Seneca's Hercules Furens: Theme, Structure and Style 9783666251450, 9783525251454

Citation preview

HYPOMNEMATA 50

HYPOMNEMATA U N T E R S U C H U N G E N ZUR ANTIKE U N D ZU I H R E M N A C H L E B E N

Herausgegeben von Albrecht Dihle/Hartmut Erbse/Christian Habicht Hugh Lloyd-Jones/Günther Patzig/Bruno Snell

H E F T 50

VANDENHOECK

& R U P R E C H T IN

GÖTTINGEN

JO-ANN

SHELTON

Seneca's Hercules Furens Theme, Structure and Style

VANDENHOECK & RUPRECHT IN G Ö T T I N G E N

CIP-Kurztitelaufnahme der Deutschen

Bibliothek

Shelton, Jo-Anti Seneca's Hercules furens : theme, structure and style. - Göttingen : Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1978. (Hypomnemata ; Bd. 50) ISBN 3 - 5 2 5 - 2 5 1 4 5 - 9

© Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht in Göttingen 1978. - Printed in Germany. Ohne ausdrückliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es nicht gestattet, das Buch oder Teile daraus auf foto- oder akustomechanischem Wege zu vervielfältigen Gesamtherstellung: Hubert Sc Co., Göttingen

FOR MY MOTHER, HELEN JOHNSON SHELTON

Preface For much of this century, critics of Roman literature simply dismissed Seneca's tragedies as poor imitations of Greek plays. In recent years, however, Seneca has found a more sympathetic audience, and critical evaluations of his plays have stressed his creativity as a writer. I hope that my work, too, will help to clarify Seneca's originality in the interpretation and dramatization of myth. My work on Hercules Furens began with a doctoral dissertation at the University of California, Berkeley, under the supervision of Professor W.S.Anderson, to whom I am indebted for his helpful criticism and friendly advice. I wish also to acknowledge my debt to Professor C . J . Herington, of Yale University, who read an earlier version of the manuscript and made many very valuable suggestions. I learned a great deal from the criticism of both these men; they are, of course, in no way responsible for the errors or faults of this book. I am grateful to the Editors of California Studies in Classical Antiquity for permitting me to include in Chapter 1 material which appeared in a somewhat different form in their journal. I want to thank Kay Asakawa, Luba Karpynka and Marcia Stroud not only for typing the manuscript but also for offering some valuable comments about the style. I am indebted to the Editors and the editorial staff of Hypomnemata for their generous help in preparing the manuscript for publication. And, though last, certainly not least, I want to thank my husband Daniel Higgins for all his support and encouragement. Santa Barbara, California August 1977

Jo-Ann Shelton

Table of Contents Introduction

11

Chapter 1.

Seneca's Use of Prologues and Dramatic Time

Chapter 2.

The Supporting Characters: Seneca's Techniques of

17

Characterization

26

Chapter 3.

The Function of the Chorus

40

Chapter 4.

Theseus' Description of the Underworld

50

Chapter 5.

The Main Character: Seneca's Concept of the Tragic

Chapter 6.

Hero

58

Structural and Thematic Unity

74

Bibliography

84

Indices

89

1. General Index

89

2. Index of Passages quoted or referred to

93

Introduction The purpose of this work is to identify some of the interests and techniques of Senecan tragedy through a careful examination of the theme, structure and style of Seneca's Hercules

Furens.1

Seneca's tragedies are

examples of a form of drama which differs widely, and consciously so, from earlier Greek drama, yet t o o often they are judged not on their o w n merits, but as adaptations from the tragedies of fifth century Athens. 2 Seneca's plays are not, however, poor imitations of Greek plays; they exhibit originality and creativity in both theme and style. The differences in the myth of Hercules' madness, as it appears in Seneca's Hercules

Furens and Euripides' Herakles,

are instructive. 3 Euripi-

des interpreted Herakles' madness as a demonstration of the gods' total lack of concern for man's suffering, and an indication of the impassable distance between the human world and the divine. 4 In order to develop this 1 For recent bibliography, see M. Coffey, "Seneca, Tragedies 1922-1955," Lustrum 2 (1957) 113-186; H.J.Mette, "Die Römische Tragödie, 1945-1964," Lustrum 9 (1964) 1 8 - 2 3 ; 1 6 0 - 1 9 4 ; Senecas Tragödien, ed. E. Lefèvre (Darmstadt 1972)583-592. 2 See, for example, N.T. Pratt, "From Oedipus to Lear," C/ 61 (1965) 54: "these pathetically inferior products of the Greek tradition." However, the comments of L.A. MacKay, "The Roman Tragic Spirit," CSG4 8 (1975) 1 4 5 162, provide a sensible counter-balance to those critics who argue that Seneca "must have" followed Greek models. See especially 153 and 154. 3 For a thorough and very valuable comparison between the two plays, see C. Zintzen, "Alte virtus animosa cadit," in Senecas Tragödien, 149—209, who maintains throughout that Seneca does not simply vary Euripides, but gives a totally different philosophic interpretation to the fate of Hercules; also L. Castiglioni, "La tragedia di Ercole in Euripide e in Seneca," RFIC 54 (1926) 176— 197, 3 3 6 - 3 6 2 ; and T.B.B. Siemers, Seneca's "Hercules Furens" en Euripides' "Heracles" (diss. Utrecht 1951). 4 For some discussions of this1 play, see U. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Euripides Herakles (Berlin 1895); J.T. Sheppard, "The Formal Beauty of the Hercules Furens," CQ 10 (1916) 7 2 - 7 9 ; E.R.Dodds, "Euripides the Irrationalist," CR 43 (1929) 9 7 - 1 0 4 ; E.M. Blaiklock, The Male Characters of Euripides (Wellington 1952); W. Arrowsmith, intro. to trans., Heracles in Euripides II, The Complete Greek Tragedies, edd. D. Grene and R. Lattimore (Chicago 1956) 4 4 - 5 7 ; H . H . O . Chalk, "Αρετή and βία in Euripides' Heracles," JHS 82 (1962) 7 - 1 8 ; A.W.H.

11

theme, he made a number of important changes in the story, placing Herakles' madness, for example, after, rather than before, the twelve labors for Eurystheus, so that he is at the height of his glory when the disaster strikes. 5 He also introduced to the story Lycus, and Theseus who represents a code of honor which demands that one help one's friends and harm one's enemies ( 5 8 5 - 6 ; 1 1 6 6 - 7 1 ) . 6 By dramatizing at length the arrival of Iris and Lyssa, 7 and Lyssa's unwillingness to cause madness in Herakles (815ff.), Euripides made it clear that the madness is caused by Hera and the arbitrary will of the gods. 8 Herakles learns that the gods are not concerned with justice or injustice as they are conventionally interpreted in the human world. 9 Human love and friendship are therefore more valuable to man than any divine favors. 1 0 Adkins, "Basic Greek Values in Euripides' Hecuba and Hercules Furens," CQ N.S. 16 (1.966) 1 9 3 - 2 1 9 ; D.J. Conacher, Euripidean Drama - Myth, Theme and Structure (Toronto 1967); A.P.Burnett, Catastrophe Survived - Euripides' Plays of Mixed Reversal (Oxford 1971); G.Karl Galinsky, The Herakles Theme (Oxford 1972) esp. 56ff. 5 Two other sources for the story of Herakles' madness are Apollodorus 2.4.11 and 12, and Diodorus Siculus 4.10 and 11, who offer the most complete account of the incidents which precede and follow the madness. Although their works are late, their accounts agree with accounts earlier than Euripides which place the madness near the beginning of Herakles' career, before the famous twelve labors. For example, Bacchylides, epinikiort 5 (B. Snell, Leipzig 1961) 155 ff., describes a meeting between Herakles and Meleager in Hades. Herakles has gone to Hades to capture Cerberus. Meleager speaks of Deianira, i.e. the murder of Megara occurred before, rather than after the journey to Hades. Pisander, fr. 10 (G. Kinkel, Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, Leipzig 1877) says that Herakles performed his deeds έπΐ καθάρσει τών κακών. 6 Friendship is a major motif in the play. Amphitryon, Megara, and the chorus often lament the fickleness of friends who have deserted them in their misfortune (e.g. 55—9, 2 1 7 - 2 2 8 , 559), and Herakles is angry when he discovers how false his supporters have proved to be (562ff.). At the end of the play, however, when all other human priorities are shown to be transitory, only friendship has real value. 7 Galinsky, 58, compares Iris and Lyssa to Kratos and Bia in Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound. Their appearance "points up the profoundly unjust and cruel nature of the gods' repugnant treatment of the noble Herakles." 8 Cf. Burnett, 175, and Conacher, 80. 9 Herakles unintentionally became a rival of the gods while he was trying to help mankind (20). They perceived his return from the Underworld as a threat to their power (841-2). 10 Galinsky, 65: "It is the men who aspire to a standard which the gods do not care to attain." Man is weak, but in his friendship and love he can become noble. 12

Euripides' structural innovations, particularly his placing of the madness after, rather than before, the twelve labors, underline an original interpretation of the meaning of the myth. The structure of Seneca's play differs from that of Euripides in many important respects. In Euripides' play, for example, the prologue is given by Amphitryon, who provides background information to the events we are about to see and then moves directly into the scene with Megara. His prologue is really part of the first scene. Seneca's opening monologue is completely separate from the rest of the play. The information which Juno gives is not background information, but rather a brief summary of the events in the play. Then, instead of the debate between Megara and Amphitryon which is found in Euripides' play, there is in Seneca a debate between Lycus and the other characters. Theseus, a character whom Euripides introduced into the story, also appears in Seneca, but he enters at the same time as Hercules, rather than arriving later, as in Euripides, to bring help; Theseus' long description of the Underworld has no parallel in the Greek play. Two other characters, Iris and Lyssa, used by Euripides to dramatize that the madness is caused by Hera, do not appear in Seneca's play. Nor does Pallas interfere to halt the murders because again Seneca excludes divine intervention and has Hercules sink into a stupor of exhaustion. Then, when Hercules awakens, he discovers for himself his crime. This self-discovery is of great importance in Seneca; in Euripides, Amphitryon explains to Herakles what he has done. The structural differences between these two plays are important indications of the playwrights' differences in thematic interest, and they suggest that Seneca was not trying to imitate a Greek play, but was in fact reinterpreting the myth. Euripides understood Herakles' madness as an example of man's vulnerability to the insensitivity and cruelty of the gods; and he used the visit of Iris and Lyssa to explain the divine interference. Seneca excludes these figures and places more emphasis on portraying the transition between Hercules' previous behavior and the onset of his destructive rampage. I have tried in this book to show that Seneca used the myth to explore the psychology of human madness and to demonstrate that insanity originates within the individual and develops gradually. Rather than examining the problems of man in an irrational universe, as Euripides had done, Seneca examined the problems of the irrational man. Hercules, not the gods, is responsible for his own disaster, 13

because emotional excess (ambitious pride) has gained dominance over the rational element in his soul. The psychological theory is, of course, Stoic, 1 1 although it is a mistake to consider the play as simply a philosophic treatise in verse. 1 2 Seneca realized that the dramatic form offered exciting possibilities for exploring certain moral and philosophic problems. 1 3 He therefore sought to dramatize the conflict in the human soul and the psychological processes which determine the actions of the characters in the myth. I have devoted a good portion of this book to an explication of Seneca's methods of characterization, his interest in psychological interpretation of action, and the correlation between the development of the theme and the development of the character of the hero. I want to show that Seneca's interest and intention is psychological drama, and that the structural and stylistic techniques he employs are well suited to producing successful psychological drama. The question of whether or not the play was in fact staged has not been resolved. 14 Most modern critics, however, agree at least that Seneca intendA. M. Marcosignori, "II concetto di virtus tragica nel teatro di Seneca," Aevum 34 (1960) 2 1 7 - 2 3 3 , discusses Seneca's emphasis on man's struggle with the violent force within. For a discussion of Stoic views of passions, impulse and assent, see J.M.Rist, Stoic Philosophy (Cambridge 1969) 2 2 - 3 6 , 3 9 - 4 1 , 1 8 2 184, and F.H. Sandbach, The Stoics (New York 1975) 5 9 - 6 8 , 1 5 9 - 1 6 1 . 1 2 Consider the comments of B. Marti, "Seneca's Tragedies. A New Interpretation," TAPA 76 (1945) 2 1 6 - 4 5 ; "The Prototypes of Seneca's Tragedies," CP 42 (1947) 1-16; "Place de L'Hercule sur l'Oeta dans le corpus des tragédies de Sénèque," REL 27 (1949) 1 8 9 - 2 1 0 ; and, more recently, W. Jamroz, "Stoicka Inspirala Sztuki Seneki Hercules Furens," Eos 60 (1972) 2 9 3 - 3 0 7 ; C.M. King, "Seneca's Hercules Oetaeus: A Stoic Interpretation of the Greek Myth," G &R 18 (1971) 217: "Hercules . . . embodies the Stoic ideal of virtus." However the Hercules of Seneca's philosophic prose is quite different, much less complex, than the Hercules of the plays. See for example Bett. 1.13.3; Ben. 4.8.1; Tranq. Anim. 16.4; Const. Sap. 2.1. Some critics maintain that the "philosophizing" in Seneca's tragedies does not go deeper than "thought coloring." See, for example, C. Garton, Personal Aspects of the Roman Theatre (Toronto 1972) 197. 13 Ep. 8.8: Quam multi poetae dicunt, quae philosophis aut dicta sunt aut dicenda! Non adtingam trágicos nec togatas nostras. Habent enim hae quoque aliquid severitatis et sunt inter comoedias ac tragoedias mediae. Cf. the comments of G. Mazzoli, Seneca e la poesia (Milan 1970) esp. 7 0 - 7 2 , 134-138. There are, of course, dramatic elements even in Seneca's prose; see B. L. Hijmans, "Drama in Seneca's Stoicism," TAPA 97 (1966) 2 3 7 - 5 1 . 14 Renaissance and modern revivals have proved that the plays can be staged. We do not have enough information to know if or how they were presented in 11

14

ed the play to be heard (rather than read silently to oneself) and that his dramatic verse is, as Herington suggests, "designed, no less than the verse of Marlowe or Racine, for its effect on the e a r . " 1 5 We are left, then, with three possibilities: 1) Seneca intended the play to be recited; 2) he intended it to be performed, but it was not performed in his lifetime; 3) he intended it to be performed and it was in fact performed in his lifetime. Our present evidence does not allow us to make an absolute decision in this matter. Today's theatre-goer, however, might find the search for a distinction between performance and recitation less pressing than earlier critics have, since we have been exposed recently to an even wider variety of theatrical experimentation and have been treated to some one-man performances which could be labelled either as plays or as readings. 16 Seneca's tragedies are dramatic literature, whether or not they were performed in his own day, and whether the performance was a theatrical spectacle, a closet-drama or a one-man reading. Hercules

Furens is a peculiar blend of rhetorical, mannerist, 17 philoso-

phical and psychological drama; it is distinctively Senecan, 18 and definitely Seneca's own time. L. Herrmann, Le théâtre de Séttèque (Paris 1924) 153 — 196, answered most of the early objections to staging. For a modern discussion about recitations and dramatic performances at the time of Seneca, see O. Zwierlein, Die Rezitationsdramen Senecas (Meisenheim 1966). Zwierlein uses the available evidence to suggest that the plays were intended only to be recited. For a recent refutation of Zwierlein, see W. M. Calder III, "The Size of the Chorus in Seneca's Agamemnon," CP 70 (1975) 3 2 - 3 5 , who maintains that the plays were performed on smaller Vitruvian stages; also L.A. MacKay, esp. 145—156. The dispute continues! 15 C.J. Herington, "Senecan Tragedy," Arion 5 (1966) 444. 1 6 Consider the dramatic quality of readings such as Dear Liar (Jerome Kilty) or Don Juan in Hell (G.B.Shaw); or the highly dramatic one-person readings by Hal Holbrook (i.e. Mark Twain tonight). The distinction between dramatic performance and dramatic recitation was probably blurred also in the time of Racine. 17 Seneca's mannerist style of composition has been examined by C. Wanke, Seneca, Lucan, Corneille: Studien zum Manierismus der Rötnischen Kaiserzeit und der Französischen Klassik (Heidelberg 1964) and E. Burck, Vom Römischen Manierismus (Darmstadt 1971). There are, however, many other mannerist elements in Seneca's plays (the exaggeration and subsequent distortion of characters, for example, or the ambiguity in the dramatist's response to his main character); the whole question of Seneca as a mannerist writer needs much more attention than it has so far been given. 18 Cf. the comments of W.H. Friedrich, "Die Raserei des Hercules," in Senecas Tragödien 131—148, about the style and hyperbole of Roman drama; E. Paratore, 15

not an imitation of Euripides. The purpose of this book is to point out some of the identifying features of Senecan drama. I have discussed critical problems in the order in which they first present themselves within the development of the plot. The play readily lends itself to such a treatment. For example, the opening monologue presents the problems of the dramatic function of Juno and of Seneca's manipulation of dramatic time. It was therefore convenient to discuss these problems at the beginning of the book and to have my first chapter correspond to his first scene. The early scenes, moreover, introduce all the supporting characters, and therefore Seneca's methods of characterization can be discussed in the context of the first part of the play. Hercules himself, who does not appear until line 592, dominates the latter part of the play. We can thus examine theme and interpretation of the hero as we examine the last part of the play. Not all the problems, of course, can be so easily blocked out, but I have tried to maintain, as far as it is possible, a correspondence between the developing discussion of the problems of Senecan tragedy and the developing plot of the play. I have based my comments about Seneca's characters, style and dramatic techniques on my close study of the Hercules Furens. Many of my conclusions do, however, relate also to his other plays and indicate the techniques, interests and problems of all Senecan tragedy. "Originalità del teatro di Seneca," Dioniso 31 (1957) 5 3 - 7 4 , considers Seneca's theatre a theatre without catharsis, a theatre documenting human desperation (69); O. Regenbogen, "Schmerz und Tod in den Tragödien Senecas," Kleine Schriften, ed. F. Dirlmeier (Munich 1961) 4 0 9 - 6 2 , discusses Seneca's originality in analysis of emotion and maintains that Seneca reflects the interest of his own period in new techniques for the representation of emotion and analysis of character; see also MacKay (supra n. 2).

16

CHAPTER

1

Seneca's Use of the Prologue and Dramatic Time

Seneca's skill as a psychological dramatist can be observed in his use of dramatic time and of the dramatic prologue. 1 Time in any play, or novel or epic for that matter, seldom represents actual elapsed time because the author includes only the action and dialogue which is relevant to his purpose and theme. It is possible, however, to maintain a forward movement from one event to its successor, and to make dramatic time correspond to real time. 2 Instead of imitating real time, however, Seneca manipulated the dramatic time, first by removing events from a chronological sequence and dramatizing one actual moment in two or three different scenes; and secondly by alternating temporally static scenes with scenes of considerable action. I want to show how this manipulation of dramatic 1 For other discussions of Seneca's prologues, see F. Frenzel, Die Prologe der Tragödien Senecas (diss. Leipzig 1914); N.T.Pratt, Dramatic Suspense in Seneca and his Greek Precursors (diss. Princeton 1939); G. Runchina, "Tecnica drammatica e retorica nelle Tragedie di Seneca," AFCL 28 (Cagliari 1960) 1 8 0 - 2 3 1 ; K. Anliker, Prologe und Akteinteilung in Senecas Tragödien (Bern 1960); E. Paratore, "Il prologo dello Hercules Furens di Seneca e VEracle di Euripide," Quaderni della RCCM 9 (1966) 1 - 3 9 ; K. Heldmann, Untersuchungen zu den Tragödien Senecas (Wiesbaden 1974) 1 - 8 9 . W.H. Owen, "Time and Event in Seneca's Troades," WS 4 (1970) 1 1 8 - 3 7 , has noticed in the Troades the same overlapping of events and manipulation of dramatic time which I have noticed in the Hercules Furens. See also A. L. Motto and J.R. Clark, "Senecan Tragedy: Patterns of Irony and Art," CB 48 (1972) 6 9 - 7 6 , who discuss Seneca's manner of presenting pictures in clipped segments rather than as a continuous sequence. 2 Cf. Euripides' Herakles. The play opens at a point when the action has already begun and the story moves steadily forward from there, so that the dramatic time and the events are meant to correspond to real time. At a number of points, the fortune of the characters suddenly shifts from bad to good and back again, but the action nonetheless moves forward steadily.

17 2

Shelton, Hyp. 5 0

time allows Seneca to explore the psychology of the action in his plays. In the Hercules Furens, for example, Seneca uses the temporal distortions as a means to reveal that Hercules' madness is not a sudden occurrence, but a gradual internal development. The prologue of the Hercules Furens (1—124) provides an example of Seneca's method of dramatizing one temporal moment in two or more scenes. Although this technique of presenting simultaneous events linearly is not unusual, 3 other scholars have failed to recognize its use in this play. For example, Juno expresses her fear that Hercules will challenge Heaven: iter ruina quaeret, 6 7 . 4 In 74, however, she suddenly describes this challenge as a present reality: quaerit ad superos viam. Anliker noted the change in tense from future to present and suggested that Juno has confused the sequence of events which she herself causes, 5 that she anticipates, and changes possibility to reality. Anliker calls this passage a "causal anachronism." 6 I think, however, that there is another explanation for the change in tense. Juno begins her speech with an angry complaint about the confusion in the universe now that mortals enter Heaven and her rivals hold power there. 7 Hercules is the particular target of her hatred and fear. He is Homer uses this technique frequently. The plans of the gods and the actions of men occur simultaneously, but are described linearly. Consider Iliad 15. 154 ff. Zeus sends to earth two messengers, Iris and Apollo. They probably depart Olympus at the same time, but their departures and fulfillment of their missions are described linearly. 4 Passages of Hercules Furens quoted in my text are from the edition of J. Viansino (Turin 1965). I have given variant readings in the footnotes. 5 Anliker, 4 6 - 8 ; however Anliker's discussion of this prologue is, in general, thorough and scholarly. 6 Ibid. 47. "Es liegt gewissermaßen ein 'Kausaler Anachronismus' vor." Cf. Κ. Trabert, Studien zur Darstellung des Pathologischen in den Tragödien des Seneca (diss. Erlangen 1953) 35—36. 7 W.H. Owen, "Commonplace and Dramatic Symbol in Seneca's Tragedies," TAPA 99 (1968) 307, says that Juno's descent to earth is an inversion of the deification theme so prominent in this play. "It (the motif of astronomical figures) has become a vivid symbol of the overreaching which is the key to Hercules' personality and his tragedy." For another discussion of Hercules' "overreaching" and Seneca's use of astronomical figures, see H.J.Mette, "Die Funktion des Löwengleichnisses in Senecas Hercules Furens," "WS 79 (1966) 4 7 7 - 4 8 9 . Heldmann, 16, also 2 1 - 2 6 , notes that Juno, like Tantalus in Thyestes and Thyestes in Agamemnon, and quite unlike the divinities in Athenian prologues, comes to earth unwillingly. She has been forced out of Heaven, and is angry and afraid. 3

18

assuming rights allowed only to the gods: toto deus/narratur orbe, 3 9 - 4 0 . Recently he accomplished the impossible by returning from the Underworld and thus destroying the strict boundary between mortal and immortal: foedus umbrarum perit, 49. 8 Because of this triumph, he is now even more proud and boastful: spolia iactantem patri/fraterna, 5 1 - 5 2 ; robore experto turnet, 68. We should note here that Juno is describing as an accomplished fact Hercules' safe return, although in Act I his family is still waiting for him to leave the Underworld. Demersus ac defossus et toto insuper /oppressus orbe, quam viam adsuperos habet? (317-18) Juno's speech is not an expository prologue, informing the audience of the events of the play before they actually occur.9 She does not predict future occurrences, but, rather, discusses present events: de me triumphat et superbifica manu/atrum per urbes ducit Argolicas canem, 58—9. Seneca has made his monologue scene a distinct temporal unit in which time moves forward at a different speed than it does in Acts I, ff. The events of Act I, moreover, do not follow in temporal sequence the events of the opening scene. In fact, Acts I, ff. repeat the events of the "prologue" so that one temporal point or moment receives dramatic treatment twice: first in the opening scene, and then in a later act. 10 Hercules, for example, returns twice. Juno had seen Hercules leading Cerberus through the cities of Argolis. He does not leave the Underworld "again" until 520 ff. effregit ecce limen inferni Iovis et opima vieti regis ad superos refert. vidi ipsa, vidi nocte discussa inferum et Dite domito spolia iactantem patri fraterna.

(47-8)

(50-2)

Zintzen, 1 6 1 - 1 6 2 , suggests that Juno is a representation of Fate who sees in Hercules' deeds the imminent destruction of the divine order. 9 Castiglioni, 180, suggests that Amphitryon's first speech is the "true prologue" of the play. Paratore, RCCM 7, and 14ff. thinks that Hercules modelled this prologue after the prologues of Euripides' Hippolytus and Bacchae, and used it, instead of an Iris-Lyssa scene later, to provide more unity in the play. Heldmann, Iff., also suggests possible Greek models for this prologue, although he sensibly points out that Seneca has not restricted himself to a close imitation of the Greek use of the prologue. 10 Cf. Chrysippus' view of time, that no time is strictly present (SVF 2. 5 0 9 518). Stoic views of time may have influenced Seneca's dramatic handling of it. 8

19

atrum per urbes ducit Argolicas canem. viso labantem Cerbero vidi'diem pavidumque Solem. Cf. cur mugit solum? audimur: est, est sonitus Herculeigradus.

(59-61) (521 and 523)

By dividing one temporal moment and dramatizing simultaneous events linearly, Seneca produced for the audience two points of perspective of the dramatic events: the superhuman perspective of the opening scene and the human perspective of the rest of the play. Juno describes a sequence of events and thoughts in Hercules' mind, and, as she speaks, the point of time moves forward rapidly. First she fears that Hercules, filled with confidence about his strength, may challenge Heaven (iter ruina quaeret, 67) and seize power from Jupiter (sceptra praeripiens patri, 65). Next she states that he is actually challenging Heaven (quaerit ad superos viam, 74). Juno's words reflect the change in Hercules' own attitude. The shift in tense from quaeret (future) to quaerit (present), which worried Anliker, signifies that dramatic time has advanced in this scene, from Hercules' return from the Underworld to his insane attack on Heaven. When Juno leaves the stage, we retreat to a time corresponding to the beginning of her speech. The time of Act I therefore precedes rather than follows the time of the opening scene. Now we watch, from a human perspective, the dramatization of the events which lead to Hercules' insane challenge to the gods in Act III: inferna nostras regna sensere impetus: immune caelum est, dignus Alcide labor, in alta mundi spada sublimis ferar, petatur aether. vincla Saturno exuam contraque patris impii regnum impotens avum resolvam.

