taken with a "wide-angle lens") take turns with detailed

descriptions (close-up views "through a telephoto lens").26 Narratolo

gists distinguish between panoramic and scenic perspectives.27 The

poet focuses on the duels and deeds of the great heroes but reminds his audience frequently that these are only part of a huge battle along an extended battle line.

For example, in the first battle between the Achaian and Trojan armies in book 4 we find the following sequence:28 general introduc tion (4.422-445), panoramic overview (446-456), scenic details of a series of duels (457-470a), summary and overview (470b-472), more

close-up shots (473-504), summary (505-507), then (after a brief

interruption by a battle exhortation) more duels (517-532a), sum

mary (532b-535a), details (535b-537), summary (538), and finally the preliminary result of these fights (539-544), leading into book 5

with Diomedes' aristeia.

Duels and mass fighting are juxtaposed but happen at the same

time. Mass fighting consists of many duels. Audiences used to such patterns of paratactic narrative and constant change of perspective would have had no problems following and understanding. We read the Iliad in a book, leaf forward and backward, and find contradictions. Yet at any given time, the poet and his audiences could only be at one point in the narrative and observe one event. Specific pointers and

changes of perspective helped them keep in mind that the spectacular duels were only part of a much larger panorama of battle.

25 See the works cited above in n.8 and A. M. Snodgrass, "The 'Hoplite Reform' Revisited," DHA 19 (1993) 47-61.

26 Latacz (above, n.8) esp. 68-95; van Wees, "Homeric Way of War" (above, n.8).

27 I. J. F. de Jong and R. Nihilist, "From Bird's Eye View to Close-up: The

Standpoint of the Narrator in the Homeric Epics," in A. Birl, A. Schmitt, and A. Willi, eds., Antike Literatur in neuer Deutung: Festschrift Joachim Latacz (Munich and Leipzig, 2004) 63-83.

28 Following Latacz (above, n.8) 82-90, summarized by de Jong and Niinlist

(above, n.27) 77.




According to the opinion that seems most prominent today, that of van Wees, Homeric battles unfold as follows:29

The heroic army is composed of many small and

loosely organized bands of warriors, held together by personal ties of subordination and companionship. Battles are fought in open order; at any particular mo ment the majority of men remain at a distance from the enemy, while a substantial minority of individual "front-line warriors" venture closer to fight with mis

siles or hand-to-hand. There is much mobility back and forth as every man in the army is expected to

join combat at least occasionally, and even the bravest heroes retire from battle every so often.

This picture, van Wees concludes, "accounts for the greater part of the narrative"; it is supported by parallels found in "primitive" warfare, even if Homer, in fact, enriches it by the use of heavy armor, chariots, and massed formations.

I disagree on several aspects of this reconstruction. To explain why, I need to mention a small selection of the evidence offered by the epics. For example, many battle similes reflect the clash of whole armies and their engagement in intense hand-to-hand fighting.30 The images invoked concern mass battles, not hit-and-run attacks by individual fighters who step forward from otherwise clearly sepa rated battle formations. The visual impressions and immense noise conveyed by these similes could never be generated by intermittent duels of individual soldiers. It is useful to remember here that even the historian Polybius, himself an experienced general, felt reminded

by some of Homer's images of the hoplite phalanx he knew well in his own time.31

Next, often all (aollees) Trojans or Achaians attack or resist, and

they fight in masses (homiladon). A good example is offered by the

Myrmidons whom Achilles' anger has condemned to long inactivity and who in book 16 excel in a collective aristeia which parallels that of their leader Patroklos. In their eagerness to fight they are

compared with wolves (16.157-166): comparison with wild animals is usually reserved for leaders. They are mustered in their units of

fifty ships with fifty followers (hetairoi) each (168-197). Achilles addresses them ("Myrmidons!" 198-209) and fills each single one

(hekastos) with courage and eagerness (210-211). The simile of a

tightly built wall illustrates their compact formation, that of a swarm of wasps their aggressiveness (212-217, 257-267). Then Patroklos

29 Van Wees, "Homeric Warfare" (above, n.8) 690. 30 On the similes, W. S. Scott, The Oral Nature of the Homeric Simile (Leiden

1974); M. W. Edwards, Homer, Poet of the Iliad (Baltimore 1987) 102-10; e.g., //.

4.275-282, 422-429, 446-456; 8.60-65; 11.67-73; 13.334-344, 795-801; 15.614-622; 16.212-217; 17.262-268.

