by Thomas; Kohn
29. Cf. Sutton (1986) 49, who thinks Medea exits here.
30. Also at lines 382–86 and 806.
31. Compare with the Nurse's description of Medea's offstage preparations in this play (670–739).
32. Cf. Euripides, Medea 1136–1230.
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 893–977 thinks that these lines “would not naturally be spoken to the children face to face.” But that strikes me as subjective and contrary to Seneca's 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 connection 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 893–977 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) 41–42, and Sutton (1986) 17.
39. This is also the view of Sutton (1986) 49. Alternatively, since Medea will shortly 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 1023–24 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) 268–72 for a discussion of the machina in Attic drama.
42. See Sutton (1986) 50.
43. Gantz (1993) 369–70 suggests that the infanticide was a Euripidean invention. For more on the question, see Blondell (1999) 152, Johnston (1997) 44–70, and Michelini (1989) 115–35.
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) 33–49 for such topics as “unexpected entrances” and “entrance of the wrong person.”
Chapter 6
1. Among them Zwierlein (1966) 47–50, Sutton (1986) 29, and Fitch (1987b) ad 503.
2. Zwierlein (1966) 47–48. Megara speaks at lines 1015–17, 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, 45–46.
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) 24–33.
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 Shakespeare 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 690–91.
12. Lycus declares templa flagrent (506–7). Fitch (1987b) ad 506 thinks this temple “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, Agamemnon, 1343 and 1345, where an offstage Agamemnon exclaims as he is being killed. At Euripides, Medea 1271–72 and 1277–78, 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 (314–17), and her mother Myrrhina begs her to be quiet (318), all from offstage. And in Plautus, Aulularia, the pregnant Phaedria also screams from offstage (691–92). That this is a standard technique of Roman comedy is argued by Carney (1963) ad 318 and Duckworth (1952) 137–38. On Seneca's influences from nontragic 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 (394–415); 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) 41–46 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, 252–74.
17. Sutton (1984) 301–5 and (1986) 41–42 claims that another Chorus enters at 827–29, because Theseus announces its arrival. Fitch (1987b) ad 827–29 and Tarrant (1978) 224–25 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 Juno's speech, and so it must enter for the first time here.
21. On the contrary, Davis (1993) 24–25 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 relevant 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 locat
ion 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 827–29, 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 Amphitryo's 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 traditionally 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 unprecedented. 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 Amphitryo's 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 hero's direct address to his absent wife and children (differ amplexus, parens, coniunxque differ, 638–39).
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 (Oedipus 212–24) and Eurybates is to tell Clytemnestra about the storm at sea (Agamemnon 406–20). Seneca uses a number of techniques, including having Amphitryo interrupt occasionally with questions (lines 697, 707–8, 727–30, 747–49, 760–61) and providing direct quotation from Charon (line 772), to make the described events come alive.
33. See, for example, Menander, Dyskolos 230–32.
34. dum nos profundae claustra laxamus Stygis, populare Bacchi laudibus carmen sonet.
35. Sutton (1984) 301–5 and Sutton (1986) 41–42.
36. Fitch (1987b) ad 827–29 and Tarrant (1978) 224–25.
37. On the secondary Chorus in Greek Tragedy, see Taplin (1977) 230–38.
38. Calder (1975) 32–35 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) 19–20 also would have the Chorus remain for this act.
41. Fitch (1987b) ad 914–17 thinks that Hercules commands Theseus to perform some sacrifices (915–17), in response to which the Athenian obeys and exits. Hercules, 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) 16–17 agrees with this interpretation. It is hard to believe that even a Roman audience, used to the brutality of gladiatorial games, would enjoy seeing a young child slaughtered. Further, there is no ceiling on the stage, and so nothing 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 Zwierlein (1986) and Billerbeck (1999), assigns line 1021 (quo tendis amens? sanguinem fundes tuum?) to Megara, family E “present[s] 1021–31 as a single speech, which must be Amphitryo's.” 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 1115–21.
46. That is, if we, follow Fitch (1987b) and Billerbeck (1999) in disregarding Leo's transposition of lines 1135 and 1136 to before 1122. On Leo's reasons and Fitch's 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) 159–60, 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 distinguish it from the pseudo-Senecan Hercules Oetaeus. Apparently someone thought that since Seneca's 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) 129–59.
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 deuteragonist, 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, Hecuba's 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 63–66.
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 supernumerary” 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 (1271–72, 1278–79). At Andromache 504–36, the child of Andromache engages in song with his mother onstage. And at Alcestis 393–415, the son of Alcestis sings a lament for his dead mother, also onstage. A fourth example, Suppliants 1123–64, 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) xix–xx maintains that the technical requ
irements 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) 67–80 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 Cassandra's will be delayed until she gets to Mycenae.
9. See Davis (1993) 46–49.
10. On the question of its onstage presence throughout the play, see Davis (1993) 20–21 and 25–27.
11. Captivae is vocative plural, in apposition to turba mea, and not genitive singular, as it would make little sense for Hecuba to use the singular in reference to the Chorus. On Seneca's practice of intertwining appositives, see Keulen (2001) ad 63 and 15.
12. For previous discussions of this issue, see Fantham (1982) 37–39 and Keulen (2001) 28.
13. Sifakis (1967) 135–35 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 δ. See Keulen (2001) ad 56 and 63–66, and Fantham (1982) ad 63–66, 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 63–66, who takes the vocative as a “metrical device…[that] avoids the inconvenient molossus of accusative or genitive case.”