1|Page

Abstract:

This research paper will summarize the analysis analyse the Fate Vs free will in the
classic plays: Agamemnon & Oedipus the Rex. The main focus is on King Agamemnon
of Argos and King Oedipus of Thebes the Rex. The overall purpose of the study is to
find the research problem design finding, major theme, compare, contrast, purpose, and
method between two dramas. The study refers to literature's main point of relating and
referencing the two dramas. Also, we can relate to kingship. (write regarding Greek
influence or tradition on believing fate over free will) This research also highlights the
surviving social norm of a king. Besides we see fate will always win not all the time free
will was work. The research examined had purpose, method, and result with about half
including a clear introduction and conclusion. (clumsy…not having clear meaning) After
that the main significance was honesty. liberty, freedom, love, charity, and democracy
were some of the major themes. At the end of this research, we can read & identify the
result.
Keywords: fate, King’s hard sacrifice, traditional, supernatural power. rules, manpower,
gratitude, people’s expectations, religious role, free will, (other than fate and free will
your key words are not found in your abstract)
2|Page

Introduction
In Greek mythology, Agamemnon & Oedipus the Rex is a very tragedy full drama.
Where we see fate is the ultimate destination for every human being and regarded as
established by a supernatural power.
Fate is responsible for each kings sad ending. Both the kings have very masculine and
intimidating personalities, but their imperfections seem to overpower them.
This research paper shows two outstanding literary works Agamemnon & Oedipus the
Rex. Both plays explore the lives of the protagonists king Oedipus & Agamemnon.
Agamemnon is a Greek leader from Agamemnon during the Trojan War while Oedipus
is the King of Thebes in Oedipus the Rex. "Both individuals engage in appalling deeds,
yet Agamemnon does so with a certain level of awareness." (source??) Oedipus'
predicament is more disturbing than Agamemnon's as Oedipus acts without awareness,
a crucial element of human experience." While Oedipus wishes to face life with open
eyes, he stumbles through a significant portion of his adulthood, remaining oblivious to
the repercussions of his deeds. Due to his lack of awareness, he lacks control over his
actions." (source??) In contrast, Agamemnon confronts a dilemma that he comprehends
well, yet he grapples with restricted choices, resulting in a lack of complete control.
By relating two plays here both King Agamemnon and Oedipus the King, attention is
given to present-day prophets. Cassandra is seen as the truth-bearer in Agamemnon,
while in Oedipus the King, Loxias?? and Teiresias are considered the sources of truth.
These prophets possess knowledge of the community's past and the ability to foresee
the future, linking present events to the backstory of each play. Cassandra, through her
visions, perceives the darkness within Agamemnon's house and foretells the impending
murders of Mycenae.
The research paper explores portrayal of fate and social environment toward kings’
work. The paper seeks to explore the experiences, limitations, and journeys toward self-
realization and agency of the drama kings through an analysis of characters, settings,
and narrative elements.
The paper seeks to enrich our understanding of how fate, tragedy, and the social
environment interact by comparing perspectives. It specifically delves into the stories,
emphasizing the influence of intense fate.
3|Page

1.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:

This study will aim to understand Greek tragedy .The hope of the people to the king
and the basic objectives to be achieved in this are-

*to investigate how fate and social expectations interact in these plays.

*to compare both kings of drama & focus on their sacrifice for the country’s people,
& ability to object to fate and expectations for free will. (no meaning at all)

*To explore the social expectations placed on the king in both dramas and to explore
how these expectations affect their fate & how this expectation killed their free will .

* to Comparison as a Tragic Hero from Agamemnon and Oedipus the King &
explore how they contribute their life to the nation.

*to the plot of Oedipus The king is perfect & Oedipus the Rex emotional ending, the
process of unfolding the truth of the life. Agamemnon was cheated & murdered by
his wife.

*** both the kings didn’t sacrifice their lives for the nation or people. Rather they got
their punishments on basis of their personal sin. Focus on this. Make two more
objectives.
4|Page

1.2RATIONAL OF THE STUDY

The goal of the study is the justification for taking on a given study. It explains the
reason the study Agamemnon was conducted or should be conducted in odipus the
Rex . (clumsy)This research aims to fill the gap by investigating the fate and free will
towards the king by conducting a comparative analysis of two plays Agamemnon &
Oedipus the Rex. By analyzing these two plays we understand how the king faced
trouble for fate. Also, kings struggle for their country & country people. Greek
Tragedy always has a sorrowful ending. Both the kings have very manly and strong
personalities, but their imperfections seem to overpower them. If they had accepted
fate along with freedom,(fate and freedom are totally opposite) they would not have
had to see the end of such suffering.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Fate Vs free will in classic drama: Agamemnon & Oedipus the Rex
1. Research Questions:
 How is fate vs free portrayed in both the plays Agamemnon & Oedipus the
Rex while identifying of the protagonists King Agamemnon and Oedipus?

Sub questions:
 Which reason is mostly responsible of suffering in Agamemnon & Oedipus the
Rex?
 Is Oedipus' case more disturbing than Agamemnon's? who is more tragic
hero?
 Is tragic flaw of the protagonists influenced by fate or can they escape
through their free will?

 Does fate have power over his fate?

5|Page

2.0 THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

In the theoretical framework, we see the deep meaning of research and how it was
affected in the drama. Also, the concept will clearly justify by explaining both dramas
Agamemnon & Oedipus the Rex. Also, The conceptual framework is constructed based
on theories surrounding the ideas of fate and free will, providing a theoretical standpoint
to elucidate how society influences the concept of fate.

Within a theoretical framework, this research paper investigates the theories of fate and
tragedy to analyze the portrayal of kings in literature. It explores the impact of the social
environment, examining how fate contributes to the conclusion of a king's story and the
norms of free will in diverse societies. This framework delves into the intricacies of
dramatic narratives.

It also discusses the effects of expectations related to free will on their agency and
autonomy. The study aims to illuminate the perceptions and constraints of fate and free
will within particular social contexts. Through an analysis of the representation of fate
and free will in both King Agamemnon and Oedipus, this research explores how fate
identity is portrayed and how it interacts with the governance of kingship. This kingship
was their curse for a few reasons. When we see some issues on Agamemnon's wife
killed by his wife & Oedipus killing his own father. So here is tragedy was fully reflected.
Greek tragedies, such as Agamemnon, typically revolved around interconnected tragic
incidents and recurring themes. These narratives often featured a tragic hero,
embarking on a journey that culminates in a resolution by the story's end.

On the other side, it implies that specific events and results are destined to occur and
remain unalterable, irrespective of an individual's actions or decisions. Conversely, free
will entails the belief that humans possess the capability to make their own choices and
decisions, without being bound by any preordained fate or destiny.

In the case of Agamemnon, Clytemnestra justifies her act of murdering him as a form of
justice, largely stemming from his sacrifice of their daughter, Iphigenia. Agamemnon,
facing a difficult choice, believed he had no alternative but to sacrifice his daughter or
abandon the war against Troy. The Chorus notes that before the sacrifice, Agamemnon
"put on the yoke-strap of compulsion," suggesting he felt compelled to act. This raises
the question: did Agamemnon make a choice under his free will, given that he accepted
this necessity? Additionally, the family curse on Agamemnon prompts speculation about
whether his tragic end was predetermined, raising the complex issue of whether he was
fated to commit the crime. The ambiguity invites contemplation on the justness of
6|Page

Agamemnon's suffering for his actions. Agamemnon made a voluntary decision to

sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia. Regardless of whether Agamemnon willingly chose to
sacrifice his daughter, the argument asserts that individuals who commit crimes should
face consequences, irrespective of their intentions.

Oedipus embodies the key elements defining a tragic hero. His complex character
resonates emotionally with the audience, as his tragic flaw instills fear without
diminishing their respect. The dramatic culmination, where Oedipus faces a devastating
punishment, evokes profound pity. As the drama unfolds, all the positive aspects of
Oedipus seem to be squandered in his relentless battle against the adversity written into
his fate. In his pursuit to evade the doom he has perennially fought against, he ironically
invites the very downfall he sought to escape. Oedipus presents a distinct viewpoint,
asserting that his grievous actions were predetermined by fate. However, he
emphasizes that the decision to blind himself was entirely his own, suggesting that while
one cannot escape destiny, how one reacts to it remains a matter of personal choice
and free will.

Numerous researchers explore the intersection of fate and free will in the context of
programming. One noteworthy literature piece delves into the theme of fate versus free
will, specifically examining expectations related to kingship and their fate identities
across various periods and contexts. This research contributes significantly to a more
comprehensive understanding of literary works and the varied expressions of fate and
free will throughout different eras. It underscores the importance of acknowledging and
examining the dynamics between fate and free will. The study specifically delves into
the experiences of two kings, Agamemnon and Odysseus, shedding light on the
challenges faced by individual characters and traditions as they navigate interactions
with these key figures and grapple with their own destinies.

*** from this point purple colored paragraphs you can take for abstract and introduction.
Use theory of Aristotle regarding tragic hero where it is focused that they are the puppet
of fate.
Use Greek mythology to focus conceptual framework.
7|Page

3.0 LITERATURE REVIEW :

Within the domain of literature, the exploration of fate, free will, and societal
expectations is a recurring theme in various dramas by King. Notably, the dramas of
Agamemnon and Oedipus delve into the concepts of fate and free will. Numerous
researchers have dedicated their work to unraveling the intricacies of fate as it pertains
to the kings Agamemnon and Oedipus.
Oedipus illustrates the idea that fate is beyond human manipulation, while
Agamemnon's destiny is intertwined with recurring cycles of vengeance. To gain a
strategic advantage in the war, Agamemnon sacrifices his daughter, Iphigenia, to the
goddess Artemis, securing favorable winds for his journey to Troy.
The essay will explore the notion that Oedipus and Agamemnon employ distinct yet
comparable approaches to rule. It will scrutinize their governing strategies by examining
commonalities and differences, focusing on elements such as fate (moirai), family
dynamics, and their methods of governance.
Moirai represents the predetermined fate of individuals as dictated by the gods. Both
King Oedipus in Sophocles' "Oedipus the King" and King Agamemnon in Aeschylus'
"Agamemnon" confront their fates, leading to their eventual downfall. At the outset of
both plays, it is evident that these kings are oblivious to their tragic destinies. Oedipus
believes he has evaded the prophecy of killing his father, King Laius of Thebes, and
marrying his mother, Queen Jocasta. Unfortunately, he unknowingly fulfills this destiny.
Similarly, Agamemnon faces his fate as a consequence of past actions.
Aegisthus, Oedipus's cousin, references Oedipus's father in line 1583-1584, revealing
familial connections. On the other hand, Agamemnon's wife, Clytemnestra, harbors
resentment due to the sacrificial death of their daughter, Iphigenia. Agamemnon's
indifference towards his family, exemplified by the sacrifice of his daughter, stands in
contrast to Oedipus's concern for his family. Furthermore, Agamemnon rejects special
treatment from his wife upon his return to Argos, reflecting a different approach to
familial dynamics compared to Oedipus.
8|Page

Literature has long explored the interplay between free will and fate in an individual's
life. Sophocles' renowned tragedy, "Oedipus the King," delves deeply into this conflict.
Oedipus's tragic fate can be interpreted from two perspectives. On one hand, he is a
victim of the gods' will and predetermined destiny. On the other hand, Oedipus's
downfall is attributed to his own misguided decisions. Despite the significant influence of
fate and prophecy in shaping Oedipus's life, his destiny is fundamentally linked to his
actions, choices, and decisions. In the initial lines of the tragedy, Oedipus is portrayed
as a heroic figure capable of safeguarding Thebes from threats. However, the king is
notably susceptible when confronting his own fate and the ominous prophecy. The
significance of the prophecy is underscored throughout the tragedy.Tiresias
underscores the inevitability of the prophecy, highlighting the king's inability to perceive
evident truths: "You have your eyes but see not where you are / in sin, nor where you
live, nor whom you live with. / Do you know who your parents are?" (Sophocles 413-
415). In this context, Oedipus's choices hinder his understanding of essential truths,
paving the way for his eventual downfall.
9|Page

In the initial lines of the tragedy, Oedipus is portrayed as a heroic figure capable of
safeguarding Thebes from threats. However, the king is notably susceptible when
confronting his own fate and the ominous prophecy. The significance of the prophecy is
underscored throughout the tragedy. Tiresias underscores the inevitability of the
prophecy, highlighting the king's inability to perceive evident truths: "You have your eyes
but see not where you are / in sin, nor where you live, nor whom you live with. / Do you
know who your parents are?" (Sophocles 413-415). In this context, Oedipus's choices
hinder his understanding of essential truths, paving the way for his eventual downfall.
The ongoing debate between free will and fate holds significant relevance in the broader
context of popular literature. Beyond Oedipus, other literary characters grapple with the
repercussions of prophecies. The clash between fate and free will arises from one's
awareness of destiny and the subsequent series of choices and actions taken to either
defy or embrace that fate. While Oedipus endeavors to evade his fate, his initial choices
prove misguided. Jocasta, underscoring the importance of embracing fate, advises in
the tragedy, "Do not concern yourself about this matter; / listen to me and learn that
human beings / have no part in the craft of prophecy" (Sophocles 707-709). The tragic
irony lies in the possibility that if Oedipus were to accept his fate, there might be a
chance to avert it.
Agamemnon encounters a classic dilemma of being in a lose-lose situation. If he
refrains from sacrificing his daughter Iphigenia to ensure favorable winds for the fleet,
he will disappoint everyone. Conversely, should he proceed with the sacrifice, he is
faced with the profound consequence of losing his daughter. Agamemnon
acknowledges that "Fate will be heavy" in either scenario. Can this be justifiably
characterized as a matter of fate .
Numerous scholars have conducted varied research fate intersectionality within the
realm of drama. In their collective body of work, a thematic focus emerges on tragic
dramas involving kings, delving into their fates and the arduous sacrifices they endure
across different eras and within varying contexts of free will. This research seeks to
address this existing gap by contributing to a more comprehensive comprehension of
fate intersectionality and the diverse encounters of kings in distinct time periods and
free will contexts. It underscores the significance of acknowledging and scrutinizing
10 | P a g e

social expectations placed on kings, employing a comparative analysis of two dramas,

Agamemnon and Oedipus Rex. The emphasis lies on navigating challenges related to
fate and free will, exploring interactions with key figures and the collective experiences
of country leaders.

** Literature review means on similar topic how many research paper have u gone
through and u must mention those books or papers including the book’s names and
authors ad their publication dates. On last para of literature review u must mention how
did you find gap from the others paper that made u choose this topic. So rewrite the
literature review.

4.0 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Aeschylus' "Agamemnon" and Sophocles' "Oedipus Rex" both explore themes of fate,
interpersonal dynamics, and societal expectations placed upon kings. This study seeks
to demonstrate that these dramas revolve around the concepts of destiny and tragedy,
examining the profound influence of kingly fate on the unfolding tragedies within the
narratives.
Agamemnon, the leader of the Greeks in the Trojan War, reportedly slew Antiphus and
fifteen other Trojan soldiers in combat, as mentioned in one account. Agamemnon,
identified as the ruler of Mycenae, led the Greeks in the Trojan War. Born to King Atreus
and Queen Aerope, he was the sibling of Menelaus, spouse to Clytemnestra, and father
to Iphigenia, Iphianassa, Electra, Laodike, Orestes, and Chrysothemis. Legends depict
him as the monarch of either Mycenae or Argos, believed to be interchangeable.
Clytemnestra, his wife, or in an earlier rendition of the tale, Clytemnestra's lover
Aegisthus, brought about Agamemnon's demise upon his return from Troy. The initial
significant prophecy in the narrative occurs before the play's commencement, advising
Agamemnon to sacrifice his daughter for an advantage in the Trojan War. This
prophecy, coupled with Agamemnon's response, sets the stage for the play.
Subsequently, a sense of ominous unrest permeates Argos, heightened by Cassandra's
crucial prophecy detailing the forthcoming murders. Agamemnon's focus on appeasing
the gods initially leads to success in the Trojan War. However, upon his return,
Clytemnestra manipulates him into an arrogant act, walking on purple cloths, inviting
divine displeasure. Cassandra's prophecy also hints at retribution for an old injustice
within the House of Atreus, later clarified by Aegisthus as Atreus' gruesome murder of
his nephews. Despite Agamemnon's individual deeds, he remains destined to bear the
consequences of his father's transgressions.
The play revolves around a compelling form of predetermination, particularly the
recurring cycles of revenge. The underlying philosophy in Agamemnon and The
11 | P a g e

Oresteia suggests that once this cycle initiates, one act of revenge inevitably triggers
another. This perpetual cycle arises from the necessity of punishing those who violate
divine laws, yet each act of revenge, in turn, violates another divine law. This cause-
and-effect relationship serves as a form of destiny for mortals entangled in it, and only
an external, non-mortal force can bring an end to this cycle. Artemis seeking revenge on
Agamemnon sets the events of the play in motion, while Clytemnestra's retaliation
against Agamemnon paves the way for subsequent events. Treating these revenge
scenarios as inevitable relegates the debate of gods (fate) versus free will to a
secondary role, emphasizing the intrinsic nature of revenge itself. Moreover, the trilogy
Agamemnon strongly emphasizes the theme of fate, evident at every stage of the play,
from start to finish. Fate comes into play when Agamemnon embarks on the battle,
sacrifices his daughter for the gods, and faces revenge from Cassandra for sacrificing
her, a daughter known as the household's beauty.

Besides Oedipus, a figure in Greek mythology, was the ruler of Thebes who
unintentionally slayed his father and wedded his mother. According to Homer, Oedipus's
wife and mother took her own life upon discovering the truth about their relationship.
Despite this revelation, Oedipus seemingly continued to govern Thebes until his
demise. The ancient Greeks, strong believers in myths, perceived them as genuine
stories of their gods and people. In the context of "fate vs free will" in Oedipus Rex, fate
is depicted as a supernatural force predetermining human life events, including the day
of death. The Greeks, deeply fatalistic, considered fate as an uncontrollable and
overpowering influence, even beyond the reach of gods. Despite their awareness of
fate, the gods were perceived as powerless to alter it. In Oedipus Rex, the prophet
explicitly acknowledges the impossibility of overcoming fate, emphasizing the notion of
"what will be, will be." The play revolves around the role of fate in human life, with King
Oedipus as the protagonist victimized by his predestined destiny. Oedipus, from birth,
was fated to marry his mother and murder his father, an inevitable and unconditional
fate. His downfall is attributed to his pride, ignorance, insolence, disbelief in the gods,
and relentless pursuit of truth. While his past actions were determined by fate, Oedipus
exercises his own will in Thebes. Teiresias initially accuses Oedipus of Laius' murder,
leading Oedipus to question the validity of the old oracle. Despite attempts to escape
the foretold destiny, Oedipus unwittingly fulfills the prophecy through his actions in
Thebes. His quest for truth, despite warnings from Teiresias, Jocasta, and the
herdsman, drives him to the tragic realization of his horrific deeds. When he discovers
the truth of his birth, Oedipus acknowledges his fate, feeling cursed and ultimately
gouging out his eyes. He accepts full responsibility for his actions, recognizing the need
for punishment and expressing guilt for the consequences of his choices. Agamemnon
and Oedipus at the Last present intriguing perspectives on fate and free will, unfolding
distinct stories in different contexts. Agamemnon delves into the struggles faced by
kings in its narrative, while Oedipus explores similar themes within its community. Both
dramas underscore the constraints that fate and free will impose on the actions of
12 | P a g e

individuals, emphasizing the tragic outcomes that ensue. These works offer profound
insights into the intricate dynamics of their respective environments and the evolving
societal expectations concerning the interplay of fate and free will.

5.1 Research Method

I have applied the qualitative research method to enhance comprehension of intricate
concepts such as fate versus free will. This approach proves valuable for exploring the
reasons behind occurrences, interpreting events, and describing actions. As it doesn't
rely on survey research, the analysis and methods utilized in this study are outlined.
This chapter substantiates the research design, library research, data collection, and
article framework with references.
5.2 Sources of Data Primary data for this thesis includes the examination of the plays
Agamemnon by Aeschylus and Oedipus Rex by Sophocles. On the other hand,
secondary data comprises a range of journal articles, notably utilized in the literature
review section. The study also incorporates references to meta-narratives, and internet
sources contributed some of the information.
5.3 Validity of the Research I research this paper in my own opinion. I confirm that the
writer autonomously created this work, utilizing observations gathered without external
assistance. The impetus behind this research stemmed from a recognized deficiency in
individual contributions, where certain individuals concentrated solely on specific areas.
The author embarked on this research endeavor to address and fill this gap.