Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 53

Thread: Trojan vs. Greek Sympathies

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    99

    Trojan vs. Greek Sympathies

    I just finished the Iliad, and I was wondering if more people sympathized with the Greeks or the Trojans when they read this. Sure, the poem was written by a Greek (or I guess an Ionian, but I presume he considers himself the descendant of the Achaians described in the poem), but the Greeks have almost no scenes of tenderness or compassion. Troy is described as a former idyllic paradise forever ruined by the Greek siege. Priam is a wise, compassionate ruler, always kind even to Helen, whereas Agamemnon is an overly arrogant tyrant who only reluctantly gives up the daughter of the priest of Apollo, nearly ruining the Greeks' chances at something they've put almost a decade of sweat and blood into. Hector, although not the fighter than Achilles is, seems like a truly noble man. He believes in the good of Troy, at what his people are fighting to save, and even though he can be overconfident and egotistical like Achilles, he seems to care more about his homeland (Achilles actually prays so that his people--granted, the Greeks didn't seem like the particularly organized and unified state that they would become in the coming centuries, so I guess it's a stretch to say that they have a national identity--will be defeated in battle by the Trojans to prove Achilles's point that they need him) than his rival does. I can't see Hector wishing defeat on his people.

    To me what makes the Iliad so tragic is not Achilles and Patroklos (because I didn't feel that their friendship was particularly well-established before the latter's defeat at Hector's hands), but the fate of the Trojans. A war fought over Paris's womanizing is so below Priam and Hector's sensibilities, yet they feel compelled to defend their homeland against invasion, even as they condemn their vain son/brother. It is their human connections that makes the story so tragic, their humane characteristics. Priam and Hector's kind treatment of Helen even as the other Trojans reject her; especially the mourning of Andromache and her heartbreaking lines about her son growing up without a father. God, that was rough stuff. To me this was the real tragedy of the Iliad, and I found it interesting how Homer devoted so much attention to the positive qualities of the Trojans, because the Greeks usually come off as bickering and overly macho (although perhaps these qualities were more important back then than the close family connections of the Trojans?). It seems unlikely, although I'm not really sure.

  2. #2
    Bibliophile JBI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,360
    You aren't supposed to sympathize with the Trojans, that is an anachronism - it's a holy war, the Trojans committed a sin by insulting the Greek's hospitality and, given the conventions, it is only fair that Troy must burn as consequence - the laws of marriage and of hospitality were ignored, and therefore Troy must pay the price as fits the conventions of religion at the time.

    Homer is singing of the glory of the Greek's victory, not of the tragedy of the Trojan defeat - I think it is important to remember that when reading the text. It's Virgil who really invents the idea of the tragic Trojan.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    99
    Yeah, I know I'm not supposed to. There are several references throughout about the Trojans being bad "guests," so to speak, because Paris went off with Menelaos's possessions, but I can't help but feel that Homer invested some tragedy into his portrayals of the Trojans. It is interesting that Virgil came up with (did he come up with this idea--wasn't Rome supposedly created by Romulus and his brother?) the idea that the Romans were descended from the Trojans instead of the Greeks, considering how much of the Greek's culture the Romans borrowed. I wonder why this was. But regardless of whether I was supposed to feel sympathy for the Trojans or not, I most definitely did. But yeah, I'm aware that the Trojans were supposed to burn because of their lack of hospitality--he points out in several places how ideally there should be a relationship of respect between a host and his guests (Achilles hosting the "entreating party" in book IX, etc.). I suppose the final book, where Achilles is warm towards Priam inside his house is the ultimate example of being a polite host, but I cannot help but feel there is some sympathy towards Priam in this conclusion too. Eh, maybe I'm wrong, but somebody else had to feel this way I'd think. I definitely wish there was more discussion about this on here, most of the topics seem pretty dead. Thanks for the quick reply, JBI.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir777 View Post
    I found it interesting how Homer devoted so much attention to the positive qualities of the Trojans
    I think you're on the right track, and this is an important insight for understanding the Iliad. It is clear that you are supposed to feel sympathy for the Trojans. From details like the mini-biographies at the deaths of minor characters (of Iphidamas, the newly-wed, for example) to important episodes like Hector's last visit with Andromache, to significant structural elements like concluding the poem with Hector's funeral, great pains are taken in the poem to make the Trojans human and invite the audience to identify with them. To insist that you shouldn't feel sympathy for them would require an impressive lack of sensitivity.

    The point, however, is not to take sides with the Trojans against the Greeks, as your original post seems to suggest. The audience already knows that the Greeks will conquer the Trojans (and, of course, the poem presents plenty of opportunity for the audience to sympathize with the Greeks). The Iliad is not about the Trojan War; it is about the wrath of Achilles. The Trojan War is the setting. An important role of the Trojans is to show what the Achaeans could not in this setting -- life at home with family and friends. Recall that the first appearance of the Trojans in the narrative is accompanied by Helen reminiscing about life with the Greeks at home. I think this role is crucial for the development of the main themes of the Iliad, and it would be ineffective if the audience doesn't feel the tragedy of the Trojans' experience.

    It is true that the Trojans have offended the gods by abducting Helen (among other offenses), but the Greeks offend the gods, too, in various ways. The overall justice of the Greek cause does not mean that the audience should feel no sympathy for the individual Trojans caught up in the consequences. The Iliad is not a fable or fairy tale for children; ancient Greeks were capable of discerning shades of gray and understanding that life is more complex than us versus them.

    As for whether or not it is anachronistic to sympathize with the Trojans, I am not aware of any convincing evidence that the original audience regarded the poem with a strict black-and-white Greeks-versus-Trojans attitude. Later Greeks often did associate the Trojans with the alien East, but that can easily be attributed to the influence of the Persian invasions (and it probably says more about how they used their mythology than about how they experienced the Iliad itself).


    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir777 View Post
    It is interesting that Virgil came up with (did he come up with this idea--wasn't Rome supposedly created by Romulus and his brother?) the idea that the Romans were descended from the Trojans instead of the Greeks, considering how much of the Greek's culture the Romans borrowed.
    The story that Romans were descendants of Trojans was traditional, and not original to Virgil.
    Optima dies ... prima fugit

  5. #5
    Registered User prendrelemick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Posts
    4,871
    Blog Entries
    29
    I would say that our sympathies are with men, playthings of the Gods.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    99
    bluevictim, you make some good points. Perhaps the title of my thread is a bit simplistic. I don't necessarily sympathize with the Trojans over the Greeks--I just found it interesting that Homer provides so many character sketches, etc. to lend this amount of pathos to their plight. Simply because of the situation, their side seems more tragic. Their homeland is being invaded, instead of them attacking the Greek cities. I suppose this says something about the tragic nature of war itself. It's ultimately about the destruction of family and friendships at the expense of pride and honor, and the situation could easily be reversed (I suppose it was when the Persians invaded the Greeks, who had to fight to defend their own families).

    The Trojans lived in what is today western Turkey, correct? Does anyone know what kind of ethnicity they were (or were supposed to be)? Were they closer to the inhabitants of the Greek mainland or closer to the Persians (or the people who would become the Persians--I'm not sure if their empire had developed around the time the story was set, which is supposedly 1200 BCE)? I know the Trojan War is only based on the dimmest recollection of history and is mostly mythical, but I find its basis in fact fascinating.

    And thanks for pointing out that the Trojan-descended Roman story preceded Virgil. Does this somehow clash with the idea that Romulus and Remus (I think that is both of them) founded Rome? It seems to, because Aineas and those two are definitely completely different. I still wonder why the Romans chose to claim their lineage was from the Trojan side instead of the Greeks, especially considering that the Greeks eventually decimated the Trojans, minus Aineas (and his son and father, I think--I haven't read the Aeneid yet, but I probably should get on that). Maybe they too liked the Trojans in this story, so it wasn't just me! No, but I understand that it isn't as simplistic as being black-and-white "you're either with me or against me" in terms of which side you sympathize with. I sympathize with both, although because of the situation (as I described above) it's easier to sympathize with the side whose families are about to be sold in slavery. But I am aware that is just how life was back then, and because of this Homer's story is ultimately about the terrible waste of life that is war. Glad we got some people in here to discuss it. Man, the more I talk about this, the more I love the poem.

  7. #7
    Vincit Qui Se Vincit Virgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,354
    Blog Entries
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by JBI View Post
    You aren't supposed to sympathize with the Trojans, that is an anachronism - it's a holy war, the Trojans committed a sin by insulting the Greek's hospitality and, given the conventions, it is only fair that Troy must burn as consequence - the laws of marriage and of hospitality were ignored, and therefore Troy must pay the price as fits the conventions of religion at the time.
    I will have to disagree and completely agree with Bluevictum below. The only real heoric character throughout is Hector and our sympathies are with Priam. It is critical to the story line that we have sympathy for the Trojans, otherwise that climatic scene between Achilles and Priam would not be poignant at all. Priam and the trojan people have suffered, paid dearly for whatever sin they may have committed. And who really on the Trojan side is anywhere as sympathetic as Hector or Priam or really any of Priam's sons other than Paris? I don't think there is any. And certainly the culture of the Trojans is charcterized as superior to the Greeks.

    Now I had never thought of this as a religious war, and though it's not religious on the part of the Trojans (does it take both sides to be fighting for a religious cause to be a religious war?) there may be something to it. However, Meneleaus and Agamenmon are hardly fighting in religious ferver. In fact none of the Greeks are; they're fighting for glory and booty. However religion is integrated into the story line, especially that plague Apollo sends out in the openning book for offense to his priest.

    Homer is singing of the glory of the Greek's victory, not of the tragedy of the Trojan defeat - I think it is important to remember that when reading the text. It's Virgil who really invents the idea of the tragic Trojan.
    The Greeks do not win the war in The Illiad. That is external to Homer's story and was probably already part of the story line before Homer. Homer was not the only teller of tales. Actually, the fact that Homer does not end with the Greek victory adds some credence to a Trojan bias.

    Quote Originally Posted by bluevictim View Post
    I think you're on the right track, and this is an important insight for understanding the Iliad. It is clear that you are supposed to feel sympathy for the Trojans. From details like the mini-biographies at the deaths of minor characters (of Iphidamas, the newly-wed, for example) to important episodes like Hector's last visit with Andromache, to significant structural elements like concluding the poem with Hector's funeral, great pains are taken in the poem to make the Trojans human and invite the audience to identify with them. To insist that you shouldn't feel sympathy for them would require an impressive lack of sensitivity.

    The point, however, is not to take sides with the Trojans against the Greeks, as your original post seems to suggest. The audience already knows that the Greeks will conquer the Trojans (and, of course, the poem presents plenty of opportunity for the audience to sympathize with the Greeks). The Iliad is not about the Trojan War; it is about the wrath of Achilles. The Trojan War is the setting. An important role of the Trojans is to show what the Achaeans could not in this setting -- life at home with family and friends. Recall that the first appearance of the Trojans in the narrative is accompanied by Helen reminiscing about life with the Greeks at home. I think this role is crucial for the development of the main themes of the Iliad, and it would be ineffective if the audience doesn't feel the tragedy of the Trojans' experience.

    It is true that the Trojans have offended the gods by abducting Helen (among other offenses), but the Greeks offend the gods, too, in various ways. The overall justice of the Greek cause does not mean that the audience should feel no sympathy for the individual Trojans caught up in the consequences. The Iliad is not a fable or fairy tale for children; ancient Greeks were capable of discerning shades of gray and understanding that life is more complex than us versus them.

    As for whether or not it is anachronistic to sympathize with the Trojans, I am not aware of any convincing evidence that the original audience regarded the poem with a strict black-and-white Greeks-versus-Trojans attitude. Later Greeks often did associate the Trojans with the alien East, but that can easily be attributed to the influence of the Persian invasions (and it probably says more about how they used their mythology than about how they experienced the Iliad itself).


    The story that Romans were descendants of Trojans was traditional, and not original to Virgil.
    Excellent post Blue. Your knowledge of classical literature has always impressed me.
    LET THERE BE LIGHT

    "Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena

    My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/

  8. #8
    Bibliophile JBI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    6,360
    I think you are anachronistically viewing Hector as heroic based on a crossing of Greek thought with other thought years after Homer's time - the reading that sympathizes the Trojans is not part of Homer - just look at, for instance, how later writers treat the "barbarians", notably Herodotus, and Aeschylus.

    I did not suggest that Hector, or other heroes of Troy were not imbued with Arete, I just feel the text isn't supposed to be read in that light, if we are trying to understand the text from a contemporary perspective. Agamemnon is a great hero, rather than a tyrant, and Achilles little fits are part of his heroism. What we value about Hector is probably not what a Greek would have valued - his sense of family, his sense of duty to his country - rather, it is the standards of Arete that we judge him on - his prowess as a general, warrior, and tactician - his presence on the battlefield.

    Homer doesn't deny the Trojans a sense of heroism - after all, you're looking at a giant war, and if only one side was heroic and possessing a heroic power then the story would be quite dull, but I think one is meant to cheer when Achilles triumphs over Hector.

    Of course, the final bits of the story, that is, the actual fall of Troy and its destruction are left out, and that is really what we are discussing - that part of the heroic cycle was either never penned by Homer, or else lost. What we do have though I think suggests that the Greeks are in the right, or at least not in the wrong. Later, Virgil, and subsequent Christian readers of Virgil have made the Trojans out to be tragic victims to Greek savagery. The burning of Troy though was considered a praiseworthy victory in Homer's time - think of it as a bard singing a song about the greatest battle that ever took place, and the world's greatest victory - that's how I think Homer envisioned it.

    Just look at, for instance, the emphasis put onto possession - the cataloging of the ships, for instance, is there to show the power and strength of an Achaean launch - The emphasis put on Armor, notably Achilles' armor shows us a sense of warlikeness being honored.

    This is all coming from a warrior culture, which sings of the valor of murderers - a giant rape and pillage was not thought of then as disgusting, or brutal, but rather heroic, justified, and praise-worthy.


    In addition to this, there is enough evidence, I think, to suggest that Ancient Greek mentality viewed non-Greeks as somehow inferior Barbarians - whereas a culture like the Ancient Chinese viewed non-Chinese people as "not Chinese yet" so to speak, Greeks seem to have seen non-Greeks as subhuman - there is enough evidence to support this in classical texts.

    How then, can we justify a Trojan envoy, who break custom, offend the gods, get what is coming to them, and lose to the mighty, honorable as being viewed as tragic victims, or sympathy-worthy within the Ancient Greek frame? Look at, for instance, the later years, with the emergence of Alexander the Great - I don't see the Persians, or any other culture conquered being held in that light within that period - likewise, to an extent, we can say that dates leading all the way to contemporary times, the most noticeable being the defeat of Japan in the Second World War as "victorious heroes" rather than savage invaders, or Nuclear tyrants (this isn't to say I do not agree with the invasion of Japan, or suggest Japan was an innocent victim, I merely am trying to show perspectives).

    The emergence of the tragic Greek then, comes from the fact that Virgil thought of Rome as somehow superior to the Greeks whose classics they were studying - Rome had beaten Greece, so how then could they sing of their military power and heroism? That's where the sympathetic Trojan starts from - not from contemporary times, I would argue.


    As time progressed though, Roman ideals collided with what would solidify as Christian ones - the Christian teachings of Jesus then, reshaped the reading of the classics once they were rediscovered - it is then, that we see the emergence of the tragic Trojan in the sense that we see him today - I would wager an ancient Greek would cheer as the Trojan women were rightfully carried away as sex slaves.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir777 View Post
    I just found it interesting that Homer provides so many character sketches, etc. to lend this amount of pathos to their plight.
    I agree, and I believe the pathos that Homer invests in their plight is not just an interesting touch, but a crucial part of how the Iliad develops its main themes.

    ...Homer's story is ultimately about the terrible waste of life that is war.
    You are certainly right that the ravages of war figure prominently in the poem, but I believe all the pathos and death serve to build up a deeper theme, more fundamental to the poem: coming to grips with our mortality. The Trojan War is a perfect choice of setting to develop this theme, as it provides an abundance of death, but I don't think the poem is primarily about the nature of war. The mini-biographies of slain minor characters (both Greek and Trojan), the touching scene between Hector and Andromache, the death of Achilles' companion -- these all poignantly illustrate the shortness of life. Most of our dreams will forever remain unfulfilled, and for the few desires we do obtain, the joy from them is short-lived. In the Iliad the vast majority of death and misfortune are a result of war, but my impression is that the poem just takes war for granted. It is one of the many ways in which the inevitable comes. Sarpedon puts it well in his famous speech in book 12:

    "If by escaping this war we would be forever ageless and immortal, neither I myself would fight in the front ranks, nor would I bid you into man-exalting battle. But in reality, innumerable dooms of death stand over us in any case, which are impossible for a mortal to flee or escape, so let's go -- either we'll give someone else triumph or someone will give it to us."

