What do you think?
Rate this book
Oresteia #1
Agamemnon
Treating ancient plays as living drama. Classical Greek drama is brought vividly to life in this series of new translations. Students are encouraged to engage with the text through detailed commentaries, including0 suggestions for discussion and analysis. In addition, numerous practical questions stimulate ideas on staging and encourage students to explore the play's dramatic qualities. Agamemnon is suitable for students of both Classical Civilisation and Drama. Useful features include full synopsis of the play, commentary alongside translation for easy reference and a comprehensive introduction to the Greek Theatre. Agamemnon is aimed primarily at A-level and undergraduate students in the UK, and college students in North America.
144 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 473
About the author
Aeschylus
1,433 books981 followersGreek
Αισχύλος
, Esquilo in Spanish, Eschyle in French, Eschilo in Italian, Эсхил in Russian.
Aeschylus (c. 525/524 BC – c. 456 BC) was an ancient Greek tragedian often described as the father of tragedy. Academic knowledge of the genre begins with his work, and understanding of earlier Greek tragedy is largely based on inferences made from reading his surviving plays. According to Aristotle, he expanded the number of characters in the theatre and allowed conflict among them. Formerly, characters interacted only with the chorus.
Only seven of Aeschylus's estimated 70 to 90 plays have survived. There is a long-standing debate regarding the authorship of one of them, Prometheus Bound, with some scholars arguing that it may be the work of his son Euphorion. Fragments from other plays have survived in quotations, and more continue to be discovered on Egyptian papyri. These fragments often give further insights into Aeschylus' work. He was likely the first dramatist to present plays as a trilogy. His Oresteia is the only extant ancient example. At least one of his plays was influenced by the Persians' second invasion of Greece (480–479 BC). This work, The Persians, is one of very few classical Greek tragedies concerned with contemporary events, and the only one extant. The significance of the war with Persia was so great to Aeschylus and the Greeks that his epitaph commemorates his participation in the Greek victory at Marathon while making no mention of his success as a playwright.
Aeschylus (c. 525/524 BC – c. 456 BC) was an ancient Greek tragedian often described as the father of tragedy. Academic knowledge of the genre begins with his work, and understanding of earlier Greek tragedy is largely based on inferences made from reading his surviving plays. According to Aristotle, he expanded the number of characters in the theatre and allowed conflict among them. Formerly, characters interacted only with the chorus.
Only seven of Aeschylus's estimated 70 to 90 plays have survived. There is a long-standing debate regarding the authorship of one of them, Prometheus Bound, with some scholars arguing that it may be the work of his son Euphorion. Fragments from other plays have survived in quotations, and more continue to be discovered on Egyptian papyri. These fragments often give further insights into Aeschylus' work. He was likely the first dramatist to present plays as a trilogy. His Oresteia is the only extant ancient example. At least one of his plays was influenced by the Persians' second invasion of Greece (480–479 BC). This work, The Persians, is one of very few classical Greek tragedies concerned with contemporary events, and the only one extant. The significance of the war with Persia was so great to Aeschylus and the Greeks that his epitaph commemorates his participation in the Greek victory at Marathon while making no mention of his success as a playwright.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 967 reviews
August 13, 2016
These Ancient Greeks never learn do they?
What do you honestly think would happen if you sacrificed your own daughter to the Gods? Yes you may appease their wrath for the war crimes you committed in Troy; yes, you may insure a safe return across the sea for your men; yes, you may have bought yourself some temporary time. But at what cost?
The Gods are abated but you’ve unleashed anger just as frightening, that of your wife. You just can’t go round killing your family and expect to get away with it. Silly, silly, Agamemnon. You were in an impossible situation and you made the impossible choice, and it’s your doom: “And once he slipped his neck in the strap of fate” it was all over. You signed your own execution order. You could expect no different.
It’s a great tragedy though.
What do you honestly think would happen if you sacrificed your own daughter to the Gods? Yes you may appease their wrath for the war crimes you committed in Troy; yes, you may insure a safe return across the sea for your men; yes, you may have bought yourself some temporary time. But at what cost?
The Gods are abated but you’ve unleashed anger just as frightening, that of your wife. You just can’t go round killing your family and expect to get away with it. Silly, silly, Agamemnon. You were in an impossible situation and you made the impossible choice, and it’s your doom: “And once he slipped his neck in the strap of fate” it was all over. You signed your own execution order. You could expect no different.
It’s a great tragedy though.
March 20, 2020
Book Review
3 out of 5 stars to Agamemnon, the first of the Orestia plays written in 458 BC by Aeschylus. Peter Arnott, a noted scholar and critic, has stated that, “The Agamemnon is a bitter indictment of war, of the folly of bloodshed, of the hardships of fighting, of the misery at home.” I couldn't agree more...
The Trojan War began when Paris and the married Helen ran back to Troy because Helen belonged to Menelaus. For over ten years Menelaus, Agamemnon, and their troops fought the Trojans to recapture Helen and punish her. However, when the war ended and Menelaus captured Helen, he looked at her and forgave her for the adultery. The whole Trojan War, caused by the adulterous Helen, only contributed to ten years of senseless murders, foolish bloodshed, and built up anger. As a result, Agamemnon gave up ten years of his life to help his brother. Upon his return to Argos, Agamemnon’s wife killed him for sacrificing Iphigenia, which he only did to leave for Troy. Thousands of men and woman suffered and lost their lives just so Menelaus could have his wife back. There must have been some kind of misery at home to make her need more love, lust and passion. If there wasn’t, she would not have run off with the handsome prince Paris. However, Helen did help make The Agamemnon a folly of bloodshed among innocent citizens. Adulterous Helen was a major element that also supports Arnott’s beliefs that The Agamemnon was an act of misery at home.
Although Helen was the primary cause of the Trojan War, the curse on the house of Atreus helped make The Agamemnon a bitter indictment of war. Ever since Atreus and Thyestes battled to inherit the throne from their father the family suffered at the hands of reciprocity. It was a game of one-up-mans-ship. It began when Atreus banished Thyestes from Argos and most recently ended when Thyestes’ son Aegisthus slept with Agamemnon’s wife Clytemnestra. Between these events were affairs, phony banquets of reconciliation, and the consumption of human children. In The Agamemnon, when Agamemnon returns, his wife Clytemnestra brutally murders him carrying on the family curse. This misery at home is because of the curse. Each generation of the house of Atreus murders another member and is then murdered himself. This offers support to Arnott’s claim that The Agamemnon is a bitter indictment of war and the folly of bloodshed. Again, the brutal murder of Agamemnon contributes to the folly of bloodshed. If Agamemnon did not help Menelaus, he would not have gone off to fight the war and then come home to suffer at the hands of a senseless curse. This curse also protrudes from misery at home. Each family member must have been miserable enough, angry enough, and vengeful enough to kill another.
However, the most contributing factor that supports Arnott’s claim is the sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis. When all the troops met at Aulis to set sail for Troy, the winds were not in their favor. In a rush to win back Helen, Agamemnon realized that he had to sacrifice his innocent daughter Iphigenia to get favorable winds from Strymon. He was forced to make a decision between killing his daughter and losing his respect and the war. This supports Arnott’s commentary that there were many hardships of fighting the war in The Agamemnon. It also shows that the shedding of Iphigenia’s blood was a foolish act only destined to happen for the sake of winning the war.
About Me
For those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at https://thisismytruthnow.com, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.
3 out of 5 stars to Agamemnon, the first of the Orestia plays written in 458 BC by Aeschylus. Peter Arnott, a noted scholar and critic, has stated that, “The Agamemnon is a bitter indictment of war, of the folly of bloodshed, of the hardships of fighting, of the misery at home.” I couldn't agree more...
The Trojan War began when Paris and the married Helen ran back to Troy because Helen belonged to Menelaus. For over ten years Menelaus, Agamemnon, and their troops fought the Trojans to recapture Helen and punish her. However, when the war ended and Menelaus captured Helen, he looked at her and forgave her for the adultery. The whole Trojan War, caused by the adulterous Helen, only contributed to ten years of senseless murders, foolish bloodshed, and built up anger. As a result, Agamemnon gave up ten years of his life to help his brother. Upon his return to Argos, Agamemnon’s wife killed him for sacrificing Iphigenia, which he only did to leave for Troy. Thousands of men and woman suffered and lost their lives just so Menelaus could have his wife back. There must have been some kind of misery at home to make her need more love, lust and passion. If there wasn’t, she would not have run off with the handsome prince Paris. However, Helen did help make The Agamemnon a folly of bloodshed among innocent citizens. Adulterous Helen was a major element that also supports Arnott’s beliefs that The Agamemnon was an act of misery at home.
