Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-17T00:15:10.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Writing and self-conscious mythopoiēsis in Euripides*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2012

Isabelle Torrance
Isabelle Torrance
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Euripides uses a variety of strategies to draw attention to the novelties in his dramatic myth-creation or mythopoiēsis. He does so, for example, through multiple allusions to earlier poets, distinguishing himself from predecessors by acknowledging their influence while simultaneously producing something distinctive. Euripidean novelties are legitimized in several instances through cultic aetiologies. These aspects of Euripidean drama have long been acknowledged. More recently, Matthew Wright has shown how the characters in several Euripidean plays discuss their own myths in a self-conscious manner, a process he terms ‘metamythology’. A technique which has been less studied, however, is Euripides' exploration of the motif of writing and its connection to the act of mythopoiēsis within his work. Scholars who discuss writing in Euripides have done so either within the general context of inherent tensions between oral and written communication in Greek tragedy (or Greek literature), or have focused on the use of letters as dramatic devices. This paper argues that Euripides exploits the motif of writing in a way which is entirely different from the other tragedians, and puts forward the central thesis that writing in Euripides is associated self-consciously and metapoetically with plot construction and authorial control.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Cambridge Classical Journal , Volume 56 , 2010 , pp. 213 - 258
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WORKS CITED

Aélion, R. (1983) Euripide: héritier d'Eschyle (2 vols), Paris.Google Scholar
Austin, C. and Olson, S. D. (eds.) (2004) Aristophanes Thesmophoriazousae. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakewell, G. W. (2007) ‘Written lists of military personnel in classical Athens’, in Cooper, C. (ed.) The politics of orality, Leiden, 89–101.Google Scholar
Barber, E. J. W. (1992) ‘The peplos of Athena’, in Neils, J. (ed.) Goddess and polls: the panathenaic festival in ancient Athens, Princeton, 103–17.Google Scholar
Barrett, W. S. (ed.) (1964) Euripides: Hippolytos, Oxford.Google Scholar
Bernadete, S. (1968) ‘Two notes on Aeschylus' Septem’ (2nd part: Eteocles' interpretation of the shields), WS 81, 5–17.Google Scholar
Bond, G. (1974) ‘Euripides' parody of Aeschylus’, Hermathena 118, 1–14.Google Scholar
Borthwick, E. K. (1994) ‘New interpretations of Aristophanes Frogs 1249–1328’, Phoenix 48, 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosher, K. (2009) ‘Dreams and empty promises: some correspondences between Aeschylus' Clytemnestra and Euripides' Iphigenia’, CB 85, 1–15.Google Scholar
Bowie, E. (1993) ‘Lies, fiction and slander in early Greek poetry’, in Gill, C. and Wiseman, T. P. (eds.) Lies and fiction in the ancient world. Austin, 1–37.Google Scholar
Bowman, L. (1999) ‘Prophecy and authority in the Trachiniai’, AJP 120: 335–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burian, P. (1985) ‘Logos and pathos: the politics of the Suppliant Women’, in (id.) (ed.) Directions in Euripidean criticism, Durham, 129–55.Google Scholar
Burnett, A. P. (1971) Catastrophe survived: Euripides' plays of mixed reversal, Oxford.Google Scholar
Caldwell, R. (1974–1975) ‘Tragedy romanticized: the Iphigenia Taurica’, CJ 70, 23–40.Google Scholar
Cole, S. G. (1981) ‘Could Greek women read and write?’, in Foley, H. (ed.) Reflections of women in antiquity, New York, 219–45.Google Scholar
Collard, C. (1972) ‘The funeral oration in Euripides' Supplices’, BICS 19, 39–53.Google Scholar
Collard, C. (ed.) (1975) Euripides: Supplices (2 vols), Groningen.Google Scholar
Collard, C. (ed.) (1991) Euripides: Hecuba. Warminster.Google Scholar
