Category: Ancient History

The modern person’s interest in ancient tragedies is quite extraordinary. In their works many centuries ago, Ancient authors raised ethical and philosophical issues relevant to their time. After more than two millennia, these same problems find a response in the heart of modern man. A modern person unexpectedly finds answers to many difficult questions when he gets acquainted with the works of ancient poets, philosophers, and playwrights. This tragedy raises many questions, the importance of which is reflected and relevant even today, and the main character can teach people of the twenty-first century a lot.

The ancient Greek tragedy “Antigone” was written by Sophocles and narrates about a woman fighting against a royal decree that hurt her personal feelings and principles. Antigone is a girl who has crossed out her future by her act and has incurred the wrath of King Creon. She has the following features: courage, pluck, and some notes of asceticism. The heroic line intersects with the lyrical one: she cries and does not want to die, making Antigone a living person with a lively character. A distinctive feature of the main characters of Sophocles is their pronounced individualization.

The conflict began with the fact that Antigone’s brothers – Eteocles and Polynices – fought with each other and, unfortunately, died. According to the decree of the Theban king Creon, Eteocles was to be buried as a hero. The body of Polynices was ordered to be left unburied, under the scorching sun, as a traitor who went to war against Thebes. Disobeying the decree, Antigone herself buries her brother’s body according to the funeral rite established by the gods. For this, Creon ordered Antigone to be walled up in a cave, but the girl, faithful to her duty to fulfill sacred laws, did not humble before Creon. She preferred death to obedience to a cruel king and committed suicide.

The key feature of the image of Antigone is her fantastic willpower. She demonstrates this feature in the struggle with Creon for the right to bury her brother according to the ancestral rite. “I know that I will die— of course I do— even if you had not doomed me by proclamation. If I shall die before my time, I count that a profit” (505-510). She honors the ancient law of the tribal society, and she does not doubt the correctness of the decision made. Feeling that she is right, Antigone boldly challenges Creon. Sophocles’ Antigone consciously goes towards death, but, like any person, it is bitter for her to part with a life that promises so many joys to a young girl. She does not regret what happened, but about her dying youth, she is dying, not mourned by anyone.

By the power of her mind and a big heart that knows how to love, not hate, Antigone chose her fate, which confronted Antigone with Creon. Creon embodies the image of a stern and inflexible ruler who puts his will above everything. This man considers any resistance to his order as an anti-state act, and he is ready to apply the cruelest laws to people who go against the state. From the very beginning, the dialogue with Ismene reveals the strong personality of Antigone, which, according to the choir, she inherited from her father. “Be as you choose to be; but for myself I myself will bury him. It will be good to die, so doing” (80-85). Antigone is shown as a determined and firm girl who challenged the autocracy of Creon.

One of the most profound conflicts of modern society – the conflict between generic unwritten laws and state laws – is revealed in this tragedy. In the ancestral community, religious beliefs, rooted in the depths of centuries, prescribed a person to sacredly honor blood relations and observe all rites about blood relatives. On the other hand, every citizen of the polis in Sophocles was obliged to follow state laws, which sometimes sharply contradicted traditional family and tribal norms. Sophocles’ Creon is a supporter of the idea of unswerving observance of state laws, written ones. On the other hand, Antigone puts family and ancestral laws, sanctified by religious authority, above these laws.

The great tragedian wanted to carry out in his work the idea that for the happiness of the citizens of the polis, unity between state and family-generic laws is necessary. The condemnation of tyranny is also expressed at the end of the tragedy in Creon’s remorse and self-flagellation. The theme raised by Sophocles in the play is the theme of duty and family, which is still relevant to this day. Only a person whose thoughts are pure and whose actions are guided by virtue can realize the concept of duty and family and the need to defend it. Sacrifice in the name of the family is another cornerstone theme of this play, the relevance of which has not disappeared even today.

Unfortunately, the family is gradually moving into second place in the modern world, giving way to a career. People increasingly prefer to live for their pleasure, travel, build a career rather than start a family and have children. Of course, each person decides how to live, but the family was and still remains the foundation of human society. Antigone is a character who loves desperately and furiously; she does not put any restrictions or conditions on love. Perhaps this is the kind of dedication and passion that modern people lack because they most often prefer comfort and safety. On the other hand, Antigone represents love and rage, which neither the king nor even death itself will stop. The themes of self-sacrifice, love, family and the conflict between the written and unwritten laws are reflected in this play and are still relevant.

Act 1 Scene III of “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar” is an excerpt of a time-tested masterpiece presenting interesting aspects of persuasive writing. Persuasive writing is not about imposing a personal opinion on the reader, but rather about motivating the reader to specific actions and thoughts. Persuasive writing is appealing to emotions as if the author is talking directly to the reader. Scent III is devoted to two dialogues: one between Cicero and Casca and another between Cassius and Casca. Even though all three men talk about Caesar and his appointment as a king, the second major theme is evolving over nature.

If to look closer at the dialogue between Cicero and Casca, they both are wondered by the weather. Casca tells that he has “seen tempests, when the scolding winds have rived the knotty oaks”, when “the ambitious ocean swell and rage” when clouds were “threatening.” He was the witness of terrible disasters; however, in this particular scene, he is afraid of thunder. Through this short dialogue, the author has skillfully conveyed the true character of Casca: the person who exaggerates his strengths. In the second dialogue between Cassius and Casca, Casca is no longer afraid of thunder and says that the weather is wonderful. There is an evident contradiction in his words. He says what other people want to hear rather than what he thinks. This persuasive element motivates the reader to analyze human nature.

