Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Agamemnon is the first play in a trilogy of tragedies by Aeschylus entitled theOresteia. (The second
two parts are called Libation Bearers and Eumenides.) When we say it is part of a trilogy, we don't
mean like nowadays, when some blockbuster movie makes a ton of money, prompting studio
executives to crank out a couple of sequels. In the heyday of Greek tragedy, all three parts of a
trilogy were performed back-to-backto-back, on a single day. Sometimes, these would be followed
by a fourth play, called a satyr play, which would provide a goofy contrast. Each series of plays
would usually be linked by some overarching story and set of themes; theOresteia, which talks about
a cycle of revenge within three generations of a single family, is no exception.
The Oresteia was first performed in Athens at the Festival of the god Dionysus in 458 B.C. At this
festival, tragedies were always performed as part of a contest pitting poet against poet; you'll be
pleased to know that, with the Oresteia, Aeschylus took home first-place.
So, that trophy must have meant Aeschylus was set for life, right? Well, yes, but Aeschylus was
already a very established playwright, and an old man, by the time he won this victory. Aeschylus
was born around 525 B.C. in Eleusis, a small town not far from Athens. Eleusis was considered part
of Athenian territory, and so Aeschylus was born an Athenian citizen; his family came from the
nobility. According to legend, when Aeschylus was a young man, he worked in a vineyard. One day,
when he dosed off, the god Dionysus appeared to him in a dream and said, "Hey, Aeschylus! You
should become a writer of tragedies." Then Aeschylus supposedly woke up and said, "Word." We at
Shmoop can't vouch for this story, but we do know that Aeschylus began writing plays in the 490s
B.C.
The guy was no shrinking violet, however, and when the Persians made war on the Greeks,
Aeschylus fought alongside his fellow Athenians at the battle of Marathon. When the Persians
invaded Greece a second time ten years later, Aeschylus fought again, this time participating in the
sea battle at Salamis, a decisive victory for the Greeks. According to one ancient source, Aeschylus
was so proud of defending his country that his epitaph (which he wrote himself, of course) made no
mention of his career as a playwright, instead boasting of his courage in battle against the Persians.
Aeschylus's epitaph makes a great story, but, at the time of his death, the guy's prowess as a writer
of tragedies probably went without saying. In between those two battles against the Persians,
Aeschylus won the annual tragedy contest for the first time in 484 B.C. He was top of the heap for a
good time after that, in part because he completely revolutionized his art form. According to Aristotle,
before Aeschylus came along, tragedies only featured one actor and a chorus; Aeschylus was the
first person to add a second actor. Thus, you could say that Aeschylus invented dramatic dialogue,
making him the originator of all subsequent theater, movies, and TV. Not too shabby.
But then, in 468, Aeschylus was given a run for his money by a young upstart namedSophocles, who
actually won first prize in his first year competing. Two millennia before the epic battle between the
Gillette Mach 3, Schick Quattro, and Gillette Fusion lines of safety razors, Sophocles soon unveiled
his new secret weapon: a THIRD ACTOR. (Whoa!) Aeschylus knew a good thing when he saw it,
though, and in no time he was working three-actor scenes into his own tragedies, including those of
theOresteia. Aeschylus's trick was that he would keep the third actor silent for long periods of time,
making him (all Greek actors were male) speak only at climactic moments. The character of
Cassandra in Agamemnon fits this pattern.
Written near the end of his life, and incorporating his own innovations and those of
Sophocles, Agamemnon and the rest of the Oresteia make up Aeschylus's greatest achievement. It
is no coincidence that these plays were revived and re-performed after Aeschylus's death, a rare
honor in ancient Athens. Fortunately for us, they continue to be read and performed today.
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
JUSTICE AND JUDGMENT
From just reading Agamemnon on its own, you might not immediately think that "Justice and
Judgment" is its most important theme. Like, sure, it would be in your Top 10, but it probably wouldn't
be top dog. Instead, you might want to put "Revenge" first, or maybe "Fate and Free Will." And that
would be cool. So why are we putting it first? That's because "Justice and Judgment" is definitely the
main theme of theOresteia trilogy as a whole; as you may remember, Agamemnon is only the first
part of this trilogy.
Appropriately enough, given that it's only part 1 of 3, the picture of justice that emerges
from Agamemnon is pretty confused. Most characters in the play view it as a form of payback: you
hurt me, so I hurt you. This gets complicated, however, like when Aegisthus considers it an act of
justice to kill Agamemnon, even though Agamemnon never did anything directly to him. Instead,
Aegisthus's variation on the payback theme would go something like this: your dad hurt my siblings
and my dad, so I hurt you.
If this sounds more like revenge to you than justice, you're definitely on to something but we'll talk
about that more under the "Revenge" theme. For now, we'll simply point out one more problem about
justice in Agamemnon: the idea that justice comes from Zeus, the king of the gods. This idea mainly
comes from the Chorus, and it kind of makes sense, since Zeus likes to protect the laws of
hospitality and nice stuff like that. The idea breaks down, however, when the Chorus claims (in line
1486) that Zeus is "all-causing" and "all-doing." If this is true, and Zeus is responsible for literally
everything that happens, doesn't that mean he's responsible for injustice as well as justice? Or is
injustice itself really justice, because it's all part of Zeus's plan? It would be pretty hard to argue that
some of the things mentioned in the play like the crime of Atreus are really, deep down, in
accordance with justice. So, basically, what we're getting at is that the treatment of justice in this play
is a major mind-bender, and we can definitely tell why Aeschylus had to write two more plays just to
get the issue under some sort of control.
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
According to the characters in Agamemnon, there is no difference between revenge and justice.
The death of Cassandra is both sanctioned by the gods and also unjust.
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
Agamemnon freely chose to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia.
It does not matter whether Agamemnon freely chose to sacrifice his daughter or not; those who
commit crimes should be punished, whether or not they intended to commit them.
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
REVENGE
The theme of "Revenge" is also closely connected with the theme of "Justice and
Judgment." Agamemnon, if you remember, is only the first part of a three-part series of tragedies
entitled the Oresteia. Most scholars think that the Oresteia as a whole charts the progress of ancient
Greek civilization from an earlier stage, in which people took the law into their own hands, and a
later stage in which crimes were punished by courts of law. According to this
model, Agamemnon represents the more primitive stage that had to be corrected by later
development.
When looking at the whole trilogy, this might be a good way of thinking about it, but let's try not to get
ahead of ourselves when looking at Agamemnon specifically. In reading the play, you'll notice that
the word "justice" gets passed around quite a lot, sometimes in contexts very close to what we would
call revenge. For example, at the end of the play, Aegisthus strikingly says that the murder of
Agamemnon proves to him that the gods are just. Is there really a difference
in Agamemnon between vengeance and justice? Is it possible to take justice into your own hands, or
does doing so just make it revenge? What is the point of revenge, anyway?
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
Aeschylus's play is designed to show that revenge only leads to more violence.
Agamemnon portrays the gods as just as vengeful as human beings.
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE
The theme of "Wisdom and Knowledge" in Agamemnon mainly centers around the Chorus's claim
that Zeus makes mortals "Suffer and learn" (177). This phrase could be interpreted to mean
"learning happens through suffering" or even, more neutrally, "learning happens through
experience." Do you think this is true? Think about it: say you're trying to communicate to your friend
that his or her new girlfriend or boyfriend is a total jerk. If the Chorus is right, and learning only
happens through suffering, your friend will probably tell you, "I don't believe you," or "It's not really so
bad," or something like that. Then, a few months later, after suffering through enough of his or her
significant other's jerkiness, your friend might come up to you and say, "You know what, you were
right; I just didn't believe you at the time."
We've probably all had this experience. But the big question that Aeschylus's play is asking is
whether learning always happens through experience, or just part of the time. How is this relevant to
the other themes in the play? Think about it: if you think people only learn through suffering, then
might want to punish them for crimes by doing the same thing back to them, right? In this way, this
theme links up to the ideas of revenge and justice. Similarly, if you only learn what's going to happen
by experiencing it, then prophecies about the future can't help you. In this way, this theme links up to
the problem of fate and free will.
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
Aeschylus's play shows that humans can only learn through experience.
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
FAMILY
Even if it isn't the most important theme in Agamemnon, "Family" is definitely up there because it
provides the context for everything else. Let's not forget that everything inAgamemnon goes back to
the generation before the main action takes place, when Thyestes had an affair with Atreus's wife; in
revenge, Atreus killed Thyestes's children, butchered them, and served them to him for dinner.
Atreus, of course, was Agamemnon's father; at the end of the play, when Aegisthus, one of
Thyestes's remaining children, shows up on stage, he remarks how the murder of Agamemnon
convinces him that the gods are just.
But Aegisthus didn't kill Agamemnon himself, right? (We don't know for sure, but it doesn't seem like
he had a hand in it.) The actual murder was committed by Clytemnestra, who was angry because
Agamemnon sacrificed their daughter, Iphigenia; thus, you could say that Clytemnestra killed
Agamemnon to defend her family. At the same time, various theories get put forward by different
characters (especially the Chorus) about how a curse on Agamemnon's family was responsible for
making him sacrifice his daughter, or even that his father's bad behavior set a bad example for his
son, and his homicidal tendencies got passed on that way. Thus, Aeschylus's play also gets into
some very modern issues about how human characteristics get passed on from generation to
generation.
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
The fact that Menelaus gets off scot free shows that, when the Chorus talks about a supernatural
spirit of vengeance inhabiting the house, that is really just a metaphor for the anger felt by
Clytemnestra and Aegisthus.
Clytemnestra's inconsistent behavior towards her children (mourning Iphigenia, banishing Orestes)
suggests that anger over her slain daughter isn't her real motivation for killing Agamemnon.
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
POLITICS
Aeschylus wrote his Agamemnon to be performed in Athens, a democratic city-state. But the society
portrayed in his play is not democratic instead, it hearkens back to an earlier time, in which Greek
cities were ruled by kings, and sometimes queens while their husbands were away fighting
wars. Agamemnon shows that these kings and queens had significant power, but only within certain
limits. For example, at the beginning of the play, the Watchman has to be very careful about what he
says; this suggests that Clytemnestra's rulership has created a climate of fear. At the same time,
however, rulers have to be wary of what their citizens say. Both Agamemnon and Aegisthus mention
that they are concerned with what the people say about them; their approaches to this problem are
different, however. Agamemnon tries to act modestly, so the people won't get angry, while Aegisthus
threatens the people with torture if they get out of line.
What about the people themselves? What are their attitudes like? Towards the end of the play,
Aeschylus gives us a vivid picture of democratic society in action, when the Chorus debates what to
do after hearing the death-cries of Agamemnon. This scene shows both the advantages and
disadvantages of democracy: it can be cautious, as the need for majority rule lets calmer heads
prevail. At the same time, this caution can mean that it is too slow to act. Thus, the Chorus fails to
catch Clytemnestra red-handed, and ends up knuckling under to her and Aegisthus's new jointdictatorship.
2. The internal debate between the Chorus members after they hear Agamemnon's death cries
mimics the Athenian democratic assembly. What does Aeschylus see as the advantages and
disadvantages of democracy?
3. In Aeschylus's view, who has more power, rulers or their subjects?
4. What does Aeschylus portray as the relationship between the family and the state?
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
Aeschylus's play indicates that rulers can only remain in power with the consent of the people they
rule.
Agamemnon shows that one can be a good ruler even if one treats one's family badly.
Chew on This
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
GENDER
In a patriarchal society like that of ancient Greece, it would be pretty hard to have a play with a
fearsome female villain like Clytemnestra and not have the issue of gender play a prominent role. At
many points in Agamemnon, we hear characters utter stereotyped views about women, but it isn't
clear how much Aeschylus endorses these. For example, the Chorus frequently remarks on how
women are irrational and don't pay attention to the facts. The Chorus members intend this as a
criticism of Clytemnestra, but do we really see her being irrational or making factual mistakes? Evil
though it is, Clytemnestra's murder plot definitely required careful (i.e., rational) planning, and she
was right about the signal fire from Troy, which the Chorus doubted. Also, the Chorus is majorly
wrong in mistaking the appearance of Clytemnestra for what it really means, when they can't believe
she will be Agamemnon's killer.
Clytemnestra's actions do, however bear out another cultural stereotype in the play: that women are
untrustworthy. (Of course, it could also be said that Agamemnon is untrustworthy, since he sacrificed
his own daughter.) At the end of the play, when the Chorus makes fun of Aegisthus by calling him a
woman for not going to war and using deception to get back at Agamemnon, does this question or
reinforce stereotypes?
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
The character of Clytemnestra reinforces gender stereotypes of women as untrustworthy.
Clytemnestra proves many of the Chorus's beliefs about women wrong.
AGAMEMNON THEME OF
MEMORY AND THE PAST
From the very beginning of Agamemnon, it's clear that the people of Argos are living in the past. If
you were a Watchman who had to spend every night of your life for ten years sitting on a roof in the
cold waiting for a sign that your king was coming home, you might start thinking that it was time to
move on, right? When the Chorus first comes on stage, we see that they are suffering from the same
symptoms; ten years later, they can't stop talking about how the Trojan War first got started. When it
turns out that Agamemnon is coming home, it seems as if the past is going to be relived in the
present; you can already see a hint of this idea when the Watchman says he can't wait to shake
Agamemnon by the hand. As it turns out, the past is going to come back, but not the past everyone
was hoping for. Instead, it is the past of murders in the previous generation (the children of Thyestes
killed by Atreus) and on the way to Troy (Iphigenia sacrificed by Agamemnon) that will come back to
plague Agamemnon and Cassandra. Thus, the theme of "Memory and the Past" brings us full circle
to our initial trio of main themes: "Justice and Judgment," "Fate and Free Will," and "Revenge."
Chew on This
Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.
Agamemnon acts as if the past is no big deal; this, however, is ultimately self-serving.
The past in Aeschylus's play is more important than the action we see onstage, in the present.
NETS
Symbolism, Imagery, Allegory
Probably the most famous symbol in Agamemnon is that of the "net." This image appears at
numerous points in the text, most memorably when Clytemnestra appears outside the palace at the
end of the play, standing over the dead bodies of Agamemnon and Cassandra; there, she boasts
about how (in Collard's translation), "A net with no way through, just as for fish, I stake out round
him, an evil wealth of clothing" (1382-1383). But similar images appear throughout the play, such as
when the Chorus says to the dead Agamemnon, "You lie in this spider's web breathing out your life
in a death which is impious" (1492-1493), or even in the famous image of the purple fabrics that
Clytemnestra bullies Agamemnon into trampling on as he walks into the palace. Taken together,
these images of nets, spider webs, and entangling clothing create a common image of
Agamemnon's death inexorably closing in on him. Could this also be an image of the inescapable
power of fate? That would depend on how you interpret the play's treatment of the theme of "Fate
and Free Will," and we're not going to spoil your fun.
FAMILY
Symbolism, Imagery, Allegory
Family is a theme in Aeschylus's play, but it is also one of recurrent symbols or motifs. We touch on
this a little bit in our section on the theme of "Family," so you can look there for more details on the
specific passages where this motif appears. Basically, though, Aeschylus keeps the theme of family
fresh in our minds by describing many things that we would not typically think of in terms of family
relations in language derived from genealogy. Thus, on several occasions, characters refer to the
night that has just passed as having "given birth to" the present day. In a play in which the crimes of
previous generations of Agamemnon's family are rehashed and repeated in the present generation,
it makes sense to think of the simple passage of time in generational terms.
ANALYSIS: SETTING
Where It All Goes Down
Argos, Ancient Greece
The play takes place in Argos, a city in the Peloponnese, a large peninsula in the south of mainland
Greece. (Here's a map.) The action begins on the night that Troy is captured by the Greeks. We
know this because, in the opening scene, the Watchman on the roof of Agamemnon's palace sees a
signal fire in the distance that tells him Troy has been captured. This setting is important for a couple
of reasons. Time-wise, by almost coinciding with the fall of Troy, the play takes place at the moment
of Agamemnon's greatest triumph; from the perspective of tragedy, this is the perfect moment for him
to take a tumble. Space-wise, the opening of the play reminds us that we are not with Agamemnon
during his triumph. Instead, we are back on the home front, where things have taken a very different
turn during his ten-year absence, mainly because Clytemnestra is in control. On his return,
Agamemnon will have to confront these changes, as well as the horrible secrets of the past that
linger in his house.
ANALYSIS: GENRE
Drama, Tragedy, Horror
Aeschylus's Agamemnon is a tragedy because it is a play focused on the downfall of a great man,
who in this case is none other than Agamemnon himself (big surprise). At the same time, however, it
makes sense to think of this play in terms of the more modern genre of "Horror." This isn't only
because, even by the standards of tragedy, it is unusually gruesome. Agamemnon also fits into the
horror category because of the agonizingly slow increase of dread as the play continues, especially
after the carpet scene and when Cassandra starts having her horrible visions. In a way,
Clytemnestra is the original horror villain.
ANALYSIS: TONE
Take a story's temperature by studying its tone. Is it
hopeful? Cynical? Snarky? Playful?
Serious, Dark
Aeschylus's Agamemnon isn't very funny at all. There's no getting round it: this is one dark, scary,
bloody, mind-bending play that may leave your eyebrows permanently furrowed. So why read it
then? Well, for one thing, there's always the thrill of the challenge; if you can grapple with Aeschylus,
you'll be pretty much set to take on anything that comes. In fact, you might even start to find
Aeschylus's own intense seriousness pretty fun. But you don't have to take our word for it; just give
the play a go, and see what happens.
That said, isn't it interesting that Aeschylus's tragic hero is only onstage for one scene of the play,
and basically all he does is show up and get killed? In terms of people who actually do things and
influence events, you might say that Clytemnestra is the more important figure. Should Aeschylus
have named the play after her? As it stands, it seems as if the title of the play creates a certain set of
expectations in the audience, but these expectations don't end up being met. Why do you think
Aeschylus might have done it this way?