Skip to main content

Apollo the Lawyer

Orestes is placed on trial for matricide in “The Eumenides”, one of the worst crimes a person can commit in Ancient Greece. Part of the reason he did so is because Apollo convinced him he should avenge his father’s murder. The furies now want justice served to him, and so Athena holds the trial to determine if he is guilty or not. Apollo makes an argument in his defense of Orestes that seems to slander woman, but in reality is not.
In his argument, Apollo states, “[t]he woman you call the mother of this child / is not the parent, just a nurse to the seed, / … The man is the source of life - the one who mounts. / She, like a stranger, keeps / the shoot alive unless god hurts the roots” (260). It sounds like Apollo is saying the mother is really no mother to the child at all, and the only purpose for which she exists is to bear the child. He then presents his reasoning behind his statement. “The father can father forth without a mother. / Here she stands, our living witness” (261). Apollo then goes on to explain how Athena was born from Zeus, not from a mother’s womb, proof that a woman is not needed to have children. Instead, he deems marriage bonds more powerful than parenthood. “Why, you’d disgrace - obliterate the bonds of Zeus / and Hera queen of brides! … Marriage of man and wife is fate itself, / stronger than oaths, and Justice guards its life” (240). His phrasing makes it sounds like to obliterate marriage bonds in any way, especially through death, is a far worse crime than parenticide. Therefore, Clytaemenstra’s action is more terrible than her son’s because she messed with something so sacred.
Keep in mind that the god has to sway the jury to his side so Orestes can go free. One way to do this is to convince the panel and Athena that the murder is not as terrible as it seems because Clytaemenstra never mattered that much. After the woman has the child, her job is over, signifying the end to her importance. If mothers are no longer important, then matricide is no longer a tremendous crime. If what the crime is for is no longer of much importance to avenge, the furies do no need to pursue Orestes to gain it for the dead queen. He also knows that Athena taking his side in the trial will be beneficial, for her vote can break a tie, and she is also a goddess, and Olympians hold power.
Apollo’s argument sways Athena to vote in favor of Orestes, so it seems like it was effective. “No mother gave me birth. / I honour the male, in all things but marriage. … I cannot set more store by the woman’s death - she killed her husband, guardian of their house” (264). She implies that Clytaemenstra’s death does not mean as much to her as Agamemnon’s because she prefers the male gender. Since she does, and deeply loves her father, the king’s murder goes against her beliefs, especially since the queen killed the person who protects the house, an important person in her view. If Apollo had not proposed what he did, he might not have persuaded Athena and half the jury to take Orestes’ side. He merely stated that women basically have no purpose, not because he necessarily believes it himself, but because it is the best way for the trial to swing in the direction he wishes.
Though what Apollo says sounds sexist, in turns out not to be when the his true motives are revealed. He really wants to have Orestes to go free, and in order to let him, he must appeal to the judges of the case. His way of doing that is to make Clytaemenstra seem less important so the charge of matricide is not so severe. Apollo is successful, for Athena clearly states that because of his words Orestes has gained her favor. She sides with him because his argument appealed to her since she is born from Zeus and favors men. She most likely also believes after his statement that a destroyed marriage holds more significance than what Orestes did, and so favors the one on trial instead of the furies who desire revenge for a woman who does not deserve it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Continuation of the Great Conversation

Reading. Discussion. Two things the Great Books program revolves around. Without them, Great Books wouldn't be the same and likely wouldn't exist. As I was reading The Screwtape Letters , I began noticing connections between the content and the program (and, to some extent, my thesis). The great conversation doesn't stop upon graduation, it flows throughout our entire lives. The form may change but it still continues; it's no longer sitting in a classroom discussion but instead finding connections in our daily lives, often between literature and life. Lewis discusses various ways that we can be led into sin and away from God in The Screwtape Letters . Many of the issues he mentions are still highly prevalent today. In one letter, Screwtape tells Wormwood about the progress they've made in disassociating the past from the present, mainly in terms of reading. By convincing modern readers to focus on anything but the truth behind a book, they've caused humanity to ...

Contract Course: Newton and Leibniz: Influenced and Influencing

People influence others, either for the better or for the worse. This fact is clearly seen in the priority dispute between Isaac Newton, an English mathematician and scientist, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, a German mathematician and lawyer, over the invention of fluxions, or differential calculus, calculus concerned with derivatives and differentials, as a result of both releasing their findings around the same time. Claiming priority was important because the person received the recognition for their accomplishment, thereby showing that anyone else that published similar theories was most likely copying. Newton and Leibniz had multiple areas of influence, including other mathematicians, journals, or colleagues. The men would not have gotten to the point they were at in their knowledge and careers if it were not for multiple parties. The priority dispute over calculus was heavily influenced by the people who supported or criticized Newton and Leibniz, whether in the early or later st...

An Introduction

Hi! Welcome to my blog. To start I'm going to give the inspiration behind my blog name (because why not). I love penguins, sometimes even calling myself one, so that is where the first half comes from. With a book is because I love to read. If I had it my way that would be one of the only things I would do. (I want a job where I can do just that.) I have a fluffy, lazy, white cat names Snowball. Emphasis on fluffy and lazy. I enjoy acting if there is an opportunity. I really want to travel to Italy, one of the reasons being because of all the history there. The purpose for this blog is for the Great Books program at Faulkner University and to share work and thoughts related to the course. If you come away from here with a new idea, that's great! It will be interesting other's thoughts.