τύχη can mean many things, from the act of a god or a human being. It can be a paraphrase for “Ἀνάγκη: Necessity or Fate.” It can be “an agent beyond human control: fortune, providence, or fate; chance; a result: good fortune or success; and ill fortune” (LSJ). Teiresias, however, seems here to mean Oidipous’s ignominy (which Teiresias views as a fait accompli) resulting from his impatience with the ambiguity of prophetic speech. Since the audience knows that the only aspect of Oidipous’s fate yet to be realized is its revelation, it can safely judge the seer’s comment to be prophetic and absolutely accurate. This means that Oidipous’s “fate” is in fact a product of Oidipous’s own shortcomings. It is a consequence of his belief in his own sagacity. Having just now begun to realize that its own interpretation of the prophecies given Oidipous seems to have been inadequate, the audience will perhaps find itself in much the same predicament as Oidipous; its impatience with prophecy and especially prophetic ambiguity dooms it to great suffering. The correct understanding of Athens’ τύχη lies not in any one of this word’s meanings, but rather in a combination of all. The act of a god is clearly necessary to bring about the consequence, but that action must be understood to be a response to human action stemming from a human error following from the arrogant presumption of preeminent problem-solving capacities even in matters pertaining to the expression of divine will through mediated speech. Correction of this error requires a divine response. Thus, when Teiresias boldly asserts that Oidipous’s gifts are precisely the problem, he speaks for a god who seems to be engaged in bringing Oidipous to insight by exposing his errors. [Md] [Ad] [Aj] [Mpe] [Mw]