What do the audience see? Tragedy was written for performance, so we must visualise the stage action.
What do the audience know? Stories about established figures of myth drew on audience’s prior knowledge and expectations, derived from literature (esp. epic), other plays, informal oral tradition [cf. R. Buxton, Imaginary Greece (Cambridge 1994)].
Tragedies performed at City Dionysia (held in March)—religious festival of Dionysus, and civic festival (assertion of Athenian identity and power), lasting 5 days. Tragedies staged over 3 days: each dramatist produced 3 tragedies + 1 satyr-lay (mythological burlesque) in competition for prize.
On the City Dionysia see in general A.W. Pickard-Cambridge The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (ed.2, Oxford 1968). [For recent debate about the implications for tragedy of the civic aspects of the festival see (e.g.) the contrasting views of: S. Goldhill ‘The Great Dionysia and civic ideology’ in J. Winkler amd F. Zeitlin (ed.), Nothing to Do With Dionysus? (Princeton 1990) ,97-129; J. Griffin, ‘The social function of Attic tragedy’ Classical Quarterly 48 (1998), 39-61. For the implications of its religious aspects, contrast: C. Sourvinou-Inwood, Tragedy and Athenian Religion (Lanham MD 2003); S. Scullion, ‘“Nothing to with Dionysus”: tragedy misconceived as ritual’, Classical Quarterly 52 (2002), 102-37.]
Large audience (theatre of Dionysus seated approx. 15000?), in semicircle of tiered stone seats. Loss of perishable wooden structures and later rebuilding means 5th-century theatre cannot be reconstructed fully. Assume:
Skęnę building represents tent/hut (i.e. not permanent: but 10 years into war presumably not makeshift shelter), as in military camp. Later reference to ‘wood’ (892) shows trees etc visible all along, presumably in front of skęnę building to one side centre (not just painted on panels: Tecmessa is concealed in the wood).
Odysseus enters from one side—the side opposite the wood? One direction = Greek camp, other unoccupied territory (cf. Iliad 11.5-9: Ajax and Achilles stationed at opposite ends of Greek camp), moving cautiously, searching.
Addressed by Athene: is she concealed in the wood? If visible, identifiable by costume and concern for Odysseus (protégé of Athene in Odyssey), before being named (14). Possibly on roof, but control of space in this scene works better if on stage. Is she invisible? Perhaps not (translation: for ‘it is your voice beyond a doubt, although I cannot see you’ (15), I prefer: ‘your voice is easily recognisable, even if I cannot see you’). But later makes Odysseus invisible to Ajax: control of human perception displays divine power.
Ajax enters from central door. (With ‘blood-stained scourge’? Note that stage-directions in modern texts and translations are not part of original text: inferred from, and must be checked against, the dialogue. No clear indication of whip in text: ancient subtitle (distinguishing from a play about Locrian Ajax) reflects performance tradition that may not go back to Sophocles. (If anything, what about a sword?)
For detail of traditions relating to Ajax see T. Gantz, Early Greek Myth (Baltimore 1993), 629-35.
In Iliad: Ajax and Achilles protect exposed flanks of Greek camp (11.5-9); Ajax second only to Achilles (2.768-70, 17.279-80); key defensive fighter (e.g. 16.674-746); ‘bulwark’ of the Greeks (3.229, 6.5, 7.211).
In epic cycle (Aithiopis, Little Iliad): Achilles’ body rescued by Odysseus (rearguard) and Ajax (carried body to safety); Achilles’ armour awarded to Odysseus (with Athene’s help); Ajax went mad, attacked the booty, committed suicide. Agamemnon withheld usual funeral honours: Ajax’s body not cremated (cf. e.g. funeral games of Patroclus in Iliad 23) but buried.
Odyssey: Odysseus in Underworld regrets own victory, seeks reconciliation with Ajax’s ghost; Ajax, implacable, is silent (11.543-64): cf. Sophocles’ unyielding Ajax, flexible Odysseus.
Hostile image of Odysseus: in tragedy see (e.g.) Soph. Philoctetes; cf. W.B. Stanford, The Ulysses Theme (London 1954). Pindar (5th-century lyric poet) sees Odysseus’ reputation inflated by Homer, award of arms as unjust, possibly corrupt: see Pindar Nemean 7.20-30, 8.21-32—both for athletes from Aegina, where Ajax was a cult-hero.
On hero-cult see (e.g.) W. Burkert, Greek Religion (London 1985) 203-8.
In 492 BC the boxer Cleomedes of Astypalaia had his Olympic victory annulled because of the death of his opponent; he went mad, returned home, and demolished the school, killing 60 children; when the townspeople attempted to stone him he took refuge in the temple of Athene and mysteriously disappeared; the oracle at Delphi advised: ‘Cleomedes of Astypalaia is the last of heroes. Honour with sacrifices him who is no longer mortal’; and ‘from that time the Astypalaians worshipped Cleomedes as a hero’ (Pausanias 6.9.6-7). Great power (shown by Olympic victory and by terrifying act of destruction) persists beyond death and must be placated by paying honour to it.
Ajax also important in role in Athenian civic and religious life.
Events after Ajax’s death also known. Note:
Preparation for next lecture: read Ajax 1-200 (opening scene, entry of chorus)
Opening lines (Athene, Odysseus seeking advantage over enemy, Ajax’s camp) evokes familiar story: but myth not fixed: adaptation and innovation possible. So audience uncertain (e.g.) which version, whether new version (within limits), details of route to outcome. Problem: should what is not mentioned (e.g. other parts of story, co-existing variants) be ignored or treated as implicit background enriching play’s meaning?
Possible innovation: summary of account in Little Iliad (after award of the arms Ajax went mad, slaughtered the animals, then killed himself) does not mention plot against other Greek leaders—incomplete summary, or innovation? If latter, Odysseus (14-35) reports traditional facts, Athene’s explanation is unexpected and shocking—Sophocles makes Ajax more extreme.
Order of events (Ajax attacks leaders before madness) precludes ‘diminished responsibility’ plea. Is his delight in torture, displayed when mad, result of madness, or part of original intention (i.e. only perception affected by madness)?
Heroic parallel: quarrel in Iliad 1 over possession (Briseis) representing giving/denying honour prompts Achilles to kill Agamemnon (1.188-94): Athene intervenes (1.194-222), giving pragmatic, not ethical, reasons for restraint. Achilles’ withdrawal from fighting leads to death of many comrades—but others do not condemn until after rejection of Agamemnon’s compensation (Iliad 9).
Odysseus does not condemn Ajax: reacts with shock and alarm—expressed in switch to alternating lines (stichomythia) at 38ff., especially when learns how close Ajax came to success (50).
Ajax’s near success confirms heroic prowess (he is the greatest Greek hero now Achilles is dead). Cf. Athene: ‘supreme in judgement, unsurpassed in action’ (119f.)—so Ajax vs Odysseus is not brawn vs brain. Does his proof of greatness confirm that he is right to resent the award of the arms to his rival?
Odysseus shares ‘help friends, harm enemies’ ethic: cf. ‘always on the trail of some advantage over your enemy’ (2: better ‘enemies’); ‘enemy’ (18, word omitted in translation); ‘the man I hated, and I hate him still’ (78); ‘he was my enemy’ (123: better ‘is’). Pity for enemy implies limit to ‘help friends, harm enemies’: Ajax’s extreme behaviour raises question about whether Ajax has gone beyond that limit.
Athene helps friends: protecting Greek leaders is protecting (i) protégé Odysseus; (ii) Greek army, as pro-Greek, anti-Trojan—hence intervention in Achilles-Agamemnon quarrel. But she persuades Achilles, drives Ajax mad—implies deeper anger: hinted in ‘uttering blasphemy against the gods’ (127), confirmed later in play.
‘The gods love goodness, and abhor all that is evil’ (132f.): must be read in context of Greek religion:
So the gods love goodness (human observance of this relationship), abhor evil (human violation of this relationship). Because gods are not vulnerable, Odysseus’s reason for pitying his enemy do not apply to Athene: the invulnerable are naturally pitiless to enemies.
Would not expect compassion from e.g. earthquake, oceans: imagine these as manifestation of power that is personal (has desires, interests etc), and gauge character of that person from the manifestation. In Greek religion that person exists: Poseidon (god of sea, Earthshaker).
Ajax exits into skęnę building; Odysseus exits to side (as entered); Athene into wood? by opposite side?
Pause before entry of chorus: they come from camp to which Odysseus went. Group of 15, identified as followers of Ajax from Salamis, chanting in unison.
