Which side was truly "in the right" during the Trojan War?

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I consider this to be a “philosophical” question. Offbeat (and non-Christian) question, for sure-----but gotta ask it. It also ties in with the idea today of folks “supposedly” using the merest “excuses” to justify a war when there is actually a REAL reason it happened that is “covered up.”

I would say the Greeks had the better claim-----superficially-----Paris had committed the ultimate crime of the Ancient World---------he had dishonored his host and broken the law of hospitality by running off with Helen.

But----Helen had been at least “pushed” by Aphrodite because of Paris’s Judgement (stupid, wasn’t it? He should have chosen Hera or Athena instead of Aphrodite)------

Although I also think that Helen also genuinely partially wanted to flee with him as well—it was not totally “against her will”-------

She also ran off with half of Menelaus’s fortune----so there is the reclaiming of property as well as the whole question of Greek “honor” to take into account------------------

ULTIMATELY, though, I have to side with the Trojans.

All of this----for a woman? Even the most beautiful woman of all time?

I don’t think so. Menelaus should have just cut his losses, maybe asked for some of his property back from the Trojans and just get another woman. (Euripides sort of made that argument in The Trojan Women). NO woman is worth 10 years of deaths on BOTH sides (hundreds, maybe thousands) AND the destruction of an entire civilization.

Agammemnon, though, pushed Menelaus into this, probably because of the whole “honor” thing and the idea that the Greeks could prove their superiority over the Trojans and also overcome them----and by defeating them the Greeks would take over as the TOP POWER in the Mediterranean.

Even ancient writers did not believe that the SOLE cause of the war was Helen----there were other, more subtle and hidden reasons. I agree with them.

So yes—Hurrah for the Trojans and their refusal to be bullied by the Greeks.

Addendum:

You could also say the GODS are ultimately to blame for this------Zeus raped Helen’s mother, after all-----

It could also be said that Zeus KNEW this would happen—and allowed it to happen so the Age of Heroes would end. Some ancient writers took that view.

If any one wants to comment, please feel free. If not, ok as well. Just wanted to see how “pros” would respond to that argument.

 

[OxygenMan]

I will say that a great deal of the trouble was caused my Mycenaean culture itself. For as much as we think of the Greeks as thinkers and philosophers, they were also a culture obsessed with war. The idea of dying on the battlefield was their greatest honor. Not particularly the cause they were fighting for, but just the fact that they fought at all.

That’s why war really shouldn’t be glorified. It’s harmful. And in a case like that, if a culture is really involved in it, they can go to war at the drop of a hat!

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

I will say that a great deal of the trouble was caused my Mycenaean culture itself. For as much as we think of the Greeks as thinkers and philosophers, they were also a culture obsessed with war. The idea of dying on the battlefield was their greatest honor. Not particularly the cause they were fighting for, but just the fact that they fought at all.

That’s why war really shouldn’t be glorified. It’s harmful. And in a case like that, if a culture is really involved in it, they can go to war at the drop of a hat!

Thanks for responding. I agree with you. basically. War is sometimes (unfortunately) necessary, but it should not be glorified.

Reminds of the line in the Iliad when Achilles basically admits that his greatest happiness is being in battle with his comrades and killing the enemy.
Lot of good it did him, ultimately. He basically admitted this to Odysseus down in the Underworld (in The Odyssey) when he says that he would choose a long, mostly boring life instead of the short, glorious life he formerly favored if he had to do it all over again.

In some ways the same thing happened with Hector.

In fact, it was partially Hector’s insistence on being “honorable” and facing Achilles that ultimately leads to his death.

Sad all around.

 

[OxygenMan]

Thanks for responding. I agree with you. basically. War is sometimes (ubfortunately) necessary, but it should not be glorified.

Reminds of the line in the Iliad when Achilles basically admits that his greatest happiness is being in battle with his comrades and killing the enemy.

In some ways the same thing happened with Hector.

In fact, it was partially Hector’s insistence on being “honorable” and facing Achilles that ultimately leads to his death.

Sad all around.

You’re welcome! I love these old mythologies and histories, so it’s always fun to discuss them. But I agree with you. One of the most chilling scenes of the Iliad is when Achilles is desecrating Hector’s corpse, dragging him around from the back of his chariot. It really is awful.

It seems like at that point, the war was no longer really about anything more than hatred between the two sides. To do something like that requires you to see someone as less than human. It seems like that’s one of the underlying messages in the story. No matter how honorable being a great warrior was, it still did terrible things to people. Hector’s parents weeping, Achilles acting like a monster, it showed that the war had changed from a matter of honor into a more barbaric affair. As for who was in the right to begin with, it’s hard to say. After seeing the devastation it caused, I wouldn’t say it was really “worth it” for either side. But hindsight is 20/20, hah.

 

[GEddie]

We have to remember that the Trojan war may not have occurred in at all the scale described, so in a sense, all of this is hypothetical.

That said, if war were not glorified, it could not take place. The aggressive side needs to present it in terms of honor and glory in order to rally its citizens’ support. So it will always be glorified.

And Classical culture had an obsession with name and reputation, such that death, if tagged as honorable, was not thought of negatively at all.

ICXC NIKA

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

You’re welcome! I love these old mythologies and histories, so it’s always fun to discuss them. But I agree with you. One of the most chilling scenes of the Iliad is when Achilles is desecrating Hector’s corpse, dragging him around from the back of his chariot. It really is awful.

It seems like at that point, the war was no longer really about anything more than hatred between the two sides. To do something like that requires you to see someone as less than human. It seems like that’s one of the underlying messages in the story. No matter how honorable being a great warrior was, it still did terrible things to people. Hector’s parents weeping, Achilles acting like a monster, it showed that the war had changed from a matter of honor into a more barbaric affair. As for who was in the right to begin with, it’s hard to say. After seeing the devastation it caused, I wouldn’t say it was really “worth it” for either side. But hindsight is 20/20, hah.

I basically agree with this.

Although, to be fair, Homer never lets you forget that Achilles’s treatment of Hector is at least partially due to Hector’s treatment of the dead Patroclus. Not to really condone what Achilles did, but one has to be fair.

That is the genius of Homer-------almost total objectivity and refusal to totally take sides. He never really questions or judges; he just tells the story.

But yes.

You are basically right.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

We have to remember that the Trojan war may not have occurred in at all the scale described, so in a sense, all of this is hypothetical.

That said, if war were not glorified, it could not take place. The aggressive side needs to present it in terms of honor and glory in order to rally its citizens’ support. So it will always be glorified.

And Classical culture had an obsession with name and reputation, such that death, if tagged as honorable, was not thought of negatively at all.

ICXC NIKA

That applies particularly to Achilles and his Greek compatriots. He specifically is almost always portrayed in aggressive, almost hunter-like ways. Totally unstoppable, in an almost inhuman, implacable, daemonic way (not surprising, given that he is a demigod). He is also shown as isolated from almost everyone else except maybe Patroclus. His killing of Hector further completes that isolation and dehumanization. It is not until Priam comes to claim Hector’s body that he begins his process of “humanization.”

Hector, OTOH, is consistently portrayed in terms of family, community, and duty. Unlike Achilles, whose parents are removed from the action relatively, Hector has his parents right there, He is always shown in purely HUMAN terms, unlike Achilles.
He is also shown in terms relating to someone being hunted------to someone doomed to die.

In fact, I read somewhere to the effect that that seems to be Hector’s function throughout the story----to die.

And yes, glory and honor mattered more than anything in those days.
Reputation mattered more than life itself in mythological Greek times.
Homer has always been accused of slightly leaning more to the Greek side, so it is not surprising that he would try to show the Greeks in an aggressive, positive way. Homer was a Greek and the winners always write the accounts, ultimately.

Great post.

 

[Alberti_Devoveo]

If we are going by the story itself, Eris placed an apple out marked to ‘the fairest’ and let Hera, Aphrodite, and Athena fight over who the apple belonged to. Rather than letting the apple be shared (or eating it himself), Zeus then forced a (weak) human to pick who it belonged to and he was (easily) bribed by Aphrodite.

So the blame starts with Eris, then Zeus, then Aphrodite, then Paris.

As an aside, if you have not seen the movie adaptation Troy, do not bother. It is a complete waste of time, effort, and money to watch it.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

If we are going by the story itself, Eris placed an apple out marked to ‘the fairest’ and let Hera, Aphrodite, and Athena fight over who the apple belonged to. Rather than letting the apple be shared (or eating it himself), Zeus then forced a (weak) human to pick who it belonged to and he was (easily) bribed by Aphrodite.

So the blame starts with Eris, then Zeus, then Aphrodite, then Paris.

As an aside, if you have not seen the movie adaptation Troy, do not bother. It is a complete waste of time, effort, and money to watch it.

I said that before—the Gods were also responsible. And PARIS particularly was responsible as well.

I guess it was easy for Aphrodite to size him up as a pleasure-seeker and a “lover,” not a “fighter.”
Later events later justified that judgement. Even Helen got tired of him. Even his own brother Hector had to harangue him into joining the fight. (Although, when he DID fight, he FOUGHT).
So yes, I agree with you. Basically.

And I did watch Troy. Liked it a bit more than you did----but I do agree it is could have been far, far better.

Not rewatchable, IMO.

Thanks for the comment.

 

[empther]

There actually was a Troy, or a city which seems to match what was described in the Illiad
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy

In real history, the war was probably economic. Troy was in Turkey and a gateway to the riches of Asia minor. ( Possibly the Greeks attacked all the cities in the region but only the name of Troy survived in history. ) “Helen” therefore represents the trading wealth which in the eyes of the Greeks the Trojans were stealing from them.

Of course, Homer had to romanticize the story for general consumption.

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

There actually was a Troy, or a city which seems to match what was described in the Illiad
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy

In real history, the war was probably economic. Troy was in Turkey and a gateway to the riches of Asia minor. ( Possibly the Greeks attacked all the cities in the region but only the name of Troy survived in history. ) “Helen” therefore represents the trading wealth which in the eyes of the Greeks the Trojans were stealing from them.

Of course, Homer had to romanticize the story for general consumption.

Some people have theorized that-----who knows--------
Many things are indeed possible when it comes to Troy.

Could ALSO have been a little bit more literal (without the Gods, of course).

Thanks for the post.