In the United States of America, whenever a crime is committed, there is a call for justice. Criminals are placed in prison, parole, and in heinous crimes capital punishment can be administered as sentence. It gives the victim and those affected closure, a sense of relief, justice.
The same concept is applied in The Aeneid.
"Decked in the spoils you stripped from one I loved - escaped my clutches? Never - Pallas strikes this blow, Pallas sacrifices you now, makes you pay the price with your own guilty blood!" said Aeneas as he drove his sword into his enemy's heart, effectively killing him. It's been stated by many that Aeneas should not have killed Turnus; he should have given compassion to his enemy. Revenge is not a motive that should give reason to kill. I agree wholeheartedly that revenge should not be the reason any type of action is performed.
I do believe, though, that justice is a motive worthy of Aeneas's actions.
In book ten of The Aeneid, Pallas is killed by Turnus during battle. And while this may seem fine as war was occurring, it is what Turnus does that evokes the right of passage for justice. He never gave Pallas the same mercy that he later begged Aeneas for. He could have killed him in a clean and proper manner. He did neither. Turnus "stomped his left foot on the corpse and stripped away the sword-belt's massive weight engraved with its monstrous crime . . . " He shouted insults to Pallas's father. "You Arcadians, listen! Take a message home to Evander, tell him this: The Pallas I send him back will serve him right! Whatever tribute a tomb can give, whatever balm a burial, I am only too glad to give. But the welcome he gave Aeneas costs him dear."
Turnus committed a terrible act, and he was proud of his latest kill!
When Aeneas had defeated Turnus, he was prepared to give the fallen hero the mercy he so begged for - the same mercy he did not give to Pallas. And then he caught sight of the "fateful sword-belt of Pallas, swept over Turnus's shoulder, gleaming with shining studs Aeneas knew by heart. Young Pallas, whom Turnus had overpowered, taken down with a wound, and now his shoulder flaunted his enemy's battle-emblem like a trophy." It was then that this became an act of justice for Aeneas. He refuses to give mercy to Turnus as Turnus had refused to give mercy to Pallas. So, in justice did Aeneas kill Turnus.
Killing Turnus may have been - in part - revenge, though it was justified in the case of Pallas. Aeneas's words state that he did not strike the blow, but Pallas had. It was Pallas who delivered the final blow that ended Turnus's life. By killing Turnus, Pallas was given the justice he so deserved.
Interesting topic, but some of your statements contradict themselves. You stated that "revenge is not a motive that should give reason to kill," but then claim that Aeneas' revenge towards Turnus was justified. So should Turnus have been killed or shouldn't he? Was this justice or revenge? Both? If it was justice, then wouldn't Turnus' death have been enough to clear the slate for Pallas' vulgar death? Aeneas sought revenge on every opposing head he encountered. How does this play into the courts of justice? Then there's the factor of the Fates. Apparently, according to Virgil, Turnus had to be killed in order for Rome to be established. How does this play into HIS idea of justice versus revenge? This seems to be a fairly controversial topic. I'd like to hear more. Maybe an idea for your final essay???
ReplyDelete