An Evaluation of Prophecy in Greek Tragedy According to the Dramatic Theory of Aristotle

7/27/2019 An Evaluation of Prophecy in Greek Tragedy According to the Dramatic Theory of Aristotle

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/an-evaluation-of-prophecy-in-greek-tragedy-according-to-the-dramatic-theory 1/82

Loyola University Chicago

Loyola eCommons

Master's eses eses and Dissertations

1940

An Evaluation of Prophecy in Greek Tragedy According to the Dramatic eory of Aristotle

John F. Sullivan Loyola University Chicago

is esis is brought to you for free and open access by the eses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in

Master's eses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please [email protected].

is work is licensed under a Creative Commons Aribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Copyright © 1940 John F. Sullivan

Recommended CitationSullivan, John F., "An Evaluation of Prophecy in Greek Tragedy According to the Dramatic eory of Aristotle" (1940). Master's Teses.

Paper 384.hp://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/384

http://ecommons.luc.edu/

http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses

http://ecommons.luc.edu/td

mailto:[email protected]

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/





mailto:[email protected]

http://ecommons.luc.edu/td

http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses

http://ecommons.luc.edu/



AN EVALUATION OF PROPHECY IN GREEK TRAGEDY

ACCORDING TO

THE DRAMA.TIC THEORY OF ARISTOTLE

BY

JOHN F. SULLIVAN, S.J ' . , A..B.

THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF LOYOLA UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFII.J.MENT OF THE

R E q U I R E ~ ~ T S FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS



AD

MA J O R EM DEI GLOR I A l L

E T

BEATA . E VIRGINIS MAR I A E HONORE :M .



CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

~ P o e t i c s . • • . • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Universal value of t reat ise ••••••••••••••••••

Inductive method used by Aristotle •••••••••••

Consequent importance of Poetics •••••••••••••

Religious na tu re£ ! Greek tragedy ••••••••••••••••

Tragedy, an act of rel igious worship •••••••••

Theophany and prophecy in tragedies ••••••••••

Problem • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • ••• . • .'rheophany condemned, prophecy omitted

1

1

22

3 - 534

5 8

in Po e t i c s • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5Purpose of thesis •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 6Value of solution for study of drama ••••••••• 6State of question •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 7

Order of treatment ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8

CHAPTER I t ARISTOTLE'S THEORY OF DRAMATIC 'IMITATION'

' Imitat ion ' and Philosophy •••••••••••••••••••••••

Plato 's solution of problem of universal •••••Consequent evaluation of ar t as an

' imitat ion' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Dependence of Aristotle 's theory of a rt

on his solution of same problem •••••••••••

No universal apart from individual •••••••••••

Hylomorphic constitution of individual •••••••

Genesis of the universal •••••••••••••••••••••

Development of the universal •••••••••••••••••' Imitat ion and Art • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

' Imitat ion•-of universal form ••••••••••••••••

Creation, not copy •••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Object of Greek ar t • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Primacy of poetic medium •••••••••••••••••••••

' I m i t a t i o n ' ~ Tragedy ••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The dramatic ' imitat ion' •••••••••••••••••••••

Law of probabil i ty or necessity ••••••••••••••

Law of unity of action •••••••••••••••••••••••

11

16

19

- 1611

12

12131314

15- 19161718

18

- 271920

23



Ideal nature of dramatic ' imi ta t ion ' •••••••• 24

Universal nature of dramatic ' imitat ion' •••• 26Chance violates dramatic ' imitat ion' •••••••• 27

CHAPTER I I : D R A J ~ T I C VALIDITY OF PROPHECY

Problem • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Prophecy defined ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Greek prophecy ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Norm of dramatic val idi ty •••••••••••••••••••Antecedent probabil i ty of inval idi ty ••••••••

The d e u s ~ machina !a Sophocles • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •T·wo instances • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Heracles in the Philoctetes • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Reason for condemnation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Raison d'etre of the 'machina' ••••••••••••••Prophecy .!!! Sophocles • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -•••••••

State of question •••••••••••••••••••••••••••Prophecy in the Oedipus Tyrannus ••••••••••••

Prophecy in the Antigone ••••••••••••••••••••

Conclusions • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Objection answered ••••••••••••••••••••••••••Conclusion concerning val idi ty • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

CHAPTER I I I TRAGirJ VALUE OF PROPHECY

31 - 3531323234

35 - 4035353738

40 - ,48

40404243

47

48 - 49

Nature Q[ t ragic action ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 52 - 55Varied emotional effects of different

forms of drama •••••••••••••••••••••••••••Specific ef fect of tragedy • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •Source of tragic effect - the t r a ~ i c action •

Prophecy and the 'hamartia ' •••••••••••••••••••••Inte l lec tual error as the 'hamartia ' ••••••••

Prophecy as the occasion of 'hamartia ' ••••••In the Oedipus Tyrannus • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

In the Trachiniae •••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Tragic Irony • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •Prophecy abd the t ragic situation · · ~ · · · • • • • • • • • •

Prophecy provides motive for act1on •••••••••

In the Oedipus at Colonus • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

52

5353

55 - 5855

55

56

5757

58 - 6058

58



In the Electra • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

In the Philoctetes • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Prophecy and t ragic surprise •••••••••••••••••••

Surprise intensif ies tragic effect •••••••••Surprise ar is ing from prophecy • • • • • • • • • • • • •

In the Arltigone • . • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••

In the Ajax ...............••.....••....... •

P r o p h e c y ~ suspense • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Aristot le on suspense ••••••••••••••••••••••

Prophecy excites suspense ••••••••••••••••••

In the A.ta.:x. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

In the Antigone ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

In the Oedipus Tyrannus ••••••••••••••••••••P r o p h e c y ~ acceleration of action ••••••••••••

Characteristic concentration of Greektragedy ••...•..•......•.....••.•••..••••

Acceleration by ?rophecy •••••••••••••••••••

Examples from Sophocles ••••••••••••••••••••

Conclusion concerning dramatic value •••••••••••

60

63

66

5960

- 63

606162

62

- 66

63

64

656566

- 68

66

67

67

68

CONCLUSION • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 71 .. 72

Bibliography • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7 3 - 75

Vita Auctoris • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 76



INTRODUCTION

THE POETICS The Poetics is the product of a combination of

circumstances unique in the history of dramatic

theory. Three centuries before i t s composition the t ragic dra-

ma had been born of Greek genius, had grown to the perfection

and beauty of the f i f th century, and declined to the mediocre

repet i t ions of the fourth. I t was at this time that i t became

the subject of study for one of the brightest in te l lects which

the world has ever seen. In perspective he could view the en

t i re f ield of Greek drama. Bringing to his study the same ana

ly t ica l penetration which he applied to metaphysics, Aristot le

sought out the principles upon which tragedy is founded and se t

them forth briefly in his Poetics . As Courthope observes:

Though the Poetics is not an elaborate t reat iseon technical pract ice , i t is exhaustive in i t sexamination of principle , and the condensedphilosacphical epigrams, which drop from the writerin a manner elsewhere unusual to him, show how

deeply he had thought upon the subject . (1)

Since the principles which he established are founded on the

very nature of the drama, they endure through the superficial

changes in form which characterize different countries and dif -

ferent ages. For a l l ~ e o p l e s and for a l l times the Poetics has

become a handbook of dramatic principle. In dramatic theory

no less than in metaphysics and ethics i t is true that -





plays in thei r proper l ight .

Before proceeding to a statement of the problem le t us con

aider an aspect of Greek tragedy which enters into the question.

RELIGIOUS NATURE

OFGREEK TRAGEDY

•The history of a r t from i t s lowest mani

festat ions to i t s highest gives evidence of

i t s union and intimacy with rel igion• says

Father Donnelly in Art Principles In Literature (3). The evi-

dence of th is intimate union between a r t and religion is s t r i -

kingly clear in the Greek tragedy. I t was Greek religion which

gave bir th to tragedy, which fostered i t s development, and which

brought i t to i t s full-blown splendor in the Golden Age of

Greece. For among the Greeks the tragedy was not merely a form

of higher entertainment, but more especial ly an act of religious

worship. I t had i t s beginning in a lyr ic poem, called a dithy-

ramb, which was sung by a leader and a chorus before the a l ta r

of the god Dionysos (4). By a gradual process th is simple cere-

many was elaborated: action became more prominent than song, the

original leader was replaced by three actors , the chorus faded

into the background unt i l i t beCame the 'sympathetic spectator '

of the f i f th century tragedy. St i l l , though the form had

changed, the tragedy always retained i t s original nature; i t was

s t i l l a par t of the public worship of a religious fes t ival .

These circumstances of i t s origin and ~ e s e n t a t i o n explain the

strong rel igious flavor of the Greek tragedy which even the

casual reader cannot f a i l to noticea

After the tragic a rt had attained to i t s maturity



in Athens, i t was s t i l l only a t the solemn fest ivals of Dionysus that plays were exhibited.The representation of a tragedy was thus in atrue and proper sense an act of public worshiprendered by the State to one of i t s Gods. I fthe spi r i t of Greek drama is pre-eminently re -l igious, i t is therefore no more than we shouldexpect from a consideration of i t s origin and

history. (5)

And, i t might be added, the religious tone of Greek drama is no

more than we should expect from a consideration of the l i fe

which i t represents. I t is only reasonable that the important

part which the gods played in the every day l i fe of the or

dinary Greek should find ref lect ion in the drama. Greek tragedy

therefore, as an act of worship and as a ref lect ion of Greek lif4

received i ts dist inct ive tone from Greek religion.

Since th is is so, i t is small wonder that the tragedians

incorporated in thei r plays some of the elements of contem

poraryrel igious bel ief

which they found useful adjuncts for the

working out of their plots . I t must be remembered that the cur-

rent religious doctrines of f i f th century Greece were not the

lof ty speculations of the philosophers, but the t radi t ional

theology which had been crystal l ized by Homer in his epics of

the heroic age and handed down through the succeeding genera-

t iona.

Homer and Hesiod had long been the rel igiousschool-masters of Greece. The Golden Age borethem in Pindar and the t ragic poets able com-mentators and successors •••••••••• Franklyaccepting the t radi t ional polytheistic m y t ~ o -logy, they s t i l l made notable advances in 1tsinner i n t e ~ p r e t a t i o n . (6)

The tenets of th is t radi t ional polytheist ic rel igion which enter





I t is the purpose of th is thes is , therefore, to examine

the prophecies which occur in the tragedies of Sophocles in the

l ight of the principles enunciated in the Poetics fo£ t h ~ ~ U £ -I!.OJ!.e of det¥rminin,& what t h ~ mind of Ar!_s!_o,ll!_ .!.&.!. !:ith !:_e!.-

I!.e£.t ,lo th!_s el!_m!.n1.• There are two reasons for selecting the

plays of Sophocles as the subject of our study. In the f i r s t

place, he represents Greek tragedy a t i t s beet . He was a mas

te r not only of beautiful dict ion, but especial ly of ar t i s t ic

plot s tructure. In the second place, he was a favorite of

Aristot le . There can be no doubt of this in the mind of one

who reads the Poetics. Speaking of the at t i tude of Aristotle

towards Sophocles, Butcher saysJ

Sm;phocles he admires not for the purity of hisethical teaching or for his deep rel igiousteaching, but for the unity which pervades thestructure of his dramas, and the closely linked

sequence of parts which work up to an inevitableend. ( 7)

The solution of th is problem will affect our judgment of

the merits not merely of the tragedies of Sophocles, but also

of the plays of Aeschylus and Euripides. In thei r dramas, no

less than in those of Sophocles, we find prophecy. This may

be looked upon as an extr insic argument for the validi ty of

supra-natural knowledge. For i f three men, admittedly masters

of the t ragic ar t , repeatedly use prophecy as a source of t ra-

gic ef fec t , i t must be legitimate or the i r works would not be

considered master-pieces of tha t ar t . This conclusion, however,

is not quite jus t i f ied . \Vhen we say that thei r works are master

pieces we do not mean to say that they are perfect in every

u



respect. I t may be that , in spite of a violat ion of a law of

tragedy, they obtain thei r effect and not because of i t . So i t

is that even Aristot le , admitting, as he does, that Homer was

the master of the epic, frequently cr i t ic izes his work, pointing

out that the poem would have bet ter attained i t s effect by the

observance of the law than by i t s violat ion.

The solution of our problem has a modern significance also.

Although oracles and soothsayers are found only in the ancient

drama, they have a modern counter-part in the ghosts and witches

of Shakespeare. The witches and the ghost of Banquo in Macbeth,

the ghost of Hamlet's father , the ghost of Caesar - a l l have

knowledge which surpasses that of humans. Nor have modern com-

mentators over-looked the par t which this knowledge plays in

the Shakesperian drama. Concerning this element A.C.Bradley

remarks:Shakespeare also introduces the supernaturalinto some of his t ragedies; he introduces ghosts,and witches who have supernatural knowledge.This supernatural element certainly cannot inmoat cases, i f in any, be explained away as ani l lusion in the mind of one of the characters.And further , i t does contribute to the act ion,and is in more than one instance an indispensable part of i t . (8)

Since the principles of Aristot le are fundamental, not only to

ancient but also to modern tragedy, the answer to our question

involves the legitimacy and significance of the ghosts and

witches of Shakespeare or of whatever else of th is nature which

appears in modern drama.

In view of the fact that both the Poetics of Aristotle



and the tragedies of Sophocles have been fine-combed by com

mentators, i t is strange that the question of the dramatic

validi ty and the t ragic significance of prophecy has never been

broached. That modern commentators have noticed the s ignif i -

cance of the supra-natural knowledge in the playa of Shakes

peare has been pointed out above. An explanation of this over

sight on the part of the students of the Poetics may be found

in the fact that they would not consider i t within the scope

of their study since i t is not mentioned by Aris tot le . To those

who have studied the tragedies of Sophocles prophecy may have

seemed merely a ref lect ion of the rel igious nature of the Greek

drama. Whatever the explanation of thei r silence may be, i t is

certain that the question has not been considered by standard

commentators.

ORDER OF

TREATMENT

"Tragedy, then,• says Aris tot le , • is an imitation

of an action that is serious, complete, and of a

certain magnitude". (9) The definit ion of drama as

an ' imi ta t ion ' is an essent ia l point in the theory of Aris tot le .

The meaning of this term, however, i s by no means clear and has

given r ise to much discussion among commentators. In view of

this fact the f i r s t chapter wil l be devoted to an explanation

of this Aristotelian concept. Then, in the second chapter, the

prophecies in the playa of Sophocles wil l be examined for the

purpose of determinipg whether they would incur the censure of

Aristotle as violat ions of the principles of dramatic ' imita

t ion• . •But again, Tragedy is an imitation not only of a com-



plete action, ·out of events inspiring fear or pi ty• . (10}

This function of tragedy distinguishes i t from the other forms

of drama. Therefore, in the third chapter, the prophecies

wil l be studied with a view to learning whether they render

the action more terr ib le or p i t i fu l and, consequently, possess

special value for tragedy.



NOTES

1. 'flilliam .Tohn Courthope, Life In Poetry, Law In Taste,P• 191.

2. F. L. Lucas, Tragedy, ]& R e l a t i o n ! ~ Aris tot le 'sPoetics , p-. 11.

3 . Francis P . Donnelly, S • .T., A!:i_ Principles In Literature,P• 31.

4. Cf. R. C .Tebb, 'l'he Growth And Influence', :Jf ClassicalGreek Literature,-p; 157. -

5• .Tames Adams, ~ R e l i g i o u s Teachers Q[ Greece, P• 138.

6. George C. Ring, S • .T., Gods Of The Gentiles, P• 229.

7. s. H. Butcher, Aristot le ' s Theory ~ P o e t r y ~ ~All• P• 225.

8. A. C. Bradley, Shakesperean Tragedy, P• 14.

9. Poetics , 1449b 24-25. The t ranslat ion of the Poeticsused throughout is that of Butaher.

10. Ib id . , 1452a 1-3.



CHAPTER ONE

ARISTOTlE'S THEORY OF DRAMATIC 'IMITATION'

'IMITATION t Plato ' s answer to a fundamental problem in philo-AND

PHILOSOPHY sophy determined hie at t i tude towards art and

furnished his disc iple , Aris to t le , with a term

which was destined to become immortal in the theory of the

drama. The p.roble.trJ which confronted Plato was the apparent

ant i thesis between the testimony of his senses and that of his

inte l lect . His senses presented material being as inf ini te ly

varied and variable; his in te l lect perceived material being as

one and stable . To take an example: as he looked about him he

saw thousands of men, men who differed from one another in a

thousand ways; on the other hand, everybody spoke of 'man' and

predicated things of him as of one being. In br ief , the sense

images were many, but the in te l lectual concept, the ides, was

~ · This unity of concept was necessary for any knowledge,

since there could be no science of variable individuals; a l l

definit ion was of the universal . Pla to , therefore, 'solved'

the problem by assert ing the real i ty of the object of the in -

te l lec t and denying the real i ty of the objects of sense; the

l a t te r , he said, have merely the 'appearance' (phenomena) of

rea l i ty . Since the Ideas, the object of the in te l lec t , are the



only true rea l i t ies , they have separate existence; there exists

in a super-mundane world an Idea of everything that is found

in the universe. (1) The varied and variable objects of sense

perception are but shadows of these rea l i t ies , mere appearances

and nothing more. When our senses apprehend these appearances,

the rea l i ty , the ~ ' which we knew before our bir th , is re

called to our mind. Thus was the problem solved at the ex

pense of material being.

r la to ' s evaluation of a r t flowed logically from his philo

sophy. The a r t i s t , by the very nature of his sensible medium,

cannot at ta in to the portrayal of the non-sensible Idea; a l l

that he can do is to represent the outward appearances of things

material - which are themselves but shadows of real i ty ! He

is l i t t l e more than an animated camera; his work is an .!!!1-tat ion which is twice removed from t ruth and useless for knowledge of the universal . •The imitator or maker of the image

knows nothing of true existence; he knows appearances only" (2}

' Imitat ion•, then, is at once Plato 's definit ion of, and ac

cusation against , ar t .

1N.hen Aristot le came to define a r t he retained his master's

term of ' imita t ion ' , but. the meaning which he attached to i t

differed ' toto coelo' from that of Plato. An accurate concept

of the term as used by Aristotle is absolutely essentia l for a

clear understanding of his dramatic theory since ' imi ta t ion '

is the font from which a l l other principles flow as corollar ies.

But "Aristotelem nonnisi ex ipso Aristotele in te l l iges• - to



appreciate the significance of the word a knowledge of i t s

philosophical background is necessary; for , jus t as Pla to ' s

depreciation of a rt flowed from his answer to the problem of

the one and the many, so Aris tot le 's appreciation depended

upon his response to the same problem.

In his explanation of this seeming paradox Aristot le

denied neither element of the problem. According to him the

manifold objects of our senses are as real as the universal

of our in te l lect ; the testimony of our senses to mult ipl ici ty

is as true as the testimony of our in te l lect to unity. As a

matter of fact , there could be no knowledge of the universal

without perception of the individual since the universal does

not exis t separated from individuals, but is found in the par

t icular things of sense (3). The explanation of th is apparent

contradiction is found in the consti tution of material beings

which are apprehended by the senses.

ln the individual substance Aristot le distinguished two

elements, or principles of being - matter ( U ' > . ~ and form ( £ . 1 ~ o s ,J.-\.Of'l>l\) (4) . Matter is that out of which a l l material substance

is made; form is that into which the being is made. Matter is

potency - the indeterminate substratum common to a l l material

being; form is act - the principle of detern1ination by which

the substance is made to be what i t is . They are not to be

conceived as separate beings, but as principles of being; matter

cannot exis t without form, nor form without matter. Their union

consti tutes the concrete exist ing substance. By form the sub-



stance is consti tuted in i ta specif ic nature (man, dog, t ree ,

e tc . ) and from the form come a l l the perfections proper to that

nature; from the matter which receives the form arise the in-

dividuating qua l i t ie s , the imperfections, and the l imitat ions

of the substance. Therefore, a l l things of the same species

have the same form which is individuated by the matter which

receives i t . Thus, because of i ta substantial form th is being

is a dog and not a cat ; because of the matter which receives

the form th is dog is Fide and not Rover. By reason of the

form Fide should have a l l the perfections which are proper to

a dog, but because of the imperfections arising from the matter

which receives the form, the potencies are never completely

actualized - and Fido is jus t Fide S

The individual thing, then, which i s apprehended by the

senses has two principles of being - matter and form.

The form, then, considered apart from the matter,is the essence of the object as far as in te l lec-tua l knowledge is concerned; for in te l lec tualknowledge has for i t s object the universal , andsince matter is the principle of individuation,and form the principle of specif icat ion, theconclusion of the inquiry as to the object ofin te l lec tual knowledge is that matter and theindividual qual i t ies arising from matter belong

to sense-knowledge, while the form alone, whichis universal , belongs to in te l lec tual knowledge. (5)

The individual thing with i t s individuating qual i t ies and im

perfect ions which arise from the matter is apprehended by the

senses. The mind spontaneously prescinds from the indivi

duating notes of the matter and abstracts those notes which

are essent ia l to the being; in other words, the in te l lec t grasps



. - •

the form, which form, as we saw, is universal because i t is the

same in a l l members of the species. The abstracted form, how-

ever, is only the material , or direct universal; the formal,

or reflexive, universal is had when the mind compares th is ab-

s t ract concept with other beings and perceives that i t can be

predicated of a large number of them in the same way; then only

is the form real ized to be universal . Consequently, although

that which is universal is found in the individuals of sense,

~ u n i v e r s a l i t can exist only in the mind. In th is way, ac-

cording to Aris tot le , can there be one and many; the indivi-

duals of sense perception are real , in fact they are the prime

r e a l i ~ y since upon them is founded the universal of the in-

t e l lec t . As Turner notes (6), the difference between Plato and

Aristot le l ies in the fact that , whereas the former separated

Idea from phenomena, the l a t t e r merely distinguished form from

matter.

With respect to our ideas an important fact must be noted.

Although by our in i t i a l abstract ion we perceive the form, we

grasp i t merely in i t s broadest determinations; i t is only by

experience with various individuals of the species that we come

to a clear and comprehensive idea of the nature, or form, of

the being. By an unconscious comparison of the individuals we

gradually discern more notes which are common to a l l members

of the species and therefore arise from the common form. In

other words, by experience we f i l l in our f i r s t sketchy outline

of the form; we come to see bet ter a l l the things which were



implied in the original concept. Although a chi ld 's idea of

human nature is true and i s suff ic ient to enable him to die-

tinguish man from a l l other beings, s t i l l there is a vast dif-

ference between his idea and that which a venerable arm-chair

philosopher has derived from the r ich experience of a l i fe- t ime.

'IMITATION'AND ART

In Aris tot le 's theory, then, the a r t i s t is a man,

who, by r ich experience and especially by his

peculiar gi f t of perception, possesses a deep ins ight into the

nature of things; he has acquired a clear and comprehensive

idea of the forms; he knows the permanent, essent ia l possi-

bi l i t i es of things. His mind, however, does not rest in the con

templation of the abstract form; h is imagination forms a pic-

ture of the being.!..!! i t would be i f i t corresponded to the idea,

i f the form ~ completely to actualiz.e the matter. His men

ta l picture is be t te r than the rea l thing because in i t the

form i s unimpeded by the imperfections of the matter which

receives i t in actual existence; h is mental picture tends to

be universal because in i t the universal form is less impeded

by the individuating matter - the form i s resplendent; the being

of his imagination is more l ike the prototype in the Mind of

God than is the thing of real existence. 'rhis mental image of

perfection the a r t i s t t r i es to reproduce in his ar t i s t i c medium,

whether i t be stone, color, sound, or language. Through th is

reproduction he wishes to ca l l up in the imagination of others

the perfect ion which he has conceived. Therefore, he fashions

his medium and creates an i l lus ion , a semblance, of the ideal



being of his mind:

Art •••••••• creating af te r a pattern exist ingin the mind, must be skil led in the use ofi l lus ion. By th is alone can i t give coherenceto i t s creations and impart to i t s f ict ions ana i r of real i ty . (7)

Therefore, a work of a r t is an ' imitat ion ' - but i t is

not an imitat ion of individuals; i t is an ' imi ta t ion ' of the i r

form, the universal principle of perfection, which is found in

each individual and apprehended by the idea. In the phi lo

sophy of Aristot le an ' imi ta t ion ' is not a copy of the thing,

but a creation, in some medium, of a l ikeness which corresponds

to the idea of the being. As Butcher puts i t (8) , the ' imi-

ta t ion ' is an "idealized reproduction•. I t is a picture of the

thing as i t would be i f i t were free from the imperfections

aris ing from the matter; i t is a. manifestation of the eternal

possibi l i t ies of the form. '.fherefore Aristotle says that the

' imi ta t ion ' •tends to express the universal• (9), that i t makes

things ' be t t e r ' (10), •as they should be• (11). For him:

Fine a r t was no longer twice removed from thet ru th of things; i t was the manifestation ofa higher t ru th , the expression of the universa l which is not outside of and apart from thepar t icular . The work of ar t was not a semblance

opposed to rea l i ty , but the image of a real i tywhich is penetrated by the idea, and throughwhich the idea shows nJOre apparent than in theactual world. (12)

The ' imi ta t ion ' i s not a photograph of Fido, but a picture of

what Fido would be i f he carne up to the idea of a dog, i f the

form of dog were completely actualized in Fido. Consequently,

•the ideal is the real , but r id of consradict ions, unfolding



i t se l f according to the laws of i ta own being• (13).

For the ancient Greeks only one object was worthy of

' imi ta t ion ' - the one extolled by Sophocles in the well-known

l ine of the Antigone: •Many wonders there be, but naught more

wondrous than man" (14). Man, and man only, was considered by

Aristot le and his contemporaries as the proper subject of ar t .

