Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-5kfdg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-23T20:48:55.322Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aeschylus and the unity of opposites*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 February 2012

Richard Seaford
Richard Seaford
Affiliation:
University of Exeter
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The idea of the ‘unity of opposites’ allows one to see important connections between phenomena normally treated separately: verbal style, ritual, tragic action and cosmology. The stylistic figure of Satzparallelismus in lamentation and mystic ritual expresses the unity of opposites (particularly of life and death) as oxymora. Both rituals were factors in the genesis of tragedy, and continued to influence the style and action of mature tragedy. The author advances new readings of various passages of the Oresteia, which is seen to advocate the replacement of a Herakleitean model of the unity of opposites with a Pythagorean model of their reconciliation.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 123 , November 2003 , pp. 141 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexiou, M. (1974) The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition (Cambridge)Google Scholar
Bethe, E. (1922) Homer: Dichtung und Sage, 2: Odyssee, Kyklos, Zeitbestimmung (Leipzig and Berlin)Google Scholar
Fehling, D. (1969) Die Wiederholungsfiguren und ihr Gebrauch bei den Griechen vor Gorgias (Berlin)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fridh-Haneson, B. (1987) ‘Votive terracottas from Italy’, in Linders, T. and Nordquist, G. (eds), Gifts to the Gods (Uppsala) 67–75Google Scholar
Gagarin, M. (1976) Aeschylean Drama (Berkeley)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, G. (1885) Die Sprache als Kunst 2 (Berlin)Google Scholar
Girard, R. (1977) Violence and the Sacred (Baltimore) (tr. of La Violence et le Sacré, Paris 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldhill, S. (1986) Reading Greek Tragedy (Cambridge)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldhill, S. (2000) ‘Civic ideology and the problem of difference: the politics of Athenian tragedy, once again’, JHS 120, 34–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthrie, W.K.C. (1962) A History of Greek Philosophy 1 (Cambridge)Google Scholar
Huffman, C.A. (1993) Philolaos of Croton (Cambridge)Google Scholar
Kingsley, P. (1995) Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic. Empedocles and the Pythagorean Tradition (Oxford)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laks, A. and Most, G.W. (1997) Studies in the Derveni Papyrus (Oxford)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorimer, H.L. (1950) Homer and the Monuments (London)Google Scholar
Moreau, A. (1985) Eschyle. La Violence et le Chaos (Paris)Google Scholar
Most, G. (1997) ‘The fire next time’, JHS 107, 117–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norden, E. (1915) Die Antike Kunstprosa (3rd edn, Stuttgart)Google Scholar
Norden, E. (1923) Agnostos Theos (2nd edn, Stuttgart)Google Scholar
Riedweg, C. (1998) ‘Initiation – Tod – Unterwelt’, in Graf, F. (ed.), Ansichten griechischer Rituale (Stuttgart and Leipzig) 359–98Google Scholar
Rösler, W. (1970) Reflexe vorsokratischen Denkens bei Aischylos (Meisenheim am Glan)Google Scholar
Rutherford, I. (1994-1995) ‘Apollo in ivy. The tragic paean’, Arion 3.1, 115–35Google Scholar
Sale, W.M. (1987) ‘The formularity of the place-phrases in the Iliad’, TAPA 117, 21–50Google Scholar
Schefer, C. (2000) ‘“Nur für Eingeweihte!” Heraklit und die Mysterien’, AA 46, 46–75Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (1984) ‘The last bath of Agamemnon’, CQ 34, 247–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seaford, R. (1986) ‘Immortality, salvation and the elements’, HSCP 90, 1–26Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (1987) ‘The tragic wedding’, JHS 107, 106–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seaford, R. (1989) ‘Homeric and tragic sacrifice’, TAPA 119, 87–95Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (1994a) Reciprocity and Ritual (Oxford)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seaford, R. (1994b) ‘Sophokles and the Mysteries’, Hermes 122, 275–88Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (1995) ‘Historicising tragic ambivalence: the vote of Athena’, in Goff, B. (ed.), History, Tragedy, Theory (Austin) 202–21Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (1996) Euripides Bacchae (Warminster)Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (1998) ‘Tragic money’, JHS 108, 119–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seaford, R. (2004) Money and the Early Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy (Cambridge)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipp, G.P. (1972) Studies in the Language of Homer (2nd edn, Cambridge)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, W.B. (1939) Ambiguity in Greek Literature (Oxford)Google Scholar
Taplin, O. (1978) Greek Tragedy in Action (London)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, G. (1953) ‘From religion to philosophy’, JHS 73, 77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, G. (1966) The Oresteia of Aeschylus (Prague)Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1970) ‘Equality and justice in early Greek cosmologies’, in Furley, D.J. and Allen, R.E. (eds), Studies in Presocratic Philosophy (London) 1.56–91Google Scholar
West, M.L. (1983) The Orphic Poems (Oxford)Google Scholar
West, M.L. (1990) Studies in Aeschylus (Stuttgart)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuntz, G. (1971) Persephone (Oxford)Google Scholar