Changes in Achilles of The Iliad
There are times in my own life in which I realize that a goal that I have been pursuing rigorously is really not worth my time and effort, or that the way I have been pursuing that particular goal is not the most effective way. After I come to these realizations I find it helpful, if not necessary, to step back and analyze the situation. This is what happened to Achilles throughout the first sixteen books of the epic.
At first Achilles had a set of clearly defined goals, he was to fight side by side with the Achaeans, sack Troy, and, by doing these things, gain honor and wealth. As the war progressed a series of events took place that forced Achilles to step out of the fight. While he was inactive and had time to contemplate, he came to the realization that he had been fighting for nine years for the sake of a man whose woman has been stolen; now that his woman had been stolen no one fights for his sake. He also realizes that there are other, less risky ways of obtaining wealth and honor, including sending Patroklus out in his armor. Another thing he ponders on, but doesn't seem to take seriously, is whether or not honor is really worth the struggle.
…show more content…
By the time the embassy arrived at his hut Achilles had been toying with the idea of returning to his homeland and abandoning the struggle for wealth and honor. Because of the embassy Achilles' mind was changed, probably due to a sense of camaraderie, and he decides to stay but fight only if the struggle reaches his own
What Achilles does know, and what he must deal with, is the fact that his life will be short if he chooses to have honor and glory. Thus, the choices he makes concerning his honor are crucial. At this point his life is riding on the decision he makes. It is inevitable that Achilles will choose door #2--to go to war, live a short life, and have much glory.
The Odyssey, written by Homer, details the dismal voyage home of a Greek Hero, Odysseus; returning from the Trojan War. Plagued by bad luck; the gods hindered Odysseus’ return to Ithaca and in return, he was away from his homeland for twenty years. Odysseus was considered a Modern Greek hero. He was thoughtful, resourceful and respectful of the gods. If we compare Odysseus to Achilles, another Greek hero, most of their traits are similar, they shared in their sense of duty, courage and bravery. However, Achilles was more impulsive than Odysseus and did not contemplate the consequences of his actions. He was solely motivated by his need for vengeance. Even though Achilles had extraordinary strength and a close relationship with the gods, he still seemed less than heroic. He possessed all the abilities to be a great warrior and was portrayed as the greatest warrior in the Greek army yet his flaws constantly hindered his capability to act with decency and honour. He could not control his pride or rage which ultimately affected his actions. An example of this is when Achilles prayed to the gods that the Trojans would slaughter the Greeks because of the indecency shown to him by King Agamemnon. Part of him desired to live a long, easy life, but he knew that his personal fate forced him to choose between living a long life and his name forgotten after a few generations; or a short life, lived with honour and glory. Ultimately, Achilles was willing to sacrifice his life so that his name would be rememb...
The question "was Achilles' anger justified" brings up issues that seem to have little or no relevance to the war. In time of war I would expect the leaders to prioritize the groups interest for the sake of unity and cooperation rather than being entrenched in achieving their own personal goals. But my expectations are those of a modern day literature student, I'm inclined to think that the Greeks who first read this epic valued different things than myself. Another relevant question might be "were Achilles' actions justified". Anger can be easily justified, but the actions that anger might lead you to take are not as easily justified. Again I am not an ancient Greek and my opinions are irrelevant unless I open my mind to different viewpoints. Therefore I am striving to look into this issue through ancient Greek eyes where the principle of sacrificing ones own interests was apparently not valued, but maintaining ones honor, on the other hand, was greatly valued. In the following paragraphs I will attempt to answer these two aforementioned questions.
If Achilles goes to war, the Greeks will recognize him as the man who saved them and his glory will live on past his death. On the other hand, if Achilles ventures home the Greeks will see him as a coward who did not help his people in their time of need. Achilles has lost the urge to continue on and fight in battle because he knows that his life will be short if he goes back to war. However, Achilles’ comrades attempt to convince him to fight for the Greeks by reminding him of all the geroi he will receive if he is victorious in battle. In response to Odysseus’ plea to Achilles asking him to come back to battle, Achilles says, “One and the same for the lot that hangs back and the man who battles hard.
The war changed Achilles behaviour.Achilles is a halfgod who everyone looks up to as a hero due to that war is important to Achilles because Achilles doesn’t want to fade into obscurity as the greatest warrior he has a reputation to live up to and fight to prove himself worthy of such a prestigious title. But it all changes due to the
Achilles’ behavior starts out with arete, or someone’s great qualities. Achilles is a highly gifted warrior who is a combination of strength, skill, courage, and determination. Achilles earned his prize of honor, Briseis, for being a great warrior and leader. Achilles explains, “my prize of honor, which I earned and which the Greeks gave to me”(129). Many people know Achilles for these qualities and look up to him for that reason. Later after Patroclus’ death, Achilles goes through the behavior cycle for the second time, starting with arete, summoning his anger and courage, and gets back on the battlefield. Achilles explains his reason for going back to war by saying, “I now ...
Russia lost many men in the battle which made them lose the war and they had to pay back. When they lost this caused the Russian economy to crash and by that caused the Russian revolution. The Russian Revolution began in 1917 after Russia lost many wars which made the economy weak. During the 1914 in World war 1 Russia had lost many supplies and military men and Russia lacked good leadership. Tsar Nicholas was in control of Russian government and the army and he refused to share his power with the masses. Then the Duma Parliament in the summer of 1915 demanded the government with democratic values and to show responsibility to the citizens in the country that needed help. However, later that year Nicholas eliminated the Duma and went to war. Tsar Nicholas left the country to be destroyed. Then the government was taken over by Tsarina Alexandra Nicholas wife. She attempted to rule absolutely in her husband’s absence by firing and electing officials of her
The resignation of Nicholas II March 1917, in union with the organization of a temporary government in Russia built on western values of constitutional moderation, and the capture of control by the Bolsheviks in October is the political crucial opinions of the Russian Revolution of 1917. The actions of that historic year must also be viewed more broadly, however: as aburst of social strains associated with quick development; as a disaster of political modernization, in relations of the tensions sited on old-fashioned traditions by the burdens of Westernization; and as a social disruption in the widest sense, concerning a massive, unprompted expropriation of upper class land by fuming peasants, the devastation of outmoded social patterns and morals, and the scuffle for a new, democratic society.
Achilles agreed that Patrokolos should wear his armor into battle, this decision along with the fact Achilles was no longer fighting, ultimately caused Patrokolos’ death. When Patrokolos died at the hands of Hektor, two things happened. First, being distraught over his friend’s death, Achilles feels responsible/ Guilt ensues but is channeled to more anger. Hektor, the slayer of Patrokolos now becomes the target of Achilles rage. Achilles is ready to fight, but more accurately ready for revenge. Achilles said, “I will not live nor go about among mankind unless Hektor fall by my spear, and thus pay me for having slain Patrokolos son of Menoetius,” (The Iliad, Chapter 18, Lines 89-91). When Achilles decided to fight, the fate of Hektor was already decided. Also, because he decided to fight, many more Trojans died. His fury with all of Troy was unleashed. Achilles killed and killed. The carnage was
... was when the Greek armies were trying to seize the city of Troy without the help of Achilles , the fight was relentless. With the unfortunate death of Achilles beloved companion and friend Patrolcus, Achilles entered the war with the city of Troy only to wind up killing his enemy, Hector. In all of the fates predicted, Achilles knew ahead of time what the outcome could possibly be, with this in mind, Achilles has the freewill of whether to engage in the war and lose his life. However, fate had been reveal prior to the killing of Hector, Achilles engaged in war with revenge on his mind and fulfilled the prophecies.
In his classic work "Poetics" Aristotle provided a model of the tragic hero. According to Aristotle, the tragic hero is more admirable than the average person. This results in the tragic hero being admired by the audience. For the audience to accept a tragic ending as just, it is crucial that the tragic hero be responsible for their undoing. At the same time though, they must remain admired and respected. This is achieved by the tragic hero having a fatal flaw that leads to their undoing. One of literature's examples of the tragic hero is Achilles from Homer's The Iliad. However, Achilles is different from the classic tragic hero in one major way - his story does not end tragically. Unlike the usual tragic hero, Achilles is able to change, reverse his downfall, and actually prove himself as a true hero.
The Nature of Tsarism and the Policies of Nicholas II as the Cause for the Revolution of February in Russia 1917
Homer makes it clear that Achilles is a man mainly driven by his hunger for glory. Achilles has all the traits of a superhuman from his strength to his incredible ability to fight on the battlefield. Even with these great abilities, it is hard for many readers to perceive him as a hero because of the way he acts. Homer takes this brief time period out of this whole ten-year war just to demonstrate how Achilles cannot control himself when he goes into a rage. In todays world Achilles would not last long as a soldier in any army because he would be court marshaled for insubordination. Achilles ye...
A large source of Achilles anger started with his fight with Agamemnon. Apollo put a plague on the Achaean soldiers that was killing them off. The only way to stop this from killing them all was to give back a priest’s daughter who had been captured. This girl “belonged” to Agamemnon and he didn’t want to give her up unless he got Achilles girl in return. This would disgrace Achilles honor but he could not let any more soldiers be killed so, he reluctantly let her go. But in return for giving up his girl he withdrew from the battle. Much of Achilles anger is a result of this occasion but the death of Patroklos later overrode his previous anger to Agamemnon.
The significant historical trend of rebellion against authoritarian rule in Russia is demonstrated through three key events; the 1905 Revolution, the February 1917 revolution and the October 1917 revolution. These events was a culmination of economic, social, and political forces which was driven by a deep dissatisfaction with inequality within society and incompetent leadership of Tsar Nicholas. The events of Bloody Sunday in 1905, as the massacre became known, started a movement that the government could not control and forced the Tsar to make some concessions, which did not last long. The further eroded public confidence in his government and in the view of the lack of the Tsar 's credibility were prepared the way for the 1917 Revolutions.