Chryses and the Opening of the Iliad

Author(s): Robert J. Rabel

Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 109, No. 4 (Winter, 1988), pp. 473-481
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/295073
Accessed: 11-11-2019 16:01 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Journal of Philology

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 AMERICAN

JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY

CHRYSES AND THE OPENING OF THE ILIAD

The Iliad is composed of small narrative units which o

the same nature as the large narrative units and reinforce
major themes.1 In addition, these small units may infl
development of the plot in significant ways. The brief sto
old priest Chryses and his revenge upon Agamemnon i
small unit, with both major thematic and causal connectio
rest of the Iliad. Homer announces explicitly at the beginn
poem that the dishonor shown to Chryses results dire
quarrel of Agamemnon and Achilles (II. 1.8-12).2 Yet in
the role of first cause, I hope to show that the episode of
for all its compact brevity and particularity, serves as a s
in miniature,3 a general paradigm of the theme of successf
and restitution which shapes the form that Achilles' wrath
and creates initial expectations of an equally happy outcom
expectations, however, are overturned in Book 9 due to un
able discrepancies between the dominant emotions and ult
of the young hero and the old priest whom he earlier cho
as his model.

Chryses comes to the ships of the Achaeans as a suppliant.4

1 Cf. Mark W. Edwards, "Convention and Individuality in Iliad 1," HSCP 84

(1980) 1-28.
2 All references to the Iliad are based on the text of David B. Monro and
Thomas W. Allen, Homeri Opera3 (Oxford 1920).
3 A number of studies have documented the recurrence of themes first broached
in the story of Chryses. Of particular importance are: Michael N. Nagler, Spontaneity
and Tradition: A Study in the Oral Art of Homer (Berkeley 1974); Albert B. Lord, The
Singer of Tales (Cambridge, Mass. 1960); and Karl Reinhardt, Die Ilias und ihr Dichter
(Gottingen 1961).
4 Chryses' appeal is not described in language employed only of supplication,
but cf. John Gould, "Hiketeia,"JHS 93 (1973) 74, n. 1.

American Journal of Philology 109 (1988) 473-481 ? 1988 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
474 ROBERT J. RABEL

Humbling himself before the great king Agamemnon, he seeks the

return of his daughter Chryseis, taken in the sack of Thebe. (She
had been given as prize to Agamemnon after the so-called "great
foray" at the same time that Briseis was awarded to Achilles.5) The
king dishonors (lTi4paoEv, 1.11) and dismisses the old man with a
brutal rejoinder (1.26-32), making him outcast from the Achaean
camp. Chryses departs in fear (E68Foev, 1.33) and walks in silence by
the shore of the sea. Then he demonstrates for the first time in the
poem the devastating effectiveness of action at a distance and success
achieved through personal inactivity.6 Summoning Apollo to avenge
his tears (6dKpua, 1.42), Chryses discharges his function of cursing
man (dpqrlrpa, 1.11), a move which, like the suppliant position he
first assumed, reflects weakness and dependence on higher powers.7
His request takes the form of what Mabel Lang has called a "complex
prayer."8 That is, he first provides a reason why the divinity should
favor him (1.39-41) and then asks that the Achaeans suffer (1.41-
42). Homer's narrative to this point remains swift, flat, and straight-
forward. The emotional intensity of the poetry rises only with Apollo's
response. The god comes from Olympus in anger (pfviv, 1.75; cf.
1.9; 1.44), and the arrows of his quiver rattle as he moves like the
night (1.46-47). Bringing plague (Xotpok6, 1.61) and destruction
(Xoty6q, 1.67; 1.97) upon the Achaeans, he compels Agamemnon to
relent and return Chryseis to her father. However, the king chooses
to find compensation elsewhere for the loss of his prize. The result
is the Iliad itself, a magnification of the themes adumbrated in the
story of Chryses. The pattern of dishonor (1.170-171), tears (1.349),
anger (1.188; 1.192; 1.224; passim), and revenge for the loss of a
woman taken in the great foray recurs with Achilles as the protagonist.

