Antigone And Exodus Character Analysis

For people of ancient times the laws of gods often prevailed over the laws of man. In both Sophocles’ Antigone and Exodus in the Bible, a character brazenly challenges the laws of a government in favor of laws from a hypothetical higher power. Antigone claims to have an instinctive understanding of what the gods have decreed, while in Exodus, God speaks directly to Moses via different miracles. Since the reader of the Bible knows exactly how Moses is receiving his instructions, Moses’ motives and actions are more plausible and relatable. Antigone, on the other hand, does not seem to have any justification except claiming that she knows what the Gods expect her to do.

Before the events in Antigone take place, the king of Thebes, Oedipus, dies

leaving Antigone’s two brothers Eteocles and Polyneices to switch off ruling Thebes. After ruling for some time, Eteocles refuses to yield his power to his brother and as a result Polyneices takes up arms against Eteocles and Thebes. The battle ultimately ends with both of the brothers dying and their uncle, Creon, becoming the king of Thebes. Creon decides that Polyneices cannot be buried because he is a traitor to Thebes and decrees that anyone who defies his decision will “die by public stoning” (Sophocles, 37). Antigone buries her brother Polyneices nevertheless, and willingly confesses this to Creon even though she knows that the punishment is death. When Creon questions her motives, Antigone argues that “it was not Zeus who made that order” so she could disobey it (Sophocles, 450). She makes the implication that if Zeus had ordered Polyneices to be left unburied she would have unquestioningly complied, but Creon’s commands contradict Zeus’. Despite having no indication of the will of the gods, Antigone asserts that the laws she is following are “unwritten and unfailing” (Sophocles, 455). She trusts that the gods have a moral code which should be followed without having to be told the guidelines unequivocally. In her mind, she rightly defies Creon’s laws because she is honoring her brother and the gods. However, Creon also believes himself to be obeying the will of the gods by following the custom of not burying traitors, so the interpretation of the divine laws is not uniform and subject to individual understanding.
The leader of the chorus suggests that maybe the gods had buried Polyneices’ body rather than a citizen disobeying the king’s declaration (Sophocles, 278-279). Creon refuses to acknowledge this option and proclaims that it is “unbearable” to think that the gods would “take any kindly forethought for this corpse” because of Polyneices’ traitorous actions against his city and his king (Sophocles, 283). Creon is sure that leaving the body unburied is exactly what the gods would expect to be done for a traitor. While Creon and Antigone hold opposing views, they both claim to be carrying out the will of the gods. At first glance Antigone’s character seems believable because she is presented as a girl trying to do the right thing by honoring her brother with a proper burial. On the other hand, she claims that the gods have unwritten laws that everyone must follow, but Creon believes Polyneices’ disloyalty supersedes any rights he may have to a proper burial. She does seem believable at this point but the question must be raised of where she acquires these notions of what the gods consider to be correct. Her interpretation’s merit comes from a claim of innate knowledge of the gods’ intention, the same innate knowledge which Creon claims to have. Both draw this knowledge from different customs – the need to bury the dead and that traitors are denied burial within city limits – but neither have any proof of which of these two customs overrules the other one.
Unlike the characters of Antigone, in the Bible, Moses does not rely on his own interpretations but rather listens to God speak Himself. In the first chapter of Exodus, the Pharaoh orders the Egyptians to “oppress [the Israelites] with forced labor” in order to keep them suppressed (Exodus 1:11). Trying to give the Israelites hope, God speaks to Moses telling him to communicate to the enslaved Israelites that he will “bring [them] up out of the misery of Egypt” and liberate them from the control of the Egyptians (Exodus 3:17). Moses tries telling the Pharaoh this, but the Pharaoh refuses to allow Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt even after witnessing Moses perform wonders as proof of his connection to God. Repeatedly “Pharaoh’s heart was hardened” so that he would abstain from believing Moses’ claims (Exodus 8:19).
At first Moses speaks to God through a blazing bush which “is not burned up” even though it was ablaze (Exodus 3:3). Through this medium, the Lord tells Moses to convince the Israelites that God will free them. Naturally, Moses is at first hesitant to follow God’s commands and asks “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh” (Exodus 3:11). Moses is reassured that God will be with him when he goes so he begins to feel more confident about confronting the Pharaoh and demanding the release of his people. But even with this knowledge, for several chapters in Exodus, Moses argues that he is a “poor speaker” and questions “why would Pharaoh listen to [him],” trying to convince God that he is not the right person for the job (Exodus 6:30). He is doubtful of his mission even after seeing miracles such as his staff turning into a snake and his hand becoming leprous and then being healed again (Exodus 4:3 – 4:5). Despite having tangible proof before him, Moses still wavers in his confidence about his assignment from God.
Both Antigone and Moses defy their respective human authority figures – Creon and the Pharaoh – in favor of following the edicts of a proclaimed higher power.

Antigone does not look for any proof to confirm the validity of her actions. She is sufficiently confident in herself to know that what she is doing is what the gods would want. On the other hand, Moses has proof that God is speaking to him via the miracles he sees performed before him, yet he still spends multiple chapters questioning his role and plan of action. This creates a fascinating dynamic between the believability of both of these characters. Antigone seems to never waver in her belief even when she is threatened with the punishment of death. She arrogantly stands up to Creon, claiming that she “knew, of course [she] knew. The word was plain” (Sophocles, 448). She demonstrates that she knows her actions directly defy Creon’s decree and that the punishment for disobeying these laws will result in her untimely death. She is almost unbelievable in her resolve, totally unmoved by the harsh consequences which she has brought down upon herself. In contrast, Moses seems like a more believable and human character because he displays doubt as opposed to Antigone’s unwavering faith. Moses hesitates to carry out God’s direct command even when it has been proven to him via a variety of miracles that this is the true will of God. His reaction it more understandable and rational because most people would think twice

before going down a path, such as defying an authority figure, which would surely put their lives in danger. Moses reacts in the same way a normal person would be expected to – with caution and restraint. On the contrary, Antigone seems to have an irrational reaction showing a blind faith and a general lack of skepticism in a code of ethics that the from the reader’s perspective there is no reason to believe in.
Antigone’s believability is further questioned because she does not provide any evidence that her philosophy on morality is any more right or any more wrong than the completely opposing philosophy of Creon. If her interpretation is genuinely correct than her actions could be considered justified, however the question is how she arrives at this interpretation which drives her to such extremes. When she is on her way to be punished, she brings more skepticism and questionability to her interpretation. She claims that she would not have defied the law if she were “a mother, with children or a husband dead” (Sophocles, 905). She undermines the morality of her actions by saying she “might have found another” husband or child and thus would not defy Creon in this case (Sophocles, 909). Before this moment she seemed to be following a strong, though unspoken, code of ethics, but in this instance she shatters that belief. This causes the reader to question whether Antigone really does understand the will of the gods. There does not seem to be any reason why the gods would treat a brother differently than a husband or a child. In fact some would expect that Antigone’s responsibility to her husband or child would be greater than to her brother. Antigone’s vague reasoning leads to the conclusion that she herself does not really know why she would perform such an act for her brother but would not bury a spouse or child when faced with the same situation. Her selectivity for whom the law of the gods applies to, and for whom she would be willing to break human law, seems too strict and too illogical to be truly believable.
In Antigone’s situation, it is likely that Moses would also bury Polyneices but he would wait to be given a direct command from the Gods to do so rather than rely on his own interpretation of what the Gods would want. In Exodus, Moses did not endeavor to aid the Israelites in Egypt until he was commanded to do so by God. In fact, Moses was 80 years old when he finally began to communicate with the Pharaoh and strive to lead the Israelites to freedom (Exodus 7:7). Additionally, unlike Antigone, Moses would likely defy Creon’s law for a wife or children as well. In the Bible, he risks his life opposing the Pharaoh to save the lives of many people who he does not know and who do not know him. Moses and Antigone clearly differ in their perspective of who is important enough to help. Antigone’s argument that a husband and children are replaceable seems foolish when applied to Moses as he was helping strangers which hold no special place in his heart and thus by that logic could also be replaced. With this in mind it seems unlikely that Antigone would act the same way Moses did if she were in his position.
Of the two characters, Moses is easily the more believable because he possesses character traits, such as caution when confronting an established ruler who is known to be cruel, which make him more human.

Antigone does not seem to display human emotion when confronted with death, and disregarding survival instinct goes as far as saying that she would be proud to die for this cause. She tries to rationalize her decision through logic which at first appeals to human emotion but later reveals itself to be faulty and a twisted ethical standpoint which is never made clear. In Exodus, Moses has good reason for assisting his fellow Israelites. His motivation, the fact that he has been commanded by God, is both well-defined and reasonable. The reflection of normal human weaknesses in Mosses’ behavior solidifies his position as the more believable of the two characters. While Antigone is not completely unbelievable and her motivation of love for her brother that could not be equaled by anyone else is not entirely implausible, she does prove herself to be a much less believable and a less humanly relatable character than

Moses.