Aural texture: tragedy provides structured variety of sound. Opening scene spoken (in verse, presumably distinctive vocal style): this is normal (70%-80% of text in Sophocles). Entry of chorus switches to recitative, accompanied on aulos (‘flute’—in fact oboe-like reed instrument), but not fully melodic. Once in the orkhęstra, chorus switches to song (172, ‘Tis a powerful tale they tell...’) with dance.
Note contrast: song has melody, accompaniment, complex and unique rhythms (contrast simple, repeated rhythms of spoken verse—‘iambic trimeter’), different dialect (imitation of Doric: contrast poetic variant of Athenian dialect in spoken verse).
So chorus provides variety.
Also structure: alternation of act (actors enter, speak, exit) and act-dividing song—in practice, tragedies are more flexible in structure, but departures from the basic pattern invite us to investigate what effect was being sought.
Act-dividing song fills interval between acts. Fourth-century tragedy used interval songs not written for a specific context (Aristotle Poetics ch.18 disapproves)—i.e. only filled interval and provided variety. In fifth-century tragedy songs usually (always?) did more. But be sceptical of generalisations about ‘the’ function of the chorus: approach it as an adaptable dramatic resource.
Within acts the chorus-leader (koruphaios) as spokesman interacts with characters and keeps to dramatic role (e.g. sailors from Salamis). Between acts the chorus may be more loosely connected to dramatic role—e.g. universal, human perspective. But chorus is not ideal or authoritative observer: sometimes wrong (e.g. Ajax 693-738: misunderstands Ajax).
Recitative and song are normal between acts, but abnormal and therefore significant within acts.
Preparation for next lecture: read Ajax 201-595
Chorus effect shift of perspective on Ajax from that of enemies to that of friends (followers, family). Chorus refer to dependence on Ajax (or interdependence: cf. 161f.), assume ‘rumours’ due to envy of greatness (157), hostile to Odysseus (189f.; Odysseus as bastard son of Sisyphus, not Laertes).
Chorus summons Ajax, but Tecmessa comes out: surprise?
‘Shipmates of Ajax, sons of Erechtheid soil’ (201f.): Erechetheus = legendary Athenian king; hence projects Athenian claim to Salamis into remote past. Cf. 861 (farewell to Salamis and Athens); 1217-22 (Chorus long for home = Athens). Links Ajax to (Athenian) audience’s present—will they share partisan attitude?
Recitative to 262, with choral song at 221 (‘It is plain. There is no escape...’) and 245 (‘There is nothing else but to cover our heads...’). Within act recitative and song are abnormal and significant: speech-recitative-song = scale of increasing emotional intensity (note the two songs are emotional peaks). At 263 (‘If the worst is over...’) switch to speech = relaxation, but relief is premature: threat from others (254f.) overshadowed by threat of suicide (‘he clearly means to do some dreadful thing’, 326).
‘Come in and help me if you can’ (334): Chorus cannot go in, but attention fixed on door: build-up to Ajax’s entry intensified by cries off.
Ajax displayed on eccyclema, with dead animals (in Agamemnon eccyclema carries Clytaemnestra and bodies of Agamemnon and Cassandra) and much blood: Ajax himself is covered in blood.
Ajax sings (in rhythm known as ‘dochmiac’, expressing extreme, agitated emotion); reverts to speech at 430 (‘Aias! Aias! How fit a name to weep with...’) for reasoned analysis of situation. Starts with cry of pain (aiai) similar to own name (Aias), treated as unrecognised omen of his grief (cf. Greek propensity to see omens across wide range of phenomena, including names).
Less concerned by threat posed by enemies (‘my armed comrades wait to take my life’, 408f.) than by their mockery (364-7, 379-82). Primary motive and value has been proving himself better than others, gaining respect: humiliating failure makes this impossible—respect replaced by mockery. Life as ‘a man disgraced’ (426f.), not worth living.
