As the Corinthian points out, the inhabitants of Thebes would know best if such a man were alive among them. And indeed, it is Iokaste who of all Thebans should know this best; she must know to whom she gave her infant son to take into the trackless waste to die. She would also be likely to know what has since become of this man. The Corinthian’s comment thus directs the audience to focus its attention on her, looking both for some sign that she knows the identity of this still unnamed shepherd and even more than this, that she is realizing that the child she gave up to the shepherd to be killed is Oidipous, miraculously saved and awfully standing beside her as her husband. That she makes no move suggests that despite the direct suggestion that she think of an instance when one of Laios’ herdsmen might have taken a hobbled infant to Kithairon to be left to die, she is still unable to make the connection. Like Oidipous, she cannot see. It is clear that, as certainly as she believes that the prophecy that Laios must be killed by the son she bears him was never realized, she places no credence in the prophecy that Oidipous must kill his father and marry his mother. Her skepticism is blinding to the point of causing her to ignore an astounding convergence of two prophecies and a mound of evidence. [Ap] [Md] [Mpea]