Although Helen was the primary cause of the Trojan War, the curse on the house of Atreus helped make The Agamemnon a bitter indictment of war. Ever since Atreus and Thyestes battled to inherit the throne from their father the family suffered at the hands of reciprocity. It was a game of one-up-mans-ship. It began when Atreus banished Thyestes from Argos and most recently ended when Thyestes’ son Aegisthus slept with Agamemnon’s wife Clytemnestra. Between these events were affairs, phony banquets of reconciliation, and the consumption of human children. In The Agamemnon, when Agamemnon returns, his wife Clytemnestra brutally murders him carrying on the family curse. This misery at home is because of the curse. Each generation of the house of Atreus murders another member and is then murdered himself. This offers support to Arnott’s claim that The Agamemnon is a bitter indictment of war and the folly of bloodshed. Again, the brutal murder of Agamemnon contributes to the folly of bloodshed. If Agamemnon did not help Menelaus, he would not have gone off to fight the war and then come home to suffer at the hands of a senseless curse. This curse also protrudes from misery at home. Each family member must have been miserable enough, angry enough, and vengeful enough to kill another.
However, the most contributing factor that supports Arnott’s claim is the sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis. When all the troops met at Aulis to set sail for Troy, the winds were not in their favor. In a rush to win back Helen, Agamemnon realized that he had to sacrifice his innocent daughter Iphigenia to get favorable winds from Strymon. He was forced to make a decision between killing his daughter and losing his respect and the war. This supports Arnott’s commentary that there were many hardships of fighting the war in The Agamemnon. It also shows that the shedding of Iphigenia’s blood was a foolish act only destined to happen for the sake of winning the war.
About Me
For those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at https://thisismytruthnow.com, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.
April 20, 2015
The First Strike
Each of the plays that make up The Oresteia tetralogy are supposed to be stand alone pieces as well as perfect complements to each other. All the themes that The Oresteia is to explore later are planted and ready for internal development at the end of Agamemnon. Aeschylus works magic with the triadic structure of the plays and of greek rituals (the fourth was probably a conventional satyr play and is lost to us) by going for a feeling of tit-for-tat of conventional revenge stories in the first two and a ‘third and final’ resolution in the third (though I feel game-theory wise a tit-for-two-tats additional play would have made for a good thought experiment!).
So in Agamemnon we are presented with the first strike -- and the tit-for-tat is ready, prophesied and waiting inevitably for the reader/viewer in the next part. It is the bleakest and most ominous ending to a play that I have witnessed because unlike a Hamlet, here there is no cosmic meaning to give us solace either. Agamemnon ends ominously and without significance-in-itself, leaving us with the feeling that the tragedy has just begun and there is a long road yet to be traversed before we can glimpse any possibility of a resolution.
A Note on the Translations
I have over the past several months read the whole play (only Agamemnon) in multiple translations. A few thoughts on each:
The Richmond Lattimore Translation: is sonorous and grand — quite impressive. You feel like you are really reading an ancient master, unlike in the Fagles version. However, it uses complex structures and hence the reading is not quite smooth. With Fagles you can just read on and on and never stop due to a complex phrasing or unclear meaning, but with lattimore you have to pause and rewind often to catch the exact drift.
The Robert Fagles Translation: is immediate and easy on the ear. It is also quite easy to grasp as the words do not form confusing structures as it does in the Lattimore translation. However I felt a certain something missing and couldn’t put my finger on it. I prefer the Lattimore version.
E.D.A Morshead Translation: Rhythmic but compromises on ease of reading to achieve the metric scheme. Could hardly grasp a thing on first reading of most verses. Has the advantage that it demarcates the Strophe, Antistrophe & Epode of each choral ode and that helps the reader visualize better. None of the other translations do this and I felt it was very useful.
The Alan Shapiro Translation: Written in beautiful blank verse, this is probably the best placed to merit first rank as a poetic work. Shapiro injects new power into the verse by his poetic take and provides a fresh perspective on almost all important scenes and imagery. But needs to be a supplementary read since it departs often from the other translations in sometimes subtle and sometimes significant ways. It tries to be an improvement on the Lattimore version but in my opinion it can at best be read as an additional indulgence by the reader already well acquainted with Lattimore.
The Headlam Translation: is bilingual and gives the Greek text on the facing page. This is useful in clarifying doubts arising from conflicting translations or interpretations. The translation itself is slightly long winded and pompous and does not strike the fine balance that Lattimore strikes between majesty and simplicity. Does provide the most elaborate stage directions and that is a plus as an aid to accurate visualization (which in my opinion can make or break your reading of almost-exotic plays).
The Denniston Commentary, the edition under which this review appears: is one which I have not read (and do not have access to) and in the interests of neutrality I have selected it — since it has no translation and is in fact the Greek text itself with english commentary, which seems to be widely accepted as some of the best scholastic commentary on the play.
I will add notes on other translations if and when I track them down.
April 18, 2022
"In war, the first casualty is truth."
Aeschylus's Oresteia trilogy examines revenge, retribution, and fate in the house of Atreus. Agamemnon, the trilogy's first play, depicts the murder of the King and his trophy slave Cassandra, daughter of the King of Troy, on his return to Mycenae from the Trojan War.
Ten years earlier, before setting out for war, Agamemnon offended the goddess Artemis, and she stopped the winds, keeping his fleet of 100 ships from sailing to battle. He learned from the prophet, Calchas, that the only way to appease Artemis was to sacrifice his oldest daughter Iphigenia. He had to decide between his duties to his family or his city-state. He chose his polis and lured Iphigenia and his wife Clytemnestra by promising his daughter's marriage to Achilles. The play begins ten years later with Agamemnon's homecoming as Clytemnestra enacts her revenge with her lover Aegisthus's help.
Agamemnon is a powerful poetic play filled with fear and rage. I listened to Audible's outstanding performance, which brought it to life. I highly recommend this production to anyone interested in the classical world or theater.
Aeschylus's Oresteia trilogy examines revenge, retribution, and fate in the house of Atreus. Agamemnon, the trilogy's first play, depicts the murder of the King and his trophy slave Cassandra, daughter of the King of Troy, on his return to Mycenae from the Trojan War.
Ten years earlier, before setting out for war, Agamemnon offended the goddess Artemis, and she stopped the winds, keeping his fleet of 100 ships from sailing to battle. He learned from the prophet, Calchas, that the only way to appease Artemis was to sacrifice his oldest daughter Iphigenia. He had to decide between his duties to his family or his city-state. He chose his polis and lured Iphigenia and his wife Clytemnestra by promising his daughter's marriage to Achilles. The play begins ten years later with Agamemnon's homecoming as Clytemnestra enacts her revenge with her lover Aegisthus's help.
Agamemnon is a powerful poetic play filled with fear and rage. I listened to Audible's outstanding performance, which brought it to life. I highly recommend this production to anyone interested in the classical world or theater.
October 10, 2016
What’s done, I know, is done; yet I will sacrifice
In hope that time may bring about some better fate.
the mother of Xerxes
3 1/2
Bust of Aeschylus. From the Capitoline Museums, Rome
Aeschylus (c. 525/524 – c. 456/455 BC) is the earliest of the four great Greek playwrights, parts of whose oeuvre have survived to the present day. (The others are, of course, Sophocles (c. 497/6 – winter 406/5 BC) and Euripides (c. 480 – c. 406 BC) [these three tragedians] and the comic playwright Aristophanes (c. 446 – c. 386 BC).
Seven of Aeschylus’ plays have survived, with about 75 other plays known only through fragments or references to their titles. The Persians is now thought to be the earliest of the seven. The play was produced in 472 BC. Other than comedies, it is the only Greek play of the Classical era whose subject matter is taken from actual history, rather than from legend.
The subject of the play is the battle of Salamis, which occurred in 480 BC.
Wilhelm von Kaulbach - Die Seeschlacht bei Salamis – 1868
As the painting makes clear, Salamis was a naval engagement, one in which the Greeks (vastly outnumbered) defeated the invading Persian forces led by King Xerxes.
The play does not, however, take place near Salamis, nor at the time of the battle – rather, it is set in the Persian royal court at Susa, a few months after the battle. At the beginning of the play the court has not heard from Xerxes’ army for some time, and rumors and dread are rife. Then a messenger arrives, who tells the horrible news of what has transpired. King Xerxes himself is a survivor, and arrives later in the play – his mother, Atossa, and the ghost of Darius, king prior to Xerxes, make up the only three named characters. The messenger and the chorus complete the cast.