The third scene is full of phrases and descriptions appealing to the reader. For example, the phrase “men may construe things after their fashion” is universal and true for modern society as well. Individuals cannot resist societal pressure or avoid stereotypes because people live in society and are dependent on each other. Nevertheless, two persons may have a different understanding of the same situation. Through the dialogue of Cicero and Casca, the author appeals to the reader through rhetorical questions. “Why old men fool and children calculate, why all these things change from their ordinance” – this question has no answer, however, the reader starts thinking about it. It is a power of persuasion.

The line “ye, gods, you make the weak most strong” has a hint at the true attitude of Cassius towards Caesar. Cassius claims to be the friend of Caesar, while at the same time he calls him a weak tyrant. Scene III contains persuasive elements even though the author does not impose his opinion on the reader, but rather smoothly leads to accepting his view through skillful descriptions and appealing phrases. Short phrases deliver messages to the reader about the true essence of Cassius, Casca, and Cicero. From the first lines, the reader accepts the view of the author about each of these three men even though the author does not express his attitude towards them. On the contrary, the reader is motivated to form his attitude while being led to it by the author.

“The Tragedy of Julius Caesar” Act 1 Scene III is a perfect example of persuasive writing because the reader accepts the position of the author as logical and natural and does not even feel persuasion in text. The author does not tell that Casca is a negative character, but the reader accepts this point of view through dialogues. Vivid descriptions, appealing phrases, and indirect talk with the reader make “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar” persuasive. Notably, there is no obvious persuasion and the reader is motivated to make his conclusions about events and characters, however, the reader makes the conclusion intended by the author. This is how good persuasion should work.

The main character in this discussion is Poseidon god. This god was referred to as god of seas and oceans in ancient Greek. He lived at the place called Aegae in the deep sea where he used to keep horses and chariots that he used for transport. His wife was called Amphitrite and had three children.

He also had other children that he bore with other mortal women and divinities. In ancient Greek people believed that storms and earthquakes happened under the influence of this god. However, just like human beings, these gods had flaws such as jealousy, anger and fear.

Therefore, these gods were immoral and committed mistakes. This paper explores on an ancient Greek myth, “the seas and oceans are controlled by gods that must be appeased to ensure that havoc such as earthquakes and storms do not occur”. It focuses on Poseidon god of the seas and oceans in Ancient Greek that was to be appeased through sacrifices to ensure that seas and oceans remained calm.

The major problem or issue that made Poseidon god to cause havoc in the sea was failure to be offered sacrifices by the people. The god caused mayhem in the seas through earthquakes, floods and storms. During such moments, the sailors and people who lived near the seas experienced problems as they lost their properties and even life. He caused this havoc because he wanted people to offer sacrifices to him. When such sacrifices were not offered, this angers the god and destruction happened to awaken the people of their duty.

Therefore, people accorded respect to the god because they were under his mercies and could not go against his interests. Therefore, people could not get peace without satisfying the god of the seas. They could not get islands to go and live if they failed to offer sacrifices to appease the good to create them. They drowned their horses to honor the god so as to please him to do according to their wish.

The problem that Poseidon caused was only solved when human being decided to offer sacrifices to him. He was a good full of anger and could cause havoc in the ship that would lead to shipwrecks, earthquakes, chaotic springs and drowning. He was believed to be the creator and the controller of the sea therefore, people gave him respect and they make him to become angry.

Therefore, Many scarifies were offered to this god and they included black and white bulls, wild boars and rams. They were thrown in wells in places such as Deine as a sign of sacrifice. Once these sacrifices were offered to him, he restored calm in the seas and oceans, and sailors regained their peace.

He also created horses and coached people skills of managing horses. This god is attributed to the protector and originator of the horses releases. Therefore, he formed positive relationship with people by coaching them to ride horses. Such periods were clear indication that peace was prevailing.

Therefore, because of close association with these horses, he was often depicted riding on the horseback or riding using his chariots, which were drawn by four or two horses. This close association made people regard him as the friend of chariots, as he sometimes metamorphosed or transformed into a horse to deceive his attackers or enemies.

He also solved problem because of his benevolence nature at some occasions especially when he was calm. For instance, when he was peaceful, he could raise the islands out of the seas on which people could come and live. Therefore, his personality differed with difference circumstances and situations.

Poseidon was also a greedy god because he was involved in a number of disputes with other gods, especially when he wanted to take over cities that were reined by other gods. For instance, he attempted to take over the city of Athens but could not succeed as Athena managed to retain it.

When islands sprout ad storms remained calm, people knew that the god was happy and therefore the problem was solved. The god could restore peace in the seas and oceans once sacrifices were made to him. He could also make new islands to sprout where people went to live. These were depictions that peace had regained and everything was in order. Poseidon was a god who reigned over the sea. He had many characteristics that were different from other gods.

He was the greatest Olympian god who reigned in the sea, floods and droughts, rivers, horses and earthquakes. The god was portrayed as a mature man, strong in physique. He kept a dark beard and held a trident in his hand. The god drove a chariot of hippocampus. The trident he always held in his hand was a sign of power and mighty. The spears were used to break rocks to calm the storms in the sea.

Once the problem or the conflict between human being and the god was over, the people continued to enjoy the resources that were in the sea. They could go to sail and fish without worry because the seas remained calm. They also went to the islands and lived there peacefully. The god had no problem or issue with the people and therefore, he allowed them to engage in their activities. People were also aware of their duties of giving their sacrifices to the gods.

Some characters of this god became evident such as greediness when there was nothing disturbing him. He got involved in a number of disputes with other gods, especially when he wanted to take over cities that were reined by other gods. For instance, he attempted to take over the city of Athens but could not succeed as Athena managed to retain it. He wanted to take everything to his control as depicted from the greediness to acquire the territory of other gods.

Therefore, to sum up, it is evident that myths in the ancient Greek played a key role in the lives of many people. For instance, the myths related to ancient Greek god Poseidon illustrates the importance of obeying and doing according to the will of the gods. Poseidon was a god of the sea and therefore was to be respected.

Just like a human being, he had strengths in other areas as well as some flaws in others. His anger could cause havoc and damage properties and lives of people. Therefore, it is an interesting myth to read because it captures the instincts of a reader. Their problems with the sea were solved when they respected and gave their sacrifices to the god. It is a very interesting myth that many generation can learn be informed about the truth or the sincerity in such myths.

Daedalus

Daedalus is a character from Greek mythology, a famous artist and craftsman known for his numerous inventions, as well as for building the Labyrinth on Crete. He is also known as the father of Icarus; he made wings for Icarus and himself to escape from Crete by air together. The story of Icarus and Daedalus is told in a Roman source, Ovid’s “Metamorphoses”; the Isle of Crete was blocked by the order of King Minos, but Daedalus wanted to return to his home, Athens. Thus, he devised the wings for himself and his young son; but the son disobeyed his instructions and sank in the sea.¹ It is stated that Daedalus is a symbol of the ability of Athenians to invent and solve extremely complicated problems. Making The Labyrinth is one of the embodiments of this ability; creating the wings enabling people to fly is another.

Artemis

Artemis is the Ancient Greek goddess of wild animals and hunting, of fertility and virginity; she is also the embodiment of femininity. This daughter of Zeus and Leto is usually portrayed as a huntress with a bow and arrows, sometimes accompanied by a deer. According to one of the myths, Agamemnon angered Artemis during the Troyan War by slaying one of her animals. Agamemnon was advised to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia to appease the goddess.² Apparently, the Ancient Greeks, who very much disliked human sacrifice, believed Artemis to be rather cruel and ruthless if they thought she would wish Iphigenia to be sacrificed. That the goddess of femininity and virginity possessed such traits is not surprising; it was common in that (rather a sexist) culture to think of women as of ruthless and cunning beings.

Medusa

Medusa, a mythical being of the Ancient Greece, was one of the three of the Gorgon sisters, the only one mortal among them. She had the appearance of a hideous human female with snakes instead of hair; her gaze was able to turn anyone into stone permanently. Ovid tells the story of how Perseus beheaded Medusa in order to protect her mother from Polydectes, who fell in love with her and whom Perseus believed to be dishonorable.³

Numerous gods helped Perseus and equipped him for battle so that he could slay Medusa. Thus, Perseus killed one woman in order to protect another. Interestingly, late classical myths state that Medusa was at first a beautiful woman who offended Athena and was transformed into a beast of malevolence, an embodiment of female rage. Thus, Medusa was first abused by one woman, and then slain to save another, which, perhaps, also shows the attitude of the Ancient Greek (male-dominated) culture towards women.

Heracleidae

Heracleidae, or Heraclids, were the numerous descendants of the Ancient Greek hero Heracles and his multiple consorts. The words are most often used to denote the descendants of the oldest son of Heracles, Hyllus, one of the generations of whom were able to capture the Peloponnesus, a land once owned by Heracles. According to Euripides, the children of Heracles were pursued by the Herald Copreus working for King Eurystheus, who was responsible for many of Heracles’ problems and thought the hero’s sons would take revenge on him.⁴ The play finishes with the death of Eurystheus; other myths state that Heraclids would recapture the Peloponnesus later. According to some historical hypotheses, the recapture is associated with the Dorian invasion, which might have taken place in the latter half of the 2^nd millennium B.C. These hypotheses reflect the fact that some historical events often might stand beyond the stories told in myths and beliefs.

Seven against Thebes

Seven against Thebes is the third (and the only one extant) part of Aeschylus’ trilogy about Oedipus; it was first staged in 467 B.C. The story starts when Polynices leads an army to Thebes in order to take power from Eteocles; both are sons of Oedipus, who married his own mother and, having learned of it, left their children to divide the kingdom via bloodshed. According to the story, Polynices leads six other heroes to attack and capture Thebes; there are seven bloody battles, in which most of the heroes die.

Tydeus, a fallen hero, even eats the brains of Melanippus.⁵ Noteworthy, the story was written circa 467 B.C., approximately 10-12 years after the unsuccessful invasion of Xerxes supported by Thebes; thus, Thebes was rather disliked by the other polises. It is, therefore, not surprising that the cruelty, greed, and other adversities of human nature are depicted as attributes of Thebans.

Theseus

Theseus was one of the most famous Ancient Greek heroes, the 11^th King of Athens, the son of either Aegeus (an Athenian king) or Poseidon (the God of the Sea), and Aethra. Theseus was famous for numerous feats, including the death of the Minotaur. According to Plutarch, Theseus, assisted by Ariadne who had fallen in love with him, killed the Minotaur, the beast who had been terrorizing the population of the Isle of Crete.

Theseus then found the way out of the Labyrinth using Ariadne’s thread, and sailed off Crete with Ariadne and “the youths.”⁶ Interestingly, by finding the Minotaur in the Labyrinth, killing him, and finding the way out, Theseus shows his Athenian strength and intelligence (even though he was helped by Ariadne). Importantly, the Labyrinth was built by Daedalus, and is, thus, also a result of Athenian ingenuity. Thus, Athenians attempted to make Theseus one of their most famous heroes, and a symbol of their wisdom, intelligence, and strength.

Bibliography

Aeschylus. “Seven against Thebes.” Theoi Greek Mythology. Web.

Euripides. “Iphigenia at Aulis.” The Internet Classics Archive. Web.

Euripides. “The Heracleidae.” The Internet Classics Archive. Web.

Ovid. “Metamorphoses, Book 8.” Theoi Greek Mythology. Web.

Ovid. “Metamorphoses.” The Internet Classics Archive. Web.

Plutarch. “Life of Theseus.” Theoi Greek Mythology. Web.

Footnotes

1. Ovid, “Metamorphoses, Book 8,” Theoi Greek Mythology. Web.
2. Euripides, “Iphigenia at Aulis,” The Internet Classics Archive. Web.
3. Ovid, “Metamorphoses,” The Internet Classics Archive. Web.
4. Euripides, “The Heracleidae,” The Internet Classics Archive. Web.
5. Aeschylus, “Seven against Thebes,” Theoi Greek Mythology. Web.
6. Plutarch, “Life of Theseus,” Theoi Greek Mythology. Web.

Introduction

Julius Caesar is probably one of the most referenced works by Shakespeare; it depicts actualities drawn upon the events in the Roman Empire. According to Wyke (4), the play explores the dramatic structure of Julius Caesar’s ambition to take to the throne of the Roman Empire. The drama introduces Julius Caesar as a man with unyielding ambition to the throne, having fought for the good of the nation. Although regarded by many pundits as a hero, Julius Caesar is equally facing opposition to ascend to Roman leadership, and there is a hatched conspiracy to assassinate him (Taylor 301). Tragic events permeate the plot and literary scholars refer to Julius Caesar as a tragedy itself.

Plot development

After a successful war that saw the killing of Pompey, Caesar returns to Rome to proclaim his Kingship. There is pure irony as a community projects itself to have more regard for an individual than a nation. The culminating events are tense; the nation is appalled, and something has to be done to neutralize the situation. Caesar is a national figure although there is clear polarization in the senate to stop his ascendancy. Overall, Caesar seems to have greater opportunities of ascending to Kinship (Wyke 5).

Despite great opportunity that Caesar wields, Cassius is championing forces to halt Caesar’s ascendancy. Cassius aligns his team and convinces Brutus to be part of this plot. The opposition clout against Caesar thinks he will dominate Rome and subsequently institute tyranny under his watch. Brutus is fronted as the best candidate to face off with Caesar in a duel. Brutus is probably aware of the personal sacrifices and the patriotic commitments that Caesar has made to Rome. Brutus ignores calls to challenge Caesar, and affirms that the nation is greater that all individuals (Taylor 303). The conspirators plot to assassinate Caesar was taken aback by Brutus refusal to challenge Caesar. In the end, Caesar is killed thrashing the nation into panic.

Antony steals an opportunity to make a strong statement in a keynote speech during Caesar’s burial. He, particularly, registers his disgust to the traitors for the wrongs they have done both to Caesar and to the nation. His speech, according to Taylor (305), arouses the nation, making the citizens come out to the streets to protest Caesar’s killing. Antony’s remarks further point a finger at Brutus and Cassius who are jointly suspected to have a hand in the King’s assassination (Taylor 304).

Antony, nonetheless, betrays Brutus and Cassius who confide in him to keep their plot secret. Consequently, Brutus and Cassius flee the city while Antony gets the support of Octavius and Lepidus. Brutus and Cassius decide not to go back to Rome for there lays the wrath of the citizens in their actions. However, despite the title of the play, Brutus and Cassius suffice as the tragic characters due to their conspiracy for personal gains that plunge the country into abject civil war and utter desperation.

Conclusion

Julius Caesar is a replica of what happened in the Roman Empire. It is a confirmation of Shakespeare’s tendency to revise history through drama. In addition, it shows how conspiracy plays out in politics, and how death is the reward of all human ills. Brutus and Cassius commit suicide when they are aware that they can no longer subdue Antony, Octavius, and Lepidus whose firm grip on power is unwavering. Antony seems to have a brighter future in the yet to be established Rome. Despite its historic overtones, Julius Caesar is a tragedy of grand proportions.

Works Cited

Taylor, Myron. “Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and the Irony of History.” Shakespeare Quarterly 24.3 (1973): 301–308. Print.

Wyke, Maria. Julius Caesar in western culture. Oxford, England: Blackwell, 2006. Print.

When it comes to Homer’s Iliad one of the earliest instances where poetry and poets was mentioned can be found in Book 2 where Homer wrote the following:

And now, O Muses, dwellers in the mansions of Olympus, tell me- or you are goddesses and are in all places so that you see all things, while we know nothing but by report … as for the common soldiers, they were so that I could not name every single one of them though I had ten tongues, and though my voice failed not and my heart were of bronze within me, unless you, O Olympian Muses, daughters of aegis- bearing Jove, were to recount them to me (Homer 2).

It is very clear in this passage that Homer deferred to the Muse to help him recount what he knew. He said that his memory failed him and that he has no ability to say the things that needed to be spoken or written down.

It is well-known that ancient poets like Homer acknowledge their dependence on the Muse for inspiration but in this passage he did not say that they inspire him he said that they were his source of information. This means to say that the Muse in the context of the Iliad is the source of inspiration.

The Muse is the giver of gifts and in this case it is the gift to create words that are melodious to the ear but at the same time the power to move the hearts and minds of men. This is the power of the poet, Homer acknowledges this but he was right to show humility and instead he deflected honor back to the gods.

It can also be argued that Homer’s remarks was not all about modesty. He has another goal and it is to put a stamp of authority on what he has to say. Homer invoked the help of the muse and in the process established a way to validate what he was trying to say.

In other words he did not put his own stamp of approval on his masterpiece, he was saying that it was the Muse who told him what to say. He could have easily said that he was the one who thought of these things but it would not have the same impact as when he said that the words came from the Muse.

In Ancient Greece the poet is therefore not a mere artist trying to express himself, he is also a builder of society.

This is like nation-building but instead of talking about revolutionaries, heroes and martyrs who died for the sake of freedom, poets like Homer created an identity for a people that are yet without permanent institutions (Haubold 162).

This means that in reality Homer did receive assistance but not from the gods. Part of his inspiration comes from fellow poets, those who came before him. Homer relied on other poets like him, to glean from them information that was handed down from generation to generation.

According to one commentary, “In Homer’s invocations these goddesses are a complex personification of the poet’s indebtedness to his tradition, but at the same time they cover over another important relationship that defines the poet, that to other poets” (Ford 90).

In other words the poets of Ancient Greece is a repository of information that anyone can access in order to understand the world that they live in.

Works and Days

The opening lines of Hesiod’s Works and Days provides an indirect explanation as to the roles of poets in Ancient Greece. The line says: “Muses of Pieria who give glory through song, come hither, tell of Zeus your father and chant his praise.

Through him mortal men are famed or un-famed, sung or unsung alike, as great Zeus wills” (Hesiod 1) It says that a poet has the power to immortalize men.

This means that in Ancient Greece the poets play an important role they are not only messengers but they are some kind of special communication and through their gift of speech and their ability to make music through their rhymes and songs gives them the ability to enhance or downgrade the image of a person.

It is through the work of poets that men of stature are celebrated in songs and declarations.

Just like Homer, Hesiod is a poet who benefitted from other poets who came before him (Athanassakis 59). But Hesiod did not only use the art of poetry to become the historian and the preserver of legacies. He used poetry to speak to the social problems that he and his fellowmen faced in Ancient Greece.

In the case of Hesiod he was able to talk about a family problem more openly and with more passion than if he was plainly speaking as an average person and not someone with the authority to speak like a god.

For instance many believed that when Hesiod wrote the Works and Days he was also in a real life struggle with his brother (Frazer 5).

Therefore the lines that says, “Perses, lay up these things in your heart, and do not let that Strife who delights in mischief hold your heart back from work, while you peep and peer and listen to the wrangles of the court-house” is not just a simple statement (Hesiod 25). Hidden within this phrase is a commentary on what he felt about his personal problems.

Another purpose of poetry and poets is to be used as a tool to explain beginnings and origins. In Hesiod’s work the poet said, “Or if you will, I will sum you up another tale well and skilfully — and do you lay it up in your heart, — how the gods and mortal men sprang from one source” (Hesiod 106-108).

The poets provide answers to some of the toughest questions on earth. Questions about origins and the source of problems can be readily answered with information that can be gleaned from listening to what these ancient poets had to say.

Therefore, poetry is a medium of communication, a powerful tool that can influence the way people think about a person, an event or even a place. What is Troy without Homer’s Iliad? Who would have known about the mighty deeds of Achilles if not for the poetry of Homer?

Poets has the ability to compose lines that are so rich with information that by simply declaring these words the audience can see and feel the past and then gain an insight into their traditions and their identity as a people. This is why poets and their poetry play an important role in a social context.

Conclusion

Poetry and poets play an important role in the evolution of ancient societies. Poets are powerful communicators. They enhance their reputation by claiming that these abilities are not innate but given by the gods. The poet is a historian, commentator, and artist rolled into one.

They have the power to make a person famous and at the same time they have this ability to create a link between the past and the present. They are able to accomplish all of these through their interesting narratives and their powerful and well-crafted poetry that can move the hearts and minds of their listeners.

Works Cited

Athanassakis, Apostolos. Theogony; Works and Days; Shield. MD: John Hopkins University Press, 2004.

Frazer, R.M. The Poems of Hesiod. OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1983.

Ford, Andrew. Homer: The Poetry of the Past. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992.

Haubold, Johannes. Homer’s People: Epic Poetry and Social Formation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Hesiod. Works and Days. Trans. H.G. Evelyn-White. The Internet Classics Archives. Web.

Homer. Iliad. Trans. S. Butler. The Internet Classics Archives. Web.

Summary

Fiction is an art form that uses natural language words and constructions as its sole material. The specifics of fiction are revealed in comparison with the types of art that use different materials, such as music, visual art, theater, song, visual poetry, as well as with different types of verbal text. In addition, fiction, like other types of art, combines the author’s works, in contrast to the results of folklore that have no author in principle. The history of literature began in the Bronze Age with the invention of writing in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. Although at first glance it seems that the literature of all countries is the same, there is still a significant difference in styles, goals, and prevailing genres.

Ancient Egyptian Literature

Throughout ancient Egyptian history, reading and writing were the main requirements for service in public institutions. However, government officials received assistance in their daily work from elite, literate social groups called scribes. Scribes were responsible for preserving, transmitting, and canonizing literary classics, as well as writing new pieces. Sometimes certain people outside the scribal profession were literate and had access to classical literature.

Literature also served religious purposes, for instance, the works of funerary literature written on the tomb walls, sarcophagi, and papyri were intended to protect and educate the soul in the afterlife. These inscriptions included magical incantations, chants, lyrical hymns, and many other types of literary works. There was a time when funeral texts were written only for the pharaohs, but then people realized that they would all end up in the afterlife, and such texts were written for everyone (Gala Tejal “The Egyptian Book of the Dead: A Guidebook for the Underworld”). Sometimes, the tombs also contained copies of literary texts not related to the funeral ritual and probably were intended for the entertainment of the dead in the afterlife.

Greek Literature

The Greeks created and developed almost all the literary forms of subsequent European literature, and thanks to their inherent sense of symmetry and proportion, they made perfect artistic forms. Most of the works of the classical period were intended for oral performance, so they convey the spirit of Greek life with a lively spontaneity that is lacking in other highly developed literature. The creative era in ancient Greek literature lasted from the XI century BC to the III century BC.

At this time, there were all kinds of prose, the dominant place among which was the epic. The epic, as a long narrative about heroes and gods, had a didactic function from its very beginning. It instructed and taught fellow citizens how to manage wisely and live with dignity. The basis for all the literature of ancient Greece was myths. The literature of Ancient Greece was able to develop many long-lasting images and ideas, to create a whole system of worldview. The originality and authenticity of such images and ideas were the reason for the enormous influence that the literature of Ancient Greece had on the formation of Western culture.

Comparison

Comparing the early literature of the two countries, one can see the striking differences between them. For example, the literature of ancient Egypt is more focused on hymns, funeral marches, and strict documents. The same cannot be said about the literature of Greece, which was aimed at praising its gods, heroes, and beauties. Pan claims that Greek literature reflects the attitude of the Greeks toward knowledge, and the world, emphasizing their philosophical wisdom (1437). Works of literature in Greece were created using the alphabet, which later became the basis of all European languages. In Egypt, hieroglyphs and the similarity of drawings were used for writing.

In conclusion, it is very important and exciting to know the features of the literature of different countries. After all, modern literature is a follower of an older one and takes its origins from there. It is also essential to know what literary works a particular country is famous for because, over time, these works have become classics that every intellectually developed person should know.

Works Cited

Gala, Tejal. “The Egyptian Book of the Dead: A guidebook for the underworld.” YouTube, uploaded by Ted-ed. 2016. Web.

Pan, Jie. “Research on the Influence of Greek Mythology on Anglo – American Language and Literature.” Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, vol. 119, 2017, pp. 1437-1440.

Mythology is commonly considered a primary system of the social perceptions of the world order. Myths are thus methods for the cognition of natural and social realities at the early stages of human development. They respond to the human need for reassurance and meaning in the universe. As a form of narration, myths share some specific features. For example, Ancient Roman myths about various historical figures are characterized by indistinct boundaries between logical and emotional comprehension and figurative conceptions.

A well-known example of Roman mythology, the story of Romulus and the founding of Rome (753 B.C.), can be regarded as an effort to explain and bring into harmony the behavior of family and societal members relationships between people and nature. Although this myth is full of fictitious and figurative imagery (e.g., vultures as divine signs, or disappearance from the earth “in the midst of the violent storm”), it is not just an abstract idea but a way of viewing life (Woodard 36). Divine interventions and symbolic elements are also extensively included in the myths about Servius Tullius (578-535 B.C.), one of the kings of Ancient Rome. Simultaneously, the stories about his life describe multiple events of political significance (e.g., the establishment of comitia centuriata) (Woodard 62). In these ways, it is evident that Roman myths combine facts with beliefs.

In the early stages of Roman culture, history served as a substitution for philosophy and played a significant role in forming their national identity. Indeed, compared to the Greeks, who composed legends about the creation of the cosmos and the gods, the central place in Roman mythology is given to Rome itself and its heroic people and the specific ethical code of Roman citizens. They shared certain priorities: duty, loyalty, courage, sacrifice, and faith in the providential role of their nation. The legend about Marcus Furius Camillus (446-365 B.C.) is an illustration of Roman values. Camillus was a dictator and military figure who saved Rome from collapse when invaded by the Galls. He also played an essential role in the restoration of the city from ruins, showing his tremendous state loyalty. This myth is an example of Roman bravery and its citizens’ ability to unite in the face of danger and fight for freedom, forgetting about all social and political controversies. Camillus is the embodiment of civic virtue. Through myths like his, a shared understanding of Roman identity was developed.

An analysis of Roman mythology also reveals that Roman identity was very different from Greek identity and values, and these contrasts contributed to the development of patriotism among Roman citizens. For instance, the myth about the capture of Marcus Atilius Regulus (307-250 B.C.) by Greek commander Xanthippus (225 B.C.) emphasizes the vices of the capturers while showing Regulus’s sense of duty, loyalty to Rome and its people, and other esteemed virtues. In this way, the heroic figures depicted in myths contributed to the great and immortal Rome’s image known for its unbreakable traditions.

By mythologizing history, Romans made the narration more poetic and epic. However, along with aesthetic elements, Roman myths also included some educational features that fostered patriotism and distinct national values. The early historical periods are more mythological than the later ones. However, there is a noticeable shift away from archetypical thinking and national identity development at the later stages of social development in the Roman Republic. For this reason, Roman mythology should not be studied separately from its history, as mythology illustrates the civilization’s initial social and cognitive structures. The mythic-historical narration allows for a more thorough analysis of the Romans’ worldview evolution and therefore has a significant educational value.

Works Cited

Woodard, Roger D. Myth, Ritual, and the Warrior in Roman and Indo-European Antiquity. Cambridge University Press, 2013.

Introduction

Infanticide is an infamous practice that has existed in almost all human societies since ancient time. It is the gruesome practice of killing infants that unfortunately was very common in every culture and especially in the ancient times. Today, infanticide is heavily condemned and has been made a crime in all countries.

