Messenger speech part one: the attack of the Seven

The scene starts with the Messenger’s entrance. Following dramatic conventions, he calls Jocasta onstage and she appears right away. Her first concern is to learn about Eteocles (1076). Contrary to the audi- ence’s expectations, the Messenger informs Jocasta that Eteocles is still alive and refers to Menoeceus’ sacrifice only in passing (1090-1092). His speech is prompted by Jocasta’s concern about the means by which the Thebans repulsed the Argives (1086-1087); his rhesis falls into the cate- gory of those messenger speeches generated by a ‘how’ question of one of the internal narratees.380

As expected, the messenger speech is a long analepsis of the offstage events.381 _{Expressions referring to the past dominate and the Messenger’s}

narrative presents both time and place as standing still, just before it switches to the intensive rhythm of the description of the actual battle.382

The seven generals have taken their places on the gates (1093-1094), while the hoplites and cavalry are waiting to face the Theban horsemen and shield bearers (1094-1096). The change from pictorial steadiness to moving action is achieved smoothly. It begins at line 1098, where the Messenger remembers how he and the rest of the Thebans were watch- ing the enemy approaching (1098-1101), getting prepared to fight by playing the paean (1102-1103).383 _{However, from the moment the ar-}

380 de Jong (1991) 33, n.81. See also Finglass (2007b) 300 ad S. El. 679 (‘[s]ince a messenger typically gives the main point of his news immediately … , his speech is normally concerned not so much with what happened as with how it happened’), who also cites other examples of a πῶς question generating the speech.

381 For the fundamental characteristics of the messenger scenes, see Poe (2009) 360 n.11.

382 See Barlow (1971) 63.

383 For the war paean signaling the beginning of the attack, see Pritchett (1971) 105-108; Käppel (1992) 45-46; Rutherford (2001) 42-45.

mies approach, the narrative becomes strikingly dynamic and previous steadiness gives way to the frenzied rhythm of the battle. Parthenopaeus was the first to attack at the Neitan gates (1104-1109), while the seer Amphiaraus dragged the sacrificial victims by the Proitidan gates (1109- 1112). The Ogygian gates were attacked by Hippomedon (1113-1118), the Homoloidan by Tydeus (1119-1121). Finally, Polynices, Adrastus and Capaneus were situated at the Crenaian (1123-1127), Electran (1128-1133) and the seventh (1134-1138) gates respectively.

Lines 1104-1140, in which the Messenger provides a catalogue of the seven attacking Argive leaders is at odds with Eteocles’ previous statement that a detailed description of the generals would be time- consuming and should be avoided (751-752, [Et.] ‘To tell you the name of each man would consume too much time with the enemy en- camped at our very gates’).384 _{Apart from triggering serious discussion}

about its authenticity,385 _{the scene brings into focus the discrepancy be-}

tween the Euripidean and the Aeschylean representation of the seven leaders in the Phoenissae and the Seven Against Thebes. An intertextual reading of the passage makes clear that Euripides did not wish to create a purely martial scene like that of Aeschylus, as he insisted more on the characterization of the leaders and less on their warlike qualities.386 _The

Messenger combines his previous description of the position of the Ar- give warriors with new information about their behavior during the at- tack. Tydeus and Polynices exhortated the rest of the soldiers (1143- 1152), while Parthenopaeus was fighting in frenzy up to the moment he was killed by Periclymenus (1153-1162). On the Theban side, Eteocles was organizing the defense by carefully circling the gates with his com- rade (1163-1171). Capaneus fought with remarkable rage, which the Messenger has no words to describe (1172, Καπανεὺς δὲ πῶς εἴποιμ’ ἂν ὡς ἐμαίνετο;, ‘How can I describe the way Capaneus raged?). His rhetoric aporia is traditionally pseudo-proleptic, since he immediately comes up with an accurate report not just of the rampant warrior, but

384 The Messenger’s description of the generals is also significantly different from the relevant description of the Servant in the Teichoscopia. Apart from the dissimilarities in style, the latter also echoes epic tradition. According to Trübe [(1952) 35-36], the first catalogue reflects Euripidean dramatic art, while the second mirrors the catalogue of the Thebaid so strongly, that it could even be considered equivalent to the lost epic in miniature.

385 The inconsistency between lines 751-752 and 1104-1140 is the main reason for doubting the authenticity of the latter. For a discussion of the passage, which I treat as genuine, see below, Appendix II: The text.

386 The shield scene in the Phoenissae works only as a literary motif and it is not given the importance that it has in the Seven [Mueller-Goldingen (1985) 174].

3.5. The city and the family 97 also of Zeus who killed him with a thunderbolt (1173-1186). Capaneus’ overconfidence is also highlighted. The Messenger’s description is rein- forced by the adjective μακραύχενος with κλίμαξ (1173-1174, μακραύχενος γὰρ κλίμακος προσαμβάσεις / ἔχων ἐχώρει, καὶ τοσόνδ’ ἐκόμπασεν, ‘With a long-necked ladder in his hands he came on and uttered this boast’), which adds even more to his arrogant behavior.387

He also uses distinctive language for the description of Capaneus’ dead body, which dropped on the ground like Ixion’s wheel (1185-1186).388

In a traditional verification of his knowledge, the Messenger states in lines 1139-1140 that he was the one who passed the watch-word to the Theban warriors, so he has a thorough understanding of the offstage situation. The Messenger’s need to defend the accuracy of his descrip- tion and present himself as a trustworthy witness is frequent in epic and historiography.389 _{In this case though, such a justification is of particular}

narrative interest. It has been maintained that by calling the offstage ac- tion a ‘spectacle’ (θέαματα, 1139), the Messenger does not simply refer to his eye-witnessing. By emphasizing seeing, he temporarily overturns his narrative identity, taking up the role of the external narratees, who – through his descriptions- are viewing a drama taking place offstage, on the battlefield.390

The Thebans’ first victory is attributed to Zeus, since both Adrastus (1187) and the Thebans (1189-1190) realized the divine favor that made the former withdraw and the latter attack with greater rage. The revela- tion of divine intentions is of crucial importance to the Messenger’s nar-

387 ‘The epithet μακραύχενος is a hapax in Euripides and in the whole of Greek literature that is the only instance in which it is used of a ladder. It seems to have been chosen by the Messenger in order to point out once more the self- assuredness of the ladder’s owner, Capaneus’ [de Jong (1991) 83-84].

388 de Jong (1991) 91-92. For Craik (1988) 237, the narrative culmination is in accordance with that created by the careful use of the tense of the verbs

βάλλει (-present-1181), ἐκτύπησε (-aorist-1181), ἐσφενδονᾶτο (-imperfect- 1183), εἱλίσσετʌ (-imperfect-1186), πίπτει (-present-1186). For discussion re-

garding the authenticity of lines 1183-1185, see Mueller-Goldingen (1985) 184; Mastronarde (1994) 476-477.

389 Cf. Il. 2.484-487; Od. 8.487-491; Hdt. 2.44; 75; 148. Also cf. A. Pers. 266; S.

OT 6; E. Supp. 684; Tr. 481; IT 901. See also Finglass (2007b) 335, ad S. El.

761-763. Lines 1139-1140 are also an example of actorial motivation (psycholo-

gische Begründung), since they link a specific development of the plot with the

intentions of a certain character [de Jong (2001) xi; Stürmer (1921) 580]. 390 de Jong (1991) 10, and n.10. As pointed out by de Jong, the word θέαμα oc-

curs in a messenger speech five times out of its eight occurrences in Euripides as a whole.

rative, since right after it, the rhythm is accelerated (1190-1195).391

What is more, it allows for a safe connection with the effectiveness of the sacrifice of Menoeceus; if the sacrifice was really a means of pleasing Ares and Earth, then Zeus’ present protection implies the end of the gods’ hostility.

Euripides takes advantage of the shield scene to echo the clamor of war. The Messenger does not yield to poetic descriptions that would slow down the narrative rhythm; the dramatic need of communicating offstage action is dominant. Even the descriptions of the shields, a good opportunity for a descriptive outburst, are significantly more limited than in the equivalent scene in the Seven.392 _{The Messenger’s description}

is still significantly detailed and specific, incorporating details that could not have been included in other parts of the dramatic narrative.393

3.5.2. Messenger speech part two: preparation for the fatal duel