In contrast to Teiresias and Kreon, Oidipous proceeds on the premise that he can control the discourse and so reveal the truth. [Mpea] This shifts the audience’s focus from how much Kreon knows to how much Oidipous knows of what Kreon knows. Itself aware that it does not know with any certainty what Kreon knows, it should treat with skepticism Oidipous’s assumption of knowledge. The audience has been making inferences about Kreon’s probable realization that Oidipous is Laios’ killer. The problem is that Kreon’s insight depends upon his interpretation of prophetic statements not necessarily even made in his presence. Nor have they been recounted in this play. There is therefore not even the softest of touchstones to serve as a basis for clarity. Oidipous, on the other hand, seems likely never to have been told about the divine messages bearing on the conception of a child by Laios and Okaste. His ignorance renders his confidence in his own knowledge meaningless and even dangerously misleading. The audience, by contrast, is aware that proper reception of prophecy is here a question of central importance. [Mpei] [Mip]