Thomas Kohn-The Dramaturgy of Senecan Tragedy-University of Michigan Press (2013)

The Dramaturgy of Senecan Tragedy
The Dramaturgy of
Senecan Tragedy
Thomas D. Kohn
The University of Michigan Press

Ann Arbor
Copyright by Thomas D. Kohn 2013
All rights reserved
This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations,

in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the
U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without
written permission from the publisher.
Published in the United States of America by

The University of Michigan Press
Manufactured in the United States of America
c Printed on acid-free paper
20162015201420134321
A CIP catalog record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Kohn, Thomas D., 1968
The dramaturgy of Senecan tragedy / Thomas D. Kohn.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-472-11857-1 (hardback) ISBN 978-0-472-02882-5 (e-book)
1. Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, ca. 4 B.C.65 A.D.Tragedies. 2. Seneca,
Lucius Annaeus, ca. 4 B.C.65 A.D.Criticism and interpretation. 3. Latin
drama (Tragedy)History and criticism. I. Title.
PA6685.K642012
872'.01dc23 2012042615
Acknowledgments
It is trite, but true, to say that any project such as this is not exclusively
the product of one individual. But to truthfully acknowledge everyone
who made a contribution to my work would require a preface longer
than the book itself. Therefore, like an actor who has just won an Acad-
emy Award, I will do my best to credit as many people as I can before
the orchestra plays me off. My most sincere thanks and gratitude go to
Robert Sonkowsky, who first introduced me to Seneca the Tragedian;
C. W. Marshall, R. Scott Smith, and Dana Sutton for their generosity
in reading and commenting on earlier drafts of various chapters; the
more than several anonymous reviewers, who provided honest critiques
and helpful suggestions that resulted in a better finished product than
I could have reasonably hoped for; Wayne State University, which not
only gave me a permanent position and an office, but also a University
Research Grant during which the original manuscript was completed;
Jennifer Sheridan Moss, Joel Itzkowitz, Kathleen McNamee, and Donald
Haase for their constant support, assistance, and encouragement; Ellen
Bauerle, who believed in the project as soon as she set eyes on it and
expertly shepherded it through the publication process; Michelle Welch,
without whose presence in my life none of this would have been possible.
Finally, this book is dedicated to you, the reader, and to everyone who
ever has been or will be moved and affected by Senecan tragedy. I can
only hope that my efforts do little to harm and more than a little to fos-
ter the appreciation for these outstanding examples of dramatic artistry.
Contents
Introduction: Dramaturgical Methodology 1

1. Seneca and His Dramatic Resources 15
2. Oedipus 32
3. Agamemnon 50
4. Phaedra 66
5. Medea 81
6. Hercules Furens (Mad Hercules) 93
7. Troades (Trojan Women) 110
8. Thyestes 124
9. Phoenissae (Women of Phoenicia) 133
Conclusion
140
Notes
145
Works Cited 175
Index
181
Introduction
Dramaturgical Methodology
This project owes a great debt to the groundbreaking work of both Oli-
ver Taplin and Dana Sutton. In his 1977 book, The Stagecraft of Aeschylus,
Taplin set out three purposes: to begin the creation of a grammar of
the dramatic technique of the Greek tragedians, to provide a scene-by-
scene commentary on Aeschylus surviving tragedies from the aspects of
dramatic and theatrical technique, and to do something towards show-
ing what Aeschylus is about.1 Sutton, in his Seneca on the Stage of 1986,
followed Taplins lead and took the first steps toward creating a grammar
of the dramatic technique of Seneca tragicus. Sutton, however, looked at
Senecas stagecraft, and only at his stagecraft, merely insofar as was nec-
essary to support his contention that Seneca was composing for actual
stage production and to refute the detailed arguments of Zwierlein and
others that he was not.2 Sutton was not engaging in performance criti-
cism, of the sort that Taplin used, for its own sake. This study proposes
to do just that: to apply the methods and goals of Taplin to the plays of
Seneca and to build on the work of Sutton in order to illuminate Sen-
ecas dramaturgy.
Before going on, we must determine what is meant by dramaturgy.
The term is variously and controversially defined, complicated in part
by the multiplicity of functions of the dramaturge in the American
theater, from critic to translator to literary manager, from researcher
to private advisor to collaborator.3 But the present purposes allow for
a more simple and basic meaning of dramaturgy as the art of making
drama. As such, it is more than simply stagecraft, although how the
2 the dramaturgy of senecan tragedy
playwright uses the physical resources of his stage, how his actors move
around, what the audience sees, and so forth, are certainly concerns. But
that is only a part of the dramatists technique. Consider as an example
the modern stage directions (called didaskalia by theater theorists) that
Arthur Miller provides at the start of his Death of a Salesman. The direc-
tions, which take up nearly two pages of text before anyone speaks, do
not simply inform that Willie Loman enters, and that his wife, Linda,
hears him. The reader is told that there is flute music, which is small
and fine, telling of grass and trees and the horizon. The set is elabo-
rately described. Instead of only marking Willy Lomans entrance, his
actions are listed in great detail, and his age and his attire are specified.
Further, Miller goes on to tell about Willys emotional state: his exhaus-
tion is apparent, and he thankfully lets his burden down (my empha-
sis). Finally, Linda, we are told, is
[m]ost often jovial, she has developed an iron repression of her

exceptions to Willys behaviorshe more than loves him, she admires
him, as though his mercurial nature, his temper, his massive dreams
and little cruelties, served her only as sharp reminders of the turbu-
lent longings with him, longings which she shares, but lacks the tem-
perament to utter and follow to their end.
This lengthy description gives us backstory, insight into both characters,

and foreshadowing for the drama to come. Thus, for Miller, the job of
the playwright, the maker of drama, is not limited to the words spoken
and simple actions performed by the actors (i.e., Willy Loman enters).
He also considers the set, the effects, and the emotions and motivations
of the characters to be part of his craft.4 Sutton was interested only in
physical elementsentrances and exits, properties, scenic features, and
so forth. But the true maker of drama is concerned with all aspects of
the art, including the inner life of the characters. This study aims to show
that Seneca tragicus was a dramaturge in that sense.
Our Roman playwright, of course, did not have recourse to external
stage directions.5 Instead, he had to embed such cues in his dialogue,
monologues, and songs. But these cues, the sorts of things that Goffman
raises in his discussion of radio dramas,6 are readily identifiable. A care-
ful reading of Senecas plays makes it clear when characters enter and
exit, what they do while onstage, and how they feel. Taplin set forth the
principle that for Greek tragedy the significant stage instructions are
implicit in the words, and indeed that [i]t would be a good start if it
Introduction 3
could be broadly accepted that the words, if we know how to use them,
give the significant action, and that there was no significant action other
than that indicated by the words.7 Revermann, after commenting that
Taplins principle has, in fact, been broadly accepted, shows a difficul-
ty inherent in it: Taplin assumes the presence of insignificant action,
which runs counter to the theatrical truth that everything onstage hap-
pens for a reason.8 Goffman supports Revermanns assertion, noting
that in the theater nothing that occurs will be unportentous or insig-
nificant . . . the audience need not select what to attend to: whatever
is made available can be taken as present for a good reason.9 Accord-
ingly, Revermann modifies Taplins principle with three assumptions: no
interpretation can be adopted if it can be proven false by the text; any
interpretation not thusly falsified must fit with the conventions of the
time; and performance critics must be transparent concerning the pos-
sibilities and why they chose their favored interpretation.10 I would add
to all this formal theory the famous dictum of Sherlock Holmes: when
you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improb-
able, must be the truth.11
This study depends on the assumption that Seneca meant for his text
to indicate certain stage events, which are motivated by the text. As we
saw in the didaskalia of Miller, stage events can include entrances, exits,
gestures, movements, indications of mental state, physical appearance of
characters, stage settings, and more. Motivated, however, does not nec-
essarily mean marked. For example, while many entrances in Senecan
tragedy are announced by another character who is already onstage, not
all are; but when someone who had not previously been present speaks,
that new person clearly has entered.12 Similarly, if someone stops speak-
ing and is never heard from again, one can safely assume the character
has exited. The disappearance is as much a motivation for withdrawal as
a line like Im leaving. Further, if one character says, Give that sword
to me, as Jocasta does at Oedipus 1034, we can infer that someone else
has been carrying a sword.
It should not be thought, however, that the interpretations of stage
events found in this study are definitive. In many instances, there are
several possibilities. As in the History of Herodotus, the alternatives will
be laid out; and following the dictates of Revermann, the advantages of
a particular interpretation will be explained. Along these lines are the
judicious words of Davis: I believe that there is an openness about the
Senecan texts which admits of a variety of possible theatrical solutions. It
is important to recognize here the fact that, even if all problems of stag-
ing Senecas plays can be solved, it does not follow that each problem
admits of only one solution. Just as there is no one right way of stag-
ing Shakespeare, so there is no single correct way of staging Seneca.13
The absence of entrance or exit announcements in Seneca can cause
disagreement as to exactly when a character comes on or off. Likewise,
there are sometimes multiple options for distributing roles among a
limited number of actors. For example, in the Hercules Furens, Sutton
assigns Lycus and Hercules to one actor, Juno and Amphitryo to a sec-
ond, and Megara and Theseus to a third,14 while it is equally possible to
give Juno, Lycus, and Theseus to one actor, Megara and Hercules to a
second, and only Amphitryo to the third. Either distribution of roles is
possible according to Suttons sound dramaturgical principles: have the
same character played by the same actor, engineer your entrances and
exits so as to leave ample time for costume changes, try to protect your
protagonist from the distracting duty of playing multiple roles, etc.15
These principles are sensible. But the process is complicated by Senecas
practice, discussed further in chapter 1, of using the doubling of roles
to produce significant patterns, which add an additional layer of depth
and meaning to the tragedies. The purpose here is not to provide the
correct or even the authentic stage direction. Even if desirable, such
a thing is impossible, given the lack of didaskalia such as is found in mod-
ern play scripts, which give information about the original production.16
Rather, the intent is to show that it is possible to determine motivated
stage events, while demonstrating how the alternatives are evaluated.
When it comes to the actors themselves, Sutton labels them protag-
onist, deuteragonist, and tritagonist, and thus must decide which
roles are more important, that is, which parts were played by the best
or most experienced actor.17 The present study will simply refer to them
as actors A, B, and C, with the occasional D. Such designations rely only
on the order in which characters enter, and in some cases are arbitrary,
as in the Agamemnon, where Clytemnestra and the Nurse enter together,
and so either could be called actor B, and the other labeled actor C.
One could just as easily call the performers Tom, Dick, and Harry (or
perhaps, Marcus, Lucius, and Gaius).
In the modern theater, it is customary to break a script down into
units smaller than acts and scenes.18 French scenes begin with the
entrance and exit of a character. Action units are reasonably complete
(although ordinarily inconclusive) interactions between characters.
And beats are the smallest units of meaning that can be clearly com-
municated to an audience. French scenes are adequately covered by
Introduction 5
the didaskalia in the manuscripts. There are too many beats in a script to
make them helpful. But for our purposes, the division into action units,
which according to Cohen and Harrop are less easily pinned down,
insofar as every director (and actor) will have his or her own scale of
determining what actions are reasonably complete, is beneficial.19 In
this study, therefore, I identify these action units at the start of each act,
in order to show how Seneca has structured the development of the play.
It should be noted that Senecas action units sometimes are monologues,
and not interactions between characters; but that should not invalidate
their usefulness for interpretation.
It is impossible to date the plays, except in the most general terms.20
There are clear echoes of Vergil, Horace, and Ovid in the tragedies,21
giving a terminus post quem of the beginning of the first century CE.
Quintilian quotes a line from the Medea apud Senecam (Institutio Oratia
9.2.9), providing an absolute terminus ante quem of 96 CE. A line from
the Agamemnon preserved as a piece of graffito on the walls of Pompeii
shows that at least that play was composed prior to 79 CE. And Fitch
detects intertextuality between the Hercules Furens and the Apocolocyntosis
of 54 CE.22
But the plays may be dated relatively. By studying midline sense paus-
es and certain metrical shortening, Fitch has divided the tragedies into
three groups: the Early Group, consisting of the Agamemnon, the Oedipus,
and the Phaedra; the Middle Group, consisting of the Medea, the Troades,
and the Hercules Furens; and the Late Group, consisting of the Thyestes
and the unfinished Phoenissae.23 These groupings make a certain amount
of sense from a dramaturgical point of view as well. For example, two
plays in the Early Group, the Oedipus and the Agamemnon, have the only
instances where a fourth speaking actor is required; and in the three
plays of the Middle Group, the center doors represent something other
than the royal palace. On the other hand, other features are not exclu-
sive to groups: ghosts appear onstage in the Agamemnon and the Thyestes,
and thus the trap door is necessary for a play in the Early Group and
one in the Late Group. And plays from all three groups, the Phaedra, the
Medea, and possibly the Phoenissae, require the use of a balcony. Never-
theless, it is sensible to think that the practical elements of dramaturgy
would change and develop both within groups as well as from one stage
to the next. Thus, this study will present the plays not in the order in
which they appear in the manuscripts, that is, the order followed both
in Zwierleins Oxford Classical Texts and in Fitchs Loeb volumes, but in
something resembling chronological order of composition.
The tragedies come to us in two branches:24 E, or codex Etruscus, rep-

resented by one manuscript written in Italy in the late eleventh century;
and A, which survives in most of the othermore than 300extant texts.
The earliest come from central or northern France in the second half
of the twelfth century, and seem to have spread from there to England.
Tarrant thinks it likely that the two traditions derive from a fourth-or
early fifth-century archetype.25 In addition to the manuscripts, there is a
tradition of performing Senecan tragedy, as well as adaptations, through-
out Europe during the Renaissance and up to today. The Archive of Per-
formance of Greek and Roman Drama has 362 entries under Seneca,
with the earliest datable example being a 1474 production of Phaedra in
France.26 Senecas plays influenced Renaissance drama both in England
and on the continent, providing quotes and allusions, ideas, and even
theatrical conventions.27 The latest datable production in the APGRD is
a 2011 English performance of Senecas Medea directed by Helen Slaney.
Recent scholars have been giving attention to the numerous stagings in
the last 100 years, especially those in English. Perhaps the best known is
Ted Hughes adaptation of the Oedipus, first performed at the Old Vic
Theatre in 1968. Davis discusses several significant performances of the
Thyestes,28 and Boyle mentions a few recent productions of the Octavia.29
Boyles own translation of the Troades was performed in Melbourne, Aus-
tralia in 1988,30 Caryl Churchills Thyestes in London in 1994, and Ruten-
bergs adaptation of the Oedipus at Hunter College in 1999 and again
in 2005 at the University of Haifa. I myself have seen two productions:
the Troades, using Ahls translation, at Xavier University in 1998;31 and
Hughes version of the Oedipus at Grand Valley State University in 2007.
I can thus testify firsthand of the power, effectiveness, and indeed enter-
tainment that can be achieved through the staging of Senecan tragedy
in the modern world.
This study generally follows Otto Zwierleins 1986 OCT of Senecas
tragedies.32 In a few places I do adopt an alternate reading that makes
more sense dramaturgically. But I am only interested in textual issues
that affect what happens onstage.
At this point, the issue of how these plays would have been delivered
to their audience must be considered, since it seems counterintuitive
to discuss the staging of these plays if full-scale theatrical performance
could be definitely disproven.33 Unfortunately, the question is difficult to
answer definitively, for a number of reasons. Since modern scholars have
no idea how or why the plays were preserved, it is even conceivable that
the playwright published them as a book, intending individuals to recite
Introduction 7
them privately. No serious tragedian in antiquity, however, is known to

have written exclusively with this delivery mode in mind. Some form of
public, oral performance was usually expected. Although there exists
no evidence that Senecas plays actually were performed in a theater
during the first century, as discussed above, they certainly were staged in
later times.34 It was only relatively recently that scholars, primarily Ger-
man,35 began to question the producibility of the tragedies, as well as
Senecas intentions for them. It is argued that the plays only superficially
resemble dramas, that they are far too rhetorical, and that their quality
is vastly inferior to the fifth-century Attic tragedies.36 Schlegel apparently
started the trend when he declared that the tragedies were so poor that
they could not have been meant for performance, but rather were to be
read.37 Marti picked up this idea, maintaining that Seneca was merely
writing philosophy in verse form, and that the tragedies were meant
to be read silently in the order they appear in the E branch of manu-
scripts.38 But this mode of reception is doubtful, since Roman literature,
following from its Greek models, still had a large aural component,39
even in the early empire. Silent reading, while perhaps not unheard of,40
does not seem to have been the primary method of enjoyment of litera-
ture, especially of tragedy.
Pliny writes about the recitatio, when writers would recite, or have
recited, their new works to a small group of friends, in order to get feed-
back before formal publication (ep. 1.13).41 This apparently was a not
uncommon occurrence, and various different genres were presented in
such a setting. Elsewhere, Pliny says that speeches, history, tragedy, and
lyric poetry all made appearances at the recitatio; but he expresses disap-
proval, saying, as an example, that tragedy desires not an auditorium,
but a stage and actors (tragoediam, quae non auditorium, sed scaenam et acto-
res [poscit], ep. 7.17.3). This indicates that, although tragedy might have
been delivered at a recitatio, this was not the ideal or ultimately intended
form of performance; indeed, it implies that stage productions were
happening, perhaps after an initial recitation, with the recitatio being the
Roman version of trying a show out in Peoria. An example of this can be
found in Tacitus Dialogus de Oratoribus, set circa 75 CE The playwright
Curiatius Maternus is said to have recently recited (recitaverat) his play
Cato, which was poorly received by its listeners (Dial. 2). Another char-
acter, Julius Secundus, asks Maternus whether, as a result of the audi-
ence reaction, he is revising the play. Maternus confirms this, and says
he is hurrying to get the tragedy ready for production, using the word
editionem, which can mean the manuscript of a book, but can also refer
to the presentation of a play.42 If Maternus, in fact, intended to release

his tragedy as a book and not have it performed first, this is the only
definite example of such a thing occurring in antiquity. But regardless,
the recitatio is here portrayed as only a first reading, and not the ultimate
production mode for tragedy. Likewise, other tragedies, even if eventu-
ally written down and so disseminated for storage, must have received at
least a trial public reading; and they probably received more than that.
Zwierlein (1966) is the most prominent proponent of the idea that
the plays were intended for performance, but not in a full-scale theatri-
cal manner; instead, they are a sort of Lese- or Rezitationsdrama, meant
for some kind of recitation. He argues that various elements of the plays
are unperformable and differ too greatly from the models of Aeschylus,
Sophocles, and Euripides. Walker and others disagree, saying that one
cannot judge Senecas tragedies by standards set over 500 years previous-
ly.43 All conventions, including theatrical ones, change over time. Since
the plays of Seneca are the only complete extant tragedies from first-
century Rome,44 it is likely that they do, in fact, adhere to contemporane-
ous practices, whatever these might have been. And even if the plays were
intended solely for the type of recitatio as described by Tacitus and Pliny,
of what exactly did this reading consist? Did the author do the reading,
or someone else, or were several readers involved? Was the whole work
presented, or just selected scenes? Was staging and movement involved?
And how did he eventually intend to make his work public?45 But regard-
less of exactly how it would have worked, the brief mentions by Pliny and
Tacitus do give some credence to Zwierleins idea of Rezitationsdramen.46
Some scholars have attempted to find middle ground between recita-
tion and full performance of Senecan tragedy. Fitch has suggested that
certain scenes, such as the banquet in the Thyestes, are highly dramatic,
and definitely meant for staging.47 He also mentions the scene in the
Medea where the title heroine kills her children as one of several that
would not make sense to an audience unless it were possible to see the
action occurring. Fitch maintains, however, that there are other scenes,
for example, the sacrifice of a cow and bull and the subsequent examina-
tion of their entrails in the Oedipus, that are unstageable. Therefore, says
Fitch, Seneca only meant for certain scenes to be performed, either as
interludes in the theater or as after-dinner entertainment. Fitchs judg-
ments of which scenes are not performable, however, are quite subjec-
tive, as others have shown how this particular scene could have been
staged to great dramatic effect.48 Further, the practice of performing
individual scenes from tragedy in Rome, while well accepted among
Introduction 9
modern scholars, has little ancient evidence to support it.49 Nor is there
evidence that new scenes were written for such a purpose. Finally, it is
puzzling why Seneca would have bothered to have composed complete
plays, if only sections from them would be performed. The Phoenissae, an
unfinished play that does survive as portions of individual scenes without
connecting choral passages, does not aid the argument. Even if this one
work were designed to be performed in scenes,50 it does not explain the
other complete plays.
Another option has been to suggest private performance of the plays.
Fantham argues for a private concert reading,51 while Marshall envisions
a more theatrical staging in a household setting.52 But there is little evi-
dence for such practices, aside from the presence of wall paintings of
theatrical scenes in private houses.53 Varner makes connections between
theatrical illustrations found in private dwellings and performances of
plays there.54 The argument goes that these painted scenes may have
served as backdrops for actual performances. But this conclusion does
not necessarily follow, nor is there evidence to support such private per-
formances. In fact, Sutton argues persuasively that, even if Senecas
tragedies were not actually written for performance, the pretense that
they were is maintained with remarkable industry and fidelity.55 That is,
the plays show a scrupulous devotion to fitting onto a full-scale stage, not
an undoubtedly smaller, private venue.56
Admittedly, there may be some hints that wealthy individuals could
have kept private performers in their homes. Petronius has Trimalchio
own a troupe of acrobats; and the fictional host comments that he once
had bought a company of comic actors, although he would not allow
them actually to perform Greek comedies, preferring instead Atellan
farces (Sat. 53). Pliny writes of an elderly woman, recently deceased,
who had owned a troupe of pantomime artists, which she used to wile
away her leisure time; he notes, however, that she never made her hus-
band watch them, either in the theater or at home (ep. 7.24.4), implying
that they performed in both places, and thus provided both public and
private entertainment. Aside from Petronius, whose description is too
comic and exaggerated to be considered accurate, no one says precisely
what these private performers did. There are no accounts of tragic actors
performing either scenes or whole plays in the home of their patron, nor
of new tragedies being written for such settings.
The evidence suggests, however, that tragedy continued to be written
as well as presented. Horace, while providing strict rules for the com-
position of tragedy in the Ars Poetica, may imply a popular interest in
composing tragic dramas, as well as suggesting that a number of people

were actually writing them, albeit badly. Quintilian praises the dramas of
Varius and Ovid, and says that Pomponius Secundus is the best tragedian
of those he had seen (eorum quos viderim longe princeps Pomponius Secun-
dus, Inst. 10.1.98), implying that Pomponius was not the sole practitio-
ner of tragic composition, and that the plays were presented somewhere
with a visual component. Seneca philosophus writes not infrequently of
having attended tragedies in a theater (e.g., de Ira 2.2.3, and de Clem-
entia 1.26.2), and in at least one passage compares human beings with
tragic actors on the stage (ep. 80.78). Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius
Dio all write of composers of new tragedies who attracted the emperors
attention after their plays were performed in the theater.57 Sometimes
a playwright was exiled or executed for a line that could be construed
as directed toward the emperor, and sometimes an alleged slight was
ignored. But the anecdotes confirm that new tragedies were being writ-
ten and performed in front of a large and diverse audience.58
There is also some evidence that the Roman theater was experiment-
ing with the stagings of other forms of literature. Tacitus, [Suetonius],
and Servius speak of the performance of Vergils Eclogues onstage.59
Kohn argues that these testimonia show that Vergil was in fact writing for
the theater, and discusses what such a performance would entail;60 but
regardless of the poets intentions, these sources demonstrate that Ver-
gils verses were received frequently with great acclaim by a mass audi-
ence in a theater. Further, Horaces protestations that he never wrote
for the stage (Satire 1.10.3739, and ep. 1.19.4142) may imply that his
poetry was delivered in such a venue, possibly over the poets objections.
Finally, Ovid states that his works were danced in the theater (Tristia
2.51920, 5.7.2528),61 leading some scholars to the conclusion that he
wrote with that mode of delivery in mind.62 The Roman theater, then,
in the early days of the empire, may have been drawing on nondramatic
genres for material, instead of relying solely on more traditional forms.
It is certain that new theater buildings were being erected and old-
er buildings were being renovated all over the Roman world.63 Vitru-
vius goes into great detail about, among other things, where to place
a theater, what its dimensions should be, and how to get the most out
of its acoustics (de Arch. 5.3.19.1). He states that the site for the the-
ater should be chosen as soon as the forum has been built, showing the
importance of such a structure to a city (de Arch. 5.3.1). Common inter-
est in theatrical productions becomes apparent from the presence of the
previously discussed wall paintings of scenes from both tragedies and
Introduction 11
comedies found in private homes.64 And if the Romans explored this

interest through the visual arts, why would they not also pursue it in the
theater itself, since they had venues in which to perform?
The Romans also had the opportunity to perform plays, namely dur-
ing festivals. Vitruvius says that games are to be presented in the the-
ater on festival days, with men, women, and children all present in the
audience (per ludos enim cum coniugibus et liberis persedentes delectationibus
detinentur, de Arch. 5.3.1). He does not specifically mention what was per-
formed at these games, but he later says that there are three kinds of
scaenae: the tragic, the comic, and the satyric (de Arch. 5.6.9), implying
that tragedies, comedies, and satyr plays were presented. The fasti from
the time of Augustus lists six annual festivals during which ludi scaenici
were presented: the Ludi Megalenses (April 410), the Ludi Cereales (April
1219), the Ludi Florales (April 28May 3), the Ludi Apollinares (July
613), the Ludi Romani (September 419), and the Ludi Plebii (Novem-
ber 417).65 In addition, plays could be performed for special occasions,
such as funerals.66
And the Romans seem to have had performers. Garton believes that,
although few names remain, a large number of actors were in Rome
during the Augustan period; he bases this belief on the boom of theater
construction, as well as on the interest in drama demonstrated by wall
paintings and literature.67 The historians report occasions when all the
actors are banished from Rome by Augustus successors,68 implying that
there continued to be a significant quantity of actors. There would be
no need to banish them en masse, if there were only a small handful of
them. Further, the Stoic martyr Thrasea Paetus was said by Tacitus (Ann.
16.21) to have been an amateur actor, and he can hardly have been the
only one. We can see, then, that the necessary resources for dramatic
performancea place to perform, people interested in viewing a per-
formance, opportunity to perform, and someone to performwere in
place.69
Nevertheless, some scholars have attempted to disregard altogether
the problem of how the Senecan plays might have been staged, since
the lack of definite evidence concerning their performance makes the
question ultimately unsolvable. Why not just read the plays as literature,
ignoring an issue that, barring the discovery of didaskalia from the first
century, cannot be determined? In fact, Motto and Clark claim to take
this approach.70 Having stated their intention to avoid the performance
controversy, however, they refer throughout their book to such theatrical
elements as the audience and onstage action; and this affects their inter-
pretation of the plays. Styan observes that the process of communicating

a play involves many components, and therefore advocates the analysis
of dramatic literature with a kind of performance criticism in which the
complex interrelationships between a large number of elements, includ-
ing but not limited to playwright, producer, script, actor, and audience,
are considered.71 More simply, Schechner defines theater as the inter-
play among space, time, performers, action, and audience.72 In the
present discussion of Senecan tragedy, it is not necessary to consider so
many variables, mainly because such factors as who the producer might
have been, or at what occasion the play was performed, cannot be deter-
mined. But any interpretation that envisions the presentation of plays,
regardless of the setting, must be different from one that simply consid-
ers them as words on a page. Indeed, Schechner maintains that theater
is a performance genre, not literature, and so requires different analyti-
cal tools than a novel or work of philosophy. And Goffman would argue
that the reader of Senecas plays would recognize them as belonging
to the theatrical frame, because the text uses the out-of-frame direc-
tional cues belonging to the theater;73 that is, they are presented on the
page in the form of a drama. If it is accepted that Senecan tragedy was
composed for some sort of public, oral presentation, the setting for that
presentation must be taken into account. As Moore states, At the core of
any theatrical performance lies the relationship between its two essential
components, performer and audience.74 And that relationship would
differ if the performance occurred in an auditorium or a dining room,
in front of a mass audience or an intimate group of friends, with one
actor or several, with or without masks or costumes, and so forth.
Latin literature was composed in order to be delivered, not read
silently. The testimonia that new tragedies were recited elsewhere than
the stage, either partially or completely, lead away from the idea that the
author meant this as the ultimate and desired mode of delivery; these
readings appear instead to be trial runs, undressed rehearsals, as it were.
In antiquity, one did not seriously write something in the form of a trag-
edy unless one intended it to be performed as a tragedy, that is, in a
theater, with multiple actors, a chorus, costumes, masks, and in front
of a mass audience. Granted, some noblemen, such as C. Julius Caesar,
who was said to have composed an Oedipus in his youth,75 and Augustus
Caesar, who spoke depreciatingly about his Ajax,76 did write tragedies as
a sort of literary exercise, not intending them to be staged; but such dil-
ettantes would compose only one play before moving on to more serious
pursuits.77 This is different from Seneca tragicus, who wrote seven and
Introduction 13
a half plays, and evidently did not hinder their preservation.78 In Sen-
ecas complete tragedies are found choruses, dialogue, characterization,
implicit stage directionsall of the traditional formal requirements for
tragedy. The Senecan dramas also contain the six parts that Aristotle says
are necessary for a tragedy: plot, characters, diction, reasoning, spec-
tacle, and song.79 And although Horace does not provide a checklist for
tragedy, Seneca usually follows his advice in, among other things, adher-
ing to a five-act structure, limiting himself, mostly, to three actors, and
including the chorus as an integral part of the play.80
In addition, a line from Senecas Agamemnon has been found as a
line of graffito in Pompeii.81 In the line in question (Idaea cerno nemora,
I see the groves of Ida, 730), Cassandra is speaking as she prepares to
enter the palace of Agamemnon. She means that, just as Mt. Ida, where
Paris made his fatal judgment between the goddesses, brought disaster
for her, so does the house of her captor. This seems to be an obscure
line, not one that sounds pithy and proverbial and would have circulated
by word of mouth, not, that is, the To be or not to be or the O, what
a rogue and peasant slave am I of the Agamemnon. It could only have
been written by someone who had heard the complete play. Further,
the line is terribly misspelled: idai cernu nemura. About half of the vowels
are wrong, again implying that they were written by someone who heard
them, not someone who read them. Finally, it is hard to believe that a
member of the imperial court, if the play had received some kind of pri-
vate performance there, would have been involved in defacing the walls
of Pompeii.82
All appearances to the contrary, it is not the intention of this study
to enter into the performance question, but merely to summarize the
debate and to present the evidence here. At the very least, Seneca shows
a consistency in his dealings with issues of staging that clearly presume
the use of a theater of the type described by Vitruvius, fictively, if not
actually. Sutton argues that Senecas plays were written for actual per-
formance. If he is right, then the tragedies are of course susceptible to
performance criticism of the type developed by Taplin.83 But even if Sut-
ton is wrong, he manages to show that Seneca was scrupulous in assem-
bling his plays as if he were writing for a stage. Even if the playwrights
use of the human and physical resources of his contemporary stage, the
strong element of opsis implied by his texts, and his observance of the
artificial conventions of contemporary Roman drama are entirely fictive,
they would still benefit from performance criticism. In the final analysis,
whether Senecas plays belong to the theater of the stage or to the the-
ater of the mind is an irrelevant question. The tragedies demonstrate a

consistency, a technique or art of theater. It is quite reasonable, permis-
sible, and indeed profitable to engage in a study of Senecan dramaturgy.
Finally, I must confess that I do not possess the same practical expe-
rience as some of my fellow scholars of ancient performance. Unfortu-
nately, as opposed to, for example, Beacham, Fortey and Glucker, and
Marshall,84 I have not directed either Roman comedy or tragedy. On the
other hand, Sutton has staged the tragedies only in his mind, nor had
Niall Slater produced any Roman comedy prior to his highly influential
work on performance theory, Plautus in Performance (Princeton, 1985). I
do, however, have extensive theatrical experience. I was occupied as an
actor throughout virtually all of high school, college, and three seasons
of summer stock; in the latter, the Uninvited Company, based at Carle
ton College, I not only performed, but also designed lights and props,
constructed sets, served as executive director, and directed Arthur Mill-
ers The Creation of the World and Other Business. In graduate school, I took
advanced courses in directing and dramaturgy, and served an internship
at the Guthrie Theatre under dramaturges Jim Lewis and Michael Lupu
on what was called The Clytemnestra Project.85 And I am credited as the
dramaturge on a number of scripts by professional playwright Rita T.
Kohn. The reader of this book and my other articles on ancient theater
may judge my scholarly credentials; but I think I have proven myself as a
practical Person of the Theater.
C h a pter 1
Seneca and His Dramatic Resources
Before examining the individual plays, one by one, for dramaturgical

elements, it would be helpful to look in general at how Seneca exploit-
ed the resources at his disposal. By necessity, this overview of the play-
wrights practices in regards to the physical stage, including entrances
and exits, props and effects, and his customs regarding the beginning
and ending of his plays will be general, and specific discussions will be
found in the chapters dealing with the individual plays. Especially use-
ful would be a detailed examination of Senecas methods with his most
important resource: his performers, including the ramifications of the
assumption that Senecan tragedy was intended for a limited number of
speaking actors, as well as consideration of mute actors and the Chorus.
After seeing how all of these elements work together, we will be better
able to appreciate Senecas skills and artistry in the individual dramas.1
The genuine tragedies of Seneca, which all tell stories from Greek
mythology,2 can easily fit onto the basic stage as described by Vitruvius.3
One set of central doors is required,4 often representing the palace, as in
the Oedipus, the Agamemnon, the Phaedra, and the Thyestes, but not always,
as in the Medea, the Hercules Furens, the Troades, and the Phoenissae. Sen-
eca also takes advantage of the two wings, one leading, as Vitruvius tells
us, from the forum, and the other from foreign parts.5 The Oedipus, the
Agamemnon, and the Thyestes all closely follow this standard convention,
while the other dramas display some slight variations. Further, Vitruvius
tells us that the Roman stage is broader than the Greek,6 wide enough
for the Chorus to perform its songs, as well as to be able to withdraw out
of the way during the episodes. This would imply that the actual entranc-
es onto the stage via the wings must be some distance from the center
15
doors, an idea that gains some support from the fact that in several plays
one character enters and then is not noticed by other onstage charac-
ters for quite a while (e.g., act 3 of the Hercules Furens and act 3 of the
Thyestes). Also, there are a number of instances where it takes someone
at least four lines to announce the entrance of another character (e.g.,
Agamemnon 77881, Oedipus 2025, and Oedipus 10049), again indicat-
ing some distance between the wing and center stage. Granted, these
examples could simply be reflections of the convention of the times.7
The fictive behavior of dramatic space need not necessarily agree with
the actual space of the stage; even if the stage is not very large, the audi-
ence will accept that certain characters cannot hear or see each other.
But it is possible that the recurrence of examples shows the playwright
taking advantage of a bigger stage area. Several plays (the Medea, the
Phaedra, and possibly the Phoenissae) require characters to stand either
on the roof or a stage building, or else on a balcony.8
Of all of the tragedies, only the Medea requires a machina, which car-
ries off the title character at the end (Medea 102225). Three plays do
feature supernatural entities in their prologues; but Juno in the Hercules
Furens seems to stand on the stage floor (Hercules Furens 15), as do the
Ghosts of Thyestes and Tantalus in the Agamemnon (14) and the Thyestes
(1ff. and 1067). These last two plays require a trap door,9 as both of the
Ghosts indicate that they have arisen from the depths of Hell; further,
Tantalus is ordered to return to the Underworld (Thyestes 105) at the
end of the prologue, making the use of an exit into the stage floor likely.
No other gods or spirits, who in Greek tragedy customarily appear on the
machina, are portrayed in Senecan drama.10 The ekkyklema, or rather the
exostra,11 is used somewhat more often, appearing at Phaedra (863902),
at Hercules Furens (10361227), and at Thyestes (9011112). All of these
examples have the device emerging from the center doors. At Agamem-
non (91343), Strophius and his silent son, Pylades, ride in via the wing
leading from foreign parts on some sort of device, possibly the exostra
that has been decorated to look like a chariot.
Vitruvius (5.6.89) also talks about scene decoration. On either side
of the doors, there is room for scenery.12 There are three kinds of scen-
ery: tragic, comic, and satyric.13 The tragic style features columns, pedi-
ments, statues, and other royal things.14 Most of the Senecan dramas
need nothing more than these sorts of generic decorations, although the
Hercules Furens and the Troades suggest specific scenic effects. In general,
the scaenae frons is a place for characters to go to when they have nothing
else to do. It is quite common for the Chorus to withdraw to the back of
Seneca and His Dramatic Resources 17
the stage during episodes, while characters such as Oedipus and Amphi-
tryo, in the Oedipus and the Hercules Furens respectively, often stand near
the scaenae frons during choral songs.
Senecan tragedy does explicitly call for many props, which gives
much dramatic value to any that are mentioned. Concerning theater in
general, not restricted to any place or time period, Schechner observes
that during the performance, these objects are of extreme importance,
often the focus of the whole activity.15 Goldhill, when describing one
of the challenges for modern actors in staging ancient (by which he
means Greek) tragedy, points out that modern plays contain a plethora
of props, items that the actors can use to tell the story, build their char-
acters, or just generally remain busy; ancient scripts, on the other hand,
have few of these props; but those that do appear are of great signifi-
cance.16 Seneca follows the Attic practice of keeping significant props to
a minimum. Many plays specifically mention various types of weaponry,
although swords are most common. Also occurring multiple times are
scepters and altars. Some activities, such as the ceremonial rites in the
Medea and the Oedipus, most probably were mimed, and so the physical
objects mentioned would not be needed. But others, for example the
onstage suicides of Jocasta and Phaedra, would require prop swords.
Blood is a special category of property, or rather of visual effect,
which certainly seems to be called for in abundance in Senecan trag-
edy.17 When Jocasta kills herself in the Oedipus (1041), so much blood
gushes out of the wound that the sword is also swept up in the torrent.
In the extispicium of the Oedipus (293383), much blood and gore would
accompany the slaughter of the cattle. Blood drips from Clytemnestras
hands upon her entrance following the murder of her husband in the
Agamemnon (949). As part of the mourning in the Troades (120ff.), the
captive women beat and tear at their breasts, causing blood and scarring.
When Medea reaches the climax of her magical rites (809ff.), she claims
to cut herself and offer up the blood to Hecate. Finally, in the Hercules
Furens, first Lycus hands are metaphorically said to be spattered with
the blood of Megaras father (372); then, Hercules himself is dripping
with blood when he returns from slaying Lycus (918ff.).18 This is not to
suggest that all of these instances would use actual stage-blood. It is likely
that Medea does not actually use all of the props she mentions, and thus,
the actor would similarly not use realistic blood; likewise, the extispicium
is probably largely mimed, and so real liquid would not be desirable.19
But it would be quite effective if Clytemnestra and Hercules, each just
returned from slaughter, bore visible proof.
The tragedies contain a number of cues for sound effects. Several

times the center doors make a noise while opening (Medea 177, 971 and
Oedipus 911, 995). A noise is heard coming from the ground when Her-
cules and Theseus enter at Hercules Furens 52123. Mournful groanings
are heard coming from the palace at Phaedra 850 and 1154. At Hercules
Furens 101020, Hercules and Megara deliver their lines from offstage.
Similarly, at Troades 792, the boy, Astyanax speaks, but it is more prob-
able that one of the speaking actors says these lines, with Hectors son
portrayed by a mute actor. Two plays require the sound effects of barking
dogs (Medea 84041 and Phaedra 8182). Two sound effects may occur
in the extispicium in the Oedipus (375 and 383), as well as during the
banquet in act 5 of the Thyestes (1001, 1004). Finally, at Hercules Furens
14651, the Chorus describes the sound of birds, possibly indicating the
type of music that is being played during the song.
Obviously, the Roman stage would not utilize lighting effects. Nor
would there have been curtains that open and close in order to signal
the beginning and ending of a play.20 As a result, the start of Senecan
tragedy can seem a bit abrupt and unrealistic to modern readers. It is
not uncommon in Greek tragedy for an actor, or even a crowd of extras,
to come onstage, take their places, and then begin the play. Taplin dis-
cusses the case of the Watchman at the start of Aeschylus Agamemnon,
and concludes that the fifth-century Athenian audience would not have
objected to the actor entering in full view and assuming a position on
the roof of the skene. The play proper would begin when he utters his
first lines.21 But even in this situation, the character first explains why he
is there: he has been on duty for a year, watching for a signal from Troy
(Agamemnon 121). As another example, consider Sophocles Oedipus,
who says he has arrived from the palace in order to help his subjects
(Oedipus Tyrannos 113). On the other hand, Senecas plays simply begin.
His Oedipus gives no motivation for his entrance. He could just as eas-
ily have pondered the philosophical implications of the plague and his
troubled past inside the palace; but for no apparent reason, he has come
outside. Similarly, Juno in the Hercules Furens could rail against Hercules
and the other illegitimate children of Jupiter anywhere. The fact that
she chose this location is simply a happy coincidence for the audience.
It is safe to assume that the actors portraying Oedipus, Hippolytus, Juno,
Hecuba, and Medea all enter from the central doors at the start of their
respective plays.22 The exceptions would be the Ghosts of Tantalus and
Thyestes in the Thyestes and the Agamemnon, who, as has been previously
discussed, specifically state that they have arisen from the Underworld.
The performers may already be in character upon their entrances from

the trap door; but it is probable that in the other plays the actors emulate
the Greek practice and take a moment to establish their presence before
beginning the play.
Likewise, it is hard to know exactly how the dramas ended. Only the
Troades concludes with a completely bare stage. In the Agamemnon and
the Oedipus, all of the speaking characters leave, but the Chorus remains.
Nobody, neither characters nor Chorus, exits at the end of the Phaedra
or the Thyestes. It is likely that the Choruses of both the Medea and of the
Hercules Furens exit before the end. In the former play, following Medeas
final exit, Jason and the Nurse are left alone onstage. At the end of the
latter, Theseus and Hercules exit, but it is difficult to determine whether
Amphitryo goes with them or if he stays onstage alone. So, except for
the Troades and possibly the Hercules Furens, all of Senecas plays end with
someone onstage, usually at least the Chorus, and sometimes a corpse
and/or other characters. Again, there was no curtain to drop in order to
let the audience know that the play was over, as well as to give the actors
a chance to exit unseen. But just as the ancient audience would not have
objected to seeing an actor enter in silence, take his position, and then
begin the play, similarly, there would be no problem with the remaining
actors taking a pause, and then exiting in silence.23 Or as Goffman puts
it, It is an obvious feature of stage productions that the final applause
wipes the make-believe away.24
This illustrates an important aspect of Senecan drama. Instead of
being naturalistic, realistic, and illusionary,25 Roman drama is conven-
tional. That is, the ancient audience accepts what it is told, and does
not need actions to be realistically represented. One need look no far-
ther than the plays of Plautus and Terence, where characters habitually
talk to the audience, telling them their plans and even asking for their
applause.26 Further, the ancient dramatists took advantage of audienc-
es that would willingly suspend their disbelief. This applies not only to
actions and characters, but even extends to the stage setting and props.
Goffman notes that stage style through the centuries and across cul-
tures varies greatly in the degree of realism of the stage props and also
in the degree of consistency sought in the level of realism from one prop
to another.... And certainly some items are likely to be literally realistic,
such as cigarettes, and others not, such as walls and windows.27 And
Schechner observes that In the performance activities all objects . . .
have a market value much less than the value assigned to the objects
within the context of the activity;28 that is, a stage king wears a crown
of cardboard and glass, but both he and the audience treat it as if it

consisted of gold and the finest jewels. Senecan tragedy takes full advan-
tage of that sort of acceptance. As was previously discussed, there are not
many explicit mentions of props. Most of them (swords, scepters, etc.)
are both important and simple enough that it would be both easy and
dramatically powerful to use them in a more realistic fashionmore
realistic, but not totally realistic, as actual swords and scepters would
not be used. Others, notably the items that Medea names in her magic
rites, are probably to be imagined.
But this leads to a common feature of Senecan drama: the description
of actions that are probably not actually being acted out. This is differ-
ent from the messenger speech, where someone talks about events that
took place offstage, for example the messengers who relate Oedipus
self-blinding (Oedipus 91579), the slaughter of the children of Thyestes
(Thyestes 623788), and the death of Hippolytus (Phaedra 9911122).29 In
the prologue to the Hercules Furens, Juno first gesticulates to the heavens,
pointing out various constellations (HF 618); she goes on to describe in
great detail the horrors of the Underworld (HF 5499). And later, Her-
cules sees unusual astronomical phenomena (HF 93952). It is possible
that stars were painted on the scaenae frons to match Junos descriptions.
Perhaps they were on scenic panels that could then be lowered to reflect
Hercules perceptions. And maybe mute actors, or perhaps the Chorus,
could portray the chthonian events. But it is more likely, especially given
the plays focus on hallucinations and mistrust of the senses, that the
audience would simply accept that the described occurrences are hap-
pening. Similarly in the Thyestes, when the Messenger (Thyestes 77678),
the Chorus (Thyestes 789874), Atreus (Thyestes 89697), and Thyestes
himself (Thyestes 99095) all see the sun return to its place of rising in
the East in response to the brothers savagery, we should not think that
this was somehow portrayed on the Roman stage. When Senecas char-
acters talk of events in the sky, his audience would accept that they were
taking place. Likewise, when Atreus talks of earthquakes and the destruc-
tion of the palace (Thyestes 26065), the audience would take his word.30
For a more modern parallel, recall the request of Chorus at the start of
Shakespeares Henry V: Think, when we talk of horses, that you see them,
printing their proud hoof i the receiving earth.
It is certainly possible that when Hecuba and the captive Trojan wom-
en scratch their breasts so deeply as to draw blood (Troades 11623), the
actors employ a device that would squirt out some sort of red liquid. When
Jocasta stabs herself (Oedipus 1041), the resulting torrent of blood could
be realistically portrayed.31 And when Theseus attempts to reassemble the

dismembered parts of Hippolytus (Phaedra 124774), the mute actors
could bring on faux lumps of flesh. On the other hand, miming would
be the best method for presenting Medeas magic rites (Medea 740816),
the extispicium in act 2 of the Oedipus (291402), and the mourning activi-
ties of the Trojan captives throughout the Troades. The mere statements
that Medea is performing magic, that Manto is sacrificing and examining
cattle, that Hecuba and the Trojan women are tearing at their breasts, and
perhaps even that the torn flesh of Hippolytus is being carried onstage
would satisfy the audience for whom Seneca was writing.
The physical stage and personal properties are not the only resourc-
es Seneca takes advantage of. The Roman playwright also shows great
skill in the ways he uses his performers. There is much uncertainty con-
cerning the number of actors Seneca could employ.32 Zwierlein assumes
that the Roman playwright was required to follow the same rule of
three actors that applied to Attic tragedy, and perceives a large num-
ber of violations.33 Sutton, on the other hand, shows that, whether or
not Seneca had to obey the rule, most of Zwierleins apparent violations
can be easily ameliorated, and the plays can be performed with only
three actors.34 This has prompted some debate as to whether Seneca
was somehow constrained to use a limited number of actors, much like
the Greeks, or whether, as Marshall asserts, the Roman playwright was
simply following an inherited literary conceit that he could abandon at
any time.35 This is, of course, impossible to determine definitively. But
the important thing for this discussion is that it is necessary in only two
places (in the Agamemnon and in the Oedipus, two of Senecas earliest
plays)36 to use a fourth speaking actor, in both instances to portray a
young girl. That is, for whatever reason, Seneca usually constructs his
plays in such a way that no more than three speakers are present at any
given time.37 Marshall suggests that, while Greek tragedy and comedy
kept its numbers low for competitive reasons, there were economic ratio-
nales for keeping a troupe for Roman comedy as small as possible.38 It
is unlikely that Seneca had to concern himself with sharing his commis-
sion with actors, musicians, et alii. But the fact remains that the trag-
edies can easily be produced with a limited number of actors, as long as
each can take on multiple roles. And if one examines which characters
were portrayed by the same performer, interesting patterns emerge. In
the Hercules Furens, the Troades, the Medea, the Oedipus, and the Thyestes,
characters with similar personalities and/or functions are played by the
same actor. The same actor portrays the murderer and the victim in the
Hercules Furens and the Phaedra. All of the male characters are given to
the same actor in the Medea and the Agamemnon. And other patterns can
be discerned. One or two such significant distributions could be coinci-
dence. But since they can be found in just about every play, they must
be purposeful. It should not be assumed, however, that, for example,
Lycus and Theseus in the Hercules Furens somehow are Juno, in the same
way that Aphrodite may be Hippolytus Attendant or Phaedras Nurse in
Euripides Hippolytus39only that a single actor could be assigned roles
that fulfill the same functions, thus giving further depth and significance
to their characters.40
There is no claim that Seneca is unique in this practice. Marshall
examines the possibility of a similar effect in the Oresteia.41 Sutton consid-
ers the significance of role sharing in Aristophanes.42 And while discuss-
ing Greek tragedy in general, Gould comments that the likely doubling
of parts is sometimes striking in its histrionic possibilities. The probabil-
ity that the parts of Deianira and Heracles (in Trachiniae), of Phaedra
and Theseus (in Hippolytus) or of Pentheus and Agave (in Bacchae) were
played by the same male actor gives an idea of the challenge to an actors
technical skills.43 Thus, the technique of significant role distribution
seems to have existed in fifth-century Attic drama. But Seneca appears to
have taken extraordinary advantage of the Greek precedent.
This practice provides strong evidence that Seneca had at least a fic-
tive stage in mind for his plays, for it is much easier for an audience
to recognize significant role sharing in performance than on the page.
Further, Seneca must envision a theater that uses masks. There is not
much evidence about masks in first-century Rome. Juvenal speaks of a
young child at a theatrical performance being frightened by the personae
pallentis hiatum (the gaping of the pale mask, Sat. 3.175). But if Seneca
tragicus has actors take on multiple roles, then masks are a necessity, so
that the audience can distinguish one character from another. But at the
same time, the audience must be able to discern which actor is playing
which parts. The cleverness of, for example, having the Fury and Atreus
in the Thyestes portrayed by the same man would be lost if no one could
tell that it was the same man. The means of this recognition are uncer-
tain. The audience may simply have recognized the performers voices,
or perhaps each actor wore an easily identifiable costume. Seneca may
have had in mind men who were physically distinctive. It is even possible
that the characters played by a single actor would demonstrate similar
gestures, postures, sudden silences, proxemics, and so on. But in order
for the technique to be most effective, the audience must at the same
time recognize each actor and accept that he is playing different parts.44
Another ramification of masks is the inability of actors to display emo-

