39 pages • 1 hour read
AeschylusA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Background
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Character Analysis
Themes
Symbols & Motifs
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Tools
Aeschylus’s Seven Against Thebes was the war play of ancient Greece: In the late fifth century BCE, the comic playwright Aristophanes described the play as “full of Ares” (Frogs, 1021), Ares being the Greek god of war. The tragedy explores both the heroics of war and the cruelty and destruction war brings in its wake.
The crisis in which Thebes finds itself is clear from the very opening lines of the play, where Eteocles addresses the citizens and tells each of them to do their part to protect the city. Eteocles himself never wavers in his courage and his commitment to fight for Thebes, and his heroic attitude is mirrored in the series of single combats between the champions of Thebes and the “Seven Against Thebes” stationed at the seven gates of the city. The famous “Shield Scene,” in which the Messenger reports the shield devices of the attackers and Eteocles responds by selecting the most suitable champion to fight against each of them, embodies the heroic ideal of the Homeric epics, where wars were decided by hand-picked elite warriors while the rest of the army remained largely irrelevant.
Balancing and undercutting these idealized heroic elements, however, is an emphasis on the horrors of war that runs throughout the play. The oath of the seven heroes to fight to the death against Thebes, as recounted by the Messenger, is chilling:
There were seven men, fierce regiment commanders;
they cut bulls’ throats into an iron-rimmed
shield, and with hands touched the bulls’ blood,
taking their oaths by Ares and Enyo,
and by the bloodthirsty god of Terror,
either to smash and lay your city level
with the ground, sacked, or by their death to make
a bloody paste of this same soil of yours (43-48).
In the Shield Scene, the Messenger again paints a terrifying picture of the attackers. Tydeus is almost an animal, “enraged and thirsting for the fight / […] like serpents’ hiss at noonday” (380-81) and raging “like the horse that chafes / against the bit” (392-93). The blasphemous Capaneus “menaces with terrors” (426) the towers of Thebes. Hippomedon’s “vast frame and giant form” (488) are enough to make the Messenger shudder. Parthenopaeus has “a Gorgon look” (537), and Polynices casts fearful curses on the city.
It is the Chorus who is most vocal about the horrors of the war facing Thebes. The invaders become a force of nature, a “a forward-rushing river, the great tide of horsemen” (80) and a roaring “resistless mountain waterfall” (86). They cannot stop themselves from imagining what would happen if they were defeated in battle and the enemy succeeded in capturing their city:
There is tumult through the town.
All around it hangs a towering net:
man stands against man with the spear and is killed.
Screams, bloody and wild, echo around,
from babies new-nourished at the breast (345-50).
War is here presented as the destruction and disruption of peaceful life cycles, with the “bloody and wild” screams “from babies new-nourished at the breast” speaking of the potential massacre that awaits Theban citizens—even the most innocent and helpless—if the seven heroes prevail against the city.
Furthermore, as young virgins, the members of the Chorus are especially afraid of the fate that befalls women taken captive in war, who were often enslaved and forced to become the concubines of their conquerors:
Woeful is it for maidens new-reared and unripe,
before the marriage rites, to tread
this bitter journey from their homes.
I would say that even the dead
are better off than this (333-37).
For all the Chorus’s foreboding, Thebes is spared. The gods come through to save the city, though Eteocles (and Polynices) are killed. The death of the brothers, in some ways, becomes the most terrible of all the horrors of the war, for it marks the destruction of Oedipus’s line.
In the world of the play, the fate that befalls Eteocles must be understood in the broader context of his family and ancestors. Eteocles, like his brother Polynices, was born into his destiny. This is illustrated most clearly in the second stasimon, where the Chorus describes the three-generation-old transgressions of the Labdacids. They begin with King Laius, whom Apollo warned not to have a son if he would save his city. When Laius disobeyed Apollo, the son he had, Oedipus, grew up to kill his father and marry his mother, Jocasta, not realizing that they were his parents. Oedipus cursed his sons, Eteocles and Polynices, who in the play are destroying themselves. As the Chorus remarks:
heavy is the settlement
of ancient curses, to fulfilment brought.
The destructive evils don’t pass away (766-768).
As Eteocles asserts, there is nothing “that will bring escape from destiny” (281). In the Shield Scene, when the Messenger reveals that Eteocles’s brother Polynices is the warrior at the seventh gate, Eteocles decides that he has no choice but to fight him, as no other major champions are left for him to take on. For Eteocles, the battle between him and his brother is part of the destiny they both have inherited:
Our family, the family of Oedipus,
by the gods maddened, by them greatly hated;
ah, my father’s curses are now fulfilled! (653-55).
Nor is it only the Curse of Oedipus that dooms the brothers (though the curses certainly have “fanned that blast” [710]). Indeed, the gods’ multigenerational anger at the Labdacids also contributes to the destiny of Eteocles and Polynices, as Eteocles says:
It is the god that drives this matter on.
Since it is so—on, on with favoring wind
this wave of hell that has engulfed for its share
all kin of Laius, whom Phoebus has so hated! (690-93).
Nevertheless, Eteocles may sometimes be too willing to embrace his destiny without making decisions that may allow him to change things. Eteocles’s conviction that he has no choice but to meet Polynices in single combat is not entirely justified. The reality is not so simple: Eteocles can still send somebody else to fight Polynices, as the Chorus points out. Indeed, Eteocles could have easily deduced Polynices’s presence at one of the later gates and spared himself the supposed necessity of fighting him by assigning himself to any one of the first six gates. However, Eteocles becomes increasingly resolved to fight his brother, even presenting their deaths as a “delightful offering” (703) to the gods. He seems almost possessed—indeed, the Chorus describes both him and Eteocles as “possessed by evil spirits” (1001). If so, then this possession seems to be divinely inflicted, another sign of the hereditary nature—and inescapability—of the unfortunate fate of Oedipus’s family.
Throughout the play, human agency and divine forces coexist. The play explores the complex dynamics between these two forces, including some of the tensions and dilemmas that can arise between them.
Eteocles, the Chorus, and the Messenger (or Messengers) almost continually pray to the gods to ensure that the war goes well. Eteocles knows that success is “the gift of god alone” (625), and as the Chorus says, the gods can accomplish anything, even the seemingly impossible, such as rescuing those who are “hopelessly sunk / in misfortune” (227-28). However, this does not mean that human beings do not have a part to play. Eteocles is very conscious of the active role he takes on as ruler of the city to fight against the threat. It is not enough to wait for the gods to lend a helping hand: People must still act, must pray, sacrifice, and fight. Eteocles’s prayer to the gods is thus an active one, stressing reciprocity: If the gods save Thebes, Eteocles vows that:
my people shall redden your hearths with the blood
of sacrificed sheep, and with the blood
of bulls slaughtered to honor the gods (275-77).
Sometimes the coexistence of human agency and divine forces is adversarial. Humans may try to escape their destiny, or they may disobey the gods, or the case of a particular event may be misattributed. As Eteocles remarks at the beginning of the play:
if we win success, god is the cause,
but if—may it not chance so—there is disaster,
throughout the town, voiced by its citizens,
a multitudinous much-repeated prelude
cries on one name “Eteocles” with groans (4-8).
In other words, people credit the gods for their successes but blame misfortunes on their leaders. In the play, of course, misfortunes are brought about by the gods too, no less than are successes. Thus, at the end of the play, the gods are thanked for saving the city, but the gods are also represented as the ones responsible for the deaths of Eteocles and Polynices: As the Messenger says, it is “lord Apollo” (800) who “has fulfilled the ancient follies of Laius” (802) at the seventh gate.
The coexistence of human agency and divine forces suggests that people enact the will of the gods. When Eteocles resolves to fight against Polynices, he holds the gods responsible for this battle, and in a way the gods really do seem intent on destroying the Labdacids. However, Eteocles’s decision is also his own, for he can always choose not to fight his brother. Both the gods and Eteocles are thus responsible for the battle between the brothers, just as both the gods and the various human actors (Eteocles, Polynices, Oedipus) are responsible for the war more broadly. In the world of the play, then, all actions are overdetermined—that is, explicable in terms of human agency and divine will simultaneously.
By Aeschylus