HERCULES

N.B. The following notes are intended be read in conjunction with my earlier commentary on this play; I have tried, so far as possible, to avoid repeating here points made in the commentary.

Herc 20 The line is missing in A; E preserves it in the unmetrical form Thebana tellus nuribus sparsa impiis. The reasons for my conjectural replacement of sparsa with aspersa, which mends the metre with min- imal change to the text, are given at AJP 1981 66 and in my comm.1 Two conjectures have since been published. Axelson through Zw. proposed Thebana tellus matribus sparsa impiis, which he intended in the sense “stained with blood by an impious mother,” viz. Agave (with matribus as a generalising plural).2 Critics have rightly found this ellipse of cruore difficult (Hudson-Williams 1989 236, Watt 1996 248, Bill. ad loc.). Further, matribus in this line and this passage would inevitably be understood as referring to the mothers of Jupiter’s bas- tards, not to Pentheus’ mother. Consequently at 1989 246 I sug- gested that the words of Axelson’s conjecture would more naturally carry the sense, “scattered with ungodly mothers.” These “mothers” would be women made so by Jupiter (Alcmene, Semele, Antiope), called impiae by Juno for their flouting of her (as she sees it). This forceful use of “mothers” would be characteristic of Sen.’s pointed style, and could well have given rise to nuribus as a gloss or intended correction. The reference to the women as “mothers” also gives spe- cial point to Juno’s reference to herself as “stepmother” to their offspring (21). (Similarly Juno complains about Semele, mater—quod vix mihi contigit—uno/de Iove vult fieri,Ov. Met. 3.269f.). Though these

1 A complete statement of the stylistic and metrical objections to the rearrange- ment found in KQ, Thebana nuribus sparsa tellus impiis, will be found in those places. There I also give parallels for passive forms of aspergo used in the sense ‘strewn, scattered.’ 2 Zw. first explained matribus ...impiis as referring to all the impiae Cadmeides (758) who attacked Pentheus (KK ), but later as referring to Agave alone (Zw. 1987 83); subsequently he identified the latter as Axelson’s intention. 6 HERCULES women were not literally scattered through the land, but concen- trated in Thebes itself, one must allow for the misrepresentation and exaggeration of Senecan rhetoric, which can speak (e.g.) of Priam as “buried beneath his whole realm,” (Tro 30), and of Achilles as sparsus per omne caelitum regnum (Tro 345). Watt 1996 248 writes, “I think it probable that nuribus is a guess which has supplanted another word ending in -us omitted because of homoeoteleuton. There is no reason why the omitted word should have been one (like nuribus or matribus) denoting women; I think it may well have been caedibus.” These impiae caedes, Watt explains, could include those of Pentheus, Laius, Eteocles and Polynices, and the terrigenae (Ov. Met. 3.123). This conjecture gives additional significance to the otherwise vague phrase dira ac fera (19), but it seems less relevant to the context than either nuribus or matribus. Why should Sen. have had Juno elaborate here on the Theban tradition of familial murder? Once that question is asked, a possible answer suggests itself: the phrase could foreshadow a further impia caedes which will stain Thebes in the course of this play. But I am not confident that Sen. uses foreshadowing of this kind. When foreshadow- ing of the tragic outcome is unconscious, as it would be here, it usu- ally takes the form of ‘dramatic irony,’ in which the speaker’s statement can be understood, or question answered, in a sense other than that envisaged by the speaker, e.g. 306–07, 613–15, 899, 938f., Med 25f. (with Gronovius’ comment on the last passage, quoted by Costa ad loc.). Since the pointed use of novercam in 21 is the rhetorical climax of the sentence, and since matribus (= mothers of Jupiter’s offspring) is the best preparation for it, I am inclined to accept Axelson’s con- jecture as reinterpreted above.

Herc 26 The context makes the traditional punctuation, with a comma at the end of the line, slightly preferable to Axelson’s question-mark. As Juno has conceded the heavens to her rivals (4), so she concedes (licet 21) the coming elevation of Alcmene and Hercules, which seems inevitable to her at this point. The phrasing of 27–29 suggests not a campaign with an immediate and specific goal, viz. to prevent their elevation, but rather a perpetual state of war, continuing after their ascent. The hope of preventing Hercules’s deification occurs to her only later in the prologue (121f.); for the development of her thought in this monologue, see pp. 115f. of my comm.