The Children of Heracles

by Euripides

The Children of Heracles is a powerful and challenging tragedy of exile and supplication. Driven from their homeland by Eurystheus, king of Argos, the children of Heracles flee as fugitives throughout Greece until they are granted protection in Athens.

Genres: Plays, Classics, Mythology, Drama, Fiction, Theatre, Ancient

Paperback

First published January 1, 431

About the author

Euripides (Greek: Ευριπίδης) (ca. 480 BC–406 BC) was a tragedian of classical Athens. Along with Aeschylus and Sophocles, he is one of the three ancient Greek tragedians for whom any plays have survived in full. Some ancient scholars attributed ninety-five plays to him, but the Suda says it was ninety-two at most. Of these, eighteen or nineteen have survived more or less complete (Rhesus is suspect). There are many fragments (some substantial) of most of his other plays. More of his plays have survived intact than those of Aeschylus and Sophocles together, partly because his popularity grew as theirs declined—he became, in the Hellenistic Age, a cornerstone of ancient literary education, along with Homer, Demosthenes, and Menander.
Euripides is identified with theatrical innovations that have profoundly influenced drama down to modern times, especially in the representation of traditional, mythical heroes as ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances. This new approach led him to pioneer developments that later writers adapted to comedy, some of which are characteristic of romance. He also became "the most tragic of poets", focusing on the inner lives and motives of his characters in a way previously unknown. He was "the creator of ... that cage which is the theatre of William Shakespeare's Othello, Jean Racine's Phèdre, of Henrik Ibsen and August Strindberg," in which "imprisoned men and women destroy each other by the intensity of their loves and hates". But he was also the literary ancestor of comic dramatists as diverse as Menander and George Bernard Shaw.
His contemporaries associated him with Socrates as a leader of a decadent intellectualism. Both were frequently lampooned by comic poets such as Aristophanes. Socrates was eventually put on trial and executed as a corrupting influence. Ancient biographies hold that Euripides chose a voluntary exile in old age, dying in Macedonia, but recent scholarship casts doubt on these sources.

Reviews

[Ali Ahmadi · Rating 3 out of 5]

دوباره فرزندان هراکلس، دوباره خویشاوند سالمندی که مراقب آن‌هاست، دوباره جباری که پی‌ کشتن آنها می‌گردد و دوباره هراکلسی که غایب است (و این بار قرار نیست برگردد). این نمایشنامه‌ی اوریپیدس طرحی بسیار شبیه به هراکلس دارد. (البته بهتر است بگوییم که هراکلس —که سال‌ها بعد‌تر نوشته شده اما وقایعی پیش از فرزندان هراکلس را روایت می‌کند— طرحش را از این اثر به ارث برده.) تفاوت اینجاست که این نمایشنامه به‌شکلی برجسته سیاسی‌ست و بیرون آمده از بستر تاریخی زمان خودش. این بار به آتن بسیار نزدیک‌تریم و نقش دولت‌شهر بزرگ یونانی به همان اندازه پررنگ‌تر است. آرگوس و شاهش به دنبال فرزندان هراکلس‌اند که در اقدامی پیشگیرانه آن‌ها را بکشند. فرزندان هراکلس و سرپرستشان به آتن و محراب زئوس پناه آورده‌اند و آتن به پناهجویان وفادار است، حتا اگر به قیمت دشمنی همسایگانش تمام شود.

وقتی رعیت‌ شهروند می‌شود
یکی از خیره‌کننده‌ترین فرازهای نمایشنامه آنجاست که پیک آرگوسی به آتنی‌ها می‌گوید اگر میخواهید بجنگید بسم‌الزئوس، اما «برای درگیر شدن در جنگ با ما چه دلیلی ارائه خواهید کرد؟» دلیل؟ به چه کسی؟ مگر پادشاه برای جنگیدن به کسی توضیحی بدهکار است؟ لابد منظورش اشراف صاحب‌نفوذ در دربار است. البته که نه. طبیعتن اشراف و دربار مفاهیمی بی‌معنا در یونان آن زمان بوده‌اند. پیک ادامه می‌دهد که «در حقیقت شهروندانتان شما را قویا محکوم خواهند کرد». درست است که شهروند معنایی محدودی دارد و زن و برده را شامل نمی‌شود، اما می‌تواند بر سر هزینه‌ی بالای جنگ و منطقی نبودنش اجماع کند و حاکم را مطیع امرش کند. [دو هزار و پانصد سال بعد، ما جایی هستیم که جنگی در می‌گیرد که نه شروع و نه پایانش در دست ماست و اعتراض به جنگیدن یا جنگیدن هر دو به هیچ گرفته می‌شود و حتا خطرناک هم هست.] البته که پناهجوها با همه‌ی محترم بودنشان شهروند نیستند و اگر جنگ قربانی بخواهد (که همیشه می‌خواهد)، آنها باید در صف اول قرار بگیرند.

گیرم پدر تو بود هرکول
هر چقدر یونانیان در پرورش مضامین تراژیک و آمیختنش با فلسفه و سیاست یا استفاده‌ی به‌جا از موسیقی و فضا در نمایش کاربلد بودند، انتخاب نام اثر برایشان در درجه‌ی آخر اهمیت بود. کاربرد نام نمایش این بود که به تماشاگر سرنخی بدهد که قرار است با کدام اسطوره روبه‌رو شود و به‌دنبالش چه انتظاراتی داشته باشد. (انتظاراتی که عامدانه برآورده نمی‌شدند.) به همین خاطر اسم اغلب یا به شخصیت اصلی اشاره داشت (آگاممنون/آژاکس/هلن)، یا به گروه همسرایانی که اثر پیرامون آنها شکل می‌گرفت (زنان فینیقی/ زنان تروایی). فرزندان هراکلس اما از این نظر کمی نابه‌هنجار است. از یک طرف پسران هراکلس حتا یک جمله هم نمی‌‌گویند و از طرف دیگر دخترش —که البته نقش مهمی دارد— حتا اسم هم ندارد و بعد از ایفای نقش به کل از صحنه و ذهن شخصیت‌ها پاک می‌شود. در حقیقت درست است که اثر بر محور فرزندان هراکلس بنا شده، اما نقش‌آفرینی آنها حداقلی یا ابتر است و میان مجادلات سیاسی نمایش گم می‌شود. با این همه چون فرزندان هراکلس‌اند، می‌شود ارفاق کرد و اسم نمایشنامه را همین که هست نگه داشت.

زن‌ها فرشته‌اند؟
حدس می‌زنند که اوریپیدس این نمایشنامه را هم‌زمان با مده‌آ نوشته، اما تصویر زن را در آن به شکلی سراسر متفاوت می‌بینیم. اینجا زن عاقل است و در عین حال شجاع و پیشقدم. بیگانه است (و نه آتنی) و حتا اگر هم نبود باز هم شهروند به حساب نمی‌آمد، اما شرافت سرش می‌شود و به خاطر آتن (و ارزش‌های میهن‌پرستانه‌ی تثبیت‌شده توسط مردهایش) ناشدنی را ممکن می‌کند. اما دقیق‌تر که نگاه می‌کنیم، تصویر زن در اینجا چیزی جز همان باکره‌ی مقدس نیست: بلندطبع و ستایش‌شده و آماده‌ی فداکاری، اما در نهایت آگاه به جایگاهش که پایین‌تر از مردان است. و باز دقیق‌تر که نگاه کنیم،‌ سهمش از ستایش بیشتر از اینکه به خاطر شجاعت باید به خاطر همین آگاهی ضمنی از بی‌اهمیتی‌ش در برابر مردان است.

کمی خنده به‌جایی بر نمی‌خورد
درباره‌ی نگاه پرحسرت اوریپیدس به پیری در هراکلس نوشته بودم. اینجا اما وقتی داستان به آن سمت می‌رود ناگهان رنگ‌وبویی کمیک به خودش می‌گیرد. پیری که میخواهد ادای جوان‌ها را دربیاورد و دستیارش به وضوح‌ به او طعنه می‌زند. این ناخالصی‌ها از ویژگی‌‌ها مهم بعضی تراژدی‌های شکسپیری‌اند، اما در تراژدی یونانی بسیار کمیابند. در حقیقت نمایش از نیمه‌ی کار از تراژدی منحرف می‌شود و به سمت حماسه و سیاست میل‌ می‌رود و به شکلی غیرمنتظره کمدی و تاریخ را هم چاشنی کار می‌کند. نتیجه شگفت‌انگیز نیست،‌ اما به شکلی غیرمنتظره نو به‌نظر می‌رسد.

خوانده‌شده از ترجمه‌ی بیدگل.

[Mahvar · Rating 5 out of 5]

این نمایشنامه رو نمیشه صرفاً یک تراژدی تاریخی یا سیاسی دونست؛ بلکه نوعی بازتاب ترس و آشوبیه که در تار و پود جامعه انسانی تنیده شده. اوریپید با ظرافتی که تو آثار دیگه‌ش هم دیدم، اسطوره‌ها رو از عرش پایین می‌کشه و انسان‌هایی رو نشون می‌ده که بین قدرت، مسئولیت و سرنوشت، سردرگم و آسیب‌پذیرن.
در فرزندان هراکلس، قهرمانان واقعی نه جنگجویان افسانه‌ای، بلکه قربانیان ناخواسته یک جهان بی‌رحم‌ان؛ کودکانی که گناه نکردن اما تاوان اشتباهات گذشته رو پس می‌دن. چیزی که برام جالب بود، همین نگاه واقع‌گرایانه به میراث قهرمانانه—نه به عنوان اسطوره‌ای درخشان، بلکه باریه که نسل‌های بعدی باید با اون دست‌وپنجه نرم کنن.
اوریپید این‌بار نه با خشم، بلکه با نوعی تلخی عمیق، پوچی قدرت، سیاست و میراث‌های اجباری رو نشون می‌ده. این تراژدی مثل یک آینه‌ست؛ آدم رو مجبور می‌کنه که به تاریخ، به قهرمان‌پرستی و به عواقب انتخاب‌های نسل‌های قبل فکر کنه. شاید اسطوره‌ها رو ما می‌سازیم، اما این اسطوره‌ها هستن که ما رو می‌بلعن.

[Roya · Rating 3 out of 5]

| اگر دلباخته زندگی‌ام نباشم، به مرگی شکوهمند خواهم مُرد. |

• شاید مثل من در ابتدا فکر کنید که دو نمایشنامه‌ی "هراکلس" و "فرزندان هراکلس" مرتبط و پیوسته باشند اما نمایشنامه "فرزندان هراکلس" در 430 ق.م و نمایشنامه "هراکلس" در 416 ق.م یعنی بعد از این نمایشنامه نوشته شده در حالی که نمایشنامه فرزندان هراکلس به وقایع بعد از مرگ هراکلس می‌پردازه.
این دو نمایشنامه از نظر داستانی و خط زمانی به هم متصل نیستند. اساطیر یونانی در منابع مختلف، ورژن‌های متفاوتی دارند و هیچ روایت واحدی وجود نداره پس در واقع اوریپید در نوشتن این دو نمایشنامه از دو برداشت مستقل از اسطوره هراکلس استفاده کرده تا به مفاهیم متفاوتی دست پیدا کنه. البته مخاطبان آتنی هم با نسخه‌های متعدد اساطیر آشنا بودند و این براشون عادی بوده که هر نمایشنامه یک برداشت و زاویه دید مستقل از زندگی اسطوره است. پس در مواجهه با این دو نمایشنامه دچار تناقض و گیجی نشید‌.

• پادشاه آرگوس (اوریستئوس) همیشه به دلیل پیشگویی‌هایی که می‌گفتند هراکلیدها (هراکلس و نسلش) در آینده قدرت زیادی پیدا می‌کنند، از هراکلس می‌ترسید و از همین رو هراکلس رو مجبور به گذشتن از 12 خوان کرده بود و حال بعد از مرگ هراکلس قصد کشتن فرزندان هراکلس رو داره تا احتمال انتقام‌جویی رو از بین ببره. فرزندان هراکلس به همراه مادربزرگ‌شون آلکمنه و یولائوس (از یاران هراکلس) به آتن پناه می‌برند. نمایشنامه از اینجا شروع میشه.

• آرگوس به عنوان دشمن آتن نشان داده میشه که در واقع با رقابت‌های سیاسی این دو سرزمین در واقعیت در قرن پنجم ق.م همخوانی داره. در واقع اوریپید سعی داره توی این نمایشنامه، برتری آتن رو نشون بده و سرزمینش رو به عنوان حامی مظلومان و قهرمانانی که برای اجرای عدالت در میدان شجاعانه می‌جنگند نشون بده‌.

نقش هر دو زن در این نمایشنامه چشم‌گیره: آلکمنه به عنوان مادری خشمگین که در پی گرفتن انتقام خون فرزندشه و ماکاریا دختری که خودخواسته و آزادانه جان خودش رو فدا میکنه تا خانواده‌ش رو نجات بده. علارغمی که توی نمایشنامه اشاره میشه که "بهترین کاری که یک زن می‌تواند بکند این است که خاموش و سر به زیر باشد و با وقار درون خانه‌اش بماند." اما هر دو زن نقشی جسورانه را ایفا می‌کنند و خودشون برای زندگی‌شون تصمیم می‌گیرند.

باز هم سرنوشت تعیین‌کننده‌ی همه‌چیزه. سرنوشتی که تحت اراده و خوشایند خدایانه و "هیچ آدمیزادی را یارای گریز از سرنوشتش نیست. هیچ خردی نمی‌تواند آن را بتاراند و آن کس که در این کار می‌کوشد، کوشش او هر اندازه هم که از سر شور و بی‌تابی باشد بیهوده است."

به نظرم این نمایشنامه در مقایسه با "هراکلس" بیشتر به آثار دیگه‌ش شبیه بود. هرچند میزان تراژدی "هراکلس" بیشتر بود و اون نوع تراژدی رو بیشتر دوست داشتم اما این نمایشنامه اوریپیدی‌تر بود =)

[David Sarkies · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Question of Refugees
12 May 2018

One of the fascinating things about these Ancient Greek plays is how many of the issues that we face today were also faced by them. Mind you, there are some differences, particularly since the Greeks were really only concerned with fellow Greeks, which basically meant that if you weren’t Greek (or even spoke Greek with a funny accent), then you weren’t really considered civilised. The whole question of who was considered Greek or not is a huge study in and of itself, but not one that I will go into here. However, the idea that comes from this play is in regards to the treatment of refugees – sort of.

The story goes that Herakles’ enemy, Eurystheus, was pursuing his children to basically kill them. At this point Herakles had thrown himself into a fire and thus ascended to Olympus as one of the Gods, but being the incredibly virile hero that he happened to be, he had left a plethora of children, known as the Heraclidae (which basically translates to Children of Herakles). The thing was that Eurystheus pretty much wanted to kill them all, and the Heraclidae has been travelling around Greece attempting to escape him, only to land up in Athens. Eurystheus then sends an envoy to request that the Heraclidae be handed over to him, and the King of Athens basically tells him where to go, and thus there is a huge battle that the Athenians win, and Eurystheus is captured and then put to death.

Unfortunately the play is not quite complete, and you can probably blame Caeser for that (among others, though I suspect that there were quite a few copies floating around the Ancient World when the Library was burnt down the first time). As such there are a number of jumps at the end, particularly where Eurystheus is brought before Herakles’ mother, Alcmene, and a debate rages over whether it is right for her to kill him or not.

What struck me was the whole idea of people seeking political asylum, and how it can really strain relations between countries. In a way there wasn’t much of an issue here, since Theseus was a good friend of Herakles, and since Theseus was king of Athens the Athenians didn’t have a problem providing shelter for the Heraklidae (actually, they were under a blood oath to do so). Also, Eurystheus was a pretty nasty piece of work, you know, genocide and all that, so it isn’t surprising that the Athenians didn’t have a problem with standing up to him. Then again there is this whole bringing an army to bear against Athens, and that can cause a few concerns.

It makes me think of the situation in the world today, and the fine line that some governments tread when dealing with refugees. The one that comes to mind are the Tamils in Sri Lanka. For quite a while there was a civil war raging across the country, and a number of Tamils were seeking asylum, fearing persecution. They basically came to Australia, but their petitions were rejected, in one sense because they didn’t want to upset the Sri Lankan government, you know, trade and what not. Yet what about say China, who happens to be a superpower, but doesn’t have the best human rights record – what happens when we offer asylum to political refugees from there – do we run the risk of a backlash by offering asylum, or do we simply hand them back, knowing full well that these guys didn’t particularly do anything wrong, I guess it really isn’t a decision that I’m personally going to have to make, but it is something to keep in mind.

Oh, and one other thing is that it is a shame that many of these plays aren’t performed all that much, or even turned into films, but I guess it is really only us Classical Greek scholars that are all that familiar with them.

[Luís · Rating 3 out of 5]

We have poor wretches who put themselves in the position of supplicants before the altar of a god, a herald of those who chase them seek to dislodge them, the king of the land defends them, it's war, the wars saved, the hunters punished.
You want names, I guess. The mothers are the children of Heracles, their grandmother Alcmene and the playmate of the demigod, Iolaos. The god before the altar of which they beg is Zeus. The hunters are the soldiers of Argos and their king Eurystheus - the one who imposed the famous works on Heracles. The vintage is Athens, and its king is Demophon, son of Theseus. These Suppliants, therefore, concern the Heraclids when episode 1 deals with the Labdacids (the Oedipus family).
The leading role is that I did not know the story told. Thus, not content with having experienced Heracles throughout his life, Eurystheus, king of Argos, was relentless on his family, pushing the cities where the latter sought asylum to hunt them under penalty of reprisals. But unfortunately, Athens and the son of Theseus do not allow themselves to be intimidated like that, and Eurysthée will find its end in this adventure.
However, several things bothered me, first at the myth's level. The Athenians ask for an oracle before starting the fight against Argos. Victory will only be assured if they sacrifice "a virgin from a noble origin". And it is the goddess Persephone who claims this high price.
I want someone to explain why a city so modern in certain respects - I think of absolute values that it represents as the ideal of democracy - accepts to obey a request as barbaric and accessible, even coming off a goddess. Are not the guardian gods of the city there to support and protect it instead of putting a stick on its wheels? These gods are incomprehensible sometimes.
Demophon refuses to sacrifice an Athenian (do not push the devotion either). It is Marcaria, the daughter of Heracles, who will stick to it, of his own will. A sacrifice which seems to suit Iolaos well, whose relief we feel under the admiring speech. Marcaria, for her part, adds the hope of posterity that she carries; there is a form of narcissism even in this sacrifice.
Eurystheus, who behaves like a coward during the battle, faces his death upright and without regret, with a specific form of honour. He goes so far as to suggest that Athenians rest on the spot, his soul protecting them from now on (but why is he doing this when he wanted to punish them for giving asylum to the supplicants?). Alcmena carries the burden of an old grandmother who chased but before her defeated enemy becomes bitter and vindictive, wanting only one thing: to be reduced to lint.
It must say that Euripides does not lose sight of contemporary politics. And if Argos is the enemy in the room, she is the ally in life. But, admittedly, this deserved to give a little grandeur to Eurystheus and reduce the aura of the Heraclids from which the Spartans hated descend.
This fact is, perhaps, the most detrimental to the play.

[İlkim · Rating 3 out of 5]

Keşke günümüze kadar tüm metin eksiksiz gelebilmiş olsaydı...

[Arman Heidaryan · Rating 3 out of 5]

• فرزندان هراکلس، پس از سال‌ها دوری از وطن و تبعید، حالا در آتن هستند. حالا با حضورِ آنان در آتن، پادشاه باید تصمیمی بزرگ بگیرد:
آنان را به موطن‌شان، آرگوس، بازگرداند و روابط سیاسی خود را با متحدی قدرتمند چون پادشاهی آن بلاد ادامه دهد؛ یا در طرف اخلاق بایستد، زادگانِ هراکلس را در آتن بپذیرد و با پادشاه آرگوس، این دشمن قدرتمند، وارد جنگی خونین شود که بی‌شک آتش این نزاع، دامن مردم مملکتش را به‌سختی می‌سوزاند.


• این اولین مواجهه‌ی من با یه نمایشنامه از دوران روم باستان بود. تراژدی‌ای که از دلِ تاریخ میاد و حرف‌هایی که می‌زنه، هنوز جدید و قابل بحثه.

[sologdin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Runs parallel to the Medea insofar as it involves exiles (aside from Athens, "the rest of Greece is banned to us" (l. 31)). Easy to discern the Peloponnesian War influences in how Athens is set against Argos (a Spartan ally in the war); the Argive ambassador is 'Copreus,' which I assume signifies that he is dungy or a coprophiliac or speaks in a coprolaliac manner or whatever.

The text lays out a legal agon between Argos, demanding extradition, and the Heraclids, demanding asylum. The extradition request boils down to "recovering / These Argive nationals who've run away" (ll. 139-40), which is absolutely inadequate under modern extradition rules--here, it is contended that the defendants are "legally condemned at home" and "we have a perfect right to carry out / The laws we make for our own sovereign land" (ll. 141-42). Normally, we will want some evidence that the persons to be extradited have committed a crime, and that this crime is criminalized in both jurisdictions (so-called 'double criminality'). Argos' abject claim lacks all this, and is supported merely by threats of "total war" (l. 160) if they don't get their way. It is in this regard very similar to how the US handled the Afghanistan War in 2001--demanding extradition without a treaty and without evidence but under threat of total war. Good job, US.

Heracles' proverbial friendly friend Iolaus argues against extradition and for political asylum; his arguments are also very bad. He begins with flattery and recognized that he shouldn't overdo it (ll. 203-4). He contends that they are no longer subject to Argive jurisdiction because they have been exiled (ll. 185 ff.), which is reasonable, but not an argument for asylum. He next avers that there is a family connection that warrants asylum (ll. 205 ff.), and then that Athens owes the children of Heracles recompense because Heracles hauled Theseus' sorry ass out of Hades (ll. 218 ff.).

By some upside-down miracle, the Athenian monarch agrees to grant asylum--until the priests reveal that Persephone demands "as victim a / Young lady of respectable descent" (ll. 409-9) in order to defeat the imminent Argive punitive invasion. The Athenians are about to tumble into stasis (l. 419) debating the issue, and the monarch, while claiming not to be "a tyrant over savages" (l. 423), declines to sacrifice his own kid or require any Athenian citizen to sacrifice theirs on behalf of the refugees--because policy must of course be formed through consultation with oracles and seers and diviners and sorcerers; that's what makes an effective polis.

The dilemma is resolved when Heracles' daughter decides to "consent to use / Me of yourselves" (l. 549-50), a perfectly agambenian moment in the 'use of bodies.' After that, it's war and retribution and ugly handling of prisoners of war, wherein the Athenians again make a good initial showing as to the rights of vulnerable persons and then again, perhaps, fail to remain steadfast, caving in to the normative impositions of a conservative theological pragmatism. Fugly, the reliance on human sacrifice to resolve political questions. The ultimate comparison on this point is the variant outcomes of Agamemnon/Iphigenia vs. Abraham/Isaac.

[Laleh · Rating 4 out of 5]

هجرت، مهاجرت،حق انتخاب و...

[Giorgia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sono pessima se gli do un voto così basso? Sì? Fa nulla.
Queste tragedie dove avviene tutto per racconto di araldi e i personaggi che danno nome all'opera praticamente non parlano... mi fanno innervosire. Si narra di una battaglia ma non si vede nulla, è una tragedia spoglia che è palese essere giunta a noi incompleta.

[Alp Turgut · Rating 3 out of 5]

Atina’ya sığınan Herakles’in çocuklarının peşinde olan Eurystheus’un ve bunun için kendini feda eden Makaria’nın hikayesini anlatan "Heraklesoğulları / The Children of Heracles", odak noktasına savaşın doğurduğu etik sorunları alan genel olarak güzel bir oyun. Bir yandan toplumun yararına kendini feda etme olgusunu sorgulatan oyun, diğer yandan da yurtseverlik duyguları hakkında düşündürüyor. Tragedya olarak çok derin ve etkileyici bir zirve bulunmaması sebebiyle Euripides’in diğer eserlerine kıyasla bir tık geride.

11.06.2022
Londra, Birleşik Krallık

Alp Turgut

[anushay · Rating 3 out of 5]

the modern penguin black classics translations of Euripides are x10000000 better !!!

[Reza · Rating 2 out of 5]

فرزندان هراکلس نمایشنامه مهمی در آثار به جا مونده از اوریپید نیست، حذفیات و تغییرات مختلف روند روایت رو دچار تناقض کرده و خود داستان هم پروپاگاندای وطن پرستانه ایه برای افزایش روحیه آتنی ها در جنگ با اسپارتا و متحدهاش!
در کل نمایشنامه آیه که میشه کاملا نادیده اش گرفت.

[Steven R. Kraaijeveld · Rating 2 out of 5]

Hard to judge, since significant parts of The Children of Heracles appear to be missing. All in all, not particularly memorable.

[Benedetta Folcarelli · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nella tradizione epica e tragica i protagonisti sono solitamente eroi o tiranni mitici, ma in “Eraclidi” i personaggi principali sono i discendenti di Eracle. Gli Eraclidi, dunque, non sono eroi gloriosi, ma persone comuni che devono ancora tracciare la loro impronta sul mondo. Tuttavia, si trovano fin dalla nascita costretti a combattere incessantemente contro la minaccia di essere offuscati dall'ombra del padre e subiscono angherie o onori a seconda delle persone che incontrano lungo il loro percorso e dei rapporti di queste con Eracle. La figura dell’eroe, in questo caso, non è rappresentata come valorosa, ma piuttosto come una fonte di danno per la sua famiglia, una condanna per i suoi figli. Euripide, ancora una volta, dimostra di essere uno scrittore innovativo, capace di sfidare le norme tradizionali dell’antica Grecia e di offrire al suo pubblico opere completamente nuove.

[Andrea Giovanni Rossi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mettendo in scena potenti che si astengono dalle proprie responsabilità e permettono il sacrificio di innocenti in nome di ideali celesti, Euripide dipinge a tinte fosche quello che, a prima vista, sembra un elogio di Atene come nucleo difensore del Diritto, tanto dividono quando umano

[Yules]

Of course Athens must sacrifice a noble-birthed virgin to the goddess Persephone (in this case, so that they may win a war against the Argos). I mean, if you're not sacrificing virgins, are you even really running an ancient Greek city-state?

But no worries. A virgin from an exceptional bloodline volunteers herself to be sacrificed, everyone claps, and then she says:

"[...] Afterward: is there
An Afterward? I hope not. If there's then
No end to all our troubles, where do we
Go on from there -- since death itself, they say,
Supplies the cure for everything that ails?"

Virgins asking the REAL questions.

[Damla · Rating 2 out of 5]

İOLAOS:
Çok eskiden beri şuna inanırım: Bazı insanlar doğaları
gereği
herkese adil davranmak için doğmuştur, bazıları da
doymak bilmez
bir hırsla çıkarlarını kollar. Kentlerine bir yararları
dokunmaz,
herkese kötü davranırlar, ama kendilerinin en iyi
dostudurlar.
Bunu başkalarından duymadım, deneyimle öğrendim.

[Kahveci · Rating 3 out of 5]

****spoiler****

Oyun, Herakles'in çocuklarının Argos Kralı Eurystheus'tan kaçarak Atina'ya sığınmalarını ve burada yaşadıkları mücadeleyi anlatır. Eurystheus, Herakles'in ölümünden sonra bile onun ailesine karşı acımasız davranmaya devam eder ve onları takip eder. Herakles'in annesi Alkmene, çocukları ve Herakles'in dostu İolaos, Zeus'un sunağına sığınırlar. Atina Kralı Demophon, bu sığınmacıları koruma kararı alır ve Argos ile savaşa girer.

Ancak savaştan önce Atinalılar, tanrıların iradesini öğrenmek için bir kahine danışırlar. Kahin, zaferin ancak soylu bir bakirenin kurban edilmesiyle mümkün olacağını söyler. Demophon, bir Atinalıyı kurban etmeyi reddeder, ancak Herakles'in kızı Makaria, gönüllü olarak bu fedakarlığı yapmayı kabul eder. Makaria'nın kurban edilmesi, savaşta Atina'nın zafer kazanmasını sağlar. Bu durum, tanrıların insanlar üzerindeki acımasız taleplerini ve insanların bu taleplere boyun eğişini sorgulatır.

Savaş sırasında Eurystheus korkakça davranır, ancak yenilgiyi kabul ederken onurlu bir tavır sergiler. Hatta ölmeden önce, Atinalıların gelecekteki düşmanlarına karşı koruyucu bir ruh olacağını söyler. Bu durum, Eurystheus'un karakterindeki karmaşıklığı gösterir: bir yandan acımasız bir düşman, diğer yandan ölüm karşısında onurlu bir figür. Alkmene ise yaşlı bir kadın olarak, düşmanına karşı intikam duyguları besler ve Eurystheus'un ölümünü şiddetle arzular.

Düşmanları cahil değil bilge olsun diye dua etmeli bilge insanlar, çünkü merhamet ve adaleti ancak böyle bulabilirler. sf: 23

[Keely · Rating 3 out of 5]

There were some great lines, ideas and scenes in this play. However, as it's unfinished it just didn't feel like a Euripides play. Still, I liked what was on the page and it definitely had a lot of potential. It's interesting how during the heights of the Peloponnesian War Euripides got away with being so anti-war. I suppose its the power of his artistry.

[HCE · Rating 3 out of 5]

rest in peace the girl Macaria, she pulled an Iphigenia before Iphigenia was a thing. for a tragedy this was really quite silly at times, for example the argument between Iolaus and the servant about Iolaus being too old to fight.

contained some reflections on Fate and the rules of the city in relation to helping refugees and revenge, but overall i can see why this play is less appreciated

[Petrus Reads · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5⭐️ Not that interesting tbh. A couple mid quotes but apart from that pretty disinteresting

[Camden Nauroth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Probably one of Euripides weaker plays. Why was Macaria so willing to kill herself, just seems weird?

