top of page
Writer's pictureLIU Honors Journal

Did Achilles handle Hector's death the correct way?

Michelle Sagal explores Achilles' character in depth in The Iliad by Homer, particularly the scene where Achilles killed Hector, his rival in war.

Michelle Sagal



In most literary works we are presented with a morally righteous hero whose purpose is to save and help people. In order to maintain balance within the story, there is also typically a villain who is evil and has the opposite objective of the hero. Instead of having characters that are righteous and evil, what if we were introduced to a character who is not fully wicked or righteous?

This is primarily what we see with Achilles, the main character of The Iliad by Homer. The most accurate way of describing Achilles is morally ambiguous: not fully honorable yet not malicious, instead falling somewhere between these two. Towards the end of the story, we see Achilles make a decision that determines the rest of the war. From a Kantian point of view his decision was morally just, even with the problems that stemmed from it. On the contrary, from a utilitarian point of view this was the wrong decision, bringing about uneasiness throughout society. With both philosophies being polar opposites, it’s rather difficult to choose which is correct. However, the Kantian theory ultimately overpowers the utilitarian theory since it was the most “morally correct” way of handling the situation. Achilles treated Hector the way a human should be treated, not just as a means to an end, which is what the utilitarian theory proposed.

The Iliad takes place during the Trojan War between the Achaeans and the Trojans, with Achilles and Hector being the two main fighters on either side, respectively. Throughout the story, Achilles makes a number of morally ambiguous decisions, with the biggest example being how he handled Hector's death. Achilles killing Hector seemed to kickstart the beginning of the end of the war, with the Achaeans steadily winning. Up until now, they’ve taken complete control of Troy and all they needed to win the war was to finally kill Hector, Troy's strongest warrior. Achilles, overtaken by anger and pride, ties his dead body to a chariot and parades it around town for all of his people to see in a very inhumane manner. Hector's father, King Priam, speaks to Achilles and tries to reason with him in an attempt to give his son a proper burial. Achilles, recognizing the significance of allowing the Trojans to pay their respects to their fallen hero, willingly returns the body. Additionally, as a mark of respect, he grants the Trojans an 11-day period of mourning during which the Achaeans agree to cease their attacks. While some may view this decision as a morally righteous one, others may argue that it poses practical challenges, as the Achaeans are in the final stages of the war and must press on to claim victory.

Utilitarianism is a moral theory in which the basis of a decision should be placed on how much overall happiness it provides. “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals “utility” or the “greatest happiness principle” holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (Mill 7). Throughout their lives, most of the actions people take are in accordance with their own happiness and wellbeing. The concept of utilitarianism limits that, so the results of an action would not only grant happiness to the person who does the action, but also to the greater community. Another key principle seen in utilitarianism is the intensity and duration at which happiness is produced. If the amount of happiness produced has intense and long-lasting consequences, then it is the correct decision. For example, a woman shoplifting a purse that she really wanted but could not afford grants herself happiness, but overall it grants more people the opposite. The shop owner loses money, which in turn grants unhappiness to him and his family, who he supports. Despite the momentary joy that the action may have brought to the woman, its consequences have resulted in greater unhappiness for the shop owner and his family. The net effect of this action is an increase in overall suffering. Furthermore, the long-lasting nature of the shop owner's anguish, which contrasts with the woman's brief pleasure, amplifies the severity of the situation. Consequently, applying the utilitarian ethical framework, the action in question can be deemed ethically flawed as it generates more unhappiness and causes more lasting harm to the affected parties.

Achilles' decision to pause the war and allow King Priam to mourn his son can be viewed as morally correct, but from a utilitarian standpoint, it could be seen as wrong. With the Achaeans on the brink of victory, the decision to halt the battle for over a week undoubtedly prolonged the war, resulting in greater unhappiness for the majority of the population. The intense dissatisfaction that was felt among the Achaeans is understandable, as they had been fighting this brutal war for an extended period and many of them yearned for it to end. With a large numerical advantage over the Trojans, the decision to delay the war only served to exacerbate their misery. While Achilles' actions may have been justifiable in terms of morality, they resulted in a negative outcome from a utilitarian perspective.

