Gorgias's The Encomium Of Helen Of Troy
In the Encomium of Helen, Gorgias takes up as his task the exoneration Helen of Troy as the cause of the Trojan War. He does this by proposing the potential causes of the will of the gods, the force of others, persuasion through words, and love.
He starts by pointing to the will of the gods. He asserts that “god’s predetermination cannot be hindered by human premeditation” (40). This implies that Helen was merely a pawn of the gods and Fate, so she cannot be blamed for the role she was destined to play. “If then one place blame on Fate and on a God, one must free Helen from disgrace” (40). In this case, Helen’s exoneration results from an all-powerful and mysterious deity or force. This seems perfectly logical and concrete; the choice was …show more content…
“The power of the incantation,” he writes, “beguile it [the soul] and persuade it and alter it by witchcraft” (41). In this case, Helen was coaxed into parting with her captor, her own will is undermined by “false argument”. Here the blame rests on the persuader and the persuaded is “wrongly charged”.
For Gorgias’s final argument, he again takes up the position that the culprit is an omnipotent and mysterious force; love. Having the “divine power of gods”, Gorgias argues that Helen, a “lesser being”, could have not possibly rejected love. Therefore, if “the eye of Helen, pleased by the figure of Alexander, presented to her soul eager desire and contest of love” (42), how can one blame Helen for “a disease of human origin”? (42)
Thus, the Encomium of Helen achieves its defending Helen, whether it be Fate, force, persuasion or love. But not only does Gorgias give valid arguments, with his argument of the power of speech the reader realizes that he too uses this tool to persuade them. It is here that the reader learns from Gorgias that Helen is neither guilty nor innocent until persuaded one
He starts by pointing to the will of the gods. He asserts that “god’s predetermination cannot be hindered by human premeditation” (40). This implies that Helen was merely a pawn of the gods and Fate, so she cannot be blamed for the role she was destined to play. “If then one place blame on Fate and on a God, one must free Helen from disgrace” (40). In this case, Helen’s exoneration results from an all-powerful and mysterious deity or force. This seems perfectly logical and concrete; the choice was …show more content…
“The power of the incantation,” he writes, “beguile it [the soul] and persuade it and alter it by witchcraft” (41). In this case, Helen was coaxed into parting with her captor, her own will is undermined by “false argument”. Here the blame rests on the persuader and the persuaded is “wrongly charged”.
For Gorgias’s final argument, he again takes up the position that the culprit is an omnipotent and mysterious force; love. Having the “divine power of gods”, Gorgias argues that Helen, a “lesser being”, could have not possibly rejected love. Therefore, if “the eye of Helen, pleased by the figure of Alexander, presented to her soul eager desire and contest of love” (42), how can one blame Helen for “a disease of human origin”? (42)
Thus, the Encomium of Helen achieves its defending Helen, whether it be Fate, force, persuasion or love. But not only does Gorgias give valid arguments, with his argument of the power of speech the reader realizes that he too uses this tool to persuade them. It is here that the reader learns from Gorgias that Helen is neither guilty nor innocent until persuaded one