Post on 22-Mar-2018
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