31 Polyb. 18.29.5-6, referring to //. 13.131-133 = 16.215-217.




exhorts them: "Myrmidons, companions (hetairoi) of Achilles! Be men now, dear friends, remember your furious valour; we must bring honor to Peleus' son, far the greatest of the Argives,

... as are

we, the followers fighting close to him (anchemachoi therapontes)" (269-272). This exhortation, addressing all Myrmidons as hetairoi and

therapontes of Achilles and in this sense as equals of Patroklos, fills

every man (hekastos) with even more eagerness: all together {aollees) they attack the Trojans, and the battle begins, as I have described it earlier: panoramic views taking turns with individual duels, followed

by flight, chaos, Patroklos' aristeia, and eventually his death. There is never a doubt that each single man among the hetairoi

who form the heroes' contingents, counts and is taken seriously. Laoi (the men) and hetairoi are often identical (e.g., 16.393-396, 495-501). Each must feel responsible for the success of the group. Hence calls for help during the battle are addressed not only to the leaders but also to all laoi. One might object that this is contradicted

by Odysseus' famous scolding of the "men of the people" in the Thersites episode in book 2: "Sit still and listen to what others tell you, to those who are better men than you, you skulker and coward

and thing of no account whatever in battle or council!" (200-202). But, like van Wees, I consider this an outburst of elite ideology, not social reality.32

In a much discussed passage (2.362-368), Nestor proposes to

Agamemnon to muster the army by phulai and phratries, because these units (however they should be interpreted) are intended to help each other.33 Then "you will see who among your leaders is a coward (kakos), and who among your men (laoi), and who is brave," because in the fighting of such units (kata spheas) it is easier to observe this.

Mutual support is thus recognized as crucial, and this concerns the

laoi no less than the hegemones. In stark contrast to the Trojans, whose allies speak many languages and thus twitter like birds, the Achaians march into battle silently, "breathing valour, stubbornly minded each in his heart to stand by the others" (3.8-9; see also 4.429-438). To be sure, normally the best fighters?usually the elite leaders?form the first line, while the weaker ones are placed in the

middle so that they must fight even against their will (4.300), but apparently even those fighters "in the middle" matter! In a critical situation fighters trade arms and armor so that the best fighters can use the best equipment (14.370-384). This is crucial: it indicates not only that each fighter brings his own equipment but also that the best fighters do not necessarily own the best equipment and are thus not a priori identical with the elite! (When I mentioned this to Donlan, he exclaimed: "That's a clincher. That seals it!")

32 Van Wees, Status Warriors (above, n.2) 82-83. 33

Donlan, "The Social Groups of Dark Age Greece," CP 80 (1985) 293-308; "Kin-Groups" (above, n.6); on phratries: A. Andrewes, "Phratries in Homer," Hermes 89 (1961) 129-40.




Nobody is dispensable; hence statements like, "We all know how to fight" (13.223); "The effort even of sad fighters combined turns into courage" (13.237); "Friends! You who are outstanding among the Argives, you who are in the middle, and you who are of low account: even if not all of us are alike in battle, there is work for all now!" (12.269-271).

All this is confirmed by the methods of distributing the booty: it is brought into the middle (es meson), into the public and common

space (to koinon).34 The leaders receive their share of honor (geras), and then the rest is distributed evenly (perhaps by lot) among all warriors, by the community, that is, presumably by the leaders in the name of the community. Hence even lowly Thersites can boast of all the treasures "we, the Achaians" have given Agamemnon (2.226-228), and Achilles complains: "The share is the same for the man who holds back, the same if he fights hard. We are all held in a single honour, the brave with the weaklings" (9.318-319).

One passage in particular seems to anticipate the spirit of the later

phalanx (17.354-365). Fighting about Patroklos' body, the Achaians form a dense line. Ajax tells them neither to jump forward out of the ranks nor to recede. The fighting is fierce on both sides, the bodies

pile up, but, says the poet, "far fewer [of the Achaians] went down, since they ever remembered always to stand massed and beat sud den death from each other" (364-365). Scholars usually explain such

compact formations as emergency measures imposed on the fighters by a crisis. True, but the poet describes similar formations also when

there is no specific crisis. Moreover, often a spear misses its target but kills the next man, which makes sense only in a relatively com

pact, not a very loose, formation.35

Of course, I am far from claiming that Homer's warriors already fight in a hoplite phalanx. They are equipped with the panoply but it retains anomalies (for example, a shorter and lighter throwing spear next to the heavier thrusting spear) and it will be developed further over the next century to meet the needs of specific phalanx fighting.36 The Homeric battle line is pretty dense in front but seems to leave some space between the ranks. Hence the comparison with waves in the surf; hence, too, spears thrown too high stick in the ground be hind their targets, and leaders circulating from one wing to the other to bring assistance find a free alley there. Missile and hand-to-hand

34 Booty: W. Nowag, Raub und Beute in der archaischen Zeit der Griechen

(Frankfurt am Main 1983); "the middle": M. Detienne, "En Grece archaique: Geome

tric, politique et societe," Annales ESC 20 (1965) 425-41. 35

E.g., 4.489-493; 8.300-302; 13.183-186, 410-411, 516-520; 14.460-468. 36 V. D. Hanson, "Hoplite Technology in Phalanx Battle," in Hanson, ed., Hoplites:

The Classical Greek Battle Experience (London 1991) 63-84. Two spears: van Wees, "The Development of the Hoplite Phalanx: Iconography and Reality in the Seventh

Century," in van Wees, ed., War and Violence in Ancient Greece (London and Swansea,

2000) 125-66, at 147-48.




combat are still combined, which requires that, at least intermittently, there be enough space between the battle lines to throw a spear; yet this space does not need to be wide because, as modern experiments triggered by the Troy movie have shown, a thrown spear can have fatal impact only from a short distance. But this suffices to explain the "hanging back" and "storming forward" of individual fighters that is often mentioned in battle descriptions.37 For the same reason,

missile specialists still play a prominent role: light-armed archers and slingers appear among the heavily armed infantrymen and take cover under their shields.38

Even if, therefore, the phalanx is still far from fully developed, it seems crucial to me that mass fighting plays a much more important and permanent role than van Wees admits. I add here that the hoplite dominates in pictorial representations, that in all literary descriptions the hoplites enjoy primacy, despite the presence of light-armed fight ers, that the earliest polis constitutions establish hoplite republics, that

military deposits in tombs and dedications in sanctuaries are virtually all part of the hoplite equipment, etc.39 From the mid- or late seventh century, at the latest, it is certain that the hoplites are predominant, after the elite, in terms of military significance and social prestige. Overall, Homer's evidence suggests that this was the case already in the late eighth or early seventh century.

Even the "commoners" among Homer's warriors, then, were

"proto-hoplites" and played a significant role in battle. They helped determine the outcome of battles, and this already began to influence formation and tactics.

IV.

I turn now to the second problem mentioned at the beginning: the duration of battles. For Homeric battles usually last in undimin ished intensity all day long, from morning to evening. This is clearly impossible and unrealistic. What do we make of it?

Again we should remember that if we analyze the evidence offered by the epics as if we were dealing with an historical description, we

37 Had the battle lines been separated by a wider margin, an individual run

ning forward for a duel would have been exposed to an intensive barrage of missiles

(spears, arrows, stones). This happens to Hector when he steps forward to announce the duel between Paris and Menelaos (3.76-83). The scene described in 4.517-538 suggests a small distance of a few meters. In 13.601-617 hand-to-hand fighting fol lows immediately upon the throwing of spears. In 13.496-498 spears are thrown in hand-to-hand fighting.

38 E.g., 8.266-272; van Wees, "Development" (above, n.36) 151-54.

39 Esp. A. M. Snodgrass, Archaic Greece: The Age of Experiment (Berkeley 1980)

99-100, 105-6. On pictorial representations and the development of the phalanx, see J. Salmon, "Political Hoplites?" JHS 97 (1977) 84-101; A. J. Holladay, "Hoplites and Heresies," JHS 102 (1982) 94-103; van Wees, "Development" (above, n.36);' Cartledge, "Birth of the Hoplite" (above, n.l7); Franz (above, n.8); P. Krentz, "Fighting by the Rules: The Invention of the Hoplite Agon," Hesperia 71 (2002) 23-39.



480 Kurt A. raaflaub

run into contradictions that cannot be resolved logically. But, as we

all know, the Iliad is neither a history book nor a sociological or

military treatise. It is poetry and a piece of art, and as such it follows its own rules and logic. This does not mean that it does not contain historical realities that can be grasped logically or rationally; it only means that we cannot discover these realities unless we understand the principles underlying the poet's or singer's narrative. We must

try to put ourselves into the shoes of his audience to whom these

principles were obvious and natural, since they had been familiar with them all their lives.

I mentioned one of these principles before: the frequent al ternation between panoramic and scenic views. Another concerns

a well-known phenomenon: the frequent use of formulaic or type scenes that are only slightly varied (such as arming for battle, the

march into battle, or battle exhortation).40 Such scenes appear even in places where they logically do not belong. As an example, we

might think in book 4 of the beginning of the battle which had been

delayed by the truce and duel between Paris and Menelaos (described in book 3). When Pandaros' treacherous arrow shot has violated the truce (4.105-147), the poet describes the reactions of the Achaians

(148-219: Agamemnon's concern and anger, Menalaos' response, the

treatment of his wound, etc.) but says nothing about the reaction of the Trojans. They must immediately have begun to prepare for the battle that was now inevitable. When the poet remembers them, they are already approaching in closed ranks, which forces the Achaians

as well to get ready for battle (220-222). Even so, Agamemnon has time to inspect his troops, contingent by contingent, to blame the slow and encourage the eager, and to exhort the leaders ironically and critically (332-421). Only after this long intermezzo the massed armies clash, and the battle begins. From a rational perspective, this is absurdly unrealistic, especially since during the duel both armies

were sitting opposite each other, separated only by a space large enough for an "arena" (3.115).

Yet what disturbs us must not necessarily have done the same

to audiences used to it. It might be useful here to draw a parallel with a modern art-form that is also performed orally. I think of opera and especially of those well-known scenes in which the pursuers are

already at the door, but the threatened lovers still have time for a

long and moving aria before they run off. Actors and public focus

entirely on one side of the action; the other side escapes our atten

tion; time and action are suspended. Again, viewed rationally, this is unrealistic, but in the logic of the art form "opera" the aria is a

firmly established, expected, and important element. The interruption of the action by an aria is thus not perceived by the audience as

40 B. Fenik, Typical Battle Scenes in the Iliad: Studies in the Narrative Tech

niques of Homeric Battle Description (Wiesbaden 1968); see also, generally, Edwards

(above, n.30) 71-81.




disturbingly incompatible with the realism of the drama enacted on

stage. Just so, in epic, set pieces like the army's march into battle or the leader's battle exhortation suspend the progress of the action; they are expected and contribute to the enjoyment of the audience.

Long conversations among fighters before they engage in battle or, occasionally, avoid doing so are set pieces as well, and with a simi

lar effect.

Now, similar principles may help us resolve the puzzle of the duration of Homeric battles. In the course of such battles several type scenes follow upon each other: arming, march into battle, clash of the massed armies, intensive exchange of missiles and close fighting (with the frequent changes of perspectives mentioned before), until one of the armies breaks down and dissolves in flight. This usually offers an opportunity for one hero's aristeia. Then comes a surprise: one of the leaders of the defeated army succeeds in stopping the

flight and encouraging his men to resume fighting. They regroup, close their ranks, and the two armies clash again in massed forma tions, followed by renewed missile and close-up fighting, until one of the sides turns and everything again dissolves in flight, chaos, and aristeia, etc., until night imposes an end to the battle.

It is clear that this cannot be realistic. The key to understand ing what is going on here lies in a phenomenon I call the "epic overextension" of battle. To explain, I suspect that before the great mass battles of the Napoleonic age, and especially in antiquity, battles usually were relatively short affairs and lasted at most a few hours.41 In Greek hoplite fighting the battle was usually over as soon as one army succeeded in breaking the opposing phalanx.42 Once the soldiers were in full flight, sometimes even throwing their shields away to run faster, it was virtually impossible to stop them, turn them

around, reorganize the tight battle formation, and lead the army back into battle with any chance of success. Very rare exceptions in the

classical period can be explained by special circumstances.43 When such maneuvers succeeded in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, they depended both on the courage and charisma of the general and on the availability of reserves (infantry and especially cavalry): we think of Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar.44 Hoplite fighting in archaic

41 Thuc. 4.134.2 suggests a battle that was ended only by darkness; it took place in winter, but we do not know when it began (I thank Larry Tritle for this reference). 42 On hoplite battle, e.g., J. K. Anderson, Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon (Berkeley 1970); Pritchett, "Battle" (above, n.8); G. L. Cawkwell, "Orthodoxy and Hoplites," CQ, n.s. 39 (1989) 375-89; V. D. Hanson, The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece, 2nd ed. (Berkeley 2000); Mitchell, "Hoplite Warfare" (above, n.8); Lendon (above, n.8). 43 Such as a retreat onto higher terrain or the late arrival of reinforcements (e.g., Thuc. 4.43; Xen. Hell. 3.5.19-20). Archilochus (fr. 5 West) famously boasts of having thrown his shield away to save his life; similarly Ale. fr. 428 Campbell. 44 A. Ferrill, The Origins of War from the Stone Age to Alexander the Great (Boulder 1997) chs. 5-6.



