Asher Sisneros

The Libation Bearers is Aeschylus’ play following Agamemnon. While I already wrote an essay about Agamemnon, here is a quick review of the play before delving into The Libation Bearers: Agamemnon went on a campaign against Troy as a personal vendetta against its king. In the process, he offered his daughter as a human sacrifice to the gods. His wife Clytaemnestra fell in love with another man while Agamemnon was at war. Her lover’s name was Aegisthus. When Agamemnon returned home from battle, Clytaemnestra murdered him because he sacrificed their daughter and because she loved Aegisthus. Now, I will delve into the second part of the play, The Libation Bearers, where Agamemnon’s son tries to honor his father’s legacy. I will also answer how he could have gotten justice in our modern world.

At the beginning of the play, Orestes and his friend Pylades stand above Agamemnon’s grave. They grieved the injustice and felt Agamemnon’s spirit screaming in unrest because Clytaemnestra disgraced his burial. Libations were a mixture of honey and food that Greeks poured at burrials, as a food offering to the dead. In Greek religion, dead ancestors couldn’t sleep in peace unless the ritual was performed. Clytaemnestra deliberately ignored those rituals to spite Agamemnon.

Orestes was banished by his mother, but one of Apollo’s prophets commanded him to go back to Argos and avenge his father. Repercussions awaited Orestes if he didn’t. By killing Clytaemnestra, he’d appease Apollo, but the demon furies would kill him after that. However, if Orestes didn’t kill Clytaemnestra, Apollo was going to punish Orestes. It was a lose-lose situation. Either way, Orestes was going to die. Since the judgment was inescapable, he decided vengeance was the best course of action.

Electra was Orestes’ sister. She thought he was banished or dead. Conveniently, she and her servants visited Agamemnon’s grave while Orestes was there. After embracing, the two plotted to kill their mother and stepfather.

Electra offered libations because her mother didn’t. When a spirit haunted their house and screamed at night, Clytaemnestra regretted her course of action. She sent her daughter Electra to Agamemnon’s grave as a way of hopefully, appeasing him.

As Electra and Orestes talking, she told him about her mother’s nightmares. Clytaemnestra dreamed that she had given birth to a snake. After cradling the snake and wrapping it in linens, she tried to nurse it. However, the snake didn’t just suck milk, it also sucked blood. Every time she had this dream, she woke up in a terrified frenzy. After hearing the dream, Orestes interpreted it as a prophecy. He was the deceptive snake born from her, bent on vengeance through bloodshed. While he was once a close and friendly infant needing her milk, now he wanted her blood. Orestes interpreted the prophecy as a blessing from the gods that he would get retribution.

Through trickery, Orestes and Pylades approached Aegisthus’ palace, pretending to be foreigners. When Clytaemnestra asked what business they had with the king, Orestes said he was a messenger bearing tragic news. Her son Orestes died, and he was commissioned to tell them. It was a blatant lie, but Clytaemnestra fell for it. In response to his deception, she also deceived. The queen was relieved. She didn’t have to fear Orestes’ wrath because he was “dead.” But she played the part of a grieving mother who just lost their son.

After she let Orestes and Pylades inside the palace, he murdered Aegisthus and his mother. Life for a life. Vengeance. However, after killing her, he saw a vision of her bloodhounds and the demon furies hunting him. He knew there was no escape. Their quasi-justice demanded more bloodshed. The furies demanded that Agamemnon kill Paris to avenge himself, that Clytaemnestra kill Agamemnon to avenge their daughter, and that Orestes kill Clytaemnestra to avenge his father, but now the furies wanted Orestes dead. Thus the cycle continued.

What is there to make out of this horrid story? Aeschylus’ plays centered around vengeance and “justice,” but his definition of justice is different than ours. To him, it was the same as revenge and karma. If you committed a murder, “justice” demanded that you be murdered. Principally, we agree in the death penalty and a life for a life. However, the difference stems from how justice is enforced. Jurisdiction is central to our definition of justice. We give certain authorities the right to enforce the law, but if someone who doesn’t have that jurisdiction tries to enforce the law, they wind up breaking the law. This is why a civilian can’t give someone speeding a ticket, even if that’s what the law demands. It’s also why personal vengeance isn’t justice in our modern world. It all comes back to jurisdiction.

If the fictional character Orestes was real and alive today, his best course of action would be to press charges on his mother for murder. It’s the court’s jurisdiction to identify a verdict, not his. In a just court, she would be found guilty, she would suffer the consequences, and Orestes could live a normal life after that. There wouldn’t be furies involved or any more bloodshed. That is modern justice.

In conclusion, Orestes killed his mother in retribution. Aeschylus painted the narrative as just, but in our modern world, vengeance isn’t justice and Orestes’ justice was a counterfeit.