commonplace and dramatic symbol in seneca's tragedies

7/29/2019 Commonplace and Dramatic Symbol in Seneca's Tragedies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/commonplace-and-dramatic-symbol-in-senecas-tragedies 1/24

American Philological Association

Commonplace and Dramatic Symbol in Seneca's TragediesAuthor(s): William H. OwenReviewed work(s):Source: Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 99 (1968),pp. 291-313Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2935848 .

Accessed: 13/03/2013 21:32

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.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 [email protected].

.

American Philological Association and The Johns Hopkins University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Wed, 13 Mar 2013 21:32:19 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2935848?origin=JSTOR-pdf






http://www.jstor.org/stable/2935848?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup



COMMONPLACE AND DRAMATIC SYMBOLIN SENECA'S TRAGEDIES

WILLIAM H. OWEN

NewYorkUniversity

Thatthecriticaltudy fSeneca's ragic oetryhould e dominatedbytwoprimaryreas f nvestigation,he nfluencefrhetoricndtheinfluencefStoicism,shardlyurprising. urely othareprimary

facets f hispoetics nd mustbe accepted nd assessed efore nygenuine valuation f theplays s literary orks an be undertaken.Yet caught etween hese wo forces,oth ooking oward strongtradition utside he poet,Senecahimself s a creativewritereemsoften o vanish mong his influences. he surface f verbal tylehassobemusedmany riticshat hey ssume fundamentalmptinessincontent,' hilefor thershese urious layshave eemedmerelypseudo-dramaticamouflage isguisingnashamedlyrosaic, hilo-sophic, edagogic, rhistoricalmpulses.2Theseapproaches,here-fore, n attemptingo relate eneca to histradition, ayeasily ose

I Cf T. Birt, Was hatSeneca mitseinenTragodien gewolt ?" NJbb 7 (I9II) 336,note i, etpassim: A. Balsamo, "De Senecae fabulaquae Troades inscribitur,"IFC I0

(I902) 44 etpassim;H. V. Canter, Rhetoricallementsn theTragediesfSeneca UrbanaI925); A. Lesky,"Die griechischen elopidendramenund Senecas Thyestes,"WS 43(I922-23) i85-86 etpassim;F. Leo, Der Monolog mDrama (Berlin I908) 89-94; De

SenecaeTragodiisObservationesriticaeBerlin I878) I46-59; F. L. Lucas, Seneca andElizabethanTragedyCambridge 922); M. W. Mendell, OurSeneca New Haven I94I)R. Schreiner, enecaals TragddiendichterDiss. Munich I909); R. Werner,De L. A.SenecaeHerc. Tro. etPhoen.QuaestionesLeipzig I888).

2 E. Ackermann, Der LeidendeHerculesdes Seneca," RhM n.s. 47 (I9I9) 460; T.Birt (above, note i) passimand "Seneca," Preuss.Jahrbiicher44 (I9II) 282-83; 0.Herzog, "Datierung der Trag6dien des Seneca," RhM 77 (I928) 54-I04; I. Lana,"L'Atreo di Accio e la leggende di Atreo e Tieste nel teatrotragicoromano," AttiAccad.Scienzedi Torino 3 (I958-59) 335-36 and "Seneca e la poesia,"RivistadiEstetica(I96I) 377-96; B. Marti, "Seneca's Tragedies, A New Interpretation,"TAPA, 76(I945) 2I6-45 and "The Prototypes f Seneca's Tragedy," CP 42 (I947) I-I6.

lO*








292 WILLIAM H. OWEN [I968

sightfthe emarkablendividualityithwhich e approachedothconventionalictionndStoicism.ThusbothSeneca'smotivation

and hisaccomplishmentss anartistavecommonlyeen everely

judged. The relativelyew, houghftencute,tudies3y criticsopenlyartisano the lays ave hereforeailedoobtainor enecaa more enerouseception,hethernthe lassroomr nscholarlycircles.

Inthe ase fdiction,t east,ne annotelp eelhathe ausesfthis nderevaluationie n therecentnpopularityfrhetoricaltyle,coupledwithwhat s a peculiarlyodernisassociationfrhetoric

from hatweconsideroeticreativity. any uestionsrenvolvedin hisatterroblem.How, ornstance,anweevenpeakf poeticcreativity"nregardo Seneca's igurativeanguage,hen hatan-guages drawnromuch heavilyraditionaleservoir?When oesa figurehedts ommonplaceriginsndmaturento uniquendcreativexpression?Must assagesuch sJuno'sxtensiveatalogueofthe onstellationsrTheseus' uidedour ftheUnderworlderegardedsdecorativeut tiose mplificationsntrudingnthe ctionoftheplays, r is therertisticustificationor hemn theirwnterms? f ome nswero such uestionsanbediscovered,eshallhave t east on footholdowardmoreympatheticnderstandingof he lays.Letusthen ormulatehe roblemsfollows:hoosingone commonplaceheme, e shall ttempto differentiateccasionson which hemotif ecomes oetically ore han hesumof itscommonplacessociations,here,n fact,t becomes dominant

influencenthemeaningf theplay tlarge.Here,fanywhere,one should e abletodistinguishhe rtistrom herhetoricianndtoappreciatehe elationetweenhem.

3 E.g. F. Egermann, Seneca alsDichterphilosoph,"NJbb (I940) I8-36; G. Miiller,

"Senecas Oedipus als Drama," Hermes i (I953) 447-64; E. Paratore, La Poesia nell'

Oedipus di Seneca," GIF 9 (I956) 97-I32; N. T. Pratt,Dramatic uspensen Senecaand

hisGreekPrecursorsPrinceton 939); "The Stoic Basis of SenecanDrama," TAPA 79

(I948) I-iI; "Tragedy and Moralism,Euripidesand Seneca," Comparativeiterature:

Method ndProspective,d. N. P. Stallknecht nd Horst Frenz (Carbondale, Ill., I96I)

I89-203; "Major Systemsof FigurativeLanguage in Senecan Melodrama," TAPA 94

(I963) I99-234; 0. Regenbogen, Schmerzund Tod in der Tragodien enecas= Vortr.

Bibl. Warburg 7 (I927-28); R. W. Tobin, "Tragedy and Catastrophe n Seneca's

Theatre," CJ 62 (I966) 64-70.








Vol. 991 SENECA S TRAGEDIES 293

In this nalysis, shall oncentraten the theme f stellarctivity,theturningfthestars,ky,day,andnight. The firsttepwillbe

toestablish,ya surveyftypical ccurrenceshroughouthe orpusoftheplays, hestandardommonplacemeanings,nd thereforehenature f suchpassing eferenceso astronomicalhenomenas arelikely o occur. This willfurnishs a control, standardfnormaluse withinSeneca's rhetoricalepertory, ith which to compareseveralccasionsf pecial evelopmentf he heme. Itwill bviouslyalsodefmehe east reative,hemost hetoricalinthe ejorativeense)levelofSeneca'swriting. Incontrastothis,wewillsee hatnsome

plays he uthor as odeveloped hemotifnaccordwith heexigen-cies of his own interpretationf thesubject hat tscommonplacemeaningsresignificantlyxpanded ndchanged. Midwaybetweenthese xtremes illbe plays nwhich heaccentuationfthemotif,withoutmajor hangenmeaning, asproceeded othepoint hat hecommonplacetselfecomes major ymbol.

Thesimplestonventionalseofthe tars,ky, ay, rnight,s asa

periphrasisor uchgeneralwords s "anyone, everyone, any-where,"and "everywhere."The form s regularlyomething fthis ort: Whoever ees heday,"or"whomeverhe un ees," tc.4

More complex, houghquite as conventional,s the use of theheavenss a reflectionfmoral rder rdisorderntheworld fman.Thismay ake everal orms.Heavenly odiesmay implyeaffectedwith hame rgrief thuman vents,ndthus urn romheir ustom-aryhabits, sAurora ides erface n grief orMemnon ead Troades

239-40), or Phoebus hides his in horror at the deeds of Thyestes4 Troades82-9o will serve as a typical xample:

Quidquid sol oriens, uidquid et occidensnovit,caeruleisOceanus fretisquidquid bisveniens tfugiensavat,aetasPegaseo corripiet radu.quo bis senavolantsideraturbine,quo cursuproperatvolveresaeculaastrorum ominus,quo properatmodo

obliquisHecate currere lexibus:hoc omnespetimusfata....

Cf.Tro. O-iI; Phaed.85-90, 33I-34; H.O. 40-4I; Thy. I3-I4, etc. All quotes andline referencesn thismanuscriptre from . Viansino,L. A. SenecaeTragoediae, vols.(Torino I965).









(Agamemnon6,53-56; Thyestes,assim).5Morc subjcctively,isrup-tionofnaturalelestial rdermay ndicate he tate fmental berra-tionof the charactererceivingt, as in themadness f Cassandra(Agamemnon26-28). Finally, hesecurityf stellarrdermayoffersuretyhat omeuntoward, nlikely, r undesiredventwillnevertakeplace, s n thenumerousdynataevelopinghe oposhat efore,for example,Atreus oves Thyestes r Megara ovesLycusThyestes476-82; Herculesurens72 ff.), heheavenswill reversehemselves.6

A third onventionalse associateshestarswiththe process fdeification. t s notcommon n these lays, utbecause fthe xtra-

ordinaryevelopment hich t receivesn the Hercules urens,t iswell tonotehere hat mbitionso oin theconstellations,ratifiednfactn thecaseof AriadnePhaedra63),andmetaphoricallyn thatof AtreusThyestes85 if.),are alsodevelopedn theHercules eteustlengthsthepropernd deserved ruitionfextraordinaryife.

In addition, emust lsonote heconventionalseof theheavenlybodies, suallynpassing eferences,sanalogies or eautyH.O. 238;Tro. I40; Med. 95ff., IOI; Phaed. 70ff.), distanceH.O. 817), or

time Phaed. 35 if.,Tro.438-39; Thy. 13-14; Agam. 2), and theirfrequentppearancesobjects r victims fmagic itesH.O. 525-27;

Tro.354ff.;Phaed. 85-92). Also,ofcourse,hetraditionaldentifi-cation fdaywith ife ndnightwithdeath r othermalignantnddangerous henomenaTro. 171, 282, 755; Phoen. 43 if.; Oed. 5;Agam.577-78; Thy.677-79) occurs n a hostofplaces. Thesearevery lementalorms f conventional otif;yeteven their implest

application ithin playmayexpand ndenlarge heirmportancebeyond heconventional.As a primenstance fthis,etus take fairlymechanicalhenome-

non, hefrequentpening ftheplays t dawn. Somescholars ave

5 So, too, the nightof Hercules'engenderingsdoubledto reflecthesuperior, early

superhuman ualitiesof the hero himselfAgam.814-26; H.F. passim)rather hanthe

superior ustiness f his divinesire. But the doublingmay even be deniedwhen the

actions ftheherodo not iveup tothe tandardwhichsucha celestial isordering ould

presuppose e.g. H.O. I47-50). Similarly hechorus of the Phaedramay hold it as areproach gainstNatura that, n spiteof theexemplaryorderof thecosmos,themoral

lifeof man is chaotic (Phaed. 59-75). Cf. Ag. 296-97, 908-9; Phoen.84-87; Phaed,955-56; Med. 8-3I.

6 Cf. H.O. 280-8I, 335-39, 467-7I; Phaed.70-7I.








Vol. 99] SENECA S TRAGEDIES 295

seennthis henomenonnexamplefSeneca's are oobservehetraditionaltageunity f time. Yet it is curious,fthis s Seneca's

aim, thathe shows o littlenterestn developing heplays long atight ime-scheme.t is true hatmostof theevents f mostof theplays anbe, with omegoodwill, onfinedoa time panoftwenty-fourhours r less. Yet for ll the ndication hat heauthor ives,theymaywellextend ar onger. What,fornstance,sthedurationofCreon'sourney rocul burbeOed.53o)whereTeiresiasxorcisesthedead? What s thetemporalonnectionf thefragmentsfthePhoenissae?What is thetime span of thedisparatections f the

Herculeseteus?Seneca'sfrequentpening f theplays t dawn s in fact esscon-

vincinglyxplaineds a mechanicaldherenceo rules, han sa desireforthekind of atmosphere hich uch an opening fforded.Themurkyualities fhalf-lightould nthemselvesredisposenauthorwithSeneca'snotorious redilectionorthegrotesquend vaguelyportentousochoose he our fdawn.7 Seneca's epertory,oreover,includesnecommonplace hich efines awn s thepoint frevela-tion, hemoment twhich hehorrorsfnight egin oresolvehem-selves nto laritynd action:

Stragemqueuamnoxfecitstendeties. (Oed. )Ceciditn ucem uror:

postquamitatumst lio,Phoebus editetdamna octisristisstendities. (Agam.76-78)Phoebiqueugitedituraoror.

Labor xoritururustomnisagitat urasperitqueomos. (H.F. I36-38)

In a very eal ense, he ackof action rplot-developmenthichhasdisturbedmanycritics f theseplaysresults romSeneca's nterestnot n thestructuringf a tragic ituation,ut n itscollapse.8Hisplaysbegin t thedawning, oth iterallyndmetaphorically,t theanagnorisis.heiraction s an amplificationf denouement;nd,moreoften hannot, it demonstrateshe impossibilityf genuine

7 Cf. M. V. Braginton, The Supernaturaln Seneca's TragediesMenasha, Wisc.,I933) 44.

8 Cf. C. Lindskog,Studien u Antiken rama Lund I 897) 2. I 5; E. Paratore, Origi-nalitl del teatrodi Seneca,"Dioniso 0 (I957) 68 etpassim;and more generally, . Dur-renmatt,TheaterproblemeZurich i955) IO-I4.









resolutionfa situationhich evelopedongbeforehe peningfthe lay.

Dawn s themoments wellwhen hose otentpiritseitherf

thisworld or fthenext-AchillesTro. 70-71), ThyestesAgam.53ff.),antalusThy.2o-2i) and venhemore emonichan elestialJunoH.F. I23-24)-are wonto ntrudehemselvesnto he ventsoftheworld. Suchfigures,owever,erveess o motivateventsthan o revealmblematicituationshich pitomizehe nevitablecatastrophesraphicallyepresentedn theplays roper.9As such,dawn sappropriatelyeneca's egular oint f departure.

But as dawn tselfs a convention hichhas more ignificanceorSeneca han simmediatelybvious r implicitn itstraditionalsso-ciations,o othercommon themes, y expansion r adaptation ospecialnterpretativeircumstances,ovefromhe ategoryf decora-tive commonplaceo thatof dramatic r poeticsymbol. Perhapsthemost bviousnstancefthis orthrightxpansions ntheThyestes,where hereversalfheavenlyrocessess notonly common heme,butdevelopsntoa majorfact ftheplay's"action" as well,when"on stage"the skydoesreversetself o compensateor hehorrorsperpetratedyAtreus.IOLetus follow he motif hroughheplay.The image s establishedn theprologue poken yTantalus ndtheFury. Himself standingxample fthe bilityfmen o pollute hevery odsbytheirin,Tantalusmustnspire isdescendantsosimilaratrocities."ITheFury, s sherehearseshe mpendingorrors,ausesmidway n her speechto discuss he astral ffectsf their rimes

(48-SI): non it vestrisalisimmuneaelum:urmicanttellaeoloflammaequeervantebitum undo ecus?nox liafiat,xcidataelodies.

The veryprospect rompts antalus o flight-back o his regulartortures,ven to the fires f Phlegython71 if.). For the furies'torcheshat errifyhe harred eadare ovable78-82) incomparison

9 Cf. Braginton above, note 7) 3I, 33; F. Freznel,Die PrologederSenecatragodien(Diss. Leipzig I9I4) 65; G. Muller (above, note 3) 448; N. T. Pratt, SenecanDrama-

turgy nd theFamiliarTraditionofDramaticMyth," abstract, APA 66 (I935) XXXiii.

10 Cf. Regenbogen (above, note 3) 32.

'I Cf. Braginton above, note 7) 25.









to theprospectfreturningmong he uperi83). Thus, nan intri-cateperversionfthe conventionaleification otif, translationo

thestarsn verso,eneca etsup a counterpointetween he skies fthe iving ainted ith heir rime ndthefires fHell. This sampli-fiedat the scene's nd; as theFuryobserves he hideous ffectsfTantalus'even unwilling resence106-21), the landscapewithersandthe un tselfalterst theprospectf eading aytoitsdeath-aneat onversionf thecommonplacefthe unbringingndawn, oanimage nwhich hevery aybecomesmortalndcorruptible:

en pseTitan ubitatn ubeatequicogatqueabenisreperiturumiem.

For themoment, hen, heastronomical otif lipsfrom ight,leavingonlya slight cho in theearly cenes. As Atreus repareshis evenge,he niversereparests onventionaleaction-the roundrumblesnd the clear ky hunders263-64: tonat ies erenus).ThesuspiciousThyestes, oo, in a traditionalstronomicaldynaton,ruminatesntheprospectsf hisbrother'sove 476-82)!

The motif eturns o dominate heplay as thedenouementp-proaches. With he rrivalfthemessengertonarratetreus'evenge,we are mmediatelynvolvednthe rimend ts straleflection. hesun ndeedgoesout. What sremarkable,owever,snotthestagefacttself,utthefact hat he udience xperienceshephenomenonnot once but repeatedly;I2theimplicationsf theeclipse nd theintensityfthecharacters'eactionsmount ogether s we seefirstthemessenger,hen the chorus, henAtreus, nd finally hyesteshimselfonfrontedith heblack-out,achtime s iftheeventwererepeatingtself.Timeandaction n the astpartof thisplayarenolonger equential,utbecomemulti-dimensional,nd theaudiencesconfrontedithfacet fter acet fthesameevent. Letus observetheprocess.

The messengereginshisnarrativen retrospect-i.e. e speaks feventsnthepast,nrealisticime-and srelativelyess oncerned ith

theeclipse han tssinfulause. Thus we meet thetheme nly ob-liquely tfirstn themessenger'snamplifiedish, hortlyfter isen-trance, o be carriedwhither heday,seizedfromhere, s borne"

12 Cf. 0. Gigon, "Bemerkungenzu SenecasThyestes,"Philologus3 (I938-39) 179.








298 WILLIAM H. OWEN [i968

(637-38, "ferte,uo ferturies/hinc aptus"). For hemain art, isnarrativeoncentratesntheunholy loomofthe ecret rovewhere

therime ookplace 65o-83), n the itual sed n the rime684-729),

evenon theominous hootingtarwhich he ky, lready eelingheeffectsf Atreus'ntentions,rovided t the nitiationf themurderrites698-99). Onlyat the conclusionfhisspeechdoeshe clearlyspeakof eclipse;for him in his simplicity,t is merelydoublyparadoxical-too ate tohide thehorribleeast776 ff.) ndtooweakto guaranteehat hecrimewillremain idden784-88):

verteriturrusicet

sibi pseTitan bvium ucenstertenebrisqueacinusbruatetrumovisnoxmissab ortu emporelieno ravis:tamenidendumst, ota atefientala.

The chorus,hough hus blyprovidedwith n explanationf thesun's behavior, eacts n fear nd confusion,ot to Atreus' rime,which theyomit entirely,ut to theeclipse tself,s if it wereinprogress.Theyaddress seriesfquestionsothefleeingun-in the

presentense otmerelyor he akeofvividness-wonderinghyhedisappearst such nunconventionalour. Then follows series fsuggestionsbout he onfusionmong heheavenlyodies, speciallyAurora,whichsuchbehavior s occasioning.Theirextensivendterrifiedonclusion wellson the total destructionf theuniversewhichtheybelieve n progress-the nd of theworld. Thus,ob-livious othemessenger'sxplanation,hey eact xactlys one would

expect fa typicalross-sectionf thepopulace, enerallynskillednastronomynd proneto endowstrangeventswith nterpretationsof the worstforeboding.Seneca has thus, y allowing heeclipsetorepeattselfor differentharacter'siewing, oubled is ain. Hehas in themessenger-scenestablished causalrelationshipetweenthemoral onditionfthehouseof Atreusnd thechaosof thesky,while llowinghe maginingsfthe horusoamplifyothfacts ithallthehorrorfuniversalataclysm.He willrepeatheprocess,ow

focusingisattentionnthe haractersntimatelynvolved.Atreus nters.Hisopeningine,followings itdoesdirectlypon

the horus' ividdescriptionfthe ollapse fsky, tar,ndconstella-tion,sspectacularfnothinglse 885-86):









animae agenturostrumtardentiretoPhlegethonarenasgneusortasgensexilia upra ostraiolentusluat.

ThethemesfTantalus, artarus,nd fieryhlegethoncho fromhedistant rologue.I3 Onlyafter hyestes as earned fhis feast oestheir ull mplicationmerge. Seeingthemoralcauseforthesun'sflightIO35), Thyestesubsequentlyevelops he full dentificationof Tartaruswith himself-both bandoned y thestars1O74)-of

Hell with ife. He prays hatJovecompensateorthe ostdaybyfilling heskieswith thundernd lightningirectedt himselfnd

Atreus. Whenhisprayers o unheard, e is leftwithno hopebuttheone already enied ythemessenger-thathe bnormal arknessshould emaino hide n tsmmensityuch ast rime. Thisfinalndpervasive arknessesolves hecounterpointfHell andEarth stab-lishedntheprologue. In tthemoral epravityftheHouseofTan-talusand itsinsatiate lood-lust ind n appropriateymbol. Thecelestialommonplaceas beenenlargednto hedominatingorce f

theendoftheplay;beforetsexpansionnd ntrusionn theseveralcharacters,ven realisticimeand consecutiveramaticctiongiveway. Itsbasicmeaning emainsnchanged,utSenecahascontriveda skillfulnd dramaticmannerfexploringhatmeaning.

This s,aswe havesuggested,nintermediatetagen thedevelop-mentof thecommonplace,nvolvingittle lterationf theconceptregularlyssociated ith hemotif-the eciprocalinks f moral ndcelestial rder-while t explores hepossibilitiesorthe expansion

of itsexpression.The poet'screations largely revelationfthestrengthatentn a thoroughlyonventionalmage. In thisregarditis instructiveo compare he commentsf Donald Davies on thedictionf i8thcentury oetry:

Poetswhousedictionngagehemselvesot o extendmeaning,ut owork ver reaslreadyxplored.Their rincipalbjectsthe ecreationofmetaphorshich ave ssifiedntomeanings,ubbedmoothytoomuch andling.'4

I3 Cf. E. Cesareo,Le Tragedie i Seneca Palermo 1932) 79-82.14 Donald Davies, Purity fDiction nEnglishVerseLondon 1952) 33, 29-6I passimt;

cf.Regenbogen (above, note 3) 55.








Vol. 99] SENECA S TRAGEDIES 30I

In a similarmanner, eneca's ramaticxpansionfthe ommonplacerevitalizesmoribundrope. Oneexamplewill ufficeodemonstrate

thedegreeo which his evivificationxtendseyonduchmonumen-tal cenes s thefinalectionftheThyestesven ominutiae.Megara(inH.F. 372ff.), acedwiththeprofferedeconciliationithLycus,allowsherselfhe uxury fa fairlyxtensivedynatonn which hereliabilityfdayandnight, ire ndsnow,Scylla ndEuripus ctasguaranteefortheconsistencyf her hate 372-78):

egone tparentisanguinespersamanumfratrumqueeminaaeda ontingam?rius

extinguetrtus,eferetccasusiem,paxante ida ivibustflammisritetScylla iculumunget usonioatus,priusque ulto icibuslternisugaEuripusnda tabit uboica iger.

If either er athos rher idelityependedor xpressionnsuch on-ventionalhrasess these,hewouldbe a paltryharacterndeed. Incontrast,hyestes, oving uspiciouslyoward similareconciliationwithhisbrother,oiceshisfears n termswhosevery imilarityoMegara's peech mphasizeshedifferenceroduced ythedramaticextension fthetheme Thy.476-82):

amat hyestenrater?etheriasriusperfundetrctosontust Siculi apaxconsistetestusnda t onio egesmaturoelagourgett ucem abit

nox tra erris,nte um lammisquae,cummorteita, ummari entusidemfoedusqueungent.

Thyestespeaksn ignorancendconventionally. utwe havemetTantalus nd heard the Fury out. Eclipseand astral haos, vividstillfrom heprologue, rovide grislyrony o thefirstection(aetheriasrius. . terris) hichbeginswiththefall of theconstella-tionsnto he eaandcloseswithnox tra s the ight-bearer;hilethe

coda ante.. iungent)lips romonventionntohorrorythe impleintrusionfthephraseummorteita-atonceastringentlyrosaicndalmost cientificallyrecise s a descriptionothofThyestes'hysicaland ofhismoral onditionfter hefeast.









The process f dramaticxtension, oreover,s this eading f theThyestes ay have suggested,lso involves nother hange n thenature, ot of the meaning, ut of the mode of expression f themotif. This hangemaybest e characterizeds a progressionowardsystematicllegorization.Herrmann asnoted he ondnessf Senecafor llegoricalmagery,articularlyn theOedipus.I5 Such allegoryregularlyettlesround hoseparadoxes f ife nd death, rime ndpunishment,uilt and innocence,whichare thestufff all seriousliterature.

We comefinallyo plays n whichthe astronomical otifs ave

become o ntegrallyssociated ith he oet's argerims stodevelopnew meaningsnder he nfluencef thedramawhich hey ominate.A primeexampleof thistechniques the Hercules urens.A justevaluation f thisplay must,t seems o me, beginwith the astutecritical osition ecentlyxpressedyWalker ndHenry,who treatit not as a developmentf the conventionaltoicHercules aboringfor hedeificationhich s his ust reward, ut as an attack ponthevery onceptfwhatwemay all"justificationyworks,"he rawnylifewith spirationseyond hemodestimitsfa healthy ortality.I6

I5 L. Herrmann,e The'trede e'nequeParis924) 542-43; cf.W. S.J.Knight,Magi-cal Motives in Seneca's Troades,"TAPA 63 (I932) 2I; for Seneca's propensityn hisproseworks to treat oetry llegorically, f.W. S. Maguinness, Seneca and the Poets,"Hermathena8 (I956) 97.

16 B. Walker and D. Henry,"The Futility fAction,A Studyof Seneca's HerculesFurens,"CP 6o (I965) I I-22. I would differromWalker and Henry on thepoint ofthe alleged "comic" effect f the bombast in theH.F. A satiric lement s certainlypresent, ut t sthedry atire fPersius rJuvenal,not thehumorof Horace or even the

buffooneryf theApocolocyntosis,herethe historical igure f Claudius makesall thedifferenceon satirical lementsntheplays cf.Mendell [above, note ] I64-65). More-over, thequestion f bombastdeserves urtheromment, ince t s argelywithrhetoricalexpansionthatthispaper deals. F. I. Merchant,"Seneca and his Theory of Style,"AJP I905) 44-59, has attempted o show that Seneca in his prose espoused,as primestylistic irtues, aturalnessnd simplicity. hishe didfor heverygood reasonthat hestyle s a mirror f theman, and simplicity reflection f sanity. If we transferhisprincipleto the tragedies,where little s naturaland precious littlesimple, we canonlyconcludethatSeneca intended xtravagance f diction s a facet f character-draw-ing. Too manycritics ave discussed, rom he pointofview of bothphilosophy ndpsychology,the pathological elementof Seneca's protagonists or the point to needlaboring. Thus the extravagant ictionof theseplaysshouldbe attributed xlusivelyneither o theauthor's"rhetorical aste" nor to thestylistic ices ofhis age. Like hiscarefuldescriptions f gesture,physique,and expression cf. K. H. Trabert,StudienzurDarstellungesPathologischennderTragodienes Seneca Diss. Erlangen 953] I4-20;

E. Evans, "A Stoic Aspectof Senecan Drama, Portraiture,"TAPA 8i [I950] I69-84)








Vol. 99] SENECA S TRAGEDIES 303

A richly omplex ystemf magerys usedbySeneca o launch hisattack;dominant mongthese mages retheastrological otifsn

whichwe are nterested. hisallegoryfmad ambitionsodivinitywhichare ultimatelyrustratedy the nature f madnessherself,Juno, evelopsxtensivelyhe oposf he tarsssymbolsfdeification,in conjunction iththe dea of theheavens s mirrorsfthemoralatmospheren earth.Juno'sopeningkatabasisI7romheaven toearth ndto madnessets hetonefor his nvertedenderingfthetheme. It is provoked y a moraldisintegrationo pervasives tomake heheavenshemselvesninhabitable,pringings itdoes from

Zeus' maritaldelicts. ThusJunodeliversherself f an extendedastronomicalatalogueof herhusband's eified aramours6-i8).The starsreall ntheir uite raditionalndproper laces, utratherthanreflectingy thatorder moraleconomy, heyprovoke-i.e.introducentothe mortal phere-Juno's eternaella,herinsatiatedesire orrevenge, nd lead to her ultimate enunciationiog ff.) fallpersonalityxceptMadness. ThusJuno's evengeffersheproofofHercules' llegeddivinepaternity,f thepretensionsfhis owninsanity"35-36). Andthis aternity,owhich hehero lsoowes

hisprodigiousmorous redilections,erveshroughouthe ubsequentportionsftheplay o ustify ercules'dventuressbeneficentctionmotivatedxternallyather han s wilfullyrutal astigation. t isthispaternity hich eadsHerculeshimself,Megara,Amphitryon,andevenJuno, o assumeHeaven s thehero's irthright.

Hercules'aborsdemonstrateisvirtusecause hey retheproduct

ofbenignntelligence,hich nduresor he ommon oodexternallyimposedburdens y controllingtsown extraordinaryhysical ndpassionateowers. Becauseof thisvirtus,owever,Herculeswouldnot so much nherits earn elestial rivileges-which,f course, sthe canonicalnterpretationf themyth. YetJunofears either isinheritanceor his ust merits; he fears hat thecelebrated irtuswhichher aborshaveonlyexercised33-46)will ead to theforcefulhis diction is a consciously Stoic method of externalizing haracter. Perhaps the

technique is best compared to the imitativediction which James Joyce frequentlyuses as a facet of characterization. For a more conventional view of Hercules, cf.Cesareo (above, note I3) 4; M. Piot, "Hercule chez lesPoetes du ier Siecle apresJesus-Christ," EL 43 (I965) 342-58.

17 As in the case of Tantalus and Thyestes, eneca gainsthiseffect y inverting hetraditional eification rocess. Cf. above,p. 297.









conquest fthe kies47-48, 4-65) andtheuniversalhaos ttendantupon uch nevent. Thusthe mbiguity,othmoral ndmetaphysi-

cal, which haracterizeshecelestialmagery fJuno's rologue, s acorollaryfSeneca'sparticularnterpretationf Hercules imself-afigurenwhichmadnessnd sanity,verreachingillfulnessnd soberresponsibilityose all viable distinctionxcept through he finalhumanizationfthehero ndthebreach f hiscosmicWeltbild.

Lest itherhevirtus-themer thepaternity-themee taken t theirconventionalalue,Senecahasthen reated,nthefigure f Lycus,careful oppelgangerf thehero, manofdeeds, rutal, master f

bella. Lycusdiffersrom heheroonly n hiscandornrecognizinghis ackofbirthright337-39) ndhisreliance otonrightuton force-which he, too,callsclaravirtus340). All ofthese hemes inallycoalescen themad-scene,nwhich hemajorvehicle or xpressionofHeracles'delusionss againa visionof theheavens.I8Hercules'prayer or osmic ndespeciallyelestialrder927ff.), hemost lo-quent xpressionf theHercules/saviorheme, s significantlyeliedbyhis refusal opurify imself or heceremonyndbyhisbrusquedismissalfAmphitryon'suggestionhat epray or eleaseromabor.Asif n answer o hisprayer,heheavens unwildand,deified eforehim n thefigurefLeo, he seeshisown laborthreateninghe tars.His subsequentacillationetween he notion fviolent verthrowof theheavenswhich eemto denyhisrights965-69) ndofsavingtheskiesfrom he Giants976-77),brings p againtheparadoxofHerculeanaborsbrutality,onfusingtself ithbenefaction.All of

thisAmphitryonaswisely haracterizedt theoutset954):acieque alsumurbidaaelumnides.

But what smadnessn t,what nfandum973), hatwasnot mpliednHercules' revioussane boast boutHades, et, iplacerentertiaesortisoca,/regnare otui" 60g-io)? Infact,ndevoting imselfomeriting is supposeddivineheritage,Herculeshas looked to afalsumaelum.His mmolationfhisfamily, is mortal onnections,isonly he ogicalresultf his mmortalspirations,sJunohad fore-cast 89-go): "i nunc, uperbe,aelitum edespete, humana emne."

i8 Cf. Trabertabove,note 6) 28-30.









His madnesssmerelynextensionfhis anity. ThusJuno'srologueand themad-scenestablishcounterpointetweenhe ctual iolence

ofHercules' ife nd its so-called eneficience,hich s groundednastronomical elusions f birth nd ambition. This ultimatelysresolved henHerculesenounceshe ntiremmortalabric f llusion,the convenientmoral escape of having been ordered (I200, I237,I297), and accepts both responsibilityI238, i26i-62, I278) and thegenuine aternityfAmphitryonI3i5). The traditionaleificationthemehas beenaltered y Seneca to imply faulty omprehensionofreality hich ubstitutesorhealthyuman spirationselusionsf

celestialrandeur.Supportinghismajor ymbol hroughoutheplayare several e-

lated hemes.Mostobvious ndfrequents theconsciousmbiguityinsuchphrasess adastra,dsuperos,aelumetere,I9whichnowreferto Hercules' earch or heheavens,ormmortality,ow tohisreturnto earth romHades, nd togenuinemortality.

Similar o thisstherecurrentse ofthe stronomicaligure hichconventionallyerves s a periphrasisoreveryone,verywhere,tc.It s nthe peningssociated ith he astnessfHercules'ccomplish-ments, he pervasivenessf his effortsoward heskies. ThusJunoevaluatesthe hero 37-40):

quasolreducensuaquedeponensiembinos ropinquainguitethiopasace,indomnitairtusoliturttoto eusnarraturrbe.

Amphitryonrgues n a similar ein (442ff.): "postquepacatummanu/quodcumque itanortus t abens idet .. nondumiquetdepatre?" A soberingontrastothis laim s raised, owever, y thechorus,peaking fdeath t theveryhourofHercules'mostrecentvictory 870 ff.):

tibi rescetmne,etquodoccasusidet tquodortus.parce enturis:ibi,mors,aramur.

I9 Cf. Walker and Henry above, note I6) i6.








306 WILLIAM H. OWEN [i968

The semichorus hichaccompanies he hero in triumph uicklyreturnshe heme o Hercules' redit, owever882-85):

Pax estHerculeamanuAuroram nter tHesperum,etquasolmediumenensumbrasorporibusegat.

In contrasto Hercules' xpansive opos,Lycus, n presentingisown claims o eminence, eginswiththe same figure,horn f itsastrononmicalanguage ndrealisticallyailoredo hispower 332-38):

Urbis egenspulentahebanaeocaetomne uidquidberi ingitoloobliqua hocis, uidquidsmenosigat,quidquid ithaeronerticexcelso idetet bina findenssthmos xilis reta,nonvetera atriaeura ossideoomusignavuseres.

After ercules'madmurders,utbeforehe elinquishmentfhisdivineambitions,t ishardlyurprisinghat hechorus xpect cosmic x-pansionfHercules'riefI054-62):

Lugeatethermagnusquearensaetherislti ellusqueeraxetvagapontimobilisnda,tuquente mnis, ui per errastractusquearisundisadiosnoctemqueugasredecoro,fervideitan: bitusaritertecum lcides idit tortusnovitqueuas trasqueomos.20

WithHercules'recoveryhefigures transformedntoa series fquestions: ercules, hohasknown llplaces, o onger nowswherehe is (II38-4I):

Quishic ocus, uaeregio, uaemundi lagas?ubi um? ubortuolis,nsub ardine

glacialisrsae? umquid esperii arisextremaellus unc atOceanomodum?

20 Cf. II03-5 for a similarly osmic expectancy: "gemitus vastos/ udiet aether,

audietatri/ reginapoli."









Asguilt pproaches,osmic xtensionsither;hus ercules,ow muchmorehuman, eeks id from terrainsmodest ndunastronomical

as thatwhich ycushad claimedii63-66):Quisquissmenioca,

Actaea uisquisrva, uigeminomaripulsataelopis egna ardaniiolis,succurre,aevae ladis uctoremndica.

The motif inally esolvesn Hercules'final peech,which t fills.The expansive errain as now, withpatheticrony,becometheguarantorf thehero's ontaminationnd concomitantumanization

(I32I-4I). Theveryands nd tarshat new is ame ow, ythatknowledge, reventimfrom iding imselfndhisguilt.2I Thus,figure hich eems t the utset omore han rhetoricalxaggerationhas, through hebroaderworking f the elestialeferenceshichtconventionallyontained,ignificantlyhanged nd beenrevitalized.Ithasbecome vivid ymbol or heoverreachinghich s thekeytoHercules' ersonalityndhistragedy.

There s one final spectof the celestialmagery f theHerculesFurenswhichwe mustnote:Hell. As consistentlyndsignificantlycharacterizedy tsmurk nd starlessnesssby tsnaturalnevitabilityandfinalityor llmortals,t offerstill heonlyrealhint fsalvation,evenofdeification.Althoughhegood and bad alikemustdie,thatinevitableath eads, or hegoodat east, o the tars742-43): "longapermensusiu/felicis evi spatiavel caelumpetit." Thus thetruerealizationfHercules'mbitionss notapparentlyo be found nthe

mainconquest fHadesbut n themortal ubjection o it. IfHelllacks tars,t s theonlyroute othem. A similar erceptionf realphilanthropyppears n Hercules'finalrecognitionhatTheseus'contemplativepproacho sin, nd nothisownviolentndpurgativeway,holds heonlypromiseI336-38):

quoniamqueempercelerislienirbiteramas ocentes,ratiam eritisefervicemqueostris:edde enfernis,recor.22

21 Cf. W. SchuIze,UntersuchungenurEigenarterTragodienenecasDiss. Halle'937) 49.

22 Cf. Walker and Henry above, note i6) I4. For Seneca's interestn limiting hescope of retributive unishment uch as that in which Hercules engaged, cf. Declementia,.4.I-4, in a fragment reservedn Hildebertof Tours, Epistle .3.









This is certainlyot an exhaustiveurvey f everythinghat hisremarkablelaycontains.However, t does, think,ndicate airly

clearlyhebreadthf

maginationndthepoetic reativityithwhich

Seneca pproached thoroughlyonventional otifnd built tintoa seriousnd thoughtfuliteraryabric.

TheOedipusemonstratessimilarower. Its stronomnicalmageryis, s we may eadilyuspectt this oint, asedupon he ommonplaceofthe elestialhenomenas guarantorsndreflectionsfmoral rder.Thus,on thosefewoccasions n whichanythingikenormalcyspredictedr supposed, raditionalstronomymakes ts appearance.

Creon ndApollobothpredictn endto theplague ndtherestorationoforder s,metaphorically,celestialvent: I9-20, "Non ante aelolucidus urret ies/haustusqueutos etherisuridabit"; 233, "mitiaCadmais emeabuntidera hebis." Similarly,edipushimselfpensthedecree romisingengeance orLaiusanda returno stabilityorThebeswith n nvocationo thegodswhoshallwitness is ntention:Jupiter,hoebus, hoebe,Neptune,ndevenPluto. Each s associatedwhere ossiblewith hefunctionsfanorderlyniverse.23 acchus,too,whoreplaces ophocles'ApolloasprotectorfThebes,dispelleroftheplague, nd-for thismust e thedramaticntentf thedithy-rambic de toBacchus-as theguarantorf the nformationhroughwhichthe ultimate olution omes,becomesa celestial otentate.The chorusnvokeshimas (405) "lucidumcaeli decus," n epithetwhichwouldapplymorereadilyoApollothan o Bacchus. Theyguaranteeheir idelitynhisworshipyan extensiveppeal oorderly

celestial orkings503-8). Wherenormalcy aybehopedfor,here-fore, enecaobservesonventionalkies. Normalcy, owever,s aninfrequenthenomenonnthis lay,which t tsmost undamentalsacharactertudyffearndthemoral ebilitationhicht causes. Thecrux f tspsychologys theparadox hat ear f uchntensitystanta-mount o acceptanceftheobjectfeared:24s thechorus' ummaryindicates992-95),

23 This sdifficult,f course, n the caseof NeptuneandPluto,who are associatedwiththe sky-motif ather eft-handedlyy an appeal to theirpowers respectively ver the

" winds and the" housesreft f skylight."24 Cf. K. von Fritz,Antike ndmoderneragodieBerlin I962) 27-29; Lindskog

(above, note 8) 38; Muller (above, note 3) 448; Paratore above, note 3).








3IO WILLIAM H. OWEN [I968

This s clearly developmentf themoral omnmonplace,s Oedipushimselfuggests35-36):"sperare oterasceleribusantis ari regnumsalubre: ecimus aelumnocens." The verymassivenessf his fearleads him to discount is conscious nnocence nd to assumeguilttantamount o intention.Thus speaking f the disease,Oedipusconcentratesn twoaspects, he atmosphericontamination37-49)and thehysteriand moral ollapse hroughouthe citizenry57-70).

Thispsychic-moralimensionf thedistortedeavenss reinforcedbytwo eventsnthegrotesqueriehichManto ndTeiresiaserform.First325-27),

ambitqueensusegiumumusaputipsosqueirca pissiorultusedetetnube ensaordidamucembdidit;

and then 337-39),

Altum aurusttollensaputprimosd ortus ositusxpavit iemtrepidusqueultum bliquattradios ugit.

These surrealisticetails hadowout both the monarch'sorruptedskies and theirultimate esolution, is cowardlyself-blinding.27Similarlynthefollowing cene, aius denies ir-pollutions a causalfactor f theplague ndtransfershe onusto thekinghimself631-

34):

nongravi latuibiluctificususterecparum luvio ethere

satiataellus alituicco ocet,sedrex ruentus..

In consequence,aius himself ill undertakeo clearOedipus'skies(658): "eripite erras,uferam aelumpater." The imagesof thesky,therefore,ork via a contrast etween supposed r desirednormal aylightnd the bnormaltmospherefguiltwhichOedipusprovokes.

Both of these cenes,moreover,he "sacrificial asque" and the

narrativeatabasis,reclear xamplesf the endencyoward llegor-izationwhich we have previously oted. Althoughneither on-

27 Cf.Cesareo above,note 3) I io-i i for much more" realistic reading f the cene.








Vol. 99] SENECA S TRAGEDIES 3II

tributesothe evelopmentfplot r ctiono degreeommensuratewithts ize, oth re n sensexpository;hisxpositionsconcerned

notwithdramaticituationraction,utwith he ketchingnofpsychictate. The formerrawsn graphicerms n almost ooobvious aradigmf Oedipus' ealsituationnd hisblindnessoit. The atterocusesnhis rrationaluiltndfear. Senecaeemsto haverecognizedlearly,hough ardlys analyticallys Freud,the ole fthe ather-sononflictnsuch psychoticituation. husthekatabasissabsolutelyermane,or he ttack ustome romhefather. erhapshemoststoundingacetf he cenes the ssump-

tionon Laius'part629ff.)ofwilful uilt nOedipus'part. Viewedasrealisticheater,his spreposterous.We expect fLaiusnotuglybloodthirstiness,uta tragicense fshame ndsorrow. Onlywhenwe recognizehat hestarlessandscape fHell is a psychic neandthatLaius' actions re allegorical eflectionsf Oedipus'own guiltand fear fhisfather,oesthe cene ecomeviable heater. Then tis very nterestingheaterndeed. ForHell becomes hebleak andsqualidrealmofthepsychic eformityhichtorturesedipus;itstenants586"94), s unmercifullyrotesques Oedipushimself;tsdarkness,s imperviouss hisfear.28

Yet a contrast etweennormal nd abnormal xists n darknessand death swell sunder he kies fthe iving. There snormalndtrue ight epresentingoth henaturalonclusionf ife nd, llegori-cally,the full wareness fguilt 583-85):

ipsetorpentesacus

vidi ntermbras,pse allenteseosnoctemqueeram.29

The characterfJocastas developed s an example fthe Stoicnor-malcywhichfinds tsrefugehere. Fromhercourage t theplay'sopening o her uicidal onclusion,he sanemblem ftheoppositionto Fate's mportunitieshichOedipusproposes orhimself933-34):"anime,quidmortemimes?morsnnocentemolaFortunaeripit,"

buthasnotthecourage oexecute95i): "morere, edcitra atrem."28 Cf. Cesareo (above, note I3) 92, forthe nexorablepaternalfigure n thePhaedra;

Paratoreabove,note ) 112, I19-20, i26-28; Herrmannabove,note 5) 404,note5.29 Cf. 393, 540, 545, 549, 572.









Instead, eopts or sham eath,which eleasesimfromightndeedbutfurnisheso realrefuge,o genuine olutionI012 ff.):"Quis frui

tenebris etat Quis redditoculos matris, n matris onus . .perdidimusperam." Blindnesss no longer he ymbol fsuperiorinsight,s ithad beenfor ophocles,utmerelyne morefalse efugefrom he ericulumucis971).

To establishhis, ven Teiresiasmustbe stripped f the dignityfhis blindness295): "visu carentimagna parsveri atet"; (30I) "tulucis nopem,gnata,genitoremegens." The night f blindnesssan infirmityhich nfectsventheold seer's owers, nd serves im

to advantagenly n so far s it protects imfrom realperceptionof thehabitantsf Dis (596-98):

intrepidusarensaudaxque amnoonvocat itis eriexsangueulgus.

Does it not offer edipus he ame llusoryefuge?30Thus Oedipus,fearful y day and night,wanders ff n theend,

having atheredheworst fbothworlds, sham ightnd a pollutedday, plusthemortiferaitia errarumI058-6i), his comrades. Stillhe is haunted yhisgrotesqueearsio5i): "i, profuge,ade .. siste,ne in matrem ncidas." What an extraordinaryransformationSenecahas achieved f a storywhichsurelyhad, after ophocles,"ossified" n meaning.3IHe hasdonethis, otby attemptinglotinnovation longthe inesofEuripides' hoenissae,utby attacking

the heart fthemyth,he mages nd thesymbolism hich rethecharacterfOedipus. Several ftheseymbols-themoral ommon-placeoftheskies, hekatabasis-areamiliarromheHerculesurens;others, ropheticeiresias,heblindness,ven heOedipalwish, romSophocleshimself.But within heir hartednd traditionalefini-tions enecahas discoverednchartedreas fextraordinaryreativebreadth.

The purpose f thispaper, hen,s to demonstratehediversityf

meaningwhich enecafoundwithin heextensionsf hisadmittedly"rhetorical,".e. commonplace,epertoryf mages,nd therelation

30 Cf. Paratore above, note 3) IIO.

3' Paratore above, note 3) III-I2.








Vol. 99] SENECA S TRAGEDIES 3I3

ofthese pecialmeaningsohisparticularnterpretationfthe everalmyths. nthe ightf uchxtensionsfmeaning,e must ecareful

torecognizehat he nly hing ecessarilyommonbout hetoricalcommonplacesstheirvailability.When heirpecialotentialityssightedntermsf he ecreationnd evivificationf quallyonven-tionalmythic aterials,e are ikely o find hat very pecial indofcreativexpressionesults. eneca imself,peakingheoreticallyof clecticism,asgiven sthekey o this rocessnEpistle84.5ff.:

sedne d aliud uam e quoagitur,bducar,os uoque as pes ebemusimitarit quaecumquexdiversaectioneongessimus,eparare. nelius

enim istinctaervantur.einde dhibitangeniiostriura tfacultatein unum aporemaria lla ibamentaonfundere,t, tiamsidparuerit,unde sumptum it, aliud tamenesse quam unde sumptum st,adpareat... 32

We have observed ne aspect f thisprocess. By theexpansion fconventionalsage ntodramaticymbol, y the nvestigationf newinnuendos ithinonventional eanings,eneca anachieve otonly

the revitalizationf the metaphorsnd symbolshemselves,ut ub-stantial ew interpretationsf the myths s well. In thisfacility,sinmany thers, otably isexperimentalpproach odramatic orm,Seneca tandsna muchmore ignificantelationshipocontemporaryexperimentalnd absurdheater,33han ven o theRenaissance.

32 Cf.Schulzeabove,note 3) I-2.

33 Cf.Paratoreabove,note8) 59; (above,note3) I25.

commonplace and dramatic symbol in seneca's tragedies

Documents