Now, man is a l iv ing being and, according to Aris to t le , " l i fe

consists in act ion• (15). Consequently, he defines the object

of a r t not merely as 'men' but 'men in act ion ' (16). I t is

evident, moreover, that when action is predicated of man i t

includes not only the external words and deeds which spring

from his free wil l , but also h is thoughts and emotions. Any

a r t , then, which s t r ives to ' imi ta te ' man must be capable of

reproducing in i t s medium there various aspects of human act ion;

otherwise i t cannot present a true picture of man •

The mediums which are employed by the dif ferent ar ts are

capable of doing th is in varying degrees. Although the ex

pression of the face and the at t i tude of the body are natural

ref lect ions of emotion, s t i l l , painting and sculpture, dealing

as they do with inanimate color and stone, can catch but a

moment in the l i fe of man and make that moment representat ive

of the whole. .Music, i t is t rue , has peculiar power for ex

pressing emotion, but i t can give only a vague pJOrtrayal of the

other aspects of human l i f e . Poetry surpasses a l l in i t s power

of expression and was, for Aris to t le , the a r t ' par excellence ' .

The medium which i t employs is language; through th is the poet



can ca l l up in the imagination of others not merely a passing

moment but a whole 'chapter of l i f e ' (17); he can reproduce

not merely emotion, but also deeds and character.

The original which i t ref lects is human actionand character in a l l the i r diverse modes of

manifestation; no other a r t has equal range ofsubject matter, or can present so complete andsatisfying an image of i t s original . (18)

In this same medium of poetry, however, there are different

ways, or manners, of reproducing human l i f e , Aristotle points

out:

For the medium being the same, and the objectsthe same, the poet may imitate by narrat ion ••••••• or he may present a l l his characters asl iving and ffioving before us. (19)

Poetry, then, may be ei ther narrat ive or dramatic. I t is th is

l a t t e r method of presentation which Aristotle considers the

best , the way of comedy and tragedy, in which •speech has i t s

counterpart in speech, and, i f the play is put on the stage,

action is rendered by action• (20) Comedy and tragedy have

the same dramatic form but different subject-matter; comedy

presents the l ighter aspects of l i f e , tragedy the more serious.

'IMITATION'

ANDTRAGEDY

•Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action

that is serious, complete, and of a certain

magnitude; • • • • • • • • • • in the form of action, not

of narrat ive". (21) t imi ta t ion ' , as we saw, does not consist

in copying the individual; i t consists in reproducing an image

which corresponds to the ~ , to the form, of the thing.

Tragedy, therefore, as an ' imi ta t ion ' , must reproduce an action



which corresponds to the idea of man, to human nature. ~dramatist ~ fashion ~ sequence of action - a plot f - which,

according 1Q.. ..tllit nature of !'!!!!!.• would be the probable ££_ E!,.-

cessary resul t of ~ certa in s i tuat ion . "It is not the function

of the poet to relate what has happened, but what may happen,

what is possible according to the law of probabil i ty or ne-

cessity" (22). The poet is not interested in what a man in

that si tuat ion actually did or experienced, what rea l ly hap-

pened, but what, as a ~ ' he should have done or experienced.

The poet 's plot , his Marrangement of incidents• (23), presents

h is idea of the probable human consequence of the original

si tuat ion. Therefore the plot is the most important element

of the t ragedy- i t i s ~ ' imita t ion ' . The qual i t ies which

Aristot le demands in i t s structure are such that , i f they are

absent, the plot fa i ls to be an ' imitat ion' and is merely achronicle.

Firs t and foremost, Aristot le ins is ts that the incidents

be arranged •according to the law of probabil i ty an.d necessity'*

(24). This is the fundamental principle of poetic ' imi ta t ion ' ;

i t is •a law relat ing primarily to s t r u c t u r e ~ not to subject

matter, and one of Aris tot le 's most valuable contributions to

l i terary theory" (25). According to this principle each in-

cident of the plot must follow what has gone before, not merely

in point of time, but as i ta probable or necessary effect .

What happens in the drama must not happen by chance, but must

be caused by the antecedents. nrt makes a l l the difference



whether any given event is a case of 'propter hoc' or 'post

hoc' " (26}. 'rhe action of the plot must be an unbroken chain

of causali ty. Therefore, a drama will not be an ' imi ta t ion '

i f the poet presents a s i tuat ion and then proceeds to recount

a series of unrelated incidents; the result is an epeisodic

plot which Aristot le just ly abhorred. *Of a l l plots and ac-

t ions the epeisodic are the worst. I ca l l a plot ' epeisodic '

in which the episodes or acts succeed one another without p r o ~bable or necessary sequence• (27).

Since the drama is concerned with men, the causal sequence

of the action must be the resul t of the men engaged (28). Now,

men are free beings; human action is determined by the wil l ,

influenced by the emotions. When a l l the requis i tes for action

are present they are not by that fact determined to a speci-

f ic act ; they can act or not act , they can act one way or ano-

ther. Hence, as ~ o o d b r i d g e observes, in the drama the •subject

matter i s the action and reaction of the human will" (29)& what

Oedipus says and does is what he wills . In i t s choice, how-

ever, the wil l is influenced by a motive which inclines i t to

choose one thing rather than another. In a sense, then, the

motive.the reason which impels a man to do what he does, can

be said to be the cause of human action. Therefore, causal

sequence is had in the drama when each incident provides a

motive for what follows.

I t is in the determination of the proper human motivation

that the personali ty of the poet comes into play as the creative



factor in the t imita t ion• . The causal sequence of probabil i ty

or necessi ty depends upon his knowledge of human nature. Given

such a man and such a s i tuat ion , the poet must represent a

natural human reaction. His characters, i t is t rue , wil l have

stronger wil ls and more violent emotions than the general run

of men, they will have a ful ler humanity, but they should not

have a different humanity. This l ~ t t e r wil l be the case i f

the poet portrays men whose actions are prompted by motives

which are odd or freakish, or whose reactions are d i s ~ r o p o r -

t ionate to the motive. The reaction of a character should not

be an idiosyncrasy of an individual , but the ref lect ion of his

human nature. ~ i t h the man whose motives are narrow and per-

sonal we have nothing in common; i t is only when the deeds and

feelings are t ruly human that a l l men can make themselves one

with the characters.

Excessive individualism, l ike the l a tes t fashion,wil l be quaint and incongruous on the morrow.Homer liYes e terna l because through strangenames and strange language and strange costumeswe see our own sun and f ields and ocean and skyand put our f ingers on a pulse which reg is tersthe beat of a heart throbbing as ours. (30)

'.'/hen the motivation is baaed on human nature the causal i ty wil l

not have to be explained to the reader or audience; for , being

men, they wil l appreciate the motives of the characters , they

wil l real ize what they think and fee l , and consequently they

wil l understand what they do.

Nature is a language ~ 1 1 can understand and human

nature is a language a l l must and do understand.·:rhen lament was made over the body of Patroklos,



the elegy of Briseis s t i r red a l l , •and thereonthe women wailed, in semblance for Patroklos,but each for her own woe". Similar is the appeal of a r t where in the semblance of somethingelse , each sees what belongs to se l f . (31)

The second important principle of Aris tot le is that of

unity - nothing should be included in the drama which has not

an essent ia l re la t ion to the end towards which the causal

sequence is working. The plot should portray the working out

of the i n i t i a l si tuat ion to i t s logica l conclusion without any

los t motion. Incidents which are not essent ia l l inks in the

chain should be ruthlessly excluded. "For a thing whose pre-

sence or absence makes no visible difference, is not an or-

ganic par t of the whole" (32). There is no place for side

act ion, which, whatever i t s own in t r insic in teres t may be, has

only a tenuous connection with the princ ipa l act ion. £verything

must be careful ly subordinated to the main i ssue. unity willbe achieved when every incident is an essent ia l par t of a

sequence which converges on a defini te point .

I f a l l the incidents are directed to a single end and a l l

are bound together by the causal i ty of perfect motivation, the

action of the plot will const i tute a perfec t whole:

A whole is that which has a beginning, a middleand an end. A beginning is that which does noti t s e l f follow anything by causal necessi ty , butaf te r which something natural ly is or comes tobe. An end, on the contrary, is that which i t -se l f natural ly follows some other thing, ei therby necessi ty , or as a ru le , but has nothing fo l -

lowin6 i t . A well constructed plo t , therefore,must nei ther begin nor end at hap-hazard, but

conform to these principles . (33)

This whole wil l represent the 'working out ' of the i n i t i a l



si tuat ion according to probable or necessary human motivation

and the conclusion wil l thereby be. seen to have -oeen implici t

in the opening s i tua t ion . :&,or, when the -oeginning is the cause

of the middle and the middle is the cause of the end, the end

wil l be the effec t of the beginning and the resul t wil l be one

action which i s an organic whole; i t wil l be the process by

which a cause at ta ins i t s ef fec t , each incident being a step

in the process.

That, then, is the essence of t ragic ' imi ta t ion ' : a causal

sequence forming one whole act ion which is an image of what

should happen according to the nature of man. What the poet

says in effec t is th i s : these characters are human beings; by

reason of the i r nature they think, and fee l , and determine the ir

words and deeds accordingly. I f they are placed in such and

such a s i tuat ion , the probable or necessary effec t of such

characters operating according to the i r nature wil l be that

which is presented in the conclusion. According to Bywater -

The action in such a story is a r r ~ ~ J.\loo.. K"'-'-~ ' > - ~ , i . e . a whole with a beginning, middle, andend; each incident resul t ing from something thatgoes before i t , and the entire ser ies from the6 tate Of things pre SUpposed 1 aS the ~ r ~ ~ Of the

whole, a t the beginning. ( ~ 4 )The plo t , therefore , const i tutes an action which is a perfect

expression of the human nature of the characters. I t is an

' imi ta t ion ' based, not on an individual of the species , but on

his nature.

Therefore, th is ' imi ta t ion ' of l i fe which the poet creates

i s , according to Aris to t le , ' be t t e r ' (.8t.)I.T{wv) ( ~ 5 ) than rea l



l i f e . The word ' be t te r ' is to be understood not in the moral,

but in the ontological , sense. For i f the probabil i ty of the

sequence demands i t , sin may be represented - but i t should be

represented as i t t ru ly is : a violat ion of the proper order and

not the ful f i l lment of i t . Ontologically the drama is bet ter

beaause i t s action is a bet ter expression of human nature than

is found in rea l l i fe . In real l i fe a s i tuat ion rarely, i f

ever, works out according to the logical human consequence.

Due to chance and unmotivated action which springs from the im-

perfection of the individual , a state of a f fa i r s , which na-

tural ly ought to lead to a definite conclusion, i l logical ly

resul ts in i t s opposite. From his knowledge of human nature

the poet constructs an image of l i fe which presents things as

they ought to be. "The poet and the his torian differ not by

writing in verse or in prose. The work of Herodotus might beput into verse, and i t would s t i l l be a species of his tory,

with metre no leas than without i t . The true difference is

that one re la tes what has happened, the other what may happen"

(36). Poetry, therefore, is , in the words of Father Donnelly

a dramatizing, a staging of l i f e , to be judged,

not by i t s correspondence with fact , but by i t sown plausible and convincing rat ional izat ion. (37)

The ' imi ta t ion ' does not copy l i f e , but presents i t s "poetic

truth" (38). Therefore, the t ru th of the drama is a higher

t ru th than that of real l i f e ; i t is based on an immutable

essence, the nature of man, and is therefore always t rue. 'l'he

action of rea l l i f e , depending as i t does on the imperfect



individual and the vagaries of chance, is as variable as those

two elements. Hence the false posit ion of those who claim that

they are presenting real i ty when they chronicle the sordid ad-

ventures of an individual. This is realism; true f ic t ion i s

rea l i ty .

Not only is the dramatic ' imi ta t ion ' bet ter than rea l l i f e ,

but i t also ' tends to express the universal ' . •Poetry, there

fore, is a more philosophical and a higher thing than history:

for poetry tends to express the universal , history the par

t icular . By the universal I mean how a certain ( ~ 9 ) person

wil l on occasion speak or ac t , according to the law of proba

bi l i ty or necessityn (40). Poetry presents human nature and

human nature is universal; the poet t i m i t ~ t e s ' not the in-

dividual, the singular, but the idea of the individual, the

universal . The observation of Bywater is pert inent :Hence i t follows that the incidents in the poeticstory are not only possible but also always poss ible , because they are such as may or must happen at any time, whenever the man and the circumstances are found together. (41)

Consequently, the drama presents in the concrete a law of l i fe

which philosophy would phrase in abstract terms. For example,

the philosopher, from his observation Qf individuals, mightI

formulate the t ruth that ' inordinate ambition 1 leads to ruin ' ;

Shakespeare fashioned a l i fe - that of Macbeth - in which the

working out of this law is seen more clearly and logically than

i t is in real l i fe . The ' imitat ion•, therefore, corresponds to

the idea. I t must not be thought, however, tha t the poet star te



from the abstract idea and t r i es to fashion a par t icu lar story

to exemplify i t . That is the process of al legory. Rather, the

imagination of the poet presents to him a concrete case which,

because of i t s perfect human causali ty, corresponds to the idea.

I t is only when the varied elements of thear t i s t ' s : experience have fused themselves intoa unity 'by having a well-motivated beginning,middle, and end that the mind feels the beautyof i t s vision. (42)

From what has been said concerning the nature of dramatic

' imi ta t ion ' i t is evident that the two elements which are

ut ter ly a t variance with i t are chance and unmotivated act ion.

The probabil i ty or necessi ty of the sequence i s the very es-

sence of the ' imi ta t ion ' ; whatever violates this tends to des-

troy i t s value as an ideal and universal representat ion of l i f e .

Chance, by i t s very defini t ion, is unpredictable and i s the

veryant i thes is

of the logical sequence which renders the ac-t ion of the drama universal . A thing that happens by chance is

in no sense probable or necessary; i t is decidedly individual

and hence has no place in the realm of ar t . In the f ie ld of

human action unmotivated act iv i ty , or act ion that is not auf-

f ic ient ly motivated, fa l l s under the head of chance; for , when

there is no apparent cause for an act ion i t i s jus t ly ascribed

to chance.



NOTES

1. •For Plato the non-sensual nature of things isthe only true real i ty , which is to be distinguishedfrom thei r sensual phenomena. The Ideas are for himnot mere things of thought, as Antisthenes consideredthem to be, but rea l i t i es . There are ideas of everything possible: not merely of things, but of qual i t iestoo, and relat ions and ac t iv i t ies ; not only of natural things, but of the products of a r t , and notonly of valuable things but of bad and worthlessthings. ••••••••••••• A ll learning and knowledge cons i s t s in the recollection by the soul of the ideaswhen i t perceives the things of sense•. EduardZeller , Outlines Of ~ H i s t o r y Of Greek PhilosoQhy,

P• 130.

2. Benjamin Jowett, !h.!. Republic of P-lato {Translated),P• 306.

3. Cf. William Turner, History Of Philosophy, P• 132for a br ief and accurate summary of Aristo t l e ' s Logic.

4. Ib id . , p. 137. Much of this matter is taken fromTurnerts explanation of Aris tot le ' s theoryof matter and form.

5. ~ · , P• 133.

6. ~ · • P• 138.

7. s. H. Butcher, Aris tot le 's Theory Of P o e ~ r y ~ F i n eArt, P• 128.

8. Ibid . , P• 153.

9. .Poetics, 145lb 6-7.

10. Ibid . , 146lb 10.

11. Ibid . , 1459b 35.

12. s. H. Butcher, Aristot lets Theory Q! Poetry And Fine

.A!:.t• p .. 160 •

13. ~ · • P• 151 .14. Antigone, L.332. All t ranslat ions of the plays of



Sophocles are by F. Storr , Sophocles. LoebClassical Library.

_. ,

15. Poet ics, 1450a 17 \o Jt. ~ ~ o ~ ) ;>ev Jrf..\)t• ' e a - T ~ v .16. Ibid . , 1447b 30 _M l M . o v v - T o ~ . , C. I I -

0 1 ,NI .I_M.OV_M.f .vC>t ITfotTTOV'tolS,

17. •Ma.rgoliouth's phrase, "a chapter of l i f e" , i l luminates the meaning, since i t includes whatthe hero does ~ w h a t happens to him.•W. Hamilton Fyfe, Translation Of The PoeticsOf Aris to t le , Loeb Classical Library, P• 22 -commentary on 1449b 24.

18. s. H. Butcher, Aris tot le 's Theory Of P o e t r y ~ FineArt, P• 138.

19. Poet ics, 1448a 20-24.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

s. H. Butcher, Aris tot le 's Theory Q!Poetry ~ F i n eArt, P• 138.

Poet ics, 1449b 24-2?.

Ib id . , 1451a 38-39.

Ibid . ,1450a 4-51-

Atfw f ~ ~ ~ v 0 o v TouTov ' 1 - r ~ v<J ( ; v 0 t..G \ V' T W v Tf f A 'f _M. . { T .....> v,

.... ~ ?' ' 7 ~Ibid . , 145la 121- K < A I ~ To € . . t J < O ~ 'Y\. To o { V J . . . ~ ) o { c t l o v ,

J . W. H. Atkins, Literary Criticism In Antiquity, vol .I ,P• 88.

Poet ics, 1452a 21-22.

Ibid . , 145lb 33-35.

Cf. s. H. Butcher, Aris tot le 's Theory Of P o e t r y ~Fine Art, P• 354.

Elisabeth Woodbridge, The Drama - ~ l a w A n d ~Technique, p . x i i i .

Francis P. Donnelly, S.J. , Art Principles In Literature,P• 12.

Ibid . , P• 16.

Poet ics, 145la 34-36.



33. Ibid •• 1550b 26-35.

34. Ingram Bywater, Aristotle On 1!1!..£1 Of Poetry,P• 187 - commentary on 145la 36.

35. Poet ics, 146lb 10.

36. Ib id . , 145la 3 9 - 145lb 5.

37. Francis P. Donnelly, S. J . , !£.i Principles .!!!._ Li t • ra

ture , P• 137.

38. Cf. Elisabeth Woodbridge, The Drama - I ts Law And I tsTechnique, p. 1- "In the l ight of s u e s - - - passages, the word "Imitat ion• takes onanother significance from that we might a t

f i r s t be inclined to give i t •••••••••••and i t seems bet ter to subst i tute the broader·term, "poetic t ru th• . •

39. The word employed by Aristot le is the indefinite adject ive ~ ~ • Butcher t ranslates this word•of a certain type". Although this is apossible rendit ion, the more l i t e ra l t ranslat ion "a certain person" seems preferable.

40. Poetics , 145lb 5-9.

41. Ingram Bywater, Aristot le On The !.!:,1 Of Poetry, p. 187:commentary on 145la 36.

42. Francis P ~ Donnelly, S . ~ •• ~ P r i n c i p l ~ _ [ In Literature , p • 13 7 •



CHAPTER TKO

DRAMATIC VALIDITY OF PROPHECY

In Chapter One we have seen that tragedy, to be an ' imi

t a t ion ' of l i f e , must be constructed according to certa in de

f in i te principles. I t is the purpose of th is chapter to

examine the prophecies in the plays of Sophocles in the l igh t

of those pr incip les . In th is sect ion, therefore , we sha l l

invest igate the dramatic validi ty of prophecy.

THE PROBLEM Prophecy, in general , may be defined as the an

nouncement of t ruths which cannot be known by

man in a natural way. 'I'hus, dis tant events which are beyond

the ken of man, past events of which there is no record or

knowledge, and future events which depend upon the wil l of man

or of a supra-natural agent - a l l f a l l within the scope of pro

phecy. Although in i t s popular sense the word prophecy is re-

s t r ic ted to future events, i t is used here in i t s wider, but

proper sense which also includes past and dis tant events. Since

such knowledge cannot be at ta ined by the natura l facul t ies of

man, prophecy evidently const i tutes an in te l lec tual miracle.

Therefore, is supposes a supra-natural inte l l igence which com

municates th is knowledge to the person or persons who an-

nounce the events.



In the theology of the ancient Greek re l igion the anthro

pomorphic gods,to,_whom was at tr ibuted "the power of seeing a l l

thingsK (1) were the ult imate source of prophecy. The channels

through which they communicated the i r prophetic knowledge to

men were the oracles and the soothsayers. The former were

shrines of the gods where men could propose the i r questions to

the dei ty through his of f ic ia l servants and from these l a t t e r

receive the response of the god, the ' o rac l e ' . The l a t t e r were

gif ted men who received the i r insight into the future ei ther

by direct inspirat ion of the gods or through the ' a r t ' of

divination. These ins t i tu t ions of prognostication were of an-

cient origin and were thriving even a t the time of Homer as

T y ~ e r points outs

Prophets hear the voice of the gods, know the i rwi l l , and thus are acquainted with the past , thepresent , and the future. Guided by Zeus andApollo, they are competent to guide the af fa i r sof men. The oracles at Dodona and Delphi a l-ready exis t in the Homeric age, and individualsand nations go to them to learn the wil l of thegods. (2)

In the t ragedies of the Greeks we have ample evidence that the

dramatists availed themselves freely of this element of re -

l igious ~ e l i e f and wove the prophecies of the oracles and

soothsayers into the pattern of the i r p lo ts .

Now, i f Aris tot le were questioned concerning the dramatic

validi ty of th is element, i t is certa in that he would not have

excluded i t on the grounds that the prophecies involve anthro

~ o m o r p h i cgods

whonever did and never could exis t .

Hewas

probably the f i r s t to grasp the fundamental notion that poetry



deals not with fact but with f ic t ion . In his Poet ics (3) he

s ta tes that i t is perfect ly legi t imate fo r the poet to take as

the basis of his story an impossible supposition - which he

cal ls a l T ~ ~ - r o v - ' t ) t . u c ) o ~ - provided that the sequence which is

bui l t on that assumption follows ra t ional ly . For example, a

poet might postulate as an i n i t i a l assumption the fancy that

a l l men have wings; granting him th is T i f ~ T c n l ' f t \ > ~ o ~ , Aris-

to t le would merely demand tha t the action portrayed be such

as would be natural to winged men. The s tory, he would say, i s

evidently impossible ( ~ ~ ~ v o ~ . . T o v ) , but , under the assumption, i t

is not improbable ( : ~ o r o ~ and hence is a true ' imi ta t ion• .

Therefore, to return to the matter in question, i t might be

taken as an i n i t i a l assumption that there are anthropomorphic

gods and that they prophesy to men through oracles and sooth-

sayers. Hence, mere lack of conformity with fact does not

inval idate the prophecies of the Greek t ragedies .

lf Aris to t le , however, would not exclude Greek prophecy

because i t was impossible, he would certa inly condemn i t i f i t

rendered the action improbable. I t has been demonstrated in

the f i r s t chapter that the very essence of the dramatic ' imi-

t a t ion ' is the causal sequence of human motivation. 'llhen each

incident of the plot follows the preceding one as i t s probable

or necessary human consequence then only is the conclusion the

logical outcome of the original s i tuat ion , then only is the

plot one whole action which is an ideal and universal repro-

duction of l i fe as i t ought to be according to the nature of



.

man. I f cer tain incidents in the plot are uncaused or are

caused by some agency extr insic to the human wil l , then the

plo t is no longer a presentation of the universal and ideal in

human l i f e , but merely a chronicle of an individual 's ex-

periences and jus t ly merits Pla to ' s condemnation of a ' copy ' .

Without any hesi ta t ion , then, i t can be said that Aris to t le ' s

norm for judging the dramatic val idi ty of prophecy would be i t s

relat ion to the essent ia l chain of human causal i ty .

~ o w , there seems to be a strong antecedent probabi l i ty

that prophecy does violate the dramatic sequence. the very

concept of prophecy implies that ~ g o d s , through the medium

of oracles and soothsayers, communicate to ~ a n a knowledge which

he could not at ta in by natural means. Therefore, by i t s very

nature , prophecy involves the gods in the action of the drama.

But Aris to t le expl ic i t ly condemned that other element of Greek

tragedy which involved the gods in the act ion, namely, the

d e u s ~ machina.(4) Not infrequently a personal par t in the

play was assigned to a god who addressed the other characters

from the 'machina ' , "a crane-like contrivance for swinging out

a dei ty , who would thus appear in mid a i r" (5) . In th is par t

which the gods played from the 'machina' Aris tot le saw a vio

la t ion of the causal sequence. St i l l , there would seem to be

l i t t l e difference between th is and prophecy - in the former

the gods address men in person, in the l a t t e r they speak to

them through oracles and soothsayers. l f the 'deus ex machina'

viola tes the causal sequence, w h y ~ not prophecy also ?



I t is the answer to tha t question which we shal l seek

in the following pages. In the f i r s t place, we shal l t ry to

learn why the 'deus ex machina' violates the dramatic causali ty

in Sophocles; having established tha t , we shal l be in a posit ion

to see whether prophecy fa l l s under the same condemnation.

'DEUS EX MACHINA' In the seven extant plays of Sophocles thereIN

SOPHOCLES are two instances of the 'deus ex machina':

Athena in the Ajax and Heracles in the

Philoctetea (6). Significantly enough, those two occur in plays

treating of the Trojan war - a time when the gods mingled

freely with thei r warrior sons, i f Homer is to be believed.

For the purpose of our study i t will be sufficient to examine

the part which Heracles plays in the Philoctetes since that is

a typical example of the 'deus ex machina' of the Greek t ra -

gedies.

~ i n e years before the play begins the Greek warrior Philoc-

te tes had been cruelly marooned on a desert island by the Greek

chieftains because of a noisome wound which he had suffered on

the voyage to Troy, a wound which had made him an object of dis-

gust to the host. In his possession, however, he had retained

the miraculous bow and arrows which had been given to him by

Eeracles. During the siege of Troy the prophet Helenua de-

clared to the Greeks that they would neve take the city un t i l

they had brought to thei r assistance Philoctetes and his re-

no•vned bow. This work was undertaken by the wily Odysseus who

persuaded the youthful Neoptolemus, son of Achilles who had



been the closest fr iend of Phi loc te tes , to accompany and

aid him. When the play opens we find Odysseus outl ining the

'modus agendi ' for Neoptolemua: the l a t t e r is to make known to

hiloctetes that he is the son of Achilles and, under the pre-

text of conveying the sufferer to his home in Greece, is to get

him aboard the ship; once aboard he will be aped to Troy, even

against his wil l . .Neoptolemus rebels against th is double-dealin

but for the sake of the warring Achaians re luctant ly consents.

