The Iliad

I have several points to make in this review. The first is to explain why I recommend the Fagles translation over that of Lombardo. The choice of translation is at one and the same time easy, personal and fraught with consequence. It is easy because all the translations that I am familiar with (Fitzgerald, Fagles and Lombardo) are excellent and have their own excellencies. It is personal because because I believe it is largely a matter of individual aesthetic. But it is fraught with consequence. Let me explain that last part. In Homeric Moments, Eva Braan points out the passage in Book 18 when Achilles first talks to Thetis after hearing that Patrocles has been killed by Hector. Fagles (p. 470, Line 96) translates the line as "I've lost him". Lombardo parses the line as "And I killed him" (Lombardo, p. 357, Line 86). Braan suggests that the alternate to lost should be "destroyed" (Braan, p. 11). This crux epitomizes my loss at not knowing Greek and having to read translations. I lose out on those moments, those flashes of shifting insight that knowing that the word I am reading can imply loss, guilt and transgression all at the same time. Knowing that there are trade-offs of insight to win or lose on the choice of a translation, I recommend you read several. Pick a main translation. And at the moments of consequence in the story, consult the others. Lombardo is flat out better at making Book 2(the catalogue of ships) not only readable but purposeful. Homer in that one chapter is giving all the islands, all the kingdoms and cities of Greece a place in the national epic of the country. He is giving everyone in Greece a hero to look back on as their own. But in general I find Lombardo to be, for lack of a better term, coarser. And, I think it has a lot to do with his methodology. I read his intro as saying that he works his translation out over the coarse of time by performing it (fair enough since we are reading Homer, the singer of epics). But, as a result of those readings perhaps, his translation has passages that are real clunkers. For example, I laughed out loud when I read this: "Well let me tell you something. I guarantee That if I ever catch you running on at the mouth again As you were just now, my name isn't Odysseus..." (Lombardo, p.28, Line 279-281) I read those line and what I see is young Marlon Brando in The Wild Ones not Odysseus. Compare Fagles: "I tell you this, so help me it's the truth: If I catch you again, blithering on this way, let Odysseus' head be wrenched off his shoulders" (Fagles, p. 108, Line 301-303). That line count is also an issue- Lombardo's methodology leads him to leave out words, phrases and lines because they are unneccessary to performance. I can't go with that. I could go on but I think you see my argument. To sum up: I don't read/speak a bit of Greek. My ear when reading aloud leads me to prefer the Fagles translation but the Lombardo is a valuable adjunct to that reading. Since both translations are also interpretations, to read them both is to probably get a little closer to Homer. And, by the way, both contain useful introductions although I think Knox's intro to Fagles' translation is better than Murnaghan's to Lombardo's translation. Finally, why should you care? I have hinted at it in my review title and my remark on the catalogue of ships. Homer's poetic style reveals so much more than an epic on force or whatever the critical summation de jour is. He creates a world. Not just a world at war but through his similes a world of crafts, work, weddings, births, murders, kinships, friendships, of gods, of monsters, of countries and of history. Toward the end of the book, the God Hephaestus creates for Achilles a new shield. Homer describes in detail the working on the shield, the two cities, one at war, one at peace and the whole universe that surrounds them. It is the perfect simile for the effect of Homer's poem as a whole. The other reason you should read this book is the central conflict between Hector and Achilles. Both men are doomed and know it. Both are aware that the success of their side is dependent on them. Achilles is the more god-like but Hector is the better man, the more humane human being. You should care about reading about these two because in their conflict, they are tracing out what is was for the men of ancient Greece to live and to die. And their story continues to carry the weight of the ways that they faced their fate down to our own time. Which brings me to my final reason for preferring Fagles over Lombardo. Brando in The Wild Ones was a marvel. There is nothing wrong at all with Brando from The Wild Ones. Brando from On the Waterfront was even better. But Brando is not Hector, he is not Achilles, he is not Odysseus or Diomedes or Great Ajax. To my ears, all too often Lombardo give us Brando. Fagles gives us the Greeks. At least, to my ears and my soul. Try the two of them out and let me know how you feel. And if anyone wants to argue the merits of different translations in the comments, have at me.

Reading Homer is essential for any study of the great western works. I chose this version since it was recommended as "the best modern English translation" from The Young Heretics podcast. This is -the- translation to experience The Iliad if you too are working your way through the great works. It truly is the best war story ever told, and boy does Fagles tell it! The translation is written in free verse (9-14 syllables per line, usually), which flows marvelously well as the drama of the Trojan War reaches its climax. If you have only experienced the tale through the movies and television then you may be surprised by how vital the pantheon is to the story, the religious adherence of all involved, and the fact that the Iliad mostly covers one week of fighting. The story itself is about the rage of Achilles, so it naturally starts with Achilles becoming enraged and ends when his rage is soothed - and no, that doesn't happen with his death. In addition to the translation, this edition also contains a 60-page introduction/commentary by Bernard Knox. The commentary alone is worth the price of the book! It contextualizes how The Iliad (probably) came to be, who Homer may be, and how scholars study the work from a variety of perspectives. He then describes the main themes of the book and contrasts the character traits of the leading heroes. Feel free to skip this section to avoid spoilers (though bear in mind that the story spoils itself quite frequently, plus it's very likely you know most of the major plot points already), or if you want a bias-free experience. I found that it enhanced my understanding of the story rather than directing it, but I'll let you be the judge of that! Keep in mind that the Alexander Pope translation is still highly regarded as the best. It was translated in the early 18th century and is even written in iambic pentameter with rhyming couplets! However, the language of that translation is archaic, akin to reading the King James Bible. It also has not benefitted from the last 300 years of classical scholarship. If this doesn't bother you then it is certainly the version you should read. But if you prefer a (still beautiful) translation into modern English then you will not be disappointed with Fagles.

beautiful book, the translation is easy to read while still maintaining the scholarly sense you get from other translations

I read Robert Fagles' translation of Homer's The Iliad for brain exercise since I read The Odyssey before I retired from teaching. The Iliad contained Homeric similes which you really should know about if you are a true literature reader. Homer did not incorporate these similes in The Odyssey which he wrote after The Iliad. While there are a lot of characters and gods in the book, however, there is a glossary in the back of the translation to help you fit them all together; and, of course, there is always Google to help you connect the relationships. I must admit I cheated a little by printing notes from Spark Notes to help me understand and remember what I was reading and some of the most important quotes so I could understand the importance of armor, burial, honor, and other Greek traditions we've lost memories of over time it enriched my reading experience. I talk to people who say, "It's too big and complicated to read!" I disagree. I am 64 years old and a retired English teacher and I understood this book. I would recommend The Iliad for 11th grade - Sophomore college years. Robert Fagles made The Iliad a truly accessible, entertaining, instructive read.

The introduction by Bernard Knox was helpful and intriguing to read. However, my reading of the poem did not exactly match that of Knox. First, when Hector has the upper hand in battle, he displays a level of rage and violence comparable to Achilles. Second, although the brutality of the war is unquestionable, Achilles' actions (and the entire premise of the war) are not necessarily outside the bounds of morality. Failing to clarify this, Knox seems surprised that a philosopher like Socrates compares himself with a murderer like Achilles at the time of his death. However, Knox overlooks that in Plato's Republic, Socrates challenges some of Homer's depiction of Achilles and calls him "a most moderate man."

There are probably at most a few hundred people in the world with the knowledge and competence to critique Robert Fagles' translation of the Iliad into English. First, one would have to be fluent in Greek and in particular the ancient dialects of Greek that Homer used to compose his poem. Since I am not in this exalted category of people I will have no comment on the translation. My interests lie more in the poem itself, its possible historicity, and other issues. Although I had read the Iliad long ago in college I had forgotten much. My recent foray to read it again had more to do with certain claims that Julian Jaynes made in his book "On the Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" which is an old classic of psychological literature from the 1970's. According to Jaynes the characters in the Iliad show no sign of modern consciousness but rather they are the playthings of the gods who issue commands which must be obeyed. Indeed, according to Jaynes' theory the gods are auditory hallucinations in people's heads and so we see Athena telling Achilles not to smite Agamemnon. After rereading the Iliad I don't find Jaynes' theory to be compelling. There are signs of human consciousness everywhere with both humans and gods judging and making decisions according to the best data they have available. So the characters seem to have an entirely modern consciousness as far as I can tell. Indeed, in Book 5 the Greek hero Diomedes attacks two of the gods in person (Aphrodite and Aries) and even wounds them. That certainly doesn't fit the bicameral mind theory. So putting Jaynes' theory aside, the next big issue is why it is the Trojan War which is the historical event that Homer chooses to write about. From the archaeological record we know that the greatest historical event between Troy being attacked and Homer was the Bronze Age collapse which resulted in the complete destruction of the Mycenaean civilization. So why is that not the theme of the poem? Why not an invasion of barbaric Sea Peoples attacking the Achaean defenders who valiantly fight to defend their cities in a losing cause against superior numbers? Perhaps that topic was too raw emotionally to deal with and so Homer chose a more remote war in which the Greeks were victorious. There may be an echo of the Bronze Age collapse when Hera says to Zeus that he can destroy the three cities she loves the most which are Mycenae, Argos, and Sparta. Perhaps Homer's audience knows that these cities have indeed been sacked. Or perhaps Troy itself becomes the poetical equivalent of the entire Bronze Age Greek civilization which is doomed to die. We can probably never know for sure why the Trojan War was picked as the topic. Another anomaly that the forward to the book points out is that the Iliad was likely first written down between 725 and 675 BCE not long after the Greeks adopted the alphabet from the Phoenicians. It is thus one of the first pieces of Greek literature to be written using the new writing system since Linear B had been long forgotten. We usually don't expect a masterpiece to be the first thing written, but rather several short stumbling efforts leading up to further sophistication and then the masterpiece. That is not the historical record of the Iliad. The masterpiece comes first with almost complete preservation and then we only have fragments of other Greek poems from the 7th century. So the history of Homer, the Iliad, and the Odyssey is indeed very peculiar and is not what we would expect from a Greece just recovering from a Dark Age lasting three centuries. Perhaps that is because of the genius of some individual named Homer or it has some other unknown cause, but we should rejoice that we have such an excellent and long piece of Greek literature from such an early age. There are still plenty of mysteries regarding the Iliad and its author. Each generation can find its own particular enjoyment in these poems. A few other comments are in order concerning historicity. Book 2 of the Iliad concerns the catalog of ships and how many came from various places in Achaea (Greece) and who their commanders were. So we see Agamemnon commanded 100 ships from Mycenae which was the biggest contingent. On the Trojan side it says that the allies of Troy speak a thousand different tongues and they come from all over Asia Minor. This matches the historical record of Asia Minor in the 13th century BCE which was dominated by the Hittite Empire in the center but with many satellite kingdoms surrounding it, each with its own language. There is some speculation that the language of Troy (called Wilusa by the Hittites) was Luwian, not Greek. And there would have been as much religious diversity as linguistic diversity although the poem does not show this. So the catalog of ships has always struck scholars as peculiar as a literary form unless it has some historical basis. It seems that most of the places listed in Achaea as sending ships were actual Bronze Age settlements so the catalog of ships may be historical. Also, strewn throughout the Iliad are hundreds of combat sequences which go like this. A, son of B whose father was C killed D, son of E whose father was F. And for the most part A, B, C, D, E, and F are never mentioned again in the poem. These numerous examples seem to have no purpose in furthering the plot. They seem to be filler material that could have been left out. So why include them? They seem to be very specific in terms of who killed whom and what genealogy each person had. Since this filler material does not advance the plot at all it would seem that the only reason this material is included is because it is historical or at least Homer thinks it is. Now, whether this material dates from the actual Trojan War of the mid 13th century BCE or from the later Iron Age is anyone's guess. My overall opinion is that the Iliad is probably much more historical than we generally think although events may have been moved in time to suit the poet's whimsy.

This is the translation to get. I have been teaching 9th grade literature for several years now and this edition/translation never fails to make converts. The students LOVE it. This is one amazing translation that bursts with beauty, energy, passion. Read it OUT LOUD.

Set in the ninth year of the war between Troy and Greece the Iliad is an epic poem covering 41 days of this tragic war. The story centers around an argument between the two main heroes of the Greek side (or the Achaeans as Homer called them): Agamemnon, the king of Mycenae and commander of the Greek forces, and Achilles, the most powerful warrior in the Greek army. The affront to Achilles by Agamemnon wounds Achille's pride. He vows to stay out of the war and in doing so Zeus tilts the scales of fate to the Trojans. With the Greek army facing almost certain defeat Achilles sends Patroclus, his closest friend, to help the Achaeans. He warns Patroclus, however, not to push the Trojans back to their walls, but Patroclus didn't listen. He was killed in battle by Hector, the Trojan commander. This Trojan victory would, however, bring Achilles into the war and turn the tide of battle. The Iliad brings the horrors of war with startling detail. Men slashed to pieces on the Trojan plain aren't just nameless enemies they are real people. Homer tells us who they were. We know their names; we know something of their family. Homer makes us care about them. He gives us a clear insight into the mind of the soldier in the ancient world. With tales of courage, honor and principle one can almost feel the horror of this titanic battle. Robert Fagles does a masterful job in translating this epic poem; now more than 2700 years old. I found the reading easy and quite enjoyable but one would do well to set aside plenty of time for reading. The story is over 15,000 lines in length. Fagles provides a nice introduction, covering the major themes of the story, and a glossary of names and a pronunciation guide at the back of the book. I highly recommend the book as one that belongs on everyone's book shelf.

I love the Penguin Deluxe editions! Bought it for a reread since it's been a few years. Highly recommend the Robert Fagles translation.

A very beautiful cover! The slightly torn page edges really add to it as well

A pleasure to look at and hold, an absolute delight to read. A treasure to pass down to future generations.

El libro es un clásico, nada que argumentar ahí. La edición se ve bella. El problema es que cómo usualmente pasa con libros grandes y Amazon, este termina por llegar dañado. Haré la devolución pero me molesta la falta de cuidado, hubo una época en que no sucedía esto.

What can I say, this poem has lived through the ages, just fantastic. There are points reading this that I felt at was at the walls of Troy. This version is well translated and printed with good fonts. I mean Homer of course I would recommend reading this.