The Ancients - Elektra

Episode Date: March 2, 2025

Few figures in Greek mythology embody vengeance like Elektra, daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra. Betrayal, grief, and justice shaped her tragic fate.In this episode of The Ancients, Tristan Hughes is joined by Professor Armand D’Angour to explore Elektra’s story and its powerful new London stage production starring Brie Larson. Along the way, they delve into Sophocles' and Euripides' strikingly different portrayals - one noble and resolute, the other bitter and broken - unpacking what these versions reveal about morality, fate, and female agency in the ancient world.See Brie Larson star as Elektra in London's West End: https://www.thedukeofyorks.com/elektraPresented by Tristan Hughes. Audio editor is Aidan Lonergan, the producer is Joseph Knight. The senior producer is Anne-Marie Luff.All music courtesy of Epidemic SoundsThe Ancients is a History Hit podcast.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe. You can take part in our listener survey here: https://insights.historyhit.com/history-hit-podcast-always-on

Hi, I'm Tristan Hughes and if you would like the ancient ad free, get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit. With a History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original documentaries, including my recent documentary all about Petra and the Nabataeans, and enjoy a new release every week. Sign up now by visiting historyhit.com slash subscribe. Acast powers the world's best podcasts. Here's a show that we recommend. If the New Year's resolution you made to read more books is not quite panning out, don't sweat it. I've got you covered. I'm Mattea Roach and my new podcast Bookends is all about discovering great books and getting

to know the writers behind them. Like Brian Leo Malley, whose personal connection to Toronto helped him create the icon Scott Pilgrim. Bookends with Matea Roche is available now wherever you get your podcasts. Acast helps creators launch, grow and monetize their podcasts everywhere. Acast.com. Hello, I'm Tristan Hughes. If you listen to my podcast, The Ancients, you'll know that I find it impossible not to share a fascinating story, especially one that involves achieving success against the odds. The new Audible original podcast The Unusual Suspects with Kenya Barris and Malcolm Gladwell is just that. Unexpected success stories from unforgettable guests, like late-night TV host

Jimmy Kimmel, award-winning filmmaker Ava DuVernay, celebrity chef David Chang and rapper, producer and music executive Dr Dre to name a few. Their stories pulled me in and I was moved and completely absorbed. Listen to the new Audible original podcast The Unusual Suspects with Kenya Barris and Malcolm Gladwell. Go to audible.ca slash unusual suspects podcast and listen now. It's the entrance on History Hit. I'm Tristan Hughes, your host. Today we're focusing on one of the most complex and compelling figures in ancient Greek mythology and tragedy, Electra.

A daughter whose path is first set in motion from the events of the legendary Trojan War. Electra is the daughter of Agamemnon, King of Mycenae and hero of the Trojan War, whose fate was actually sealed before he reached Troy. After being stalled by stilled winds with his army on the way to Troy when they were trying to leave Greece, Agamemnon is told he must sacrifice his daughter, Electra's sister, Iphigenia, to appease the goddess Artemis and restart the wind. This Agamemnon does and off he sails to Troy with his army where he would lead the Greek forces in the fabled siege alongside famous names such as Achilles, Ajax and Odysseus.

Once he returns home, however, his grief-stricken wife, Clytemnestra, murders him as revenge for sacrificing their daughter. These events all lead to Electra being consumed by grief for her father, rage and an unrelenting desire for justice against her mother. Electra's story is one of the most powerful explorations of revenge and morality in the ancient world, preserved in the plays of great Greek playwrights such as Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides. Indeed both Sophocles and Euripides each wrote a tragedy titled Electra, offering strikingly

different portrayals of this famous heroine. In Sophocles' version, Electra is noble, resolute and unwavering in her pursuit of vengeance for her father. In contrast, Euripides presents a more psychologically raw and disturbing Electra, bitter, broken and consumed by years of suffering. These differences raise fascinating questions about justice, fate and the portrayal of female agency in Greek tragedy. To help me unravel the story of Electra, I was delighted to interview Professor Armand Dunguil from Oxford University, a renowned classicist, musician and author.

Now Armand and I were delighted to watch a new stage production of Electra in London a couple of weeks back. The performance stars Brie Larson in the eponymous role and it was certainly a powerful production that stayed true to the original. Armand and I recorded this interview a couple of days after we watched the performance and I hope you enjoy. Armand, it is great to see you again. Welcome back to the podcast. Thank you. Nice to see you too. And it is not long time no see because we recently went to watch the play Electra in

London. I'd never seen a performance of Electra before. I hadn't really even understood the plot quite in all its detail detail but this is a rather chilling ancient play can't we say with revenge and matricide right at its heart. Yes and it's part of the story of Agamemnon the great leader of the Achaeans, the Greeks who goes to Troy and destroys it but in order to do that he has to get an expedition together and because he has to get an expedition together and because he has offended the goddess Artemis she requires that in order for the fleet to sail

she becalms the winds but for the fleet to sail the winds have to be brought back by the sacrifice of Agamemnon's daughter Iphigenia. So he kills his daughter in a ritual sacrifice. And this is a great affront to his wife, Clytemnestra. And when Agamemnon is away for 10 years fighting at Troy, Clytemnestra gets together with Aegisthus, and when Agamemnon returns, she and Aegisthus kill him. And Aegisthus is like her lover kind of thing back in Greece whilst he's away fighting

in the Trojan War, the name we know so well. Indeed. So her lover and a rival clan of Agamemnon. So when Agamemnon returns he's killed by Clotid Minestra and their son, Orestes, and their daughter Electra have to avenge this killing. Now you could say, well, why didn't they feel upset about the death of their sister, Iphigenia? But there are various cultural reasons, perhaps, why they think the killing of their father is more of a crime than the killing of their daughter. Admittedly, the

killing of their daughter has been required by a goddess, the killing of Agamem of their daughter. Admittedly, the killing of their daughter has been required by a goddess, killing of Agamemnon's daughter. But in any case, they have strong feelings of vengeance. So it's not just Electra, it's Orestes as well. He has his own story. And of course he appears in the play Electra. So the question is really about the aftermath of the killing of Agamemnon. And so as you say, it's about vengeance. And so Electra, as you've highlighted there, so she is the daughter of the great king Agamemnon, famous from the Trojan War. And the story itself then, should we be imagining the setting, is this going back almost 3000 years into Bronze Age Greece or Early Iron Age Greece

3000 years? Is that supposed to be the setting of this tale? Will Barron Up to a point, yes. The 5th century BC Athenian dramatists, essentially three Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides all write the story of Electra and they all go back to myths that seem to go back to the Bronze Age, but they very often make them more contemporary for their audience. So although we might think historically this is a myth that is set in Bronze Age Mycenae, a site that we can still visit today. They might have thought, well, let's take this on its own terms as a story of the vengeance

of a young woman against her mother for killing her father. And lots of contemporary issues of gender or of justice might then be raised in the course of such a play. So we can't really find out whether there's any kind of historical truth to the story of Agamemnon's being killed. I mean, we think we can trace quite a lot of historical truth to the Trojan War, the assault of a Greek force against what might have been Hittite kingdom in Asia Minor or something local to the Hittites in Western Asia Minor where Troy is located. The Hittites are a powerful Bronze Age kingdom in Anatolia in Turkey at that time. Exactly. And some Hittite documents show that there was a kingdom in the Trood, that's

where Troy is, which had a king or a prince called Alexandus, the first name therefore that we can relate to Alexander, another name for Paris, the Trojan prince, and the name Priam seems to come up and the name Achaeans as the enemy. So these Hittite documents are extraordinary on tablets as evidence for some kind of historical Trojan War in the 13th century BC. So this is the time that it's all taking place. And that then leads to centuries of myth-making which end up with first of all the epics of Homer in the eighth century BC, which tell the story of the Trojan War, en passant, when it's talking about the anger of Achilles, for example, or the return home from the Trojan War of Odysseus.

The Iliad in the Odyssey, yeah. That's the Iliad in the Odyssey. And that's the first piece of ancient Western literature and hugely influential, those two epics. And they touch upon the story of Orestes, they call him a mother killer. So Homer knew the story, he doesn't elaborate on it, but he talks about the return of heroes and the return of Agamemnon and we see a little bit into the future when Agamemnon, having been killed by Thaitamnestra, causes the rest of the East to take revenge and to kill his mother, Thaitamnestra. So Amon, that's really interesting.

So can we presume then that by the 5th century BC, when we get to the time of those playwrights that you've mentioned for the story, the tragedy of Electra, the likes of Sophocles and Euripides that we're going to explore, that the name Electra, the whole myth, all of those names would have been known by Athenians and then also the name of Electra would have been known too as the daughter involved in the revenge against her mother alongside Orestes? Yes. They were all part of a great mythical background, which would have been known to Greeks of Sophocles' time. Sometimes the names aren't exactly the same as you get in Homer's Iliad, so sometimes they change. For example, the Oedipus story, his wife in the Iliad is called Epikasta,

not Jocasta. So we know Oedipus' wife is Jocasta, but she was known by a different name. Some of the names in tragedy, as far as we can tell, were invented by the tragedians themselves for the first time, so they are quite inventive about that. Tragedy doesn't have to rely on existing myths entirely, it can innovate. And it seems to be one of the tasks of tragedians to create a new story, create new characters, create new names for them. So Antigone of Sophocles is that great story about the daughter of Oedipus

who buries her brother Polyneices. I think the name Antigone doesn't appear in texts prior to Sophocles Antigone. So it doesn't mean it wasn't known about, it doesn't mean that the daughter didn't somehow exist in the mythical background. What's it means that the tragedians can feel free to invent the stories or to reinvent them. possibilities for modern authors and you find today you get some Natalie Haynes writing about Pandora in her own feminist way and you get authors like Madeleine Miller or Emily Hauser writing revised versions of ancient myths and there's nothing wrong with that because the ancient tragedians did the same thing. And so does that also bring us nicely onto Electra and the story of Electra? Were there different versions of Electra's story created by these ancient Greek playwrights in the

5th century BC? What versions do we have? Yeah, so it is interesting that the story of Electra is unique in that it is treated by all three of the great Attic tragedians. So Aeschylus treats her story in the second play of the trilogy that is called the Orestiah trilogy, which is about the return of Agumim and his killing and then the killing of Gleitomnestra in the second play of that trilogy, which is called the Coifere, the picture bearers. is called the coifery, the picture bearers. And in that you have Electra Pyr as the wounded child of Agamemnon who seeks her death. Though I think that the emphasis is more on Orestes in that particular play. And at the end of it, when Ply Minestrius is killed, having begged her son not to kill her,

her furies are released. That is the spirits of vengeance that will haunt Orestes in the third of that trilogy, the Eumenides, and will eventually lead him to a court of justice in Athens, which will decide on his guilt or innocence and which famously has a split verdict, which then has to be decided by the goddess Athena. And the goddess decides for rather dubious reasons, with a rather dubious explanation as to why, that he shouldn't be executed, he should be sent into exile, so the punishment is mitigated. And the reasons that she gives is that killing a father is worse than killing a mother because after all a man is just, well, what she says is that the woman is just the furrow in which the seed is planted. So it's a somewhat patriarchal view of the relative

importance of men and women that ends Aeschylus' trilogy. Anyway, but none of that is evident in the other two treatments of Electra, which are standalone. And now we know that ancient plays were created as trilogies. They weren't necessarily always connected trilogies like the Orestiah. But we then have standalone plays by both Sophocles and Euripides. Not clear whether they were written exactly the same time or in response to another or which indeed came first of the two but they both take the figure of electric as central. Also she becomes the main character so it's kind of an evolution from me so close where she's possible but but in these later versions of the name electric is the name of the place she comes right to the for this daughter of Agamemnon seeking revenge. Exactly yes and so as you say the names of these two plays are electric.

The uriphid version is typically European I mean he was. Always ready to do something clever and unusual and innovative. And in Aeschylus' Coifery, what you get is that Electra is awaiting the return of Orestes to avenge because Orestes has been sent away into exile. So he hasn't been in Mycenae in the palace, whereas Electra has stayed there and she's waiting for him to return and avenge her father's death. ALICE Awaiting her brother's return. Got it.

Yeah. CB That's it. And when he does return, she recognises him by means of tokens. So there's a lock of hair, which she recognises as his, there's a piece of clothing, and there's his footprint. But Euripides makes fun of these tokens. So Euripides has Electra presented with a lock of hands you look anybody can have. Doesn't have to be my brother's so much to swipe at a past tragedy in that it really is a swipe at the tradition that you could recognize.

through these tokens and then you know how about a piece of clothing she's well you know if i knitted him a piece of clothing when he was a baby it would have had to grow alongside him in order to still be you know clothing that he could wear today so that's not going to work either and as for the footprint how could you leave a footprint on stony ground and anyway it's a man's foot not a woman so all these tokens are made fun of in your empty so he's doing something with the tradition. That aims to be quite self-conscious i think he's also he's also created a story for electric. She's not just staying in the palace which she has stayed in according to the sofa story, she's married off to a local peasant by Aegislas and Thaitamnestra. They've decided they want to get rid of her. So they marry her off to a local peasant and she comes on at the beginning carrying a picture of water

as if she, the great princess, is just a mere peasant wife. So he's changed that story and she's much more embittered by all of that. Whereas the Sophoclean Electra, well she's determined to have justice, she talks about vengeance and she eventually recognizes Orestes when he returns because he comes back pretending to be a stranger because he knows that if he's found in Mycenae he will be killed so he's as it were disguised and saying Orestes is dead and bringing his ashes in an urn and she is so distraught at this because she's been waiting him to return that her response makes him take pity on her and he says, look, I am indeed Orestes and eventually proves that he is by showing her the ring that he has been given.

If you're like me and you love history, but in particular you love the smutty, salacious, gossipy history, then do I have the perfect podcast for you. If you fancy finding out about the slippery origins of lube or how Vikings linked sex and magic together, then listen no further. Join me, Kate Lister, on Betwixt the Sheets where I delve into the most outrageous, the most taboo and the downright sexiest parts of our history. It's the kind of history that you probably wouldn't bring up at a family lunch, but you might bring it up down the pub. From the history of swear words to answering important questions like just how incestuous were Neanderthals?

