Annux, Arthur, and Old Testament politics
Jun. 28th, 2009 01:37 pmSo, I feel slightly embarrassed for putting up three posts in a row, but what the heck - it's the weekend, and I have burning questions! (Or at least itchy ones.)
I'm fascinated by this concept of Annux - and Gen's apparent destiny as king of kings - and I'm trying to align it with a particular historical or mythical inspiration. Classical Greece, if I'm remembering my very weak ancient history correctly, was a collection of city states without one uniting leader, right? We do have uniting conquerors - like Alexander and Julius Caesar (once Rome appears on the stage), but in the particular case of Eugenides, this doesn't seem like a good parallel. Eddis, Sounis, and Attolia need unity to keep out the invading power; those men kind of were the invading power; Gen's destiny is (apparently) to become high king of only a particular set of countries and strictly for those countries' good, not because he's completely bent on achieving power.
What it actually reminds me most of is the British legend about the coming of Arthur, where he becomes high king in Britain, not because he has a bigger army than everyone else but because he's destined to be. Being a Victorianist, I depend rather heavily on Tennyson for my opinions and information about Arthurian legend, so indulge me for a second here:
For many a petty king ere Arthur came
Ruled in this isle, and ever waging war
Each upon other, wasted all the land;
And still from time to time the heathen host
Swarm'd overseas, and harried what was left
....
And after these King Arthur for a space,
And thro' the puissance of his Table Round,
Drew all their petty princedoms under him,
Their king and head, and made a realm, and reign'd. (Idylls 1: 5-9, 16-19)
Isn't that a pretty good description of what has happened and what will (hopefully) happen in E/S/A?
The other comparison I thought of was the ancient tribes of Israel, who were being harried by other people's and demanded a king to lead them into battle. Saul, the first king, is something like Gen in that he was more or less dragged into it kicking and screaming - when the time came for him to be presented to all the people, he tried to hide in the baggage.
So, thoughts? Additions to my scanty historical knowledge?
I'm fascinated by this concept of Annux - and Gen's apparent destiny as king of kings - and I'm trying to align it with a particular historical or mythical inspiration. Classical Greece, if I'm remembering my very weak ancient history correctly, was a collection of city states without one uniting leader, right? We do have uniting conquerors - like Alexander and Julius Caesar (once Rome appears on the stage), but in the particular case of Eugenides, this doesn't seem like a good parallel. Eddis, Sounis, and Attolia need unity to keep out the invading power; those men kind of were the invading power; Gen's destiny is (apparently) to become high king of only a particular set of countries and strictly for those countries' good, not because he's completely bent on achieving power.
What it actually reminds me most of is the British legend about the coming of Arthur, where he becomes high king in Britain, not because he has a bigger army than everyone else but because he's destined to be. Being a Victorianist, I depend rather heavily on Tennyson for my opinions and information about Arthurian legend, so indulge me for a second here:
For many a petty king ere Arthur came
Ruled in this isle, and ever waging war
Each upon other, wasted all the land;
And still from time to time the heathen host
Swarm'd overseas, and harried what was left
....
And after these King Arthur for a space,
And thro' the puissance of his Table Round,
Drew all their petty princedoms under him,
Their king and head, and made a realm, and reign'd. (Idylls 1: 5-9, 16-19)
Isn't that a pretty good description of what has happened and what will (hopefully) happen in E/S/A?
The other comparison I thought of was the ancient tribes of Israel, who were being harried by other people's and demanded a king to lead them into battle. Saul, the first king, is something like Gen in that he was more or less dragged into it kicking and screaming - when the time came for him to be presented to all the people, he tried to hide in the baggage.
So, thoughts? Additions to my scanty historical knowledge?
no subject
Date: 6/28/09 08:51 pm (UTC)Arthur, et.al.
Of course, the Tennysonian model is, I think, much more akin to what is happening in E/S/A., although of course MWT is an original and direct parallels just don't work.
I agree with you that the Greek city state system is not an adequate model. Nor is the analogy of the tribes of Israel exact, if only because they were much more closely related to each other and essentially in agreement with each other to begin with.
