How Are Telemachus And Orestes Alike

Orestes is, by the ideal standards of family, a devoted son to his father. He is extremely loyal to his father in many of the same ways that Telemachus is, such as speaking with reverence about his father by referring to some of his great deeds, such as his “sacrifice” and how he has “…paid [Zeus] great honor,” (Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 254). Both Telemachus and Orestes longed dearly for their fathers in their absence, and Orestes describes the, “great sorrow I feel for my father…” (Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 300). Orestes, most of all is a model son to his father, because he swears to take revenge on his father’s murderers. Orestes speaks of, “[avenging his] father’s killers… [killing them] the way they killed… answering this

Apollo’s position on this case is made clear, when his oracle orders Orestes to avenge his father’s death, which Orestes is very honest about and explains, “The great oracle of Apollo will never betray me, it is his mandate that I should endure this trial. His shrill prophecies wrenched my guts and chilled me to the bone, they foretold storms of suffering if I did not avenge my father’s killers… murdered kin beg for revenge,” (Aeschylus, The Libation Bearers, 269-286). Apollo clearly finds it best to uphold revenge for Agamemnon. This is a sentiment that many ancient Athenians would have shared, as vengeance, especially for loved ones, was an important aspect of their culture. Apollo defends Orestes actions, “He was avenging the death of a nobleman sceptered with Zeus-given honor,” (Aeschylus, The Furies, 625). Apollo also points out that Orestes has done well by obeying his own orders, and questions, “How can it not be just to aid the faithful man especially in his time of greatest trouble?” (Aeschylus, The Furies, 725). The gods, however, are moral-less beings. They do not consider the ethical implications of actions, no matter if their intent is

Respect for Agamemnon by avenging his murder, and respect for Clytemnestra by not killing her. The relationship of a father to his parents was arguably, the most defining and important connection in family dynamics of antiquity. The Greeks’ fascination with flawed cases of these relationships forced them to consider their own ideals, and how best to uphold that important relationship. The trial, in a way, could represent the internal conflicts that humans face all the time. Although the choice of whether or not to kill one’s mother was probably not a common dilemma the average Athenian faced, there are aspects of this choice that can be seen in other types of conflict that the everyday Greek may have faced. Perhaps, when faced with the choice to confront an enemy who insults your wife, even though this enemy might be a distant relative. This would challenge the morals of justice for your loved ones, or respect for blood. Or maybe, the choice of whether to forego your morals of justice when a little brother commits a crime that he did for your benefit. Is it best to punish someone for a crime and serve justice, or to protect your blood because he was trying to help you? Even ethical dilemmas such as sharing what little food a poor family may have when a homeless traveller comes to the door, which would challenge traditional customs with putting family