Category: Iliad

There is a great deal of different methods and techniques to introduce the main characters of the story, to organize the text and to make the reader interested in the book from the very beginning. Authors usually use various methodologies in their work, as they want to be unique and different from other authors by the special text organization or the characters introduction. There are occasionally situations, when one author uses different techniques within different works. Such mix of the techniques and characters introduction is provided by Homer in two of his works, The Iliad and The Odyssey, which are going to be analyzed from the point of view of the characters insertion in the description. In The Iliad, the poet begins with a description of Achilles anger (mnis). Unlike Achilles, Odysseus name does not occur in The Odyssey until line twenty-one. Nevertheless, Odysseus is established as the subject of the poem in the very first line when he is described as the man of many ways. Such distinctive beginnings suggest about the difference in perception of respective protagonists, and explain in terms of larger cultural and narrative themes in both epics.

Considering the cultural and time environment, the poems were written in ancient Greece by Homer, who is considered to be, according to the accepted information, a legendary epic poet. To consider the exact time of the poems creation with the aim to research the political and social environmental and to add to the supportive facts is impossible, as there is no exact information about Homer and the dates of his birth and death. Different versions are analyzed, but the evidences of the concrete supportive facts give us just the information that The Iliad and The Odyssey are one of the most ancient pieces of literature of ancient Greece. Nevertheless, the picture of the cultural life of people of that time may be reconstructed. The existence of lots of myths and description of the society in ancient Greece and the very development of literature, music and theater may be the main points of reviewing the life of ancient Greeks.

First of all, ancient Greece is characterized by the constant battles for the territory, love and with the aim of revenge. The myths are the main resources of information, and this information should not be trusted as the magnificent power and incredible creations are the main characters of the ancient Greek myths. The heroes were the main characters and the idols, as their power was so huge and immense, that they are introduced in many stories of that time. The difference of the characters introduction may be the reason, which is coming out of some mythological understanding of these characters. The stories about magnificent people with huge power were familiar for all and there are some distinctive features, which made them different. To be more specific, the exact examples should be discussed, in particular the first lines where the acquaintance with the main heroes takes place.

Tell me, Muse, of the man of many ways, who was driven
Far journeys, after he had sacked Troys sacred citadel& (Homer, The Odyssey 27).

These are the first lines of The Odyssey, which do not mention the main character, but anyway, he may be guessed. Who is the person of many ways (Homer, The Odyssey 27)? Who was driven far journeys and sacked Troys sacred citadel (Homer, The Odyssey 27)? Considering the ancient Greece mythology, there were not so many people, who could fit the mentioned description. Being concerned about Odysseys 10 years journeys, when could not return home because of the Gods anger and had to float in the ocean. Reading the lines, it seems that there is no need to name the main character, as all is understood: there is no any other person, except Odyssey, who had to travel by so many ways and so much time. The association is direct, so no other variants immerge in mind. This may be one of the reasons why the author of the poem did not use the name of the main character in the first lines, and just gave the reader the opportunity to guess.

Such method, the guessing of the main character, could have been used to enhance the perception of the poem. First of all the reader is excited, as no main character is introduces, at the same time the reader surmises him, but still waits for the author to name him. This could have been supported by the cultural perception of the mythical heroes: they were familiar, discussed and popular. The cultural factor is of great importance here as to guess the hero of the myths is rather difficult if no any reminders of the heroes in the society takes place. The myth about Odyssey is familiar for all and people are just given several words the man of many ways (Homer, The Odyssey 27) and the reader has already guessed the main character of the play and the main idea, which is going to be developed, but still the reader is captured in the tense and interest as the language, the author uses is so exciting and easy to read, moreover, reading the poem by Homer, there is the impression that you appear near him and experience with him all the adventures.

Odyssey appears only on the 21^st line, when the description of the situation takes place, but still, the name of Odyssey is mentioned in the situation and without the first line and the words this one alone, longing for his wife and his homecomming (Homer, The Odyssey 27) it is impossible to understand that Odyssey is the main character of the story.

The cultural aspect is also taken into account while The Iliad creation, but in this situation, the main character of the poem is introduced in the first lines:

Sing, goddess, the anger of Peleus son Achilleus and its devastation, which put pains thousandfold upon the Achaians, hurled in their multitudes to the house of Hades strong souls of heroes, but gave their bodies to be the delicate feasting of dogs, of all birds, and the will of Zeus was accomplished since that time first there stood in division of conflict Atreus son the lord of men and brilliant Acilleus (Homer, The Iliad 59).

This is the first sentence of The Iliad, which mentions the name of Achilleus for two times. One of the reasons that the name of Achileus are mentioned in the first line of The Iliad, and also the names of the other mythological heroes are mentioned, may be the fact that the poem is considered to be the first piece of literature, written in western part of the world. The description is started from the main hero and some supportive characters and the environment where the events take place, the connected elements and conditions. Being the first written piece of literature, the author wanted to give the understanding to the events, to make the reader familiar with the situation. Creating The Odyssey, such mention was not so necessary, as the author could have thought that the reader should combine these two poems, as if The Odyssey is the continuation or contribution to The Iliad.

The reason that The Odyssey had to be perceived after reading The Iliad is rather ponderous argument. The poems were titled by one and the same author and this is reasonable that one poem had to be perceived through the other. Knowing the history of literature and the progression of the poems creation, modern reader will read The Iliad first and only then will turn to The Odyssey. The perception of the poems should be provided gradually, including different aspect of The Iliad plot while perceiving The Odyssey. Moreover, the plot of The Iliad and The Odyssey are closely connected, especially in the part of the Troy war, so the author could just omit some facts as they were mentioned in the first poem. In addition, there are some other versions of the same theme, and they should also be discussed.

The problem of differences of introducing the main characters of the poems adds to the skeptical opinion of some modern scholars, who do not consider homer as the historical individual. The reasons for such point of view comes from the fact that there is no any supported and trusted documents about the existence of such personality as Homer, neither biography, no other documentary evidences. The difference of the written styles in the poems is so visual, that it may be concluded as additional support to the fact that there has never been such personality as Homer, and the works, which are titled by this name, is just the collective works of several authors, who are unknown till now. The researches on the topic continue as a lot of facts are hidden for now but there is the possibility to find them and to introduce to the society.

The both poems introduce the largest cultural and narrative themes of the discussed period. The Troy war also remains one of the most important events foe the ancient Greeks, and it is not the surprise that this theme is described by one author in different poems. The core difference is that the perspectives are different which may mean that a lot of facts could have been mentioned and there were no any importance to repeat one and the same for several times. The author could start The Odyssey with the same narration, but what for? Furthermore, the main themes of the poems are not heroes in themselves, but love and war, hope and despair, and honor and glory, and the start of the poem, which main idea (Troy war) has already been discussed, with the description of the main character is not so important. The main idea of the story had already been familiar to the reader from The Iliad, and the reader had to be captured by the other idea, by the other theme. Starting The Odyssey from the description of the main hero without naming him may be considered as the special device, thanks to which the reader is captured to the poem, to the plot and the desire to read the book till the end appears.

In conclusion, In The Iliad, the poet begins with a description of Achilles, while Odysseus name does not occur in The Odyssey until line twenty-one. Nevertheless, Odysseus is established as the subject of the poem in the very first line when he is described as the man of many ways. Such distinctive beginnings suggest about the difference in perception of respective protagonists, and explain in terms of larger cultural and narrative themes in both epics. Here are a lot of factors, which could promote the author of the poems, Homer, to provide such different text organization and main character introduction. First, The Iliad is the poem, which was written earlier and the author could presuppose that he reader will base his/her reading of The Odyssey on the knowledge, which were already received from the previous poem by the author. The perception of one literature piece through the other is one of the most exciting things, as the reader is already familiar with the situation, and there is no need to explain everything one more time. The other idea is that Homer is not the single personality, but he collective of writers, who created the poems by different techniques, that is why Homers writing style is rather different, if to analyze his works from this, technological, perspective.

Works Cited

Homer. The Iliad of Homer. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 1961. Print.

Homer. The Odyssey of Homer. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 1999. Print.

Decision making in The Iliad by Homer is provided by mostly by Gods, as they were the most powerful creatures, who could construct peoples lives and change their destinies according to their fads.

Life is created in such a way, that people should always make decisions. The decision making process has penetrated in peoples life so much that it is we do not always get that we are making decisions. The process of decision making may be perfectly followed in the works of literature, when a thorough analysis of the text takes place. Decision making in The Iliad by Homer is provided by mostly by Gods, as they were the most powerful creatures, who could construct peoples lives and change their destinies according to their fads.

Starting the discussion with the significance of Gods in the ancient Greece, it may de stated that their power was incredible, and they could act as they wants, intrude in peoples life and provide the correctives to their destinies. People were like the marionettes in Gods hands, who could spin them and play according to their satisfaction.

Divinely born son of Laertes,
resourceful Odysseus  try lifting me,
or I will try lifting you. And we will let Zeus
decide the outcome (Homer 518).

The quote is rather capacious and informative, which tells that Gods power was huge and people submitted to that power without any oppositions. People knew that they could not confront Gods and did nothing in order to make their life free of Gods and their anger was devastating and could lead to unpredictable and terrifying effects. So they lived, submitted to Gods power and their desires, without any attempts to provide their decisions and relying to Gods decisions.

People still could provide some decisions, if they can be named so, as these decisions were based on the Gods one, and did not have any direct influence on the situation development, as all had to be so. They were all constructed according to Gods will and were consequential, without any importance. People most had the right whether to follow gods instruction and advices or not, but they mostly relied on them and did according to their will. Patroclus decides to change his appearance and to fight, without thinking about the consequences. This decision lead to his death, as Hector, thinking that it was Achilles, kills him, vaunting, that he is the best warrior, as he could kill Achilles, without knowing that he was mistaken. Patroclus himself decided to go to fights and died (Homer 368).

Agamemnon also had to make decision himself, and this decision was to sacrifice his daughter in the benefit of the city. Providing this decision, Agamemnon showed himself as the politician, who cared about people more, than about his personal life and parental feelings. Achilles having decided to left the fight and never return to the battle field changes his mind, when had heard about his companion death, starting his argument

Then let me die, since I could not prevent
the death of my companion. He has fallen
far from his homeland. He needed me there (Homer 399).

Providing the decision to return to the battle field, he was killed, and this was his personal decision. The same was his decision when he had the option to live a long life and die in the old age, but he chooses fights and dies. Hectors decision, when he decides to save others and goes to fight with Achilles, is the right one, as he is a real hero, who sacrifice his life for the benefit of others. He had to fight and this obligation was created by his firm decision (Homer 475)

Supporting the idea that Gods still decide everything, the fact that the decision to destroy Troy came from Gods and this were they, who directed people in this action, they tried to do everything to make Troy disappear from the Earth. The main decision, made by Zeus, is that all Gods are forbidden to help both Greeks, and Trojans, which creates the quarrel on the Olympus. The battle continues without Gods interference, but there are a lot of ways to overcome the decision, and when Zeus sleeps, Hera make up the decision to help Greeks. Then Apollo interferes with his help to Trojans, causing plague through Greeks. The death of Hector was possible only by Athenas help, who concluded that she had such power.

In conclusion, all the decisions, made by people in The Iliad were promoted by Gods actions. Gods have created the sort of a game and tried to help their loves, without considering that there were people, who loved, wanted to live and tried to make all possible to save their nation in the fight, which did not have any aim, if to think deeper, just Gods wanted to decide which power is greater, and whose hero will win the battle. The decisions, even those which had consequential nature, from both peoples and Gods sides, led to peoples death, while Gods had fun on the havens. Providing some actions, Gods did not understand that they decided not only the question, but peoples life, what was promoted by the fact that they were powerful and possessed peoples character features, such as envy and malignance.

Works Cited

Homer. The Iliad. Tr. by Ian Johnston. Arlington: Richer Resources Publications, 2006.

The role of women in the ancient world is generally accepted to be that of possession and house-servant, mother and decorative status symbol, but not human, not thinking and not individual enough to act upon her own volition. This impression comes from a long line of ancient texts and documents that suggest women were barely a part of the action but were frequently the treasure behind the throne. The truth, however, is that womens roles differed from one culture to another and a blanket statement simply cannot be made. To get a real glimpse of what womens roles might have been like in the ancient world, it is necessary to understand what the ancient texts really have to say about them, such as the character of Andromache, who provides us with an idea of what womens roles might have been like in Troy during the time of the Trojan wars.

Andromaches first major appearance in the play occurs in Book Six as she attempts to convince her husband not to go off to war. As she pleads with her husband not to go outside the citys walls, she outlines the many roles Hector fills for her, you who to me are father, mother, brother and dear husband, and then advises him as to the safest course of the battle, as for the host, place them near the fig-tree, where the city can be best scaled, and the wall is weakest. Thrice have the bravest of them come thither and assailed it, under the two Ajaxes, Idomeneus, the sons of Atreus and the brave son of Tydeus. That she is bold enough to make the suggestion indicates her role in the home is not necessary the silent and meek impression one typically holds of the ancient woman but is instead a helpmeet to her husband, accustomed to providing counsel and intelligent in the ways of war. In his answer to her, though, Hector outlines more of what Andromache is expected to do during her everyday activities which include your loom, your distaff, and the ordering of your servants. When Hector loses in battle, he indicates he fully expects Andromache to be taken prisoner and forced to serve someone else for the rest of her days but prays that one day his son will become a great leader and she will once again be provided with a protector.

Andromache is again seen engaged in the typical duties of the housewife immediately following Hectors death in Book 22. As Hector breathed his last words to Achilles, Andromache was in a room inside their lofty home, weaving purple fabric for a double cloak, embroidered flowers on it. Shed told her well-groomed servants in the house to place a large tripod on the fire, so Hector could have a hot bath when he came home from battle. Upon hearing the sounds in the street, she again boldly moves forward to the tops of the walls where the rest of the townspeople are and arrives just in time to see Achilles dragging Hectors body off to the Achaean camp. Without Hector, Andromache is no longer the brave individual she was seen to be in Book 6 but is now weak, requiring the help of her sisters-in-law to help support her and mourning the fate of her son now that he has no father to show him the way.

Throughout the Iliad, the character of Andromache demonstrates the power women held within their society as the keepers of the home. They werent necessarily the silent shadows and pieces of property they seem to be within the Greek camp through such figures as Briseis, but were respected by their men and had voices of their own. While Andromache begs her husband not to go to war, fearing she will lose him, she accepts his decision as protector of the home and holds such confidence in him that she makes preparations for his immediate return. Through Andromache, we gain a glimpse of the lifestyles and risks taken by all of the women of Troy as their men fought outside the gates and away from the family as their only means of protecting it. While her situation after Hectors death seems incredibly pitiful, it is difficult to understand how it might have been different.

Works Cited

Homer. The Iliad. Trans. Stanley Lombardo. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 1997.

In today’s battles, soldiers wear uniforms designed to make them indistinguishable from each other. Forced to wear the same clothes and don identical haircuts, soldiers are stripped of their identity as they collectively become G.I Joes. Conversely, in Homer’s epic The Iliad, warriors dress in decorative armor and wield glitzy weapons and shields to stand out and make a name for themselves, reflecting the heroic nature of the war. Throughout the epic, warriors wear armor to express their individuality, and, inevitably, their armor takes up a recognizable identity. But conflict arises when warriors wear armor that do not belong to them. Demonstrated through Patroclus and Hector’s deaths while wearing Achilles’ armor, the identity of the warrior and identity of the armor clash as the warrior attempts to live up to the armor’s reputation but pays the price when he cannot reach the potential of the armor.

In The Iliad, warriors choose specific armor to express themselves in a certain way, consequently revealing underlying character traits they may have not meant to express. This motif is clear through the description of Paris’ armor, which encapsulates his beautiful, but narcissistic characteristics: “But shining Alexandros put his fine armor upon his broad shoulders, he, the husband of Helen of the lovely hair. First he strapped the splendid greaves around his shins…over his powerful head he placed his well-forged helmet with flowing horsehair” (3:328-336). Descriptive vocabulary such as “broad” and “lovely” paint Paris as a strong, attractive male. Just as pretty as his looks is his armor, as illustrative vocabulary including “splendid”, “well-forged”, and “fine” draw attention to the alluring armor. Although his armor is shiny and pretty, it hinders him on the battlefield as Menelaus “seized Alexandros’ horsehair-crested helmet” (3:67), hinting at Paris’ obsession with beauty over utility. After being saved by Aphrodite from certain doom, Aphrodite quotes in a sarcastic tone, “he is in there, in his bedroom, on his bed that is inlaid with rings, shining in beauty and raiment—you would not think that he come from fighting a man, but rather that he was going to a dance, or had just left the dance and was reclining” (3:91-94). As beautiful as Paris’ armor is, the chief purpose of it is to be beautiful and not contribute to the battlefield, just as Paris often finds himself not on the battlefield, but rather in the bedroom unscarred, narcissistically admiring his beauty.

Similarly, the scene where Achilles is armored in Book 19 not only reflects his rage following Patroclus’ death, but also suggests Achilles’ godliness. As Achilles continuously stares at the armor aptly forged by Hephaestus the god of fire, “anger entered him all the more, and his eyes terribly shone out beneath his lids like fire flare” (19:16-17). The symbol of fire mirrors Achilles’ uncontrollable wrath and indicates Achilles’ ability to wreak havoc on the battlefield. Furthermore, at first sight, the armor’s aura intimidates all other warriors: “And trembling took all the Myrmidons, nor did any dare to look upon it straight, and they shrank” (19:14-16), but Achilles is the only warrior capable of staring at the armor, suggesting that he is godlike because he is able to wear armor from the gods. The juxtaposition between the godlike Achilles and the mortal Myrmidons highlights the greatness of Achilles on the battlefield, as he stands as a godlike figure among mortals.

While warriors wear armor to express certain traits, they also wear armor as a trophy of glory to flaunt their victories, therefore leading to armor taking up the identity of the warrior. To win glory on the battlefield, warriors not only had to claim victory, but also have others see it. Hence, warriors strived to strip the armor of their fallen foes to seize permanent proof of victory, which is why a big fight occurs over Achilles’ armor when Patroclus falls. What follows is that armor becomes a sign of reputation and identity. Achilles gains the reputation as the strongest warrior because others see him defeating other warriors and stripping their armor. Because others see Achilles claim victory in his armor, the reputation and glory of Achilles as a warrior becomes associated with Achilles’ armor. Thus, his armor takes up his identity. In other words, Achilles’ enemies fear the image of Achilles’ armor, not necessarily Achilles himself.

Since armor takes up the identity of its owner, it veils sightseers from the true warrior underneath. When people view a warrior and garner a certain impression, anybody could be underneath the armor, but the person viewing the armor will have a certain impression because of the armor’s reputation. When Hector meets with his wife and son before saying farewell, his son does not recognize him in his shining armor. In fact, “the child turned away, back to the breast of his fair-belted nurse, crying, frightened at the sight of this own fire, struck with terror seeing the bronze helmet and crest of horsehair” (6:467-469). Hector’s moral identity is that of a family man, evidenced by when his son immediately returns affection when Hector takes his helmet off. But with his armor on, Hector is masked and appears as a monstrous man, unrecognizable by the masquerade his armor creates.

Yet, though armor can mask the physical appearance of a warrior, armor cannot disguise the true warrior underneath. Before even stepping on the battlefield, as Patroclus suits up in Achilles’ gear, he is able to wear all the armor but is unable to take the spear, as “Only the spear of blameless Aeacides he did not take up, heavy, massive, powerful; this no other Achaeans could wield, but only Achilles knew how to wield” (16:140-142), signifying Patroclus can never be the warrior Achilles is, no matter how much he looked like Achilles.

Since wearing someone else’s armor disguises the wearer’s appearance, the wearer strives to take on the identity of the armor due to how people react to seeing the armor. What brings Patroclus’ downfall is not his plan, but rather his over-eagerness while wearing the armor of Achilles. Patroclus, normally a man of reason, conjures a seemingly innocent plan to hold off the Trojans from the ships: “And give me your arms to wear upon my shoulders, with the hope that likening myself to you the Trojans will hold off from fighting” (16:40-43). Homer, however, foreshadows his impending death after he relays his plan to Achilles, suggesting he will be a “great fool; for he was to beseech his own evil death and destruction” (16:46-47) because he does not keep his promise to follow the plan. With the appearance of Patroclus in Achilles’ armor, the illusion of Achilles being back on the Achaean side rallies the Achaeans and startles the Trojans as Patroclus “drove panic upon them all when he killed their leader” (16:292). Descriptions such as “And Patroclus, when he had cut off the ranks of the Trojans turning back, he penned them against the ships… he rushed among and killed them, and exacted vengeance for many” (16:392-297) highlight the temporary boost Patroclus gains from wearing Achilles’ armor. He feels stronger because he is wearing the armor of the greatest warrior, and his opponents are scared to fight the greatest warrior. Patroclus’ plan is working, but the identity of the armor overtakes Patroclus’ identity. With his logic blinded by the lust of power when wearing Achilles’ armor, Patroclus overextends by pushing the Trojans all the way back to the gate—something only Achilles would dare do, leading to his gruesome death. From this, it is clear Patroclus is not Achilles, no matter if Patroclus wears Achilles’ armor.

Hector’s death in Achilles’ armor is another reminder that you cannot become someone else by wearing their armor because armor stays true to its identity and is loyal to its intended wearer. When Hector strips Achilles’ armor, he gains glory that elevates him to the title of the greatest warrior. Despite this, the armor is attributed to Achilles’ identity and aura. The armor betrays Hector when fighting with Achilles, as it seemingly communicates to Achilles the right spot to strike, “The rest of his body was held by brazen armor…but at the point where the collarbone holds the neck from the shoulders there showed his gullet, where death of the soul comes swiftest” (22:322-326). Hector’s false sense of security from wearing Achilles’ armor is his downfall, as the armor betrays him for its true master. Wearing Achilles’ armor only gives Hector the illusion of being the greatest warrior when the reputation that comes with the armor rightfully belongs to Achilles. As long as Achilles is alive, Hector can not claim the title of “greatest warrior” no matter if he dresses in the armor of the “greatest warrior”.

All in all, armor in The Iliad serves as a form of expression on the battlefield. It functions as a trophy of conquest and glory, garnering reputation for prowess on the battlefield. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that although wearing armor can act as a disguise from reality, wearing armor is not disguise from the true warrior underneath. By wearing someone else’s armor, warriors strive to live up the identity of the armor. However, the clash of identities between the armor and warrior may lead to disastrous consequences, as the true warrior comes from within, not from their gear.

Greek Literature carries some of the most influential messages and lessons of any grouping of writing in history: The Iliad, an epic poem, and Medea, a Greek tragedy, supply examples of literature that do so. The Iliad, written by the infamous Homer, tells a story centered around the gods, mortals, and war, set in the Trojan war. Through its ongoing depiction of the disputes between Agamemnon and Achilles, the poem carries messages of fate, love, mortality, forgiveness, and more. Additionally, the Greek tragedy, Medea, written by Euripides’ was a play that carried revolutionary and progressive pro-female attitudes. The plot follows Medea and her reaction to discovering her husband’s disloyalty. This play also carries strong messages of femininity, revenge, and betrayal. Both The Iliad and Medea illustrate themes of honor, justice, and revenge, which can be traced throughout their plots; however, those in The Iliad are more driven by honor and the afterlife, while in Medea they are driven by a desire for vengeance and validation.

In ancient Greece, honor was far more than just a virtue or trait: it defined the lives of individuals and deemed them respect, privilege, and status. Through comparison of The Iliad and Medea, this is clearly evident, as honor is often the main force that drives the actions of individuals. In The Iliad, the ongoing dispute between Agamemnon and Achilles demonstrates the strength of honor on one’s decision making. Agamemnon takes the woman that was gifted to Achilles, Briseis, which begins this feud, as it was seen as extremely disrespectful to Achilles that Agamemnon had taken his “prize”. The epic reads: “I will be there in person at your tents / to take Briseis in all of her beauty, your own prize- / so you can learn how much greater I am than you” (Homer 1.217-219). By attesting that this was a plea to demonstrate his greatness, Agamemnon takes a stab at Achilles honor and practically strips him of it in public. This brings the wrath of Achilles to the forefront of the plot. This event leads to Achilles leaving the army and refusing to fight for the Achaeans, Zeus getting involved, and much more. Both of these men were attempting to maintain their egos and the honor that comes with doing so. Agamemnon was not known as a very strong leader to his army, while Achilles was known as one of the greatest fighters, thus there was bound to be tension between the two. The fact that this decision to take Briseis from Achilles was made shows that honor has the power to completely dry the actions of an individual in Greek culture, or at least that of The Iliad. Honor is also a theme within Euripides’ Medea but in a slightly different form. The theme of honor shines through as more of an expression of feminism and empowerment, as Medea is a female character. The plot revolves around Medea and her quest for justice and revenge, yet there are tones of honor throughout. A lot of what Medea does is motivated by proving that men are no stronger than women both physically and mentally. Often times throughout the play the Chorus acts as a medium for these messages to be passed along. At one point, the chorus says, “Men’s minds are deceitful, and nothing is settled, not even oaths that are sworn by the gods. The tidings will change, and a virtuous reputation will grace my name. The race of women will reap honor, no longer the shame of disgraceful rumor” (Euripides 422-426). This can be seen as a borderline expression of an early feminist revolution, as far as it was concerned in Greek culture. Knowing the climate of society at this time, this would have carried many implications as a written act. Women mostly had power in Greek society through their husbands, and with that in mind, this commentary is immensely suggestive about Medea’s motivations to prove that women can be powerful too. This play was revolutionary with its views of females in society, although the plot is questionable in its expression of Medea’s sanity. These two examples of Honor — both Agamemnon and Achilles feud, as well as Medea’s expression of her motivation — shows that honor was a prevalent motivator of individuals in ancient Greece; however, these two examples do have their differences. In The Iliad, the feud is strongly motivated by honor in pertinence to recognition and reputation, as those were seen as extremely valuable in view of an afterlife. On the other hand, Medea carries connotations of feminism and female empowerment, as Medea felt strongly that she needed to defend herself against her unloyal husband. Overall, the impact of honor on these plots suggests that it was so important in a culture that it had the power to drive these conflicts, although they are manifested in different ways.

Likewise, the theme of justice and the quest for it was important to the plot of both of these plots, but unlike the acts of honor, the theme of justice is more congruous between the two. The epic of The Iliad is filled with examples of justice, following numerous characters’ quests for achieving it. One of the most influential instances of this was in Book 22 when Achilles kills Hector. Hector had killed Patroclus, Achilles’ cousin, and some would argue his lover too. From the death scene of Hector, Achilles says, “I smashed your strength! And you — the dogs and bird will maul you, shame your corpse while Achaeans bury my dear friend in glory!” then later, says, “Would to God my rage, my fury would drive me now to hack your flesh away and eat it raw … not even then will your noble mother lay you on your deathbed, mourn the son she bore” (Homer 22.408-416). The way that Achilles speaks to Hector on his deathbed shows that this was his vision of serving justice. Achilles continues to tell Hector that he would never die a hero, which was an extremely important part of the afterlife in Greek culture. Hector begs Achilles for a true burial, but Achilles refuses, proving how he believed that this was how Hector was to be served justice. However, we see that Achilles is overcome with emotion and begins to shave the border between justice and revenge, which is also seen within Medea. Achilles tells Hector that it was foolish to think that nobody would attempt to serve justice in the killing of Patroclus. Achilles finds final justice in defiling the corpse of Hector by sending him off in a chariot. The epic also shows other examples of searching for justice through instances like Zeus seeking vengeance on Odysseus’ men for killing the sun-god’s cows and others. Similarly, the plot of Medea is riddled with examples of justice in practice, the most prevalent one being the overall decision of Medea to seek vengeance on Jason. The plot of this play revolves around violations of natural law, in this case, Jason’s disloyalty and Medea’s decision to kill her own children. Medea searches for justice both to Jason, to seek vengeance for his actions, as well as justice for women as discussed previously. When Medea makes the decision to seek justice for the wrongdoings of Jason, she says, “If I should find some way, some strategy to pay my husband back, bring him to justice, keep silent. Most of the time, I know, a woman is filled with fear. She’s worthless in a battle and flinches at the sight of steel. But when she’s faced with an injustice in the bedroom, there is no other mind more murderous” (Euripides 265-271). Medea states that she plans to “bring him [Jason] to justice,” then proceeds to discuss how women are marginalized in Greek society, but empowers herself with the thought of her husband’s disloyalty. Justice is the driving force in her actions, as he has wronged her, and she wants to do him right for his actions. However, some may argue that in her quest for justice, she is overwhelmed by emotions of revenge. Jason has wronged Medea in ways that do call for justice; however, the way that Medea handles the search for justice was unlawful, and evidently she violates natural law herself. Medea is also inspired by the abusive treatment she receives from Jason, which justifies the need for justice even more. Jason says the following to Medea: “You hateful thing, O woman most detested by the gods, by me, by all mankind … I wish you would die … you’re a plague, betrayer of your father … You ruined me. You’re not a woman; you’re a lion, with a nature more wild than Scylla’s, the Etruscan freak… Get out of here, you filth, you child-murderer. For me, all that’s left is tears for my misfortune. I’ll never have the joy of my bride’s bed, nor will I ever again speak to my children, my children, whom I raised. And now I’ve lost them” (Euripides 1369-1398).

This example exhibits multiple topics for discussion: Jason was abusive to Medea, and Medea was successful hi hurting Jason. He says that he was “ruined” by her and that all that was left were his “tears of misfortune.” Thus Medea was successful in serving Jason with the suffering that she believed would bring justice to the situation. Additionally, the abusive manner that Jason speaks to her with, calling her “hateful,” “a plague,” and “filth.” This language supports the actions of Medea in her attempts to find justice; however, they can also be seen as border lined with revenge, rather than justice, which would be an attempt to make things right. In comparing the epic and the play, the situations are basically the same. Justice becomes entangled with revenge, and the search to right someone’s wrongs becomes a test of getting back at said person. Both The Iliad and Medea show how this is true through these examples of justice portrayal.

As discussed, revenge in these Greek stories becomes entangled with the idea of Justice, and this happens in both The Iliad and Medea. In The Iliad, revenge is motivated by upholding honor and pride, while in Medea it is more motivated by love and pure vengeance. In The Iliad, strong leaders like Agamemnon, Achilles, and Odysseus treated revenge as a necessity, as it was the most direct way to gain back their honor and pride when it was taken from them. We see the motivation of revenge through the rage of Achilles when Briseis is taken from him. Achilles says: “Never again, I trust, will Achilles yield to you. And I tell you this- take it to heart, I warn you my hands will never do battle for that girl, neither with you, king, nor any man alive. You Achaeans gave her, now you’ve snatched her back. But all the rest I possess beside my fast black ship not one bit of it can you seize against my will, Atrides. Come, try it! So the men can see that instant, your black blood gush, and spurt around my spear!’ (Homer 1.347-355).

The second that a prize of honor is taken from Achilles, he begins to defend himself aggressively. He threatened Agamemnon for taking her from him, saying his blood will “spurt around [his] spear,” and that he will never “yield” to him again. He immediately moves towards violence, as it is the simplest form of revenge. Achilles is attempting to defend his honor, and this is seen similarly through Medea’s attempts to defend her honor as a woman and a respectable wife. Medea plans to take the lives of her own children in order to cause pain to Jason, as she believes that it would be sufficient revenge or justice. Medea has the following interaction with the chorus: “Chorus: ‘Will you have the nerve to kill your children?’ Medea: ‘Yes: to wound my husband the most deeply’” (Euripides 839-840). This demonstrates Medeas relentless desire to cause pain to Jason, and evidently gain revenge for what he has done to her. Revenge is the driving force for everything that Medea does, as her desire for revenge takes over her life. She also says that killing her children is “the supreme way to hurt [her] husband,” which further demonstrates how her hatred and anger towards Jason is so intense that she would do anything to hurt him back (Euripides 815). Overall, the two Greek stories demonstrate revenge through their characters and the way that they handle conflict. Medea and Achilles suggest that there was a strong entanglement of revenge and justice in Greek culture, as some thought that there was almost an “eye for an eye” motif to everything that was done wrong.

Overall, the themes of honor, justice, and revenge are prevalent in both The Iliad and Medea; however, they contrast in certain areas. Both of the implications of these themes in these stories carry strong suggestions of how Greek society operated. Themes of honor are about the afterlife and reputation in The Iliad, while in Medea it is more about maintaining the honor of women against men. Additionally, the concept of justice is practiced in a similar way through the two works: Achilles seeks to gain justice through killing Hector, and Medea does the same by trying to cause pain to Jason. However, these attempts at Justice certainly get entangled with motivations of revenge. Finally, revenge in Homer’s epic is centered around protecting those ideas of reputation through honor, while in Euripides’ tragedy it is more about protecting those rights and powers of women. Overall, there are consistencies between these two legendary Greek works, as they suggest things about the society of that time period and how situations like this were handles. The values of honor, justice, and revenge clearly play roles in the management of conflict, although they sometimes act in various ways.

The Iliad was written by the Greek poet, Homer, which covers the war and fights between the Trojans and the Acheans during the final year of the Trojan war. The events surrounding the main characters and gods are depicted in the last several weeks of the war. The poem begins with King Agamemnon demanding Achille’s, a powerful Greek warrior, to give him Briseis, which was Achille’s war prize. This ignites an ongoing feud which ultimately results in Achilles distancing himself from the war. Achilles even asks that the Trojans beat the Greeks, which cause the Acheans to suffer greatly. The fight between Paris and Menelaus over Helen is also described to be the main cause of the war. The story is heavily affected by the involvement of gods throughout and reflects the key characteristics of heroism. In many ways, Hector, the leader of the Trojan army, embodies what being a hero is. Hector reflects his heroism through his selflessness and humanity, bravery, and loyalty.

When Hector is first introduced in the Iliad, the primary reason for his involvement in the war is out of responsibility to his city and his family. His selflessness is shown throughout many of the speeches he makes during the war. Most of his speeches are concerned with the fate of his city, and the effect the war may have on his family. Another attribute of Hector’s selflessness is he rarely boasts about his successes during the war and he is not as prideful compared to his other war hero counterparts. It is clear that Hector deeply cares for his family, and it shows that he is a lot more human than a lot of the characters in the story. One example of his humanity is at the end of book 6, Hector tries to cheer up his wife after she worries about his fate in the war. “Andromache,/ dear one, why so desperate? Why so much grief for me?/ No man will hurl me down to Death, against my fate.” (6.579-581). Hector’s character traits are also shown in his dismay for the war. He voices his disappointment of Paris, who is his brother, for allowing a war to happen so close to where his wife and son live, especially over such juvenile circumstances. Hector even persuades Paris and Menelaus to end the war with a one-on-one fight, because he looked out for his people as a whole (Thomas).

Courage in the Iliad is praised even more than faithfulness or honesty, which is why Hector is described as one of the greatest warriors to fight in the war. Hector is also very different from some of the other greatest warriors because he is mortal. Hector also exhibits humanity and often times more bravery than some of the demigods in the war. Hector is also unwavering when it comes to facing his duty and even his fate. Although he is devoted to his wife and son, he continues to fight for his city. Hector is also faced with many which might tempt him to leave the war, one of which is when his young son cannot recognize him after coming back in his battle gear covered in blood, sweat, and dirt. His son cries and screams until Hector takes his helmet off and comforts his son. Hector’s bravest moment is perhaps when he recognizes that his death is inevitable. “I beg you, beg you by your life, your parents/ don’t let the dogs devour me by the Argive ships!” (22.399-400) Hector does not plead for Achilles to save his life, Hector accepts his fate heroically not cowardly and just asks that Achilles returns his body back to his loved ones.

A big part of Hector’s personality that makes him a hero is his loyalty towards all aspects of his life. It is clear from the beginning of the plot that Hector feels very strongly about fulfilling one’s duty to their city and that each person is responsible for pulling their own weight in the war. He is highly critical of people who do not carry out their duties and are cowardly. Hector regularly insults his brother Paris for his lack of responsibility to defend his city and how cowardly Paris is. Hector also shows a lot of loyalty to his family. He is faithful to his wife and is very family-oriented. His loyalty to his family is largely due to his kindness by nature which is characterized by his attitude towards Helen because he was the only person who was ever nice to her once the war started. His loyalty to his city is depicted in his prayer over his son before he returns to battle. “ Zeus … Grant this boy, my son,/maybe like me, first in glory among the Trojans.” (6.569-571) Hector understands that Troy may be defeated, his family may be killed, and his wife may be enslaved if he continues to fight, but wishes that his son might gain glory like Hector.

Although Hector was not the strongest warrior in the Iliad, it does not mean he was not the best. He was outmatched because mainly because of his mortality but this was a key factor that contributed to his heroism. Hector, was not gifted courage and strength unlike Achilles, instead, he devoted his life to learning and observing how to be strong and brave. His humanity and loyalty also made him very respected and loved by many people which is much more relatable, which allowed Hector to resonate with more people.

The denotation of individualism is the principle of being independent from group mentality and having freedom of actions and thoughts without limitations. Ancient Greece placed an emphasis on the individual, making it a major aspect of Western Civilization. Greeks were the first to experiment with ideals of individualism through direct democracy, in which certain citizens were encouraged to take an active role in government. As this idea developed and spread throughout Greek culture, people were encouraged to act and create based on their own talents that were unique to them. However, the only way to know this was to have a sense of self, or as Socrates proclaimed, “know yourself” and this will lead to a path of individuality. This concerns rising above social conformity and taking responsibility of one’s own actions, which can be seen through two unique but very different Greek heroes, Achilles and Agamemnon. They are portrayed in the “Iliad” with similar and opposing values and virtues, which stem from their unique strengths and weaknesses. The contrasting personalities of Achilles proves that individualism can be shown in different lights. Although it can be beneficial to ignore society’s standards, in can lead to feelings of isolation and alienation. Despite the challenges they were destined for, Socrates and both Greek heroes were able to overcome the negative aspects of possessing individuality, even in the face of death.

Socrates expresses individualism and the idea that the individual has dominance over all other things through his philosophy and search for wisdom. It is because he held this trait that he was sentenced to death. One of the main accusations held against Socrates was his corruption of the youth. The young men of the wealthier class enjoyed watching him aggravate Athenian elderly, especially politicians, by persistently asking difficult and embarrassing questions, exposing the ignorance of those who claim to be wise. Despite Socrates’s accusations against him, he remained the same, truthful and simplistic, even when his death sentence was quickly approaching. His trial and death were a sacrifice for the individual, resisting conformity to the respected standards of Ancient Greek. Socrates says, “Men of Athens, at hearing the speeches of my accusers, I cannot tell; but I know that their persuasive words almost made me forget who I was: – such was the effect of them, and yet they have hardly spoken a word of truth” (Apology Pg. 19). He did not change his perception of the world or halt his methods of seeking wisdom just because he was told to. This proves Socrates had no fear of death, unlike the rest of the “wise” people. He says “For to fear death, my friends, is only to think ourselves wise without really being wise, for it is to think that we know what we do not know. For no one knows whether death may not be the greatest good that can happen to man” (Apology Pg. ). He believed a life lived through injustice is known to be inadequate, and not the life he wished to live. Socrates would rather die in honor while fulfilling his search for wisdom, than giving up and live a life of dishonor. He, unlike those accusing him, has no passion for what is in the heavens or under the earth, or for worldly things, such as money, reputation, or politics. Plato says this when describing Socrates:

“When a man is refuted in argument, and when that has happened to him many times and on many different grounds, he is driven to think that there’s no difference between honorable and disgraceful, and so on with all other values, like right and good, that he used to revere… when he’s lost any respect or feeling for his former beliefs but not yet found the truth, where is he likely to turn? …And so, we shall see him become a rebel instead of a conformer” (The Republic Part VIII).

Socrates was a man interested only in seeking human virtue, wisdom and excellence, heading for a path to individualism. He is more invested in individual morality, not social politics. In his eyes, if you participate heavily in government, there is no time to care for one’s own soul or to become moral experts. One must pursue his or her best interest, but the only way to do that is to become as virtuous as possible. The individual is of upmost importance to Socrates because the individual has different freedoms. There is freedom from control of the state and desires of pleasure, and there is freedom from self-deceit, or believing false testaments to be true and hold important value. The individual must be worthy of their freedom, resisting worldly temptations and by yearning for and seeking out ultimate wisdom and virtuous perfection, which was accomplished by Socrates himself. Socrates teaches that the human is not just a mere body, but also a soul. The soul of a human justifies reason and logical thought and allows one to make their own decisions and become a self-sufficient individual, independent of others.

In “The Iliad,” it is obvious that Achilles embodies the idea of individualism, which can be exhibited through his strong emotions, but also his actions and motives. At the very beginning of the epic poem, Achilles persona shines though, establishing his “rage” just within the first line. His human characteristics do not fit the normal standards of a united military. He is temperamental, merciless and selfish. However, he is a great warrior, stronger and smarter than other men. The aspects of individualism Achilles possesses are negative and detrimental to his life and his army. He reveals the self-centered side of him, with only revenge on his mind. Every action must be to his benefit in order to protect his masculinity and pride, which was ripped away when his prize, Briseis, is taken from him. Throughout “The Iliad,” Achilles has his own battle with rage, and his journey to the moment of realization is due to this internal conflict. Despite the vicious war surrounding him, his greatest battle is with himself. This is a downside to individualism, which created anxiety from feeling outcast and alienated from his people and most importantly from himself. With only the restoration of honor on his mind, Achilles has no concern for how his actions affect those who are close and loyal to him. His decision to refuse to fight in the war was an independent and individual choice based on his heightened rage and passion. In Book 16, his sense of independence surfaces. Patroclus warns Achilles of how bad the war is going, and says “Achilles, son of Peleus, greatest of the Achaeans, spare me your anger, please, such heavy blows have overwhelmed the troops” (The Iliad, Book 16, Line 23). Achilles agrees to lend his armor and troops but refuses to fight himself. He is aware that the battle cannot be won without him present. His pride is still wounded, as he continues to act without humanity. Achilles is semi-divine, considering his mother, Thetis, is a goddess, while his father is a mortal. As Achilles’s rage grows stronger, he is straying further and further away from his human side and begins to retrieve his strong emotions from his godlike side. As the book progresses, Achilles takes responsibility for his actions all on his own, guilt setting in and finally showing a good side to his individuality. Homer says, “A black cloud of grief came shrouding over Achilles… Overpowered in all his power, sprawled in the dust, Achilles lay there fallen, tearing his hair, defiling it with his own hands” (The Iliad, Book 18, Line 24). Although he knows he must die, he still maintains a sense of eternal life. Achilles eventually accepts his fate of death, which is a step to achieving happiness according to Socrates, who had no fear of death itself. Achilles represents individuality, both its negative and positive aspects. Although he shows his human side, with rational thought, he is overcome by the alienation of himself from the rest of the world. He functions within his own realm, following through with actions that are to his own benefit. He lacks the important individual values associated with success and ultimate happiness and wisdom.

Throughout the Iliad, Agamemnon possesses many of the same characteristics of Achilles. However, with his pride at stake, he tends to use manipulation in order to benefit himself. Agamemnon acquires the negative aspects of individualism, which he somewhat overcomes. These damaging traits doubt his qualifications as a king. For example, he feels the need to test his troops in Book 2. Agamemnon exclaims, “But first, according to a time-honored tradition, I will test the men with a challenge, tell them all to crowd the oarlocks, cut and run in their ships” (The Iliad, Book 2, Line 85). This action is detrimental to the morale of his army, who now believe that their leader has no loyalty and faith in them. He consistently allows his overwhelming emotions to influence critical decisions in government and warfare. For example, to restore his honor, Agamemnon claims Briseis, who happens to be Achilles’s prize. He says,

“Not so quickly, brave as you are, godlike Achilles – trying to cheat me. What do you want? To cling to your own prize while I sit calmly by – empty handed here? No – if our generous Argives will give me a prize, a match for my desires, equal to what I’ve lost, well and good. But if they give me nothing, I will take a prize for myself – your own” (The Iliad, Book 1, Line 153).

He does not understand that the needs of his people should come before his own, especially his desires. This tragic flaw is what encourages him to keep Achilles’s prize, despite Nestor’s advice to let her go. Agamemnon’s individualistic traits reveal his selfish inner motives. For example, he is dishonorable, lacks faith in the gods and regrets offending Achilles when he offered him treasures as an incentive to fight. He worries his own men will turn against him and blame him for the many deaths of the Achaeans, which he deserves. In Book 14, Agamemnon is cowardly, and fears losing the war. He says “How on Earth can a wounded man make a war?… No shame in running, fleeing disaster, even in pitch darkness. Better to flee from death than feel its grip” (The Iliad, Book 14, Line 77 & 96). By proposing to sail away while his army stays and fights, he shows cowardice and weakness due to his overwhelming sense of pride. Agamemnon finally comes to realize just how badly his decisions have affected others and led to irreversible consequences. By recognizing his mistakes, he expresses a positive side to individualism, coming to this conclusion independent of others.

Though Greek literary works, such as “The Iliad” and Socrates’s philosophy teachings in “The Trial and Death of Socrates,” the concept of individualism is revealed to be a substantial focus in Greek culture. Although this idea is linked with positive and negative aspects, the two Greek heroes mentioned, along with Socrates, were able to rise above and allow for the benefits of individuality to lead them toward the fulfillment of truly knowing themselves, including their strengths and weaknesses. Being an individual stems from using this knowledge as a way to fulfill one’s happiness in life, allowing to express themself freely and creatively, based on their talents attributed to them. Socrates was wise, because although he did not know everything, he recognized his faults, making him wiser than even the greatest politicians. Achilles, though very stubborn and isolated, was a confident leader, obtaining the skills needed to win the Trojan war and create a spark of motivation in his troops. In the beginning of “The Iliad,” Agamemnon lacks all the traits of a moral and efficient king, repeatedly making decisions for his own benefit, rather than for the good of the public. In hindsight, he comes to realize his actions had detrimental consequences to the outcome of the war and finally understands what it means to be a virtuous ruler. Individualism involves rising above society’s limiting factors (for Achilles, this was alienation due to his emotional persona. For Socrates, this was the politicians and accusations) and staying true to one’s beliefs and talents, despite being faced with challenges, especially death, in which there should be no fear.

The Iliad is an epic poem, which was written by the ancient Greek poet Homer; the story recounts most of the significant events experienced in the final weeks of the Greek and the Trojan War under the military action of the city of Troy. The Iliad tells the story of what occurred during the last year of the Trojan War. The poem was written in the mid-8th Century BCE, and therefore it is considered as the earliest work in the whole Western literary tradition. In this essay, we will review about the story Iliad, we will then discuss the dichotomy that is portrayed in the story after the discussion is well understood we will be in the position of connecting this dichotomy with the current world issues considering the contrast between suffering and understanding as experienced in our contemporary society.

In the story ‘The Iliad’ it displays the chaos between the city of Troy army, known as the Trojans, and a confederation of Greek cities, which was collectively known as the Achaeans. The course of the war was when Paris, who was the son of Troy’s King Priam, seized the most beautiful woman in the world known as Hellen from the Achaean king Menelaus. This did not impress the Achaeans, and therefore they raised a massive army and sailed to Troy, hoping to win the woman back by force. This is where the war started claiming many lives. However, Homer began to write the story after nine years of the conflict between Troy and the Achaeans, During this period the Achaeans had just sacked a nearby city, and took several beautiful women with a lot of treasure. Chryses, Who was a priest from the sacked city, Tried approaching the Achaean camp to ask for there asks for her daughter back from the leader of the Achaeans, but it was all in vain.

In this story revenge is what everyone thinks can make things better for him. For instance, Chryses prays to Apollos to punish the Achaeans Army, and indeed the army is struck with a plague. Secondly, Achilles, who was the greatest of the Achaean fighters, asks for revenge on Agamemnon from his mother Thetis asking her to beseech Zeus to turn the tide of the war against the Achaeans. Another instance of retaliation is seen when Achilles learns of Path on the death of Patroclus; they, therefore, desiring revenge on Hector and the Trojans, what they deed by slaughtering numerous Trojans. A truce is declared When Priam pleads with Achilles for mercy, by asking the Achilles to remember his ageing father (Peterson &Spike 14). Achilles is moved by his entreaty and agrees to give back Hector’s body. Priam returns to Troy with Hector, and the Trojans grieve for their loss.

Relating the Iliad to the current world, Killers are often described with inhuman similes. Still, in the fury of the rampage, the greatest heroes take on the aspect of ‘god-kindled fire’ or some similar elements. Iliad is a tale of violent deeds and violent men what is experienced in the current world, Everyone ones to win the war with or without bloodshed,everyone is after revenge without knowing that he is likely to lose even more. Looking at all these instances, we get a better explanation from Peter Leithart in Heroes of the City of Man; he explains that Iliad is valuable because it reveals the longing of the pagans for a true Prince of Peace. We can, therefore, point to key characters like Priam, Helen and Achilles, who mourn the wreckage of their world without seeing beyond it. The story Iliad presents, juxtaposed with the heroic life and a well-developed alternative ( Rose& Peter 188). The Tragic Dichotomy is the juxtaposition of different ways of life, a good life but of different versions. In this case, we can say a life of convenience, life Hector and Achilles could have chosen, a life of peace, order, family, justice, average wealth but relative obscurity, they could choose a life of respect for and fellowship with humanity rather than private and destructive. According to Rose&Peter, in the current world there are different decisions that should be made, to choose what kind of life that we should live considering the sort of life Hector and Achilles chose (163).wars are experienced all-time between different counties where every country needs to get what they want by force, blood is shed and a lot is lost,yes, this could be a solution to heroes but if we choose what we need wisely, if we need peace justice and humanity we can live a better life ( Peterson &Spike 24)

In conclusion, in any case we have had it enough that Homer’s poem Iliad, not by any stretch promotes peace, it is far more than a poem of force. Therefore, this is what we might find in the Tragic Dichotomy and its spatial. Consequently, it is a visual way of linking the poem to a powerful tool for teaching this most pagan of classics. The story, therefore, warns on the effects of using force to demand what you need, be it be justice. It also warns against revenge in some instances. A truce is declared when Priam pleads with Achilles for mercy by asking the Achilles to remember his ageing father, therefore, this shows that being humble and giving dialogue a chance in the current society is the best way to solve disputes between two parties, one of the parties need to humble down and apologize the way Priam did.

If there were a thousand and one pages to write on Sappho, it still would not be enough. So I choose to only write five. Throughout this research assignment there were many ways found to express the meaning of Sappho, Poem 16. I have decided to focus my essay on the differences between meanings of love and desire. The differentiation of love between Sappho and The Iliad helps to voice Helen’s agency.

The Iliad focuses on the love for war and prizes. Within the Iliad the only voices were of the men. The entire story focused on war. War was their love language. The voice of any woman was silenced within this Epic Poem. Sappho gave voice and agency to women within her writing. She was the voice for the women. While being the voice, she also found a way to mock and poke fun at Homer. “ …some men say an army of ships is the most beautiful thing” (Sappho, ll. 2).

The context from that one line shows sarcasm. Simply because she repeats “some men”. By that phrase, Sappho is referring to Homer, the author of The Iliad. She also states her own opinion on what the most beautiful thing on the Earth is. She states that is what you love. This brings the entire theme of Poem 16. The theme is love. Throughout Sappho’s Poem 16, there are many ways to describe Helen. In the Iliad there is only one way to describe Helen; she was the wife of King Menelaus. Sappho gives us more insight on Helen’s life.

Sappho’s Poem 16 gives us Helen’s side of the story. Sappho describes Helen as a woman who did exactly what she wanted. She left everything behind for the love of another man. It seems selfish, but rational. It states, “not for her children nor her dear parents” (Sappho, ll. 10). This means that she did it for herself, and no one else. She left to fulfil her own desires.

This is also a contradiction within itself. While being the voice of Helen, she also gave Helen props for doing as she pleases. In the beginning of the poem she states the most beautiful thing is what you love (Sappho, ll. 3-4). You can see this poem from the different perceptions that she intentionally wrote it in.

From my perspective I see that she did it for love. I agree with Sappho that she was pretty selfish for leaving family for another man. In the same sense, what is a life worth living if you are not happy? There are different emotions to this side of the story. Sappho intentionally leaves some parts within this poem blank to let the readers put their own intel. Their intel will show in their eyes if she was selfish or selfless.

While putting in their own words, this gives them access to Helen’s voice as well. This could help shape and mold her story into whatever the reader chooses it to be. This allows the reader to decide what kind of person Helen was. Sappho intentionally inserted these inserts within the middle of the poem. This will show if there were regrets or second thoughts. She gives the reader the power to actually show remorse for Helen.

She wanted Helen to glow and not be gloomy over “ranks over foot soldiers” (Sappho, ll. 20-21). She describes the way a “glowing” woman would walk and look. The way the sun would reflect on her skin as she is glowing. Sappho states that she would rather Helen be happy than overpowered by war and men. To some extent she was glad that she chose to be happy over it all.

The commentary piece from Page duBois is stating that Helen of Troy is the evidence from the phrase of doing what you love. She is saying that Sappho used Helen to show that the most beautiful thing is what you love (Sappho, ll. 3-4). She believes that there was no inbetween with the first stanza. She states that it is either “Little fanciful or little dul” (Pages duBois 79). She also describes the “Black Earth” (Sappho ll. 3) as warriors, warships, and Homeric poems. duBois says the reader would compare Helen to the beginning of the poetry itself; when that is not the case at all. She believes that at the start of the poem, even her meer name was masked as feminen and masculine. She believes that because of her beauty she was getting respect from mankind. She believes that the power that Sappho gives Helen is clarified and stressed.

Page duBois says that that Helen leaving is a static force. She leaves any and everyone that she holds close to her heart. The ones she left should have been the ones who should have satisfied her. Page states that she forgets all about them, which is “suggesting madness” (Page duBois 81). She gives the imaginary of motion when she mentions the leaving of Helen. She also mentions the blanks within that particular stanza. She states that the reasoning that lead Helen astray is something or someone.

Page duBois says that the last stanza, they went from a legend world, back to the same world as line 3 of this poetry. Line 3 is recognized to be the singer’s time. This part of the poem is understanding and feedback of the lines 3 and 4. She states that the memory of Anaktoria brings her to the absent loved one. Even through her absence, Sappho made her presence imaginable as well. She also states that the last stanza is sort of like a memory for Sappho. She believes that the last stanza brings the listener and readers back to a wider world. Page also says that the line 17 reflects back to line 4. She believes that these two lines echo one another.

According to Hanna M. Roisman, Achilles and Agamemnon had many issues between each other. Helen’s role within the abduction that caused the war is unknown and unheard of. Helen has many perceptions, but little to no voice in the Iliad. Hanna states that Helen only appears six times within the Iliad. She states that Helen realizes that from her abduction alone, there have been many deaths and sufferings on her behalf. She states that Helen had no choice in the Iliad. She was viewed as only a possession.

This also shows that Helen has a regret of being where she was. Hanna states that her mistakes and blames are within her beauty. Hanna states that Helen is still longing for her first husband, Menegalus. Hanna states that Helen says she regrets leaving her homeland. Where she left her husband and daughter behind to come for love. Helen is full of regret for deciding to chase behind Priam’s son. She blames herself for all of the deaths and sufferings, due to her leaving her husband.

Hanna states that Helen is taking responsibility for her actions. She also states that as she watches the duel between her husbands, she is filled with sadness. She is longing for her first husband. This goes to show that Helen did have feelings within this entire process. She realizes that she has started a war that quickly became a blood bath. She is feeling sorry that she was the cause of a war. She felt guilty for having a hand in creating Priam into the man that he is now.

Hanna states that Helen sees straight through the disguise Aphrodite has. She was representing blind lust. She was called to Paris’s bed after the duel. The duel was between Paris and Menelaus. Hanna states the irritation and aggravation between Aphrodite and her ways of living her life. Hanna even says that Helen believes that Aphrodite wants Paris to herself. Hanna also states that Helen has been married to Paris for nine years.

While depicting and understanding all three excerpts, I have decided that my thesis is true. I stand by my thesis, because each gives evidence that Helen did not have a choice at all. The only choice that she did have was when she ran away from her family and homeland. This goes to show that she did not have any voice within the Iliad.

In Sappho’s Poem 16, she gave Helen all of the voice that she needed. Helen had free will to do as she pleases, and she did just that. Sappho even gave the readers the opportunity to shape and mold who they thought Helen would or could be. Sappho also shared her perception of Helen through the text. She also shared her open of Homer’s Iliad. She used sarcasm and different literary devices.

In Reading Sappho: Commentary Approaches, Page DuBois shares her thoughts of Sappho as well. She believes that Sappho worded and made the poem in a certain way to portray Helen doing what she loved. She gave commentary to each part of the poem. She even agreed that war was the love for Iliad. As to where the love for Paris that Helen had was the definition of love for Sappho. Page DuBois commentary agrees with my thesis because she acknowledges that Helen left her family for love. She sees that Helen sailing to Paris caused a static force. This means that there was a feeling of leaving home for love; which is considered Helen’s voice.

Hanna M. Roisman gives plenty of examples that Helen had no voice in the Iliad. She only had feelings. Her feelings were not vocally spoken by her. Homer only wrote them down so the readers could feel with Helen. He never gave her the chance to choose who she wanted to stay with. Even though he states that she regrets everything, but still she stayed with Paris because Menelaus lost the duel.

In conclusion, all of these sources show that my thesis was correct. In the Iliad, Helen has no voice nor a choice to choose who she wants to be with. The only voice she has was in the Sappho Poem 16, where she is captivated as a woman who made her own choice. The difference between The Iliad and Sappho Poem 16 is that, Helen has a voice and choice to do as she pleases. Which now shows and gives Helen her voice and agency.

The point which is to be adressed in the beginning is what is an epic poem and an epic film? An epic poem, epic, epoc, or epopee is a long narrative poem, usually involving a period beyond living memory in which the extraordinary acts of the extraordinary men and women who, in dealing with gods or other divine powers, formed the moral universe for their descendants, the poet and his audience, to see themselves as a people or a nation. When referring to the achievements of Western Literature, Homer’s Iliad is the work that comes to mind readily which tells the story of the darkest episode of the Trojan War. The focus of the epic poem is Achilles, the greatest warrior-champion of the Greeks and his reluctance to fight after being humiliated by Agamemnon. The first epics are examples of literary practices in preliterate cultures and oral history. Oral tradition has been used to communicate and facilitate the spread of culture alongside written scriptures. Poetry is conveyed to the public in these rituals and by solely verbal means from performer to performer. Lets come to our next point i.e epic films. Epic movies are a large-scale, expansive, often dramatic form of filmmaking. Throughout time, the use of the word has varied, often designating a form of film and sometimes associated with large-budget films. Unlike epics, it is often based on a heroic character in the traditional literary sense. The adventurous aspect of an epic tends to differentiate it from other movie styles like the period piece and fantasy picture.Usually, epic historical films would take on a historical or a mythical event, adding an extravagant setting and lavish costumes, accompanied by an expansive musical score with a cast ensemble that would make them one of the most expensive to produce. Once characterized as ‘epic’ due to plot, an epic movie is often shown during a time of war or other social crisis, while it typically spans a longer period of time, often across centuries arriving and going, in terms of both the events depicted and the film’s length. These films usually have a historical setting, though in recent decades settings of fantasy and science fiction have become popular. Typically, the film’s main struggle is seen to have far-reaching effects, sometimes changing the course of history. The acts of the main characters are often crucial to resolving the conflict of culture.

It is very clear that the film Troy, directed by Wolfgang Peterson, was strongly influenced by the epic poem, the Iliad, a work commonly attributed to the ancient Greek poet Homer. Both the film and the poem have the same overall plots, such as the siege of Troy by the Greeks, the feud between the warrior Achilles and King Agamemnon, and these events are triggered by the stealing of King Menelaus ‘ Helen of Sparta by the Trojan prince of Paris as his wife. There are, however, many major differences in many of the factors involved in these plots. These include some major characters dying in the Iliad and living in the movie Troy, the time of the demise of the protagonists, and the friendship between the characters. The main reason for the differences in the film Troy from the Iliad is for the convenience of the director and the entertainment, but the film was relatively censored compared to the poem, which was very graphic in the portrayal of violence. If the film remained true to the poem, it would most likely have earned more restrictive rating and thus that the audience that the publisher/director would then earn less money. There are some major differences between the epic poem and epic war film Troy – The fighting lasted 10 years for the Iliad but it took just 17 days for the movie Troy.

Patroclus was not the cousin of Achilles, but only Achilles’ friend, who was dead before the Trojan Horses were established. In the Iliad, Paris is killed, the baby of Hector is killed, and the wife of Hector is enslaved, but they escape safely in the film Troy. Ajax doesn’t perish from Hector’s own side, he destroys himself because of his guilt that he hasn’t been fortified with Achilles. In the Iliad, Agamemnon is killed by his wife Clytemnestra after returning to Greece, but in the movie he is killed by Briseis. The cause for these differences between the Iliad and the film Troy are almost 100% monetary as when looking at every man or woman instance of the differences all of them are either due to reducing expenses/complexity of making the movie Troy (i.e. 17-day combat as a substitute of 10 years), or due to the director trying to make the movie extra likable to enlarge the size of the target market appeal and consequently earn greater revenue from the film (i.e. making the movie a greater experience excellent ride with the aid of letting Paris, Hector’s wife, and Hector’s toddler break out with citizens of Troy developing surroundings of hopes lives on/light at the cease of the tunnel for Troy). The movie would attraction to a substantial decrease quantity of humans had Paris, and Hector’s wife and baby been killed, many people would likely be annoyed by means of the ‘well this is just dull anybody dies’ ecosystem that would be current had the director remained real to the Iliad, as in the Iliad there is absolutely no hope left Troy. There is actually no other purpose the director has made these variations in the movie Troy apart from money, and as all the principal and small differences are found it becomes clear that the film was once molded and catered to appeal to a modern-day target audience with cutting-edge day expectations of films.

One of the fundamental differences among troy and the iliad is the involvement or observable involvement of the gods within the siege of troy. Inside the iliad, many gods are physically concerned within the conflict, war along the mortal people, but in troy, the gods are not even established to exist, they’re simply the priority of prayer and praises, with the most tangible example being a statue of apollo. Despite the fact that the dearth of motion via the gods in troy is a very huge difference, this has little have an impact on at the plot usual, as in every texts the greeks defeat the trojans. But within the historic greek fable, texts along with the iliad supply notion into the context of many situations, which includes the judgement of paris being the motive for helen falling in love with Paris, and the reference to the Achilles heel. The subsequent is a quote from the Iliad clealy showing the involvement of the gods.

‘ And flashing-eyed Athene took furious Ares by the hand and spake to him, saying: ‘Ares, Ares, thou bane of mortals, thou blood-stained stormer of walls, shall we not now leave the Trojans and Achaeans to fight, to whichsoever of the two it be that father Zeus shall vouchsafe glory? But for us twain, let us give place, and avoid the wrath of Zeus.’

The cause for the lack of gods in Troy is not financial like the principal plot differences, in fact seeing gods battle every different and human beings would be viewed quite enjoyable in an action film and would proabably go down quite well with the common viewer. This leads me to agree with that the director has chosen now not to consist of visible involvements of the gods in Troy to in addition enhance the characters, such as Achilles, Hektor and Paris. Achilles shows riot against the gods when he cuts off the head of a statue of Apollo and later suggests that the gods envy human beings which makes sense when the gods aren’t visible, however it in all likelihood wouldn’t have had the equal effect had the viewers witnessed powerful immortal gods battle on the battlefield subsequent the everyday mortals.

“The Gods envy us. They envy us because we’re mortal because any moment might be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we’re doomed.”

Also when a priest of Troy concludes the look of birds to be a correct omen/sign from the gods indicating they should attack, Hektor says,

“Bird signs? You want to plan out strategy based on bird signs?”,

indicating his lack of faith in these omens, and making him appear like a down-to-earth man who doesn’t choose to count numbers on the gods to format his battles. This down-to-earth impact would be misplaced if the gods have been considered slaughtering dozens of mortals on the battlefield in an almighty and divine manner.

And ultimately in the crucial point of the movie the place the Trojan Horse is found the priest believes it to be a gift from the gods and that it would be disrespectful to reject it. Paris strongly suggests that they should burn it, however Priam, Paris’s father (King of Troy), decides to deliver it inside the walls of Troy, in the end leading to the downfall of Troy.

The extent of the ancient basis of the Homeric epics has been a subject of scholarly debate for centuries. Even as researchers of the 18th century had typically rejected the tale of the Trojan warfare as fantasy, the discoveries made by Heinrich Schliemann at Hisarlik reopened the query in modern-day terms, and the subsequent excavation of troy viia and the discovery of the toponym ‘Wilusa’ in Hittite correspondence has made it possible that the Trojan War cycle was once at the least remotely based on a historical warfare of the 12th century BC, even if the poems of Homer are eliminated from the match by manner of more than four centuries of oral culture. The more that is known about bronze age records, the clearer it turns into the point that it isn’t always a yes-or-no doubt but certainly one of knowledgeable evaluation of the way a whole lot of historical information is present in homer, and whether it represents a retrospective reminiscence of Dark Age Greece, or of Mycenaean Greece. The specific narrative of the Iliad is not an account of the conflict, but a story of the psychology, the wrath, vengeance and death of character heroes, which assumes common information of the trojan war as a back-story. No pupils now count on that the person occasions of the story (lots of which involve divine intervention) are ancient fact; however, no scholars claim that the tale is entirely without recollections of mycenaean instances. But, in addressing a separate controversy, oxford professor of greek, martin L West indicated that such an method ‘misconceives’ the problem, and that troy in all likelihood fell to a far smaller institution of attackers in a much shorter time.

A film that is historically inaccurate gives no benefit to its viewers as the story can be so twisted and modified that it is no longer, a tale of history, tradition or culture. When examined meticulously, it is actually evident however, that the film Troy, is historically accurate as it is based on true records from the ancient Greek life. The military, portrayed via war formations, weapons, and naval warfare, the culture of the Greeks portrayed via burial customs, faith in gods and structure as well as category structure, portrayed through the roles of women, the recognize to the king, and the appreciate to the Myrmidons, Achilles struggle group, are all pieces of evidence that lead to the verdict that the film Troy is traditionally accurate. The military and the extraordinary components that it is made up of are necessary to any nation, mainly one which is emerging to be the most powerful. The navy no longer only protects the country from invaders however also helps in the conquering of new territories to increase the country so that it can grow. Expansion and conquering enemies all deliver up a countries status, which is why the Greeks fought with each other to achieve energy and appreciate from others. Part of the militaries practices which had been necessary to its existence have been struggle formations. The war formations of the Greeks were tightly shaped and equipped so that the enemy could now not penetrate. “The hostilities line a cautiously built wall, the warriors standing with defend touching protect in a strong line. This is likely to have been the position before a battle, with armies drawn up in opposing traces and assembly in this simple formation. The struggle possibly broke up into a mêlée, solely after one aspect had given way, observed by using person duels and single combat.” [1] It is evident that the conflict formations have been strongly structured so that the navy regarded no longer only more effective and mighty, but greater geared up and consequently extra likely to intimidate the enemy. Once the formations have been broken, the warriors fought individually, trying to kill as many of the opponents as possible. This type of combat in formation was once additionally portrayed in the movie “Troy” where Hector’s army gathered outdoor of the Trojan partitions standing side by side, with their large rectangular shields touching every different for protection. Once hostilities was once initiated however, the guys separated and fought individually. This tournament in the movie was once honestly an accurate portrayal of battle formations in Greece all through 1250 B.C.E and as a result starts offevolved to prove that the film Troy is traditionally accurate.

The category structure of the ancient Greek world was once tons distinct than ours today, although some matters are similar to today’s world. Historical accuracy in the classification structure device is key to a profitable depiction of the historical Greek world in film. The respect given to women, to the king, and to Achilles’ elite warrior group, the Myrmidons, all are historically accurate due to the fact it is very similar to the respect given in the ancient Greek world. The appreciate given to girls in the historic Greek time length used to be small but there were enjoyable parts to it. “Female characters of the higher type led a distinctly independent life…. Although ladies had been technically of citizen status, they had no rights of citizenship. Women had no political rights and could take no phase-in anyway in government.” [10] Evidently women had small admire however these of the upper category have been pretty independent, being allowed to do extra than the poorer women, although none of them could take part in politics. This is also portrayed in the film “Troy.” The girls of the palace who had been princesses or so took no section in the politics of the palace where all the men assembled, led by using the king and his princes to graph out things for Troy. Although women had no role in politics and government, they performed an essential function in religion. “Within religion female did play an vital role, such as a dominant function at funerals, weddings…. There had been many priestesses. [11] This is additionally portrayed inside the movie “Troy” as when Briseis, the cousin of Hector and Paris, decided to come to be Apollo’s servant she was once commended and it used to be said that Apollo is going to have a splendid servant. Although women had this advantage, they had been regarded vulnerable and a reference to this is made in the movie when it is said that “peace is for female and weak” by Agamemnon. Evidently the usage of that metaphor, female had been considered fragile and therefore peace went straight alongside with women considering peace did not show off nations might or power. Evidently, the movie “Troy” is traditionally correct due to the fact it successfully portrays the recognize given to ladies in the historical Greek type system.