Mujeres en Sofocles

Women in Sophocles
Author(s): S. Wiersma
Source: Mnemosyne, Fourth Series, Vol. 37, Fasc. 1/2 (1984), pp. 25-55
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4431297 .
Accessed: 20/06/2011 19:55
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Mnemosyne.
http://www.jstor.org
Mnemosyne, Vol. XXXVII, Fase. 1-2 (1984)
WOMEN IN SOPHOCLES
BY
S. WIERSMA
"When I compare Euripidean to Sophoclean heroines, I prefer

Euripides' Medea and Hecuba, for they are successful. Deianira, in
Sophocles' Trachinian Women, naively mixes a potion intended to
restore her husband's affection for her; instead, the potion tortures
and kills him. Antigone courageously and singlemindedly defends
her ideals, and is willing to die for them, but her last words dwell
not upon her achievements but lament that she dies unwed. Medea
and Hecuba are too strong to regret their decisions"1). This
bellicose-sounding statement by Sarah Pomeroy is typical of the
way she uses literary evidence to support the provocative argument
in her famous book. Subscribing to Pomeroy's views, J. Gould
discerns in Sophocles' Trachiniae the playwright's intention to
present Deianira's suicide with the sword as a "horrifyingly
masculine way to die" (my italics). Indeed "the shock of it
reverberates through the play", but even the passages referred to
by Gould do not qualify this shock as having been provoked by an
offence against social standards2).
To my mind, such criticisms raise two important questions. Can
the substance of a playwright's view on women be inferred from the
social position of the females as they are presented in his plays? And
to what extent, if any, did a dramatist really intend to give his own
opinion on the question of women's rights? In this paper I shall first
(I) shortly treat both problems with regard to Sophocles. Next (II) I
shall describe the way his female characters handle their specific
1) S. B. Pomeroy, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves: Women in Classical

Antiquity (London 1976), 109.
2) J. Gould, Law, Custom and Myth: Aspects of the Social Position of Women in
Classical Athens,JUS 1980, 35-59 (esp. 57), a very useful anthropological study. Cf.
by the same author PCPS 1978, 46 and 49-50.
26 WOMEN IN SOPHOCLES
dramatic situation from their given social position. In the final part
(III) I shall bring together the results of this inquiry.
Sophocles' texts, as we know them, do not lead us to believe that

the poet dealt with the difference man/woman as a separate, not to
say discriminatory, factor in characterization. Of course I do not
mean to say that Sophocles did not put recognizably male and
female characters upon the stage. What should rather be examined
systematically is whether and to what extent dissimilarities in
thought, feeling and behaviour tend to coincide with differences in
sex. In most studies about the function and position of male and
female heroes respectively in Attic tragedy, the opposite sex is com-
mented upon only at random3). However, any description of one of
both categories dramatis personae should allow the features of the one
to be checked against the characteristics of the other. In
investigating women in Sophocles one should ultimately not leave
aside his men.
In the structure of Sophocles' tragedies characterization and
dramatic action are dynamically put together4). This coherence
prohibits the critic from isolating theoretically a consistent
3) A. Jenzer, Wandlungenin der Auffassung der Frau im ionischen Epos und in der
attischen Trag?diebis auf Sophokles(Z?rich 1933); E. M. Blaiklock, The Male Characters
of Euripides (Wellington, ?. ?. 1952); G. J. M. J. te Riele, Les femmes chez Eschyle
(Groningen 1955); G. Meremans, Les femmes, le destin, le si?cle dans le th??tre
d'Euripide (Bruxelles 1972); D. M. Kolkey, Dionysus and Women'sEmancipation,CB
1973-4, 1-5; S. J. Simon, Euripides' Defense of Women, CB 1973-4, 39-42; C. A. S.
Dreyfuss, Femina Sapiens in Drama: Aeschylus to Grillparzer(Ann Arbor 1975).
The rare instances of a confrontation of both sexes in tragedy (drama) show a
tendency to psycho-analytical speculation, e.g. M. Shaw, The Female Intruder:
Women in Fifth-CenturyDrama, CPh 70 (1975), 255-66, an analysis of the conflict
between "the pure male" and "the pure female" in Ajax, Medea and Lysistrata.
Some patterns for comparison are to be found in M. Gagarin, AeschyleanDrama
(Berkeley-London 1976), an interesting attempt to explain dramatic action as
resulting from conflict and concordance between political and sexual forces (cf. D.
Korzeniewski, Gymn. 1978, 455-7).
4) The best summary of this well-known view on Sophoclean tragedy now in R.
P. Winnington-Ingram, Sophocles:An Interpretation(Cambridge 1980), 5-8. Cf. also,
for instance, G. H. Gellie, Sophocles:A Reading (Melbourne 1972), 212 ?T.;J.-U.
Schmidt, SophoklesPhiloktet: Eine Strukturanalyse(Heidelberg 1973), 194 ff.
WOMEN IN SOPHOCLES 27
'recognizable' character5). The examination I meant above,

however, is not focused on individuals. Systematizing characters,
one has, of course, to take into account not only the dramatic struc-
ture: the author's view of life ought also to be taken into account. If
we may say that Sophocles confronted his heroes with the caprice of
destiny, their actions being caught within a web
and that he saw
made up by fate, the gods and individual desires6), then we should
not, as Pomeroy does, call Deianira's activities naive7).
In short, we could only make significant statements about
women in Sophocles if we knew whether and to what extent
people
with a female name are characterized
by aspects and impulses that
are not in the same way characteristic of people with a male name
too, or cannot directly be deduced from Sophocles' general concept
of the world and human beings.
Moreover, extant Sophoclean tragedy does not contain explicit
clues which enable one to infer the poet's intention. There are no
asides directly commenting on the action8), while all other indica-
tions are conditioned by the dramatic situation. This has not been
recognized by Pomeroy who, for instance, puts forward Ant. 61-2 in
order to demonstrate that Antigone may be seen as a "portrayal of
the masculine woman as heroine"9). However, it is hardly sound to
5) Cf. J. de Romilly, Les h?rostragiqueset la condition humaine, ??FS?? 1977-8

(Athens 1979), 17: "... les personnages (se. in Sophocles) s'identifient si totale-
ment avec le sentiment ou la r?gle de conduite qu'ils ont d?cid? de suivre que la
r?sonance universelle du drame se d?gage d'autant plus nettement". Impertinent,
given such a structure, is C. A. S. Dreyfuss' (cf. above, note 3) criticism that
Sophocles did not succeed in "presenting woman on stage as a complete and multi-
dimensional being, equal to man".
6) Cf. C. H. Whitman, Sophocles: A Study of Heroic Humanism (Cambridge,
Mass., 1951), 245 ff.; G. M. Kirkwood, A Study of SophocleanDrama (Ithaca, N.Y.
1958), 279 and 286-7; J. P. Poe, Heroism and Divine Justice in Sophocles' Philoctetes
(Leiden 1974), 38-9 and 48-51; Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 321: "In the
exposure to such forces, as in the individual moira, there is an arbitrariness which
defies explanation".
7) Better Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 329. There is no question of naivety but
of situational irony: "It is ironical that the faithful and sensitive Deianira should
*
produce a result to be expected from the pitiless woman' of Aeschylus; that the
admirable monster-slayer should be destroyed by the woman he despises".
8) Cf. D. Bain, Actorsand Audience:A Study of Asides and Related Conventionsin Greek
Drama (London 1977), 5 and 70-86.
9) Pomeroy, op. cit., 99. In Ant. 61-2 Ismene points out that she and Antigone,
by their female nature not qualified to combat men, would do better yield to
interpret a passage in which one of the dramatis personae qualifies

somebody's action in the play as the direct wording of the poet's
thoughts10).
The implicit evidenceput forward by Pomeroy is not valid either.
Grammatically speaking, it is a mistake to explain, as she does, the
forms masculinigeneris, used in Ant. to refer to the heroine (by herself
and others), as "a device used by the playwright in characterizing
power. Her remark is not to be interpreted as a general statement by the poet about
women. Through such words he puts her in a dramatically very effective contrast
with her sister. With a similar utterance Chrysothemis is distinguished from
Electra: S. El. 997-8. See T. B. L. Webster, An Introductionto Sophocles(London
19692), 87-93, for a discussion of Sophocles' characteristic way of presenting his
characters in contrast.
10) But that is exactly what Pomeroy does with Creon's sexist attitudes,
referring to Ant. 484, 525, 740, 746, 756: she explains this not as indicative of the
person's character but of the poet's prejudices. She does the same with Creon's
condescension in OC 746-52 where he pretends solicitude for the maiden Antigone.
From a methodological point of view Gould's (see above, note 2) and Pomeroy's
interpretations should be considered a kind of 'documentary fallacy', pace W. B.
Stanford, Enemies of Poetry(London 1980), 142-6.
Already Plato, Lg. 719 c, points to divergencies between the personal views of a
poet and the statements uttered by his characters. G. J. M. J. te Riele, op. cit.,
8-10, deals with the fallacy of inferring from such statements the author's thoughts.
W. Schmid observes that most of the maxims occurring in Sophoclean tragedy
serve to mark its characters or to characterize its action (Geschichteder griechischen
Literatur,1.2, M?nchen 1934, 482), but whenever maxims are inconsistent with the
speaking character or are expressed by several persons in different situations,
Schmid arbitrarily considers them as "Konfessionen des Dichters". Recently on
the relation between a speaker's text and the author's opinions: P. D. Juhl, Inter-
pretation:An Essay in the Philosophy of Literary Criticism (Princeton 1980), 100-5. To
quote from p. 105: "Since we cannot assume that the speaker represents the
author's beliefs (feelings, attitude, concerns, and so on), we cannot attribute the
speaker's beliefs to the author".
It is another question whether literary texts are to be used as primary sources for
historical studies on the position of women in antiquity. The positive position of,
for instance, Gomme, Ch. Seltman and D. C. Richter is rejected by Pomeroy
(93-5), rightly in my view, at any rate with respect to Homer and the tragedies (cf.
W. den Boer, Mnem. IV 29 [1976], 319-21). J. Gould rightly stresses that we con-
tinuously have to "remember that the words of a Lysistrata or a Medea, for
example, are the product of a man's imagination" (op. cit., 38). Even so, he seems
to accept works of literature as a category of evidence. But drawing on myth,
imaginative literature, classical orators and inscriptions, he could take from the
literary texts no more evidence than some trivial data (for instance p. 50 on the
proverb-like Aj. 293).
For the support of such statements as Gould's or Pomeroy's, Greek tragedy
seems only usable with respect to the implied myth(s) and apparent references to
historical facts, proverbs, lore, etc.
the heroine who has become a masculine sort of woman" (100).

Extensive quotation is needed: "..., Antigone refers to herself with
an adjective in the masculine
gender (464). Creon, in turn,
perceives her masculinity and refers to Antigone by a masculine
pronoun and participle (479, 496). He resolves to punish her,
declaring, ? am not a man, she is the man if she shall have this
success without penalty' (484-5). ... Creon, when he declares
sentence upon the sisters, asserts that 'they must now be women'.
However, he continues to refer to them in the masculine gender
(579-80). ... We may note the male orientation of the Greek
language, in which
general human truths, though conceived as
referring specifically to women, can be cast in the masculine
gender. Perhaps this grammatical explanation will suffice when the
change in gender is sporadic. However, the masculine gender used
to refer to a female in specific rather than general statements?a
rare occurrence in Greek?occurs with significant frequency in
Antigone".
To quote 484-5 (which does not contain a form mase. gen. in sup-
posed to Antigone)
reference together with the other cases is highly
suggestive: the language of those cases, Pomeroy seems to imply,
would reflect the view expressed in 484-5. Besides, her interpreta-
*
tions of the specific' statements, which would point to the poet's
bias, are questionable from a syntactic and stylistic point of view.
At 464 Antigone refers to herself at most indirectly. The masculine
form is in concord with dde, which is qualified in advance by ?st??
..., the beginning of Antigone's general statement. With subordinate
??? (463) she refers to herself:
dst?? ?a? ?? p?????s?? ?? ??? ?a????

??, p?? 88' ???? ?at?a??? ???d?? f??e?; (463-4)
From Pomeroy's texts only 484-5 itself expresses a clear prejudice,

characteristic of the speaking person Creon. All other utterances
quoted by Pomeroy as evidence for Antigone's masculine thinking
fit in with the usage to formulate a general assertion with
masculina"). A direct reference in the context to Antigone (or A.
11) Cf. E. Schwyzer, GriechischeGrammatik, II, 31, for the use of masculina in
statements with a general reference including women. Pomeroy (op. cit., 100,
?. 11) unjustly mentions R. K?hner-B. Gerth, Ausf?hrlicheGrammatikdergriechischen
and Ismene) is worded in forms feminini generis: 480 (not mentioned

by Pomeroy together with 479!) and 579 alongside of 580-1 (cited
by P., but with wrong conclusion):
(???) /???a??a? e??a? t?sde ??d' ??e????a?.

fe????s? ?a? t?? ??? ??ase??, dta? p??a?
?d? t?? "??d?? e?s???s? t?? ????. (579-81)
Lastly I call to mind that are no records

there dating back to
Sophocles' contemporaries (or other documents) available for any
sketch of his own characteristics to make plausible a vivid concern
with Women's Lib12).
II
It seems reasonable to suppose that if there are any differences

between male and female characters in tragedy they bear especially
upon the way they handle their respective status. Accordingly, to
start the systematic examination referred to above, in the main part
Sprache, Satzlehre, I, 83. There a peculiarity of the use of number is dealt with:
female characters speaking about themselves use a plural masculinigeneris(striking
exception: Hipp. 1105-6 where the chorus speak about themselves in masculine
singular). V. Langholf, Hermes 105 (1977), 290-307, has examined this usage of
masculine singular and plural forms from classical times up to the Byzantine period
in a study covering a wider field than only tragedy. See esp. pp. 290-2. In all the
cases he collected no masculine form could be taken to express even an implicit
view on women. Pomeroy's position is also affected by Me. 314-5 where in front of
Creon Medea makes herself submissive, using masculina to describe this not
specifically male attitude.
12) See S. Radt, TragicorumGraecorumFragmenta, Vol. 4: Sophocles(G?ttingen
1977), 29-95: Testimonia vitae atqueartis. Through ? 172 we are informed that "the
'
poet Philoxenus' related the high morality aimed at in Sophoclean tragedy to the
poet*s pedagogical intentions: F????e??? ? p???t?? e?p??t?? t????, d?at? S?f?????
???sta? pa?e?s??e?t?? ???a??a?, a?t?? de fa????, e?pe? 'dt? S?f????? ?e? ??a?de?e??a?
ta? ???a??a? ???e?, ??? d? ??a? e?s??' (cf. Webster, op. cit., 18). If authentic, these
words would still tell us more about Phil, than about Soph. Probably they are a
derivation from Arist. Po 1460 b 32 ( = Radt ? 53) where Sophocles and Euripides
are compared with regard to their portraying of people in general. Concerning
Euripides there are indeed some explicit reports: in the G????????p?d??as well as
the Suda the works of this dramatist are partly understood as the expression of a
(negative) view of women, the outcome of a special interaction between his
character and personal experiences (see the edition of the scholia by E. Schwartz,
pp. 5,4 ?T., 6,1 ff., 8,7 ff.). However, we have to subscribe to M. R. Lefkowitz'
scepticism about the reliability of Greek literary biography (Lefkowitz, The Lifes of
the GreekPoets, Baltimore 1981; see esp. 97 and 100 on Euripides and women).
of this article I shall describe the behaviour of characters in

Sophocles from a social point of view, confining myself to one of
both categories.
The 9 women in the 7 preserved tragedies are all confronted with
conditions that menace their existence and are related to their social
positions. Jocasta, Tecmessa and Eurydice are in danger because of
their position being dependent on their men's. Deianira and
Clytemnestra find themselves, though in morally different contexts,
threatened with regard to their own position. Antigone and Electra
risk their
position for the cause of right, whereas Ismene and
Chrysothemis are just in this respect their contrasts. Starting from
these sketches of their situations I want to follow the behaviour of
the female characters in Sophocles, and to find out whether a
position of social dependence goes with dependent behaviour or
compliance13), and, on the other hand, independent behaviour is
represented by the poet as presumptuous or symptomatic of a
reprehensible, subversive attitude.
In other words, do women in Sophocles accept, resist or
disregard their place in society? In a recent paper Winnington-
Ingram has pointed out convincingly that all Sophoclean female
characters are "placed firmly within the context of their
femininity,\ However, the poet's portrayal of their behaviour
displays no elements of conflict or compliance with the limitations
of their status: as for a point of view towards women as such
Sophocles "retreats behind the barrier of his plays". But
Winnington-Ingram's survey Sophoclean of characters, female
'Sophocles and Women', is full of insights into the situations and
*
reactions of women in Sophocles'. My own survey, which was
finished when I first saw his paper, at once corroborates and sup-
plements his views14).
13) Cf. C. A. S. Dreyfuss, I.e. "Sophocles' drama, which I call 'normative',

stressed the desirability of public conformity to an idealized Periclean society".
14) R. P. Winnington-Ingram, Entretiens sur l'antiquit? classique (Fondation
Hardt), 29 (Gen?ve 1983), 233-57. The author kindly enabled me to compare his
text before its publication with my own. So I could improve my argument at some
points and leave out some passages which now appear to have become redundant.
In qualifying a 'context of femininity' one should be careful not to take too
easily, as W.-I. occasionally seems to do, a general social assumption of fifth-
century Athens to represent the poet's view. Even if one studies 'Sophocles and
Women' and not 'Women in Sophocles' I doubt for instance whether we may
count Antigone's indifference to politics as "characteristically feminine" (114).
The Phrygian princess Tecmessa, being Ajax' captive, finds

herself in an absolutely dependent position. Did the poet make this
female character conform to her given position15) or does she act in
defiance of her social limits?
The beginning of an answer to this
question is outlined already at her first entrance. Significant is the
way the sailors urge her to explain her lamentation over Ajax. After
explicitly defining her official status (formerly princess, captive con-
cubine at present: Aj. 211) they implicitly put forward her real
position (the hero's beloved and esteemed intimate16)) in support of
their request for information. Apparently Ajax' "spear-won bride"
is not introduced as a submissive person in subordination.
We seem to get a first glimpse of Ajax' own feelings in 293.
Tecmessa describes how Ajax tried to steal away at midnight, with
his sword in hand, and she informs the chorus that at her
reproachful appeal for explanation she was instructed to be silent
(Ajax: ???a?, ???a??? ??s??? ? s??? f??e?). It would seem that Ajax*
words are meant to reduce a rebel to submission. "As a corollary,
critics usually treat Tecmessa with the same ofihandedness as Ajax
does"17), reducing this female character to a subordinate position.
However, 293 should be viewed from a different angle. Most likely
Ajax wants at this very moment to get her out of the way by an
utterance, perhaps a commonplace18), which escapes him at that
moment full of tension and irritation (Tecmessa should not have
noticed him!). The depreciatory tone of his words need not reflect
15) This position is described by the chorus: 210, 331, 894-5, and by Tecmessa
herself: 485-90, 514-9.
16) Her position is indicated unmistakably in 212-213: st???e?? connotes mutual
regard (W. B. Stanford ad loc), ????e? may imply respect (J. C. Kamerbeek ad
loc), while a state of being informed points to intimacy.
17) Kirkwood, op. cit., 104. Cf. Stanford ad loc.
18) Cf. S. Fr. 64.4 Radt: a????s??? ? s??? te ?a? ta pa??* ep?, and Pearson ad loc.
and ad 81, J. C. Kamerbeek ad Aj. 293. Cf. also Od. 1.358 and A. Th. 232.
Directly at her first entrance in E. Heracl. Macaria apologizes for the mere fact of
appearing:
???a????a? s??? te ?a? t? s?f???e??
?????st??, e?s? ?' ?s???? ???e??d???? (476-7),
words apparently pointing to the submissiveness of a woman who shortly after-
wards, when hearing that to save her family a girl was to die, offers her life.
Lysistrata mocks women's patience with their obligation to keep silence,
referring to their acceptance of being excluded from conversation at home about
politics (Ar. Lys. 514-5).
his personal feelings, as we may infer from the way Tecmessa, later
on, expresses her grief at being kept ignorant of her beloved man's
real intention. At 807-8 she feels miserably repudiated from the
position of intimacy she once enjoyed (t?? pa?a??? ????t??)19).
Already before the proper action starts we know where Tecmessa
stands in society from the attitude of other people20). Addressed by
the chorus as
Ajax' well-informed partner, she irritates the
tormented for the very reason that she forms part of his life.
hero
This is touchingly proved as she opens the door and turns to her
miserable beloved to stop him disparaging himself, but is rejected
bluntly (368-9)21). Against Tecmessa's only two partners in
dialogue22) the contours of a woman in danger are taking shape,
who wisely cadis on Ajax' men to render indispensable assistance in
carrying out her strategy and tactics23). In spite of Ajax' reactions
(293, 368-9), Tecmessa joins the chorus in trying to moderate her
partner's slanderous language several times (410-11, 591).
Moreover, her much-discussed monologue (485-524) displays
sound reasoning against Ajax' vindication of his heroic duty to
commit suicide. In this harangue she does more than throw herself
at Ajax' mercy24). To interpret her speech as just a plea for pity
would require the disregard of Ajax' former words and an
unwarranted emphasis on her argument of imminent bondage
19) See about ????? Stanford ad 522. In 318 Tecmessa explicitly points to the
abnormal aspects of Ajax' behaviour at a later stage.
20) The speaking parts Tecmessa is confronted with later on are the Messenger
(792 if.) and Teucer (985 ff. and 1168 ff.), who in the latter passage, however,
primarily addresses the child.
21) Too rationalistic Stanford's explanation: Ajax' harshness towards Tecmessa
should result from "his refusal to take her wise advice in 288 ff., which would have
prevented his humiliation".
22) In her confrontation with Teucer who has to urge the woman to save her
child, Tecmessa, paralysed with horror at seeing Ajax' corpse, has no text
(985 ff.).
23) In 329-30 she asks them to enter the tent, suggesting that men like Ajax
could be pacified and restrained by the arguments of friends, and immediately
after Ajax' snubbing words the chorus grants Tecmessa's wishes 371. Afterwards
she calls them in to look for Teucer (803 ff.).
24) Cf. Kirkwood, op. cit., 104 ff., and P. E. Easterling who regards Tecmessa's
monologue "not as a pathetically misdirected plea for pity, but as a well designed
argument to deter Ajax from suicide, based on a sensitive understanding of the
values he respects'' (from a lecture summary, Proc. Cl. Ass. 1980, 22-3).
(496-9)25). Resolutely Tecmessa deals with the hero's line of

thought.
The subject of their speeches is the ethic of a noble man26). As
e??e??? Ajax shrinks from coming face to face with his father and
having to account for his double defeat (in the contest for the arms
and in the effort to take revenge). To him the father is the embodi-
ment of the family's code of honour27). His partner sets the only
real alternative against his argument, appealing to another part of
the heroic code28): being e??e??? Ajax should obey the rules of a?d??
and consider both his parents' situation (506-9). She points, of
course, to her own future and the interests of their child. Strikingly,
however, she does not mention her vulnerable status; she uses the
terms and arguments used by Andromache to keep Hector from
going towards his death (510-22)29). To destroy the rights of his
woman, she argues, would bring more shame upon his house than
the wrong that plagues his sense of honour now (505). That Ajax is
not able or willing to share her views (594-5) does not annihilate the
fact that Tecmessa acts on equal terms.
25) With a future d????a?t??f?? (499) Tecmessa indirectly qualifies her present
status. The purport and tone of her speech indicate that Tecmessa's action to stop
Ajax is not merely an attempt to keep off actual slavery. Winnington-Ingram, art.
cit., 109, points to the subtle play with ???????? (491) and s?????????? (493) in
"
preparation for her final eloquent and touching appeal to the memory of
pleasure".
26) At the end of both monologues e??e??? is used in a terse recapitulation. Cf.
Kirkwood, op. cit., 106.
27) Three times Ajax explicitly mentions his father: as a paragon of valour once
covered with glory (434-6), as a terror at a possible return of the dishonoured hero
(463-6), and as a courageous man whose moral standard would compel his son to
choose an hounourable death (470-2).
28) Cf. Stanford ad 506-22. Tecmessa makes *'appeals to which a hero might
respond" (Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 19, cf. pp. 29-30. Cf. the same, art. cit.,
111. Otherwise Kirkwood, op. cit., 106.
29) Also Ajax' sailors' future depends on the fortunes of their master, as appears
from their lamentations at his death: 901-3.
Tecmessa realizes that her social status is an extra complication. She even begins
her monologue by expressing this thought. There, however, it illustrates the futility
of a noble birth. Here (514 f?.) this notion is not prominent. Cf. Kirkwood, op. cit.,
105.
Tecmessa's pointing to the social vulnerability of a (bond-)woman is inconsistent
with Pomeroy's "apparent discrepancy between women in the actual society and
the heroines on the stage" (op. cit., 93). Cf. 944-5 where slavery looms as the cer-
tain consequence of Ajax' death.
In his monologue 646-92 Ajax implicitly acknowledges her claim

to equivalence. Whether one takes his words to be honest or deceit-
ful, describing the revulsion of his feelings Ajax refers to womanly
tenderness in a necessarily positive way. After his rigidity "like iron
by dipping,,3?), he says, his "speech is womanish for this woman's
sake" (????????? st??a p??? t?sde t?? ???a????, 651-2)31). Ajax'
words cannot, of course, be meant in a depreciatory sense, neither
if spoken honestly nor if for tactical reasons he only wanted to
suggest the existence of a tender feeling32).
Tecmessa's real
position is matched by her actions and
behaviour. Having heard that Ajax' life could be saved if on this
day he were only protected against himself (and Athena), she does
not fall into panic or inertia, but immediately starts a searching
campaign: 803 ff. Nor is she paralysed at seeing his stabbed body:
amidst her lamentations (partly echoing Ajax' words!33) she is the
first to take care of the corpse, and not the chorus (915 ff.). With
this display of initiative Tecmessa's active part ends. She has come
to impersonate convincingly the sorrows caused by Ajax' suicide.
But not only Tecmessa's active part ends here. Her last words also
mark the end of a train of events in which she participated on a level
with her partner. Her finad speech (961-73) contains a personali
retrospection but at the same time it coincides with a caesura in the
dramatic structure; it ends where the second part of this 'diptych'
tragedy begins34).
30) Cf. Stanford ad 651.

31) Free translation, giving the purport of the Greek, by J. Moore.
32) One need not choose between both alternatives if one accepts a suggestion
by O. Taplin, GreekTragedyin Action, London 1978, 127-31. In his view 646-92 has
been written (and placed in its position) to raise hopes (in Tecmessa, the chorus
and the audience) which are afterwards painfully dashed. The monologue
anticipates events to come and especially the hero*s last farewell (815-65). To
Taplin's examples one may be added. In 657-60 Ajax remarks that he is going to
hide his sword in the ground. That "??d?? in 660 is ominous, one fully realizes at
hearing 815-22 and in 865 "??d??. W. B. Stanford deals with the ambiguity of
st??a (651): it indicates a possible difference between words and deed but may also
suggest the point of Ajax' sword. The adjunct st??a needs not imply moral
(negative) estimation of the feelings meant by ?????????.
33) Cf. Jebb ad loc.
34) S. Aj., Tr. and Ant. are all, though in different ways, divisible into two more
or less independent parts. Some critics therefore have compared these tragedies to
a diptych. Cf. for instance Kirkwood, op. cit., 42 ff.
In this way the dramatic structure emphasizes that Ajax' most

important opponent has fulfilled her drama. Accordingly she is in a
position to stand aloof from the subsequent action without
suggesting subordination. The poet has no reason to drag Tecmessa
into participating in the coming rhetorical tilt (over Ajax' corpse!).
Nor could she plausibly take part in Teucer's and Eurysaces' ritual
dealings with the dead father and hero (1170 ff., 1402 ff.), for the
parallel scene 545 ff.35) was exclusively a matter between Ajax and
his little son.
Consequently it does not enter her mind that their child, which in
809 she hesitatingly36) left behind in her search for Ajax and, as
appears from 944, had not forgotten, could be kidnapped by his
father's enemies. Teucer has to point out the danger (985-9). Her
silent exit to fetch the boy suggests no failure. The very silence
indicates that she only acts to correct the outcome of her previous
activities37). Her real place in this drama has become apparent
from the eloquent and courageous way she summed up the conse-
quence to all of Ajax' death. The views expressed, also dealing with
other people's interests, and especially her challenge directed
towards the Greeks in general and Odysseus in particular, are not
to be expected from a subordinate character (966-8). It is simply not
true to say that Tecmessa is characterized by want of firmness;
some critics assumed this to be the effect of her given social position
and read it into the text38). She does not confine herself to her own
social security nor does she rely on any appeal for pity. Tecmessa's
action covers more than the mere defence of her subsistence.
Actual matrimony presents the risks Jocasta has to dead with.
Unlike Tecmessa she is the queen and legal wife whom her husband
35) Cf. J. C. Kamerbeek ad loc.

36) Cf. R. C. Jebb and W. B. Stanford ad loc.
37) Teucer's words are addressed to Tecmessa, not to the coryphaeus. As
appears from 1169, she is the person sent away to save Eurysaces. Other views
seem far-fetched. For the adopted view see Taplin, op. cit., 149, and A. Dain,
Sophocle II, Paris 19652, 44, n. 1. Eurysaces' presence on the stage is needed
especially to protect the corpse by virtue of suppliants' rights (cf. J. C. Kamerbeek
ad 1171-2). It marks the dramatic poet that he made great play with this
dramaturgical element by making Tecmessa go and fetch the child.
38) Pomeroy, op. cit., 98, ranks Tecmessa with Ismene and Chrysothemis, and
qualifies these women (as well as Deianira) as "modest" and "submissive".
holds in high esteem and confidence39). Her security, however, just

like Tecmessa's, depends on the fortunes of her man. And up to the
moment she turns out to be herself involved in the evils, Jocasta is
comparable with Tecmessa. That Oedipus' actions could have
caused the pestilence, is threatening Jocasta no less than Ajax'
behaviour threatens Tecmessa. At first Jocasta appears not to be
aware of any danger. The stealthy nature of the risks she runs as
well as her official status contribute, of course, to make her act
without precaution. Her subsequent way of acting, however, makes
clear that the initial rashness and indiscreet denial of complications
are primarily features of her character. Her impulsiveness and in-
clination to reckless argument, being elements affecting the hero's
catastrophe40), take shape as the characteristics of a living person
from her very first entrance (07" 634). Confronted with a heated
altercation between the king (her husband) and his supposed rival
(her brother) she at once takes control of the situation and tells the
men to go inside. Neither of them responds to this urgent request
immediately, but Creon starts
explaining the matter, and later on
Oedipus follows, notwithstanding his state of agitation41).
The oath Creon swears that he is not to blame leads Jocasta for
the moment to refrain from further
questions and to pacify her hus-
band (646-8). She seemsto act intuitively, but shows no sign of the
religious inconsistency some critics, pointing to her scepticism with
regard to oracles, thought they had found. The sequel makes clear
that she has no doubts about the gods and the truth of their oracles,
but only questions the veracity of priests and prophets42). Her first
action in response to danger43) displays a kind of carelessness based
on a conventional religiosity and a tendency to treat unexpected,
39) OT 577-80, 700, 772-3.

40) Cf. Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 183-4.
41) It marks his frame of mind that Oedipus, after hearing the name of Apollo
(377), takes Teiresias' declaration concerning Laius' death (352-3, 362) to be the
evidence of a plot arranged by Creon (572-3), whom he sent to Delphi (69-71).
42) Cf. Jebb XXVIII about Jocasta's significant, though short, remark that the
oracle concerning Laius, which appeared to be '*false", did not come from the god
himself but "from his servants" (712).
43) She has not yet been informed of Oedipus' motive for suspecting Creon, the
charge brought against him by Teiresias. But her husband spoke of an attempt on
his life, and that points to danger.
but possibly fatal, turns as mere coincidences to be dealt with

hastily.
Jocasta is, however, characterized by another, striking tendency.
Now that Creon gets off scot-free after the chorus* intervention
(669-70), the present situation would have given comfort to a queen
standing solely on the defence. A tricky problem appears to be
settled, while her request to go inside has been partly acceded to
with Creon's exit (676-7). As it seems, she has only to make
Oedipus leave the stage. Surprised, the chorus ask why she delays
(678-9). At this moment Jocasta shows a trait of character that
makes her action somewhat ambivalent: an inclination to recon-
sider matters, expressing itself in utterances of curiosity, in the
course of time changing into suspicion and, ultimately, anguish.
First she asks for background information (680). The chorus eschew
the question, but from Oedipus' answer (703, 705-6) Jocasta con-
cludes that his suspicion with regard to Creon is due to a remark of
the old blind prophet. Delusive though the insights of a mortal seer
may be, his words might point to political danger. Such a con-
sideration, however, does not occur to Jocasta. Hearing the
prophet's name the queen is brought to a hasty argument: since the
oracle concerning Laius' death proved to be false, one should in
general disregard that kind of prophecies (723-5).
Since her entrance some hundred-odd lines ago the features of
this fatal character have been roughly drawn. Inclined to deal with
problems (in this case the quarrel Oedipus-Creon) off-handedly, on
second thoughts she shows some curiosity to go into the matter, but
as soon as she discovers a complication (the possibility that her
husband is compromised44) she falls back into rashness. At this
moment we also discern the
way Jocasta's attitude affects her
husband's dramatic The argument
situation. in support of her
opinion about prophecies arouses Oedipus' first misgivings (726-7).
Jocasta's scope for alternating between wantonness and curiosity
gradually decreases. Everything to the emergence
she does adds of
the truthwhich is able to ignore any longer. At the
at last nobody
end of the second part of her first episode (728-862), however,
Jocasta makes a desperate attempt to brush all risks aside. She has
44) In Oedipus' own words which reveal awareness of the danger: 701 and 703.
informed Oedipus of some details with regard to Laius' death. His

reactions have evoked her first expression of alarm (746, 749).
Nevertheless she agrees to send for the only servant who survived
and informed her. Characteristically she does not enquire after
Oedipus' motives, but the reasons for his sorrow
(769-70). Only
after his confession (774-833), which is another step towards the
disclosure of the truth, does she ask why the servant has to come.
And to the answer that all depends on whether one or two men
murdered Laius, Jocasta reacts in a way revealing most dramatical-
ly the trait of defence mechanism in her attitude.
Her dramatic situation at that moment being determined by the
possibility that Oedipus himself is Laius' murderer (846-7), she
tries in advance to make sure no information would be in-
criminating. She argues that even in case the servant should take
back his former words and now mention only one person who com-
mitted the murder, the oracle concerning Laius would still be
unfulfilled, a fact discrediting the words of prophets (851-8)45).
However, to throw doubt upon Teiresias' words now (unlike
708 ff.) does not meet the case. Jocasta takes the line that her and
Laius' son is dead. But the truth of this premise should at least be
doubted, since Oedipus informed her about the oracle he received
at Delphi (793). Her behaviour unmistakably reveals a trait of
escapism, whether she unwittingly drives this complication out of
her mind46) or, more probably, in full knowledge suppresses it
tactically47).
On the hypothesis that, at this point, she knows the truth the
remainder of her part is perfectly understandable. In that case she is
45) Jocasta's scepticism, as expressed in 857-8, of course relates to Teiresias.

Strictly speaking, in 853 she deals not with Apollo's priests and prophets (as in 712)
but with the god himself. The epithet ????a?, however, points to the enigmatic way
his servants word the god's intentions. Cf. Kamerbeek ad 853-4, and Jebb adi M
and 853.
Jebb (a?852) states, confusing the issue of this epeisodion (Teiresias' accusation)
and the issue of the next (the oracle given Oedipus at Delphi), that Jocasta at this
point tries to reassure her husband by reminding him that he did not kill his father'
Polybus.
46) Cf. Kamerbeek's clarifying comments at 853-4.
47) We cannot assume that the obvious thought of this difficulty would stay
away without some psychic mechanism. Also in case of repression, however, her
actions would still give evidence of a precipitate approach.
driven by a motive which would also be the key to her preceding

attitude: fear of reality. Then her prayer to Apollo is dictated by the
alarming fear that the Laius oracle might be a message from the god
himself and not his prophets' fabrication (cf. 711-12, in this view
Jocasta is prompted by something more than the impulse she speaks
about48)). Her reaction to the news that Polybus is dead (943 ff.) is
dramatically more effective if taken as a way to conceal the truth
than as the expression of a real feeling. And the haste she makes to
inform Oedipus would be caused by her desire to keep him on the
wrong track.
Nevertheless, up to this moment, it is still possible to imagine
that Jocasta has no suspicion of reality at all. We should only have
to admit a rather strange trait of na?vet?. Her following scene with
Oedipus, however, to my mind definitely makes clear that she is in
touch with what really happens. Having thrown doubt upon oracles
(964-72), Oedipus realizes that the prediction concerning a
marriage with his mother is still to be falsified (976). Jocasta on her
part, of course assenting to his scepticism (973, 975), deals with the
new sign of faith not in the usual way, but, instead of stressing the
unreliability of divine messages, she hastens to convince her
husband that one should not concern oneself too much about the
future (977-9). And insteadof asking for further information, which
was to be expected, she tries to reassure him by comparing the
contents of a prophecy to the imaginary world of dreams (980-3).
The way Jocasta waves aside his last objections indicates that at the
moment she fully recognizes a reality she may have been surmising
since 790 ff. Her retreat after the last disclosures (1016 ff.) does not
result from an instantaneous discovery. Having lost all oppor-
tunities for concealing the truth, she has no other escape.
The character Jocasta is a determinant of the dramatic action
and structure. Her attempts to eliminate complications attain the
reverse of what she has in view. With her argument to prove that
48) Jebb takes her words in the literal sense: "The state of Oidipus frightens
her" (cf. 914-7), and he presupposes an improbable frivolity: "It is not that she
herself has much fear for the future". To Kamerbeek Jocasta's offering is there to
demonstrate that her distrust of oracles does not mean a disbelief in the gods. But
711-2 and 724 already preclude the possibility of such a disbelief. At this moment of
distress she turns to the god for help.
the prophet's accusation is invalid she causes Oedipus to doubt his

innocence: 715 ff. Even her frantic persistence, when circum-
stances change (851 ff.), seems to be inserted to enhance Oedipus'
search for the truth. And her impulsive interest (e.g. 769-70)
provokes information (793) that hastens the course of the dramatic
action: having been informed that Oedipus is doomed to murder
his father, and after getting the announcement of Polybus' death
she immediately lets her husband know, which in turn brings about
the fatal confrontation between Oedipus and the Corinthian
messenger (1014 ff.). Jocasta's behaviour displays no trait of incon-
sistency. Her initial carelessness in face of danger reveals the same
rashness as does finally her desperate reaction to the inescapable
truth. Jocasta's suicide is part and parcel of her character. Her act
should not be severed from its context and connection, as S. B.
Pomeroy does who, referring to Jocasta, Antigone and other
females, calls suicide "a feminine and somewhat cowardly mode of
death"49). The dramatic impact of
Jocasta's personality in-
dicates?even more than Tecmessa's?that in the poet's view a
given position of social dependence need not interfere with
individual freedom50).
Having tried to sketch the individual way Tecmessa and Jocasta
act under conditions,
existing we now attempt to determine, to
what extentAntigone and Electra, who have placed themselves in
social isolation, are characterized as improper females. As we saw,
the first two are behaving far from subserviently to their men. But is
the way Electra and Antigone take matters into their own hands still
acceptable to Sophocles? Or does he disapprove indirectly of their
49) Op. cit., 101. Besides, Pomeroy unjustly ranks Jocasta with Eurydice,
Haemon's mother whose short appearance (Ant. 1183 fT.) tells us nothing about
her inner motives. The dramatic function of her suicide is apparent but one should
not infer from her text and action any view of Sophocles on women. To
Winnington-Ingram, art. cit., 109, the way Jocasta commits suicide along with the
non-intellectual character of her scepticism qualify her role as "essentially
feminine'\ I hope to have made plausible that Jocasta, having drawn the right con-
clusion from a consistent argument, in the last part of her role (from 943 on?)
displays the (intellectual) power of cold strategy.
50) Despite her official status Jocasta, no less than Tecmessa, is socially
dependent on her husband's fortunes.
behaviour by rendering these women insolent, overbearing or

subversive51)?
The answer to thequestion, whether or to what extent both
women's actions do not accord with their female sex, may be found
in their last episodes. Whereas Tecmessa and Jocasta, in a
sequence of ever more dramatic repetitions of their initial situation,
are shown to keep their state of mind, Electra and Antigone in their
concluding scenes present some new characteristics that correct the
picture of their personality as it has appeared up to then.
The dialogue beginning Ant. is dominated by the contrast
between passion and prudence. Yet in some respects Antigone
appears to resemble her sister. In the intimacy of her talk with
Ismene52) she shows a remarkable sign of modesty, which shortly
after, under the stress of circumstances, temporarily disappears
again (1-99). Ismene's reasonable appeal to Antigone that she may
51) Pomeroy, op. cit., 99-103, discerns in Antigone the portrayal of a masculine
woman and she takes this character to express indirectly the poet's supposed view
that such a person could not be female nor a female such a person. A. Jenzer allows
Antigone to be a woman but she regrets that Sophocles "die M?glichkeiten, die in
einer Auffassung der Frau wie Antigone lagen, nicht weiter verfolgt hat" (op. cit.,
93, see my note 3).
The most lucid treatment of Antigone and Electra from a woman's point of view
is Christina E. Sorum's important essay The Family in Sophocles' 'Antigone' and
'Electra', CW 1982, 201-11. She deals with the contradictions that arise when a fifth
century Athenian female "is compelled to defend the family", and with which
these heroines find themselves confronted. In the course of her (anthropological)
argument, however, she emphasizes the generic and seems to neglect some specific
features through which the poet, as we hope to show, presents the action as an
achievement of individual heroic women. Antigone's efforts indeed cause danger
to the public order but she is not seeking to subvert the government, as Sorum
apparently presumes: "the private, non-political conception of the family
developed by Antigone is subversive" (205). "If she acts to fulfil the demands of
birth and blood", Sorum argues (206), "she cannot act as a woman", but, we
would add, actually she does. Electra's decision to assume the heroic role of
avenger is dealt with in the same way: "By acting Electra denies the female basis of
the action" (209). But in this woman's dramatic situation it is significant, as I hope
to make clear, that in the end she need not carry out her resolution.
In a plausible interpretation of Antigone's behaviour H. Rohdich combines the
specific and generic: "In die Klage (se. in the fourth episode) ?ber das Leiden, das
die T?terin sich zuzog, mischt sich ... das Bewusstsein individualer Ausser-
ordentlichkeit, die gesellschaftlich Relevantes vollbrachte" (Antigone:Beitragzu einer
Theoriedes sophokleischenHelden, Heidelberg 1980, 186).
52) Cf. Kirkwood, op. cit., 119-20, on the confrontation between both sisters.
refrain from
extending the chain of calamities, which runs through
their family by their own ruin (49-68), she answers with a strong
denied of any possible help from others (69-70). The following alter-
cation goes to show that Antigone dislikes her sister's attitude53).
She not try, however,
did to refute Ismene*s argument that they
"two are women, so not to fight with men" (61-2)54). And when
Ismene remarks that she "craves what can't be done", she admits
that her strength is limited (90-1)55). Antigone is standing alongside
and opposite her sister: they know, both of them, that their position
is vulnerable, but Antigone reaches another conclusion.
So far this woman displays no sign of rebelliousness nor could she
be considered as a possible exception to the womanly pattern of life.
Being socially at a disadvantage she acts all the more courageously.
The audience has been informed of the ambitious aims of a female
protagonist. This portrait seems to be affected by a reaction from
Creon. Hearing that his order has been disobeyed and that the
corpse has been buried, he asks in anger, what man has dared to do
53) Cf. Ant. 538 ff. where she does not allow Ismene to be a party to the crime
and, in the presence of Creon, denies her the right to pay the penalty of death.
54) Cf. V. Citt?, Strutturee tensioni sociali nell'Antigonedi Sofocle, Atti dell'Istituto
Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, CXXXIV, Venezia 1976, 483: "?
significativo che Antigone non replica agli argomenti della sorella ... Antigone non
contesta (non pu? contestare, vedremo), Gaffermazione della debolezza e dell'in-
feriorit? della donna". Citt? studied a wide range of (Attic) social divisions
(man/woman, e??e???/?a???, Greek/barbarian, etc.) as they are revealed in Greek
tragedy. In particular Sophoclean drama Citt? takes to be a *'veicolo dell'ideologia
della classe dominante" (I.e. 499), but (with regard to Ant.) he remarks: "appunto
nella misura in cui l'eroina rifiuta il ruolo che la societ? del suo tempo le
proponeva, l'umanit? eccede i condizionamenti storici e si ripropone come testimo-
nianza" (I.e. 482). We do not venture to discuss Citti's position in so far as he con-
siders Sophoclean tragedy as a "strumento della lotta di classe" (I.e. 499). Suffice it
to note that an Antigone involved in class struggle activities by no means needs to
be seen as 'masculine'. See also V. Citt?, Sofoclee le strutturedi poterenell'Atenedel V
secolo, BIFG (Padova) 1976, 84-120, and Tragedia e lotta di classe in Grecia, Napoli
1978 (good short review by R. G. A. Buxton, JHS 1981, 172).
55) ??????, ?ta? 8? ?? s????, pepa?s??a? (91). G. M?ller, SophoklesAntigone,
Heidelberg 1967, 39, rightly argues that Ismene's a???a??? (90) may be taken in a
moral or a practical sense. But I doubt whether he is right in adding this observa-
tion: "Antigone, der es auf das Sittliche ankommt, meint mit s???? das
Technische, mit pepa?s??a? den Tod (daraus erkl?rt sich auch das Tempus, das f?r
das Aufgeben einer aussichtslosen Sache nicht gew?hlt worden w?re)", s????,
however, points to individual strength, and in S. Tr. 587 pepa?s??a? refers to the
stopping of rash action.
that (248)56). As he really does not know the identity of this person,
Creon's words do not merely voice an individual prejudice. The
audience must have been brought at least to consider whether
Antigone should have
disqualified herself as a female.
The suggestion of transgressing conventions is heightened by the
attitude Creon assumes when Antigone has been brought up. The
way he deals with this girl, who is a danger to the state, primarily
marks the man. Nevertheless, through him and up to his downfall
some spectators must have had their doubts as to Antigone's
femininity57). He appears to be more vexed by her self-confidence
than by the discovery that she is the offender (473-85). And when
he makes the punishment of this young girl a case to test his
manliness and the only answer to her pretensions (484-5: "I am no
man, but she is the man, if she may have this victory without
harm'*), some of those present in the theatre may, as a result of self-
criticism, have recognized their own bias, others will have swal-
lowed it without a second thought. Through Creon's words the
audience is confronted with the discriminatory point of view several
times, once even with an appeal to their sense of law and order
(677-8)58). Besides, Antigone's dramatic situation (she finds herself
in opposition to the power) leaves no room for the tender feelings
expressed before. Face to face with Ismene, however, she is still
capable of being affectionate. She refuses to allow her sister to
participate in blame and punishment (538-9), but confesses that she
rejects her with pain (551).
Certain suggestions, having come from her opponent, still linger
on. The audience may have been wondering for a considerable time
56) t?? a?d??? ?? ? t????sa? t?de; The possibility of some action by a woman is
not even thought of. Strictly speaking, t?? a?d??? need not be taken in a specific
masculine sense (M?ller, Kamerbeek). Later on, however, Creon uses the
unequivocal t?? a?t??e??a (306). But cf. V. Citt?, Strutturee tensioni sociali (see my
note 54), 484-5.
57) Apparently in the end Creon realizes the untenable nature of his views: in
the kommosthat represents his ruin (1261-1346) and in which he admits his faults
(1269) there is no word about the fact that his opponent was a woman.
58) While 484-5 and 677-8 contain suggestive remarks about Antigone ("she is
a man" and "her actions interfere with discipline"), the other cases point
exclusively to his claim to masculine superiority (525: ???? hi ???t?? ??? ???e?????,
and still more vehemently 740, 746 and 756, where Haemon's call, not to
"trample on the gods' honours", is rejected as "yielding place to a woman").
whether the heroine is driven by a social motive. Such considera-

tions might also have been provoked by the way Haemon draws his
father's attention to sneaking sympathies with
Antigone in town
(692-5) and discusses the question whethera king should heed
rumours (732-9). Judging from her own text, Antigone does not
seem to tamper with her given state of being a female59). The
lament and monologue concluding her appearance put this matter
past all doubt60). Announcing the heroine's last entrance the chorus
touch a motif, which is developed in a specific way with her own
words. On her way to "the bridal chamber where all must sleep"
(804-5, chorus)61) she sings of her single state in terms of a personal
defect. For her there was no hymenaios (813-14), the old hymn sung
by friends escorting bride and bridegroom to their apartment.
Before her bedchamber no chorus sang the bridal serenade
(814-16)62). And after mentioning these conventional wedding
songs she ends her first strophe with a lamentation that brings to
mind the misery of this female in her specific situation. Making
herself the future bride of Acheron (816) she unconsciously answers
Creon's former suggestion that Antigone should have no other right
than to "marry somebody in Hades" (654)63).
This final turn of her action accords with the trait of character
Antigone showed in the beginning, where she, no more than
59) As Winnington-Ingram, art. cit. 114, puts it, "she is not in revolt against the
limitations of her sex, which she chooses to disregard in her determination to carry
out a duty that her feminine instincts dictate".
60) Cf. I. M. Linforth, Antigone and Creon, CPCPh 15,5,1961, 251: "As she is
led away to the tomb, she reveals the other aspect of her woman's nature". H.
Rohdich, op. cit. (see my note 51), 11-25, discusses the many ways critics dealt with
the (also by Rohdich maintained) 'difference' between the Antigone of the fourth
episode and the courageous heroine scorning death before. It marks this masterly
drawn passionate young female character that she is never lacking in human
feelings (e.g. Ant. 91, 551). About the dramatic function of ????: S. de Lannoy, Le
r?ledu ch?ur dans la trag?diegrecque.Eros et pudeurd'Oresteet d'Antigone, Cahiers th??tre
Louvain 1978, 15-23.
61) Cf. for ???a??? in epitaphs on the (not only female!) unmarried: R.
Lattimore, Themes in Greekand Latin Epitaphs, Urbana 1962, 192. In 806 ff. the
traditional motif of a marriage with Death is suited to the woman in Antigone, who
not merely talks of dying. The emotional tenor of this "imagery of marriage" is
dealt with by R. F. Goheen, The Imagery of Sophocles' Antigone, Princeton 1951,
37-41.
62) She means the ?p??a???????????, known e.g. from Theoc. 18.
63) Cf. for the implied irony R. F. Goheen, op. cit., 40.
Ismene, could be called a "masculine woman"64), as S. B.

Pomeroy describes her. In her concluding scene Antigone does not
"revert to a traditional female role". Nothing indicates that she
ever thought of any social inversion. Certain suggestions on the
part of Creon are definitely with her last monologue
refuted before
the king himself. Addressing her grave as marriage-chamber (891),
towards the end she speaks about her dying unmarried in terms of
an individual tribulation (915-20). The way Sophocles dealt with
Antigone in her dramatic situation does not appear to imply a
negative statement about the mental and moral faculties of women
in generad.
Both women, Ismene and Antigone, behave in line with their
parts in
OC that on first acquaintance are already undeniably
female. This is not altered, of course, by the appreciative remarks
of their aged father, who in the presence of Polyneices, and while
comparing his daughters with his sons, prefers his daughters
and?this is in itself quite revealing?calls them 'men': OC 1367-9.
"The normal sex-roles are indeed up to a point reversed, and yet
there is nothing essentially unfeminine in the behaviour of the
'
daughters' (Winnington-Ingram65)). Resemblances between
Antigone's behaviour in OC and Ant. support the interpretation of
the latter play's great heroine as a characterfeminini generis. In OCy
at an earlier stage in her life, she is presented, unlike her sister but
like her role in Ant., as a confident woman. In OC 1181 ff. she is the
64) Op. cit., 99-103. Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 137-46, argues convincingly
that the Antigone of 801-943 and the person who before is measuring her strength
with Creon are the very same woman. The question whether 904-20 are spurious,
is thoroughly discussed in T. A. Szlez?k, Bemerkungenzur Diskussion um Sophokles,
Antigone 904-920, RhM 124 (1981), 108-42.
65) Art. cit., 114-5. At 337-45 Oedipus had made a similar comparison. These
words do not point to social discrimination. Cf. W. Sch?tz, ?ST?????
F?S?OS, diss. Heidelberg 1964, 111: "Immerhin wird gerade darin, dass sich
die M?dchen ihrer Aufgabe gewachsen zeigen, offenbar, dass sich die Frau bei
Sophokles im Grunde nicht anders bew?hrt als der Mann", 112: "Wenn somit bei
Sophokles die Frau Antigone nicht anders als ein '???? a?a???' kraftvoll den Weg
der Bew?hrung zu Ende geht, so besagt das, dass der Dichter gerade hierin keinen
Unterschied zwischen der m?nnlichen und der weiblichen f?s?? anerkennen will;
letztere wird ja auch in den erhaltenen Dramen ebensowenig wie bei Aischulos als
'schwach' bezeichnet. Damit erscheint die grunds?tzliche Einheit der mensch-
lichen f?s?? ... bei Sophokles ... als der sichere Besitz menschlicher Vorstellung".
one who applies to their father, and she is successful where Theseus
failed. With an argument, already showing the self-reliance that
marks her statement before Creon in Ant. 450 ff., she succeeds in
persuading Oedipus to listen to Polyneices (OC 1204). In OC
1280 ff. Antigone breaks the deadlock between Oedipus and
Polyneices. When later on Polyneices asks the girls to bury him if he
dies, Antigone begins to speak and urges him not to attack Thebes
(OC 1414 ff.). The girls' kommos (OC 1670-1750) presents the con-
trast between self-centred Ismene (1689-92, 1715-19, 1734-6) and
her noble sister (1704-14), which we find again in the prologue of
Ant. Lastly, Antigone's decision to intervene at Thebes (OC
1768-72) matches her subsequent vigour.
For some time the action of El. seems to force its heroine to
repress her inner self. Near the beginning of the dramatic crisis we
expect Electra to give a turn to her activities that would have given
this character a trait of social inconsistency. Being informed of
Orestes' 'death' Electra expresses her embitterment at first through
a total inertia: 674, 677, 808-12, 857-9. Information from
Chrysothemis, of equal reliability and indicative of the opposite
(892-919), is not even pondered. The confrontation with her sister
causes the inner change that makes Electra propose that they wait
no longer and start taking vengeance on their own (947-57).
Pointing to the difference of physical strength between men and
women, Chrysothemis rejects her sister's suggestion (995-8).
Though she expected that answer (1017-8) Electra does not deny
the suggestion of being arrogant. Besides, her previous taunt at
Aegisthus who "only fights with women" (302) indicates that she
takes the difference in vigour between males and females for
granted. If Electra had actually carried out her plan or taken up the
running, such a final stage of her activities would have seemed to
have been forced upon her. The surprising way she would have
acted might have
been interpreted as a negative statement by the
poet about the capability of women.
The heroine, however, does not exhibit any inconsistency. In the
course of her recognition-dialogue with Orestes she gets into a state
of euphoria, which in a way is the reverse of her initial paralysis and
makes her forget her resolve to take the initiative. It seems
unwarranted to question "ob Sophokles je im Ernst an die Aus-
f?hrung dieses Planes durch Elektra gedacht hat"66). There is no

indication that we should hold Electra's decision to be unattainable
in advance. If her situation had not changed, she would have been
able to perform the action required. That she does not execute her
plan, may not be taken as a sign of any inability67).
Electra should not be placed "innerhalb der Schranken leiden-
den Frauentums"68) on the score of her passiveness. In part El. is a
piece of character study, though still, as Kirkwood put it, of
"character in situation"69). Her frantic joy ensuing from the
reunion and her submissiveness to the brother who came back are
dictated by the same mental condition that underlies her initial way
of acting. From the very beginning she is prompted by her desire
for vengeance (245-50), imagining Orestes to be the agent. Already
in lines 11-14 (cf. 296-7) the old paedagogus called attention to the
fact that he had received the newborn brother from Electra and
reared him until he reached manhood to be his father's avenger. In
117-20 we hear the sister pray for Orestes' return, while in 164-72
she gives voice to her unwearied longing. On some other occasions,
too, in different contexts, Electra's opinion on the part Orestes has
to play is put forward unmistakably: 303, 317-23, 455-6, 604-5.
The audience is faced with a woman whose life hangs on to
vengeance but who does not hold herself to be the most

likely
avenger. That
is why Orestes' 'death' means to her the end of all
existence: 674, 677, 808-12, 854-9. She does not even notice that
Chrysothemis' observations (see above), pointing to the presence of
a living Orestes, are in themselves no less credible than the message
of his death.
The stress of circumstances drives this, until now, grimly waiting
character to a venture that
temporarily evokes the possibility of
another Electra. Independent action is foreshadowed. In the depths
of despair no danger counts. But naturally the heroine retreats
66) Jenzer, op. cit., 91 (see my note 3).

67) Winnington-Ingram, art. cit., 112, points to the fact that in Electra's great
speech to Chrysothemis personal grievances are emphasized instead of vengeance
for the father, and he concludes that "we can be sure she would have made the
attempt".
68) Jenzer, 91.
69) Kirkwood, op. cit., 135.
when her brother has come back to take the lead she has so eagerly
been waiting for. Under the pressure of necessity she had decided to
act on her own70). Now that conditions have changed, her despera-
tion turns to an equally raging and unruly recklessness. Again and
again she has to be urged to be aware of the dangers of their situa-
tion, and to keep silence: 1236-44, 1251-2, 1257, 1259, 1288-92,
1322, 1364-6. Her conduct, however, is not represented as
characteristic of women specifically. For all those frantic utterances
of joy no reference is made to femininity or womanhood71).
To sum up, although Electra's action and experience do take a
decisive turn it is not correct to take this character to be a portrayal
of inconsistency72). Both Electra and Antigone actually (are ready
to) take the consequences of their own choice. In their last episodes
their personal attitude of resistance is given up, the contrasting
characters are apparently no longer needed73) and their own
portraiture is definitely finished.
I have kept as finid subject the two Sophoclean women who find
themselves directly menaced with regard to their own position, for
Clytemnestra her legal status, for Deianira the place she occupies in
love. Deianira has provoked indignation in feminist-minded
studies. To A. Jenzer she is the very picture of passivity and
helplessness, derived from social conditions in classical Athens
where wives often had to suffer the presence of a concubine74). S. B.
Pomeroy considers Deianira a simple woman who intends to restore
her husband's passion with a potion75).
Is Sophocles' Deianira a woman who fends offa danger with the
helpless na?vet? that results from habituad passiveness? In her first
scene, the prologue, her behaviour is marked indeed by disturbance
70) It is characteristic of her feelings that, shortly after her decision, and while
speaking to the urn, she mentions Orestes' promise to return to kill their mother
(1154-6).
71) In 188, 240-1 and 961-2 the need for love and protection of a husband is put
forward to mark both women's dramatic situation.
72) Cf. Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 239.
73) Ismene disappears (Ant. 581) at a moment Antigone still has to act her
kommos(806 ff.) and monologue (891 ff.). Chrysothemis, in opposition to Electra,
is on the stage for the last time when her sister, disappointed at her waiting for
revenge, has decided on her desperate deed (El. 1057).
74) Op. cit., 89-90.
75) Op. cit., 109.
and a lack of quick-wittedness. She relates the story of her misfor-

tune, to have been captured from a monstrous river-god by a man,
who ever since, and now especially, has made her more anxious
and fearful than happy. It is left to the old nurse to suggest sending
one of the sons to inquire for her husband who should have
returned (Tr. 54-5). Apparently Sophocles wants to introduce
Deianira as an irresolute and vacillating kind of woman. She
acknowledges her own dependence on her husband's safety (83-5)
while the parodos and her own subsequent monologue express her
anguish for the future. Being informed of Heracles' safe return she
manifests yet another trait of her character. Despite her own relief
she appears at once to be able to put herself in the position of the
captured women who have in the meantime entered (242-3). That
she addresses one of them in particular, viz. Iole (307 ff.), sharpens
our view of her personality. From the way in which she inquires
about the girl's origins, with intuition and insight, Deianira shows
herself a woman
of experience, capable of independent judgement.
Up to the end of her appearance she exhibits the same alternation
between discernment and mental confusion. When the woman she
took pity on actually out to be her rival, she at first asks the
turns
chorus for advice: 385-8.
And when on their suggestion her
husband's herald is examined, most of the questions (402-33) are
asked by the messenger who at her request had stayed (391-2). This
man, however, does not manage to detect the truth and Deianira
has perforce to make
a plea herself. Her speech (436-69) displays an
*
acquaintance with
love's pathology', which is immediately
acknowledged by the herald (472-3), who feels prompted to tell her
what he knows. Appealing to the sentiments of Lichas (and the
audience!) she refers to Zeus, her status, the inconstancy of
happiness, the power of love's passion, the herald's honour; to the
circumstance that she will hear the truth from others and that not
knowing at any rate hurts more than knowing, her forbearance
towards Heracles' many other women, to her sympathy
and finally
for Iole. At this moment it seems she has the situation well in hand.
The way she has qualified Heracles' sexual desires in her
monologue is the clue to understanding her subsequent action.
Calling love a power that even rules the gods she describes his
disposition as a disease. It would be mad, she argues, to blame her
husband for his sickness (438-46)76). Twice the term is used again. In
491-2, when apparently she has already decided to apply the
'medicine', she declares that if she resisted the gods she would add
to the afflictions. And as appears from 543-6, it has already become
evident to her that Heracles' illness is chronic. To call the mixing of
a potion intended to restore her husband's affection "na?ve"77) is
not only incompatible with the mythical character of this story but
conflicts with Deianira's conviction. The intention to break a spell
by magic at least attests to consistency. Nessus' instruction to keep
the drug away from sun and fire (685-6) need not raise suspicion
yet: that prescription might have been given in order to conserve a
beneficiad drug. After all, she once got that liquid as a present from
a suitor.
This portrait of an easily perplexed but in the end purposive
personality is mirrored in Deianira's last monologue, which is com-
posed of three parts: the description of an alarming fact (672-704:
the crumbling of the shred of wool smeared with the poison), an
exposition of the consequences for her situation (705-18) and her
own person (719-22). The second part at first displays her well-
known feelings of impotence (705-11). Directly, however, she
proceeds to a sound reasoning and faces its conclusion: her gift will
cause the death of Heracles. And consequently she decides to die
with him (719-20). This resolution, announced in advance, makes
Deianira's suicide the final event of a consistent sequence of
76) In Fr. 680 (Radt) from the Phaedra??s??? ?e???t??? probably refers to the
same phenomenon. Mental confusion in consequence of a superior powef is meant
also in Aj. 59 (?a???s?? ??s???, used by Athena for Ajax* state of mind she herself has
brought about) and 185 (?e?a ??s??, of Ajax' condition, spoken by the chorus). Cf.
R. P. Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 25-6.
For ??s?? in Ant. expressing individual or collective moral and mental disorder
cf. R. F. Goheen, op. cit. 41-4: *'... imagery of disease ... relates the human action
to the 'action' of the gods, which, though not visible on stage, is shown to be the
final determinant in human welfare". Generally on ??s??-metaphors H. Ruess,
Gesundheit? Krankheit? Arzt bei Plato, diss. T?bingen 1957. On medical language
in Sophocles: Winnington-Ingram, op. cit., 20, n. 28. Sophocles has made
sufficiently clear that Deianira's own motive force was also sexuality. Cf.
Winnington-Ingram, art. cit., 110. That Deianira is not trying to deceive her
hearers in lines 436-69, is rightly argued by D. A. Hester, Deianeira's 'deception
speech', Antichthon 14 (1980), 1-8.
77) Pomeroy, op. cit., 109.
events78). Her actual reaction to Hyllus' tirade and Messenger-

speech (734 ff.) should be seen in this perspective. In spite of the
fatal effect of her initiatives and her husband's depreciatory
remarks the audience still has to listen to (1058-63), Deianira
represents a female person capable of determinate, though
unsuccessful, resistance.
Strictly speaking, the murder of Agamemnon lies outside the
story of El. and may be taken into account only indirectly. Here we
have to analyse the behaviour of a queen faced with a daughter who
challenges the legitimacy of her mother's position79).
Clytemnestra's first utterances (516 ff.) are defensive and in the
course of the action of this secondary antagonist next to Orestes and
Chrysothemis, no essentially other motive becomes apparent. A
disquieting dream, of which we have been informed already by
Chrysothemis (410 ff.), makes her self-defence dramatically
probable80) and points to the real character of her motives.
Clytemnestra turns out to be prompted by a desire to continue her
present position of power and prosperity. She has only one rational
argument, and she makes it effectively. It runs as follows: when a
woman kills her husband on the ground that he has sacrificed one of
their children of a brother,
to the interests who has got children of
his own, then she is in the right (528, 531-2, 537-41). This train of
thought is preceded by a captano benevolentiae81): Aegisthus being
absent, she is at the mercy of her daughter's imputations (516-22).
The following speech is larded with canvassing elements. For
instance, she attempts sometimes to excite in the chorus (and
Electra) feelings of womanly togetherness, pointing to her throes
78) On the other hand, Jocasta's suicide, as I tried to show above, results from
that woman's characteristic rashness.
79) In Clytemnestra's own text the murder is once mentioned shortly as a given
fact: 525-7. According to Pomeroy, op. cit., 95, all three dramatists depicted this
heroine as a murderess; in Ag. alone the killing is a main constituent of the
dramatic action, while in the other tragedies she is portrayed in confrontation with
her children (Ch.: Orestes, S.?7. and E.El. : Electra). Apparently Winnington-
Ingram, art. cit. 114, takes the same stand as my own: "her notorious crime is
(apart from its effect on Electra) left largely exo tou dramatos".
80) Cf. Kirkwood, op. cit., 140.
81) On the employment of rhetorical techniques in the theatre see P. T.
Stevens, Euripides Andromache,Oxford 1971, 118.
(532-3), Iphigenia's supposed opinion (548), and the decisive part

played by that other female Helen (541).
Having been refuted by her daughter, Clytemnestra proceeds to
reproach Electra with slander, the one way left to her to hold her
own. And this encounter, though at the outset not unreasonable82),
gradually merges into an escalation of emotions from which
Clytemnestra dissociates herself by the performance of her sacrifice
to Apollo (634 ff.). Apart from the implied situational irony83), she
has under the circumstances saved her face. But, once unmasked,
Clytemnestra does not try to continue keeping up appearances.
Even her opportunism she conceals no more. She asks Apollo to let
her dreams come true as far as they are good, but turn upon her
enemies if ill (644-7). In the presence of Electra, servants and the
chorus she asks for the maintenance of her wealth and social posi-
tion (648-51). And her reaction to the news that Orestes has died is
dictated by a concern about her self-interest. Twice, on the first and
second announcement of her son's death (673, 676), she reacts with
a gesture of annoyance with Electra's sorrow and a request for
details. In this situation and at this moment Clytemnestra considers
every sign of grief for Orestes as a token of hostility towards herself.
Not until the end of the circumstantial narrative does she wonder
whether her son's death should be considered good luck or a misfor-
tune. But she hastens to assure the narrator, who is afraid of having
come in vain (772), that "this one day" she is "freed from fear"
(783).
Finally this self-assured queen disposes of her daughter. In their
decisive dialogue (788-96) the poet seems to have stripped this
woman of her last maternal instincts. She compliments the
messenger on having stopped her daughter's "never ceasing
clamour" (797-8), coaxing him to go inside. Clytemnestra has suc-
ceeded in holding out against Electra, not only thanks to the
message of Orestes' death. Tactically switching from argument to
insinuation she contrived to appeal to the bystanders who have
82) In 556-7 Clytemnestra acknowledges Electra's first words to be suitable

while at 631 she reminds that on her own part she permitted Electra to finish her
speech.
83) Clytemnestra prays the god for help who, as appears from 35 ff., 70 and
1425, has charged Orestes with her death.
apparently become suspicious of her daughter (610-11)84).

Clytemnestra's actions all point to resolution. Obviously this
woman realizes that her very existence depends on the maintenance
of her position.
Ill
The results of my survey may be summarized in the following

terms. In all cases the poet has related the social position of the
female characters to their specific dramatic situation. We have been
able to infer their status from their own and other persons' texts in
order to compare their actual behaviour with what one should
expect. Did Sophocles make them act in accordance with their place
in society? Do their social positions turn out to be final deter-
minants of their activities?
Tecmessa and Jocasta, who are socially dependent and run risks
because of their men's honour and position being menaced and
harmed, display activities not merely tosafeguard their own
interests. The concubine, no less than the legal wife, participates in
the dramatic action on her own right. Tecmessa succeeds in
bringing out the significance of Ajax' tribulations, not only to
herself but to him and others, while Jocasta's rashness, her curiosi-
ty and the way she tries to manipulate her husband direct his
actions. There is no sign of submissiveness pointing to their
position of social dependence.
On the other hand, the audience would have thought Antigone's
and Electra's self-reliance to be a separate and distinct dramatic
factor if these females had been furnished with social pretensions.
Their texts, however, do not indicate any disposition to transgress
conventions or to reverse men's and women's roles or conditions.
84) I agree with Kamerbeek that ????? p????sa? and et ... (f???t??) refer to the
same. However, p????sa?, directly following Electra's words, is not likely to refer
exclusively to Clytemnestra, whereas Clytemnestra's reaction (612) strongly
suggests that preceding ti ... (f???t(?) refers to her. So, pace Kamerbeek, Kaibel
and others, I would take these lines to be meant as an amphiboly. Otherwise, one
should agree with A. K. Frangoulis, Sophocles,Electra 610-11, LCM 8 (1983), 98,
who argues that "it is more natural for the lines to be taken by the audience as
referring to the attitude of Electra" (my italics), the subject of ???est? being the
outrageous attitude of Electra "as implied by ????? p????sa?".
Some suggestions and insinuations of such a tenor might only have

been taken into consideration up to the scenes concluding their
appearances. Antigone's farewell lament in terms of marriage and
the frenzied way Electra reacts to Orestes' complete return both
unmistakably these women's portraits.
Neither the references to sex and gender (I) nor the described
patterns of behaviour (II) may be taken to indicate that the poet,
while depicting characters in action, would have discriminated
between males and females. In each the status, though going
case
with their sex, does not affect the drift of their activities: Antigone
and Electra, in their
resistance, do not display a sign of social
rebelliousness, Tecmessa's and Jocasta's attitudes in a way abolish
a position of dependence. In the case of a direct personal menace
status itself is the main factor. To stand up then for one's rights
points to independence. The way Clytemnestra and Deianira react
to their dramatic situation corroborates our former observations.
Sophocles' female characters show themselves as adult persons,
acting in society on their own terms, and not pre-determined by
their inferior place in society85).
3583 SB Utrecht, Gerard Doustraat 11
85) I express my thanks to Dr. J. Den Boeft, Dr. J. N. Bremmer, Prof. A. H.

M. Kessels and Prof. W. J. Verdenius for reading and criticizing a draft of this
article.

Mujeres en Sofocles

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mujeres en Sofocles

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Women in Sophocles

"When I compare Euripidean to Sophoclean heroines, I prefer

1) S. B. Pomeroy, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves: Women in Classical

Sophocles' texts, as we know them, do not lead us to believe that

'recognizable' character5). The examination I meant above,

5) Cf. J. de Romilly, Les h?rostragiqueset la condition humaine, ??FS?? 1977-8

interpret a passage in which one of the dramatis personae qualifies

the heroine who has become a masculine sort of woman" (100).

dst?? ?a? ?? p?????s?? ?? ??? ?a????

From Pomeroy's texts only 484-5 itself expresses a clear prejudice,

and Ismene) is worded in forms feminini generis: 480 (not mentioned

(???) /???a??a? e??a? t?sde ??d' ??e????a?.

Lastly I call to mind that are no records

It seems reasonable to suppose that if there are any differences

of this article I shall describe the behaviour of characters in

13) Cf. C. A. S. Dreyfuss, I.e. "Sophocles' drama, which I call 'normative',

The Phrygian princess Tecmessa, being Ajax' captive, finds

(496-9)25). Resolutely Tecmessa deals with the hero's line of

In his monologue 646-92 Ajax implicitly acknowledges her claim

30) Cf. Stanford ad 651.

In this way the dramatic structure emphasizes that Ajax' most

35) Cf. J. C. Kamerbeek ad loc.

holds in high esteem and confidence39). Her security, however, just

39) OT 577-80, 700, 772-3.

but possibly fatal, turns as mere coincidences to be dealt with

informed Oedipus of some details with regard to Laius' death. His

45) Jocasta's scepticism, as expressed in 857-8, of course relates to Teiresias.

driven by a motive which would also be the key to her preceding

the prophet's accusation is invalid she causes Oedipus to doubt his

behaviour by rendering these women insolent, overbearing or

whether the heroine is driven by a social motive. Such considera-

Ismene, could be called a "masculine woman"64), as S. B.

f?hrung dieses Planes durch Elektra gedacht hat"66). There is no

vengeance but who does not hold herself to be the most

66) Jenzer, op. cit., 91 (see my note 3).

and a lack of quick-wittedness. She relates the story of her misfor-

events78). Her actual reaction to Hyllus' tirade and Messenger-

(532-3), Iphigenia's supposed opinion (548), and the decisive part

82) In 556-7 Clytemnestra acknowledges Electra's first words to be suitable

apparently become suspicious of her daughter (610-11)84).

The results of my survey may be summarized in the following

Some suggestions and insinuations of such a tenor might only have

3583 SB Utrecht, Gerard Doustraat 11

85) I express my thanks to Dr. J. Den Boeft, Dr. J. N. Bremmer, Prof. A. H.

You might also like