[Mert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Puanım 3/5 (%60/100)

Şu ana kadar en sevmediğim Euripides eseri oldu. Tabi ki bu demek değildir ki kitap kötü okunmaz. Açıklayayım efenim. Bununla birlikte 13 tane Euripides eseri okumuş oldum (Zaten 19 tanesini biliyoruz). Konusu ve anlatımı olarak Yakarıcılar'a benzeyen bir kitap ve ben onu da çok başarılı bulmamıştım. Bunun nedeni de Euripides'in Bakkhalar ve Medea gibi muazzam eserlere sahip olması. Heraklesoğulları işlediği konudan dolayı sanırım ilgimi çekmedi. Bir de oyunun özelliklere sonlara doğru önemli kısımları eksik. Bu yüzden de Euripides'in en kısa tragedyası olarak biliniyor. Eksiksiz olsaydı kusursuz mu olurdu? Hayır. Ama bu halinden çok daha başarılı olacağını düşünüyorum.

Bu saydıklarıma rağmen kendini okutturan ve yer yer gerçekten hoşuma giden bir oyun oldu. Alkmene (Herakles'in annesi) özellikle sevdiğim bir karakterdir ve torunu Makaria da aynı ona çekmiş. Kitabın ismine de pek aldanmayın çünkü olaylar daha çok Herakles'in yeğeni ve dostu İolaos üzerinden gidiyor. Heraklesoğulları çok fazla olduğu için (70ten fazla düşünülüyor) ismen bahsedilmiyor. Herakles'in düşmanı Eurystheus'un onun oğulları kovalaması ve olayların Atina'ya taşınmasını anlatıyor. Yakarıcılar gibi vatan sevgisi, savaş, aile gibi konular işlenmiş. Genel olarak okunmasını tavsiye ediyorum fakat Euripides'i tanımıyorsanız önce Bakkhalar, Medea veya Andromakhe gibi eserlerle başlayın. O kadar olumsuz konuştun ama düşünmeyin çünkü Euripides benim en sevdiğim ilk 20 yazar içerisine falan kesin girer.

[Joseph Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

“For this is joy supreme: To see a vaunting foe in ruin sink” *me when I did better than my OChem rival on every test Winter semester 2019

[Sarah · Rating 2 out of 5]

...meh. I feel like this play was not really thought out enough by Euripides, as if he had a deadline to meet and simply churned out this half-assed play in order to meet the deadline. There isn't really a difference in plot that makes it any better than the other mediocre works of Greek drama; maybe this would be the equivalent of a movie that people go to see just because they're bored enough, but don't actually care if it's good or not.

The plot has to do with Heracles' children being kept as refugees because some king wants to kill them. That's about as much as I can ascertain about the play, and I feel that there's not much more to tell about it. This play kind of feels like Aeschylus' The Suppliant Maidens, if anyone needs a comparison. This play is definitely one to skip if you're into Greek drama.

[Illiterate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Athenians show virtue & valor in protecting refugees.

[Meredith Johnson · Rating 3 out of 5]

not really a fan but it feels disrespectful to give Euripides two stars

[Doug · Rating 2 out of 5]

Probably the weakest of Euripides' plays, as far as I am concerned.

The subject matter here is closely connected to Euripides' *Herakles*, which is an infinitely better play.

In this play, Herakles has been taken up to Heaven after the completion of his labors. Eurystheus, a king of Argos, has chased down Herakles' children and their supervisor, Iolaus, who was also Herakles' good friend. Eurystheus is continuing his vendetta against Herakles by trying to kill the children and Iolaus. This has led everyone to Athens, where Iolaus and children are begging Acamas and Demophon to be the only city actually brave enough to stand up to the Argives and protect the Heracleidae and Iolaus. They agree to help. But when they learn from the god that a daughter of a noble, well-born family will have to die to keep Eurystheus out, they are reluctant. That's when one of Herakles' daughters sacrifices herself. Her sacrifice pays off: Iolaus fights off Eurystheus in defense of everyone, and Eurystheus is eventually executed.

Not much substance here, and a rather short play, too.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

This play was written during the Peloponnesian War, when Sparta was attacking Athens. Euripides's The Children of Herakles is a tale of the children of the dead Heracles, now a god, who are being pursued by Eurystheus, who also persecuted their father. Their guardian, Iolaos, takes the children to the temple of Zeus in Athens and asks the Athenians to be protected as suppliants. Eurystheus decides to go to war over possession of the children (whom he wishes to execute), and loses. I guess this was all good for the morale of the Athenians.