Fëanor and Akhilleus.

[Inderjit S]

Fëanor and Akhilleus. Two great beings in their legendariums. But with great power, comes great pride and great pride manifests itself into arrogance. Fëanor and Akhilleus were perhaps the greatest being in their worlds, but they were also arrogant, cruel, blinded by their own sense of power and eager for glory and success. Though Tolkien was against allegory, one cannot help but think that he modelled his greatest creation, Fëanor on the greatest Man to ever live: Akhilleus.

When exploring the two characters one is startled to find how similar they in fact are. Their boundless arrogance is one of the main ties between the two. Fëanor was the son of Finwë, the Ñoldoran (King of the Ñoldor) and his mother died when he was still young. He was, for the most part, spoilt, petulant and arrogant, though even more importantly, he was skilful, dexterous, brave and great-greater then any incarnate. Yet he was arrogant. He was disliked because of his arrogance. He claimed that the people of Fingolfin’s host, or the people who did not in general agree with him were, in some way, inferior to him, in fact everybody was. “Perhaps Eru has set in me a fire great then you can imagine”, his last words to the Valar, the gods of Middle-Earth, as he left Valinor forever in order to go to Middle-Earth and get revenge on Morgoth, who murdered his beloved father and robbed him of his prize possession-his Silmarils. Not only that, but his arrogance also manifested itself in harmless things, such as the naming of his brother, Fingolfin (Nolofinwë (wise-Finwë)) and Finarfin (Arafinwë (noble-Finwë.) Fëanor felt himself slighted, since he, fallaciously, regarded himself the wisest and noblest of all Finwë’s children. So his arrogance had no bounds and every target.

Akhilleus too, has an arrogance the size of the Akhaian fleet. He frequently claims he is the greatest warrior to ever exist. And it is very probable that he was the greatest warrior to ever exist-more powerful then Herakles, who used to strangle snakes in his cot. The fate of the entire Akhaian army, with its commanders, Aias, Menelaus, Agamemnon, Nestor and Odysseus lay in his hands, as well as the fate of his friends, such as Patroklos lay in his might hands. In fact, the opening scene is a display of Akhilleus’s arrogance and unbending will. Agamemnon, the lord marshal of the Akhaians claims that he wants the girl Briseis, who Akhilleus had captured, as his spoils of war. Akhilleus arrogantly replies that since it was he who did the fighting, whilst Agamemnon just stood there and watched, as usual. When Agamemnon forces Akhilleus to give up Briseis he claims that he will not take part in the war-and thus puts the lives of his fellow Akhaians at risk.

Again, we come to another similarity between Fëanor and Akhilleus; their disregard for the welfare of their people and their loved ones. In fact, both are partly responsible for the deaths of their love ones. Fëanor, after threatening his brother Fingolfin during a Ñoldorin council, is banished to Formenos, along with his family and followers. His father joins him. When he is invited to a feast, by the Valar, he elects to go, but leaves the Silmarils at home. Whilst he is at the feast, Melkor attacks Formenos, steals the Silmarils and kills his father, Finwë, leaving Fëanor distraught. He elects to go after Melkor and many of the Ñoldor follow him. But he commits several terrible acts. He and his sons say an oath, claiming that they will seek vengeance on anybody who claims the Silmarils and that the Silmarils are the property of Fëanor and his sons only. He then kills the Teleri, after they refuse to lend him ships to ferry him and his host to Middle-Earth, and he then abandons the host of Fingolfin at Araman, just because they disagreed with his actions, and, after realising that he and the Ñoldor will never be able to defeat Morgoth, he forces his sons to re-swear their oath and to seek vengeance upon Morgoth. So you can see that his actions constantly act to the detriment of his people, and his loved ones, and you begin to think whether he appreciates them or not.

The same with Akhilleus. Despite the fact that he is bellicose and the greatest warrior to ever live he refuses to join the Akhaian host, because of his pride as he felt himself slighted by Agamemnon. He also tells Thetis to convince Zeus to let tor Trojans win until Agamemnon admits he was wrong. As a result many Akhaian warriors die, along with his great friend Patroklos, who Akhilleus consents to take his place, and though he does warn him to be careful, he eventually gets himself killed by the Trojan prince, Hector. Akhilleus, like Fëanor, reacts badly to bad news. He vows revenge on Hector, and eventually kills him and drags his body around Troy three times. So both are mighty in their anger, impetuous, brave, arrogant and more importantly great. Both also anger easily, the opening line of ‘The Iliad’ deals with Akhilleus anger. ‘menis’ or divine wrath.

Another thing they both have in common is their desire for fame and glory. Akhilleus wants to be known as the greatest warrior ever after he dies. For to be remembered is the only way in which a human can gain immortality, but to be forgotten is something that Akhilleus does not desire. Akhilleus was a great man, and so he naturally wishes to be remembered as one. The same with Fëanor. He realises the folly of his vengefully going after Morgoth, yet he claims that if songs will be sung about him, and the Ñoldor, even if they do fail then it will be worth it. If the courage and endurance of the Ñoldor are remembered for many years to come then it all makes it worth it, in the end. Both eventually repent. Akhilleus allows Priam to take away the body of his son, Hector, and give him the funeral deserves, and it is said that in the end, Fëanor will repent of his bad deeds and present the Silmarils to Yavanna.

So, Fëanor and Akhilleus: great, arrogant, supercilious, easy to anger and terrible in their wrath, though hidden deeply in each character is the desire to do good, even though their actions belie this and their desire for glory and power are without bounds. If somebody was ask me who I though Fëanor was modelled on, then I would immediately reply ‘Akhilleus’.

[Lhunithiliel]

Originally posted by Inderjit
Here (http://thetolkienwiki.info/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=123) is discolsed by post at the Tolkienwikki forum, and Walter's brilliant critical reply.

Walter has made several interesting critical points here (http://thetolkienwiki.info/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=123)
The Silmarils/Eris's Apple
Peleus and Thetis compared to Finwë and Míriel
Fëanor's skill and interest in arts-and how Akhilleus is not interest in such things
Other similar myths


I am also looking forward to your reply, Lhun. Theoden-Theoderic is also coming soon, perhaps today, but if not today then after the weekend. It will, I hope, be more discussion orientated.

My replies

The Silmarils/Eris's Apple

Maybe, but the apple was the work of a perfidious god, the apple was made importance by the vainglory of several god's, and by the choices of Paris and others, therefore, Akhilleus can, by and large be held unresponsible for the whole apple situation-whereas Fëanor created the Silmarils, coveted them, and exacerbated the problem because of his pride and arrogance. Though I see your point i.e. that two objects were the cause of the terrible wars.

Peleus and Thetis compared to Finwë and Míriel

Maybe. Though clearly the position are different-on one situation the female is dominant, Thetis and in the other the male, Finwë, though Míriel was a strong willed woman. Plus the wedding of Thetis and Peleus was somewhat forced, by the revelation that Thetis's son would be more powerful then his father, which put Zeus off her, and so she was forced to shack up with a mortal, which is antipathetic to any god. Plus Peleus and Thetis's wedding feast was where it all began, Eris's apple, which set everything in motion-Odysseus oath, Paris and Helen etc.

And also, something which I forgot to mention, "that both were considered immortal - if in a different sense - and yet both were slain"

I was going to touch on that, but it seemed slightly paradoxical to call a man immortal, when he is a man, and as Aristotle would point out, mortal. I would label him as quasi-immortal. I mean, he was bound to die one day, and he would have preferred to die in battle, though I understand what you are saying, that he was generally considered to be "immortal"-but for his heel and the dratted Apollo!
And since Fëanor was banished from Valinor forever and Mandos predicted he would die soon, then you could say that his fate belied his nature. So another interesting comparison is drawn up-both are meant to be immortal, but ironically, are doomed to die.

[Lhunithiliel]

Originally posted by Scatha

In many way, Tolkien had been inspired by Mythology, which most of us know already. He had set out to write a Myth for the good old england, when LOTR was created. Little did he know that his work would surpass what he had set out to do.

The comparison made by Indy is a good quality piece and no doubt there will be more of these comparisons to be found within Tolkiens work. This dragon here does however have to admit, that I do not even have the slightest clue who Ankhilleus is, until I read about the figure on this board. Greek mythology is not my strong point, since I always preferred the celtic and nordic gods.

(More crunchy and tastes less like olives ;) )

[Inderjit S]

I know next-to-nothing about any Nordic or Germanic gods.

