Picture and text from wikipedia
The expandable list called "thematic structure" presented here is meant to serve as a list of pointers to a "map" of ideas or themes that forms the basis of the composition we call The Iliad. It is a work in progress, likely there will be changes, but the overall shape I consider well-established. There is no exact method behind this map, except my subjective opinion "this looks like that" and "this is about that". It was made by grouping the text lines into topics, short (5-10) sequences about a single subject, as much as possible at least, and then grouping those recursively, naming and color-coding the likenesses (1). But how the map of themes came to be is not really relevant. The only criterion is the reader's evaluation of the end result and how well it helps create a model for interpretation of this poem. How many Homeric questions does it answer (or raise), compared to other models. Others will have to answer that. I find it likely that the structure mirrors, however imperfectly, a structure that the composer(s) of the poem had in mind to help create it - orally, without the help of writing(2). As an informal framework, probably only meant for the aoidos who created it, it is of limited importance for his contemporary listeners. But for us, it may influence our evaluation of the unity (or otherwise) of the poem. Also the interplay of likenesses and contrasts may help answer some of our questions by giving us a better idea of "what the poet is talking about", which is by no means a trivial question considering the distance between ourselves and the world of Odysseus. The first place to go to when faced with these questions is Homer himself, obviously. Aristarchus' "Ὅμηρον ἐξ Ὁμήρου σαφηνίζειν" still goes. My comments on the individual nodes is shown in the Commentary column and can be accessed by clicking on the light blue line numbers in the list.
I assume that the structure was indeed a private one, a mnemonic device to help compose and recite a long poem using only memory. If this in itself long and complex aide-mémoire was somehow communicated to others, later-generation rhapsodes for instance, the "unity" argument loses its force at least so far as composition by one person is concerned. For a poet, if writing comes into the picture in helping compose, the structure itself loses its usefulness and will soon disappear. So, to jump to a conclusion, I would like to present the picture of a single poet with a great knowledge of existing aoidē and with the drive, the mission even, to create a truly monumental poem. He creates it in memory, not at once but as "a tale that grew in the telling". The fact that I see this as an exclusively oral composition does not mean that I think the dictation hypothesis is out of the picture. As I shall argue elsewhere, we need an early written down copy to explain the relatively intact survival of such an intricate structure.
The titles of the tree nodes attempt to summarize its contents and to bring out similarities between it and nodes of the same color within the same subtree. Outside the same level in the subtree, color correspondences have no significance. The similarities are relations by likeness or contrast. These are formed by the action of the narrative and/or by the focus on certain actors or the presence of gods. Not too much importance should be attached to the title of the node: the actual play of likenesses and contrasts can only be discerned by studying the text itself. Sometimes these are hard to find and clearly other groupings would be possible there. But often enough, the likenesses are on the surface creating a basic framework to build the structure on.
In this way three basic types of structure are formed: ring compositions, repeated sequences and catalogues. Catalogues are independent, longer sequences of similar items. Repeated sequences are structures like ABCABC where the similar items repeat themselves, rings are like ABCBA where the similarities cycle back in reverse order. Most of the rings found are triplets of the form ABA.
There are also a number of nodes (almost separate poems) that do not fit well in the overall structure of the poem.
These are few and can be briefly described here:
- there is a form of sub-poem called "aristeia", a form of praise-poetry where one hero is the permanent focus of
attention and which establishes him as a major hero (or otherwise). Usually the aristeia starts with an introductory
arming-and-marching-out scene (though Homer varies this quite a bit), then follows a ring-structured main part. E.g.
Diomedes, Agamemnon, Patrocles and Achilles all have an aristeia showing this structure. This is brought out in the
coloring of the nodes. Actually I consider the proem of the Iliad (1.1-7) to be such an introductory node.
There are two or three longer catalogues that fall outside the ring structure: 1. the Catalogue of Ships and Men
(2.455-3.14), 2: the Shield episode (18.490-605) though I am less certain about this one's place in the structure,
3: Patrocles' Funeral Games (23.258-897).
See more about those in the commentary section.
First we must identify two modes of poetry in the Iliad: one centers on battle, the other is about speech. These are also the two area's in which a man can achieve fame in the Homeric world. So we find that there are three main stretches of poem that focus on fighting, you might call them 'days of battle': Diomedes' aristeia, the long day of fighting here called 'the Plan of Zeus' and Achilles' aristeia. Surrounding this: four stretches which focus on speech mainly in the form of assemblies and of embassies. An embassy is sending someone on a mission to talk to the other side, e.g. Thetis to Zeus, Odysseus and Aias to Achilles, Priam to Achilles etc. Assemblies and councils are gatherings where all the people resp. the chief heroes give their opinion and advice about a situation. NB: This ignores the fighting scenes in book 8 'Failure by Day' and book 10 'Success by Night' which are included here in a speech part. Much more about that in [link: stitches.html]. If we accept the above amendment, we find that we have three fighting parts, three days of battle, wrapped in four speech parts. The latter I shall name 'Embassy and Assembly' (E&A) parts. This leads me to adopt a Homeric image, the Chimaera, as a metaphor for the whole Iliad. Homer may or may not have meant this as a metaphor, he certainly never explains it except by the whole poem. The Chimaera (she-goat) is a four-legged monster with a lion's head, a goat's body and a snake for a tail. Why those? A lion is of course the main metaphor for a hero, dominant king of of beasts. Exactly the way Achilles used to think it would be: like Diomedes, greatest of heroes, wearer of golden armour and also the first one to get safely home. The poet heaps a lot of irony into that picture. A goat is the typical sacrificial beast - like Patrocles (and therefore like Achilles). A snake is a deadly animal that achieves immortality by always re-appearing in a different new skin - like an Achilles. So we have three parts resting on four legs, the whole representing a terrible fire-breathing man-killing beast.
```
``` So this is the top-level threefold division. Perhaps it should be a sevenfold division, 3+4. The four E&A are not obvious parts of any ring structure but the three 'fighting parts' (days of battle) are. In this, Diomedes is contrasted with Achilles. Moreover, the past is contrasted with the future, with the present in the middle. The past, in the minds of the people, consists of Diomedes-like heroes who are brave and relentless and who know just when to go and when to stop so they come out of the battle alive. A god must have taught them that. The alkē of these heroes comes not out of bottomless fury and shame but out of a desire to live up to their father's and comrades' expectations. The middle part is a description of Homer's contemporary situation: the Greeks keep attacking but for reasons made clear by the poet, they actually lose and are in danger of being driven into the sea. This fits with historical realities: not long after Homer's supposed lifetime, the Trojans (calling themselves Lydians) from the Hermus plain together with the Carians from the Meander plain became an existential threat to the Ionians, especially to Smyrna and Miletus (though only Smyrna was sacked). The last division, Achilles' aristeia, says "don't worry, (an) Achilles will rise and free your city from its besiegers, though he will not conquer Troy (Sardis) for you". So, in short, we have the contrast Diomedes - Achilles representing past and future, with the gist being "how you thought it would be" vs. "how it will really be". The middle part describes the realities of battle, both for the Greeks and for the Trojans, especially for Hector.