"Arts, Faculty of"@en . "Classical, Near Eastern and Religious Studies, Department of"@en . "DSpace"@en . "UBCV"@en . "Bowman, Laurel Marjorie"@en . "2010-07-13T02:57:59Z"@en . "1986"@en . "Master of Arts - MA"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "In the last eighty years a great deal has been written about the character and symbolic significance of Klytemnestra in Aeschylus' trilogy, the Oresteia. These studies have contributed much that is useful to the understanding of Klytemnestra's character and her role in the trilogy. However, by concentrating on her position in the Oresteia, some aspects of her role in the first play (the Agamemnon), of which she is the protagonist, have been neglected because they are not absolutely relevant to the themes of the whole trilogy. Equally, the significance of some aspects of her character and role in the Agamemnon have frequently been blown out of proportion in that play simply because they become important later in the trilogy.\r\nThis thesis attempts, by careful consideration of the text of the Agamemnon alone, to arrive at a balanced view of Klytemnestra 's character and role in that play. Her personal characteristics, and her relationship with the themes developed and images used in the Agamemnon, are discussed in the order in which they are revealed in the text.\r\nAppendix A traces the development of the Oresteia myth in literature and art before Aeschylus, and discusses the changes he made in the story as he received it.\r\nAppendix B analyses the arguments surrounding Klytemnestra' s stage movements in the Agamemnon, and suggests a sequence of entrances and exits which satisfies most of the points raised."@en . "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/26376?expand=metadata"@en . "KLYTEMNESTRA IN THE AGAMEMNON OF AESCHYLUS By LAUREL MARJORIE BOWMAN B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o , 1981 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN THE REQUIREMENTS MASTER PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF FOR THE DEGREE OF OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE \u00C2\u00A9 UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1986 L a u r e l M a r j o r i e Bowman, 1986 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the head o f my department or by h i s or her r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood t h a t copying or p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department of The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date ^ /\"''^ \u00C2\u00AB1 N. i i ABSTRACT In the l a s t e i g h t y years a gre a t d e a l has been w r i t t e n about the character and symbolic s i g n i f i c a n c e of Klytemnestra i n Aeschylus' t r i l o g y , the O r e s t e i a . These s t u d i e s have c o n t r i b u t e d much that i s u s e f u l to the understanding of Klytemnestra's c h a r -a c t e r and her r o l e i n the t r i l o g y . However, by c o n c e n t r a t i n g on her p o s i t i o n i n the O r e s t e i a , some a s p e c t s o f her r o l e i n the f i r s t p l a y (the Agamemnon), of which she i s the p r o t a g o n i s t , have been n e g l e c t e d because they are not a b s o l u t e l y r e l e v a n t to the themes of the whole t r i l o g y . E q u a l l y , the s i g n i f i c a n c e of some aspects of her character and r o l e i n the Agamemnon have f r e q u e n t -l y been blown out of p r o p o r t i o n i n that p l a y simply because they become important l a t e r i n the t r i l o g y . T h i s t h e s i s attempts, by c a r e f u l c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the t e x t of the Agamemnon alone, to a r r i v e at a balanced view of Klytem-n e s t r a 's character and r o l e i n that p l a y . Her p e r s o n a l c h a r a c -t e r i s t i c s , and her r e l a t i o n s h i p with the themes developed and images used i n the Agamemnon, are di s c u s s e d i n the order i n which they are revealed i n the t e x t . Appendix A t r a c e s the development of the O r e s t e i a myth i n l i t e r a t u r e and a r t before Aeschylus, and d i s c u s s e s the changes he made i n the s t o r y as he received i t . Appendix B a n a l y s e s the arguments surrounding Klytemnes-t r a ' s stage movements i n the Agamemnon, and suggests a sequence of entrances and e x i t s which s a t i s f i e s most of the p o i n t s r a i s e d . i i i T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S ABSTRACT i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i v INTRODUCTION 1 KLYTEMNESTRA IN THE AGAMEMNON 7 NOTES 109 APPENDIX A: The O r e s t e i a T r a d i t i o n and A e s c h y l u s ' I n n o v a t i o n s 118 NOTES TO APPENDIX A 129 APPENDIX B: K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s E n t r a n c e s and E x i t s 132 NOTES TO APPENDIX B 148 BIBLIOGRAPHY 150 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to thank my a d v i s o r , Dr. P o d l e c k i , and Dr. Edinger, f o r t h e i r t h o u g h t f u l advice and a s s i s t a n c e i n t h i s t he-s i s , and f o r t h e i r u n f a i l i n g p a t i e n c e . I am a l s o g r a t e f u l t o Robert, C a r o l and Edward f o r t h e i r c h e e r f u l h e l p i n p r o o f r e a d i n g , and f o r a l l o w i n g me to d i s c u s s problems i n the t e x t a t l e n g t h with them i n the course of my work on the t h e s i s ; and to Matthew, f o r showing me what graduate students are r e a l l y supposed t o be do i n g . F i n a l l y , I would p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e t o thank my p a r e n t s f o r t h e i r unceasing moral (and frequent f i n a n c i a l ) support over the l a s t three years. 1 INTRODUCTION To i n t e r p r e t p r o p e r l y Klytemnestra's r o l e i n the Agamemnon one should keep two p r i n c i p l e s i n mind. F i r s t , she i s a p e r s o n 1 , not merely an e x p r e s s i o n of a p o l i t i c a l or s o c i a l theme. Second, she i s not the p o i n t of the p l a y . Neither of these p r i n c i p l e s has been a matter of common agreement among c r i t i c s ; i n f a c t , one or the other i s u s u a l l y ignored, by omission or d e l i b e r a t e neg-l e c t . For t h i s reason, I would l i k e to d i s c u s s my reasons f o r h o l d i n g them before going on. In the O r e s t e i a , A eschylus attempts to r e s o l v e a b s t r a c t q u e s t i o n s of j u s t i c e and d i v i n e w i l l , which he e x p l o r e s through the c o n f l i c t of male versus female, o i k o s v e r s u s s o c i e t y , and parent versus c h i l d . These i s s u e s are expressed one way or an-other i n a l l three p l a y s , but they become c l e a r e s t i n the Eumen- i d e s , where they are i s o l a t e d from human a c t i v i t i e s and judged ra t h e r than enacted. (The f a c t that many c h a r a c t e r s i n the Eumen- i d e s are d i v i n e i s indeed a s i g n that the i s s u e s i n t h a t p l a y have become more a b s t r a c t than they were i n the f i r s t two p l a y s of the t r i l o g y . ) In the Agamemnon, however, the c h a r a c t e r s are human, and the i s s u e s are not as w e l l - d e f i n e d or as a b s t r a c t as they l a t e r become. I t i s a mistake to t r e a t them as i f they a r e . I t i s e q u a l l y a mistake to t r e a t the i s s u e s developed and r e s o l v e d i n the Eumenides as the only q u e s t i o n s of any importance i n the Agamemnon. The c o n f l i c t and t r i a l i n the Eumenides stands on a b a s i s of p e r s o n a l , human, concrete a c t i o n s and events which 2 was e s t a b l i s h e d i n the Agamemnon. The events of the f i r s t p l a y are not simply examples of the work of f o r c e s r e v e a l e d and i s s u e s addressed i n the t h i r d . Rather, the events of the Agamemnon are the r e a l i t y from which the Eumenides' a b s t r a c t , i n t e l l e c t u a l p r i n c i p l e s are d e r i v e d . The pers o n a l and the concre t e form the core of the Agamemnon. In the Eumenides the p e r s o n a l and con-c r e t e aspects have been p a r t l y s t r i p p e d away; but to ignore them i n the Agamemnon f o r that reason, or to di s m i s s them as unimpor-t a n t , i s to miss a l a r g e part of the t h r u s t of the f i r s t p l a y . Thus, the c h a r a c t e r s found i n the Agamemnon are not merely the v e h i c l e s of a theme, however much the t r i a l i n the Eumenides might tempt one to think they a re. They cannot be l i n e d up as n e a t l y as one might wish to do on one s i d e or another of the c o n f l i c t s d e f i n e d i n the Eumenides. They are not simply d e v i c e s to move the p l o t , or the e l a b o r a t i o n of the c o n f l i c t , forward. The l i n e s You make t r i a l of me as i f I were a s i l l y woman; but ... whether you p r a i s e or blame me, i t ' s the same. T h i s i s Agamemnon, my husband, and a corpse; the work of t h i s r i g h t hand, a j u s t craftsman. So th i n g s stand. (Ag_. 1401-1406) 2 are not d e l i v e r e d by an a b s t r a c t symbol of ma t r i a r c h y , a p a s s i v e v e h i c l e of the workings of j u s t i c e , or an example of e a r l y femin-i s t t h o u g h t . They a r e spoken by a s p e c i f i c , p o w e r f u l , s e l f -aware, b l o o d - s p a t t e r e d woman s t a n d i n g over a b l e e d i n g c o r p s e . They were spoken, moreover, before an audience which had not the 3 advantage l a t e r c r i t i c s d i d of knowing what was going to happen i n the Eumenides l a t e r on and i n t e r p r e t i n g a c c o r d i n g l y . T h i s i s not to say that the pl a y s of the O r e s t e i a are not connected. Of course they are; and of course the i s s u e s r e s o l v e d i n the Eumenides are f i r s t r a i s e d i n the a c t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n of the Agamemnon, i n which they a r e indeed i mportant, i f not as c l e a r - c u t as i n the l a t e r p l a y . But not a l l of the i n f o r m a t i o n g i v e n or q u e s t i o n s asked i n the f i r s t p l a y are t r e a t e d i n the t h i r d ; and those which do have been reduced and s i m p l i f i e d . I t i s necessary to say t h i s because i t has so o f t e n been f o r g o t t e n . Winnington-Ingram's a r t i c l e (1948: passim), i n which he proposes t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a be seen as a r e b e l l i o u s f e m i n i s t who r e s e n t s male power, f i t s her p o r t r a i t i n the Eumenides i n some ways, but s u i t s the Klytemnestra of the Agamemnon h a r d l y at a l l . Z e i t l i n ' s theory (1978: passim) that the O r e s t e i a i s one of a capacious genre of myths concerning the o v e r t u r n of m a t r i a r c h a l r u l e a g a i n s u i t s only the t h i r d p l a y of the t r i l o g y . Her theory a r i s e s from themes s t r o n g l y s t r e s s e d i n the Eumenides, Winning-ton-Ingram's from more minor p o i n t e r s i n the t e x t ; but n e i t h e r t h e o r y can be read back i n t o the Agamemnon and h e l d to \" f u l l y e x p l a i n \" Klytemnestra, or the a c t i o n of the f i r s t p l a y . As Aya Betensky (1978:11) p o i n t s out, to make of Aeschylus no more than a f e m i n i s t , an economist or a housekeeper t r i v i a l i z e s the p l a y s . One must ignore a good deal of the text of the Agamemnon i n order to make the Kly t e m n e s t r a of that p l a y no more than a symbol of something e l s e . She i s perhaps \" d e p e r s o n a l i z e d \" (Betensky, 1978: 4 12), and c e r t a i n l y o n e - d i m e n s i o n a l , i n the t h i r d p l a y of the t r i l o g y , but not i n the f i r s t . In the Agamemnon, Klytemnestra i s the c h a r a c t e r through whom v a r i o u s themes and f o r c e s a r e f o c -ussed; she i s not h e r s e l f only an e x p r e s s i o n of one (or more) of those themes. The o t h e r p r i n c i p l e , e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t , i s r a t h e r the r e v e r s e of the f i r s t . Klytemnestra i s so s t r i k i n g and dominant a c h a r a c t e r i n the Agamemnon that one i s sometimes tempted to f i n d the r e s t of the p l a y no more than a r e f l e c t i o n o f , or a r e a c t i o n to , her. As Gould (1978: 59) expresses t h i s view, \"the s t r u c t u r e of the p l a y i s such that i t s other f i g u r e s are seen i n the h a l f -shadow of her aura\". Her p o r t r a y a l i s so v i v i d , i n f a c t , t h a t i t can l e a d the unwary to think that Aeschylus' primary purpose, i n the Agamemnon at l e a s t , was to b u i l d up a strong human c h a r a c t e r and a l l o w the p l o t and a c t i o n to develop more or l e s s as a con-sequence of her nature; but the s u b j e c t s of the c h o r a l odes - the gods, the p a s t , j u s t i c e , and h u b r i s , and o n l y o c c a s i o n a l l y the Queen - s h o u l d t e l l us o t herwise. C e r t a i n l y the c h a r a c t e r of K l y t e m n e s t r a dominates and c a r r i e s the burden of the a c t i o n i n the f i r s t p l a y ; and, e q u a l l y c e r t a i n l y , the p l a y i s not about h e r , nor i s her psychology the focus of A e s c h y l u s ' a t t e n t i o n . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r , or \" p s y c h o l o g y \" , h e l p s to humanize and make p a r t i c u l a r the general i s s u e s Aeschylus t r e a t s i n the Agamemnon. E q u a l l y , the f o c u s s i n g of the themes and f o r -ces i n the p l a y through her c h a r a c t e r and a c t i o n s helps to make t h a t c h a r a c t e r s t r o n g e r and more v i v i d . The reader should not 5 d i s m i s s e i t h e r of these f a c t o r s as t r i v i a l . Her p e r s o n a l c h a r a c -t e r does e x i s t , and i s to some extent independent of the a c t i o n : one can imagine a l e s s complex and c o l o u r f u l c r e a t u r e performing the same a c t s and a c t i n g as an exejnplujn of the same i s s u e s as K l y t e m n e s t r a does. But the f o r c e s r e v e a l e d l a t e r i n the p l a y which o n l y i n d i r e c t l y concern Klytemnestra and which do not de-pend e n t i r e l y on her ch a r a c t e r f o r t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n demonstrate Aeschylus' concern with i s s u e s other than h i s p r o t a g o n i s t ' s psy-chology. Aeschylus d i d not invent the p l o t or the themes he ad-dres s e s i n the Agamemnon i n order to i l l u m i n a t e d i f f e r e n t f a c e t s of her p s y c h o l o g y . Klytemnestra i s a v i v i d and unique i n d i v i -d u a l , but her c h a r a c t e r i s subordinate to the theme of the p l a y . In t h i s d i s c u s s i o n of Klyte m n e s t r a i n the Agamemnon, an attempt w i l l t h e r e f o r e be made to keep to the middle ground. T h i s can be done by s t i c k i n g c l o s e l y to the t e x t of the p l a y , a s k i n g t h o s e q u e s t i o n s which the t e x t prompts us to ask and a v o i d i n g the i n v e n t i o n of thoughts, past events, or doings behind the scenes t o which the t e x t never a l l u d e s . By examining her speeches and a c t i o n s , the way other c h a r a c t e r s see and r e a c t to her and the imagery a s s o c i a t e d with her, step by st e p from be-g i n n i n g to end of the play i n the order i n which the l i n e s were o r i g i n a l l y p r e s e n t e d , I w i l l attempt to present a balanced and c o m p r e h e n s i v e v i e w o f K l y t e m n e s t r a and h e r r o l e i n t h e Agamemnon. The t e x t of the Agamemnon i s i t s e l f n o t o r i o u s l y d i f f i c u l t and i n some p l a c e s h o p e l e s s l y c o r r u p t . Great e f f o r t s have been 6 made i n t h i s century to r e c o n s t r u c t i t i n i t s e n t i r e t y , f o r i n -stance by Fra e n k e l (1950) and by Denniston and Page (1957). The products of such attempts, however c a r e f u l and s c h o l a r l y , are of course always s l i g h t l y suspect, as they must to some extent de-pend on what the e d i t o r f e e l s that Aeschylus i s l i k e l y to have w r i t t e n . In both the above-mentioned e d i t i o n s , however, the e d i t o r s have made every e f f o r t to keep the i n f l u e n c e of t h e i r own p r e j u d i c e s t o a minimum i n t h e i r d e c i s i o n s on the t e x t of the p l a y , and the r e s u l t s of t h e i r e f f o r t s are as trustworthy as such t h i n g s can p o s s i b l y be. In t h i s t h e s i s I have r e l i e d w i thout comment on the e d i t i o n of the Agamemnon p u b l i s h e d i n 1957 by John Denniston and Denys Page. Any d e v i a t i o n s from t h e i r t e x t w i l l be noted. 7 KLYTEMNESTRA IN THE AGAMEMNON A e s c h y l u s d r a s t i c a l l y changed t h e e a r l i e r v e r s i o n s o f t h e myth o f t h e O r e s t e i a i n h i s t e l l i n g o f t h e s t o r y o f t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon 3. B e f o r e A e s c h y l u s , K l y t e m n e s t r a was s e e n a s a s h a -dowy, s e c o n d a r y c h a r a c t e r who s t o o d i n t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f t h e h e r e d i t a r y f e u d between t h e k i n g and h i s c o u s i n A e g i s t h u s . The r e a d e r i s e a r l y warned t h a t she w i l l n o t o c c u p y t h e same p o s i t i o n i n t h i s p l a y . In l i n e s 10-11, t h e watchman e x p l a i n s t h a t he i s on t h e r o o f w a t c h i n g f o r t h e b e a c o n - f i r e f r o m T r o y b e c a u s e \" t h u s r u l e s ( K p a f V R ) / t h e m a n - c o u n s e l l i n g ( ^ ^ o p o u X o s ) ) e x p e c t a n t h e a r t o f a woman\". \" Kp*T\u00C2\u00A3( <\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 i s t h u s t h e f i r s t a c t i o n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h K l y t e m n e s t r a . \"CW^>OJ3OU\O\) \", a r a r e word p r o b a b l y c o i n e d by A e s -c h y l u s f o r t h i s l i n e ( F r a e n k e l 1950: n. a d l o c . ) h a s s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e c o n n o t a t i o n s , b u t must convey a t l e a s t t h e i d e a o f mas-c u l i n e i n t e l l i g e n c e o r p l a n n i n g . The p o s i t i o n o f t h i s word b e -s i d e y ^ i i X O s ( \" Y I A U L K O S UO'dpopoiAoy) \") c a s t s i m m e d i a t e l y i n t o r e l i e f one o f t h e p r i n c i p a l themes o f t h e p l a y , t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f male a n d f e m a l e , as w e l l as t h e p r i n c i p a l o d d i t y o f K l y t e m n e s -t r a ' s own c h a r a c t e r - t h a t she i s a woman, b u t has q u a l i t i e s o f m i n d w h i c h p r o p e r l y b e l o n g t o a man. I t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y t o t r a n s l a t e \" f W l j ^ \" (11) as \" a m b i t i o u s \" , a s W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m (1948: 130) d o e s , t o u n d e r s t a n d t h a t an u n u s u a l woman r u l e s t h e h o u s e h o l d t o w h i c h t h e watchman b e l o n g s . W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m (1948: 130) goes t o o f a r i n s e e i n g a c l e a r r e f e r e n c e t o A e g i s t h u s i n l i n e 18. The watchman i s unhappy w i t h h i s p o s i t i o n , f e a r f u l , 8 and mourns the misfortune of a house which i s not as w e l l c a r e d -f o r as i t was (15-19); but no more can be understood from h i s words at t h i s time than that a l l i s not w e l l under the roof t h i s woman r u l e s . The watchman now h a i l s the beacon. The strange woman, who i s now (26) i d e n t i f i e d as the w i f e of Agamemnon, i s b i d d e n to r a i s e a \"woman's c r y of j o y \" (b\oXuy/Uod i 28), because Troy has been taken - i f , the watchman adds, the beacon i s c o r r e c t . His speech concludes i n f e a r , doubt and s i l e n c e . He hopes he may see h i s master a g a i n , but does not t r u s t that he w i l l (34); and he w i l l say nothing more of what i s wrong with the household. Some know a l r e a d y and understand h i s h i n t s ; to o t h e r s , he r e f u s e s to c l a r i f y the matter. (37-39). A e g i s t h u s as h i s m i s t r e s s ' l o v e r , as the reader l a t e r - much l a t e r - d i s c o v e r s ; but i n the course of the p l a y many problems of t h i s house w i l l be d i s c l o s e d , and the watchman's vague f e a r s h i n t at a l l of them. A l l that has been re v e a l e d at t h i s p o i n t i n the p l a y i s that a woman commands i n the household and that something i s badly wrong, so wrong that even the good news from Troy, i f i t i s t r u e , i s not s u f f i c i e n t to d i s p e l the gloom. The chorus enter at l i n e 40. They speak of the departure of the A r g i v e f l e e t f o r Troy, ten years ago. Agamemnon and Mene-l a u s are d e s c r i b e d as the \" s t r o n g yoke of the A t r e i d a e \" (ovupdO Of c o u r s e the watchman h i n t s here a t the p r e s e n c e of ,44) and t r e a t e d as a u n i t , with common concerns. 9 They a r e d e s c r i b e d as v u l t u r e s m o u r n i n g t h e l o s s o f t h e i r young ( 4 9 - 5 4 ) , whose c r i e s a r e h e a r d by a god who p i t i e s them and s e n d s t h e \" l a t e - a v e n g i n g E r i n y s \" (fartpottodoJ ... E.pa)oJ ,59-60) on t h e t r a n s g r e s s o r . In t h e same way Zeus X e n i o s s e n d s t h e A t r e i d a e , a s E r i n y e s , a g a i n s t A l e x a n d e r , t h e t r a n s g r e s s o r , o v e r a \"many-manned\" o r \"much-married\" (TToXiMi)op<*5 , 62) woman who w i l l be t h e c a u s e o f many d e a t h s . The woman i s o f c o u r s e H e l e n , t h e d a u g h t e r o f L e d a a n d T y n d a r e u s , t h o u g h she i s n o t y e t named. T h u s t h e f i r s t i m a g e u s e d i n t h e ode c o n c e r n s an E r i n y s who a v e n g e s , t h o u g h l a t e , t h e l o s s o f c h i l d r e n ; and w h i l e i t i s u s e d o n l y o f t h e A t r e i d a e h e r e i t s h o u l d be remembered. M e t a p h o r s i n A e s -c h y l u s s h o u l d n e v e r be assumed i n a d v a n c e t o h o l d a s i n g l e o r a s i m p l e m e a n i n g . They now (83-103) t u r n t o w a r d s t h e p a l a c e and a p o s t r o p h i z e i t s i n h a b i t a n t , who i s not y e t on s t a g e 4 . The f i r s t r e f e r e n c e t o K l y t e m n e s t r a was a s t h e w i f e o f one o f t h e A t r e i d a e . Now t h e c h o r u s ' a d d r e s s \" d a u g h t e r o f T y n d a r e u s \" ( T^'d^t^ QO^f<.u -660f.li}fj means a l s o \" a d u l t e r a t e d \" or \"poisoned\"; and as G o l d h i l l (1984: 17) shows, \"/^/W^i \", with i t s c o n n o t a t i o n of womanish or O r i e n t a l l u x u r y , stands almost i n c o n t r a d i c t i on to ncl^ohoLft \"\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 \"$o\o$ \" i s commonly a s s o c i a t e d with feminine or b a r b a r i a n c h a r a c -t e r i s t i c s . P e rsuasion, 7Tec0^> , i s important throughout the p l a y , u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d with Klytemnestra. Already Klytemnestra, hav-ing been \"persuaded\" by a message, i s shown as a d u l t e r a t i n g with perhaps d e c e p t i v e \"persuasions\" the b l a z i n g torches whose k i n d -l i n g she commanded and which the chorus have seen as symbols of hope (99-103). T h i s renders ambiguous the s i g n i f i c a n c e of these t r i u m p h a n t l y b l a z i n g torches; The ambiguity i s s t r e s s e d by the chorus' own doubt of the torches' meaning; they end t h e i r address on a note of u n c e r t a i n t y , unsure that they should t r u s t the s a c -r i f i c i a l f i r e as the watchman was unsure of the beacon, both i n e x i s t e n c e by command of Klytemnestra. I t should be noted ( Z e i t l i n , 1965: 463) that Klytemnestra has been shown as a s a c r i f i c e r i n t h i s scene, i n t h a t she a r -11 ranged the s a c r i f i c e s throughout the c i t y . The motif of s a c r i -f i c e w i l l appear throughout the p l a y . The chorus now t u r n from t h e i r apostrophe t o the p a l a c e and break i n t o s t r o p h i c song. The f i r s t strophe (104-121) speaks of the omen of the two eagles which a t t a c k and eat the pregnant hare. The a n t i s t r o p h e (123-129) g i v e s C a l c h a s 1 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s event. The A t r e i d a e are the eagles; the hare i s Troy; the omen thus p r e d i c t s that the Greeks w i l l capture Troy. But A r t e -mis p i t i e s the hare with her young and may hold up the campaign. The epode (140-159) e l a b o r a t e s the prophecy: Artemis i s k i n d to the young of a l l c r e a t u r e s - l i o n s are s p e c i f i c a l l y mentioned. Calchas prays that she may not keep the Danaans i n p o r t with an adverse wind, i n anger at the e a g l e ' s f e a s t and eager f o r an-othe r s a c r i f i c e , a lawless one (k\)op.6\) , 150), \"inborn worker of feuds that does not fe a r a husband (or \"a man\")\" (^ cK\u00C2\u00A3o>i) TfcWtfiU St/f-fiu'roJ , ou $ic6rj0op*. , 151-2) ;for t h e i r abides a \" t e r r i b l e , e v e r -r e c u r r i n g , d e c e i t f u l housekeeper, u n f o r g i v i n g c h i l d - a v e n g i n g (or ch i l d - a v e n g e d ) Wrath\" {(pOfHp* TT*\ci)opTos OLKO\)6^OS $o\t<* , ^ui/^uo\) (IrjJlS TtuJoiTOiJoS , 152-155). There f o l l o w s (160-183) the p u z z l i n g hymn to Zeus. For our purposes i t need o n l y be mentioned that he i s d e s c r i b e d as the u l t i m a t e v i c t o r i n any contest (no matter what human seems to win), as those with understanding k-now. Zeus i s a l s o a s s o c i a t e d h e r e w i t h (j)prj) , i n t e l l e c t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g , and cognate words (\)rt\u00C2\u00A7os , 16 5; fosJuJ , 17 5; To 181.) He has a l r e a d y been a l l i e d with the A t r e i d kings i n t h e i r quest f o r vengeance f o r a woman. \"(f)pj) \" g e n e r a l l y seems to be a c h a r -a c t e r i s t i c a s s o c i a t e d with males i n t h i s p l a y . At 184 the chorus r e t u r n to the n a r r a t i v e . Gales sent by A r t e m i s h o l d the s h i p s i n p o r t , as C a l c h a s had f e a r e d . The storm, which wears away the \"flower of the A r g i v e s \" ( Wi), 297-98), can be h a l t e d by a more grievous remedy (than the d i s e a s e ? ) - the s a c r i f i c e of Agamemnon's daughter, SO^-UA) kyAji** , at her f a t h e r ' s hands. A f t e r d e l i b e r a t i o n , Agamemnon dec i d e s to commit the a c t . At the moment of h i s d e c i s i o n , the wind of h i s (fipjH v e e r s and blows i l l , l i k e the g a l e s from the Strymon; h i s t h i n k i n g (To fataJtci) ) becomes JAh6'To\j+c\) . He s a c r i f i c e s h i s daughter i n a i d of a \"woman-avenging\" or \"woman-avenged\" (JvddL -HoTTOiJcui) , 226) war. Thus comes about the second s a c r i f i c e n a r r -ated i n t h i s p l a y . Calchas' prophecy has so f a r , then, been f u l f i l l e d . What of the r e s t of i t - the c h i l d - a v e n g i n g , housekeeping Wrath which does not f e a r a husband? W i l l the war be avenged by_ a woman? The powerful man-minded woman whom the watchman spoke of comes to mind; she i s the mother of the s a c r i f i c e d g i r l , and has so f a r kept to the house i n the p l a y . The chorus warn \"ItyJdt- $( A<*A^ ~ yos ouiA afuftfjyoc \"( 249), and show a g e n e r a l fear of the f u t u r e (251-253). Klytemnestra now appears i n the doorway of the house. The chorus r e f e r to her r e s p e c t f u l l y as the \"^ut)iJo^aou^o\) YptAOZ \" (257) 13 of the land and assure us (or themselves) that her wishes f o r the outcome of these things are benign (255). 