War tends to incite very specific images: madness, mēnis, and mercilessness. All these concepts create an atmosphere of carnage; however, when reading the histories of great ancient battles like those of the Trojan and Peloponnesian Wars, it is clear that even during comparatively less “civilized” times, war was not an unstoppable force; across both cultures, it proved to be limited, most notably by the notions of honor and humility.
In Homer’s Iliad, the tone of the story is characterized by the very first word: “mēnis” (Il. 1.1). This foundation of a quiet rage held quite strong throughout the story and played into the assumed typical idea of a wartime novel. The blunt portrayal of unadulterated conflict seemed to be intentional on Homer’s …show more content…
In Thucydides’ account of The History of the Peloponnesian War, the rules of war changed when Melos chose to stand in solidarity with their honor rather than back down to Athens (the typical course of action for Athenian foes) (Whidden; Discussion 9.18.17). Approaching Athenian soldiers tried to convince Melians that “This is no fair fight, with honor on one side and shame on the other.” (HPW 5.101). Melians, however, regarded strength, not surrender, as the honorable choice. Despite the improbability of their success (Whidden; Lecture 9.20.17), they asserted they “ [stood] for what is right against what is wrong…” a metaphor for their value of honor over ease (HPW 5.104). Until that point, it was apparent Athenian war involved minimal discussion and maximum coercion. Melians were, to our knowledge, the first of Athens’ ventures to be given a say in the matter, and they chose to indulge in war in the name of honor. In this case, the decision leads to carnage nonetheless, but is a turning point. The humanity of men once again obstructs the traditional course of war (the course in which “the strong [Athens] do what they have the power to do and the weak [Melos] accept what they have to accept.”), proving these ancient cultures had some limitations on what they were willing to partake in when it came to conflict. (HPW …show more content…
In the Peloponnesian War, the honor of the Melians, who “...are not prepared to give up in a short moment the liberty which [their] city has enjoyed from its foundation for 700 years” (HPW 5.112) represented the ability of mankind’s to interfere with the moira of war, thereby acknowledging there are rules, and simply choosing to rewrite them. The defiance of rules was paralleled in Iliad when Glaucus and Diomedes “...clasped hands, and pledged their friendship” in the no-man’s-land of the battlefield (Il 6.242), and when Priam asked Achilles to “...pity [him]” (Il 24.540). The two scenes were threaded together by their vague sense of misplacement, as though they did not fit the mold of a bold action novel. Instead, they restricted the story, limiting the war’s ability to carry on as normal. In both Homer’s and Thucydides’ stories, there appears to be a jarring rift in the expectations of
In Homer’s Iliad, the tone of the story is characterized by the very first word: “mēnis” (Il. 1.1). This foundation of a quiet rage held quite strong throughout the story and played into the assumed typical idea of a wartime novel. The blunt portrayal of unadulterated conflict seemed to be intentional on Homer’s …show more content…
In Thucydides’ account of The History of the Peloponnesian War, the rules of war changed when Melos chose to stand in solidarity with their honor rather than back down to Athens (the typical course of action for Athenian foes) (Whidden; Discussion 9.18.17). Approaching Athenian soldiers tried to convince Melians that “This is no fair fight, with honor on one side and shame on the other.” (HPW 5.101). Melians, however, regarded strength, not surrender, as the honorable choice. Despite the improbability of their success (Whidden; Lecture 9.20.17), they asserted they “ [stood] for what is right against what is wrong…” a metaphor for their value of honor over ease (HPW 5.104). Until that point, it was apparent Athenian war involved minimal discussion and maximum coercion. Melians were, to our knowledge, the first of Athens’ ventures to be given a say in the matter, and they chose to indulge in war in the name of honor. In this case, the decision leads to carnage nonetheless, but is a turning point. The humanity of men once again obstructs the traditional course of war (the course in which “the strong [Athens] do what they have the power to do and the weak [Melos] accept what they have to accept.”), proving these ancient cultures had some limitations on what they were willing to partake in when it came to conflict. (HPW …show more content…
In the Peloponnesian War, the honor of the Melians, who “...are not prepared to give up in a short moment the liberty which [their] city has enjoyed from its foundation for 700 years” (HPW 5.112) represented the ability of mankind’s to interfere with the moira of war, thereby acknowledging there are rules, and simply choosing to rewrite them. The defiance of rules was paralleled in Iliad when Glaucus and Diomedes “...clasped hands, and pledged their friendship” in the no-man’s-land of the battlefield (Il 6.242), and when Priam asked Achilles to “...pity [him]” (Il 24.540). The two scenes were threaded together by their vague sense of misplacement, as though they did not fit the mold of a bold action novel. Instead, they restricted the story, limiting the war’s ability to carry on as normal. In both Homer’s and Thucydides’ stories, there appears to be a jarring rift in the expectations of