The Greeks had an intoxicating culture, or at least it seems to us. All of the iniquities and superstitions of the ancient people have been buried or lost, leaving only the perfect skeletons of buildings and the greatest of their literary productions. As a result, they strike us as a race of superpeople. This trilogy certainly furthers this impression, for it is a perfect poetic representation of the birth of justice and ethics out of the primordial law of retaliation.

The most basic ethical principal is loyalty. We are born into a family, establish reciprocal relationships with friends, become a contributing member of a mutually supporting group, and so naturally feel bound to treat this network of people with the proper respect and kindness. But loyalty has several problems. First, one’s family, friends, and group are largely determined by chance—and who is to say that our family and friends are the most worthy? Second, loyalty does not extend outside a very limited group, and so does not preclude the horrid treatment of others. And, as the Greek plays show us, the bounds of loyalty can sometimes cross, putting us in a situation where we must be disloyal to at least one person.

This is the essential problem of Antigone, where the titular character must choose between loyalty to her city or to her dead brother, who betrayed the state. This is also the problem faced by Orestes, who must choose between avenging his father and treating his mother properly. In Sophocles’ play, the problem proves intractable, leading to yet another string of deaths. But Aeschylus shows that by submitting the bonds of loyalty to a higher, impartial court that we can resolve the contradictions and put an end to the endless series of mutual retaliations that loyalty can give rise to.

The rise of judicial procedures, and of concepts of ethics that extend beyond loyalty to fairness, was a crucial step in the rise of complex societies. Aeschylus has given us an immortal dramatization of this epochal step. But, of course, this play is more than a philosophical or historical exercise. It is a work of high drama and poetry, worthy to stand at the first ranks of literature for its aesthetic merit alone. The Greeks continue to enchant.

First acquaintance with Aeschylus. This is oral poetry with minimum action. Themes: man has to be faithful to the gods, who goes against the law and against human traditions has to deal with inevitable doom, that curse shall pass on to the next generations. Eventually Zeus appears as the caretaker of the world. Full of symbolism. Difficult to digest

The penguin classics version is to be particularly recommended - The translation works very well and the 90 page introduction is just brilliant.

As for the plays, well...they are essential reading obviously. And like all great works in translation, one should really read 2 or 3 different versions in order to get as close as possible to the “original”. The Fagles translation should certainly be one of those versions.

Even compared to other Greek tragedies, the Oresteia stands out. It's not just about the family drama or the bloody cycle of revenge. It's more than that. It's about peering deeply into the darkness of the human soul, stripping any semblance of control over one's destiny, and seeing what would result--madness.

Orestes was driven by forces more ancient and far bloodier than his mere judgment. In a society divinely centered on the family, Orestes was ordained to avenge his father's death, even if it meant killing his own mother. What is a man to do? If he doesn't kill his mother, the furies of his father would pursue him. If he does kill his mother, same story. Hardly fair, as his father Agamemnon was the one who sparked this vicious chain of events in the first place by sacrificing his daughter so that the Achean fleet could sail to Illium. The lack of control, being tossed this way and that like a lone battered ship caught in a divine storm, the uncertainty of life and yet the certainty of eternal torment--such is the definition of hell.

In such a system, how will the House of Atreus, a house of kings and heroes, survive itself?

When I studied the play, many found Athena's judicial intervention jarring and strange, especially since the first two plays centered around emotionally charged brutality and violent justice. In comparison, the resolution of the trilogy seems cold, a stark contrast to the previous two plays. But it is in this intervention that Aeschylus really delivers his message to Greece. Bound by its own traditions and practices, the House of Atreus would ultimately collapse in on itself. But when subjected to a common, binding law determined by moral and impartial judges was the House of Atreus salvaged. A court system and laws, created by the people, established order where there was madness. In the end, man can find his own way, even if divine forces seek to drive us to another fate.

In these plays, Aeschylus wrested our destiny away from the gods and placed the strands of our fate in our hands. Though it might be a fleeting moment of control, even if we are truly the chess pieces of the gods, Aeschylus reminds us to a certain extent, our fates are our own.

Maybe I had built it up too much in my head! I really really wanted to love it but in the end I found it just okay. I would like to read the different Electra's at some point and see if I get more out of that. Or perhaps I need to see it performed :)

"But a man’s lifeblood is dark and mortal. Once it wets the earth what song can sing it back?”



Tragedy is described by Aristotle as “An imitation of an action that is admirable,complete and possesses magnitude.” (Poetics 4.1). However the Greeks had a radically different interpretation of what constituted admirable action than we do today. This brings us to today’s work, Aeschylus’ Oresteia.

Considered the grandfather of tragedy, Aeschylus’ masterpiece is the only surviving trilogy from antiquity; a rich and layered cycle of violence and its consequences that still feels fresh and vibrant today.

The first play, Agamemnon, centres on the brutal murder of the eponymous King of Argos (Also the leader of the Greek army in the Iliad) by his wife, Clymenestra. The second play, the libation bearers, focuses on his son’s quest for vengeance, whilst the third, the Eumenides, utilises the setting of a trial to discuss the moral ambiguities inherent in the climaxes from the previous pieces.

