Rhetorical Tragedy: The Logic of Declamation David Konstan In a recent dissertation that takes the form of a commentary on the first 705 verses of the Hercules Oetaeus “attributed to Seneca,” Lucia Degiovanni remarks of the prologue recited by Hercules (more precisely, of the “monologic section,” that is, verses 1–98 addressed to Jupiter or to the cosmos in general): “it has been considered, by those who maintain that the work is not authen- tic, to be a cento of passages from Seneca’s tragedies (in particular, of the Hercules Furens), bloated and needlessly repetitive,” and she adds: “in fact a certain redundancy is undeniable in Hercules’ boasting about his own labors,” and she notes that he mentions his descent to Hades and the abduction of the dog Cerberus no fewer than four times (13–14, 23–24, 46–48, 79). Nevertheless, Degiovanni argues, “it is possible to identify a coherent rhetorical pattern in Hercules’ speech.” She divides it into four sections, each of which has two parts: first, a recollection of his labors, and second, a demand for his divinization. What is more, the four segments exhibit a progression, according to which the first part, on his merits, expands and becomes more extravagant as his attitude increasingly bears the stamp of hybris.1 This movement is not without a larger purpose, according to Degiovanni. For if Hercules emerges clearly as a bene- factor of humanity, his oration nevertheless reveals his arrogance, which is precisely the reason why he cannot yet gain admission to heaven: “Only when, through his struggle with physical pain, he succeeds in acquiring the greatness 1 Degiovanni (2010): “La sezione monologica (1–98) è stata considerata, da quanti sostengono la non autenticità dell’opera, come un centone di passi di tragedie senecane (in particolare dell’Hercules Furens), ampolloso e inutilmente ripetitivo (cfr. da ultimo ZWIERLEIN 1986, pp. 314–318). In effetti è innegabile una certa ridondanza nel vanto delle proprie imprese, da parte di Ercole: alla sola discesa nell’Ade e al rapimento del cane Cerbero si fa riferimento ben quattro volte (13–14, 23–24, 46–48, 79). È possibile tuttavia individuare uno schema retorico coerente nel discorso di Ercole. La perorazione della sua causa può essere suddivisa in quattro sezioni, ciascuna delle quali s’articola in due momenti consecutivi: (a) rievocazi- one delle imprese compiute; (b) richiesta di divinizzazione. Queste quattro sequenze sono a loro volta disposte secondo una climax, che procede verso una sempre maggiore espansione della parte dedicata alla rivendicazione dei propri meriti, con un atteggiamento sempre più improntato all’hybris da parte dell’eroe” (129–30). Degiovanni indicates the four sections and their subdivisions are as follows: I (a) 1–7a; (b) 7b–13a; II (a) 13b–30a; (b) 30b–33: III (a) 34–64a; (b) 64b–78: IV (a) 79–91; (b) 92–99. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���5 | doi ��.��63/9789004�84784_007 David Konstan - 9789004284784 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 06:12:42PM via free access 106 Konstan and imperturbability of the Stoic sapiens will he be ready for apotheosis,” as happens in the finale of the play.2 Degiovanni’s analysis is ingenious and plausible, and makes good sense of the theme of the play; it exhibits the sophisticated construction of the speech, without regard to whether the tragedy is in fact by Seneca or an imitator (as Degiovanni herself is inclined to believe). I wish here to attend, however, to what we may call the micro-structure of the rhetoric, the small moves and transitions that give the style its coruscating quality. Seneca, as I will call the author (understand “pseudo-Seneca” if you prefer), makes heavy demands on the spectators or readers, who are required to fill in information and make con- nections on their own. This is in line with the expectations of active reading that was characteristic of classical literature generally, but Seneca is particu- larly adept at exploiting the technique.3 In what follows, I will take a jeweler’s loupe to the prologue of the play, which runs for some 103 verses. We may begin by examining the opening verses of the prologue (1–17):4 {Herc.} Sator deorum, cuius excussum manu utraeque Phoebi sentiunt fulmen domus, secure regna: protuli pacem tibi, quacumque Nereus porrigi terras vetat. non est tonandum; perfidi reges iacent, 5 saevi tyranni. fregimus quidquid fuit tibi fulminandum. sed mihi caelum, parens, adhuc negatur. parui certe Ioue ubique dignus teque testata est meum patrem noverca. quid tamen nectis moras? 10 numquid timemur? numquid impositum sibi non poterit Atlas ferre cum caelo Herculem? quid astra, genitor, quid negas? mors me tibi certe remisit, omne concessit malum 2 “Ercole è sì il benefattore dell’umanità, ma la perorazione stessa che egli pronuncia per otte- nere la divinizzazione mette a nudo la sua arroganza e rivela allo spettatore il motivo per cui egli non può, al momento attuale, essere ammesso in cielo. Solo quando, attraverso la lotta con il dolore fisico, riuscirà ad assumere la grandezza e l’imperturbabilità del sapiens stoico, sarà pronto per l’apoteosi” (130). 3 On the active role of readers in classical antiquity, cf. Konstan (2006), (2009), (2010) and Johnson (2010). 4 All translations of Seneca are my own, and taken from my forthcoming versions of the two Hercules plays in the Chicago edition of the complete works of Seneca in translation. David Konstan - 9789004284784 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 06:12:42PM via free access Rhetorical Tragedy: The Logic of Declamation 107 quod terra genuit, pontus aer inferi: 15 nullus per urbes errat Arcadias leo, Stymphalis icta est, Maenali nulla est fera. {Herc.} You who sowed the gods, whose lightning, launched from your hand, both houses of the Sun perceive, you may rule safely now: I’ve pushed peace forward for you to wheresoever the Sea prevents the land’s extending. No need to thunder: treacherous kings, cruel tyrants, 5 are laid low. I have smashed whatever deserved to be blasted with lightening. But heaven, Father, is still denied me. Surely I have shown myself worthy of Jupiter everywhere, and that you are my father she—my stepmother—testifies. Why do you weave delays? 10 Am I feared? Will Atlas be unable to uphold heaven if Hercules as well is loaded on him? Why, father, why deny me still the stars? Surely death5 has released me to you: every evil has surrendered that earth or sea or hell has sired. 15 No Arcadian lion prowls through cities, the Stymphalian bird’s been shot, there’s no Maenalian beast. The invocation to Jupiter opens with the formula, Sator deorum or “father of the gods” (or “of gods”). The expression is less common than “father of gods and men”,6 but the abbreviated form is not without purpose: if Jupiter is father of gods, and is the father as well of Hercules, it follows that Hercules ought to be a god (so Degiovanni ad 1), which is just the status that he is about to claim. Jupiter is then presented in his capacity as master of lightning, his principal attribute: it is perceived where Phoebus, that is, the sun, rises and where he ends his daily journey. The metonymy of Phoebus as the sun keeps the focus on the gods and their place in the heavens, as opposed to the earth, whence Hercules speaks; but it is worth noting that Apollo, too, is a son of Jupiter, and he is in the sky, whether we identify Apollo with the sun or think of him in his usual character as the bow-bearing, lyre-playing young deity. If this offspring of Jupiter has his domain among the stars, why not Hercules? 5 Perhaps a reference to the underworld, which Hercules visited and survived, but looking for- ward to his own death as well. 6 Cf. Virgil Aeneid 1.254 = 11.725 hominum sator atque deorum; Phaedrus Fables 3.17.10 deorum genitor atque hominum sator. David Konstan - 9789004284784 Downloaded from Brill.com09/29/2021 06:12:42PM via free access 108 Konstan This much is familiar, but the next verse introduces a surprise: secure regna, “reign secure” (secure is vocative). Although Jupiter’s thunderbolts are a sign of his power, suddenly they seem to have defensive function, as though what happens on earth could threaten his rule. It turns out that Hercules’ activi- ties in this world have in fact served to protect his father, inasmuch as he has provided peace for Jupiter the world over, or, as Seneca phrases it, wherever Nereus sets a limit to land. Once again, as with Phoebus, there is metonymy, this time with Nereus standing for the sea or perhaps for the river Ocean, which embraces the world; and once again, it is not without significance. The eleventh chore that the tyrant Eurystheus assigned to Hercules, in addition to the original ten (because he had assistance in the execution of two of them: cf. Apollodorus Library 2.5.2, 2.5.5, 2.5.11), was to fetch the golden apples of the Hesperides, a task that Hercules himself soon mentions in his catalogue of his labors (alluded to rather cryptically in 18: sparsit peremptus aureum serpens nemus, The dragon’s killed, spattering his golden grove). As he marched to ful- fill the order, he encountered Nereus, of whom he inquired about the loca- tion of the Hesperides. When Nereus refused to instruct him, Hercules held him fast, despite his shape-shifting, until he finally released the information.7 Nereus, the ancestor of the sea nymphs or Nereids, is one of the lesser nature deities who do not have their dwelling on Olympus; that Hercules defeated him in the course of one of his labors is again a sign of his right to claim a place among the stars.