The Iliad

Satisfied

I agree with almost everything Bruce Trinque says in his review... with one obvious exception, so I'll concentrate on that.Given that with Verity the reader is "getting something that hews quite closely to the original" for a variety of reasons, and despite that it's "not the finest English poetic rendition" but "may well be the best way for an Enflish (sic) language reader to best approach the real heart of the Iliad," I would suggest that it is, in fact, close to perfect for the first time reader. In my opinion, it's also impressive for those already familiar with the poem, both in the Greek and in other translations.Also, I would recommend that first time readers avoid like the plague both Fagles' and Mitchell's versions, the former vastly overwritten and the latter vastly underwritten. That's not to say that Fagles and Michell have produced unreadable versions, but both are very definitely "based on" the Greek text as opposed to being an attempt to faithfully reproduce the Greek text into English, which is what Verity is attempting and largely succeeds in doing. For what it's worth, I admire both the Fagles and Mitchell versions.Lattimore's translation comes closest to Verity's in form and spirit and is venerated, justly, by many, but I prefer Verity's on the grounds that it's less cumbersome in expression, a fault which Lattimore falls into surprisingly often, and Verity seldom makes straightforward translation errors, which crop up in Lattimore more often than one might expect.My only serious objection to Verity is that he frequently alters the expression of what are verbatim repetitions in the Greek, almost as if he were trying to disguise the immense volume of such occurences in the original.However, if I were recommending a translation for first time readers, Verity's would come first with Lattimore's a close second.

I note that I read the E. V. Rieu translation....I lack the knowledge to give a learned opinion on "The Iliad," either on its cultural significance over the millenia, or the historical insights that it provides, or on which person or group of people composed it. Back in high school, I did take ancient Greek for two years, during which we read part of "The Odyssey" in Greek. I remember almost nothing from that: the Greek alphabet, yes; the grammar, vocabulary, and the literature, no. I read "The Iliad" around then, but largely forgot it too.I can report that I am glad to have re-read it, and that I have profited from the experience. The book is of interest in itself, separated from the impact it had as a foundational part of the Western canon. Observations that many others have made with which I agree: it is notable that the book begins nine years into the siege of Troy and that it covers a relatively short time-frame, stopping before Troy falls to the Achaeans; it is notable that wounds are described in gory detail, that at times even the great warriors flee in terror, that the warriors weep and wail; it is notable how un-heroic the heroes are: Achilles sulks and broods; Agamemnon is merciless, arrogant, irresponsible, genocidal; Hector flees.I doubt "The Iliad" was intended or perceived as an anti-war book, but it certainly doesn't paint a glorious picture of noble heroes valiantly dying for a great cause. Despite this, the participants appear to see warfare as worthy, witness Hector's wish for his baby son, "Let him bring home the bloodstained armor of the enemy he has killed, and make his mother happy."I was never proficient enough at Greek to appreciate the poetic merit of Homer, but E. V. Rieu's translation includes some beautiful passages, such as: "There are nights when the upper air is windless and the stars in heaven stand out in their full splendor round the bright moon; when every mountain-top and headland and ravine starts into sight, as the infinite depths of the sky are torn open to the very firmament; when every star is seen, and the shepherd rejoices. Such and so many were the Trojans' fires, twinkling in front of Ilium..."Millenia have passed since "The Iliad" was created. Much has changed, and I found some of these changes almost comically striking, e.g. how often "The Iliad" cites tripods (yes, tripods) as magnificent treasures. To me, the most striking thing of all is that despite the passage of time, the story still speaks of things that matter to us, that move us. Anger. Violence. Grief. Love.

Great poetry to enjoy and tring to find these people in ancient hittite text is fun

It's a classic book don't get me wrong. I however found myself skipping through large sections of the book (just reading the chapter summaries to get a basic overview for particularly dry parts). I can imagine die hard classical scholars ranting and raving about such mis-treatment of a classical work.I approached the book as a casual reader with little knowledge of the classics. I found the summaries great...the latin difficult, and the names of people and places extremely confusing. Very difficult to parse through a novel when characters are referred to by three separate names and sometimes the names of their fathers....each of which is indistinguishable as a name of a region, a lesser god, a warrior or a town.I'm glad that I read it. And it's finally off my list of books I've always wanted to read...but it was rough getting through it.

There are many version of Iliad in the market but I always like Chiltern. It’s high quality, affordable and pocket size. One more for my Chiltern collection.

What a book. Glad I didn't live in those times, but love reading about them. I was first not interested in reading Homer, but he got me in the first pages. I highly recommend!

Somehow Fagles achieves a remarkable translation of an author who can only be grasped outside of time, he too invoking the eternal muse.