One of the ancient societies, the history of which has been tainted by the practice of infanticide is the Greek one. This paper is going to look at infanticide in the ancient Greece as seen in Euripides’ “Medea”, “The sayings of the Spartan Women”, and Xenophon’s “Spartan Society”.

Infanticide In The Ancient Greece

There is much evidence showing how parents under stressful conditions decide to end the life of their child. From the splendor of the Persian Empire to the golden age of the ancient Greece, this barbaric act went on behind the closed doors depending on many reasons: population control, poverty, and the children with defects.

In most ancient societies, children were the property of the parents, and those children who the parents deemed unfit were killed or sold into slavery. This practice was common in militaristic societies like the Spartans who demanded that the children meet a certain standard so that the state can use them in the army. Infants who did not meet the standards were killed.

In the ancient Greece, like in other societies at the time the value of human life was perceived differently as compared to today. Infanticide was not only common, it was encouraged.

The Greek philosophers actually encouraged people to kill infants born with disability, considered defective and had no place in their society. In the Greek society this was carried out by exposure. Usually, this decision was made by the father and later on in Sparta it was a group of elders who determined the fate of the child.

In the famous play ‘Medea’ by Euripides, the main character kills her sons just to get back at her husband. She uses her children as part of her revenge against her husband. This shows the views that people held on the value of children. To Medea the children were only important to serve the needs and wishes of their parents. If the parents did not need the children then they were killed.

This may have been the same kind of reasoning that drove parents into killing the disabled children since they could not serve their parents in any way. The play by Euripides is all about a scorned woman who decides to take revenge on all the people causing her pain but the centerpiece of the play is the murder of her sons.

This play treats infanticide as a tool to exert pain on people. Medea sees Jason’s adultery and betray as awful as her murders, this is how she justifies killing all those people .

In the Spartan society as written by Xenophon, infants endured some horrible fates. Compared to Egypt where laws had been passed to prohibit infanticide, the Greek infants were at the mercy of their parents and the state.

The Spartan society was predominantly made up of warriors, which led to children being judged by their physical abilities to become fully fledged warriors. Upon birth, the children were checked for any disabilities or deformities. Those who could not meet a certain standard were murdered because they were deemed futile.

Infants were exposed or even thrown off cliffs. Male infants who had no defects were left in the wilderness to fend for themselves. If they survived then they had proven themselves fit. In this society, children were seen as a vessel for the state.

They had to prove their usefulness to be given the same rights as other people. In Xenophon’s Spartan society, children were born and bred to serve in the states military. Those who could not, were not worth living.

From the ‘Sayings of Spartan Women’, it is clear that even women supported the infanticide. In Sparta being a militaristic society, no woman wanted to give birth to a defective child. They all wanted sons who were worthy of serving in the Spartan army.

It was honorable to fight and die for the state and women whose sons escaped war became very angry with them. One of the women is quoted saying she killed her son who returned after the whole army had died in war. She preferred having her son killed in honor.

This attitude translated into harsh parenting. The Spartan women were very famous for their tough upbringing of boys and were sorted after by people from other communities to help them raise good soldiers .

Conclusion

In the pursuit of perfection, the ancient Greece encouraged infanticide. They demanded too much from their infants who could barely defend themselves. In a society where children were the property of the parents, those who were not fit, met a very painful fate.

Even though militaristic aspiration were the main course of infanticide, parents had many other excuses to kill their children and since it was not illegal they could do it as often as they wanted without having to bear responsibility. In the end, it seems that the value placed on the infant’s life is what determined whether they would live or die.

Works Cited

Euripides. Euripides I: Alcestis, Medea, The Children of Heracles, Hippolytus. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. Print

Gray, Vivienne J. and V. Gray. Xenophon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print

Plutarch. On Sparta. London: Penguin Books Limited, 2005. Print

Life of Cleopatra is still one of the most captivating subjects in a world’s history. The figure of the majestic Egyptian queen was always covered with legends and mystery. Just this mystery made ordinary people create new stories connected with her life and reign, artists and writers – worship her in numeral art masterpieces, and historians – investigate thoroughly all existing documents in order to have the real notion about her as a historical character.

The book under consideration is Cleopatra by Michael Grant (New York: Simon and Schuster,1972). This is not another one attempt by some author to achieve world fame using a remarkable person in his writing. This book is a new version of Cleopatra’s history. It is a new look on her person as an important historical figure, her role in the history of Egypt, her relationships with Rome.

In the introduction to Cleopatra the author designates the main thesis of his work. He points out that the traditional version of Cleopatra’s life was very easily adopted by lots of historians. As the result, in modern society the name Cleopatra is, first of all, associated with magical beauty and love relationships with two noble Romans: Julius Caesar and Mark Antony. At the same time the real services of Cleopatra to her country are simply forgotten or are not taken into account. They seem to be faded in comparison with bright legends existing around her name.

In another his book Greek and Roman Historians: Information and Misinformation, Grant emphasizes that “the one thing that is certain about history is that what we are told is by no means always true” (90). This point of view the author explains by huge amount of inadequate information, fabrication, facts distortion and pure lie. He also points out that some information fabrications are made purposely to distort the political and social picture of a country in a determined period of time.

Michael Grant says “it is evident that we do not ever obtain the whole truth about what is happening today, and in consequence it is equally or even more evident that we do not, cannot, glean the whole truth about things that have happened in the past” (90).

The author develops his argue by emphasizing that goals of the Egyptian queen were not limited only by dynastic ambitions. She dreamed a huge territory of Empire to be reined not only by Romans how it was till those times.

Cleopatra envisaged that this whole vast territory, together with the external regions dependent upon it, should not longer be under the sole, exclusive domination of Italians, as it had been hitherto. Instead it should be a partnership, in which the Greek and Hellenized orientals that inhabited the regions east of the Adriatic were to be associates of the Romans rather then merely their subjects, enjoying their status almost equal to theirs (Engle, 219).

This, of course, led to misunderstanding among historians as for Cleopatra’s biography. Thus, Michael Grant tries to resolve this problem in his book by separating true facts of the queen’s life from pure invention.

Successful Vice-chancellor and President of the Queen’s University in Belfast, Michael Grant, as a real historian, tells a story of Cleopatra chronologically, carefully examining all historical documents and fiction. About the importance of ancient history authors he says the following:

There is, we are told, a widespread feeling that the ancient authors are somehow privileged, exempt from the normal canons of evaluation. But they ought not to be when it is a question of arriving at the truth, not the “higher truth” but the truth of how things actually happened (95).

The book consists of several parts such as Cleopatra’s life up to 21 year, Cleopatra and Caesar, Cleopatra and Mark Antony, Cleopatra against Rome. Numeral chapters of the book describe in detail all events and people living at those times. Discussing the most disputable questions and trying to throw daylight upon true facts of Cleopatra’s story, the author draws his evidences from the scientific works of ancient Roman historians, modern historians and literature artworks as well.

In conclusion to the book introduction Michael Grant points out that all those sources give a lot for understanding of this problem. But one should still recognize that there is a lot of points not studied and incomprehensible in this theme nowadays. The nature of sources allows not only to resolve some questions but puts new ones. The author hopes that future researches will be able to cast light on Cleopatra’s role in history which was, of course, of the great importance.

To evaluate the author’s success in his subjects, I should say that his argues are very convincing. To prove this point of view, we should consider one material, presenting new vision of Cleopatra’s origin.

Michael Grant also believes that, although Cleopatra lived and ruled in Egypt, she did no possess “a drop of Egyptian blood in her veins.” Grant also brings up the issue of the identity of Cleopatra’s mother, concluding that she must have been Cleopatra V Tryphaena – the first wife of Cleopatra’s father. It is unlikely Cleopatra was an illegitimate child because the negative Roman propaganda against her never mentioned it. Although Grant adamantly insists that Cleopatra had no “Egyptian blood,” he does suggest that she was racially mixed and quite “dark,” a fact he attributes to her Macedonian forebears who “were of very mixed blood”. He concludes, significantly, that, although the “racial ingredients” of Cleopatra’s Macedonian identity might have been mixed, culturally she was entirely Greek (Shohat, 170).

This approach to the history facts investigation made me believe in new hypothesis proposed by Michael Grant. Moreover, I consider this book to be valuable and useful not only for historians and professors but for general readership as well. Writing about Egypt, Rome and Greece, the author provides a huge amount of personal and background details fueling readers’ curiosity. Popular history described in Grant’s works has scholarly foundations. His books open the world in a new way, they orient without overpowering. At the same time they instigate curiosity and indicate other useful resources.

The modern reconstruction captures very accurately the reality of ancient times and characters.

The marked tendency of twentieth-century historians to break into Shakespearean tragic dialogue when describing the queen’s death demonstrates the pervasiveness of the particular ancient fiction, from Plutarch in a direct line of descent through his translators Amyot and North, to Shakespeare and the first 1930s edition of The Cambridge Ancient History. Similarly, when Michael Grant, at the outset of his own biography of the queen, invites his readers into the “story of a woman who became utterly involved, in her public and private life alike, with two men,” he borrows his narrative strategy from the ancient historian Cassius Dio who centers Cleopatra’s reign around her captivation of two Roman men, Julius Caesar and Mark Antony, and her destruction by a third, Octavian (Wyke, 197-198).

The main motives and agendas of the author provided by this book, are to examine thoroughly all possible ancient historian resources, evaluate their importance in world history heritage and separate pearls of truth from fiction in order to present the veritable portrait of a famous Egyptian queen. “The main reason, why we should read the ancient historians, says Grant, is not because they were great historians (which, by modern standards, they could not expected to be) but because they were literary artists” (97). Thus, he does not consider their works to be authentically true, though some valuable historical facts still can be found there. The task of Michael Grant was to pick up those pearls of truth from the fancy garbage. As the practice shows, he succeeded in doing this hard task and his work may be evaluated with the highest mark.

The estimation of Michael Grant’s Cleopatra by the scholarly community was diverse. Some people considered it to be very specific research, because this book depicted a rather new vision of Cleopatra’s life version. This was a daring attempt to present one’s own understanding of ancient history events.

From the other hand, this book was highly estimated for its vivid narration and captivating plot. Though the volume of a book is not big, the information presented in it, is rather extensional. The book is also valuable because it provides answers on the most disputable questions. However, there are some points to be studied in more detail.

In conclusion I would like to say that Michael Grant did not aim to put a bullet point in Cleopatra’s history. His goal was to help readers know more true information and push them to other researches. Because, as the author fairly noted, “historiography in antiquity dealt with important and noteworthy events, or at any rate those regarded as such, according to principles, interests, aims and tastes of great diversity” (5).

Bibliography

Engle, Lars. Shakespearean Pragmatism: Market of His Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.

Grant, Michael. Greek and Roman Historians: Information and Misinformation. New York: Routledge, 1995.

Shohat, Ella. Taboo Memories, Diasporic Voices. Durham: Duke University Press, 2006.

Wyke, Maria. The Roman Mistress: Ancient and Modern Representations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.