^{page 21 note 2} I cannot subscribe to the views of some distinguished scholars who do not regard Sophocles as a thinker. DrSheppard, J. T. has shown in the Introduction to his edition of the Tyrannus, pp. xxvGoogle Scholar, etc., that he actually ran counter to the popular notions of his day with regard to sin, guilt, and retribution. Sophocles does not consider Oedipus guilty of the parricide and incest, because they were committed un- wittingly and innocently (v. infra, p. 22, n. 2); but he is guilty of his own self-inflicted injuries, because they were perpetrated consciously, even if under extenuating circumstances. To advancei deliberately upon a contemporary code is not the act of a man who never thought.

I submit that whereas Aeschylus supplied an answer in the Oresteia and presumably in the Prometheia, and Euripides ends every one of his plays on a mark of interrogation, Sophocles leaves all the questions unanswered until in the O.C. he answers not only the problem of Oedipus, the greatest conflict of all, but also that of Philo-ctetes, Electra, and the rest.

^{page 21 note 3} Sargeaunt, G. M., Classical Studies, London, 1929, p. 123Google Scholar.

^{page 21 note 4} Abbott, Evelyn, Hellenica,² 1898, p. 31Google Scholar. This applies equally, I think, to Apollo and the rest: the idea of ‘Deity’ is apparent in Sophocles, ‘Often, instead of naming any special deity, the poet speaks vaguely of θεóς, θεóς, θεοί, δαίμων—words which seem to be used, without much difference of meaning, for the divine power; but which have the effect of emancipating us entirely from the old mythology’(ibid. 41).

^{page 21 note 5} Soph. Phil. 177.

^{page 21 note 6} Ibid. 191.

^{page 22 note 1} Soph. Phil. 451.

^{page 22 note 2} Evelyn Abbott tried to show that, although oracles have caused repeated catastrophes in Sophocles, not they but the persons themselves have been the true cause of their calamity. He observes that although the oracle foretold Oedipus' parricide and incest, Oedipus is, in fact, guilty, because ‘οὐθ’ ρν, οὐθ’ ίστορν he slays a man in his haste and takes to wife the queen of Thebes’ (Hellenica ², p. 39). But Oedipus had no reason to doubt that Polybus and Merope were his parents, nor cause to abstain from marriage altogether, or from avenging an insult, especially in self-defence (OC. 992–5). Cf. Schol. OC. 960: τѿ ōντι ò Οίδίπους, εί τις κριβѿς ξετáζοι, ἂδικος μν ούκ Ӗστιν, τυχής δ καί περιπαθής.

^{page 22 note 3} Track. 1276.

^{page 22 note 4} El. 1424.

^{page 22 note 5} OT. 1329.

^{page 22 note 6} Genesis, v. 24.

^{page 22 note 7} There is another reconciliation of opposites apparent in Sophocles' use of thunder. Thunder and tempest are important poetical symbols of tragedy and evil, as has been well shown by ProfKnight, G. Wilson, The Shakespearian Tempest, London, 1932Google Scholar, and elsewhere. The most obvious uses of it occur in King Lear, Macbeth, the Gospel account of the Crucifixion (observe that Bach has made the Thunder and Lightning the central feature of the S. Matthew Passion), and, in Greek Tragedy, the PV. and Hippolytus.

In Lear Shakespeare uses Tempest in the same way as Sophocles uses Thunder. Tempest-Thunder ordinarily symbolizes evil and catastrophe, but in Lear the tempest is kind in comparison with man's cruelty. This shows that the symbol may be ‘equivalent to its opposite in the sense that any contrast is a comparison’. In the OC. the Chorus tremble at the thunder, anticipating some great disaster; but instead it symbolizes the release of Oedipus from his earthly misfortunes. The suspense of the Athenian audience must have been as great as it was for the Chorus: for they too, as when they witnessed the PV., must have expected some still greater calamity, if such were possible, to befall Oedipus.