6 I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that the chorus s p e c i f i c a l l y s t a t e t h a t they revere her K^A-Tot, which d e r i v e s , they e x p l a i n , from the f a c t t h a t she i s the wife of an absent male r u l e r (258-260). The word used f o r \"male\" here ('Ap6(}) ) i s the medical, b i o l o g i c a l and gram-m a t i c a l term meaning \"male p r i n c i p l e \" ( G o l d h i l l , 1984: 34). They acknowledge her a u t h o r i t y o n l y because i t d e r i v e s from male power, which shows again the o p p o s i t i o n between male and female which has a l r e a d y been seen i n the p l a y . They express no l o y a l t y to her p e r s o n a l l y ; i n f a c t , t h e i r care i n e x p l a i n i n g that what they r e s p e c t they show for her i s based o n l y on her p o s i t i o n i s so p o i n t e d as to appear almost rude. As Denniston, Page (1957: n. ad l o c . ) p o i n t out, \"... i t i s not thus t h a t the s e n a t o r s address Atossa i n the P e r s i a n s \" (at Pers. 150-158). That g r e e t -i n g c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d away as O r i e n t a l extravagance; but the A r g i v e e l d e r s themselves greet Agamemnon q u i t e d i f f e r e n t l y , when he a r r i v e s , a s s u r i n g him of t h e i r h e a r t f e l t f r i e n d s h i p and good w i l l (805-806). That g r e e t i n g shows t h a t they are c a p a b l e o f d i s p l a y i n g a f f e c t i o n towards a r u l e r ; but here, they are p o l i t e , i f t h a t , and no more. They r e p e a t t h e i r q u e s t i o n s about the s a c r i f i c e s , a sking i f Klytemnestra has heard good news, or s a c r i -f i c e s i n hope of i t . They add a p o l i t e formula t o the e f f e c t t h a t she need not answer i f she does not wish t o . T h e i r tone i s fo r m a l , very r e s p e c t f u l , and holds no warmth towards her. 14 K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s f i r s t two l i n e s c i t e a p r o v e r b which i n -v o l v e s a maternal f i g u r e ; she hopes that morning, \"from (or \"tak-i n g a f t e r \" ) i t s mother n i g h t \" [jUyrpos gojpoi)r]$ \u00E2\u0080\u00A2frJ^><* , 265 ) may b r i n g good t i d i n g s . S e v e r a l c r i t i c s have commented with percep-t i o n on t h i s l i n e : Goheen (1955: 133) that i t shows Klytemnes-t r a , from the b e g i n n i n g , as t h i n k i n g of e v e r y t h i n g i n terms of motherhood and generation; Betensky (1978: 13) that the E r i n y e s , a l r e a d y mentioned, a r e l a t e r r e v e a l e d to be the daughters o f Mother Night - the morning i s thus a l l i e d to the Avenging Ones; Peradotto (1964: 388) that i n saying that t h i s day \"takes a f t e r \" (or i s born from) the n i g h t , Klytemnestra c o u l d w e l l mean that i t w i l l be dark, no r e a l day a t a l l . C o n v e n t i o n a l imagery makes l i g h t a symbol of hope and l i f e : the watchman, however, was d o u b t f u l of the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the b e a c o n - l i g h t which Klytemnes-t r a commanded; the chorus have doubted the s a c r i f i c i a l t o r c h e s which she commanded and a l s o a d u l t e r a t e d ; and now she h e r s e l f p e r v e r t s the hopeful dawn l i g h t ' s s i g n i f i c a n c e i n s a y i n g that i t i s from a dark mother. One need not accept a l l of these i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n s to understand that her opening l i n e s , however looked a t , are ominous. She then t e l l s the chorus that the A r g i v e s have taken Troy. G o l d h i l l (1984: 36 and ch. 1, passim) has developed an i n t e r e s t i n g and u s e f u l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the ensuing scene and some ot h e r s i n the p l a y , which i n v o l v e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between symbol and meaning, speaker and l i s t e n e r and verbs of \" s e e i n g \" 15 (or \"seeming\") and \" s a y i n g \" . These d i s t i n c t i o n s are p a r t i c u -l a r l y r e l e v a n t to a d i s c u s s i o n of Klytemnestra i n these scenes. Klytemnestra i n t h i s p l ay i s f r e q u e n t l y shown as an a d r o i t m a n i p u l a t o r of symbols, both words and o t h e r s . T h i s i s shown p a r t l y by the f a c t that she d e f i n e s the s i g n i f i c a n c e of symbols. For i n s t a n c e , she d e f i n e s the symbol of the beacon l i g h t as hav-in g the meaning (or \" s i g n i f i c a n c e \" ) that Troy has been d e s t r o y e d . The beacon, l i k e any other symbol, c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y have any meaning a t a l l . The chorus r e c o g n i z e the ambiguity of meaning i n h e r e n t i n any symbol and a c c o r d i n g l y doubt t h a t the meaning Klytemnestra has d e f i n e d f o r the beacon i s i t s t r u e s i g n i f i c a n c e - there i s f o r them a gap between symbol and meaning. Klytemnes-t r a , who invented the symbol to begin with (she ordered the c h a i n of beacons) and d e f i n e d i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e , sees no gap between the symbol and i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e ; there i s no ambiguity, no p o t e n t i a l other meaning, inherent i n the beacon as f a r as she i s concerned. The d i s t i n c t i o n between v e r b s of s e e i n g and s a y i n g i s p a r a l l e l to that between symbols and meaning. A symbol \" i s \" what one sees, but \"means\" what i t says. For i n s t a n c e , the beacon \" i s \" a l a r g e f i r e on a mountain, which one sees i n the n i g h t ; i t \"says\" that Troy has been captured - or so Klytemnestra t e l l s us. For the chorus, then, true knowledge comes of a c c u r a t e i n t e r p r e t -a t i o n of what a symbol \" t r u l y \" (or \" c l e a r l y \" ) says. But a sym-b o l , by i t s n a t u r e , can have any s i g n i f i c a n c e - can \"say\" any-t h i n g ; and what i t \" t r u l y says\" need have no connection with what i t \"seems\" to be. The chorus, t h e r e f o r e , cannot know the t r u t h , 16 u n l e s s they f i n d an i n t e r p r e t e r of symbols whom they can t r u s t n e i t h e r to make mistakes i n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n nor to l i e . 7 Klytem-n e s t r a , as w i l l appear throughout the p l a y , a t t a c h e s meaning more or l e s s a r b i t r a r i l y t o symbols, w i t h more regard f o r what w i l l s u i t her p u r p o s e s - f o r \" f a i r seeming\" - than f o r t h e i r t r u e s i g n i f i c a n c e , t h a t i s , f o r what they \" t r u l y say\". The chorus sense t h i s aspect of her c h a r a c t e r , and a c c o r d i n g l y do not t r u s t her i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s without q u e s t i o n . Because what a symbol \"says\" (= \"means\") i s the o n l y t r u t h t h e r e i s to f i n d , however i n a c c e s s i b l e i t may be, verbs of \"say-i n g \" a r e a s s o c i a t e d with t r u e u n d e r s t a n d i n g , . fafji) i s a m a s c u l i n e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , as noted e a r l i e r ; knowledge a c q u i r e d t h r o u g h \" s e e i n g \" or \"seeming\" i s c o n s i d e r e d f e m i n i n e i n t h i s p l a y . When meaning and symbol are thus d i v i d e d there w i l l a l s o e x i s t a gap between l i s t e n e r and speaker. The l i s t e n e r cannot t r u s t the words of the speaker to hold true meaning; words are a l s o symbols and so can be a r b i t r a r i l y d e f i n e d . T h i s gap i s c l o s e d by means o f \"Vtt6\u00C2\u00BB\". \"lifted\" i s d e f i n e d by G o l d h i l l (1984: 36) as that q u a l i t y of the speaker or of the \"faos \" of the speaker which engenders \"Uutts \" and understanding i n the l i s t -e n e r . Thus, t h e r e i s a s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between fi<-eu> and TiLGYt* . Klytemnestra, through her s k i l l at m a n i p u l a t i n g symbols - or p o s s i b l y simply as an innate c h a r a c t e r i s t i c - i s p o r t r a y e d as the possessor of a great deal of ireid^ . 17 The chorus' f i r s t r e a c t i o n to Klytemnestra's statement i s (268) \"How do you say? Your word ('iTios ) has escaped me on ac-count of my Utrc6'rti) ... Wu^J-p ) of what she says. Has she perhaps t r u s t e d to a p e r s u a s i v e v i s i o n ( ^ ^ t t v V . . . \u00E2\u0082\u00ACuntt&'j ) of a dream (274)? That i s , has she been convinced merely by \"see-i n g \" and being too e a s i l y persuaded (both feminine c h a r a c t e r i s t -i c s ) ? K l y t e m n e s t r a r e j e c t s t h i s ; she would never a c c e p t the o p i n i o n of a slumbering ( 2 1 5 ) . She i m p l i e s that she pos-sesses the q u a l i t y of an a l e r t d4^u<* ) i n favour of that a c c e p t a b l e to the ( G o l d h i l l , 1984: 37). 18 The chorus back away at her evident annoyance and seem to a c c e p t her statement with t h e i r next q u e s t i o n , \" s i n c e when was the c i t y destroyed?\" (278) Klytemnestra's answer once agai n uses maternal imagery - \" s i n c e the night which j u s t now g i v e s b i r t h to t h i s l i g h t \" (77)5 vW titfooerjs (jfuis ToS' \u00C2\u00A3upo'drjs , 279). The cho-rus ask what messenger (etyyt\o5 , 280) c o u l d a r r i v e so q u i c k l y . \"tt^SAOs \" and \" both imply speech; and Klytemnestra answers \"H e p h a i s t o s \" - a god who c o u l d , i n person, speak - \"who sends b r i g h t l i g h t from Ida\" (281). The chorus, e x p e c t i n g a spoken message, have been d i s a p p o i n t e d . In the beacon speech which f o l l o w s (281-316), Klytemnestra t r a c e s f o r the chorus the journey of the b e a c o n - l i g h t from Troy to Argos, as the T W ^ ^ > they have asked that Troy has i n f a c t been captured. She uses words of showing and saying i n t e r c h a n g e -a b l y -KtifJyjecXud (to pass the news, g i v e the password), 289; ^//\u00C2\u00ABA -ov, 294 ; trj^iJit , 293; e t c . - because f o r her, who d e f i n e d the meaning of the beacon, there i s no d i f f e r e n c e . The beacon i t -s e l f , a l i g h t - s i g n a l , i s e s s e n t i a l l y something which cannot speak; i t can o n l y be seen. To Klytemnestra, however, i t speaks as w e l l as s h i n e s . She ends her d e s c r i p t i o n of i t s journey say-ing that \" t h i s i s the proof and token {61/^0 ), I t e l l you, my husband sent as a password (or \"passed on as news\" - tty^y^A Afros, 316) from Troy to me (315-316). To her, the unbroken pass-age of the l i g h t i s proof; she i s c e r t a i n of i t s meaning. The chorus are not so sure. 19 A few other p o i n t s i n t h i s speech should be noted b e f o r e c o n t i n u i n g . I t s tone throughout i s of knowledge and power. As Betensky (1978: 14) p o i n t s out, i t shows K l y t e m n e s t r a i n f u l l command of r e s o u r c e s and i n f o r m a t i o n - of d e t a i l s of geography which she i s able to use to her own ends, of f i r e s \" l i k e the sun\" (288) or the \" b r i g h t moon\" (298) which leap v i g o r o u s l y from moun-t a i n t o mountain, shoot over the sea, k i n d l e w i t h u n c e a s i n g s t r e n g t h (305) and b r i n g the news at l a s t to Argos - a l l appar-e n t l y at her command, by her arrangement, and under her c o n t r o l . Even H e p h a i s t o s has done her b i d d i n g . The c o n f i d e n c e o f the Queen i s shown i n her d e s c r i p t i o n of the b r i g h t n e s s and s t r e n g t h of the beacons. I t i s not necessary to see i n t h i s speech super-n a t u r a l or p r o p h e t i c powers; o n l y a Queen i n c o n t r o l o f ev e r y aspect of her world, who knows, t h e r e f o r e , what i s happening i n i t . Her powers of v i s u a l i z a t i o n and her eloquence are g r e a t ; but one need not f o r t h i s reason make a seer of her. Here as w e l l she uses images of f e r t i l i t y i n her d e s c r i p -t i o n ; the l i g h t which a l i g h t s on the roof of the A t r e i d a e i s \"not p a r e n t l e s s \" (am 'dnr^iriroi , 311) - i t s parent i s the beacon on Ida. I f c h i l d r e n take a f t e r t h e i r p a r e n t s (as the chorus w i l l l a t e r e x p l a i n they d o ) , one might be concerned to know what s o r t o f l i g h t , born i n the d e s t r u c t i v e f i r e s of a burning c i t y , has a r -r i v e d . The symbolic c o n n o t a t i o n s of her use of l i g h t have now i n c r e a s e d . We had heard beacons k i n d l e d and watched f o r at her command and of t o r c h e s b l a z i n g i n presumably j o y f u l s a c r i f i c e , a d u l t e r a t e d by her \"persuasions\"; we have now heard i n Klytemnes-20 t r a ' s own words of day born from night and l i g h t from d e s t r u c -t i o n . 9 T h i s speech seems to p o r t r a y Klytemnestra i n f u l l c o n t r o l of her world. But i t has connotations of which even Klytemnestra i s unaware at t h i s p o i n t i n the p l a y . The passage of l i g h t from beacon to beacon, remaining strong as i t advances (6e>eJou6* Ou^t ftco utopoj*iin , 296; Utyeody M>th< , 305) and o c c a s i o n a l l y burn-301) can be seen as an a l l e g o r y of the seemingly unbreakable and u n c o n t r o l l a b l e c h a i n of vengeance and murder which, the reader w i l l d i s c o v e r , i s the h i s t o r y of the house of A t r e u s , i n which each crime i s k i n d l e d by the one before and i t s e l f k i n d l e s new s l a u g h t e r . (Gantz, 1977: 31). The beacon speech i s the f i r s t h i n t of t h i s m o t i f i n the p l a y . But Klytemnestra w i l l show no awareness of such a chain of crime f o r much of the p l a y ; she w i l l see her a c t s as simple r e t r i b u t i o n f o r the only crime the reader has so f a r been informed o f , the s a c r i f i c e of her daughter, and not as p a r t of an u n c o n t r o l l a b l e and unending sequence. In K l y -temnestra' s own speech, then, i s the f i r s t s i g n that there are f o r c e s o p e r a t i n g i n the p l a y of which she i s not aware. At t h i s p o i n t , however, she appears to be i n p e r f e c t c o n t r o l of events. The chorus doubt that the passage of the beacon, which she has t r a c e d f o r them, r e a l l y s i g n i f i e s the d e s t r u c t i o n of Troy. They say that they w i l l l a t e r pray to the gods ( i n t h a n k s g i v i n g ? ) but f i r s t , would she repeat her a s t o n i s h i n g s t o r y from the b e g i n -ing even more f i e r c e n i n g ? They address her, moreover, as ( 317 ) ; p r e v i o u s l y 21 they have c a l l e d her only \"Queen\" or by her name. T h i s i s s u r e l y a r e a c t i o n to her t r u s t i n what they c o n s i d e r a mere v i s i b l e symbol, a (j)k6p.<*, rather than a spoken message; t h i s g u l l i b i l i t y they see as a feminine c h a r a c t e r i s t i c . Once more, i n s h o r t , they misjudge her. K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s second speech i n e f f e c t \"decodes\" the bea-con and g i v e s a v i v i d p i c t u r e of the \"true meaning\" behind i t , which they w i l l f i n d more trustworthy. She repeats, a g a i n , her statement that Troy has f a l l e n to the Greeks, and goes on to des-c r i b e the scene i n the conquered c i t y . I t i s again unnecessary to a s c r i b e s u p e r n a t u r a l powers to her i n order to understand her speech. She begins \"o\u00C2\u00A3p*i<- \"\u00C2\u00BB s u r e l y a c l u e that t h i s i s a poss-i b l e v e r s i o n of events at Troy, not a true v i s i o n (Kassandra does not begin t h i s way). Her d e s c r i p t i o n i s i n f a c t a g e n e r a l one, which would s u i t events l i k e l y to f o l l o w the capture of any c i t y . She e x t r a p o l a t e s from the knowledge she has, t h a t T r o y has f a l l e n , to an image of the l o g i c a l consequences, which she v i s u -a l i z e s v i v i d l y and i n d e t a i l . The powers i n v o l v e d here are o n l y those of i m a g i n a t i o n and eloquence, not second s i g h t . The chorus do not possess a l i k e a b i l i t y to v i s u a l i z e and are overwhelmed; they b e l i e v e - h e r decoding of the beacon and accept her d e s c r i p -t i o n , f o r the time being, as the true meaning of the symbol. Her Vtteu) - i n t h i s case based on her eloquence (that i s , her manipul-a t i o n of words) and imagination - has conquered. The c o n n e c t i o n between symbol and meaning remains tenuous, as i s shown by the f a c t that i n t r u t h , she cannot and does not know e x a c t l y what i s 22 happening a t Troy; but her THi&u) has b r i d g e d the gap and erased doubt from the chorus' minds. L i n e s 340 f f . of her speech r a i s e f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n s . I t has been noted t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a m a n i p u l a t e s and a r b i t r a r i l y d e f i n e s the meaning of symbols, as she does w i t h the beacon. When one \" a t t a c h e s a r b i t r a r y meaning\" to words, i t i s commonly c a l l e d l y i n g . (In f a c t , Umberto Eco (1979) d e f i n e s a symbol simply as anything that can be used to l i e . 1 0) I t i s tempting to i n t e r p r e t l i n e s 340 f f . as h y p o c r i s y , or l y i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y as l y i n g would be e a s i e r f o r someone with the a b i l i t i e s Klytemnestra has a l r e a d y shown i n the manipulation of symbols. Throughout the p l a y , i n f a c t , i t i s hard to t e l l i f she means, or how she means, what she says. Here, i n a speech which r a i s e s again the i d e a of r e c i p r o c a l a c t i o n and r e v e r s a l which f i r s t appeared i n the paro-d o s 1 1 , Klytemnestra p i o u s l y expresses the hope that the army has not \"ravaged what they should not\" (To^eiu) * jur^ ^p'rj , 342) - the T r o j a n s h r i n e s - and thus offended the gods, f o r f e a r of a d i s a s -t e r b e f a l l i n g them on the homeward journey. I t i s odd t h a t she b r i n g s up the p o s s i b i l i t y of d i s a s t e r f o l l o w i n g on impiety here, when she i s d e s c r i b i n g the overwhelming and long-awaited v i c t o r y of the A r g i v e s ; i t c l o s e s her d e s c r i p t i o n on a note of f e a r and p o s s i b l e doom rather than triumph, although she i s d e s c r i b i n g a presumably j o y f u l event - the v i c t o r y of her husband and K i n g a f t e r many years of war. She adds (345-346) that i f the army has not offended the gods, the s u f f e r i n g - fir^ - of the ( p l u r a l ) dead may be aroused (hpnvopos , Denniston Page 1957: n. ad l o c . ) even 23 i f no sudden d i s a s t e r s h o u l d b e f a l l . She i s s p e a k i n g o s t e n s i b l y o f o f f e n s e s a g a i n s t t h e gods and s u f f e r i n g s o f t h o s e k i l l e d a t T r o y . The a u d i e n c e , however, would remember t h e o n l y i m p i e t y and o n l y d e a t h t h e y have as y e t been t o l d o f - t h e s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i -g e n i a . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s u s e o f m a t e r n a l i m a g e r y e a r l i e r , and h e r d e s c r i p t i o n o f T r o j a n s m o u r n i n g d e a d f a m i l y members i n t h i s s p e e c h (327-329 ) 1 2 , would c o n t r i b u t e t o r e m i n d t h e a u d i e n c e t h a t t h e s a c r i f i c i a l v i c t i m was her c h i l d as w e l l a s Agamemnon's. The p a t t e r n o f hope t h a t s o m e t h i n g may n o t happen, w h i c h i m m e d i a t e l y d o e s h a p p e n , h a s a l r e a d y b e e n s e e n i n C a l c h a s ' p r a y e r , a n d memory o f t h i s w o u l d l e a d t h e a u d i e n c e t o f e a r t h e same h e r e . They would be f u r t h e r u n s e t t l e d by h e r f o r e b o d i n g s o f d i s a s t e r i n a s p e e c h d e s c r i b i n g v i c t o r y , and by t h e a l l u s i o n s i n h e r m e n t i o n o f i m p i e t y , and o f t h e s u f f e r i n g s o f t h e d e a d , t o an a c t i n w h i c h s h e m i g h t be e x p e c t e d t o f e e l a s t r o n g p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t . A l l o f t h i s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a s p e e c h w h i c h a l s o r a i s e d t h e i d e a o f r e c i p r o c a l a c t i o n c o u l d o n l y be d i s t u r b i n g . I t w o u l d l e a d , a l t o g e t h e r , n o t o n l y t o a f e a r t h a t h e r u n e x p r e s s -ed hope o f a v o i d i n g d i s a s t e r was l i k e l y t o go u n f u l f i l l e d , b u t a l s o t o a s t r o n g s u s p i c i o n t h a t i t was n o t s i n c e r e . On t h i s d o u b t f u l and f o r e b o d i n g n o t e she ends h e r d e s c r i p -t i o n , s a y i n g \" s u c h t h i n g s you h e a r f r o m me, a woman\" (youd-rd %(\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 yuiJeiwbs tpou k\u'tc$ , 348) - a n s w e r i n g b o t h t h e i r a d d r e s s o f Vi/^t (317) and t h e d i s b e l i e f i t i m p l i e d . Her l a s t two l i n e s (349-350) m i r r o r t h e l a s t two l i n e s o f t h e watchman's and c h o r u s ' s p e e c h e s i n t h e i r r a t h e r f o r m u l a i c hopes f o r good. They s o u n d 24 c o n v e n t i o n a l l y a p o t r o p a i c and designed to reduce the impact of her p r e v i o u s ten l i n e s . However, they are ambiguous i n Klytem-n e s t r a ' s mouth. She says that she hopes e v e r y t h i n g w i l l p r e v a i l w e l l (t'o H^oCrj i 349) and be seen c l e a r l y (\u00C2\u00A7tyojOp><>r\U)S 349), f o r she p r e f e r s the enjoyment of many good t h i n g s (TToXXuIi) . .. 266\\u00C2\u00A3>\) , 350). What should p r e v a i l , and what the a l t e r n a t i v e i s to which she p r e f e r s good t h i n g s , i s l e f t u nexplained. The obvious i n f e r e n c e which the chorus i s intended to draw i s that she p r e f e r s good to the e v i l s she has j u s t d e s c r i b e d and that she hopes the v i c t o r y at Troy w i l l p r e v a i l ( i . e . that the good f o r -tune of the A r g i v e army w i l l l a s t ) and become v i s i b l e at Argos. K l y t e m n e s t r a has not, however, s a i d e i t h e r of these t h i n g s and does not n e c e s s a r i l y mean them. They answer her \"woman, you speak l i k e a wise and temper-ate man\" (K^r' 6w0f>oJ' evfa>oVu>s , 351). Both \" i \" are r e l a t e d to 'n\" (361). The e n s u i n g ode speaks of the e v i l consequences to the oikos of h u b r i s , i n f a t u -a t i o n Cr\trj ) and war.The f i r s t s t r o p h e (367-384 ) speaks of the dangers of e x c e s s i v e w e a l t h i n a h o u s e h o l d , which r e s u l t s i n \"more than j u s t \" {jUitfyoi rj SMJIMS , 376) p r i d e . T h e re i s no s h e l t e r f o r a man (iftyt , 382) who from excess of wealth \" k i c k s the great a l t a r of J u s t i c e i n t o o b s c u r i t y \" (ft\u00C2\u00AB 'ctfa'Jetati) ,383-384). The a n t i s t r o p h e (385-402) d e s c r i b e s Tfi&* d i r e c t l y . She i s \"wret-ched\" C)u\ja/oi , 385) and the \" c h i l d of i n t o l e r a b l e f o r w a r d - p l a n -n i n g F o l l y \" (^o^oH/koty Ov/V 'JfiyProf 'AT^S , 386); moreover, she uses f o r c e (j3c2-rjt ) . 1 3 There i s no remedy a g a i n s t TTfe&<-> (386). The harm she does i s impossible to hide. An example of such harm i s the t h e f t of a woman from the A t r e i d household ($cyuoJ /Arpgc^oo > 399). \"yvJjuAos \" (402) i s i n a prominent p o s i t i o n at the end of the s t r o p h e , emphasizing the s p e c i f i c a l l y sexual r o l e i n v o l v e d ; the i n d i v i d u a l , Helen, i s unimportant. The c o u p l i n g of the 28 A t r e i d a e i n one household l i n k s t h e i r concerns and f o r t u n e s , as we saw i n the p a r o d o s . I t a l s o g i v e s Agamemnon reason to be off e n d e d at the t h e f t of Menelaus' w i f e . 1 4 The second strophe (404-419) speaks of the damage done by t h e s e d u c t i o n ( o r p e r s u a s i o n ) of the unnamed woman. \" $f\ifi rXite\" ( 408), as Agamemnon was \" nMvotyud \"(221), she l e f t her household, l e a v i n g war to her countrymen and b r i n g i n g d e s t r u c t i o n as dowry to Troy. In her abandoned household there i s s i l e n c e , m i s e r y and d i s h o n o u r . Through l o n g i n g f o r h e r , a t$ (425) which appears o n l y i n dreams and vani s h e s . Such v a i n dream-images have been mentioned before and w i l l be ag a i n . Her d a r i n g has brought g r i e v o u s s u f f e r i n g and death to other Greek households as w e l l as her own (429-436). Throughout these verses the woman i s never named; onl y her female r o l e i n the oik o s and the misery caused by her t r a n s g r e s s i o n of i t are c o n s i d e r e d here. ( G o l d h i l l 1984: 45) . T u r n i n g f r o m t h i s woman, t h e cho r u s next s i n g o f the deaths at Troy, the ashes sent home \" i n exchange f o r men\" (443) and \" f o r the sake of another man's wi f e \" (448). The o p p o s i t i o n of the sexes i s a g a i n apparent here. The f i n a l strophe passes ( 4 5 6 - 4 7 4 ) t o t h e p o s s i b l e a n g e r o f t h e g o d s a t t h e TtfW'r/iAvi) ( 4 6 1 ) , and the slow {ypcn)u> , 464) vengeance of the E r i n y e s a g a i n s t one without J u s t i c e , whom they w i l l wear away by r e v e r s a l of f o r t u n e (IfJlkJ Iroyet , 465) to dimness {iff^ufot), 465) 29 and e v e n t u a l l y i n v i s i b i l i t y (^u^ocs , 467) - that i s , death. I t i s dangerous, they add, to be p r a i s e d e x c e s s i v e l y . The l a s t stanza of the chorus 1 song a p p l i e s so unmistak-a b l y to Agamemnon, i f he has indeed been s u c c e s s f u l at Troy, that the chorus grow f r i g h t e n e d . I f such dangers await the s u c c e s s f u l w a r r i o r - the 1fo\uHToJ- i t would almost be b e t t e r i f the news were f a l s e , and Troy were not taken a f t e r a l l . But the news can onl y be f a l s e i f Klytemnestra has, i n f a c t , i n t e r p r e t e d the sym-b o l ( i . e . , the beacon) i n c o r r e c t l y ; and they t u r n ( i n r e l i e f ? ) to grounds f o r b e l i e v i n g that she may w e l l have done so - that she i s , a f t e r a l l , a woman, and t h e r e f o r e l i k e l y to be g u l l i b l e . ( I t i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of Klytemnestra' s Tttteu> that i s seems to be most e f f e c t i v e when she i s p r e s e n t ; i n her absence, d i s t r u s t of her words can r e t u r n . ) On those grounds, they r e t r e a t t o t h e i r o r i g i n a l d i s b e l i e f i n the beacon and d i s m i s s a l of her i n t e l l i -gence. (Thus, once again, the movement i n a speech or song has been from c e r t a i n t y and joy to doubt and f e a r . ) Who, they ask, i s so c h i l d i s h (1fJL$Jos , 479) or so struck out of t h e i r <^?V(479) as to be inflamed at heart by a f i r e ( Irijou/eeJr* #<*f>\u00C2\u00A3<.'<*J , 481) and then d i s t r e s s e d by a change of message (or an exchange [of flame] f o r words - UWA^A XO^OU ,480-482)? They once again f e e l that a v i s u a l message i s not s u f f i c i e n t to the fyy^ '< words are necess-a r y . They imply a l s o that Klytemnestra, whose heart i s inflamed by the beacon, i s c h i l d i s h and without tyjd - e x a c t l y what she e a r l i e r a c c u s e d them of t h i n k i n g . They c o n t i n u e , making the sexual o p p o s i t i o n i m p l i e d i n these l i n e s p e r f e c t l y c l e a r - \" i t i s 30 f i t t i n g to the r u l e of a woman to agree to gi v e thanks because of (?r/?o / 484) appearance; f o r the d e f i n i t i o n (nv and spoken messages, i s once a g a i n f u l l y e x p r e s s e d ; t h e i r renewed d i s t r u s t of Klytemnestra i s i m p l i e d . T h e i r d i s c u s s i o n i n the f i r s t stasimon of women who t r a n s g r e s s t h e i r household r o l e and the g e n e r a l theme of payment f o r past crimes (which by the f i n a l a n t i s t r o p h e i s a p p l i e d s p e c i f i c a l l y to Agamemnon) may con-t r i b u t e to t h i s d i s t r u s t . C e r t a i n l y they are uneasy about the f u t u r e and h e s i t a n t about t r u s t i n g the Queen. However, they continue to underestimate her a b i l i t i e s and there i s no s i g n that they have thought of combining i n one o b j e c t t h e i r f e a r and t h e i r d i s t r u s t . at Argos, j u s t as the beacon d i d e a r l i e r . The message, then, w i l l probably be the same. And i t i s : Troy has f a l l e n , but the image used i s odd. Agamemnon has \"dug over\" Troy with the mat-tock of \"Zeus j u s t i c e - b r i n g e r \" (528) and th o r o u g h l y worked the ground; but t h i s p r o c e d u r e , which would at any o r d i n a r y time i n c r e a s e the f e r t i l i t y of the ground, has \"destroyed the seed of the whole l a n d \" (528). By the a c t i o n of t h i s i n v e r s i o n of na-t u r e , the h e r a l d c o n t i n u e s , P a r i s and the whole house of Priam have p a i d twice over f o r h i s crime. The h e r a l d ' s f i r s t speech (503-537) d e s c r i b e s Agamemnon as b r i n g i n g l i g h t i n the night-time ( flfti sO eo^^Orji , 522) to those 32 The h e r a l d and chorus now converse i n s t i c h o m y t h i a . The chorus, i t appears, d e s i r e d the presence of the army - and the k i n g - g r e a t l y ; they have been unhappy out of f e a r of someone (W<*s , p l u r a l ; 549); but i n the absence of the r u l e r s (the A t -r e i d a e ) , they have not dared to speak. Even now, t h e i r f e a r e x i s t s (550). The h e r a l d seems to misunderstand t h i s , or take t h e i r f e a r to be f o r Agamemnon's s a f e t y at Troy r a t h e r than the r e s u l t of any c o n d i t i o n at Argos, f o r he assures them that e v ery-t h i n g has turned out w e l l (551) and goes on to t e l l them of the h a r d s h i p s a t Troy. Nature was a g a i n s t them, as always i n t h i s p l a y 1 7 : the c o n s t a n t wet brought l i c e ; the w i n t e r snows even k i l l e d b i r d s and the summer was i n t o l e r a b l y hot and b r e e z e l e s s . But t h e r e i s no need to remember these t h i n g s now\u00E2\u0080\u0094 i t i s no l o n g e r a concern to the dead to r i s e again, and why should one reckon up the number of the dead, or g r i e v e the l i v i n g with r e -c u r r i n g e v i l f o r t u n e ('ruif/js faXyKorot) i 571)? These l i n e s r e c a l l both the chorus' f e a r s of r e v e r s a l s of f o r t u n e f o r the u n j u s t but s u c c e s s f u l (465) and Klytemnestra's remarks about the awakening s u f f e r i n g s of the dead ( 346-347). L i k e K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s and the chorus' comments, the h e r a l d ' s l i n e s here are ominous i n them-s e l v e s and the more d i s t u r b i n g i n t h e i r immediate c o n t e x t : past s u f f e r i n g s and f u t u r e dangers a r e odd s u b j e c t s to r a i s e i n a speech on the j o y f u l o c c a s i o n of a great v i c t o r y . He ends \"you have the whole s t o r y \" (W)-' iyus XoyoJ > 582). The chorus respond, \"I am conquered by your words\" (^ o -\OL&LJ , 583); they accept h i s message, as i t i s v e r b a l . They then 33 d i r e c t him to \"the house and Klytemnestra\" (585), to whom these matters are of concern. K l y t e m n e s t r a enters by the Skene door and i n t e r c e p t s the messenger b e f o r e he e n t e r s the p a l a c e . Ewans (1982: 7-8) sees t h i s as an example of the d i s r u p t i o n s of the u s u a l homecoming r i t u a l s which K l y t e m n e s t r a c r e a t e s throughout the p l a y - the h e r a l d would expect to go indoors with h i s news. C e r t a i n l y her unannounced appearance i s s t a r t l i n g ; we have not been prepared f o r i t by anything i n the t e x t . One f e e l s that she has suddenly i n t r u d e d on the scene. Her f i r s t l i n e s (586-593) p o i n t out that she was r i g h t to t r u s t the beacon (which she c a l l s o npZhros iffflek -ot irupos , 588) and the chorus wrong to reproach her f o r \"being persuaded by beacons to l i f t up her h e a r t , j u s t l i k e a woman\" CkfteutA i 591; 1tfos ^uiJjiMOi , 592). \" T h i s t a l k made me appear wandering ( i . e . i n her w i t s ) \" , she c o n t i n u e s . 1 8 Neverthe-l e s s , she - and the other women - s a c r i f i c e d \" i n woman's f a s h i o n \" throughout the c i t y . The d i v i s i o n between male and female i s a g a i n apparent. The chorus blamed Klytemnestra's b e l i e f on her feminine g u l l i b i l i t y ; and the d i s t i n c t i o n i s made more u n i v e r s a l by the f a c t that a l l of the women s a c r i f i c e d , not only Klytemnes-t r a . The tone of K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s words here i s very much one o f stung p r i d e . We have seen her before take o f f e n s e a t t h e chorus' r e f u s a l t o r e c o g n i z e her i n t e l l i g e n c e ; c e r t a i n l y she i s p l e a s e d to be a b l e to p o i n t out t h e i r mistake now and rub i t i n , a s w e l l . 34 She turns (598) to the matter at hand. Having blocked the e x i t of the h e r a l d i n t o the p a l a c e , she now r e f u s e s even to l e t him g i v e h i s message. What need has she of a f u r t h e r t a l e from him? She w i l l l e a r n the whole s t o r y from the l o r d h i m s e l f . Now she must prepare to r e c e i v e her \"revered husband\" (ettSoiot) Ifotci) , 600); f o r \"what l i g h t i s sweeter f o r a wife/woman ( juddwc , 602) to behold than t h i s , to open the gates to a husband/lover {'Jttfyd , 602) saved by god from the f i e l d ? Take that message to my hus-band.\" She has r e f e r r e d to him by h i s p o l i t i c a l , household and p e r s o n a l r o l e s i n quick s u c c e s s i o n - , 599; ffoas , 600; etJr]f> , 603. The most p e r s o n a l statement i n her speech ( t r a n s l a t e d above) i s put i n the most general language. Any woman, any man w i l l f i t ; i t need not even be a husband and wife - her words c o u l d r e f e r e q u a l l y t o a l o v e r {Jffyp has a s e x u a l c o n n o t a t i o n which Wotis does n o t ) . She then sends a message, v i a the h e r a l d , t o her husband. T h i s i s a r e v e r s a l of e x p e c t a t i o n : she has not o n l y b l o c k e d h i s entrance and r e f u s e d h i s message, but now uses him i n s t e a d to send one back. Her c o n t r o l of events and communi-c a t i o n i n t h i s scene seems a b s o l u t e . The message she sends ( l i k e her p r e v i o u s statement) i s f u l l o f innuendo and ambiguous p h r a s i n g . She c a l l s him \"the d a r l i n g of the c i t y \" - a c c u r a t e l y enough, as one has seen from the watchman's and the chorus' a f f e c t i o n f o r him - but expresses no fondness h e r s e l f . The o p t a t i v e \"iiifoc \" (606) only o f f e r s a hope f o r the f u t u r e , not a guarantee of i t - one i s reminded of C a l c h a s 1 u n f u l f i l l e d hopes, or Klytemnestra's e a r l i e r hope that 35 the army would not d e s p o i l the T r o j a n temples, as we have j u s t now ( 527) d i s c o v e r e d they d i d . \"May he f i n d a wife as f a i t h f u l ( t r u s t w o r t h y -^a^jl) , 606) as the one he l e f t \" i s ambiguous; i t s meaning depends e n t i r e l y on her o r i g i n a l c o n d i t i o n , which we do not know. For that matter, l o y a l to whom - or to what? Her next l i n e s , (May he f i n d her a) \"(watch-)dog of the house, n o b l e / l o y a l to t h a t man, h o s t i l e to enemies\" (607-608), can a l s o be v a r i o u s l y i n t e r p r e t e d . \"iMtfy \u00C2\u00BB need not r e f e r to Agamemnon. Klytemnestra has so f a r been seen i n c l o s e a s s o c i a t i o n with the house - the watchman r e f e r s to the sorrows of the house under her r u l e (18); the chorus r e f e r the h e r a l d ' s news to \"the house and Klytemnes-t r a \" i n one b r e a t h (585); w h i l e the watchman speaks of the joy the beacon b r i n g s t o Argos (24) and the h e r a l d of the l i g h t b r o u g h t to a l l by Agamemnon (522), K l y t e m n e s t r a d e s c r i b e s the beacon as a l i g h t i n g on \"the roof of the A t r e i d house\" (310) a f t e r i t s long journey, as i f i t s news were s o l e l y a household concern. Now she speaks of h e r s e l f as \"watchdog of the house\", demonstrat-i n g her a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h i t once a g a i n . But the \" $u6f>oii\) \" (608) c o u l d as e a s i l y be enemies of the house i t s e l f as of the k i n g . Among these \"enemies of the house\" Agamemnon h i m s e l f , as k i l l e r o f the \" $0/uw\) 3\ci\pA \" (208) might w e l l be numbered, i n K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s eyes. F i n a l l y , \"AVt^\" , used to d e s c r i b e a human, has a complimentary meaning i n o n l y one other p l a c e i n Greek l i t e r a t u r e , as l i s t e d by LSJ. That i s i n l i n e 896 of t h i s p l a y , where, i n f a c t , i t i s a g a i n ambiguous (Klytemnestra uses i t to d e s c r i b e Agamemnon). Elsewhere, when used of a woman, i t u s u a l l y 36 means \"wanton\" or \"brazen hussy\" ( G o l d h i l l 1984: 56). There i s a h i n t here, then, of her i n f i d e l i t y . 1 9 Her next two l i n e s (609-610) l i k e w i s e a f f i r m her f i d e l i t y , but the l e n g t h of time she has been f a i t h f u l - and thus, whose s e a l i t i s which she has not broken - i s again not s p e c i f i e d . L i n e s 611-612 (\"I do not know p l e a s u r e , or s c a n d a l o u s c o n v e r s a t i o n , from another man, any more than I know the d i p -p ing/tempering of bronze\") are a g a i n not an a b s o l u t e statement and imply that i t i s p o s s i b l e that she does know these t h i n g s . The phrase '\"^i^KdS fZA^Js \" (612) has been v a r i o u s l y i n t e r p r e t e d . C l e a r l y , i t r e f e r s to the use of bronze as a weapon, as one usu-a l l y o n l y tempers blades. Bronze, however, i s not tempered. The primary meaning, that \"I know no more of ( i n f i d e l i t y ) than of the tempering of bronze\", might be a d e l i b e r a t e i n a c c u r a c y , intended to show t h a t she knows so l i t t l e of weapons t h a t she does not even know bronze l o s e s i t s edge i n c o l d water. \"^ d^ Js \" has an-o t h e r meaning, of d i p p i n g , or dyeing and l a t e r used by Klytem-n e s t r a of dyeing c l o t h e s (ufut*jj /3<*fiJs , 960) i n the r u s t y , pur-p l e - r e d c o l o u r (TfOiPijk/pios ) of the t a p e s t r i e s , which Goheen (1955: 115-117) has shown to be approximately the c o l o u r of d r i e d b l o o d. T h i s l i n e may then be i n t e r p r e t e d as the even more v i o l e n t \"the d y e i n g / d i p p i n g of bronze ( i n b l o o d ) \" , with which we l a t e r d i s -cover Klytemnestra to be w e l l acquainted. Now, we can only won-der and f e e l uneasy at her choice of such a v i o l e n t metaphor. 2 0 37 Her c l a i m that her words are \" s t u f f e d f u l l of t r u t h \" , (rrji k\r}Oitds V^uwi) ,613), as G o l d h i l l (1984: 56) p o i n t s out, r a i s e s i m m e d i a t e l y to mind the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t they are not; i f i t c o u l d be simply assumed that what she says i s t r u e , she would not need to so assure us. As w i t h 613, so w i t h the whole message to her husband. Her i n s i s t e n c e on her f i d e l i t y - which i s the face value of her speech - i m p l i e s that i t could not i n f a c t be assumed and r a i s e s the p o s s i b i l i t y that she i s not f a i t h f u l . Her e x i t l i n e , \" I t i s not shameful f o r a noble lady to p r o c l a i m t h i s \" (ow< etigjpos ][WJp.o6(t\) Y^f , 650) o f t h i n g s u s u a l l y a p a r t , f i r e and water (651), i n which stormwinds (654) and perhaps even dry land (666) p a r t i c i p a t e d ; and even the sun, \"nurturer of a l l things on e a r t h \" (*ro^O(jo^) -yoi CH \tou j^eoJos, 633), rose only to r e v e a l the extent of the c a r -nage, the sea blooming ('oiJeoOi) , 659) wit h A chaian c o r p s e s and wrecked s h i p s . Menelaus and h i s s h i p have v a n i s h e d and o n l y H e l i o s can say i f he i s a l i v e . Agamemnon's s h i p was o n l y saved by chance and the gods (663-664); even i n the b r i g h t day a f t e r the storm they d i d not t r u s t t h e i r good fortune (668), but c o u l d t h i n k o n l y o f the wrecked and beaten f l e e t (670). He hopes i t w i l l t u r n out w e l l and advises the chorus to think of Menelaus as s a f e and on the way home (675). I f he i s a l i v e , there i s some hope t h a t Zeus, \"not y e t (O'OITOJ, 678) w i l l i n g t o d e s t r o y the r a c e \" , may l e t him come home a g a i n . The h e r a l d a s s u r e s the chorus that what they have heard - d i s a s t e r , u n c e r t a i n t y as to the f u t u r e , d i s t r u s t of good f o r t u n e and t o t a l dependence on perhaps angry gods - i s the t r u t h (680). T h i s perhaps stands, a g a i n , ~ i n c o n t r a s t to Klytemnestra' s \" w1ff>t*fj \oy-o*) \". The her-a l d ' s speeches a l s o , then, have s t a r t e d i n joy and triumph and ended i n doubt and f e a r . The A t r e i d a e and t h e i r f o r t u n e s have been t r e a t e d as a c l o s e l y coupled p a i r throughout the p l a y . I t i s n a t u r a l f o r the 40 chorus, having been t o l d only of Agamemnon's a r r i v a l , to immedi-a t e l y i n q u i r e a f t e r Menelaus; and i t i s n a t u r a l a l s o , h a v i n g heard of h i s disappearance and p o s s i b l e death i n the storm K l y -temnestra f o r e c a s t , to f e e l that t h i s d i s a s t e r bodes i l l f o r the other h a l f of the A t r e i d p a i r , when t h e i r f o r t u n e s u n t i l now have been so c l o s e l y l i n k e d . The \"doubling\" images at the beginning of t h i s speech (642-643), some perhaps r e f e r r i n g d i r e c t l y to the A t r e i d a e , emphasize t h e i r bond. Immediately on the e x i t of the h e r a l d , the chorus t u r n i n the second stasimon t o a d i s c u s s i o n of Menelaus' w i f e , Klytem-n e s t r a 's s i s t e r . As Menelaus i s l i n k e d with Agamemnon, a song of Menelaus' wife r a i s e s thoughts of Agamemnon's; and i n f a c t , much of what the chorus say i n these l i n e s can be a p p l i e d to both s i s t e r s . Helen i s p o r t r a y e d i n the f i r s t s t r o p h e (684-698) as an e n t i r e l y d e s t r u c t i v e f o r c e , to s h i p s , males and c i t i e s . In the a n t i s t r o p h e (700-716), the \" w i l l - f u l f i l l i n g \" Wrath (tiXHafouid 4 , 701) which formed a \"woe/marriage-bond\" (ufj^os , 699) f o r Troy, thus \" e x a c t i n g f o r h e r s e l f \" (1rfJ&o/H.(J* , 705) payment i n l a t e r time (.U6^if>(^ ^foJ<*> , 703) f o r the dishonouring of h o s p i t a l -i t y , b r i n g s s e v e r a l echoes to mind. The \" l a t e - a v e n g i n g E r i n y s s e n t by Zeus a g a i n s t P a r i s (58) i s r e c a l l e d h e r e . f1fj\Jc$ , \"Wrath\", l a s t spoken of by Calchas as a \"remembering, r e c u r r i n g \" avenger of c h i l d r e n , who s t a y e d at home and f e a r e d no man, i s a l s o brought to mind. Klytemnestra was and i s at t h i s p o i n t i n the p l a y the o n l y person one c o u l d i d e n t i f y with these words. 41 \"Remembering\" (^u.i/dft.u>J, 155) imp l i e s a lapse of time, echoed here by \" i n l a t e r time\": \"avenging\" {VfuJo trocjos > 1 5 5 ) i s echoed by \"ex a c t i n g f o r h e r s e l f \" . Even i n t h i s passage, the \"woeful mar-riage-bond\" a p p l i e s not only to Helen and P a r i s , but a l s o Helen and Menelaus. The p a r a l l e l s between the Wrath that waits at home and the one which arranged Helen's marriage make the reader asso-c i a t e KfjSos with a t h i r d couple as w e l l , Klytemnestra and Agamem-non. One set of marriage-hymns has changed a l r e a d y to mourning (705-711); what of the marriage at present before us? The second strophe (718-726) begins the metaphor of the l i o n c u b i n the house. As Knox (1952: passim) has shown, t h i s image, a s s o c i a t e d by the chorus i n t h i s s t a s i m o n with Helen, d e s c r i b e s a l s o every other major cha r a c t e r i n the t r i l o g y . In the beginning of (married) l i f e ( f {)\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (ZcoWoo \u00E2\u0080\u00A2tTfol-e^ti'o'-s , 720) i t was tame (720-721) and \" \u00E2\u0082\u00ACbi.\6ir 735). '\"tywr^Aft'-oi\u00C2\u00BBs \" r e f e r s to p r e l i m i n a r y s a c r i f i c e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y before mar-r i a g e ; i t was used of I p h i g e n i a ' s s a c r i f i c e [TipoTcXtti \J*u>\) , 227). I t thus b r i n g s I p h i g e n i a to mind, as w e l l as the e a r l y days of Helen's (or K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s) m a r r i a g e . \" \u00C2\u00A3o$c\o-ffM \u00C2\u00A3j \" b r i n g s Klytemnestra to mind, even at t h i s p o i n t i n the p l a y , more 42 t h a n i t d o e s a ny o t h e r c h a r a c t e r - c e r t a i n l y i t d o e s n ' t s u i t Agamemnon o r H e l e n ; but t h e o f C a l c h a s i s 'TtmJoirotJof .(154-1 5 5 ) . The l i o n c u b shows i t s p a r e n t s ' ways and t h e c h o r u s i d e n t -i f y i t a s H e l e n ( 7 3 9 - 7 4 9 ) ; b u t K l y t e m n e s t r a and H e l e n have t h e same p a r e n t s ( o f f i c i a l l y , a t l e a s t ) . The r e s t o f t h i s a n t i s -t r o p h e , a s f a r as t h e a u d i e n c e y e t knows, does n ot a p p l y t o K l y -t e m n e s t r a ; b u t t h e p a r a l l e l s i n t h e f i r s t h a l f o f t h e a n t i s t -r o p h e , d i s c u s s e d above, make t h e doom and s l a u g h t e r o f t h e l a s t h a l f sound l i k e ominous p r e d i c t i o n s . I n t h e t h i r d s t r o p h e (739-749) H e l e n i s d e s c r i b e d a s a \"fy^tev^tot) '/fiv'rof %\J&p5 \" (743 ), who b r i n g s a b i t t e r e n d t o a m a r r i a g e , by t h e w i l l o f Zeus X e n i o s ; s he i s a b r i d e - m o u r n e d E r i n y s ( 7 4 9 ) . Thus she i s b o t h t h e c a u s e o f Zeus X e n i o s ' a n g e r and h i s a g e n t i n a v e n g i n g i t . The c h o r u s t h e n t u r n t o a d i s c u s s i o n o f h e r e d i t y . I n t h e ne x t a n t i s t r o p h e and s t r o p h e (750-62, 764-771), t h e y speak o f t h e p r o v e r b i a l p r o s p e r i t y f r o m which grows woe t o a r a c e . The c h o r u s d i s a g r e e w i t h t h i s p r o v e r b ; i t i s t h e i m p i o u s deed w h i c h g i v e s b i r t h t o o f f s p r i n g w h i c h a r e a l i k e , but more i n number (TrAciovU tt^rrtt , ffie-Tfp* two** yiJJd , 75 9 - 7 6 0 ) ; t h e f a t e o f a j u s t (\u00C2\u00A3U6s \" (690). Klytemnestra' s i n f i d e l i t y has been hinted at by the chorus and more strongly suggested by Klytemnestra herself. She i s shown obstructing an expected procedure associ-ated with homecoming and apparently controls a l l events on stage when she i s there. She does not cause the storm, but she came c l o s e to p r e d i c t i n g i t . Her s k i l l at manipulating words i s great. Her speech shows her personal character as proud and powerful. The chorus fear and d i s t r u s t her and fear for the safety of the king and of his household. At this juncture, Aga-memnon enters. The chorus address Agamemnon as he progresses in a char-i o t with Kassandra across the stage (783-809). They warn him a g a i n s t those who value mere appearance, \"seeming to be\" (To 2o\u00C2\u00ABftv ftJjt , 788) more ( i . e . more than true being). As has been shown above, Klytemnestra i s certainly one of these. The chorus add that such people overvalue appearance \"after they have trans-gressed j u s t i c e \" . These people w i l l feign sympathy while f e e l i n g none in their hearts; but a good judge of character w i l l be able to discern false loyalty. The fear and di s t r u s t the chorus have shown for Klytemnestra e a r l i e r would make the audience think 45 i m m e d i a t e l y o f her as t h e p e r s o n t h e c h o r u s a r e w a r n i n g Agamemnon a g a i n s t . The c h o r u s a d d t h a t , w h i l e d i s a p p r o v i n g o f t h e o r i g i n a l m i s s i o n , t h e i r f e e l i n g s have a l t e r e d now t h a t Agamemnon has r e -t u r n e d v i c t o r i o u s and t h e y g r e e t him i n l o y a l t y \"ou\A k t r ' %uf>; o'vdiUA ( 8 2 3 ) , i s v i v i d and d i s t u r b i n g , c a r r y i n g a h i n t o f t h e h u b r i s t h e c h o r u s sang o f not l o n g ago. The A r g i v e army he c a l l s a r a v e n i n g l i o n , w h ich l e a p t t h e w a l l and drank i t s f i l l o f t h e b l o o d o f t y r a n t s (827-828). T u r n i n g t o t h e c h o r u s ( 8 2 9 ) , he a n s w e r s t h e i r a d d r e s s , b u t e n t i r e l y m i s s e s t h e i r p o i n t . He i s a c q u a i n t e d w i t h f a l s e f r i e n d s , he s a y s ; o n l y O d y s s e u s was l o y a l t o him, o f a l l t h e men a t T r o y (841-842). T h i s m e n t i o n o f Odys-s e u s , a l o y a l man r e t u r n i n g home t o -his l o y a l w i f e , c a l l s K l y t e m -n e s t r a t o mind i n c o n t r a s t . 2 2 As f o r t h e r e s t , he w i l l s e t t h e 46 s t a t e i n o r d e r and c u r e what i s wrong w i t h i t . I t does n o t o c c u r t o him t h a t t h e \" f a l s e f r i e n d s \" may be i n h i s home, n o t h i s c i t y ; h i s words and c o n c e r n s a r e o n l y t h o s e o f a k i n g , n o t a h o u s e -h o l d e r . He t h e n announces h i s i n t e n t i o n o f g o i n g i n t o h i s house and \" s a l u t i n g f i r s t t h e gods\" (QioZtt tipwr* $i$tu6op.+<. , 852) a t h i s h e a r t h . He does n o t , ev e n now, m e n t i o n t h e p e o p l e i n h i s h o u s e h o l d , b u t o n l y t h e gods. Of c o u r s e t h i s i s a p u b l i c o c c a -s i o n , a n d Agamemnon t h e k i n g n e e d n o t be e x p e c t e d t o s p e a k o f p r i v a t e m a t t e r s w h i l e s t a n d i n g i n t h e s t r e e t : b u t t h e r e a d e r has s e e n and h e a r d a good d e a l o f K l y t e m n e s t r a i n t h i s p l a y , and h i s c o m p l e t e o m i s s i o n o f h e r f r o m t h i s s p e e c h i s t h e r e f o r e n o t i c e -a b l e . He ends w i t h t h e hope t h a t t h e v i c t o r y w h i c h has f o l l o w e d him u n t i l now w i l l r e m a i n s e c u r e ( 8 5 4 ) . T h i s s p e e c h i s t h e f i r s t w h o l l y t r i u m p h a n t one i n t h e p l a y ; he a c k n o w l e d g e s t h e p r o b l e m s he may e n c o u n t e r i n h i s kingdom, but s p e a k s c o n f i d e n t l y o f s o l u -t i o n s . The f o r e b o d i n g and f e a r o f e a r l i e r s p e e c h e s do not a p p e a r i n Agamemnon's words. He i s s u r e h i s a c t i o n s were j u s t i f i e d and t h a t t h e gods a p p r o v e d and a s s i s t e d him. A t t h i s l i n e K l y t e m n e s t r a s t e p s o u t o f t h e h o u s e a n d b l o c k s h i s e n t r a n c e . As W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m (1948: 132) p o i n t s o u t , i t i s p r e c i s e l y when he p r a y s f o r a s e c u r e v i c t o r y t h a t Agamemnon l o s e s ; f o r K l y t e m n e s t r a c o n t r o l s t h e s c e n e f r o m t h a t p o i n t u n t i l t h e y b o t h e x i t a t 974. T h i s s p e e c h i s K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s l o n g e s t and t h e l o n g e s t i n t h e p l a y . I t i s a d d r e s s e d o s t e n s i b l y t o t h e c h o r u s , b u t i s i n -t e n d e d f o r Agamemnon's e a r s . The s p e e c h h a s many f u n c t i o n s . 47 F i r s t and f o r e m o s t , i n t h e a c t i o n o f t h e p l a y , i t i s t h e o p e n i n g move i n h e r e f f o r t t o p e r s u a d e him t o walk t h e t a p e s t r i e s . S e v e -r a l t e c h n i q u e s t o w a r d s t h i s e n d a r e c o m b i n e d i n h e r w o r d s . F i r s t , a s Simpson (1971: 9 7 - 9 8 ) 2 3 p o i n t s o u t , she p r e s e n t s h e r -s e l f as p r e c i s e l y t h e s o r t o f g u l l i b l e , o v e r - e m o t i o n a l b e l i e v e r i n dreams and rumours f o r w h i c h t h e c h o r u s have ( t o h e r annoy-a n c e ) e a r l i e r m i s t a k e n h e r . T h i s p e r s o n a a l l a y s t h e s u s p i c i o n s Agamemnon m i g h t o t h e r w i s e f e e l a b o u t h e r m o t i v e s i n s u g g e s t i n g t h e i m p i o u s and h u b r i s t i c a c t o f w a l k i n g on t h e t a p e s t r i e s . The e x a g g e r a t e d l y d e p e n d e n t , e m o t i o n a l a n d c r e d u l o u s p e r s o n h e r s p e e c h p r e s e n t s m i g h t s u g g e s t t h i s a c t o u t o f an o v e r z e a l o u s d e s i r e t o honour him ( c o u p l e d p e r h a p s w i t h a l i t t l e s t u p i d i t y ) , b u t i t i s h a r d t o s u s p e c t her o f m a l i c e . Second, h e r s p e e c h i s b o t h s o c i a l l y i n a p p r o p r i a t e - as an i n t e n s e l y p e r s o n a l s p e e c h d e l i v e r e d i n p u b l i c - and a l s o g e n u i n e l y d a n g e r o u s , a s i t o v e r -p r a i s e s Agamemnon. ( M i c h e l i n i , 1974: 527.) The c h o r u s have s p e n t much o f t h e l a s t s t a s i m o n commenting on t h e d a n g e r s o f t o o - g r e a t p r a i s e and have j u s t now warned Agamemnon o f t h e danger o f w e a l t h \" f a l s e - s t a m p e d w i t h p r a i s e \" . I f Agamemnon c a n be b r o u g h t t o a c c e p t h e r s p e e c h as no more t h a n s o c i a l l y i n a p p r o p r i a t e , i t w i l l be e a s i e r t o move him t o c o n s i d e r t r e a d i n g t h e t a p e s t r i e s , a l s o b o t h s o c i a l l y u n a c c e p t a b l e and a c t u a l l y d a n g e r o u s , a s a m e r e l y s o c i a l i m p r o p r i e t y . T h i r d , h er d e s c r i p t i o n o f her s u f f e r i n g s i s d e s i g n e d , among o t h e r t h i n g s , t o g i v e him a s e n s e o f o b l i g a t i o n t o h e r , so t h a t no r e a s o n a b l e r e q u e s t w i l l be r e f u s e d . ( S i m p s o n , 1 9 7 1 : 99.) The i m p l i c a t i o n i s , \" o u t o f my g r e a t d e v o t i o n , I 48 s u f f e r e d a l l t h e s e t o r m e n t s f o r y o u r s a k e ; s u r e l y y o u c a n i n r e t u r n do t h i s one t h i n g f o r me\" . T h e s p e e c h t a k e n by i t s e l f seems i n t e n d e d t o a s s u r e A g a -memnon o f h e r e m o t i o n a l d e p e n d e n c e on h im i n h i s a b s e n c e a n d t h u s a l l a y any s u s p i c i o n s he m i g h t have a b o u t h e r l o y a l t y . As he h a s n o t i n f a c t e x p r e s s e d a n y s u s p i c i o n o f h e r ( o r , i n f a c t , shown t h e s l i g h t e s t i n t e r e s t i n h e r ) , h e r words d e f e n d i n g a l o v e a n d ( b y i m p l i c a t i o n ) f i d e l i t y w h i c h h a s n e v e r b e e n q u e s t i o n e d seem o d d . T h e y a r e , a t t h e l e a s t , o v e r b l o w n f o r t h e o c c a s i o n ; m o r e -o v e r , d e f e n s e a g a i n s t a c h a r g e w h i c h has no t been l e v e l l e d w i l l o f t e n r a i s e more d o u b t s t h a n i t s t i l l s . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s p r o t e s t -a t i o n s m i g h t t h e r e f o r e h a v e t h e e f f e c t o f r a i s i n g q u e s t i o n s i n A g a m e m n o n ' s m i n d . H e r e x a g g e r a t e d e x p r e s s i o n s a r e , h o w e v e r , n e c e s s a r y t o t h e image o f h e r s e l f as o v e r - e m o t i o n a l a n d d e p e n d e n t w h i c h s h e w i s h e s h i m t o a c c e p t . A g a i n , t h e s o l u t i o n t o t h i s d i l e m m a i s t o p e r s u a d e Agamemnon t o a c c e p t t h e u n e a s i n e s s s u c h a s p e e c h c r e a t e s i n h im as due m e r e l y t o i t s s o c i a l i m p r o p r i e t y . I n s t r o n g c o n t r a s t t o Agamemnon's s p e e c h , w h i c h i s s o l e l y p o l i t i c a l a n d \" k i n g l y \" , K l y t e m n e s t r a s p e a k s o f h im e x c l u s i v e l y i n h i s d o m e s t i c r o l e as h e r h u s b a n d and t h e h e a d o f t h e h o u s e h o l d . T h i s r e i n f o r c e s h e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e o i k o s r a t h e r t h a n -o r e v e n a s o p p o s e d t o - t h e o u t s i d e w o r l d . Her l a n g u a g e t h r o u g h -o u t i s v i v i d a n d e l o q u e n t ; t h e i m a g e s s h e u s e s i n 890 f f . a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r i k i n g , b u t t h e w h o l e s p e e c h shows h e r g i f t f o r m o v i n g a n d c o l o u r f u l d e s c r i p t i o n . 49 K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s f i r s t l i n e s a f t e r her g r e e t i n g t o t h e c h o -r u s a r e ( 8 5 6 - 8 5 8 ) \" I am n o t ashamed (ouu c/c6^\u00C2\u00B0^/^(- ' 8 5 6 ) t o speak t o you o f my h u s b a n d - l o v i n g ways (t^iX^o^ds r^onrous , 8 5 6 ) ; i n t i m e s h y n e s s f a d e s away f o r humans.\" As M i c h e l i n i (1974: 527) p o i n t s o u t , t h o s e who say t h e y \" a r e n ' t ashamed t o s a y \" s o m e t h i n g u s u a l l y i n t e n d t o say s o m e t h i n g e m b a r r a s s i n g o r awkward. In t h i s c a s e , what K l y t e m n e s t r a w i l l s a y i s not o n l y e m b a r r a s s i n g - t h a t i s , s o c i a l l y i n a p p r o p r i a t e - b u t a l s o d a n g e r o u s and u n t r u e , - as d i s c u s s e d above; t h e s e l i n e s have t h e e f f e c t o f d i r e c t i n g Agamem-non's a t t e n t i o n away f r o m t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e words and t o w a r d s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n which t h e y a r e s a i d . In t h i s r e s p e c t , t h e y e c ho t h e e x i t l i n e i n her s p e e c h t o t h e messenger ( 6 1 4 ) . \" j^^nj-o/?*$ T/?6itt>u{ \" r e c a l l s her s i s t e r ' s \" grfiot fitXlJofez \" ( 4 1 1 ) . F o r b o t h s i s t e r s , t h e n , i t i s an ambiguous d e s c r i p t i o n ; w h i c h 'JJrjp i s meant? F o r H e l e n a t 411, M e n e l a u s i s t h e man p r i n c i p a l l y r e -f e r r e d t o ; b u t she l e f t him. K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s \" m a n - l o v i n g ways\", even i f t h e y d i d o r i g i n a l l y a t t a c h t h e m s e l v e s t o Agamemnon, c o u l d by a n a l o g y w i t h H e l e n have changed t o a n o t h e r o b j e c t . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s e n t i r e d e s c r i p t i o n o f h e r s u f f e r i n g s i n Agamemnon's a b s e n c e (858-894) i s i n t h e p a s t t e n s e . The r e a d e r has no way o f knowing t h a t t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n i s u n t r u e ; a t some t i m e i n t h e p a s t she may have f e l t t h i s way a b o u t her h u s b a n d . ( B e t e n s k y , 1978: 15.) I f s o , she has u s e d her p a s t e x p e r i e n c e t o make t h e s p e e c h more c o n v i n c i n g now. However, any c h a r a c t e r w i t h t h e p o w e r s K l y t e m n e s t r a has a l r e a d y shown us need n o t be assumed t o be d e s c r i b i n g her p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s h e r e ; she has 50 e a r l i e r shown h e r s e l f c a p a b l e o f d e s c r i b i n g v i v i d l y what she has n e v e r s e e n . She p a s s e s i m m e d i a t e l y from t h e s t a t e m e n t t h a t she knows f r o m h e r own e x p e r i e n c e t h e m i s e r i e s she s p e a k s o f (858-860) t o th e g e n e r a l comment \" i t i s a t e r r i b l e h a r d s h i p ( f W ^ W KAUO^ , 862) f o r a woman t o s i t a t home a l o n e w i t h o u t a man\" ( 8 6 1 - 8 6 2 ) . T h i s may g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g be t r u e , but K l y t e m n e s t r a has n o t had t o do i t h e r s e l f , as t h e c h o r u s have h i n t e d i n t h e i r i n t e r c h a n g e w i t h t h e h e r a l d (546-550). In any e v e n t , w h i l e \" s i t t i n g a l o n e \" K l y t e m n e s t r a was d i s t u r b e d by r e p o r t s o f worse and worse e v i l , s he c o n t i n u e s . Had a l l o f t h e rumours been t r u e , Agamemnon \"had more h o l e s t h a n a n e t \" crfTprjttiL Smtvou -V^tui , 868) a n d d i e d t h r e e t i m e s o v e r (869-871). Her d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e rumours i s d i s t u r b i n g l y v i o l e n t and s o u n d s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e l i g h t o f l a t e r e v e n t s ) more l i k e a s t a t e m e n t o f i n t e n t t h a n o l d f e a r . 2 4 She s o d e s p a i r e d a t t h e s e t a l e s t h a t she f r e q u e n t l y a t t e m p t e d s u i c i d e ( 8 7 4 - 8 7 6 ) , she a d d s . T h i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f b e l i e v i n g u n s u b s t a n t i a t e d rumours i s one which t h e c h o r u s e x p e c t e d h e r , a woman, t o have. She v e h e m e n t l y r e j e c t e d t h e i r a s s u m p t i o n o f h e r g u l l i b i l i t y , b u t i s w i l l i n g (or even e a g e r ) t h a t Agamemnon s h o u l d b e l i e v e i t o f her now. She u s e s t h i s as an e x p l a n a t i o n o f O r e s t e s ' a b s e n c e : she has s e n t him t o an a l l y ' s house so t h a t , i f she c o m m i t t e d s u i c i d e a n d / o r Agamemnon was k i l l e d a t T r o y - e i t h e r o f w h i c h c o u l d l e a d to r e v o l u t i o n a t A r g o s - he would s t i l l be s a f e . L i n e s 877-879 51 do n o t o n l y r e f e r t o O r e s t e s , however; t r a n s l a t e d i n t h e o r d e r o f t h e G r e e k , t h e s e l i n e s a r e : And f o r t h e s e r e a s o n s , i n d e e d , t h e c h i l d does not s t a n d h e r e b e s i d e us, o f me and o f you a w a r r a n t o f ( o u r ) p l e d g e s , as i s p r o p e r , ( t h a t i s ) O r e s t e s . U n t i l s he s a y s O r e s t e s ' name, t h e o n l y m i s s i n g c h i l d we have h e a r d o f i s t h e one Agamemnon k i l l e d , I p h i g e n i a ; \"77,05 ( 8 7 7 ) \" c a n r e f e r t o e i t h e r s e x , \"KvptPS \" ( a d j e c t i v a l ) has two e n d i n g s i n i t s a l t e r n a t e f o r m , and no a r t i c l e i s g i v e n t o t e l l us w h i c h g e n d e r i s meant. The k i l l i n g o f I p h i g e n i a i s t h e o n l y e v e n t w h i c h c o u l d come t o m i n d f o r t h e a u d i e n c e . I p h i g e n i a i s , i n K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s t h o u g h t h e r e , t h e p o s s e s s o r o r g u a r a n t o r o f t h e p l e d g e s between h e r s e l f and her husband; w i t h o u t h e r , s u c h p l e d -ges do n o t n e c e s s a r i l y h o l d . As Simpson (1971: 97) p o i n t s o u t , 884-885 a r e i n agreement w i t h Agamemnon's and t h e c h o r u s ' w o r r i e s a b o u t f a l s e ( p o l i t i c a l ) f r i e n d s - c e r t a i n l y Agamemnon has t h o u g h t o n l y o f p o l i t i c a l t r e a c h e r y . Thus she has p r o v i d e d a r e a s o n f o r O r e s t e s ' a b s e n c e w i t h w h i c h Agamemnon has a l r e a d y a g r e e d and c a n n o t now deny. She c o n t i n u e s , \"Such an e x c u s e , i n d e e d , c an c a r r y no d e -c e i t \" (oo $6\oJ (f>{pfc t 886), s u r e t h a t Agamemnon w i l l a g r e e w i t h h e r p o l i t i c a l r e a s o n i n g and t h e r e f o r e d e t e c t no d e c e i t . But a s , i n f a c t , t h a t i s n o t why she s e n t O r e s t e s away ( t h o u g h t h i s i s n o t y e t a b s o l u t e l y c l e a r ) , and as she was not r e f e r r i n g o n l y t o O r e s t e s - as t h e a u d i e n c e i s w e l l aware - i t t a k e s d a r i n g t o make 52 t h i s s t a t e m e n t . A g a i n , r e f e r r i n g t o t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f d e c e i t r a i s e s q u e s t i o n s i n t h e minds o f t h e h e a r e r s ; t h e t r u t h o f h e r s t a t e m e n t s c a n n o t s i m p l y be assumed, o r she would n ot t h i n k i t n e c e s s a r y t o r e a s s u r e u s . 2 5 T h e \" g u s h i n g s p r i n g s o f h e r t e a r s \" (KArfi^i^wD ZiriMvfot TTrj^i \u00C2\u00BB 887-888) w h i c h have r u n d r y a r e c l e a r l y a n e g a t i v e f e r t i l -i t y image. She does not s a y p r e c i s e l y what she was weeping f o r ; by i m p l i c a t i o n i t i s Agamemnon's p e r i l , but I p h i g e n i a was r e c e n t -l y r e c a l l e d t o t h e a u d i e n c e ' s mind as w e l l . 2 6 She has a l s o been d e e p l y t r o u b l e d by h e r dreams (894-895) - t h i s , f r o m t h e woman who \"would n o t a c c e p t t h e f a n c y o f a s l e e p i n g i n t e l l e c t \" (275) . A g a i n , she i s p o r t r a y i n g h e r s e l f as a weak and g u l l i b l e f e m a l e . Now, h a v i n g e n d u r e d a l l o f t h e s e t h i n g s OtHhi. tXiiJL > 895, w h i c h s e t s up d i s t u r b i n g e c h o e s o f Agamemnon's frame o f mind a t t h e s a c r i f i c e (221) , o r H e l e n ' s when she d e s e r t e d h e r h u s b a n d (408) ) , she s p e a k s o f \" t h i s man\" (unnamed) i n a s e r i e s o f s e v e n h y p e r b o l i c m e t a p h o r s . The f i r s t t h r e e , \"watchdog o f t h e h o u s e \" (896) ( t h e a m b i g u i t y o f which has a l r e a d y been n o t e d ) , \" f o r e s t a y o f t h e s h i p \" a nd \" f i r m p i l l a r o f a l o f t y r o o f \" ( 896-897) , a l l r e f e r t o p h y s i c a l p r o t e c t i o n and s t a b i l i t y ; t h e l a s t t h r e e , l a n d a p p e a r i n g t o s a i l o r s b e y o n d hope (899) ( a s P e n e l o p e p e r c e i v e s O d y s s e u s , 23 :233 -40 ) , a f a i r day a p p e a r i n g f r o m a s t o r m a nd a f l o w i n g s p r i n g t o a t h i r s t y t r a v e l l e r (901), a l l p r e s e n t an image o f u n h o p e d - f o r r e l i e f f r o m n a t u r a l phenomena. The \"WX\\u00C2\u00ABTOJ rjf^p \" a p p e a r i n g f r o m t h e s t o r m r e c a l l s t h e b e a c o n , b r i g h t a s day i n t h e n i g h t (22) , or t h e morning which a p p e a r e d \" f r o m \" mother 53 morning which appeared \"from\" mother night (265); the image, of l i g h t s p r i n g i n g from darkness and d e s t r u c t i o n , has d e s t r u c t i v e connotations once again. The \"flowing s p r i n g \" r e f e r s back to her own t e a r s , dry f o r some time but now r e s t o r e d by Agamemnon's stream. The \"land appearing to hopeless s a i l o r s \" metaphor would c a l l Penelope to the minds of an audience who knew t h e i r Homer and remind them t h a t i t i s not Penelope who now speaks these words. The c e n t r a l metaphor of the seven, \"only c h i l d to a f a -t h e r \" (898), stands out because i t alone i s human and because i t i s very ambiguous. Agamemnon and Menelaus have been too c l o s e l y p a i r e d t h r o u g h o u t the p l a y to p r o p e r l y c a l l e i t h e r an \" o n l y c h i l d \" now; but (as Betensky 1978: 17 p o i n t s o u t 2 7 ) , i t r e f e r s q u i t e w e l l to Odysseus, who has been mentioned e a r l i e r and whom these l i n e s r e c a l l . Aegisthus i s the s o l e s u r v i v i n g c h i l d of h i s f a t h e r ; I p h i g e n i a seems to be the only c h i l d her mother c o n s i -ders. The audience would not yet think of Aegisthus (though they would remember the reference once he appears): but the r e c o l l e c -t i o n of Odysseus c o n t r a s t s the homecomings of the two heroes; and whether or not Iphigen i a came immediately to mind, i t i s always d i s t u r b i n g to hear Klytemnestra speak of c h i l d r e n . She r e f e r s to the (j)eo\)os he w i l l f e a r , and which too-great p r a i s e might induce, only to dismiss i t - \" l e t 0&oi)o{ be absent; f o r we have endured many e v i l s \" (904-905) - that i s , t h e i r p r e v i -ous s u f f e r i n g s j u s t i f y her great p r a i s e now. T h i s f r u s t r a t e d prayer i s another i n the s e r i e s which began with Calchas; K l y -54 t e m n e s t r a knows t h a t what she i s sa y i n g and about t o do w i l l invoke gj&6\)os and that i t w i l l not be absent from f u t u r e events. At t h i s p o i n t i n the play , the very mention of fieoJot ~ p a r t i c u -l a r l y a f t e r the second stasimon's c o n c l u s i o n - i s ominous; the p o s s i b i l i t y that i t may indeed be present i s r a i s e d by her prayer to the c o n t r a r y . Having d e l i v e r e d t h i s m a s t e r f u l l y m u l t i - l e v e l l e d and de-c e p t i v e speech, she says \"Now, my dear, step down from the c a r \" (905-906) - as he had intended to do, 61 l i n e s e a r l i e r . I t i s as i f she had s a i d \" I have f i n i s h e d what I had to say; now I w i l l p e r m i t you to s t e p down\". From her entrance she has a l r e a d y c o n t r o l l e d events and f r u s t r a t e d Agamemnon's p l a n s . He may en-t e r , but only when she allows i t and - i t soon appears - onl y on her terms: f o r she c a l l s to the maids to l a y down the p u r p l e {iroptfufeos ) t a p e s t r i e s . She concludes (910-913) with the ominous l i n e s : ... l e t there be a purple-strewn path (stream), so that {cos ) J u s t i c e may lead (him) i n t o an unhoped-f o r home. As f o r the r e s t , thought not overcome by s l e e p w i l l arrange the des t i n e d things j u s t l y , with the gods' a s s i s t a n c e . As Goheen ( 1955: 121) p o i n t s out, '\"ttdpos \" (910) can mean \"stream\" as w e l l as \"path\". The f a c t that h i s w i f e thought a blood-red stream was necessary, so that J u s t i c e could l e a d him t o an unexpected home, s h o u l d perhaps have g i v e n even Agamemnon pause. 2 8 The Dike which w i l l lead him i s o b v i o u s l y Klytemnestra, who i d e n t i f i e s h e r s e l f w i t h J u s t i c e here ( P o d l e c k i 1966:67). 55 This i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s foreshadowed in her speech about Troy and stated almost d i r e c t l y here; for as she speaks of \"Justice lead-ing him\" inside, the tapestries are being l a i d down on her order; and she has already ensured that he cannot get inside without her lead, that i s , her permission and guidance. As for the \"other things\", destined \"with the w i l l of the gods\" - what are they? But Agamemnon does not think of t h i s . The thought (fyk/Jrcf ~ of the same root as $f>r/i) ) not overcome by sleep i s Klytemnestra' s and r e c a l l s p a r t i c u l a r l y l i n e 275, as well as 15 and 290-91: what she i s about to arrange w i l l be no i d l e dream. This i s a hint that she has not, even in this speech, cast aside the masculine i n t e l l e c t ( ) she claimed e a r l i e r (for instance at 275); but Agamemnon does not notice this e i t h e r , encouraged as he i s to think of her as an emotional, g u l l i b l e woman throughout t h i s speech. Klytemnestra speaks only of Agamemnon's return to the household and to her; she does not mention his p o l i t i c a l role. This focus i s in sharp contrast to Agamemnon's speech, which, as we have seen, was exclusively p o l i t i c a l , referring to his hearth and household gods once and his family not at a l l . His over-valuing of p o l i t i c a l at the expense of domestic t i e s was shown c l e a r l y by his s a c r i f i c e of Iphigenia; the same misjudgement causes h i s h a l f - b l i n d n e s s now. When the chorus warned him against false friends and false praise, he thought only of public enemies and for this reason i s caught off guard by an attack from the household. Klytemnestra 1s speech i s intended, by misleading 56 him as to her character and a t t i t u d e , to b l i n d him even f a r t h e r to the p o s s i b i l i t y of a t t a c k from that q u a r t e r . His answer to her makes i t obvious that she has succeeded. While her speech has made him uneasy, he accepts the impression she has t r i e d to g i v e that i t i s based on feminine f o o l i s h n e s s and overemotional tendencies, not i n d e l i b e r a t e , harmful i n t e n t . I t w i l l be u s e f u l to mention here the s i g n i f i c a n c e of \" t r e a d i n g on the t a p e s t r i e s \" , about which t h e r e has been some d i s p u t e 2 9 . I take the s i g n i f i c a n c e to be somewhere between the m e a n i n g l e s s \"walking on a r a t h e r expensive p i e c e of m a t e r i a l \" (Dawe, 1963: 48 n.2), which Aeschylus uses as an excuse f o r a c o n f l i c t between husband and wife and the sine qua non on which hangs K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s d e c i s i o n to k i l l her husband. Klytemnes-t r a ' s purpose i s c l e a r l y to persuade her husband w i l l i n g l y to commit an impious act on h i s homecoming. Ewans (1982: 12) p o i n t s out that t h i s impious act occurs d i r e c t l y before Agamemnon s a c r i -f i c e s , thus r e n d e r i n g him u n f i t to do so; Lanahan ( 1974 : 25 ) suggests that Agamemnon's \"not s e t t i n g foot on the ground\" sym-b o l i c a l l y meant, a l s o , that he had not yet reclaimed h i s k i n g -dom.30 Burkert (1966: 108-109) shows that i n Greek s a c r i f i c i a l r i t u a l i t was considered a b e t t e r omen i f the v i c t i m approached the a l t a r w i l l i n g l y and were g u i l t y of some minor s i n which made i t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i t s own death. (For i n s t a n c e , goats would be teased i n t o e a t i n g i v y leaves sacred to Dionysus and then s a c r i -f i c e d f o r doing so.) T h i s r i t u a l f i t s events here p e r f e c t l y and accounts f o r the f e e l i n g (however i m p o s s i b l e to prove) of some 57 readers that Klytemnestra would not have k i l l e d him i f he had not walked on the t a p e s t r i e s . In f a c t , what she \"would have done\" cannot be known, as i t does not happen; but Agamemnon c e r t a i n l y makes himself a more p e r f e c t v i c t i m by walking w i l l i n g l y on the t a p e s t r i e s . There are s e v e r a l l a y e r s of s i g n i f i c a n c e here and the f e e l i n g that something of importance occurs i s f u l l y j u s t i -f i e d . The degree and q u a l i t y of impiety or h u b r i s i n v o l v e d can-not be a b s o l u t e l y determined: i t i s not zero, or the scene would be p o i n t l e s s ; i t i s not absolute - an impious and g r o s s l y h u b r i s t i c a c t under any p o s s i b l e c i r c u m s t a n c e s - or Klytemnes-t r a 's arguments would not take the form they do of r a i s i n g ques-t i o n s about s i t u a t i o n s i n which the a c t might be p e r m i s s i b l e . (Were i t an a b s o l u t e l y impious a c t , she would not be a b l e to suggest that t h e r e c o u l d be any c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n which i t was proper.) Many c r i t i c s have commented on t h i s scene. Goheen 1s d i s -c u s s i o n (1955: 115-120) of the colour and i t s connection with the blood s p i l l e d on the ground again and again i n the course of the t r i l o g y i s w e l l taken, as i s Jones' (1962: 86-87) p o i n t that the economic value of the t a p e s t r y i s a l a r g e i n g r e d i e n t i n i t s s i g -n i f i c a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y a f t e r the chorus 1 comments on the dangers of e x c e s s i v e wealth. The economic value of the t a p e s t r i e s i s emphasized by K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s f i n a l speech i n t h i s scene. The h u b r i s i n v o l v e d i n conspicuous consumption i s , of course, one of the kinds shown i n t h i s scene, but i t i s only one aspect of the g e n e r a l h u b r i s of g e t t i n g above one's s t a t i o n , which i s l i k e -58 l y to a t t r a c t <^>&o\)os (both human and d i v i n e ) . Jones i s q u i t e r i g h t i n p o i n t i n g out that Agamemnon wounds the oikos (economic-a l l y ) by h i s very entrance; but the economic aspect i s only one p a r t of h i s hubris here. The t r e a d i n g of the t a p e s t r i e s i s a l s o the g r e a t e s t of the symbols c r e a t e d by Klytemnestra's powers of symbolic manipula-t i o n . She has here i n v e n t e d an a c t which i s s u r e l y h u b r i s t i c (though the degree of h u b r i s i n v o l v e d i s not c e r t a i n ) and then succeeded i n r e p r e s e n t i n g i t as only very l i t t l e more than what i s due the conqueror of Troy. (That i s , she c r e a t e s a symbol which c l e a r l y has one s i g n i f i c a n c e and then persuades her hearer that i t has q u i t e another.) T h i s i s a f e a t which only a c h a r a c -t e r of Klytemnestra's powers of d e f i n i t i o n and p e r s u a s i o n c o u l d accomplish. F i n a l l y , t h i s scene i s the prime example of Klytem-n e s t r a ' s -prec&hj. Agamemnon a d d r e s s e s her as \" o f f s p r i n g o f Leda\" (Arj$ tffrni/JS \" (916) i s , i n the interchange between the two c h a r a c t e r s , not an i n s u l t , but rather a m i l d w i t t i c i s m de-signed to take away the s t i n g of the reproof which f o l l o w s , and 59 i n the for m a l s t r u c t u r e of the p l a y , a marker to show a break from the r h e s i s - f o r m of Klytemnestra's speech and a r e t u r n to the a c t i o n . 3 1 Agamemnon's o b j e c t i o n to her speech, her t a p e s t r i e s and perhaps her p o s t u r e , i f \" \"^/fa/t tfTTf 5\" (920) ( \" g r o v e l l i n g \" ) r e f e r s t o her p o s i t i o n and not her s t y l e of s p e e c h 3 2 , shows c l e a r l y that he has accepted the image she presented of h e r s e l f as an e x c i t a b l e female. She should not t r e a t him d e l i c a t e l y , \" l i k e a woman\" {^oj ^t/\)j 6Jos , then i s not a sure under which he would do i t , which would not incur d i v i n e 62 consequence of the a c t . Turning from t h i s p o i n t , she a t t a c k s the o t h e r p o t e n t i a l source of (j)eo\)o$ , human o p i n i o n , s a y i n g (937) \"Don't f e e l ashamed then at (merely) human censure.\" I f the gods do not disapprove, what do humans matter? But he demurs, s a y i n g (938 ) \"But the v o i c e , at l e a s t , of the people i s very s t r o n g \" . She answers w i t h a touch of the p r a i s e of her f i r s t s p e e c h -probably welcome to him now, a f t e r t h i s sudden cross-examination - and s k i l f u l l y using a s o p h i s t i c a l r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of \"faoJot\"-. \"The unenvied (kfieodyo-os ) man i s not admired.\" (939) Her i m p l i -c a t i o n i s that any admirable man i s envied. Throughout, Klytem-n e s t r a has made only negative arguments (the gods wouldn't nece-s s a r i l y be angry; some people would do t h i s ; the people wouldn't envy a man they didn' t admire), which do not prove the p o s i t i v e c o r o l l a r i e s she implies (the gods won't be angry; you should do t h i s ; i f the people envy you, i t i s because they admire y ou). Her arguments thus do not give an a c t u a l , p o s i t i v e b a s i s f o r the a c t i o n she suggests. Agamemnon, however, has accepted at l e a s t the p o s s i b i l i t i e s she has i n t r o d u c e d - as G o l d h i l l puts i t , he has accepted the idea that an act which he thought had only one s i g n i f i c a n c e has, i n f a c t , s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t p o s s i b l e s i g n i f i -cances (1984: 77) - and i s now i n p o s i t i o n to be toppled by the t h i r d l e v e l of argument, the p e r s o n a l , based on sexual d i f f e r -ences which he himself i n t r o d u c e s . He says (about her w i l l i n g -ness to q u a r r e l with the people) \" I t i s not the part of a woman to d e s i r e b a t t l e \" . Klytemnestra d e l i b e r a t e l y misunderstands him to mean b a t t l e with himself and answers (941) \"For the f o r t u n a t e ( i . e . Agamemnon), i t i s f i t t i n g even to be conquered ( i . e . i n 63 t h i s b a t t l e with h e r ) . \" When Agamemnon answers \"Does i t r e a l l y mean that much to you?\" (942), he i s doomed; h i s q u e s t i o n makes i t c l e a r that he has given up h i s c e r t a i n t y that the gods or men would o b j e c t and h i s o n l y r emaining ground f o r r e f u s a l i s an uneasy r e l u c t a n c e . While he has no longer a good reason to r e -f u s e , t h i s does not g i v e him good reason to agree. Klytemnes-t r a ' s d e s i r e t h a t he t r e a d the t a p e s t r i e s i s the o n l y f a c t o r m o t i v a t i n g him to do so, i f he does; so he asks how important i t i s to her. T h i s i s where the groundwork of Klytemnestra's f i r s t speech proves d e c i s i v e . F i r s t , her motives seem to be innocent and do not, i f the a c t i o n i t s e l f i s (as i t now seems) f a i r l y harmless, i n themselves give him anything to f e a r . There i s no harm i n g i v i n g i n . Second, he i s under o b l i g a t i o n to her because of the s u f f e r i n g she d e s c r i b e d there and so should grant her a favour i f she s t r o n g l y d e s i r e s i t . When she answers \"be persuaded; you r u l e indeed i n sub-m i t t i n g w i l l i n g l y to me\" (Jceod- upjrtls ^fJrn Trusts (y ) Ij^oc , 943 ) 3 5 , showing that i t is_ important to her, he has no c h o i c e l e f t but to y i e l d . Throughout, Agamemnon has been gi v e n no good reason to a c t ; KLytemnestra 1s arguments have been s u f f i c i e n t to remove h i s o b j e c t i o n s , but no more. This negative approach i s not i n i t s e l f s u f f i c i e n t to produce a c t i o n ; and K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s \"VCBou \" i s s i g n i f i c a n t . Argument c o u l d b r i n g him to the p o i n t of u n c e r -t a i n t y , but no f a r t h e r ; i t - i s her powers of p e r s u a s i o n which 64 a c t u a l l y b r i n g him t o t h e p o i n t o f a c t i o n - p r e c i s e l y t h a t f o r c e -f u l p e r s u a s i o n o f which t h e c h o r u s sang so f e a r f u l l y ( 3 8 6 - 3 9 5 ) . Agamemnon t h e n has h i s shoes removed, so as t o damage t h e f a b r i c l e s s and m i n i m i z e t h e (fieo'Jos p e r h a p s i n c u r r e d . H i s p r i n -c i p a l o b j e c t i o n s now (948-949) a r e e c o n o m i c - w a s t i n g t h e s u b -s t a n c e o f t h e house - and i t i s on t h i s a c c o u n t t h a t he i s a f r a i d o f d i v i n e e n v y , w h i c h he p r a y s may n o t s t r i k e him as he w a l k s (much a s he p r a y e d t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f I p h i g e n i a ' s s a c r i f i c e m i g h t be g o o d ) . He t h e n s p e a k s o f K a s s a n d r a , whom he d e s c r i b e s f l a t t e r i n g l y a s a \" f l o w e r c h o s e n f o r me from among much w e a l t h \" (.ifoW&d yp/jjuirud 'ffApe-rod 'iJeos ,954-955) - t h a t i s , t h e p i c k o f t h e r i c h b o o t y a t T r o y - and commends her t o h i s w i f e ' s k i n d n e s s f o r an e s c o r t i n s i d e . T h i s i s p r o o f , were any n e e d e d a t t h i s p o i n t , t h a t he d o e s n o t u n d e r s t a n d h i s w i f e . B r i n g i n g home a c o n c u b i n e was no way t o i n g r a t i a t e y o u r s e l f w i t h y o u r l o n g - a b a n -doned s p o u s e , even i n G r e e c e , whose customs, we a r e a s s u r e d , were d i f f e r e n t ( b u t see Gomme, 1925: 1-25). Even L a e r t e s n e v e r s l e p t w i t h E u r y c l e i a , f o r f e a r o f h i s w i f e ' s anger - and h i s w i f e was no K l y t e m n e s t r a . And i n d e e d , K l y t e m n e s t r a does not answer t h i s p a r t o f h i s s p e e c h . Agamemnon wal k s i n t o t h e house on t h e t a p e s t r i e s , s p e a k i n g o f h i m s e l f as h a v i n g been \"subdued\" (^T^rpj^y^.M( , 956) by K l y -t e m n e s t r a i n t h i s m a t t e r . T h e r e i s no doubt t h a t t h i s i s a v i c -t o r y f o r K l y t e m n e s t r a ; Agamemnon has e n t e r e d t h e s t a g e a c o n -q u e r o r and l e f t i t c o n q u e r e d by h i s own w i f e . T h i s s p i r i t u a l 65 v i c t o r y i s the symbol and precursor of the p h y s i c a l v i c t o r y K l y -temnestra w i l l win i n s i d e . K l ytemnestra f o l l o w s , making another v i v i d , eloquent and double-edged speech. (She i s thus the l a s t of the two to speak, which r e i n f o r c e s her dominance over her husband.) She speaks of the sea as unendingly f e r t i l e , n o u r i s h i n g CYf>t0ot>6A , 959) an ever-renewed Ctfu^Mti)c\u00C2\u00A3^ro\) , 960) flow of p u r p l e dye (nop^uj/P'iS , 959) f o r dipping (fj^JS, 960) garments. T h i s sea, however, was l a s t spoken of using another f e r t i l i t y image - as \"blooming with shipwrecks and Argiv e corpses\" (659-660); and the \"tfop^tjpdS \" she speaks of i s the same d r i e d - b l o o d c o l o u r which has been mentioned b e f o r e . /3j.ftd$ was l a s t used of d i p p i n g bronze; now i t i s used of dipping c l o t h e s i n t h i s ominously-coloured dye. The image of the d e s t r u c t i v e l y f e r t i l e sea producing b l o o d - c o l -oured l i q u i d (xrjutSj. , 960) i s q u i t e d i s t u r b i n g . She c o n t i n u e s , saying \"Our house has a s u f f i c i e n t supply of these things (T^Sf / 961), by the gods' w i l l ; the house does not know how to be poor\" (961-962). T h i s statement i s a l s o menacing, p a r t l y because of the chorus' warnings i n the l a s t stasimon of the dangers a r i s i n g from t o o - g r e a t wealth (772-781) and p a r t l y because one wonders what, e x a c t l y , the house has a s u f f i c i e n c y of, given the ominous tone o f her p r e v i o u s l i n e s . The ob v i o u s r e f e r e n t i s \"GcjM'ru/i) pztftAS \" (960)or \" {ao^uj}tii \"; e i t h e r one has f r i g h t e n i n g connota-t i o n s of v i o l e n c e and bloodshed. Her c l a i m (963-965) that she would have vowed the trampling of many such garments, at an o r a -c l e ' s guidance, to save t h i s man's l i f e , shows the same e x t r a v a -66 gance as her previous comments and o f f e r s a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the a c t i o n which Agamemnon does not have - no o r a c l e has commanded him. T h i s seems intended to point out h i s g u i l t to the chorus, while i t o s t e n s i b l y reassures him. Furthermore, i t i s probably a l i e . 3 6 The o s t e n s i b l e s u b j e c t of her next two statements (966-969) i s Agamemnon; he i s the root which remains to spread f o l i a g e over the house and p r o t e c t i t against the \"s c o r c h i n g d o g ( s t a r ) \" , i . e . the summer heat; i t i s he, r e t u r n i n g to h i s h e a r t h , t h a t b r i n g s warmth i n w i n t e r . She l a t e r speaks of Aegisthus i n p r e -c i s e l y the terms of the second image ( 9 6 8 - 9 6 9 ) . Now, however, the reader has been given no h i n t that he should think of anyone but Agamemnon. The fulsome language of the next seven l i n e s ( 9 6 6 - 9 7 2 ) , expressing the highest degree of joy at her husband's homecoming, i s p u z z l i n g . I t i s even more emotional than her f i r s t speech i n Agamemnon's presence. But that f i r s t speech was fulsome by n e c e s s i t y , i n order to delude Agamemnon: these l i n e s do not seem to have a s i m i l a r purpose. Agamemnon has a l r e a d y g i v e n i n , and i s walking on the t a p e s t r i e s even as she speaks; she does not need to persuade him f u r t h e r . One could argue that she needed to keep up the i l l u s i o n of welcome u n t i l he was a c t u -a l l y i n the door, l e s t he begin to suspect the t r u t h and take f r i g h t while escape i s s t i l l p o s s i b l e . T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n does not however account f o r the sheer i n t e n s i t y of emotion p r e s e n t i n these l i n e s . Perhaps Klytemnestra here should be seen as ex-p r e s s i n g her r e a l joy (at the f a c t that Agamemnon has been sue-67 c e s s f u l l y d e c e i v e d ) i n t h e o n l y way she c a n i n p u b l i c c i r c u m -s t a n c e s : she shows h e r j o y , b u t a s c r i b e s i t t o t h e a c c e p t a b l e c a u s e t h a t she i s p l e a s e d t o see Agamemnon e n t e r t h e house a g a i n . T h e s e l i n e s a r e i n t h e m s e l v e s a l s o d e c i d e d l y d o u b l e - e d g e d . The \" r e t u r n i n g f o l i a g e {faW&S , 9 6 6 ) \" i s c l e a r l y t h e symbol o f h e r r e t u r n i n g f e r t i l i t y , w h ich she l o s t when Agamemnon l e f t and r e c e i v e s on h i s r e t u r n , s h e i m p l i e s - o r , a s s h e has i m p l i e d e a r l i e r , w h i c h she l o s t when he k i l l e d I p h i g e n i a and w i l l r e c o v e r when she k i l l s him. Agamemnon has e a r l i e r been c a l l e d t h e \"J(CJJL 6rn0jktH)\" ( 8 9 6 ) , s o t h e n6tCf>c'ou KVI/O'S \" ( 9 6 7 ) , w h i c h w i t h e r s t h e f e r t i l i t y o f t h e h o u s e , r e f e r s t o him as w e l l . The s u b j e c t o f t h e t h i r d s t a t e m e n t i s Zeus, w i t h whose w i l l D i k e has p r e v i o u s l y b e e n i d e n t i f i e d . When Zeus makes w i n e f r o m b i t t e r ( u n r i p e ) g r a p e s {bftfauo* ffiupZs , 970), she s a y s , t h e n i n d e e d t h e r e i s c o o l i n t h e house, when t h e \"man i n f u l l a u t h o r i t y \" , \"man who accom-p l i s h e s t h i n g s \" ( z f y o s Te\{coo , 97 2) o c c u p i e s t h e h o u s e . Zeus \" m a k i n g w i n e f r o m u n r i p e g r a p e s \" c o u l d r e f e r t o an u n t i m e l y d e a t h w i l l e d by Z e u s / D i k e - t h a t i s , Agamemnon's d e a t h ; t h e wine would t h e n s y m b o l i z e b l o o d . Wine, t h e s e a and t h e dye t h e n have a l l b e e n c o n v e r t e d t o n e g a t i v e , f a t a l i m a g e s . 3 7 I f t h e \"fl^po* 'YzXeLou \" i s Agamemnon, which i s t h e immediate i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , one s h o u l d remember t h a t the a d j e c t i v e 7t\icos \" was u s e d o f p e r f e c t s a c r i f i c i a l v i c t i m s . The f a t e Agamemnon i s about t o f a c e i s t h u s f o r e s h a d o w e d by t h i s e p i t h e t . When Agamemnon has e n t e r e d t h e p a l a c e ( a t ab o u t 972: s e e A p p e n d i x B , ! ^ ) K l y t e m n e s t r a c o n c l u d e s w i t h a p r a y e r t o Zeus 68 Accomplisher (973-974) to f u l f i l her prayers and c o n s i d e r what he i s about to f u l f i l . What has gone before i s a strong h i n t that the o b j e c t of her prayers i s something harmful to Agamemnon. In these f i f t e e n l i n e s (958-974), K l y t e m n e s t r a uses the words \" O C K O S \" or \" 9o^\u00C2\u00AB?s \" seven times. I t i s never \"Agamemnon's house\"; i t i s j u s t the house, with whose good she i s concerned and w i t h which she has been c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d throughout the p l a y . T h i s speech (958-974) u n i t e s many of the t e c h n i q u e s and themes found e a r l i e r : Klytemnestra's connection with s a c r i f i c i a l r i t e s , her use of f e r t i l i t y imagery, negative nature images i n -c l u d i n g l i g h t (the Gtiptou KvJos ), the household and Klytem-n e s t r a ' s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with i t , the w i l l of Zeus and the ex-tremely ambiguous use of metaphor and speech by Klytemnestra . In the e n t i r e scene, Klytemnestra has shown the f u l l range of her powers of eloquence, manipulation, i n t e l l i g e n c e and persua-s i o n ; and at the l a s t i t i s her power, not h i s , a g a i n s t the back-ground of c o n f l i c t between house and s o c i e t y , female and male, which overcomes. The motives she might have f o r h o s t i l i t y t o -wards her husband - Iphigenia, Aegisthus and Kassandra - have a l l been more or l e s s o b l i q u e l y presented i n t h i s scene. Agamemnon's complete i n a b i l i t y to c o n t r o l h i s wife has a l s o been shown - she seems to have c o n t r o l l e d events from f i r s t to l a s t , as she d i d with the messenger. 69 I t i s no wonder t h a t t h e c h o r u s on her e x i t b e g i n (975-977) \"Why does t h i s f e a r , h o v e r i n g c o n s t a n t l y , f l i t a b o u t my p r o p h e t i c h e a r t ? \" A l t h o u g h t h e y have s e e n t h e r e t u r n o f t h e f l e e t ( o r p a r t o f i t ) , t h e y c o n t i n u e , t h e y s t i l l f e e l no hope; t h e i r s p i r i t s s i n g \" t h e l y r e l e s s d i r g e o f t h e E r i n y e s \" (toi) S'fyeo ...QfyM 'Epc*) -t/o$, 990-991) and t h e i r h e a r t s \" w h i r l i n e d d i e s b r i n g i n g f u l f i l l -ment t o w a r d s m i n d s c o n s c i o u s o f j u s t i c e \" (iJScUocs , 9 9 6 - 9 9 7 ) . T h a t i s , t h e y s t i l l f e a r some d i s a s t e r w h i c h , however, t h e y w o u l d r e c o g n i z e a s j u s t ( 1 0 0 1 - 1 0 1 6 ) . T h e y c o n t i n u e i n t h e s e c o n d s t r o p h e w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e danger o f t o o - g r e a t f o r t u n e ; i t i s b e s t t o throw some p a r t o f w e a l t h o v e r b o a r d , so t h a t t h e whole house i s not d e s t r o y e d . T h i s i s c l e a r l y a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e r e -c e n t s p e e c h o f K l y t e m n e s t r a , e m p h a s i z i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l l y i n -f i n i t e w e a l t h o f t h e house; i t i s a l s o a r e f e r e n c e t o Agamemnon's g r e a t good f o r t u n e i n c o n q u e r i n g T r o y . They f e e l t h a t s u c h good f o r t u n e i s p e r i l o u s and s u g g e s t a remedy a g a i n s t i t ; b u t ( t h e y c o n t i n u e i n t h e f i n a l a n t i s t r o p h e , 1018-1033) once a man's b l o o d has f a l l e n t o e a r t h , who can c a l l i t up a g a i n ? T h e r e i s no r e -medy f o r d e a t h . T h i s i s t h e c l o s e s t t h e y come t o s p e a k i n g o f what t h e y t r u l y f e a r , t h e d e a t h o f t h e i r m a s t e r . K l y t e m n e s t r a r e - e n t e r s a t 1035 t o f e t c h K a s s a n d r a i n s i d e ; she r e t i r e s a t 1068, d e f e a t e d i n her o b j e c t . Her d e f e a t i s a s -t o n i s h i n g ; s h e h a s o v e r c o m e t h e e l e m e n t s , t h e c h o r u s a n d t h e k i n g , b u t c a n n o t budge a f o r e i g n s l a v e - g i r l . T h e r e have b e e n 70 many d i s c u s s i o n s o f t h i s s c e n e and r e a s o n s s u g g e s t e d f o r her l o s s o f c o n t r o l h e r e . 3 8 The f i r s t e x p l a n a t i o n , s u g g e s t e d by K l y t e m -n e s t r a , i s t h a t she does n o t u n d e r s t a n d G r e e k (1060-1061); b u t a f t e r K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s d e p a r t u r e K a s s a n d r a p r o v e s t h i s e x p l a n a t i o n wrong by s p e a k i n g f l u e n t G r e e k . The e a s i e s t e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t K a s s a n d r a , a s a s e e r , knows what l i e s i n w a i t f o r h e r and i s r e l u c t a n t t o f a c e i t . In t h e end, however, she does e n t e r , o f h e r own f r e e w i l l ( t h a t i s , i n w i l l i n g o b e d i e n c e t o A p o l l o ) . I f she i s w i l l i n g t o e n t e r a t a l l , why not when she i s a s k e d ? I b e l i e v e t h e answer i s t h a t she i s a s e e r and knows t h e t r u t h ; k n o w i n g e v e r y t h i n g , a s A p o l l o r e v e a l s i t t o h e r , s h e knows a l s o K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s p l a n s and what her words c o n c e a l . F o r t h a t r e a s o n , K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s TTSLBOO , w h i c h i s b a s e d on d e c e p t i o n and o b s c u r i n g o f meaning, has no e f f e c t on h e r . O t h e r p e o p l e c a n be t a l k e d i n t o a c c e p t i n g K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s t e r m s and p l a n s ; K a s s -a n d r a does not r e s p o n d a t a l l , or even a n s w e r . 3 9 B e f o r e a t r u e s e e r , K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s powers o f i m a g i n a t i o n f a i l ; b e f o r e one who knows what symbols r e a l l y mean, K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s a t t e m p t s t o m a n i -p u l a t e them a r e u s e l e s s ' . The f a c t t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s s p e e c h i s a t l e a s t i n p a r t a c a l c u l a t e d i n s u l t may r e i n f o r c e K a s s a n d r a ' s r e f u s a l t o g i v e i n t o i t . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s s p e e c h t o K a s s a n d r a i s d o u b l e - e d g e d , a s a l w a y s , a n d t h i c k w i t h c o n d e s c e n d i n g k i n d n e s s q u i t e p o s s i b l y o f f e n s i v e t o a p r i n c e s s . She i n t e n d s t o p u t her i n h e r p l a c e as a s l a v e q u i c k l y and b e g i n s by a d d r e s s i n g her o n l y as K a s s a n d r a , w i t h o u t p a t r o n y m i c ( 1 0 3 5 ) . Zeus has s e t K a s s a n d r a i n t h e h o u s e , 71 she c o n t i n u e s , t o s h a r e t h e s a c r i f i c i a l w a t e r , s t a n d i n g among t h e many s l a v e s a t t h e h o u s e h o l d a l t a r (1036-1038). K l y t e m n e s t r a o f c o u r s e means K a s s a n d r a t o s t a n d a t t h e a l t a r as a v i c t i m ; t h e c h o r u s do n o t r e a l i z e t h i s . But even i n i t s s u r f a c e meaning, i t i s an i n s u l t ; K a s s a n d r a i s n o t t o t h i n k o f h e r s e l f e v e n a s an u n u s u a l s l a v e - she w i l l be t r e a t e d as a n o t h e r d o m e s t i c and no more. T h i s i s c l e a r l y not what Agamemnon meant f o r h e r , as h i s d e s c r i p t i o n o f her and d i r e c t i o n s f o r her c a r e r e v e a l (950-955); s h e i s a u n i q u e c r e a t u r e i n h i s e y e s , and no common d o m e s t i c s e r v a n t . \" G et down f r o m t h e c h a r i o t and d o n ' t be a r r o g a n t \" (1039), K l y t e m n e s t r a now adds; K a s s a n d r a has n o t y e t r e s p o n d e d t o h e r o r i g i n a l o r d e r . She a t t e m p t s f l a t t e r y a t t h i s j u n c t u r e , s a y i n g t h a t even H e r c u l e s was once a . s l a v e (1040-1041). T h e r e i s no r e s p o n s e . I f one must be a s l a v e , K l y t e m n e s t r a t h e n a d d s , i t i s b e t t e r i n a house w i t h o l d money t h a n i n t h e house o f a nou-veau riche, who i s a p t t o t r e a t h i s s l a v e s h a r s h l y . (1042-1043). T h i s i s s m a l l c o m f o r t a t b e s t , and sounds more as i f - K l y t e m n e s t r a w i s h e s t o p r a i s e her own h o u s e h o l d t h a n r e a s s u r e her c a p t i v e . K a s s a n d r a r e m a i n s s i l e n t . Command, f l a t t e r y and d u b i o u s r e a s s u r a n c e have had no e f f e c t ; t h e c h o r u s a d v i s e h e r t o \"obey\", o r \"be p e r s u a d e d \" (\u00E2\u0080\u00A2frciW' '^i> , tc nrtc&oi! ( 1049 ) ) , b u t she d o e s n o t . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s p e r s u a s i v e t a c t i c s have f a i l e d . K l y t e m n e s t r a w o n d e r s n e x t i f p e r h a p s K a s s a n d r a s p e a k s a n o t h e r l a n g u a g e ; i f n o t , t h e n she w i l l p e r s u a d e her w i t h words (1050-1053). The c h o r u s a g a i n s u g g e s t t h a t K a s s a n d r a obey t h e Queen. S t i l l t h e r e i s no r e s p o n s e . K l y t e m n e s t r a becomes impa-72 t i e n t now (1055-1061) - she has no l e i s u r e t o waste o u t s i d e ; t h e sh e e p s t a n d r e a d y a t t h e a l t a r f o r s a c r i f i c e , f o r her who n e v e r hoped f o r s u c h a p l e a s u r e (cos o'uiro'Y i X i r U o t t s r/ji)$' YfaiJ ^^ci) , 1 0 5 8 ) . Her o s t e n s i b l e meaning i s t h e p l e a s u r e o f a s a c r i f i c e i n honour o f h e r husband's homecoming. In f a c t , Agamemnon i s one o f t h e \" f l o c k \" [jUjL. , 1057) a t t h e a l t a r ; t h e s a c r i f i c e o f s h e e p r e c a l l s t h e l i o n c u b ' s s a c r i f i c e as a p r i e s t o f 'fan ( 7 3 0 - 7 3 1 ) . The u n e x p e c t e d p l e a s u r e , we w i l l s o o n d i s c o v e r , i s t h a t o f k i l l i n g K a s s a n d r a , whose p r e s e n c e K l y t e m n e s t r a had n o t p l a n n e d f o r , as w e l l a s t h e k i n g . I f K a s s a n d r a means t o come i n s i d e , t h e Queen c o n t i n u e s , she s h o u l d do so now; i f she d o e s n ' t \" r e c e i v e ( K l y t e m -n e s t r a 's) s p e e c h \" ( ^ o ' p o J , 1060), she s h o u l d s i g n a l w i t h h e r hand i n p l a c e o f a v o i c e . T h i s i s a r e t r e a t t o t h e n e x t l e v e l o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , t h e v i s u a l ; b u t K a s s a n d r a does n ot i n f a c t \" r e -c e i v e \" - t h a t i s , a c c e p t - K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s s p e e c h and so i g n o r e s t h e compromise K l y t e m n e s t r a o f f e r s . K l y t e m n e s t r a , t h o r o u g h l y i n c e n s e d by now, s a y s t h a t K a s s -a n d r a i s mad and \" l i s t e n s t o an e v i l j\) \" ( 1 0 6 4 ) , not knowing how t o b e a r t h e b r i d l e (^AcJox) , 1066 ) ( i . e . o f s l a v e r y ) . She c o n c l u d e s \" I w i l l n o t be d i s h o n o u r e d by s a y i n g any more\" [ov ju\"rj\> TrXtu pctjJM' %re>s , I 2 5 1 ) w i l l commit the crime. The v i s i o n s s e i z e Kass-andra a g a i n (1256 f f . ) and she sees K l y t e m n e s t r a as a \"\u00C2\u00A7tfws \ietiJ<* \", thus l i n k i n g her unmistakably to the l i o n c u b metaphor. T h i s l i o n e s s l i e s with the wolf (^KaLjucjjuiJrj \u\tco ,1258-1259-that i s , Aegisthus) i n the well-born l i o n ' s absence, which sounds not only a d u l t e r o u s but deviant. She i s planning to k i l l Kass-andra as w e l l ( 1260 ) and w i l l boast as she \"whets the sword a g a i n s t the man\" (1262) t h a t she \"exacts a p e n a l t y of death\" (U\)\"ri~'r$(6f6&p, the avenging s p i r i t . By the 81 end of the scene, she i s w i l l i n g to compromise with the daemon-Klytemnestra, who has never compromised before. This change s u r e l y argues, at the l e a s t , a change of a t t i t u d e . G i l b e r t Murray goes the whole way, arguing that u n t i l about half-way through the kommos Klytemnestra is genuinely possessed by the daemon; af t e r the murder, the daemon releases the body to i t s o r i g i n a l inhabitant, who i s l e f t to cope as best she may.41 Other interpretations have r e l i e d on \"inconsistency of character\" (Dawe, 1963: 51) - the theory that one should not expect Klytem-nestra to act l i k e \"the same person\", because Aeschylus did not write the scene, or the play, with her character as his primary concern. Therefore, as this theory explains, we are mistaken in expecting a consistency of character in this scene, or anywhere in the play, as i t would never have crossed the playwright's mind that such a q u a l i t y was necessary to the drama. This theory, however, i s unconvincing when one considers the obvious consis-tency of Klytemnestra's character in a l l the rest of the play-i f consistency of character did not concern Aeschylus at any time, i t i s hard to imagine why her character should only become \"inconsistent\" here, after 1300 l i n e s . Those interpretations which do allow Klytemnestra's char-acter to retain i t s integrity explain her change in various ways. Podlecki (1983: 33), for instance, explains that she i s seeking refuge from her g u i l t in uncharacteristic submissiveness (in this play and the next), hoping thus to appease the world. He adds that this could easily be an elaborate charade on the part of a 82 n o t o r i o u s l y d e c e i t f u l woman. I agree that she i s r e a c t i n g t o \" g u i l t \" , i f t h i s means \" r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a crime and r e a l i z a -t i o n that i t may have consequences\" and not ( f o l l o w i n g the mod-ern usage) \"a f e e l i n g that she had done something wrong\". K l y -temnestra never shows any remorse over Agamemnon's death, only unhappiness at i t s consequences. But i n the Agamemnon, at l e a s t , t h e r e i s not so much \"feminine submissiveness\" as a d a p t a t i o n to new circumstances. The r e a l change i s i n the f a c t t h a t , before the murder, Klytemnestra has never seemed to adapt; she has ap-p a r e n t l y c o n t r o l l e d a l l circumstances h e r s e l f and f o r c e d o t h e r s -with one exception - to adapt to her. In f a c t , as w i l l appear, she d i d not e n t i r e l y c o n t r o l her world; the f o r c e s which combined to produce the death of Agamemnon c o i n c i d e n t a l l y agreed with her own wishes, and thus seemed to be under her c o n t r o l . She i s , b e f o r e the murder, p e r f e c t l y adapted to a world i n which a l l events f a l l out as she has planned them, and which thus appears to be completely i n her power. A f t e r the murder she must adapt to a world which i s revealed to be only p a r t i a l l y amenable to her w i l l . M i c h e l i n i e x p l a i n s the \"change\" i n Klytemnestra's charac-te r as born of her new s o c i a l circumstances: she i s now not the r e b e l , but the maintainer of a new status quo; her a c t i v e r o l e i n the c y c l e has gone by and i t w i l l next be her t u r n to s u f f e r (1979: 55). Betensky (1978: 12) ex p l a i n s the change as one not so much i n K l y t e m n e s t r a as i n the way she i s viewed by those around her. This l a s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n e x p l a i n s a good d e a l of the 83 p r o g r e s s i o n of the t r i l o g y , but i s not as u s e f u l i n the f i r s t p l a y , when a change i n the way Klytemnestra handles the world i s evident as w e l l as i n the way i t sees her. More than anything, Klytemnestra seems to me to act l i k e a person who has not thought past a c e r t a i n p o i n t , or whose expect-a t i o n s past that p o i n t have not been f u l f i l l e d . A l l events and elements of her world have u n i t e d , apparently (to the reader and to Klytemnestra) under her c o n t r o l , i n order to b r i n g about the death of her husband. A f t e r that event she ( u n l i k e Aegisthus) had no c l e a r p l a n s , no great goal towards which to s t e e r events. Her immense t a l e n t s f o r manipulating people and things are no use when she has no reason to manipulate them. Moreover, the world a f t e r the murder i s not what she expected, i n as much as she e x p e c t e d a n y t h i n g - she hoped, as she says h e r s e l f , t h a t the murder of Agamemnon would end the bloodshed i n the house. The chorus convince her that t h i s w i l l not n e c e s s a r i l y be the r e s u l t of her crime; that there may be consequences she d i d not d e s i r e or f o r e s e e : that her c o n t r o l , i n f a c t , may have been i l l u s o r y . Her goal i s gone and the world she c o n t r o l l e d turns out, i n one re s p e c t , to have been u n c o n t r o l l a b l e , at l e a s t by her. I t i s no wonder that a d apting to these f a c t s causes her to act a l i t t l e d i f f e r e n t l y . K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s \"character change\", whatever i t s cause and na t u r e , has i n any case been exaggerated by some commentators. For i n s t a n c e , i t i s true that at 1372-1398 she claims r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y f o r Agamemnon's death and at 1496-1504 says that i t was 84 e n t i r e l y the j W r w ^ ' s crime; but by 1552-1553 she once a g a i n c l a i m s at l e a s t p a r t i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , t h i s time using a (per-haps p o e t i c ) p l u r a l : \"By our (hands) he f e l l , he d i e d ; and we w i l l b u r y him.\" {Ifpbs fj/\) \" (1396-1397). T h i s image thus continues the p e r v e r s i o n of s a c r i f i c i a l imagery; one does not p r o p e r l y pour out curses as l i b a t i o n s to a god. Her d e s c r i p t i o n of her deeds as \"viftpSiuojs \" i s p e r f e c t l y accurate^ and damning. J u s t i c e , the theme of the p l a y , i s a matter of balance; one cannot be \"more than j u s t \" without becoming u n j u s t . In these 26 l i n e s Klytemnestra has a s s e r t e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the murder ten times, i n the most f o r c e f u l language p o s s i b l e . The c h o r u s 1 f i r s t r e a c t i o n i s i n f a c t to her language: they are s u r p r i s e d at her boldness of speech (Qp*i6udrof4.os , 1399) and t h a t she b o a s t s i n t h i s way over her man (kfopc , 1400). T h e i r s u r p r i s e i s not at what she has done, but at her v i o l a t i o n of the f e m i n i n e r o l e to do i t - not \"How c o u l d you k i l l our k i n g ! \" but \"How c o u l d a p r o p e r l y - b r e d woman use such immodest language!\" T h e i r use of \"kJfyc \" emphasizes t h i s i m p l i c a t i o n by g i v i n g Agamemnon a sexual r o l e (opposed to Klytemnestra's) . Klytemn e s t r a shows the same r e a c t i o n she has had i n the past when s l i g h t e d and d i s m i s s e d on sex u a l grounds; her answer shows a touch of offended p r i d e . \"You t r y me as i f I were a f o o l i s h woman\" (yvJjtKos u>s 'o(^A6juo\)oi ,1401) she s a y s ; but i t 88 doesn't matter, her deed s t i l l s t ands. Agamemnon, her husband (tOSi$ , 1405, g i v i n g only h i s s o c i a l r o l e ) l i e s dead, the work of her hand, a j u s t craftsman (Stuiu* 'rkwroOos , 1406). T h i s phrase r e c a l l s the \" c r a f t e r (^ S V Y O J U , 151) of feuds that does not fe a r a man, ... c h i l d - a v e n g i n g ft^Ou \" (151-155), with which the reader has always suspect that Klytemnestra was i d e n t i f i e d . That i d e n t -i f i c a t i o n i s now v e r i f i e d : Klytemnestra and the C a l c h a s spoke of are one. The phrase a l s o shows that Klytemnestra i d e n t -i f i e s her a c t and h e r s e l f with j u s t i c e and wants i t to be seen that way, unbiased by c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of the sexes of the k i l l e r and v i c t i m . The chorus ask \"w \" (1407) what she has eaten which made her take on t h i s \" s a c r i f i c e \" (Quo$ , 1408), \" c a s t i n g o f f \" (!/ir{$LK\u00E2\u0082\u00AC2 , 1410) - i . e . , not concerned with - the curses of the people (1407-1410). Their i m p l i c a t i o n i s that as she i s female, her a c t cannot have been the product of a r a t i o n a l d e c i s i o n ; she must have simply gone mad. They warn her that she w i l l be e x i l e d from the c i t y ('jirono\t$ , 1410). Klytemnestra p o i n t s out (1412-1421) that they sentence her to e x i l e and hatred of the people, but d i d not do the same when Agamemnon s a c r i f i c e d h i s own daughter - her \"dearest b i r t h p a n g \" (1418) - l i k e a beast (1415). Why d i d they not banish him? The crimes were equal, i n sho r t , a s a c r i f i c e f o r a s a c r i f i c e ; why do they judge her alone so harshly? But i f they t h r e a t e n her, she continues (1421-1425), i t i s on the f o l l o w i n g equal terms (PA -y&O CfioLuiO , 1423): i f they win (the argument), they w i l l r u l e ; i f the 89 god g r a n t s the o p p o s i t e , then \"having been t a u g h t , you w i l l l e a r n , though l a t e , to be wise (To sojfooJtiJ, 1425)\". The s t r i c t r e c i p r o c i t y and e q u a l i t y of judgement Klyt e m n e s t r a d e s i r e s i s s t r e s s e d i n t h i s speech and once a g a i n , she seems to d e s i r e s t r i f e and v i c t o r y , as she d i d i n the t a p e s t r y scene and as women s h o u l d not do. 1425 i s r e m i n i s c e n t of the Zeus hymn, where wisdom comes even to the u n w i l l i n g , through s u f f e r i n g . She i s then promising them s u f f e r i n g here. The chorus respond (1426-1430) by r e i t e r a t i n g t h e i r b e l i e f t h a t she i s i n s a n e : she i s o v e r w e e n i n g l y proud (jUfyi\o^^Te5 , 1426), they say, and her words haughty because her i s mad-dened with the b l o o d - d r i p p i n g crime (foJoXySft y^y* , 1427). How-ever, they accept the idea of a c t i o n paying for a c t i o n and pro-mise that i n r e q u i t a l ('JJ^i-raJ , 1429) f o r her crime she w i l l yet pay blow f o r blow, b e r e f t of f r i e n d s . K l y t e m n e s t r a responds to the suggestion that she w i l l be 6/rtp>of4.fJjd 91 1439) and l o v e r of t h i s \" c a p t i v e , seer and bedfellow\" (^ y/^ Xw -7 0 4 .. . W W . . . Hoc\/6\wrpos , 1440-1441 - Kassandra) as w e l l , the \"prophesying b e d f e l l o w of t h i s man, t r u s t y c o n s o r t , wearer-down of the s a i l o r ' s benches\" (1441-1443). The p a i r has not s u f f e r e d u n j u s t l y , she adds: he i s dead, and Kassandra, the l o v e r of him, l i e s here a l s o , b r i n g i n g \"an added r e l i s h to the p l e a s u r e s of my bed (? text u n c e r t a i n ) \" (1445). There i s more anger and b i t t e r n e s s i n her words here than can be e x p l a i n e d without assuming j e a l o u s y on K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s p a r t . J ealousy need not be based on any s o r t of a f f e c t i o n , how-ever and c e r t a i n l y i t i s not here. I t i s not s u r p r i s i n g t h at a woman who has so f a r shown a d e s i r e - and an apparent a b i l i t y -to c o n t r o l almost a l l elements of her world would now show e v i -dence of v i o l e n t p o s s e s s i v e f e e l i n g s towards her husband - that i s , of d e s i r e to c o n t r o l , or to have c o n t r o l l e d , a l l h i s a c t i o n s as w e l l . Such a d e s i r e can c e n t r e on hated o b j e c t s as w e l l as loved ones. 4 4 However, i f Agamemnon's death repays I p h i g e n i a ' s and h i s i n f i d e l i t y b a l a n c e s K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s, then what w i l l repay the death of Kassandra? A e g i s t h u s 1 death? K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s own? By K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s own r u l e s , i f one i n f i d e l i t y i s p u n i s h e d , the other must be a l s o ; as, i n f a c t , i t w i l l be l a t e r on. In f a c t , K a s s a n d r a has not s u f f e r e d j u s t l y ; even K l y t e m n e s t r a t a c i t l y admits t h i s by g i v i n g such a f r i v o l o u s reason f o r k i l l i n g her (because i t gave her a d d i t i o n a l p l e a s u r e ) . T h i s , l i k e her ex-92 c e s s i v e l a n g u a g e e a r l i e r , shows t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s a c t i o n was i n f a c t u^Y'S5 -The c h o r u s a r e now b r o u g h t , p e r h a p s by t h e t h o u g h t o f a d u l t e r y , t o t h i n k o f H e l e n . H e l e n and K l y t e m n e s t r a , a l w a y s p a r a l l e l , a r e f i n a l l y l i n k e d as c l o s e l y t o g e t h e r i n t h i s p a s s a g e as t h e A t r e i d a e were a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e p l a y . The c h o r u s mourn t h e i r k i n g , who has \" s u f f e r e d many t h i n g s on a c c o u n t o f a woman/ and by a woman l o s t h i s l i f e \" (yuJuwb* / ti^os yuJjtx -os ,1452-1453). The c h o r u s ' t e n d e n c y t o speak o f women as o p p o s e d t o men, r a t h e r t h a n naming s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s , has been c o n s i s -t e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e p l a y , p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e y speak o f H e l e n . In t h e c h o r u s ' e y e s , - t h a t i s , i n t h e e y e s o f t h e male A r g i v e c i t i z e n r y whom t h e y r e p r e s e n t - a woman's sex, and t r a n s g r e s s i o n o f h e r s e x u a l r o l e , i s more i m p o r t a n t t h a n her p e r s o n a l c h a r a c -t e r i s t i c s . To t h e c h o r u s , an a c t c a n n o t be d i s c u s s e d o r j u d g e d i n i s o l a t i o n ; t h e y must c o n s i d e r a l s o ( o r even p r i m a r i l y ) w hether t h i s a c t was committed by a woman, and i f s o , whether i t s u i t s a woman's p r o p e r r o l e . So, t h e y f i r s t e s t a b l i s h H e l e n ' s s e x ; t h e y t h e n a d d r e s s h e r s p e c i f i c a l l y . They c a l l her i n s a n e (irifuJoos , 1455) and s o l e d e s t r o y e r o f t h e many l i v e s a t T r o y , she who has now a d d e d Agamemnon's b l o o d a s a f i n a l g a r l a n d f o r h e r s e l f . (k-HrjOeUu AL^.' , 1460, f o l l o w i n g F r a e n k e l ' s t e x t (1950: n. ad l o c . ) ( 1 4 5 5 - 1 4 6 1 ) . T h e r e was c e r t a i n l y an E r i s , woe o f m a l e s [Uttfor otyvs , 1461) i n t h e house, t h e y c o n t i n u e . The E r i s ( S t r i f e ) t h e y mean i s H e l e n , b u t K l y t e m n e s t r a , s t i l l s t a n d i n g o v e r h e r h u s -band's c o r p s e , i s t h e woe t o men who comes i m m e d i a t e l y t o mind. 93 The \"garland of blood\" (1459-1460) - l a s t i n the s e r i e s of f a t a l f l o w e r s i n t h i s p l a y - i s another p e r v e r t e d f e r t i l i t y image which f o r t h a t r e a s on reminds one of K l y t e m n e s t r a w h i l e o s t e n s i b l y r e f e r r i n g to H e l e n . The f i n a l l i n k between the s i s t e r s , o f course, i s that they a t t r i b u t e Agamemnon's death to Helen. K l y t e m n e s t r a (1462-1467) does not deny Helen's r o l e i n Agamemnon's murder. This non-denial i s the s i g n of the t u r n i n g -p o i n t i n her a t t i t u d e towards her crime; she has not g i v e n an i n c h u n t i l now. She o b j e c t s , i n s t e a d , to t h e i r c a l l i n g Helen a \"man-destroyer\" (^J^/W'-Tf UIOC6L , 1469 ) means e i t h e r \"of d i f f e r e n t n a t u r e s \" or \"each one of a double nature\" ( i . e . two-faced). Given what we have a l r e a d y heard of the two s i s t e r s - the daemon wields a \" l i k e -s o u l e d \" power from the women; they are both a bane (o*i-\vi , 1461) to t h e i r men; they are both adulterous and d e s t r u c t i v e ; i n s h o r t , 94 they are shown as very much a l i k e - the second meaning seems more a p p l i c a b l e . The natures of the two s i s t e r s are not d i f f e r e n t . T h i s daemon has now s e t t l e d on Agamemnon's body (1472-1473), thus showing p l e a s u r e and p a r t - r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the de a t h . T h i s daemon, f i n a l l y , f e l l f i r s t on the ( A t r e i d ) house, then on the women ($cyu*i6c K J I ... T^^u\c^csc , 1467-1468). Kassandra has al r e a d y shown that the d i s a s t e r s of the house antedate Klytemnes-t r a , which i n d i c a t e s t h a t Klytemnestra's a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h the house, w i t h which she so s t r o n g l y i d e n t i f i e s h e r s e l f , i n f a c t came a f t e r the daemon s e t t l e d i n i t . Klytemnestra's l i n k with the house i s then not as absolute as she has thought; the daemon i n f e s t e d i t e a r l i e r and f a r from r e l i n q u i s h i n g c o n t r o l of i t to her, has - i n the chorus' eyes at l e a s t - f a l l e n on her as w e l l . K l y t e m n e s t r a has a l r e a d y admitted the a u t h o r i t y o f some s u p e r n a t u r a l powers. She i s happy t o a c c e p t the daemo, now (1475) as a f o r c e i n the crime ( i t i s p r e f e r a b l e to i m p l i c a t i n g her s i s t e r , at l e a s t - 1475). They are r i g h t to speak of the t h r i c e - g o r g e d (/Ypc^i^u\JAro J , 1476) daemon, she says, f o r he nour-i s h e s (i\" 'you . . . fpiftwc , 1478-1479) the c r a v i n g (fytos , 1478) f o r blood, new i c h o r (pus - cjuf* , 1479) before the o l d has ceased (1479-1480). That i s : one crime f o l l o w s another b e f o r e the wounds of the o l d one are f o r g o t t e n ; and w h i l e the a c t i o n i s s t i l l the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the doer, the d e s i r e to act i s promp-ted by the daemon. Klytemnestra's d e s c r i p t i o n of him as \" t h r i c e -gorged\" shows that she i s now w i l l i n g to accept the idea that her a c t i o n was part of a s e r i e s of a c t i o n s , not n e c e s s a r i l y beginning 95 w i t h I p h i g e n i a . The \" t h r e e \" t h e daemon has f e d on c o u l d by I p h i -g e n i a , Agamemnon and K a s s a n d r a , b u t K a s s a n d r a wasn't r e a l l y o f t h e \" r a c e \" {j\u00C2\u00A3\)\)rjs , 1477); k e e p i n g t o t h e f a m i l y , t h r i c e - g o r g e d must i m p l y Agamemnon, I p h i g e n i a and T h y e s t e s ' c h i l d r e n . B e f o r e , she has c l a i m e d t h a t Agamemnon's d e a t h was a s i m p l y b l o w - f o r - b l o w payment f o r t h e d e a t h o f h e r d a u g h t e r , whose d e a t h had no h i s -t o r y ; s h e i s now b e g i n n i n g t o a c k n o w l e d g e t h a t a n o t h e r c o n t e x t f o r h e r c r i m e e x i s t s , one which d i d not c o n c e r n her d i r e c t l y and wh i c h she d i d not c o n t r o l . The c h o r u s lament t h e \" g r e a t and h a r m f u l l y w r a t h f u l (pyrir-jisujjol, 1482) daemon\" she p r a i s e s and move u n h a p p i l y ( luJ ly , 1485) t o c o n s i d e r i n g Zeus \" Ij^a^coo 'frAtJipyi-rJ. \" (1486) - \"what i s a c -c o m p l i s h e d ( o r \"ends\" -1~z\tirJt ) f o r men w i t h o u t Z e u s ? \" (1487) E v e n t h i s c r i m e - a n d e v e n t h e daemon - must be g o d - o r d a i n e d (O*ou\jo*i]'rod , 1 4 8 8 ) . T h e y have come t o t h i s u l t i m a t e l e v e l o f c a u s a t i o n b e f o r e , i n t h e p a r o d o s , i n a l a s t - d i t c h a t t e m p t t o u n d e r s t a n d why e v e n t s f a l l o u t as t h e y do; and so h e r e . The c a u s e s o f Agamemnon's d e a t h have moved back f r o m K l y -t e m n e s t r a , t o H e l e n , t o a daemon o f t h e T y n d a r i d s , t o a daemon o f t h e ( A t r e i d ) h o u s e , t o Zeu s . However, when t h e y r e t u r n (1489-1496) t o l a m e n t i n g t h e i r b e l o v e d k i n g (\"Oh k i n g , how s h a l l I weep f o r you? From a l o v i n g mind what s h a l l I s a y ? \" (1489-1491) t h e y r e t u r n a l s o t o t h e p r e s e n t and t o the d i r e c t c a u s e o f h i s i m p i o u s d e a t h , t h e d o u b l e - e d g e d weapon w i e l d e d by a w i f e ' s hand (1495-1 4 9 6 ) . 96 K l y t e m n e s t r a , however, has l i s t e n e d t o and a c c e p t e d t h e p a s t h i s t o r y a n d s u p e r n a t u r a l c a u s e s s h e a n d t h e c h o r u s h a v e b r o u g h t up between them. She answers them w i t h an a s s e r t i o n a s s t r o n g a s t h a t 100 l i n e s ago, but a p p a r e n t l y o p p o s i t e i n m e a n i n g : You a r e s u r e t h e d e e d i s mine and t h a t ... I am Agamemnon's w i f e . But a p p e a r i n g i n t h e l i k e n e s s (faJ'rj.$o/ ) a v e n g i n g A t r e u s t h e c r u e l f e a s t e r , h a v i n g s a c r i f i c e d t h i s f u l l -grown man, r e p a i d him ( a s payment) f o r t h e y o u n g ( i . e . T h y e s t e s ' c h i l d r e n ) . (1498-1504) T h i s i s t h e u l t i m a t e e x p r e s s i o n o f s u p e r n a t u r a l c a u s e s g o v e r n i n g human a c t i o n s ; i t comes a t t h e end o f a s e r i e s o f s u c h e x p r e s s i o n s . I t i s s u r p r i s i n g b e c a u s e i t i s i n t h e f i r s t p e r s o n and b e c a u s e i t i s s a i d by K l y t e m n e s t r a , who e a r l i e r c l a i m e d f u l l p e r s o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . But w i t h i n a t h e i s t i c ( o r p o l y t h e i s t i c ) w o r l d - v i e w , s u c h as t h e one f o u n d i n t h i s p l a y , o v e r - d e t e r m i n a -t i o n o f a c t i o n s ( t h a t i s , t h e c o i n c i d e n c e o f d i v i n e a n d human f o r c e s i n t h e same a c t i o n ) i s p e r f e c t l y p l a u s i b l e . I t i s i d l e t o ask whether e i t h e r f o r c e by i t s e l f would have been s u f f i c i e n t t o p r o d u c e t h e a c t i o n ; a s i t h a p p e n s , b o t h f o r c e s were p r e s e n t . K l y t e m n e s t r a e x p r e s s e d t h e human c a u s a t i o n f i r s t , b a s e d on t h e s a c r i f i c e o f h e r d a u g h t e r , w i t h o u t any s u p e r n a t u r a l e l e m e n t . T a u g h t by t h e c h o r u s , t o whom she i s w i l l i n g t o l i s t e n a f t e r t h e y f i r s t t h r e a t e n her w i t h repayment f o r her own c r i m e - s o m e t h i n g h e r own code t e a c h e s her t o f e a r - she r e a l i z e s t h a t t h e r e were o t h e r m o t i v e s and f o r c e s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e c r i m e , w h i c h have a c t e d t h r o u g h h e r . Her l i n e s h e r e e x p r e s s t h e s t r i c t l y d a e m o n i c 97 c a u s a t i o n , b a s e d on t h e T h y e s t e a n f e a s t . In f a c t , b o t h m o t i v e s a n d f o r c e s e x i s t now and d i d b e f o r e ; she e x p r e s s e d them s e p a r -a t e l y b e c a u s e s h e d i d n o t o r i g i n a l l y a c k n o w l e d g e ( o r p e r h a p s r e a l i z e ) t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l f o r c e s o p e r a t i n g o u t s i d e h e r c o n t r o l . Now she does acknowledge t h e s e f o r c e s . She t h u s a c k n o w l e d g e s and f u l l y i d e n t i f i e s h e r s e l f and h e r a c t i o n s w i t h t h e \u00C2\u00A3)u' / \u00C2\u00A7Myf ttUjs lfatf> ... zpffj \" ( 1529 ) . The c h o r u s f e a r t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e house by a \"h o u s e -r u i n i n g b l o o d y r a i n \" (oju^joou uru-JToJ ZcyofpsXy \">-o) v/^<-?r^coV , 1532-1533) c r a s h i n g a g a i n s t i t ; t h e d r i z z l e K l y t e m n e s t r a s p o k e o f (1390) i s c e a s i n g . N a t u r e has not r e t u r n e d t o n o r m a l , t h e n , a s 98 K l y t e m n e s t r a hoped i t would; her b l o o d y dew may o n l y be a p r e l u d e t o a b l o o d y s t o r m . The c h o r u s a l s o f e a r t h a t J u s t i c e - w i t h whom K l y t e m n e s t r a u s e d t o i d e n t i f y h e r s e l f - i s b e i n g \" w h e t t e d on \" o t h e r w h e t s t o n e s \" by f a t e (Hoijo*), f o r new harm ( 1 5 3 5 - 1 5 3 6 ) . J u s t i c e a n d n a t u r e h a v e b o t h p a s s e d o u t o f K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s c o n t r o l . P e r h a p s t h e y , l i k e t h e daemon and p e r h a p s A e g i s t h u s , were t h e c o - w o r k e r s t h e c h o r u s and K a s s a n d r a spoke o f , and were n e v e r under h e r c o n t r o l a t a l l , d e s p i t e a p p e a r a n c e s . They wonder n e x t (1541-1550) who w i l l b u r y t h e k i n g and s i n g a d i r g e f o r him? I t i s K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s d u t y , b u t how c a n she when s h e k i l l e d him? E v e n i f she d i d b u r y him, how c o u l d s h e s p e a k a e u l o g y a n d mourn a t h i s g r a v e s i d e s i n c e r e l y {'j\r\$it* , 1550)? \" T h a t i s no c o n c e r n o f y o u r s \" (ol es ^po^rfufc r\"a yut'X^' k\{fiii\) -ruhro i 1 5 5 1 - 1 5 5 2 ) , a n s w e r s t h e Q u e e n . She ( o r \" t h e y \" -p l u r a l , 1 5 5 2 ) k i l l e d h i m a n d w i l l b u r y h i m ( 1 5 5 2 - 1 5 5 3 ) ; t h e h o u s e h o l d w i l l n o t mourn (15 5 4 ) , but h i s murdered d a u g h t e r w i l l g r e e t him \"as i s p r o p e r \" (OJS ^prj , 1556) a t t h e r i v e r o f woe ( t h e S t y x ) , w i t h a k i s s . T h i s p a s s a g e makes i t c l e a r t h a t K l y t e m n e s -t r a may ack n o w l e d g e now t h a t o t h e r f o r c e s and m o t i v e s were o p e r a -t i n g , b u t i n h e r e y e s , t h e y i n no way d i m i n i s h h e r own i n v o l v e -ment; she a c c e p t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r her a c t and she has n o t l o s t h er p r i d e ( o r h e r v i v i d use o f l a n g u a g e ) . The c h o r u s c a n n o t a n s w e r t h e a r g u m e n t o f t h e d e a t h o f I p h i g e n i a . They a d m i t t h a t t h e c a s e i s h a r d t o j u d g e ( 1 5 6 0 ) . 99 They add t h a t i t i s t h e w i l l o f Zeus t h a t t h e d o e r s h a l l s u f f e r (Titetii) ri\) epfevh-J. , 1564). They see ( t h e r e f o r e ) no end t o t h e s u f f e r i n g s o f t h e house - nKu6\\q*AL y40os npos %*r*i \u00C2\u00BB ( 1 5 6 6 ) . T h i s p e s s i m i s t i c v i e w o f t h e h o u s e ' s c o n d i t i o n and p r o b -a b l e f u t u r e a c c o r d s w i t h K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s o r i g i n a l e y e - f o r - a n - e y e v i e w o f j u s t i c e ; she c a n n o t d i s a g r e e w i t h i t . Her new knowledge o f t h e d a e m o n i c f o r c e s o f t h e w o r l d prompt h e r t o t r y t o f i n d a n o t h e r s o l u t i o n , one v e r y c l o s e t o a compromise. She a n s w e r s t h e c h o r u s \"you e n t e r i n t o t h i s o r a c l e w i t h t r u t h \" (1567 ) a n d s a y s t h a t she i s w i l l i n g t o swear a compact (bpuovs &i^*(Jrj , 1570) w i t h t h e daemon, whereby i t c e a s e s t o t o r m e n t t h e house o f P l e i s -t h e n e s and \"wears o u t a n o t h e r f a m i l y w i t h k i n d r e d - m u r d e r s \" ( 1 5 7 1 -1 5 7 3 ) ; i n r e t u r n , she w i l l g i v e up a l l but a s m a l l p a r t o f h e r p o s s e s s i o n s and be c o n t e n t , i f o n l y t h e m u t u a l b l o o d s h e d i s t a k e n f r o m t h e house (1574-1576). T h i s o f f e r s u r p r i s i n g f r o m t h e woman who was e a r l i e r so e x t r a v a g a n t w i t h t a p e s t r i e s and o t h e r r e s o u r c e s ( t h e s e a , t h e b e a c o n - l i g h t s , e t c . ) . The house \"does not know how t o be p o o r \" ( 9 6 2 ) , she s a i d o n c e , i n o b v i o u s p r i d e ; but t h i s s c e n e w i t h t h e c h o r u s has had s u c h an e f f e c t on her t h a t she i s w i l l i n g t o l e t t h e house l e a r n p o v e r t y , i n o r d e r t o e s c a p e worse d a n g e r s w h i c h she d i d n o t b e f o r e f o r e s e e . K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s TTZ.I&U> has worked on t h e c h o r u s i n t h i s s c e n e : t h e y no l o n g e r condemn he r u t t e r l y t o e x i l e a n d t h e i r f i n a l word i s t h a t i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o j u d g e . However, t h e y have had an e f f e c t on h e r as w e l l : she now r e c o g -n i z e s t h e f o r c e s which were beyond h e r c o n t r o l a l l t h e t i m e and 100 which i n f a c t a s s i s t e d (and perhaps even i n f l u e n c e d ) her own a c t i o n s , when she thought h e r s e l f and the world e n t i r e l y , at only her command. Because of these f o r c e s , she a l s o r e a l i z e s , t h i s may not be the end; she may be the v i c t i m of the daemon i n her t u r n . She does not regr e t her crime, but understands i t s context and consequences b e t t e r than she had before. The o p p o s i t i o n between male and female (and t h e i r uses of l a n g u a g e ) , the l i n k between the T y n d a r i d s , the r o l e s o f the c h t h o n i c , daemonic and Olympian powers, and the s a c r i f i c i a l and n a t u r a l imagery of the p l a y a l l combine and c u l m i n a t e i n t h i s scene. A r e s o l u t i o n of the var i o u s opposing elements appears to be c l o s e a t hand; t h i s kommos seems to be the end of the p l a y . But there i s one loose end, who suddenly enters at t h i s j u n c t u r e (1577) with a bodyguard. Aegisthus' scene f u n c t i o n s p r i n c i p a l l y as a l e a d - i n to the Choephoroe; w i t h o u t h i s entrance to d e s t r o y the rapprochement d e v e l o p i n g between Klytemnestra and the chorus, the r e s t of the t r i l o g y would be unnecessary. His e x i s t e n c e (and thus a d u l t e r o u s l o v e as a motive f o r the death of Agamemnon), i s very important i n the Choephoroe, and i t i s p r i n c i p a l l y f o r t h i s reason that he i s i n t r o d u c e d here. He a l s o makes v i s i b l e something about K l y -temnestra which has only been spoken of before: that she i s an a d u l t e r e s s , t h a t she does not l i v e alone; that perhaps she d i d not a c t a l o n e . The l a s t of the other f o r c e s o p e r a t i n g i n the p l a y i s thus presented here. 101 Klytemnestra i s nearly e n t i r e l y s i l e n t i n t h i s scene. Aegisthus gives his version of the death of Agamemnon after his entrance. To him there was only one motive for i t - the feast of Thyestes, which was the result of a dynastic struggle (1585). He does not mention the cause Kassandra does (1193 - Thyestes' adul-tery with his brother's wife), as i t weakens his case. Aegisthus claims that after Justice led him home from e x i l e , he devised the whole plan f o r the murder (1609) and thus k i l l e d Agamemnon, though he was absent at the time. Aegisthus, then, also sees himself as an agent of Dike and sees Klytemnestra as only a tool in his plot. The chorus' h o s t i l i t y , subdued by Klytemnestra i n the previous scene, i s f u l l y reawakened by Aegisthus' speech. They threaten him with stoning and curses (1616); Aegisthus responds with threats of prison and enforced hunger (1620-1621). The chorus c a l l him \"^OJJI \" (1625), who stayed home from b a t t l e , d e f i l i n g the bed of this man (^f>t , 1626) while planning t h i s fate for \"a man, a general\" (MSpS , s~rf>7n-nyZ\u00C2\u00BB , 1627). They add that he didn't have the courage to k i l l Agamemnon himself (1635). Aegisthus, who shares the assumptions about women which the other males in the play have shown, explains that \"Y0 %\U>SJ<. \" (1636) was c l e a r l y the woman's part; Agamemnon would have recognized his old enemy. Where Klytemnestra was w i l l i n g to give away most of the wealth, Aegisthus now announces his intention of using Aga-memnon's wealth to rule the people (1638-1640). The chorus' early fears of tyrannical intent on the part of the k i l l e r s are 102 p a r t l y j u s t i f i e d , i t seems: A e g i s t h u s has such a m b i t i o n s , a l -t h o u g h K l y t e m n e s t r a , who a c t u a l l y p e r f o r m e d the murder, never mentions a d e s i r e t o r u l e at any t i m e . 4 5 The chorus repeat t h e i r a c c u s a t i o n of co w a r d i c e i n a l l o w -i n g a woman t o k i l l the k i n g (1643-1646). They now pr a y f o r the r e t u r n o f O r e s t e s (1646-1648). A e g i s t h u s responds t o t h i s t h r e a t by c a l l i n g up h i s guards ( 1650 ); t h e c h o r u s s q u a r e o f f f o r a f i g h t ; and o n l y now does K l y t e m n e s t r a speak, t o a v e r t bloodshed. She asks the \" d e a r e s t o f men\" (2 ^'^wr' XJSpZjJ , 1654) t h a t they work no f u r t h e r e v i l s ; a l r e a d y t h e r e a r e enough. She wishes t o a v o i d bloodshed ( 1 6 5 6 ) . She a d v i s e s the chorus t o dep a r t \" b e f o r e d o i n g makes you s u f f e r \" (y*i) 1t&&Ui) fyfjJrrs , 1658); c e r t a i n l y she has taken t h a t l e s s o n t o h e a r t . She speaks of h e r s e l f and A e g i s t h u s - and the cho r u s a l s o , p e r h a p s - as \" u n f o r t u n a t e l y s t r u c k by the daemon's hoof\" ( 1 6 6 0 ) and f e a r s f u r t h e r s o r r o w s . She ends her s h o r t s p e e c h \"Thus you have t h e speech o f a woman ( yuJituos ), i f any t h i n k i t worth knowing\" ( 1 6 6 1 ) . The d i s t a s t e f o r f u r t h e r bloodshed does not show a major change i n c h a r a c t e r , as some ( e g . M i c h e l i n i , 1979: 156) have thought. I t was o n l y Agamemnon's b l o o d she wanted and she thought the b l o o d s h e d would s t o p t h e r e . She would s t i l l p r e f e r t h i s t o be s o , but now t h a t she un d e r s t a n d s the daemonic a s p e c t o f the w o r l d , she i s a f r a i d t h a t i t w i l l not end her e , a f r a i d t h a t her s h e d d i n g of b l o o d w i l l l e a d t o more - a s , o f c o u r s e , i t w i l l . 103 She t r e a t s Aegisthus with respect and a f f e c t i o n , as a wife would, and does not challenge h i s misconceptions about her as she d i d tho s e of the chorus ( f o r i n s t a n c e at 277, 348 or 1401). The combination of c o n v e n t i o n a l w i f e l i n e s s and f e a r of the daemon, both changes, both appearing i n the same speech, might be s i g n i -f i c a n t , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t she wishes to appease the daemon by no longer being \"unnatural\" and beginning i n s t e a d to le a d an o r d i -nary feminine l i f e . Or, i t may be that towards A e g i s t h u s , with whom she l i v e s as a wife, and against whom she has no grudge, she i s prepared to behave i n a \"normal\" w i f e l y manner. Her l a s t l i n e (1661), however, which c e r t a i n l y sounds submissive, i s so reminiscent of l i n e 348 ('\"TocJun -T-oi ^ ^ o s 4j ^ut>2 \u00C2\u00AB\ufi$ \") - which was mock-humble and, i n f a c t , an answer to the chorus' previous doubts about women - that we should pause here. In f a c t , A e g i s t h u s does l i s t e n to the \"\6yos ^uO^c^os \u00C2\u00BB; imminent bloodshed i s averted by her i n t e r v e n t i o n . Her powers of pers u a s i o n are s t i l l i n t a c t , whatever e l s e may have changed. In f a c t , the audience would wonder i f , even here, she has s i m p l y manipulated both s i d e s to avert the thre a t of v i o l e n c e by a c t i n g f e a r f u l and feminine, as she manipulated Agamemnon i n t o t r e a d i n g the t a p e s t r i e s ; and here, as i n the t a p e s t r y scene, succeeded i n her i n t e n t . The exact p r o p o r t i o n s of t r u t h and p e r s u a s i o n i n t h i s speech, as i n her other speeches, cannot be p r e c i s e l y d e t e r -mined. Her fear of the f u t u r e i s probably r e a l , as i t was d e v e l -oped i n the previous scene. However, her use of that f e a r here and her show of a f f e c t i o n f o r Aegisthus, seem to me to be proof 104 o n l y that her a b i l i t y to say the r i g h t thing at the r i g h t time i s undiminished. Aegisthus grumbles and a few more i n s u l t s are traded; but Kl y t e m n e s t r a persuades him, i n the end, to pay no a t t e n t i o n to the \"v a i n yappings\" ((/A^urfei) , 1672) of the chorus. She speaks of the two of them as equal masters of the household (she does not, even now, speak of r u l i n g the c i t y ) and ends the pl a y hope-f u l l y , \"&rjfo/f<*\" uses f o r c e - eg. Aegisthus and P a r i s . He a l s o speaks of f a l s e T I L \u00C2\u00BB J , which K l y t e m n e s t r a uses, to \" f a l s i f y the r e l a t i o n s h i p between speaker and l i s t e n e r \" ; and impotent nu*f<>* \" may have been used by Homer t o mean not \" p u r p l e \" , from the noun \" -nop^y** \" ( s h e l l -f i s h ) , but \" t h r o b b i n g \" , from the v e r b \" \u00C2\u00BB ( t o t h r o b ) . L a t e r a u t h o r s , he suggests, used the a d j e c t i v e not because i t d e s c r i b e d the c o l o u r of blood, which i t d i d not, but because i t was the word Homer used to d e s c r i b e b l o o d , and had become the t r a d i t i o n a l e p i t h e t . However, the audience w i l l not have been so c l o s e to the stage as to be able to d i s t i n g u i s h p e r f e c t l y between a r e g u l a r and an i r r e g u l a r b l o t c h of c o l o u r : nor should one a s -sume t h a t a b s o l u t e n a t u r a l i s t i c r e a l i s m i n such a matter would have been thought necessary by e i t h e r the p l a y w r i g h t or the a u d i -ence. Perhaps a r e a l b l o o d s t a i n would be i r r e g u l a r i n shape; a symbolic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of one need not be. Any b l o o d - c o l o u r e d spot c o u l d c a l l to mind a b l o o d s t a i n . As f o r the c o l o u r , Goheen (1955: 115-117) has shown that while nro^i^ofot r e f e r r e d to many d i f f e r e n t c o l o u r s , the most h i g h l y - v a l u e d one seems to have been the c o l o u r of d r i e d b l o o d . Furthermore, f o l l o w i n g the r e c i p e g i v e n f o r T y r i a n purple (the most expensive dye) produced e x a c t l y t h a t c o l o u r , TO? juntos may have been the t r a d i t i o n a l Homeric d e s c r i p t i o n of blood, but seems thus to have been a f a i r l y a c c u -r a t e d e s c r i p t i o n of i t s c o l o u r as w e l l . The high economic v a l u e of these t a p e s t r i e s i s emphasized by both Klytemnestra and Aga-memnon, and i t makes sense to think that t h e i r ( a l s o emphasized) c o l o u r i s an aspect of that economic value - that the dye used was the most e x p e n s i v e one a v a i l a b l e , t h a t i s , the c o l o u r o f d r i e d blood. I b e l i e v e , t h e r e f o r e , that the d e c o r a t i o n an c o l o u r of the t a p e s t r i e s can be assumed to have reminded the audience very s t r o n g l y of b l o o d s t a i n s . 2 9What e x a c t l y were these re-\u00E2\u0084\u00A2*/*-*\u00E2\u0084\u00A2 \" ( 909)? They were p r o b a b l y garments of some s o r t ( i f / ^ t t , 921), and bore e i t h e r embroidered or woven de c o r a t i o n s (nro^^k^O t 926). Whallon (1980: 64-66) argues p e r s u a s i v e l y that they were probably e i t h e r ffrrrXo<. or fapi* , both of which were blanket-shaped and c o u l d be spread o u t , were o f t e n d e s c r i b e d as embroidered, and ( p a r t i c u l a r l y 4*/i>tU ) were a p p r o p r i a t e a t t i r e f o r h i g h - r a n k i n g n o b l e s . I am l e s s c o n v i n c e d by h i s argument t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s use of the p l u r a l to d e s c r i b e them (eg. ti/*^^ r 960) i s an e x a g g e r a t i o n , and o n l y one Wiriot or tffrof i s i n f a c t spread out. The t e x t i t s e l f does not make c l e a r what the spread-out c l o t h s were: they a r e d e s c r i b e d v a r i o u s l y as c o v e r l e t s (909), garments (921), and footwipes (926). I think Whallon i s r i g h t i n d e s c r i b i n g them as garments, which the audience w i l l remember when the murder-robe i s d e s c r i b e d by Klytemnestra (1382-83) or d i s p l a y e d by Orestes i n the next p l a y . However, to preserve the ambiguity of the o r i g i -n a l t e x t , and because no one word i n E n g l i s h conveys a l l of these 115 meanings, I s h a l l r e f e r to them as \" t a p e s t r i e s \" . T h i s word at l e a s t has the n e c e s s a r y c o n n o t a t i o n s of d e c o r a t i o n and g r e a t expense. 3 0 I am not event. The i d e a ground to c l a i m i t no h i n t of i t i n thought. 3 1She i s r i g h t a l s o i n p o i n t i n g out t h a t s a y i n g \"your speech was l o n g \" was not n e c e s s a r i l y the i n s u l t to an a n c i e n t Greek that i t would be to us now. We think of a long speech as a d u l l one; there i s no reason to b e l i e v e that the Greeks d i d the same. ( C o n s i d e r i n g t h e i r admiration f o r o r a t o r y , i n f a c t , t h e r e i s every reason to b e l i e v e they d i d not.) 3 2 T h i s p o s i t i o n i s found elsewhere i n A e s c h y l u s and i s always shown as a p p r o p r i a t e f o r women and b a r b a r i a n s , u s u a l l y i n the worship of gods. (Couch, 1930: 316-318). 3 3\"Not t h i n k i n g e v i l l y i s the g r e a t e s t g i f t of the gods\", from a man whose mind was s e i z e d by r e c k l e s s d a r i n g and impiety at A u l i s ; \"only c a l l b l e s s e d those who end t h e i r l i v e s i n p r o s -p e r i t y \" , from a man i n h i s p o s i t i o n ; and f i n a l l y , \" i f I should a c t (or \"should have acted\") t h i s way i n a l l t h i n g s , I would be f u l l of c o n f i d e n c e \" , from a man who has not a c t e d thus i n the past and who i s about to make the same mistake again. 3 4 T h e s e l i n e s a r e an e x c e l l e n t example o f the use o f s t i c h o m y t h i a to f u r t h e r the a c t i o n . Throughout, Agamemnon i s c o n s i s t e n t l y c u t o f f b e f o r e he can muster a s t r o n g argument a g a i n s t Klytemnestra's p o s i t i o n . (See Gould, 1978: 55). 3 5 I have here accepted the emendations of t h i s l i n e sug-gested by W e i l l (Kpa^s ), Bothe ( -^ciV ) and Wecklein ( d e l . W ) r a t h e r t h a n the d i f f i c u l t m a n u s c r i p t r e a d i n g (\"nteoZ -vpS-ros z^ijroc 'HJ.fti y !<) \" ) \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Fraenkel (1950: n. ad l o c . ) a c c e p t s these emendations i n h i s t e x t , and Denniston, Page (1957: n. ad l o c . ) speak f a v o u r a b l y of them, but r e t a i n the manuscript t e x t and o b e l i z e \" Kp\u00C2\u00A3y0i . . . y \". Even o m i t t i n g the p o r t i o n o b e l i z e d by Denniston, Page, the general sense \"be persuaded ... w i l l i n g l y by me\" remains, and the presence of some form of the word \" \" a t l e a s t i n d i c a t e s t h a t power, or the l o s s of i t , i s a t i s s u e . Presumably, Klytemnestra would wish to reassure Agamemnon at t h i s p o i n t that there was no l o s s of power (or face) i n v o l v e d i n g i v i n g i n to her w i l l i n g l y ; i t i s d i f f i c u l t to t h i n k of ano-ther reason f o r her to mention vpirtoi. T n e suggested emendations do produce such a reassurance. However, even without the emend-a t i o n s , the sense of a request f o r w i l l i n g obedience i n response to Agamemnon's l a s t q u e s t i o n (\"does i t r e a l l y mean so much t o you?\", 942) i s preserved. T h i s request i s i t s e l f s u f f i c i e n t to c e r t a i n that t h i s was the Greek view of the t h a t the king must p h y s i c a l l y set f o o t on the sounds more medieval to me; furthermore, I see the t e x t here. However, i t ' s an i n t e r e s t i n g 116 s u p p o r t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s c e n e w h i c h I have p r e s e n t e d h e r e . 3 6 I t h i n k t h a t B e t e n s k y (1978: 15) o v e r e m p h a s i z e s t h e s e l i n e s when she s a y s t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a e a g e r l y d e s i r e d h e r h u s b a n d t o come home s a f e l y so t h a t she c o u l d k i l l him h e r s e l f . P e r h a p s some o f t h e e a g e r n e s s she shows i s s i n c e r e and e x i s t s f o r t h e r e a s o n B e t e n s k y s u g g e s t s ; p e r h a p s i t i s w h o l l y s i m u l a t e d ; t h e r e i s no way o f knowing. I t i s my f e e l i n g t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a w o u l d n o t have l i f t e d a f i n g e r t o s a v e her husband's l i f e and t h a n any p l e a s u r e s h e e x p r e s s e s i n h i s s a f e a r r i v a l i s w h o l l y h y p o c r i t -i c a l ; b u t t h a t i s p e r h a p s g o i n g t o o f a r i n t h e o p p o s i t e d i r e c -t i o n . T h i s i s n o t one o f t h e q u e s t i o n s t o w h i c h A e s c h y l u s s u p -p l i e d an answer. 3 7 I am i n d e b t e d t o B e t e n s k y (1978: 19) f o r h e r a n a l y s i s o f n e g a t i v e f e r t i l i t y i m a g e r y i n t h i s p a s s a g e . 3 8 W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m ' s e x p l a n a t i o n - t h a t t h e d a u g h t e r o f P r i a m does n o t f e e l she need g i v e way t o t h e w i f e o f a h a l f - c i v i -l i z e d G r e e k p r i n c e (1948: 134) - i s an i n t e r e s t i n g e x p l a n a t i o n . He o v e r - e m p h a s i z e s i t , b u t some shade o f t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s t r u e : K a s s a n d r a has a g r e a t d e a l o f p r i d e , as K l y t e m n e s t r a r e -c o g n i z e s and - whether b e c a u s e o f her a n c e s t r y , o r f o r some o t h e r r e a s o n - she does not t o l e r a t e b e i n g t r e a t e d as a s l a v e , e x c e p t by A p o l l o . 3 9 G o l d h i l l ' s d i s c u s s i o n o f t h i s s c e n e (1984: 81-88) d e a l s w i t h t h e exchange o f l a n g u a g e t h r o u g h o u t v e r y t h o r o u g h l y . 4 0 I a s k e d a f r i e n d who grew up on a b e e f f a r m a b o u t t h i s (by way o f v e r i f i c a t i o n ) and i t was t h e f i r s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n he t h o u g h t o f when t h e l i n e was q u o t e d t o him. 4 1 A s c i t e d i n A n d e r s o n (1929:'136-138). 4 2 S e e Dodds ( I 9 6 0 : 30) f o r a much more d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s o f t h e l e a r n i n g K l y t e m n e s t r a d o e s , h e r e and l a t e r , a b o u t t h e t r u e n a t u r e o f t h e w o r l d she i n h a b i t s . 4 3 I n t e r e s t e d r e a d e r s s h o u l d see Co n a c h e r (1974: 324-329) and Dodds (1960: 29-31) f o r u s e f u l a n a l y s e s o f t h i s s c e n e . I am i n d e b t e d a l s o t o G o l d h i l l (1984: 89-98) i n my d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e kommos, though more f o r t h e method o f a t t a c k t h a n t h e c o n c l u s i o n s r e a c h e d . 4 4 I do n o t a g r e e w i t h W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m (1948: 135) t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a i s j e a l o u s not o f t h e o t h e r women's s e x u a l r e l a t i o n -s h i p w i t h Agamemnon, b u t r a t h e r o f t h e i r s h a r i n g h i s m i l i t a r y l i f e - C h r y s e i s a t T r o y , K a s s a n d r a on t h e s h i p - w h i l e s h e , w i t h a temperament more a c t i v e and m i l i t a r y even t h a n Agamemnon's, was f o r g o t t e n a t home. K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s a g g r e s s i v e n a t u r e makes t h i s 117 an a t t r a c t i v e h y p o t h e s i s , but I see no s i g n of t h i s reason f o r j e a l o u s y i n the t e x t . 4 5 I think t h i s must stand as an answer to Winnington-Ing-ram's t h e s i s (1948: passim), at l e a s t as f a r as the Agamemnon i s concerned. L i k e Z e i t l i n ' s a r t i c l e , Winnington-Ingram's e x p l a i n s some elements of the Eumenides w e l l ; but they are both wrong i n r e a d i n g i n t o t h i s p l a y (or the next) any p o l i t i c a l ambition i n Klytemnestra - at l e a s t , I can f i n d none. 118 APPENDIX A THE ORESTEIA TRADITION AND AESCHYLUS' INNOVATIONS A e s c h y l u s ' v e r s i o n o f t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon, i n manner and m o t i v e , was s t r i k i n g l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e v e r s i o n o f t h e myth w h i c h p r e v a i l e d i n h i s e r a o r i n t h e p r e c e d i n g t r a d i t i o n . When a p l a y w r i g h t goes a g a i n s t h i s a u d i e n c e ' s e x p e c t a t i o n s o f a s t o r y i n s u c h i m p o r t a n t ways, one c a n assume t h a t i t was i n t e n d e d t o be n o t i c e d and t h a t t h e changes a r e i m p o r t a n t t o t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e p l a y . T h i s A p p e n d i x w i l l show t h a t A e s c h y l u s d i d make i m p o r t a n t c h a n g e s i n h i s v e r s i o n o f t h e myth, by d i s c u s s i n g what e v i d e n c e e x i s t s f o r o t h e r v e r s i o n s . T h i s argument c a n n o t be c o n c l u s i v e , a s a g r e a t d e a l o f i n f o r m a t i o n has been l o s t a n d much o f t h e argument i s c o n s e q u e n t l y f r o m s i l e n c e . However, a s s u m p t i o n s have been made a b o u t p r e c u r s o r s t o t h e O r e s t e i a w h i c h a r e not j u s t i -f i e d by t h e a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e and which e i t h e r i n v e n t u n v e r i f i -a b l e t h e o r i e s or i g n o r e some o f t h e l i t t l e t h a t i s known. I w i l l t r y t o a v o i d b o t h o f t h e s e e r r o r s . The s t o r y o f t h e f a t a l homecoming o f t h e c o n q u e r o r o f T r o y h a d e x i s t e d a t l e a s t s i n c e t h e t i m e o f Homer and i n t h e m i n o r d e t a i l s t h e r e were many v a r i a t i o n s . The p l a c e v a r i e d f r o m one a u t h o r t o t h e n e x t - Homer p u t i t i n A e g i s t h u s ' h o u s e o u t s i d e M y c e n a e (Od. 3.304, 4 . 5 1 7 - 5 1 8 ) , S t e s i c h o r u s a n d S i m o n i d e s i n S p a r t a 1 , P i n d a r a t Amyclae ( P y t h . XI.32) and A e s c h y l u s a t A r g o s . Some o f t h e s e changes o f c i t y were u n d o u b t e d l y made by t h e p o e t 119 f o r p o l i t i c a l r e a s o n s ( s e e C o s t a , 1962; 23-28), but t h e y d i d n o t o t h e r w i s e a f f e c t t h e s t o r y . The a v e n g i n g s o n , who had a memor-a b l e r o l e , i s O r e s t e s i n a l l s o u r c e s , but t h e names o f t h e d a u g h -t e r s v a r i e d . I n Homer, t h e r e a r e t h r e e d a u g h t e r s , I p h i a n a s s a , L a o d i k e and C h r y s o t h e m i s ( I I . 9.145) 2. In a r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d H e s i o d i c f r a g m e n t 3 t h e r e a r e two d a u g h t e r s , E l e c t r a and Iphimede (5 a , 1 . 4-5). Iphimede can be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h I p h i g e n i a , b e c a u s e i n t h e f r a g m e n t Iphimede i s s a c r i f i c e d t o A r t e m i s , as I p h i g e n i a i s i n t h e p l a y ; L a o d i k e and E l e c t r a a r e e q u a t e d by a s e v e n t h -c e n t u r y w e s t e r n p o e t , X a n t h o s , who e x p l a i n s t h a t t h i s d a u g h t e r was named L a o d i k e , but a c q u i r e d t h e nickname E l e c t r a (\"Unchosen\") b e c a u s e s h e c o u l d n o t m a r r y . 4 I n A e s c h y l u s t h e c h i l d r e n a r e I p h i g e n i a , E l e c t r a and O r e s t e s ; C h r y s o t h e m i s r e a p p e a r s i n S o p h o c -l e s . T h e s e c hanges a r e f o r t h e most p a r t u n i m p o r t a n t 5 ; b u t e v e n t h e m o t i v e and i d e n t i t y o f t h e m u r d e r e r v a r i e d i n d i f f e r e n t v e r -s i o n s and were g r e a t l y a l t e r e d i n A e s c h y l u s ' hands. From t h e e a r l i e s t t i m e s t h e r e c o r d o f a r t shows e v i d e n c e o f two d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n s o f t h e s t o r y . In t h e e a r l i e s t s u r v i v -i n g d e p i c t i o n o f t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon, a t e r r a c o t t a p i n a x f o u n d a t G o r t y n , C r e t e , K l y t e m n e s t r a i s t h e k i l l e r . ( D a v i e s , 1969: 229-230.) I n t h i s r e l i e f , d a t e d t o t h e s e c o n d q u a r t e r o f t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y , Agamemnon i s shown e n t h r o n e d and h o l d i n g h i s s p e a r d i a -g o n a l l y b e f o r e him, i n t h e s t y l e o f a w a r r i o r - k i n g . K l y t e m n e s -t r a , on t h e r i g h t , w e a r i n g a l o n g C r e t a n gown, i s a b o u t t o s t a b him w i t h a d a g g e r she h o l d s i n h e r r i g h t h a n d . A e g i s t h u s a p -p r o a c h e s f r o m b e h i n d Agamemnon and has g r a s p e d Agamemnon's s p e a r 120 t i p w i t h h i s l e f t hand o v e r Agamemnon's s h o u l d e r , w h i l e w i t h h i s r i g h t he h o l d s , o r d r o p s , some s o r t o f f a b r i c (a n e t ? ) o v e r A g a -memnon's head. On a s t e a t i t e d i s k s e a l f r o m c e n t r a l C r e t e , d a t e d t o t h e same p e r i o d o r a l i t t l e e a r l i e r , K l y t e m n e s t r a i s a g a i n shown s t a b b i n g a s e a t e d Agamemnon; A e g i s t h u s does n o t a p p e a r a t a l l . ( D a v i e s 1969: 224-228). F i n a l l y , on two e a r l y s i x t h c e n -t u r y b r o n z e r e l i e f s from s h i e l d s t r a p s , one f o u n d a t O l y m p i a and one a t A i g i n a , A e g i s t h u s i s shown p i n n i n g Agamemnon w h i l e K l y -t e m n e s t r a s t a b s him i n t h e back. (Vermeule 1966: 1 3 ) . The f a c t t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a r e C r e t a n i n o r i g i n and s t y l e m i g h t l e a d one t o s u s p e c t t h a t t h e r e e x i s t e d an e a r l y C r e t a n v e r s i o n o f t h e myth i n which t h e Queen was t h e p r o t a g o n i s t 6 . In t h e o t h e r t r a d i t i o n , s e e n more i n A t t i c v a s e - p a i n t i n g , A e g i s t h u s i s t h e k i l l e r . In f a c t t h e r e i s o n l y one s u r v i v i n g p a i n t i n g o f t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon b e f o r e t h e f i f t h c e n t u r y , t h e p r o t o - A t t i c v a s e o f t h e Ram J u g P a i n t e r , d a t e d t o t h e s e c o n d q u a r t e r o f t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y . ( D a v i e s 1969: 252-256 ) . 7 I n t h i s p a i n t i n g one man, sword i n hand, s t a n d s b e h i n d a n o t h e r man and w i t h h i s f r e e hand p u l l s a n e t o v e r t h e head o f t h e man b e -f o r e him. A woman s t a n d s i n f r o n t o f t h e p a i r , f a c i n g away f r o m them an d t e a r i n g h e r c h e e k s i n d e s p a i r . The armed man i s com-monly i d e n t i f i e d as A e g i s t h u s and h i s v i c t i m as Agamemnon. A s i d e f r o m t h i s p a i n t i n g , no o t h e r d e p i c t i o n s o f t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon a r e f o u n d u n t i l t h e f i f t h c e n t u r y ; t h e s c e n e f r o m t h e O r e s t e i a most o f t e n p a i n t e d was t h e d e a t h o f A e g i s t h u s . T h i s s c e n e s u d d e n l y became v e r y p o p u l a r a f t e r 500 B.C. ( V e r m e u l e 1966: 121 1 4 ) . T h i s w o u l d i n d i c a t e t h a t A e g i s t h u s was s e e n a s a p r i m e a g e n t o f Agamemnon's d e a t h and t h u s t h e p r i n c i p a l o b j e c t o f O r e s -t e s ' r e v e n g e . 8 The e a r l i e s t s u r v i v i n g p a i n t i n g o f t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon i n A t t i c a r t i s t h e B o s t o n K r a t e r by t h e D o k i m a s i a p a i n t e r , w h i c h was p a i n t e d v e r y c l o s e t o t h e t i m e o f A e s c h y l u s ' p l a y . 9 Agamem-non i s shown d r a p e d i n a g a u z y m a t e r i a l (a n e t ? ) and o t h e r w i s e naked; A e g i s t h u s has j u s t s t a b b e d him w i t h a sword. The n e t and Agamemnon's n a k e d n e s s (as i f he had j u s t s t e p p e d f r o m t h e b a t h ) m i g h t have been i n f l u e n c e d by A e s c h y l u s ' p l a y , i f i t was p a i n t e d a f t e r t h e p r o d u c t i o n ; b u t w h e n e v e r t h e v a s e was p a i n t e d , t h e t r a d i t i o n t h a t A e g i s t h u s was t h e m u r d e r e r must have b e e n t o o p r e v a l e n t f o r t h e p a i n t e r t o i g n o r e . In f a c t , e v e n a f t e r A e s c h y l u s , t h e m u r d e r e r o f Agamemnon i s shown as A e g i s t h u s i n A t t i c v a s e - p a i n t i n g u n t i l t h e end o f t h e f i f t h c e n t u r y . ( V e r m e u l e , 1966: 1 4 ) . So w h i l e two v e r s i o n s o f t h e s t o r y were a v a i l a b l e f o r A e s c h y l u s t o draw upon, t h e v e r s i o n most common i n h i s own t i m e - i f t h e s u r v i v i n g a r t i s a n y t h i n g t o j u d g e by - made A e g i s t h u s t h e k i l l e r and t h u s t h e p r i m a r y v i c t i m o f O r e s t e s ' r e v e n g e . The l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n v a r i e s as w e l l . The l o n g e s t s u r -v i v i n g a c c o u n t o f t h e O r e s t e i a b e f o r e A e s c h y l u s i s f o u n d i n Homer. Homer seems t o have known two v e r s i o n s o f t h e myth an d u s e d e a c h one a c c o r d i n g t o t h e needs o f h i s own s t o r y . The f i r s t f o u r b ooks o f t h e Odyssey a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h T e l e m a c h u s ' g r o w t h 122 t o manhood and a c c e p t a n c e o f h i s a d u l t r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , i . e . t h e d e f e n c e o f h i s h o u s e h o l d . Most o f t h e r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e O r e s t e i a myth i n t h e s e f o u r books a r e i n t e n d e d (sometimes e x p l i c i t l y ) t o s p u r h i m t o w a r d s t h a t e n d 1 1 ; a l l b u t one a r e s a i d d i r e c t l y t o T e l e m a c h u s 1 2 ; and a l l , w i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n , name A e g i s t h u s as t h e p l o t t e r and k i l l e r 1 3 , w i t h K l y t e m n e s t r a , i f she i s m e n t i o n e d a t a l l , p l a y i n g a c l e a r l y s e c o n d a r y r o l e . 1 4 Agamemnon, who s p e a k s o f h i s d e a t h e v e r y t i m e we meet him, t e l l s a n o t h e r v e r s i o n o f t h e s t o r y . When e x p l a i n i n g h i s p r e s e n c e i n t h e U n d e r w o r l d t o O d y s s e u s (Od. 1 1 . 