The evolution of the hero: heroic values across literary cultures
Raphael del P
The literary hero serves as more than a protagonist; they embody the aspirational values and conflicts of their age. As Northrop Frye observes in Anatomy of Criticism , the hero is almost always superior in degree or kind to other men and to his environment, but the nature of this superiority shifts dramatically across historical periods, reflecting evolving concepts of human excellence and moral authority. 1 The evolution from Homer's Achilles through Shakespeare's Hamlet to Byron's Childe Harold reveals a fundamental transformation in western literary culture: from heroism defined by external validation and social honour, through the psychological complexity of characters caught between conflicting moral systems, to the Romantic celebration of individualism and alienation. This progression is not solely literary but also deeply cultural, reflecting each society's dominant value systems, philosophical tensions, and understanding of individual worth. By examining how each hero embodies and challenges their era's understanding of human virtue, we can trace the broader intellectual history of western civilization itself. Homer’s Achilles represents heroism in its most elemental form, within a shame-honour culture where individual worth derives entirely from social standing and martial excellence. E.R. Dodds argues that ‘the strongest moral force which Homeric man knows is not the fear of god, but respect for public opinion’. 2 Achilles' defining characteristic—his menis or wrath—emerges not from moral outrage but from wounded honour when Agamemnon publicly dishonours him by seizing Briseis. The opening lines establish this immediately: ‘The wrath sing, goddess of Peleus’ son Achilles/ the accursed wrath which brought countless sorrows upon the Achaeans’. 3 That Homer makes one warrior's wounded pride the subject of divine epic poetry—worthy of an invocation of the Muse and cosmic significance— reveals how completely individual identity depends on social validation in this society. Personal honour is not merely private feeling but a force capable of bringing devastation to entire armies. Crucially, Achilles never questions whether his anger is morally justified, only whether his honour has been adequately restored. In Book IX, when Agamemnon offers magnificent gifts and Briseis' return, Achilles rejects them because the original insult to his honour cannot be undone: ‘Not even if he gave me ten times and twenty times all that now he has . . . will Agamemnon persuade my heart until he has paid the full price of all the outrage that stings my heart’ ( Iliad 9.378-387). This response reveals how, within an honour-based culture, heroism operates on principles of absolute social reciprocity and inflexible social codes rather than considering consequences and moral calculation. Thus, the hero's worth is measured not by inner virtue but by society's recognition of his superiority.
The Homeric worldview that produced Achilles as an ideal hero reflects a society where survival depends on both divine favour and military excellence. Achilles' decision to remain in Troy, choosing
1 Frye, N. (1957) Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays , p. 33. 2 Dodds, E. (1951) The Greeks and the Irrational , p. 17. 3 Homer, The Iliad , trans. Murray, A.T., rev. Wyatt, W.F. (1928). 1.1-2. All subsequent reference to The Iliad is from this translation unless otherwise stated.
241
Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting