Janice Siegel: Abstract for CAMWS 2004 (Successful)
Euripides’ Bacchae as an Inverted Model for Ovid’s Procne
Ovid’s presentation of the myth of Procne, Philomela, and Tereus diverges from the
mythographic and dramatic treatments that precede his in significant ways. Briefly put, Ovid’s
presentation allows us to see the women Procne and Philomela as empowered avengers, not victims
cowed by their oppressor’s formidability, monsters who give into irrational impulses, or pawns of
vindictive gods. Ovid’s poetic, dramatic and symbolic representations of dis/empowerment remain
consistent throughout the episode as the balance of terror shifts from man to women. And unlike all the
mythographers who preceded him, the power struggle presented by Ovid occurs strictly in the human
realm, with no hint of divine instigation, inspiration or even resolution.
But although Ovid rejects divine influence, Dionsyian imagery and allusion resonate throughout
his Procne episode. Clearly the allusions are ironic, for the women cannot at one and the same time be
avenging a personal wrong and be under the influence of a jealous god. And it is the discovery of
Euripides’ Bacchae as the central intertext for Ovid’s unique formulation of this tale (also presented in the
form of a play) that explains many of Ovid’s peculiar poetic and dramatic choices in this episode.
In broadest terms, both tales are about avenging a gross impiety, and both concern a mother’s
particularly gruesome murder of her own son in the interest of justice. The characters in Ovid’s Procne
take up the same roles as their corresponding dramatis personae in the Bacchae: Pentheus/Tereus is the
Committer of Impious Deeds, the Stranger/Philomela is the Victim, and Dionysus/Procne is the Avenger.
While Pentheus/Tereus is the Target of the Justice sought, Agave/Itys is the Instrument by which that
justice is achieved.
But Agave cannot be blamed directly for murdering Pentheus since becoming a maenad was an
involuntary act. On the other hand, Ovid stresses Procne/Philomela’s willing participation in Itys’ death.
One scene evokes the other to highlight the differences. For example, Philomela’s holding high the trophy
of Itys’ gory decapitated head (a unique method of presenting the victim of any child feast in mythology)
is clearly a reflection of the penultimate scene of Euripides’ Bacchae. But unlike Agave, Philomela
knows the source of this head, and the gruesome ramifications of its display.
A comparison of the pivotal scenes of both plays – the maedanizations of Pentheus and Philomela
– is the focus of this short presentation. Both false maenadizations dramatize the shift in power that
occurs in each play. When Philomela’s tapestry informs Procne that her long-lost sister is not dead, but
has been mutilated by her husband and kept prisoner in the woods, she joins the trieterica already in
progress, dresses in ritual garb, storms Philomela’s place of imprisonment, dresses her up as a Bacchante,
and liberates her (= Dionysus Lusios). In the Bacchae, the scene of sham maenadization marks the
moment that Dionysus decides to take action against Pentheus, who mistakenly believes that he is still in
control of his own destiny. But Dionysus turns Pentheus into a maenad to destroy him as punishment for
his blasphemy; Procne disguises Philomela as a maenad to save her so they can together avenge their
crimes against Tereus. Ovid’s Procne is regina (Met. 6.590) to Dionysus’  (Ba. 666, 671 and 760),
and she is terribilis (Met. 6.595), the human equivalent of his  (Ba. 861). The liberated
Philomela is even described as attonitam (Met. 6.600), a word Ovid himself uses elsewhere (Ov. A.A.
1.538) to describe a true maenad.
Rife with ironic Dionysian allusions misunderstood by many to be literal (Seaford, Reciprocity
and Ritual 270, e.g.), this maenad scene in Ovid’s Procne effectively shifts the drama from the realm of
the divine to that of the human. Just as in the Bacchae there is no limit to divine vengeance, in Ovid’s
Procne there is no limit to human cruelty without moral codes of behavior or any higher authority to
enforce them.
By holding Ovid’s Procne up to the mirror of Euripides’ Bacchae, we can see the truth of his
parallel universe, where human beings usurp the power of the gods and innocent victims get caught in the
sweep of the righteously vindictive. In the end, the irreparable destruction Procne causes in her genuine
quest for justice cannot be mitigated in the name of a greater Truth (as opposed to the guiltless Dionysus,
for “the gods are self-justifying and must not be judged by human standards,” Winnington-Ingram 7).
Ovid implores us to understand that left to their own devices, human beings live in constant danger of
becoming the victims of their own passions and confusing justice with revenge.