The Arms of Achilles: Re-Exchange in the Iliad

by

Eirene Seiradaki

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Graduate Department of Classics

University of Toronto

Copyright by Eirene Seiradaki (2014)

ii

The Arms of Achilles: Re-Exchange in the Iliad

Eirene Seiradaki

Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Classics

University of Toronto

2014

Abstract

This dissertation offers an interpretation of the re-exchange of the first set of Achilles

arms in the Iliad by gift, loan, capture, and re-capture. Each transfer of the arms is

examined in relation to the poems dramatic action, characterisation, and representation

of social institutions and ethical values. Modern anthropological and economic

approaches are employed in order to elucidate standard elements surrounding certain

types of exchange. Nevertheless, the study primarily involves textual analysis of the

Iliadic narratives recounting the circulation-process of Achilles arms, with frequent

reference to the general context of Homeric exchange and re-exchange. The origin of the

armour as a wedding gift to Peleus for his marriage to Thetis and its consequent bequest

to Achilles signifies it as the heros inalienable possession and marks it as the symbol of

his fate in the Iliad. Similarly to the armour, the spear, a gift of Cheiron to Peleus, is later

inherited by his son. Achilles own bond to Cheiron makes this weapon another

inalienable possession of the hero. As the centaurs legacy to his pupil, the spear

symbolises Achilles awareness of his coming death. In the present time of the Iliad,

iii

Achilles lends his armour to Patroclus under conditions that indicate his continuing

ownership over his panoply and ensure the safe use of the divine weapons by his friend.

Patroclus transgression of the terms of the loan of the arms leads to his death, but also

signals Achilles return to the battlefield and to his traditional fate. Hector kills Patroclus

and acquires the arms in accordance with the Homeric mechanism stipulating the

despoilment of defeated warriors. Interestingly, however, his acquisition constitutes an

improper exchange, because he did not obtain the arms from Achilles, their legitimate

owner. Achilles defeats Hector on the battlefield and repossesses his arms. The

restoration of the arms to Achilles confirms them as his inalienable possessions and

corroborates the principles of the Homeric exchange mechanisms. Yet it leaves Achilles

without spoils from his military victory. This study suggests that the ransom that Priam

offers to Achilles for the release of Hectors corpse symbolises the spoils from the sack

of Troy, which chronologically will happen after the death of Achilles. Thus the re-

exchange of the arms leads to the exchange between Achilles and Priam, which in turn

compensates the former for the loss of honour caused by Agamemnons confiscation of

Briseis that happens in Book 1. In Book 24, Troy has figuratively fallen, while countless

Trojan riches are carried to Achilles tent.

iv

Acknowledgments

During my time as a doctoral student in the Department of Classics at the University of

Toronto, I have been thrice and four times blessed with the help and support of a large

number of people. My thanks go first and foremost to my dissertation supervisor,

Jonathan Burgess. A few words here cannot suffice to convey my abiding gratitude. He

first steered my interest toward the topic and the pattern of exchange in the Iliad and

constantly guided my thinking throughout my dissertation. His enthusiasm, criticism,

insight, and dedication made the completion of this project possible. In his unstinting

support of me, he continued going above and beyond what anyone would be expected to

do. His excellent scholarship has been both a great influence and an inspiration at every

stage of this project and has made a big difference in my intellectual development.

Professors Martin Revermann and Victoria Wohl, as members of my committee,

helped improving my thesis in countless ways and provided crucial help at crucial

moments. Martin Revermann has kindly given me feedback not only on various drafts of

the manuscript, but also on my academic teaching. He has my heartfelt thanks. Victoria

Wohl has patiently commented on my work already since my dissertation proposal and

has constantly pushed my thinking in new directions. Her probing questions, her detailed

feedback, and her own fascinating research on exchange have sharpened my ideas and

have led me to a clearer understanding of the topic of re-exchange. I owe her my deepest

gratitude. Hugh Mason, my internal-external reviewer, has given me advice and

encouragement in all matters of research and teaching throughout graduate school. In

addition, his stylistic comments on the final draft of my dissertation saved me from

v

various infelicities. Seth Schein, my external reviewer, took an immediate interest in my

dissertation. He devoted a great deal of time into reading my dissertation and offered me

generous and prolific comments on issues of exchange and Homeric epic. Furthermore,

his countless editing suggestions were invaluable in the final revision of my thesis and

his advice on my future scholarly work was indispensable.

I am particularly grateful to a few other scholars of my department for their

tireless efforts on my behalf. Christer Bruun, Regina Hschele, Alison Keith, and Jarrett

Welsh have offered me unfailing encouragement and assistance through various stages of

my graduate studies. I would also like to thank my colleagues in the department of

Classics for providing intellectual engagement and enhancing my graduate experience.

Finally, it is impossible adequately to express all that I owe to my parents,

Antigoni and Dimitrios, and to my brother, Konstantinos, for their unconditional love and

their unwavering support throughout my doctoral studies. Although from afar, their

unflagging guidance and stimulating discussions have made an incalculable contribution

to this project from its earliest stages. Their boundless encouragement has shepherded my

dissertation to its final completion.

vi

Table of Contents

Abstract ii

Acknowledgements iv

Introduction 1

Chapter 1: Re-Exchange in the Iliad 44

Chapter 2: The Fabula of Achilles Arms 65

Chapter 3: The Homeric Origin of Achilles Arms 86

Chapter 4: Cheiron and Achilles Spear 123

Chapter 5: The Loan to Patroclus 155

Chapter 6: The Spoils of Hector and the Spoils of Achilles 187

Conclusion 225

References 233

1

INTRODUCTION

Methodology and Outline

Exchange permeates Homeric epic in various modes and forms to such an extent that it

often seems a self-evident, expected, and casual feature of the plot. Offers of gifts,

parental inheritances, personal loans, property thefts executed individually or

collectively, organised plundering expeditions, raids, and war are some instances

involving exchange between two parties. The multiplicity of distinct circumstances that

appear to cause or accommodate transferences of tokens in the Iliad and the Odyssey

signify that exchange, in general, is a very inclusive and complex operation. The

diversity and ubiquity of the phenomenon in Homeric society combined with the limited

sources of wealth featured in the epics inevitably require that certain tokens change hands

more than once. They are exchanged once, and then re-exchanged, and possibly re-

exchanged again, frequently under different circumstances and expectations each time.

That is, their disposition does not constitute a single one-time action, but a longer process

of continuing circulation.

This dissertation explores the phenomenon of re-exchange in Homer, exhibited in

a variety of forms, ranging from voluntary permanent re-gifting or temporary re-

assignment of possessions to re-appropriation through the use of violence. The extent to

which re-exchange recurs in the Iliad and the Odyssey and the emphasis that it receives

from the characters and the narrator each time indicate the importance of this

phenomenon for both the community depicted in the poems and the story of the poems

2

weaved around this community. The present study illustrates how Homeric epic employs

re-exchange in order to construct its poetic society, which in turn it uses as a foundation,

in order to build its plot. In this sense, re-exchange lies at the intersection of Homeric

society and Homeric poetics.

There have been many excellent previous studies on exchange in antiquity with

special attention to Homer in particular. Yet most focus only on gift-giving, or the

exchange of women as a form of gift exchange.1 A few studies isolate other types of

exchanges, such as inheritance bestowals, or ransom and spoils.2 And some types of

Homeric exchange, such as loan stipulations, have been overlooked. This selective and

inconsistent treatment of exchange is to be expected, given its versatility and dynamism