Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura Classica, 78 (2004)

Maria Vamvouri Ruffy

VISUALIZATION AND DEIXIS AM PHANTASMA IN AESCHYLUS3 PERSAE

In

narrative, the narrator remembers, recounts and sometimes re-en

acts a past event that the narratee has to recreate in his imagination. They both focus "on what is not present or not perceptible in an individu al's physical here and now".1 Aeschylus' Persae, which stages the an nouncement at Sousa of the Persian disaster in Greece, is a good example of this kind of focus, since narrative makes up an important part of the

play. Queen Atossa recounts the dream she had the night before and which provides the first sign of the Persian army's defeat in Greece. The

messenger then reports the crucial events of the expedition. Finally, the

ghost of Darius prophecizes the army's disaster at Plataea and foretells Xerxes' return.

The predominance of narrative within the play may cast doubts on its essence as

"spectacle" and it has accordingly been criticized for its static character. The play's narrative orientation made Kitto (1950: 34-45) argue that there is a lack of a clear focal point in the action, and Broadhead (i960: xxxm-xxxv) commented that "the play is virtually devoid of the 'action' characteristic of a gradually developing plot".2

If we go back to ancient Greek theory on the theatre, we see that for Aris totle

"spectacle" (oiptc) plays an important role in a theatrical perform ance.3 While he initially says that tragedy can create effects even without

scenery and actors, and argues that it should arouse fear and pity through plot, not by means of visual effects and external trappings, he then states that word images should coincide with representation on stage and ac

company the actor's performance and emotions evoked by gestures.4 Thus Aristotle does not underestimate the importance of vision and

i. Bakker 1999. 2. Broadhead argues that the lack of plot is especially due to the limitations imposed

on the dramatist by the historical subject of the play. Cf. also Lavagnini 1927. 3. For Arist. Po. 1450a 7-10, oipi? is one of the six constituent elements of tragedy. Ta

plin 1977, 477-479, argues that in the Poetics the word has a full and a superficial sense. It

refers either to the entire visual aspect of a play or to the external trappings. Cf. also Silk

1994,109. 4. See Arist. Po. 1450b 17-21; 1453b 1-3. On the paradox introduced by Aristotle when he

takes up the problem of chjji? in tragedy, cf. Ca?ame 1996, 18-19. For the interpretation of the expression jtq? ?^crccov in 1455a 1, see Dupont-Roc and Lallot 1980, 278-282, who

12 MARIA VAMVOURI RUFFY

"spectacle". Likewise, for Plutarch, "spectacle" is a constituent element of

tragedy. According to him watching a tragedy is an amazing aural and vi sual

experience.5 Should we then argue that the dramaturgy of Persae is na?ve and that it

is an eccentric play located on the border of the tragic genre?6 This

viewpoint should be qualified for two reasons. First, the visual element is not totally absent from the play. As Hall (1989: 67-77) correctly argues, the

mass prostration of the chorus, the Queen's splendid chariot, the liba tions, the prayers, Darius' ghost, the arrival of Xerxes and the final pro cession provide a visual stimulation to the audience.7 Secondly, there is a

powerful linguistic device which repeatedly overcomes the problem of not seeing in that it helps the audience and characters to visualize clearly

many of the narrated events. This device is deixis, the linguistic strategy that enables speakers "to locate themselves in space and time, with re

spect to things, events and each other".8 Deixis allows the listener by means of "verbal gesture" to see what the speaker is pointing at, and es

tablishes a link between the text and the extra-textual world. Persae ex

ploits a particular kind o? deixis which has been called Deixis am Phantasma

by Karl B?hler.9 In contrast with Demonstratio ad oculos which is a point ing to something that stands before the eyes, Deixis am Phantasma is a

pointing at something imagined, and so creates the illusion of vision. The

speaker leads the listener into something that can only be represented by the imagination. He makes the remote reality and the invisible referent

"present" in front of the listener's eyes. The listener can see the absent ob

ject with his mind's eyes, not with his bodily eyes. This article is concerned with Deixis am Phantasma in Persae, and more

precisely, with its relation to the stragecraft and the thematic structure of the play. In particular, I will study the verbal mechanisms that activate the imagined deixis and I will attempt to show the textual strategies which reinforce its effectiveness within the play.

explain that for Arist. Rh. 3, 1411b 23-25, the dramatic poet should represent action by act

ing unlike the orator who should create an illusion of acting through lexis.

5. Plut. Mor. 348c: dauf.iaoT?v ?xQOajia xai O?afxa. 6. Lavagnini 1927, 301. 7. Hall 1989 also asserts that Persae, as other Aeschylean plays, progresses from verbal

to visual: "the meaning of themes and events evoked through words is given definition

by visual apparitions on scene". Hall 1996, 16-19, retorts with the idea that Persae does not

deserve to be designated as a tragedy. She argues that the same form and conventions, such as reversal of fortune, universality and theological references are found in other

tragedies. For the reversals in Persae, see the important contribution of Sa'id 1988, 321 341.

8. Bakker 1999,1. 9. B?hler 1990, 137-157. On Deixis am Phantasma as a poetic technique in archaic lyric

texts, see Latacz 1985, 67-94.

visualization and deixis am phantasma in aeschylus' persae 13

1. CLUES OF DEIXIS AM PHANTASMA IN PERSAE

1.1. Common Deictic Words and Utterances

To transform narrative into a deictic field, Deixis am Phantasma requires the same deictic clues as the ocular demonstration. In the Greek lan

guage, the most frequently used deictic markers are the demonstrative

pronouns and adjectives (e.g. o?e, ?xeivo?, oirto?);10 first and second per son pronouns which point to the speaker and the addressee; spatial and

temporal adverbs (e.g. ?vM?e, vDv,


Chorus is now pointing at. The past invades the actual performance all the more since the metre is the marching anapaest in the first 64 verses.

This metre, which is generally associated with a military pace, reinforces in a vivid way the re-enactment of Persian army's departure.14

The messenger's narrative brings us to the second occurrence of Deixis am Phantasma. In his long narrative, the messenger describes the army's defeat in Greece. First he gives an overview of the Persian leaders who

perished in the naval encounter (302-330). He then reports an account of the fleets' size (336-347) and of the events which took place before and dur ing the naval battle (353-432). He describes the battle on the island facing Salamis (447-471) and finally he relates the Persians' escape through Greece and Thrace (480-514). Most of the narrative is in the third person and focus on a remote reality creating thus a distance from the here and now. However, the messenger choose essentially the imperfect to nar rate the battle at Salamis.15 As Bakker points out, "the use of the imperfect is not so much a reference to an event as the displacement of its observa tion into the past".16 The imperfect presents the action as an experienced one. Indeed, it presupposes a personal point of view on the action since its

non-complession depends on the point of view of the speaker. In that per spective, in messenger's narrative the imperfect effects a displaced view

ing, a viewing in the personnal memory of the messenger, which puts the listeners' minds into the past, and so draws the past into the present.

Without beeing a deictic mark, the use of imperfect creates a proximity effect that the Deixis am Phantasma will amplify.

The messenger includes deictic markers in his speech which effectively link the battle and the defeat to the present moment of utterance and thus activate a Deixis am Phantasma. Such is the case at verses 402-405 where the messenger impersonates the voices of Greeks. In fact, he uses direct

speech to report the exhortation they uttered before the naval battle:17

(...) d) jxotioe? cEX??]V(jov, ixe 8? Uf}?QO?JTe JiaiQL?', ?XeudeQO?JXe 08

jta?oa? yvjva?xa? flecov xe Jiaxodbitov e?r] f)r)xa? xe jxQoyovojv v?jv vjjx?o jr?vxoov ?yoov.

14. On this metre, cf. West 1987, 48-49, and Taplin 1977, 64-65. 15. See the verses 373-428. 16. Bakker 1997, 37. 17. As Broadhead i960, 124 argues, the Greeks' exhortation was probably a traditional

battle song. Aeschylus avoids identifying the speaker. This anonymity contrasts with the named description of the Persians (21-58) and suggests that the triumph of Greeks was a collective victory. Goldhill 1988, 193, correctly notes that for Aeschylus the Greeks were victorious not only because of the Persians' transgressive acts but also because of the

city's democratic values.

VISUALIZATION AND DEIXIS AM PHANTASMA IN AESCHYLUS' PERSAE V=>

O sons of the Greeks, come on

liberate your fatherland, liberate your children, your wives, the shrines of your ancestral gods and the graves of your forefathers. Our struggle now is on behalf of them all!

Deixis is actualized thanks to the vocative t?) Jia??e?, the deictic time ad verb vDv, the motion verb ?xe in its second person plural imperative form and the imperative ??,enf}eooijxe. We should note that the context here is imagined since the deictic markers point to something that is not present and visible. The vocative and the imperatives constitute the deictic center of the Greek warriors who participated in the naval battle at Salamis,

whereas the messenger, the Chorus and the Queen are in Persia.18 As far as the adverb vDv is concerned, it locates the present utterance into the

past time of the naval battle. For the Chorus and the Queen, who are the messengers' addressees,

the deictic center is shifted from the here and now to a point within the

story world described by him. As I have just mentioned, the vDv creates a coincidence, one would almost say confusion in time, between the pre sent moment of the messenger's enunciation in Persia and the past mo

ment of the battle at Salamis. The speaker-oriented verb ?xe creates a spa tial coincidence between Salamis, where the initial speakers i.e. the

Greeks, were located, and Persia, where the actual speaker, i.e. the mes

senger is now located. Due to the messengers' impersonation and the de ictic clues contained in his utterance, the Chorus and the Queen can travel in their imagination to Greece and hear what the army heard at Salamis

before the encounter.

Impersonation combined with deictic markers is used in other greek tragedies.19 Yet, in Persae it is particularly meaningful for it occurs in a

play which is built up on the themes of absence, emptiness and invisibil

ity.20 Kitto remarks that in Persae "action is partly past action, partly inner action, in the mind of the hero: in either case, necessarily conveyed in a series of speeches".21 In that perspective, the deictic markers the messen

ger uses stand as a powerful device compensating the impossibility of see

ing. Besides, as Taplin points out, in most greek tragedies the events re

ported by messengers are to be supposed to have been happening simul

i8. The l?JTOOeot? of the play states that the action takes place before the tomb of Da rius. The dead king was buried at Perseptolis but several times the play suggests that the scene of action is Sousa. On the problem of the location of the action, see the interesting contribution of 2axa)o)? 1984 who opts for Perseptolis as the probable location.

19. See for exemple Soph. O. C. 1640-1641; Eur. Med. 1155. 20. Cf. the terms OL^o^?vcov (1, 546), wL/coxev (13), x?vav??ov (119), ?xxexevoofi?va (549). 21. Kitto 1950, 41.


taneously with earlier scenes.22 In this case, the proximity effect is already there since the messengers point to something that has just happened. In

Persae, on the contrary, the events recounted by the messenger occured in the past before the play began. In this respect, the impersonation and the deictics he uses are all the more meaningful that they gap an important distance which is not only spatial but also temporal.

What about Athenians? When an Athenian audience hears the exhorta

tion, it identifies itself with the "sons of the Greeks" since it had recently participated in the naval battle.23 The Athenian spectators now become, once again, the deictic center of the battle cry.24 For them the messenger's impersonation is in fact a displaced Demonstratio ad oculos. If the Chorus and the Queen have to activate their imagination, Athenians have to actu alize their memory in order to re-experience a crucial event that occured before the battle. Briefly said, the same deictic words entail both a Deixis am Phantasma and a displaced Demonstratio ad oculos. Their sense depends on the experience and the identity of the listeners.

Deixis am Phantasma occurs also in Darius' narrative. When his ghost comes up to the earth, he first questions Atossa who tells him the bad news about Xerxes' defeat. Darius, in his turn, explains the theological reasons for the disaster, recalling Zeus' unfavorable oracles and the his

tory of the Persian empire.25 He then predicts the defeat at Platea of the Persians who were left behind in Greece. For Darius this catastrophe is the penalty they paid for their hybris against the Greek gods.26 He proph

22. Taplin 1977, 83. 23. Broadhead i960, xlviii-lv, discusses Weil's interpretation (1888, 23-26), who sugg

ests that there were two different performances of the play. For Weil, the first one was

probably acted in Sicily and was different from the second one which was performed in Athens. In this perspective, the play was destined to be first performed in front of a Sici lian audience. Yet, Broadhead argues that the internal and external evidence is quite in

conclusive, and that though the assumption is an interesting possibility "the evidence is too

slight to make it more than a possibility". 24. For Podlecki 1966, 8-26, one of Aeschylus' aims was to remind Athenians of the

glorious naval battle of Salamis and thus to make them realize the importance of Themi

stocles, the architect of the victory. On this subject, see Goldhill 1988 and Sommerstein 1996, 410-413. Cf. also Pelling 1997, 9-13 who expresses some doubts about Podlecki's poli tical interpretation.

25. For the Chorus and Atossa, the reversal of fortune and the disaster are a divine de ceit for the gods are jealous of human succ?s (345, 354, 362, 373). Nevertheless, Darius at tributes the disaster to the transgressive acts af Persians. Zeus judged their hubris and in

flicted the punishment. On the contradiction between Darius' interpretation of the dis aster and the one given by the Chorus and Atossa, see Winnington-Ingram 1973, 210-219. See also Paduano 1978, 71-84.

26. Hybris here is signified by the words ?jreQcpeu (820), ujreQ(pQovr|OG:? (825), ujreQx? jiJTcov (827) ujTEQx?jiJTcp (831). Lycurg. In Leocr. 81, and D.S. 11, 29, 3, affirm that the Persians

VISUALIZATION AND DEIXIS AM PHANTASMA IN AESCHYLUS' PERSAE YJ

ecizes the sufferings the Persians will endure in Greece, warning the Chorus and the Queen (823-824):

xoLaijO' ?Q?rvxe? x v?e x?mxLjua ji??ivr|Gd' 'AOnvcbv eEM,a?o? re (...)

seeing that such are the penalties for these remember Athens and Greece

The demonstratives xoiaDxa and x?ov?e are anaphoric since they refer to the Persians' transgressive actions and to the penalties Darius just re ferred to.27 In other words they refer back and thus replicate what has just been introduced in the narrative. Nevertheless, the present participle o

Q?3VX8?, "seeing", also gives a deictic value to the anaphoric clues, for it implies that the Chorus and the Queen are able to see now with their own eyes the Persian disaster and the penalties the army will suffer in Greece.

What Darius "sees" with his prophetic eyes now becomes an immediate

reality, a palpable object for the characters on stage. We have here a par ticular kind of Deixis am Phantasma. It is not the past event but rather a fu ture

reality which becomes present in the field of perception. For the Athenian audience, however, the penalties that Darius points at

are already a past event. When Aeschylus' Persae was performed, in 472 B.

C, the battle of Platea had already taken place. Thus, for Athenians Deixis am Phantasma points to a past event which invades the present action. In other words, it is the past and not the future which becomes an immediate

reality. Such a situation reveals the broadness of the deictic field. As I said before, the sense of a deictic utterance depends on the context as well as on the particular experience of the different listeners. Understood from that perspective, deixis introduces a dynamic antagonism between lis teners, because each of them decodes and understands the deictic expres sion differently. In the case of Darius' warning, the deictic utterance not

only reveals the distinction in the theatre between characters and audi ence (Darius' listeners) but also amplifies the historical antagonism be tween Greeks and Persians.

1. 2. Deictic Virtues of Polysemie Words

Let us now examine another means by which Deixis am Phantasma comes

took away Greek statues and that the Athenians swore an oath not to reconstruct the burned monuments but to leave them ruined. Sa?d (1981) explains that for Aeschylus the downfall of Xerxes and of the Persian army was caused by the hybris of the young king.

Herodotus gives a more rationalist explanation of the disaster. For him the main cause

of the Persian defeat, was not only hubris but also the expansionist policy of the Persians. On the differences between Aeschylus' and historians' narrative of the battle of Salamis, cf. Roux 1974, 51-94.

27. On anaphora cf. B?hler 1990, 438-451; Donnellan 1979, 28-44.


to be realized and emphasized. It consists in deictic words and utterances with a double referent: one that belongs to the empirical here and now visible sphere of the speaker, and the other which belongs to a past real

ity. Such words are able to point at an invisible object, even if the initial purpose is to point at things which confront bodily eyes. Such utterances occur in the Chorus' and in Xerxes' lamentation. When the Persian Elders see the king of Persia returning to his homeland alone, with his clothes in

rags, they realize that the prosperity of Persia is destroyed forever.28 They then express their sadness in a long lamentation which they sing with

Xerxes. Verses 1015-1019 of the threnos comprise both a Demonstrate ad ocu los and a Deixis am Phantasma :

Xerxes jtco? ?' ov ; otqcxt?v ?lev xoooutov xcda? TC?nkr\y\iai. Chorus t? ?' ovjx o^co?.8v, iiEy?XaxE Iieoa?v; Xerxes ?qoi? t? Xoljiov xo?e r?? ?ji?? oro^??; Chorus ?qco ?qco. Xerxes r?v?e t5 oioTo??y?.iova

How could it be otherwise? It is a miserable blow for me to have lost so great an army. Is anything left of the Persians, O man of great calamity?

Do you see what remains of my outfit?

I see, I see.

And this quiver ...

At verse 1017 Xerxes uses the demonstrative xo?e (this here, this present) in order to point at his rags and his empty quiver. As Said (1988: 340-341) stresses, oxo??? refers to the king s torn clothes since the word is linked,

through xe, to rovos (1019) which designates Xerxes' quiver, a part of his military gear. Xerxes' uniform is visible to the Chorus since the latter as

serts that they see it (1018: oqc?, oqc?). Undoubtly, the rest of the king's uniform is also visible to the audience who is watching the play and sees the king on stage. From this point of view, the demonstrative xo?e ac tivates an ocular demonstration for both Chorus and audience, in B?h lers' terms a Demonstratio ad oculos.

Nevertheless, Said points out that the meaning of oxoXa? is ambiguous here since it can also refer to the Persian army (axQcxxi?) or fleet (axo^o?), as ancient scholia proposed.29 The military connotation of the word

28. Xerxes' rags are often mentionned in the play. See 468, 834-836, 847-848, 1030. As Thalmann 1980 points out, the King's torn clothes suggest both the loss of his military power and the collapse of Persian rule.

29. Schol. ad Aesch. Pers. 1020: oqq? t? ?oljt?v x??e t\)?, ?\xf\? gtoX?\c? ??youv Oecoqelc t? 8JU?.01JTOV Ae?Apavov roil ?[.ioi3 OT?A.OD rp/ouv rfj? 8?Lif|c OTQcm?? tlv?? ?? (paoiv, on Oecooei? r?oe t?]? ?[if]? ?ToA.f]c r?Toi T?]v cpag?Toav t?]v ajtoXeicpdEtoav dur? t?jv 8|ic?v ?7t>.cov.

VISUALIZATION AND DEIXIS AM PHANTASMA IN AESCHYLUS' PERSAE 19

otoXt] is in fact suggested at verse 192. Of one of the yoked women in Xerxes' chariot that Atossa dreamed about it is said that she "towered

proudly in this costume".30 The association with jcurjy?co (to tower) un derlines the link between axoM] and military reality. Besides, the meaning "army" or "fleet" for oxoXi] is all the more possible since Xerxes uses the expression xo?e oxoXa? to answer, through a question, the Chorus' en

quiry about the survival of the army. In this context, Xerxes' deictic utter ance points at the Persian army which is invisible for the Chorus and the audience and this in turn activates a Deixis am Phantasma. In other words,

Deixis am Phantasma modifies the communicative situation in an intri

guing way in that it leads the Chorus and the audience into the realm of an absent referent, allowing them an imaginative glimpse at something

which is in fact impossible to see. At verse 1046 Demonstratio ad oculos and Deixis am Phantasma are once

again synchronized:

8Q8??5 808008 X L aXSVa^' 8?KIV X&QIV strike with

rythm and woe for my own sake.

The verb 8Q80000 is used here in the metaphoric meaning of beating him self during lamentation.31 The Elders are asked by the king to strike them selves and make movements in order to give rhythm to the mourning.

The King's injunction has a deictic value, since the present imperative s Q8008 helps him to point at the Chorus in the here and now of the utter ance. Deixis here is a Demonstratio ad oculos since the Chorus stands before

Xerxes' eyes. However, if we take into account the literal meaning of 8

o?aooo, the imperative activates at the same time a Deixis am Phantasma. 'Eo?oooo of course literally means "to row" and is frequently used in a

naval context.32 In this respect, Xerxes would ask the Chorus to row with their arms. Such an injunction leads the Persian counsellors into the

battle scene of Salamis and re-enacts the order the Persian commanders

undoubtedly gave to their mariners to row faster and escape from the de

30. Yoking is a recurrent theme in Persae. See for exemple the verses 50, 71, 594 and 722. The yoke pattern underlines Xerxes' will to bridge East and West and abolish a natural

boundary. As Hall 1996, points out, it symbolizes the Persian despotism. See also Ander son 1972, 166-174, and 167-168. On the yoke as a symbol of political domination, cf. Thgn. 1023 IEG.

31. Broadhead i960, 242-343, notes that the verb ep?oooo is used for rythmical move ments such as the flying of the birds (Aesch. Ag. 52) or the quick motion of feet (Eur. Iph. A. 138). In Aesch. Th. 855, as in Persae, the verb is used in a context of lamentation and means

"ply with your hands the measured stroke of the lamentation."

32. See for exemple Horn. IL 9, 360-361: f|Qi \iak3 cE^t]?jtovtov 8jt' ?/Ov?evia jtX?ouoa? / vfja? e^ia?, ?v ?' av??a? eQeoa?^evai fiefiaarca?; Soph. Tr. 560-561: oike jto?jji?|ioic / xwjtai? 8Q8aoo)v orne kxicpeaiv veoa?.

20 MAR?A VAMVOURI RUFFY

struction. As the messenger noted, during the naval battle the Persian

ships rowed in disorderly flight (422) :

cpuyf|i ?' axo?Licoq n?oa voru? r?Q?ooexo

Every ship was being rowed in disorderly flight.

While Xerxes here impersonates the captains' voice, the Chorus is asked to impersonate the Persian sailors. Thus, in their imagination the Elders are able to transfer themselves back to the battle scene and the rushing flight of the Persian ships. As a matter of fact, some verses later, the El ders assume the Persian warriors' role. Specifically, they say (1052-1053):

ii?Xaiva ?' av ji??i??;?xai o? oTov?eaaa izXay?.

Groans will mingle, oi, with blackening blows.

The faithful counsellors announce that they will inflict self-mutilation

upon themselves, as a sign of their excessive grief. Yet the word Ji)u]yf) which they use to designate their own "blackening blows", recalls the blows that the Persian army suffered. At verse 304 the messenger speaks about the spear blows by which a Persian commander was struck (jt?i]yfjL ?oq??), and at verse 906 the Chorus refers to the blows inflicted on the Persian forces in the sea (?jiotir?vTec; ?ley?Xcoc jiXayatai jiovT?oaoiv). By us ing the word jr^yi] even in a metaphorical sense, the Chorus enacts at

verse 422 a crucial event of the battle scene, enduring in its own way the Persian warriors' suffering. As Hall (1996: 22) observed, the word 7ikr\yr\ "unites the different registers within which the play operates".

To sum up, Xerxes' utterance has a particular deictic value given its se mantic ambiguity. In Bakhtinian terms it is a hybrid construction since "it

belongs, by its grammatical (syntactic) and compositional markers, to a single speaker, but that actually contains mixed within it two utterances, two

speech manners, two styles, two "languages," two semantic and axio

logical belief systems".33 This double-voiced utterance, expressing two different speakers' intentions, enables both Demonstratio ad oculos and Deixis am Phantasma to be achieved and constitutes a signal given to both the Chorus and the audience to help them to transform a distant event into an immediate experience.

2. Visible or invisible?

I will now argue that the vividness and the effectiveness of Deixis am Phan

33- Bakhtin 1981, 301-331, especially 304, 324. Bakhtin 1981, 305, points out that "there is no formal boundary between these utterances but that the division of voices and lan

guages takes place within the limits of a single syntactic whole".


tasma in Persae is strengthened by textual strategies on the level of the vo

cabulary and plot. The first strategy consists in the use of vision/light words. Such a vocabulary is in itself not deictic, but it works as a persuas

ive device, as a rhetorical means which aims at increasing the visual im

pact the narrated events have on the listener. In fact, just as Deixis am Phantasma authenticates the immediacy of the events described by the

speaker, in the same way the vision/light vocabulary may convince the listener of the immediacy of an invisible referent in his field of per ception.

In Persae the characters who describe unstaged events consider them to be patently clear. Ironically enough they repeatedly stress the visibility of events that are not perceptible by vision. Thus, they predispose the lis tener to activate his visual imagination. Such is the case at verses 27, 48 and 81. The Chorus points to the marching of Persian army which is not shown on stage. In the middle of their enumeration, the faithful counsel lors draw attention to the power as well as the impressive aspect of the

Persian commanders, and of the Lydian warriors, saying that they are ter

rifying to look upon:

(po?eooi ?lev L?e?v, ?eivoi ?? ?i?xi]v terrifying to look upon and formidable in battle

q)o?8Q(iv chpiv Jtoooioeodai

a terrifying sight to behold.

Later on, they describe Xerxes' gaze as being powerful and terrifying (81):

xu?veov ?' ?ji^aoL Xevjoooov cpov?ou 08Qy?ia ?qcd?ovxo? He casts from his eyes the dark glance of a lethal snake.

This last verse contains four words that are related to sight. The words

?jijia (eye), Xevoowv (beholding), Oepy^ia (glance), clearly belong to the lexical field of vision. So does the word ?qoxovxo? (snake), which etymo logically derives from the verb 08qxo?iooi, "to behold in a dense gaze".34 Such terms stimulate the visual imagination of the audience and perfect

Deixis am Phantasma that is achieved in the parodos. They emphasize the

visibility of the pointed object and thus make the audience temporarily forget that it doesn't actually see Persian army's departure.

Before impersonating the Greeks' battle cry so as to activate a Deixis am

Phantasma, the messenger also makes use of the vocabulary of light and vision. He refers to the day of the catastrophe as "a brilliant sight of

34- On the etymology of the word OQ?xoov, see Chantraine 1992, 264-265.


daybreak" (386-387) and he says that the trumpet of war "fired the fleet" (395)- Through this metaphor he renders visible the loud noise of the instrument:

8Jt8L ye ?isvxoL XeuxortcoXo? fjfi?oa jx?oav xccx?o/e yalav 8?)(p8yyf|c; l?e?v.

As soon as the brilliant sight of daybreak and her white horses covered the earth.

o?'kmy'E, ?' cruxfji jmvx' 8X8iv5 ejr?cp^eyev. A trumpet fired the whole fleet on with its sound.

At verse 398, he describes the way the Greeks appeared before the Per sians on the day of the catastrophe:

do ? ?? Jictvxe? fjoav ?xq)av8?? l?e?v.

at great speed the whole fleet came clearly into view.

The repetitive use of the verb ?Qaoo in the Chorus' as well as in the mes senger's speech, and the words XevkotioAo?, eijcpevyric;, ?jricpXeyev, and ?x cpave?? in the speech of the latter, transfer the listener into the realm of the

visual, prompting him once again to activate his inner eye. In other words, they prepare the Queen as well as the Athenian audience to

"sharpen" their visual senses by bringing them to visualize the unseen narrated events. The obviousness of the imagined referent, which is stressed with such words, creates favourable circumstances for an illusion of vision.

Let us note that the messengers' arrival is regarded by the Chorus not

merely as a source of knowledge, but as a knowledge related specifically to sight. At verses 246-248 the Elders say:

?W 8|iOL ?OX8?V xa/' d'oni Jt?vxa vafieoxfj X?yov xo?oe y?o ?Q?\xr\\ia (poox?? IleQOix?v jtq8jt8i ?laOetv, xcd (p?oei oacp?? xi jro?yo? ?odX?v i) xax?v xXtjslv.

I think that you will soon be in possession of a full and truthful report; for this man is clearly Persian, to judge from the way he is running, and he is bringing news of some event, whether it will make good or bad listening.

The Chorus presumes that the messenger will give a powerful and vivid

report of the events. In other words, the Chorus recognizes the messen

ger's knowledge as transparent (oacp??), one could say visual. In fact, the verb oi?a the Elders use in its future form (slot]), derives from the root wid- (videre) which pertains to vision.35 Besides, the visual dimension of the messenger's forthcoming narrative is suggested by a subtle play of

35- On the relationship between oi?a and video, see Chantraine 1992, 779-780. Often in


words. The genitive cpooxoc here (247) comes from the word cpco? "man". But in greek language this genitive is also that of the word cpao? "light". Therefore, the arrival of the messenger and the information he is sup posed to bring can be associated by the listeners with the coming of light. This play on words suggests that the messenger's narrative will promote a visual experience for the Chorus, the Queen and the audience. Such an interpretation is all the more plausible in that the messenger uses two vi sion words to speak of his arrival. As a matter of fact, he compares his re turn to the country with a coming to light (261) :36

xcrux?? ?5 ??^Jtxco? v?gxlliov ?Xejtoo cpao? and myself I see unexpectedly the light of the return.

Darius' narrative is also punctuated by vision/light vocabulary. Let us re call that when he advises the Chorus and the Queen against future imperi alistic acts, he uses the participle ?Qcbvxe? (823), presuming that they are able to see what the army has already suffered and what it will suffer in the future. Moreover, in his answer to the Chorus' question about the Persians' crossing the Helle, he uses a similar word (800-802):

JKX?QO? y? 7l0XkG)V ?1 XL JtloX??JGCU f>?COV, XQTj f>??CpaxOL?LV ?? x? V?V JT?JIQayLl?VCX ?êâvxcr GUji?aiva y?o ov x? Li?v, x? ?5 o?? Few

enough out of so many, if one may trust the gods'

prophecies regarding these present events.

They all without exception come to pass.

Darius announces that only few warriors will arrive in Persia. In fact, the

army's total destruction is inevitable since it is predicted by divine or acles.37 At verse 802 Darius uses the participle ?Aiâvxa. Even if the word has here the metaphorical meaning of "taking into account", it is a vision word which suggests that what has happened until now, is supposed to be

contemplated. In a challenging way Darius stresses the visibility of the events that cannot be seen in reality and indirectly invites the Chorus and the Queen to enter into visual contact with them. Deixis am Phantasma

which will take place at verses 823-824 finds here its best context. To summarize so far, the recurrent use of terms relative to sight, vision

and light is a substitute, one could say an antidote, to the invisibility of the

Greek litt?rature "telling" is expressed as "bringing to light". Cf. Holt 1987, 205-217, and

Buxton 1996, 38-48. 36. In Greek literature light is often associated with returning home. See Frame 1978

24-33, 73-80. 37. For oracles who had predicted the Persian catastrophe, see Hdt. 8, 77; 8, 96; 9, 42

and 43.


narrated events. Such a vocabulary enables the speaker to promote the il lusion of seeing and to make the images he describes more vivid for those

who are listening to him. Is there a better way to ensure the efficacy of Deixis am Phantasmal

Besides, in Persae, the plot goes beyond the problem of invisibility and attenuates it by reversing the physical laws of perception. As the play con

veys, it is possible to see something with the mind's eyes without neces

sarily perceiving it in the here and now. The plot provides a powerful paradigm of what Deixis am Phantasma is supposed to do, that is to point to an object that is impossible to see in reality. The inability of the Athenian audience to see the representation of the narrated events on stage finds a

paradoxical resolution. In fact, two characters from the play have to cross darkness and night in

order to see and testify what has happened or will happen elsewhere.38

They come to knowledge, and they gain awareness, after passing through darkness. In other words, darkness, surprisingly, is the context within

which they see far away events. This is the case of the Queen. Atossa is a person who lives in darkness since Xerxes, "the eye of her household", is not present anymore (168-169) :39

(...) ?jicpL ?' ?cpdaXiicTji cpo?oc ?lilicx y?o ??jicov voli??co ?eojroxou Jtaoouo?av.

but I am afraid for the eye of my household. For I consider a household's eye to be the presence of its master.

When, on the contrary, she learns through the messenger that Xerxes

lives and sees the daylight she expresses her joy with a metaphor saying that this news is a light that comes after night (300-301). Thus, she insinu ates that until now she was living in darkness :

ELioi? ?.lev ELjra? ?toLiaaiv cpao? Li?ya xai Xeux?v ?jlicxq vuxx?? ?x ?ieXayxijiovj.

38. The darkness and light pattern has long been recognized. Most critics, philologists and historians alike, commented on the light/darkness pattern in relation to the scenes of naval battle and of the Strymons' crossing which display this lexical recurrence.

Scholars such as Hammond 1956, 403-404; Podlecki 1966, 8-9, and Lazenby 1988, 185, have tried to determine whether the temporal information given in these accounts was based on historical fact or if it consisted of poetic fabrication. Contrasting with this historical

investigation, Kakridis 1975, 145-154, and Pelling 1997, 6, propose a literary interpretation and correctly argue that the light and day motif is reserved for the Greeks, and fore shadows hope and victory, whereas darkness pertains to Persian action and implies de

ception, furtiveness and defeat. Light symbolizes here deliverance and happiness. 39. We find an analogous example in Aesch. Ch. 131, where Electra is praying to her de

ceased father and asks him for the return of Orestes. She equates Orestes with light in the household.


What you have said brings a great radiance to my household,

anyway, and a brilliant day out of dark night.

When she comes on stage for the first time, she recounts to the Chorus the dream she had the night before. She dreamed that Xerxes had fallen from his chariot because of the violent struggle it regain liberty of one of the women whom he had subdued under his yoke.40 Her movements

were so violent that the king fell out of the chariot. When he realized that his father was watching this episode and pitying him, he tore his clothes.

The Queens' dream announces the defeat and the destruction of the Persian army in Greece. It offers proleptic knowledge, a foreshadowing of the play's ending, since Xerxes will finally arrive in Persia defeated, with his clothes in rags. It is interesting to note that the Queen arrives on stage after a night's sleep. In this respect, she is someone who has already passed through darkness and who brings knowledge only after night. Darkness and night are for her the favourable moment for seeing, in a

symbolic way, what has already happened and what will happen in the fu ture. Curiously enough, night enables her to see clearly the phantasmic referent. The adjective ?votQy??, which she uses to qualify the vividness of her dream, implies transparence and visual clarity in so far as ?vaQyeia in Greek designates the effects of immediate knowledge acquired through vision and sight.41 Moreover, her ability to see clearly future events dur

ing the night is suggested by the repetition of vision words such as et

?OjJT|V (179), 81? ?lJUV (183), ?Q?V (188), 8IOI?8IV (200), ??8?V (210). Darius is also a character who comes on stage out of darkness. Hades,

from which he emerges, is obscure, whereas the place he arrives at is lu minous. This is made clear when the Chorus asks Earth and Hermes to

send Darius up to the light (630):

n?jLlpax' SV8Q?T8V ^l^V 8? cpcb? Send up the soul from below into light.

Moreover, when the Elders invite Atossa to call Darius up to the Earth,

they use the distinction between light and darkness to designate the world of the living and the underworld respectively (221-223):

O?V Jt?OLV AaQ8LOV, ?VJT8Q Cpf]l? l?S?V Xax' 81)(pQ?VT|V,

40. For a textual analysis of Atossas' dream see Moreau 1992-1993, 29-51.

41. In Homer the adjective evciQyri? qualifies the god's appearance to mortals through dreams or as human beeings. See for exemple Horn. II. 20, 131; Od. 16, 161; 3, 420; 7, 201.

Later on, in Plato and for the rhetoricians evapyeia becomes understood to mean "vivid ness of expression" and designates the capacity to put an action before the mind's eyes. Cf. Cic. Part or. 6, 20; De orat. 3, 53, 202. For a diachronic study of the term evaQyeia see Ca?ame 1991. See also Zanker 1981, 297-311.


8?f>Xa OOL ?8LIJT8LV X8XV101 X8 yfj? 8V8Q?8V 8? Cpao?, xotjurcdiv 08 XC?V?8 ya?ai x?xoxa [iauQoi3of}ai ox?xcoi

(ask) that your husband Dareios, whom you say you saw during the night, send good fortune for you and your son up into the delight from beneath the earth, and that contrary fortune be kept down by the earth in obscure dark

ness.

Later on, Hades is designated by Darius himself as a dark and shady place (839):

?ycb ?5 ?jteiiu yfj? vno C?cpov x?xco. I am now going back down into the subterranean darkness.

Even if Darius is linked to an obscure place where it is impossible to see what happens in the world of the living, he is able to give an explanation for the defeat and to see future realities with his prophetic eyes. The verb

qualifying the knowledge of the dead man is oi?a (838), which, as I men tioned before, is etymologically associated to vision.

For Darius, as well as for Atossa, darkness and night is a condition which leads them to contemplate what is not perceptible with bodily eyes. This intriguing situation reminds us of the process that underlies

Deixis am Phantasma. Characters who are in a condition of metaphorical blindness enjoy a clear vision of a distant reality as Deixis am Phantasma points at an absent object. Darius and Atossa incarnate an eloquent paradigm of the power of visualizing an invisible object, which is pre cisely what the audience who watches Persae is asked to do. Such a paral lelism familiarizes the audience with what Deixis am Phantasma asks them to do and thus invites them to play the game of seeing without perceiving.

Deixis am Phantasma finds here an ideal background for its assimilation. To conclude, I have tried to bring into focus the idea that if Persae con

fronts the audience with the challenging reality of not seeing the de scribed events, Deixis am Phantasma counterbalances and attenuates this

invisibility by bringing the spectators as close as possible to the events and by reminding them of their role as eyewitnesses. I have also at

tempted to emphasize that Deixis am Phantasma can be all the more effect ive in

making the audience really perceive when it is combined with a vi sion

vocabulary and set within a context which is expressed in the same contrastive mode between invisible and visible. The reading of the play

which I have proposed shows that the study of deixis in a poetic text in tended for representation on stage can be enriched by an investigation of the way the text itself deals with "showing" and "seeing", two acts inextric

ably interwoven with both deixis and theatre.

University of Lausanne

VISUALIZATION AND DEIXIS AM PHANTASMA IN AESCHYLUS' PERSAE 2J

Bibliography

M. Alexiou, The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition, Cambridge 1974. M. Anderson, The Imagery of the Persians', Greece and Rome 19,1972,166-174. M. Bakhtin, The Dialogic Imagination. Four Essays by MM. Bakhtin, in M. Holquist

(ed.), trans. C. Emerson and M. Holquist, Austin 1981. E. J. Bakker, 'Discourse and Performance: Involvement, Visualisation and 'Pres

ence' in Homeric Poetry', Class. Ant. 12,1993,1-29. -

'Verbal Aspect and Mimetic Description in Thucydides', in E. J. Bakker (ed.), Grammar as Interpretation: Greek Literature in its Linguistic Contexts, Leiden-New York-K?ln 1997, 7-54.

-

'Homeric OYT02 and the Poetics of Deixis', Class. Philol. 94,1999,1-19. E. Benveniste, Probl?mes de linguistique g?n?rale, Paris 1966. H. D. Broadhead (ed.), The Persai of Aeschylus, Cambridge i960. K. B?hler, Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language, trans. D.

F. Goodwin, Amsterdam-Philadelphia 1990. R. Buxton, 'What Can You Rely on in Oedipus Rex?', in M. S. Silk (ed.), Tragedy

and the Tragic: Greek Theatre and Beyond, Oxford 1996, 38-48. C. Ca?ame, 'Quand dire c'est faire voir: l'?vidence dans la rh?torique antique', Et.

de lettr. 4,1991, 3-22. -

'Vision, Blindness, and Mask: The Radicalization of the Emotions in Sopho cles' Oedipus Rex, in M. S. Silk (ed.), Tragedy and the Tragic: Greek Theatre and Beyond, Oxford 1996,17-37.

P. Chantraine, Dictionnaire ?tymologique de la langue grecque: Histoire des mots, Paris 19922.

K. Donnellan, 'Speaker Reference, Descriptions and Anaphora', in P. A. French

Jr., T. E. Uehling and H. K. Wettstein (eds.), Contemporary Perspectives in the

Philosophy of Language, Minneapolis 1979, 28-44. R. Dupont-Roc andj. Lallot, Aristote: La Po?tique. Le texte grec avec une traduction et

des notes de lecture, Paris 1980. N. Felson, 'Vicarious Transport: Fictive Deixis in Pindar's Pythian Four', Harv.

Stud. Class. Philol. 99,1999,1-31. C. J. Fillmore, 'How to Know Whether You're Coming or Going', in G. Rauh

(ed.), Essays on Deixis, T?bingen 1983, 219-228. H. P. Foley, 'The Politics of Tragic Lamentation', in A. S. Sommerstein et al.

(eds.), Tragedy, Comedy and the Polis, Bari 1993,101-143. D. Frame, The Myth of Return in Early Greek Epic, New Haven-London 1978. S. Goldhill, 'Battle Narrative and Politics in Aeshylus' Persae', fourn. Hell. Stud.

108,1988,189-193. E. Hall, Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self Definition through Tragedy, Oxford

1989. -

(ed.), Aeschylus: Persians, Warminster 1996. N. G. L. Hammond, 'The Battle of Salamis', fourn. Hell. Stud. 76,1956, 32-54.

J. Herington (ed.), Aeschylus, New Haven-London 1986. C. Hignett, Xerxes7 Invasion of Greece, Oxford 1963.


P. Holt, Tight in Sophokles' Trachiniai', Class. Ant. 6, 1987, 205-217. N. M. Horsfall, Aeschylus and the Strimon', Hermes 102,1974, 503-505.

J. Kakridis, 'Licht und Finsternis in dem Botenbericht der Perser des Aischylos\ Graz. Beitr. 4,1975,145-54.

H. D. F. Kitto, Greek Tragedy, London 1950.

J. Latacz, 'Realit?t und Imagination. Eine neue Lyrik-Theorie und Sapphos cpaive xai jioi xfjvocTied', Mus. Helv. 42,1985, 67-94.

F. Lazenby, Aischylos and Salamis', Hermes 116,1988,168-185. B. Lavagnini, X'azione drammatica nei Persiani di Eschilo', Athenaeum 5, 1927,

295-301. F. L?toublon, Il allait, pareil ? la nuit: Les verbes de mouvement en Grec, Paris 1985. D. Maingueneau, El?ments de linguistique pour le texte litt?raire, Paris 1990. A. Moreau, Xe songe d'Atossa. Perses 176-214. El?ments pour une explication de

textes', in A. Moreau et al. (eds), Les Perses d'Eschyle, Montpellier 1992-93, 29-51.

G. Paduano, Sui Persiani di Eschilo: Problemi di focalizzazione drammatica, Roma 1978.

C. Pelling, Greek Tragedy and the Historian, Oxford 1997. A. Podlecki, The Political Background of Aeschylean Tragedy, Ann Arbor 1966. G. Roux, Xschyle, H?rodote, Diodore, Plutarque racontent la bataille de

Salamis', Bull. corr. hell. 98,1974, 51-94 S. Said, Trag?die et renversement: l'exemple des Perses , Metis 111,1988, 321-341. -

'Darius et Xerx?s dans les Perses d'Eschyle', Kt?ma 6,1981,17-38. ?. ZaxaXfj?, 'Aiu/i^o? ?xvjLio^oyo?: Nomina Omina oxou? ITsQoe? xou AloxvXov\

Dodone 13,1984, 57-85. M. S. Silk, The 'Six Parts of Tragedy' in Aristotle's Poetics: Compositional Pro

cess and Processive Chronology', Proc. Cambridge Philol. Soc. 40, 1994, 108-115. A. H. Sommerstein, Aeschylean Tragedy, Bari 1996. O. Taplin, The Stagecraft of Aeschylus: The Dramatic Use of Exits and Entrances in

Greek Tragedy, Oxford 1977. W. Thalmann, 'Xerxes' Rags: Some Problems in Aeschylus' Persians', Am. Journ.

Philol. 101,1980, 260-282.

H. Weil, 'Des traces de remaniement dans les drames d'Eschyle', Rev. et. gr. 1,

1888, 7-26. M. West, Introduction to Greek Metre, Oxford 1987. R. P. Winnington-Ingram, 'Zeus in Persae , Journ. Hell. Stud. 93, 1973, 210-219,

reprinted in Studies in Aeschylus, Cambridge 1983,1-15. G. Zanker, 'Enargeia in the Ancient Criticism of Poetry', Rh. Mus. 124, 1981,

297-311

Stefano Novelli

L/AMARO LETTO DELLE VERGINI (AESCH. SEPT. 363 SS.)

NELLA

chiusa del primo stasimo, a suggello di una serie di tableaux pr? figurant! la devastazione ed il saccheggio di Tebe, le fanciulle del

coro immaginano il destino che potrebbe essere loro riservato nell'even tualit? che Eteocle e i suoi vengano sopraffatti:

?jito'?Oec ?? xaivojirijiove? v?cu

txX/ruxove? etW?v aixfi?Xcoxov

?v?Q?? eijxvjxovjvxo?t, cb? ?UO|18VO?)? l)Jt8QX8?)Orj ?XjT?? 80XL VVJXX8QOV x?ô? ?lot?v jrayx?,ai)xtov ?Xy?cov smoooirov.1

Cosi West riproduce il testo di questa antistrofe che, come testimoniano le cruces apposte ai vv. 364 s., costituisce tuttora materia di animato dibat tito fra commentatori e critici. Gi? a partir? dagli editori rinascimentali, infatti, le cure degli interpreti si sono alternativamente concentrate ora su

xaLVOJtr]|iov8?, modificato in xoivojtr]|Lov8? da Robortello,2 ora su e?jv?v, emendato da Scaligero in zvvav, correzione che non ha tuttavia goduto di nessuna fortuna.3

I nodi esegetici di pi? difficile soluzione ruotano pero soprattutto in torno all'interpretazione dell'incerta relazione sintattica dei nominativi

incipitari con il prosieguo del periodo, e del sintagma v?cu x^rjjiove?, parso ai pi? una banale glossa del contiguo xcuvojTr)|iov8?;, che dai marginalia del l'antigrafo sarebbe err?neamente confluita nel testo. Ad incrementare poi il sospetto di corruttela contribuisce un'aporia m?trica nello stesso v. 364.

i. La colometria ? quella di quasi tutti i codici (i divide invece in xcuvojt?i-/[aov?? v?ai T?-fifiove?: vd. O. L. Smith, Studies in the Scholia on Aeschylus i. The Recension of Demetrius

Triclinius, Lugduni Batavomm 1975,193). 2. Analoga la ratio che ha dettato il pi? costoso veaoojirjîove? di Heimsoeth: anche in

questo caso, per?, non si coglie dawero la n?cessita di rimpiazzare un unicismo perfet tamente conforme agli innumerevoli Qfîaxa yojicpojiayfi di memoria aristofanea con un

altro, si esemplato sugli ipotesti epici, ma quantomeno pi? prosastico nel primo ele

mento che lo compone. 3. Modificando anche l'aggettivo in aixficdotrcoov, il ritocco avrebbe Fu?ico vantaggio

di ripristinare Tusuale reggenza di tXt]?io)v con il genitivo di causa, per cui cf. ex. gr. Eur.

Hipp. 554 d) x^?jicov i)[i8vaicov (dove il nesso ? sincategorematico se non isosemantico ri

spetto al nostro) e Ar. Thesm. 1072 dav?xou ilrifioov.

30 STEFANO NOVELLI

In via preliminare, all'interno di una struttura poem?tica che pur con

qualche nervatura giambica ? di natura prevalentemente trocaica, si pu? notare corne il v. 363 e il v. 351 che gli corrisponde nella strofe siano dime tri trocaici catalettici, fra loro difformi solo nel primo elemento del se

condo metron, a?mayai ?? ?ia?QOî?v ?jjmjiove? ~ ?jiooL?e?; 6? xaivojrrpo ve? v?oa (-u-u^y.u-u-uW). Al verso successivo, invece, xXf]|iov8? 8i)v?v aixii?X xov (- u u-u - u v. 364) fa eco a ûji?oXel cp?pcov cp?Qovxi (-u-u-u-u v. 352) nella strofe corrispondente: Lasimmetria nel se

condo elemento del primo metron ? immediatamente percepibile. Di qui, una messe di operazioni testuali atte a ripristinare Lesattezza responsiva. Se il principale bersaglio ? stato ovviamente tX,t)|iov8?, corretto in xXr|jiovco?, t1t]?iov' e xXr||i?v8oaiv, rispettivamente da Oberdick, Hermann e Weil, altre soluzioni che hanno Levidenza di meri escamotages sono state

escogitate da Enger (xXf)?iovec; ?i?v) e da Blomfield (xA,?]|iov' a?xiia?ooxov Evv?v).

Prima pero di postulare corruttela o rassegnarsi ad accogliere inter venu variamente costosi,4 ci pare sussista pi? di un elemento perch? la

paradosis possa con qualche ragione essere difesa. Per quanto concerne la

m?trica, infatti, non manca qualche raro caso, sebbene al di fuori della tra

gedia, di sostituzione dattilica del primo piede trocaico -

cf. Timocr. 10 W.

Krj?a ?18 jtQoaf?^de qAuaQ?a ovx ?^?ôvxa / ovx e?r?Xovx? fie JtQoo?jWre Ki]ia cpXuocQ?a,5 Ar. Thesm. 437 Jt?vxa ?5 e?aoxaoev,6 461 ota xaxeaxco

4- Come ?nica alternativa mi sentirei di proporre TA.?vai/TX.fjvai in luogo di TArpovec, con

correptio dinanzi a evv?v. La ratio corruptelae consisterebbe allora nella difficolt? in contrata da uno scriba, poco curante della m?trica, di interpretare sintatticamente fin

finito, sostituito con un x?-rpovEc omologo al precedente xcavojtrmove?. In questo modo, ripristinata la responsio, si potrebbe intendere f infinito come epesegetico rispetto alia frase iniziale, cosi da illustrare il contenuto dei nuovi dolori che affliggeranno le vergini tebane:

"giovani schiave nuovamente afflitte per dover sopportare il letto servile di un uomo fortunato".

5. Bench? lo stesso West (IEG 169) abbia stampato al v. 2 il suo ritocco ov d??ovxa, il testo sembra sicuro in quanto patente e chiastica parodia metrico-sintattica rispetto a Si

mon. Epigr. 92 W. Movo? ?liol sAXx|ir]vr|? xaMviacpuoou ui?v aei?e/ in?v sAXx[ir)vr|? cxEi-?e Moijo? [.toi xaXXio^voov (su cui B. Gentili

- L. Lomiento, M?trica e r?tmica, Milano 2003, 121

s.). 6. Il testo tr?dito ? stato a buon diritto considerato genuino da Coulon, da Dale,

LMGD, 91 e ?ltimamente anche da C. Prato, Aristofane. Le donne alie Tesmoforie, Milano 2001, 348 s. (vd. contra L. P. Parker, The Songs of Aristophanes, Oxford 1997, 414, la quale stampa fra cruces i w. 437 s.). Da mantenere fra i dubia, invece, i luoghi selezionati da Martinelli, 207, fra cui Vesp. 407 /-?leoda, x?vxoov ?vx?xax' 6?v (D. M. MacDowell, Aristophanes. Wasps,

Oxford 1971, 190 ? uno dei pochi a difendere la paradosis e quindi ad ammettere l'analisi dattilica di evx?xax'), nonch? Lys. 1202 ?^?xeqov ???o? ?êjtei, analizzabile pi? verosimil

mente corne - u Ul^ W- u - (~ 1071 \\ ftvga xexbioexai ~

1057 ?v â?ll, l^xex' our-o?c?).

i/aMARO LETTO DELLE VERGINI (AESCH. SEPT. 363 SS.) 31

\ivXaxo nonch? Av. 396 orjjioo?g y??* ?va xacpcojiev7 (un fen?meno simile ? costituito dallo spondeo in prima sede, pur senza ulteriore soluzione dat tilica, nelLitifallico, per cui cf. Soph. Trach. 523 s., Eur. Cycl. 78 e Aie.

92=104)8 - oppure, corne pi? normalmente awiene, del secondo, anche in responsione 'imperfetta' : vedi ad es. Ar. Eq. 406 mv8 jtlv5 ?m oijjicpoQa?? (~ 332 xod xo?aXixeujiaoiv - u - u), Thesm. 436 oi)?? ?8lvox8qov \zyovor\c, (~ 522 x^tL? 8^8^Q8\|)8 %(?Qa - u - u ) e 956 imaye Ji?oa. Batve XaQJia^L^lOLV JtO ?o?v (uuu-u-u-l?ju-u-).9 In questa posizione, un caso di cuioyo? so luta occorre anche in Aesch. PV 418 s.

~

423 s., dove, in base aU'assetto co lometrico dei manoscritti, tre dimetri trocaici sono seguiti dal distico

eoxaxov x?jtov ?jjxpi MaLO)-/TLv e%ovoi Xi\ivav (-u-l?5u-u-- ztr \ uu-u-- reiz). Quantunque la maggioranza degli editori abbia artificio samente riordinato questi versi, in modo da ottenere un gliconeo (eoxa xov x?jtov ?jicpi Mat-/ -U-UU-U-) in linea con Laristofaneo che cosi se guirebbe in clausola (/-?oxiv exouoi A41VCIV -uu-u--), la tessitura m?

trica del contesto induce ad un'interpretazione trocaica anche di questo colon.10

Se dunque in questo modo perde forza Tobiezione m?trica, anche Tac cusa di dittografia imputata al nesso v?cu xXrpove? rispetto a ?jiooi?e? xoa vojtt]|iov8? si rivela meno consistente se si osserva che il primo termine, oltre a chiudere perfettamente il dimetro, qualifica opportunamente la natura d?lie ?jiooi?e? menzionate nelYincipit, mentre xXrijiove?, secondo uno stilema caro ad Eschilo, riprende e varia il secondo elemento dello

hapax specificando meglio l'innovazione lessicale.11 Concorre poi al mantenimento del testo tr?dito una considerazione di

7. N. Dunbar, Aristophanes. Birds, Oxford 1995, 289 discute il passo rimandando alia p. 233, dove offre utili annotazioni anche riguardo ad alcuni loci similes comici.

8. Vedi Gentili-Lomiento 126.

9. Questo il testo e la colometria del Ravennate (R), assetto per contro ritenuto inau tentico da Parker, 428, la quale cosi riordina e stampa i vv. 956 s.: tQut}?i?v xoqeloi? imcxye / ?alve xaQJta^LîOLV jto?olv (nella discussione che segue a p. 431, poi, mostra di non disde gnare Tinnecessaria traiectio ii?oa imaye suggerita da Austin). A proposito vedi Gentili Lomiento 121 e, pi? in gen?rale sull'alogos, p. 28.

10. Cf. Gentili-Lomiento 120. Non diversamente, com'? noto, la sostituzione delf ele mento breve con due brevi ? riscontrabile anche nel tetr?metro trocaico, sia in tragedia, pur limitata a due sole occorrenze in coincidenza con nomi propri, ehe in commedia (vd.

M. L. West, Greek Metre, Oxford 1982, 91): cf. almeno Eur. Or. 1535 o?yyov?v x' ?|ii]v FTvAa ?rjv, Epich. 53, 2 K.-A. ?aji?Qoi?ovec xe xai xixât, taxyoi ?Qaxovx?? x' ?Xxijioi e Ar. Ach. 318 vji?Q ejtii;?|vou 'deb'iooj xf|V xecpaXf|V e/cov ^?yeiv (recentemente S. D. Olson, Aristophanes. Acharnions, Oxford 2002, 161 cita a supporto Men. Dysk. 774, per cui rinvia a E. W. Han

dley, The Dyskolos ofMenander, London 1965, 71). 11. Vedi ad esempio i vv. 384 s. xqel? xaxaoxiou? ^cxpou?;/ oeiei, xqctvou? xaLX(i>[i\

ijjt'a?m?oc, in cui il poco perspicuo xaxaaxiou? ôcpou? ? esplicitato dall'apposizione xo? vod? xatxcD[ia: qui, specularmente al nostro passo, ? il nomen rei actae a specificare il nesso

32 STEFANO NOVELLI

natura intertestuale che, fugando l'esitazione circa la sintassi di zvv?v ?v

?qo? zvxvxovvxo? rispetto a xb^iove?, potrebbe risultare decisiva. La iun ctura, infatti, pare chiaramente foggiata su II. 18, 433 s., dove la madre di

Achille lamenta con Efesto di aver dovuto sopportare un connubio da lei mai desiderato, exb]v ?v?po? e?vqv / noXX? ?iaX5 otjx ?^?Xovoa: ma se qui

il letto' sul quale Teti aveva malvolentieri giaciuto era quello del marito

Peleo, nella dolorosa prefigurazione d?lie Tebane ?, malauguratamente, quello aLX^ia?coxov del nemico vincitore. Eschilo dunque, secondo l'enne simo modello di variatio in imitando, recupera e trapianta in lyricis una lo cuzione omerica, sintetizzandola e sfruttando l'espressivit? di xX%iove?, rispetto al quale e?w?v sar? owiamente accusativo di relazione e non pre dicativo del pi? lontano v?wxsqov x?Xo?. A complemento non marginale, infine, mette conto sottolineare corne la patente espressivit? del dettato trovi un prezioso pendant anche a livello metrico-prosodico, giacch? l'at tacco 'dattilico' all'interno di una sequenza a coloritura quasi totalmente trocaica sembra costituire un ulteriore segno del rapporto istituito con il

passo iliadico. Corne accennato, permangono alcune difficolt? per la comprensione

complessiva del passo. Le opinioni dei critici divergono infatti tanto sul si

gnificato quanto sul referente dell'espressione vvkxeqov x?lo?, che puo valere sia 'rito notturno', in relazione alle infauste unioni cui le fanciulle sarebbero costrette dal vincitore nemico, sia 'compimento notturno', cio?

'morte', secondo uno slittamento sem?ntico modellato su nessi ome

rici del tipo dav?xoio x?Xo? (T 309), o su pi? distese perifrasi illustranti il motivo d?lia Todesnacht.12 Conseguentemente, resta?o incerte tanto l'ac

cezione di ??m? che quella di ?jt?qqot}ov: mentre per il sostantivo, confor memente alla sua natura di vox media, si puo esitare fra il senso di 'attesa',

'speranza' e quello di 'paura', l'interpretazione corrente delLaggettivo ?, da Sch?tz in poi, quella di 'adiutor', che implica il passaggio dal valore pri

mario di 'fragoroso', 'impetuoso'

- attraverso il medium di ?mQQod?co in dicante 'sollevare un clamore in segno di approvazione', 'applaudire'

-

a

quello nettamente positivo di 'soccorritore', Tiberatore'.13 Nonostante

questa vulgata, pero, la menzione di e?v?v al v. 364 orienta l'asse seman

precedente nella sua qualit? di hapax e, contempor?neamente, di doublet di maggiore ca ratura

rispetto al pi? comune xa?xr|. 12. Ovvio il confronto con II. 13, 580 x?v ?e xax' ocpftaXfic?v eoe?evvrj vv'E, ex?XmjjEv, sul

quale ? a sua volta perspicuamente esemplato Sept. 403, ei y?o dav?vxi vvE, en 6[i\iao\. jx? 001 (questi luoghi sono gi? messi in relazione fra loro da A. Sideras, Aeschylus Homericus, G?ttingen 1971, 214).

13. Fra i loci similes che documentano questa seconda accezione sia sufficiente rinviare a Horn. II. 4, 390; 23, 770, Hes. Op. 560 e Apoll. Rh. 2, 225, 1050, 1068 e 1193 (come in

Omero, sempre davanti a dieresi buc?lica).

l'aMARO LETTO DELLE VERGINI (aESCH. SEPT. 363 SS.) 33

tico verso un ?mbito di chiara marca sessuale,14 per cui sar? lecito attri buire a x?Xoq il pi? coerente significato di 'rito nuziale' e dunque, preser vando in 8JTLQQof>ov l'idea denotata dal formante nominale, interpretare il gruppo corne 'atto notturno, clamore che si somma a pene molto lacrim?

se'.15 Sembrano confortare questa esegesi alcuni luoghi tragici in cui

qoDo? e composa sono accompagnati da lessemi che, come ? qui Kay>iXavT(?v, designano il 'pianto', il lamento' et simm.: nei w. 6 ss. di questa tragedia, ad es., Eteocle ?v ei? jto?,vj?... / i^tvo?f}5 vn ?ox v (prjoiuioi? jio?,DQQOf}oL? / OLjidby|iaoLv f}', cosi corne in Cho. 427 s. si legge xximcp ?' 8Jt8QQ?f>8L/ xqoxt]x?v ??i?v {xai} nav?^Xiov naga. Infine, in modo pi? li neare e conforme alio sviluppo del periodo e dell'intero c?rale, dove le

protagoniste sono sempre le vergini in preda al p?nico, il referente di

?uouxvoD? ?meox?oon dovr? dirsi v?xxeQov x??o? e non ?Am?, con il quale si avrebbe di contro un cambio di prospettiva che assuma come soggetto il conquistatore argivo.

Circa la sintassi, invece, creano qualche problema sia la mancanza di un verbo di modo finito riferibile al soggetto ?jico??e? xaivojrf]jiov??, sia il valore d?lia pericope d)? ?vjajievoD? ?meQx?oou. Se questa locuzione

viene intesa come parentesi esplicativa del precedente nesso genitivale, letto di un uomo fortunato, cio? di un nemico (rivelatosi) pi? forte', dovremmo ammettere una costruzione anacolutica in cui il periodo ini

ziale, prendendo le mosse dalla catena di nominativi, continua aut?no mamente con la sovraordinata ?bti? ?oxi... x?Xo? ?LO?e?v.16 In questo caso,

la iunctura ?[lool??? xaivojtf]ucrve? costituirebbe, secondo una figura ben attestata in Eschilo, un nominativus pendens irrelato con quanto segue,

ma collegato a ?Xm? eoxi con l'efficacia di una costruzione 'normale' del

14- Sul modello ?pico del x?ô? y?fioio, infatti, inducono a questa lettura iuncturae tra

giche quali ya\ii\kiov xekx (Aesch. Eum. 835) e y?jicov xeêux? (Suppl 1050, mentre un nesso quasi id?ntico si legge in Ag. 745). Non pare aflora inutile ricordare come Fimma

gine del destino di concubinaggio delle prigioniere si snodi come Leitmotiv da Omero (cf. ex. gr. 6, 456 ss. e 463 ss.) alle Troiane euripidee, punteggiate per lunghe sezioni da analo

ghe immagini che profilano il futuro di schiave di Ecuba e delle jmcêvoi sotto il giogo del vincitore (cf. in part, i w. 190 ss., 240-295, nonch? il gioco di poliptoti e figure etimo

logiche imperniati sulla nozione del y?jioc ai vv. 308 ss.). 15. Rimarchevole, inoltre, Fattacco 'pesante' costituito dal molosso jtayxXonjxoov in re

sponsione con il baccheo xiv' ex xcov?' della strofe, entrambi in grado di potenziare grazie al proprio ethos la Stimmung di sofferenza e concitata angoscia che caratterizza Tintero

stasimo (per un'an?loga liberta responsiva, questa volta in clausola, cf. ex. gr. Aesch. Ag. 978-990, su cui Gentili-Lomiento 233).

16. Coloro che hanno ritenuto intollerabile una simile deviazione sintattica, son? in

tervenuti o con l'inserzione di un verbo al v. 364 o con rimedi altrettanto diseconomici ai

versi successivi (ampio campionario in Wecklein): ad es. G. O. Hutchinson, Aeschylus. Seven against Thebes, Oxford 1985, 102 propone oel?T e?, con ?oxi sottinteso, mentre West

avanza cautamente in apparato xkx|iov evv?v |aix?i?â)xov}.

34 STEFANO NOVELL!

tipo: "quod attinet ad ancillas quibus... (oppure quarum) etc. ... iis manet spes".17

Lo sviluppo del discorso permette tuttavia una seconda alternativa sin

tattica, cio? quella di dividere il periodo in due segmenti segnando pausa dopo efJxuxoDvxo?. In tal modo, cb? introdurrebbe non una consecutiva o un genitivo assoluto, come peraltro si ? pensato, quanto piuttosto una causale epesegetica in cui ?uojievoiJ? ?)jt6QT8qotj sarebbe da connettere di rettamente con v?xxeoov x??o?. Questa opzione, che pare preferibile, avrebbe il vantaggio di evitare il pleonasmo determinato dall'accumulo dei quattro genitivi all'interno d?lia stessa frase e soprattutto di evitare l'anacoluto dei versi precedenti. La sequenza 6|ia)L?e? xaivojrrpovec;... xXr]|iov8? potrebbe cosi essere pi? f?cilmente intesa quale frase nominale esattamente corne il corrispettivo verso strofico, che appunto suona ?g jrayai ?? ?ia?oojaav ?|iciijiov8? ('saccheggi consanguinei di precipit?se corse'): la prefigurazione di un futuro di schiavit? si 'concretizza' nel sin tagma collocato in incipit al v. 363, che assume dunque una chiara accen tuazione enf?tica nell'icasticit? dell'immagine in primo piano.

Riordinati quindi in un quadro coerente i dati e gli argomenti fin qui esposti, il testo dovrebbe essere cosi inteso:

Da nuova pena afiflitte le giovani schiave

che subiranno il letto servile

di un uomo cui arride la sorte,

ch? del vittorioso nemico v'? presagio che giunga l'atto notturno, clamore ancora

aggiunto a pene molto lacrim?se.

Universit? di Cagliari

Abbreviazioni bibliografiche

Blomfield: C. J. Blomfield, Aeschyli Septem contra Thebas, Cantabrigiae 18172. Coulon: V. Coulon, Aristophane iv. Les Thesmophories, Les Grenouilles, Paris 1967. Dale: A. M. Dale, The Lyric Metres of Greek Drama, Cambridge 19682. Heath: B. Heath, Notae sive lectiones ad Tragicorum Graecorum veterum Aeschyli, So

phoclis, Euripidis quae supersunt dramata deperditorumque relliquias, Oxonii 1762. Hermann: J. G. Hermann, Aeschyli Tragoediae, Lipsiae et Berolini 1852. Martinelli: M. C. Martinelli, Gli strumenti del poeta. Elementi di m?trica greca, Bolo

gna 19972 Pauw: J. C. de Pauw, Aeschyli tragoediae superstites, graeca in eas scholia, et deperdi

17. Cosi M. Berti, 'Anacoluti eschilei', Rend. Ace. Lincei 6, 1930, 240. Dello stesso awiso anche H. J. Rose, A Commentary to the Surviving Plays of Aeschylus 11, Amsterdam 1958, 191, secondo il quale "there is no full stop till the end of the stanza and the whole is governed by ?XjcL? eon".

l'aMARO LETTO DELLE VERGINI (aESCH. SEPT. 363 SS.) 35

tarum fragmenta, cum versione latina et commentario Thomae Stanleii et notis F. Ro

bortelli, A. Turnebi, H. Stephani et G. Canteri, curante]. C. de P., cujus notae acce dunt mi, La Haye 1745.

Robortello: F. Robortello, Aioyv^ov xQaycp?ica ?itx?. Aeschyli tragoediae septem, Venezia 1552.

Scaligero: G. G. Scaligero, Marginalia in exemplari ?d. Vict., Lugd. Bat. Bibl. Univ.

756 D 21. Sch?tz: C. G. S. Sch?tz, Aeschyli Tragoediae quae supersunt ac deperditarum frag

menta 1, London 1808.

Weil: H. Weil, Aeschyli Tragoediae, Lipsiae 1884. West: M. L. West, Aeschylus Tragoediae, Stuttgart 1990 (19982). West IEG: M. L. West, Iambi et Elegi Graeci 11, Oxford 1972.

Thomas G?rtner

LEIDEN NACH DEM KRIEG. BEOBACHTUNGEN ZU DEN EURIPIDEISCHEN

TRAG?DIEN HEKABE UND TROERINNEN. I*

Eine vergleichende Betrachtung der euripideischen Trag?dien Hekabe

und Troerinnen bietet sich an, insofern in beiden St?cken im wesentli chen dieselbe Situation Gegenstand der dramatischen Darstellung wird: das Ungl?ck der trojanischen K?nigin Hekabe und anderer trojanischer Frauen nach dem Sturz Trojas. Das Kollektiv der leidenden Frauen wird in beiden F?llen durch einen Chor von Trojanerinnen repraesentiert, und

die dramatische Handlung wird jeweils durch eine Windstille erm?glicht, welche das griechische Heer an der Heimreise hindert. Die dramatische Situation der Hekabe liegt sagenchronologisch etwas sp?ter als die der Troerinnen: In der Hekabe hat das griechische Heer mitsamt seiner Ge

fangenen Troja bereits verlassen und die K?ste von Thrakien erreicht, w?hrend es sich in den Troerinnen noch unmittelbar vor Troja befindet

(den Abschlu? des St?cks macht die endg?ltige Ein?scherung der Stadt durch die Griechen). Die fast st?ndig auf der B?hne praesente Figur ist in beiden St?cken Hekabe selbst; die diese bedr?ngenden Ungl?cksf?lle sind zumindest in einem Fall identisch, denn in beiden St?cken erf?hrt Hekabe vom Tod ihrer j?ngsten Tochter Polyxena,1 die von Neoptolemos am Grab seines Vaters Achill auf die Forderung von dessen Totenschatten hin geopfert wird. Da? diese Opferung nach den Troerinnen zu einem

Zeitpunkt stattfindet, wo sich das griechische Heer noch in Troja befin det, nach der Hekabe dagegen sp?ter, als man bereits die thrakische K?ste erreicht hat,2 zeigt strenggenommen bereits die Inkommensurabilit?t der in beiden St?cken zugrundegelegten Mythen.

Die Troerinnen wurden im Jahr 415 aufgef?hrt zusammen mit den bei

* Der zweite Teil wird im n?chsten Heft dieser Zeitschrift erscheinen. i. In den Troerinnen erf?hrt sie hiervon allerdings erst nachtr?glich. Nach Stephano

poulos 93 vermeidet Euripides hier die Wiederholung gegen?ber dem chronologisch fr?heren St?ck Hekabe, welche sich erg?be, wenn er die Polyxena-Handlung erneut dra

matisierte. Dagegen betont Petersmann in seinem Aufsatz die eigenst?ndige Funktion, welche die derart gegen?ber der Hekabe verknappte Polyxena-Handlung im Zusammen

hang der Troerinnen hat (vgl. besonders a.a.O. 158; Erg?nzungen bei Manuwald 1987/ 88, 413 mit Anm. 44). Andererseits werden auch in der Astyanax-Szene der Troerinnen Ele

mente aus der Polyxena-Sequenz der Hekabe aufgegriffen, s.u. S. 23 ff. 2. Vgl. Stephanopoulos 83.

38 THOMAS GARTNER

den anderen gro?enteils verlorenen Trag?dien Alexandros3 und Palame des und dem ebenfalls verlorenen Satyrspiel Sisyphos. ?ber das Auf

fuhrungsdatum der Hekabe (und die anderen St?cke der Tetralogie) kann man nur Vermutungen ?u?ern; vor allem die metrische Technik weist das St?ck in die zwanziger Jahre des f?nften vorchristlichen Jahrhun derts,4 also auf einen fr?heren Zeitpunkt als die Troerinnen. Wenn Euripi des somit im Abstand von ungef?hr zehn Jahren zwei derart ?hnliche und sich teilweise (in der Polyxena-Handlung) sogar ?berschneidende Stoffe dramatisiert hat und dabei andererseits teilweise mythologisch inkom

mensurable Sagenversionen zugrundelegte, so mu? er zwei wesentlich verschiedene Sinnkonzeptionen verfolgt haben. Es ist das Ziel der na

chfolgenden ?berlegungen, die Qualit?t dieser beiden Konzeptionen und die aus ihnen hervorgehende verschiedene dramatische Umsetzung he rauszuarbeiten.

Die in beiden St?cken fast st?ndig auf der B?hne praesente Hekabe kann ihrer ?u?eren Lage nach keine Peripetie im aristotelischen Sinne

mehr erfahren: Sie ist bereits vor dem Einsetzen der jeweiligen dramati schen Handlung vom h?chsten Gl?ck (als kinderreiche K?nigin des

wohlhabenden Troja) in das ?u?erste Ungl?ck (als kriegsgefangene Skla vin der Griechen) gest?rzt. Insofern kann sie nicht mehr vom Gl?ck ins Ungl?ck geraten:5 Ihr Ungl?ck kann sich nur noch durch neue Ungl?cks f?lle um Bruchteile vergr??ern.

Nichtsdestoweniger liegt sowohl in der Hekabe als auch in den Troe rinnen eine bestimmte Form der Peripetie vor, die freilich jeweils auf v?l lig verschiedenen Ebenen des dramatischen Geschehens angelegt ist.

i. Die Troerinnen

Die Interpretation der Troerinnen hat von dem einleitenden G?tterdialog zwischen Poseidon und Athene auszugehen. Der in dieser Version troja nerfreundliche Meeresgott Poseidon schickt sich nach dem Sturz von

Troja an, seine verwaisten und verw?steten Kultst?tten zu verlassen. In diesem Augenblick wird er von der eigentlich griechenfreundlichen G?ttin Athene angesprochen, die im vorausgegangenen Krieg

- an dem sich entsprechend epischer Tradition auch beiderseits die verschiedenen

3. Separate Ausgabe der Fragmente des Alexandras: Snell. Zur neu gefundenen Hypothesis: Coles (Nachtr?ge bei W. Luppe, Philologus 120,1976,12-20).

4. Vgl. Mossman 10 mit Anm. 19. 5. Die Aussagen von Meridor 1991/ 92, 2 und Dunn 23 ?ber die Troerinnen gelten glei

cherma?en f?r die Hekabe; speziell zur Hekabe vgl. Rabinowitz 110. Analogien zu einem solchen Plot, der im wesentlichen eine vorausgegangene Peripetie "verarbeitet", sucht in der attischen Trag?die Scodel 138 f.

BEOBACHTUNGEN ZU HEKABE UND TROERINNEN 39

Gottheiten beteiligten -

auf der Poseidon feindlichen Seite stand und sich insofern mit dem Meeresgott momentan nicht auf gutem Fu?e befindet.

Nach einem etwas steifen Gespr?chsauftakt bezieht Athene den Poseidon in ihren Plan ein, sich im folgenden gegen die Griechen zu wenden und diesen durch ein Unwetter eine verlust- und schmerzreiche Heimkunft zu bereiten. Ihren pl?tzlichen Stimmungsumschwung gegen die Griechen

begr?ndet Athene mit der frevelhaften Mi?handlung der Kassandra in ihrem Heiligtum durch den Griechen Aias.

Abgeschlossen wird das Prolog-Gespr?ch durch eine auf die Griechen

gem?nzte Verallgemeinerung Poseidons: "Dumm ist unter den Sterbli

chen, wer St?dte zerst?rt: Nachdem er zun?chst Tempel und Gr?ber, die

Heiligt?mer der Verstorbenen, der Ver?dung preisgegeben hat, geht er

sp?ter selbst zugrunde".6

Zur Verteidigung der ?berlieferung und zur richtigen Interpunktion vgl. Manu wald 1989, der die ?berlieferte Textfassung folgenderma?en deutet: "T?richt der Sterbliche, der St?dte verheert. (Denn) Tempel und Gr?ber, heilige St?tten der Toten, gibt er (sc. durch seine Tat) der Ver?dung/ Verw?stung anheim und geht

(erfahrungsgem??; gnom. Aor.) sp?ter selbst zugrunde/ ... Nicht besondere Ta ten ?ber die Vernichtung von St?dten hinaus fuhren also zum Untergang, son

dern Euripides l??t Poseidon sagen, da? beim Verheeren von St?dten zwangs l?ufig Dinge geschehen, die eigentlich nicht geschehen sollten und die sich er

fahrungsgem?? r?chen" (a.a.O. 243 f.; vgl. auch Manuwald 1987/88, 400). In sp? teren Arbeiten hat man versucht, die Worte aik?c c?^ef}5 ?jcrteQov in den von ??xic abh?ngigen Relativsatz zu ziehen: Dyson nimmt an, da? das erste xe in Vers 96 die Verben ?xjro?>f}el und eoXexo verbindet: "...the folly ...consists in a conqueror coming to grief after he has wiped out the most sacred institutions of a commu

nity. How stupid it is ...to do such awful things to others and in so doing destroy oneself, how stupid to embark on an enterprise which has effects of such enor

mity on others, and then, through blundering into the pitfalls of impiety with

which such operations are beset, to bring ruin upon one's own head" (a.a.O. 30).

Dagegen will Ko vacs 1996, um dieselbe syntaktische Auffassung zu erm?gli chen, mit Blomfield ebendieses xe in ?? ?ndern: "T?richt ist der Sterbliche..., der zwar St?dte erobert, aber danach selbst ins Verderben ger?t. Das Wort [i??qo? ma

cht es klar, da? der Zugrundegehende durch tadelnswerte Torheit umkommt, und der unmittelbare Kontext legt es nahe, da? diese Torheit in der Entfremdung von g?ttlichen Bundesgenossen besteht" (a.a.O. 1996, 99).

Wieder anders ?ndert Holzhausen a?xo? in avjxo? und versteht: "Ein Dumm

kopf unter den Sterblichen ist, wer St?dte, Tempel und Gr?ber, Heiligt?mer der Toten, zerst?rt und sie dadurch der Ver?dung preisgibt, und dann selbst

6. Eur. Tro. 95-97: fuoQoq ?? trvrjxwv ?axic ?xjtOQdE? jt?Xeic* vaou? te xi3(.i(3ou? ?)\ iep? x?)v X?X[it]x?t?)v, ep?fita Ootj? or?x?? oj^ed' ijoxeQov.

40 THOMAS GARTNER

nachher umkommt" (a.a.O. 30). Den Grund f?r den eigenen Untergang sehen Kovacs 1996 und Holzhausen in dem von den Griechen nicht geahndeten Frevel

des Aias gegen Kassandra, Dyson dagegen in der Ver?dung von Tempeln und Gr?bern.

Demnach w?rde sich Poseidon nach Kovacs 1996 und Holzhausen die Argu mentation der verletzten Athene

zueigen machen; nach Manuwald und Dyson formulierte er hingegen ein gegen?ber dem bisherigen Prolog neuartiges Prinzip h?herer Gerechtigkeit. Die Neuartigkeit des sich nach dieser Deutung ergeben den Gedankens der drei Schlu?verse gegen?ber dem bisherigen Verlauf des Pro

logs wird betont von Manuwald 1989, 244-247, der a.a.O. 246 spricht von "s?kula

risierter Gerechtigkeit solonischer Pr?gung" (hiergegen Holzhausen 31); Kovacs 1996, 101 hebt gegen Manuwald die in diese Ideen liegende "Spannung zu ihrem

Kontext" hervor. Gemeinsam ist allen vier Interpretationen (Manuwald, Dyson, Kovacs 1996, Holzhausen) die Denkvoraussetzung, da? Poseidon den Untergang der Sterblichen (konkret: der Griechen) in irgendeiner Weise kausal-schuldhaft

mit deren eigenem Verhalten in Verbindung bringt (mag er speziell an den Fre vel gegen Kassandra oder allgemein an Frevel gegen heilige Instanzen der ero berten Stadt denken). Gerade diese Denkvoraussetzung ist aber nach der im fol genden gegebenen Interpretation des G?tterprologs fraglich: Denn dieser Posei don ist seinem Wesen nach weder an den Vers?ndigungen der Griechen gegen Athene noch an der Herstellung einer h?heren Gerechtigkeit durch die Abstra

fung von Frevlern gegen Sakralinstanzen interessiert. Die Dummheit, die er den Griechen in h?hnischer Form vorwirft, besteht nicht in einem moralischen

Fehlverhalten, sondern in ihrer Ahnungslosigkeit ?ber das von Poseidon und Athene vorbereitete Verh?ngnis, welches ihr momentanes Wirken als St?dtezer

st?rer ad absurdum fuhren wird.

Was die Entscheidung ?ber die richtige sprachliche Form der Sentenz angibt, so erweist sich ein Blick auf die im folgenden hervorgehobene Parallele in der

Hekabe-Rede (1203-1206) als hilfreich. Da hier die Sentenz ?ber die Dummheit (t>vr)Tcov ?? ?LicoQo? ogxl? ei) Jio?aaeiv ?ox?rv/ ?e?aia xotLQa) begr?ndet wird durch eine Verallgemeinerung ?ber die Wechselhaftigkeit des Geschicks, scheint es

w?nschenswert, die Sentenz ?ber die Dummheit in 95 durch eine der Verallge meinerung in 1204-1206 (tol? TQOJTOL? y?o cu t?r/ai,/ eujtXnxro? ob? av&ocojco?, aXXox' ?XXooE/ Jtr|??)oi, xovj?ei? or?r?? erku/e? jcoxe) entsprechende Konkretisierung be gr?ndet sein zu lassen. Das Asyndeton ist als sprachliche Variation zu einem be

gr?ndenden y?g (1204) ohne Ansto?, und die gesuchte Konkretisierung ergibt sich, wenn man die Verse 96 f. mit Manuwald als syntaktische Eiinheit nimmt, freilich zwischen Partizip und Hauptverb kein kausales, sondern ein temporales

Verh?ltnis annimmt: "Nachdem er [auf dem H?hepunkt seines Gl?cks] Tempel und Gr?ber [der eingenommenen Stadt] ver?det hat, st?rzt er nachher selbst in den Untergang [also ins Ungl?ck]". Einerseits Zerst?ren fremder St?dte und an dererseits

eigener Untergang sind gewisserma?en die extremen Alternativen des

Gl?cks bzw. Ungl?cks, welches das menschliche Geschick potentiell in sich schlie?t; zu dieser Vorstellung vgl. das Chorlied in Aisch. Ag. 471-474: xq?voo ?'

acpdovov ?X?ov/ urjT5 elY|v jitoXlji?qOtjc,/ ut]x' ovjv a?x?? cdo?? vn a\-l A.cov ?iov xaxL?oiui.


Im letzten Satz beschreibt Poseidon das Paradoxon, da? Menschen, die eben noch das Allerheiligste einer fremden Polis-Gemeinschaft vernich teten, im n?chsten Moment selbst zugrundegehen.7 Diese Aussage ist nicht im Sinne einer Vorstellung g?ttlicher Gerechtigkeit oder Vergel tung zu verstehen, in dem Sinne, da? auf die mit der Zerst?rung einer Stadt notwendig verbundenen Frevel gegen Tempel und Grabst?tten mit ebensolcher Notwendigkeit eine vergeltende Bestrafung f?r die frevel haften Sieger folgte. Wenn diese Deutung zutr?fe, w?rde Poseidon am Ende des Prologs in der Tat eine gewisserma?en pazifistische Warnung vor der kriegerischen Zerst?rung von St?dten aussprechen. Diese An sicht wird von einem gro?en Teil der modernen Forschung vertreten; in

folgedessen tritt der Gesichtspunkt strafw?rdiger griechischer Verfehlun

gen, die weniger in der Tatsache des milit?rischen Siegs selbst als im Ver halten der siegreichen Griechen nach der Eroberung liegen, in den Mit

telpunkt der Interpretation des gesamten St?cks.

Der erw?hnten Ausrichtung der modernen Forschung tritt Kovacs in seinem Auf satz von 1997 entgegen, wo er sich speziell gegen die Auffassung richtet, Euripides

wolle durch eine Aufzeigung griechischer Hybris das Verhalten der Athener bei der Einnahme von Melos kritisieren, vgl. besonders a.a.O. 166: "What this play suggests strongly in all its parts is that it was the gods who destroyed Troy, with

Helen and the Greeks as their instruments" ; 176 : "There is far too much about the role of the gods in the destruction of Troy for us to make a facile connection bet

ween Troy and Melos" ; das St?ck sei ein "bracing reminder that uncertainty about the future is the human condition's most salient feature, and that it is the part of a

wise man not to take today's happiness for granted". Die letztgenannte -

von Ko

vacs zu Recht festgestellte -

euripideische Aussagetendenz l??t sich vor allem erh?rten durch die im folgenden gegebene Neuinterpretation der Schlu?sentenz Poseidons im G?tterprolog; Kovacs 1997, 171 (mit Anm. 10) h?lt an seiner zuvor

(1996) vertretenen Deutung von Tro. 95-97 fest, vgl. oben S. 39.

Doch erzwingt der griechische Text eine Deutung der Worte Poseidons im Sinne einer Bestrafung, welche kausal-schuldhaft auf eine Verfehlung folgt,8 keineswegs: Die logische Verbindung zwischen den Verbalbegrif fen

"Ver?dung von Tempeln und Gr?bern" und "eigener Untergang" er

folgt durch die Subordination eines Partizips unter ein Hauptverb, welche kausalen Sinn haben kann, aber nicht mu?. Aufgrund des Temporal

7. Roisman 46 f. sieht in den Worten eine historische Anspielung auf das Handeln der Spartaner im Peloponnesischen Krieg. Dyson/ Lee (a.a.O. 17. 22) bringen die Er

w?hnung der ver?deten "Gr?ber" mit der am Schlu? des St?cks dargestellten Bestattung des Astyanax durch Hekabe in Verbindung.

8. Vgl. etwa Meridor 1984, 209 f.: "... Poseidon in his final gnome insists that it is the

conquerors' devastation of the holy places that brings desaster on them (96 f.)'\

42 THOMAS GARTNER

Adverbs "sp?ter" (?oxeQov) liegt ein nur temporales Verst?ndnis des lo

gischen Verh?ltnisses mindestens genauso nahe.

Eine enge Parallele f?r das nicht-kausale, nur temporale Verh?ltnis bietet der

Ausspruch des Teukros, der von seinem Vater Telam?n verbannt wurde, weil er

den Selbstmord des Aias nicht teilte, und auf die Frage, ob er nach Troja gekom men sei, antwortet (Eur. Hei. 106):

xai ?vjv ye ii?Qoaz, amo? ?vTajrtoX??ir]v.

Das Ungl?ck des Teukros ist offenkundig keine Strafe f?r die Zerst?rung Trojas oder f?r besondere Vergehen bei der Einnahme der Stadt, und dennoch wird das

eigene Ungl?ck nachdr?cklich (vgl. onjt??; und das Kompositum ? v x anoA?^v) als eine Art von Ausgleich

- nicht jedoch als selbstverschuldete Vergeltung - f?r das zerst?rerische Wirken bei der Einnahme Trojas herausgestellt. Poseidon hat in den vorigen Versen die Vorbereitungen des gegen die heimkehrenden Griechen gerichteten Seesturms beschrieben und sich be reits ein grausiges Bild der an die K?sten angetriebenen Leichen der Schiff

br?chigen ausgemalt.9 Die Gottheit, die sich somit im vollen Bewu?tsein ihrer Zerst?rungsgewalt befindet, macht sich in den letzten Worten gera dezu lustig ?ber die Ahnungslosigkeit der Griechen, die von ihrem bevor stehenden Ungl?ck noch nichts wissen. Diese Ahnungslosigkeit wird in

beinahe zynischer Weise als "Dummheit" bezeichnet und mit einem gno mischen Erfahrungssatz beschrieben, der die von Poseidon im vollen Bewu?tsein seiner eigenen Gewalt herbeigef?hrte Entwicklung als eine

objektive Gesetzm??igkeit darstellt: "Wie t?richt sind doch Sterbliche, die (wie jetzt die Griechen) St?dte zerst?ren: Sie vernichten das Allerheiligste einer fremden Stadt, aber wenig sp?ter gehen sie selbst zugrunde (wovon sie freilich noch nichts wissen)". Die den St?dtezerst?rern unterstellte "Dummheit" liegt also nicht darin, da? sie bei ihrem Tun Vers?ndigun gen auf sich laden, f?r die sie sp?ter mit ihrem Untergang b??en m??ten, sondern einfach darin, da? ihr extremes, gegen die heiligsten Werte einer anderen Stadt gerichtetes Handeln durch ihren eigenen bevorstehenden

Untergang ad absurdum gef?hrt wird. Wer eine fremde Stadt zerst?rt, handelt naturgem?? im Bewu?tsein eigener Kraft und St?rke. Solches Handeln wird aber durch einen unmittelbar folgenden eigenen Unter

gang des Zerst?rers in Frage gestellt. Wenn der St?dtezerst?rer, der eben noch unerbittlich gegen die Tempel und Gr?ber der fremden Polis vor

ging, im n?chsten Augenblick selbst zugrundegeht, kann man sein "Han deln" aus einer ?bergeordneten, g?ttlichen Perspektive als "dumm" be zeichenen - nicht, weil es moralisch fehlerhaft w?re, sondern weil es an der Tatsache des bevorstehenden eigenen Endes v?llig vorbeigeht.

9- Eur. Tro. 89-91.


So scheint die Verse auch Murray 143 zu verstehen, dessen freie (und daher die genaue grammatisch-sprachliche Auffassung des ?bersetzers nicht widerspiegeln

de) Wiedergabe der Verse folgenderma?en lautet: How are ye blind Ye treaders down of cities, ye that cast

Temples to desolation, and lay waste

Tombs, the untrodden sanctuaries where lie

The ancient dead, yourselves so soon to die.

Nach dieser Deutung besteht die "Dummheit" nur in der (jedem normalen Men schen eigenen) Blindheit gegen?ber der eigenen Zukunft: Wenn man dagegen in 96 f. eine auf dem Vergeltungsprinzip beruhende Weltgerechtigkeit ausgedr?ckt findet, so w?re die "Dummheit" vor allem eine (schuldhafte) Mi?achtung dieses universalen Gerechtigkeitsprinzips. In diesem Sinne legt sich die Nachdichtung von Walter Jens fest:

Ihr Narren! Menschen, die ihr glaubt, Man k?nne St?dte niederbrennen Und aus Gr?bern W?sten machen, Ohne selbst zugrund zu gehn.

Der Gedanke, da? die Zerst?rung fremder St?dte ohne anschlie?enden eigenen Untergang unm?glich ist, impliziert ein moralisches Weltgesetz, welches jegli chen ?bergriff als Straftat ahndet.

Eine solche Aussage, wie sie nach der hier vertretenen Deutung vorl?ge, mutet dem sprechenden Gott freilich ein erhebliches Ma? an Zynismus zu, ja, es l??t ihn geradezu ung?ttlich erscheinen: Nicht eine moralisie rende Lehre wird ausgesprochen, welche den Untergang der Griechen

rechtfertigen und zugleich andere Sterbliche vor ?hnlichem Ungl?ck war nen k?nnte, sondern ein sarkastischer Kommentar ?ber die als Dumm heit bezeichnete Ahnungslosigkeit der Griechen, welche, noch gegen die

Heiligt?mer Trojas w?tend, ihren eigenen kurz bevorstehenden, von den G?ttern selbst herbeigef?hrten Untergang nicht vorausahnen. Das

Vorgehen gegen Heiligt?mer und Gr?ber wird nicht als etwas f?r sich Frevelhaftes angesehen, sondern nur als eine sinnlose und t?richte Hand

lung vor der Folie des von Poseidon selbst betriebenen bevorstehenden

Untergangs der Griechen. Dieses G?tterbild entspricht aber genau der Tendenz der gesamten Un

terredung zwischen Poseidon und Athene. Wie begr?ndet Athene ihr

Vorgehen gegen die Griechen? S

Documents

Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura Classica, 78 (2004)