Michelle Currie (Colby College)
Parallels of Anger and Fear in Seneca’s Thyestes
This paper builds on previous analyses of emotion in Senecan philosophy and tragedy (e.g., Staley 1975 and 1981, Schiesaro 1997 and 2003, Rodríguez Cidre 2000, Galán 2003) by offering a case study on anger and fear in Thyestes. Just as Atreus and Thyestes can be seen as reflections of each other (Steidle 1944: 252, Schiesaro 2003: 140-47), fear and anger too are “equal and similar to each other” (Ira 1.10.1)—a link noted also by modern psychologists (Ekman 2003: 154). Atreus and Thyestes are traditionally associated with anger or fear respectively. In this paper, however, I argue that Seneca, inspired by the parallels of anger and fear suggested in Stoic emotion theory, explored both emotions within the likewise connected brothers to a greater extent than previously appreciated. This emotional interplay illuminates each brother’s motives and actions, while also illustrating the relationship of these emotions as suggested in Seneca’s De ira. Furthermore, the brothers’ relative success at handling these emotions also influences our evaluation of them.
Atreus, an overt iratus (Tarrant 1985: 117, Boyle 2017: 169-74), experiences anger that drives his revenge. Yet Atreus’ crimes are also motivated by fear, which warns him to preempt further mistreatment from Thyestes. Conversely, other fears work to prevent his crimes: despite his usual resolution, Atreus momentarily hesitates with fear when envisioning his crimes’ climax (241-43, 284-86). In the De ira, Seneca suggests that if ratio cannot restrain anger, another emotion—often fear—may serve as a deterrent (1.8.7, 1.10.1). This approach is especially viable for those with exceptionally violent anger (3.39.4). Atreus is thus a good candidate for this therapy. Yet Atreus cannot balance his emotions: his anger escalates so much that not even fear can moderate it. Rather than contradicting his philosophy, however, Seneca here demonstrates how Atreus’ anger surpasses normal human bounds in surviving even the most desperate therapies.
Thyestes too experiences both emotions, despite his fear being more apparent. Returning from exile, he admits to fearing both his brother and power itself. Additionally, Thyestes nearly gives in to anger at the play’s conclusion. Thyestes uses a balance of fear and anger to constrain both emotions, with greater success than Atreus. Though Thyestes cannot be a Stoic sapiens given his prominent emotions, he has sometimes been read as at least striving toward Stoic ideals (Gigon 1938, Lefèvre 1985: 1279-80, Monteleone 1991: 361-67, Mader 2000: 165-67, Schiesaro 2003: 147-51, Galán 2003: 221-25). Thyestes to some extent applies therapeutic methods from the De ira to avoid anger. Thyestes’ character is thus also delineated from his brother’s in terms of his relative success at applying philosophical restraint on his emotions.
Thyestes offers Seneca the opportunity to explore connections between anger and fear, which he uses to add depth to his two characters. Their varied degrees of philosophical failure—with Atreus doing worse than Thyestes—further support the audience’s evaluation of their relative flaws. At the same time, the play allows Seneca to examine more fully these cognate emotions discussed in Stoic philosophy.