GREEK TRAGEDY IN NEW TRANSLATIONS general editors Peter Burian and Alan Shapiro founding general editor William Arrowsmith former general editor Herbert Golder THE COMPLETE AESCHYLUS, VOLUME II This page intentionally left blank The Complete Aeschylus, Volume II Persians and Other Plays Edited by PETER BURIAN and ALAN SHAPIRO 1 2009 3 OxfordUniversityPress,Inc.,publishesworksthatfurther OxfordUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellence inresearch,scholarship,andeducation. Oxford NewYork Auckland CapeTown DaresSalaam HongKong Karachi KualaLumpur Madrid Melbourne MexicoCity Nairobi NewDelhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto Withofficesin Argentina Austria Brazil Chile CzechRepublic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore SouthKorea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam PersiansCopyrightq1981byJanetLembkeandC.JohnHerington PrometheusBoundCopyrightq1975byJamesScully SevenagainstThebesCopyrightq1973byAnthonyHechtandHelenBacon SuppliantsCopyrightq1975byJanetLembke CompilationCopyrightq2009byOxfordUniversityPress,Inc. PublishedbyOxfordUniversityPress,Inc. 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016 www.oup.com OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPress Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced, storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans, electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording,orotherwise, withoutthepriorpermissionofOxfordUniversityPress. LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData Aeschylus. [Selections.English.2009] Persiansandotherplays/editedbyPeterBurianandAlanShapiro. p. cm.—(ThecompleteAeschylus;v.2) (TheGreektragedyinnewtranslations) Includesbibliographicalreferences. ISBN978-0-19-537337-0;978-0-19-537328-8(pbk.) 1.Aeschylus—TranslationsintoEnglish. I.Burian,Peter,1943– II.Shapiro,Alan,1952– III.Title. PA3827.A2B872009 882'.01—dc22 2008039935 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica EDITORS’ FOREWORD ‘‘TheGreekTragedyinNewTranslationsisbasedontheconviction that poets like Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides can only be properlyrenderedbytranslatorswhoarethemselvespoets.Scholars may,itistrue,produceusefulandperceptiveversions.Butourmost urgent present need is for a re-creation of these plays—as though theyhadbeenwritten,freshlyandgreatly,bymastersfullyathome intheEnglishofourowntimes.’’ With these words, the late William Arrowsmith announced the purposeofthisseries,andweintendtohonorthatpurpose.Aswas trueofmostofthevolumesthatbegantoappearinthe1970s—first under Arrowsmith’s editorship, later in association with Herbert Golder—those for whichwe bear editorial responsibility are prod- uctsofclosecollaborationsbetweenpoetsandscholars.Webelieve (as Arrowsmith did) that the skills of both are required for the difficultanddelicatetaskoftransplantingthesemagnificentspeci- mensofanothercultureintothesoilofourownplaceandtime,to do justice both to their deep differences from our patterns of thought and expression and to their palpable closeness to our most intimate concerns. Above all, we are eager to offer contem- poraryreadersdramaticpoemsthatconveyasvividlyanddirectlyas possible the splendor of language, the complexity of image and idea, and the intensity of emotion and originals. This entails, among much else, the recognition that the tragedies were meant for performance—as scripts for actors—to be sung and danced as wellasspoken.Itdemandswritingofinventiveness,clarity,music- ality, and dramatic power. By such standards, we ask that these translationsbejudged. v EDITORS’ FOREWORD Thisseriesisalsodistinguishedbyitsrecognitionoftheneedof nonspecialistreadersforacriticalintroductioninformedbythebest recentscholarship,butwrittenclearlyandwithoutcondescension. Each play is followed by notes designed not only to elucidate obscure references but also to mediate the conventions of the Athenian stage as well as those features of the Greek text that might otherwise go unnoticed. The notes are supplemented by a glossary of mythical and geographical terms that should make it possible to read the plays without turning elsewhere for basic information. Stage directions are sufficiently ample to aid readers inimaginingtheactionastheyread.Ourfondesthope,ofcourse,is that these versions will be staged not only in the minds of their readers but also in the theaters to which, after so many centuries, theystillbelong. anoteontheseriesformat A series such as this requires a consistent format. Different translators, with individual voices and approaches to the material at hand, cannot be expected to develop a single coherent style for each of the three tragedians, much less make clear to modern readers that, despite the differences among the tragedians them- selves, the plays share many conventions and a generic, or period, style. But they can at least share a common format and provide similar forms of guidance to the reader. 1. SpellingofGreeknames Orthography is one area of difference among the translations that requires a brief explanation. Historically, it has been com- mon practice to use Latinized forms of Greek names when bringing them into English. Thus, for example, Oedipus (not Oidipous) and Clytemnestra (not Klutaimestra) are customary in English. Recently, however, many translators have moved toward more precise transliteration, which has the advantage of presenting the names as both Greek and new, instead of Roman and neoclassical importations into English. In the case of so familiar a name as Oedipus, however, transliteration risks the appearance of pedantry or affectation. And in any case, perfect consistency cannot be expected in such matters. Readers will feel the same discomfort with ‘‘Athenai’’ as the vi EDITORS’ FOREWORD chief city of Greeceastheywouldwith‘‘Platon’’astheauthorof TheRepublic. The earlier volumes in this series adopted as a rule a ‘‘mixed’’ orthographyinaccordancewiththeconsiderationsoutlinedabove. ThemostfamiliarnamesretaintheirLatinateforms,whiletherest are transliterated; -os rather than Latin -us is adopted for the ter- mination of masculine names, and Greek diphthongs (as in Iphi- geneiaforLatinIphigenia)areretained.Someofthelatervolumes continuethispractice,butwheretranslatorshavepreferredtousea moreconsistentpracticeoftransliterationofLatinization,wehave honoredtheirwishes. 2. Stagedirections The ancient manuscripts of the Greek plays do not supply stage directions (though the ancient commentators often provide infor- mationrelevanttostaging,delivery,‘‘blocking,’’etc.).Hencestage directions must be inferred from words and situations and our knowledgeofGreektheatricalconventions.Atbestthisisaticklish anduncertainprocedure.Butitissurelypreferablethatgoodstage directions should be provided by the translator than that readers shouldbelefttotheirowndevicesinvisualizingaction,gesture,and spectacle.Ancienttragedywasaustereand‘‘distanced’’bymeansof masks, which means that the reader must not expect the detailed intimacy (‘‘He shrugs and turns wearily away,’’ ‘‘She speaks with deliberate slowness, as though to emphasize the point,’’ etc.) that characterizesstagedirectionsinmodernnaturalisticdrama. 3. Numberingoflines For the convenience of the reader who may wish to check the translation against the original, or vice versa, the lines have been numberedaccordingtoboththeGreekandEnglishtexts.Thelines of the translation have been numbered in multiples of ten, and thesenumbershavebeensetintheright-handmargin.The(inclu- sive) Greek numeration will be found bracketed at the top of the page. The Notes that follow the text have been keyed to both numerations,thelinenumbersofthetranslationinbold,followed bytheGreeklinesinregulartype,andthesameconventionisused forallreferencestospecificpassages(ofthetranslatedplaysonly)in boththeNotesandtheIntroduction. vii EDITORS’ FOREWORD ReaderswilldoubtlessnotethatinmanyplaystheEnglishlines outnumbertheGreek,buttheyshouldnotthereforeconcludethat the translator has been unduly prolix. In most cases the reason is simply that the translator has adopted the free-flowing norms of modern Anglo-American prosody, with its brief-breath-and-em- phasis-determined