Sing, O goddess, The rage of Achilles son of Peleus, that brought
countless ills upon the Achaeans. Many a brave soul did it send hurrying
down to Hades, and many a hero did it yield a prey to dogs and vultures,
for so were the counsels of Zeus fulfilled from the day on which the son
of Atreus, king of men, and great Achilles, first fell out with one another
Yes, this is the opening verse of Homer’s Iliad. It is about a huge war between the Greeks and the Trojans. This war brought innumerable misery to lots of men as Homer describes. The catalyst for the war was Paris, the prince of Troy, taking away Helen, the wife of king of Sparta, Menelaus. Agamemnon, the leader of the kings of Greece and brother of Menelaus decides on revenge, gathers all the Greek kings with their armies to attack Troy.
Achilles, a Greek hero, gets enraged because Agamemnon took away Briseis from Achilles, who had claim over Briseis as spoils of the war. I invite the reader to observe the farcical wheel within wheel here. The war’s background is rivalry over Helen, a woman taken from her husband by another man. Ironically, leader of the Greeks himself does the same to Achilles by taking away Briseis from him. (Ignoring the modern ethical standards on treatment of women).
Achilles kills the Trojan Hero Hector, ties his dead body to his chariot and drags it around. The scene is depicted in this Water Jar from Athens dated 520- 510 BCE, Click on the image for furher details and source
Achilles never respected Agamemnon and didn’t see Helen’s abduction as a cause worthy enough to go to war. He joined the war for the glory that would come with it. The war presented him with a chance to achieve immortality. He joined the war, despite the prophecy from his mother of the impending early death that would befall him if he pursues this path.
Another aspect of Iliad is the role of the gods in the Trojan War. The war lasted for 10 years as the capricious gods got deeply involved in the affairs of these mortals. The action of the gods were driven by personal vendettas and rivalries, and scheming among the gods. So what the heroes on both sides took as their achievement was largely influenced by various extraneous factors that the mortals were ignorant about.
Iliad is an Epic, either entirely a work of fiction or perhaps an amalgamation of some truths woven into this form by Homer or a collection of forgotten bards. Even today, when we analyse in its entirety, wars often appear futile. Politicians and generals secured in their positions and comfortably ensconced in their offices send the young to imminent death under the pretext of honour, glory, justice and other lofty ideals. Such glorification of war has permeated every culture /people /civilization throughout history to this very present day.
Take, for example, Alfred Lord Tennyson's poem Charge of the Light Brigade, a famous poem written to commemorate the bravery of British soldiers during the Crimean War. The soldiers, however, lost the battle in what is widely considered a military blunder. According to Wikipedia, out of the 670 soldiers who went, 110 died, and 161 were wounded. Yet, Tennyson immortalized their heroism from the comforts of his home, declaring:
Not though the soldier knew
Someone had blundered.
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die.
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
The 'Charge of the Light Brigade' ,oil painting by Richard Cantom Woodville Jr, 1894. Click on image for further details and source
While Tennyson’s poem glorified their sacrifice, a lesser-known poem, Last of the Light Brigade by Rudyard Kipling, written much later offers a stark contrast. After discovering the pitiful conditions faced by the surviving soldiers, of this same Crimean war, Kipling penned this sombre poem. The first verse says:
There were thirty million English who talked of England's might,
There were twenty broken troopers who lacked a bed for the night.
They had neither food nor money, they had neither service nor trade;
They were only shiftless soldiers, the last of the Light Brigade.
This later poem presents a sobering reality, contrasting the glorified vision with the harsh truth of the soldiers’ lives after the war, reflecting the enduring cycle of glorification and the often-ignored consequences of conflict.
It is not my present endeavor to debate the ethics or alternatives of war but to probe what compels a soldier to risk his/her life, take pride in killing strangers, and perceive this as honour. President Truman’s decision to nuke two Japanese cities—diabolic as it was—might have filled him with pride, believing he ended the war. Posterity often pardons or even glorifies such acts under the doctrine of 'lesser evil.' This echoes Agamemnon, who claimed divine favour each time he inflicted brutal death upon the Trojans.
Crewmembers of the 'Enola Gay' the american bomber that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, proudly parade through New York on a Jeep in April, 1946. Click on image for further details and source
In social insects, we observe a striking parallel to the human act of dying for the nation. In some bees, for instance, the worker bees sacrifice their lives to protect the queen. This self-sacrifice stems from the fact that their genetic survival is entirely dependent on the queen’s ability to reproduce; by defending their queen, they ensure the continuation of their lineage. In the animal kingdom wars are for survival—territory, food, or mating. Baboons wage wars over dominance and resources. Animals exhibit this warring nature by instinct. However, human wars, often justified by ideals like honour, glory, or justice, extend far beyond survival. These lofty narratives might be rationalizations of primal instincts, exposing how little we have overcome our animal origins. For us, beings that consider ourselves rational, this contradiction between intellect and instinct is profoundly unsettling.
How, then, do we justify our adherence to these fragile concepts? A penny drops when we read Plato’s Republic. To sustain his envisioned utopian society, Plato suggests the propagation of ‘Noble Lies’—false myths crafted to unify people and inspire them to defend an idea. One major contributing factor to war, I believe, is the enduring myth we have spun around war heroes and the lofty ideals for which it is deemed noble to kill or die. The Iliad, composed around the 8th century BCE and recounting events of the Trojan War some 3,000 years ago, exemplifies this with its celebration of glory, honour, and reputation.
This pattern of justifying wars with lofty ideals is not confined to ancient epics or theoretical frameworks—it permeates modern history as well. Terms like 'War on Terror' or 'Defence of Democracy' have been invoked to rally support for conflicts. While these are undoubtedly noble causes, one must ask: is war truly the only way to achieve them? To examine this question dispassionately, it helps to look at past conflicts, distanced from the immediacy of current events.
Consider the Vietnam War, which raged for 20 years. At the time, politicians justified it with narratives that galvanized public support, but decades later, it is widely viewed as futile and inhumane. Another example is the Afghanistan conflict of the late 1980s. When I was in school, a popular movie, Rambo III, portrayed the Taliban as heroic liberators fighting for their people. Such cultural portrayals highlight the fluidity of these narratives, shaped by political agendas. Back then, the U.S. supported this depiction, yet today, it presents a diametrically opposite argument with remarkable sprezzatura.
Perhaps it is time for humanity to transcend these ever-shifting narratives, confront the enduring truths behind war, and reimagine our approach to justice and coexistence.
Comments