Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T08:46:03.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Secreti Loqvimur: An Interpretation of Seneca's Thyestes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2014

William M. Calder III
William M. Calder III*
Affiliation:
The University of Colorado at Boulder
Get access

Extract

Athenian tragedies are dated by didascaliae that commemorate public performance, less satisfactorily by historical allusion or parody in dated comedy. Because Seneca's were never publicly performed and, therefore, lack didascaliae, and because precise historical allusions and comic parodies do not exist, we have no absolute date for Thyestes. Traditionally the tragedies are assigned to the eight year exile in Corsica (41-49). There the busy statesman enjoyed the leisure necessary for composition. But Quintus Cicero (Ep.Quint. 3.5.7) wrote four tragedies in sixteen days. The speed of Pliny's composition is attested. There is a further objection. Seneca did not write tragedies because he was bored. He had something compelling to say. More easily the fifties. Neronian classicism and the youth's histrionic enthusiasm stimulated the playwright, a view not inconsistent with Tacitus Ann. 14.52. Relative chronology, argued from the texts themselves on stylistic grounds, is another matter. Thyestes precedes Agamemnon.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ramus , Volume 12 , Issue 1-2 , 1983 , pp. 184 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © Aureal Publications 1983

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

1. For the futility of earlier attempts see Herrmann (1924), 95–97.

2. See, e.g., Schanz and Hosius, (1959), II 458: ‘Die gewöhnliche Anschauung lässt die Tragödien in der Einsamkeit des Exils von Korsika entstehen,’ and Butler (1909), 43: ‘The view most widely held — why it should be held is a mystery — is that they were composed during Seneca’s exile in Corsica (41–9 A.D.).’ The sobering words of Coffey (1957), 150, deserve recall: ‘But in general the tragedies may have belonged to any stage of Seneca’s literary career.’

3. For the literary career of Pliny see Syme (1958), I 93–99.

4. The refusal of Griffin (1976) to consider Seneca’s tragedies in a book devoted to his politics merely reveals her own limitations: see her remark, 24 n. 2: ‘What is said in a play need not be intended as the author’s view at all’! I review the book cruelly (1976/77a).

5. I argue this (1976), 28–30.

6. I have read no cogent argument to the contrary. There is an unrewarding catalogue of objections at Herrmann (1924), 153ff. They are vitiated often by application of standards from nineteenth century realistic theater and by failure to consider private performance.

7. See the convincing argumentation of Jacobson (1981) for performance of Ezechiel’s Exagoge; and his brilliant recent book (1983). This book which treats the best preserved of all Hellenistic tragedies is of interest to all Senecans. I have argued a Hellenistic chorus for Seneca (1975), 32–35. This obviates a number of imagined difficulties in production.

8. Zwierlein (1966); with the reviews of Janssen (1968), Lefèvre (1968), and Walker (1969).

9. For Nero as tragic actor see O’Connor (1908), 121 s.n. Nero. O’Connor misses luv. 8. 228f. Nero played Antigone, Melanippe, and Thyestes.

10. See my discussion of this revealing passage (1976/77), 5.

11. See Herrmann (1924), 312: ‘Toutes les sources possibles sont perdues.’

12. See H. von Heintze, in Helbig-Speier (1963), 317.

13. See Strong (1971), 249.

14. Regenbogen (1961), 431.

15. See Radt (1977), 240.

16. See Wilamowitz-Moellendorff (1969), 174 n. 105. Roma locuta, causa finita.

17. This may be argued by comparison of Seneca’s tragedy with Ovid, Heroides 12.

18. For the view that it did not see Lefèvre (1976).

19. Lesky(1966).

20. Marchesi (1976) adds nothing. She does not know Lesky.

21. Lesky (1966), 532–34, accepted most recently by Pöschl (1977), 226.

22. See Leo (1966), 202: ‘Wie Iris die Lyssa ins Haus des Herakles treibt, Luxuria die Inopia in das des Lesbonicus, so im Eingang von Senecas Thyestes die Furie den Schatten des Tantalus ins Haus des Atreus.’ Because Inopia does not resist (Plaut. Trin.1ff.), Luxuria-Inopia is no parallel. Leo, Lesky’s source, is also unaware of Aesch. PV.

23. For the influence of Prometheus on Oedipus Coloneus see Adams (1957), 160f., and further Knox (1964), 45–50.

24. Lesky (1966), 535–38.

25. Lesky (1966), 532, argues the unlike brothers to be Euripidean, comparing Polyneices and Eteocles in Phoenissae; but unlike brothers are as old as the Iliad (Hector and Paris) and we have unlike sisters in Soph. Ant. and El.

26. For such boy-actors, presumably apprentices, see Sifakis (1979).

27. Soph, fragg. 471–477 Radt. I have sought to reconstruct the tragedy: Calder (1974).

28. Soph, fragg. 581–595b Radt. I have reconstructed the play at Thracia 2 (1974), 87–91.

29. See Brouskari (1974), No. 1358 (pp. 182–84).

30. For the type of vessel see Kent and Painter (1977) Nos. 58, 59 (pp. 34–35 with colour plate). The covered basket of Hdt., l.ll9 seems less suitable to tragedy.

31. So unnecessarily Hadas (1957), 29, and earlier Miller (1929), 171.

32. I prefer ‘this cup, an heirloom’ (Miller), ‘den ererbten Becher’ (Thomann) to Hadas’ ‘it is symbolic of our family’ for gentile (983).

