Orestes has revealed himself to Electra and sworn with her to avenge Agamemnon. He outlines his plan and leaves the stage with a prayer to his father, after warning the chorus against indiscretion . They begin: Earth nurtures many dread hurts and fears; the sea's embrace is full of monsters hostile to man; lights in mid-air between earth and heaven also harm winged things and things that tread the earth; and one might also tell of the stormy wrath of tempests. (...) But who could tell of a man's unruly will, and of ruthless woman's unbridled passions, that share her heart with evil powers ruinous to mankind?3 But surpassing all is the wicked female passion whereby wedded union is worsted, among beasts and men alike. (shrink)

The first strophe opens with a wish and a syntactical problem:εἴ μοι ξυνείη φέροντι μοῖρα τὰν εὔσεπτον ἁγνείαν λόγων ἔργων τε πάντων,…The sentence is often interpreted as though φέροντι were φέρειν: ‘may it be my destiny to possess’. However, for this meaning the infinitive is clearly required; there is no valid parallel for the use of the participle supposed here. Burton offers: ‘may a share of life be my companion provided that I win or possess purity’; purity is a precondition (...) for life. This interpretation is possible but improbable, for the use of μοῖρα as a synonym for βίος would be obscure in this context. It is altogether easier to interpret with Kamerbeek: ‘would that Destiny were with me when I ’; the chorus hopes for the favour of fate, provided that this is earned by purity of word and deed. The hope thus embraces an intention to avoid all impurity of word or action. Against this interpretation it has been objected that μοῖρα is a constant presence, not a helpful power which might desert. However, συνεῖναι is attested with the sense ‘favour’ ; and the notion that fate may favour individuals or groups is attested. (shrink)

Este estudo incide sobre o primeiro estásimo da Antígona de Sófocles e procura analisar o seu significado. A questão a que tenta responder é a seguinte: que imagem do ser humano se encontra expressa nesta ode coral? Tal questão encerra várias outras: 1) Em, que sentido se diz que o homem é algo δεινόν – e mesmo até o mais δεινόν de tudo? 2) Qual a relação entre esta característica e o ser auto-inventado ou auto-inventor de que falam as três (...) primeiras estâncias deste estásimo? 3) Que significa exactamente παντοπόρος? É este conceito decisivo para se entender o ser humano? 4) É o homem efectivamente παντοπόρος? 5) Por que razão os anciãos de Tebas sustentam que, ainda que o epíteto “assente como uma luva”, παντοπόρος está longe de ser a última palavra sobre o ser humano? (shrink)

In their first stasimon, the chorus of Euripides’Iphigenia at Aulis(=IA) praises ‘concealed Kypris’ as a marker of virtue for women (568–72):μέγα τι θηρεύειν ἀρετάν,γυναιξὶ μὲν κατὰ Κύ-πριν κρυπτάν, ἐν ἀνδράσι δ᾿ αὖκόσμος ἐνὼν ὁ μυριοπλη-θὴς μείζω πόλιν αὔξει.It is something great to hunt for excellence. For women, it is according to concealed Kypris, and among men in turn manifold order being within makes the city grow greater.

In the fifth stasimon of Antigone the chorus observes that "the whole city is subject to a violent sickness" and invokes Dionysos to "come with kathartic foot." It is generally assumed that the katharsis the chorus has in mind is purification of Thebes from a plague or pollution arising from the unburied corpse of Polyneikes; katharsis of this sort is however unattested as a function of Dionysos. It is argued that this is rather the earliest explicit attestation of the (...) kathartic effect of ecstatic Dionysiac dancing upon nosos as mental disorder, the chorus equating the mental nosos of Kreon, Antigone and Haimon with the nosos of civil strife affecting Thebes. A large number of passages indicate that mention of feet in cultic and especially Dionysiac contexts almost invariably refers to dancing, which is a dominant motif of the fifth stasimon both in its content as hymn to Dionysos and formally as a hyporcheme. Evidence from the fifth century and from Plato for the connection of Dionysos with kathartic dancing as a cure for mental disorder is stronger than previous discussions maintain. It is suggested that Sophokles elides two senses of nosos-mental disorder and civil strife-and that the chorus are invoking Dionysos to relieve them of the stress of these, rather than of a general plague or pollution. Whereas mental disorders and civil strife are constant themes of the play, the corpse as pollutant affects only altars-nothing like a "violent plague" is attested in the text. This reinterpretation of the ode suggests that it relates rather to the tragic conflict still to be played out among the principal characters than to the corpse, which is shortly buried with invocation of Hekate and Plouton rather than Dionysos. (shrink)

The third stasimon of Oedipus Rex is the climax of the play, separating the conversation with the Corinthian messenger from the interrogation of the shepherd, so crucial for the narrative. Indeed, the question τίς σε, τέκνον, τίς σ’ ἔτικτε, critical for the plot, comes right at the beginning of its antistrophe. Sophocles, however, offers no easy answer to it. Instead, he provides yet another narrative misdirection, one that—for the last time—suggests that the paths of the king of Thebes and (...) of his predecessor may have been divergent: the possibility that Oedipus’ divine ancestry would question the prophecy of Apollo. After enumerating Pan, Hermes and Apollo himself as possible parents, the song also mentions Dionysus and the ‘Heliconian nymphs’. The reference to Helicon has perplexed the readers for many years, since the text seems to focus on Cithaeron as the ‘birthplace’. As a result, editions and translations prefer the conjecture ἑλικωπίδων proposed by U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff in 1879, over Ἑλικωνίδων, the form present in all manuscripts. In this paper I argue that an analysis of our sources for Heliconian cults, an assessment of the performative context, and a close reading of the stasimon and its place in the narrative, all suggest that the manuscript reading should be retained. (shrink)

πνοϲ, in general a common word in Greek tragedy, is a cardinal theme in the Heracles. In the first half of the play the glorious saving Labours of the warrior Hero with his bow, club and other weaponry are retrospectively evoked and further enacted. Repeated emphasis on this kind of ‘noble toil’ accords with the heroic definition of ρετ, which traditionally βανει διμχθω–8 the first strophe of the long First Stasimon in honour of Heracles ends with: μνῆϲαι ϲτεφνωμα μ– (...) χθων δι' ελογαϲ θλω γενναων δ' ρετα πνων τοῖϲ θανοϲιν γαλμα. Heracles par excellence merits the title πολπονοϲ and for their individual greatness. πολυ- can mean either ‘much-’, so that it suffices for Amphitryon at 1190ff. to mention a single especially grand and godlike Labour: AM.μϲ μϲ δε γνοϲ πολπονοϲ, π δρυ γιγαντοφνον λθεν ϲν θεο- ϲι Φλεγραον ϲ πεδον ϲπιϲτϲ This we may call the ‘epic’ view of the hero and of the πνοι performed by him cw ϲν θεοϲ. πνοϲ is normally martial in the Iliad.4 Note also, however, that the terminal ϲπιϲτϲ adds an allusion to the kind of martial ρετ most admired by 5th-century Athenians. (shrink)

In a recent paper, M. Finkelberg has endorsed part of M.L. West's emendation of the fifth strophe of the second stasimon in Aeschylus’ Seven against Thebes. In her opinion, accepting West's emendation also allows adopting earlier emendations proposed by Schütz and Prien, leading to a better understanding of the passage. It is recalled that this is where the chorus relates the disasters that ensued from Oedipus’ discovery of the truth about his marriage. In the following short discussion, I intend (...) to revisit and defend once again the reading, according to which the two acts mentioned in connection with Oedipus’ discovery are gouging out his eyes and casting a curse on his sons, and not murdering his father and bedding his mother. (shrink)

The starting point of this brief discussion is the emendation in line 782 of Aeschylus' Septem proposed by M.L. West in his 1990 Teubner edition. In the fifth strophe of the second stasimon, the chorus recollects the misfortunes that struck Oedipus when he finally discovered the truth about his marriage. This severely corrupt passage, whose original meaning was lost at an early stage of transmission, runs as follows:ἐπεὶ δ' ἀρτίϕρων ἐγένετο [στρ. ε]μέλεος ἀθλίων γάμων,ἐπ' ἄλγει δυσϕορῶν 780μαινομέναι κραδίαιδίδυμα κάκ' (...) ἐτέλεσενπατροϕόνωι χερὶ τῶν†κρεισσοτέκνων δ' ὀμμάτων† ἐπλάγχθη.τέκνοις δ' †ἀραίας† ἐϕῆκεν [ἀντ. ε]ἐπίκοτος τροϕᾶς, αἰαί, 786πικρογλώσσους ἀράς.782 δίδυμ' ἃ West 784 κρεισσοτέκνων M2PKQ1Tr κρείσσω τέκνων rell. κυρσοτέκνων Herm. δ' ὀμμάτων HaQTr δ' ἀπ᾽ ὀμμάτων rell. δωμάτων Schütz χρυσοτέχνων πωμάτων Verrall κρεισσοτέρων γνωμάτων West 785 ἀθλίας Prien ἀρχαίας Wil.But when the miserable man became aware of his wretched marriage, vexed with pain in his frenzied heart, he committed double evil: with his parricidal hand †he wandered from his eyes, dearer than children†. But upon his sons he put bitter-tongued curses, angry on account of his †accursed† sustenance. (shrink)

El v. 526 del primer estásimo de Traquinias ofrece un problema textual hasta el momento no resuelto. La difícil comprensión del μάτηρ transmitido por los manuscritos ha dado lugar a diversas conjeturas. Entre ellas la que ha gozado de mayor aceptación es la de θατήρ de Zielinski, pero también provoca problemas la interpretación que se le ha dado a tenor de la caracterización del coro. El artículo apoya esta conjetura y la pone en relación con una fuente esencial de información (...) de hechos pasados especialmente para las mujeres, la iconografía. In the first stasimon of Trachiniae, l. 526 there is an issue related to textual criticism which has not been solved yet. It is hard to understand the term μάτηρ noted in manuscripts, hence this fact leads to various assumptions. The most relevant was made by Zielinski, noting θατήρ. The interpretation given to Zielinski’s assumption causes several difficulties as it takes into account how the Chorus is depicted in the plot. This paper supports Zielinski’s assumption as it shows how it is related with a relevant source of information about the past events of women such as the iconography. (shrink)

Modern interpretation tends to take E. Med. 639, ‘driving from the senses over a second bed’ , found within the petition of the chorus that ‘dread Cypris never…inflict angry arguments and insatiate quarrels’ , as referring to a second bed that might allure these women themselves rather than one that might allure their husbands. None the less, the latter interpretation seems to be recommended by both the contents and the context of the line; it is also consistent with Euripidean idiom. (...) As to the context, v. 639 is found in the second stasimon. An examination of the attitude of the chorus toward Medea up to this point may guide us towards a fuller understanding of the phrase. In her opening speech in the first episode Medea, who was betrayed by the husband for whom she left family and country , persuades the already sympathetic chorus to side with her as underprivileged women in a world dominated by egocentric men . In the first pair of strophes of the following stasimon they accept Medea's division of human beings into ‘the female stock’ and ‘the race of males’ and sing of male perfidy and discrimination against women. They stress their own personal involvement by replacing ‘women’ with ‘I’ and ‘we’ in five of the seven references to the second sex. (shrink)

I present first what I take to be a more interesting item than the others. O.C 716–19. δ' ερετμος κπαγλ' λα χερ σ ✝παραπτομναπλτα θρσκει, τν κατομπδων νηρῄδων κλουθος. The above is Pearson's text, except that I have transferred the last syllable of his 716 to the beginning of my 717. Careful consideration of the metre of this stasimon has convinced me that 716 is rightly regarded by Schroeder as an ionic trimeter ; further, that 717 is what most (...) people call a glyconic, as is also 718. Naturally therefore I follow Hermann and Jebb as regards the text in 704, and have thus no use for the three conjectures mentioned by Pearson as substitutes for our admittedly corrupt παραπτομνα. (shrink)

I present first what I take to be a more interesting item than the others. O.C 716–19. δ' ερετμος κπαγλ' λα χερ σ ✝παραπτομναπλτα θρσκει, τν κατομπδων νηρῄδων κλουθος. The above is Pearson's text, except that I have transferred the last syllable of his 716 to the beginning of my 717. Careful consideration of the metre of this stasimon has convinced me that 716 is rightly regarded by Schroeder as an ionic trimeter ; further, that 717 is what most (...) people call a glyconic, as is also 718. Naturally therefore I follow Hermann and Jebb as regards the text in 704, and have thus no use for the three conjectures mentioned by Pearson as substitutes for our admittedly corrupt παραπτομνα. (shrink)