Elizabethan audiences were likely very familiar with the intricacies and subtleties of the Trojan War through both medieval and classical narratives. The Elizabethan era tended to embellish and romanticize ancient myths and tales. However, Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida challenges this romanticism by depicting the Trojan War in a way that reveals its participants as flawed and human, rather than mythically grand. Shakespeare's purpose might not be to instill pessimism or cynicism within his contemporary viewers. Instead, he seems to bring ancient mythological figures down to a human level to dispel the belief that the ancient world was more noble or virtuous than the Elizabethan era. It's important to recognize that idealizing the past is a common practice, not unique to the Elizabethans' view of antiquity. Many cultures tend to nostalgically recall past eras, often highlighting values perceived as missing in the present.

In Troilus and Cressida, many characters are nearly despicable, and none consistently embody nobility or virtue. Thersites is portrayed as so malicious, distasteful, and uncontrollable that the Greeks, who not only tolerate him but find him entertaining, end up condemning their own moral standing. Pandarus openly admits to being nothing more than a straightforward pimp. Helen, celebrated throughout history for her beauty and influence over men, is depicted as a frivolous and shallow woman. Early in the play, it's mentioned that she finds great amusement in flirting with the young Troilus, counting the hairs of his budding beard. Later, she is seen singing and dancing, seemingly indifferent to the violence she has indirectly caused, which is safely kept away from her by the walls of Troy. Paris is accurately described by his father, Priam, when he says:

Paris, you speak
Like one besotted on your sweet delights.
You have the honey still, but these the gall;
So to be valiant is no praise at all.
(II.ii. 143-46)

Shakespeare's portrayal of Cressida is equally unflattering; many critics agree that she is depicted as a flirtatious and unfaithful woman. Achilles, the formidable Greek warrior, is so absorbed in his own pride and indulgence that he refuses to leave his tent to fight, despite the reputation that has brought him much praise. His sneaky and cowardly killing of Hector further undermines the high regard in which he is held throughout the play. Hector, the steadfast Trojan hero, also shows inconsistency. He retracts his argument that Helen is not worth the lives lost defending her when Troilus appeals to his pride, emphasizing the war's opportunity for heroic acts. In the final battle, Hector pursues and kills a fleeing Greek soldier just to claim the soldier's appealing armor.

Shakespeare deliberately prevents audiences from maintaining their idealized views of ancient times. The Trojan War, fought over Helen's perceived worth, serves as a metaphor for the peril of masking reality with idealism, highlighted at two points in Shakespeare's play. Early on, Ulysses claims the Greek army has failed because the established hierarchy is no longer respected, justifying this order with the Great Chain of Being—a concept often promoted as the conservative norm in Elizabethan England. However, by elevating Ajax as an ideal figure, Ulysses merely creates a replacement for Achilles, whose exemplary leadership distracts from and undermines divinely ordained authority. Towards the play's conclusion, Troilus strikes Pandarus and shouts, "Hence, broker, lackey! Ignominy, shame / Pursue thy life, and live aye with thy name!" (V.x.33-34). Yet, Pandarus has the final word, questioning why he is mistreated for fulfilling requests. He provided Troilus exactly what he desired. If Troilus suffers from idealizing his relationship with Cressida, it's his own doing, not Pandarus's.

Upon learning of...

Barton, Anne. Introduction to

Troilus and Cressida

by William Shakespeare. In The Riverside Shakespeare, edited by G. Blakemore Evans, pages 443-47. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1974. Barton explores the play's textual history and offers a comprehensive analysis. She contends that no character in Troilus and Cressida consistently embodies truth or nobility. According to Barton, the only element that spares the audience from the characters' destructive nihilism is Shakespeare's artistic integrity in crafting the play.

Cole, Douglas. "Myth and Anti-Myth: The Case of Troilus and Cressida." Shakespeare Quarterly 31, no. 1 (1980): 76-84. Cole argues that Shakespeare's portrayal of the myth of Troy challenges the way societies construct myths to connect with specific histories and define their values.

Dusinberre, Juliet. "Troilus and Cressida and the Definition of Beauty." Shakespeare Survey 36 (1983): 85-95. Dusinberre investigates the role of beauty in the play, asserting that Helen and Cressida are valued solely for their physical attractiveness rather than their spiritual or moral qualities.

Fly, Richard D. "Cassandra and the Language of Prophecy in Troilus and Cressida." Shakespeare Quarterly 26, no. 2 (1975): 157-71. Fly analyzes the theme of prophecy in Troilus and Cressida, arguing that the foretellings of Cassandra and Calchas, combined with the Elizabethan audience's knowledge of Troy's fate, create an overarching sense of doom in the play.

Foakes, R. A. "Troilus and Cressida Reconsidered." University of Toronto Quarterly 32, no. 2 (1963): 142-54. Foakes addresses the complex genre classification of Troilus and Cressida, proposing that the first three acts are comedic, while the concluding two acts lead to an ambiguous ending that merges both comedy and tragedy.

Franson, J. Karl. "An Antenor—Aeneas Conspiracy in Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida." Studies in the Humanities 7, no. 1 (1978): 43-47. Franson explores how Shakespeare draws from Chaucer's narrative, suggesting that Antenor was the traitor of Troy. He argues that the exchange of Antenor for Cressida overlooks Antenor's greater significance to the Greeks, hinting at a conspiracy involving Aeneas to reintegrate Antenor into the fortified city of Troy.

Greene, Gayle. "Language and Value in Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida." Studies in English Literature 21, no. 2 (1981): 271-85. Greene discusses how, during the sixteenth century, the capacity of language to convey meaning fully and effectively was under scrutiny. She argues that the characters' communication failures in Troilus and Cressida disrupt the hierarchical social structure described by Ulysses.

Hunter, G. K. "Troilus and Cressida: A Tragic Satire." Shakespeare Studies 13 (1974-75): 1-23. Hunter refutes the idea that Shakespeare heavily or solely depended on medieval sources for the narrative of Troilus and Cressida, instead claiming that the play adopts the tone and themes found in Homer's works.

Kaula, David. "'Mad Idolatry' in Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida." Texas Studies in Literature and Language 15, no. 1 (1973): 25-38. Kaula highlights the biblical references in Troilus and Cressida and argues that the play suggests a Christian interpretation that contrasts with the idolatry of the Greeks and Trojans.

Kimbrough, Robert. "The Troilus Log: Shakespeare and 'Box-Office'." Shakespeare Quarterly 15, no. 3 (1964): 201-09. Kimbrough suggests that in Troilus and Cressida, Shakespeare aimed to entertain a sophisticated and courtly audience characterized by their extreme cynicism and craving for sharp satire in their theatrical experiences.

Powell, Neil. "Hero and Human: The Problem of Achilles." Critical Quarterly 21, no. 2 (1979): 17-28. Powell defends Achilles as the sole consistent character within Troilus and Cressida.

Rabkin, Norman. "Troilus and Cressida: The Uses of the Double Plot." Shakespeare Studies 1 (1965): 265-82. Rabkin explores how Troilus and Cressida portrays the conflict between love and political ambition as a battle between reason and emotion.

Rowland, Beryl. "A Cake-Making Image in Troilus and Cressida." Shakespeare Quarterly 21, no. 2 (1970): 191-94. Rowland examines the sexual connotations of cake baking in Pandarus's advice for Troilus to be patient in his pursuit of Cressida, arguing that Troilus's attraction is purely physical.

Roy, Emil. "War and Manliness in Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida." Comparative Drama 7, no. 2 (1973): 107-120. Roy asserts that both Greek and Trojan warriors exhibit an Oedipal struggle through their relentless engagement in warfare.

Stockholder, Katherine. "Power and Pleasure in Troilus and Cressida, or Rhetoric and Structure of the Anti-Tragic." College English 30, no. 7 (1969): 539-54. Stockholder analyzes characters such as Cressida, Hector, Helen, Troilus, and Ulysses, proposing that Shakespeare subverts the play's tragic elements by presenting characters focused solely on their fleeting images, which fail to meet the expectations of audiences familiar with their historical backgrounds.

Thompson, Karl F. "Troilus and Cressida: The Incomplete Achilles." College English 27, no. 7 (1966): 532-36. Thompson contends that the play is riddled with inconsistencies, particularly in Shakespeare's incomplete development of Ulysses and Achilles, and his failure to adequately address Achilles's vow to Hector's sister, Polyxena, that he would refrain from fighting the Trojans.

The ancient city of Troy, under the rule of King Priam, stands as a beleaguered symbol of resistance amidst the relentless onslaught by the powerful Greeks. Within the city walls, the Trojans grapple with the wisdom of persisting in this seemingly endless conflict. Troilus, a young Trojan noble, personifies the romantic and chivalrous ideals held dear by his people, especially through his affection for Cressida, a woman of Greek origin. In stark contrast, Hector, the voice of reason and the embodiment of Troy's noble values, urges his fellow Trojans to reconsider the war, arguing that neither its justification nor its costs warrant continued struggle.

Outside the fortified city, the Greek camp sprawls—a military encampment that has borne witness to seven years of siege. Unlike the idealistic Trojans, the Greeks are characterized by pragmatism and self-interest rather than romantic ideals. This fundamental difference between the two cultures is mirrored in their strategic centers. The extended duration of the siege has taken its toll, leaving the Greek leaders demoralized. Agamemnon, the commander of the Greek forces, attempts to rally his troops by framing the siege as a testament to Greek endurance. Ulysses, however, identifies a deeper malaise: a lack of order and discipline, rather than the strength of the Trojans, as the root of their stagnation. Instead of questioning their war motives, the Greek leaders focus on reigniting their campaign by coaxing their greatest warrior, Achilles, into action.

As the conflict escalates to the battlefield, initial victories favor the Trojans, suggesting a brief resurgence of their chivalric ideals. However, the tide soon shifts, and Greek triumph overpowers the Trojans, signaling not just the fall of a city, but the demise of a chivalric code that once infused the hearts and minds of its defenders. Thus, Troy's downfall marks a poignant end to an era where love and honor were paramount, swept away by the pragmatic and unyielding force of the Greeks.