Violence and the Political in Greek Epic and Tragedy

Several tragedies that foreground the rape of an unmarried woman by a god or hero

portray the rape as necessary for the political foundations of a community. Scholars have

analyzed these tragedies in terms of an ongoing debate about consent in antiquity (Scafuro 1990,

Doblhofer 1994, Omitowoju 2002, Harris 2004, Sommerstein 2006, Rabinowitz 2011, James

2014). In an attempt to expand analysis of sexual violence in tragedy beyond issues of consent,

this paper asks, borrowing from feminist philosopher Robin Schott (2010, 25), “what logic

Nonnus’ Dionysiaca is replete with violence more graphic and more ubiquitous than anywhere else in
the Greek epic tradition. Much of this violence is directed against the Indians, who are killed in
the name of, and often at the hands of, Dionysus himself. In this paper, I argue that Nonnus’
representation of this divinely-sanctioned slaughter should be seen as political rather than merely
literary, that it reflects on the Christian violence of the late-antique world in which Nonnus

A popular theme in the archaic visual tradition must have shocked its viewers with its evocation of what has been called the most violent sentiment in the Iliad: Achilles appears to fulfill his threat to cut up Hector’s flesh and eat it raw (Segal 1971: 38 on Il. 22.345-54). On closer examination, it becomes clear that the image actually adheres more closely to the epic narrative of the ransom. Priam has come to ransom Hector’s body and Achilles’ participation in the dais or properly ordered feast suggests a favorable outcome.

Few plays have seen the political reality of 5^th-century Athens encroach more unceremoniously on the tragic stage than the Euripidean Orestes. Frequently deplored for its glaring ‘anachronisms’ (cf. Porter 1994 with Easterling 1985) this tragedy is set in a quasi-democratic polis, where decision-making remains in the hands of the people. The eponymous hero is tried not at a solemn, aetiological congress of gods and men, but an ordinary judicial session of the assembly.

‘Sovereign is he who decides on the exception.’

Karl Schmitt, Political Theology