Orestes Trial By Jury In The Eumenides

The creation of a trial by jury in the Eumenides marks a shift in the way justice is determined. The fulfillment of justice shifts from a personal act to a more public and institutionalized one. The trial puts an end to acts of vendetta and prevents a cycle of never ending retribution. Justice has to be enforced in order for a society to develop and function peacefully. However, aligning the ethics of societal justice and personal justice can be difficult. The trial is effective in establishing some form of justice and appeasing society, but does not end the crisis in the Eumenides.
Orestes’ trial begins with the leader of the Furies arguing that Orestes should be brought to justice for killing his mother. The Furies argue that matricide

/ You did it all, and all the guilt is yours” (197-198). While the Furies blame Apollo for precipitating the crime in question at the onset of the trial, they still try to make Orestes pay for it. If the Furies wanted justice from the guilty party, Apollo or Zeus should have been put on trial since they were responsible for ordering the killing of Clytemnestra. Since they aren’t held accountable for their actions, Aeschylus leads Athena to believe that the Furies “are set on the name of justice rather than the act” (443-444). However, the Furies have no interest in determining true justice, they simply want the murderer of Clytemnestra to face the same fate as she did in order to appease society. The Furies acknowledge that there is “Guilt both ways” (155) which is ironic because they only focus on punishing Orestes. The Furies are not interested in who commanded the deed to be done, they only want to rid the world of the doer of the deed. This double standard is problematic considering the gods are accessories to the crime but do not have to face justice for

Although a verdict is reached, the jury is not swayed towards one argument over the other showing that neither side makes a strong case. The trial only establishes a verdict to end the old form of personal justice and break the cycle of retribution and tragedy. However, it’s arguable that Orestes’ acquittal creates more instability in the polis since the result of the trial leads to the Furies threatening to destroy the city. Had the verdict found Orestes guilty, the outcome would have been a violent punishment of Orestes. Although a trial does not necessarily prevent justice from being achieved through capital punishment, it does prevent justice from being reached rashly and without due process. Trial by jury is a more civilized way to determine justice but it could have also led to violence. Aeschylus shows the faults in a trial and brings to attention that although a trial may not establish a perfect justice, it does establish some form of it. This urges his audience to ask what if true goals of a trial are ever achieved, a question that even modern political theorists continue to