Return to Troy

Metaforms
Studies in the Reception of Classical Antiquity

Editors-in-Chief

Almut-Barbara Renger (Freie Universitt Berlin)

Jon Solomon (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
John T. Hamilton (Harvard University)

Editorial Board

Kyriakos Demetriou (University of Cyprus)

Constanze Gthenke (Princeton University)
Miriam Leonard (University College London)
Mira Seo (University of Michigan)

VOLUME 5

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/srca



Return to Troy
New Essays on the Hollywood Epic

Edited by

Martin M. Winkler

LEIDEN | BOSTON


Cover illustration: Image courtesy Daniel Petersen.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Return to Troy : new essays on the Hollywood epic / edited by Martin M. Winkler.
pages cm -- (Studies in the reception of classical antiquity ; 5)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-29276-5 (hardback : alk. paper) -- ISBN 978-90-04-29608-4 (e-book) 1. Troy (Motion
picture) 2. Trojan War--Motion pictures and the war. I. Winkler, Martin M., editor.

PN1997.2.T78R48 2015
791.4372--dc23

2015008273

This publication has been typeset in the multilingual Brill typeface. With over 5,100 characters covering
Latin, ipa, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the humanities. For more
information, please www.brill.com/brill-typeface.

issn 2212-9405
isbn 978-90-04-29276-5 (hardback)
isbn 978-90-04-29608-4 (e-book)

Copyright 2015 by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi and
Hotei Publishing.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill nv provided
that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive,
Suite 910, Danvers, ma 01923, usa.
Fees are subject to change.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.



Contents

Editors Acknowledgmentsvii
List of Photographsviii
Notes on Contributorsix

Introduction: Troy Revisited1

Martin M. Winkler

1 Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy16

Martin M. Winkler

2 Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War27

Daniel Petersen

Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy49

3 In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative: Anachronisms and Other

Supposed Mistakes in Troy65
Eleonora Cavallini

4 Petersens Epic Technique: Troy and Its Homeric Model86

Wolfgang Kofler and Florian Schaffenrath

5 Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods108

Martin M. Winkler

6 Achilles and Patroclus in Troy165

Horst-Dieter Blume

7 Odysseus in Troy180
Bruce Louden

8 A New Briseis in Troy191

Barbara P. Weinlich

9 The Fall of Troy: Intertextual Presences in Wolfgang Petersens Film203

Antonio M. Martn-Rodrguez
vi Contents

10 Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy224

Jon Solomon

Coda: On Cinematic Tributes to Homer and the Iliad255

Martin M. Winkler

Bibliography265
Index of Films and Television Productions278
General Index281


Editors Acknowledgments

I am chiefly indebted to all contributors, my laoi Trikoi kinmatographikoi, as

they might be called in not-quite-Homeric Greek, for their unwavering dedica-
tion to this volume. I owe special thanks to Wolfgang Petersen for his willing-
ness to answer my questions and to his assistant Barbara Huber for serving as
intermediary between him and me. Daniel Petersen was so generous as to
make his entire treasury of photographs taken during the production of Troy
available to me for this book. A small selection of his images can be found in
the color insert; the one on the books cover is his as well. In view of the cost
involved in reproducing these photographs, I have proposed, and my contribu-
tors have kindly agreed, not to include additional illustrations such as stills or
screenshots of Troy in individual chapters. Since both the theatrical release
and the directors cut of Troy are readily available in home-video formats, we
hope that our readers will approve of the rationale behind this decision.
I am grateful to the editors of Metaforms for including this book in their
series and, at the press, to Tessel Jonquire and Kim Fiona Plas for their ready
cooperation. Special thanks to Jon Solomon. He knows why.
List of Photographs

1 Model set of Troy51

2 Malta. City wall and gate (extreme r.) of Troy with camera crane52
3 Malta. Preparing the set of Priams palace, with blue screen and camera53
4 Malta. Filming Achilles (Brad Pitt, top r.) on board his ship54
5 Mexico. The deserted plain of Thessaly55
6 Mexico. Part of the Greek army56
7 Mexico. Director Petersen (l., in white shirt and hat) with camera crew and
Trojans57
8 Mexico. Not all Trojan warriors are real or digitally created58
9 Mexico. Part of the beach set for the Greek ships59
10 Mexico. Director Petersen (r.) and Patroclus (Garrett Hedlund) ready for his
dying close-up, with chest plate and plastic tube for fake blood60
11 Malta. The Wooden Horse waiting for its cue inside Troy61
12 Mexico. The Wooden Horse on the beach outside Troy62
13 Mexico. Another fall of Troy: the city walls after the hurricane63
14 Mexico. A suitably melancholic sunset on the Trojan beach64


Notes on Contributors

Horst-Dieter Blume
is Professor Emeritus of Classics at the Westflische Wilhelms-Universitt in
Mnster, Germany. He is the author of several books on ancient theater prac-
tice and the comedy of Menander and has written Homer auf der tragischen
Bhne. He has translated Menanders Dyskolos, Euripides Iphigenia at Aulis,
and Aeschylus Seven against Thebes.

Eleonora Cavallini
is Professor of Greek Language and Literature at the Department of Cultural
Heritage, Bologna UniversityRavenna Campus (Italy), where she also
teaches History of Classical Tradition in Modern and Contemporary Culture
and Historical Anthropology of the Greek World. From 2002 until 2005 she was
vice-dean for the Faculty of Preservation of Cultural Heritage at Bologna
University. She is responsible for the international research project Mythimedia
and director of the book series Nemo: confrontarsi con lantico for d.u. Press,
Bologna. Her latest major work is the edited volume La Musa nascosta: Mito e
letteratura greca nellopera di Cesare Pavese.

Wolfgang Kofler
is Professor of Classics at the Leopold-Franzens-Universitt in Innsbruck,
Austria. He has published on Hellenistic and Augustan poetry, epic, and epi-
gram. He also works on aspects of classical reception, especially the most
recent periods, and on Neo-Latin literature.

Bruce Louden
is Professor of Classics at the University of Texas at El Paso. He is the author of
The Odyssey: Structure, Narration, and Meaning; The Iliad: Structure, Myth, and
Meaning; and, most recently, Homers Odyssey and the Near East. He has also
published on Gilgamesh, Ugaritic myth, Greek tragedy, Roman comedy, Virgils
Aeneid, the Bible, Beowulf, Shakespeare, and Milton.

Antonio M. Martn-Rodrguez
is Professor of Latin and Dean of the School of Philology at the University of
Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (Spain). His books include El campo semntico de
dar en latn, De Aedn a Filomela: Gnesis, sentido y comentario de la versin
ovidiana del mito, Fuentes Clsicas en Titus Andronicus de Shakespeare, and El
mito de Filomela en la literatura espaola. He is the editor of El humanismo
x Notes on Contributors

espaol, su proyeccin en Amrica y Canarias en la poca del humanismo. He

has published articles on Latin linguistics, on Latin literature (especially
Plautus, Ovid, and Bede), and on the classical tradition. He also works on criti-
cal editions of the works of Spanish humanists.

Daniel Petersen
was personal assistant to Wolfgang Petersen on Troy. He is the author of Troja:
Embedded im Troianischen Krieg.

Florian Schaffenrath
is Associate Professor of Classics and Neo-Latin Studies at the Leopold-
Franzens-Universitt and director of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Neo-
Latin Studies, both in Innsbruck, Austria. His research and publications
encompass Cicero and Silius Italicus, the history of Latin literature, especially
epic, and classical receptions.

Jon Solomon
is Robert D. Novak Professor of Western Civilization and Culture and Professor
of Cinema Studies at the University of Illinois. He is the author of numerous
publications on classical literature and culture and on the classical tradition,
among them The Ancient World in the Cinema and, as co-editor, Ancient Worlds
in Cinema and Television: Gender and Politics.

Barbara P. Weinlich
is Visiting Assistant Professor of Classics at Eckerd College. Her interests
include late republican and early imperial Roman literature, epigraphy, literary
and critical theory, and classical reception. She is has published a monograph
on Ovids Amores and a number of articles on Roman love elegy and on classi-
cal reception in visual media.

Martin M. Winkler
is University Professor and Professor of Classics at George Mason University.
He is the editor of Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic, among other
essay collections on historical films, and the author of books, articles, and book
chapters on classical literature, classics and cinema, the classical tradition, and
related topics. His most recent book is Arminius the Liberator: Myth and
Ideology.
Introduction: Troy Revisited
Martin M. Winkler

There are an awful lot of Greeks in it. Harry Cohn, boss of Columbia
Pictures and Hollywood barbarian par excellance, had Homers number
right from the start when he was contemplating a film adaptation of the
Iliad, the founding text of Western culture. Cohns now classic verdict
prompted me to pose a particular question about films of the Iliad at the
beginning of my Editors Introduction to an essay collection on Wolfgang
Petersens Troy, the first blockbuster Hollywood epic on an ancient Greek
subject made in the twenty-first century.1 My question was this: Too many
Greeks for the American public? Before asking it, I had quoted the anecdote
that led to Cohns insight into the Iliad. But I never provided a direct answer.
Instead, I pointed to the recurring presence of the Iliad in American history
and culture since the nineteenth century and then turned to the main topic
of the book.
Now, a decade after its initial release, Troy has established itself as an impor-
tant and timely contribution to, and indeed further impulse for, the new lease
on life that classical antiquity has found on our large and small screens world-
wide. And so my question has virtually answered itself. Today even the shade
of Harry Cohn might agree that, yes, there are an awful lot of Greeks in the
Iliad, but, no, they are not too many for the American public to handle, even if
all adaptations omit numerous minor characters. Heinrich Schliemann, the
discoverer of Troy, had himself come in for a moment of homage, as it were, in
Columbias own 1955 thriller 5 Against the House. A law student eager to
achieve a big first adduces him as just such an achiever: You guys ever hear
of a man named Schliemann? He dug up the ancient city of Troy in Greece.
(Actually, in Turkey, but why quibble?) A smart-aleck college friend retorts:
Hey, what a cat to dig Troy! Harry Cohn could hardly have put the case better.
And this is to say nothing of the public virtually everywhere else on earth half
a century later.2

1 Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell,
2007). Except for the Bibliography, abbreviated references to this book will from now on be
given as TROY.
2 And this includes serious readers. Here are a few examples. Lawrence Freedman, Strategy:
A History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), proudly displays the wooden horse from
Troy on its front cover. Sir Lawrence, Professor of War Studies at Kings College, London, and
a Fellow of the British Academy, had been foreign policy advisor to Tony Blair and was a
member of the Chilcot Inquiry into Great Britains part in the Iraq War. By contrast, the

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_002

2 Winkler

Readers who come across a book titled Return to Troy may ask another
question: Why a second essay collection on Petersens film? Were this books
editor from Sparta, he might take recourse to laconic Spartan rhetoric and
might simply retort: Why not? The question deserves a more detailed answer,
however, or several answers. Here are some possibilities, addressed not only to
cats who dig Troy.

1 Troy in Retrospect

In May of 2004, Troy was the first giant epic on a Greek theme to come out of
Hollywood in decades. It caused controversy chiefly for two reasons. First, the
plot of the Iliad and, with it, the mythology of the Trojan War as we know it
from ancient sources was radically altered. Secondly, the gods do not appear
on screen except as statues, with one brief and deliberately understated excep-
tion: Achilles mother. She is, however, not identified as divine and not named.
These changes and others, on which more below and in several of the present
books contributions, were enough to bring the wrath of various guardians of
the classical flame down on the head of director Petersen and his principal
screenwriter, David Benioff. One aspect of the plot of the Iliad that Troy did not
tamper with was held against the film as well: its Achilles and Patroclus were
not portrayed as lovers. Apparently the fury of Achilles against Hector over the
death of Patroclus could, in some quarters, no longer be sufficiently explained
on the basis of their close friendship as it had been in the Iliad. Or this friend-
ship could no longer communicate to audiences the emotional intensity
required for a complex and harrowing plot that would culminate in Hectors
death, Achilles own death, vast slaughter, and the destruction of a mighty city.
Or the two cousins friendship was considered part of middle-brow squea-
mishness over homoeroticism and a throwback to a time in cinema history
actually, most of cinema historywhen the love that dared not speak its name
also dared not show its face on the screen.

American (but not the original British) publisher of David Gemmell, Troy: Shield of Thunder
(2006; rpt. New York: Ballantine Books, 2007), also featured on the books cover a huge and
dark wooden horse that is clearly modeled on, but (for copyright reasons?) not identical to,
the horse on view in Petersens film. Undergraduate students in Classics could see Petersens
Horse (the one in Turkey) on the cover of Stephen Esposito (ed.), Odysseus at Troy: Ajax,
Hecuba, and Trojan Women (Focus: Newburyport, 2010), a textbook with translations of, and
essays on, plays by Sophocles and Euripides and with a few additional translations of related
classical texts.
Introduction: Troy Revisited 3

On the other hand, Troy has been instrumental in bringing, to cinephiles

and readers who have fallen under Homers spell, repeated intellectual and
academic debates concerning the way in which a modern mass medium could,
should, or should not adapt a classic work of literature that is also a beloved
and nearly sacrosanct text. One particular instance, rather vitriolic but for that
reason unintentionally amusing, may serve to illustrate how easily the keepers
of the classical flame are apt to lose their equipoise as soon as they deal with
something as commercial or low-brow as they commonly regard the cinema to
be. Here is a revealing statement delivered by an internationally highly
respected (and deservedly so) Cambridge don: Troy, I thought, was so unutter-
ably bad. There comes a point where, as a paid-up professional classicist you
can take many things, but not f***ing about with the plot of the Iliad. For a
professionaltheres a boundary that once you cross you cannot take it
seriously.3 The paid-up professional seems to have forgotten that even in
antiquity people, including revered authors, had been f***ing about with the
plot of the Iliad. Here are a few famous examples. Aeschylus made Achilles and
Patroclus lovers and started a trend that is still continuing.4 Euripides had
Helen in Troy and in Egypt in different plays. Such infamous offenders as Dares
and Dictys rewrote the Trojan War myth, and any number of vase painters
changed or invented details as they saw fit. But this development goes back
even further, to the Epic Cycle of poems on the Trojan War.5 In the late nine-
teenth century a scholar concluded about the poet of the Little Iliad: Lesches
conducts himself toward [or is related to] the heroic world [of Homer] just as
later, among the tragedians, Euripides.6

3 Quoted from Sam Leith, Pecs and Violence, Financial Times (May 1516, 2010), 17; asterisks
and ellipsis in original.
4 A modern example is Madeline Miller, The Song of Achilles (New York: HarperCollins, 2012),
a (near-) juvenile novel. Of greater interest is the ongoing graphic-novel series Age of Bronze
by Eric Shanower, published in book form since 2001 and intended to tell the entire tale of
the Trojan War, incorporating all ancient sources. On the latter see Chiara Sulprizio,
ErosConquers All: Sex and Love in Eric Shanowers Age of Bronze, in George Kovacs and
C.W. Marshall (eds.), Classics and Comics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 207219. See
further Eric Shanower, Twenty-First Century Troy, in Kovacs and Marshall (eds.), 195206,
and Trojan Lovers and Warriors: The Power of Seduction in Age of Bronze, in Marta Garca
Morcillo and Silke Knippschild (eds.), Seduction and Power: Antiquity in the Visual and
Performing Arts (London: Bloomsbury, 2013), 5770.
5 On this see Jonathan S. Burgess, The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001; rpt. 2003).
6 Theodor Bergk, Griechische Literaturgeschichte, vol. 2; ed. Gustav Hinrichs (Berlin: Weidmann,
1883), 51: Lesches verhlt sich der heroischen Welt gegenber gerade so, wie spter unter den
4 Winkler

What was the Iliad coming to? But then, none of these Greeks was a paid-up
professional.7 And not even the Homeric poet or poets, as one theory holds,
was or were above such f***ing about: the Homeric poems themselves attest
to the malleability of myth.8 The crucial quarrel between Achilles and
Agamemnon that sets the plot of the Iliad in motion is mentioned in the
Odyssey, the later of the two Homeric epics. There, however, Demodocus is
reported to have sung about a quarrel between Achilles and Odysseus.
Agamemnon is delighted because an oracle from Apollo had foretold him that
after this quarrel the defeat of Troy was near.9 No such quarrel is attested any-
where else. A scholar explains it like this: the oracle must [!] have been
invented with a view to the quarrel of Agamemnon and Achilles in the Iliad.
The Odyssey poet substitutes Odysseus for Agamemnon because Odysseus is
in Demodokos audience.10
In spite of all the objectionable f***ing about with Homer that can be seen
in Troy, the book on the films original release version inspired new and valu-
able scholarship on the film, on Homers epic, and on the aesthetic, cultural,
and political background of the films production and reception.11 Now there

Tragikern Euripides. The original is quoted, with approval, by M.L. West, The Epic Cycle:
A Commentary on the Lost Troy Epics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 171. The
translation here given is mine.
7 For an eye-opening account of the whole phenomenon see Jon Solomon, The Vacillations
of the Trojan Myth: Popularization & Classicization, Variation & Codification,
International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 14 (2007), 482534, especially 490499 on
various ancient Greeks f***ing about.
8 So Jonathan S. Burgess, Achilles Heel: The Historicism of the Film Troy, in Kostas
Myrsiades (ed.), Reading Homer: Film and Text (Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University
Press, 2009), 163185; quotation at 163. Burgess, 164, sensibly observes: Classicists, having
artificially reconstructed for themselves the knowledge of the ancient audience, some-
times lose sight of Troys responsibilities toward its modern audience. But the movie mak-
ers did not spend millions on the film for academics; the general public was naturally
regarded as the films intended audience.
9 Odyssey 8.7282.
10 Quoted from West, The Epic Cycle, 98 (on Cypria, Arg. 4a). West believes that the poet
of the Iliad was someone other than that of the Odyssey. Further basic information,
including references, on this Odyssey passage is given by J.B. Hainsworth in Alfred
Heubeck, Stephanie West, and J.B. Hainsworth, A Commentary on Homers Odyssey, vol. 1:
Introduction and Books IVIII (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988; rpt. 1990), 351352.
11 Modesty requires me to refrain from listing any of the (nearly unanimously positive)
reviews of the book, but curious readers might wish to look at the comments by Jonathan
Burgess, Recent Reception of Homer: A Review Article, Phoenix, 62 (2008), 184195, at
189191. Burgess, 189, seems to regard the cinema as belonging only to low culture. The
Introduction: Troy Revisited 5

are two additional reasons why a new collection on Troy is called for. One is the
fate of antiquity on the big screen since Troy. Another is the availability, on
home video, of a directors cut of Petersens film.
Oliver Stones Alexander came to theaters six months after Troy was released.
And thereby hangs a tale of even greater controversy than had been the case
over Petersens film and the beginning of a slow, or not so slow, decline. The
critical reception of Alexander by film reviewers, scholars, self-appointed
Internet judges and juries, and not least general audiencesto say nothing of
classical scholars and studentswas mixed, to put the matter lightly. Little if
any expense was spared, and it must have been evident even to its detractors
that Alexander was a labor of love. Stone, who had been fascinated by Alexander
the Great for a long time, was honest and daring enough not to sweep homo-
erotic love and sex under the carpet of prudery in his film. But the life and
culture of the heroic and charismatic conqueror seems to have been too com-
plex for one film to present in a coherent and convincing manner to viewers
who had no more than a general, and generally vague, idea about Greeks and
Persians. Reactions to Alexander were rarely positive. Stone then released a
directors cut, which he followed with yet another version, the longest:
Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut. But nothing could rescue his film from
remaining by and large a commercial failure.
In whichever version, Alexander is anything but a disgrace. But two other
films set in antiquity are a different matter. Mel Gibsons The Passion of the
Christ, released in early 2004, is a clever but hypocritical orgy of sanctimonious
torture porn that appeals equally to sadists and masochists. Its huge commer-
cial success, not least among fanatic Christians and anti-Semites, was to be
outdone by Zack Snyders 300 (2007), an excessive and distastefully neo-Fascist
epic about the Spartans last stand at Thermopylae.12 Between Troy and
Alexander there had been Antoine Fuquas King Arthur, despite its name a late-
Roman rather than medieval mini-epic with a simple linear plot and emphasis
on violent action. Doug Leflers The Last Legion (2007) was a later variation on
the same theme. Neil Marshalls Centurion (2010) and Kevin MacDonalds The
Eagle (2011) followed, the former more graphic than the latter. If 300 plumbed
the depth of tastelessness, it was in turn outdone in unbridled silliness by
Tarsem Singhs Immortals of 2011. Some of the Greek gods actually die in this

most important scholarship about Troy that has appeared after the earlier essay collec-
tion is referred to at appropriate moments in the present volume.
12 This films 2014 sequel, 300: Rise of an Empire, presents more of the same in its story of
Themistocles, Artemisia, Xerxes, and the Battle of Salamis. Very little history was harmed
in the making of this motion picture because it contains almost none.
6 Winkler

film, as if the meaning of the title word did not matter. Computer-generated
special effects, a feature of filmmaking that had cleverly been employed to
enhance the story and the looks of Ridley Scotts Gladiator (2000) and Petersens
Troy, was now becoming the be-all and end-all of spectacles set in antiquity. The
superfluous remake of Desmond Daviss Clash of the Titans (1981) by Louis
Leterrier in 2010 and the latter films sequel Wrath of the Titans (2012), directed
by Jonathan Liebesman, are cases in point. Like Immortals, both these films and
no fewer than four others released in 2014Renny Harlins The Legend of
Hercules, Brett Ratners Hercules, Nick Lyonss Hercules Reborn, and Paul W.S.
Andersons Pompeiirelied heavily on special effects; most were released in
3-D. Their stories were weak and puerile, and so were their understanding of and
feeling for ancient myth, history, or culture. An honorable exception to this
trend had been Alejandro Amenbars Agora (2009), whose attractive computer-
generated reconstruction of the city of Alexandria provided a dramatic contrast
to its drama about religious fanaticism in the early fifth century A.D. Alexander,
Agora, and Troy stand out as historical or mythical epics which, although not
flawless, are noticeably superior to most other films about ancient Greece made
in the last decade. Troy in particular has earned a new appreciation.

2 Troy: The Directors Cut

Petersen returned to his film in 2007 for a directors cut, which introduces a
number of significant alterations, all of them for the better. Gone is the obtru-
sive female vocalise that threatened to drown emotional scenes in a tonal soup
of pseudo-lamenting exoticism, an import from Gladiator, where it had not
worked, either, and from various other films with ancient or non-Western
settings. Gone is Helens pronouncement to her cowardly lover Paris about not
wanting a hero but someone to grow old with, the original versions most ridi-
culed line. Some scenes are re-edited or dropped; some are added. Altogether,
the film is a little over half an hour longer than it was before. In his introduc-
tion to the new cut on home video, Petersen states: I could now do the film
Ireally envisioned all the time. This version, he adds, comes very, very close
to his own original cut.13 One new scene at the beginning and the films
expanded ending are especially noteworthy.

13 A few errors that might have been easily removed remain. A Thessalian is not a
Thessalonian. Phthia is still misspelled in the opening text cards. References to weeks
are anachronistic, as is Agamemnons statement about Achilles as a man who fights for
Introduction: Troy Revisited 7

The Iliad shows us the pattern according to which archaic epic composi-
tions began. The poet invokes the Muse, his inspiration, and announces the
subject of his epic: the wrath of its protagonist. In this case, however, a stark
comment on the result of that wrath follows immediately:

Sing, goddess, the anger of Peleus son Achilleus

and its devastation, which put pains thousandfold upon the Achaians,
hurled in their multitudes to the house of Hades strong souls
of heroes, but gave their bodies to be the delicate feasting
of dogs, of all birds, and the will of Zeus was accomplished
since that time when first there stood in division of conflict
Atreus son the lord of men and brilliant Achilleus.14

The greatest hero causes the greatest loss of livesand to his own side much
more than to the enemy. The horrors of war, a major aspect throughout the Iliad
but especially in its last third, outweigh any glorious feats of arms, as the undig-
nified treatment that the bodies of the fallen receive from wild dogs and carrion
birds on the battlefield attests even before listeners or readers encounter any of
the military action that will follow in the story. From the first, the poet empha-
sizes the immorality of war. The dead, friend and foe alike, are due their
ritual burial. The violation of corpses either by humans, as will happen to
Hectors body, or by animals through lack of burial, is a sign of the barbarism
to which human nature is capable of sinking. The Iliad thus begins with the
poet focusing on the victims of war even before the poems chief hero swings
into action.
The formation of two large armies in preparation for a decisive encounter
replaced by a ferocious duel had opened Troy in its original version. The direc-
tors cut begins on a radically different note. Initial texts with a map of the
eastern Mediterranean still introduce us to Agamemnon, Menelaus, and
Achilles. We are told that Agamemnons drive for total dominion has been
exerting immense pressures on the Greek military alliance. Simultaneously we
hear overly dramatic music and then the tread of soldiers on the march. This
sound becomes ever louder. Then Petersen fades in on an empty desert plain.
Now a dog appears and moves across the deserted landscape. The buzzing of
flies that becomes audible on the soundtrack alerts us to the presence of dead

no flag. Achilles mother should not tell her son that stories will be written about him
even if they will be.
14 Iliad 1.17. The translation is by Richmond Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, new ed.
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), 75.
8 Winkler

bodies off screen. The dog comes across a puddle of dried blood and a dis-
carded helmet nearby. Black birds momentarily appear in the background sky.
The dog, evidently searching for a specific scent, continues sniffing and moves
past a noticeably larger puddle of blood, a shield, and a spear stuck in the
ground. By the time he finds the carcass of a horse lying in its blood, with bod-
ies of other animals and humans as black specks in the distance and with ele-
giac music and, more ominously, the sounds of crows commenting on the
images, we know what has happened here. The dog, now running, comes
across the bloody corpse of a man with a gaping chest wound. Crows are peck-
ing away at his flesh. The dog barks and chases the birds away. We see, from his
point of view, the chest and head of the man in medium close-up. The sight is
gruesome. The dog approaches the man and begins licking his bloodied face,
whining softly. He has found his master, for whom, we deduce, he had been
searching. Then he appears to notice something in the distance off screen. He
growls. Cut, and an extreme long shot shows us a vast army on the march. This
is where the original release had begun.
The new opening sequence lasts less than a minute and a half. Petersen says
about it in his Introduction:

I always liked it. It was in the script like that, but we never used it. I liked
it because it said so much about the tragedy of the whole situation.
[The dog] finds some bloody remnants of obviously a fierce battle, and
then finally he sees the crows up there and finds [his] dead masterand
then he looks up, and heres already the dreaded stomping [of boots]
againthat means the next battle is coming. no words, nothing, but it
sayseverything about the insanity of this all, and the tragic tone.

Devastation, multitudes of dead heroes, birds (but not dogs) feasting on

corpsesPetersens opening sequence effectively expresses these Homeric
aspects without forcing viewers to endure the aftermath of excessive blood-
shed and carnage and the desecration of dead bodies. Such restraint works
well, not least since most of the time we see only what the dog sees, often in
close-up. This contrasts with the perspective of the omniscient narrator in the
Iliad, who tells us about the carnage of war in the verbal equivalent of a high-
angle (or birds-eye view) panoramic long shot. Homers summary language in
the proem is more gruesome than are Petersens images of details, but Petersen
turns the impersonal bloodshed reported in Homers proem into something
more powerful to us by making it personal, indeed presenting it from a
non-human perspective. It is altogether fitting, then, that toward the end of
the film another dog should unexpectedly appear among the corpses littering
Introduction: Troy Revisited 9

the deserted beach outside Troy. This dog, too, is searching for its master, finds
him, whimpers softly, and tenderly licks his face.15
Still, Petersens visual proem to Troy is only partly Homeric. Homer empha-
sized the horrors of war; Petersen, in line with modern sensibilities, focuses on
what we might call, with Wilfred Owen, the pity of war. As Owen wrote in his
World War I poem Strange Meeting: The pity of war, the pity war distilled.
From the Iliad to Troy, the Trojan War has always distilled both pity and horror.
As Owen also said: The poetry is in the pity. In the new prologue and the brief
moment that recalls it later, Troy evokes at least a certain measure of such pity,
even though the film is not entirely free of sentimentality. Troy may not reach
the emotional power that the Iliad evokeswhich work could?but it is an
honorable attempt to present at least some of its poetic and other qualities to
modern mass audiences.
The new proem of Troy is balanced by a new final sequence. Before, the last
we saw was the smoke rising from Achilles pyre in the midst of the ruins of
Troy. This ending was therefore quite bleak despite Odysseus somewhat
maudlin affirmation of the legend of heroes remembrance in the stories told
by future generations: these names will never die. Now, there is a new hope.
Additional footage is intercut with Achilles funeral and before Odysseus
lastwords. Some of the Trojans have managed to escape into the mountains;
prominent among them are Andromache, holding Hectors child in her arms,
Paris and Helen, and Briseis. The latter is the only one to turn around; in an
extreme long shot we see, from her point of view, a tiny Troy in the far distance,
with smoke from Achilles pyre rising into the sky. Then Petersen cuts back to
the city in ruins, and Achilles funeral continues. The Trojans exodus reveals
what the brief appearance of an all-too-young Aeneas earlier, during the
nightof Troys fall, had hinted at: their line will survive. The additional foot-
age, less than a minute in duration, is without spoken words and the more
effective for it.
The arguments advanced in the present essay collection intend to appreci-
ate the films new version. The volume in hand is thus a companion to, and
complement of, the earlier one mentioned. But a few comments about
Petersens most famous earlier epic, made before his arrival in Hollywood, are

15 The sorrow of dogs for dead masters appears in an epic simile in Quintus of Smyrna,
Posthomerica 2.575579. The simile is not warlike (dogs mourn for a hunter killed by boar
or lion), but its context is. It occurs after Achilles has killed Memnon the Aethiopian in a
duel. No earlier example of this simile exists. The context is poignant, for in Book 3
Achilles himself will die.
10 Winkler

appropriate here as well. They help throw Troy into greater relief, especially in
regard to both films presentations of their main heroes.16

3 Petersens Epic Heroes: Das Boot and Troy

Das Boot (1981) is adapted from an autobiographical novel by Lothar-Gnther

Buchheim about his experiences as a war correspondent for the German navy
in World War II. Both novel and film tell the story of a German submarine on
its dangerous journey in the Atlantic and Mediterranean.17 Its Captain and
crew survive all dangers, often by a hairs breadth. The main reason is the
Captains sea-faring experience and his ability to keep cool and show grace
under pressure. The submarine manages to return to the port of La Rochelle in
France, from which it had begun its odyssey. Viewers have by now become
emotionally involved with the mens fate. But a wholly unexpected Allied air
strike destroys the submarine and kills most of the men, including the Captain.
Screenwriter and director Petersen shows different sides of warfare: heroism
and horror, excitement and boredom, and the impossibility of moral clarity,
to adduce an expression much touted in the u.s. during the time Petersen
made Troy. The main advertising slogan on German posters announced Das
Boot as showing Eine Reise ans Ende des Verstandes: a journey to the ends of the
human mind and of rationality and sanity. Although it came more than two
decades later and despite obvious differences between ancient myth and mod-
ern history, Troy, Petersens second war epic, echoes Das Boot in several
respects. This is best seen in the character of the Captain Lieutenant
(Kapitnleutnant), the submarines commander, who is a modern relative, as it
were, of Petersens Achilles.
Like Achilles in Troy, the Captain of Das Boot is not committed to, or even
interested in, the war or his countrys supposedly glorious cause; he is con-
cerned primarily with and for his men. Much like Achilles, he does his job;
unlike Achilles, however, he is uninterested in personal glory although he is a
hero who has been awarded the Iron Cross. He informs his men that the

16 See also Federick Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War, in TROY, 163185.
17 Das Boot exists in different cuts, the longest of which ran to six hours. The film was origi-
nally released to theaters in a two-and-a-half-hour version; five-hour versions were broad-
cast in Europe in 1984, 1985, and 1988. For theatrical showings in 1997, Petersen prepared
a Directors Cut running three and a half hours. An almost five-hour version appeared
on home video as The Original Uncut Version. The following comments are based on the
directors cut.
Introduction: Troy Revisited 11

journalist who has been ordered to accompany the submarine on its journey is
there to observe whether they are decent German heroes, but the sardonic
smile with which the Captain makes this announcement in close-up tells us
that he takes a dim view of heroism. From experience he can realistically assess
Germanys chances of winning the war, and he is openly contemptuous of the
Nazi partys big shots and warmongers. The way he publicly characterizes
Reichsmarschall Hermann Gring may remind us of Petersens Agamemnon:
Big talk from a big mouththats all this fatso can come up with (Groe
Schnauze habendas ist alles, was dieser Fettwanst leistet). The members of
the Nazi hierarchy are heroes only with their mouths (Maulhelden). The
Captain then taunts the reporter to make a note of his words: Put that into
your heroic epic (Nehmen Sie das auf in Ihr Heldenepos).
One particular sequence in Das Boot exceeds Troy in its grim picture of the
horrors of warfare. Tellingly, it comes exactly at midpoint of the directors cut
of this film. The submarine has come across an enemy convoy and succeeded
in torpedoing two of its vessels before sustaining serious damage from a
destroyer and barely getting away. When the submarine surfaces again hours
later, Captain and crew observe a huge ship still burning. Hopelessly and help-
lessly, it is drifting on the water without being able to sink. The Captain orders
a coup de grce (Fangschu), and a torpedo is launched toward the doomed
vessel. But then the crew realizes that several men are still on board. The
Captain is horrified: Why did nobody get them off? Damn itall these hours!
(Warum hat die keiner vom Schiff geholt? Verdammt noch malso viele
Stunden!) Some of the enemy crew, calling for help, jump overboard and
attempt to swim across to the submarine. The Captain orders a slow retreat.
He cannot save the men because the submarine is damaged too much and is
too cramped to take on anyone else. It is clear that he hates giving the com-
mand to go back. The enemy ship eventually sinks. No survivors. The screen
goes black.
This sequence is harrowing. The shot of the submarine slowly receding,
foreground and screen right, almost in direction of the viewers, and bathed in
the infernal red glow of fires and explosions, may be the films emotionally
most exhausting image. (The fact that the ship and the sub in this shot are
miniatures does not detract from its power.) After the fade-out Petersen shows
the Captain in medium close-up, brooding. He did the right thing, but his con-
science is not clear. For the only time in the entire film, he loses his iron self-
control and yells at one of his officers. In his log he carefully records the fact
that survivors from the enemy vessel were trying to reach his sub, lingering
over the entry. Petersen now gives him one of his tightest close-ups to drive
home the moral: No heroism! (Kein Heroismus!)
12 Winkler

A later sequence brings a counterpart and comments on the one just

described. The Captain and some of his officers are on board a German supply
ship. They neither pay attention to nor return the Nazi salute with which they
are greeted. The ships captain mistakes a uniformed officer for the Captain,
who is not in uniform and looks thoroughly unheroic, and welcomes the wrong
man: a hero in person; Im thrilled (ein Held, leibhaftig; bin begeistert). He is
clueless about what the men have been through, something he has never expe-
rienced himself. Soon he wants to hear all about the gallant exploits of the
heroes of the deep, the gray wolves (die Helden der Tiefe, die grauen Wlfe), as
he calls them. As is expected of him, he proposes a toast to the German subma-
rine fleet and our beloved Fhrer. After being interrupted, he does not insist
on the toast or the expected formula. He now realizes that empty heroics and
patriotism cut no ice with these men.
The war correspondent on board the submarine is modeled on Buchheim
and, to readers and viewers of Das Boot, serves as a figure of identification:
someone who at first only observes but is then drawn ever deeper into what he
watches and records. Petersen gives him a brief speech to explain why he is
there:

I wanted this for myself. To stand, once in my life, before the Implacable.
Where no mother looks after us. Where no woman crosses our path.
Where only Reality rules, brutal but great.18

Now Petersen cuts to a close-up of the Captain. The stony expression on his
face tells us that he knows just what the reporter is talking about, something
that he himself may have believed once as an eager or romantic young man.
The reporter then comments on his own words: I was completely drunk on
that kind of talk (Ich war ganz besoffen davon). This, too, may apply to the
Captains former self. By now, of course, he has lost all illusions.
In Greek myth (but not in the Iliad), Achilles dies rather ignominiously at
the hands of Paris, a far inferior fighter. It is really Apollo who kills Achilles by
using Paris as his tool. In Troy, Achilles has a memorable death scene that
results from his attempt to save the woman he loves during the night of Troys
fall. This is not Homeric, but it makes for an effective and emotionally satisfy-
ing conclusion to the story of the films greatest hero. In Das Boot the Captain,
mortally wounded, watches the submarine sink. Dying, he falls below and

18 The original German is more powerful: Ich habs ja selbst so gewollt. Einmal vor
Unerbittlichem stehen. Wo keine Mutter sich nach uns umsieht. Wo kein Weib unseren
Weg kreuzt. Wo nur die Wirklichkeit herrscht, grausam und gro.
Introduction: Troy Revisited 13

outside the frame.19 Here we may see Petersens most powerful comment on
the nature of heroism. The Captain is just one among innumerable other casu-
alties of war. That he was a hero, torn in himself, no longer matters, for who will
remember him? We feel for him, of course, for we have followed him, perhaps
suffered with him, on his dangerous journey. But we do not even know his
name. He has no name.20 Has he become a nobody? No, because he is remem-
bered in epicfirst novel, then film. The Iliad preserves the memory of mythi-
cal heroes, primarily of Achilles himself. Epic cinema can fulfill a comparable,
although perhaps not an identical, function. As did the Iliad, Das Boot both
presents the appeal of heroism and shows its limitations and the price it exerts.
So does Troyin spite of the fact that Petersens Achilles is more ambiguous
about heroism and glory than Homers Achilles had been.
Troy is certainly not the first example of a film that presents the archetype,
or stereotype, of the reluctant hero or of the hero too experienced, too cynical,
and too weary to make a particular cause his own. An earlier parallel, also set
in the Trojan War, occurs in Giorgio Ferronis La guerra di Troia (1962).21 It tells
the end of the war from the Trojan perspective; the films main hero is Aeneas.
After Hectors death, a Trojan informs Aeneas: The soldiers will follow you
wherever you lead them, Aeneas. But Aeneas demurs: I have no wish to be a
leader. The curse of war has lasted long enough. Helen later tells him: When
so many heroic men die for one woman, her glory will last through eternity.
Aeneas remains unimpressed: Perhaps. But no eternity is long enough to con-
tain the horror of such a glory. He will make the same argument before the
council of the Trojans: There is no glory that produces such agony as this war
has done.
From the outset, Petersens Achilles is openly contemptuous of Agamemnon,
his supreme commander, and is reluctant to fight for him. Comparable per-
spectives on heroism, if for different reasons, regularly appear in American
cinema. A few classic instances may suffice to illustrate the point. Rhett Butler
in Gone with the Wind (1939) does not much care to fight for the Confederacy

19 Here Petersen is in good cinematic company when he shows the death of the hero. Sam
Peckinpah had closed Ride the High Country (1962), his elegy on the death of the West and
its last old-timer hero, in a comparable way.
20 The Kapitnleutnant of Buchheims novel is based on Heinrich Lehmann-Willenbrock,
commander of U-96. Buchheim had accompanied him on his patrol in 1941.
21 The film has several English-language titles: The Wooden Horse of Troy, The Trojan Horse,
and War of the Trojans. My comments here are taken from the English subtitles of a
French release now on dvd. I examine Ferronis film in connection with Troy in Martin M.
Winkler, Cinema and Classical Texts: Apollos New Light (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2009; rpt. 2011), 109111.
14 Winkler

and is late in joining the army. His heroism is most evident when he rescues
Scarlett OHara from the burning city of Atlanta. Rick Blaine in Casablanca
(1942) may be the best-known example. Although he already has heroic cre-
dentials, he declares: I stick my neck out for nobody. And: The problems of
the world are not in my department. He even goes so far as to state, emphati-
cally: Im the only cause Im interested in. An almost identical case is that of
Henry Morgan in To Have and Have Not (1944). Both films take place in World
War II, although in different parts of the world; both heroes are played by
Humphrey Bogart. Of course the protagonists will change; otherwise there
would be no story worth telling. A modern variation on this theme can be
found in Petersens In the Line of Fire (1993). Here it is not the hero but the vil-
lain, a would-be presidential assassin, who observes: Theres no cause left
worth fighting for. All we have is the game. Paradigmatically, in Casablanca
and To Have and Have Not it is love that decides the hero to become involved in
and committed to a cause. So it is in Troy, if not to the same extent or in the
identical manner.22 The nadir, at least for the present, of this plot type came
with John Carter (2012), an expensive and inane retro-futuristic science-fiction
epic with a bland and thoroughly unappealing titular character.

4 About This Book

As with the earlier volume on Troy, so here, too, its editor and its contributors,
with two exceptions, are scholars of classical antiquity with serious interests in
the cinema, not least as medium of epic storytelling. The exceptions are
Wolfgang Petersen, who agreed to a kind of long-distance interview with the
editor (Chapter 1), and Daniel Petersen, who reports on the production process
of his fathers film (Chapter 2). These begin the present book. Chapters 3 and 4
examine major aspects of Petersens presentation of Homer: supposed errors
and anachronisms and the directors epic technique. Chapter 5 deals with the
films treatment of the gods. Since this is the chief point of criticism leveled at
Troy, the subject deserves a detailed examination. But the topic has wider ram-
ifications, too, both for the presentation of gods in ancient epic (and else-
where) and for that in different kinds of films. For these reasons Chapter 5 is
the longest in the book, even though it does not exhaust its topic. Chapters 6 to

22 I briefly discuss the hero of Ridley Scotts Gladiator (2000) from a comparable perspective
and in connection with yet other films in Martin M. Winkler, Gladiator and the Traditions
of Historical Cinema, in Winkler (ed.), Gladiator: Film and History (Oxford: Blackwell,
2004), 1630, at 2526.
Introduction: Troy Revisited 15

8 then turn to some, but not all, of the films prominent individuals. Chapters 9
and 10 place Troy into wider contexts, first within cinema history, a topic that
has been dealt with in some of the earlier chapters as well, and then within
modern cultural history.
The chapters on Homer, Troy, and related films and literary or historical
themes reflect their authors different but mutually complementary perspec-
tives and invite intellectual and emotional engagement from the books read-
ers. Such engagement need not only take the form of agreement. Of course, all
contributors hope for at least a measure of sympathetic interest from readers,
but reasoned and spirited disagreement, especially if it eventually finds its way
into print, is useful as well. It serves to advance our understanding of the com-
plexities inherent in the translation of an ancient literary work into a modern
visual medium. To address as wide a readership as possible, one that ranges
from specialists via lovers of antiquity and cinema to students in such aca-
demic disciplines as Classical and Film Studies, Comparative Literature and
Cultural Studies, to name only a few, contributors have refrained from all aca-
demic and obfuscating jargon. All Greek terms have been transliterated, and
passages from Homer or other classical authors appear in translation.
No single study can exhaustively demonstrate the importance of Homer, the
composer or creator of the earliest surviving stories from antiquity, for the cin-
ema, the most influential modern medium of storytelling. The present volume,
then, stands as a small tribute to Homers influence and some of its ramifications
in one particular, and particularly noteworthy, case. From different perspectives
but united in this one starting point, the books interpretive chapters will attempt
a new critical evaluation of the film, chiefly based on its directors cut.
 chapter 1

Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy

Martin M. Winkler

The following is the edited version of an interview conducted long-distance

by e-mail in the winter of 2010. It is meant to supplement more general inter-
views of, and conversations with, director Petersen that were published in
newspapers and magazines in connection with the theatrical release of Troy in
2004. The most important of these are listed in the bibliography of Troy: From
Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic; some of them are quoted in excerpts in that
volume as well. An overview of Petersens career as a filmmaker up to Troy is
provided in my Editors Introduction to that volume on pages 49, with quo-
tations from interviews. Below, editorial annotations have been added in
square brackets. The prose translation of the Iliad from which Petersen quotes
is by Samuel Butler.

You learned Greek and Latin at a traditional German high school and read parts
of the Homeric epics in the original. Could you briefly describe the role these
courses played in your education and later life? As a teenager, did you actually
like the ancient cultures?

I would imagine that no thirteen- or fourteen-year-old student anywhere really

likes to learn Latin or Greek. It is quite cumbersome to learn an ancient lan-
guage that nobody speaks anymore and on top of it uses a completely different
alphabet. At that age you dont trust your teachers and parents when they tell
you that all of this actually does make sense and will pay off at some point in
the future. All the talk about training the brain, logical thinking and suchno
teenager believes any of that. But there is no doubt that, once we actually got
to the literature, the fun part, things changed for me. Particularly the epic sto-
ries with plenty of gruesome action and heroes of all stripes proved enough to
rope in the heart of a fourteen-year-old with plenty of fantasy and energy to
spare. Achilles was definitely my hero.
Im not sure how much influence Greek and Latin had on my adult life, with
the exception of this quasi built-in love for heroes and their stories. And that
definitely helps when you are a film director!

In your career as a film director, were there moments during your workon a script
or while shooting that reminded you of analogies to characters or themes you had

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_003

Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy 17

encountered in your high-school courses on Greece andRome? Now, after Troy, is

there anything in your prior work that strikes you as being more Homeric or epic
than you were aware at thetime?

Up to then I was never really aware why I like duels in films: mano-a-mano
stories as in One or the Other [1974; Petersens first thriller, made in Germany]
or In the Line of Fire [1993], with Clint Eastwood vs. John Malkovich, or even my
never realized concept for Batman vs. Superman. But who knows, maybe that
affinity really does reach back into the existential conflict of ambivalenceas
Goethe says: Two souls, alas, reside within my breastand with that all the
way back to my first experience with Achilles and Hector.

One of your most controversial German films, Die Konsequenz (1977), could be
characterized as a modern tragedy, while Das Boot (1985) is an epic with tragic
overtones and a tragic ending. Did either of these films remind you of classical
parallels or archetypes when you were working on them? If so, did such remem-
brances influence you in terms of the films content or style?

To me those films seem to have much more to do with the, generally speaking,
sober German character and approach to life rather than with classical arche-
types. As has been duly noted a few times before, Germans seem to have a
strong affinity for tragedy. We are not exactly known for our comedic nature.
Once you dive into all that ponderous Angst as a young person, youll never get
that out of your blood, I guess. Thats perhaps why everybody always complains
that I tend to kill most of my characters off! The Perfect Storm [2000] was a
record in that regard: all six of my heroes die.

In the Line of Fire, Outbreak (1995), and The Perfect Storm are heroic stories in
the tradition of action and adventure cinema, but below the surface they reveal
aspects of a more tragic nature, such as a protagonists failureand flaws like stub-
bornness or hubris. Were you thinking back to c lassical epic or tragedy when you
made these films? If not, do you thinkthat it is legitimate today for classical schol-
ars to look for such parallels?

Again, it is very well possible or even probable that my sense for stories that are
tragic in nature has been planted, or rather reinforced, through this intense
contact with classical literature.

When you first read David Benioffs script for Troy, you probably noticed immedi-
ately how much Homers Iliad had been changed. Did this new version of the
18 Winkler

Trojan War story appeal to you, or would you have preferred a storyline that kept
closer to the Iliad? Were you concerned about how extensive and even radical the
changes were?

I was very aware of the radical changes made and I fully supported them, even
though my assistant wouldnt stop nagging me to leave it open if Agamemnon
dies or not. As you noticed, Benioff did not call his script Iliad, he called it Troy
and based on the Iliad, and he did that for good reason.
My intent was always to tell the story as it could have happened in reality,
before it was relegated by the centuries to a more mythical realm. When Homer
composed the Iliad, the events depicted, or the series of related and even unre-
lated events, were already hundreds of years old. So what could have really
happened in a world populated by humans, humans that have a very close rela-
tionship to their religion and their gods? The gods are always present, just not
in the flesh, but as ideas and guiding principles in their heads. There were also
very practical reasons for changing the peripherals of the story:

1. A work of literature, even one that is passed along in history in oral form,
is in a different category than film. They have different rhythms and rules.
It very rarely happens that literature can be translated literally. Just as a
translation can only be an approximation of the original, a film can only
be an approximation of a book, or script in this case.
2. The original Iliad was most likely told in a series of events for many
hoursat a time. A film has two to three hours to cover the same ground
impossible.
3. The Iliad in its original has 240 characters, some even with identical
names (Ajax!), and the story covers two different worlds with two differ-
ent sets of characterswho will be able to keep track?
4. Who could possibly portray a god without looking ridiculous?

How closely did you work with Benioff on the screenplay before and during pro-
duction? Did you change the script on your own?

We were in almost daily contact all the way through the production process,
and David constantly made changes because it is a relatively fluid process with
ever-changing parameters. On rare occasions I had to make changes on the
spot without being able to talk to him first. Example: Scene at the beach, night;
Achilles and Eudorus; Achilles sends his men home. The first few takes made it
clear that the scene was just a tad too expositional, and we decided to shorten
and improvise right there and then.
Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy 19

Before Troy, Warner Bros. had produced another epic film about the Trojan War,
Robert Wises Helen of Troy (1956), to which Troy bears a number of similarities.
Were you familiar with Wises film? If so, did it in any way influence you, either
positively or negatively?

Im sorry, but I have never seen that one. I always try to avoid other films with
themes similar to what Im dealing with so as not to get influenced, however
subconsciously.

The city of Troy in Wises film was completely modeled on the Minoan palace of
Knossos, while your Troy combines a number of diverse architectural styles:
archaic Greece, Egypt, the Near East. Was there a thematic reason for this, for
instance to point to the multiculturalism, as we call it today, of early antiquity?
Even Hittites are mentioned in your film.

Minoan culture had already ceased to exist by the time the Trojan War is sup-
posed to have taken place. Consequently, our set designer set out to create
architecture that had to adhere to two principles: First, it had to be big enough
to make an impact on the big screen. On television you can probably get
away with the actual size of the buildings of the time, but in this case the
buildingsfor example the temple by the beachhad to be able to stand up
to the epic story and the action. Secondly, the Trojan empire of the time, politi-
cally speaking, stood at the crossroads of various cultures. We assumed the
Minoan culture to be the basis. The proximity of the Hittite empire made for
possible influences. The only other empire of considerable size and influence
all theway up to Asia Minor was Egypt, so elements form this side worked their
way into the concept, too. Since nobody knows exactly what the buildings
would have looked liked, we took artistic license to create our own architec-
tural canon.

The only other American film about the Trojan War after Wises and before Troy
was the 2003 television film Helen of Troy, directed by John Kent Harrison and
produced in anticipation of your film. Are you or were you familiar with that ver-
sion of the story? If so, what is your opinion of it?

I had (and have) not seen that version, and I wasnt interested in seeing
it, either. I always intend to make any story I choose to tell entirely mine
(so to speak), rather than produce a film in opposition or contrast to another
one. (Especially when it is made for an entirely different medium, as is
television.)
20 Winkler

Troy begins with the romance of Helen and Paris, but then the love story of Achilles
and Briseis begins to overshadow it, as viewers probably did not expect. There is
also the marital love between Hector and Andromache. Was it difficult to balance
three major romances without letting them get in the way of the film as a whole,
which is about war and heroism?

To keep the focus on all the different aspects is very difficult, especially with a
film of such magnitude and scope. I was constantly worried about the audi-
ence and if I was possibly asking too much of them; there are so many different
characters, storylines and destinies to keep track of. That is one of the reasons
Im so much happier with the directors cut because it gave me about thirty
more minutes to focus and deepen those diverging aspects.

After Troy was released, a number of critics and scholars pointed out modern
parallels. You did so yourself on several occasions, drawing particular attention
to Agamemnons similarities to President George W. Bush. Did you at the time also
have in mind the similarity between Hector, who realizes that the war he is forced
to fight is based on an unjust case, and American soldiers in Iraq, who may
have realized that the justification for the war they were engaged in was also
questionable?

It is certainly true that the ambitions of a few can bring great suffering to many.
That was true then, and it is true now. Im sure that any number of examples
can be found in our more recent history, not just in Iraq. Unfortunately, it
seems to be a human trait.

Achilles and Hector both face what might be called a heros dilemma: fighting and
eventually dying for their country in a war that to them seems unjustified. In your
view, does love of ones country trump all reasons not to fight? Do you agree or
disagree with the oft-quoted line of the Roman poet Horace: Sweet and fitting it is
to die for your country?

This is a very difficult question, especially for me as a German. Unabated love

for ones country to the point of sacrificing ones life had been so horribly per-
verted during the Hitler years that it has become a very tainted feeling, tainted
to the point of aggravation. So the contemporary German experience in terms
of love for the Fatherland is a very difficult one. Even hearing the German
national anthem being sung still has something almost unpleasant to it, and
up to very recently the sight of a sea of flags with the German colors created a
certain very deep-seated unease in me. To me our current reality is indivisible
Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy 21

from our past. The thought of our proverbial fathers sins is not easily
banished.

One of the most gripping scenes in Troy is Paris duel with Menelaus. Dramatically,
it is a pivotal moment and prepares the way for Hector to prove his greatness as
hero, brother, and defender of Troy. But at the same time it must have been quite
a shock to viewers who remembered a heroic Orlando Bloom from the Lord of the
Rings films and now see a complete opposite. Could you describe how and why
you emphasized the cowardice of Paris to such a degree?

I do not think I particularly over-emphasized Paris cowardice. Looking at the

corresponding passage in Book 3 of the Iliad, Homer himself describes Paris
very much as such: Paris quailed as he saw Menelaus come forward, and
shrank in fear of his life under cover of his men. As one who starts back
affrighted, trembling and pale, when he comes suddenly upon a serpent in
some mountain glade, even so did Paris plunge into the throng of Trojan war-
riors, terror-stricken at the sight of the son of Atreus. And a few sentences
later, Hector says: Will not the Achaeans mock at us and say that we have
sent one to champion us who is fair to see but who has neither wit nor cour-
age? Aside from that, I really admire any actor who readily accepts such a
difficult task. Orlando was well aware of the fans possible dismay when he
signed on, but as an actor he was looking forward to the professional
challenge.

In ancient myth Achilles dies from Paris arrow to the heel, a circumstance that
has prompted a number of rational explanations. His death scene in Troy is quite
ingenious because you show us both a realistic deathAchilles is mortally
wounded by several arrowsand a convincing explanation of the way the famous
Achilles heel version may have come about. Was this manner of Achilles death
intended simultaneously to affirm, deny, and explain the myth?

My goal was always to tell a realistic story, even though I didnt want to drop the
mythical aspect but rather give it a nod. Im very proud of this solution, and
whenever I watch Achilles death Im moved. It really is realistic and still has
the air of myth. The combination just works in this scene.

One of the most notable and most often criticized differences between the Iliad
and Troy is the absence of the gods as characters. You explained the reason
for this absence on several occasions, and a leading contemporary scholar of
Homer, Joachim Latacz, has defended it. Troy actually adheres to the ancient epic
22 Winkler

tradition: the Roman poet Lucan omitted all gods from the Pharsalia, his epic on
the civil war between Julius Caesar and Pompey. But there is an exception in Troy,
Achilles mother Thetis. Why did you include her and only her?

She is Achilles mother and as such bound to the real world, the world of
humans. In Troy she is the only god straddling these boundaries. She is also
there to ground Achilles and his initial hubris. Her insight into his fortunes
formulates his fundamental life choice: quiet peaceful life or eternal fame. As
such she has a pivotal role within the arc of the story I wanted to tell.

The similes in the Iliad often compare battle scenes to natural phenomena or
disasters. Troy contains an exact visual equivalent of one such simile (Iliad 4.422
456), when you showed a clash between Greeks and Trojans as if a wave were
crashing down on top of something. How, and more importantly why, did you
come up with this extraordinary shot, which, stylistically, is the most highly
Homeric moment in the film?

Easy answer: it is a wonderfully expressive passage in the Iliad itself, which

David [Benioff] replicated almost verbatim in the script. And it translates
spectacularly to film.

You once spoke of a tree of storytelling, whose trunk is Homer and on which
Troy represents one leaf. In ancient Rome, the Augustan poet Manilius used a
comparable metaphor: the mouth of Homer is a spring from which all later rivers
of stories flow. What prompted you to use the image of the tree to characterize
Troy?

It is just a beautiful visual, and I felt it was very fitting. Homer is the seed from
which all other literature grows, so the tree is a natural image to me.

Great narrative literature possesses strong visual qualities and has often been
regarded as inherently cinematic, even if it was composed long before the inven-
tion of the film camera and projector. Sergei Eisenstein, for example, considered
certain passages in Paradise Lost as virtual blueprints for a screenplay, with
directions for camera placement and editing provided in the text. Do you think
such a perspective applies to Homer as well? Assuming that you read the Iliad
again in preparation for Troy, did you notice any particular passages in the text
that struck you as cinematic? While reading, could you already imagine how you
might film a particular episode?
Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy 23

All throughout the preparation phase I had a condensed version and particular
songs [i.e. books of the Iliad] with me. I cant go into the minutiae here, but it
is certainly true that everything in the Iliad appears almost to be written for the
screen. That alone was a reason for me to make the film because there are [in
Homer] so many cinematic scenarios with images of such power and intensity.
It most certainly is no coincidence that a tale that was performed for many
days in sequence would evoke images of such force to sustain the necessary
momentum. These visuals would have been almost seared in everybodys
mind. And David Benioff took the best parts of it and integrated them into the
screenplay. Nobody can possibly say that the Iliad is short on visuals. Its all
there, right for the taking.

The directors cut of Troy is over thirty minutes longer than the original release
version. In your introduction on the dvd you say that this isthe film I really
envisioned all the time and that the studio had imposed restrictions on you for
length, violence, and nudity. How seriously did the compromises you had to
make affect the earlier v ersion of Troy?

When I created the Directors Cut version with my editor Peter Honess, I was
already aware how much more lively and how much more powerful it would be
and how much better the understanding of the story is. The Directors Cut is
much closer to Homer in my understanding: more violent, emotional, and
intense. I was already painfully aware how much of its essence we had lost with
the theatrical version.

Was there anything in the first version that you were especially unhappy with?
Besides adding and re-editing for the directors cut, did you take anything out of
the release cut?

Yes, we did take one scene out of the release cut. It is a scene in Paris bedroom
with Helen closing the gaping wound in Paris thigh and Hector forgiving him
for his cowardice. I felt that the scene didnt work very well, neither from the
acting nor from the directing point of view.
Other than that we only added to it, the missing opening scene with the dog
looking for his master, for example. It is a beautiful scene. And Priams wonder-
ful scene that explains his blind devotion to the gods fell, too, and Id missed it
terribly. It gives so much more meaning to his decisions. In terms of violence,
there had to be a compromise for the rating. The directors cut is much closer
to the blow-by-blow violence and quite graphic cruelty of Homer.
24 Winkler

The opening of the Iliad states that the dead bodies of the Greeks became, in
Richmond Lattimores translation, the delicate feasting/of dogs, of all birds. The
opening of the directors cut adapts this statement and expands on it, although
the Trojan War has not yet begun. A stray dog roams over a battlefield, sniffs at
corpses lying around, barks at the crows perched on one of them, and so finds its
master, whose face it licks. This is a highly effective opening to an epic film about
a devastating war. Why then was the scene with the dog, which lasts less than a
minute and a half, cut from the release version?

The audience in the first test screening objected very strongly to it; they hated
it with a vengeance. They did not understand that it signified a terrible, pro-
longed conflict coming to a head with the following battle.

What else could you tell us about the directors cut that you think is especially
important or worth noticing?

I was particularly impressed with the grandiose work of music editor Roy
Prendergast. He took the original score by James Horner and massaged it with
great skill and talent to fit this new version. After all, we had to score thirty new
minutes to fit seamlessly, without becoming repetitive. The only cue of Horners
music that I didnt likethe cue for the big duelwas consequently replaced
with a piece that Prendergast fitted together from two or three pieces of temp
music we had to buy. Its a truly brilliant piece of music editing.

The original release version of Troy showed surprisingly little blood in its
fighting sequences, although they were still intense. The directors cut is more
graphic. Why is there such a significant difference in your depiction of war-
fare in the two versions? Did you try to be as realistic as possible in your battle
scenes?

From an economic point of view the rating of a film is of enormous importance

to the studio. The younger a film is rated, the better the earning potential
because of the inclusion of a whole age group. We were going for a pg-13 rating,
which precluded the use of a lot of blood and/or graphic violence. I made all
the requested cuts, with the exception of one. I refused to cut the most crucial
scene in the film: Achilles dragging Hectors corpse behind his chariot. It is my
opinion that the artistic integrity of the entire film would have been irrepara-
bly compromised had this scene been cut. This is ultimately the reason that
the original cut did not get the pg-13 rating in the end.
Wolfgang Petersen on Homer and Troy 25

The Iliad is horrendously violent in its later books, with minute descriptions of
dying and death and even grotesque details of bodily mutilation. Since it is a text,
listeners and readers see such scenes in their imagination, whereas the cinema
puts everything before the viewers eyes. What is your opinion about showing
explicit acts of violence in a film like Troy?

In Troy there is nothing gratuitous about the violence. As you mentioned

yourself, Homer goes to great lengths to describe it. It has certainly been an
integral part of war at the time and thus is justified as reality. It is also the
background to the dark side of Achilles character, the part that doesnt care
but goes about his bloody business: his plan to become immortal in peoples
memories. And it is the background to Hectors life. Hector wishes for noth-
ing more than to live the quiet life that Achilles rejected but is drawn into the
tragedy, anyway.

Achilles duels in Troy are highly stylized; the one with Hector could even be called
a fighting ballet. Were you aesthetizing violence or at least running the risk of
doing so? Were you concerned that viewers, especially teenagers, might regard
this as a glorification of killing?

No, I wasnt. It is the expression of these two characters destiny in life. Achilles
is the born fighter, so elegant, so graceful, and dancing a kind of Dance of
Death, in total control. In contrast to Hector: strong, but much less graceful,
driven only by the wish to live an honorable life and defend whats important
to him. Whereas Achilles is gifted, Hector is a hard worker, duty-bound and
honest to the end.

Zack Snyders 300, released by Warner Bros. three years after Troy, is a war epic
about ancient Greece that is very different in tone and style from your film. It is, for
one thing, far more explicit in its on-screen violence. Both you and Snyder used
state-of-the-art computer-generated images to show huge armies, battles, and
slaughter, but Troy is far more restrained. How would you characterize the differ-
ence between these two films?

300 is much more stylized and cartoonish in its tone and images. It is, after all,
based on a cartoon. And cartoon audiences have a very different acceptance
level. If you are as stylized as 300, then you can get away with much more. Troy
has been set up as a very different film, much more realistic, and the violence
has a very different weight. It is more direct and affecting.
26 Winkler

Many critics and viewers have taken the appearance of Aeneas at the endof Troy
as a way to introduce a possible sequel. Is this a correct assumption?

Of course I had Virgil in my hand and thought about this. I even talked to
Benioff about it. But Troy was such an enormous undertaking, and, thinking
about all the hard work and the physical toll it took on everybody, I think
I should probably leave it alone. In addition, it is rare to do a sequel and attain
the same level of satisfaction as with the original work. The fear to repeat your-
self is always there, too. Maybe I should just leave that one alone.

Troy is one of the most successful epic films about antiquity, and Greek myth and
history are back on our cinema screens, in large part because Troy did for Greece
what Ridley Scotts Gladiator had done for Rome. Do you think that a sequel to
Troy may yet be made? If so, would you want to direct it? Are there any other clas-
sical subjects that might interest you?

There is another story, the Odyssey, by the same gifted author! It also is and
hasforever been one of my favorite stories. But so far I havent seen a scripted
version that has inspired me. Still, never say never.
 chapter 2

Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War

Daniel Petersen

Shepperton Studios, London. The set decorator guides us through an exquisite

exhibition of objects from the late second millennium bc. Their range and rela-
tively good condition astonish us. There are bronze tripods, leather belts,
leather bags, leather stools, leather chairs, votive figurines, libation vases, even
an example of the kind of two-handled cup (depas amphikypellon) mentioned
by Homer (Iliad 1.584), along with earthenware mugs, earthenware cutlery,
golden plates, bowls of various sizes, a waist-high bronze statue from the clas-
sical Greek period, a miniature of Poseidons statue in the National Museum in
Athensthese two must have been placed here temporarily on their way to
another department. They were followed by a procession of regal wooden
cabinets ornamented with well-preserved decorative paintings, oil lamps and
massive lamp holders, wooden and stone-fired animal figurines, earthenware
trays decorated with cuneiform letters; sparkling gold objects resembling coins.
Finally an entire battery of more than man-high royal scepters, each different
from the other, grouped in threes. Each group carries a name: Agamemnon,
Nestor, Priam, and so on. One will be chosen for its designated recipient.
Inan adjoining hall all those precious relics are being fabricated by the dozen.
Catalogues from museums all over the world lie open on the worktables, sets
ofMycenaean winged figures, all alike, are being hand-painted.
Simon Atherton, the head of the special props department, is exceedingly
nice and doesnt look like the kind of man youd imagine traveling the globe,
attending weapons trade shows, fairs, and exhibitions and, as soon as hes
home, rebuilding whatever weapons have caught his fancy. He explained to me
later that weapons were his passion but that he had absolutely no desire to use
them in real life. The only thing to do was to use them in a virtual reality, where
the only blood that flowed was fake. He shows me around, obviously proud of
his accomplishments, and explains that he has to make spears, battle axes, and
shields in his workshop for about 3,000 Greeks and Trojans. They are made in
part from metal so they will look great on screen and in part from plastic so
they can be carried aroundand to make sure that the number of extras
fallenin battle doesnt rise unnecessarily. Holding a sword in my hand, I think
our ancestors must have been much stronger than us. Simon has made dis-
tinctly different designs for Greeks and Trojans to keep the warring parties
from decimating their own kind. Using basic guidelinesGreeks round,

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_004

28 Petersen

Trojans angularSimon has forged individual designs for swords, shields, and
spears to identify each people participating in the war: Myrmidons, Ithacans,
Thessalians, Mycenaeans, Spartans, and whoever else was in the war. Every
single piece had to be painstakingly executed, quite apart from the fact that the
swords, daggers, or shields specially made for leading characters like Achilles,
Agamemnon, Hector, Odysseus, and others had to have their own individual
designs. Simon admits to getting carried away by this titanic assignment, creat-
ing the armaments for two entire Bronze-Age armies. It could be risky to equip
just a few warriors fighting in the foreground with clearly identifiable weapons
and those in the background only with toy swords. The reason is the chance,
even if it is only remote, that in the heat of battle the props in the foreground
will get battered, nicked, or otherwise banged up. In that case they can be
exchanged for undamaged props from the background.
Simon has to pay close attention to another problem. The weapons really
have to work the way they are intended to. According to him, some of the
shapes for the shields shown on Greek vases, for example, are not suitable for
battle. They are designed for exhibition and for showing off. The shield of
Achilles, for instance, is an aesthetic creation that nobody in his right mind
would use to ward off lethal blows. Its weight alone would have made lifting it
the bearers toughest job. The current version of this shield has been properly
slimmed down and cleaned up. Simon doesnt want to give up on the narrow
band of images around the center because it is so striking. His images show
episodes from the Trojan War, an insider gag that exhibits an elegant cascade
of self-reflection and divine intervention. Achilles carries a shield into a battle
whose entire history and future are already carved onto it. Simon shows me
a finished but now discarded shield in his office. The costume designer said:
No, no; it doesnt match the colors of the costumes. Too bad, since Simon
thinks this shield is actually more beautiful than the one being used.
Later, during breaks in the set changes, I get to talk to Lesley Fitton, the
British Museum expert on the late Bronze Age who is present on several days
partly as adviser, partly just for fun. In view of the historical inaccuracies, not
huge but still noticeable, I expected her, if not to faint, then at least to object,
but she finds everything exciting and quite amusing. I ask her to explain to me
the gifts presented to Zeus that are lying at the feet of his statue. She is very
happy that some of them are accurately Anatolian and fitting for the time
period were dealing with. Various other objects, however, are more Assyrian or
Persian and dont really belong here, but at least they look pretty good. Finally
Lesley asks, rather cautiously, what might happen to these props after filming.
Im amazed: heres somebody surrounded every day by the real things who is
interested in our fakes.
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 29

INT. Palace of Troy: Priams Throne Room. C Stage, Shepperton Studios. This is
the first day of shooting in Priams impressive throne room. A massive statue of
Zeus glares down into the spacious hall, which is not quite ready, though.
Helping hands are flying around fixing up a few places. Awe-inspiring statues
of the gods line a long, sparkling pool of water. Poseidons trident is so heavy
that invisible nylon threads hanging from the ceiling are needed to hold it in
place. Stone seats for Priams noblemen and high priests are meticulously lined
up. The heavy, thick columns and solemn faces in the scenery seem stony, eter-
nal, and massive, even though they have warning labels affixed behind their
knees: Fragile. Handle with care.
Busy temple servants have devoted various golden gifts to Zeus, the Father
of the Gods: sphinxes, winged lions, bearded heads of steers. The combination
of predominantly Minoan elements, such as the octopus painted on several
large vases, with the architecture, which shows Hittite influences such as the
winged sun under Zeus feet and the tribute procession by his side, is less an
indiscriminate mixture of styles, with everything tossed together from what
picture books of the Archaic Period had to offer, than a curious historic and
dramatic constellation. Troy was within the Hittite sphere of influence at the
time of the war. But the Minoans could not have had any noteworthy contact
with Troy in those years. So the production design corresponds to the authen-
tic history of Troy by using Hittite forms and shapes, while the echoes of
archaic Crete embody a self-contained, purely aesthetic bridge linking the
Trojans to the Minoans, who, according to one theory, may themselves have
been overrun by the Mycenaeans two hundred years earlier. The most elegant
example of all this syncretism is the cuneiform inscription over Zeus head,
which quotes from a Homeric Hymn. What a pity the audience wont be able to
notice these details.
INT. Mycenae: Agamemnons Throne Room. D Stage, Shepperton Studios. This
throne room leaves no doubt about who has gone over to the Dark Side in this
story. This monster of monolithic mass was necessary for its dramatic expres-
siveness. In Troy, King Priam sits almost on a level with his aristocrats. At
Mycenae, a visitor who seeks an audience with Agamemnon has little choice
but to mount the stairs that lead up to him and, even if he is himself a king, to
extend his greetings while standing a step below the level of the Great King. In
Troy, all kinds of precious offerings are lying at the foot of the statue of Zeus; at
Mycenae, they are jam-packed alongside the ascent to Agamemnons throne.
In council, Priam and his noblemen gather around a common center, the pool,
which reflects the assembly back on itself. Agamemnons hall is not designed
to hold conferences of any kind. The king presides in the shadow of the two
growling Mycenaean lions high above on the wall. The more people are in the
30 Petersen

hall, the more its thick columns crowd them together. Priam reigns in a hori-
zontal space, Agamemnon dictates downwards. The architecture suggests the
contrast between democracy and dictatorship, but there is a paradoxical twist.
When the members of the Trojan Parliament vote to strike back against the
Greeks, they work themselves up into a kind of blood lust that their enemy, the
isolated tyrant, has long ago abandoned in favor of ice-cold Realpolitik.
EXT. Troy. Malta. Fort Ricasoli, which is located on the peninsula directly
opposite Valletta and is beautiful to behold, has been used as a film studio for
a long time. Outside, the original fortress, now dilapidated, is still standing,
here and there. The interior is wide and flat. Although a third of the set is still
under construction, its easy to see Priams monumental palace and, further
down, a complete Trojan street that leads from an immense gate large enough
for horses to pass through up to the main square, with side streets along either
side. The square is surrounded by columnar buildings adorned with raised
relief images, among them a temple to Poseidon. We march single file through
the support struts up to the construction site, look down at the boulevard, and
further beyond to a ring under a tent top where Brad Pitt is practicing his
sword-fighting scenes. It may be impressive enough to see a reconstruction of
Troy in a book, but even for someone who had walked around the excavation
site of Troy for hours on end on a hill in Turkey, it is beyond impressive to wan-
der around in this full-scale realization of what once might have been.
EXT. Cliff Above the Sea: Temple. Marfa Ridge, Malta. An ancient temple
looms high above the sea on a spectacularly steep cliff. A bunker next to the
temple is disguised by a false faade of boulders and small trees. The floor of
the temple is finished; the set has been painted the colors of the local gold-
yellow limestone. The temple is overgrown with vines and other plants that
grow all around. Malta is a very flat place, wide and empty, which is why you
can build such nice and big things here. The disadvantage is that you have to
build yourself everything you want to appear in your movie.
Its amazing how much scaffolding and railing fits on this tiny hilltop. Heavy
scaffolding is fastened at an angle to the slope, and thats only for the second
camera. Around a corner along the sheer cliff a row of palettes with rails on
them is anchored to a wall. A massive camera crane rolls on these rails. All of
this equipment has been hauled up from a base camp down in the bay over a
single lane, and for the first set-up only. Afterwards, everything will be taken
down and set up differently for another shot.
Achilles and Patroclus are tickling each other with their wooden swords.
Brad and Garrett have been rehearsing extensively, it seems. They dive between
the cardboard columns as though theyve never done anything else, and the
shots are finished in just a few takes. The wind plays the only discordant note,
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 31

so that the columns have to be held tight to be kept from swaying. Its decided
in late afternoon to stop for the day and shoot the next part of the scene tomor-
row, when the light is coming from behind. The remaining part is going to be
shot in one long take. Brad and Garrett rehearse their fight choreography. The
temple gets tied down so it wont blow away. We got some beautiful shots today,
and nobody fell off the cliff.
Next day the sun beams down on us from the other side. The two cousins
have fought their way down the steps, the concluding part. Patroclus is lying on
the floor after scooting here and there. Achilles kicks away his sword and then
pops the spear up with his foot. He hurls it directly into a tree trunk thats
standing right beside Odysseus, who has now arrived. Its all to be shot in one
take with a Steadicam, so it has to be scrupulously rehearsed.
They are ready to shoot. The fight progresses elegantly as the blades clash,
even though theyre made of wood. This is not a mistake: Achilles and Patroclus
dont want to hurt each other any more than Brad and Garrett. The second take
works just as well as the first. Brad kicks the sword out of Patroclus hand, and
it lands on the shinbone of a stuntman, who silently collapses in agony. At the
end of the take, however, Brad cant get his foot under his spear to pop it up
into his hand. Wolfgang says Cut. A sympathetic assistant brings along a blan-
ket for the next take and gives it to the stuntman who will catch the sword next
time. Brad, however, kicks the sword higher this time. The stunt double is just
able to grab it before it sinks into someone. Never a dull moment. Something is
always happening. Otherwise the takes are very good. Brad tripped a couple of
times or looked into the lens when he whirled around for his close-up. Now its
time really to hurl the spear for another close-up. Everyone gets out of the gen-
eral area of the target. Brad turns and throws the spear, which plunges into a
column a few yards away. To keep the damage to the set within reason, the
number of takes for this shot is kept to a minimum. The grips are already hav-
ing plenty of trouble to keep the camera crane from being lifted off its rails in
the gale-force winds that have started blowing. All that remains now is to
rehearse the dialogue scene with Odysseus and to wrap for the evening.
INT. Greek Encampment, Beach: Achilles Tent. Mediterranean Film Studios,
Malta. Achilles tent doesnt offer much room. It smells of the animal skins or
whatever it is decorated with. There are only three set-ups today for a single
scene. Eudorus enters and tells Achilles that the Greek army is getting ready to
march. Achilles orders his people to stand down. He delivers a lengthy mono-
logue about the reason and unreason of war. This is a scene that Brad, Wolfgang,
and David Benioff have been discussing a lot. For Brad, the dialogue didnt go
far enough; on the other hand he was uncertain whether he had mastered
Achilles character at this early but important stage of the shoot. Brad, who
32 Petersen

enjoys delving into in the darker depths of his characters, reveals the well-kept
secret that none other than Klaus Kinski is among his role models. Today Brad
is getting full control over the scene; he and Wolfgang have been discussing
Achilles anguish for quite some time. Now Brad is on his own, alone with
Achilles demons.
Where does he want to sit? What does he want to do? Achilles should be
sitting in the dark in a corner, Brad thinks. Roger Pratt, the cinematographer,
proposes to throw a narrow shaft of light through the tent that Brad could lean
in and out of to lend visual texture to his monologue. Wolfgang says he should
do whatever he feels like; two cameras will cover whatever he does in close-up
and medium shots. He wont do much more than say Action! and Cut! Ten
long takes come after this talk and last until late in the afternoon. Brad digs
deep into his character from different angles. None of his portrayals is like the
others. He keeps changing the position of the props and keeps improvising. He
mixes his lines at will from different scripted versions or quotes directly from
the Iliad. Brad says Wolfgang can choose from this rich and varied material and
edit together the pieces that work best. Not an easy task, as any selection that
makes it into the movie can only convey fragments of Brads achievement.
EXT. Troy: Palace Garden. Fort Ricasoli, Malta. The scene: Briseis plunging a
dagger into Agamemnons throat. Whoever wants to grumble about how con-
venient it was for her to be carrying a dagger around may now do so. Since
Briseis is a priestess, however, it is conceivable that she would have a ceremo-
nial dagger on her person. Something a lot more difficult to reason away is that
Agamemnon dies. A large bit of ancient literature is thus summarily wiped out.
But Wolfgang and David Benioff had decided that this was the only possible
dnouement as long as they dont want to film the Oresteia.
I make it just in time to catch Brian and Roses rehearsal. Her hair is under a
plastic bag. They are standing trying out when he should pull her up by her
hair, how to turn her around and mash her face, and where she will pull her
dagger from since she has no pockets in her cloak. The solution is at hand. She
carries it in her sleeve. Maybe she just hid it there in case she needs to protect
herself. They keep on working out the details about when Agamemnon should
grab her and where, to make sure she has enough room to stab him. When the
shot has been choreographed and synchronized with the cameras circular
crane movement and its simultaneous movement down and back up, the
actors say their lines straight through, execute the dagger stab and the sinking
to the knees afterwards. The nearby statue of Apollo disturbs the crane move-
ment a little bit.
When its time, the plastic bag is removed. Everything syncs up. Roger cow-
ers and hands Briseis the bladeless handle of the dagger. She grabs it and stabs
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 33

Agamemnon; the blade will be digitally inserted into the shot later. His eyes
wide with fear, Agamemnon sinks to his knees. That hurts the first time because
nobody pushed the cushion under his knees that Briseis had squatted on at
thestart of the shot. Roger will be responsible for this from now on as well.
When this set up is completed, Agamemnon is sent away. When he comes
back, he looks the same as before except for the gaping wound in his neck.
Acolorfast flap of neck, made from gelatin with a stab wound modeled on, has
been glued onto Brian. Inside, theres a hidden tube for blood that runs down
beneath his armor and connects with some sort of oxygen cylinder that can be
pumped by hand to make the blood spurt from the wound. And: Action! Rose
goes for it, pulls back the handle, Brian slumps to his knees. It looks good on
the monitor, but shouldnt blood be spurting from the wound? It is. Its all over
Roger. Everyone looks at Roger whos wiping himself and the floor with paper
tissues. Why dont we see it in the frame? They try it with more blood. This
works better, but it takes longer to set up again. Whats going on? A blood clot,
Brian says. Assistants fiddle around with the tube. Blood drips through here
but is stopped there. Brian finally gets a bypass that leads directly from the
wound over his back to the pump. Now the blood spurts and gushes the way its
supposed to.
EXT. Troy: Battlefield. Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. Paris turns to Menelaus and
takes a few measured steps towards him since he doesnt want to trip over the
rails that have been laid out for the camera dolly. As Paris comes closer, the old
trick of zooming out at the same time makes Paris determined face bulge out
from the plane of the image. When he briefly tilts his head up towards the sun,
we have all we need. The camera turns around to face his opponent, and we
have an unobstructed view of the Greek army. Menelaus can hardly wait. We
see the scene from Paris point of view, staring from under his helmet at
Menelaus, who is huffing, puffing, and stamping his feet. Then Paris looks up at
Helen and back, as Menelaus is already right in front of his nose and takes a
whack at him. The camera movement takes too long; Menelaus would have
had plenty of time to chop Paris head off. Paris can only keep his eyes on
Menelaus. Thats still enough time for the angry giant to whack at him so pow-
erfully that his sword misses the Steadicam by a hair. Perfect, says Wolfgang,
but he wants a few more grunts and groans. He doesnt need to tell Brendan
that twice. Brendan scraps poor Orlando all over the place, grunting and groan-
ing until he finally steps on him. The Steadicam operator who is closely follow-
ing behind has to take care that Orlando doesnt bump into the camera. It looks
pretty scary a time or two. Bathed in sweat, Brendan and Wolfgang review the
manoeuver, and Brendan suggests to Wolfgang how he could whack Orlando
more effectively. Wolfgang buys it. Right before seven oclock, Brendan stomps
34 Petersen

on Orlandos shield so powerfully that its good enough even for Wolfgang. He
laughs in appreciation of a job well done and calls it a day. Brendan apologizes
politely to Orlando, who says, hey, its okay, as long as it was good. Close your
eyes and think of Troy. Tomorrow well be doing this all day long.
The next day starts where we left off and means no mercy for Orlando.
Brendan is just as unrelenting as yesterday. He watches the monitor after every
take, still bathed in sweat, and discusses with Wolfgang how to whack and bash
Orlando even better. Orlando, evidently suicidal, beams while he gives Brendan
a few tips. First, we see Paris helmet fly off and the two get embroiled in com-
plicated close-quarter fighting. The stuntmen have choreographed and prac-
ticed the fight down to the last detail. They show the two actors exactly how to
continue grappling, which one will spin the other around at what moment,
and which will swing his sword and miss by a hair. Rehearsal for rehearsal, take
for take, they keep polishing their performance. At one point Paris, out of des-
peration, is using his shield as a weapon. But when he swings it at Menelaus,
doesnt it look as if hes falling towards him? Does the way Paris rolls over
Menelaus back seem too labored, as if Menelaus were letting him do it? Does
one believe his punch into Paris jaw really hit home? Is Orlando not wobbling
his head enough, or does he shake his head too much afterwards? Everybody
likes it, though. Paris is meant to get so thoroughly whacked that Orlando has
to be replaced by a stunt double. The cameras watch everything from a safe
distance. Only the Steadicam operator walks around in the middle of the
action and has to pay the price for the privilege. Once Menelaus pokes his lens
with the tip of his sword, and Paris falls a number of times onto the cameras
counterweight.
Menelaus still has to be disposed of. Hector is now towering over Paris,
whos holding onto his leg, and glares at the Spartan king. Menelaus slobbers
and stomps up to send the little prince to the Underworld, but he isnt quite
able to. Hector pulls his sword and rams it into Menelaus gut. Three cameras
have been set up to record this moment. One is pointed at Hector, one at
Menelaus, and one at the action. This way nothing will get lost in any of the
takes. Brendan, please let your eyes bulge out nicely, die, die, die, then fall
down. Well see everything. What luck. There arent any problems during
rehearsal, so lets go! Pads are set out for Menelaus to fall on, Eric takes off his
sunglasses, Brendan has blood put into his mouth. Sword out and zoom! As
always, the sword is only a stump, but you can already look forward to seeing it
plunging out of Menelaus back, if Hector is able to draw his sword out again.
Not in the second take, though; he can only yank on it. The third take is perfect;
even the sword slides out easily. Menelaus is fitted with extra blood packets,
atube that runs under his armor, and a blade sticking out his back. He walks
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 35

around that way and talks to people. Hector then pulls the stump of the sword
out, and a specially rigged mechanism pulls out the tip of the sword under the
armor on Menelaus back. Simple, but it looks good. The camera on Menelaus
doesnt miss a thing.
Menelaus sways back and forth until he finally decides to fall down. Brendan
knows how to milk the moment. As Menelaus is swaying, Hector grabs his
brother and takes off. Paris, however, tears himself loose and runs back with his
eyes wide open, the Greek army relentlessly charging towards him. Has he gone
crazy? No, because the sacred Sword of Troy is still lying on the ground. Paris
grabs it and races back to Hector. This moment can be milked just as much as
the other one: the sword shouldnt be seen until the very last moment. The shot
hovers above ground; Paris runs into the foreground, and the frame reveals the
sword just as Paris reaches for it. So, if Paris is supposed more or less to stay in
the frame and the background, then you cant just tilt the camera down to the
sword as he reaches for it. Theres only one way to shoot: the camera has to sink
down to ground level and film a kind of over-the-shoulder shot of the sword.
This means that they have to dig a hole in the ground so that the crane can lower
the camera down enough. So the dutiful grips dig a hole in the hard ground.
While this is going on Wolfgang asks whether the Second Unit has enough shots
of the Greeks charging Hector and Paris. They do: long shots of the entire forma-
tion from the cameras set up on the wall of Troy. Do they also have shots down
here on the ground, with the soldiers engulfing the chariots so viewers can fully
understand that Hector and Paris are in a scary situation and in danger of being
trampled to death? Well, no. Then we have to shoot that some other time, from
the side of the battlefield at an angle to the phalanx. Okay.
Theyve dug the hole. Wolfgang gets Nick Davis, the visual-effects supervisor,
and asks him if the Trojan soldiers are standing too close to the wall. Yes, they
are. They need to come forward a little. But think for a second! Now the dis-
tance between the Trojan soldiers and the sword is way too short. Maybe we
need to move back one camera-crane length. So fill up the hole and dig a new
one. The grips dig the new hole while people from the props department fill in
the hole because its their job to take care of the way the set looks and to sweep
up afterwards to hide the fact that the hole was ever there.
When theyre ready to start again, dead Menelaus is hauled out and draped
over the ground. Its a realistic dummy of Menelaus in his bloody armor. Now
we learn that the Second Unit, while shooting the fight between Hector and
Ajax immediately following Menelaus death, had forgotten to put the dummy
on the ground. This concerns only a couple of shots, but Nick has to go back
and fix it. Our shot, though, goes well. Since Wolfgang is only going to use
the middle segment with Paris in the foreground, its no big deal that Hector, in
36 Petersen

the background, couldnt get his horse to move for several seconds. Just to be
sure, the horse is replaced. Dead Menelaus, his work done for the day, gets
pulled over to the side, and immediately someone puts a cigarette between his
cold lips.
Paris still has to jump up on the horse Hector is holding for him. This shot
takes its time because this particular horse doesnt accept just anybody as its
master. Once it tells Hector to go on without him, then it takes a few unauthor-
ized side steps that cause a problem for Paris who comes running up, jumps on
the horse but slides right off the other side. Extras watching in the background
howl with laughter. At last Paris manages to stay on, Hector shouts Lets go,
Paris! The horse gallops off. Only not quite in the right direction. Still, were
getting there. Finally we have a few close-ups of Hector charging towards us.
The last three takes are keepers, and then the light fades. Were just about ready
to leave when the camera crew calls Wolfgang back. The last magazine they
used left a scratch on the film, the entire length of the roll. How much was
that? Oh, the last three takes. Well reshoot them tomorrow morning. Scratches
happen.
EXT. Troy: Battlefield. Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. Today were getting the shot
from the sideline of the battlefield on the front rows of the Greek phalanx
while theyre charging. The call sheet only says: The Greek army charges.
Preparations are dragging on: to get all the extras in place and teach them to
bring their spears exactly in position and only on command. It takes a while to
get and keep the chariots with their horses in place; it takes a while to get four
cameras set up in their final positions and to work out their movements.
During the first rehearsal the soldiers hold their spears forward at a slight
angle, charge when Agamemnons double gives the order, and leave behind
several spears and a shield. A few helmets are rolling around, and some plastic
cups. At least the main camera didnt see it; it panned with the soldiers as they
charged, flooding the plain.
Otherwise, the rehearsal seems to go off without a hitch. The spears have to
be raised together, and there mustnt be too many gaps in the rows of soldiers.
The chariots cant advance too far in front of the soldiers but have to be sur-
rounded by charging Greeks and then left behind. Maybe well leave the cam-
era mounted on the crane up above and pan with the charge. Details can be
picked up by the other cameras that are closer.
They film the various takes. The soldiers raise their spears, charge, and again
leave a couple of helmets behind, along with a soldier from the last row. This
one is squatting on one knee on the battlefield: Hey, that guys on the phone!
Next time its better but still not right. The spears really have to come down as
one while the soldiers are aligned accurately. Still, Wolfgang says, its not epic
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 37

enough. Lets start with the main camera at eye level again and then pull up.
But then we wont see the spears anymore. Dont we have a camera to concen-
trate on them? No, we dont. Roger asks about zooming in a bit at the command
to charge. Yes. Okay, we can start now. Stop! Two horses in the foreground are
acting up and have to be exchanged. An assistant gives Agamemnon some last-
minute instructions and runs back. Action! A military advisor takes a deep
breath, uses his army voice, and yells the command for the army to raise its
spears. Zoom in. Charge!
Everything works. The crane camera rises up to reveal fifty thousand sol-
diers charging across the battlefield and engulfing the chariots. Rogers camera
gets the best shots of the wall of spears and then of the helmets and shields
charging past. Only two extras were asleep at the wheel again, leaving their
spears pointed up. Something for Nick to clean up digitally.
The scene is done, finished by lunchtime.
EXT. Troy: Battlefield. Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. The rest of the shoot for today
and tomorrow will be shots to fill in gaps around the fight between Hector and
Achilles. The Second Unit will shoot the fight itself next week, long after were
done here. Whats missing now is Achilles entrance on the field of battle and
his dialogue with Hector to create the right mood and his exit from the field,
dragging Hectors body behind his chariot. All the rest is already there: Achilles
ride down the beach and Hectors appearance at the main gate that was shot
on Malta long ago. Slowly, the last pieces of the puzzle are being put in place.
Wolfgang has been looking forward to the beginning of the duel, when
Hector steps out of the city and Achilles rides up in his chariot. This is the
moment for a David Lean shot. He plans to shoot Achilles with a very long lens
as he charges towards the camera starting from a long ways off, just like Omar
Sharif coming towards the well in Lawrence of Arabia. Achilles rides up in his
chariot from a distance in the shimmering air. Weve already shot the close-up
of Priam anxiously following Achilles, only without Wolfgang telling Peter
OToole, who had been Leans Lawrence, what exactly he was looking at. We
first see Achilles coming over the dune from far away, then closer on the hills
until hes there. Can you even drive a chariot over those dunes? Theyre a little
steep, and the sand is loose. Maybe we need to get a bulldozer to go over the
trail a couple of times and shoot this first thing in the morning as a point-of-
view shot from the grandstand in Troy. So now only the second part: the main
city gate is open; two cameras are set up underneath it. The one with a massive
telephoto lens gets its own little cabin with a hole for the lens to look through
to keep the wind from rocking it ever so slightly. A lens of this size is extremely
sensitive, and the slightest movement would spoil the shot. On the third take
we get the sun all over the place. You cant ask for anything more.
38 Petersen

Were hurrying to complete the long shot of tiny Achilles driving his chariot
up to the enormous walls of Troy from the side of the field. Brad pulls in the
reins, stops the chariot, and climbs down. But before he can say anything, the
horses decide to run off, the chariot bumping along behind them. People run,
ride, and drive after them to catch them and calm them down. But that was it
for this shot.
We continue with two other dark horses; the first ones need rest. Now their
heads arent in the frame, and they can easily be held in place. This is the close
shot of Brad climbing down from the chariot and yelling for Hector, and every-
thing goes as planned. In between, completely out of order, we shoot Paris
low-angle point-of-view glance up to the grandstand at Helen or, if you look
closely, her double. This close to the finishing line, we take everything we can.
On the next and last day of shooting for the main unit we start off with yes-
terdays leftovers, first the pov from the grandstand down to tiny Achilles
approaching. The ride over the dunes has been cancelled because the sand
wont support the chariot. Then the shot from the side, where the horses had
run off. Today they stay, so Brad can climb down confidently and yell for Hector.
The sun hides behind a cloud at the end of the first take. The cloud is not huge
but very thick. Nothing to be done.
Time leap. Achilles has killed Hector and ties his body to his chariot to drag
him through the dirt to his camp. Its still cloudy, this time with a larger and
darker cloud. A few drops of rain are falling. They set up the next shot as if
nothing were wrong. Not long after, the sun comes back. The make-up girl
sprays some sweat on Achilles muscles, Hectors double takes his position, and
three cameras shoot a couple of takes. Then the continuation: Achilles lashes
his horses, takes a victory lap in front of the grandstand, and drives off towards
the beach, with Hector behind. Several cameras follow his every move. During
the rehearsals a professional drove the chariot, dragging a dummy, one of those
foam manikins that have been lying around on the battlefield by the dozen.
But it was only a rehearsal dummy, to be replaced when a take is scheduled.
The other one bears a close resemblance to Eric. It has the wobbly but strong
consistency of a human body and is artificially weighted.
Wolfgang will join the Second Unit to inspect the duel between Achilles
and Hector. Stunt and Second Unit director Simon Crane and his people cho-
reographed the fight a long time ago and rehearsed it with the actors until
they dropped. It just has to be shot. After the main unit is finished, the
Second Unit still has about ten days to go: a few follow-up shots and about a
week for the fight Achilles vs. Hector, which Wolfgang is planning only to
supervise, whatever that means. The fight may be at the heart of the movie,
but since Simon and his stunt people have choreographed it independently
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 39

and Brad and Eric have rehearsed thoroughly, there isnt any reason for the
main unit to film it.
INT. Achilles Tent. Cabo Real, Mexico. This is one of the most important
scenes, the main reason Peter OToole had taken the part of Priam. Priam
sneaks out of Troy and into Achilles tent and begs him to let him have the body
of Hector so he can give him an honorable funeral. A day was set aside for this
scene in the original production schedule, but Wolfgang has long suspected it
will take more like two days. Even with the weather iffy, you can start filming
the master shots, using two cameras: Priams entrance into the tent; after that
the end of the scene when he and Achilles exit. That goes smoothly; they only
need a couple of takes for each. Now they need a two-shot to cover the entire
dialogue, with a tricky dolly around Achilles that begins as soon as Priam sits
down. Everything fine; lunch.
After lunch weve got to go shoot the most important set-up, Priams close-
up. This part lasts three and a half minutes, and the camera will stay on his face
for the entire time. This means that the slightest change in expression, the
slightest tremble of a lip or the slightest movement of face muscles, will be
magnified a hundred times. That puts a lot of pressure on an actor, even if the
other one talks in between, especially in a situation when an old, noble king
has to get on his knees and bare his soul to the moody young braggart who has
killed his son. In the first few takes Peter uses the earth-shaking power of his
voice to protect himself from the humiliation implicit in his behavior. Wolfgang
tells him to be a little softer, more vulnerable. It gets palpably quieter. When
they have everything they need, Wolfgang asks for a bonus take. This time he
wants Peter to be barely audible. And it works. Priams injured pride is evident,
with nuances that were previously obscured by his louder voice.
Scenes such as this always take longer to complete than expected, just like
the set-up for the reverse shot on Brad. The side of the tent behind him had
been removed for the camera directed at Peter and now has to be put back in
place, while the side behind Peter has to be removed to make way for the cam-
era on Brad. The new shot now has to be lit. Thats not as easy in such a cramped
space as it may seem. It means more than just setting up the lights and switch-
ing on a lamp; it mainly involves producing shadows. The bottom line is that
we wont make it today. Theyll just finish the lighting. Well continue early
tomorrow morning.
EXT. Thessalian Valley. Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. New location: the opening
sequence. Overnight a provisional base camp was hauled in over a bumpy dirt
road, with trailers, catering tents, and so on. A couple of hundred yards further
away were now standing in a valley in Thessaly and plan the best way to open
the movie. A beautiful ochre-colored cliff is on one side of the valley, etched
40 Petersen

with furrows by the rain. On the other side there is a sandy flood plain covered
with small trees and shrubs. Green mountains rise in the background. The
rains of the past few weeks have done us a favor. The valley is green and bushy
now, which reinforces the illusion of a green northern mountain region; a cou-
ple of weeks ago the mountains had looked brown. The visual effects people
still have to fiddle around with it, of course, to make the mountains higher and
add some more vegetation, but its fine for now. The plain has been cleared of
loose shrubbery, and as many cacti as possible have been hidden by brown
bushes put in front of them or branches tied around their arms.
Meanwhile, his generals surround Wolfgang on the flat flood plain. Theyre
trying to figure out how to make cinematic sense of this valley: who will come
from where, where the others will be, etc. The background looks more interest-
ing down there than over here, so the Mycenaeans will come in from over
there. Well need more coverage of them, and later of Achilles, and so on. The
Thessalians then come from that side. How many extras do we have? Five hun-
dred. For each army? No, for both. Well then, well put the 250 from the enemy
army way in the background so we cant see their uniforms. Etc.
Afterwards Wolfgang and production designer Nigel Phelps stroll around to
find a place for the very first shot that a special unit will be filming later: a dog
sniffs the hand of a dead soldier, which is supposed to give the audience a little
emotional jolt at the beginning. A ditch or an arroyo in a small grove looks
promising, not least because Nigel dug it himself. Apart from that, hes under a
little stress. He has until three oclock this afternoon to finish making up the
beach for the Second Units night work: the first part of the battle on the bar-
ricades of the Greek camp, whose outcome theyve already filmed during the
last few days. Now they have to tidy everything up and make all the charred,
burned ships and tents like new. Nigel complains that the beach location
should really be in three different stages at the same time: crowded and intact,
destroyed, completely empty.
The extras are being moved to their starting positions, the cameras are being
set up. We begin in the middle of things with the dialogue; well film the two
armies marching towards each other another day. The sun is brutal, and theres
no breeze to cool us off so far from the Pacific. But its beautiful here: the flat,
sandy ground, the vegetation all around thats a touch too green, the cliff thats
a touch too yellow, with a high plateau full of dense vegetation, the pale moun-
tains in the distance. The long dialogue between Agamemnon and Triopas
goes fast and easy. Theres even a little bonus thrown in, for eerie echoes rever-
berate down the cliffs when the kings call for their heroes. That wasnt planned,
but its a welcome effect. The cameras are turned around after lunch, because
the sun has moved in that direction. Were looking at Triopas as he calls for his
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 41

champion Boagrius. Nathan Jones got the part, an Australian wrestler, who
brings a good mix of huge body size and sculpted muscles. His slogan is Nathan
Jones will break your bones. During the entire production, extras, stand-ins,
and crew members line up to have their photos taken with him.
The weather remains cooperative, even though we are all stewing in our
own juices. Towards the end of the day Boagrius gets to make his entrance. He
stomps through the rows of Thessalian soldiers like King Kong, comes to the
foreground, pushes two soldiers aside, and steps into the arena, as it were. Two
cameras cover him from the front, one from the side, and Nathan is clearly hav-
ing fun. Wolfgang this time wanted smaller soldiers to be in the front row so the
barbarian would tower even higher above them. It works. The smaller Mexican
extras can finally use their size to advantage.
The following day is Thursday, September 11, 2003. During the afternoon
Achilles has his first appearance on the battlefield. He rides up from the
Mycenaean camp of last week, gallops through the soldiers, and dismounts.
Several obstacles have been put in his way; at one point Wolfgangs car drives
over a cable box and knocks out the power, then we have to wait for some
clouds to part so the sun can shine. Its still hot, with and without clouds. When
we can shoot again, Brad rides up, and the soldiers move their spears up and
down and cheer silently so they wont spook his horse. Then we wait some
more. During the break Brad gets to see Boagrius on the monitor: Oh, man. Im
going to need a trampoline. After three takes, its time for lunch, but a long
dark bank of clouds is approaching. Wolfgang looks at all three takes from all
three cameras and decides that theres enough material out of which he can
assemble something that makes sense. Then it begins to rain.
When the rain stops, the next scene is set up and rehearsed. Achilles strides
up towards Boagrius, Agamemnon tries to rebuke him, Achilles wheels around
and strides back towards his horse, Nestor catches up with him and calms him
down, Achilles turns around again and jabs his spear in the ground in front of
Agamemnons feet, then strides towards the giant, Nestor and Agamemnon
watch the fight and are thrilled when Achilles slays him. It sounds like a long
and complicated mise-en-scne, and it is. Normally, in the best of all worlds,
with the sky blue for hours, you would break up this scene into several compo-
nent shots, maybe light each shot individually and shoot it from different
angles. Its clear today, though, that, if we get even some sun, well have to shoot
the whole thing in one go to avoid continuity problems with cloud shadows,
light intensity, etc. So they decide to block and play the whole scene through,
with three cameras covering the action in one shot. That way well get every-
thing we need. So one camera dollies along beside Brad; the second camera,
moving back at an angle, covers him from the front; and Roger, on the third
42 Petersen

camera, stands where both sets of tracks almost run into each other and keeps
the two kings in a medium close-up. Every camera films its segment of the
action until the next one takes over. Thus the actors are confined to a tight pat-
tern of movement, whose tracks they must pace off without taking too much
liberty.
But none of this gets us any further if the sun doesnt come out. We just
shoot one take and then another to get the choreography down. We shoot
about seven takes before the clouds begin to part and the sun slightly reflects
off the armor. Way back in the other direction theres a blue sky, which ought
to move over here any minute. But it doesnt. Instead, it begins to rain again.
Then it gets dark, although over there theres increasingly more blue in the sky.
We still have time, but something has to happen soon. All of a sudden, around
six oclock, a few thin patches appear in the clouds, and everything is gotten
ready in a panic. The extras are shooed into position and made up. The horses
are put in place, and the actors are hurried to their marks as politely as possi-
ble. The sky opens, the sun bursts out in all its glory, and we get the eighth take
in bright sunshine. But with a scene as important as this you cant go home
with only one take.
It stays dark for a while, at least where the sun had been before. The sky is
perfectly blue on the other side. Then again, all of a sudden, theres another
hole in the clouds. Pandemonium breaks out again. Just when everythings
ready, the hole closes up again as suddenly as it had appeared. Time is slowly
running out. The sun pokes out again at six-thirty, but its noticeably lower on
the horizon. Were halfway through the scene when it goes away again. Were
already into overtime. The sun is slowly moving to the edge of the cliff. Another
hole in the clouds opens up. Everybody scurries around, and the last reserves
are called on. There, the sun! We get a take, but an airplane flies through the
picture. Everybody back to starting positions; quick, one more take. Everything
goes smoothly, but afterwards one of the camera operators says that some guy
was wearing a T-shirt in the background the whole time. Damn! Quick, one
more time; the suns still out. Brad raises his spear in the middle of the scene to
jam it in the ground in front of Agamemnon, but it slips out of his hands. Nick
comes running up from the monitor and tells Wolfgang that he can take the
T-shirt guy out of the takeno problem! A quarter to seven. The last round,
carried out quickly and smoothly. It looks good. Nestor crosses from the right,
and theres Achilles. Cut! Clouds move in front of the sun. The actors plop
down on the grass, exhausted by their efforts.
Then Wolfgang and Roger watch the monitor and go through the usable
takes, decide whether this is enough or whether we have to do it over again
tomorrow morning. Theyre deciding whether theyll have to add half a day to
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 43

our schedule: That part is good; I can cut away there. Whats that shadow on
Brads chest? A helmet, not the boom? Okay then. Can I see take eight again?
Brad walks into a shadow at the end there. Okay by me, but is it okay for you,
Roger? Sure, as long as thats not the cameras shadow. It isnt. Great. Yes, I think
we have everything we need. Well go on with the next scene tomorrow
morning.
The sun comes up in the morning as if nothing had ever gone wrong. Dozens
of Greek soldiers stand next to blue tourist buses and yank their shields, hel-
mets, and weapons out of their storage compartments. Quickly we get the last
pop of Agamemnon watching the fight between Achilles and Hector with
Nestor and Triopas. Triopas? Well, we didnt have their reactions yet, and in
front of soldiers and a blue sky they can be shot anywhere. Afterwards its
Boagrius hurling two spears at Achilles and then getting a sword in his neck.
The Steadicam operator is running after Boagrius. No problem, even though
the spears bang against the camera monitor before Boagrius drops them. The
operator gives him more room during the third take.
For the next shot he wants to run in front of the accelerating Achilles. No
problem, Wolfgang tells him. It all works fine in rehearsal with Brads stunt
double. Getting real, though, Brad easily catches up with the camera, cant help
running past it, and ending up out of the frame. That wouldnt be so bad, but
the clouds have slowly started creeping back up on us again. Meanwhile, the
operator and his Steadicam are put on a Quad bike, and that works fine. He sits
on the luggage rack, and the driver can easily keep up with Brads speed. Water
poured on the wheels keeps the dust from flying up.
After lunch its the same scenario as yesterday. The sky turns partly cloudy
and lets the sun shine through only here and there. The stunt crew wanted to
shoot a quick extra pop of Achilles flying past Boagrius and sticking his sword
in the back of his neck, but it wont work without the sun. At least they have
time to rehearse and explain to Wolfgang why we need this shot. He thinks we
already have more than enough jumping and stabbing in the Steadicam travel-
ing shot of Boagrius. But there you cant really see how Brad jumps and flies
past the giant with his legs tucked underneath. So they rehearse and shoot and
try out different perspectives. Wolfgang sorts it all out: Well, this we have
already; thats from a completely different angle, etc. He would rather move on
to setting up the next scene so theyll be ready in case the sun peeks out again.
Which actually happens sooner than expected. This means we can shoot the
pop once in sunlight. Okay, quick! Brad jumps and stabs, the Steadicam catches
him just fine, and Nathan Jones keels over in the background. The sun has just
about disappeared again, but Nick strides up to us with a big grin on his face:
That was it! Great jump, great stab, great landing, great exit; hats off! Rogers
44 Petersen

camera had shot the same action from the side, focusing on Boagrius fall. In a
beautiful close shot Nathan topples over like a giant redwood, smashing into
the ground full length without even trying to cushion his fall. Fascinating. This
shot couldnt be any better.
If the sun breaks through again it would come from over there, so we turn
everything around, from the extras and the camera cart to the tents and the
Quad bikes. We watch Triopas during his closing dialogue with Achilles. All
that remains is to set up, rehearse, and wait for the sun. We hear its raining
over at our base camp, which is a couple of hundred meters away. But not here.
Back there above the hill, its been blue skies for hours. A part of the cliff, not
even two hundred meters behind the Mycenaeans, is bathed in sunlight con-
stantly. Why not here? Accordingly, the Mycenaeans could just as easily be in
the sun and the Thessalians in the shade. That would take care of any continu-
ity problems. Only nobody would ever believe it. But today, shortly before we
wrap, we get ten minutes of sun not once but twice. Youd be surprised how fast
four or five takes can be reeled off when youre under the gun. Finally, from out
of the valley a curious herd of cows comes trotting along, a species with funny
floppy ears, and moos down a take. On the whole its good, but its not good
enough. Well be coming back here tomorrow. Originally Wolfgang had set
aside the whole day for those monumental shots of the two armies marching
towards each other. Now we still need the reverse shot of Brad from the scene
we shot yesterday in the late afternoon and the long reverse shot of Boagrius
charging towards Achilles. We even start half an hour earlier. But were faced
with a spotty cloud cover. Wolfgang shoots the pop on Brad anyway; against the
sky you cant really see that theres no sun. After this, the traveling shot from
behind Achilles charging Boagrius, until he jumps up. All goes well for three
takes, and there was even a little sun. Next come the rehearsals with Boagrius,
clouds darkening the sky. The giant turns to his fellow soldiers as they cheer
him on, yells, turns, and charges hurling his spears while the Steadicam travels
backwards in front of him. Cut. The extras applaud and cheer wildly. Wolfgang
and the others grin and nod in approval. Do we really have to wait for the sun
now? No, we can shoot it. Theres blue sky in the background, so the sun wont
matter much. It all turns out great. Nathan is evidently having the time of his
life; the masses are howling, especially when Brad jumps and Boagrius thun-
ders to the ground. All we need now is a shot with a clear sky, right? No, says
Wolfgang, this will be fine. With this last shot the scene can be edited together
nicely. Hed rather move on to the big set-up, the one with the two armies in the
valley, with six cameras.
They start setting up right away. Wolfgang drives up on top of the cliff with
some of his camera team to find a position for one of the cameras. While
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 45

theyre at it, they shoot an extreme long shot of the entire valley, with a pretty
cross-section through our slightly surreal weather: one side of the sky is clear
and blue, the other side is covered with dark heavy clouds. Not everything is
visual effects, even when it looks like it. Soon after lunch all the cameras have
been set up and their operators briefed. The armies of extras stand ready on
both sides. Today we have more than the usual five hundred on the set. Each
side has been rehearsing. The British military advisor yells his lungs out. So
everything could go ahead; only the sun is missing. We need a little sun in
between, to have our shots for today and the whole valley scene in the bag.
Everything we dont get today will cost us an extra day here.
There, a hole in the clouds seems to be forming. Wolfgang shouts: Hurry,
lets go! Now! But the first assistant director objects that theyre not ready yet.
There are still water-carriers and make-up people running among the soldiers;
some of the horses arent in position; Nestor is just now getting into his chariot.
Agamemnon has long been ready because you rather let doubles wait than
actors. Brian has had to leave, so its an archaeology professor from La Paz on
Agamemnons chariot. Okay, now were ready. Action! Both armies advance
towards each other, the Thessalians march, the Mycenaeans charge. The sun is
gone again; no matter. But theres room for improvement. The Mycenaeans
charge fell apart; theyd stopped everywhere except where they were supposed
to. And there was too much room between the horses and the first row of sol-
diers: basic problems with crowd scenes. In the next take everything will be
tighter, more compact, more evenly spaced. For the moment we have blue
skies in every direction; only directly above us theres a huge dark cloud that
doesnt look as if its going away soon. Time is running out. We cant wait as
long as we did in the last few days because, if the sun gets any lower on the
horizon, the shadow of the cliff will grow noticeably larger on the battlefield.
Around five oclock the cloud bank disappears. Okay then, go! The armies
run, stop, two chariots approach each other. Thats better, but there are still too
many gaps in the formations. After the second theres a little commotion. The
Bulgarian extras have sat down in collective protest; its too much running for
them. Altogether we shoot four takes and get the rest of what we were after
with the last one, even though a big shadow has been creeping up along the
field. The valley is a wrap; we can hardly believe it. Only four days, three of
them cloudy and interspersed with light rain. What was perhaps the most
spectacular location was also the most nerve-wracking. Afterwards I hear what
one of the locals thinks about this location: You guys shot up there in the
mountains? Are you nuts? It rains there all the time!
EXT. Beach Outside Troy. Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. Five more days to go. The
weather is again only partly sunny; a couple of white clouds dim the light.
46 Petersen

Fortunately this is okay, for the discovery of the Trojan Horse in the morning
doesnt need bright sunlight. The scene is supposed to be shot in one day.
Wolfgang had always believed it would take two. But after a visit to the beach
he began to think they could shoot it in one day if the action guidelines in the
script could be tightened up. One extreme long shot of the empty beach with
the Trojan Horse on it, to be the point of view of a guard posted on the wall of
Troy, would have gone anyway, since you cant see the beach from the city. We
can let a sentry on horseback convey the news that the Greeks have departed,
riding like crazy from the beach up to Troy. It would also be too repetitive to
show the approaching Trojans on the sand dunes, climbing off their horses
and, slack-jawed, standing next to the wooden horse and delivering their lines.
We just cut the first part, which saves us the time necessary to shoot on the
dunes, and start down on the beach instead. We can save a day of filming and
a bundle of money by not shooting footage that might well have wound up on
the cutting room floor. Its much more effective to show the Horse and the
amazed Trojans in one fluid shot. Now it works like this: after Achilles dialogue
with Eudorus at night we see a rider dashing over the plain who seems to have
something to report. Then we cut to the rulers of Troy, who hesitantly approach
the massive soot-blackened Trojan Horsejust as the apes in 2001 approached
the monolith. Thats all you need.
At least thats the theory. The location itself looks great. The horse alone is
breathtaking, all the more so in that its towering, in lonely splendor and men-
ace, over the deserted beach with a roaring Pacific, charred remains of tents,
grotesquely twisted bodies, and smoldering skeletons of ships. The horse
imparts a post-apocalyptic atmosphere to the scenery. Further down the
beach, towards the temple, the ships, tents, and the other props that had been
here are crowed together; after all, the Second Unit is still filming the Battle of
the Barricades at night. Bulldozers have moved enough sand to make a broad
hill across the beach that will hide all that. When were finished here, every-
thing will be set up exactly as before. The ships masts that stick out above the
hill will have to be removed digitally.
Considering the effort it takes, the actual shooting goes relatively quickly.
Put a couple of cameras on rails, set the lights, dismiss the stand-ins, get the
actors, and have them walk to the horse and stare. According to the position of
the sun, we look first in the direction of the temple and the hidden ships. Next
up is the dialogue, right after lunch. How will things go from here? Not easy to
say, since the present position of the sun is tricky. A camera tilt over the dead
bodies and across the ground up to the living wont leave much room for the
boom or its shadow. The other side of the beach is next. A reverse shot means
that everythingcameras, video village, make-up bags, catering coolers, and
Live from Troy: Embedded in the Trojan War 47

so onwill have to be carried off ten meters. First a quick establishing pan to
the horse in long shot to make sure we have that one in the bag, then the dia-
logue from this side. Everything in just a few takes, and with a sense for speed;
what wont be used doesnt need to be shot in the first place. With so much
time saved you can treat yourself to a bonus shot: do the previous long shot
again, but now in more beautiful light, the late sun behind the Horse. The day
ends with applause.

Translated by Martin M. Winkler

Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy 51

Model set of Troy.

Photo 1
 52
Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Photo 2 Malta. City wall and gate (extreme r.) of Troy with camera crane.
 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy
53

Photo 3 Malta. Preparing the set of Priams palace, with blue screen and camera.
 54
Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Photo 4 Malta. Filming Achilles (Brad Pitt, top r.) on board his ship.
 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy
55

Photo 5 Mexico. The deserted plain of Thessaly.

56 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Mexico. Part of the Greek army.

Photo 6
 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy
57

Photo 7 Mexico. Director Petersen (l., in white shirt and hat) with camera crew and Trojans.
 58
Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Photo 8 Mexico. Not all Trojan warriors are real or digitally created.
 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy
59

Photo 9 Mexico. Part of the beach set for the Greek ships.
 60

Photo 10 Mexico. Director Petersen (r.) and Patroclus (Garrett Hedlund) ready for his dying close-up, with chest plate
Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

and plastic tube for fake blood.

 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy
61

Photo 11 Malta. The Wooden Horse waiting for its cue inside Troy.
62 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Photo 12 Mexico. The Wooden Horse on the beach outside Troy.

 Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy
63

Photo 13 Mexico. Another fall of Troy: the city walls after the hurricane.
 64
Photographs: Behind the Scenes of Troy

Photo 14 Mexico. A suitably melancholic sunset on the Trojan beach.

 chapter 3

In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative:

Anachronisms and Other Supposed Mistakes
in Troy
Eleonora Cavallini

Despite many critics negative views, Troy has now been discussed, taught in
schools, colleges, and universities, and written about for well over a decade,
especially after the video release of the films directors cut in 2007. A superfi-
cial blockbuster can be quickly and easily forgotten, but this has not been the
case for Troy. It will be useful for us to remember, and to take as our starting
point, the well-balanced judgment by Joachim Latacz of the films original
version:

Notwithstanding some weaknesses in dialogue or plot construction,

Petersens film will be a surprising achievement for anybody who knows
the Iliad.
Petersen and [screenwriter David] Benioff should not be criticized
that, in order to achieve such effects, they sometimes changed the
sequence of eventsor invented connections between and among char-
acters and events about which our texts say nothing at all. The filmmak-
ers are actually in excellent company. For example, Aeschylus, Sophocles,
and Euripides, besides many other playwrights in fifth-century Athens,
had done just that. They surprised their audiences with variants of
the venerable matter of Troy, which was a recurring subject of their
tragedies.1

Again and again, critics have written about the filmmakers choice to exclude
the gods from the action. Here is an early example, commenting on an early
draft of the script:

1 Joachim Latacz, From Homers Troy to Petersens Troy, in Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Troy:
From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 2742; quotation at 41.This
chapter is based on my earlier A proposito di Troy, Quaderni di Scienza della Conservazione,
4 (2005), 301334; also in Eleonora Cavallini (ed.), I Greci al cinema: Dal peplum dautore alla
grafica computerizzata (Bologna: d.u. press, 2005), 5379.

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_005

66 Cavallini

the Gods are not in evidence throughout this script. The war between
the Greeks and Troy is an affair of men, not their Gods and, although a
number of the characters defer to the judgment of the Gods, others, such
as Achilles and Hector, are contemptuous and dismissive of these predi-
lections. Achilles and Hector depend on their own skill with weapons
rather than the intercessions of Zeus or Apollo.2

This choice indicates that the filmmakers intended to impute to men, and to
men only, all of the responsibility of war in opposition to the widespread but
dangerous ideology of a Holy War: a war inseparable from religion. In contrast
to the opinion quoted above, and with greater insight into the characters of
Troy, Latacz writes: one of the main charges critics have leveled against
Petersenthat he omitted the gods from his narrativeis wrong. The gods
are present in Troy. They are inside the humans.3
On the following pages I examine some of the principal aspects and charac-
ters of Troy that deserve a more dispassionate assessment than critics, includ-
ing film and classical scholars, have shown the film.

1 The Trojan War in the Iliad and in Troy

A fundamental point for us to keep in mind is the following: to speak of histori-

cal mistakes in Troy is nonsense. The film is inspired by a myth which, in turn,
is the result of a process of imaginative amplification and transformation of
some historical events.
The Trojan saga and many other Greek myths were subjected to continuous
re-writing for many centuries, again and again affected by changes in ethical
and aesthetic codes and in social and political situations. During the Roman
imperial age (1st to 3rd centuries ad) many writers, such as Dares the Phrygian
(i.e. the Trojan), Dio of Prusa, and Dracontius, interpreted the story from a pro-
Trojan point of view and no longer addressed a Greek but rather a Roman
audience. Some of these works tended to secularize the myth by removing
supernatural events or at least by reducing them to a rational level. An extreme

2 Frederick J. Chiaventone, Troy Script Review, dated May 24, 2004; at http://www.tnmc.org/
Untitled-Deadpool-Column/troy-script-review.html. Chiaventone is an American military
historian and historical novelist.
3 Latacz, From Homers Troy to Petersens Troy, 42. On Petersens intention to re-imagine the
influence of gods on human actions see also Jon Solomon, Viewing Troy: Authenticity,
Criticism, Interpretation, in TROY, 8598, at 9798.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 67

example, although not one unusual in Roman literature, is the Anti-Homer of

Ptolemy Chennus, a work in twenty-four books that was meant to correct
Homer. Although lost, it was probably full of freely invented changes. There are
also many instances of Homer criticism, mainly of the divine characters, in the
Heroicus by Philostratus.4 As regards ancient myth in general, the following
observation by a classical scholar is important to remember: mythis never
exhaustedthere is always another version to read; myth is never finished
there is always another version to write.5
The Trojan War was very different from its poetic representations, not only
the Homeric ones. As some historians have shown, it was probably not a ten-
year-long siege but a series of short raids aiming at mere looting, whose final
act was the siege of Troy. As such, it throws a sinister light on the military hab-
its of the time.6 This interpretation corresponds with the mythographic tradi-
tion itself. In Apollodorus, for example, the ten-year-long conflict appears to be
nothing more than a series of ferocious raids by Achilles and the Myrmidons
in many towns on the Anatolian coast and the Aegean islands.7 Only in the
ninth year of the war do the Trojans get a huge supply of troops from their
allies, and the Trojan War assumes larger proportions. (One might wonder
what Agamemnons mighty Armada was doing under the walls of Troy in the
meantime). In Troy, the characterization of the Myrmidons as a bunch of
pirates gives us a good idea of what a real war in the Mycenaean age could have
been like, stripped of any poetic amplifications.8
The post-Homeric epics describe Achilles as a thug and the Myrmidons as a
band of robbers, spoiling temples and abducting daughters of priests. Besides,
at the time of the Trojan War the Mycenaeans were considerably impoverished
in contrast to their wealth in the previous centuries, and they needed new
lands to conquer and sack. Any unfaithfulness, as it is often called, towards
Homer or the Iliad is a false problem if we consider that the myth of the Trojan
War was told by many poets and writers in different ways, from different points

4 On the wider context see now Lawrence Kim, Homer between History and Fiction in Imperial
Greek Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), especially 85139 (chapter
titled Homer the Liar: Dio Chrysostoms Trojan Oration) and 175215 (chapter titled Ghosts
at Troy: Philostratus Heroicus).
5 Maurizio Bettini, in Maurizio Bettini and Carlo Brillante, Il mito di Elena: Immagini e racconti
dalla Grecia a oggi (Turin: Einaudi, 2002; rpt. 2008) back cover; my translation.
6 So Pierre Lvque, The Greek Adventure, tr. Miriam Kochan (London: Weidenfeld and
Nicolson, 1968), 5052.
7 Apollodorus, Library of Mythology 3.3235.
8 Cf. Iliad 11.670762, where Nestor narrates in gory detail an old-style military expedition,
replete with cattle theft, sharing of loot, and punitive expeditions.
68 Cavallini

of view, and at different times in different ancient cultures. For instance, the
authors of the Roman era such as Virgil, Seneca, and Dracontius show a deep
sympathy for the Trojans, who were considered the ancestors of the Romans.
The historical and archaeological evidence available to us today can help us
understand the considerable efforts by the filmmakers, especially the produc-
tion designer, to reproduce an ancient epic atmosphere. Anyone who wants to
reconstruct the Trojan War by scrupulously following the historical evidence
should first of all get rid of Homer. For example, the historical Mycenaeans
usually buried their dead, as is shown by the burial sites of Mycenae and other
towns, and the practice of cremation spread in Greece only later. The Iliad,
composed some centuries after the Trojan War, is the result of a compositional
practice based on the use of stereotypical formulas that survived across the
centuries thanks to their conformity to the metric structures of epic but that
can often create anachronistic contradictions between older and more recent
parts of epic composition. Moreover, because of the essentially oral character
of archaic epic, poets felt free to modify their stories, especially in order to
satisfy different audiences different expectations. Troy often distorts the tradi-
tional storyline of the Trojan War, but the plot was uncertain and contradictory
already in Homers time. Homer, for instance, denies Iphigenias sacrifice,
which is told in the Cypria.9 The Iliad not only ignores the tale of Thetis hiding
young Achilles on Skyros to prevent him participating in the war but also
underscores his willingness to accept Odysseus and Nestors invitation to take
part.10 Moreover, in the Iliad there is no reference to Cassandras art of divina-
tion. Even after the canonical Alexandrian edition of the Homeric poems,
the late ancient and medieval tradition readily elaborated upon peculiar
retellings of the myth, which in the process acquired some sentimental and
chivalrous aspects.
As regards the production and costume design for Troy, all that could be
drawn from Homer is reproduced with noticeable precision. The reconstruc-
tion of the Achaean tents is flawless.11 So is that of the pyres of the fallen heroes,
lit during the night for strong visual impact. (The use of coins on the eyes of the
dead as payment to Charon the ferryman, however, is a mistake. First in Minoan
and then in Mycenaean culture, thin golden foils engraved with eye shapes
were put on the faces of the dead.) The black ships beaked on both ends are

9 Cypria, Frg. 23 (Bernab) Cf. Iliad 9.145287.

10 Cypria, Frg. 19 (Bernab); Apollodorus, Library of Mythology 3.13.8; Iliad 11.780782.
11 They are described at Iliad 24.448456. On the Achaean camp as described by Homer see
Paul Faure, La vie quotidienne en Grce au temps de la guerre de Troie (1250 a.c.) (Paris:
Hachette, 1975), 142144.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 69

accurate, too.12 Their shape is confirmed by images on vases dating to the

Geometric Period. The films combat scenes are stunning, with ranks of sol-
diers waving like a stormy sea:

As when the shudder of the west wind suddenly rising

scatters across the water, and the water darkens beneath it,
so darkening were settled the ranks of Achaians and Trojans
in the plain.13

The duel between Hector and Achilles, told through an interplay of intense
stares and lightning-quick movements and jumps on the ghostly background of
an empty battlefield, is particularly accomplished.14 Any anachronisms that can
be detected in the war tactics are already present in the original text, which is
partially based on what early Mycenaean bards had described. Homer knew
almost nothing about the Mycenaeans way of fighting, except for what had been
reported in archaic poems in stereotyped and rigidly crystallized ways. For this
reason combat techniques in Homer are not always the same. Ajax is the only
hero who fights in the Mycenaean style, whereas Achilles and the Myrmidons
fight according to more recent hoplite technique, which is described as follows:

as a man builds solid a wall with stones set close together

for the rampart of a high house keeping out the force of the winds, so
close together were the helms and shields massive in the middle.
For shield leaned on shield, helmet on helmet, man against man,
and the horse-hair crests along the horns of the shining helmets
touched as they bent their heads, so dense were they formed on
each other.15

Achilles armor is a hoplite panoply like the one he wears in the film. By
c ontrast, Ajaxs armor and his use of an old-fashioned shield reflect Mycenaean
custom.16

12 On the ships see, e.g., Iliad 1.300 and 18.3. The Homeric term orthokrairos means with
upright horns because bow and stern were higher up than the rest of the vessel and
looked like bull horns.
13 Iliad 7.6366; quoted from Richmond Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, new ed. (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2011), 188.
14 On Achilles jumps see especially Iliad 20.164 (comparison with a lion), 353, and 381382.
15 Iliad 16.212217 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 336).
16 Cf. Iliad 7.219223.
70 Cavallini

The Homeric war chariots (harmata) show us that some Mycenaean war
tactics are combined with later ones. A trace of their original function can be
found only once in the Iliad, where the old king Nestor arranges his troops
according to the old Mycenaean tactics, which consisted of lining up infantry
behind chariots, from which warriors were given full freedom to fight and
move while a charioteer took care of the driving:

First he ranged the mounted men with their horses and chariots
and stationed the brave and numerous foot-soldiers behind them
to the bastion of battle, and drove the cowards to the centre
so that a man might be forced to fight even though unwilling.
First he gave orders to the drivers of horses, and warned them
to hold their horses in check and not be fouled in the multitude:
Let no man in the pride of his horsemanship and his manhood
dare to fight alone with the Trojans in front of the rest of us,
neither let him give ground, since that way you will be weaker.
When a man from his own car chariot encounters the enemy chariots
let him stab with his spear, since this is the stronger fighting.
So the men before your time sacked tower and city,
keeping a spirit like this in their hearts, and like this their purpose.
Thus the old man wise in fighting from of old encouraged them.17

Nestor himself emphasizes the effectiveness of such an arrangement. But

everywhere else in the Iliad these tactics seem to have been nearly completely
abandoned. John Chadwick points out that war chariots had become obsolete
weapons by Homers time and that their former use was no longer known: In
Homer chariots seem to be little more than taxicabs taking the warriors into
and out of battle.18 Chariots were the prerogative of princes and heroes, any-
way. In his combat scenes Homer mostly moves his warriors according to the
latest hoplite tactics, which are often reproduced in Troy; we can also see a
battle array similar to the one Nestor suggested. The films scenes of warfare
imply an accurate reading of Homer, even including the use of the cumber-
some chariot-taxicab. The differences between Homeric fighting and that seen
in the film are mainly intended to make the action scenes appear more realis-
tic to modern viewers.

17 Iliad 4.297310 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 138).

18 John Chadwick, The Decipherment of Linear B (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1960), 109.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 71

2 Architecture

The matter concerning buildings and monuments is much more complicated.

The reconstruction of Agamemnons gloomy palace at Mycenae looks satisfac-
tory, with the famous Lions Gate the inspiration for the large lion statues deco-
rating the wall of a large hall (megaron). The palace is a bare fortress endowed
with a single entrance, the high-ceilinged megaron, and a double portico but
without a central altar (eschara). Many furnishings are noteworthy for their
craftsmanship. Other implements are made with materials of great value, such
as the bulls head with gilded horns, whose original was found at Mycenae. The
impregnable walls of TroyHomer calls it the sheer city of Ilion and steep
Ilionare most impressive.19 They have been reproduced according to Homer
and on the basis of certain archaeological finds that date back to the Mycenaean
age, for example earthenware representing walled towns whose towers are
topped by merlons. Layout and appearance of the city itself is substantially
plausible, with one portico copied from a fresco at Mycenae. This Troy, impres-
sive and sumptuous as it looks, has been chiefly inspired by Homers descrip-
tions, which follow some typical shapes of Late-Helladic palatial architecture.
For instance, the excavations of the palace at Pylos reveal long sequences of
square rooms thronged around a court. Dwellings are in the lower town and
in the shade of Priams palace, which occupies an outstandingliterally and
figurativelyposition according to Mycenaean practice now confirmed by recent
excavations on the site of Troy. Priams palace is briefly described in the Iliad:

Now he [Hector] entered the wonderfully built palace of Priam.

This was fashioned with smooth-stone cloister walks, and within it
were embodied fifty sleeping chambers of smoothed stone
built so as to connect with each other; and within these slept[,]
each beside his own wedded wife, the sons of Priam.
In the same inner court on the opposite side, to face these,
lay the twelve close smooth-stone sleeping chambers of his daughters
built so as to connect with each other; and within these slept,
each by his own modest wife, the lords of the daughters of Priam.20

Priams palace in the film exhibits such Mycenaean architecture, with

an irregular shape and several storeys, even if individual rooms are quite

19 Iliad 9.419 and 13.773 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 227 and 312). Cf. Iliad 9.402, quoted
below.
20 Iliad 6.242250 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 177).
72 Cavallini

homogeneous. They have been designed in order to provide characters with

handy exits and entrances, as becomes evident during the fall of Troy, espe-
cially in the directors cut. Each room is frescoed with vegetable and animal
patterns that recall, among others, frescoes from Thera-Santorini.
Temples and statues of gods are a complex matter, too. Homer mentions, for
example, a temple and statue of Athena in Troy, but without describing them.21
On the other hand, we do not have any proper archaeological documentation.
(The Athena in Homers Troy belongs to the ancient Mediterranean typology of
the throne-seated goddess, but the only Greek examples we know of are from
the seventh to sixth centuries.) During the Mycenaean age sanctuaries were
mostly part of royal palaces. True temple architecture starts only during the
eighth-to-seventh century, but Homer substantially ignores it. But literary
sources from the seventh and sixth centuries mention a temple of Apollo
Thymbraeus (Thymbraean Apollo, Apollo of Thymbra) at Troy, perhaps
anachronistically, which is situated outside the city walls.22 Achilles profanes it
during one of his first exploits on Trojan territory. The film gives us a very inter-
esting reconstruction. An an-iconici.e. non-representationalstatue in the
shape of a square stone has been placed in the temples interior (cella). This is
the most widespread representation of Apollo during the archaic age. The
building itself follows the proto-archaic seventh-century Cretan temples at
Gortyn and Prinias; in particular the latter is characterized by friezes and stat-
ues showing a deep Oriental inspiration. Figural temple decorations in the film
are also inspired by Cretan works of that time. The Daedalic Style, as it is called,
is the first kind of monumental sculpture following the Middle-Hellenic age
and probably developed owing to renewed contacts with the Near East, mainly
Egypt. The placement of a gilded statue of Apollo the Archer in front of the
temples door is noteworthy if not very convincing from an archaeological point
of view. (It resembles Greek statuary of the sixth century.) But it is in a domi-
nant position overlooking the sea and the beach, which implies Apollos func-
tion as apotropaios (warding off evil) and propylaios (defender of gates).
These aspects of Apollo are widely attested in the Classical Age. But they are
probably much older, as is suggested in the Iliad itself: Apollo settles on the

21 Iliad 6.8892 and 292311.

22 Cf. Iliad 10.430 (after Thymbra, a region in the Troad); the sanctuary of Apollo stood near
the place where the rivers Skamander and Thymbrius met. Early Greek sources are Cypria,
Frg. 41 (Bernab), and Ibycus, Frg. S 224 (Davies). For later sources see, e.g., Euripides,
Rhesus 224; Strabo, Geography 13.1.35; Virgil, Georgics 4.323 and Aeneid 3.85. See further
J.M. Cook, The Troad: An Archaeological and Topographical Study (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1973; rpt. 1999), 117123.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 73

ramparts of Troy in order to defend them against Patroclus attacks.23 A temple

of Apollo Thymbraeus as represented on a seventh-century terracotta shows the
god put in front of the door and witnessing Achilles bloody profanation of his
sacred place. The temple and the statue represented a considerable problem
for the films production designers, so their solution, not completely satisfac-
tory as it is, is still excusable. Unlike anthropomorphic gods, sanctuaries and
religious statuary could not be omitted, since the literally iconoclastic fury of
victorious warriors will unavoidably play itself out in and against just such sites.
Our literary sources, including Homer, explicitly tell about statues, but hardly
anything is left of monumental sculpture of the Mycenaean age except for the
stone lions at Mycenae, presumably because Mycenaean statuary was made of
perishable materials like wood and ivory and was doomed to destruction by fire
or earthquake. In the absence of archaeological finds that can be dated back to
the Trojan War, the filmmakers choice of male and female statues (kouroi and
korai) in Daedalic Style for the guardian deities of Troy was the most sensible.
In particular, their Aphrodite seems to have been inspired by the seventh-
century relief with a female head from Malesina in Locris and by some other
contemporary finds. The typology of the kouros dates back to a much older age,
as is attested by an exceptional chryselephantine figurine from Palekastro on
Crete, now in the museum of Sitia. Representing a naked young man with arms
stretched out, it can be dated to the Neo-Palatial era, when interactions between
Mycenaean and Minoan cultures were at their height. This astonishing piece
anticipates statuary which will appear in Greece only centuries later.
Finally, it is appropriate here to point out that the ruin where Achilles trains
Patroclus is not the classical Greek temple that many reviewers think it is but a
monumental cromlech or group of menhirs as found on Malta, where this scene
of Troy was filmed. Besides, the sun that rises from the sea is not an error in
geography, since the beach of Troy with the Scamanders mouth lies on the
eastern side of the Sygean Promontory at the entrance of the Dardanelles. As
the Iliad itself tells us: Dawn the yellow-robed arose from the river of Ocean /
to carry her light to men and to immortals.24

3 The Heroes: Appearance and Costumes

Long discussions have centered on the physical appearance of the Achaean

heroes in the film. Unlike the Trojans who are, like Homers Hector,dark-haired,

23 Iliad 16.698711.
24 Iliad 19.12 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 414).
74 Cavallini

most of them have fair hair.25 The mythical tradition is quite explicit about this
matter. Achilles, Menelaus, and Helen are fair. So is Odysseus, at least in the
Odyssey.26 The appearance of Achilles and, approximately, the looks of the
other Greek warriors are consistent with Homeric descriptions, regardless of
their reliability from historical and anthropological points of view.27 In Homer
and in later literature, fair hair and tall stature are conventional prerogatives of
gods and of god-like heroes, as they are often called. Still, it is difficult to
explain why princes and heroes are represented as dark-haired in the figurative
arts. Vase paintings adhere to strict dichromatismblack figures on red back-
ground and, from the second half of the sixth century on, red figures on black
backgroundand al fresco paintings, too, mostly represent dark-haired char-
acters, although they could have used a much wider range of colors both dur-
ing the Mycenaean age and down to the fifth century. (Cf. the wall paintings in
the Tomb of the Diver at Paestum). This widespread difference between poetic
and pictorial representations might be due to a desire for greater realism in the
figurative arts than in poetry, although it could also imply an aesthethic judg-
ment. The latter is suggested, for instance, by a passage in Ion of Chios from the
fifth century bc. Ion attributes the following words to the tragedian Sophocles:
you do notlike the poet who spoke of the golden-haired Apollo; for if a
painter were to represent the hair of the god as actually golden, and not black,
the picture would be all the worse.28

25 On Hectors hair color see Iliad 22.401402.

26 Helen: Sappho, Frg. 23.5 (Voigt). Golden-haired (xanthos) is a standard epithet of
Menelaus in the Iliad, beginning with 3.284, although several other heroes are also blond.
Odysseus: Odyssey 13.399 and 431. Cf. Bernard Knox, What Did Achilles Look Like? in
Bernard Knox (ed.), Backing into the Future: The Classical Tradition and Its Renewal (New
York: Norton, 1994), 4855; published previously as The Human Figure in Homer in
Diana Buitron-Oliver (ed.), New Perspectives in Early Greek Art (Washington, d.c.:
National Gallery of Art, 1991), 9396.
27 The Achaeans were an Indo-European people who came down from the Balkans at the
beginning of the second millennium bc, so it is possible that tall and fair- or red-haired
people were still existing at the time of the Trojan War and could be so described by
Homer. Some archaeological finds, in particular the skeleton of a man taller than 182 cm
that was found in Circle A of the tombs of Mycenae, bear this out. About the iconographi-
cal and anthropological problems connected with the poetic representation of gods and
heroes in Greek mythology see in general Faure, La vie quotidienne en Grce au temps de la
guerre de Troie (1250 a.c.), 4851.
28 FGrH 392 F 5b = Athenaeus, Deipnosophists 13.81 (604b). The quotation is taken from
C.D. Yonge (ed. and tr.), The Deipnosophists or Banquet of the Learned of Athenaeus, vol. 3
(London: Bohn, 1854), 964. The poet referred to is Pindar (Olympian 6.71).
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 75

Archaeological research has revealed the presence, during the Mycenaean

age, of cone-shaped helmets similar to the ones that Hector and other Trojan
warriors wear in Troy. They also wear short skirts decorated with metal studs
similar to the ones painted on the Warrior Vase discovered by Heinrich
Schliemann at Mycenae and dating back to the Sub-Mycenaean age.29 On the
other hand, Achilles armor recalls a later type from the eighth to the seventh
century: Corinthian helmet, metal shin-guards, and a round and historiated
shield. This armor is, however, compatible with the one Hephaestus forges for
Achillesexcluding, of course, its scenic decorations.30 Homer, as we have
seen, is by no means free of anachronisms and often refers to the military
equipment of his own time rather than to the arms and armors of the
Mycenaean age. In particular, Achilles shield as described in Book 18 is inlaid
with metals of different colors, comparable to the daggers found in Mycenaean
tombs, although Hephaestus technology is iron-working. On the other hand,
Achilles costumes are highly stylized. They are dark blue (kyanos) and so
allude to his origin: they were a gift from his mother Thetis, a sea goddess.31
Red, ochre, and yellow tones predominate in the other characters costumes.
These colors are generally prevailing in Greek figurative arts, starting from
the Mycenaean age. In particular, womens dresses are partly inspired by
Mycenaean frescoes but can also be linked to later iconography. Homer him-
self constantly speaks of peploi.32 Some of the dresses worn by Helen and
Andromache look very similar to those of some figures at Mycenae and Thera-
Santorini, and their jewelry reproduces some Mycenaean pieces.

4 Achilles

Criticisms of Troy have not been limited to comparison with the Homeric text.
A lot of superficial irony has been expended on other aspects of the film,

29 The vase, which can be dated to shortly after 1,200 bc, reveals the impoverishment of
Mycenaean society during the last phase of its history, both because of its second-rate
quality of painting and and because of the poor humble look of the figures painted on it.
Anthony M. Snodgrass, Arms and Armor of the Greeks (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1999), 34, points out that it depicts an antidote to the poetic glories of the Iliad.
30 Iliad 18.478608.
31 In Homer kyanochaits (with dark-blue hair) is an epithet of Poseidon, the god of the sea
(e.g. Iliad 20.144). At Iliad 24.94 Thetis wears a dark-blue (kyaneos) veil. The Greeks did not
seem to have had an exact idea about the real color of the sea, which Homer often calls
black (Iliad 24.79) or wine-faced (e.g. Iliad 23.316 and, especially famously, in the Odyssey).
32 First at Iliad 5.194 (chariot cover), 315 (Aphrodites garment), and 734 (Athenas).
76 Cavallini

especially its casting. Discussions of the character of Achilles were particularly

harsh, mainly because of Brad Pitt. The hypothetical scar that, according to
some reviewers, should have disfigured Achilles face, has nothing to do with
Homer but derives from the paretymology of Byzantine commentator John
Tzetzes, who interpreted the name Achileus to mean a-cheilos, that is to say
without lip.33 Such arguments, albeit insubstantial, often achieved their goal:
they propagated the wrong belief that in Homer and Greek myth Achilles was
ugly or even repulsive. This characterization of Achilles has nothing to do with
ancient mythology, although it has survived until our time, as we will see.
The way we imagine the heroes of Greek epics is strongly conditioned by an
iconography that is contemporary with or, more often, later than Homer but
does not always reflect the representation of the epic world as it is shown
in the Iliad. The Trojan War took place some centuries before the composition
of the Iliad, and the poem in turn derives from a long oral tradition in which
formulaic segments of very ancient origin coexist with elements introduced
later. In Homers age people presumably resembled very little the heroes that
are described in the Iliad; from this point of view, Achilles is an emblematic
case. Homer not only underscores his exceptional beauty but also says that
he was blond, as some Achaeans in the second millennium bc probably were
and later were perceived to be in the Homeric epics.34
Achilles modernity, in contrast with the old Mycenaean world whose traces
are still perceivable in Homer but that at the same time appears to have been
largely surpassed in the Iliad, is also manifest in his obstinate refusal of abso-
lute power as embodied in Agamemnon. This is not only a demigods rebellion
against merely human rule but also the symptom of a progressive evolution of
social and political institutions, which evolved towards oligarchic forms of
government after monarchy of Mycenaean origin. This explains the arrogance
of Agamemnon, the despotic king who fears a menace to his power, and conse-
quently the rage of the valiant and uncompromising hero against him. Early in
the Iliad Agamemnon says to Achilles: To me you are the most hateful of all

33 John Tzetzes, Commentaries on Lycophron 178. The view that Brad Pitt with his generous
lips should not have played Achilles has been advanced by well-known classicist Eva
Cantarella, Ma Achille non pu avere la faccia di Brad Pitt, Corriere della sera (March 23,
2004), 1.39; available at http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2004/marzo/23/Achille_non
_puo_avere_faccia_co_9_040323008.shtml. This newspaper article has misled reviewers
of the film and students of mythology, who often think that Achilles, the most handsome
of all Greek heroes (cf. below), was actually rather ugly. Cantarella also affirms that Homer
nowhere mentions Achilles killer, but this assertion is incorrect; cf. Iliad 22.358360.
34 Achilles handsome appearance: Iliad 2.673674 and 24.629630; his hair color: 1.197 and
23.141.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 77

the kings whom the gods love, a phrase that is quoted, nearly literally, early
in Troy.35
Achilles, incredibly swift and quick when fightingin Homer he is regu-
larly called swift-footedis nearly unbeatable on the battlefield, although
the belief in his invulnerability began in earnest only with Statius in the first
century ad.36 Homer records an event when Achilles received a minor wound
and even bled.37 The film follows Homers representation, as is clearly shown
early on, when Achilles tells a young boy that if he were invulnerable he would
not bother with shield and armor.
In an important passage Achilles, answering Odysseus, declares that he
loves life more than everything else in the world, even if he has often risked it
in order to gain immortal glory:

For not
worth the value of my life are all the possessions they fable
were won for Ilion, that strong-founded citadel, in the old days
when there was peace.38

Achilles has abandoned the battlefield because of his conflict with Agamemnon
and threatens to return to Phthia with all of his Myrmidons, although after
Patroclus death he will be reconciled with Agamemnon, showing that his soul
belongs to the Greek army. Achilles pays no attention to social hierarchies but
assigns the greatest importance to personal relations and outstanding fame.
Besides, cunning intelligence (mtis), although associated in the Homeric
epics primarily with the hero of the Odyssey, appears already in the Iliad, as is
shown by Heras beguilement of Zeus in Book 14 or by Antilochus victory over

35 Iliad 1.176 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 79).

36 Achilleid 1.269270 and 480481. Cf. Jonathan Burgess, Achilles Heel: The Death of
Achilles in Ancient Myth, Classical Antiquity, 14 (1995), 217244, especially 222. For the
wider context, and incorporating earlier analyses, see now Jonathan S. Burgess, The Death
and Afterlife of Achilles (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009).
37 Iliad 21.166167.
38 Iliad 9.401403 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 227). The expression unperishing glory
(kleos aphthiton, 9.413) defines the Homeric concept of heroism. At 9.410416 Achilles
reports Thetis prophecy that he can choose to remain at Troy and go to his glorious death
or go back to his homeland and live a long but inglorious life. According to the ancient
commentary (schol. Iliad 19.326), Achilles was destined to die, anyway, if he should leave
for Troy. It is essential that Homer gives him a chance to survive nearly until the end in
order to make his story more fascinating and his characterization of Achilles more
incisive.
78 Cavallini

Menelaus in Book 23. In his dialogue with Odysseus, Achilles shows himself to
be no less clever than his interlocutor. At the stage of epic composition which
is represented by Homers poems, the most valiant and charismatic hero
reveals certain anti-hero features. We are not that far from the seventh century
bc, when Archilochus will declare, with no shame, to have abandoned his
shield to save his life.39
Achilles leaves the fighting for the sake of a slave and concubine whom he
declares to love with all his heart.40 He returns to the battlefield with the
sole aim of avenging his beloved Patroclus, toward whom he feels a deep
affection. In Homer their relationship is not homoerotic, but it will turn to
homosexuality in the fifth century with Aeschylus Myrmidons.41 This impli-
cation is suggested in the film by some details that undoubtedly derive from
Homer, as when Achilles laid his manslaughtering hands over the chest of
his dear friend.42 In the film, before landing on the beach outside Troy,
Achilles holds the head of Patroclus, who is wearing Thetis talisman, in his
hands. This amounts to a visual equivalent of the moment near the end of
the Iliad when Achilles addresses Patroclus ghost, which appears to him in
a dream, with the words o hallowed head of my brother.43 As I will show
later, the accusation, often advanced, that Troy is homophobic is groundless.
The films representation of Achilles can be fully defended from a Homeric
perspective, except for his tenacious, irreducible hatred of Agamemnon, the
villain whom Hollywoods Manichaeism has deprived of any spirit of justice
or loyalty.
Among the multifarious problems that screenwriter and director had to
face, an important role concerns the reconstruction of those parts of the myth
that are related neither by Homer nor by other significant literary sources but
are known only from short and very simple summaries written by late mythog-
raphers. One of the most difficult tasks for the filmmakers was representing
Achilles landing on the beach of Troy and his conquest of Apollo Thymbraeus
temple. Screenwriter Benioff reconstructs the first stage of this legendary
enterprise in the following way:

39 Archilochus, Frg. 5 (West).

40 Iliad 9.343.
41 The erotic nature of the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus is confirmed by
Plato, Symposium 180a, and by Aeschines, Against Timarchus 1.141151. Xenophon,
Symposium 8.31, denies it. On the subject see the contribution by Horst-Dieter Blume in
the present volume.
42 Iliad 18.317 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 405).
43 Iliad 23.94 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 474).
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 79

Hundreds of arrows whistle through the air. Four of the Myrmidons

climbing down cry out as arrows hit them; they tumble into the sea.
Other arrows rip into the packed sand or zip harmlessly into the water.
The Myrmidons, clustered together and holding their shields above their
heads, look to Achilles. Achilles makes a hand signal. Half his men split
off and run to the fortifications on their left, howling like wolves as arrows
rain down.44

Very little of this scene could be drawn from our scant mythographic sources.45
This means that Benioff had to look elsewhere. But if the description of the
Myrmidons clustered together like a phalanx derives, as we saw, from Homer,
the sequence in its entirety seems to be inspired by a modern literary work, in
which a deep knowledge of classical myth coexists with an extremely loose
and personal employment of this myth, which is manipulated and adapted to
the writers purposes. In Christa Wolfs short novel Cassandra, a polemical
reinterpretation of the Trojan saga from a feminist (and Trojan) point of view,
we read:

A formation of Greeks in close array, wearing armor and surrounding

themselves with an unbroken wall of shields, stormed onto land like a sin-
gle organism with a head and many limbs, while they set up a howl whose
like had never been heard. Those on the outlying edges were quickly killed
by the already exhausted Trojans, as no doubt it had been intended that
they should be. Those toward the center slew altogether too many of our
men. The core reached shore as they were meant to, and with them the
cores core: the Greek hero Achilles.46

The image of the compact wall, derived from Homer, has been utilized for one
of the most spectacular sequences in Troy. The Myrmidons avoid the Trojans
arrows by huddling together, protected by their shields. But Wolfs text appears
to underlie other passages of the screenplay as well. One of the most disquiet-
ing and provocative scenes in the film shows Achilles beheading Apollos
statue:

44 David Benioff, Troy (draft dated February 21, 2003), 48; italics added.
45 For instance Apollodorus, Epitome 3.31, merely states: Achilles lands and kills Cycnus by
beating his head with a stone.
46 Christa Wolf, Cassandra: A Novel and Four Essays, tr. Jan van Heurck (New York: Farrar
Straus Giroux, 1984; rpt. 1988), 72; italics added.
80 Cavallini

Achilles nods and walks over to the towering statue of Apollo in front of
the temple. Eudorus watches in horror as Achilles climbs atop the statue
and beheads Apollo with a swing of his sword.47

There is no reference to such a sacrilege in ancient myth. According to the

tradition, the offense to Apollo consists of Trojan prince Troilus murder inside
Apollos sanctuary, where Troilus had taken refuge as a suppliant.48 In Wolfs
novel Achilles, portrayed as an awful symbol of inhumanity, decapitates an
unarmed and defenseless Troilus in front of his terrified sister. But if such bru-
tality reflects Wolfs emphasis on the hero as the villain of her story, the film
rejects her negative characterization of Achilles. His aggressiveness turns into
an act of irreverent iconoclasm. Far from being as respectful towards the gods
and implacable to his human enemies as Homers Achilles had been, the hero
of Troy is less fierce towards humans and contemptuous of gods. This is consis-
tent with the films reduction of the gods role and of Homers archaic mysti-
cism. And it underscores from a modern perspective, which is nevertheless not
entirely in contrast to Homers, the irreplaceable value of human life.

5 Paris and Patroclus

The mythical tradition in general, and not only Homer, presented Paris in a bad
light. Yet the young Trojan prince should be the true holder of royalty, not a
bare subordinate of his pugnacious brother Hector, whose name means
Holder, Preserver. After all, Paris had married the semi-divine Helen, and in
some Mycenaean documents as perhaps in some Hittite ones Paris appears to
have had a more prominent role than Hector. Moreover, the fact that Priam
entrusts him with the task of negotiating with Menelaus at Sparta underscores
the political importance of this character.49 Troy shows us an immature and
irresponsible Paris even when he gets ready to deal with Menelaus, as in the

47 Benioff, Troy, 53.

48 Apollodorus, Epitome 3.32.
49 It is worthwhile to mention in this context the fascinating, if controversial, identification
of Paris with Alaksandu, the king of Wilusa as preserved in the archives of Hattusha, the
Hittite capital. In the Greek traditioncf. Apollodorus, Library of Mythology 3.12.5, on
Euripides lost play Alexanderit is Paris, not Hector, who completes the path of initia-
tion that belongs to a heros career: parting from his original family unit, being nursed by
a wild beast, and being trained by a tutor who lives on the fringes of society; finally receiv-
ing a new name (Alexander) and returning home. Similarities with Achilles youth are
self-evident.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 81

Iliad. In the film, Paris is saved from Menelaus by human help from Hector, not
by Aphrodites interference. This re-reading of Paris character is not entirely
new. In the Posthomerica by Quintus of Smyrna of the fifth century ad, Paris
takes over the reins of government after Hectors death and displays great ora-
torical skills. Dares and Dio of Prusa fundamentally rethought Homers Paris,
whose shortcomings are now noticeably diminished. Paris changes from a
weak, cowardly, and amorous fop into a responsible defender of the city, a
function implied in his other name, Alexandros, and so deserves to replace
Hector in the government of Troy. After the fall of Troy Paris sees to it that
Helen and Andromache in particular are safe, and he stays behind rather than
fleeing with them. In the directors cut, however, we then see him as part of an
orderly evacuation of the burning city. The fact that Paris is the one who has
the honor to kill Achilles is well known to the Iliad, although there Paris acts as
Apollos tool. Hector, just before dying, foretells Achilles destiny:

Be careful now; for I might be made into the gods curse

upon you, on that day when Paris and Phoibos Apollo,
destroy you in the Skaian gates, for all your valour.50

In the film, Achilles death is the fatal consequence of the absurdity of war and
of the useless chain of revenge that it causes, as Odysseus had practically
prophesied with his cautionary words to Achilles before the latters quarrel
with Agamemnon: War is young men dying and old men talking. You know
this. In the myth, the slaying of Achilles by Paris has something inglorious
about it, above all the version in which the great hero was a victim of a treach-
erous ambush set by Paris and Polyxena with the help of Apollo. (Cf. below.)
In contrast to Paris, the character of Patroclus is left largely undeveloped. In
the Iliad Achilles companion was not yet his lover; their homosexual relation-
ship became explicit with Aeschylus Myrmidons. According to the mythical
tradition, Patroclus was a long-standing guest at the house of Peleus, Achilles
father, and has family ties with him. There also seems to have been family ties
between Achilles and Patroclus, for in the version attributed to Hesiod the two
really are the cousins they are in Troy.51 An ambiguous relationship between

50 Iliad 22.358360 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 467).

51 As early as Hesiod (Frg. 212 Merkelbach-West), Patroclus father Menoetius was the
brother of Achilles father Peleus. In other sources the degree of their relationship
changes. Menoetius is the son of Actor, whose wife Aegina is the mother (by Zeus) of
Achilles grandfather Aeacus; cf. Diodorus, Library of History 4.72.5; Pausanias, Description
of Greece 2.29.2; Apollodorus, Library of Mythology 3.12.6. At Apollodorus 3.13.8 Patroclus
82 Cavallini

Patroclus and Achilles is perceivable in the film, although barely suggested.

