The Source of Pain in a World of Hurt: an Augustinian Analysis

It only takes only a few moments of careless inspection to see it. It has existed since the beginning of time. It is what binds all humans together yet creates distinct and distasteful boundaries under which we are repelled from one another. The universal topic of philosophical thought; ubiquitous in all questions. No matter what set of beliefs one holds, there is one thing to be sure, and perhaps one of the only things: the world we exist in doesn’t function properly. In Augustinian terms, “evil” certainly does exist in our world. Religion and philosophy alike try to put reason behind why the world is corrupted and how we can understand this corruption, since that is the only experience we hold. If there was something as ideal goodness, we could not comprehend it considering we have no comparison, having only experienced a less-than-good world. Augustine explains in his Confessions the reason behind our fallen world; why there is the concept of evil. He says that God, who is a perfect being, created man and the world, also perfect. However, when sin contaminated the world, it created a string of improper relationships in the world, that is things interacting contrary to how God intended them to. As Christians, our goal is to come back to the proper relation we had with God and creation before sin entered the world. Augustine sees the relationship between Creator and Creation after the Fall as a complex mixture of the original good God intended and the sin-contaminated interactions between them.

The first aspect to look at when dealing with the problem of evil is establishing what evil is to begin with, where did it come from, and so on. Again, this is an onslaught of philosophical problems and abstract terms. Augustine, however, quite clearly defines evil in the context of good, reaching his definition through several logical steps. First he notes that God created all things, and everything he created was good. Since we understand evil to be, perhaps, the polar opposite of good, it therefore cannot be a ‘thing’ at all, otherwise God put evil in the world, contradicting the first two premises. The next questions that Augustine follows with is, “Where, then, is Evil...?” (Bk. VII, 5.7). Augustine argues that evil is not material at all, nor is good. Rather both are entities that exist in the essence and context of material, that is how material is used. The articulation of evil is solely based on the quantity of good within the material, evil then, being a relative term. 

This concept may be hard to comprehend, however, the nature of light and darkness effectively communicates the parallel nature of good and evil. Light and darkness, both being non-physical, in a tangible sense, are yet detectible entities and exist under human visual senses, yet are invisible to all of our other senses. In a similar way, humans can detect good and evil, perhaps not through any neurological sense, but rather a moral sensory device, noted by no scientific evidence. Also, darkness cannot exist without the acknowledgement of light and vice-versa. Yet darkness only can exist without light, or is defined by “the absence of light”. Evil also exists in the absence of good, being defined in Augustine’s words as “...evil is nothing but the diminishment of good to the point where nothing at all is left” (Bk. VII 7.12). 

Augustine, desperate for answers to the problem of evil in our material world then asks, “...where does it come from and how does it creep in?” (Bk. VII, 5.7). Surely evil though it may not be a ‘thing’, stems from absolutely no root. To properly consider evil’s true origin, Augustine traces it back to its birth: the Fall. He notes how the Fall was again, not begun by any evil object, for everything God created in the Garden was truly good, but rather the Serpent’s persuasion and the choice man was given.  After pondering the mysteries of the Fall, and how humanity became imperfect beings influenced by evil he sources “...the cause of evil is the free decision of our will...”(Bk. VII, 5). It is not the actions themselves not the results they may cause that are evil, for they are only the victims of human defected will (the term voluntarius defectus is used in Ch. IV of Augustine’s Enchiridion). Humans have corrupted will in that they do not submit in obedience to the higher power who created them as they were designed. Instead, we exist in a state of constant rebellion to a force that we can and will never overcome.

Now that the source of evil is identified, it is for man to determine where good is and to align himself accordingly with it. In order to understand how Augustine would determine this. Firstly, goodness should be understood in Augustine’s terms, the way to goodness is the same way to Truth. Augustine considers goodness is a mere stem of Truth, and Truth is parallel with God. Therefore, all good things, or all things, have elements of Truth, but not all of Truth exists within each individual thing. This is a gateway to whole other philosophical study, that being the pursuit of Truth, but also drives Augustine’s audience to inquire what the essence of man is and how man can extract goodness from a fallen world. Augustine’s understanding of philosophical ideas and general Epistemology moves from a Manichean ideology to a Neo-Platonist’s perspective in the context of Christianity. A Manichee sees the world as fallen as well, but not by mere defected will, but everything in it being evil. Augustine’s language strongly reflects his distaste of this idea, provided that at the time of writing he believes all Creation to be good. After abandoning Manicheism, Augustine’s post conversion philosophy shows quite strong Platonic sympathies. In reference to Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, Augustine explains the nature of reality. The key to understanding Augustinian Epistemology and how Augustine views the material world is in understanding the Platonic concepts demonstrated in the Allegory of the Cave. 

