"Oedipus Tyrannus" and the Problem of Knowledge
Marjorie W. Champlin
The Classical Journal, Vol. 64, No. 8. (May, 1969), pp. 337-345.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0009-8353%28196905%2964%3A8%3C337%3A%22TATPO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X
The Classical Journal is currently published by The Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc..
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/camws.html.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
http://www.jstor.org
Tue Oct 23 19:00:03 2007
OEDIPUS TYRANNUS
AND THE PROBLEM OF KNOWLEDGE
I
have hinted
A
that the a
Oedipus
might have special significance in Oedipus
T LEAST TWO CLASSICISTS
(OiSborr)
t y ~ a n n u s .As
~ this drama is about a man
who wishes to know (oESCY),it is my contention that it does have special meaning
and that it is for this reason that Sophocles
makes a play upon Oedipus' name in various places in the drama."
This play treats the theme of linowledge
as derived from the use of the senses, particularly that of sight (6pLw). 'rhough
words for hearing ( 8 ~ 0 6 ~and
) touching
($a&) also occur-the first with great frequency-there is certainly a closer correlation in the Greek mind between the faculty
of sight and the ability to know than in the
use of the other senses for the attainment of
k n o w l e d g e . V h e verb +do ( I see) is the
activity which carried to completion results
in knowledge (oZSa, literally, "I have seen":
in usage, ('I know"). The purpose of this
lBernard Knox, Oedipus at Thebes (New
Haven 1957), p. 127. Also Peter IVestervelt
during a 1965 Harvard summer course entitled
"Homer and the Greek tragedians."
E.g,, 924-926:
dp' c?v s a p ' 5p&v, d [ivor, paHoipl o s o u
r i rot5 rupavvov Fhpar' & o r i v O i F i s o v
p d h i o r a 6) aCrbv e i s a r ' el K ~ T L C H ) 6 ~ d u ,
See also lines 397, 415, and 1008.
Other words for the senses of seeing, hearing,
,
and touching also occur, such as pAE'rrw, ~ A b w and
B r y y d v w . The first two senses relate most directly
to intellectual processes.
paper will be to show that the pervading
theme of Oedipus ty~annusis the problem
of knowledge and that this theme has Parmenidean overtones.
At the outset Sophocles poses a problem
for Oedipus, wrestling with which he will,
at length, become acutely aware of his own
human limitations, his own insufficient
knowledge. This problem is a natural disaster, threatening with extinction the full
range of physical life-a
problem which
demands a divine solution. At the beginning
of the play, Sophocles presents Oedipus as a
man of unusual resourcefulness and prescience. His mental skills command respect.
The priest and elders have come to him for
assistance almost as if he were the center of
their religious life.
I n his initial speech Oedipus shows his
acumen with very active physical senses
which immediately come into play. His
eyes inform him of petitioners i ~ T ~ p ~ O l 5
KXXSOLULV
i~cu.rePpcL;vo~.
His sense of smell
notifies him that the city B U ~ L ~ ~ L & TY
U I;/p ~ ~ ,
and to his ears come sounds of chants and
TE ~ n U
l TEV~~~~TWV.
lamentations, ~a~dvwv
Oedipus refers to himself as ~Atu/d$(line
S ) , renowned in everyone's eyes, for his
solution of the Sphinx's riddle. At the
play's end (line 1524) the chorus also reminds the audience of this mental achievement. Indeed the priest sets him just below
the level of the gods for this reason. He
wonders aloud, in response to Oedipus'
initial address, whether he had a source
338
MARJORIE IV. C H A ~ I P L I ~
of divine inspiration or acted through
human wit alone :
Two significant words here are L~ov'aasand
oEaOa, showing the correlation of the use of
the senses with the acquisition of human
lrnowledge.
I n a later passage Oedipus credits himself
solely for solving the riddle:
6 p786v ei8;s Oi8i?rous, E?rauaii viv, y v h p v ~ v p l j u a s068' d?r' oiwv&v p a 8 h v . (397-398)
The two passages cited contain the kernel
of the philosophic theme of this drama.
Sophocles portrays his hero, in fl~llpossession of his physical senses and as having
the knowledge that those senses can convey.
The overriding question is whether, so
equipped, he can master the problems which
confront him. Throughout the play Sophocles uses the senses in conjunction with the
acquisition of knowledge. At moments of
crisis words for seeing, hearing, and touching frequent the text. These are the signposts to watch for as the play progresses.
As the opening scene advances, Creon
reports the message from Apollo, god of
truth, and Oedipus assumes an air of selfassurance as if accomplished in the art of
sleuthing. Speaking of Laii~s,he says : ;'[016'
L~ov'wv. 0; y&p tiati8o'v -jC TOJ (105). Xote
the confidence he expresses in his knowledge. This is typical of a man who has
learned to depend on his own wit, this time
in combination with only one of his senses.
But with a pun on Oedipus' name Sophocles gives the Greek audience an ironic
glimpse of Oedipus' physical weakness, as
when the king asks Creon:
The "evil before the feet" or "blocking the
feet" was in a direct sense the Sphinx but
indirectly Oi6l~ov~.
I n freeing the city from
the Sphinx, he proves himself woit'ny of
kingship. As he filled the vacuum left by
Laius, the search for the killer was neglected, until the pollution caused by
Oedipus' presence forced a renewed inquiry.
During the same early scene with Creon,
Oedipus very nearly equates himself with
Apollo, as he says:
WUT'
EU~LKLVS
O$CUHE
y$ 7 5 6 ~T L U W P O G P T ~
hup.e
T$
u~p,uu~ov
BFQ 8' Bpa
(135-136)
This is a highly significant passage, for
,4pollo represents truth i t s ~ l f . I n no estimation, save his own, could Oedipus claim
the inborn quality of truth; yet he affirms
his willingness to undertake the task of
avenging Eaius' death as a partner of the
god. Even the word o " + ~ a has
0 ~ an ostentatious sense here.
Having received information or '.leads"
from Apollo, &dipus issues a proclamation,
commanding that the murderer, if known,
be disclosed and ordering him to b? banished. Three times in the speech the word
oT8a is used in some form, and what an
ironic touch it has when Oedipus, the one
who should h a v ~been in a state of linowledge, reveals his ignorance:
Equally ironic is the next use of the word
in the same speech, since it so obviously
reflects his lack of knowledge:
t i 6' a 3 T L S a h h o v ol6ev 6f a h h q s ~ 8 o v b s
~ b av d ~ 6 ~ t i p p?)
u , U ~ W T & T W. . . .
(230-231)
Eager to be helpful and hoping to discover the truth, the Chorus tactfully offers
a significant suggestion to Oedipus:
I n its desire to show deference to Oedipus
the Chorus has equated Apollo, Teiresias,
and Oedipus by calling them all "lord"
though it assigns to Teiresias the closer
acquaintance with Phoebus. The sentence
OEDIPUS TYRANNLiS AND THE PROBLEM O F KNOWLEDGE
339
facts which have determined human circumstances or those which are prophesied.
Either use would require the intuitive
linowledge of a prophet. Was Teiresias, as
an exponent of truth, on the general level
of an Old Testament prophet? Sophocles
spealis of him as cognizant of ineffable
heavenly matters. The strictures of the
play demanded only that he possess a full
awareness of past and future human events.
Knowing the truth of these was a source
not of joy but of sorrow. We should remind
ourselves that, if the Chorus could linow of
a divine realm where the laws of Olympus
originate and Justice holds sway, Teiresias
would also be cognizant of this more metaphysical sense of truth.
A climactic confrontation of linowledge
and ignorance is reached in this scene. Teiresias reveals the truth that Oedipus is the
murderer of Laius, but Oedipus completely
and instantly rejects the charges, not seeliing any clarification. I n his mental darkness
the king upbraids Teiresias for blindness
with respect to his ears, mind, and eyes in
this alliterative line: T V + X ~ S T& T' Era
T ~ VTE VOGV T$ T' GPpa~' EE
(371). Then
Oedipus charges Teiresias with being an
"Without physical eyesight you are aware accessory to the criminal death of Laius.
mistakenly- he
of the plight of the city," says he. Yet a Reasoning cleverly-but
deduces
a
plot
against
his
throne and life,
bit of insincerity appears to creep in as
with
Creon
as
the
other
malefactor.
Oedipus in the next breath explains PhoeThe next scene with Creon is ushered in
bus' message, thereby attributing a degree
with
several verbal configurations, associof ignorance to the seer.
ating
the senses and human knowledge, as
All through this passage the word
Creon
tries to ascertain what charges were
'.truthn ( T & ~ ~ &isF )used in some form,
made
against
himself, the presumed fellow
first by the Chorus with relation to
conspirator.
T & ~ ~ O i~pS~ l + v ~ t v
Teiresias' nature:
The Chorus says: $k%ro ptv ra'S7,oY8a 8'
b ~ 0 ~ h ~ pdvc?
w v (298-299), and then by
06
yvLpn TIVL(527). Incredulously Creon
the prophet as he designates himself an
tries
to determine in what state of stupeexponent of truth: rrl+~vya. T B X ~ ~y;LP
~ F
faction
Oedipus might have made such
;uXGov ~ p C + o (356) ; E?7rep TI y' iui-2 ~ r j ~
charges:
&Xrl&la~
U I ~ ~ (369).
V ~ F
I t becomes pertinent
structure as well as its meaning conveys
Teiresias' close acquaintance with Apollo.
The titles for the two men stand side by
side in line 284 and their names in juxtapositional identity in line 285.
The entire scene with Teiresias teems
with references to knowing or understanding (+povlo) and seeing (Apa'o,) employed
with clear differentiation. Just before the
prophet's entrance Oedipus with his usual
air of adequacy makes a n effort to reconstruct earlier events. He shows familiarity
with rumored accounts: .;j~ovaaK & ~ TAV
& . 8'
Q ~ v To68tl~
'
Ap$ (293). Oedipus assigns himself quite a sense of mental acuity as he
uses in this brief line three words denoting
sense activity! H e wishes to give the impression of a man as watchful as Argus.
From this self-appointed height of perception no one is more capable than he of
according to Teiresias his proper worth.
Oedipus then credits Teiresias with linowledge of heavenly and earthly matters and
pays him the ultimate tribute of possessing
intuitive linowledge:
+
to ask what Sophocles rneant by the
"truth." Careful consideration would lead
one to believe that the word "truth" is used
in the play primarily as denoting the facts
of human experience, either those concealed
The Chorus responds evasively: O ~ KolS1. il
yhp SpSu' oi ~paroGvr~s
oJX hpC (530). Creon
340
MARJORIE W. CHAMPLIN
builds a sound case against his own impli- sion at the thought of Jocasta's religious
cation in the imagined plot, but Oedipus impiety. As I7ictor Ehrenberg says in
seeing darkly, remains unpersuaded. I n Sophocles and Pericles, "the poet (Sophofrustration, but without violence, Creon cles) is opposed in heart and soul" to the
makes an observation on Oedipus' mental "man-made standards'' and morality which
confusion: o i yiLp +povoCv~& U' €3 pXt'no Jocasta represent^.^ I n the Athens of Sophocles' day oracular responses and even the
(626).
Jocasta, undoubtedly drawn to the scene gods themselves were subject to skeptical
by the uproar, enters. U'ith her entrance questioning. Sophocles remonstrated. Unthe fearsome truth perversely begins to doubtedly his voice is joined with that of
dawn in Oedipus' mind. I n attempting to the Chorus as they pray for confirmation of
quiet Oedipus' fear, Jocasta discredits the truths of prophecy and ask for assurTeiresias as being in the number of the ance in their observance of religious piety.
The messenger from Corinth enters, and
unreliable prophets. Then in disclosing
some additional facts about Laius' demise the full disclosure of the truth is postponed.
she awakens a dread recollection in Oedi- Jocasta's skepticism seems to be solidly
pus' mind. At this tragic dawn of knowledge based as she says to Oedipus:
E) p C I ~ ~ ~ ~
he laments: St~vDsb81+& p?j PX~TOV
5 (747). Oedipus' conception of Teiresias
has changed twice in a brief time. lnitially
he exalts the seer: next he reviles him;
Xotice the prominence given the two words
finally, coming full circle, he begins to
for "hearing" in this speech, in which
accord him respect once again.
Jocasta presuming her knowledgeability
Jocasta remains in darkness. I n her eardenounces "the holy oracles of the god."
nest attempt to discredit Teiresias' discloAfter this careless denunciation one is not
sures as falsehood, she inadvertently has
surprised to hear her make this tasteless
brought to light the truth which he revealed.
statement, following the messenger's initial
At the close of the scene Jocasta, by reason
; &as y' 6+0aXp& oi r a ~ p 6 s
disclosure: ~ a p?jv
of her own myopic state, comforts Oedipus
T&OL
(087). The unusual use of 6+6'aAp6r
with the supposed falsity of a n oracle alabove can best be explained as indicating
ready delivered, condemning the seer and
that the author's purpose is to relate the
Loxias in one breath (lines 851-854).
use of the senses to knowledge."
The reaction of the Chorus to the denial
As the scene moves on, the Corinthian
of the validity of oracular responses is
messenger brings more and more facts to
forceful. They pledge themselves to greater
the forefront. Two opposing forces provide
sanctity affirming the existence of divine
tension here, the one to conceal ltnowledge,
laws. Thereafter they condemn insolence
the other to disclose it. Oedipus, true to
and pride using the word i ~ a l p o 7 i ~with
n.
aphis nature, continues to probe; and Jocasta,
propriate pointedness for the man of
completely aware now of the situation, tries
haughty mien and manner. In the word
vainly
to block full disclosure: E 6 d ( r a o ~ ~ ' ,
; ) n i p o n r a there may be an indirect reference
--to Oedipus, who has now been disclosed as
'Oxford 1954, p 72
the possible murderer of Laius.I
"As K C Jebb (Sophocles [Cambridge 18931
The Chorus displays a pronounced revul- Part I, pp 132-133) notes, the use of the word
4Bernard Knox belie~es that the Chorus in
Strophe B' is referring not to Jocasta alone but
also to Oedipus, whose past, they have just
learned, has been tarnished with the stain of
blood: Oedipus at Tlzebes, p. 174.
is not "merely (though this notion comes in) 'a
great help to seeing' that oracles are idle." He
relates it to the idea of ''a bright, sudden comfort." Jebb does not see what appears to me the
more obvious reason for the usage-its
relation
to the theme of the play.
341
O E D I P U S T Y R A N N U S A N D T H E PROBLEM O F I<NOU'LEDGE
d0e prj.rro~e yvolVq i ; ~EZ (1068). But Oedipus' will-to-know cannot be suppressed. I t
has led him to the tragic linowledge that he
murdered his father, and i t will soon expose
his fateful identity. At this crucial moment,
as a t others, the senses come designedly
into play.
The herdsman says woefully: olpol, np6s
u;r& -y' €;pi 76 SELI@
A L Y c ~ (1
~ ~160). And
oedipus' determined response: K ~ ~
~ K O ~ E&Ah'
L V 8pwq
.
& K O U U T ~ O V ( 1170).
By the recurring and obvious employment of sense terminology, the poet has
heightened tension and highlighted the
play's deep message. This is the inadequacy
of unaided human intelligence to master
life's larger problems. When the Chorus
learns the identity of Oedipus, i t is caught
between a sensed need for proper retribution and a profound feeling of pity for the
king. Note how deliberately in this speech,
Sophocles personifies time by assigning to
it the potential of vision:
i @ ? t p i u' t i ~ o v 8 ' 6 s d v 0 ' d p d v x p 6 v o s ,
6 i ~ c i l e7'~ a y a p o v y c i p o v s d h a i
T E K P O ~ V T ~~ a Ti ~ K V O ~ ~ E V O V .
(1212-1214)
and then, after solemn sermonizing, the
Chorus expresses its heartfelt grief:
The complete reversal of Oedipus' fortunes has been precipitated. As darkness
appears to close in on all sides, the illusion
of achievement ceases to be even an illusion. The Chorus' abysmal despair over
Oedipus' decline is prolonged as a second
messenger excitedly signals another disaster :
2, y + s p i y ~ u ~r +aa 8 ' dei r r p L ; I p ~ v o r ,
0:' gpy' C i ~ o l j u e u O ' , o i a 6' t i u b + t u 8 ' .
.. .
(1222-1223)
and a minute later: . . . T ~ ~ > ' ~ @K EE~ O V 'loK ~ U T ~
~ Fk p a(1235).
T h e messenger's next speech describes
Oedipus' viewing of the sight and, as might
be expected, carries frequent references to
"seeing," as Oedipus blinds himself:
a p a s E s a r u e v a p B p a T G a~ 6 r o t ~ b r h w v ,
a 6 E d v ~ o r a f i O ' , 6 8 0 6 ~ ~0 ~6 ' ~6 4 0 1 ~ 7 6 V L V
068' 01' E s a u x e v 068' d s o i ' 1 6 p a K U K U .
(1270-1272)
With one sense rendered useless, Oedipus
must make use of another. Beseeching
Creon to send for his children, he says:
w
~
'
LVhat has always and inevitably gripped
an audience a t this point in Oedipus tyrannus is a depressing sense that an intelligent
man has unaccountably met a tragic reversal of fortune. This is one of the apparently intended effects. And there are still
more deliberate implications concerning
the futility of man's human achievements.
There are, however, positive notes which
need accent. Prophecy has been fulfilled.
The gods and the oracles themselves have
been vindicated. Removal of Oedipus as
a source of pollution must bring restored
health to the people and physical soundness
to their surroundings. Life will go on.
This restoration of order concludes the
play as Oedipus plans for the burial of his
wife and his own removal from Thebes.
The evidence of a restoration of inner order
within man's consciousness is sounded by
Creon's reminder of the governance of the
divine: K a ; yXp a; vCv T&V T? Be? ~ U T L V
dhpo~v (1445).
The last two speeches are enorn~ously
significant. Creon urges upon Oedipus appropriate humility, since the superiority he
attained to could not support him throughout his life:
s d v r a p i poljhou ~ p a ~ t i v piw & ~ v b u ? r e ~ o .
~ a y ih p c i ~ p d ~ ~ ao ba uso r (1522-1523)
Finally the Chorus using the key words of
the play exposes the vanity of man's finest
342
MARJORIE W. CIIAMPI,IK
knowledge, and it set up a world of truth
completely apart from the realm of the
senses. This realm was approachable
6 r d ~ p a sO l j p ~ s@ e o i ~ o Ai ,e i r a c ~ ' ,Oi8irrous 88c,
through the use of reason coupled with
8s T Z ~KXEIV'a i v i y p a r ' j8ei ~ a ~ip k r i u ~ o$ vs d q p ,
spiritual
vision, as Parmenides himself
0 3 r i s oLi [ l j h y BOXLTSVjjv rtIXais E I ~ i @ h t n - ~ v ,
E ~ S 8008 ~ h l j 8 w v a b t i v f s uup@op&s ZhljhuOev.
taught. The effect of this Eleatic monism
WUTE B V V T ~ V
6 v ~ aK€iv?lv
T ~ V
~ ~ A c u ~ a i:8civ
av
must have been massive, comparable to that
+pipav & ~ u K o ? ~ o L ? v T ~
y778iv' d h p i { ~ i v ,r p i v i v
of Einstein's discoveries in our own age.
~ C p y aTO$ Piou repbu?l p ~ 8 k vdhytivbv r a 0 6 ~ . ~
The irrefutable logic could not and still
(1524-1530)
cannot be ignored.
Werner Jaeger says that Parmenides of
Elea
"was one of the greatest philosophers
I t is not unlikely that Sophocles gave
who
ever
lived. . . . In every epoch of
considerable thought to the problem of
knowledge in fifth-century Athens. An- Greek philosophy the effect of his work
axagoras was a familiar figure in Pericleari can be traced, and even today he is a leadcircles, and his acceptance by Pericles' own ing representative of a permanent philocoterie was indicative of a general interest sophical position."1°
Antony Charles Lloyd, professor of philin philosophical and scientific concerns."
osophy
a t the University of Liverpool,
Another philosopher-scientist who made a
corroborates
Jaeger's evaluation. He comdemonstrably profound impression in this
era was Parmenides of Elea. Since there is ments discerningly that Parmenides' theory
considerable evidence that. his stout defend- was stated in such abstract terms that
ant and pupil, Zeno, resided for a linie in widely divergent intellectuals could adapt
Athens, visited the residence of Pericles, it to their own purposes. Professor ~ l o y d
and taught several prominent Greeks there, affirnis that both Democritus and Leucipone is just in assuming that Sophocles, who pus took Parmenides' concept of Being into
also frequented Periclean circles, was ac- consideration when they propounded their
quainted with Parmenidean monism. I n - theories. Plato made use of it in the Pladeed broad hints of Parmenidean influence tonic system of ideas." The poet Pindar,
emulating Parmenides, showed a deep conappear in Oedipus t y r a t z n ~ s . ~
"absolute beThe Parmenidean monism involved a cern-even enthusiasm-for
ing"
and
man's
momentary
glimpses
of it.12
denial of sense testimony as a basis of true
Furthermore Aristotle suoke of the "science
of truth as it was introduced by the school
Though he does not confirm the skepticism,
Jebb observes in his footnotes (p. 198) to the of Anaxagoras and Parmenide~."~:'
quoted lines (1524-1530) that there has been some
C. hlaurice Rowra and Karl Reinhardt
question as to their validity; but the several have hinted that Oedipus tyran~zus may
references to the words for the senses should put
have reflected Parmenidearl philosophy.14
to rest such doubts and show a continuity l o tlze
achievements when they are dependent on
human wit :
play never bejore observed.
Ehrenberg, Soplzocles atzd Pericles. The author
retells (p. 149) a story of PIutarch's in \vhich the
scientist-philosopher Anaxagoras and the seer
Lampon both vie for Pericles' mind and favor.
Francis M. Cornford, in his book Plato and
Par?tzenides (London 1951), p. 63, states that,
according to information in Alcibi~des 1.119A,
i'Pythodorus and Callias had each paid Zeno a
hundred lninae for his instruction," and Plutarch
(Pericles 4) says that Pericles had heard Zeno
discourse." He adds further, "There is thus independent evidence for Zcno's residence in Athens."
lo. Paideict: tlze ideals o f Greek cultwre, vol. I
(Kew York 1939), p. 174.
" E~zcyclopnedia Britannica, 1967, vol. 17, p.
394.
l v o h n H . Finley, Jr., Pitzdar atzd deschylzcs
(Cambridge 1955), pp. 6-7.
'Ti. Lloyd, op. cit., p. 394. See Aristotle,
P r o t r e p t i c ~ ~5b,
s in R. R. \Valzerls edition of the
Fragments.
14C. M. Hoxi~ra,Sophocleatz tragedy (Oxford, 1945), pp. 201-202. Karl Reinhardt, Sophokles (F1.anlrfurt 1947) p. 108. Bowra, analyzing Oedi-
OEDIPUS TYRANNUS AND THE PROBLEM OF KNOI%'LEDGE
343
Each of these critics make one or two ref- say that Sophocles in Oedipus tyrannus
erences to Parmenides, while analyzing the displayed an awareness of the Absolute as
Oedipus t y ~ ~ a ~ z nbut
u s , neither has made a vivid as Parmenides', but I think he meant
studied comparison between Eleatic philos- to draw a sharp distinction between the
ophy and the Greek play. While asserting limited knowledge drawn from the senses
no direct tie between the Eleatic philo- and acted upon by the human mind and the
sophy and the play, Reinhardt does see more inclusive and often intuitive knowlthe play as one dealing with human illusion edge imparted by Deity.I6 Oedipus was a
or the fallacious basis of human linowled~e, representative of the first, Teiresias of the
Other classicists have made scattered second.
There is internal textual evidence that
references to the "truth and illusion" theme,
as, for example, Victor Ehrenberg, who Oedipus tyrannus was, not only a play
states categorically, but without pressing about knowledge, but also a play having
the matter beyond this statement that: "the Eleatic overtones. C. Ill. Bowra has proconflict between divine truth and human vided some evidence, though rather inadillusion, the main theme of 'Oedipus Ty- vertently. In his chapter on King Oedipus
rannus', was a well-known topic of Greek (see n. 14) he mentions, though not in conthought both philosophical and religiou~."~" nection with Parmenides' doctrine of ('the
Although it would not have served Ehren- One and the Many," that Oedipus (842berg's purpose to discuss it, the theme of S45), Jocasta (715-716), Creon (107), and
divine truth and human illusion is an integ- the Chorus (292) are all trapped in the
ral part of the theme of knowledge; and this world of illusion. As a result, they confuse
was certainly a preoccupation of Oedipus the one murderer with the .many of a
tyrawzus. T o Parmenides absolute truth reported account. In my opinion, this
Sophoclean contrivance of numerical misinwas the only valid knowledge, and he who
formation establishes a significant connectwas not conscious of truth was in a state of
ing link between the play and the poem.
human delusion. I t would be incorrect to There are, in addition various other hints
that Sophocles may have been familiar with
pus tyrannzls, mentions three philosophical statePardmenides' poem.
ments oi Heraclitus. He has thus tied the message
I n the lines of Oedipus' second speech
o i the play to Pre-Socratic philosophy, especially as
he has also referred to Parmenides. M y reasons ior
the king states:
seeing a more decisive cause-effect relationship
between Parmenides' teaching and Sophocles'
play are these: The themes oi the play-knowledge-ignorance (divine intuition vs. sense-based
knowledge), sight-blindness, truth-illusion, oneThis appears to be an unusual use of 686s
ness-manyness-relate directly to the Parmenidean
in combination with a word for mental
philosophy in its well-defined statements of Being.
Heraclitus touched upon some of these but in an
inquiry. Yet in the sixth fragment of Parimprecise, oiten self-contradictory manner. The
menides'
poem these lines appear:
fact that he set up the doctrine of mutability as
alz. Absolute would have been an offense to both
Parmenides and Sophocles. Further Zeno's preslGAlong with Parmenides, Sophocles seems to
ence in ,4thens, and possibly Parmenides' u~ould have attributed to the physical world an ~llusory
have made Sophocles more susceptible to the
state. Sophocles and Parmenides appear to part
enormous impact of the Eleatic doctrines. Note
company when the playwright attributes to Deity
(Apollo) the source presumably oi Absolute
also that Reinhardt, an eminent European Classicist, and one who has to his credit a book
Truth, an awareness oi the human condition.
entitled Pa~nzefzides und die Geschichte der
This ~ v o u l dhave made a Deity aware of "nongriechischen Philosophie, alludes only to ParmenBeing." I t is most likely that Sophocles' .4pollo
was still a rather traditional Homeric god with
ides' philosophy in his deep analysis of the play
l%Sophocles and Pericles, p. 143.
anthropomorphic aspects.
344
MARJORIE W. CHAMPLIN
a p w r v s y a p u' d$' 6806 r a 6 r ~ r8 1 j l j ~ l 0eilpyu,
~
abrlrp E?reirl ciao rGs, ijv 67) pporoi €i867€s 0b6;v
ahcirrourai, 6iKpauol' c i p ~ x a u yi a~ p 6v adrGv
urljoeuiv iO6ver s h a ~ r b vv6ov. . . I 7
.
The very double-minded inquiry against
which Parmenides warns, Oedipus has undertaken (PP0~7l80GTALVOLGand his mental
bewilderment may have resulted from his
too great reliance on the information of his
senses.
An illuminating comment of Werner Jaeger points up the correlation of the word
686s with thought activity in Parmenides.
Though he is speaking of Parmenides alone,
the exposition is relevant also to the passage quoted from Oedipu.~tyrannus:
Parmenides held that the discovery of
pure reason and of the stringent rules of
logical thought meant the discovery of a
new 'road' to truth-in fact, of the only
practicable one. I n Greek philosophy the
metaphor of the right road ib80s) of research coilstantlp reappears; although
it was only a metaphor, it has an almost
technical sound about it, especially in the
contrast of the right road and the wrong,
where it approaches the sense of 'method'.
This concept, fundamental in the dcvelopment of scholarship, was created by Parmenides; for he was the first thinker
who deliberately endeavoured to solve
the problem of philosophical method, and
clearly distinguished the two chief channels in which, thenceforth, philosophical
research was to run--thought and perception, the way of the senses and the
way of reason.lY
The passages from Sophocles and Parmenides just quoted both use the word
6 6 6 i~n the sense of method. Parmenides was
not only the originator of the use of 686s
to mean a 'method' of inquiry, but as can
be discovered from a check ;ith the word"Herman Diels, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (Zurich 1 9 6 6 ) , p. 233. ( N . B . The verb
a h d r r o v ~ a iin this fragment is taken by Diels as
the equivalent of aAd{ovrar.) I believe the verb
a x d r r w should stand as it is in the text, since its
meaning as "imagine," "invent," or "fabricate"
elucidates Parmenides' accusation against his contemporaries that their ~vorldis a concoction of
their imagination.
IsPaideia, vol. I, p. 177.
index of Diels' Fragmente,19 he used it
seven times in this manner in our fragments
of his poem.
I s it too bold to make a conjecture that
Sophocles appropriated this use of the word
6 6 6 ~and from precisely this source, inasmuch as the play is one in which Oedipus
pursues truth by the "method" of persistent
investigation? The fact that Sophocles was
a younger contemporary of Parmenides,
that Parmenides made an immeasurable
impact on his age, as well as the fact that
the poet and playwright are concerned with
the problem of knowledge, lends credence
to this conjecture.
Another use of the word 6 6 6 ~with a
philosophic twist occurs near the conclusion
of the play, when Oedipus is transferring
his mantle of authority to Creon. He utters
this prayer:
dhh' t d r v x o l ~ r ~, a Ui E r ? j u b ~T ~ ddori
S
Gaikwv dkeivov +j ' p & @poupljuar ~ 6 x 0 1 .
(1478-1479)
Here the word 686s is connected with Galpov
and reminds one of the 8alpovcs and Oea'
which guide Parmenides into the realm of
true Being.20
'I'hree other passages in Oedipus tyrannus might support the linkage between that
play and fragments of Parmenides. In the
lines of the sixth fragment, already quoted,
Parmenides refers to the double-minded
mortals who live in an imagined world of
reality as c i 8 6 ~ c s 0<'8&; correspondingly
in line 397 of Sophocles' play Oedipus in a
deceptive state of self-exaltation calls himself 6 p r 1 6 2 ~E;~;DFO ~ ~ ~ T O V F .
I t might be argued that this phrase was
"'01.
111, p. 302. I n adding a historical perspective, Professor John Finley has called to my
attention the fact that thought as travel, clearly
a Parmenidean metaphor, was not unique to
Parmenides. He referred me to various places
where this figure of speech with slightly different
connotations occurred in the Odyssey (8.481 ;
22.347) ; the Iliad (13.8&82) ; Pindar (5.5.2-3 ;
0.6.22-28) ; and Eleraclitus (Diels, Vorsokratiker,
4th etl. 1922, I 8 6 , fr. 45).
O' JJiels, Fragnaente, Vol. I, pp. 228, 230.
OEDIPUS T Y R A N N U S AND THE PROBLEM OF KNOWLEDGE
too casual a one to link significantly the
play and the poem. If the play were not
linked to the poem in general subject matter, this would be true. But the two are so
obviously concerned with the theme of
knowledge that it can have philosophic
significance when related to Oedipus' actual
state of ignorance.
Parmenides goes on to describe the
"know-nothing" mortals in lines immediately following those quoted of Fragment 6.
He says of them:
345
Parmenides did, to be the commuilicators
of dire knowledge.
As Teiresias is the spokesman for intuitive truth in the drama, so Parmenides is
his counterpart in the poem; as Oedipus,
the E ~ e r y r n a n , ~ V i v ein
d a state of selfdeception, so for the same causes do the
uncritical throngs mentioned in Parmenides' poem.
Even the chorus intones the hymn of
humanity caught in the world of the "Seeming" :
ii yeveai PporLjv,
h s h p 6 s Zra ~ a TlO pv6+v l d r a s 6vapiQpD.
is y a p , r l s dv+p ?rXiov
7 6 s ed8aipovias @&pel
$ 7 0 ~ 0 6 7 0~ ~U O V~ O K E ~ V
~ a 86Eavr'
l
dsoii-Aivai. . . ."
I s it reading too much into the Sophoclean
text to suggest that Sophocles may have
(1186-1192)
had the above lines in mind: when the
Later in his life Sophocles wrote a play
deluded Oedipus ironically makes an attack
in which he has shown his Everyman adupon Teiresias, the spokesman for truth? :
vancing to a state of true self-knowledge.
~ v + h &TsL T' % ~ ~a d vT C vodv TL T' d p l ~ a ~ '
I n Oedipus at Colonus the hero, blind to
ce (371).
the world around him-perhaps because he
Finally may we not say that Oedipus
is blind to the world of the senses-acquires
had traveled on the ~ a A ~ v ~ ~ o~t'h~v8os
7i-6~
inner vision and takes on the prophetic
from the start of the play like one of the
qualities and capabilities of Teiresias.
2KplTa @ha mentioned by Parmenides? The
Sophocles' Oedipus, the man who solved the
period of the play marked the complete
Sphinx's riddle, seems a t length to have
reversal of his fortune, until he came to the
solved the riddle of man.
point of yearning to block the sorrow-bringMARJORIEMr.CHAMPLIN
ing sense organs:
Yorth Kingstowfz Sefzio~High School
These very organs whose impartations of
fact seemed to bring Oedipus to an unsurpassed height of self-awareness and knowledgeable prestige he now recognized, as
21
Ibid., p. 233.
"E. R. Dodds, "On misunderstanding the
Oedipus rex," Greece alzd Rome, vol. X I 1 (Oxiord 1 9 6 5 ) , p. 148. Dodd suggests that Sophocles
intended a kind of universal depiction of man.
\lTerner Jaeger (Paideia, vol. I, p. 284) says he
personifies "suffering humanity."
Immediately belo~irthe reference to Parmenides in his textual study, Reinhardt cites the
chorus quoted above as proof that Oedipus tyranlzus is not a tragedy of fate but a play about
human seeming.
"