The Chorus proposes that it is Apollo’s responsibility to name the culprit. This raises the question, why Apollo has not revealed the culprit’s name, to which the only reasonable answer is that it does not suit him to do so. What might be the benefit of directing Oidipous to identify the killer? First, had Delphi named him, it seems unlikely that Oidipous would have accepted that statement as the truth; even now he will not consider the possibility that he was involved in the killing. Second, if the problem resides in skepticism towards the god’s capacity for direct intervention, this is best addressed through the god’s demonstration of his powers. The fact that Oidipous appears now both to be speaking and acting for the god demonstrates those powers—at least to the audience. He himself is not yet capable of appreciating the demonstration, but surely this can be expected to follow from the discovery that he killed Laios, that Laios was his father, and that the woman to whom he is married is his mother. [Md] [Ap]