Through Plato’s ideas, Augustine accounts for reality among the material we live in. He highlights the points of the Allegory of the Cave, creating a parallel to a Christian theology. Here, Augustine sets a Platonic standard that is closely kept throughout the Medieval and Renaissance Church, as can be seen later in the writings of Thomas Aquinas and Dante Alighieri. The significance of Plato’s influence on the Church through Augustine during this time period is key to understanding the shifts the church went through at this time. In the Allegory of the Cave, men are bound to face a wall of shadows, imitations of their true forms. These shadows, while they are not as “real”, or in Augustinian terms as “good”, as the original true form, they reflect parts of it, and thus are not the ‘unreal’ or ‘evil’, but rather they are faded forms. In Augustine’s terms, these imitating forms that we interact with on earth are considered to be “the lowest kinds of goods”(Bk. II, 5,10). The prisoners chained to the wall of the cave, having only been taught that they shadows they see are true, in Augustine’s words “turn away from the better and higher [goods]” (Bk. II, 5,10). However, due to our lack of contact with the greater goods, we are unable to understand the scale of goodness and “these lowest goods hold delights for us indeed” (Bk. II, 5,10).  Humans confuse the lesser goods, which we desire because of the aspects within it pointing toward the greater goods, with the greater goods themselves. Or in Plato’s terms, the prisoner finds beauty and truth within the shadows cast upon the wall because they see part of the beauty and truth in the shadows that exist in the world outside. Augustine says that men “distort Truth into a lie and worship and serve the creature instead of the creator”(Bk. V, 5).

Even though the world that exists around us is good to some extent, it surely cannot be the only means by which we perceive true goodness. Trying to understand Truth through material is as difficult as trying to fully imagine a painting with only exposure to a square inch of it. The often conflicting free-wills of humans who attempt coexistence in the world are indeed corrupt (as men naturally are), and we are to “shape ourselves no longer to the standards of this world, but rather restrain ourselves from it”(Bk. XIII, 30), noting that we should not isolate ourselves from it. If we were meant to completely isolate ourselves from the world, we would have no sensual access to God’s goodness through his Creation. Since we are human, we have a great deal of reliance of the material, rational experience, because we have become “servants of reason”(Bk. XII, 31). God’s encouragement to retain a degree of contact with the world is evident in the reincarnation of Christ, which otherwise would’ve been completely pointless. If we were to rely solely on irrational faith, then we would’ve never been created into physical existence in his Creation to begin with. God very specifically intended the physical, material world we live in and created us to be rational beings to understand the material around us. Since we understand truth in a rational way, he sent Christ as a means of sensual and rational connection. Had we been created to only account for God on a rational level, the miracles Jesus performed would have been only a mystery and the breath of God amid the world would be nonexistent and invisible. It is in our individual lives we are to account for both God’s rational, through the material world, and irrational, through faith, communication and decide how we will control our loose free will.

     Augustine demonstrates through the Confessions the complex relationship between God, man, and the world. He presents God as being the innate-known ideal goal after whom man pursues, all men having a desire for Truth and an understanding of evil. The Platonic forms he refers to reflects the nature of God and how the world appears good to us. It is through the material world that we were designed to know God. However, through our defected will, we deny God’s superiority and often live our lives in futile disobedience. This corruption is evil and therefore, we confuse the world, the means by which we reach the goal, with the goal itself, creating an ambiguous journey for man which God actively tries to clarify through the events in our lives.

Beowulf Pastiche

So it was fate that had brought Grendel down

and future-cast at work in man’s victory.

But the hell homed demon was not alone and the only

a victim of fate for all are given such an affliction

as breath-cease serves both the hero and the horn rigged monster.

Soon it will be our hero’s duty and turn to submit to death;

forced by fate to give up glorious victory.

The warrior who breathes heavily one morn

will only rot in the earth the rest, reason to their notorious names “earth-dwellers”,

men and women descend to the very dust-slime they ascend from.

What great shield-clash there must be between mortals

two warriors fight to enjoy life’s honey-taste for a while longer,

they only postpone a day doomed to come, pointless to avoid.

In a battle’s fierce-cry frenzy any man may believe, even if for a moment

he is beyond the long-grasp of fate, an immortal god.

Almighty God surely determines who dies and lives,

who takes a seat in victory or stands in shameful loss,

a man’s worth is only determined after gracious God determines his end.

Vengeance is justice-made mourning, an exchange considered:

blood for tears, blades for pyres, war-galleys for burial ships.

Man’s fate must play out, it must eventually bring him to breath-cease,

vengeance troubles the wicked wyrd, tears only fulfill its desire.

Each glorious victory only means the earth-dweller one thing,

a glorious death escaped once is a humiliating death to be expected.

Beowulf Response Question: Warrior Code

What evidence do you see in the Beowulf poem regarding the presence of a "warrior code"? How would you describe that code? Which characters do you see exemplifying this code (give textual evidence) and which characters do you see breaking this code?

The warrior code in Beowulf can be articulated in a few common and significant virtues. I have picked up on courage and bravery as two major virtues expected of the warrior. Also the warrior is expected to be loyal to figure in leadership and understand his fate determined by following the other virtues. These traits are demonstrated in the battle scene between Beowulf and his men and Grendle in the mead hall. Prior to the fight, Beowulf promises the lady Wealhtheow that he "shall fulfil that purpose, prove [him]self with a proud deed or meet [his] death in the mead-hall." (l. 636-639). This shows that Beowulf holds fast to a standard of loyalty and bravery in facing Grendle. Beowulf's bravery and courage is again exemplified when Beowulf removes his armour to fight Grendle. Unferth, holding the opposite values to Beowulf, seems to disregard this code completely. The characteristics shown through Beowulf's actions reflect the general standards of the warrior in the poet's culture.

Seamus Heaneyʼs Introduction and Notes on the Translation Discussion

1. Consider Heaneyʼs comment, “...the poem possesses a mythic potency” (Introduction, xii). Based on your reading of his introduction what do you think Heaney means by this phrase? What is “mythic potency”? Do you agree with Heaney?

I think one heavy implication Heaney makes with describing Beowulf with potency due to its mythological nature is that mythology itself has an advantage over more realistic styles of literature. Mythology allows two human characteristics to flourish within the literature: creativity (or imagination) and belief. 
Creativity and imagination, both on part of the author and the audience allows for a much more eccentric form of a story arise without completely distorting the events that happened. The poet of Beowulf accounts for the intersection of the histories of the Geats and the Danes. In reality, their encounter probably was more like two parties of neanderthalic peoples meeting together in harmony, exchanging bear pelts for roast venison. However, this tale lacks a certain excitement for poetry and retelling. The mythology behind Beowulf contributes to its longevity through oral tradition.
The poet, understanding the culture in which he was writing well, is well acquainted with the norse mythology. By using and referencing this mythology in his work, he escapes excessive side-stories and superfluous background information. Beowulf and norse mythology work in synergy, both supporting and further exemplifying each other. The intended audience not only understands the story, but also believes it, looking to it as source of moral code. For the modern reader, it is not quite as easy to relate to it, forcing the reader to be even more aware of this factor.

SWB's History of the Medieval World: Chapter 16 Response Question

5. What was the "Robber Council"? What was the result of the Robber Council?

The Robber Council was a sudden church council that took place in Ephesus in 449 AD. Dioscorus, the bishop of Alexandria at the time, called this for one major reason: to climb the political and religious ladders of power in the Christian world. His main competor, Leo, bishop of Rome, differed on one theological idea, Dioscorus used this to try to turn other religious figures against him. Both Leo and Dioscorus believe in "Monophysitism", the idea that God and Christ were of one nature, being both divine and human. Dioscorus, however, believes in a more extreme version which also says that Christ was of two natures until the moment of incarnation, strongly implying that Christ was not as much human as he was God. This view is considered common heresy at this time. By calling this council, Dioscorus tries to convince as many religious leaders as he could to condemn Leo's version of Monophysitism, and promoting his own as orthodoxy. He went as far as to pressure these various religious figures to sign blank pages, filling in the theological agreements retrospectively. For these reasons, this "council" was termed the Robber Council, also called Latrocinium, due to its deceptive nature, and his council then, is considered illegitimate. This leads to a trail of liberal excommunications, starting with Dioscorus, enraged by his council being deemed illegitimate. He tries to excommunicate both the bishops of Constantinople and Rome, another final attempt to transfer power to his own seat in Alexandria. As these harsh internal struggles play out, these cities receivied many threats from the Huns externally. 

