Teiresias, the seer of Oedipus the King - Leeds International ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HANNA M. ROISMAN, TEIRESIAS, THE SEER OF OEDIPUS THE KING In a previous paper (1999) I suggested that Sophocles included Teiresias in the play in order to protest the cruelty of the gods who were allowing the Athens of Sophocles’ day to suffer from the plague. While I still hold to this view, I have come to feel that it does not do full justice to the pivotal role that Teiresias performs in the play. This paper, which covers not only Sophocles’ Teiresias but also the very different seer of Seneca’s Oedipus, presents the development of my thinking on the sage. Since one can never answer with certainty the question ‘why’ an author did what he or she did, I will shift focus here to the interrelated matters of Teiresias’ characterization and functions in the two plays. 1. Sophocles’ Teiresias I start with Sophocles’ characterization of Teiresias, for this is crucial to both his dramatic and thematic functions in the play. Teiresias comes on stage a walking disappointment. The Chorus advise Oedipus of Teiresias’ access to Apollo’s thoughts and suggest that he may find out the murderer’s identity from the god: ‘I know that lord Teiresias sees things in the same way as Lord Apollo, from whom anyone examining these things might learn most clearly’, they say (¥nakt' ¥nakti taÜq' Ðrînt' p…stamai / m£lista Fo…bJ Teires…an, par' oá tij ¨n / skopîn t£d', ðnax, km£qoi safšstata, 284-6). 3 When they see Teiresias approaching, they speak of him as a ‘godly prophet, in whom alone of all men truth lives by nature’ (tÕn qe‹on ½dh m£ntin ïd' ¥gousin, ú / t¢lhqj mpšfuken ¢nqrèpwn mÒnJ, 298f.). Oedipus, for his part, greets Teiresias as one who, ‘grasps everything, things that can be taught, and things that are unspeakable, things that are in heaven, and things that walk the earth’ (ð p£nta nwmîn Teires…a, didakt£ te / ¥rrht£ t' oÙr£ni£ te kaˆ cqonostibÁ, 300f.). 4 Listening closely, one may detect a certain tentativeness in these lines. The Chorus says that one ‘might learn’ the murder’s identity from Teiresias, using the optative form km£qoi, not that one will learn it. Oedipus observes that some of what Teiresias knows is unspeakable. Nonetheless, their expectations are of an allknowing seer who will unravel the mystery of the pollution that has been afflicting their city—a seer who knows the truth and will reveal it. The seer of their expectations is much the same venerable and prescient seer who, in Homer, had informed Odysseus, from the depths of the Otherworld, how to return home to Ithaca, what would await him there and how he would end his days, and who had advised him on the pitfalls to avoid—namely the island of Thrinacia and the cattle of Helios—and on the rituals to perform. The Homeric Teiresias is a seer who warns and informs. In this respect, he serves Sophocles as a model for the Teiresias of the Antigone, who urges Creon to retract his refusal to allow the burial of Polynices and warns him of the consequences of his obstinacy, 3 I follow Jebb, on line 284, in reading taÜq' Ðrînt' as ‘seeing in the same manner’. 4 Champlin (1969) 339 comments: ‘Was Teiresias, as an exponent of truth, on the general level of an Old Testament prophet? Sophocles speaks of him as cognizant of ineffable heavenly matters. The strictures of the play demanded only that he possess a full awareness of past and future human affairs.’ Owen (1968) 33, describes Teiresias as one ‘whose name stands in story as synonymous with true prophecy.’ For the suggestion that Teiresias might not speak what scholars assume to be the ‘truth’ see Ahl (1991) 88f. 2
HANNA M. ROISMAN, TEIRESIAS, THE SEER OF OEDIPUS THE KING as well as for the prophet Calchas in the Ajax, who sends word to Teucer to keep Ajax in his tent for the day on which Athena will come to avenge his failure to honor her properly. That the warning in Antigone falls on deaf ears and arrives too late in Ajax is the fault of flawed men, not of the seers themselves. They do their job. They do their best to avert catastrophe by sharing their knowledge with those who should benefit from it. This is the type of seer that the Chorus, Oedipus, and, most likely, the audience all expect. This is not the seer they get. Teiresias comes on stage a grumpy old curmudgeon, most reluctant to share his knowledge. Oedipus, distraught by the plague that has infected the city, greets him with respect and implores his assistance: sÝ d' oân fqon»saj m»t' ¢p' o„wnîn f£tin, m»t' e‡ tin' ¥llhn mantikÁj œceij ÐdÒn, ·àsai seautÕn kaˆ pÒlin, ·àsai d' mš. ·àsai d p©n m…asma toà teqnhkÒtoj. n soˆ g£r smen: ¥ndra d' çfele‹n ¢f' ïn œcoi te kaˆ dÚnaito k£llistoj pÒnwn. (310-5) Do not grudge now any voice from birds nor any other road of prophecy that you have, save yourself and the city, and save me, save us from all the defilement of the dead. For we are in your hands, and it is the noblest of labors for a man to help as he is able and has power to. Teiresias’ response to this moving—and humble—supplication sounds like a selfcentered moan: ‘How dreadful to have wisdom when it brings no profit to the man that is wise!’ (feà feà, frone‹n æj deinÕn œnqa m¾ tšlh / lÚV fronoànti, 316f.). Teiresias makes it clear that he came against his will and better judgment. Initially, he refuses outright to divulge what he knows. Then he reveals it bit by bit, in a gallingly opaque manner. He first tells Oedipus that he is the one who is polluting the country (353), then some nine lines later that he is the murderer he is seeking (362), and another four lines later that he is living in shame with those he most loves (366f.). To the inner audience, unfamiliar with the myth, these disclosures, extracted from Teiresias against his will, are so unintelligible that they leave the Chorus bewildered (404f., 483f.), and their telling is so protracted and lacking in supportive evidence that they leave Oedipus disbelieving and increasingly angry. 5 5 Easterling (1979) 125 summarizes Tycho von Wilamowitz’s view: ‘The dramatic power ... is in the contrast between the knowing seer and the unsuspecting Oedipus, with Oedipus forcing the full revelation of his guilt out of Teiresias. The characters understand only what is necessary for the action and do not hear the rest.’ Gellie (1972) 85f. notes: ‘it is not only that the wording is often cloudy and cryptic; the key link in Teiresias’s chain of argument is omitted. The argument has three steps: Oedipus killed Laius, Oedipus was son of Laius, Oedipus is now living in incest. Teiresias never states the second of these acts, and therefore the third, the taunt of incest, comes out unattached, seemingly only a wild and brutal slur. It is not given the chance to make rational contact with Oedipus’s mind.’ For a discussion of the order of revelation and its impact on Oedipus’ lack of immediate understanding of his situation see Bain (1979). Owen (1968) 33 sees in Oedipus’ lack of understanding of Teiresias’ replies, which reveal everything, a dramatic device 3
Page 1: Leeds International Classical Studi
Page 5 and 6: HANNA M. ROISMAN, TEIRESIAS, THE SE

Teiresias, the seer of Oedipus the King - Leeds International ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?