In telling of the Persian calamity, Aeschylus (who is believed to have seen the battle, perhaps even fought in it) obviously plays to the home crowd. One can almost hear the audience hooting, hollering, applauding as the deaths of various Persian generals are announced.
But, though this “tragedy” (more a triumph from the Greek point of view) seems of little interest to the modern reader as drama, I found myself curiously affected by it. First, even as perhaps fictionalized history, it did appeal to the historian in me. And the last part of the play, in which the glost of Darius laments the foolishness of Xerxes in falling into the trap set for him by the Greeks, certainly has traditional elements of the tragic, even though being presented from a point of view quite different from that of the audience.
The play is short, easily read in an hour or so. The translation by Philip Vellacott appealed to me, as indicated by the great number of underlinings I made. Recommended.
In hope that time may bring about some better fate.
the mother of Xerxes
3 1/2
Bust of Aeschylus. From the Capitoline Museums, Rome
Aeschylus (c. 525/524 – c. 456/455 BC) is the earliest of the four great Greek playwrights, parts of whose oeuvre have survived to the present day. (The others are, of course, Sophocles (c. 497/6 – winter 406/5 BC) and Euripides (c. 480 – c. 406 BC) [these three tragedians] and the comic playwright Aristophanes (c. 446 – c. 386 BC).
Seven of Aeschylus’ plays have survived, with about 75 other plays known only through fragments or references to their titles. The Persians is now thought to be the earliest of the seven. The play was produced in 472 BC. Other than comedies, it is the only Greek play of the Classical era whose subject matter is taken from actual history, rather than from legend.
The subject of the play is the battle of Salamis, which occurred in 480 BC.
Wilhelm von Kaulbach - Die Seeschlacht bei Salamis – 1868
As the painting makes clear, Salamis was a naval engagement, one in which the Greeks (vastly outnumbered) defeated the invading Persian forces led by King Xerxes.
The play does not, however, take place near Salamis, nor at the time of the battle – rather, it is set in the Persian royal court at Susa, a few months after the battle. At the beginning of the play the court has not heard from Xerxes’ army for some time, and rumors and dread are rife. Then a messenger arrives, who tells the horrible news of what has transpired. King Xerxes himself is a survivor, and arrives later in the play – his mother, Atossa, and the ghost of Darius, king prior to Xerxes, make up the only three named characters. The messenger and the chorus complete the cast.
In telling of the Persian calamity, Aeschylus (who is believed to have seen the battle, perhaps even fought in it) obviously plays to the home crowd. One can almost hear the audience hooting, hollering, applauding as the deaths of various Persian generals are announced.
But, though this “tragedy” (more a triumph from the Greek point of view) seems of little interest to the modern reader as drama, I found myself curiously affected by it. First, even as perhaps fictionalized history, it did appeal to the historian in me. And the last part of the play, in which the glost of Darius laments the foolishness of Xerxes in falling into the trap set for him by the Greeks, certainly has traditional elements of the tragic, even though being presented from a point of view quite different from that of the audience.
The play is short, easily read in an hour or so. The translation by Philip Vellacott appealed to me, as indicated by the great number of underlinings I made. Recommended.
April 29, 2015
A celebration of a Greek victory
13 March 2012
This is actually quite an unusual Greek play in that it does not deal with a mythological event. Granted Aristophanes deals with historical events, but he wrote comedy as opposed to tragedy (and I have explained elsewhere what is meant by Greek Tragedy). Excluding Aristophanes, The Persians is the only historical play that we have, and it is possible that it is the only historical play that was ever written during the classical period of Ancient Greece.
The play is about the Persian defeat at Salamis and is set entirely within the palace in Susa. Once again (as we always see) the unities of time and place are obeyed. While many seem to point to Aristotle as being the one who developed the unities, we must remember that Aristotle lived at least two generations after the great dramatists. Aristotle was the pupil of Plato who in turn was the pupil of Socrates, who was alive when Euripides and Sophocles were producing their plays.
This play is pretty much a pat on the back for the Athenians for winning what was considered to be the unwinnable war. It is also the second of the two sources that we have regarding the Battle of Salamis, however we need to remember that this was written from the Athenian viewpoint and in turn was written by Aeschylus' viewpoint, so it will automatically be biased in favour of the Athenians. However, it is a very useful source as numerous generals on the Persian side were named, and the play also outlines the Achameid Dynasty (the line of kings from whom Darius and Xerxes' were descended).
I won't go into too much detail regarding the battle of Salamis as this is discussed extensively in other places (by me as well as others). However the Battle of Salamis (which was a naval battle) is considered to be one of those points upon which of history swings. I am not entirely convinced by this argument, namely because I also believe in divine influence (as we can see from the Battle of Jerusalem when Sennacerib's army was completely destroy by something during the night) but then as we read through this play we can also see numerous references to the gods. However Aeschylus is theologically wrong when dealing with Persian religion. He seems to think that they had a polytheistic religion when in reality, by Xerxes' time, Persia had become Duotheistic, where two gods, equal and opposite, are forever slugging it out with each other (this is Xorastrianism in a really small nutshell).
One thing we must remember though is that Xerxes' survived. This is actually quite unusual for a king who is defeated in battle. Senacerib was killed by his sons upon his return to Ninevah, namely because his defeat was evidence that he no longer had the support of the gods. However, there are two possible answers to why he was no deposed. The first, and the more unlikely, is that Xorastrianism did not allow for this and that defeat is not necessarily the disapproval of the gods, but rather just bad luck. However, this, as far as I am concerned, is not a hugely satisfying answer.
The second answer to this question, I suspect, comes from the Bible, namely from the Book of Esther. Now the events in Esther occur during the reign of Xerxes (though there is debate as to whether it is Xerxes or not, however, for the purpose of my argument, I will take it as it stands) and deals with the festival of Purim. Here the Jews were marked for death, and it was only the intervention of Esther that enable them to be saved. Now, we ask the question of why were they marked for death, and what swayed Xerxes to listen to Haman (boo, hiss). It is clear from the book that Haman (boo, hiss) hated Mordechai (Yay) and the Jews, but I doubt he could have gone to Xerxes and said 'I hate these people, please wipe them out' (by the way, the 'yays' and the 'boo hisses' apparently come from the Jewish tradition when this book is read).
Okay, the Bible indicates that the events in Esther occurred in the twelfth year of the reign of Xerxes, which put it around 474 BC, where as the Persian Wars occurred in 480 to 479 BC, which is about 5 years afterwards. So when I think about it, it is unlikely the the attempted genocide of the Jews could have been related to the Persian Wars. The reason I suggested this is because it is common for a minority group to be blamed for an empire's failure, as we saw in Nazi Germany. So, I guess my thoughts about this pomgrom would be incorrect. However, let us further consider more evidence from the Bible. The feast at which Xerxes' first wife, Vashti, is set in the third year of his reign, which is before the Persian wars. However, it also appears that Esther was married to him probably a few months after, and was queen while Xerxes was away in Greece. This suggests that Amestris (the Greek name of Xerxes' wife) is in fact Esther. Now, I checked Wikipedia and they indicate that she was actually Vashti, but it then goes on to expound the Akkadian root of both words and this seems to indicate that Amestris is Esther as opposed to Vashti. I believe that that is the case, based on the biblical record (if it is correct that Ahasuerus and Xerxes are in fact the same person).
So, I guess my point is that the reason that Xerxes' was not deposed was because he was persuaded by Haman to blame the Jews for his defeat at Salamis, however through the intervention of Esther, this blame was then shifted back onto Haman, who was then subsequently executed. Anyway, this is all speculation, however I do enjoy speculating about ancient historical events, which is why I wrote this in the first place.
13 March 2012
This is actually quite an unusual Greek play in that it does not deal with a mythological event. Granted Aristophanes deals with historical events, but he wrote comedy as opposed to tragedy (and I have explained elsewhere what is meant by Greek Tragedy). Excluding Aristophanes, The Persians is the only historical play that we have, and it is possible that it is the only historical play that was ever written during the classical period of Ancient Greece.
The play is about the Persian defeat at Salamis and is set entirely within the palace in Susa. Once again (as we always see) the unities of time and place are obeyed. While many seem to point to Aristotle as being the one who developed the unities, we must remember that Aristotle lived at least two generations after the great dramatists. Aristotle was the pupil of Plato who in turn was the pupil of Socrates, who was alive when Euripides and Sophocles were producing their plays.