33. Miller (1929), 171, and Hadas (1957), 29, have Atreus himself remove the cover. There is nothing in the text against this but it robs the scene of its drama and requires the actor to balance a heavy platter on his left hand while removing the cover with his right.

34. I have treated the staging in detail (1963).

35. See Jacoby, , RE Supp. 2 (1913), 232–37Google Scholar.

36. Herington (1972), 218 n. 84.

37. Only the cruellest is the parody of the recognition scene in Choephori at Eurip. El. 520–84.

38. See Plut. Mor 79B = I.157.23ff Paton-Wegehaupt-Pohlenz-Ziegler = Soph. T 100 Radt (1977), q.v. for an extensive bibliography.

39. See especially Spika (1890) and Doppioni (1939).

40. Thomas Legge, master of Caius College, Cambridge, and twice vice-chancellor, based his Richardus Tertius, acted at St John’s College in spring 1580, on the portrayal of Atreus in Thyestes and Nero in Octavia. There is little doubt that his drama indirectly influenced Shakespeare’s Richard III: see Boas (1932), 301. I owe the reference to Professor John Murphy.

41. See easily Dover (1974), 181–84.

42. Seneca still suffers immeasurably from self-righteous, schoolmasterly critics, who cannot conceive the world in which he survived: see above, n. 4, and any work by Anna Lydia Motto. For a breath of fresh air I recommend the brilliant essay of Schindler (1980).

43. Knoche (1972), 486.

44. See my remarks (1976/77), 10, and (1976), 34f.

45. The source of Thy. 885: aequalis astris gradior is Hor. Carm. 1.1.36: sublimi feriam sidera vertice. The Senecan verse should be added to A.S. Pease on Verg. Aen. 4. 177.

46. Here I disagree with my former student, Poe (1969), 361f., who, deeply influenced by Regenbogen, has written one of the best papers in English on Thyestes.

47. Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose, And nothin’ ain’t worth nothin’ but it’s free.

The verses are by Kris Kristofferson, Me and Bobby McGee (1969Google Scholar). The sentiment recalls Solzhenitsyn in The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956. It is entirely Senecan and such alienation does much to explain the revival of interest in his thought.

48. Kenner (1970).

49. See Kenner (1970), 97f., with the important discussion of Apocolocyntosis 7. 1.

50. Compare Thy. 102 (sic, sic) with Verg. Aen. 4. 660. I discuss the verses (1984).

51. See Sevenster (1961), 219–40. Seneca’s idea of death as an aeterna requies in so far as it is an improvement over the pain of life recalls Tantalus’ preference for Hell.

52. Knoche (1972), 481.

53. Knoche (1972), 480.

54. See my remarks (1976/77), 10f.

55. Steidle (1972a).

56. Gigon (1938).

57. Lesky (1966), 528f.

58. See Pöschl (1977), 233: ‘Seneca ist der satelles und er ist auch Thyest, Thyest der Geläuterte, und auch Thyest, der schuldig geworden ist, aber nun bereit ist zu bussen.’

59. See Zintzen (1960), 131: ‘Den Auftritt eines deus ex machina hat Seneca, wie allenthalben in seinen Dramen, auch hier gestrichen.’

60. See Friedrich (1933), 55.

61. See my remarks (1974), 210f. He is attested by the Ruvo Amphora.

62. See Young (1971), 37f. There is no need to republish here the large secondary literature on exempla.

63. For tyrants in the poetry of Seneca see Berve (1967), 486f. To my surprise I find Cizek (1972) uncritical and even naive.

64. See Carbone (1977).

65. After Herington (1961), 28f.

66. Herington (1961), 28. This valuable article is reprinted in Lefèvre (1972), 559–582.

67. That the first epeisodion of Octavia imitates the first epeisodion of Thyestes is noteworthy. Noteworthy too is that the author of Octavia replaces the introductory soliloquy of Atreus (Thy. 176–204) with an introductory soliloquy by Seneca (Oct. 377–437) rather than by Nero. He approves Seneca not Nero. My student, Mrs. Mary Calm, further compares Oct. 440 with Thy. 219; Oct. 530f. with Thy. 203; Oct. 448 with Thy. 213; Oct.519 with Thy.214f., adding: ‘The ideas expressed are much more closely related than the vocabulary used.’

68. See Herington (1961), 29: ‘.… the author of the Octavia was nearer to the events he describes than any of the extant historians, and very likely lived through them himself.’

69. A famous imitation from another Senecan tragedy deserves mention here. Oct. 371–376 applies to Agrippina the last words of Seneca’s Jocasta (Oed. 1038f.). Tacitus, Ann. 14.8, follows Octavia. For my interpretation of these famous verses see (1976/77), 5.

70. In Stier (1931), 339. E. C. Kopff drew my attention to this remarkable passage.

71. I owe much stimulation to three graduate seminars in Seneca Tragicus, one at Columbia and two in Colorado. Wolfgang Schindler has done much to sharpen my thoughts on Thyestes. Joy K. King has beneficially read my typescript. An earlier version of this paper was delivered on November 18th, 1982 as the 45th Hulley Lecture at the University of Colorado, Boulder. It was the last one that Professor Emeritus Karl K. Hulley attended. To the memory of that gentleman and scholar I dedicate this paper. Requiescat in pace.