#like a girl randomly getting seduced by a stranger that came to her palace and persuaded her somehow to let everything go and go with him

[katerinaaqu]

Hehehe to be fair I wasn't listing the absolute totality of the sources here hahaha but it is great that you popped in with the other side of the spectrum

I believe you refer on the moment in book 2 section 115 where the passage goes: καὶ μάλα ταῦτά τοι οὐκ ἤρκεσε, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναπτερώσας αὐτὴν οἴχεαι ἔχων ἐκκλέψας. "And to make matters worse that was not enough for you but you seduced/excited her to come with you that you have stolen her" (translation by me)

That is not Herodotus opinion that was him speaking on the words spoken by Proteus to Paris. Basically Proteus says that Paris basically excited or urged Helen to follow (ἀναπτερώσας αὐτὴν) but that doesn't seem to be Herodotus' opinion but rather the assumption of Proteus when he received Paris in his palace or him trying to shift the blame a bit on Helen too in order not to have as many excuses as to kill Paris for what he did because Paris claimed shelter to Egypt. But the word is not necessarily mentioning sexual desire or anything similar. As a word it also means to excite someone to do something not necessarily in love but also in adventure or something else. Basically Proteus speaks that Paris outsmarted Helen with excitement (sexual or other) and dragged her with him. I think this passage doesn't give much agency to Helen. If anything he seems to say that Helen didn't have the maturity or the brains to counter Paris even if he had stolen her as if she cannot see the right for her or not.

The way Proteus speaks in the passage seems to me like a parent accusing their kid for "exciting" another kid to do something as if that kid was not smart enough to defend itself against an obviously bad decision (It almost reminded me of how Mufasa scolded Simba for dragging Nala along with him to that obviously stupid adventure in the Lion King). Throughout most passages Herodotus speaks on Helen's matter by giving most agency to Paris instead to Helen. Helen for most part seems to be either abducted or outsmarted by Paris.

To be fair even Homer gives her a more active role but she does seem to already have regretted her decision to the passage of the Iliad and the reason why even if your criticism is valid that she could be projecting an "excuse" that Aphrodite made her do it to redeem herself to the Achaeans I tend to believe that it is not the reason because Aphrodite confronts Helen in the Iliad so her arguing with her at that passage could not be a coincidence for me so it seems that Homer being concerned, Helen was indeed influenced by Aphrodite (although of course that as I mention above could be an allegory for her falling in love and going)

As well as there is no question as to who was more good looking (all sources speak on Paris) the real question lies if beauty was the thing to move her or love. Many times we do see ancient sources comment on how beauty is a force that can lead to people do things and how sometimes it is not (Odysseus is a prime example in the Odyssey actively rejecting a number of women that could objectively be considered more beautiful than Penelope, even Helen herself to get to his wife) so I think none of the sources doubts that Paris was undoubtedly more beautiful. The real question is how many agree on her being willing or not

In fact many tragic poets do seem to make Greeks assume she is willing for example in Euripides play "Cyclops" the Greeks even mock Helen and ask if Odysseus or any other kings "shared her" because as they say "she likes it with many people" (although that play seems to be more sarcastic so it is not fully serious to begin with). In "Orestes" Electra sees her as unapologetic as she claims "look at her how she cut her hair just for show to give it to her sister's tomb and she did it so it wouldn't ruin her looks" etc.

So in the Odyssey to conclude my point, they have already patched up and she has had 7 years in Egypt to do so. So it doesn't seem like a mere excuse. If anything in various occasions she is shown to narrowly escape with her life from her husband not because she said this excuse but because she showed him her naked breasts and Menelaus not only still loved his wife but also feared to ruin such a beauty so it doesn't seem to me that Homer points to the direction that Helen is only making up excuses there (as per her passage in Iliad too)

And as I said Aphrodite could be always the force of love in general not just a goddess that has a face that decides but rather love itself as a moving force. As for the Zeus comments well I am not 100% convinced that it is actually rooted to way too many opinions! Hahaha looks to me like someone commenting on Euripides commenters! Hahahahaha! especially knowing the story of Trojan war being linked to the general Epic Cycle and all but sure these are on the table too hehe

Also another thought that is important to make is the fact that her abduction by Paris is always commented side by side with her abduction by Theseus at other sources (which was also implied by the Iliad as well with the mention of her brothers although not fully commented on). Another interesting thought is that "abduction" could also be used as the term "elope" which is something could be taken into consideration and also the abduction theme doesn't necessarily remove the willingness of the affair but rather her unwillingness to abandon her birthplace but many sources also speak on her honeymoon with him and the way they roam at least a year after they left Sparta and all so that is also into consideration.

Also I wouldn't say "remove the gods" per se I should say that not all sources need to mention them at every stop and turn. Since the story of the Epic Cycle was already moving and revolving around the gods, the importance of the Judgement of Paris was not necessarily mentioned in every single passage that mentions Helen and Paris.

Now sources like Dares the Phrygian are interesting because is claimed to be almost as old as Homer is but of course is being rescued by much later roman times thus me not including him here. Herodotus is a little closer to the times we are discussing and he is known for his consistency of gathering local legends even if those are not so pleasant for the characters themselves which is why I did include him to this. Similarly all the commenters of the Epic Cycle like Cypria are much much later sources Proclus for example being a neoplatonic philosopher born in Constantinopole in 400s so that needs to be taken under consideration too of course though scholia such as these are valuable sources to the lost poems

Even Diodorus Siculus mentions the story of a chain that belonged to Helen and now it was worn by a woman who "sank into shameful life" so it could be an indicator too on Helen's infidelity towards Menelaus (aka correlation between the stories but that is another idea)

So yup! Definitely fascinating to compare sources!

Question: Did Helen go to Troy with Paris willingly?

It depends on the source really.

Homer gives us a more complicated situation. In it Helen apparently leaves at her own accord with Paris however it is later revealed in the Odyssey that she did so because Aphrodite influenced her judgement. She already speaks with regret on her decision in the Iliad and wonders on her family and husband but in the Odyssey where more or less they have patched things up with Menelaus she says that it was because Aphrodite had her under her spell (Now of course for some people that is also a symbolism of her falling in love since Aphrodite-> Goddess of love so Aphrodite's influence -> love's influence and so Aphrodite made her fall for Paris -> she fell for Paris, but that is up for interpretation. Quite frankly given how the gods are given in a bit more literal sense in the epics as opposed to mythology in general this scenario is not necessarily likely but it is on the table)

Now other sources such as tragic writers (for example Aeschylus and Euripides) that oftentimes write their tragedies implying that Helen truly had an affair but on the other hand for once it is important to take into account that they write from the point of view of other characters for example in Euripides's "Orestes", Electra is cussing the hell out of Helen speaking on her with the worst words which makes sense given how she thought that Helen was indeed cheating her husband as opposed to the play that has Helen as a central role in which even Euripides came up with a story that says Helen never went to Troy in the first place but an idol of hers (this version is retold by Apollodorous in Epitome as well)

Apollodorous mentions how Paris persuaded Helen to follow him in his work "Epitome" so possibly here we have one of the versions in which Helen followed willingly at first. But since Apollodorous gives us many versions and retellings at the same time (as for example Euripides's version) he also mentions the word ἁρπαγή which means "taking" or "abduction" but also seems to be indicating "rape" so Apollodorous gives us many different versions for the event. Herodotus also mentions how Helen was likely abducted. Valerius Catullus in his "Carmina" also agrees.

And so on and so forth. So the majority of sources speak about how Paris carried Helen away to Troy. Now there are versions that speak on Helen being willing but I think the most prominent version is that she was not willing at least not through and through or that she was somehow either persuaded or outsmarted by Paris or by Aphrodite's influence. In general one can choose between the sources which they can place their attention to