Murder Most Foul – Part 1

Pic Courtesy - www.india.com

The latest murder of Sheena Bora has raised quite a furore in the minds of people, not because of the probable gruesome death of the victim, but more so because the murder was none other than her mother. Mothers in India and similar cultures have a much esteemed position and at times dramatically divine, as mothers are akin to creators, the beings that give birth to the child. This elevated the status of a mother, in a cultural sense, and thus the place of significance. It is this very elevation, which leads to shock and surprise, when we learn of such murders, which raise questions, as to how can a mother kill her child/children? How can the hands that rocked the cradle, end up throttling the life of her child? Melodrama apart, this definitely raises a very pertinent question on the current state of relationships and the complexities involved in some cases, like the present case of Sheena Bora.

Without going into the murky aspects, and the ever-growing web of complex-relationships of the dramatis personae of the case, I am personally quite intrigued by the motif of killing ones children. While this is a disturbing aspect from a social perspective, it is this that has caught my attention, leading me to see, if this is a modern phenomenon and if I could blame it on the modern degradation of familial structures, moral values and a growing lack of sensitivity, or did such crimes exist from time immemorial.

My hunting ground (pardon the ironical usage!) is mythology. Theorists and academicians will say that myths give messages of social or accepted behaviour or norms. Simplistically put, they lay down social and cultural norms. While at it, certain characteristics are reinforced metaphorically and extremes are highlighted to shock and thus bring out the enormity of the sin, which ends up being forbidden or unthinkable. Filicide or killing of one’s children is one of them.

Mythology abounds in examples of filicide, but it is important here to distinguish between sacrifices (often by the orders of gods) and murders (with or without a purpose).

In the case of the first one, parents, often fathers, are asked to offer their sons as an offering to gods leading to the ‘sacrifice’ of their sons. The case of Abraham and Isaac is the best example of this. This is primarily to test the devotion of the father to gods and in majority of the cases, the life of the son is awarded back or the pleased god appears just before the child is about to be sacrificed. Such cases are many and we will not call them acts of filicide here. We will also ignore cases of sacrificing ones children for a specific purpose without the gods asking for them, as they remain examples of sacrifices, like Jephthah sacrificing his daughter to Yahweh, from the Old Testament.

We will only focus on cases where children were killed by their parents, often for no fault of theirs and without the divine order.

A number of such myths exist in the Greek Mythology, chief among them being Medea, Procne and Tantalus. Procne and her husband Tereus lived happily with their five year old son Itys. Once Procne

Philomela and Procne

decided to invite her beautiful sister Philomela to live with them, and Tereus volunteered to bring her. On the way, Tereus falls in love with Philomela and ends up marrying her in an island under the pretext that her sister had died. When the truth was revealed to Philomela, she threatened to expose him. Fearing the inevitable, Tereus cuts her tongue and leaves her in an island and goes back to Procne, telling her that Philomela had died on the way. Soon with the turn of events, Procne learns the truth and in an act of retribution kills her son, saying that in him she could see his father. She then cuts pieces of her son and prepares supper from it and offers it to Tereus. Only after he consumes it, does she reveal the truth and escapes a raging father at her heels.

Tantalus is another similar example, except that he had no reason, whatsoever. Tantalus was a mortal son of Zeus but unlike other mortals, was a favourite with both the gods and Zeus. He was probably the only mortal, who was allowed to dine with the gods, especially the dinner-for-gods-only kind!

The feast of Tantalus. 1767. Hugues Taraval. French

Once to prove the gullibility and the foolishness of the gods, he invited them for dinner to his castle. He then cut his son Pelops to pieces and made a stew out of it and served to the gods. None of the gods had quite had the stew except for Demeter, who unmindfully chewed into what turned out to be the shoulder of Pelops. When she realised what had happened she alerted all the gods, who were now furious. Zeus punished him and sent him to the lowest region of the Underworld. (For more on this read The Crime and Punishment of Tantalus).

Finally, the murder considered to be most gruesome was by Medea. Medea had fallen in love with Jason (of the Argonauts fame) and helped him get the Golden Fleece much against the desire of her father. Later when they were escaping from a chasing father, she is supposed to have killed her brother, cut

Medea (about to murder her children)
by Eugène Ferdinand Victor Delacroix (1862)

him into pieces and scattered the parts all over, so that the distraught father got busy collecting the pieces for a respectable funeral for her son while Jason and Medea managed to escape. Yet further in the story, Jason falls in love with the princess of another city where they were seeking asylum and ends up marrying her. As an act of retribution for being ditched, Medea killed the princess and her own two sons, whom Jason loved deeply, leaving Jason all alone. (For more on this read Medea the Barbarian and Medea the Barbarian – Concluding Part ).

In all the three cases, the murder of the children, were not sacrifices; they were either an act of vanity or retribution, where the child was not at fault. All of them go down as gruesome acts of filicide and while literature has glorified Medea, the act of killing her children has always been condoned. There are many more such cases, like Cronos ‘eating’ all his sons, except Zeus, who later ends up killing his father. Besides these well known cases, there are other cases where fathers/mothers have killed their children by mistake, or in a fit of madness, often brought about by divine intervention, but we will not discuss them.

The Celtic myths too have some interesting references to filicide in the myth of Cath Maige Tuired, in which a man kills his son over the difference of opinion of medical method of curing the king who had lost his hand. The father was of the opinion that the king should have an artificial silver hand, while the son wanted to regenerate a hand magically from a tissue. The father was supposed to be so enraged with the superior medical skills of his son, that he struck him with a sword and killed him.

The Prose Edda of the Norse mythology also relates to many such cases of filicide and one of them is similar to that of Procne of the Greek mythology. In this Gudrun, avenges the death of her brothers by her husband by offering the hearts of their sons to the husband! The objective is to cause pain to her husband, leading to an heirless throne, an act which never went down well in the cultural milieu in which the story takes place. In yet another version of the same story, the murder is gruesome. Gudrun is 

supposed to have killed her sons, made goblets out of their skulls and fed their blood and hearts to her husband. Drinking from the skulls of enemy was a widely practised cultural act and thus went unnoticed by the husband, who is later killed by Gudrun and one of his nephews.

It is important to mention that the murder above and that by Procne earlier in Greek mythology, is seen more as an act of retribution, than filicide. The central theme is more to avenge an earlier act, than the murder of one’s own children. While this might seem an effort to overlook the crime, but the treatment of the acts is less important in the said narratives than what led to the crime. Besides the mothers who have avenged certain acts by killing their children, had to battle emotions before they committed the acts. Their love for their children was not less, though the need to seek revenge was greater, and in the case of Medea it was more out of being spurned or rejected by the one for whom, she had committed the crime of fratricide (killing ones brother) and more.

To be continued……………

Medea the Barbarian – Concluding Part

In the previous part we read about Jason’s voyage to Colchis and how with the help of Medea he gets the Golden Fleece, but in the process, Medea loses her family. After they reach Colchis, Pelias is killed by his daughters after they are tricked by Medea, but have to leave Colchis too.

Euripides’s play “Medea” starts from here.

Jason and Medea along with their children reach Corinth and seek asylum. Creon, the King of Corinth was aware of the fame and the heroism of Jason. Soon Jason leaves Medea and gets married to Glauce, the daughter of the King of Corinth. Medea is shocked to learn about the development and had been sulking at the rejection for no apparent reason, except ambition, which was so obvious. Needless to say that Medea felt used and discared.

The King of Corinth however, was uncomfortable with the presence of Medea whose reputation had preceded her in Corinth. He took it upon himself, to banish Medea and her children from Corinth, as Medea had made her disapproval of the marriage of Jason and Glauce public, in no uncertain terms. The king wanted her to leave immediately, but Medea managed to beg a day to make arrangements for the departure. The King was uncomfortable but agreed reluctantly to give her no more than the dawn of the next day.

When Jason learnt about the banishment, he ended up blaming Medea and washed his hands off from being able to do anything or even intervening in the said matter. Instead he offered her money as an aid which she would need during her exile, which Medea declined. Clearly Jason had found new family and couldn’t care much for Medea.

On the same day, the King of Corinth had a guest, in the childless Aegeus, King of Athens and fortunately an old friend of Medea. Medea requested him for a safe haven in Athens and in return promised him a son. Aegeus told him that since he was a state guest of Corinth, it would not be a good idea to take her with him, but if she could reach Athens, then she could be his guest and stay with him. Having secured her future, Medea set out for what she had in mind. She was not going to leave things so easy for Jason.

Medea was aware that Jason had a soft corner for his children, and if he wanted to intervene, it was only for the children and not so much for Medea. She approached Jason, and reasoned with him, that it wouldn’t be easy for her to take care of the children in exile and now that she was away, couldn’t he take care of the children? As a token of her appreciation, she would send the children to Glauce. Jason found it reasonable and accepted it and was sure Glauce should have no problems with the arrangement as long as Medea was not in Corinth.

To reflect her change of heart, she sent her children with gifts for Glauce. The children take with them a robe and a small crown for Glauce as gifts. Once the children return from Glauce, Medea awaits news from the palace. Glauce in the meanwhile was happy with the change of heart and was glad that Medea was leaving the next day. When the children had left, she decided to try the gifts. She put on the robe and the crown.

Unknown to Glauce, the robe and the crown had poison in them. As soon as she wore the dress and put on the crown, her body was covered with poison which ate into her, and she died even before she could realise what had happened to her. When the King saw the dead body of his daughter, he tried to save her and when he realised she was dead, he embraced her in grief. The poison soon spread over to him and he too met a slow bur torturous death.

 

Glauce and Creon Roman Sarcophagus

When the news of the deaths in the palace reached Medea, she made her final move. She entered into the bedroom of her children and killed her own children. By now Jason had heard about the deaths of the King and Glauce. He rushed in to Medea’s room as he was sure that the soldiers of Corinth would kill his children. When he reached the room, he learnt that his children too had been murdered. He broke open the bedroom door of his children, only to find them missing. He could see Medea flying away in a flying chariot with the dead bodies of their children, depriving him of even the last look and the last rites of the children he so loved.

 

Medea Flees after killing children

Medea escaped to Athens and left Jason with neither a family nor a loved one, and deprived him of all that he craved for in life.

This brings an end to the tragic life of Medea according to the play of Euripides. The story goes on to another conclusion, according to which, she flees to Athens and bears a child to the King of Athens. However, she never finds peace even there as she gets embroiled in palace intrigues and other issues, which we will skip for the time being.

While Medea is the heroine of Euripides’s play, she comes across as a vengeful woman, who doesn’t hesitate to murder, all of them pre-meditated. So what was it about this woman, a villain or a victim?

While the murder of an innocent brother, going against ones father and then killing her own children would be proof enough of an individual’s inherent criminality, the story goes beyond that. The story of Medea is not simply a tale of love and vengeance. It’s a beautiful drama of love and passion, at its extremities, though. It brings out the strength of passion along with the suffering of spurned love leading to the terrible consequences of vengeance. The great sorceress ends up being portrayed as a weak woman, succumbing to the emotions of love. For Medea, the crime or the hurt of being spurned by the man for whom she left her home, country and reputation was much stronger than the subsequent murders that led her to a life of uncertainty, which she had foreseen and thus the plan to escape made well in advance.

 

Medea

While many might not agree with her murdering her own children, this was dramatically expressed in the turmoil she goes through before she slays them. There was no dearth of love for the children, rather it was love, that made her kill her children, rather than they be killed by the men of the King or grow up to be vengeful creatures. Was it a mother killing her children to save them from a barbarous and torturous death by the kings soldiers or was it a mother killing her children just to deprive their father of the love of his children, is hardly debatable. Finally, she leaves with the bodies of her children depriving Jason of even the last rites of the children he so loved. However cruel this may sound; the pain that Jason goes through is the emotional victory for Medea, not that she could escape the emotional turmoil of killing her own children herself.

Medea’s actions are downright despicable, but then matters of heart are never judged by the rules of mind. The inner recesses of a woman’s mind are unfathomable and the ire of a spurned woman is more so. Is a woman, just a lover or wife and finally a mother? Isn’t she an individual who has a right to express her hatred and indignation? Must her expression of indignation always be within the boundaries of expected behaviour or cultural norms? Euripides’s Medea defies these and expresses her anger and resentment in her own way, which goes against the set norms of a dutiful wife or motherly love. Her passion is intense, albeit with aberrations which are wild, but by these aberrations she either reigns or ruins wayward men!

Call her a barbarian, a villain, the vile or whatever; Medea is the intense lover, in her own way who lets her passion dictate her ways and nothing else. It is important to note that the story of Medea has always been treated as a story of a woman who is vile and treacherous, while Jason is the tragic hero; it is only in Euripides’s play that Medea gets a different treatment and some semblance of respect.

What do you think?

Medea the Barbarian

Medea is an interesting character from Greek mythology. Was she a villain or was she a victim, has been the debate for very long. A woman who takes lives, is a villain, and if the lives she has taken are that of her own brother and sons, then there is no doubt she is one. But even then, the question arises, was she one? Was Macbeth a villain or was he a victim of circumstances? Was Macbeth a victim of his ambitions, fuelled by his wife, and thus a tragic villain? Was Othello a victim of suspicion and jealousy or was he inherently evil? All such characters had a fault in their fate and Medea was no exception. While Greek mythology in general is not quite appreciative about Medea, Euripides in his play 'Medea’, tries to portray Medea as a tragic heroine. This article is based on the play by Euripides.

Before we refer to the play, a brief background is necessary.

The story begins with Jason (of the Argonauts fame). Jason was the designated King of Iolcus, in Greece, but since he was too young to rule, he was sent to be educated by Chiron, the centaur. In his place, his uncle Pelias ruled the kingdom. When Jason returned, Pelias was not keen to part with power. Pelias asked Jason, as to what could be done to get rid of a person, who was not wanted. Jason answered that the person should be sent to get the Golden Fleece. Pelias promptly asked Jason to get the Golden Fleece for him and Jason decided to accept the challenge.

 

Jason and the Golden Fleece. National Archaeological Museum. Naples.

Soon Jason sets out on the expedition with a selection of fifty heroes of the times (Hercules and Orpheus being among them), in a ship called the Argo, considered to be the first large ship and a prototype of naval ships to come. After many adventures, and with the help from Goddess Hera, Jason reached Colchis, the land where the Golden Fleece was supposed to be guarded by a dragon. At Colchis, they were greeted by Aeetes, the King of Colchis and his daughter Medea.

When Aeetes asked Jason the cause of their arrival, Jason said that he had been entrusted with the task of bringing the Golden Fleece and for that he was willing to render any service that the King might ask. While this angered the King to no end, he decided not to react harshly and set his terms for handing over the Fleece. The King said that he would hand over the Fleece to Jason, only if he could yoke two monstrous and fire-breathing bulls and plough the land with them, to sow some dragons teeth, from which would spring armed warriors, who had to be then killed by Jason. Jason would then have to overcome the dragon, which stood guard to the fleece. If Jason achieved all this, then the fleece would be his.

Hera, in the meanwhile had instructed the god of love, to make Medea fall in love with Jason, as she was rumoured to have magical powers which would be needed by Jason to achieve the tasks given to him. Jason accepted the challenge and decided to seek help from Medea. When the two met, Medea who had already been besotted by Jason’s looks was now madly in love with him. She decided to help him and to cut short a long story; Jason achieved all that he had been asked to do.

When the King learnt about his daughter’s betrayal, he was angry and chased a fleeing Jason and Medea, since the latter had no choice but to flee with Jason. It is said that during the conflict, Medea’s brother was killed and according to a version, Medea cut her brother into pieces and flung them all over the sea, so that her father would stay back to collect all the pieces for a respectable funeral. This gave the fleeing Argonauts time and soon they were way ahead. Jason got the Golden Fleece and Medea lost her country and family.

 

Escape from Colchis

Soon Medea and Jason reached their country but Jason’s uncle, Pelias was still not willing to part with the throne. Medea used her magical powers once again. She told the daughters of Pelias that she had the power to restore the youth of their old father.

She demonstrated it by cutting a ram to pieces and putting it in a cauldron with magical herbs and out came a lamb. The unsuspecting girls were impressed by this and they decided to rejuvenate their father. They killed their father and cut him into pieces and put them in the cauldron, but this time Medea did not use her magical powers to bring Pelias back to life. This however did not go down well with people and once again Jason and Medea along with their two children, had to flee and reached Corinth seeking asylum.

Euripides’s play “Medea” starts from here.

Jason and Medea along with their children reach Corinth and seek asylum. At Corinth, the King of Corinth was aware of the fame and the heroism of Jason. Soon Jason leaves Medea and gets married to Glauce, the daughter of the King of Corinth. Medea is shocked to learn about the development and had been sulking at the rejection for no apparent reason, except ambition, which was so obvious. Needless to say that Medea felt used and thrown away.

We will continue from here tomorrow......Keep reading.....