lines, and its habit of indicating cadence and caesuras by line length and setting rather than by conventional punctuation.Evenwheretranslatorshavepreferredtocastdialogue inmoreregularfive-beatorsix-beatlines,thegreatercompactness ofGreekdictionislikelytoresultinasubstantialdisparityinGreek andEnglishnumerations. aboutthetranslations Thetranslationsinthisserieswerewrittenoveraperiodofroughly fortyyears.Noattempthasbeenmadetoupdatereferencestothe scholarly literature in the Introductions and Notes, but each vol- ume offers a brief For Further Reading listthat will provide some initial orientation to contemporary critical thinking about the tra- gediesitcontains. thisvolume The seven surviving plays of Aeschylus amount to less than one- tenthofwhathewrote,atleasttojudgebythetitlesandfragments that have come down to us—and one of the survivors may not be his. Nevertheless, we can consider ourselves lucky to have one complete trilogy, the Oresteia, and the group of four very fine dramasthatmakeupthisvolume. Theearliestisalsothemostunusual,inthatithasasubjectbased on contemporary history rather than the distant, legendary past. AeschyluswasalmostcertainlyatthebattleofSalamishedescribes sovividlyinPersians,whichwasperformedonlyeightyearsafterthe event, when Athenians’ memories were still fresh.The most inter- esting thing about the play, however, is not its documentation of realevents,butitstransformationofthoseeventsintoatrueGreek tragedy, of history into myth. Thus, for example, the ghost of the previous Persian king, Darius, whom the chorus invokes as a king ‘‘who brought no evil’’ (1064 / 1071) despite the Persian disaster at Marathon, appears as a kind of idealized god-king, the legendary heroofanearlierandbettertime.Aeschylusiscreatingnotmerely viii EDITORS’ FOREWORD anaccountofhowbutalsoanexplanationofwhyXerxes’attemptto subjugatetheGreekscametogrief. The explanation involves the same sequence of human over- reaching and divine chastisement that appears again and again in tragic myth. Scholars have debated whether Aeschylus’ choice of telling this tale entirely from the point of view of the defeated Persians creates sympathy for the enemy’s suffering, or whether it is designed to honor the Greeks’ defeat of a supposedly invincible enemy. The two need not, of course, be entirely exclusive. In any case,weshouldnotethattheplaydefinestheGreeksaseverything the Persians are not, while at the same time it sounds a warning about the fate that could be theirs should they succumb, as the Persiansdid,tooverweeningambition. SevenagainstThebes,producedfiveyearsafterPersians,isalsoa war play—‘‘full of Ares,’’ says the character Aeschylus proudly in Aristophanes’comicFrogs.Yet,likePersians,itfocusesonthefear andsufferingwarbringsratherthanongloryandvictory.Thisisthe third play of a trilogy that traced the fate of the royal house of Thebesthroughthreegenerations,fromLaiostoOedipustoOedi- pus’children.InSeven,Oedipus’curseofhissonsisfulfilledwhen theydieateachother’shands,butthecityofThebesissavedfrom destruction. Attheheartofthisdramaisthe‘‘shieldscene,’’asetofsevenpairs of speeches in which a scout tells Eteokles which Argive com- manderhasbeenstationedateachofThebes’sevengates,describ- ing the blazons on each of their shields. Eteokles responds by appointingaThebancaptaintodefendeachgate.Onlyattheend ofthisprocess,whenEteokleshearsthathisbrotherPolyneiceswill attacktheseventhgate,doeshedecidethathehimselfwilloppose him;andonly when hehas made thatdecision doesherecognize thathisfather’scursesarebeingaccomplished.Eteoklesisatonce the self-sacrificing defender of his city and the son whose choice fulfills the fate to which Oedipus consigned him along with his brother.Theclosingsceneoftheplay,inwhichThebes’magistrates refusePolyneices’burial,isconsideredbymostscholarstobealater addition to the play designed to harmonize it with Sophocles’ Antigone, perhaps on an occasion when the two plays were being performed together. As Hecht and Bacon point out in their Intro- duction,however,thesceneiswellintegratedintowhatprecedesit ix
Description: