Rage — Goddess, sing the rage of Peleus’ son Achilles,
murderous, doomed, that cost the Achaeans countless losses,
hurling down to the House of Death so many sturdy souls,
great fighters’ souls, but made their bodies carrion,
feasts for the dogs and birds,
and the will of Zeus was moving toward its end.
Begin, Muse, when the two first broke and clashed… (1.1-15)
After a first reading of Homer’s Iliad, one might venture to say the famous epic is a masculine story. It is apparent that the human female characters in the Iliad lack any agency. It could be argued that the personalities and behaviors of the female characters, both human and goddess, are primarily stereotypes or tropes that are designed to mirror the way male Greeks perceived women. However, in spite of these somewhat reductive presentations of women and the overarching masculine themes, is it possible that the Iliad is subtly being presented from a feminine perspective?
While many of the soliloquies by kings, heroes, and gods revel in the glories of battle, the epic as a whole seems to shed a negative light on the idea of war. The poem honestly presents the horrors of war and the highly emotional response that these hardships evoke. This emotionally charged, graphically violent perspective is arguably anti-war, which might be a more feminine perspective on the subject than male. Not every man in this epic enjoyed being at war, yet they would continually justify their impending fate by boasting of their honor in death as a hero. Their wives and mothers would beg for them to forgo these heroic antics in order to live longer lives. As Hector prepares to die in combat, his mother begs him:
Don’t go forth, a champion pitted against him [Achilles]…
If he kills you now, how can I ever mourn you on your deathbed?
Dear branch in bloom, dear child I brought to birth!
Neither I nor your wife, that warm, generous woman… (22.101-105)
Although the heroes ignored the pleas of the female characters, these pleas often marred their deaths and made them seem particularly tragic or even futile. Many of the soldiers wanted nothing more than to go home and return to their wives. In a way, this desperation for the comfort of home could be seen as a projection of their wives’ desires. Though no one seemed question the many abusive behaviors exhibited towards women throughout the war, the notion of women as war prizes or the prospect of Trojan wives being raped after the city’s defeat came across as unsavory throughout the epic. All of these elements colored the mood of the epic. Rather than coming across as a tale of heroics in battle, the despair of the female characters presented a somber and grotesque interpretation of events that could be interpreted as anti-war.
One subsequent question, with no obvious is answer, is whether the female muse is the true poet. At the very opening of the poem, the muse, a female goddess, is being evoked by the poet to tell the story of the battle. The muse is never discussed outside of the calls the poet makes to her, but perhaps it is possible that the entire poem is being presented from her feminine point of view. The poet, who we can assume to be male, is telling or writing the story, but as he does this, is he channeling a female perspective from the spectral muse who imparts the story on to him?
Additionally, it can be postulated that Helen is assuming the role of the muse in the physical realm of the epic. During her first appearance in the poem, we witness Helen weaving a tapestry on the walls of Troy as she watches the battle unfold beneath her.
And Iris came to Helen in her rooms…
Weaving a growing web, a dark red folding robe,
Working into the weft the endless bloody struggles
Stallion breaking Trojans and Argives armed in bronze
Had suffered all for her at the god of battle’s hands (3.150-155)
Symbolically, the act of weaving a tapestry can imply that she is playing a significant role in elements like fate and the course of the narrative. In this moment, she is also the role of the narrator or perhaps even becoming the muse herself. After this very specific instance, her speeches are focused on her misery and do not offer any more observations on the events. However, as the cause of the war, it could be argued that her role as the muse extends beyond storytelling. Her watchful presence over the scenes of battle that erupted because of her further align her with the muse. More to the point, the fact that she provoked this lengthy, exhaustive war also seems to push her towards the role of muse. She is, after all, the face that launched a thousand ships, which seems to make her the most pivotal character in the poem and indicates that she is quite an inspiring force.
To reiterate, the men and gods in the Iliad do not often treat women kindly and the female characters often to little to counter this. This claim can be seen over and over again in the scenes where women are briefly given their moment in the midst of the action. Women like Helen and Aphrodite are portrayed as dishonest sexual deviants who betray men and instigate ruin in their lives. Hera comes across as the nagging, bickering wife while Andromache is presented as a docile, loving wife and mother that the men of war hope to return to. Chryseis and Briseis are just sexual objects, taken as the spoils of war, and only speak for themselves once in the entire epic. Despite all of this though, the women seem to have strong voices that vividly reflect their perception of events as they unfold. Even if Helen or a more abstract female muse are not the true poet, perhaps it could be argued that the voices of these women develop a feminine, anti-war lens through which we can perceive the Iliad.
Female and Male in Ancient Greece 
Dear Madeline,
I very much appreciate the way you have nuanced the voice of the Iliad. Indeed after my first (and second) reading of the epic, I resigned myself to accepting a masculine narrative. Your post has expanded my outlook. Thinking of the Muse and feminine influence as a sort of specter behind the masculine presentation of the epic makes me think of Ortner’s “Is Female to Male as Nature Is to Culture?” and the role the female has played as interface between realms. Here, the Muse seems to act as the liaison between the mortal and immortal realms, again demonstrating the importance of the female power to overcome boundary. In this role, the female seems to be closer to the power of gods. However, I still wonder how the female characters seem to be consistently relegated to vessel and channel rather than active body. How can the value of voice be measured when one has little agency to act?
Focusing on your reading of the epic as anti-war, I wonder how Athena complicates the modern notion that being anti-war is considered a more female perspective. By portraying the active role of immortal women like Aphrodite, Hera, and Athena who took part and interest in the war, is the masculine voice suggesting that it is only mortal women, inherently weaker than their immortal counter-parts, who allow war to upset them?
When it comes to your comparison of Helen and the Muse, I am intrigued by your highlighting of her role as the face that launched a thousand ships. Here it seems like Helen and the female characters in general have a certain catalytic power that men do not. Women begin the narrative, support its continuation and fuel its conflicts. In this way it really does begin to show how the female aspects of the epic hold it together and weave throughout the story. Thank you for inspiring new ways for this time-honored text to be interpreted.
Sincerely,
Petal
LikeLike
Dear Madeline,
I really appreciate your thoughtful reflection on the female perspective in the Iliad. Personally, I struggled, when reflecting on our reading and class discussions, with what the use of discussing gender in the poem was. I felt that much of the conversation focused on the objectification of women and the patriarchal overtones in the poem. However, I feel that simply viewing the poem as a mirror of misogyny in ancient culture and our modern culture fails to ask a deeper question. I think your exploration of the Muse’s role in narration opens up a larger discussion. We must consider that Ancient Greeks were generally part of patriarchal societies. However, if, within that consideration, we form a deeper discussion of what womens’ roles are in the midst of oppression and objectification, we can have a much more revealing and feminist conversation. One part of your post that really appealed to me was the idea that the war was being perceived through a feminine lens. This made me consider the fact that women do serve as the onlookers in the war. While the men are fighting, it is the women who serve as the audience. In this way, the women are analogous to the audience listening to the poem being performed. This is also interesting when you consider the scene in which Helen tells Priam who each hero is. It makes sense that the women would be the best narrators for the battles because the men are too busy fighting in them. I wrote my post about the difference between Athena and Ares’ roles in war. I think this idea of the female lens also applies there. Athena is wise and strategic in war, which could be parallel to the way women are able to see the full scope of the war, past any two men engaged in combat. Your line of inquiry is critical to further inspection of the entire poem, and could provide a new lens through which we could consider all of the female characters. Although the presentations of many of the women in the Iliad leave much to be desired, if we are to successfully suss out the role of women in the proposed birthplace of “western civilization,” I believe we need to be more imaginative and read between the lines, much like your blog proposes.
Best,
Betts Alalou
LikeLike
Dear Madeline,
The thing that I liked most about your essay is that as I was reading I would periodically think “no there’s no way” and then I would read a few more sentences and think “oh my god she’s right.” I had never thought about the invocation of the muse as a subtle hint that the poem was written from a female perspective, but your essay makes it hard to see it any other way.
I like the point you made about the soldiers’ desperation for home being a projection of their wives’ desires. That theme can be seen in the play not just with Hecuba but Andromache as well. However, I don’t know that I fully agree that the rape and enslavement of the Trojan women was always depicted as unsavory in the poem. While from the Trojan perspective it was always seen as horrible and gruesome, the Greeks certainly did not see it this way. Moreover, the poem is very blasé about the women whom the Greeks have already taken as their slaves. While obviously this practice is reprehensible from a modern perspective, I’m not totally convinced that the narrator of the poem was as disgusted by it.
Your point about Helen being the physical embodiment of the muse was just amazing. Again, I never would have thought that before, but now I find it hard to see it as anything else. The specific moment you quoted is especially compelling since it has her weaving a tapestry of the Trojan War. I was hoping, however, that you were going to talk about the moment on the wall when Helen really did narrate the poem. Especially since, to me at least, it seems like Priam’s asking Helen about specific Greek heroes is mirroring Homer’s invocation of the muse. Also, I found it a bit strange that in this paragraph you talked about Helen being the embodiment of the muse, but in the next you called her a “dishonest sexual deviant.” This is a bit jarring, and seems pretty contradictory. While I do think this contradiction exists in the poem, you could present the contrast in a way that made it make more sense.
Overall, you present a lot of really interesting thinking here. Great job!
Best,
Aidan
LikeLike