According to Homer, Patroclus is slightly older than Achilles.52 He is such a
brave warrior that he kills Zeus son Sarpedon in battle and assaults the walls
of Troy. But his most significant character traits are altruism and kindness,
which he shows not only towards his companions but also towards Briseis and
even to Achilles horses, which are entrusted to his custody. In a context as
cruel and merciless as the Trojan War, Patroclus is an exceptional character,
one that would have been worth far greater development in Troy than he
receives. But the films Patroclus fulfills another purpose: to demonstrate how
an evil fascination with warfare can affect young brains. Patroclus is tormented
by a misconceived love for his homeland and does not hesitate to sacrifice his
own life, deceiving Hector and causing Achilles vengeful rage. The film pre-
serves Patroclus essential role as scapegoat whose death will decisively influ-
ence the outcome of the war.53

6 The Chief Female Characters

Women in the Iliad are few, and their personalities are quite indefinite; never-
theless they carry great importance because they influence mens deeds. In the
film, which is intended to satisfy modern audiences, the mythic heroines
resemble modern women as much as possible. They are strong-willed and can
interact and negotiate with their partners. In the case of Helen, the difference
between her Homeric and cinematic representations is quite evident. A daugh-
ter of Zeus in the mythical tradition, she is a disquieting and mysterious figure,
always in the balance between human and divine. Historically, in Sparta and
some other places Helen was worshipped as a goddess.54 In Homer Helen is
presented as a mortal woman, but she keeps some significant features that

is the son of Menoetius and Achilles stepsister Polymele and seems to be younger than
Achilles.
52 Iliad 11.786789.
53 On this see Eleonora Cavallini, Patroclo capro espiatorio: Osservazioni sul libro XVI
dellIliade, Mythos, n.s. 3 (2009), 117129.
54 On the cult of Helen at Therapne near Sparta see Herodotus, Histories 6.61.3, and
Pausanias, Description of Greece 3.19.9. Pausanias also mentions a temple dedicated to
Helen as goddess of trees on Rhodes, but at Sparta Helen was worshipped in the shape
of a plane tree, as can be deduced from Theocritus, Idylls 18.3848. About Helens divine
character in the Spartan tradition see Fernand Chapouthier, Les Dioscures au service dune
desse: tude diconographie religieuse (Paris: de Boccard, 1935); in general see now
M.L. West, Immortal Helen (London: Bedford College, 1975).
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 83

recall her divine origin. The Elders of Troy watch her with admiring astonish-
ment, since she is similar to the immortal goddesses.55 Paris is repeatedly
called her husband and is considered as a goddesss partner (paredros). Helen
treats Aphrodite as her equal and even with some impudence, although she
must eventually obey her command.56
Above all, Helen is respected, welcomed by Priam and Hector as if her rela-
tionship with Paris were a warrant of regality: something similar to what hap-
pened in Eastern religion, where the union of the king with the goddess
Ishtar-Astarte represented the sealing, and sometimes the institutional recog-
nition, of royal power.57 Helen is the only woman in the Iliad who is allowed to
move easily on the ramparts of Troy, watching the Achaean army and answer-
ing Priams questions about the identity of the main kings and heroes.58 At least
among the males there is no one who dares to blame or offend her because of
her unseemly behavior towards her first husband, Menelaus. Menelaus avoids
all other women while he is waiting to win back Helens love, as if he were aware
that only the resumption of marriage with Helen would grant him a quiet life as
king of Sparta, even deification alongside hers.59 The film does not inquire into
these complexities; on the contrary, it replaces the ambiguous and seductive
Homeric Helen with too human a female, beautiful but meek and a home-body.
This characterization, however, is consistent with the films overall reconstruc-
tion of a society in which the gods are not physically present.
Andromache is even more one-dimensional as faithful wife and loving
mother who subordinates herself to Hectors authority. Her meeting with
Hector near the Scaean Gate, one of the most famous and emotionally power-
ful scenes in the Iliad, is rendered almost perfunctorily. (Other films about the
Trojan War, however, tend to omit it entirely.) Homers version, with its mourn-
ful omens regarding the heros death, may occur too early; Troy moves it close
to the moment of greatest danger for Hector, just before his deadly fight with
Achilles. The outcome of their duel is not in doubt even to viewers unfamiliar
with Homer or Greek myth, so the brief ritardando effected by the encounter

55 Iliad 3.156160.
56 Iliad 3.383420.
57 See Eleonora Cavallini, Afrodite Melenide e letra Laide, Studi classici e orientali,
48(20032004), 239256, with bibliography.
58 Iliad 3.161263.
59 On the temple dedicated to Menelaus at Therapne cf. Pausanias, Description of Greece
3.19.9. At Odyssey 4.561569 Proteus prophesies Menelaus that he will become immortal
in the Elysian Fields as Helens husband and Zeus son-in-law. On Menelaus avoidance of
other women in the Iliad see Athenaeus, Deipnosophists 13.3 (556de).
84 Cavallini

of Hector and Andromache emotionally reinforces the inevitable by delaying

it, if briefly.
By contrast, Briseis, Achilles favorite slave and the cause of his fatal wrath, is
much more important for the dramatic structure of the film. In the Iliad Briseis
embodies the typical lot of a prisoner of war: someone who is forced to submit
to her conqueror, then lives with him and even loves him although he has killed
her husband and brothers.60 The Homeric Achilles explicitly declares his love
for Briseis and cares for her as if she were his bride (alochos). As he tells Odysseus:

from me alone of all the Achaians

he has taken and keeps the bride of my heart. Let him lie beside her
and be happy. Yet why must the Argives fight with the Trojans?
And why was it the son of Atreus assembled and led here
these people? Was it not for the sake of lovely-haired Helen?
Are the sons of Atreus alone among mortal men the ones
who love their wives? Since any who is a good man, and careful,
loves her who is his own and cares for her, even as I now
loved this one from my heart, though it was my spear that won her.61

Achilles comparison of his and Menelaus positions seems to imply a provoca-

tive intent. The affront the king of Sparta has suffered when his wife eloped is
so serious as to involve the mobilization of an impressive army against Troy,
but Achilles maliciously insinuates that the offended persons brother in turn
did not hesitate to offend the bravest of the warriors engaged in this war. The
use of the word alochos is significant. The word generally means legal bride.62
But here it refers to Agamemnon and Menelaus wives and to Briseis. In this
way Achilles puts Briseis on the same level as Clytaemnestra and Helen. We
may have legitimate doubts about the seriousness of Achilles intention towards
Briseis. Not much later he disdainfully refuses to marry one of Agamemnons
daughters but declares himself disposed to marrying a girl chosen by his father
Peleus, provided he, Achilles, should succeed in returning home after the
war.63

60 Iliad 2.688693 and 19.295296.

61 Iliad 9.335343 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 225).
62 At Iliad 1.114 it refers to Clytaemnestra, Agamemnons wife.
63 Iliad 9.388400. On this see now Eleonora Cavallini, La mtis di Achille, in Umberto
Bultrighini and Elisabetta Dimauro (eds.), Homeron ex Homerou saphenizein: Omaggio
a Domenico Musti (Lanciano: Carabba, 2013), 123127.
In the Footsteps of Homeric Narrative 85

In the film, Homers submissive Briseis is replaced by a proud and strong-

willed woman, who combines some features of Cassandra, Apollos virgin
prophetess, and, most of all, of Polyxena, a daughter of Priam.64 Polyxena,
being loved by Achilles, agrees to meet him in Apollos temple. Here, with the
help of the god who is angry with the hero for an old offence, Paris succeeds in
shooting Achilles with a deadly arrow.65
The films representation of Achilles end, with its sentimental implications,
seems to be chiefly inspired by the Roman de Troie of Benot de Sainte-Maure
written after 1165 and in turn inspired by the Latin versions of the tales of Dares
and Dictys. Significantly, the Roman was dedicated to Eleanor of Aquitaine, a
formidable queen in her own right. In this work the hero, blinded by amour fou
for Polyxena, throws caution to the winds and falls into Paris trap. This version
of the story was very successful in the Middle Ages and influenced even Dantes
imagination:

Helen I saw, for whom so many ruthless

Seasons revolved; and saw the great Achilles,
Who at the last hour combated with Love.66

Love conquers all: this is the poets warning, recalling a famous Virgilian phrase
and an Ovidian mood.67 In late-classical and medieval imagery the cruel and
absurdly late vengeance of Apollo on Achilles yielded to other, more charming
scenarios, of which the filmmakers have opportunely availed themselves.

64 Cassandra is mentioned in the Iliad only at 13.365 and 24.699, but without any reference
to her role as a priestess.
65 Ibycus, Frg. S 224 (Davies), recalls Troilus death (cf. above). Several sources place Polyxena
at the ambush set for Achilles. The later tradition ascribes to Polyxena, offered to Achilles
as an exchange for a suspension of the siege, a conclusive role in his death; cf. Hyginus,
Fables 110; Philostratus, Heroicus 51.14; Tzetzes, Posthomerica 385423. Cf. M.L. West, The
Epic Cycle: A Commentary on the Lost Troy Epics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013),
241243, on Polyxena in the Iliou Persis, with additional references. According to some
sources, Polyxena may have been unaware that Paris was using her as a tool for his machi-
nations; according to others, she was his accomplice. Philostratus, Heroicus 51.6, has her
return Achilles love, even commit suicide on his grave. This romantic version is an adjust-
ment of the traditional legend, according to which Achilles ghost would have demanded
Polyxenas sacrifice, as at Euripides, Hecuba 3546, or Ovid, Metamorphoses 13.441480.
66 Dante, Inferno 5.6466. The translation is quoted from The Works of Henry Wadsworth
Longfellow, vol. 9: The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri: Inferno (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1886), 45.
67 Virgil, Eclogues 10.69: omnia vincit amor (love conquers all).
 chapter 4

Petersens Epic Technique: Troy and Its Homeric

Model

Wolfgang Kofler and Florian Schaffenrath

Film adaptations of literature have always had to face tough criticisms. The
most likely reason is the continuing influence of the age of Romanticism and
its concept of artistic quality: only a completely original work of art can be
valuable or significant. Anything that is likely to raise objections of some kind
or other is suspected of being mediocre, a deviation from an earlier and higher
level of creativity, ingenuity, imagination, and overall greatness. Rarely are crit-
ics willing to entertain, much less concede, an argument to the opposite: that
works need not be contemptible because they are copies of originals believed
to be vastly superior. Creators of works of the latter kind usually strive to pre-
serve a measure of artistic and creative independence from their models. They
may wish to avoid any slavish adherence to or simple imitation of the original
works; they may further develop traits, ideas, or other concepts inherent in
these models they may even succeed in improving on their models in certain
regards. The artistic impulse for innovation or improvement, however, gener-
ally goes unrewarded. Artists of the kind here outlined are quickly charged
with misunderstanding a beloved model or with falsifying it beyond recogni-
tion. Such is the case most frequently when the original work goes back such a
long time that it has by now become part of our common cultural heritage. The
closer a work of art is to the very roots of our civilization, the more we tend to
treasure it. In some cases it may even acquire an aura of mystical or quasi-
religious reverence. This process is especially noticeable with works of litera-
ture. Whoever tampers with them is quickly charged with profaning them.
Change, any change, is tantamount to sacrilege. Texts dealing with religion are
a case in point, for these carry their own baggage, as it were, being weighed
down by taboos.
As foundational texts of Western culture, the Homeric epics have by now
acquired a nimbus of such inviolability. Wolfgang Petersens film Troy,
inspired by the Iliad, was therefore a risky undertaking from the beginning.
For this reason it is downright astonishing that the film could achieve an
overall positive reception despite negative criticism from a number of
reviewers and scholars. It is quite possible that Petersen profited from the
newly awakened interest in epic films set in antiquity that came in the wake

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_006

Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 87

of the unexpected success of Ridley Scotts Gladiator (2000) and encouraged

studios or producers to launch films on comparable topics. Moreover, the
Trojan War had long been a subject attractive to filmmakers. Adherence to
Homeric epic was rarely to be taken for granted, however, as even a brief
glance at film history tells us.1 Much the same can be said about the recep-
tion of Homer and the myths of Troy in traditional artistic media such as
opera, novel, painting, and stage play.2 The first two large-scale films about
the war, made in the silent era, were The Fall of Troy (La caduta di Troia; Italy,
19101911), directed by Piero Fosco (pseudonym of Giovanni Pastrone) and
Romano Luigi Borgnetto, and Helena (Germany, 19231924), directed by
Manfred Noa. Both have only a few points of contact with the Iliad; rather,
they are a kind of potpourri of the most important episodes and characters
of the Trojan War. Equally John Kent Harrisons Helen of Troy, an American
television film broadcast in 2003, about a year before the release of Petersens
Troy, has only vague connections with Homers epic. Marino Girolamis
Italian spectacle Fury of Achilles (Lira di Achille, 1962) is the only exception,
along with Troy. From the beginning, Troy was intended to show rather closer
adherence to Homer, as its working title, The Iliad Project, indicates.3
Screenwriter David Benioff and director Petersen proceeded accordingly.
Petersen in particular repeatedly emphasized his knowledge of Homer in
interviews. As he states on the bonus material included on the dvd release of
the directors cut of Troy:

I grew up with Homer. I was in Hamburg in Germany, where I grew up;

I was at school [Gymnasium, i.e. high school], where we learnt actually
ancient Greek and Latin, so I actually read Homers work in the original
ancient Greek language. So I was very close to it, very familiar.4

1 A survey can be found in Martin M. Winkler, The Trojan War on the Screen: An Annotated
Filmography, in Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford:
Blackwell, 2007), 202215.The present chapter is a revised and updated version of Wolfgang
Kofler and Florian Schaffenrath, Petersens epische Technik: Troja und seine Homerische
Vorlage, in Stefan Neuhaus (ed.), Literatur im Film: Beispiele einer Medienbeziehung
(Wrzburg: Knigshausen & Neumann, 2008), 313330.
2 On this see Jon Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization & Classicization,
Variation & Codification, International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 14 (2007), 482534.
3 So according to the Internet Movie Database at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0332452/
releaseinfo#akas.
4 Quoted from Troy in Focus, part 1: Adapting Homer on the directors cut dvd edition of
Troy.
88 Kofler and Schaffenrath

Petersens words encourage us to regard Troy as a filmic adaptation of a literary

text and to ask two main questions. These concern the extent to which Troy
was really inspired by the Iliad, as a text card states, and the narrative strate-
gies that Petersen employed to take into account his viewers knowledge, if any,
of the ancient epic and their expectations in order to achieve a successful
translation of a work of classical literature into the film medium. (The final
credits of Troy list Homer immediately after director and screenwriter, both of
whom in this way become Homers direct successors.) In answering the ques-
tions here raised, we will equally consider aspects of content and form. In this,
too, Petersen himself is our guide:

Name any dramatic plot turn, name any ingenious principle of portray-
ing charactersHomer already applied them all, 3000 years ago. If there
is something like a tree of storytelling, on which each book, each film, is
a tiny leaf, then Homer is its trunk.5

1 Iliad 1.1: The Anger of Achilles

The greatest difference between the Iliad and any of its screen adaptations lies
in the fact that films tend to tell the story of the entire Trojan War, whereas
Homers epic does not. The Iliad deals with the anger of Achilles, his mnis,
and this, the epics very first word, announces its theme. Homer limits himself
to a number of episodes from the wars last year. Girolamis Fury of Achilles is,
in this regard, comparable, for the film excludes the death of Achilles and the
fall of Troy. By contrast, Troy presents a more panoramic view. It begins with
the abduction, more willy than nilly, of Helen from Sparta and ends with the
Trojan Horse, the citys fall, and Achilles funeral. Still, Achilles anger is at its
very center. This is true for the directors cut even more than it was for the origi-
nal release version. Petersen himself rightly emphasizes the greater depth of
his new version, which allows for more detailed portrayals of his main charac-
ters. He singles out the new opening and Odysseus first appearance on screen
(on which below), then adds: There are so many other moments. The relation-
ship between Paris and Helentheir desperate love is so much more

5 Cited, in translation, from Tobias Kniebe, Homer ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht: Troja-
Regisseur Wolfgang Petersen ber die mythischen Wurzeln des Erzhlens und den Achilles
in uns allen, Sddeutsche Zeitung (May 11, 2004); at http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/
artikel/607/31576/print.html.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 89

emotional and, in a way, sad. And the tension between Agamemnon and
Achilles.6
Text cards following the opening credits inform us about what is at stake in
the story we are about to see; the introductory text ends with these words:

Achilles, considered the greatest warrior ever born, fights for the Greek
army. But his disdain for Agamemnons rule threatens to break the fragile
alliance apart.

The films first sequence culminates in the duel between Achilles and the
Thessalian warrior Boagrius. Here the festering animosity between Achilles and
Agamemnon is especially noticeable. Achilles, sleeping off the effects of a night of
lovemaking, has to be summoned to appear on the battlefield. Terse exchanges
of words between Agamemnon and Achilles ensue. Agamemnons taunt (Perhaps
we should have our war tomorrow, when youre better rested) leads to Achilles
truculent reply regarding Boagrius: Perhaps you should fight him. And: Imagine
a king who fights his own battles. Wouldnt that be a sight? Although he obeys
and fights, Achilles makes Agamemnon, the commander in chief, look bad.
Agamemnons reaction to Nestor is telling: Of all the warlords loved by the gods,
I hate him the most. These words are an almost verbatim translation of Iliad 1.171.7
Later, the quarrel over Briseis leads to an open break between the two. This
sequence even contains elements from the Homeric text that modern viewers
who have a rudimentary knowledge of ancient poetry may well regard to be
incompatible with the sublime pathos of classical epic. Agamemnons leering
taunt that he will force Briseis to give him a bath that very night causes Achilles
to retort with an angry You sack of wine! This very charge Achilles levels
against Agamemnon in the Iliad, calling him oinobars (heavy with wine,
Iliad 1.225). For good measure Achilles adds with the eyes of a dog, the heart of
a deer in the same line. The literal translations given here, however, hardly
express the roughness of Achilles insults, which are more like our colloquial
expressions such as drunkard or wino, treacherous dog, and coward or, even
more colloquially, chicken.8 Related animal imagery recurs later as well. To

6 Quoted from Troy Revisited: An Introduction by Wolfgang Petersen on the directors cut dvd of
Troy.
7 On this and other such adherences to the original text see Georg Danek, The Story of Troy
through the Centuries, TROY, 6884, especially 7677.
8 On the exact connotations of these Greek terms see Joachim Latacz, Ren Nnlist, and
Magdalene Stoevesand, Homers Ilias: Gesamtkommentar, vol. 1: Erster Gesang (A), part 2:
Kommentar, 3rd ed. (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2009), 80 and 9697.
90 Kofler and Schaffenrath

Odysseus, Achilles calls Agamemnon a pig of a king. The tone of the entire
passage struck even ancient readers as an insult, as is evident from the fact that
in the third century bc the Alexandrian philologist Zenodotus started a debate
about their authenticity.9
Achilles anger becomes crucial for the entire plot of Troy, as three of the
films sequences illustrate especially well. These are Patroclus death, the duel
between Achilles and Hector, and the ransoming of Hectors body. The first of
these in particular gives us important clues about how Petersen proceeds in
bridging the gap between text and film.

2 The Death of Patroclus

Near the end of Book 15 of the Iliad, the Greeks military situation is nearly
desperate. Obeying a command by Zeus, Poseidon withholds his support
from the Greek army, and the Trojans have advanced into the camp of the
Greeks. Hector, protected by Apollo, is advancing, and there is no one to
stop him. In addition, the Greeks are weaker than usual because Achilles,
still angry over the loss of Briseis and the insult to his honor, is refusing to
fight, together with his Myrmidons, the Greek armys elite force. At the begin-
ning of Book 16 Patroclus, worried about the current crisis, confronts
Achillesand remonstrates with him, calling him harsh and pitiless. He begs
Achilles to allow him to borrow his armor and weapons and to lead the
Myrmidons against the Trojans, even though Achilles himself is to stay
behind. Achilles agrees. He gives Patroclus a detailed command, here quoted
in abbreviated form:

So do you draw my glorious armour about your shoulders;

lead the Myrmidons whose delight is battle into the fighting,
if truly the black cloud of the Trojans has taken position
strongly about our ships, and the others, the Argives, are bent back
against the beach of the sea.
But even so, Patroklos, beat the bane aside from our ships; fall
upon them with all your strength; let them not with fires blazing
inflame our ships, and take away our desired homecoming.
But obey to the end this word I put upon your attention
so that you can win, for me, great honour and glory.

9 On this see G.S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 1: Books 14 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1985; rpt. 2001), 7576.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 91

When you have driven them from the ships, come back
you must not set your mind on fighting the Trojans, whose delight
is in battle, without me.10

Achilles then helps his men to prepare for battle and gives them instructions
while his charioteer Automedon harnesses the horses. Patroclus ascends the
chariot; all depart. Achilles now prays to Zeus for the Greeks success in turning
back the Trojans and for Patroclus safe return. The Homeric narrator matter-
of-factly comments: The father granted him one prayer, and denied him the
other.11 Before he joins the fray, Patroclus delivers an encouraging speech to his
men, then begins his aristeia; that is to say, a killing spree during which the
hero proves himself the bestaristos in Greekof all heroes. The end of Book
16 brings the decisive encounter between Patroclus and Apollo. The god, cham-
pion of the Trojan cause, attacks Patroclus from behind and sends him reeling;
he then strikes off Patroclus helmet. The hero next loses spear and shield
before Apollo breaks the corselet that protects Patroclus chest. A Trojans spear
hits Patroclus in the back. Hector, who has been approaching, stabs Patroclus
in the belly with his spear, finishing him off. Fighting over Patroclus dead body
and the armor of Achilles that he has been wearing takes up Book 17.
Petersens version of this episode proceeds from one major and decisive
change: no one except Patroclus himself knows of the deception to be practiced
on Greeks and Trojans alike. Although Petersens Patroclus does attempt to make
Achilles change his mind about returning to battle, the part of their conversation
in the Iliad in which Patroclus suggests to fight in Achilles place is omitted.
Instead, Achilles sticks with his earlier command to ready his ships to sail home
to Phthia the next day. When the Trojans attack the Greek camp and when, to
everybodys surprise, the Myrmidons, who are immediately recognizable by
their black armor, storm forward, viewers are just as ignorant about the identity
of the black-clad warriors leader as Hector is. After a brief but intense duel
Hector succeeds in slitting his opponents throat. Hector then removes the
helmet of the fallen hero, who is gasping for breath and struggling for words.
Only now does Hector, as do we, realize that he is facing Patroclus, not Achilles.
He is also immediately aware of the dire consequences of this deadly duel and,
with Odysseus consent, proclaims an end to all fighting for this day.

10 Iliad 16.6468, 8084, 87, and 8990; quoted from Richmond Lattimore, The Iliad of
Homer, new ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), 353. The entire speech of
Achilles is at 64100; its very length emphasizes what is at stake during this crucial
moment.
11 Iliad 16.250 (Lattimore, 358).
92 Kofler and Schaffenrath

Petersen uses a variety of strategies to get viewers to believe that it is indeed

Achilles who is now leading his Myrmidons back into battle. In Homer
Patroclus rides into battle on Achilles chariot; in Troy he races into action on
footthis is the very kind of movement we associate primarily with Achilles.
(More on this below.) On the soundtrack we hear the same kind of music we
heard when the Myrmidons were the first of all Greek contingents to reach the
Trojan beach and when they were fighting their way to the temple of Apollo. It
is therefore rather ironic that Achilles had forbidden Patroclus to participate in
that first battle. Now the cheering and calling out of Achilles name that had
accompanied the earlier heroic exploit is heard again. Moreover, first Odysseus
and then Hector exclaim Achilles! Patroclus, who in the Iliad is given much to
say while on the battlefield, here remains utterly silent. All this serves to uphold
to the last possible moment the illusion among the armies on screen and the
viewers in the theater that it was none other than Achilles who has been killed.
The revelation of who really was fighting in Achilles armor comes as a shock to
all, including the viewers.
Unlike Petersen, Homer never had the opportunity to direct his plot to such
an unexpected and climactic moment, for he had to proceed from the assump-
tion that his listeners or readers were fully conversant with the tale of Achilles
and Patroclus and with everything that surrounded this part of the Trojan War
myth. By contrast, Petersen takes advantage of his viewers diminished, perhaps
in some cases non-existent, knowledge of the myth to achieve an additional arc
of suspense, one that is resolved in a moment of shock. Even so, Petersen does
not neglect those in the audience who have retained a measure of mythical
knowledge, for he prominently includes in this sequence someone who serves
as a figure of projection, as it were, for those who remember their Iliad. Petersen
achieves this aspect of his retelling by purely cinematic means. The entire scene
here under discussion takes up no more than about four minutes of screen
time, from the arrival of the Myrmidons in battle until the temporary armistice
that is agreed upon after Patroclus death. During this time Petersen cuts to
close-ups of Odysseus several times, although Odysseus has no active part in
the proceedings and serves no dramatic purpose at all until the armistice. But
in the glances of Odysseus that we observe we detect an ever-increasing mea-
sure of concern and then doubt about the result of the duel in progress. This
might well be for the sake of those viewers who may not know exactly what is
wrong at this time in the plot but who may suspect that all the indications
pointing to Achilles as the hero in black are actually meant to deceive.
In this context a glance at the way in which Girolami previously staged this
scene in Fury of Achilles is instructive. As he did elsewhere in his film, Girolami
adhered more closely to Homer than Petersen was to do four decades later.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 93

This circumstance is especially noteworthy in regard to the advance knowl-

edge of the Iliad that viewers of the 1960s could be expected to bring to the
theater. Girolami shows Patroclus putting on Achilles armor. Like Homer,
Girolami reveals from the beginning who will lead the Myrmidons into battle
and fight side by side with them. Nevertheless, one specific detail in Fury of
Achilles practically prepares the way for the scene in Troy, for Girolamis
Achilles, like Petersens, is completely in the dark about Patroclus intentions.
In Girolamis version Achilles, drowsy from heavy drinking, barely registers
Patroclus attempt to talk to him about the military situation. Differently from
the common version, however, Girolamis Patroclus does not suggest to Achilles
to fight in his place; rather, he suggests that Achilles could save face, as it were,
by fighting dressed in his, Patroclus, armor! Only after Achilles has sunk back
into deep sleep does Patroclus eye happen to fall on his friends near-by armor.
The rest we know.

3 Swift-footed Achilles

Let us now turn to the question how Troy attempts to follow its Homeric model
in regard to its manner of presentation. Here certain stylistic features of
Homeric epic become important. Modern readers of the Iliad will doubtless
first notice its composition in verse, although modern translators routinely
abandon the original hexameter and substitute some other kind of versifica-
tion or occasionally none at all. Another major feature of archaic epic composi-
tion to be noticed is that of formulaic language. It points us to the era in
which bards (aoidoi) improvised their oral recital of mythical material. The
Homeric epics belong to the moment in history at which the transition from
oral poetryi.e. from the oral tradition, as it is commonly calledto literary
poetryi.e. poetry that is written downwas in progress or, perhaps more
accurately, was reaching its conclusion. For this reason the Iliad and the Odyssey
preserve the formulaic nature that was a key feature of oral recitals and have
made it canonical for later, even highly literate, Greek and Roman epic.
The formulae that appear in Homeric epic can be distinguished primarily by
their length. Among the longest are the typical scenes, as scholars call them,
which describe recurrent situations in standardized language that varies only
slightly from occurrence to occurrence. Such scenes describe someone rising
in the morning or turning in at night, preparations for and consumption of a
meal, or other daily activities. In addition, longer text passages are repeated
when a command is being transmitted by means of an intermediary. In such
cases we are first informed about a commands wording as told to a messenger
94 Kofler and Schaffenrath

and then again when the latter delivers the command to its addressee.
Occasionally, the actual carrying out of such a command can be told in words
that repeat the original order.
Short epic formulae occur especially in references to time. Instead of simply
saying in the morning, the epic poet famously refers to the appearance of
rosy-fingered Dawn (Iliad 1.477 and 24.788, and no fewer than twenty-two
times in the Odyssey). Standard lines regularly introduce or conclude direct
speech: Then resourceful Odysseus spoke in turn, and answered him or Then
in turn the lord of men Agamemnon spoke to him.12 Expressions like rosy-
fingered, resourceful, and lord of men are the smallest units or building blocks
of such epic formulae. These are nouns or adjectives which accompany certain
names over and over again. They bring about standard combinations such as
grey-eyed Athena (Iliad 1.206) or Hera of the white-arms (Iliad 1.208), which
today are still familiar beyond the small circles of scholars and experts.
It may at first seem strange that the director of a film based on the Iliad
should turn to such formulaic expressions in order to convey to a mass audience
some kind of idea of the formal nature of Homeric narrative. Is not the very
principle of repetition incompatible with a Hollywood genre that is generally
associated with, and largely depends on, action, suspense, and a certain speed
or at least expediency in telling its story? However this may be, Troy is especially
remarkable for its awareness, and incorporation, of the smallest units of
Homeric formula. The films portrayal of Achilles shows this throughout.
By the time we first encounter Achilles, we have already observed two large
armies advancing upon each other and drawing up for battle. The text that
opens Troy allows us to deduce that these are the Greek and the Thessalian
armies. Their leaders, Agamemnon and Triopas, agree to let a duel of champi-
ons rather than a full-scale battle decide about victory. Boagrius, the Thessalian
champion, is a veritable Goliath. Agamemnons call for his hero, Achilles, goes
unanswered; as it turns out, Achilles is not even on the battlefield, a circum-
stance that causes the Thessalians to break into mocking laughter. A messen-
ger boy is sent to fetch Achilles, whom we discover in his tent in the company
of two pretty women. The three, all naked, have evidently spent an agreeable
night making love. Achilles then rides, rather un-Homerically, to the battle line
and has the unfriendly exchange with Agamemnon discussed above. Then he
approaches his opponent. We now expect a complex and prolonged duel
between the two heroes that shows us their respective prowess, something we
are familiar with from action films: each fighter cautiously testing the other for

12 Iliad 10.423 and 554 (Lattimore, 247 and 251), 14.64 (Lattimore, 317) and 19.184 (Lattimore,
419).
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 95

possible weak spots, followed by a ferocious clash of arms. But we are in for a
big surprise. While Boagrius is still attempting to intimidate Achilles with
threats, the latter begins to run, then race, toward him. Boagrius throws his two
spears but does not hit the ever-faster Achilles. Achilles, ducking, catches the
first spear with his shield and evades the second by a quick and lithe side
movement. Then he throws away his own shield and spear and, without having
to carry this additional weight, accelerates even more. Before Boagrius can
draw his sword, Achilles, yet faster, is already upon himquite literally, for in
full race he jumps up into the air and buries his own sword deep in the side of
Boagrius neck while flying past him. Petersen emphasizes the moment in
which Achilles kills Boagrius by means of slow motion. Boagrius totters and
crashes to the ground dead.
Several action or epic films released before Troy opened with long and
drawn-out battle sequences, as was the case with Steven Spielbergs Saving
Private Ryan (1998), Ridley Scotts Gladiator, and Martin Scorseses Gangs of
New York (2002). But Achilles takes only twenty seconds of screen time to race
toward Boagrius and to thrust his sword into the giants neck. The reason may
be Petersens intent to show his viewers something they may not have expected
at the beginning of this kind of film, but a more convincing reason is to be
found in the Iliad itself. The most common and most familiar formulaic epi-
thets that characterize Achilles in Homer in about a hundred occurrences all
tell us about his unmatched speed.13 The most common rendering of the com-
bination of epithet and name in English is therefore the phrase swift-footed
Achilles. This seems to be the real reason for Petersens way of filming Achilles
first great deed and thus of introducing him not only as a deadly force but also
as the films chief hero.14 Petersen could easily have presented a fast Achilles in
a much longer duel, as he will do later when Achilles and Hector meet in their
decisive encounter. The lightning speed of the first action sequence in Troy is
entirely in the spirit of Homer: it visually expresses and dramatically empha-
sizes the essential nature of Achilles physical prowess. That all this occurs in
the first sequence of such a long film is therefore telling, for it announces to
those viewers who know the Iliad that Homers epic is the basis for what will

13 Exact figures about these and all other Homeric epithets may be found in James H. Dee,
Epitheta hominum apud Homerum: The Epithetic Phrases for the Homeric Heroes:
A Repertory of Descriptive Expressions for the Human Characters of the Iliad and the
Odyssey (Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 2000).
14 Cf. Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth, 486: near the opening we see a duel
between Achilles and the [Thessalian] Boagrius, which serves to establish the former as
swift of foot and sure of hand.
96 Kofler and Schaffenrath

follow, all the liberties taken with the Trojan War myth notwithstanding. From
the beginning we are shown not just any Achilles but Homers Achilles. It may
just be that Homer himself had resorted to a comparable clever device, for he
calls Achilles swift-footed (podas okys) as early as line 58 in Book 1. Before this
line, there occurs only noble (dios), a general epithet that fits practically any
Homeric character. Swift-footed is much more exclusive, for it is applied only
to Achilles and to Iris, the messenger goddess.15
If, as we saw, Petersen translates Homers phrase swift-footed Achilles into
visual terms by means of an action sequence, does not this very fact transpose
something that belongs to the formal aspects of Homeric epic into (an
invented) part of its plot? After all, the formulaic nature of those stock epithets
mentioned above and of many others like them derives from their repeated
occurrences. Nor are they based on any individual acts or actions. Does
Petersen actually adhere to this function of such descriptions, thereby express-
ing his awareness of how and why the epithets appear in Homer? Indeed he
does, at least in connection with his films greatest hero, as later scenes of
Achilles fighting will show. The sequence in which the Greek fleet lands on the
beach before Troy is especially instructive in this regard, for again Achilles dis-
tinguishes himself from all other warriors by his speed. This becomes evident
even before the first ship hits the sand, for Achilles is so eager for battle and
glory that he incites his men to row faster than the rowers on all other ships can
manage to do. Achilles even ignores the sensible warnings of his advisor
Eudorus. As a result the Myrmidons reach the beach well before the other con-
tingents. They jump ashore in a hail of Trojan arrows. Achilles storms ahead. In
a matter of seconds he is so far ahead of the others that he has to wait for them
to catch up. They then form a defensive wall against enemy arrows with their
shields. As soon as they are close enough to the enemy, they abandon their
shield formation, and Achilles launches himself on another fast advance,
which takes him into the thick of the Trojans. Achilles kills them one by one as
they face him and works his way up to the temple of Apollo on a near-by hill.

4 Resourceful Odysseus

Petersens use and awareness of Homeric epithets is not limited to Achilles.

The directors cut of Troy contains a crucial scene missing from its release

15 Homers other term for swift-footed (podarks) is applied solely to Achilles. The occur-
rence of the same word as the name for Protesilaus brother does not invalidate or even
diminish this circumstance.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 97

version: our introduction to Odysseus. Agamemnons ambassadors have trav-

eled to Ithaca to recruit this islands king for the war effort against Troy. In addi-
tion, Odysseus is to persuade Achilles to join the war as well. Agamemnons
two legates, who have never seen Odysseus in person, find him in the country-
side with his dog but do not recognize him. A conversation follows, in which
Odysseus makes fun of them:

First Ambassador: Greetings, brother. We were told King Odysseus is

hid in the hills.
Odysseus: Odysseus? That old bastard drinks my wine and never pays.
Second Ambassador: You ought to respect your king, friend.
Odysseus: Respect him? Id like to punch him in the face. Hes pawing at
my wife, trying to tear her clothes off. (The ambassadors turn around
and are about to leave.)
Odysseus (calling after them and petting his dog): I hope Agamemnons
generals are smarter than his emissaries. (The ambassadors stop and
turn around.)
First Ambassador: What did you say?
Odysseus: You want me to help to fight the Trojans?
Second Ambassador: Youre?
First Ambassador: Are you?
Odysseus laughs.
First Ambassador: Forgive us, King Odysseus.
Odysseus (in close-up with his dog): Well. (He pauses slightly.) Im gonna
miss my dog.

Odysseus best-known epithets in the Homeric epics are polymtis and

polymkhanos; both mean clever, cunning, wily.16 With the verbal hide-and-
seek game that Odysseus plays with, or on, Agamemnons ambassadors,
Petersen has Homers clever hero display just that side of his character. This
parallels the earlier moment when Achilles gets to demonstrate his speed.
Both scenes cleverly introduce their respective protagonists in cinematic ways
that are at the same time in keeping with the spirit of Homer. Odysseus clever-
ness is in evidence throughout Troy. In the very next sequence Odysseus is
such an accomplished rhetorician that he succeeds in persuading Achilles to
join the Greek forces, although Achilles contempt for Agamemnon remains
undiminished. In connection with the crucial scene in which Achilles con-
fronts Agamemnon over Briseis, Odysseus counsels the young hero by trying to

16 Dee, Epitheta hominum apud Homerum, provides details.

98 Kofler and Schaffenrath

restrain him: War is old men talking and young men dying. Ignore the poli-
tics. The fact that Achilles does not listen to such advice does not in the least
diminish Odysseus astuteness. He sees through the power plays hidden behind
a political faade: the honor of Greece that the Trojans violated must be
restored, and all that. Most famously, however, no one but Odysseus can bring
about the fall of Troy. Even todays audiences will remember his ruse with the
Wooden Horse, even though Benioff and Petersen put a realistic spin on how
Odysseus comes to think of it.
The narrative and indeed programmatic importance of the restored scene
of Odysseus meeting the emissaries becomes evident from the first ambassa-
dors statement that the two are looking for Odysseus in the mountains of his
island rather than in his palace because Odysseus is supposed to be in hiding.
The film never explains this circumstance, which alludes to a part of the Trojan
War myth in which Odysseus, newly married and a father, tries in vain to get
out of joining the war. This is not in Homer, but the archaic literature on the
Trojan War, such as the Cypria and the Epic Cycle, reports numerous additional
episodes and details about the war, its origins, and its aftermath. A few viewers
of Troy may have known about Odysseus situation before the war; most prob-
ably did or do not. The ambassadors information remains unconnected to the
story as it will unfold, and for this reason the entire scene could easily have
been omitted, just as it originally was. But the very fact that Petersen filmed it
and later added it into his preferred cut tells us something about his approach
to Homer.
The episode also points ahead to the Odyssey, which on frequent occasions
presents Odysseus as an accomplished liar. Even his initial appearance in Troy,
when he is practically in rags, reminds us of his disguise as a beggar after his
return to Ithaca long after the war. And then there is the dog. We know its
name, Argus, from the Odyssey, in which this faithful and by that time very old
animal is the very first to see through Odysseus disguise. Immediately after-
wards, Argus dies. Saying, in Troy, that he will miss his dog before the war actu-
ally begins, Odysseus is acknowledging Argus unwavering devotion to his
absent master well in advance. Readers of Homer will regard his doing so as a
kind of proleptic retrospective on both epics. In the Odyssey, Odysseus must
not, and does not, acknowledge his beloved dog because to do so is much too
dangerous for him. He will not even reveal himself to his faithful Penelope
until each and every danger has been removed. A tear does escape Odysseus
eye on seeing Argus, but it is quickly wiped off and remains unnoticed by oth-
ers. The indirect importation of a moment from the Odyssey into an Iliadic
situation is fully justified if we consider it within the wider context of Benioff
and Petersens reception of Homerthe Homer of both Iliad and Odyssey.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 99

5 Heroic Duels

Homers highly formulaic language includes similes and ecphrases

i.e. detailed verbal descriptions, especially of works of artamong its
most significant aspects alongside its epithets. That epithets are capable of
being translated or adapted into the visual language of the cinema we
have just seen; that the other two characteristics are equally adaptable
has recently been shown as well.17 We can therefore turn to the typical
scenes, already mentioned in passing, that present us with another impor-
tant stylistic feature of the Iliad. As a rule, such scenes are much longer
and more detailed than similes or ecphrases; they include, importantly,
the long battle sequences in which one particular hero goes to fight a
series of enemy heroes, whom he defeats and usually kills. In such scenes
the hero in question embarks on his aristeia. Best of the Achaeans (aris-
tos Akhain) is therefore another important epithet in the Iliad. Unlike
swift-footed and some other epithets that are limited to specific bearers,
several heroes can take turns proving themselves the best at certain
moments. Diomedes, Menelaus, Agamemnon, Patroclus, and especially
Achilleseach of them embarks on his own aristeia in the course of
the Iliad.
For an example of the way Homer presents such an aristeia to his listeners
or readers, we turn to a passage from the aristeia of Achilles, the longest and
bloodiest in the entire epic. We would expect nothing less from its central hero.
At the end of Book 20 we follow Achilles working his gruesome way through
the battle raging all around him:

with the spear full in the neck he stabbed Dryops

so that he dropped in front of his feet. He left him to lie there
and with a spear thrown against the knee stopped the charge of Demouchos,
Philetors son, a huge man and powerful. After the spearcast
with an inward plunge of the great sword he took the life from him.
Then Achilleus swooping on Dardanos and Laogonos, sons both
of Bias, dashed them to the ground from behind their horses,
one with a spearcast, one with a stroke of the sword from close up.
Now Trios, Alastors son: he had come up against Achilleus
knees, to catch them and be spared and his life given to him
if Achilleus might take pity upon his youth and not kill him;

17 On these see Martin M. Winkler, The Iliad and the Cinema, in TROY, 4367, at 5257
(similes) and 5763 (ecphrases).
100 Kofler and Schaffenrath

fool, and did not see there would be no way to persuade him,
since this was a man with no sweetness in his heart, and not kindly
but in a strong fury; now Tros with his hands was reaching
for the knees, bent on supplication, but he stabbed with his sword at the liver
so that the liver was torn from its place, and from it the black blood
drenched the fold of his tunic and his eyes were shrouded in darkness
as the life went. Next from close in he thrust at Moulios
with the pike at the ear, so the bronze spearhead pushed through and came out
at the other ear. Now he hit Echeklos the son of Agenor
with the hilted sword, hewing against his head in the middle
so all the sword was smoking with blood, and over both eyes
closed the red death and the strong destiny. Now Deukalion
was struck in the arm, at a place in the elbow where the tendons
come together. There through the arm Achilleus transfixed him
with the bronze spearhead, and he, arm hanging heavy, waited
and looked his death in the face. Achilleus struck with the swords edge
at his neck, and swept the helmed head far away, and the marrow
gushed from the neckbone, and he went down to the ground at full length.
Now he went on after the blameless son of Peires,
Rhigmos, who had come over from Thrace where the soil is rich. This man
he stabbed in the middle with the spear, and the spear stuck fast in his belly.
he dropped from the chariot, but as Arethos his henchman
turned the horses away Achilleus stabbed him with the sharp spear
in the back, and thrust him from the chariot. And the horses bolted.18

Enough already? It may have been for Homer, for after these lines there comes
a pair of similes to underscore Achilles irresistible and inhuman fury in battle
from poetic rather than martial perspectives.
The lines quoted above make it immediately evident that there is not much
of a difference between the emotional impact of such a passage on its readers
and the extensive carnage we witness today on our cinema screens. Where
graphic violence is concerned, Homeric and later classical epic in the tradition
of the Iliad, such as Virgils Aeneid and Lucans Pharsalia, is in no way inferior
to modern film in its detailed attention to death and gore. In particular, several
of the lines above correspond to close-ups in films on moments of slaughter,
severed body parts, gushing blood, and collapsing corpses. The mayhem in
the Iliad and that on the screen is comparable or, despite the obvious

18 Iliad 20.455489 (Lattimore, 438439).

Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 101

differences between an ancient text and a modern technological medium,

nearly identical. Graphic violence is more in evidence in the directors cut of
Troy than inthe original release. The degree to which this violence expresses
the nature of Homeric battle scenes will likely astonish those viewers who
understandably, of courseattribute it only to their own experiences as film-
goers: Troy is explicitly violent because films like Saving Private Ryan and
Gladiator, to say nothing of contemporary horror and slasher films, have raised
the level of gore to unprecedented heights. As our Iliad passage shows, such
viewers would be mistaken.
Another analogy between Troy and the Iliad in this regard concerns the
course of action itself, as Achilles storm on the beach and up to Apollos t emple
makes clear. Several of Petersens shots in that sequence and the way these are
edited together actually closely resemble the narrative technique of the
Homeric aristeia, which proceeds from one kill to the nextand the next and
the next. But here, too, there are a few noteworthy differences, for Petersen,
making his film more than 2,500years after Homer, was facing huge cultural
changes. The first important difference is that Homer names and briefly
describes the fallen victims, whereas they remain anonymous in the film. It is
self-evident that this change derives from the differences in the two narrative
media: it would be absurd to interrupt the narrative flow of a film to provide, in
whatever manner, information about momentary opponents who appear only
for seconds and play no part in the story. In classical epic, however, it is almost
necessary that individuals be identified or named; in this way a victims ances-
try and social rank heighten the victorious heros glory, his kleos. While Homer
could count on his listeners familiarity with at least some of such minor
heroes, modern audiences would be at a loss to recognize any of them and
might well wonder what the point might be in receiving details extraneous to
the story. Moreover, the catalogue-type listings of names is an integral part of
ancient epic technique and goes back to the pre-literate era of oral narration,
usually delivered before varying aristocratic audiences who might even trace
their own ancestry back to the heroic age of the Trojan War. Such listeners
would have considered mention of a mythic ancestor in any epic context a
great family or personal honor. Some of these aristocrats may well have been
the very employers, as it were, of Homeric bards or performers. Such consid-
erations, of course, do not apply to viewers of Troy. Instead, their personal or
emotional allegiances derive mainly from what is generally called audience
identification: agreement with, or disagreement from, a storys main charac-
ters on the basis of their morals or ethics, their behavior, and their social or
political convictions. In the case of Troy, Hector is primarily the patriotic
102 Kofler and Schaffenrath

defender of his country; Achilles exhibits heroic strength, a sense of political,

military, and personal independence from and opposition to a tyrannical and
power-hungry Agamemnon; Helen embodies a kind of female seductiveness to
which both women and men in the audience can easily respond, if in different
ways. The casting of Eric Bana as Hector, Brad Pitt as Achilles, and Diane Kruger
as Helen underscores their characters physical allure. By contrast, the
Agamemnon of Brian Cox and the occasionally downright sleazy Menelaus of
Brendan Gleeson are immediately recognizable as villains by the unappealing
figures they cut.
The second chief difference between a heros aristeia in epic and one on
screen derives from a change in narrative technique that works better in a
film than in a text. The reason can be understood immediately. Homeric
epic usually concentrates on one hero at any one momentthe separate
aristeiai especially by Diomedes, Agamemnon, and finally Achilles
and turns to the next heros aristeia only after the end of anothers. In the
cinema we usually find, and indeed expect, a rapid intercutting from one
fighter to another and from one part of a battlefield to another. Editing, the
very basis of cinematic technique, necessitates such a change in a films
presentation of its heroes in war; it also makes for more dramatic action
and suspense scenes as they unfold in images. By contrast, such jumping
around in an oral tale or in a story being read on a page is likely to confuse
or disorient a listener or reader. In Troy, Achilles is clearly the chief heroic
character during the fighting around the temple of Apollo, but Petersen
also shows us various other fights or brief skirmishes occurring at the same
time and in Achilles vicinity, fights in which he is not himself involved.
These other fights in turn take place between and among nameless war-
riors and as well-known a figure as Ajax. Here, in scenes of rapid action, the
cinema exhibits far greater flexibility than literature, mainly because view-
ers are more immediately drawn into complex sequences they see before
their eyes than readers who imagine such scenes in their mindseyes while
turning the pages. A viewers intellectual (and emotional) capabilities are
better suited to following rapidly changing images on a screen, even those
shown from different characters perspectives or even from a s udden birds-
eyes view, than to keeping pace with comparable changes in verbal
narratives. Moreover, cinematic editing techniques, especially that of rap-
idly intercutting disparate moments, people, or places, are especially well
suited to presenting stark contrasts with powerful immediacy. The rustic
giant Ajax whowildly swings his oversized axe around his head, for instance,
is in strong contrast to the lithe Achilles and the swift-footed elegance of
his style of fighting.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 103

6 Arming for Battle

Homer frequently describes scenes in which the greatest heroes put on their
armor before going out on the battlefield. It is immediately noticeable that his
descriptions are greatly enhanced by formulaic language, which signals to listeners
or readers the special importance of the fighting that is to follow. Scholars refer to
these and comparably formulaic scenes as being typical of Homeric epic; they
function as kinds of building blocks for larger narrative units.19 Formulaic language
and typical scenes, especially those that describe heroes arming themselves or
fighting a duel, can readily be transposed into cinematic styles of storytelling.
Achilles rejoins the Greek army after the death of Patroclus and after receiving
from his mother Thetis a new set of armor wrought by Hephaestus, the divine
smith. Having provided a detailed ecphrasis of Achilles shield at the end of Book
18, one of the most famous passages in the entire work, Homer does full justice in
the following book to the moment in which Achilles readies himself:

First he placed along his legs the fair greaves linked with
silver fastenings to hold the greaves at the ankles.
Afterward he girt on about his chest the corselet,
and across his shoulders slung the sword with the nails of silver,
a bronze sword, and caught up the great shield, huge and heavy
next, and from it the light glimmered far, as from the moon.
And lifting the helmet he set it
massive upon his head, and the helmet crested with horse-hair
shone like a star, the golden fringes were shaken about it
which Hephaistos had driven close along the horn of the helmet.
And brilliant Achilleus tried himself in his armour, to see
if it fitted close, and how his glorious limbs ran within it,
and the armour became as wings and upheld the shepherd of the people.
Next he pulled out from its standing place the spear of his father,
huge, heavy, thick, which no one else of all the Achaians
could handle, but Achilleus alone knew how to wield it,
the Pelian ash spear which Cheiron had brought to his father
from high on Pelion, to be death for fighters in battle.20

19 On this side of Homeric epic see especially Bernard Fenik, Typical Battle Scenes in the
Iliad: Studies in the Narrative Technique of Homeric Battle Descriptions (Stuttgart: Steiner,
1968), 7374 (the goddess Athena), 7879 (Agamemnon), and 191 (Patroclus).
20 Iliad 19.369391, omitting the simile at 375380 (Lattimore, 424).
104 Kofler and Schaffenrath

Achilles horses and chariot are brought up next. The hero is ready.
The equivalent of this scene in Troy begins at dawn with Achilles, morose
or even depressed, staring at the mound on which the mortal remains of
Patroclus had been burned the night before. Achilles then rallies and
strides to his tent, before which his faithful companion Eudorus is lying. I
need my armor! Achilles declares and vanishes inside. Now a cut to a bed,
in which Hectors wife Andromache is sleeping; next to the bed is little
Astyanax crib. We realize at once that we are in the royal palace of Troy.
The camera, pulling back steadily, reveals, after a couple of seconds, a side-
ways view of Hector, turned screen right, in medium close-up. Standing in
front of a kind of rack on which his suit of armor is hanging, he is in the
process of pulling an arm guard onto his right forearm. Suddenly we get a
new view. A second arm guard, seen from the left, is being taken down from
a similar rack in close-up. The different view and the darker color of this
piece allow attentive viewers to deduce that they are not now observing
Hector. Petersen immediately provides certainty, for his following shot
shows Achilles standing inside his tent. He is putting on his left-arm guard.
But we do not stay with him for long, for another cut shows us a leg guard
being pushed down over a knee. Since the warrior in question is again fac-
ing right, we are back with Hector. Quickly, however, the camera takes us
back to Achilles, who is putting on a leg guard as well, still turned screen
left. Then back to Hector, looking at the rack and placing one hand on the
shoulder piece of his armor. Next Achilles, taking down and putting on his
armor. Now Hector again: he takes his helmet in his hand and reaches for his
shield. Even before he can finish lifting it up, however, we see Achilles putting
on his helmet. After this we are in Hector and Andromaches bedroom for the
last time, with the husband casting a final glance at his wife across their babys
crib and going out. At that moment Andromache awakens and looks after
Hector. The sequence ends outside Achilles tent. His chariot is being driven
up; Achilles mounts. Rope! he commands, laconically and ominously. Not
even Briseis and her desperate pleas can hold him back.
It is immediately evident that this scene follows the model of Homers lines
quoted above, but it does so with noticeable differences. A verbal description
has been translated into its visual and entirely wordless equivalent.21 The

21 Evidence that ancient visual arts had shown the same kind of scene appears on the tondo
of a Laconian kylix (ca. 550525 bc), which shows two Spartan warriors arming for battle.
A photograph may be found, and in a cinematic context at that, in Carmine Catenacci, Le
Termopili, i 300 e larcheologia dellimmaginario, in Roberto Andreotti (ed.), Resistenza
del Classico (Milan: Rizzoli, 2009), 160172, at 165 (Fig.1).
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 105

scenes deviations from Homer are, in fact, the very reason why this scene in
Troy stands out as particularly memorable. Smaller differences in the epics
and the films ways of describing Achilles arming himself are quickly evident,
for Petersen adds greaves but omits spear and sword. Moreover, for the sake of
realism, Achilles armor is nowhere near as beautiful or as splendidly deco-
rated as the one Homers Achilles puts on. The most obvious difference, of
course, is the addition of Hector. Rapid intercutting between two separate
locations but with fundamentally one and the same activity going on in both
this is a highly cinematic and effective way to impress on viewers what will
soon follow, the duel to the death between the films main heroes. Whereas
Homers emphasis during the day of their duel is wholly on Achilles, who
defeats and kills a whole slew of other heroes before facing Hector, Petersen, by
contrast, focuses entirely on the one decisive fight between the greatest war-
riors among the Greeks and Trojans. As viewers familiar with the Iliad will
know in advance, and as viewers unfamiliar with it can foresee, Achilles will
win. But the death of Hector is, in Troy, of such great importance that Petersen
is fully justified in giving equal attention to Hector and Achilles before they
meet. As in Homer and Greek myth generally, Hectors death dooms Troy, the
Trojans, and Hectors young son.22 In retrospect, then, we realize that Petersens
presentation of the two heroes arming themselves, with the emotional weight
distributed equally between the two, amounts to no less than an ideal intro-
duction to their duel and even to the manner in which Petersen has staged and
edited it.23
Petersens integration of Hector into the Homeric arming scene provides the
film with new opportunities concerning the structure of its plot. As we saw
already, cinema can more easily cut back and forth between two narrative per-
spectives or situations than epic could do. In the films scene of Hector and
Achilles putting on their armor, this advantage becomes more pronounced.
The intercutting amounts to a clever interlocking, as it were, of both heroes
actions. Hector puts on the first arm guard, Achilles the second; Hector slips on
a leg guard, Achilles fastens it; Hector looks at a suit of armor, Achilles takes it
down and puts it on. The result is an impression of temporal simultaneity,
which is a given, and, beyond this, an initial impression that two places and

22 The subtitle of a well-known study of the Iliad is therefore apropos: James M. Redfield,
Nature and Culture in the Iliad: The Tragedy of Hector, expanded ed. (Durham: Duke
University Press, 1994; rpt. 2004). Cf. further Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan
Myth, 486487.
23 On the duel, and especially Achilles balletic movements, see Stephen Scully, The Fate of
Troy, in TROY, 119130, at 129130.
106 Kofler and Schaffenrath

two men are identicalwhich is not the case. In this way the arming scene
acquires a high degree of cohesion, as if the two opponents were one and the
same. In Homer they actually appear so when they finally encounter each
other in Book 22, for Achilles is wearing his divinely made armor and Hector is
wearing Achilles old armor, stripped from Patroclus body. If we visualize the
Homeric moment in our minds eye, it is as if two Achilleses were fighting each
other. In Troy, the contrast between Achilles and Hector that Petersen man-
ages to infuse into this very brief sceneonly fifty seconds of screen time pass
between Achilles entering and leaving his tentincreases our understanding
of their respective personalities, for attentive viewers will not overlook the dif-
ferences between Achilles and Hector in terms of their temperaments and
states of emotion. A rather subdued Hector, who presumably senses or even
knows his fate, protracts his farewell from his family and takes up the individ-
ual parts of his armor only slowly. In particular, the almost sensitive way in
which he puts on his leg guard and his contemplative glance at the cuirass
hanging on the rack before him tell us much about his state of mind. Achilles,
on the other hand, whose impulsive, even hot-headed, disposition we have
witnessed more than once, is still angered by the death of Patroclus; he is
apparently barely able to restrain himself. The jerky movements with which he
ties his leg guard and practically tears his cuirass from its rack are revealing.
Petersens narrative technique takes direct recourse to the Iliad. A detailed
comparison between Homers Iliad and Petersens Troy, provided that it is
based on close familiarity with both works, is apt to demonstrate how certain
formal, and formulaic, criteria of epic style and various narrative or plot cor-
respondencesand, yes, differencesbetween epic and film can throw new
light on artistic creativity across millennia. It can tell us how artists of the early
twenty-first century, working in a highly sophisticated technical medium that
was inconceivable to the ancients, adapt and meaningfully update a work of
classical literature for their and our time. Troy is not the Iliadwhat but the
Iliad itself is?and does not pretend to be the Iliad. But it is certainly more
Homeric in spirit than many critics, among them classical scholars, were quick
to assert.24 It is likely that the significant changes to, and downright deviations
from, Greek myth and mythical epic that are on view in Troy blinded many
viewers, reviewers, and scholars to the undeniable subtleties that the film does
contain. From this point of view it may be regrettable that Petersen could

24 Contrast, for example, Daniel Mendelsohn, A Little Iliad, The New York Review of Books
(June 24, 2004), 4649; rpt. in Daniel Mendelsohn, How Beautiful It Is and How Easily It
Can Be Broken: Essays (New York: Harper, 2008; rpt. 2009), 111123, with Joachim Latacz,
From Homers Troy to Petersens Troy, in TROY, 2742.
Petersens Epic Technique: Troy And Its Homeric Model 107

release his preferred version, the directors cut, only on home video and only
years after the theatrical version had appeared. But at least the directors cut
can serve as a new basis of study for all those seriously interested in ancient
epic, in Homer and his Iliad, and in epic cinema.

Translated by Martin M. Winkler

 chapter 5

Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods

Martin M. Winkler

In 1954, half a century before the release of Wolfgang Petersens Troy, Homers
Odyssey made a triumphant return to Italian high and popular culture in print
and on the screen. Alberto Moravia published his novel Contempt (Il disprezzo),
and Dino de Laurentiis and Carlo Ponti released Ulysses (Ulisse), directed by
veteran filmmaker Mario Camerini and starring Kirk Douglas. This Italian-
American co-production was the first adaptation of Homeric epic in the sound
era, filmed on attractive locations in widescreen (1.66:1) and color and even in
3-D. (It went into general release in a shortened and flat version.) The film
established, or rather re-established after a considerable hiatus, classical antiq-
uity as a popular and lucrative subject for the cinema. Some years ago Hanna
Roisman, an experienced Homer scholar, wrote a brief appreciation in a jour-
nal intended for professionals and general readers alike. She called the films
screenplay tersely cogent and yet entertaining and its scenery absolutely
captivating. The film, she concluded, preserves the spirit of fantasy and
adventure of the ancient epic in spite of significant alterations to and conden-
sations of Homer. Her review ends with the verdict: This is one of the best film
versions of the Odyssey.1
Contempt, the other influential reappearance of Homer that year in Italy, is,
however, more important. Moravia had started writing about cinema in 1933;
from 1944 on he regularly wrote film reviews and essays.2 By 1954 he had col-
laborated on several screenplays, with and without credit. A number of his
novels, sometimes with his script participation, were made into outstanding
films. Best known are Vittorio De Sicas Two Women (1960) and Bernardo
Bertoluccis The Conformist (1970). In between came Jean-Luc Godards adapta-
tion of Contempt (1963), to which I will turn later.

1 Hanna M. Roisman, Film Reviews: Ulysses (1954), Amphora, 1 no. 1 (2002), 1011. Details
about the film are in Herv Dumont, Lantiquit au cinma: Vrits, lgendes et manipulations
(Paris: Nouveau Monde/Lausanne: Cinmathque suisse, 2009), 203204. A 2013 edition of
this essential book is available electronically from its author at www.hervedumont.ch.
2 His writings on the cinema are now collected in Alberto Moravia, Cinema italiano: Recensioni
e interventi, 19331990, ed. Alberto Pezzotta and Anna Gilardelli (Milan: Bompiani, 2010). The
book is over 1,600 pages long.

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_007

Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 109

1 Spectacle vs. Psychology: The Debate about Gods in Moravias

Contempt and Its Importance for Film

Riccardo Molteni, the narrator of Moravias Contempt, is a novelist and occa-

sional screenwriter. He is looking back on the disintegration of his marriage
while he was involved with a film version of the Odyssey that emphasized the
marriage of Odysseus and Penelope. Molteni is eloquent about the complexi-
ties that arise when a classic work of literature is to be adapted in a modern
medium for contemporary audiences. What, decades later, a Homer scholar
observed in connection with Troy about epic audiences at any time in and
since antiquity fits Moltenis context equally well: to a large degree audiences
dictate the way that a story is told. Audiences take their own preconceptions
and expectations to a narrative; responsibilities and opportunities as well
result for the storyteller.3 To this we might add: audiences also come with their
prior knowledge or ignorance of that story.
Moravia modeled Molteni largely on himself, for what Molteni reveals about
filmmaking could easily have been said or written by his creator from both his
cinematic and marital experiences.4 Moltenis observations about the gods in
Homer and what could or should be done with them are important for any
screen adaptation of Homer. They appear to derive from Moravias observa-
tions about Camerinis film.
While preparing an initial treatment, Molteni stumbles over a question
prompted by the very first scene in the Odyssey: whether or not it was suitable

3 Quoted from Jonathan S. Burgess, Achilles Heel: The Historicism of the Film Troy, in Kostas
Myrsiades (ed.), Reading Homer: Film and Text (Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University
Press, 2009), 163185; quotation at 164.
4 The close analogies between Molteni and Moravia are well-documented. See, e.g., Renzo
Paris, Moravia: Una vita controvoglia (Florence: Giunti, 1996), 143144 and 234236. Paris, 234,
speaks of Alberto-Riccardo. What Moravia later said about his screenwriting experiences
could have come from Molteni: I always had the sensation that I was giving something pre-
cious, for money, to someone who would exploit it for his own ends. The scriptwritergives
himself totally to the script, but the directors name is on the movie. Quoted from Alberto
Moravia and Alain Elkann, Life of Moravia, tr. William Weaver (South Royalton, Vt.: Steerforth
Italia, 2000), 151.Moravia may have visited Camerini on location for Ulysses, at least accord-
ing to Laura Mulvey, Le Mpris (Jean-Luc Godard 1963) and Its Story of Cinema: A Fabric of
Quotations, in Colin MacCabe and Laura Mulvey (eds.), Godards Contempt [sic]: Essays from
the London Consortium (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012), 225237, at 227. Cf. Michel Marie,
Un monde qui saccorde nos dsirs (Le Mpris, Jean-Luc Godard, 1963), Revue belge du
cinma, 16 (1986), 2436, at 27. The writings collected in Moravia, Cinema italiano, mention
Camerini on a few occasions, mainly concerning earlier films of his, but never refer to Ulysses.
110 Winkler

to introduce into my summary the Council of the Gods. Molteni is aware of the
serious alteration that an omission of the gods would mean for the film, but he is
equally aware that neither his producer nor his director, the two other people
most intimately and powerfully involved in the production, are in favor of includ-
ing Homers divine apparatus. Molteni then muses about the fate of the gods:

Cutting out the council meant cutting out the whole supramundane
aspect of the poem, eliminating all divine intervention, suppressing the
figures of the various divinities, so charming and poetical in themselves.
But there was no doubt that Battista [the producer] would not want to
have anything to do with the gods, who would seem to him nothing more
than incompetent chatterboxes who made a great fuss about deciding
things that could perfectly well be decided by the protagonists. As for
Rheingold [the director], the ambiguous hint he had given of a psycho-
logical film presaged no good towards the divinities: psychology obvi-
ously excludes Fate and divine intervention; at most, it discovers Fate in
the depths of the human spirit, in the dark intricacies of the so-called
subconscious. The gods, therefore, would be superfluous, because n either
spectacular nor psychological.5

No one has ever put the matter with greater concision than Moravia did here
through his Molteni. If you keep the gods, you have to hire actors to portray
them, build a sumptuous setMt. Olympusto put them in, and provide
them with something to do and say that is important enough to justify their
presence and your expenses. And you must make absolutely clear who all these
characters with supernatural powers are. This is not an easy thing to pull off in
an age of significantly decreased familiarity with classical religion, myth, litera-
ture, and culture. Additional explanatory dialogue becomes unavoidable. Gods
on screen tend to have a lot more to say than to do. Desmond Daviss Clash of
the Titans (1980) provides a telling example of gods who do little more than
stand around talking. The gods in Don Chaffeys Jason and the Argonauts (1963)
suffer much the same fate, although a few of them are integrated into that
films plot. The following words by Wolfgang Petersen about this side of epic
filmmaking are therefore fully justified:

5 The preceding quotations are taken from Alberto Moravia, Contempt, tr. Angus Davidson
(New York: New York Review Books, 1999; rpt. 2004), 98 and 9899. Davidsons translation is
slightly different in this edition from its original version published under the title A Ghost at
Noon (New York: Farrar Straus and Young/London: Secker & Warburg, 1955). The variant
English title derives from the novels pre-publication title Il fantasma di mezzogiorno.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 111

Do you remember how Laurence Olivier as Zeus in Clash of the Titans

came down from the clouds? Today, seeing this, sixteen-year-old movie-
goers would only giggle or yawn. They want to watch how Brad Pitt as
Achilles takes his own fate in hand, they want Orlando Bloom [as Paris]
to fight and then run away because he is a coward and not because the
gods command him to.6

On another occasion Petersen was even more explicit: I think that, if we could
consult with him, Homer would be the first today to advise: Get rid of the
gods.7 Earlier, Greek writer-director Michael Cacoyannis, who made three
films based on plays by EuripidesElectra (1962), The Trojan Women (1971),
and Iphigenia (1977)had been equally clear on the subject, virtually provid-
ing the rationale for Petersens view: To show them [the gods] on the screen
would be alienating to modern audiences, who should identify with the char-
acters and be as moved as Euripides intended his audiences to be.8
In principle, there is nothing new here. As has been observed about ancient
epitomes of the Homeric epics:

In the Iliad and Odyssey there is much preparation by means of debates

at the divine or human level and much prompting of action by the inter-
vention of individual deities. A prose epitomator eliminates this sort of
thing: he is concerned to describe the action itself and how the story
moved on from one decisive event to the next.9

6 Quoted, in my translation, from Frank Arnold, Wolfgang Petersen: Keine Welt in

Schwarz und Wei, Klner Stadtanzeiger (May 14, 2004); http://www.ksta.de/kultur/
wolfgang-petersen--keine-welt-in-schwarz-und-weiss,15189520,14068132.html. The Zeus of
Clash of the Titans does not actually leave Olympus.
7 Quoted, in my translation, from Peter Zander, Deutscher Hrtetest: Wolfgang Petersen hat
Troja verfilmtund fand in den Sagen Parallelen zu George W. Bush, Berliner Morgenpost
(May 12, 2004); http://morgenpost.berlin1.de/archiv2004/040512/feuilleton/story677622.html.
8 Quoted from Marianne McDonald and Martin M. Winkler, Michael Cacoyannis and Irene
Papas on Greek Tragedy, in Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Classical Myth and Culture in the Cinema
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 7289; quotation at 79. Gods appear in Euripides
Trojan Women but not in Electra or Iphigenia in Aulis. Cacoyannis directed several Greek trag-
edies on the stage in Europe and the United States. On the problems of the appearance of
gods (and other supernatural beings) in the modern theater see now the overview in Simon
Goldhill, How to Stage Greek Tragedy Today (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2007),
189222.
9 Quoted from M.L. West, The Epic Cycle: A Commentary on the Lost Troy Epics (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2013), 51.
112 Winkler

Such an epitome is not the epic it is based on, and no one ever mistook the one
for the other or became incensed at the changes. Petersens and Cacoyanniss
films are not, and were not meant to be, their originals and no one has ever
mistaken the ones for the others. But this has not always saved such films from
the ire of scholars.
Taking ones fate in hand and acting in a certain way because one is a hero
or a cowardthis is the kind of psychological approach that is important to
Moravias Rheingold and that enables a director to avoid all the divine chat-
terboxes that Moltenis producer does not want. But what does his producer
want? Molteni has no illusions about this; the fact that the matter comes up for
discussion several times in Contempt reveals that it was also important for
Moravia. Homers poetry is always spectacular, Battista opines, and when I
say spectacular I mean it has something in it that infallibly pleases the public.10
Polyphemus, for example, is to Battista a kind of ancient King Kong. Later
Battista elaborates on this analogy:

Now, Molteni, let it be quite clear that what I want is a film as much like
Homers Odyssey as possible. And what was Homers intention, with the
Odyssey? He intended to tell an adventure story which would keep the
reader in suspense the whole timea story which would be, so to speak,
spectacular. Thats what Homer wanted to do. And I want you two
[Molteni and Rheingold] to stick faithfully to Homer. Homer put giants,
prodigies, storms, witches, monsters into the Odysseyand I want you to
put giants, prodigies, storms, witches and monsters into the film.11

Later yet, Rheingold gives a concise summary of Battistas viewpoint: a mas-

querade in technicolor [sic] with naked women, King Kong, stomach dances,
brassires, cardboard monsters, model sets!12 Much of this kind of filmmaking
is on view in Camerinis Ulysses. But brassires and naked women? Battista had
drawn special attention to this when he emphasized the spectacular that infal-
libly pleases the public. At that point he had continued: Take for example the
Nausicaa episode. All those lovely girls dressed in nothing at all, splashing
about in the water under the eyes of Ulysses. There, with slight variations,
you have a complete Bathing Beauties scene.13 King Kong and Bathing
Beauties: small wonder that Battistas company is called Triumph Films!

10 Moravia, Contempt, 86.

11 Moravia, Contempt, 154; last two ellipses in original.
12 Moravia, Contempt, 206.
13 Moravia, Contempt, 86.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 113

Contemporary readers of Contempt who had recently watched Camerinis

Ulysses or would watch it soon after reading the novel may well have been
struck by how closely the discussion in the book fits the images on the screen.
Ulysses is exactly that: a spectacular adventure story that keeps its viewers if
not in suspense then at least not bored, what with its giant monster, witch,
storm, and lovely girls. The latter could not possibly have been naked, but
Nausicaas companions are as daringly close to naked as any producer could
have hoped to get away with. Their loose-flowing and semi-diaphanous clothes
clearly reveal their well-rounded personalities. No brassires are in evidence.
All this is spectacularly attractive, but it is hardly Homer. It is doubtful that
Ulysses is one of the best films of the Odyssey.
Then there is the absence of the gods from Ulysses. A statue of Athena in the
courtyard of Odysseus home on Ithaca tells us about his and Penelopes sense
of religion, but a statue of Neptune (Poseidon) is first toppled during the fall of
Troy and then thrown from Odysseus ship during a storm, both times on
Odysseus command. Odysseus boasts about his heroism as invincible sacker
of Troy and his defiance of Poseidon cause the gods persecution, not Odysseus
blinding of Poseidons son Polyphemus. To paraphrase Molteni: what in Homer
the god decides about the protagonist is decided in the film by the hero. This
Odysseus is practically asking for a storm. The purely human motivation for
the reason why Odysseus is being persecuted recurs in a later adaptation,
Andrey Konchalovskys television film The Odyssey (1997), in which Odysseus
is even more daring than he had been in Camerinis version and boasts about
his invincibility to Poseidon himself.
Closely connected to such a change concerning the divine, or perhaps even
a necessary result of it, is the exclusively human and realistic motivation for
the origin of the Trojan War in several films, including Troy. The narrator of
Robert Wises Helen of Troy (1956), another American-Italian coproduction,
informs viewers that Troy grew prosperous, a tempting prize of war for the
Greek nations. The Greek kings are assembled at Sparta, contemplating a
campaign against Troy even before Paris arrives. You can have the glory; Ill
take Troys gold, Menelaus declares, and Odysseus first words to the others
are: Greetings, fellow pirates! Agamemnon rebukes him for his levity, calling
the war they are contemplating righteous and, in an astonishing display of
Orwellian double-speak, a war of defensive aggression. There will be more
along these lines later in the film. Such militarism and greed contrast with the
pacifism of the Trojans, a happy people in love with beauty, as the narrator
describes them. Troys industrious citizens were enjoying the works of peace.
A voice-over at the beginning of Cacoyanniss The Trojan Women, an inter-
national production, tells us that Troys wealth was legend and that for years
114 Winkler

the Greeks had looked toward the East and talked of the barbarian threat.14
After Helens abduction they were ready. Apparently the military or political
threat was no more than a pretext for the Greeks war of conquest, with the
elopement or abduction of Helen merely a convenient justification. In
Iphigenia the matter comes even more to the fore when Agamemnon sets
Menelaus straight about the real reason for the impending war:

You think that the elders of Greece go to war for you and your honor. They
just wanted an excuse, and you gave it to them on a platter. Their dreams
of invasion are getting wilder because of Troys gold.

Similarly, in John Kent Harrisons television film Helen of Troy (2003)

Agamemnon tells his little brother Menelaus about his aims after Helens
elopement with Paris: You may have the Trojan [Paris] and your whore. I will
take Troy. Youll share no spoils. Much the same is the case a year later in Troy.
It is solely Agamemnon, routinely called King of Kings, whose dream of inva-
sion is getting limitless. Agamemnon lusts after more and more power. I didnt
come here for your pretty wife, he tells Menelaus, I came for Troy. Such ruth-
less Realpolitik smacks more of twentieth-century imperialism than of ancient
literature, but it nevertheless reflects what we know about Bronze-Age history
and what at least one classical historian in the fifth century bc thought
aboutAgamemnon. Here is a modern scholars summation, based on the pre-
classical literary and archaeological record:

It is unlikely that the war was actually fought because of Helens kidnap-
ping, even though that may have provided a convenient excuse. The real
motivations were probably political and commercial, the acquisition of
land and control of lucrative trade routes, as were most such wars in the
ancient world.15

And here is what Thucydides, the great Athenian historian, wrote about
Homers (and historys) Agamemnon:

14 That victory in the Trojan War brought immense wealth to the Greeks is, of course, not to
be denied. Quintus of Smyrna, Posthomerica 14.354360, is a convenient summary state-
ment of the fact.
15 Quoted from Eric H. Cline, The Trojan War: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2013), 52. Apparently the point is important enough for Cline to restate
it later (107108).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 115

Agamemnon, it seems to me, must have been the most powerful of the
rulers of his day; and it was for this reason that he raised the force against
Troy. The descendants of Pelops became more powerful than the
descendants of Perseus. It was to this empire that Agamemnon suc-
ceeded, and at the same time he had a stronger navy than any other ruler;
thus, in my opinion, fear played a greater part than loyalty in the raising
of the expedition against Troy. It appears, if we can believe the evidence
of Homer, that Agamemnon himself commanded more ships than any-
one else and at the same time equipped another fleet for the Arcadians.
Homer calls him: Of many islands and all Argos King. As his power was
based on the mainland, he could not have ruled over any islands, except
the few that are near the coast, unless he had a considerable navy.16

The Agamemnon of Troy fits this description to a surprising degree.

Neither Wises nor Petersens films contain the divine beauty contest among
Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite that led to the Judgment of Paris, to Paris abduc-
tion of Helen, and to the Trojan War. Even when it is not entirely absent, as is
the case in Harrisons Helen of Troy, the supernatural is largely de-emphasized.
Harrisons film includes the Judgment of Paris because it increases the roman-
ticism of its story. Even so, the cause of the goddesses rivalry remains untold.
A far shorter, indeed radically abbreviated, version had appeared on Italian
screens more than nine decades before. In Luigi Romano Borgnetto and
Giovanni Pastrones The Fall of Troy (1911), an elaborate (for its era) epic of
about thirty minutes running time, Paris arrives at Sparta as ambassador from
Troy while Menelaus is absent. He is immediately smitten with Helen. She,
surprisingly, is at first shocked at his advances but almost instantaneously falls
for his sweet talk. He is also handsome and younger than her husband. Then
we see the two strolling around the countryside. An intertitle identifies Paris as
Venus favorite, and the goddess herself appears on screen in a double expo-
sure next to the lovers. She holds her cloak or large veil over the two as an
indication that it is she is who is engineering their affair. Why Paris should be
her favorite is left unexplained.

16 Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War 1.9; quoted from Rex Warner (tr.),
Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War, rev. ed. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972;
several rpts.), 3940. The Homeric passages to which Thucydides refers are Iliad 2.569
580 (Agamemnon commands a hundred ships and rules the most peoples) and 603614
(he furnishes the Arcadians with sixty ships). Thucydides quotation is from Iliad
2.107108.
116 Winkler

In Contempt, Molteni seems to agree to omitting the gods from his script for
the sake of greater realism and a more psychologically convincingthat is to
say, modernpresentation of human characters. Apparently the actual direc-
tors of all the films mentioned above shared the fictional Rheingolds and
Battistas views on the matter. Evidently, Roisman agrees with Camerini and
his writers when they did the same in Ulysses, as did Wise and his writers, one
of whom had worked on Camerinis film. And nobody has ever seriously criti-
cized Cacoyannis for adhering to the same attitude. We may conclude that it
has been entirely acceptable to experts and to lovers of classical literature that
gods should be left out of filmsuntil Troy.

2 Varieties of Religious Appearance: Athenas Theophany to Achilles

(and Odysseus)

The gods in Troy are conspicuous by their absence as characters and by their
presence as statues. The Trojans in particular revere them; they mention the
gods, especially Apollo, on numerous occasions. Briseis, here a member of the
Trojan royal family rather than Homers Lyrnessian princess, is Apollos most
important priestess. Achilles mother, the eternally young sea goddess Thetis,
does appear on screen, but she is never referred to as a goddess or identified as
Thetis. And she is played by an actress old enough to be actor Brad Pitts actual
motheranother turn toward realism: to audiences who are unaware of
Thetis divinity in Homer, Troy does nothing to suggest that she is anything
other than a worried, intuitive mother.17
Scholars have repeatedly focused on the gods in Troy and the films merits or
demerits that result from their omission. Here I summarize three verdicts by
Homer scholars. I will then advance a different perspective in order to demon-
strate that the entire matter is both more complex and more Homeric than
most of the films critics have realized.
Stephen Scully reports his ambivalence about the quality of Troy as epic
filmat the beginning of his essay The Fate of Troy.18 Concerning the gods,
however, Scully is not at all ambivalent:

17 Quoted from Joanna Paul, Film and the Classical Epic Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2013), 108. Pauls previous assertion on the same page that Thetis appears as a
named deity is therefore misleading. Thetis is named in the script, not in the film.
18 Stephen Scully, The Fate of Troy, in Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to
Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 119130, at 119: the films overall design, on
which my view is mixed.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 117

Troy, to its peril, has done away with Homers gods, although Achilles
mother Thetis does make an odd cameo appearance as an aging goddess.
The absence of divine machinery and its mundane dialogue keep Troy
from achieving epic greatness. Cutting the gods out of his film, Petersen
significantly domesticates plot and motivation. His recourse is to make a
story of true love [Paris and Helens] on the one hand and of naked impe-
rialism [Agamemnons] on the other. How pale compared with what
Homer gave him! It is crucial to the broad canvas of epic that some force
larger than human contain man. In ancient epic the gods fulfill this role,
but it need not always be so. In Tolstoys War and Peace history functions
in much the same way. Without such framing, the hero looms too large.19

To this we could add that the gods did not make it into each and every epic
even in antiquity. In Lucans Pharsalia, a Roman epic composed during the
reign of Nero that deals with the Civil War waged by Julius Caesar and Pompey
the Great, the gods are absent and no longer play the important part that they
did in Homer. History has decisively functioned in literature long before
Tolstoy. Times change; epics change. Long before Lucan and other Roman
poets, Greek epics had been changing since the time of Homer.20 As has been
concisely observed about later Hellenistic epic and its influence on Roman
epic, especially Ovids Metamorphoses:

Since it was ingrained in the nature of Alexandrianism to regard gods and

heroes not so much from a reverent distance but to move them closer to
the sensibilities of modern man, a poet like Ovid in particular would have
had to deny his own nature if he had granted his characters nothing but
that sublimity which the grand genre [i.e. epic] naturally demanded but
which not even Homer himself had observed throughout.21

19 Scully, The Fate of Troy, 120 and 124.

20 The comments by Albert Severyns, Le Cycle pique dans lcole dAristarque (Lige: Vaillant-
Carmanne/Paris: Champion, 1928; rpt. 1967), 352, on the epic technique followed by the
poet of the Little Iliad, one of the works from the Epic Cycle about the Trojan War, are
useful for our context. West, The Epic Cycle, 171, quotes Severyns with approval.
21 Quoted, in my translation, from Hans Herter, Ovids Kunstprinzip in den Metamorphosen,
American Journal of Philology, 69 (1948), 129148; quotation at 132. The original reads: Lag
es schon im Wesen des Alexandrinismus, Gtter und Heroen nicht so sehr aus
ehrfrchtiger Ferne zu betrachten, sondern dem Gefhle des modernen Menschen nher
zu rcken, so htte ein Ovid erst recht sich selbst verleugnen mssen, wenn er seinen
Gestalten immer die Erhabenheit gewahrt htte, die die grosse Form eigentlich erfor
derte, aber nicht einmal Homer selber durchweg beobachtet hatte.
118 Winkler

Modernization is unavoidable and necessary. If the ancients themselves did

not see anything wrong in moving gods closer to modern sensibilities, why
should we?
In contrast to Scully, consider now what Joachim Latacz has said on the
same topic. From the scene that contains the films most controversial state-
ment about the gods, when Achilles tells Briseis that they envy humans, Latacz
concludes:

The scene reveals that one of the main charges critics have leveled against
Petersenthat he omitted the gods from his narrativeis wrong. The
gods are present in Troy. They are inside the humans.

