<p>From the time of Goethe's writing of Iphigenie auf Tauris, a play based on Euripides' drama Iphigenia in Tauris, critics have been occupied with comparisons of the German 18th century and the ancient Greek works. Schiller, Goethe's contemporary, in a letter to Körner, has called Goethe's version "ungriechisch" and "erstaunlich modern". Since that time critics have taken varying viewpoints concerning the relationship between the two versions. This thesis takes a fresh view of this fascinating relationship by working very closely with the two texts. Certainly Goethe's play, like any great work, is a creation of his own epoch, and as such is modern. However, the author of this thesis demonstrates that many of the changes Goethe has made do not actually depart from the Greek work, but rather represent a development of the ideas already present in the Greek drama. Euripides, a late contributor to 5th century tragedy, was an innovator and Goethe capitalized on some of his innovations. The direction the two plays take does vary, particularly with the decision Goethe's heroine makes to tell Thoas the truth, but in spite of this difference, there is much common ground in the characterization of the figures. This investigation comprises two parts. In the first part the plight of the human will be explored: Orestes' escape from the Furies, his recognition of Iphigenia, the curse on the house of Tantalus and Iphigenia's dilemma. In the second part the author deals with aspects which are considered to lie outside the human sphere: the goddess Diana, the heroic element, Apollo's oracle and the divine. The element of "Greek Renaissance" found in Goethe's early classicism is evident in his exploration of the relationship between humanity and divinity. By tracing the origins of the myth surrounding Iphigenia, the author shows that Goethe's Iphigenie auf Tauris is part of a European literary tradition that finds its roots in the Euripidean drama.</p> / Master of Arts (MA)

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1964. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Modern Languages. Thesis. 1965. Ph.D. / Ph.D.