To an audience mindful of Oidipous’s misdeeds Teiresias’s words σὺν τοῖς φιλτάτοις . . . ὁμιλοῦντ’ (“consorting with your dearest kin”) would seem to refer to the fact that he has most shamefully been having intercourse with his mother. The word φιλτάτοις, however, is in the plural, and thus must embrace other close relations, such as his children, in which case the force of the word ὁμιλοῦντ’ would not be limited to intercourse. It is of course shameful that his children are also his siblings, but the audience may think also of Oidipous’s relationship with the citizens whom he improperly addresses as children. All of the relations, then, in which he lives are improper, even shameful. This might include the seer and the god for whom he speaks, for in the context of the heated words between Oidipous and Teiresias, it would make sense for the prophet to complain, as he has been doing, that Oidipous fails to appreciate those who have his best interest in mind. It is in fact permissible to interpret ὁμιλοῦντ’ as “attacking,” which produces the reading: You fail to notice that you attack those who love you most. [Mpei] Considering, however, that it is the gods who are working to destroy Oidipous, the audience must find it strange for Teiresias to describe them as φιλτάτοι. Teiresias’s speech thus implicitly raises the issue of the gods’ attitude towards Oidipous, his family, and his city: do they love or hate them? Or better: when they destroy men, can it still be true that they are their dearest friends? If Teiresias means that they are, then Oidipous indeed behaves “most shamefully” for wrangling with Apollo’s prophet, thus showing a grave disregard for the god who so cares for him. Indeed, this same insight may be applied to the more obvious way in which his behavior is shameful—his having intercourse with his mother, for that deed was prophesied by another of Apollo’s mediums—the Oracle at Delphi. If the parallel between the two incidents holds meaning here, it lies in Oidipous’s disregard for Apollo’s agents. The gods may hold mortals dear, but mortals do not always appreciate this fact and they certainly do not always reciprocate; they do not regard the gods with the utmost love but “consort” with or even attack them shamefully. The failure cannot, then, be ascribed to the god, but to Oidipous for not recognizing the god’s efforts on his behalf, for not recognizing the gods as “dearest,” and for not understanding that in attacking the seer he attacks the god. [P] [Mipd] [Apcma]