Was the Trojan Horse a War Crime?: The modern heart of the filmed Odyssey is a transgression and its consequences. But how did the ancients see the epic ruse? (Barry Strauss, August 25, 2026, Freedom Frequency)
What would we say if the Trojan Horse took place today? Does it violate international humanitarian law, which is also known as the Law of Armed Conflict? The law permits “ruses of war” if they don’t otherwise violate international law and if they don’t constitute “perfidy.” The law defines a ruse of war as anything aimed at misleading the enemy if it doesn’t trick him into thinking that he is protected under the law of war. The latter is perfidy. For example, attacking the enemy after either pretending to surrender or faking a wound is considered perfidy. But feigned retreat, such as the Greeks engaged in at Troy, is not perfidious, and is permitted by international humanitarian law.
The Trojan Horse was an ambush by means of camouflage, and both ambushes and camouflage are permitted ruses. Still, the horse was a religious symbol and an unofficial emblem of Troy, a country known for horse breeding and horse trading. The law of armed conflict prohibits the use of a religious symbol in an ambush, but only if it invokes legal protection. Pretending to be a chaplain or hiding soldiers in a religious shrine would violate the law, but offering a false gift to a nation’s god probably would not. International law would probably judge the horse to be a legitimate ruse of war.
It might not give Sinon’s behavior a pass. On the one hand, lies and deception are no violation of the law of war. On the other hand, Sinon claimed to be hors de combat (not to be confused with horse de combat) and a refugee when, in fact, he remained an enemy soldier. The Roman poet Virgil condemned Sinon’s behavior as perjury. Lawyers will disagree, but Sinon might well be judged today to have violated the law of armed conflict.