482 Kurt A. Raaflaub

and classical Greece knew neither reserves nor a sophisticated use

of cavalry. Homeric battles, too, therefore normally and realistically should have ended after the first breakthrough achieved by one army and the mass flight of the other. The defeated army would evacuate the battlefield, the victors erect a tropaion (an improvised victory

monument) with some of the arms and armor of the fallen enemies; a truce would allow both sides to collect and bury their dead, and on a later day the war would resume. This is indeed what happens in book 7 of the Iliad (325-432).

Yet in Homer we are not dealing with normal men but with the heroes of the "Heroic Age" who are capable of most astonishing deeds. Their endurance is virtually unlimited, they fight from morning to

evening, and they even succeed in renewing the battle out of their

army's flight. Clearly, this is another element of "heroic exaggera tion. "Epic overextension" of battle thus means that an epic battle

repeats ad libitum a basic sequence of "normal battles" and chaotic

flight phases. Normal battles consist of the elements described above: march into battle, clash between massed armies, intensive and extended missile and close-up fighting described from changing perspectives, and flight of one side.

By contrast, the chaotic flight-phases offer the poet an opportunity to give free rein to his fantasy and to glorify the greatest heroes: here we find the most astonishing deeds, innumerable variations of

flight, resistance, local massing of fighters, and renewed chaos: a constant movement back and forth. These scenes contain several

fantastic elements: the aristeiai of the great heroes, in which they reach a level of achievement far beyond human potential, mowing down scores of enemies and single-handedly chasing whole armies across the entire battlefield: this too, of course, is heroic exaggera

tion. Aristeia of the victor and aristeia of the loser complement each

other, for it is no less an accomplishment of which only the great est heroes are capable to stop, reorganize and remotivate a fleeing

army. Not surprisingly, in such "superhuman" achievements often

the gods are involved: they facilitate the turnaround by encouraging and strengthening, or discouraging and weakening, the leaders. Here

too, horses and chariots play their most important role: during the normal battles they are usually parked behind the front, but as soon as the flight begins, they appear very prominently and permit the main actors to move freely about the entire battlefield. Incidentally, this goes a long way in explaining the role of chariots in Homeric battles that has always baffled scholars. Gods, chariots, and aristeia thus belong mainly to the fantastic flight-phases; in normal battles

they are much less visible. All this can be illustrated by close analysis of one of the great

battles described in the Iliad. I have done this elsewhere.45 The result,

45 Raaflaub (above, n.l) 239-44.




I think, is encouraging. The normal battles, I suggest, correspond to a reality with which the singer's audiences were closely familiar. We should not forget that these audiences had experience with war, per sonally or from the accounts of others. To what extraordinary degree this must indeed have been the case has been demonstrated recently in an unexpected area. Larry Tritle fought as an officer in Vietnam and observed there the mutilation of fallen enemies by both Vietnamese and Americans. This clearly was a violent psychological reaction to the devastating brutality of infantry fighting. Tritle sees close parallels in Achilles' mutilation of Hector's body. Jonathan Shay, a psychiatrist

who worked with many Vietnam veterans, recognizes close analogies between Achilles' reaction to Patroklos' death?his excessive grief, self-incrimination, and going berserk in the subsequent battle?and the "Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder" (PTSD) typical of many war veterans.46 No doubt, therefore, Homer's audiences knew all too well the devastating impact of war on the soldiers' psyche.

V.

In conclusion, then, the normal battles involve participation of masses of commoners who have an impact on the outcome of battles and fight in relatively dense formations. We see here first indications of what was to evolve into the hoplite phalanx. The flight and aristeia

phases represent heroic and fantastic exaggeration. We moderns feel

uncomfortable with the combination of such realistic and fantastic elements. But, as the use of set pieces demonstrates as well, the

poet's audiences were used to this. They must have enjoyed these

greatly entertaining episodes with sensational "special effects" and were not deterred by them from identifying with the realistic scenes of normal battles that corresponded to their own experiences. As a

consequence, if we want to find answers to our historical questions, we need to focus on the normal battles.

Brown University Classical World 101.4 (2008)

KURT A. RAAFLAUB

[email protected]

46 L. Tritle, "Hector's Body: Mutilation of the Dead in Ancient Greece and

Vietnam," AHB 11 (1997) 123-36; J. Shay, Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character (New York 1994); see also Tritle, From Melos to My Lai:

War and Survival (London 2000); Shay, "Killing Rage: physis or nomos?or Both?" in van Wees, War and Violence (above, n.36) 31-56; Shay, Odysseus in America: Combat Trauma and the Trials of Homecoming (New York 2002).



on behalf of the classical association of the atlanticburkert, the orientalizing revolution: near...

Documents