The staffperson announces that Oidipous “will show” (δείξει) his affliction to the throng outside his palace. It is characteristic of Oidipous that he does not hide himself in shame but wishes to present himself to his subjects as a spectacle. Again he seems to put his Theban subjects’ wellbeing ahead of his own, but the audience has come to understand that the best display of concern for the town is to submit to the god’s will through full and complete inquiry at Delphi and adherence to the detailed instructions obtained. Nothing in Oidipous’s words suggests, however, that he has come to this realization. He must still wish, then, to display to Thebes the gods’ arbitrary and unjust power. Oidipous appears to be persisting in the delusion that mortals can always rely upon their own moral judgment. He has not yet seen that mortals’ freedom of action is constrained by the fact that for it to be salubrious it must harmonize with divine action, which is predicated upon communication with mortals about their needs. This communication serves as an agreement or contract; it creates a necessity to which mortals and gods alike are subject. If mortal action does not harmonize with divine instruction, the god will be compelled to bend circumstances until harmony is restored. The god appears always already to have foreseen Oidipous’s freely-made decisions, including his present intention to make a display of Iokaste and himself to the Theban public. Oidipous’s belief in the autonomy of his action is thus correct, but incomplete, and so serves to demonstrate all the more sharply the subtlety and complexity of the god’s actions. The fact is that the gods themselves are subject to necessity imposed upon them by their obligation to maintain a meaningful relationship with mortals. That is the goal of the display to which Apollo is presently contributing. If discourse between gods and mortals is to be of any value, it constrains the gods to arrange circumstances to validate the messages delivered to mortals by their intermediaries. If a divine message is misinterpreted by its mortal recipient, the god is then under constraint to realize it as understood, not as may have been meant. Discourse between gods and mortals put both under constraint; gods to make their speech consequential and mortals to seek to reduce or even eliminate misunderstanding by resolving any ambiguity of which they might be aware. [Gd] [Mpei] [Dnc] [Dnp] [Mipd]