Aeschylus’s The Oresteia is a foundational text in Western literature. Written in Greece in the 5th century B.C.E., the trilogy grapples with fundamental questions about justice, revenge, and the role of law in society. Comprising Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, and The Eumenides, the plays are set in the aftermath of the Trojan War and explore the transition from a world governed by blood feuds to one governed by legal institutions.
At the heart of the drama is the tension between revenge and justice—between personal vendetta and the creation of an impartial system meant to break the endless cycle of retribution. However, justice in The Oresteia is not straightforward. The trilogy exposes flaws in both the old and new systems. It questions whether justice can ever truly be impartial and whether legal institutions, even in their attempts to create order, reinforce existing power hierarchies—particularly in terms of gender.
The Curse of the House of Atreus and the Seeds of Vengeance
The story begins with Agamemnon’s return home after ten years at war, but its roots stretch back decades earlier. The House of Atreus is marked by a generational curse, a cycle of betrayal and bloodshed that stretches back to Agamemnon’s father, Atreus. In a gruesome act of revenge, Atreus killed two of his brother Thyestes’s sons and served them to him at a feast. This horrific crime led to divine punishment upon Atreus’s bloodline, ensuring that future generations would be haunted by violence.
The immediate catalyst for The Oresteia is Agamemnon’s role in the Trojan War. As leader of the Greek forces, he found himself stranded at Aulis with no wind to sail to Troy. The seer Calchas declared that the goddess Artemis demanded a sacrifice, and the only offering she would accept was Agamemnon’s daughter, Iphigenia. Agamemnon agreed to the heinous act, sacrificing Iphigenia to ensure favorable winds and his military glory.
This act of violence against his own family sets off a chain reaction. His wife, Clytemnestra, never forgives him (and what modern reader can blame her?). When Agamemnon returns home victorious, he is met not with celebration, but with an ambush. Clytemnestra, with the help of her lover Aegisthus—who has his own vendetta against Agamemnon’s family as the last surviving son of Thyestes—murders her husband.
Her actions serve two purposes—personal vengeance for Iphigenia’s death and a continuation of the House of Atreus’s cycle of violence. But here, the play introduces its first major ethical dilemma—is Clytemnestra’s murder of Agamemnon an act of justice, or merely another link in the chain of revenge?
Revenge and the Limits of Personal Justice
From the outset, The Oresteia contrasts two models of retribution. The first is revenge, which is deeply personal, emotional, and cyclical, perpetuating endless violence. The second is justice, which is supposed to be impersonal, institutional, and final.
The characters themselves wrestle with these ideas, using the language of justice while often engaging in revenge. Clytemnestra sees herself as an agent of justice, framing her actions as divine retribution for Iphigenia. However, because she is a woman in a patriarchal society, her claims are dismissed (made explicitly evident with her debate with the leader of the choir). Instead of being seen as righteous vengeance, her actions are framed as an unnatural betrayal of both her husband and her gender role.
This gendered double standard becomes even clearer when her son, Orestes, is faced with his own moral crisis. Apollo demands that he avenge his father by killing his mother. Yet by doing so, he will be committing matricide—an act that almost no one can fathom as a reasonable and righteous course of action. This paradox exposes the contradictions of revenge. In his world, Orestes is both right and wrong, justified and condemned, fated to act yet doomed by his actions.
The Role of the Furies: From Vengeance to Law
At this point, the Furies (or Erinyes) emerge as central figures in the drama. These ancient deities exist to enforce blood vengeance, ensuring that crimes—especially those within a family—do not go unpunished. Unlike Apollo and Athena, who represent the newer Olympian order, the Furies belong to an older world where justice and revenge are indistinguishable.
The Furies relentlessly pursue Orestes, demanding that he suffer for killing his mother. They do not care that he was avenging his father or that Apollo ordered the act. To them, a crime is a crime, and Orestes must pay the price.
However, their pursuit of vengeance is eventually challenged when Orestes seeks relief from Athena. In response, she establishes the first-ever trial by jury in Athens. This moment represents a major shift—justice moves from being a personal duty (revenge) to a civic duty (legal judgment). The jury is split in its decision, and Athena casts the deciding vote in favor of Orestes.
The Furies, enraged at being denied their role, threaten to unleash chaos. But instead of dismissing them, Athena offers them a new purpose. The Furies will no longer be goddesses of vengeance but protectors of justice, ensuring Athens remains a city governed by law. They are renamed the Eumenides (“the Kindly Ones”), marking the transition from blood feuds to institutional justice.
The Imperfect Victory of Justice
The trial of Orestes is often framed as a triumph of law over chaos, but Aeschylus presents a more nuanced picture. While Athena’s intervention prevents further bloodshed, the trial itself reveals the limitations of this new system.
For one, Athena’s verdict is not purely legal—it is biased. She openly admits she sides with men over women, reinforcing the idea that justice, even in its new form, is not free from inequality.
A generous reading of Athena’s reasoning is that she bases her decision on a legal principle—that marriage is a serious and sacred bond, while blood relationships are somehow secondary. But this principle itself is arbitrary. It raises a troubling question—how many laws, even today, are similarly arbitrary? If life-and-death decisions come down to legal technicalities rather than absolute moral truths, can justice ever truly be fair?
Additionally, while Orestes is freed and the cycle of bloodshed stemmed, Clytemnestra’s suffering is never truly acknowledged. She remains a figure whose grievances were dismissed, whose actions were judged more harshly because she was a woman, and whose murder is ultimately sanctioned by the gods. The message is clear, while law may bring order, it does not always bring true justice.
This of course rings true in its own way today. Justice never truly rights a wrong. For instance, lost loved ones aren’t restored with a favorable verdict. Justice, when served, is simply the best society can offer.
Conclusion: The End of Vengeance, But Not the End of Injustice
The Oresteia is not just a play about ancient Greek myths—it is a profound meditation on the foundations of justice and the flaws inherent in any legal system. Aeschylus shows us that law is preferable to endless cycles of revenge, but he also suggests that justice will always be shaped by those in power. The transition from vengeance to law is not a perfect evolution; it is simply the best available alternative to chaos.
The Furies may have been tamed, but their legacy remains. Even today, we struggle with the same questions:
• Who decides what justice looks like?
• Can law ever be truly impartial?
• How do we reconcile the need for order with the demand for fairness?
Aeschylus does not give us easy answers. But in following the tragic history of the House of Atreus, he forces us to confront these questions—and in doing so, he ensures that the cycle of justice, debate, and reform continues.
The Curated Life Worth Reading 
Leave a comment