Shame focused by thoughts of father Telamon, who took part in Heracles’ successful attack on Troy: now he is ‘disgraced’ (440) how can he face his father? See 434-40, 462-6, 471f. For heroic fathers’ expectations cf. Iliad 6.207-10 (Glaucus): ‘Hippolochus fathered me, and he is the man I spring from. He sent me to Troy, and gave me constant instructions, always to be the bravest and best and excel over others, and not bring disgrace on the stock of my fathers, who were far the best men in Ephyre and in the breadth of Lycia’; cf. 11.783f. (Peleus to Achilles): ‘always to be the bravest and best and excel over others’
Options (‘And now what must I do?’, 457): (i) going home (cf. Achilles in Iliad 9)—but cannot face father; (ii) attack Trojans single-handed, die fighting, and so prove his courage—but cannot help enemies (Agamemnon and Menelaus); (iii) nothing—but living irretrievably ruined life implies cowardly fear of death; hence (iv) prove not coward by suicide.
Tecmessa’s reply not uncontrolled emotion but carefully judged appeal to heroic values. Cf. meeting of Hector and Andromache in Iliad 6. Andromache, afraid for Hector’s life, urges defensive posture; Hector replies: ‘Wife, all that you say is surely in my mind also. But I would feel terrible shame before the men of Troy and the women of Troy with their trailing dresses, if like a coward I skulk away from the fighting. Nor is that what my own heart urges, because I have learnt always to be brave and fight in the forefront of the Trojans, winning great glory for my father and myself’ (6.441-6)—note values shared with Ajax (father, need to prove himself and win respect). Hector expects Troy to fall (6.447f.) and is most distressed by Andromache’s future fate (6.450-65). Andromache appeals to her and their son’s dependence on him (6.431f.), as does Tecmessa: hero has obligation to protect dependents, failure to do so (failure to help friends) diminishes respect: cf. ‘The blow will fall on me—but on your head, and on your blood [i.e. family], will fall the shame of it’ (504f.). Note also argument from obligation to protect aging father. There are conflicting pressures on Ajax—no definitive resolution?
Tecmessa is not wife, but captive, slave, concubine: not without status, but more precarious. Eurysaces is nothos (‘illegitimate’): free, member of household, but rights not equal to a gnęsios (‘legitimate’):son. Cf. (e.g.) Euripides Hippolytus: Hippolytus (nothos) has marginal status, seen as potential threat to legitimate half-brothers. Teucer, son of Telamon and concubine Hesione (daughter of Laomedon, king of Troy) is nothos: creates problems later in play, and (after play) when returns home.
Iliad 6.466-81: Hector takes baby son in arms (cf. Ajax calling for Eurysaces); Hector and Andromache amused when child is frightened by helmet plume, Hector removes helmet (contrast Ajax: his son won’t be frightened by blood).
Tone to Tecmessa (when he does speak to her) is harder: cf. already ‘”Woman,” he answered shortly, “Women should be seen, not heard”’ (288). But Ajax then starting on bold, dangerous enterprise; now facing disgrace and ruin—how much emotional sensitivity should we expect?
Does not ignore Tecmessa: address to Eurysaces (too young to understand: ‘seeing this trouble and not understanding all that it means’, 553) obliquely addressed to Tecmessa, and meets her arguments—Teucer will protect boy (and, since he will grow up ‘to make your mother happy’ (559), presumably her), and the boy will be substitute son for Ajax’s parents. This assumes Teucer can meet the responsibility. Note how play begins to look towards sequel—return of survivors to Salamis.
Tecmessa’s intelligence: see also 527-44, evading Ajax’s demand for their son as long as possible, Emotional control: her speech does not directly ask Ajax to take pity on her (this is left to chorus: 525f.). But self-control gives way at end of scene—does she collapse distraught? (Ajax tells her to go inside at 578-80: but if so, she must follow Ajax out in next scene: perhaps odd).
Preparation for next lecture: read Ajax 596-973
Contrasts Salamis (happy) and Troy (miserable), past departure from Salamis (Ajax honoured) and present (Ajax dishonoured). Picks up theme of Ajax’s parents from previous scene.
May expect Messenger to report suicide (as in Aeschylus Thracian Women)—reappearance of Ajax is surprise.
Ajax’s speech is complex, enigmatic (no definitive interpretation): (i) Ajax is wrestling with difficult issues; (ii) his meaning is deliberately veiled.
Ajax is aware of Tecmessa’s presence (652: ‘a woman’, better ‘this woman’), and must mean her to hear: he communicates obliquely, as in previous act. Tecmessa and Chorus (not knowing traditional story, subject to wishful thinking) think he has decided not to commit suicide; audience (knowing traditional story) will see through ambiguities. Ajax’s apparently conceals intentions deliberately—hence ‘deception speech’. Contrast Achilles: ‘I hate like the gates of Hades the man who hides one thing in his mind and speaks another’ (Iliad 9.312f.). Why does Ajax not follow this principle here?
Has he softened his attitude (even if not his decision)? ‘I am loth [literally, ‘I feel pity’] to leave a widow and a fatherless child here among enemies’ (652f.)—contrast previous scene: further thought about Tecmessa’s appeal has revealed that his response was insufficient?
New plan: (i) wash off blood in sea; (ii) bury sword in ‘secret place’. Envisages (i) as ritual purification, making peace with Athene (how?)—contrast defiant tone of previous scene (‘Do you believe I still owe any duty or service to the gods?’ 589f.), and cf. ‘I have learned my lesson, to obey the gods’ (666f.); ‘Must not we learn this self-discipline? I think we must’ (677f.). Giving way to stronger power is no disgrace. But note also ‘... and not be disrespectful [better, ‘and to reverence’] to the sons of Atreus; they are in command and we are under them; that is as it should be’ (666f.): ironic overstatement? Contrast later curse against sons of Atreus (835-8) with prayers to gods.
Sword was gift of enemy—Hector: exchange of gifts after Hector-Ajax duel, proposed be Hector: ‘Come, let us both give each other glorious gifts, so that people will say, both Achaeans and Trojans: “These two fought together in rivalry that ate at their hearts, and then when they parted they were joined in friendship”’ (Iliad 7.299-302). But this enmity has proved more stable, unlike friendship of comrades: ‘since I had it the Greeks have done me nothing but ill’ (663). Cf. provisional nature of enmity and friendship, need to qualify treatment of enemies and friends (678-83). Ajax acknowledges the fact without approving?
‘When you next hear of me, I shall be safe’ (691f.): what does he means by ‘safe’?
Chorus celebrate Ajax’s change of mind in song and dance.
Audience, recognising the truth, may expects news to shatter the illusion: e.g. Messenger to report Ajax’s death. Messenger does arrive—but from the wrong direction (camp, not wilderness): surprise?
Chorus expected reconciliation, but news of hostile reception of Teucer shows hardened attitudes in Greek army. Messenger confirms that Ajax had spoken so as to offend Athene (cf. 127): attitude to gods renounced in deception speech has informed past behaviour, leading to downfall.
He will be safe if he survives the day: prompts urgent action by Chorus—leaves in haste to search. Exit of Chorus, leaving acting area vacant, unconventional: parallels in Aeschylus Eumenides (with other unconventional stagecraft), Euripides Alcestis.
May expect Messenger to report discovery of Ajax’s body, procession with corpse, lamentation. Reappearance of live Ajax must be surprise.
Questions of staging:
(i) Does Ajax commit suicide in view of audience? Death on stage would be unconventional, but can we rule that out? One later actor famous for the suicide, but that does not prove Sophocles did this. Practical problem: only three actors available, all needed for Teucer-Agamemnon-Odysseus scene: so a dummy corpse must have been used—but if the death was in full view, how is the substitution done
(ii) Is there a change of location (majority view)? Ajax will go to ‘secret place’ (657)—so not near tent? Cf. change of location (Delphi-Athens) when acting area cleared in Eumenides, but that is clearly signalled. In Ajax no clear indication—and wouldn’t scattered Chorus reunite at starting-point after fruitless search? [Against the change of location: S. Scullion, Three Studies in Athenian Dramaturgy (Stuttgart 1994), 89-128 (‘The staging of Sophokles’s Aias’). A different account of play’s staging: G. Ley, ‘A scenic plot of Sophocles’ Ajax and Philoctetes’ Eranos 86 (1988), 85-115. A new account in M. Heath and E.R. OKell, ‘Sophocles’ Ajax: expect the unexpected’, Classical Quarterly 57 (2007), forthcoming - a preprint is available on line]
Tecmessa discovers body out of sight of Chorus, in a wood (892). If change of location, must be change of scenery. If no change location, wood on stage from beginning—and this removes need for change of location: wood towards one end of skęnę-building = unoccupied territory beyond Greek camp, hence suitable ‘secret place’; provides concealment for suicide and substitution of dummy corpse (possibly actor uses side doors, against tragic norm, but here concealed by wood?)
