Stack Exchange questions/115169/would-the-trojan-horse-ruse-be-legal-under-the-modern-laws-of-war changes — 20260729_rev01

1

In the mythology of the Trojan wars, the Greeks didn't surrender, they've supposedly left. The horse was left for the Trojans without any accord or agreement. Trojans, assuming the Greek retreated, then took the horse as a trophy. See the description on the [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_Horse):

2

3

> The Greeks pretended to sail away, and the Trojans pulled the horse into their city **as a victory trophy**.

4

5

Trojans were entitled to take what's left on the battlefield as trophies, but there was no promise by the Greek that the war was over and no more fighting to ensue.

6

7

As such, this is a **[ruse of war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre)** (the linked page actually shows the Trojan Horse as an illustration for the term), not perfidy.

8

9

- * *

10

11

Apparently, as you called out in the comments, the Trojan Horse is also illustrating the perfidy Wikipedia article. The other interpretation (where it is considered perfidy) is based on a different point of the story that the Wikipedia omits. The [Encyclopedia Britannica](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Trojan-horse) for the rescue:

12

13

> The Greeks, pretending to desert the war, sailed to the nearby island of Tenedos, **leaving behind Sinon, who persuaded the Trojans that the horse was an offering to Athena that would make Troy impregnable**.

14

15

Here, the Greeks didn't just retreat. They left an ambassador who persuaded the Trojans that the horse was a gift of good will and an offering to the gods.

16

17

**This point** (the ambassador lying) is considered "acting in bad faith" and **may make it perfidy**. Though it doesn't immediately follow from the plain text of the relevant article of the Geneva Convention.

+In the mythology of the Trojan wars, the Greeks didn't surrender, they've supposedly left. The horse was left for the Trojans without any accord or agreement. Trojans, assuming the Greek retreated, then took the horse as a trophy. See the description on the [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_Horse):
+> The Greeks pretended to sail away, and the Trojans pulled the horse into their city **as a victory trophy**.
+Trojans were entitled to take what's left on the battlefield as trophies, but there was no promise by the Greek that the war was over and no more fighting to ensue.
+As such, this is a **[ruse of war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruse_de_guerre)** (the linked page actually shows the Trojan Horse as an illustration for the term), not perfidy.
+- * *
+Apparently, as you called out in the comments, the Trojan Horse is also illustrating the perfidy Wikipedia article. The other interpretation (where it is considered perfidy) is based on a different point of the story that the Wikipedia omits. The [Encyclopedia Britannica](https://www.britannica.com/topic/Trojan-horse) for the rescue:
+> The Greeks, pretending to desert the war, sailed to the nearby island of Tenedos, **leaving behind Sinon, who persuaded the Trojans that the horse was an offering to Athena that would make Troy impregnable**.
+Here, the Greeks didn't just retreat. They left an ambassador who persuaded the Trojans that the horse was a gift of good will and an offering to the gods.
+**This point** (the ambassador lying) is considered "acting in bad faith" and **may make it perfidy**. Though it doesn't immediately follow from the plain text of the relevant article of the Geneva Convention.

questions/115169/would-the-trojan-horse-ruse-be-legal-under-the-modern-laws-of-war

Full text changes — 20260728_rev01 to 20260729_rev01