Sabrina Mancuso

Myth teaches us that the more one tries to escape oracles, the more they tend to be fulfilled. My paper offers a reconstruction of Sophocles’ play Sons of Aleus, focusing on an oracle about Telephus’ birth, which according to critics was mentioned in the drama. Since this oracle foretells to Telephus’ grandfather Aleus that the son of his daughter Auge will kill his own uncles, it seems to anticipate motifs that will be thematised in Oedipus Rex: the identification of common elements between the
two plays is thus of paramount importance. My paper will demonstrate that the drama stages the killing of Aleus sons by Telephus; this killing was probably accidental (cf. Soph. OT 729-730). In addition to the plot, I will discuss the title, the genre of the drama, as well as the subject of tragedies such as Mysians, Telephus and Eurypylus, which could belong to the same tetralogy. The purpose of my paper is an in-depth focus on a drama inspired by the myth of Telephus with a broader reflection on Sophocles’ treatment of this myth.

The topic of the conference is myth and rhetoric in Greek tragedy. There are two main literary tools at the disposal of the tragic poet: myth, which serves as material, and rhetoric, by which poetry itself and characters’ speeches are shaped. The tragic genre is inseparable from myth, for the essential characters and plots of tragedy are drawn from the traditional mythological repertoire. But the myths taking place in specific tragedies are discussed from a rhetorical perspective, which questions the protagonist’s words and deeds, influences the plot’s development and equally comments on the values of the πόλις. Myth and rhetoric are therefore potential tools, which should guide our interpretation of Greek tragedies of the classical era.

Already in ancient times, Greek authors often compare their characters to other characters found in the collective memory of myths. In Homer's works the mythical paradigm is introduced to encourage or to comfort the addressee. In order to produce similar paradigms, Homer is even ready to invent or alter significant details of the myth (Il. XXIV 599-620). Turning to the dramatic uses of the mythical paradigm, Ino’s example in Euripides’ "Medea" (1282-1289) and Procne’s example in Euripides’ "Heracles" (1016-1020) reload around the filicide committed by them. Taking into account the couples Medea-Ino and Heracles-Procne, it appears that in each couple one character is acting out of madness, while the other one in full awareness of her own deeds. So, Euripides compares his heroes with characters that, although similar, are not strictly identical to them. This chapter will argue via Ino’s and Procne’s specimina how Euripides, in the selection of examples from the collective memory of myths, appears to be suffering from a sort of “selective amnesia”. In particular, I will show that only exchanging the first illustrans with the second in the examples of both "Medea" and "Heracles", a complete relevance with the corresponding illustrandum can be obtained. Euripides separates the mythical example from the dramatic reality as much as possible, and, at the same time, he presents it emphatically as the most similar case offered by the whole tradition. In this way, he tries to isolate his characters and to present them as unjustifiable (in the case of Medea) or inconsolable (in the case of Heracles). Surely, Euripides could have chosen more suitable characters as examples for Medea’s and Heracles’ sufferings. An intentionality in his choice of antiphrastic examples is evident, especially in comparison with the Homeric use of mythical examples, which is totally opposed to the Euripidean one.

Das Paradigma aus dem Mythos wird von Homer verwendet, um zu ermutigen oder zu trösten. Bei Euripides hingegen dienen die meisten Paradigmen dazu, den Schmerz des Protagonisten zu verstärken. Das Ino-Paradigma (Med. 1282-1289) und das Prokne-Paradigma (HF 1016-1024) stellen zwei gute Beispiele dafür dar. Unter Berücksichtigung der Paare Medea-Ino und Herakles-Prokne lässt sich beobachten, dass bei jedem Paar eine Figur in einem Zustand des Wahnsinns handelt, wobei die andere bei vollem Bewusstsein ist. Somit vergleicht Euripides seine Helden mit kontrastierenden Figuren. Durch mein Kapitel möchte ich zeigen, wie Euripides-überspitzt formuliert-an einer Art ‚selektiver Amnesie' bei der Auswahl von Beispielen aus dem mythologischen Repertoire zu leiden scheint. Denn Euripides versucht, in seinen Paradigmen zwei Figuren in Beziehung zu setzen, die in der mythischen Tradition jedoch wenige Gemeinsamkeiten aufweisen. Somit zielt Euripides darauf ab, seine Figuren zu isolieren und sie als völlig hilflos (wie im Fall von Herakles) oder als unentschuldbar (wie im Fall von Medea) darzustellen. Euripides hätte geeignetere Paradigmen für Medeas bzw. Herakles' Schmerzen wählen können. Eine Intentionalität bei der Wahl gegensätzlicher Beispiele ist offensichtlich, insbesondere im Vergleich mit dem Einsatz von Paradigmen bei Homer.

L’ambientazione di un dramma mette spesso in luce significativi risvolti politici. Il presente contributo si propone di mostrare come l’ambientazione tracia del Tereo di Sofocle sia un’innovazione dell’autore. L’originalità di questa scelta può essere dimostrata sulla base delle testimonianze di Tucidide (3, 29, 3) e Pausania (10, 4, 8), che attestano per la stessa vicenda un’ambientazione daulia. È quindi possibile dimostrare che il trasferimento dello sfondo del mito in Tracia può essere letto come una critica nei confronti di questa regione, con cui Atene intratteneva in quegli anni difficili rapporti. Tale dimostrazione è corroborata dall’analisi di alcuni aspetti del Tereo: la differenziazione fra «stranieri» e «barbari» presentata nel frammento 583 Radt2; la glossotomia inflitta a Filomela da Tereo, che allude all’ἰσηγορία, osteggiata dai barbari; il pregiudizio sull’avidità dei barbari (Fr. 587 Radt2); il possibile sfondo dionisiaco (Frr, 591, 595a Radt2). È determinante in tal senso la testimonianza di Tucidide (2, 29, 3), che difende il re di Tracia Tere dall’accusa di essere imparentato con Tereo, poiché a suo avviso Tereo era un trace di Daulide. Il bersaglio polemico di Tucidide potrebbe essere Sofocle, che col suo Tereo volle esprimere la propria opinione in merito alla possibile alleanza con la Tracia ventilata ad Atene in quegli anni.

The setting of a drama often entails significant political implicatons. My paper focuses on Sophocles’ fragmentary Tereus, which is a version of the nightingale-myth different from the one attested by Homer (Od. 19.518-524), Pherecydes (vol. 3 fr. 124 Jacoby) and Aeschylus (Suppl. 58-76). First of all, Sophocles’ Thracian setting is an innovation which can be read as a criticism towards Thrace itself. This can be demonstrated through an analysis of the allusions to the myth included in two other Sophoclean plays — Ai. 623-634 and El. 145-152 — in which the story of the nightingale shows a paradigmatic function. Although briefly mentioned, the two mythical exempla seem on the one hand to allude to the contrast between civilization and barbarism, on the other hand to stress the metapoetic function of the nightingale’s song. The first of the two motifs that emerges from Ajax and Electra can be compared with some aspects of Tereus: the differentiation between «foreigners» and «barbarians» presented in fragment 583 Radt; the glossectomy which Tereus inflicted on Philomela (referring to the hostility of the barbarians towards ἰσηγορία); Tereus’ transformation into a hoopoe (whose typical traits recall the characterization of the Thracians: fr. 581 Radt). It is therefore possible to demonstrate that Sophocles re-read the nightingale-myth in political terms to criticize any possible alliance with Thrace.

L’obiettivo di questo contributo è di chiarire la ricezione del mito tebano di Zeto e della sua sposa Aedon in epoca classica attraverso un’analisi dei suoi adattamenti e interpretazioni. Lo spostamento dello sfondo del mito in Tracia può essere letto come una critica nei confronti di questa regione, con la quale Atene aveva in quegli anni dei rapporti difficili. Alcuni elementi deducibili dal Tereo, come la «voce della spola», monstrano che Sofocle ha proposto una rilettura del mito dell’usignolo in termini politici: in questo modo egli intese esprimere la sua avversità a proposito di una possibile alleanza ateniese con la Tracia. Si tratta di un problema capitale nel dibattito politico ateniese all’epoca del regno tracio di Tere e di Sitalce.

L’objectif de cette contribution est de clarifier la réception à l’époque classique du mythe du cycle thébain de Zéthos et son épouse Aédon à travers une analyse de ses adaptations et interprétations. Le déplacement du décor du mythe en Thrace peut être lu comme une critique envers cette région, avec laquelle Athènes avait des rapports difficiles à l’époque. Il y a des éléments déductibles du Térée, comme la « voix de la navette », qui montrent que Sophocle a proposé une relecture du mythe du rossignol en termes politiques : par ce moyen, il veut exprimer son aversion contre la possibilité d’une alliance athénienne avec la Thrace. Il s’agit d’un problème capital dans le débat politique athénien au moment du gouvernement de la Thrace par Térès et Sitalcès.

By analyzing its adaptations and interpretations, this paper will shed light on the reception, in the classical period, of the Theban cycle myth of Zethus and his bride Aëdon. The myth’s displacement resulting from its setting in Thrace can be read as a critique of Thrace itself, with which Athens had difficult relations with at the time. Some topics recognisable from Tereus, such as the “voice of the shuttle”, show that Sophocles re-read the myth of the nightingale in political terms. The re-reading expresses Sophocles’ aversion to any possible alliance with Thrace, a central issue in the Athenian political debate at a time when Thrace was under Teres’ and Sitalces’ government.

Die attischen Tragiker bringen die weibliche, mit hoher Stimme artikulierte Klage mit der Nachtigall in Verbindung. Aber wie stellt sich die Verwendung des Bildes der klagenden Nachtigall bei den Tragikern als metapoetische Referenz im Rahmen ihrer Lesart des Mythos dar? Auf welche Weise lassen sich die assoziativen Anklänge wie programmatische Verschiebungen von Motiven oder Figurationen, neue Kontextualisierungen, variierende ästhetische Konnotationen oder poetologische Valenzen, die der Nachtigallen-Mythos bei den Tragikern erlebt, interpretieren? Durch die Kombination der oben erwähnten Aspekte, mit Blick auf deren Entwicklung von den älteren Tragödien des Aischylos zu den jüngeren des Euripides, bietet diese Dissertation nicht nur einen neuartigen Zugang zur Behandlung des Mythos in der griechischen Tragödie, sondern bestätigt in ihrer Untersuchung der erhaltenen Dramen unter Berücksichtigung der Fragmente, dass bei den Tragikern die Nachtigall untrennbar mit metapoetischen Funktionen verwoben ist.

The Attic tragedians associate the female, high-pitched lament with the nightingale. But how does the tragedians’ use of the lamenting nightingale present itself as a metapoetic reference within the framework of their reading of the myth? How can we interpret the associative echoes, the programmatic shifts of motifs or figurations, the new contextualisations, the varying aesthetic connotations and the poetological values that the nightingale myth experiences in tragic poetry? By combining the above-mentioned aspects, with a view to their development from the older tragedies of Aeschylus to the more recent ones of Euripides, this dissertation not only offers a novel approach to the treatment of the myth in Greek tragedy but confirms through its analysis of the surviving dramas combined with the fragments that in tragic poetry the nightingale is inextricably interwoven with metapoetic functions.