Augustine's City of God: Book I Chapter 19 Summary and Reflection

Augustine speaks about the justification of a rape victim's innocence prior to Chapter 19 and continues to that of suicide shortly following it. In Chapter 19, he uses Lucretia as an example of a suicide because of the shame she felt caused by rape, also serving as a bridge between these two heavy topics. 
Augustine had already established that in the case of rape, in definition, "involves no blame to the sufferer"(Bk.1, Ch. 16). However in the case of Lucretia's rape, it is commonly contested among literary scholars of antiquity whether it provided her some degree of pleasure to which she submitted to her perpetrator's actions or was a genuine act of resistance on her part, and thus considered rape through and through. This then leads to the question of the justification of her suicide. Was the shame that drove her to suicide derived from her submission, and even perhaps, enjoyment of her "rape", or from the humiliation of being raped? Had she submitted, being overwhelmed by sensual experiences and therefore found a degree of pleasure in it, her suicide would have been a self-inflicted capital punishment. This might seem like a good justification, however, Augustine argues that capital punishment in solely reserved for a position of governmental authority. If it were of only humiliation, her suicide would be considered murder of one's self, and biblically considered a sin. As far as the innocence of her rape, Augustine once again cites this to her deepest and genuine intentions and motives. Was she raped due to submission of the senses, or was it due to her body being physically unable to resist? Augustine finds no guilt in the act of being raped, assuming it was true rape and no physical nor mental submission was given, only God can determine this. But suicide on the other hand, is no morally correct answer to anything.
As this relates to the City of God, Augustine is making the direct connection between Lucretia's body and the city of Rome. He notes that it is not fault of Rome that it was invaded, nor was it a divine punishment. Rome was simply a victim of man's greed and lust for domination, as Lucretia was for King Tarquin's son's lust.

Augustine's Confessions: Book X Response Questions

6. What does Augustine tell us in book X that helps us understand the structure of the Confessions as a whole, including the non--narrative books?

Books I-IX serve as the narrative of his life describing the events leading to his conversion. In book X however, Augustine justifies the validity of this narrative through the power of narrative as he compels the audience to reexperience the events of his past with him in order to further understand the relationship between man and God. Memory, Augustine claims in book X, is the mode of recalling events and reexpereicing the feeling and senses that came with it. Doing this in Augustine's life allows him to analise the difference between his human-centered motives prior to his conversion compared with his God-filled attitude after it. The change Augustine observes, which he clearly points out to his audience, was extremely provocative in explaining the relationship between man and God, using his Memory to employ himself as a humble example. Reading Augustine May cause some Christians some spiritually nostalgic feelings in recalling their personal experiences after reading Augustine's.

Augustine's Confessions: Book IX Response Question

2. What can we infer about Augustine as a father from what he tells us about his son in this book?

Although Augustine is shamed by the circumstances under which Adeodatus was born, he still shows immense love toward his child and vast grief at his death. In Book IX, Augustine must not only cope with the death of his son, but also his mother. Augustine's relationship with his son was filled with respect and companionship. He describes his own spiritual maturity being at a similar level with that of his son's. They were both baptised together and had very similar timing in their spiritual growth. The parallel nature of their lives comes to a disruptive stop at Adeodatus's untimely death, and Augustine loses not only his son, but also a spiritual companion.

Augustine's Confessions: Book 8 Question Response

2. How is the conversion of Victorinus, told in this book,  a model for Augustine's own conversion?

Augustine's conversion reflects that of Victorinus in that there was a transitional distinction between being nominally christian and real salvation. For Victorinus, he considered himself a "christian", yet he still revelled and associated in the pagan rituals of Rome, popular among his friends. One of Victorinus's true Christian friends confronted him of his duality. Later, Victorinus sees the downfall of his ways and rejects the Roman paganism completely, isolating himself from some of his friends. Augustine in a similar way saw christianity as a philosophical answer rather than a personal divine relationship. His duality was solved when he also made his official conversion to Christianity, breaking the ties with his secular friends in Rome. The duality in both Victorinus and Augustine is not tolerated at all in Christianity, where it might be tolerated in eastern religions at that time, such as Zoroastrianism, if not outrightly encouraged. Duality is even encouraged today in religions such as Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism, claiming multiple ways to Truth. However, Christianity clearly claims one way only, and in the words of Governor Danforth, "there be no road in between".

Augustine's Confessions: Book VI Response Question

3. Why does Augustine "interrupt" his narrative to tell us about how Alypius became addicted to the violence of the gladiatorial contests.

Augustine's friend Alypius is a base and prime example of the process of any kind of addiction, and therefore any form of idolatry. Augustine is not sidetracking in the slightest telling the story of Alypius. In fact, rather than "interrupting" his broader narrative, he is making a great addition, further supporting what the image of a good Christian might look like. Alypius went to a gladiatorial fight unwillingly, yet he went but only after closing his eyes for the duration of the fight. This is a great demonstration of how even when we blind ourselves to temptation and are even perfectly aware of sin's evil nature, we are still vulnerable to being completely overtaken by worldly things. Before, Augustine has given his audience personal examples, but in this instance perhaps he cannot recall or cannot relate a life event to this particular idea. Calling on Alypius's story is another kind of experience, not personal, but still quite effective.