(956-9)

(965-7)

Although Juno's descriptions and Hercules' thoughts and actions occur simultaneously, they are presented dramatically in different parts of the play 11 , and the audience perceives one temporal moment twice. 12 11 Owen, WS 124, speaks of the counterpoint between real and dramatic time in the Troades. He says that "the experienced dramatic present has become iterative." 12 There are other examples in Seneca's tragedies of this distortion of dramatic

20

Seneca's manipulation of dramatic time and experiments with the function of the prologue allow him to demonstrate human responsibility for actions. He can represent on stage how psychological, not external, forces determine the behavior of the characters. He can emphasize what Wolfgang Clemen has called the "inward tragedy." 13 And he can prepare the audience so that it is not "overwhelmed by the impact of . . . inner and outer events following closely one upon another." 1 4 Juno's divine nature enables her to perceive processes hidden from mortal sight. Through her words, we learn of, even as they are occurring, the progressive stages in the development of Hercules' pride, ambition and madness. He is successful in his exploits {cf. 33); he is worshipped as divine (39—40); he has stormed the Underworld and returned (47ff.); he is proud and boastful (51, 58); he is challenging Heaven (74—5); he is his own worst enemy (85). The opening scene provides an explanation of a psychological development. Pride and ambition motivate Hercules' actions. And madness is an extension of boastfulness. 15 When we go back in time to the level of physical action (Acts I, fi.), and watch from a human perspective the same sequence of events (from Hercules' return to the final stage of his insanity), we possess an understanding of the forces determining his behavior. In Act III, Hercules' madness seems a sudden occurrence to his family; we, however, are well aware of the mad pride which has led to the development of this irrationality because Juno's words have disclosed Hercules' thoughts. We may identify with the characters' reactions, but we can at the same time reject their attitudes because the dramatist's skillful manipulation of time, and consequent preparation of two points of perspective, have given us superior knowledge of the thoughts in Hercules' mind. time. In the Thyestes, the sun retreated in horror at Atreus' deeds only once, but the event is described by a number of different people so that it seems to occur a number of times when in reality they are describing the same event. I.e. 776ff. (nuntius); 789ff. (chorus); 892ff. (Atreus); 990ff. (Thyestes). 13

Wolfgang Clemen, English Tragedy before Shakespeare, trans. T.S. Dorsch

(London 1961) 4 0 and 2 2 4 ; he speaks of "the variety of approach in Seneca's contemplation of what goes on in the minds of his characters."

Clemen, Shakespeare's Dramatic Art (London 1972) 4. Cf. De Ben. 2.13.1: O Superbia, magnae fortunae stultissimum malum ... ut omne beneficium in iniuriam convertís. Ep. 106.6: superbia is a morbus 14 15

animorum. One passion, not checked by reason, leads to total destruction of the mind: de Ira, 1.7. 2 - 4 .

21

Although Seneca has used a goddess as a dramatic character, he is not suggesting that the gods control human actions. 1 6 Quite the opposite. He insists on human responsibility for human actions 1 7 and his use of a goddess in the opening scene is simply a technique which allows him to present to the audience processes not normally visible to humans, and to explore, therefore, the psychology of his characters. 1 8 Juno, who does not appear again after the opening scene, serves two purposes as a dramatic figure. At the beginning of the scene, when she expresses her jealousy of her husband's mistresses, she appears as a divine personality, the jealous goddess of myth. In this role, as a divinity, she has the power to reveal the thoughts in Hercules' mind. As the scene progresses, however, she emerges more as an evil force than a personality, as Vergil's Juno similarly appears on one level as the divine personality and on another level as the force of disorder and irrationality. 19 Juno's second function in the play, then, is to represent irrationality. 20 Although she speaks at first of obstacles which she has created for Hercules, she later admits that she

1 6 Juno is the only divinity to appear anywhere in Seneca's tragedies, and in only three plays do supernatural figures appear in the opening scenes (Hercules Furens, Thyestes, Agamemnon), although M. Braginton, The Supernatural in Seneca's Tragedies (Menasha 1933), 33f., considers as gods the Fury in Thyestes and Hercules himself at the end of Hercules Oetaeus\ As Heldmann points out, 16, all three prologists complain of their helplessness. At any rate, it is doubtful that the Stoic Seneca would suggest, as Euripides did, that a god was capable of evil or cruelty. See Alex. Aphrod., de Fato 37 (SVF 2.1005) and Seneca, Ep. 95.36; Ep. 65.10; Ben. 7.31.4, for the Stoic view that the gods are good. 17 Ep. 98.2: Errant enim, Lucili, qui aut boni aliquid nobis aut mali iudicant tribuere fortunam. Ep. 53.8: Quare vitia sua nemo confitetur ... vitia sua confiteri sanitatis indicium est. 18 Cf. the use of Tantalus in the prologue of Thyestes. Tantalus personifies the lust in the house of Atreus. Here, too, Seneca dramatizes in two places one event (the banquet) in order to explain the motivation of the characters. See my article, "Problems of Time in Seneca's Hercules Furens and Thyestes," CSCA 8 (1975)

257-269.

1 9 Frenzel, 40 ff., and Runchina, 185ff., discuss the similarities between Seneca's Juno, and that of Vergil (and Ovid). (Paratore, RCCM 16ff., indicates similarities in the phrasing of Euripides' Iris and Seneca's Juno.) 2 0 Rather than Fate, as Zintzen, 151-162, suggests. See Paratore, RCCM 33 ff., for a discussion of Juno's role not just as a representation of Furor but as a force in the human soul.

22

has lost control over Hercules' actions and that he himself is his own worst enemy: 2 1 quaeris Alcidae parem? nemo est nisi ipse: bella iam secum gerat. et se vincat et cupiat mori ab inferís reversus.

(84-5) (116-17)

When Juno states at the end of her speech that she herself must become mad (107-9), Seneca wants us to realize that Hercules' enemy is not a goddess, but the irrational force which dwells in his mind and motivates his actions: stabo et, ut certo exeant emissa nervo tela, librabo manu, regam furentis arma.

( 118 - 2 0 )

It is madness which directs his weapons. Juno is a vivid dramatization of the disorder in the human mind. 22 There are other examples in the play where a simultaneous event is described linearly. In the third choral ode (830-94), the chorus knows that Hercules has returned from the Underworld, but not that he has gone to punish Lycus. This ode must be occurring at the same time as the speech of Theseus, which the chorus does not hear. Seneca provides us with two reactions to Hercules' return, Theseus' reaction and the chorus'. Because Lycus' murder is largely ignored, while both Theseus and the chorus describe the Underworld victory at length, Seneca creates the impression that the murder of the family occurs immediately after the return from the Underworld. He thus emphasizes the irony of the situation. 21

In Hercules Oetaeus, Hercules complains bitterly that he is being destroyed by an enemy he cannot see (1250, 1 2 6 3 - 1 2 6 4 ) . Here, too, the threat of being attacked from within is a much greater hazard than confrontation with a monster which can be overcome by physical strength. M. L'Abbé E. Dutoit, "Le thème de 'la force qui se détruit elle-même'," REL 14 (1936) 3 6 5 - 7 3 , discusses the interest among Roman writers in the idea of self-destruction. 22 Trabert, 35 ff., is correct in thinking that Seneca has put Juno on stage as Hercules' enemy; but Juno at the end of this scene is not the goddess, as Trabert suggests, but a dramatization of the madness within Hercules, i. e. his real enemy, the one that instigates his actions. 23

The second aspect of Seneca's manipulation of time which I want to discuss is the fluctuation from scene to scene in the speed of plot advancement. In some scenes, time is suspended; in others, considerable time passes and much action occurs. For example, we expect the arrival of Lycus in Act I to produce action - either the murder, or the rescue of the family. Instead, he, Megara and Amphitryon debate the definition of virtus. There is no action. Instead of moving forward in time, we move deeper into an understanding of the characters and their motivations. When, at the end of the debate Lycus summons his men to burn the palace, we are suddenly jolted forward in time. We now know that the moment of Hercules' arrival has come (Juno's speech assured us he would return). Lycus' order for torches breaks into the suspension of action and draws us into the next point of time. Similarly, Hercules' arrival pulls us forward in time, but we remain at this one point for another two hundred lines while Theseus describes the Underworld and the achievements of Hercules. The effect of this alternation of static present with movement forward is to produce two levels of development in the play, psychological development and plot development. The debate in Act I and the Underworld description in Act II increase our understanding of Hercules' character and the importance of his deeds, although there is no plot action in these scenes. After Theseus' lengthy and static description, an explosion of action occurs when Hercules murders his family. Because there is so little physical action in the play, the murders are all the more shocking. Amphitryon's detailed description creates an effect similar to a slow motion sequence in a movie. 23 Is Seneca catering to his audience's love of horror If the play was produced on stage the murders probably were hidden from view, perhaps behind the temple into which the family ran. The scaenae frons represents the temple into which Megara and the children run to hide from the mad Hercules. Hercules tries to tear the building down: 23

hue eat et illuc valva deiecto obice rumpatque postes, culmen impulsum labet perlucet omnis regia.

(999-1001)

Perhaps for the production of this play, the central door of the scaenae frons can be only loosely hinged, and Hercules can then actually tear away the door. What is visible to the audience through the doorway is Hercules chasing his

24

and his own fascination with violence? 24 I think that we are forced to absorb each grim and frightening detail so that we may be disgusted by the uncontrollable cruelty which loss of reason causes. The effective use of violence and action at this one specific point allows Seneca to stress the terrible and tragic nature of the deed. Seneca's manipulation of dramatic time and use of the prologue reveal, his independence as a dramatic writer. He experimented with traditional forms and techniques and discovered methods of dramatizing his interpretation of Hercules' madness as an internal, psychological development. family within the temple. The murders themselves take place behind portions of the temple which remain standing and which block the view of the audience. For more suggestions about staging this play, see MacKay, 150—151. If we employ such techniques to dramatize the scene, we avoid a murder scene almost impossible to stage with real actors (in contugem nunc clava libratur gravis: /perfregit ossa, corpori trunco caput/abest nec usquam est, 1024-26), - although we know that murders were enacted on stage in Seneca's time (Suetonius, Caligula, 57) — but we still allow the audience to feel it is present as a witness to the murders. 2 4 J. Park Poe, "An Analysis of Seneca's Thyestes," TAPA 100 (1969) 3 5 5 - 7 6 , thinks that Seneca, in the Thyestes, derives satisfaction from describing the grisly events because there is a "natural human impulse to violence and ultimately to self-destruction" (p. 359). He puts forward the necrophilia of the Roman elegiac poets as additional examples of writers who gain satisfaction from describing what they abhor. See also Regenbogen, 4 0 9 - 6 2 , who discusses the preoccupation in Senecan tragedy with violence, suffering and death.

25

CHAPTER 2

The Supporting Characters: Seneca's Techniques of Characterization Much of the scholarly debate about Seneca's plays has concentrated on his techniques of characterization. Garton has noted that there exists in Seneca's plays "the paradox of an art of characterization which has somehow contrived both to stimulate and to bore, to matter greatly and not to matter at all." 1 The most obvious feature of Seneca's characters is that they all display the skill of rhetorical school debaters. 2 We cannot, however, simply dismiss Seneca as a second-rate dramatist because the dialogue is rhetorical and the characters' poses are stylized. The forms and conventions of rhetorical drama are, in fact, well suited to Seneca's interest in psychological portrayal. I want here to examine how Seneca used techniques of characterization which helped him achieve his dramatic intentions. A frequent criticism is that the characters lack realism, 3 but lack of realism is defined in at least four ways. Some critics, for example, suggest that the characters represent not individual personalities, but composite "stock" figures. 4 Exaggeration of character is another charge. 5 A third charge is that the characters do not portray the conflict of people but rather the conflict of abstract arguments, and that each character there1

Garton, 190. The rhetorical elements in Seneca's tragedies have been studied in detail; see especially H. V. Canter, "Rhetorical Elements in the Tragedies of Seneca," University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, vol. 10, 1 (Urbana 1925). 3 For example, C.W. Mendell, Our Seneca (New Haven 1941) 120. 4 For example, Max Pohlenz, Die Stoa, Vol.1 (Göttingen 1959) 3 2 4 - 7 ; S. F. Bonner, Roman Declamation (Berkeley 1949) 162. 5 For example, Mendell, 199. Cf. Moses Hadas, "The Roman Stamp of Seneca's Tragedies," AJP 60 (1939) 222, and his comments about melodrama. 2

26

fore represents an argument, not a person. 6 Other critics have an opposite complaint, that every character expresses the same sentiments, usually Stoic, and in the same manner, and that the characters in each play therefore lack realism because they are undifferentiated.7 Although these critics do not define the term "realism", they suggest that realism means an imitation of human behavior as we experience it in everyday life.8 "Realistic" characters, under this definition, will speak and gesture in the same manner as people we know. This kind of realism is an element of the theatre of illusion.9 Such realism is not, however, an element of the theatre of convention which can dramatize universal problems of human life without imitating the external behavior of the average man. When we judge the characters of Noh drama or Greek tragedy, we do not expect the realism of the theatre of illusion. 10 The realism of these 6 For example, D. Henry and B. Walker, "Phantasmagoria and Idyll: An element of Seneca's Phaedra," G&R 13 (1966) 225. 7 For example, N.T. Pratt, "The Stoic Base of Senecan Drama," TAPA 79 (1948) 8; Mendell, 120; and D. Henry and B. Walker, "Seneca and the Agamemnon: Some Thoughts on Tragic Doom," CP 58 (1963) 5. 8 For example, Pratt, CJ56: "Seneca can give us no grounds for sympathizing with these characters as participants in normal human experience." 9 "If realism is defined as the imitation of external nature, as the presentation of the illusion of nature, the most obvious thing about drama before the nineteenth century is that it is unrealistic . . . When, for example, Ibsen was congratulated because he created good parts, he replied, 'Parts! I do not write parts. I create men and women.' ... realistic drama usually lacks not only a sense of play but also a sense of the exceptional ... We can no longer be as sure as Archer was that 'the purification of drama by the expulsion of operatic and exaggerative elements is a mark not of decline, but of progress.'" Sylvan Barnet, Morton Berman, and William Burto, edd., The Genius of the Early English Theatre (New York: The New American Library 1962) 8 - 1 0 . 10 Cf. the remarks of W. Clemen, English Tragedy 42, about how modern theatre-goers have lost the sense, which earlier audiences possessed, of direct contact with elevated language to express emotion: "An Elizabethan theatre-goer would not have found it either unnatural or improbable that the tragic hero should express himself in an elaborate verse-speech, full of rhetorical figures, overdrawn images, and far-fetched allusions, that he should move in a world of highly exaggerated forms of language such as he would never use in real life. It is only the realistic attitude of much later times that has made it all seem so disproportionate, and has caused us to think inadmissible in tragedy, or all but inadmissible, much that to earlier periods must have seemed entirely proper and matter of course." See also Cleanth Brooks and Robert Heilmann, Understanding Drama (New York 1945) 32.

27

characters lies not in imitation but in their ability to communicate to the audience universal human emotions. In our evaluation of Seneca's characters we should similarly seek a broader definition of dramatic realism. Consider Garton's comments about judging dramatic characters. "The dramatic person, whether more or less visualized, is a complex of language which has to and does mould itself about the dramatic center and is conditioned by the shape of that. It can have a truth and a unity, but they apply within the context of one play and are not best seen (and may be seriously damaged) by abstracting. There is no 'normal man' to argue about ... And if the center of an Oedipus play is the shattering hand of fate, the criterion for judging Oedipus is less whether he is 'vraisemblable' than whether he is a character so made as to bring home the drama." 11 Hercules' madness is the dramatic center of this play, and Seneca's intention is to explore the cause and the development of the madness. We should not abstract the characters from the purpose of the play or judge them by criteria which were not Seneca's. The most important criterion for the characters of any play is that they be dramatic. Realistic is not, of course, a synonym for dramatic; drama can and does exist without realistic characters. The essence of drama is the credible portrayal of conflict within and between characters. And characters which express and communicate this conflict are dramatic, whether or not they mimic the patterns of everyday behavior. In order to evaluate the dramatic quality of Seneca's characters, I want to examine four points: whether there is conflict in the play, whether the characters express this conflict, whether we can distinguish among the arguments of the characters, and whether the characters fulfil the dramatist's intentions. The conflict in this play is the discrepancy between Hercules' illusions about strength (virtus) and the reality of strength. His madness results from his distorted definition of virtus. He imagines that his physical force makes him greater than the gods; he discovers that force produces disaster, and that true strength is not physical but emotional. As one method of dramatizing this psychological conflict and giving external expression to an internal process, Seneca created the dialogue of the supporting characters. 12 Their words reflect the conflict in Hercules' mind. The final dialogue Garton, 193. Another method of revealing the processes in Hercules' mind was the use of Juno's speech. 11

12

28

between Theseus and Hercules, for example, externalizes Hercules' discovery of the true nature of virtus. In Act I, Seneca places Amphitryon, Megara and Lycus in a debate about virtus. The physical safety of the family in Act I is a secondary crisis, subordinate to the conflict about Hercules' ability and the meaning of virtus.13 As they each attempt to establish their definitions, a conflict arises which reflects Hercules' own confusion about his abilities and about virtus. Each character has failed to recognize the true meaning of virtus and has created illusions about Hercules' strength which prove deceptive and destructive. Quod nimis miseri voluntjhoc facile credunt (313-4). And Hercules forms an opinion of himself which is based on the opinions of the others. Although he does not appear in Act I, 1 4 the words of the other characters indicate the nature of his exploits and the development of his reputation. Despite the proliferation of opinions, however, Seneca does not believe that the meaning of virtus must be relative. He explores the possible meanings of the word only in order to arrive, at the end of the play, at a true definition and a true assessment of Hercules. I have indicated briefly that there is conflict in the play and that it is expressed through the dialogue of the characters. I want to restate and examine in detail the third question posed above. Can we distinguish between the opinions of the characters? The credibility of the conflict depends on the credibility of the characters. They need not be active, or "real," but they must communicate clearly the nature of the conflict, and therefore they must each express views which are individual, consistent and distinct. Before examining how Seneca has portrayed distinctions in character and argument, we should consider two points. First, because the purpose of this drama is the examination of one personality, Seneca presents the supporting characters only in their relationships to Hercules. They are, therefore, one-dimensional figures, and, since Seneca omits so many personality traits, the few he develops will seem exaggerated. The characters 13 Cf. Euripides' play where the conflict between Lycus and Hercules' family concerns only their physical safety. The plight of the family is portrayed in such detail that at least one critic has suggested that this first act was written originally as a separate play. See J. Carrière, " L a composition de l'Héracles d'Euripide,"

Annales de la Faculté des Lettres de Toulouse (1952) 2-14.

1 4 Anliker, 5Iff., points out that, in most of Seneca's tragedies, the first act presents the main character and indicates his determination to act.

29

will, moreover, appear to be types, such as "wife of the hero" or "villain," because Seneca does not present them in their other roles in life. He does not, for example, develop Megara "the mother." In fact, his characters seldom mention the "incidentals" of life or make remarks which would attach them to a specific time or location. These exaggerated figures thus seem to move in a spaceless, timeless landscape, much as the elongated and distorted figures of mannerist painting. 15 The restriction of detail about the supporting characters, however, allows us to concentrate on the personality of Hercules. Secondly, Seneca is interested in inner motivation as the cause of action. He wants to pierce beneath the action of the myth to reveal the psychological processes which lead to the actions. He therefore minimizes the physical responses which are only external manifestations. Consider, for example, line 621. When Amphitryon says membra laetitia stupent, Seneca is describing in a controlled and almost formulaic manner the physical processes of emotion. Two influences contribute to this style: rhetorical training (which reduced emotion to a formalized study) 16 and Stoic psychology (which taught that the whole person, mind and body, was affected by the emotions). 17 Seneca's descriptions are stylized because he does not wish to engage in a lengthy explanation of the complete process of emotional behavior each time he wants to express an emotional change. However, he wishes to remind us that this change is occurring and he does so in this rhetorical shorthand. Formula does not mean that the feeling is not present; it means that the feeling is expressed in a well-known phrase, easily understood by the audience. Because, however, there is little action in the play, his characters lack the outward distinctions of personality which emotional and physical responses provide. His characters do react to their situations, but in a manner which reveals their intellectual positions. 18 15

Cf. the description of Michelangelo's Crucifixion of St. Peter given by R. Coughlan, The World of Michelangelo (New York 1966) 190; also A. Hauser, The Social History of Art, trans. S. Godman, vol. 2 (New York 1957) 103. 16 See Canter, 55 ff. and 76 ff., and Bonner, 60. 17 See E.C. Evans, "A Stoic Aspect of Senecan Drama: Portraiture," TAPA 81 (1950) 1 6 9 - 8 4 . 18 When there is a sudden burst of action in the play, the murder scene, for example, we are all the more shocked, first because action, especially violent action, is so limited in Seneca's plays, and secondly because we ourselves are suddenly forced for a moment to make an emotional, rather than intellectual response. 30

Three of the four supporting characters appear in Act I. Each presents a monologue which introduces us to his set of values and his opinions of Hercules' achievements. Although Megara and Amphitryon have appeared at the same time (203—4), there is no interaction or exchange of dialogue until each has revealed his opinions. Amphitryon's opinion (205—278) of heroism equates physical strength with morality.19 Although he worries with fatherly concern because Hercules must face one conflict after another without rest,20 he praises him as a champion of justice qui scelera terra quique persequitur mari/ac saeva iusta sceptra confringit manu (271-2). Because of his confidence in the morality of Hercules' deeds and physical strength, he is dismayed by the situation in Thebes where physical strength has brought Lycus, a usurper, to power. The disintegration of previous standards of behavior parallels a change in word definitions:21 felix scelus /virtus vocatur (251—2). Amphitryon understands neither the confusion in Thebes nor the confusion in the universe where Hercules, who fought for freedom, now dwells in the Underworld because of his servitude to Eurystheus. (Cf. Juno's remarks that Heaven is in turmoil because of the aspirations of mortals.) Although he suggests that Hercules is striving for a place in Heaven (subitus ad astra emerget, 276), he does not think the aspiration improper. His confidence in Hercules' ability to accomplish anything, even entry into Heaven, perhaps justifies Juno's fears that Hercules is being worshipped as a god. Significantly, when he prays at the end of his speech, adsis sospes, he is addressing not Jupiter, as he did at the beginning, but Hercules (cf. the same impiety in 519-20). 2 2 Megara's speech (279-308) is a separate monologue; she does not respond to or correct Amphitryon but, rather, gives her own description of Hercules.23 She is more concerned that Hercules' strength help his family than the world in general. She, too, values physical strength as 1 9 Amphitryon has a Homeric view of heroism. Zintzen, 166 n. 56, compares Amphitryon to Seneca's Jocasta, in Oedipus, who, he says, also has conventional views. 20 Cf. 4 7 6 where Amphitryon thinks virtus should sometimes be relaxed. He obviously thinks of virtus in terms of physical strength. 21 Cf. Thucydides, 3.82.4. Cf. also H.O. 4 2 1 - 2 : vitium impotens/virtus vocatur·, similarly: H. O. 9 3 0 ; Medea 4 9 2 ; Phaedra 9 2 0 - 9 2 1 . 22 Cf. Friedrich, 144; but see also Heldmann, 55, for an opposing view. 23 Cf. Zintzen, 167—168. In Euripides' play, Amphitryon and Megara argue about their next course of action.

31

the most desirable kind of strength although her words reveal the violence of which Hercules is capable: dispuisas

manu/abrumpe

tenebras

(279-80).

She is less concerned with the morality of his deeds. She even encourages him to exceed his commands: indigna quantum

imperatum

te sunt spolia,

si tantum

refers/

est ( 2 9 4 - 5 ) . And, like Amphitryon, she includes Her-

cules' name a m o n g those of the gods, confirming Juno's statement

(tibi,

2 9 9 = Jupiter; tibi, 3 0 0 = Demeter; te, 3 0 5 = Hercules; cf. 3 9 - 4 0 :

deus/

narratur). Lycus ( 3 3 2 - 5 7 ) is a novus homo24

w h o has ruthlessly seized p o w e r but

n o w desires to legitimize his position and join the ranks of the respectable old nobility. 2 S H e is not so much a brutal tyrant as a pragmatic usurper and he therefore realizes that Megara is more valuable to him alive, as his wife, than d e a d . 2 6 H e contends that virtus is more important than f a m i l y , 2 7 although he defines virtus as the strength to gain one's o w n ends (cf.

omnis

in ferro est salus - 342). Seneca's tyrants, with the exception of the maniacal Atreus, are not bloodthirsty villains but shrewd realists w h o s e lack of sympathy and human warmth allows them to employ any means towards a given end. 2 8 Often w e cannot argue with the "end." 2 9 When 24 Lycus is certainly a figure more Roman than Greek. In 339, Seneca uses the word titulis, a Latin word and idea, therefore creating a deliberate anachronism. 25 Euripides' Lycus was able to point to a family connection to the Theban throne ( 2 6 - 3 4 ) , but the background of Seneca's Lycus is left obscure. 26 Euripides' Lycus made no marriage proposal. 27 Cf. Lycus with Sallust's Marius, especially the speech in BJ 85. 28 Siemers, esp. 6—27, considers Lycus as "absolutely" evil. For a similar view, see H. Opelt, Der Tyrann als Unmensch in den Tragödien des Seneca (diss. Freiburg 1951) who discusses in detail Seneca's characterization of the tyrant figures in his plays as insanely and uncontrollably evil. She maintains, 32, that in the characterization of Lycus, Seneca is contrasting Tyranny with Heroism and suggesting that in a world of true virtus there is no place for a tyrant. She mentions the characterization of tyrants in earlier literature (8—19) and concludes her discussion with some remarks on the character of Nero (98-110). Bonner, 162, maintains that "Lycus in the Hercules Furens is a stock tyrant." But Seneca had enough personal encounters with real tyrants to enable him to create his dramatic tyrants from his own experience, rather than from a rhetorical school handbook. Seneca's depiction of tyrants is influenced much more by his personal experiences and his Stoic philosophy than by his rhetorical training. For example, when, at the end of the first act (509—13), Amphitryon pleads for death, Lycus will not allow it. Seneca suggests that the worst tyranny is to prevent a man from dying when he wishes to (cf. Atreus' attitude in the Thyestes). "Seneca's identification of suicide as a free act, perhaps as the supremely free act, is at the

32

we hear Lycus stating that he would be an acceptable ruler of Thebes, we are reminded that the chorus is quite willing to accept any strong ruler who provides security. Once Seneca has allowed each character to define virtus and present his value system, he makes them interact in a scene ( 3 5 8 - 5 2 3 ) quite unlike the first scene in Euripides. We do not feel that Hercules' family is in any immediate danger because what occurs here is not a scene of threats and desperate appeals but a discussion on the nature of valor. Seneca keeps emotion to the minimum, barely mentioning the family's previous hardships, forgetting its present desperate position until the end of the scene, and ignoring the children. His rhetorical training, with its emphasis on formal debate structure, on stating one's case and on proof and persuasion, serves his dramatic purpose well here. The characters expose both themselves and Hercules in a debate which advances like a chess game, with argument and counter-argument. Each reveals the set of values by which he makes judgments and which therefore cause emotional and physical reactions, the action of the myth. Because we already know that Hercules will return {cf. Juno's speech), we are in a position to judge these arguments on rational rather than on emotional grounds. very least a new emphasis in Stoicism," J.M. Rist, 247. Cf. Ep. 70; Ep. 12.10; Ep. 24.11. The restrictions which a tyrant creates prevent the Stoic from realizing the degree of freedom necessary to his pursuit of wisdom. Protest was particularly strong among the Stoics of the early Roman Empire. See G. Boissier, L'Opposition sous les Césars (Paris 1875), especially 8 3 - 9 6 . Certainly there is much emphasis in this play on the evils of tyranny, and it is to Hercules' credit that he fights against tyrants, particularly Lycus. One flaw of his own character is that he is likely on occasion to act himself the part of the tyrant (477-80). Since this hatred of tyranny was especially prominent during the early Empire, among Stoics and nonStoics alike, it would be difficult to label this element in the play as a specifically Stoic teaching. More likely, Seneca found in the myth an opportunity to discuss one of his own favorite themes (and perhaps the favorite of the Imperial audience). There is another reason why Seneca opposed tyranny. The Stoics believed that personal disorder was dangerous because it might cause more widespread, even cosmic disorder. Megara and Amphitryon mention the disorder in the household and state which the tyrant has caused. In fact the civil and world disorder are the background against which we watch and evaluate the disorder of Hercules. 29 Cf. Medea where Creon wants to free his people from their fear of Medea's witchcraft. The chorus confirms his statements. 33 3

Shelton, Hyp. 5 0

Although the first act contains little plot action, it is not static, because during this act our understanding of character and conflict deepens. The play develops intellectually as Seneca presents us with different sets of values and forces us to judge them. Characteristically of Senecan drama, no one character is completely right or wrong. When Lycus says that old hatreds should be forgotten and that marriage would bring peace to Thebes (362ff.), his statements, like Ulysses' arguments to Andromache in the Troades (524ff.), bring us face to face with a cold reality which may seem totally unacceptable emotionally, but cannot be ignored. What irritates us most when watching Lycus and Ulysses is that we must accept many of their statements as sensible, or even irrefutable, although we know their intentions are evil. Seneca demands the intellectual involvement of his audience. It is much easier to watch Euripides' Lycus, because we do not have the struggle of reason and emotion which we cannot reconcile. Lycus' remarks about the futility of continued hatred and war force us at least to consider whether submissive peace is not a better course than violent and self-destructive opposition.30 arma non servant modum, nec temperari facile nec reprimi potest stricti ensis ira: bella delectat crúor.

(403-5)

We may object that Lycus is hypocritical because he is himself the cause of the bloodshed, but we cannot say that the statement is itself incorrect. We cannot totally accept or reject the moral position of each character. None of the characters represents one school of philosophy; together they reveal the kind of conflicting and ambiguous patterns from which we, the audience, must choose the right course of action. No one character preaches the correct Stoic way, no character is an exemplum. Megara's refusal of marriage is rhetorical ("sooner will ... before I will ...") 3 1 but the rhetoric is used as a formalized code to express the J.Dingel, Seneca und die Dichtung (Heidelberg 1 9 7 4 ) 1 1 3 - 1 1 4 , reminds us that Lycus is not an objective critic. Certainly he is not; but Dingel has failed to note that there is, nonetheless, truth in many of Lycus' statements, and that Seneca deliberately elicits from his audience an ambiguous response to his characters. 3 1 Canter, 6 0 — 6 1 , mentions this passage as an example of άδύνατον and then says "every αδύνατον is, of course, a form of hyperbole." On 138—9, speaking 30

34

emotions which she feels (anger and disgust), but does not portray directly. Since Seneca wants us to concentrate without bias on the validity of the arguments and on the exposure of inner motivation, he makes use of a rhetorical form to express the emotion in a way which does not obtrude upon us. Nevertheless Megara's stolid determination not to submit to any dishonor contrasts with Lycus' cunning and cleverness. The hostility between Megara and Lycus is expressed in terms of argument; however, although the emotion of the characters is masked by the discipliné of arrangement of the argument and although Megara and Lycus expose their inner motivation for action in a stylized form, great tension builds up as the arguments and counter-arguments continue.32 Megara acts as she does because of her belief in a certain set of principles, which differ sharply from those of Lycus. Euripides' Megara reacted to Lycus emotionally (and his threat was emotional). Seneca strips away this aspect of character to reveal the processes in the mind which are not displayed on the surface but which affect our actions. Lycus' cogere (426) is substituted for a display of physical violence. Megara's response to this threat, cogi qui potest, nescit mori, is a revelation of the set of values which causes Megara to resist Lycus. Megara, of course, does not know that she will die at the hands of her husband, so there is irony in her determination to die, particularly when Lycus says, moriere demens, and she replies, coniugi occurram meo (cf.. 420—421: non vincet fidem/vis ulla nostram; moriar, Alcide, tua). Later we learn that she dies not because she is mad, but because he is. When their argument concentrates specifically on the meaning of virtus, Lycus expresses surprise that Hercules would serve Eurystheus (432). This submission does not seem admirable to the man who had defined virtus as the strength to usurp power. When Megara defines virtus as obedience without hesitation (433) and victory over that which all men fear (435), Lycus belittles Hercules' achievements by recalling that his opponents were non-human. This is the first time in the play that Hercules' achievements have ever been criticized as unworthy, since even Juno had admitted the difficulty of the deeds and the skill needed to perform them. When Lycus of hyperbole, he says "its force lies in the fact that the hearer feels that the exaggeration is due to emotion and so receives it with something of the speaker's emotion." 3 2 Garton, 2 0 2 , has pointed out that it was Seneca's ability to express passionate intensity under formalized control which made him a popular model for the French classical stage.

35

raises the question of whether it is truly virtus to conquer wild animals and monsters, he reveals weaknesses in the reputation which has been built up for Hercules. When he suggests that Hercules' boastfulness is a wellknown trait (loquentem magna, 436; cf. Juno's words, spolia iactantem, 51 and superbifica manu, 58), he indicates another aspect of Hercules' character which has not been mentioned by Megara or Amphitryon.33 Later Amphitryon can cite examples for each objection about Hercules' paternity which Lycus raises (439ff.) but, as with Megara's answers, we are not completely satisfied. Lycus has put in our minds the question, "Does Hercules deserve to be considered a god?", and Amphitryon has not listed divine qualities in Hercules but only given examples of gods who have had experiences similar to Hercules. Because Amphitryon thinks of virtus in terms of physical strength, he suggests, as he did in 205—213, that it can sometimes be relaxed (476). Lycus uses the remark about relaxation to describe a number of Hercules' less noble actions which Amphitryon cannot deny although he tries to detract from their infamy by mentioning some of thé noble deeds.34 Again, Amphitryon's protests do not completely convince us. Megara and Amphitryon would like to think of Hercules' deeds as morally correct and thus they overlook the ones mentioned by Lycus. Lycus' words, however, have now made it possible for the audience to judge Hercules' subsequent actions with a knowledge of these earlier reprehensible deeds. Before Hercules even appears, therefore, we are confronted with an ambiguous presentation of his character. We await his arrival to confirm or deny the information we have acquired. Throughout the debate, Lycus has really gotten the better of Amphitryon, who is terribly loyal to Hercules but unable, against the clever twistings of Lycus, to establish beyond doubt the validity of his claim to divinity. Amphitryon looks upon Hercules as a figure of heroic virtue such as we find in Homer. Lycus has shown that his concept of heroism is flawed and insufficient. It is ironic that the insufficiencies are pointed out by this advocate of the pragmatic philosophy, but Seneca does not so much want us to choose sides between the speakers as to judge their statements. We, too, must decide on a definition of virtus. 3 3 Anliker is wrong when he suggests, 46, that the picture of Hercules we receive in the prologue is not the picture we receive in the rest of the play. 34 Cf. the comment of Friedrich, 145, that Hercules, in his madness, goes not much farther than his friend and enemy believe him capable of.

36

We miss much of the subtlety of the character contrasts by reading rather than hearing or viewing the play. Lycus remains cool and sneering and sarcastic as he mocks Hercules' family and their delusions about Hercules. His scornful pose provides a good counterbalance to the serious resolve of Megara who speaks honestly and bluntly. Amphitryon blusters more and more as he tries to think of examples to defend Hercules because he is confused by Lycus' interruptions and twisting of the conversation. Actors would have no difficulty showing a difference in the manners of speech of the characters.35 We should not associate the emotional restraint of the dialogue and the formal arrangement of the argument with any inability on the part of the dramatist to fit dialogue to character. Juno's monologue, brimming with angry emotion which is represented by the sudden changes of topic and many references to personal suffering, is quite different from the monologue of Amphitryon (205—78) whose speech flows more smoothly than Juno's, without constant stops and shifts. Moreover, there are fewer personal references, since he speaks more of his concern for the state. Like Nestor, Amphitryon spends much time reminiscing about the past. Megara, whose monologue (279-308) is comparatively brief and contains fewer sententiae than Amphitryon's, appears of a different nature than Amphitryon. Like Juno, she dwells on her personal state, and reveals her emphasis on a violent return through her use of imperatives (emerge, abrumpe, emitte, defende, trabe), in contrast to Amphitryon's more reserved use of futures and subjunctives (emerget, inveniet; adsis, venias). The opening of each monologue reveals much of that character's moral position. Amphitryon begins with a pious appeal to Jupiter; Megara begins with a personal appeal to Hercules' violent strength. Lycus begins his monologue with the words urbis regens opulenta Thebanae loca (332), thereby informing us of the importance he attaches to power and wealth. There are far fewer questions in his monologue than in those of the others, an indication of his self-assurance. We can see this same non-questioning confidence in Hercules' entrance speech (592—617). In contrast, his speech when he wakes from his madness is filled with questions (1138 ff.). It is incorrect, then, to state that Seneca has not provided any differentiation of character in the monologues. 35

Cf. T. S. Eliot, introduction to Seneca: His Tenne Tragedies, ed. Thomas

Newton (Bloomington 1927) xi: "Seneca's plays might, in fact, be practical models for the modern 'broadcasted drama.' "

37

In the dialogue sections, Seneca concentrates on revealing not the external features or emotions of his characters but rather their philosophic positions. If Seneca has stripped the characters of identifying marks of personality, we cannot expect to find a clear differentiation in the oral expression, because such differentiation would be working against the author's purpose. We must, instead, concentrate on the thought of the line. Consider exchanges like that in 4 6 3 - 6 4 : Lycus: Amphit.:

Quemcumque miserum videris, hominem scias. Quemcumque fortem videris, miserum neges.

The obvious similarity of expression stresses how closely matched the two viewpoints are and forces us to make a decision about the validity of the statements. When we consider Seneca's purposes in his characterizations, we realize how very effective stichomythia and compact gnomic statements within longer dialogue can be. 36 Seneca allows his characters to speak in a more elevated than normal style in order to stress the philosophic belief which lies underneath and causes the emotional state. His style is well-suited to his intention. The fourth supporting character, Theseus, arrives with Hercules when he returns from the Underworld (637ff.). Like a messenger, he reports what has happened there, but reveals little of his own personality. Since his rescue has been so recent, he is still fearful and apprehensive. 37 Theseus is a foil for Hercules. Both are heroes, both have gone to and returned from the Underworld, both are responsible for the deaths of their children. Theseus provides for the audience a constant reminder that Hercules' fate greatness and shame — is not unique. In Act IV (1138 to end), first Amphitryon and then Theseus try to comfort the distraught Hercules and prevent his suicide. Amphitryon plans to 36 B. Seidensticker, Die Gesprächsverdichtung in den Tragödien Senecas (Heidelberg 1969) 43, 5 7 - 5 8 , 76—77, discusses the effectiveness of stichomythia for pinpointing the essence of a conflict. Garton, 201, says that "the true and apt sententia can add powerfully to the home thrust of a character: it is not for nothing that some 2,700 different sententiae and maxims are found in the plays of Shakespeare." 37 Euripides' Theseus, who arrived later in the play, came from Athens, was accompanied by his army and could therefore act more self-confidently. Mette, WS 478, suggests that Seneca may have copied the early arrival of Theseus from an Amphitryon of Accius.

38

conceal from Hercules the truth about the murders, but Hercules discovers the truth for himself and accepts full responsibility. Amphitryon's attempts to minimize the criminality of the deed contrast strikingly with Hercules' own insistence that he be punished. Amphitryon's character has not changed; he threatens suicide because he loves his son. When, however, Hercules submits to his father, he discovers that virtus is the strength to temper one's emotions. Seneca has used the character Amphitryon to reveal the discoveries and development within Hercules. Similarly, the final dialogue of Theseus and Hercules gives expression to Hercules' own discovery that heroism and virtus involve the strength of self-control. Seneca uses the supporting characters in this play to present dramatically the conflict in Hercules' mind. These characters do not change, but they are agents in the development of Hercules. The differences in their personalities are, moreover, well developed. Seneca deliberately minimizes their actions and even emotions by the rhetorical arrangement of their arguments in order that we may concentrate on their statements. As they express the set of values by which they make judgments, they reveal the causes of conflict. We do not have to see them act; we know, from their statements, how they would act. Conflict arises because their definitions of valor and virtus differ, and yet none perceives the nature of real strength. The conflict they express verbally is the conflict in Hercules' mind. Their praise of his physical strength leads him to create for himself an unrealistic opinion of his abilities and position in the universe. Through the words of the supporting characters we can perceive how Hercules' madness has developed because of his confusion about virtus. When, at the end of the play, Hercules discovers the nature of real strength, his discovery is internal, but is given external expression through the dialogue. Seneca's supporting characters communicate the conflict and the resolution of the conflict. They clarify Seneca's interpretation of the myth and allow him to dramatize a psychological development. Because these characters fulfil the dramatist's intentions, they are, within the context, valid dramatic characters.

39

CHAPTER 3

The Function of the Chorus Even the first reading of Seneca's plays reveals that he has not adopted, for his chorus, the functions of the chorus in the Athenian tragedies. 1 The chorus in Athenian tragedy has two basic functions: it is a dramatic personality whose words and interactions influence the development of the plot; and it provides, at other times, a commentary on the words and actions of the characters. 2 It is generally sympathetic to, and expressive of, the problems of the hero. Because of its roles as character and commentator, it is an integral element in the play. In comparison, Seneca's chorus seems quite a separate element. First of all, the composition of the chorus is often not clear. In Hercules Furens, we have no idea about its age or even nationality. 3 Secondly, its entrances are seldom noted by the other characters. For choral odes 1 (125-204) and 2 (524-591), we are not told from where or how the chorus enters. Its entrance, as a triumphal procession, for ode 3 (830-894) is mentioned by Theseus. We might assume here that it is composed of Theban citizens, but if 1053 is an entrance cue for the fourth choral ode (1054-1137), then the chorus is composed of slaves or attendants (famuli, 1053). Thirdly, and more importantly, the chorus does not participate in a dialogue with the other characters and often does not even seem to overhear or respond specif1 A number of critics have addressed themselves to the problems of the Senecan chorus. See particularly F.Leo, "Die Composition der Chorlieder Senecas," RhM 52 (1897) 5 0 9 - 5 1 8 (especially metrics); C. Kapnukajas, Die Nachahmungstechnik Senecas (diss. Leipzig 1930); W. Marx, Funktion und Form der Chorlieder in den Seneca-Tragödien (diss. Heidelberg 1932); A. Cattin, Les Thèmes lyriques dans les tragédies de Sénèque (Fribourg 1959); Runchina, 2 3 2 - 2 6 2 ; Zwierlein, 72—87; J. D. Bishop, "The Meaning of the Choral Meters in Senecan Tragedy," RhM 111 (1968) 1 9 7 - 2 1 9 , (who discusses Marx' theories); W.M.Calder, CP 70 (1975) 32-35. 2 Cf. the statements of Aristotle, Poetics 18.1456 a (and Horace, A. P. 193 ff.). 3 See the complaints of Zwierlein, 7 2 - 7 6 ; and Mendell, 1 3 3 - 4 .

40

ically to their dialogues. The absence of exit cues leaves us wondering whether or not the chorus is present during the dialogue scenes. 4 In its odes, it is often not sympathetic to the hero 5 nor does it dwell directly on the problems of the hero. In fact, a fourth point, the odes are filled with traditional and topical matter, much of it seeming totally unrelated to the plot of the play. 6 Mendell comments that only half of each choral ode is concerned with the subject matter of the plot, and that the odes contain a "somewhat indiscriminate medley of ideas and conceits already made familiar by the Roman poets." 7 Critics are correct in suggesting that the choral odes do not influence the development of the plot, but they are mistaken when they assert that the words and the personality of the chorus do not affect the development of the theme. The purpose of this chapter is to indicate in what ways the chorus of the Hercules

Furens is an inte-

gral element in the play. Seneca wrote, of course, much later than the Athenians, and the use of the dramatic chorus underwent considerable modifications during the 4 Calder (supra n. 1) has made a very interesting suggestion, and refuted ZwierIein's statements, 72—74, 8 0 - 8 1 , that the absence of entrance and exit cues for the chorus means that the plays were not performed. He suggests, first, that the Senecan chorus was confined to a relatively small playing area (because of the dimensions of the raised Vitruvian stage or because of the limitations of theatres in homes) and could enter or exit discreetly and, secondly, that there were perhaps only three people in the Senecan chorus. Its absence would explain why it seldom comments on events of the previous scene: it didn't witness or hear them. I like Calder's suggestion of the smaller chorus; I think, however, that it was quite possible for the chorus to remain on stage for the whole play. It could position itself in the background during the episodes, and therefore not overhear the comments of the actors. Such procedure would be no more unusual than the use of "asides" by dramatic characters. The chorus could then step forward, at 506 for example, when Lycus calls to his attendants. 5 Cf. Seneca's Medea, where the chorus hates and fears Medea (Euripides' chorus was sympathetic). 6 As Zwierlein, 76 ff., and Mendell, 132, complain. 7 Mendell, 136. Cattin has provided a catalogue of themes from the odes. Seneca's "borrowings" have been thoroughly documented by Kapnukajas (supra n. 1); P. Keseling, "Horaz in den Tragödien des Seneca," Philologische Wochenschrift (Leipzig 1941) 190-192; Runchina, esp. 247, 255, 261. W.S. Maguiness, "Seneca and the poets." Hermathena 88 (1956) 81-98, discusses Seneca's attitude towards the poets from whom he borrowed and the use which he made of their works. There is no doubt that Seneca used familiar themes in his odes; we must ask why he used these themes.

41

intervening centuries. 8 We cannot, unfortunately, determine with certainty to what extent Seneca was influenced in his use of the chorus by earlier Roman dramatists and to what extent his techniques are original. Seneca uses the chorus not as a sympathetic companion of the hero or his family but as a basically non-partisan observer whose philosophy provides a counterpoint to the philosophies of the other characters. 9 Its words and its moods offer a background against which we can judge the words and actions of the other characters. The choral odes help to establish the theme of the play not through the development of imagery, but through expansion on a moral or philosophic issue. To support my statements, I want to examine the choral odes of the Hercules Furens, studying the structure and theme of each individual ode, the dramatic personality of the chorus and the relationship of the odes to the thematic development of the play. In its first ode (125—204), 1 0 the chorus is speaking at the same time as Juno because it mentions the departure of the night, while she, at the end of her speech, has spoken of the rising of the sun. The chorus has not, however, heard Juno's words. 11 The first part of its speech (to 158) describes a pastoral scene and brings a change of mood after the angry outbursts of Juno. The description of the sunrise assures us of the order in the universe, which we may have come to doubt after hearing Juno's complaints about the gods leaving Heaven, mortals entering Heaven, and Hercules escaping from the Underworld. Garton, 1 9 6 - 1 9 7 , feels that comedy, which had soon after Aristophanes relegated the chorus to a role of "between act" entertainment, influenced later tragedy to make the same change. Of course, the change in the plan of the Roman theatre, with the orchestra being used for audience seating, also meant that the movement of the chorus was restricted. See M. Bieber, The History of the Greek and Roman Theatre (2nd ed.; Princeton 1961) 173. P. Grimal, "Les Tragédies de 8

Sénèque," in Les Tragédies de Sénèque et le Théâtre de la Renaissance, ed. by

J. Jacquot (Paris 1973) 3, suggests that Seneca's use of the chorus reflects Italian, not Greek tastes. He observes that the native Italian theatre preferred a medley of separate songs or odes. See also O. Ribbeck, Die römische Tragödie (Leipzig 1875)637-41. 9 Cf. the use of counterpoint in mannerist music, D. B. Rowland, Mannerism -

Style and Mood (New Haven 1964) esp. 3 3 - 3 6 .

1 0 See P. Grisoli, "Per l'interpretazione del primo canto corale dell 'Hercules Furens di Seneca," Boll. Com. 19 (1971) 73—99. Grisoli makes some valuable remarks about Seneca's originality in his use of Horatian and Vergilian "echoes." 11 Cf. Euripides where the chorus does hear Iris and Lyssa discuss Heracles' madness.

42

The sentiments which the chorus expresses have the same Epicurean tone that we find in much of Roman poetry. 12 "Live happily while you may, for life is brief." "A quiet and humble life leads to a secure old age." "Misfortune and death strike the strong and mighty." For Euripides' chorus, old age was a frustrating hindrance to effective action. 13 For Seneca's chorus, it is a reward for a life well-led. The Epicurean clichés spoken by the chorus are, of course, "topical" and are not individually important as philosophic statements, 14 but they give us an impression of the chorus as men of limited perception and simple intelligence whose opinions are shaped primarily by a desire for security. Seneca, as we noted in the last chapter, is not interested in the external details of his characters. Therefore the identity of this chorus is not defined in terms of age or nationality, but in terms of its approach to life. To this extent, it has a distinct personality. The members of the chorus are not fighters like Hercules and Lycus, but are content to submit to any ruler or restriction which will offer them security. The words of the chorus are the expressions of ordinary men and provide another point of reference from which to judge the events in the play. Unable to appreciate the value of Hercules' deeds and accomplishments, it considers him reckless indeed for challenging fate by entering the Underworld. Virtus, whose definition is much debated 12 Cf. Agamemnon 5 7 - 1 0 7 (evils of kingship); Oedipus 8 8 2 - 9 1 4 (Icarus as an example of immoderation); Troades 3 7 1 - 4 0 8 (there is no afterlife); Thyestes 3 3 6 — 4 0 3 (it is better to live humbly). Comparisons with Horace are too numerous to be mentioned here; see supra n. 7.

Euripides, Herakles, 107ff. The odes contain both Stoic and Epicurean clichés as well as topical themes. It is therefore difficult to accept a critical theory which maintains that the ideas expressed in the play are primarily Stoic, or that the play is a Stoic treatise. The philosophy of this chorus is never discredited. In fact, at the end of the play, the chorus is still in much the same position as it was in the beginning, for its philosophy of non-involvement, of cringing from confrontation and danger, has kept it unharmed. It does not, of course, serve as an example of nobility, but since its philosophy is not clearly and finally discredited, the audience is not forced or persuaded to choose another position. Cf. the following comment about Seneca's eclecticism in his prose work: " T o attempt to find in Seneca's writings fixed and unalterable dogmatic principles is to expect more than he desired to give . . . His only concern is to extract practical principles from every field of thought." A . L . Motto, Guide to the Thought of Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Amsterdam 1 9 7 0 ) xi. For Seneca's own declaration of independence of thought, see Ep. 5 8 . 2 6 ; De Otio 3 . 1 ; De Vita Beata 3.2. 13

14

43

throughout the play, is, in the chorus' eyes, undesirable: alte virtus animosa cadit (201). Hercules, as Amphitryon sees him, is struggling to save mankind from the restrictions of fear and tyranny, but mankind is clearly not interested in being saved or in being heroic. Because of this attitude toward risk and danger, the chorus does not support Hercules to the extent that the Euripidean chorus supported the hero. l s Since the Senecan chorus rarely supports the main character, Seneca's heroes remain much more isolated from the world around them and from the company and sympathy of common men than do the Greek heroes. Like many of Seneca's choruses, this chorus expresses truisms without being fully aware of their correctness. 16 At 192—96, it rejects ambition and the desire for praise; its words here seem the expressions of cautious, cowardly men. Only later in the play does the validity of its choice become apparent, when we realize that Hercules' pride in strength and his ambition are forms of madness. A pessimistic strain runs through this play and it is caused partly by Seneca's use of the chorus to point up the futility of action. Although the main characters praise heroic undertakings, the counterpoint movement of the chorus reminds us of the dangers of such aspirations. The next appearance of the chorus (524-91) follows the Megara Lycus — Amphitryon debate. Once again, its recital of traditional thoughts defines its own identity, and, at the same time, provides an ironic perception of Hercules' ambition. As we might expect from this chorus, its opening words, that Fortuna is harsh to strong men, suggest that it prefers a position of secure weakness. It considers Hercules' labors as unenviable hardships caused by fate and does not support the belief of Amphitryon that Hercules undertook the labors to free humanity from fear. The chorus expresses a wish that he may return from the Underworld and break down the restrictive law of death, but there is really no urgency in its wish. 15 Cf. Euripides' chorus: κάγώ γε συν σοι, μή προδούς τάς συμφοράς (1110). Troades and Hercules Oetaeus, where the chorus supports the main character, are exceptions to this observation. 16 Cf. Medea 3 0 1 - 7 9 , where the chorus says that man challenged nature by venturing on the sea. It thinks that nature has now forgotten her anger, but we soon see how Jason is punished for his audacious voyage. In Thyestes, 546—622, the chorus rejoices that Atreus and Thyestes have now settled their differences. Then it states that Fortune changes quickly. Soon we see the truth of their words when Thyestes' fortune changes to disaster.

44

Compare the subjunctives évinças, 558; pateat, 567; det, 568, with Megara's imperatives: emerge, 279; abrumpe, 280; redde, 292; age, 293. The chorus admits the possibility of his return by citing the example of Orpheus' descent and return - but this is a strange example, since Orpheus did not successfully accomplish his plan, but lost his gift, his wife, when almost on the point of securing it. 17 Munus dum proper at cernere, perdidit (589). We might at first think that Seneca is guilty of inserting a common, but here inappropriate, myth about the Underworld. However, unwittingly, the chorus is warning Hercules that all men are bound by the iura of the Underworld and that he may pay dearly for his return.18 The choice of example at first appears foolish but in reality the story conveys a grim truth.19 Hercules is returning to misfortune, but there is no one to help him. The inaction of the chorus creates an atmosphere of static foreboding and reminds us of the hopelessness of the situation. To save his family from Lycus, he must return, but his return means their deaths. The chorus' recital of the Orpheus myth warns us of the impossibility of the situation. The topic of the third choral ode (830—94), which follows Theseus' lengthy description of the Underworld, is death and afterlife.20 The chorus presents a picture of Hell which contains much more pathos than Theseus' description. Instead of monsters, the chorus describes the crowds of the dead. The images of people of all ages moving towards the Underworld evoke our sympathy and remind us that no one escapes death. The comparison of the shades of the Underworld with people streaming to a festival is good, and the clever repetition of sound at the beginning of the lines increases its effect: quantus, quantus, quinta, quanta (838-42) tanta, turba, tristis (848-50) Unlike Vergil, who compares the souls to non-human objects like leaves and birds, Seneca compares the souls of the dead to groups of living people on the way to the theater or to a religious ceremony. The simile 17 In Hercules Oetaeus, 1031—1127, the Orpheus and Eurydice story is used as an example of the statement that all men must die. 18 Cf. Phaedra 1150ff. 19 Cf. the comments of Zintzen, 180, about the appropriateness of this use of the myth. 2 0 Zintzen, 189, comments that the chorus is here like a Stoic philosopher opposing to the victory of Hercules the words meditari mortem.

45

of people flocking to the mysteries is particularly good, because it is a comparison not only of number but also of destination. They are all, living or dead, approaching an area which is shrouded in mystery. In addition, people who attended the mysteries were often promised an existence in an afterlife, and there is thus a further connection between the crowds of the living and dead. In enumerating the ages of the dead, Seneca mentions first men of old age, and then middle age, youth and infancy so that our sympathy increases for each successive group. Seneca finally lingers over the description of the young children whose fear of the darkness arouses deep pathos. Afterlife, according to the chorus, is a dreary non-existence, a dark emptiness relieved by no visions of Tantalus or Ixion. Its description thus provides a counter-balance to Theseus' lively narrative and makes us comprehend the real horror of death. The laments are repeated that death comes too soon and that it is foolish to rush or tempt fate. Quid iuvat durum properare fatum? (867). There is no glory in death; death is the natural outcome of life. Prima quae vitam dedit hora, carpit (874). 21 Because the chorus believes that it is death and not life which determines our decisions to act or, in its case, not to act, it provides a counterpoint to opinions expressed by other characters. Here its words make us question the value of the conquest of Cerberus if men must die nonetheless and if men keep fearing death. The despair of the chorus lessens when it remembers that Hercules has returned, and it begins a hymn of joy and a thanksgiving sacrifice for this happy day. Ironically, the chorus for the first time claims that Hercules has brought peace to the world by descending to the Underworld, although we soon find that he has created disorder and must pay for it. Their expression of joy here creates a false mood of relief before the horror and despair of the rest of the play.22 Cf. Oedipus 988; de Prov. 5.7 for similar expressions. Often the metre of the ode imitates the mood of the ode. Although Seneca abandoned the strophe structure which the Greek dramatists had employed, he used a variety of metres. For example, the iambic senarii of Theseus' description are followed by sapphics in the first part of the ode, while the glyconics in the second part imitate the break in thought from the depressing doctrine of causation to a joyful thanksgiving hymn. The short, sharp glyconics imitate the exuberant happiness of the chorus and the bustle of the sacrifice preparations. The mood of joy which Seneca establishes in this choral ode is, of course, in striking contrast to the darkness of the following scene. Cf. the comments of Bishop, 2 0 4 , who thinks that the underlying unity behind sapphic odes in the tragedies is "the 21

22

46

The fourth choral ode (1054-1137) begins after Hercules has slaughtered his family and fallen into unconsciousness. Many of the chorus' statements point up the futility of Hercules' actions because they reveal that everything has turned out contrary to intention or expectation. When it asks in 1063 that his mind be released from the monstra, its words recall Juno's words, monstra iam desunt mihi (40), and Hercules' boastful wish, si quod parat/monstrum, meum sit (938—9). It is his mad mind which has become the monstrum and he has proved that man, not the gods, is capable pf destroying man. When the chorus prays that pietas /virtusque (1093-94) may return, virtus here means the strength not of body (Hercules' earlier definition, 6 3 4 - 6 ) , but of mind, the strength to regain control over one's actions. The statements of the chorus indicate how completely Hercules' situation has been reversed and how invalid were his previous beliefs and behavior. Speaking of the children who were cut off in their youth, the chorus says: noti per iter/triste laboris, ite (1135-6), and its words indicate precisely what Hercules' time in the Underworld has accomplished: he has only made it easier for his family to find its way there. In this ode, we find an interesting example of how Seneca's style changes a particular emotional situation to a timeless and universal, and therefore readily understood, response. This ode offers a representation of the chorus' mourning. Its mourning is very ritualized, as is the mourning of the Trojan women in the Troades.23 It speaks not of its grief, but its method of expressing externally its grief, just as the emotions of joy or surprise were externalized in Seneca by mentioning the physical changes in the body.24 Here, of course, the physical actions are voluntary, the beating of the breast, etc., but the chorus expresses, in a timeless way, grief and people's response to a tragic situation. The situation is not inappropriate or artificial; rather it is intellectualized. Not only do the meter and sound imitate the rhythmic beating of the breast,25 but the frequency of repeated imperatives is an attempt to represent a formal lament ritual: solvite... solvite ... flectite (1063—5) ite... ite ...ite ... ite ... visite (1131-7) idea of an external power, a power outside men and their own wills." For earlier discussions of Seneca's metres, see M a r x and Leo, supra n.l. 23 I.e. Troades 9 9 - 1 1 6 . 24 Cf. my comments, in the previous chapter, on 6 2 1 : membra laetitia stupent. 2 5 In 1 1 0 6 - 0 8 , the repetitive " c " sounds imitate the harshness of the mournful breast-beating in which the chorus is engaged.

47

Seneca uses, in this same ode, enumeration to good advantage in the long list of epithets for Somnus (1065—76). All Somnus' attributes are carefully listed and the enumeration of epithets reaches an effective climax in 1 0 7 5 - 6 : pavidum leti genus humanuni/cogis longam discere noctem. Here Seneca indirectly reminds us that what once seemed a great achievement by Hercules, conquest of the Underworld, has really been of no advantage at all to pavidum leti genus humanum. The string of epithets which rises to a climax thus helps enforce a major statement in the play; it also produces a striking verbal effect when we hear, rather than read the ode, especially since the chorus can indicate the rising movement with its voice. The sound of the epithets can create a mood, even apart from the meaning, which is poetically effective and valid. Since the chorus realizes how greatly distressed Hercules will be when he becomes aware of the enormity of his crime, it prays that his sanity may not be restored and that error may remain in his mind (1096) so that he may continue ignorant of his deed. Once again the chorus has recommended a course of action which will produce the least disturbance. Its statement, though true, is not the statement of a noble man because it completely avoids the difficult question of guilt and responsibility. Its suggestion here emphasizes, by contrast, Hercules' later determination to accept guilt and punishment. Early in the play, Hercules, and even Lycus, enjoyed positions of glory and power while the cautious and fearful chorus remained humble. When, however, both Hercules and Lycus have plummeted from great good fortune to disaster, the fortunes of the chorus have remained constant. Unlike the chorus of Euripides' Herakles, which shifted emotionally as changes occurred in the fortunes of the hero, 26 this chorus has shifted very little from its early resignation to a life of quiet inaction and its determination to avoid misfortune and postpone death. Seneca has kept the chorus quite separate from the other characters to bring out more clearly the contrast and irony of its position. Moreover, the largely topical choral odes are not trite, hackneyed verse, but an effective method of establishing the identity of the chorus and its philosophy of non-involvement. Seneca 2 6 In the first ode of Euripides' play ( 1 0 7 - 1 3 9 ) , the chorus complains that old age prevents it from accomplishing noble deeds. It respects and admires strength and initiative. (Seneca's chorus fears ambition and calls virtus dangerous.) In the third ode, 637—700, the changes in the family's fortunes are marked by the changes in the chorus' moods.

48

developed for his chorus the function of a mannerist counterpoint movement. While the other characters praise action and heroism, the chorus points out the futility of action and the dangers of ambition. The theme of the play is the abuse of strength and the growth of destructive pride. The chorus provides the background of conflicting sentiment against which is played the rise and fall of Lycus, Hercules and his family. Its words do not affect the movement of the plot, but they definitely influence the development of the theme. The frightened men of the chorus present a dramatic personality whose participation in the tragedy is essential.

4

Shelton, Hyp. SO

49

CHAPTER 4

Theseus' Description of the Underworld The scene in which Theseus describes the Underworld (640-829) puzzles critics of the play because its theme does not at first seem to warrant the emphasis which its length suggests. Because it occupies almost two hundred lines in the middle of the play, it checks the development of the plot and divides the play into two parts: the rescue of Hercules' family, and the murder of the family. Some critics suggest that Seneca has placed the scene here as a dramatic device to cover the time during which Hercules carries out the execution his parting words imply — nuntiet Diti Lycus/me iam redisse (639—40).1 Theseus, however, does not describe in detail the murder of Lycus {cf. the emphasis given it in Euripides), but briefly announces it by the skilful shift in tenses - dab it, dat, dedit (644). Seneca uses Lycus' death as a way of introducing a description of an Underworld journey.2 Since, however, he dispensed with the problem of vengeance in one line, he is not using this scene to "cover" the time of Hercules' absence. Hercules could, after 644, return victoriously, but does not in fact arrive until 250 lines after Lycus' murder. I think the scene has two functions. It is a rhetorical showpiece to display Seneca's literary talents and, more importantly, it provides valuable information about Hercules' character.3 In its function as a rhetorical showpiece,4 the scene gives Seneca an opportunity to exhibit his skill at "descriptions."5 Theseus does almost all H.MacMaster Kingery, ed., Three Tragedies of Seneca (Norman 1966) 1 8 3 - 4 , note on line 644; Mendell, 173. 2 Vergil's description of the Underworld begins right after the burial of Misenus (6:236ff.) and it may be that Seneca saw here the possibilities of using Lycus' death as a way of introduction to the Underworld description. 3 For other discussions of this scene, see Regenbogen, 4 4 2 - 5 ; Runchina, 3 1 1 - 3 1 4 ; Zwierlein 1 1 2 - 1 1 3 ; D. Henry and B. Walker, "The Futility of Action, a Study of Seneca's Hercules Furetts," CP 60 (1965) 1 1 - 2 2 ; Seidensticker, 1 1 4 116; Dingel, 1 2 1 - 1 3 0 . 4 Zwierlein, 112—113, and Mendell, 173, suggest that this is its only function, and that it is therefore not important to the development of the plot. 5 See Canter, 70ff. and Bonner, 58. 1

50

the talking except for a few questions from Amphitryon, questions which seem rather silly ("Are there farms in the Underworld?"), but which Theseus answers at great length. Amphitryon's questions have two purposes. First, they provide the scene with the dramatic tension of dialogue. Secondly, they create sudden shifts in topic and allow Seneca to describe various aspects of the geography of the Underworld without providing elaborate transition pieces. In 697, for example, we move without lengthy transition from a description of the abstractions at the entrance of the Underworld to a description of the desolate plains. Nonetheless, this scene is basically a monologue. Recitation of long monologues was a popular entertainment among the Romans, particularly of the Empire. Where the theme was familiar (as this one was), the excellence of the speech was judged by the writer's novel use of rhetorical figures within a rigid framework of composition. Since descriptive monologues are common in Seneca's plays, 6 they may have been a feature of Roman tragedy which the audience expected, demanded and appreciated. Descriptive is not, however, a synonym for digressive and when we state that a descriptive passage allows a poet to display his rhetorical talents we do not preclude other reasons for its appearance at this point in the play. The second, and more important function of this scene is to provide additional information about Hercules' character. For this function, its length is appropriate. We have already heard much about Hercules' deeds and we have seen him as he boasted about his success in the Underworld. We want to know how Hercules really acted there. Was he strong and brave? Was his deed a true triumph? Was his mad pride obvious there, too? Are his boasts valid? In this scene Seneca extends our knowledge about Hercules' behavior so that we may judge the value of his Underworld performance. Unfortunately, Seneca himself has tried to impose on the scene two conflicting interpretations. He tries, first, to portray the Underworld as a very frightening and dangerous place so that Hercules will appear brave and so that his glory here will thus be a dramatic point of contrast with his later shame. However, because Seneca believes that Hercules' greatest opponent is his own irrationality, he must make the victory 6 This scene is the longest descriptive passage in the plays, but consider also Agamemnon, 421—578, the messenger's description of the return of the Greek fleet; Oedipus, 5 3 0 - 6 5 8 , Creon's description of necromancy; Medea, 7 4 0 - 8 4 9 , description of Medea's magic.

51

over Cerberus appear of lesser consequence. Seneca uses this scene to examine two apparently conflicting aspects of Hercules' development. Our reactions, therefore, to Theseus' description are ambiguous. I want to examine Seneca's methods of description, the portrayal of Hercules in this scene and the confusing conflict of interpretations. Our knowledge of Hercules' journey is, of course, indirect since we learn about it through Theseus' words rather than by watching Hercules himself.7 Seneca has employed two different methods of revealing character through description. The first method involves creating a background for Hercules' deeds. Theseus describes the regions of death (662—759) so that we may know what Hercules has scorned (morte contempta, 612). The second method involves giving an account of his actions. Theseus concentrates on Hercules' defeat of Cerberus ( 7 6 2 - 8 2 7 ) and we see how he has scorned death. The scene is thus divided into two sections (662—759; 760— 827). The description in the first part of the scene is reminiscent in tone and style of Vergil's Book 6. Seneca has used the same elements as Vergil: the darkness, the cave, the whirlpool, the rivers of Hell, the abstractions waiting at the entrance. The differences, however, in the two descriptions reveal the nature of Seneca's poetic and rhetorical ability. Seneca, like Ovid, does not sustain an effect over a number of lines, but prefers to compress the description within a few verses. Where Seneca imitates Vergil closely, his poetry is flat because, in his efforts to state the same thing in different words, he risks choosing a flatter word or twisting the poetic expression into prose. Compare: spelunca alta fuit vastoque immanis hiatu

(Aeneid 6.237) with hiatque rupes alta et immenso specu (H.F. 665).

Seneca is much more successful where he describes something not mentioned by Vergil. Vergil, for example, made the passageway descending to the Underworld as obscure as the profound darkness of a cloudy night (270—2). 8 Seneca describes the passageway as illuminated by a light similar 7 Zintzen, 186—188, suggests two reasons why Theseus arrives from the Underworld with Hercules and then gives this account. (Euripides' Theseus arrived much later in the play.) He suggests, first, that having Hercules stop and describe his visit to the Underworld would interrupt our impression of Hercules' frenetic activity, and, secondly, that Theseus can give to the description an objectivity which Hercules could not. 8 Vergil is not describing a half-light. See the note on line 2 7 0 in T.E. Page's edition of the Aeneid (London 1920). Cf. Paradise Lost, 1.63, "no light, but rather darkness visible."

52

to the gloaming, when the sunlight is still present but beginning to mingle with the night shadows. This eerie half-light of dusk would remind the Underworld traveller that he was leaving the sun, the symbol of life, and descending into night, the symbol of death. Tenuis relictae lucis a tergo nitor ... ludit aciem (669—71) describes well the transition. Seneca's description of the sterility of the Underworld, an element not in Vergil's description, is similarly effective. Non prata viridi laeta facie germinant nec adulta leni fluctuât Zephyro seges; non ulla ramos silva pomíferos habet: sterilis profundi vastitas squalet soli etfoeda tellus torpet aeterno situ. (698-702) Seneca makes us feel the parched dryness of the region, the stagnant air, the smothering confinement of disease and death. The sounds of the words (aer haeret) and the repeated " s " and " t " sounds, particularly in 701. and 702, make this passage highly effective. As Vergil, in the sixth book, described what happened in the Underworld to the souls of the dead, 9 so Seneca also speaks of an afterlife. He describes only one region, an area of punishment and reward, and includes a traditional list of sinners, such as Tantalus, but does not attempt a detailed list of human crimes. He concentrates on the punishment of tyrants and the rewards for good rulers. 10 From Vergil's description of this area, 9

The eschatology of the sixth book has long been a problem to Vergilian scholars. See, for example, L. A. MacKay, "Three levels of meaning in Aeneid VI," TAPA 86 (1955) 1 8 0 - 9 ; Β. Otis, "Three Problems of Aeneid 6," TAPA 90 (1959) 165-179; F. Norwood, "The tripartite eschatology of Aeneid VI," CP 49 (1954) 15-26. 10 Dingel, 1 2 5 - 1 3 0 , suggests that the function of this scene is to underline the importance of Hercules as a tyrant killer. It is interesting that Seneca should dwell on the punishment of tyranny, and no other sin. He often speaks of tyranny in his other plays and in his prose works. In Ep. 1 1 4 . 2 3 - 5 , Seneca compares disease in the mind to the control of the state by a tyrant. In Con. Helv. 10.4, he describes C. Caesar Augustus as the man quem mihi videtur rerum natura edidisse, ut ostenderet, quid summa vitia in summa fortuna passent. His concern may reflect his feelings toward his own contemporary political situation and the problems presented by an emperor such as Nero, for whose actions Seneca seems to share some responsibility. (See above, Chapter 2 n. 28). Many critics have censured Seneca for including in his plays what they consider rhetorical commonplaces and they maintain that Seneca's excessive concern about murder, exile, incest and tyranny were learned as themes in the rhetorical schools. Certainly these topics 53

we learned: "Do not scorn the gods" (Discite iustitiam moniti et non temnere divos, 620), but from Seneca we learn: "Do not be a bloodthirsty tyrant." The warning is reinforced by the fact that Hercules has just killed Lycus and therefore punished him for his tyranny. Tyrants are punished in the Underworld by the people whom they oppressed while on earth. Quod quisque fecit, patitur (735). Curiously, some tyrants suffer punishments which they could actually receive on earth. 11 And good rulers live a long life (742), a reward surely of value on earth, not in the Underworld. Seneca is, in fact, warning cruel tyrants that they may, while on earth, pay for their crimes by death. They should then fear life, not afterlife. This first section of the description provides a setting for Hercules' deeds. Amphitryon's question, whether Hercules took Cerberus by force or was given him as a gift (761), introduces the second part of this scene, the description of Hercules' conduct in the Underworld. Although Seneca's Charon is similar in appearance to Vergil's, 12 the encounter between Hercules and Charon is quite different from that between Aeneas and Charon. In the Aeneid, the Sibyl politely addresses Charon (399ff.), who is anticipating another attack on his territory by someone as bold as Hercules, and assures him that Aeneas is extremely pious. Charon has control over the situation and is a truly frightening and grotesque figure. In the confrontation between Hercules and Charon, Hercules appears rough and brash as he pushes his way through the crowd and ignores Charon's shouts. Charon comes out the worst in this contest. Cerberus, whom Vergil mentioned only briefly, is described here in detail, not unexpectedly, of course, since we want to know just what sort were "commonplace" for Seneca, but they did not become so because of his training in school, but because he saw these things occurring around him, day after day. Cf. Herington, 4 3 0 - 3 1 : "Rhetorical commonplaces, like early epic formula (which in fact they closely resemble), can be adopted by a writer with or without feeling, disposed with or without art. Everything in Seneca's career, as well as a dispassionate study of his writings, would suggest that these themes, for him, were or became urgent realities." 1 1 Afterlife justice is not a part of Stoic belief, but Seneca describes the punishment of cruel tyrants because poetically it is an effective way of showing that evil men are punished. Indeed, quite contrary to Stoic belief, death itself is considered a punishment (good rulers live longer, 739—43). 1 2 Vergil: terribili squalore ( 2 9 9 ) ; sordidus ex umeris nodo dependet amictus ( 3 0 1 ) ; portitor (298). Seneca: squalidus senex ( 7 6 5 ) ; deformem sinumi nodus coercet (766—7); portitor (768).

54

of opponent Hercules faced. The description of Hercules' victory over Cerberus is the climax of the scene and a high point in the tragedy because it shows Hercules at his bravest, just before he plunges to his greatest dishonor. His previous monster-killings ( 7 7 8 - 8 1 ) 1 3 had been preparation (cf. prolusit, 222) for this deed. Confronted by this formidable opponent, Hercules clubs the dog without hesitation and overwhelms it. Pluto and Proserpina, fearing for their own safety, bid him take the dog and leave, with Theseus as an additional gift. Seneca's description of the struggle and the victory impresses on us the magnitude of Hercules' accomplishment. Once Seneca has concluded the account of Hercules' fight with Cerberus, however, he changes the tone of the scene. A tame Cerberus, with tail wagging, follows his master obediently. Suddenly frightened by the unaccustomed light of earth, he tries to escape to the Underworld, and Hercules requires Theseus' help to hold him (816—18). If he could defeat the dog in the Underworld, why should he have problems now? And once Cerberus is on earth, he hides in Hercules' shadow. At the end of the scene, we are left with the puzzling picture of a frightened dog and two men dragging it towards the light it fears. The picture is puzzling because Seneca's intent is not clear. Is Hercules really strong? Is Cerberus an awesome opponent? Are we to praise or scorn Hercules' victory? In the first part of the scene, Seneca creates a frightening picture of the Underworld. This description satisfies poetically and dramatically, and provides a suitable background for Hercules' achievement. Seneca does, however, omit details of the story, such as Theseus' desperate plight or the pathetic existence of the dead (cf. chorus 8 3 0 - 9 4 ) , which would make the Underworld even more terrifying. He shows, moreover, that only tyrants need fear punishment and even they are often punished while alive. Men should not fear death. In the second part of the scene, the ambiguity of 13 At Hercules' approach, many of these monsters shudder with fear. Vergil, too, has a passage where Aeneas' former enemies are frightened when they see him ( 4 8 9 - 4 9 3 ) , but these were human enemies, the Greeks against whom he fought for many years. There is a surreal aspect about Seneca's description since it is monsters and not humans who inhabit this part of the Underworld. We seem to be in a realm of fairy tales, though we are reminded of Lycus' criticism that Hercules' opponents were always monsters and not men. N. Q. I, Pref. 5, Seneca suggests that we often waste our time struggling against monsters instead of concentrating on the important concerns of the human mind: etiamsi superiores sumus, portenta vincimus.

55

interpretation increases as Seneca attempts 1) to make Hercules glorious here, and therefore more shameful later; 2) to demonstrate that Hercules' greatest opponent was not Cerberus but madness, and that man should worry about life, not death. To fulfil the last intention, Seneca must detract somewhat from the victory over Cerberus. Hercules conquers Cerberus, who frightens only umbrae,14 and then needs help to drag him to the Upperworld. Seneca has reduced Hercules to human size and prevented our full acceptance of the heroic value of the act. I am not suggesting that this scene is comic in intent, but it is obvious that Seneca has created an ambivalent picture of Hercules by including elements which detract from the magnitude of the deed. 15 Aeneas was ennobled and made stronger by his Underworld experience. Hercules, too, was changed by his journey, but in a different way. Juno had earlier informed us that Hercules boasted of his victory over the Underworld (58 ff.); then Hercules appeared and confirmed her statements (592 ff.). Now we learn what actually happened in the Underworld in order that we may judge for ourselves the value of the deed. When Hercules returns, he kills his family. Of course, temporally the revenge murder on Lycus intervenes, but Seneca barely mentions it, and gives us the impression that the murders of the family occur right after the return from the Underworld. Euripides had emphasized the murder of Lycus in order to draw parallels between the two murders committed by Hercules, but Seneca wants us to associate the journey to the Underworld with the mad murder of the family. 16 His victory over the forces of the Underworld increased 1 4 It is interesting that Seneca says a number of times that Cerberus frightened umbrae (783, 791, 797). This is the only word he uses in this section to denote

inhabitants of the Underworld {cf. Vergil: animus, anima, manes, defuncta corpora

vita, imago). Then in 827, when Cerberus, brought to the Upperworld, is frightened by the strange light, he hides in the umbrae of Hercules which here must mean "shadow." The repetition of this word may be coincidental, or it may be that Seneca is telling us that what Cerberus frightened in the Underworld were mere shadows, and what after all does it mean to frighten shadows or to conquer something that is frightening shadows? See also supra n. 13. 1 5 Henry and Walker, CP 60 (1965) 18: "The scene (Hercules and Cerberus) is comic first in an over-violent, then in a doggy way." They think Seneca is suggesting the mental incapacity of Hercules and his lack of dignity when real suffering comes. 1 6 Just as the journey of Aeneas works on a figurative level to describe the development of understanding in his mind, so too the same journey is used here figuratively to show that Hercules in his own mind is "going through Hell," and

56

his mad delusions about his own power and his immortal nature, and he became his own worst opponent (cf. 8 4 , 85). He boasted of his Underworld success, but what, in fact, did he accomplish? 1 7 His reaction to success causes the deaths of his family. He has certainly not freed mankind from its mortality. 1 8 The subsequent deaths of his family prove that death is as much an irresistible force as it was before his journey. 1 9 Seneca does not resolve the conflict of interpretations in this scene. Hercules' journey is the bravest of his labors, and brings him great glory. W e must accept it as a courageous undertaking, but we also know that Hercules has exaggerated its importance to mankind and is deceived about his own abilities. The scene is an integral element in the play because it allows us to understand the final stages in the development of Hercules' insanity. In the next scene, encouraged by his success in the Underworld, he tries to storm Heaven. the murders, which are in Euripides considered to be a result of sudden madness, are actually the result of a madness of long development. Herington, 452: "he (Theseus) is not only describing what Hercules has been through; he is indicating what Hercules, for the moment, is." 17 Cf. Henry and Walker, CP 60 (1965) 1 1 - 2 2 , especially 15: "Throughout the play the terrors of the journey are emphasized but the actual nature of Hercules' achievement remains obscure." 18 Cf. the effect of the following choral ode ( 8 3 0 - 8 7 4 ) . The chorus' statements that there is no glory in death and that death is the natural outcome of life make us question the value of Hercules' defeat of Cerberus if men must die nonetheless. 19 Hercules' victory over Cerberus (and therefore Pluto and Proserpina) and his return to the Upperworld seem to prove that some very strong men, at least, can conquer the forces of death. But what is the relevance of Hercules' victory to the average man? See supra n. 18. The validity of the earlier statement ( 7 3 9 745) that the just man need not fear death or afterlife still stands, but Seneca, in his efforts to meet the dramatic requirements of the play in the murder scene, to make us realize the horror and pity of the family's deaths, has failed to show that death is a matter of indifference, which is the Stoic teaching. However, perhaps the confusion here reflects Seneca's own personal confusion and the peculiar combination of death-fear and death-wish which we find in his prose works. For a modern psychiatrist's analysis of Seneca's statements about death, see R. Noyes, "Seneca on Death," Journal of Religion and Health (New York Institute of Religion and Health) 12 (1973) 2 2 3 - 2 4 0 .

57

CHAPTER

5

The Main Character: Seneca's Concept of the Tragic Hero T h e most disputed problem in the scholarship of Hercules

Furens

is the

cause of Hercules' madness. Is Hercules a truly great man, perhaps a portrait of the Stoic wise m a n , 1 whose insanity is caused by a petty, jealous goddess? 2 O r is he a man of outstanding ability who causes his own madness when he tries to exceed the limits of nature? 3 Are the murders of the family the madness, or the result of a madness which had been developing for some time? I think that Seneca is portraying a madness which originates within the individual and develops slowly; moreover it is not caused by a deluded view of one's ability, but is, in fact, that very delusion. 4 And it leads the individual to further madness. Seneca developed his concept of the tragic hero most completely in Hercules

Furens.

H e used

the myth to examine the problems which an outstanding individual faces, not in his relationships with the gods, 5 but when he contemplates his own mortality and strength. H o w can a heroic temperament maintain a course of action which is free from extremes? W h a t happens when a person's own

The opinion of, for example, O. Edert, Über Senecas Herakles und den Herakles auf dem Oeta (diss. Kiel 1909) 29—33; B. Marti (see above, Introduction η. 12); C.King (Introduction η. 12); F. Egermann, "Seneca als Dichterphilosoph," Senecas Tragödien 3 3 - 5 7 (46: "die verkörperte Virtus"); Κ. von Fritz, "Tragische Schuld in Senecas Tragödien," Senecas Tragödien esp. 71 and 72. 2 See, for example, Trabert, 7 7 - 8 0 ; Anliker, 4 5 - 4 8 ; Heldmann, 1 7 - 5 6 . 3 See, for example, Henry and Walker, CP 60 (1965); Mette (WS); Seidensticker, 1 0 9 - 1 1 9 ; Friedrich; and Zintzen. 4 Zintzen also speaks of the delusion of human might, but he believes that Hercules' catastrophe results from a combination of his own delusion (caecus error) and invida Fortuna (cf. the chorus, 524) who opposes all who attempt to go beyond the limits of nature (see esp. 1 5 5 - 1 5 7 ) . 5 Seneca did not believe that the gods were cruel. See Ep. 65.10; 95.36 and 49; De Ira 2.27.1; also Ch. 1 η. 16 above. 1

58

view of his place in the universe is distorted? Seneca chooses as his main characters individuals of greater than normal ability. He refers, for example, frequently to Hercules' divine paternity, 6 not to contrast, as Euripides did, the cruelty of the divine father and the compassion of the human father, but to assure us that Hercules is a superior individual, with great abilities and potentials. 7 But does he use his abilities with reason? What internal factors influence his mind and cause his body to respond as it does? The psychological exploration of the main character and his madness is the primary interest in the play. In this chapter, I will first examine the development of the main character and the psychology of madness and then define Seneca's concept of the tragic hero. Seneca's depiction of the development of Hercules' madness is influenced by Stoic ideas about reason and emotion. Hercules is indeed strong but he overestimates the value of human strength, which should be an "indifferent," and thinks it is equal to virtus. His faulty judgment in this respect leads to further faulty judgments and to emotional, rather than rational behavior. 8 Fame and pride encourage rivalry with the gods; success We are assured at the beginning of the play that Hercules will be granted a place in Heaven. Consider Juno's remark, 1 2 1 - 2 : licet/admittat illas genitor in caelum manus. Also Theseus, at the end, places Hercules in the company of the gods, 1 3 4 1 - 4 4 . 7 Mette, esp. 487, and Seidensticker, esp. 113 f., understand the play as a portrayal of the fragility of man's greatness. Mette compares this play to Ep. 94: 62—66 where Seneca uses Alexander, Marius, Caesar and Pompey as historical paradigms of the dangers to men of their own greatness. See also Frenzel, 42 n. 1. Zintzen sees Hercules as an example not of greatness, but over-greatness. 8 Passions are exaggerated and excessive impulses to action (S VF. I. 206) which must be restrained and made obedient to reason (Cicero, De Off. 2.18). A major problem of Stoic ethics is whether passions 1) follow a faulty judgment, that is, an overestimation of indifferent things (the view of Zeno; see Galen, SVF 3.461); 2) are mistaken, irrational judgments, that is, impulse equals assent (the view of Chrysippus; see Galen above; also Plut., SVF 3.459; but does Cleanthes believe irrational judgments oppose rational judgments in the debate between Passion and Reason, Galen, SVF 1.570?); 3) cause faulty judgments (Posidonius). The first two views assume a unity of the soul (unless Cleanthes, above, means that passion and reason co-exist in the soul). The third view assumes a duality - a rational and irrational force - in the soul (Cicero, De Off. 1.101; 1.132). Evil can then arise in man by nature. Seneca sometimes suggests that the soul is one and rational, and that passions result from an overestimation of indifférents {i. e. fear of death or poverty). Elsewhere, however, he speaks of duality (Ep. 92.1, 8) and suggests that passions cause, rather than result from, faulty decisions {Ep 113.18; 6

59

against his enemies leads to an intense anger against all who oppose him. Intrigued and perhaps frightened by the destructive power of immoderate emotions, Seneca sought to dramatize the conflict which occurs in the human soul between the rational and the irrational. We have three sources of information about Hercules: 1) the opinions of other characters; 2) his own words; 3) his own deeds. The opinions of supporting characters provide all our information in the early part of the play because Hercules is not present. (Contrast the form of other Senecan plays, Medea for example, where the main character speaks immediately of the events which are disturbing her life, and of her own reactions and plans.) Juno's words briefly reveal the stages of development of Hercules' pride, ambition and madness. The words of the chorus and other characters provide more detailed information about Hercules' behavior and reputation, although these characters do not themselves perceive his madness. We have observed that Act I reveals more about Hercules' personality than about the personalities of the supporting characters. Seneca, however, carefully presents the criteria by which each character makes judgments so that we can properly assess their judgments on Hercules. Although they agree that Hercules is strong, they differ greatly in their opinions about his use of strength and about the value of his deeds. Lycus, who mentions Hercules' boasting and his disreputable deeds, makes us question the value of killing monsters (i.e. 434; 4 7 7 - 8 0 ) . The chorus suggests that Hercules' ambition is dangerous (i.e. 201). Even Megara provides, though unwittingly, information about Hercules' excessiveness and violence (i.e. 294—5).9 From Act 1 we gain an impression of Hercules as strong, but also boastful and aggressive. Ep. 37.5). In the tragedies, Seneca dramatizes this later view (although one might suggest that Atreus' lust results from an overestimation of wealth and power, rather than causes the banquet). In addition he dramatizes, as did Cleanthes, a conflict of Reason and Passion in the human soul. For discussion of Stoic views of passions, impulse and assent, see Rist 2 2 - 3 6 , 3 9 - 4 1 , 182—184, and Sandbach 59-68,159-161. 9 His family does not, of course, directly criticize his behavior, but their words reveal to us some of his faults. Much of Hercules' self-assurance arises from the praise which he has received from his family. For example, when Amphitryon sees the returning Hercules, he calls him first domitor orbis (619), and only then natus (621). It is surprising that Amphitryon uses the affectionate term only after calling Hercules domitor orbis, but we have seen earlier that Amphitryon is apt to praise Hercules rather excessively, and I think that this is the characteristic of Amphitryon which Seneca wishes to bring out here.

60

Hercules' own words are our second source of information. His first appearance (592-640) is brief, especially considering its lateness in the play, but his speech proves the truth of Juno's statement that he had become boastful and jealous of the gods (i.e. 51). He first praises Phoebus for his beauty and regularity of movement, and then begs pardon for bringing to light things forbidden, the arcana mundi (597). He proceeds, however, to warn also Jupiter (visus ... tege, 598) and Neptune {im as pete undas, 600). He cautions all the gods (aciem reflectat, 602) and asserts that only two creatures can view hoc nefas·. Juno and Hercules. Surely Hercules has wandered far from an apology and even farther from a hymn of praise.10 Is Hercules suggesting that he is stronger than Phoebus? Than the other gods? This is a boast, not a hymn. In fact, Hercules states bluntly that he could have ruled in the Underworld if it had so pleased him (609-10; cf. 6 4 - 6 where Juno fears that victory in the Underworld is a prelude to an attack on Jupiter).11 When he demands, quid restât aliud (613), he reminds us that Juno had announced Hercules' greatest enemy to be himself. His challenge to Juno for another "test" is ironic. This first speech of Hercules exposes his mad thoughts of rivaling the gods.12 His final "madness" is not a punishment, but a stage of development in his own mind and an extreme form of the delusion he already suffers here in thinking that he is a serious rival of Phoebus for power in Heaven.13 Hercules' violence dominates his plans for revenge on Lycus. His desire for revenge may be justified, but his intense anger is an emotional, rather than rational response to the situation.14 1 0 Theseus, in the next scene, similarly begs pardon for describing the secrets of the Underworld (658—61). I think that we are meant to recall Hercules' words here when we hear Theseus' apology, and to contrast the two apologies. Theseus makes a brief prayer that he may remain unpunished for what he is about to say, and then begins his description. His apology is sincere. 1 1 Anliker, 4 6 , suggests that Juno's description of Hercules is distorted, but here he is acting as she feared. Perhaps we cannot expect modesty (Heldmann, 5 6 ) , but surely rivalry with the gods is wrong and irrational. 12 Cf. the remarks of Clemen, Shakespeare's Dramatic Art 156ff., about "selfdramatization," where a character dramatizes his thoughts in a monologue and thus shows his mind at work; see also T. S. Eliot, "Shakespeare and the Stoicism of Seneca," Selected Essays (London, new edition, 1 9 5 0 ) 1 1 0 and 1 1 1 . 13 Cf. the remarks of Zintzen, 1 8 2 , and Seidensticker, 1 1 1 - 1 1 4 . However, Anliker, 4 7 , suggests that Hercules' thoughts about entering Heaven begin only after 9 3 9 . 1 4 The wise man remains objective even while punishing (e.g. de Clem. 1.20. 1 - 3 ; 1 . 2 1 . 1 - 4 ) . Otherwise, he may himself become irrational. Ira est cupiditas

61

mactetur 15 hostis, hanc ferat virtus notam fiatque summus hostis Alcidae Lycus: ad hauriendum16 sanguinem inimicum feror. (634—6) His assertion that Lycus is his summus hostis is, of course, ironic because Juno has already told us he will be his own worst enemy. Violence and aggression also determine his definition of virtus. We have already noted, in the discussion on Act 1, that the search for the true definition of virtus is a major theme in the play. Each character holds a different, but incorrect definition. Hercules thinks that virtus is physical strength. Since he possesses, according to his definition, virtus, he thinks he has also the right to do whatever he pleases. Mactetur hostis, hanc ferat virtus notam: he proposes to demonstrate his virtus by committing an excessively cruel deed. His desire to achieve, to be always the strongest, makes him blind to the real meaning of virtus.11 Ironically, even as he is striving to live up to his distorted expectations of virtus, he moves closer and closer to the disaster caused by his lack of true virtus. Hercules' words reveal only his excessive and violent ambition. This onesided portrayal is not, however, an indication that Seneca lacks skill in character portrayal. He has deliberately emphasized the boastful part of Hercules' nature, and omitted the type of detail which would bring our sympathy to Hercules; he devotes only two lines (629—30) to Amphitryon's account of the family's misfortunes and allows no emotional meeting between Hercules and his wife and sons. By concentrating on one personality feature, Seneca can manipulate the opinion we form of Hercules. 18 He shows that pride and ambition are leading Hercules to ruin. ulciscendae iniuriae, aut, ut ait Posidonius, cupiditas puniendi eius, a quo te inique putes laesum (de Ira 1.2.4). Seneca considered anger the most destructive and violent of emotions. Cf. (ira) in se ipsa morsus suos vertit (de Ira 3 . 1 . 5 ) with in se semper armatus Furor (H.F. 98) and bella iam secum gerat (H.F. 85). For the destructiveness of passion, see de Ira, 1.7. 2—4; 8.1—2 and Ep. 8 5 . 8 — 10. 1 5 In Euripides' play, Megara emphasized the excessiveness of Lycus' violence by saying that he planned to offer her and her family as a sacrifice (451 ff.). 16 Haurire can mean " t o drink" as well as " t o spill, shed," and I think both meanings are intended here. Lewis and Short, 8 4 2 , I.B. 1. 17 Cf. Galinsky, 171. 18 Cf. Medea whose anger is exaggerated and whose other emotions are not developed by the dramatist; thus the overwhelming force of anger is revealed. Because of this distorting technique, she often appears as a caricature of " a woman

62

Our third source of information about Hercules' character is his deeds. His behavior in the Underworld is described by Theseus. We have already examined the conflicting interpretations which Seneca presents of Hercules' victory there. The journey to the Underworld was valuable because it helped to relieve fear of death and afterlife. It did not, however, release Hercules from the restrictions of mortality. Although he boasts of power greater than the forces of the Underworld, he cannot free his family from death and mortality. 19 In fact, his return from the regions of the dead represents a shattering of world order (iura ferae Stygis, 558). When he sends his family to the Underworld, he restores the imbalance his return has caused. 20 His loss of rational control, which is precipitated by success and praise, represents another disruption of order which is not corrected until reason regains control of his mind. Hercules' victory over Cerberus is impressive, but far less important than his victory over his own irrationality. He must learn that he cannot change his fate or exceed his appointed place in the universe. The development of Hercules' madness intensifies in the last section of the play (Acts 3 and 4). His first words after the revenge murder on Lycus are pious: he should sacrifice to the gods who have guided his victory and the safety of his family. Almost immediately, however, Hercules' behavior changes. He conducts the preliminary part of the sacrifice piously until Amphitryon advises him to cleanse his hands which are still bloody from the slaughter of Lycus. He ignores this advice and, in deliberately bypassing this part of the ritual, he must certainly appear to us impious. He cruelly longs to dedicate as a preliminary offering not wine, but the blood of his enemy, an offering which he thinks would be appreciated especially by Jupiter, the tyrant-hater (920-4). What sort of man is Hercules? The pious Hercules whom we saw at the opening of the scene is, in reality, a man so proud of his achievements that he wants not to thank the gods for them, but to boast to the gods of them. In Euripides' play, Herakles went mad even as he was purifying himself (927—30). His subsequent refusal to purify himself was an indication that he was mad. Seneca's interpretation of the story suggests that Hercules is already possessed by the madness scorned" though we are meant to recognize in her behavior an intelligence and strength of character which would be admirable if properly used, i.e. directed by reason. 19 Cf. Galinsky, 171. 2 0 See Phaedra 1165—6: natus et genitor nece!reditus tuos luere.

63

of excessive anger and excessive pride when he begins the sacrifice. The impiety is part of his character and does not symbolize a change of character {cf. 97, where Juno speaks of Impietas dwelling within Hercules). He drives himself to further madness by his anger and his inability to see his own limitations. Hercules is a man still seething with anger, although he has accomplished his vengeance. The recent bloodshed has only stimulated his rage. Hercules is striving toward a goal which he has not yet stated explicitly, but which Juno described: he is determined to rival the gods and, if necessary, storm his way into Heaven. 2 1 Obsessed by a desire for power, and ultimately power in the realm of the gods, Hercules is as much a tyrant as the man he has just destroyed. 22 Amphitryon's two requests, that Hercules purify himself (918-19) and that he pray for rest (924-6), frame Hercules' angry outburst, emphasizing it and providing a commentary on Hercules' turmoil, anger and impiety. Hercules does not pray for the rest or personal peace 23 recommended by Amphitryon, but boasts that he shares Jupiter's role of maintaining universal peace (preces/love meque dignas, 926—7).24 He assumes the role of world monster-killer: et si quod parat/monstrum, meum sit (938—39). Suddenly he begins to hallucinate and his madness, so long developing within, becomes apparent even to his family. Seneca correlates the hallucinations with his boast in order to make clear the cause and nature of Hercules' insanity. Although he thinks he can control any disruption in the order of the world, he cannot control the disorder in himself. In this "mad scene," Seneca illustrates Juno's statement that Hercules would be his own worst enemy. He imagines the world in disorder. The sun hides {cf. 60—1), darkness covers the earth and the constellations leave their accustomed positions. Shortly before, he assumed the role of 21 22

Cf. Owen, TAPA, 304 and 305.

Opelt, 32, suggests that Seneca uses Lycus as a point of contrast with Hercules, when, in fact, Seneca is careful to emphasize the parallelisms in the plans and actions of the two figures. Later Hercules completes the destruction of the family which Lycus had planned. 23 Galinsky, 1 7 0 - 7 1 , suggests that Hercules is obsessed by a desire for violent action and that one of his faults is his refusal to seek otium for which Amphitryon asks him to pray. 24 Herington, 469 η. 76, suggests that Hercules' prayer is sincere. I think, however, that Hercules is quite obviously comparing himself to the gods. Paratore, RCCM 23—24, esp. n. 29, comments that the stress in 927 is on me not love.

64

world monster-killer, but now the monsters he had once subdued are becoming wild again. 25 Of course, his own mental disorder makes him imagine universal disorder. 26 Amphitryon's remarks (falsum caelum,

954)

allow us to judge the seriousness of Hercules' delusions. 27 Senecan tragedy does not show man looking at the disorder in the universe, but man looking at the beast in himself. 28 Hercules' mind, which overestimated his ability to destroy monsters, has now created its own monster. The meum, in monstrum,

meum sit (939) can be understood as "for m e " or, ironically,

"of me." The gods do not send Lyssa; Hercules destroys himself. The sudden twists in Hercules' thoughts represent well the turmoil and paranoia of an irrational mind. Juno earlier revealed the development in Hercules' thoughts from self-assurance about past deeds, to overestimation of his abilities, to mad threats against the power of Heaven. Now Hercules himself expresses his ambitions. Claiming to have settled land, sea and the Underworld, he announces that he will conquer Heaven: immune

caelum

est, dignus Alcide labor (957). He suddenly forgets the attack on Heaven when he sees his own children whom he imagines are those of Lycus. Because Seneca makes Lycus the object of Hercules' rage, he continues the For a discussion of the importance here of the astrological symbols for defining the character of Hercules, see Mette, WS 4 8 5 - 6 , who claims that the leap of the Lion represents Hercules' disturbance of world order. See also Owen, TAPA 3 0 4 - 3 0 5 . 2 6 Because Hercules is out of harmony, he cannot see the order of the universe. In Thyestes 9 9 0 - 9 1 the sun really does retreat in horror at Atreus' deed. Friedrich, 146, speaks of the tendency in Senecan tragedy towards cosmic intensification. The danger of personal disorder is explained by the Stoic belief that in a rational universe disorder begins on a personal level first and then may cause more widespread, even cosmic disorder. In Thyestes, for example, the disorder in Atreus' mind leads to disorder in the heavens when the sun hides. In Hercules Furens, Hercules only imagines cosmic disorder, but civil disorder caused by personal ambition (that is, personal disorder) is a frequent theme. Disorder was a frightening prospect to many Romans of the late Republic and early Empire. I. ScottKilvert, "Seneca or Scenario," Arion 7 (1968) 502, suggests Seneca had a "horrific vision of the disintegration of the universe, which is the result of crime against the moral order." The idea that Rome was a force which was destroying itself is common in Latin literature. See Regenbogen and Dutoit. Compare the frequent mention of portents of world disorder and destruction in Roman history. 27 Cf. Macbeth, Act 3, Scene 4 (the banquet scene) where Macbeth is the only person who "sees" Banquo's ghost and where Lady Macbeth's words allow us to judge how seriously Macbeth's mind has been affected. 2 8 J. Park Poe, 3 5 9 - 3 6 0 , η. 10. 25

65 5

Shelton, Hyp. 5 0

comparison between the deeds of the two men. He, moreover, gives Hercules' anger little justification, since Hercules has already exacted vengeance on Lycus. Euripides' Herakles imagined his own children to be those of Eurystheus. His suppressed resentment found release in the murders, and in madness he acted as he would not act while sane. Seneca's Hercules is continuing the vengeance begun while "sane." 2 9 The madness of Euripides' Herakles was motivated and halted by divinities. In Seneca's play, there is no divine interference because Seneca's tragic hero is not destroyed by external force or accident, but by his own inability to control his emotions. Madness is an exaggeration of certain personality features. Hercules undergoes no significant personality changes in this scene; he is motivated by the same values which have always been most important to him: violence, success, reputation.30 The play does not, however, end with the catastrophic murders.31 Seneca presents Hercules' reaction to the catastrophe, and herein lies the real tragedy, and the real heroism. Restoration of sanity, in Seneca's terms, depends on self-recognition and acceptance of guilt, not on the sudden interference of a goddess. Hercules discovers the grisly act himself (Euripides' Herakles was informed by his father). Amphitryon takes the attitude of the chorus (1096-99), and tries to convince him that some evils are best left unknown, but Hercules persists in his questioning. When he sees his hands and arrows covered with blood, he realizes the truth. Hoc nostrum est scelus (1199)? The recognition scene is much more painful than in Euripides' play, but its starkness is consistent with Seneca's belief that the tragic hero must recognize himself as the cause of his own misfortune. The recognition is the real tragedy, not the murders. His response to the catastrophe determines our final judgment on Hercules and on the meaning of virtus. See supra n. 14. Trabert, 3 5 - 3 9 , wrongly suggests that Hercules' mania bears no relationship to his earlier behavior. 3 1 R.W.Tobin, "Tragedy and Catastrophe in Seneca's Theatre," CJ 62 (1966) 69: "In Hercules furens the tragic pain derives . . . not from the death of the family (which is catastrophic), but from Hercules' recognition of his own guilt, and his defeat by Juno." (Although I agree with Tobin's definition of the tragic pain, I believe that Hercules, and not Juno, defeats Hercules.) Henry and Walker, CP 60 (1965) 20, are wrong in thinking that the tragedy centers not on Hercules but on his family. 29

30

66

The catastrophe has stripped Hercules of his emotional and material defences. At first, he thinks only of self-inflicted punishment, 32 and his desire to return to the Underworld suggests that earth has become a source of greater suffering than Hell. 33 Theseus' long description gave us a point of comparison; it informed us what Hell was like and how Hercules reacted there so that we might now compare his life and conduct on earth. Hercules' demand for eternal punishment also shows that his excessive anger has not been exhausted but rather turned against himself. He is still mad! Amphitryon, recognizing this, says that the furor which destroyed his family is now raging against Hercules: in se ipse saevit (1221). This statement is a confirmation of Juno's statement, irt se armatus Furor (98). 34

Seneca carefully dramatizes the change in Hercules' reactions, from his disgust at the murders and himself and his attempt to escape the scene to his calm acceptance of responsibility. Hercules tries to return to the Underworld, and then to dissociate himself from his hands which he claims have obeyed Juno not him (novercales manus, 1236). He gains, however, a clearer perception of his position when he and Amphitryon debate the distinction between scelus and error (cf. crimen and casus, 1201). 3 5 Am-

phitryon, of course, does not blame Hercules, but it is nonetheless his cautious argument which leads Hercules to the correct assessment of the 32

His threat to burn himself (Cithaeronis iuga/mecum cremabo — 1286-7) foreshadows his subsequent cremation (described in detail in Hercules Oetaeus). See Galinsky, 173. 33 In his declaration inferís reddam Herculem (1218), we are reminded that he earlier desired to reach Heaven, limitem ad superos agam (970). Hercules' desire to return to the Underworld suggests that earth has become a source of greater suffering than Hell, just as it had so become for Tantalus and Thyestes (Thyestes 68—83, and Agamemnon 1-5). Cf. 116-7, Juno's statement that Earth would become a Hell for him. 34 Furor is a part of Hercules' character: cuncta iam amisi bona ... etiam furorem (1259-61). Dingel, 112 η. 7, however, suggests that Hercules' expression here is rhetorical and formulaic. 35 The distinction between scelus and error is discussed by other characters in other plays with reference to their misdeeds. See especially, Hercules Oetaeus (884-90; 898-902; 982ff.), and Phoenissae (451-4; 535-40; 553-5). Juno had earlier informed us of the close relationship between error and scelus when she said that both were residing in his mind (96—8). See Seidensticker, 110, and R. Pack, "On Guilt and Error in Senecan Tragedy," TAPA 71 (1940) 360-71. Pack has examined the meanings and uses in the tragedies of the words error, scelus and casus, and concluded that error and casus are used interchangeably.

67

situation.36 Amphitryon says that Hercules will be adding scelus to error if he destroys himself. Scelus is a crime committed willingly and knowingly (scelus/volens sciensque, 1300—01). Error is a "wandering" and often means insanity. When Amphitryon suggests that Hercules has just "wandered" into the misdeed [cf. his reference to casus in 1201), Hercules disagrees and insists that error ingerís is, as much as scelus, an act which deserves punishment. Though the murder was not deliberate he is guilty because it was the result of his violence and abuse of strength. Lack of self-knowledge cannot be excused. The heroes in Greek tragedies accepted the responsibility of being agents in a chain of unhappy events, while still maintaining that the gods or cruel fate were the initial cause.37 Seneca's heroes, however, do not accept a lesser charge of error. They declare (sometimes almost with pride, i.e. Medea and Phaedra) that the deeds are totally their own.38 Since the deeds are scelera, they will accept the full blame. The chorus had prayed that error remain in Hercules' mind (1096), but ignorance of the specific deed and the specific victims is not an excuse for Seneca's Hercules. His realization of guilt and acceptance of responsibility are heroic features. Hercules' reaction to his guilt signals a return to sanity.39 He has not, however, come to a complete understanding of his character and fate, or a true definition of virtus. When he fears that he has destroyed his reputation for virtus (1270), he obviously still thinks of virtus as action. Amphi36 y e r y often in Seneca, the "advisor" in advice scenes (nurse, satelles, or here Amphitryon) does not succeed in turning the "advisee" to his opinion, but rather is used as a dramatic device to expose to us alternatives which entered the mind of the main character, but then were rejected. For example, in the Clytemnestra — Nurse scene in the Agamemnon, 1 0 7 - 2 2 5 , the Nurse tries to dissuade Clytemnestra from taking vengeance on Agamemnon, but each argument she uses ironically convinces Clytemnestra of the wisdom of her plan. The nurse begs her to consider the children, meaning Orestes and Electra, but Clytemnestra thinks of Iphigenia, and her anger and resolve for revenge increase (157ff.). Cf. Pack, 3 6 0 - 6 1 . Cf. the comments of A . A . L o n g , Problems in Stoicism (London 1971) 185, (speaking of the Stoic theory of immediate and efficient causes): "Medea is the cause of her children's murder, not Jason's perfidy, because she and she alone planned and performed the action. And no one but she was in a position to plan and perpetrate that particular murder." 39 Ep. 5 3 . 8 . Quare vitia sua nemo confitetur ... vitia sua confiteri sanitatis indicium est. Cf. Ep. 2 8 . 9 , 1 0 . 37

38

68

tryon and Theseus, however, suggest that virtus is the strength to suffer and avoid anger: nunc tuum nulli imparem animum malo resume, nunc magna tibi virtute agendum est: Herculem irasci veta. (1275-7) In the final part of the play, we watch Hercules arrive at the realization that virtus is the inner strength to control one's emotions. Since Hercules' tragedy was caused by lack of emotional control, his final submission to Amphitryon's emotional plea against suicide is puzzling;40 we expect an intellectual decision to accept Fate. I think that Seneca's personal experience with suicide did influence his dramatization of the story at this point. 41 If we look closely, however, at Amphitryon's statements, we realize that his argument is not purely emotional. Amphitryon threatens his own suicide, and he then suggests that Hercules will be committing a greater crime because he will be responsible for his father's death when it was in his power to prevent it: hie iacebit Herculis sani scelus (1313). His excessive anger at himself will produce an excessive crime, patricide. To this rational argument, Hercules submits (succumbe ..., 1315). 42 He has already accepted responsibility (1238, 1262, 1268); now he learns to accept self-control and to moderate his passions. Hercules' virtus is not simply strength but the ability to control strength. And proper use of strength depends on acceptance of Fate. We learned from Juno that Jupiter would grant Hercules immortality,43 but he 4 0 The later Stoics did not, of course, condemn all emotion, but rather advocated rational control and limited emotional response. De Ira 1.16.7; Ad Pol. de

Cons. 18.5,18.6. 41 Ep. 78.2. Saepe impetum cepi abrumpendae vitae: patris me indulgentissimi

senectus retinuit. This incident occurred in Seneca's youth. Elsewhere Seneca says that one may keep oneself from suicide for the sake of one's family. Ep. 1 0 4 . 3 - 4 . This is not, however, the Stoic position. See Rist, esp. 250. 4 2 Zintzen, 205—206, says Hercules' restraint, here, of his virtus, which was for him the guarantee of his greatness, is the last crucial confrontation with himself.

He cites Ep. 80.4: Quid tibi opus est ut bonus sis? Velie. See Rist, 223 ff., on

the Stoic will to be good. Seidensticker, 117, calls Hercules' decision here an act

of pietas·, Dingel, 111, calls it an act of virtus.

When Theseus offers Hercules a home in Athens where Mars also had been acquitted of murder and when he says that the land which is accustomed to receive superos will receive Hercules, his words assure us that Hercules' suffering is over and that a place will be granted him among the gods (1341-44). 43

69

struggled for divinity before it was fated to be given. 4 4 Overreaching caused his tragedy. N o w his human suffering and his father's suffering have reminded him of his place in the universe. Hercules is heroic when he puts aside his anger and reputation and accepts life (i.e.

Fate, since he is not

yet destined to die). 4 5 His recognition of true virtus

solves both the

intellectual and dramatic crisis in the play. Hercules' final tragic realization of his madness and guilt elicits from the audience an emotional response quite distinct from our response to the didacticism of a treatise. T h e theme of the play - the destructive power of emotion — could, of course, be the topic of a Stoic treatise, but it is also the theme of many tragedies, both ancient and modern, and Seneca presents the theme as a tragedy. In treatise, the emotionally excessive person is an object of scorn. In tragedy, he is an object of pity. W h a t many tragic heroes have in common is an admirable capacity of soul which allows them to reach great levels of emotion. At the same time that we might deplore Hercules', or any tragic hero's actions, we are forced to admire his capacity to involve himself so deeply. 4 6 T h e characterization of Hercules demonstrates the manner in which Seneca the dramatist used Stoic doctrine and terminology. T h e other characters describe Hercules in Stoic terms; 4 7 he is strong, intelligent, self-sufficient. H e has the qualities admired in a Stoic sage, but he abuses them. Is Seneca trying to demonstrate the dangerous potential of the Stoic sage? I think, rather, that he characterizes people in Stoic terms because these are most c o m m o n to him. T o be tragic, Hercules must be admirable. Stoic terms may simply reflect Seneca's

Galinsky, 173, also 181, concludes that when Hercules is converted from exercise of his physical strength to exercise of his spiritual strength, Seneca, by emphasizing the superhuman qualities in the hero, completely reverses the humanizing direction which the depiction of Hercules had taken in the 500 years before him. I do not, however, agree that Seneca intended to show in Hercules a development away from the human and toward the divine. His purpose is to emphasize the importance of virtus as a human quality in human life. 4 5 Marcosignori, 225, similarly defines tragic virtus as Hercules' acceptance of the weight of guilt and determination to endure. 46 Cf. Marcosignori, 223. 4 7 Some of the "Stoic" terms used in the description of Hercules (these just from the beginning of the play): indomita virtus (39); laetus imperia excipit (42); Alcide, pectore forti (186); seretiis vultibus nodos tulit (220); prolusit hydrae (222); inveniet viam/aut faciet ( 2 7 6 - 2 7 7 ; cf. Cicero's words in T.D. I. 32: earn sibi viam munivisset). 44

70

manner of expression. Much of modern day character judgment is still done in Christian terms even by people who profess not to be Christian. It is simply that we are trained to express our judgments in a certain way. Similarly, Seneca has described fate, the universe and man's relationship to it in terms most familiar to him, that is, in Stoic terms, just as Shakespeare describes the universe in Christian terms even in his deliberately pre-Christian plays. 48 Seneca may interpret Hercules' disorder in the context of Stoic theories of rational fate and cosmic harmony, but he portrays the disorder as tragic and pitiable. Can there, in fact, be Stoic tragedy? A Stoic hero could not be truly tragic because he could not be touched by disaster. I stated at the beginning of this chapter that we can determine not only Seneca's interpretation of the Hercules figure, but also his concept of the tragic hero. In what sense are the main characters of Seneca's plays tragic and heroic? 49 We must decide what characteristics, physical, mental and emotional, his hero possesses; how he uses his potential; what precisely is the tragic crisis; and how he reacts to this crisis. Of course, all these questions have been discussed in this chapter and I would like only to summarize them here and point out briefly the similarities between Hercules and Seneca's other main characters. The main characters possess qualities admired by the Stoics, especially strength, 50 self-sufficiency 51 and disregard for death. 52 They all grow stronger in the face of adversity, 53 but their strength and desire to achieve isolate them from the common man, represented by the chorus and other characters. 54 All have a reputation which they believe they must maintain 48 Cf. the comments of Eliot, Selected Essays 117 and 118, about the "philosophy" of Dante and Shakespeare. 4 9 Henry and Walker, CP 60 (1965) 11 and 18, strangely do not consider Hercules as either tragic or heroic. s o Often the strength has a divine origin. Phaedra and Medea are descendants of the Sun. Cf. Hercules. 51 Cf. Scott-Kilvert, 502, who says the Senecan hero embodies the Stoic ideal of self-sufficiency. 52 Cf. especially Astyanax and Polyxena in Troades, a play which has a number of "heroes." 5 3 Consider the frequency in the plays of such phrases as crescit malts (H.F. 33) and crevit malts (Medea 910). 5 4 The chorus, in particular, often advocates a philosophy contrary to the hero's desire to achieve.

71

or even exceed and they create a self-image which they then manipulate. Hercules, for example, is obsessed with the idea of fulfilling his divine potential. 55 This obsession, this tendency to excess, leads the heroic temperament to abuse of strength and then disaster. 56 The potential of the hero is great, but he is so obsessed by one emotion that he ceases to function except in respect to this one emotion. 57 Hercules' ambition, his desire to exceed Fate, is an emotional not rational response to his situation and talents. By emphasizing the psychology of the main character, Seneca is able to explore the emotional reasons for the actions described in the myth. In each play we witness the catastrophic results of excess in the main characters, and we observe that the tragic hero is responsible for his own suffering. 58 Medea and Phaedra realize their lack of rational control, but are unable to save themselves. This consciousness is their tragedy. Hercules and Oedipus (in both Oedipus and Pboenissae) are more fortunate. They,

5 5 Phaedra and Oedipus are both hindered from a clear understanding of their problems because they shape their thoughts according to the image they hold of themselves. Oedipus constantly recalls his victory over the Sphinx as proof of his intelligence and ability to save Thebes (92—93). Cf. Hercules' reputation as a monster killer. Phaedra mentions the family curse which has driven her, she thinks, to seek an unnatural relationship with her stepson ( 1 1 2 - 2 8 ; 698-699). And Medea spends most of the play trying to build up the courage to commit deeds worthy of her reputation and the fulfillment of her character. Note especially Medea's use of her own name to express the development towards what she feels is the fulfillment of her character. Medea superest (166); Medea ... Fiam (171); Est et his maior metus/Medea (516-17); Medea nunc sum: aevit ingenium malis (910). Hercules' strong assertion of self does not gain for him the sympathy which Medea gains. She was driven to anger by the cruel treatment of Jason and Creon and the unbearable situation in which they had placed her. 5 6 G. Braden, "The Rhetoric and Psychology of Power in the Dramas of Seneca," Arion 9 (1970) 5 - 4 1 , says that Seneca's leading characters take on a certain expansive imperialism not altogether distinct from the impulses of the Roman Empire itself. 57 Cf. the love which so completely overwhelms Phaedra that she is incapable of rational decision; or the anger which overwhelms Medea, who is noble in other respects, and drives her to a deed repulsive even to her. Neither woman can function rationally because their mental powers are dominated by one emotion. Phaedra 184: Quid ratio possiti vicit ac regnat furor. So, too, Atreus is a study in a totally paranoid desire for revenge. 5 8 In the Thyestes, the play ends once we have witnessed the extreme insanity of Atreus. He does not himself realize that he is out of control, except perhaps in 261—2, raptor et quo nescio, /sed raptor, and 267—69.

72

too, come to a tragic crisis, the realization of responsibility for their own suffering, but with the help of friends and family they learn to respond to the crisis in a rational manner. Hercules gains control over himself and learns to use, rather than abuse, his strength. His acceptance of the true meaning of virtus justifies his reputation and his acceptance into heaven. Seneca's concept of the tragic hero is most fully developed in the Hercules Furens where we see the strong and self-sufficient hero moving, because of excess, to his tragic crisis, but also then moving heroically to an acceptance of his guilt and a rational response to his situation.

73

CHAPTER 6

Structural and Thematic Unity A. Structural

Unity

Structure is the form imposed on the play by the playwright. The most basic structure in a play is the movement of the plot, the order of the dramatic events. Structure, however, is also a complex organizing principle which produces a unity of the component parts of the play by emphasizing the relationship between different events and the importance of particular events. Structure, therefore, clarifies meaning. I would like to begin this chapter with an examination of the structural unity in the Hercules Furens. The structure which Seneca designed for this play underlines the connection which he wished to make between the portrayal of Hercules as a personality and the abstract considerations of a definition of virtus. The play can be divided into an opening scene, four episodes and four choral odes. The opening scene (1—124) provides an outline of the play's events. The four episodes balance one another; in episode 1 (205—523), the discussions of Amphitryon, Megara and Lycus provide an appraisal of virtus·, in episode 2 (592-829), we learn of the conquest of the Underworld — Hercules' highest moment — and the advantages of physical strength; in episode 3 (895—1053), we witness the murders — Hercules' lowest moment — and the dangers of physical strength; in episode 4 (1138 — 1344), the discussions of Amphitryon, Hercules and Theseus provide a reappraisal of virtus and then a resolution of the problem of definition. Thus two appraisals of virtus, first erroneous, then correct, frame two scenes portraying Hercules' greatness and fall. Temporal succession of events is an element of structure. I discussed in an earlier chapter the irregular movement of dramatic time in this play. The play moves forward, but at an uneven pace because Seneca has alternated slow-moving and fast-moving scenes in order to emphasize certain events. The first act, for example, moves slowly, indeed is almost static, until the very end. Suspense drives us forward into the next act where 74

there is a burst of action. The suddenness and brevity of Hercules' appearance contrasts with the long speeches of the first act. Theseus' slowmoving narration then offers a remarkable difference in tone both to Hercules' appearance and swift departure, and to the impending violent action. This Underworld description interrupts the dramatic progress of the play and causes a break between two pictures: Hercules when he appears greatest and Hercules when he appears most wretched; an opportunity for the audience to reflect upon his past successes and to prepare for his future disgrace. Seneca's purpose as a psychological dramatist is to reveal man's responsibility for his own disorder, and therefore the madness of Hercules is the climax of the play because it allows our most vivid impression of the disorder in Hercules' mind. The last act of the play, Hercules' realization and resolution, again moves slowly so that we may, through the careful speeches, appreciate fully the tragic crisis. Unlike the first act, however, this last act does not seem static. There is little or no action, but Hercules' increasing awareness of guilt and responsibility moves us forward in time. This structural technique of alternating slow and fast moving scenes, discussion and action, is an effective method (1) of emphasizing the violence and madness when they occur; (2) of forcing the audience to compare the "action" scenes; (3) of providing the background for the action by the slower discussions and explorations of intellectual problems. Seneca uses other techniques besides temporal movement to provide structural unity. He also uses carefully controlled rising and falling movements. There are two rising movements in the play. The play moves steadily from bad to good, that is from fear of death, to the conquest of fear of death, and the extinction of the family enemy. We pause for reflection in Theseus' speech. Then, at the climax, Hercules' fortunes plummet suddenly to their lowest depths. In the remainder of the play, his fortunes move once more from bad to good as he learns a new way to cope with his mortality. The external similarities in the two rising movements allow us to concentrate on the difference in Hercules' reactions. The structure of Seneca's play is more tightly controlled than that of Euripides, and the difference results partly from Seneca's use of Juno's monologue. The monologue outlines the events of the play; when we witness the events later from a human perspective, they follow therefore an expected and logical pattern. Seneca even provides verbal echoes to reinforce our association of the events in the monologue and of the events 75

in the rest of the play. For example, Juno expresses her dismay that the only thing strong enough to destroy Hercules is Hercules himself by saying nec satis terrae patent (46). Then Hercules, in the midst of the mad boasting which leads to his downfall, shouts: non satis terrae patent (605). The many parallelisms in action connect the episodes of the play. When, for example, Hercules returned from the Underworld, he discovered that disaster had befallen his family. When he "returns" from his stupor after his madness, he again finds that disaster has befallen his family. Often the parallelisms are ironic. The audience already knows the events of the play, both from previous knowledge of the myth and from Juno's monologue. When we hear the words of a character unwittingly predict his own fate {i.e. Amphitryon's prayer in 278: venias victor ad victam domum, or Megara's assertion in 421: moriar, Alcide, tua), we connect this scene with an event which we know will occur. Consider how irony emphasizes the complete reversal of Hercules' situation at the end of the play. When Hercules desires to return to the Underworld, we remember that earlier he had struggled to leave the Underworld. We also recall that Hercules, who had earlier saved Theseus, now depends on Theseus for salvation. There is further irony in the fact that Hercules, who earlier did not want to purify his bloody hands, now recognizes his guilt by his bloody hands. Parallel episodes and dramatic irony are methods of maintaining structural unity because they stress the relationship between, and the importance of, certain events. B. Thematic Unity Structural unity is one method of achieving clarification of meaning. Just as important is the development of thematic unity. Seneca has interpreted the myth to reveal that man is responsible for his own misfortunes and that immoderation can destroy even the strongest character. The developments of theme and character parallel one another because the development of the character of Hercules as a mad individual is the theme itself. Other elements, however, besides characterization contribute to the thematic unity of the play. Seneca also uses motifs and images to reinforce his theme. 1 1

Imagery and motif in Seneca's plays are discussed by Owen, TAPA 291—313; and N.T. Pratt, "Major Systems of Figurative Language in Senecan Melodrama," TAPA 94(1963) 199-234. 76

Violence is a major motif in this play although the only portrayal of violence occurs in the "mad scene" when Hercules slaughters his family.2 Constant verbal reference, however, is made to violence in the recitations of Hercules' past deeds (205-48; 4 4 9 - 8 9 ; 5 2 4 - 4 6 ) and in Megara's and the Chorus' pleas to Hercules to burst forth from the Underworld {abrumpe tenebras, 280; fatum rumpe manu, 566). Lycus' aggressiveness, revealed not only by his present threats, but also by the description of his earlier murders of Megara's father and brothers, illustrates a pattern parallel to Hercules' own behavior and reinforces our awareness of the kind of destruction which a very strong character can perform. Certain recurrent images and word motifs point out the horror of violence. The sacrifice, for example, is a prominent image which stresses the madness and brutality of violence. The whole Lycus, Amphitryon and Megara scene takes place before a temple or shrine (356-7: iuxta praesides adstat deos / laterique adhaeret verus Alcidae sator), and when Lycus threatens to burn the temple and use it as a pyre for the family (506—07), he is proposing a human sacrifice. During his argument with Lycus, Amphitryon, recounting some of Hercules' more noble deeds, mentions the slaying of Busiris, the king of Egypt, who offered human sacrifices (483: hospitali caede manantes foci). Seneca thus provides two examples of the atrocity of such sacrificial acts; therefore when Hercules speaks of sacrificing Lycus (920—924), we will realize how evil and intemperate his character has become. The central sacrifice scene is, of course, Hercules' murders of his family, and Seneca has carefully prepared us for the full horror of it. The chorus, hearing of Hercules' return from the vengeance on Lycus, arranges for a happy sacrifice (875-77) and calls Hercules sacrificus (893). He undertakes a pious offering (899), but his anger against the dead Lycus overwhelms him and he decides to use Lycus' family as the sacrificial victims. He slaughters his own family within the sanctuary and dedicates the murders as a sacrifice to Juno (1038; Amphitryon, using Hercules' terms, calls himself a hostia in 1040). The complete perversion of what began as a joyous thanksgiving intensifies the impious violence of Hercules' deed. Another aspect of the violence in the play is the child - parent murder, a common motif in Senecan tragedy.3 The parentage of Hercules himself is 2 3

Cf. Pratt, TAPA 94 (1963) 201. Cf. the kin-murders in Oedipus, Thyestes, Phaedra, Medea.

77

in doubt and he suffers from the ill-will of his stepmother (whom he confuses with his wife in 1018). His father, Jupiter, suffered from the hatred of his father (460). In 496, Megara mentions the ill-fated marriage of Oedipus. Hercules, in turn, is unable to distinguish his own children and kills them because of this confusion. His friend, Theseus, as the audience would be well aware, will also later be responsible for the death of his own son. Like the grisly human sacrifices, these kin-murders emphasize how unnatural the madness of violence is. The repeated mention of blood and slaughter, and the use of imagery of blood also impress upon us the brutal violence which results from emotional immoderation. One need only consider how many times particular words are used 4 (cruentus, 7 times; cruor, 5 times; sanguis, 8 times; caedo, 5 times) to realize that from the very beginning Seneca is piling up images of horror which climax in the one violent action scene in the play. Bellum is another word which is used frequently in the play (17 times) to create images of strife and bloodshed. One word motif which specifically symbolizes the violence is manus (also dextra), the most prominent word-motif in the play. This word occurs 55 times. 5 Its meaning changes with the context - hand, bravery, power - but we discover that often the meaning "violence" is combined with, or included in, the meaning "hand," so that we begin to associate Hercules' hands with violence. We are led to this association by the skilful use Seneca has made of this motif with reference not only to Hercules but to other characters as well. He frequently uses the word manus to designate the character or attitude of a person. We learn that Theseus is a strong individual by a reference to his hands (818: tunc et meas respexit Alcides manus). Similarly, the guilt of Mars and his subsequent purification are both pointed out with reference to his hands ( 1 3 4 1 - 4 3 : Nostra te tellus

manet. /Illic solutam caede Gradivus manumlrestituii

armis).

This technique facilitates in particular the characterization of Lycus as a cruel tyrant. In 254, Amphitryon speaks of his violence against Megara's father and brothers as the result of truculenta manu. In 331, when we have our first view of Lycus, we see him aliena dextra sceptra concutiens. Megara expresses her refusal of marriage with him as a refusal to accept 4 W.A. Oldfather, A.St. Pease, H. V. Canter, "Index Verborum Quae in Senecae Fabulis necnon in Octavia Praetexta Reperiuntur," University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature 4 , 2 - 4 (Urbana 1918). 5 Index Verborum, 1 3 9 - 4 0 .

78

his bloody hands (372: Egone ut parentis sanguine aspersam manum ... contingam). Lycus speaks of his own victory as a tyrant in terms of the accomplishments of his hands ( 3 9 9 - 4 0 0 : ego rapta quamvis sceptra victrici geramldextra), and when Amphitryon prays to the gods to restrain the tyrant, he asks them to control his hands (518-19: impiam regis feri/compesce dextr am). It is not surprising, then, to find that Seneca has depicted Hercules' character and the development of his madness with the help of this wordmotif. In 58, Juno informs us of Hercules' pride when she mentions his superbifica manu. That Hercules is a man of strength becomes clear in a number of passages (121-22: licet/admittat illas genitor in caelum manus; 247: ad omne clarum facinus audaces manus·, 4 4 2 - 4 3 : postque pacatum manu/quodcumque Titan ortus ... videt; 487: nec unus una Geryon victus manu). Hercules' reputation depends on the strength of his hands and people seldom examine the other aspects of his character. In 2 7 9 - 8 0 , Megara's first words in the play dwell on his strength (dispuisas manu/ abrumpe tenebras; cf. the chorus' fatum rumpe manu, 566), and Hercules' own opinion of himself is similarly based on an assessment of the power of his hands ( 6 1 4 - 1 5 : iam diu pateris manus/cessare nostras, Juno). Even when the chorus speaks of the peace in the world, it mentions that it was achieved not by Hercules, but by Hercúlea manu (882), so completely has Hercules become identified with his hands. We form our impression of Hercules as a man of strength, violent action and pride through our observations about his hands, and it is in terms of these that Seneca chooses to illustrate the changes in Hercules' character. Hercules returns from slaying Lycus and expresses his piety by the word manus (914: Tonantem nostra adorabit manus). Amphitryon reminds him to purify himself (918—19: Nate, manantes prius/manus cruenta caede et hostili expia), but Hercules ignores his advice, begins boasting and becomes gravely deluded, a state of mind again expressed in terms of his hands (988—89: inviso patri/haec dextra iam vos reddet). Seneca stresses the atrocity of his murder of his sons by indicating their innocence and trust as they stretch forth their hands (1002—03): blandas manus/ad genua tendens; 1017: cernis, ut tendat manus}).6 And the chorus identifies 6 Cf. the use of the motif to describe Hercules' hands when young and innocent (tenera ... manu, 221). Innocence and purity as general characteristics are

described in terms of hands (739 -40: quisquís est placide

potens/dominusque 79

Hercules' guilt with his hands (1034: unumque manibus aufer Herculeis scelus). When Hercules awakens, he first becomes aware of his crime through Amphitryon's negative response to his outstretched hands. He tries to divorce himself from his hands and make them belong to Juno (1236: cremabo telis, o novercales manus; cf. Amphitryon's statement in 1297), but finally accepts his guilt and plans a death inflicted by his own hand (1271-72: vincatur meal fortuna dextra; 1281: agedum, dextra). He gives up suicide plans when he yields to the pleas of his father; the continued use of manus as a motif (1319: Hanc manum amplector libens) clarifies his submission and his father's acceptance. Theseus' reference to Mars' solutam manum (1342) assures us that Hercules will receive complete absolution. Seneca uses manus (dextra) as a word-motif first to establish Hercules' character and to emphasize the violence in the play and then to trace the development of Hercules' madness and eventual purification. A motif closely linked to the word-motif manus is the association of Hercules with his weapons in a manner which suggests that they are almost an extension of the person himself ( 6 2 4 - 2 5 : agnosco toros/umerosque et alto nobilem trunco manum, i.e., his club). When the chorus discusses Hercules' disastrous action, it suggests that even his weapons should join in the mourning (1115 ff.), that his breast should be beaten not only by his hands but by their extensions, his weapons. When Hercules awakens, he has a premonition that something evil has happened (1147) and then he notices that his weapons are missing (1150—54). Seneca is suggesting that the absence of the weapons has made him feel weak and helpless. At the end of the play, Hercules expresses his desire for self-destruction by asking permission to destroy his weapons (1229ff.) so closely does he seem to equate in his mind his own strength and violence with his weapons. The sacrifice imagery, the kin-murder motif, images of brutality and bloodshed, and the use of word-motifs such as manus, all combine to emphasize that Hercules' strength, since it is uncontrolled, is violent, that violence is a form of madness and that madness is, in the end, self-destructive. In contrast to the many images of violence, we also find in the play frequent references to peace and quiet which stress the opposite course vitae servai innocuas manus·, 1098—9: próxima puris/sors est manibus nescire nefas). 80

of action open to mankind. The chorus often mentions the blessings of a peaceful life. Amphitryon mentions Hercules' lack of quiet (212: nec ulla requies tempus aut ullum vacat; 9 2 4 - 2 6 : finiat genitor tuus/opta labores, detur aliquando otium/ quiesque fessis). When, however, Hercules prays for peace (926ff.), he is actually praying for a continuation of violent action (939), 7 and, precisely at this point, his madness intensifies and becomes apparent to all around. Amphitryon, gazing on the exhausted Hercules, says, detur quieti tempus (1051), and his words emphasize the contrast between Hercules' obsession with violent action and the quiet he could have pursued. In a similar manner, we find early in the play numerous references to control and restraint (384: dominare tumidus, spiritus altos gere; 433: imperia dura tolle: quid virtus erit?) which remind us of the necessity of selfcontrol before we actually see the full intensity of Hercules' lack of restraint. One major motif is virtus, which is closely associated with the figure of Hercules. Various definitions are provided by different characters. The development of our understanding of its meaning parallels the development of Hercules' understanding of his position in the universe. I have discussed this motif in earlier chapters. Another major system of motifs is concerned with light and darkness. When the play opens, we see Juno hovering over the earth, having just left the starry realms of heaven with its bright constellations. The constellations, by the regularity of their movements, serve as an assurance of the harmony and order of the universe and an indication of the existence of good.8 (The disorder in the constellations observed by Juno and Hercules symbolizes the disorder in their minds.) Throughout the play, the stars and sun represent the region of light. The realm of brightness is also the goal of Hercules' highest aspiration, deification (66: nec in astra lenta veniet ut Bacchus via), and early in the play we begin to identify light and brightness with the gods, goodness and man's greatest possible achievement.9 It is appropriate that Hercules' first outward manifestation of madness is his delusion that Heaven has become dark.

Cf. Galinsky's remarks (170—1) that Hercules is obsessed with violent action. Owen, TAPA 2 9 3 , says that the heavens are used "as a reflection of moral order or disorder in the world of man." 9 The stars are connected with the process of deification not only in the Hercules Furens but also in the Hercules Oetaeus; see Owen, TA PA 294. 7 8

81 6

Shelton, Hyp. 5 0

Quite opposite to the light of Heaven is the darkness of the Underworld. The Underworld is a central element since the play treats man's mortality and his struggle either to overcome it or to reconcile himself with it. Every character in the play, except Amphitryon and the chorus, travels to the Underworld. Theseus describes the Underworld as dark and gloomy (704-05): immotus aer haeret et pigro sedet/nox atra mundo·, 709: in recessu obscuro; 710: gravibus umbris spissa caligo). The Underworld, moreover, means death, the end of human existence, and the opposite of deification. Hercules' victorious return may dispel the fear of the Underworld, but his subsequent murders show death itself as a present and real horror. Thus, light and dark, good and evil, happiness and gloom, deification and death, are set up as opposites by the imagery of Heaven and the Underworld. The Earth, the region of man, takes on lightness or darkness as a reflection of the moods and actions of men. Theseus describes the welcome light of the earth (653) which provides the final blow to Cerberus, who is an evil (813). On the other hand, Megara and Amphitryon, in their anxiety, see darkness on earth (207—08; 280). Words important to the meaning of the play gain additional definition by reference to their lightness or darkness: clara virtus (340); error caecus (1096). And Hercules, who is fond of comparing himself to Apollo, receives additional characterization when described as a light (1251: unum lumen). Hercules should be the bringer of light, but he becomes for his family the bringer of darkness and death. By contrasting the light and darkness of Heaven and the Underworld, and the opposite fates of man which they represent, deification and death, Seneca is able to give extra meaning to the events on earth and their effect on character. The chorus, which throughout counterbalances the ideas of other characters, provides a completely opposite view of light and darkness. Daylight brings danger and hard labor; gold causes discomfort (168); dark night brings the restfulness of sleep (1066). It is, of course, typical of Seneca's style to use such arguments to provide a counterpoint to the main movement of the play. Fire, also a source of light, appears in its different forms, and its shifting nature provides imagery which emphasizes the theme of the play. The heavenly fires of the stars and the sun represent the brightness of deification. Earthly fire, however, often takes on a sinister appearance. 10 The 10

Cf. Pratt, TAPA 94 (1963) 211. See also his comment (231) that in the Hercules Oetaeus the destructive fire meets its master. 82

proposed marriage torch-fires (346), a symbol of happiness on most occasions, threaten to become the fire of the family's funeral pyre (508). And, in a sequence even more important to the development of the theme, Hercules speaks first of the fires of legitimate sacrifice (918), another usually happy occasion, but when confronted by his evil deed sees fire as an instrument of his own death (1285ff.). Earthly fire is a force parallel to Hercules' strength and emotion when they are without restraint. By the use of such images and motifs, Seneca achieves thematic unity. *

*

*

Seneca's interpretation of the myth of Hercules' madness is clarified by the careful attention he has given to structural and thematic unity. However his skill as a dramatic poet is evident not only in the larger formal control of the play, but also in the verbal brilliance and complexity of each line. The plays are not merely philosophic treatises after the manner of the Cynic drama of Diogenes; 11 Seneca's talents and creativity as a poet and dramatist help him produce successful psychological drama. In the Hercules Furens, Seneca provides a dramatic presentation of those psychological processes which determine the actions of the myth. He analyzes the origin and development of madness and demonstrates that it is internal and produced by the dominance of the irrational over the rational part of the soul. His dramatic techniques reflect, of course, his dramatic intentions. He changed the function of the opening monologue, he distorted the flow of dramatic time and he stressed the thoughts, rather than the feelings and actions, of his characters in order to reveal most clearly the psychology of madness. Seneca's tragedies are important dramatic works reflecting the problems and interests of his own period. 11

Marti, CP 42 (1947) 7, says that the prototypes of Seneca's tragedies were the philosophic dramas of Diogenes which were meant to be read to oneself, not performed. "They (Diogenes' tragedies) presumably consisted of long tirades and tedious philosophical dialogues."

83

Selected Bibliography Editions Peiper, R. and Richter, G.: L. Annaei Settecae tragoediae. Leipzig 1867. Leo, F.: L. Annaei Senecae tragoediae. 2 vols. Berlin 1878. Moricca, H.: L. Annaei Senecae tragoediae. 3 vols. Corpus Script. Lat. Paravianum. 2nd ed. Turin 1947. Kingery, H.M.: Three Tragedies of Seneca: Hercules Furens, Troades, Medea. With an introduction and notes. Norman 1966. Giardina, J.C.: L. Annaei Senecae tragoediae. 2 vols. Bologna 1966. Viansino, J.: L. Annaei Senecae tragoediae. 3 vols. Corpus Script. Lat. Paravianum. 2nd ed. Turin 1968. Haase, F.: L. Annaei Senecae opera quae supersunt. Leipzig 1893. Arnim, J.: Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. 4 vols. Stuttgart 1964. Murray, G.: Euripidis Fabulae. Vol. 2. 3rd ed. Oxford 1913. Lexicon Oldfather, W.A., St. Pease, Α., Canter, Η. V.: "Index Verborum quae in Senecae fabulis necnon in Octavia praetexta reperiuntur." University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature. 4. Urbana 1918. Secondary

Literature

A. Works about Seneca Anliker, K.: Prologe und Akteinteilung in Senecas Tragödien. Bern 1960. Bieber, M.: The History of the Greek and Roman Theatre. 2nd ed. Princeton 1961. Bishop, J. D.: "The Meaning of the Choral Meters in Senecan Tragedy," RhM 111 (1968) 1 9 7 - 2 1 9 . —: "Seneca's Hercules Furens. Tragedy from modus vitae," C & M 27 (1966) 216-24. Boissier, G.: L'Opposition sous les Césars. Paris 1875. Bonner, S.F.: Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire. Berkeley 1949. Braden, G.: "The Rhetoric and Psychology of Power in the Dramas of Seneca," Arion 9 (1970) 5 - 4 1 . Braginton, M.: The Supernatural in Seneca's Tragedies. Menasha 1933. Brooks, C. and Heilmann, R.: Understanding Drama. New York 1945. Burck, E.: Vom Römischen Manierismus. Darmstadt 1971. 84

Calder, W.M.: "The size of the chorus in Seneca's Agamemnon," CP 70 (1975) 32-35. Canter, H. V.: "Rhetorical Elements in the Tragedies of Seneca," University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature 10. Urbana 1925. Castiglioni, L.: "La tragedia di Ercole in Euripide ed in Seneca," RFIC 54 (1926) 176-197,336-362. Cattin, Α.: Les thèmes lyriques dans les tragédies de Sénèque. Fribourg 1959. Clemen, W.: English Tragedy Before Shakespeare. Tr. T.S. Dorsch. London 1961. -: Shakespeare's Dramatic Art. London 1972. Coffey, M.: "Seneca, Tragedies, including pseudo-Seneca Octavia and Epigrams attributed to Seneca, Report for the years 1922-1955," Lustrum 2 (1957) 113-186. Dingel, J.: Seneca und die Dichtung. Heidelberg 1974. Dutoit, M. L'Abbé E.: "Le Thème de 'la force qui se détruit elle-même'," REL 14 (1936) 365 - 7 3 . Edert, O.: Uber Senecas "Herakles" und den "Herakles auf dem Oeta." Diss. Kiel 1909. Egermann, F.: "Seneca als Dichterphilosoph." Senecas Tragödien 3 3 - 5 7 . (See Lefèvre). Eliot, T. S. : Introduction to Seneca·. His Tenne Tragedies. Bloomington 1927. - : "Shakespeare and the Stoicism of Seneca," Selected Essays. New Edition. London 1950. Enk, P. J.: "Roman Tragedy," Neophilologus 41 (1957) 2 8 2 - 3 0 7 . Evans, E.: "A Stoic Aspect of Senecan Drama: Portraiture," TAPA 81 (1950) 169-84. Frenzel, F.: Die Prologe den Tragödien Senecas. Diss. Leipzig 1914. Friedrich, W.H.: "Die Raserei des Hercules," Senecas Tragödien, 131-148. (See Lefèvre). Galinsky, G.K.: The Herakles Theme. Oxford 1972. Garton, C.: Personal Aspects of the Roman Theatre. Toronto 1972. Grimal, P.: "Les Tragédies de Sénèque," Les Tragédies de Sénèque et le Théâtre de la Renaissance, 1-10. Ed. J. Jacquot. Paris 1973. Grisoli, P.: "Per l'interpretazione del primo canto corale dell' Hercules Furens di Seneca," Boll. Com. 19 (1971) 7 3 - 9 9 . Hadas, M.: "The Roman Stamp of Seneca's Tragedies," AJP 60 (1939) 2 2 0 - 2 3 0 . Heldmann, Κ.: Untersuchungen zu den Tragödien Senecas. Wiesbaden 1974. Henry, D. and Walker, B.: "Seneca and the Agamemnon·. Some Thoughts on Tragic Doom," CP 58 (1963) 1-10. - : "The futility of action: A study of Seneca's Hercules Furens," CP 60 (1965) 11-22. - : "Phantasmagoria and Idyll: An Element of Seneca's Phaedra," G&R 13 (1966) 2 2 3 - 3 9 . Herington, C. J.: "Senecan Tragedy," Arion 5 (1966) 4 2 2 - 7 1 . Herrmann, L.: Le théâtre de Sénèque. Paris 1924. Hijmans, B.L.: "Drama in Seneca's Stoicism," TAPA 97 (1966) 2 3 7 - 5 1 . 85

Housman, A. E.: "Notes on Seneca's Tragedies," CQ 17 (1923) 1 6 3 - 7 2 . Hynd, J. and Whitaker, R.: "Senecan Triptych - a Conversation," Arion 7 (1968) 58-67. Jamroz, W.: "Stoicka Inspiracja Sztuki Seneki H.F.," Eos 60 (1972) 2 9 3 - 3 0 7 . Kapnukajas, C.: Die Nachahmungstechnik Senecas. Diss. Leipzig 1930. Keseling, P.: "Horaz in den Tragödien des Seneca," Philologische Wochenschrift (Leipzig 1941) 190-192. King, C.M.: "Seneca's Hercules Oetaeus: A Stoic Interpretation of the Greek Myth," G&R 1 8 ( 1 9 7 1 ) 2 1 5 - 2 2 . Lefèvre, E.: Ed. Senecas Tragödien. Darmstadt 1972. Leo, F.: "Die Composition der Chorlieder Senecas," RhM 52 (1897) 5 0 9 - 5 1 8 . MacKay, L. Α.: "The Roman Tragic Spirit," CSCA 8 (1975) 145-162. Maguiness, W.S.: "Seneca and the Poets," Hermathena 88 (1956) 81-98. Marcosignori, A.M.: "II concetto di virtus tragica nel teatro di Seneca," Aevum 34(1960)217-233. Marti, B.: "The Prototypes of Seneca's Tragedies," CP 42 (1947) 1-16. - : "Seneca's Tragedies. A New Interpretation," TAPA 76 (1945) 2 1 6 - 2 4 5 . - : "La Place de L'Hercule sur l'Oeta dans le corpus des tragédies de Sénèque," REL 27(1949) 189-210. Marx, W.: Funktion und Form der Chorlieder in den Seneca-Tragödien. Diss. Heidelberg 1932. Mazzoli, G.: Seneca e la poesia. Milan 1970. Mendell, C. W. : Our Seneca. New Haven 1941. Mette, H.J.: "Die Römische Tragödie, 1945-1964," Lustrum 9 (1964) 1 8 - 2 3 ; 160-194. - : "Die Funktion des Löwengleichnisses in Senecas Hercules Furens," WS 79 (1966) 4 7 7 - 4 8 9 . Motto, A.L.: Guide to the Thought of Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Amsterdam 1970. Motto, A. L., and Clark, J. R.: "Senecan Tragedy: Patterns of Irony and Art," CB 48 (1972) 6 9 - 7 6 . Noyes, R.: "Seneca on Death," Journal of Religion and Health (New York Institute of Religion and Health) 12 (1973) 223 - 2 4 0 . Opelt, H.: Der Tyrann als Unmensch in den Tragödien des Seneca. Diss. Freiburg 1951. Owen, W.H.: "Time and Event in Seneca's Troades," WS 4 (1970) 118-137. —: "Commonplace and Dramatic Symbol in Seneca's Tragedies," TAPA 99 (1968) 291-313. Pack, R.: "On Guilt and Error in Senecan Tragedy," TAPA 71 (1940) 3 6 0 - 3 7 1 . Paratore, E.: "Originalità del teatro di Seneca," Dioniso 31 (1957) 5 3 - 7 4 . —: "Il prologo dello Hercules Furens di Seneca e l'Eracle di Euripide," Quaderni della RCCM 9 (1966) 1 - 3 9 . Poe, J.P.: "An Analysis of Seneca's Thyestes," TAPA 100 (1969) 3 5 5 - 3 7 6 . Pohlenz, M.: Die Stoa. Vol. I. Göttingen 1959. Pratt, N.T.: "The Stoic Base of Senecan Drama," TAPA 79 (1948) 1-11. - : "From Oedipus to Lear," CJ 61 (1965) 4 9 - 5 7 . 86

- : "Major Systems of Figurative Language in Senecan Melodrama," TAPA 94 (1963) 1 9 9 - 2 3 4 . Regenbogen, O.: "Schmerz und Tod in den Tragödien Senecas," Kleine Schriften. Ed. Franz Dirlmeier, Munich 1961. Ribbeck, O.: Die Römische Tragödie im Zeitalter der Republik. Leipzig 1875. Runchina, G.: "Tecnica drammatica e retorica nelle Tragedie di Seneca," AFCL 28 (Cagliari 1960) 1 8 0 - 2 3 1 . Scott-Kilvert, I.: "Seneca or Scenario," Arion 7 (1968) 5 0 1 - 5 1 1 . Seidensticker, Β.: Die Gesprächsverdichtung in den Tragödien Senecas. Heidelberg 1969. Shelton, J.R.: "Problems of Time in Seneca's Hercules Furens and Thyestes," CSCA 8 (1975) 2 5 7 - 2 6 9 . Siemers,T.B.B.: Seneca's "Hercules Furens" en Euripides' "Herakles". Diss. Utrecht 1951. Tobin, R.W.: "Tragedy and Catastrophe in Seneca's Theatre," CJ 62 (1966) 64-70. Trabert, K.: Studien zur Darstellung des Pathologischen in den Tragödien des Seneca. Diss. Erlangen 1953. von Fritz, K.: "Tragische Schuld in Senecas Tragödien," Senecas Tragödien 6 7 - 7 3 . (See Lefèvre). Wanke, C.: Seneca, Lucan, Corneille: Studien zum Manierismus der Römischen Kaiserzeit und der Französischen Klassik. Heidelberg 1964. Zintzen, C.: "Alte virtus animosa cadit," Senecas Tragödien 1 4 9 - 2 0 9 . (See Lefèvre). Zwierlein, O.: Die Rezitationsdramen

Senecas. Meisenheim 1966.

B. Works about Euripides Adkins, A. W.H.: "Basic Greek Values in Euripides' Hecuba and Hercules Furens," CQ N.S. 16(1966) 1 9 3 - 2 1 9 . Arrowsmith, W.: Introduction to Hercules in Euripides II, the Complete Greek Tragedies. Edd. D. Grene and R. Lattimore. Chicago 1956. Blaiklock, E. M.: The Male Characters of Euripides. Wellington 1952. Burnett, A. P.: Catastrophe Survived - Euripides' Plays of Mixed Reversal. Oxford 1971. Carrière, J.: "La Composition de YHéracles d'Euripide," Annales de la Faculté des Lettres de Toulouse (1952) 2 - 1 4 . Chalk, H.H.O.: "Αρετή and βία in Euripides' Herakles," JHS 82 (1962) 7 - 1 8 . Conacher, D. J.: Euripidean Drama — Myth, Theme and Structure. Toronto 1967. Dodds, E.R.: "Euripides the Irrationalist," CR 43 (1929) 9 7 - 1 0 4 . Greenwood, L.H.G.: Aspects of Euripidean Tragedy. Cambridge 1953. Kamerbeek, J.C.: "Unity and Meaning of Euripides' Heracles," Mnemosyne ser. 4 , 1 9 (1966) 1-16. Murray, G.: "Herakles, the Best of Men," Greek Studies (Oxford 1946) 1 0 6 - 1 2 6 . Sheppard, J.T.: "The Formal Beauty of the Hercules Furens," CQ 10 (1916) 72 - 7 9 . 87

Verrall, A. W.: Essays on Four Plays of Euripides. Cambridge 1905. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von: Euripides Herakles. Vols. 1 and 2. Berlin 1895. C. Works about Stoicism Arnold, E.V.: Roman Stoicism, re-issue. New York 1958. Christensen, J.: An Essay on the Unity of Stoic Philosophy. Long, A.A.: Problems in Stoicism. London 1971. Rist, J. M.: Stoic Philosophy. Cambridge 1969. Sandbach, F.H.: The Stoics. New York 1975.

88

Copenhagen 1962.

1. General Index Action, futility of, 4 4 , 4 6 , 4 7 , 4 8 , 4 9 little in play, 24 f., 30,33 f., 74f. motivation for, 21,34f., 39,72 Actors, 37 Advice Scenes, 68 n. 36 Adynaton, 34 n. 31 Aeneas, 54,55 n. 13,56,56 n. 16 Afterlife, 45 f., 53 f. Agamemnon, 68 n. 36 Alexander the Great, 59 n. 7 Ambiguity, 3 4 , 3 6 , 5 2 , 5 5 - 5 7 Ambition, a form of madness, 44 of Hercules, 2 1 , 6 0 , 6 2 , 6 5 , 7 2 viewed by chorus, 48 n. 26,49 Ambivalence, see Ambiguity Amphitryon, in Seneca's H.F., 24, 29, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38f., 44, 51, 54, 60 n.9, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 6 7 - 6 9 , 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81,82 in Euripides' H. F., 12 η. 6 , 1 3 , 3 1 η. 23 Anachronism, 32 η. 24 Andromache, in Seneca's Troades, 34 Anger, 60, 61, 62 nn. 14 and 18, 64, 65 f., 67, 69,70 Argument, formal arrangement of, 35,37,39 Atreus, 32, 32 n. 28, 44 n. 16, 60 n. 8, 65 n. 26, 72 nn. 57 and 58 Audience, 14f., 22,24,24 n. 23,34,70,75 Blood, 63,66,76,78, 80 Boastfulness, 19, 21, 36, 47, 51, 56f., 60, 61, 62,63,64,76,79 Busiris, King of Egypt, 77 Caesar, C. Julius, 59 n. 7 Casus, 67 f. Catastrophe, 66 f., 72 Cerberus, 1 9 , 4 6 , 5 2 , 5 4 - 5 6 , 6 3 , 8 2 Characterization, methods of, 2 6 - 3 9 , 52, 6 0 63 Stoic influence on, 70 f. through word motif, 7 8 - 8 0 Charon, 54 Children, of Hercules, 3 3 , 4 7 , 6 2 , 6 5 , 7 9 and of Theseus, 38,78

Choral odes, content of ode 1, 4 2 - 4 4 ; ode 2, 44 f., 79; ode 3, 45 f., 77, 79; ode 4, 47 f., 80 metre, 46 n. 22,47 overlapping speech of Theseus, 23 topical material, 41,43,48 Chorus, composition and identity, 40 f., 43 f., 48,71 counterpoint philosophy, 42, 44, 46, 57 n. 18,60,71 n. 54,82 desire for security, 33 function in play, 4 0 - 4 9 lack of sympathy towards Hercules, 41, 42, 43 f. position of stage, 41 n. 4 Clytemnestra, 68 n. 36 Comic elements, 56,56 n. 15 Contrasts, between characters, 37,61 n. 10 Crimen, 67 Cynic drama, 83,83 η. 11 Death, disregard for, 71 fear of, 46,48,75 finality of, 44,45 Hercules' conquest of, 55 - 5 7 , 63,82 Stoic attitude, 54 n. 11 Definitions, to establish dramatic conflict, 39, 62 to identify characters, 31,43 f. to indicate development of Hercules, 67,74, 81

Deification, Hercules' aspirations, 64 theme in play, 18 n. 7,81, 82 Delusions, of family about Hercules, 28 f., 37 of Hercules about his strength, 28, 57, 58, 59,61 of Hercules during "mad scene", 65, 79, 81 Descriptions, in rhetorical drama, 50 f. Dialogue, characterization through, 37, 38, 39 credibility of, 28,38 function in Underworld description, 51 Didacticism, in play, 70 Diogenes the Cynic, 83,83 n. 11 Disorder, created by Hercules, 46 in Hercules' mind, 6 3 - 6 5 in Imperial Rome, 65 n. 26

89

in Thebes, 31 in universe, 18 f., 3 1 , 3 3 η. 2 8 , 4 2 Juno, as force of, 22 f. man causes his own, 75 Dramatic conflict, 2 8 - 2 9 , 3 9 Dramatic realism, 28—29 Emotional response, by audience, 34 by Amphitryon, 6 2 , 6 9 by Hercules, 72 Emotions, anger, 61 development of, 2 1 , 2 1 n. 15,62 excess of, 7 0 , 7 2 n. 57 formalized portrayal of, 30, 33, 35, 37, 39 lack of restraint, 66 representation through lament, 47 Stoic definition of, 59f., 59 n. 8 , 6 9 n.40 Epicureanism, in choral odes, 4 3 , 4 3 n. 14 Error, 4 8 , 5 8 n. 4 , 6 7 , 6 7 n. 35,68, 82 Euripides, Herakles, 1 1 - 1 3 , 17 η. 2, 29 η. 13, 42 η. 11, 43, 44 η. 15, 48, 50, 56, 59, 62 η. 1 5 , 6 3 , 6 6 , 7 5 Baccbae, 19 η. 9 Hippolytus, 19 η. 9 Eurystheus, in Seneca's Η. F., 3 1 , 3 5 in Euripides' Η. F., 12,66 Exaggeration, in dramatic characterization, 2 6 , 2 9 f. Family, of Hercules, 31, 33, 37, 45, 49, 60 n. 9 , 6 2 , 6 3 Fate, 4 3 , 4 4 , 4 6 , 6 3 , 6 8 - 7 0 , 7 1 , 7 2 , 8 2 Fear, chorus', 44 Hercules' victory over, 35 of afterlife, 5 4 , 5 7 n. 19,63 of death, 4 6 , 4 8 , 5 5 , 5 7 n. 19, 6 3 , 7 5 Fortuna, 4 4 , 5 8 η. 4 Furor, 6 7 , 6 7 η. 34 Future tense, in dialogue, 37 Gnomic, statements, 38 Gods, cruelty of, 58 n. 5 , 6 8 Hercules' rivalry with, 5 9 , 6 1 , 63f. role in play, 22, 22 n. 16, 36, 47, 58, 66, 81

Greek tragedy, chorus, 4 0 , 4 4 realism of characters, 27 role of gods, 68 Guilt, 4 8 , 6 6 , 6 8 , 7 0 , 7 3 , 7 5 , 8 0 Hallucination, 64 f. Heavenly bodies, symbolism of, 18 n. 7, 42, 5 3 , 6 4 , 6 5 nn.25 and 2 6 , 8 1 , 8 2

90

Hercules, passim, esp. 5 8 - 7 3 his own worst enemy, 23, 23 n.21, 51, 57, 64,65,75 his paternity, 3 6 , 5 9 , 7 7 f . isolated from others, 44 Heroic temperament, 58 f., 6 6 , 6 8 , 7 0 - 7 3 Horace, 42 n. 10,43 n. 12 Ignorance, of guilt, 4 8 , 6 6 , 6 8 Imagery, 7 6 - 8 3 Imitation, of earlier poets, 41 n. 7 , 4 2 , 4 2 n. 10 Immoderation, 1 4 , 6 0 , 6 9 , 7 6 , 7 8 Immortality, of Hercules, 59 n. 6, 69, 69 n.43, 73 Imperatives, use of, 3 7 , 4 5 , 4 7 Impietas, 64 Impiety, 3 1 , 6 3 , 6 4 Indifferent, Stoic, 57 n. 1 9 , 5 9 , 5 9 n. 8 Insanity, see Madness Iris, in Euripides' H. F., 1 2 , 1 3 , 2 2 η. 19 Irony, 2 3 , 3 5 , 4 4 , 4 6 , 4 8 , 6 1 , 6 2 , 6 5 , 7 6 Irrationality, see Madness Ixion, 46 Jason, 68 n. 3 8 , 7 2 n. 55 Juno, in Seneca's H.F., 1 8 - 2 3 , 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 42, 47, 56, 59 n.6, 60, 61, 62, 6 4 , 6 7 , 6 9 , 7 5 , 7 6 , 7 7 , 7 9 , 80,81 Jupiter, 3 2 , 3 7 , 6 1 , 6 3 , 6 4 , 6 9 , 7 8 Kin-murders, 7 7 - 7 8 , 80 Lycus, in Seneca's H.F., 12, 23, 24, 29, 31, 3 2 - 3 7 , 43, 45, 48, 49, 55 n.13, 60, 64 n. 2 2 , 6 5 f., 7 4 , 7 7 , 7 8 , 7 9 his death, 5 0 , 5 4 , 5 6 , 6 1 f., 63 in Euripides' H. F., 12,32 η. 2 5 , 3 2 η. 2 6 , 3 4 , 3 5 , 5 6 , 6 2 η. 15 Macbeth, 65 η. 27 Mad scene, 6 4 - 6 6 , 7 7 Madness, causes of, 2 1 , 2 8 , 3 9 depiction of, 65 f. develops gradually, 18, 21, 57, 61, 63 f., 67 Euripides' interpretation of, 1 1 - 1 3 Hercules' greatest opponent, 5 1 , 5 6 Juno, as representation of, 22 f. not caused by gods, 47, 66 results of, 35 Seneca's interpretation of, 13f., 25, 44, 5 8 60,66,83 Mannerism, 1 5 , 3 0 , 3 0 n. 15,42 n. 9 , 4 9

Manus, as a word motif, 6 7 , 7 8 - 8 0 Marius, 32 η. TI, 59 η. 7 Marriage proposal of Lycus, 32, 34, 78, 83 Mars, 69 n. 4 3 , 7 8 , 8 0 Medea, 33 n.29, 62 n.18, 68, 71 n.50, 72, 72 n. 5 5 , 7 2 n. 57 Megara, in Seneca's H.F., 24, 29, 30, 3 I f . , 3 4 - 3 7 , 4 5 , 6 0 , 7 4 , 7 6 , 7 7 , 7 8 , 7 9 , 82 in Euripides' H.F., 13, 31 n.23, 35, 62 n. 15 Metre, 46 n. 2 2 , 4 7 Monologues, 1 3 , 3 1 , 3 7 , 5 1 , 6 1 n. 12,75 Monsters, 36, 45, 47, 55, 55 n. 13, 60, 64, 65 Mortality, 5 7 , 5 8 , 6 3 , 7 5 , 82 Motif, 7 6 - 8 3 Murders of the family, 23, 24f., 47, 50, 56f., 58,66,68,74,77,79 Myth, use of, 1 3 , 4 5 , 5 8 , 7 2 Neptune, 61 Nero, 32 n. 2 8 , 5 3 n.10 Nestor, 37 Novus homo, 32 Oedipus, 28, 7 2 , 7 2 n. 5 5 , 7 8 One-dimensional characters, 29 Orpheus, 45 Ovid, 22 n. 1 9 , 5 2 Parallels, between characters, 38, 64 n. 22, 65 f., 77 between episodes, 7 4 , 7 6 historical, 59 n. 7 in development of theme and character, 14, 74,76 Pardon, request for, 61 Parricide, 69 Passions, see Emotions Peace, Amphitryon advises, 64 Hercules, bringer of, 4 6 , 7 9 motif, 8 0 - 8 1 Personality, distinction of, 37f., 43 Phaedra, 6 8 , 7 1 n. 5 0 , 7 2 , 7 2 n. 55, 72 n. 5 7 Philosophic positions, stated by characters, 3 1 - 3 9 , 4 3 , 4 3 n. 14 Phoebus Apollo, 6 1 , 8 2 Pietas, 4 7 , 6 9 η. 42 Piety, 63 f., 7 7 , 7 9 Pluto, 5 5 , 5 7 η. 19 Poetic drama, 27 n. 10 Poetic skill, 45 f., 47 f., 52 f., 55 Pompey, 59 η. 7 Pragmatism of Lycus, 32 f., 3 4 , 3 6

Praise, of family for Hercules, 31, 60 n. 9, 63 Pride, 21, 44, 49, 51, 59, 60, 62, 63, 64, 79 Prologue, in Seneca's H.F., 13, 1 8 - 2 3 , 36 n. 3 3 , 3 7 , 8 3 in Euripides' H. F., 13 Proserpina, 5 5 , 5 7 n. 19 Psychology, portrayal of, 2 1 - 2 3 , 25, 26, 28f., 30, 35, 39, 59 ff., 65 f., 68 η. 36, 72, 75, 83 Punishment, in Underworld, 53 f., 54 η. 11, 55 of Hercules, 6 1 , 6 7 f. Purification, before sacrifice, 63 f., 7 6 , 7 9 of Mars, 7 8 , 8 0 Questions, use of, 3 7 , 5 1 Racine, 1 5 , 1 5 n. 16 Realism, 2 6 - 2 9 Recitation, as entertainment, 15,51 Recognition scene, 6 6 , 7 0 , 7 5 Reputation, importance of, 29, 36, 60, 66, 68, 7 0 , 7 1 - 7 3 , 7 2 n. 5 5 , 7 9 Responsibility, question of, 13, 22, 39, 48, 66-70,73,75 Revenge, Hercules' desire for, 50, 56, 6 1 - 6 4 , 66,77 Rhetoric, influence in play, 26, 30, 32 n.28, 33, 34f., 34 n.31, 39, 50f., 53 n.10, 67 n. 34 in Elizabethan theatre, 27 n. 10 Roman theatre, 4 1 n. 4 , 4 2 n. 8 Sacrifice, 4 6 , 6 2 n. 1 5 , 6 3 f., 77, 8 0 , 8 3 Sanity, 4 8 , 6 6 , 6 8 Scaenae frons, 24 n. 23 Scelus, 6 6 , 6 7 f. Self-control, 3 9 , 6 4 , 6 9 , 7 2 f., 81 Self-sufficiency, 7 0 , 7 1 , 7 3 Seneca, Agamemnon, 18 n.7, 22 n. 16, 51 n.6, 67 n . 3 3 Hercules Oetaeus, 22 n. 16, 23 n.21, 44 n. 15,45 n. 17,67 n. 3 2 , 8 1 n. 9, 82 n. 10 Medea, 33 n.29, 4 1 n.5, 44 n.16, 51 n.6, 6 0 , 7 2 n. 55 Oedipus, 3 I n . 19,51 n . 6 , 7 2 Phoenissae, 72 Thyestes, 18 n. 7, 22 n. 1 6 , 2 2 n. 18, 25 n.24, 32 n.28, 44 n.16, 65 n.26, 67 n.33, 72 n.58 Troades, 17 n . l , 20 n . l l , 44 n.15, 47, 71 n. 52 Seneca's father, 69 n. 41

91

Sententiae, use of, 38 Shakespeare, 38 n.36,65 n.27,71 Sibyl, in Aeneid, 54 Simile, use of, 45 f. Slaves, in the chorus, 40 Soul, 59 n. 8 , 6 0 , 7 0 , 8 3 Sound, effective use of, 15, 45, 47, 47 n.25, 48,53 Staging, of Seneca's plays, 14 f., 24 η. 23, 41 η. 4,42 η. 8 Stichomythia, 38 Stock characters, 26,32 η. 28 Stoic terminology, use of, 70 f. Stoic theories on, afterlife, 54 n. 11 causes, 68 n. 38 death, 57 n. 19 disorder, 65 n. 26 emotions, 59,69 n. 40 psychology, 14,30 suicide, 32 n. 28,69 n. 41 time, 19 n. 10 tyrants, 32 n. 28 virtus, 69 n. 42 Stoic "wise man," 34,58,61 n. 14,70 Stoicism, chorus' use of, 43 n. 14, 45 n. 20 Strength, use and abuse by Hercules, 28 f., 31 f., 35f., 39, 44, 47, 49, 5 8 - 6 0 , 62, 68f., 71,73,74,79, 80,83 Structural unity, 7 4 - 7 6 Subjunctive, use of, 37,45 Suicide, 25 n.24, 32 n.28, 38 f., 6 7 - 6 9 , 80, 83

92

Tantalus, 18 n.7, 22 n. 18, 46, 53, 67 n.33 Theatres, of convention and of illusion, 27 Thematic unity, 7 6 - 8 3 Theseus, in Seneca's H.F., 23, 24, 29, 38f., 46, 50f., 52, 52 n.7, 55, 61 n.10, 67, 69, 74,76,78,80,82 in Euripides' H. F., 12,38 η. 37,52 η. 7 Thyestes, 18 η. 7,44 η. 16,67 η. 33 Time, manipulation of, 17—25 suspension of, 34,50,74 f. Tragic hero, concept of, 58 f., 66, 68, 7 0 - 7 3 Treatise, Seneca's H.I·., as, 14, 43 n. 14, 70, 83 Twelve labors of Hercules, 12, 35 f., 44, 57 Tyranny, 32, 32 n.28, 44, 53f., 55, 63f., 78f.

Ulysses, in Seneca's Troades, 34 Umbra, 56 Underworld, 23, 24, 38, 43, 4 4 - 4 6 , 47, 48, 5 0 - 5 7 , 6 1 , 6 3 , 6 7 , 7 4 , 75,76,82

Validity of arguments, judging, 35, 38, 44, 60 Value of Hercules' deeds, 51,56 f., 60 Verbal echoes, use of, 75 f. Vergil, 22,42 n. 10,45,50 n. 2 , 5 2 - 5 6 Violence, 24f., 30 n.18, 32, 35, 60, 61f., 66, 75' 77—80 Virtus, 24, 28f., 3 1 - 3 3 , 35f., 39, 43f., 47, 48 n.26, 59, 62, 66, 6 8 - 7 0 , 73, 74, 81, 82

2. Index of Passages quoted or referred to Alexander Aphrodisiensis: De Fato: 37 (SVF 2.1005): 22 η. 16 Apollodörus: Bibliotheca: 2.4.11,12: 12 η.5 Aristotle: Poetica: 18.1456 a: 40 η. 2 Bacchy lides: Epinikion: 5, 155 ff.: 12 η. 5 Chrysippus: SVF: 2 . 5 0 9 - 1 8 : 19 η. 10 Cicero: De Officiis: 1.101: 59 n. 8 1.132: 59 n. 8 2.18: 59 n. 8 Tusculanae Disputationes: 1.32: 70 n. 47 DiodorusSiculus: History: 4.10,11: 12 η. 5 Euripides: Herakles: 20: 12 η. 9 2 6 - 3 4 : 32 η. 25 5 5 - 5 9 : 12 η. 6 107ff.: 43 η. 13 107-139: 48 η. 26 2 1 7 - 2 2 8 : 12 η. 6 45Iff.: 62 η. 15 559: 12 η. 6 562ff.: 12 η. 6 5 8 5 - 5 8 6 : 12 6 3 7 - 7 0 0 : 48 π. 26 815 ff. : 12 8 4 1 - 8 4 2 : 12 η. 9 9 2 7 - 9 3 0 : 63 1110: 44 η. 15 1166-1171: 12 Galen: SVF: 1.570: 59 η. 8

De Tranquillitate Animi: 16.4: 14 η. 12 De Vita Beata: Homer: 3.2: 43 η. 14 Iliad: Quaestiones Naturales: 15.154ff.: 18 η.3 1, Pref. 5: 55 η. 13 Horace: Epistulae: Ars Poetica: 8.8: 14 η. 13 193ff.: 40 η. 2 12.10: 33 η. 28 24.11: 33 η. 28 Pisander: 28.9,10: 68 η. 39 fr.: 37.5: 60 η. 8 10: 1 2 η . 5 53.8: 22 η. 17 53.8: 68 η. 39 Plutarch: 58.26: 43 η. 14 SVF: 65.10: 22 η. 16 3.459: 59 η. 8 65.10: 58 η.5 70: 33 η.28 Sallust: 78.2: 69 η.41 Bellum Jugurthinum: 80:4: 69 η. 42 85: 32 η. 27 8 5 . 8 - 1 0 : 62 η. 14 92.1,8: 59 η. 8 Seneca: Ad Helviam De Consolatione: 94.62-66: 59 η. 7 95.36 : 22 η. 16 10.4: 53 n. 10 Ad Polybium De Consolatione,: 95.36,49: 58 η. 5 98.2: 22 η. 17 18.5: 69 n.40 104.3-4: 69 η.41 18.6: 69 n.40 106.6: 21 η. 15 De Beneficiis: 113.18: 59 η. 8 1.13.3: 14 n. 12 114.23-5: 53 η. 10 2.13.1: 21 n. 15 Agamemnon: 4.8.1.: 14 n. 12 1 - 5 : 67 η.33 7.31.4: 22 n. 16 5 7 - 1 0 7 : 43 η. 12 De Clementia: 107-225: 68 η.36 1.20.1-3: 61 n. 14 157ff. : 68 η. 36 1.21.1-4: 61 n. 14 421-578: 51η.6 De Constantia Sapientis: Hercules Furens: 2.1: 14 η. 12 1 - 1 2 4 : 18,74 De Ira: 33: 21, 71 η.53 1.2.4: 62 η. 14 39: 70 η. 47 1.7.2-4: 21 η. 15 3 9 - 4 0 : 19,21,32 1.7.2-4: 62 η. 14 40: 47 1.16.7: 6 9 η . 4 0 42: 70 η.47 2.27.1: 58 η. 5 46: 76 3.1.5: 62 η. 14 4 7 - 8 : 19 8 . 1 - 2 : 62η. 14 47 ff. : 21 De Otto Sapientis: 49: 19 3.1.: 43 η. 14 5 0 - 2 : 19 De Providentia: 5 1 - 2 : 19 5.7: 46 η. 21 SVF: 3.461: 59 η. 8

93

51: 2 1 , 3 6 , 6 1 58: 2 1 , 3 6 , 7 9 58 ff.: 56 5 8 - 5 9 : 19 5 9 - 6 1 : 20 6 0 - 6 1 : 64 6 4 - 6 6 : 61 65: 20 66: 81 67: 18,20 68: 19 74: 18,20 74 - 7 5 : 21 84-85: 23,57 85: 21, 62 η. 14 9 6 - 8 : 67 η.35 97: 64 98: 62 η. 14, 67 1 0 7 - 1 0 9 : 23 1 1 6 - 1 1 7 : 2 3 , 6 7 η. 33 1 1 8 - 1 2 0 : 23 121-122: 59η.6,79 1 2 5 - 1 5 5 : 42 125-204: 40,42 168: 82 186: 70 η. 47 1 9 2 - 1 9 6 : 44 201: 4 4 , 6 0 2 0 3 - 4 : 31 2 0 5 - 2 1 3 : 36 2 0 5 - 2 4 8 : 77 205-278: 31,37 2 0 5 - 5 2 3 : 74 2 0 7 - 2 0 8 : 82 212: 81 220: 70 η. 47 221: 79 η. 6 222: 5 5 , 7 0 η. 47 247: 79 2 5 1 - 2 5 2 : 31 254: 78 2 7 1 - 2 7 2 : 31 276: 31 2 7 6 - 2 7 7 : 70 η.47 278: 76 279: 45 279-280: 32,79 279-308: 31,37 280: 4 5 , 7 7 , 8 2 292: 45 293: 45 294-295: 32,60 299: 32

94

300: 32 305: 32 3 1 3 - 3 1 4 : 29 3 1 7 - 3 1 8 : 19 331: 78 332: 37 3 3 2 - 3 5 7 : 32 339: 32 η. 24 340: 82 342: 32 346: 83 3 5 6 - 3 5 7 : 77 3 5 8 - 5 2 3 : 33 362ff.: 34 372: 79 384: 81 3 9 9 - 4 0 0 : 79 4 0 3 - 4 0 5 : 34 4 2 0 - 4 2 1 : 35 421: 76 426: 35 432: 35 433: 3 5 , 8 1 434: 60 435: 35 436: 36 439ff.: 36 4 4 2 - 4 4 3 : 79 449-489: 77 460: 78 4 6 3 - 4 6 4 : 38 476: 31 η. 20, 36 4 7 7 - 4 8 0 : 33 η. 2 8 , 6 0 483: 77 487: 79 496: 78 506: 41 η. 4 5 0 6 - 5 0 7 : 77 508: 83 5 0 9 - 5 1 3 : 32 η. 28 5 1 8 - 5 1 9 : 79 5 1 9 - 5 2 0 : 31 520 ff.: 19 521: 20 523: 20 524: 58 η. 4 5 2 4 - 5 4 6 : 77 524-591: 40,44 558: 4 5 , 6 3 566: 7 7 , 7 9 567: 45 568: 45

589: 45 592: 16 592ff.: 56 5 9 2 - 6 1 7 : 37 5 9 2 - 6 4 0 : 61 5 9 2 - 8 2 9 : 74 597: 61 598: 61 600: 61 602: 61 605: 76 6 0 9 - 6 1 0 : 61 612: 52 613: 61 6 1 4 - 6 1 5 : 79 619: 60 η. 9 621: 3 0 , 4 7 η. 24, 60 η. 9 6 2 4 - 6 2 5 : 80 6 2 9 - 6 3 0 : 62 634-636: 47,62 637ff.: 38 6 3 9 - 6 4 0 : 50 6 4 0 - 8 2 9 : 50 644: 50 653: 82 6 5 8 - 6 6 1 : 61 η. 10 6 6 2 - 7 5 9 : 52 665: 52 6 6 9 - 6 7 1 : 53 697: 51 6 9 8 - 7 0 2 : 53 701: 53 702: 53 7 0 4 - 7 0 5 : 82 709: 82 710: 82 735: 54 7 3 9 - 740: 79 η. 6 7 3 9 - 7 4 3 : 54η. 11 7 3 9 - 7 4 5 : 57 η. 19 742: 54 761: 54 7 6 2 - 8 2 7 : 52 765: 54 η. 12 7 6 6 - 7 6 7 : 54 η. 12 768: 54 η. 12 778 - 781: 55 783: 56 η. 14 791: 56 η. 14 797: 56 η. 14 813: 82 8 1 6 - 8 1 8 : 55

818: 78 827: 5 6 η. 14 8 3 0 - 8 7 4 : 5 7 η. 18 8 3 0 - 894: 2 3 , 4 0 , 4 5 , 5 5 8 3 8 - 8 4 2 : 45 8 4 8 - 8 5 0 : 45 867: 4 6 874: 46 875 - 877: 7 7 882: 79 893: 7 7 8 9 5 - 1 0 5 3 : 74 899: 7 7 914: 79 918: 83 918-919: 64,79 9 2 0 - 924: 6 3 , 7 7 924-926: 64,81 9 2 6 f f . : 81 9 2 6 - 9 2 7 : 64 927: 64 η. 2 4 938-939: 47,64 939: 6 1 η. 13, 65, 8 1 954: 65 9 5 6 - 959: 20 957: 65 9 6 5 - 9 6 7 : 20 970: 6 7 η. 3 3 9 8 8 - 9 8 9 : 79 9 9 9 - 1 0 0 1 : 2 4 η. 23 1 0 0 2 - 1 0 0 3 : 79 1017: 7 9 1018: 78 1024-1026: 25η.23 1034: 80 1038: 7 7 1040: 7 7 1051: 81 1053: 4 0 1054-1137: 40,47 1063: 4 7 1063-1065 : 47 1 0 6 5 - 1 0 7 6 : 48 1066: 8 2 1 0 7 5 - 1 0 7 6 : 48 1093-1094: 47 1096: 4 8 , 6 8 , 8 2 1 0 9 6 - 1 0 9 9 : 66 1 0 9 8 - 1 0 9 9 : 80 η. 6 1 1 0 6 - 1 1 0 8 : 4 7 η. 25

1115 ff.: 8 0 1131-1137: 47 1135-1136: 47 1138ff.: 3 7 , 3 8 1 1 3 8 - 1 3 4 4 : 74 1147: 80 1 1 5 0 - 1 1 5 4 : 80 1199: 6 6 1201: 6 7 , 6 8 1218: 6 7 η . 3 3 1221: 6 7 1229ff.: 80 1236: 6 7 , 8 0 1238: 6 9 1251: 8 2 1259-1261: 1262: 6 9 1268: 6 9 1270: 6 8 1271-1272: 1275-1277: 1281: 8 0 1285ff.: 83 1286-1287: 1297: 80 1300-1301: 1313: 6 9 1315: 6 9 1319: 8 0 1341-1343: 1341-1344: 1342: 80

6 7 η. 34

80 69

67η.32 68

78 5 9 η. 6 , 6 9 η. 4 3

Hercules Oetaeus: 4 2 1 - 2 : 31 η . 2 1 8 8 4 - 8 9 0 : 67 η.35 8 9 8 - 9 0 2 : 6 7 η. 3 5 930: 3 1 η . 2 1 9 8 2 f f . : 6 7 η. 3 5 1 0 3 1 - 1 1 2 7 : 45 η. 17 1250: 2 3 η. 21 1 2 6 3 - 1 2 6 4 : 23 η.21

Medea: 166: 72 η. 5 5 171: 72 η. 5 5 3 0 1 - 3 7 9 : 4 4 η. 16 492: 31 η . 2 1 516-517: 72η.55 7 4 0 - 8 4 9 : 51 η.6 910: 71 η. 5 3 910: 72 η. 5 5

Oedipus: 92 - 9 3 : 72 η . 5 5 5 3 0 - 6 5 8 : 5 1 η. 6 8 8 2 - 9 1 4 : 4 3 η. 12 988: 4 6 η . 2 1

Phaedra: 1 1 2 - 1 2 8 : 72 η. 5 5 184: 72 η. 5 7 698 - 699: 7 2 η . 5 5 9 2 0 - 9 2 1 : 31 η . 2 1 1150: 4 5 η. 18 1 1 6 5 - 1 1 6 6 : 63 η . 2 0

Phoenissae: 4 5 1 - 4 5 4 : 6 7 η. 35 5 3 5 - 5 4 0 : 6 7 η. 35 553-555: 67η.35

Thyestes: 6 8 - 8 3 ; 67 261-262: 267-269: 336-403: 546-622: 776ff.: 21 789ff.: 21 8 9 2 f f . : 21 990: 21 η. 990-991:

η. 3 3 72η.58 72 η . 5 8 4 3 η. 12 44 η. 16 η. 12 η. 12 η. 12 12 65

Troades: 9 9 - 1 1 6 : 4 7 η. 23 3 7 1 - 4 0 8 : 4 3 η. 12 5 2 4 f f . : 34 Stobaeus:

SVF: 1.206: 5 9 η.8 Suetonius:

Caligula: 5 7 : 25 η. 2 3 Thucydides:

History: 3.82.4: 3 1 η. 21 Vergil:

Aeneid: 6.236 ff.: 5 0 n. 2 6.237: 5 2 6.270: 5 2 n. 8 6.270 - 2 7 2 : 52 6 . 2 9 8 : 5 4 n. 12 6.299: 5 4 n. 12 6.301: 5 4 n. 12 6.399ff.: 54 6 . 4 8 9 - 4 9 3 : 55 n. 6.620: 5 4

Wolf-Hartmut Friedrich · Dauer im Wechsel Aufsätze. Herausgegeben von C. Joachim Classen und Ulrich Schindel. 1977. 440 Seiten, Leinen Inhalt: I. Allegemeines: Zur philologischen Methode / Philologen als Teleologen / Uber den Hexameter / II. Zur griechischen Dichtung und zu ihrem Nachleben: Odysseus weint. Zum Gefüge der homerischen Epen / Prolegomena zu den Phönissen / Zu Euripides' Hypsipyle / Zwei Szenen in Racines Phèdre / Menander redivivus. Zur Wiedererkennung im Nathan / III. Zur lateinischen Dichtung und zu ihrem Nachleben: Zur altlateinischen Dichtung / Ennius-Erklärungen (Auszug) / Otto Ribbeck und die Römischen Tragiker / Exkurse zur Aeneis (Auszug) / Europa und der Stier. Angewandte Mythologie bei Horaz und Properz / Lückenbüßer: Zu Ausonius / Sprache und Stil des Hercules Oetaeus / Cato, Caesar und Fortuna bei Lucan / IV. Zu antiken Prosa-Autoren: Der Tod des Tyrannen. Die poetische Gerechtigkeit der alten Geschichtsschreiber - und Herodot / Caesar und sein Glück / Multa Caesarem incitabant / Eine stilistische Tugend Senecas / Eine Denkform bei Tacitus / Stilistische Symptome der Geschichtsauffassung des Tacitus.

Wolf-Hartmut Friedrich · Vorbild und Neugestaltung Sechs Kapital zur Geschichte der Tragödie. 1967. 2 1 2 Seiten, engl, broschiert. (Kleine Vandenhoeck-Reihe 2 4 9 ) Inhalt: Medeas Rache / Medea in Kolchis / Die Raserei des Hercules / Ein ödipus mit gutem Gewissen / Schuld, Reue und Sühne der Klytemnestra / Sophokles, Aristoteles und Lessing.

Albin Lesky · Die tragische Dichtung der Hellenen 3., völlig neubearbeitete Auflage 1972. 5 4 4 Seiten, kartonierte Studienausgabe und Leinen. (Studienhefte zur Altertumswissenschaft 2)

Ulrich Knoche · Die römische Satire 3., veränderte Auflage 1971. 142 Seiten, kartoniert. (Studienhefte zur Altertumswissenschaft 5)

Ludwig Braun · Die Cantica des Plautus 1970. 2 1 0 Seiten, broschiert

Carl Becker · Das Spätwerk des Horaz 1963. 2 5 7 Seiten, Leinen

Max Pohlenz · Die Stoa Geschichte einer geistigen Bewegung. Band I: 4. Auflage 1970. 4 9 0 Seiten, Leinen / Band II: 4. Auflage 1972. Zitatkorrekturen, bibliographische Nachträge und ein Stellenregister von Horst-Theodor Johann. 3 4 0 Seiten, Leinen Alle lieferbaren Titel der HYPOMNEMATA sind auf der vierten Umschlagseite abgedruckt. VANDENHOECK

&

RUPRECHT

IN

GÜTTINGEN

UND

ZÜRICH