And so much more. Listen every Tuesday and Friday wherever it is that you get your podcasts. A podcast by History Hit. So it is interesting, Armand, how I remember when studying Euripides for a bit at school and you compare it to Sophocles and Deschless, it's funny how even in the 5th century BC, these different tragedians, whether they are competing at the same festival or their plays are in direct competition with one another, which I guess we should also remember that these plays are created to be performed as part of these competitions in Athens, that you get almost jibes at one another, but also Euripides. Is it fair to say he's a bit radical, he's quite new in his approach to the stories compared to those tragedians who have gone before them, and he likes doing that, and Electra is a good example of that. Yeah, I mean, he's definitely the most radical and most avant-garde of all of the Tridygians. I mean, the others in a sense are the classic tragedies that you might expect. Euripides does write a couple of classic tragedies. So

his Bacchae, one of his very late tragedies, his Hippolytus, they are fairly classic in terms of their structure and the sensibility that they evince. But some of his other plays are completely wacky. I mean, his Helen, for example, he takes the story of Helen never having gone to Troy, but a phantom went to Troy and Helen got stranded in Egypt. Oh, Egypt, yes. And Menelaus comes back from the Trojan War and gets washed up on the Egyptian shore and Helen appears and he says, what are you doing here? And she said, I've been here for the last 10 years. Why do you been fighting for me at Troy? And it wasn't me. It was Phantom. I mean, so, you know, that's a weird take on the Helen story and he's happy to do that.

And the other thing is that Euripides really was up for a laugh. So one of the things he was accused of was being a tragedian who allowed for humor and comic elements in his tragedies. Now a tragedy doesn't have to be tragic in the ancient world as you said, it was a competition. So you had a competition originally tragedy Originally, tragedy seems to have meant a goat song, meaning a song or a presentation that the first prize is a goat as a prize. That's really what it was initially. It was a competition for some kind of play or drama or song where you had a prize, and it continues to be competitive. You have these big tragic festivals in Athens and the tragedians put on their plays and they are ranked and What

Matters is winning the first prize. Rieks weren't too keen on second and third place people, you know, What Matters is winning. So Euripides in fact doesn't win a lot of prizes because his plays are seen to be… Doesn't win many goats. … doesn't win many goats, but Sophocles won quite a lot. So Euripides is bringing in comic elements and you can see this up, well certainly in his electorate you can see that because this jibe about the tokens being a worthless way of recognising Orestes. That would have surely raised a laugh in the theatre. Similarly, you get Helen being so weird as I mentioned, and even in his back

eye the story of the destruction of Pentheus by Dionysus, which is a gruesome and ghastly story. But at the beginning you get the old men, Tiresias and Cadmus, who are being faithful devotees talking about how difficult it is to sort of dance and walk up a mountainside with their old sticks. And so almost played for love, these old guys, a bit like those two muppets talking to each other. You did mention Dionysus there, the god of wine, which is an interesting feature of a god in the play too, which we might come back to, I think, with Euripides. I'd like to explore a lecturer's character a bit more because something which also strikes me with

this is if I think of ancient Greek women, I think of women who don't really have many freedoms at all in ancient Greek society, yet you've got a lecture at the forefront of this play leading this vengeance arc and being a key proponent behind it. Does her portrayal challenge those ancient Greek traditional ideas of femininity and an ideal ancient Greek woman. Yes. Well, one of the almost paradoxes of ancient Greek tragedy is that it has a lot of women doing things that are extraordinary or unusual out there killing. And that has often been a question. Why do we see this side of things where we know that Athenian society in particular tended to want to ensure that women were kept indoors. Women who are of citizen class would be married

very young. They would become housewives. Their main tasks would be to do with weaving and also things like mourning and religious tasks. That's how women would be perceived in the society in which these plays were being presented. And yet these women are not like that at all. As you say, they have agency, they can talk and discuss and have ideas about the divine and about justice and about vengeance. Now the question is what are the tragedians doing? And yes, I think they are showing a different side. They're exploring a different side of femininity and one that would not have been encountered very much in their own time. And of course, these plays are not about ordinary women. They're about women in a much earlier

mythical age and they're about noble women. They're about princesses. They're about queens. So you could say that it gives license to the tragedians to explore femininity in a different way by saying, okay, yes, these are women, but these are women at a time when they could assert themselves when up to a point at any rate they had more agency and they were of a sufficient status to be able to act essentially like men and now that of course is a bit shocking in itself because a woman who acts like a man and Clytemnestra and Aeschylus, for example, is specifically called someone who thinks like a man, and this is something quite sinister about her. This would have been a sensation

for a Greek audience, for an Athenian audience, to see women acting in this way and speaking in this way. And maybe that's the point, that's an opportunity to show women who might be considered rather monstrous or rather frightening or alarming to an audience. One shouldn't forget, of course, that the Greeks had a number of goddesses such as Athena or Hera who they worshipped as women with exceptional power. So maybe there's also that connection. So when you get Euripides, for example, writing the story of Medea, who kills her own two children to spite her husband Jason, and then gets whisked away at the end of the play because she is the granddaughter of the god of the sun, Helios. So she gets off scot-free at the end of that

play. And so the audience must be thinking, my goodness, this is another view of a woman not of the kind that we can experience, but someone who has a sinister divine side to her. ALICE It's almost, I guess, for an ancient Greek man watching that play, I guess kind of scary in their mindset, fearful of what a woman could do. Is that fair to say in their kind of mindset? I think there must have been something of that kind. You don't want to have a wife like that. You don't want to live with women in your society who are like Electra or who are like Medea or who are like Antigone,