tions or facial expressions. Although a gifted performer can use a mask
to his or her advantage,45 it is still an unmoving canvas. Emotions are
very important to Senecan tragedy, and the playwright would need to use
every means at his disposal to get them across. Certainly, such nonverbal
elements as tone of voice, posture, gestures, and other movements would
inform the audience of a characters feelings; but Seneca also indicates
emotions verbally. Every play has at least one character expressing him-
or herself: being angry or sad, weeping, and so forth. Modern audiences
may find such descriptions annoying or redundant. But the ancient audi-
ence would expect that, for example, a physical portrayal of a weeping
Hercules would be accompanied by a statement concerning his tears.
A more specific illustration of this principle can be found in Senecas
descriptions of hairstyles. Balsley (2006) discusses how the Roman play-
wright uses the alteration of hair as a metaphor for changing emotional
state. For example, Hecuba orders the captive women to let down their
hair as a symbol of their mourning in the first act of the Troades. Also,
Medea, in act 4 of her eponymous play is said to have undone her hair
in preparation for her magic rites, and Phaedra illustrates her distress by
changing her hairstyle (Phaedra 39395). In all cases, physical signs of
emotion coincide with verbal descriptions.
Besides distributing roles in significant ways, Seneca also shows great
artistic skill as well as quite a bit of variety in using the three actors
onstage. They do not all have to be present at once. Many characters,
such as Juno in act 1 of the Hercules Furens, Hecuba in act 1 of the Troades,
the Nurse in act 4 of the Medea, and Oedipus in act 1 of the Oedipus
deliver monologues.46 Phaedra and her Nurse as well as Creon and Oedi-
pus are among the many characters who engage in dialogue,47 and such
sequences often contain speaker changes in the middle of the line of
verse. Fantham (1996b), in an analysis of such midline interruption,
finds that they can fulfill a limited number of functions: answers to ques-
tions/demands, urgent sequences of cut-and-thrust dialogue, impatient
demand, and prolongation or delay. And quite a number of these dia-
logues occur with a third speaking actor observing; in the Hercules Furens,
for example, Theseus observes silently while Amphitryo and Hercules
converse in act 4 and most of act 5. The Old Servant watches without
speaking while Andromache and Ulixes verbally spar with each other
in act 3 of the Troades. The Nurse in the Medea says nothing in act 2
when her mistress talks with Creon or in act 3 when she talks with Jason.
Phaedra and her Nurse take turns conversing with Hippolytus in act 3
of the Phaedra, but only one woman participates in the dialogue at a
time: lines 431588 feature Hippolytus and the Nurse, while lines 589
718 are between Hippolytus and Phaedra, with the Nurse only speak-
ing again once the youth exits. And Cassandra is silent in act 5 of the
Agamemnon while Electra entrusts Orestes to Strophius. These are only
a few examples of a fairly common practice. It is hard to say exactly why
Seneca favors this technique, but it makes it all the more effective when
all three characters do speak together, such as during act 4 of the Oedi-
pus (Oedipus, the Old Corinthian, and Phorbas) or act 5 of the Troades
(Hecuba, Andromache, and the Messenger).
Although Seneca seems to have limited himself to three (and very
occasionally four) speaking actors, he appears to have been quite free in
the use of silent actors. Virtually every play has mute servants or atten-
dants who carry out the commands of the dramatic royalty,48 characters
whom Goffman refers to as disattended, that is, present in a relevant
way, but treated as if not present49 until their actions become necessary.
In the Hercules Furens, Lycus gives orders for Megara and the children
to be blockaded inside the temple (5068). Ulixes, in the Troades, is
accompanied by unspeaking soldiers as he hunts for the child of Hector
(627). In the Medea, Creon employs silent bodyguards to protect him
(188), and Jason seems to summon mute townspeople (978). Hippoly-
tus begins the Phaedra by addressing hunting companions; they must
either be silent extras, or perhaps the Chorus. But it is more certain that
Theseus, upon his entrance, commands mute servants to reveal the piti-
ful Phaedra (863), and later to carry on the mutilated limbs of his son
(1247). In the Oedipus, unspeaking attendants bring on the cattle for
the extispicium (299), haul Creon off to imprisonment in a cave (707),
and fetch Phorbas the shepherd (82324). In the Agamemnon, the king
orders mute servants to lift up Cassandra from the ground and give her
some refreshment (78788); later on, Aegisthus issues commands to his
silent servants, first to drag Electra to a cave (997), and then to carry
Cassandra into the palace (1004). Finally, in the Thyestes, Atreus orders
unspeaking attendants to open the doors to reveal Thyestes (9012).
Clearly, Seneca follows the Greek tradition of having mute servants
accompany kings.50
But Seneca also uses unspeaking actors to portray more specific and
significant characters. There are no silent individuals in the Phaedra,
the Oedipus, or, unsurprisingly, the Phoenissae. In the Hercules Furens, the
three small children of Hercules and Megara are represented onstage by
mute actors.51 Similarly, in the Medea the two sons of Jason and Medea
are present but silent. Act 5 of the Agamemnon features two unspeaking
boys: Orestes and Pylades. And when Thyestes and Tantalus enter for
act 3 of the Thyestes, they are accompanied by two mute actors as Tan-
talus brothers.52 In four of the tragedies, then, Seneca employs mutes
to portray young boys. The Troades, however, diverges somewhat from
this practice, including in all but the final act mute actors who portray
a variety of powerless young characters: Cassandra in act 1, Polyxena in
acts 2 and 4, Astyanax in act 3, and Pyrrhus in act 4. That is powerless,
since three of the four are on the verge of being slain,53 and the fourth,
Pyrrhus, helplessly obeys the wishes of his deceased father. And this is, in
fact, in keeping with the other tragedies. In the other plays that include
mute characters, all but the Agamemnon use them for young boys who
are about to be slaughtered: the sons of Hercules, Medea, and Thyestes.
The sole exception, aside from the Troades, which includes girls who are
about to be sacrificed, along with the son of Achilles, is Orestes in the
Agamemnon, who on the contrary is being saved, along with his cousin
Pylades; but one could argue that the two boys in the Agamemnon are
mere pawns of their relatives, and so have no more control over the
situation than their mute counterparts in the other plays. On the other
hand, the two young girls who require a fourth speaking actor are far
from powerless: Manto in the Oedipus is an equal partner to her father,
and Electra in the Agamemnon actively defies the wishes of her mother in
sending her brother away to safety. It is not a perfect rule, then, but we
can say that generally Seneca uses mute actors for young boys, especially
those on the verge of death, and helpless young girls, while he twice uses
a fourth speaker for powerful young girls.
One final category of performer remains to be discussed: the Cho-
rus.54 Calder suggests, rather sensibly, that Senecas Chorus would
have between three and seven members.55 This would be large enough
to establish its presence, but manageable enough to be able to move
around the stage. And when it withdraws to the scaenae frons, there would
still be room for the other characters. Although both Aristotle56 and
Horace57 say that the Chorus should be an integral part of the drama,
modern scholars often have difficulty seeing Senecas singers as essen-
tial. For an extreme example, consider Rutenbergs free adaptation of
the Oedipus, in which the choral songs are replaced by passages from
Senecas philosophical treatises.58 On the other hand, one can often see
the Senecan Chorus as Goffmans mediator: a specialized viewer who
also participates as a staged character [and who] can comment on whole
aspects of the production, treating as an object of direct attention what
the projected characters have to treat as something in which they are
immersed. He is a footnote that talks,59 or, more frequently, sings. The

present aim is not to talk about its role or the content of its songs,60 but to
consider how the Chorus works within Senecas dramaturgical structure.
One of the difficulties for a modern reader is the uncertainty in some
plays as to who the Chorus is supposed to be. Sutton rightly points out
that in performance the identity of the Chorus would be perfectly clear
from some visual clue, such as masks and costumes.61 But if understand-
ing is limited to just the text, the makeup of the Chorus is sometimes
hard to determine.62 In the Hercules Furens, for example, there is no indi-
cation as to its identity. It is only through such clues as a clearly demon-
strated sympathy for Hercules and his family, as well as comparison with
Euripides play, that one can conjecture that it consists of Theban elders.
Similarly, the Chorus of the Medea does not identify itself; but since its
first song is an epithalamium that extols the beauty of Creusa, and since,
as the play progresses, the Chorus paints Medeas achievements in an
increasingly negative light, it seems safe to take it as a group of Corinthi-
ans, most likely women,63 who approve of Jasons remarriage. The only
clues about the Chorus in the Phaedra are likewise to be found in the
content of the songs: a consistent sympathy for Hippolytus, suggesting
a group of the youths hunting companions. The Chorus of the Thyestes
gives no clue to its identity, except for displaying sympathy for Mycenae
and its royal family, and so implies a group of Mycenaean citizens. In
half of the plays, then, it is very difficult to determine the identity of the
Chorus through textual means.
The identity of the Chorus in the Troades, on the other hand, could
not be more clear. At line 63, Hecuba addresses it as turba captivae mea.
Throughout the first act it follows the former queens instructions of how
to mourn,64 and it will continue to lament its fate and the destruction of
Troy. Similarly, the Chorus of the Oedipus is, ironically, one of the best
identified,65 referring to itself as Theban citizens in its first song (110
and 124). Seneca, then, is perfectly capable of identifying his Chorus if
it suits his purposes. The unfinished Phoenissae does not have any choral
parts; but as the only other drama to be named for a group instead of
an individual, one could surmise that Seneca meant to have a Chorus
of Phoenician women.66 The Agamemnon seems to have two Choruses.67
One, which sings the first two passages, identifies itself as Mycenaeans
(342)68 and its songs definitely betray Greek sympathies. At lines 586
88, Clytemnestra announces the arrival of Cassandra and a sad crowd
of captive Trojan women, which will take over the duties of the Chorus
for the rest of the drama. The first Chorus of Argives, then, must exit
at some point, probably after announcing the entrance of the herald
Eurybates, change masks, and then return. Seneca, then, varies in his
approach to the Chorus, sometimes letting the audience know specifi-
cally who it is, and sometimes, apparently, leaving it up to visual clues.
Occasionally in the tragedies, the Chorus will show a particularly
close connection with one of the characters. The two notable examples
are the groups of captive Trojan women who interact with Hecuba in the
Troades and with Cassandra in the Agamemnon. Another addition to this
list is the huntsmen who accompany Hippolytus at the start of the Phae
dra. The opposite side of the coin would be the Corinthians who seem to
detest Medea throughout the Medea.
In most of the plays, the Chorus enters after an initial act or pro-
logue. The exceptions are the Troades, where it enters with Hecuba at the
beginning of the play, and the Phaedra, where it comes on with Hippoly-
tus. In a strictly functional and structural sense, the Chorus job is to sing
between episodes, and to buy time for costume changes. The genuine,
complete plays generally follow a pattern of five acts in iambic trimeter,
with choral songs in various meters in between. Admittedly, there is no
definitive evidence that the five-act structure was followed by Roman dra-
matists. Horace advocated for it (Ars Poetica 18990), although he may
simply be parroting a Hellenistic tradition going back to Aristotle.69 In
modern editions, Roman comedy is usually divided into acts, although
that seems more a matter of convenience, and it often appears that it
would be more useful to separate the plays of Plautus and Terence into
French scenes.70 Still, from a strictly formal sense, if one accepts Aristo-
tles definition of an act (i.e., ) as the material between choral
songs (Poetica 1452b2021), then Senecan drama adheres to the prac-
tice. On a certain level, the use of these act labels is purely conventional
and a convenience for modern readers. But there may be more to con-
sider. The acts in the Thyestes do seem to represent distinct actions. Act
1 is the prologue, act 2 shows Atreus settling on a course of action, act 3
features the return of Thyestes to Mycenae with his sons, act 4 sees the
Messenger telling about the slaughter, and act 5 portrays the feast and
aftermath. Similarly, in the Oedipus, act 1 is the prologue, act 2 begins the
investigation into the death of Laius, act 3 features Creons description
of the necromancy, act 4 shows more of the investigation, act 5 includes
the Messenger speech, and act 6 (see below) portrays the aftermath. In
these plays, then, act divisions are clearly significant. Further, two plays,
the Troades and the Phoenissae, have changes of setting between the acts.
Thus, it seems that Seneca was conscious of act divisions, taking advan-
tage of them and incorporating them into his dramatic technique.
The main exception to the five-act structure in Senecan tragedy is the
Oedipus, which has an extra choral song at 98097, and so, strictly speak-
ing, should be said to have six acts.71 Somewhat problematic is act 4 of
the Agamemnon. Prior to the arrival of Agamemnon, Cassandra, and the
Chorus interact, with the following line assignments:
Lines 65963: Cassandra

Lines 66494: The Chorus
Most of the episode consists of iambic trimeters; but the Chorus sings
in anapests at 66492, and Cassandra has iambic dimeters at 75974.
This section is traditionally considered part of act 4,72 probably because
the meter is primarily iambic. On the other hand, the passage of lines
67163 of the Troades is usually labeled as the first choral song, in spite
of actually being an exchange between the Chorus and Hecuba.73 This
identification no doubt emerges because the passage consists of ana-
pests. The final slight abnormality is in the opening lines of the Phaedra,
where Hippolytus sings in anapests to the Chorus consisting of his fellow
hunters.74
There are a few other occurrences of another meter within an act.
At Troades 70535, Andromache sings about Astyanax and the previous
destruction of Troy by Hercules, in anapests. Thyestes sings his drunken
song, also in anapests at Thyestes 92069. In the first episode of the Phae
dra (184), Hippolytus sings to his fellow huntsmen, again in anapests.
Later in the same play, Theseus calls upon the gods of the Underworld,
singing in trochees (Phaedra 120112). Medea sings in trochees, lyric
iambs, and anapests when she performs her magic at Medea 740842. In
the Oedipus, Creon first describes Delphi using trochees (Oedipus 223
32), and then quotes the Oracle verbatim, using the traditional dactylic
hexameter (Oedipus 23338). Finally, Cassandra sings in iambic dimeter
at Agamemnon 75981. It seems, then, that when a character uses a meter
other than iambic trimeter, it is most likely to be anapests, unless she or
he is describing magic or an exotic location, in which case trochees are
often used.
The Chorus uses a variety of meters for its songs.75 Anapests are a
particular favorite,76 appearing at least once and usually more in each of
the tragedies. In fact, this meter is used in the first choral passage in six
of the plays: the Hercules, the Troades, the Phaedra,77 the Oedipus, and the
Agamemnon;78 only the Medea and the Thyestes do not feature it. This meter
in Greek is, according to Rosenmeyer, Ostwald, and Halporn, firm and
regular, suitable for the musical setting of marches and processionals.79
It seems, then, that Seneca liked to use anapests for the entrance of his
Choruses. To be sure, some of these songs are not exclusively anapestic.
But the presence of this meter would be natural and appropriate and
would make the audience comfortable. Further, the final song in the
Hercules Furens (10541137), at the end of which the Chorus exits, is also
in anapests; and so this meter again signals movement offstage. And the
first Chorus in the Agamemnon sings in anapests just before its exit (310
87). This is not to imply that all instances of anapests signify a choral
entrance or exit, or that all exit songs must contain anapests. But it is a
technique that Seneca often employs.
The choral passages must have been sung, or at least chanted, and
they would have been accompanied by some kind of movement and
music. Only two plays, the Oedipus and the Agamemnon, include lengthy
passages of canticum polymetrum, although the Medea and the Phaedra
have some fairly exotic combinations. In all of the dramas except for the
Troades and the Thyestes, at least one song has a change of meter. Presum-
ably, this would signal a change in the Chorus dance. Vitruvius tells us
that the Roman Chorus, as opposed to the Greek, stayed on the stage
and did not use the orchestra.80 And in fact, although the Chorus often
remains onstage from its initial entrance until the end of the drama,
there are exceptions and variations.81 Sutton argues strongly that once
the Chorus has entered, it generally stays for the entire play.82 Davis, on
the other hand, accepts that it may sometimes exit between odes. He
uses four criteria to determine when the Chorus is present for an act: if
someone announces its entrance or previous exit; if it participates in the
dialogue; if there is some connection between an act and the ensuing
song; and finally, when the previous criteria are inconclusive, dramatic
appropriateness.83 I take a middle position, and accept Davis first two
criteria. But in their absence, I join Sutton in assuming that the Cho-
rus remains unless there is a good dramatic reason for it to leave. For
example, after the second song, the Chorus of the Hercules Furens seems
to get depressed over the sufferings of Hercules and exits, to reenter
just before its third song when Theseus announces its arrival (82729),
presumably elated because they have encountered Hercules on his way
to kill Lycus.84 On the other hand, there is no good reason for the Cho-
rus to exit following the parodos of the Thyestes, aside from Davis subjec-
tive belief that the second song shows no familiarity with Atreus plans,
formulated in act 2;85 Goffman, on the contrary, notes the convention
of theater: out-of-frame activity can occur, in which any aside or col-
lusion... not meant for oneself is not to be perceived to occur no mat-
ter how broad the act is.86 That is, if the playwright does not want the
onstage Chorus to hear what other onstage characters are saying, it will
not. Admittedly, my judgments can be just as subjective as Davis; but it
seems to me that the burden of proof is on absence: the reader should
assume that the Chorus is present, unless there is persuasive argument
that it is not.
Very often, the Chorus, upon concluding its song, simply retires to
the scaenae frons in order to observe the ensuing action or meditate on
the previous. But sometimes, it will announce the arrival of a character.
This happens at the end of all four choral songs in the Phaedra, as it
remarks upon the entrance of the Nurse at 35859, of Theseus at 824
34,87 of the Messenger at 98990, and of Phaedra at 115455. The Cho-
rus also announces the entrance of Creon at Oedipus 2025, of Eurybates
at Agamemnon 38891, and of Agamemnon himself at Agamemnon 778
81. In all of these instances, regardless of the meter of the song, the
entrance announcement is in trimeter. But when the Chorus remarks on
the arrival of Hecuba at Troades 85860, it continues the use of anapests.
Similarly, the announcement of the Messengers entrance at Oedipus
91114 stays in glyconics, and that of Oedipus at 99597 in anapests.88
Finally, at Hercules Furens 2024, when the Chorus tells of the arrival of
Megara and Amphitryo, the first two lines continue the anapests from
the song, while the last changes to trimeter.
Only occasionally does a character comment upon the Chorus. Cly-
temnestra, at Agamemnon 58688, announces the entrance of a Chorus
of Trojan women. More remarkably, at Hercules Furens 82729, Theseus
states that the Chorus will sing a song in praise of Hercules, and at Oedi-
pus 4012, Tiresias commands the Chorus to fill the time while he per-
forms the necromancy with a hymn in honor of Bacchus. It is uncom-
mon in tragedy, both Greek and Roman, for someone to announce that
while he does something else, a band of people will perform a song. The
only other extant example is in Euripides, Phoenician Women 196 ff. But
it is a fairly frequent element in Greek New Comedy.89
At least once in each play, and usually only once, the Chorus, or
possibly a coryphaeus as in Greek tragedy, speaks in trimeter within an
episode.90 We have already noted that the Chorus is an active partici-
pant with Cassandra in the fourth act of the Agamemnon. In the Hercules
Furens, it prevents Amphitryo from committing suicide just before Her-

cules enters after killing his wife and children (103134). In the Troades,
it asks the newly arrived Talthybius why the departure of the Achaean
fleet has been delayed (16667). It engages in dialogue with the Messen-
ger in the Medea, asking questions about the fire that consumed Creusa
and her father (87990, with the Chorus speaking at 881a, 882b, 884b,
and 887b). Similarly, in the Thyestes, the Chorus frequently interrupts
the Messenger with queries about the slaughter of the sons of Thyestes
(623788; the Chorus speaks at 626b, 633, 638b40, 690b, 716b, 719,
7301, 743b, 745b46a, 747b48). The Chorus speaks twice in act 5 of
the Oedipus, commenting first on the arrival of Jocasta, and then on her
onstage suicide (10049 and 104041). The Phaedra is remarkable for
having the Chorus speak in two different episodes. In act 2, it tells Phae
dra to set aside her grief (4045), and in act 5, it counsels Theseus to
turn away from laments and toward burying Hippolytus (124445). The
Chorus, then, is closely integrated into the structure of Senecan drama
and is clearly an important element in Senecas dramaturgical vision.
It should be clear by now that whoever our playwright might have
been, for whatever purpose he might have composed the tragedies, and
whatever performance modes and venues he might have intended, Sen-
eca had a dramatic vision, an art of drama, which he pursued in his
tragedies. He took advantage of the stage of his time, letting characters
enter and exit from the center doors as well as the side wings. He used
such devices as the machina, the exostra, and a trap door, not to excess,
but when appropriate. Likewise, he did not go overboard in the use of
significant props, but specifically mentioned a few when it contributed
to the play. He also took full advantage of the rule of three actors that he
inherited from his Greek predecessors, not to level the competitive play-
ing field or to keep the size of the theatrical company to a minimum, but
to draw connections between the characters in his plays. His Choruses
were integrally connected with the dramatic structure. In short, as Sut-
ton so admirably showed, the author of these dramas had a style of dra-
maturgy that he followed consistently, while allowing flexibility. We are
now prepared to examine each of the genuine tragedies in some detail,
showing how this dramaturgy plays out, and how keeping an eye attuned
to this dramatic vision can help in the interpretation of what are, after
all, the only complete extant examples of Roman tragedy.
C h a pter 2
Oedipus
Dramatis Personae
Actor Act 1 Act 2 Act 3 Act 4 Act 5 Act 6
Actor A Oedipus Oedipus Oedipus Oedipus Oedipus
Actor B Jocasta Creon Creon Jocasta/Phorbas Jocasta
Actor C Tiresias Old Corinthian Servant
Actor D Manto
Oedipus himself is onstage for almost the entire play, entering at line
1, and leaving the stage only twice before the end. His persona is so
dominant and overwhelming that even when he is not physically present
during act 5, the servants report makes him seem to be there. Oedipus
is the most demanding role of the drama. He is, therefore, the only char-
acter assigned to one actor.
A second actor is required to portray Jocasta, Creon, and the shep-
herd, Phorbas. It is certainly interesting that, in a drama where incest
plays such a prominent role, brother and sister are given to the same
actor. There is some scholarly disagreement concerning Phorbas. Weil,
feeling that Jocastas part was too small, assigns to her some lines in act
4 that the manuscripts give to the Old Corinthian.1 This requires her to
stay onstage longer, and thus necessitates a fourth actor to portray the
shepherd.2 Recent translations have gone even further in padding the
queens part.3 But Seneca is very meticulous in creating the persona of
Jocasta. In her first two appearances, when she is acting as the wife of
Oedipus, her part is kept to a minimum. She is a good Roman matron,
performing her duty and supporting her husband, but doing nothing
32
Oedipus 33
more. She does not hang around longer than necessary, but leaves as
soon as she has delivered her required words, and neither her arrival
nor her departure is marked. Once she is recognized as Oedipus moth-
er, however, her behavior and dramatic treatment change. The Chorus
announces her entrance and exit (i.e., her onstage suicide); she dis-
plays more emotion than in her previous appearances; and instead of
taking her physical leave once she has said her piece, Jocasta kills herself,
remaining in sight of the audience even after Oedipus has left and the
play has ended. But in act 4, she is still his wife. And so, the manuscripts
are correct in having her answer the kings questions, succinctly and fair-
ly directly, and then exiting. Thus, the actor who plays Jocasta and Creon
is available to portray Phorbas. In fact, the shepherd has much in com-
mon with Creon. Both men possess information that is vital if Oedipus
is to solve the mystery of Laius death; but both are reluctant to tell what
they know, ultimately needing to be threatened. Jocasta also tells her
husband things about Laius murder that he needs to know. She seems
to talk willingly, but her responses in act 4 sometimes rival the Delphic
oracle for brevity and obscurity. It is, then, quite appropriate that these
three characters all be played by the same actor.
The third actor has Tiresias the Seer, the Old Corinthian, and the
Messenger. Like the characters played by the second actor, these roles
also bring important information. But they all come voluntarily. Creon
states that Tiresias enters in his own time, driven by Apollo (in tempore
ipso sorte Phoebea excitus, 288). Neither the Corinthian nor the Messenger
says why they have come, but clearly no one has sent for them. On the
contrary, Creon was sent to Delphi and ordered to observe the necro-
mancy, and Phorbas was summoned. The third actor, then, gets the char-
acters who appear on their own accord.
One more role remains. When the blind seer, Tiresias, enters in act
2, he is led by his daughter, Manto, who not only guides her father, but
also describes the details of the extispicium to both him and the audi-
ence. The text indicates that Oedipus is there, because he speaks both
before and after the rite. And even though Creon is not heard from after
the mantic pair enter, his presence is strongly suggested. Creon himself
announces the entrance of the seers. Only two lines are spoken between
his final words and Tiresias first, making a switch problematic. Further,
Creon would undoubtedly exit into the center doors, while Tiresias and
Manto enter from the wing. It is virtually impossible for the actor to leave
the stage, change costumes and masks, and run to the proper entrance
in two lines. Finally, at the end of the extispicium, Oedipus addresses him
directly, using the second-person pronoun (te, Creo, 399), indicating that
Creon is still present, and so confirms that this episode requires a fourth
speaking actor to portray Manto.4
In a somewhat unusual move for Seneca, the Chorus clearly identifies
itself as consisting of Theban citizens (e.g., Cadmi generosa proles, 110, and
stirpis invictae genus, 124). Further, they are worshippers of Bacchus, as
lines 11323 and the second choral song make clear, as well as intensely
loyal to Oedipus.5
The Set: Thebes
Dramaturgical Issues
Act 1 (1109)
Action units: (1) Oedipus, in monologue, talks about the curse

that drove him from Corinth and about the plague that is ravaging
Thebes; he refers to kingship as a dubious good and is on the verge
of running away. (2) Jocasta chastises Oedipus and snaps him out of
his depression, saying he must face his responsibilities. (3) Oedipus,
again in monologue, agrees, citing his previous accomplishment in
solving the riddle of the Sphinx.
Oedipus enters at line 1 from the center doors representing the pal-
ace at Thebes. His first words establish that it is dawn. He identifies him-
self at line 12 by referring to his supposed father, Polybus, the king of
Oedipus 35
Corinth (parentis Polybi).6 Sutton has him come on alone, with Jocasta
entering as she speaks her first words at line 81.7 This is possible. But
since she directly responds to her husbands speech, it is more likely that
she enters with Oedipus at the start of the play, and stands silently until
she cannot bear it any longer. The less satisfying alternative, which must
be accepted if Suttons reading is followed, is that she has heard this kind
of thing from him before, and so is able to respond to what she knows
he must have just said, even if she does not know the exact words he has
used. At line 14, Oedipus raises his hands and looks up while praying to
the sky and the gods (caelum deosque testor). This behavior continues at
line 71, when he prostrates himself before an onstage altar and stretches
forth his hands in supplication (adfusus aris supplices tendo manus).8
At lines 8081, Oedipus ironically suggests that he might flee to his
parents for comfort (profuge... ad parentes). As if on cue, Jocasta inter-
rupts midline.9 She identifies herself by addressing Oedipus as her hus-
band (coniunx, 81).10 Her speech lasts only through line 86, with Oedi-
pus resuming at 87. Sutton has her remain onstage until the end of the
act.11 There is, however, a textual concern. Manuscript branch A gives
lines 1035 to Jocasta, while E retains Oedipus as the speaker.12 Either
Oedipus talks to himself, hence Fitchs stage direction,13 or else Jocasta
further and unnecessarily cheers him on. As previously discussed, Sen-
eca portrays Jocasta throughout this drama as a good Roman matron,
whose job is to support her husband, but not to needlessly interfere.14
Having her speak here would be an unwanted intrusion. If Jocasta does
remain silent for the rest of this episode, her physical presence accom-
plishes nothing, and so it is sensible that she exit after line 86, through
the center doors, having fulfilled her function of strengthening her hus-
bands courage.
After Oedipus final words at line 109, he falls silent and withdraws
to the scaenae frons. Sutton cautiously suggests that he may exit and reen-
ter at line 201.15 As previously noted, however, Oedipus presence domi-
nates the drama, and so it is important that he remain onstage through-
out, except for specific times when he says that he goes into the palace.
First Choral Song (110201)
The Chorus enters at line 110, discussing in some detail the effects of
the plague. The song begins in minor sapphics and changes to anapests
at line 154. Presumably this reflects a change in the choral dancing. It

is possible that the individual members mime what they sing about, but
this would be awkward and inelegant. Sutton suggests that the Chorus
refers to itself at line 197, and so lies prostrate before the altar (prostrata
iacet turba per aras).16 Instead, I take the turba as the unseen multitude of
Thebans who are praying for some deliverance from the plague, and so
again we should not imagine the Chorus as acting out its song.
Act 2 (202402)
Action units: (1) Creon returns from Delphi, where he had previ-
ously been sent by Oedipus. (2) Oedipus forces Creon to publicly
announce what happened. (3) Creon makes his report, (4) which
causes Oedipus to curse Laius killer and to begin an investigation
into the regicide. (5) Tiresias and his daughter, Manto, perform an
extispicium,17 but the results are inconclusive, leading the seer to go
elsewhere in search of answers.
At lines 2025, the Chorus sees someone approaching and switch-

es to iambic trimeter to announce his entrance. Once it concludes, it
repairs to the scaenae frons.18 The newcomer enters from the wing lead-
ing out of town, and moves quickly toward the palace (quisnam ille pro-
pero regiam gressu petit, 202). He turns out to be the kings brother-in-law,
Creon (adest... Creo, 203 and again at 205).
As Creon reaches center stage (line 206), Oedipus steps forward to
address him. The king quakes with fear (horrore quatior, 206) and his chest
falls with twin emotions (trepidumque gemino pectus affectu labat, 207). The
obvious meaning of this line is that he is both glad for Creons arrival
and fearful of his news; but it also seems to be a reference to labored
breathing or hyperventilating. Oedipus then commands the reluctant
Creon to speak (voce properata edoce, 211), and so dialogue between the
king and his brother-in-law ensues beginning with line 212 and ending
at 216, after Oedipus has broken in midline, indicating an impatient
demand.
Although a pause is not indicated by his words,19 it is sensible to
think that Creon would take a deep breath before giving a summary of
Apollos pronouncement at lines 21720. Following more questioning
by Oedipus (22122), Creon describes what happened at Delphi using
trochees (22332). Just as elsewhere,20 Seneca uses this meter here for
Oedipus 37
vivid description of mysterious events. Finally, Creon quotes the Delphic

oracle directly (23338), using dactylic hexameters, the meter that the
Pythia would have used, and thus trying to distance himself from the bad
news he delivers.
After another unmarked pause to indicate shock, Oedipus speaks
(239). Following more dialogue (24447), Oedipus prays to the gods,
with appropriate hand gestures (24873). Finally, the king ends his
prayers and addresses Creon (27475), who uses the standard iambic
trimeter to describe the place where Laius met his end (27687). At
lines 28890, Creon announces the entrance of Tiresias (Tiresia, 289)
and his daughter, Manto (comesque Manto, 290; Tiresias later confirms
this identification: tu... gnata, 301), portrayed by actors C and D, along
with the mute attendants who will assist them with the impending rites.
The seers blindness is referred to several times (e.g., luce viduatum, 290;
visu carenti, 295; and lucis inopem, 301). He has not been summoned
as he was in Sophocles Oedipus Tyrannus, but has been motivated by
Apollo (sorte Phoebea excitus, 288). He trembles while making haste slowly
(tremulo tardus accelerat genu, 289), and is led by Manto (luce viduatum
trahens, 290). Oedipus commands that Tiresias reveal the will of the gods
(29192). In the ensuing lines, the seer and his daughter conduct an
extispicium, or ritual sacrifice and examination of the entrails.
There has been much scholarly controversy surrounding the staging
of this episode. Zwierlein finds the whole thing completely unacceptable
dramatically,21 a view taken up most recently by Fitch, who asks how a
cow and a bull could be brought onstage and sacrificed.22 Sutton sug-
gests that drugged calves could be the solution; he goes on to raise the
possibility of mute actors standing in front of the animals, blocking them
from the audiences direct sight.23 Rosenmeyer posits that the sacrifice
takes place offstage, and that Manto stands at the wing and describes
what is happening out of sight.24 Ahl makes the brilliant suggestion
that the heads of a bull and heifer are brought in by attendants, who
would then move around to emulate the bovine actions.25 I think it pos-
sible that, instead of animals, Seneca could have envisioned dancers to
represent them. I argue elsewhere that the theatrical performance of
Vergils Sixth Eclogue would include two dancers portraying the myth of
Pasipha and the bull.26 And Suetonius tells of a pantomime depiction
of the same story in 58 CE.27 Seneca might have had a similar technique
in mind for the Oedipus, employing dancers to impersonate cattle. Dur-
ing a production of the Ted Hughes translation of this play, performed
at Grand Valley State University on April 14, 2007, no attempt was made
to represent the animals. The actions of the humans during the extispi-
cium were completely mimed; and yet the skill of the actors was such
that it seemed to the audience as if the cow and bull were before our
eyes. Fitch maintains that any attempt to portray live animals who are
then killed and whose intestines are examined would be unrealistic and
unacceptable to a Roman audience.28 And even though he cites Walkers
important review of Zwierlein, Fitch ignores Walkers wisdom: how can
one object that Senecan drama does not fit the accepted convention
of first-century Rome, when the only evidence we have for these conven-
tions is these plays?29 As discussed in the first chapter, this is not a theater
of illusion. Thus, if Manto says that a bull and a cow have been brought
onstage, the Roman audience would take her word. Likewise, the actor
does not actually slaughter a pair of bovines and examine their entrails;
but the audience would accept that the extispicium is taking place. Simi-
larly, if Tiresias daughter states that the incense produces multicolored
flames, and that the smoke circles around the head of Oedipus, the audi-
ence would believe her; we do not need to try to figure out how such an
effect could have been created on the Roman stage. This is not in any
way to belittle or disregard the contributions of scholars such as Sutton,
who tries to rationalize that sulfur thrown onto the sacrificial fire would
cause the flame to leap up.30 Such technology might have been possible;
but the effect need not be overly elaborate. Any physical suggestion of
leaping flame, coupled with Mantos words would be enough for the
audience of the time.
Regardless, at line 293, Tiresias speaks and steps forward with Manto
to the altar that Oedipus mentioned at line 71. Creon and Oedipus move
to the side, far enough to get out of the way, but close enough for it to
be believable that the smoke from the altar could waft around the kings
head. The ceremony begins as Tiresias commands mute attendants to
bring a bull and a cow to the altar (appellite aris bovem, 299). Even though
he only mentions one singular bovem, he uses two distinct adjectives to
modify the noun: first the masculine candidum and then the feminine
depressam, indicating he desires two animals, one of either gender. Tire-
sias then commands that Manto relate to him the details of the sacrifice
(signa refer, 302). This is, of course, a narrative necessity, since Tiresias is
blind, and so cannot see what is happening. But it also serves the impor-
tant dramaturgical function of letting the audience know what it should
be seeing. In the ensuing scene, Manto and the mute attendants carry
out the actions as Tiresias commands them; or rather, the actors mime
Oedipus 39
the actions, as it is unlikely that an actual sacrifice occurred during the

play. Still, since the described events are ostensibly taking place onstage,
we should consider them.
After being informed that the sacrificial animals are before the altar
(victima ante aras stetit, 303), Tiresias commands Manto to call upon the
gods ceremonially (superos voce sollemni voca, 304). She does not, in fact,
pray verbally, and so must utter some sort of wordless chant. Following
her fathers command to heap incense upon the altar (arasque dono turis
extrue, 305), Manto confirms that she has done as he instructed (iam tura
ingessi, 306). As a result, the flame that consumed the incense leaps up
and then suddenly dies (subito refulsit lumine et subito occidit, 308). Fur-
thermore, the flame, rather than having just one appearance, instead
consists of many colors (non una facies flammae fuit, 314). The multicol-
ored flame then flickers (caerulea fulvis mixta oberravit notis, sanguinea
rursus, 31920), and finally sputters into the shadows (ultima in tenebras
abit, 320). Now the flame divides itself into two parts (ignis in partes duas
discedit, 32122), just as the ashes separate themselves into two piles (se
scindit unius sacri discors favilla, 32223), and the sacrificial wine changes
into blood (libata Bacchi dona permutat cruor, 324). Finally, a thick cloud
of smoke surrounds the head of Oedipus (ambitque densus regium fumus
caput, 325).
Tiresias is dumbfounded (inter tumultus mentis attonitae vagus, 329),
but recovers somewhat from his confusion, at least enough to move on
from the burning of incense to the sacrifice of the cattle. He commands
that Manto bring the victims to the altar (huc admove, 334) and sprinkle
salt onto their necks (et sparge salsa colla taurorum mola, 335). As if in
response, the bull, facing east (primos ad ortus positus, 338), first raises his
head high (altum taurus attolens caput, 337) and then shies away from the
light of the sun (expavit diem, 338). He suffers two blows from the sacrifi-
cial knife (at taurus duos perpessus ictus, 34243), but yet wanders to and
fro before the altar (huc et huc dubius ruit, 343); the bull finally dies, tired
and reluctant (animamque fessus vix reluctantem exprimit, 344). Meanwhile,
the heifer impales herself (iuvenca ferro semet opposito induit, 341), and
dies from that single wound (et vulnere uno cecidit, 342).31 Further, blood
gushes forth from the heifer, but only seeps and oozes out of the bull,
while flowing into his eyes and mouth (34750).
Tiresias is terrified by what he has just heard (infausta magnos sacra ter-
rores cient, 351), but nevertheless orders Manto to go on with the exami-
nation of the entrails (ede certas viscerum nobis notas, 352). The following
description of the extispicium is quite accurate, both in terminology and

in picking out the features that were looked for.32 But it is also hard to tell
which animal is being examined at any given point in the proceedings,
except, of course, when Manto speaks of the unborn fetus not being in
the womb of the cow. Obviously, the following descriptions of what is
going on within the bodies of the dead animals are not being portrayed,
if only for practical reasons: nobody in the audience, possibly beyond
the first few rows, would be able to see. But Mantos account is so vivid as
to create the illusion for listeners that the condition and activities of the
entrails are taking place before their eyes. The actor portraying Manto
continues to behave as if there were real carcasses, and pretends to con-
duct the investigation. The intestines vibrate forcefully (non levi motu agi-
tata trepidant exta, 35354), strong enough to jostle Mantos hands (sed
totas manus quatiunt, 35455). Blood continues to pump through the
veins (novusque prosilit venis cruor, 355) and the diseased heart droops
and hides (cor marcet aegrum penitus ac mersum latet, 356). The veins are
black and blue (liventque venae, 357) and large chunks of the intestines
are missing (magna pars fibris abest, 357). The liver, which is spewing forth
bile (et felle nigro tabidum spumat iecur, 358), has two masses, or heads (en!
capita paribus bina consurgunt toris, 360), each one covered by a thin mem-
brane (sed utrumque caesum tenuis abscondit caput membrana, 36162). The
unfavorable side of the liver has seven veins (hostile latus septem venas
tendit, 36364).33 The right lung is bloody and not able to draw breath
(non animae capax pulmo sanguineus, 36768), presumably because it is so
full of blood that it would not be able to take in air.34 There is no room
for the heart on the left side of the chest cavity where it belongs (non
laeva cordi regio, 369). The intestines are not entwining around them-
selves and providing concealing folds (non molli ambitu omenta pingues vis-
ceri obtendunt sinus, 36970). Surprisingly, since the heifer had not been
mated prior to slaughter, there is a fetus inside the cow (conceptus innup-
tae bovis, 373), but the unborn calf is not in the womb, where it should
be (nec more solito positus, 374). The carcass of the cow now produces a
noise (membra cum genitu movet, 375). This and the roaring of the altar
fire below (immugit aris ignis, 383) could be cues for sound effects. But
given the intimate nature of the noises, it is equally possible that simply
stating that they occurred would be enough for the audience to accept
them. The limbs quiver (artus micant, 376), and bloody gore corrupts the
discolored intestines (infecit atras lividus fibras cruor, 377). Finally, both
carcasses try to get up and walk (temptantque turpes mobilem trunci gradum,
Oedipus 41
378), and in fact, the bull attempts to gore the silent priests (sacros petit
cornu ministros, 37980).35 As a result of attempting to rise, the entrails
slip out of Mantos hands (viscera effugiunt manum, 380). The fire on the
altars roars and the altars themselves tremble (et trepidant foci, 383).
After ninety lines of exchange between Tiresias and Manto, Oedi-
pus speaks (38486), commanding that Tiresias reveal the secrets of the
gods. The seer replies that he needs to perform a necromancy (39097),
and orders the Chorus to sing while he does so (4012). After line 402,
Tiresias, Manto, and Creon exit through the wing leading out of town,
while Oedipus retreats to the scaenae frons.36
Second Choral Song (403508)
The Chorus steps forward at line 403 to follow Tiresias orders and per-
form a hymn in honor of Bacchus. The song employs a great variety of
meters, including several sections each of dactylic hexameter and cantica
polymetra, minor sapphics, anapests, and dactylic tetrameter. It is hard to
tell what these changes of meter add to the meaning of the song; but it
must surely reflect changes in the dance of the Chorus. The song con-
tains very vivid descriptions of Bacchus and his various adventures. It is
possible that some Chorus members act out the stories, but this does not
seem likely. On the other hand, they do behave in a way proper for devo-
tees of the wine god, binding their loose hair with ivy clusters (effusam
redimite comam nutante corymbo, 403), bearing thyrsi in their arms (armati
bracchia thyrsis, 404),37 and praying with arms outstretched and raised
(palmis supplicibus, 408a). After having declared its intention to praise
Bacchus forever, the Chorus concludes its song at line 508 and retreats
to the scaenae frons.
Act 3 (509708)
Action units: (1) Oedipus addresses the recently returned Creon.

(2) He reports the results of the necromancy: the dead king accused
Oedipus, (3) who responds that it must be some kind of plot and has
Creon imprisoned.
Creon must enter via the wing leading out of town while the choral
ode ends, since Oedipus steps forward and speaks to him at line 509.
Creon looks sad (vultus flebiles praefert notas, 509). Twenty lines of rapid-
fire dialogue between Oedipus and Creon occur, with the two of them
often mirroring each others vocabulary.
Creon pauses before he begins to speak, giving him time to collect his
thoughts and decide exactly how he wants to deliver his lengthy account
of the necromancy (530658). The narration is vividly descriptive,38 but
none of the events he relates should thought to be physically portrayed
onstage.
After Creon completes his account, Oedipus pauses before he speaks,
once more shaking with fear (et ossa et artus gelidus invasit tremor, 659).
Creon and Oedipus engage in another passage of dialogue with much
repetition of vocabulary, and several midline speaker changes (678
708). At last, Oedipus orders his silent attendants to imprison Creon
(servate sontem saxeo inclusum specu, 707). They drag him off via the wing
leading out of town, since it is doubtful that a rocky cave exists within
the city.39 This is Creons final appearance in this play; as for Oedipus,
for the first time since his initial entrance in act 1, he leaves the stage,
exiting through the center doors into the palace (ipse ad penates regios
referam gradum, 708).
Third Choral Song (70963)
While Oedipus searches for Jocasta, the Chorus steps forward to sing a
canticum polymetrum, starting at line 709. It addresses Oedipus directly
(tu, 709), which is noteworthy because the king has just left the stage.
The Chorus did not speak to him when he was there; so why do so when
he is absent? The Chorus has done this before, addressing Bacchus in
both the first and second songs, although the god was not actually there.
This technique helps to keep Oedipus in the mind of the audience dur-
ing his absence. Even though he is offstage, Oedipus is never far from
the spotlight. At the conclusion of its song (763), the Chorus goes back
to the scaenae frons.
Act 4 (764881)
Action units: (1) Oedipus asks a few questions, which Jocasta hesitant-
ly answers. (2) She is replaced on stage by an Old Man from Corinth
Oedipus 43
who tells Oedipus that King Polybus not only is dead, but also is not
really his father. Oedipus, while still a baby, had been given to the Old
Man by a Theban shepherd named Phorbas, who is coincidentally
the same shepherd who was previously summoned. (3) With much
reluctance, Phorbas reveals that Oedipus is really the son of Laius and
Jocasta. (4) Oedipus does not take the news well.
At line 764, Oedipus and Jocasta enter through the center doors.
The king speaks. He addresses Jocasta (unanima coniunx, 773), with no
indication that she is only now coming onstage, thus confirming that
she entered with him at line 764.40 The queen answers (776), and dia-
logue ensues. At line 783, Jocasta speaks her final words in this episode,
although there is a bit of controversy about this. Lines 82527, 82932,
83536, and 84344 are assigned in the manuscripts to the Old Corin-
thian. Weil, however, gives them to Jocasta,41 an emendation that many
scholars adopt,42 but not all.43 The reasoning for reassigning is, first, that
the Old Corinthian would not use the type of frank and straightforward
language that these lines contain; however, the servant states early on
that he is accustomed to keeping confidence with kings (praestare tactitam
regibus soleo fidem, 799). So it is in keeping with his character for the Old
Corinthian to speak in this way to the king of Thebes. The second argu-
ment is that Jocasta does not have a big enough role in this play, and so
lines must be added in order to give her the kind of part that modern
scholars who have read Sophocles think she deserves.44 Senecas Jocasta,
however, as we have seen before, is the model of a Roman matron, who
does what she can to support her husband, but otherwise stays in the
shadows. Thus, it is understandable that she exit after her final words at
line 783, after telling Oedipus about Laius death, but before revealing
a truth that she must by this point suspect. So neither of Weils reasons
for reassigning lines hold. And a third argument against him is that this
would lead to an unnecessary violation of the rule of three actors, since
an actor will shortly be needed to portray the shepherd, Phorbas. There-
fore, I follow the reading of the manuscripts and have Jocasta exit after
783, with the Old Corinthian speaking the contested lines.
As Jocasta (actor B) exits following line 783,45 the Old Corinthian
(actor C) enters via the wing leading out of town at line 784 and speaks.
Dialogue with Oedipus follows, during which the king calls upon the
gods (testor, 790) with the proper accompanying gestures. In fact, he
hopes his hands are pure and may acceptably be raised to the heavens
(licet tollere ad caelum puras manus, 79091). Later, the Old Corinthian
gestures with his own hands (hae manus, 806). Finally, Oedipus orders
his mute attendants to go and fetch Phorbas, the old shepherd (ite, pro-
pere accersite, famuli, 82324). These servants may be the same ones who
dragged Creon to the cave (707), who then must have returned at some
point via the wing leading out of town; but those men probably stayed to
guard the cave. It is more likely that these are new servants who entered
with Oedipus and Jocasta from the center doors at line 764. They carry
out the kings present orders by going out the wing leading to the forum,
where they will find the shepherd, whose flock, according to Oedipus,
is being driven to the temples and altars (ad sacra et aras compulsum pecus
duces sequuntur, 82223).
An old man (actor B), later called by name (Phorbas, 840), enters
from the wing leading to the forum (ecce grandaevus senex! 838), where
Oedipus had previously said the flocks were being driven (82223). He
is accompanied by the servants who had been sent to fetch him. Before
he speaks (845), there are two lines whose speaker is in doubt. Zwierlein
follows Gronovius in giving lines 84344 to Oedipus, instead of the Old
Corinthian, as is found in the manuscripts.46 This, however, seems to
me an arbitrary attribution. The servant, who is used to giving advice
to kings (799), is just as likely as the king himself to begin the question-
ing. And he will continue to take part in the interrogation, speaking
again at line 847 and 855. So I stick with the manuscript reading.47 Once
Phorbas begins to talk at line 845, three-way dialogue between Phorbas,
Oedipus, and the Old Corinthian takes up the following lines until 867.
The shepherd pauses before breaking in midline at 847; in fact, his first
word is dubitat, confirming that he hesitates before speaking. Phorbas
continues to hesitate (dubitas? 849) and blushes (cur genas mutat color?
849). Oedipus points to the Old Corinthian (huic, 848), as does Phorbas
(isti, 853). Oedipus himself interrupts in the middle of line 864 with an
impatient demand, which the shepherd answers (coniuge est genitus tua,
867), again following a midline pause. After these words at 867, neither
Phorbas nor the Old Corinthian speaks again. It is possible that they exit
at this point. I think, however, that this would be distracting. Nothing
should take focus away from Oedipus as the bitter truth hits him that he
has, in fact, married his mother and killed his father. Indeed, it would
help him keep the attention of the audience if there were two extra sets
of eyes watching him.48
The king takes center stage, and the two servants retreat to the side,
cowering and watching in horror, as Oedipus begins a monologue (868).
He addresses an unidentified group of citizens (congerite, cives, 871). It
Oedipus 45
could be the Chorus, or perhaps some mute citizens who have been look-
ing on. It is hard to tell, since nobody obeys Oedipus commands to
come together and hurl rocks at his head (saxa in infandum caput mactate
telis, 87172). Finally, he announces his second exit from the stage (i,
perge, propero regiam gressu pete, 880), leaving quickly through the center
doors leading to the palace following line 881. His destination will be
confirmed by the royal Servant in the next act (regiam petens, 917), along
with his pace (propero gradu, 918). Phorbas and the Old Corinthian, still
in shock, also exit here via the wing leading to the forum. Clearly they
would not go into the palace with Oedipus; and it makes more sense for
them to go into town in search of people than to go out into the coun-
tryside.
Fourth Choral Song (882914)
The Chorus, alone on the stage, steps forward to sing in glyconics at line
882. It hears something (sed quid hoc? 911), indicating a sound cue: it is
the center doors, creaking while opening (postes sonant, 911). A Servant
from the palace (actor C) enters via the center doors, sad and beating
his head with his hand (maestus et famulus manu regius quassat caput, 912
13). The Chorus, still using glyconics, addresses him (ede quid portes novi,
914). It will take an active role from now until Jocastas death, and so
stays downstage, not returning to the scaenae frons.
Act 5 (91579)
Action unit: (1) A Messenger (Servant) from the palace tells the Cho-
rus about Oedipus self-blinding.
The Servant responds to the Chorus question, reverting back to trim-

eter at line 915. His account of Oedipus blinding is extremely vivid;49
but we should not imagine that it is being silently acted out onstage as
the Servant speaks. The previously mentioned performance of this play
at Grand Valley State University did, in fact, feature the miming of the
blinding. And while it was quite effective for a modern audience, ancient
spectators would have found it gratuitous. Once the Servant finishes his
report at line 979, he falls silent and exits. It is uncertain whether he
would go through the center doors back into the palace, or whether,
being so upset by the events he has just recounted, he goes off through
the wing leading to the forum. Since it is unclear why he entered in the
first place,50 either is a possibility.
Fifth Choral Song (98097)
The stunned Chorus sings one final song, this time in anapests, begin-
ning at line 980. It is already downstage, and so does not have to move.
At the conclusion, there is a sound cue as the center doors once again
make a noise while opening (sonuere fores, 995). Oedipus himself enters
alone (ipse suum duce non ullo molitur iter, 99596). This stage direction
does not simply inform the audience that he is accompanied neither by
Jocasta, his usual mute attendants, nor even one or both of his daugh-
ters; it is also a note about characterization: the king is horribly and irrev
ocably alone, providing contrast to the blind Tiresias, who was led by
Manto. Like Tiresias, however, Oedipus is now blind (luminis orbus, 997,
and vacuosque vultus, 1012). The actor may wear a different mask that
indicates his new ocular status, and may support himself with a staff.
Act 6 (9981061)
Action units: (1) Oedipus laments. (2) Jocasta confronts him, (3) and
then kills herself onstage. (4) Oedipus exiles himself.
Most scholars who make act divisions label line 911 to the end as act
5.51 If, however, we accept Aristotles definition of an act (i.e., )
as the material between choral songs (Poetica 1452b2021), then act 5
must end with the ode at lines 98094, and lines 9951061 must be
regarded as a sixth act.
Oedipus begins to speak at line 998, in trimeter as would be expected.
The Chorus again stays where it is. At lines 10049 the Chorus speaks, in
trimeter, within an act for the first time in this play.
Jocasta enters through the center doors from the palace, quickly and
frenzied, indeed leaping out (en ecce! rapido saeva prosiluit gradu Jocasta
vaecors, 10045). In fact, she is compared to Agave, the raving maenad
who killed her own child, Pentheus (10057).52
Jocasta hesitates to speak to the troubled Oedipus (dubitat afflictum
alloqui, 1007), both wanting to address him, and yet being afraid to
Oedipus 47
(cupit pavetque, 1008). When at last she does say something, she breaks
in midline, indicating delay, and addressing Oedipus directly, using the
second-person pronoun (quid te vocem? 1009). The king, however, turns
his head away from Jocasta in shame (quo avertis caput, 1011), eventually
showing his own desire for delay by interrupting in the middle of line
1012. Oedipus extends his hands in prayer in the direction of Jocasta
(precor, 1021).
At last, Jocasta can bear no more and begs for Oedipus sword (rapia-
tur ensis, 1034), pointing to it (hoc ferro, 1034). She points to where she
wants her right hand to pierce her belly (hunc, dextra, hunc pete uterum,
103839), before fatally wounding herself. The Chorus, speaking for a
second and final time within an act, describes Jocastas death, as she falls
to the ground, having stabbed herself (iacet perempta, 1040). She bleeds
so much53 that the sword pops out of her wound (ferrumque secum nimius
eiecit cruor, 1041). This is another instance where the original audience
would believe an action to have happened without realistic effects; how-
ever, in the Grand Valley State University production of this play, a spate
of stage blood accompanied the prop sword clattering to the stage. I
found the effect a little silly and over the top. But a number of my fellow
audience members gasped in horror, showing its potential effectiveness.
After this, the Chorus falls silent and withdraws to the scaenae frons.
For the rest of the play, Oedipus shares center stage with Jocastas
corpse. He speaks at line 1042, undoubtedly pausing first. Oedipus trem-
bles (pavitante gressu, 1047, and tremente dextera, 1049) as he prepares to
depart (ingredere, i, profuge, vade, 105051), not only from the stage, but
also from Thebes itself. Nevertheless, he warns himself to proceed care-
fully so that he does not trip over Jocastas corpse (siste, ne in matrem inci-
das, 1051). This has struck some as poor taste, and yet, describes exactly
what happened when Oedipus first came to Thebes: he was not paying
attention, and so fell upon his mothers body.54 Oedipus finally exits
after line 1061, going through the wing that leads out of town, leaving
behind a dead Jocasta and a silent Chorus.
Conclusions
Senecas play clearly owes much to Sophocles drama (ca. 430 BCE).
The basic structure is the same, and such details as the plague and the
indictment and imprisonment of Creon remain. Seneca has added the
vivid description of Delphi, as well as the extispicium and necromancy,
and has given Tiresias a speaking companion. There were a number of

other Greek versions of the story;55 but the only known Roman dramatic
rendition is one that Gaius Julius Caesar composed as a youth.56
Stage business in this play is extremely helpful for interpreting the
characters. The fact that Oedipus is onstage for most of the play serves
to underscore his importance to the plot.57 And even when he is not
present, the audience is reminded of him, by the address of the Cho-
rus at line 709 and by the Servants account of his self-blinding at lines
91579. Clearly, Oedipus is the central figure of the drama, not only
standing apart from the others in importance, but also literally remain-
ing isolated. The other characters help to reinforce Oedipus status as a
loner. Jocasta makes only brief appearances in acts 1 and 4, saying what
she needs to in order to help her husband, and then exits. Her role is
so auxiliary and dependent on Oedipus that her entrances and exits are
not marked. The pattern changes in act 6, when the Chorus announces
her entrance; she has a longer exchange with Oedipus, and then does
not leave physically, but kills herself onstage. This change is appropriate,
since her status has changed; she is no longer Oedipus wife, but now his
mother, and thus it is not unexpected that she behaves differently.
Tiresias and Manto together also serve to emphasize Oedipus isola-
tion. The king and the blind seer have much in common.58 But Tiresias
is accompanied by his daughter, whereas Oedipus is tragically alone. So
important is this comparison that Seneca apparently violates the rule
of three actors in order to bring on Manto with Tiresias, while keeping
Oedipus and Creon present as well. We also see this contrasting pair-
ing again in act 4, when the Old Corinthian and Phorbas the shepherd
cower together in silence while the lone Oedipus bemoans his fate; pre-
sumably, the two comfort each other, while the king has no one to turn
to for support. The closest Oedipus comes to a partner is Creon, who is
onstage longer than anyone besides his brother-in-law, and with whom
he engages in verbal play, intertwining vocabulary and syntax. But the
king is constantly sending him away: to Delphi before the play begins, to
the necromancy with Tiresias and Manto, and finally to a cave.
The play is also filled with abnormalities. Sutton notes, with apparent
surprise, that [w]ith one exception, characters are clearly identified in
the text with their first appearance.59 The one exception is the Old
Corinthian, and it soon becomes clear who he must be. Even the Chorus
is identified, to a degree unusual for Senecan tragedy, and it takes on
the role of frequently announcing entrances. Further, most exits are also
announced. All this must contribute to the theme of puzzle-solving. The
Oedipus 49
play itself is largely about Oedipus figuring out who killed Laius. Many
of the clues are obvious, to one who knows what to look for, but Oedi-
pus seems to refuse to recognize the uncomfortable truths. Similarly, the
obvious informationthe identity of the characters, when most of them
enter and exitis clearly stated. But the movements of Jocasta the wife,
and the exits of those characters who delivered unpleasant newsthe
Old Corinthian, Phorbas, the Servantare unremarked upon, as if by
not mentioning them their information can be ignored.
Further unusual dramaturgical elements include a sixth act, the abun-
dance of sound cues, the onstage altar, the fact that the Chorus speaks
within the final act, as well as its second song that serves to kill time while
the necromancy is performed. Separately, none of these things are out
of the realm of possibility for a Roman tragedy, in the same way that any
one or two of the details Manto reports during the extispicium would be
dire. But together they build to tell the audience, if not the characters,
that all in Thebes is not what it seems.
C h a pter 3
Agamemnon
Dramatis Personae
Actor Act 1 Act 2 Act 3 Act 4 Act 5
Actor A Ghost of Aegisthus Eurybates Agamemnon Strophius/
Thyestes Aegisthus
Actor B Clytemnestra Clytemnestra Clytemnestra
Actor C Nurse Cassandra Cassandra
Actor D Electra
One actor is assigned only the role of Clytemnestra, who appears in acts
2, 3, and 5, and speaks with all the other characters except the Ghost of
Thyestes and Agamemnon. Elsewhere, I argue that the festa coniunx who,
according to the Chorus, accompanies Agamemnon in the fourth act
(78081) is not Clytemnestra, but Cassandra.1 Briefly, it is both unprec-
edented and also makes little sense for Clytemnestra to enter from the
palace, go to Agamemnon as he enters via the wing leading to the har-
bor, walk back to center stage with him, and then exit back into the
center doors, all without saying a word. On the other hand, Cassandra
is already onstage and will remain after Agamemnon leaves. She more
closely fits the description festa in the sense of engaging in sacred rites,
since she is wearing fillets, has been called the priestess of Apollo, and in
fact was just possessed by the god. And in the eyes of the Trojan captives
who speak the words, Cassandra is Agamemnons mate. Thus, Clytem-
nestra does not appear in act 4, although the actor would be available.
A second actor is assigned the Nurse, who almost succeeds in dis-
suading Clytemnestra from killing her husband, and Cassandra, who has
50
Agamemnon 51
apparently been sleeping with Agamemnon. Thus, this second actor gets
female roles that are particularly attached to the king: one who tries to
save his life, and the other who is physically bonded to him.
A third actor gets all the male roles: the Ghost of Thyestes, Aegisthus,
the herald Eurybates, Agamemnon, and Strophius.2 This gender special-
ization, both in this play and in the Phaedra, helps to create an interest-
ing dynamic. But equally intriguing is the fact that all of the male roles,
aside from Eurybates, are related: Thyestes is the father of Aegisthus and
uncle of Agamemnon, while Strophius is married to Anaxibia, the sister
of Agamemnon.3 And it would not be too much of a stretch to consider
Eurybates, Agamemnons herald, as a member of his household and
symbolically part of his family.
One character remains unaccounted for. At the end of the play, Cas-
sandra, Electra, Clytemnestra, and Aegisthus are all onstage and talking.
A fourth actor, then, is required for Electra,4 just as one is needed for
Manto in the second act of the Oedipus. In addition, two mute actors are
necessary to portray the silent Orestes and Pylades in act 5.
The parodos gives no indication of the identity of the Chorus, but the
parallel of Aeschylus Agamemnon would suggest elders of Mycenae.5 The
second song, however, seems to contain clues. Tarrant states that [t]he
second choral song, unlike the first, is linked to a specific persona, a cho-
rus of Argive maidens.6 This assertion is founded upon lines 31014,
where unmarried Inachian girls (innuba stirps Inachia, 314) are said to
perform various actions in honor of Phoebus. Thus, the Chorus would
don crowns (caput coronat, 311), shake laurel branches (laurum quatiens,
312), and let down its maidenly locks (virgineas comas fudit, 31214).7
Tarrant, however, notes that [t]he change from command in 310 to
description of the chorus actions in 31115 is problematic; he goes on
to not so much explain the change as search fruitlessly for parallels.8 The
following lines (31521) then order other peoples to join their dances
(nostros comitare choros, 31516). The nostros further suggests that the
Chorus is performing the acts it describes. Later, the Chorus calls itself
Mycenaean and worshippers of Juno (tua te colimus turba Mycenae, 342).
This confirms that they are Argives, but does not mandate their being
young girls. The following stanza describes a number of rites performed
for Juno, but which are probably not happening onstage during this
song: the offering of victory wreaths in honor of Agamemnon (tu nunc
laurus Agamemnonias accipe victrix, 34647); the playing of hymns on a
flute (tibi multifora tibia buxo sollemne canit, 348) and lyre (tibi fila movent
docta puellae carmine molli, 34950); the hurling of sacred torches (tibi
votivam matres Graiae lampada iactant, 35152); and finally, Clytemnes-

tras sacrifice of a bull (35355). None of these actions occur onstage.
The next stanza, addressed to Pallas, likewise speaks of rites that are
not presently being performed (35967). Nor does the audience see
the worship of Diana (38081), nor that of Jupiter (38287). Since the
later rites are not actually performed, I have trouble assuming that the
earlier ones are. Instead, this entire hymn is a description of the kinds
of activities that ought to be carried out once Agamemnon gets home.9
And while it is tempting to see the innuba stirps Inachia of line 314 as a
self-identification, how can we accept that and at the same time reject
the matres Graiae (351), the permixto matrona minor maiorque choro (359
60), and the grandaevi lassique senes (364)? The only definite identifica-
tion is that found at line 342: tua te colimus turba Mycenae, which indicates
only that the Chorus consists of Mycenaeans, but their age, gender, and
marital status remains unclear.
Toward the end of the third act, Clytemnestra announces the arrival
of a group of Trojan women (sed ecce! turba tristis incomptae comas Iliades
adsunt, 58687). Its identity is confirmed, first by the Chorus itself (Iliades,
655), and then by Cassandra (Troades, 660).This group sings the third
ode in cantica polymetra; it also interacts with Cassandra in the following
scene, using both anapests and iambic trimeter. Clearly, the Chorus has
taken on a new identity of captives brought from Troy by Agamemnon.10
There is no reason to doubt the Chorus previous self-identification as
Mycenaeans. The earlier songs definitely betrayed Achaean sympathies,
and a crowd of captive Trojan women would not have appeared onstage
before Agamemnons arrival was announced. Nor is there any reason to
think that the actual members of the Chorus are different. Instead, the
same singers are simply wearing different masks; only the persona of
the Chorus has changed. Thus, we must assume that the first Chorus of
Argives exits at some point, probably shortly after the arrival of Eurybates
at lines 38891. It must guess what the soldiers presence portends
the long-awaited return of Agamemnon. Instead of waiting to hear Eury-
bates story, it goes to meet the king. Agamemnon then must send his
captive slaves ahead of him. This Chorus then remains onstage11 and
retains the persona of Trojan women for the rest of the play.
Tarrant and Davis, on the contrary, maintain that the Chorus of Myce-
naeans sings the fourth choral song;12 and Sutton and Davis, would then
keep both Choruses, Achaean and Trojan, onstage for the rest of the
play.13 Tarrant states that the fourth ode is sung by the Argive chorus;
the chorus of Trojan captives would hardly choose this moment to glorify
Agamemnon 53
Hercules, and, through him, Argos.14 Davis, on the other hand, says the
song is curiously unenthusiastic about Agamemnon, and points out
that the Trojan Chorus had already drawn a comparison between Her-
cules and Agamemnon to the latters disadvantage (614f.). He seems
to assign the song to the Mycenaeans because he believes the captive
maidens exit with Cassandra in the middle of act 5, but is not happy with
the arrangement, noting an inexplicable inconsistency between Odes 2
and 4.15 This inconsistency, however, only exists if the same Chorus sings
both. The fourth song is far from the lavish praise of Argos that Tarrant
would have us believe, and by no means is it out of character for the
Trojan women. Further, there is no indication that either the Chorus or
Cassandra exits after line 909, especially since she speaks again at 1004.
Finally, even if each Chorus consists of as few as three performers,16 hav-
ing two such groups onstage, along with Electra, Strophius, and the two
mute boys in the second section, and four speaking actors with the nec-
essary mute attendants at the end, would be intolerably crowded. There
is no good reason to have both a Chorus of Argives and a Chorus of
Trojans onstage at the same time. It is most sensible to think, therefore,
that there is only one Chorus, which portrays citizens of Mycenae when
it first appears, and which later exits to return as captive Trojan women
and remains in that persona for the rest of the play.
The Set: Mycenae
One wing leads to The Harbor, since everyone who comes onstage
from foreign parts (i.e., Eurybates, Agamemnon, Cassandra, and the
captive Trojan women) has just arrived by ship. In addition, this play
requires a trap door for the entrance of the Ghost of Thyestes.17
Act 1 (156 )
Action unit: The Ghost of Thyestes, in monologue, states that he has

returned to the Upper World in order to witness a deed even more
barbarous than his consumption of his own children: the slaughter of
his nephew, Agamemnon, by his own wife, Clytemnestra.
At line 1, the Ghost of Thyestes (actor A) appears onstage, alone.18

He is frightened (en horret animus, 5), and his body shakes with panic
(et pavor membra excutit, 5). He identifies himself (fugio Thyestes, 4), but
provides no indication of exactly why he has returned from the Land of
the Dead. He further identifies the setting as the royal palace at Mycenae
(video paternos immo fraternos lares, 6). The ensuing lines continue that
identification, as Thyestes points to various things both physically and
verbally by employing the demonstrative pronoun: hoc (7), hinc (8), hoc
(9), hic, hic (11); and later on he addresses an offstage Aegisthus (Aegis-
the, 49).19 He also establishes that it is dawn, and indeed that night has
lasted too long (5356). There is no clear statement concerning his posi-
tion, but he is most likely on the stage floor. Thyestes is a ghost, and not a
god. The earth would be his natural place, not the machina, and so extra
comment would not be needed to explain where he is. Further, Sutton
suggests that line 2 (adsum profundo Tartari emissus specu) may indicate
that the actor is emerging from this trap door.20 This would confirm that
the Ghost is standing on the stage, while also letting the audience know
how he got there. After finishing his soliloquy at the end of line 56, Thy-
estes leaves. There is no indication of which exit he uses. If his reason for
being here in the first place is so that he may observe the ensuing trag-
edy, or so that he may cause it by his very presence, then perhaps he goes
into the palace through the center doors. He says, however, that a delay
in the sunrise is his fault (Phoebum moramur, 56), implying that his pres-
ence on the surface world is bringing about an unacceptable disruption
of the natural order, and so his departure from the stage is an attempt
at a remedy. He should, then, return to the Underworld, and so exit the
same way he came in, via the trap door.
The Chorus enters as its song begins at line 57.21 Assuming it consists
of Mycenaean elders, it would be sensible for it to use the wing leading
Agamemnon 55
to the forum. The parodos is in anapests, the typical meter for Senecan
entrance songs. After finishing at the end of line 107, the Chorus falls
silent and withdraws to the scaenae frons.22
Act 2 (108309)
Action units: (1) Clytemnestra muses with herself as to whether she

should carry out her plot to kill Agamemnon. (2) She then confers
with her Nurse, who seems to be on the verge of convincing her to
abandon the scheme. (3) Finally, Aegisthus, Clytemnestras lover and
Agamemnons cousin, arrives and strengthens her resolve.
The entrance of Clytemnestra (actor B) is indicated when she begins

to speak at line 108. She enters from the palace through the center
doors. She is sluggish (segnis anime, 108), as well as uncertain as to what
she should do (quid fluctuaris? 109). At line 125, the Nurse (actor C)
speaks as she enters through the center doors. She identifies Clytemnes-
tra (regina, 125), and states that she is quietly contemplating something
(quid tacita versas, 126). This would indicate not only that Clytemnestras
previous speech was a soliloquy, unheard by the rest of the characters,
but also that the Nurse was not previously aware of her charges activi-
ties. Since she has only just now figured out what her mistress is up to, it
makes more sense for the Nurse to enter separately, rather than entering
with her at line 108.23 As Clytemnestras silent reflections continue, the
Nurse can tell that her spirit is inflamed (tumido animo, 127), and she
gestures fiercely (feroces impetus geris, 127). Although the queen remains
silent (ipsa sileas, 128), nevertheless pain is evident on her face (totus in
vultu est dolor, 128).
Finally, at line 131, Clytemnestra responds to the Nurse, as if only
now recognizing her presence. The queen explains that passion con-
sumes her from within (flammae medullas et cor exurunt meum, 132), that
she experiences fear mixed with pain (mixtus dolori timor, 133), that jeal-
ousy beats within her breast (invidia pulsat pectus, 134), and that lust
oppresses her spirit (animum iugo premit cupido, 13435). Nevertheless,
shame, although exhausted by the effort of restraining her, still tries to
assert itself (fessus quidem et deiectus et pessumdatus pudor rebellat, 13738).
Dialogue between Clytemnestra and the Nurse, rapid-fire but with no
midline interruptions, ensues (14561), followed by monologues from
Clytemnestra (162202) and the Nurse (20325).
At line 226, Aegisthus (actor A) speaks, and so must enter through
the center doors. The Nurse and Clytemnestra would have been stand-
ing center stage as they talked. Aegisthus should barge between them,
taking the Nurses place and pushing her to the side. The Nurse does
not speak again, and so Sutton has her exit after her final words;24 but
the scene is much more effective if the audience can actually see Cly-
temnestra physically caught between the voices of propriety and viricide.
Although his entrance was unannounced, Aegisthus identifies himself
(Aegisthe, 233). By using the vocative, he shows that the previous eight
lines have been a soliloquy, meant to strengthen his own courage, and
not that of Clytemnestra, as might be expected given what she and the
Nurse have been talking about. At last, Aegisthus addresses Clytemnestra
(tu, Leda sata, 234), identifying her more precisely than did the Nurse
with regina (125). The queen is pale and her cheeks tremble (trementis
circuit pallor genas, 237). She has a logy, drooping, glassy-eyed expression
(iacensque vultu languido optutus stupet, 238). At line 239, dialogue begins,
starting with an alternation of short speeches, eventually becoming
shorter exchanges, before reverting back to short speeches; this section
contains one midline interruption, as the queen responds to her lovers
urgent demand (293). Aegisthus seems to be successfully rousing up the
anger in Clytemnestra (iramque flammis iam residentem incitas, 261); nev-
ertheless, her previous shame revives itself (surgit residuus pristinae mentis
pudor, 288). His frustration is apparent; he both uses a charming and
eloquent tone of voice (voce blandiloqua, 289), but is also shouting (quid
obstrepis? 289). The act ends as Clytemnestra announces her exit and that
of Aegisthus (secede mecum, 308), through the center doors, following
line 309. The Nurse trails after them.
The Chorus steps forward at line 310 and begins to sing (canite, 310) in
anapests.
Act 3 (388588)
Action units: (1) Eurybates, Agamemnons herald, arrives. (2) Cly-

temnestra rejoices and asks Eurybates for the full story. (3) He tells
Clytemnestra about the storms that racked the fleet. (4) Clytemnestra
is unsure how to react.
Agamemnon 57
The Chorus, having concluded its song, reverts to trimeter at line 388,
in order to announce the arrival of actor A as a visibly excited soldier
(sed ecce! concitus miles, 388), later identified as Eurybates (Eurybates adest,
391).25 He comes in via the wing leading to the harbor, and uses a giant
pace (vasto gradu, 388). Tarrant takes this as [a] sign of haste, along with
concitus and the ensuing properat (389).26 But the phrase suggests a long-
legged gait that is not fast as much as distance consuming. It must imply
that the man is tall, as well as being a pun with his name: Eurybates, Greek
for the Far-Goer. He is clearly happy (manifesta signa laetitiae ferens, 389),
possibly indicating that he is smiling, perhaps with a joyful bounce in his
step. But the following line identifies specifically the clear sign that the
Chorus is referring to: a victory wreath on the tip of his spear (hasta summo
lauream ferro gerit, 390). The Chorus finishes its announcement at the end
of line 391, and exits.27 Calder has the Chorus go out through the center
doors into the palace as Clytemnestra enters at the end of Eurybates
first speech (39296).28 This is undesirable for several reasons. It would
be awkward for the Chorus and actor B to be using the same entrance at
the same time, going in opposite directions. Further, Clytemnestras first
words indicate that she heard Eurybates good news (felix ad aures nuntius
venit meas, 397). Therefore, she must have been onstage in time to hear
him, and so must enter as he begins to speak.29 Similarly, the Chorus,
understanding that the heralds arrival portends the imminent return of
Agamemnon, exits after its final words. It makes little sense, however, for
the Chorus to go into the palace, as it has previously shown no direct
connection to the royal family. Instead, it is more reasonable that it goes
out the way Eurybates has just come in, through the wing leading to the
harbor, in order to greet the long-absent Agamemnon.
By line 392, Eurybates has reached center stage and begins to speak,
praying to the gods with outstretched arms (supplex adoro, 394), and
announcing the arrival of Agamemnon (39596). Clytemnestra (actor
B), who must have entered from the center doors already, responds. The
queen addresses Eurybates directly, asking him questions about the voy-
age from Troy (39899). Although he answers, throughout the scene he
is reluctant to reveal the unpleasant news.30 In celebration of her hus-
bands safe return, Clytemnestra proposes to conduct sacrifices (sacris
colamus prosperum diem, 402). It is possible that mute attendants obey her;
but much like the unfulfilled rites described by the Chorus in its second
song, these are probably also not carried out. Finally, she commands
Eurybates to tell the story (exprome! 419).
At line 421, Eurybates takes a short pause, and possibly a deep breath,
before beginning his vivid account of the storms.31 He continues, unin-
terrupted by Clytemnestra, until concluding his report at line 578. After
this, he does not speak again, nor does Clytemnestra address him. It
makes best sense that he leave, but it is unclear where would he go. He
has no reason for exiting into the palace. Of all the characters in this
play, he is the one who would sensibly go to town, having been away for
so long. And yet, as a soldier and herald of Agamemnon, it would make
most sense that he go back to his commander, perhaps to report what he
saw or how he and his news were received, perhaps simply to get further
orders. Thus, he should exit through the wing leading to the harbor.
Another short pause occurs before Clytemnestra speaks, to herself,
beginning at line 579, uncertain whether to rejoice or lament.32 She
once again calls for public displays of rejoicing and thanksgiving (583
85); and again, the rites are not performed. Amid the uncertainty, a
Chorus of Trojan women enters (sed ecce! turba tristis incomptae comas Ili-
ades adsunt, 58687), along with a young woman played by actor C (quas
super celso gradu effrena Phoebas entheas laurus quatit, 58788). Although
she is not named until later (Cassandra, 691), she is obviously Cassandra,
since she is a priestess of Apollo and in the company of the captive Tro-
jan women. She is taller than her companions, walks quickly, is frenzied,
and brandishes laurel wreaths. After announcing the arrival of her hus-
bands concubine and other slaves, Clytemnestra exits into the center
doors at the end of line 588.
The Chorus begins to sing in cantica polymetra at line 589, before switch-
ing to anapests at line 637. At 655, it weeps (flent).33
Act 4 (659807)
Action units: (1) The Chorus of Trojan women interacts with the rav-
ing Cassandra. (2) At last, Agamemnon enters. (3) He has a brief
exchange with Cassandra, (4) before going to the palace and his
death.
With her first words, Cassandra orders the Chorus to stop crying (cohi-
bete lacrimas, 659), and instead to express its grief with groans (lugete gem-
Agamemnon 59
itu, 661).34 Both Cassandra and the Chorus use several different meters.
The former mostly employs iambic trimeters (65963, 695709, 720
58), while the latter first reverts to anapests (66492), before switching
to trimeter (69394 and 71019). At the end of the episode, Cassan-
dra, in her madness, lapses into iambic dimeter (75974).35 The metri-
cal change indicates that Cassandra either chants or sings, and probably
moves rhythmically, perhaps even breaking into dance. Finally, the Cho-
rus concludes the scene in trimeter (77581). The shifts show that, on
the one hand, the Chorus is becoming more and more involved in the
action as an active participant, while on the other Cassandra becomes
more and more distant as Apollo takes control of her.
This gradual possession can also be seen in her actions. First she tears
the sacred fillets off of her head (sed cur sacratas deripis capiti infulas? 693).
Later, she suddenly goes silent and her cheeks grow pale (silet repente
Phoebas et pallor genas, 710). Her whole body shakes violently (creberque
totum possidet corpus tremor, 711), and both her headbands and her hair
itself stand straight up (stetere vittae, mollis horrescit coma, 712). A groaning
comes from deep within her (anhela corda murmure incluso fremunt, 713).
Her eyes, no longer seeing properly, droop (incerta nutant lumina, 714).
In fact, her eyeballs roll back in their sockets, and then suddenly snap
back (versi retro torquentur oculi, 71415); but once they have returned
to normal, they become fixed (rursus immoti rigent, 715). At one point,
she raises her head high, higher than usual, and walks proudly (nunc
levat in auras altior solito caput graditurque celsa, 71617); at another point,
she hesitantly opens her mouth, as it she were about to say something
unpleasant (nunc reluctantantis parat reserare fauces, 71718), ultimately
clamping her mouth shut (verba nunc clauso male custodit ore maenas, 718
19),36 lest evil words escape. At last, Cassandra speaks for herself, inform-
ing the observers that some new madness excites her (me furoris incitam
stimulis novi, 720), and that flames of passion are fixed within her (flam-
mas pectori infixas meo, 723). She hallucinates (ubi sum? 726), seeing the
Furies (instant sorores squalidae, 759), among other things.37 Finally, Cas-
sandra collapses, falling forward on bended knees (caditque flexo genu,
776), as various Chorus members help her up (relevemus artus, 778).38
At line 779, Agamemnon (actor A) enters through the wing leading
to the harbor (Agamemnon adit, 779). He wears a laurel wreath, symbol-
izing his victory at Troy (victrice lauru cinctus, 779),39 and he is accompa-
nied by mute attendants. Cassandra, not Clytemnestra, goes to him (et
festa coniunx obvios illi tulit gressus reditque iuncta concordi gradu, 78081),40
and the two of them reach center stage together. Once they get there,
the Chorus withdraws to the scaenae frons. Agamemnon speaks at line
782. At line 786, Cassandra once again faints, apparently suffering some
kind of epileptic fit: her body trembles and her head sways (quid ista
vates corpus effusa ac tremens dubia labat cervice? 78687). Sutton suggests
that she has been lying unconscious since lines 77577.41 This is unlikely
for several reasons. First, the Chorus has already helped her up (778).
Second, Cassandra met Agamemnon upon his entrance. Third, it would
be odd for Agamemnon to speak for four lines before noticing her lying
at his feet. Finally, the Chorus noted the mercurial nature that divine
possession imposed upon her, at one moment wanting to talk, and then
not (71619). This is another manifestation of that uncertainty, as Cas-
sandra repeatedly faints, recovers, and then faints again. Agamemnon
orders his silent attendants to lift the poor girl (famuli, attollite, 787) and
to revive her spirits with cold water (refovete gelido latice, 788), although it
is uncertain whether he means for them to splash water in Cassandras
face, or if she is to have a beverage.42 Whatever they do seems success-
ful, as she comes around (iam recipit diem, 788) with eyes still drooping
(marcente visu, 789).
Agamemnon addresses Cassandra, telling her to regain her senses
(suscita sensus tuos, 789). She responds in the middle of line 791; indeed,
Agamemnon begins all of the ensuing lines of dialogue (79299), with
Cassandra completing them. He suggests that they should pray at the
altars (veneremur aras, 792), especially to Jupiter (Iovem precemur pariter,
793); but, like the Chorus and Clytemnestra before him, he is prevented
from carrying out the specified rites. He gestures, pointing to his city,
Mycenae (hic Troia non est, 795). Fitch suggests that as she replies (ubi
Helena est, Troiam puta, 795), Cassandra glances at Clytemnestra, and
means that the queen of Mycenae is equally as destructive as her sister.43
This interpretation assumes that Clytemnestra is onstage, which I have
argued against above and elsewhere. There are, however, other possi-
bilities: Cassandra answers Agamemnons gesture by pointing to the pal-
ace and the offstage Clytemnestra. Cassandra hallucinates that Helen is
standing before her. Or Cassandra is referring to the fact that Helen is,
by now, in Sparta (i.e., Helen is in Greece; therefore, Greece is Troy).
Finally, Agamemnon loses his patience, puts an end to the dialogue, and
tells his attendants to restrain Cassandra (hanc fida famuli turba... reti-
nete, 800801), who is trying to shake off the effects of divine possession
(excutiat deum, 800) and is possessed by a powerless rage (impotens furor,
801). He is at last able to pray, specifically to Jupiter and Juno (at te, pater!
802 and Argolica Juno, 806). He intends to pursue further rites (colam,
807), but unfortunately he will not get the chance. Having finished his
Agamemnon 61
lines, Agamemnon (actor A) exits into the palace, leaving Cassandra

(actor C) behind.44
The Chorus of Trojan women steps forward and sings in canticum poly-
metrum,45 beginning at line 808 and concluding at line 866. After that,
it does not sing or speak again. Nobody addresses it. And yet it would be
strange for captive slaves to exit without instruction. Instead, it withdraws
to the scaenae frons and silently watches the rest of the play.46
Act 5 (8671012)
Action units: (1) Cassandra describes the death of Agamemnon as

it occurs offstage. (2) Electra entrusts her silent brother, Orestes to
their uncle, Strophius, who happens to be passing by with his own
unspeaking son, Pylades. (3) Clytemnestra demands the location of
Orestes from Electra, who refuses to tell. (4) Aegisthus responds to
the screams of the queen, commanding guards to imprison Electra
in a cave outside of the city. (5) Finally, Clytemnestra orders the still
present Cassandra to be dragged to her death in the palace.
At line 867, Cassandra speaks, a soliloquy to no one in particular, but

certainly not to the Chorus. Like Aeschylus Cassandra, she sees the
slaughter of Agamemnon as it occurs within the palace. In fact, she not
only can see the murder, but the sensations are so vivid that she feels that
she is actually there (video et intersum, 873). Furthermore, she rejoices
in the deed (et fruor, 873), perhaps because the conqueror of Troy lies
dead, perhaps because it foreshadows her own death and deliverance
from the wretchedness that her life has become, or perhaps because she
still feels a degree of joy in being possessed by Apollo. But even though
her visions give her some joy, she is horrified and trembles deep within
her soul (horreo atque animo tremo, 883). Cassandra falls silent at line 909;
but she will be addressed at 1001 and speak again at 1004. Further, she
would not go to town or to the harbor; and if she were to go into the
palace, it is doubtful that she would get out alive. So she does not exit.
Instead, she withdraws, either to the side or more likely to the Chorus,
seeking comfort from her fellow slave women.
A young woman (actor D) enters through the center doors at line

910. She is accompanied by a mute actor, portraying a young boy, whom
she addresses. She calls him her brother (germane, 914), and refers to
the death of our father (paternae mortis auxilium unicum, 910), thus
making them Electra and Orestes. This is confirmed as the episode goes
on (Oresta, 917 and 933, Oresten, 931, and Electra, 924). At line 913,
actor A, later self-identified as Strophius (Strophius, 918), king of Pho-
cis and uncle to Electra and Orestes, enters through the wing leading
to the forum. He is accompanied by a mute actor portraying a young
boy, namely his son, Pylades (Pylade, 941). They ride the exostra deco-
rated like a chariot (quis iste celeres concitus currus agit? 913)47 and drawn
by horses. It is most likely that the horses are not, in fact, represented.
There could be some kind of model horses, or perhaps mute dancers
pretending to be horses.48 The big difficulty, however, would be how to
turn the chariot around so the horses could be in front as the exostra is
dragged offstage at the end of the episode. Simply accepting the conven-
tion that there ought to be horses since Strophius says that there are, and
that sensibly they should be in front of the chariot, whichever direction
it happens to be moving, should have been enough for an ancient audi-
ence. This mechanism must be big enough to hold three people, and
allow access for the silent Orestes to either climb aboard, or be lifted by
Electra. Strophius wears a victory wreath that he boasts to have won at
the games at Elea (Elea inclutus palma, 91819).49 Electra, frantic (anime
demens, 915), as well as fearful (times, 915) and wanting to flee (refugis,
915), conceals Orestes face in the folds of her skirt (vultus veste furabor
tuos, 914). In mourning, she weeps (ista lacrimis lugubrem vultum rigat,
922), is sad, and trembles (pavetque maesta, 923). At line 925, dialogue
ensues between Electra and Strophius. At 931, Electra either simply
points toward Orestes, or more likely pushes the boy in the direction
of her uncle (recipe hunc Oresten, 931). The king, addressing his nephew
with the vocative (te Oresta, 933), not only accepts the boy from Electra
and lifts him into the chariot, but also gives his victory wreath (cape hoc
decorum, insigne fronte, 93536) to Orestes, instructing the boy to hold it
in his left hand in such a way as to shade his head (laeva victricem tenens
frondem virenti protegat ramo caput, 93637). Strophius then speaks to his
son (9401), and finally shouts orders to the horses that pull the chari-
ot (vos... equi,... fugite! 94243). The exostra withdraws the way it came,
via the wing leading to the forum, carrying off Strophius (actor A) and
the two silent boys. Electra comments on the chariot as it departs (exces-
Agamemnon 63
sit, abiit, currus effreno impetu effugit, 94445), noting that it leaves with an
unbridled blow. Fitch simply renders effreno impetu as headlong.50 But
it seems to mean more than that. Perhaps it is a reference to Strophius
skill as a horsemanhe is so good that he does not need the reins. Or
perhaps it is an ironic metatheatrical comment, drawing attention to the
fact that there are no actual horses, and so the actor does not actually
have to use the reins.
At line 947, Clytemnestra (actor B) enters through the center doors,
covered in blood (adest cruenta victrix, 947). Specifically, her clothes are
drenched with blood (signa caedis veste maculata gerit, 948), and her hands
drip with fresh blood (manus recenti sanguine madent, 949), perhaps indi-
cating an actual stage effect.51 Electra seeks shelter at the onstage altar
(concedam ad aras, 951), actually fulfilling a religious-like act, unlike the
other characters in this play. She addresses Cassandra (actor C) (Cassan-
dra, 952), confirming that the Trojan girl has not left the stage. Electra
does not receive an answer. Instead, Clytemnestra speaks (953). Dia-
logue between the queen and her daughter ensues, during which Electra
leaves the protection of the altar (recedo ab aris, 972). She presents her
throat to her mother to be cut (praebo iugulum tibi, 973); or, if Clytemnes-
tra prefers, Electra presents the back of her neck, like a sacrificial animal
([seu] intenta cervix vulnus expectat tuum, 975).52 Clytemnestra, helpless
and confused, calls to the offstage Aegisthus to come and help her (con-
sors Aegisthe, gradere! 97879).
Aegisthus (actor A) enters through the center doors at line 981,
accompanied by mute attendants. All four speaking actors are now pres-
ent. Aegisthus addresses Electra, and three-way dialogue between Aegist-
hus, Electra, and Clytemnestra ensues. Cassandra remains silent for now.
Aegisthus commands some of his attendants to drag Electra offstage and
imprison her in a cave (abripite, famuli, monstrum! 997).53 They obey his
orders, and exit with her via the wing leading to the harbor, since it is
more likely that the cave will be found near the coast than in the center
of town.
Clytemnestra now turns her attention to the still silent Cassandra (at
ista, 1001), ordering the remaining attendants to seize the Trojan cap-
tive (trahite! 1003). But Cassandra tells them to keep their hands off of
her (ne trahite! 1004); instead, she will walk into the palace ahead of
them (vestros ipsa praecedam gradus, 1004). Following two last words from
Clytemnestra (furiosa, morere, 1012), Cassandra, starting midline, speaks
the final words of the play (veniet et vobis furor, 1012). She exits into the
center doors, followed closely by the attendants, and then by Clytemnes-

tra and Aegisthus. The drama ends with the Chorus of Trojan women
alone onstage.
Conclusions
The story of Agamemnons return from Troy and subsequent murder

by Clytemnestra, while popular among poets and painters, both ancient
and modern,54 does not seem to have much representation by Attic and
Roman dramatists, as far as we can tell.55 The most well known dramatic
version of the myth from antiquity is the first play of Aeschylus trilogy,
the Oresteia (458 BCE); but Ion of Chios (ca. 490421 BCE) was known
to have composed one, and another anonymous Agamemnon was pro-
duced in 420/19 BCE. The Roman playwright Livius Andronicus in the
third century BCE seems to have told the story in his Aegistus,56 as did
Accius in his Clytemnestra of the second century BCE.57
Senecas play follows the basic structure of Aeschylus Agamemnon. A
third party, the Watchman in the Attic drama and the Ghost of Thyes-
tes in the Roman, presents a feeling of foreboding. Clytemnestra takes
the plays focus, until a messenger arrives to tell her of Agamemnons
return. Then Agamemnon himself appears for a short time. After his
departure, Cassandra raves and describes the offstage murder of the
king. Finally, Cassandra goes to her death and both Clytemnestra and
Aegisthus assume control of the situation. But within that framework,
there is much variation, so much that Tarrant argues that It seems
incredible that the Agamemnon of Aeschylus could have been thought
Senecas source.58 On the other hand, Gantz points out that, prior to
Aeschylus, the murder of Agamemnon seems to take place at the home
of Aegisthus, and that Aeschylus appears to move the event to the pal-
ace of Agamemnon.59 This, along with the basic structural similarities,
suggests strongly that, while Seneca certainly had other influences and
made substantial alterations, the Roman tragedian must have at least
been drawing on the Aeschylean tradition when he composed his drama.
That being said, Senecas rendition is about deception. Clytemnes-
tra pretends to be a faithful wife, while secretly plotting her husbands
destruction. Cassandra, conversely, tries to be truthful, but can only
deceive because of the interference of Apollo. Electra, under the guise
of dutiful daughter, spirits her young brother away. It should come as
no surprise, therefore, that similar deceptions can be seen in the stage
Agamemnon 65
actions. Throughout the drama, various people propose sacred rites that
are not carried out: the Chorus in its second song mentions many servic-
es for the gods that are not performed. Clytemnestra suggests sacrifices
(402), as does Agamemnon (792 and 807). In fact, only Electra seems
to be able to successfully fulfill her intention to approach the altar (951
and 972). And yet her actions are not religious per se, but attempts to
escape punishment from Clytemnestra and Aegisthus. Thus, in this play,
a persons statements do not necessarily indicate fulfilled actions.
As in the case of Cassandra, not all deceptions are negative or even
intentional. The confusion with the Chorus is a good example. The first
two songs seem to be performed by a group of Argives; at least the third
is delivered by captive Trojan women, and probably the fourth as well.
The movements of the Chorus on-and offstage are as uncertain as its
identity. And while the Chorus is not trying to deceive, it adds to the
general atmosphere of distrustfulness.
It should also be noted that in this play, which centers on the murder
of Agamemnon, no weapons appear as props.
Finally, in this play, more than any of the others, the distribution of
roles among a limited number of actors becomes an issue. It is surely
significant that all the male roles can be portrayed by a single actor. And
it was clearly Senecas intention to have three characters who have taken
so much from Clytemnestra surrounding her at the end. It is almost as if
now that the queens plot has been revealed, all the significant (and sur-
viving) characters also show themselves. Rather than ending in decep-
tion, as it began, the play concludes with a new openness, which perhaps
is not desirable, but is certainly different.
C h a pter 4
Phaedra
Dramatis Personae
Actor A Hippolytus Hippolytus Theseus Theseus Theseus
Actor B Phaedra Phaedra Phaedra Phaedra
Actor C Nurse Nurse Nurse Messenger
One actor plays Phaedra exclusively, since she is onstage for four of the
five acts,1 and speaks with all of the characters aside from the Messenger.
It is possible for the same actor to portray both; but Phaedra is a strenu-
ous role, and it is more sensible to give him a break during act 4.
The Nurse, likewise, interacts with all of the characters with the
exception of the Messenger, who shares act 4 with Theseus.2 Fortunately,
the Nurse is not as strenuous a role as her mistress. Both servants, then,
must be assigned to the same actor.
The remaining actor gets the remaining parts: Hippolytus and The-
seus. Thus, son and father, as well as victim and murderer, are played
by the same person. There is undoubtedly some intentional irony, if
not humor, when Phaedra comments to Hippolytus that he resembles
Theseus (646ff.), and when the youth says that he will fill his fathers
place (633). This assignment also prevents the Euripidean confronta-
tion between Hippolytus and Theseus. As a result, the Roman audience
does not see a noble Hippolytus who would rather be condemned than
break his oath; and Theseus seems even more rash and headstrong
than his Attic counterpart, since he passes judgment without even see-
ing his son.
66
Phaedra 67
The Chorus is not identified in any way, except for being hostile to
Phaedra and sympathetic to Hippolytus.3 But in this context, the odd-
ness of the opening act should be considered. It seems to divide itself
into two parts: the song of Hippolytus and the dialogue between Phaedra
and the Nurse. The youths ode, in fact, consists of anapests, the meter
that Seneca often uses for the entrance of the Chorus. I would suggest,
therefore, that this first section is actually the choral parodos, only with
the singing done by an actor while the silent Chorus of huntsmen enters
and follows his instructions.4
The Set: Athens
It is reasonable to assume that the play is set in Athens, since all of

the geographical names and references in the first thirty lines, except for
Riphaea at line 8, are to places in Attica.
The center doors stand for the palace. Kragelund argues ingeniously
that there is a change of setting to the forest outside the city at line 405,
based on his assumptions that the confrontation between Hippolytus
and Phaedra would naturally take place in the forest, that the altar to
Diana would be found in the woods, and that Hippolytus frequently stat-
ed aversion to urban living would preclude his ever setting foot in Ath-
ens.5 These are all fairly subjective points, and none are supported by the
text, unless, as Kragelund does, we take them as given and reinterpret
certain lines accordingly. To be sure, Seneca does sometimes change the
setting, for example in the Troades and apparently in the Phoenissae, but
only when it serves some dramaturgical purpose. Nothing is achieved
by shifting the action between the forest and the city; indeed, retaining
the same setting throughout would emphasize the way Phaedra desires
to blend nature and civilization. And so it is better to assume a constant

setting in front of the palace at Athens.
Rather than leading to the forum and to foreign parts, both wings
have more specific associations: Theseus emerges from the Underworld
via one wing,6 while Hippolytus and the Chorus enter from and exit into
the forest through the other. This represents a notable departure from
the norm, since both destinations seem to be foreign, and neither
could be interpreted as the forum.
There also is a window or balcony above the center doors that opens to
reveal Phaedra in act 2 (sed en! patescunt regiae fastigia, 384), undoubtedly
the same mechanism as is used in the final act of the Medea. Fortey and
Glucker absolutely deny that anything indoors happens on the Roman
stage, and instead would have Phaedra appear onstage and enter from
the center doors;7 but Fitch surely has it right when he observes that the
balcony allows Phaedra to be visible to the audience while remaining
indoors by theatrical convention.8
Act 1 ( 1273) 9
Action units: (1) Hippolytus orders his companions to scatter to the

four winds in pursuit of wild game. (2) Phaedra and her Nurse dis-
cuss the formers improper lust for her stepson and consider possible
courses of action.
Hippolytus enters at line 1, accompanied by the Chorus of hunting

companions, via the wing leading to the forest. Throughout the play
he is frequently described as hairy (e.g., habitus horrens, 916). It is dawn
(dum lux dubia est, dum signa pedum roscida tellus impressa tenet, 4143).
The youth, unidentified aside from his love of hunting and the goddess
Diana, speaks directly to the men (vos at lines 16, 20, and 31, as well as
frequent occurrences of the second-person singular pronoun through-
out). Since, over the course of his speech, he orders many men to go
off in different directions, it seems that there are either a great many of
these companions, or at least that as one or more exit, others enter to
take their place. Sutton favors a literal reading of these lines, and wants
there to have been an extra for each singular imperative and two for
every plural imperative; he goes on to say that only two or three would
Phaedra 69
seem silly.10 A happy medium can be reached, however, if the Chorus

consists of six to eight performers who enter and exit silently numerous
times, either individually or in pairs. In general, there is much activity in
this episode as the hunters obey Hippolytus orders and come on-and
offstage. At lines 3143, Hippolytus talks about preparing the hunting
dogs, raising the slim possibility that there are actual dogs on the stage.11
Hippolytus orders various companions to ready various pieces of hunt-
ing equipment. The prop master should take note. One man is to carry
loosely woven nets on his neck (alius raras cervice gravi portare plagas, 44),
while another should bear smooth snares (alius teretes properet laqueos, 45).
A third is to ready a formido, or line that the hunters use to drive the wild
game, given color by red feathers (picta rubenti linea pinna, 46). One par-
ticular fellow is in charge of brandishing a light throwing spear (tibi libre-
tur missile telum, 48); a different hunter should direct his energy toward
a broad holding spear (lato ferro, 50). Someone else has a curved knife.
(curvo cultro, 5253). Finally, Hippolytus hears the dogs barking offstage,
suggesting that none were onstage earlier, and indicating a sound cue
from the wing leading to the forest (signum arguti misere canes, 8182).
He signals his own exit (vocor in silvas, 8284) through the wing leading
to the forest. The Chorus of huntsmen leaves with him, as it would not
be appropriate for its members to be present for Phaedras confession.12
At line 85, Phaedra enters through the center doors, identifying her-
self by referring to her husband, Theseus (coniunx Theseus, 9192 and
Thesea coniunx, 129). The Nurse must come on with her at this time,
since when she first speaks at line 129, she knows what Phaedra has just
said.13 Phaedra weeps (lacrimis, 91) and gestures with her hands (ipsas
manus, 104). She suffers from her passion (furor, 178), namely the
flames of improper love (compesce amoris impii flammas, 165). These emo-
tions further show themselves as Phaedra begins a speech in the middle
of line 177. The Nurse resumes at line 195, with dialogue occurring at
21873. Finally, the two women exit into the palace through the center
doors following line 273.
The Chorus enters at line 274, from the wing leading to the forest. It
sings first in minor sapphics, before switching to anapests at line 325,
Senecas usual meter for the choral parodos. The song concludes at 357
(quid plura canam? 356).
Act 2 (358735)
Action units: (1) The Nurse enters and reports on Phaedra. (2)
The queen then appears in an upper window of the palace. (3) The
Nurse urges Hippolytus to give more attention to Venus, only to be
rebuffed. (4) Phaedra throws herself at the youth, who is appalled.
(5) The Nurse comes up with a new plan.
The Chorus remains onstage,14 switches to trimeter, and addresses

the Nurse (altrix, profare, 358), who has been attending to Phaedra with-
in the palace, and so enters from the center doors. The Chorus makes
room for the Nurse, perhaps splitting into two parts, so she can be alone
center stage; alternatively, the entire Chorus moves to one side, but does
not retreat all the way back to the scaenae frons. The Nurse addresses
the huntsmen, describing what Phaedra has been doing inside.15 These
should not be taken as stage directions; that is, Phaedra is not visible per-
forming the acts as the Nurse mentions them.16 Her mood while offstage,
however, will still be applicable when she reenters. Although she has tried
to hide it (lines 36162), Phaedras passion is manifest in her expression
(proditur vultu furor, 363). Fire erupts from her eyes (erumpit oculis ignis,
364), which she in exhaustion covers and hides from the light (lassae
genae lucem recusant, 36465). Phaedra flits from one activity to anoth-
er (nil idem dubiae placet, 365), as some unspecified pain occupies her
limbs (artusque varie iactat incertus dolor, 366). She droops her head with
exhaustion, but then suddenly starts awake (nunc ut soluto labitur marcens
gradu et vix labante sustinet collo caput, 36768), at one moment sleeping
(nunc se quieti reddit, 369), and the next complaining of insomnia (et
somni immemor noctem querelis ducit, 36970). She first wants her hair to be
let down, and then to be bound up again (solvi comas rursusque fingi, 371
72).17 Throughout all this activity, Phaedra is constantly impatient (sem-
per impatiens, 372), and her appearance keeps changing (mutatur habitus,
373). She walks like an invalid (vadit incerto pede, 374), lacking both her
previous strength (iam viribus defecta: non idem vigor, 375) and the usual
healthy redness in her face (non ora tinguens nitida purpureus rubor, 376).
At last, she weeps (lacrimae cadunt, 381).
Suddenly, the Nurse points as a window or balcony in the second
level of the scaenae frons opens (sed en! patescunt regiae fastigia, 384). Phae
dra herself appears (ipsa, 385), reclining on a golden chair (reclinis
sedis auratae toro, 385). She speaks to her mute servants (famulae, 387),
ordering them to take off her fancy clothes (removete vestes, 38788) and
Phaedra 71
demanding hunting garb (brevis expeditos zona constringat sinus, 390). She
wants neither a collar (cervix monili vacua, 391) nor pearl earrings (nec
niveus lapis deducat auris, 39192). Her hair should be down and without
perfume (odore crinis sparsus Assyrio vacet, 393), and in general allowed
to flow freely down her neck and arms, moved by the wind (39496).
After line 403, Phaedra withdraws from the balcony and the window is
closed.18
There is some dispute about what happens next. The only definite
facts are that someone gives a command to calm down and pray to Diana
(4045). Someone else does just that (40622), before the arrival of
Hippolytus is announced (42330). Clearly, 4045 should belong to
someone other than Phaedra, and 40630, in its entirety, to someone
other than the speaker of 4045. The E manuscript branch gives 404
5 to the Chorus, while the A family assigns them to the Nurse. Then,
before 406, many of the manuscripts list Hippolytus and the Nurse as the
characters in the ensuing episode. Fortey and Glucker (1975), Zwierlein
(1986), Boyle (1987), and Fitch (2002) all go with the Chorus for 4045
and the Nurse for 40630, while Coffey and Mayer (1990), reluctantly,
give 4045 to the Nurse, 40626 to Phaedra, and 42730 to the Nurse;
their rationale seems to be that sepone questus (404) must be directed to
Phaedra, and therefore she must utter the prayer. But throughout her
appearance in this episode, Phaedra has paid no attention to either the
Nurse or the Chorus, and it is hard to imagine why she would start now.
She is simply displaying the short attention span that the Nurse com-
mented on at lines 36572: she comes to the window suddenly, and just
as suddenly withdraws. In response to this display, the Chorus, which had
asked the Nurse about Phaedra at lines 35859, now says that lamenting
will do no good; instead, she must appeal to the gods. The Nurse then
obeys. The Chorus is very active in this play. It speaks in trimeter and
announces an entrance at the end of each song. And in fact it speaks
within an episode at lines 124445. So it is both sensible and consistent
to have it speak within the act here. Finally, it is clear that lines 42330
are spoken by the Nurse. But it is equally clear that it makes little sense
to change speaker at 423. Lines 40630 belong to the same person, and
that person must be the Nurse. So, to sum up, at line 403, Phaedra leaves
the balcony and the window is closed. The Chorus speaks lines 4045
and then, having advised the Nurse to give proper reverence to its favor-
ite goddess, exits to the forest.19 The Nurse, center stage, prays to Diana,
with all appropriate hand gestures.20
The Nurses prayers have been answered, as Hippolytus enters at line
423 from the wing leading to the forest. She observes him (ipsum intuor,
424) as he carries out some sacred rite (sollemne venerantem sacrum, 424).
Hippolytus is alone (nullo latus comitante, 425), confirming that the Cho-
rus of his companions is not present for this episode. The Nurse hesi-
tates (quid dubitas, 425), afraid to speak to the young man (trepidamus,
427). Instead, he addresses her at line 431, noting that she walks like
an old person (seniles moliris gradus, 431). Further, she looks tired (fessa,
431), troubled (turbidam frontem gerens, 432), and sorrowful (maesta vul-
tu, 433). The Nurse responds at line 435, confessing to being worried
(anxiam me, 438). Throughout her speech, she refers to Hippolytus and
his youthfulness as being sad (e.g., tristem iuventam, 449), reflecting
some seriousness or general dourness in the young man. At line 483, he
answers, finally displaying some emotion (horreo, fugio, execror, 566) as he
gets onto the subject of women.
At line 583, Phaedra enters (sed Phaedra praeceps graditur) from the
center doors, still displaying impatience (impatiens morae, 583). Sudden-
ly, out of breath, she collapses onto the ground (terrae repente corpus exani-
mum accidit, 585), as a deathlike paleness creeps over her face (et ora morti
simils obduxit color, 586). Her Nurse urges her to raise her head and speak
(attolle vultus, dimove vocis moras, 587). Meanwhile, Hippolytus rushes to
Phaedras side and holds her (temet Hippolytus tenet, 588), cradling her
head in an attempt to revive her. Following line 588, the Nurse does
not speak again until the end of the episode; she moves to the side and
remains as a silent observer of the dialogue between Phaedra and Hip-
polytus.21 Phaedra prays to the gods (vos testor omnis, 604), with appropri-
ate accompanying gestures, and is so flustered that she leaves line 605
incomplete (me nolle). Both characters display uncontrolled emotions
throughout the episode, as each one begins to speak in the middle of a
line several times. At the first occurrence (summus hoc omen deus avertat,
62324), Hippolytus is shocked by Phaedras use of the word viduae.22
She is still held in Hippolytus embrace (sinu receptam supplicem, 622); but
this would be a good time for him to recoil from her touch and stand,
leaving her still on the ground, sitting up. Later on, Phaedra reaches out
to touch Hippolytus knees (en supplex iacet adlapsa genibus, 66667). The
revolted Hippolytus addresses the gods (magne regnator deum! 671) with
appropriate gestures, and moves away from Phaedra, who continues to
grovel (genibus advolvor tuis, 703). The youth backs up as he tells his step-
mother to move away (procul impudicos corpore a casto amove tactus, 7045);
nevertheless, she continues to try to embrace him (etiam in amplexus ruit?
705). In desperation, Hippolytus draws his sword (stringatur ensis, 706),
Phaedra 73
grabs Phaedra by the hair, and twists (en impudicum crine contorto caput
laeva reflexi, 7078). She, however, welcomes death (Hippolyte, nunc me
compotem voti facis, 710), and so does not struggle. But Hippolytus refuses
to sully his sword, throwing it aside (hic contactus ensis deserat castum latus,
71314) and demanding that she go away (abscede, vive, 713).23 Finally, at
line 718, the young man exits via the wing leading to the forest (o silvae,
o ferae! 718), not to be seen again in one piece.
After a pause, the Nurse speaks at line 719. She is stunned (quid segnis
stupes? 719), having witnessed the whole thing. She calls upon Athenians
(Adeste, Athenae! 725), specifically a band of servants (fida famulorum
manus, 725), to come as witnesses to Phaedras abuse by Hippolytus. It
is doubtful that this group is the Chorus, since it subsequently blames
Phaedra for the plot that the Nurse herself is hatching (82428). Fur-
ther, it would be awkward to bring mute actors onto the stage, only to
move them out ten lines later. It is, then, most sensible that the actor
behaves as if the summons were answered without employing actual
performers.24 The Nurse goes on to describe the alleged crimes of Hip-
polytus, pointing to his sword as proof of his villainy (ensem liquit, 729).
Phaedra is also still onstage, lying on the ground, having fainted during
the struggle with Hippolytus (hanc maestam prius recreate, 73031), her
hair pulled and torn out (crinis tractus et lacerae comae, 731). The Nurse
commands the Athenians to carry the news of Hippolytus treachery into
the city (perferte in urbem! 733),25 before addressing the reviving Phaedra
(recipe iam sensus, era, 733). The queen tears at her breast in mourning
and looks away in shame, avoiding all eye contact (quid te ipsa lacerans
omnium aspectus fugis? 734). After line 735, the Nurse escorts Phaedra
offstage through the center doors into the palace
The Chorus, evidently having heard the news, enters at line 736 and
sings in a variety of meters, before concluding at line 823.
Act 3 (824958)
Action units: (1) Phaedra is distraught. (2) Theseus returns from his
long stay in the Underworld, only to be greeted by outcries from the
palace. (3) He consults with the Nurse, (4) before Phaedra herself
tells her husband that his son attempted to have his way with her. (5)
Theseus both exiles Hippolytus and also asks his father, Neptune, to
kill him.
At line 824, the Chorus reverts to iambic trimeter. It suddenly sees

Phaedra (en scelera! 826), who opens the window in the second level of
the scaenae frons, and appears on the balcony, as she did earlier.26 She
musses her hair (decus omne turbat capitis, 827), which is torn (crine lac-
erato, 826) as the Nurse had described at 731, and weeps (umectat genas,
827).
At line 829, a man enters (sed iste quisnam est? 829), later identified
as Theseus (en ipse Theseus! 834), via the wing leading from the Under-
world. He is portrayed by the same actor who played Hippolytus, explain-
ing why the two do not confront each other, as they do in Euripides play,
as well as why the youth does not speak as he lies dying. He has a regal
expression (regium in vultu decus gerens, 82930), and holds his head high
(alto vertice attollens caput, 830). But he is pale and sluggish (languido
pallore canderent genae, 832), and his hair is filthy and unkempt (staretque
recta squalor incultus coma, 833). He comes center stage as the Chorus
withdraws to the scaenae frons.27 At line 835, he speaks. After being gone
for so long, he blinks and shades his eyes from the unaccustomed light
of the sun (vix cupitum sufferunt oculi diem, 837).28 Further, he is old and
weak, not as he was before his long sojourn in the Underworld (fessa
virtus robore antiquo caret, 846),29 and his steps are quivering and hesitant
(trepidant gressus, 847). Theseus is surprised to hear cries of mourning
coming from the palace, indicating a sound cue (quis fremitus aures flebilis
pepulit meas? 850).
At line 854, the Nurse enters from the center doors, and speaks,
engaging in a few lines of dialogue with Theseus. The king orders mute
attendants, who must have entered with the Nurse,30 to unbar the gates
of the palace (reserate clausos regii postes laris, 863). The center doors are
opened, and Phaedra is wheeled out on the exostra.
Theseus addresses his wife (o socia thalami, 864). The Nurse falls
silent for the rest of the episode, but remains onstage. She stands by her
mistress, comforting her.31 Phaedra holds the sword of Hippolytus in her
right hand (quin ense viduas dexteram, 866); she eventually speaks, jump-
ing in the middle of line 868. Dialogue ensues between her and Theseus,
with a number of midline speaker changes. The king weeps (lacrimae nos-
trae, 880) and orders the mute attendants to beat the Nurse (vincite ferro,
884) in order to learn of Phaedras malady. They move to obey, before
Phaedra 75
being stopped by the queen (mane, 885). Phaedra turns away from her
husband (ora maesta avertis, 886) and raises a veil or other article of
clothing (veste praetenta optegis, 887), in an attempt to hide the tears that
have begun to fall down her cheeks (lacrimas genis subito coortas, 88687).
Next, she prays to Jupiter (te, te, creator caelitum, 888), with appropriate
gestures, before displaying the sword that Hippolytus dropped (hic dicet
ensis, 896). Theseus, in disbelief, identifies the weapon as one bearing
his royal family crest (regale patriis asperum signis ebur capulo refulget, gentis
Actaeae decus, 899900). Finally, Phaedra points to the servants (hi famuli,
9012) who saw Hippolytus flee, apparently the same imaginary people
to whom the Nurse called at line 725. At his point, the exostra rolls back
inside, bringing with it Phaedra and the Nurse, neither of whom speaks
for the rest of the episode, and the center doors are closed.32
Theseus, now alone with the Chorus, prays to the gods (pro sancta
Pietas, 903), with appropriate gestures. At line 958, he concludes his
appeal, and retires to the scaenae frons.
At line 959, The Chorus steps forward to sing in anapests. It prays to the
gods (o magna parens, 959), and gestures appropriately.
Act 4 (9891122)
Action units: (1) A Messenger arrives who tells Theseus about the
maritime sea-monster that has caused Hippolytus death. (2) Theseus
both rejoices and mourns.
The Chorus, again reverting to trimeter, announces the entrance of

a quickly moving Messenger (sed quid citato nuntius portat gradu, 989),
played by the same actor who portrays the Nurse.33 He comes from the
horrific scene of Hippolytus death, and so uses the wing leading to the
forest. He weeps and has a mournful expression (rigatque maestis lugu-
brem vultum genis, 990). After line 990, the Chorus falls silent and with-
draws to the scaenae frons. Theseus steps forward to engage in dialogue
with the Messenger (99199); both men retain enough composure to
not begin speaking in the middle of a line. At line 1000, the Messenger
begins his account of Hippolytus offstage death.34 When he concludes at
line 1114, Theseus finally breaks in midline, lamenting (o nimium potens,

1114) and weeping (fleo, 1117). After line 1122, he ceases to talk and
recedes to the scaenae frons. The Messenger exits via the wing leading to
the forest, from whence he originally came, in order to lament with his
fellow former companions of Hippolytus.
The Chorus steps forward at line 1123 and sings its final song, in a variety
of meters. There are no indications of specific stage business, although
the huntsmen must move with the rhythm, and the shifts of meter must
indicate changes in the dance. At line 1153, it concludes.
Act 5 (11541280)
Action units: (1) Phaedra confesses the truth, and then fatally stabs
herself. (2) Theseus laments. (3) The torn body parts of his son are
brought onstage, as Theseus attempts to put them back together.
The Chorus, reverting once more to trimeter, hears a mournful

sound coming from the palace (quae vox ab altis flebilis tectis sonat, 1154),
indicating a sound cue. Phaedra enters from the center doors, carrying a
drawn sword (strictoque vecors Phaedra quid ferro parat, 1155).35 Although it
is not explicitly stated that she uses the same weapon that her stepson left
behind, such a recycling of props would make a powerful statement.36
The Chorus moves back to the scaenae frons, while Theseus moves for-
ward with Phaedra. She is not only raving (vecors, 1155), but also riled
up with pain and rage (quis te dolore percitam instigat furor, 1156). The-
seus points to the sword, asking about both it and the outcry that Phae
dra makes as she laments (quid ensis iste quidve vociferatio, 1157). The
queen beats her breast in mourning (planctusque supra corpus invisum
volunt, 1158).37 At line 1159, she begins her monologue. She addresses
the imaginary corpse (Hippolyte, 1168), and gestures with her hand (hac
manu, 1176), while foreshadowing her impending suicide (nefando pecto-
ri ferrum inseram, 1177). She then cuts off a lock of her hair as an offering
for Hippolytus (capitis exuvias cape laceraeque frontis accipe abscisam comam,
118182). Finally, she stabs her chest (mucrone pectus impium iusto patet
Phaedra 77
cruorque sancto soluit inferias viro, 119798) and dies onstage; her body
remains in plain view of the audience for the rest of the play.
Most scholars follow manuscript family E in assigning lines 1199
1200 to Theseus.38 Without explanation, Fitch (2002) adopts the reading
of family A and assigns these lines to Phaedra, while Fortey and Glucker
(1975) 714 give the lines to a member of the Chorus. Phaedra is already
dead, so it would make little sense for her to speak these words. Further,
the content of the lines argue in favor of Theseus. The speaker advises
Theseus to follow the example of Phaedra and kill himself. While there
is precedent in Senecan tragedy for one character to counsel another
not to commit suicide,39 not even the overly vindictive Atreus suggests
that Thyestes should take his own life. Further, the language used is
more in line with Theseus than either Phaedra or a Chorus member:
condere Acherontis plagis. The Athenian hero has recently returned from
the Underworld, and so he would think of returning there. In addition,
the lines fit in with the ensuing monologue, in which Theseus describes
the Underworld and begs for death. It is reasonable, then, to follow fam-
ily E and let Theseus speak lines 11991200. Interestingly, he uses tro-
chaic tetrameter at lines 120112, a meter that occurs twice more in
Senecan tragedy: at Medea 74051, when Medea calls upon the spirits
of the Underworld, and at Oedipus 22332, when Creon describes the
horrors he saw at Delphi. Thus, it is a meter that Seneca sometimes uses
for telling about horrifying scenes, and quite appropriate here. At line
1213, Theseus reverts to trimeter.
At lines 124446, the Chorus speaks within an episode for the second
time in this play,40 advising Theseus to put off lamenting and instead see
to his sons corpse. He in turn orders mute attendants to carry in the
remnants of Hippolytus body (huc, huc reliquias vehite cari corporis, 1247).
They come in from the wing leading to the forest. It is hard to know
whether this is pantomimed, or whether actual lumps of something are
brought on.41 Throughout, both Theseus (lacrimis nostris, 1261) and the
attendants (fletusque largos sistite, arentes genae, 1263) weep. Once these
remains have been collected, Theseus embraces them (complectere artus,
1254) and attempts to reassemble them (in ordinem dispone, 1257);
unfortunately, too much of the body is missing (quam magna pars adhuc
abest, 1261). Nevertheless, Theseus continues with his task (genitor corpus
fingit, 126465). At lines 127580, the king gives some final commands
to his servants, including orders to prepare for Hippolytus funeral and
to throw Phaedras body into a ditch somewhere. The silent attendants
leave in order to do that, some going into the palace, and some to the
forest. Theseus is left onstage, alone, except for the Chorus and the piec-
es of Hippolytus.
Conclusions
The most obvious influences for Seneca were the two Hippolytus plays by
Euripides, both the extant Hippolytus Stephanophoros (ca. 428 BCE), and
the earlier Hippolytus Kalyptomenos,42 which remains only in fragments.
There is also a fragmentary play by Sophocles, thought to have been
composed between the two versions by Euripides. Lycophron, in the
fourth century BCE, wrote a dramatic version of the story. We know of
no Roman plays other than Senecas, although Ovid deals with the myth
in Heroides 4.
Seneca follows the basic structure of Euripides later, extant drama,
with some notable omissions. The Roman play has no prologue by the
goddess of love, but instead jumps right to Hippolytus as he prepares
for the hunt. Then Phaedra and her Nurse discuss the situation and
what should be done. The Nurse confronts Hippolytus, who subsequent-
ly flees. Theseus returns to learn Phaedras version of the events. He
responds by praying for the death of Hippolytus. Following a Messen-
gers news that the young man has died as a result of a sea monster,
Theseus discovers the truth, and laments. Besides this structure, Seneca
retains the motif of the three wishes that Neptune promised to Theseus,
an element that Euripides may have invented.43 But Seneca has also left
out or changed a number of events: there are no bookend appearances
by the goddesses of love and hunting; no Old Retainer advises Hippoly-
tus to change his ways; Phaedra does not kill herself offstage before The-
seus return, but survives until the end, when she commits suicide in full
view of the audience; and there is no confrontation between Theseus
and Hippolytus. Perhaps most importantly, Senecas Phaedra has given
in to her lust for her stepson. The Nurse, instead of urging her mistress
to succumb and then telling Hippolytus against her wishes, first tries to
dissuade the queen before submitting to Phaedras desires. And instead
of killing herself and leaving an incriminating note, the Roman Phaedra
confesses her lies to her husband in person. We are told that Euripides
earlier play portrayed a similarly shameful Phaedra, and that the trag-
edy received public condemnation.44 Some scholars have thought, since
the characters of Phaedra are similar, that Seneca was more influenced
Phaedra 79
by the first Euripides play than by the second.45 But this is a difficult
proposition to prove, since we have only fragments and descriptions of
Hippolytus Kalyptomenos. The safest thing to say is that Seneca seems to
have followed the traditions of both Greek dramas and combined them
in his play.
There are a number of interesting staging issues in this play. To start,
there is the question of the first act. It is peculiar that it can be divided
into two distinct parts, and that the first section is sung by Hippolytus in
anapests. As this is the meter that Seneca often uses for the choral paro-
dos, I suggested above that the Chorus may actually enter here, and con-
sist of Hippolytus companions. If this is the case, no longer is the first act
bifurcated, nor is the entrance song missing. It further explains who the
Chorus is, and why it is sympathetic to Hippolytus and hostile, or at least
indifferent, to Phaedra. And it sets the precedent for the Chorus being
such an active participant in this play. It speaks within an episode twice;
and at the end of every ode, the Chorus speaks in trimeter to announce
another characters entrance or ask a question. In general, the Chorus
of the Phaedra seems to be much more integrated into the action of this
play than in any other in the Senecan corpus. And this integration starts
from the very beginning, as Hippolytus initially introduces its members
as mute actors.
This may also be an indication of Hippolytus true transgression.
In the extant Euripidean version, it is made clear that the youth has
offended Aphrodite by not worshipping her. At a deeper level, Hippoly-
tus has violated the laws of nature and society. Artemis watched over and
protected the young of every species. But there was an expectation that
at the proper time, one would move on to the sexuality that Aphrodite
embodied. Hippolytus refuses to do this, and so his entire family struc-
ture is subverted, and everybody suffers.46 But in the Roman play, the
goddess of love does not announce the difficulty. Instead, Seneca has
Hippolytus assume a role that is not rightfully his. A speaking character
should not sing the choral parodos, but he does. So in this metadramati-
cal way, our playwright indicates that the young man is not behaving in a
manner acceptable to society.
It is also interesting to note that this play requires a great deal of stage
machinery. At least once, Phaedra appears in a window in the second
level of the scaenae frons.47 An exostra is necessary for Phaedras entrance
in act 3. And there are quite a few offstage sound cues. Perhaps this
reflects the machinations and scheming that Phaedra and the Nurse go
through throughout the play.
Finally, the role distribution in the play deserves comment. The actor
assigned to Phaedra has no other parts. The Nurse and the Messenger
are portrayed by the same actor, meaning that he plays all of the ser-
vants and intermediaries. Further, that actor does not return after the
account of the death of Hippolytus; clearly, after that, no further help is
necessary. And the remaining actor plays Hippolytus and Theseus, son
and father, victim and murderer. In a dramaturgical sense, Theseus truly
deprives Hippolytus of life, because when the one character is onstage,
there is not an actor available to portray the other.48 This also explains,
at least from a staging perspective, why Theseus does not confront his
son as he does in Euripides play. He cannot, unless the actor looks at
himself in the mirror. The result is that Senecas Theseus seems much
more tragic than Euripides. The Latin hero readily believes Phaedra
and leaps to punish his son. This makes his grief much worse when he
eventually learns the truth.
C h a pter 5
Medea
Dramatis Personae
Actor A Medea Medea Medea Medea Medea
Actor B Nurse tacita Nurse Nurse Nurse Nurse
Actor C Creon Jason Messenger/Jason
Two mute actors are required to portray the sons of Jason and Medea at
the end of act 4 and all of act 5.
Medea and her Nurse are present for all five acts,1 and so one actor
must be assigned to play each of these roles exclusively. The third actor
gets the remaining characters: Creon, Jason, and the Messenger. It is
significant that all are men, and that all are to a greater or lesser degree
hostile to Medea.
The Chorus does not identify itself, but its first song is a wedding
hymn or epithalamium, celebrating the beauty of Creusa. Thus it clearly
consists of people, presumably Corinthians, who approve of the marriage
between their princess and Jason. This is supported by the ensuing songs
that paint Medea and her achievements in a negative light. The initial
epithalamium mentions the bride standing among a female chorus (haec
cum femineo constitit in choro, unius facies praenitet omnibus, 9394), which
could possibly mean this Chorus is made up of Corinthian women.2 Oth-
ers argue that the first song follows the examples of Catullus 61 and 62,
and so the Chorus splits into two separate groups of men and women.3
But the only certainty is that, throughout the play, the Chorus is hostile
to Medea and friendly to Jason. In fact, Davis (1993), 2728, has the
81
Chorus absent for all the acts, except for the beginning of act 5, when it
interacts with the Messenger; he reasons that it is so inimical to Medea
that it would not stand idly by as she plots against Jason and Creusa.
Certainly Seneca is not averse to having the Chorus leave the stage in the
middle of the play. But in all other cases where this occurs (e.g., act 3 of
the Agamemnon), there is a good, dramatic reason for it to exit and then
reenter. This is not the case in this play. Nothing can justify a Chorus that
simply comes on in order to sing, and then immediately leaves. It makes
more sense for it to remain once it enters, serving as a silent reminder of
the danger Medea faces. The fact that it does not overhear her plans is
more a problem for those who demand excessive realism.4
The Set: Corinth
In this play, the center doors represent, not a palace as they do so

often in Senecan tragedy, but Medeas house. This is not quite the same
thing as a royal residence, but similar, since it is the home of the main
character. And since the center doors open into Medeas home, one
wing must lead to the palace, while the other leads out of town. Sutton
maintains that this play requires a two-building set, with one building
representing the palace, while the other stands for Medeas dwelling.5
The necessity for the representation of the palace is based on Medeas
announcement that the gates make a noise (sed cuius ictu regius cardo
strepit, 177) when Creon enters. But there is no reason that such gates
must be onstage. Instead, I think this is more likely an offstage sound
cue. The real doors to the palace would presumably be massive, and
one could hear them open all over town.
There is also an opening in the scaenae frons above the center doors,
and some kind of platform or balcony, accessible from backstage, for
Medea 83
Medea to stand on in act 5.6 The access to this platform must either be
a ladder or staircase onstage that Medea climbs in full view of the audi-
ence, while leading one son and carrying the corpse of the other, or else
there is an offstage staircase.7 The presence of an onstage ladder would
tip off the audience from the very start that eventually someone would
climb up. This would not only spoil any suspense that the effects might
have, but it would not fit in with Senecas general practice in this drama
for confounding audience expectations. The simplest explanation, then,
would be a backstage staircase.8
Act 1 (155 )
Action unit: Medea complains about Jasons unfaithfulness.
At line 1, Medea enters from the center doors of her house and
begins to speak. It is probable that the Nurse comes on at this point also,
although Sutton would have her enter at the beginning of act 2.9 But
throughout the play, she is a fairly constant companion and confidant
of her mistress, and so it would be most sensible to have her present,
though silent, from the very start of the drama. As usual, there is no
motivation for the entrance. Medea identifies herself (Medeae, 8) and
prays (precor, 12) with appropriate gestures. During the monologue, her
mind undergoes internal struggles (mens intus agitat, 47). She finally falls
silent at line 55, and withdraws to the scaenae frons, along with the Nurse.
Sutton gives the option for Medea to exit here, but acknowledges that it
would be better for her to remain onstage through the choral epithala-
mium.10 Further, when she speaks in the next act, she indicates that she
has heard the wedding song (aures pepulit hymenaeus meas, 116), indicat-
ing that she has been onstage the whole time.
The Chorus enters at line 56.11 It uses several meters, starting with minor
asclepiadeans, followed by glyconics, then another section of minor
asclepiadeans, and finally six lines of dactylic hexameter. Euripides does
not include a parallel wedding hymn in his Medea, but in the Bacchae
there is a similar ode, in which the Chorus orders its fellow bacchants
to go forth and honor Dionysus with their frolicking (15269). In that
passage, Euripides uses cantica polymetra, which include lines of glycon-
ics and of dactyls. On the other hand, the traditional meter for an epi-
thalamium is dactylic hexameter.12 So Seneca seems to be invoking the
precedent of Euripides by mixing meters, while at the same time evoking
tradition by including hexameters. At line 115, the Chorus concludes its
song and withdraws to the scaenae frons.13
Act 2 (116300)
Action units: (1) Medea and her Nurse discuss the situation. (2) Cre-
on banishes Medea from Corinth.
At line 116, Medea steps forward and speaks. The Nurses first words
beg Medea to be silent (sile obsecro, 150) and to keep her laments to herself.
It was not necessary for her to say anything before this, because nobody
else was there, and Medea could rage and plot revenge to her hearts
content. But now the Nurse is alert to the danger and warns Medea to be
careful because the Chorus, which is clearly hostile to her, is present and
capable of overhearing. Dialogue between Medea and the Nurse ensues
(15576), with neither character speaking for more than two lines, while
they frequently interrupt each other in the middle of lines.
Suddenly, the palace gates creak (sed cuius ictu regius cardo strepit?
177), cueing a sound effect from the wing leading to the palace. Medea
announces that an excited Creon enters (ipse est tumidus Creo, 178) from
the same wing, along with a number of silent guards (famuli, 188). He
begins to speak at line 179, but does not address Medea directly.14 She
steps fiercely into his path (fert gradum contra ferox, 186). Her expression
is threatening (minax, 187), and she moves closer to Creon so that she
can hear what he is saying (nostros propius affatus petit, 187). He orders
the mute attendants to keep Medea away from him (arcete, famuli, tactu
et accessu procul, 188), finally addressing her at line 190. Dialogue ensues
(192202). In response to Creons command that she leave (i, querere Col-
chis, 197), Medea breaks in midline with a promise to return (redeo; qui
avexit, ferat, 197). The two then exchange monologues (Medea: 20351;
Creon: 25271; Medea: 27380). At 24748, Medea describes the prop-
er actions of a petitioner: kneeling, stretching out her hands, touching
his garments, and so on; later, she performs these acts (supplex precor, 282,
Medea 85
and precor, 288). The scene ends with dialogue (281300), during which
Creon becomes so flustered that he twice interrupts in the middle of a
line (290 and 297). Finally, he exits via the wing leading to the palace,
saying that he must participate in the marriage rites for his daughter and
Jason (sacra me thalami vocant, vocat precari festus Hymenaeo dies, 299300).
It is possible that the audience can hear the wedding songs offstage; but
it is more likely that Creon simply knows that the time is approaching;
or else it is the equivalent of a childs I have to go. My mother is calling
me. Medea and the Nurse withdraw to the scaenae frons.15
At line 301, the Chorus steps forward. Its song consists entirely of ana-
pests, a quite common meter for Seneca. It withdraws to the scaenae frons
at the end of the ode (379).16
Act 3 (380578)
Action units: (1) Medea rages while the Nurse attempts to calm her
down. (2) Jason claims that he is doing his best to help a disbelieving
Medea. (3) She devises her plan to send the poisoned gifts to Creusa.
The Nurse steps forward at line 380 and addresses Medea (alumna,
380), who rushes into her house (celerem quo rapis tectis pedem? 380). Sut-
ton suggests that tectis means on the roof, and so Medea has climbed
onto the roof of the scaena.17 I think it more likely simply to mean to the
house,18 and so would have her exit through the center doors. By line
385, she has reentered. She rushes about here and there (recursat huc et
huc, 385), not only moving around the stage, but also in and out of the
center doors. Further, her actions are savage (motu effero, 385), like those
of a maenad (38284). Her face shows signs of frenzied rage (furoris ore
signa lymphati gerens, 386) and is flushed (flammata facies, 387) as she
works herself into a frenzy (spiritum ex alto citat, 387). Medea runs the
gamut of emotion (omnis specimen affectus capit, 389), crying out (procla-
mat, 388), weeping copiously (oculos uberi fletu rigat, 388), smiling (renidet,
389), hesitating, threatening, raging, complaining, and moaning (haeret
minatur aestuat queritur gemit, 390). Finally, rage gains the upper hand
over the other emotions (exundat furor, 392). According to the Nurse,
this anger is worse than anything she has ever seen in Medea (39496).
In fact, she seems to become the living embodiment of anger (vultum
Furoris cerno, 396). Eventually, Medea stops rushing back and forth and
delivers a monologue (397425), before being interrupted midline by
the Nurse, who in turn is interrupted by Medea. Sutton raises the possi-
bility that, after her final words (42930), the Nurse exits so that Medea
and Jason can speak in private; she would then return at 568 after his
departure.19 I see no reason for this, however. Seneca typically has a third
party silently observing dialogue, a role that the Nurse fills admirably
throughout the ensuing scene between her mistress and former master.
At line 431, Jason enters without announcement via the wing lead-
ing to the palace, and begins to speak. As soon as she sees him, Medea
angrily attacks him physically (ecce: viso memet exiluit, furit, 445), display-
ing her rage (fert odia prae se, 446) and obvious pain (totus in vultu est
dolor, 446). She then verbally assaults Jason (44789). In the following
dialogue (490560), both characters repeatedly burst in midline. Final-
ly, Jason exits (discessit, 560).
In the next monologue (56878), Medea addresses the Nurse, and
orders several things: that Medeas sons bring presents to Creusa; that
the gifts be enchanted; that Hecate be summoned; that deadly rites
be prepared; that the altars be set up; and that flames resound in the
house.20 When she is done, Medea exits with the Nurse through the cen-
ter doors into the house to take care of these things.
At line 579, the Chorus steps forward and sings in sapphic stanzas. It
prays with appropriate gestures (precamur, 595). At line 669, the song
ends, and the Chorus withdraws to the scaenae frons.21
Act 4 (670848)
Action units: (1) The Nurse describes Medeas offstage actions as

she prepares to perform the magic rituals. (2) Medea casts the spell
onstage. (3) She sends her children to the palace with presents for
Jasons new bride.
At line 670, the Nurse enters from the center doors and speaks,
shaking with fear (pavet animus, horret, 670). The following messenger
Medea 87
speech describes events that are happening offstage. Specifically, the

Nurse tells the audience what Medea is doing in the house.22 Nothing
in the speech should be taken as indications of stage business. At line
738, Medea enters from the center doors. She makes noise, moves with
a maddened pace, and sings (sonuit ecce vesano gradu canitque, 73839).
The earth trembles as Medea begins to speak (mundus vocibus primis tre-
mit, 739); this is, however, not a stage effect, but something the audience
is meant to imagine.
True to the Nurses word, Medea sings (comprecor, 740) in trochees.23
At line 752, she shifts back to iambic trimeter and speaks instead of sing-
ing. Lines 77186 consist of iambic trimeter and dimeter in alternation,
and would presumably be sung,24 as would the anapestic finale (787
842).25 If she does not actually dance to the various nonspeaking meters,
she would at least move rhythmically to the beat, praying to Hecate and
gesturing appropriately.
During the ensuing magic spell, a number of items are mentioned:
holy offerings to Hecate (79798), a burning torch (800), a branch from
the Underworld (8045), and a knife (809). I am hesitant to believe,
however, that these props actually appear physically onstage. It is doubt-
ful that an actor would really cut himself and bleed all over the altar; this
act was undoubtedly pantomimed. There would, then, be no need for an
actual knife. And if this item must be imagined, then why not the others?
Further, at 84142, the torch is said to light itself. It certainly is possible
that the Romans possessed the technology to achieve such an effect. But
it is equally possible, and in fact probable, that the audience would have
accepted the action just because they were told it was happening. Finally,
unless Medea is accompanied by silent attendants, which is not other-
wise indicated, it is hard to know how she would have carried all of these
objects with her when she entered from her house. I think, then, it is
most likely that all of these magical items were pantomimed.
As the spell-casting begins, Medea has unbound her hair (vinculo sol-
vens comam, 752) and is barefoot (nudo pede, 753).26 She places the cus-
tomary offering for Hecate on bloody sod (tibi sanguineo caespite sacrum
sollenme damus, 79798). A burning torch has been raised (fax nocturnos
sustulit ignes, 800), as Medea, having moved her head and bent her neck,
sings spells (mota caput flexa voces cervice dedi, 801). A headband encircles
her disheveled hair (passos cingit vitta capillos, 803) in funereal fashion
(funereo de more, 802). Medea places a branch from the Underworld on
the ground (iactatur tristis Stygia ramus ab unda, 8045). She bares her
breast and, in the manner of a maenad,27 prepares to strike her arms with
a knife (nudato pectore maenas sacro feriam bracchia cultro, 8067). Although
we are told that the blood is about to flow over the altar (manet noster san-
guis ad aras, 808), it is doubtful that the actor is really about to cut him-
self. More likely, just telling the audience that the self-mutilation is about
to happen is enough. Nevertheless, Medea draws the pantomimed knife
(assuesce, manus, stringere ferrum, 809). After much ado, she offers her
blood to Hecate (sacrum laticem percussa dedi, 811), who in acknowledg-
ment causes a dog to bark three times (ter latratus audax Hecate dedit, 840
41), cueing a sound effect. Finally, a torch appears to light by itself (et
sacros edidit ignes face luctifera, 84142), possibly indicating a stage effect.
With the spell concluded, Medea reverts to iambic trimeter and regu-
lar speech at line 843, summoning her sons (huc gnatos voca, 843), who
enter right away through the center doors, accompanied by the Nurse.28
Medea addresses the children (ite, ite, nati, 845), telling them to go to
the palace, give the gifts to Creusa, and hurry back. At line 848, the chil-
dren exit through the wing leading to the palace. The Nurse goes with
them. The ensuing ode describes Medeas mood, and so it is likely that
she remains onstage, receding to the scaenae frons,29 and performing the
actions as the Chorus narrates them.
The Chorus steps forward at line 849. It performs in iambic dimeters, an

interesting choice, since Medea has recently used it in her magic spell.
In the very first line of this song, the Chorus compares Medea, once
again, to a maenad,30 and calls her bloodthirsty as well (cruenta maenas,
849). Further, she is impetuous and seized by savage love (praeceps amore
saevo rapitur, 85051), though for whom is unclear. She displays power-
less rage (impotenti furore, 85152), is stiff with anger, and enraged (vul-
tus citatus ira riget, 85354). She shakes her head fiercely, while being
arrogant and threatening (caput feroci quatiens superba motu... minatur,
85456). Her face constantly changes color (nullum vagante forma servat
diu colorem, 86061): her cheeks blush and burn (flagrant genae rubentes,
858), before paleness drives away the redness (pallor fugat ruborem, 859).
Finally, Medea demonstrates her nervousness by pacing back and forth
(huc fert pedes et illuc, 862).
Act 5 (8791027)
Action units: (1) The Messenger tells the Chorus that the palace has
caught on fire. (2) Medea, with mixed emotions, ultimately decides
Medea 89
to kill her children. (3) Jason confronts her. (4) She flies off in the
chariot of the Sun.
At line 879, an unnamed Messenger enters. It is not clear who he is,

but he knows what has happened to Creusa and Creon, and so appar-
ently has come from the wing leading to the palace. It is also not clear
that the Chorus was done with its song. It simply stops when the Messen-
ger starts speaking. The rest of the play is spoken in iambic trimeter. The
following twelve lines consist of dialogue between the Messenger and
the Chorus, which speaks within an episode for the only time in this play.
This is an unusual messenger speech. It is short, and the Messenger does
not have a long solo passage.31 Further, the Messenger does not really
relay much information, except that Creusa was tricked by Medeas gifts,
which caused the palace to catch on fire, and the flames are threatening
to spread to the city. There is no description, for example, of the princess
being overjoyed by the presents, burning up, and being helped by her
father who sticks to her and likewise goes up in flames.32 All Seneca tells
us is that there was a fire that killed Creon and his daughter, and that all
of Corinth is in danger. Following his final words at line 890, the Mes-
senger exits. He is fleeing the fire, and so goes out the wing leading away
from town. The Chorus does not speak again, and has so far expressed
no sympathy with Medea. It does not seem to care what happens to her,
nor does it express any interest in the outcome. So it is probable that the
Chorus heeds the Messengers warning and exits, also via the wing lead-
ing away from town.33
At line 891, the Nurse enters, with Medeas sons from the palace, and
advises her to flee (89192).34 There is a bit of confusion here, since
one manuscript branch assigns this warning not to the Nurse but to the
Messenger. In that case, he would defer his exit two more lines. And
since these are the only words the Nurse speaks, there would be no need
for her to enter at all if the lines belong to the Messenger. But Medea
addresses her sons in her ensuing speech (liberi quondam mei, vos poenas
date, 92425),35 and then kills them onstage; so they must return from
the palace at some point. The Nurse escorted them to the palace, and
so would presumably bring them home again. As long as she is onstage,
she might as well say something. Further, there seems to be a division
throughout the drama between the Chorus on one hand and Medea
and the Nurse on the other. The Messenger has aligned himself with
the Chorus, and so it is doubtful that he would now address the hated
Medea, especially as she has just caused the death of the king and his
daughter. I think it most sensible, then, that as the Messenger and Cho-
rus exit through one wing, the Nurse enters with the children via the
wing leading to the palace.36
At line 893, Medea steps forward and speaks. Horror strikes her heart
(cor pepulit horror, 926), and her limbs grow stiff with cold (membra tor-
pescunt gelu, 926). Finally, her breast trembles (pectusque tremuit, 927),
as she weeps (ora lacrimae rigant, 937). Medea then summons her sons
to her (huc, cara proles,... huc vos ferte, 94546).37 She hugs them (infu-
sos mihi coniungite artus, 94647), demonstrating her affection for them.
But her mental anguish has returned (rursus increscit dolor, 951), and her
hatred for Jason burns within her (fervet odium, 952). Now Medea begins
to hallucinate, first seeing a Fury (antiqua Erinys, 953, continuing into
95866), then the brother whom she slew on Jasons behalf (frater est,
964, continuing into 96771). At last, she draws a sword (manu quae
strinxit ensem, 96970) and kills one of the children (victima manes tuos
placamus ista, 97071). But before she can slay the other (caede incohata,
974), she hears Jason offstage as he approaches (quid repens affert sonus?
971), a cue for a sound effect. Medea states her intention to climb onto
the roof of her house (excelsa nostrae tecta conscendam domus, 973).38 She
addresses first the surviving boy (perge tu mecum comes, 974), and then the
dead child (tuum quoque ipsa corpus hinc mecum aveham, 975). She exits
following her last words at line 977, carrying the corpse.39
At line 978, Jason enters via the wing from the palace, accompanied
by a number of mute attendants. He immediately begins to speak, call-
ing together Corinthians to help him find Medea, whom he cannot see
because she is on her way to the roof. The ensuing scene consists of short
alternating speeches.40 Medea enters on the roof and speaks at line 982,
although Jason does not spot her until later (en ipsa tecti parte praecipiti
imminet, 995). He orders someone to fetch him a torch (huc rapiat ignes
aliquis, 996). Medea points to the corpse (gnatus hic, 1000), preparing
to kill the remaining boy while Jason watches below (hic te vidente dabitur
exitio pari, 1001). In full view of her former husband, she slays their son
(hac... ferrum exigam, 1006) and threatens to defile the corpse (scrutabor
ense viscera et ferro extraham, 1013).
As the scene ends, a chariot drawn by serpents appears in order to
carry Medea away (squamosa gemini colla serpentes iugo summissa praebent,
102324). In Euripides Medea, this effect is achieved by using the machi-
na. We can assume that Seneca would have used a similar device.41 As she
flies away (ego inter auras aliti curru vehar, 1025), Medea either tosses the
bodies to Jason, or else indicates that he can now climb up and get them
(recipe iam gnatos, parens, 1024).42 Jason speaks the final words of the play
(102627) as he watches his ex-wife disappear. The tragedy comes to a
Medea 91
close with Jason onstage with the corpses of his sons, either at his feet
or still on the roof of the scaena, along with the attendants, and with the
Nurse cowering by the scaenae frons.
Conclusions
There are clear parallels to Euripides Medea (ca. 431). In both plays,
Medea is confronted both by Creon, who ultimately agrees to give her
the time she needs to exact her revenge, and by Jason, who claims that
his actions are in everyones best interests; and in both plays Jason
comes back in the end just in time to see the corpses of his children
and Medeas escape. Both plays feature Medea slaying her own sons,43
and then escaping on a magic chariot that had been a gift from her
grandfather, the Sun. So it would seem that Seneca was at least drawing
on the Euripidean tradition. But the Roman playwright also makes some
substantial changes: he makes the Chorus unsympathetic to Medea,
eliminates the appearance of Aegeas,44 substantially increases the role of
the Nurse while doing away with the boys Tutor, portrays the casting of
the magic spell onstage, and has the fire consume not only Creusa and
Creon but the entire palace. It is unknown whether the Greek versions
by Neophron or Carcinus or the Latin renditions by Ennius or Ovid con-
tained these alterations, or even if Seneca was familiar with these plays.
Senecas drama, like Medea herself, is full of contradictions. On the
one hand, there seem to be fewer directions than in some of the other
tragedies. The characters mainly stand and talk, either in soliloquy or to
each other, without indicating much action or emotion, at least until act
3. Arguably, this could be because the play is concerned not with action
but with Medeas inner struggles. But the same could be said for the
Hercules Furens, and yet that play is full of descriptions of what Hercules
is going through emotionally. On the other hand, this play has a great
number of technical effects. Medea climbs up on the roof of her house,
and then flies away in the chariot of the Sun; thus, both some kind of
balcony on the second tier of the scaenae frons and also a machina are
required. There are a number of offstage sound effects. And of course
the centerpiece of the drama is Medeas magic incantation in act 4. It is
almost as if Seneca was saving the good stuff for the end of the play, start-
ing off slow and then building to a fever pitch. But regardless of when
they occur, the abundance of such technical devices, as in the Phaedra,
reflects Medeas schemes and machinations.
As always, some of the entrances and exits are announced, and others
are not. But in this play, a small pattern can be detected. Jasons move-
ments on and off the stage are never announced. This fits in nicely with
Medeas own perceptions of the man. He is a kind of blind spot to her,
causing her to do things, such as betraying her father and killing her
brother, without really noticing the morality of these acts. And yet, in the
end, they cause her great pain. Similarly, Jason in the drama can come
and go without comment.
The play also seems to challenge audience expectations.45 Anyone
familiar with Euripides play would be shocked at the absence of Aegeas,
and at the unsympathetic Chorus. The former means that a spectator
unaware of the story would have no idea what happens to Medea after
she escapes. The latter means that Medea must rely much more on her
Nurse for support and sympathy, and perhaps must act somewhat stealth-
ily in order to avoid premature detection. Throughout the play, one can
see this division between Medea and the Nurse on one side, and the
Chorus on the other; it is nowhere more clear than in act 5, where the
Messenger speaks only with the Chorus, who then exits with him. And yet
Seneca assumes that his audience does know the story, as he has Medea
repeatedly say that she will take on the part of Medea and behave the way
that role requires.
But more than playing with narrative expectations, Seneca also plays
with dramatic ones. Again, we assume that in performance the play
would utilize an upper platform and a machina. And yet, no other known
Roman tragedy seems to use these devices. And the whole concept of the
messenger speech is turned on its ear. The one true messenger speech in
this play is delivered by the Nurse. She is unnamed, as we would expect;
but she does not simply come on, present her information, and then
leave. Rather, this narration occurs in the middle of the play, and is only
one of several functions the character performs. On the other hand,
there is an actual Messenger, who comes on in the final act. He, however,
participates only in dialogue with the Chorus, and when all is said and
done does not really give much information. Since neither the Nurse
nor the Chorus nor the Messenger is behaving as one might expect, is
there any surprise that Medea must continually remind herself to act like
herself?
C h a pter 6
Hercules Furens (Mad Hercules)
Dramatis Personae
Actor A Juno Lycus Theseus Theseus Theseus
Actor B Amphitryo Amphitryo Amphitryo Amphitryo
Actor C Megara Hercules Hercules/Megara Hercules
Three mute actors are required to portray the sons of Hercules and Meg-
ara in acts 2 and 4.
Since Juno is the only speaking character in act 1, and she does
not appear subsequently, the actor portraying her could, in theory, be
assigned any of the other roles. Of the remaining characters, Amphitryo
is onstage for all four acts; therefore, once an actor assumes that role,
he can take on no others. Lycus and Megara are present together, as are
Hercules and Theseus, and so these two pairs must be played by differ-
ent actors.
Act 2 provides further clues and complications. The second half of
this act consists of a confrontation between, on the one side, Megara
and Amphitryo, and the tyrant Lycus on the other. The episode ends
with Lycus commanding Megara to seek sanctuary (complectere aras, 503).
Some scholars assume that Megara clings for safety to an actual onstage
altar.1 Lycus goes on to command his servants to pile wood upon it and
set it on fire, thus threatening the wife and children of Hercules with
death (5068). He then exits (51415), as Amphitryo prays to the gods
(51623). Following a choral hymn, Hercules and Theseus enter, having
recently emerged from the Underworld (592). Amphitryo has remained
93
onstage. Zwierlein assumes Megara is still present as well, clinging to the

altar, although she does not speak again until the fourth episode.2 Four
speaking characters seem to be present, and so a fourth actor would
be necessary to play Theseus, thereby breaking the rule of three actors.
Sutton, on the other hand, thinks that at some point during the choral
passage, the actor portraying Megara leaves quietly, changes masks, and
then comes on as Theseus; a mute supernumerary sneaks on to resume
the onstage presence of Megara.3 This exchange of roles, while nicely
doing away with the need for a fourth speaking actor, is, however, both
awkward and unprecedented.4
But some extraordinary staging seems necessary, since Hercules,
shortly after entering, asks about the appearance of his family (62628);
and he addresses his wife as he leaves (63839). These lines imply that
Megara and the children are in fact onstage. On the contrary, I would
suggest that Hercules is hallucinating. Juno, in the prologue, proclaims
that it is her intent to drive Hercules mad (84124). Later signs of this
madness will be Hercules seeing the constellations run amok in the sky
(93952), and then mistaking his wife and sons for his enemies (1001
2, 101820), thus leading to their slaughter. The manifestation, then,
of this Juno-inspired madness is an inability to trust his eyesight. Fitch,
in discussing Hercules sane versus Hercules insane,5 recognizes that
Hercules is close to insanity in his daily modus vitae, and that when
he has reached the highest pitch of megalomania, his mind topples
over into madness.6 I would argue, however, that Seneca depicts not a
sudden freefall, but a steady build. From his very first entrance, Hercu-
les is already seeing things that are not there. In addition, when Juno
instructs the Furies to harass her stepson, she calls one of them by name:
Megaera (102).7 The clever wordplay suggests that Hercules may think he
addresses his wife, Megara, when in fact he sees Megaera, the embodi-
ment of madness.
Theseus further complicates matters when, after Hercules exit, he
addresses Megara (64142). There is no other indication that he shares
his friends madness, so he would not also be hallucinating. But a few
lines later, Theseus himself provides an explanation when he states that
he is having trouble seeing after spending so much time in the land of
the dead (65153).8 He may mistake an attendant or some other shape
perhaps even the ubiquitous altarfor Megara.9 Or, perhaps, convinced
of her presence since Hercules has just addressed her, the partially blind
Theseus may simply be following his friends lead, speaking to his wife
as politeness would dictate, regardless of whether she is actually there.
Thus, Theseus words are not necessarily proof of Megaras presence.
Hercules Furens (Mad Hercules) 95
But if Megara is actually no longer onstage during act 3, where did

she go, and when? As was noted previously, Lycus, before his exit at the
end of act 2, advises her to keep clinging to the altars for safety, and then
orders his servants to set fire to the shrine in which she and the children
are hiding. Fitch assumes this altar is in front of the center doors, which
he takes to represent the palace, as they do in many Senecan plays, such
as the Agamemnon and the Oedipus.10 But this entrance does not always
stand for the royal residence. In act 3 of the Troades, for example, the
main doors represent the tomb of Hector. Andromache hides Astyanax
there in hopes that she can prevent his capture by Ulixes. All is going
well with this plan until the Ithacan threatens to tear down the tomb,
which would ironically cause the child to be killed by his own sanctu-
ary, as well as symbolically by his own father.11 Similarly, in the Hercules
Furens, the central doors must represent the temple into which Megara
and the children flee for safety after her last words to Lycus, and in front
of which the king orders his servants to pile wood, thus dramaturgically
giving a reason for closing the doors until later.12 Much like the tomb
of Hector in the Troades, this temple does not offer much protection to
Megara, as it is first threatened by Lycus, and later stormed by the finally
fully insane Hercules, who kills his own children, as Hector nearly did. In
act 5, once Hercules has come to his senses, the center doors are opened
and an exostra used to reveal the corpses inside the temple.
The play, then, only needs three actors, as long as the same perform-
er portrays both Hercules and Megara, shouting the lines of both charac-
ters from offstage during the slaughter in act 4.13 Besides being a practi-
cal necessity, such a pairing lets the same actor play husband and wife,
along with murderer and victim. This, then, leaves the third actor being
assigned Lycus in act 2 and Theseus in acts 3, 4, and 5. The only part
remaining is Juno. In the prologue, the goddess expresses her intent to
persecute Hercules, and then to stand back and observe the carnage.
When the action of the play begins, the tyrant, Lycus, threatens and oth-
erwise abuses Megara and Amphitryo, the family of Hercules. And for
large portions of the drama, Theseus is onstage, silently observing his
friends misfortunes. Lycus and Theseus, then, carry out the actions that
Juno promised, and so it would be highly symbolic for all three charac-
ters to be portrayed by the same actor.14
Finally, there is little textual indication of who the Chorus is.15 The
fact that this identification is unclear from the text is in keeping with the
tragedys theme of madness, uncertainty, and ambiguity. In Euripides
Herakles, it is clearly stated that the Chorus consists of elderly Theban
citizens.16 But there is no similar identification in our Roman drama,
nor any clue in the manuscripts; and so Senecas Chorus could be any
group of people who are interested in and sympathetic with Hercules
and his family. Its main role throughout the drama is to observe and
comment, although it does apparently remove Hercules weapons after
he collapses.17 It is doubtful that it represents the Furies and other deni-
zens of the Underworld Juno addressed in the prologue, as they would
be visible only to Hercules, whereas this Chorus addresses Amphitryo
at lines 103234, and Theseus announces its presence at lines 82729.
Another reasonable guess would be female servants of Megara; but the
Chorus remains long after she has exited, and it speaks sympathetically
to Hercules after he kills her. In the third choral song, a number of
celebratory events are described. It is possible, but by no means certain,
that the Chorus is performing these acts. It goes on to sing of a chorus of
young women mixed with men, which would be a clue as to its identity,
if the Chorus is, in fact, relating its own actions. But, as this is extremely
tenuous, it may be best to simply identify the Chorus as Thebans.
The Set: Thebes
The center doors in this play represent not the royal residence as
in most Senecan drama, but a temple.18 One wing leads to the palace,
which could be seen as equivalent to the forum, that is, a public place
where public events happen, while Hercules and Theseus use the other
on their approach from the Underworld, the ultimate foreign part.
Act 1 (1124 )
Action unit: Juno delivers the prologue, informing the audience of
her intent to drive Hercules mad.
At line 1, Juno enters and begins her monologue. She identifies her-
self as Jupiters sister (soror tonantis, 1), but, as is typical for Senecan trag-
edy, she gives no motivation for her entrance. She is a goddess, and so it
would be appropriate for her to appear ex machina, hovering in the air
above the stage. She states unequivocally, however, that all the mortal
harlots with whom Jupiter has slept and produced sons have usurped
her accustomed place on Mt. Olympus (ac templa summi vidua deservi aeth-
eris locumque caelo pulsa paelicibus dedi, 34). Thus, Juno has been evicted
from her usual spot, and stands on the stage as any other mortal charac-
ter would.19 There is also no indication of which entrance she uses, but
the temple is a fitting place for her to spend her exile. While discuss-
ing the various lovers of Jupiter and their children who have taken over
the heavens as constellations, she uses demonstrative pronouns to point
them out (hinc... hinc... illinc... hinc... hinc, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14). It is
possible that the constellations are actually painted on the scaenae frons,
but more likely that she merely gesticulates toward the sky as she talks.
Further, when Juno talks of the river Styx (en retegit Styga, 54), as well as
the horrors of the Underworld (hic tibi ostendam inferos, 91) that she will
show to Hercules here on earth, such sights should not be thought to be
realistically portrayed. Instead, such statements speak to the theme of the
play: madness. Just as in Shakespeares Macbeth, the characters describe
things, and the audience is not sure whether they are real or not. As early
as the prologue, then, Seneca establishes that the spectators cannot trust
their eyes, and that the characters are not necessarily in touch with real-
ity. At line 118, Juno says she will remain (stabo) and supervise the Furies
as they persecute Hercules, another indication that things are not what
they seem. The audience is to accept the presence of Juno as it watches
the rest of the play, even though she is not physically present. In fact,
following line 124, Juno exits, going into the temple through the center
doors. She does not give any motivation, nor comment on her departure
in any way, aiding the illusion that she is still present in spirit; that is, if
she does not discuss her leaving, it is almost as if she is still here.
At line 125, the Chorus enters20 via the wing leading to the forum and
moves to center stage, singing in anapests. It establishes the time of day
and year by describing constellations and other astronomical events
(12536). It further describes the sound of birds (14651), indicating
a sound cue.
Act 2 (202523)
Action units: (1) Amphitryo and Megara, the father and wife of Hercu-
les, enter, and (2) bemoan the heros absence from Thebes. (3) The
evil king, Lycus, demands that Megara marry him. (4) She refuses.
In an odd transition, partly sung and partly spoken, the Chorus

announces the entrance of Megara (Megara, 203) and Amphitryo (Alci-
dae parens, 204) from the wing leading to the palace and the forum (202
4); the first two lines are anapestic, while the third reverts to trimeters.
Megara is sad (maesta, 202), with unbound hair (crine soluto, 202), and
accompanied by her children (parvum comitata gregem, 203), portrayed
by mute actors. Amphitryo moves slowly because of his old age (tardus
senio graditur, 204). Having finished, the Chorus moves back, silently, to
the scaenae frons.21
Amphitryo first delivers a long speech (20578), followed by Megara
(279308). Dialogue then ensues (30928). At line 313, Megara breaks
in midline, snapping at Amphitryos naive belief that Heracles will soon
return; in response, Amphitryo, equally snappishly, interrupts in the
middle of line 314.
At lines 32931, Megara announces the entrance of Lycus (Lycus,
331), accompanied by mute attendants. His mood, raging and threaten-
ing (saevus ac minas vultu gerens, 329), is reflected in the way he walks and
carries himself (qualis animo est talis incessu venit, 330), and he brandishes
a scepter in his right hand (aliena dextra sceptra concutiens, 331).22 Lycus
confirms this statement later on (rapta sed trepida manu sceptra optinentur,
34142; and sceptra geram dextra, 399400); but whereas Megara states
that he shakes it deliberately in a threatening manner, Lycus blames his
trembling hand, making it sound involuntary. Thus, Seneca shows two
characters interpreting the same event in two different ways. Further,
Lycus comment indicates weakness on his part. He cannot control his
body. His hand seems to be shaking of its own accord. It either is not
strong enough to bear the power he has seized, or it somehow antici-
pates the return of Hercules and the subsequent death of Lycus. The
direction could also be a form of synecdoche: Lycus whole body could
shake, not only his right hand. Perhaps he displays other tics as the scene
progresses, which Megara interprets as savageness. When Lycus begins
to speak at line 332, his monologue continues until 371, with a short
interruption by Megara at 358; Lycus resumes in the middle of 359.
During the speech, he draws a sword with his left hand (strictus tuetur
ensis, 344).23 As if he had not previously noticed their presence, Lycus

describes Megara and Amphitryo. She wears a mourning veil (tristi vestis
obtentu caput velata, 35556), and has taken refuge near the doors of
the temple (iuxta praesides adstat deos, 356). Amphitryo clings to her side
(laterique adhaeret, 357). Lycus stretches out his right hand for Megara
to take in acceptance of his marriage proposal (continge dextram, 371);
instead she fiercely remains silent (quid truci vultu siles? 371).
After a pause, Megara refuses Lycus, indicating that his hand is, figu-
ratively, covered in blood (sanguine aspersam manum, 372). The two char-
acters exchange speeches and engage in dialogue (372438), with the
occasional midline interruption by Megara. Although three speaking
actors are present, this scene follows the usual Senecan practice of rarely
having more than two of them engage in conversation at any one time.
After hearing Lycus proposal, Megara grows pale and shakes (gelidus per
artus vadit exanguis tremor, 414), fearing such a marriage bed (thalamos
tremesco, 418). Finally, at line 439, Amphitryo, who has been silent since
Lycus entrance, and who has endured the kings insults as well as the
proposition to Megara, has now had enough. In response to Lycus inso-
lent question (quo patre genitus, 438), Amphitryo first tells his daughter-
in-law to be quiet (miseranda coniunx Herculis magni, sile, 439), and then
takes her place in the dialogue with the king. Megara obeys, not speaking
again until lines 495500, when she says the last words until her death.
At line 503, she exits,24 with her children, through the center doors into
the temple as Lycus commands her to seek sanctuary (complectere aras,
503). He further orders his mute servants to gather firewood (congerite
silvas, 506) and set the temple on fire (templa flagrent, 5067), so that the
wife and children of Hercules might be burned (coniugem et totum gregem
consumat rogus, 5078). These commands, as far as we can tell, are not
completely fulfilled.25 The servants might pile firewood before the cen-
ter doors; but Megara and her children are not consumed by flames
unless by the metaphorical fires of Hercules passion. It is unlikely that
an actual fire would be started onstage. The Chorus is not particularly
concerned about the flames during its subsequent song. And the arrival
of Hercules in the next episode is not greeted with Put out the fire!
Your family is burning! The lack of actual flames may indicate that the
guards have either piety for the gods or pity for Megara; in either case,
Lycus power is not as absolute as he believes. But, apparently confident
that his servants will, in fact, set the temple on fire in his absence, Lycus
exits through the wing leading to the forum and the palace, intending
to go and pray to Neptune (sacro regentem maria votivo colam, 515) while
the pyre burns (dum cremandis trabibus accrescit rogus, 514). Amphitryo
remains onstage, praying to the gods (51620). He sees the temple move
(subito labant agitata motu templa, 52021), hears the ground moan (mugit
solum, 521), and perceives a sound coming from the earth (infernus imo
sonuit e fundo fragor, 522). It is doubtful that the scaenae frons actually tot-
ters here,26 but the sound effects are more possible. Or, like the effects
that Juno describes in the prologue, like the blood Megara thinks she
sees on Lycus hands, and like the fire that Lycus thinks consumes Meg-
ara, this could be another hallucination. Again, a character seesand
this time hearssomething other than what the audience witnesses. And
again we in the audience must ask whether we can trust our own senses.
Since there is no indication that Amphitryo exits, and indeed he is an
active participant in the next act from the very beginning, he retires to
the scaenae frons as soon as he stops speaking.
At line 524, the Chorus begins its song, consisting entirely of minor
asclepiadeans. Since it enters again at lines 82729 and there is no other
good place for it to leave between now and then, it is probable that the
Chorus exits at the conclusion of its song.27 Since Hercules and Theseus
will enter shortly from the wing leading to the Underworld, and Amphi-
tryo stands near the center doors, the Chorus must go out through the
same wing it had previously entered from, the one leading toward the
palace and the forum. Evidently, after singing of the injustices suffered
by both Hercules and Orpheus, it gets depressed and goes home.
Act 3 (592829)
Action units: (1) Hercules and Theseus emerge from the Under-
world. (2) Amphitryo tells them about the evil deeds of Lycus. (3)
While Hercules is offstage killing the tyrant, Theseus paints a vivid
description of the Underworld and Hercules adventures there.
At line 592, Hercules enters, with Theseus, via the wing leading to the
Underworld. There is no announcement; or rather, Hercules entrance
was announced by Amphitryo prior to the choral song (est sonitus Her-
culei gradus, 523), and it took seventy lines for the hero to appear;28 he
is not identified until his father calls him son (natus, 621 and nate,
622). Hercules simply starts talking, thus indicating that he must have
come onstage. He speaks for twenty-four lines before spotting either the
guards at the temple or his father, who is still onstage, probably near the
center doors, but nearer to the wing leading to the palace, since Hercu-
les does not seem to see him. The delay suggests that it takes a long time
to walk to the center from the side entrance.29 Hercules addresses the
sun (o lucis almae rector et caeli decus, 592), indicating that he is looking
up. He finally begins to notice his surroundings, namely that soldiers
are guarding the center doors (sed templa quare miles infestus tenet limenque
sacrum terror armorum obsidet? 61617).
At line 618, Amphitryo speaks. He is not sure whether his eyes
deceive him (utrumne visus vota decipiunt meos, 618), or whether Hercu-
les has actually returned. Happiness paralyzes Amphitryo (membra laeti-
tia stupent, 621), explaining why he does not run to his long-absent son
with open arms. Hercules is recognized by his muscles and shoulders
(agnosco toros umerosque, 62425), possibly denoting some kind of cos-
tume, perhaps a padded toga; more probably, simply telling the audi-
ence that the actor has a Herculean physique would be enough. He also
proudly carries his signature club (et alto nobile in trunco manum, 625).30
He asks his father why his wife and children are filthy and in mourn-
ing clothes (62628), providing an early sign that he has already begun
to hallucinate, since his family exited before his entrance.31 After being
informed of Lycus evil deeds (62930), Hercules addresses Theseus
(Theseu, 637), for the first time acknowledging that the Athenian hero
entered with him. Hercules tells his friend to remain (resiste, 637), thus
explaining why Theseus does not go with him. Finally, Hercules declares
his intention to slay Lycus (nuntiet Diti Lycus me iam redisse, 63940), and
then exits via the wing leading to the palace.
At line 640, Theseus pauses and then speaks for the first time, begin-
ning his statement in the middle of a line. He must have followed Her-
cules to the middle of the stage, and so stands near Amphitryo close to
the center doors. He plays along with his friend, addressing the absent
Megara (regina, 641). He then turns his attention to Amphitryo, who is
on the verge of weeping for joy (tuque nato sospite lacrimas cadentes reprime,
64142). In response to the fathers request (64557), Theseus reluc-
tantly delivers a messenger speech describing the adventures of Hercules
in the Underworld (662827).32
Theseus breaks off his story suddenly in the middle of line 827 to
announce the arrival of a large group of people (densa sed laeto venit
clamore turba frontibus laurum gerens magnique meritas Herculis laudes canit,
82729). Such an announcement is fairly typical of Greek New Com-
edy,33 and Seneca uses the same device at Oedipus 4012.34 In the Oedipus,
however, Tiresias simply announces that while he is gone, the Chorus
will sing a song in praise of Bacchus. What makes the present announce-
ment unusual is the present-indicative verb venit. Clearly, this crowd is
now entering the stage. There has been some scholarly discussion as to
whether this is a second Chorus or whether the previous one exited,
unannounced, at some time in the past. Sutton claims this is another
Chorus,35 while others disagree.36 Textually, this is indeed problematic.
The just-mentioned scholars all point out that in Greek tragedy, there
is always a good thematic reason for introducing a secondary Chorus;37
they then proceed to argue about what a good thematic reason might
be. But the consideration of stagecraft can suggest a solution. Although
Calder argues persuasively that a Senecan Chorus consists of three to
seven people,38 the stage is still not big enough to fit five to nine people
standing still (the first Chorus plus Amphitryo and Theseus), in addi-
tion to three to seven people dancing. It is more likely that the origi-
nal Chorus exited, silently, at the end of its last song (line 591). It now
enters wearing laurel wreaths and singing praises to Hercules, having
just passed the hero (offstage) on his way to kill Lycus. It has returned
to Amphitryo so that they may all rejoice together. There is no reason to
think that Amphitryo and Theseus exit during the song. And indeed, in
the next episode, Hercules addresses Theseus and engages in conversa-
tion with Amphitryo. Instead, the two men retire to the scaenae frons.
At line 830, the Chorus begins to sing in minor sapphics, later changing
at line 875 to glyconics. After the metrical change, it describes a num-
ber of celebratory events (aras tangite supplices, pingues caedite victimas.
permixtae maribus nurus sollemnes agitent choros, 87679), raising the pos-
sibility that the Chorus actually performs these activities while it sings.
It ends the song with an address to a priest, telling him to don a poplar
wreath (stantes sacrificus comas dilecta tege populo, 89394). Fitch sensibly
suggests that the priest is actually Hercules himself,39 making the remark
an entrance announcement.
Act 4 (8951053)
Action units: (1) Hercules returns triumphant; (2) but suddenly he

has visions, mistaking his own wife and children for the family of
Lycus. (3) He then brutally kills them, one by one, (4) and finally
collapses.
At line 895, Hercules, having entered from the wing leading to the
forum and the palace, speaks. The Chorus withdraws to the scaenae frons,40
and Amphitryo and Theseus step forward. The ensuing act is emotion-
ally fraught, as is demonstrated by frequent midline interruptions. Her-
cules carries weapons with him, specifically a bow (lines 99295) and a
club (lines 9991001). He prays to Minerva (te te precor, belligera Pallas,
900901) with appropriate gestures, then addresses Theseus (te Theseu,
91314).41 Next, he commands mute attendants to pour incense upon
the altars (date tura flammis, 918). But Amphitryo interrupts his son in
the middle of a line, to tell him to wash his hands, still dripping from the
slaughter of Lycus (nate, manantes prius manus cruenta caede et hostili expia,
91819). Hercules responds with a wish that he could use the gore as a
libation (utinam cruore capitis invisi deis libare possem, 92021), throwing
up his hands to bespatter the stage, the altar, his father, and possibly even
the front rows of the audience.
Suddenly Hercules breaks off his rant in the middle of line 939, as
his hallucinations take over in earnest (acieque falsum turbida caelum vides?
954). He paces back and forth (quo, nate, vultus huc et huc acres refers?
953), showing by his actions, not just his words, that he is seeing things
that nobody else can see. Finally, he thinks he sees the children of Lycus
(sed ecce proles regis inimici latet, 987), mistakenly identifying his own sons
for the progeny of his enemy. Since the boys had previously exited into
the temple with their mother, the mute actors who portrayed them in the
first act must be peeking through the center doors.
At line 991, the slaughter begins. Hercules has drawn his bow and let
a whistling arrow fly. The missile passes through the neck and leaves a
fatal wound (99295). But clearly this is not really happening onstage.
Instead, Hercules, standing to one side of the center doors, mimes the
actions as Amphitryo describes them: he pulls back the bow and fires
an imaginary arrow into the temple. The mute actor playing the son of
Hercules, hiding behind the slightly ajar center doors, staggers back, as
if having been hit. Thus, Hercules and his son act out the basic actions
of the killing, and Amphitryo fills in the details for the audience. Megara
and another silent boy must pull the corpse inside and shut the doors,
which Hercules then attacks with his club, breaking the bar and the gates
themselves, and causing cracks and collapsed columns (huc eat et illuc
clava disiecto obice rumptatque postes. columen impulsum labet. perlucet omnis
regia, 9991001). Again, the actor does not literally destroy the set, but
instead hacks at the scenery with his club and lets his words help the
audience fill in the details of destruction. He calls the structure regia
instead of templa, reminding the audience that he thinks he is killing the
children of the king, who of course would have gone to the palace for
refuge. As a result of the attack, the doors are slightly ajar, allowing Her-
cules to see his second son (hic video abditum gnatum scelesti patris, 1001
2). He exits into the temple through the center doors, while Amphitryo
moves to the slender opening and looks within, reporting what he sees.42
After a short pause, the old man describes the next murder, which
occurs behind the center doors. The child touches his fathers knees in
supplication (blandas manus ad genua tendens, 1002) and begs for mercy
in a wretched voice (voce miseranda rogat, 1003). The raging Hercules,
however, seizes the suppliant (precantem rapuit furens, 1005) and sends
him spinning numerous times (bis ter rotatum misit, 1006). The childs
head makes a noise (illi caput sonuit, 10067) when it hits, and the ceil-
ing of the temple drips with scattered brains (cerebro tecta disperso madent,
1007). But Megara, also raging (furenti similis, 1009), tries to protect her
third son (parvum protegens gnatum sinu, 1008) and flees from the shad-
ows (e latebris fugit, 1009). Lines 101011, spoken by Hercules, 1015
17, spoken by Megara, and 101820, again by Hercules, are all deliv-
ered from offstage by the same actor43in a very real sense, Hercules is
depriving Megara of life by taking the only available actor.
After another short pause, Amphitryo vividly describes for the audi-
ence the offstage killings of Megara and the third child of Hercules.
The boy is truly terrified (pavefactus spiritum eripuit pavor, 102223) by
his fathers fiery expression (igneo vultu, 1022), while Hercules smash-
es Megara with his club (in coniugem nunc clava libratur gravis, 1024).
Amphitryo, meanwhile, points to the slaughter (stipitem istum huc caede,
1029). At lines 103234, the Chorus speaks in iambic trimeter within an
episode for the first, and only, time in this play, addressing an onstage
character. Amphitryo rushes around the stage in his grief (quo te ipse
ingeris? Quo pergis amens? 103233). The Chorus advises him to seek shel-
ter, lest he too be killed by Hercules (profuge et obtectus late unumque mani-
bus aufer Herculeis scelus, 103334), but Amphitryo has no time to obey.
At line 1035, Hercules reenters from the center doors and speaks.
Only his words mark his entrance. He points to the corpses of his wife
and children (hunc gregem, 103637), indicating that they are onstage.
When the center doors open for his entrance, the exostra must roll out
with a tableau of the slaughter. Amphitryo stands nearby (stat ecce ad
aras hostia, 1040),44 with his neck bent in the manner of a sacrificial vic-
tim (expectat manum cervice prona, 104041). Like nearly everyone else
involved with this play at one time or another, including the audience,
he questions his eyesight (quid hoc est? errat acies luminum visusque mae-
ror hebebat? 104243). Nevertheless, he continues to describe Hercules
actions. His hands tremble (Herculis manus trementes, 104344). His eyes
droop shut (vultus in somnum cadit, 1044), and his head sinks (et fessa
cervix capite summisso labat, 1045). Finally, his knees give way and he falls
to the ground (flexo genu iam totus ad terram ruit, 1046). Hercules sleeps
(sopor est, 1050), but it is a fitful rest (reciprocos spiritus motus agit, 1050).
Amphitryo then commands those still onstage to be quiet (detur quieti
tempus, 1051) and orders mute attendants to take away Hercules weap-
ons (removete, famuli, tela, 1053). That they obey him is confirmed when
Hercules awakes (cur latus laevum vacat spolio leonis? quonam abit tegimen
meum idemque somno mollis Herculeo torus? ubi tela? ubi arcus? 115053).
At line 1054, the Chorus moves forward with no announcement, and

sings in anapests, a meter not particularly suited for quiet, as requested
by Amphitryo. It is, however, appropriate for a choral procession. The
Chorus used it for its parodos, and this ode, the final one of the play,
seems to be an exit song. It starts as a lament for all Hercules has suf-
fered, then becomes a description of the slumbering hero. He lies on the
ground asleep (en fusus humi saeva feroci corde volutat somnia, 108283),
but unfortunately, has not yet fully recovered from his madness (nondum
est tanti pestis superata mali, 108384). In his sleep, he searches for his
missing club with his right hand (quaerit vacua pondera dextra, 1086). His
arms twitch or thrash, as if Hercules were having some kind of seizure
(motu iactans bracchia vano, 1087). Now the Chorus orders the sleeping
Hercules to beat his chest hard enough to make a sound (nunc Hercu-
leis percussa sonent pectora palmis, 11001), corresponding to the ictus of
the song, driving the choral dance. The self-inflicted blows are said to
resound and be heard throughout the whole world (110414) and cause
the slumbering Hercules to strike his arms with his hand (lacertos verbera
pulsent ultrice manu, 11023). Next, the Chorus orders Hercules weap-
ons to beat him (111521). This is clearly fantastical and not actually
happening,45 but is in keeping with the general theme of the play: either
characters (in this case, the entire Chorus) hallucinate, or else see things
that the audience cannot. The ode ends as a prayer that the spirits of
Hercules dead sons should go to their proper places in the Underworld
(112237). Of the final seven lines of this song, four begin with the
imperative ite.46 These words are ostensibly directed to the ghosts; but
the Chorus, at last overcome by sorrow, also addresses itself, using the
constant strong beat, ite, and the processional quality of the anapestic
rhythm to exit the stage.47
Act 5 (11381344)
Action units: (1) Hercules awakes and slowly realizes what he has done.
(2) Amphitryo and Theseus convince him to not commit suicide.
At line 1138, with no transition from choral song to episode, Hercu-

les awakes and begins to speak. He sees the corpses of his sons displayed
on the exostra (unde prostrata ad donum video cruenta corpora? 114344),
but does not seem to recognize them, as he does not exclaim something
like, Why are my sons lying dead? At long last, though far too late,
Hercules wonders if he is hallucinating (an nondum exuit simulacra mens
inferna? post reditus quoque oberrat oculis turba feralis meis? 114446). Ironi-
cally, the answer is no. After 1,100 lines of everyone seeing things that
are not really there, finally the illusions have been lifted from Hercules
eyes, and he sees the truth at the very time that he would want to be
deceived. He trembles with fear (paveo, 1147) and at last recognizes the
corpses of his wife and children (gnati cruenta caede confecti iacent, perempta
coniunx, 116061). His sins stand revealed to the world (en nudus asto,
1172). Hercules also notices Theseus and Amphitryo, who both refuse
to make eye contact with him (cur meos Theseus fugit paterque vultus? ora
cur condunt sua? 117374) and weep (differte fletus, 1175). They remain
silent and continue to cry, although Hercules begs them to tell him what
has happened (quid, genitor, siles? at tu ede, Theseu, sed tua Theseu, fide.
uterque tactitus ora pudibunda obtegit furtimque lacrimas fundit, 117679).
Finally, Amphitryo speaks in the middle of line 1186. The rest of the
play consists of dialogue, mostly between Hercules and his father, with
many speaker changes occurring midline; Theseus speaks only twice,
although Hercules addresses him several times. Hercules stretches forth
his hands in supplication (supplices tendo manus, 1192), but Amphitryo
shrinks away (manus refugit, 1193). Hercules points to the gore (hic cruor,
1194) and to the arrow (illa harundo, 119495) that killed his son. But
he soon recognizes his weapons, which are either lying next to, or per-
haps sticking out of, his family (iam tela video nostra. non quaero manum,
1196). Amphitryo and Theseus are silent for a moment (tacuere. nostrum
est, 1200) confirming Hercules suspicions. At last, Amphitryo begins to
speak in the middle of the line, observing that Hercules is not yet entire-
ly free from madness: once again, the insanity manifests itself physically
as his chest heaves and he rages against himself (nondum tumultu pectus
attonito carens mutavit iras, quodque habet proprium furor, in se ipse saevit,
121921). And yet Hercules is not able to cry (hic durus malis lacrimare
vultus nescit, 122829). He repeatedly demands to be given his weapons
so that he may break and burn them (122995), but is not obeyed until
line 1295 (reddo arma). At last, after standing silently onstage since the
third choral song, Theseus speaks at line 1272. He weeps (sed tamen nos-
tro quoque movere fletu, 127374) and tells Hercules to get up off of the
ground (surge, 1274). Hercules and Amphitryo point to specific items
(hoc... hoc... hoc, 129698). The former is still wracked with powerful
emotions, which continue to manifest themselves physically (ecce quam
miserum metu cor palpitat pectusque sollicitum ferit, 129899). In despair, he
has drawn the bow and holds it ready to fire (aptata harundo est, 1300).
Further, he has a villainous expression (ecce iam facies scelus volens scien-
sque, 13001301). Amphitryo then points, emphatically and violently, to
where he will lie once he has been killed by his son (hic, hic iacebit Herculis
sani scelus, 1313). In response, Hercules tells Amphitryo that the old
man should no longer point out his own resting place (revoca manum,
1314), but instead asks Theseus to help Amphitryo find a seat on the
ground (artus alleva afflicti solo, Theseu, parentis, 131718). Amphitryo,
however, remains standing while gladly grasping his sons hand (hanc
manum amplector libens, hac nisus ibo, pectori hanc aegro admovens pellam dolo-
res, 131921). Theseus then speaks the final words of the play (1341
44). It is unclear what happens at the end of the drama. Theseus has
just promised Hercules absolution in Athens. They may leave Thebes
immediately, or else, together with Amphitryo, they exit through the
wing leading to the palace in order to prepare for their journey.
Conclusions
This story was previously dramatized by Euripides in his Heracles48 (ca.

414 BCE). Senecas play basically follows the structure of Euripides. The
Roman tragedy retains Euripidean innovations: the placement of the
heros labors before the murder of Megara and the children; the inven-
tion of the usurper Lycus; and the appearance of Theseus.49 Both trage-
dies have almost the same cast of characters, with Seneca substituting the
goddess Juno for Euripides Iris and Lyssa (Madness); and Senecas Juno
appears at the beginning of the play instead of toward the middle. Final-
ly, whereas Euripides Theseus enters at the end, Senecas comes on with
Hercules in act 2, delivers a long description of the Underworld, and
spends much of the play onstage as a silent observer. Still, it seems that
Seneca followed the tradition of Euripides play, although the Roman
play displays more unity.50
A few questions still remain. First, why does Seneca begin the play
with a prologue by Juno? It is a departure from Euripides Heracles, which
starts with speeches by Amphitryo and Megara. And in the Phaedra Sen-
eca cuts the initial monologue by Venus in his version of Euripides Hip-
polytus. So, clearly the Roman playwright chose to use a divine prologue
in this drama. Second, who exactly is the Chorus, and what is its role
in this drama? Third, what is Theseus role? His first job is to describe
Hercules activities in Hades; and then he remains silent throughout act
3 and most of act 4. Finally, why are many of the entrances and exits
unmarked and unclear? All of these issues can be resolved by consid-
ering the main event of this play: the madness of Hercules. Euripi
des Herakles is notoriously not unified. The first half of the Greek play
deals with the dire situation in Thebes; the second focuses on Herakles
slaughter of his family. Senecas play has these same elements; but Junos
appearance at the beginning informs the audience that a mad Hercu-
les will shortly return home and deal with the situation. Juno makes it
clear that Hercules is already insane, and has been since arriving in the
Underworld. So from the very start the madness is established as the
central action. Theseus is necessary so that the audience can witness
the beginnings of Hercules mania. He is the only one who could deliver
a firsthand account of the start of Junos revenge. And since he was the
initial witness, he must continue to observe. Further, the goddess needs
someone to witness her victory over Hercules. Her initial complaints in
the prologue involve constellations. It is not just that Jupiter cheated
on her, but that everybody on earth can see. So the defeat of Hercules
must be viewed by someone not related to him. But it is not necessary for
the witness to say anything, and so Theseus remains silent. The Chorus
seems to be a friend to Hercules, or at least personally interested in his
affairs. It responds positively to his victories and laments his misfortunes,
even to the extent of wandering offstage when things look bleak. It is too
emotionally involved to be an impartial observer, thus further explain-

ing the necessity for the more impersonal Theseus. Finally, Hercules
madness manifests itself by hallucinations and uncertainty. He cannot
trust his own eyes. He sees things that are not there, does not see what is
clear to everyone else, and is often not sure what he is seeing. And, as is
typical for Seneca, the rest of the characters suffer the same emotional
symptoms as the main character. Thus, Juno and the Chorus think they
see constellations where there are none, and Theseus thinks he sees the
wife of Hercules after she must have exited. The characters are often so
uncertain that they either cannot or will not comment on entrances or
exits, or even fully identify who they are. Thus all of the elements of this
play that seem to be fuzzy and unclear dramaturgy in fact reinforce the
central theme: Hercules is mad and not in control of his own senses.
C h a pter 7
Troades (Trojan Women)
Dramatis Personae
Actor A Hecuba Agamemnon Ulixes Hecuba Hecuba
Actor B Talthybius/ Senex Helen Nuntius
Calchas
Actor C Pyrrhus Andromache Andromache Andromache
Named Cassandra Polyxena Astyanax Polyxena/
Mute Pyrrhus
Character
The distribution of roles in this play is particularly significant.1 One actor

portrays the herald Talthybius, the seer Calchas, Andromaches Old Ser-
vant, Helen, and the anonymous Messenger. All of these characters are
messengers or facilitators: Talthybius reports the demands of the ghost
of Achilles, which Calchas confirms, adding also the necessity for sacri-
ficing Astyanax; the Old Servant simply acts as a confidant for Androm-
ache, helping and giving moral support as she attempts to protect her
son; Helen prepares Polyxena for her imminent sacrifice; and the Mes-
senger describes the deaths of Astyanax and his aunt. None of these are
major roles, yet they are quite necessary for the play to progress.
A second actor is assigned Pyrrhus and Andromache. These charac-
ters would not seem to have much in common at first glance; and yet they
are each related to one of the two ghosts who are prominent in the play:
Achilles and Hector.2 Further, both Pyrrhus and Andromache immediate-
ly and unquestioningly believe the spirits and act to carry out their wishes.
Pyrrhus argues with Agamemnon concerning the sacrifice of Polyxena,
110
Troades (Trojan Women) 111
and ultimately is victorious. Andromache, after a visitation from her hus-

bands spirit, attempts to hide Astyanax from Ulixes, but fails in the end.
Thus, the two characters who are connected to supernatural entities and
who have vested interests in the sacrifices are played by the same actor.
The third actor gets the foils Agamemnon and Ulixes, as well as
Hecuba. The first two aim to block Pyrrhus and Andromache, respec-
tively. And Hecuba, in a certain sense, is a foil to the victorious Greeks.
She surrenders herself to grief to such an extent that she claims it as her
own. And she rejoices in the end when she discovers that she has been
given to Ulixes, and thus prevented him from receiving a valuable prize.
In addition, Seneca makes frequent use of mute actors in this play.
In act 1, Hecuba addresses Cassandra. Her use of the vocative, as well as
the second-person adjective (61), indicate the girls physical presence.3
The Trojan princess must enter with her mother at the beginning of the
act and stay with her until its end. Similarly, while Pyrrhus, Agamemnon,
and Calchas discuss the impending sacrifice of Polyxena in act 2, the seer
addresses the girl, again using the vocative and the second-person adjec-
tive (203), meaning that she must come on with the Greek leaders. In
act 3, while the Old Servant and Andromache search for a place to hide
her son, he is by her side until he seeks sanctuary in his fathers tomb. He
is clearly present, not only because Andromache frequently addresses
him,4 but also since the manuscripts identify him as a participant in the
act. In fact, the boy speaks two words (miserere, mater! 792) long after the
entrance of Ulixes, thus creating a potential violation of the three-actor
rule. It is possible that the Old Man exits sometime after his last words
(51718); but this is doubtful, as there is no good reason for him to
leave, and it fits with Senecan practice to have characters silently observe
dialogue between two others. In addition, Sutton shows that among the
sound dramaturgical principles followed by Seneca is a tendency to
have the same character played by the same actor.5 At the beginning
of the act, Astyanax would have been portrayed by a mute actor, while
two speaking actors played Andromache and the Old Man. The boy exits
into the tomb before the third actor comes on as Ulixes. For Astyanax
to actually speak, the Old Man would have to exit, and that actor would
then return as the boy. Thus, two different performers would portray
Hectors son in the very same episode. It would be both awkward and
odd for the playwright to break with his usual practice here.6 Anoth-
er possibility would be for the actor portraying the Old Man to exit
immediately after line 518, and return as Ulixes at line 522. A four-line
turnaround would certainly be possible, especially since the Old Man
would exit into the same wing that Ulixes enters from. The third actor,
then, could have been playing Astyanax from his initial appearance with
Andromache at 409. But again, this seems like an awfully complicated
maneuver, just to allow the child to speak two words. Instead, it is more
probable that throughout the episode, Astyanax is portrayed by a mute
actor. When he seems to speak, it is another actor, either onstage or off,
performing a sort of ventriloquist act.7 In act 4, an unusual dumb-show
occurs. Polyxena is once again onstage, sitting silently as Helen prepares
her for her marriage to Achilles. Then, at 999, Pyrrhus enters to take
the girl away. He also does not speak. This could be seen as a violation
of Suttons rule that the same character should always be portrayed by
the same actor; but changing between acts is far less jarring than switch-
ing a role in the middle of an episode, as would be required for Asty-
anax, or replacing a character already onstage, as Megara in the Hercules
Furens. Only act 5 lacks a mute character, although both Polyxena and
Astyanax are present by means of the Messengers description of their
heroic deaths. Throughout the play, three of the four mute characters
are powerless Trojan captives facing death.8 By act 5, however, Polyxena
and Astyanax have empowered themselves by taking their fates into their
own hands and facing their destruction bravely. The silent ones have
gained voice, and so no unspeaking characters are necessary. Pyrrhus
in act 4 is more problematic. But during his appearance in act 2, he is
portrayed as merely following the orders of his deceased father; and so
he is just as helpless because of the demise of his parent as the daughters
of Priam and the son of Hector.
The identity of the Chorus is unusually clear,9 just as remarkable as
its level of participation in the play itself.10 Hecuba identifies it as her
band of captives (turba captivae mea, 63, and also agnosco Troada turbam,
95), that is, her Trojan companions in captivity. Although the A family
of manuscripts identifies them as men (Chorus troianorum, before line 1),
Hecubas undisputed use of captivae definitely marks them as women.11
And as will be seen, throughout all the changes in this tragedy, the Cho-
rus remains the one constant that ties everything together.
The exact setting of this play is uncertain,12 but a few things are clear.
Hecuba explicitly states in her opening monologue that the ruins of Troy
are nearby (me videat et te, Troia, 4, and en alta muri decora congestis iacent
tectis adusti, 1516). Act 3 definitely takes place in front of the tomb of
Hector, with the center doors representing the tomb itself. Finally, the
Messenger, during his description of the offstage death of Astyanax in act
5, says that an Achaean soldier was sitting on the tomb of Hector (atque
aliquisnefas!tumulo ferus spectator Hectoreo sedet, 108687), indicating
The Set: Troy
that the action of the play has shifted. I think it is likely that acts 1, 2, and
3 have different locations, with acts 4 and 5 returning to the same place
as act 1.13 My supposition is that act 1 is set in front of the slave huts, act 2
in the camp of the Achaeans, act 3 before Hectors tomb, and acts 4 and
5 back at the slave huts. Act 2 consists of a debate between Pyrrhus and
Agamemnon as to whether Polyxena should be sacrificed on the tomb of
Achilles, a debate bookended by monologues by Talthybius and Calchas.
It is certainly possible that this argument occurs among the huts of the
captive women. But it seems more sensible to shift it to the camp of the
Achaeans. It is certainly less cruel than if the Achaeans go from their own
tents to those of their captives for the sole purpose of discussing the fate
of those captives. The action of the final two acts returns to the tents of
the captive women, as they discuss their final fates.
The center doors allow Astyanax entrance to and exit from the tomb
of Hector and are used only in act 3. One wing leads to other places
around the ruins of Troy and is used for most of the entrances and exits
throughout the play; the other wing leads to the ships of the Achaeans
and is only used at the end of the drama by the Messenger, Hecuba,
Andromache, and the Chorus. Throughout the tragedy, the Trojans
look toward this wing with dread and apprehension, while the Achaeans
regard it with hope and longing.
Act 1 (166 )
Action unit: Hecuba and a Chorus of Trojan Women mourn and
bemoan the destruction of Troy; their hair-tearing and breast-beating
flows into the next episode.
At line 1, Hecuba enters via the wing leading from the ruins of the
city with the Chorus14 and a silent Cassandra, whose presence is indi-
cated by the use of the vocative (Cassandra, 61), along with the second-
person possessive adjective (tuos, 61), as well as her mention at line 37
(Cassandram).15 Hecuba gives no motivation for her entrance. She simply
comes on and begins to talk. She speaks for a long time before finally
identifying herself (Hecuba vidi, 36),16 and portraying herself as an old
woman who has lived too long (vivax senectus, 42);17 her age should be
apparent in both her movements and vocal quality, as well as her cloth-
ing. She directly addresses Troy, using the second-person pronoun and
vocative (me videat et te, Troia, 4), thus indicating the general setting of
the play: the ruins of the city. Hecuba also indicates an overturned pillar
(columen eversum occidit, 6), surely a poetic reference to the destruction
of Ilium, but also a hint that an overturned pillar may be painted on the
scaenae frons, or perhaps be a piece of the set. She continues to describe
the scene (en alta muri decora congestis iacent tectis adusti, 1516), again
possibly commenting on the decoration of the scaenae frons, but definite-
ly telling the audience what it should be seeing, much like Prologue in
Shakespeares Henry V; besides the overturned walls and smoking build-
ings, a dense cloud of smoke covers the city, even though it is day (19
21). Hecuba prays (testor, 28), with appropriate gestures. Meanwhile, the
Chorus has apparently been lamenting quietly since the start of the play,
but evidently has fallen silent (lamenta cessant? 63). Therefore, Hecuba
commands the women to beat their breasts (ferite palmis pectora, 64),
make lamentations (planctus date, 64), and perform funeral rites for Troy
(iusta Troiae facite, 65). The beat should be so loud and strong as to make
Ida resound (sonet fatalis Ide, 6566), and coincides with the ictus of the
ensuing anapests.
At line 67, the Chorus moves to center stage from its previous position
behind Hecuba and near the scaenae frons. It sings in anapests, a com-
mon meter for the Senecan Chorus, especially in the parados.18 It is not
new to tears (non lacrimisque novum, 67), which would be reflected in its
clothing: disheveled, torn, filthy. Nevertheless, it obeys Hecubas com-
mands to lament (ite ad planctus, 79). The former queen is established as
the leader of the Chorus bewailing;19 she raises her hand, as a signal for
the mourning to begin (miseramque leva, regina, manum, 80). In fact, she
takes part in the choral song starting at line 83, maintaining its anapestic
meter, as she continues to issue commands to the Chorus. It is to undo its
hair (solvite crinem, 84), which is filthy and coated with dust (tepido Troiae
pulvere turpes, 86), and allow it to flow down the neck (per colla fluant mae-
sta capilli, 85).20 Further, it should gather up the rubble of Troy (complete
manus, 102), as if in that way it will be able to take part of the city with
it always. Finally, the women are to stretch out their arms and uncover
them (paret exertos turba lacertos, 87), undo their clothing all the way down
to the abdomen (veste remissa substringe sinus uteroque tenus pateant artus,
8889), and use their robes as a sort of belt or sash to tie the loosened
garments in place (cingat tunicas palla solutas, 92), so that their hands
might be free for the ensuing breast-beating. Even though Hecuba is
pleased by their actions (placet hic habitus. placet, 95), she hopes they will
surpass their previous efforts in lamenting (iterum luctus redeant veteres,
solitum flendi vincite morem, 9697).
The Chorus, beginning at line 99, states that it has done what Hecuba
commanded, but not exactly as ordered. Everyone has let down her hair
(solvimus omnes crinem, 99 and coma demissa est libera nodo, 100); however
it is not filthy, but only torn (lacerum multo funere, 99). The Chorus has
disrobed (cadit ex umeris vestis apertis imumque tegit suffulta latus, 1045)
and prepares for the breast-beating (iam nuda vocant pectora dextras, 106).
And in a new detail, hot ashes bespatter their faces (sparsitque cinis fer-
vidus ora, 101). At line 117, Hecuba takes over, describing the beating.
The women use their right hand to beat their upper arms (nostra ferit
dextra lacertos, 117), their shoulders (umeros ferit sanguineos, 118), and
their heads (nostra caput dextera pulsat, 119). In addition, they have torn,
mutilated, and slapped their breasts (ubera palmis laniata patent, 120).
As a result, bloody scars ooze, rupture, and fester (fluat et multo sanguine
manet rupta cicatrix, 12123), all while the women continue to weep (fun-
dite fletus, 131). A fair degree of theatrical realism is possible for these
descriptions. The hair and clothing could be unbound and dirt could
be smeared. Breasts could be beaten, and weeping could be portrayed.
But it is doubtful that the Chorus members are actually inflicting real
wounds upon themselves. It is possible to use some kind of makeup or
prosthetic effect. But I think it more likely, in a theater of convention,
that the audience would simply believe that the women are physically
scarred just because they say that they are. At line 132, the Chorus takes
up the song from Hecuba, as the breast-beating and weeping continue
(accipe planctus, 132, accipe fletus, 133, and lacrimas flectite vestras, 142).
Hecuba resumes singing at line 142, and commands her companions
to call the dead king, Priam, happy (felix Priamus dicite cunctae, 145).
Using the exact word order, and three out four identical words with a
synonym (felix Priamus dicimus omnes, 156), they obey. The former
queen does not speak again until act 4, and the actor will be needed. It
is sensible, then, for her to exit after line 156, using the wing leading to
the ruins of Troy, once she has heard the Chorus carry out her last order.
The mute Cassandra leaves with her.
Act 2 (164370)
Action units: (1) Talthybius announces that the ghost of Achilles

demands the sacrifice. (2) Pyrrhus and Agamemnon debate whether
or not to obey the ghosts wishes. (3) Calchas sides with Achilles and
Pyrrhus, adding that Astyanax must also be killed before the Achae-
ans will be able to return home.
At line 164, Talthybius, the herald of Agamemnon, enters via the

wing leading to the ruins of Troy, apparently talking to himself. Not only
are both his entrance and his exit unannounced, but he is also identi-
fied only by the character heading in the manuscripts; this identifica-
tion, however, as well as the parallel of Euripides Troades, is enough
for modern scholars.21 The absence of Hecuba and the presence of the
Greek messenger indicate that the setting has changed to the tents of
the Achaeans.22 At lines 16667, the Chorus overhears Talthybius and
responds, speaking within an episode and in iambic trimeter for the only
time in this play. Although he appears to answer its questions, it does not
subsequently react to him in any way, and in fact does not seem aware of
the impending sacrifice of Polyxena in act 4. So, following its rhetorically
necessary questions, the Chorus withdraws, both emotionally and physi-
cally, back to the scaenae frons, where it keens softly and pays no attention
to the events unfolding in front of it.23 The herald must exit through
the wing leading to the ruins of Troy following line 202, since there is
no good reason for him to remain onstage any longer once he finishes
his monologue, and since the actor is needed to portray Calchas at line
360. It is interesting, significant, and ironic that the last word spoken by
Talthybius is chorus (202), as the Chorus is the only other entity that has
been present for his soliloquy. The technique calls to mind Oedipus 81,
where Oedipus last word before Jocastas entrance and monologue is
parentes. The audience, then, could reasonably expect another song. But
Seneca confounds that expectation, in order to show the mental state of

the captive Trojan women. The Chorus, clearly in shock and mourning,
does not sing, unless to continue softly lamenting.
There is a short pause before Pyrrhus and Agamemnon enter with a
silent Polyxena at line 203. They come in from the wing leading to the
ruins of Troy, and walk to center stage. The entrance is not announced
in any way, except that Pyrrhus begins to talk, trying to convince his
companion that Achilles deserves a sacrificial bride. The speaker is not
identified for nearly thirty lines (iter est Achillis; sic meus venit pater, 232),
while Agamemnons identity is clear only when Pyrrhus refers to the
sacrifice of Iphigenia at lines 24849. Manuscript family E states that
Pyrrhus, Agamemnon, and Calchas all enter here, but that would give
actor B very little time to change, as well as nothing to do for 150 lines.
More importantly, Agamemnon summons Calchas later on (potius inter-
pres deum Calchas vocetur, 35152). Thus, manuscript family A, which
lists only Pyrrhus and Agamemnon, must be correct. Calchas, upon his
entrance, addresses Polyxena (nobilior tuo, Polyxene, cruore debetur cruor,
36667), implying she is onstage. She could come on with the seer at
353; but it would be quite powerful to have the mute girl standing in
full view while Pyrrhus and Agamemnon debate her fate. In addition,
it matches well with the onstage presence of a silent Cassandra in act 1,
and a nearly silent Astyanax in act 3. At line 250, Agamemnon replies
to Pyrrhus monologue with his own. The two men then engage in the
first true dialogue of the play, starting at line 292, with frequent midline
interruptions. At one point, Pyrrhus gestures with his right hand (hac
dextra, 306). Finally, Agamemnon summons Calchas (potius interpres deum
Calchas vocetur, 35152).
After another brief pause, Calchas enters at line 353 via the wing lead-
ing from the ruins of Troy. Agamemnon addresses him directly, using the
vocative (Calchas, 359), as well as the second-person pronoun and the
singular imperative. The seer delivers his own short monologue (360
70). Upon its conclusion, Calchas, Pyrrhus, Agamemnon, and Polyxena
go out through the wing leading to the ruins of Troy.
At line 371, the Chorus steps forward and sings in lesser asclepiadeans.24
There are no indications of stage business during the song, although
the Chorus undoubtedly moves to the rhythm and continues its self-
mutilation. Following the song, the Chorus withdraws back to the scaenae
frons at line 408.25
Act 3 (409813)
Action units: (1) Andromache hides Astyanax in the tomb of Hector.

(2) Ulixes demands to know where he is. (3) Andromache ultimately
surrenders the boy.
At line 409, Andromache enters, with an Old Servant and a silent

Astyanax, via the wing leading to the ruins of Troy. The Old Man is not
identified at all, and the woman and child only when the ghost of Hec-
tor refers to them as wife and child (natum eripe, o fida coniunx, 452
53).26 The setting, however, is clearly marked as Hectors tomb (quaesivi
Hectorem, 459, and est tumulus ingens, 483). Andromache states that she
would follow her husband to the land of the dead, if her son were not
keeping her alive by needing her protection (coniugem sequerer meum, nisi
hic teneret, 41819). Ironically, however, she has indeed pursued Hec-
tor by coming here to his tomb. She addresses Astyanax (o nate, 461),
confirming that he is onstage, and gestures toward him repeatedly (hic
at 419, 420, 422). She goes on to say that he has the same appearance,
bearing, build, and so on, as Hector.27 She also addresses the Chorus
(maesta Phrygiae turba, 409), indicating that it is still present, that it still
consists of captive Trojan women, and that it shows signs of mourning:
torn hair (laceratis comas, 409), beaten breasts (miserumque tunsae pectus,
410), and tear-stained cheeks (effuso genas fletu, 41011). At line 426,
the Old Man speaks, engaging Andromache in dialogue. Both are terri-
fied, as is signaled by several midline interruptions, and she drips with
cold sweat (sudor per artus frigidus totos cadit, 487). Finally, Andromache
sends Astyanax into the tomb (succede tumulo, 503), but he is frightened
and comes back (nate, quid retro fugis? 503). In the end, however, he
exits through the center doors (claustra commissum tegunt, 512) per his
mothers command. That having been accomplished, the Old Man and
Andromache prepare to leave (procul hinc recede teque diversam amove, 514,
and referamus hinc alio pedem, 516), even though she continues to lament
(cohibe parumper ora questusque opprime, 517). But it is too late. The Old
Man sees Ulixes approaching (gressus nefandos dux Cephallanum admovet,
518) via the wing leading to the ruins of Troy. After this, the Old Man
does not speak again. It is possible that he exits; but it accomplishes

nothing to have him leave. Indeed, it is more likely that he stays, follow-
ing the Senecan practice of having a third character remain to observe
dialogue in silence.28
Ulixes enters (adest Ulixes, 522), deep in thought (dubio gradu vul-
tuque, 522 23), and weaving plots (nectit pectore astus callidos, 523),
accompanied by mute attendants. At line 523, he speaks, addressing
Andromache directly, as is indicated by second-person verbs (e.g., cre-
das, 526) and the vocative (Andromacha, 533). Suddenly, starting at line
607, he talks to himself (quid agis, Ulixe? 607), weighing his options. He
watches Andromache closely as she mourns, weeps, and groans (maeret,
illacrimat, gemit, 615), paces back and forth anxiously (huc et illuc anxios
gressus refert, 616), and listens for the cries of her son (missasque voces aure
sollicita excipit, 617). At line 619, Ulixes resumes talking to Andromache.
She is gripped with fear and grows faint (reliquit animus membra, 623).
Her limbs shake (quatiuntur, 623, and intremuit, 625), and she collapses
as, once again, her blood goes cold (labant torpetque vinctus frigido san-
guis gelu, 62324). Ulixes then orders his silent attendants to pretend to
look for Astyanax (ite, ite celeres! 627). At one point, he pretends that the
boy has been taken (bene est! tenetur. perge, festina, attrahe, 630), in order
to fool Andromache into giving something away. She looks around and
trembles (quid respicis trepidasque? 631). Emotions run high on both sides,
reflected by an increase in midline interruptions. Andromache threat-
ens to resist and even offers violence to the Achaeans (67177); but her
words do not translate into actions. They seem, however, to have affected
the attendants, who, moved by her tears (flebilis clamor, 678) and rage
(furor feminae, 679), have evidently stopped their sham search (cessatis,
678) and must be commanded to resume (iussa ocius peragite, 67980).
Andromache next demands to be stabbed (me, me sternite hic ferro prius,
680), pointing to the spot where she wants the wound and emphasizing
it with the duplicated me.29 But she is pushed aside by the attendants
(repellor, 681). Now she hallucinates the ghost of Hector (cernitis, Danai,
Hectorem? an sola video? 68485), but Ulixes will brook no supernatural
nonsense (funditus cuncta eruam, 685). Finally, she falls to her knees in
supplication (ad genua accido supplex, 69192) and touches his feet with
her right hand (dextram pedibus admoveo tuis, 693). But his only response
is a command to produce her son from hiding (exhibe natum et roga, 704)
or watch as he dismantles the tomb.
After a brief pause, the deep grief of having to choose between her
living son and her husbands tomb causes Andromache to switch to ana-
pests (70535), the same meter that Hecuba and the Chorus used for
their laments in the first episode. She calls to the hidden Astyanax to
leave his hiding place (huc e latebris procede tuis, 705), and the boy soon
returns via the center doors (hic est, hic est terror, 707). He holds out his
hands (submitte manus, 708) and touches the feet of Ulixes with his right
hand in supplication (dominique pedes supplice dextra stratus adora, 7089).
Further, he assumes the proper behaviors of a captive, including fall-
ing on bended knee (gere captivum positoque genu, 715). Both he and his
mother weep (matris fletus imitare tuae, 717). Finally, Astyanax prostrates
himself before Ulixes (iacet ante pedes supplex, 73233). At line 736, the
Ithacan speaks, reverting back to iambic trimeter; he has been moved
by Andromaches display of sadness and terror (matris maeror attonitae
movet, 736). She does much pointing and gesticulating (has, has ruin-
as... hic... hae, 73940). And she begs to be allowed to hug her son
one last time (amplexu ultimo, 761), a request that Ulixes grants (762
65), followed by much weeping (rumpe iam fletus, parens, 785). Astyanax
speaks, only two words (miserere, mater, 792), and never again.30 He clings
to his mothers hands and the folds of her clothing (quid meos retines
sinus manusque occupas? 792 93). Andromache responds with kisses,
tears, and bits of her hair that she has torn from her head (oscula et fletus,
puer, lacerosque crines excipe, 799800); she makes one final request: that
Astyanax take off his tunic and leave it behind, as a memento for her
(relinque vestem, 810). Ulixes speaks for the last time and exits after line
813, using the wing leading to the ruins of Troy. He takes his attendants,
the Old Man,31 and Astyanax with him. Andromache appears in the next
episode, and so remains onstage.
Following the departure of the men, the Chorus trades places with
Andromache at line 814, moving forward as she retreats to the scae-
nae frons. The song, in minor sapphics, concludes with an address to
Hecuba (Hecabe, 859), indicating that she has entered. The audience
would properly assume that she will speak to begin the next act; but once
again, expectations are disappointed, as, even though she is present, she
remains silent at first. Hecuba and Helen, along with a mute Polyxena,
enter together through the wing leading to the ruins of Troy, Androm-
ache moves forward, and the Chorus retreats to scaenae frons.32
Act 4 (8611008)
Action units: (1) Helen prepares a mute Polyxena for her marriage.
(2) Andromache hurls abuse at the Spartan woman. (3) Hecuba joins
the discussion. (4) Pyrrhus arrives to take Polyxena to her death.
At line 861, Helen speaks, identifying herself (Helena, 863) and direct-
ly addressing Polyxena several times (e.g., Dardaniae domus generosa virgo,
87172, and Polyxene miseranda, 942). The Achaeans have commanded
Helen to get Polyxena ready for her so-called marriage to Achilles in
the proper Greek fashion (ego cultus dare habitusque Graios, 86566). She
does this throughout the episode, accomplishing such tasks as styling her
hair (deprime horrentis comas crinemque docta patere distingui manu, 88485)
and applying makeup. Although such props as an assortment of combs
and brushes are not explicitly mentioned, we can imagine their pres-
ence. Polyxena had been wearing the squalid attire of a captured slave
(depone cultus squalidos, 883), which she now changes for clothes more
suitable for a wedding (festos cape, 883). Besides her appearance and her
clothing, Polyxena must also change her behavior and unlearn how to
be a prisoner (dedisce captam, 884); that is, she must stop the lamenting
and breast-beating that she had been engaging in.
Andromache delivers a monologue (888902), in which she, among
other things, verbally attacks Helen and suggests that the wedding be
celebrated properly: with laments and moanings (celebrate digne: planctus
et gemitus sonet, 902). During the ensuing exchange of speeches, Helen
is so upset, she can scarcely hold back the tears (vix lacrimas queo retinere,
92526), while Andromache thinks she is up to something (92637).
Polyxena, however, suddenly cheers up as she learns that, instead of actu-
ally having to marry an Achaean, she is about to die (vide ut animus ingens
laetus audierit necem, 945). The girl now wants to dress suitably (cultus
decoros regiae vestis petit, 946) and allows her hair to be styled (et admoveri
crinibus patitur manum, 947).
But Hecuba, who has been standing by silently this whole time, is
stunned and groans audibly (at misera luctu mater audito stupet, 949);
indeed, Andromache fears that her mother-in-laws mind has gone (labe-
facta mens succubuit, 950). But she recovers (spirat, revixit, 954) and begins
to speak at line 955, engaging in three-way dialogue, during which Polyx-
ena weeps (inrigat fletus genas imberque victo subitus e vultu cadit, 96566).
Finally, a sneering Pyrrhus runs in quickly (sed incitato Pyrrhus accurrit
gradu vultuque torvo, 9991000). He does not speak,33 but merely seizes
Polyxena. He pauses for a moment (Pyrrhe, quid cessas? 1000), but only
for a moment. He drags the seized Polyxena away (abreptam trahit, 1003)
through the wing leading to the ruins of Troy. Helen goes with them.
At line 1009, the Chorus steps forward and sings, again in minor sap-
phics. Andromache leads Hecuba back to the scaena frons, where both of
them remain throughout the song. The Chorus concludes at line 1055.
Act 5 (10561179)
Action units: (1) An unnamed Messenger recounts the noble deaths

of Astyanax and Polyxena, (2) and then orders the Trojan Women to
go to the Achaean ships, which are ready to leave Troy.
At line 1056, a Messenger enters from the wing leading to the ruins
of Troy. He is unnamed and unidentified,34 but must be an Achaean
soldier. The Chorus withdraws to the scaenae frons,35 while Hecuba and
Andromache move forward, both engaging in dialogue with the Mes-
senger throughout this final act. At line 1068, he begins his account of
the deaths of Astyanax and Polyxena, staying in iambic trimeter, and not
changing to another meter, such as trochees, which Seneca sometimes
uses to describe unpleasant events.36
The drama concludes with the Messenger commanding the Trojan
women to go to the ships (repetite celeri maria, captivae, gradu, 1178),
which are ready to sail. He leads the way, as Hecuba, Andromache, and
the Chorus exit through the wing leading to the Achaean ships. They
either go out in silence or continue the soft moaning they have main-
tained throughout the entire play, leaving the stage empty.
Conclusions
The most obvious precursor for Senecas play is Euripides Troades (ca.
415 BCE). But aside from the lamenting Hecuba and Chorus in the
beginning37 and a focus on the death of Astyanax, the Roman play does
not seem much indebted to the Athenian. Fantham suggests Euripides
Hecuba (ca 424 BCE) as a model for Senecas decision to deal with the
twin fates of Polyxena and Astyanax.38 Sophocles lost Polyxena is another
possible source.39 But it seems more likely that Seneca used a variety of
sources, including the above-mentioned Attic tragedies, the epic tradi-
tion,40 and Roman drama.41
Seneca has created a play that is not as concerned with the fine points
of dramatic storytelling as with showing the horrors of the aftermath
of war. As in the case of the Hercules Furens, this play itself reflects the
mood of the title character, specifically the captive Trojan women. The
uncertainties of setting and staging that so bother modern critics42 show
the Chorus mental state to the audience. The women neither know nor
care where they are. They only know that they are helpless and soon to
be transported from one place to another by the whim of fate, which is
shown graphically in the abrupt changes of setting from the tents of the
captives, to the camp of the victorious Greeks, to the tomb of Achilles,
and back to the tents. Fanthams complaint that the Chorus does not
seem to be aware of things that were discussed in their presence is easily
explained:43 the captive women are experiencing the kind of shock that
would be expected for people who have just witnessed the destruction
of all they have ever known, and do not fully comprehend what is going
on around them. Throughout the drama, there is one constant: the Cho-
rus, which serves as the tie that binds together what could otherwise be
regarded as separate and loosely connected vignettes. The Trojan wom-
en, then, are truly the title characters, and, similar to Senecas Oedipus
and Phaedra, are present for most if not all of the drama, and provide
the audience with the lens through which to see the plays actions.
C h a pter 8
Thyestes
Dramatis Personae
Actor A Ghost of Tantalus Thyestes Thyestes
Actor B Fury Atreus Atreus Atreus
Actor C Henchman Tantalus Minor Messenger
Two mute actors are necessary to portray two of the sons of Thyestes in
act 3.
In acts 25, one actor must portray Atreus exclusively, while a second
is reserved for Thyestes. The third actor is assigned Atreus Henchman,
the younger Tantalus, and the Messenger. This leaves act 1, the prologue.
Sutton gives the Ghost of Tantalus to the same actor who plays Atreus,
and the Fury to the same man who has the three smaller roles.1 This
is certainly a possibility, since the first choral song gives plenty of time
for the actors to exit, change masks, get to the proper place for their
entrance, and even have a quick drink. But I would make a different
suggestion, based on the behavior and personalities of the supernatural
beings. Tarrant notes that their [i.e., Tantalus and the Furys] struggle
parallels and symbolically anticipates Atreus victory over Thyestes.2 The
Ghost of Tantalus is reluctant from the start. He would prefer to return
to his eternal torments in the Underworld than cause even more trouble
for his family. The Fury, on the other hand, is the instigator of the whole
business, eager to inflict far greater horrors upon the House. Similarly,
Thyestes is the reluctant brother. He has to be talked into accepting
Atreus hospitality and unwittingly eats his own sons. Atreus is the brains
124
Thyestes 125
behind the tragedy. His is the idea, and his is the hand that kills the
children. It seems, then, that Thyestes and the Ghost of Tantalus are
kindred spirits, while Atreus and the Fury are cut from the same cloth.
Indeed, in a symbolic sense, and only in a symbolic sense, the Ghost is
Thyestes, while the Fury is Atreus. It would, therefore, be both quite
appropriate and immensely powerful to assign the roles accordingly and
give the Ghost to the actor playing Thyestes, and the Fury to the actor
who portrays Atreus.
Throughout the play, there is no indication who the Chorus is or
what it wants. The only clue is that is seems to have pity for the royal
house of Mycenae, and for the city itself. It may, therefore, consist of
Mycenaean citizens, perhaps even elders.3
The Set: Mycenae
A trap door is required for the entrance of the Ghost of Tantalus.4
Act 1 (1121 )
Action unit: Compelled by an unnamed Fury, the Ghost of Tantalus
has been reluctantly brought back from the Underworld to his home
in Mycenae, so that his presence may stir up more trouble between
his grandsons, the brothers Atreus and Thyestes.
At line 1, the Ghost of Tantalus rises from the trap door, to stand on
the stage floor.5 When the Fury interrupts his monologue in the middle
of line 23, she seems familiar with what he has been saying, and so it is
likely that she has also been present from the beginning.6 The Ghost
identifies himself (Tantalo, 3), and asks who has brought him to the sur-
face world (14), a question he would not pose if he and the Fury were
in physical proximity, or indeed if she had fetched him from the Under-
world herself. The Fury must be a longtime resident of the palace, hav-
ing contributed to the acts of cruelty and deception committed by Atreus
and Thyestes against each other for many years, and so it is sensible for
her to emerge from the center doors.7 The Ghost tries to escape, but the
Fury stops him in his tracks (siste! quo praeceps ruis?67). The two alternate
speaking, with several midline interruptions (23, 83, 86). The Ghost
prays to Jupiter (magne divorum parens, 90), using appropriate hand ges-
tures, then states his intention to remain standing in his current spot
and not participate in the incipient villainy (stabo et arcebo scelus, 95). But
inevitably, he gives in and succumbs to the Furys compulsion (sequor,
100). The feelings of dread and helplessness are reinforced by the fact
that line 100 consists solely of this word: Tantalus simply says I follow,
leaving the remaining line of trimeter to be completed in silence. The
Fury responds by pointing (hunc, hunc, 101), before ordering the Ghost
to return to the Underworld (gradere ad infernos specus, 105). He obeys,
exiting through the trap door.8 She remains a bit longer, finally return-
ing into the palace via the center doors following her last words after
line 121.9
At line 122, the Chorus enters,10 singing in minor sapphics, from the
wing leading to the forum. It withdraws to the scaenae frons after conclud-
ing the song at line 175.11
Act 2 (176335)
Action unit: Atreus and his Henchman devise a horrific plot against
Thyestes.
Atreus enters at line 176 from the palace through the center doors
with a Henchman, but speaks to himself. He identifies himself (iratus
Atreus, 180) early on. The Henchman interrupts in the middle of line
204, and dialogue ensues with frequent midline interruptions.12 Atreus
Thyestes 127
calls upon the host of Furies (dira furiarum cohors, 250), ironically, of
course, since at least one is already there. He burns with rage, but not
nearly enough to satisfy him (non satis magno meum ardet furore pectus,
25253). Atreus is seized (rapior, 261), not just by inspiration, but also by
visions. He describes hallucinations:13 Nature running wild and Thyestes
eating his own children. Atreus begins to have second thoughts (anime,
quid rursus times et ante rem subsidis? 28384), and the Henchman con-
fesses that he, too, is afraid (ista nostro in pectore fides timorque, 33435).
But it is to no avail. Atreus will carry out his plans (sed magis claudet fides,
335). After these final words, Atreus and the Henchman exit through
the center doors into the palace.
At line 336, the Chorus steps forward and begins to sing in glyconics.14 At
line 403, it concludes its song and returns to the scaenae frons.15
Act 3 (404545)
Action units: (1) Thyestes is reluctant to return to Mycenae. (2) His

son, inauspiciously called Tantalus, persuades his father to think of
his children and to accept the overtures of Atreus. (3) Atreus gloats
that the trap is about to be sprung, (4) before he welcomes his broth-
er and nephews, and ushers them into the palace.
At line 404, Thyestes enters with his sons: Tantalus, the mute Plis-
thenes, and a third who is unnamed and equally mute.16 They have been
in exile, and so come through the wing leading to foreign parts. Thyestes
speaks, although he remains unidentified for quite some time (Thyesten,
476). He sees the buildings of the city of his birth (optata patriae tecta
[cerno], 404), but only walks forward reluctantly (moveo nolentem gradum,
420).
After a pause, Tantalus, the son of Thyestes, speaks, observing that
his father has first slowed down, and then stopped completely (pigro
genitor incessu stupet, 421). They are still close to the wing, at the side of
the stage. Dialogue ensues between the two, with much midline inter-
rupting. Thyestes looks back the way they came (vultumque versat seque in
incerto tenet, 422), frozen in indecision and wrestling with his thoughts
(42328). He is afraid (sed timeo tamen, 435). His whole body trembles,
and his knees are weak (pigris membra sed genibus labant, 436). Finally, he
indicates that he will proceed to the palace, but his sons must lead the
way (ego vos sequor, non duco, 489). Tantalus, in response, instructs his
father to proceed with confidence (perge non dubio gradu, 490).
At line 491, Atreus enters from the palace via the center doors. He
speaks to himself. He can clearly see his brother and nephews, but they
have not yet reached center stage, and so he neither addresses them, nor
can they hear him. Thyestes hair is weighed down by much filth and he
has a sad expression (aspice, ut multo gravis squalore vultus obruat maestos
coma, 5056), along with a beard, befouled and drooping (foeda iaceat
barba, 507).
At last, Thyestes has reached center stage, and is greeted by his broth-
er (fratrem iuvat videre, 508). Atreus stretches out his arm, inviting an
embrace (complexus mihi redde expetitos, 5089). Thyestes begins to weep
(lacrimis agendum est, 517) and falls to his knees like a suppliant before
Atreus (supplicem primus vides, 517). He further makes hand gestures and
grabs the feet of his brother (hae te precantur pedibus intactae manus, 518),
before gesturing to his sons (hos innocentes, 521). Atreus, interrupting in
the middle of the line, tells Thyestes to stop touching his feet (a genibus
manum aufer, 52122). Instead, he embraces Thyestes and helps him rise
(meosque potius amplexus pete, 522), then turns to the boys and embraces
them (vos quoque meo pendete collo, 52324). He promises them all fresh
clothing (squalidam vestem exue, 524), along with regal accoutrements
(ornatus cape pares meis, 52526). Dialogue between the two brothers
ensues (53045), as Atreus gestures broadly, encompassing the entire
stage (hoc regnum, 534) and presents Thyestes with a crown (imposita capi-
ti vincla venerando gere, 544).17 Following the final words of Atreus at line
545, they all exit into the palace through the center doors.
At line 546, the Chorus steps forward and sings in minor sapphics, con-
cluding at line 622. It remains in place for the following act.18
Act 4 (623788)
Action unit: A Messenger tells of Atreus slaughter and subsequent

cooking of the sons of Thyestes.
Thyestes 129
At line 623, an unnamed Messenger enters via the center doors and
speaks with the Chorus. There are no other characters onstage, so it
is not unsurprising that the Chorus, speaking in trimeter, engages the
Messenger in conversation throughout this episode.19 Besides recount-
ing Atreus horrific behavior, the Messenger tells of odd astronomical
events: the sun sets in the East earlier than usual, and the stars vanish
(77678). Having completed his account, the Messenger exits following
line 788. It is unclear which wing he uses. If his mission is to tell as many
people as he can about Atreus atrocities, then he would go to the center
of town. If, on the other hand, he is shocked and ashamed of what he
has seen, he would want to avoid people, and so would head for foreign
parts.20
The Chorus, which is already downstage, watches the Messenger leave,

and then sings in anapests, starting at line 789. The ode, which further
discusses the unusual activity in the sky, concludes at line 884, at which
point the Chorus returns to the scaenae frons.21
Act 5 (8851112)
Action units: (1) Atreus rejoices that his plan is working. (2) Thyestes
is drunk and unknowingly partakes in the cannibalistic banquet. (3)
At last Thyestes learns the truth and calls curses upon Atreus, who
merely continues to take pleasure in his brothers torment.
At line 885, Atreus enters with silent attendants from the center doors
and speaks, further attesting to the weird celestial phenomena (dies reces-
sit. perge dum caelum vacat, 892). He orders his mute servants to open the
center doors and wheel out the exostra (turba famularis, fores templi relaxa,
festa patefiat domus, 9012).22
The house opens up (aperta tecta, 908) to reveal Thyestes on the plat-
form, which is elaborately decorated with a fully laden table, flowers,
large silver cups, and torches (multa conlucent face, 908).23 He is drunk
(gravisque vino, 781) and has a cheerful expression (hilarique vultu, 899).
His hair, adorned with flowers (vernae capiti fluxere rosae, 947), is slicked-
back and greasy (nitet fluente madidus unguento comam, 780 and pingui
madidus crinis amomo, 948). Thyestes reclines on pillows of purple and

gold (resupinus ipse purpurae atque auro incubat, 909) and drunkenly rests
his head on his left hand (vino gravatum fulciens laeva caput, 910). He sud-
denly vomits (eructat, 911), but then drinks unmixed wine from a large
silver cup (capaci ducit argento merum, 913). Finally, he begins to sing
(iam cantus ciet festasque voces, 91819) in anapests (92069).24 But even
though Thyestes is having a very good time, he feels a sudden upsurge of
sorrow (nulla surgens dolor ex causa, 944). He weeps, neither willingly nor
understanding why (imber vultu nolente cadit, 950), and groans reluctantly
while continuing to sing (venit in medias voces gemitus, 951).
At line 970, the meter reverts to trimeter, as Atreus speaks. Dialogue
follows between the two brothers, for the rest of the play. Atreus hands
the royal scepter to his brother, who apparently accepts it (hic est, sceptra,
971). Thyestes asks for his children (97475), and in reply Atreus ges-
tures toward Thyestes stomach (hic sunt eruntque, 977); but the drunken
reveler apparently does not recognize the significance of the movement.
Atreus then hands a cup of wine to Thyestes (poculum infuso cape gen-
tile Baccho, 98283), which in fact contains wine mixed with the blood
of his sons; Thyestes accepts it (capio, 983). Thyestes proposes to pour
a libation to the gods (paternis vina libentur deis, 984), but finds that he
is unable to move his hands (nolunt manus parere, 98586). Indeed, the
cup becomes too heavy to hold (crescit pondus et dextram gravat, 986);
Thyestes right hand trembles and wine spills from his lips (admotus ipsis
Bacchus a labris fugit, 987), dripping down his face, but avoiding his open
mouth (circaque rictus ore decepto fluit, 988). The upset Thyestes overturns
the table (et ipsa trepido mensa subsiluit solo, 989). The torches die down
(vix lucet ignis, 990), and Thyestes at last sees the darkness and stellar
anomalies that were previously noted by the Messenger, the Chorus,
and Atreus (99095). Thyestes now feels a rumbling within his stom-
ach (quis hic tumultus viscera exagitat mea? quid tremuit intus? 9991000),
from where strange sounds emerge (meumque gemitu non meo pectus gemit,
1001 and unde obloquuntur, 1004).25 At a signal from Atreus, servants
bring in a covered tray, from which the lid is removed with a flourish to
reveal what is left of the boys (venere! 1005). He points to them (accipe
hos! 1021), indicating that the childrens heads and hands and feet are
among the remains (abscisa cerno capita et avulsas manus et rupta fractis
cruribus vesitgia, 103839).26 Presumably, the tray holds stage representa-
tions of heads and hands. It is possible that holes were cut in both the
table and the tray, and that mute actors hid underneath the table until
just before the remains are revealed. But this would be difficult, since
Thyestes 131
Thyestes overturns the table at 989. Rather than hiding from the start
when the exostra was rolled in, the actors would have to sneak in unseen
during the episode. Fake heads or even the masks worn by the actors
in act 3 are, therefore, more practical. Meanwhile, Thyestes innards
are churning (volvuntur intus viscera, 1041). He demands a sword from
his brother so that he may cut out the offending meal (da, frater, ensem,
1043), but the request is denied (negatur ensis, 1045).27 He proposes to
beat his chest in mourning (pectora inliso sonent contusa planctu, 1045
46),28 but stops himself, lest he cause further pain to his dead children
(sustine, infelix, manum! parcamus umbris, 104647). After further mourn-
ing and exultation, Atreus ends the play at line 1112. Everyone seems
to remain onstage. It is possible, however, that the exostra is rolled back
through the center doors, taking Thyestes and Atreus with it, and leaving
the stunned Chorus behind.
Conclusions
The story of the brothers Atreus and Thyestes seems to have been quite
popular among both Greek and Roman tragedians.29 Sophocles, Eurip-
ides, Agathon, Chaeremon, Carcinus, Cleophon, Diogenes, and Apol-
lodorus of Tarsus are all known to have dealt with the subject. Likewise,
Ennius, Accius, Varius, Gracchus, Mamercus Aemilius Scarus, and Pom-
ponius Secundus took up the story. Unfortunately, no more than frag-
ments remain from these previous plays, and in some cases only titles or
lists of characters. It is difficult to know, therefore, exactly what influence
they had on Senecas version, though undoubtedly there was some.
The most remarkable aspect of the Thyestes in terms of dramaturgy
is the surprising lack of the type of stage business and emotional cues
that are found in the other plays. There is less here than in any of the
others, except for the fragmentary Phoenissae. And there are a number
of passages where more might be expected. For example, the Messenger
is obviously distraught when he first enters (623ff.), and yet neither his
mood nor actions are described. Compare this with the Oedipus, where
the Chorus tells that the royal Servant is sad and beating his head with his
hand (maestus et famulus manu regius quassat caput, 91213). Nor is this
the lone instance of such omissions. Like the Agamemnon, this play that
centers so much on violence is remarkable for its lack of props; none are
mentioned until the banquet of the final act. There are a number of pos-
sible explanations. Fitch (1981) argues that the Thyestes is one of the lat-
er plays; perhaps our playwright has changed his approach to composing

drama. Tarrant (1985) notes that the Thyestes is widely acknowledged to
be one of Senecas most powerful tragedies (ix) and [t]he Thyestes is an
extraordinarily cohesive play (43). Perhaps Seneca pursues this power
and cohesion at the expense of physical cues. Or this could be an argu-
ment for performance: if the play were staged, it would be clear when
people entered and exited, and what their emotional states were. In any
case, this minimalism reflects the greater themes of the play. Through-
out, Atreus and Thyestes hide their true feelings, hatred and lust for
revenge for the former, fear and reluctance for the latter, from each
other. The Fury is a constant, though unseen, presence. And in a real
sense, the sons of Thyestes enter unseen and unannounced along with
their father in the final act. Thus, it is quite fitting that other stage busi-
ness is unremarked upon.
A further aspect of this lack of markers is the presence of the sons
of Thyestes in act 3. The eldest boy, Tantalus, is the only one to speak.
This is necessary, because with two actors required to play Atreus and
Thyestes, only one remains. But, while the manuscripts do identify him
as Tantalus, and he is named by the Messenger later on (718), the text
does not name him when he is physically present. Further, the second
son, who the manuscripts say is present and named Plisthenes, and who
is likewise mentioned by the Messenger (726), is similarly unnamed in
the dialogue, in addition to being mute. And the third child, who is
only referred to by the Chorus during the exchange with the Messenger
(731), is never given a name, called only Tacitus by the manuscripts.30
Silent boys are not at all unusual for Seneca. Other plays portray the sons
of Hercules (Hercules Furens), Astyanax (Troades), the sons of Medea and
Jason (Medea), and Orestes and Pylades (Agamemnon). Aside from the
last pair, all the mute youths are facing impending death; so the three
sons of Thyestes fit with Senecas usual practice. But again, the apparent
sloppiness with the names and the uncertainty of which boys are present
in act 3 add to the pervasive sense of secrecy and deception.
C h a pter 9
Phoenissae (Women of Phoenicia)
Dramatis Personae
Actor Act 1 (ll. 1362) Act 2 (ll. 363442) Act 3 (ll. 4436 64)
Actor A Oedipus Jocasta Jocasta
Actor B Antigone Antigone Polynices
Actor C Messenger Attendant Eteocles
Because of the fragmentary nature of this play, it is hard to determine

what Seneca had in mind for the Phoenissae in terms of role distribution.
So extreme is the uncertainty that Sutton (1986) does not even posit
suggestions. Aside from needing the same actor to play Antigone in acts
1 and 2, and the same actor for Jocasta in acts 2 and 3, the role assign-
ments are almost arbitrary. It seems sensible that one actor gets both
Oedipus and Jocasta, showing that the famous incest from the Oedipus
extends even to the casting of the sequel. Similarly, the two servants are
given to the same actor. It also appears necessary for the same actor to
portray Antigone and either Polynices or Eteocles. It would be signifi-
cant to give the performer both the girl and the brother she will subse-
quently bury.1
There is no Chorus. Manuscript family E gives the title of the play
as Phoenissae, implying that if there were a Chorus it would consist of
women from Phoenicia. Family A labels the drama Thebais, in which case
the songs would be performed by a group of Thebans.2
The Phoenissae, like the Troades, appears to change location.3 Act 1
takes place in the wilderness where Oedipus and Antigone wander in
exile. In subsequent acts, the center doors appear to stand for the battle-
133
The Set: Thebes
ments of Thebes, on which Jocasta, Antigone, and the Attendant stand

in act 2, and in front of which Jocasta confronts her sons in act 3.
Act 1 (1362 )
Action units: (1) Oedipus laments that his life is terrible, while Antig
one tries to cheer him up.4 (2) A Messenger tells Oedipus and Antig
one about the impending battle at Thebes.
The play, as it exists, begins with the entrance of Oedipus and Antig
one from the wing leading to Thebes. The two exchange long speeches
throughout the act. Oedipus speaks first, addressing his daughter, Antig
one (nata, 2). He, however, is identified later by reference to his father
(genitor vocat, 39), whom he subsequently names (Laius, 41).5 Oedipus
stumbles (errantem gradum, 4)6 and Antigone supports him (in recta quid
deflectis? 4). The old man (senex, 32) wants to collapse (permitte labi, 5),
but Antigone holds him up, gripping him tightly by the arm or holding
him on her shoulder. He gestures (hac manu, 8) and demands that she
cease clinging to him (solve inhaerentem manum, 10). He begins to hal-
lucinate, seeing the ghost of his father, Laius (genitor vocat, 39),7 and
addresses him. Oedipus points to the ghost (en ecce, 42), who attacks his
son, going specifically, and symbolically, for his eyes (inanes petit foditque
Phoenissae (Women of Phoenicia) 135
vultus, 4243). The old man then turns back to Antigone, asking her
whether she can see her grandfathers shade (nata, genitorem vides? 43)
as he does (ego video, 44), despite his conventional blindness. At last, he
tries to push her away (discede a patre, discede, virgo, 4950), to no avail,
as Antigone continues to hold her fathers hand (a tuo nostram manum
corpore resolvet, 5152). She performs a series of gestures, pointing first
toward the offstage mountains (hic, 67), then in various different direc-
tions: toward a rocky crag (hic, 69), then toward a chasm (hic, 70), and
finally toward a rapids (hic, 71). Oedipus addresses his right hand (dextra
quid cessas? 91). Apparently, Antigone still clings to the other, despite
his entreaties to let go (mitte genitoris manum, 93). Next, the old man
demands a sword (ensem parenti trade, 106);8 but Antigone does not obey
(ferrum negabis? 147). Again, Oedipus addresses the ghost of his father
(et tu, parens? 166). He gestures with his hand (manumque hanc, 217) and
points toward the sky (hoc caelum, 217), as well as, much later, to himself
(hic Oedipus, 313).
Line 319 is incomplete (iubente te vel vivet), which could suggest that
the play itself is unfinished, instead of just preserved only in fragments.9
While it is never a good idea to try to supplement missing lines of poetry,
one could fruitfully insert something like en! aliquis venit! At this point,
either there is a Choral parodos, if, in fact, this is meant to be the end of
act 1, or else the play proceeds directly to the Messengers entrance.
At line 320, an otherwise unidentified Messenger enters and speaks.
He brings news from Thebes, and so comes on via the wing leading to
that city. Oedipus responds at line 328. The Messenger interrupts him
in the middle of line 347.10 At 350, the old man resumes speaking. He
is enraged (tumet animus ira, 352), and his indignation boils over (fervet
dolor, 352).
After line 362, the episode is clearly over for Oedipus, Antigone, and
the Messenger. The former king exits through the wing leading to for-
eign parts. The Messenger goes back to the wing leading to Thebes. But
the activities of Antigone are unclear. On the one hand, she has proven
her intention to follow her father in exile, wherever he goes, if for no
other reason than to prevent him from committing suicide. But she also
seems to appear in the next episode with Jocasta. Frank discusses but
ultimately dismisses the possibility that, since nobody but Oedipus is ever
identified by name, the daughter in act 2 is actually Ismene, finally sug-
gesting that such MS evidence as there is thus points to Antigone and
not Ismene as being at Jocastas side.11 If so, Antigone leaves with the
Messenger through the wing leading to Thebes, and so is able to partici-

pate in the next act. Alternatively, if it is Ismene in act 2, Antigone exits
with Oedipus via the wing to foreign parts, never to be heard from again
in this play. But in any event, all three actors exit here. A choral song
would follow before the next episode begins.
Act 2 (363442)
Action units: (1) Jocasta, an Attendant and Antigone discuss the

impending battle. (2) Jocasta exits to confront her two sons.
At line 363, Jocasta enters, with her daughter and an Attendant, and
speaks. Other than from context, Jocasta is only identified when the
Attendant calls her regina (387), and the daughter names her parens
(403); she also describes herself as an old woman (anus, 411).12 The
action takes place on the battlements of Thebes, as the three characters
watch the gathering armies. They would either enter from the center
doors, with the scaenae frons representing the walls of the city, or else
perform the episode from the balcony.13 At line 387, the Attendant
responds to Jocasta, indicating that he does, in fact, enter with her. The
queen has been both weeping and lamenting (flebiles questus cies, 387).
The Attendant describes the scene, both for the onstage women and
for the audience: a soldier quickly rushes back and forth (cursu citato
miles hinc atque hinc ruit, 393), dust envelopes Thebes in darkness (394
97), and battle standards shine (397400). Finally, the Attendant tells
Jocasta that she should go to her sons and beg for peace (i, redde, 401
2). At line 403, the daughter speaks, until Jocasta resumes at line 407.
The daughter then interrupts in the middle of line 414, describing fur-
ther the events on the battlefield: battle standards are shining (41415),
a hostile shout erupts (415), and the armies are on the move (418).
Jocasta must exit through the center doors following her last words at
line 426, for the Attendant describes her actions on the battlefield. After
line 442, no more is heard from either him or Jocastas daughter; and
in fact, the queen herself, who has gone to confront her sons on the
battlefield, speaks at the next line. This must, then, be the end of this
act. The two remaining characters must exit into the city through the
center doors or by withdrawing from the balcony. The Chorus would
then sing another song.
Act 3 (443664)
Action unit: Jocasta tries to convince both Polynices and Eteocles to

make peace with each other.
At line 443, Jocasta enters, with Polynices and Eteocles. It would be

dramatically effective if she comes in from the center doors represent-
ing the main gate of the city, while each son comes on from a different
wing. The previous descriptions of the Attendant apply here: Jocasta is
terrified (attonita, 433), she has torn her white hair in her grief (laniata
canas mater ostendit comas, 440), and tears flow down her cheeks (irrigat
fletu genas, 441). She indicates where she would like to be stabbed (hunc
petite ventrem haec membra, 44748).14 She points first to Polynices (hic
afuit, 462), then to Eteocles (nunc alter, 463). At last, Jocasta commands
Polynices, who is worn out from long exile (longo fessus exilio, 466),
to embrace her and to put aside his weapons (46473). Frank notes
that Polynices is described as holding a drawn sword and shield, while
brandishing a spear, a physical impossibility; she does point out, how-
ever, that it is possible to simply hold all three objects.15 I would suggest
instead that, although Jocasta uses the second-person singular impera-
tive throughout this passage, she is actually talking to both of her sons,
one at a time. Thus, one son may have a drawn sword, while the other
brandishes a spear, and Jocasta turns to one son and then the other in
turn. Fitch thinks Polynices obeys.16 Each brother watches the other for
signs of treachery (quo vultus refers acieque pavida fratris observas manum?
47374). Polynices is in doubt of what to do (quid dubius haeres? 477).
He responds to his mother, telling her that he is afraid (timeo, 478); but
he only speaks for two and a half lines before Jocasta interrupts in the
middle of line 480. She turns to Eteocles (tu, 483) for a few lines. She
then addresses one brother, and then the other, pointing to the proper
one in turn (ille te, tu illum times? 488). As Polynices has indeed put aside
his sword, and his shield is leaning against his spear, which has been
planted in the ground (hic ferrum abdidit, reclinis hastae parma defixae incu-
bat, 49899), Jocasta turns again to Eteocles (ad te, 500). She weeps (sed
ante lacrimas, 501), and is stunned, pale, and trembling (stupeo et exanguis
tremo, 528). She points here and there (hinc et hinc, 529), as her limbs
quake with fear (membra quassantur metu, 530). She prays (precor, 537),
with appropriate gestures. At line 586, Polynices responds, pointing to
his brother (ille, 590). Jocasta resumes, starting at line 598. She points
in various directions (hinc, 602; hinc, 608; hinc, 610), before gesturing
toward Eteocles (hunc, 640). Polynices speaks again, bursting in at the

middle of line 643. His mother responds, starting at line 645. One of
the men then interrupts in the middle of line 651, to engage in dialogue
with his mother for the rest of what remains of the play. The manuscripts
have Polynices continue to argue with Jocasta, a reading accepted by
Fitch (2002). Grotius gives the lines to Eteocles and Polynices. But Zwi-
erlein (1986) and Frank (1995) assign the scene to Eteocles and Jocas-
ta.17 The content of the debate is typical Senecan argumentation about
kingship and fear, and is most appropriate for someone who is currently
a ruler (i.e., Eteocles) and a third party who is trying to get him to abdi-
cate (i.e., his mother, Jocasta, and not his rival). In addition, it is awkward
and somewhat unfair for Eteocles to be present and never get a chance
to speak. Thus, I would follow Zwierlein and Frank.
At line 664, the manuscripts stop. Presumably, after some blustering
threats between the two brothers, all three actors exeunt, probably Jocas-
ta through the center doors, and each brother back through the differ-
ent wing from which he came to his army. Perhaps the Chorus would
sing again. Then a Messenger would tell Jocasta the results of the battle,
and she would lament, as the play draws to a close.
Conclusions
Senecas play evokes the memory of Aeschylus Septem Contra Thebas

(467 BCE). The opening scene with an exiled Oedipus brings to mind
Sophocles Oedipus Coloneus (ca. 401 BCE), as well as Senecas own Oedi-
pus, along with its antecedents. But the most striking similarities are to
Euripides Phoenissae (ca. 410 BCE). Aside from the title18 (and possibly
the Chorus), in both tragedies Jocasta, who has somehow survived the
events of the Oedipus, pleads with her two sons not to bring ruin upon
Thebes. Antigone has a prominent role in both, including a scene where
an old family retainer describes the battlefield from the walls of Thebes.
And both include a sightless and exiled Oedipus. Euripides, however,
brings the blind former ruler out at the end, while Seneca uses him in
the beginning. And the Roman play includes Jocasta in the scene on the
walls. The Attic tragedian employed a much greater cast of characters, as
well as a parallel plot where Tiresias orders Creons son, Menoeceus, to
sacrifice himself in order to save the city. But there is simply not enough
of the Roman play to be able to tell what else he was planning to do, nor
what his influences might have been.19
The plays difficulty is that it is clearly unfinished.20 There are no

choral passages, nor a satisfying prologue or conclusion. And transitions
from one episode to the next are also lacking. What remains seems to
be the hearts of several episodes, which the playwright was, for whatever
reason, unable to complete. There are certainly clues about stage busi-
ness within the scenes,21 but no clear indications of how to get from one
episode to the next. And while Euripides Phoenissae seems to provide the
general structure for the play, with the story of the Septem Contra Thebas as
a general backdrop, there is no unifying factor, as there was for Senecas
Troades. In fact, in that play, the Chorus provided the unity, and so it is
probable that the Chorus was supposed to serve similar duty here.
The big question is why did Seneca move the scene with Oedipus
from the end to the beginning? Just as in Euripides play, the audience
gets to see the reaction of both parents to the boys struggle for suprem-
acy. But the Roman play presents the practical problem of how to get
Antigone from exile in the wilderness with her father back to the walls of
Thebes with her mother. Seneca must have had a reason for the change,
as well as a solution to the Antigone conundrum; but there is no way to
identify either.
There simply is not enough of this play to draw any conclusions. One
can only wish that Seneca had not been interrupted in his work, and had
left a finished product that contained at the very least a prologue, choral
odes, and a satisfying ending. On the other hand, the characters of this
play respond to each other to a degree not found in the other plays. And
even in this sketchy condition, there are signs of stage business, as well as
some very powerful speeches.22
Conclusion
This project began as an investigation into the first-century Roman trage-

dies of Seneca, combining the methods of Oliver Taplin (1977) and Dana
Sutton (1986) in order, to paraphrase Taplin, to develop a fuller gram-
mar of Senecas dramatic technique and to show what Seneca is all about.
Oddly, neither of these two scholarly pioneers, nor many who followed,1
included a conclusion. There are, however, a number of conclusions that
can be drawn from the present examination of Senecan dramaturgy.
First and foremost, it should now be clear that Seneca was, in fact, a
dramaturge in the truest sense of the word: a maker of dramas. Regard-
less of whether he composed with an actual theater or a fictive stage
in mind, the Roman playwright constructed his tragedies with a certain
consistency. A careful reading of the plays reveals entrances and exits,
gestures, properties, and the emotions of the characters. The dramas
also take full advantage of the Roman stage, using the center doors and
the wings in a consistent manner, along with the trap door, the machina,
the exostra, and the balcony, and even including the occasional change of
scene. Seneca seems to follow the rule of three actors for the most part,
distributing roles among a limited number of performers with skill and
creativity in a way that often adds depths of meaning to the plays and to
the characters themselves. The Chorus, although not always endowed
with a clear identity, is nevertheless a vital and integral part of the plays.
Even the clearly unfinished Phoenissae, while lacking a Chorus and a defi-
nite idea of the ultimate direction of the plot, shows obvious signs that
staging and emotional concerns were in the forefront of the composers
mind. In short, all of the issues that a true maker of dramas must con-
sider, and that a modern dramatist is accustomed to indicating through
140
Conclusion 141
didaskalia, can be discerned in Senecan tragedy.2 And although the

directions deduced in this study are not necessarily authentic or defini-
tive, the fact that the options can be detected and evaluated reveals the
artistry of Seneca tragicus.
Second, dramaturgy is not an isolated element of Senecan drama,
but rather a key ingredient, contributing to the themes of the individ-
ual plays. In the Oedipus, staging issues reveal Oedipus isolation and
loneliness, and a number of unusual abnormalities nudge the audience
toward the fact that something is rotten in Thebes. The Agamemnon is
full of deception, illustrated by the intentions to perform sacrifices to
the gods, frequently stated by various characters, but never fulfilled. By
the end of the play, the deception has been revealed, symbolized by the
onstage presence of all of the important characters. In the first act of the
Phaedra, Hippolytus introduces the Chorus, not verbally, but by singing
the parodos, signaling that it will be an unusually active participant in
the play. This also shows Hippolytus to be assuming a role not normally
his, thus letting the audience know that he has transgressed the laws of
theater, nature, and the gods. Further, the play requires a great deal of
machinery, reflecting the machinations of Phaedra and the Nurse. And
the role distribution provides important insights into the characters and
the plot. The Medea also includes a large number of technical devices,
which again illustrate Medeas plots and schemes. Jason is a blind spot to
our heroine, and so his entrances and exits are consistently unmarked
and unremarked upon. These two elements combine with others to chal-
lenge audience expectations, thus making it easier to accept that Medea
frequently forgets to behave like herself. Many aspects of the Hercules
Furens appear unclear and confused. But instead of being evidence of
poor or fuzzy dramaturgy, these in fact serve to emphasize the central
theme of the play: Hercules madness. Similarly, the confusion and
uncertainty in the Troades reflects the mood of the title characters. The
Trojan women themselves are in shock, helpless and confused, and Sen-
eca uses his dramatic technique to cause the audience to feel the same.
Dramaturgical elements in the Thyestes are kept to a minimum. Entranc-
es and exits are generally unannounced; emotions are not described;
and the children of Thyestes, though vital to the action, are not named
in the text. Throughout the play and its backstory, Atreus and Thyestes
engage in secrecy and deception; and so the playwright himself keeps
silent about all manner of onstage occurrences. Thus, dramaturgy is not
an extra, subservient to the words; Seneca uses all of the elements at his
disposal to craft his tragedies.
Third, the previous points lead to the issue of the effect all of this
would have on an audience. For whether our playwright composed with
full-blown staging or a fictive theater in mind, he must have intended
for someone to receive his work. That the plays have come down to us
through graffito at Pompeii, through the writings of Quintilian,3 and
through the E and A manuscripts themselves, shows that reception did
occur. What reaction, then, would Senecas particular dramatic style cre-
ate for an audience? It is doubtful that storytelling was his primary moti-
vation, as the playwright often assumes prior knowledge that he does
not provide. The tragedies contain numerous instances of the omission
of important plot points: the absence of any deities in the Phaedra to
indicate that Venus is responsible for the misfortunes of Theseus and his
family; any mention in the Medea that Creon stuck to his daughter as he
tried to free her from Medeas gift; nor indeed any clue of where Medea
escapes to in the end, and so forth. Either Seneca took it for granted that
his audience would be aware of both the myth and previous renditions of
it, or else he did not consider such awareness to be necessary for appre-
ciating the play. In either case, surely a spectator who was familiar with
other versions would add an additional dimension to the proceedings by
recognizing what had been omitted.
Further, characters frequently exclaim that they must behave as them-
selves (e.g., Ulixes at Troades 61314, Medea at Medea 171 and 910). This
kind of metadramatic shorthand allows the playwright to present a more
or less fully developed character quickly and with a minimum of descrip-
tion. The audience does not need to be told what kind of person Ulixes
ishe is Ulixes, and behaves in the way we would expect him to. But by
drawing upon the tragic tradition and taking full advantage of it, Seneca
assumes that his audience is aware of that tradition. Neither plot omis-
sions nor character shorthand require prior knowledge, though it would
enrich the experience. But these features do hint that storytelling was
not the primary goal.
So if telling the story was not foremost on Senecas mind, what was he
about? Many of the themes to which the dramaturgy calls attention have
to do with the inner workings of the characters. For example, deception
and scheming are emphasized in the Agamemnon, Phaedra, Medea, and
Thyestes. But more than that, emotional states are revealed: the loneli-
ness of Oedipus, the madness of Hercules, the confusion of the Trojan
women, and so forth. In this way Senecan tragedy more closely resembles
Japanese Noh theater than the intellectual drama of the second half of
the fifth century.4 Keene describes Noh plays as distillations of powerful
Conclusion 143
emotionsjealousy, the craving for revenge, unswerving loyalty, or heart-

break over disappointed lovethat transcend the particular character.5
The same could be said for Senecas plays, as the audience takes away
Atreus lust for revenge and Thyestes helpless despair more than the
events that got them into this situation. Keene further notes, We tend
to remember the [Noh] plays in terms of one prevailing emotion.... In
extreme cases this means that a play lacks any semblance of conflict...
and even plot.6 Obviously, conflict is integral to Senecan drama; and
while our Roman playwright could not abandon totally the Greek idea
that plot is a key component of tragedy, he certainly does not give it as
much emphasis as Aristotle would insist upon.7 Rather, at times the story
seems to exist as an excuse through which Seneca may show his audience
the strong emotions of his characters. This is not in any way to belittle
these Roman dramas, nor indeed to elevate them. Senecas plays are
inherently neither worse nor better than those of Aeschylus, Sophocles,
or Euripides. They are simply different, created by a different playwright,
in a different culture, with a different dramaturgy.
But it is not an easy task to negotiate a path between difference and
tradition. W. Jackson Bate (1970) discusses at length the difficulties
experienced by poets in eighteenth-century England as they tried to be
original, to find something new that had not been done before. Ralph
Waldo Emerson, in his 1837 speech that became known as The Ameri-
can Scholar, says that Americans must find their own voice, using their
European predecessors as inspiration, but creating something new and
unique. Roman authors clearly felt the same tension, but each followed
a different course. Plautus and Terence each responded to Greek New
Comedy in his own way. Vergil and Ovid each found a different method
of adapting Homeric epic into Latin. Horace and Catullus were both
inspired by Greek lyric poetry, but went their separate ways. Similarly,
Seneca took on the genre of Greek tragedy. He accepted the stories and
characters, and some of the basic structure; but he grafted them onto the
conventions of the Roman stage, and made plot subservient to the emo-
tions of his characters. In this way, he created something new, something
inherently Roman, while still acknowledging his debt to the past.
Finally, the question remains, why did Seneca tragicus, whoever he
might have been, compose these plays? I do not mean to stir up the
debate as to whether he was a philosopher, desiring to use the dramas to
teach Stoicism, or a politician wanting to relay hidden messages to either
Nero or his enemies. This study has established that our playwright was
a dramatic artist with artistic goals. Today, any artist has practical consid-
erations: create something popular that will draw an audience and thus
make money, or something that could use the resources at the artists
disposal, in this case specific actors or a specific theater space. But, all
things being equal, an artist without economic concerns should produce
art that she or he is moved to create. The same, I would argue, is true
for antiquity. Vergil did not compose the Aeneid just because Maecenas
or Augustus wanted him to. He would certainly be happy that the poem
fit into his patrons designs. But surely Vergil would have found a way
to create his masterpiece no matter what. And I would maintain this
to be the case with Seneca tragicus, especially since there is no indica-
tion either way that the playwright was a professional man of the theater,
needing the plays to be successful in order to survive. In any time period,
a person does not compose seven complete tragedies on a whim. Even
more, she or he does not put as much care and attention into them as
we have seen in these dramas. Senecas attention to the practicalities of
the stage, his integration of those concerns into the very structure of the
plays, and his using that method of composition to paint an emotional
portrait for the audience, show that our playwright was an artist, taking
full advantage of the tools and techniques of an artist, and driven by the
concerns of an artist.
Notes
Introduction
1. Taplin (1977) 12. Compare with Seale (1982) 1213, who, although study-
ing stagecraft in Sophocles, equates stagecraft with spectacle, and describes it as
external, obtrusive, conspicuous, and often gratuitous.
2. This controversy seems to have begun with A. W. Schlegel (1815), and
reached its full fruition with Otto Zwierlein (1966). That it continues to be a subject
of scholarly concern today can be seen in the efforts of George Harrison (2000) to
gather together a number of Senecan scholars for a conference at Xavier Univer-
sity, including a performance of the Troades, which resulted in a collection of papers
intended to shed light on the issue from a variety of points of view. See also Boyle
(2006) 19293.
3. For a sampling of the discussion, see Leverett (2008) and Cardullo (1995).
4. Consider also the so-called stage directions in parenthesis, which can be
found throughout Roman epic, most prominently in Ovid. These figures interrupt
direct speech with information ranging from actions (e.g., Metamorphoses 1.591) to
both physical and atmospheric settings (e.g., Metamorphoses 5.282) to explanations
(e.g., Metamorphoses 9.17).
5. Stage direction in the modern sense, as illustrated above by the opening of
Death of a Salesman, do not appear in written play scripts until the medieval period,
when playwrights began to compose scripts intended to be produced by someone
else. See McJannet (1999) 910. On the theory behind explicit stage directions in
drama, see Chancellor (1979), Issacharoff (1988), and Suchy (1991).
6. Goffman (1986) 14445, writing in the twentieth century, was more accus-
tomed to stage dramas in which embedded directions were not only unnecessary, but
also out of fashion. On the other hand, such explicit directions were integral to the
type of radio plays that were common in Goffmans time, and today can be found in
Public Radios Prairie Home Companion.
7. Taplin (1977) 28. See also Mastronarde (1979) 2.
8. Revermann (2006) 50. He goes on (5354) to discuss big troublemakers
passages in Greek drama which refer to vital stage action, but not in the way required
by the significant action hypothesis.
9. Goffman (1986) 143.
145
146 notes to pages 36
10. Revermann (2006) 6364.

11. A. Conan Doyle, The Sign of the Four, ch. 6.
12. To give just one of many, many instances, consider Oedipus 2025, where the
Chorus announces the entrance of Creon. Contrast that with the uncertainty of when
exactly during act 1 Jocasta both enters and exits. Hamilton (1978) 6373 offers a
statistical analysis of announced versus unannounced entrances in Attic tragedy. See
also Frost (1988) 517 on entrances and exits in Greek New Comedy.
13. Davis (1993) 9.
14. Sutton (1986) 29.
15. Sutton (1986) 32. See also Marshall (1994) for a discussion of how role
assignments may be determined for Greek tragedy.
16. And even those directions do not have to be followed by subsequent directors.
Indeed, I would argue that a good script, be it ancient or modern, allows for multiple
readings and considerable artistic freedom. Cf. the view of twentieth-century play-
wright Sam Shepard, as quoted by Schechner (1988) 76, who both understands that
different productions of his plays might be far from what I had in mind, but also
expresses hope that someday a director will successfully achieve his original vision.
17. Sutton (1986) 2931 also assumes that the ancient theater had specialist
character actors, and so in his analyses tries to give the bit parts to the tritagonist.
18. The following terms and definitions are from the discussion of Cohen and
Harrop (1984) 2529. Seneca himself seems to have put some thought into the divi-
sion of his plays into acts; see further in chapter 1.
19. We shall see that often a pause occurs between action units.
20. The task of dating is made a little easier, though not much, if we assume the
playwright is Lucius Annaeus Seneca minor. In that case, we can narrow things down
to between his birth in 4 BCE or 1 CE and his death in 65 CE. It is disheartening,
however, that even with all that we know about the mans life we cannot place the
composition of the tragedies within it. Kohn (2003) argues that the attribution of the
plays to Seneca philosophus is by no means secure.
21. For example, the accounts of the tragic story of Actaeon at Oedipus 75163
and Metamorphoses 3.138252 share common vocabulary and syntax. See Canter
(1925) 4055 for a fuller list. See also Schiesaro (1992) 5663 and Hlikk (1997)
5862.
22. Fitch (1987b) 5053.
23. A recent study by Joachim Dingel (2009), Die Relative Datierung der Tragdien
Senecas (Berlin), which I have not had the opportunity to see, promises to provide a
new order, based on an internal analysis of ideas and themes in the individual plays.
24. On the manuscript tradition, see Tarrant (1976) 2396. This discussion is
repeated in Reynolds (1983) 37881. See also Philp (1968) 15079 and the intro-
duction to Zwierlein (1986) vxi.
25. Tarrant (1976) 58.
26. http://www.apgrd.ox.ac.uk. This website (abbreviated to APGRD) is an
invaluable compilation sponsored by the Faculty of Classics at the University of
Oxford. Other productions are mentioned, here and there, by various modern schol-
ars. For example, Davis (1993) 6 mentions performances in Rome and Wittenberg.
Both Beare (1964) 236 and Bieber (1961) 255 report that the plays were staged in
English schools in the 1560s. And Cruciani (1983) 21927 discusses productions of
the Hippolytus in Rome in 1486. Other examples of modern productions of Seneca
in Europe can be found in Smith (1988).
Notes to Pages 68 147
27. See Boyle (1997) 141207 and Eliot (1934) 7697. But cf. Goldberg (2000),
who argues that while Seneca contributed language to English tragedy, Ovid may
have had more influence over action.
28. Davis (2003) 2736.
29. Boyle (2008) xl, note 67.
30. Boyle (1994) 38.
31. Harrison (2000) vii. See also the contributions of Ahl and Raby in Harrison
(2000). The former (15172) discusses his concerns as a Senecan translator; the lat-
ter (17396) explicates her process as a director.
32. Tarrant (1976) 8794 has a useful discussion of editions of Seneca.
33. Not much is definitely known about theatrical practices during the first centu-
ry. The best, as well as most recent, discussion of the Roman theater is Boyle (2006).
But see also Beacham (1991), Beare (1964), and Duckworth (1952).
34. In addition to the previously mentioned sources, Wrigley (2005) includes
many productions and/or adaptations of Senecas Agamemnon in her extensive list of
performances of the myth.
35. Harrison (2000) vii notes that the whole question of performance of Senecan
tragedy seems a curiously German and Anglophone concern. Colleagues in other
countries appear to take it as an article of faith that the plays are capable of being
produced and were performed during the course of the first century CE.
36. This view pervades the very influential edition of Leo (1878), and also is
prominent in Eliots (1934) essay, Seneca in Elizabethan Translation, 6676, which
maintains that the tragedies neither belong on the Greek stage, nor were they meant
to be read silently; instead, Eliot advocated for recitation. Cf. Davis (1993) 9, who
places himself solidly in the properformance camp.
37. Schlegel (1815) 28790. See also Sutton (1986) 1 and Seidensticker and
Armstrong (1985) 92021 on the consequences of Schlegels pronouncement.
38. Marti (1945) advocates silent reading at 21920, and later (221) refers to
Stoic readers.
39. As well as oral, gestural, kinesic, histrionic, corporeal, and mimetic. For just
one example of the type of aural detail that must be considered, see Guggenheimers
(1972) work on rhyme in Latin poetry. Allen (1978) vii maintains that Latin litera-
ture had an oral component that must be studied to achieve full appreciation. Aldrete
(1999) provides testimony for the gestural component, specifically of oratory; and
Sonkowsky (1959) 273 suggests that writers of all kinds of Latin literature, not only
orators, took aspects of delivery into consideration while composing; see also Norden
(1958) 6 and Nachtrge 12.
40. See Knox (1968) 42135, Winsbury (2009) 95110 and 12934, and the vari-
ous essays in Johnson and Parker (2009).
41. See also Cicero, Att. 16.2.5, and Off. 1.147. For a detailed, scholarly discussion
of the recitatio, see Funaioli (1920) cols. 43546. On the recitatio and how it relates to
Vergils Eclogues, see Kohn (2000).
42. As at CIL 2.6278.18, 8.11345, 9.1156. See TLL V.2, s.v. editio C: de munerum
praestatione, and editor 3: muneris exhibitor; see also OLD, s.v. editio, 5, and edo (2), 12.
43. Walker (1969) 18387. Kragelund (1999) makes the same point. See also
Marshall (2000) 27, who observes that some of the performance problems Zwierlein
and others have noted are not necessarily solved by advocating recitation. See also
Tarrant (1978) 21363, who shows that Senecan tragedy is influenced at least as
much by later theatrical conventions as it was by Attic tragedy.
44. There are, however, a number of fragments of tragedies by other authors, and
some elements of dramaturgy can be teased out; see the discussions of Boyle (2006)
and Erasmo (2004).
45. For more on these questions, see Kohn (2000) 26774.
46. Cf. Hollingsworth (2001) 13544, who argues that Senecas tragedies do not
match with the testimonia about recitationes. See also Sutton (1986) 5, who notes that
it is difficult to identify characters nonverbally in recitation.
47. Fitch (2000) 112. His efforts in this matter have received praise from Fan-
tham (2000) 13, among others.
48. For example, Sutton (1986) 2223, Rosenmeyer (1993) 236ff., and Holling-
sworth (2001) 14243. See also the discussion below, in the chapter on the Oedi-
pus. The lines in question are Oed. 299389. And consider that not only were the
unstageable scenes imitated by Renaissance playwrights (see Eliot [1934] 7684),
but they were in fact performed (see Cruciani [1983]).
49. Easterling (in OCD 3, s.v. tragedy, Greek) says that over time it probably
became common to act selected scenes or speeches, highlights from famous plays.
Bartsch (1994) 224, note 4, while discussing the performances of Nero, notes that
scholars generally agree that these performances consisted of individual scenes rath-
er than whole tragedies; she refers to, among others, Beare (1964) 234, who says
these seem to have been cantica depicting certain scenes of tragic character. None of
these scholars cite original sources to back up their claims. While evidence of the per-
formance of individual scenes from drama exists from the Hellenistic period (Csapo
and Slater [1995] 78 list four examples, two from comedy), there is no proof that
the Romans did such a thing. There are vague references in the Historia Augusta
(Hadrian 26.4) and in Plutarchs Convivial Questions (7.8.711.E) to tragedies being
part of dinner entertainment. Which ones, when, how, and by whom they might have
been performed, however, is unclear. See Jones (1991) 19194 for a discussion of
these and other entertainments.
50. See Frank (1995) 3942 on the scholarly discussion concerning the perfor-
mance of the Phoenissae.
51. Fantham (1982) 48ff. and (1996a) 150.
52. Marshall (1998) 95 and (2000) 3233.
53. Such as the examples from the House of Augustus at Rome and various hous-
es at Pompeii pictured in Beacham (1992) 7280.
54. Varner (2000) 132.
55. Sutton (1986) 5.
56. See also Sutton (1986) 6062.
57. All three historians mention the story of Mamercus Aemilius Scaurus who ran
afoul of Tiberius. See Tacitus, Ann. 6.29.1925; Cassius Dio, 58.24.34; and Sueto-
nius, Tib. 61.3. See also Bartsch (1994) 8688.
58. On the other hand, there is little evidence for either the performance or
the composition of comedy in the first century CE. This is not to say that it was not
happening; simply that there is little said about it. Quintilian states that comedy is
the literary form in which Latin literature is most deficient, and names no comic
writers later than Afranius, who flourished ca. 150 BCE (Inst. 10.1.99100). Further,
the only role that Cicero specifically names for Roscius, his favorite actor, was from a
revival of a previously successful comedy (QRosc. 7.20the role is Ballio in Plautus
Pseudolus; see also Garton [1972] 16988), implying that even by the first century
BCE the composition of comedy had ceased, even if its performance had not. But if
Vitruvius is correct in naming the comic as one of the types of scaena (De Arch. 5.6.9),
then comedies, presumably restagings of older works, were still being performed in
the first century.
59. Tacitus, Dial. 13.2, [Suetonius] Vergil 26, Servius ad Ecl. 6.11.
60. Kohn (2000) 26774. See also Sutton (1986) 5 and Funaioli (1920) cols
43546.
61. See Wheeler (1988) ad 5.7.25.
62. See Cunningham (1949) 100106 and Baca (1969) 110.
63. Sear (2006) provides a comprehensive listing of all the known sites, along
with sketches, descriptions, and analyses; see also Bieber (1961) 190226.
64. See Varner (2000) 11936, who argues that the theatricality of fourth-style
wall painting reflects a popular interest in the theater. Fourth-style painting repro-
duced architectural features, often those found in a theater, such as columns and
the scaenae frons. In addition, it frequently depicted stories from mythology, often the
same ones represented in tragedy.
65. Bieber (1961) 227.
66. For example, Terences Adelphi, performed at the funeral of Aemilius Paullus;
see Scullard (1981) 41 and 221.
67. Garton (1972) 26783.
68. See, for example, Suetonius, Tib. 37.2, and Tacitus, Ann. 1.77, on Tiberius
reaction to licentiousness in the theater in 15 CE. Tiberius again exiles the actors in
23 CE. (Tacitus, Ann. 4.14), implying that they either returned in the intervening
years, or that a new crop of performers arose.
69. On the basic theatricality of Rome in the first century, see Boyle (2011) xix
xxv.
70. Motto and Clark (1988) 2.
71. The main focus of Styan (1975) is on Shakespearean drama, but he does
extend his theories to later plays. The same elements existed for Greek and Roman
drama, and so Styans methods certainly could also be applied to plays before the
Elizabethan period. See also the model of Schechner (1988) 64.
72. Schechner (1988) 61.
73. Goffman (1986) 21011.
74. Moore (1998) 1.
75. Suetonius, Iulius 56.
76. Suetonius, Augustus 85: nam tragoediam magno impetu exorsus, non succedenti sti-
lo, abolevit quaerentibusque amicis, quodnam Aiax ageret, respondit Aiacem suum in spongiam
incubuisse.
77. See Beacham (1991) 12526, Beare (1964) 12627, and Conte (1994) 1089.
78. Cf. Sutton (1986), 59, who comments that it is universally conceded... that
Seneca was a dilettante playwright.
79. Aristotle, Poetics 1450a710.
80. Horace, Ars Poetica 18995.
81. CIL iv Suppl. 2, 6698.
82. Boyle (1997) chapter 1, note 23, doubts that much can be proven based on
this evidence; still, he finds it suggestive and tempting.
83. Taplin (1979) 5 also refers to his pursuits as dramatic or theatrical criti-
cism. There is, of course, a difference between performance criticism, as pursued
by such scholars as Taplin (1977), Sutton (1986), Marshall (2006), and Revermann
(2006), and performance theory, practiced by Turner (1974), Goffman (1986),
and Schechner (1988), to name a few. This study is mostly concerned with the for-
mer, although the work of the latter can help to illuminate certain elements.
84. Beacham (1991) 86, Fortey and Glucker (1975) 699700, and Marshall
(2006) xixii.
85. Lewis (1996). The production consisted of Aeschylus Agamemnon, Sopho-
cles Elektra, and Euripides Iphigenia at Aulis.
Chapter 1
1. One aspect of Senecan dramaturgy that will become clear through this discus-
sion is his great diversity; on this quality, see also Boyle (1997) 8284.
2. The only exception in the corpus is the pseudo-Senecan Octavia. Further, for
all of the genuine tragedies aside from the Thyestes, there is at least one extant Greek
tragedy. On Senecas rewriting of previous Greek tragedies, see Boyle (1997), espe-
cially chapter 5. See also Tarrant (1978) on post-fifth century BCE Athenian influ-
ences on Senecan tragedy.
3. Vitruvius, de Arch. 5.6.8.
4. ipsae autem scaenae suas habent rationes explicatas ita, uti mediae valvae ornatus
habeant aulae regiae, Vitruvius, de Arch. 5.6.8, as opposed to Roman comedy, which usu-
ally needs at least two separated doors, each representing the house of a neighbor. Cf.
Sutton (1986) 6870, who argues that the Medea requires a two-door set.
5. versurae sunt procurrentes, quae efficiunt una a foro, altera a peregre aditus in scae-
nam, Vitruvius, de Arch. 5.6.8
6. ita latius factum fuerit pulpitum quam Graecorum, quod omnes artifices in scaena
dant operam, Vitruvius, de Arch. 5.6.1.
7. On the conventions concerning contact between an already onstage charac-
ter and a character entering through a wing in Attic tragedy, see Mastronarde (1979)
2026.
8. For a Greek parallel, consider the Watchman in the prologue to Aeschylus
Agamemnon.
9. See Sutton (1986) 20.
10. See Mastronarde (1990) 24796 for a discussion of the skene roof and the
machina in Attic drama in general, and specifically about the position of gods in both
tragedy and comedy.
11. The term exostra is used by Cicero, de Prov. 14. See Sutton (1986) 18 and
Beare (1964) 270.
12. secundum autem spatia ad ornatus comparata.
13. genera autem sunt scaenarum tria: unum quod dicitur tragicum, alterum comicum,
tertium satyricum.
14. tragicae deformantur columnis et fastigiis et signis reliquisque regalibus rebus.
15. Schechner (1988) 9.
16. Goldhill (2007) 8294. On props in Greek tragedy, see Dingel (1971) 352
55.
17. Sutton (1986) 6367 discusses the copious evidence for the use of pretend
blood on the Roman stage.
18. Also, Creon, when describing the ghost of Laius that Tiresias raises in the nec-
romancy of the Oedipus, says the dead king is covered in blood (62425). This does
not count as a necessary prop, since Laius is only spoken of, and does not physically
appear onstage. But it does contribute to the bloodiness of Senecan tragedy.
19. See below, the discussion of naturalism vs. convention, as well as the analysis
of the extispicium in chapter 2.
20. Cf. Beacham (1991) 172.

21. Taplin (1977) 276. See also 13436 on the crowd at the beginning of the
Septem Contra Thebas. Contrast this with the modern theater, where it is not uncom-
mon for one or more actors to appear onstage, already in character, in full view as the
audience enters and mills around.
22. In the Oedipus, Phaedra, Hercules Furens, Troades, and Medea respectively. The
Phoenissae is too incomplete to know who would be the first to enter.
23. Boyle (1997) 8384, points out that Each Senecan play ends in dialogue
uttered by one of the dramatis personae, while Attic tragedy ends more frequently
than not (it becomes the rule in the received texts of Euripides) with a short ode or
lyric utterance from the chorus, as do the non-Senecan plays of the corpus, Hercules
Oetaeus and Octavia. No extant Senecan play does this.
24. Goffman (1986) 131.
25. As the modern theater tends to be. Of course, a certain amount of freedom is
allowed. But for the most part, a modern audience expects the illusion that the char-
acters are realistic people, behaving in a natural manner, whose actions are somehow
visible as if through an invisible fourth wall. Indeed, Schechner (1988) and Goff-
man (1986) 43235 discuss the uncomfortable and sometimes violent reaction to
attempts to alter the relationships between audience and performers. For discussions
of the different expectations of ancient and modern audiences, see Taplin (1977)
2839 and 27375, as well as Goldhill (2007).
26. Of course, such audience address can also be detected in Greek drama, for
example any of Aristophanes parabases.
27. Goffman (1986) 238.
28. Schechner (1988) 9.
29. Boyle (1997) 83, discusses Senecas limited and varied use of the messenger
speech; but cf. Kohn (2007) for an expanded definition of this type of speech and
subsequent analysis.
30. Cf. Sutton (1986) 24 and 55, who suggests some kind of stage effects. The
obvious parallel, both in terms of stated effects and the uncertainty of scholars con-
cerning whether and how they would have been produced, is the earthquake and
subsequent destruction of Pentheus palace in Euripides Bacchae. On stage effects in
Greek tragedy, see Dingel (1971) 354.
31. See the discussion in the Oedipus chapter of the way this was handled in a
recent performance.
32. See Kohn (20045) 16365.
33. Zwierlein (1966) 4551. Zwierlein uses these supposed violations as further
ammunition for his attack on theatrical performance of the tragedies. On the rule in
Greek tragedy, see Marshall (1994) 5361, as well as Flickinger (1936) 16295.
34. Sutton (1986) 2832.
35. Marshall (1998) 8695.
36. See Fitch (1981).
37. This does not include the Chorus, characters who do not speak, or mute
guards and attendants.
38. Marshall (2006) 8387.
39. On the latter idea, see DeForest (1989) 7173.
40. In a modern context, consider the 1987 musical Into the Woods by Stephen
Sondheim and James Lapine. In the original Broadway production, there were two
quite significant occurrences of role doubling. Robert Westenberg played both the
Wolf and Cinderellas Prince. Both characters are notorious womanizers who seem
kind at first but prove untrustworthy. Further, Tom Aldredge played both the Narra-
tor and the Mysterious Man. The former begins the play with the words Once Upon
a Time... and continues to tell the story until his death in act 2. The latter character
turns out to be the father of the Baker who had abandoned his family. The Baker first
attempts to distance himself from his father, and then thinks that he is following in
his footsteps when he runs away from his wife and child. But in the end, the Baker
takes up his responsibilities. This is shown symbolically as he holds his infant son and
begins to tell him the story, starting with the words Once Upon a Time... Thus, the
Baker is seen acting not like his actual father, but like the other character his fathers
actor portrays.
41. Marshall (2003) 27071.
42. Sutton (1988) 1058.
43. Gould (1985) 275.
44. Remember also that from the mid-fifth century on, Greek tragedy awarded a
prize for best actor as well as best playwright, implying a lack of difficulty in recogniz-
ing who was playing which role.
45. Consider the modern example of Hugo Weaving in the 2005 film V for Ven-
detta, in which he wears a blank, white mask throughout. Although the mask never
changes, Weaving successfully conveys a wide range of emotions.
46. See Goffman (1986) 23033 on soliloquy and direct address.
47. On stichomythia in both Greek and Senecan tragedy, see Seidensticker
(1969).
48. The only exception, unsurprisingly, is the unfinished Phoenissae; but even
there it is possible to conjecture where Seneca might have taken advantage of silent
servants.
49. Goffman (1986) 207.
50. See Taplin (1977) 7980.
51. Sutton (1986) 4546 suggests that Megara is portrayed by a mute actor in act
3, but see the discussion below of the Hercules Furens.
52. The Messenger will give one of them the name Plisthenes, while the other
remains unnamed.
53. Polyxena and Astyanax will lose their lives momentarily, while Cassandra has
only until she gets to Mycenae to live.
54. For an extensive study of the Chorus, see Davis (1993), especially chapter 1
on when it is onstage and chapter 2 on its identity in the various plays.
55. Calder (1975) 33.
56. Poetica 56a2532.
57. Ars Poetica 193201.
58. Rutenberg (1998) 1416.
59. Goffman (1986) 227.
60. The content is discussed by many scholars, including Bishop (1968) and
Davis (1993).
61. Sutton (1986) 3536.
62. See further Davis (1993) 3963.
63. See also Sutton (1986) 36. Hine (2000) 122 agrees.
64. Keulen (2001) 16566 suggests that the second choral song is performed by
a second Chorus of Greek soldiers, because of the content of the song. But this seems
unnecessarily complicated.
65. Ironic, because Oedipus himself does not know who he really is.
66. This conjecture is complicated by the fact that one manuscript family gives
the plays title as Thebais; see Frank (1995) 1. The lack of a Chorus could suggest Sen-
ecas technique for composing, implying that he wrote the episodes first, and then
filled in the choral songs. This would depend, however, on Seneca having a regular
practice. It also would have more credence if, in fact, the episodes as we have them
were finished, simply needing polish and lyrics for a complete tragedy. This is not the
case, as we have at best incomplete fragments of three (or possibly four) episodes.
67. Or, rather, the Chorus exits at a certain point, and returns with another iden-
tity.
68. The parallel of Aeschylus Agamemnon would suggest Mycenaean elders.
69. See the discussion of Brink (1971) 24851.
70. On the issue of scene division in Roman comedy, see Hammond, Mack, and
Moskalew (1970) 2122 and Flickinger (1936) 19495.
71. Cf. Sutton (1986), Fitch (2004), and Tchterle (1994), who all consider this
final song to be part of the fifth act, whereas Boyle (1997) 83, agrees that this play has
a sixth act.
72. As it is, for example, by Tarrant (1976) 295.
73. Keulen (2001) 124 refers to the passage as a carmen amoebaeum or a kommos,
while Fantham (1982) 220 ff. calls it the First Choral Ode and Lyric Dialogue.
74. See the brief discussion of Boyle (1997) chapter 4, note 45.
75. Cf. Bishop (1968) 197, who, although providing an analysis of Senecan metri-
cal practice, laments that Seneca employed a limited number of meters and combi-
nations of them in the choral odes of his tragedies. This is in sharp contrast with the
seemingly endless variety found in Greek tragedies.
76. On the issue of breaking the lines into trimeters or a combination of dimeters
and monometers, see Fitch (1987a).
77. This is in addition to the passage of anapests sung by Hippolytus at the very
beginning.
78. In fact, both the first and third passages in the Agamemnon include anapests,
meaning that both the Chorus of Mycenaean elders and the Chorus of Theban wom-
en use that meter in their entrance songs.
79. Rosenmeyer, Ostwald, and Halporn (1963) 20.
80. Vitruvius, de Arch. 5.6.2 and 5.7.2.
81. On the withdrawal of the Chorus during the play in earlier Roman tragedy,
see Capps (1895) 298.
82. Sutton (1986) 3741.
83. Davis (1993) 19.
84. On the scholarly discussion concerning the choral reentry, and especially the
question of whether there is a secondary Chorus, see further in chapter 6.
85. Davis (1993) 1718.
86. Goffman (1986) 233.
87. Here the Chorus also comments upon hearing noises within the palace.
88. There may be a thematic reason for this change of practice in the Oedipus.
The entrance of Creon at 2025 occurs before Oedipus has learned the truth about
his parentage and the death of Laius, whereas those of the Messenger and Oedipus
take place after. Seneca may have altered the meter to reflect the change in Oedipus
status.
89. See Menander, Dyskolos 23032, Aspis 24649, Epitrepontes 16971, and Perikei-
romene 26166. On the influence of Greek New Comedy on Senecan tragedy, see
Tarrant (1978) 22728.
90. With the obvious exception of the Phoenissae. Capps (1895) 29798 discusses
the interaction of the Chorus with other characters in earlier Roman tragedy.
Chapter 2
1. Weil (1897) 31522.
2. Indeed, Ahl (2008) 197, in his list of dramatis personae, assigns Phorbas to the
fourth actor. Granted, the Oedipus, along with the Agamemnon, is unusual in requiring
a fourth actor; but this resource is only to be employed when absolutely necessary.
And as was discussed above, chapter 1, the fourth actor is used exclusively to portray
young girls.
3. Most notably Rutenberg (1998) 17 and Ahl (2008) 200 and 203.
4. See Kohn (20045), 17074 for an interpretation of why the playwright
would have wanted all four characters onstage at the same time and able to speak.
5. See also Davis (1993) 5455.
6. The name Oedipus will not be spoken until line 216 (Oedipodae); after that,
it will recur only three times more: line 916 (Oedipus), line 943 (Oedipoda), and line
1003 (Oedipodam). It is interesting to note that each appearance in this play is in a
different case: dative, nominative, ablative, and accusative respectively. Seneca uses
the genitive (Oedipodae) at Hercules Furens 496, and the vocative (Oedipu) at Phoenissae
178. The name occurs only three more times in all of Senecan tragedy: Phoenissae 89,
313, and 553.
7. Sutton (1986) 53.
8. Boyle (2011) 12829 points out that this action shows Oedipus as the infant,
or creature who walks on four legs in the morning, from the riddle of the Sphinx.
When he rises, he becomes the creature who walks on two legs in the afternoon. And
at the end of the play, when he supports himself with a staff, he is the creature who
walks on three legs in the evening.
9. Fantham (1996b) identifies this as an example of prolongation or rhetorical
enjambment by first speaker.
10. In its only appearance in all of Senecan tragedy, the name Iocasta does not
occur until line 1005, after she has, in fact, been recognized as Oedipus mother.
11. Sutton (1986) 53.
12. Zwierlein (1986), Tchterle (1994), Fitch (2004), and Boyle (2011) side with
E, while Huptli (1983) adopts the reading of A.
13. Fitch (2004) 27, to himself.
14. Rutenberg (1998) 17, disagrees and so increases Jocastas role in his adapta-
tion.
15. Sutton (1986) 53, but he is not adamant about this, saying about a possible
entrance at the start of the next act, if he does not stay onstage for the parodos.
16. Sutton (1986) 53.
17. The extispicium can also be divided into parts: (1) The sacrificial animals are
led to the altar. (2) Incense is burned and the flames observed. (3) The victims are
slaughtered. (4) Manto examines the entrails. (5) Tiresias states his intention to sum-
mon the ghost of Laius.
18. Davis (1993) 22, 31 similarly argues that the Chorus will remain onstage for
the rest of the play.
19. The beginning of a new action unit may suggest a pause.
20. I.e., Phaedra 120112 and Medea 74051.
21. Zwierlein (1966) 2425 and 3132.

22. Fitch (2000) 911.
23. Sutton (1986) 23.
24. Rosenmeyer (1993) 24243. Part of his thesis is also that Oedipus has exited,
since the smoke from the sacrificial pyre is said to loop around the kings head. Hol-
lingsworth (2001) 14243 offers evidence from the language of the scene to support
Rosenmeyer, while Porter (1996) 80, is unconvinced by Rosenmeyers explanation.
25. Ahl (2008) 21213.
26. Kohn (2000) 272.
27. Suetonius, Nero 12.2.
28. Fitch (2000) 911.
29. Walker (1969). Kragelund (1999) makes much the same point.
30. Sutton (1986) 23.
31. The deaths of the cow and bull clearly foreshadow the ultimate fates of Jocasta
and Oedipus. The former will kill herself once she discovers the truth, while the latter
will do everything he can to deny it.
32. The best ancient discussion the ritual is Ciceros de Divinatione; see also Pease
(1920) ad 1.16, 1.119, and 2.32. Useful information can also be obtained from Aris-
totle, On the Parts of Animals. For more recent discussions, see RE 7 (1912) s.v. harus-
pices, cols. 2451 ff.; Halliday (1913) 184204; and Van Der Meer (1987).
33. For a discussion of the liver in ritual, and which side is disfavorable, see Van
Der Meer (1987) 14752. This is clearly a reference to the events of the Septem Contra
Thebas, which will follow Oedipus exile.
34. It would be incapable of breathing anyway, since the cow is dead and Manto is
holding the lungs in her hands.
35. This last detail provides an argument for why actual drugged animals are not
likely, why the dancers are more probable, and why imaginary bovines are most likely.
36. An uncertain Sutton (1986) 53 raises the possibility that Oedipus exits here,
saying that he might enter at 509, if he does not stay onstage for the following choral
ode.
37. Scholars, for example, Sluiter (1941) ad 404, and Curley (1986) 112 and
129, note 13, have objected to this and other statements in this song as not being
suitable for a body of Theban citizens. This has led to various alternate readings. Zwi-
erlein (1986), Tchterle (1994), Fitch (2004), and Boyle (2011) all accept armatus
from the R and E branches, meaning that Bacchus is armed with a thyrsus. Huptli
(1983), on the other hand, prints armatae, and takes it that the Chorus describes a
band of bacchants. I prefer armati, the reading of the A family of manuscripts, for I
have no objections to these Theban elders emulating the behavior of Cadmus and
Tiresias in Euripides Bacchae (17094).
38. An example of techniques employed to enhance vividness is the use direct
quotation, first of Tiresias (57173), and then of Laius (62658); see Kohn (2007).
39. Possibly the same mythological cave in which Creon imprisons Antigone, and
which serves as the site of both her death and that of Haemon, in Sophocles Antigone.
40. Cf. Sutton (1986) 53, who thinks that Jocasta enters at 773, and not at 764.
41. Weil (1897) 31522.
42. Zwierlein (1986), Tchterle (1994), Fitch (2004), and Boyle (2011) for four.
43. Huptli (1983) sticks with the manuscript readings. See also Sutton (1986)
31, 53, who thinks Jocasta exits at line 783, thus implicitly agreeing with the manu-
scripts, unless the queen is thought to deliver her lines from offstage.
44. It is this kind of reasoning that led Rutenberg (1998) to import whole scenes
from the Oedipus Tyrannus into his free adaptation of Senecas play.
45. Sutton (1986) 31, 53 agrees that Jocasta exits here.
46. Zwierlein (1986). Fitch (2004), Huptli (1983), and Tchterle (1994) also
adopt the reading of Gronovius.
47. As does Boyle (2011).
48. Sutton (1986) 53 agrees, and has the two servants remain until 880.
49. Adding to the vividness is the direct quotation of Oedipus at lines 92634,
93657, and 97577; see Kohn (2007).
50. I.e., did he come on for the purpose of telling the Chorus what had hap-
pened, or did he have some actual errand to perform, which he would now carry out?
51. This includes Sutton (1986), Fitch (2004), and Tchterle (1994), but not
Boyle (1997), Boyle (2011), and Davis (1993).
52. Cf. 93133, where the Servant reports Oedipus also making a reference to
Agave.
53. Much like the sacrificial heifer at the extispicium (34748).
54. On the issue of humor in Senecan tragedy, see Meltzer (1988).
55. For a fuller discussion of other versions, both dramatic and not, and both
Greek and Roman, see Kohn (2001) 6264.
56. Suetonius, Iulius 65. Nero is also said to have sung the part of Oedipus onstage
(Suetonius, Nero 46.3, and Dio Cassius 63.9.4 and 63.28.5); but no other details are
given.
57. Compare with Agamemnon, who is the catalyst for so much in his eponymous
play, but is onstage for only thirty lines. Instead, Clytemnestra is clearly the central
dramatic figure; see Kohn (20045).
58. For a fuller discussion of this, as well as the importance of having Creon
onstage during the extispicium, see Kohn (20045).
59. Sutton (1986) 53.
Chapter 3
1. Kohn (20045) 16768. See also the discussions of Tarrant (1976) 31718
and Sutton (1986) 2425.
2. Sutton (1986) 31 gives Eurybates to the same actor who plays the Nurse and
Cassandra.
3. According to Pausanias; see Gantz (1993) 223. Strophius, then, would be
brother-in-law to Agamemnon, cousin-in-law to Aegisthus, and nephew-in-law to Thy-
estes.
4. See Kohn (20045) 16870 for a discussion of the dramatic reasons for hav-
ing all four speaking characters present.
6. Tarrant (1976) 231; Davis (1993) 5557 echoes this idea.
7. Cf. the descriptions of choral actions in the Troades (63116) and the Oedipus
(4034).
8. Tarrant (1976) 232.
9. Compare to HF 90818, where Hercules tells Theseus about rites that should
soon be performed.
11. Davis (1993) 23 agrees.
12. Tarrant (1976) 324 and Davis (1993) 57.

13. Sutton (1986) 54 and Davis (1993) 23.
14. Tarrant (1976) 324.
15. Davis (1993) 57.
16. Calder (1975) 33.
17. Sutton (1986) 20, states that [i]n the Roman theater the normal way to stage
such apparitions was by use of a trap door. The Ghost of Tantalus in the Thyestes,
similarly, uses the trap door, while the Fury comes in and out via the center doors.
18. Compare this to the Thyestes, where the Ghost of Tantalus opens the play
accompanied by an anonymous Fury, who impels the unwilling spirit to stir up trou-
ble for the House.
19. Sutton (1986) 54 agrees that an onstage Aegisthus at this point is unneces-
sary.
20. Sutton (1986) 20. Compare with the Hercules Furens: Juno, another supernatu-
ral entity, specifically states that she has been ejected from the heavens (35), leading
to the conclusion that she stands on the stage, not in a machina or on the balcony.
21. Davis (1993) 32, agrees that it enters at this point.
22. Cf. Davis (1993) 32, who believes that the events of Act 2 require secrecy and
yet Clytemnestra makes no attempt to secure the chorus-members silence. We can
legitimately infer the chorus-members are absent. This is, however, demanding an
unnecessary realism.
23. Compare with Jocasta in the first act of the Oedipus, who enters with her hus-
band, listening silently to him for eighty-one lines. Sutton (1986) 54 does not com-
ment on the entrance of the Nurse, except to point out that she is never identified.
24. Sutton (1986) 54.
25. The Messenger who announces Agamemnons arrival in Aeschylus Agamem-
non is not named. But Seneca does not pull the name Eurybates out of thin air. Hom-
er applies it to one of the companions of Odysseus (Il. 1.319, 2.184, 9.170 and Od.
10.246).
26. Tarrant (1976) ad 408.
27. Davis (1993) 23, thinks that Eurybates vota superis solvite (394) and Clytem-
nestras commands to give thanks to the gods at 58385 are addressed to the Chorus.
It is more sensible, however, to see these as still more appeals for religious behavior,
like those found in the second choral passage, neither directed toward anyone in
particular, nor ever actually performed.
28. Calder (1975) 34.
29. Sutton (1986) 54 suggests an entrance at or slightly after 392a.
30. Much like Creon and Phorbas the Shepherd throughout the Oedipus.
31. Cf. Creon at Oedipus 217. Among the techniques Eurybates uses to enliven the
story is the direct quotation of the sailors (51726) and Ajax the Lesser (54552).
32. Cf. the gods in the Oedipus, who according to Tiresias wish both to conceal
their secrets and to make them plain (33233).
33. This is also the constant activity of the Chorus of Trojan women in the Troades.
34. Tarrant (1976) ad 659 offers another plausible interpretation.
35. This meter is common in Roman comedy, but only occurs in Senecan tragedy
in the Medea, and there in stanzaic patterns; see Rosenmeyer, Ostwald, and Halporn
(1963) 8486.
36. Like Medea (Medea 806, 849), she is compared to a raving Maenad.
37. Cf. Juno and Hercules in the HF.
38. Cf. Sutton (1986) 55, who believes the Chorus does not complete this action,
being interrupted by the triumphal entrance of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra.
39. Cf. lines 390 and 588, where both Eurybates and Cassandra are also said to be
bearing laurel. This would seem to be an emblem of Agamemnons company.
40. See the above discussion of the distribution of roles.
41. Sutton (1986) 55.
42. Tarrant (1976) ad 788 states that there are no parallels to this action in trag-
edy, either Greek or Roman, although there are several examples from comedy:
Aristophanes, Wasps 995ff., Menander, Sikyonioi 364, Plautus, Miles Gloriosus 1332,
Trinummus 1091, and Truculentus 306. In all but the last example, one character sim-
ply tells another to go get some water with no mention of what should be done with
it. In the Truculentus, there are references both to drinking and to besprinkling.
43. Fitch (2004) 19293.
44. Cf. Sutton (1986) 54, who posits that the attendants actually take Cassandra
offstage at this point, along with the Chorus of Trojan women. In this scenario, she
reenters, alone, at 867. This is not only awkward and unlikely, but it leads to the
unnecessary confusion concerning which Chorus performs the fourth choral song, as
well as the possible needless reentry of the Chorus of Mycenaeans.
45. Cf. Tarrant (1976) 324 and Davis (1993) 57.
46. So also Davis (1993) 37.
47. Cf. the Medea 102225, where the title character rides out in the machina,
decorated to look like the chariot of the Sun. The vital difference is that Medea flies
away with the help of the gods, while Strophius et alii are mortals and must stick to the
ground. Thus, the Medea needs the machina, while here in the Agamemnon the exostra
is employed.
48. Cf. the representation of the sacrificial animals during the extispicium in the
Oedipus.
49. Cf. the laurels worn by Eurybates (390), Cassandra (588), and Agamemnon
(799).
50. Fitch (2004).
51. As also in the Hercules Furens (918ff.). See above chapter 1 and Sutton (1986)
appendix A.
52. Or as Iphigenia was slaughtered at Aulis (16273).
53. Compare to Oedipus 707, where Creon suffers the same fate.
54. See Gantz (1993) 66476, as well as Macintosh et al. (2005).
55. I mean here that we do not know of many plays dedicated to Agamemnons
death. Certainly, both Sophocles and Euripides referred to the story frequently, for
example in their respective Electra plays; see Gantz (1993) 675.
56. See Boyle (2006) 3033.
57. Tarrant (1976) 13.
58. Tarrant (1976) 10.
59. Gantz (1993) 673.
Chapter 4
1. Sutton (1986) 30 has Phaedra as a character in act 4. He must envision her
standing silently while listening to the Messengers account.
2. Sutton (1986) 30, without explanation, has the Messenger present for act 5.
3. See also Davis (1993) 5254. He further rehearses the arguments that the
Chorus consists of men (certain masculine forms used toward itself, and misogynistic
sentiments) or of women (the presence of the feminine CHORUS GRESSAE in certain
manuscripts), himself leaning toward the latter. Neither line of reasoning is particu-
larly persuasive.
4. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 703 support this idea when they suggest that the
huntsmen exit and later return as the Chorus; see also Capps (1895).
5. Kragelund (1999) 23943.
6. Just as he does in the Hercules Furens.
7. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 705.
8. Fitch (2002) 479, note 19; see also Sutton (1986) 18.
9. Hippolytus speech and the dialogue between Phaedra and the Nurse are gen-
erally considered parts of the same act because there is no intervening choral song.
Cf. Boyle (1987) 134 and Davis (1993) 2831, who both regard the two sections as
two separate acts.
10. Sutton (1986) 34.
11. Cf. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 703, who concede that actual dogs could have
appeared on the Roman stage, though Fortey and Glucker used a tape recording for
the barking in their modern production.
12. See also Davis (1993) 2829.
13. Cf. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 703, who have the Nurse use a different
entrance. They also have the Chorus enter individually as the episode progresses.
14. See also Davis (1993) 2930.
15. Much like the similar character in Senecas Medea.
16. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 704 have the Nurse act out what she describes, but
this seems unnecessarily campy and naturalistic.
17. Balsley (2006) discusses the significance of changing ones hairstyle in Sen-
ecan tragedy.
18. Cf. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 706, who place Phaedra on the stage floor for
the preceding scene, and so would have her exit via the wing leading to the forest.
19. Davis (1993) 2930 agrees, pointing out that Hippolytus says nobody is pres-
ent for his exchange with Phaedra (en locus ab omni liber arbitrio vacat, 601), and the
Chorus seems ignorant of the truth during its next song. See also Boyle (1987) 67.
20. Cf. Kragelund (1999) 23943.
21. Sutton (1986) 51 sees a potential difficulty in lines 600601. Phaedra asks to
speak to Hippolytus alone (si quis est abeat comes, 600), to which he replies that nobody
is present (en locus ab omni liber arbitrio vacat, 601). The key word in Phaedras request,
however, is comes. She wants none of Hippolytus companions to hear what she has to
say, but has no trouble with her own confidant. Further, Hippolytus notes a lack of
arbitrium, i.e., judgment (but see Coffey and Mayer [1990] ad 601, who render the
word as observation). The time for the Nurse to pass judgment on Phaedras desires
is long past.
22. See Coffey and Mayer (1990) and Boyle (1987), both ad 623.
23. Cf. Phoenissae 106 and Thyestes 104345, where both Oedipus and Thyestes
request swords in order to kill themselves, but are denied.
24. Cf. the imaginary citizens to whom Oedipus calls in act 4 of the Oedipus, so
that they might hurl stones at him (87072).
25. A direct object for perferte must be supplied. I join Sutton (1986) 1213 and
others in favoring something like nuntium, i.e., news of Hippolytus crime. In this
case, in urbem means not so much into the city, as throughout the city. Cf. Krage-
lund (1999) 24142, who supplies eam, i.e., Phaedra herself, and uses this as part
of his argument for a change of setting to the forest outside of Athens. Fortey and
Glucker (1975) 706 follow a similar line of thought, as does Smith (2011) 128.
26. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 710 have a chorus member peep through the
center doors.
27. Davis (1993) 30 concurs that the Chorus remains for the rest of the play.
28. Compare with Theseus similar reaction to daylight at HF 65153.
29. On Theseus relative old age, see Kohn (2008) 38990.
30. Cf. Sutton (1986) 5051, who thinks they entered with Theseus. But surely
they would not have been in the Underworld with him, and it seems that he has only
just arrived in the upper world, not having time to go into the palace.
31. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 710 have the Nurse exit at 862 so that the actor
has plenty of time to change into the Messenger. But it is common Senecan practice
to have the third actor silently observe dialogue between the other two. Theseus
monologue and the ensuing choral song provide ample time to make the change.
Further, why would Theseus threaten the Nurse with a beating at line 884 if she were
not present?
32. Coffey and Mayer (1990) ad 902 agree, while Fortey and Glucker (1975) 710
had the Nurse exit earlier and Phaedra remain throughout the song and the ensuing
episode.
33. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 71112 note that the audience might have expect-
ed Hippolytus to enter here, and that this is one of many instances in this play when
Seneca disappoints expectations of which character appears. On the other hand,
actor A is already onstage playing Theseus, and the audience would not expect a dif-
ferent actor to portray Hippolytus.
34. At line 1004, the Messenger creates the expectation of oratio recta (effatus,
1004), only to disappoint; at 10667, however, the exact words of Hippolytus are
quoted. See further Kohn (2007) 6566.
35. Sutton (1986) 17, 52 thinks Phaedra is once again on the balcony. In her
previous appearances on the balcony, however, Phaedra did not address or otherwise
acknowledge those on the stage below her. This time, she is definitely interacting with
Theseus, and so should be on the same level.
36. Cf. Jocasta in the Oedipus, who before her suicide demands from Oedipus the
same sword he used to slay Laius: hoc iacet ferro meus coniunx, Oedipus 103435.
37. Coffey and Mayer (1990) ad 1158 voice some discomfort with supra corpus,
since the phrase suggests the presence of Hippolytus corpse, which Theseus will
not order to be brought on until 124748. But this is only a problem since they take
invisum to mean hated, as do Fitch (2002) and Boyle (1987) ad loc. Instead if we
take it as unseen, then Theseus here is wondering why Phaedra seems to be lament-
ing over a corpse that is not, in fact, present. Consider in this context HF 664 and 988,
where invisus seems to literally mean hated, and yet refers to entities (in the first
example, Dis, in the second, Lycus) who are not physically present, and so clearly are
invisible; cf. Fitch (1987b) ad 664. This interpretation would fit with the Chorus
label of Phaedra as vecors, especially when we recall that hallucination is an obvious
sign of Hercules madness in the HF.
38. See Boyle (1987) ad 1199ff.; Coffey and Mayer (1990) and Zwierlein (1986)
agree.
39. For example, Amphitryo advises Hercules to stay alive at HF 130213.
40. See above, lines 4045.
41. For possible parallels from Greek tragedy, see Euripides, Troades 111822,
where the corpse of Astyanax is brought on by Talthybius, and Bacchae 1168ff, where
Agave brandishes the head of Pentheus on her thyrsus.
42. See Mills (1997) 186ff. on the relative dating of the two plays by Euripides,
as well as that of Sophocles. See also the detailed discussion of Barrett (1964) 1045,
which includes fragments from plays by both Euripides and Sophocles.
43. For discussion of the motif in both Euripides and Seneca, see Kohn (2008)
37992.
44. Coffey and Mayer (1990) 6.
45. Kakridis (1928) for one.
46. See Kohn (2008) 38586.
47. This is quite probably the same balcony that Medea ascends to in the Medea.
Although these two plays belong to different groups according to Fitchs (1981) rela-
tive dating, the common use of this device suggests that the Phaedra is the final play of
the Early Group, and Medea the first of the Middle.
48. A similar effect occurs in the HF.
Chapter 5
1. The Nurse does not actually speak in act 1, but there are other indications
that she is onstage.
2. Sutton (1986) 36 agrees, thinking women are more appropriate for the Cho-
rus than men.
3. Davis (1993) 4951 takes this side; Hine (2000) 122, on the other hand,
ultimately dismisses the possibility.
4. This stand is supported by Sutton (1986) 3741.
5. Sutton (1986) 1112, 6870. This is a rare occasion where he agrees with
Zwierlein (1966) 40ff.
6. Sear (2006) does not report any such structure. But there may be written
evidence. Plautus at Amphitro 1008 has Mercury say ascendam in tectum (I will climb
onto the roof). A few lines later, he appears, apparently above Amphitruo (see Chris-
tenson [2000] ad 100920). Also Vitruvius says of the comic style of scenery, maenia-
norum habent speciam profectusque fenestris dispositos ([Comic scenery] has the appear-
ance of balconies and projections adorned with windows). Seneca again uses such
machinery in act 2 of the Phaedra, where Phaedra apparently appears in an upper
window of her house, and possibly in act 2 of the Phoenissae as Jocasta observes the
battlefield with her daughter and an attendant. Mastronarde (1990) 24794 discuss-
es the use of the skene roof in Attic drama. And see Sifakis (1967) 13132 on ladders
or steps connecting the orchestra and the stage.
7. Sear (2006) 8990 catalogs a number of theaters in various places that had
staircases in the proscaenium wall.
8. There is also the possibility, which I think unlikely, that Medea uses the bal-
cony in act 3. See also Mastronarde (1990) 25960, who lists five possibilities for
access to the roof in Attic drama.
9. Sutton (1986) 49.
10. Sutton (1986) 49.
11. Davis (1993) 27 also has the Chorus absent for act 1.
12. For example, Catullus 62 and 64.32381.
13. Davis (1993) 27 would not have the Chorus onstage for act 2.
14. His first word, Medea (179), is the nominative subject of exportat, and not the
vocative.
15. Cf. Sutton (1986) 49, who thinks Medea exits here. But if so, the Nurses ques-
tion at 380 would make little sense.
16. Davis (1993) 2728 has the Chorus absent for act 3.
17. Sutton (1986) 17. If he is right, this could be an argument for an onstage
ladder/staircase. Such machinery would not be distracting if used throughout the
drama.
18. OLD s.v. tectum, -i, n, 2.
19. Sutton (1986) 49.
20. The tectis again means Medeas house (see Hine [2000] ad 578 and Costa
[1973] ad 57778) and refers to the fires of the altar. But there may also be some
foreshadowing, since the palace will soon be engulfed in flames.
21. Davis (1993) 28 does not think the Chorus remains onstage for act 4.
22. On the likelihood of this being a messenger speech, and not a description of
what an onstage Medea is doing, see Hine (2000) 175 and Rosenmeyer (1993) 239
40. As he so often does, Seneca makes this messenger speech more vivid and exciting
by including direct quotation; see further Kohn (2007).
23. Seneca also uses this meter at Phaedra 120112, when Theseus describes the
horrors of the Underworld, and at Oedipus 22332, as Creon tells of the events that
immediately preceded the revelation of Apollos oracle. It seems, then, that Seneca
liked to use trochees for horrific descriptions. He did not, however, always use them
for such narrations, as, for example, Theseus description of the Underworld in HF,
or the Messengers description of Atreus palace in the Thyestes.
This is the only occurrence of the compound comprecor in the tragediesit is also
used once in the corpus of Seneca philosophus: epistle 99.16.10as opposed to the
precor usually employed by Seneca. This may indicate that this is a different kind of
praying, i.e., singing instead of speaking.
24. This system was previously used by Horace in epodes 110; see Rosenmeyer,
Ostwald, and Halporn (1963) 94. Hine (2000) ad 77186 points out that epode 5 is
about witchcraft, and implies therefore that this metrical system is somehow appro-
priate to Medeas spell. Hine (2000) ad 740848 further states that in the theater of
the Roman Republic iambic trimeters were spoken, and the other meters, includ-
ing iambic dimeter, would have been chanted or sung, adding to the likelihood that
this combination of trimeters and dimeters would likewise be sung; see also Marshall
(2006) 23044.
25. On the division of these lines into combinations of dimeters and monom-
eters, see Fitch (1987a).
26. Hine (2000) ad 75270 states that in the following lines Medea talks about
things that she has done for Hecate in the past. He is correct in making the associa-
tion with the usual formula for invoking the aid of a god by enumerating the services
one has done for that god in the past. But Medea implies that loose hair and bare feet
are necessary accompaniments to magic. And so it is sensible to think that she has let
down her hair prior to her entrance. See Balsley (2006) on the significance of chang-
ing ones hairstyle in Senecan tragedy.
27. Recall that the Nurse also compared Medea to a bacchant at lines 38286.
28. Sutton (1986) 34 posits that this command to call the children is given either
to the Nurse or else to an otherwise unmentioned tutor. I prefer the former, doing
away with the necessity of bringing on an entirely new character, who is not intro-
duced, does not speak, and serves no other dramatic purpose.
29. Cf. Sutton (1986) 49, who thinks Medea exits here.
30. Also at lines 38286 and 806.
31. Compare with the Nurses description of Medeas offstage preparations in this
play (670739).
32. Cf. Euripides, Medea 11361230.
33. Davis (1993) 21, 35 similarly has the Chorus onstage for the first part of this
act, but not the rest.
34. Sutton (1986) 49 thinks that Medea also enters here; but I maintain that she
never left.
35. Hine (2000) ad 893977 thinks that these lines would not naturally be spo-
ken to the children face to face. But that strikes me as subjective and contrary to
Senecas usual practice of having people onstage when they are directly addressed,
regardless of age, gender, or status.
36. This solution is supported by Sutton (1986) 70. Another alternative would be
that there is no messenger, but rather the Nurse enters at line 879 with the children,
and it is she who tells the Chorus what happened at the palace. I think this is unlikely.
The Nurse has already proven herself a much better storyteller than this. Further, she
has not interacted with the Chorus in any way throughout the entire play. Why would
she converse with it now? The messenger scene wants another person, with a connec-
tion to the Chorus, that is, with Corinthian sympathies. Further, Seneca is deliberately
playing with audience expectations for a more extensive messenger speech. Such a
strategy would be more effective if the account is delivered by someone other than
the Nurse.
37. Hine (2000) ad 893977 does not think the children are onstage, because
she ceases to address the children within a few lines and reverts to self-absorbed
deliberations that could not reasonably by addressed directly to them; however, he
does acknowledge that if they are not here now, they must come on soon.
38. See Hine (2000) 4142, and Sutton (1986) 17.
39. This is also the view of Sutton (1986) 49. Alternatively, since Medea will short-
ly ride the machina to safety, it is possible that it has been onstage the whole time,
and she now climbs a ladder to reach it; then at line 1022 she pulls off some kind of
disguising cover, revealing the snakes of the chariot of the Sun. But this seems overly
complicated, and could potentially spoil the surprise.
40. They do not really listen to each other, so dialogue may not be the best term
to use.
41. See Hine (2000) ad 102324 and Costa (1973) ad 1022ff. This is the only
place in extant Roman drama, tragedy or comedy, that needs the machina. See also
Mastronarde (1990) 26872 for a discussion of the machina in Attic drama.
42. See Sutton (1986) 50.
43. Gantz (1993) 36970 suggests that the infanticide was a Euripidean inven-
tion. For more on the question, see Blondell (1999) 152, Johnston (1997) 4470,
and Michelini (1989) 11535.
44. And thus gives the audience no idea of what will become of her when she
leaves Corinth.
45. On this idea in Euripidean tragedy, see Halleran (1985) 3349 for such topics
as unexpected entrances and entrance of the wrong person.
Chapter 6
1. Among them Zwierlein (1966) 4750, Sutton (1986) 29, and Fitch (1987b)
ad 503.
2. Zwierlein (1966) 4748. Megara speaks at lines 101517, as Hercules begins
to slaughter her and her sons. Sutton (1986) 30 is on the right track in thinking that
the actor delivers these lines from offstage, but does not go far enough.
3. Sutton (1986) 29, 33, 4546.
4. The closest precedent, from extant Greek tragedy, would be the title role in
Sophocles Ajax, who kills himself onstage, presumably falls behind a bush, and then
evidently must crawl off so the actor can portray Agamemnon.
5. Fitch (1987b) 2433.
6. Fitch (1987b) 30.
7. Megaera is one of the traditional names of a Fury, along with Tisiphone and
Alecto. Seneca is fond of invoking her, using her name at Medea 963 and Thyestes 252.
8. Theseus expresses the same thought at Phaedra 837: et vix cupitum sufferunt
oculi diem. Consider also the real-life recent case of Chilean gold miners who were
trapped underground for several months. Upon being rescued, it took them all some
time to adjust to the light of the surface world, requiring the very latest in sunglass
technology while their eyes became reoriented.
9. Although uncomfortable and politically incorrect today, artists from Shake-
speare to the creators of Mr. Magoo have long taken advantage of the potential for
laughter caused by poor eyesight. On Senecan humor, see Meltzer (1988).
10. Fitch (2002) 47.
11. Troades 69091.
12. Lycus declares templa flagrent (5067). Fitch (1987b) ad 506 thinks this tem-
ple is close to the altar, probably just behind it. Sutton (1986) 8, on the other hand,
supports my interpretation, saying the scaenae frons represents a temple.
13. There are some near parallels for this in Greek tragedy: Aeschylus, Agamem-
non, 1343 and 1345, where an offstage Agamemnon exclaims as he is being killed. At
Euripides, Medea 127172 and 127778, the sons of Jason and Medea are in the skene
building as they discuss their impending slaughter, possibly with a single performer
delivering the lines of both boys. Other possible parallels to offstage delivery can
be found in Roman comedy. In Terence, Hecyra, the pregnant Philumena screams
in pain (31417), and her mother Myrrhina begs her to be quiet (318), all from
offstage. And in Plautus, Aulularia, the pregnant Phaedria also screams from offstage
(69192). That this is a standard technique of Roman comedy is argued by Carney
(1963) ad 318 and Duckworth (1952) 13738. On Senecas influences from non-
tragic sources, see Tarrant (1978). Finally, there is thought among scholars that the
actor portraying Admetus in Euripides Alcestis sings the words attributed to his son
(394415); for other examples of similar dubbing in Greek comedy; see Marshall
(1997).
14. Compare with Sutton (1986), 29, who gives Lycus and Hercules to the first
actor, Juno and Amphitryo to the second, and Megara and Theseus to the third.
15. Davis (1993) 4146 agrees, ultimately stating that Seneca is more concerned
to establish a philosophical identity for this chorus than to emphasize its age, sex or
nationality (46).
16. Euripides, Herakles, 25274.
17. Sutton (1984) 3015 and (1986) 4142 claims that another Chorus enters at
82729, because Theseus announces its arrival. Fitch (1987b) ad 82729 and Tarrant
(1978) 22425 disagree. I also disagree with Sutton, both because there is no good
reason for a second Chorus, and because its presence along with the first would make
the stage too crowded.
18. See above, and compare with the scene as described by Fitch (2002) 47.
19. Cf. Sutton (1986) 17, who feels Juno presumably appears on the theologeion.
Note also that this is the only deity to appear in Senecan tragedy, and so it is difficult
to say what typical practice might be. See also the discussions concerning ghosts in the
Agamemnon and the Thyestes.
20. Davis (1993) 24 similarly has the Chorus absent for Junos speech, and so it
must enter for the first time here.
21. On the contrary, Davis (1993) 2425 argues that since the Chorus, in its next
ode, seems unaware of the activities of this act, it must exit after announcing the
arrival of Amphitryo and Megara. There is, however, no good dramatic reason for the
Chorus to depart, and so I would have it stay, off in its own world.
22. This, of course, is a symbol of his power, of the fact that he usurped the
throne, and of his innate cruelty. It is interesting to note, though not necessarily rel-
evant to stagecraft, that throughout the play, whenever someone does something evil,
it is done with the right hand; see Boyle (1997) 106.
23. This could be metaphorical; however, since Lycus actually is brandishing a
scepter, he could also be holding his sword. The sight of him, scepter in one hand and
sword in the other, would be highly effective in performance.
24. Before line 618, the manuscripts list the characters in act 3. Family A lists
Amphitryo, Hercules, and Theseus only, while Family E has those three plus Megara.
Clearly, Family A has it right, while Family E also misinterprets the location of the
arae. Similarly, before line 895, Family E lists the participants in act 4 as Hercules,
Amphitryo, Megara, and the Chorus; Family E, on the other hand, says Hercules,
Theseus, Amphitryo, and Megara. Megara does play a rather important part, but does
not actually appear onstage.
25. See Sutton (1986) 33.
26. Sutton (1986) does not address this issue; but he does state that the
earthquake-like effect at Thyestes 261 would have been realistically represented (24,
55). The issue is similar to that raised by the earthquake in Euripides Bacchae, on
which see Fitzgerald (1992).
27. See also Davis (1993) 19, Fitch (1987b) ad 82729, and Tarrant (1978) 224
25. The lack of an announced exit further develops the theme of uncertainty that
pervades the play.
28. Theseus is not announced at all.
29. Other indications include Amphitryos use of the demonstrative ille (lines 619
and 621) to describe Hercules, and his delay in addressing his son directly.
30. The phrase is troubling. Zwierlein (1986) prints caput as the final word,
taking it from Axelson, who emended manum as is found in all of the manuscripts.
According to Fitch (1987b) ad 625 and Billerbeck (1999) ad 625, this has tradition-
ally been rendered as something like his noble hand with its great club. Axelson,
however, noted that taking trunco as a synonym for robure (cf. line 800) or stipite (cf.
line 1029), literally a club made from an oak tree, would be a stretch and unprec-
edented. But it does make more sense than trying to figure out what exactly a proud
torso means. The club was a vital part of Hercules iconography, and so it should play
a part in Amphitryos identification. And so, unusual though it may be, I would keep
the manuscript reading. The actor playing Hercules is therefore carrying a club in
his famous hand (note, the hand is nobilem, and not dextram). And I would take alto
as proud, a transferred epithet that should be applied not to the weapon but to its
bearer. Thus, as Hercules approaches his father, he walks and brandishes the club in
a haughty manner, as befits someone who has performed such mighty Labors and has
returned unharmed, though not unaffected, from the Underworld.
31. Further indication is the heros direct address to his absent wife and children
(differ amplexus, parens, coniunxque differ, 63839).
32. On such messenger speeches in Seneca, see Kohn (2007). Theseus is just as
hesitant to tell his story as Creon is to tell Oedipus about the events at Delphi (Oedi-
pus 21224) and Eurybates is to tell Clytemnestra about the storm at sea (Agamemnon
40620). Seneca uses a number of techniques, including having Amphitryo interrupt
occasionally with questions (lines 697, 7078, 72730, 74749, 76061) and provid-
ing direct quotation from Charon (line 772), to make the described events come
alive.
33. See, for example, Menander, Dyskolos 23032.
34. dum nos profundae claustra laxamus Stygis, populare Bacchi laudibus carmen sonet.
35. Sutton (1984) 3015 and Sutton (1986) 4142.
36. Fitch (1987b) ad 82729 and Tarrant (1978) 22425.
37. On the secondary Chorus in Greek Tragedy, see Taplin (1977) 23038.
38. Calder (1975) 3235 goes on to argue that, in the Agamemnon, the stage
would not be too small to accommodate two Choruses.
39. Fitch (1987b) ad 893f. This interpretation is supported by line 912, where
Hercules echoes the call for a poplar wreath (populea nostras arbor exornet comas).
40. Davis (1993) 1920 also would have the Chorus remain for this act.
41. Fitch (1987b) ad 91417 thinks that Hercules commands Theseus to perform
some sacrifices (91517), in response to which the Athenian obeys and exits. Her-
cules, however, speaks of various local landmarks (the caves of Zethus, the spring of
Dirce) whose location Theseus, a foreigner, could not be expected to know. Further,
the verb Hercules uses is neither imperative nor jussive subjunctive. Family E reads
coles (future indicative) while A reports colis (the present indicative). Neither denotes
an order. In fact, this is not a command, but a boast to his friend: now that Hercules
has taken care of business (i.e., killed Lycus), he can show his comrade the sights of
Thebes, where they will worship at all of these places. Theseus does not go anywhere;
instead, he stands in mute observation as his friend works himself into a manic pitch.
42. Sutton (1986) 1617 agrees with this interpretation. It is hard to believe that
even a Roman audience, used to the brutality of gladiatorial games, would enjoy see-
ing a young child slaughtered. Further, there is no ceiling on the stage, and so noth-
ing for the brains to drip from. Finally, if Megara were to enter here, it would violate
the three-actor rule.
43. Fitch (1987b) ad 1021 notes that while manuscript family A, followed by Zwi-
erlein (1986) and Billerbeck (1999), assigns line 1021 (quo tendis amens? sanguinem
fundes tuum?) to Megara, family E present[s] 102131 as a single speech, which must
be Amphitryos. Fitch gives a number of good textual reasons for this; but one more
is that it precludes more of these awkward offstage lines.
44. The arae to which he refers are the same ones that Megara and the children
fled to for sanctuary, i.e., those within the temple. Now that the corpses have been
revealed on the exostra, the arae have also been brought onstage with them.
45. See Fitch (1987b) ad 111521.
46. That is, if we, follow Fitch (1987b) and Billerbeck (1999) in disregarding
Leos transposition of lines 1135 and 1136 to before 1122. On Leos reasons and
Fitchs refutation, see Fitch (1987b) ad 1135ff.
47. Similarly, Davis (1993) 34 would have the Chorus exit at the end of its final
ode.
48. Katherine Washburn, one of the translators of The Madness of Heracles in Slavitt
and Bovie (1999) 15960, discusses her decision to stick with the traditional title,
Herakles mainomenos. This tradition seems to be postclassical, and in fact derived
from Seneca. It is necessary to call the Roman play Hercules Furens in order to distin-
guish it from the pseudo-Senecan Hercules Oetaeus. Apparently someone thought that
since Senecas play is derived from the Euripidean tradition, the title must apply to
the Greek play as well. See Wilamowitz-Moellendorff (1959) vol. 2, 166.
49. For a discussion and bibliography, see Mills (1997) 12959.
50. On the question of unity in the Euripidean play, see Michelini (1987) 231
36.
Chapter 7
1. Sutton (1986) 30 makes the same assignments, but labels my actor A the deu-
teragonist, my actor B the tritagonist, and my actor C the protagonist. He also points
out that as an alternative, my actor C could play Pyrrhus, Ulixes, and Hecuba, with
actor A playing Agamemnon and Andromache. But, aside from the significant role
distribution discussed below, Hecubas part in act 1 is fairly demanding, so it is best
to give that actor as much of a break as possible and let him play Agamemnon, who
speaks after Talthybius and Pyrrhus.
2. Neither ghost actually appears onstage, as opposed to the ghosts of Thyestes
in the Agamemnon and Tantalus in the Thyestes.
3. Cf. Keulen (2001) ad 61 and Fantham (1982) ad 6366.
4. E.g., o nate, 461, as well as hic at 418, 419, 420 and 422.
5. Sutton (1986) 32.
6. Cf. Sutton (1986) 29, who suggests a similar (and similarly odd) exchange of
the role of Megara in the Hercules Furens between an actor in act 2 and a mute super-
numerary in act 3.
7. Sutton (1986) 30 suggests that the Old Man had exited at some point, and
speaks the words from offstage. Keulen (2001) ad 792 agrees; see also the discussion
in chapter 6 of the murder of Megara and the children in act 4 of the Hercules Furens.
There is precedence for such ventriloquism, both on-and offstage, in Euripidean
tragedy, often at particularly poignant moments. In the Attic Medea, the children of
Medea cry out from offstage (127172, 127879). At Andromache 50436, the child
of Andromache engages in song with his mother onstage. And at Alcestis 393415, the
son of Alcestis sings a lament for his dead mother, also onstage. A fourth example,
Suppliants 112364, has a small Chorus of children singing with the main Chorus, and
so is not much of a parallel for the present situation. Dale (1954) xixxx maintains
that the technical requirements would make it too difficult for an actual child to sing
onstage, asserts that in the Andromache an offstage actor sang the lines, and suggests
that in the Alcestis the protagonist, portraying the dead Alcestis, actually performed
the song. On the contrary, Stevens (1971) ad 504ff. simply states, Apparently one
or more children could be brought in as extras, with small speaking (singing) parts.
Pickard-Cambridge (1968) 144 offers either possibility, while Sifakis (1979) 6780
maintains that there must have been boy actors in fifth-century Athens who could
play these roles (his emphasis). His arguments rely, however, on the examples of
Japanese Noh and Elizabethan theater. But if Dale is correct, this would provide an
example for Seneca to follow and solve all manner of awkwardness.
8. The deaths of Polyxena and Astyanax are imminent, while Cassandras will be
delayed until she gets to Mycenae.
9. See Davis (1993) 4649.
10. On the question of its onstage presence throughout the play, see Davis (1993)
2021 and 2527.
11. Captivae is vocative plural, in apposition to turba mea, and not genitive singu-
lar, as it would make little sense for Hecuba to use the singular in reference to the
Chorus. On Senecas practice of intertwining appositives, see Keulen (2001) ad 63
and 15.
12. For previous discussions of this issue, see Fantham (1982) 3739 and Keulen
(2001) 28.
13. Sifakis (1967) 13535 argues that changes of setting become commonplace
in Hellenistic tragedy because of the raising of the stage.
14. Its entrance is marked by manuscript branch . See Keulen (2001) ad 56 and
6366, and Fantham (1982) ad 6366, who to a greater or lesser degree agree that
the Chorus is present from the beginning. Sutton (1986) 47, on the other hand,
seems to think the Chorus enters at line 63 when Hecuba first addresses it, while
Boyle (1994) ad 56 thinks it is more powerful dramatically for it to enter at line 56.
Davis (1993) 20 does not choose a side.
15. Cf. Keulen (2001) ad 61, who thinks Cassandra may be thought present in
the chorus, and Fantham (1982) ad 6366, who takes the vocative as a metrical
device... [that] avoids the inconvenient molossus of accusative or genitive case.
16. See also Boyle (1994) 134.
17. See Keulen (2001) ad 42.
18. This, of course, is not really an entrance song; but Seneca often employs ana-
pests for the initial choral song, whether it actually enters then or not.
19. Compare with the second choral song of the Oedipus. An absent Bacchus is
called upon to lead the Chorus revels, which are performed under the shadow of the
Theban plague, and so no more a joyous celebration than the present Trojan lamen-
tations.
20. Balsley (2006) discusses the symbolic use Seneca makes of women changing
their hairstyles onstage. If the Chorus members are wearing masks or wigs, or even if
their natural hair is visible, it is not hard to imagine them reaching up and undoing
whatever pins or ribbons were holding the hair in place. Alternatively, the audience
would accept that a change of hairstyle occurs if it is told about it.
21. See Keulen (2001) 165 and Boyle (1994) 152. Fantham (1982) does not
address the issue. See also Kohn (2007) 5253.
22. Davis (1993) 25, Boyle (1994) 132, and Fantham (1982) 38 all would have
the setting change following Talthybius exit. But, as long as we are allowing a change
of scene, there is no reason why the entire act should not take place in the Argive
camp. Even though the precise setting is different, Agamemnon later confirms that
the general location is still Troy (stamus hoc Danai loco, 265).
23. Davis (1993) 2526 would have the Chorus exit for the second half of this act.
Cf. Keulen (2001) 16566, who follows manuscript family A in having the Chorus of
Trojan women exit with Hecuba, and a Chorus of Greek soldiers enter with Talthybius.
24. Many scholars, among them Fantham (1982) 26264, have objected to this
song. The Chorus questions the existence of an afterlife, which contradicts a number
of elements of the play, including the existence of the ghosts of Hector and Achilles,
as well as the laments of the Chorus itself. This objection, at least in part, motivated
Keulen (2001) 16566 to adopt a second Chorus of Greek soldiers. But if we accept,
as I have so far been arguing, that the Chorus is deep in shock and mourning, it is
clear that in this song it is grasping at straws. If only death were truly oblivion, it
imagines with longing, offering an escape from the horrors of life. The Chorus is
not expressing its belief, but rather positing one of the few possibilities of relief. See
also Davis (1993) 4748, who sees this song as a normal human reaction, and Boyle
(1994) 17273.
25. Davis (1993) 2627 would have the Chorus exit after line 426.
26. Boyle (1994) 177 suggests that Hectoreo (415) provides identification, but that
does not seem definite enough.
27. The mute actor could be carrying himself like a warrior in imitation of the
boys father. It is even conceivable that he is wearing a mask that the audience would
recognize as belonging to Hector. Cf. Phaedra 64662, where Phaedra similarly says
that Hippolytus resembles his father, Theseus. In that play, however, the lines are
ironic and metatheatrical, since the same actor would have portrayed both men. Here
there is no corresponding irony; Hector does not appear as a character in the Troades,
nor in any other plays in the Senecan corpus. It would be interesting, however, if Asty-
anax had been played by a well-known actor who had previously portrayed Hector in
some otherwise unknown and not extant tragedy.
28. Cf. the Creon in act 2 of the Oedipus, Theseus in acts 4 and 5 of the Hercules
Furens, and the Nurse in act 2 of the Agamemnon.
29. Compare with Jocasta in the Oedipus (hunc, dextra, hunc pete uterum capacem,
103839), and Phaedra in the Phaedra (mucrone pectus impium iusto patet cruorque sancto
soluit inferias viro, 119798).
30. See above discussion concerning the dramatis personae.
31. He has no business in the next act, and indeed the actor will be needed, so
he cannot stay. He would not go into the tomb, nor would he go to the harbor. Thus,
he must use the wing leading to the ruins of Troy, and so must go off with the others.
Presumably, now that Andromache has been broken and stripped of both husband
and child, she also has no need for servant or confidant.
32. Davis (1993) 27 agrees that the Chorus remains for act 4.
33. Fantham (1982) ad 999 finds the silent action unparalleled in stage drama
and theatrically gratuitous, and the violence is equally unnecessary; she admits,
however, it contributes to the structure of the play. Keulen (2001) ad 9991008
contrasts the scene to the entrance of Ulixes in this play and to the similar scene in
Euripides Troades. Boyle (1994) ad 999 finds it bold and innovative. Compare to
the silent entrance and exit of Clytemnestra in Senecas Agamemnon (78081). Tar-
rant (1976) ad 780ff. refers to the dumbshow quality of that incident. But see
Kohn (20045) 16768 for the argument that Clytemnestra does not actually come
onstage. In contrast, Pyrrhus silent entrance and quick exit here serve a dramatic
purpose.
34. See Fantham (1982) 36667 and Keulen (2001) 491.
35. Davis (1993) 20 agrees the Chorus remains.
36. As at Medea 74051, Phaedra 120112, and Oedipus 22332.
37. And even there, the comparison falls flat, as Euripides starts his play with a
prologue delivered by the gods Poseidon and Athena, while Seneca starts immedi-
ately with the bemoaning mortals.
38. Fantham (1982) 7175.
39. Fantham (1982) 5760 and Keulen (2001) 11.
40. Fantham (1982) 5057.
41. Fantham (1982) 6171.
42. For example, Any stage director would find some difficulty in plotting the
moves of Senecan characters, Fantham (1982) 35.
43. Fantham (1982) 3940.
Chapter 8
1. Sutton (1986) 31.
2. Tarrant (1985) 45.
3. Davis (1993) 5863 argues that in this play above all others,... Seneca takes
pains to provide the chorus-members with a consistent persona. They are presented
as decent citizens of Argos, as upholders of moral and philosophical ideals who do
not understand the realities of power.
4. On possible objections for this setting, see Sutton (1986) 1314, who points
out the difficulties and then dismisses them. See Sutton (1986) 20, and the discussion
of the set for the Agamemnon in chapter 3.
5. This is confirmed at the end of the act: iam tuum maestae pedem terrae gravantur,
1067. Both the Ghost of Thyestes in the Agamemnon and Juno in the Hercules Furens
similarly deliver the prologues of their respective tragedies on the stage floor; but
those other supernatural entities are alone.
6. Compare with Jocasta in act 1 of the Oedipus. Sutton (1986) 55 agrees that the
Fury enters with the Ghost.
7. Consider also 24954, where Atreus invites a band of Furies into his home.
8. Sutton (1986) 55 has the Ghost remain until the Furys exit at line 121,
apparently ignoring line 105.
9. Sutton (1986) 55 thinks the Ghost enters the palace with her, disregarding
line 105, where she orders him back to the caves of the dead.
10. Davis (1993) 32 would also have the Chorus absent for the prologue, and so
must enter here.
11. Davis (1993) 1718 argues that the Chorus ignorance about Atreus plot in
the next ode means that it must exit after this one. There is, however, no good dra-
matic reason for the Chorus to leave, nor to enter again later. Further, throughout the
play, Atreus speaks without being overheard by others onstage: in act 3, as Thyestes
and his sons approach; in act 5 when he gloats over Thyestes feast; and conceivably
also here, where the Henchman might not hear his initial soliloquy. Thus, Atreus is
accustomed to speak without being detected, and so it would not be unreasonable for
the Chorus similarly to miss his plotting against his brother.
12. The wordplay between the king and his servant is reminiscent of that in the
Oedipus, between Oedipus and Creon (678708), and between Tiresias and Manto
(3036).
13. Sutton (1986) 24 and 55 posits a stage effect here similar to the earthquake
in Euripides Bacchae (on this type of effect in Greek tragedy, see Dingel [1971] 354).
Instead, however, this scene is more in keeping with the hallucinations of Juno and
Hercules in the Hercules Furens, which are merely depicted with words, but not acted
out. Yet.
14. Cf. HF 87594, Medea 7592, Phaedra 783, 1130, and Oedipus 882914 for
other instances of this meter in Senecan tragedy.
15. Davis (1993) 32 similarly has the Chorus remain for act 3.
16. Manuscript family E labels him TACITUS. Tantalus name is provided at 718
(Tantalus prima hostia est), and that of Plisthenes at 726 (tunc ille ad aras Plisthenem
saevus trahit).
17. See Sutton (1986) 55.
18. Davis (1993) 23 and 33 concurs that the Chorus remains onstage for this act.
19. The Chorus speaks at lines 626, 633, 63840, 690, 716, 719, 73031, 743,
74546, 74748.
20. This is similar to the uncertainty surrounding the purpose and final destina-
tion of the Messenger in the Oedipus.
21. Davis (1993) 36 would also have the Chorus remain for this final act.
22. See Sutton (1986) 18. Cf. Fortey and Glucker (1975) 705, who deny that
anything indoors happens on the Roman stage.
23. His appearance was partly described previously by the Messenger, and is partly
discussed by Atreus, both before and after the emergence of the exostra.
24. Manuscript family A gives the whole song to Thyestes, while family E divides it
between him and the Chorus. But it makes little sense for the Chorus to join in; family
A must be correct.
25. Given the intimate nature of the noises, it is more probable that simply stating
that they occurred would be enough for the audience to accept than that these be
cues for sound effects.
26. Compare to end of the Phaedra, where Theseus first embraces the torn-apart
limbs of Hippolytus, and then attempts to put them into their proper order (1256
68).
27. Cf. Phoenissae 1058 and Phaedra 70414.
28. Compare with similar expressions of lament in the HF and the Troades.
29. For a much more comprehensive discussion, see Tarrant (1985) 4043 and
Gantz (1993) 54550.
30. There is a tradition that Thyestes had three sons, found in the Byzantine scho-
lia on Euripides Orestes 812 and picked up by Apollodorus (ApE 2.13), although
Seneca uses different names. See Gantz (1993) 549.
Chapter 9
1. On the other hand, since Polynices has more lines than Eteocles, it is tempt-
ing to give his part to actor C, just for the sake of fairness and in the interest of giving
actor B a break. But since it is almost impossible to know what Seneca was planning
for the brothers as the play progressed, the more symbolic arrangement is desirable.
2. For more, see Frank (1995) 1.
3. Sifakis (1967) 13435 argues that changes of setting are facilitated by the
development of the raised stage.
4. Frank (1995) 2 makes a further act break at line 320, in part because of the
entrance of the Messenger, and in part because manuscript family A lists the charac-
ters before line 320 as is the usual practice at the beginning of a new act. Family E,
however, does not. For further discussion, see Frank (1995) ad 32062.
5. The name Oedipus does come up subsequently. In fact, it occurs four times
in this play: lines 89, 178, 313, and 553. Cf. the four times it appears in the Oedipus,
and once in the HF. But none of the names of any of the other characters are spoken.
See Frank (1995) ad 2.
6. Later on, Oedipus confirms his infirmity: quid segnis traho, 47. Literally, in this
line he questions why he drags out his life instead of committing suicide. But it could
also indicate that he drags himself slowly, i.e., that he is moving slowly.
7. Compare with Andromache and the Ghost of Hector at Troades, 68485.
8. But not just any sword will do. He wants the one with which he killed his father
(1067). Unfortunately, that one is back in Thebes. Cf. Thyestes 104345, where Thy-
estes similarly asks his brother, Atreus, for a sword so he can recover the remains of
his children, but is denied. Consider also Phaedra 70614, where Hippolytus draws his
sword, but refuses to kill Phaedra, because she is too eager.
9. But cf. Frank (1995) ad 319.
10. Some manuscripts give lines 34749 instead to Antigone. But this seems
incorrect; see Frank (1995) ad 32062 and 349.
11. Frank (1995) 8.
12. Compare with Oedipus self-identification as senex at line 32.
13. Cf. Medea 973ff. and Phaedra 384ff.
14. Cf. Jocasta at Oedipus 103839. On the arguments for deleting line 447, see
Frank (1995) ad 447. But regardless of the status of this line, Jocasta still points to her
stomach in line 448, showing her sons where to attack her body.
15. Frank (1995) ad 46770; she further believes there is some sort of sexual
imagery going on here.
16. Fitch (2002) 317; lines 48082, where Jocasta tells his to rearm himself, as
well as 49899, would confirm this.
17. For discussion, see Frank (1995) ad 65153.
18. See above on the alternate titles provided by the manuscripts.
19. For more on Senecas possible influences, see Frank (1995) 1629.
20. See Frank (1995) 116. There are no lacunae or missing pages in the manu-
scripts; and for no other plays did a scribe or other editor omit whole sections. So we
must assume that we have as much of the play as ever existed.
21. Sutton (1986) only considers this play twice: in the sections on Use of Dra-
matic Space and the Scaenae Frons (1516), and Implicit Stage Directions (5657).
But for such issues as role distributions, Sutton is silent.
22. Consider, for example, the judgment of Frank (1995) 165 on the Messenger
scene, as extremely powerful for all its brevity.
Conclusion
1. Including Halleran (1985), Marshall (2006), Revermann (2006), Seale
(1982), Sutton (1986), and Taplin (1977).
2. The plays of Seneca also have all of the parts of tragedy as identified by Aris-
totle: plot, character, diction, reasoning, spectacle, and lyric poetry (Poetica 1449b36
1450a10).
3. In addition Martial (Epigrams 1.61.78 and 4.40.2) and Sidonius Apollinaris

(Carmina 9.23238) both refer to Seneca tragicus in their poetry.
4. See Smethurst (1989) 1721. Her main argument is that the plays of Aeschy-
lus also are closer to Noh than they are to the tragedies of Sophocles and Euripides;
but her general discussion of Noh in connection with Greek tragedy is most helpful
to the present investigation.
5. Keene (1970) 11.
6. Keene (1970) 1213.
7. Aristotle, Poetica 1450a1239.
Works Cited
Ahl, Frederick. 2008. Two Faces of Oedipus. Ithaca.

Aldrete, Gregory S. 1999. Gestures and Acclamations in Ancient Rome. Baltimore.
Allen, W. Sidney. 1978. Vox Latina. 2nd ed. Cambridge.
Baca, A. R. 1969. Ovids Claim to Originality and Heroides 1. TAPA 100, 110.
Balsley, Kathryn. 2006. Styling Hair, Styling Character: Female Habitus in Senecas
Tragedies. Paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Classical Association of
the Middle West and South, Gainesville, FL, April 6, 2006.
Barrett, W. S. 1964. Euripides: Hippolytus. Oxford.
Bartsch, Shadi. 1994. Actors in the Audience. Cambridge, MA.
Bate, W. Jackson. 1970. The Burden of the Past and the English Poet. Cambridge, MA.
Beacham, Richard. 1991. The Roman Theatre and its Audience. Cambridge, MA.
Beare, W. 1964. The Roman Stage. 3rd ed. London.
Bieber, Margarete. 1961. The History of the Greek and Roman Theater. Princeton.
Billerbeck, Margarethe. 1999. Seneca: Hercules Furens. Leiden.
Bishop, J. David. 1968. The Meaning of the Choral Meters in Senecan Tragedy.
Rheinisches Museum fr Philologie 111, 197219.
Blondell, Ruby. 1999. Medea. In Ruby Blondell, Mary-Kay Gamel, Nancy Sorkin
Rabinowitz, and Bella Zweig, eds., Women on the Edge. New York. 14969.
Boyle, A. J. 1987. Senecas Phaedra. Liverpool.
Boyle, A. J. 1994. Senecas Troades. Leeds.
Boyle, A. J. 1997. Tragic Seneca: An Essay in the Theatrical Tradition. London.
Boyle, A. J. 2006. Roman Tragedy. London.
Boyle, A. J. 2008. Octavia Attributed to Seneca. Oxford.
Boyle, A. J. 2011. Seneca: Oedipus. Oxford.
Brink, C. O. 1971. Horace on Poetry. Cambridge.
Calder, William M., III. 1975. The Size of the Chorus in Senecas Agamemnon. CP
70, 3235.
Canter, Howard Vernon. 1925. Rhetorical Elements in the Tragedies of Seneca.
University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature 10, 7185.
Capps, Edward. 1895. The Chorus in the Later Greek Drama with Reference to the
Stage Question. AJA 10.3, 287325.
Cardullo, Bert, ed. 1985. What is Dramaturgy? New York.
175
176 works cited
Carney, T. F. 1963. P. Terenti Afri Hecyra. Pretoria, Transvaal.

Chancellor, Gary. 1979. Implicit Stage Directions in Ancient Greek Drama: Critical
Assumptions and the Reading Public. Arethusa 12, 13351.
Christenson, David. 2000. Plautus: Amphitruo. Cambridge, MA.
Coffey, Michael, and Roland Mayer. 1990. Seneca: Phaedra. Cambridge, MA.
Cohen, Robert, and John Harrop. 1984. Creative Play Direction. 2nd ed. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Conte, Gian Biagio. 1994. Latin Literature: A History. Trans. Joseph B. Solodow. Bal-
timore.
Costa, C. D. N. 1973. Seneca: Medea. Oxford.
Cruciani, Fabrizio. 1983. Teatro nel rinascimento Roma 14501550. Rome.
Csapo, Eric, and William J. Slater. 1995. The Context of Ancient Drama. Ann Arbor.
Cunningham, M. 1949. The Novelty of Ovids Heroides. CP 44, 100106.
Curley, Thomas F., III. 1986. The Nature of Senecan Drama. Rome.
Dale, A. M. 1954. Euripides: Alcestis. Oxford.
Davis, P. J. 1993. Shifting Song: The Chorus in Senecas Tragedies. New York.
Davis, P. J. 2003. Seneca: Thyestes. London.
DeForest, Mary. 1989. Gods in Livery. CB 65, 7177.
Dingel, Joachim. 1971. Requisit und Szenisches Bild in der Griechischen Tragdie.
In Walter Jens ed., Die Bauformen de Griechischen Tragdie. Munich. 34767.
Duckworth, George. 1952. The Nature of Roman Comedy. Princeton.
Easterling, P. E., and B. M. W. Knox. 1985. The Cambridge History of Classical Literature.
Cambridge.
Eliot, T. S. 1934. Selected Essays. London.
Erasmo, Mario. 2004. Roman Tragedy: Theatre to Theatricality. Austin.
Fantham, R. Elaine. 1982. Senecas Troades. Princeton.
Fantham, R. Elaine. 1996a. Roman Literary Culture. Baltimore.
Fantham, R. Elaine. 1996b. Midline Speaker Changes in Senecan Tragedy: Drama or
Metrics. Paper delivered at Annual Meeting of the American Philological Asso-
ciation, New York.
Fantham, R. Elaine. 2000. Production of Senecas Trojan Women Ancient? and Mod-
ern. In Harrison 2000, 1326.
Fitch, John G. 1981. Sense-Pauses and Relative Dating in Seneca, Sophocles, and
Shakespeare. AJP 102, 289307.
Fitch, John G. 1987a. Senecas Anapaests. Atlanta.
Fitch, John G. 1987b. Senecas Hercules Furens. Ithaca.
Fitch, John G. 2000. Playing Seneca. In Harrison 2000, 112.
Fitch, John G. 2002. Seneca VIII: Tragedies I. Cambridge, MA.
Fitch, John G. 2004. Seneca IX: Tragedies II. Cambridge, MA.
Fitzgerald, Gerald. 1992. Textual Practices and Euripidean Productions. Theatre
Survey 33, 522.
Flickinger, Roy C. 1936. The Greek Theater and its Drama. Chicago.
Fortey, S., and J. Glucker. 1975. Actus Tragicus: Seneca on the Stage. Latomus 34,
699715.
Frank, Marcia. 1995. Senecas Phoenissae. Leiden.
Frost, K. B. 1988. Exits and Entrances in Menander. Oxford.
Funaioli, G. 1920. Recitationes. RE ser. 2, vol. 1, cols. 43546.
Gantz, Timothy. 1993. Early Greek Myth. Baltimore.
Garton, Charles. 1972. Personal Aspects of the Roman Theatre. Toronto.
Works Cited 177
Goffman, Erving. 1986. Frame Analysis. Boston.

Goldberg, Sander. 2000. Going for Baroque. In Harrison 2000, 20931.
Goldhill, Simon. 2007. How to Stage Greek Tragedy Today. Chicago.
Gould, John. 1985. Tragedy in Performance. In Easterling and Knox 1985, 26380.
Guggenheimer, Eva H. 1972. Rhyme Effects and Rhyming Figures. The Hague.
Halliday, W. R. 1913. Greek Divination. London.
Hlikk, Riikka. 1997. Generating Meaning: Some Aspects of Intertextuality in Sen-
ecas Phaedra. Annales Universitatis Turkuensis ser. B, vol. 219, 5862.
Halleran, Michael R. 1985. Stagecraft in Euripides. London.
Hamilton, Richard. 1978. Announced Entrances in Greek Tragedy. HSCP 82, 63
82.
Hammond, Mason, Arthur M. Mack, and Walter Moskalew. 1970. T. Macci Plauti Miles
Gloriosus. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA.
Harrison, George W. M., ed. 2000. Seneca in Performance. London.
Huptli, Bruno W. 1983. Seneca: Oedipus. Frauenfeld.
Hine, H. M. 2000. Seneca: Medea. Warminster.
Hollingsworth, Anthony. 2001. Recitational Poetry and Senecan Tragedy: Is There a
Similarity? CW 94.2, 13544.
Issacharoff, Michael. 1988. Stage Codes. In Michael Issacharoff and Robin F. Jones,
eds., Performing Texts. Philadelphia. 5973.
Johnson, William A., and Holt N. Parker. 2009. Ancient Literacies: The Culture of Reading
in Greece and Rome. Oxford.
Johnston, Sarah Iles. 1997. Corinthian Medea and the Cult of Hera Akraia. In
James J. Clauss and Sarah Iles Johnston, eds., Medea. Princeton. 4470.
Jones, Christopher P. 1991. Dinner Theater. In Slater 1991, 19194.
Kakridis, Johannes Th. 1928. Der fluch des Theseus im Hippolytos. Rheinisches
Museum 77, 2133.
Keene, Donald. 1970. Twenty Plays of the No Theatre. New York.
Keulen, Atze J. 2001. L. Annaeus Seneca: Troades. Leiden.
Knox, Bernard. 1968. Silent Reading in Antiquity. GRBS 9, 42135.
Kohn, Thomas D. 2000. An Early Stage in Vergils Career. CW 93.3, 26774.
Kohn, Thomas D. 2001. The Poetics of Senecas Oedipus (a dramaturgical approach).
Dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Kohn, Thomas D. 2003. Who Wrote Senecas Plays? CW 96.3, 27180.
Kohn, Thomas D. 20045. Senecas Use of Four Speaking Actors. CJ 100.2, 16375.
Kohn, Thomas D. 2007. Oratio Recta in Senecan Tragedy. Prudentia 39, 5167.
Kohn, Thomas D. 2008. The Wishes of Theseus. TAPA 138.2, 37692.
Kragelund, Patrick. 1999. Senecan Tragedy: Back on Stage? Classica et Mediaevalia
50, 23547.
Leo, Friedrich. 1878. L. Annaei Senecae Tragoediae. 2 vols. Berlin.
Leverett, James. 2008. Dramaturgy: An Embarrassment of Job Descriptions. Perform-
ing Arts Resources 26, 110.
Lewis, Jim. 1996. The Clytemnestra Project. In Mark J. Bly, ed., The Production Note-
books: Theatre in Process, vol. 1. New York. 162.
Macintosh, Fiona, Pantelis Michelakis, Edith Hall, and Oliver Taplin, eds. 2005. Age-
memnon in Performance: 458 BC to AD 2004. Oxford.
Marshall, C. W. 1994. The Rule of Three Actors in Practice. Text and Presentation:
Journal of the Comparative Drama Conference 15, 5361.
Marshall, C. W. 1997. Comic Technique and the Fourth Actor. CQ 47.1, 7784.
178 works cited
Marshall, C. W. 1998. In Senecas Wings. In Janet P. Brews, Ian C. Storey, and Martin
Boyne, eds. Celebratio: Thirtieth Anniversary Essays at Trent University. Peterborough,
Ontario. 8695.
Marshall, C. W. 2000. Location! Location! Location! Choral Absence and Theatrical
Space in the Troades. In Harrison 2000, 2751.
Marshall, C. W. 2003. Casting the Oresteia. CJ 98.3, 25774.
Marshall, C. W. 2006. The Stagecraft and Performance of Roman Comedy. Cambridge.
Marti, Berthe. 1945. Senecas Tragedies: A New Interpretation. TAPA 76, 21645.
Mastronarde, Donald J. 1979. Contact and Discontinuity. Berkeley.
Mastronarde, Donald J. 1990. Actors on High: The Skene Roof, the Crane, and the
Gods in Attic Drama. CAnt 9.2, 24794.
McJannet, Linda. 1999. The Voice of Elizabethan Stage Directions: The Evolution of a The-
atrical Code. Newark.
Meltzer, Gary. 1988. Dark Wit and Black Humor in Senecas Thyestes. TAPA 118,
30930.
Michelini, Ann N. 1987. Euripides and the Tragic Tradition. Madison.
Michelini, Ann N. 1989. Neophron and Euripides Medeia 105680. TAPA 119,
11535.
Mills, Sophie. 1997. Theseus, Tragedy, and the Athenian Empire. Oxford.
Moore, Timothy J. 1998. The Theatre of Plautus: Playing to the Audience. Austin.
Motto, Anna Lydia, and John R. Clark. 1988. Senecan Tragedy. Amsterdam.
Norden, Eduard. 1958. Die Antike Kunstprosa. Stuttgart.
Pease, A. S. 1920. M. Tullius Ciceronis de Divinatione: Liber Primus. University of
Illinois Studies in Language and Literature 6.23.
Philp, R. H. 1968. Manuscript Tradition of Senecas Tragedies. CQ n.s. 18, 15079.
Pickard-Cambridge, Arthur. 1968. The Dramatic Festivals of Athens. 2nd ed. Oxford.
Porter, John. 1996. Review of Scodel 1993. Phoenix 50, 7781.
Revermann, Martin. 2006. Comic Business. Oxford.
Reynolds, L. D., ed. 1983. Texts and Transmissions: A Survey of the Latin Classics. Oxford.
Rosenmeyer, Thomas G. 1993. Senecas Oedipus and Performance: The Manto
Scene. In Scodel 1993, 23544.
Rosenmeyer, Thomas G., Martin Ostwald, and James W. Halporn. 1963. The Meters of
Greek and Latin Poetry. Indianapolis.
Rutenberg, Michael Elliot. 1998. Oedipus of Lucius Annaeus Seneca: Freely Translated and
Adapted. Wauconda, IL.
Schechner, Richard. 1988. Performance Theory. New York.
Schiesaro, Alessandro. 1992. Forms of Senecan Intertextuality. Vergilius 38, 5663.
Schlegel, Augustus William. 1815. A Course of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Literature.
Trans. John Black. London.
Scodel, Ruth, ed. 1993. Theater and Society in the Classical World. Ann Arbor.
Scullard, H. H. 1981. Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic. Ithaca.
Seale, David. 1982. Vision and Stagecraft in Sophocles. Chicago.
Sear, Frank. 2006. Roman Theatres: An Architectural Study. Oxford.
Seidensticker, Bernd. 1969. Die Gesprchsverdichtung in den Tragdien Senecas. Heidel-
berg.
Seidensticker, Bernd, and D. Armstrong. 1985. Seneca tragicus: 18781978. Aufstieg
und Niedergang der rmischen Welt 2.32.3, 91668.
Sifakis, G. M. 1967. Studies in the History of Hellenistic Drama. London.
Sifakis, G. M. 1979. Children in Greek Tragedy. BICS 26, 6780.
Works Cited 179
Slater, William J., ed. 1991. Dining in a Classical Context. Ann Arbor.
Slavitt, David R., and Palmer Bovie, eds. 1999. Euripides 4. Philadelphia.
Sluiter, Th. H. 1941. L. Annaei Senecae Oedipus. Groningen.
Smethurst, Mae J. 1989. The Artistry of Aeschylus and Zeami. Princeton.
Smith, Bruce R. 1988. American Scripts and Modern Experience on the English Stage, 1500
1700. Princeton.
Smith, R. Scott. 2011. Seneca: Phaedra and Other Plays. New York.
Sonkowsky, Robert P. 1959. An Aspect of Delivery in Ancient Rhetorical Theory.
TAPA 90, 25674.
Stevens, P. T. 1971. Euripides: Andromache. Oxford.
Styan, J. L. 1975. Drama, Stage and Audience. London.
Suchy, Patricia A. 1991. When Worlds Collide: The Stage Direction as Utterance.
Journal of Dramatic Theory and Criticism 6.1, 6982.
Sutton, Dana. 1984. Senecas Hercules Furens: One Chorus or Two? AJP 105, 3015.
Sutton, Dana. 1986. Seneca on the Stage. Leiden.
Sutton, Dana. 1988. Dicaeopolis as Aristophanes, Aristophanes as Dicaeopolis. Liv-
erpool Classical Monthly 13.7, 1058.
Taplin, Oliver. 1977. The Stagecraft of Aeschylus. Oxford.
Taplin, Oliver. 1979. Greek Tragedy in Action. Berkeley.
Tarrant, R. J. 1976. Seneca: Agamemnon. Cambridge.
Tarrant, R. J. 1978. Senecan Drama and Its Antecedents. Harvard Studies in Classical
Philology 82, 21363.
Tarrant, R. J. 1985. Senecas Thyestes. Atlanta.
Tchterle, Karlheinz. 1994. Lucius Annaeus Seneca: Oedipus. Heidelberg.
Turner, Victor. 1974. Dramas, Fields and Metaphors. Ithaca.
Van Der Meer, L. B. 1987. The Bronze Liver of Piacenza: Analysis of a Polytheistic Structure.
Amsterdam.
Varner, Eric R. 2000. Grotesque Vision. In Harrison 2000, 11936.
Walker, B. 1969. Review of Zwierlein 1966. CPh 64, 18387.
Weil, Henri. 1897. tudes sur le Drame Antique. Paris.
Wheeler, A. L. 1988. Ovid IV: Trisita, Ex Ponto. Cambridge, MA.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich Von. 1959. Euripides: Herakles. 2nd ed. Darmstadt.
Winsbury, Rex. 2009. The Roman Book. London.
Wrigley, Amanda. 2005. Agamemnons on the APGRD Database. In Macintosh et
al. 2005, 359435.
Zwierlein, Otto. 1966. Die Rezitationsdramen Senecas. Meisenheim am Glan.
Zwierlein, Otto. 1986. L. Annaei Senecae: Tragoediae. Oxford.
Index
Accius, 64, 131 Aeschylus, 1, 8, 18, 51, 61, 64,

action units, passim 138, 143, 150n85, 153n68,
definition of, 45 157n25, 164n13, 172n4
act division, 27, 46, 79, 135, Afranius, 148n58
159n9, 171n4 Agathon, 131
actors Apocolocyntosis, 5
distribution of roles among a Apollodorus, 171n30
limited number, 4, 2122, Apollodorus of Tarsus, 131
3234, 5051, 65, 66, 74, archive of performance of Greek
80, 81, 9395, 11011, 116, and Roman drama, 6
12425, 132, 133, 140, 141 Aristophanes, 22, 151n26, 158n42
mute characters, 18, 2425, 51, Aristotle, 13, 25, 27, 46, 143,
53, 62, 81, 88, 8990, 93, 155n32, 172n2
98, 99, 103, 11112, 114, audience expectations, confound-
116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 124, ing of, 83, 92, 11617, 120,
127, 13031, 132, 151n37 141, 160nn3334, 163n36
mute extras as attendants, 20, 21, 24, Augustus Caesar, 11, 12, 144
37, 38, 42, 44, 46, 53, 57, 59,
60, 63, 64, 70, 73, 74, 77, 84, 87, balcony/roof, 5, 16, 18, 68, 7071,
90, 91, 98, 99, 101, 103, 105, 74, 79, 8283, 85, 90, 91, 92,
119, 120, 129, 130, 151n37 136, 140, 157n20, 160n35
mute supernumerary, 94, 167n6 Bate, W. Jackson, 143
speaking from offstage, 18, 95, beats, 45
104, 112, 155n43, 164n2 blood, 17, 2021, 39, 40, 47, 63, 87,
three-actor rule, 13, 21, 31, 43, 88, 99, 100, 103, 115, 130
48, 94, 111, 140, 166n42 Byzantine scholia, 171n30
use of a fourth speaker, 5, 21, 25,
3234, 51, 53, 62, 63, 94 Carcinus, 91, 131
Aemilius Paullus (comedy performed Cassius Dio, 10, 156n56
at his funeral), 149n66 Catullus, 143, 161n12
181
182 index
center doors, passim, 1516, 18, 31 Eliot, T. S., 147n36

representing someplace other Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 143
than the palace, 5, 15, 82, 95, Ennius, 91, 131
96, 11213, 13334, 136 epithalamium, 26, 81, 83, 84
Chaeremon, 131 Euripides, 8, 22, 26, 30, 66, 74, 78, 79,
Chilean gold miners, 164n8 80, 8384, 90, 91, 92, 95, 107
chorus, passim, 2531 8, 116, 122, 131, 138, 139, 143,
activities commented on by a char- 150n85, 151n23, 151n30, 155n37,
acter, 30, 41, 52, 57, 96, 102 158n55, 161nn4143, 163n32,
announcing the entrance of a 163n43, 163n45, 164n13, 167n7,
character, 30, 33, 36, 45, 169n33, 170n13, 171n30, 172n4
48, 71, 75, 79, 98, 102 exostra (ekkyklema), 16, 31, 6263, 74, 75,
exit and reentry during play, 19, 79, 95, 105, 106, 129, 131, 140
2627, 29, 5253, 57, 58, extispicium, 8, 17, 18, 21, 24, 33,
6869, 71, 100, 102, 153n67 36, 3841, 47, 49, 156n53,
final exit before end of play, 156n58, 158n48
19, 29, 89, 92, 1056
identity of, 2627, 34, 5153, five-act structure, 13, 2728, 49
65, 67, 79, 8182, 9596, French scenes, 45, 27
108, 112, 125, 133, 140
secondary, 2627, 5253, 102, ghosts, 5, 16, 18, 50, 51, 53, 54, 64, 106,
152n64, 153n84, 164n17, 11011, 116, 118, 119, 12426,
168n23, 169n24 13435, 150n18, 165n19, 169n24
size of, 25, 53, 6869, 102 gods present onstage, 16, 97,
speaking within an episode, 108, 16970n37
3031, 4647, 49, 71, 77, Goffman, Erving, 2, 3, 12, 19, 24, 25
79, 89, 104, 116, 129 26, 30, 149n83, 151n25, 152n46
Churchill, Caryl, 6 Gracchus, 131
Cicero, 147n41, 148n58, 155n32 graffito at Pompeii, 5, 13, 142
Cleophon, 131 Grand Valley State Univer-
convention vs. realism, 16, 1821, sity, 6, 3738, 45, 47
30, 38, 62, 82, 87, 88, 115 Greek New Comedy, 102, 143,
costume/clothing, 12, 22, 26, 27, 146n12, 153n89
33, 7071, 75, 84, 99, 101, Guthrie Theatres Clytem-
114, 115, 120, 121, 128 nestra Project, 14
Curiatius Maternus, 78
curtain, 18, 19 hair/hairstyle, 23, 41, 51, 7071,
73, 74, 76, 87, 98, 115, 118,
dating the plays, 5, 13132, 161n47 120, 121, 128, 12930, 137
death offstage, 61, 64, 75, hallucination, 20, 59, 60, 90, 94,
78, 1034, 112, 122 100, 103, 106, 109, 119,
death onstage, 31, 33, 4647, 127, 13435, 160n37
48, 7677, 78, 89, 90 Herodotus, 3
didaskalia, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11, 141 Historia Augusta, 148n49
Diogenes, 131 Holmes, Sherlock, 3
dogs, the barking of, 18, 69, 88 Homer, 143, 157n25
dramaturgy and dramaturge, defi- Horace, 5, 910, 13, 25,
nition of, 12, 14041 27, 143, 162n24
dumb-show, 50, 112, 169n33 Hughes, Ted, 6, 37
Index 183
incomplete line, 126, 135 canticum polymetrum, 29, 41,

Into the Woods, 1512n40 42, 52, 58, 61, 84
Ion of Chios, 64 chorus using iambic trimeter, 28, 30
31, 36, 46, 52, 57, 59, 70, 71, 74,
Julius Caesar, 12, 48 75, 76, 79, 89, 98, 104, 116, 129
Julius Secundus, 78 dactylic eexameter, 28, 37, 41, 83, 84
Juvenal, 22 glyconics, 30, 45, 83, 84, 102, 127
sapphic meter, 35, 41, 69, 86,
Kohn, Rita T., 14 102, 120, 122, 126, 128
trochees, 28, 36, 77, 87, 122
Lewis, Jim, 14 midline change of speaker, 23, 35, 36,
lighting effects, 18 42, 44, 47, 55, 56, 60, 63, 69, 72,
Livius Andronicus, 64 74, 75, 76, 84, 85, 86, 98, 99, 101,
ludi scaenici, 11 103, 106, 107, 117, 118, 119, 125
Lupu, Michael, 14 26, 127, 128, 135, 136, 137, 138
Lycophron, 78 Miller, Arthur, 2, 3, 14
miming, 17, 21, 36, 3741, 45,
machina, 16, 31, 54, 90, 91, 92, 77, 8788, 1034, 115
97, 140, 158n47, 163n39 modern production of Sen-
Maecenas, 144 ecan tragedy, 6
magic, 17, 20, 21, 23, 28, 8688, motivated stage events, 34
91 Mr. Magoo, 164n9
Mamercus Aemilius Scarus, 131,
148n57 necromancy, 27, 30, 33, 41
manuscripts, 5, 6, 7, 32, 33, 35, 43, 44, 42, 47, 48, 49, 150n18
71, 77, 89, 96, 111, 112, 116, 117, Neophron, 91
132, 133, 135, 138, 142, 153n66, Nero, 143, 148n49, 156n56
155n37, 158n3, 165n24, 165n30, Noh Theater, 14243, 16768n7
166n41, 166n43, 168n14, 168n23,
171n16, 171n24, 171nn45, orchestra, 29, 161n6
172n11, 172n19, 172n21 Oresteia, 22, 64
martial, 173n3 Ovid, 5, 10, 78, 91, 143, 145n4, 147n27
masks, 12, 2223, 26, 27, 33, 46, 52,
94, 124, 131, 168n20, 169n27 Pausanius, 156n3
Menander, 153n89, 158n42, 166n33 performance question, 1,
messenger speech, 20, 27, 45, 48, 613, 132, 140, 142
5758, 75, 8687, 89, 92, Petroinus, 9
101, 122, 129, 135, 138 plague, 18, 34, 35, 36, 47, 168n19
metatheater, 63, 66, 79, 142, 169n27 Plautus, 19, 27, 143, 148n58,
meter, 2729, 30, 59, 73, 158n42, 161n6, 164n13
76, 8384, 89, 122 Pliny the Younger, 7, 8, 9
actors using a meter other than Plutarch, 148n49
iambic trimeter, 28, Pomponius Secundus, 10, 131
8788, 120, 130 Prairie Home Companion, 145n6
anapests, 2829, 30, 35, 41, 46, props, 17, 1920, 31, 47, 57, 58,
52, 55, 56, 58, 59, 67, 69, 75, 59, 62, 65, 69, 7273, 7475,
79, 85, 87, 97, 98, 105, 106, 76, 77, 87, 90, 9899, 101,
114, 115, 120, 129, 130 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 121,
asclepiadean meter, 83, 100, 117 128, 129, 130, 131, 137, 140
184 index
[pseudo] Suetonius 10 Thrasea Paetus, 11

Tiberius, 148n57, 149n68
Quintillian, 5, 10, 142, 148n58 trap door, 5, 16, 19, 31, 53,
54, 125, 126, 140
recitatio, 78 Turner, Victor, 149n83
Roscius, 148n58
Uninvited Company at Car-
scaenae frons, passim, 16, 17, 20, 25, leton College, 14
30, 35, 36, 41, 42, 45, 47, 55, 59,
61, 70, 7476, 79, 8283, 84, 85, V for Vendetta, 152n45
86, 88, 91, 97, 98, 100, 102, 103, Varius, 10, 131
114, 116, 118, 120, 122, 126, ventriloquism, 18, 95, 112, 120
127, 129, 136, 149n63, 164n12 Vergil, 5, 10, 37, 143, 144, 147n41
scene decoration, 16, 20, 97, 114 Vitruvius, 10, 11, 13, 1516,
Schechner, Richard, 12, 17, 19, 146n16, 29, 148n58, 161n6
149n71, 149n83, 151n25
Schlegel, A. W., 7, 145n2 wall paintings, 9, 1011
Seneca philosophus, 7, 10, 25, 146n20 wings, 15, 16, 31, 33, 68, 113,
Servius, 10 129, 137, 138, 140
setting, change of, 27, 6768, leading to the Forum (Oedipus,
11213, 116, 118, 123, Agamemnon,Thyestes), 44, 45,
13334, 140, 159n25 46, 53, 5455, 62, 125
Shakespeare, William, 4, 13, to Thebes (Phoenissae),
20, 97, 114, 149n71 134, 135, 136
Shepard, Sam, 146n16 to the palace (Medea, HF), 82, 84,
Sherlock Holmes, 3 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 96, 97,
Sidonius Apollinaris, 173n3 98, 99, 100, 101, 103, 107
silent reading, 7 to the ruins of Troy (Troades), 113,
Slaney, Helen, 6 114, 116, 117, 118, 120, 122
Sophocles, 8, 18, 37, 43, 47, 123, to the Underworld (Phaedra),
131, 138, 143, 145n1, 150n85, 6768, 74
158n55, 161n42, 164n4, 172n4 leading to foreign parts/out of town
sound cues/effects, 18, 40, 45, 46, 49, (Oedipus, Medea, Thyestes, Phoenis-
69, 74, 76, 79, 82, 84, 85, 88, 90, sae), 36, 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 82,
91, 97, 100, 153n87, 171n25 89, 125, 127, 134, 135, 136
Sphinx and her riddle, 34 to the forest (Phaedra), 6768, 71,
stage directions in parenthesis, 145n4 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 159n18
Stoicism, 143 to the harbor (Agamemnon),
Suetonius, 10, 37, 149n68, 50, 53, 57, 58, 59, 63
149nn7576, 156n56 to the ships of the Achaeans
synecdoche, 98 (Troades), 113, 122
to the Underworld (HF), 96, 100
Tactitus, 78, 10, 11, 149n68 wordplay, 42, 48, 94, 170n12
Terence, 19, 27, 143, 149n66, 164n13
theologeion, 165n19 Xavier University, 6, 145n2

Thomas Kohn-The Dramaturgy of Senecan Tragedy-University of Michigan Press (2013)

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Thomas Kohn-The Dramaturgy of Senecan Tragedy-University of Michigan Press (2013)

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Dramaturgy of Senecan Tragedy

The University of Michigan Press

This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations,

Published in the United States of America by

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Introduction: Dramaturgical Methodology 1

[m]ost often jovial, she has developed an iron repression of her

This lengthy description gives us backstory, insight into both characters,

The tragedies come to us in two branches:24 E, or codex Etruscus, rep-

them privately. No serious tragedian in antiquity, however, is known to

to the presentation of a play.42 If Maternus, in fact, intended to release

composing tragic dramas, as well as suggesting that a number of people

comedies found in private homes.64 And if the Romans explored this

pretation of the plays. Styan observes that the process of communicating

ater of the mind is an irrelevant question. The tragedies demonstrate a

Seneca and His Dramatic Resources

Before examining the individual plays, one by one, for dramaturgical

The tragedies contain a number of cues for sound effects. Several

The performers may already be in character upon their entrances from

of cardboard and glass, but both he and the audience treat it as if it

be realistically portrayed.31 And when Theseus attempts to reassemble the

Another ramification of masks is the inability of actors to display emo-

immersed. He is a footnote that talks,59 or, more frequently, sings. The

Lines 65963: Cassandra

Furens, it prevents Amphitryo from committing suicide just before Her-

The Set: Thebes

Action units: (1) Oedipus, in monologue, talks about the curse

First Choral Song (110201)

at line 154. Presumably this reflects a change in the choral dancing. It

At lines 2025, the Chorus sees someone approaching and switch-

vivid description of mysterious events. Finally, Creon quotes the Delphic

the actions, as it is unlikely that an actual sacrifice occurred during the

description of the extispicium is quite accurate, both in terminology and

Second Choral Song (403508)

Action units: (1) Oedipus addresses the recently returned Creon.

Third Choral Song (70963)

Fourth Choral Song (882914)

The Servant responds to the Chorus question, reverting back to trim-

Fifth Choral Song (98097)

and has given Tiresias a speaking companion. There were a number of

votivam matres Graiae lampada iactant, 35152); and finally, Clytemnes-

The Set: Mycenae

Action unit: The Ghost of Thyestes, in monologue, states that he has

At line 1, the Ghost of Thyestes (actor A) appears onstage, alone.18

First Choral Song (57107)

Action units: (1) Clytemnestra muses with herself as to whether she

The entrance of Clytemnestra (actor B) is indicated when she begins

Second Choral Song (31087)

Action units: (1) Eurybates, Agamemnons herald, arrives. (2) Cly-

Third Choral Song (589658)

lines, Agamemnon (actor A) exits into the palace, leaving Cassandra

Fourth Choral Song (80866)

Action units: (1) Cassandra describes the death of Agamemnon as

At line 867, Cassandra speaks, a soliloquy to no one in particular, but

A young woman (actor D) enters through the center doors at line

center doors, followed closely by the attendants, and then by Clytemnes-

The story of Agamemnons return from Troy and subsequent murder

The Set: Athens

It is reasonable to assume that the play is set in Athens, since all of

to blend nature and civilization. And so it is better to assume a constant

Action units: (1) Hippolytus orders his companions to scatter to the

Hippolytus enters at line 1, accompanied by the Chorus of hunting

seem silly.10 A happy medium can be reached, however, if the Chorus

First Choral Song (274357)