Latacz then gives a concise characterization of Petersens Achilles and reaches

an overall assessment of the film that may astonish more traditionally inclined
scholars:

Petersen has understood Homer. Following the examples of Homer and

other ancient poets, he did the only right thing: he emphasized several, if
not all, of the themes that had already been important to Homer and his
audiences.22

Important to Homer and his audiences: evidently Latacz has understood

Petersen. If, as we saw, epics changed even in antiquity, so did audiences. From
Homer to Tolstoy and beyond, the great epic poets and novelists composed
their works for their own listeners and readers. In our age of visual storytelling,
epic filmmakers compose their works for their own contemporaries, their
viewers. As Latacz observes, Petersen has emphasized themes important at
Homers time. Many of these are still important in our time. Their substance
war and peace, heroism and cowardice, love and lust; duty, honor, mortality
remains unchanged, even if their outward appearances are different.
After Scully and Latacz, Charles Chiasson has attempted to stake out a
thirdpositionsince the status of the gods in Troy is more complexthan the
bare binary opposition of presence and absence would suggest.23 This is a

22 Joachim Latacz, From Homers Troy to Petersens Troy, tr. Martin M. Winkler; in TROY,
2742; quotations at 42 (ellipses in original).
23 Charles C. Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, in
Myrsiades (ed.), Reading Homer: Film and Text, 163185, with section Heroism and the
Gods (195203); quotation at 197. A more recent examination of heroism in Troy is in
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 119

useful perspective. Chiasson well discusses the gods in connection with

the films portrayals of its heroes, especially Achilles. Although Chiasson
remains highly critical, his analysis went further than anyone elses. Here is
itsessence:

Petersens gods exist as utterly debased versions of their Homeric counter-

partsas paradoxically impotent deities who prove powerless both to
punish the humans who are disrespectful to them and to protect the
humans who revere them. In other words, these are gods who lack what the
ancient Greeks considered the essence of deity, namely, power: effective
and indeed transcendent power. While such divine fecklessness would
have mystified and indeed scandalized those ancient Greeks who held tra-
ditional religious views, it has little impact upon a modern audience, for
whom the Olympian pantheon is no longer part of a living belief system.
In this new cultural context, the relationship between heroes and gods
assumes a different significance, whereby the very fact of belief or disbelief
in the gods becomes one index of heroic stature. Petersens Troy could be
said to represent the logical conclusion of the modern tendencyto aggran-
dize the heroes of Greek mythology at the expense of the Greek gods.24

Not everyone might regard the gods of Troy as being quite as debased as
Chiasson does. But all of the preceding analyses make it advisable to reopen
the topic. I do not wish to have the last word on this subject, let alone on the
Homeric gods, but I hope that the argument I present on the following pages
will advance future debates about the ways in which the complexities of clas-
sical myth and literature may be portrayed in our visual media.
I begin with the first interaction between a human and a god in Book 1 of the
Iliad: the appearance to Achilles of Athena during Achilles quarrel with
Agamemnon over Briseis. The Homeric passage is a masterpiece of verbal
mise-en-scne: The quarrel itself is treatedwith extreme brilliance, through a
careful and deeply dramatic presentation of the speeches and counter-
speeches in which the two protagonists drive themselves into destructive

Paul, Film and the Classical Epic Tradition, 108110. Especially valuable is the discussion by
Burgess, Achilles Heel, 170174.
24 Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 197. He adduces in
this context Mary Lefkowitz, Greek Gods, Human Lives: What We Can Learn from Myths
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003; rpt. 2005), a book useful to general readers for its
narrative overviews of epic and tragedy.
120 Winkler

bitterness and blindness to others.25 Deeply dramatic: today such a verbal duel
calls for visual re-enactment on film.26 I here consider only the turning point
of the quarrel scene in connection with a characteristic feature of Homeric
epic, something that scholars term double motivation or over-determination.
The scene demonstrates a duality concerning human actions and mental pro-
cesses. Mark Edwards has described and explained over-determination as
follows:

Characteristically Homeric is the notion of double motivation, by which

many decisions and events are given one motivation on the divine level and
one on the human. This over-determination, as it has been called, allows
the poet to retain the interest of human characterization and action while
superimposing upon it, for added dignity, the concern of the divinities.27

Human motivation is explained in connection with something divine, such as

a theophany, a gods epiphany. The gods of early epic are externalizations and
anthropomorphic visualizations of human states of mind.
Here now the decisive moment in Achilles reaction to Agamemnons demand
for Briseis; I omit a few descriptive details that do not affect my argument:

So he [Agamemnon] spoke. And the anger came on Peleus son, and within
his shaggy breast the heart was divided two ways, pondering
whether to draw from beside his thigh the sharp swordand kill the son
of Atreus,
or else to check the spleen within and keep down his anger.
Now as he weighed in mind and spirit these two courses
and was drawing from its scabbard the great sword, Athene descended
from the sky.
The goddess standing behind Peleus son caught him by the fair hair,
appearing to him only, for no man of the others saw her.
Achilleus in amazement turned about, and straightway

25 G.S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 1: Books 14 (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1985; rpt. 2001), 47.
26 Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 1, 75 (on 1.215218), appropriately speaks of the dra-
matic force of the main argument between the two leaders.
27 Mark W. Edwards, Homer: Poet of the Iliad (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
1987; rpt. 1990), 135, with examples discussed here and elsewhere in his book. The classic
study of the matter is Albin Lesky, Gttliche und menschliche Motivation im homerischen
Epos (Heidelberg: Winter, 1961).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 121

knew Pallas Athene and the terrible eyes shining.

He uttered winged words and addressed her: Why have you come
now?
Then in answer the goddess grey-eyed Athene spoke to him:
I have come down to stay your angerbut will you obey me?
Come then, do not take your sword in your hand, keep clear of fighting,
though indeed with words you may abuse him, and it will be that way.
Hold your hand then, and obey us.
Then in answer again spoke Achilleus of the swift feet:
Goddess, it is necessary that I obey the word of you two,
angry though I am in my heart. So it will be better.
If any man obeys the gods, they listen to him also.
He spoke, and laid his heavy hand on the silver sword hilt
and thrust the great blade back into the scabbard nor disobeyed
the word of Athene. And she went back again to Olympos.28

Achilles is torn between an emotional impulse (I will yield to my anger and kill
him for his insults) and rational thought (I will control my anger because I should
not kill my commander-in-chief). At this critical moment Athena appears and
seems to decide the issue for him. But does she? Although she tells him clearly
what she expects from him, she leaves the decision to him, as her question (will
you obey me?) makes evident. One might even put the matter in Freudian
terms: Achilles id is his impulse to attack Agamemnon; his ego makes him
hesitate; his superego is Athena. Achilles knows that it is necessary for humans
to obey gods, but he also understands that Athena and Hera, who sent her, are
not threatening or forcing him. They advise, although strongly; but the out-
come depends on him. The decision between the two courses of action that
Achilles is pondering is entirely his own:

It is important to note exactly what the poet has Athena do here. She
does not put anything into the heros mind, or exercise any superior
power over his thinking. the decision is his.29

28 Homer, Iliad 1.188221; quoted from Richmond Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1951; new rpt., 2011), 8081. Cf. on this passage the detailed
observations by Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 1, 7376, and Edwards, Homer: Poet of
the Iliad, 178182.
29 Edwards, Homer: Poet of the Iliad, 181. In the passage here quoted in an excerpt
Edwards view differs somewhat from the one by Bruno Snell adduced below and from
my own.
122 Winkler

Athena is the external manifestation of what is going through Achilles mind;

her words could be the equivalent of an interior monologue in modern lit-
erature. Her presence serves to underline the importance of this crucial
moment. Had Achilles decided differently, he would have provoked a crisis
in military leadership and seriously jeopardized the Greeks chances of win-
ning the war. That decision would have changed the entire plot of the epic,
which is just getting under way. Athenas appearance furthermore makes the
scene vivid and exciting. It is the best means to let listeners or readers fully
realize what is at stake. The moment could not have been made more effec-
tive or more immediate. It illustrates what Edwards observed about double
motivation: Athenas presence superimposes added dignity on a common
human phenomenon, a change of mind. And it is inherently dramatic, even
visual: the description of his [Achilles] internal struggle is made more
graphic by the addition that it took place within his shaggy chest. And:
she[Athena] gave it [Achilles hair] a good tugto gain his attention with-
out delay.30
But is the Homeric scene realistic? The kings who witness Achilles and
Agamemnons quarrel see Achilles, hand on sword already partly drawn, sud-
denly checking himself, abruptly turning around, and speaking toapparently
nobody, for Homer takes care to inform us that only Achilles can see Athena.
Achilles seems to be listening, speaks againto no one in viewand puts his
sword away. Then he turns around to face Agamemnon once more.
If we imagine ourselves among the kings, we might well wonder what is
going on since we are not let in on anything. Why is Achilles behaving inexpli-
cably or irrationally, talking to himself, as it seems? If we cannot see Athena,
presumably we cannot hear her, either. If we can, the scene is even more
bizarre, with a disembodied voice, a womans at that in this all-male gathering,
suddenly coming from nowhere. If, however, we imagine ourselves as com-
plete outsiders or spectators who are not directly involved, we are at an even
greater loss to understand what is happening, for then we simultaneously
observe Achilles strange behavior and the others incomprehension. Homer
does not tell us how the kings react, and this is the key to the scenes effective-
ness. Its point of view is severely restricted. It is, as it were, entirely sealed off
from realism since it is presented exclusively from Achilles perspective. Homer
is silent about any reaction such as surprise or bafflement on the part of the
kings. The scene may at first strike us as an objective report on a past event
since it comes from an omniscient third-person narrator. Instead, it is wholly

30 The quotations are from Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 1, 73 (on 1.188192) and 74 (on
1.197).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 123

psychological and not at all realistic. Narratology, a modern theory of storytell-

ing, here speaks of focalization in narrative.31
Decades ago, German classicist Bruno Snell provided a fundamental analy-
sis of the scene under discussion in Chapter 2 of his book The Discovery of the
Mind. I quote him both in the original and in translation. (The former is slightly
more incisive than the latter.) Snell contrasts the workings of the archaic Greek
mind as evidenced in Homeric epic with the radically different perspective
that modern readers bring to the Iliad. He observes:

Der Dichter bedurfte an dieser Stelle keines Gtterapparates: Achill

bezwingt sich einfach, und da er nicht gegen Agamemnon losstrzt,
liee sich auch aus seinem Inneren erklren: das Eingreifen der Athena
strt fr uns eher die Motivation, als da es sie plausibel macht.32

The poet, we feel, had no special need of the divine apparatus at this
juncture; Achilles simply controls himself, and it would have been suffi-
cient to explain his failure to rush upon Agamemnon from his own men-
tal processes. From our point of view, the intercession of Athena merely
confuses the motivation rather than making it plausible.33

31 On this see especially Mieke Bal, Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative, 3rd
ed. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009). The theory has repeatedly been applied
to Homeric epic, especially by Irene J.F. de Jong, Narrators and Focalizers: The Presentation
of the Story in the Iliad, 2nd ed. (Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 2004); A Narratological
Commentary on the Odyssey (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); and
Narratology and Classics: A Practical Guide (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), On
focalization see in particular the overviews by Bal, 145165 (chapter Focalization), and
de Jong, Narrators and Focalizers, 2940 (chapter A Narratological Model of Analysis). I
return to this theory below.
32 Bruno Snell, Die Entdeckung des Geistes: Studien zur Entstehung des europischen Denkens
bei den Griechen, 6th ed. (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985). Later reprints,
called editions by the publisher, are unchanged; the first edition appeared in 1946. The
title of Chapter 2 is Der Glaube an die olympischen Gtter (Belief in the Olympian
Gods; 3044 and 298299 [notes]). The passage quoted is on pages 3536.
33 Bruno Snell, The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek Origins of European Thought, tr. T.G.
Rosenmeyer (Cambridge: Harvard University Press/Oxford: Blackwell, 1953; several rpts.).
The translation is based on a much earlier German edition than the one I use. Its latest
reprint (New York: Dover, 1982) has The Discovery of the Mind in Greek Philosophy and
Literature as its title. The original title of Chapter 2 has been simplified to The Olympian
Gods, (2342 and 311 [notes]). My quotation is from page 31. E.R. Dodds, The Greeks and
the Irrational (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1951; numerous rpts.), 14, echoes
Snell: We find it [i.e. that machinery of physical intervention to which Homer resorts so
124 Winkler

Modern readers of Homer can easily imagine the scene in their minds eye.
And that may have been its very purpose. As E.R. Dodds explained in his classic
study The Greeks and the Irrational:

ought we notto saythat the divine machinery duplicates a psychic

interventionthat is, presents it in a concrete pictorial form? This was
not superfluous; for only in this way could it be made vivid to the imagi-
nation of the hearers. [Athena appearing to Achilles] is the projection,
the pictorial expression, of an inward monition.34

Pictorial expression: Doddss emphasis on the visual is crucial for our topic and
goes to the heart of the matter already broached in connection with Moravias
Contempt.
But how would a stage or screen version of the moment in which Achilles
changes his mind affect its viewers? Modern spectators are outsiders; they
observe Achilles irrational behavior and the others incomprehension and
inaction. Actors playing Agamemnon and the kings would have to remain
immobile; the effect on them is one of time standing still. This is also the
impression on viewers in the theater because Homer takes no fewer than eigh-
teen lines (1.201218) to tell us about Achilles and Athenas exchange of words.
About thirty to forty-five seconds are necessary for such a dialogue to take
place in real time. Are the kings simply sitting idly through it all?
It is unlikely that most modern audiences should know the warrior-like
woman who is unexpectedly dropping in from the sky or should be aware why

constantly] superfluous because the divine machinery seems to us in many cases to do

no more than duplicate a natural psychological causation. The passage from Dodds that
I quote below then follows. The chapter on Athena in Hartmut Erbse, Untersuchungen zur
Funktion der Gtter im homerischen Epos (Berlin: De Gruyer, 1986), 116155, is worth con-
sulting in our context. Erbse dedicated his book to Snell, his teacher. Erbse, 137139, dis-
cusses the appearance of Athena to Achilles and observes (139) that only the personal
epiphany of a divinity could have explained the reasons for Achilles sudden decision not
to kill Agamemnon. Cf. Erbse, 142. Erbse was convinced that the Iliad and the Odyssey
were composed by different poets; as a result, he examined the similarities and differ-
ences between the portrayals of certain divinities, including Athena, in either epic. This
side of his argumentation does not pertain to my topic. For a related but anthropologi-
cally influenced restatement see, e.g., Jean-Pierre Vernant, Myth and Society in Ancient
Greece, tr. Janet Lloyd; rev. ed. (New York: Zone Books, 1990; rpt. 1996), 101119 (chapter
titled The Society of the Gods), especially 103104.
34 Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, 14. He says soon after: The poets did not, of course,
invent the gods. But the poets bestowed on them personality (15).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 125

Athena tends to help heroes in moments of crisis. An adaptation would have to

provide this essential information in order to establish her identity and to
ensure that the cause and importance of her appearance are justified. The
result: boring background verbiage (I am Athena, goddess of such and such, and
I am appearing to you because of this and that). Even worse, a director would
have to cut away from the excitement and suspense of impending violent
action to two talking heads. All talk and no actionthe very death of visual
storytelling. This is not a problem the Homeric narrator had to worry about.
His focus could remain on Achilles and Athena, and he could neglect their sur-
roundings. A film director could not, for the surroundings are present on the
screen. It is therefore doubtful that Athenas epiphany to Achilles can be made
to look convincing on film.
A worthy but not entirely successful attempt to keep the goddess in the pic-
ture both literally and figuratively is instructive. Director Marino Girolami, a
prolific veteran of Italian cinema, made Fury of Achilles (Lira di Achille) in 1962,
with American bodybuilder Gordon Mitchell as Achilles. Girolamis two-hour
color and widescreen epic is generally dismissed as yet another example of the
muscleman cinema that was cashing in on the sensational success of Pietro
Franciscis recent Hercules films with Steve Reeves (Hercules [Le fatiche di
Ercole], 1958; Hercules Unchained or Hercules and the Queen of Lydia [Ercole e la
regina di Lidia], 1959). And at first sight Girolamis film is just that: a colorful
spectacle with brawny men and buxom ladies, action and romance, and fanci-
ful costumes and sets. But the film stays unexpectedly close to the Iliad in sev-
eral sequences. The one of Achilles quarrel with Agamemnon is a case in
point. We have seen the devastation in the Greek camp wrought by Apollos
plague, and the narrator tells us that on the tenth day Achilles calls the kings to
an assembly, just as Homer had him do, but without any mention of Hera, who
had put the suggestion in Achilles mind.35 Again as in Homer, Achilles opens
the discussion and calls on the seer Calchas for an explanation (5767). The
dialogue is not particularly poetic, but it is to the point and informs viewers
about what is at stake. Still as in Homer, Calchas is fearful to speak and calls on
Achilles for protection, which he is promised (6891). Calchas now reveals the
cause of the plague (92100). Agamemnons harsh reaction to his words sticks
closely to what Homers Agamemnon had said (106120). Now Achilles
addresses Agamemnon. Their antagonism begins to heat up when Agamemnon
replies sullenly and suspiciously. Here the films dialogue is more condensed
and deviates from Homer (121147). Agamemnon, for instance, suspects
Achilles to have told Calchas what to say. His demand for Briseis precipitates

35 Iliad 1.5356. Further line references to Book 1 will appear in parentheses in my text.
126 Winkler

Achilles angry reply, a long speech in Homer (148171) that is curtailed in the
film. This change, however, is fully justified; Homer conveys Achilles anger
verbally, as he must; Girolami does so visually, as he should, with a medium
close-up on the two kings. Achilles is, as we say today, in Agamemnons face
almost literally; he dominates the center of the screen. But the essence of his
words is preserved. Achilles threatens to sail home with his men. As Homers
Agamemnon does, Girolamis Agamemnon taunts him that greater heroes will
take his place. Homers Agamemnon then threatens that he will personally
take Briseis away (172187), and this precipitates Achilles fury. The lines that
now follow in the text have been quoted and discussed above.
At this moment Girolami introduces another change. Achilles is in the
process of leaving the assembly, which has been taking place in Agamemnons
tent. In a long shot we see him walking toward the exit while Agamemnon
threatens him. Agamemnon does not mention Briseis but insults Achilles:
Bastard son of a goddess! (Bastardo di una dea!) The camera rapidly travels
close to Achilles, who has stopped in his tracks and is turning around. He is
seething. An ominous musical chord on the soundtrack underscores the
dramatic moment. Without a cut the camera tilts down and advances into a
close-up of Achilles sword being drawn from its scabbard. Nestor and some of
the kings rise in shock and horror. Achilles, hand on sword hilt, begins to rush
on Agamemnon in long shot while others, including Patroclus, attempt to hold
him back. Achilles loses control of himself, screaming and pushing the kings
out of his way. Agamemnon, we believe, is doomed. At this moment Athena
appears, but not exactly as she does in Homer.
Girolami cuts to a medium close-up of Achilles center right, facing Patroclus
screen right, who is still holding Achilles by the arm. Other kings are visible
screen left and at the right edge. The tent, brightly lit during the entire assem-
bly scene, is suddenly darker. A black area is visible on the top left of the wide-
screen image. This would be a bad composition if it did not prepare the
goddesss epiphany. Momentarily all is silent. Then an unfamiliar and super-
naturally sounding organ is heard on the soundtrack. Achilles turns his
head toward the center of the screen, and a double exposure brings Athena
into view, screen left behind Achilles and filling the black space. He keeps
turning his head slowly. Athena tells him not to kill Agamemnon; if he
restrains himself now he will be better off later. Then she vanishes. Cut to a
long shot in the tent, lit realistically again, with Achilles turning back to
Agamemnon. Since Athena did not specifically permit him to abuse
Agamemnon verbally, Achilles does not do so. His hostile words to Agamemnon
in the Iliad (225244) are condensed to their climax: Agamemnon will be
responsible for the Greek blood that Hector will shed (240244). Then Achilles
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 127

and most of the kings leave. Homer has him and them stay because the debate
continues (245307).
The shot in the darkened tent as Athena appears deserves further comment.
It stands out aurally by means of the unexpected organ chord; clearly this
instrument, associated with religion more closely than any other in the history
of Western music, is meant to alert us to the imminent theophany. Visually the
shot stands out through its noticeably darker colors, the artificially created
black area in which Athena will be seen, and the silhouette-like superimposi-
tion of her body on those of the kings standing in the background of that area
on screen. Athena is thus clearly marked as a supernatural being. Her voice
sounds a little eerie as well, for an echo effect is added to her words.
Most telling, however, is what we witness while Athena is speaking. Achilles
dominates the center-right of the screen image; he and Patroclus take up one
half. The head of a young king is visible behind and between them. On the left
of the screen and in the background we see Athena standing between and
slightly in front of two other kings. Her body partly blocks one of these. She is
looking at Achilles, who, as mentioned, is slowly turning his head in her direc-
tion. But he never turns around completely, never looks at her. And she does
not pull him by the hair; there is no physical or eye contact between them. The
effect is such that we must assume that he does not see her but only hears her
voice, which presumably he recognizes instantly, for he smiles rather wryly or
enigmatically. As she vanishes, Achilles turns his head screen right again, and
the shot ends.
What about the others? They, we realize even if we have never read Homer,
do not see Athena and do not understand what is going on. Girolami conveys
their ignorance and incomprehension by having them, too, turn their heads
very slowly while Athena is speaking: to left and right and back. The effect is
one of searching. Do they then hear Athenas disembodied words? It seems at
least possible. On viewers, the chief effect of the shot is one of utter unreality.
Athena speaks at a normal pace; Achilles and the kings react in what is almost
slow motion. The moment is obviously intended to stand out from its sur-
roundings. Divine involvement is important throughout the film, so this is sen-
sible, especially since no other god ever appears in person. Girolami and his
screenwriters understood the crucial importance of Athenas epiphany for a
narrative that is focused, after all, on the wrath of Achilles. They were evidently
trying to do justice to Homer by keeping the goddesss theophany.
Why then is this crucial shot as brief as it is, lasting about fifteen or sixteen
seconds? There is no exchange between Athena and Achilles as there was in
Homer. Athena speaks for six or seven seconds; her entire epiphany lasts about
fourteen. This condensation of the Homeric moment is decisive, because it
128 Winkler

tells us about the filmmakers sense of realism: a compromise between fidelity

to their source and adherence to contemporary sensibilities. In the early 1960s,
not least in Italy, general audiences were familiar with classical culture and
literature. Teenagers and their parents knew the story of the Trojan War and
the great epics of Homer and Virgil that told parts of this myth. For this reason
Girolami need not have been, and presumably was not, overly worried about
including a sudden theophany. But he was working in a realistic medium and
with realistically minded viewers. It was inadvisable for him to show the
Homeric scene in its entirety because there would have been far too much
talkthe theophany is part of an extended debate to begin withand because
it would have prolonged the looks of incomprehension on the part of the
assembled others beyond anything a viewer could accept as realistic. Half a
minute or more of kings turning their heads back and forth while Athena and
Achilles speak with each other would look ridiculous. To stay close to the spirit
of Homer, Girolami and his writers had to tamper with the text of Homer.
Agamemnons insult to Achilles concerning his mother is revealing in this
regard. It introduces a modern and immediately understandable note into the
verbal quarrel to make the flaring up of Achilles white-hot wrath wholly con-
vincing, not least to Italian viewers raised on a strict code of reverence toward
their mothers. Much the same goes for Anglo-Saxon audiences. According to
classical myth, Achilles was anything but a bastard child, for his parents Peleus
and Thetis had been legitimately married. In fact, their wedding feast, dis-
rupted by Eris, the goddess of strife, led to the Judgment of Paris, which, as
mentioned, led to the Trojan War. Girolami, his screenwriters, and most of his
viewers must have known all this.
Girolamis approach to this particular moment in the Iliad is noteworthy
because it is unique. It is honorable because it is not a failure. But it is also not
a complete success. Girolamis limited technical means are largely to blame.
Superimposing Athena was the obvious way to include her. But as French film
critic and scholar Andr Bazin wrote in 1946: Superimposition can, in all logic,
only suggest the fantastic in a conventional way; it lacks the ability actually to
evoke the supernatural. And: Superimposition on the screen signals:
Attention: unreal world, imaginary characters; it doesnt portray in any way
what hallucinations or dreams are really like, or, for that matter, how a ghost
would look.36 The superimposition of Venus next to Helen and Paris in The
Fall of Troy, described above, bears out Bazins verdict.

36 Quoted from Andr Bazin, The Life and Death of Superimposition, in Andr Bazin,
Bazin at Work: Major Essays and Reviews from the Forties and Fifties, ed. Bert Cardullo; tr.
Alain Piette and Bert Cardullo (New York: Routledge, 1997), 7376; quotations at 76 and 74.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 129

Here a comparison with a later filmmakers approach to showing his viewers

a highly emotional moment in which someone nearly superhuman appears to
a mortal while time is suspended is instructive. John Kent Harrisons Helen of
Troy was made in anticipation of the release of Troy. Harrison, like Petersen,
tells the story of the entire Trojan War. At one moment during intense fighting
below the walls of Troy, Menelaus, in medium close-up, is pushing a defeated
Trojan to the ground. He is surrounded by other warriors. Arrows are flying
audibly through the air. Unexpectedly the film slows down, and both the
sounds of battleclanging of swords, whooshes of arrowsand the accom-
panying music stop. Slowly Menelaus turns around and looks up. All back-
ground action has come to a standstill: a warrior is unmoving, an arrow is
stationary in midair. Gentle strings in the high register and an ethereal choir
now become audible on the soundtrack. A cut to Menelaus point of view
shows us, also in slow motion, Helen approaching the battlement on top of the
wall of Troy and looking down at the mele in progress. Trojan archers on
either side of her do not move; their arrows are stopped in midair. The super-
natural music continues as Harrison cuts back to the battlefield, with various
Greeks and Trojans frozen in motion and only Menelaus moving slowly and as
if in a daze while looking at Helen. In another shot the camera circles around
him, showing fighters engaged in duels and other kinds of combat, all standing
still in mid-fighting. A female solo voice now begins to intone a kind of word-
less chant, conveying an exotic aura. In close-ups Menelaus looks at Helen, and
she looks at him. A high-angle long shot then shows the battlefield. For special
emphasis, the camera circles around a little, primarily to bring several arrows
arrested in flight to viewers attention. Menelaus, still in slow motion, turns
away from Helen; no one else is moving. The music ebbs away. Now everything
and everybody, including Menelaus, comes to life again at regular speed of
movement. After the eerie music and a moment of silence before the battle
recommences, the cranked-up sound of arrows resuming their flight comes
asa shock.
This moment does not, strictly speaking, involve a theophanyHelen,
although a daughter of Zeus, is mortalbut it does present an epiphany.
Unlike Petersens Menelaus, who is a brute of a husband, Harrisons is hope-
lessly in love with his unfaithful wife. Menelaus, unexpectedly seeing Helen,
focuses only on her; all else surrounding him fades from his consciousness.
Harrison shows us his state of mindor state of feelingfrom an outsiders
perspective, for we still see what Menelaus no longer notices, the battlefield
around him. The unmoving fighters and weapons and Menelaus in slow motion
all combine realism with subjectivity. The moment of arrested time is unreal-
istic. But as an illustration of Menelaus psychology it is wholly appropriate.
130 Winkler

Cinematically the moment is a success because we accept it as an expression

of the power that his love for Helen still has over Menelaus. It works particu-
larly well as spectacle, for its unreality is presented realistically.
The opposition of spectacle and psychological realism that Moravias
Contempt revealed as being crucial for any film adaptation of the Odyssey
applies to those of the Iliad as well. Fury of Achilles shows us one attempt to
take both sides into account. But because Girolami sought to combine two
incompatibles, the moment does not fully succeed on either level. The super-
natural undermines realism; the directors sense of what will work for his audi-
ence diminishes the spectacular, for Athenas theophany is not eye-popping
enough. By contrast, Helens epiphany is. Harrisons way of arresting time works
far better than Girolamis; this is why the realistically unreal can last for almost
one minute. Harrison could avail himself of a technical advantage that Girolami
did not have, for the moment in which time is arrested was created by digital
effects.37 We can only speculate how Girolami might have shown Athenas
appearance, had he had access to the same kind of technical support.
How does Petersen handle the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon?
The changes from Homer and even from Girolami are significant, because
Petersen opts for wholesale realism, as he must do in an age of seriously dimin-
ished audience familiarity with Greek literature, religion, and myth.38 Petersen
resembles Moravias Rheingold, the director committed to realism and modern
psychology. Calchas, for example, appears nowhere in Troy. And there is not
even an assembly left in Agamemnons hut when Achilles arrives. Leave us,
Agamemnon commands the other kings when he notices Achilles. Their quar-
rel is not about Briseis, at least not initially, since there has been no plague
caused by Apollo; it is about military victory and heroic glory. Then Achilles
finds out that Agamemnon has already had Briseis taken from him. She is now
being dragged into the tent. The spoils of war, Agamemnon comments

37 The technical effect is an example of bullet time, as it is generally called. On it see Bob
Rehak, The Migration of Forms: Bullet Time as Microgenre, Film Criticism, 32 no. 1
(2007), 2648.
38 This circumstance is nicely, and tellingly, illustrated by the very look of the Wooden Horse
of Troy. It is evidently built from ships planking and not from wood cut on Mt. Ida outside
Troy, as ancient sources report; cf. West, The Epic Cycle, 193195 (on the Little Iliad). The
result is a horse simultaneously eerie in its black bulk and weirdly attractive. Cinema his-
tory has shown a veritable herd of Trojan Horses; that in Troy is one of the most memo-
rable. It is outdone in sheer menace only by the emaciated-looking Horse in Franco
Rossis Odissea (1968). Other noteworthy Horses can be seen in Manfred Noas Helena
(1924), Giorgio Ferronis La guerra di Troia (The Trojan Horse or The Wooden Horse of Troy,
1961), and Harrisons Helen of Troy.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 131

cynically. Achilles is determined to free her, Agamemnon calls for his guards,
and Achilles draws his swordnot against Agamemnon but against the sol-
diers rushing in. Slaughter seems inevitable. Interference from a woman pre-
vents it. Stop! Briseis exclaims. Too many people have died today. I dont
want anyone dying for me. Achilles, tensed for immediate action, seems riv-
eted to the ground as she speaks. He remains in his crouching position for a
few moments, then suddenly straightens up and lowers his sword. Agamemnon
is both surprised and sarcastic: Mighty Achilles, silenced by a slave girl.
Agamemnon taunts Achilles by a sleazy sexual threat against Briseis, which
causes Achilles to exclaim: You sack of wine. This is a direct quotation of part
of Achilles verbal abuse of Agamemnon after Athenas disappearance in the
Iliad.39 Achilles utters one more threat, puts his sword into its scabbard, and
leaves. In close-up Agamemnon leers at Briseis, and the scene is over.
Evidently all this is an adjustment of its source toward full and convincing
rationalism. Agamemnons, Achilles, and Briseis motivations and actions are
immediately clear even to viewers wholly ignorant of Homer. Everything that
happens in word and deed on the screen could happen today. No goddess is
required. Achilles change of mind is still prompted by a woman, and the deci-
sion to put away his sword is entirely his own. From the moment Agamemnon
notices Achilles until the latter leaves, the scene has lasted about three and a
half minutes. It can be this long because it is geared toward our modern mind-
set. But to be convincing to all and sundry, the Homeric model had to be radi-
cally altered. Nevertheless the critical moment is still suspenseful, even
spectacular. The camera dollying into close-ups on Agamemnon and Achilles,
enhanced sound effects like the clang of Achilles sword coming out of and
going back into its scabbard, ominous music, and especially Achilles charac-
teristic gesture of threatening someone with his sword held in such a way that
the blade points not toward but away from its potential victimall this and
the way Petersen edits everything together make for a dramatically satisfying
scene. Such it had been in the Iliad. Troy is not the Iliad, but in the films con-
text this scene works perfectly well. Could it have been done better with the
addition of Athena? In that way it would have staid closer to Homer, but would
it still have been convincing to its audiences? Girolamis version may provide
answers.
An even more radically different version of the quarrel had appeared on
screen eighty years before Troy. Manfred Noas Helena, a German silent epic in
two parts, is considerably more noteworthy than Troy for its many changes to

39 Iliad 1.225 begins You wine sack (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 81).
132 Winkler

the myth and to Homer.40 Lack of familiarity with this remarkable film may be
a good thing for the peace of mind of conservative scholars. Noas Achilles had
been struck by Helens beauty before the Trojan War began.41 Later, Helen and
heroic fame are Achilles main reasons to fight, and she is even implicated in
his death. When Thersites taunts Achilles for his infatuation with Helen and
suggests that he can find lots of pretty girls back home in Greece, Achilles beats
him up and boasts that he will decide the war in a glorious duel with Hector.
Agamemnon and Menelaus forbid Achilles the duel, claiming Hector for them-
selves. This now unleashes Achilles fury. Achilles threatens Agamemnon. He
pulls a large brazier from the ground and wields it like a lance. But then, pro-
claiming that he and his men will no longer fight, he bends it double and
throws it away. The scene lasts no more than a few seconds in a film that is
longer than the directors cut of Troy. Achilles barely menaces Agamemnon.
Nor is he about to attack or kill him. There is no Briseis. There is no Athena. No
gods are ever to be seen.
Is there then no possibility in which the Homeric moment can be faithfully
and convincingly rendered in the cinema? Everything depends on a directors
ingenuity and the technical means he has available, such as the computer-
generated imagery that is on plentiful display in Troy. But technical wizardry is
not the decisive factor. Rather, what counts is a directors approach to presenting
on screen something interior and subjective: Achilles change of mind. In its
combination of the objective (third-person narration) with the subjective
(Achilles state of mind), the Homeric scene anticipates the stream of con-
sciousness or free indirect discourse that is found in the modern novel and that
is wholly psychological and not at all realistic. And here is the crux of the mat-
ter as far as visual representations or adaptations of this moment are con-
cerned. Nevertheless, film may well be the modern medium best suited to a

40 Pedro Luis Cano, El ciclo troyano: Helena (1924), in Los generos literarios: Actes del VII
simposi destudis clssics, 2124 de Mar de 1983 (Bellaterra: Universitat Autnoma de
Barcelona, 1985), 7593, provides an outline.
41 This is a faint, and doubtless wholly unintended, echo of Achilles secret meeting with
Helen during the Trojan War (Cypria, Arg. 11b), whose underlying cause may be the for-
mers amatory interest in the latter. On this see West, The Epic Cycle, 118119. West, 119,
rejects the possibility that they had a romantic attachment or made love, as has been
suspected, but grants the Cypria enough influence to have given rise to a tendency
towards a romantic pairing of Achilles and Helen (286). But there was more. According
to Pausanias, Description of Greece 3.19.1113, Achilles and Helen were said to have lived as
husband and wife on the White Island in the Black Sea, his cult place. Exhaustive details,
including variations, in Guy Hedreen, The Cult of Achilles in the Euxine, Hesperia, 60
(1991), 313330.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 133

scene as the one under consideration. The cinema has a long tradition of
showing just this kind of thing. In an influential study a film scholar has coined
and explained what he terms mindscreen: the screen shows, apparently from
an objective or third-person perspective, an entirely subjective and first-person
image or sequence of images.42 Here is a description of this concept, taken
from several passages in his book:

There arethree familiar ways of signifying subjectivity within the first-

person narrative field: to present what a character says (voice-over), sees
(subjective focus, imitative angle of vision), or thinks. The term I propose
for this final category is mindscreen, by which I mean simply the field of the
minds eye. the mindscreen can present the whole range of visual imagi-
nation. mindscreens belong to, or manifest the workings of, specific
minds. A mindscreen sequence is narrated in the first person. Mindscreen,
as a term, attempts to articulate [the] sense of the image as a limited whole,
with a narrating intelligence offscreen. This intelligenceselects what is
seen and heard; it is a principle of narrative coherence. The film is its visual
field, made accessible to an audience through the technology of projec-
tion. Even when it depicts a fantasy in the minds eye, then, the mind-
screen remains a medium of first-person visual narration. It presents a
personalized world. it is both an agency of visual telling and an expres-
sion of mind in the world; in short, it is the eye as I, the vision of Vision.43

Much of this can be applied to Achilles vision of Athena, which presents the
whole range of the formers visual imagination and manifests the workings of
his mind, although it is not narrated in the first person. Still, the divine epiph-
any presents, and represents, a personalized worldAchillesfrom which
the surrounding charactersthe assembled kings and Agamemnonare
excluded. The theophany is an expression of Achilles mind in his, but also in
the Homeric, world, the externalized vision of an inner Vision.
This cinematic side of narrative might be juxtaposed to the idea of focaliza-
tion advanced in modern narrative theory.44 What a pioneering scholar wrote

42 Bruce F. Kawin, Mindscreen: Bergman, Godard, and First-Person Film (1978; rpt. Normal,
Ill.: Dalkey Archive, 2006). Kawin begins his analyses at the dawn of cinema (1903).
43 Kawin, Mindscreen, 1012, 55, and 84 (emphases in original); cf. Kawin, 1819. His concep-
tion of mindscreen is applied best to complex modern rather than traditional filmic nar-
rations, as in European art cinema since the 1960s.
44 It is telling in this regard that Bal, Narratology, follows her chapter Focalization with one
titled Visual Stories (165175). The term focalization is derived from photography and
134 Winkler

about a focalizor in a text may be directly applied to our scene in the Iliad, as
my parenthetical insertions in the following quotations indicate:

If the focalizor [Achilles] coincides with the character [Achilles], that

character will have an advantage over the other characters [the assem-
bled kings]. The reader watches with the characters eyes and will, in
principle, be inclined to accept the vision presented by that character.45

On the problem in our scene concerning who hears what is said by Athena and
Achilles, consider the following about characters spoken and unspoken words:

Herelies a possibility for manipulation [on an authors part] which is

often used. Readers are given elaborate information about the thoughts
of a character, which the other characters do not hear. If these thoughts
[in our case, the words of Athena and Achilles] are placed in between the
sections of dialogue [as spoken to or before the assembly, such as Calchas
words, Achilles to Agamemnon, and Agamemnons to Achilles], readers
do not often realize how much less the other character knows [or the
other characters know: the kings] than they do. An analysis of the per-
ceptibility of the focalized objects supplies insight into these objects
relationships.46

To summarize:

The text [in our case, the Iliad]is the result of the narrating activity
(narration) of a narrator [the omniscient storyteller, who need not be
identical to Homer, even if there was a Homer]. That which the narrator
tellsis astory, consisting of a fabula (see below) looked at from a cer-
tain, specific angle [and] the result of the focalizing activity (focaliza-
tion) of a focalizer. Focalization comprises not only seeing, but [also]
ordering, interpreting, in short all mental activities. That which the focal-
izer focalizesis afabula, consisting of a logically and chronologically

film (Bal, 147). As she says, attention to visuality is tremendously enriching for the analy-
sis of literary narratives (166). Cf. Bal, 167, on adapting novel (and, we might add, epic) to
film.
45 Bal, Narratology, 149150. The spellings focalizor (Bal) and focalizer (de Jong and gen-
erally) carry no difference in meaning.
46 Bal, Narratology, 157. Cf. Bal, 156, on what is visible only inside the head, mind, or
feelings.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 135

related series of events [brought about] by characters in a fictional

world. We, the hearer/reader [sic], are always confronted with a filtered
view, i.e. selection and evaluation, of the events and this filtering is due to
a focalizer. For this vision to become accessible to us, it must be put into
words by a narrator.47

Despite its terminology and high level of abstraction, all this is elementary and
sensible.
A combination of the concepts of focalization and mindscreen, then, may
be useful for a screenwriter or director who wants to incorporate Athena in a
sophisticated film version of the quarrel between Agamemnon and Achilles.
How exactly this may be done is a question fascinating to contemplate but too
complex to be pursued here. Still, one fundamental consideration of why the
cinema with its inexhaustible toolkit of special effects is especially well suited
to depictions of the supernatural and the fantastic, of subconscious and
unconscious states such as dreams or nightmares, and of other related phe-
nomena is worth keeping in mind. What Andr Bazin had written in 1946 may,
to us, be a pertinent comment on Moltenis, Rheingolds, and Petersens view of
the gods in epic film:

The opposition that some like to see between a cinema inclined toward
the almost documentary representation of reality and a cinema inclined,
through reliance on technique, toward escape from reality into fantasy
and the world of dreams, is essentially forced. The fantastic in the cin-
ema is possible only because of the irresistible realism of the photo-
graphic image. It is the image that can bring us face to face with the
unreal, that can introduce the unreal into the world of the visible. What
in fact appeals to the audience about the fantastic in the cinema is its
realismI mean, the contradiction between the irrefutable objectivity
of the photographic image and the unbelievable nature of the events that
it depicts.48

Bazin then goes on to observe that Hollywood cinema has already begun
creating the supernatural in a more purely psychological manner.49
A few comments about another appearance of Athena to a hero she pro-
tects will be apposite here. Her epiphany to Odysseus in Book 13 of the Odyssey

47 Quoted from de Jong, Narrators and Focalizers, 31 and 3233.

48 Bazin, The Life and Death of Superimposition, 73.
49 Bazin, The Life and Death of Superimposition, 74.
136 Winkler

does not present the kind of narrative problem Snell had identified because it
does not illustrate a humans mental activity and because her epiphany
involves only the two of them. The spiritual and emotional closeness of god-
dess and mortal, beautifully conveyed in their conversation in a manner that is
convincing even today, is one of the highlights of character portrayal in the
Odyssey.50 Their encounter in Homer appears to have been the source for that
between Odysseus and Athena in Konchalovskys adaptation. In his film
Athena appears to Odysseus at night as he is sailing to Troy. They engage in
rather a long conversation, and she is invisible to the men on board his ship.
The scene works because Odysseus names Athena in a short soliloquy before
she appears and she has referred to herself as his protector off-screen moments
before we see her. In this way we are prepared for her theophany. The music,
Athenas golden dress, and especially the pale lighting with which Konchalovsky
shows her in the surrounding darkness all tell us that this woman who is sud-
denly there is indeed a divinity. Athenas teasing banter and Odysseus happi-
ness at seeing her well capture, although in abbreviated form, the nature of
their close alliance as soul mates that we find in the Odyssey. Then their con-
versation turns serious, and we get a short lesson in the Homeric concept of
heroic glory. Konchalovsky also includes a particular Homeric detail: The god-
dess, gray-eyed Athene, smiled on him, and stroked him with her hand.51 So
does Konchalovskys Athena. She even gently rebukes Odysseus for lying to
her. So did Homers Athena.52
One prominent scholar has made it evident that the figure of Athena in the
Odyssey is conceived according to the model provided by Odysseus, her human
favorite.53 He further notes that Odysseus inner turmoil as evinced in Book 13
becomes intelligible and capable of being told convincingly because the poet
assigns Athena a decisive part in his planning of how to deal with the situation
at home.54 This divine being is patterned on a human. Nor is she the only one.

50 Suzanne Sad, Homer and the Odyssey, tr. Ruth Webb (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2011), provides an attractive introduction to the epic. A detailed and highly insightful
examination of Book 13 may be found in Erbse, Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Gtter
im homerischen Epos, 116124.
51 Odyssey 13.287288; quoted from Richmond Lattimore, The Odyssey of Homer, rev. ed.
(New York: Harper and Row, 1967; several rpts.), 205.
52 Odyssey 13.291295.
53 Erbse, Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Gtter im homerischen Epos, 121, on Odyssey
13.296299: Hier wird ganz deutlich, da diese Athene nach dem Vorbild ihres menschli-
chen Lieblings konzipiert ist. On this below.
54 Erbse, Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Gtter im homerischen Epos, 124 (verstndlich
und erzhlbar).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 137

If Athena in the Odyssey illustrates the fact that, in the common saying, the
Greeks created the gods in their own image, then we can better understand
Lataczs observation about the gods in Troythat they are inside the humans.
If any omission of the Homeric gods is by its nature non-Homeric, must it
also be anti-Homeric? Scholars are familiar with the fate of the gods during the
apex of Greek civilization in the fifth century bc. The development from myth
to reason, from mythos to logos, brought the decline of religion and the
advances of philosophy. Snell aptly comments:

Allerdings hat dies Fortschreiten des Denkens zur Philosophie diese

Gtter selbst zum Opfer gebracht. Sie verloren ihre natrliche und unmit-
telbare Funktion, je strker der Mensch seiner selbst als eines geistigen
Wesens bewut wurde. Hatte Achill seine Entscheidung noch als Eingriff
der Gttin gedeutet, so trug der Mensch des 5. Jahrhunderts im Bewutsein
eigener Freiheit selbst die Verantwortung fr die von ihm selbst getrof-
fene Wahl; das Gttliche, von dem er sich gelenkt und vor dem er sich
verantwortlich fhlte, wurde immer strker bestimmt von der Vorstellung
der Gerechtigkeit, des Guten, des Anstndigen, oder wie immer man das
nennen will, wonach man sich bei seinem Handeln richtet.55

progress of thinking towards philosophy was effected at the sacrifice of the

gods themselves. They lost their natural and immediate function in propor-
tion as man became aware of his own spiritual potential. Whereas Achilles
had interpreted his decision as an intercession of the goddess, fifth century
man, proudly convinced of his personal freedom, took upon himself the
responsibility for his choice. The deity whose guidance and authority he rec-
ognized with ever increasing assurance was formulated as the concept of jus-
tice, or the good, or honesty, or whatever else the norm of action be called.56

This progress presents what we might call, in rather abstract terms, a re-
internalization and de-visualization of mental processes.57 If such was a

55 Snell, Die Entdeckung des Geistes, 4142.

56 Snell, The Discovery of the Mind, 39.
57 Cf. on this the classic account by Wilhelm Nestle, Vom Mythos zum Logos: Die
Selbstentfaltung des griechischen Denkens von Homer bis auf die Sophistik und Sokrates
(Stuttgart: Krner, 1940; 2nd ed., 1942, with several rpts.). See further Snell, Die Entdeckung
des Geistes, 178204 and 310313 (chapter titled Gleichnis, Vergleich, Metapher, Analogie:
Der Weg vom mythischen zum logischen Denken)=The Discovery of the Mind, 191226
and 316318 (notes; From Myth to Logic: The Role of the Comparison).
138 Winkler

c ommon phenomenon in antiquity, we should not expect it to be absent from

modernity, least of all when modern artists re-imagine an ancient work of lit-
erature in a modern medium and all its contexts. The story of the Trojan War is
no exception. It was not an exception in antiquity, not even given the hallowed
status of the Homeric epics. By the first century ad, for example, things had
already changed drastically. (Lucans Pharsalia may have pointed the way.) In
Statius Thebaid, a Roman epic on Greek myth, the gods yield to many pres-
sures. Their claims to authority exploded, they surrender the moral stage
to the human actors. Further, the poet deprives them of the right to fulfill their
proper epic modes of action.58 A telling illustration is the short speech that
Minerva, the Roman Athena, addresses to the hero Tydeus.59 It is evidently
modeled on our scene in the Iliad, but it differs from it significantly. A scholar
explains:

Minerva here is human wisdom, given a voice, and a compelling philo-

sophical rhetoricundisguisedly a state of Tydeus mind, as Lewis puts
it. The care which Statius lavishes on this effect begins with his refusal
even to figure Minerva in the action. Statius is so far from having her
appear that he contrives to introduce her words without using an actual
verb of speech. The appearance of Athene to Achillesis the obvious
model for Statius scene, yet the departure from Homers procedure is
radical. The attenuation of the goddesss personality in Statius, the
absence of any narrative dynamic or interchange, are astonishing if one
reads his scene immediately after reading Homers.60

Nor was this the only instance of radical departure from Homer. A work about
the fall of Troy composed centuries after Homer and ascribed to Dares the
Phrygian is telling. In antiquity, he was even identified with the Dares who is
named in the Iliad.61 In Dares version of the Trojan War, the pagan gods did
not have the same omnipresence they had [had] in the Iliad.62 Dares was

58 Quoted from D.C. Feeney, The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991; rpt. 1993), 364.
59 Statius, Thebaid 2.682706.
60 Quoted from Feeney, The Gods in Epic, 365366. He quotes C.S. Lewis, The Allegory of Love:
A Study in Medieval Tradition (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1936; numerous rpts.), 52.
61 Dares is named at Iliad 5.9 and 27.
62 Quoted from Jon Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization &
Classicization, Variation & Codification, International Journal of the Classical Tradition,
14 (2007), 482634; quotation at 507.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 139

especially popular during the Middle Ages, not least because people no longer
believed in the ancient gods.
Today Homer is back, eclipsing Statius, Dares, and Dictys of Crete, the latter
another semi-fictive author who wrote on the fall of Troy. But Homers gods are
not always back. Still, their absence from modern adaptations of Homeric epic
is not in itself proof of irreverence on the part of the adapters. Even when the
latter come up with what may at first seem an outrageous distortion of Homer,
things may not be as dire as over-eager defenders of the classics may think. To
this side of my topic I turn next.

3 Gods, Humans, and the Meaning of Life

Achilles observation to Briseis in Troy about gods envy of humans has become
especially controversial and has furnished many with ammunition or, as they
see it, definitive proof that the film fails as an adaptation of Homer. Early on,
Achilles told Briseis of his suspicion that Apollos failure to avenge the deaths
of his priests and the desecration of his temple and statue indicates divine
indifference or even worse: I think your god is afraid of me. Achilles question
about Apollo that comes soon after is therefore inevitable: Where is he?
Briseis calls Achilles nothing but a killer who wouldnt know anything about
the gods. Here is his reply:

Ill tell you a secretsomething they dont teach you in your temple. The
gods envy us. They envy us because were mortal, because every moment
might be our last. Everythings more beautiful because were doomed.
Youll never be lovelier than you are now. We will never be here again.

Chiassons verdict on this speech, which he quotes, is representative: Achilles

perception of the relationship between gods and mortals is emphatically
un-Homeric because Achilles effectively subverts the metaphysical justifi
cation for heroic warfare argued by Sarpedon in Book 12 of the Iliad, a passage
Chiasson has examined earlier in his essay.63 I will turn to it below. But at the
beginning of Book 22, when Achilles encounters Apollo himself on the
battlefield, the exchange between the two tells us something different from
what Chiasson here argues. Unlike Diomedes in Book 5, who stops fighting
gods as soon as he realizes that Athena, whose presence had sanctioned his

63 The quotations are from Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens
Troy, 200.
140 Winkler

doing so, is no longer by his side, Achilles has few qualms about taking on
Apollo in a duel. Their exchange is worth our attention. The god remonstrates
with the mortal: Why, son of Peleus, /do you keep after me, being mortal/
while I am an immortal god? Even yet youstrain after me in your fury. You
will never kill me. I am not one who is fated [to die].64 Here now, in full, is
Achilles reply:

You have balked me, striker from afar, most malignant of all gods,
when you turned me here away from the rampart, else many Trojans
would have caught the soil in their teeth before they got back to Ilion.
Now you have robbed me of great glory, and rescued these people
lightly, since you have no retribution to fear hereafter.
Else I would punish you, if only the strength were in me.65

Achilles does not fight Apollo because no mortal on his own can fight a god. To
him, it is as simple as that, and this obvious circumstance is the only reason he
retreats. It is evident that Homers Apollo is by no means afraid of Achilles. It is
equally evident that Achilles is not afraid of, and fears no retribution from, the
very god who will eventually kill him, using Paris and his arrow as his tool.
(Homers ancient listeners and readers were aware of this.) A modern com-
mentator calls Achilles answer to Apollo angry and defiant and goes on to
observe: His readiness to defy Apollo contrasts with the helplessness of both
Diomedes and Patroklos in the face of this god in Books 5 and 16. It is a mea-
sure of the unusual or unique nature of Achilles words that they were cen-
soredas morally reprehensible even in antiquity.66 In the Republic, Plato has
Socrates quote Achilles first and last lines as examples, among several others,
of a humans irreverent behavior toward the divine.67 So not everything in
Homeric epic may have been as clear-cut as Chiasson presents it. In particular,
Achilles impulsive decapitation of Apollos golden statue early in Troy, an
undeniably shocking sacrilege, takes on a somewhat different meaning in light
of the opening scene in Book 22, a passage about which Chiasson is silent.
In antiquity, corroboration of Achilles attitude toward Apollo came later.
His defiance of Apollo in the Iliad was the model for an encounter between god

64 Iliad 22.810 and 13 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 457).

65 Iliad 22.1520 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 457).
66 Both quotations are from Nicholas Richardson, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 6: Books
2124 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993; rpt. 2000), 107 (on 22.1520).
67 Plato, Republic 3.4 (391a). Cf. Jasper Griffin, Homer on Life and Death (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1980; rpt. 2009), 188189, on the Homeric scene and its contexts.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 141

and mortal in another Greek epic on the Trojan War, the Posthomerica of
Quintus of Smyrna from the third century ad. This passage, too, is often over-
looked. At the beginning of Book 3, Achilles is yet again on an irresistible killing
spree; he is about to fight his way through the Scaean Gate of Troy and to enter
the city, whose fall would then be imminent. Angered by this and worried about
the fate of Troy, Apollo flies down from Olympus and warns Achilles to desist.
But Achilles will have none of this. Their exchange is worth remembering:

The great god gave a terrible shout, to deter Achilles

From the battle for fear of the supernatural voice
Of a god and so to save the Trojans from being killed:
Back off, son of Peleus, away from the Trojans. No longer
May you inflict the evil Fates [of death] upon your foes,
Or one of the deities of Olympos may destroy you.
But Achilles did not quail at the gods immortal voice;
Already the merciless Fates were hovering over him.
So without respect for the god he shouted back at him:
Phoibos, why do you rouse me, even against my will,
To fight against gods, in order to save the arrogant Trojans?
Once before you tricked and decoyed me from the fighting.
Back off now, far away, and join the rest of the gods
At home, or I will strike you, immortal though you are.68

This is an astonishing reply, for Achilles even throws Apollos own words back in his
face. The god now becomes so irate that he shoots Achilles on the spot. (No Paris is
involved.) Readers ancient and modern may well agree with Apollos characteriza-
tion of Achilles state of mind as exhibiting such insane defiance of the gods.69
Altogether, then, what Petersens Achilles says to Briseis about Apollo may
not be quite as emphatically un-Homeric (or un-Greek) as Chiasson believes.
Chiasson concludes:

Homeric warriors aspire to the immortality and eternal potency of the

gods, but since they themselves are bound to die, they must settle for

68 Quintus of Smyrna, Posthomerica 2.3748 and 5152. The quotation is from Alan James
(ed. and tr.), Quintus of Smyrna: The Trojan Epic: Posthomerica (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 2004; rpt. 2007), 44. Apollos trickery and the two lines here omitted refer
to Achilles encounters with Hector (Iliad 20.441454 and 21.59622.20).
69 Quintus of Smyrna, Posthomerica 2.59 (James [ed. and tr.], Quintus of Smyrna: The Trojan
Epic, 44).
142 Winkler

immortal existence in the memories of men, the result of extraordinary

military prowess. The gods of Troy, by contrast, are such that they envy
humans their transience and mortality.

Chiasson then calls Achilles view of the gods a startling secret.70 Is it really
all that startling?
Chiasson well summarizes the Homeric warriors views of heroism (even if
potency in the above quotation may be an infelicitous word choice) and con-
trasts Troy with the Iliad. But is the films Achilles, especially in this one regard,
wholly incompatible with ancient Greek thought about life and death as it is
presented in Homeric epic, even despite major changes? Petersens Achilles,
for instance, tells Briseis that he did not choose to lead a great warriors life: I
chose nothing. I was born, and this is what I am. Homers Achilles did choose
something: he chose what he was.71
Although we should not expect any profound understanding of Greek reli-
gion or the archaic Greek mind in a film intended for international modern
viewers, we can nevertheless find several indications that the Iliad and the
Odyssey can prompt the kind of view Achilles espouses in Troy. The sort of
critical inquiry into the nature of myth and religion that came with the rise of
science and philosophy and reached a great height in fifth-century Athens
could well have led a rational-minded ancient Greek to conclude something
comparable about human and divine existence and the limitations inherent in
the latter from reading Homer. Troy, perhaps only serendipitously, is not all
that far removed from a possible line of thought about the gods that the
Homeric epics may have prompted in classical times.72

70 Both quotations are from Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens
Troy, 200. Chiasson, 206 note 20, rightly adds that it would be wrong to regard this as a
restatement of the Greek belief in the gods envy (phthonos) toward mortals as it occurs
in some well-known semi-historical tales.
71 Standard studies on this and related matters are Griffin, Homer on Life and Death, and
Seth L. Schein, The Mortal Hero: An Introduction to Homers Iliad (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1984). On the fall of Troy see especially Michael J. Anderson, The Fall of
Troy in Early Greek Poetry and Art (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997).
72 Rational or rationalizing interpretations of Homers gods have long been a staple of clas-
sical scholarship. A prominent example is Walter F. Otto, Die Gtter Griechenlands: Das
Bild des Gttlichen im Spiegel des griechischen Geistes (1929; rpt. Frankfurt: Klostermann,
2002); in English: The Homeric Gods: The Spiritual Significance of Greek Religion, tr. Moses
Hadas (1954; rpt. New York: Octagon Books, 1978). The roots of such views go back to
antiquity, not least to the philosopher and mythographer Euhemerus, who regarded the
gods as humans whom later generations had deified.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 143

The gods happiness and immortality are attractive to mortals, primarily to

those who are engaged in warfare and put their lives on the line at virtually all
times. But on a deeper level the gods eternal bliss is unsatisfactory and ulti-
mately pointless.73 If this were not the case, the gods would be concerned pri-
marily or exclusively with maintaining their unblemished and happy existence
and would not be as deeply involved in the lives of humans as they are. They
would keep themselves removed or aloof from human suffering, misery, and
death. They would have no need to leave Olympus. A particular passage in the
Odyssey tells us why. In Book 6 Athena appears to Nausicaa in a dream as part
of her strategy to ensure Odysseus safe reception by the Phaeacians; then she
returns to Olympus:

So the gray-eyed Athene spoke and went away from her

to Olympos, where the abode of the gods stands firm and unmoving
forever, they say, and is not shaken with winds nor spattered
with rains, nor does snow pile ever there, but the shining bright air
stretches cloudless away, and the white light glances upon it.
And there, and all their days, the blessed gods take their pleasure.74

Such a vivid description of the weather on Olympus relieves the poet of the task
of describing the interior of the gods actual abode. The lines quoted strongly
imply the beauty of the divine residence.75 The blessed gods have no need ever
to abandon their eternal pleasure even for short periods of time. But they do.
Other passages alert us to the shortcomings inherent in the very bliss the
gods enjoy. Calypsos existence on Ogygia, described in Book 5 of the Odyssey,

73 Lorenzo F. Garcia, Jr., Homeric Durability: Telling Time in the Iliad (Cambridge: Center for
Hellenic Studies/Harvard University Press, 2013), deals with the topic at hand with great
sensitivity and provides extensive primary and secondary references, but he does not
reach the position that I argue below. Still, his chapter The Impermanence of the
Permanent: The Death of the Gods? (159229) is valuable for the present context.
74 Odyssey 6.4147; quoted from Lattimore, The Odyssey of Homer, 103. In his comment on
these lines J.B. Hainsworth, in Alfred Heubeck, Stephanie West, and J.B. Hainsworth, A
Commentary on Homers Odyssey, vol. 1: Introduction and Books I-VIII (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1988; rpt. 1990), 296, calls them a fine description that was imitated by Lucretius
(On the Nature of Things 3.1822), Lucan (Pharsalia 2.271273), and Seneca (On Anger 3.6).
He further observes that the authenticity of this passage has been suspected. Rainer
Spieker, Die Beschreibung des Olympos (Hom. Od. 4147), Hermes, 97 (1969), 136161,
argues for it carefully and convincingly.
75 An impressive passage in Roman epic is the description of the sun gods palatial hall or
throne room (regia) in Ovid, Metamorphoses 2.118.
144 Winkler

is revealing. This nymph is not an Olympian deity and lives not in a palace but
in a cave on an out-of-the-way island. But what a cave and what an island!
Hermes sees it for the first time when he comes with a message for Calypso
from Zeus. Himself an Olympian, Hermes is presumably used to the best. But
he is greatly impressed:

There was a growth of grove around the cavern, flourishing,

alder was there, and the black poplar, and fragrant cypress,
and there were birds with spreading wings who made their nests in it,
little owls, and hawks, and birds of the sea with long beaks
who are like ravens, but all their work is on the sea water;
and right about the hollow cavern extended a flourishing
growth of vine that ripened with grape clusters. Next to it
there were four fountains, and each of them ran shining water,
each next to each, but turned to run in sundry directions;
and round about there were meadows growing soft with parsley
and violets, and even a god who came into that place
would have admired what he saw, the heart delighted within him.76

Here, too, the natural beauty surrounding the cave implies a comparably
attractive indoors. The Homeric narrator makes sure that we do not miss
Hermes admiration, for he tells us about it two more times in the two lines
immediately following the passage here quoted. And small wonder: as many
scholars have pointed out, this is one of the earliest descriptions of a locus
amoenus, the paradisal pleasing place of love and tender passion, of harmony
between man and nature.77 The passage reveals to listeners and readers the
easy and, on the surface, happy existence of an island fit for the habitation of
a goddess. Yet, the sociable Greek might discern a sinister overtone: there are
no people in this paradise; Odysseus is both marooned and utterly alone.78
But so is Calypsoor would be if Odysseus had not been driven off course to
her shore. And, we may well wonder, how often does anyone land there?
Odysseus himself will later point out Calypsos solitude to the Phaeacian
queen: with the exception of himself, Calypso has never had anyone for

76 Odyssey 5.6374 (Lattimore, The Odyssey of Homer, 90).

77 The sequence set on Calypsos island in Franco Piavolis little-known film Nostos: Il retorno
(1989) beautifully and poetically illustrates this very point.
78 Both quotations are from Hainsworth in Heubeck, West, and Hainsworth, A Commentary
on Homers Odyssey, vol. 1, 262.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 145

company, neither god nor mortal.79 Presumably she will be alone forever after
Odysseus departure. Calypso has handmaidens living with her, but these
apparently do not count. They are mentioned only in passing.80 Their presence
does not change her situation in the least.
Calypsos emotional reaction to Hermes message that Zeus now commands
her to let Odysseus go is no surprise. She is, first and foremost, anguished by los-
ing her lover of seven yearsthat Calypso is genuinely in love with Odysseus we
need not doubtbut she seems also to realize that she will be condemned to
eternal loneliness. Her lament, full of anguish and resignation, is heart-rending.
She charges the Olympians with heartlessness and recounts similar love affairs
between a goddess and a mortal that all ended unhappy.81 Calypsos offer to make
Odysseus immortal now takes on added poignancy: if accepted, it would have
been an antidote to her endlessly lonely and pointless existence.82 As the mean-
ing of her name implies, Calypso is hidden on her solitary island from all and
sundry. In addition, we now realize, the beauty of her surroundings only disguises
a profoundly miserable existence. Not only the sociable Greeks of Homeric and
classical times will have been able to see beneath the attractive surface. Homer
nowhere states that Calypso envies Odysseus, but the conclusion that she might
suggests itself with some force. The post-Homeric tradition about Calypsos sui-
cide or attempted suicide over the loss of Odysseus is simultaneously remarkable
or strangeshe is immortal, after alland fully understandable.
Another central Homeric passage, this one from the Iliad, may be more
important for my argument. It occurs in Book 21, when Apollo and Poseidon,
fighting on opposite sides, encounter each other on the battlefield. Rather than
engaging in combat, Apollo honors his uncles superior status and yields.
Chiasson discusses Apollos words to Poseidon at some length.83 Poseidon
challenges Apollo to a duel and then rebukes him for fighting on behalf of the
Trojans.84 Here is Apollos reaction:

Shaker of the earth, you would have me be as one without prudence

if I am to fight even you for the sake of insignificant

79 Odyssey 7.246247.
80 Odyssey 5.199.
81 Odyssey 5.118144.
82 Calypsos offer is mentioned at Odyssey 5.135136, 7.256257, and 23.335336. West, The
Epic Cycle, 148149 (on Aethiopis, Arg. 2e) and 306 (on Telegony F6), however, argues for a
different kind of immortality from that of gods (and as generally taken by readers).
83 Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 200201.
84 Iliad 21.436460.
146 Winkler

mortals, who are as leaves are, and now flourish and grow warm
with life, and feed on what the ground gives, but then again
fade away and are dead. Therefore let us with all speed
give up this quarrel and let the mortals fight their own battles.
He spoke so and turned away, for he was too modest
to close and fight in strength of hand with his fathers brother.85

Apollos behavior is appropriate, and his comparison of human life to the exis-
tence of leaves on trees is stark and vivid. It takes up, with momentous change,
the famous simile of the leaves in Glaucus words to Diomedes.86 Glaucus included
the annual rebirth or regeneration of leaves in nature because it is a comfort to
the heroes who are surrounded by death on all sides. To Apollo, the point of the
simile is the brief existence of individual leaves or generations of leaves, a power-
ful image to contrast the shortness of human life with the eternity of the gods
lives. Small wonder Apollo calls humans insignificant, not worthy of a duel
between gods. His words, however, strongly contrast with his earlier behavior as
afighter in the war. In Book 16 Apollo saved the city of Troy from a decisive Greek
attack led by Patroclus. Three times Apollo threw Patroclus down from the wall he
was climbing; the fourth time an angry Apollo threatened and warned Patroclus
to desist.87 Patroclus obeyed. So did Diomedes in Book 5. He had charged the
Trojan hero Aeneas three times but was rebuffed by Apollo. In his frenzy Diomedes
then attacked the god himself. He desisted when Apollo warned him off.88 In
these episodes and elsewhere, Apollo is fully invested in the Trojan War.
Apollos reply to Poseidon and his reaction raise a serious question concern-
ing Apollos presence in battle: if what Apollo says is true, as it evidently is from
his point of view, why then is he there in the first place? This question remains
fundamentally unanswered.89 Does Apollo realize how insignificant mortals
are only at this moment? If we take Apollos reason not to fight Poseidon to its
logical conclusion, the gods should never have become involved in this

85 Iliad 21.461469 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 452453).

86 Iliad 6.146149.
87 Iliad 16.698711.
88 Iliad 5.431446.
89 Garcia, Homeric Durability, 166168 and 240241, examines the scene but does not raise
this question. An obvious reply is that Zeus instigates the gods to fight at Iliad 20.431.
Poseidons surprised reaction to Zeus summons of the gods is instructive; he asks if Zeus
is concerned for the Trojans and the Greeks (1618). To this Zeus agrees (2021). But is this
a good enough reason? The narrator sensibly closes his report on this brief assembly on
Olympus by observing, matter-of-factly, that Zeus here causes an endless war among the
gods (31). What sense then does the battle of god against god make?
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 147

devastating war. Is Apollo then as one without prudence after all? Or is it that
human life with all its complications, afflictions, and, ultimately, death justifies
the gods participation in human affairs, indeed justifies their very existence?
Apollo does not envy humans one whit, but his words to Poseidon reveal that he
must have been aware of the human condition, which the Achilles of Troy
expresses like this: every moment might be our last. Everythings more beauti-
ful because were doomed. We will never be here again. Achilles last sentence
amounts to a concise, although prosaic, restatement of Apollos words about the
flourishing and then fading leaves. Perhaps without realizing it, Chiasson comes
close to expressing the perspective advanced here. After summarizing Apollos
sense of superiority over the insignificant leaf-like mortals, he concludes:

And yet Apollos action or rather inaction, his declining to fight even
though he is immortal, implicitly underscores the courage of those
human beings who do choose to fight at the risk of their lives.
Thus the Homeric Apollos decision not to fight for the sake of mortals
manifests both superhuman powerhe need not fight to achieve
immortalityand inferiority to heroes who must strive to overcome the
limitations of the human condition.90

This is both accurate and sensible. And yet, when Chiasson detects inferiority
to mortals in the Homeric gods, a more sympathetic approach to Troy might
have prompted him to push such a thought further. But the question posed
above does not occur to him.
Achilles We will never be here again may be linked to the reason Odysseus does
not accept Calypsos offer of immortality. The words with which a classical scholar
has summarized Odysseus perspective closely fit Achilles worldview in Troy:

Humans have ties to each other, and to their homeland and property, and
the intensity of these ties is all the stronger precisely because they cannot
last. Also, it is the excitement of living that appeals to him [Odysseus],
as opposed to the continual sameness of existence on Calypsos island. In
contrast to the change and uncertainty that is characteristic of human
life, there is the eternal comfort of the lives of the godswith all their
wants supplied.91

90 Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 201. He then turns
to Apollos impotence in failing to punish Achilles in Troy.
91 Lefkowitz, Greek Gods, Human Lives, 9091, 111, and 112.
148 Winkler

Eternal bliss is eternal boredom. The gods ties to their home and property are
necessarily far looser than mortals ties are to theirs. Hectors farewell from his
wife and son in Book 6 of the Iliad, one of its most moving scenes, illustrates
that very point. Who among the gods could ever experience such profound
emotions as Hector and Andromache do here? Only Zeus anguish over the
imminent death of his son Sarpedon in Book 16 comes close. But that moment
is as powerful as it is because it hinges on the death of a mortal. For gods, all is
different:

Exemption from deathdoes not exempt the gods from passion, though
it strips them of its tragic consequences. Deathless, they cannot risk
their lives for anything more precious than life, be it honor, the love of a
friend, or the love of home. Their inability to sacrifice themselves for
something higher constitutes a limitation on the gods. it is through
their involvement with their inferiors, earthbound men, destined to die,
that the gods acquire a measure of earnestness. The superhuman, then,
turns out to be less than the human in an essential respect.92

Ancient Greeks, and presumably Homer himself, whoever he was, realized

these things. Death is the meaning of life. Petersens Achilles knows this; so did
Homers. In the last book of the Iliad Achilles tells King Priam, who has come
to ransom the dead body of Hector from his sons killer:

Such is the way the gods spun life for unfortunate mortals,
that we live in unhappiness, but the gods themselves have no sorrows.
If Zeus who delights in thunder mingles these and bestows them
on man, he shifts, and moves now in evil, again in good fortune.
But when Zeus bestows from the urn of sorrows, he makes a failure
of man, and the evil hunger drives him over the shining
earth, and he wanders respected neither of gods nor mortals.93

These words movingly illustrate our topic. According to Achilles, Zeus grants
humans gifts only from the urn of blessings or good fortune when these are
mixed with evils and sorrows; we never receive pure blessings.
Not all scholars may agree with what I have outlined above. Still, the preced-
ing view of Homeric epic is worth contemplating when classical literature has

92 Quoted from Jenny Strauss Clay, The Wrath of Athena: Gods and Men in the Odyssey (1983;
rpt. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1997), 139 and 140141.
93 Iliad 24.525533 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 511).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 149

been adapted and modernized for a popular medium whose vast reach gives
new life to an old work.
I return now to Homers Athena and her closest association with a mortal.
As has been well said about the Odyssey: Athenas affection for Odysseus and
his family is extraordinary, especially since she is not his mother or his lover.94
And she serves a function in regard to Odysseus that is comparable to that
in her epiphany to Achilles: On several occasions she puts a good idea into
Odysseus mind.95
Why is immortal Athena so concerned about and so close to mortal
Odysseus? Her immortality by necessity overshadows their relationship:
Athenacannot change the conditions of mortal life: she can ward off harm,
but ultimately she cannot keep her mortal friends from dying.96 So her deep
affection amounts almost to a cursefor her. He will die after a period of time
that to an immortal must be very brief, while she will continue to live without
him and without all other heroes whom she helps and protects. Like Calypso,
Athena is condemned to lose Odysseus. He is obviously not her lover physically
as he was Calypsos, for Athena is forever a virgin goddess. But Odysseus is her
lover, as it were, on a spiritual, intellectual, and emotional level. This is nowhere
better seen than in the charming and moving description of their encounter in
Book 13 already referred to.97 Odysseus has not seen Athena or been aware of
her nearness in a decade. Their reunion shows that the two, mortal and immor-
tal, are like two peas in a pod of cleverness.98 Athena feels closer to Odysseus
than to any other mortal because he is closest to her in cunning intelligence, as
she observes herself. Odysseus gives Athena the greatest meaning, the greatest
purpose, for her very existence. For this reason she is more intimately involved
in the plot mechanism of the Odyssey than she is anywhere else in classical
literature, including the decisive part she plays at the conclusion of Aeschylus
Oresteia.
If we consider the relationship between Athena and Odysseus from such
a perspective, we are likely to respond to their encounter on Ithaca with a
certain sense of foreboding. What will happen to Athena emotionally after

94 Lefkowitz, Greek Gods, Human Lives, 88.

95 So Sad, Homer and the Odyssey, 328, who then lists instances. Sad, 345 and note 78,
observes that Odysseus and Athena already had their special relationship in the Iliad.
96 Lefkowitz, Greek Gods, Human Lives, 90. Lefkowitz, 112, astutely observes that their [the
gods] affections [for humans] are tempered by the security of their existence.
97 A darker view of Book 13 is advanced by Clay, The Wrath of Athena, 186212 (chapter titled
The Encounter of Odysseus and Athena), with references to related scholarship.
98 Especially Odyssey 13.221352.
150 Winkler

Odysseus dies? Will she ever find anyone similar? Or is she condemned, much
like Calypso, to remember or pine for the one mortal about whom she cared
the most and who gave her existence its greatest purpose? Will the virgin god-
dess who can never have a husband or son be condemned to eternal loneliness
once all the generations of heroes from Heracles and Jason, Achilles and
Diomedes, to Odysseus and Telemachus are gone? Is this the kind of happiness
anyone would want to aspire to? Had Athena ever offered Odysseus immortal-
ity, might he not have accepted it in spite of his love for Penelope, the mortal
wife for whose sake he had rejected Calypsos offer? This is no more than a
hypothetical question about something that could never have taken place in
Greek myth and remains outside the Homeric understanding of the divine and
human worlds. But the greatness of the Odyssey justifies at least raising the
question.
If Athena will have to give up Odysseus to the natural limitations of his exis-
tence, why then is she setting herself up for the inevitable losshis death,
foretold in the Odyssey?99 The reason must be that a close association of per-
fect beings with beings who are far more limited in their capabilities, knowl-
edge, and existence is the very thing that gives meaning to any divine existence.
With appropriate changes, we may apply what has been said about gods and
heroes in the Iliad to Odysseus and Athena in the Odyssey, or at least we may
contemplate certain similarities:

The gods love great heroes, but that love does not protect them from
defeat and death. The heroeswho are doomed[are] whom the gods
love. As they come nearer to that terrible transition [i.e. death], the shin-
ing eyes of Zeus are fixed on them all the more attentively; he loves them
because they are doomed.100

Conversely, what humans strive fora long, healthy, easy, luxurious lifethe
gods already have in abundance. They live in splendid palaces (or attractive
caverns), wear fancy clothes, and possess wealth and beauty. But the gods real-
ize that all material and other possessions are insignificant in themselves. If
you are immortal, why should you value riches that highly? A telling illustra-
tion, although from the opposite perspective, can be observed on screen. In
Jason and the Argonauts, a film already mentioned, the seafaring heroes land

99 At Odyssey 11.134137, Tiresias tells Odysseus about his death in old age. On this prophecy
in connection with the Telegony, the fragmentary epic in which Odysseus son Telegonus
kills his father, see West, The Epic Cycle, 307315.
100 Quoted from Griffin, Homer on Life and Death, 87.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 151

on a remote island that contains the treasuries of the gods. Hercules and Hylas
break into one of them, steal from the immense wealth it contains, and bring
down divine retribution on themselves and the other Argonauts.101 But to any
attentive viewer of the film who can think beyond its spectacular surface
attractions, the very idea of the gods amassing treasures is unconvincing
because it is inherently meaningless. The film almost tells us so in spite of
itself, for this island is far removed from Olympus, as if the gods had no use for,
and no great interest in, what they are hoarding and guarding so carefully.
What humans prize, gods can despise. But that does not necessarily make
them any the happier or give greater meaning to their lives.
The fact that Troy prompts any consideration of the kind advanced above,
although it does so only rather briefly and not nearly as profoundly as Homeric
epic had done, is sufficient to show us that this film is less superficial and more
Homeric than cursory classicists might acknowledge. As a result, the death of
Achilles in Troy evokes its own sense of poignancy in any sympathetic specta-
tor. Achilles view of himself as he has told it to BriseisI chose nothing. I was
born, and this is what I amwill change because of her. Later, he does choose.
When we first see him, Achilles is sleeping off a night of meaningless sex.
Petersen gives him two and not one partner for the night as an obvious indica-
tion that Achilles has nothing emotional at stake here.102 Then he encounters
Briseis and genuinely falls in love.103 For the sake of this love he returns to the
burning city of Troy to rescue her but is killed by Paris. Achilles dies with the
awareness that his death is not meaningless. Notwithstanding all the talk
about fame and immortality in Troy, Petersens hero is not as obsessed with
the idea of immortal glory as Homers Achilles was, even if Agamemnon and

101 Their sacrilege awakens the bronze giant Talos, whose statue had guarded this particular
treasury. I analyze the Talos sequence of this film in Greek Myth on the Screen, in Roger
D. Woodard (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Greek Mythology (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2007), 453479, at 462463.
102 Quintus of Smyrna, Posthomerica 4.272283, reports that two each of four women whom
Achilles had captured were given to Diomedes and Ajax as prizes during the funeral
games in Achilles honor. They were valuable because they excelled in domestic tasks, and
Achilles had taken great pleasure in them (277). It is obvious that Achilles pleasure was
not limited to observing the young women carrying out their chores. It is equally obvious
that they meant nothing to him personally or emotionally, not least since they are said to
have been not as excellent as Briseis (275276).
103 On this side of the myth and its afterlife in Greek and Roman literature see now Marco
Fantuzzi, Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012),
99185, especially 143157. Burgess, Achilles Heel, 176177, links the Achilles-Briseis
romance in Troy to Achilles love for Polyxena in ancient sources, as have a few others.
152 Winkler

others believe that it is his only goal. Understandably, in the twenty-first cen-
tury the concept has become suspect, at least partly unsuitable even for an
Achilles. Its replacement is love, or rather, heroic death for love. True, this is
not as it was in Homer. But is it pointless? Even if it is un-Homeric, it is not anti-
Homeric. As we have seen, the very limitations that define human existence
give meaning to our lives; they impart sense to our desires, loves, hates, and
strivings. Without death, the whole idea of a heros everlasting glory, a concept
central to Homer, could not operate. The hero Sarpedon actually says so in his
exchange with Glaucus before yet another round of fighting:

Man, supposing you and I, escaping this battle,

would be able to live on forever, ageless, immortal,
so neither would I myself go fighting in the foremost
nor would I urge you into the fighting where men win glory.
But now, seeing that the spirits of death stand close about us
in their thousands, no man can turn aside nor escape them,
let us go on and win glory for ourselves, or yield it to others.104

It is extremely poignant that Sarpedon will soon be killed by Patroclus, who in

turn will be killed by Hector, who in turn will be killed by Achilles. Petersens
Achilles is weary of slaughter, has no personal interest in the outcome of the
war, certainly takes no joy in the glory of the Greeks victories, and leads a
largely pointless life before Briseis makes it possible for him to change. Girolami
had already presented a comparable portrait of Achilles. As played by Gordon
Mitchell, a bodybuilder beyond his prime, Achilles is initially not much more
than a haggard-looking killing machine without serious purpose and tired of
endless slaughter. Briseis changes him.
The Homeric epics themselves had changed Achilles. In Book 11 of the
Odyssey Odysseus descends to the Underworld, where he meets the shades of
several dead heroes, among them Achilles. Odysseus reminds him of the great
honors Achilles received from the Greeks during his lifetime and calls him
more blessed (makarteros) than any other mortal. He uses a form of the
adjective that in Homeric epic regularly describes the gods. Odysseus comforts
Achilles, who died before his time, by reminding him of his royal status both
on earth and among the dead. Achilles will have none of it:

104 Iliad 12.322328 (Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, 286). Chiasson, Redefining Homeric
Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 187188 and 198, summarizes the importance of this
crucial scene.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 153

O shining Odysseus, never try to console me for dying.

I would rather follow the plow as thrall to another
man, one with no land allotted him and not much to live on,
than be a king over all the perished dead.105

So much for all heroic valor and glory. The Achilles of the Odyssey knows that
the Achilles of the Iliad made the wrong choice: a heroic short life on earth
with everlasting glory after death.106 If we measure the later by the earlier
Achilles, must we conclude that the later one is un-Homeric because he is radi-
cally different from the former? No answer seems necessary.
Overall, then, we ought not simply to dismiss the way Troy portrays Achilles.
His words to Briseis are appropriate. The film focuses on humans who do not
have gods appearing to them or helping them as they did in the Iliad. Instead,
the divine is in the humans, as Latacz has argued.107 Hence Hectors religiosity
in Troy, which contrasts with the Greeks greed and cynicism, especially
Agamemnons. Once again Snells observations about the Homeric gods are to
the point. He characterizes their existence in the following terms:

Diese Gtter sind die rheia zontes, die Leichtlebenden; ihr Leben ist
besonders lebendig, da das Dunkle und Unvollkommene ihnen fehlt, das der
Tod in das Menschenleben bringt; vor allem aber, weil es ein bewutes Leben
ist, da ihnen Sinn und Ende [i.e. Ziel] ihres Tuns anders gegenwrtig ist als
den Menschen. Tod und Dunkel ist berhaupt so weit wie mglich an den
Rand dieser Welt geschoben.Da allem Lebendigen eine Grenze gesetzt ist,
findet auch das freie Leben der Gtter seine Schranke in dem, was, wenn
auch nicht nach einem blinden Fatum, so doch nach einer bestimmten
Ordnung geschehen mu, da z. B. Sterbliche sterben mssen.108

The gods are the rheia zoontes, they live at ease; their life is especially vital
in as much as they are not touched by the darkness and the imperfection
which death engenders in the human life, but even more so because

105 Odyssey 11.488491 (Lattimore, The Odyssey of Homer, 180). Cf. Odyssey 4.76112, where
Menelaus, although now reunited with Helen, surrounded by great wealth, and celebrat-
ing a double wedding, confesses to grieve for his lost friends and companions in arms
almost constantly. By this time the Trojan War has been over for a decade.
106 Iliad 9.410416.
107 As was Erbse, Latacz is a student of Snells.
108 Snell, Die Entdeckung des Geistes, 38. The Greek words here transliterated appear in Greek
letters.
154 Winkler

theirs is a fully conscious life. The gods know the meaning and the end
[i.e. goal, aim] of their existence as human beings can never hope to.
Darkness and death have been pushed to the furthest limits of this
world. Since all life has its boundaries, even the free life of the gods is
limited, if not by a blind fate, at least by a fixed order or universal law
such as that which compels all men to die.109

4 Man as the Measure of Gods

The greatest film adaptation of Homer until today is Franco Rossis Odissea.110
Its ending is pertinent for my subject. The narrator, who had accompanied us
throughout this six-hour film, quotes, in measured Italian prose, Homers
description of the serenity that characterizes the gods abode on Olympus.
These lines I quoted above. Classical Beckmessers could grumble that this end-
ing is not strictly Homeric because the Odyssey does not end with this passage.
The narrators words accompany a series of impressions of an actual building
that stands in for the gods palace. This is Athenas temple on the Acropolis of
the city whose patron and guardian she is. The ending of Rossis Odissea
presents a synthesis. We agree with the narratorsreally, Homerswords
and their application to, or illustration by, one of the greatest works of classical
architecture. We come to realize that the divine perfection that eludes us in
our lives has become humanized in the artistic perfection made possible by
our own species ingenuity. After all, as the Sophist Protagoras famously
observed, man is the measure of all things.111 And, we might add, of all gods.

109 Snell, The Discovery of the Mind, 3435.

110 Brief appreciations of this extraordinary film, produced for television, are in Arthur J.
Pomeroy, Then It Was Destroyed by the Volcano: The Ancient World in Film and on
Television (London: Duckworth, 2008), 6772, and in Martin M. Winkler, Leaves of
Homeric Storytelling: Wolfgang Petersens Troy and Franco Rossis Odissea, in Eleonora
Cavallini (ed.), Omero mediatico: Aspetti della ricezione omerica nella civilt contempora-
nea, 2nd ed. (Bologna: d.u.press, 2010), 153163, at 157161, and Three Queens: Helen,
Penelope, and Dido in Franco Rossis Odissea and Eneide, in Marta Garca Morcillo and
Silke Knippschild (eds.), Seduction and Power: Antiquity in the Visual and Performing Arts
(London: Bloomsbury, 2013), 133153, at 134143.
111 Protagoras, Fragment 80.B1 (Diels-Kranz). The classic scholarly source on Protagoras (life,
ancient testimonies, and fragments) is Hermann Diels, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker,
ed. Walther Kranz; vol. 2, 6th ed. (Zurich and Hildesheim: Weidmann, 1952; rpt. 1992),
253271, especially 263; in English: Rosamond Kent Sprague (ed.), The Older Sophists
(1972; rpt. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2001), 328 (tr. Michael J. OBrien), especially 18.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 155

The following conclusion about Homeric gods, derived from a specific passage
in Athenas encounter with Odysseus in Book 13 of the Odyssey, is revealing:

Die zitierten Verse sind fr die Frage, wie das eigentliche Wesen der homeri
schen Gtter zustandegekommen sein knnte, von einzigartiger
Bedeutung: Sie zeigen, da die Dichter bei ihren Konzeptionen jeweils
von der Beobachtung menschlicher Eigenschaften ausgegangen sind und
da sie diese Wesenszge dann auf die allgemein bekannten Gtter ber-
tragen haben. Immer aber geschah das so, da der Gott Gefallen an sei-
nem menschlichen Ebenbild finden und gleichzeitig eine glaubwrdige
Rolle in der olympischen Gesellschaft spielen konnte. Es wird sich auch
weiterhin herausstellen, da die gottesfrchtigen Verfasser der beiden
groen Epen in erster Linie vortreffliche Menschenkenner waren.

The lines quoted [Odyssey 13.296299] are of singular importance for the
question how exactly the essential character of the Homeric gods came
about. They demonstrate that each of the poets took observations of human
qualities for his starting point as he conceived of them and then attributed
these character traits to the gods with whom everybody was familiar from
before. This process always occurred in such a way that the god concerned
could delight in his human mirror image and, at the same time, could play
a credible and authentic part in the company of the Olympians. It will
become evident again and again that the god-fearing composers of these
two great epics were, first and foremost, excellent judges of human nature.112

The Homeric poet knows and understands the nature of gods because he
understands that of humans. But when knowledge of human natureand of
nature in generalincreased, understanding or knowledge of gods frequently
decreased. In his lost work On the Gods Protagoras admitted: Concerning the
gods, I cannot know either that they exist or that they do not exist, or what
form they might have, for there is much that prevents ones knowing: the
obscurity of the subject and the shortness of mans life.113 Protagoras did not
think or believe the way Homer did. In this he was not alone, as, for example,
the plays of Euripides make abundantly clear. The gods in fifth-century Greece
were no longer what they had been in Homeric culture. Nor were the heroes, as
Aeschylus new conception of the reason for Achilles uncontrolled anger over
the death of Patroclus in his lost Myrmidons makes equally clear.

112 Quoted from Erbse, Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Gtter im homerischen Epos, 121;
emphasis in original. The English translation is mine.
113 Protagoras, Fragment 80.B4 (Diels-Kranz); quoted from Sprague (ed.), The Older Sophists, 20.
156 Winkler

Jean-Luc Godards film of Moravias Contempt points us in a similar direc-

tion.114 Differently from the novel, here it is the director of the film that is being
made who upholds the integrity of the Odyssey against the radically modern
view held by the screenwriter. Godard attributes Rheingolds vision of what the
Odyssey means to Paul Javal, his equivalent of Moravias Molteni, and to Jerry
Prokosch, the equivalent of Battista. The fictional director in Godards film is
played by Fritz Lang and called Fritz Lang. The real Lang had had extensive
experience with mythic-epic cinema, although not in connection with classi-
cal antiquity. Lang made the two-part epic Die Nibelungen in 1924 and the
futuristic Metropolis in 1927; both are milestones of epic filmmaking. The Fritz
Lang of Contempt is furthermore meant as an Old World counterpoint to his
producer, whom Godard changed to an American.115 Lang speaks German,
English, French, and Italian and readily quotes Dante, Brecht, and Hlderlin.
He explains his approach to Homer by telling Prokosch: Here, its the fight of
the individual against the circumstances; the eternal problem of the old
Greeks. I dont know if you are able to understand it, Jerry; I certainly hope
you can. (No such luck.) But then Lang adds: Its the fight against the gods.116
Over images of fake statues of Athena and Poseidon, Lang explains that these

114 Much has been written about this film. The chapter on Contempt in Richard Brody,
Everything is Cinema: The Working Life of Jean-Luc Godard (2008; rpt. New York: Picador,
2009), 156173 and 645647 (notes), may serve as a detailed first orientation. For brief
comments by Moravia on the film see Moravia and Elkann, Life of Moravia, 216217.
115 In passing we may note that Carlo Ponti, co-producer of Camerinis Ulysses, was co-producer
of Contempt. So was, albeit without credit, Joseph E. Levine, who had made Steve Reeves as
Hercules an international phenomenon. Levines name has become a byword for a wheeler-
dealer producer and distributor interested in moneymaking, not in the art of cinema.
116 Lang immediately adds, making the connection to the film he is directing: The fight of
Prometheus and Ulysses. Mythologists will realize that this is a slight imprecision since
the Titan Prometheus was a god himself. (He did have a major conflict with Zeus, as is
shown in Aeschylus Prometheus Bound.) These words appear to be from Godards screen-
play rather than to come from (the authentic) Lang, who may have known better. The
following statement by Sam Rohdie, Promised Lands: Cinema, Geography, Modernism
(London: bfi [British Film Institute] Publishing, 2001), 16, about the statues in Contempt
is, however, misleading: In Le Mpris, the Greek statues are also those that Ingrid
Bergman gazes at in the museum in [Roberto Rossellinis] Viaggio in Italia, are the gods of
Langian fatalism, are the excavations of Schliemann at Troy. The second of these proposi-
tions by fiat may be correct, the first and the third are not. Rossellinis film, whose English
release title Voyage to Italy is incorrect, is certainly important for Godards Contempt. But
the statues in the Naples museum, where the sequence Rohdie mentions was filmed, are
authentic, not obvious props as those in Contempt. To link either kind of statuary to
Schliemann and Troy is more than far-fetched.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 157

are Odysseus protector and enemy. A bit later Lang enlightens Prokosch about
the gods in a manner we have already encountered in a different context: Jerry,
dont forget; the gods have not created man, man has created gods. A bronze
copy of the famous Greek marble bust of blind Homer now is on screen. But
Prokosch, not surprisingly, proves himself to be a cultural barbarian. (He twice
calls Langs rushes that are being screened for him that stuff.) Lang directly
addresses the heart of our topic when he quotes, in German:

Furchtlos bleibt aber, so er es mu, der Mann

Einsam vor Gott, es schtzet die Einfalt ihn,
Und keiner Waffen brauchts und keiner
Listen, so lange, bis Gottes Fehl hilft.

Fearless, however, Man remains, if he must,

lonely before God; straightforward simplicity guards him,
and there is no need for any weapons or any
ruses, until the moment that Gods absence aids him.

This is the final stanza, lines 6164, of Hlderlins poem Dichterberuf (The
Poets Vocation).117 The manor Everymanof Hlderlins poem in part
resembles Odysseus: fearless, at least most of the time; lonely before divine
powers when these are hostile (Poseidon), friendly (Athena, Hermes), or
ambiguous (Circe, Calypso). Presumably this is why Lang quotes this stanza.
But Odysseus is anything but simple or guileless. And he needs and uses his
weapons on Ithaca. Is he aided by Godsor a godsabsence? Lang then dis-
cusses, in French, the poems final line, whose meaning, he says, is obscure.
Lang explains (and quotes in German) that Hlderlin originally wrote so lange
der Gott nicht da ist (as long as the god is not there) but then changed it to so
lange der Gott uns nah ist (as long as the god is close to us) before adopting
the published version that Lang quotes.118 This exegesis, however, is not strictly

117 I quote Hlderlin in the modern-spelling edition of the two-volume Studienausgabe

(study edition) by Detlev Lders (ed.), Friedrich Hlderlin: Smtliche Gedichte, vol. 1: Text
(Bad Homburg: Athenum, 1970), 248250; quotation at 250. Friedrich Beissner (ed.),
Hlderlin: Smtliche Werke, vol. 2: Gedichte nach 1800, pt. 1: Text (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer,
1951), 4648, provides an old-spelling version. Hlderlins is an Alcaic ode. My prose trans-
lation can provide only a vague impression of the originals elegance.
118 The English subtitle for the French translation of so lange der Gott nicht da ist on the
Criterion Collection edition of Contempt reverses the meaning: So long as God is not
absent (for not present). This makes nonsense of the entire point and of the next subtitle:
So long as God is close to us.
158 Winkler

correct. Godards Lang does not distort the meaning of the two earlier versions
of this line, but he does not quote them quite accurately. The correct wordings
are so lange der Gott nicht fehlet (as long as the god is not absent) and so lange
der Gott uns nah bleibt (as long as the god remains close to us).119 The ode and
especially its ending have frequently been analyzed from various perspectives
(and with somewhat different conclusions).120
Lang comments: Ce nest plus la prsence de Dieu; cest labsence de Dieu
qui rassure lhomme. Cest trs trange. Mais vrai. (Its no longer the presence
of God, its the absence of God that reassures man. Its very strange. But true.)
Strange it may be, but fifth-century Greeks, especially Protagoras or Euripides,
might not have found it strange and are likely to have found it true. Man finds
his resources within himself. From this perspective we may even say that Troy
makes a similar or at least related point, as when Hector tells the Trojans: The
gods wont fight this war for us.
Moravia had Molteni characterize his director as not quite in the league of a
classic German director like G.W. Pabst or Fritz Lang, although Rheingold is
clearly patterned on either one.121 It is therefore a pleasing serendipity that
Rheingold was played on screen by none other than Lang. Godards Lang, how-
ever, is not the Fritz Lang of film history but a fictionalized character in a f ictional
plot played by someone who had been given his linesalthough Godard, who
revered Lang as one of the greatest filmmakers ever and, in homage to him,
played Langs assistant in his own film, allowed his actor Lang some leeway to

119 Beissner (ed.), Hlderlin: Smtliche Werke, vol. 2: pt. 2: Lesarten und Erluterungen, 476
483, provides the odes textual variants.
120 Lders (ed.), Friedrich Hlderlin: Smtliche Gedichte, vol. 2: Kommentar, 213214, gives an
explanation of the final line. Beissner, Hlderlin: Smtliche Werke, vol. 2, pt. 2, 485486,
comments on the last three stanzas.
121 Moravia, Contempt, 7980: Rheingold was a German director who, in the pre-Nazi film
era, had directed, in Germany, various films of the colossal type. He was certainly not
in the same class as the Pabsts and Langs, but, as a director, he was worthy of respect. Das
Rheingold is the first of four operas in Richard Wagners Der Ring des Nibelungen, so
Moravias choice of name for his invented filmmaker is meant to evoke Lang, who had
made Die Nibelungen. Godard once said: Moravias character [of Rheingold] was mod-
eled after Pabst because he was talking about a second-rate director. Quoted from Gene
Youngblood, Jean-Luc Godard: No Difference Between Life and Cinema (transcript of
series of 1968 panel discussions), in David Sterritt (ed.), Jean-Luc Godard: Interviews
(Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1998), 949, at 25. It is doubtful that Georg
Wilhelm Pabst was a second-rate director. But Godard may have considered someone like
Camerini as such. As Dumont, Lantiquit au cinma, 204, reports, Pabst had been intended
as the original director of Ulysses and had spent several years working on the script and
on pre-production.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 159

improvise.122 But the quotation from Hlderlin was Godards idea. Like his Lang,
Godard once characterized the lines as a very strange text of Hlderlins because
it is incomprehensible. Godard included it for the following reason:

Because it is a text which is called The Poets Vocation and because in

Le Mpris Lang symbolizes the poet, the artist, the creator. So it was appro-
priate that he should speak a poem about the poets vocation.
That the text is strange, thats certain; I dont understand it. And Lang doesnt
understand it any better. I chose Hlderlin because Lang is German and
also because Hlderlin wrote many poems about Greece. I wanted,
through it, to imply the Odyssey and Greece. I chose Hlderlin because of
this fascination that Greece and the Mediterranean exert on him.123

Godards direct inspiration to include Hlderlin in his film was literary theo-
rist, philosopher, and novelist Maurice Blanchots brief essay Hlderlins
Itinerary, in which the final stanza of The Poets Vocation is quoted.124
As a result, it is not at all strange (and very true) that Gods absence should
receive such prominent treatment in Godards Contempt. (There is no Hlderlin
in Moravias Contempt.) Ironically, however, the very absence of Godor, of
the godsmay be only temporary, for the poem does not exclude the possibil-
ity of His or their eventual return, a return prepared by heroic menor heroic
Manof the future.125
In an interview he gave during filming, Godard described Lang as someone
tranquil and serene, who had meditated at length and finally understood the

122 Patrick McGilligan, Fritz Lang: The Nature of the Beast (1997; rpt. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 2013), 449 and 450: Godards reverence for Fritz Lang was explicit.
Encouraged to come up with his own dialogue, the director wrote some of his lines as the
camera rolled.
123 Godard added: But the poem must be taken as a poem. One doesnt ask Beethoven what
his music means. My translations are taken from Jean Collet, Jean-Luc Godard, 2nd ed.
(Paris: Seghers, 1967), 109110.Besides poems, Hlderlin also wrote dramas on classical
topics. Best known are Antigone and the fragmentary The Death of Empedocles.
124 An English translation of this essay is available in Maurice Blanchot, The Space of
Literature, tr. Ann Smock (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1982), 269276. The
French original had appeared in 1955. See further Oliver H. Harris, Pure Cinema?
Blanchot, Godard, Le Mpris, in MacCabe and Mulvey (eds.), Godards Contempt, 96106.
Tom Gunning, The Films of Fritz Lang: Allegories of Vision and Modernity (London:
Palgrave Macmillan/British Film Institute, 2000; rpt. 2009), 481 note 14, suspects yet
another (unidentified) source of inspiration for Godard.
125 So, e.g., Lders (ed.), Friedrich Hlderlin, vol. 2, 213214.
160 Winkler

world.126 The character of the fictional director corresponds closely to that of

the real filmmaker. So it is more than fitting that Godards Lang should quote
Hlderlin on God and, by implication, on the ancient gods. These gods are rep-
resented only by statues. Godard is not the first filmmaker to show statues of
gods in place of actors playing gods. Franco Rossi had done the same in his
Odissea, even animated them, as it were, through camera movements, editing,
and voice-overs. Rossi had filmed Greek originals; Godard shows us garishly
colored and painted copies. While the presence of real gods (as statues) in
Rossi had been, to put the matter in Hlderlins terms as expressed by Godards
Lang, both reassuring and true, Godards own gods are strange, untrue, and
hardly reassuring at all. The dichotomy that Lang attributes to Hlderlins ode
is thus reproduced visually in the film in which he points it out.
Godard has Lang characterize Homer and his world in terms that pertain to
our topic, the fight of the individual against circumstances. Later, Lang explains
(in French):

The world of Homer is a real world. And the poet belonged to a civiliza-
tion that developed in harmony, and not in opposition, with nature. And
the beauty of the Odyssey lies precisely in this belief in reality as it isand
in a form that cannot be broken down and that is what it is. To take it or
leave it.

This, too, reflects Godards own views. As he said about the reality of Homer:
its the opposite of the modern world, which seeks to accommodate itself to
everything. We say maybe, not exactly and no longer yes or no.127
Such various pronouncements may be correct up to a point, but they do not
seem to be consistent with each other or with Homers epic. It is for us to take
them or leave them. But how are we to understand Godards points as expressed
by Lang? In his earlier statement the gods, as antagonists of the Greeks, appear
to take a back seat to the humans, the protagonists of Greek literature. In the
later the gods seem to be more inside the humans, as Latacz put it in regard to
Troy. Ironically, the rushes of Langs Odyssey film that Godard puts on the
screen in Contempt fit neither perspective. Rather, they express Godards own
contempt for the commercial cinema against which the New Wave filmmakers
had rebelled. It is often overlooked that the title of the adaptation of Homer
that Godards Lang is filming is not The Odyssey but Odysseus, as is evident

126 Quoted from McGilligan, Fritz Lang, 450.

127 Quoted, in my translation, from Jean Collet, Jean-Luc Godard, 111. Godard will summarize
Contempt from this very perspective a little later (Collet, 111).
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 161

from the slate or clapperboard that appears on screen a couple of times. This
seems to be both an echo of Camerinis film, given the titular similarityboth
films are named after the hero of the Odysseyand a simultaneous rejection,
given the titular differencethe name is not Italian but Greek (and German,
because of Lang). Presumably we are intended to notice all this. Are we also
meant to agree with Prokosch, the commercial producer, when he complains:
You cheated me, Fritz? In turn, should viewers of Contempt conclude: You
cheated us, Jean-Luc? Consider what Godard once said about the gods in con-
nection with this film:

Cinema replaces the gaze of the gods. It comes close [to us]. The gods
never did anything other than to come close to men. The Greek gods
became mortally bored far away from men, they came down all the time,
they were in love with the people below, they would join them or have
them near them, protect them. This is the essence [le propre] of all the
gods, or of God if you prefer.128

Is cinema the new godor God if you preferin our secular technological
age? Has it replaced the classical gods (or the Judeo-Christian God)? Asked
about the meaning of the statues in Contempt, Godard once replied:

No meaning. They were the Greek gods. Usually you see them always
white. But in ancient Greece they were painted psychedelic colors. So
I painted them to remind people how it was in ancient Greece. Thats all.129

But is that really all? Is there no meaning? Or do Godards words, a little glib as
they are, reinforce Hlderlins final stanzawhich, in this way, would lose at
least a measure of its incomprehensibility? As Godard, alluding to Proust, put
it the year he made the film:

In short, Contempt could be called In Search of Homer. The subject of

Contempt are the people who look at and judge each other, then in turn
are looked at and judged by the cinema, which is represented by Fritz
Lang playing himself; in sum, the conscience of the film, its honesty.
Whereas the odyssey of Odysseus was a physical phenomenon, I filmed a

128 Quoted, in my translation, from Jean Collet, Jean-Luc Godard, 111.

129 Quoted from Youngblood, Jean-Luc Godard, 44.
162 Winkler

moral odyssey: the gaze of the camera on the characters in search of

Homer replaces that of the gods on Odysseus and his companions.130

Now we can answer the earlier question: yes, the cinema is a new god, perhaps
also a new God. Homer is the godfather of film. The camera which approaches
the viewers of Contempt during the films opening sequenceits credits are
spoken, not superimposed on the screenand then gazes down at them from
above with its Cyclopean eye, had already hinted at this.131 The statement that
follows the credits, here given in my translation, is apropos as well:

The cinema, said Andr Bazin, substitutes to our gaze an alternate world
that corresponds to our desires. Contempt is the story of this world.

Godard may have wrongly attributed the first sentence to the godfather of the
New Wave filmmakers, for apparently no such statement is to be found among
Bazins writings.132 Godard may, however, remember hearing Bazin utter it.133
Regardless of its source, Godard was right to adduce this sentiment. The
Homeric world of Contempt is both ancient and modern.134 The ancient epic
has been made modern by the film camera and the projector, which, in the
earliest age of filmmaking, had been one and the same apparatus. Different
filmmakers, both fictional like Moravias Battista, Molteni, and Rheingold, and
real like Camerini, Girolami, Rossi, Petersen, Godard and yet others, have kept
the ancient epics alive. The Sophist Alcidamas, Gorgias student, may have
been one of the earliest to explain artists and readers (and viewers) undying

130 Quoted, in my translation, from Jean-Luc Godard, Le mpris, Cahiers du cinma, 146
(August, 1963), now available in Alain Bergala (ed.), Jean-Luc Godard par Jean-Luc Godard,
new ed., vol. 1: 19501984 (Paris: ditions de ltoile/Cahiers du cinma, 1998), 248249;
quotations at 249.
131 On this see Jean-Louis Leutrat, Le cinma, art cyclopen, ou: dans le sillage dHomre,
Gaia, 7 (2003), 573584.
132 On this see Jonathan Rosenbaum, Trailer for Godards Histoire(s) du Cinma, Vertigo, 1
no. 7 (Autumn, 1997), 1320, at 19 (author and source reference); more easily accessible
now in Jonathan Rosenbaum, Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia: Film Culture in Transition
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 305318; there 314.
133 On an audio recording promoting his film A Woman is a Woman (1961), Godard says:
said Bazin, the cinema substitutes itself to our gaze to offer a world that corresponds to
our desires. Quoted, in my translation, from Jean-Luc Godard, Une femme est une
femme (transcription of recording), in Bergala (ed.), Jean-Luc Godard par Jean-Luc
Godard, vol. 1, 210215; quotation at 211.
134 Godard, Le mpris, in Bergala (ed.), Jean-Luc Godard par Jean-Luc Godard, vol. 1, 249,
eloquently made this point himself.
Troy and the Cinematic Afterlife of Homeric Gods 163

love for Homer. Alcidamas is reported to have called the Odyssey a beautiful
mirror of human life.135 It is such a mirror because it substitutes to our gaze an
alternate world that corresponds to our desires.
After the producers death in Contempt, it remains doubtful whether Godards
Lang will ever finish his version of the Odyssey. Not even the footage we see on
screen bodes well, since the statues of the gods are strange copies and the
humansOdysseus, Penelope, a suitor with an arrow through his throat
appear to be a weird throw-back to the kind of filmmaking practiced by Camerini
and a satire of Godards commercially oriented producers Ponti and Levine.136 Is
Contempt then a statement about the impossibility to film the Odyssey as any-
thing other than a crassly commercial spectacle, with all the nudity that Moravias
Battista had called for and that is on occasional view in Langs footage
something that the actual Fritz Lang would never even contemplate shooting?
Can the Odyssey ever become an art film? Or do the garishly colored statues
tell us that, in a manner of speaking, the gods are dead? Is there no meaning after
all? Are we to be reassured by the absence of the divine? Contempt remains
ambiguous and enigmatic on this subject. And therein lies part of its fascination.
In retrospect it seems obvious that the debate about gods on screen that was to
heat up over Troy should have begun with Camerinis Ulysses (or even earlier, in
the silent era) and been taken to a serious intellectual level with Contempt.137
Altogether, then, we need not be surprised to find that artists always change
Homer. But this does not amount to any evidence of disrespect. Troy is a nota-
ble modern example. In Petersens words, which echo the Homeric simile of
the leaves: If there is something like a tree of storytelling, on which each
book, each film, is a tiny leaf, then Homer is its trunk.138

135 The saying is preserved by Aristotle, Rhetoric 3.3.3 (1406b).

136 On this side of Contempt see, e.g., Jacques Aumont, The Fall of the Gods: Jean-Luc
Godards Le Mpris (1963), tr. Peter Graham, in Susan Hayward and Ginette Vincendeau
(eds.), French Film: Texts and Contexts, 2nd ed. (London and New York: Routledge, 2000),
174188, at 176 and 186 note 3 (Mussolini Ponti and King Kong Levine).
137 On Homers presence on the silent screen see the filmographic listings in Dumont,
Lantiquit au cinma, 177201 (Trojan War, Iliad) and 201209 (Odyssey); updates in the
2013 electronic book are at 655657. See now also Pantelis Michelakis, Homer in Silent
Cinema, in Pantelis Michelakis and Maria Wyke (eds.), The Ancient World in Silent Cinema
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 145165.
138 Quoted, in my translation, from Tobias Kniebe, Homer ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht:
Troja-Regisseur Wolfgang Petersen ber die mythischen Wurzeln des Erzhlens und den
Achilles in uns allen, Sddeutsche Zeitung (May 11, 2004); at http://www.sueddeutsche.
de/kultur/petersen-interview-homer-ist-wenn-man-trotzdem-lacht-1.429599.
164 Winkler

A recent translator of the Iliad has made a related point. Characterizing

himself as a translator interested in holding a wider than academic audience,
he observes:

There is no turning back the trend, the huge flood tide, that is taking all
of us ever deeper into [a situation in which] the reading of books [is] giv-
ing way to television and movies, a long-established reading culture
reorienting itself to audio and audiovisual experience. Only mass media
could accomplish this.139

Troy is one leaf on the tree of Homeric storytelling. It is not the Iliad and was
never intended to be. Petersens Achilles does not think or believe completely
the way Homers Achilles did. Nor could he. As a result, Troy may be more
Sophistic than Homeric. But scholars who cannot accept Troy as being at least
partly in the spirit of Homer can still agree that it is at least partly in that of
Protagoras and Alcidamas. Consequently, Troy expresses more of the ancient
Greek outlook on life and death than may appear to casual or hostile viewers.
The film rewards multiple viewings, not least in its definitive version.

139 The quotations are from Stanley Lombardo, Translating the Iliad for a Wider Public,
Classical World, 103 no. 2 (Winter 2010), 227231, at 227 and 231. His translation: Stanley
Lombardo (tr.), Homer: Iliad (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997; rpt. 2000).
 chapter 6

Achilles and Patroclus in Troy

Horst-Dieter Blume

Among the many kings and princes who follow Agamemnon from all over
Greece on his campaign against Troy, Achilles and Patroclus stand out as a pair
of close friends who maintain a high degree of independence in the army. In
this regard the Iliad established a fixed tradition, so Achilles and Patroclus have
been named together ever since, besides other famous pairs of mythological
friends such as Orestes and Pylades or Theseus and Pirithous.1 Wolfgang
Petersen and his screenwriter David Benioff did not altogether disregard this
tradition, yet they present Achilles as rather a solitary character, someone who
stands and fights for himself only. The introduction of Patroclus therefore
caused them some problems since Patroclus, an outstanding warrior in Homer,
plays only a minor part in Troy.
By eliminating the gods as active participants from his plot, Petersen
reduced the siege of Troy to a realistic affair of human power politics. At the
beginning we learn that Greeks and Trojans already have been rivals for years,
struggling for predominance in the Aegean Sea. In this, Agamemnon is the
driving force: by and by he has subdued the local rulers of Greece, aspiring to
absolute power and supremacy. The kidnapping of his brothers wife Helen
gives him a most welcome pretext of gathering a pan-Hellenic army against the
mighty city of Troy, his rival. All Greek leaders except Achilles feel obliged to
fight in revenge of the violation of Menelaus honor but really for the ambition
of his powerful brother. King Priam, on the other hand, who after many wars
over several decades had been anxious to secure peace, has finally realized,
with bitter resignation, that his efforts have been for nothing.
War and peace are depicted on an equal level of importance for human soci-
ety at the beginning of Troy. War is then shown gaining the upper hand,
whereas the peace treaty between Trojans and Spartans will not keep its valid-
ity beyond even one day after being agreed upon. The films opening scenes
stress the cruelty of war by introducing to the audience its two chief promot-
ers: Agamemnon, who has led his conquering army against Triopas, king of
Thessaly, and young Achilles, who has joined the campaign although we are

1 Cf. Plutarch, On Having Many Friends 93d-e; Lucian, Toxaris, or On Friendship 10. The friend-
ship of Achilles and Patroclus remains proverbial over centuries in tragedy (Sophocles,
Philoctetes 434), philosophy (Plato, Symposium 179e180a), and elegy (Ovid, Tristia 5.4.25).

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_008

166 Blume

given no explicit reason for his participation. The opening of the directors cut
of Troy reveals, to stark effect, that fierce slaughter has already taken place, as
we can deduce from the corpses that are lying unburied in the fields. Yet the
two armies have formed up against each other for battle again. But their lead-
ers decide to end the war in traditional aristocratic manner by single combat
of their best warriors. Triopas presently summons Boagrius, a man of colossal
monstrosity and frightening strength, whose name appropriately means Wild
Bull. Just as Triopas is not an indigenous Thessalian name, so Boagrius is
invented for the present situation. In turn Agamemnon calls out for Achilles
but gets no reply. The young hero is not among the soldiers lined up for battle
but, as we will soon find out, is lying asleep in his hut in the company of two
pretty women. An infuriated Agamemnon, King of Kings, is compelled to send
a messenger boy to fetch Achilles and to wait in front of both armies for the
arrival of his man. The duel then ends in one quick go: Achilles rushes up
against his huge opponent, with a high jump lands upon him like a flash, and
plunges his sword into Boagrius neck. Is there no one else? he yells, facing
the front line of the enemy with deliberate provocation.
Agamemnon will gain the allegiance of yet another people by Achilles act
of bravery. When, as a symbol of submission, the Thessalian king is about to
hand his scepter to Achilles to give to his king, Agamemnon, Triopas receives
the curt answer: He is not my king! The antagonism between Agamemnon
and Achilles, already implied in the latters absence from the battleline, is
now confirmed. Whereas the other Greek rulers have accepted Agamemnons
superiority more or less voluntarilyIthaca cannot afford an enemy like
Agamemnon, observes Odysseus the pragmatistthis is not the case with
Achilles. Agamemnon knows all too well that Achilles is not his loyal subordi-
nate and that he does not fight for anybody but himself. Of all the warlords
loved by the gods I hate him the most, he later mutters. On his first appearance
in the film, then, Achilles proves himself both a lover of women, if without any
emotional involvement, and a ruthless killer, but he is stripped of his mythical
nature as a demigod. For the time being we are introduced to an individual
fighter with no troops of his own to command. His soldiers, the Myrmidons,
and Patroclus will be introduced only later, after the films and our focus of
attention has turned explicitly towards Troy.
Meanwhile in Sparta, peace with the Trojans was being both celebrated and
broken. Menelaus at once hurries to Mycenae to let his brother know about the
wrong done to him by Prince Paris. Agamemnon, more than eager to resume
war against Troy, immediately gets down to gathering troops for a revenge
campaign. Most conveniently, the old and wise Nestor, whose kingdom of
Pylos is never mentioned in the film, happens to be present at court; he urges
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 167

Agamemnon to win Achilles for their new campaign. Without him, Nestor
argues, the Greek army will never be able to overcome a city as mighty as Troy.
Reluctantly Agamemnon agrees, and they decide to entrust Odysseus with the
task of persuading him. Straight away two messengers are sent to Ithaca, who
somewhere in the mountains stumble upon a man dressed like a shepherd and
with a dog at his feet. They are none too smartthis circumstance may be
meant as an indirect comment on Agamemnonso it takes them some time
to realize that the smiling man is King Odysseus himself. Their mission ends
with a humorous touch. The dog here is a clever allusion to a moving scene in
the Odyssey, where Odysseus dog Argus is the first to recognize his master
even though Odysseus is disguised as a beggar when he returns home after an
absence of twenty years.2
Quickly hereafter, the scene shifts to Phthia, the home of Achilles. An ideal-
istic and idyllic setting creates the ambience that is appropriate for the most
outstanding hero of Greece. We are shown remains of an archaic building situ-
ated high up above the sea, with a few touches of a Cretan palace added.
Among the broken pillars Achilles and his cousin Patroclus, like two high-
spirited colts, jump and bound at each other, fighting with wooden swords and
practicing their quick reactions. Achilles is the elder of the two, the teacher
and an experienced fighter, as we know from the first scene. Yet here, in his
youthful appearance, he does not much differ from the ephebe Patroclus. Their
long aristocratic locks, still unshorn, and their beardless faces distinguish both
of them from the rest of the Greek kings and heroes. As we may guess from a
short remark by Odysseus, Patroclus, when his father had died, was sent to king
Peleus of Phthia to be brought up there together with his cousin Achilles, but
Peleus, too, died before his time. Achilles divine descent is not altogether elim-
inated, though. Viewers versed in Greek myth can still make out that Achilles
mother Thetis was an immortal Nereid, a daughter of the sea god Nereus.
Petersen, in contrast to Homers Iliad, does not grant her an active part in the
plot of Troy; indeed her name is not mentioned at all. She appears only once,
and in her hereditary element. In a solitary grotto by the seaside she meets her
son for the last time, not a goddess of eternal youth but an elderly melancholic
woman with the gift of prophecy. More briefly than she does in the Iliad, Thetis
informs Achilles about his fate if he goes to Troy: he will gain honor in battle
and everlasting fame, but he will never return home; staying in Larissa, he will
lead a peaceful yet inglorious life with a loving wife and children by his side.3
She offers him a choice but knows well enough which decision he will make.

2 Odyssey 17.290327.
3 Achilles himself tells this story at Iliad 9.410416.
168 Blume

In antiquity a number of places were called Larissa, and one of them later,
although not yet in Homeric times, was identified with Phthia. This is Larissa
Kremast, the Hanging Larissa on the slope of Mount Othrys in southern
Thessaly. On the other hand, the city of the same name in the wide plane of
Thessaly that still exists today lies too far off in the north to fit the story.
Achilles, a Thessalian hero, makes the first sequence of Troy implausible, for
why should he help Agamemnon subdue his own country or even a nearby
region? A king with the non-Homeric name Triopas could easily have been
transferred to another, more distant part of Greece for greater accuracy.
The main purpose of Thetis appearance in the film is to predict Achilles
fateful death as an inevitable outcome of his participation in the Trojan War. In
the literary tradition the fact that he is free to choose between two different
ways of life but at the same time becomes fully aware of his impending death
made Achilles a tragic figure, but his tragic existence is hardly recognizable in
Troy. This Achilles is mortalI wouldnt be bothering with the shield then,
he replies to a young boy who speculates about his mothers divinityand he
would not have it otherwise. As he explains to Briseis: The gods envy us
because any moment might be our last. Everything is more beautiful because
we are doomed. For him, immortality therefore can only mean not to be for-
gotten even after thousands of years.
In battle Achilles presents himself as a one-sided character, someone almost
exclusively keen on fighting and gaining fame. Patroclus, among the Myrmidon
soldiers at Achilles command, follows him to Troy as his protg and devoted
friend. Petersen makes it obvious from the beginning that Achilles does not
readily fit into the pan-Hellenic fleet of a thousand ships but will undertake his
own military campaign. He has just a single ship at his disposal, manned by
fifty warriors; in the Iliad he had commanded a contingent of fifty.4 However,
by means of the well-trained rowers who, spurred on by his ambition, prove to
be the fastest of all, they land on the coast of Troy before the others. Achilles is
the first to jump ashore, ahead of his soldiers; he will distinguish himself from
the very beginning as the outstanding individual fighter in the Greek army.
Young Patroclus is being kept away: although he has been a quick disciple in
Phthia, he is, Achilles tells him, not a Myrmidon yet and receives a strict order
not to fight but to guard the ship. By contrast, Homers Achilles calls Patroclus
the best of the Myrmidons.5 In keeping with the later tradition, still current,
Troy treats what is originally no more than the name of a Greek tribe as if it
denoted a special type of elite soldiers. In Troy it is not Patroclus but Eudorus

4 Iliad 2.685.
5 Iliad 18.10.
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 169

who ranks first after Achilles. Homer mentions a Eudorus only once: a son of
Hermes and one of the five leaders of Achilles fleet.6 Homers Patroclus was so
superb in single combat as to kill even Sarpedon, a son of Zeus.7 But even so he
did not command a contingent of his own. He was Achilles closest confidant,
shared the same hut with him, and retired with him from fighting. Only when
the Trojans threatened to burn the Greek ships was Patroclus sent into battle
as Achilles representative. The long Book 16 of the Iliad is devoted almost
exclusively to his praise and ends with his death.
The films following scene not only reveals the essence of Achilles character
but also contains all the basic elements of its further action. At once Achilles is
confronted with a vast majority of Trojans and in a fit of rage rushes forward,
killing whoever dares oppose him. We are reminded of Nestors earlier words
to Agamemnon, that Achilles cannot be controlled but only needs to be
unleashed. Like a hungry wolf he forces his way through the enemy lines,
storming uphill towards the sanctuary of the Sun God outside the walls of Troy.
In front of his temple, on a platform bathed in glaring sunshine, a golden statue
of Phoebus Apollo the Archer is keeping guard. The style of this statue copies
ancient models, and readers of the Iliad will remember that it was Apollo who
sent a plague into the Greek army with his arrows and so set off the animosity
between Agamemnon and Achilles.8 A huge statue of oriental character, on
the other hand, dominates the gloomy interior of his temple. Achilles and his
warriors defile the sanctuary; the temple is desecrated by violence and blood-
shed, looted and vandalized: Take whatever treasure you find, Achilles urges
his soldiers. In vain Eudorus, the captain of the Myrmidons, objects to Achilles
sacrilege with the utmost caution and tries to keep him back from rash and
insolent acts: Apollo sees everything, and perhaps it is not wise to offend him.
Whereupon Achilles, with a mighty blow of his sword, chops off the head of
the golden statue and with a provocative gesture invites immediate divine
retributionwhich, however, does not happen. The soldiers meanwhile kill the
priests and take a young virgin priestess prisoner. Earlier we have learnt that
she is Briseis, a cousin of Hectors. She is brought into Achilles tent and pre-
sented to him as part of his spoils of war. The consequence will be a fateful love
affair between victor and victim, between the foreign conqueror and a mem-
ber of the royal family. In addition, Hector is introduced in this first scene
of battle, defending Apollos sanctuary against an ever-increasing number of
invaders. When he suddenly finds himself isolated from his troops, the

6 Iliad 16.179192.
7 Iliad 16.419507.
8 Iliad 1.852.
170 Blume

Myrmidons could easily have killed him, but Achilles intervenes and sends
him back to his city, not from an impulse of magnanimity but in order to have
a better chance of defeating him in single combat later, in full view of the two
armies. This is quite an independent and thoroughly modern way of looking at
the mythological tradition. Achilles makes use of the Trojan War simply to sat-
isfy his personal desire for glory and immortality and begins fighting even
before Menelaus and Agamemnon have set their feet on Trojan soil. This war is
marked from the very beginning by a brutal act of sacrilege, committed by a
man who has no plausible reason at all to fight against the Trojans. Achilles
actions anticipate the atrocities of the final capture of the city.
Afterwards the Greek leaders gather in Agamemnons tent. When the King
of Kings claims victory for himself, Achilles is the only one seen to refuse to pay
abject homage to the man who had disdained to fight in the front line at the
risk of his life. Their personal animosity ends in open hostility when, at a wave
of Agamemnons hand, two of his soldiers drag in Briseis, who had been vio-
lently taken from Achilles tent. Drawing his sword, the young hero is about to
rush at the man he hates and despises. Only Briseis, who will have no more
blood shed for her sake, can stop him. Feeling humiliated, dishonored, and
overcome by anger, Achilles swears to stay away from the fight. Here the action
of the film has arrived at the crucial conflict that constitutes the subject matterof
the whole Iliad, but what in Homer does not happen before the tenth year
of the siege of Troy occurs on its very first day. The Homeric Agamemnon felt
degraded when the seer Calchas proclaimed that he must give back to her
father, a priest of Apollo, a captured princess he had received as his spoils of
war while all the other kings would keep their prizes. This situation made him
demand recompense and take Briseis from Achilles. In the film the conflict is
much simpler, arising on a purely personal level: Agamemnon is not forced to
give up anything himself but acts from sheer greed and arrogance, which
makes him all the more repulsive.
When, on the second day, the two armies line up for battle, Achilles and his
warriors are missing. They look down upon the plain from the top of a hill,
uninvolved. The stereotypical scene of Homeric teichoscopiathe look from
the walls upon a dramatic actionis thus doubled here: not only Priam, the
Trojan elders, and Helen watch and comment on the fight from the city walls,
but Achilles and the Myrmidons do so as well, from a nearby hill.9 Deprived
of the strength and the zeal of their best fighter and, in addition, shocked by
the sudden and unforeseen death of Menelaus after his duel with Paris, the
Achaeans suffer heavy losses. Huge Ajax is slain by Hector, and many Greeks

9 Iliad 3.146244.
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 171

die in a shower of arrows from the city walls. Gladly the army would now return
home, especially since they do not see any longer the need to fight for the kid-
napped wife of a king who is dead. The events told in the Iliad now follow in
quick succession, and for the first time Patroclus comes to the fore again. In
Homer there is a gradual increase of dramatic intensity. In Book 9, several days
after the fatal quarrel of the two leaders an embassy is sent to Achilles to make
him give up his wrath, but their gifts and pleadings remain fruitless; only when
the Trojans are about to set fire to the Achaean ships does Achilles allow
Patroclus to put on his own splendid armor and fight in his place. In a heroic
assault Patroclus pushes far ahead towards the city gate but is finally stopped
and killed by Hector with Apollos help in Book 16. This abruptly puts an end to
Achilles refusal to fight. His mother Thetis implores Hephaestus to forge new
weapons for him. Before devoting himself to the ceremonies for Patroclus
funeral, Achilles rushes forth to satisfy his thirst for revenge, quenched only
with Hectors death and the abuse of his body in Books 19 to 22. Achilles
actions are now entirely motivated by his excessive grief over the loss of his
dearest friend.
Petersen again focuses the story on individuals. A single day is enough for
Agamemnon to give in. Persuaded by Nestor that Achilles cooperation will be
indispensable for their campaign, he feels compelled to act, but no detailed
and meticulous preparations are initiated for a reconciliation as is done in
Homer: no presents listed to make amends; no formal restitution of the girl will
take place. There is not even a personal encounter of the two enemies, and
Agamemnon never apologizes. He can take the damned girl. I havent touched
her, he explains to Nestor and Odysseus in his tent. He is clearly a hypocrite,
because he had already handed her over to his soldiers, and only by chance
does Achilles turn up in time to rescue her from that randy rabble. Briseis is
therefore by no means restored to Achilles; rather, he takes her back on his own
authority. The hatred of the two leaders, which had existed long before her
abduction, does not end with her return.
Achilles gives order to sail home (I refuse to be a servant any longer), much
to Patroclus indignation because, up to this moment, he has not had a chance
to fight. The Myrmidons obey and prepare their ship. Early next morning, after
the Trojans have launched a dangerous surprise attack, Patroclus puts on
Achilles armor, greaves, and helmet and leads the unsuspecting soldiers into
battle. Neither Achilles nor viewers yet know that the man wearing Achilles
armor is not its owner. In marked contrast to what he achieves in Iliad 16,
Patroclus is granted only a short advance before encountering Hector. Patroclus
is quickly slain. Too late Hector realizes what has happened, that he has killed
a boy whom he had mistaken for his greatest enemy. When the news is
172 Blume

delivered to Achilles, he is still in his hut with Briseis. Choked with anger and
overwhelmed by grief, he immediately rushes forward to take revenge, chal-
lenging Hector to a duel.
Their duel is of crucial importance, a matter of life and death for the heroes,
with decisive consequence for the destiny of Troy. Petersen succeeds in repro-
ducing Iliad 22, a magnificent episode of considerable length, in a compara-
tively brief sequence of impressive images. Homer lends greatness to Hectors
death by a gradual increase of tension and excitement. Moreover, not only the
gods participate in the human conflict, but celestial phenomena and various
wild animals are also involved, thanks to the similes that enrich Homers epic
style. The combat of the two greatest heroes is long delayed and yet inevitable,
and its final result is one of horrifying brutality. Petersen has to replace epic
description by dramatic action and therefore gets to the climax of the conflict
at once, but he emphasizes the unique character of the heroes encounter by a
skillful visual arrangement. Achilles and Hector meet, as it were, on an empty
echoing stage under the eyes of a Trojan public who witness Hectors and their
own impending disaster. When Achilles arrives on his chariot, a tiny figure
below the immense city walls, and again and again calls out Hector in violent
rage, he represents the lonely hero who would stand up against a whole world.
The archers on the battlements easily could have killed him and so saved Troy
had not Hector kept them from shooting: a noble gesture, far different from the
arrogant way in which Achilles had earlier dismissed Hector from Apollos
sanctuary. It takes some time until the city gate opens and Hector appears. The
wait creates a tense atmosphere, a feeling of anxiety about what is bound to
happen.
The single combat then proceeds close to the Homeric pattern, starting with
a detailed quotation, of course not verbatim, of Hectors appeal that the win-
ner shall allow the loser all proper funeral rites.10 Achilles haughtily rejects
this: There are no pacts between lions and men, another, and this time closer,
reference to the Iliad.11 Their duel is a masterpiece of cinematic staging, perfor-
mance, and editing. It ends with Achilles relentlessly carrying out his threat to
abuse Hectors corpse. Without the slightest respect to the slain prince he ties
his dead body to his chariot and drags it back to the Greek camp. Briseis cries
out in despair: Hector is her cousin, as Patroclus is Achilleswill the atrocities
never end? Yet when, on a nightly visit to his tent, Priam kisses Achilles hands
and pleads for Hectors body, Achilles gives in and even grants a truce of twelve

10 Iliad 22.254259.
11 Iliad 22.262.
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 173

days for the funeral rites. Attentive viewers will notice that Agamemnon, sup-
posedly King of Kings, has no say in the matter.
At this point the Iliad comes to an end: the wrath of Achilles is finally extin-
guished after he has avenged the death of his beloved friend Patroclus. In the
film, however, Achilles hatred for Agamemnon continues, if without any con-
sequence since they no longer pursue a common aim. Petersen offers an indi-
vidualized version of future events. During the period of the truce the Greeks
build their Wooden Horse, which will eventually cause the fall of Troy; and
Briseis, separated from Achilles after he consents to her return home with
Priam, will eventually cause his death as a result of their tragic love affair.
Achilles orders the Myrmidons to sail off; from now on he will fight alone, and
only in his own cause. There follows a significant deviation from Homer and all
classical literature, because the mythical ancient Achilles is already dead by
the time Troy falls. Petersens Achilles, entering Troy within the wooden horse,
searches for Briseis to save her from the general massacre. The horrors of war
are depicted on screen at great length, with city and palace burning, temples
laid waste, and even murder of the innocents. The victorious mob tears the
statues of the gods from their bases with ropesan obvious allusion to the
demolition of the monument of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad in 2003. At last
Achilles and Briseis meet in an open courtyard of Priams palace, just after she
has freed herself with a thrust of her dagger from the clutches of Agamemnon.
At that same moment Paris turns up on a gallery. He shoots an arrow into
Achilles heel, an obvious reference to the mythological tradition. But addi-
tional arrows hit Achilles in the chest and body. For a short while the hero
seems invulnerable, even pulling out all arrows except the first. Embracing a
weeping Briseis, he comforts her (You gave me peace in a lifetime of war) and
entreats her not to stay but to save herself. Only when he is sure of her safety
does he sink to the ground and die. The film ends with his funeral in the smok-
ing ruins of Troy and the exodus of a few survivors, including Helen and Paris.
Petersen had to leave out all details of Achilles life before the Trojan War
and all explanation how he became what he is. When Briseis asks him why he
chose the life of a great warrior, his answer is revealing: I chose nothing. I was
born, and this is what I am. So let us turn back from Homer and Troy and take
a glance at his youth. The story is told in various ways, as so often in Greek
myth. Being an offspring of the Nereid Thetis and the human hero Peleus,
Achilles was a demigod: an outstanding character, but still mortal. The initial
version contains a number of elements from folklore or fairytale. Peleus, a
huntsman from Mount Pelion, came across a mermaid (Thetis) at the seashore;
he wrestled with her, defeated her, and made her his wife against her will.
When she had borne a son (Achilles), she tried to make him immortal by
174 Blume

anointing him with ambrosia and secretly putting him into the fire of the
hearth.12 But Peleus surprised her in the act and cried out in horror, where-
upon she left him and returned to the sea. According to another version Thetis
dipped the child into the icy water of the Styx, one of the rivers of the under-
world, and only the heel by which she was holding her infant son remained
vulnerable; this is, of course, where Achilles was hit by Paris arrow. The story
was told in the lost epic Aethiopis, the ancient sequel, as it were, to the Iliad.
Peleus, left alone with the child, gave it away to be brought up by the centaur
Chiron, a good-natured and wise creature living in the nearby mountains.
Later, the story came to be rationalized. Peleus and Thetis were married accord-
ing to the will of the Olympians, and she lived happily together with her hus-
band, bringing up their son at home. Literary tradition and fine arts have
handed down to us isolated episodes of Achilles life that do not form a consis-
tent picture. We are constantly reminded that we are dealing with a figure of
myth and not with a historical person, and we cannot therefore expect to get,
or reconstruct, anything like a conventional or coherent biography of Achilles.
There is general agreement that Achilles was born in Phthia. The geographi-
cal name, however, raises a problem because Homer primarily had in mind a
region, a Thessalian landscape of rich soil. But in a few passages Phthia could
also be understood as a specific place: if not a polis, the capital of the
Myrmidons, then surely a rulers residence. Here Achilles possessed cattle and
horses and grain-producing fields. Neither of his parents was of Thessalian ori-
gin. Peleus was born on the island of Aegina; he was a son of Aeacus, who after
his death became key-holder and judge in the underworld as a reward for his
piety. Peleus had to leave Aegina after he and his brother Telamon killed their
half-brother Phocus, hitting him with a discus in the gymnasium.13 Peleus then
took refuge in Phthia, in this connection definitely to be understood as a place
name, to be purified from blood guilt by king Eurytion. He afterwards married
Eurytions daughter Antigone and received a third of the country as his share.
The continuation of the story is rather complicated. Eurytion and Peleus
took part in the famous Calydonian boar hunt, which gathered most of the
noble Greeks of the time. Here Peleus accidently killed his father-in-law with a
misdirected spear. Again he had to flee into exile for purification; this time he

12 Ambrosia and nectar are the food and drink of the gods, which render immortal not only
those who take them but also those who get in contact with them. A few drops given by
Thetis are sufficient to keep the corpse of Patroclus from decaying (Iliad 19.3839).
13 Telamon, king of Salamis, became father of Ajax, the best fighter in the Greek army after
Achilles. In Troy Ajax is killed by Hector; in the Iliad (7.287307) their duel ends in friend-
ship and with an exchange of gifts.
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 175

turned to king Acastus of Iolcus.14 The matter, however, came to a bad end.
Acastus wife Astydamia passionately fell in love with Peleus and, when he
rejected her advances, took revenge on him by uttering vicious slander, where-
upon Antigone in Phthia committed suicide and Acastus planned to get rid of
his guest. But rather than kill the man he himself had purified, he took Peleus
out for a hunt on Mount Pelion and, when Peleus had fallen asleep, stole his
sword and left him. Chiron the centaur saved him from being torn apart by
wild beasts and restored his weapon to him. Peleus now found himself in the
awkward situation of a homeless widower, but he faced his greatest adventure.
In a wrestling match he overcame Thetis in spite of her ability to change shapes
rapidly and won her for his new wife. According to the later literary tradition
this happened with the explicit approval of the gods. Zeus and Poseidon once
had desired to gain Thetis favors, but a prophecy had warned them that she
would give birth to a son who would be stronger and more powerful than his
father. If Poseidon or especially Zeus were to be this father, it would mean the
end of the reign of the Olympians. So they decided that Thetis should get mar-
ried to a mortal and chose Peleus, a man whom they held in high regard, for the
purpose.15 The wedding was celebrated on Mount Pelion, and all the gods from
Olympus joined the feast, rejoicing, as it were, in their salvation. Euripides
composed a magnificent choral ode commemorating the event: when the nine
Muses were praising bride and bridegroom and all the Nereids were dancing
and even the clumsy centaurs, holding trees in their hands, were rhythmically
stamping the ground, Eris appeared uninvited and created discord by rolling a
golden apple among the guests as prize to the most beautiful goddess.16 With
this she gave rise to the Judgment of Paris and eventually the Trojan War.
Together with Thetis, Peleus returned to Phthia. Although he had caused,
unintentionally, the death of his predecessor on the throne and of his first wife,
he was held blameless. The royal seat from which Thetis returned to her sister
Nereids soon after her son was born should be located not far from Mount
Pelion and the sea coast. In the Iliad Achilles calls the Spercheus his native
river, to whom he had solemnly promised to offer his long juvenile hair after
his return from Troy. Later he realized that he could not keep this vow, so he
cut off his locks on occasion of Patroclus funeral.17 In between the valley of
the Spercheus and the coastal plain along the Malian Gulf, Phthia comprises

14 Iolcus, modern Volos, is famous as the home of Jason and the starting point for the voyage
of the Argonauts. It is situated near Mt. Pelion.
15 Iliad 24.619.
16 Euripides, Iphigenia at Aulis 10361079.
17 Iliad 23.141142.
176 Blume

the southern part of Thessaly, and its location is in harmony with the Catalogue
of Ships, in which the territory and cities under Achilles command are called
Pelasgian Argos. It is clearly separated from Locris in the south and Phthiotis
in the north.18
After his mother had gone, somebody had to bring up the infant Achilles.
The folklore version is that Achilles, only twelve days old, was handed over to
Chiron, who fed him with lions meat and bears marrow. Chiron made Achilles
a strong and intelligent youth, teaching him how to ride and to hunt, to use
weapons, to play the lyre, and even to cure wounds.19 When Achilles left the
centaurs cave, he was not to return to his fathers court. His mother, who kept
worrying about him, though from her distant abode, tried to prevent him from
going to Troy. She dressed him in girls clothes and hid him among the daugh-
ters of king Lycomedes on the island of Scyrus. This female ruse is barely com-
patible with the preceding story of a boy nourished on lions and bears in the
wilderness, in order to become a warrior of a correspondingly fierce character.
Homer therefore does not mention Achilles childhood with Chiron except to
note that he has learned from him the art of medicine.20 In this way Homer
reduces the centaur from a god-like demon to a simple teacher. Homer also
omits the story of the boy being hidden among Lycomedes daughters. Instead,
he introduces Phoenix as his tutor at home. Phoenix, cursed by his father
Amyntor, had fled from Boeotia and been received in Phthia by Peleus, who
made him ruler over the neighboring Dolopes. When Peleus sent young
Achilles to Troy as commander of the Myrmidon fleet, he entrusted him to
Phoenix.21 Achilles friend Patroclus, some years older but inferior in strength,
was expressly ordered by his father Menoetius to keep an eye upon the emo-
tional and impulsive prince, and Thetis prepared a chest filled with warm
clothing and blankets for him.22 Whereas the scene of Achilles disguised
among the girls of Scyrus resembles a folktale, Homer tells a realistic story
about his upbringing.
This quality of Homeric narrative concerning Achilles becomes all the more
evident when we take into account the following incident, which shows us that

18 Iliad 2.681685. Cf. Edzard Visser, Homers Katalog der Schiffe (Stuttgart: Teubner, 1997),
644661. Argos is the name of several regions: Achaean Argos (i.e. the Argolid) is
Agamemnons home. Pelasgian Argos suggests a pre-Hellenic origin. Patroclus was born
in Locris.
19 On this see K. Friis Johansen, Achill bei Chiron, in Krister Hanell (ed.), Dragma: Martino
P. Nilsson A.D. IV Id. Iul. MCMXXXIX dedicatum (Lund: Ohlsson, 1939), 181205.
20 Iliad 11.832.
21 Iliad 9.438443.
22 Iliad 11.786789 and 16.220224.
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 177

any attempt to create a sound chronology is bound to fail. Achilles, it is said,

seduced Deidamia, one of King Lycomedes daughters, and she gave birth to
Neoptolemus, who was later also called Pyrrhus. Since epic poets had elimi-
nated the episode of the young hero hidden among women, they had to invent
an alternative version for the birth of Achilles son. They made Achilles con-
quer Scyrus.23 His conquest occurred on the Greeks return from their first and
unsuccessful expedition to Troy, after they were beaten back by Telephus in
Mysia. Achilles then formally married Deidamia, but he left her as soon as the
fleet assembled again in Aulis. Neoptolemus, who never in his life had seen his
father, was brought up in Scyrus. When Achilles had fallen in battle, his son
was already old enough to set out for Troy himself. A prophecy had announced
that his presence was indispensable for the sack of the city.
By an ingenious trick Odysseus had discovered Achilles, dressed as a girl, on
Scyrus and had disclosed his identity. Like a merchant Odysseus had spread
out gifts for the princessesprecious garments and little baskets for their
wool workbut also weapons and armor. Suddenly a trumpet was sounded,
and Achilles instinctively seized the weapons. Through his impulsive reaction
he was recognized; he would and could now no longer stay behind. Achilles
and Odysseus, the main characters of the two Homeric epics, differ in many
respects, but both of them have achieved an exemplary status and significance.
The older and more mature Odysseus stands for rational action and persuasive
rhetoric, but also for cunning and curiosity. Young Achilles excels in every
physical virtue: bravery, strength, and swiftness. But he is quick-tempered as
well, prey to strong emotions, rash and impulsive in his actions. Odysseus
therefore seems to be the suitable person to win him over for the general inter-
est of the Achaeans. In the Iliad Odysseus is second to, but only to, wise old
Nestor, who acts as spokesman when the Greeks ask Peleus for support and
succeed in having Achilles and Patroclus come to Troy with them.24 In Troy
everything depends exclusively on Odysseus. And his errand to get Achilles to
join the Greek army is successful, not only because of Achilles thirst for glory
but also because there is great sympathy between the two heroes, who differ
from all the other Greek kings in the awareness of their independence from
Agamemnon.
As we know primarily from Homer, at Troy Achilles, unrivaled in strength
and courage, performed the heroic deeds that gained him eternal fame and
glory. Only here was he fated to become the actual Achilles or, to use a term of
Aristotle, to reach his telos, the meaningful goal of his life and existence. The

23 Iliad 9.668.
24 Iliad 11.767782.
178 Blume

same applies to his older friend Patroclus. Achilles grief over his bereavement
is excessive; it seems to go beyond all bounds. His determination to resume
fighting in order to avenge Patroclus death will result in his own end, a fate he
willingly accepts according to his mothers prophecy.25 Patroclus body is burnt
on a pyre with many elaborate offerings, and twelve Trojans are killed as offer-
ings to the dead heros shade.26 The next morning Patroclus bones are col-
lected in a golden bowl, which will later be buried together with those of
Achilles in the same mound.27 The funeral is crowned with athletic games in
honor of Achilles beloved friend.
Petersen offers us a radically different Patroclus, cousin of Achilles, still very
young, and an inexperienced warrior. Why this change? Obviously because of
the difficulty to make it plausible to a modern public that Achilles furious
reaction to Patroclus death was simply due to friendship. Even in antiquity the
archaic poet Hesiod, a near contemporary of Homer, considered the two
heroes to be cousins and made their fathers, Menoetius and Peleus, brothers.28
But this version did not gain further currency. Another tradition became more
common instead, according to which Achilles and Patroclus were regarded as
lovers. The tragic poet Aeschylus was the first to make their love the subject of
widespread discussion when he dramatized the second half of the Iliad in his
Achilleid, a trilogy now lost although fragments survive. The first of these plays,
The Myrmidons, began with angry Achilles refusing to fight. When the Trojans
set fire to the Greek ships, he sends Patroclus into battle. A messenger reports
Patroclus off-stage bravery and death, then the corpse is brought on stage.
In desperate grief Achilles embraces and addresses his dead friend, a reminis-
cence of their kisses and intimacies.29 Nowhere did Homer explicitly mention
or even hint at homosexual love, but, as W.M. Clarke has aptly put it, his
Achilles and Patroclusare lovers from their hearts.30 In later centuries
such homoeroticism was by no means a taboo topic.31 Benioff and Petersen

25 Iliad 18.8896.
26 Iliad 23.164177.
27 Patroclus wish (Iliad 23.9192) was fulfilled (Odyssey 24.7277). A monument existed on
Cape Sigeum in the Troad.
28 Hesiod, Fragm. 212a Merkelbach-West.
29 Aeschylus, Myrmidons, in Stefan Radt (ed.), Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, vol. 3:
Aeschylus (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985), 239257; where see Fragm.
135137. At Iliad 19.4 Thetis finds Achilles lying on the floor, embracing his dead friend.
30 W.M. Clarke, Achilles and Patroclus in Love, Hermes, 106 (1978), 381396; quotation at
395.
31 Cf. K.J. Dover, Greek Homosexuality, updated ed. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1989), 196203. For additional details and references see David M. Halperin, One Hundred
Achilles and Patroclus in Troy 179

deliberately and understandably avoid it, but they cannot altogether do with-
out love in their plot. This must be the chief reason why they turned Briseis
into a major character, in the process promoting a mere captive princess from
some nearby town to an important member of the Trojan royal family. As in
Aeschylus, Achilles the fighter and war-hero again softens in the arms of a
beloved.

Years of Homosexuality: And Other Essays on Greek Love (New York: Routledge, 1990),
7587; Pantelis Michelakis, Achilles in Greek Tragedy (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2002), 2257 (chapter on Aeschylus Myrmidons); Manuel Sanz Morales and Gabriel
Laguna Mariscal, The Relationship Between Achilles and Patroclus According to
Chariton of Aphrodisias, The Classical Quarterly, n.s. 53 no. 1 (2003), 292295, especially
292; Gabriel Laguna-Mariscal and Manuel Sanz-Morales, Was the Relationship between
Achilles and Patroclus Homoerotic? The View of Apollonius Rhodius, Hermes, 133 (2005),
120123; and, in particular, Marco Fantuzzi, Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2012), 187265 (chapter titled Comrades in Love). Andreas
Krass, Over His Dead Body: Male Friendship in Homers Iliad and Wolfgang Petersens
Troy (2004), in Almut-Barbara Renger and Jon Solomon (eds), Ancient Worlds in Film and
Television: Gender and Politics (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 153173, discusses ancient sources
(Aeschylus, Plato, Aeschines) in conenction with Homer and Troy. Krass, 168170, sees
queer moments in the film.
 chapter 7

Odysseus in Troy
Bruce Louden

In spite of sweeping changes to the larger plot of the Trojan Warcompression

of time, radical excision of the gods, combining multiple characters into one
Troy presents an Odysseus who remains largely Homeric.1 But Wolfgang
Petersens Odysseus combines his chief characteristics from the Iliad with sev-
eral of his defining roles and functions from the Odyssey. The use of material
from the Odyssey may result from the filmmakers decision to present a version
of the Trojan War slightly less tragic than Homers, one that places greater
emphasis on survivors and on some of the central characters romantic
relationships.2
I begin by considering what is perhaps Petersens most surprising move but
also one of his most Homeric, Odysseus first appearance in Troy. Proceeding
in chronological order, which is, on the one hand, a non-Homeric tendency but
on the other a concession to simplifying an extremely complex backstory, Troy
depicts the reasons why Odysseus takes part in the war, a subject outside of the
plots of both the Iliad and the Odyssey. Thus, by including Agamemnons
ambassadors as they are looking for him on Ithaca, Troy appears to glance at
the episode, recounted in the Cypria, of Odysseus feigned madness. This was a
ruse by which he attempted to avoid having to go to Troy. At his first appear-
ance on screen Odysseus pretends to be another man, outraged at the behavior
of none other than Odysseus:

Odysseus, that old bastard, drinks my wine and never pays. Respect
him? Id like to punch him in the face. Hes pawing at my wife, trying to
tear her clothes off.

1 On this see Georg Danek, The Story of Troy through the Centuries, in Martin M. Winkler
(ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 6884, at 82. The
resultant length of the war in terms of actual days of fighting is curiously close to that in the
Mahabhrata. Cf. further Danek, 78, on this as an established characteristic of earlier adapta-
tions of the Trojan War story, and Alena Allen, Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy, in TROY,
148162, at 149151, on Briseis as a combination of Cassandra, Polyxena, and even
Clytaemnestra with Homers original.
2 On these as general characteristics of Petersens film see Charles Chiasson, Redefining
Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, in Kostas Myrsiades (ed.), Reading Homer:
Film and Text (Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2009), 186207.

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_009

Odysseus in Troy 181

However, the details are less reminiscent of the Cypria and closer to Odysseus
use of disguise and extended role-playing in the Odyssey. The brief dialogue in
this scene pointedly conjures up references to multiple episodes in the Odyssey,
especially its depictions of the suitors in Odysseus palace, with their attempts
at engaging Penelope (1.366 = 18.213) and their slovenly behavior with the
maidservants (16.108109, 20.318319), which includes sex with Melantho and
several others (20.613).
In Troy, as the bewildered ambassadors prepare to leave, Odysseus makes
an offhand remark that reveals his true identity: I hope Agamemnons gener-
als are smarter than his emissaries. You want me to help you fight the Trojans.
The encounter thus turns into that most Odyssean of episodes, a recognition
scene.3 The film now lingers on a close-up of Odysseus as he affectionatelyhan-
dles a dog. Odysseus offhandedly signals his agreement to serve Agamemnons
cause, declaring: Well, Im going to miss my dog. Informed members of the
audience will think of the Odysseys unexpectedly moving recognition scene in
which Odysseus faithful dog Argus, barely alive, is the only mortal character
who immediately penetrates Odysseus beggar disguise after his twenty-year
absence (17.290327). Neglected, sitting on a dung heap, and infested with
ticks (17.300), Argus embodies all the damage the suitors have inflicted on
Ithaca and Odysseus family and possessions during his absence. Wagging his
tail in recognition, he dies. Troy in this way masterfully serves up a brief vignette
that captures a kernel of the whole Odyssey but sets it before any of its depic-
tions of scenes from the Iliad. I will consider below the inclusion of other ele-
ments from the Odyssey, but turn first to a brief analysis of the Iliadic Odysseus
in Troy.
What are Odysseus chief functions and characteristics in the Iliad?
Understanding of his role has all-too-often been sidetracked by contemporary
(and some ancient) commentators misplaced emphasis on an imagined con-
flict between him and Achilles. There is, however, no evidence in the Iliad for
such a quarrel other than the implausible assumption that Achilles targets
Odysseus, not his hated commander, with his famous line For as hateful to me
as the gates of Death is he who hides one thing in his heart but speaks another.4
As Achilles well knows, Odysseus, on this occasion, serves as Agamemnons
mouthpiece, a function he regularly fulfills throughout the Iliad. In a parallel
episode in Book 1, Achilles similarly recognizes that the embassy that comes to
take Briseis away from him is not acting of its own accord and is not itself to

3 For recent discussion and analysis of all the Odysseys recognition scenes see Bruce Louden,
Homers Odyssey and the Near East (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 7292.
4 Iliad 9.312313. All translations from Homer are my own.
182 Louden

blame for its act but is only carrying out Agamemnons orders: as far as Im
concerned, you are not to be blamed at all, but Agamemnon (1.334135). In the
larger context of the Iliad, Achilles famous remark clearly informs and reso-
nates with his quarrel with Agamemnon, the poems central theme.5 When
Odysseus and the other members of the embassy arrive at his tent in Book 9,
Achilles greets them warmly (9.19798), proclaiming them his friends, and
offers full hospitality (9.196222), a more certain sign of his actual feelings
toward the king of Ithaca.6
The Iliad thematically depicts Odysseus conducting various types of diplo-
matic tasks on Agamemnons behalf, instilling order among the Greeks and
serving as their most persuasive speaker.7 A recent commentator broadly notes
Odysseus thematic associations with diplomacy: Diplomatic business in the
Iliad is conducted by Odysseus aloneor by Odysseus and an appropriate or
interested party.8 The Iliad first sketches out most of his defining characteris-
tics in an earlier act of diplomacy, as Antenor recounts (3.205224), when he
and Menelaus were entrusted with attempting to come to terms with the
Trojans before the war actually starts. Odysseus skills as a persuasive speaker,
which Antenor describes at length, are here chronologically first emphasized.
This earlier incident resonates with and parallels several of his other acts in the
Iliad: conducting the sacrifice to Apollo in Book 1, restoring order in the assem-
bly in Book 2, leading the embassy to Achilles in Book 9, and insisting on the
meal with the troops and presiding over the restoration of gifts to Achilles in
Book 19.
Odysseus repeatedly acts to clean up the mess Agamemnon has made
through his arrogance or reckless behavior. He performs the expiatory sacrifice
to Apollo, necessary because of Agamemnons contemptuous treatment of
the gods priest (1.308317), which also becomes inextricably entangled in the
quarrel between Agamemnon and Achilles. Odysseus act is the key for appeas-
ing Apollos wrath, provoked entirely by Agamemnon (1.11100). Odysseus

5 For full discussion of this passage see Bruce Louden, The Iliad: Structure, Myth and Meaning
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006), 127130.
6 Cf. Ruth Scodel, Listening to Homer: Tradition, Narrative, and Audience (Ann Arbor: University
of Michigan Press, 2002; rpt. 2009), 164: There is no real evidence that Odysseus and Achilles
were traditional enemiesindeed, the epics make them friends.
7 On these as his general functions in the Iliad see especially Louden, The Iliad: Structure, Myth
and Meaning, 120134 and 141148. See Malcolm Davies, The Greek Epic Cycle, 2nd ed.
(London: Bristol Classical Press, 2001; rpt. 2003), 53, on the likelihood that the Aethiopis
depicted Odysseus relationship with Achilles in a similar manner.
8 Bryan Hainsworth, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 3: Books 912 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1993; rpt. 2000), 81.
Odysseus in Troy 183

restrains the troops from leaving (2.166210) after Agamemnons test of them
backfires, then proceeds to restore order to them with his thrashing of Thersites
and his subsequent speech (2.244335). Both acts are necessary because of
Agamemnons failures of leadership, which Odysseus several times mends and
repairs. Odysseus leads Agamemnons embassy to Achilles (9.169693), though
on this occasion he is unsuccessful in mending the rift Agamemnon has
caused. Generally, however, because of his role as deviser of the Trojan Horse,
the Iliad associates Odysseus with success, his triumphs pointing ahead to his
victorious conclusion of the war.9 The Iliad broadly alludes to this in the games
Achilles holds for Patroclus, in Odysseus defeat of Locrian Ajax in the footrace,
in Athenas aid (23.740796), and in the prominence of Epeius (23.665699),
the builder of the Horse.10
Since Odysseus punishment of Thersites is perhaps the clearest illustration
of this larger theme, we might consider it in some detail. The episode is the
second of a two-part sequence featuring Odysseus. After Agamemnons disas-
trous testing of the troops (Iliad 2.1154), most of the Greeks who were not at
Agamemnons council embrace the thought of returning home instantly and
begin a mad dash to the ships. The war would here and now have ended unsuc-
cessfully if Odysseus had not immediately acted to reverse their course. Urging
them to obey their kings authority, he directs them to the assembly. But in that
assembly Thersites, who is described as an abusive agent of chaos, speaks first
(2.212214). He is highly critical of Agamemnon (2.224242). He continues
with an argument that has more than a little in common with Achilles own
criticisms of his commander: unfair distribution of war winnings and an
unseemly fondness for slave women. Commentators have noted the consider-
able overlap between what Thersites says here and what Achilles said earlier;
Thersites even repeats a line Achilles used (2.242=1.232).11 Thersites functions
as a parodic version of Achilles.12 The critical stance he assumes against
Agamemnon serves briefly to re-enact, in a partly comic way, the fissures
formed between Agamemnon and Achilles. Odysseus answers Thersites
speech by declaring him unfit to criticize his king and, indeed, as the worst

9 Cf. Louden, The Iliad: Structure, Myth and Meaning, 120.

10 On this see Bruce Louden, Epeios, Odysseus, and the Indo-European Metaphor for Poet,
The Journal of Indo-European Studies, 24 nos. 34 (1996), 277304, at 290, and Nicholas
Richardson, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 6: Books 2124 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1993; rpt. 2000), 202203 and 249.
11 See especially W.G. Thalmann, Thersites: Comedy, Scapegoats, and Heroic Ideology in
the Iliad, Transactions of the American Philological Association, 118 (1988), 128; cf.
Louden, The Iliad: Structure, Myth and Meaning, 142143.
12 Thalmann, Thersites, 19: Thersites is Achilles comic double.
184 Louden

man at Troy. He then thrashes Thersites with the royal scepter, to the enthusi-
astic approval of the others (2.270277).
Thersites has become something of a scapegoat for Agamemnons short-
comings. Odysseus vanquishing of him and his subsequent speech to the
assembly (2.278335), which urges them to remember their resolve and
reminds them of Calchas prophecy of victory, restores unity to the Greek cause
and allows them, for the time being, to move past the problems and divisions
which Agamemnons quarrel with Achilles has brought about.13 The Iliad has
presented us with a comparable scene shortly before this episode, when the
Olympians are laughing at limping Hephaestus as he serves them nectar and
creates a welcome diversion from the quarrel between Zeus and Hera (1.571600).14
Here, then, are all of Odysseus key traits. He is a persuasive speaker and a con-
scientious hero who contains or even reverses Agamemnons recklessness and
restores order and unity to the Greeks. By keeping focused on the chief task at
hand, he alone makes eventual victory possible.
Odysseus acts in a broadly parallel fashion at the assembly in Book 19, where
he again instills order in the troops following Agamemnons inadequate public
apology to Achilles. Achilles responds to Agamemnons immense offer of gifts
with indifference (19.147148). He prefers to go to war immediately, perhaps
more from a desire for personal vengeance than for what is good for his fellow
Greeks. Odysseus, however, in two speeches (19.155183 and 216237) insists
that the army should have a common meal and that Agamemnon should trans-
fer his gifts to Achilles before all the troops. Agamemnon agrees and enjoins
Odysseus to carry out the transfer of the gifts. Achilles, however, suggests that
Agamemnon see to such things at another time, swearing that he will not eat
or drink until he has avenged Patroclus. Here a seemingly irreconcilable divi-
sion remains between the two antagonists.
Odysseus then speaks a second time, praising Achilles as the greater warrior
but asserting himself the superior strategist. Emphasizing the inevitability of
death on the battlefield, he advises a more stoic approach to grieving for slain
warriors so as not to neglect their preparedness for battle. Odysseus prevails.

13 Thalmann, Thersites, 17 (Thersites, through his defiance and the reaction it provokes,
involuntarily performs a healing function for his society) and 19 (The Thersites scene
has performed the socially integrative function typical of comedy). I partly disagree with
Thalmanns interpretation that Thersites is a scapegoat for all the emotion and poten-
tial violenceover the ten years of war (21) and would restrict his function to being a
scapegoat for the problems Agamemnon has himself just now caused.
14 Note that both Thersites and Hephaestus are singled out for being lame (2.217; implicitly
in 1.591) and falling short of the physical ideals of the Greek aristocracy and the Olympians.
Cf. Thalmann, Thersites, 24, on their parallels as scapegoats.
Odysseus in Troy 185

His insistence, before battle against the Trojans resumes, on the public transfer
of Agamemnons gifts and a common meal serves to instill order in the troops.
All this is necessary for the Greeks morale after the general ill will the quarrel
between Agamemnon and Achilles has provoked and especially after the disas-
trous turn of events since Achilles withdrew from the fighting.15
For the most part, Troy depicts an Odysseus who fulfills his important func-
tions in the Iliad. Throughout, Odysseus balances the opposing and even con-
tradictory forces of Agamemnon and Achilles, nudging both men into an
involuntary teamwork of sorts. Odysseus appears in several intimate council
scenes with Agamemnon, but he also adviseshandles, reallyAchilles, with
whom he has a closer relationship than in Homer. The films portrayal of him
builds logically on the relationship that the Iliad depicts between the two and
even deepens that relationship.
Odysseus and Achilles have four dialogue scenes in the film. The first, and
lengthiest, builds on an episode merely alluded to in the Iliad (11.766789):
Nestor recounting to Patroclus how he and Odysseus came to recruit Achilles
for the war. The film portrays the event not as a flashback but in the present,
full of forward-looking allusions that comment on the Iliads central issues.
The episode carefully balances Achilles potential for unrestrained, individual
violence (he hurls a spear into a tree as the delegation Odysseus is leading
approaches), against Odysseus larger view of the war and how it could be suc-
cessful for them as individuals and for Greece as a whole. Odysseus carefully
avoids Achilles pointed questions (e.g. Are you here at Agamemnons bid-
ding?) and focuses instead on how Achilles could earn honor for himself.
Odysseus observation You have your sword, I have my tricks exemplifies how,
as commentators have noted, the two characters embody the different means
by which Troy might be sacked.16 These are bi (force) and mtis (cunning),
an opposition that runs throughout the Trojan War myth and to which Achilles
himself alludes (Iliad 9.423). When Odysseus attempts to provoke Achilles

15 Of course, no thrashing of Achilles occurs, nor is it necessary or could occur. Still, the
thematic parallels with Odysseus handling of Thersites in Book 2 are evident. See Louden,
The Iliad: Structure, Myth and Meaning, 144146, for further discussion of the larger paral-
lels between Odysseus thrashing of Thersites in Book 2 and his prevailing over Achilles in
Book 19. For additional support on links between the episodes in Books 2 and 19 see Mark
W. Edwards, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 5: Books 1720 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1991, rpt. 2000), 263, on 19.233237: This is the Odysseus who disciplined
the troops as they ran for the ships in book 2.
16 On this see especially Dan Petegorsky, Context and Evocation: Studies in Early Greek and
Sanskrit Poetry (dissertation; University of California, Berkeley, 1982). The remark quoted
loosely resembles Odysseus observation at Iliad 19.216219.
186 Louden

pride by noting that some say Hector is better than all the Greeks, his specific
type of manipulation is less Homeric, but it resembles more that of Odysseus
in Greek tragedy (as in Sophocles Philoctetes) or perhaps even the Ulysses of
Shakespeares Troilus and Cressida (especially Act 3, Scene 3).
This first dialogue exhibits all the principal traits of the Iliadic Odysseus: the
diplomat who serves the larger cause of Agamemnon, the pre-eminent persua-
sive speakerThetis, immediately following the scene, notes: They say the
king of Ithaca has a silver tongueand the only mortal character who keeps
the big picture in mind and refuses to let himself be sidetracked by personal
issues. The dialogue also raises the central issues which the Iliad explores,
Achilles quarrel with Agamemnon and his potential to isolate himself from his
comrades, whether they are in need of him or not. Thus Achilles here, while
emphasizing that he himself has no personal quarrel with the Trojans, under-
mines the validity of the war and questions Agamemnons honor and integrity.
Odysseus deftly concludes the dialogue by appealing, in good Homeric fash-
ion, to Achilles desire for eternal fame: This war will never be forgotten, nor
will the heroes who fight in it. His words fit more than one depiction of
Achilles in the Iliad, particularly in Book 9.17
The second and third dialogue scenes between the two are brief exchanges
that expand upon the tendencies and relationships now established. In the
second, as Odysseus arrives at Troy after most of the other Greeks, Achilles
charges: If you sailed any slower, the war would be over. Odysseus replies:
Idont mind missing the start as long as Im here at the end. As occurs several
times in the Iliad, this Odysseus is firmly associated with bringing the war to a
conclusion. In the third, Agamemnon is shown basking in the glory of the suc-
cessful first day of fighting and other kings, including Nestor, honor him with
gifts. He then asks them to leave so he can speak in private with Achilles. When
Odysseus exits, he advises Achilles: War is young men dying and old men talk-
ing. You know thisignore the politics. His attempt at smoothing things over
between the two adversaries is, however, unsuccessful, just as in the middle
books of the Iliad.
As for the Iliads pivotal embassy led by Odysseus to Achilles in Book 9,
which attempts to address the problems caused by Achilles quarrel with
Agamemnon, Troy takes this convoluted episode and distributes its several
concerns among three other scenes: the one just noted; one in which only
Agamemnon, Nestor, and Odysseus are present; and Odysseus final dialogue

17 See especially Iliad 9.189 (as Odysseus and the embassy approach, Achilles is singing of
the fames of men) and 9.413 (Achilles relates Thetis prophecy concerning his own
unperishing fame).
Odysseus in Troy 187

with Achilles. Here Odysseus openly criticizes his commander, as he does at

Iliad 4.350363 and 14.82108, for the damage he has done to his troops. He
emphasizes their new willingness to abandon the war, the same state of affairs
the Iliadic Odysseus addresses in Book 2, and their larger cause, by acting on
his own pride in the quarrel. The scene concludes with Agamemnon offering
to restore Briseis to Achilles.
The final dialogue between Odysseus and Achilles occurs after Achilles
announces to his men his intention to return home and draws on elements
from the Iliads embassy scene. The two are drinking wine together, reminis-
cent of the hospitality Achilles extends to the embassy (9.193217). Odysseus
carefully addresses the damage Agamemnon has done (Agamemnon is a
proud man, but he knows when hes made a mistake), plays the realist by not-
ing that it is much better to have the powerful Agamemnon as a friend than an
enemy, and appeals to Achilles camaraderie with his fellow Greek warriors
and to his own proud identity as a warriorall topics closely related to the
embassy in Book 9. Achilles replies by emphasizing his respect for Odysseus
(Of all the kings of Greece I respect you the most) but criticizes his willing-
ness to work for Agamemnon: But in this war youre a servant. Odysseus
response (Some times you have to serve to lead) appears less Iliadic and
closer to the Odysseus of the Epic Cycle, the Philoctetes, or Euripidean tragedy
(e.g. Hecuba or Iphigenia in Aulis) in its emphasis on manipulation and willing-
ness to resort to apparently less than honorable acts and means.
Such a depiction of Achilles relationship with Odysseus takes the respectful
but more formal bond between the two in the Iliad and strengthens it. This
comes at considerable expense to Telamonian Ajax, whose importance Troy
considerably diminishes. The Iliad implies that, since he is temperamentally
nearer to Achilles than Odysseus, their friendship may be closer. The film thus
firmly and, in my view, correctly reads Achilles in the Iliad as targeting
Agamemnon, not Odysseus, in his hateful as the gates of death speech (9.312).
Troy also focuses on Odysseus as a great and important warrior, much as the
Iliad does, especially at 4.494504, in the daring night mission of Book 10, and
at 11.310455. The film includes him in key confrontations, from being on one
of the front seven chariots as the army advances before the duel between
Menelaus and Hector to shots of him fighting in the scenes immediately before
Hector kills Patroclus and close-ups of him slaying Trojans, including Glaucus,
during the sack of the city. The multiple close-ups on Odysseus during and
after Hectors slaying of Patroclus and especially his brief dialogue with the
Trojan hero reinforce his role as the only Greek king who assumes leadership
and keeps the army together in the face of Agamemnons excessive self-interest
and Achilles withdrawal from fighting. The Iliad offers retrospective accounts
188 Louden

of Odysseus courteous interaction with Trojans, particularly Antenors account

of how he himself had earlier entertained Odysseus (3.203224). Troy shows a
similar perspective in its depiction of how Odysseus interacts with Hector,
when he informs the latter that he has slain Patroclus, not Achilles.
When it shows the fall of Troy and the Trojan Horse, Petersens film turns to
episodes that fall chronologically between the two Homeric epics but were
included in the Epic Cycle.18 For the most part, the Iliad and Odyssey narrate
events before and after the destruction of Troy. Of the many heroic deeds nec-
essary to achieve that end, most important are Achilles slaying of Hector and
Odysseus conception of the Horse and his leadership of those within it. The
Iliad does not depict the Horse, not only because it falls outside of the poems
time frame but also because it would celebrate a triumph in which its own
protagonist had no hand.19 Similarly, the Odyssey, though briefly alluding to
the Horse three times, does not offer the full story, because it is not part of
Odysseus homecoming.
In keeping with its decision to downplay the gods, Troy shows Odysseus get-
ting the idea for the Horse by observing a comrade carving a toy horse for his
son back home. Immediately afterward, the Greeks are gathering wood under
Odysseus supervision. It is likely that in ancient versions Athena would have
been involved, much as she advises Odysseus in plotting the suitors destruc-
tion in the Odyssey. According to the Little Iliad, Athena instructs Epeius how
to build the Horse. Troy not only removes the gods, but, in repeatedly depicting
the Trojan high priest as confidently making decisions which turn out to be
disastrous, it also portrays the Trojans as foolish for putting their trust in the
gods. Only Hector is an exception. When Priam surveys the Horse, standing
near the coast now deserted by the Greeks, all his advisers except for his priest
recommend destroying it. This is a nod to the Laocoon episode told in the Sack
of Troy to Virgils Aeneid, and to the tradition about Cassandra.
Troy excises an episode that the Odyssey does tell us about. Helen, alone of
those in the city, had intuited the Horses true nature and, guessing which
Greeks must be inside, walked around it while calling out to the men and imi-
tating the voices of their wives. One of the Greeks is overcome and about to
call out in return, but Odysseus forcefully squeezes his mouth shut (4.271289).
But Petersens film has little interest in dwelling on this rather more traitorous
side of Helens character, preferring to focus on the romantic elements of her
relationship with Paris.

18 The Odyssey includes three brief retrospective accounts of the Wooden Horse: 4.272289,
8.492521, and 11.523532.
19 Louden, Epeios, Odysseus, and the Indo-European Metaphor for Poet, 278.
Odysseus in Troy 189

However, Troy determinedly incorporates significant features of Odysseus

character from the Odyssey. The film opens by implicitly referring to the Iliads
proem (1.45), as a dog and birds pick at a warriors corpse. The first voice we
hear is that of Odysseus. With a few broad strokes he deftly sketches a majestic,
big-picture frame for the war to come:

Men are haunted by the vastness of eternity, and so we ask ourselves: Will
our actions echo across the centuries, will strangers hear our names long
after we are gone and wonder who we were, how bravely we fought, how
fiercely we loved?

While this opening, spoken in retrospect, echoes themes central to Homeric

epic in general, especially the epic heros desire for immortal fame, the choice
of Odysseus as narrator clearly points to the Odyssey, in which he serves as
major internal narrator and transmitter of his own fame.20 His opening words
may remind viewers of another epic film, Ridley Scotts Gladiator (2000),
whose hero had at one point exclaimed: Brothers, what we do in life echoes in
eternity.
Troy has Odysseus reprise this role, again offering framing comments, at its
conclusion. At Achilles funeral he anachronistically places coins on the slain
warriors eyes, and the camera follows the smoke from the funeral pyre as it
ascends to the sky. A subdued if still proud Odysseus declares:

If they ever tell my story, let them say I walked with giants. Men rise and
fall like the winter wheat, but these names will never die. Let them say
Ilived in the time of Hector, breaker of horses; let them say I lived in the
time of Achilles.

The winter wheat neatly suggests a Homeric simile (Iliad 11.6771; cf. 19.221
224), and Hector, breaker of horses bestows closure on Troy by quoting from
the Iliads final line (24.804). The mention of giants points ahead to the naming
of Hector and Achilles as the greatest heroes in the Trojan War, but it also
alludes to his own future adventures on his return from the war, off the map in

20 Cf. also, in the Odyssey, his exchange of narratives with Eumaeus (14.192359, 14.469502,
and 15.403484), his interactions with the Phaeacian singer Demodocus (8.485499), and
the importance of his sparing the Ithacan singer Phemius (22.330256). Cf. Robert
P.Creed, The Singer Looks at His Sources Comparative Literature, 14 (1962), 4452, on
how that episode exemplifies a traditional theme also extant in Beowulf, whereby the epic
protagonist has a face-to-face encounter with an epic singer.
190 Louden

the Odysseys never-never land of supernatural beings, rising up like the smoke
to the sky.
In both Homeric epics Odysseus is a survivor and, compared to Achilles and
Hector, a less tragic figure. He thus fits in well with the films presentation of a
somewhat less tragic view of the larger tale, as is evident from the complete
absence of Queen Hecuba, Priams wife and Hectors mother, who may well be
the most tragic character in the Trojan War saga, and from the greater focus on
the loves of the two central Trojan couples. The exaggerated youthfulness of
Aeneas, Paris, and Astyanax who survive the war are additional indications
that Troy opts for a significant focus on survivors of the citys apocalyptic
destruction.
In spite of all the significant changes Troy imposes upon the inherited story
to make it more accessible to contemporary audiences, its presentation of
Odysseus remains unexpectedly close to the Homeric conception. Petersen
sensibly depicts a relationship between Odysseus and Achilles close to that in
the Iliad. Especially in the directors cut he deepens Odysseus character
through brief allusions to some of his dominant traits from the Odyssey.
 chapter 8

A New Briseis in Troy

Barbara P. Weinlich

Aside from Menelaus death at the hands of Hector, the refashioning of Briseis
as a devotee of Apollo, defiant captive of Achilles, and murderess of
Agamemnon may be the most significant variation that either version of Troy
makes to the ancient myths of the Trojan War. Yet, compared to the theatrical
release version, the directors cut highlights a different aspect of Briseis. As he
displays her emotions more comprehensively and even intensifies them,
Petersen now grants Briseis greater capacity to act decisively than the theatri-
cal release version had done. Now, emphasis is less on her rather passive role as
Achilles woman and more on her actions and reactions and on the values by
which these are guided. As a result, the directors cut significantly modifies the
profile of Briseis in both the ancient myth and the theatrical release version. It
also places the heroine in a noticeably different narrative and, by extension, in
a different contemporary context. In this chapter I hope to show how the direc-
tors cut reframes Briseis and her actions, how these changes re-shape the
ancient myths war narrative, and how these modifications endow the film
with a political dimension, even ideology, that wasand still isparticularly
appealing to American audiences of the early twenty-first century. In view of
the defenseless temple virgins evolution to a woman who is ready to preserve
her autonomy at all cost, the directors cut adds a new dimension to her narra-
tive, that of goodi.e. morally justifiableviolence by the weaker as opposed
to bad violence of the stronger. Through Briseis and her story the directors cut
evokes the dream as well as the paradox of what we might call the empowered
powerless. In doing so, it also touches on contemporary politics.
The work of Alena Allen and Robert Rabel on the theatrical release version of
Troy may serve as a backdrop for the approach that this chapter will choose.1
Allen focused primarily on Briseis profile in the literary tradition and identified
four aspects in the Briseis of Troy that stem from different ancient narratives. Like

1 Alena Allen, Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy, and Robert J. Rabel, The Realist Politics of
Troy, both in Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford:
Blackwell, 2007), 148162 and 186201. Earlier versions of this chapter were presented at
Monash University and the Freie Universitt Berlin. I am grateful for both audiences helpful
suggestions, and I would like to thank Jane Montgomery Griffith and Almut-Barbara Renger
in particular.

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_010

192 Weinlich

her counterpart in Ovids Heroides, Briseis is the romantic lover of Achilles; aside
from that, however, the films Briseis appears to be a composite character derived
from Polyxena, the Trojan princess whom Achilles desires, Cassandra, the Trojan
priestess of Apollo, and her counterpart in Homers Iliad, Achilles war prize.
Allens solid analysis of Briseis literary origins calls for a complementary
study of Briseis cinematic presentation, in particular of the motifs that guide
her actions in either version of Troy. While it is tempting to agree with Allens
rather schematic division of Briseis plot involvement into a three-part sequence,
at the beginning and end of which she embodies princess, priestess, and war
prize combined, this approach runs the risk of deemphasizing, even devaluing
any existing inconsistencies or actions that do not fit into a category. We may
wonder, for example, why Briseis should not also be acknowledged as a lover
when she is holding the dying Achilles in her arms, or what significance her
stabbing of Agamemnon could have beyond the action of a vengeful priestess
who achieves the equivalent of an aristeia.2
In order to measure the political dimension of the theatrical release version
of Troy, Rabel suggested to regard the film as a dialogue with the past about
the present.3 For this purpose he applied the concept of political realism, an
approach that is rooted in the past, specifically in Thucydides realist thought.
This concept has been identified by Richard Ned Lebow as the dominant par-
adigm in international relations for the last fifty years.4 Given that political
realism is characterized by a tragic view of history in general and by a pessimis-
tic attitude toward a possible resolution of the the major social and political
problems plaguing mankind in particular, Rabel chose a tool of interpretation
that is geared toward confirming his chosen concept and its principles.5 His
reading of the film from the perspective of political realism thus concluded
that Troy transforms the Homeric epic into tragedy. At its conclusion the film
juxtaposes the horror of the destruction of Troy, seen through King Priams
eyes, with the claims to heroic achievement that Odysseus pronounces at the
funeral of Achilles.6
Quite obviously, Rabel has prepared the ground for my own approach in
several respects. On the one hand, he aimed at integrating Troy into

2 Allen, Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy, 161.

3 Rabel, The Realist Politics of Troy, 186.
4 Richard Ned Lebow, The Tragic Versions of Politics: Ethics, Interests and Orders (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003), 14; previously adduced by Rabel, The Realist Politics of
Troy, 186.
5 Rabel, The Realist Politics of Troy, 187.
6 Rabel, The Realist Politics of Troy, 201.
A New Briseis in Troy 193

contemporary world politics; on the other, he implicitly acknowledged that

the films narrative is organized around the principle of duality by applying an
interpretive concept that defines the logic of a political situation in terms of
binary opposition. Yet Rabels analysis of Troy focused primarily on consisten-
cies and on the films overarching narrative rather than on details. Therefore
one may wonder, for example, how Briseis fits into this concept and, specifi-
cally, how one should make sense of her refashioning as a temple virgin. There
are good reasons why the story of Briseis received only little attention from
Rabel, for political realism conceptualizes history and, given the topic of his
chapter, such realism can justifiably be applied to Troy. Still, Briseis and her
story involve values that deserve closer analysis.
I choose a different point of departure to examine the political and ideologi-
cal dimensions of Troy as presented in Petersens directors cut, in particular in
connection with Briseis. I will apply primarily Laura Mulveys observation that
the cinematic apparatus is not ideologically neutral.7 I will concentrate on
the specific manner of how images tell a story and will address four core ques-
tions: What are the narrative and visual means by which Petersen has changed
Briseis profile? What new narrative and visual viewpoints does Briseis new
profile introduce into the films main story? What conscious or unconscious
needs does Briseis changed profile and story satisfy in the audience? What
changes does Briseis reframed profile and story bring about for the classical
reception of the ancient war narrative? In answering these questions, my
chapter attempts to show that in the directors cut Briseis and her story ulti-
mately cater to the illusions in which a Western patriarchal society firmly
wants to believe in order to prevail. As adapted to issues of contemporary
power politics, the myth of the Trojan War meets various needs within and
outside modern culture, and not only Hollywoods, and may be regarded as
being chiefly political.
In the theatrical release version, the last shot is of the dead body of Achilles.
By contrast, in the directors cut the camera seeks out Briseis in the few surviv-
ing Trojans exodus from their doomed city. The audience watches her as she
stops and turns back, looks at the ruins of Troy, and then continues with the
others. Only then does Petersen return us to Troy and the films final image,
unchanged from the earlier version. To argue that the directors cut simply
added the exodus scene into the original ending would, however, miss the

7 Laura Mulvey, Film, Feminism and the Avant-Garde, in Laura Mulvey, Visual and Other
Pleasures, 2nd ed. (Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 115131, at 125; quoted in turn
from the editorial Feminism and Film: Critical Approaches, Camera Obscura, 1 (1976), 310,
at 10.
194 Weinlich

point. A close comparison of both versions reveals that the new place assigned
Briseis in the closing sequence, both literally and metaphorically, is the result
and climax of a careful visual strategy that encourages the audience to take the
heroines side.
The use of a long take, of an uninterrupted single perspective on one or
several characters and their actions or interactions, is perhaps the most power-
ful visual device that the directors cut employs for this purpose. In both ver-
sions, the verbal exchanges during Achilles first encounter with Briseis are the
same, but in the later one the audience gets a different picture, in the true
sense of the word, of his captives emotions and personality. The first seventy-
two seconds of the earlier version are composed of fifteen shots; in the direc-
tors cut the camera does not move for the first fifty-five seconds. The audience
is thus able closely to watch Briseis, who sits in the foreground, and to study
her body language and facial expression while Eudorus is telling Achilles: The
men found her hiding in the temple. They thought shed amuse you. (That
Achilles is used to finding amusement with attractive women we know from
his first appearance on screen.) Then Briseis and Achilles start talking to one
another:

Achilles: Whats your name? Did you not hear me?

Briseis: You killed Apollos priests.
Achilles: I have killed men in five countries. But never a priest.
Briseis: Then your men did. The Sun God will have his vengeance.
Achilles: Whats he waiting for?
Briseis: The right time to strike.
Achilles: His priests are dead and his acolytes a captive. I think your
god is afraid of me.

The crucial piece of information about Briseis manifest during this shot is her
devastated state of mind and, more specifically, her inability to come to terms
with what has happened in the temple of Apollo. Far from cringing at the obvious
sexual innuendo of Eudorus remark, she appears to be neither in distress about
her own situation nor intently listening to what is being said. What is on her mind
and what she finally blurts out, instead of giving her name, is the sacrilegious
manslaughter that she witnessed. Having watched her struggling to hold back the
words You killed Apollos priests, the audience may perceive Briseis statement
not so much as an aggressive accusation but possibly as an expression of help-
lessness, of her disorientation after her religious values have been shattered.
Yet this focus on Briseis mental and emotional state and on the complexity
of the situation in which she finds herself offers more than one strong point
A New Briseis in Troy 195

of identification. For the uninterrupted take has already captured the fact
that the Trojan princess breaks the mold of traditional gender roles. By con-
trast, the theatrical release version had evoked the image of a shrew who only
needs to be tamed by a strong male in order to match Helens passive eroti-
cism in her affair with pretty but not exactly super-masculine Paris. While it
presents Briseis not exactly as an action heroine except perhaps at one deci-
sive moment, the directors cut nonetheless grants her a more complex iden-
tity. Represented as a woman who may be passive or active as the situation
(and the plot) demands, Briseis can be equally attractive to male and female
audience members.8
Especially female audiences can readily identify themselves with Briseis in
the directors cut because her character for the most part fends off the objecti-
fying male gaze upon women that Briseis counterpart Helen attracts from the
very beginning. Within less than a minute the audience realizes that Briseis is
not a woman who wants or needs a protector. Only Achilles seems to project
on her the standard male view that women are primarily helpless when facing
an adversary. His statement, You dont need to fear me, girl. You are the only
Trojan who can say that, expresses a stereotypical male assessment of the situ-
ation; he thoroughly misjudges Briseis state of mind. As a result, his perspec-
tive does not match that of the viewers, who have been cued by Petersens long
take. This discrepancy in turn ensures that, throughout the film, Briseis is
viewed in her own right, far more as an independent woman than as an object
of Achilles desire.9
Petersens greater focus on Briseis emotions firmly puts the spectators, and
not only women, on her side. In particular, the directors cut gives more space
and attention to her reactions to violence, whether committed by others or
herself. Her first encounter with Achilles is again instructive. Unlike in the the-
atrical release version, the audience watches Briseis cringing at Eudorus
remark The kings are gathering to celebrate the victory, evidently suffering at
the thought of the Trojans defeat on the beach. Similarly, in contrast to the

8 For a discussion of the representation of gender in contemporary mainstream media see

Roberta Sassatelli, Rappresentare il genere, Studi culturali, 7 no. 1 (2010), 3750, and Roberta
Sassatelli, Interview with Laura Mulvey: Gender, Gaze and Technology in Film Culture,
Theory, Culture and Society, 28 no. 5 (2011), 123143.
9 On the traditional framing of women as erotic objects for the characters within the screen
story and the male spectators in the audience see Laura Mulvey, Visual Pleasure and
Narrative Cinema, in Mulvey, Visual and Other Pleasures, 1427. Cf. now also Celina Proch
and Michael Kleu, Models of Masculinities in Troy: Achilles, Hector and Their Female
Partners, in Almut-Barbara Renger and Jon Solomon (eds.), Ancient Worlds in Film and
Television: Gender and Politics (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 175193.
196 Weinlich

theatrical release version, the directors cut does not have Briseis suffer and
cringe at all when she later kills Agamemnon in front of Apollos statue. Briseis
carries a dagger with her as the Greeks are storming Priams palace and stabs
Agamemnon. This shows us that, for her, violence is not simply violence, but
either good or bad violence. Less easy to assess, partly because of its ambiguity,
is Briseis earlier attempt to kill Achilles. Is she yielding to a baser instinct in a
moment of weakness, or does she really want to kill him? In Alexander, released
about six months after the original version of Troy, Oliver Stone gave Roxane a
comparable moment with Alexander. In both films the lovers have to over-
come feelings of hostility before the expected romance (or more) can
blossom.
The directors cut also gives heightened attention to the suffering that
Achilles slaying of Hector causes Briseis and makes her feelings for Achilles
from then on appear in a different light. The camera rests approximately twice
as long on Briseis sobbing in Achilles tent as it had in the theatrical release
version. Her grief thus has a much stronger effect on the audience. As a result,
our perception of Briseis emotional state differs from that in the earlier ver-
sion, although the next four episodesBriseis interaction with Achilles, her
withdrawal to the beach, Priams visit to Achilles, and his departure with
Briseisare identical in both versions. The directors cut emphasizes Briseis
mourning (You lost your cousin. And now youve taken mine) and her despair
(When does it end?). Her anguish about the long war (It never ends) finds a
parallel in the endless waves that she watches breaking on the shore. This focus
on Briseis crisis, in turn, leaves little or no room for loving feelings for Achilles.
Despite the fact that she looks back at Achilles several times as she leaves the
Greek camp with Priam, she seems to depart in relief. By contrast, one may
well agree with Allen that in the theatrical release version Briseis acted as if
she were not too certain that she wants to go.10 Remarkably, this change
makes the romance between Achilles and Briseis appear rather one-sided; that
is to say, Achilles appears to be in love with Briseis more than she may be with
him. So it may be at least at first, but when Paris faces Achilles and starts shoot-
ing him, Briseis agonized outcries tell us something different.
Another device that makes Briseis appear less attached to Achilles in the
directors cut is the modification of individual events or of a sequence of
events. The addition of the exodus is perhaps the most prominent example in
this regard, for now Briseis story does not end, literally and metaphorically,
with Achilles funeral, and neither does the film. Now there is substantial hope
for the continuation of the tale of Troy, which the original version had only

10 Allen, Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy, 160.

A New Briseis in Troy 197

hinted at, rather murkily, with the sudden and unmotivated, and all too brief,
introduction of a teenage Aeneas. The added episode defines Briseis as a survi-
vor who can let go of the past, alone and with determination. As the long train
of refugees passes by on the screen, the audience first sees the happily reunited
lovers, Helen and Paris, and soon afterwards Briseis, followed by a priest and a
young male temple acolyte of Apollo. Of all of these only Briseis is shown stop-
ping to look back upon the ruins of Troy and at the smoke of Achilles funeral
before she rejoins the group. Her gaze at Troy reminds viewers of her gaze at
Achilles in reply to his assuring words You dont need to fear me, girl. Here as
there, her look reflects sadness but not fear.
Of similar importance is an episodes elimination. For example, in the theat-
rical release version Achilles recovery of Briseis from Agamemnons soldiers is
preceded by a short conversation between Paris and Helen, who is stitching
the wound that Menelaus had inflicted on him. Paris is ashamed of his coward-
ice when facing Menelaus outside Troy, but Helen comforts him and dismisses
his lack of courage with the words: I dont want a hero, my love. I want a man
to grow old with. This statement influences the audiences perception of
Achilles and Briseis first lovemaking that soon follows and raises viewers
expectations for a similar love story. Such a hope is reinforced by the lovers
dialogue on the following night, which we may understand as a mutual testing
of their commitment:

Briseis: Am I still your captive?

Achilles: Captive is a harsh word. Youre my guest.
Briseis: In Troy, guests can leave whenever they want.
Achilles: You should leave then.
Briseis: Would you leave this all behind?
Achilles: Would you leave Troy?

In the directors cut this conversation receives a different meaning partly

because the brief preceding episode with Helen and Paris is left out. Instead,
Petersen devotes more time to the display of Achilles and Briseis lovemaking
and pays greater attention to Briseis initial reluctance. In addition, the
Myrmidons preparation for departure is shown in more detail. In this new
context the dialogue appears to stress Achilles awareness that his wish to leave
with Briseis may be disappointed. He seems to be realistic and to infer that
Briseis would prefer to go back and remain in Troy to joining him in Greece.
Briseis sigh at his last question quoted above seems to confirm his concern.
But all this will soon change in view of a more pressing issue, Hectors slaying
of Patroclus.
198 Weinlich

Briseis prominence at the end of the film is the logical consequence of

Petersens deliberate act of turning her into what Laura Mulvey defines as a
true heroine, a female character at the centre of the narrative arena.11 Or, at
least, almost. There is no doubt that Achilles dominates the main plot in either
version of Troy, but in the directors cut Briseis story, a major subplot that cru-
cially intersects with the main narrative, now carries considerably greater
weight.
A telling example of how Briseis new profile changes the main narrative
early on is her now more powerful appearance and intervention in the tent of
Agamemnon. In both versions Briseis speaks the same words: Stop! Too many
people have died today. [To Achilles:] If killing is your only talent, thats your
curse. But I dont want anyone dying for me. The directors cut provides the
audience with a larger picture, both literally and metaphorically. Briseis is
shown full-length not only before her outburst but also afterwards. Her words
seem to reverberate in her swaying body, which reveals her outrage at Achilles
ready and fast resort to murderous violence. In notable contrast to Achilles,
who is restrained by the swords drawn around himAgamemnon snidely
comments: Mighty Achilles, silenced by a slave girl!Briseis stands up for
her ethical values, not entirely free but with the guards shaken off. Being a kind
of passive commodity to be exchanged between men is not how she sees her-
self; it is the killing frenzy of war that has to be stopped.
Moreover, by showing her full body and not just her face immediately after
she has finished her speech, the directors cut makes Briseis outburst a larger
part of the picture. Petersen now frames the alternating close-ups on Briseis
and Achilles with a long shot before and afterwards, and the viewer gets the
impression that Briseis restrains not Achilles alone but also everyone else in
the tent. In contrast to the earlier version, Briseis words If killing is your only
talent, thats your curse sound noticeably less contemptuous, while her state-
ment that she does not want anyone dying for her sounds more frustrated.
Clearly, Briseis appearance is here geared towards increasing and displaying
her power over the whole group, even granting her a measure of control over
the greatest warlord, Agamemnon. In this way Briseis intervention in
Agamemnons tent is emblematic of Petersens new presentation of her whole
story. The latter fuses a non-combatants experience of war and her grappling
with personal values and ideals into the story of a young woman who is reach-
ing maturity and attaining personal empowerment after encountering a man
who is powerful in himself. The clash of two strong personalities, Achilles and

11 Laura Mulvey, Afterthoughts on Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema Inspired by King
Vidors Duel in the Sun, in Mulvey, Visual and Other Pleasures (1946), 3140, at 31.
A New Briseis in Troy 199

Briseis, starts this process and eventually changes them both. A closer look at
the balance of power between Briseis and Achilles in the two versions of Troy
may clarify this argument.
In the theatrical release version Briseis had played an important but only
ancillary part in expanding Achilles purpose in life. As he falls in love with her,
he gains a new perspective on the Trojan War and on his obsession with heroic
glory and starts pursuing a new goal. He is ready to abandon the war, give up
immortal fame, and return home with Briseis. You gave me peace in a lifetime
of war, he tells her, thereby giving her credit for the change that she has
brought about in him. At the same time, however, his words reinforce a rather
stereotypical image of women. By contrast, in the directors cut this conven-
tional image of Briseis coexists with, and even outweighs, one that captures a
contemporary feminist spirit of a beautiful woman on a quest for meaning.
From the beginning, Petersen dramatizes the learning process that Achilles
makes Briseis undergo by emphasizing Briseis emotions in response to his acts
of violence. The audience thus witnesses Briseis painful awakening from the
illusion that there is a universally shared respect for the gods during her first
encounter with Achilles. Equally important is her realization after Achilles
duel with Hector that anybody, good or bad, may be fated to die in a war. Even
previously implacable killers can have their justification for slaughter, and
even those fighting in defense of their home and country can be merciless in
battle. Petersen subtly prepares us for Briseis own, and only, act of violence
when she encounters Agamemnon again during Troys fall.
It is now easier for us to grasp the significance of Briseis killing of
Agamemnon, a surprising plot turn to viewers familiar with Greek myth. As
Allen rightly pointed out, Briseis fulfills Achilles threatthat he would see
Agamemnon dead. As she strikes Agamemnon, Briseis uses Achilles sweeping
arm motion when he killed Boagrius and Hector.12 In the directors cut Briseis
act nearly elevates her to the heroic level of an Achilles. Far from appearing as
a woman who does un-womanly things, she demonstrates that she has under-
gone, and now completed, a learning process. In both her intervention in
Agamemnons tent and her killing of Agamemnon Briseis demonstrates that a
strong and spirited woman has the capacity to act in a decisive manner. This
circumstance is reinforced by the fact that Achilles did not have such a capac-
ity in Agamemnons tent when he found himself checked by the very same
concept with which he checks others: violence. Briseis achievement lies in
attaining the power to act in war, unlike Helen or Hectors wife Andromache,
who remain passive. Briseis earns the audiences approval because of the inner

12 Allen, Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy, 161.

200 Weinlich

strength she has acquired and eventually displays in what appeared to be the
exclusively male domain of warfare and heroism.
The new Briseis eludes traditional categorizing as it can be identified nei-
ther as strictly feminine and thus passive nor as strictly masculine and thus
active. Her in-between status likens her to the modern image of an indepen-
dent or liberated woman, one who thinks for herself and learns to take charge
of her life. Her transformation from powerless girl into empowered woman
parallels that of Paris, who turns from being a meek fighter into a skilled archer.
The directors cut recognizes and acknowledges Briseis as a beautiful and
mature woman whose thought and action are firmly grounded in reality.
Curiously, a parallel to this may be seen in the new portrayal of another female
character, Helen. The latters maturity and intellectual superiority over Paris is
best illustrated in the couples dialogue in their bedchamber when Helen is
thinking of the imminent arrival of the Greek fleet at Troy: Theyre coming for
me. Paris suggests that they flee and live off the land, in hiding from Menelaus.
When Helen finds fault with this impractical plan, Paris comes up with an even
bolder and more naive one, to claim Helen for his wife from Menelaus. The
ensuing exchange emphasizes that Paris is much less mature than Helen and
that she is aware of it:

Paris: Then Ill make it easy for him to find me. Ill walk right up to him
and tell him youre mine.
Helen: Youre very young, my love.
Paris: Were the same age!
Helen: Youre younger than I ever was.

What Helen expresses in words, Briseis expresses in action. Both women show
maturity in their knowledge of what can and should be done in a given situa-
tion and what cannot. Since Briseis and Helen share this capacity, it is there-
fore fitting that they sit to the right and left of Andromache during Hectors
funeral ceremony. In this way they frame the only woman whose thoughts
have been least grounded in reality. A comparison with the theatrical release
version shows that Andromache, too, has been changed. She is rather more
egocentric and less receptive to what is going on around her. Once she has
stated that she is not ready to lose her husband, she represses the idea of his
death to such an extent that she initially does not understand why Hector even
gives her instructions on how to escape from Troy once it has fallen. At Hectors
funeral, the camera turns from the pyre and tightly frames the faces of the
three women. Andromache is fighting tears, the others are sad but composed,
and beautifully so. Helen holds Andromaches son on her lap. In retrospect, it
A New Briseis in Troy 201

almost seems as if both she and Briseis were taking care of Troys future rather
than the widow of the citys greatest hero. This, of course, is in keeping with
Andromaches fate after the fall of Troy, as seen most devastatingly in Euripides
The Trojan Women.
The dream of the powerless becoming empowered is ingrained in Western
culture and closely associated with the belief in the triumph of good over evil
and in the eventual triumph of justice. Briseis killing of Agamemnon rein-
forces these ideas. Being physically much weaker, against all odds, and to
everybodys surprise, his own included, Briseis stabs him. In doing so, she not
only performs an act of self-defense but also carries out the long-expected
punishment of the villain. The fact that she uses a ceremonial dagger makes
her deed appear as an act of divine justice, carried out on behalf of Apollo, and
as an act of good because justifiable violence. Briseis does the right thing and
carries out what not even Achilles accomplished. Moreover, the Hellenistic lit-
erary tradition refused to accept that Achilles had no erotic feelings for his
beautiful captive.13 The directors cut adds a new twist to his liaison with Briseis
by adding only seven words to Agamemnons speech as he holds Briseis in his
clutches. Agamemnon, seizing her while she is kneeling as a supplicant before
Apollos statue, remarks: I want to taste what Achilles tasted. These words
both reinforce the love story we have followed and Agamemnons sleaziness.
In spite of all this, no one could deny that this courageous, mature, and clear-
headed Briseis, who foreshadows the modern liberated woman, was raised in a
well-established patriarchal system. But she liberates herself from, and acts
outside or against, that system at least to a certain extent. She has no father,
brother, or husband to restrict her movements or decisions. She is guided by
her own principles, not by any male authority imposed on her. The directors
cut adds something new to all this. Here the myths of Lucretia and Verginia as
presented by the Roman historian Livy may be usefully adduced, if only up to a
point.14 Roman culture drew a parallel between the female body and the early
city-states body politic.15 Regarded as a metaphor for an enemys violation of
Romes autonomyas it was defined, of course, much later in its historythe
rapes of Lucretia and Verginia were used to justify a major change in the city-
states government (all-male, of course). They reveal one of the fundamental
and most carefully concealed contradictions in Roman culture: the distinction

13 Marco Fantuzzi, Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012), 99185, surveys the Greek and Roman reception history of Briseis and Achilles.
14 Livy, From the Foundation of the City 1.5859 and 3.4448.
15 Cf. Patricia Klindienst Joplin, Ritual Work on Human Flesh: Livys Lucretia and the Rape
of the Body Politic, Helios, 17 (1990), 5170.
202 Weinlich

between good violence and bad.16 The preservation of Roman womens sexual
integrity was thus used as a pretense for, or a cover-up of, patriarchal concerns.
In the directors cut of Troy, good violence is not primarily tied to the preserva-
tion of a womans sexual integrity but to her empowerment. The films story
thus associates the concept of good violence with feminism and gender equal-
ity. But whereas Verginia and Lucretia are victimized by males in ways that
strike us today as horrendous, Briseis ultimately is not. She successfully rises up
against the most evil male in the entire story and does him in.
The directors cut was released on home video in 2007, when the adminis-
tration of President George W. Bush was at a low point with its protracted
bloody wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. For Petersen, President Bush shared clear
similarities with Agamemnon.17 Many hoped for a change of government. So,
for audiences in the United States, Briseis killing of Agamemnon may have
paralleled the uprisings of local fighters against American occupiers. From this
point of view, the directors cut becomes more of a political film. Briseis new
profile and story deepen the shift of focus at the end of Troy from the undoing
of Achilles character to the undoing of Agamemnons power. Briseis capacity
to act grants her survival. The directors cut associates Briseis with the modern
liberated woman and, in this way, indirectly voices a call for action. Reinforced
in their belief that good will prevail and that resilience or resistance will win
out, audiences are reminded of their own capacity to act and are invited to
dream of a world in which oppression, though perhaps not war, can be put to
an end. This, of course, is the standard way in which historical and mythic-
historical cinema presents the past. As such, Troy remains firmly entrenched in
the traditionalpatriarchalproduction mechanisms of popular media.
As the Roman myth of Lucretia had justified the use of good violence
through the need to protect a womans sexual integrity, so Troy justifies it by
associating Briseis with the modern stereotype of the self-determined, liber-
ated woman. Lucretia and Briseis function as cover-ups of male-orientedi.e.
violentexit strategies that restore power to the weaker party. The rape of
Lucretia allegedly led to the overthrow of a degenerate monarchy and gave
political power to the Roman people. In the film, patriarchal authority as a
whole is left in place, even if its worst excesses against womenor rather, one
particular womanare punished or avenged.

16 Joplin, Ritual Work on Human Flesh, 53. See also Sandra R. Joshel, The Body Female and
the Body Politic: Livys Lucretia and Verginia, in Amy Richlin (ed.), Pornography and
Representation in Greece and Rome (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 112130.
17 Petersen said so repeatedly in interviews given in 2004; reviewers and film scholars have
made the same point. Cf. Martin M. Winkler, Editors Introduction to TROY , 119, at 78,
with quotation from Petersen and additional references.
 chapter 9

The Fall of Troy: Intertextual Presences in

Wolfgang Petersens Film

Antonio M. Martn-Rodrguez

Wolfgang Petersens filmic version of the Trojan War and the fall of Troy is
likely to be the most popular point of reference for at least a generation, con-
sidering that those who consume audiovisual materials nowadays are far more
numerous than those who study classical texts and know firsthand the myths
that form the basis of our culture. A talented director, an exciting story, and a
spectacular cast have made Achilles image inseparable for many from that of
dashing Brad Pitt, just as Hector has become associated with responsible and
reliable Eric Bana. Criticized by purists and scholars at first, Troy deserves seri-
ous attention because of its immense popular success, its intrinsic cinematic
quality, and its ability to revive worldwide interest in a topic that, by and large,
had been buried in dusty libraries.1 The first collection of essays on the film
appeared three years after its premire.2 The contributions to that volume ana-
lyzed sources of Troy, suggested comparative parallels, and identified precur-
sors, both filmic and literary. My contribution here continues in that vein, as I
propose to study the audiovisual narrative of the fall of Troy in Petersens film
by focusing on two types of sources, literary texts familiar to academic audi-
ences and cinematographic titles from popular and mass culture. Concerning
the former, I will concentrate on Book 2 of Virgils Aeneid. Though mentioned
as a source in the earlier collection of essays, no detailed analysis of this con-
nection exists. As for the latter, I will highlight connections to several earlier
films, even if some of them are not related to the Trojan myth.
I approach the study of these sources as part of a dynamic process by which
the classical tradition renews itself not through the repetition of well-known,
untouchable canonical texts, but through the perpetual transformation and

1 However, as Jonathan S. Burgess, Achilles Heel: The Historicism of the Film Troy, in Kostas
Myrsiades, (ed.), Reading Homer: Film and Text (Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University
Press, 2009), 163185, reports at 178 note 6: I have found undergraduate students to be the
harshest critics of Troy; recent initiates can be the fiercest guardians of antiquity.I would
like to thank Prof. Manuel M. Martn-Rodrguez for the English translation of this chapter.
2 Martin M. Winkler, (ed.). Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell,
2007).

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_011

204 Martn-Rodrguez

adaption of earlier materials. In the case of popular culture, the reception and
transformation of classical elements is not always the result of conscious bor-
rowing. I will first analyze the concept of the classical tradition, paying special
attention to the ways in which it travels across generations and to the role that
popular culture plays in its transformation. Next, I turn to Virgils account of
the fall of Troy and its possible impact on Troy. Here I will devote some time to
consider the importance of visual sources for a culture like ours, one that is
largely audiovisual; the capacity of cinema to generate complex interconnec-
tions based on the image; and the active role of the audience in creating new
meanings. Finally, I will review certain probable cinematic sources for Troy,
including likely influences such as films based on the story of the Trojan War
and some successful epic and adventure films released just before Petersens
blockbuster, whose influence had not been considered in the earlier volume of
essays on Troy.

1 Classical Tradition and Popular Culture

The expression classical tradition does not primarily refer to elements of

modern culture that originated in Greece or Rome but rather to the process by
which they have reached us. The Latin noun traditio conveys action or process.
It derives from the verb tradere in the sense of transmitting from hand to hand
or from generation to generation. In consequence, when we speak of the clas-
sical tradition it is important for us to take into account the process of trans-
mission as much as the contents transmitted. We commonly refer to the
classical tradition as if it were a torch that passes from hand to hand. While the
torch in this metaphor remains the same, the materials transmitted are subject
to continuous transformation. In that sense, a better image might be the inges-
tion of food. In this process, the flavors of the foods we consume linger for a
while in our mouths, while the nutriments are broken down in our system and,
mixed with other foodstuff, are eventually absorbed into the blood stream,
thus becoming part of ourselves. The classical tradition, likewise, has ensured
the intergenerational transmission of numerous Greco-Roman elements that
have become firmly implanted in our culture, even if their origins are not eas-
ily recognizable. In the process, classical materials have fused with others of
diverse origin to form the popular tradition as a whole. In this sense, tradition
may be defined as the genetic code of a culture. In the case of Western culture,
the classical tradition and Christianity are its two main genetic codes. But
since Christianity first expanded under the guidance and guise of Greek cul-
ture and as part of the Roman world at just the moment when the Mediterranean
The Fall of Troy 205

world had become a Greco-Roman oikoumen, a unified world of culture and

civilization, Greek and Roman influences are of paramount importance for the
genetic map of all later cultures down to our own.
These metaphors help us explain the two main modes of reception of the
classical tradition across the centuries, the conscious and the unconscious.
The former explains such instances as James Joyce rewriting the Odyssey as
Ulysses. The latter, in turn, is evident in the film industrys unconscious adapta-
tion of, for instance, the formulaic presentation of plots in classical theatre,
including the alternation of episodes that advance the story with pauses that
serve to reflect on the action, as had been the case with the chorus in Greek
plays. The same can be said of certain television sitcoms that seem to borrow
the entire cast of comical characters present in Plautus comedies without any
apparent awareness of such appropriation.
Although conscious imitation is far more common in the learned tradition
than in popular culture, it would be a methodological mistake to identify the
direct apprehension of the classical tradition with high culture and the
indirect reception with mass culture. On the contrary: the learned tradition
at times re-uses classical materials while ignoring their origin, and it is not
uncommon in popular culture to find consciousoften parodicelaborations
of old topics and genres. Such is the case in the clever use of the conventionsof
Greek tragedy in Woody Allens Mighty Aphrodite (1995), in the funny parody
of the structure of a Greek tragedy in Ron Clements and Ron Muskers ani-
mated Hercules (1997), and in the hilarious multiple borrowings of Plautine
topics in Richard Lesters A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum
(1966), a film based on the successful Broadway musical.
Most critics favor the term classical tradition for conscious uses of the clas-
sical models, preferring to call instances of unconscious borrowings coinci-
dence. However, if our goal is to document the scope and relevance of what we
have inherited from Greece and Rome, we should be prepared to analyze this
legacy in its entirety, regardless of whether it has reached us consciously or
unconsciously, through the prestigious channels of learned culture or through
the less respected conduits of popular culture. If we wanted to study, for exam-
ple, the relevance in our culture of the image of Venus emerging from the sea, it
is evident that Botticellis Birth of Venus would be an important part of the works
we examine. Just as important, if not as immediately apparently, would be the
scene of Marilyn Monroe over a subway grate in Billy Wilders The Seven Year
Itch (1955), which seems modeled on Botticellis painting. Without Botticelli,
our study would be unthinkable; without Wilder, it would be incomplete.
Studies of the classical tradition have restricted themselves for too long to
materials from high or academic culture, belittling the presence of the same
206 Martn-Rodrguez

topics and elements in popular culture as a kind of corruption or degradation.3

But this type of restriction is unreasonable. Beyond the aspect of thoroughness
already mentioned, any omission of popular culture from the study of the clas-
sical tradition would seriously distort our findings, since the influence of mass
culture is often broader and deeper than that of high culture. If we asked a
large number of non-specialists where Agamemnon died, who rode Pegasus,
or what Charon looked like, few would know that Agamemnon died in
Mycenae, that Bellerophon was Pegasus rider, and that Charon was an ill-clad
elder with a white, hirsute beard, at least according to Virgil.4 Instead, most
people would probably answer that Agamemnon died in Troy, that Perseus or
Hercules rode Pegasus, and that Charon was a skeleton. The reason for these
answers is simple: those who have watched Troy, Desmond Daviss Clash of the
Titans (1981) or Disneys Hercules far outnumber those who have read Aeschylus
Agamemnon, Book 6 of the Aeneid, or Ovids Metamorphoses.
Those who disagree with such an approach might wish to remember that
even classical authors provided us with alternative versions of their stories.
This is the case with Euripides, who first gave us a canonical presentation of
Helen in The Trojan Women and then left her out of the Trojan War altogether
in his Helen.5 Likewise, those who frown upon the association of Perseus and
Pegasus in Clash of the Titans, deeming it a fabrication of screenwriters in
search of special effects, should remember that such an association was estab-
lished in Ovids Amores, notwithstanding the fact that Ovid also presents
Perseus with his traditional winged sandals in the Metamorphoses and even in
the Amores.6 Since the Amores is the only classical text in which we find Perseus
riding Pegasus, some critics have suggested that this may have been a mistake
made by the copyist.7 But this motif established itself firmly in the classical
tradition through Boccaccio and through the allegorizing commentaries on

3 Cf. Martin M. Winkler, The Iliad and the Cinema, in TROY, 4367, at 43: Classicists tend to
reserve their greatest scorn, however, for adaptations of ancient masterpieces to modern
mass media. Cinema and television, they believe, only turn sacred texts into fodder for the
undiscriminating millions.
4 Virgil, Aeneid 6.298301.
5 As Martin M. Winkler, Editors Introduction, in TROY, 119 at 14, observes: such free adapta-
tions are nothing new. Even in antiquity, alternate versions of myth spread far and wide
throughout literature and the visual arts. Modern visual media have only taken this tradi-
tion further. Georg Danek, The Story of Troy Through the Centuries, in TROY, 6884, pro-
vides a detailed analysis in the case of the Trojan story.
6 Ovid, Amores 3.12.24 and 6.13; Metamorphoses 4.677 and 729730.
7 See Salomon Reinach, Pgase, lHippogriffe et les Potes, Rvue dArchologie, 11 (1920),
207235. A possible antecedent may be Hesiod, who calls Perseus a rider (Shield 216).
The Fall of Troy 207

Ovids epic and is found both in high culture (Ben Jonson, George Peele,
Thomas Heywood, William Shakespeare, Pierre Corneille, and others) and
now in popular culture (Clash of the Titans). The screenwriters of this film,
therefore, invented nothing by making Perseus Pegasus rider. On the other
hand, the screenwriters of Disneys Hercules in all likelihood were inspired by
Clash of the Titans to make Hercules ride Pegasus.
For all of these reasons it is easy to understand why a film like Troy has
received much critical attention. As a prime example of the conscious appro-
priation of classical themes in popular culture, Troy is likely to imprint a dis-
tinct image of the Trojan War and its main protagonists on an entire generation.
In that light, I will devote the rest of this chapter to examining the sources of
Troy from the double perspective of high and popular culture.

2 Troy and Book 2 of Virgils Aeneid

Asserting that Troy is not a film version of the Iliad but a narrative inspired by,
and expanding, Homers epic poem has by now become a commonplace. But,
as one scholar rightly observes, Petersens Troy, claiming only to be inspired
by Homers Iliad, contains more Iliadic material than most works of art of the
past three millennia.8 Since the film deals with events that precede Achilles
wrath and extend beyond the funeral of Hector, the opening and closing epi-
sodes of the Iliad, it is clear that the film goes far beyond the Homeric storyline.
In fact, screenwriter David Benioff has acknowledged in interviews that the
Iliad was not his only source; he also cites, for instance, the Odyssey, the Aeneid,
and Ovids Metamorphoses. According to Benioff, Troy is more a retelling of the
entire Trojan War than an adaptation of the Iliad.
Wolfgang Petersen, as many have noted, read Homers poem in its original lan-
guage during his studies of the humanities in Europe, although apparently with-
out much enthusiasm.9 Given this first-hand knowledge, critics have observed
that changes to the canonical text in Troy cannot be attributed to ignorance but
are due to authorial intention, audience expectations, and the film industrys
proverbial need to turn a profit. Thus, one scholar has observed about one of the
most controversial aspects of the film, the exclusion of gods: The decision to

8 Jon Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization & Classicization, Variation
& Codification, International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 14 (2007), 482534, at 482.
9 On this cf. Petersens own words in the present volume (Martin M. Winkler, Wolfgang
Petersen on Homer and Troy). On the importance of Petersens background in classical
antiquity see Winkler, Editors Introduction, in TROY, 5.
208 Martn-Rodrguez

exclude the gods as a motivating force makes man (and woman) the measure of
all things and transforms the mythological story of the Trojan War from a web of
interactions between mortals and immortals to a chronicle of strictly human
cause and effect.10 Another transgression of the canonical text that has received
many negative comments, Menelaus death at the hands of Hector, is regarded to
have made the long war meaningless; it also makes clear that, for Agamemnon,
Helen was only a pretext for war on Troy.11 As for audience expectations, it has
been said that poetic justice demanded in the finale of the classical Hollywood
film motivates some of the most radical changes from the myth in Troy.12
Several scholars have explored the differences between Troy and the Iliad
and other classical texts that deal with the Trojan matter; others have com-
pared moments in Troy that happen before and after the Homeric material
with those in the Epic Cycle; yet others have examined the procedures
employed in the film that deviate from the Homeric matter with those docu-
mented in versions of the Trojan War by Dares and Dictys at the end of classi-
cal antiquity.13 It is worth noting, however, that no comparative analysis exists
of Petersens visual telling of the fall of Troy and the verbal tale in the Aeneid,
our most important ancient source for this event.14 The Little Iliad and The Sack

10 Kim Shahabudin, From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story: Explanatory Narrative in Troy,
in TROY, 107118, at 107108. For a nuanced analysis of the role of the gods in Troy see
Charles Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, in
Myrsiades (ed.), Reading Homer: Film and Text, 186207, at 195203. Cf. further Joachim
Latacz, From Homers Troy to Petersens Troy, in TROY, 2742, at 42.
11 On this see Danek, The Story of Troy through the Centuries, 79, and Monica S. Cyrino,
Helen of Troy, in TROY, 131147, at 144. For Jon Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan
Myth: Popularization & Classicization, Variation & Codification, International Journal
for the Classical Tradition, 14 (2007), 482534, at 486, the innovation of Hector killing
Menelaus and Ajax establishes Hector as a more worthy opponent of the invincible
Achilles. In any case, as Solomon, 504, suggests, Dio Chrysostom in his Eleventh (Trojan)
Oration surpasses all of Petersens narrative transgressions by having Hector kill not Menelaus
or Ajax but Achilles himself. The matter of authenticity in the retelling of the Trojan tale, in
fact, rarely seems to have been of concern for thousands of years (Solomon, 534).
12 Shahabudin, From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story, 113. Jon Solomon, Viewing Troy:
Authenticity, Criticism, Interpretation, in TROY, 8598, at 90, analyzes the financial
motivation of the film.
13 On the films use of material from the Epic Cycle see Cyrino, Helen of Troy, and Burgess,
Achilles Heel. On Dares and Dictys see, e.g., Danek, The Story of Troy through the
Centuries.
14 Cf. Shahabudin, From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story, 112: The entire story of the fall of
Troy is borrowed from the Aeneid, too, in adapted form. Frederick Ahl, Troy and
Memorials of War, in TROY, 163185, at 171 and 184, acknowledges that the film is indebted
The Fall of Troy 209

of Troy (Iliou Persis), two short poems from the Epic Cycle that narrated, respec-
tively, the episode of the Wooden Horse and the sack of the city, among others,
are now lost. We know of their contents thanks to some surviving prose sum-
maries by late compilers. This aspect of Troy has been corroborated by screen-
writer David Benioff: We wanted to tell the entire story from before the
beginning when Paris seduces Helen and triggers the entire war through to the
fall of Troy, and you dont get all of that in The Iliad, so some of it comes from
Ovids Metamorphoses, and some of it comes from The Odyssey, actually. There
are little bits from Eneid [sic].15 Moreover, if Petersen as a student read the
Iliad in Greek, it is safe to assume that he must have read the second Book of
the Aeneid as well, since it has been required reading for Latin students in
Europe for generations.16
But Troy could not possibly be faithful to the description of the fall of Troy
in the Aeneid. In the first place, the principle of economic treatment of dra-
matic and narrative elements that is characteristic of this type of film is incom-
patible with the very detailed description in Virgil. In addition, the account of
the fall in Virgil is given by Aeneas, who tells the story to Dido. The film rests
not on a diegetic approach in the first person but on a mimetic or impersonal
one in the third person. In the latter, events are told from the perspective of the
audience as much as the camera lens permits, of course.
The events narrated retrospectively in Book 2 of the Aeneid last somewhat
less than one day, and the action may be divided into three parts.17 The first
spans almost a full day well into the night, ranging from the moment the
Trojans discover a giant horse in front of the gate of their city to the point when
the warriors hidden in the belly of the horse exit and help the Greek army
enter the city. The second part focuses on the events of that dreadful night,
always from Aeneas perspective. The last part consists of a brief epilogue that
narrates Aeneas encounter with his comrades outside the city at the break of

to Virgils Aeneid and that the sequence of events in the final part of the film recalls the
Aeneid rather than the Iliad.
15 Quoted from http://www.screenwritersutopia.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa
=showpage&pid=2686.
16 As Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War, 184, notes: If Petersens education followed the typi-
cal European pattern, his first encounter with an ancient version of the Trojan War would
have been in Virgil, not Homer.
17 Peter Jones, Reading Virgil: Aeneid I and II (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011),
provides a useful recent commentary on the first two books of the Aeneid for students and
non-specialists, providing essential bibliographical information and offering some alter-
nate versions of the fall of Troy reported in the extant ancient sources.
210 Martn-Rodrguez

dawn; thus begins a long journey that will end much later on the shores of
Latium in Italy.
The first part chronicles the feigned departure of the Greeks, the Trojans
discovery of the horse, and its transportation into the city. Its structure is
tripartite. First, Aeneas explains that the Greeks, weary after long years of
fighting, apparently sailed back home, leaving a massive wooden horse in front
of Troy. This horse appeared to be a sacrificial offering to ensure them a safe
return. The belly of the horse, however, contained a handful of Greek warriors.
The rest of the army was hidden on the near-by island of Tenedos. Secondly,
the Trojans take the opportunity to visit the abandoned Greek camp and
admire the horse. An argument ensues as to what to do with it. We can discern
four different steps in this argument:

Thymoetes, perhaps a member of a fifth column, suggests bringing it into

the city, but Capys and the more reasonable citizens would rather throw
it into the sea or burn it. At the least they want to pierce its side to see
what it might contain.
With the arrival of the furious priest Laocoon, who advises the destruc-
tion of the horse, Capys suggestions gain momentum. When his lance
hits the horse, an ominous metallic sound is heard.
The unexpected appearance of the traitor Sinon, an alleged Greek
fugitive, once again changes the Trojans minds. Sinon makes them
believe that the Greeks left the horse in atonement for their theft of
Athenas Palladium from Troy and that they built it so huge that it could
not be brought into the city.
Now the Trojans favor bringing the horse into their city, especially after
two giant serpents have killed Laocoon and his sons and sought refuge in
the temple of Athena.

In the third and final part, the Trojans take the horse into their city despite
Cassandras dreadful prophecies. They pay no heed to the fact that the horse
got stuck four times on the threshold of the gate and that these moments pro-
duced an ominous metallic sound.
The surviving summary of the Iliou Persis makes evident that it had influ-
enced Virgil, although with a slight difference, easy to understand: Aeneas
journey with his people to Mount Ida after the death of Laocoon:

The Trojans, deeply suspicious of everything to do with the wooden

horse, stood round it debating what they ought to do. Some thought they
ought to throw it over the cliff, others to set fire to it, while others said
The Fall of Troy 211

they ought to offer it up to Athena. The last option finally prevailed, and
they turned to joyful feasting, as if the war were over. But at this very
moment two serpents appeared and destroyed Laocoon and one of his
two sons. Aeneass followers, deeply concerned at this omen, left for
Mount Ida.18

In Petersens film a horseman appears at full gallop, screaming Open the

gates! Priam, Paris, Glaucus (the principal Trojan commander after the death
of Hector), the influential priest Archeptolemus and others verify that the
Greeks have sailed away, leaving the shore full of corpses; in all likelihood, a
plague is the cause of death. Benioff added this motif to render the Trojans
gullibility more plausible. Later it becomes clear that this is a false epidemic,
since the marks of the disease disappear from a corpse when a dog licks its
face. At the same time, however, the scene may be inspired by the epidemic in
Book I of the Iliad or even by The Little Iliad, in which Sinon convinced the
Trojans to bring the Wooden Horse into Troy by saying that the Greeks, fearing
the plague, had returned home.
Whatever the case, Archeptolemus interprets the plague as divine punish-
ment for the desecration of the temple of Apollo, and he considers the horse
an offering to Poseidon in a pray for a safe return home, which thus should be
taken to the gods temple.19 Petersen omits the characters of Thymoetes, Capys,
Laocoon, and Sinon, but the controversy appears in the subsequent dialogue.
Paris and Glaucus take the part of those who support the destruction of the
horse, but the priest finally convinces Priam:

Paris: I think we should burn it.

Priam: Burn it?
Another Trojan: My prince, this is a gift to the gods.
Glaucus: The prince is right. I would burn the whole of Greece if I had
a big enough torch.
Priest: I warn you, good men, be careful what you insult. Our beloved
prince Hector had sharp words for the gods and a day later Achilles
sword cut him down.
Paris: Father, burn it.

18 Quoted from Jones, Reading Virgil, 298.

19 Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 202, notes: This
marks a significant variation from the best-known version of this incident, in the second
book of Vergils Aeneid, where the Trojan priest Laocon shrewdly urges that the horse be
destroyed.
212 Martn-Rodrguez

Priest: Forgive me, my king, I mean no disrespect but I dont want to see
any more sons of Troy incur the gods wrath.
Priam: I will not watch another son die.

Priams words end the argument, and the horse is brought into the city amid
general joy and without any of the disturbing omens present in Virgils Aeneid.
In the meantime, a Trojan horseman discovers the entire Greek fleet moored
in a well-protected bay. The horseman readies himself to ride back to Troy but
is hit and killed by several arrows.
As mentioned, the second part of the Virgilian account, told from Aeneas
point of view, focuses on nightfall, the citys destruction, and Aeneas flight.
It may be summarized as follows:

Hector appears to Aeneas in a dream and advises him to seek safety with
his family, taking the household gods of Troy with him.
A clatter of arms awakens Aeneas. He watches Troy in flames from the
top of his house.
Panthus, a priest of Apollo, arrives with the sacred objects.
Aeneas joins the fight with a few loyal companions and after numer-
ous vicissitudes arrives at the palace of Priam.
A description of the brave defense of the palace ensues. Achilles son
Pyrrhus finally breaks down the doors and kills Priam.
Venus deters Aeneas from killing Helen and persuades him to flee,
while helping him get back home. Anchises, Aeneas father, refuses to
leave until two divine prodigies convince him otherwise.
Aeneas flees, carrying his father on his shoulder and holding his son by
the hand. His wife, Creusa, is lost. Aeneas returns to the city to search for
her, but in vain. Eventually her ghost appears to him and encourages him
to leave Troy.

In Troy, once night falls and everything is quiet, the Greeks emerge from the
Wooden Horse. They kill the sleeping sentinels, the Greek army enters Troy,
and a terrible massacre ensues. Achilles searches frantically for Briseis. Priam
climbs to the rooftop of his palace and, in tears, watches his city engulfed in
flames. Andromache convinces Helen to flee through an underground passage
whose entrance Hector had revealed to her. While Paris refuses to leave and so
to abandon Priam, a very young Aeneas appears, holding an exhausted older man,
his father, in his arms.20 In a dialogue that critics rightly consider incongruous,

20 A source for this passage may be Aeneid 2.657658, where Aeneas refuses to leave Troy
without his father.
The Fall of Troy 213

Paris gives Aeneas the Sword of Troy, a sort of talisman that guarantees the
survival of the Trojan race. It is an obvious substitute for the mythical Palladium,
a small wooden image of Athena believed to have fallen from the sky, with an
additional medieval hint at the Arthurian sword Excalibur.21 Paris asks Aeneas
to lead the fleeing Trojans:

Paris: Whats your name?

Aeneas: Aeneas.
Paris: Do you know how to use a sword?
Aeneas: Yes.
Paris: The Sword of Troy [handing him the sword]. As long as it remains
in the hands of a Trojan, our people have a future. Protect them,
Aeneas. Find them a new home.
Aeneas: I will.
Paris: Hurry. Quick.

The Greeks, led by Odysseus, manage to enter the royal palace that Glaucus
was defending. Agamemnon kills Priam and captures Briseis. Agamemnon
captures her while she prays kneeling in front of an altar. This is a clear
reminder of Robert Wises Helen of Troy (1956), in which Ajax apprehends
Cassandra in the same manner. Before Achilles can protect her, Briseis plunges
her dagger in Agamemnons neck and kills him. When Paris arrives and sees
Briseis in Achilles arms, he discharges a veritable rain of arrows on the Greek
hero. Before succumbing, Achilles manages to pull them all out, except for the
one that struck him in the heel.22 Paris and Briseis flee into the secret passage,
and Achilles dies.
Finally, the third part of the Virgilian account tells how Aeneas joins his
people in the outskirts of Troy at dawn and how they flee towards the mountains.
Likewise, in Troy, the fugitives escape through a steep pass in the moun-
tains. The broad outline of events logically coincides in both versions: the
Trojans bring the horse into their city, the concealed warriors open the gates
for the Greek army, Troy is sacked, the king is killed, and a few Trojans led by

21 Cf. Stephen Scully, The Fate of Troy, in TROY, 119130, at 121, and Ahl, Troy and Memorials
of War, 176. In Wises Helen of Troy Priam charges Aeneas, whose role in this film is more
significant, to take care of his daughter-in-law and grandson.
22 According to Burgess, Achilles Heel, 176177, this scene is based on the version of
Achilles death in which he is shot by Paris when he has met Polyxena in a temple of
Apollo. On this see especially the chapter by Eleonora Cavallini in the present volume. A
possible cinematic intertext is Wises Helen of Troy, at whose end a dying Paris bids fare-
well to Helen in Menelaus presence.
214 Martn-Rodrguez

Aeneas manage to escape. But the differences are equally obvious. In Troy
Achilles participates in the citys capture and dies in the process; Odysseus
rather than Pyrrhus breaks down the defenses of Priams palace; Agamemnon,
not Pyrrhus, kills the king; Briseis kills Agamemnon; Paris, Helen, Briseis, and
Andromache with her son join the fleeing Trojans; and Aeneas is a youngster,
not an experienced warrior. Petersen and Benioff have taken various liberties
in their retelling of the fall of Troy as described in ancient texts, but their ver-
sion retains traces of the Virgilian accountno matter how liberally trans-
formed and regardless of the fact that characters and circumstances have been
altered. Thus in Troy it is Priam and not Aeneas who watches the burning city
from the rooftop, and the Sword of Troy corresponds to, and is equivalent to,
the Trojan Penates and sacred objects. Virgils Aeneas does not dare to carry
the latter because his hands are tainted with blood, and so he gives them to his
father Anchises.23 In Troy, likewise, Paris, become a warrior at last, gives the
sacred articles to Aeneas, a young and innocent lad with little military experi-
ence and no involvement in combat. The surreptitious way in which Aeneas
enters the palace under siege is substituted in the film by a scene in which
Achilles climbs the walls of the palace to save his beloved.24 The murder of
Polites by Pyrrhus and the ensuing killing of Priam, enraged by this incident, in
Virgil is replaced in Troy by a scene in which Archeptolemus the priest is killed
in front of an altar and his body is hurled over the balustrade. Priam then
condemns the Greeks dishonorable actions and confronts Agamemnon, who
treacherously kills him. The image of the sword buried to the hilt in the old
mans body seems a clear reference to the Virgilian text, although there the
sword enters Priams side, not his back: with his right [he] drew his gleaming /
Sword which he then buried up to the hilt in the flank of the old king.25
Archeptolemus words before being hurled over the balustradeBeware, my
friends. I am a servant of the godslikewise appear borrowed from Virgil.
Aeneas says about the death of Panthus: your utterly righteous life and
Apollos / Ribbons of priesthood gave you no protection when you began stum-
bling; then: as you fell.26 Additionally, the scene in which Aeneas sees
Helen and conceives the idea to kill her, although he then pardons her, becomes

23 Aeneid 2.717720.
24 Aeneas does so by way of a back door that Andromache had frequently used to go from
her house to that of her in-laws (Aeneid 2.453457). This passageway may have suggested
to the screenwriters the secret passage that Hector brings to Andromaches attention.
25 Aeneid 2.552553; quoted from Frederick Ahl, (tr.), Virgil: Aeneid (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2007; rpt. 2008), 45.
26 Aeneid, 2.428432; quoted from Ahl, Virgil: Aeneid, 41.
The Fall of Troy 215

in Troy an encounter between Achilles and a Trojan soldier, whom Achilles

questions about Briseis whereabouts and then spares:

Achilles: Briseiswhere is she? Where?

Soldier: I dont know. Please, I have a son.
Achilles: Then get him out of Troy.

Finally, Aeneas frantic search for Creusa in the midst of the slaughter is com-
parable to Achilles search for Briseis in Troy. In the former, Creusas ghost
appears to Aeneas and convinces him to leave the city, find a new wife, and
start a new life; in the latter, a dying Achilles asks Briseis to flee the city with
Paris to begin a new life: Go. You must. Troy is falling. Go. Begin anew.27
Some of the correspondences between Troy and the Aeneid are conscious
borrowings. Others may be the result of coincidence. Yet others are examples
of unconscious apprehension of classical elements without knowledge of
their origin. This is the case with the burning of Troy, which has begun while
the Greeks are still in the process of conquering it. At first glance this may
seem a logical consequence of the fall of a city, but the simultaneity of fire
and conquest is Virgils invention. Other sources state that the city was
burned down only after the Greeks takeover.28 Early films about Troy
repeated the motif from the Aeneid, as is the case with Wises Helen of
Troy. Benioff adopted it as well, probably unaware that he was pouring old
wine into a new skin.

3 Visual Subtexts

Many of the images that make a strong impression on our minds frequently do
so on an unconscious level. It follows, then, that many of the conceivable visual
references in a film may not be conscious to its makers or may be the product
of an unconscious association of ideas in the viewers mind. In the latter case

27 Purists may consider the image of Achilles dying in the arms of Briseis outrageous. Still, a
modern reader of Propertius could easily imagine such a scene since Propertius, Elegies
2.9.910, presents Briseis embracing the dying or dead Achilles as a prime example of
fidelity, thus contrasting Briseis and Cynthia. Moreover, Propertius 2.15.1314, where the
love-stricken Paris watches a naked Helen getting out of Menelaus bed, might have
inspired the moment in Troy in which a naked Helen, in bed after consummating again
her adulterous affair with Paris, receives a pearl necklace from the enraptured Trojan
prince.
28 Cf. Jones, Reading Virgil, 234, with further reference.
216 Martn-Rodrguez

one could argue that these visual references could not be deemed to be sources;
however, since viewers are by no means merely passive recipients but active
participants in visual narratives, viewer associations that connect two seem-
ingly unrelated texts are not at all unlike the metaphors that a poet uses to
connect realities that have previously been foreign to each other.
At times the visual subtext for a particular scene is evident, as in the case of
the sea full of ships sailing to Troy, which reminds us of Ken Annakin, Andrew
Marton, and Bernhard Wickis The Longest Day (1962), or in that of the landing
of Achilles and the Myrmidons, which echoes the beginning of Steven
Spielbergs Saving Private Ryan (1998).29 Other examples are not as clear and
may be considered coincidences. Such is the case with the swordfight between
Achilles and Patroclus when Odysseus visits them in Phthia, which is vaguely
reminiscent of Einar fighting, although in deadly earnest, his half-brother Erik
at the end of Richard Fleischers The Vikings (1958). Indeed it is difficult to
decide when filmmakers intentionally present us with iconic intertexts and
when critics or scholars point to them in their interpretations. In that sense it
would be difficult to represent Achilles mother Thetis as a goddess in the style
of Don Chaffeys Jason and the Argonauts (1963) or Clash of the Titans (1981),
considering that the gods are absent in Troy as characters, just as they had been
in Lucans Pharsalia.30 At most, then, Thetis could be represented as someone
who is considered a goddess by the ignorant populace. This seems to be the
case when a little boy asks Achilles at the beginning of the film: Are the stories
about you true? They say your mother is an immortal goddess. The films pre-
sentation of Thetis walking on the shore and collecting shells alludes to her
mythological nature as a sea deity while still allowing for a rational interpreta-
tion of why tradition had turned her into a sea goddess.31

29 On the former see Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War, 181. For Mendelsohn, A Little Iliad,
47, the second of these two sequences is shamelessly lifted from Spielbergs film. Cyrino,
Helen of Troy, 136, suggests that the computer-generated image of the massive Greek
armada is intended to evoke Marlowes description of Helen: the face that launched a
thousand ships. Shahabudin, From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story, 113, suggests that
the burning missiles catapulted into the Germans in Gladiator influenced the Trojan
night attack on the Greek ships in Troy, but the final battle in Stanley Kubricks Spartacus
(1960) is a closer parallel.
30 On the affinities between Petersen and Lucan in the representation (or absence thereof)
of divinities see Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War.
31 Cf. Danek, The Story of Troy Through the Centuries, 68, and Ahl, Troy and Memorials
of War, 173. In any case, Achilles words to Briseis seem to contain an allusion to
Thetis divine nature: I know about the gods more than your priests. Ive seen them.
The Fall of Troy 217

The same rationalization is allowed in the episode of the death of Achilles.

Shot several times, Achilles succeeds in removing all arrows but the one in his
heel, which the Greek soldiers see when they find his corpse.32 This is a deli-
cate way of suggesting a rationalizing origin for the legend of Achilles invul-
nerability.33 The hero himself had denied his invulnerability at the start of the
film when he answers a childs question about this very thing: I wouldnt be
bothering with the shield then, would I? This technique of allusive explana-
tion for the creation of legends is, of course, not exclusive to modern culture.
An ancient example may be the curious incident in Book 2 of the Aeneid, in
which Coroebus convinces Aeneas to switch armors with those of the Greeks
they have just killed in order to inflict further punishment on their enemies.
This may be Virgils subliminal version of certain ancient traditions according
to which Aeneas betrayed the Trojans, and it would explain why Aeneas had
been seen in Troy apparently fighting on the Greek side.34
Critics have suggested several further classical intertextual presences in
Troy.35 I would like to adduce a few other possible instances which, although
less obvious than those cited above, are equally suggestive. Troy omits the non-
Homeric episode in which a young Achilles, disguised as a girl, initially avoids
the war by hiding in the womens quarters of King Lycomedes palace. The film
may contain a playful iconic reference to that episode when Agamemnon pre-
pares to eliminate the last vestiges of resistance to his power in northern
Greece. Thessalian king Triopas and Agamemnon agree to avoid battle by a
duel of their champions, the formidable giant Boagrius and Achilles. But
Achilles fails to show up. And where is he? Far from the battlefield in his tent,
in bed with two women. The formulaic character of Homeric language, full

Chiasson, Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 206207 note 19,
concurs.
32 Two different intertextual allusions are possible here. One is the death of Ajax at the
hands of Hector in Troy itself. The other, suggested by Danek, The Story of Troy through
the Centuries, 70, is the passage in Homer in which Diomedes during Achilles absence
from combat receives multiple arrow wounds and promptly removes all arrows before
seeking a cure in his camp (Iliad 11.369400). The first of these allusions permits us to
think of Paris as a hero comparable to Hector, as he chooses to stay and confront Achilles
in order to save Briseis.
33 On this Danek, The Story of Troy through the Centuries, 69; Shahabudin, From Greek
Myth to Hollywood Story, 117; Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War, 173. Burgess, Achilles
Heel, 174177, gives a detailed analysis of this scene.
34 Cf. Jones, Reading Virgil, 245.
35 So Winkler, The Iliad and the Cinema, 51 and 54; Scully, The Fate of Troy, 129; Cyrino,
Helen of Troy, 136 and 144; Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War, 179.
218 Martn-Rodrguez

of recurring epithets, can only have a marginal importance in a medium as dif-

ferent as film.36 Still, in the epilogue of Troy Odysseus refers to Hector as
breaker of horses, thus recalling the final line of the Iliad. Other well-known
epithets, such as swift-footed for Achilles, are not used. Instead, the film pre
sents Achilles as swift-footed visually in two symmetric key moments: first in
his combat with Boagrius and then in his victory over Hector he demonstrates
an agility and a speed that are almost balletic.37 This constitutes a type of
visual representation that generates an intertextual effect by iconic rather than
verbal means.
Troy also leaves out the alleged homosexual relationship between Achilles
and Patroclus that is not present in Homer but common in later sources.38
Nonetheless, Achilles maintains with Patroclus a close physical contact, stron-
ger and more delicate than the behavior exhibited by other male characters in
the film. To some critics and viewers Achilles furious reaction after the death
of Patroclus lacks verisimilitude, considering that the two are only cousins.39
But we may look for subliminal allusions to their homosexual relationship. For
instance, after the death of Patroclus Achilles gives Briseis the necklace he had
given his cousin before, thus signaling the similar place both have in his
heart.40 At the same time Achilles offer of the necklace to Patroclus is reminis-
cent of Paris gift of another necklace to Helen after a night of lovemaking in
Sparta. Their age difference and the fact that Achilles is in charge of Patroclus
education may also refer to the well-known Greek institution of homosexual

36 Cf. Burgess, Achilles Heel, 177: Homeric epithetsappear occasionally throughout the
film, apparently in order to suggest a grandiose if stilted protocol at work among prehis-
toric royalty.
37 So Scully, The Fate of Troy, 120 and 129. For Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan
Myth, 486, the duel between Achilles and Boagrius serves to establish the former as swift
of foot and sure of hand. The name of Boagrius, an invented character, corresponds to
that of a Locrian river (Iliad 2.533), as Solomon, 486 note 17, has noted.
38 On this Mendelsohn, A Little Iliad, 47; Ahl, Troy and Memorials of War, 179. According
to Shahabudin, From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story, 113, this absence may be due to
pressure exerted by the studio to protect the popularity of their stars. On the matter see
the relevant comments by Eleonora Cavallini in this volume and especially the chapter by
Horst-Dieter Blume.
39 So, for example, Shahabudin, From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story, 113; Burgess,
Achilles Heel, 172.
40 On this Alena Allen, Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy, in TROY, 148162, at 160. According
to Burgess, Achilles Heel, 180 note 29, this successive offering of the necklace from
Thetis to Achilles to Patroclus to Briseis might allude to the fate of the first armor of
Achilles, which is passed on from Peleus to Achilles to Patroclus to Hector.
The Fall of Troy 219

paideia. Finally, the death of Achilles, shot by Paris arrows, is reminiscent of

the visual image of one of the most popular gay icons in the cinema, Saint
Sebastian.
Given their importance, visual correspondences in Troy are probably not
mere coincidences. For example, Odysseus idea of the Wooden Horse is the
result of his watching a soldier carving a small wooden horse as a toy for his
son; this image, in turn, refers to the beginning of the film when Hector carves
a little lion for his son, just when he is about to discover that Helen is hidden
away in the ship that brings him and Paris back to Troy. The killing of the giant
Ajax at the hands of Hector refers to Achilles slaying of the giant Boagrius and
proves that Hector, whose life Achilles spared at the temple of Apollo, is as
good a warrior. In turn, the rain of arrows sent by Paris against Achilles corre-
sponds to the many darts that Hector had shot at Ajax before killing him and
suggests that Paris is now a warrior like his brother. Finally, Odysseus farewell
to Achilles corpse (Find peace, my brother) echoes that uttered by a tearful
Achilles to the disfigured body of Hector before delivering it to Priam (Well
meet again soon, my brother). Odysseus words thus indicate that the two
dead heroes have attained the same stature.
After this brief account of the various ways in which images can suggest
something without explicitly stating it, I turn to some examples of visual and
plot echoes of other films in the part of the story that primarily concerns us,
the fall of Troy. The influence of Wises Helen of Troy is evident and has been
documented before.41 I will therefore examine other works, starting with the
many elements that Troy shares with the television film Helen of Troy (2003),
directed by John Kent Harrison.
Like Petersen, Harrison and his screenwriter take liberties with their story.
Neither Briseis nor Patroclus appear or are mentioned; also absent is the con-
flict between Agamemnon and Achilles; there is no recovery by Priam of
Hectors corpse; Agamemnon kills Priam and publicly rapes Helen. The pres-
ence of some similarities with Troy might suggest that Helen of Troy influenced
Petersens film, although the release dates for both works are very close. More
likely, most of the coincidences resulted from the use of common sources, in
particular Wises Helen of Troy. Such is the case with the negotiation of a peace

41 So Winkler, Editors Introduction, 17: In both plot and visual style, for instance, Troy is
reminiscent of the first American widescreen epic on the same subject, Robert Wises
Helen of Troy (1956), also produced by Warner Brothers. See now also Martin M. Winkler,
Cinema and Classical Texts: Apollos New Light (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2009; rpt. 2011), 210250 (chapter titled Helen of Troy: Marriage and Adultery According
to Hollywood), on affinities among Wises, Harrisons, and Petersens films.
220 Martn-Rodrguez

agreement between Troy and Sparta without the knowledge of the other Greek
states, which is the reason for Paris visit to Menelaus palace and his falling in
love with Helen. A second coincidence may also be due to Wises film:
Agamemnon is presented as an imperialist politician whose goal is to conquer
Troy even before his sister-in-laws elopement with Paris gives him an excuse.
However, whereas Wise cast both Agamemnon and Menelaus, the true driving
force for the war, in this negative role, Petersen and Harrison focus on
Agamemnon exclusively.
More significant are the coincidences between Harrisons and Petersens
versions that cannot be traced to Wises. First among them is the murder of
Priam at the hands of Agamemnon. In Wises film Priam and Hecuba are taken
captive, but their deaths are not shown; in Petersens, Agamemnon treacher-
ously kills Priam and then takes Briseis captive; in Harrisons, Agamemnon kills
Priam, and his appalling behavior is exacerbated when he rapes Helen in front
of her husband, his brother.
Petersens choice to have Agamemnon die in Troy rather than after his
return to Mycenae has met with sharp criticism from purists, but it may have
been inspired by Harrisons version. In Troy Agamemnon dies at the hands of
Briseis; in Harrisons Helen of Troy Agamemnon is killed in Troy by Clytemnestra,
who thus avenges the sacrifice of Iphigenia and the rape of her sister. It is worth
noting that both versions stress visual details whose origin dates back to
Aeschylus Agamemnon. The recurring comparison in Aeschylus play of
Agamemnon to a sacrificial ox may explain Agamemnons death in Troy after
Briseis plunges a knife into his neck, precisely where sacrificial beasts were
struck. By contrast, in Helen of Troy Clytemnestra surprises her husband in the
bath, casts a net over him, and stabs him to death. Moreover, the rather unat-
tractive characterization of Achilles as a shaven and dumb-looking husky giant
in Helen of Troy is revived at the beginning of Petersens film when Achilles kills
Boagrius, a similar brutish giant. Beyond the physical resemblance of both
characters, the camera movements in the two films suggest a connection.
When Achilles and Hector fight each other in Helen of Troy, Achilles taunts
Hector, turning his back to him, and dares him to cast his spear where his
strong neck meets his broad back. The camera focuses on this spot in an
extreme close-up. Hector hesitates and eventually drops his weapon, consider-
ing such a kill unworthy, unheroic, and unethical. Now Achilles quickly turns
around, chastises Hector for not taking advantage of his opportunity, and sur-
prises everyone by hurling his own spear at Hector. After killing him in this
despicable manner, Achilles lashes Hectors body behind his chariot and drags
it to the Greek camp amid the wild cries of the onlookers. In Troy, Boagrius
turns his back on Achilles twice in order to encourage his fellow soldiers lined
The Fall of Troy 221

up behind him; then he hurls his spear at Achilles. But Achilles, disdaining
face-to-face combat and turning swiftly, kills Boagrius by thrusting his weapon
in the exact same spot where Achilles had dared Hector to hit him in Helen of
Troy. Whether or not this is coincidence, an attentive viewer of Troy familiar
with Helen of Troy would be justified in interpreting the Boagrius scene as
rather ironic: Harrison presents his Achilles as a dull, brawny character who
looks like a villain rather than like the exceptional hero that he is in myth and
in Troy and whose military prowess could have been shown in a much more
elegant and artistic manner.
A connection with the narratives of the Trojan War by Dictys and Dares,
who offer alternate versions of the Iliad by alleged eyewitnesses, has been sug-
gested for this element.42 In this context one final, if minor, influence of
Harrisons Helen of Troy on Troy may be the use of a voice-over at beginning
and end. In Helen of Troy the action is framed by Menelaus voice asserting
viewers that the stories about the Trojan War have not always been truthful
and that he will set the record straight since he was there. The voice-over at the
beginning and the end of Troy is by Odysseus, who, of course, also was there.
Filmmakers tend to be eclectic when it comes to borrowing from other
sources. In the case of Troy, inspiration went well beyond films about the
Trojan War. One such source accounts for a most intriguing sequence in Troy:
that of the subterranean passage used by the fleeing Trojans. This passageway
does not appear in the Aeneid or in any other films about the Trojan War.
Rather, Peter Jacksons The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) may be the
likely source. When the situation becomes critical for those under siege in
Helms Deep, Aragorn asks one of King Theodens captains:

Aragorn: Is there no other way for the women and children to get out
of the caves? Is there no other way?
Captain: There is one passage. It leads into the mountain.

Likewise, the scene in which the Trojans under Glaucus command resist the
final Greek attack inside Priams palace is reminiscent of the final defense of
Theodens Eorlingas in Helms Deep against the Uruk-hai. And the source of
the scene in which Achilles beheads Apollos statue may well be Achilles
slaughter of Troilus at the altar of Apollo.43 But it also may remind us of The

42 So Danek, The Story of Troy through the Centuries, 75.

43 Burgess, Achilles Heel, 167. The point is argued in greater detail by Eleonora Cavallini
elsewhere in this volume. According to Chiasson, Redefinig Homeric Heroism in
Wolfgang Petersens Troy, 205206 note 17, the conversation between Achilles and
222 Martn-Rodrguez

Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003), in which Aragorn does the
same with the Mouth of Sauron in front of the Black Gate. This potential influ-
ence is complicated, however, by the fact that the scene only appears in the
films extended version. Nevertheless it would be difficult to dismiss the influ-
ence of The Lord of the Rings on Troy out of hand. Orlando Bloom, the actor
who plays Petersens Paris had been cast as the formidable archer elf Legolas in
Jacksons trilogy, and many of the features of Petersens Hector, played by Eric
Bana, seem modeled on Jacksons Aragorn, played by Viggo Mortensen, whom
Bana somewhat resembles. Benioff himself has referred to The Lord of the
Rings when describing Troy: Its not the epic battle of good versus evil. Its not
humans versus orcs (sic).44 This type of inspiration results in casting as a par-
ticular character an actor who had played the same or a similar character
before. This is the case, for instance, with Steve Reeves, who played Aeneas in
Giorgio Ferronis The Trojan Horse (1961) and its sequel, Giorgio Rivaltas The
Avenger (1962). These films came after Reeves had twice played Hercules, had
practically won the Battle of Marathon (in Jacques Tourneurs Giant of
Marathon, 1959), had survived the eruption of Vesuvius (in Mario Bonnard and
Sergio Leones The Last Days of Pompeii, 1959), and had appeared as compara-
ble saviors and rescuers in other historical fiction films.

4 Conclusion

Classical topics and motifs persist not only in the realm of academia but also,
and most significantly, in that of mass culture. Although the Iliad continues to
be the main point of reference for the Trojan War myth, every century and
even every generation has been able to tell the story again and differently,
infusing an old tale with new blood. For Homer the main episode was that of
Achilles wrath, which provokes the events that culminate with the death of
Hector, the main defender of Troy. Virgil emphasized the destruction of Troy,
which results in the exile of Aeneas and the eventual foundation of Rome.
Dictys and Dares offered alternate eyewitness accounts, which they presented
as being closer to the truth than Homer. Benot de Sainte-Maures twelfth-
century epic Le roman de Troie reads much like a novel, although written in
elegant verse. Shakespeare focused on the love episode of Troilus and Cressida

Eudorus before the beheading of the statue is reminiscent of Euripides, Hippolytus

88120.
44 Quoted from http://www.screenwritersutopia.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=sh
owpage&pid=2686.
The Fall of Troy 223

in his play. With World War II nearly on the horizon, Jean Giraudoux, in The
Trojan War Will Not Take Place (1935), presented a pacifist Hector not entirely
unlike Petersens and the possibility that the war could have been avoided had
it not been for an unfortunate trivial incident. Petersen has focused on the
main heroes of each side: Hector, who understands his role in life and is willing
to die for his country and society if necessary, and Achilles, who is still search-
ing for meaning in his life but is willing to sacrifice himself in order to save his
beloved. This Achilles comes close to the ethics of the solitary hero of the
Western. Some of these diverse versions are conscious heirs to their classical
models; others deviate from them. Some are the product of scholarly research;
others are meant for broad audiences. Some are serious; others are comic, like
Jacques Offenbachs operetta La belle Hlne.
The recurrence of the Trojan story in the cinema, the most representative
art form of the twentieth century, proves how timeless this subject has become.
After all, topics are not important because they appear in books; rather, they
appear in books because they are important. It is true that the Iliad cannot be
compared with Dictys and Dares little novel-like stories, but no scholar would
seriously advocate to removing them from our critical attention for that rea-
son. If we refused to study some of the branches, we would lose an overall
vision of the tree of the Trojan tradition. Why then not study the filmic ver-
sions of the Trojan myth, especially since viewers of works of popular culture
greatly outnumber readers of the illustrious works that we treasure as our
highest culture? Moreover, new digital technologies allow us to analyze cine-
matic and other visual works with critical and intellectual tools that are com-
parable to those long applied in literary studies. Troy will leave its imprint on
the collective imagination of a whole generation, creating a certain powerful
image of its main heroes. Just for that reason, it deserves our admiration, our
study, and our respect.
 chapter 10

Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy

Jon Solomon

In my 2007 publication The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization &

Classicization, Variation & Codification, I responded to the criticism that
Wolfgang Petersens Troy failed to reproduce faithfully Homers Iliad by survey-
ing the Iliadic and broader Trojan War tradition from the era of Homer to the
present.1 In doing so I observed that in ancient Greece and Rome the Iliad,
insofar as it was an artistic work worthy of imitation and capable of inspiring
subsequent artists, was overshadowed for the most part by the Cyclic Epics.
The predominant number of dramas (the extant tragedies that involve the
families that fought in the Trojan War), vase paintings, and mural paintings
that depended on the Trojan War tradition featured pre- and post-Iliadic
events and characters. Even those that depicted characters from the Iliad were
often extra-Homeric, such as the Sosias Painters depiction of Achilles bandag-
ing the wounds of Patroclus and the thirty-seven vases painted by Exekias, the
Andocides Painter, and others of Achilles and Ajax playing dice.2 During
the Roman era the Iliad was relatively neglected, denigrated, and then contra-
dicted by authors of the Second Sophistic movement and supplanted entirely
by the vulgar narratives of Dictys and Dares, which inspired subsequent artists
until the end of the Renaissance.3 By that time the Iliad had finally been trans-
lated into various European vernacular languages and was available for wider
dissemination and imitation, but painters, sculptors, playwrights, and opera
librettists chose to draw their narratives from the much broader corpora of
Greco-Roman mythology and history.4 In the eighteenth century, under the

1 Jon Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization & Classicization, Variation
& Codification, The International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 14 (2007), 482534.
2 limc I.1, Achilles 468 (Berlin F 2278) and 391427.
3 The Hyginus collection of myths provides an example of neglect, assigning just one of 257
fables to the Iliadic material. Dio Chrysostom, 11.9596 and 123124, has Hector kill Achilles
and claims that the Trojans were ultimately victorious. For Dictys and Dares see Stefan
Merkle, Telling the True Story of the Trojan War: The Eyewitness Account of Dictys of Crete,
in James Tatum (ed.), The Search for the Ancient Novel (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1994), 183196, and The Truth and Nothing But the Truth: Dictys and Dares, in Gareth
L. Schmeling (ed.), The Novel in the Ancient World (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 563580.
4 Claudio Monteverdi, for instance, during the years 16401643, produced in succession the
first operas based on Homeric and Vergilian epics, Il ritorno dUlisse in patria (1640) and Le

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_012

Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 225

influence of Robert Wood, Friedrich August Wolf, and others, the Iliad became
the subject of intense intellectual and academic study, and at the end of the nine-
teenth century Heinrich Schliemann demonstrated that the Iliad was based on a
historical war. He thereby drained most of the remaining blood from an already
anemic Iliadic artistic tradition.5 My purpose in this chapter is to continue this
survey into twentieth century popular culture, particularly representations of
the Iliad in film and television, leading up to the first decade of the third millen-
nium, which brought us Troy. I am particularly interested in the subdivisions of
the century, that is, the ranges of years which bracket various fads of pop cul-
ture that encouraged or discouraged mini-renascences of the classical tradition
and the Trojan saga in general and the Iliad in particular. Hopefully these subdivi-
sions will be of use in other, similar studies of ancient phenomena in twentieth-
century popular culture. But for the present, they help us to locate and categorize
the limited number of representations of the Iliad in popular culture and dem-
onstrate further that Petersens Troy belongs solidly in the Iliadic tradition.

1 Background

Some procedural matters first. The study of popular culture, particularly

the study of the legacy of Classics, does not by nature submit to the same
scholarly methodologies as does the long-practiced study of antiquity. The
products of popular culture as commonly defined todayprimarily commer-
cialized products designed for widespread dissemination, as well as ambitious
amateur or alternative works tailor-made for demographically determined
target audienceslack the two millennia or more of study focused upon the
mostly non-commercial artistic products of classical antiquity. This often
means that, while we have comprehensive and frequently revised lists of all the
important works produced in a given period during antiquity, we have less com-
plete and less reliable lists of modern works which lack the two-millennium
vetting process and, by nature, tend to be more numerous, scattered, and of
lower profile. This chapter, therefore, cannot pretend to be complete. Also,
most of the artistic products of antiquity became canonical when later schol-
ars and artists selected, judged, adapted, or discarded them according to the
preferences of the period. By contrast, the success and survival of popular

nozze dEnea e Lavinia (1641), as well as Lincoronazione di Poppea (1643), based on the Annals
of Tacitus. The absence of an opera based on the Iliad is notable.
5 For details, examples, and statistical evidence, see Solomon, The Vacillations of the Trojan
Myth, 521530.
226 Solomon

culture depends much more on an embrace by its audience, not the judgment
of scholars and artists. That means that popular culture is often measured
quantitatively rather than qualitatively and that works without much artistic
merit may be popular while others, whether meritorious or not, may not
achieve any popular acclaim.
We should also keep in mind that the production of a large-scale, Hollywood-
style costume epic costs more than any other contemporary artistic or commer-
cial enterprise. The cinemas dramatic predecessor was royally patronized opera,
but the cost of films like Troy, Lord of the Rings, and Avatar surely rivals that of
even the operatic celebration mounted for the wedding of Leopold I, Holy Roman
Emperor, and Margarita Teresa, daughter of King Philip IV of Spain, in 1666, which
was probably the most grandiose opera ever produced. This wedding, designed to
surpass the expenditures lavished upon the recent 1660 wedding of Louis XIV and
his Spanish Infanta, was to feature the massive production of Francesco Sbarras
free adaption of the ancient Cypria tradition. Two years in the making, the pre-
miere of Il pomo doro (The Golden Apple), set to music by Antonio Cesti and with
numerous attendant ballets, spanned three days. But even allowing for inflation,
its cost could hardly have exceeded the estimated $185 million needed to pro-
duce, advertise, and release Troy in 2004. Even if it were possible to perform a
detailed cost analysis and prove my supposition to be wrong, it is essential for us
to remember that Leopolds as well as Louis operatic productions were financed
through the coffers of imperial governments. The millions for Troy were raised
entirely at private commercial risk. Although the gross receipts from Troy would
ultimately reward its investors with nearly half a billion dollars in worldwide
receipts, in the entire history of the dramatic arts there has never been a genre
that demanded so much financial risk at the outset of a single project as popular
cinema.6 And because Troy was made in an era in which powerful entrepreneurs
and multinational corporations control the production of artistic enterprises, this
makes the selection of the subject matter for a high-profile, large-budget film a
very important decision. Those who make such a decision are therefore unlikely
to invest in subjects that are unexplored, unproven, or unlikely to succeed. We
will see that the track record of Homers Iliad was not at all exemplary.

2 Schliemanns Legacy

Heinrich Schliemann had begun excavating in earnest the historical site of

Troy at Hisarlik, Turkey, in 1871, and by the time of his death in 1890 the city had

6 http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/wbotitle.php?t=2341.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 227

been almost completely stripped of its mythological nature and, as a result,

much of its artistic inspiration. With press releases, newspaper articles, and
books, Schliemann heralded to the entire Western world a series of significant
discoveries. Late in 1880, the American publishing house Harper & Brothers
gave Schliemanns book Ilios more press coverage than their concurrent
release, Lew Wallaces Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ, which would develop into
an extraordinary bestseller. The reviewer in The New York Times, even if still
doubting that Schliemann had uncovered Homers Troy, makes it clear that
what was of interest in 1880 was not the mythological war but the search for its
historical site and the man searching for it:

Dr. Schliemanns theoryhas done much to make the story of his labors
interesting. It throws a halo of romance over what would else have been
but a record of archaeological explorations such as have of late become
somewhat monotonous. It also shows the explorer himself, not in the
character of an antiquarian overturning the earth in search of what
ancient treasures he may find, but as an enthusiastic admirer of Homer
seeking a foundation for the story of his poet-hero, and leaving no effort
unmade to point out to the world the scene of that wondrous tale.7

After Schliemanns death, work at Troy was continued by the less charismatic
and more precise Wilhelm Drpfeld and confirmed the ancient citys less
appealing historicity. In 1896 The New York Times reported on Drpfelds s tanding-
room-only lecture at Columbia University without the slightest hint at myth or
romance. Now there was no question that this was Homers Troy, but Homers
Troy had become merely a historical city and an archaeological site:

The question of the site of Homers Troy was reviewed by the lecturer.
On the site now proved to be the place where Homers Troy stood the
excavations have revealed nine strata of earth and ruins, representing
recognizably distinct periods in the history of the three cities that have
there been builtfirst the prehistoric, before Homers time; then the
Greek, the City of Priam; lastly, the Roman city. The citadel of Troy he
held to be the most interesting group of ruins now accessible to the inves-
tigator of classical antiquity and of ruins still more remote.

The article mentions the Iliad only once, and in conjunction with Helen:

7 The Land of Homer, The New York Times (December 19, 1880), 4.
228 Solomon

In the sixth stratum have been found the remains of the Homeric Troy,
the city of which the siege and capture, with varying fortunes of the war
for the punishment of Helens ravisher, formed the subject of the Iliad.8

Troys popular legacy reflects these different traditions: the legacy of the Iliad,
especially when compared to the legacy of the Odyssey; the legacy of Helen,
and the legacy of Schliemann himself. For this portion of our survey, let us take
as a starting point Jane Davidson Reids The Oxford Guide to Classical Mythology
in the Arts, 13001990s. This compendium contains an enormous list of works
that treat Greco-Roman mythology in the fine arts, music, dance, and litera-
ture. Derived from hundreds of previous scholarly compilations and studies,
Reids compendium is not complete or error-free, but it will serve our purpose
as a standard for comparison.
The dearth of Reids entries under such headings as Trojan War: General
List and Achilles is striking. Under the former are listed only seven entries
between 1870 and the 1920s, a period which produced hundreds upon hun-
dreds of poems, novels, paintings, etchings, drawings, operas, ballets, musicals,
songs, plays, dramatic spectaculars, and films involving classical myths. And of
these seven, most have little to do with the plot of the Iliad, none had a large
concept or any significant influence, popular impact, or lengthy shelf life, and
one was never completed and another never published.
The first, a polyptych by the Pre-Raphaelite Edward Burne-Jones called The
Story of Troy, depicted only pre- and post-Iliadic events (Helen Carried Off by
Paris, Judgment of Paris, Helen Captive at the Burning of Troy). Begun at
the outset of an uncharacteristically unproductive seven-year period in Burne-
Joness life, the project was commenced in 1870 (just as Schliemann was peti-
tioning for his Troy excavation) but never finished, although Burne-Jones
heard a lecture by and even had a private discussion with Jane Ellen Harrison
on the subject.9
The second, Aubrey De Veres poem The Theater at Argos (1884), is a son-
net, whose fifth line refers merely to The old Homeric hosts, with spear and
lance. The third, Otto Goldschmidts setting of The Tale of Troy, was hardly an
opera, as listed in Reid. It provides additional evidence that towards the end
of the nineteenth century the Iliad did not lend itself easily or often to dra-
matic adaptation, remained primarily in the academic environment, and usu-
ally played a secondary role to the Odyssey. The work was written as a fundraiser

8 Ruins of Ancient Troy, The New York Times (November 10, 1896), 3.
9 Lady Georgiana Burne-Jones, Memorials of Edward Burne-Jones, vol. 2: 18681898 (New York:
Macmillan, 1904; rpt. 1906), 157.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 229

for the creation of a new department in Kings College for the higher educa-
tion of women and was performed once in English and once in ancient Greek.
George Charles Winter Warr, who would publish a translation of the Oresteia
in 1900, wrote the libretto. Even the writer for The Times recognized the prob-
lems apparently inherent in rendering a dramatic adaptation of the Iliad:

As the narrative of the Trojan war and the events springing out of it
is voluminous, and as, moreover, no ingenious commentator has ever
suspected Homer of writing for the stage, it is manifest that the task of
casting the Tale of Troy into dramatic shape is one demanding the exer-
cise of sound judgment. Professor Warr has performed it in the manner
least likely to offend scholastic prejudice, and at the same time most con-
ducive to dramatic effect.10

Much of the performance consisted of tableaux that required nearly eighty

volunteer players, of whom only a handful spoke or sang. The program con-
sisted of an initial tableau, The Pledge of Aphrodite, and concluded with a
lengthy series of songs and tableaux derived from the Odyssey. In between
there were four scenes inspired by the latter portions of the Iliad: Helen at the
Scaean Gate, the Parting of Hector; Priam on his Way to the Achaean Camp;
Priam in the Tent of Achilles; and The Mourning for Hector at the Scaean
Gate. The tableaux were interspersed with three songsPrayer to Athene,
Elegy for Patroclus, Dirge for Hectorcomposed not by Goldschmidt, who
set only the initial tableau, but by Walter Parratt. The work was performed
once more in 1886 and then published in 1888 as Echoes of Hellas, essentially a
libretto with descriptions and piano reductions. Iliadic material comprises
only six of its sixty-five pages, the majority of which are dedicated to The Story
of Orestes, added in 1886.
In his review of Echoes of Hellas, classical scholar Richard C. Jebb addressed
the particular difficulties he observed in excerpting epics and dramas but
voted in favor of this experimental Iliadic adaptation:

An epic is perhaps a more favourable subject than a drama for the pur-
pose of representation by excerpts. When the dramatiser places before us
the great scene between Achilles and Priam, he is doing a thing different
in kind from what the poet has done, and is vivifying that portion of the
epic narrative in a new way. But when scenes are detached from the tex-
ture of a play, each scene inevitably loses something of the effect which,

10 The Tale of Troy, The Times (May 30, 1883), 10.

230 Solomon

in the dramatists conception, belonged to it as part of a single action.

Prof. Warr has done all perhaps that could be done to surmount this dis-
advantage; and if, in the result, we prefer the Tale of Troy to the Story
of Orestes, it must be allowed that the latter, in the shape given to it here,
forms at least a splendid series of impressive pictures.11

The fourth, Edward Bowles Troy Again, performed first at St. Georges Hall in
London on March 13, 1888, was by genre an extravaganza, as Reid specifies,
but the source she cites, Allardyce Nicolls six-volume A History of English
Drama, makes clear that it was an amateur production.12 The fifth, Samuel
Butlers 1898 translation of Homers Iliad, preceded his Odyssey translation by
two years but followed upon his much more widely disseminated and influen-
tial book The Authoress of the Odyssey of 1897, which developed his earlier
hypothesis that Nausicaa was the author of the epic.13 The sixth, Max Klingers
Die Geburt von Trojas Unheil (The Birth of Troys Misfortune), was a pen-
and-ink drawing published in 1907 in Epithalamia. It illustrated a text by his
companion Elsa Asenijeff that was termed a masterpiece in Burlington
Magazine.14 The seventh, Rupert Brookes fragment And Priam and His Fifty
Sons, was unpublished. The Collected Poems of Rupert Brooke includes the
poem Menelaus and Helen, but this offers only two stanzas on the love tri-
angle involving Helen, Menelaus, and Paris.15
Similarly, under Achilles: General List Reid lists another five, under
Achilles: Wrath of Achilles another eight, and under Achilles: Return to
Battle none. Most of these are minor works as well. Of note is only Karl
Goldmarks opera Die Kriegsgefangene (The [Female] Prisoner of War), the
premiere of which was conducted by Gustav Mahler at Viennas Hofoperntheater

11 Richard C. Jebb, review of George C. Warr, Echoes of Hellas (London: Ward, 1887), Classical
Review, 2 (1888), 248249.
12 Allardyce Nicoll, A History of English Drama, 16601900, vol. 5: A History of Late Nineteenth
Century Drama, 18501900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1946), 271; cf. Walter
Hamilton (ed.), Parodies of the Works of English and American Authors, vol. 6 (London:
Reeves & Turner, 1889), 343.
13 Samuel Butler, The Authoress of the Odyssey, Where and When She Wrote, Who She Was, the
Use She Made of the Iliad and How the Poem Grew Under Her Hands (London: Longmans,
Green, 1897; several rpts.); cf. Samuel Butler, Lorigine siciliana dell Odissea (Acireale:
Donzuso, 1893). His hypothesis was earlier espoused in Butler, A Lecture on the Humour of
Homer (Cambridge: Metcalfe, 1892).
14 Hans Wolfgang Singer, Art in Germany, The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, 12
(1907), 116118, at 118.
15 Rupert Brooke, The Collected Poems of Rupert Brooke (New York: Lane, 1920), 7677.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 231

on January 17, 1899. Like David Benioff in his screenplay for Troy, librettist Ernst
Schlicht (the pseudonym of Rev. Alfred Formey) expands the role of Briseis
and, like Warr in his The Tale of Troy, elaborated on events that took place in
the last few books of the Iliad.16 The appeals of Thetis and Priam in Iliad 24 are
not successful in convincing Achilles to surrender Hectors body for burial, so
the ghost of Patroclus visits Briseis to make her more persuasive. Even though
Achilles fellow warriors object to giving up Hectors body, Briseis ultimately
prevails. At the conclusion of the second and final act, Briseis and Achilles sing
an extended duet, professing their love for each other.17 Although of consider-
able interest for the tradition of the Trojan saga, the influential contemporary
music critic Eduard Hanslick described the opera itself as tiresome and bor-
ing with long and monotonous declamations sustained by constant orches-
tral polyphony.18 The Allgemeine Zeitung noted that it lacked depth, body,
power, and grandeur.19 Henry-Louis de La Grange in his biography of Mahler
reports that Mahler himself got no pleasure from the performance, for he
despised both Goldmark and his work. So did Brahms.20
Two relatively high-profile works deserve mention in this context. First is
Andrew Langs narrative poem Helen of Troy (1882).21 Representing an aca-
demic perspective, Lang, a Fellow of Merton College, Oxford, would later pub-
lish several scholarly works on Homer and on epic and archaic Greek poetry,
including a prose translation of the Iliad co-written with Walter Leaf and
Ernest Myers.22 This rather popularizing work recounts the pre-and extra-
Iliadic activities of Helen, Paris, and Oenone in rhyming couplets, finishing
with the sack of Troy and the reunion of Helen and Menelaus. It consists of six
books of multiple stanzas built of eight pentameters each. Lang describes the
events of the Iliad from Achilles quarrel with Agamemnon to the funeral of
Hector, but this passage amounts to less than seven percent of the total num-
ber of stanzas. The other is Camille Saint-Sanss Hlne (1904), generically

16 Goldmark had originally intended to name his opera Briseis until he learned that Chabrier
had already used that name for his incomplete opera (the plot of which is set during the
reign of Hadrian and does not include a role for Achilles); cf. Henry-Louis de La Grange,
Mahler (Garden City: Doubleday, 1973), vol. 1, 921 note 11.
17 Cf. the summary in Arthur Elson, Modern Composers of Europe (Boston: Page, 1904),
6566.
18 Roger Dettmer, Goldmark: Die Knigin von Saba, Fanfare, 4 (1981), 122.
19 La Grange, Mahler, vol. 1, 500.
20 La Grange, Mahler, vol. 1, 500.
21 Andrew Lang, Helen of Troy (London: Bell/New York: Scribners, 1882).
22 Andrew Lang, Walter Leaf, and Ernest Myers, The Iliad of Homer (London: Macmillan,
1882); Lang, Homer and the Epic (London: Longmans, Green, 1893).
232 Solomon

described as an opera, but one which conformed to current fashion as a one-

act Pome Lyrique in six tableaux. Saint-Sans designed his work specifically
to restore Helen to some level of propriety after she had been mocked and
parodied in Jacques Offenbachs extremely successful 1864 comedy La Belle
Hlne, but it did not succeed nearly as well.23 The reviewer in Punch lamented
its lack of dramatic action and its somber tone.24
Of lesser importance but worth mentioning in connection with popular cul-
ture is the tradition of rendering an older, more difficult text into popular ver-
nacular, as Charles Lamb had done a century earlier when he published The
Adventures of Ulysses in 1808, followed by the likes of Gustav Schwab in
Germany and Thomas Bulfinch in the middle of the century. Other authors
further simplified and also romanticized the narratives for children, particu-
larly in illustrated volumes. Agnes Cook Gale retold the Iliad for children in
Rand McNallys fully illustrated Achilles and Hector of 1903 (reissued in 1930),
and Padraic Colum had rendered both the Iliad and the Odyssey into The
Childrens Homer in 1918.
The preceding list of works inspired by Homers Iliad is not complete, but
were it an archaeologists exploratory trench, it would certainly suggest that a
more concentrated and significant concentration of finds lay elsewhere. By
comparison, the Odyssey inspired much more notable artistic products during
the same period. August Bungert, for instance, had originally planned to write
and compose a monumental operatic hexalogy Die Homerische Welt (The
World of Homer), beginning with two operas derived from Iliadic material
Achilles and Klytemnestrabut never completed them.25 He did complete
the four operas derived from the Odyssey: Kirke (1898), Nausikaa (1901)
inspired in part by Butlers bookOdysseus Heimkehr (Odysseus Return,
1896), and Odysseus Tod (Odysseus Death, 1903).26 In 1913 came the pre-
miereof Gabriel Faurs operatic Pnlope, which was revived several times in

23 Brian Rees, Camille Saint-Sans: A Life (London: Chatto & Windus, 1999), 355; cf. James
Harding, Saint-Sans and His Circle (London: Chapman & Hall, 1965), 205. See Alexander
Faris, Jacques Offenbach (London: Faber & Faber, 1980), 112114, for Saint-Sans statement
that Paris took leave of its senses and for criticisms from the eminent French drama
critic Jules Janin, who lamented La Belle Hlne as a sacrilege, a desecration of
antiquity.
24 Operatic Notes, Punch, or the London Charivari (June 29, 1904), 463.
25 Cf. Herr Bungerts Odysseus, The Musical Times, 38 (February 1, 1897), 104 and 113.
26 See Christoph Hust, August Bungert: Ein Komponist im Deutschen Kaiserreich (Tutzing:
Schneider, 2005), 291350, for a recent analysis and 478486 for the Iliad material in par-
ticular. For Goldmark and Bungert, see Tagesgeschichte: Musikbrief, Musikalisches
Wochenblatt, 30 (February 2, 1899), 8284.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 233

subsequent decades. The Odyssey also inspired two literary monuments of the
first half of the twentieth century: James Joyces Ulysses (1922) and Nikos
Kazantzakis Odyssey: A Modern Sequel (19251938).27 More to our concern, the
first few years of narrative cinema produced three films realizing episodes
from the Odyssey in France and Italy: Georges Mlis Lle de Calypso: Ulysse
et le gant Polyphme (English titles: Ulysses and the Giant Polyphemus
and The Mysterious Island, 1905), Charles Le Bargys Le retour dUlysse (The
Return of Ulysses, 1908), and Odissea (1911), featuring and directed by Giuseppe
De Liguoro.
One of the obvious reasons for the Odysseys dominance, beginning with
the post-Humanism era, is that this Homeric epic offers dramatists the essen-
tial female roles the Iliad lacks. Whereas the role of Briseis in the latter had
to be expanded in the Schlicht-Goldmark opera, the former offers roles for a
faithful wife and two femmes fatales, not to mention the heros mother and his
protector goddess. Another is that the events recounted by Odysseus in Books
912 in particular suggest the kind of visual inspiration that would attract
filmmakers from Georges Mlis to the Coen brothers. In addition, while
Schliemann helped to demythologize the Iliad with his Troy excavations, his
1868 and 1878 explorations of Ithaca did not unearth enough material remains
to render the mythological Odysseus into a clear historical figure. Moreover,
many of the best-known passages in the Odyssey take place not on Ithaca but
in undiscoverable quasi-fantasy lands. And, in the decade in which moving
pictures were invented, Odysseus was already riding a wave of popular appeal
in the success of The Worlds Desire (1890), a novel written by adventure writer
Sir H. Rider Haggard in collaboration with the aforementioned Andrew Lang.28
The romantic appeal the Iliad lacked seems to have been stolen away
by Helen, no doubt augmented by the famous 1873 photograph of Sophie
Schliemann wearing what were called the Jewels of Helen. From that year
there developed a steady output of works of art depicting, describing, adoring,
and condemning Helen that would persist, with occasional and brief periods
of dormancy, into the 1950s. Reids Guide lists some fifty Helen items from
Benots twelfth-century romance to Offenbachs 1864 opra buffe, La Belle
Hlne, a rate of about seven works of art per century. From the publication of

27 On the Odyssey tradition see Bernd Seidensticker, Aufbruch zu neuen Ufern:

Transformationen der Odysseusgestalt in der literarischen Moderne, in Bernd
Seidensticker and Martin Vhler (eds.), Urgeschichten der Moderne: Die Antike im 20.
Jahrhundert (Stuttgart: Metzler, 2001), 249270.
28 H. Rider Haggard and Andrew Lang, The Worlds Desire (London: Longmans, Green, 1890),
takes Odysseus on an adventure in Egypt where he encounters Helen.
234 Solomon

Sophie Schliemanns photograph to the end of the century, just twenty-seven

years, there were an additional thirty works, or more than one per year. We
have already seen the importance of the Helen character in Burne-Jones
polyptych, Warrs The Tale of Troy, Rupert Brookes poetry, and Saint-Sans
Hlne. She also plays an important role in Langs Helen of Troy and in The
Worlds Desire.
Schliemann himself became a celebrity, especially in the latter half of the
twentieth century. We are moving now beyond the original fifty-plus year
period, but a considerable number of light biographies and novels appeared in
which Schliemann was the romantic lead: Robert Paynes The Gold of Troy
(1959), Marjorie Braymers The Walls of Windy Troy (1960), Lynn and Gray
Pooles One Passion, Two Loves (1966), Arnold C. Brackmans The Dream of Troy
(1974), Irving Stones The Greek Treasure (1975), Piero Venturas and Gian Paolo
Ceseranis In Search of Troy (1985), Giovanni Casellis In Search of Troy (1999),
and Laura Schlitz The Hero Schliemann (2006). By 1986 Schliemann had even
become the subject of popular controversy, not just in the accusation that he
suffered from severe personality disorders but also in the judgment that his
archaeological method was unscientific and unethical.29 Popular focus shifted
again in 1993 when the Trojan gold, which Schliemann had smuggled out of
Turkey in 1873 and later donated to a museum in Berlin but which had disap-
peared in May of 1945, unexpectedly reappeared in the Pushkin Museum in
Moscow and was put on public display in 1996. The following year brought
attempts by the governments of Turkey and Germany to have the Trojan
treasure returned to their rightful owners. All of this press coverage kept
Schliemann, Troy, and, to a lesser extent, Homer in the limelight, but not nec-
essarily the Iliad.30
The period after Schliemanns first landing at Troy in 1870 is critical for our
investigation. Most of the genres of popular culture were thoroughly reformu-
lated, and most of the new media by which popular twentieth-century art

29 Especially William M. Calder III, Schliemann on Schliemann: A Study in the Use of

Sources, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies, 13 (1972), 335353; and William M. Calder
III and David A. Traill (eds.), Myth, Scandal, and History: The Heinrich Schliemann
Controversy and a First Edition of the Mycenaean Diary (Detroit: Wayne State University
Press, 1986).
30 Cf. Caroline Moorehead, The Lost Treasures of Troy (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson,
1994) = Lost and Found: The 9,000 Treasures of Troy: Heinrich Schliemann and the Gold That
Got Away (1996; rpt. New York: Penguin, 1997), and Vladimir Tolstikov and Mikhail Treister,
The Gold of Troy: Searching for Homers Fabled City, tr. Christina Sever and Mila Bonnichsen
(New York: Abrams, 1996).
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 235

would be produced and distributed came into existence. The consumer culture
as we know it today became a significant force in the economy.
In particular, Thomas Edison either invented or developed (or both) electric
lighting (18791882), the wax phonograph player (18871890), the motion-
picture camera (1891), and the disc phonograph and records (19101914). In the
same period came Emile Berliners gramophone (1887), George Eastmans
mass-produced box camera (1889), Vladimir Poulsens magnetized steel record-
ing tape (1899), the radio receiver (1901), comic books (1904), radio tuners
(1916), and television (1923), not to mention the automobile (1885), assembly-
line production (1908), and the car radio (1929). All of these inventions would
play an important role in conveying popular culture in numbers, speeds, and
varieties hitherto unimaginable.
One of the lessons learned in the high-tech era of the past few decades is that
very often an enterprise which is successful in the early stage of a commercial
revolution tends to maintain its predominance and to grow significantly. Edisons
inventions, along with his General Electric Company (founded in 1886) and
Edison Studios (1894), followed a similar trajectory. Companies and products
formed and developed during this period were the first of their kind and remain
as household names or dominant brands well over a century later: Western
Electric (1872), Barnes & Noble (1873), Blackwell (1879), Parker Brothers (1883),
AT&T (1885), Sears (1886), Westinghouse Electric (1886), Columbia Records
(1888), Kodak (1892), Eveready (1896), Path (1896), ibm (1896), Deutsche
Grammophon (1898), Ford (1903), Loews (1904), Bell & Howell (1907), and oth-
ers, all ultimately involved with the mass dissemination of popular culture.
The period between 1870 and the 1920s was therefore extremely important
for the growth of popular culture particularly in the United States, where non-
commercial, non-popular (i.e. fine) arts did not have such a long-standing tra-
dition and where no monarchical or imperial traditions existed. This era
witnessed the formation of numerous artistic production companies. From
1878 the successful musical comedies of Harrigan and Hart and their Mulligan
Guard began depicting everyday life among the lower classes of New York, the
very demographic which formed their audiences. Just after the traditional
Metropolitan Opera of New York was formed in 1883, Henry Lee Higginson ini-
tiated the Boston Pops in 1885. The birth and growth of the American film
industry was soon to follow. Its first venues were nickelodeons, the term itself
promoting the popular nature of the institution. The first of these opened in
1905, and by 1908 there were some 8,000 nickelodeons, including Louis B.
Mayers Orpheum Theater near Boston.
Clearly this was a unique situation in the history of the arts. During these
unparalleled years the nature of the arts themselves and the artistic climate in
236 Solomon

the United States in particular changed so drastically and developed so rapidly

that entrepreneurs who established themselves in this new climate, particu-
larly in the dramatic arts, could maintain their fiefdoms for a generation.
George M. Cohan debuted on Broadway in 1901 and had twenty-eight Broadway
musicals to his credit before he was thirty years old. Louis B. Mayer had
the largest theater chain in New England by 1916, formed Metro Pictures
Corporation in 1916, moved to Hollywood in 1918, became head of Metro-
Goldwyn-Mayer in 1924, and was one of the most powerful men in Hollywood
for almost three more decades. Similarly, to develop the recorded music indus-
try, Eldridge Johnson, who had incorporated his Victor Talking Machine
Company in part by subsuming Berliner Gramophone, made Enrico Caruso
into Americas first successful recording artist, his voice beloved by uncultured
masses who never before had had any inclination to attend an operatic perfor-
mance. His Masters Voice had popularized and commercialized opera in the
United States in just a few years.
Such developments had a profound effect on artistic subject matter. Any
topic that offered or promised mass appeal and massive profits would have
the opportunity to become a huge popular success immediately and to remain
so for years or decades. In popular culture, the timing of a products release
often makes the difference between success and failure. Busby Berkeleys
musicals delighted Depression-era film audiences with their tough-egg, poor-
kid heroines who persevered and made it to the top.31 Cecil B. DeMille per-
fectly timed his production of Samson and Delilah (1949), his first biblical
spectaclein two decades, by introducing it at the outset of the American post-
war boom and helping to create the era of ancient quasi-biblical spectacles
on screen.
The period of innovation after 1870, however, was not the proper time to
launch a successful popular venture based on the Iliad. Instead, its technical
and artistic revolution would cater to the general profile of the American
public in the decades surrounding the turn of the nineteenth century. Ben-Hur:
A Tale of the Christ, written by Lew Wallace and published by Harper and
Brothers in 1880, blazed a new and unparalleled trail in the history of American
popular culture. It provided the exciting action of a naval battle and chariot
race, motherly and romantic love, a femme fatale, and an uplifting theology.
Harper sold over one million volumes over three decades and then negotiated
an unprecedented sale of an additional one million volumes through Sears in
1913. Wallaces novel inspired a burgeoning crop of products, companies, and

31 Examples include 42nd Street (1933) and Gold Diggers of 1933, which were followed the
same year by Roman Scandals.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 237

brands from coast to coast. For example, Coney Island opened a ride called
The Ben-Hur Race, and John Philip Sousas band recorded E.T. Paulls Ben-
Hur Chariot Race for several labels. Marcus Klaw and Abraham Erlanger took
a license from Wallace to produce a Broadway version of the novel in 1899,
complete with naval battle and chariot race. This spectacular was seen by mil-
lions of people from San Francisco to London for the next two decades. In 1907
its popularity was transferred to the newest artistic medium of the century,
when Kalem released an eleven-minute film illustrating several episodes. The
success of Ben-Hur paved the way for Quo Vadis? Henryk Sienkiewicz 1897
novel in turn inspired a Broadway play in 1900, an opera in 1909, and Enrico
Guazzonis precedent-setting blockbuster film of 1913. Bulwer-Lyttons 1834
novel The Last Days of Pompeii would enjoy a similar proliferation, particularly
in film.
Homers Iliad never sailed on that ship. Its popularity as dramatic inspira-
tion was at a nadir in the wake of the Schliemann and Drpfeld excavations.
Because it chiefly offered intense hand-to-hand combat and existential
dilemma, it was not suitable for popular exploitation. It was not to gain a foot-
hold in popular culture for many decades.

3 Screen History

The twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty-first would eventually
integrate the Iliad into popular culture. We may conveniently divide this era
into eleven periods. This chronological division will serve to organize my dis-
cussion for the remainder of this chapter.

3.1 Before and After 1900: Experimental Short Silent Films

This period includes such experimental shorts as Edisons Cupid and Psyche
(1897) and Robert W. Pauls The Last Days of Pompeii (1900). The latter film is
lost, while the former provides a single tableau with two dancers and lasts less
than one minute. Similarly, Georges Hatots Le jugement de Pris (The
Judgment of Paris, 1902) runs for less than one minute, during which the three
goddesses present themselves one after the other to Paris. The Iliad is not rep-
resented on screen in this period. In the world of theater, however, Stanislaw
Wyspiaski spent many months during 1903 writing his third mythological
play, Achilleis. To prepare, Wyspiaski made a study of the Iliad along with
Wilhelm Heinrich Roschers mythological Lexicon and several works by
Nietzsche and produced a series of drawings as well. However, the play was not
produced on stage until more than a decade later.
238 Solomon

3.2 1907 to the Early 1920s: Ambitious Italian and American Silents
The period begins with the American Ben-Hur (1907) and the Italian The Last
Days of Pompeii (1908). Chariot racing and a volcanic eruption presented film-
makers with the opportunity for visual excitement they could realize via live
action or editing effects. In the five years following the innovative Ambrosio/
Maggi film, several different versions of The Last Days of Pompeii would be pro-
duced in Italy,32 and even Giovanni Pastrones blockbuster Cabiria (1914) would
feature a volcanic eruption just a few minutes into the film. The years 19011914
produced more than a dozen historical films ranging in ancient subject matter
from the ancient Near East to the Roman period. Three films derived from the
Odyssey: Charles Le Bargys French Le retour dUlysse (1908), Giuseppe De
Liguoros Odissea (1911), and Theo Frenkels English Telemachus (1911).
Although Pastrones La caduta di Troia (The Fall of Troy, 1911) begins with a
depiction of Homer reciting his verses, its story concerns mostly the romance
between Paris and Helen, the Trojan Horse episode, and a fiery climax la The
Last Days of Pompeii.33 In the United States the choice of subject matter was
similar. Most films set in antiquity were taken from history or theater. Of the
few that were mythological, it was the Odyssey and not the Iliad which was
represented. The Triumph of Venus (1918) dramatized the romantic entangle-
ment of Venus, Mars, and Vulcan in the eighth book of the Odyssey. In the
1920s, several films featured parallel ancient and modern stories, often using
the latter as a morality play echoing the former. But in Robert Z. Leonards
Circe the Enchantress (1924), based on the novel by Vicente Blasco Ibez,
again it was the Odyssey, not the Iliad, that provided the inspiration.

3.3 Mid- to Late 1920s: Mature Silents

The economic boom that had begun by the mid-1920s helped to finance a
number of epic films, including the 1925 version of Quo Vadis? directed by
Gabriellino DAnnunzio and Georg Jacoby, and mgms Ben-Hur (1925), directed
by Fred Niblo at a cost of almost $4 million. The year before, Manfred Noa

32 E.g. Gli ultimi giorni di Pompei, directed by Eleuterio Rodolfi, and Ione, o gli ultimi giorni di
Pompei, directed by Giovanni Enrico Vidali. See Maria Wyke, Screening Ancient Rome in
the New Italy, in Catharine Edwards (ed.), Roman Presences: Receptions of Rome in
European Culture, 17891945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999; rpt. 2007),
188204, at 196198.
33 A number of dramatic plays were written during this same period in Europe: Nausikaa
(1906) and Achill (1910), two German verse tragedies by Ernst Rosmer (pseudonym of Elsa
Bernstein); Der Zorn des Achilles (1909), a German verse tragedy by Wilhelm Schmidtbonn;
and Phoenix (1923), an English tragicomedy by Lascelles Abercrombie. None were partic-
ularly successful on stage.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 239

directed his Helena (1924) in Bavaria. This starred Edy Darclea as Helen and
was released in two parts, Der Raub der Helena (The Rape of Helen) and Der
Untergang Trojas (The Fall of Troy). The former part focuses, as often, on the
Cypria, but it also includes a chariot race. The second part does not at all pre-
tend to be a literal version of the Iliad; Hans Kysers script is said to be frei
bearbeitet nach der Ilias des Homer (freely adapted from Homers Iliad).
Nonetheless, he includes the touching scene in Iliad 6 where the helmeted
Hector frightens his young son. Helen, hated by the Trojans, is still the main
focus of the narrative. Achilles is portrayed as a bare-chested strongman bend-
ing iron with his bare hands. His anger results from being forbidden to fight a
duel against Hector and thereby winning the crown of glory: possessing Helen.
Achilles orders music and dancing girls to drown out the sound of the battle.
The narrative then dwells on the death of Patroclus, Achilles grief, and subse-
quent revenge on Hector, whom he kills by throwing a spear through his neck
from a distance. Iliad 24 is enhanced by having Hecuba, Andromache, and
Astyanax plead at the knees of Achilles. And the funeral of Hector is an elabo-
rate affair attended by Achilles, who finally gains the crown but also gets a
poisoned arrow in his heel. Much of this takes place before or in the enormous
set of Troy. Despite its ambitions, the film was not a commercial success.
The year 1927 produced Alexander Kordas American film adaptation of
John Erskines popular 1925 novel The Private Life of Helen of Troy, a light-
hearted accounting of Helen. Apparently the Iliads best entrance ticket into
the world of popular culture was to feature and enhance the romantic ele-
ments of the Epic Cycle, the prequel and sequel of Homers epic. Despite such
expansion, however, the scales of popular commercial value had not fully
tipped towards the Iliad. Kordas film fell into obscurity, and only twenty-seven
minutes of it survive today.

3.4 1930 to 1945: The Great Depression and World War II

The horrors of World War I, the War to End All Wars, and the looming threat of
the next one returned warfare to public and intellectual consciousness and pro-
vided the circumstances for a different kind of adaptation of the Iliad in Europe.
This was Jean Giraudouxs 1935 play, La guerre de Troie naura pas lieu (The
Trojan War Will Not Take Place). Once again Homers original yields to romance,
but Giraudoux also recalibrated Homers war epic by infusing a call for peace.
Pre-figuring Petersens Hector, who attempts to speak against war to both Paris
and Priam, Giraudoux turns Hector into a pacifist. Giraudoux contaminates the
Iliadic tradition as well by depicting Helen as the alluring temptress of Troilus.
He thereby develops one of the Trojan sagas leading female (and feminine)
characters, who has only a relatively small and barely romantic part in the Iliad,
240 Solomon

and greatly increases the role of Troilus. Giraudouxs play was not filmed, but
the next period would provide both a dramatic and a television adaptation.
Troilus, although he is mentioned only briefly in Homer, plays a major role
in the series of anti-Homeric late medieval and Renaissance romances set
before, during, and after the Iliads portion of the Trojan War. Accounts of
the romance between Troilus and Bressida (Briseis) seem to originate in the
twelfth century with Benot de Sainte-Maure andBressida now changed to
Cressidacontinue through Boccaccio, Chaucer, and Shakespeare, on to the
twenty-first century. When Warner Brothers was searching for a Troy script in
2001, the original story Michael Tabb submitted was based on Shakespeares
Troilus & Cressida and Homers The Iliad.34
In the United States, the Depression of the 1930s, its concurrent interna-
tional isolationism, and then the war against European enemies diminished
the influence of the European and the classical traditions considerably.
Interestingly, an Italian studio produced the lone mythological and Homeric
release in the United States just at the outset of this period. This was the vener-
able Itala Film, founded in 1907, which set up a short-lived production office in
California (La Itala Film Company di Hollywood) to produce La regina di
Sparta (The Queen of Sparta, 1931). This was another film about Helen of Troy,
directed by Manfred Noa, who had directed the German Helena. La regina di
Sparta was a silent film enhanced by a synchronized musical score and inter-
polated dialogue. The New York Times review thought that the film was so poor
in every department that an honest examination of it would seem cruel.35

3.5 1949 to 1965: The American Studio Era

In 1947 Colgate-Palmolive-Peet introduced Ajax cleanser, which was to be
described as stronger than dirt. The allusion to the strongest Greek warrior at
Troy, albeit by his Latin name, reflects the relatively serious attitude towards
the Iliad which Schliemanns excavations had brought about.36 The product, of
course, is common and commercial, but the idea that a very strong commer-
cially advertised product was named after the strongest Greek in the Iliad con-
forms to the state of late-1940s popular culture.

34 http://www.joblo.com/scripts/TabbsTROY-Final.pdf, accessed 9-24-2011.

35 a.d.s., An Italian Production, The New York Times (February 23, 1931), 21.
36 In 1917 the B.J. Johnson Soap Company renamed itself Palmolive after its successful line of
soaps made from palm oil and olive oil. Their magazine advertisements often featured
modern women imagining themselves or receiving beauty counsel from Cleopatra, but
not Helen. See Sandra Vandermerwe and J. Carter Powis, Colgate-Palmolive: Cleopatra,
Harvard Business School Cases (January 1, 1990; March 18, 1993), 124.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 241

In popular drama, a contemporary example of this relatively serious

approach was the cbs television program You Are There, originally a 1947 radio
program [cbs Is There] reconfigured for television in 1953 and hostedor
rather, reportedby anchorman Walter Cronkite. Historical events were
dramatized as if they were occurring live, with cbs correspondents reporting
from the scene. The first radio series, originally a brief summer replacement of
only seven episodes, began with The Assassination of President Lincoln and
ended with The Last Day of Pompeii. When it returned in the winter as a
regular series, the eighteenth episode was The Assassination of Julius Caesar,
the twenty-second The Death of Socrates, and the twenty-seventh The Fall
of Troy, broadcast on April 25, 1948. The television version aired on December
20, 1953.
The Iliad would also provide the basis for an episode of Omnibus during
the Golden Age of American television, when all three networks were regu-
larly producing adult educational programming. Sponsored in part by the
Ford Foundation, Omnibus focused on the arts and sciences, included inter-
views with celebrity artists (particularly Leonard Bernstein), and occasionally
offered original dramas. Its Iliad episode, broadcast on April 3, 1955, had a
script by Andrew K. Lewis, a veteran television writer. But it was not well
reviewed:

Omnibus set out heroically to recreate Homers Iliad, and for 90 minutes
the poetry was mostly drowned out in a clatter of tin swords on tin shields
as Trojan and Greek struggled on the plain and seashore of Troy. The
Trojans lost the war, but they won what few acting honors were available:
Frederick Rolf displayed both majesty and grief as King Priam, while
Michael Higgins doomed Hector seemed far more a man and soldier
than his rival, Achilles.37

This was also the period in which Giraudouxs play was performed on stage
and on live television, the latter adapted by British playwright Christopher Fry.
His version, called Tiger at the Gates, opened in London in June, 1955, and in
New York the following October.38

37 Radio: The Week in Review, Time (April 18, 1955), 80. Also quoted in William Hawes,
Filmed Television Drama, 19521958 (Jefferson: McFarland, 2002), 18.
38 Tiger at Gates Opens in London, The New York Times (June 3, 1955), 27; Tiger at the
Gates, The New York Times (September 11, 1955) Sunday Magazine, 20. The television ver-
sion was broadcast in New York and Los Angeles in 1960 and 1961, for which see Val Adams,
Tiger at Gates Is Listed for tv, The New York Times (January 26, 1960), 67. The play was
242 Solomon

In 1950 Albert Kanter, the founder and publisher of the Classics Illustrated
series, published The Iliad as the 77th novel adapted to comic book format.
(Some printings have Homers Iliad on the cover.) The post-war period, at
least at first, brought an Iliad renascence to relatively well-educated Americans.
One of the best-selling poetic translations in the history of American academic
publishing emerged at this very time, the University of Chicago edition of the
Iliad translated by Richmond Lattimore, published initially in 1951. As with
more popular artistic products, the timing of its release was ideal in that there
was a sizable and expanding demographic, particularly students and educated
adults, eager for a new and critically acclaimed product that was enjoyable,
affordable, and accessible and suited contemporary interests.
In 1961 Folkways Records issued Album FL9985, on which J.F.C. Richards,
Associate Professor of Greek and Latin at Columbia, read selections of
Homerthe encounters between Hector and Andromache (Iliad 6.391496)
and Achilles and Priam (Il. 24.468570), and additional selections from the
Odysseyin ancient Greek.39 This demonstrates how the serious nature and
tradition of the Iliad gave it a special place on the commercially educational
fringes of American popular culture. Nonetheless, before Folkways felt com-
fortable recording and releasing an album in ancient Greek, they first had
Richards issue such albums as Essentials of Latin (2), Odes of Horace,
Selections from Virgil, and Selections from Ovid, and, for their first Greek
album, Ancient Greek PoetryTragedy, Comedy, Lyric, Elegiac and Iambic
Poetry.
It is difficult to estimate the extent to which the educational and high-brow
underpinnings of the Iliad tradition in the middle of the twentieth century
enabled the proliferation of films that followed the commercial success of
DeMilles 1949 Biblical spectacle Samson and Delilah for the next sixteen years.
Certainly many factors were involved, not least DeMilles re-introduction to
the screen of the biblical element, which tended to dominate over purely his-
torical and pagan mythological films. As for the historical films, this period
revived many of the subjects from the first two decades of the century. Now
Alexander the Great (1956) and Hannibal (1959) were rendered cinematically
along with Julius Caesar (1953), Spartacus (1960), and Cleopatra (1963), as well
as the protagonists of such historical novels as Ben-Hur (1959), which featured
Emperor Tiberius, and Quo Vadis (1951), in which Nero plays an important role.

revived as a Vietnam allegory in 1968; cf. Clive Barnes, Theater: Jean Giraudouxs Tiger
Returns With Fewer Teeth, The New York Times (March 1, 1968), 30.
39 Odysseus and Nausicaa (Od. 6.4171 and 85136), the Cyclops (Od. 9.437463), Circe (Od.
10.203243, and Odysseus mothers shade (Od. 11.150208).
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 243

Helen once again became a title character in Helen of Troy (1956), the plot of
which is set before, during, and after the Iliadic timeframe. This was a major
CinemaScope production that employed an entirely European cast, headlined
by the hitherto unfamiliar Italian actress Rossana Podest. The film features
the romance between Helen and Paris, portrays the Greeks, particularly
Achilles, as the villains (like the late-Roman model), and reduces several
important scenes from the Iliad to very brief segments, e.g. the argument
between Achilles and Agamemnon and the domestic encounter between
Hector and Andromache.
This was the era of blond bombshells like Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield,
Mamie Van Doren, and Brigitte Bardot, who played a minor role in Helen of
Troy. Nonetheless, just a few years earlier Hedy Lamarr, a brunette, had played
Helen in the tripartite The Love of Three Queens (1953), a film with very limited
release in the United States and England (two years later, as The Face That
Launched a Thousand Ships). In Irwin Allens The Story of Mankind (1957),
blond model Dani Crayne played Helen in a minor role. In the romantic com-
edy It Happened in Athens (1962) Jayne Mansfield played a modern Eleni who
offers to marry whoever wins the marathon at the first Olympic Games in 1896.
The poster advertising the film included the tagline: When Jayne decides to
rival Helen of Troyits a madcap marathon for Olympic Heroes and Grecian
Glory!
Popular culture tends to proliferate in a variety of media and demographic
sectors. A concept that sells in one market can influence or reappear in another
and another. The same era that revived Troy on the operatic stage, with Sir
William Waltons Troilus and Cressida (1954) and Michael Tippetts King Priam
(1962), also produced The Three Stooges Meet Hercules (1962), in which the
Stooges land their time machine in the midst of the Trojan War, where Achilles
makes a brief appearance mostly for the joke they make out of his full name:
Achilles the Heel. Three years later, abc television broadcast a one-hour pilot,
Hercules and the Princess of Troy, starring Gordon Scott and produced by
Joseph E. Levine. This story took place among the mythological generation
before the Trojan War.
Episode seven of Irwin Allens science-fiction television series The Time
Tunnel, which abc broadcast on October 21, 1966, was called Revenge of the
Gods and transported modern time-traveling scientists into the midst of
the Trojan War. They encounter Ulysses and Helen as well as Paris, but not
Achilles. This was the same year Star Trek debuted. Thematically, the series
offered Odyssey-like adventures in that an unpredictably clever, Ulysses-type
commander led a ship and crew beyond the borders of the known world
and encountered a variety of alien creatures. Blending this concept with the
244 Solomon

long-standing association between science fiction and Greco-Roman names,

the first season included The Return of the Archons, in which the long-lost
crew of the starship Archon was living on a planet ruled by a Draconian law-
giver. Who Mourns for Adonais?the second offering of the second season
broadcast on September 22, 1967features Apollo, the last of the Olympian
race which had visited earth 5000 years ago, recalling some of his adoring
earthlings: Agamemnon, Hector, and Odysseus. During the third and final sea-
sons Elaan of Troyius, the princess Elaan of Elas refused to participate in an
arranged marriage which could stop the impending war between the planets
Elas and Troyius. She also has the biochemical power to bewitch men with
the touch of a single teardrop.40
These types of television episodes help illustrate the observation that the
most likely elements of Homers Iliad to make even an insignificant and iso-
lated inroad into mid-century popular culture were either a romanticized
Helen or a thought-provoking re-examination of the war, as was Tippetts King
Priam. The three-act libretto of the latter begins with Hecubas dream and ends
with Priams death at the hands of Neoptolemus, piecing together pre- and
post-Iliadic material while forcing Priam and the other principals to face a
series of choices which offer no benign alternatives.
Although the Iliad was relatively scarce in feature films, television shows,
bestselling books, platinum records, and the like and was relegated to educa-
tional or outer fringes of popular culture, Troy became very popular as a per-
sonal name in the mid-to-late 1960s. According to statistics compiled by the
Social Security Administration, in 1956, the year Helen of Troy was released, the
name Troy was the 277th most popular name for newborn male babies regis-
tered that year, and this was the approximate ranking it had held since the
1920s.41 In 1960 there began an abrupt rise in popularity, peaking at 40th-42nd
in 19671970. Thereafter it fell back to 106th in 1980. It presently ranks 228th.
One could posit that there was some considerable lag time between the release
of the film and the greatest popularity of the name. In all likelihood, however,
the impression made on expectant parents was not from the film or anything
having to do with Homer. Rather, in 19551956 an influential Hollywood agent,
Henry Willson, who represented Rock Hudson and several other popular male

40 John Meredyth Lucas was the only writer to direct his own Star Trek episode. He was the
son of Bess Meredyth, the continuity writer for Ben-Hur (1925) and the adopted son of
Michael Curtiz (Noahs Ark). In addition, the role of Petri, the Troyian ambassador, is
played by Jay Robinson, who created a memorable Caligula in both The Robe (1953) and
Demetrius and the Gladiators (1954).
41 http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 245

talents, thought he could enhance a young actors career by giving him the
name Troy. (His father was from Troy, New York.) He so renamed Merle Johnson,
thereafter known as Troy Donahue, a teenage heartthrob. Donahues feature-
film and teen-magazine floruit was from 1959, when he broke out with Sandra
Dee in A Summer Place, to the mid- or late 1960s. Willsons biographer, quoting
Donahue, records that the 1956 film did actually have a lasting influence:

No sooner had he signed Universals newest contractee than Henry

arranged a meeting with the studio executives to come up with a new
name for Merle Johnson. I was off in this corner while Henry and a few
men tossed out suggestions. At first they had Paris, the lover of Helen
of Troy, in mind, he said. But I guess they thought they couldnt name
me Paris Donahue because there was already a Paris, France and Paris,
Illinois.
Finally, Henry turned to him and, thinking back to his first meeting
with the ex-con Frank Durgin, he exclaimed, Youre Troy, Troy Donahue!
Let everybody else joke about the Henry Willson names. For Merle
Johnson Jr., being called Troy Donahue meant he had been blessed
Troy Donahue was a stars name. Merle sounded like I ought to go out
in the farmyard and do the chores. My mother and sister loved my new
name from the start and never call me anything but Troy.42

Willson had named Frank Durgin Rory Calhoun in the late 1940s, although
he first tried to create the name Troy Donahue for him. Willsons biogra-
phernotes that of all Willsons well known pseudonymsRock Hudson, Rory
Calhoun, Tab Hunter, Troy Donahueonly Troy became a popular name for
average people.43

3.6 19571965: European, Predominantly Italian, Sword-and-Sandal

Films
Like many of the 1950s and 1960s American films set in antiquity, Helen of
Troy was filmed in Italy. Another was Mario Camerinis Ulysses (1954), star-
ring Kirk Douglas as Ulysses and including Rossana Podest as Nausicaa.
(Achilles appears briefly as the dour Achilles of Odyssey 9). The frequency with
which American productions were filmed in Italy helped restore financial sta-
bility and professional credibility to the post-war Italian film industry, and this

42 Robert Hofler, The Man Who Invented Rock Hudson: The Pretty Boys and Dirty Deals of
Henry Willson (2005; rpt. New York: DaCapo, 2006), 303.
43 Hofler, The Man Who Invented Rock Hudson, 138.
246 Solomon

evidenced itself within the classical tradition in two steps. First was the prolif-
eration of low-budget Italian and multi-national sword-and-sandal pepla
which offered excitement to American matinee and television audiences.
Scores of films featured mythological strongmen like Hercules, Samson,
Goliath, and Maciste. Another group set during the Roman Empire had intrepid
gladiators, wicked emperors, and barbarian hordes. Other films took their
heroes and villains to the outer provinces of the Roman Empire and even
beyond its borders, both geographically and chronologically. Of well over
one hundred productions, only two were set during the Trojan War. One was
Giorgio Ferronis La Guerra di Troia (The Trojan War, 1961; also released as The
Trojan Horse, The Trojan War, and The Wooden Horse of Troy), starring Steve
Reeves as Aeneas and loosely deriving its plot from the Aeneid. The other
was Lira di Achille (The Fury of Achilles1962), starring Gordon Mitchell as
Achilles. Its plot is based on the Iliad, beginning with the capture of Briseis and
concluding with the ransom of Hectors body, although it is not at all a faithful
dramatization. Its first half is taken up with the pre-Iliadic capture of Lyrnessus;
Trojan war councils (also recreated in Troy); Hector leading the Trojans along
the course of the Scamander to attack the Greek fleet, being wounded by an
arrow, and finally running away from Achilles; Chryses trying to ransom his
daughter with a wagon of gold supplied by an Apollonian thunderbolt; war
games and Apollos devastation of the Greek host. In its second half there is no
embassy to Achilles; Briseis and Achilles fall in love; and the reason Patroclus
dons Achilles armor is that Achilles has drunk too much wine and passed out.
The film, however, employed double exposures to show the divine interven-
tions of Athena and Thetis. There is a third, slightly later film, Il leone di Tebe
(The Lion of Thebes1965), which invents romance and adventure for Helen
after the Trojan War.

3.7 19661970: Predominantly Italian Alternative and

Art Films
Art films that garnered international attention and were regularly exhibited in
American cities and college campuses include Pier Paolo Pasolinis Edipo re
(Oedipus Rex, 1967) and Medea (1969), Fellinis adaptation of Satyricon (1969),
and, for public Italian television, Rossellinis Socrates (1970). None of these tells
an Homeric Iliadic tale, although Satyricon offers a mock recitation of a few
lines of Homer during Trimalchios banquet. The American counterparts to
these European directorsalternative imaginative directors like Russ Meyer
(Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!, 1965) and Brian De Palma (Dionysus in 69, 1970)
were more interested in the spirit of Erinyean and Dionysian violence than in
Homeric epic.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 247

Around 1970, the momentum provided by the huge financial success of

Samson and Delilah, The Ten Commandments (1956), and Ben-Hur (1959) and
by the introduction of the wide screen format had run its course. Nonetheless,
a few feature films set in antiquity were still to be produced in the next two
decades. Three of these were set in Troy, but none was Iliadic.44 All were
European. Two were adaptations of Euripidean dramas by Michael Cacoyannis,
The Trojan Women (1971) and Iphigenia (1977). The other was an Italian erotic
parody by Alfonso Brescia, Elena si, madi Troia (Helen, YesHelen of Troy)
(1973), which included footage from La guerra di Troia.

3.8 The 1970s and 1980s: American, British, and Italian

Made-for-Television Miniseries
New subgenres developed for commercial popular culture provided new and
different outlets in the 1970s and 1980s. The success of multi-evening television
miniseries presented a more relaxed format in which to dramatize lengthy
pieces of literature. But again, despite the production of several high-profile
miniseries in ancient settingsI, Claudius (19761977), Jesus of Nazareth
(1977), Masada (1981), The Last Days of Pompeii (1984), and a.d. (1985)the
Trojan War lay at the fringes. In Europe Franco Rossi directed three ancient
miniseries, but although two of them, Odissea (1968) and Eneide (1971), involve
the Trojan War, they are not Iliadic. Federico Fellini and Anthony Burgess did
experiment with producing a dramatic version of the Iliad in 1980, but their
project was never fully developed, let alone produced.45 Rossi, too, did not
make his version of the Iliad.46
Arnold Brackmans The Dream of Troy (1974) and Irving Stones The Greek
Treasure (1975), both novelized retellings of the excavation of Troy, reinforced the

44 In the category of popular music, rock guitarist Eric Clapton had vacationed in Greece in
1966 and was so inspired that he wrote the song Tales of Brave Ulysses. But it would not
be until 1976 that a major popular group recorded an Iliadic counterpart, Led Zeppelins
Achilles Last Stand [sic], although the lyrics are not at all Homeric. For the wider musi-
cal context, including Homeric themes, see now Eleonora Cavallini, Achilles in the Age
of Steel: Greek Myth in Modern Popular Music, Quaderni di Scienza della Conservazione,
9 (2009), 113141, and Cantare glorie di eroi, oggi: Achille nella popular music contempo-
ranea, in Eleonora Cavallini (ed.), Omero mediatico: Aspetti della ricezione omerica nella
civilt contemporanea, 2nd ed. (Bologna: d.u.press, 2010), 217235; and Elena Liverani, Da
Eschilo ai Virgin Steele: Il mito degli Atridi nella musica contemporanea (Bologna: d.u.
press, 2009).
45 Hollis Alpert, Fellini: A Life (New York: Atheneum, 1986), 276279.
46 Martin M. Winkler, The Iliad and the Cinema, in Martin M. Winkler (ed.), Troy: From
Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 4367, at 4647.
248 Solomon

non-dramatic influence of the Iliad. During this same period but representing
more the educational, historical, and scholarly traditions associated with
Homer and the Iliad, the bbc produced Michael Woods In Search of the Trojan
War (1985). This was a six-hour documentary investigating the historicity of
the Trojan War, broadcast in the United States by public television stations in
weekly installments. Each episode featured a visit by Wood to Troy, Mycenae,
and other archaeological sites and interviews with such highly regarded schol-
ars as John Chadwick and Colin Renfrew.47 Wood published a book of the same
title as a companion volume to the series.

3.9 The 1980s and 1990s: Nostalgic Revival via Home Video
Meanwhile, the video revolution was taking place, reviving interest in films of
the previous generations through videotape and laserdisc sales and rentals
from small stores, Blockbuster (which was founded in 1985), and supermarkets.
Major metropolitan areas were being wired for cable television, which offered
several channels continuously playing films out of current circulation. Films
like Ben-Hur (1959) and Spartacus (1960) returned to the popular conscious-
ness, as individuals could now easily watch, purchase, or even copy them.
Camerinis Ulysses reappeared on video as well, and Tokyo Movie Shinsha, a
Japanese animation studio, issued a twenty-six episode version of the Odyssey
(Ulysses 31) in 1981, the same year that pbs distributed its National Radio
Theatre of Chicago dramatized version of the Odyssey to member stations and
sold copies on audiocassette. But Warner Brothers 1956 version of Helen of
Troy was nowhere to be found except for a bootleg black-and-white video ver-
sion dubbed into French. No authorized English video of Helen of Troy was
made available until June, 1996, and it was not until the release of Troy in 2004
that Warner Brothers finally issued a dvd of Helen of Troy.

3.10 The Late 1980s and Beyond: Classical Allusions in Films with
Post-Classical Settings
Part of the result of the revival of Ancients from the 1950s and 1960s was the
broad dissemination of a fairly select list of popular icons from antiquity, par-
ticularly in the cinema. Since the mid-1980s, in the absence of incentives or
finances for making films set in antiquity, a significant number of filmmakers
have been inserting classical themes and allusions into films with modern set-
tings. More often than not a film contains only one specific allusion, e.g. a Latin
phrase, a historical exemplar, a profound statement, or a joke. Sometimes these

47 By contrast, in 1979 the British made-for-television Of Mycenae and Men had dramatized
events in the life of Helen (Diana Dors) after the war.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 249

can be rather important, leading to a deeper perspective or even a thematic

concept that pervades or underlies the entire film.48 Allusions to the Trojan
saga, not including the Odyssey, are of five types: to the Iliad, Troy, Achilles,
Helen, and the Trojan Horse. I include here only those which allude to the Iliad
and Achilles, particularly those in which the Iliad represents the educational
tradition, the romantic elements of the Epic Cycle, or the quintessential book
about war. In some instances the Iliad is matched with the Odyssey.

Education:
The computer in 2010 (1984), the sequel of 2001: A Space Odyssey,
says that there are twenty-five definitions of Phoenix, but the only
one it speaks out loud is the tutor of Achilles.
Lieutenant Raffaele Montini in the Italian film Mediterraneo (1991)
tells a Greek priest that he was a teacher before the war and that he
has read the Iliad and Odyssey.
Introducing the school master in Scent of a Woman (1992), the
prankster students recite this rhyme:
Mr. Trask is our fearless leader,
A man of learning, a voracious reader.
He can recite the Iliad in ancient Greek,
While fishing for trout in a rippling creek.
Endowed with wisdom, of judgment sound,
Nevertheless about him, the questions abound.
In What Happened Was (1994), writer-director-actor Tom Noonan
tries to impress his date with his description of how he used to act
out battles of the Iliad when he was young.
In Free Enterprise (1999), the Iliad Bookshop, according to the dvd
commentary, stands next to Odyssey Video, where the two pro-
tagonists intersect with their idol William Shatner, who plays
himself.
The first act of Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights (2004) portrays its pro-
tagonist as a young, underprivileged urban woman eager to improve
her lot in life. The class she attends is reading the Odyssey, and she
offers a fresh interpretation of the roles of Athena, Odysseus, and
the suitors. A classmate asks her out. When she says that she is too
busy, he responds: Im sure even Homer took some time off between
the Iliad and the Odyssey.

48 See Jon Solomon, In the Wake of Cleopatra: The Ancient World in the Cinema Since 1963,
Classical Journal, 91 (1996), 113140.
250 Solomon

Epic Cycle and Romance:

In Mike Leighs Naked (1993) the protagonist reacts to a mantelpiece
decorated with a number of Greek souvenirs by saying that he likes
the Iliad. But then he holds up a copy of the Odyssey, rapidly rattling
off such words and phrases as Cyclops, Trojan Horse, and Helen
of Troy, but also Achilles heel.
In The Human Stain (2003), based on Philip Roths novel, Anthony
Hopkins plays a classics professor who lectures on Achilles and the Iliad:
Sing, O Gods, the wrath of Achilles. All of European litera-
ture springs from a fight, a barroom brawl really. And what was
Achilles so angry about? Well, he and King Agamemnon were
quarreling over a woman, a young girl and her body, and the
delights of sexual rapacity. Achillesthe most hypersensitive
fighting machine in the history of warfare. Achilleswho
because of his rage at having to give up the girl isolates himself
defiantly outside the very society whose protector he is and
whose need of him was enormous. Achilles has to give up the
girl. He has to give her back. And that is how the great imagina-
tive literature of Europe begins, and that is why 3000 years later
we are going to begin there today.
Later in the film, his lawyer calls him Achilles on Viagra, making it
clear that screenwriter Nicholas Roth identifies his protagonists
love affair and dismissal from college with this interpretation of
Achilles.

War:
In Sommersby (1993), protagonist Jack Sommersby twice reads to
his son from the Iliad. Both sessions concentrate on Hector and his
successes, thereby emphasizing the value of a noble but futile vic-
tory, the kind Sommersby himself will experience. Moreover, the
uncertainty about Sommersbys identity when he returns from the
Civil War is increased in that his wife says that the Sommersby she
married before the war never used to read Homer.49
In John Singletons Higher Learning (1995), a member of a skinhead
white supremacist organization on a college campus asks a student

49 For a detailed analysis see Justine McConnell, Eumaeus and Eurycleia in the Deep South:
Odyssean Slavery in Sommersby, in Edith Hall, Richard Alston, and Justine McConnell
(eds.), Ancient Slavery and Abolition: From Hobbes to Hollywood (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2011), 385407.
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 251

what book he is reading. He replies: The Iliad, to which the skin-

head responds: Thats a good book; a lot of great battles in that
book. Singleton seems to be suggesting that the Iliad is a book
inspirational to violence.
In The War at Home (1996), an anti-war and anti-Vietnam War ban-
ner hangs on the right side of the screen, with an Iliad poster bal-
ancing it on the left.
In Never Back Down (2008), a high-school martial-arts film, the
protagonist demonstrates his intelligence by responding articulately
in class to a question about the anti-war symbolism in the Iliad, add-
ing a brief discourse on the pacifist element in the shield of Achilles.
After class his love interest calls him a Shield of Achilles. This theme
will be carried through to the films action-combat finale.

3.11 The Present: High-Profile Feature Films and Television Series

Set in Antiquity
Sam Raimis syndicated television series Hercules: The Legendary Journeys in
1994 became the most widely watched syndicated television series in the
world, ran for six seasons until 1999, and inspired an extremely successful spin-
off, Xena: Warrior Princess. The latter ran until June, 2001. The synthesis of
Hollywood-style brawn in a sensitive 1990s man and a thinly clad athletic
woman enacting heroic conquests in rustic settings with state-of-the-art com-
puter-generated special effects attracted huge audiences, particularly among
the younger viewers and their youngish parents. The application of cgi effects
eliminated most of the logistical problems involved in producing ancient-style
epics. It was primarily this new style of presentation that gave the ancient
world a fresh start for the new century ahead.
Even though there were 111 episodes of Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and
another 134 of Xena: Warrior Princess, and even though most of them derived
in various degrees from Greco-Roman myths, none involved the Iliad. In fact, it
is quite clear that the plot and main characters of the Iliad were intentionally
avoided. Three episodes involved Troy or the Trojan War to some extent. The
second pilot film, Hercules and the Lost Kingdom (1994), sends Hercules on a
mission to rescue the lost city of Troy from Heras tyranny, but the plot con-
cerns Deianeira, Queen Omphale, and a fictional Gargan the Giant and has
nothing whatsoever to do with Homers Troy. In the first season of Xena:
Warrior Princess, the twelfth episode, Beware Greeks Bearing Gifts (1996),
features Helen, who asks Xena to assist the Trojans during the last days of the
war against the Greeks; the cast list includes not a single Greek warrior from
the Iliad and instead features a romance between Xenas sidekick Gabrielle
252 Solomon

and a newly invented mercenary named Perdiccas. In the second seasons

nineteenth episode, Ulysses, Xena supports Ulysses against Poseidon in the
aftermath of the Trojan War; on the way to Ithaca Xena and Ulysses begin to
fall in love.
In the late 1990s American network television was in direct competition
with the burgeoning number of channels and alternative programming deliv-
ered to households via antenna, cable, and satellite. nbc responded to the suc-
cess of the syndicated Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and Xena: Warrior
Princess by broadcasting a new Hallmark Entertainment miniseries, The
Odyssey, in May, 1997. As we have seen, it is not surprising that the choice of
which ancient story to dramatize fell upon the well-established popular pri-
macy of Homers romantic and magical epic. But by the end of the twentieth
century Schliemanns demythologization of the Iliad had had more than a cen-
tury to settle out of and back into the popular consciousness, and there was
now a segment of the alternative artistic community who responded quite dif-
ferently by popularizing works derived from more historical and quasi-histori-
cal material. The two most exemplary of these works are the first installment
of Eric Shanowers successful series of graphic novels Age of Bronze and Frank
Millers 300, both of them published in 1998. Both achieved wide popularity
and garnered Eisner Awards in 1999 and 2001.
The success of Sam Raimis television productions reinvigorated ancient sub-
jects in the popular arts, or other projects rode the same wave of popularity that
greeted the innovative Hercules: The Legendary Journeys. On a small, independent
scale Barry Purves produced his experimental Claymation short-film, Achilles
(1995). On the large, blockbuster scale, David Franzoni received the green light
from Steven Spielberg to proceed with the script of Gladiator, which was released
the first week of May, 2000, the same week in which another new Hallmark
Entertainment miniseries, Jason and the Argonauts, was broadcast on nbc.
The proliferation of films set in antiquity, which has not yet abated as of
2015, has thus far produced two additional films involving the Trojan War. The
first was another television miniseries, usa Networks Helen of Troy, which pre-
miered on April 20, 2003.50 The second was Wolfgang Petersens Troy, released
in the United States in May, 2004. The plot-line and spectrum of lead roles in
Troy resemble those of Homers Iliad more closely than any of its predecessors.
Also in 2004 came the German Singe den Zorn (Sing the Wrath, the opening
phrase of the Iliad), directed by Matthias Merkle. Filmed in the ruins of Troy

50 Before Helen of Troy (2003) and the successful My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002), Meredith
Cole had directed a modern romantic comedy about Greek Americans in Pittsburgh with
the recognizable Iliadic title, Achilles Love (2000).
Homers Iliad in Popular Culture: The Roads to Troy 253

and with a cast of only fourteen people, Singe den Zorn represents a resurfac-
ing of the academic approach.51
For the past century since Schliemann first went to Hisarlik and intention-
ally demythologized Troy, the Iliad has not been nearly as inspirational for
American popular culture as have been the Odyssey and other works written in
or set in classical antiquity. We have seen numerous instances of works derived
not from the Iliad but from the extra-Homeric romance of Helen and the aura
surrounding Homer, his poetry, and the city of Troy. It is probably too early to
analyze the most recent period accurately. But for more than fifteen years the
waters of classical allure in the commercial sector of the popular culture have
risen considerably, and the Homeric tale of Troy has resurfaced as well.
Of particular importance here is Petersens Troy. In addition to the lack of
mythological allure that resulted from the excavations and publications of
Schliemann and Drpfeld, the Iliad itself still presented a number of obstacles
to a faithful and comprehensive cinematic rendering. In addition to an insuf-
ficient number of prominent female roles and the lack of a romantic plot, the
poem begins long after the beginning of the war and offers little backstory,
includes an excessive amount of speaking and limited action roles and a com-
plicated pantheon of divinities who have limited and ill-defined powers, takes
place in a single location unembellished by a picturesque or variegated land-
scape, and has a depressing endingnot at all a list of elements which one
could use to convince film producers to invest nearly $200 million.
Nonetheless, Petersen and his co-producers followed tradition in expanding
the pre-Iliadic backstory and including post-Iliadic elements from the Cyclic
Epics, developed a romance between Achilles and Briseis, cast one of the most
desirable male stars in Hollywood, and substituted not so much an atheistic or
agnostic theme as a pervasive belief that human events unfold despite the
benign or ill will of the gods. By now, Troy has earned over half a billion dollars.
Tens of millions of viewers have seen the film, and many of them own it on
dvd. The success of the released film and its subsequent dvd sales provided
an additional incentive to the producers to release the directors cut on dvd.
This provided an additional advantage to viewers and scholars, for it added
new footage to the original release version of the film, changed a number of
scenes and so improved upon the whole film, and included within its Special

51 See Anja Wieber, Vor Troja nichts Neues? Moderne Kinogeschichten zu Homers Ilias, in
Martin Lindner (ed.), Drehbuch Geschichte: Die antike Welt im Film (Mnster: lit, 2005),
137162. In the realm of popular literature, this period also produced Amanda Elyot, The
Memoirs of Helen of Troy (New York: Crown, 2005) and Margaret George, Helen of Troy
(2006; rpt. New York: Penguin, 2007).
254 Solomon

Features Petersens explanation of how this longer version more closely

resembles his original vision. This first full-scale, high-profile cinematic ren-
dering of the Iliad in a widely popular and widely distributed format is well
worth examination by classical scholars, even aside from its astonishing com-
mercial success. When modern media, especially audio-visual ones, return to
the long-distant past, we can realize how much this past can still mean to the
present. Considered together, the Trojan War myth, the Iliad, and now Troy are,
in their different ways and in the course of various historical and cultural peri-
ods, useful reminders of antiquitys inexhaustible vitality.
Coda: On Cinematic Tributes to Homer and
the Iliad

Martin M. Winkler

In 1938 poet Cecil Day-Lewis, later Professor of Poetry at Oxford, translator of

Virgil, and Poet Laureate of the United Kingdom, published, under the pseud-
onym Nicholas Blake, his fourth mystery novel, The Beast Must Die. The novel
was twice adapted for the screen, once in Argentina (La bestia debe morir; 1952)
and once in France. Que la bte meure was directed in 1969 by Claude Chabrol
from a screenplay by himself and Paul Ggauff, Chabrols regular co-scenarist.
The films British release title was This Man Must Die (also Killer!), its American
title was The Beast Must Die. This last is how the film is referred to most often
in English today.
The widowed father of a young child killed in a hit-and-run accident decides
to search for the culprit, whom the police have been unable to find, and to kill
him in revenge. Against all odds the father, a childrens book author and mys-
tery writer, succeeds in tracing the murderer. He insinuates himself into the
killers family to carry out his plot the more easily. His intended victim is an
unfaithful husband and abusive father. Unavoidably, an emotional bond devel-
ops between the father who lost his son and the teenage son who suffers from
his own fathers brutal behavior toward his mother and himself.
Chabrol and Ggauff changed the setting from England to France and added
one telling scene that has no equivalent in Blakes novel. The writer takes to
helping the boy with his homework. One day the two are working on classical
literature, and the writer gives the boy a brief lecture on Homer. Since the
scene is not as well-known as it deserves to be, I quote at some length:

Most people prefer the Odyssey, but the Iliad is the most sublime thing
that has ever been written. Homer is much finer [plus beau, i.e. than, for
example, Kafka]. There is a city talked about but never entered. And hun-
dreds and hundreds of young heroes fight each other and die for this
unreal, inaccessible thing. The theme is very simplebut treated with
incomparable poetic detail. So, when a bad poet describes a death, he
automatically employs clichs: eyes turning up, sweat beading the fore-
head, the terrible inhuman grin. But not Homer. Each death he describes
is distinctive, and even real. There is a moment when a young Trojan is
pursued by Diomedes, and he receives the javelin in his neck, and the
point protrudes from his mouth like a tongue of iron [metalle]. And he

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004296084_013

256 Winkler

rolls on the ground, biting the cold iron. Thats pretty [beau] as an image,
isnt it?

The boy is appreciative: I was completely lost with these Greeks and these
Trojans.1
The closeness between the man and the boy increases as a result. The origi-
nal revenge plot, however, takes an unexpected turn. The films ending and our
last glimpse of the writer after the death of his intended victim are ambiguous.
The ending also makes evident that the specific Greek overtones which Chabrol
and Ggauff added were not incidental. A policeman says about the teenage
boys dead father: An inhuman grinit was really frightening to see. Here is
the very clich that, according to the writer, the Iliad had avoided. The refer-
ence to Diomedes is even more telling. In Book 5 of the Iliad Diomedes goes on
a killing spree, and we are told that he brutally killed the sons of several Trojan
fathers. Repeatedly Diomedes kills two brothers. Some of the Trojan fathers,
we understand, are left as childless as the writer who tells the boy about
Diomedes is himself.2
Blakes novel deals with the ethics and the unavoidable entanglements
resulting from acts of violence and revenge. What comes along in the guise of
a melodramatic mystery story is really a tragedy.3 So, to its honor, is Chabrols
film.4 At its end the writer looks back on what has happened: What a beautiful
[belle] revenge, isnt it? Its worthy of a Greek tragedy. A man kills a child, the
child of this man will kill him in turn. It fits that the final images of Chabrols
film leave the writers eventual fate uncertain. He is more likely to perish than
to survive. Chabrol and Ggauffs incorporation of Homer, however, elevates
the film to a higher level. In the words of a contemporary critic: In one exqui-
site scene Charles [the bereaved father] discusses The Iliad with Philippe [the
teenage boy], with a great teachers patience and commitment demonstrating
the lyricism and originality that Homer brings to his descriptions of death.5
But Chabrol and Ggauff make the scene between Charles and Philippe even

1 The preceding translations of the films dialogue are taken from the subtitles of the 2006
Arrow Films dvd release of Que la bte meure in The Claude Chabrol Collection (vol. 1), with a
few adaptations.
2 A death inflicted by Diomedes that includes the detail of his protruding javelin appears at
Iliad 5.290293. The exact parallel, however, to the writers words is Meges killing of Pedaios
at Iliad 5.6974.
3 Its very title makes this evident; cf. Ecclesiastes 3.19.
4 A brief appreciation may be found in Stephen Farber, Melodramatic Truths, The Hudson
Review, 23 (19701971), 685696, at 687691.
5 Quoted from Farber, Melodramatic Truths, 689.
coda: On Cinematic Tributes to Homer and the Iliad 257

more important: they give it a crucial significance in that it becomes the turn-
ing point in the development of Charles character from cold-blooded avenger,
made ruthless by the loss of his child, to a man who finds back to his humanity.
He even sacrifices himself for the boy who has become almost a new son to
him.6 Overtones of Homers Achilles are hardly accidental. Because of its sub-
tlety, the film is one of the best illustrations of how references to classical lit-
erature in a modern story can provide added psychological depth and
emotional power to a tale ostensibly wholly unrelated to antiquity.
Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic included a list of films made
about the Trojan War.7 Like Troy, most of them are not, strictly speaking, adap-
tations of the Iliad, but all include Homeric material. The Beast Must Die is just
one example to show us that Homer is nearly omnipresent in the history of
cinema and that he may be encountered in the most unlikely places. Homer is
the godfather of film.8 Pioneering French writer-director Abel Gance, who
made several historical and contemporary epic films, once delivered what may
be called an imaginative hymn to Homer.9 As Prometheus had brought the
light of fire to mankind, so Homer brought Lady Poetry back to earth after the
death of the mythical earlier poet Orpheus:

Dying, Orpheus gave poetry back to the gods. These, never having seen a
woman so beautiful, held her prisoner, and the earth was without charm
since poems [les chants], these rivers of the soul, no longer arise. Homer
decided to charm poetry. His genius climbed Olympus; he delivered the
captive, who descended back to earth. But like Prometheus he paid
with his eyesfor the theft from the gods which he had committed.

Related to this is Homers desire to understand the hidden nature of light.

Gance adds a little later:

Like Prometheus stealing fire, he wanted to wrench from the sun the
secret of its light, and he set about gazing at it for a long time. He stared

6 The point is made evident by Michael Walker, Que la bte meure, in Robin Wood and
Michael Walker, Claude Chabrol (London: Studio Vista/New York: Praeger, 1970), 123131,
especially 126 and 127. This chapter, although brief, is essential.
7 Martin M. Winkler, The Trojan War on the Screen: An Annotated Bibliography, in Martin M.
Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 202215.
8 I have made this argument in Winkler, Cinema and Classical Texts: Apollos New Light
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009; rpt. 2012), 298303.
9 Abel Gance, Prisme: Carnet dun cinaste (1930; rpt. Paris: est, 2010), 7183 (section titled
Divagations sur la lumire; roughly, Random Thoughts about Light); my translation.
258 Winkler

at it for hours, and progressively, to the degree that the great truth of
living light is unveiled before him, his eyes are burned up. When he left,
his soul flooded by the sun, his eyes were dead. He was blind. From that
moment on he could build his dream greater than reality. He could begin
the Iliad.10

Evidently Gance himself has been kissed by Lady Poetry since he waxes poetic
and symbolic at the same time. To Gance, light is the well-spring and quintes-
sence of all nature and culture. As everyone knows, it is also the basis of all
cinema. Homers physical blindness derives, for Gance, from his poetic genius
that ascended to the realm of the gods to bring both light and poetry to earth.
The cinema writesi.e. tells its storieswith light and, on its highest level of
artistry, becomes visual poetryincluding epic poetry, as in Gances own body
of work. The cinema is by nature Homeric.11
A particular, and particularly famousor infamousfilm bears witness to
this pleasing fact. Tony Richardsons The Loved One (1965) is an adaptation, as
elegant as it is biting, of Evelyn Waughs 1948 satiric novel by the same title
(and with the additional description An Anglo-American Tragedy). The screen-
play was written by satirist Terry Southern and Christopher Isherwood. Novel
and film satirize the Californian Way of Death and its cult, British expatriates
in Hollywood, and the film industry at large. The main character, a British
innocent abroad, is looking for a suitable burial site for his uncle at Whispering
Glades, a high-class establishment for the Loved Ones who have left the
Waiting Ones. Miss Aime Thanatogenos (translate her first name literally!)
guides him through the premises and a wide range of offerings. She informs
him, piously and impressively, that several plots are available in Poets Corner
in the shadow of the prominent Greek poet Homer. A large statue of the
prominent poet is ruling over the residents of the quadrangle, which is lined
with other and less prominent statues. The young man immediately realizes
that this is just the place for his uncle, a painter. And why is this? Homer used
very visual imagery, he tells Miss Thanatogenos. We knew it all along! The term

10 The preceding two quotations, in my translation, are from Gance, Prisme, 75 and 7677
(ellipsis in original).
11 I present a similar argument, although Apollonian rather than Homeric, in Winkler,
Cinema and Classical Texts, 119 (Introduction: The God of Light and the Cinema Eye).
On cinema as poetry see Winkler, 5057, primarily on the theory of Pier Paolo Pasolini.
The visual side of Homeric epic has received much recent attention; a starting point for
newcomers to the topic is Egbert J. Bakker, Discourse and Performance: Involvement,
Visualization and Presence in Homeric Poetry, Classical Antiquity, 12 no. 1 (1993), 129.
coda: On Cinematic Tributes to Homer and the Iliad 259

Poets Corner comes from Waugh, as do the pretty misss words in the film
except for in the shadow in place of Waughs under the statue. But the rea-
son why Uncle will feel right at home here is not in Waugh. It is an improve-
ment over the novel and, of course, feels right at home in a film. Even the Greek
poet might appreciate his enhanced prominence.
Homer himself, not simply as a statue or bust, appeared on the cinema
screen early on. Here are two examples from the same year and even the same
month, April, 1911; both are films made in Italy on what was then an epic
scale. In LInferno (Dantes Inferno), co-directed by Francesco Bertolini, Adolfo
Padovan, and Giuseppe de Liguoro, Virgil and Dante meet a distinguished
group of ancient poets. A title card in the English-language version of the film
tells us: Homer, Horace, Ovid and Lucanus [sic] come forward to greet Virgil.
He explains to them the nature of Dantes mission in the Inferno. Homer and
the Romans except for Virgil have only a supporting role as extras and receive
no dialogue. Astonishingly, however, Homer is just as impeccably dressed in a
senatorial toga as are Horace, Ovid, and Lucan. Being the oldest, he has been
given a walking stick. The four wear laurel wreaths on their heads. More aston-
ishingly, all four give the Roman Salute, eagerly and repeatedly.12 But only
churls will complain about this innocently charming scene.
Homer came into his own, however, in La caduta di Troia (The Fall of
Troy), directed by Luigi Romano Borgnetto and Giovanni Pastrone; the latter
was to make film history three years later with Cabiria, a giant epic set at the
time of the Second Punic War. The Fall of Troy was a lavish production by
contemporary standards. The film opens with Homer giving a public recital:
Homer sings to the Greeks the deeds of the heroes in the Trojan War, a card
tells us. In his left hand Homer holds a large and elaborately wrought lyre.
He declaims while vigorously gesturing with his right arm, but he never plucks
the strings. What his on-screen audience hears him chant about we are
then shown. The films story begins with Menelaus farewell from Helen in
Sparta and the arrival of Paris as ambassador from Troy. None of this is part
of Homeric epic. But then, neither is the fall of Troy. Only Beckmessers will
complain.13

12 On the history of this modern gesture, for which no Roman and certainly no ancient
Greek evidence exists, see Martin M. Winkler, The Roman Salute: Cinema, History, Ideology
(Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2009).
13 One unexpected mistake does occur, however. The Greek who cajoles the Trojans into
taking the wooden horse into their city is identified as Sychaeus (in Italian, Sicheo) in an
intertitle. He should have been called Sinone, Italian for Sinon. He later swims across the
water to tell the Greeks that they should now storm Troy.
260 Winkler

Films like The Fall of Troy, Troy, and others on the Trojan War, alongside vari-
ous adaptations of the Odyssey, directly or indirectly take their inspiration
from Homer. They are therefore worthy of our attention. As Grard Genette
has made clear, the Odyssey is the ultimate hypotext, as he calls it, for virtually
the entire literary tradition, this epics hypertexts, in the history of the West.14
The same applies to visual narratives. In the words of Greek writer-director
Theodoros Angelopoulos, who took much of his artistic inspiration from
ancient Greek literature and myth: I have a soft spot for the ancient writings.
There really is nothing new. We are all just revising and reconsidering ideas
that the ancients first treated.15 The most important of these ancients as well
as the earliest of whom we know is Homer. Here are two additional but radi-
cally different examples of Homeric moments: one serious, one amusing. Both
occur in the context of modern warfare.
A number of the films made after World War ii in the German Democratic
Republic attempted to come to terms with the horrors of the Nazi past in
connection with soul-searching about guilt and responsibility (Vergangen
heitsbewltigung). Kurt Maetzigs Council of the Gods (1950) is a fictional retell-
ing of actual facts as recorded, for instance, in the Nuremberg Trials after the
war. Powerful German industrialists welcome the rise of Hitler, profit from the
production of poison gas used in concentration camps, and continue business
as usual with their American associates, who are as cynical and immoral as the
Germans. (The film is, among other things, an important document of incipi-
ent Cold-War propaganda.) Early on, we observe the biggest of the German
bosses in a meeting with his board of directors at his home. A huge tapestry
dominates one of his living-room walls. It shows a scene from the Trojan War
in which some of the gods on top of the image watch a battle between Greeks
and Trojans below. The painting is titled Der Rat der Gtter, which is also the
films original title. The industrialists daughter reveals that the board members
refer to themselves by the same expression. Over a long shot of the painting
and the board meeting below it, she comments to a newcomer: See, isnt it just
as with the ancient Greeks, where the Olympian gods above the clouds, unaf-
fected themselves, are holding the fates of the wildly brawling humans on
earth in their hands? To anyone in the films audience with the kind of educa-
tion that could be taken for granted at the time, the analogy is so obvious as to

14 Grard Genette, Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree, tr. Channa Newman and
Claude Dubinsky (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1997).
15 Quoted from Theo Angelopoulos Official Website at http://www.theoangelopoulos.com/
voyagetocythera.htm. Angelopoulos said this in connection with his film Voyage to
Cythera (1983).
coda: On Cinematic Tributes to Homer and the Iliad 261

make any verbal explanation superfluous. Still, those who could not figure it
out get help in a later scene, when the American industrialist, who is the
Germans equal in immorality and profiteering, looks at the tapestry for
the first time: Oh, The Council of the Gods. Ah, I understand: Homer and the
ancient Greeks. Indeed. The classical subject recurs a third and final time
when a German general refers to a painting entitled The Flight from Troy,
which Maetzig shows only briefly. Although it alludes to the Nazis large-scale
looting of art from conquered countries, to classically trained viewers the
moment is more poignant as a comment on the parallel results of two self-
imposed wars.16
A light-hearted moment occurs in an entirely unexpected context. Argo
(2012), directed by and starring Ben Affleck, deals with a particular side of the
American hostage crisis of 1980. Under the pretext of scouting locations for a
science-fiction epic in Tehran for a phony Hollywood production company, a
cia agent manages to get several members of the American embassy safely out
of the country. (The plot is based on fact.) Early on, a make-up artist and a
hardboiled has-been producer of B movies are hashing out what kind of plot
their fictional epic should have. The character of the producer is an obvious
satire of old-style Hollywood barbarians like Harry Cohn. How about The
Horses of Achilles? the make-up man suggests. No good, the producer tells
him, nobody does Westerns any more. Even the appropriate enlightenment
(Its ancient Troy!) leaves the producer unimpressed: If its got horses in it,
its a Western. Such a Western would have an awful lot of Greeks in it. So much
for Achilles and ancient Troy. Might this have become another case of
Hollywood f***ing about with the plot of the Iliad?
I now briefly return to this argument, if indeed it is one. As we saw, there has
been a longand even distinguishedtradition of authors and artists doing
just that sort of thing with the Iliad since antiquity, if not usually on the level
of the Trojan Western in Argo. No less an ancient literary authority than Horace,
both a poet and a literary critic, had broken a lance (spear?) on behalf of con-
temporary artistic creativity in Epistles 2.1, an open letter to Emperor Augustus.17

16 Translations from the films dialogue are my own.

17 Robin Nisbet, Horace: Life and Chronology, in Stephen Harrison (ed.), The Cambridge
Companion to Horace (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 721 at 1920,
argues for 11 bc as date of publication for Book 2 of the Epistles. The following is identical
in substance to my earlier discussions in Winkler, Cinema and Classical Texts, 6869, andin
Leaves of Homeric Storytelling: Wolfgang Petersens Troy and Franco Rossis Odissea,
in Eleonora Cavallini (ed.), Omero mediatico: Aspetti della ricezione omerica nella civilt
contemporanea, 2nd ed. (Bologna: d.u. press, 2010), 153163 at 161162. It may be a sign of
the times that the point bears or needs restating.
262 Winkler

Here Horace speaks out, quite forcefully, against prejudices directed at modern
poetry. Evidently it was just as fashionable at his time to disdain modernized
versions of works by revered and usually long-dead authors, especially Homer,
as it is today (and may be tomorrow). But to Horace those who judge nothing
to be comparable to the old masters are in error. Their judgment is wrong
because it is merely a prejudice. I find it offensive, Horace confesses, when
something is criticizedmerely because it is new. The main reason for his
view is that unthinking adherence to everything ancient, combined with ready
condemnation of everything modern, denies the great authors of the past one
of their most important achievements, the creation of a never-ending tradi-
tion of influence. If the Greeks had hated anything new as much as we do
now, Horace asks, what would now be old?18 The answer is obvious. Horace
previously observed that the earliest works of the Greeks are the greatest of all,
so the attitude with which he takes issue, had it prevailed, would have made
any literary creativity since the time of Homer impossible.
All of Horaces works, most famously his Odes, demonstrate how sensible
his position was in balancing the old and the new and in finding praiseworthy
qualities in both. Horaces view on the folly of archaism applies not only to
poetry but also to all creative endeavors in literature and the visual arts.19
It is worth our while to consider in this context the other side of the argu-
ment, linked, however, to a much more balanced view of the old and the new
than our dyspeptic classical scholar was able to muster. Manoel de Oliveira,
cinemas Nestor, rejects all the die-hard modernists:

Nowadays there is a frequent confusion about the word modern, as if it

designated a new and improved morality, signifying, in and of itself,
something good, better, as if that which is older were, in and of itself,some-
thing bad, undesirable, and that which is modern something good, in life
as well as in the arts. In a certain sense, we are losing fairness in criteria in
a movement towards abstraction of the authentic values, thereby equat-
ing modern and good in an absolute sense.20

18 Horace, Epistles 2.1.7677 and 9091 (my translations); see further 4549 and 6365. On
the subject see especially C.O. Brink, Horace on Poetry, vol. 3: Epistles Book II: The Letters to
Augustus and Florus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 57132.
19 The quotation is from Brink, Horace on Poetry, vol. 3, 74.
20 Quoted from Absoluto ([The] Absolute), a long conversation, recorded on video, with
writer-director Manoel de Oliveira about his work and about his philosophy of life and
cinema. Its release version, edited to appear more like a monologue than an interview,
is available on the dvd of his film The Strange Case of Anglica (2010), released by
coda: On Cinematic Tributes to Homer and the Iliad 263

All this is highly pertinent to our topic. Oliveira sounds virtually like a Horace
of our own time, however, when he says a little later:

There is no old without modern, because the latter generates the old, and
everything old was, in its own time, modern. Old or modern are made up
of good and bad parts, and tradition is like sifting wheat, separating it
from the chaff, time being the greater judge.

Nothing in excess: the classical saying on Apollos temple at Delphi is worth

heeding in any discussion about the old and the new. The qualities of modern
adaptations of classical works deserve to be evaluated critically, but also ratio-
nally. Easy dismissal is as unhelpful as blind enthusiasm would be. Troy is not
the Iliadand what is or ever has been or will be?but it is a notable example
of what we might term posthomerica cinematographica.

The Cinema Guild. The preceding and the following quotations from Oliveira are based
on the subtitles provided on the dvd, with slight adjustments.
Bibliography

A.D.S. An Italian Production (mini-review of La regina di Sparta). The New York Times
(February 23, 1931), 21.
Adams, Val. Tiger at Gates is Listed for tv. The New York Times (January 26, 1960), 67.
Ahl, Frederick (tr.). Virgil: Aeneid. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Rpt. 2008.
. Troy and Memorials of War. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to
Hollywood Epic, pp. 163185.
Allen, Alena. Briseis in Homer, Ovid, and Troy. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers
Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp. 148162.
Alpert, Hollis. Fellini: A Life. New York: Atheneum, 1986.
Anderson, Michael J. The Fall of Troy in Early Greek Poetry and Art. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1997.
Andreotti, Roberto (ed.). Resistenza del Classico. Milan: Rizzoli, 2009.
Arnold, Frank. Wolfgang Petersen: Keine Welt in Schwarz und Wei. Klner
Stadtanzeiger (May 14, 2004). http://www.ksta.de/artikel.jsp?id=1084203219381.
Aumont, Jacques. The Fall of the Gods: Jean-Luc Godards Le Mpris (1963). Tr. Peter
Graham. In Hayward and Vincendeau (eds.), French Film: Texts and Contexts,
pp. 174188.
Bakker, Egbert J. Discourse and Performance: Involvement, Visualization and
Presence in Homeric Poetry. Classical Antiquity, 12 no. 1 (1993), 129.
Bal, Mieke. Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative. 3rd ed. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 2009.
Barnes, Clive. Theater: Jean Giraudouxs Tiger Returns with Fewer Teeth. The New
York Times (March 1, 1968), 30.
Bazin, Andr. Bazin at Work: Major Essays and Reviews from the Forties and Fifties.
Ed. Bert Cardullo; tr. Alain Piette and Bert Cardullo. New York: Routledge, 1997.
. The Life and Death of Superimposition. In Bazin, Bazin at Work, pp. 7376.
Beissner, Friedrich (ed.). Hlderlin: Smtliche Werke. Vol. 2: Gedichte nach 1800. Pt. 1:
Text. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1951.
Bergala, Alain (ed.). Jean-Luc Godard par Jean-Luc Godard. New ed. Vol. 1: 19501984.
Paris: ditions de ltoile/Cahiers du cinma, 1998.
Bergk, Theodor. Griechische Literaturgeschichte. Vol. 2. Ed. Gustav Hinrichs. Berlin:
Weidmann, 1883.
Bettini, Maurizio, and Carlo Brillante. Il mito di Elena: Immagini e racconti dalla Grecia
a oggi. Turin: Einaudi, 2002. Rpt. 2008.
Blanchot, Maurice. The Space of Literature. Tr. Ann Smock. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press, 1982.
266 Bibliography

Brink, C.O. Horace on Poetry. Vol. 3: Epistles Book II: The Letters to Augustus and Florus.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
Brody, Richard. Everything Is Cinema: The Working Life of Jean-Luc Godard. 2008. Rpt.
New York: Picador, 2009.
Brooke, Rupert. The Collected Poems of Rupert Brooke. New York: Lane, 1920.
Buitron-Oliver, Diana (ed.). New Perspectives in Early Greek Art. Washington, D.C.:
National Gallery of Art, 1991.
Bultrighini, Umberto, and Elisabetta Dimauro (eds.). Homeron ex Homerou saphen-
izein: Omaggi a Domenico Musti [main title in Greek letters]. Lanciano: Carabba,
2013.
Burgess, Jonathan [or Jonathan S.]. Achilles Heel: The Death of Achilles in Ancient
Myth. Classical Antiquity, 14 (1995), 217244.
. Achilles Heel: The Historicism of the Film Troy. In Myrsiades (ed.), Reading
Homer: Film and Text, pp. 163185.
. The Death and Afterlife of Achilles. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
2009.
. Recent Reception of Homer: A Review Article. Phoenix, 62 (2008), 184195.
. The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 2001. Rpt. 2003.
Burne-Jones, Lady Georgiana. Memorials of Edward Burne-Jones. Vol. 2: 18681898.
New York: Macmillan, 1904. Rpt. 1906.
Butler, Samuel. The Authoress of the Odyssey, Where and When She Wrote, Who She Was,
the Use She Made of the Iliad and How the Poem Grew under Her Hands. London:
Longmans, Green, 1897. Several rpts.
. A Lecture on the Humour of Homer. Cambridge: Metcalfe, 1892.
. Lorigine siciliana dell Odissea. Acireale: Donzuso, 1893.
Calder, William M. III. Schliemann on Schliemann: A Study in the Use of Sources.
Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies, 13 (1972), 335353.
Calder, William M. III., and David A. Traill (eds.). Myth, Scandal, and History: The
Heinrich Schliemann Controversy and a First Edition of the Mycenaean Diary. Detroit:
Wayne State University Press, 1986.
Cano, Pedro Luis. El ciclo troyano: Helena (1924). In Los generos literarios, pp.
7593.
Cantarella, Eva. Ma Achille non pu avere la faccia di Brad Pitt. Corriere della sera
(March 23, 2004), 1. 39. http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2004/marzo/23/Achille
_non_puo_avere_faccia_co_9_040323008.shtml.
Catenacci, Carmine. Le Termopili, i 300 e larcheologia dellimmaginario. In Andreotti
(ed.), Resistenza del Classico, pp. 160172.
Cavallini, Eleonora. Achilles in the Age of Steel: Greek Myth in Modern Popular
Music. Quaderni di Scienza della Conservazione, 9 (2009), 113141.
Bibliography 267

. Afrodite Melenide e letra Laide. Studi classici e orientali, 48 (20032004),

239256.
. A proposito di Troy. Quaderni di Scienza della Conservazione, 4 (2005),
301334. Also in Cavallini (ed.), i Greci al cinema, pp. 5379.
. Cantare glorie di eroi, oggi: Achille nella popular music contemporanea. In
Cavallini (ed.), Omero mediatico, pp. 217235.
(ed.). i Greci al cinema: Dal peplum dautore alla grafica computerizzata.
Bologna: d.u. Press, 2005.
. La mtis di Achille. In Bultrighini and Dimauro (eds.), Homeron ex Homerou
saphenizein, pp. 123127.
(ed.). Omero mediatico: Aspetti della ricezione omerica nella civilt contempora-
nea. 2nd ed. Bologna: d.u. Press, 2010.
. Patroclo capro espiatorio: Osservazioni sul libro xvI dellIliade. Mythos,
n.s. 3 (2009), 117129.
Chadwick, John. The Decipherment of Linear B. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1960.
Chapouthier, Fernand. Les Dioscures au service dune desse: tude diconographie reli-
gieuse. Paris: de Boccard, 1935.
Chiasson, Charles. Redefining Homeric Heroism in Wolfgang Petersens Troy. In
Myrsiades (ed.), Reading Homer: Film and Text, pp. 186207.
Chiaventone, Frederick J. Troy Script Review (May 24, 2004). http://www.tnmc.org/
Untitled-Deadpool-Column/troy-script-review.html.
Clarke, W.M. Achilles and Patroclus in Love. Hermes, 106 (1978), 381396.
Clay, Jenny Strauss. The Wrath of Athena: Gods and Men in the Odyssey. 1983.
Rpt. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1997.
Cline, Eric H. The Trojan War: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2013.
Collet, Jean. Jean-Luc Godard. 2nd ed. Paris: Seghers, 1967.
Cook, J.M. The Troad: An Archaeological and Topographical Study. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1973. Rpt. 1999.
Creed, Robert P. The Singer Looks at His Sources. Comparative Literature, 14 (1962),
4452.
Cyrino, Monica S. Helen of Troy. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to
Hollywood Epic, pp. 131147.
Danek, Georg. The Story of Troy through the Centuries. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From
Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp. 6884.
Davies, Malcolm. The Greek Epic Cycle. 2nd ed. London: Bristol Classical Press, 2001.
Rpt. 2003.
De Jong, Irene J.F. A Narratological Commentary on the Odyssey. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001.
268 Bibliography

. Narratology and Classics: A Practical Guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

2014.
. Narrators and Focalizers: The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad. 2nd ed.
Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 2004.
De La Grange, Henry-Louis. Mahler. Vol. 1. Garden City: Doubleday, 1973.
Dee, James H. Epitheta Hominum apud Homerum: The Epithetic Phrases for the Homeric
Heroes: A Repertory of Descriptive Expressions for the Human Characters of the Iliad
and the Odyssey. Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 2000.
Dettmer, Roger. Goldmark: Die Knigin von Saba. Fanfare, 4 (1981), 122.
Diels, Hermann. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Ed. Walther Kranz. Vol. 2. 6th ed.
Zurich and Hildesheim: Weidmann, 1952. Rpt. 1992.
Dodds, E.R. The Greeks and the Irrational. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1951.
Numerous rpts.
Dover, K.J. Greek Homosexuality. Updated ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1989.
Dumont, Herv. Lantiquit au cinma: Vrits, lgendes et manipulations. Paris: Nouveau
Monde/Lausanne: Cinmathque suisse, 2009. 2013 ed. www.hervedumont.ch.
Edwards, Catharine (ed.). Roman Presences: Receptions of Rome in European Culture,
17891945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Rpt. 2007.
Edwards, Mark W. Homer: Poet of the Iliad. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
1987. Rpt. 1990.
. The Iliad: A Commentary. Vol. 5: Books 1720. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1991. Rpt. 2000.
Elson, Arthur. Modern Composers of Europe. Boston: Page, 1904.
Elyot, Amanda. The Memoirs of Helen of Troy. New York: Crown, 2005.
Erbse, Hartmut. Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Gtter im homerischen Epos. Berlin:
De Gruyer, 1986.
Esposito, Stephen (ed.). Odysseus at Troy: Ajax, Hecuba, and Trojan Women. Focus:
Newburyport, 2010.
Fairclough, H. Rushton (ed. and tr.). Virgil in Two Volumes. Vol. 1: Eclogues, Georgics,
Aeneid IVI. Rev. ed.; rev. G.P. Goold. Cambridge: Harvard University Press/London:
Heinemann, 1934. Rpt. 2006. Originally 1916.
Fantuzzi, Marco. Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012.
Farber, Stephen. Melodramatic Truths. The Hudson Review, 23 (19701971),
685696.
Faris, Alexander. Jacques Offenbach. London: Faber & Faber, 1980.
Faure, Paul. La vie quotidienne en Grce au temps de la guerre de Troie (1250 a.C.). Paris:
Hachette, 1975.
Bibliography 269

Feeney, D.C. The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1991. Rpt. 1993.
Feminism and Film: Critical Approaches. Camera Obscura, 1 (1976), 310.
Fenik, Bernard. Typical Battle Scenes in the Iliad: Studies in the Narrative Technique of
Homeric Battle Descriptions. Stuttgart: Steiner, 1968.
Freedman, Lawrence. Strategy: A History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Gance, Abel. Prisme: Carnet dun cinaste. 1930. Rpt. Paris: est, 2010.
Garcia, Jr., Lorenzo F. . Homeric Durability: Telling Time in the Iliad. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 2013.
Garca Morcillo, Marta, and Silke Knippschild (eds.). Seduction and Power: Antiquity in
the Visual and Performing Arts. London: Bloomsbury, 2013.
Gemmell, David. Troy: Shield of Thunder, 2006. Rpt. New York: Ballantine Books, 2007.
Genette, Grard. Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree. Tr. Channa Newman and
Claude Dubinsky. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1997.
George, Margaret. Helen of Troy, 2006. Rpt. New York: Penguin, 2007.
Godard, Jean-Luc. Le mpris. Cahiers du cinma, 146 (August, 1963). Also in Bergala
(ed.), Jean-Luc Godard par Jean-Luc Godard, pp. 248249.
Goldhill, Simon. How to Stage Greek Tragedy Today. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 2007.
Griffin, Jasper. Homer on Life and Death. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980. Rpt. 2009.
Gunning, Tom. The Films of Fritz Lang: Allegories of Vision and Modernity. London:
Palgrave Macmillan/British Film Institute, 2000. Rpt. 2009.
Haggard, H. Rider, and Andrew Lang. The Worlds Desire. London: Longmans, Green,
1890.
Hainsworth, Bryan. The Iliad: A Commentary. Vol. 3: Books 912. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1993. Rpt. 2000.
Hall, Edith, Richard Alston, and Justine McConnell (eds.). Ancient Slavery and Abolition:
From Hobbes to Hollywood. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality: And Other Essays on Greek
Love. New York: Routledge, 1990.
Hamilton, Walter (ed.). Parodies of the Works of English and American Authors. Vol. 6.
London: Reeves & Turner, 1889.
Hanell, Krister (ed.). Dragma: Martino P. Nilsson A.D. IV Id. Iul. MCMXXXIX dedicatum.
Lund: Ohlsson, 1939.
Harding, James. Saint-Sans and His Circle. London: Chapman & Hall, 1965.
Harris, Oliver H. Pure Cinema? Blanchot, Godard, Le Mpris. In MacCabe and Mulvey
(eds.), Godards Contempt, pp. 96106.
Harrison, Stephen (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Horace. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2007.
270 Bibliography

Hawes, William. Filmed Television Drama, 19521958. Jefferson: McFarland, 2002.

Hayward, Susan, and Ginette Vincendeau (eds.). French Film: Texts and Contexts.
2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge, 2000.
Hedreen, Guy. The Cult of Achilles in the Euxine. Hesperia, 60 (1991), 313330.
Herr Bungerts Odysseus. The Musical Times, 38 (February 1, 1897), 104 and 113.
Herter, Hans. Ovids Kunstprinzip in den Metamorphosen. American Journal of
Philology, 69 (1948), 129148.
Heubeck, Alfred, Stephanie West, and J.B. Hainsworth. A Commentary on Homers
Odyssey. Vol. 1: Introduction and Books IVIII. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988. Rpt.
1990.
Hofler, Robert. The Man Who Invented Rock Hudson: The Pretty Boys and Dirty Deals of
Henry Willson. 2005. Rpt. New York: DaCapo, 2006.
Hust, Christoph. August Bungert: Ein Komponist im Deutschen Kaiserreich. Tutzing:
Schneider, 2005.
James, Alan (ed. and tr.). Quintus of Smyrna: The Trojan Epic: Posthomerica. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004. Rpt. 2007.
Jebb, Richard C. Review of Warr, Echoes of Hellas. Classical Review, 2 (1888),
248249.
Johansen, K. Friis. Achill bei Chiron. In Hanell (ed.), Dragma, pp. 181205.
Jones, Peter. Reading Virgil: Aeneid I and II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2011.
Joplin, Patricia Klindienst. Ritual Work on Human Flesh: Livys Lucretia and the Rape
of the Body Politic. Helios, 17 (1990), 5170.
Joshel, Sandra R. The Body Female and the Body Politic: Livys Lucretia and Verginia.
In Richlin (ed.), Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome, pp. 112130.
Kawin, Bruce F. Mindscreen: Bergman, Godard, and First-Person Film. 1978. Rpt. Normal,
Ill.: Dalkey Archive, 2006.
Kim, Lawrence. Homer between History and Fiction in Imperial Greek Literature.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Kirk, G.S. The Iliad: A Commentary. Vol. 1: Books 14. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1985. Rpt. 2001.
Kniebe, Tobias. Homer ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht: Troja-Regisseur Wolfgang
Petersen ber die mythischen Wurzeln des Erzhlens und den Achilles in uns allen.
Sddeutsche Zeitung (May 11, 2004). http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/petersen-
interview-homer-ist-wenn-man-trotzdem-lacht-1.429599.
Knox, Bernard. Backing into the Future: The Classical Tradition and Its Renewal. New
York: Norton, 1994.
. The Human Figure in Homer. In Buitron-Oliver (ed.), New Perspectives in
Early Greek Art, pp. 9396.
Bibliography 271

. What Did Achilles Look Like? In Knox, Backing into the Future,
pp. 4855.
Kofler, Wolfgang, and Florian Schaffenrath. Petersens epische Technik: Troja und
seine Homerische Vorlage. In Neuhaus (ed.), Literatur im Film, pp. 313330.
Kovacs, George, and C.W. Marshall (eds.). Classics and Comics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2011.
Krass, Andreas. Over His Dead Body: Male Friendship in Homers Iliad and Wolfgang
Petersens Troy (2004). In Renger and Solomon (eds.), Ancient Worlds in Film and
Television, pp. 153173.
Laguna-Mariscal, Gabriel, and Manuel Sanz-Morales. Was the Relationship Between
Achilles and Patroclus Homoerotic? The View of Apollonius Rhodius. Hermes, 133
(2005), 120123.
The Land of Homer. The New York Times (December 19, 1880), 4.
Lang, Andrew. Helen of Troy. London: Bell/New York: Scribners, 1882.
. Homer and the Epic. London: Longmans, Green, 1893.
Lang, Andrew, Walter Leaf, and Ernest Myers. The Iliad of Homer. London: Macmillan,
1882.
Latacz, Joachim. From Homers Troy to Petersens Troy. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From
Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp. 2742.
Latacz, Joachim, Ren Nnlist, and Magdalene Stoevesand. Homers Ilias:
Gesamtkommentar. Vol. 1: Erster Gesang (A), part 2: Kommentar. 3rd ed. Berlin: De
Gruyter, 2009.
Lattimore, Richmond. The Iliad of Homer. New ed. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 2011. Originally 1951.
. The Odyssey of Homer. Rev. ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1967. Several
rpts.
Lebow, Richard Ned. The Tragic Versions of Politics: Ethics, Interests and Orders.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Lefkowitz, Mary. Greek Gods, Human Lives: What We Can Learn from Myths. New Haven:
Yale University Press, 2003. Rpt. 2005.
Leith, Sam. Pecs and Violence. Financial Times (May 1516, 2010), 17.
Lesky, Albin. Gttliche und menschliche Motivation im homerischen Epos. Heidelberg:
Winter, 1961.
Leutrat, Jean-Louis. Le cinma, art cyclopen, ou: dans le sillage dHomre Gaia,
7 (2003), 573584.
Lvque, Pierre. The Greek Adventure. Tr. Miriam Kochan. London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, 1968.
Lewis, C.S. The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1936. Numerous rpts.
272 Bibliography

Lindner, Martin (ed.). Drehbuch Geschichte: Die antike Welt im Film. Mnster: lit, 2005.
Liverani, Elena. Da Eschilo ai Virgin Steele: Il mito degli Atridi nella musica contempora-
nea. Bologna: d.u. Press, 2009.
Lombardo, Stanley (tr.). Homer: Iliad. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997. Rpt. 2000.
. Translating the Iliad for a Wider Public. Classical World, 103 no. 2 (Winter
2010), 227231.
Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth. The Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Vol. 9: The
Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri: Inferno. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1886.
Los generos literarios: Actes del VII simposi destudis clssics, 2124 de Mar de 1983.
Bellaterra: Universitat Autnoma de Barcelona, 1985.
Louden, Bruce. Epeios, Odysseus, and the Indo-European Metaphor for Poet. The
Journal of Indo-European Studies, 24 nos. 34 (1996), 277304.
. Homers Odyssey and the Near East. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2011.
. The Iliad: Structure, Myth and Meaning. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 2006.
Lders, Detlev (ed.). Friedrich Hlderlin: Smtliche Gedichte. Vol. 1: Text. Bad Homburg:
Athenum, 1970.
MacCabe, Colin, and Laura Mulvey (eds.). Godards Contempt [sic]: Essays from the
London Consortium. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
McConnell, Justine. Eumaeus and Eurycleia in the Deep South: Odyssean Slavery in
Sommersby. In Hall, Alston, and McConnell (eds.), Ancient Slavery and Abolition,
pp. 385407.
McDonald, Marianne, and Martin M. Winkler. Michael Cacoyannis and Irene Papas
on Greek Tragedy. In Winkler (ed.), Classical Myth and Culture in the Cinema,
pp. 7289.
McGilligan, Patrick. Fritz Lang: The Nature of the Beast, 1997. Rpt. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 2013.
Marie, Michel. Un monde qui saccorde nos dsirs (Le Mpris, Jean-Luc Godard,
1963). Revue belge du cinma, 16 (1986), 2436.
Mendelsohn, Daniel. How Beautiful It Is and How Easily It Can Be Broken: Essays. New
York: HarperCollins, 2008. Rpt. 2009.
. A Little Iliad. The New York Review of Books (June 24, 2004), 4649. Rpt. as A
Little Iliad (Troy) in Mendelsohn, How Beautiful It Is and How Easily It Can Be
Broken, pp. 111123.
Merkle, Stefan. Telling the True Story of the Trojan War: The Eyewitness Account of
Dictys of Crete. In Tatum (ed.), The Search for the Ancient Novel, pp. 183196.
. The Truth and Nothing but the Truth: Dictys and Dares. In Schmeling (ed.),
The Novel in the Ancient World, pp. 563580.
Bibliography 273

Michelakis, Pantelis. Achilles in Greek Tragedy. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 2002.
. Homer in Silent Cinema. In Michelakis and Wyke (eds.), The Ancient World in
Silent Cinema, pp. 145165.
Michelakis, Pantelis, and Maria Wyke (eds.). The Ancient World in Silent Cinema.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Miller, Madeline. The Song of Achilles. New York: HarperCollins, 2012.
Moorehead, Caroline. Lost and Found: The 9,000 Treasures of Troy: Heinrich Schliemann
and the Gold That Got Away. 1996. Rpt. New York: Penguin, 1997.
. The Lost Treasures of Troy. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1994.
Moravia, Alberto. Cinema italiano: Recensioni e interventi, 19331990. Ed. Alberto
Pezzotta and Anna Gilardelli. Milan: Bompiani, 2010.
. Contempt. Tr. Angus Davidson. New York: New York Review Books, 1999.
Rpt. 2004.
. A Ghost at Noon. Tr. Angus Davidson. New York: Farrar Straus and Young/
London: Secker & Warburg, 1955.
Moravia, Alberto, and Alain Elkann. Life of Moravia. Tr. William Weaver. South
Royalton,Vt.: Steerforth Italia, 2000.
Mulvey, Laura. Afterthoughts on Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema Inspired by
King Vidors Duel in the Sun (1946). In Mulvey, Visual and Other Pleasures,
pp. 3140.
. Film, Feminism and the Avant-Garde. In Mulvey, Visual and Other Pleasures,
pp. 115131.
. Le Mpris (Jean-Luc Godard 1963) and Its Story of Cinema: A Fabric of
Quotations. In MacCabe and Mulvey (eds.), Godards Contempt, pp. 225237.
. Visual and Other Pleasures. 2nd ed. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
. Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. In Mulvey, Visual and Other Pleasures,
pp. 1427.
Myrsiades, Kostas (ed.). Reading Homer: Film and Text. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson
University Press, 2009.
Nestle, Wilhelm. Vom Mythos zum Logos: Die Selbstentfaltung des griechischen Denkens
von Homer bis auf die Sophistik und Sokrates. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Krner, 1942. Several
rpts.
Neuhaus, Stefan (ed.). Literatur im Film: Beispiele einer Medienbeziehung. Wrzburg:
Knigshausen & Neumann, 2008.
Nicoll, Allardyce. A History of English Drama, 16601900. Vol. 5: A History of Late
Nineteenth Century Drama, 18501900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1946.
Nisbet, Robin. Horace: Life and Chronology. In Harrison (ed.), The Cambridge
Companion to Horace, pp. 721.
274 Bibliography

Operatic Notes. Punch, or the London Charivari (June 29, 1904), 463.
Otto, Walter F. Die Gtter Griechenlands: Das Bild des Gttlichen im Spiegel des
griechischen Geistes, 1929. Rpt. Frankfurt: Klostermann, 2002.
. The Homeric Gods: The Spiritual Significance of Greek Religion. Tr. Moses Hadas.
1954. Rpt. New York: Octagon Books, 1978.
Paris, Renzo. Moravia: Una vita controvoglia. Florence: Giunti, 1996.
Paul, Joanna. Film and the Classical Epic Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2013.
Petegorsky, Dan. Context and Evocation: Studies in Early Greek and Sanskrit Poetry.
Dissertation; University of California, Berkeley, 1982.
Pomeroy, Arthur J. Then It Was Destroyed by the Volcano: The Ancient World in Film and
on Television. London: Duckworth, 2008.
Proch, Celina, and Michael Kleu. Models of Masculinities in Troy: Achilles, Hector and
Their Female Partners. In Renger and Solomon (eds.), Ancient Worlds in Film and
Television, pp. 175193.
Rabel, Robert J. The Realistic Politics of Troy. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers
Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp. 186201.
Radio: The Week in Review. Time (April 18, 1955). http://www.time.com/time/
magazine/article/0,9171,866227,00.html.
Radt, Stefan (ed.). Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta. Vol. 3: Aeschylus. Gttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985.
Redfield, James M. Nature and Culture in the Iliad: The Tragedy of Hector. Expanded ed.
Durham: Duke University Press, 1994. Rpt. 2004.
Rees, Brian. Camille Saint-Sans: A Life. London: Chatto & Windus, 1999.
Rehak, Bob. The Migration of Forms: Bullet Time as Microgenre. Film Criticism, 32
no. 1 (2007), 2648.
Reinach, Salomon. Pgase, lHippogriffe et les Potes. Rvue dArchologie, 11 (1920),
207235.
Renger, Almut-Barbara, and Jon Solomon (eds.). Ancient Worlds in Film and Television:
Gender and Politics. Leiden: Brill, 2013.
Richardson, Nicholas. The Iliad: A Commentary. Vol. 6: Books 2124. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1993. Rpt. 2000.
Richlin, Amy (ed.). Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1992.
Rohdie, Sam. Promised Lands: Cinema, Geography, Modernism. London: bfi [British
Film Institute] Publishing, 2001.
Roisman, Hanna M. Film Reviews: Ulysses (1954). Amphora, 1 no. 1 (2002), 1011.
Rosenbaum, Jonathan. Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia: Film Culture in Transition.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
. Trailer for Godards Histoire(s) du Cinma. Vertigo, 1 no. 7 (Autumn, 1997),
1320. Also in Rosenbaum, Goodbye Cinema, Hello Cinephilia, pp. 305318.
Bibliography 275

Ruins of Ancient Troy. The New York Times (November 10, 1896), 3.
Sad, Suzanne. Homer and the Odyssey. Tr. Ruth Webb. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2011.
Sanz Morales, Manuel, and Gabriel Laguna Mariscal. The Relationship Between
Achilles and Patroclus According to Chariton of Aphrodisias. The Classical
Quarterly, n.s. 53 no. 1 (2003), 292295.
Sassatelli, Roberta. Interview with Laura Mulvey: Gender, Gaze and Technology in
Film Culture. Theory, Culture and Society, 28 no. 5 (2011), 123143.
. Rappresentare il genere. Studi culturali, 7 no. 1 (2010), 3750.
Schein, Seth L. The Mortal Hero: An Introduction to Homers Iliad. Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1984.
Schmeling, Gareth L. (ed.). The Novel in the Ancient World. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Scodel, Ruth. Listening to Homer: Tradition, Narrative, and Audience. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 2002. Rpt. 2009.
Scully, Stephen. The Fate of Troy. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to
Hollywood Epic, pp. 119130.
Seidensticker, Bernd. Aufbruch zu neuen Ufern: Transformationen der Odysseusgestalt
in der literarischen Moderne. In Seidensticker and Vhler (eds.), Urgeschichten der
Moderne, pp. 249270.
Seidensticker, Bernd, and Martin Vhler (eds.). Urgeschichten der Moderne: Die Antike
im 20. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart: Metzler, 2001.
Severyns, Albert. Le Cycle pique dans lcole dAristarque. Lige: Vaillant-Carmanne/
Paris: Champion, 1928. Rpt. 1967.
Shahabudin, Kim. From Greek Myth to Hollywood Story: Explanatory Narrative
in Troy. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp.
107118.
Shanower, Eric. Trojan Lovers and Warriors: The Power of Seduction in Age of Bronze.
In Garca Morcillo and Knippschild (eds.), Seduction and Power, pp. 5770.
. Twenty-First Century Troy. In Kovacs and Marshall (eds.), Classics and
Comics, pp. 195206.
Singer, Hans Wolfgang. Art in Germany. The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs,
12 no. 56 (1907), 116118.
Snell, Bruno. The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek Origins of European Thought. Tr.
T.G. Rosenmeyer. Cambridge: Harvard University Press/Oxford: Blackwell, 1953.
Several rpts.
. The Discovery of the Mind in Greek Philosophy and Literature. Tr.
T.G. Rosenmeyer. New York: Dover, 1982.
. Die Entdeckung des Geistes: Studien zur Entstehung des europischen Denkens
bei den Griechen. 6th ed. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985.
Snodgrass, Anthony M. Arms and Armor of the Greeks. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1999.
276 Bibliography

Solomon, Jon. In the Wake of Cleopatra: The Ancient World in the Cinema since 1963.
Classical Journal, 91 (1996), 113140.
. The Vacillations of the Trojan Myth: Popularization & Classicization, Variation
& Codification. International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 14 (2007), 482534.
. Viewing Troy: Authenticity, Criticism, Interpretation. In Winkler (ed.), Troy:
From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp. 8598.
Spieker, Rainer. Die Beschreibung des Olympos (Hom. Od. 4147). Hermes, 97 (1969),
136161.
Sprague, Rosamond Kent (ed.). The Older Sophists. 1972. Rpt. Indianapolis: Hackett,
2001.
Sterritt, David (ed.). Jean-Luc Godard: Interviews. Jackson: University Press of
Mississippi, 1998.
Sulprizio, Chiara. Eros Conquers All: Sex and Love in Eric Shanowers Age of Bronze.
In Kovacs and Marshall (eds.), Classics and Comics, pp. 207219.
Tagesgeschichte: Musikbrief. Musikalisches Wochenblatt, 30 (February 2, 1899), 8284.
The Tale of Troy. The Times (May 30, 1883), 10.
Tatum, James (ed.). The Search for the Ancient Novel. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1994.
Thalmann, W.G. Thersites: Comedy, Scapegoats, and Heroic Ideology in the Iliad.
Transactions of the American Philological Association, 118 (1988), 128.
Tiger at Gates. The New York Times (September 11, 1955), Sunday Magazine, 20.
Tiger at Gates Opens in London. The New York Times (June 3, 1955), 27.
Tolstikov, Vladimir, and Mikhail Treister. The Gold of Troy: Searching for Homers Fabled
City. Tr. Christina Sever and Mila Bonnichsen. New York: Abrams, 1996.
Vandermerwe, Sandra, and J. Carter Powis. Colgate-Palmolive: Cleopatra. Harvard
Business School Cases (January 1, 1990; March 18, 1993), 124.
Vernant, Jean-Pierre. Myth and Society in Ancient Greece. Tr. Janet Lloyd. Rev. ed. New
York: Zone Books, 1990. Rpt. 1996.
Visser, Edzard. Homers Katalog der Schiffe. Stuttgart: Teubner, 1997.
Walker, Michael. Que la bte meure. In Wood and Walker (eds.), Claude Chabrol,
pp. 123131.
Warner, Rex (tr.). Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War. Rev. ed. Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1972. Several rpts.
Warr, George C. Echoes of Hellas. London: Ward, 1887.
West, M.L. The Epic Cycle: A Commentary on the Lost Troy Epics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2013.
. Immortal Helen. London: Bedford College, 1975.
Wieber, Anja. Vor Troja nichts Neues? Moderne Kinogeschichten zu Homers Ilias. In
Lindner (ed.), Drehbuch Geschichte, pp. 137162.
Bibliography 277

Winkler, Martin M. Cinema and Classical Texts: Apollos New Light. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2009. Rpt. 2011.
(ed.). Classical Myth and Culture in the Cinema. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2001.
. Editors Introduction. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood
Epic, pp. 119.
. Gladiator and the Traditions of Historical Cinema. In Winkler (ed.), Gladiator:
Film and History, pp. 1630.
(ed.). Gladiator: Film and History. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.
. Greek Myth on the Screen. In Woodard (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to
Greek Mythology, pp. 453479.
. The Iliad and the Cinema. In Winkler (ed.), Troy: From Homers Iliad to
Hollywood Epic, pp. 4367.
. Leaves of Homeric Storytelling: Wolfgang Petersens Troy and Franco Rossis
Odissea. In Cavallini (ed.), Omero mediatico, pp. 153163.
. The Roman Salute: Cinema, History, Ideology. Columbus: Ohio State University
Press, 2009.
. Three Queens: Helen, Penelope, and Dido in Franco Rossis Odissea and
Eneide. In Garca Morcillo and Knippschild (eds.), Seduction and Power,
pp. 133153.
. The Trojan War on the Screen: An Annotated Bibliography. In Winkler (ed.),
Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic, pp. 202215.
(ed.). Troy: From Homers Iliad to Hollywood Epic. Oxford: Blackwell, 2007.
Wolf, Christa. Cassandra: A Novel and Four Essays. Tr. Jan van Heurck. New York: Farrar
Straus Giroux, 1984. Rpt. 1988.
Wood, Robin, and Michael Walker. Claude Chabrol. London: Studio Vista/New York:
Praeger, 1970.
Woodard, Roger D. (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Greek Mythology. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Wyke, Maria. Screening Ancient Rome in the New Italy. In Edwards (ed.), Roman
Presences, pp. 188204.
Yonge, C.D. (ed. and tr.). The Deipnosophists or Banquet of the Learned of Athenaeus.
Vol. 3. London: Bohn, 1854.
Youngblood, Gene. Jean-Luc Godard: No Difference Between Life and Cinema. In
Sterritt (ed.), Jean-Luc Godard: Interviews, pp. 949.
Zander, Peter. Deutscher Hrtetest: Wolfgang Petersen hat Troja verfilmtund
fand in den Sagen Parallelen zu George W. Bush. Berliner Morgenpost (May 12,
2004). http://morgenpost.berlin1.de/archiv2004/040512/feuilleton/story677622.
html.
Index of Films and Television Productions

Achilles (short)252 Face That Launched a Thousand Ships, The

a.d. (tv)247 see Love of Three Queens, The
Agora6 Fall of Troy, The87, 115, 128, 238, 259260
Alexander56, 196 Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!246
Alexander the Great242 Fatiche di Ercole, Le
Argo261 see Hercules (1958)
Avatar226 5 Against the House1
Avenger, The222 Free Enterprise249
Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the
Beast Must Die, The255257 Forum, A205
Ben-Hur (1907)237238 Fury of Achilles8788, 9293, 125128, 130, 246
Ben-Hur (1925)238, 244n40
Ben-Hur (1959)242, 247248 Gangs of New York95
Bestia debe morir, La255 Giant of Marathon222
Boot, Das1013, 17 Gladiator6, 14n22, 26, 87, 95, 101, 189,
216n29, 252
Cabiria238 Guerra di Troia, La13, 130n38, 222, 246247
Caduta di Troia, La
see Fall of Troy, The Hannibal242
Casablanca14 Helena87, 130n38, 131, 239240
Centurion5 Helen of Troy (1956)19, 113, 213, 215, 219,
Circe the Enchantress238 243245, 248
Cleopatra (1963)242 Helen of Troy (2003, tv)19, 87, 114115, 129,
Conformist, The108 130n38, 219221, 252
Contempt108, 156163 Helen, YesHelen of Troy
Council of the Gods260261 see Elena si madi Troia
Clash of the Titans (1981)6, 110111, 206207, 216 Hercules (1958)125, 156n116, 222, 246
Clash of the Titans (2010)6 Hercules (1997)205207
Cupid and Psyche237 Hercules (2014)6
Hercules and the Lost Kingdom (tv)251
Dantes Inferno Hercules and the Princess of Troy (tv)243
see Inferno, L Hercules and the Queen of Lydia
Demetrius and the Gladiators244n40 see Hercules Unchained
Dionysus in 69246 Hercules: The Legendary Journeys
Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights249 (tv)251252
Hercules Reborn6
Eagle, The5 Hercules Unchained125, 156n116, 222, 246
Edipo re246 Higher Learning250
Electra111, 247 Human Stain, The250
Elena si madi Troia247
Eneide (tv)247 I, Claudius (tv)247
Ercole e la regina di Lidia le de calypso: Ulysse et le gant
see Hercules Unchained Polyphme, L233

* Wolfgang Petersens Troy is not indexed here.

Index Of Films And Television Productions 279

Immortals56 Odyssey, The (1997, tv)113, 252

Inferno, L (1911)259 Oedipus Rex
In Search of the Trojan War (tv)248 see Edipo re
In the Line of Fire14, 17 Of Mycenae and Men (tv)248
Iphigenia111, 114, 247 One or the Other17
Ira di Achille, L Outbreak17
see Fury of Achilles
It Happened in Athens243 Passion of the Christ, The5
Perfect Storm, The17
Jason and the Argonauts (1963)110, Pompeii6
150, 216 Private Life of Helen of Troy, The239
Jason and the Argonauts (2000, tv)252
Jesus of Nazareth (tv)247 Queen of Sparta, The240
John Carter14 Que la bte meure
Jugement de Pris, Le237 see Beast Must Die, The
Julius Caesar (1953)242 Quo Vadis? (1913)237
Quo Vadis? (1925)238
King Arthur5 Quo Vadis (1951)242
Konsequenz, Die17
Rat der Gtter, Der
Last Days of Pompeii, The (1900)237 see Council of the Gods
Last Days of Pompeii, The (1908)238 Regina di Sparta, La
Last Days of Pompeii, The (1959)222 see Queen of Sparta, The
Last Days of Pompeii, The (1984, tv)247 Retour dUlysse, Le233, 238
Last Legion, The5 Ride the High Country13n19
Lawrence of Arabia37 Robe, The244n40
Legend of Hercules, The6
Lion of Thebes, The (Il leone di Tebe)246 Samson and Delilah236, 242, 247
Longest Day, The216 Satyricon (1969)246
Lord of the Rings, The21, 221222, 226 Saving Private Ryan95, 101, 216
Loved One, The258 Scent of a Woman249
Love of Three Queens, The243 Seven Year Itch, The205
Singe den Zorn252253
Masada (tv)247 Socrates (tv)246
Medea (1969)246 Sommersby250
Mediterraneo249 Spartacus (1960)216n29, 242, 248
Mpris, Le Star Trek (tv)243244
see Contempt Story of Mankind, The243
Metropolis156 Strange Case of Anglica, The262n20
Mighty Aphrodite205 Summer Place, A245

Naked250 Telemachus238
Never Back Down251 Ten Commandments, The (1956)247
Nibelungen, Die156 This Man Must Die
Noahs Ark244n40 see Beast Must Die, The
Nostos: Il ritorno144n77 3005, 25
Three Stooges Meet Hercules, The243
Odissea (1911)233, 238 Time Tunnel, The (tv)243
Odissea (1968, tv)130n38, 154, 160, 247 To Have and To Have Not14
280 Index Of Films And Television Productions Index Of Films And Television Productions

Triumph of Venus, The238 War at Home, The251

Trojan Horse, The What Happened Was249
see Guerra di Troia, La Woman Is a Woman, A162n133
Trojan Women, The111, 113114, 247 Wooden Horse of Troy, The
Two Women108 see Guerra di Troia, La
2001: A Space Odyssey46, 249 Wrath of the Titans6
2010249
Xena: Warrior Princess (tv)251252
Ulysses (Ulisse)108, 112113, 116, 156n115,
158n121, 163, 245, 248 You Are There (tv)241
Ulysses 31 (tv)248

Vikings, The216
Voyage to Cythera260n15
Voyage to Italy (Viaggio in Italia)156n116
General Index
Achilleid (Aeschylus)178
Achilles24, 7, 910, 1213, 1618, 2022,
2425, 28, 3032, 3744, 46, 6669,
7282, 8485, 8892, 94106, 111,
116128, 130135, 137142, 147153, 155,
164179, 181203, 207, 212224, 228232,
239, 241243, 245, 249251, 253, 257, 261
Aeneas9, 13, 26, 146, 190, 197, 209214, 217,
222, 246
Aeneid100, 188, 203, 206215, 217, 221, 246
Aeschylus3, 65, 78, 81, 149, 155, 178179,
206, 220
Aethiopis174, 182n7
Agamemnon4, 7, 11, 13, 18, 2021, 2730,
3233, 3637, 4043, 45, 67, 71, 7678,
81, 84, 8990, 94, 97, 99, 102, 113115, 117,
119126, 128, 130135, 151, 153, 165171,
173, 176n18, 177, 180187, 192, 196199,
201202, 206, 208, 213214, 217, 219220,
231, 243244, 250
Agamemnon (Aeschylus)206, 220
see also Oresteia
Ajax18, 69, 102, 151n102, 170, 187, 213, 217n32,
219, 224
Alcidamas162164
Alexander the Great5, 196
Allen, Alena191192, 196, 199
Andromache9, 20, 75, 81, 8384, 104, 148,
199201, 212, 214, 239, 242243
Angelopoulos, Theodoros260
Anti-Homer67
Aphrodite73, 81, 83, 115, 128, 205, 212,
229, 238
Apollo4, 12, 32, 66, 7274, 7881, 85, 9092,
96, 101102, 116, 125, 130, 139141,
145147, 169172, 182, 191192, 194,
196197, 201, 211212 219, 221, 244, 246,
258n11, 263
Apollodorus67
Archilochus78
architecture19, 27, 29, 4041, 7173
aristeia91, 99102, 192
Aristotle177
* Troy, the Trojan War, Homer, and the Iliad are not indexed here.
Astyanax104, 190, 200, 214, 239
Athena72, 113, 115, 119128, 130139, 143,
149150, 154157, 183, 188, 210211, 213,
229, 246, 249
Bana, Eric34, 3839, 203, 222
Bazin, Andr128, 135, 162
Beast Must Die, The (Blake)255256
Belle Hlne, La (Offenbach)223, 232233
Benioff, David2, 17, 2223, 26, 3132, 65,
7879, 87, 98, 165, 178, 207, 209, 211,
214215, 222, 231
Benot de Sainte-Maure85, 222, 233, 240
Beowulf189n20
Blake, Nicholas (pseudonym)255256
Bloom, Orlando21, 3334, 111, 222
Boagrius41, 4344, 89, 9495, 166, 199,
217221
Briseis9, 20, 3233, 82, 8485, 8990, 97,
104, 116, 118120, 125126, 130132, 139,
141142, 151153, 168173, 179, 181, 187,
191202, 212215, 217n32, 218220, 231,
233, 240, 246, 250, 253
Bush, George W.20, 202
Butler, Samuel16, 230
Byrne, Rose3233
Cacoyannis, Michael111113, 116, 247
Calchas125, 130, 134, 170, 184
Calypso143145, 147, 149150, 157
Camerini, Mario108109, 112113, 116,
156n115, 158n121, 162163, 245, 248
Cassandra68, 85, 188, 192, 210, 213
Cassandra (Wolf)79
Chabrol, Claude255256
Chiasson, Charles118119, 139142, 145, 147
cgi see digital effects
Clytaemnestra, Clytemnestra84, 220, 232
Coen, Ethan and Joel233
Cohn, Harry1, 261
Contempt (Moravia)108110, 112113, 116,
124, 130, 156, 159
Cox, Brian3233, 45
282 General Index

computer-generated images Harrison, John Kent19, 87, 114115, 129130,

see digital effects 130n38, 219221
Cyclic Epics Hector2, 7, 9, 13, 17, 2021, 2325, 28,
see Epic Cycle 3439, 43, 66, 69, 71, 73, 8084, 9093,
Cypria68, 98, 132n41, 180181, 226, 239 95, 101, 104106, 126, 132, 148, 152, 158,
169172, 186191, 196197, 199200,
Dante85, 259 203, 207208, 211212, 217n32,
Dares3, 66, 81, 85, 138139, 208, 221224 218223, 229, 231, 239, 241244,
Day-Lewis, Cecil255 246, 250
DeMille, Cecil B.236, 242 Hedlund, Garrett3031
Dichterberuf (Hlderlin)157159 Hephaestus75, 103, 171, 184, 238
Dictys3, 85, 139, 208, 221224 Helen3, 6, 9, 13, 20, 23, 33, 38, 7475, 8084,
digital effects6, 25, 37, 42, 46, 130, 132, 88, 102, 114115, 117, 128130, 132,
223, 251 153n105, 165, 170, 173, 188, 195, 197,
Dio Chrysostom208n11 199200, 206, 208209, 212, 213n22, 214,
Dio of Prusa66, 81 215n27, 218220, 227231, 233234,
Dodds, E.R.123n33, 124 238239, 243246, 248n47, 249251,
Donahue, Troy245 253, 259
double motivation120122 Helen (Euripides)206
Dracontius66, 68 Hera77, 115, 121, 125, 184
Hermes144145, 157
Edwards, Mark120, 122 Heroicus67, 85n65
Eisenstein, Sergei M.22 Heroides192
Epic Cycle3, 98, 117n20, 187188, 208209, Hesiod81, 178, 206n7
224, 239, 249, 253 Hitler, Adolf20, 260
Eudorus18, 31, 46, 80, 96, 104, 168169, Hittite, Hittites19, 29, 80
194195 Hlderlin, Friedrich157161
Euhemerus142n72 homoeroticism2, 5, 78, 81, 178, 218219
Euripides3, 65, 80n49, 85n65, 111, 155, 158, Horace20, 242, 259, 261263
175, 187, 201, 206 Hyginus224n3
Exekias224
Iliou Persis85n65, 188, 208210
Fitton, Lesley28 Ion of Chios74
focalization, focalizer133135
formulae, epic9395, 99, 103 Jebb, Richard C.229230
Francisci, Pietro125 Joyce, James205, 233

Gance, Abel257258 Kazantzakis, Nikos233

Genette, Grard260
Giraudoux, Jean223, 239241
Girolami, Marino8788, 9293, 125128,
130131, 152, 162
Gleeson, Brendan3335
Godard, Jean-Luc108, 156, 158163
gods14, 66, 80, 83, 108164, 199, 207208, 212,
214, 243, 260
see also individual names
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang17
Gorgias162
Konchalovsky, Andrey113, 136
Lang, Fritz156161, 163
Latacz, Joachim21, 6566, 118, 137,
153, 160
Lattimore, Richmond24, 242
Lesches3
Little Iliad3, 117n20, 188, 208, 211
Livy201
Lucan22, 100, 117, 138, 216, 259
Lucretia201202
General Index
Manilius22
Mlis, Georges233
Menelaus7, 21, 3336, 74, 78, 8081, 8384,
99, 113115, 129130, 132, 153n105,
165166, 170, 182, 187, 191, 197, 200, 208,
220221, 230231, 259
mindscreen133135
Minoan19, 29, 68, 7273
Monteverdi, Claudio224225n4
Moravia, Alberto108110, 112, 124, 130, 156,
158159, 162
Mulvey, Laura193, 198
Mycenae, Mycenaean27, 29, 4041, 6776,
80, 166, 206, 220
Myrmidons (Aeschylus)78, 81, 155, 178
narratology123, 133135
Nestor27, 4143, 45, 68, 70, 89, 126, 166167,
169, 171, 177, 185186
Noa, Manfred87, 130n38, 131132, 238, 240
Odysseus4, 9, 28, 31, 68, 74, 7778, 81, 84, 88,
9092, 94, 9698, 109, 112113, 135136,
143145, 147, 149150, 153, 155, 156n116,
157, 161163, 166167, 171, 177, 180190,
192, 213214, 216, 218219, 221, 233,
243244, 249, 251
Odyssey4, 26, 74, 77, 9394, 98, 108, 109,
111113, 124n33, 135137, 142143,
149150, 153156, 160, 163, 180190, 205,
207, 209, 228230, 232233, 238, 243,
248250, 253, 255, 260
Offenbach, Jacques223, 232233
Oliveira, Manoel de262263
On the Gods155
OToole, Peter37, 39
Oresteia32, 149, 229
overdetermination
see double motivation
Ovid85, 117, 192, 206207, 209, 242, 259
Owen, Wilfred9
Pabst, G.W.158
Paradise Lost22
Paris6, 9, 12, 2021, 23, 3336, 38, 8083, 85,
88, 111, 113115, 117, 128, 140141, 151, 166,
173175, 188, 190, 195197, 200, 209,
211215, 217n32, 218220, 222, 230231,
238239, 243, 245, 259
283
Pastrone, Giovanni87, 115, 238, 259
Patroclus23, 3031, 73, 7778, 8082,
9093, 99, 103104, 106, 126127, 140,
146, 152, 155, 165171, 174n12, 176178,
183185, 187188, 197, 216, 218219, 224,
229, 239
Penelope98, 109, 113, 150, 163, 181
Petersen, Wolfgang2, 714, 1626, 3146,
6566, 86107, 110112, 115, 117119,
129131, 135, 141142, 148, 151152,
162165, 167168, 171173, 178, 180, 188,
190191, 193, 195, 197199, 202204,
207208, 211, 214, 219220, 222225, 229,
252254
Pharsalia22, 100, 117, 138, 216
Philoctetes186187
Philostratus67, 85n65
Pindar74n28
Pitt, Brad3032, 3839, 4144, 76, 111, 116, 203
Plato140
Plautus205
Polyxena81, 85, 151n103, 192, 213n22
Poseidon27, 2930, 90, 113, 145147, 156157,
175, 211, 251
Posthomerica81, 141
Priam23, 27, 2930, 37, 39, 71, 80, 83, 85, 148,
165, 170, 172173, 188, 190, 192, 196, 211214,
219221, 229, 231, 239, 241242, 244
Propertius215n27
Protagoras154155, 158, 164
Ptolemy Chennus67
Quintus of Smyrna81, 141
Rabel, Robert191193
Reeves, Steve125, 156n115, 222, 246
Republic (Plato)140
Roisman, Hanna108, 116
Roman de Troie, Le85, 222
Rossi, Franco130n38, 154, 160, 162, 247
Sack of Troy
see Iliou Persis
Saddam Hussein173
Sarpedon82, 139, 148, 152, 169
Schliemann, Heinrich1, 75, 156n116,
225228, 233234, 237, 240, 252253
Scott, Ridley6, 26, 87, 189
Scully, Stephen116118
284 General Index

Seneca68 Trojan War Will Not Take Place, The223, 239

Shakespeare, William186, 207, 222, 240 Trojan Women, The111n8, 201, 206
simile, epic22, 99, 172 Tzetzes, John76
Snell, Bruno123, 136137, 153154
Socrates140 Ulysses
Sophocles65, 74, 186 see Odysseus
special effects
see digital effects Venus
Statius77, 138139 see Aphrodite
Stone, Oliver5, 196 Verginia201202
Virgil26, 68, 85, 100, 128, 188, 203204,
Telegony150n99 206215, 222, 242, 255, 259
Thebaid138 Vulcan
Thetis2, 22, 75, 77n38, 78, 103, 116117, 128, see Hephaestus
167168, 171, 173176, 178n29, 186, 216,
218n14, 231, 246 War and Peace117
300 (graphic novel)252 Wise, Robert19, 113, 115116, 213, 215, 219220
Thucydides114115, 192 Wolf, Christa7980
Tiger at the Gates (play after Giraudoux)241 Wolf, Friedrich August225
Tolstoy, Lev117118
Triopas40, 4344, 94, 165166, 168, 217 Zenodotus90
Troilus80, 221, 239240 Zeus7, 2829, 66, 82, 9091, 129, 144145,
Troilus and Cressida186, 222223, 240 146n89, 148, 150, 169, 175, 184