The Kantian moral theory is of a different viewpoint however, with Kant stating, “To act morally is to act from no other motive than the motive of doing what is right.” (Kant 150). In order to act righteously, it is essential to adhere to a moral code, even if doing so goes against one's own happiness. Kant's two formulations of categorical imperative provide valuable guidance in this regard. The first formulation, "Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should become a universal law" (Kant 155), stresses the importance of acting in a way that is universally acceptable. Actions such as lying, stealing, and killing are universally recognized as immoral, and it is crucial to treat others as one would like to be treated. This mindset helps individuals make ethical decisions, as they would not want to experience the negative consequences of such actions themselves. The second formulation, "For all rational beings come under the law that each of them must treat itself and all others never merely as means, but in every case at the same time as ends in themselves" (Kant 159), emphasizes the significance of showing respect and treating others with dignity. It is essential to recognize people as having inherent moral value, rather than just as a means to achieving one's own desires. Treating people as objects and manipulating them for personal gain is immoral and should be avoided.


In this case, Achilles's decision to pause the war to allow Hector's family and community time to grieve was a morally just decision. Proper burials were highly valued in Greek culture, especially for noble fighters and prominent figures in the community. By disrespecting Hector's body and using it as a mere resource for his own glory, Achilles acted immorally. However, returning Hector to King Priam and giving the Trojans time to mourn, although it did not fully excuse Achilles's actions, was a display of moral righteousness. Despite the negative consequences that pausing the war had for him and his army, Achilles demonstrated respect and humanity by treating Hector's body with dignity. This aligns with Kant's second formulation, which emphasizes the importance of treating people as ends in themselves and not merely as a means to an end. Furthermore, by following the Golden Rule (Kant's first formulation), Achilles made the right decision, as he would not want his body separated from his family if the roles were reversed. In conclusion, according to Kant's philosophy, Achilles ultimately made the correct decision by showing moral righteousness and treating others as he would want to be treated.

In this particular case, the Utilitarian and Kantian moral theories contradict each other. When considering the Utilitarian theory, Achilles’s decision seems to be the incorrect one. On the other hand, the Kantian theory states that Achilles’s decision was morally righteous and ultimately the correct one. Utilitarian theory mostly considers what will benefit the greater part of the community, disregarding what is morally just and instead valuing what will have the most reasonable outcome. In most cases, treating an important decision with practicality makes sense and has the best outcome. However, in this case it does exactly the opposite. While it may seem logical for Achilles to completely disregard Hector and swiftly end the long and brutal war, such an action would be highly immoral. From a Kantian perspective, Achilles made the right decision to grant Hector's family and community time to mourn. By doing so, he upheld the dignity and worth of humanity, which is a fundamental aspect of Kant's philosophy. If Achilles had failed to provide Hector's family and community with the opportunity to mourn, he would have done a great disservice to humanity and disrespected not only Hector, but the entire Trojan community as well.


While the utilitarian theory may prioritize practicality and what is most beneficial, it neglects the importance of morality in decision making. Morality is a significant factor in human behavior, and living life purely based on reason can lead to a lack of humanity and disregard for the worth of others. Treating people as mere means to an end is not a sustainable way to live, as humanity is necessary for a functioning and healthy society. Without compassion and empathy, life would be devoid of any true meaning or purpose, and we would be left with a dull and robotic existence.


What defines someone as a hero or villain: the actions they take or the outcomes they produce? In The Iliad, Achilles makes questionable decisions, but we must consider the moral complexities of war. After Hector's death, Achilles disrespects his body, but ultimately allows for proper burial, despite the potential negative impact on the war effort. Utilitarianism would view Achilles' decision as wrong, as it causes more unhappiness than happiness. However, a Kantian perspective highlights Achilles' heroism in treating Hector as a fellow human, deserving of respect and dignity in death. Ultimately, treating people with universal respect takes precedence over utilitarian reasoning.


References


1. Kant, Immanuel. “Good Will, Duty, and the Categorical Imperative.” Virtue and Vice in

Everyday Life: Introductory Readings in Ethics, edited by Christina Sommers and Fred Sommers, 3rd edition, Harcourt Brace, 1993, pp. 149 – 159.

2. Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism, edited by George Sher, 2nd edition, Hackett, 2001.


Comments


bottom of page