Collard, C. (ed.) (2004) ‘Antiope’, in Collard, C., Cropp, M. J., Gibert, J. (eds.) Euripides: selected fragmentary plays II, Oxford, 259–329.Google Scholar
Collard, C. and Cropp, M. J. (eds.) (2008) Euripides: Fragments (2 vols), Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Conacher, D. J. (1956) ‘Religious and ethical attitudes in Euripides' Suppliants’, TAPA 87, 8–26.Google Scholar
Cropp, M. J. (1986) ‘Heracles, Electra and the Odyssey’, in Cropp, M. J., Fantham, E., Scully, S. E (eds.) Greek tragedy and its legacy, Calgary, 187–99.Google Scholar
Cropp, M. J. (ed.) (2000) Euripides: Iphigenia in Tauris. Warminster.Google Scholar
Csapo, E. (2007) ‘The men who built the theatres: theatropolai, theatronai, and arkhitektones’, in Wilson, P. (ed.) The Greek theatre and festivals: documentary studies, Oxford, 87–115.Google Scholar
Dällenbach, L. (1989) The mirror in the text (tr. Whiteley, J. with Hughes, E.), Chicago [first published in French in 1977].Google Scholar
Davies, M. (ed.) (1991) Sophocles: Trachiniae, Oxford.Google Scholar
Dawson, S. (1997) ‘The theatrical audience in fifth-century Athens: numbers and status’, Prudentia 29, 1–14.Google Scholar
Derrida, J. (1981) Dissemination (tr. Johnson, B.), Chicago [first published in French in 1972].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diggle, J. (ed.) (1994) Euripidis fabulae III, Oxford.Google Scholar
Dinsmoor, W. (1951) ‘The Athenian theater of the fifth century’ in Mylonas, G. (ed.) Studies presented to David Moore Robinson, vol. 1, St. Louis, 309–30.Google Scholar
Dobrov, G. W. (1993) ‘The tragic and the comic Tereus’, AJP 114, 189–234.Google Scholar
Dobrov, G. W. (2001) Figures of play: Greek drama and metafictional poetics, Oxford.Google Scholar
Easterling, P. (ed.) (1982) Sophocles: Trachiniae, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Easterling, P. (ed.) (1985) ‘Anachronism in Greek tragedy’, JHS 105, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faraone, C. A. (1991) ‘The agonistic context of early Greek binding spells’ in Faraone, C. A. and Obbink, D. (eds.) Magika Hiera: ancient Greek magic and religion, Oxford, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelberg, M. (1998) The birth of literary fiction in ancient Greece, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finley, M. (1978) The world of Odysseus, New York.Google Scholar
Fitton, J. W. (1961) ‘The Suppliant Women and the Herakleidai of Euripides’, Hermes 89, 430–61.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, D. and Sommerstein, A. H. S. (eds.) (2006) ‘Tereus’, in Sommerstein, A. H., Fitzpatrick, D., Talboy, T. (eds.) Sophocles: selected fragmentary plays I, Oxford, 141–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, J. (2000) Review of Wise, J. (1998), Phoenix 54, 146–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, J. (2009) ‘Weaving women's tales in Euripides' Ion’, in Cousland, J. R. C. and Hume, J. R. (eds.) The play of texts and fragments: essays in honour of Martin Cropp, Leiden, 127–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, H. (1985) Ritual irony: poetry and sacrifice in Euripides, Ithaca.Google Scholar
Foley, H. (2001) Female acts in Greek tragedy, Princeton.Google Scholar
Ford, A. (2002) The origins of criticism: literary culture and poetic theory in classical Greece, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, A. (2003) ‘From letters to literature: reading the “song culture” of classical Greece’, in Yunis, H. (ed.) Written texts and the rise of literate culture in ancient Greece, Cambridge, 15–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagarin, M. (2008) Writing Greek law, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, R. (2003) ‘Making the stronger argument the weaker: Euripides, Electra 518–44’, CQ 53, 401–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gantz, T. (1993) Early Greek myth: a guide to literary and artistic sources, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Garner, R. (1990) From Homer to tragedy: the art of allusion in Greek poetry, London.Google Scholar
Gellie, G. (1981) ‘Tragedy and Euripides' Electra’, BICS 28, 1–12.Google Scholar
Gera, D. (2003) Ancient Greek ideas on speech, language and civilization, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibert, J. (1995) Change of mind in Greek tragedy, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Gibert, J. (1997) ‘Euripides' Hippolytus plays: which came first?’, CQ 47, 85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibert, J. (2005) ‘Clytemnestra's first marriage: Euripides' Iphigenia in Aulis’, in Pedrick, V. and Oberhelman, S. M. (eds.) The soul of tragedy: essays on Athenian drama, Chicago, 227–48.Google Scholar
Goette, H. R. (2007) ‘An archaeological appendix’ to Csapo, (2007) 116–21.Google Scholar
Goff, B. (1990) The noose of words: readings of desire, violence, and language in Euripides' Hippolytos, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goff, B. (1991) ‘The sign of the fall: the scars of Orestes and Odysseus’, CA 10, 259–67.Google ScholarPubMed
Goldhill, S. (1986) Reading Greek tragedy, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldhill, S. (1991) The poet's voice: essays on poetics and Greek literature, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gregory, J. (ed.) (1999) Euripides: Hecuba, Atlanta.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. (1990) ‘Characterization in Euripides: Hippolytus and Iphigenia in Aulis’, in Pelling, C. B. R. (ed.) Characterization and individuality in Greek literature, Oxford, 128–47.Google Scholar
Griffiths, E. (2007) ‘Fighting the future: Euripidean letters and Thucydides' Athens’, in Cooper, C. (ed.) The politics of orality, Leiden, 277–91.Google Scholar
Gurd, S. A. (2005) Iphigenias at Aulis: textual multiplicity, radical philology, Ithaca.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, E. (1989) Inventing the barbarian: Greek self-definition through tragedy, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hall, E. (1997) ‘The sociology of Athenian tragedy’, in Easterling, P. (ed.) The Cambridge companion to Greek tragedy, Cambridge, 93–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, E. (2006) The theatrical cast of Athens: interactions between ancient Greek drama and society, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, N.G.L. (1984) ‘Spectacle and parody in Euripides' Electra’, GRBS 25, 373–87.Google Scholar
Harriott, R. (1969) Poetry and criticism before Plato, London.Google Scholar
Harris, E. M. (2004) ‘Antigone the lawyer, or the ambiguities of nomos’, in Harris, E. M. and Rubinstein, L. (eds.) Law and the courts in ancient Greece, London, 19–56.Google Scholar
Harris, W. V. (1989) Ancient literacy, Cambridge, Mass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havelock, E. A. (1980) ‘The oral composition of Greek drama’, QUCC 35: 61–113Google Scholar
[reprinted in Havelock, E. A. (1986) The Muse learns to write: reflections on orality and literacy Jrom antiquity to the present, New Haven, 261–313].Google Scholar
Henrichs, A. (2003) ‘Writing religion: inscribed texts, ritual authority, and the religious discourse of the polis’, in Yunis, H. (ed.) Written texts and the rise o literate culture in ancient Greece, Cambridge, 38–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, R. (2009) Critical moments in classical literature: studies in the ancient view of literature and its uses, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, G. O. (ed.) (1985) Aeschylus: Septem Contra Thebas, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, G. O. (ed.) (2004) ‘Euripides' other Hippolytus’, ZPE 149, 15–28.Google Scholar
Jenkins, T. E. (2006) Intercepted letters: epistolarity and narrative in Greek and Roman literature, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Jouan, F. and Van Looy, H. (eds.) (2000) Euripide: Fragments de Bellérophon à Protésilas, vol. 8, pt 2, Paris.Google Scholar
