Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T14:35:56.118Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bow, Oracle, and Epiphany in Sophocles' Philoctetes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2009

Christopher Gill
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There are certain puzzling features about Sophocles' Philoctetes, notably concerning the oracle of Helenus that is the mainspring of the whole action. What were the exact terms of Helenus' prophecy? Did he state simply that Troy was to fall to Neoptolemus and the bow of Heracles; or did he also stipulate that the bow was to be used by its present owner, Philoctetes, that Philoctetes was to come willingly to-Troy, and that his wound was to be healed there? By the end of the play, we may well think that the prophecy made these further stipulations; but the references to the prophecy earlier in the play (and the actions of Odysseus, who should be familiar with its conditions) do little to make this plain. It is also difficult to determine exactly how much Neoptolemus knows about the prophecy. In the opening dialogue with Odysseus, he seems to know nothing about the oracle, not even the role of the bow in the capture of Troy (112 ff.). But, as the play proceeds, he gives an increasingly precise account of its conditions; although the source of his expanding knowledge is by no means clear. A further problem is posed by the epiphany of Heracles that concludes the play. Why has Sophocles constructed his play in such a way that the natural conclusion of the human characters' interaction is in direct contradiction both to the divine plan and the traditional myth, and needs (as it may seem) to be awkwardly reversed by a deus ex machina??

Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , October 1980 , pp. 137 - 146
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. e.g., by Bowra, C. M., Sophoclean Tragedy (Oxford, 1944), pp. 261 ff.Google Scholar, Whitman, C. E., Sophocles, A Study of Heroic Humanism (Cambridge, Mass., 1951), pp. 182 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Kitto, H.D.F., Form and Meaning in Drama (FM) (London, 1956), pp. 95 ff.Google Scholar, cf. Greek Tragedy, (GT) (3rd edn., London, 1961), pp. 297 ff.Google Scholar, Kirkwood, G. M., A Study of Sophoclean Drama (Ithaca, 1958), pp. 79 ff.Google Scholar, Knox, B.M.W., The Heroic Temper (Berkeley, 1964), pp. 126 ff.Google Scholar, Hinds, A.E., CQ 17 (1967), 169 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Steidle, W., Studien zum antiken Drama (Munich, 1968), pp. 169 ff.Google Scholar, Robinson, D.B., CQ 19 (1969), 45 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Zweierlin, O., GGA 222 (1970), 206 ff.Google Scholar, Seale, D., BICS 19 (1972), 94 ffGoogle Scholar. Recent work on the Philoctetes is surveyed in a perceptive article by Easterling, P. E., ICS 3 (1978), 27 ffGoogle Scholar. (I am grateful to Oliver Taplin for drawing my attention to this and other recent articles). These works are referred to below by author's name alone.

2. Cf 1418–40, esp. 1425–33, and Harsh, P. W., AJPh 81 (1960), 408 ffGoogle Scholar.

3. Taplin, O, Greek Tragedy in Action (London, 1978), pp. 90–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Segal, C., QUCC 23 (1976), 67 ffGoogle Scholar. (hereafter, Segal, , QUCC), esp. 76 ffGoogle Scholar.

4. The connection between the two acts is underlined by the fact that Philoctetes wants Neoptolemus to take him home to Oeta, which is famous for being the location of Heracles' funeral pyre (664 ff., 725–9, 1430–3).

5. Cf. Odysseus' advice in 54–5, 77–8, 100 ff., and Philoctetes' accusations in 927 ff.

6. Note esp. 1421–37. βøɛίλɛται (1421) implies both that glory ‘is owed’ to Philoctetes in return for his labours and that he is ‘obliged’ to accept the chance of glory that his labours have given him.

7. Cf. Robinson, 49, and Zweierlin, 210. The content of the oracle is expounded at 1329 ff., cf. 1421 ff., and (perhaps) 604 ff.

8. Cf. Plato, , Ap. 21a–23bGoogle Scholar. For Sophocles' special interest in riddling prophecies, see Kirkwood, pp. 73 ff., and Knox, , Oedipus at Thebes (New Haven, 1957), pp. 33 ffGoogle Scholar.

9. Cf. Parke, H. W. and Wormell, D. E., The Delphic Oracle (Oxford, 1956), vol. i, pp. 378 ffGoogle Scholar.

10. See 915 ff., 1326 ff., 1423 ff., and cf. Biggs, P., CPh 61 (1966), 231–5Google Scholar, Segal, , QUCC, 72Google Scholar, and Segal, , Hermes 105 (1977), 133 ffGoogle Scholar. (hereafter Segal, , Hermes), esp. 150–2Google Scholar.

11. As Bowra seems to suggest, pp. 265 ff.

12. See 54 ff., 100 ff., 981 ff., 1241 ff., 1293 ff., cf. Bowra, pp. 267–8. In the pseudo-merchant's account of Odysseus' response to Helenus' prophecy (whether or not this account is a true one), Odysseus shows a similar indifference to the question of Philoctetes' willing co-operation; see 617–8 (contrast 612), cf. Zweierlin, 206 ff.

13. See 68–9, 77–8, 113–5, 1055 ff.; cf. Bowra, p. 268, Whitman, pp. 182–3, Knox, pp. 126–7, Segal, , Hermes, 140–1. On Odysseus' possible reasons for being ambivalent, cf. Hinds, 180Google Scholar.

14. 68–81, 105, 113, 1055 ff., contrast 654 ff., 774–5, 1232 ff.

15. 1293–1304, cf. Segal, , QUCC, 76–7Google Scholar.

16. He is, perhaps, over-clever (431–2, 1244, cf. Bowra, p. 269).

17. As Robinson seems to suggest, 49.

18. 50 ff., 79 ff., 109 ff., cf. 980 ff., 1049 ff., 1241 ff. Cf. M. Nussbaum's interesting article in Philosophy and Literature 1 (1976), 29 ffGoogle Scholar.

19. Cf. Zweierlin's criticism of Steidle's view, 209 ff., Segal, , Hermes, 145, Easterling,Google Scholar 34.

20. Neoptolemus talks of bringing Philoctetes (ἅγɛιν, 90, 102) and of his coming to Troy (112). Odysseus talks of ‘taking Philoctetes by a trick’ (δόλῳ…λαβɛïν, 101, cf. 103, 107), but this may simply mean ‘tricking’ Philoctetes to make him give up his bow (cf. 77–8); cf. knox, p. 187 n. 20, Hinds, 171.

21. 839–42; cf. Whitman, p. 183, Knox, p. 131, Nussbaum, 36.

22. As Kitto seems to suppose, GT, p. 302, FM, pp. 117 ff., cf. Steidle, p. 173. For a better account of the function of the pseudo-merchant's speech, see Zweierlin, 206 ff., Easterling, 30.

23. 902–3 and ff., cf. 79–80, 86–9, 100 ff.

24. The phrase σῶσαι κακοũ…τοũδ' hints at this; the idea is spelled out more fully at 1329 ff., 1423 ff.

25. 925–6, cf. Odysseus' authoritarianism at 52–3, and 994 ff., 124.1 ff.

26. 1329 ff., incl. his first reference to Helenus himself, 1336 ff.; for the account, cf. Heracles', own, 1421 ff.; cf. Segal, , Hermes, 147Google Scholar.

27. Aristotle describes this as characteristic of a good man and good friend, EN 1168a32–4.

28. Cf. Nussbaum, 47.

29. Cf. Campbell, C., Theoria to theory 6 (1972), 81 ffGoogle Scholar. (I am grateful to Philip Vellacott for drawing my attention to this article). See further J-P Vernant, Vidal-Naquet, P., Mythe et Tragedie en Grèce Ancienne (Paris, 1973), pp. 161 ff.Google Scholar, esp. 177–9, Rose, P. W., HSCP 80 (1976), 49 ff.Google Scholar, esp. 77.

30. EN 1162a4–5, EE 1242a32, cf. Bowra, pp. 302–3, who also mentions these passages.

31. Heracles' epiphany is sometimes seen as essentially an externalization of Philoctetes' change of mind (e.g., by Whitman, pp. 186–9), but Philoctetes' realization that he should pay attention to the opinions of others, beside himself, is an important part of his ‘cure’ and rehabilitation with men and gods, cf. Segal, , Hermes, 153Google Scholar.

32. For Philoctetes' comments on the work of the gods in the world, see 446–52, cf. 1197–1201, but also 1035–9 and 1466–8. The theological implications of the play are treated convincingly by Segal, , Hermes, esp. 153 ff.Google Scholar, unconvincingly by Poe, J. P.. Heroism and Divine Justice in Sophocles' Philoctetes (Leiden, 1974)Google Scholar.

33. Cf. Segal, , QUCC, 79Google Scholar; and contrast, for instance, the deus ex machina of Eur. Or. 1625 ff., presented one year after the Philoctetes, in 408 BC.

34. Plato gives a similar view of the gods at R. 378–83, but he presents his view as being unconventional, and in contradiction with traditional accounts.

35. Cf. Easterling, 31–4, who emphasizes that Sophocles need not have made the oracle of Helenus so important to the plot, nor have included the epiphany of Heracles, if he had not some reason for doing so. (Easterling does not, however, see the play as religious in quite the sense I do, 33–4, though Segal, , Hermes, 153 ffGoogle Scholar. comes closer to my view).

36. Campbell, 81 ff., discusses a production in which she was involved, which set out to represent the epiphany as the natural climax of the human action.

37. I would like to acknowledge the perceptive comments and criticisms of Tim Chilcott on an earlier draft of this article.