At line 1025 of Sophocles' Oedipus Tyrannus,
σὺ δ᾽ ἐμπολήσας ἢ τεκών μ᾽ αὐτῷ δίδως;,
our hero seems victim of some serious ‘obtuseness of understanding’, because the Corinthian to whom Oedipus is speaking has already clearly denied being the father of the foundling (line 1020 ἀλλ᾽ οὔ σ᾽ ἐγείνατ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἐκεῖνος [
sc. Polybus] οὔτ᾽ ἐγώ, ‘well, neither he nor I begot you’). Is Oedipus in such a state of mental confusion? Perhaps his supposed ‘obtuseness of understanding’ depends on his permanent hallucination? Maybe the same hallucination that keeps him from understanding the explicit prophecies of Teiresias (lines 408–25, 447–62) or drawing obvious conclusions from the revelation of Jocasta (lines 707–25). If so, the text requires no correction, and Sophocles' strategy is to show, through this and similar clues, the basic weakness of the protagonist, who proves to be nothing but a puppet in the hands of the gods.