Proposal (contrast stage-directions in translation, which are not part of Sophocles’ text): Chorus departs (side entrances); Ajax, now cleansed of blood, emerges from the wood; gestures back to sword planted in ground in wood; exits into wood for suicide. Chorus returns (from side entrances). Pause before Ajax’s entry (necessary if enters from eisodos) might cause worry about missed cue? or heighten tension? If no pause, surprise follows surprise rapidly. Is there pause before re-entry of Chorus?
Alternative: e.g. Chorus departs (side entrances); scenery changed (tent becomes wilderness); eccyclema brings wood out of central door; Ajax emerges, plants sword and commits suicide in full view; eccyclema withdrawn; dummy corpse substituted; eccyclema pushed out again. Too clumsy?
Note question of burial raised in suicide speech: Ajax prays that Teucer will find his body, ‘before some one of I hate can get me and throw me to the dogs and carrion crows’ (829f.)—pointing to last part of play. Does this explain ‘safe’ (691f.): death is not a definitive solution, and to be sure of burial needs to be at peace with gods?
Chorus sings in dochmiacs (rhythm expressing extreme, agitated emotion).
If the staging proposed is correct: Tecmessa, initially unseen in wood, emerges; gestures back into wood when referring to Ajax’s body and sword; at 912-4 (‘Show us, show us where Ajax lies’) the body still out of Chorus’s sight; must be carried out of wood—connected Tecmessa’s covering corpse with cloak (915f.)? But nothing in text indicates the moving of the body. Does this show flaw in the staging proposed? Is there a better alternative?
Preparation for next lecture: read Ajax 974-1420
Does Ajax fall into two discontinuous parts (a ‘diptych’)?
Objections:
(i) plot continues past natural closure (death of Ajax);
(ii) the inessential continuation is anticlimactic.
But audience has unfinished business:
(i) no closure is possible:
(a) while Ajax alive;
(b) until search for Ajax resolved;
(ii) what will enemies do? This is raised by:
(a) epic tradition concerning fate of body (buried, not cremated, without usual
honours);
(b) Ajax’s prayer (829f., going beyond epic tradition).
Performance may influence sense of (dis)continuity: is there a pause before/after the suicide speech? After: return of chorus is new beginning. Before: suicide initiates new chain of events. Before and after: suicide isolated and emphasised. Neither: unbroken stream of action.
Ajax’s burial and the fate of his dependents are entrusted to Teucer: 565-73 (Ajax to Chorus, indirectly replying to Tecmessa), 688f. (Ajax to Chorus, deception speech), 804 (Tecmessa sends for Teucer), 829f. (Ajax’s prayer), 921f. (Tecmessa)—where note fate of dependents again raised (944-8).
Given hostile reception of Teucer by army (719-32) this will not be easy. Is he up to it? For negative view see e.g. R.P. Winnington-Ingram, Sophocles: an Interpretation (Cambridge 1980), 81: ‘Teucer is an Ajax-substitute—and a poor one... his inadequacy is pathetic.’ But:
(i) not being Ajax’s equal is not evidence of inadequacy;
(ii) Ajax (‘supreme in judgement, unsurpassed in action’, 119f.) has confidence
in him;
(iii) Messenger’s report shows he can defend himself, and is capable of quick
action (esp. 780-2);
(iv) acts quickly to protect Ajax’s son (983-9), before Chorus pass on
Ajax’s instructions (990-2).
Tecmessa sent with soldiers to fetch child to release actor ready for later triangular scene (Teucer, Agamemnon and Odysseus), given limitation to three speaking actors. Her role is taken over by non-speaking extra (her silence while men transact public affairs would seem normal to Greek audience).
Teucer’s lament (emotionally controlled: spoken, not sung), note:
(i) Ajax dying by sword given by enemy (cf. 661-5, 815-2) seen as parallel to Hector’s death by belt given by Ajax: see Iliad 7.305—but in Homer Achilles drags dead body of Hector behind chariot, with no reference to Ajax’s belt (22.395-404): live Hector dragged by Ajax’s belt is a different (innovative?) version.
(ii) Teucer foresees likely rejection by father, suspecting him of cowardice in failing to defend, or malice in betraying, Teucer as nothos (son by concubine, not fully legitimate son) has more precarious position, might be suspected of envy (cf. Euripides Hippolytus: nothos Hippolytus seen as potential rival to Theseus’ legitimate sons). In tradition, Teucer was exiled.
