In Attic Greek the verb ἐπισκήπτω regularly means to impose something on someone; Oidipous used it himself when, standing before the people of Thebes fully confident in his own powers, he ordered them to carry out his commands pertaining to the apprehension of Laios’ killer (l. 252). Yet when used by a powerful ruler like Oidipous, this verb may well carry its older Homeric connotations, and so suggest that, like Agamemon in the Iliad, Oidipous has in his right hand a staff of royal authority that he lifts and then thumps down against the ground to punctuate an edict. While this meaning has passed out of usage with the staff and the social system it served, one might recall that it was a staff (σκήπτρωι; l. 811) with which Oidipous laid Laios low. Thus, this verb connects his present misery to the wanton wielding of his staff as a deadly weapon. Similarly, the word προστρέψομαι, by which Oidipous expresses the idea that he “entreats” Kreon to do something for him, carries a more gestural meaning: “turn . . . towards a god as a suppliant, approach [a god] with prayer” (LSJ I.1). Both verbs have their origins in physical gestures appropriate in two distinct spheres of activity: one the expression of temporal power through the issuance of an edict set into force by the movement of a symbolic staff, the other a gestural turning towards the god to invoke a divine intervention; the one expresses the exercise of temporal power and authority, the other humbly acknowledges the insufficiency of mortal powers; the one implies domination, the second implies subordination. Oidipous’s combination of the two is thus problematic, especially since Kreon, who is neither a subordinate nor a god, is the adressee for both. Not only does this contradiction indicate a disturbing confusion in Oidipous’s thinking, it also indicates an unseemly lack of appreciation for the actual state of his relationship with men (Kreon) and gods (Apollo) alike. This confused pairing recalls, moreover, the way in which Oidipous at the play’s opening stepped forward as a man into the space reserved for Apollo and the personal journey on which he approached the god at Delphi as a mortal suppliant without the intent of placing himself in the god’s care by asking the latter to direct his steps. Sensing the problematic relationship between his language and the way in which he has previously behaved, the audience will note that conflicted language is expressive of conflicted attitudes and beliefs and leads to conflicted action. [Mpea] [Md] [Mw]