Justice In The Eumenides

997 Words4 Pages
The Eumenides confronts two contradictory perspectives: the Furies of the ancient order against Apollo of the young generation of Gods. Aeschylus introduces spiritual conflict within the human and universal realms. There is a lack of understanding of justice within the individual, producing an interrelational struggle amongst citizens, and resulting to the incomplete human identity in correspondence to their community. The justice system conquers upon an arbitrary verdict, providing little insight of the positions of good or evil. Aeschylus, through Athena, offers a compromise between two opposing radical ideas, balancing the neutrality of logic and sentiment within the individual, to strengthen unity of a society, and to stimulate the transcendance of humanity. The Eumenides begins with the feud between two opposing principles, blinded by their…show more content…
On the other hand, the Furies "plead for [m]easure", suggesting that justice requires the equalization of pain from perpetrator to victim (Eumenides 541). The Furies embody eternal vengeance that transfers through multiple generations, relying upon the cleansing of blood crimes through the shedding of more blood as inherent law. The Furies avoid the preservation of men who "knows no fear", acknowledging the importance of "suffer[ing] into truth" (Eumenides 530-531). Ancient justice fosters the act of seeking vengeance, breeding uncontrollable raw emotions (such as anger) with priority above reason and rationale. Revenge allows the repetition of the same events within a neverending cycle, offering minimal resolve. Both sides have their positive sides regarding the concept of justice. Before the trial ensued, an ideological conflict already existed. This explains that the trial does not serve to resolve a human problem, but mediate and cultivate a new belief system that reaches an overarching
Open Document