Menelaus has a potentially strong argument (Ajax betrayed friendship: 1053-6), but undermines it; e.g.:
(i) ‘We’ll throw him out on the yellow sand, and let the sea-birds feed on
his carcase’ (1063-5); Athenians banned burial of traitors in Attica—but not
entirely (cf. Antigone, and for evidence and discussion of views on
burial see R. Parker, Miasma (Oxford 1983), 32-48; J. Mikalson, Honour
Thy Gods (Chapel Hill 1991), 121-8);
(ii) ‘We couldn’t rule him while he lived, but dead... we’ll keep in subjection’
(1067f.): weakness and the malicious envy (cf. 157);
(iii) ‘common man’ (1071): ludicrous as description of Ajax—and arrogance would
not appeal democratic Athens?
Tecmessa and child posed as suppliants at Ajax’s body: paradoxically, body in need of defence is treated as sacred object that can protect suppliants. This anticipates, and made intelligible by, Ajax’s hero-cult. See P. Burian, ‘Supplication and hero-cult in Sophocles’ Ajax’, Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 13 (1972), 151-6; A. Henrichs, ‘The tomb of Aias and the prospect of hero cult in Sophokles’, Classical Antiquity 12 (1993), 165-80.
The Chorus sing a song expressing their misery and longing for home.
Unlike Menelaus, Agamemnon is the overall leader of the Greek army (but with limits: cf. Achilles’ defiance in Iliad 1), and has a potentially strong argument (authority of majority vote: 1242f.—unless Teucer’s accusation of fraud is justified? Cf. 1135-7), but undermines it; e.g.: ‘this nobody’ (1231), claim to equal share in fighting with Ajax (1237: cf. Achilles’ complaint, Iliad 1.163-8)—exposed in Teucer’s reply with reference esp. to Ajax’s role in defence of the ships (Iliad 16.674-746), taken as grounds for (violated) obligation towards him.
Teucer is defiant, but does not achieve resolution. How effective is he? Note: (i) two assaults increases sense of resoluteness; (ii) verbal victories over both opponents are crushing, morally and rhetorically: for Teucer’s mastery of invective (e.g. on Agamemnon’s ancestry) as heroic trait cf. Achilles: ‘Drunkard, with the eyes of a dog and the heart of a deer...’ (1.225). But: he rebuffs, but does not win over, his opponents.
How involved should we be? Is the appropriate stance (here, and in Greek tragedy in general) detachment and impartiality, or partisan engagement?
Teucer’s final threat (1313-15): cf. Achilles to Agamemnon: ‘But as for the other possessions I hold by my fast black ship, you will not take and carry away any one of them without my will. Come, try, if you wish, to make it clear to all: in an instant your dark blood will drip from my spear’ (Iliad 1.293-303). Teucer could not win a fight with the army (nor could Ajax: 408f.). But is threat-display a means to avoid fighting? Menelaus and Agamemnon try, but fail, to intimidate Teucer; Teucer’s counter-threats show he will not back down, is willing to die—cannot win, but can make victory unacceptably costly? If so, Agamemnon has reason to back down, given a suitable opportunity. When Teucer was attacked ‘elders’ intervened to defuse confrontation (729-32): should we expect intervention here—even if not from Odysseus?
Opening scene may mean we are not surprised: Odysseus recognised enemy’s ruin as limit to enmity, so naturally also sees death as limit (1332-45 makes clear that exposing the corpse is unacceptable, confirms Ajax’s greatness). Does not have qualms about enmity (cf. 1336, 1347, 1355), but recognises limits—unlike Agamemnon and Menelaus (e.g. 1356, 1372f.).
Do Agamemnon and Menelaus share Ajax’s inflexibility? (Or only with respect to enmity, not friendship? But recall Menelaus’ complaint that Ajax betrayed friendship: 1053-6.) Contrast Odysseus’ flexible attitude (1359, 1376f.)—welcomed by Teucer. Would Ajax welcome it? His ‘acceptance’ of instability of friendship and enemy (678-83) perhaps ironic; Teucer declines Odysseus’ offer to assist in funeral, ‘which might displease the dead’ (1394f.); cf. implacable Ajax in underworld (Odyssy 11.543-64).
Where in this range of attitudes should our sympathies lie?
Preparation for next lecture: read Hecabe 1-215