Kreon’s insistence that he has “no idea” what Oidipous has in mind is clearly disingenuous, for had he allowed Oidipous to complete his thought, he would immediately have learned what he had in mind. His interruption allows the audience to infer that he does know, but he is anxious to redirect the course of the discussion from that to something else so that Oidipous might not come to know. What happened to Laios was that he was killed a long time after receiving a prophecy about the cause of his death. Either Kreon has supposed the killer to have been the son mentioned by prophecy, which means he has supposed that the infant did not die when exposed, or Kreon has concluded from Laios’ death that seers and prophets have little claim to be trusted. If the former, then Kreon is endeavoring to protect Oidipous from a truth whose implications Kreon himself may be afraid to explore. If the latter, then Kreon is endeavoring to protect himself from the truth that he is skeptical of prophecy. Either way, the audience is reminded that the prophecy was accurate, powerful, and potentially useful, had Laios respected it. [Mpew] [Mi] [Apcma]