This play is pretty much a pat on the back for the Athenians for winning what was considered to be the unwinnable war. It is also the second of the two sources that we have regarding the Battle of Salamis, however we need to remember that this was written from the Athenian viewpoint and in turn was written by Aeschylus' viewpoint, so it will automatically be biased in favour of the Athenians. However, it is a very useful source as numerous generals on the Persian side were named, and the play also outlines the Achameid Dynasty (the line of kings from whom Darius and Xerxes' were descended).
I won't go into too much detail regarding the battle of Salamis as this is discussed extensively in other places (by me as well as others). However the Battle of Salamis (which was a naval battle) is considered to be one of those points upon which of history swings. I am not entirely convinced by this argument, namely because I also believe in divine influence (as we can see from the Battle of Jerusalem when Sennacerib's army was completely destroy by something during the night) but then as we read through this play we can also see numerous references to the gods. However Aeschylus is theologically wrong when dealing with Persian religion. He seems to think that they had a polytheistic religion when in reality, by Xerxes' time, Persia had become Duotheistic, where two gods, equal and opposite, are forever slugging it out with each other (this is Xorastrianism in a really small nutshell).
One thing we must remember though is that Xerxes' survived. This is actually quite unusual for a king who is defeated in battle. Senacerib was killed by his sons upon his return to Ninevah, namely because his defeat was evidence that he no longer had the support of the gods. However, there are two possible answers to why he was no deposed. The first, and the more unlikely, is that Xorastrianism did not allow for this and that defeat is not necessarily the disapproval of the gods, but rather just bad luck. However, this, as far as I am concerned, is not a hugely satisfying answer.
The second answer to this question, I suspect, comes from the Bible, namely from the Book of Esther. Now the events in Esther occur during the reign of Xerxes (though there is debate as to whether it is Xerxes or not, however, for the purpose of my argument, I will take it as it stands) and deals with the festival of Purim. Here the Jews were marked for death, and it was only the intervention of Esther that enable them to be saved. Now, we ask the question of why were they marked for death, and what swayed Xerxes to listen to Haman (boo, hiss). It is clear from the book that Haman (boo, hiss) hated Mordechai (Yay) and the Jews, but I doubt he could have gone to Xerxes and said 'I hate these people, please wipe them out' (by the way, the 'yays' and the 'boo hisses' apparently come from the Jewish tradition when this book is read).
Okay, the Bible indicates that the events in Esther occurred in the twelfth year of the reign of Xerxes, which put it around 474 BC, where as the Persian Wars occurred in 480 to 479 BC, which is about 5 years afterwards. So when I think about it, it is unlikely the the attempted genocide of the Jews could have been related to the Persian Wars. The reason I suggested this is because it is common for a minority group to be blamed for an empire's failure, as we saw in Nazi Germany. So, I guess my thoughts about this pomgrom would be incorrect. However, let us further consider more evidence from the Bible. The feast at which Xerxes' first wife, Vashti, is set in the third year of his reign, which is before the Persian wars. However, it also appears that Esther was married to him probably a few months after, and was queen while Xerxes was away in Greece. This suggests that Amestris (the Greek name of Xerxes' wife) is in fact Esther. Now, I checked Wikipedia and they indicate that she was actually Vashti, but it then goes on to expound the Akkadian root of both words and this seems to indicate that Amestris is Esther as opposed to Vashti. I believe that that is the case, based on the biblical record (if it is correct that Ahasuerus and Xerxes are in fact the same person).
So, I guess my point is that the reason that Xerxes' was not deposed was because he was persuaded by Haman to blame the Jews for his defeat at Salamis, however through the intervention of Esther, this blame was then shifted back onto Haman, who was then subsequently executed. Anyway, this is all speculation, however I do enjoy speculating about ancient historical events, which is why I wrote this in the first place.
November 13, 2021
I’m assuming no one cares about spoilers in this well-known tale, the first in the Oresteia trilogy about revenge killings.
A pre-story event sets this tale in motion. Agamemnon had the ships all ready to go to Troy for the war, but massive winds came to prevent them from sailing. Of course, these were brought on by the goddess Artemis, who was angry at Agamemnon for something, and of course, Agamemnon had to do something about it, so he sacrificed his daughter Iphigeneia. Of course!
“Her pleas, her cries of ‘father!’, and her maiden years, were set at naught by the war-loving chieftains. After a prayer, her father told his attendants to lift her right up over the altar with all their strength, like a yearling goat, face down, so that her robes fell around her …”
This didn’t sit well with her mom, Clytemnestra, who stewed over it until Agamemnon returned from the war. She took up with another man, his cousin Aegisthus. Together they plotted to kill Agamemnon, but in this telling, Clytemnestra is the villain.
“…she is--what loathsome beast’s name can I call her by, to hit the mark? An amphisbaena, or some Scylla dwelling among the rocks, the bane of sailors, a raging hellish mother, breathing out truceless war against her nearest and dearest?”
What I found most interesting was the way the Chorus stands for the trial we might have today. I suppose the gods are the judge, but the Chorus argues with the victims and the murderers, pointing out their mistakes and scolding them for their wrongs. Thinking of current trials, this made me wonder what would happen if, instead of a carefully controlled courtroom, we had a Greek chorus to reflect the thoughts of the people?
A fun read. I’ve seen the Mask of Agamemnon in the museum in Athens, and it’s a power experience. I’m giving this rating an extra star for giving me even more to think about when I look at the impression of that tragic face.
A pre-story event sets this tale in motion. Agamemnon had the ships all ready to go to Troy for the war, but massive winds came to prevent them from sailing. Of course, these were brought on by the goddess Artemis, who was angry at Agamemnon for something, and of course, Agamemnon had to do something about it, so he sacrificed his daughter Iphigeneia. Of course!
“Her pleas, her cries of ‘father!’, and her maiden years, were set at naught by the war-loving chieftains. After a prayer, her father told his attendants to lift her right up over the altar with all their strength, like a yearling goat, face down, so that her robes fell around her …”
This didn’t sit well with her mom, Clytemnestra, who stewed over it until Agamemnon returned from the war. She took up with another man, his cousin Aegisthus. Together they plotted to kill Agamemnon, but in this telling, Clytemnestra is the villain.
“…she is--what loathsome beast’s name can I call her by, to hit the mark? An amphisbaena, or some Scylla dwelling among the rocks, the bane of sailors, a raging hellish mother, breathing out truceless war against her nearest and dearest?”
What I found most interesting was the way the Chorus stands for the trial we might have today. I suppose the gods are the judge, but the Chorus argues with the victims and the murderers, pointing out their mistakes and scolding them for their wrongs. Thinking of current trials, this made me wonder what would happen if, instead of a carefully controlled courtroom, we had a Greek chorus to reflect the thoughts of the people?
A fun read. I’ve seen the Mask of Agamemnon in the museum in Athens, and it’s a power experience. I’m giving this rating an extra star for giving me even more to think about when I look at the impression of that tragic face.
May 15, 2023
Questa tragedia narra la spedizione militare intentata dal re persiano Serse, figlio di Dario, nei confronti delle città greche del Peloponneso esitata nella disfatta degli asiatici sul mare a Salamina e continuata sulle truppe di terra in ritirata. Esile nell’impianto e strutturata in modo semplice con pochi personaggi essenziali a esprimere il pathos della vicenda, la trama si consuma nella reggia di Susa dove la regina Atossa vedova del grande re Dario e madre di Serse, scossa dall’assenza di notizie e da gravi presagi, raccoglie a sé gli anziani della città per parlarne: i maggiorenti convincono la regina a consultare lo spirito del defunto re Dario ma irrompe sulla scena un araldo giunto dai luoghi della battaglia che svela la grave e inattesa sconfitta e la morte di tantissimi ufficiali, coraggiosi comandanti e amici personali di Serse. Commovente l’atteggiamento della regina preoccupata per la sorte del figlio ma ancora di più l’intervento accorato di re Dario, invocato dall’Ade. La tragedia si conclude con l’appassionato mea culpa di Serse ritornato con le vesti regali strappate, umiliato dalla sconfitta subita e nella rievocazione con un addolorato racconto della sorte della spedizione e della perdita degli amici più cari sul campo di battaglia. Tragedia personale e di un popolo sconfitto per la sua arroganza di superiorità.
November 16, 2018
Representada pela primeira vez em 472 a. C., Persas é a peça grega mais antiga que chegou completa ao nosso tempo.
O tema é a Batalha de Salamina, "a mãe de todas as guerras". A acção decorre em Susa, Pérsia, iniciando-se com a glorificação e esperança de vitória do exército atacante e terminando com os lamentos do sobrevivente Xerxes, cujos trajes reais esfarrapados simbolizam a derrota numa guerra onde pereceram quase todos os persas pelas armas dos gregos.
(Wilhelm von Kaulbach, Battle of Salamis)
O tema é a Batalha de Salamina, "a mãe de todas as guerras". A acção decorre em Susa, Pérsia, iniciando-se com a glorificação e esperança de vitória do exército atacante e terminando com os lamentos do sobrevivente Xerxes, cujos trajes reais esfarrapados simbolizam a derrota numa guerra onde pereceram quase todos os persas pelas armas dos gregos.
(Wilhelm von Kaulbach, Battle of Salamis)
June 26, 2017
The Homecoming of Agamemnon
02 July 2012
This is the first part of the only Greek trilogy that we have. The play is set after the Trojan War in the city of Argos, of which Agamemnon is the ruler. Agamemnon's wife learns of the defeat of the Trojans and the imminent return of her husband through the use of a series of beacons. However while she is eagerly awaiting her husband's return, it is a different scenario from Odysseus' wife Penelope, who remained faithful to her husband for the twenty years he was away. Instead, while Agamemnon was away, she took a lover, Aegisthus, and is plotting her revenge for the murder of her daughter at Aulis.
There is a lot of background to this play, but that is not uncommon for Greek drama in that they are set within a complex historical context that has a lot of past events that all tie in together and also provide the precursor to a lot of other events. This is probably why the trilogy was so popular in that it enabled the playwright to look to the events that arose within the play (and also that Greek plays tend to be quite short).
Agamemnon is a man with a lot of enemies, but then that is to be expected in relation to a man that had set himself up as overlord of Greece. However, his father had tricked Aegisthus' father, Thyestes, into eating his children, but Aegisthus managed to escape, and by allowing Clytemnestra (Agamemnon's wife) to take him as her lover puts him in the best position to extract his revenge. However, Clytemnestra did not need much encouraging to murder Agamemnon, as prior to the war, he sacrificed his daughter, Iphagenia, so that the war would be successful (actually it was so that the winds would change to enable the fleet to sail to Troy). This is going to upset most mothers, though to add insult to injury, he brought Cassandra back as his prize, so he effectively arrives in Argos to face an angry wife with a woman that he picked up to take her place when she was not around. However, it is clear that Clytemnestra's actions were not looked upon all that well. While revenge is acceptable to the Greeks, it does not seem to be the case where it is the woman seeking revenge.
As with a lot of Aeschylus' plays, it seems to be very little on the action, and a lot on the storytelling. While Clytaemnestra does appear at the beginning of the play, it is not until a quarter of the way through that she first speaks. In fact, most of the major characters only appear for a short time. The only major character that is on the stage for an extended period of time is Cassandra, and she is trying to warn the Chorus of what is to come, but due to her curse nobody believes her. It seems that a majority of the play actually revolves around Cassandra and her prophecies, and also the curse that has been placed upon her to be able to predict the future, but is never listened to. In fact, she is treated like the barbarian that she is.
Clytaemnestra and Penelope are two contrasting women in Greek mythology. Penelope is seen as the epitome of female honour however Clytaemnestra is portrayed as the complete opposite. Penelope waits patiently for her husband to return, and uses every trick that she can think of to outwit the suitors who are eating her out of house and home. Throughout all that time she rebukes the advances of all of the man that come, and also resists the social pressure that she is under to remarry. Clytaemenstra is the opposite as she is a very proud and hot headed individual who is seeking revenge against her husband. She takes a lover, and then lays a trap for her husband for when she returns.
The play concludes with the idea that Argos has now become a tyranny. This is odd because it never was anything other than a tyranny. Agamemnon is actually not a very nice guy. The best portrayal of him would have been in the movie Troy, where he is portrayed as a vicious imperialist who is looking for any excuse to expand his power. We don't see that here, but rather see a man who has returned from ten years of war to find his house not only in shambles but also turned against him. In a way, this play is another example of returning from war and the difficulties of returning to one's previous life. I suspect that there are a lot of soldiers out there that could sympathise with the plight of Agamemnon, though these days, with much better communication systems, the breakdown of the family unit due to war is evident much sooner, but happens all too often.
02 July 2012
This is the first part of the only Greek trilogy that we have. The play is set after the Trojan War in the city of Argos, of which Agamemnon is the ruler. Agamemnon's wife learns of the defeat of the Trojans and the imminent return of her husband through the use of a series of beacons. However while she is eagerly awaiting her husband's return, it is a different scenario from Odysseus' wife Penelope, who remained faithful to her husband for the twenty years he was away. Instead, while Agamemnon was away, she took a lover, Aegisthus, and is plotting her revenge for the murder of her daughter at Aulis.
There is a lot of background to this play, but that is not uncommon for Greek drama in that they are set within a complex historical context that has a lot of past events that all tie in together and also provide the precursor to a lot of other events. This is probably why the trilogy was so popular in that it enabled the playwright to look to the events that arose within the play (and also that Greek plays tend to be quite short).
Agamemnon is a man with a lot of enemies, but then that is to be expected in relation to a man that had set himself up as overlord of Greece. However, his father had tricked Aegisthus' father, Thyestes, into eating his children, but Aegisthus managed to escape, and by allowing Clytemnestra (Agamemnon's wife) to take him as her lover puts him in the best position to extract his revenge. However, Clytemnestra did not need much encouraging to murder Agamemnon, as prior to the war, he sacrificed his daughter, Iphagenia, so that the war would be successful (actually it was so that the winds would change to enable the fleet to sail to Troy). This is going to upset most mothers, though to add insult to injury, he brought Cassandra back as his prize, so he effectively arrives in Argos to face an angry wife with a woman that he picked up to take her place when she was not around. However, it is clear that Clytemnestra's actions were not looked upon all that well. While revenge is acceptable to the Greeks, it does not seem to be the case where it is the woman seeking revenge.
As with a lot of Aeschylus' plays, it seems to be very little on the action, and a lot on the storytelling. While Clytaemnestra does appear at the beginning of the play, it is not until a quarter of the way through that she first speaks. In fact, most of the major characters only appear for a short time. The only major character that is on the stage for an extended period of time is Cassandra, and she is trying to warn the Chorus of what is to come, but due to her curse nobody believes her. It seems that a majority of the play actually revolves around Cassandra and her prophecies, and also the curse that has been placed upon her to be able to predict the future, but is never listened to. In fact, she is treated like the barbarian that she is.
Clytaemnestra and Penelope are two contrasting women in Greek mythology. Penelope is seen as the epitome of female honour however Clytaemnestra is portrayed as the complete opposite. Penelope waits patiently for her husband to return, and uses every trick that she can think of to outwit the suitors who are eating her out of house and home. Throughout all that time she rebukes the advances of all of the man that come, and also resists the social pressure that she is under to remarry. Clytaemenstra is the opposite as she is a very proud and hot headed individual who is seeking revenge against her husband. She takes a lover, and then lays a trap for her husband for when she returns.
The play concludes with the idea that Argos has now become a tyranny. This is odd because it never was anything other than a tyranny. Agamemnon is actually not a very nice guy. The best portrayal of him would have been in the movie Troy, where he is portrayed as a vicious imperialist who is looking for any excuse to expand his power. We don't see that here, but rather see a man who has returned from ten years of war to find his house not only in shambles but also turned against him. In a way, this play is another example of returning from war and the difficulties of returning to one's previous life. I suspect that there are a lot of soldiers out there that could sympathise with the plight of Agamemnon, though these days, with much better communication systems, the breakdown of the family unit due to war is evident much sooner, but happens all too often.
November 28, 2015
"XERXES
Wail, wail the miserable doom, and to the palace hie!
CHORUS
Alas, alas, and woe again!
XERXES
Shriek, smite the breast, as I!
CHORUS
An evil gift, a sad exchange, of tears poured out in vain!
XERXES
Shrill out your simultaneous wail!
CHORUS
Alas the woe and pain!
XERXES
O, bitter is this adverse fate!
CHORUS
I voice the moan with thee!
XERXES
Smite, smite thy bosom, groan aloud for my calamity!
CHORUS
I mourn and am dissolved in tears!
XERXES
Cry, beat thy breast amain!
CHORUS
O king, my heart is in thy woe!
XERXES
Shriek, wail, and shriek again!
CHORUS
O agony!
XERXES
A blackening blow—
CHORUS
A grievous stripe shall fall!
XERXES
Yea, beat anew thy breast, ring out the doleful Mysian call!
CHORUS
An agony, an agony!
XERXES
Pluck out thy whitening beard!
CHORUS
By handfuls, ay, by handfuls, with dismal tear-drops smeared!
XERXES
Sob out thine aching sorrow!
CHORUS
I will thine best obey.
XERXES
With thine hands rend thy mantle's fold—
CHORUS
Alas, woe worth the day!
XERXES
With thine own fingers tear thy locks, bewail the army's weird!
CHORUS
By handfuls, yea, by handfuls, with tears of dole besmeared!
XERXES
Now let thine eyes find overflow—
CHORUS
I wend in wail and pain!
XERXES
Cry out for me an answering moan—
CHORUS
Alas, alas again! "
Thats basically my daily internal monologue
Wail, wail the miserable doom, and to the palace hie!
CHORUS
Alas, alas, and woe again!
XERXES
Shriek, smite the breast, as I!
CHORUS
An evil gift, a sad exchange, of tears poured out in vain!
XERXES
Shrill out your simultaneous wail!
CHORUS
Alas the woe and pain!
XERXES
O, bitter is this adverse fate!
CHORUS
I voice the moan with thee!
XERXES
Smite, smite thy bosom, groan aloud for my calamity!
CHORUS
I mourn and am dissolved in tears!
XERXES
Cry, beat thy breast amain!
CHORUS
O king, my heart is in thy woe!
XERXES
Shriek, wail, and shriek again!
CHORUS
O agony!
XERXES
A blackening blow—
CHORUS
A grievous stripe shall fall!
XERXES
Yea, beat anew thy breast, ring out the doleful Mysian call!
CHORUS
An agony, an agony!
XERXES
Pluck out thy whitening beard!
CHORUS
By handfuls, ay, by handfuls, with dismal tear-drops smeared!
XERXES
Sob out thine aching sorrow!
CHORUS
I will thine best obey.
XERXES
With thine hands rend thy mantle's fold—
CHORUS
Alas, woe worth the day!
XERXES
With thine own fingers tear thy locks, bewail the army's weird!
CHORUS
By handfuls, yea, by handfuls, with tears of dole besmeared!
XERXES
Now let thine eyes find overflow—
CHORUS
I wend in wail and pain!
XERXES
Cry out for me an answering moan—
CHORUS
Alas, alas again! "
Thats basically my daily internal monologue
January 23, 2017
" [...] Στη δυστυχία
δε θα προδώσουμε όποιους αγαπάμε. "
Η δυστυχία του χαμένου πάντα προκαλεί λύπη. Στην τραγωδία αυτή, με συγκίνησε ιδιαίτερα η έμφαση που δόθηκε στον χαμό όσων ακολούθησαν, χωρίς να έχουν επιλογή, τον Ξέρξη- όχι μόνο επιφανείς πλούσιοι άνδρες, που εκτέλεσαν χρέη στρατηγών, αλλά και πολλοί ανώνυμοι, οι γυναίκες, οι γονείς και τα παιδιά των οποίων δεν θα τους ξαναδούν ποτέ.
Πολύ συγκινητικός και συμπαθητικός ο χαρακτήρας της Άτοσσας, μητέρας του Ξέρξη και χήρας του Δαρείου. Η αγωνία για το γιο της είναι η αγωνία κάθε μάνας, αίσθημα πανανθρώπινο και διαχρονικό.
"Πόσο πολύ με σπάραξεν η θλίψη,
τις τωρινές μας συμφορές γρικώντας
κι όσες ακόμη απάνω μας θα πέσουν.
δε θα προδώσουμε όποιους αγαπάμε. "
Η δυστυχία του χαμένου πάντα προκαλεί λύπη. Στην τραγωδία αυτή, με συγκίνησε ιδιαίτερα η έμφαση που δόθηκε στον χαμό όσων ακολούθησαν, χωρίς να έχουν επιλογή, τον Ξέρξη- όχι μόνο επιφανείς πλούσιοι άνδρες, που εκτέλεσαν χρέη στρατηγών, αλλά και πολλοί ανώνυμοι, οι γυναίκες, οι γονείς και τα παιδιά των οποίων δεν θα τους ξαναδούν ποτέ.
Πολύ συγκινητικός και συμπαθητικός ο χαρακτήρας της Άτοσσας, μητέρας του Ξέρξη και χήρας του Δαρείου. Η αγωνία για το γιο της είναι η αγωνία κάθε μάνας, αίσθημα πανανθρώπινο και διαχρονικό.
"Πόσο πολύ με σπάραξεν η θλίψη,
τις τωρινές μας συμφορές γρικώντας
κι όσες ακόμη απάνω μας θα πέσουν.
June 3, 2019
Yet the insidious guile of god—what mortal man can escape it? Who with agile foot can lightly overleap and escape its toils?
This is a mournful gaze of the vanquished. Fortuna's Wheel has spun and the Imperium has been struck. The famed army of the title have been routed at Salamis.
There's very effective use of the chorus, the tempo of such leads us to the precipice.
This is a mournful gaze of the vanquished. Fortuna's Wheel has spun and the Imperium has been struck. The famed army of the title have been routed at Salamis.
There's very effective use of the chorus, the tempo of such leads us to the precipice.
October 31, 2019
Don't mess with the mama bear.
"Perched over his body like a hateful raven, in hoarse notes she chants her song of triumph."
Agamemnon and his brother Menelaus with their women are property attitudes have never been favs. Not sure what Aggy was thinking would happen when he got back after the whole Iphigenia incident. Of course, the whole Aegisthus sidebar is a fun twist, and I see where Shakespeare got his inspiration for Titus Andronicus.
All Hail the Hero!
Sucks to be Cassandra.
Clytaemestra gets two thumbs up!
"Perched over his body like a hateful raven, in hoarse notes she chants her song of triumph."
Agamemnon and his brother Menelaus with their women are property attitudes have never been favs. Not sure what Aggy was thinking would happen when he got back after the whole Iphigenia incident. Of course, the whole Aegisthus sidebar is a fun twist, and I see where Shakespeare got his inspiration for Titus Andronicus.
All Hail the Hero!
Sucks to be Cassandra.
Clytaemestra gets two thumbs up!
April 3, 2021
Não posso mentir, já me passaram textos clássicos pelas mãos que fizeram as minhas delícias e este "Persas" não provocou um impacto muito significativo. Mas há algo de especial nele, nem que seja o facto de se tratar da peça grega mais antiga que chegou inteira aos nossos dias, ou até o espantoso poder evocativo da palavra: muito antes de Xerxes entrar em cena, é pela mão do Mensageiro que se torna possível desenhar mentalmente toda a desgraça que se abateu sobre os bárbaros — "A costa de Salamina e toda a região em volta estão juncadas dos cadáveres", "do lado dos Gregos, irrompe um grande clamor, semelhante a um canto, cujo eco é devolvido pelos rochedos da ilha"... esta evocação dos acontecimentos passados é violenta e arrepiante, mas também incrivelmente bela (talvez por ser tão sensorial).
July 3, 2018
Συγκλονιστική η ευχαρίστηση που πήρε η Κλυταιμνήστρα μόλις σκότωσε τον Αγαμέμνονα!
October 20, 2023
I mean, I kind of get it, but after reading this I would expect more people to name their daughter Clytemnestra.
That ending, though. Dang.
That ending, though. Dang.
December 18, 2017
Written in 472 B.C., Aeschylus’s Persians is the oldest surviving play in the history of Western drama. How astonishing, then, to consider that the first piece of Greek tragedy to come down to us was written not from a Greek perspective, but ostensibly from that of an implacable enemy defeated a mere eight years prior; an enemy that had terrorized all the Greeks, enslaved many of them, and had sacked the very city in which the play was first performed.
Aeschylus, along with many of the play’s original viewers, was likely at the Battle of Salamis. The graphic imagery conjured by the Persian Messenger—the sea being so cluttered with corpses and debris that one couldn’t see the water; bodies clustering on the shoreline like litter; Athenian marines using the splintered, jagged ends of their rowing oars to skewer wounded Persians in the water like fish—were probably drawn not from Aeschylus’s imagination, but from his memory. Many of his viewers would have had similar recollections. Many of them would have lost friends in the battle, and some of them may have suffered from symptoms of what we would now call Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. For those who didn’t participate in the battle, the memory of the war would have recalled the deep existential dread they must have felt for the prospect of their total annihilation at the hands of a foreign invader; a level of terror impossible to comprehend by those of us who have never lived in the path of an invading army.
Needless to say, there were doubtless some exposed nerves in the audience that would have been touched upon seeing a play set not at Salamis or at Athens, but at the Persian court at Susa. There is certainly some Greek triumphalism woven into the dialogue, as the characters lament the folly of trying to subdue the irrepressible Greek genius. But there is also an admirable effort on Aeschylus’s part to make the Persian experience—that of the “other”—palatable to his Athenian audience. The festival goers gathered at the Dionysia would have been permitted to see their great oriental nemesis no longer as a faceless terror, but as a king reduced to a beggar in rags; a defeated and despondent victim of the mercurial intelligences which rule the fates of all men of all races. In the world of gods and men, the mighty could be cast down without notice and without recourse.
Such was the warning of Aeschylus to an Athens which was entering its golden age. One wonders if, fifty-seven years later, the sailors embarking from an Athens which was now the center of an aggressive and expansionary maritime empire on the doomed Sicilian Expedition spared a thought for the inconsolable Xerxes and his fawningly pitiful mother.
Aeschylus, along with many of the play’s original viewers, was likely at the Battle of Salamis. The graphic imagery conjured by the Persian Messenger—the sea being so cluttered with corpses and debris that one couldn’t see the water; bodies clustering on the shoreline like litter; Athenian marines using the splintered, jagged ends of their rowing oars to skewer wounded Persians in the water like fish—were probably drawn not from Aeschylus’s imagination, but from his memory. Many of his viewers would have had similar recollections. Many of them would have lost friends in the battle, and some of them may have suffered from symptoms of what we would now call Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. For those who didn’t participate in the battle, the memory of the war would have recalled the deep existential dread they must have felt for the prospect of their total annihilation at the hands of a foreign invader; a level of terror impossible to comprehend by those of us who have never lived in the path of an invading army.
Needless to say, there were doubtless some exposed nerves in the audience that would have been touched upon seeing a play set not at Salamis or at Athens, but at the Persian court at Susa. There is certainly some Greek triumphalism woven into the dialogue, as the characters lament the folly of trying to subdue the irrepressible Greek genius. But there is also an admirable effort on Aeschylus’s part to make the Persian experience—that of the “other”—palatable to his Athenian audience. The festival goers gathered at the Dionysia would have been permitted to see their great oriental nemesis no longer as a faceless terror, but as a king reduced to a beggar in rags; a defeated and despondent victim of the mercurial intelligences which rule the fates of all men of all races. In the world of gods and men, the mighty could be cast down without notice and without recourse.
Such was the warning of Aeschylus to an Athens which was entering its golden age. One wonders if, fifty-seven years later, the sailors embarking from an Athens which was now the center of an aggressive and expansionary maritime empire on the doomed Sicilian Expedition spared a thought for the inconsolable Xerxes and his fawningly pitiful mother.
June 30, 2018
Με τους Πέρσες ο Αισχύλος δίδασκει το ανθρώπινο γένος ότι η ηθική τάξη διαταράζεται, όταν ο άνθρωπος φτάσει στην υβρι. Και η ύβρις γεννιέται, όταν υπερβαίνουμε το μέτρο που δόθηκε από το θεό στη φύση μας. Η υπέρβαση αυτή εμφανίζεται σαν αλαζονεία απέναντι όχι μόνο στους άλλους ανθρώπους αλλά και στον ίδιο το θεό, του οποίου η ουσία και η βούληση εκφράζεται φιλάνθρωπη αλλά και αδυσώπητα σκληρή μέσα στους νόμους της φύσης.
November 17, 2019
Conservando diante dos olhos este castigo, lembrai-vos sempre de Atenas e da Grécia e que ninguém despreze a sua sorte presente porque, ao cobiçar o que é dos outros, pode deitar por terra uma grande felicidade.
November 29, 2020
God of the long road,
Apollo Apollo my destroyer-
you destroy me once, destroy me twice -
A classic Greek tragedy- haunting, beautifully written, and telling of the pitfalls of cyclical vengeance. It definitely builds up a sense of foreboding. Themes surrounding power, sacrifice, revenge and righteousness.
For their mad outrage of a queen we raped their city - we were right.
Read
June 9, 2021Full bitaitanço soon.
April 27, 2024
پرناله ترین نمایشنامهای که خوندم😭😂همسرایان بیشترین دیالوگها رو داشتن.
۳۰درصد آخرش بهتر بود.
|تکه کتاب|
▪︎اکنون آن دشمنی که سالها در دل میپروردم به پایان آمده است.
▪︎او که به هوای زنی سالیان دراز در آن سوی دریا نبرد کرد
اکنون در خانه خود به دست زنی از پای درآمده است.
هلن، ای فریب خورده به نادانی
تنها یکی، یکی زن که هزاران جان در خاک تروا به تباهی افکندی
کار تو اکنون به انجام آمد.
[خندهام گرفت سر این تیکه😂]
۳۰درصد آخرش بهتر بود.
|تکه کتاب|
▪︎اکنون آن دشمنی که سالها در دل میپروردم به پایان آمده است.
▪︎او که به هوای زنی سالیان دراز در آن سوی دریا نبرد کرد
اکنون در خانه خود به دست زنی از پای درآمده است.
هلن، ای فریب خورده به نادانی
تنها یکی، یکی زن که هزاران جان در خاک تروا به تباهی افکندی
کار تو اکنون به انجام آمد.
[خندهام گرفت سر این تیکه😂]
December 7, 2019
تعتبر هذه المسرحية التي كتبها أسخولوس من أوائل المسرحيات في الأدب اليوناني، مسرحية بدائية وخصبة تستدعي الهلع التراجيدي الأول عند الأدباء الأغريق، تتجسد فيها شخصية البطل والصراع من أجل الدولة وسنوات من الحرب والانتظار، مسرحية مليئة بالعنف والعاطفة الشديدة والمكر وكيف أن الحقد لا يمكن أن تمحوه السنوات ولا حتى الغياب ولا النصر، تتجلى في المسرحية أصوات الحرب والأمواج التي تحطم أعتى السفن والإنهاك الواضح للجنود والقادة، تتمتلئ جنبات هذا المسرح بالعويل والصراخ والجُمل المركبة والتشبيهات البليغة والشعارات والأساطير وآلهة اليونان القديمة ..
هذه المسرحية هي الجزء الأول من ثلاثية (أوريستيا) والتي تبدأ بعودة أجاممنون إلى أراجوس بعد حربه الطويلة في طروادة وعودته من النصر المظفر الذي حققه بعد عشر سنوات كاملة من الحرب مع الطراوديين ..
نلتمس هنا الكثير من ملحمتي هوميروس من حيث اللغة الشعرية العاطفية التي تسود جو المسرح والصخب الهائل والروح الأغريقية العريقة، للأسف كثر أستخدام الكورس في المسرحية مما أدى إلى ضعف ظهور الشخصيات بل ومحو بعضها تماماً، وكأنك أمام جمهور يتحدث بلا توقف بدل أن تتحاور الشخصيات وتعبر عن ذاتها، على كل حال، المسرحية صادمة وغريبة، قرأتها بترجمة لويس عوض وهي ترجمة فذة وتعطيك الأحساس بقوة المسرحية وقدمها ..
هذه المسرحية هي الجزء الأول من ثلاثية (أوريستيا) والتي تبدأ بعودة أجاممنون إلى أراجوس بعد حربه الطويلة في طروادة وعودته من النصر المظفر الذي حققه بعد عشر سنوات كاملة من الحرب مع الطراوديين ..
نلتمس هنا الكثير من ملحمتي هوميروس من حيث اللغة الشعرية العاطفية التي تسود جو المسرح والصخب الهائل والروح الأغريقية العريقة، للأسف كثر أستخدام الكورس في المسرحية مما أدى إلى ضعف ظهور الشخصيات بل ومحو بعضها تماماً، وكأنك أمام جمهور يتحدث بلا توقف بدل أن تتحاور الشخصيات وتعبر عن ذاتها، على كل حال، المسرحية صادمة وغريبة، قرأتها بترجمة لويس عوض وهي ترجمة فذة وتعطيك الأحساس بقوة المسرحية وقدمها ..
May 30, 2019
Esta foi uma leitura que não superou as minhas expectativas iniciais, pois esperava um pouco mais desta tragédia de Ésquilo.
Achei o texto bastante repetitivo, com um enredo monótono e pouco diversificado. A acção é quase inexistente, tratando-se maioritariamente, de uma descrição pormenorizada da derrota do exército Persa pela mão do exército Grego. Sendo o relato feito pela voz dos Persas, é um relato muito pungente, cheio de emoção, que não deixa o leitor indiferente. Assistimos à dolorosa ampliação da desgraça dos Persas, que remete para uma subtil glorificação da superioridade militar grega. No entanto, para além deste aspecto central, muito bem conseguido e que se repete ao longo de toda a tragédia, este texto pouco mais me "falou".
Enquanto leitora senti a falta de algumas das características da tragédia grega, e interroguei-me sobre esta estrutura um pouco diferente das que li anteriormente. Uma pesquisa sobre esta obra, revelou-me que Os Persas seriam a segunda tragédia de uma tetralogia (grupo de três tragédias, seguidas de uma peça satírica, tudo do mesmo autor), mas que foi a única chegar até aos nossos dias. Sabendo isto, julgo que apenas lendo a obra no seu devido contexto se poderia avaliar correctamente sobre a mesma. Infelizmente, tal já não é possível, e apesar de não ter gostado particularmente desta peça, reconheço o seu valor, e fico feliz por a mesma ter sobrevivido até aos nossos dias. Não posso no entanto, aconselhar a sua leitura.
Para o post completo visite:
http://linkedbooks.blogspot.pt/2015/0...
Achei o texto bastante repetitivo, com um enredo monótono e pouco diversificado. A acção é quase inexistente, tratando-se maioritariamente, de uma descrição pormenorizada da derrota do exército Persa pela mão do exército Grego. Sendo o relato feito pela voz dos Persas, é um relato muito pungente, cheio de emoção, que não deixa o leitor indiferente. Assistimos à dolorosa ampliação da desgraça dos Persas, que remete para uma subtil glorificação da superioridade militar grega. No entanto, para além deste aspecto central, muito bem conseguido e que se repete ao longo de toda a tragédia, este texto pouco mais me "falou".
Enquanto leitora senti a falta de algumas das características da tragédia grega, e interroguei-me sobre esta estrutura um pouco diferente das que li anteriormente. Uma pesquisa sobre esta obra, revelou-me que Os Persas seriam a segunda tragédia de uma tetralogia (grupo de três tragédias, seguidas de uma peça satírica, tudo do mesmo autor), mas que foi a única chegar até aos nossos dias. Sabendo isto, julgo que apenas lendo a obra no seu devido contexto se poderia avaliar correctamente sobre a mesma. Infelizmente, tal já não é possível, e apesar de não ter gostado particularmente desta peça, reconheço o seu valor, e fico feliz por a mesma ter sobrevivido até aos nossos dias. Não posso no entanto, aconselhar a sua leitura.
Para o post completo visite:
http://linkedbooks.blogspot.pt/2015/0...
Read
July 14, 2016Πολύ δυνατό έργο. Το διάβασα χωρίς διακοπή και πραγματικά ο λόγος του Αισχύλου είναι μεγαλειώδης και συνεπαίρνει τους θεατές και τους αναγνώστες. Ακολουθούν οι Χοηφόροι.
ΚΛΥΤΑΙΜΝΗΣΤΡΑ: Έτσι πεσμένος καταγής ξερνά την ψυχή του
και ξεφυσώντας με ορμή το αίμα απ' την πληγή
με καταβρέχει με μελανές ψιχάλες φονικής δροσιάς,
και πήρα χαρά όχι λιγότερη απ' όση δίνει στο σιτάρι
η θεόσταλτη βροχή όταν αρχίζει να δένει. [1388-1392] (μτφρ. Δημήτρης Δημητριάδης).
ΚΛΥΤΑΙΜΝΗΣΤΡΑ: Έτσι πεσμένος καταγής ξερνά την ψυχή του
και ξεφυσώντας με ορμή το αίμα απ' την πληγή
με καταβρέχει με μελανές ψιχάλες φονικής δροσιάς,
και πήρα χαρά όχι λιγότερη απ' όση δίνει στο σιτάρι
η θεόσταλτη βροχή όταν αρχίζει να δένει. [1388-1392] (μτφρ. Δημήτρης Δημητριάδης).
June 26, 2020
You almost feel shy before opening "The Persians". We know its historical immensity.
And then we apprehend a long and dull reading, a generality that we apply all too often to the dramatic theatre of antiquity, sometimes wrongly. Not always.
Then, finally, careful reading and some research in parallel to the discovery of the work we are fascinated by this story that comes from afar.
And then we apprehend a long and dull reading, a generality that we apply all too often to the dramatic theatre of antiquity, sometimes wrongly. Not always.
Then, finally, careful reading and some research in parallel to the discovery of the work we are fascinated by this story that comes from afar.
January 1, 2016
على هذه الأرض ما يستحق الحياة .. كتابات أسخيليوس ...
شكرا محمود درويش :)
دايما كان رأيي أنو الترجمة بتشوّه الشعر ، بهاد الكتاب الترجمة كانت مذهلة لدرجة فيني اعتبرا عمل متفرّد مو مجرّد ترجمة (ترجمة لويس عوض ) ..
هي تجربتي الأولى مع التراجيديا اليونانية وصرت متحمسة كررا ♡
شكرا محمود درويش :)
دايما كان رأيي أنو الترجمة بتشوّه الشعر ، بهاد الكتاب الترجمة كانت مذهلة لدرجة فيني اعتبرا عمل متفرّد مو مجرّد ترجمة (ترجمة لويس عوض ) ..
هي تجربتي الأولى مع التراجيديا اليونانية وصرت متحمسة كررا ♡
January 27, 2021
Trojanski rat je završen i Agamemnon se vraća u Arg. Jeste zbog sujete u Maloj Aziji izgubio desetine hiljada života, uz to mu je na povratku potonulo 99 od 100 brodova, ali vraća se pobednik. Klitemestra, supruga mu, dočekuje ga nakon tih deset godina odsustva ("Ta koji dan bi ženi slađi svanuo no kad joj muža kući s vojske vrati bog"). To je ujedno i dan kad ga vidi prvi put otkako je bogovima žrtvovao ćerku Ifigeniju, kako bi uopšte mogao otploviti za Troju.
Agamemnon je početak jedine sačuvane antičke trilogije, a kao i brojne druge tragedije, u centar postavlja ženu. Klitemestra je ta koja iznosi glavnu temu - šta je pravda? Da li je iskustvo pravde uvek povezano sa ispravljanjem velike nepravde? Da li pravda bez nepravde postoji? Oko za oko - da li je pravda samo osveta ili još nešto drugo?
U svakoj grčkoj tragediji izgleda postoji trenutak kad nam autor slama srce. Ovde je to strašan trenutak žrtvovanja Ifigenije.
(nastavlja se još tužnije)
Klitemestra naravno ubija Agamemnona. Poželiš da se ta pravda izvrši pred tvojim očima, nasred scene, ali možda je ovako i bolje. Znamo da ga ubija krvnički, sekirom, iza scene u kupatilu. Ipak, ne bi rekao da to donosi osećaj pravde prisutnima. Niko ne spominje Ifigeniju ili druge gadosti koje je ovaj počinio. Da li ubistvo ćerke nije nepravda, pošto je to njegovo dete? A i, na kraju krajeva, tu žrtvu su tražili bogovi?
Tekst je gust, stilski sjajan, zbog toga ponekad i nerazumljiv.
Agamemnon je početak jedine sačuvane antičke trilogije, a kao i brojne druge tragedije, u centar postavlja ženu. Klitemestra je ta koja iznosi glavnu temu - šta je pravda? Da li je iskustvo pravde uvek povezano sa ispravljanjem velike nepravde? Da li pravda bez nepravde postoji? Oko za oko - da li je pravda samo osveta ili još nešto drugo?
U svakoj grčkoj tragediji izgleda postoji trenutak kad nam autor slama srce. Ovde je to strašan trenutak žrtvovanja Ifigenije.
"Dok ćerka moli: 'Babo, babo!'
na devojačku mladost njenu
bes vojvoda ne osvrće se.
Kad molitvu pred žrtvu svrše,
tad na znak očev sluge počnu:
k'o jagnje dignu je nad oltar,
s ramena oklizne se veo,
pa snažno pomaknu je napred
i lepa zatisnu joj usta
da kletvu kući ne krikne."
(nastavlja se još tužnije)
Klitemestra naravno ubija Agamemnona. Poželiš da se ta pravda izvrši pred tvojim očima, nasred scene, ali možda je ovako i bolje. Znamo da ga ubija krvnički, sekirom, iza scene u kupatilu. Ipak, ne bi rekao da to donosi osećaj pravde prisutnima. Niko ne spominje Ifigeniju ili druge gadosti koje je ovaj počinio. Da li ubistvo ćerke nije nepravda, pošto je to njegovo dete? A i, na kraju krajeva, tu žrtvu su tražili bogovi?
Tekst je gust, stilski sjajan, zbog toga ponekad i nerazumljiv.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 967 reviews