Also, whilst we are, or were, discussing Akhilleus's "immortality" and his bathing in the River Styx-there is a similar story, I believe in the Vedic myths, about a great warrior whose mother bathes him in a special river (The Ganges?) in order to "make" him immortal. Off the top of my head, I have no idea who it was, perhaps Walter will, he is like 3 times older then me and compared to him I am just a dilettante/ :D

Also---thanks for changing everything for me, Lhun. I was busy yesterday so I had little chance, or time, to do so.

I sure hoped that my comparison would generate more interest/replies-I wonder how much replies my Theoderic thread will get, and given that Greek Mythology is a lot more exoteric then Goth kings.

Also, I would also like to echo Walter's sentiments, about the homogeneity about ancient legends, or rather, a lot of them have similair elements and outcomes.

I also think that Tolkien borrowed a lot more from Nordic myths then Greek ones.

[Lhunithiliel]

Here are some thoughts after reading this wonderful expose.

I do not intend to counter points of view of the author or/and of others, or to suggest my views are of an ultimate authority.
I’ll just share.

First of all I have to admit that there is a great similarity between these two characters. And amazing it is. Two men, two great leaders, two great human minds… yes!… they are alike in lots of things!
And on grounds of the similarity of their minds and of a lot of similar circumstances in their lives, their reactions to these circumstances are alike, too.

So, divine and terrible is their wrath said to be.
But I count it as a righteous reaction on their behalf.
A couple of reasons:
- A great part in both conflicts, where both these heroes are involved in, had been caused by Gods. But Gods had erred! And then men were involved in Gods’ affairs and only men, in fact, had to suffer the consequences of Gods’ mistakes and pay the price. At reaching the understanding of such circumstances, wouldn’t anyone’s wrath be terrible? That depends of course on the person who experiences the wrath. But in the case of Feanor and Achilles, taking into consideartion the might of their individuality, I would’ve not expected other reaction than this.
- However, I have to admit that their wrathfull reaction was unjustly directed, or, better said – it fell upon the wrong target. Both of them, in their wrath, hurt people who, in fact, were not guilty of the whole situation and therefore suffered the “blow” unjustly.
- ‘Divine’ their wrath is said to be. IMO, it is a mode of expressing the grandeur of both these men, but to some extent, they really had sth. ‘divine’ in them, didn’t they. Achilles’ strength and invincibility provided by the Gods, and Feanor’s powers that were greater than those of any living Elf , which he believed to be granted to him by Eru himself and which even the Valar respected.

But whatever their wrath is called, and whatever the reasons were, and no matter how these are to be analysed, I still distinguish it from ‘vengance’. I think their reaction is very close to ‘vengance’ but is not it, in its essence.

Then,
Arrogant they are said to be.
Arrogant, however, IMO, are often, not always !, called people who are admitted to have powers, skills, knowledge etc. much greater than that of the valuator. Because the valuator, if being honest, cannot but admit what is obvious! But it is so human to ‘envy’! And ‘envy’ has many names and ‘arrogance’ is one of them. If not ‘envy’, then it might be as well ‘not understanding’ and that can, too, have many names and ‘arrogance’ is one of them.
In other words, think of who considered them arrogant?

This leads us to sth. else :
Inder says:
But with great power, comes great pride and great pride manifests itself into arrogance.
I, in fact, agree with this to some extent. Both, Feanor and Achilles, ‘suffered’ from this ‘disease’.
What however this statement provoked in my mind, was the issue of leadership.
It is a fact that both of them were great leaders. Now … what does it take to be a leader of such a level?
I enlisted a couple of qualities, when thinking about this:
- high intelligence
- hight self-respect and deep self-esteem
- amazing skills to persuade large groups of people in the righteousness of your own cause, thus making them follow, even though they all are different individuals, hence expected to not have identical views, opinions, intentions.

In this aspect, both are very much the same, aren’t they!
And … I, personally, bow in front of such qualities. I count them among the virtues of the human character.
On this grounds, I highly respect them both, and also this gives me all reasons to … sort of ‘forgive’ their ‘bad’ deeds.

A side note: While studying English, I was astonished to learn that the word ‘ambicious’ has a negative notion in the English-speaking world, while in my language (though in both languages it is an imported word) is has a strong positive meaning!

Another issue, related closely to the above, is that of “Who makes history – the masses or the individuals?”
I was raised with the ideology which used to teach us that ‘ masses make history’.
Yet… is it so? If it were so, then why does history, both – of ‘real life’ and that in fiction, gives us names of individuals to be remembered and cherished?
Nopw, I admit that this topic is extremely large, and it is not in this thread to discuss it, but in its light, I have found another similarity between Feanor and Achilles.
They both made history!
Feanor : the flight of the Noldor >> creation of the Sun and the Moon>> la ‘conquista’ of ME >> wars against Morgoth which provided the opportunity of the Free Peoples to develop a civilization>> Melkor’s destruction >> etc.
Achilles: destruction of Troy >> escape of Enei (spelling?) >> formation of the little realm on the Penines >> the Roman Empire >> etc…

Next thing I would like to comment on came to my mind when I read sth. Tolkien said of Beowulf:
“He is a man, and that for him and for many is sufficient tagedy.”

This statement I find so very true and applicable not only to Beowulf, but to Feanor as well, for not only it is that most of Tolkien’s main characters, with strong trace to leave behind, are men, but also because they are strongly and deeply tragic. And Feanor is one of the finest and strongest examples of these. I find his tragedy to arise from the clash between his own inner recognition of his own power and greatness, and what he could used them for for the good of his people , but also realizing that these were being misused and manipulated by forces beyond his control – all that versus the constraints of the objective circumstances of his time and not least – versus Gods’ will.
This makes Feanor’s tragedy monstruous, and such powers are able to ‘consume’ even the greatest of minds. As it was the case with him.

In this aspect, however, I find a great difference between Feanor and Achilles. I don’t think Achilles was consumed by the power of such a desaster.

Last thing:
They both are accused of causing the death of loved ones in their lives: Feanor lost his father, Achilles – Patrokles (sp?) as well as of many others, involved in the events.

I, however, find some reasons to justify their behaviour and to also hold them irresponsible for some, not all !, of their actions.

With Achilles:
What guilt does he have that the whole war was unjust?
And was it his fault that the “great” commanders of the armies lacked any reasonable and good military strategy and tactics, thus – depending on the interferrence of a single man – him?! Not to mention that the war was eventually won again because of the brilliance of a single man’s mind – that of Odysseus!
If many soldiers died, this is definitely not Achilles’ fault, I think.
As for Patrokles, I think this was not his fault either, but the young warrior’s desire to achieve the same greatness and fame as Achilles himself had. Unfortunately for him he was not Achilles and he found his death. Why would Achilles be held responsible?

With Feanor:
What guilt does he have that the Valar had been negligent towards Melkor’s affairs and had let him become THE Evil – a divine power that Feanor dared to oppose but was doomed not to defeat?!
Was he really guilty of his father’s death? I don’t think so. It’s a deed of Morgoth and a consequence of many other interrelated factors and circumstances, but to hold Feanor entirely responsible for this, I think is not a just ‘verdict’.

Well, this is it. :)

[Scatha]

I know next-to-nothing about any Nordic or Germanic gods....
I also think that Tolkien borrowed a lot more from Nordic myths then Greek ones.

Indy, sorry for the skew of the contents of you post above, I think this is not a coincidance. Tolkien was said to have used Finnish for a base to quenya, since he so admired the language, that leaves but a small step to use their myths. It gave him a range of ideas, such as the wolves, who were easily transformed into wargs. The great dragon nidrafell, who was btw so much more powerful then those depicted in LOTR, but surely jst as evil. ;)

Walter stated a few examples as well, that are easily indentifiable once you know a bit of the ancient 'germanic/norse' legends. And yes Walter, these were the examples I was aiming at. ;)

[Maedhros]

Akhilleus too, has an arrogance the size of the Akhaian fleet. He frequently claims he is the greatest warrior to ever exist. And it is very probable that he was the greatest warrior to ever exist-more powerful then Herakles, who used to strangle snakes in his cot. The fate of the entire Akhaian army, with its commanders, Aias, Menelaus, Agamemnon, Nestor and Odysseus lay in his hands, as well as the fate of his friends, such as Patroklos lay in his might hands. In fact, the opening scene is a display of Akhilleus’s arrogance and unbending will. Agamemnon, the lord marshal of the Akhaians claims that he wants the girl Briseis, who Akhilleus had captured, as his spoils of war. Akhilleus arrogantly replies that since it was he who did the fighting, whilst Agamemnon just stood there and watched, as usual. When Agamemnon forces Akhilleus to give up Briseis he claims that he will not take part in the war-and thus puts the lives of his fellow Akhaians at risk.

This is not right.
From the Iliad: Book I
And which of the gods was it that set them on to quarrel? It was
the son of Zeus and Leto; for he was angry with the king and sent
a pestilence upon the host to plague the people, because the son
of Atreus had dishonoured Chryses his priest. Now Chryses had
come to the ships of the Achaeans to free his daughter, and had
brought with him a great ransom: moreover he bore in his hand the
sceptre of Apollo wreathed with a suppliant's wreath, and he
besought the Achaeans, but most of all the two sons of Atreus,
who were their chiefs.

The king is of course Agamemnon.
"Son of Atreus," said he, "I deem that we should now turn roving
home if we would escape destruction, for we are being cut down by
war and pestilence at once. Let us ask some priest or prophet, or
some reader of dreams (for dreams, too, are of Zeus) who can tell
us why Phoebus Apollo is so angry, and say whether it is for some
vow that we have broken, or hecatomb that we have not offered,
and whether he will accept the savour of lambs and goats without
blemish, so as to take away the plague from us."

With these words he sat down, and Calchas son of Thestor, wisest
of augurs, who knew things past present and to come, rose to
speak. He it was who had guided the Achaeans with their fleet to
Ilius, through the prophesyings with which Phoebus Apollo had
inspired him. With all sincerity and goodwill he addressed them
thus:--

"Achilles, loved of heaven, you bid me tell you about the anger
of King Apollo, I will therefore do so; but consider first and
swear that you will stand by me heartily in word and deed, for I
know that I shall offend one who rules the Argives with might, to
whom all the Achaeans are in subjection. A plain man cannot stand
against the anger of a king, who if he swallow his displeasure
now, will yet nurse revenge till he has wreaked it. Consider,
therefore, whether or no you will protect me."

And Achilles answered, "Fear not, but speak as it is borne in
upon you from heaven, for by Apollo, Calchas, to whom you pray,
and whose oracles you reveal to us, not a Danaan at our ships
shall lay his hand upon you, while I yet live to look upon the
face of the earth--no, not though you name Agamemnon himself, who
is by far the foremost of the Achaeans."

Thereon the seer spoke boldly. "The god," he said, "is angry
neither about vow nor hecatomb, but for his priest's sake, whom
Agamemnon has dishonoured, in that he would not free his daughter
nor take a ransom for her; therefore has he sent these evils upon
us, and will yet send others. He will not deliver the Danaans
from this pestilence till Agamemnon has restored the girl without
fee or ransom to her father, and has sent a holy hecatomb to
Chryse. Thus we may perhaps appease him."

With these words he sat down, and Agamemnon rose in anger. His
heart was black with rage, and his eyes flashed fire as he
scowled on Calchas and said, "Seer of evil, you never yet
prophesied smooth things concerning me, but have ever loved to
foretell that which was evil. You have brought me neither comfort
nor performance; and now you come seeing among Danaans, and
saying that Apollo has plagued us because I would not take a
ransom for this girl, the daughter of Chryses. I have set my
heart on keeping her in my own house, for I love her better even
than my own wife Clytemnestra, whose peer she is alike in form
and feature, in understanding and accomplishments. Still I will
give her up if I must, for I would have the people live, not die;
but you must find me a prize instead, or I alone among the
Argives shall be without one. This is not well; for you behold,
all of you, that my prize is to go elsewhither."

And Achilles answered, "Most noble son of Atreus, covetous beyond
all mankind, how shall the Achaeans find you another prize? We
have no common store from which to take one. Those we took from
the cities have been awarded; we cannot disallow the awards that
have been made already. Give this girl, therefore, to the god,
and if ever Zeus grants us to sack the city of Troy we will
requite you three and fourfold."

Then Agamemnon said, "Achilles, valiant though you be, you shall
not thus outwit me. You shall not overreach and you shall not
persuade me. Are you to keep your own prize, while I sit tamely
under my loss and give up the girl at your bidding? Let the
Achaeans find me a prize in fair exchange to my liking, or I will
come and take your own, or that of Ajax or of Ulysses; and he to
whomsoever I may come shall rue my coming. But of this we will
take thought hereafter; for the present, let us draw a ship into
the sea, and find a crew for her expressly; let us put a hecatomb
on board, and let us send Chryseis also; further, let some chief
man among us be in command, either Ajax, or Idomeneus, or
yourself, son of Peleus, mighty warrior that you are, that we may
offer sacrifice and appease the the anger of the god."

Achilles scowled at him and answered, "You are steeped in
insolence and lust of gain. With what heart can any of the
Achaeans do your bidding, either on foray or in open fighting? I
came not warring here for any ill the Trojans had done me. I have
no quarrel with them. They have not raided my cattle nor my
horses, nor cut down my harvests on the rich plains of Phthia;
for between me and them there is a great space, both mountain and
sounding sea. We have followed you, Sir Insolence! for your
pleasure, not ours--to gain satisfaction from the Trojans for
your shameless self and for Menelaus. You forget this, and
threaten to rob me of the prize for which I have toiled, and
which the sons of the Achaeans have given me. Never when the
Achaeans sack any rich city of the Trojans do I receive so good a
prize as you do, though it is my hands that do the better part of
the fighting.

Agamemnon didn't want Briseis as his spoils of war, he wanted Briseis because it was Achilles who defended the seer Calchas who told the reason of the suffering of the plage that Apollo sent to the Achaeans because Agamemnon had taken Chryseis. If it would have been another achaean captain such as Ulysses or Ajax, the quarrel would have been with them instead.

[Maedhros]

Again, we come to another similarity between Fëanor and Akhilleus; their disregard for the welfare of their people and their loved ones.
Have you read greek Tragedies?
From Euripides Iphigenia At Aulis
ACHILLES My proud spirit is stirred to range aloft, but it has learnt
to grieve in misfortune and rejoice in high prosperity with equal
moderation. For these are the men who can count on ordering all their
life aright by wisdom's rules. True, there are cases where 'tis pleasant
not to be too wise, but there are others, where some store of wisdom
helps. Brought up in godly Chiron's halls myself, I learnt to keep
a single heart; and provided the Atridae lead aright, I will obey
them; but when they cease therefrom, no more will I obey. Nay, but
here and in Troy I will show the freedom of my nature, and, as far
as in me lies, do honour to Ares with my spear. Thee, lady, who hast
suffered so cruelly from thy nearest and dearest, will I, by every
effort in a young man's power, set right, investing thee with that
amount of pity, and never shall thy daughter, after being once called
my bride, die by her father's hand; for I will not lend myself to
thy husband's subtle tricks; no! for it will be my name that kills
thy child, although it wieldeth not the steel. Thy own husband is
the actual cause, but I shall no longer be guiltless, if, because
of me and my marriage, this maiden perishes, she that hath suffered
past endurance and been the victim of affronts most strangely undeserved.
So am I made the poorest wretch in Argos; I a thing of naught, and
Menelaus counting for a man! No son of Peleus I, but the issue of
a vengeful fiend, if my name shall serve thy husband for the murder.
Nay! by Nereus, who begat my mother Thetis, in his home amid the flowing
waves, never shall king Agamemnon touch thy daughter, no! not even
to the laying of a finger-tip upon her robe; else will Sipylus, that
frontier town of barbarism, the cradle of those chieftains' line,
be henceforth a city indeed, while Phthia's name will nowhere find
mention. Calchas, the seer, shall rue beginning the sacrifice with
his barley-meal and lustral water. Why, what is a seer? A man who
with luck tells the truth sometimes, with frequent falsehoods, but
when his luck deserts him, collapses then and there. It is not to
secure a bride that I have spoken thus-there be maids unnumbered eager
to have my love-no! but king Agamemnon has put an insult on me; he
should have asked my leave to use my name as a means to catch the
child, for it was I chiefly who induced Clytaemnestra to betroth her
daughter to me; verily I had yielded this to Hellas, if that was where
our going to Ilium broke down; I would never have refused to further
my fellow soldiers' common interest. But, as it is, I am as naught
in the eyes of those chieftains, and little they reck of treating
me well or ill. My sword shall soon know if any one is to snatch thy
daughter from me, for then will I make it reek with the bloody stains
of slaughter, ere it reach Phrygia. Calm thyself then; as a god in
his might I appeared to thee, without being so, but such will I show
myself for all that.

The story here is that the Achaean fleet in order to triumph against Troy, Agamemnon as their leader, has to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia to Artemis. Because his wife Clytaemnestra would never consent to such a thing he doesn't consult with her and she thinks that she is to be married to Achilles who does not know it either.
When Achilles find out about it, quoted above, he defends Iphigenia with his own life.
The sad part is that when the Achaeans knew that they had to sacrifice Iphigenia in order to win at Troy, they do not hesitate and even Achilles own Myrmidons turn against him.
In the End, Agamemnon nor his brother Menelaus have the will to kill Iphigenia, but she seeing the situation volunteers herself to be sacrificed for the greater good. The interesting part is that when she is about to be sacrificed the godess Artemis saves her live but neither Agamemnon nor Clytaemnestra knew that she lived. Because of that, when Agamemnon returns to his home, he is killed by her wife, and later Clytaemnestra is killed by her own son Orestes.
Fëanor would never, IMHO, have put himself in the line for a stranger the way Achilles did with Iphigenia.

Both eventually repent. Akhilleus allows Priam to take away the body of his son, Hector, and give him the funeral deserves, and it is said that in the end, Fëanor will repent of his bad deeds and present the Silmarils to Yavanna.
In the legendarium, we don't actually see nor read that Fëanor actually repents, but we do see it clearly with Achilles.
From the Iliad: Book XXIV
As when some cruel spite has befallen a man that he should have
killed some one in his own country, and must fly to a great man's
protection in a land of strangers, and all marvel who see him,
even so did Achilles marvel as he beheld Priam. The others looked
one to another and marvelled also, but Priam besought Achilles
saying, "Think of your father, O Achilles like unto the gods, who
is such even as I am, on the sad threshold of old age. It may be
that those who dwell near him harass him, and there is none to
keep war and ruin from him. Yet when he hears of you being still
alive, he is glad, and his days are full of hope that he shall
see his dear son come home to him from Troy; but I, wretched man
that I am, had the bravest in all Troy for my sons, and there is
not one of them left. I had fifty sons when the Achaeans came
here; nineteen of them were from a single womb, and the others
were borne to me by the women of my household. The greater part
of them has fierce Mars laid low, and Hector, him who was alone
left, him who was the guardian of the city and ourselves, him
have you lately slain; therefore I am now come to the ships of
the Achaeans to ransom his body from you with a great ransom.
Fear, O Achilles, the wrath of heaven; think on your own father
and have compassion upon me, who am the more pitiable, for I have
steeled myself as no man yet has ever steeled himself before me,
and have raised to my lips the hand of him who slew my son."

Thus spoke Priam, and the heart of Achilles yearned as he
bethought him of his father. He took the old man's hand and moved
him gently away. The two wept bitterly--Priam, as he lay at
Achilles' feet, weeping for Hector, and Achilles now for his
father and now for Patroclous, till the house was filled with
their lamentation. But when Achilles was now sated with grief and
had unburthened the bitterness of his sorrow, he left his seat
and raised the old man by the hand, in pity for his white hair
and beard


Not to mention that the war was eventually won again because of the brilliance of a single man’s mind – that of Odysseus!
A coward of a man I would say. He killed the baby Astyanax who has Hector's and Andromache's son.

From Euripides Rhesus:
ATHENA Whither away from the Trojan ranks, with sorrow gnawing at
your hearts, because fortune granteth not you twain to slay Hector
or Paris? Have ye not heard that Rhesus is come to succour Troy in
no mean sort? If he survive this night until tomorrow's dawn, neither
Achilles nor Aias, stout spearman, can stay him from utterly destroying
the Argive fleet, razing its palisades and carrying the onslaught
of his lance far and wide within the gates; slay him, and all is thine;
let Hector's sleep alone, nor hope to leave him a weltering trunk,
for he shall find death at another hand.

There is an Euripide's incomplete tragedy called Rhesus. In that tragedy it is stated that Rhesus was a greater warrior than Achilles.