PT Journal
AU Danes, J
SO Aither
PY 2024
BP 6
EP 27
VL 15
IS 1
DI 10.5507/aither.2024.003
AB In this article, I examine how Aeschylus works with the discourse of honour and shame. In most of the cases mentioned, this discourse is problematised (Sept., Ag., Suppl., Pers.) or its ambivalence can also be implied (Pers.). Aeschylus' revision of the Homeric concept of immortal glory (κλέος ἄφθιτον) is quite clear. Both war in general and the heroes of Aeschylus' tragedies are problematic, and the emphasis is clearly on the  suffering and crushing consequences that war brings, whether for members of the ruling families or for the polis. This is probably due to the experiences of Aeschylus' generation. The Athenian ideology of Aeschylus' time worked with heroic concepts of honour that made it possible to gain, maintain, and develop a hegemonic position and the τιμή associated with it. This political-social direction also required a new conceptualisation of the relationship between the individual and the collective. We can probably observe what problems this conceptualisation could generate in the retelling of the Iliad in the Myrmidons. Hand in  hand with the problematic nature of the discourse of honour and shame in the political-military field goes its problematisation in the religious-political field. This problematisation is part of the study of the anatomy of individual and collective fall.
ER