First, I would like to begin with a question. Why is it called the Encomium on Helen when it could be the Encomium to Theseus?
In praising Theseus, Isocrates hopes to accomplish a dual purpose. First, he seeks to establish the practically of wisdom. He seeks to show that all human acts should be of practical use to humans, and that only a proper education in practical wisdom can achieve this. Second, he seeks to establish a syllogism that will help strengthen the foundation of his argument. His syllogism is basically as follows, in my view:
Theseus is the greatest hero.
The greatest hero would only desire the greatest woman.
Theseus would Desire Helen.
Therefore, Helen is a great woman.
Isocrates begins by comparing Theseus to another great hero, Heracles. He contrasts their various deeds, and deems Theseus the greater hero. He does so because he believes that Theseus completed the more practical deeds. Isocrates argues that, “we shall find that other famous people lack something—the one courage, another wisdom, another some other share of virtue—this person (Theseus) was in need of nothing; he had achieved complete virtue (arête`)” (37). One of the basic foundations of Isocratian wisdom, it seems, would be for that wisdom to be of practical use to the state, but more specifically in improving the state. Education is the means to train good men to speak well, and the state suffers when men misuse rhetoric for ill gains. His statement in the antidosis that he should be held accountable if ever his students were evil is a powerful statement that teachers hold a responsibility for the education they provide (223).
His argument for Theseus being the greater hero resides in the fact that all of Heracles acts were for selfish personal gain. He alone benefitted from his acts, whereas Theseus’s acts “freed the inhabitants of the city from great distress and fear” (38). The essential point is that the acts of Theseus were practical whereas the acts of Heracles were not. He then argues that “we cannot produce a more credible witness—or more competent judge—of Helen’s good qualities than the insight of Theseus” (41).
He then goes on to argue that, “one side could have returned Helen and been free of the troubles, and the other could have forgotten about her, and lived securely for the rest of time but were unwilling to do so,” because “they did not fight because they were fighting for Alexander or Menelaus, but for Asia and Europe. The thought that whichever land she physically inhabited would be the more prosperous” (43). This is interesting because it argues that her beauty and breeding were so powerful as to totally alter the course of a kingdom’s fate. Isocrates reiterates this by acknowledging the power of beauty by stating, “She had the most beauty, which is the most venerated, most honored, and most divine quality in the world. It is easy understand its power: many things that lack courage or wisdom or sense of justice may appear more honored than of these qualities alone, but we will not find anything loved that has been stripped of beauty; everything is despised unless it has gained a share of this aspect, and virtue is especially esteemed because it has the most beautiful of qualities” (44).
This underscores the her value, and establishes her as a suitable mate for Theseus who he has already established as the greatest of heroes, and helps complete his syllogism.