Ethics: Zeus and Jesus

"Compare the ethical behavior of Zeus with the ethical teaching of Jesus."



The ethics between Zeus and Jesus are extremely different from one another!  I can't stress enough how different the ethics are.  Zeus is a rather lawless individual.  Zeus cheated on his wife, Hera, and he turned the woman, Io into a heifer!

The teachings of Jesus vary greatly with the behavior of Zeus.  Jesus taught that adultery was a sin, and he taught that you are to love one another as you love yourself.  Jesus' ethical teachings are the complete opposite of Zeus' anti-ethical behavior.

Thank you so much for reading, and please let me know what you think!        

Ovid's View of the God's Ethical Performance

" What was Ovid's view of the god's ethical performance?"



     He never states his view formally in Metamorphoses, but we can get a pretty clear idea from the stories that he chooses for his poem.  The stories that he chooses are extremely lacking in ethical performance.

     Let's take the story of Jupiter and Io as an example.  The god Jupiter rapes Io and tries to hide the evil deed from his wife.

     For the lack of ethics in these stories I assume that he didn't think highly of the god's ethical performance.

Thank you so much for reading this essay, and please let me know what you think of it!

Comparison of Works and Days with The Eumenides

"How does the view of ethical cause and effect in history in Works and Days compare with the furies' view in The Eumenides?"

     In both Works and days and The Eumenides, we see a clear view of ethical sanctions.  Works and days gives instructions on how to live a good life and it also talks about the repercussions of living a morally wrong life.  The same goes for The Eumenides, although it is more so showing the negative sanctions instead of telling you about the good ones.

     One of the first similarities that I notice between these two pieces of literature is that they both have very distinct characteristics as far as revenge is concerned.  In Works and Days it talks about how it's alright to seek out revenge if the person has wronged you. The same goes for The Eumenides.  In The Eumenides, Orestes is being tried to see if he was in the right when he sought out revenge on his mother who killed Orestes' father.  This is one of the distinct characteristics that I talked about a second ago.  In this play we see that it was completely acceptable to commit murder in the name of revenge.

     Another similarity that I see is how in Works and Days it talks about finding a good wife.  It says that if you don't, then you will reap the consequences.  We can see this played out in The Eumenides.  In The Eumenides, Agamemnon's wife was Clytemnestra.  She committed adultery and then killed her husband.  In the view of Hesiod, the writer of Works and days, Clytemnestra would have been considered a bad wife.


     The furies did not see Clytemnestra as a "bad" wife.  They saw her as taking completely just revenge.  This is one of the places where the course of ethical cause and effect in Works and Days varies with the view of the furies in The Eumenides.

     We also see that both the furies' view and the view of ethical cause and effect in Works and Days agree with one another on the topic of "Honesty is the best policy".  In Works and Days, Hesiod says to be honest.  When asked to testify, the furies are honest about what Orestes did to his mother and Orestes is honest about why he killed her.  The furies in this situation agree with Works and Days because of the presence of honesty.

     Now I would like to compare the furies' view with the view of ethical cause and effect in Works and days on the subject of hard work.  In Works and Days, Hesiod says that hard work pays off.  We can see the furies' hard work paying off in The Eumenides when they became respected gods.  No, Orestes wasn't found guilty, but they did receive fame and honor from the city of Athens.

     As you can see, there are many similarities between these two works of art.  I encourage you to take a look at them yourself and see if you are able to find any more similarities/non-similarities between them.

Thank you for reading, and please let me know what you think!

The Libation Bearers (Orestes)

"What would have been Orestes' proper course of action had he been living today?  Why?"

     In the Libation Bearers, we see a man named Orestes attempting to avenge his father's death by killing his mother and her lover.  Orestes' mother, Clytemnestra, had killed his father to avenge the death of her daughter.  Orestes' father, Agamemnon, had killed the girl in hope of appeasing the gods.

     Well, if this was today, all these people would be in prison.  The proper course of action would be to go to the court system.  More likely, the court system would come to you if they knew of a murder that you were involved in.  They would not just stand around like a Dodo bird and do nothing.  (I mean no deceased Dodo birds offence by this statement.)

     His course of action would have been to report the murder of his father, testify in court, and see his mother go to prison.  Then, and only then, could he live a happy, regret-free, and worry-free life.

     Today, the proper course of action would be to not go into "serial killer mode".  If you did this, then you would be no better than the people/person that had committed the gruesome act that brought upon another's doom.

     Thanks for reading, and please let me know what you think!      

"What Was Hesiod's View of the Mankind's Past and Future?" (Works and Days)

     Well, Hesiod worshiped the gods of Olympus, so his view of the past and future revolves mainly around them.

     When he talks about the past of mankind, it consists of five races of men.

1. gold: the first race
2. silver: the second race
3. bronze: the third race
4. the demi-gods: the fourth race
5. iron: the fifth race (our race)

     The past races of men were all destroyed by Zeus, and according to Hesiod, our race will be destroyed in the future as well.
   
     Another thing to keep in mind is that each one of these races are supposed to be worse than the one before them.  Taking this into consideration, I believe that his view of Mankind's past was both good and bad, because although he notes the negative qualities in "Works and Days", he also states the good.  And as far as the future goes, it can only be negative if each race gets worse than the other.

     Thanks for reading, and please let me know what you think!    

Theogony and Genesis 1

"What are the main differences between Genesis 1 and Theogony?"

     The main differences between these two pieces of literature are very drastic indeed!

     In Genesis we see that God creates things and they are good.  In the Theogony we see a lot of chaos. Unlike the Bible, in the Theogony many things were created out of trickery or wrong doing.

     Here is another main difference between the two.  God is said to be all powerful but the Greek gods in the Theogony are not.  The Greek gods rely on one another to do certain things, whereas God does not need anyone's help or permission in order to preform tasks.

     Another one is that the gods are all born but God just always was.  He had no beginning and no end but the Greek gods, although undying, did not always exist.  

     It is also worth stating the similarities between the Theogony and Genesis.
   
     Both in the Bible and the Theogony, men were created before women.

     Another similarity is that they both have a head honcho (God and Zeus).

     We also see that they both have that which is supernatural (God in the Bible and the Greek gods in the Theogony).

     We can see many similarities and differences between these two amazing pieces of written art!  Thanks for reading!

 
   
   

Medea (Thoughts)

"What does the fate of Medea and those who mistreat her and oppress her say about it's own time?"

     The play Medea is about a woman who has been left by her husband for a princess.  Obviously, she is upset about this. (Wouldn't you be too?)  She was in despair and she decided to commit a series of brutal murders in order to avenge the misfortune that her husband had brought upon her.
   
     In her doing this, we can see very clearly the affects that the Peloponessian War had caused.  (the play and the war were about the same time)
   
     This work of Greek drama has a mix of grief, anger, and love all wrapped up into one.  This being the case, I can see the same thing in war.
   
     War is typically brought on by grief (and or) anger just as the murders that Medea committed were brought on by these.
   
     In war we also see love.  Men leaving their friends and families can be tragic.  It tears the people affected apart.  It can be the making or unmaking of a person, and in Medea's case, it was her unmaking.
   
     It was tragic, just as the time of the Peloponessian War was tragic.  These are the things that I see reflected in the play Medea.

"Can we learn anything from Medea about the Greek's attitude towards foreigners and women?"

     Yes, I believe that we can.  In Medea we see both a mix of those that don't care what your gender is or about where you come from, and then again, we see those who do.  (Sounds a bit like society today don't you think?)
   
     We see some, (her husband, Jason for example) that can be sexist.  He seems to see Medea as no more than a play thing.  Something that he can leave and not reap the consequences of doing so.  And then we see others such as the king.  He seems less opposed to the opposite gender than did Jason.  We see this when his daughter is killed by Medea.  He is heart-broken by the loss of his dear daughter.  In this seen, we can tell that he really did care for his daughter.  It certainly didn't seem like he thought of her as no more than a play thing.
   
     Now I will do my best to answer the question concerning the view of foreigners.

     Medea was a foreigner and it appears that although she was respected by some, she was also mistreated by others.  (Again, I am using Jason as an example).  He left her for a woman of his own city.  Not that of another which Medea was.  And then again, we see the man who agreed to offer Medea safety in his land if she could get there.  It doesn't seem like he was very opposed to foreigners.

     Yes, I think that there where certain wide-held views of women and foreigners, but also that there were some who didn't have those views.  I believe that just like with anything in the world, it was a mixed lot.
     Thank you so much for reading, and please let me know what you think!                      

The Peloponnesian War and Pericles' Funeral Oration

"What points is Pericles trying to make about Athens in his Funeral Oration?"


     Pericles was trying to get across how wonderful Athens was, praise the people, and honor the dead at the same time. 
     
     He talked about all the advantages that Athenian citizens had, he tried to motivate the living during a time of war, and as stated earlier, honor the dead.  
     
     He wanted to help the people to keep going by telling them about what they had to live up to (The dead soldiers).  He also tried to give them a reason(s)to keep fighting by telling them about all that they had to lose.  He told them about all of the amazing advantages that Athens had to offer like its freedom in government and ordinary life.  

     These were the points that Pericles was trying to make in his Funeral Oration.


"Why was the Peloponnesian War fought?  What was its long-term significance?"


     The Peloponnesian War was fought for these reasons.

1.  Athens appeared to be using the Delian League's ship-building funds to help beautify itself instead of to build ships for the protection of those in the Delian League.
2.  Sparta was afraid that Athens was becoming too powerful.

     Here is the war's long-term significance.

1.  Athens would lose its dominance of the other members of the Delian League.
2.  Sparta would take control of things.
3.  In the end, this war between the Greeks would ultimately weaken them and spell out some serious consequences.

     Well, That's all for this week. I hope that you have enjoyed this essay on "The Peloponnesian War and Pericles' Funeral Oration". See you next Friday, and please let me know what you think! 

     

The Odyssey (Cyclopes)

   In The Odyssey we read about a people known as the Cyclopes.  The Cyclopes are not human.  They are described in a way that makes you think of them as giants, which have a mind that can understand, reason, etc.  They appear to be very cruel and horrid.
  For a part of this report I will share my opinion on weather or not they have a civilization.  I believe that the Cyclopes do have a civilization, but not as we know it.  Although they do not gather together, live in a village, sell merchandise, etc.  They do appear to get along together.  Their species does not seem to have broken into factions, but rather, they seem to have adapted to living in the same area.  These are the reasons why I believe that the Cyclopes do have a civilization.
 

  Now I would like to talk about Odysseus and the Cyclops named, Polyphemus.  In the Odyssey we are are told of a man named, Odysseus.  Odysseus was traveling back home after fighting in the Trojan war for ten years.  He and his men encounter many dangers during their journey back home and one of those dangers is their encounter with the Cyclops, Polyphemus.
  Odysseus and his men go to the cave of Polyphemus to see is he is a friend or foe.  He turns out to be a foe and everyday he eats two of Odysseus's men.  Odysseus comes up with a plan of escape and they poke out the giant's eye.  Next, they hide underneath of the Cyclops' sheep and escape to their ship.  Once they reach their ship, Odysseus tells the giant his real name, Ulysses.  The monster is terribly angry and tries to kill them again.  Luckily, he does not succeed and they get away.
   Thank you very much for reading, and don't forget to tell me what you think!    

 

The History of Minoan Crete and the Mycenaeans

     We did not really learn about the existence of Minoan Crete until about 1899 when the city of Knossos was excavated.  Other cities were found around the island of Crete as well.
     They were a civilization with lovely pottery, palaces, and frescoes.  Their art seems to focus on daily life.  As for the palaces, they are thought to have originally been religious centers and later used for royalty.
     The Minoans are thought to have been a peaceful people focusing in trade instead of war.  But it does appear that they took part in human sacrifice.
     They had a "palace economy" where the people would manufacture the goods and the government would decide where everything went.
     We are not familiar with their literature because their language is written in a text called "Linear A" which we cannot decipher.
      They are thought to eventually be invaded by the Mycenaeans of mainland Greece.


     We will now talk about Mycenaean Greece.  It was thought that Greek history began in 800 BC but that theory was proved wrong by a man named, Heinrich Schliemann who lived from 1822-1890.  He loved the Homeric epics and decided to go to Turkey to find the city of Troy.  He does find Troy and excavates it.  He found evidence of destruction and he wondered if that could possibly be evidence of a Trojan war.  It was not enough however, and we still are not sure if their ever was a Trojan war.
      The Mycenaeans appear to have had independent cities and each one was probably ruled by one king.         The Mycenaeans seem to have been a warlike people quite unlike the Minoans of Crete.  The Mycenaeans did however absorb some of the Minoan culture which can be seen in their craftsmanship.
      The Mycenaeans used a form of writing called "Linear B" which we have deciphered and have learned that it is an early form of Greek.
      We think that a lot of Greek religion originated in Mycenaean times.
      We will now come to the demise of Mycenaean Greece.  Here are some theories on what happened to Mycenaean Greece.  Some believe that there was internal conflict.  Others think that environmental factors were involved.  There are also other theories but I will not mention all of them.
      Now we will move on to the Mycenaean Dark Age, (1100-800 BC) where we find next to nothing concerning outside trade, literacy, or anything else.   There is however, some controversy on if their ever was a "Dark Age". This minority is convinced that we have the dating systems wrong and that we are adding time that was never there.
     Thank you so much for reading "The History of Minoan Crete and the Mycenaeans" and please let me know what you think!