Jouan, F. and Van Looy, H. (eds.) (2002) Euripide: Fragments de Sthénébée à Chrysippos, vol. 8, pt 3, Paris.Google Scholar
Kannicht, R. (ed.) (2004) Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 5: Euripides, Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knox, B. (1968) ‘Silent reading in antiquity’, GRBS 9, 421–35.Google Scholar
Korres, M. (2002) ‘Modell des Dionysos-Theaters’, in Die griechische Klassik- Idee oder Wirklichkeit. Exhibition Berlin March 1st-June 2nd 2002. Mainz am Rhein, 540–1.Google Scholar
Kyriakou, P. (2006) A commentary on Euripides' Iphigenia in Tauris, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lange, K. (2002) Euripides und Homer: Untersuchungen zur Homernachwirkung in Elektra, Iphigenie im Taurerland, Helena, Orestes und Kyklops. Stuttgart [= Hermes Einzelschriften 86].Google Scholar
Linforth, I. M. (1941) The arts of Orpheus, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H. (ed.) (2003)2Sophocles III: fragments. Cambridge, Mass, [first published in 1996].Google Scholar
Lowe, N. J. (1993) ‘Aristophanes' books’, Annals of Scholarship 10, 63–83.Google Scholar
Luppe, W. (2004) ‘Griechische literarische Texte: Drama’, APF 50, 215–21.Google Scholar
Luschnig, C.A.E. (1988) Tragic aporia: a study of Euripides' Iphigenia at Aulis, Victoria.Google Scholar
Marshall, C.W. (1996) ‘Literary awareness in Euripides and his audience’, in I.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worthington, (ed.) Voice into text: orality and literacy in ancient Greece, Leiden, 81–98.Google Scholar
Mastronarde, D. J. (ed.) (1994) Euripides: Phoenissae, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Mastronarde, D. J. (ed.) (2002) Euripides: Medea, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Mendelsohn, D. (2002) Gender and the city in Euripides' political plays, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelakis, P. (2006) Euripides: Iphigenia at Aulis, London.Google Scholar
Michelini, A. (1994) ‘Political themes in Euripides' Suppliants’, AJP 115, 219–52.Google Scholar
Morwood, J. (ed.) (2007) Euripides: Suppliant Women, Oxford.Google Scholar
Mossman, J. (1999)2Wild justice: a study of Euripides' Hecuba, London [first published by Oxford in 1995].Google Scholar
Munson, R. V. (2005) Black doves speak: Herodotus and the language of barbarians, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Nünlist, R. (1998) Poetologische Bildersprache in der frühgriechischen Dichtung, Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, D. (1934) Actors' interpolations in Greek tragedy, Oxford.Google Scholar
Papadopoulou, T. (2005) Heracles and Euripidean tragedy, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, L. P. E. (ed.) (2007) Euripides Alcestis, Oxford.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. (1946) The theatre of Dionysus in Athens, Oxford.Google Scholar
Podlecki, A. J. (1999)2The political background of Aeschylean tragedy, London [first published in 1966].Google Scholar
Pöhlmann, E. (1971) ‘Die ABC-Komödie des Kallias’, RM 114, 230–40.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, N. S. (1993) Anxiety veiled: Euripides and the traffic in women. IthacaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehm, R. (1988) ‘The staging of suppliant plays’, GRBS 29, 263–307.Google Scholar
Rehm, R. (1994) Marriage to death: the conflation of wedding and funeral rituals in Greek tragedy, Princeton.Google Scholar
Revermann, M. (2006a) Comic business: theatricality, dramatic technique and performance contexts of Aristophanic comedy, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revermann, M. (2006b) ‘The competence of theatre audiences in fifth- and fourth-century Athens’, JHS 126, 99–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgway, B. S. (1992) ‘Images of Athena on the Akropolis’ in Neils, J. (ed.) Goddess and polis: the panathenaic festival in ancient Athens, Princeton, 119–42.Google Scholar
