You are on page 1of 16

In A Nutshell

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.

WHY SHOULD I CARE?


What is it about scary movies that makes them irresistible? Why do we enjoy that feeling of slowly
increasing tension, like a knot in the pit of our stomach? What is it about the sudden jolt, when the
killer finally appears, that keeps us coming back for more? If you don't know, that's OK: we don't
either. But we all know the feeling, and that's why we think you're going to
enjoy Aeschylus's Agamemnon, the original horror movie, in which the tension doesn't let up until the
final terrifying conclusion. (Also, like a typical modern horror movie, the ending leaves the door open
for a sequel.) But here's the thing. Instead of focusing on the fate of a bunch of teenagers holed up
in a cottage in the woods, Agamemnon tells the story of a great and powerful man, brought low by a
combination of fate and his own evil deeds. Because the killer is also morally ambiguous,
Aeschylus's play actually uses its terrifying elements to explore profound themes about Fate and
Free Will, the human capacity to learn, and, above all the nature of Justice.

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.

Questions About Justice and Judgment


1. In Agamemnon, is there a difference between justice and revenge? If so, what is it?
2. How is Agamemnon's theme of "Justice and Judgment" related to that of "Wisdom and
Knowledge"?
3. Many characters in the play say that Zeus and the other gods are in charge of justice. But if
Zeus is in charge of absolutely everything, doesn't that make him the cause of injustice as
well? How can we resolve this contradiction? Is it possible?
4. Who is the most unjust character in Agamemnon?

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.

AGAMEMNON THEME OF FATE


AND FREE WILL
Is it fair to punish someone for something they didn't choose? Consider the case of Agamemnon.
One of the reasons Clytemnestra murders him (an act she considers the implementation of justice)
is because he sacrificed their daughter Iphigenia. When Agamemnon did this, of course, he felt that
he was trapped between a rock and a hard place: he had to sacrifice his daughter or abandon the
war against Troy. The Chorus tells us that, before undertaking the sacrifice, Agamemnon "put on the
yoke-strap of compulsion" (218). That means, in the Chorus's eyes at least, he did what he had to
do. But then again, if he accepted that necessity, that means he chose it through his own free will,
right? Also, there is the whole issue of the curse on Agamemnon's family, which might have made it
fated for him to come to a bad end. Could this mean that he was fated to commit that crime? But, if
so, was it just for him to suffer for it? We'll let you puzzle out the answers to these questions. Either
way you cut it, however, it's clear that Agamemnon's theme of "Fate and Free Will" is closely
connected to the problem of "Justice and Judgment."

Questions About Fate and Free Will


1. Does Agamemnon portray fate and free will as complete opposites, or is there some wiggleroom between the two ideas?
2. Does Agamemnon have a choice when he sacrifices Iphigenia at Aulis?
3. According to Agamemnon, does knowing the future provide any sort of advantage? Does it
provide a disadvantage? Does it matter at all?
4. If Agamemnon did not have free choice over his actions, is it fair for him to be punished?

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?

Questions About Revenge


1. According to Aeschylus's play, is revenge an effective way of solving problems?
2. Whose reason for getting revenge on Agamemnon makes more sense, that of Clytemnestra,
or that of Aegisthus?
3. Does Aeschylus's play portray revenge as ever justified?
4. Is there a difference between justice and revenge? If so, what is it?

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.

Questions About Wisdom and Knowledge


1. It is clear that the theme of "suffer and learn," as the Chorus puts it in line 177, is central to
this play. But what does "learn" mean in this context? Do we have to suffer to learn all things,
or only some things? What does Aeschylus's play tell us about these matters?
2. The god Apollo has cursed Cassandra so that she can prophesy but will not be believed. And
yet, the Chorus tells her that they believe her prophecy. Does this contradict the idea of
Apollo's curse, or does it fit in with it somehow? If it does fit in, how?

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.

Questions About Family


1. How would Agamemnon be different if its acts of murder and revenge had been committed
by unrelated people, instead of members of the same family? Would the play even still make
sense?
2. Clytemnestra appears to care deeply about her children; thus, her main motivation for killing
Agamemnon appears to be because he sacrificed their daughter Iphigenia. If this is true, why
did Clytemnestra banish their son Orestes?
3. Atreus kills Thyestes's children because of what Thyestes did. Aegisthus is pleased with the
death of Agamemnon because of what his father Atreus did. Based on the play, do you think
Aeschylus considers it just to punish a child for its parent's crimes?
4. If Agamemnon is guilty because his father was guilty, why does his brother Menelaus get off
scot free? What does the fate of Menelaus say about the possibility that injustice is 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.

Questions About Politics


1. Where does Aeschylus see political power as coming from: from the gods or from human
beings?

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.

