I strongly believe that if Achilles were a juryman, he would have thought
honorably and nobly of Socrates’ defense and ultimately reached a verdict of not guilty.
Achilles was regarded by all as a great, if not the greatest, Greek hero of his time and
would be persuaded by the similar “heroic” nature of Socrates’ divine purpose, views,
and actions. Socrates’ view of a “quintessential man” may differ drastically from that of
Achilles, yet the fundamental sameness in individual morality and honor are unparalleled.
Based on Socrates’ devotion to the gods, fearlessness in his beliefs, and dedication to
justice above all, Achilles would not only consider Socrates not guilty of the accused
crimes, but also instilled with heroic ideals relative to Achilles himself.
Achilles would essentially be judging Socrates’ character through his speech, and
in terms of one’s character, Achilles is as dedicated to the gods as one can be, therefore,
considering this aspect of Socrates very important. One of the initial claims brought
against Socrates by Meletus and others was his lack of devotion to the same gods that the
city worships. Socrates refutes this claim by acknowledging his belief in daimons. He
says, “If daimons are certain bastard children of gods, whether from nymphs or from
certain others of whom it is also said they are born, then what human being would believe
that there are children of gods, but not gods?” (Pg.78,
) Although this satisfies his
belief, Achilles would be more concerned with his devotion. Socrates proves this by
claiming he was destined by the gods to philosophize and owes his life’s purpose and
actions to their will. He says, “I, men of Athens, salute you and love you, but I will obey
the god rather than you; and as long as I breathe and am able to, I will certainly not stop
Achilles would admire this devotion to not only the gods, but to Socrates’ own