The Eumenides c.

458 BCE
SHC
The text is a celebration of the Athenian triumph over the
Persians/despotism/monarchy/barbarism (when foreigners were
speaking in their language, the Greeks only heard bar-bar-bar-bar, and
hence foreigners were called barbari barbarian is a form of
onomatopoeia) / rule of law over arbitrary rule (despotism/abs
monarchy) / civilisation over barbarism
A celebration of Athenian culture
Whilst it falls under a tragedy, there is n.t tragic about it
In a way, the play is a celebration of Athens
Moral supremacy - justice
Shows us the ideal system of Justice one which brings binding and lasting
resolutions how the justice sys should be tied to Aths seeing itself as
the ideal polis
Its better to live in freedom rather than tyranny for you have the freedom to
do whats right in doing a good act b/c its inherent is where it is virtuous
This was the ideal justice system in the eyes of the Athenians
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The transformation from a private to pub justice A MORAL ISSUE
The charge against Orestes is brought up by the Furies who rep
Nature / Primeval Nature modern-day prosecutor, who rep the
State/nation. So perhaps in one sense, by having a pub trial sys, nature
is itself harnessed by the State (controlled), leading to what we know
as civilisation the triumph of the polis over brute nature (the polis
needed to conquer and control nature in order to survive (food source))
90% of ppl were farmers.
Nature is also brutal
The Furies have no personal interest in Orestes, only in his act the
murder of his mother
If your morality cannot be justified, how can you claim to be moral
Use of divinities
Orestes doesnt dispute charges but that he has NO justification
He appeals to divine providence/auth as his defence and witness
The Apology
SHC/setting
Decline of Aths as a power in the Mediterranean militarily,
economically
Society had started to divide and breakdown means that as things
get desperate, there is also a decline in morality
democracy was called into question for as there was this moral
decline, self-interest took over as the guide for their actions (self-int
has greater appeal than the States)
What we have here are humans rather than the gods we see in the
Eumenides and we know that humans have many flaws and they make
mistakes unlike the gods

 In terms of the trial and the justice system [when we regard all this], what
emerges is a throw up and magnification of the possibilities of its
weaknesses, or rather potential fallibility. there may be people who are
biased in ways which sway their arguments, both in +ve and ve ways for the
defendant. Thicydides talks of the moral decline of Athens whereby the
moral decline means that there are no longer able leaders to bring Aths to
glory once again the rise of demagoguery (an implied concept in the
Apology eg. Thucydides mentions this in Pelops War)
DONT GENERALISE IN THE SAC not everyone was bias towards him,
some wold have been swayed by the evidence
Can no longer link back to the Eumenides w/ regards to moral supremacy for
they have fallen farther from the unattainable concept of being close to godly
than ever before.
Private prosecution arbitrary? personal feelings / emotions
The accusors have a very personal vested interest in Socs condemnation /
conviction this is resorting to the old ways, it goes back to what we first see
in the Eumenides it means that Nature is brutal/nasty/arbitrary and it isnt
being controlled
Society and the judicial sys has become subjective it is no longer rational,
consistent, reasoned
Why???
The old ways seen in the Eumenides was arbitrary means that in reverting
back, it was very diff to have a cohesive society it was slightly chaotic in a
manner of speaking
Use of divinities
Soc denies the charges, and seeks to refute them not by appeal to
divine auth, but by rationally demonstrating a) their contradictory
nature eg. impiety, and b) by showing there was no evidence to sup
charges eg. The charges of corrupting the youth
He feels his life is on trial, for too many of the jurors have a
preconceived idea of what his life is like
Soc does not appeal to divine justification against the charges, but
appeals to them only in the sense of justifying his life, which he points
out numerous jurors have condemned for in advance which arent the
charges he was brought to court for. justifying his way of life against
the unwritten, unspoken charges which lay at the heart of numerous
jurors prejudices, thus clouding the ability to rationally arrive at just
verdict.
EXPLAIN WHY THE JURORS FEEL BIAS TOWARDS/AGAINST HIM
His appeal to the Delphic oracle isnt an appeal against the charges laid
against him, but rather to justify his way of life