Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
The Contradictions of Freedom in Euripides' Children of Heracles In this paper I argue that Euripides’ Children of Heracles dramatizes the internal contradictions in the Athenian ideology of eleutheria (“freedom”). In particular, two distinct concepts of polis freedom were promoted by the Athenian propaganda of the early Peloponnesian War years, when this play was performed (cf. Raaflaub 2004: 181-93): the freedom to rule over others, and freedom from foreign domination. I show how these two concepts are evoked at the beginning of the play, through Euripides’ condensed suppliant plot, in ways that initially suggest the compatibility of these two freedoms; thus Demophon is convinced by the rhetorical arguments in the agôn that he must defeat the Argive army in order to preserve the Athenians’ territorial integrity. But Alcmene’s act of revenge (928-1055), and the reversal of power between the suppliants and their Argive persecutors, bring these two concepts of freedom into conflict at the end of the play. Although it was commonly believed that a lacuna was present after line 1052 (for this argument see Wilkins 1993), Allan (2001) has recently provided strong arguments in favor of the integrity of the text and the coherence of the ending in our manuscripts. My paper, therefore, will follow Allan’s defense of the transmitted text, and will focus on the reversal in this final dramatic movement, in order to argue that the play is more deeply aporetic, particularly in its political stance, than has been recognized. Freedom is a keyword of the drama, as several features make clear: (1) eleutheria and its cognates occur more often here (thirteen times) than in any other extant tragedy, (2) the setting of the supplication in Marathon, with its evocation of the Athenian victory over the Persians, appears to be a Euripidean innovation, (3) the invocation of Zeus Agoraios (70) may be an allusion to the recently constructed Stoa of Zeus Eleutherios in the Athenian agora (Rosivach 1978), and (4) the Athenian funeral orations exploited the legend as evidence of their city’s devotion to absolute freedom throughout its history (e.g. Lysias 2.11-16). Although earlier scholars interpreted such elements as proof of the play’s patriotic intent (e.g., Spranger 1925, Delebecque 1951: 83, Fitton 1961: 460, Goossens 1962: 190), these readings underplay the significance of the final scene (as noted by Burian 1977: 16), in which the Athenian chorus acquiesces to Alcmene’s murder of Eurystheus, despite an Athenian decree prohibiting the murder of prisoners of war. Parodoxically, the Athenian decision to use military force against the Argives – an expression of the freedom to rule others – leads to the erosion of the other concept of freedom (the absolute sovereignty of the polis within its borders). For Alcmene seizes the opportunity provided by the reversal in power to disregard the Athenian nomos (961-77) and to kill Eurystheus. Although Eurystheus’ death will benefit Athens (through the protective power of his tomb), this fact does not resolve the contradictions within the ideology of freedom that Alcmene’s action (and the Chorus’ consent) have exposed. The play’s delight in the paradoxical nature of freedom makes it difficult to read Children of Heracles as a mystification of Athenian imperial interests (Tzanetou 2005). While the contemporaneous political rhetoric of, for example, Pericles’ funeral oration (Thuc. 2.35-46) constructs a natural linkage between these two concepts of freedom, Euripides’ play brings into the open contradictions that the Athenian political orators, for instance, are at pains to smooth over. BIBLIOGRAPHY Allan, W. (2001), Euripides: The Children of Heracles. Warminster. Burian, P. (1977) ‘Euripides’ Heraclidae: An Interpretation’, Classical Philology 72: 121. Delebecque, E. (1951), Euripide et la Guerre du Péloponnèse. Paris. Fitton, J. (1961) ‘The Suppliant Women and the Heraclidae of Euripides’, Hermes 89: 430-61. Goossens, R. (1962). Euripide et Athènes. Brussels. Raaflaub, K. (2004), The Discovery of Freedom in Ancient Greece. Chicago. Rosivach, V. (1978) ‘The Altar of Zeus Agoraios in the Heracleidae’, Parola del Passato 33: 32-47. Spranger, J. (1925) ‘The Political Element in the Heraclidae of Euripides’, Classical Quarterly 19: 117-29. Sternberg, R. (2005), Pity and Power in Ancient Athens. Cambridge. Tzanetou, A. (2005) ‘A Generous City: Pity in Athenian Oratory and Tragedy’, in Sternberg, ed. 98-122. Wilkins, J. (1993), Euripides Heraclidae. Oxford.