Clash Between Kinship and Politics

Kinship and Politics

One interesting thing a scholar can investigate is the similarities and differences between ancient texts, especially those that operate on the basis of different moral and religious assumptions and beliefs. One such comparison can occur between the Euminides by Aeschylus and the New Testament book Romans by the Apostle Paul in the Bible. The main difference is that the Euminides is based upon the ancient Greek morality, involving a polytheistic system, while Romans is based upon the monotheistic system. This main difference also manifests in specific differences and similarities, involving kinship, politics, the law, and the acceptability of violence.

In the Euminides, for example, the concepts of kinship and politics are separate and contested. In the first scene of the play, where the Pythian Priestess enters, she indicates that the throne is not necessarily the birthright of those who are born into royal homes. Thrones can be given over to others who are found to be more deserving, or by the choice of those who are born into the political arena. In this way, both kinship and political prowess can be contested, decided by human beings, or decided by the gods.

In Romans 1, the Apostle Paul indicates that the context of politics is also kinship. Christ was the descendent of a long line of kings, for example, putting him in a rulership position by birth. In addition, he was also reported to be the legitimate son of God, providing him not only with a political stronghold in terms of human kinship, but also by that of divine kinship. This is not a flexible or contestable type of kinship, as that provided for in the Euminides.

The law is another point of contrast between the Euminides and Romans. In the former, for example, the law is created by people who are required to live under the law. Hence, Orestes is able to contest the laws that require his punishment for the murder of his mother. Aeschylus also indicates that, should Orestes' innocence be proven, this would create a change in the existing law. Although not a pleasant possibility, this is accepted as reality according to the needs of specific human circumstances at a specific time. Orestes' murder of his mother is surrounded by circumstances of revenge for the death of his father, rather than pure matricide.

In Romans, there is no such flexibility in terms of the law. There is a certain status quo, according to the Christian morality, that must be retained regardless of centuries of human development. In Romans 1, for example, this law concerns the "knowledge of God." Those who choose not to have this knowledge, were punished by being made even more wicked than they were in the first place. Particularly, Paul refers to the Ten Commandments in terms of "fidelity," "love," and "murder," as well as disobedience towards parents. These are laws that are considered universal and unchanging according to god's decrees.

Also unlike the Euminides, the punishment for these offenses is both eternal and incontestable. There is no court in which one's innocence can be contested, nor are there any mitigating circumstances that can be taken into account, as in the case of Orestes. According to Paul and the religious law, "…those who do such things deserve death…" (Rom. 1:32).

Another feature of the law in the Euminides is that it is generally participatory. As mentioned, there was a hearing for Orestes. Despite his crime and the seriousness of it, a number of persons participated in the final decision regarding his guilt or innocence. Furthermore, also as mentioned, the effect of this could have upon the law is also primarily participatory. Indeed, it is recognized that a not guilty finding could change the nature of the law from then on.

There is no such participatory feature in the law created by God. Although Christianity recognizes that faith leads to mercy and universal love, these are features provided for by God rather than by means of participatory decision-making, as the laws in the Greek text. Indeed, although much less harsh than the Old Testament laws, the new, merciful feature of the law also concerns regulations put in place by God. Human beings must follow a certain set of protocols to become part of the law, but they have no control over the evolution or stagnation of these laws. In contrast to the Greek text then, these laws are based upon a religious ideal rather than practical human conditions or circumstances.

Returning to the concept of kinship, the Euminides makes it clear that this is defined by blood and no other means. It is therefore stagnant and unchanging, like the concept of law in Romans. Although politics as it relates to kinship can be contested in the Greek text, there is no contest when it comes to blood relationships. This applies both the gods and human beings. Orestes' crime is made all the more odious by the fact that he is related to his victim by blood. Furthermore, the reference to an "ancient line" is also taken as a quite serious relationship, whose end is mourned.