The word hamartia comes from the Greek word ἁμαρτία, which means "to miss the mark" or "to make a mistake." It is most often connected to Greek tragedies, though it is also used in Christian theology. The term is sometimes used to describe the weaknesses or mistakes of a character, showing these as the cause of their downfall. However, some experts argue that the term refers only to a tragic accident or mistake that happens by chance, leading to serious consequences without blaming the character.

Definition

The term hamartia, as it relates to dramatic literature, was first introduced by Aristotle in his work Poetics. In tragedy, hamartia is often described as the mistake or flaw made by the main character that causes a series of events leading to a change from happiness to tragedy.

What is considered the mistake or flaw can differ. It may result from not knowing something, a poor decision, a natural weakness in the character, or an action that is morally wrong. The range of meanings has led to discussions among critics and scholars, and different dramatists have offered various interpretations.

In Aristotle'sPoetics

Hamartia is first discussed in the field of literary criticism by Aristotle in his work Poetics. According to Aristotle, hamartia is the connection between a character and their actions or behaviors.

In his introduction to the S. H. Butcher translation of Poetics, Francis Fergusson describes hamartia as an inner quality that causes the protagonist to take actions that move the story toward its tragic ending. These actions create feelings of pity and fear in the audience, which eventually lead to a release of those emotions, called catharsis.

Jules Brody, however, explains that the term hamartia does not mean fault, guilt, or moral failure. Instead, it comes from the Greek verb hamartanein, which means "to miss the mark" or "to fall short of a goal." Hamartia can refer to a mistake, such as misunderstanding something or making an error due to lack of information. It does not judge the character's actions as right or wrong but focuses on the outcome of their choices.

In Greek tragedy, a story must involve characters of high rank, prestige, or good fortune to be "of adequate magnitude." If the main character is too virtuous or too wicked, their change in fortune will not create the right balance of pity and fear needed for catharsis. Aristotle explains that hamartia is the quality of a tragic hero that helps achieve this balance.

Tragic flaw, tragic error, and divine intervention

Aristotle discusses hamartia in his work Poetics. He explains that hamartia is a storytelling technique where a story begins with a hero who is neither extremely good nor extremely bad. This hero makes a mistake or error, leading to their downfall. Scholars often debate whether hamartia refers to a character's flaw or a mistake they make.

Poetic justice describes a responsibility for poets, philosophers, and priests to ensure their work encourages moral behavior. In 18th-century French drama, hamartia was used to show a character’s vice being punished. For example, in Phèdre by Jean Racine, based on Hippolytus by Euripides, the main characters’ vices—such as anger, desire, and jealousy—lead to their tragic end. In his Preface to Phèdre, Racine writes:

The story follows a royal family. The characters’ personal vices cause their downfall.

In a 1963 article titled “The Tragic Flaw: Is it a Tragic Error?”, Isabel Hyde examines how scholars in the 20th century interpreted hamartia as a tragic flaw. She argues this interpretation is incorrect. Hyde refers to Butcher’s translation of Poetics, which describes hamartia as both an error and a "defect in character." Butcher later clarifies that "defect in character" is not a natural way to describe a flaw in behavior. Hyde also references A.C. Bradley’s Shakespearean Tragedy (1904), which she says may be misleading.

Hyde explains that treating hamartia as a tragic flaw can lead to misunderstandings. She uses examples from famous tragedies, such as Hamlet and Oedipus Rex, to show these issues. She notes that students often say Hamlet’s tragic flaw is "thinking too much," but this does not explain moments when Hamlet acts impulsively or violently. This idea also suggests Hamlet should have killed Claudius immediately to avoid tragedy, which Hyde argues is a problem.

In Oedipus Rex, Hyde observes that focusing on Oedipus’ hasty actions or overconfidence is incomplete. Instead, the key to his downfall lies in his lack of knowledge about his true parentage. His error stems from not having enough information, not from a character flaw.

In a 1978 article titled Hamartia, Atë, and Oedipus, Leon Golden studies how scholars place hamartia on a spectrum between moral flaws, character defects, and intellectual errors. He explores whether divine intervention, called Atë, plays a role in hamartia. Butcher’s translation of Poetics describes hamartia as both a "single great error" and a "single great defect in character," leading to debates among critics.

Mid-20th-century scholar Phillip W. Harsh views hamartia as a tragic flaw, pointing out that Oedipus takes some moral responsibility for his death by reacting violently at the crossroads. Van Braam, however, argues that Oedipus’ hamartia is not a personal sin but a universal human trait of trusting one’s own intellect. He notes that tragedy requires the sufferer to cause their own suffering without a conscious moral failure, creating a tragic irony.

O. Hey and others agree that hamartia refers to an action taken in good faith by the protagonist, but with missing information, leading to bad results. J.M. Bremer studied hamartia in Greek thought, focusing on Aristotle and Homer. Like Hyde, he argues hamartia is an intellectual error, not a moral failing.

J.M. Bremer and Dawe both suggest that the will of the gods may influence Aristotelian hamartia. Golden disagrees. Bremer cites a line from Oedipus Rex where the Messenger says Oedipus was "possessed by dark powers," suggesting divine or supernatural guidance.

Dawe argues that a protagonist’s downfall can come from four sources: fate, the wrath of a god, a human enemy, or the protagonist’s own weakness or error. He believes a tragic ending can result from a divine plan if the story follows Aristotle’s principles.

Golden supports Van Braam’s view that Oedipus’ tragic error comes from trusting his intellect despite warnings, emphasizing human error over divine influence. He concludes that hamartia mainly refers to an intellectual mistake, though it may include moral aspects. Golden separates the idea of divine punishment from hamartia, a view that conflicts with Bremer’s and Dawe’s interpretations.

In Christian theology

Hamartia is also used in Christian teachings because it appears in the Septuagint and the New Testament. The Hebrew word (chatá) and its Greek version (hamartia) both mean "missing the mark" or "off the mark."

There are four main uses of hamartia:

• Hamartia sometimes refers to actions that are considered sins, such as not doing something they should or doing something wrong in their thoughts, feelings, words, or actions. An example is found in Romans 5:12, which says, "all have sinned."
• Hamartia is sometimes used to describe the fall of humans from their original state of righteousness, which led to a natural tendency for people to sin. This is called original sin. For example, Romans 3:9 states, "everyone is under the power of sin."
• A third use refers to the "weakness of the flesh," which means the natural struggle humans face in resisting sin. This idea is expressed as, "the original inclination to sin in mankind comes from the weakness of the flesh."
• Hamartia is sometimes described as if it is a person. For example, Romans 6:20 mentions being enslaved to hamartia (sin).