Pericles’ funeral oration, one of the most famous passages in Thucydides’ book History of thePeloponnesian War, is the clearest expression of the myth of Athens. The oration articulates ancient democratic theory, and the picture of democracy it describes serves as a model for democratic States even today.In a seminal piece of work, Clifford Orwin has argued in his book, The Humanity of Thucydidesthat Pericles’ third speech, delivered to the Athenian populace after the outbreak of the plague represents Pericles’ true funeral oration. Orwin argues this because the plague represented a real crisis.
The link Orwin makes between these two speeches is illuminating and casts a new, unprecedented light on Pericles’ later speech. This paper will argue that the connection Orwin articulates between the two speeches is essential for a proper understanding of both; however, he misrepresents the relationship between the speeches. Pericles’ final speech is not the true funeral speech, but rather represents a pragmatic instruction manual for how the Athenians can embody the myth of Athens, as articulated in the funeral speech proper. This is demonstrated by examining the traditional understanding of Pericles’ funeral oration, Orwin’s argument and the common themes in both speeches. Understanding the relationship between these speeches is essential for understanding the role of political myth in democratic states.
The Virgilian patterns that Shakespeare refigured for Prospero’s role place The Tempestdirectly in the line of earlier imitators of the Aeneid. Following the practice of Tasso, who, like Homer, was understood to have used two different characters to present the images of the public and private man,Shakespeare created the private man, Ferdinand, primarily from patterns in the Dido and Aeneas love story. But he constructed Prospero in such a way that he embodies the idea of rule associated with Aeneas in and after book 6 that is, Aeneas as one who will be an ideal governor, and also so that he carries, but transforms, the ideas of wrath, revenge, and destruction associated with the Troy story in Aeneid 2 and 3. Thus, in the part of Prospero, as in other instances in The Tempest, Shakespeare conflates widely separated sections of Virgil’s text.
Method dominates the composition of Prospero’s first scene (1.2) where he, like Aeneas in Aeneid 2 and 3, speaks a long narration of the past that establishes him as the figure that holds the memory of the culture and is haunted by its tragedies. Virgil does not mention what kind of tree harbors the golden bough. But just after Aeneas has found the bough and before he and the Sibyl reach the ferryman Charon, they pass through a forest in the midst of which stands an elm, where “false Dreams hold here and there”.
Though the dialogue is retold by the narrator, Socrates, one day after it has occurred, the actual events unfold in house of Cephalus at the Piraeus on the festival day of the goddess Bendis .Once Polemarchus and several other men catch up to Socrates and Glaucon after the celebratory procession, Polemarchus, desirous of Socrates’ delightful conversation, compels him to join their company at his home. There Socrates encounters Polemarchus’ father, Cephalus, an old man, and the two men speak candidly about aging.
The Republic written by Plato examines many things. It mainly is about the Good life. Plato seems to believe that the perfect life is led only under perfect conditions which are the perfect society. Within the perfect society there would have to be justice. In the Republic it seems that justice is defined many different ways. Analyzing what the dialogue format does in some of Plato’s writings inevitably raises the problem of the border between philosophy and literature. Thus, in some respect, this paper touches the issues of what makes a text philosophical or fictional. Nevertheless, this very question about the border between philosophy and literature might be misleading, especially in the cases of the two writers analyzed. For one of them uses literary forms to better express a theory that would negate itself, overtly stated, while the other employs philosophical concepts and theories as pieces to obtain with their combination a literary effect, mainly irony. Whereas notions of fictionalized representations appear basic to all known human communities and clearly predate any written records those peoples may have developed, it may be adequate to begin our consideration of classical Greek poetics with Iliad and Odyssey. These are two rather extensively developed “epic” poems attributed to Homer (c700 BCE).
Iliad and Odysseyare intense, adventurous, and complex accounts of people’s experiences as they attempt to deal with matters of group life, personal honor, and physical survival, amidst an assortment of super beings and very human and mortal others. Iliadis developed around the experiences of a Greek warrior/champion, Achilles, a mortal superhero who encounters dramatic battlefield challenges with the Trojans. Still, Achilles also faces the tasks of coming to terms with the interests and maneuverings of a set of immortal gods as well as Achilles’ own, less than honorable, but very human Commander-in-chief, Agamemnon.
Presumably taking place after the Trojan War, Odysseyrevolves around the trials and triumphs of a Greek King Odysseus who following a shipwreck initiated by the gods, finds himself thrust into a series of highly novel but mortally perilous adventures. After a series of incredible adventures, Odysseus eventually makes his way home. However, given his prolonged absence during which time he is presumed dead, Odysseus now has to deal with those who have tried to take advantage of his queen and his position during his voyage. While among the first extensively preserved, written Greek texts, these two volumes depict a great many aspects of community life, both through author account andextended character dialogue. Situated within developmental sequences or processes, the human interchange depicted in Iliad and Odysseyrevolves around the matters of adversity, deliberation, agency, deception, affection, loyalty, morality, persona, mortality, and ongoing adjustment. Thus, whereas Iliad and Odysseynot only have inspired a great deal of classical Greek literature and have been treasured on a variety of literary bases by scholars familiar with their contents, these texts also represent particularly significant reference points for those embarking on scholarly considerations of things “human.”
It is generally accepted that the tragedians of the 5th century BCE i.e. Sophocles were influenced by the tragic element in Homer’s Iliad. With respect to this tragic element, Achilles is often likened to a tragic hero akin to Oedipus in Oedipus Tyrannus or Antigone in Antigone. Analyze and discuss this characterization of Achilles. Agree or disagree and defend your stance.
Achilles is the greatest warrior in the Achaian army. The Iliad is about the Trojan War, but it is primarily about the war as it is affected by Achilles’ wrath, or anger. Achilles is the main character, and his inaction, or withdrawal from the fighting, is crucial to the plot. He is a complex warrior who sometimes ignores the cultural norms of his society because he sees through some of its fallacies in particular, he sees many of the faults in the often narrow and contradictory heroic code. Achilles is also the greatest warrior and fighter among the Achaians. He is invulnerable, except on the heel because his mother dipped him in the River Styx as a baby. Furthermore, no warrior comes close to being his equal as a fighter. He finds out why the plague is killing hundreds of Achaian soldiers, but in the process, he creates disorder when it is revealed that Agamemnon is responsible for the deadly plague. Thus, Achilles’ attempt to return order to the Achaian camp does little, ultimately, to establish order. Apollo lifts the plague, but after Achilles withdraws himself and his troops from the Achaian army, disorder still remains among the Achaians.