Dr. Solez is writing a book that is the culmination of his feasting research thus far. Feasting in the Iliad: Structure, Character, and Diplomacy is a literary study bookended in the introduction and conclusion by two historical observations: 1) the prominence and frequency of feasts in the Iliad is grounded in the near universal role feasts play in defining relations within communities and managing relations with outsiders. Related themes animate the Iliad and so feasts are abundant as one vector where these social relationships are explored and articulated; 2) feasting in the Iliad is a historical force influencing later ancient Greek ideas and practices about how to relate to one another, to the gods, and to outsiders.
The literary study begins in the first chapter with feasting in the structure of the Iliad. There will be a visualization which represents all the formal scenes in the epic in story-time and in narrated time. This will make it apparent that there is regularity in the occurrence of feasting scenes. They are used as literary devices of closure, as analeptic and proleptic plot devices to summarize past action and plan for future action, and their occurrence may relate, as suggested many times before, to the performance context of early archaic epic, providing the audience the opportunity to feast with the ancestors. Feasts also regularly precede the set-pieces in the epic, occurring before the Catalogue of Ships and before the ekphrasis.
Structure is also the subject of Chapter 2, where I explore the evidence revealed by the pattern of feasts in the Iliad. There is a general pattern I observe that shows alternation between human and divine feasts. In the first act or section of the Iliad (Books 1-7), until Poseidon complains of the lack of sacrifice in concert with building the wall, human feasts are predictably followed by divine feasts, and vice versa. The central portion of the epic (Books 8-17) shows a breakdown of this pattern that is thematically significant: the human-divine relationship is disturbed as the devastation of Achilles’ withdrawal consumes the narrative. With Book 18 and Achilles’ imminent return, the pattern is reestablished, and continues to the end of the epic, which features a dense cluster of feasts. The literary analysis in Chapter 2 will include a religious interpretation of the pattern of feasts, showing how it is emblematic of the sacrificial relationship, and how feasting also defines human relations with gods.
Chapter 3 is about feasting and characterization. Characters in the Iliad feast differently, and these differences reflect sociopolitical roles and strategies employed by the characters to achieve their goals. Agamemnon’s feasts are always the most expensive, featuring beef, but they are entirely parochial in their reference points. His feasts would be at home in Greece, and, though he has acquired the most foreign booty, it is never displayed at his feasts. He wishes to exemplify the role of king and so his feasts are typical of what an Achaean king would offer in his home territory. The feast hosted by Nestor spanning Books 11-14 is different; he uses elaborate furniture and feasting vessels and serves a unique cuisine (the kukeon with onion garnish). His feasting shows cosmopolitanism, familiarity with the wider world, and wisdom about the functions of certain foods. The feasts of Achilles are different still, but more closely resemble Nestor’s than Agamemnon’s, including in his possession of a special cup. Achilles’ feasts (Books 9 and 24) are the most elaborate of the epic, full of fancy furniture and feasting vessels, serving a more varied cuisine of pork, mutton, goat, bread and wine. Booty acquired on the campaign is proudly displayed, making the claim to knowledge of the wider world. Achilles does not possess the same political prerogatives of Agamemnon, and cannot match his wealth, but he enthusiastically deploys all the wealth he can muster to make a claim to authority that counters Agamemnon’s. Achilles’ strategy can be deemed successful in Iliad 18-24, where his authority eclipses Agamemnon’s, he never accepts the compensatory feast Odysseus and Agamemnon offer, and he gives Agamemnon several orders which he obeys.
Chapter 4 is the last before the conclusion. It is about the feast of Achilles and Priam that resolves the epic and serves as its dénouement. The political goals of Achilles, to be the highest ranking man on the Trojan battlefield, motivate his use of a feast to serve as the context of negotiation. He wishes to subordinate Priam by feasting him, to show himself to be a superior king to Agamemnon according to the values of Achaean society (his acceptance of a ransom in Book 24 versus Agamemnon’s refusal of one in Book 1), and to avoid the reciprocal obligations of guest-friendship, which motivates the unusual diction, dorpon instead of words related to xenia, to describe the feast.
Dr. Solez’s orientation: These interests that grew out of the study of ancient Greek and Roman societies nevertheless have obvious points of contact with academic disciplines outside of classics, and the Raven Research Group was conceived to unite scholars in several disciplines around a limited set of research questions, so that their great variety of expertise, theory and methods may productively be translated into other disciplines. The group currently consists of world renowned scholars, junior and mid-career academics, and graduate students.
Raven was founded partly in response to an ideological position the director maintains. We support the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada with a commitment to follow its recommendations and to engage Indigenous people and perspectives in the study of traditional cultures around the world, including those of antiquity.
Research Group for the Comparative Study of Feasting 