Essay On Motives And Incentives In The Odyssey
Motives and Incentives
“Since often enough in war it is surer and safer to quest for food with sword and buckler than with all the instruments of husbandry” Xenophon
Why would the Greeks go to war in the first place? Moreover, why would small farmers participate in the phalanx rather than cultivate their crops and earn income? The fact that such tactical development and the ensuing improvements in the military technology were effective in battle is not a sufficient argument for the drastic increase in the size of armies. Thus, the events of the Hoplite Reform occur within a political context in which even the less wealthy had to stand their ground against invaders and function within a moral framework that compels them to live a world of …show more content…
This is areté, this is the best and loveliest prize for the young man to win. A common good is, for the whole polis and all the demos, when a man holds, firm-set among the fighters, unflinchingly (…) For it is a fine thing for an agathos man to die, falling among the front-fighters, fighting for his fatherland
Even though Tyrtaeus lived in Sparta and, inevitably, was deeply influenced by the warrior culture of this particular polis, the areté and courage portrayed in his narratives is a recurring theme across the rest of the Greek states – especially concerning the duty to the polis . Yet, setting aside the technological and tactical developments, the mindset behind the devastating Greek military force was nurtured by the shame culture:
It is a fine thing for a good man to fall in the front line fighting on behalf of his country; but is a grievous fate for a man to leave his city and rich fields and wander begging (…) He shames his family and ruins his noble beauty, and every form of disgrace and evil follows …show more content…
This might seem like a contradiction with the absolute bloodlust discussed by Tyrtaeus, Socrates and other sources of the time, yet it justifies the effectiveness of Greek combat. The more time small farmers spent campaigning, the less income they produced from working their crops. Therefore, any sort of strife was to be brief and decisive, and hoplites were to display the most of their courage and achieve areté throughout the short-lasting conflicts. Nonetheless, this framework is constrained to the small-scaled struggles between poleis, setting aside major events such as the Persian and the Peloponnesian Wars. During the latter two, the moral mindset around courage and areté is almost conspicuous, yet the costs of both wars were extremely elevated to demonstrate that either side desired an expedite end to the
“Since often enough in war it is surer and safer to quest for food with sword and buckler than with all the instruments of husbandry” Xenophon
Why would the Greeks go to war in the first place? Moreover, why would small farmers participate in the phalanx rather than cultivate their crops and earn income? The fact that such tactical development and the ensuing improvements in the military technology were effective in battle is not a sufficient argument for the drastic increase in the size of armies. Thus, the events of the Hoplite Reform occur within a political context in which even the less wealthy had to stand their ground against invaders and function within a moral framework that compels them to live a world of …show more content…
This is areté, this is the best and loveliest prize for the young man to win. A common good is, for the whole polis and all the demos, when a man holds, firm-set among the fighters, unflinchingly (…) For it is a fine thing for an agathos man to die, falling among the front-fighters, fighting for his fatherland
Even though Tyrtaeus lived in Sparta and, inevitably, was deeply influenced by the warrior culture of this particular polis, the areté and courage portrayed in his narratives is a recurring theme across the rest of the Greek states – especially concerning the duty to the polis . Yet, setting aside the technological and tactical developments, the mindset behind the devastating Greek military force was nurtured by the shame culture:
It is a fine thing for a good man to fall in the front line fighting on behalf of his country; but is a grievous fate for a man to leave his city and rich fields and wander begging (…) He shames his family and ruins his noble beauty, and every form of disgrace and evil follows …show more content…
This might seem like a contradiction with the absolute bloodlust discussed by Tyrtaeus, Socrates and other sources of the time, yet it justifies the effectiveness of Greek combat. The more time small farmers spent campaigning, the less income they produced from working their crops. Therefore, any sort of strife was to be brief and decisive, and hoplites were to display the most of their courage and achieve areté throughout the short-lasting conflicts. Nonetheless, this framework is constrained to the small-scaled struggles between poleis, setting aside major events such as the Persian and the Peloponnesian Wars. During the latter two, the moral mindset around courage and areté is almost conspicuous, yet the costs of both wars were extremely elevated to demonstrate that either side desired an expedite end to the