The Agon of the Old Comedy 9781463221560

Citation preview

The Agon of the Old Comedy

A n a l e c t a Gorgiana

326 Series Editor George Kiraz

Analecta Gorgiana is a collection of long essays and

short

monographs which are consistently cited by modern scholars but previously difficult to find because of their original appearance in obscure publications. Carefully selected by a team of scholars based on their relevance to modern scholarship, these essays can now be fully utili2ed by scholars and proudly owned by libraries.

The Agon of the Old Comedy

Milton Humphreys

l gorgias press 2009

Gorgias Press LLC, 180 Centennial Ave., Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2009 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2009

1

ISBN 978-1-60724-558-2

ISSN 1935-6854

Extract from The American Journal of Philology, vol. 8 (1887).

Printed in the LTnited States of America

I l l — T H E AGON O F T H E O L D COMEDY. An ancient Greek tragedy may be compared to a discourse the object of which is to inculcate some moral or to explain and illustrate some divine law—such a discourse, for instance, as a sermon based upon a " text." A comedy of the old period, on the other hand, is like a debate on a more or less definitely formulated question. This question may be a practical one of a moral or political nature, or it may be merely ideal or purely fanciful. In comedies of the former kind there is a contest, earnest and serious, sometimes bitter, between two opposing principles ; in those of the latter class the contest is only an outward form, owing its existence to custom. 1 It is not possible to draw the line sharply between the two kinds of comedy ; but the Knights and the Clouds are separated by a wide gulf from the Birds and Ekklesiazousai. There is another basis of classification that will be useful in the present discussion, and that is, the result of the contest. Just as in the tragedy (to use the word in its ordinary loose sense) the characters with whom we sympathize may succumb, as in the Antigone of Sophokles, or may triumph, as in his Elektra, so in comedy the good principle or the true doctrine may triumph, as in the Wasps, or it may succumb, as in the Clouds. In the latter case the dénouement always shows us that it is the unjust cause that has prevailed. The closing scene of the Clouds and the various warnings of the Choros are comparable to the utter desolation of Kreon and the ominous voice of Teiresias, while, so far as the play is concerned, the Sinaws Xoyos is as hopelessly undone as Antigone. In the old comedy not only is each play a general contest, but at a certain point the representatives of the two opposing principles are brought face to face and have a regular debate under fixed rules and in prescribed form. This special contest forms the central part of the play, around which all else is grouped. W h a t 1

With the further development, leading to the new comedy, which had amusement for its object, and consequently gave up even the form of a contest, and with the causes that brought about this revolution, we are not here concerned.

180

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

precedes it is introductory to i t ; what follows flows from i t If w e c o m p a r e the w h o l e p l a y to a war, the scene under discussion is the decisive pitched battle. Before the battle there is organizing, manoeuvring, s k i r m i s h i n g ; after the battle pursuing, capturing, negotiating ; but during the all-important crisis of conflict e v e r y t h i n g else awaits the issue in breathless suspense. Sometimes, h o w e v e r , a great battle does not decide a war. T h i s too finds its a n a l o g y in comedies. T h e conflict in the F r o g s is called a n S k t ^ (v. 1099), but at the end of the special contest the battle is pronounced indecisive and the continuation of hostilities is proclaimed. In the K n i g h t s there is a second conflict between the same antagonists (303 ff., 756 if.). T h e s e features of the p l a y s mentioned will b e found to affect the form of the contests proper. T h i s scene, so characteristic of the old c o m e d y , of course could not escape notice. W e s t p h a l (Metrik der Griechen, I I , p p . 401 ff., 494) g i v e s a clear statement of the form and nature of at least the chief portion of the contest, calling it a S y n t a g m a (with A n t i s y n t a g m a ) ; but he treats it merely as an important p a s s a g e of the epeisodia, without a c c o r d i n g to it the importance of a distinct subdivision of the p l a y , quite co-ordinate with the P a r o d o s a n d the Parabasis, t h o u g h in his P r o l e g o m e n a z u A e s c h y l o s T r a g ö d i e n (p. 97) he s p e a k s of the typical form of the Parabasis and the A n t i s y n t a g m a t i c parts of the old c o m e d y . Nesemann, in his D e Episodiis Aristophaneis, 1872 (p. 43), calls it comoediae nobilissimam partem eiusque robur, and (p. 5 1 ) totius c o m o e d i a e partis scenicae umbilicum, considers it a special form of the epeisodion, and devotes no less than eighteen p a g e s out of his s i x t y - t w o to the certatio; whereas A r n o l d t g i v e s no further d e v e l o p m e n t to the subject, but even totally ignores it in his Chorpartien bei A r i s tophanes, although he bases part of his w o r k upon that of N e s e mann. S o m e of the editors, such as K o c k and Teuffel, d e e m it sufficient to refer to W e s t p h a l ' s Metrik. T h e ancient scholiasts, as will be seen, w e r e not entirely ignorant of the peculiar form of the contest. 1 S u c h was the state of the subject w h e n the writer, being e n g a g e d in the revision of K o c k ' s Clouds, felt the inadequacy of the 1 Zacher, in an elaborate review of Zielinski (Wochenschrift für klassische Philologie, 1886, Coll. 1546-1553.1610-1615), cites also Bräuning, Ueber Aristophanes Frieden, Halle, 1874, S. 23 foil., and maintains, in the usual generous German way, that Zielinski has done nothing more than to set up a nomenclature for the whole and the parts.—B. L. G.

THE

AGON

OF THE

OLD COMEDY.

l8l

existing treatment, so far as it had c o m e to his k n o w l e d g e , and c o m m e n c e d the preparation of an article. T h e plan contemplated a careful s t u d y of Aristophanes and the fragments of all the comic poets, with a view to ascertaining the origin and tracing the history o f the A g o n — f o r it was at once d e c i d e d to substitute this name for the " S y n t a g m a " of W e s t p h a l . N a m e s for the different parts of the A g o n were adopted after correspondence and conference with scholars, a n d all the material was collected and prepared, except on one branch of the subject. It was discovered, namely, that three p l a y s of Aristophanes, Acharnians, Peace, and T h e s mophoriazousai, are entirely or virtually without an A g o n , t h o u g h all the other plays s e e m e d to s h o w that an A g o n was an essential part of a c o m e d y . W h i l e the causes of this a n o m a l y were b e i n g s o u g h t and investigated, and in two of the three cases an explanation was well-nigh despaired of, 1 a new w o r k appeared, D i e G l i e d e r u n g der Altattischen K o m o e d i e , v o n D r . T h . Zieliriski— one of the most important works, in m y opinion, that the form of the G r e e k d r a m a has ever called forth. It treats not only of the analysis of the old c o m e d y , but also of the manner of the w h o l e performance of plays, and the relation of c o m e d y to t r a g e d y in respect to form. A review of the entire w o r k will appear hereafter ; this article precedes it because a full discussion of the A g o n is necessary to a full appreciation of his theory. H i s w o r k opens with an elaborate discussion of this subject, and he too uses the name " A g o n . " T h e greater part of what I had prepared to say was found fully presented in this w o r k , and that too from a more comprehensive point of view. In this article no attempt will be m a d e to distinguish what is d u e to it. T h a t is a matter of no interest to the reader, and I can only request him not to ascribe to Zieliriski any errors that he m a y detect. T o obtain the clearest possible conception of the form and 1 N e s e m a n n had already attacked this subject. O f the P e a c e he says (p. 52): A l t e r c a t i o quidera iis inest nulla ( T r y g a e u s enim nil facit nisi stupide interrogate [ n V ] ) : attamen quae fatur ibi Mercurius ab iis sententiis, quas in dictis certationibus solemus invenire, non sunt aliena. O f the Thesmophoriazusae he says v a g u e l y (p. 53) : Caussa cur sententiarum generalium contentio omnino desit, ex singulari fabulae conformatione videtur repetenda. O f the A c h a r nians (p. 5 3 ) : E t i a m in A c h a r n e n s i b u s dicta certatio frustra quaeritur. Sed compensatur aliquatenus longa oratione (496-556) qua Dicaeopolis ad audientes versus omnes iis acerrime exprobrat perversitates, quibus rempublicam iam satis superque labefactatam in tot tantasque calamitates detruserint. — B . L. G.

182

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

nature of the A g o n would require a survey of all the plays in which it occurs, with attention specially directed to that feature. In the present article, however, only one play will be examined beyond the limits of the A g o n , and merely an analysis of the A g o n itself of other plays will be given, details being discussed only when they are of special interest. For the general survey the most suitable comedy is the Wasps. T h e question discussed in this play relates to the advantages and disadvantages of litigation. It is a satire upon the litigiousness of the Athenians; but there is so little hope of practical results that in some respects the play inclines to the farcical. Prologos, 1-229. Philokleon and Bdelykleon, whose names sufficiently characterize them, are father and son. T h e opening scene takes place before day at the house of Philokleon, who has been imprisoned at home by his son because he is afflicted with a mania: he is an extreme ^tXjjXiao-rijs. H e makes several vain attempts to elude the slaves that have been placed to guard him. Parodos, 230-525. Philokleon's a-vpSiKaarai have been summoned b y Kleon to be on hand at an early hour provided with a three days' supply of wrath, for the purpose of prosecuting Laches, who has been discovered to possess some money. On their way they arrive, twenty-four in number, in front of the house of Philokleon. Here the boys who carry the lamps take advantage of a mudpuddle and give some trouble. T h e Choros of dicasts, thus brought to a halt, sings a song, calling upon Philokleon to appear, and making various conjectures as to the cause of his unwonted remissness in failing to appear promptly. A t last he is seen on top of the house, and attempts to let himself down with a rope. W h e n in mid-air he is discovered, and a violent scene ensues. Bdelykleon and the two guards interrupt the proceeding. T h e dicasts dispatch the lamp-carriers to K l e o n with news of the treason, and make a furious assault upon their opponents ; that is, the Choreutai attempt to scale the Logeion. Other slaves are called to the rescue and the assailants are driven back, bewailing the ills of declining years. All parties come to parley. Bdelykleon repels with ridicule the charge of treason and attempted tyranny, and claims that he is only trying to make his father lead an honorable life free from all 6p6po? ÒVTGJV TGJV Trpoaùiruv, KatìàiTEp kv TDLR K