A thought I had, not as clever or attuned as the Arthurian legend, was of the Allied powers before and during WWII. These were separate, disparate countries having to come together, many of them quite reluctantly, to fight one or more common enemies/invaders. Some resisted on their own, some were overcome, but ultimately they united under a single military leader and a committee (of three) of political leaders. The single military leader had to quite forcefully bring his allies to heel, to conquer egos and politics and then to bring out the best plans from all, prior to even beginning to address the problems of overcoming the enemies from without.
Anyway, Philippas, I very much enjoy your posts and look forward to reading more clever ideas and analogies from you.
no subject
Date: 6/28/09 11:46 pm (UTC)And Alcibiades is lovely.
no subject
Date: 6/28/09 11:46 pm (UTC)Poor Saul: he was chosen for a job he wasn't quite able to do and he took his eye off the ball. Gen wouldn't do that. In fact, in that situation Gen would be the best choice for a leader: he's sneaky enough to win any way he can. That's one reason I love him so much!
another thing about Israel
Date: 6/29/09 12:22 am (UTC)I guess this won't mean much if you're not a follower of Judaism or Christianity, but anyway: according to the Bible, God wasn't too happy with Israel's desire for a king. It was more a lack of faith on their part than a real need for a king.
no subject
Date: 6/29/09 12:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/29/09 12:44 am (UTC)I always got the impression that Gen is more along the lines of David in the sense that the gods are rooting for him and setting it up for him to be king. :-)
no subject
Date: 6/29/09 12:49 am (UTC)Although if memory serves me right there was this incident in which he disobeyed God's orders. And he was quite jealous of David who everyone loved after the defeat of Goliath. He tried to get David killed once or twice.
So there, since you pretty much summed up everything I thought I'd just put some more of Saul's story in. Just some Biblical and historical discussion. With all the historical knowledge you possess you should go to history_haven, I know it was suggested before but I thought I should say it again to make sure you are properly encouraged.
Re: Arthur, et.al.
Date: 6/29/09 12:58 am (UTC)That was an interesting point about the Allies in WW2. I realized that although I have miscellaneous collection of knowledge about that war, the politics of the American military supervision is something I actually know nothing about. Anyway, it's a much more modern example, and interesting to think about, particularly since issues of empire have become so fraught in the last century and especially recent decades.
no subject
Date: 6/29/09 12:58 am (UTC)I'm sorry, I didn't make it clear enough that I don't think Gen is like Saul (though I do feel sorry for Saul, promoted above his level of competence!)
no subject
Date: 6/29/09 01:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/29/09 01:05 am (UTC)It will be extremely interesting to watch how Gen's relationship with the gods develops as he rises to greater levels of power.
no subject
Date: 6/29/09 12:57 pm (UTC)At some point a little while ago I started thinking of Alcibiades as the Gen of Athens (disrespectful, very powerful but very odd) and now I'd love to see more comparisons.
Re: another thing about Israel
Date: 6/29/09 08:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/29/09 08:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/29/09 08:12 pm (UTC)(A painting of the happy event can be found here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_Roman_Emperor_AD41_detail1byAlmaTadema1871.jpg)
Claudius had a definite cruel streak (seems like most Roman emporers did) but he did bring some much-needed stability to Rome and managed Rome's client kingdoms pretty well. Like Eugenides, he might have been able to use people's underestimation of him to his own advantage.
For more information: http://www.roman-emperors.org/claudius.htm
Re: another thing about Israel
Date: 6/29/09 09:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/29/09 09:39 pm (UTC)Except to stir things up in court, of course.
no subject
Date: 6/30/09 12:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/30/09 11:47 am (UTC):DD
no subject
Date: 6/30/09 04:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 7/1/09 08:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 7/1/09 08:36 am (UTC)Re: another thing about Israel
Date: 7/1/09 08:39 pm (UTC)Re: another thing about Israel
Date: 7/1/09 08:54 pm (UTC)Re: another thing about Israel
Date: 7/3/09 07:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 7/6/09 08:10 pm (UTC)