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 Γενναῖον of Oedipus in Sophocles’ Oedipus at Colonus The Oedipus in Sophocles’ Oedipus at Colonus at first glance seems an unlikely hero: he is blind, filled with shame, and is doomed to a life of wandering around Greece bereft of a polis. However, by the end of the play, he assumes the function of cult hero, who will provide a continual benefit, κέρδη (OC 92, 578, 579), to the city of Athens as a savior, σωτήρ (OC 460, 463; Burian 1974). While some scholars have sought to minimize the role of Oedipus’ apparent heroization to the meaning of the play (e.g., Linforth 1951), it nevertheless functions as important plot device that must be integrated into any cohesive scholarly interpretation (e.g., Bowra 1944, Mikalson 1991). One aspect to this point neglected in the study of Oedipus as cult hero the degree to which the Oedipus’ innate nobility, his γενναῖον, factors into his fittingness to become Athens’ σωτήρ. At the beginning of the play, the importance of this concept is set forth when Oedipus programmatically describes his important characteristics to the audience (7-8): “My sufferings, the long expanse of time, and thirdly my nobility (τὸ γενναῖον) are what have taught me to go on.” Falling in the important third spot in this list, the quality of nobility remains an important theme throughout, the term recurring no less than five more times to describe both Oedipus and Theseus as king of Athens (8, 76, 569, 1042, 1636, †1640†). This paper will argue that the nobility of Oedipus factors heavily into his eventual heroization at the end of the play and explore the consequences that entail from such an interpretation. Most notably, it will suggest that the connection between heroization and nobility highlights the problem of how to integrate an institution (namely hero cult) that traditionally served as a way to glorify tyrant-like figures into the burgeoning democracy that was forming at the same time as tragedy itself (Carter 2011). This problem is especially important in the consideration of Oedipus at Colonus, which Sophocles likely composed between 409 and 406 BCE, but was not actually staged until after 402BCE—all these dates point to a time when democracy was challenged by the denouement of the Peloponnesian War. By exploring this angle of Oedipus’ heroization, I hope to add to the burgeoning field exploring the intersections of Sophoclean poetry and concepts of democracy (e.g., Wilson 1997, Beer 2004, Markantonatos 2007) as well as to the established study of Greek hero cult as a religious practice (e.g., Kearns 1989, Antonaccio 1995, Ekroth 2002). Works Cited: Antonaccio, Carla M. 1995. An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece. Lanham, MD. Beer, Josh. 2004. Sophocles and the Tragedy of Athenian Democracy. Contributions in Drama and Theatre Studies 105. Westport, CT. Bowra, C.M. 1944. Sophoclean Tragedy. Oxford. Burian, Peter. 1974. “Suppliant and Saviour: Oedipus at Colonus.” Phoenix 28: 408-29. Carter, D.M., ed. 2011. Why Athens? A Reappraisal of Tragic Politics. Oxford. Ekroth, Gunnel. 2002. The Sacrificial Rituals of Greek Hero-Cults in the Archaic to the Early Hellenistic Periods. Kernos Supplement 12. Liège. Kearns, Emily. 1989. The Heroes of Attica. BICS Supplement 57. London. Linforth, Ivan M. 1951. “Religion and Drama in Oedipus at Colonus.” University of California Publications in Classical Philology 14: 75-191. Markantonatos, Andreas. 2007. Oedipus at Colonus: Sophocles, Athens, and the World. UaLG 87. Berlin. Mikalson, Jon D. 1991. Honor Thy Gods: Popular Religion in Greek Tragedy. Chapel Hill. Wilson, J.P. 1997. The Hero and the City: An Interpretation of Sophocles’ Oedipus at Colonus. Ann Arbor.