Rosen, R. (1999) ‘Comedy and confusion in Callias' Letter Tragedy’, CP 94, 147–67.Google Scholar
Rosenmeyer, P. (2001) Ancient epistolary fictions: the letter in Greek literature, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rösier, W. (1980) ‘Die Entdeckung der Fiktionalität in der Antike’, Poetica 12, 283–319.Google Scholar
Ruijgh, C. J. (2001) ‘Le Spectacle des lettres, comédie de Callias’, Mnemosyne 54, 261–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruschenbusch, E. (1979) ‘Die Einfürung des Theorikon’, ZPE 36, 303–8.Google Scholar
Sansone, D. (1975a) Aeschylean metaphors for intellectual activity. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Sansone, D. (1975b) ‘The sacrifice-motif in Euripides' IT’, TAPA 105, 283–95.Google Scholar
Scodel, R. (1980) The Trojan trilogy of Euripides, Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scullion, S. (2000) ‘Tradition and invention in Euripidean aitiology’, ICS 24–5, 217–33.Google Scholar
Seaford, R. (2009) ‘Aitiologies of cult in Euripides: a response to Scott Scullion’, in Cousland, J. R. C. and Hume, J. R. (eds.) The play of texts and fragments: essays in honour of Martin Cropp, Leiden, 221–34.Google Scholar
Segal, C. (1982) Dionysiac poetics and Euripides' Bacchae, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, C. (1985) ‘Tragedy, orality, literacy’, in Gentili, B. and Paioni, G. (eds.) Oralità: cultura, letteratura, discorso, Rome, 199–231.Google Scholar
Segal, C. (1986) Interpreting Greek tragedy: myth, poetry, text, Ithaca.Google Scholar
Segal, C. (1992) ‘Signs, magic and letters in Euripides' Hippolytus’, in Hexter, R. and Selden, D. (eds.) Innovations of antiquity, New York, 420–56.Google Scholar
Slater, N. (1996) ‘Literacy and Old Comedy’, in Worthington, I. (ed.) Voice into text: orality and literacy in ancient Greece, Leiden, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slater, N. (2002a) Spectator politics: metatheatre and performance in Aristophanes, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Slater, N. (2002b) ‘Dancing the alphabet: performative literacy on the Attic stage’, in Worthington, I. and Foley, J. M. (eds.) Epea and Grammata: oral and written communication in ancient Greece, Leiden, 117–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (1996) Aristophanes' Frogs. Warminster.Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (2000) ‘The prologue of Aeschylus' Palamedes’, RM 143, 118–27.Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (2001)2Aristophanes: Thesmophoriazusae. Warminster [first published in 1994].Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (2006) ‘Syndeipnoi (The Diners) or Achaiôn Syllogos (The Gathering of the Achaeans)’ in Sommerstein, A. H., Fitzpatrick, D., Talboy, T. (eds.) Sophocles: selected fragmentary plays I, Oxford, 84–140.Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (2008) Aeschylus III: Fragments. Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (2010) ‘The theatre audience, the Demos, and the Suppliants of Aeschylus’ in (id.) The tangled ways of Zeus and other studies in and around Greek tragedy. Oxford, 118–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[first published in Pelling, C.B.R. (ed.) (1997) Greek tragedy and the historian, Oxford, 63–79].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (forthcoming a) ‘Palamedes, Nauplios Katapleon, Nauplius Pyrkaeus’ in Sophocles: selected fragmentary plays II. Oxford.Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. H. S. (ed.) (forthcoming b) ‘Atē in Aeschylus’ in Lurie, M. (ed.) Tragedy and archaic thought. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sorum, C. E. (1992) ‘Myth, choice and meaning in Euripides' Iphigenia at Aulis’, AJP 113, 527–42.Google Scholar
Steiner, D. (1994) The tyrant's writ: myths and images of writing in ancient Greece, Princeton.Google Scholar