The strategem succeeds to the extent that N e o p t o l e n ~ u s gains

possession of the precious bow and arrows, but when he declines

to res tore them and confesses the true s tate of af fa i r s , Philoc-

te tes is adamant in his re fusa l to accompany the youth and aid

the Greeks who had t reated him so badly. Neoptolemus and

Odysseus are about to depart without him when the former, moved

by the sufferings of Philoctetes and overcome with shame at his

part in the t ransact ion, res tores the bow and arrows and agrees,

sincerely th is time, to return to Greece with the aff l ic ted

warrior. ~ h e n they are set t ing out for the boat, however, an

unexpected incident occurs which completely reverses the i r in

tentions - the demi-god Heracles appears to them, bearing a

command from Zeus1

Go not yet t i l l thou has heardSon of Poeas, f i r s t my word:Heracles to thee appears,His; the voice that th r i l l s thine ears .'Tis for thy sake I have come,Leaving my Olympian home.

l ~ n d a t e from high zeus I bring

To forbid thy journeying:Hear the wil l of heaven's King.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •



• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •Go with yon man to Ilium. There f i r s tThou shal t be healed of thy grievous sore;Then,chosen as the champion of the host ,With these my arrows thou shal t pierce

to the heartPar is , guil ty cause of a l l that woe. (7)

With such an expl ic i t order from the gods there is l i t t l e l e f t

for Philoctetes to do except to put aside his wrath and join

his former comrades in the storming of the leagured ci ty . And

so a l l i s well because of • the god a t whose decree a l l was

ordered" (8}.

Two things must be noted about th is appearance of Heracles.

In the f i r s t place, as an incident of the plo t , i t can in no

sense be said to be the probable human consequence of what has

gone before. 1'he app.earance of Heracles certa inly does not

evolve out of the will of the characters , but is something in-

jected 'ab extr inseco ' . I t is an arb i t rary element which is

nei ther probable nor necessa.ry in the course of the human

act ion. In the second place, i t diverts the natura l course of

t h ~ action and thereby brings about a conclusion which is not

the probable or necessary resu l t of the i n i t i a l si tuat ion ac-

cording to the characters of Philoctetes and heoptolemus.

I t is through the intervention of the deifiedHeracles that the aim with which Odysseus andNeoptolemus came to Lemnoa - to secure Philocte tes and his bow for the f inal overthrow ofTroy - gains i t s fulfi l lment. Apart from thatintervention the issue would have been far otherthan that contemplated a t the outset of the

act ion. (9)

I f the story had been allowed to run i t s natural course, the

logica l conclusion would have been the departure of both



Philoctetes and Neoptolemus for Greece. But zeus, through

Heracles, commands otherwise and so the act ion is directed to

an unnatural conclusion.

From th is character is t ic example of the 'deus ex machina'

i t can readi ly be seen why the gods violate the causal se-

quence when they are introduced into the act ion as personal

agents. ' rheir appearances, being independent of human cau-

sa l i ty , are uncaused incidents; the i r commands, suppressing

free play of human motivation, cause the denouement. Therefore,

the 'deus ex machina' in the Greek t ragedy was a miraculous

means £! ext r ins ic determination and as such was condemned by

Aristot le :

I t is therefore evident that the unravell ing ofthe plo t , no less than the complication, mustar ise out of the plot i t s e l f , i t must not bebrought about by the 'Deus ex Nachina' . •••••••••• 7ithin the action there must be nothingi r ra t iona l . I f the i r ra t iona l cannot be excluded, i t should be outside the scope of thetragedy. (10)

I t is from th is usage of the Greek t ragedians that the expressio

'deus ex machina' has come to s ignify any i r ra t iona l element

in f ict ion which is used to turn the act ion to the desired

conclusion.

'fhe Greek t ragedian, however, had much more reason for em-

ploying the 'machina' than have modern dramatists for in t ro-

ducing similar devices. ~ y a t radi t ion that was almost iron

bound he was forced to draw his story from the accepted legends

of the people; therefore the conclusion was predetermined and

well known to his audience.



The t ragic poet hardly ever invents his fable .His duty is to present in the concrete, withl iving power. an act ion of which some l ineamentsare already given in legend or t rad i t ion . I twas only when the great period of Hellenic t r a gedy was past tha t such an elegant caprice couldbe attempted as the Flower of Agathon • • • • • • • • •The tas te for novelty, to which such a poem appealed, would be at tr ibuted by lovers of Aeschylus to the degeneracy of the contemporarytheat re . A good reason for the preference ofknown subjects is assigned by Aris to t le ; - "\Vhati s possible is credible , and what once happenedwas clearly possible• . (11)

The dramatist , therefore, took the legend and transfused i t

with his own personal i ty; i t was his function to work out a

sequence of events which would inevitably lead to the con-

elusion determined by the legend. That was a matter of his tory

which could not be changed; i t would be an intolerable t ravesty

of fac t for Sophocles to represent Philoctetes and Neoptolemus

as departing for the i r homes when every school-boy knew tha t the

bow of Philoctetes was an important factor in the taking of

Troy. Consequently, when the dramatist found his plot logi

cal ly tending towards a conclusion other than that required by

legend, his only avenue of escape was the 'machina' .

The Philoctetes i s the only play of Sophoclesin which the 'denouement' i s effected by the

intervention of a god, the 'deus ex machina' .Another ending was hardly possible af ter themanner in which the poet had emphasized Philoct e t e s ' unyielding nature. (12)

In spi te of the necessi ty induced by the legendary source of

the fables (of which Aristot le approved), the philosopher had

l i t t l e patience with:a use of the 'machina' and declares tha t ,

i f the s tory is such that i t must be used, i t would be bet te r



for such a story not to be writ ten (13).

INSOPHOCLES

I t is evident that prophecy wil l f a l l under the

condemnation of the 'deus ex machina' as a via-

la t ion of the causal sequence i f 1} i t is an ]:!!!-

caused incident in the t ragedies , that i s , an event which does

ot spring from the human wil l in the natural course of the

and 2) i f , as a locution of the gods, i t causes the sub

sequent act ion, so that what follows represents not the wil l

of the characters , but the wil l of the gods. An 'a pr ior i ' con

sideration of the nature of prophecy would seem to indicate that

i t does fu l f i l l both of these conditions since 1) i t is a

a,nd therefore above the human wil l ; and 2) i t is a

of the gods who, as supreme ru lers , can demand

obedience from men. The question, however, cannot be se t t led

'a pr io r i ' , but must be answered by an examination of the pro-

which occur in the tragedies of Sophocles. There are

en prophecies in his plays - one or more occurring in each of

he t ragedies - but for the purpose of our investigation two

r three examples wil l be suff ic ient . These wil l be taken from

playa which were special favori tes of Aristot le , namely,

he Oedipus Tyrannus and the Antigone.

a) The Oedipus Tyrannus. As the play begins we find the

of Thebes suffering from a dire plague. A group of the

elders has gathered before the palace of the king,

to implore him to take steps to bring thei r sufferings

to an end. Oedipus repl ies that the pl ight of his people has



caused him great anguish and that he has already taken steps

to learn the cause of the disas ter :

Thus pondering one clue of hope I caught,And tracked i t up; I have sent Kenoeceus' son,Creon, my consort ' s brother, to inquireOf Pythian Phoebus at his Delphic shrine ,How I might save the State by ac t or word. (14)

Scarcely has he f inished speaking when Creon enters bearing a

message from the oracle:

Let me report then a l l the god declared.King Phoebus bids us s t ra i t ly extirpateA f e l l pollution that infests the land,And no more harbour an inveterate sore. (15)

I t is the unpunished murderer of the former king Laius, he ex-

pla ins , who pollutes the land by his presence and causes the

plague; th is assassin must be found and brought to jus t ice .

But who is the murderer of Laius I In his perplexity Oedipus

appeals to the seer ' l 'eiresias for aid:

ChorusM.y l i ege , i f any man sees eye to eyeWith our lord Phoebus, ' t i s our prophet, lordTeires ias ; he of a l l men best might guideA searcher of th is matter to the l igh t .

OedipusHere too my zeal has nothing lagged, for twiceAt Creon's instance have I sent to fetch him,And long I marvel w ~ y he is not here. (16)

When the prophet f ina l ly comes he is unwill ing to make known

the murderer, but a t length, goaded to anger by Oedipus, he

divulges his heaven-sent knowledge:

I say thou a r t the murderer of the man7!hose murderer thou pursuest . (17)

Oedipus, unaware of such a crime, denounces the prophet as a

fraud and at t r ibutes his statement to the prompting of Creon



whom he suspects of aspiring to the crown of Thebes. As the

play progresses , however, i t is brought home to Oedipus that

in t ruth he is the murderer; many years before, in a road-side

f igh t , he had s la in a man whom the subsequent incidents of the

play clear ly prove to have been I.aius. Thus the curses which

Oedipus had cal led down upon the bead of the assassin of the

king fa l l upon himself.

b) The Antigone. Antigone, daughter of the la te Oedipus,

defies an edict of the reigning sovereign Creon and gives

r i tua l bur ia l to the body of Polyneices, her brother, who had

been slain in an at tack on Thebes. ·,fuen she is apprehended

by the guards and brought before Creon she ju s t i f i e s her act

by appeall ing to the eterna l laws of r ight and wrong which are

superior to any law of man. Angered by ber defiance, Creon de-

crees that she shal l be buried al ive in a cavern dug in the

rock. 'l'he pleadings of Hae:mon, his san, who was to marry An-

t igone, f a l l upon deaf ears and the youth threatens to die

with her. ·:vhen Antigone has been led out to her death chamber

and Haemon has l e f t in anger, the blind prophet ·1'eiresias,

guided by an at tendant , comes to Creon to remonstrate with

him:

o King, thy wil fu l temper a i l s the State ,For a l l our shrines and a l ta r s are profanedBy what has f i l l ed the maw of dogs and crows,The f lesh of Cedipus' unburied son.Therefore the angry gods abominateour l i tan ies and our burnt offer ings . (18)

The body of Polyneices, he says, must be given fu l l bur ia l and

Antigone must be released from her tomb. 7lhen the king re -



fuses to do these th ings, the prophet predicts the dire con-

sequences of his stubbornness:

Know then for sure , the coursers of the sunNot many times sha l l run the i r race, beforeThou shal t have given the f ru i t of thine own

loinsIn quit tance of thy murder, l i fe for l i f e ;• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •And now, consider whether bought by goldI prophesy. (19)

Too la te Creon repents himself of his stubbornness; when he

hastens to the cave he f inds Antigone has hanged hersel f . In

an excess of gr ie f Haemon upbraids his father for his deed

and then throws himself upon his sword. .Vhen the king returns

to the ci ty he f inds that the cup of his misery has been f i l led

to the brim; his wife Eurydice, having heard of the death of

her son has taken her l i f e .

~ P r o p h e c i e s In These Playa. In these two t ragedies

there are three prophecies. In the Oedipus Tyrannus both the

oracle and the seer divulge information which the characters

a.re unable to know in a natura l way. ' feiresias in the Antigone

predicts a future event which takes place precisely as he fore-

told i t . Therefore, in each of these incidents we have the

gods involved as the ef f ic ien t causes of preternatural events.

These pre terna tura l incidents, however, do not violate the

causal sequence for the following reasons:

1) ~ p r o p h e c i e s are caused incidents. To understand

how prophecy can be caused by the wil l of man i t is necessary

to understand the Greek concept of oracles and soothsayers.

In the popular bel ie f the gods communicated information through



the oracles and prophets, not merely now and again, but habi

tual ly - and,in the case of the oracles , upon request : This

idea flowed logical ly from the i r concept of the gods; for , i f

the gods were l ike men in a l l things except power and knowledge,

what could be more natura l than tha t there should be some re-

gular means of communication petween the Olympians and the i r

lesser counterparts ?

There arose as to ta l resu l t of the s i tuat ion ,the need for an easy and quick access to divineauthori ty, to a revelat ion, in br ief , aD to adogmatically infa l l ib le teacher. The f igure of

Zeus was remote, but not so was his son and theconfidant of his counsels. ]'or the bel ief ofa l l the Greeks held that a t Delphi in Phocisthe sp i r i t of Apollo emanated from the sacredcavern and answered questions. (20)

In Greek l i f e , then, the remarkable powers of the oracles and

soothsayers were taken for grant:ed. They were accepted as

established re l igious ins t i tu t ions , a sor t of telephone system

which was avai lable to any individual or group which wished to

use i t . rhis commonplace nature of oracles in Greek l i fe is

t es t i f i ed by the aoracle Inscr ipt ions Discovered a t Dodona",

as E. s. Roberts points out in his ar t ic le on that subject :

The examination has established a new proof

of the considerable part which the consultationof the oracle played in the public and privatel i fe of the ancient Greeks • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •Aptly confirming the testimony of authors tothe wide-spread fame of the oracle, these hap)"'hazard survivals depict for us as seeking thehelp of the god, not only the simple peasant ofthe neighborhood, but members of other Greekcommunities fa r and near. (21)

8ince th is is the nature of the oracles and prophets i t can

readi ly be seen how the prophecies in the Oedipus and in the



Antigone are not unforeseen incidents , but are brought about

natural ly by the sequence of human motivation. 'fhe recourse

of Oedipus to the Delphic oracle fo r aid in his dilemma is not

only natura l but almost imperative. Teiresias , in the Oedi-

~ , has already received enlightenment from the god with res-

pect to the t rue s ta te of af ra i r s before he becomes involved

in the act ion, but he does not divulge his knowledge unt i l he

has been goaded 12. anger ·by the king his prophecy then is a

natural human react ion to a motive. In the Antigone the blind

prophet despairs of moving Creon by any other means and, as a

threat , predicts his future misery which the gods have made

known to the seer . Thus, i t can be seen that prophecy f i t s

natural ly into the course of the human act ion. I t never happens

by chance, but is always e f f e c t e d ~ human motivation. There-

fore i t does not f a l l under the same condemnation as the 'deus

ex machina' on the score of being an uncaused incident in the

act ion.