    The Trojans lived in what is today western Turkey, correct? Does anyone know what kind of ethnicity they were (or were supposed to be)? Were they closer to the inhabitants of the Greek mainland or closer to the Persians (or the people who would become the Persians--I'm not sure if their empire had developed around the time the story was set, which is supposedly 1200 BCE)?
    Yes, Troy is presumed to be in western Turkey next to the Aegean Sea. As described in the Iliad, in all the relevant categories (religion, language, political/social structures, kinship systems, funeral customs, etc.) the Trojans were ethnically identical to the Greeks. Later on Greeks began to represent Trojans as alien and foreign.
    Optima dies ... prima fugit

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Virgil View Post
    The only real heoric character throughout is Hector and our sympathies are with Priam. It is critical to the story line that we have sympathy for the Trojans, otherwise that climatic scene between Achilles and Priam would not be poignant at all. Priam and the trojan people have suffered, paid dearly for whatever sin they may have committed. And who really on the Trojan side is anywhere as sympathetic as Hector or Priam or really any of Priam's sons other than Paris? I don't think there is any. And certainly the culture of the Trojans is charcterized as superior to the Greeks.
    I remember you've posted before about your esteem of Hector over any of the Greek warriors. I'm afraid I feel your heart might have gotten the better of you, though , and you go a little too far; I think Achilles is the clear protagonist of the Iliad, and I think he is (or, at least, he becomes) truly heroic, and I think there are many sympathetic characters on the Greek side. I wonder what you mean by the culture of the Trojans being superior to the Greeks? As far as I know, the Trojans in the Iliad are essentially culturally identical to the Greeks.


    Now I had never thought of this as a religious war, and though it's not religious on the part of the Trojans (does it take both sides to be fighting for a religious cause to be a religious war?) there may be something to it. However, Meneleaus and Agamenmon are hardly fighting in religious ferver. In fact none of the Greeks are; they're fighting for glory and booty. However religion is integrated into the story line, especially that plague Apollo sends out in the openning book for offense to his priest.
    In my opinion, claiming that the war was a religious war is somewhat hollow. It seems religious justification has been offered for pretty much every war that mankind has ever fought.

    Excellent post Blue. Your knowledge of classical literature has always impressed me.
    Thanks for the compliment!
    Optima dies ... prima fugit

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by JBI View Post
    I think you are anachronistically viewing Hector as heroic based on a crossing of Greek thought with other thought years after Homer's time - the reading that sympathizes the Trojans is not part of Homer - just look at, for instance, how later writers treat the "barbarians", notably Herodotus, and Aeschylus.
    I'm a little puzzled by the evidence you cite. Both Herodotus and Aeschylus are 5th century sources. Why are their views conclusive for evaluating the response of the original audience of Homer's Iliad? It is true that there is evidence that Greeks from the classical period on believed themselves to be superior to non-Greeks. But the Iliad was not from the classical period, and it does not present the Trojans as alien. Even among 5th century and later sources, the Greeks were capable of sympathizing with non-Greeks as tragic figures. Consider the Persians of Aeschylus. Aeschylus also wrote a tragedy about Memnon, who fought for the Trojans. We have tragedies from Euripides about the Trojans as well.
    Optima dies ... prima fugit

  12. #12
    Vincit Qui Se Vincit Virgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,354
    Blog Entries
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by bluevictim View Post
    I remember you've posted before about your esteem of Hector over any of the Greek warriors. I'm afraid I feel your heart might have gotten the better of you, though , and you go a little too far; I think Achilles is the clear protagonist of the Iliad, and I think he is (or, at least, he becomes) truly heroic, and I think there are many sympathetic characters on the Greek side. I wonder what you mean by the culture of the Trojans being superior to the Greeks? As far as I know, the Trojans in the Iliad are essentially culturally identical to the Greeks.
    You are right that Achilles is the clear protangonist. But Achilles is a character in transition, a childish brat who needs to learn the lessons of humanity and true manhood. Hector is that secondary character who represents that ideal in the flesh.

    I believe the Greeks are protrayed as cruder, less sophisticated, without cultural refiniements. Compare Agonmenon and Priam. Compare Menelaus and Paris. Even Priam's gifts to Achilles suggest a cultural sophistication. It's the same culture, but it's like New York versus the back woods. (That's an exaggeration of course, but I'm just trying to get a point across.)

    In my opinion, claiming that the war was a religious war is somewhat hollow. It seems religious justification has been offered for pretty much every war that mankind has ever fought.
    Yes that's true, but I thought it was an interesting and different angle.
    LET THERE BE LIGHT

    "Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena

    My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    99
    bluevictim, I will agree that mortality plays a prominent role in the story. Mortality and fate really become quite prominent in the later books. Achilles comes to term with his own death after he faces the dilemma, Do I go home and live for many years in anonymity or do I do great things here but die young? I suppose this is the warrior ideal of being heroic: doing great things but dying on the battlefield. And yes, you're right, there are moments of pathos for almost all of the otherwise faceless soldiers who die on the battlefield. Homer often mentions that their parents won't be able to greet them with joy when they come home, and I remember one warrior hadn't even consummated his marriage yet, leaving his wife widowed. I hadn't really thought of this as being an overall portrayal of the fleeting nature of life, but I suppose you are right. Some of the best similes in the poem (perhaps the best actually) compare humanity to leaves: they wilt and fall off in the autumn, soon to be replaced by new ones. Beautiful stuff.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    99
    I read this somewhere--perhaps in my commentary book on the Iliad?--that the Trojans were considered culturally superior to the Greeks, which were more of a warrior-like culture versus the more civilized nature of the Trojans (although they are described as being a conglomeration of a bunch of different groups, many of which do not speak the same language). I'm not sure of the truth to this. I also remember reading that the Trojans were supposed to represent part of a misty past even in Homer's age, the Mycenean Age, which apparently had writing which was lost in the "Greek Dark Age" (of which Homer came on the tail end--I suppose he was the beginning of the Archaic Age?). I forget where I read this, too--perhaps it was the introduction to Lattimore's Iliad? For some reason, I like the idea of a Greek Dark Age, like a mini-version of the Middle Ages.

  15. #15
    Vincit Qui Se Vincit Virgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,354
    Blog Entries
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by JBI View Post
    I think you are anachronistically viewing Hector as heroic based on a crossing of Greek thought with other thought years after Homer's time - the reading that sympathizes the Trojans is not part of Homer - just look at, for instance, how later writers treat the "barbarians", notably Herodotus, and Aeschylus.
    If that's addressed to me, I'm not thinking of anything other than what's in the Illiad itself.

    I did not suggest that Hector, or other heroes of Troy were not imbued with Arete, I just feel the text isn't supposed to be read in that light, if we are trying to understand the text from a contemporary perspective. Agamemnon is a great hero, rather than a tyrant, and Achilles little fits are part of his heroism. What we value about Hector is probably not what a Greek would have valued - his sense of family, his sense of duty to his country - rather, it is the standards of Arete that we judge him on - his prowess as a general, warrior, and tactician - his presence on the battlefield.
    While it's true that we have to be careful in projecting contemporary values into the work, there is no other way to read Agamemnon as piggish and stubborn to the point of a poor leader. I think Homer actually says that. Achilles is spoiled and childish and disrespectful. Hector is given the aura as protector of the homeland. I don't think that's projecting our contemporary values into them.

    Of course, the final bits of the story, that is, the actual fall of Troy and its destruction are left out, and that is really what we are discussing - that part of the heroic cycle was either never penned by Homer, or else lost.
    We are? Homer composed a carefully constructed story around the nature of mortality (as Blue outlines elsewhere here) and valor and humilty. The fall of Troy is purposely left out. Homer didn't create the outline of the trojan/greek tales. He selectively picked what he wanted to tell his story.

    What we do have though I think suggests that the Greeks are in the right, or at least not in the wrong. Later, Virgil, and subsequent Christian readers of Virgil have made the Trojans out to be tragic victims to Greek savagery.
    Well, it was way before the Christians came into power in Rome. Idealizing the Trojans for the Romans goes back at least to the Roman general Scipio Africanus, the general of the third Punic war (146 BC) who was supposed to have slept with a copy of The Illiad under his pillow.
    LET THERE BE LIGHT

    "Love follows knowledge." – St. Catherine of Siena

    My literature blog: http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. How many languages do you speak fluently?
    By Scheherazade in forum Introductions
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: 09-13-2010, 01:04 AM
  2. Influence of Greek Myths
    By Virgil in forum General Literature
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 09-19-2009, 03:25 AM
  3. " Zorba The Greek "
    By atena_63 in forum General Literature
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-21-2009, 06:29 PM
  4. Greek versus Roman
    By ndoman in forum The Odyssey
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-07-2007, 10:00 PM
  5. Aristotle, Classic Technique, and Greek Drama
    By Tariq Hayat Las in forum Aristotle,
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-30-2006, 06:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •