In defence of Jason against Medea

Medea is one of the most prominent tragedies of ancient Greek literature that has managed to greatly influence the literature of antiquity until today. Most scholars - including myself - having used, among other things, modern feminist theory and female perspectives in ancient tragedies have argued that Medea is a victim of Jason. Euripides presents a betrayed woman who fell in love with a man who simply used her to serve his own selfish aims. Jason, therefore, has been characterized as a "utilitarian" husband, a "bad" father and an anti-hero. However, to what extent does this correspond to reality? Can we really accuse Jason of taking advantage of Medea and of being responsible for what she and the Nurse attribute to him in Euripides' tragedy? To answer, we must also refer to the epic of Apollonius Rhodius entitled Argonautica. Medea is presented in both texts as a deeply in love woman who was hurt by her future husband. Jason, however, never seems to have fallen in love with Medea. The god Eros is the core of Medea's love for Jason and she appears in the Hellenistic epic admiring the stranger - enemy Jason. Jason does not feel the same way about Medea and only she is surrendered from the start to her love feelings. At the same time, one can understand by reading the Argonautica that Medea was the one who approached Jason and begged him to travel with the rest of the Argonauts because of her fear that the truth about having helped Jason would be revealed. Jason never tried to persuade Medea to leave her home nor did he 'kidnap' her. The trip was her own decision in order to save herself from her father's impending wrath and the punishment that would be inflicted on her. Even the death of her brother is her decision, so that she can escape without being forced to be returned by the Argonauts to Aetes. Jason, therefore, is presented throughout the epic as a mere man who received the care and help of a woman in love. At no point in the epic does he seem to have thrown anything at her or presented himself as in love to mislead her. The only promise he made to her was that she would travel with him and they would have children. His oaths, the seeming violation of which both Medea and the Nurse refer to, were simply to support her on the journey and to protect Medea from Aeetes. Even in his apology in the tragedy of Euripides, he highlights his concern for his children and the goal of his impending marriage to protect them and offer them a better future. Indeed, he took advantage of Medea, but is he as responsible for the latter's actions as he is accused by Medea, the Nurse and the Chorus? Or is he merely a scapegoat for dashing young Medea's hopes?
--
Andreas Prasinos is a classical philologist, a graduate of the Philology department of Classics and Greek Philology in National and Kapodistrian University of Athens and University of Amsterdam. His specialization concerns the classical world and, specifically, ancient Greek and Roman literature. He has taken part in several scientific conferences in Universities and research organizations in Greece and abroad and has published a number of scientific articles, as well as scientific books. His research interests concern the works of ancient Greek and Roman writers of the Classical and post-classical periods. He works as a professor in educational organizations and as a scientific researcher at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.