Augustine's Confessions: Book V Response Question

2. How does Augustine's disappointment with Faustus's response to his questions further his quest for wisdom?

                                                 

Augustine begins to realise the appealing elements of the Manichean worldview, not necessarily the worldview itself being appealing. For one, he realises, as he states earlier, that the Manichees pride themselves with what they perceive as 'superior wisdom'. Augustine admits to a feeling of importance as a part of the Manichees. On another level, he begins analysing the content of Faustus, and being a great orator himself, identifies the sophistesque structure of his arguments, not backing the way he speaks with any intellectual power. The "last straw" for Augustine to reject the Manichean worldview comes when he realised that Faustus cannot support his claims by the reality in which we inhabit, and furthermore questions how he can interpret any reality if he cannot even correctly interpret the one which he experiences. This in turn leads Augustine to declare himself out of the Manichees, rejecting the ideas on which he based his reality for the past decade.

Augustine's Confessions: Book IV Response Question

3. How do Augustine's interests in astrology and the writings of Aristotle demonstrate that education is not easy and that there is no straight movement toward wisdom?

Augustine points out that the pursuit of wisdom outside of Christ is a very confusing and time-wasting act. While knowledge in the terms of man can be considered to be universally understood and agreed upon, wisdom varies across the earth as the people who populate it. Augustine retrospectively sees himself looking for philosophical Truth in those only esteemed in human knowledge. But these 'knowers' are only in contact with our physical, human world. Augustine sees the need to search for knowledge among humans, but Truth and wisdom is something of only divine possession, something we must look past humans for. Humans may be a means of being guided toward philosophical Truth, but never was/is/will be the final means of obtaining it. Education, therefore while being an appropriate means of learning, is not an effective manner to pursue Truth, considering the vast array of opinions and worldviews to select from. Had Augustine not had realised this, he very well could've spent his lifetime experimenting in every ideology known and still be able to makeup an infinite amount himself.

Augustine's Confessions Book III Discussion Question

2. What is the argument Augustine is making regarding the "moralities of countries and times" and "the most righteous law of almighty God"? What proofs does he use to support his claim? How convinced are you by his argumentation?

In section 13 of the third book, Augustine's begins to compare the nature of God's law with the human-written laws of nations. For Augustine, the main difference between the two is their flexibility and universality. Augustine notes that God's law "has remained unchanged everywhere and always" and that it is "not one thing in one place and something different elsewhere". God's law for the Jews and then for the Church has always been the same, no matter when or where. While there are aspects of universality among human law (e.g. murder, stealing, etc... are wrong) it is not wholly universal and accounts for the beginning of many human arguments. He compares the world's nations as a knight trying to fit armour to the appropriate appendages. This knight spends his time finding the correct placement of each piece of armour and what its purpose is rather than using it (correctly). Humans make righteousness seems as if it can be constantly sculpted to an ideal image, but in fact, God has already designed the perfect statue, all we must do is replicate it. I agree with Augustine as far as how flimsy human morality is, but I would give humanity a little more credit for having a reflection of universality. Even though we are corrupted by sin, I believe there is a degree of righteousness we innately know of.

Augustine's Confessions: In My Own Words

How shortsighted am I, oh God, that I am unable to foresee the plans You have before me. You whose judgement is flawless, whose precepts are more precious than the purest gold, sweeter than the honey from the honeycomb. When I reveled in the ignorance of my own humanity, You sat in silence, overlooking my stupidity, but now I am called to repent. Even though You said, oh Lord, “There is a time and a way for everything” I am called to repent to the one who shows light to man. Why is it that man is ignorant to the ways of God? For what cause is man blind to the God that looks down from heaven upon mankind? Is it according to his own folly? God what do You endlessly search for? Men with whom You are pleased? Or is it truly any man who searches for You? Oh God, how foolish was I when I searched for answers rather than You, the provider! From where does my help come? My help truly and surely comes from the Lord, maker of Heaven and Earth.

It was upon the departure from my last home, the home from which I was called away. I was Jonah in my comfortable place. But then You, oh God, called me from my place! While my heart fled toward Tarshish, You called me back into obedience, which in turn leads to righteousness, to where I considered a Ninevah. But I was not called to help, nor was I being punished, despite my current thinking. I was blinded to Your Love by my own folly! What acts You made in love, because You are Love, oh God, I interpreted as punishment. But it was certainly not for punishment that You called me. For now, I see Your goodness through You commands, the Love You abundantly poured out for me. To where You sent me, I was further able to develop as a human of You. You gave me opportunity, which I so ungratefully rejected. It was by genuine Love that You forced me into discomfort. And it was through discomfort that I was brought into understanding. 

Now God, I see the righteousness of Your ways, and I give thanks! While in my blinding ignorance I refused the gifts You so lovingly gave, I now try to express the gratitude to match the extent of Your grace! Come, mankind, and see what God has done for me, his awesome deeds he extends also to you all! But still yet, oh God, we are still blind to Your ways, and revel in the darkness of our ignorance.

Confessions Response Questions: 3. What would you say are the "moral standards of the world" according to Augustine? How do you think Augustine understands the "moral standards" of God? How and where are these standard different?

"Such were the moral standards of the world at whose threshold I lay, a wretched boy; this was the arena in which I was to struggle." (19, 30)

Augustine makes a clear distinction between the morality that we are "taught" in this world and that of God's standard. Our human morality may not be entirely separate from God's, but there is a certainly a difference to be noted. The morally righteous actions we commit on earth are only reflections of the good character we wish others to assume of us by our appearance. Augustine says that prior to his conversion he "believed that living a good life consisted in winning the favour of those who commended me." (19, 30). Implicitly, Augustine sees God's morality supported by the pure desire of good, being the omni-benevolent being He is. Perhaps the audience may make the logical bridge to say that the closer humans come to God, like through conversion, the purer their motivation of morally righteous acts is. Augustine doesn't deny a sense of 'God-like' moral standard among humans, he only condemns the selfish motivations of these standards.

Augustine's Confessions: First Impressions

Augustine presents to his audience an analysis of his life that not only deals with the events of his life not only on a factual level, as many autobiographies are constructed today, but also on a philosophical and theological level. As if this was not already interesting enough, Augustine's mode of presentation is set as a prayer. In the first book alone, we are confronted by Augustine's inquisitive nature as he asks God what it means to be a Christian and how we are, as humans, to exist with and in relation to God. I am excited to not only study Augustine biographically, but also go through the questions he asks, being those I have my self only tried to comprehend. Perhaps being quite pretentious goal, I hope by reading Augustine's Confessions, to not only have a historical education, but also to further understand Christianity and its history.

SWB's History of the Medieval World:Chapter 4 Response Question

4. How do you see that Constantine "had married Christianity and state politics and in doing so had changed both forever"?

By making Christianity the most encouraged religion of Rome, he inevitably united Church and State into a union that lasts to this day. Constantine, either in attempt to or not, made a new definition of what it meant to be 'Roman', now not only being defined by by your nationality, but also by your religion. Before Constantine's Christianity, Rome followed a branch of polytheistic paganism which in a way served as multiple religions. Those who were worshippers of Neptune were not necessarily worshippers of Jupiter and so on. This made Roman paganism very isolated from itself by nature. Christianity on the other hand cannot function like that. It is structured under a singular and omnipotent God, universally and wholly worshipped by Christians. Now in Constantine's Rome, the structured government functioned in the same way as Christianity. While the government may fund the Church in this case, the Church fuels the Roman government to be unified and omnipotent. 

SWB's History of the Medieval World- Chapter 1 Response Question

7. How, according to Wise-Bauer, did Constantine view Christianity? What evidence does she marshal to support this claim?

Bauer states that Constantine views Christianity as far much more than just his eternal salvation, but rather as a "new and fascinating way of understanding the world" (Bauer pg.7). It also ensured him an eternal seat as Emperor. By adopting Christianity as the national religion of the Roman Empire he could accomplish two things. He could unify his very racially and regionally diverse empire (having spread well into Persia and North Africa at this point) with an overarching moral law while, at the same time, he was able to retain and perhaps enhance the ideologies of the 'proper' Roman citizen. He also was able to elevate himself over the people by claiming authorisation from a divine being, distancing himself from deification as Augustus and Caesar had both done. The Edict of Milan, Bauer argues, demonstrates the action in front of motives in Constantine's brilliant chronological strategies.

Aristotle's Poetics VIII

In this book, Aristotle speaks to the Unity in a Plot. He argues that while a Plot should be well unified, it also shouldn't focus exclusively on an individual character. He praises Homer's Odyssey as a prime example of the integration of multiple character focus, as well as keeping it unified. He also says that both the characters and the events of the Plot should be well correlated and relevant to each other.

"For a thing whose presence or absence makes no visible difference, is not an organic part of the whole."

Aristotle's Poetics VII

Aristotle focusses primarily on the action in a Tragedy. The action of a Tragedy should be "complete, whole, and of a certain magnitude". This may be done by ensuring the use of a beginning, middle, and end to a story. The beginning is where there are no preceding events of pertinent importance to the Plot, and from which all events of the story follow from. The middle leads and follows other events of the story. And the end must have no following events pertinent to the Plot, and it is what all other events lead to. Also the length of the Tragedy must be set between two standards, as a Tragedy that is too long gathers much detail yet will lose the attention of the audience; a Tragedy that is too short may stick in the audience's mind, it is not able to contain many details. Therefore the Tragedy should be in a midpoint between those two points.

Aristotle's Poetics VI

Aristotle notes there are six parts to Tragedy, excluding nothing in its essence, they determine the quality of the art. In order of importance, Aristotle denotes the following:
First and foremost is the Spectacle, how the audience perceives the overall visual presentation of the Tragedy through stage and actors. Second is the Characters, the people who make up the actions in the story. Thirdly is the Plot, which is the chronology and events in the Tragedy. Fourth is the Diction, the syntax, composition and word choice of the poet, sets the tone of the Tragedy through language. Fifthly lies Song, which may be described as the embellishments and flourishes of the Tragedy. And finally sixth is the Thought of the poem, which is the intellectual and philosophical depth within the Tragedy. Combined, these aspects of Tragedy reflect a very similar approach to theatre even today.

Aristotle on Tragedy and Mimesis

Aristotle views Mimesis as an Epistemology, and a good one at that. It is a natural form of learning things, used even by small children. Not only is it natural, we find pleasure in imitation (as a form of art). We have a desire to learn; to know the unknown, and this is all by isolating the original form. Mimesis offers a way of understanding the original form of the imitation through discovery, connection, and contemplation through personal reflection.

Aristotle's definition of Tragedy (as always) isolates it from otther forms of imitation. He says that "Tragedy" is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude. It should also have a degree of artistic value, like metre or rhyme. It shouldn't, however be a narrative, only presented through action. It also forces the audience into feeling certain emotions, like pity and fear, and properly purges them.

Aristotle's Poetics V

Comedy is of lower character, not necessarily in a bad sense, but in an 'ugly' or 'misshapen' way. Like a mask, it imitates a face, but in a distorted form. Comedy has a relatively short history, as it was not respected or treated seriously in any manner, certainly not appropriate for a Dithyramb. Comedy progresses Poetry far beyond any spiritual sense and moves along into a sense of self reflection of society, similar to epic poetry. However, Epic Poetry has strict rules when it comes to metre, Comedy on the other hand has no use for these rules. Similar to Epic Poetry, Tragedy follows these rules, and in essence Epic Poems follow after Tragedy, not vice versa.

Aristotle's Poetics IV

Aristotle begins the fourth part by explaining how poetry even began. He goes on to say that imitation is a purely natural thing for humans to do, adopting it as small children and ceasing not from there. Not only is it natural, but we learn things through imitation and delight in works of imitation. What poetry does is takes this imitation to levels of rhythm, making heavy emphasis on its innate aesthetic beauty.  

Tragedy draws imitation from the parts of reality that are filled with misfortune; dramas derived from poetic Dithyrambs. He mentions that Tragedy has drastically changed from what it was in that it included far more many actors than intended due to Aeschylus and Sophocles' innovations. Also the metre changed from a satyric trochaic tetrametre to simplistic iambic hexametre. The iambic stanzas are far too similar to how people normally speak to be very aesthetic. His final complaint is how long and how many acts the plays contain, granted details are important. 

Aristotle's Poetics II and III

Aristotle in his brief second part of the Poetics describes the three different levels of agency in poetry. There are, in other words, three different ways to present a character to an audience. In relation to the 'average man' a character can be presented in a standard better or worse than us, or else the same as. He gives three examples: Homer shows his character's better, Cleophon (Athenian politician) presents them on 'our own level', and finally Hegemon of Thasos presents his character lower than a standard.

In the third part of the Poetics, Aristotle furthers his segregation of the elements to good literature/poetry. He points out that there are three ways to deliver the story and go as follows:
1. A narrative with elements of monologue and dialogue mixed in. Homer often does this. The narrator and the character[s] don't necessarily need to interact, however.
2. The poem remains in one voice for its entirety, certainly no dialogue is allowed here. 
3. In this form, dialogue is superfluos, and the events of the story are 'acted' out. What we   call now 'playwrights' would fall under this category.

Aristotle's Poetics I

In this part of the Poetics, Aristotle begins by defining what poetry is. He notes that there are four genres of poetry that may be written in three 'styles'. The four genres that Aristotle notes are epic poetry, comedy, tragedy, and Dithyrambs. Each of these can differ however in that they can be expressed through these three ways: the medium, the objects, or the mode of imitation. These make up what poetry is, and how it can be expressed as an art form. Another aspect of poetry Aristotle speaks of is the importance of both metre and 'harmony' in poetry. Through imitation it is important to add rhythm and metre, otherwise it cannot be considered poetry. All art however also contains elements of tune, rhythm, and metre, or else all its structure is ambiguously messy.

Summary of Aeschylus's The Libation Bearers

Greek Mosaic depicting a Libation

Agamemnon has been murdered by his own wife, Clytemnestra as soon as he returned from the Trojan War. Many feel this act is unjust, and strongly wish for Justice to be enforced, especially Agamemnon's son, Orestes. Orestes has been placed in exile by Clytemnestra for quite sometime, she claims that this was done for his own protection. Orestes, having heard about his father's murder, rushes to Agamemnon's corpse incognito to mourn. As he bitterly mourns, his sister, Electra, followed by the Chorus of enslaved Trojan women, see Orestes in disbelief. Evidently the two hadn't seen each other since they were quite young; proper identification is difficult followed by a joyous reunion. Electra discusses the nature of their father's murder and begin to plot vengeance.
Orestes plots to disguise himself as a traveler to penetrate the heavily guarded palace walls. Then as soon as he enters he kills both Aegisthus (Clytemnestra's lover) and Clytemnestra. The Chorus and the olympian Apollo support his plan, easily creating sympathy toward the two orphaned children. His plan changes, however, when Clytemnestra unexpectedly answers to disguised Orestes' knocking. To further conceal his identity, Orestes pretends to be a messenger announcing Orestes' death. Clytemnestra mourns and sends Orestes' old nurse for Aegisthus and his bodyguard to hear of the news. The Chorus convinces the nurse to just send Aegisthus alone, and so he does. Aegisthus meets Orestes off stage and is killed, his death is announced by a messenger to the audience.
Chaos breaks out in the palace, and Clytemnestra sense something is wrong, she finds Orestes by Aegisthus' corpse. It was her turn to receive Justice. Cunning Clytemnestra puts herself at Orestes' knees, begging him to remember their familial connection. He is nearly convinced to spare her life, but when one of Orestes' friends, Pylades arrives, he reminds Orestes of Apollo's will. He stabs his mother to death, in an act of Justice.
The Furies are enraged, seeing Clytemnestra's murder as an act of injustice.

The Iliad: Book XVI

Gavin Hamilton's Death of Patroclus

The Trojans have come directly up to the Greek's ships, threatening them with fire, ensuring that the Greeks will never return home. Achilles still refuses to help fight against the Trojans, heightening the chance of the Greeks demise. Patroclus, Achilles's best friend, decides to step in. He approaches Achilles's tent, offering him two options. Either Achilles returns to battle himself, or Patroclus takes Achilles's armour and fights. Achilles decides to let Patroclus take the armour under the single condition that he return once the Trojans retreated away from the ships. Patroclus agrees and heads off to battle, Achilles sending his personal warriors (Myrmidons) to accompany Patroclus. Achilles then prays to Zeus asking for both the protection of the Greek ships and his dear friend, Patroclus. Homer reveals to the audience that only one of these things Zeus could protect.

Patroclus initiates several things on the battlefield upon arrival. The Trojans are struck with fear, believing that swift-runner Achilles had returned to fight. The Greeks are also deceived into thinking this, only further boosting their dangerously low morale. Patroclus slaughters every Trojan he encounters, fighting more viciously than any other present warrior. He encounters a son of Zeus, Sarpedon, and kills him on the spot. Zeus is enraged by this act, and is ironically affected by mortal's fate; Patroclus has betrayed Zeus.

He continues through the battlefield slaughtering Trojan after Trojan, pushing them back toward the walls of Troy. Despite Achilles request for Patroclus to return to camp at this point, he continues to push. He finally reaches mighty Hector, a match for even Achilles. Hector is favoured by the gods, specifically Apollo and Zeus. Apollo strikes Patroclus from behind, causing him to fumble, and Hector throws the final spear into his abdomen. Among Patroclus's final words, he foretells the soon death of Hector. Patroclus dies, and the rage of Achilles is soon to follow.