John Dickson Book Critique

It is inferred that the parents should take care of their children and have their best interest at heart. This however, is not the case in Greek and Roman mythology. The killing of ones own children, or filicide, was not viewed as negative upon in their era. The contemporary times contrast with the ancient Greek and Roman’s because it was justified to use any means necessary to obtain a higher status. The Greeks and Romans valued keeping a high social reputation and having respect for those of great power. The motherly union between their children conflict with the reality that the father strives to retain or gain control. These circumstances cause a tense bond between the members of the family. The strained parent to child relationship in

In parallel to the argument between the Just and Unjust speeches, ‘new’ triumphs over ‘old’ once again in the fight between Strepsiades and Pheidippides. Pheidippides declares to his father, “I will make it clearly apparent, by Zeus, that I was beating you with justice (Clouds, 1332). Throughout their argument, Pheidippides was applying the same techniques to his speech that the Unjust speech utilized. Their apparently cynical disrespect for social mores emphasizes the fact that what is ‘old’ is losing its strength within society. What is right is in palpable contrast to what is currently occurring in the social order. Strepsiades broached the suggestion that as a father he has nurtured Pheidippides from infancy to his adulthood. Because of this, Strepsiades insists that he has earned his son’s respect. However, Pheidippides is convinced

Democratic societies view fathers as equals to their sons. The father limits the freedoms of his son for a short time period, then willingly releases his authority once the child reaches adulthood. The son readily accepts his newfound freedom. Though all democratic men follow their own paths, only some aristocratic men are leaders, while others readily follow. In an aristocracy, sons lack an identity that is separate from their fathers. But, the democratic government merely perceives the father as an older and wiser citizen, in comparison to his sons (559). In this form of government, “mores” unite all men and the “general notion of a superior becomes weaker and less clear” (560). The head of the aristocratic family has a much more extensive and respected power than a democratic father. Tradition and ancestry play a larger role in determining the actions and beliefs of an aristocratic society. Aristocratic sons show immense respect for their ancestors and seek to continue the path that history has laid for them. The father’s link to the family’s ancestry allows him to serve as the family’s “organ of tradition”, which causes the son to both respect and rely on his father’s guidance (560). In contrast, democratic sons allow the past to inspire, not completely guide their futures. Democratic sons are typically not reluctant to go against tradition. As a

Honor is a concept that has a great deal to do with entitlement and based on the actions or qualities of a person. There are three main types of honor that society recognizes; family, men, and women and in The Heptameron, Marguerite de Navarre portrays each of the three types of honor throughout her stories. Published in the 1500s, the series of short stories portrays the values and beliefs of that period of time. However, there are often a number of complications that follow honor that lie with classified and understandably honorable deeds or traits, and who is it that determines this. Another issue that one may find is that it is also complicated to be able to view one form of morality in the presence of another due to certain views clashing with one another. In addition to this, Marguerite de Navarre’s stories are written around the themes of love, lust, and adultery, in addition to honor. Each of these has a significant role in portraying the integrity of men, women and family. The Heptameron’s twelfth story has each of the three types of honor present throughout it, and show how they either compliment or conflict with one another. Through the character of the Duke of Medici, the Duke’s “other half”, and the sister of this man, the reader is able to recognize the instances in which honor is evident.

The study of honor in Renaissance cities presents an intriguing paradox. On the one hand, honor seemed ‘more dear than life itself’, and provided one of the essential values that shaped the daily lives of urban elites and ordinary city folk. For wealthy merchants and aspiring artisans, honor established a code of accepted conduct against which an individual’s actions were measured by his or her peers, subordinates and social superiors. Possessing honor helped to locate a person in the social hierarchy and endowed one with a sense of personal worth. The culture of honor, which originated with the medieval aristocracy, directed the everyday activities of urban-dwellers of virtually all social groups from at least the fourteenth century on.

Most humans create a facade which they hide behind. A person will create an identity that fits their expected role in their family, community, and society. All of these factors play into the human ideal because no one expectation of an ideal human matches another, but people still want to meet the expectations of the people around them. One common thread comes from even under the mask that all humans wear. Within The Odyssey by Homer, The Republic by Plato, and The Holy Bible, honor is able to play a role into a human’s life in many different ways; it is what pushes people into becoming the leader, teacher, and follower of what is believed in, and honor is what creates an ideal human.

The Greek Alexander Romance describes the life of Alexander the Great, focusing primarily on his great military feats as a leader of Greece and highlighting why he is remembered as a great Greco-Roman leader. Similarly, the Gospel of Matthew explains the life of Jesus Christ through his teachings and miracles, which underline why he is known as the greatest figure from Judeo-Christian culture. Alexander and Jesus easily compare because they died in their early thirties, were known as kings, and are remembered for impressive triumphs while on earth. Alexander sought to build his empire and essentially rule the world through victories on the battlefield and the conquering of neighboring countries. Jesus sought to destroy evil on earth by establishing God’s Kingdom and teachings in the hearts of all. Comparing the lives of these great Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian leaders highlight the differences in cultural opinion on the highest good in life, how one obtains that good, and what that means in connection to an afterlife. Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman perspectives on elements of a meaningful life contrast in the sense that Judeo-Christian actions to pursue these elements are motivated by the desire for everlasting life in heaven, while Greco-Roman actions are motivated by the desire for perpetual fame on earth after one dies.

Many people believe that Christians played a great role in abolishing slavery. However, Douglass’ ideas about religion and its connection to slavery shine a light on the dark side of Christianity. Douglass’ account of his own life is a very eloquent first hand retelling of the suffering and cruelty that many slaves were going through. His account gives a detail of the ills that were committed against the slaves. The atrocities committed by the various different masters varied in intensity depending on the masters’ individual personality (Glancy 42). This first hand narrative gives us a glimpse in to the connection between religion (Christianity) and slavery.

Honor is defined as a high respect given to an individual that brings credit. To receive honor is paralleled to being crowned with jewels and being regarded as a role model to all. The society that the Iliad portrays is “centered on the battlefield of achievement and its rewards” (Homer, xxi). The figures in Homer’s epic poem, the Iliad, partake in events that will allow them to “receive more honor and more material rewards” even if it means that they must indulge themselves in heightened risks that could end in death (xxiii). Hector, one of the most pivotal characters in the poem, illustrates the lust for glory and ignorance of everything else that holds just as much importance. As his character is strengthened, it can be seen that every

The relationships between parents and their sons in the Iliad are not relationships we expect to see in today’s society. The Iliad portrays the relationships between fathers and sons as something more than just physical and emotional. It is based on pride and respect for one another. The expectations of their son are more so to pass on their fathers reputable name and to follow in their father’s footsteps of being noble warriors. These relationships are the driving forces in the Iliad, making each son in the Iliad identifiable first by their father’s name. An outcome of the father–son relationships is ancestral loyalty among the characters which play a prominent role in war. Therefore, not only does the Iliad share a major war story, but

In Greek mythology, there is always a perpetual notion of power. The desire for power is associated with the father figure of a family. Furthermore, a father sets the tone for his family by setting rules and establishing their reputation. From the beginning of time, there has been angst in losing power, starting with the Earth and sky. Arising fear occurs when a father finds that one of his children is a threat to his throne. It also develops when a father realizes that since he sabotaged his own father, potentially his child could the same. Taking into consideration both of these cases, it is understood that a male parent in ancient Greek consciousness seeks a role having power. This thirst for power has resulted in the betrayal of wives and the attempt to destroy an upbringing of children. Through the fatherhood of Ouranos, Cronos, and Zeus, it is clear that their role is to exercise dominance, moreover keep away potential threats.

The Roman Empire is well known for their patriarchal society, and for being a society in which a person’s morals and virtues were a prudent portion of their identity. In ancient times, Roman’s based a majority of their philosophy off of their moralistic standards. The Romans began to distinguish themselves through applying their morals and virtues to their philosophy, and in turn became a society in which an individual’s actions were governed in large part, by their moral compass. A classic example of this application can be seen in the Roman concept of pietas. For Roman citizens, the idea of pietas, or “dutifulness” was a highly important aspect of an individual’s life (Sayre, 2015). Although the concept of pietas was applicable to all Roman citizens, it was especially important to males, particularly fathers, who were to be regarded with the upmost respect and revered to the greatest extent possible. The following essay will discuss the definition and significance of the Roman concept of pietas, and will provide the reader with a example of how Roman’s applied this concept to their everyday lives.

It is possible to write on the life of Jesus from the information gathered from the bible. I will be dividing my essay into three parts. In the first part of the paper, I will talk about the nature of the gospels, John’s views vs. the Synoptic, discuss if the authors of the gospels are eyewitnesses and how they used written sources. Also I will talk about the Q source. Then I will elaborate on the topic of how Matthew and Luke were similar. Then I will continue on by discussing how the Old Testament uses Moses, Samuel and Elijah to interpret Jesus, and finally whether or not the Sermon on the Mount happened. In the second part of my paper, I will talk about Jesus’s birth and childhood, his miracles, his resurrection, and what Jesus did to cure people, spirits and how they are interpreted to the prophet, magician and the mad man compared to Saul and Elijah. The final part of the paper I will talk about what Jesus talked about as regards to the Kingdom of God vs. the Kingdom of the Romans and what he intended by speaking of the end of the world. I will also speak of the reasons behind the Romans executing him. My sources for this paper will be the New Jerusalem Bible Readers edition as my primary source and lecture notes from Professor Trumbach.

Jesus Christ is known for his brave and selfless personality as well as his crucifixion due to his pure and unorthodox thoughts and actions. Due to Christ’s heroic personality, authors often highlight their literary work’s character’s heroism with Christ personality traits. In Aldus Huxley’s Brave New World, it is evident that the Christ figure is John the Savage. John is often shown re-enacting Christ’s crucifixion to purify his soul. “[He] held [his hands] in voluntary crucifixion, while he repeated, through clenched teeth, ‘Oh, forgive me!

As is already known, Homeric literature served as the model for educating Greek boys and young men, as well male Roman citizens later on in Antiquity. The passages of Homer and Hesiod instructed a decorum which defined proper behavior as unyielding bravery in the field of battle, and the continuous desire for besting an opponent through strident competition, or agon in the Greek. Achilles defined this part of heroic conduct, while Odysseus, through his renowned ability for persuasion, defined the other. Ideally therefore, both ways melded together provided a path to immortality and glory, which was the ultimate goal for every male aspirant in Classical Athens. As can be witnessed in Homeric literature – especially the Iliad – the real meaning of this immortality lay in the recognition of one’s achievements by his peers. And while immortality naturally meant being remembered for one’s actions, the potential for infamy also was part and parcel of this method. Therefore, this path to everlasting glory may been seen as highly individualistic, with no lasting contribution to the society left behind. Yet this masculine-nihilistic