セネカ『ポエニッサエ』 : セネカの構想とテキストの性格について

概要

論文の詳細を見る
この論文は国立情報学研究所の学術雑誌公開支援事業により電子化されました。The text of Phoenissae consists of the following four scenes ; A (a) 1-319 Oedipus-Antigona scene (b) 320-362 nuntius-Oedipus-Antigona scene B (a) 363-442 Iocasta-satelles-Antigona scene (b) 443-664 Iocasta-Polynices-Eteocles scene These scenes were once considered as fragments or excerpts of a tragedy or two or more tragedies. But opinions about the nature of the text of Phoenissae seem nowadays to fall into two main groups, one which considers it as an unfinished text of a tragedy, the other as another type of text, that is, a text of a tragedy for recitation or a text of a Lesedrama. In either case, it is generally agreed that these scenes constitute as a whole a text of one work, be it a tragedy (for staging) or a tragedy for recitation or a Lesedrama. Those scholars who consider it as a text of an unfinished tragedy naturally conjecture from the text the whole construction and plot planned by Seneca of the unfinished tragedy, and almost all of them (e. g. Th. Hirschberg, Senecas Phoenissen, 1989, p. 7 ; I. Opelt, Zu Senecas Phoenissen, in, Senecas Tragoedien, 1972, p. 284) suppose the developement of events or the plot after B(supposed as act 111) is the same as that of Euripides' Phoinissai, that is, that the battle between Eteocles' army and Polynices' begins and they fall in a duel, and then Iocasta commits suicide in the battlefield. But does the text permit such a supposition ? At 272ff. Oedipus mentions, for the first time in the text, the crime his sons will commit in the near future, which is the main theme of Phoenissae. He describes it as 'maius' (i. e. greater than his) in three places(272ff., 287, cf. 306 nocentior me), but does not reveal concretely what it is in this presaging scene A(a). In the next scene A(b), however, in which he lays curses upon his sons, what he meant by this 'maius (crimen)' becomes clear. His main and greatest curse is uttered in these words ; 'primus a thalamis meis /incipiat ignis.' (347), date arma matri' (358), both of which means one and the same thing('incipiat ignis' being a metonym), that is, the death, or rather, the murder (even if indirect) of their mother Iocasta. This is both the main theme (because her death and her sons' crime are two sides of the same coin) and the climax of the text, and events after this scene progress toward the realization of this curse of Oedipus. In the next scene B(a), in which Iocasta is requested by an attendant to 'be the barrier to stay unholy arms of her sons', her daughter Antigona also entreats her, 'aut solve bellum, mater, aut prima excipe' (406) This 'prima excipe' echoes that curse of Oedipus 'primus incipiat ignis' Iocasta's reply reechoes it again ; 'ibo, ibo・・petere qui fratrem volet, / petat ante matrem・・qui non est pius / incipiat a me' (407-14) Determined, in this way, to sacrifice her life, or rather, premediating suicide(cf. 413-4), Iocasta hurries to the battlefield to dissuade her sons from the crime (of war and mutual killing). The opening words of Iocasta in the last scene B(b) are an announcement of her firm resolve to sacrifice her life or to commit suicide if her sons will not stop the war and mutual killing. She says, 'in me arma et ignes vertite... hunc petite ventrem... haec membra spargite ac divellite... si placuit scelus, maius paratum est' (443ff.) The curse of Oedipus was also 'maius' (272, 287, cf. 353), 'ignis' (347) and 'arma' (358). Again and again the effect of the magical charm of his curse is manifested. And the brothers reject her dissuasion. The text ends with Eteocles' merciless words 'imperia pretio quolibet constant bene.' What can be supposed to happen then? It is inevitable, we think. Iocasta should commit suicide before, not after, her sons begin war and mutual killing, just as Oedipus cursed 'primus incipiat' and Antigona entreated 'prima' and she herself determined firmly 'ante', 'incipiat', 'maius paratum', and despite her death, the brothers go on to war for imperium, trampling over their mother's corpse, in a sense, and crossing over a pool of their mother's blood (cf. tuo cruori per meum fiet via. 476). Is this-Iocasta's suicide before her sons' war and mutual killing-not both Seneca's plan and his invention? Seneca seems to be fond of this kind of motif of 'suicide of protest or condemnation' in persuasion-or dissuasion-scenes (cf. Phaedra 250ff., Hercules Furens 1301ff., and esp. Oedipus 1004ff., where Seneca, changing the famous Sophoclean plot, makes Iocasta commit suicide on the stage ). We think Seneca must have carried out his plan, which can be read clearly from the text, and inserted 'Iocasta's suicide before her sons' war and mutual killing' -scene or -speech just after the end of B(b)(i. e. in the supposed third act), if he had tried to write a text of a tragedy for staging. As it is, the extant last scene B(b) lacks it. Why did Seneca not add it? Our conclusion is that the text of Phoenissae is not a text of a tragedy for staging, but such 'a written text for recitation or dramatized reading' as is suggested by E. Fantham (Seneca's Troades, 1982, p. 48), in other words, a text as a prototype of Senecan tragedies, and the uniqueness and incompleteness of Phoenissae come from the different nature of the text.
京都大学の論文
1996-03-31

著者

大西英文
神戸市外国語大学

セネカ『ポエニッサエ』 : セネカの構想とテキストの性格について

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク