|
Such is the account given by the Egyptian priests, and I am myself
inclined to regard as true all that they say of Helen from the
following considerations: If Helen had been at Troy, the
inhabitants would, I think, have given her up to the Greeks,
whether Alexander consented to it or no. For surely neither Priam,
nor his family, could have been so infatuated as to endanger their own
persons, their children, and their city, merely that Alexander might
possess Helen. At any rate, if they determined to refuse at first,
yet afterwards when so many of the Trojans fell on every encounter with
the Greeks, and Priam too in each battle lost a son, or sometimes
two, or three, or even more, if we may credit the epic poets, I do
not believe that even if Priam himself had been married to her he would
have declined to deliver her up, with the view of bringing the series
of calamities to a close. Nor was it as if Alexander had been heir to
the crown, in which case he might have had the chief management of
affairs, since Priam was already old. Hector, who was his elder
brother, and a far braver man, stood before him, and was the heir to
the kingdom on the death of their father Priam. And it could not be
Hector's interest to uphold his brother in his wrong, when it brought
such dire calamities upon himself and the other Trojans. But the fact
was that they had no Helen to deliver, and so they told the Greeks,
but the Greeks would not believe what they said - Divine
Providence, as I think, so willing, that by their utter destruction
it might be made evident to all men that when great wrongs are done,
the gods will surely visit them with great punishments. Such, at
least, is my view of the matter.
|
|