Achilles and Agamemnon
If I were to side with Achilles or Agamemnon in their quarrel, I would choose to side with Achilles. Based on the story from the book, it seems as though Achilles is much more worthiness than Agamemnon. Achilles is not as dishonorable as Agamemnon, nor is he as greedy, and he is also more useful for the Greeks rather than Agamemnon is.
Although Agamemnon is the king of Mycenae, he is a king with great disgrace. A first example would be when Agamemnon dishonored Chryses, by not returning Chryseis to him. Because of this, Apollo started the plague on the Achaians. Many of them died only because of Agamemnon's morally unacceptable ways. Another example of his indignity would be that after the plague started, Agamemnon seemed like he didn't want his fellow Achaians to know why it happened. After he made the mistake of letting the plague happen, he should of have at least let them know, but it had to be said by Kalchas, because Achilles made a deal with him. When Kalchas told everyone the truth, Agamemnon was furious, when he should have been the one telling them first.
Another reason why I would side with Achilles is because he is not selfish like Agamemnon is. One example is that Agamemnon wouldn't give back Chryseis when asked. And when he was in a position where he had to give back Chryseis, he said he wanted to take Achilles' prize, Briseis. This shows how gluttonous Agamemnon is because he has no right to take Achilles' prize just because something came up and he had to lose his. Also, Agamemnon is always wanting something and expecting something, thinking that he is the best of the Achaians. In the third page in the book, Achilles says, "Son of Atreus, most lordly, greediest for gain of all men, how shall the great-hearted Achaians give you a prize now?" This makes Agamemnon seen to known as a greedy king who needs to be granted all that he wants.
The third reason why I would definitely side with Achilles is because he is much...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document