2) ·rhe p r o p h e c i e ~ do not cause the seque.l. The reason

for th is l ies in the very nature of prophecy. Although i t i s

true that the pronouncements of the oracles and the declarat ions

of the gods who appear on the 'machina' are the same in so fa r

as they are both divine messages, s t i l l they are essent ia l ly

different with respect to the nature of the message which is

communicated. When the gods appear in person they issue .£Q!!L-

mands; when they speak through oracles and soothsayers they

supply information. That information may pertain to the past ,





sciously involved a t the beginning of the play. The gods,

through the oracle and the prophet, merely furnish the facts

which he requests; the i r role is pract ica l ly equivalent to that

of a lawyer in a modern play. Far from imposing a necessary

course of act ion, they allow great freedom; Oedipus even spurns

the services of Teiresias - and l a t e r , to his sorrow, learns

how true were the words. In the Antigone the blind prophet

announces the suffering which is about to f a l l upon Creon;

everything hapf)ens !!§..he said , but not because he said i t .

The deaths of Antigone, Haemon, and Eurydice are brought about

not by the gods but by the passions of the persona involved .

Speaking of the plays of Sophocles, Campbell says:

Given the character and the s i tuat ion , a l l seemsto come inevita"bly. The persons are the i r fa tes .The gods have hidden themselves, even as the poethides his a r t . The only "ce les t ia l machinery" i safforded by the soothsayer, a famil iar personageof Greek l i f e , who reveals , but does not cause,the sequel. (24)

Prophecy, then, does not effec t the complication of the de-

nouement; i t is the mere relat ion of an event and not the cause

of i t .

I t might be objected, however, that pre-knowledge implies

pre-determination; therefore, a drama in which prophecy occurs

does not represent the working out of the origzinal si tuat ion

according to the nature of the characters , but according to

the wil l of the gods. J i th respect to th is argument i t must

be noted, in the f i r s t place, that foreknowledge, in i t s e l f ,

does not imply pre-determination. Of the innumerable courses



which are possible to man i t i s cer tain that he wil l choose

one of them. I f "to the gods we ascribe the power of seeing

a l l th ings" , tha t one course of act ion which the man wil l

f reely choose i s known to the gods. Therefore, they can pre

dict what i t wil l be without determining i t in any way. But

even on the false supposition that pre-knowledge does imply

pre-determination, prophecy does not vi t ia te the dramatic ' imi

t a t ion ' . The only thing that the principles of Aris tot le de

mand is that the plot should develap according to a natura l

human sequence. I f the gods work behind the scene, arranging

circumstances so that ~ h u m a ~ ~ o t i v a t i o n the men come to the

end which the gods desi re , there i s no violat ion of the causal

sequence. I t is only when the gods in terfere d i r e c t l ~ to bring

about the desired end that the universal nature of the ' imi

t a t ion ' is destroyed. Therefore, the question as to whether

prophecy indicates extr insic determination i s a theological ,

and not a dramatic, di f f icu l ty ; i t has been demonstrated above

that i t does not const i tu te extr insic determination in i t s e l f .

CONCLUSION Aris to t le condemned the 'deus ex machina' of the

Greek t ragedies because i t was a miraculous means

of extr insic determination and therefore a violat ion of the

causal sequence. The appearances of the gods, being indepen

dent of human motivation, came under the category of 'chance' ;

the commands of the gods brought about an arbi t rary conclusion

which did not flow natural ly from the original s i tuat ion . Pro

phecy also involved the gods, but in a di f ferent ro le . Their



locutions were not 'mi rac les ' , but probable or necessary events

in the course of the act ion which depended upon the wil l of the

characters; the i r messages were not imperative, but informative;

hence they did not cause the denouement. The oracles and pro

phets consti tuted a rel ig ious apparatus which could be con

sulted a t wil l and hence were a more or less constant element.

Therefore, prophecy in the Greek t ragedies , being a natural

means of self-guidance, does not f a l l under Aris to t le ' s con

demnation of the •deus ex machina' as a violat ion of the se

quence of human motivation. I t is a valid element in the

dramatic ' imi ta t ion ' .



NOTES

1 .t . l

Poe t i c s , 1454b 5-6 : - d. rr..._ v T t ~ . .0 t o l ' ~ ; ~ ~ ~ .

2 . W. s. Tyler , ' rheology Of ~ Greek Poe ts , p. 158.

3 . Poe t i c s , 1460a 18-26.

4 . I b i d . , 1454a 37 - 1454b a.

5 . Richard G ~ Moulton, The Ancient Clas s i ca l Drama, P• 127.

6. Ajax, L l. 1-133; Phi loc t e t e s , L l. 1408-1451.

7. Phi loc t e t e s , L l. 1408-1427.

8 . ~ · • L l. 1467-1468.

9. :Marshall Macgregor, Leaves Of Hellas , P• 112.

10. Poe t i c s , 1454a 37 - 1454b 7 .

11. Lewis Campbell, A Guide To Greek Tragedy, p . 60.

12. A. ·r;. Vera l l , 'rhe Studen t ' s 11a.nual Of Greek Trage<!l_,

P• 1oo:-

13. Poe t i c s , 1460a 33-34.

14. Oedipus T y r a n n ~ ~ · L l. 68-72.

15. I b i d . , L l. 95-98.

16. I b i d . , L l. 284-289.

17. I b i d . , L l. 362.

18. Ant igone, L l. 1015-1020.

19. I b i d . , L l. 1064-1068.

20. George C. Ring, S . J . , ~ Q[ ~ G e n t i l e s , P• 211.

21. E. s. Rober t s , "Oracle Insc r ip t ions Discovered AtDodonan, Journa l 6f Hel lenic Studies I , P• 211.

22. Arthur Fai rbanks , A Handbook Of Greek Rel ig ion , P• 39.



23. E. S. Roberts, "Oracle Inscriptions Discovered At

Dodona", Journal ~ { H e l l e n i c Studies I , p. 228.

24. Lewis Campbell, A Guide To Greek Tragedy, p. 152.



CHAPTER THREE

TRAGIC VALUE OF PROPHECY

We are now in a posi t ion to advance a step further in our

evaluation of the prophecies of the Greek tragedy according to

the principles of Aris to t le . In the l as t chapter we have seen

that prophecy does not violate the basic principle of ' imi ta-

t ion ' • namely, the causal sequence and i s , therefore, a legi-

t imate element in the t ragedy. This conclusion, however is

negative. We must now consider ~ r o p h e c y from another

of view and t ry to learn whether i t has any posit ive

value for the t ragic act ion. That is the purpose of th is

chapter .

NATURE OF

TRAGIC ACTION

Epic poetry and Tragedy, Comedy alsoand Dithyrambic poetry, and the music ofthe f lute and of the lyre in most of the irforms, are a l l in the ir general conception

modes of imitat ion. They di f fer , however, fromone another in three respects , - the medium, the

objects , the manner or mode of imitat ion, beingin each case dis t inc t . (1)

both tragedy and comedy are the same with respect to

the medium they employ (language) and the manner of represen-

ta t ion (action) they dif fer with respect to the nature of the

act ion which i s reproduced. Comedy is an ' imi ta t ion ' of a

l igh t act ion, tragedy is a reproduction of a serious act ion.



Consequently, the emotional effect which the sight of the ac

t ion produces on the spectator differs according to each form;

in other words, the function o f tragedy is not the same as that

of comedy.

When Aristot le comes to define t ragic action he does not

attempt an essent ia l def in i t ion but ra ther describes i t by i t s

effects . His def in i t ion is inductive, the f ru i t of observation

and reflect ion. Tragedies, he says "imitate act ions which ex

ci te pi ty and fear , th i s being the dist inct ive mark of t ragic

imi ta t ion• (2). ' fherefore, the proper object of tragedy is a

sequence of incidents which are p i t i fu l ( e ~ t ~ , v ~ ) and t e r r ib le

( $ o ~ L ~ ~ ) . and the more intense is the pi ty and fear which they

excite the more t ragic is the act ion. Just as the causal se

quence was Aris tot le ' s norm for judging the dramatic validi ty

of an incident , so i t s eff icacy to inspire those two emotions

i s his standard for estimating i t s t ragic value. Any incident

which heightens the pity and fear is a decided asse t to the

t ragic act ion.

•As the sequel to what has already been said, we must pro-

ceed to consider • • • • • • • • • • • • • • by what means the specific e f-

fect of Tragedy wil l be produced". (3). From a comparison of

the Greek t ragedies Aris to t le describes the type of plot which

e considers best suited to inspire the emotions of pi ty and

In general the best tragedies are those which represent

the inevitable progress of a man from prosperi ty to advers i ty.

e protagonis t , however, should not be an ut ter vi l l ian , for



his downfall would not excite pi ty and fear , but would merely

sa t i s fy our moral sense; nor should the t ragic hero be an ex

tremely virtuous man since his adversi ty would not be t ragic

but shocking. "There remains, then, the character -between

{hese two extremes, - that of a man who is not eminently good

and j u s t , yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or

depravity, but by some • • • • • • • • • f ra i l ty" {4). The t ragic

hero, then, should be a strong, but imperfect, character whose

adversi ty is the inevitable resul t of some short-coming. Since

he is a man l ike ourselves we pi ty him· in his suffering and

struggle against the inevitable downfall; when we see how one

step leads logical ly to the next and how a l l tend towards a

catastrophe we are fearful because of the ev i l which is im

minent and inevi table .

Sucha

changeof fortune, then,

is essent ia lto every

tragedy and const i tutes the t ragic act ion. Depending upon the

incidents which are portrayed, however, the plots of the va

r ious plays are capable of excit ing pity and fear in different

An examination of the plays in which prophecies occur

the fac t that the prophecies render the change of for

tune from propperi ty to adversi ty more p i t i fu l and fearful and

therefore, valuable elements in the t ragic act ion. They

re a source of t ragic effect which is characteris t ic of the

drama. A consideration of the plays of Sophocles shows

the prophecies: 1) provide the t ragic 'hamart ia ' ; 2) es

a t ragic s i tuat ion; 3) furnish an element of surprise;



) generate suspense; 5) accelerate the catastrophe. Let us

each of these in de ta i l .

00 •

AND

HAN..ARTIA t

Aris to t le , as we have seen above, considered that

the catastrophe in the t ragic action shouldbe

the resu l t of some ' f r a i l t y ' on the par t of the

The word which he usee is d' f-lo.. F''· In his com-

on the Poet ics Butcher explains (5) that th is word may

three meanings: 1) an unintentional error ar is ing from a

of knowledge; 2) a moral fa i l ing when the fau l t or er ror

conscious and in tentional , but not del iberate ; and 3) an

defect in character . The f ra i l ty , therefore , may be

weakness of the in te l lec t or of the wil l which i s natural to

An error of judgment no less than a moral fau l t may, by

natural sequence of human motivation, lead a man to ruin . As

matter of fac t , an in te l lec tua l error would seem to be a more

means of inspir ing pi ty and fear since i t springs na

from man's l imited abi l i ty to understand, and the cata-

which follows upon i t is even less deserved than is one

comes from a weakness of the wil l .

I t has been explained in Chapter Two (6) tha t , among the

oracles and prophets were natural means of obtaining

concerning the administration of prac t ica l af fa i r s .

th is i s the nature of prophecy and since t ragic action

n readily ar ise from an in te l lec tua l error , the value of th is

of Greek rel ig ion to the tragedian is evident. A mis-

in the in terpretat ion of an oracle or the pronouncement of



a soothsayer presents a natural 'hamart ia ' .

Oracles present an inevitable future in termsthat are dim, ambiguous, equivocal, i ronica l ;the dimness lessens as the issue advances, butthe clear meaning or t rue rendering is onlyapparent when the fulf i lment is ent i re ly ac-complished. (7)

The prophecies provide information which is infa l l ib ly t rue ,

but owing to the natural l imitat ions of the human in te l l ec t

man f a i l s to understand them in the i r r ight l igh t and undertakes

a course of act ion which wil l inevitably lead him to his doom.

His f ran t ic , and frequently bl ind, struggle to escape the con-

sequences of his fa ta l mistake const i tu te an act ion which i s

t ruly t rag ic . From th is source spring the t ragic emotions - ~ v h i c h

are inspired by the Oedipus Tyrannus and the Trachiniae of

Sophocles.

a) The Cedipus Tyrannus. The actual play presents merely

the denouement of the whole act ion. In the mind of the Greek

audience the incidents which are presupposed were no l ess a

par t of the play than the action which was put on the boards.

Therefore, the t rue 'hamart ia ' of the play is the mistake which

Oedipus makes in the in terpretat ion of an oracle . 'dhen as a

youth Oedipus appeals to Delphi for advice he is told that he

wil l k i l l his father some time in the future. He believes that

his father is Eolybus, the king of Corinth, by whom he has been

raised from infancy; to avoid the catastrophe which the oracle

predicts he shuns Corinth and goes to Thebes. That is his

fa ta l step; for therehe

k i l l s Laius, his t rue father ,whom

he

had never known. Thus, due to his in te l l ec tua l e r ro r , the very



means which he employs to avoid the prediction of the oracle

bring about i ts fulf i l lment . In the play i t se l f we are shown

the steps by which he learns his fa t a l error and the subse-

quent ruin which i t brings upon him.

b) ~ Trachiniae. In th is play also a mistake in the

interpreta t ion of a prophecy i s the 'hamart ia ' which prec ipi -

ta tea the catastrophe. Fif teen years before the action of the

play begins a centaur whom Heracles had slain had predicted to

Deianeira, the wife of the hero, tha t the blood which flowed

from his wound would be a charm over the affect ions of the

f ickle Heracles:

'rhus shal t thou have a charm to bind the heartOf Heracles, and never shal l he lookOn wife or maid to lover her more than thee. (8)

As the play opens Deianeira has grave reasons for thinking

that the time has come to tes t the t ruth of the prediction of

the centaur. However, when she avai ls herself of th is charm to

win back the waning love of the adventurous Heracles she f inds

tha t , although the prediction was t rue , i t bore a fa r di f ferent

meaning than that which she had ascribed to i t ; for the blood

of the centaur in f l ic t s an agonizing death on her husband -

so tha t indeed he never looked upon another.

Such fa ta l mistakes give r ise to the "irony of action"

fo r which Sophocles i s jus t ly famous:

Another character i s t ic of Sophocles is thatfamous • t ragic irony" by which again he impartsnew power to old themes •••••• Between the au

dience whtch foresees the event and the stagepersonages who cannot, the playwright sets up

a th r i l l ing in teres t of suspense. He causes his



characters to discuss the ~ u t u r e they expect inlanguage which is fearfu l and exquis i te ly sui tableto the future which actually awaits them. (9)

~ u s t as an orator employs irony in speech so the tragedians of

Greece used the prophecies to render the downfall of the pro

tagonist i ronical and therefore more p i t i fu l and ter r ib le . The

characters put one interpretation on the prophecy, but i t s

true meaning is ent i re ly d if ferent . Then, ei ther by opposing

or following thei r own interpretation they bring about the ful -

f i l lment of the prophecy in i t s true sense. The man learns the

true interpretat ion only at the endwhen he

is ruined, but i t

is known throughout by the spectators who pity him and fear

for his welfare.

PROPHECY Al'ID

TRAGIC SITUATION

Akin to i ta use as the occasion of the

'hamart ia ' , but somewhat dif ferent , i s ana-

ther function of prophecy. Since oracles and soothsayers were

natural means of obtaining information thei r pronouncements

were apt means of providing a t ragic situation a t the outset

of the play. A prophecy by ei ther an oracle o.r a seer , re

ferring to the unknown past , presentt or future, puts the

characters in possession of the necessary facts and leads them

to adopt a certain course of act ion. Examples of th is function

of prophecy are found in the Oedipus At Colonus, the Electra ,

and the Philoctetes .

a) The Oedipus At Colonus. The blind Oedipus, having

arrived a t a grove dedicated to the Furies, reca l ls an oracle

which predicted that he would find res t under the ir protection.



From the king of Athens. in whose domain the grove is si tuated,

he obtains permission to remain there. Then his daughter Ismene

arrives bearing news of a recent oracle from Delphi:

IsmeneThy country (so i t runs) shal l yearn in time

To have thee for thei r weal alive or dead.Oedipus

And who could gain by such a one as I ?Ismene

On thee, ' t i s said, thei r sovereignty depends. (10)

According to this la te r oracle , then, the faction at Thebes

which procured Oedipus would gain the upper hand in the struggle

for supremacy. On these twoo r a c l e ~

the res t of the actiondepends. From the ancient oracle arises the firm determination

of Oedipus to remain a t Athens and f inish out his days in peace

according to the prediction of the god; in accord with the

l a te r oracle Polyneices and Creon str ive to win him to thei r

side so that with them wil l res t the sovereignty of Thebes.

As Croiset notes, the whole of the t ragic action depends upon

the oracles:

E t, de meme, la legende d'Oedipe a Colone n 'aura i tpas ete une matiere de t ragedie, s i Oedipe ne con-naissa i t sa destinee, s ' i l ne l 'acceptai t avecdes sentiments de joie e t de f i e r te , e t s i , d'unbout a l ' aut re du drame, i l ne s 'a t tachai t al 'accomplir en depit des resis tances. (11)

b) The Electra . In th is play Orestes goes to the Delphic

oracle to learn how he should take a ' j u s t ' vengeance; the

answer of the oracle establishes a si tuat ion from which the

res t of the story flows:

Know then that when I l e f t thee to consultThe Pythian oracle and learn how bestTo execute jus t vengeance far my sire



On those that slew him, Phoebus answered thus:Trust not to shields or armed hosts , but s tealThe chance thyself the avenging blow to deal. (12)

The oracle does not command the vengeance - Orestes takes that

for granted according to the lex ta l ionis - but i t does lay

down a defini te 'modus agendi' which consti tutes the t ragic

plo t . The pity and fear which ar ise from the action are due

to the manner of accomplishing this odious vengeance. Moulton

has called at tent ion to this function of the oracle in the

Electra:

Sophocles makes the oracle to sketch a dramaticplot , and makes Apollo, so to speak, set Orestesan intrigue as a task. ( 1 ~ )

c) ~ Philoctetes . Since the plot of this play has

already been outlined in Chapter Two i t will be suff icient here

merely to ca l l at tent ion to the fact t r ~ t i t was because of the

prophecy of Helenus that Odysseus and Neoptolemus undertook to

bring Philoctetes to Troy; hence i t was the prediction of this

prophet which gave r ise to the ent i re draniatic s i tuat ion .

"Ne'er can ye take the ci tadel of TroyTi l l by persuasion ye have won him overAnd brought him from the island where he bides•.

(14)

The whole plot of the Philoctetes is concerned with the en-

deavors of Neoptolemus to accomplish this task.

PROPHECY AND But again, tragedy is an imitationTRAGIC SURPRISE •••••••••• of events inspir ing fear

or pi ty . such an effect is bestproduced when the events come on us

by surpr ise; and the effect is heightened when,

a t the same time, they follow as cause andeffect . (15)



A tragedy which presents the unimpeded course of a man from

prosperi ty to adversi ty is less suited to produce the emotions

of pi ty and fear than i s a plot in which the catastrophe is the

sudden, unexpected, but probable effect of what has gone before.

Due to the sharp contrast of happiness and misery the t ragic

emotions of pity and fear are accentuated. I t i s for th is

reason that Aris tot le prefers what he cal ls the 'complex plo t • .

A complex action is one in which the chapge(from prosperi ty to adversity) is accompaniedby • • • • • • • • • • • • Reversal, or by Recognitionor by both. {16)

Reversal of the Situation is a change by whichthe action veers round to i t s opposite. (17}

Recognition • • • • • • • • is a change from ignoranceto knowledge, producing love or hate betweenthe persons destined by the poet for good orbad fortune. (18)

In such an act ion, then, the man a t f i r s t seems to be victorious

against the forces which seek his downfall, but then is sud-

denly plunged into the catastrophe. There is a complete re

versal of the si tuat ion within the scope of a single ac t . How-

ever gradual the approach to the catastrophe may be, i t seems

to the man to happen suddenly; he thinks himself a happy man

at the beginning of an act , but he learns the t ruth of the

si tuat ion and i s a miserable man a t the end of i t .

In the plays of Sophocles we find such surprises in the

action aris ing from prophecy. The information which i t sup

pl ies brings the man to a recognition of the t rue s ta te of a f -

fa i rs and precipi tates the catastrophe. The prophecies in the

Antigone and in the Ajax are used to effect such a Recognition



d Reversal.

a) 'fhe Antigone. At the beginning of the fourth and

act of th is play Creon, the king of Thebes, considers him-

a happy man who has jus t acquit ted himself of a di f f icu l t

in vindicat ing the laws of the s ta te . He has refused

to a t r a i to r gui l ty of high treason, he has punished

for attempting to violate his decree, and he has re

the attempts of his son Haemon to shake him in his deter-

carrying out his orders. At th is point , however,

e advent of the soothsayer Teiresias and his prediction of the

which i s about to f a l l upon the king because of his s tub-

make Creon recognize the true s ta te of af fa i r s . His

endeavor to make amende is too la te and a t the end of

he is a miserable man who has offended the gods, los t

is son, and caused his wife to take her l i f e . Thus, the pro-

of Teiresias brings about a recognition and causes a re-

of s i tuat ion which is prevocative of pi ty and fear .

b) The Ajax. The head-strong hero of th is play, having

an humilating f i t of madness through the agency of the

is plunged to the depths of despair

returns to himself and learns what he has done in his

To the anguish of his wife, Tecmessa, and his com-

the chorus of sa i lors , he proclaims tha t only his

can wipe out his shame. Later , however, a t the pleading

f his wife, he repents himself of th is d.etermination and makes

that he has resolve& to bury the sword which he had in-



tended to use as the instrument of his death. At th is his

wife and comrades are over-joyed:

0 joy, when Ajax has forgot once moreHis woe, and turns the godhead to adore ! (19}

However, they are soon plunged from happiness to misery. When

Ajax has departed to bury his sword a messenger bearing news of

a prophecy of the seer Calchas arrives . The humiliated warrior

must be kept within his tent for that one day i f he is to l ive :

ChorusList to th is man - the t id ings he has broughtOf Ajax' fortunes, f i l l ing me with gr ie f .

Tecmessa-Nhat is thy news, man ? Say, are we undone ?Messenger

I know not of thy fortunes, only th is -I f Ajax is abroad, I augur i l l .

TecmessaAlas ! . he i s . How thy words ch i l l my soul ! (ao)

I t is then that they recognize the true import of the words of

Ajax; he went for th to bury the sword in his s ide ! Fran-

t i ca l ly they search for him; they find him dead on the sol i ta ry

beach, pierced by his own weapon. The prophecy of Calchas is

the means which brought them to an understanding of the true

state of af fa i r s and a t the end. of the act their joy has

turned to sadness.

PROPHECYAND

SUSPENSE

Speaking of the best way to excite t ragic pi ty and

fear , Aristot le says:

He (the tragedian) may not indeed destroy the framework of the received legends ••••••• but he ought to show invention of his own,and ski l ful ly handle the t rad i t ional mater ial . (21)

He then proceeds to enumerate various methods by which the



poets fashion the i r mater ial and construct a sequence of events

which leads natural ly to a catastrophe. He singles out one

type of act ion which he considers most capable of producing the

proper t ragic effect :

The l a s t case is the best , as when in the Cresphontes Merope is about to slay her son, but ,recognising who he is , spares his l i f e . (22)

I t is evident tha t in such a si tuat ion as Aris tot le sets for th

the effect on the audience is one of suspense. This mental

s ta te a r i ses when we perceive in a certa in set of circumstances

the possibi l i ty of e i ther a fe l ic i tous or a disastrous outcome.

Accompanying th is perception is a tense emotional state which

i s a mixture of hope and fear - an effec t which is t ruly proper

to the tragedy. In the excitation of suspense the Greek t ra -

gedies excel l . Since the legendary source of the ir fables des-

troyed the possibi l i ty of novelty of subject-matter , the t r a

gedians developed th is source of t ragic effect to perfect ion.

Symonds has summed up in an apt simile the suspense which is

characteris t ic of Greek tragedy:

We seem to be watching a boatful of carelesspersons gliding down a r ive r , and graduallyapproaching i t s f a l l aver a vast c l i f f . I f

we take an in teres t in them, how t e r r ib le i sour anxiety when they come within the i r re s is t ib le current of the s l iding water, howfrigfitful is their cry of anguish when a t l as tthey see the precipice ahead, how horrorstricken is the si lence with which they shootthe f a l l , and are submerged 1 Of th is naturei s the in teres t of a good Greek tragedy. ( 2 ~ )

In prophecy the tragedians found a splendid instrument by

which they could bring about th i s effect of t ragic suspense.



The pronouncements of the oracles and soothsayers put the

characters in possession of information which makes i t EOSsible

for them to escape the catastrophe towards which the events are

tending. Examples of th i s use of prophecy are found in the

A,jax, the Antigone, and the Oedipus Tyrannus.

a) ~ A,jax. The prophet Calchas declares that Ajax

wil l be safe i f ~ r e m a i n s in his tent for that ~ day; but

the hero has already gone off by himself to bury his sword.