The similarities of Lear to the OC. have been well noticed by ProfBignone, Ettore in Dioniso, Bollettino dell' Institute Nazionale del Dramma Antico, Syracuse, v. 1936,154 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 23 note 1} Rohde, E., Psyche, English tr., London, 1925, p. 455, note 112Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 2} Rohde, ibid., thinks that the Messenger also refuses to admit that Oedipus has died.

^{page 23 note 3} Farnell, L. R., Greek Hero Cults and Ideas of Immortality, Oxford, 1921, pp. 333–4Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 4} Jebb, R. C., OC., Cambridge, 1928, p. xxviGoogle Scholar.

^{page 23 note 5} Cf. Pausanias, i. 30. 4, who himself did notbelieve Sophocles’ version to be founded on fact, i. 28. 7; Apollodorus, iii. 5; Aristides, 'γπ τν τεττáρων, p. 284 (ii. 230 Dindorf). Schneidewin, , in the introduction to his edition of the OC., 9th ed., Berlin, 1909, p. 6Google Scholar, says: ‘Pausanias sah bei Kolonos ein ρον des Oedipus; doch auch dies k;Ṑnnte seine Grϋndung der sophokleischen Dichtung verdanken.’

^{page 23 note 6} Herodotus, iv. 149.

^{page 23 note 7} Farnell, , Greek Hero Cults, p. 332Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 8} Ibid., p. 334.

^{page 23 note 9} Ibid.

^{page 23 note 10} OC., ed. Schneidewin, , p. 6Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 11} If anyone would object that this interpretation gives an expression of the ‘miraculous’ which is foreign to Greek thought or to the conventions of the drama (e.g. the deus ex machina), let him reflect that those eyeballs which were lacerated with brooches regained their vision.

^{page 24 note 1} Hyperides, ap. Stobaeus, 4, p. 134Google Scholar, Meineke; quoted and translated by Famell, , Greek Hero Cults, p. 392Google Scholar.

^{page 24 note 2} Farnell, , op. cit., p. 259 and refs. on p. 423Google Scholar; Foucart, P., Les Mystères d'Eleusis, Paris, 1900, p. 319Google Scholar.

^{page 24 note 3} In his latest book, Aeschylus and Athens, London, 1941Google Scholar, he traces the whole development of Tragedy from the ceremonies of initiation.

^{page 24 note 4} Or perhaps as ProfessorThomson, suggests(Aeschylus and Athens, p. 123)Google Scholar: ‘The main reason why our evidence for the actual content of the Eleusinian Mysteries is so slight is probably not that the secrets were so well kept, but that they were so well known. The habitual and casual familiarity with which such writers as Aeschylus and Plato allude to these matters pre-supposes in their public a general and intimate knowledge.’

^{page 24 note 5} Bodkin, Maud, Archetypal Patterns in Poetry, London, 1934, 55 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 24 note 6} Lewis, C. B., Classical Mythology and Arthu-rian Romance, Oxford, 1932, p. 283Google Scholar.

^{page 24 note 7} Cf. Knight, W. F. J., Cumaean Gates, Oxford, 1936, passimGoogle Scholar.

^{page 24 note 8} Thomson, George, Mystical Allusions in the Oresteia, JHS. Iv, 1935, 25 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 24 note 9} Tierney, Michael, The Mysteries and the Oresteia, JHS. lvii, 1937, 17 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 24 note 10} Full refs. are given in Farnell, , Cults of the Greek States, Oxford, 1896–1909, iii. 355–6Google Scholar. In what follows no rite is claimed specifically for either the Eleusinian or the Orphic mysteries, When so many elements are common to both, and our knowledge of either is so meagre, there seems to be no point here in making distinctions. Sophocles is known to have participated in both, and so his allusions to the Mysteries might presumably be generalized.

^{page 25 note 1} Stobaeus, from Themistius, (Plutarch), De Anima, iv. 107, MeinekeGoogle Scholar.

^{page 25 note 2} Plat. Phaedo, 108 A.

^{page 25 note 3} Themistius, lOC. cit.

^{page 25 note 4} Plat. Phaedrus, 251 A.

^{page 25 note 5} Them., lOC. cit.

^{page 25 note 6} Plat. Phaedrus, 250 C.

^{page 25 note 7} Plutarch, De Project. Virt., p. 81 E.

^{page 25 note 8} Them., lOC. cit.

^{page 25 note 9} Aristotle, 'Αθ. Πολ. 56. Foucart, , Mystères d'Eleusis, pp. 284ff.,295Google Scholar.

^{page 25 note 10} Refs. are given in Thomson, , Oresieia, ii. 203–4Google Scholar.

^{page 25 note ll} Ar. Clouds, 250 ff.

^{page 25 note 12} Ibid. 263.

^{page 25 note 13} Thomson, , Oresieia, ii. 243Google Scholar gives refs. to Cook, A. B., Zeus, i. 219, 245Google Scholar, and Harrison, J. E., Prolegomena, pp. 229–30Google Scholar, and Lobeck, , Aglao-phamus, p. 646Google Scholar.

^{page 25 note 14} Ar. Clouds, 254.

^{page 25 note 15} Farnell, , Cults, iii. 174Google Scholar.

^{page 25 note 16} Clem. Alex., Protrept., quoted by Farnell, , Cults, iii, p. 355Google Scholar, note 218 c. Cf. Foucart, , op. cit. 460 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 25 note 17} OC. 3 ff., 50,123,164, 347ff.,444, 746,1359 ff.

^{page 25 note 18} OC. 730.

^{page 25 note 19} OC. 360.

^{page 26 note 1} OC. 95, 1466, 1514.

^{page 26 note 2} OC. 1650 ff.

^{page 26 note 3} So the Messenger in the OC. says (1651–2): χείρ' ντχοντα κρατóς, ώς δεινο τινος

φóβου ϕανντος ούδ' ναοχετο βλóπειν.

^{page 26 note 4} Plat.Phaedrus, 250 C.

^{page 26 note 5} OC. 16, 146, 668 ff.

^{page 26 note 6} OC. 349, 751, 1263.

^{page 26 note 7} OC. 131.

^{page 26 note 8} OC. 489.

^{page 26 note 9} OC. 624.

^{page 26 note 10} OC. 1052.

^{page 26 note ll} őπου θεν σεμνν Ӗδραν λáβοιμι. OC. 89.κθρον τóδ' σκπαρνον. OC. 100.

ΟIgr;Δ. ήσθ;

XOP. λχριóς γ π' äκρου

λȃος βραχừς óκλáσας. OC. 195.

^{page 26 note 12} Ar.Frogs, 911.

^{page 27 note 1} Rohde, , Psyche, p. 295Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 2} Jebb, OC., note to line 470.

^{page 27 note 3} Rohde, , op. cit., p. 455, note 114Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 4} Farnell, , Cults, iii. 165 ff.Google Scholar, etc.

^{page 27 note 5} , Aesch.Persae, 201–4; 609–18Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 6} , Soph.El. 634–59Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 7} e.g. the use of running water; wool, for its absorbent properties: cf. Farnell, , Cults, iii, p. 354, note 216 c; and p. 357, note 219 dGoogle Scholar. Thus the Διóςκώδιον was used. Wool served as a substitute for squills; cf. Rohde, , op. cit., p. 590Google Scholar. Clean hands were essential: Farnell, ibid., p. 355, note 217 a. Honey was used in initiations: ibid., p. 357, note 219 d.

^{page 27 note 8} , Xen.Mem. iv. 4. 19–21Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 9} , Plat.Laws, 538 BGoogle Scholar.

^{page 27 note 10} Cf. Thomson, , Oresteia, ii. 269 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 27 note 11} Ibid. 270.

^{page 27 note 12} , Soph.OT. 863–70Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 13} Lysias, , In Andoc. 10Google Scholar. Cf. Farnell, , Cults, iii. 188 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 27 note 14} Demosthenes, 601.

^{page 27 note 15} Farnell, , Cults, iii. 53 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 27 note 16} Ibid. iii. 54, note d.

^{page 28 note 1} Schol, . , Hom.Od. xi. 271Google Scholar.

^{page 28 note 2} Josephus, iv. 315 ff.

^{page 28 note 3} Schol, . , Soph.OC. 1590Google Scholar.