It is this final play that transcends the whole piece into more than just revenge tragedy. The Trial of Orestes, Agamemnon’s son, creates an environment where the morality of vengeance is laid bare and the virtues of law over violence are discussed.

However the predecessors also have a part to play in the overall effect. The dramatic tension boils over in the first two plays, and particularly when Orestes confronts his mother in the libation bearers, to a nauseating degree. Furthermore the initial murder that sparks this cycle of violence is not unprovoked, leaving the audience to decide who they should side with.

Overall, the work is a measured and developed contemplation on violence, revenge and justice. It provides a unique insight into the Greek views on morality and righteousness and makes for thrilling drama.

Check out my blog at

http://mikesliteraryhistory.wordpress... for more reviews.

As I finish the Aesquylos trilogy, I also finish reading every known drama about the fall of the House of Atreus, which I have committed to these last months. I never thought it would end this way, but the curiosity of comparing the three authors through the same myth really caught my attention (besides the story being fascinating to me).

Having said that, the A. trilogy has the most poetic and introspective feel of the three, with long dialogues, many of them recalling past events such as the Trojan War. It delves into the themes of justice and the inescapable violence that is looming on the horizon for this family.

I enjoyed this study of themes and expected the culmination of it in the final work, The Euminides. However, this third tragedy was the culmination of something else, and that was the misogyny of the story, which came with the greatest force. It is a courtroom drama in which the expected themes (which are perfectly suitable for discussion, and indeed they are talked about at first) are interrupted by Apollo's defence, and everything turns to the said conversation. With this review, I'm not condemning centuries-old works of misogyny (I think that has already been said and is obvious), but the radical turn of themes of the trilogy, which could lead to the fact that I'm not giving it 5 stars.

Having said that, if you're interested in this tragedy, give it a try anyway, it's beautifully written and well worth the time (although of the plays I've read, Euripides ones are still my favourite).

Really liked this one! I love Ted Hughes a great deal as a poet and as a translator as well, although you should see his translations more like interpretations or very (very, very) loose translations. I loved his translation of Alcestis even more than this one, but this was great as well. It was especially the Agamemnon that really drew me in (that part gets 5 stars from me, the other two both 4).
Instead of arguing why or how, I'm going to quote a little bit so you can see for yourself:

"War is a pawnbroker - not of your treasures
But of the lives of your Men. Not of gold but of corpses.
Give your man to the war-god and you get ashes.
Your hearo's exact worth - in the coinage of war."

For me this was a great read and I recommend it to anyone who's interested in the Classics, Ted Hughes or just a great play in general!

review forthcoming of the oliver taplin version — source text for Harry Potter

A mini description of the family of Argos: revenge on revenge on revenge on revenge. Enjoy your read.

Agamemnon: 4 stars
I'll always be team Clytemnestra, you can never make me change my mind. She was right, this is obvious if you read Iphigeneia.  Agamemnon killed her child (it's not his child, he wasn't quite a father) for a war. Is war more important than your own child? And Clytemnestra just waited and waited for ten years to take her revenge. And when Agamemnon returns, he acts like nothing is wrong between them. Like he never sacrificed Iphigeneia. But there's nothing like the rage of a mother whose child has been murdered. Especially when the murderer is her own husband. So she murdered him. She paid blood with blood. Don't try to convince me that Agamemnon was a victim. Because he was not.

The Liberation Bearers: 5 stars
Okay, this one was my absolute favorite of the three. I've seen this play so many times, both as a theatre play and as a movie. I've read it many times, both as an original story and as a retelling (Electra, Mourning Becomes Electra, The Flies / Les Mouches) and yet I don't think I'll ever get bored of it. It always makes my heart beat faster. Orestes taking revenge on his mother because she took revenge on his father because he killed his daughter (Orestes' sister). How much more complicated can this get? I think it really shows how, once rage has awaken, it won't stop until everyone is affected. And it doesn't care who is family and who is not, revenge will be taken no matter what. This theme is just so strong. But this play also makes me wonder when did Clytemnestra change so much? She did what she did for her child, Iphigeneia, and yet now we see her not caring for the rest of her children. I suppose that this also means that, once you've felt hate, real hate, not just dislike, you can never unfeel it.  And probably just the act of murder changed her so much, even if her revenge was reasonable  

The Eumenides: 3 stars
Okay, so this one wad my least favorite. I don't know, perhaps I had too high expectations because the other two were perfect. But this one was basically a trial. It did have some interested parts, but I guess I kinda liked it just because it included Orestes, whom I love. Otherwise I probably wouldn't like it. A bit of a disappointment but who cares? The other 2 were great.

لذت نبردم. دیگه وقتشه دور آیسخولوس(آشیل) و سوفوکل رو خط بکشم -_-
فقط اوریپید♡

I enjoyed reading this back in school after I had read The Iliad & The Odyssey. I haven't read them in years, but still remembered a lot of the names. Still, I thought I should read a summary of this first since it is an audio play, complete with the chorus. It was really good & I'm glad that I did read the Wikipedia article first. You can find it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oresteia

The twisty way the gods used men & people used each other makes this fascinating. Glad I listened to it this time. That's far better than reading it.