There i s s t i l l the poss ib i l i ty that he may be found and brought

back to the camp before disaster has overtaken him. During the

f rant ic search which follows the audience i s l e f t in suspense,

hoping that he wil l be discovered in time but fearing that the

worst has already happened.

b) ~ Antigone. In the las t act of th is play the pro-

phet Teiresias fore te l ls the evi ls which wil l f a l l upon Creon

for his obstinacy. This prediction shakes the determination

of the king and he decides to make amends before the prophecy

of Teiresias is fulfilled&

I go hot-foot . Best i r ye one and a l l ,My henchmen ! Get ye axes l Speed awayTo yonder eminence ! I too wil l go,

For a l l my resolution th is way sways. (24)

The very language which Sophocles puts in the mouth of Creon

indicates the suspense of the s i tuat ion . There is a poss ib i l i ty

that he wil l arrive in time, but the audience, knowing the in -

fa l l ib i l i ty of the utterances of Teiresias , fear that he wil l

be too l a te . Hence, they are in suspense while he hastens to

the tomb in which he has incarcerated Antigone.



c) ~ h e Oedipus Tyrannus. When the king sends for Tei

resias and t r i e s to extort from him the name of the murderer

of Laius, the si tuat ion is one of breathless suspense, The

audience knows that Oedipus himself is the guil ty party and

that Teiresias i s aware of that fac t . The pert inaci ty of

Oedipus in seeking the t ruth gives the audience grounds for

fearing that he will learn i t to his own sorrow; on the other

hand, the stubborn refusa l of Teiresiaa to divulge his knowledge

provides the hope that the king wil l , af ter a l l , be l e f t in his

bl i ss fu l ignorance. Thus the knowledge of the prophet fur-

nishes material for t ragic suspense.

PROPHECY AND

ACCElERATIONOF ACTION

In the l as t chapter of the Poetics Aristot le

sets for th a number of arguments to demonstrate

the superiority of tragedy over the epic as a

l i terary form. One point in his argumentation is the followinga

Moreover, the a r t at ta ins i t s end within narrower l imi ts ; for the concentrated effec t ismore pleasurable than one which is spread overa long time and so diluted. (25)

I f th is is true of a l l tragedy, i t is true of the Greek tragedy

in a specia l manner. Concentration of action is a quality

which i s peculiar ly character ist ic of the Greek dran:a. In i t

we find none of the side action or pauses of modern drama; the

action is concerned with a single issue and runs along rapidly

without any los t motion. The resu l t is that the emotions of

pi ty and fear are intensif ied because of the speed and in

evi tabi l i ty with w h ~ c h the catastrophe follows upon the in i -



t i a l mis-step.

This accelerat ion of the action i s due, in no small de

gree, to the re l igious doctrine of pract ica l prophecy. By

means of the oracles and soothsayers the characters can be sup

plied with information which they could not obtain in a na

tu ra l way without a long process of invest igation or without

the introduction of an inar t i s t ic chance discovery. I f the

abi l i ty of the oracles and seers ' to know a l l things ' is

granted, then the t ragedian has a t r...and a means of accelerat ing

the action of the tragedy. In a supra-natural way the oracles

and soothsayers have the same role which the messengers of the

Greek t ragedies have in a natura l way. This function of pro

phecy has been remarked by Campbell in his commentary on the

plays of Aeschylus. "In the Prometheus and elsewhere",he says,

"prophecy vir tua l ly f i l l s the place of the narra t ive" . (26)

Through the services of the oracles and soothsayers the unknown

pas t , present , and future are brought to l igh t without any loss

of time and without any violat ion of dramatic probabi l i ty .

Since th is function of prophecy springs from i t s very

nature as a source of .9ractical information, i t effects ac

celerat ion of action wherever i t occurs. Consequently, i t wil l

be necessary here merely to note a few instances in which the

appeal to prophecy obviates a long process of invest igat ion.

a} The Oedipus Tyrannus. The Delphic oracle informs

Oedipus that the cause of the plague i s the unpunished murderer

of Laius and the prophet Teiresias t e l l s the king that he -



Oedipus - i s the assassin. Both of these announcements hasten

Oedipus' discovery of his unhappy s i tuat ion .

b) The Antigone. The soothsayer makes known to Creon

the ruin towards which he is hastening and thereby shows him

the true state of af fa i rs which would in a natura l way be

brought home to him only af te r the passage of some t ime.

The prophecy of Calchas precipi tates a

search for Ajax and thereby uncovers the fact that the hero

has already done away with himself. In the ordinary course

of eventsth is

factwould be

known onlyaf te r

some time orthrough some chance discovery.

CONCLUSION Aris tot le considered that the proper function of

the tragedy is to excite the emotions of pi ty and

fear in those who witness or read i t . I t has -been demonstrated

in th is chapter that prophecy in tens i f ies those effec ts . There-

fore , the logical conclusion is that the philosopher would look

upon th is element of the Greek tragedy not only as legitimate

but also as valuable.. He would say that the use of prophecy in

a drama rendered the act ion more t rag ic . koreover, since pro-

phecy implies an in teres t of the gods in the af fa i r s ofmen

i t

gives to the tragedy that 'high and excel lent ser iousness ' (2?)

which Aristot le considered proper to that form of the drama.



NOTES

1. Poet ics , 1447a 13-18.

2. Ib id . , 1452b 32-33.

3. Ib id . , 1452b 28-30.

4 . Ib id . , 1453a 7-10.

5. S. H. Butcher , Ar i s to t l e ' s Theory Of Poetry A n d ~Art , P• 317 f f .

6. Page 44.

7. Richard G . Moulton, ~ A n c i e n t Class ica l Drama, p . 103.

8 . Trachiniae , L l. 575-57?.

9 . Gilber t Norwood, Greek Tragedy, P• 179.

10. Oedipus At Colonus, L l. 389-392.

11. Alfred and 1 ~ a u r i c e Croise t , His toi re De La Li t t e ra tu re

Grecque, p . 250.

12. Elec t ra , L l. 32-37.

13. Richard G. Moulton, The Ancient Class ica l Drama, P• 150.

14. Phi loc te t es , L l. 610-613.

15. Poet ics , 1452a 1-4.

16. Ib id . , 1452a 16-18.

17. Ib id . , 1452a 22-24.

18. I b id . , 1452a 29-32.

19. Ajax, Ll. 710-712.

20. Ib id . , L l. 789-795.

21. Poet ics , 1453b 22-25.

22. Ib id . , 1454& 4-7.

23. John Addington Symonds, Studies Of ~ G r e e k Poets ,



Vol. I I , P• 157.

24. Antigone, L l. 1108-1111.

25. Poet ics , 1462a 18 - 1462b 1.

26. Lewis Campbell, A Guide To Greek Tragedy, p. 175.

27. Matthew Arnold as quoted by Elisabeth Woodbridge inThe Drama - I t s law And I ts Technique, .P• 22.



CONCLUSION

The purpose of our study, as set forth in the Introduct ion,

was to determine the mind of Aristot le concerning prophecy as

an element of the t ragic drama. This was to be done by an

examination of the prophecies in the plays of Sophocles accordin

to the principles propounded in the Poetics .Two

questions had

to be answered before a solution of the di f f icu l ty could be ar-

r ived ats 1) i s prophecy a val id dramatic element ? and 2) i f

so , has i t any special eff icacy for producing the specif ic ef-

fect of tragedy ' In the subsequent chapters we sought the

answers to these questions.

Aris to t le ' s theory of a r t , we saw in Chapter 6ne, i s

founded on the very essence of material being. A work of a r t

should be an imitat ion not of an individual , but of the 'form•

which is apprehended by the idea. Then the ' imi ta t ion ' is

' be t t e r ' than rea l i ty and •tends to be universa l ' . In the drama

a t rue ' imi ta t ion ' is had only when each incident follows w ! ~ thas gone before as i t s probable or necessary ef fec t . This is

the primary law of the drama and Aris to t le ' s norm for judging

the dramatic val id i ty of an incident . In the second chapter

we applied th is norm to the two supra-natural elements of Greek

tragedy, the 'deus ex machina' and prophecy. The former, we



found, is an uncaused incident which causes the sequel. I t

const i tutes a miraculous means of extr insic determination and

i s , therefore, i l legi t imate as an incident of the drama. Pro

phecy, on the other hand, i s an incident which is caused by the

antecedents, but does not cause what follows. I t is a natura l

means of self-guidance and hence a legitimate dramatic element.

Having establ ished the legitimacy of prophecy, we proceeded to

a consideration of i t s t ragic value. In the thi rd chapter we

saw that the t ragic value of an incident depended upon i t s e f-

f icacy to arouse in the spectators the emotions of pity and

fear . An examination of the prophecies in the plays of Sophocle

revealed the fac t that oracles and soothsayers are employed to

intensify the t ragic effec t . They have a special signif icance

in the t ragic act ion, therefore, and produce an effect which

is character is t ic of the Greek drama..

We have answered both quest ions, then, which we proposeds

according to the principles of Aris tot le prophecy i s l eg i t i -

mate as an incident of the drama and has special eff icacy to

produce the effects proper to tragedy. Since th is is so,we

can reasonably conclude that Aris tot le approved the par t which

prophecy played in the t ragedies of the Greeks.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adam, James

Atkins, J.W.Ha

Bradley, A.C.

Butcher, s.H.

Bywater, Ingram

Campbell, Lewis

Courthope, ·.nlliarn John

Croiset, Alfred andmurice

~ R e l i g i o u s Teachers Q[ Greece,Edinburgh: T.& T. Clark, 1923a467 pp •

Literary Criticism ~ A n t i g u i t y ,Vola I , Cambridge: UniversityPress, 1934. 199 PP•

Shakesperean Tragedy, London::Macmillan and Co., 1926. 498 PP•

Aris tot le 's Theory Q!Poetry ~Fine Art, London: Macmillan andCa., 1932. 421 pp.

Aristotle .Qu. ~ !£ i Q!. Poetry,Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1909.387 PP•

~ Guide ~ Greek Tragedy, NewYork: G.P.Putnam's Sons, 1891.

335 P.P•

~ I n Poetry, ~ In Taste,London: Macmillan and Co., 1901.452 PP•

Histoire De La Lit teratureGrecque, Paris: Ancienne Librarie

Thorin Et Fi l s , 1899. 687 PP•

Donnelly, Francis P ., S.J. ~ P r i n c i p l e s ~ Literature,New York: The Nacmillan Company,1923. 144 PP•

Fairbanks, Arthur A Handbook Of Greek Religion,

New York: American Book Company,1910. 384 PP•



Fyfe, w. Hamilton

Jebb, R ~ C .

Jowett, Benjamin

Lucas, F.L.

Macgregor, Marshall

Moulton, Richard G.

Norwood, Gilbert

Ring, George C., S.J.

Roberts, E.s.

Storr 1 F.

3ymonds, John Addington

Aristot le - The Poet ics. LoebClassical Library. New York:G.P.Putnam's Sons, 1927.

The Growth And Influence OfC"i'i"ssical Greek Poetry, Boston:Houghton, Mifflin And Company,1897. 257 PP•

The ReTublic Of Plato (Transla t ion , New York: ColonialPress, 1901. 306 PP•

Tragedy - .!!!_ Relation !e.~ -

to t le ' s Poet ics. Hogarth LecturesOn Literature Series. New YorksHarcourt, Brace and Company,1928. 160 PP•

Leaves Of Hellas, London: EdwardArnold and Co., 1926. 300 PP•

~ A n c i e n t Classical Drama,Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1898.

479 PP•

Greek Tragedy, Boston& John ·N.Luce and Company, 1920. 394 PP•

Gods Of The Gentiles , MilwaukeeaBruce;-1938. 349 PP•

"Oracle Inscriptions DiscoveredAt Dodona". The Journal Of Hel

lenic S t u d i e s ~ (1879). 228=241.

Sophocles (English Translation).Loeb Classical Library. New York:G.P.Putnam's Sons, 1919.

Studies Of ~ G r e e k Poets , Vol.

I I , New York& Harper and Brothers,1882. 419 pp.



Turner, William, S.T.D.

Tyler, w.s.

Verral l , A.W.

Woodbridge, Elisabeth

Zeller , Eduard

History Q!Philosophy, Boston:Ginn and Company, 1903. 674 pp.

Theology Of The Greek Poets,Boston: Draper and Halliday,1867. 365 PP•

The Student's Manual Of GreekTroagedy, London& Swan:Sonnen-achein & Co., 1891. 324 PP•

The Drama - I ta Law And I ts

Technique, BoatoliS'AllynB:nd

Bacon, 1898. 181 PP•Outlines Of The History Of

Greek PhiiOsQRSy, Translated byL.R.Palmer. LondonJ Kegan Paul,Trench, Trubner & Co., 1931.324 PP•



VITA AUCTORIS

John Francia Sullivan S.J . 1 born a t Chicago,I l l ino is karch 9, 1910

Resurrection Parochial School,Chieago ••••••• 1915- 1924

~ u i g l e y Preparatory Seminary, Chicago ••••••• 1924- 1927

St. Ignatius High School, Chicago ••••••••••• 1927- 1928

Entered Society of Jesus a t Milford, Ohio,September 7, 1928

Xavier University, Cincinnati , Ohio, • • • • • • • • 1928- 1932

St. Louis Universi ty, St. Louis, Missouri ••• 1932 - 1934

Awarded degree of Bachelor of Arts , June •••• 1933

Entered Graduate School, Loyola University,

September, 1935

Documents

An Evaluation of Prophecy in Greek Tragedy According to the Dramatic Theory of Aristotle