4 0 9 - 4 5 3 ) , he a t f i r s t a g r e e s s u b s t a n t i a l l y w i t h t h e O l d Man o f t h e Sea's a c c o u n t o f h i s d e a t h , a d d i n g o n l y h i s b a n e f u l w i f e ' s a s s i s t a n c e (11.409-410) t o A e g i s t h u s ' p l o t t i n g a n d e x e c u t i n g o f t h e d e e d . T w e l v e l i n e s l a t e r he s a y s t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a k i l l e d K a s s a n d r a \" o v e r me\" (11.422-423), which g i v e s K l y t e m n e s t r a a more a c t i v e and v i o l e n t r o l e i n p r o c e e d i n g s t h a n we had h e a r d o f b e f o r e , and adds t h a t she abandoned him as he l a y d y i n g , w i t h o u t even c l o s i n g h i s mouth and e y e s (11.425-426), which p l a c e s K l y t e m n e s t r a i n t h e i m m e d i a t e v i c i n i t y r i g h t a f t e r Agamemnon was s t a b b e d - a g a i n new i n f o r m a -t i o n . A l i t t l e l a t e r , he s a y s t h a t i t i s K l y t e m n e s t r a who p l o t t e d t h e d e e d and d e v i s e d her husband's d e a t h (11.429-430); i t i s h e r \" r u i n o u s t h o u g h t s \" which shame a l l women; and by t h e end o f h i s a c c o u n t (11.452-453), A e g i s t h u s has been f o r g o t t e n and Agamemnon s a y s t h a t h i s w i f e k i l l e d him. K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s r o l e t h u s moves i n t h e s p a c e o f 43 l i n e s f r o m p a s s i v e a c c o m p l i c e , t h r o u g h a c t i v e p l o t t e r , t o a c t u a l m u r d e r e r . In book 24 Agamemnon a g a i n r e f e r s 123 t o h i s d e a t h , f i r s t as a t t h e hands o f A e g i s t h u s and h i s w i f e (24.97) and l a t e r as b e i n g p l o t t e d and e x e c u t e d by h i s w i f e a l o n e ( 2 4 . 1 9 9 - 2 0 0 ) . The d i s c r e p a n c y between t h e a c c o u n t s o f Agamemnon's d e a t h g i v e n i n v a r i o u s p l a c e s i n t h e Odyssey c an e a s i l y be e x p l a i n e d i n s e v e r a l w a y s . 1 5 B u t w h a t e v e r e x p l a n a t i o n one a c c e p t s , i t i s c l e a r t h a t Homer had two s t o r i e s i n mind, b o t h o f w h i c h he f e l t f r e e t o use a t need. K l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s m o t i v e f o r b e t r a y i n g h e r husband, i n s o f a r a s Homer g i v e s h e r one a t a l l , i s A e g i s t h u s ' s e d u c t i o n o f h e r (Od. 3.262-264); t h e s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i g e n i a i s n o t m e n t i o n e d . Between Homer and A e s c h y l u s o n l y f r a g m e n t a r y r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e myth o f t h e O r e s t e i a s u r v i v e . T h e r e a r e t h r e e H e s i o d i c r e -f e r e n c e s . P a u s a n i a s t e l l s us t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o H e s i o d ' s C a t a l o g u e o f Women, I p h i g e n i a was n o t k i l l e d , b u t became H e c a t e \"by t h e w i l l o f A r t e m i s \" 1 6 . A c c o r d i n g t o a s c h o l i a s t , H e s i o d s a i d t h a t A p h r o d i t e was j e a l o u s o f t h e d a u g h t e r s o f T y n d a r e u s and so c a u s e d them a l l t o be u n f a i t h f u l t o t h e i r h u s b a n d s . 1 7 F i n a l l y , i n a r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d H e s i o d i c f r a g m e n t c o n c e r n i n g t h e d a u g h t e r s o f L e d a , we a r e t o l d t h a t t h e G r e e k s s a c r i f i c e d \" I p h i m e d e \" , t h e d a u g h t e r o f K l y t e m n e s t r a a n d Agamemnon, t o A r t e m i s , b u t t h a t A r t e m i s s a v e d (or h e a l e d ) her and made her i m m o r t a l ; and t h a t she i s now c a l l e d \"wayside A r t e m i s \" 1 8 . In t h i s f r a g m e n t O r e s t e s grew up and \" r e p a i d h i s (male) f a t h e r k i l l e r and k i l l e d h i s m o t h e r \" 1 9 . 124 To t h i s p o e t , t h e n , A e g i s t h u s was t h e m u r d e r e r , b u t K l y t e m n e s t r a was n o t i n n o c e n t . The s e v e n t h - c e n t u r y a u t h o r o f t h e C y p r i a t e l l s t h e s t o r y o f t h e a t t e m p t e d s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i g e n i a , s a y i n g t h a t A r t e m i s r e s c u e d h e r , r e p l a c i n g her w i t h a s t a g , t r a n s p o r t e d h e r t o T a u r i s a n d made h e r i m m o r t a l . 2 0 A g i a s o f T r o e z e n s a y s t h a t Agamemnon was k i l l e d by A e g i s t h u s and K l y t e m n e s t r a . 2 1 . X a n t h o s , a s e v e n t h -c e n t u r y w e s t e r n p o e t , i s r e p u t e d t o have i n f l u e n c e d S t e s i c h o r u s ' work w i t h h i s t r e a t m e n t o f t h e O r e s t e i a myth, b ut n o t h i n g o f h i s work s u r v i v e s . (Vermeule 1966: 1 1 ) . S t e s i c h o r u s , i n t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y , w r o t e an O r e s t e i a w h i c h i s n e a r l y e n t i r e l y l o s t . The a b s e n c e o f most o f h i s work h a s i n s p i r e d v a r i o u s c r i t i c s t o a t t r i b u t e t o i t themes and a c t i o n s s e e n e l s e w h e r e , f o r w h i c h t h e y w o u l d l i k e t o f i n d a s o u r c e . W i l a m o w i t z , f o r example, t h o u g h t t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s i n t r o d u c e d t h e d e a t h o f I p h i g e n i a as a m o t i v e f o r K l y t e m n e s t r a . 2 2 W h i l e were a r e t o l d t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s c l o s e l y f o l l o w e d H e s i o d i n s a y i n g t h a t I p h i g e n i a became H e c a t e 2 3 , a s D u r i n g (1943: 107) p o i n t s o u t , t h e r e i s no m e n t i o n o f s a c r i f i c e , o r o f a r e a c t i o n by K l y t e m n e s -t r a , i n t h i s f r a g m e n t . In f a c t , i n a n o t h e r o f t h e few s u r v i v i n g f r a g m e n t s o f S t e s i c h o r u s ' work, S t e s i c h o r u s i s r e p o r t e d t o have s a i d t h a t A p h r o d i t e , a n g r y t h a t T y n d a r e u s f o r g o t h e r a t a s a c r i -f i c e t o a l l t h e g o d s , made a l l o f h i s d a u g h t e r s f a i t h l e s s ( \" t w i c e - w e d and t h r i c e - w e d and h u s b a n d - l e a v i n g \" ) . 2 4 T h i s w o u l d i n d i c a t e t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s gave K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s m o t i v e as l o v e f o r A e g i s t h u s , i f he c o n s i d e r e d her m o t i v e a t a l l . 125 S e v e r a l s c h o l a r s ( D u r i n g 1943: 106, V e r m e u l e 1966: 12, D a v i e s 1969: 249) a g r e e t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s ' poem p r o b a b l y s t i m u l a -t e d p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e d e a t h - o f - A e g i s t h u s v a s e p a i n t i n g s , l i k e t h e B o s t o n K r a t e r , w h i c h s u d d e n l y became p o p u l a r a r o u n d 500 B.C.; b u t t h e c o n c l u s i o n s t h e y b a s e on t h i s d i f f e r g r e a t l y . D u r i n g b e -l i e v e s t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s p r o b a b l y made K l y t e m n e s t r a t h e m u r d e r e r , u s i n g an axe; D a v i e s t h i n k s t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s had A e g i s t h u s s t a b Agamemnon w i t h a sword and K l y t e m n e s t r a f i n i s h him o f f w i t h t h e axe; and V e r m e u l e , t h e most moderate, s a y s o n l y t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s p r o b a b l y i n t r o d u c e d t h e axe and K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s s k i l l w i t h i t . 2 5 A l l t h r e e a g r e e t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s 1 O r e s t e i a p r o b a b l y e m p h a s i z e d t h e d e a t h o f A e g i s t h u s r a t h e r t h a n Agamemnon ( t h e t i t l e a l o n e s t r o n g l y i m p l i e s t h i s ) and t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s i s u n l i k e l y t o have d w e l t on t h e o r i g i n a l m u r d e r . I t h i n k t h i s l a s t , a nd p e r h a p s K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s m o t i v a t i o n by A p h r o d i t e r a t h e r t h a n I p h i g e n i a , a r e r e a l l y t h e o n l y c o n c l u s i o n s t h a t c a n s a f e l y be drawn f r o m what few f r a g m e n t s o f S t e s i c h o r u s s u r v i v e . The l a s t p o e t c e r t a i n t o have t r e a t e d any p a r t o f t h e myth b e f o r e A e s c h y l u s i s S i m o n i d e s . A f r a g m e n t o f a commentary on h i s poem ( o r p a r t o f i t ) has r e c e n t l y been p u b l i s h e d . 2 6 The poem u n d e r d i s c u s s i o n i n t h i s p a p y r u s i s p r o b a b l y by S i m o n i d e s 2 7 and s p e a k s o f t h e mourning a t Mycenae o v e r t h e s a c r i f i c e o f a human f e m a l e (unnamed). The g r i e f o f t h e mother c a n n o t be overcome and t h e k i l l i n g i s i n honour o f a god. The o n l y known myth c o n s i s -t e n t w i t h t h e s e d e t a i l s i s t h a t o f t h e s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i g e n i a . I f t h a t i s t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e poem, i t c o n t a i n s t h e f i r s t s u r v i v -126 i n g r e f e r e n c e t o K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s g r i e f a t h e r d a u g h t e r ' s d e a t h . However, t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a t a k e s t h e s t e p f r o m g r i e f t o v engeance i n t h i s poem. P i n d a r ' s e l e v e n t h P y t h i a n ode was w r i t t e n t o commemorate t h e v i c t o r y a t D e l p h i o f a Theban r u n n e r , T h r a s y d a i o s . ( H e r i n g -t o n , 1984: 1 4 3 ) . In i t , P i n d a r r e f e r s t o K l y t e m n e s t r a as t h e s o l e m u r d e r e r o f Agamemnon and s p e c u l a t e s on h e r m o t i v e - was i t t h e k i l l i n g o f I p h i g e n i a , o r h a b i t u a l i n f i d e l i t y w i t h A e g i s t h u s , w h i c h prompted h e r a c t ? ( P y t h . X I , 23-28). T h e r e were two P y t h -i a n v i c t o r i e s by so-named Theban r u n n e r s , i n 474 and 454. I t has g e n e r a l l y been assumed t h a t P y t h i a n XI was w r i t t e n t o commemorate t h e T h r a s y d a i o s o f 474, and t h a t P i n d a r ' s m a g n i f i c a t i o n o f K l y -t e m n e s t r a ' s r o l e and h i s s p e c u l a t i o n on h e r m o t i v e s i n f l u e n c e d A e s c h y l u s . However, as F a r n e l l 2 8 , D u r i n g ( 1 9 4 3 : 108-114) and H e r i n g t o n (1984: 140-146) a r g u e , from d i f f e r e n t a n g l e s 2 9 , i t i s f a r more l i k e l y t h a t P i n d a r ' s ode was w r i t t e n t o commemorate t h e s e c o n d T h r a s y d a i o s and was i n s p i r e d by A e s c h y l u s ' p l a y . I t would o f c o u r s e be unwise t o s t a t e c a t e g o r i c a l l y t h a t a p o e t \"must h a v e b e e n \" i n s p i r e d by one t h i n g , or \" c a n n o t h a v e b e e n \" i n s p i r e d by a n o t h e r . But P i n d a r i n P y t h i a n XI does g i v e t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t he i s r e f e r r i n g b r i e f l y t o a myth w h i c h was a l r e a d y f u l l y d e v e l o p e d e l s e w h e r e , i n t h e f o r m i n w h i c h he p r e -s e n t s i t . He can assume t h a t h i s a u d i e n c e t h o u g h t o f K l y t e m n e s -t r a as t h e m u r d e r e r and o f t h e s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i g e n i a as a p o s s -i b l e m o t i v e ; he did- n o t need t o e x p l a i n o r e l a b o r a t e on t h e s e p o i n t s h i m s e l f . T h e r e i s o n l y one a u t h o r who i s c e r t a i n l y known 127 t o have p r e s e n t e d t h e myth i n p r e c i s e l y t h e f o r m i n w h i c h P i n d a r u s e s i t , and t h a t i s A e s c h y l u s . A e s c h y l u s a l o n e o f t h e a n c i e n t a u t h o r s p r e s e n t s K l y t e m n e s t r a a s t h e s o l e k i l l e r ; t h e d e a t h o f I p h i g e n i a i s t h e p r i n c i p a l m o t i v e f o r her c r i m e i n t h e f i r s t p l a y a n d l o v e f o r A e g i s t h u s i s g i v e n as her m o t i v e i n t h e s e c o n d . 3 0 I f we need assume a d e f i n i t e i n s p i r a t i o n f o r P i n d a r ' s q u e s t i o n i n P y t h i a n X I , A e s c h y l u s ' t r i l o g y o b v i o u s l y s u p p l i e s one and n o t h i n g e l s e s u r v i v i n g d o e s . Thus I am i n c l i n e d t o a g r e e w i t h D u r i n g and H e r i n g t o n t h a t P y t h i a n XI s h o u l d be d a t e d t o 454 r a t h e r t h a n 474. In t h e r e c o r d o f a r t t h e r e a r e two t r a d i t i o n s b e f o r e A e s -c h y l u s ' t i m e and he seems, on t h e e v i d e n c e a v a i l a b l e , t o h a v e d e f i e d t h e one p r e v a i l i n g i n h i s own e r a and r e g i o n i n m a k i n g K l y t e m n e s t r a t h e m u r d e r e r . In t h e l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n t h e r e a g a i n seem t o have been two t r a d i t i o n s , but a f t e r Homer t h e one g i v i n g K l y t e m n e s t r a t h e r o l e o f s o l e k i l l e r seems t o have f a l l e n e n -t i r e l y o u t o f f a s h i o n - even i n Homer she i s r a r e l y , and n e v e r u n q u e s t i o n a b l y , g i v e n t h a t r o l e - a n d she i s r e g a r d e d a s , a t most, a c o - c o n s p i r a t o r i n A e g i s t h u s ' c r i m e . T h e r e a r e r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i g e n i a b e f o r e A e s c h y l u s , but b e f o r e Simon-i d e s t h e y seem t o have d w e l t c h i e f l y ( o r e n t i r e l y ) on h e r t r a n s -f i g u r a t i o n t o t h e i m m o r t a l H e c a t e ; and nowhere, i n c l u d i n g Simon-i d e s , i s t h e r e any e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e s a c r i f i c e o f I p h i g e n i a was c o n s i d e r e d a m o t i v e f o r K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s p a r t (however s m a l l ) i n t h e murder. On t h e c o n t r a r y , Homer, the H e s i o d i c p o e t and S t e s -i c h o r u s a l l e x p l a i n K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s d i s l o y a l t y t o h e r h u s b and as 128 due t o l o v e : H e s i o d and S t e s i c h o r u s a s c r i b e i t t o A p h r o d i t e and Homer t o t h e p e r s u a s i o n o f A e g i s t h u s . A e s c h y l u s t h u s seems t o have a l t e r e d t h e s t o r y h i s a u d i -e n c e e x p e c t e d i n two major ways, f i r s t i n making K l y t e m n e s t r a t h e o n l y m u r d e r e r and s e c o n d i n making t h e d e a t h o f I p h i g e n i a h e r p r i m a r y m o t i v a t i o n i n t h e f i r s t p l a y o f t h e t r i l o g y . B o t h o f t h e s e c h a n g e s have t h e e f f e c t o f a l m o s t c o m p l e t e l y s u p p r e s s i n g t h e r o l e o f A e g i s t h u s ; and t h e s t o r y i s e n t i r e l y c h a n g e d i n em-p h a s i s f r o m t h e l o v e - t r i a n g l e murder ( o r p o l i t i c a l a s s a s s i n a t i o n ) f o u n d i n Homer. Th e s e changes form t h e b a s i s f o r t h e Agamemnon and f o r t h e p o r t r a y a l o f K l y t e m n e s t r a i n t h a t p l a y . The a u d i e n c e c a n n o t h e l p but wonder i f K l y t e m n e s t r a was j u s t i f i e d i n h e r a c -t i o n s ; h e r g u i l t was n e v e r i n q u e s t i o n , b e f o r e A e s c h y l u s . T h i s v i o l e n t and p e r h a p s r i g h t e o u s K l y t e m n e s t r a t h u s p o s e s h e r a u d i -e nce d i f f i c u l t q u e s t i o n s o f g u i l t , i n n o c e n c e , and t h e w o r k i n g s o f j u s t i c e , w h i c h a r e t h e theme o f t h e whole t r i l o g y and w h i c h a r e n o t r e s o l v e d u n t i l t h e l a s t p l a y . The c h a n ges i n t r o d u c e d i n t o K l y t e m n e s t r a * s r o l e t h u s draw t h e a u d i e n c e ' s a t t e n t i o n t o t h e c e n t r a l theme t o be worked o u t i n t h e t r i l o g y . 129 N O T E S T O A P P E N D I X A !D.L. Page, P o e t a e M e l i c i G r a e c i ( O x f o r d : 1962); p. 287, f r . 44. 2 I p h i a n a s s a i s u s u a l l y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h A e s c h y l u s ' I p h i -g e n i a . I f t h i s i s c o r r e c t , Homer must not have known t h e s t o r y o f h e r s a c r i f i c e , o r have i g n o r e d i t a t t h i s p o i n t i n t h e poem; f o r Agamemnon a t T r o y s p e a k s o f her as a l i v e . 3 O x y r h y n c h u s P a p y r i 28 ( 1 9 6 2 ) , ed. E. L o b e l ; 2481, f r . 5a, c o l . 1 (pages 8-11). 4 C i t e d i n V e r m e u l e (1966: 1 2 ) . 5However, t h e change o f venue o f t h e murder i t s e l f , f r o m A e g i s t h u s ' house t o Agamemnon's own, i s not i n s i g n i f i c a n t . T h i s move c o n s i d e r a b l y i n c r e a s e s t h e e l e m e n t o f d o m e s t i c t r e a c h e r y , w h i l e d e c r e a s i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e p o l i t i c a l o r d y n a s t i c m o t i v e s i n v o l v e d . A e s c h y l u s ' t r e a t m e n t , w h i c h c o n c e n t r a t e s a l -most e x c l u s i v e l y on t h e d o m e s t i c a s p e c t o f t h e c r i m e , demonst-r a t e s t h i s . 6 D a v i e s (1969: 236-238) d i s c u s s e s t h i s more f u l l y . 7 V e r m e u l e ( 1 9 6 6 : 13) b e l i e v e s t h a t t h i s i s a d e a t h o f A e g i s t h u s and t h a t t h e weeping woman s t a n d i n g i n f r o n t o f t h e two m a l e s i s K l y t e m n e s t r a . But t h a t does not e x p l a i n t h e n e t w h i c h t h e m u r d e r e r i s c l e a r l y p u l l i n g o v e r t h e v i c t i m ' s head and w h i c h e l s e w h e r e i s a s s o c i a t e d e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon. The w e e p i n g woman, whose e x p r e s s i o n and p o s e a r e c e r t a i n l y t o o s t r i k i n g t o be l i k e l y t o d e n o t e a s i m p l e s e r v i n g - w o m a n , c o u l d s u r e l y be K a s s a n d r a . 8 T h e r e i s a b r o n z e C r e t a n m i t r a o f t h e 7 t h c e n t , w h i c h shows O r e s t e s k i l l i n g an e n t h r o n e d K l y t e m n e s t r a ( D a v i e s 1969: 2 3 7 ) . I n t h e C r e t a n v e r s i o n o f t h e myth, K l y t e m n e s t r a seems t o have been s e e n as t h e k i l l e r and O r e s t e s ' v e n g e a n c e i s a c c o r d -i n g l y d i r e c t e d towards h e r . 9 V e r m e u l e (1966: 19) a r g u e s t h a t i t was p a i n t e d a f t e r 458 a n d i n s p i r e d by t h e p l a y i t s e l f ; D a v i e s (1969: 258) s e t s i t i n t h e 470's, where s t y l i s t i c a l l y i t b e l o n g s . 1 0 V e r m e u l e a r g u e s t h a t t h e p a i n t e r u s e d a male r a t h e r t h a n a f e m a l e m u r d e r e r b e c a u s e he was b o r r o w i n g f r o m t h e i c o n o g r a p h y o f t h e d e a t h o f A e g i s t h u s , as t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon had no t r a -d i t i o n a l i c o n o g r a p h y o f i t s own. I f i n d t h i s u n c o n v i n c i n g . E v e n a s s u m i n g - a s V e r m e u l e has c o n v i n c e d me one s h o u l d - t h a t t h e p o s i t i o n i n g o f t h e f i g u r e s i n t h e d e a t h o f Agamemnon was b o r r o w e d f r o m t h e t r a d i t i o n a l p o s e s o f t h e d e a t h o f A e g i s t h u s , a p a i n t e r 130 who c o u l d change the t r a d i t i o n a l v i c t i m from a seated, c l o t h e d l y r e - p l a y e r to a standing, naked man i n a net c o u l d s u r e l y a l s o a l t e r the k i l l e r from a male to a female. 1 1 F o r i n s t a n c e , Athena (Od. 1.298-300) mentions the renown Orestes won i n k i l l i n g Aegisthus, h i s f a t h e r ' s murderer; and Nes-t o r (Od. 3.199-200) a d v i s e s Telemachus to be brave as O r e s t e s was, who took vengeance on h i s f a t h e r ' s k i l l e r . 1 2The exception i s the gods on Olympus (Od. 1.29-43). One might expect the gods to know \"what r e a l l y happened\" and t h e r e -f o r e t h i n k that Aegisthus was \" r e a l l y \" , i n Homer's eyes, s o l e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r Agamemnon's death. But the gods i n Homer ar e p a r t of the s t o r y , l i k e e v e r y t h i n g e l s e , and tend to say what s u i t s the needs of the s t o r y at that p o i n t . There i s no reason to expect them to r e f l e c t the o p i n i o n of the poet. 1 3The gods say so (Od. 1.36); Athena says t h i s (1.299-300 and 3.235); N e s t o r does~T3.194 and 3.255-310, e s p e c i a l l y a t 3.305); Menelaus says t h i s (4.91-92); and the Old Man of the Sea, as Menelaus quotes him (4.514-537, e s p e c i a l l y at 4.537). 1 4Athena (Od. 3.235) says that Agamemnon was k i l l e d by the d e c e i t of Aegistfnus and h i s w i f e ; Nestor (3.255-310) says t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a , b e i n g f o r m e r l y n^ptsc . . . \" ( e i t h e r \"with honest h e a r t \" or s i m p l y \" i n t e l l i g e n t \" ( 3 . 2 6 6 ) , was seduced by A e g i s t h u s ; Menelaus (4.91-92) says that \"another\" (male - ) k i l l e d Agamemnon \"by s u r p r i s e u n l o o k e d - f o r and by h i s b a n e f u l w i f e ' s t r e a c h e r y \" . In none of these i s Klytemnestra more than an a c c e s s o r y t o Aegisthus' p l o t . 1 5 F o r i n s t a n c e , a p s y c h o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n c o u l d say t h a t w h i l e the v e r s i o n g i v e n i n the Telemachy, w i t h A e g i s t h u s as k i l l e r and Klytemnestra as p a s s i v e accomplice, i s \" c o r r e c t \" , and Agamemnon knows t h i s , he i s so shocked at the f a c t that h i s w i f e had any hand i n i t at a l l t h a t he cannot h e l p d w e l l i n g on her r o l e and consequently e v e n t u a l l y exaggerating i t i n h i s own mind. The more common l i t e r a r y e x p l a n a t i o n (found, f o r i n s t a n c e , i n D'Armes 1946: 211-212) p o i n t s out t h a t K l y t e m n e s t r a ' s r o l e i s emphasized whenever a c o n t r a s t to Penelope's conduct i s d e s i r e d and t e l l s us more about Penelope than about Klytemnestra - j u s t as A e g i s t h u s ' r o l e i s emphasized- whenever i t i s needed as a spur to Telemachus. 1 6 P a u s a n i a s i . 4 3 . 1 , i.116 Sp. (quoted i n Page, Poetae M e l i c i G r a e c i p. 115, n . l ) . 1 7 s c h o l . on Eur. Orestes 249. 1 BP. Oxy. 28 (1962), 2481 f r . 5a c o l . 1, ed. E. L o b e l , 1.8-11 a\"ncl 15-18. I t may be t h i s passage to which P a u s a n i a s r e f e r r e d . 131 1 9 I b i d . , 2 1 - 2 5 . 2 0 S t a s i n u s ( ? ) , C y p r i a , i n H e s i o d , H o m e r i c Hymns and Ho- mer i c a (Heinemann, L o n d o n ) , 2~92-29*' \". Hermes 102, 524-539. 153 . ( 1 9 7 9 ) . \" C h a r a c t e r s and C h a r a c t e r Change i n A e s c h y l u s : C l y t e m n e s t r a and t h e F u r i e s . \" Ramus 8, 153-164. M u r r a y , G i l b e r t . ( 1 9 2 0 ) . The Agamemnon o f A e s c h y l u s . ( O x f o r d . ) O r t n e r , S h e r r y B. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . \" I s Female t o Male as N a t u r e i s t o C u l t u r e ? \" i n Women, C u l t u r e and S o c i e t y . M. R o s a l d o a n d L. L a m p h e r e . e d s . ( S t a n f o r d . ) 67-89. P e a r s o n , A. C. ( 1 9 3 0 ) . \" A e s c h y l u s , Agamemnon 1525 f f . CR 1930, 55. P e r a d o t t o , J o h n J . ( 1 9 6 4 ) . \"Some P a t t e r n s o f N a t u r e Imagery i n t h e O r e s t e i a \" . AJP 85, 378-393. P o d l e c k i , A. J . ( 1 9 6 6 ) . The P o l i t i c a l B a c k g r o u n d o f A e s c h y l e a n T r a g e d y . (Ann A r b o r ) . P o d l e c k i , A. J . ( 1 9 8 3 ) . \" A e s c h y l u s ' Women\". H e l i o s n . s . 10, 23-47. P o o l , E . H. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . \" C l y t e m n e s t r a 1 s F i r s t E n t r a n c e i n A e s c h y l u s ' Agamemnon: A n a l y s i s o f a C o n t r o v e r s y . \" Mnemosyne S e r . 4 V. 36, 71-116. P u g s l e y , J . W. ( 1 9 2 9 ) . \"The F a t e M o t i v e and i t s E c h o e s i n t h e O r e s t e i a \" . TAPhA 1929, 38-47. R i e l e , G.J.M.J. T e . ( 1 9 5 5 ) . L e s Femmes Chez E s c h y l e . ( G r o n i n g e n , D j a k a r t a . ) R o s e , H. J . ( 1 9 5 6 ) . \" A e s c h y l u s t h e P s y c h o l o g i s t \" . SO XXX I I , 1-21. S c h e f o l d , K. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . Myth and Legend i n E a r l y Greek A r t . (New Y o r k . ) S c u l l y , S. E. \" A e s c h y l u s , Agam. 489 f f . : d i d C l y t e m n e s t r a speak t h e s e l i n e s ? \" (U. V i c t o r i a : u n p u b l i s h e d . ) S i m p s o n , M. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . \"Why d o e s Agamemnon y i e l d ? \" PP XXVI, 94-101. S t a n f o r d , W. B. ( 1 9 3 7 ) . \"yuJ^hs ^ ^ ' ^ . U f ^ . ^ Klup \". CQ 1937, 92-93. . ( 1 9 6 3 ) . T he U l y s s e s Theme: A S t u d y i n t h e A d a p t a b i l i t y o f a T r a d i t i o n a l H e r o . (Second E d i -t i o n . ) ( B l a c k w e l l , O x f o r d . ) 154 T a p l i n , 0. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . \" A e s c h y l e a n S i l e n c e s and S i l e n c e s i n A e s c h y l u s \" . HSCP 76, 57-97. . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . The S t a g e c r a f t o f A e s c h y l u s : t h e D r a m a t i c Use o f E x i t s and E n t r a n c e s i n Greek T r a - gedy . ( O x f o r d ) . V e r m e u l e , E m i l y . ( 1 9 6 6 ) . \"The B o s t o n O r e s t e i a K r a t e r \" . AJA 70, 1-22. V e t t a , Massimo. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . \"La P r i m a A p p a r i z i o n e d i C l i t e -m e s t r a N e l l ' A g a m e m n o n e d i E s c h i l o . P r o b l e m i d i Scena T r a g i c a . \" M a i a 28, 109-119. W h a l l o n , W i l l i a m . ( 1 9 5 8 ) . \"The S e r p e n t a t t h e B r e a s t \" . TAPhA 89, 271-275. . ( 1 9 6 4 ) . \"Maenadism i n t h e O r e s t e i a \" . HSPh L X V I I , 317-327. . ( 1 9 8 0 ) . P r o b l e m and S p e c t a c l e : S t u d i e s i n t h e O r e s t e i a . ( H e i d e l b e r g . ) W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m , R. P. ( 1 9 3 3 ) . \"The R o l e o f A p o l l o i n th e O r e s t e i a . \" CR 1933, 97-104. . ( 1 9 4 8 ) . \" C l y t e m n e s t r a a n d t h e V o t e o f A t h e n a \" . JHS LXIX, 130-1947. . ( 1893 ). \"Agamemnon and t h e T r o j a n War\", i n S t u d i e s i n A e s c h y l u s , R. P. W i n n i n g t o n - I n g r a m . (Cambridge.) 78-100. Z e i t l i n , F. I . ( 1 9 6 5 ) . \"The M o t i f o f C o r r u p t e d S a c r i f i c e i n A e s c h y l u s ' O r e s t e i a \" . TAPhA XCVI, 463-508. . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . \"The Dynamics o f M i s o g y n y : Myth and M y t h - M a k i n g i n t h e O r e s t e i a \" . A r e t h u s a X I , 149-184. "@en . "Thesis/Dissertation"@en . "10.14288/1.0096943"@en . "eng"@en . "Classics"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use."@en . "Graduate"@en . "Klytemnestra in the Agamemnon of Aeschylus"@en . "Text"@en . "http://hdl.handle.net/2429/26376"@en .