The Tragedies of King Oedipus 
In this lecture, we examine the myth of Oedipus, which 
has had a profound impact on 20th century thought. 
The lecture begins by summarizing Oedipus’s story; we 
then look briefly at Freud’s famous interpretation of 
the myth as presented in Sophocles’s Oedipus the 
King and at Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist reading. We 
next consider two interpretations that are more widely 
accepted among classicists. The first of these sees the 
central point of the play in the conflict between fate 
and free will, while the second connects it with the 
philosophical movement Sophism, current in Athens 
when Sophocles was writing. The lecture concludes by 
considering the difficulties of disentangling the myth of 
Oedipus from the presentation by Sophocles.
The story of Oedipus has become, in this century, the most famous of all Greek 
myths. The basic outline of the story as it appears in various ancient sources shows 
many motifs from the familiar test-and-quest pattern. 
The hero’s birth and conception are surrounded by difficulty. 
Oedipus’s parents know that their son will kill his father, Laios, either because of an 
oracle or because Laios was cursed by Pelops, whose son he had raped. 
An elaboration of the story adds that the oracle says Oedipus will also marry his 
mother, Jocasta. 
The infant Oedipus is exposed and expected to die—in the cultural norms of the 
time—but is instead rescued and brought up by foster parents. 
He grows up in Corinth, ignorant of his true identity.
The young man performs 
exceptional feats of 
strength, cleverness, or 
both. These often involve 
encounters with monsters. 
Oedipus shows exceptional 
strength when he kills Laios 
and all Laios’s attendants. 
He shows exceptional 
cleverness when he solves 
the riddle of the Sphinx, a 
monster that terrorizes 
Thebes.
Successfully completing these 
“tests” gains the young man a 
bride. 
When Oedipus solves the 
Sphinx’s riddle, he is granted 
the hand of the Queen of 
Thebes in marriage. 
Unfortunately, she is his 
mother. 
Oedipus’s discovery of the 
truth of his actions leads to 
Jocasta’s death and his own 
self-blinding.
We are most familiar with this story through Sophocles’s great play Oedipus the King. Two of this 
century’s most influential theorists of myth, Freud and Lévi-Strauss, have interpreted the Oedipus 
myth, and other scholars have followed in their tracks. 
Freud assumes that Sophocles’s play represents the desires of the unconscious; thus, it appeals to 
modern audiences no less than to ancient ones as a kind of wish-fulfillment fantasy. 
Scholars often object that Oedipus’s ignorance of his parentage is crucial to the myth and that if 
Oedipus felt oedipal desires, he would have felt them toward his adoptive mother, not Jocasta. 
Freud’s theory of the Oedipus complex, whether correct or not, does not tell us much about the 
myth itself, but offers a reason for its appeal. 
The second main objection is the one we discussed as an objection to psychological theories of 
myth in general: Freud assumes that the unconscious operates the same way cross-culturally and 
through time.
Lévi-Strauss reads the myth as mediating between the 
two conflicting accounts of human origin, autochthony 
(“coming from the earth”) and sexual reproduction. 
The riddles of the Sphinx and Oedipus’s uncertainty 
about his parentage both concern the essential nature 
of being human: What are human beings and where do 
they come from? 
Lévi-Strauss finds traces of autochthony in the 
“lameness” characteristic of Oedipus’s family—very 
often in autochthonic stories, the people who emerge 
from the earth are lame. 
The myth, which is about the origins of Oedipus, 
mediates between the theory of autochthonous 
human creation and the observed reality of sexual 
reproduction. 
Few classicists have been persuaded by this reading of 
the myth.
Other scholars connect the Oedipus myth with initiation rites, which sometimes include 
symbolic killing of the father. 
The most common reading of Sophocles’s play (if not of the underling myth) among 
literary critics and classicists is that its main topic is the conflict between fate and free will. 
Max Ernst 
Oedipus Rex
The actions taken by 
Laios, Jocasta, and 
Oedipus himself all lead 
to the inexorable working 
out of fate. 
By trying to avoid fate, 
these characters 
guarantee its fulfillment. 
They are fated to commit 
the deeds they commit, 
but this fate works 
through their own freely 
chosen actions. 
The blind Oedipus goes into exile led by his daughter Antigone, 1835: King Oedipus and Antigone. Statue by Rudolph Tegner
Some scholars object that this is an anachronistic reading. 
The conflict that moderns find between the idea of fate and free will does 
not seem to have troubled the Greeks. 
Classical Greek, in fact, has no term for “free will.” 
Another way to look at the play is to see Oedipus as the paradigm of a 
rationalist intellectual, seeking to establish truth through the use of his own 
intellect, rather than through relying on the god’s oracles. 
Modern critics often assume that this is a good thing and see Oedipus as a 
kind of humanist hero, battling for truth for its own sake.
In the context of 5th-century Athens, however, most people would probably have seen such 
intellectual independence as a bad thing. 
Sophocles is drawing on one of the most controversial movements of his day, the teachings of the 
“Sophists.” 
Among other subjects, the Sophists, itinerant teachers, taught rhetoric and techniques of 
argumentation. 
The most famous Sophist was Protagoras, best remembered for his dictum “man is the measure of 
all things.” 
They questioned the validity of oracles, which implies questioning the existence or relevance of the 
gods. 
Their opponents accused them of corrupting morals and weakening religious beliefs. Socrates was 
executed on just such grounds, although he vehemently denied being a Sophist.
In this context, Oedipus becomes an 
example of a Sophist. 
His refusal to accept the oracle and the 
words of the prophet Teiresias shows the 
distrust of religious traditions that was 
characteristic of the Sophists. 
He is also like a Sophist in his insistence 
on using his own intelligence and his 
determination to reason out the puzzles 
of his own origin and who killed Laios. 
Sophocles’s play seems to indicate that 
the human intellect alone is not sufficient 
for understanding the world, that the 
gods’ oracles are valid, and that the gods 
must be taken into account. 
The Plague of Thebes, oil on canvas, 
Charles François Jalabeat (French, 1819-1901)
All these reading show the difficulty in 
separating the Oedipus myth from 
Sophocles’s particular telling of it. 
The text of Oedipus the King has become so 
central in Western literature that it has even 
overshadowed Sophocles’s retelling of the 
aftermath of Oedipus’s story in his last play, 
Oedipus at Colonos. 
Can we cut through the later interpretations 
and around Sophocles’s hegemony to try to 
uncover the original significance of the myth? 
The most unusual thing about this myth is its 
association of parricide and incest, two 
elements that are not normally part of the 
same classical myth. 
Oedipus Cursing his Son, Polyneices 
By Henry Fuseli, 1741-1825
Many Greek myths can be 
found about sons killing or 
almost killing fathers and vice 
versa. 
Parricide, and even lesser 
violence against fathers, was 
regarded with absolute 
horror as the worst 
imaginable crime. 
We tend to see the incest 
with Jocasta as a worse crime 
that the killing Laios, but this 
may be anachronistic.
Jan Bremmer suggests that the incest was 
added to the story to underline the horror 
of the parricide. 
Parricide, cannibalism, and incest are the 
worst imaginable transgressions. 
Cannibalism does not appear in Oedipus’s 
story (unless we see it as displaced onto the 
Sphinx), but the incest here functions as the 
cannibalism does in the House of Atreus: to 
underline the horror of the murder. 
As Bremmer puts it, “the monstrosity of the 
transgression is commented upon by letting 
the protagonist commit a further 
monstrosity.”
Oedipus’s eventual 
heroization at Colonos is a 
reminder that heroes, in the 
sense of guardian spirits, 
were not necessarily noted 
for good deeds. 
Oedipus’s crimes mark him as 
different from the rest of 
humankind. 
This difference qualifies him 
to be a hero.
In this context, it is interesting to 
consider Burkert’s reading of the myth. 
Burkett connects the myth with the 
scapegoat or pharmakos, a person 
who is driven out of a city to free it 
from some disaster, such as a plague. 
The pharmakos must be disgusting or 
foul in some way; this quality enables 
him to be able to divert the disaster 
from the city. 
In this regard, Oedipus’s pollution 
enables him both to lift the plague from 
Thebes and to protect Athens. 
Antoni Brodowski, Oedipus and Antigone, 1828.

Oedipus

  • 1.
    The Tragedies ofKing Oedipus In this lecture, we examine the myth of Oedipus, which has had a profound impact on 20th century thought. The lecture begins by summarizing Oedipus’s story; we then look briefly at Freud’s famous interpretation of the myth as presented in Sophocles’s Oedipus the King and at Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist reading. We next consider two interpretations that are more widely accepted among classicists. The first of these sees the central point of the play in the conflict between fate and free will, while the second connects it with the philosophical movement Sophism, current in Athens when Sophocles was writing. The lecture concludes by considering the difficulties of disentangling the myth of Oedipus from the presentation by Sophocles.
  • 2.
    The story ofOedipus has become, in this century, the most famous of all Greek myths. The basic outline of the story as it appears in various ancient sources shows many motifs from the familiar test-and-quest pattern. The hero’s birth and conception are surrounded by difficulty. Oedipus’s parents know that their son will kill his father, Laios, either because of an oracle or because Laios was cursed by Pelops, whose son he had raped. An elaboration of the story adds that the oracle says Oedipus will also marry his mother, Jocasta. The infant Oedipus is exposed and expected to die—in the cultural norms of the time—but is instead rescued and brought up by foster parents. He grows up in Corinth, ignorant of his true identity.
  • 3.
    The young manperforms exceptional feats of strength, cleverness, or both. These often involve encounters with monsters. Oedipus shows exceptional strength when he kills Laios and all Laios’s attendants. He shows exceptional cleverness when he solves the riddle of the Sphinx, a monster that terrorizes Thebes.
  • 4.
    Successfully completing these “tests” gains the young man a bride. When Oedipus solves the Sphinx’s riddle, he is granted the hand of the Queen of Thebes in marriage. Unfortunately, she is his mother. Oedipus’s discovery of the truth of his actions leads to Jocasta’s death and his own self-blinding.
  • 5.
    We are mostfamiliar with this story through Sophocles’s great play Oedipus the King. Two of this century’s most influential theorists of myth, Freud and Lévi-Strauss, have interpreted the Oedipus myth, and other scholars have followed in their tracks. Freud assumes that Sophocles’s play represents the desires of the unconscious; thus, it appeals to modern audiences no less than to ancient ones as a kind of wish-fulfillment fantasy. Scholars often object that Oedipus’s ignorance of his parentage is crucial to the myth and that if Oedipus felt oedipal desires, he would have felt them toward his adoptive mother, not Jocasta. Freud’s theory of the Oedipus complex, whether correct or not, does not tell us much about the myth itself, but offers a reason for its appeal. The second main objection is the one we discussed as an objection to psychological theories of myth in general: Freud assumes that the unconscious operates the same way cross-culturally and through time.
  • 6.
    Lévi-Strauss reads themyth as mediating between the two conflicting accounts of human origin, autochthony (“coming from the earth”) and sexual reproduction. The riddles of the Sphinx and Oedipus’s uncertainty about his parentage both concern the essential nature of being human: What are human beings and where do they come from? Lévi-Strauss finds traces of autochthony in the “lameness” characteristic of Oedipus’s family—very often in autochthonic stories, the people who emerge from the earth are lame. The myth, which is about the origins of Oedipus, mediates between the theory of autochthonous human creation and the observed reality of sexual reproduction. Few classicists have been persuaded by this reading of the myth.
  • 7.
    Other scholars connectthe Oedipus myth with initiation rites, which sometimes include symbolic killing of the father. The most common reading of Sophocles’s play (if not of the underling myth) among literary critics and classicists is that its main topic is the conflict between fate and free will. Max Ernst Oedipus Rex
  • 8.
    The actions takenby Laios, Jocasta, and Oedipus himself all lead to the inexorable working out of fate. By trying to avoid fate, these characters guarantee its fulfillment. They are fated to commit the deeds they commit, but this fate works through their own freely chosen actions. The blind Oedipus goes into exile led by his daughter Antigone, 1835: King Oedipus and Antigone. Statue by Rudolph Tegner
  • 9.
    Some scholars objectthat this is an anachronistic reading. The conflict that moderns find between the idea of fate and free will does not seem to have troubled the Greeks. Classical Greek, in fact, has no term for “free will.” Another way to look at the play is to see Oedipus as the paradigm of a rationalist intellectual, seeking to establish truth through the use of his own intellect, rather than through relying on the god’s oracles. Modern critics often assume that this is a good thing and see Oedipus as a kind of humanist hero, battling for truth for its own sake.
  • 10.
    In the contextof 5th-century Athens, however, most people would probably have seen such intellectual independence as a bad thing. Sophocles is drawing on one of the most controversial movements of his day, the teachings of the “Sophists.” Among other subjects, the Sophists, itinerant teachers, taught rhetoric and techniques of argumentation. The most famous Sophist was Protagoras, best remembered for his dictum “man is the measure of all things.” They questioned the validity of oracles, which implies questioning the existence or relevance of the gods. Their opponents accused them of corrupting morals and weakening religious beliefs. Socrates was executed on just such grounds, although he vehemently denied being a Sophist.
  • 11.
    In this context,Oedipus becomes an example of a Sophist. His refusal to accept the oracle and the words of the prophet Teiresias shows the distrust of religious traditions that was characteristic of the Sophists. He is also like a Sophist in his insistence on using his own intelligence and his determination to reason out the puzzles of his own origin and who killed Laios. Sophocles’s play seems to indicate that the human intellect alone is not sufficient for understanding the world, that the gods’ oracles are valid, and that the gods must be taken into account. The Plague of Thebes, oil on canvas, Charles François Jalabeat (French, 1819-1901)
  • 12.
    All these readingshow the difficulty in separating the Oedipus myth from Sophocles’s particular telling of it. The text of Oedipus the King has become so central in Western literature that it has even overshadowed Sophocles’s retelling of the aftermath of Oedipus’s story in his last play, Oedipus at Colonos. Can we cut through the later interpretations and around Sophocles’s hegemony to try to uncover the original significance of the myth? The most unusual thing about this myth is its association of parricide and incest, two elements that are not normally part of the same classical myth. Oedipus Cursing his Son, Polyneices By Henry Fuseli, 1741-1825
  • 13.
    Many Greek mythscan be found about sons killing or almost killing fathers and vice versa. Parricide, and even lesser violence against fathers, was regarded with absolute horror as the worst imaginable crime. We tend to see the incest with Jocasta as a worse crime that the killing Laios, but this may be anachronistic.
  • 14.
    Jan Bremmer suggeststhat the incest was added to the story to underline the horror of the parricide. Parricide, cannibalism, and incest are the worst imaginable transgressions. Cannibalism does not appear in Oedipus’s story (unless we see it as displaced onto the Sphinx), but the incest here functions as the cannibalism does in the House of Atreus: to underline the horror of the murder. As Bremmer puts it, “the monstrosity of the transgression is commented upon by letting the protagonist commit a further monstrosity.”
  • 15.
    Oedipus’s eventual heroizationat Colonos is a reminder that heroes, in the sense of guardian spirits, were not necessarily noted for good deeds. Oedipus’s crimes mark him as different from the rest of humankind. This difference qualifies him to be a hero.
  • 16.
    In this context,it is interesting to consider Burkert’s reading of the myth. Burkett connects the myth with the scapegoat or pharmakos, a person who is driven out of a city to free it from some disaster, such as a plague. The pharmakos must be disgusting or foul in some way; this quality enables him to be able to divert the disaster from the city. In this regard, Oedipus’s pollution enables him both to lift the plague from Thebes and to protect Athens. Antoni Brodowski, Oedipus and Antigone, 1828.