While it is widely agreed that psychological realism is not a primary objective of Aeschylean dramaturgy, it remains somewhat uncertain whether any psychological interpretation can be valid for this sort of drama. Do Aeschylean stage figures possess ‘dramatic character’ at all? The answer probably depends upon a definition of ‘character’. Even in recent years, some critics have continued to assume that psychological analysis will not work at all unless at least the primary dramatic figures have been given a consistent and self-aware personality, whose motivations will bear rationalist scrutiny to the last detail. It was this notion of character that T. Wilamowitz used as a lever to overthrow traditional psychological interpretations of Sophoclean drama. But T. Wilamowitz's own touchstone of ‘dramatische Wirkung’ is so broad — and can be attached to such trivial matters — that it is virtually worthless as a tool of criticism. Use of such a vague criterion can lead, for example, to the assumption that anything anomalous or unexpected must somehow be ‘effective’.