Monsters and the Family: the Exodos of Sophocles' "Trachiniae" Elliott Sorum, Christina Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Jan 1, 1978; 19, 1; ProQuest pg. 59 Monsters and the Family: the Exodos of Sophocles' Trachiniae Christina Elliott Sorum SOPHOCLES' Trachiniae is a troublesome play. One source of difficulty is its dramatic richness, for it offers two fully developed major characters, Heracles and Deianeira, a separate dramatic presentation of the story of each, and any number of themes ranging from simple romance to djvine injustice. Even the conclusion of the play appears to raise more questions than it answers. One critic, in fact, regards it as an afterpiece added only to satisfy that taskmaster "the demands of the myth."l Yet in any drama it is the end that shapes the audience's final understanding, and Trachiniae is no excep­ tion: the final three hundred lines establish the significance and unity of the entire play. To understand this resolution, two interwoven themes that dominate the end must be examined in light of the previous story. These themes are the monsters and the family. When Heracles finally appears on stage (983), he comes as a con­ testant in mortal combat, struggling against an invisible opponent, the disease caused by the poison of the Hydra combined with the blood of Nessos. Throughout the play this disease is characterized as a living creature, a beast.2 Deianeira first attributes animal qualities to Nessos' philtre, reporting that it 'devoured' and 'consumed' (FHafJopov 676; eSEC'Tov 677) the tuft of wool with which she anointed the robe for Heracles and describing it as a 'black venom of blood' (loc aifLaToc pIAac 717) that has boiled up in 'foamy clots' (OpofLfJwOEtC &cppol 702)­ clots that recall the clotted blood of Nessos (572). The wool itself is 1 I. M. Linforth, «The Pyre on Mount Oeta in Sophocles' Trachiniae," CPCP 14 (1952) 266. An abbreviated version of this paper was read 16 April 1976 at the meeting of CAMWS in Knoxville, Tenn. For futher discussion of the bibliography on the diverse problems pre­ sented by the play, see Christina Elliott Sorum, «Monsters and the Family: A Study of Sophocles' Trachiniae," Diss. Brown U. 1974; on the complex issue of the date of the play, see especially App. II (139-73). For the purposes of this paper the date is assumed to be between 442 and 429. Charles Segal, «Sophocles' Trachiniae: Myth, Poetry, and Heroic Values," yes 25 (1977) 103-04, includes the most recent discussion of the dating [hereafter, SEGAL]. My text is Sophoclis Fabulae, ed. A. C. Pearson (Oxford 1924, rpt. 1964). S Penelope Biggs, «The Disease Theme in Sophocles' Ajax, Philoctetes, and Trachiniae," CP 61 (1966) 223-35, discusses this metaphor at length. See also Segal 114. 59 60 MONSTERS AND THE FAMILY personified as the victim of the monstrous poison; it lies opac lv' ECTap.Ev 1145). Unlike Deianeira, he not only hears the CHRISTINA ELLIOTT SORUM 67 truth but immediately recognizes its full significance and is able to act in light of this knowledge.I5 The name of Nessos the centaur is the key. This double-natured creature, half man and half horse, half alive and half dead, is a meaningful element in Heracles' realm, the ambiguous world of the hero who is man and son of Zeus, monster and monster-killer. The poison of the Hydra, the blood of Nessos are appropriate enemies. Deianeira, whose human love and desire for security were manipu­ lated by Nessos, is not. Heracles supplied Nessos with a motive and a means. He himself provoked Deianeira to act by sending Iole home. Deianeira's fundamental irrelevance to Heracles' destiny is demon­ strated by his complete disregard of her and her death after he hears Nessos' name.I6 By the revenge of the monsters Heracles is released from his labors. This release is contingent upon the destruction of the monstrous element in his nature, his strength. From this destruction emerges a transformed hero who immediately ceases to lament his devastated body.17 Physical prowess is now irrelevant, for Hercules has found another basis for his authority: his comprehension of and submission to his father's will. Each of his subsequent actions reaffirms this interpretation. IS The first command of the transformed Heracles is that Hyllos collect his scattered family, a family fragmented by Heracles' own deeds, in order that he may explain to them the oracles concerning his fate (1146-50). Heracles' previous orders to his son have all involved an element of brutal threat and physical violence for his son or his family (797-98, 1031-40, 1064-70). Now he makes a positive and 15 Galinsky, op.cit. (supra n.12) 49, also compares the two recognition scenes. He stresses, however, that Deianeira, after she has learned, focuses her sympathy on Iole, while Heracles thinks only of himself. Segal (132) considers both Heracles and Deianeira to be late learners. 16 Heracles' failure to refer again to Deianeira has been considered by some as proof of callous behavior; see Kirkwood, art.cit. (supra n.9) 208-09; Linforth, op.cit. (supra n.1) 264. For views more similar to those expressed here, see Reinhardt 69; Waldock, op.cit. (supra n.5) 88; McCall 160; Segal 131. 17 See Kamerbeek 23 and Easterling 67 on the cessation of lamentation. 18 This transformation is interpreted variously by the critics who note it. Linforth, op.cit. (supra n.l) 259, finds that from the moment Heracles hears Nessos' name the motivation of the play becomes obscure. Adams (103) considers the change to be a shedding of mortal­ ity and an assumption of divinity. Reinhardt (65) and Segal (133-34, 140) elaborate views similar to those expressed here. Heinrich Weinstock, Sophokles (Berlin 1937) 33, is almost alone in seeing no change. 68 MONSTERS AND THE FAMILY peaceful request. Heracles' desire to see his family is itself an indica­ tion of change. In the past he visited them only occasionally (31-33) and by his absences caused great anxiety for them. Now he affirms not only the importance of the family unit but also, in his plea that Hyllos call Heracles' own mother Alkmene, the importance of the continuity of the generations. Hyllos. however. is unable to comply with the request, for the family is too scattered and remote (1151-56). Heracles' peaceful acceptance of his son's inability contrasts with his hostile resistance to Hyllos' attempts to thwart him in seeking his revenge on Deianeira (1114-42). It contrasts even more with his violent reaction when Eurytos refused to grant him Iole as concubine (359-65). Heracles' explanation of the two oracles sustains the familial theme. In reporting the oracles-the first concerning the means by which he will die and the second concerning the time-Heracles refers both to the authority of his father (lK 7TaTp6c 1159; 7TPOC TfjC 7TaTpcpac Ka, 7ToAvyAwccov 8pv6c 1168). He accepts this fate decreed by his father without anger or grief. Furthermore. Heracles emphasizes his own role as a father to Hyllos, who has come to a critical moment in his own life-a moment dependent upon and parallel to his father's crisis-where he must display those attributes befitting the son of Heracles (1157-58). Heracles demanded earlier that Hyllos assist in the murder of his mother to prove he was a true son. Now he asks that Hyllos be his ally (1175, 1177) in a common endeavor not to destroy but rather to fulfill Heracles' destiny and reconstruct the family. Heracles needs this alliance, in the first place, in order to carry out his own death on the pyre, the "f//-,a 554) from her troubles: the love philtre given to her by Nessos. The chorus, commenting on Deianeira's directions to Lichas concerning the use of this potion, say that Ares now .Exoc (1227) necessarily mean 'marriage'. He concludes that Heracles intends Iole to be Hyllos' concubine. Segal, op.cit. (supra n.6) 49-50 n.30, argues that the tradition speaks of the marriage of Hyllos and Iole (Apollod. 2.7.7 and 2.S.2) and that the ambiguity of M,.,.ap in Trachiniae itself is so great that it cannot exclude their marriage: M,.,.apTa is used at 406 to refer to Deianeira herself, and it may mean 'wife' in 429. Segal's view is reinforced by Deianeira's insistence throughout the play that there can be no separation of the wifely and the sexual role. 18 There is great controversy over this request. The majority of critics regard it negatively as a sign of Heracles' continued cruelty, disregard of others, or assertion of his ego in a tribute to himself: H. D. F. Kitto, Poiesis: Structure and Thought (Sather Lectures 36, Berkeley 1966) 170-72; Kirkwood, op.cit. (supra n.9) 209; Kamerbeek 25; T. B. L. Webster, "Sophocles' Trachiniae," in Greek Poetry and Life: Essays Presented to Gilbert Murray (London 1937) 178-79; Victor Ehrenberg, Aspects of the Ancient World (Oxford 1946) 155; Ronnet, op.cit. (supra n.5) 9S; Weinstock, op.cit. (supra n.1S) 33. The opposite view is represented most strikingly by Bowra 142-43, who sees in the request an expression of Heracles' tenderness, justice and great love and concern for Iole. Elements more similar to the ideas expressed here appear at Musurillo 380; Hoey, op.cit. (supra n.5) 14; Adams 131; Letters 198; Segal 126. 152-53. CHRISTINA ELLIOTT SORUM 71 his parents.23 Now the survivors-Hyllos, who has been compelled to fill his father's role, and Iole, in whom Deianeira found so many similarities-must reestablish what is gone; they must lie together to restore life to the family. Herac1es contends that this is a pious act (dJC€/3€iv 1222). Hyllos objects that to marry her whom he regards as the cause of his mother's death and his father's suffering could only be the act of someone maddened by the avenging Furies (acnc p.~ '~ aAaC'Topwv vocoi 1235); marriage is the antithesis of the revenge that he ought to seek. It was Hyllos himself who previously introduced the Furies into the play when he cried out that 'avenging Justice' and the 'Fury' (TTO{V£p.oc LI {K7J, 'Epwuc 808-(9) woulq punish Deianeira for the murder of her husband. He, however, soon learned that he had wrongly assessed his mother. The chorus affirmed that the Furies entered this family not through Deianeira's actions but rather through Heracles' relationship to Iole, which had borne a 'great Fury' (p.Ey&Aav 'Epwuv 893-95) for the house. Heracles, in turn, saw the work of the Furies in his own tragedy, claiming that the cloak sent by Deianeira was the net of the 'Furies' CEpwuwv 1051). The cloak was, in fact, a gift of revenge, for its poison was the venom of the Hydra and the blood of Nessos whom Heracles had killed, but the aptness of the reference to the Furies has a source other than Deianeira. It was Heracles' actions that began the cycle of destruction for the family. The Furies do revenge themselves upon Heracles and destroy in him that element that led to his crime. After this cathartic loss, Heracles can meet his son's charges of impiety and assure him that the Furies have been laid to rest. With an authOrity that recalls Oedipus at the end of Oedipus of Colonus, Heracles asserts that what is pleasing to him is not impious (ov 8vcdfJEUX, 'ToVP.6v El 'T€P!fEtC K€ap 1246). Confident that he has fulfilled his mission, he can go to his final rest from toil. But Hyllos does not rejoice in his father's accomplishment. Indeed, he responds with a bitter condemnation of the gods and their treat­ ment of men (1264-74). If Heracles' last commands indicate that he accepts his terrible death as a meaningful end and that the families he 18 Easterling (66) notes that Nessos. Heracles and Deianeira are all wounded in the ribs. OfHyllos' lying side by side with his mother, Easterling says. "This detail perhaps helps to bring out the interconnexion between the deeds and sufferings of all the people involved in the disaster. as well as stressing the great lovability of Deianeira as a mother." 72 MONSTERS AND THE FAMILY has destroyed are reestablished, how can his son's extreme bitterness be explained? In Hyllos' first appearance in the play, his specific function is to act as go-between for his mother and father, but more basically he serves to emphasize by his presence as a son Deianeira's role as a mother and the existence of a household. In spite of his eagerness to find his father, Hyllos in no way appears to be inspired to act because of a desire to exhibit noble and manly qualities or a desire to identify with his heroic father. Like Telemachos at the beginning of the Odyssey (1.280-305), he requires the urgings of another to undertake the journey for information about his father and to recognize that this is the manly course (65--66, 92-93). When Hyllos returns to the stage, he is again in the role of the son and the messenger, but this time he is a messenger from Heracles. Horrified by the familial aspects of the crime he has witnessed (739-40), he denounces his mother for the murder of Heracles (734-36). Yet throughout his speech it is apparent­ through his emphasis on the fact that Deianeira is his mother and that it is his mother who did the awful thing-that his relationship to her pervades his thoughts. Hyllos learns too late of his mistake in accusing Deianeira of willful murder; she has died. His belated understanding (01/ €KS,Sax8ek 934) of the true situation echoes a theme first presented through Deia­ neira; she learned too late of the true effects of the philtre. Encounter­ ing forces outside their usual world both mother and son fail to understand. It is only Heracles who, when he learns of the role of Nessos in his death, can respond with creative action. The nurse's report of Hyllos lying side by side with his dead mother concludes Deianeira's role in the drama. Together on the bed the mother and the son who is so closely identified with her symbolize the death of the family. The alliance of Hyllos and Deianeira becomes explicit in the exodos. Here Hyllos accomplishes his first significant individual act by telling his father Deianeira's story. The strength that he exhibits in standing up to his father's wrath is the first sign of his manhood-but it is done for the sake of his mother and is an indication of his continuing love and regard for her. Soon, however, Heracles demands that his son become his father's substitute in the perpetuation of the family. Hyllos never accepts this role willingly because he does not understand the true nature of his father's demands. He believes that he will be CHRISTINA ELLIOTT SORUM 73 the murderer of his father. He is unconvinced by his father's assertions of the piety of his marriage to lole and acquiesces only because he feels that he has protected himself from the danger of