AGAMEMNON THEME OF FEAR


As you may have noticed, elsewhere in this guide, we refer to Agamemnon as the world's first horror
movie. So it wouldn't make very much sense if "Fear" wasn't one of its major themes, would it? Fear
in the play takes many forms; from the very beginning, in the speech of the Watchman, we get the
sense that Clytemnestra's rulership in Argos has instilled a culture of fear in which people have to be
very careful what they say. But this doesn't even come close to the horrifying visions of Cassandra,
when her prophetic powers allow her to reveal that past crime of Atreus, and also predict her own
and Agamemnon's imminent murder by Clytemnestra. The amazing thing is that Cassandra also
shows us that fear can be conquered, as when she finally decides to go meet her death. Are there
other moments in the play when characters are faced with a choice of confronting or surrendering to
their fear? How might this relate to some of the play's other major themes?

Questions About Fear


1. Who is the most fearful character in Agamemnon?
2. In the play, do characters most often fear for themselves or on behalf of others?
3. In their big debate scene, who is more fearful, Cassandra or the Chorus?
4. To what degree does Aeschylus's play portray fear as inhibiting action?

Chew on This

Try on an opinion or two, start a debate, or play the devils advocate.


On the whole, Aeschylus portrays fear for oneself as outweighing fear on behalf of others.
Cassandra is the only character in the play who successfully conquers her fear.

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?

Questions About Gender


1. Overall, does the play's depiction of Clytemnestra question or reinforce gender stereotypes?
2. Who violates gender stereotypes more, Clytemnestra or Aegisthus?
3. Why does the Chorus consider it especially bad to be ruled by a woman?
4. What does Agamemnon's behavior say about his attitude towards women?

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."

Questions About Memory and The Past


1. Why did Aeschylus choose to leave so many important elements of his story (such as the
crime of Atreus and the sacrifice of Iphigenia) in flashback?
2. What does it say about human memory that it takes a prophet (Cassandra) to look into the
past as well as into the future?
3. How does the theme of "Memory and the Past" relate to the themes of Revenge and
Justice?
4. Many characters in the play seem to be living in the past. Are there any characters who
seem eager to forget the past? If so, why?

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: NARRATOR POINT


OF VIEW
Who is the narrator, can she or he read minds, and, more
importantly, can we trust her or him?
Third Person (Objective), Third Person (Limited
Omniscient)
Technically speaking, Agamemnon doesn't have any narrator at all, because it's a play. Instead of
hearing about what characters do, we actually see them do it. Of course, those characters also talk
about themselves, in which case they act as first-person narrators, and about each other, in which
case they act as either second or third person narrators. Of the narrations within the play, the most
notable are those of the Chorus, when recounts Agamemnon's experiences leading up to the Trojan
War from a Third Person Limited Omniscient point of view, and of Cassandra, when she recounts the
crime of Atreus, from the same point of view.

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.

ANALYSIS: WHAT'S UP WITH


THE TITLE?
Aeschylus's Agamemnon is named after its tragic hero, King Agamemnon of Argos. What's a tragic
hero? Tragedies typically tell the story of a great man (sometimes woman) who gets cut down to
size; this initially successful but ill-fated person is usually referred to as the "tragic hero." It's actually
pretty common for the names of tragic heroes to appear in the titles of the plays centered on them;
thus, Oedipus is the tragic hero of Sophocles's Oedipus the King, or, in more modern times, Hamlet
is the tragic hero of Shakespeare's Hamlet, and King Lear is the tragic hero of his King Lear. So,
Aeschylus's Agamemnon seems to fit pretty nicely into this pattern.

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?

ANALYSIS: WHAT'S UP WITH


THE ENDING?
At the end of Agamemnon, Cassandra and Agamemnon are lying dead and unburied; the Chorus
has just narrowly avoided fighting Aegisthus and has called for the return of Orestes to avenge his
father; and Clytemnestra has announced her intention to share rulership of Argos with her lover,
Aegisthus. This leaves a lot of loose ends to tie up, doesn't it?
Of course it does! That's because Agamemnon is only part one of a three-part trilogy of tragedies
called the Oresteia (the other two are Libation Bearers and Eumenides); originally, all three tragedies
would have been performed on the same day at the festival of Dionysus in Athens. It wouldn't have
been very smart of Aeschylus to wrap everything up nicely at the end of the first play. If he did,
people would probably have wandered off in search of lunch or the ancient equivalent of cotton
candy, or something (provided that the gruesome murders at the end of Agamemnon hadn't made
them lose their appetites). So, it's best to think of the end of Aeschylus'sAgamemnon as a
cliffhanger.

You might also like