5 Cf. Iliad 2.690-693, and John W. Zarker, "King Eetion and Thebe as Symbols
in the Iliad," CJ 61 (1965) 110.
6 Cf. William R. Nethercut, "The Epic Journey of Achilles," Ramus 5 (1976)
8-9.

7 Cf. James M. Redfield, Nature and Culture in the Iliad: The Tragedy of H
(Chicago 1975) 94: "The priest is himself a somewhat problematic figure; h
cultural specialist who stands somewhat outside the status order. Or, to put
another way, he is a low-status person with special powers.... Agamemnon se
reason why he, a powerful man, should give way to someone insignificant and w
For the special powers inherent in the curse of the lowly, cf. Gilbert Murray, Th
of the Greek Epic4 (Oxford 1934) 86-88.
8 Mabel L. Lang, "Reason and Purpose in Homeric Prayers," CW 68 (1975)

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CHRYSES AND THE OPENING OF THE ILIAD 475

Yet commentators fail to recognize the extent to which th

hero seems to model his actions upon those of the old prie
Karl Reinhardt saw in Book 1 the repetition of a story
dealing with the strife of vassals and their king.9 How
emphasized the role of Apollo as Agamemnon's adversa
first quarrel and Achilles as Agamemnon's adversary in th
Certainly much in the text recommends this view especiall
we have seen, the poet stresses the swiftness and angry in
the god's response to the insult-and these qualities we
associate with Achilles himself"l-while portraying Chry
as his pathetic and humble creature. (The emotions whi
attributes to Chryses are fear and the pain that we may in
his tears.) Nevertheless, we may draw a distinction be
significance of events which the poet intends the audience
hend and the conclusions which his characters draw. Here, Homer
goes to great lengths to establish that Apollo serves as a fitting
prototype of Achilles in the formal pattern of strife. Yet the hero
appreciates only his own affinity with Chryses. A brief study of the
interlocking structure of the resolution of the first quarrel and the
beginning of the second will make the implications of this parallel
clearer.

After Homer formally closes his account of the fateful assembly

at which Agamemnon has decided to return Chryseis and take Briseis
(1.304-307), an embassy of reconciliation is appointed under the
leadership of Odysseus and sent to Chryses (1.308-311). Meanwhile,
heralds are dispatched to carry off Achilles' prize (1.318-348).
Chryses, then, has demonstrated the best means to avenge dishonor
and recover a stolen woman-by punishing the king through losses
to his army-at the very moment when Agamemnon blunders a
second time. Achilles' great prayer to Thetis demonstrates that he
appreciates this obvious lesson.
The prayer falls into two parts, background narrative (1.365-
392) followed by a request (1.393-412). First, Achilles retells the
whole story of the insults to Chryses and himself, beginning with the

9 Reinhardt (n. 3 above) 43.

10 Reinhardt (n. 3 above) 44.
'1 Gregory Nagy, The Best of the Achaeans: Concepts of the Hero in Archaic Greek
Poetry (Baltimore 1979) 143, speaks of the large number of thematic and formal
convergences between the characters of Apollo and Achilles in the Iliad.

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
476 ROBERT J. RABEL

sack of Thebe. Lines 372-379 are repeated verbatim from the poet's
own description. Homer's purpose in having his protagonist retell a
story so fresh in our minds is at least threefold. According to J. T.
Sheppard, he wishes to emphasize the importance of Agamemnon's
cruelty to the old suppliant.12 Secondly, Mark W. Edwards notes the
psychological relevance of such repetition. Homer emphasizes
Achilles' sorrow by having him pour out his woes at great length.13
In addition, I believe that the retelling serves equally to illuminate
the depths of Achilles' anger and the motivation underlying his
subsequent request. Explaining to his mother the origins of the
quarrel with Agamemnon, Achilles in the process hits upon the best
means of winning a second such victory. I am suggesting, in other
words, that the Chryses story becomes a pattern and a subject for
imitation not merely because of an oral poet's well known tendency
to attach the same kind of song to different characters,14 in this case
Chryses and Achilles. Rather more subtly, Homer allows the parallels
to emerge at least in part from the perceptions of Achilles himself.
In fact, the hero seems even to work against his artful narrator by
discerning a pattern quite different from what the poet presented
to his audience.
Achilles' narrative differs in two very significant details from
Homer's earlier account. Edwards has pointed out that he describ
Apollo's launching of the arrows and their deadly effect in rathe
flat and objective terms-in contrast to the poetic and emotion
account which Homer earlier provided.15 Secondly, and in keepin
with Edwards' observation, Achilles attributes the angry reaction
(Xc06opvoq, 1.380) not to Apollo but to Chryses himself.l6 Thus the
human victim of Agamemnon's caprice and not the god becomes the
emotionally charged focus of Achilles' narrative-precisely the op
posite of Homer's earlier emphasis. The young hero sees that h
shares the old man's plight and quite naturally, but wrongly, assumes
the motivating force of anger in the formulation of the earlier pla
for restitution. In this way, the analogy between the two mortals i

12 J. T. Sheppard, The Pattern of the Iliad (New York 1922) 11-12.

13 Edwards (n. 1 above) 18.
14 Cf. Lord (n. 3 above) 120.
'1 Edwards (n. 1 above) 10-11.
16 In speaking of "the wrath of Chryses-Apollo" Lord (n. 3 above) 188, conflates
themes which both Homer and Achilles keep quite distinct.

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CHRYSES AND THE OPENING OF THE ILIAD 477

extended beyond what the author intended in his narrativ

is Achilles' first major error and the source of his eventual de
tion.) The decision to seek a settlement after the same fashion
naturally; therefore, Achilles dispatches Thetis to Olympus w
request that Zeus punish Agamemnon a second time with lo
his army (1.393-412). Once again like Chryses, Achilles employ
form of a complex prayer: he claims justification in Thetis
service to Zeus.17 Finally, in discussing recourse to prayer as a
of defense against aggression, we should note the unconve
and unheroic nature of Achilles' plan. Warriors normally win
for deeds not words.18 As the aftermath of the theft of Hele
Trojan War itself results from the heroic necessity of reco
stolen women through force of arms.19 Indeed, Achilles' first r
to Agamemnon's outrage was more in accord with the heroic r
He was prepared to draw his sword, disrupt the assembly,
Agamemnon until Athena persuaded him to stop with repr
words and come away eventually with three times as man
(1.188-218). With his prayer to Zeus, however, Achilles ado
traditional defense of the outcast, the powerless old man, a
unprotected woman.20

17 Samuel Eliot Bassett, The Poetry of Homer (Berkeley 1938) 130, r

correctly that there was no way for Achilles even to have known that Chryse
to Apollo. Bassett, however, notes also that Homer was not troubled by such diff
18 This generalization requires a slight qualification; words were indeed
prized in the assemblies. Note what Patroclus says at 16.630-631. Arthu
Adkins, Merit and Responsibility: A Study in Greek Values (Oxford 1960) 36, rem
Homeric society values men who are well-armed, strong, fleet of foot and sk
war, counsel, and strategy.
19 Cf. Michio Oka, "The Iliad and the Wrath of Achilles," JCS 22 (197
(English summary 151-153), who finds in the taking of Briseis the repetit
pattern involved in the taking of Helen. Also, cf. Lord (n. 3 above) 190.
20 Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution an
(Baltimore 1966) 132, provides a generalization which supports my thesis: "Mo
it is a common feature of competitive segmentary political systems that the l
the aligned forces enjoy less credit for spiritual power than certain person
interstices of political alignment." These persons are the politically weak. Of
cursing can also be an attribute of authority: cf. Robert Parker, Miasma: Pollu
Purification in Early Greek Religion (Oxford 1983) 191-206; also, the article by
in RE, s.v. Fluch. Nevertheless, with the exception of Achilles, the only vesti
in the Iliad of the curse of one in authority and able to enforce his will t
personal strength is Menelaus' highly rhetorical curse at 7.99f., probably
expression of personal frustration. Heroes frequently pray: to express vain

