Reading Sophocles' Antigone

16 Pages·2007·0.44 MB·English

Assumptions and the Creation of Meaning: Reading Sophocles' Antigone
Author(s): Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood
Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 109 (1989), pp. 134-148
Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/632037 .
Accessed: 15/03/2014 15:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Journalo f HellenicS tudiesc ix (1989) 134-148
ASSUMPTIONS AND THE CREATION OF MEANING:
READING SOPHOCLES' ANTIGONE*
THE notion that texts are not read neutrally, but through perceptual filters shaped by
culturallyd etermineda ssumptionsw hich determinep erceptiona nd reactionl would, I believe,
be accepted-in some form-by most literaryc riticsb y now. But the extent and radicaln ature
of the cultural determinationo f reading and their methodological implications are often not
fully realized. For they entail that, if we wish to read a text such as the Antigonea s closely as
possiblet o the ways in which its contemporarya udienced id, we must reconstructi n detail their
cultural assumptions, by means of which meaning was created, and try to read through
perceptualf iltersc reatedb y those assumptions;2o therwise we will inevitably read through our
own assumptionsb y default, and as these are very differentf rom those of the Athenianso f the
late 440s,3 they will inevitably produce very differentm eanings from theirs.
We must also block the intrusion of all preconceptions,f or they corrupt the reading by
functioninga s unconsciousc entreso rganizingt he text into patternsw hich reflectt hem, not only
by privileging certaini nterpretationsb, ut also at a basic level of reading,b y leading us to stress
* Severe limitations of space prevent me from in BW, section 2. Cultural determination cannot be
confronting the earlier literature;r eferences are cut to wholly eliminated but it can be blocked to a very
the minimum. A draft of this paper was delivered at a considerablee xtent (Sourvinou-Inwood 1987 [n. I] 52
seminar at King's College, Cambridge, in 1983 and nn. 3-4). Such reconstruction is a construct of some
subsequently also at Oxford. I am grateful to many minimum common sets of assumptions that can be
scholars who discussed aspects of the play with me, presumed (when they can) to have been shared by this
especiallyt o ProfessorP at Easterling,D r Ruth Padel, Dr other construct: all or most mid-fifth century Athe-
Robert Parkera nd Dr Oliver Taplin for discussionsa nd nians.
advice, and the editor ofJHS Dr ChristopherP elling for 3 The exact date of the Antigonei s not certainb eyond
his manifold help. I discuss other aspects of this play doubt, but the generally accepted date in the late 440s is
elsewhere, and use the following abbreviationsf or these extremely likely. The story (Radt, TrGF vol. 4, 45 T.
papers: MT: Le mythe dans la tragedie, la tragedie a no. 25) that Sophocles was elected generalb ecauseo f the
traversl e mythe: Sophocle, Antigone vv. 944-87 in C. success of the Antigone( on this story cf L. Woodbury,
Calame (ed.), Metamorphosedsu mythee n Grecea ntique Phoenix xxiv [1970] 209-24; M. R. Lefkowitz, The lives
(Geneva 1988) 167-83; FS: The fourth stasimon of of the Greek poets [London I98I] 80-3; U. von
Sophocles' Antigone, published in BICS xxxv (1989). Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Aristotelesu nd Athen. vols.
BW: Sophocles' Antigone as a bad woman, forth- I-II [Berlin 1893] 298 n. 14), which suggestsa date in the
coming in F. Dieteren and E. Kloek (eds), Women's late 440s, since Sophocles was general at 44I/440 may be
historyi n theorya ndpracticeF. L:F amiliall oyalties:n orms an invention, but was it based on correct information
of feminine behaviour in classical Athens, to be about the play's date?L efkowitz op. cit. 82 rightly notes
published in a collection ed. by L. Archer, S. Fischler that other stories, one of which was ascribedt o Satyros,
and M. Wyke. AAR: Antigone 904-20: a reading, place the Antigonea t the end of Sophocles' life, which
forthcoming in AION sezionef ilologico-letterariaI. use suggests that in the third century there was no fixed
the term 'reading' partly metaphorically, to include information on the date of the Antigone.D espite this,
making sense of a play in performance;t he points I am there are reasons for thinking that the story about
making have even greater force in the latter case. Sophocles' generalshipc ontains correct historicali nfor-
1 For references to works discussing the cultural mation, and that this tragedy had indeed been produced
determination of perception cf. C. Sourvinou-Inwood, in the late 440s. First, this story, unlike the others, is
in C. Berard, C. Bron and A. Pomari (eds), Imagese t certainly known to contain one piece of correct
societee n Grece ancienne.L 'iconographiceo mmem ethode information, that Sophocles had been a general, indeed,
d'analyse( Lausanne1 987) 52 nn. 2-4; to discussionso f that his careera s a generali ncluded an involvement with
signification and the creation of meaning: op. cit. nn. 5- Samos. Second, and most importantly, there is a
8. For the placing of such insights in reader-oriented reflection of Antigone9 09-12 in Euripides'A lcestis2 93-
criticism:J.C uller, On deconstructioTn.h eorya ndc riticism 4; cf. also 285-6 (H.J. Blumenthal, CR n.s. xxiv [1974]
after structuralism( London, Melbourne and Henley I74-5). Alcestisw as produced in 438, which thus gives
1983) 17-83 passim;S . R. Suleiman in S. R. Suleiman us the terminusa nte quem;t he inspiration would make
and I. Crosman (eds), The readeri n the text. Essays on perfect sense if the Antigonew as produced in the late
audiencea nd interpretation(P rinceton 1980) 3-45. The 440s. Finally, the story's invention makes best sense as a
model I follow in my attempt to reconstructt he reading post hoct ransformedi nto a propterh oc.( Cf: Wilamowitz
processi s basedo n U. Eco, The roleo f the reader(L ondon op. cit. 298 n. I4. For a discussion of the play's date: cf.
1981) 3-43. esp. Woodbury op. cit.; W. M. Calder III, GRBS ix
2 I discuss the questions associated with this process [1968] 389-90.)
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
READING SOPHOCLES' ANTIGONE I35
some parts of the text and underplay others. If the preconceptions which thus unconsciously
organize the text are incorrect, the reading is corrupted-though such readings appear
convincing because they are coherent and self-validating.T he case limit of such unconscious
structuring through prior assumptions is the excision of passages that challenge those
assumptionsJ. ebb's case againstt he authenticityo f Ant. 904-204 is an example of an argument
which begins implicitly with certain unconscious views about the play-and about tragic
writing-being taken as a 'given' with which vv. 904-20 is not easily compatible;n o account is
taken of the possibility that the logical flaws create specific meanings (which fit perfectly with
the rest of the play when it is read through the ancient perceptualf ilters).
Two types of prior assumptions can lead to major distortion. First, those created by earlier
readings which can create filters through which the text is unconsciously structured. Thus, if we
apply to the Antigone-even if only to question it-the perceptualm odel 'individualo pposing
the state to obey his conscience',w e run the risk of structuringt he play through an alien schema
and of introducing a multifaceted distortion. The polis was not simply 'the state', the political
establishment,i t was the orderedw orld of its citizens,i n which religion was centrallyi mportant.
Also, that perceptualm odel representsa n establisheds chema with potent connotations in our
own world, but not, in my view, in that of the fifth century Athenians.5T his entails that we
would be organizinga nd understandingt he text differentlyf rom the latter, insteado f trying to
reconstructh ow this specific situationw ould have been perceived by them. The most obvious
source of distortion from this perceptual model is the ideological bias.6 For7 we privilege
individual freedom and distrustt he state'sc laim to supremacy,a nd so are hostile to the views
expressedb y Kreon at vv. I75-90, unlike the Athenians,f or whom loyalty to the polis was a
necessity,a nd the notion that one's supremel oyalty was to the polis was part of the commonly
sharedi deology. Thus Kreon in vv. 175-90 speakst he polis discourse,e xemplifying democratic
patriotism which is indeed how Demosthenest ook the lines.8 Ideologicalb ias does not simply
affectr eaders'r eactionsa nd assessmentsb, ut also the perceptiono f the text itself, what aspectst he
readerw ill privilege, stresso r ignore within the text (cf. n. 6).
Another potential sourceo f distortioni s the assumptionsg eneratedt hrough the knowledge
of the play's outcome, when we read backwards.9F irst,s ince our aim is to try to reproducet he
processo f significationt hrough which the original audiencem ade sense of the play, we should
eschew this type of readingw hich had no part in that process.T hen, since the perceptualf ilters
we deploy lead us to stresso r neglect some aspects,a nd structureo thersi n certainc onfigurations,
if we assumet hat, for example, the meaning 'Antigone is right' is the centre of the play, we shall
implicitly organizea nd readi t through this centre,w ith the inevitabler esulto f reducing,o r even
concealing, the play's complexities, polysemies, ambivalences and ambiguities, and any
multivocality and warringd iscoursesi t may contain, and thus implicitly collapsingi ts meanings
into a straightforwardd evelopment of a simple, monosemic message and assume that it is
unilineara nd univocal. Contemporary literary criticism has taught us that the assumptiono f
monosemy and of such an extraordinaryu nity of discoursei mpoverishesa nd distortst he reading
of texts.10 To put it crudely, if we privilege the point of view or characterw hich eventually
4 R. C. Jebb ed., Sophocles.T he plays andf ragments. i8i n. 52); cf C. M. Bowra, Sophocleantr agedy( Oxford
Part III. The Antigone (Cambridge i888) p. I64 ad loc. I964) 68.
and esp. Appendix pp. 257-6i. On 904 ff. cf. BW and 9 Especially as this procedure would interact with
FL. our assumptions which include perceptions of the
5 Cf. also G&R xxxv (I988) 29-39. Antigoned eveloped over the years which privilege the
6 On ideological bias cf. Eco op. cit. (n. i) 22-3; cf. id., backwards reading (which partly generated them), so
A theory of semiotics( Bloomington I976) 289-90o; T. that the two fallacies would reinforce each other and
Eagleton, Criticisma nd ideology2( London I978) passim, distort in the same direction.
esp. 11-43. 10 Even those who do not accept that all texts and
7 Cf. B. M. W. Knox, The heroict emper( Berkeley myths are polysemic and multivocal cannot deny the
and Los Angeles I964) 84-7; id., Word and action possibility that they may be, and so should avoid
(Baltimore, London I979) I66-7. methodologies that would distort the reading if their
8 Cf. Dem. xix 247 (cf. 246-8) andK nox I964 (n. 7) assumptionasr e wrong.
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
I36 CHRISTIANE SOURVINOU-INWOOD
'prevailsw' e distortt her eadingf, or in thep layt hisw aso nly one possibilitye, ventuallyr ealized
out of severaol thersa, ndt hisw asa ni mportanat specto f thep rocesso f meaningc reationa; lso,i ts
'victory'm ayn ot haveb eena bsolutein thep lay,i t mayh aveb eenm odifiedo r deconstructebdy
elementsw hicha reu nderstresseodr ignoredw hent her eadingis centredo n thef inalo utcome-
an outcomew hichi n sucha processis itselfp erceivedm orem onolithicallyth ant he text in fact
presentist , preciselyb ecauset he earlierc omplexitya ndm ultivocalityh asb eenm issed.T his,i n
my view, is the case with the Antigonet:h e privilegingo f Antigone'sd iscourseb y modern
readerhs asl ed to readingsw hichi gnoret he play'sc omplexitieas nda mbivalencesa,n do bscure
whatI seea sa centracl oncerno f thep lay,a questiona t thev eryc entreo f classicaGl reekr eligion.
Readingsc entredo n a play'sf inal outcomea lso implicitlyp resupposea, nd to a largee xtent
creater eadingsi nvolving, a notion of charactera s a static 'essence'( with or without an
underlyingn otion of psychologicalc oherence),i nsteado f the shifting constructsc reated
interactivelbyy thea uthort, het ext,a ndt hea udiencew, hichi s whatc haracterins Greekt ragedy
are.11
Severel imitationos f spacep reventm e from settingo ut the corrects tepb y steps ystematic
readingo f the AntigoneI; shall presenta condensedv ersiono f some aspectso f, and some
conclusionds erivedf rom,t hatr eadingc, oncentratinogn ther oleo f two typeso f assumptionisn
thep rocesso f meaningc reationT. he firstp ertaintso thea rticulatioonf thet ragedyI. beginw ith
a pairo f textuald evicesp ertainingto the relationshibpe tweent he worldo f the playa ndt hato f
the audienceI. n thisp lay, the concept' polis'i s most importantT. he relationshipb etweent he
semanticf ield 'Athenianp oliso f the late 440s'a s an empiricarl ealitya nd also an ideality( the
collectiveA thenianr epresentatioonf the Athenianp olis, which is not to be reducedt o this
empiricarl eality)a ndt he Thebanp oliso f the playi s very complex.I t mustn ot be assumedth at
the latterw as perceivedb y the audiencea s a mimeticr epresentatioonf Atheniand emocracy-
whichw ouldh avee ntailedt hatK reonw ouldh aveb eenj udgedb y theses tandardosf democratic
behaviour.1B2 ut neitherw as it perceiveda s an alienw orld ruledb y a tyrant,i nsulatedf rom
Athenianr eality.T he distancingin volved in situatingt he action of the play in the distant
mythologicapl ast( andi n Thebes13)m, ayw ell haveb eeni n thef oregroundb, uti t waso nly one
faceto f a very complexr elationship.
Thee mpiricarle alityo f, andt hei dealitya bout,f ifth-centurAy thensi nevitablyp rovidedt he
raw materiaol ut of whichw eres hapedt he filterst hroughw hichm ythicalT hebesw asv iewed,
shapingS ophocless' electionsi n the play, and determiningh is audience'sp erceptiono f, and
reactiont o, thatp olis;w e alli nevitablym akes enseo f the world,a ndo f textsa ndp lays,t hrough
filtersf ormedb y our own experienceas ndc ulturaal ssumptions-unlessc arei s takent o block
and replacet hem with others.T hesea ssumptionisn cludedt he intertextuaflr ame' heroica ge
polisr uledb y a king'-constructedt hroughe arlierp lays-in all its diversity( cf.n . I2). In my
view, the relationshibpe tweent he worldo f the audiencea ndt hato f the playw asn ot constant
andi nert,b ut was createdb y the play,m anipulatedin differenwt aysi n the courseo f it. In the
Antigone(a nd not only here) this relationshipis manipulatedth rought wo types of textual
devices:' distancindge vicesw', hichh adt he effecto f distancingth e actionf romt he world of the
fifthc enturyA thenianp olis,d ifferentiatintgh e two; and' zoomindg evicesw', hichh adt he effect
of bringingt hew orldo f thep layn earerp, ushingt hea udiencein tor elatingt heire xperienceasn d
assumptionds irectlyt o the play.
Anotheri mportantte xtuale lementp ertainingto the articulatioonf the tragedyi s furnished
by the schematap, articulamr odelso f organizinge xperiencew hichs tructurem yths,c ollective
11 Cf. also P. E. Easterling in C. Pelling ed., between the Theban polis ruled by Kreon and its politeia
Characterizationa nd individuality in Greek literature, to the Athenian political myth of Theseus the democra-
forthcoming. tic king. Aesch. Suppl. 365-9, 397-9, 6oo-5 presents a
12 On kings in tragedy cf. P. E. Easterling,i n Javier democracy with a king in Argos.
Coy y Javier de Hoz (ed.), Estudioss obre los generos 13 On this cf. F. I. Zeitlin, inJ. P. Euben (ed.), Greek
litearios ii (Salamanca I984) 33-45- Eur. Suppl. 399-441 tragedy and political theory (Berkeley I986) 101-41.
can be seen also as an attempt to articulatea relationship
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
READING SOPHOCLES' ANTIGONE I37
representationasn dt exts-such as the 'patricides'c hemaw, hichs tructureasl l mythsi nvolving
patricide--and are themselvess tructuredb y, and thus express, the society's collective
representationasn d ideologies, its culturala ssumptions.14I shall be suggestingt hat the
deploymento f such schemata( which helpeda rticulatet he tragedy,f unctioninga s matrices
shapingt he elementst hatm akeu p the story)t riggeredo ff certainr eactionsa nde xpectations.
I shalln ow discussa culturaal ssumptionw hichi s cruciatl o the readingo f the Antigonea,n d
haso ften been misunderstoodI.n the classicaGl reekw orld it was the polis which articulated
religion, which providedt he basic frameworki n which religion operateda nd anchored,
legitimateda ndm ediateda llr eligiousa ctivitya ndh adt he ultimatea uthorityin , andc ontrolo f,
all cults;i t encompassedan d sanctioneda ll religiousd iscoursew ithin it, includingt hat of its
constituentu nits such as the oikosa nd the phratry.I t was the polis which mediatedt he
participatioonf its citizensi n Panhelleniccu lt. In the absenceo f scripturatle xts,r evelationo, f a
canonicalb ody of belief, and of a 'professionald' ivinely anointedc lergy claimings pecial
knowledgeo r authoritya, ndo f a churchi,t wast hep olis,t heo rderedc ommunityt, hata ssumed
the authorityt hats tructuredth e worldi nto a religiouss ystem.C orrelativwe ith thosea bsences
mentionedis the factt hata centralc ategoryi n Greekr eligioni s unknowabilityt,h e belieft hat
humank nowledgea boutt he divinea nda boutt her ightw ay of behavingt owardsit is limited.15
Prophecy,t he only directm eanso f accesst o the divinew orld in Greekr eligion,p rovidest he
only anchoringfo r thep olis'e ndeavoutro ensuret hec orrectb ehaviourto wardst heg ods.B ut in
Greekm entalityp rophecyis flawed,b ecauseh umanf allibilityin terfereasn dt heg ods'w ordsa re
often misinterpretedIn. tragedy,p rophecyi s alwaysr ight;b ut this is a piece of intertextual
knowledgep ossessedb y the audience;in the world of the play, in the eyes of the dramatis
personaep, rophecyi s as likely to be flaweda s it was in fifth-centuryA thens-and thisw ould
have been perceivedt o be so by the audience.
Thusi t is a misunderstandinogf the ancientr ealitiews hichl eadst o a misreadinogf the text
to believe,16t hatK reon,i n privilegingt he polis,h asf ocusede xclusivelyo n politics;o r that17
Antigoneo n the one hand,a ndK reona s a spokesmanfo r the poliso n the other,h aved ifferent
religiouslo yalties,t he formerp rivileginga ndc hampioningth e chthonicg odsa ndt he funerary
rites,w hich the polis allegedlyu nderprivilegews, hile Kreona s spokesmano f the polisi s only
concernedw ith theO lympianc ivicg ods,a ndi gnoresa nde xcludesth ec laimso f then etherg ods,
of funeraryp racticesw, hichb elongt o the domaino f the familya ndn ot of the state.T he polis
doesn ot excludeo r undervaluceh thonicc ults;i t encompasseasl lr eligiousd iscoursae ndp ractice.
Neithera rea llc ivicc ultsO lympianm; anya rec hthonicb, othh eroica ndd ivinec ults( including,
in Athens,t he importantc ivic cult of PoseidonE rechtheus)I.n denyingb urialt o Polyneikes
Kreonw as not undervaluingfu neraryc ults. He was simply exercisingt he polis' taken-for-
grantedr ight to deny burialt o a traitor.T he polis had ultimatej urisdictiono ver funerary
discoursea ndp racticea, s is shownb y the funeraryle gislationis suedb y variousp oleis,t hrough
which they regulateda ll 'privatef' uneraryp ractice.18T he funerawl as a familya ffairb, ut this
does not affectt he factt hati t was the polis thats anctionedfu neraryd iscoursea ndp racticeI. n
Athenst he war-deadw ere given a publicb urialb y the polis;i n it theirf amiliesp lay only a
limitedr ole-and the women of the familya very limiteda nds trictlyd emarcatedon e.1 9 The
mirrori mage of the publicf uneralso f the war heroes,t he disposaol f the traitor'sb ody, also
belongedt o the publics phere.I t was normalA thenianp racticef or traitors,s acrilegeras nd
14
I discusss chematae, specially' child-parenht os- notion of Kreon'sn arrowlyp oliticalb iasc f e.g. R. P.
tility' ones in Theseusa s son and stepson( London 1979) Winnington-Ingram, SophoclesA. n interpretatio(nC am-
8-i8; and in OpAth xvii (I988) section 2. bridge I980) 148.
15 I present the arguments on which these views are 17 Cf. Knox I964 (n. 7) 99-102.
based in a paper ('What is polis religion?') forthcoming 18 I have discussed funerary legislation in R. Higg
in S. Price and 0. Murray( eds), The Greekc ityf rom (ed.), The Greekr enaissancoef the eighthc enturyB .C.:
Homerto AlexanderC. f. alsoK .J. Dover, Greekp opular traditioann di nnovatio(nS tockholm 47-8.
I983)
morality( Oxford I974) 306. 19 Cf N. Loraux, L'inventiond 'Athenes( Paris, La
16 Cf e.g. G. F. Else, The madnesso f Antigone Haye, New York 1981) passim:c f esp. 23-6.
(Heidelberg 1976) 40. For a muchs ubtlerv ersiono f the
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
I38 CHRISTIANE SOURVINOU-INWOOD
certaino ther categorieso f transgressortso be deniedb urial.20T he opposition between war-dead
and traitorsw as very important;d emocraticA thens made the public funeralso f the war-deada n
occasiona nd focus for its own glorification.B y the late fifth centurya t least,K annonos'd ecree21
decreedt hat anyone convicted of having wronged the Athenianp eople should be executed and
thrown into the pit.
I shall now set out a small incomplete sample of my attempted reconstructiono f the fifth
century readings of the Antigone.A t the very beginning of the play the audience saw two
women in the dark, in a place which (it becomes clear in vv. 18-19) is beyond the courtyard's
gates, and thus a place where they ought not to be.22 This frames them negatively, and this is
intensified when the woman who spoke first, whom the audience would have immediately
identified as Antigone, mentions their father and the misfortuneso f their family, since for the
Athenian audience this would have activated the perception that the two women belong to a
perverted family, whose doom is caused (the establishedm entality pertainingt o such matters
would lead the audiencet o understand)b y the gods' will and their own actions.T his perception
is explicitly articulatedb y the chorusi n the second stasimon.23T he notion of doom, and the role
of the gods, is explicitly stressedt hrough Antigone's referencei n vv. 2-3 to the ills derivedf rom
Oidipous which Zeus visits upon them. This placesw hat follows in that context of disordera nd
ills which Oidipous' activitiesh ave causedt o be visited upon his descendantsb y Zeus. Antigone
first mentions Kreon and his prohibitiono f burialt hrough the expression( v. 8) Kiipvypa eTvaOi
TOV crTpacxO yov (... [this] proclamation that [they say] the general has issued .. .). Kreon is not
referredt o by name, but is defined entirely through a civic office, one which was importanti n
the fifth century Atheniand emocraticp olis, and which was naturallya ssociatedw ith kerygmata
(proclamations,d ecrees).24A ntigone, that is, is describing the action she objects to, and the
person who has taken it, neithero f which are specified,t hrough the terminology of democratic
Athens in which both are legitimate and positively coloured. Thus, before they heardw hat the
kerygmasa id or who the stratego(sg eneral)w as, this formulationi n v. 8 functioneda s a zooming
device which made the audiencep erceive Kreon'sa uthorityi n termso f the Atheniani nstitutions
and polis authority, and thus to colour positively the action which he was perceived to be
performing in the name of the polis, and negatively Antigone who objects to it. The positive
colouring of the unnamed strategoas nd his kerygmam ust have been intensifiedw hen Ismene's
words (vv. I if.) made clear (beforet he content of the kirygmaw as announced)t hat the polis has
just overcome great danger, that the Argive army brought by Polyneikes against Thebes was
defeated,a nd Eteoklesa nd Polyneikesh ad killed each other. The negative colouring of Antigone
is furtheri ntensifiedt hrough vv. 18-I9, which make clear that the two women are out of their
proper place and stresst he conspiratorialn ature of the encounter.
20 Cf referencest o ancient sourcesa nd discussionsi n 22 On the use of space in the Antigonec f. O. Taplin,
R. Parker, Miasma. Pollution and purificationi n early Omnibusv ii (March I984) 13-16; P. E. Easterling,B ICS
Greekr eligion( Oxford 1983) 45-7; G. Cerri, in G. Gnoli xxxiv (1988) 22-3.
andJ .-P. Vernant (eds), La mort,l es mortsd ansl es societes 23 On which cf. H. Lloyd-Jones, Thej ustice of Zeus
anciennes (Cambridge, Paris 1982) I21-3I passim; V. J. (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 1971) 113-14 (cf. 114-
Rosivach, RheinischesM useumc xxvi (1983) 193-4; T. I7); P. E. Easterling, in R. D. Dawe, J. Diggle, P. E.
C. W. Oudemans and A. P. M. H. Lardinois, Tragic Easterling( eds), Dionysiaca.N ine studiesi n Greekp oetry
ambiguityA. nthropologyp, hilosophya nd SophoclesA' nti- presentedt o Sir Denys Page on his 7oth birthday( Cam-
gone (Leiden 1987) IOI-2; J. Bremmer, The early Greek bridge 1978) 141-58.
concepto f the soul (Princeton 1983) 90-2. Whatever the 24 Cf. Thuc. iv o05. On kerygmac f. also Calder (n. 3)
statuso f the story of the clandestineb urial of Themisto- 392-3 and n. 20. One strategocso uld sometimes be given
cles' bones in Attica reported in Thuc. i 138-6, the law supremec ommand in a particularc ampaign, and one or
forbidding the burial of traitorsi n Attica was probably more could be granted specialp owers (cf. C. Hignett, A
in existence at 462. The story is likely to have been part historyo f the Athenianc onstitution[O xford 1952] 247-8,
of the anti-Themistoclean propaganda. Perception of 353-4). Knox 1964 (n. 7) 82-3 sees Antigone's reference
the action would have been coloured by the fact that to Kreon's edict in terms similar to mine. Cf. also
Themistocles' status as a traitor was not unambivalent. Winnington-Ingram (n. 16) 122 and n. I8.
21 Cf. Xenoph. Hell. i 7.20 but cf.J. Diggle, CR xxxi
(1981) 107-8; Parker (n. 20) 47 n. 52; it cannot be dated
precisely.
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
READING SOPHOCLES' ANTIGONE 139
After this framing has been set in place, Antigone reveals that Kreon has buried Eteokles
with honour and refusedb urialt o Polyneikes, whose corpse he orderedt o be left exposed to be
eaten by carrionb irds.T he Atheniana udiencew ho took for grantedt he authorityo f the polis to
disposeo f the bodies of traitorsa nd sacrilegersw ould have seen the differentialt reatmento f the
two brothers,a nd the denialo f properb urialt o Polyneikes, as perfectlyr easonable.T hey would
have perceivedP olyneikesa s a traitor.25A s a moment of supremed angerw as overcome, Kreon,
like Athens, used death as a symbolic focus for the reconstitution and glorification of the
shatteredp olis, by evaluatingt he leaderw ho died for the polis, and its opposite, the traitorw ho
endangeredt he existence of the polis, as politai,g iving the former an honourablef uneralw hile
refusing burial altogether to the latter. This is normal, legitimate polis discourse.I t is doubtful
whether the audience would have meditated on the particularf orm of the dishonourable
treatment meted out to Polyneikes' corpse, for the centre of gravity created by Antigone's
words was on the differential treatment of the two brothers and the dishonour done to
Polyneikes. Soon (45-6), it moves to the notion that she will defy the kerygmao f the strategos.
The Atheniana udiencew ould have understoodt his to entail that she would be acting againstt he
will of the citizens;t his perceptioni s articulatede xplicitly at v. 79, when Ismenem akesc leart hat
Antigone's plan involves acting biai polit6n (against the will of the citizens). This extremely
importantf ormulationi s taken up again by Antigone herselfa t 907, when she almost explicitly
admits that she buried Polyneikes biaip oliton.
There can be no doubt that Antigone's behavioura nd actionsw ould have been perceivedb y
the Athenians as illegitimately subversive of the polis. She proposed to break the law in
disobeying the decree, and also she was challenging the polis' control over the funerary
discourse,a nd its fundamentalo rderinga nd articulation,w hich declaredt he disposalo f the body
of both the war-deada nd of traitorsa public matter;s he challenged,i nvaded and disturbedt he
public sphere in the service of her private interests.T he polis values dictated that the citizens'
privatei nterestsh ad to be subordinatedt o the public interestso f the polis (cf.T hucydidesi i 60).
Kreon'ss peeche xpressingt hese sentiments( I75-90) was quoted with approvalb y Demosthenes
(xix 247 cf 246-8) as the epitome of democratic patriotism. Antigone privileged her own
interestso ver those of the polis and subvertedt he very articulationo f the polis.26 For the fifth
century Athenians her actions were not a response (let alone a correct or acceptableo ne) to
'legitimately' conflicting duties, towards the oikos and towards the polis. The notion that in
Athenian eyes it was Antigone's family duty to bury her brotheri s, I submit, wrong. First,t he
head of the oikos to which Antigone became attachedo n the death of her brotherE teoklesw as
Kreon. Thus her oikos duty was to obey Kreon. (Kreon was also the father of her prospective
25 A man who raisesa foreign army to march against which Polyneikes is presented in the text (cf. IIo ff.;
his own city to destroy it would indisputablyb e a traitor 285-7. Cf. also Knox 1964 [n. 7] 83-4). He wished to do
in the eyes of the Athenians who had declared to Thebes and its hierat he opposite of what Athenians
Themistocles a traitor for much less (cf. Thuc. i I35-8). swore to do in the ephebic oath, which would
A large section of the audience had experienced the characterizeh im as an impious traitori n their eyes. Any
events of 458/7, when treachery had endangered intertextuale choes that may have come into play would
Athenian democracy, when there was a Spartana rmy in have operated in the same direction. He is characterized
Boeotia and a threat of a Spartan invasion of Attica, very negatively at A. Sept. 580-5 by Amphiaraos,w ho
encouraged and probably urged by some extreme is a wise man and a seer. This negative characterizationis
Athenian oligarchs who hoped to overthrow demo- reinforced by his marriage, which Antigone calls ill-
cracy with Spartanh elp. The stories told about Kimon starred (v. 870), and which places him even more
and his followers fighting for Athens make clear that strongly on the wrong side in Athenian eyes: he
such behaviour was seen as treachery abhorred by the contracted a marriage alliance with the leading family
traitors' political allies, not as a legitimate move in a of a foreign state, which he used against his own city.
political play between oligarchs and democrats. Given This was aristocraticb ehaviours een to be inimical to the
the interactive process of meaning creation, the exper- democratic polis who feared conflicting loyalties and
ience and memory of these events, and its traces in the foreign power-bases; it was one of the reasons behind
collective imaginaire inevitably helped shape the Pericles' citizenship law of 45 I/o.
audience'sp erceptualf ilters, so that they could not have 26 There was no notion of individual (human) rights
thought of Polyneikes as other than a traitor. This limiting the polis' right to demand the sacrifice of
perception was strongly reinforced by the ways in private interests (cf: Dover [n. I5] 156-60; 289).
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
140 CHRISTIANE SOURVINOU-INWOOD
husband.H ere the natal family and the [prospective]h usband'sa re one.) Moreover, it is very
doubtful whether the Atheniansw ould have understoodt hat Antigone, a woman, would have
been allowed, let alone had the duty, to bury her brother.T he personw hose duty it would have
been to bury Polyneikes if he had not been a traitor was Kreon. Of course, when the man
responsiblef or a buriald oes not perform it others do so. But even when no disobediencet o the
polis was involved, such others would normally be men.27 Thus, it was not the case that, as has
been suggested, the associationb etween women and the death ritual entails that Antigone is
acting in her appropriater ole as a woman. For, because of the women's close symbolic
associationw ith disorder,t hey carriedt he main ritualw eight in the first part of the death ritual,
which was dominated by ritual disorder and pollution, while in the burial ceremony, which
terminated the period of abnormality and restored order, it was carriedb y men. Antigone's
choice was deeply subversive, as is expressed symbolically in the fact that the family whose
interests she privileged above those of the polis is a deeply flawed, perverted family-as is
stressedi n the play. Antigone and her brother were the products of an incestuousu nion. The
brothers he wants to bury was killed by her other brotherw hom he killed at the same time. This
negative colouring of the oikos whose interests Antigone privileges against the established
ideology, intensifiedf urthert hrough Ismene'sw ords at 49 ff., which strengthent he notion that
they were a pervertedf amily acting out their own destruction,h elps give negative connotations
to Antigone's actions.T he fact that in Atheniane yes Antigone's was a pervertedc hoice is made
explicit and intensifieda t 904-I2 where she statest hat she would not have acted in this way for a
husband or a son, while in the ideology of the time her familial duty was very much more
compelling in those cases.28
The perceptiont hat Antigone's action was a self-willed act of rebelliona gainstt he polis and
the establishedo rder was both reinforced,a nd expressed,t hrough the fact that she is a woman
out of her properp lace, conspiringi n the darkt o act againstt he polis at a criticalm oment, when
the polis hadj ust been saved from a dreadfuld anger brought about by the traitorousa ctions of
the man for whom she plannedt o subvert the law. Ismene'sw ords at 61-2 yuvaTXO' 6rEt pupEv,
cbsT -rp6& vSpaso vuw axovulva (for we were born women, not meant to fight againstm en) not
only helps frame Antigone's behavioura s bad when set againstw hat was consideredp roper for
women, but also, I suggest, activatess chematai n which the notion that women act on their own
subversivelya re articulateda nd evaluated( very negatively) 'women in charge'a nd 'women out
of control'.29 When Kreon says more than once (484-5; 525; 678-80; cf also 740, 756) that he
will not be ruled by a woman he is activating (inside the ppllaayy aanndd ffoorrt h ttheh ee aauuddiieennccee))t he schema
'women in charge', of the rule of women as reversed world, and is thus expressing, and
communicating, his perception of the threat of disorder representedb y Antigone. In the
symbolic classificationw hich structuredt his schemat he female when opposed to the male stands
for disorder.I have argued elsewhere (BW) that the Athenian audiencew ould have perceived
Antigone as a woman out of her proper place acting againstw hat is consideredp roper female
behaviour,a s a 'bad woman', and that this expressed,a nd polarizede ven further,t he perception
of her behaviour as subversive and threatening. Ismene is excessively 'forgiving' towards
Antigone despite the latter'sa ggressivea nd contemptuous behaviour, and thus exemplifies, as
she does in her refusalt o act with Antigone, the correct modality of female response.
At the end of the Prologue, before returning to her proper place inside the house (while
Antigone goes outside into the plain to bury Polyneikes, thus moving further away from a
woman s proper place) Ismenec haracterizesA ntigone as anous( foolish, wanting in sense).T his
notion of Antigone's folly, first mentioned by a characterw ho is sympathetic to her, is an
importantm otif which recurs( cf. v. 562; cf. also aphrosynei[ folly] at 383). In the second stasimon,
27 Cf BW. charge': P. Vidal-Naquet, Le chasseurn oir2 (Paris I983)
28 On vv. 904-I2 cf BW, and esp. AAR; on 267-88; S. G. Pembroke,JESHOviii (1965) 2 7-47; id.,
privileging the husband'so ikos cf. op. cit. and FL. JWCI xxx (I967) i-35; F. I. Zeitlin, Arethusax i (I978)
29 On 'women out of control' cf FS. On 'women in 153-60.
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
READING SOPHOCLES' ANTIGONE I4I
at 602, the notion of anoia( folly) is connected with the ate which is destroying the house of the
Labdacidsi, t is causedb y the ate and is bringing about Antigone's destruction.T hus v. 99, which
markst he end of the Prologue, confirmst he negative colouring of Antigone. Even in the eyes of
IsmeneA ntigone's enterprisei s the manifestationo f folly. The fact that Ismenel aterjoinsi n that
folly does not invalidatet his assessment.T he anoiaa ttackedt his other last shoot of the house of
the Labdacids.
This negative colouring is confirmed and reinforcedf urtherb y the parodosw, hich throws
into relief the dangert hat Thebes had suffered,a nd thus also the anti-polisb iaso f Antigone who,
by conspiringa gainstt he kerygma(f or the sake of the traitorw ho causedt his danger),t hreatens
disordera t the very moment when order was reestablished.I t is sung by the chorus of Theban
eldersw ho in the eyes of fifth century Atheniansr epresentt he voice with which-in the absence
of signalst o the contrary-their own perceptionsw ould above all identify. The case of the polis
would be privileged by the audienceb ecauseo f their own preconceptionsa nd becauset he play
articulatesi t in positive colours:i t was presentedi n the sunlight, with an emphasiso n the rising
sun, by elderso f the city celebratingv ictory and the polis' salvation.T he positive symbolism of
the parodos30e mphasizest he negative evaluationo f, and the threato f anarchyr epresentedb y,
Antigone. As is known, its opening words recallP indar'sn inth paean.I n both songs the darkness
is over-the darknesso f the eclipse in one case, the metaphoricald arknesso f war and threat,
symbolized by the darkness of the night in the other. But the paean mentions the fear that the
eclipse may have been a sama of war or stasis or some other terrible thing. Thus the combination
of the audience'sk nowledge of Antigone's plotting and the intertextuale choes-for those in
whom they were activated,a nd certainlyf or Sophocles-introduced into the celebratoryo de an
intimation of threata nd disorder.I ncidentally,b y presentingi t from this viewpoint, the play is
here also articulatingA ntigone's actionsi n negative terms.T he intimationo f threata nd disorder
is reinforcedb y the invocation of Dionysos, where the ninth paean had addresseda prayer to
Apollo, the god of order par excellence. With or without the activation of the intertextual
referencesw hich throw the intimations of danger into relief, the invocation of Dionysos as a
civic god by the eldersw ho invite him to lead the victory celebrationsi nevitablyb rought with it
the evocation of his persona, which included the tendency to confuse boundaries,a nd disturb
temporarilyt he normal articulationo f the polis.
The image of the god who brings disordert o the polis by leading women to abandont heir
homes, traditionalr oles and the polis and go outside in a state of'madness' would, I submit, set
up an echo leading back to the prologue and the action Antigone proposed to take, and
forwards,p refiguringt he accomplishmento f that action. This (implicith ere) image of Antigone
seen (metaphorically)a s a Maenadr eturns,a nd is taken furtheri n the fourth stasimon,w here, I
have argued elsewhere (FS;M T) it is articulateda nd developed in a context that prefigurest he
revelation that the case for which, like the Maenads,s he had abandonedh er home and proper
role and embracedd isorderedb ehaviour, was ultimately serving the gods. The invocation of,
and prayert o, Dionysos who is askedt o heal and purify Thebes in vv. I I 5-54 is also correlative
with his role of promoting order-creatingd isorder( in the play through Antigone); for this, it
will emerge, is what had become necessaryo nce the polis polluted itself by transgressinga gainst
the cosmic order. In the parodos the notion of order-crdeaistoinrgd er and women acting in a
disordereda nd mad manner in the service of a god has been brought into play though the
invocation of Dionysos; but it is doubtful whether the audience would have consciously
associatedi t with Antigone at this point. It is an element of the play's multivocality, which will
eventually partly deconstructt he negative anti-polis female rebel image of Antigone-and be
deconstructedb y it.
The beginning of the first episodeion throws again sharply into relief the dominant and
primary theme in the parodos:t he salvation of the polis and the restorationo f order after dire
30 On which,a ndt hec ontrastto thato f thep rologue Tragedie(sO xford I980) 90; cf. op. cit. 90-5 on the
cf. also R. W. B. Burton, The Chorusi n Sophocles' parodosi n general.
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
CHRISTIANE SOURVINOU-INWOOD
I42
danger.K reon'sf irst words refer to the restorationo f order;t his and the statementst hat follow,
of which vv. 175-90 were cited by Demosthenes as admirablee xemplification of democratic
patriotism, must undoubtedly have coloured Kreon positively in the eyes of the Athenian
audience.V v. 207-Io which conclude his speech expresss entimentso f which all right-thinking
Athenians would approve, and stress that it is loyalty to the polis that Kreon values and
rewards-punishing its opposite-not to himself. It thus functions as a zooming device. The
chorus'r esponse( 211-14) articulatest he notion that the polis, in this casei n the persono f Kreon,
has the absolutea uthority to disposeo f its citizens, alive or dead, as it wishes, accordingt o their
behaviour towards it. This notion on the one hand correspondst o the realitieso f democratic
Athens concerningt he power of the polis, on the other it is distancedf rom it, for in the world of
the play the authorityo f the polis was concentratedi n the handso f one man. But this distancing
does not entail that the Atheniana udiencew ould perceiveK reon negatively becauseh e had such
power; the Thebes of the play was not seen as a mimetic representationo f democraticA thens
and judged accordingly.
As for the guard, in my view, it is not the case that the guard'sf ear and Kreon'st hreatss how
that Kreon was seen as a despotic tyrant. First,h arshp enaltiesf or failurew ere not unknown in
democraticA thens (the fate of the Arginoussaig eneralsb eing a prime example);s econd, similar
behaviour also characterizesf, or example, Oidipous in 0 T who is not presenteda s a despotic
tyrant;f inally, vv. 3 15-I9 and 323 make clear that the guard was constructed,a nd would have
been perceived, as a 'comic character',s o that he (his reactionsa nd statements[ other than those
involving factualr eporting],a nd so also his expressionso f fear) was made sense of also through
the filter of the polarizing comic mode. The deployment of the comic mode may have
diminished,a nd diverted attention from, the importanceo f an element containedi n his speech:
the fact that Polyneikes' dust-covered corpse had not been disturbedb y animals (vv. 257-8)
could be takena s a possibles ign that the burialw as accepteda s valid by the gods; that, because( as
it will ultimately turn out) the polis had violated the cosmic order, the rite was valid, even
though it had not been sanctionedb y the polis who had authority over the funeraryd iscourse.
But this sign was too ambiguous to be understooda s a manifestationo f divine will, especially
when viewed through the negative perceptualf ilter of the awarenesso f Antigone's anti-polis
subversion,e ven when the possibility of supernaturailn volvement is articulateda t vv. 278-9,
where the coryphaiose xpressesv ery tentativelyt he possibilityt hat Kreon may have been wrong
after all, that the gods may have wanted Polyneikes buried, that the burial may have been
theelaton (causedb y a god).31 Kreon's reply, that the gods are most unlikely to take care of the
impious sacrilegerw ho had intendedt o burn their shrines,a nd that they do not honour bad men,
would have sounded wholly reasonable. (What Kreon-and, I suspect, the Athenian
audience-failed to see is that it was not Polyneikes who was at issue, but that a disturbanceo f
the cosmic order had taken place.)
Having started with this perfectly reasonablep resupposition,K reon reaches the rational
conclusion, that people opposed to him bribed the guards and had Polyneikes buried. In
Atheniane yes this would have sounded an eminently reasonableh ypothesis,e speciallys ince the
fear of conspiracya gainstt he politeia was a recurrentm otif in Atheniand emocracy (parodiedi n
e.g. Ar. Lys. 6 16-25)-no matter that the nature ofthepoliteia is different in the two cases; it is,
again, a case not of a simplistic' other', but of a complex relationshipc onstantlyc onstructeda nd
deconstructedw ithin the play. The alternativeh inted in vv. 257-8 and 278-9 deconstructedt he
dominant discoursei n the multivocal, polyphonic construct that was the Antigone. Antigone
never knew about this sign which, though ambiguous, may have given some support to her
otherwise illegitimate claim to be a source of value in opposition to the polis. For the direct
intervention of the gods through prophecy and other sign-revelationi s the ultimate religious
authority, the only source of religious authority transcendingt he polis discourse. Antigone's
31 On this passage cf. also H. D. F. Kitto, Forma nd understood how limited the scope of divine approval
meaningi n drama (London 1956) 153-5, who has not was here; cf. Burton (n. 30) 87.
This content downloaded from 137.140.1.131 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 15:32:00 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions