“Agamemnon and The Eumenides two parts of one trilogy

Three parts of Aeschylus’s trilogy compose one consummate and perfect work. In my paper I will compare and contrast the first and the third parts of the tragedy. In my paper I would like to prove that despite their belonging to one tragedy, Agamemnon and Eurinies present completely different moral, social and even political systems.
Let’s center on the history to the tragedy firstly.
Aeschylus is called one of the three Tragedy poets on equal terms with Sophocles and Euripides. He was born in 525 B. C. and died in 456 B. C., so he is one of the most ancient Greek writers, whose works are popular and relevant even nowadays, in approximately 2500 years. What’s the secret of such success? Why are his works of current importance today? We’ll try to find the answer on the example of his trilogy “The Oresteia”. It’s the only trilogy of Greek ancient culture that survived in full. It contains three parts: “Agamemnon”, “The Libation Bearers” and “The Eumenides”, which are logically and in plot connected.
The trilogy is an example of the classical tragedy and contains all the necessary points of it. The plot of it is connected with the curse on the kin of Atreus and its end. The trilogy won the first prize at the Dionysia festival. In this work we will stop on the first and the third part of the trilogy and give the comparative characteristics of them.

What really unites both tragedies is their dark and gloomy atmosphere, motives of fear, evil and revenge. Third story continues the themes of revenge and bad fate, which haunts the descendants of Atreus. Orestes, who killed his mother and her lover in order to revenge for the murder of his father, has to escape from the severe penalty of the Furies - the deities of revenge. There is one more thing similar to both tragedies – their wonderful poetic language, twisted plot and perfectly written characters. Aeschylus didn’t mean his tragedy to be an entertainment spectacle. When writing “the Oresteia” he was aiming to deliver his philosophical credo to the public. Art was the mean to influence society, express political, social and moral ideas. The theme of the triumph of evil and revenge is central to the first part of the tragedy called “Agamemnon”. Aeschylus believed in the power of sufferings and pain as the main driving motive of all human actions. These sufferings and pain destroy the lives of all characters of the first tragedy – Agamemnon, Iphigeneia, Clytemnestra, Cassandra and many others. Aeschylus was interested in human actions and reactions in the most borderline cases. Other themes of these tragedies are violence, revenge, male-female domination, punishment for the crime, hatred and forgiveness. As we see, events and problems depicted by the author are still relevant for a modern reader. It’s necessary to remember about the metaphorical character of the tragedy when applying it to modern society, but the problems of moral responsibility, crime and punishment and individual choice are still up to date for all of us. “Agamemnon” is an introductory part that begins with the return of Agamemnon after the Trojan War. His wife, Clytemnestra, conspired with Aegisthus, Agamemnon’s cousin, against Agamemnon. She couldn’t forgive him their daughter’s sacrifice and was in veiled relationship with Aegisthus.
Agamemnon arrives with Cassandra, who is clairvoyant but she is curved and nobody believes her words. Clytemnestra entrapped her husband and kills him. Cassandra feels that Agamemnon is in danger, so she enters the room and follows her fate. Agamemnon and Cassandra are dead and Clytemnestra and Aegisthus argue with the chorus.
All these questions dominate in the third part of the tragedy called “Eurinies” but we can notice that the author’s position is different here. Here Aeschylus goes much further than depicting the character fighting the heartless doom and become the weapon of the blind fate. In the beginning the plot of the story resembles those of the first parts. Orestes kills his mother Clytemenestra and her lover Aegisthus as a revenge for the death of his father. The condign punishment almost overtakes him in the face of the Furies – the goddesses of revenge but the interference of Athena, who tries to protect him. This interference breaks the vicious circle of hatred and revenge, which lasts for several generations. Orestes and the Furies go before a jury of Athenians, the Areiopagos. The opinions of the juries share and they can’t bring in a verdict. Athen ends up the dispute but taking Orestes’ part and persuading the Furies into the proprieties of his actions. The Furies, the deities, which haunt people for patricide and matricide, are now renamed to Eumenides – the deities of good will and start helping the Athenians.
Very symbolic are words at the end of the tragedy, when Athena sets up a new rule, which proclaims that all hung juries should result in the favor of the person accused. These words lead to an important conclusion that mercy should always dominate over harshness. This conclusion controversies the ideas of hatred and revenge from the first part of the tragedy. Athena breaks the vicious circle and gives a wonderful example of mercy.
The contrast between two tragedies is a contrast between archaic methods of justice based on personal revenge and new system based on justice and honest trial. Contrast between two tragedies of one trilogy goes even further as it also symbolizes the change from primitive society abided to the only rule – rule of force and severity to - the fundamentally new type of society – society based on the principles of good reason and justice. The system of governing, represented in the first tragedy called “Agamemnon” reflected the primitive society of ancient Greece ruled by the tribal norms are rites. At the same time “Eumenides” represents the new system of political and social relations based on the principles of law and justice. The idea of lawful and fair court is one of the central themes of the “Eumenides” and this concept is opposed to the old principles of revenge and coercive authority.
Bibliography
1. Fagles, Robert and W. B. Stanford. “THE SERPENT AND THE EAGLE,” in Aeschylus. THE ORESTEIA. Trans. Fagles. New York: Viking Penguin, 1979, pp. 13-97.
2. Finley, John H. PINDAR AND AESCHYLUS, Martin Classical Lectures 14. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1966.
3. Gagarin, Michael. AESCHYLEAN DRAMA, Univ California Pr, 1976.