M. is a poet and writer of fiction as well as a translator. He has previously translated the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Book of Job, the Bhagavad Gita and the Tao Te Ching.

More than 70 translations of the Iliad into English already exist, so a first question is whether M.'s adds anything new or different. The ‘golden-bronze’ coloured cover depicts a warrior crouched behind his shield ready for attack or defence. Since his head is bowed it is also possible to see him as dying and this reflects the character of the translation. M. presents the Iliad as a condensed and action-filled war-story that in some parts reminds us of modern movies. The tragic overtones are present but are somewhat dimmed by the emphasis on conveying rapid action. In its direct, contemporary and clear-cut language this shorter version of the Iliad may have a good chance of reaching a new generation of first time readers of Greek epic poetry. But is M.'s translation Homer's Iliad or is it something else? The answer to this question depends on how we react to M.'s choices and which Iliad we choose to identify as the real Iliad.

M.'s Iliad is well structured. The short summaries of each of the 24 books and the introduction which deals with the poem as a whole, describes some of the main human characters and introduces the themes of ‘Honor and Fate’, ‘Wretched War’, ‘Man-Glorying War’ and ‘Poetry’ are instructive. The sections that deal with the Greek text and M.'s views on translation are necessary, and the parts that address the pronunciation of Greek names and the geography of the Iliad are helpful, as is the map.

This is the first translation of the Iliad which is based on M.L. West's edition, in which many passages have been identified as probable interpolations that were added by rhapsodes after the Iliad was first written down (M. p. lvii, M. West, Homeri Ilias I–XII [1998] and M. West, Homeri Ilias XIII–XXIV [2000]. See also M. West, Studies in the Text and Transmission of the Iliad [2001] and The Making of the Iliad: Disquisition and Analytical Commentary [2011]). Following West's deletions and bracketing of passages M. has chosen to remove more than 1,000 lines, including all of Book 10 from his translation. The effect of omitting the interpolated lines ‘is a dramatically sharper and leaner text’, according to M. (p. lvii).

All the same, he includes Samuel Butler's translation of Book 10 with a short explanatory note at the end of his own translation of the poem. The decision to include Book 10, even though it has been rejected as not part of the original Iliad, appears contradictory and the chances that it will be read, when taken out of its narrative context, are small. Perhaps this choice most of all signifies the difficulties associated with removing it from the ‘Iliadic scene’ and from Homeric discourse. I would imagine that most contemporary Homeric scholars, while well aware of the inconsistencies and weaknesses of Book 10, would still count it as an intrinsic part of the Iliad. Many readers will therefore probably find M.'s translation problematic. In describing the problems with Book 10 in the introduction M. argues that ‘its style is different, and it can be excised without leaving a trace’ (p. lvii). I cannot agree completely with this view. Book 10 – whether a later addition or not – has certainly left traces and communicated information to a wide group of people for a long time. Without it we would not have learnt, for example, of the fear associated with visiting the enemy's territory during the night, of the courage of Odysseus and Diomedes, of the close bond between Athena and Odysseus, or of Odysseus' attentiveness to bird signs.

M. uses a five beat metre, which gives a rapid and smooth rhythm, and his language is characterised by a powerful simplicity. Together with the deletions of many epithets, this makes his Iliad very easy to read. However, I frequently missed important words and epithets from the Greek text. Here is an example from the opening (Il. 1.1–7):

Both language and rhythm are clear, rapid and elegant, and most of the content is kept. But one vital part is missing in this section, namely the introduction of one of the most important human characters in the Iliad as Peleus' Achilles. To be identified as the ‘son of …’ is important for the construction of identity in the Iliad. We all know that a multitude of epithets of this kind are frequent in the Iliad. I see a risk that we today in our written culture may experience these epithets and repetitive words as unnecessary and time-consuming to read and thus dismiss them as uninteresting. The Iliad was not, however, originally meant to be read, and if we want to get close to the Iliad and its characters as well as to grasp a sense of the oral character of the narrative, these characteristics should be kept. There are other examples of crucial information being lost. For instance, M.'s translation of the bird named ἅρπη as ‘sea hawk’ in Il. 19.350. According to LSJ it is an ‘unknown bird of prey’, but it is unlikely that it is a sea bird since Athena, assimilated to this bird, departs from the mountainous area of Mt Olympus. This is not a natural place for a sea bird of any kind.

M.'s language is contemporary and his characters' speech is informal. Sometimes, however, the language becomes too simplistic, such as in the episode where the gods speak to each other in a way which reminds one too much of a family of today with teenagers round a dinner table: ‘These words caused Athena and Hera to seethe with fury as they sat together devising grief for the Trojans. Athena was silent; though angry at Zeus, her father, and though a fierce passion gripped her, she held her tongue. But Hera could not contain herself, and she cried out, “Dread Lord, what are you saying?”’ (4.18–23) And further on: ‘Greatly annoyed by what she had said, Zeus answered, “How absurd you are!”’ (4.29–30).

There are also problems with words such as κύων that M. translates as ‘bitch’ (Il. 9.373). ‘Dog’ and ‘bitch’ are not the same, and information and connotations get lost. Many replacements of words, sometimes archaic words, with contemporary words might be a way of reaching a new generation of readers of the Iliad, but such choices simultaneously run the risk of moving the text too far from its original meaning. One function of the archaic and formal language in the Iliad was surely, already at the time of its creation, to give a touch of a former period of time when the ancestors were stronger and mightier.