The People vs. Orestes :: essays research papers

The People v. OrestesIn the last portion of The Orestia, titled The Euminides, Aeschlyus describes the trial of Orestes, who is brought in front of a jury on the charge of matricide. The jury hands in a tied verdict and the goddess Athena casts the deciding vote in favor of Orestes. This of course begs the question Was Athenas end fair? I believe that this finish was in the best interest of fairness because Orestes was motivated by Apollo, enraged by the murder of his father, and aggrieved by the distressing cycle of anti neighborly behavior that was running rampant in his family. Often, jurists, counselors, judges, politicians, and citizens alike are called upon to distinguish the difference (and subsequently choose) between the interests of fairness and justice. While Athenas decision might not have carried out the value of justice, it upheld the advantages of reasonable fairness.The supporting rationalization, I listed above might not have been taken into Athenas consideration of this proceeds however, one must consider the practical application of the verdict. This application ceased the Taleonic nature that had befitted the House of Atrius. Although it is difficult to imagine that this action was in the interest of fairness, the applied attitude that the outcome was more important the means, supplied the burden of proof for this acquittal.Many parallels between modern American juris prudence and that applied in Orestes case can be illustrated, with a primary focus on circumstances creating a reasonable doubt. To better understand this concept one should apply the conditions of this case in a modern setting. If Orestes were called forward, on the same charges under the jurisdiction of a United States court of law, would he have been acquitted? Furthermore, would similar circumstances be enough to create a reasonable doubt? By my estimation, I would suggest so. It is easy to assume that democratic legal standards (standards of law favored by approxim ately citizens) are involved in a constant evolutionary process. Subsequently, one is lead to the interpretation that ancient cultures would most likely subscribe to hedonistic principles however, examen of The Orestia proves otherwise. Just like the final decree of Athena, most modern juries would see Clytaemnestra as a catalyst for Orestes homicide. This illustrates that while specific legislations evolve to mirror social change, the foundational essence of democratic trial-law remains unmolested. Orestes was by no means innocent of matricide.