In each generation in the house of Atreus blood flows with lies, deception and murder[1]. The Argive Elders in Agamemnon acknowledge pollution infects all living there but hold out hope for a better tomorrow. Three times in the parodos they intone “We cry, cry for death, but good win out for glory in the end.[2]” This is the pivotal dilemma woven throughout The Oresteia. Due to the implementation of the first Athenian court at the end of Eumenides which ceases the cycle of murders stemming from blood retaliation many scholars maintain good does, in fact, win out[3]. This paper contests that notion and asserts good is killed or subdued in the end. Success belongs to those with selfish motives; man, woman and god alike. Central characters and each chorus in The Oresteia will be analysed concerning motives for their crimes. By the conclusion only three will remain innocent in the eyes of Justice; Iphigenia, Cassandra and the Furies.
To understand character’s motives in conjunction with morality the term justice must be examined in context of the time in which the trilogy is set. Several critics who equate good with the construction of the first court ignore Aeschylus was not writing about his own time, when such an institution was already established[4], but one prior in which blood vengeance was the basic principle of law[5]. The chorus clarifies this when referencing Iphigenia’s sacrifice, “stop the wind with a virgin’s blood, feed their lust, their fury! Law is law![6]” This is repeated in the Choephori “Stroke for bloody stroke must be paid[7].” Even Athena agrees in Eumenides blood vengeance is the Furies raison d’etre, “Even they have their destiny too, hard to dismiss[8].” Athena’s manipulation; creating a court to circumvent these rules, does not negate blood vengeance as rule of law at the time[9]. In the mind of Athenians when Justice is served good reigns which, in the light of blood vengeance[10], means “the one who acts must suffer[11].”
Iphigenia suffered at the hands of her father yet did not whet the ground with another’s blood. This means Iphigenia cannot be seen as a victim of retaliative justice though this has been claimed by some. It has been argued Iphigenia’s sacrifice was payback for the murder of Thyestes children by Agamemnon’s father. Iphigenia, however, lifted no hand against another in violence therefore her death was not an act of vengeance[12]. In Agamemnon it is stated Iphigenia was sacrificed to “charm away the savage winds of Thrace[13].” Agamemnon sacrificed his own daughter to maintain his reputation as a military hero[14]. It has been posited “once he put his neck in the strap of fate[15]” means Agamemnon had little choice to do as Artemis degreed. Agamemnon’s motive, however, was not fear of a wrathful goddess but of what his comrades would think of him[16]. The chorus remind us of Agamemnon’s musings, “What is worse? Desert the fleets, foul the alliance? No, but stop the winds with a virgin’s blood.[17]” There is no inference Agamemnon fears for his life but rather his reputation. Agamemnon’s crimes have nothing to do with retaliation or fear but with pride; a sin equated with evil[18].
Clytemnestra has been painted as both good and evil. Evil for the murder of a hero; proven to be no hero at all. In feminist readings she is, however, equated with a distraught wife grieving for her daughter. If her reason for murdering Agamemnon is revenge for the sacrifice of Iphigenia, as stated repeatedly, then if good is equated with justice and justice with the law of retaliation Clytemnestra’s identity as a good woman bears out[19]. The problem is these readings only focus on one of Clytemnestra’s motives and ignore other reasons explicit in the text. Clytemnestra is not only bitter about Iphigenia’s murder but also because Agamemnon abandoned her for ten years[20]. As she explains to Orestes in The Choephori “It hurts women, being kept from men, my son[21]”
Clytemnestra’s jealousy is commonly cited as an additional motive connected to Cassandra’s intimate relationship with Agamemnon. This theory is unsubstantiated as Clytemnestra hates Agamemnon and desires to be rid of him[22]. She prays to Zeus for her murder to be successful, “Zeus, Zeus, Master of all fulfilment, now fulfil our prayers.[23]” She also has a lover of her own Aegisthus; who is weak and can be controlled allowing her to rule over the city[24]. Clytemnestra’s jealousy is about relinquishing her power to Agamemnon and the threat another woman may possibly usurp the limited power she would retain[25]. As Clytemnestra’s murder of her husband is not purely retaliatory but mixed with self-serving motives it cannot be seen as justice in its primal sense[26].
Orestes, is often interpreted as a man just doing his filial duty at the behest of the gods. He is shown to struggle with his decision[27]. At the moment of truth, he hesitates asking ‘What will I do Plyades! I dread to kill my mother![28]” Plyades urges “Make all mankind your enemy not the gods[29].” This reasoning persuades Orestes to commit matricide. This is not a cry for justice rather one to avoid the wrath of the divine[30]. Orestes fears also extend to his reputation as a powerful wealthy man[31]. When Orestes prays to Apollo in The Choephori he claims, as a man, he should save his citizens “from the beck and call of a brace of women[32]” at the same time lamenting his “lack of patrimony.[33]” This makes it clear vengeance is not Orestes only goal but one among many including greed, power, fear and status[34].
The evil in human form has been discussed now the role of the Olympian gods; Apollo and Athena will be considered. Apollo claims he speaks with the voice of Zeus, “Seer, that I am, I never lie/not once have I declared a word…Zeus did not command[35]”. Even in this line Apollo lies; he tells Orestes the Furies will pursue him if he does not avenge the murder of Agamemnon but then blames the Furies for not going after Clytemnestra. This shows the Furies would not have pursued Orestes if he did not kill his mother; therefore, Apollo lied[36]. Apollo hates the Furies and their destined role of blood vengeance yet agrees it is expected in the case of murder. He calls the Furies “obscenities[37]” yet admonishes them for not pursuing “the wife who strikes her husband down[38]. It appears Apollo only denies this is the base law of homicide when advantageous for him. If the Furies are exiled or subdued then the Olympian Gods will have supreme rule. This is one of Apollo’s motives to place Olympian rule over Chthonic[39].
Apollo also feels the need to preserve a patriarchal society highlighted in his argument discussing the parental role of the mother. He explains Clytemnestra’s murder was less heinous than Agamemnon’s because it was not committed by a blood relative[40]. He asserts the mother is “just a nurse who holds the seed.[41]” This is ironic as Apollo had previously accused the Furies of not avenging Agamemnon; no blood relative to Clytemnestra. Apollo’s motives for helping Orestes have nothing to do with justice but misogyny and self-interest[42].
Athena manipulates the true form of justice, blood vengeance, for her own selfish reasons. It must be remembered Athena implemented the first court at the end of Eumenides. This was not around at the beginning of the trilogy but created by Athena in order to rule over the Furies[43]. The law at the time was blood vengeance[44]. Athena acknowledges this when referencing the Furies, “they have their destiny too, hard to dismiss[45].” She, however, ignores this, as she wants Olympian Gods to be supreme rulers, and creates a new form of justice which subsumes the Furies[46]. Nowhere does it say Zeus required a new law. In fact, throughout Zeus is said to uphold the law of blood vengeance[47]. The chorus in Agamemnon intone “Zeus led us on to know/…We must suffer, suffer into truth.[48]” Athena agrees with the misogyny of Apollo not to uphold justice but so she can rule over the polis without interference[49].
The Gods have been shown to be selfish and the same can be said of the first two choruses. The Argive Elders in Agamemnon are often equated with ambivalence not evil[50]. There is, however, the old maxim which asserts evil triumphs when good men do nothing. This exactly the case with the Elders. They are aware Clytemnestra plans to murder Agamemnon well before it occurs yet do not warn him. Their concern is with self-preservation[51]. Even as they hear Agamemnon’s death cries they ask “but who[52]” yet it can be no-one else. Fear stills them in their tracks and costs Agamemnon his life[53].
In contrast the chorus of slave women in the Choephori howl for the blood of Clytemnestra. This seems counter intuitive as Clytemnestra murdered the destroyer of their city and so they should champion her[54]. Instead they side with Orestes because their main concern is pleasing their new master[55]. In their own words “we kneel at their command/our masters right or wrong.[56]” If their concern was purely about the dead left behind this would be comparable with retaliatory justice yet this is not their only consideration. The slave women know they have to live under the new king Orestes and are determined to make their new accommodations as tolerable as possible[57].
The central characters and two choruses have been examined in terms of the law of retaliatory justice and in no case was this a solitary motive for murder. The good consisting of Iphigenia, Cassandra and the Furies will now be analysed. Iphigenia, overwhelmingly, is viewed as the purest victim. Her death has nothing to do with retaliation. It was unexpected, she was a child and it was perpetrated on her wedding day[58]. Her innocence exists without question, even the Archive Elders who love Agamemnon are appalled at his filicide[59]. In contrast, some scholars attempt to besmirch Cassandra’s innocence. They claim because Cassandra did not act to save herself or Agamemnon she is guilty[60]. This discounts Cassandra’s position as a slave. She was powerless and had to make the best of the situation she was forced into[61]. In Cassandra own words, “There is no escape[62].” Cassandra bravely embraces her death with no mar upon her soul. She remains truly innocent.
The final innocents are the Furies. They are seen by many, especially Apollo, as the epitome of evil. This blackening of their name is just rhetoric spouted by an Olympian God who wants to usurp the place of the Chthonic Gods[63]. The Furies uphold the law of justice as it was at the time. The law of kin blood for kin blood. Some scholars who acknowledge the Furies uphold this primal law then lampoon them for not pursuing Clytemnestra. This is not their role, as they point out[64], “That murder would not destroy one’s flesh and blood.[65]” The Furies execute their duty of vengeance with no other motive than to preform the job they were created for. Considering this, in a place where the law is vengeance and vengeance equals justice the Furies are innocent[66]. These innocents are in the end subsumed with threats and bribes from selfish Olympian Gods desiring power[67].
As demonstrated evil wins out in the end of the Oresteia in the form of selfish motives including greed, power and misogyny. The good, Cassandra, Iphigenia and the Furies, are either killed or subsumed. The plea of the Archive Elders goes unheard. Good does not “win out for glory in the end[68]” but glory goes to those consumed with self-interest.
References
[1] James, J, Helm ‘Aeschylus: the genealogy of morals’ Transactions of the American Philological Association, 134 (2004) p. 38.
[2] Aeschylus, Agamemnon. 125;139;160.
[3] Judith Fletcher ‘Polyphony to Silence: The Jurors of the Oresteia’ College Literature, 41. 2 (2014) p. 63.
[4] Ibid, p. 58.
[5] Helen Bacon ‘The Furies Homecoming’ Classical Philology, 96. 1 (2001) p.49.
[6] Aeschylus, Agamemnon,214-216.
[7] Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 319.
[8] Aeschylus, The Eumenides, 491.
[9] Phillip Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy: Morals and Integrity in Aeschylus’ Oresteia, (Durham, 1984). p.126.
[10] P.B.R. Forbes, ‘Law and Politic in the Oresteia’ The Classical Review, 62 (1948) p.100.
[11] Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 320.
[12] William Whallon, ‘Why is Artemis Angry?” The American Journal of Philology, 82 (1961) P.79.
[13] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 1444.
[14] Helm, ‘Aeschylus: Genealogy of morals’ p.41.
[15] Ibid, 218.
[16] Helm, ‘Aeschylus: Genealogy of morals’ p.42.
[17] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 213-214
[18] Helm, “Genealogy of morals’ p.44.
[19] Sanna-llaria Kittela, ‘The Queen Ancient and Modern: Aeschylus’ Clytemnestra’ New Voices in Classical Reception Studies, 4 (2009) p. 125.
[20] Reginald Pepys Willington-Ingram ‘Clytemnestra and the Vote of Athena’ The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 68 (1948), p.135.
[21] Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 907.
[22] Kittela ‘The Ancient and Modern Queen’ p. 124.
[23] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 975-976.
[24] Kittela, ‘The Ancient and Modern Queen’ p. 129.
[25] Ibid, p. 128.
[26] Ibid, p.135.
[27] William Chase Greene, Moria: Fate, Good and Evil in Greek thought, (New York, 1963) p.125.
[28] Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 886.
[29] Ibid, 888.
[30] Greene, ‘Moria’ p. 129.
[31] Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy, p. 29.
[32] Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 308-310.
[33] Ibid, 307.
[34] Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy, p.35.
[35] Aeschylus, Eumenides, 622-625
[36] David Cohen, ‘The Theodicy of Aeschylus: Justice and Tyranny in the Oresteia’ Greece & Rome, xxxiii, (1986), p. 137.
[37] Aeschylus, Eumenides, 70.
[38] Ibid, 209
[39] Greene, Moria, p.134.
[40] Froma Zeitlin, ‘The Dynamics of Misogyny: Myth and Mythmaking in the Oresteia’ Arethusa, 11 (1978) p.168.
[41] Aeschylus, Eumenides, 667
[42] Greene, Moria, p. 135.
[43] Fletcher, ‘Polyphony to Silence’, p. 60.
[44] Bacon, ‘The Furies Homecoming’, p. 96.
[45] Aeschylus, Eumenides, 491.
[46] Benjamin Fuller, ‘The Conflict of Moral Obligation in the Trilogy of Aeschylus’ Harvard Theological Review, (1915) p. 478.
[47] Charles Chiasson, ‘Lecythia and The Justice of Zeus in Aeschylus Oresteia’ Phoenix, 42 (1988), p. 4.
[48] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 177-179.
[49] Fuller, ‘The Conflict of Moral Obligations’ p. 478.
[50] Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy, p.104.
[51] William C. Scott ‘The Confused Chorus (Agamemnon 975-1034)’ Phoenix, 23 (1969), p.338.
[52] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 1396.
[53] Scott ‘The Confused Chorus’ p.338.
[54] Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy, p. 107.
[55] N.B Booth ‘The Run of Sense in Aeschylus “Choephori” 22-83’ Classical Philology, 54 (1959) p.112.
[56] Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 77-78.
[57] Booth ‘The Run of Sense’, p. p.112.
[58] Froma Zeitlin, ‘The Motif of Corrupted Sacrifice in Aeschylus’ Oresteia’ Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 96 (1965) p. 466.
[59] Philip Vellacott, ‘Has Good Prevailed: A further study of the Oresteia’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 81, (1977), p. 113.
[60] Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy, p.88.
[61] George Newtown, ‘Vengeance is his: Justice in the Oresteia’ Angelaki: Journal of Theoretical Humanities, 4, (1999) p. 138.
[62] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 1322.
[63] Vellacott, The Logic of Tragedy, 118
[64] Forbes, ‘Law and Politic in the Oresteia’ p. 101.
[65] Aeschylus, The Eumenides, 210.
[66] Desmond Manderson, ‘Athena’s Way: Jurisprudence in the Oresteia’ Law, Culture and Humanities, (2016) p.11.
[67] Greene, Moria, p.134
[68] Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 125.
Comments