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
478 ROBERT J. RABEL

With Achilles' wrath so formalized, the poet returns to Odysseus

and his expedition. The ensuing passage seems further to confirm
the soundness of Achilles' strategy. Chryses gratefully (Xatpov, 1.446)
receives back his daughter and prays that Apollo relent (1.451-456).
Both have achieved their ends. Agamemnon dishonored a mortal
and offended a god; yet neither of his victims separates the question
of honor from the question of material compensation. Full restitution
has been made. Apollo hears this second prayer, accepts the sacrifice
of the Achaeans, and takes delight in the paean which they perform
on his behalf (1.457-474). His wrath (plvtv, 1.75) dissolves in pleasure
( EpneTo, 1.474). Thus Homer brings to a close the first, minor quarrel
of the poem in a scene of fellowship and peace. However, the second
meanwhile increases in bitterness and intensity as we are reminded
that Achilles sits in anger (pQvi?, 1.488) by his ships and abstains
from war and the assembly (1.488-492). In other words, a healing
of the rent in the social fabric has been accomplished only at the
expense of tension and disruption elsewhere. Nevertheless, the
termination of the first cycle of revenge and restitution seems to
promise an equally successful resolution of the second movement, so

wishes (7.132f.; 16.97f.); to seal an oath (3.298f.; 19.258f.); and to seek the help of a
god in war or in council. The latter is the most frequent form of prayer in the Iliad
(cf. 2.412f.; 5.115f.; 10.278f.; 16.514f.; 17.561f.). However, heroes are not given to
asking the god's service while they sit in idleness. Achilles repeats his unheroic form
of prayer at 16.233f., with three lines borrowed from Chryses' second prayer to Apollo
(16.236-238 = 1.453-455).
The closest analogues to Achilles' prayer in the Iliad seem to be the prayer of
Chryses to Apollo and the curses of Amyntor (9.453f.) and Althaea (9.565f.) upon
their children. Whether Achilles' and Chryses' prayers may properly be considered
curses is difficult to determine. L. R. Farnell, The Higher Aspects of Greek Religion
(Chicago n.d.) 52, argues that the Greeks early associated curses with their belief in
gods, so that curses are difficult to distinguish from prayers. The curse was originally,
he says, "an ebullition of personal destructive will-power." Wolfgang Hiibner, Dirae
im romischen Epos: Uber das Verhiltnis von Vogeldaimonen und Prodigien (Hildesheim 1970)
60, claims that curses never invoked Zeus directly.
In contrast to my argument, Gregory Nagy (n. 11 above) 80, and Mary Louise
Lord, "Withdrawal and Return: An Epic Story Pattern in the Homeric Hymn to
Demeter and in the Homeric Poems," CJ 62 (1967) 241-248, discern in Achilles'
actions a significant parallel with an immortal. The akhos of Demeter begins with the
abduction of Kore. Her resulting menis causes devastation which is replaced by fertility
when she receives the appropriate timai (H. Dem.) In this paper, however, I have
attempted to separate Achilles' perception of parallels from those drawn by the poet
or enforced by the epic tradition.

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CHRYSES AND THE OPENING OF THE ILIAD 479

long as Achilles continues to follow the example of Chryse

possibility is complicated in Book 1 by the presence of ange
combines the lot of the suffering mortal Chryses with
wrath of the god Apollo.21 (The consequences of this co
ambiguous status erupt in Book 9 when anger raises th
above the level of material compensation and forestall
completion to the second, major movement of the theme o
and restitution.)
Again like the prayer of Chryses, Achilles' request
generates a further quarrel-between two gods on Mt.
However, the argument between Zeus and Hera is quickly c
Hephaestus with drink and by Apollo with song (1.533
son advises Hera to endure the grief she feels (1.573-58
process, Hephaestus explains the ease with which gods a
put aside anger where mortals are concerned and thus shed
spective light upon the abrupt termination of Apollo's earl
Men and their affairs, he says, must not be taken too seriou
576). They are not in a position to damage significantly
of the gods.22 (Whether mortals like Achilles can manage a
equal success is left in suspense.) Finally, the divine banque
concludes the book is reminiscent of Chryses' feast with
and the other ambassadors from Agamemnon.
In Book 1, Homer presents the origins of the quarrel b
Achilles and Agamemnon and in the process creates and sh
expectations. The flow of events-two movements from c
to peace interrupted by a third where the outcome is
leaves us to suppose that anger will cool and disputes be re
the satisfaction of all, that Achilles will also relent when Ag
offers restitution. Indeed, through Books 2-8 events c
broadly to the shape of the miniature Iliad encapsulat
Chryses episode. The plague (Aoip6q, 1.61) and destruction
1.67; 1.97) which Apollo inflicted upon the host prefig

21 The word menis in the Iliad denotes the anger of a god. The on
where it is applied to heroes is the mutual anger between Achilles and
cf. Nagy (n. 11 above) 73. James Redfield finds Achilles' ambiguous status
in the first line of the poem: cf. "The Proem of the Iliad: Homer's Art,"
98: "The first line of the Iliad qualifies the hero [Achilles] in terms of his
and his human father, and thus places him between god and man."
22 Cf. Arthur W. H. Adkins, "Values, Goals, and Emotions in the Ilia
(1982) 306.

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
480 ROBERT J. RABEL

destruction (Xotyo6, 1.341) which Achilles predicts for his fellow

Achaeans and which Hector in fact brings. Thereupon, Agamemnon
sends a second embassy, nominally under Phoenix (9.168) though
Odysseus conveys the king's offer as he had done before. Only now
does Achilles deviate sharply from his self-imposed precedent.
Why does Achilles not relent in Book 9 and complete the
pattern? The course of action which he has pursued could bring no
more than the prizes which Agamemnon offers. Indeed, he first
seemed content with Athena's offer of gifts and counsel of patience.
This question has been discussed endlessly by the commentators,
and I have little to add to the debate, except briefly to point out the
influences which make a reduplication of Chryses' success impossi-
ble. The first, of course, is the anger which he shares with the god
and wrongly attributes to the mortal in the formal pattern of strife.
(The three ambassadors from Agamemnon and Achilles himself are
all aware of its compelling force in blocking the king's attempt at
reconciliation.23) The fact of immortality makes Apollo naturally
more responsive to persuasion and entreaty in the petty, ephemeral
affairs of men. Achilles' mortality, however, serves to intensify his
anger and shift the dispute entirely from the material level to a
deeper question of personal integrity.24 Such a stimulus was entirely
lacking in the case of Chryses. Now Phoenix argues that the gods
are capable of being swayed (orpenroi, 9.497) and that Achilles should
be disposed likewise. Yet, as Arthur Adkins has argued, the parallel
he draws between the ambassadors' beseeching Achilles and a mortal's
praying to god is inexact. For the average mortal cannot damage the
honor of a god as seriously as Agamemnon hurt Achilles.25 And so
Achilles comes to believe that no amount of wealth will compensate
for what he has suffered (9.378-387). And yet the young hero was
equally mistaken in finding such a significant parallel with the old
priest. I suggest that this initial error results directly in the refusal
of Agamemnon's offer, the decision to send Patroclus into battle,
and ultimately his own death. Twice Achilles bitterly and accurately
sums up his condition when he complains that Agamemnon has

23 Odysseus (9.260), Achilles (9.426), Phoenix (9.436), and Ajax (9.628-629) all
find anger to be the major stumbling block.
24 I refer the reader to the brilliant analysis of Cedric Whitman, Homer and the
Heroic Tradition (New York 1958) 186f.
25 Cf. Adkins (n. 22 above).

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 CHRYSES AND THE OPENING OF THE ILIAD 481

treated him like a despised outcast (&TipqirTov pCtEavdoxTv,

16.59).26 Ironically, his choice to stand alone in the manner o
a one brought a victory that left his heroic honor unsatisfied
in motion a chain of events ending in a tragic Iliad.

ROBERTJ. RABEL
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

26 dITip-rlov is perhaps ambiguous here. Cf. Leafs note on 9.648.

This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:01:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms