The nature of the
ancient Greek concept of the heroes, is something to be critical about, in that
the homogeneity in what the hero is and does, is not the same across the board.
In comparing the works of Virgil, Philostratus, and Homer, we get a depiction
at the end of the hero in either a forgiving manner, or someone who enacts
their vengeance against something or someone that has done something to offend
them, just as a deity would do (alluding to their respective role in the
afterlife). The comparison of these works is important in understanding the
role of the culture of heroes, in that they demonstrate the forces that drive
them to do good or bad. In Homer’s Iliad[1],
we see how in Book 24, Achilles comes face-to-face with his foe, Priam, and the
tension that arises from this meeting and the nature for the hero to be
empathetic towards those who have wronged him. In Virgil’s Aeneid, we get the same discourse of persuasion and mercy from a
foe of Aeneas, but takes a different approach than Achilles, in that Aeneas does
not put himself in the victim’s role, but rather as the vengeful hero to bring
back honor for his friends’ death. For Philostratus in his work, On Heroes[2],
we are presented with an Achilles in the afterlife, that is far telling of Achilles
in how the Iliad ends, seeing as his
demeanor and portrayal by the vinedresser, are of a hero filled with anger and
lacking in empathy. These three works illuminate the extreme trait of a hero,
being either driven by mênis or akhos, and the judgment call they make to spare
a foe or to incite revenge. The Greek and Roman literature all rely on the same
concepts that represent what a hero is, which is: their unseasonal nature,
their antagonistic relationship with a god, and their extremities in their work
and how they act. In this analysis, I aim to show the interpretation of how the
hero is depicted in each work and to compare them, and how they connect to the grander
scheme of the culture of heroes.
In the Iliad, we
examine Achilles as the man destined to die young for kleos (glory through
epic) at a war that he feels doesn’t benefit him at all, and he takes himself
out of the narrative, and is only driven back into the war by the loss of his
comrade, Patroklos.[3]
The Iliad begins with the wrath (mênis)
of Achilles towards being dishonored by Agamemnon, but ends with the
transformation of the hero, Achilles, in a positive note. Hektor took part in
the killing of Patroklos, and so when Achilles returns to battle, his prime objective
is to get revenge and kill Hektor, which he does. But he goes against the
tradition of how a hero is able to garner a cult and their kleos, by refusing
Priam to have Hektor’s body, in order to carry out the proper burial rituals.
What takes place in Book 24, represents how Achilles is able to see the other
side of the narrative, the Trojan side, and his role as a chthonic deity. Priam,
the King of Troy, risks his life in order to obtain his son’s body to secure
his kleos, and he begins his pleading towards Achilles by saying, “Achilleus
like the gods, remember your father one who is of years like mine, and on the
door-still of sorrowful old age.”[4] He
evokes Achilles to compare him to his father, Peleus, and how he would feel
should he lose his son, and how the body would bring some closure. This is all
good pathos and persuasion, until Priam says, “…give him back, so my eyes may
behold him, and accept the ransom we bring you, which is great. You may have
joy of it, and go back to the land of your fathers, since once you have
permitted me to go on living myself and continue to look on the sunlight.”[5]
This resurfaces the akhos that Achilles is feeling, seeing as he knows that
sooner or later he will die, based on the prophecy that Thetis, his mother told
him, should he return to battle and kill Hektor.[6] He
replies with such force, that even Priam is scared, but Achilles understands
why he should not act upon his emotions. He replies to Priam,
I
know you Priam, in my heart, and it does not escape me
that some god led you to the running ships of the Achaeans.
For no mortal would dare come to our encampment, not even
one strong in youth…
[t]herfore
you must not further make my spirit move in my sorrows, for fear, old sir.[7]
that some god led you to the running ships of the Achaeans.
For no mortal would dare come to our encampment, not even
one strong in youth…
[t]herfore
you must not further make my spirit move in my sorrows, for fear, old sir.[7]
For Achilles, the
material possessions mean nothing for him and to be told that he will soon
enjoy it when he goes back home, is an insult that I would expect he would not
let go, but he does, because he sees that the gods have guided Priam to request
Hektor’s body. However, the comparison that Priam makes to Peleus, is also
playing a part on Achilles decision to not incite revenge on him, because he
feels the pain that Priam is dealing with and the consequences that the war has
taken on both sides, and he gestures to this by mourning with him.[8]
The empathy that Homer works at the end of the Iliad, is also weaved into the epic of
Virgil’s Aeneid, but there is a
distinction between the two on what happens in the end. In Book 12 of the Aeneid, the same situation is presented
where Aeneas is faced with a foe (Turnus), that has done something wrong to him
(the killing of his best friend, Pallas); facing the scenario whether he should
spare his life or kill him. Turnus’ plead is the same as Priam, in that he
brings into his plead Aeneas’ father, Anchises, and what it would mean to lose
a child. However, just as Priam made a mistake with his words, so does Turnus, but
he makes a mistake by having Pallas’ belt on him, which he took upon himself as
a prize after he killed him. After Pallas’ death, Aeneas experienced the same
sorrow (akhos) that Achilles suffered upon the learning of Patroklos’ death.
This narrative is extremely relatable to the Iliad only up to this point. Aeneas reply is, “How can you who wear
the spoils of my dear comrade now escape me? It is Pallas who strikes, who sacrifices
you, who takes this payment from your shameless blood.”[9]
This vengeance is relatable to that of Aeschylus’ Agamemnon, in which Clytemnestra kills her husband, Agamemnon, for
sacrificing their daughter Iphigenia. It seems that the theme here is the
concept of dike, or the belief of
justice in what they are going to commit. But for the purposes of the Agamemnon, dike actually turns out to be atê,
or the opposite of justice, in which destruction has taken the wheel in a long
generational course of atrocities.[10]
Aeneas' judgment to go ahead and “sink his sword into the chest of Turnus,”[11]
shows how Virgil was able to construct the context of material possessions,
where Aeneas attributed those possessions with much more significance than the petty
pleas. The hero here is shown as not being able to be in control of his emotions, just as
Achilles’ rampaged after he return to battle. This exemplifies the extreme
nature that comes with a hero.
Though Achilles appears to exhibit some humanistic
qualities at the end of the Iliad, as
being depicted as a “rational individual,” Philostratus shows the other side of
Achilles, after his death and as the chthonic deity. In On Heroes, we are given an account of Achilles living in a white
island, with Helen and the powers that come to be associated with him after he
has achieved this role as a hero. It’s not a very nice portrayal of the
Achilles we are left off with by Homer. Two atrocities are committed by him, all
because they have some relation to Hektor and the Trojan War. The following
excerpts show the vengefulness that occurs by Achilles as told by the
vinedresser,
A)
They had not yet gone a stade away from the land when the girl’s wailing struck
them, because Achilles was pulling her apart and tearing her limb from limb.
B)
In Troy, however Achilles did not kill the Amazons.
C)
When [the Amazons] anchored at the island, they first ordered their Hellespontian
guests to cut down the trees with which the sanctuary was adorned round about. But
when their axes, driven back against them, went into the head of some, into the
neck of others, and all fell near the trees, the Amazons streamed to the
sanctuary, crying aloud and driving on their mares.
D)
The horses took on the habits of wild beasts, and as they fell upon the Amazons,
who lay on the ground, the horses thrust their hooves, bristled their manes,
and pricked up their ears against them, just like savage lions.[12]
These four excerpts
demonstrate the power that Achilles has, as a chthonic deity. In excerpt A,
Achilles negotiates with a merchant who is in need of some winds for sailing,
if he in return gets a girl that is decedent of Hektor. As soon as the sailors
part, they hear screaming and see the girl being torn apart by Achilles. Again,
Philostratus is employing this sacrifice for winds as depicted by early works
in which two virgins were sacrifice for preferable winds, at the start and end
of the war; Iphigenia and Polyxena. Excerpt B is important in that it provides
some content on why he decides to massacre the Amazons that arrive on the
island. However, it seems that the reason they were massacred is because the
Amazons defy the sanctuary of Achilles, when they try to cut the trees from the
sanctuary, similar to how Agamemnon kills a divine deer that belongs to
Artemis, and ends up being the cause of why Iphigenia is sacrificed, as told by
the myth.[13]
Excerpt C and D, describe the length of Achilles’ doing in the killing of the
Amazons, and the explicit language that Philostratus uses to covey it. It is
shocking to say the least, and shows the importance of the hero, in that it is
not a good idea to disrespect them, even in death.
Good or bad, the concept of what it means to be a hero is
not limited to the actions that count as “good,” in this culture. The Homeric
works, particularly the Iliad, end by
Achilles’ transformation from a stubborn individual to a compassionate being
that has been able to gain some rehabilitation and control of what truly is
honor. Virgil address the same theme, but differently; in that he has Aeneas go
through the killing of the person that did him wrong, to portray the hero not
as an entity out of their bounds, but of a hero seeking a justified type of
glory for a fallen friend, which Achilles doesn’t really grasp until he sees
the other side of the narrative. For Philostratus, the culture implies the
sacredness that comes with a hero, and the cautiousness to work around them in their
duplicitous/complex nature. These works all demonstrate that the concept of the
hero, is an ever complex, evolving theme in the culture to try and understand
the enigmatic humanistic traits that make society, human. To be extreme, to be
unseasonal, to be antagonistic against a god—is to be a hero willing to suffer
for the self or for others, and to be compensated by kleos, as these works have
done.
[1] Homer, , and Richmond Lattimore.
The Iliad of Homer. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2011. Print.
[2] Philostratus, , Jennifer K. B.
Maclean, and Ellen B. Aitken. On Heroes.
Leiden: Brill, 2003. Print.
[3] Iliad, 18.1-342.
[4] Iliad, 24.485-487.
[5] Iliad, 24.552-558.
[6] Iliad, 18.
[7] Iliad, 24.563-570.
[8] Iliad, 24.
[9] The Aeneid, 12.930-952.
[10] Aeschylus’ Agamemnon.
[12] On Heroes, 57.2-17.
[13] Euripides’ Iphigenia at Aulis.
Comments
Post a Comment