The Reality of the Principate in the Extant Tragedies of Seneca

Abstract

The attempts made by scholars to find allusions to specific historical events in Seneca's tragedies and establish a chronology for them on that basis have proved unsatisfactory. The aim of this thesis as stated in the introduction is to explore the possible political nature of the tragedies in a more general way, by 'demonstrating how various historical and political allusions and comment emerge from the context of the action within the drama'. For the actions in the tragedies may gloss events and experiences from Seneca's past, as well as contemporary situations. His viewpoint was not confined to only one principate, but spans his whole experience of the principate from Augustus onwards. However, it may be possible to regard certain tragedies as having been written after the death of Agrippina in 59 and even after 62, such as the Troades, Thyestes, Oedipus, Phoenissae and possibly the Agamemnon as well as the Hercules Oetaeus, if genuine, because in these plays there is reflected a greater degree of bitterness and disillusionment due to the author's increasing awareness of the limitations of the human capacity to influence events and to avert evil by political participation and his realisation that the acquisition and maintenance of power is inevitably bound up with crime and that for the participant there is no escape, save in renunciation and death. Such feelings as expressed more fully in the abovementioned plays are considered more appropriate to the late stage in his career, when his hopes and illusions, entertained before and during the 'Quinquennium Neronis', began to fall. The analysis of the plays is presented thematically in eight sections. Section A deals with the Usurper with Aegisthus and Lycus as examples. In the case of Aegisthus, his emergence as effective tyrant and dominant partner after the crime, his elevation to figure of stature and some resemblances of his way of proceeding in the Clytemnestra/Aegisthus scene to that of Gaius Silius are considered. His success is compared with the failure of the over-confident and rash Lycus, in whose usurpation various Sallustian influences have been explored. For Lycus' proposal of marriage and Megara's resistance, parallels have been drawn from Nero's relationship with Octavia, as reflected in Tac. A. XIV and the Octavia. A later dating than 54 has also been suggested. The other sections deal with clemency and cruelty as exemplified in the Troades, the consorts in Phaedra and Deianira, justice with reference to Theseus (Phaedra) and Creon (Medea) who may reflect certain negative aspects of Claudius. The figure of Oedipus is considered as an 'exemplum' of degeneration from kingship to tyranny with parallels drawn from the reign of Tiberius. Shared power and withdrawal are treated in the Thyestes and the Phoenissae, in which it is examined how far Thyestes and Polynices are free in making their choices and how far those choices are determined by factors outside their control. These factors, particularly in the case of Polynices, are related to Seneca's own experience on his withdrawal from Nero's court. Section H deals with Hercules. In the hero of the Furens, the focus has been on the fragility of his greatness, and his reduction to the same level as Lycus through the violence practiced throughout his career. The various levels on which Juno may be interpreted is also discussed. The liberator in Hercules is compared with the four Emperors from Tiberius to Nero, who were welcomed as liberators from the tyranny of their predecessors but who quickly had recourse to tyranny, particularly in the case of Gaius, whose aspirations to divinity in his own lifetime find a mythic parallel in the Senecan Hercules' own crazed aspirations to an immediate assumption of divine prerogatives. The possible influence of Seneca's experience under that Emperor is suggested for the characterization of Hercules. Lastly, the Hercules Oetaeus is accepted as possibly genuine or only partly so. The hero's release from pain and his tormenting passions and his serene acceptance of his destiny is related to Seneca's own acceptance of his destiny and the serenity with which he faced his own death. Other influences have been taken into account, such as the influence of Greek tragedy, the post-classical development of tragedy and Roman declamation etc. Parallels have also been drawn from the modern tragedians, Shakespeare, Corneille, Racine and Alfieri.