but then they don't have to live in that kind of society because they have a different world. They're not in the mythical world. So on the other hand, women have got the capacity to think and act in the ways that traged tragedians have shown them thinking and acting. And therefore, perhaps it is the duty of a tragedian to allow that side to be exposed in their mythical fictional worlds. I'd like to focus one more question on Electra before we move on to other themes of the play, which is kind of bringing it back to what you said near the start when you were summarising the plot of Electra. Now just as a recap, Electra's father Agamemnon, after returning from the Trojan War he's murdered by his wife Clytemnestra, but the motive for that, as you've highlighted, is before he sails to Troy in order to get the winds so

that his ships can sail to Troy with his soldiers to appease the goddess Artemis, that he has to sacrifice another of his daughters, who is Electra's sister, Iphigenia, and Agamemnon goes through with it. Clytemnestra wants to get revenge, wants to kill Agamemnon because he sacrifices their daughter. But Electra, regardless of that, she wants to kill Clytemnestra wants to get revenge, wants to kill Agamemnon because he sacrifices their daughter. But Elektra, regardless of that, she wants to kill Clytemnestra for murdering her father even though he murdered her sister. So is this an interesting part of the plot? Because I also know in the play there's that whole part when Clytemnestra and Elektra talk and she tries to justify why she kills her husband by saying, well, he killed my daughter, your sister. Do we know why she ultimately decides that she wants to kill Clytemnestra

rather than side with her and accept her point of view in that whole… I mean, it's a horrible family, basically. Riegel It is. you could say heroism and the requirements to avenge is the seduction of Helen by Paris leads Agamemnon to do something that he wouldn't otherwise wanted to do, which is to sacrifice Iphigenia. I mean, there might be some interesting quasi-historical background to this. So in one of the plays about Iphigenia, she's about to be sacrificed, but Artemis actually replaces her with a deer. So the sacrifice is that of an animal and not of a human being. And that reminds us a little bit of the story of Abraham and Isaac, because remember he

was about to sacrifice Isaac, his son in the Bible, and God substitutes a ram. And that might perhaps reflect some historical memory of human sacrifice in early Bronze Age leading to a world of animal sacrifice. Animal sacrifice was very common in the Greek world, but human sacrifice was abhorred. There are even some archaeological indications that there was the killing, ritual killing of children, certainly in the Phoenician world, but possibly in the Greek Bronze Age world as well. The Phoenician world, that's Tyre, that's the Lebanon region. Yes, that's right. The biblical world, you might say.

The whole world, yeah. But that aside, I mean, one doesn't know how much of that sort of historical memory was enshrined in these stories, but the fact is that the myth held that Agamemnon kills his daughter because she's required to by Artemis, again the reasons for that are not always very clear. He seems to have insulted Artemis in some way perhaps by saying he was a better hunter than her or by killing one of her sacred deer or something of that kind. So she's got it in for him, becomes the winds and the expedition is there, gathered at the shores of Aulis and in order to get it on its way he does what he's required to do,

which is horrible. On the other hand, you might say, and maybe Elektra feels that that is something that the goddess has required. Whereas the killing of her father by Clytemnestra seems a much more selfish act. So although, as you rightly say, Clytemnestra does argue that this was the reason she felt justified, she felt it was right to kill the man who killed her daughter, that doesn't seem to be taken terribly seriously by Electra and perhaps again it's because of this misogynistic view that a mother's blood is really not as important as a father's and maybe that would have been accepted by the Athenian audience that actually it was a worse crime to kill her husband for phytominox to kill her husband than it was for Orestes and Electra to kill their

mother. Especially because, again, Orestes is commanded to do this by the god Apollo. So that's his excuse for it. In all the plays he's commanded to return from exile and to kill the woman who has killed Agamemnon, his father, the king. But again, the fact that Clytemnestra makes that argument and makes it quite powerfully in all the plays actually, she leads for her justified behaviour, suggests to me that the Trajeejans did want us not to simply think this was a straightforward tale of the bad person gets her just desserts. They want us to recognise that there is a moral dilemma here. We should think, is it really right that she deserved to die? Doesn't she have good reasons for having killed Agamemnon? Yes, there are bad reasons as well. She and her lover, Aegisthus, set up in the royal palace. Aegisthus himself

is not a very pleasant individual. So there are all sorts of good reasons why the two of them perhaps shouldn't be let off the hook. But you can't simply say they were all bad and they had no reason to do what they did. I think exactly. Also given the fact that the major events of these stories always seem to circle around the killing of another member of your family, which you see again and again. I mean, even with that divine commandment that Orestes has received to kill his mother. When Orestes enters the stage, do you see that moral dilemma in him as well, even though Electra is on the side saying,

you need to go through this, you need to kill our mother. But is that moral dilemma also reflected then before the moment happens? There's almost a wavering in the decision to actually go ahead and commit matricide. Yes, I mean, so there are a few lines of a recipe, aren't there, where he says something like, there's a terrible thing to kill one's own mother. So he recognises that it's not an easy demand that he has to follow. She stiffens his resolve. I mean, in a sense, what you get is a much more vengeful woman. You get a sense that she's the one who's deciding that this should be done. And that's just pushing it. Okay.

Yeah. And I think that leads us to think more psychologically about what's going on. Jung famously thought that the Oedipus complex in which Freud had suggested that young infant boys want to murder their father and then suppress that because they want to be at one with their mother, so that sense that they love their mother and kill their father that we get in the play of the Oedipus. But Jung suggested that the counterpart for girls was an Electra complex. And I think one of the reasons for that is that Electra clearly resents and hates her mother in the play. And that hatred and resentment is balanced by excessive love and loyalty towards her father so she can

resent her mother and perhaps even ignore her sister's death, which is the justification of Clytemnestra killing Agamemnon in order to argue strongly that Clytemnestra deserves to die. strongly that Clytemnestra deserves to die. So, I mean, you might say there are questions of mother-daughter relationships and sibling rivalry. All these things perhaps are raised unconsciously or raised in some way by the way this Electra play is mapped out. How do you think the Athenian audience would have reacted ultimately to the seeing through this murder, Orestes being encouraged by Elektra? And it almost feels a bit Amorabi law code, could we say, in the fact, look, an eye for an eye, like a murder for a murder kind of logic.

I mean, how would the Athenian audience have reacted to that delivering of justice that they would have just witnessed in the play? I think that's very interesting to think that the Athenian audience is likely to have been aware of Aeschylus' treatment, where you get indeed, as you say, an eye for an eye, the lex talionis, the notion that someone gets killed, you kill them, a vendetta that runs through this family was seen as itself at a terrible blight and one that in Aeschylus's trilogy is finally put to rest by the introduction of law. And this was terribly important, I think, for an Athenian audience because they had these legal institutions. I mean, that particular case,

it's the Areopagus Court of Athens, which judges the final guilt or innocence of arrestees. But it's like saying, look, you know, if I kill X because X has killed Y, it just goes on and on and on and this kind of vendetta has to come to an end and how should we do that? Well both in Aeschylus or Ars Stoia and in Euripides play Orestes which is about Orestes himself coming to judgment in Argos. innocent in Argos. The solution is that it should be taken to law and that the law and your court of one's peers should judge whether or not one is guilty and innocent or whether one should be killed or not. And that then ends this cycle of vengeance. So yes, the audience would have thought it is terrible that you're just killing someone

who's killed someone else, and when will this ever stop? But they would also have known that there is a solution, and the solution is in their own institutions, their own legal institutions. So some scholars think that a lot of Greek tragedy aims to show the athena audience how lucky they are in a way the athena is watching these mythical stories. 99% which are not set in athens at all so they set in other parts of the greek world thieves my senior goals. The reason for their success and the reception by the Athenian audience is because precisely they show the kind of thing that can no longer happen in their own Athenian world. Is it this idea that they have a more civilized way of living compared to these people living hundreds of years ago, these mythological people. Absolutely. Yeah, they have created a civilization. And that's one explanation for Aristotle's view that the proper pleasure of tragedy is catharsis. You get pleasure because you feel

pity and fear, Aristotle said, but those feelings are then released. Now some people say that's because actually you can feel those things, but the scenario that is put in front of you is a fictional one. And so you exercise these strong emotions on a fiction. And when you emerge from that fiction, you feel relieved. Part of that sense of catharsis, of purgation, of liberation from these heavy feelings is because you recognize that the world of the play is not the world in which you live. I'd like to move on now to talk about another part of the play and indeed of Greek tragedies in general that we haven't talked about yet but is always central and we saw it during

the performance a couple of nights ago, which is the chorus. Now, Armand, I know you love the chorus, but what exactly was the chorus and how important a role does it play in the whole story? So the chorus is sometimes thought to have been the original elements of tragic plays, a group of devotees of a god, for example, singing hymns. And then what you have is the emergence sometime in the 6th century BC of a player who impersonates a hero or something that comes from the mythical background. And then the two come together. I mean, the origins of tragedy are very murky, but one has a sense that some early tragedies have much larger groups. So early tragedy of Aeschylus, the supplement women,

appears to have perhaps 50, or at least to represent 50 women. So let's assume that the chorus has been one of the original elements of a tragedy. And of course chorus also represents Athenian religion. So in Athenian religion, there were groups of men, sometimes groups of women as well, singing hymns and marching in honor of some God or other. So you have, for example, a genre called the Dithyramm, in which in the 5th century BC, it became a formal performance event with

50 men and 50 boys in a large circle singing hymns in honour of the god Dionysus. Oh, it would just be men, would it? Interesting. Okay. Yeah. I mean, so essentially there were male choruses. There were female choruses as well, but mainly relating to female religious occasions. So there were separate women's festivals, for example. But male festivals had male choruses who could appear in public unlike women choruses. And these male choruses would sing hymns to gods. They would worship gods in that way. And then they're incorporated into tragedy in ways that don't exactly replicate what the chorus would have been doing in religious terms.

Sometimes it looks as if the choruses in tragedy do exactly that. So you might get a chorus singing a prayer in honor of a god in the course of Antigone or even Electra, but it's not really a full religious kind of song. So there's again some debate about what the choruses are doing in tragedy, but what they end up doing for most of us is giving a commentary on the story. So they comment on the story, they rarely actually take part in it. They rarely become agents of any kind sometimes there is seem to be very present amongst the people who are on stage amongst the. As with the main actors in the case of electro they have the women of my senior and they seem to be there observing what's going on. I'm observing the killing so in the recent production that we saw. in the recent production that we saw, it's as if they are the members of the public who, when Light and Lester is killed, they're announced in a kind of radio-like way as

clustering around and looking at the dead bodies and looking at the gory scene in front of them. But we know in ancient tragedies, the chorus consisted of, or eventually at any rate consisted of 15 men, so it was all male choruses. And they had these interludes in which they sang and danced. So between the action of the play and the speeches given by the actors, the protagonists, you had the chorus come on, comment on the action, sing and dance, prayers to gods who happen to be engaged, maybe sing prayer for mercy or to allow something to happen that they fear is not going to happen or something of that kind, and occasionally interchange with the actors about what's happening and express emotions. So they act a little bit as if they're an intermediate group between the actors

and the audience, they kind of represent the act in actors. They kind of represent us, the audience. So they will reflect in the way we might, Oh, what a horrible, terrible thing. You know, the item is dead and bleeding the way that we, the audience might be expected to react. So they're this kind of intermediate group. But the key thing is that they are there to provide musical interlude. So I mean, they were very much the music of the play. These were like operas. That went off. It was first invented in the 16th century. They were trying to replicate what they

thought Greek theatre was doing. And so they thought, well, you know, there is this singing that goes on, they tried to work out what the music was, but they didn't have enough evidence at that stage. We now have more. And they created Italian, you know, wonderful Thorontine offer oratorio as a result of not really knowing what ancient should music was like probably a blessed relief but the chorus then in the production that we saw. Actually had rather lovely singing. Hearts for harmonies and they were singing making their. Comments very clear for us to hear and the interjections. And it feels almost like electress consulting them almost as you say when she's talking or they're they're kind of giving their opinions on what she's thinking about you know about

murdering Clytemnestra when she hears that arestes has died that fake news that he's died you know and she's bereft and everything like that and all hope is lost and you know the chorus is that almost as you say that reflecting reflecting her thoughts into someone else when someone else is not on stage one of the main other main protagonists. Yes that's right they so they do reflect they do advise as well so you know sometimes the advice of the chorus is part of the action. So in St. Sophocles' Antigone, when the chorus say, they say to Creon, who has ordered Antigone to die by being walled up, they say, really, you should release her. You made the wrong decision.

And he then waivers and decides that he will do that too late. But they do have a power of intervention and they seem to be, as in this case, people who have an interest in what's going on. So the women of my senior will have some interest. Now, if you imagine in the ancient theatre, these would have been men dressed in long robes, impersonating women. It does seem rather strange that we have to think of them as a woman's chorus, but there are a lot of women's choruses. So most tragedies actually have choruses which, at least half the current tragedies we have, are women's choruses.

Let's talk about the end of the Electra in Euripides and Sophocles, because it is not the murder of Clytemnestra that is the ending of the story so how does. The story of electric where the play is electric so suffocates into your keys how do these stories how do they end and are there any differences between the two. Yes and that's again your interest in psychology he wants to know how after they killed their mother how arrested electric are going to react to their own actions and say what we get is quite a long after lude in which they express a sense of real remorse and guilt. What is happened and that's in a way takes the place of what you get in Aeschylus where very physically the spirits of vengeance appear ready to hound Orestes and they will eventually hound him to the court in Athens at the end of that trilogy and will be assuaged by what happens. In Euripides, there's that emotional response of the two of them to having killed their mother, showing that I think

it leaves us very uncomfortable. And I'm sure that's Euripides' purpose, because although he does point out that the Orestes is going to be hounded by the spirits of vengeance, what is more important is showing that their own psyches have been traumatised by what they've done. And that is so different from Sophocles, it's a almost like a revengeous tragedy where you expect revenge to have taken place. And it happens in its fullness they kill fighting extra they then. You're against this into the room where he sees the death of semester and he is himself stabbed to death and that's it. death, and he is himself stabbed to death. And that's it. We have our vengeance. Will Barron We've done it. Angus That's right. The gods have commanded, the vengeance has been taken. And that's his story.

In Euripides, what you get is a resolution which comes out of the blue because the other siblings, Caster and Polydeuces, who are also divine characters, appear and they say, look, this is what's gonna happen. This is called the Deus Ex Machina, the god from the crane, because they'll be hoisted aloft like divine beings. And so there is no resolution on the human level. When those things look intractable on the human level, then the tragedians who like using this particular deus ex machina,

bringing the gods to say, look, okay guys, this is what's gonna happen. Electra, you are gonna marry Orestes friend Pilatees. And if I have to laugh, Orestes, you are going to be judged for your crime. And so they make the resolution to the play. To us, it's a very unsatisfactory idea that a god or two gods can come. A divine intervention.

Yeah, can just suddenly appear and say, look, this is how it's going to end because that is how fate has decreed that it ends. I mean, that's the point. We all know how these things end. But actually, if the on the human level, it looks as if things are going, sadly, awry, as for example, in Sophocles play the philic titis, where there seems to be an impasse, you know, this philic titis is meant to get to Troy with his bow. But it's not going to happen because he won't be persuaded. He can't be taken there by force or the bow can't be taken there by force. And then you get the God on the machine. In that case, Apollo, the God on the crane coming in and saying, look, this is what's going to happen.

He's going to go to Troy. He's going to bring his bow with him. Sorry. In that case, it's a terraclete appears and says, my bow will be taken to Troy. So you get these and Euripides was fond of this device, he used it in his Orestes, that's where Apollo appears. And here in his Electra, Castor and Polyduckes produce a solution to something that looks like a very difficult emotional situation for the kids.

If anyone wants to look up the story of Philoketetes, just be aware that I believe he has a very, very smelly foot. That's him. That's what we need to know in this chat indeed. So let's talk about Jung quickly and go to the 20th century, the famous psychiatrist Carl Jung, because you mentioned his name earlier and he is with whom we associate the Oedipus complex. But does he also try to create an Electra complex too? What is this whole story with Jung and the Electra?

Will Barron Yes. Jung and Freud initially were collaborators and Freud came up with the Oedipus complex and elaborated it at some length because he felt that the Sophocles play gave us a model for thinking about infant mental development. And in our very earliest infancy, we sense this third party in our lives, the father, and we want to obliterate it from our lives because we have this nice relationship with the mother, we're on the breast, we feel at one, and suddenly there's this third party that comes into our consciousness. We want to obliterate that so we have murderous feelings which we immediately suppress because we know they're not good, and that leads to

all kinds of defences and unconscious repressions. And similarly, our love for our mother, which is wholesale. We don't separate wanting to be with from what then eventually will become sexual feelings. All of that seems to be elaborated for Freud in the Oedipus story as told by Sophocles. Well the question then arises, what about girls? Do they feel the same oneness with the mother? Do they feel the desire to obliterate the father? And Freud probably would have said, well yes we all are subject to some kind of Oedipus complex, but Jung didn't feel that and perhaps as a sort of rivalry he brings up but only en passant, he doesn't elaborate it in the way that Freud elaborates the Oedipus

complex. He brings up the idea of the Electra complex, we should call it the Electra complex. And you know, you have a few paragraphs about that, but not elaborated. But he would have known as Freud would have known, the myth of Electra very well. And of course, what that does allow us to think about, and I think both of these are good to think with, even if there is no real evidence for either complex, what allows us to think about things like mother-daughter rivalry and resentment. So you might not want to kill your mother, but you certainly, young girls might feel a certain resentment and indeed feel that they want to be closer to their father and that the mother should be out of the picture. And that would then be

modelled on the story of Electra. Toby To think the tragedians, Sophocles and Euripides who entered one of these festivals in Athens more than 2000 years ago in the hope of winning a goat with their Electra, to think that from those beginnings and creating those tragedies that they now have endured down to the present day over thousands of years and remain so popular, The legacy of Greek tragedies, including Electra, is astonishing. I mean, why do you think that they've remained so popular, why we find the story of Electra so popular today? If you can nail it down to one particular reason,

I'd be incredibly grateful, but I appreciate that it's quite complex. Why do they retain their power? I think I would just have to agree with Freud that they have things which resonate with our psychology and things that we can see in a very concrete way on stage that are indeed quite alien to us, but we recognise that they seemed less alien to ancient audiences. But the idea of a sibling rivalry or a mother-father relationship or desire to kill that can be justified by ideas of vengeance or justice. These are things which are very hard for us to imagine happening in our own everyday lives and therefore, they're kind of extreme presentation ordinary with these kind of larger than life characters and these plots that strike us as horrendous in some ways. I think that's part of the fascination. The fact that they are both alien and yet we understand what's going on.

Well, Armand, that's a lovely thought to finish it on. It just goes for me to say thank you so much for taking the time to come on the podcast today. Thank you very much. Well there you go, there was Professor Armand Dengour talking you through the story of Electra, this extraordinary woman of ancient Greek mythology and tragedy. I hope you enjoyed today's episode. Thank you for listening to The Ancients, please follow this show on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts, it really helps us and you'll be doing us a big favour. If you want more Ancient History videos and clips then be sure to follow me

on Instagram at AncientsTristan. Don't forget you can also listen to us and all of History Hits podcasts ad free and watch hundreds of TV documentaries when you subscribe at historyhit.com slash subscribe. That's enough from me and I'll see you in the next episode. ["The Last Post"] ["The Last Post"] ["The Last Post"] Acast powers the world's best podcasts. Here's a show that we recommend.

So you enjoy a good podcast and you also like comedy? Look no further than the Pantelis Podcast. I'm Pantelis and this is my podcast. Every week I'm coming at you with a different reason to be angry, whether it's current events or arguing with my comedian friends that also pop into the show. The Pantellus podcast drops new episodes weekly powered by Acast. Acast helps creators launch, grow and monetize their podcasts everywhere. Acast.com