On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Borges da Costa, Fernanda
Data de Publicação: 2015
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Rónai
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/article/view/23028
Resumo: The proposed paper addresses Ate’s and Zeus’ interventions over Agamemnon according to Hugh Lloyd-Jones’s treatment in the paper “The Guilt of Agamemnon”. Lloyd-Jones’s main thesis is that Agamemnon’s guilt comes ultimately from Zeus’ acknowledgment of the Atreidae curse. He reaches this conclusion by reducing Agamemnon’s free will, considering his choices not made by clear continence but taken by Ate, sent by Zeus to stun the hero. Lloyd-Jones reduces the god’s intervention to be fomented by this single cause. Although his article has in many aspects a good approach of the tragedy, I reject Lloyd-Jones’s thesis by basing myself on Aeschylus’ text and the absence of enough textual evidence to give weight to his interpretation. I intend to substantiate my position showing that Lloyd-Jones inclusions of Ate cannot give a good interpretation on Agamemnon’s choices in the passages of Iphigenia’s Sacrifice and the stroll over the purple tapestry. On reading Aeschylus’ tragedies one must take in consideration the previous epics as background knowledge that he constantly dialogs with – but not always in agreement. In the end, I suggest that Zeus is still the main planner of all events but Agamemnon’s guilt remains also as a part of his own character and that he consciously play his part on building his tragic fate.
id UFJF-3_c22ed6cc7795d4fec6f557576a78f5f1
oai_identifier_str oai:periodicos.ufjf.br:article/23028
network_acronym_str UFJF-3
network_name_str Rónai
repository_id_str
spelling On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus interventionOn the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus interventionAgamemnonAeschylusGuiltAteAgamémnonÉsquiloCulpaAteThe proposed paper addresses Ate’s and Zeus’ interventions over Agamemnon according to Hugh Lloyd-Jones’s treatment in the paper “The Guilt of Agamemnon”. Lloyd-Jones’s main thesis is that Agamemnon’s guilt comes ultimately from Zeus’ acknowledgment of the Atreidae curse. He reaches this conclusion by reducing Agamemnon’s free will, considering his choices not made by clear continence but taken by Ate, sent by Zeus to stun the hero. Lloyd-Jones reduces the god’s intervention to be fomented by this single cause. Although his article has in many aspects a good approach of the tragedy, I reject Lloyd-Jones’s thesis by basing myself on Aeschylus’ text and the absence of enough textual evidence to give weight to his interpretation. I intend to substantiate my position showing that Lloyd-Jones inclusions of Ate cannot give a good interpretation on Agamemnon’s choices in the passages of Iphigenia’s Sacrifice and the stroll over the purple tapestry. On reading Aeschylus’ tragedies one must take in consideration the previous epics as background knowledge that he constantly dialogs with – but not always in agreement. In the end, I suggest that Zeus is still the main planner of all events but Agamemnon’s guilt remains also as a part of his own character and that he consciously play his part on building his tragic fate.O presente artigo aborda a Ate e Zeus na tragédia de Ésquilo de acordo com o tratamento de Hugh Lloyd-Jones em seu artigo “The Guilt of Agamemnon”. A tese principal de Lloyd-Jones propõe que a culpa de Agamémnon deriva em última instância do reconhecimento de Zeus sobre da maldição dos Átridas. Ele chega a esta conclusão por reduzir drasticamente o livre arbítrio de Agamémnon, considerando que suas escolhas não foram feitas com a consciência clara, mas sim tomado por Ate, a qual fora enviada por Zeus para atordoar o herói. Lloyd-Jones propõe a intervenção de Zeus como fundamentada na maldição familiar. Apesar de seu artigo, em vários aspectos, possuir uma boa abordagem da tragédia, rejeito a tese de Lloyd-Jones embasando-me no texto de Ésquilo e na ausência de fundamento textual suficiente para peso à sua interpretação. Pretendo justificar minha posição demonstrando que as inclusões de Ate feitas por Lloyd-Jones não podem resultar em uma boa interpretação acerca das escolhas de Agamémnon nas passagens do Sacrifício de Ifigênia e da caminhada sobre a tapeçaria púrpura. Ao ler as tragédias de Ésquilo devem-se levar em consideração os antecedentes épicos como conhecimento de fundo com o qual ele dialoga constantemente – com os quais nem sempre de acordo. Ao final, sugiro que Zeus ainda é de fato o principal maestro dos eventos da peça, mas a culpa de Agamémnon permanece também como uma parte de seu próprio caráter; e sugiro que ele faz sua parte na construção de seu destino trágico de modo consciente.Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora2015-08-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAvaliado por paresapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/article/view/23028Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórios; Vol. 2 No. 2 (2014); 1-24Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórios; v. 2 n. 2 (2014); 1-242318-3446reponame:Rónaiinstname:Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF)instacron:UFJFporhttps://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/article/view/23028/12712Copyright (c) 2015 Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórioshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBorges da Costa, Fernanda2020-03-04T02:47:26Zoai:periodicos.ufjf.br:article/23028Revistahttps://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronaiPUBhttps://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/oairevistaronai@gmail.comhttps://doi.org/10.34019/2318-34462318-34462318-3446opendoar:2024-05-03T12:00:49.940275Rónai - Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF)true
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
title On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
spellingShingle On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
Borges da Costa, Fernanda
Agamemnon
Aeschylus
Guilt
Ate
Agamémnon
Ésquilo
Culpa
Ate
title_short On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
title_full On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
title_fullStr On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
title_full_unstemmed On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
title_sort On the guilt of Agamemnon, by Lloyd-Jones: a problematic of Ate and Zeus intervention
author Borges da Costa, Fernanda
author_facet Borges da Costa, Fernanda
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Borges da Costa, Fernanda
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Agamemnon
Aeschylus
Guilt
Ate
Agamémnon
Ésquilo
Culpa
Ate
topic Agamemnon
Aeschylus
Guilt
Ate
Agamémnon
Ésquilo
Culpa
Ate
description The proposed paper addresses Ate’s and Zeus’ interventions over Agamemnon according to Hugh Lloyd-Jones’s treatment in the paper “The Guilt of Agamemnon”. Lloyd-Jones’s main thesis is that Agamemnon’s guilt comes ultimately from Zeus’ acknowledgment of the Atreidae curse. He reaches this conclusion by reducing Agamemnon’s free will, considering his choices not made by clear continence but taken by Ate, sent by Zeus to stun the hero. Lloyd-Jones reduces the god’s intervention to be fomented by this single cause. Although his article has in many aspects a good approach of the tragedy, I reject Lloyd-Jones’s thesis by basing myself on Aeschylus’ text and the absence of enough textual evidence to give weight to his interpretation. I intend to substantiate my position showing that Lloyd-Jones inclusions of Ate cannot give a good interpretation on Agamemnon’s choices in the passages of Iphigenia’s Sacrifice and the stroll over the purple tapestry. On reading Aeschylus’ tragedies one must take in consideration the previous epics as background knowledge that he constantly dialogs with – but not always in agreement. In the end, I suggest that Zeus is still the main planner of all events but Agamemnon’s guilt remains also as a part of his own character and that he consciously play his part on building his tragic fate.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-08-14
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Avaliado por pares
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/article/view/23028
url https://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/article/view/23028
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/ronai/article/view/23028/12712
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2015 Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórios
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2015 Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórios
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórios; Vol. 2 No. 2 (2014); 1-24
Rónai – Revista de Estudos Clássicos e Tradutórios; v. 2 n. 2 (2014); 1-24
2318-3446
reponame:Rónai
instname:Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF)
instacron:UFJF
instname_str Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF)
instacron_str UFJF
institution UFJF
reponame_str Rónai
collection Rónai
repository.name.fl_str_mv Rónai - Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (UFJF)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistaronai@gmail.com
_version_ 1798044933070782464