Steiner, D. (2000) Review of Wise, J. (1998), CP 95, 229–32.Google Scholar
Stehle, E. (2005) ‘Prayer and curse in Aeschylus' Seven against Thebes’, CP 100, 101–22.Google Scholar
Storey, I. (2009) ‘How does “seven” go into “twelve” or “fifteen” in Euripides' Suppliant Women?’, in Cousland, J.R.C. and Hume, J. R. (eds.) The play of texts and fragments: essays in honour of Martin Cropp, Leiden, 111–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, D. F. (1978) ‘Euripides' Theseus’, Hermes 106: 49–53.Google Scholar
Svendsen, J. T. (1984) ‘The letter device in Euripides and Shakespeare’, in Hartigan, K. V. (ed.) Legacy of Thespis: Drama Past and Present, Volume IV. Lanhman, MD, 75–88.Google Scholar
Talboy, T. and Sommerstein, A. H. S. (eds.) (2006) ‘Phaedra’, in Sommerstein, A. H., Fitzpatrick, D., Talboy, T. (eds.) Sophocles: selected fragmentary plays I, Oxford, 248–317.Google Scholar
Taplin, O. (1978) Greek tragedy in action, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taplin, O. (2007) Pots and Plays: interactions between tragedy and Greek uase-painting of the fourth century B.C., Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. (1992) Literacy and orality in ancient Greece, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, R. (1994) ‘Literacy and the city-state in archaic and classical Greece’ in Bowman, A. and Woolf, G. (eds.) Literacy and power in the ancient world, Cambridge, 33–50.Google Scholar
Toher, M. (2001) ‘Diodorus on Delion and Euripides' Supplices’, CQ 51, 178–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, I. C. (2005) ‘Andromache aichmalōtos: concubine or wife?’, Hermathena 179, 39–66.Google Scholar
Torrance, I. C. (2007) Aeschylus: Seven Against Thebes. London.Google Scholar
Travis, R. (1999) Review of Wise, J. (1998) BMCR http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/igg9/iggg-02-18.htmlGoogle Scholar
Tzanetou, A. (2000) ‘Almost dying, dying twice: ritual and audience in Euripides' Iphigenia in Tauris’, ICS 24–5, 199–216.Google Scholar
Webster, T. B. L. (1967) The tragedies of Euripides. London.Google Scholar
Wilson, P. (2000a) The Athenian institution of the khoregia, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wilson, P. (2000b) ‘Euripides' tragic muse’, ICS 24–5, 427–49.Google Scholar
Wise, J. (1998) Dionysus writes: the invention of theatre in ancient Greece. Ithaca.Google Scholar
Wolff, C. (1965) ‘The design and myth in Euripides' Ion’, HSCP 69: 169–94.Google Scholar
Wright, M. (2005) Euripides' Escape-Tragedies: a study of Helen, Andromeda and Iphigenia among the Taurians, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, M. (2006) ‘Cyclops and the Euripidean tetralogy’, PCPS 52, 23–48.Google Scholar
Wright, M. (2010) ‘The tragedian as critic: Euripides and early Greek poetics’, JHS 130, 165–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeitlin, F. I. (1965) ‘The motif of corrupted sacrifice in Aeschylus' Oresteia’, TAPA 96, 463–508.Google Scholar
Zeitlin, F. I. (1982) Under the sign of the shield: semiotics and Aeschylus' Seven Against Thebes, Rome.Google Scholar
Zeitlin, F. I. (1996) Playing the other: gender and society in classical Greek literature, Chicago.Google Scholar
Zeitlin, F. I. (2003) ‘The closet of masks: role-playing and myth-making in the Orestes of Euripides’, in Mossman, J. (ed.) Oxford readings in classical studies: Euripides, Oxford, 309–41Google Scholar
[first published in Ramus 9 (1980) 51–77].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeitlin, F. I. (2005) ‘Redeeming matricide? Euripides rereads the Oresteia’, in Pedrick, V. and Oberhelman, S. M. (eds.) The soul of tragedy: essays on Athenian drama, Chicago, 199–225.Google Scholar
Zuntz, G. (1955) The political plays of Euripides. Manchester.Google Scholar
Zwierlein, O. (2004) ‘Senecas 'Phaedra’ und ihre Vorbilder nach dem Fund der neuen ‘Hippolytos'-Papyri’, in (id.) Lucubrationes Philologae I, Berlin, 57–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar