diff options
Diffstat (limited to '76555-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 76555-0.txt | 18954 |
1 files changed, 18954 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/76555-0.txt b/76555-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1a802a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/76555-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,18954 @@ + +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 76555 *** + + + + + +[Illustration: _Frontispiece._ + +FIG. 1. THEATRE AT ATHENS, FROM THE EAST.] + + + + + THE + ATTIC THEATRE + + A DESCRIPTION OF THE STAGE AND THEATRE + OF THE ATHENIANS, AND OF THE DRAMATIC + PERFORMANCES AT ATHENS + + BY + A. E. HAIGH + LATE FELLOW OF CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, OXFORD + + THIRD EDITION + REVISED AND IN PART RE-WRITTEN + BY + A. W. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE, M.A. + FELLOW OF BALLIOL COLLEGE + + WITH ILLUSTRATIONS + + OXFORD + AT THE CLARENDON PRESS + MCMVII + + HENRY FROWDE, M.A. + PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD + LONDON, EDINBURGH + NEW YORK AND TORONTO + + _Made and Printed in Great Britain_ + + + + +PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION + + +My purpose in this book has been to collect and piece together all the +available information concerning the outward features and surroundings +of the old Athenian dramatic performances; in other words, to write +a history of the Attic drama from the theatrical, as opposed to the +literary, point of view. The subject is one which has been practically +revolutionized during the last half-century, partly through the labours +of various scholars in interpreting the notices of the old grammarians, +but more especially owing to the rich discoveries of inscriptions +relating to theatrical affairs, and the information supplied by +excavations in the old Greek theatres. But in spite of the copious +accession of fresh materials, it is now more than fifty years since +any work has appeared in English, in which this particular department +of Greek dramatic history has been treated in a comprehensive manner. +The neglect is all the more remarkable, as the subject is undeniably of +great interest and importance, and this for two reasons. In the first +place it is difficult to understand and appreciate the peculiar qualities +of the existing Greek plays, without acquiring some knowledge of the +circumstances under which they were produced, and the limitations within +which the ancient dramatic poets had to work. In the second place, as +the Attic drama was essentially a public institution, and formed one of +the most conspicuous elements in the national life, the various details +connected with its management are incidentally most instructive, because +of the light which they throw upon the habits, feelings, and tastes of +the old Athenians. It is owing to these several considerations that the +present work has been undertaken. + +Unfortunately, with the exception of a list of names and definitions +in Pollux, and a few observations upon the theatre in Vitruvius, none +of the ancient treatises, which dealt with the various portions of the +subject, have been preserved. The materials have in consequence to +be collected from the most multifarious sources—from casual remarks +in ancient authors, from incidental references in the Greek dramas, +from obscure and often contradictory notices in the scholiasts and +grammarians, from old inscriptions, and the ruins of Greek theatres, +from vases, statuettes, wall-paintings, and other works of art. In the +treatment of questions which depend upon evidence of this intricate and +complex character, it is inevitable that there should be much diversity +of opinion, and that numberless opportunities should be afforded for +ingenious conjectures and fanciful combinations. As a matter of fact the +whole history of the Attic drama has been to a certain extent obscured +by the mass of controversy and hypothesis to which it has given rise. +My purpose throughout the following pages has been to keep close to the +original sources of information, to restrict myself to such facts as seem +to be fairly well established by the evidence, and to clear the subject +of all those fine-drawn theories and conjectures which have no definite +foundation to depend upon. For every statement concerning the Attic drama +I have been careful to quote the ultimate authority, and the plan which +I have adopted, in the citation of evidence, has been as follows. Where +a passage is appealed to in support of some mere matter of fact, about +which there could be no particular difference of opinion, I have been +content to simply give the reference. But in cases where the inference is +more dubious, I have quoted the original authorities in full, so as to +enable the reader to judge for himself as to the validity of the views +adopted in the text. It would have been impossible, within the limits of +a single volume, to discuss in detail all the points concerning which +controversies have been raised. The more important questions I have +treated at considerable length; but as regards matters of minute detail +and trivial interest, I have merely given my own opinion in the text, and +appended a statement of the evidence in the notes. + +The various books, articles, monographs, and dissertations, which +have been written on the subject of the Attic theatre and dramatic +performances, are numerous enough in themselves to constitute a +considerable literature. It will be sufficient in the present place to +mention those to which I have been principally indebted. Of writings in +which the subject is treated as a whole the most important is Albert +Müller’s _Lehrbuch der Griechischen Bühnenalterthümer_ (Freiburg, +1886)—a work which is conspicuous for the industry, learning, and +sound judgement displayed in its compilation, and for the lucid +manner in which an immense amount of information is compressed into a +comparatively limited space. The exhaustive account which it contains +of the bibliography of the subject is especially valuable. Another book +which I have found of the greatest help is Schneider’s _Das Attische +Theaterwesen_ (Weimar, 1835). It consists mainly of a citation in full of +all the ancient passages which refer to performances in the theatre; and +although Schneider’s own views and inferences are now mostly antiquated, +and his collection of ‘Quellen’ requires to be supplemented, the work +will always be most interesting and serviceable to students of the Attic +drama. The description of the Greek dramatic performances in the third +volume of Bergk’s _Griechische Literaturgeschichte_ (Berlin, 1884) has +been exceedingly useful and suggestive; and considerable assistance has +been derived from the similar account in vol. ii. pt. 2 of Bernhardy’s +_Grundriss der Griechischen Litteratur_ (Halle, 1880). + +As regards the separate portions of the subject, the following is a +list of the treatises which I have found of most assistance. For the +Dionysiac festivals: Böckh’s dissertation, _Vom Unterschiede der Lenäen, +Anthesterien, und ländlichen Dionysien_, Berlin, 1816; A. Mommsen’s +_Heortologie_, Leipzig, 1864. For the arrangements connected with the +dramatic contests and the production of a play: Rohde’s article on the +Proagon in _Rhein. Museum_, xxxviii. p. 251 ff.; Sauppe’s paper, _Ueber +die Wahl der Richter_, &c., in _Sächs. Gesellschaft der Wissensch. zu +Leipzig_, 1855; Petersen’s _Preisrichter der grossen Dionysien_, Progr. +Dorpat, 1878; Lipsius, _Ueber die dramatische Choregie_, in _Sächs. +Gesell. der Wissensch._, 1885. For the structure and arrangement of the +theatre: Kawerau’s article _Theatergebäude_, in vol. iii. of Baumeister’s +_Denkmäler des klassischen Alterthums_, 1888; Vischer’s _Die Entdeckungen +im Dionysostheater_ (_Neues Schweizerisches Museum_, 1863); Julius’s +article, _Das Theater des Dionysos_ (_Zeitschrift für bild. Kunst_, +1878); J. R. Wheeler’s _Theatre of Dionysus_ (_Papers of the American +School of Classical Studies at Athens_, vol. i); Kabbadias, on the +theatre at Epidaurus, in _Πρακτικὰ τῆς ἐν Ἀθήναις ἀρχαιολογικῆς ἑταιρίας_, +1881 and 1883; the account of the Greek theatre by Wieseler in vol. +83 of Ersch and Gruber’s _Allgemeine Encyklopädie_, 1866; Wieseler’s +_Theatergebäude und Denkmäler des Bühnenwesens bei Griechen und Römern_, +1851; and Strack’s _Das altgriechische Theatergebäude_, Potsdam, 1843. +On the question of the scenery: Niejahr’s _Quaestiones Aristophaneae +Scaenicae_ (Greifswald, 1877); Sommerbrodt’s _De Aeschyli re scenica_ +(in _Scenica_, Berlin, 1876). On the actors in the Greek drama, their +costume, style, and mode of delivery: Grysar, _De Graecorum tragoedia_, +&c. (Cöln, 1830); K. F. Hermann, _De distributione personarum inter +histriones in tragoediis graecis_ (Marburg, 1840); Beer, _Ueber die Zahl +der Schauspieler bei Aristophanes_ (Leipzig, 1844); Sommerbrodt’s two +articles _De Histrionibus_ and _De Arte Histrionum_, in his _Scenica_; +Wieseler’s _Das Satyrspiel_ (Göttingen, 1848); Dierk’s two dissertations, +_De tragicorum histrionum habitu scaenico apud Graecos_ (Göttingen, +1883), _Ueber das Costüm der griechischen Schauspieler in der alten +Komödie_ (_Archaeol. Zeitung_, xliii); Christ’s _Metrik der Griechen und +Römer_ (Leipzig, 1879). On the subject of the chorus: K. O. Müller’s +_Dissertations on the Eumenides_ (Engl. transl., London, 1853); G. +Hermann’s _De choro Eumenidum_ (Opusc. ii. p. 129 ff.); Schultze’s _De +chori Graecorum tragici habitu externo_ (Berlin, 1857); Sommerbrodt’s _De +chori tragici principibus_, in _Scenica_; and Arnoldt’s _Die Chorpartieen +bei Aristophanes_ (Leipzig, 1873). + +In conclusion I wish to express my obligations to Professor Gardner for +his assistance in various questions connected with archaeology, and +to Mr. Evelyn Abbott for many valuable suggestions and criticisms. I +have to thank the Council of the Hellenic Society for their permission +to reproduce the illustration of a chorus of birds from the _Hellenic +Journal_. I desire at the same time to acknowledge the great courtesy +with which Dr. Dörpfeld, of the German Archaeological Institute, has +supplied me with the latest information concerning his excavations in the +theatre of Dionysus, and his views on Greek theatres in general. + +OXFORD, _June, 1889_. + + + + +PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION + + +Since the first edition of this book was published many important +additions have been made to our knowledge of the Greek stage. Various +theatres have been excavated for the first time; fresh inscriptions +have been discovered; and the evidence of the ancient authorities has +been examined and sifted with the minutest care. The effect has been +to throw a new light on many points which were previously obscure. In +order to incorporate these results in the present edition, it was found +necessary to make considerable alterations in the book. The third and +fourth chapters—those dealing with the Theatre and the Scenery—have +been entirely re-written. The first chapter, on the Dramatic Contests +at Athens, has been re-written in parts. The other chapters have been +carefully revised throughout, and numerous corrections and additions +have been inserted, especially on such subjects as the choregia, the +theoric fund, the theatre-tickets, and the costume of the actors and +the chorus. Eleven new illustrations have been added. The old ones have +been mostly retained, with the exception of the ground-plan and the two +views of the theatre at Athens, which have been replaced by more accurate +representations. + +The number of books, treatises, and articles which have been written +on the subject during the last few years is so great that it would be +impossible to mention them all. I propose in the following list to +specify only those which I have found most useful, and to which I am +chiefly indebted. Many others will be referred to in the notes. The most +important work of recent years on the Greek theatre is Dörpfeld and +Reisch’s _Das griechische Theater_ (Athens, 1896). The admirable and +exhaustive account of the Theatre of Dionysus at Athens, which is given +in this book, has superseded all previous descriptions. Dörpfeld appears +to have now proved conclusively that the stone theatre at Athens was not +earlier than the fourth century B.C., and his views on the subject have +been followed in the present edition. The book also contains a valuable +summary of the chief points of interest in other theatres recently +excavated, and a complete exposition of Dörpfeld’s theory about the Greek +stage. Some further developments and modifications of this theory will +be found in two articles lately published by Dörpfeld in the _Bulletin +de Correspondance Hellénique_, 1896, p. 563 ff., and in _Athenische +Mittheilungen_, 1897, p. 439 ff. After reading through Dörpfeld’s +arguments, and those of other scholars who support his views, I am still +of opinion that the old theory is the right one, and that the Greek +actors performed on a stage from the first; though no doubt the stage of +the fifth century was much lower than that of later times. Among other +writings which deal with the subject of the Greek theatre as a whole I +may mention the following:—Oehmichen, _Das Bühnenwesen der Griechen und +Römer_, München, 1890; Navarre, _Dionysos_, Paris, 1895 (a lucid and +well-written summary); the valuable articles by Prof. Jebb in Smith’s +_Dictionary of Antiquities_ (v. _Theatrum_), and by Prof. P. Gardner in +Jevons and Gardner’s _Manual of Greek and Roman Antiquities_; and Bethe’s +_Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Theaters im Alterthum_, Leipzig, 1896. +This last book, though often rather fanciful in its conclusions, is full +of useful information and interesting suggestions. + +To turn to the treatises on special portions of the subject. The point +which has been most discussed in recent years is the question of the +stage. The following are among the more important articles which +have been written in favour of Dörpfeld’s views:—White, _The Stage +in Aristophanes_ (_Harvard Studies_, ii. pp. 159-205); Bodensteiner, +_Scenische Fragen im griechischen Drama_ (Leipzig, 1893); Capps, _The +Chorus in the later Greek Drama_ (_American Journal of Archaeology_, x. +3. pp. 287-325), _The Stage in the Greek Theatre_ (New Haven, 1891), +_Vitruvius and the Greek Stage_ (_Studies in Classical Philology_, +Chicago, 1893, p. 3 ff). The opposite side of the question has been +defended by Todt, _Noch einmal die Bühne des Aeschylos_ (_Philologus_, +1889, p. 505 ff.); Curtius, _Orchestra und Bühne_ (_Berliner Philolog. +Wochenschrift_, 1893, p. 97 ff.); Prof. E. Gardner, _A Plea for +Vitruvius_ (_Supplementary Papers of the Hellenic Journal_, 1892, p. +92 ff.); Lechat, _Épidaure_ (Paris, 1895, p. 215 ff.); Zacher, _Die +erhöhte Bühne bei Aristophanes_ (_Philologus_, 1896, p. 181 ff.); +Chamonard, _Bulletin de Corr. Hellénique_, 1896, p. 294 ff. (an +admirable criticism); and also in various reviews of Dörpfeld’s book, +and especially by Bethe (_Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen_, 1897, pp. +701-28), and by A. Müller (_Berl. Philolog. Wochenschrift_, 1897, pp. +1121-31). Special views, which may be regarded as a sort of compromise +between the ordinary theory and that of Dörpfeld, are advocated by +Weismann in _Die scenische Aufführung der griechischen Dramen_ (München, +1893), _Zur Thymele-frage_ (_Jahrb. für classische Philologie_, 1895, +pp. 673-9), _Scenische Anweisungen, &c._ (Bamberg, 1896); and by Christ +in _Jahrb. für classische Philologie_, 1894, p. 27 ff., p. 157 ff., and +_Sitzungsberichte der bayer. Akad. der Wissenschaften_, 1894, pp. 1-52. +All these articles, together with others which might be mentioned, have +been of great service in the preparation of the present edition. Opinions +may differ as to the soundness of the views which they respectively +advocate. But there can be no doubt that this exhaustive discussion of +the subject has brought to light many new facts, and cleared up many +difficulties. + +As regards the theatres which have been recently explored and excavated, +I have consulted (in addition to Dörpfeld’s book) the following +sources:—Hermann, Bohn, and Fränkel, _Ausgrabungen zu Pergamon_, Berlin, +1888, p. 40 ff. (theatre at Pergamon); _Athen. Mittheilungen_, 1894, +p. 65 ff. (theatre at Magnesia); _Papers of the American School of +Archaeological Studies at Athens_, 1888, pp. 1-34 (Thoricus); _American +Journal of Archaeology_, 1891, p. 253 ff., 1895, p. 331 ff. (Eretria); +_Ibid._ 1889, p. 267 ff., 1893, p. 388 ff. (Sicyon); Defrasse and +Lechat, _Épidaure_, Paris, 1895 (Epidaurus); Schultz, Gardner, and +Loring in _Excavations at Megalopolis, Supplement to Hellenic Journal_, +1892 (Megalopolis); Chamonard, _Bulletin de Corr. Hellénique_, 1896, p. +256 ff. (Delos); _Athen. Mittheilungen_, 1893, p. 404 ff. (Tralles); +Lanckoronski, _Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens_, Wien, 1892 (contains +a very valuable account, with excellent plans and illustrations, of +certain Asia Minor theatres hitherto but little known); Schrader, +_Berl. Philolog. Wochenschrift_, April 16, 1898, pp. 508, 509 (a +brief preliminary notice of the interesting theatre at Priene, lately +excavated). + +The subject of the choregic arrangements has been ably treated by Capps +in his _Dramatic Synchoregia at Athens_ (_American Journal of Philology_, +xvii. 3. pp. 319-28), which I have followed in most points. For certain +questions connected with the Dionysiac festivals I have consulted with +advantage Körte’s article _Zu Dionysos-Festen_ (_Rhein. Museum_, 1897, +pp. 168-74), and Wachsmuth, _Das Thukydideische Urathen_ (_Abhandl. +der Sächs. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften_, xviii. pp. 1-56). As for +the costume of actors and chorus, the most valuable and instructive +of recent treatises are Körte’s _Studien zur alten Komödie_ (_Jahrb. +des archaeol. Instituts_, 1893, pp. 61-93), and his articles in _Athen. +Mittheilungen_, 1894, p. 346 ff., and in Bethe’s _Prolegomena_, p. +339 ff.; Crusius, in _Philologus_, xlviii. p. 696 ff.; Poppelreuter, +_De Comoediae Atticae Primordiis_, Berlin, 1893; Loeschcke, _Athen. +Mittheilungen_, 1894, p. 519 ff.; and Bethe’s _Prolegomena_, p. 35 +ff. Other articles on special points from which I have taken various +suggestions are—Neckel, _Das Ekkyklema_ (Friedland, 1890); Cook, _The +Thymele in Greek Theatres_ (_Classical Review_, Oct. 1895); Reisch, +_Griechische Weihgeschenke_ (Wien, 1890); and Svoronos, Περὶ τῶν +Εἰσιτηρίων (_Journal International d’ Archéologie Numismatique_, 1898, +i. pp. 37-120). I should also mention Albert Müller’s _Die neueren +Arbeiten auf dem Gebiete des griech. Bühnenwesens_ (_Philologus_, Suppl. +vi. 1891)—an interesting and judicious criticism of the various writings +about the Greek stage which had appeared shortly before the publication +of the article. + +It will be seen that many of the authorities mentioned in the preface to +the first edition have been superseded, at any rate in part, by these +more recent investigations. But I have thought it best to reprint the +earlier list, since there are few of the old authorities which are not +still worth consulting on some point or another. + +I gladly take this opportunity of expressing my obligations to various +friends for the corrections and suggestions which they have sent to me. +I have derived many valuable hints from the reviews and notices of the +first edition, and especially from the very friendly and useful criticism +by Mr. L. C. Purser in _Hermathena_, and from that by Mr. H. Richards +in the _Academy_. I am greatly indebted to Professor E. Gardner for the +photograph of the Epidaurian theatre which is reproduced in Fig. 7; and +to the Council of the Hellenic Society for their permission to copy from +the _Hellenic Journal_ the illustration of a satyric chorus. I have to +thank the Provost of Oriel, Professor P. Gardner, Mr. F. Madan, Rev. +G. C. Richards, and other friends for their help and advice in various +matters; and Dr. Albert Müller, Professor White, and Mr. Capps for their +kindness in sending me writings of theirs on the subject of the Greek +stage which have proved of very great service. + +OXFORD, _July, 1898_. + + + + +PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION + + +After the lamented death of Mr. Haigh, the Delegates of the Clarendon +Press entrusted me with the revision of his book for a third edition, +and his relatives kindly supplied me with the materials which he had +collected for a revision. I have tried to follow as far as possible such +indications as I could find of his own intentions in regard to the new +edition. He had re-written parts of Chapters I and II, and his review +of Puchstein’s _Die griechische Bühne_ showed sufficiently what view he +took of that work. He also left careful analyses of many papers which +had appeared in periodicals since the second edition, with occasional +criticisms. It is clear from the manner in which the portions of the +book referred to were re-written that he intended to cut out many of the +repetitions, both of matter and expression, which had been allowed to +remain in the second edition. I have therefore felt at liberty to follow +him in this respect; but the space gained has been almost all filled +by the new matter which it has been necessary to insert, either at the +suggestion of his own notes, or in consequence of important writings on +the subject since the last edition. + +Since 1898 the inscriptions bearing upon the Greek drama have been +the subject of thorough investigation at the hands of Prof. Edward +Capps, Dr. Adolph Wilhelm, and others. The complete treatment of all +the inscriptional evidence in the latter’s _Urkunden dramatischer +Aufführungen in Athen_, just published, is an invaluable contribution to +the history of the Greek theatre and drama, and I have made as much use +of it as the time of its publication allowed, the revision of the present +volume having been almost completed by that date. It was beyond the +scope of the present work to embark on a full discussion of the points +of detail on which the chief authorities on the inscriptions differ; but +I have re-written many of the notes on these points, and have tried to +give sufficient indications of the character of the evidence. Further, in +re-writing Appendix B, as it was necessary to do in the light of recent +work on the subject, I have thought it best to give the reader access to +considerably more of the inscriptional material, though still omitting +many fragments whose readings, date, or meaning were too uncertain to +allow them to be of value to the ordinary student. + +Puchstein’s book, _Die griechische Bühne_, above referred to, is the +other work of first-rate importance in connexion with the Greek theatre +which has appeared since 1898. There has been much controversy in regard +to the theories contained in it, and Dr. Dörpfeld has published a reply +to most of Puchstein’s contentions (_Athenische Mittheilungen_, 1903, +383 ff.). But though in several points of detail Puchstein’s position +seems to be open to criticism, it is very difficult to believe that Dr. +Dörpfeld has improved his case for his own theory; and I have followed +both Mr. Haigh’s view and my own conviction, in not modifying in any +essential point the opinions expressed in the last edition. I have, +however, altered the expressions ‘Lycurgean’ and ‘Hellenistic’ in most +cases where they were applied in the last edition to the stage-buildings +of different periods, since Puchstein’s work makes it at least an open +question whether some of the ‘Lycurgean’ work is not to be ascribed to +an earlier period, and some of the ‘Hellenistic’ work to Lycurgus. Mr. +Haigh’s manuscript notes show, I think, that he would have approved of +this. The new section on Puchstein’s theory follows in most points the +lines of Mr. Haigh’s article on the subject in the _Classical Review_. +I have inserted a number of references to the writings of Puchstein, +Dörpfeld, and others who have taken part in the controversy as to the +stage-buildings; and I have in many cases written fresh notes upon these +and other points which have come into dispute since 1898, or upon which +fresh light has been thrown. In cases where I could find no warrant +in Mr. Haigh’s own notes or writings for the views expressed, I have +included these notes in square brackets, and I have, so far as I could, +avoided inserting in the text anything with which I had reason to think +he would have disagreed. + +On one point on which there has recently been much controversy, the site +of the Lenaeum, I have thought it best to relegate the discussion to +a new Appendix; partly owing to its complicated character, and partly +because I am not sure that Mr. Haigh would have entirely agreed with my +views. He had not of course seen Miss Harrison’s _Primitive Athens_, and +I do not think he had read some other recent writings on the subject, +when he began to rewrite Chapter I; in particular, he seems not to have +been acquainted with Nilsson’s _Studia de Dionysiis Atticis_—the most +valuable contribution of recent years to discussions on the festivals. +I have therefore allowed myself a fairly free hand in dealing with this +topic. I am much indebted to Mr. W. H. Forbes of Balliol College for his +kind criticisms on this part of my work. + +The following are the principal writings which have been published since +the last edition, and which I have been able to consult, besides those +already named: E. Capps, papers in the _American Journal of Philology_, +_American Journal of Archaeology_, and _Chicago Decennial Publications_, +vol. vi; Miss Harrison, _Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion_; E. +A. Gardner, _Ancient Athens_; Roberts and Gardner, _Greek Epigraphy_, +vol. ii; Mazon, _Sur le Proagon_ (Rev. de Philologie, 1903); A. Müller, +_Untersuchungen zu den Bühnenalterthümern_, and papers in _Philologus_ +and _Berlin. Philolog. Wochenschrift_; Noack, _Das Proskenion in der +Theaterfrage_ (Philologus, lviii); Exon, _A New Theory of the Eccyclema_ +(Hermathena, xxvi); Dörpfeld, papers in _Hermes_ and _Athenische +Mittheilungen_; Frei, _De certaminibus Thymelicis_; Hampel, _Was lehrt +Aischylos’ Orestie für die Theaterfrage?_; Flickinger, _The meaning of +ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς in the Fourth Century B.C._; Engelmann, _Archäologische +Studien zu den Tragikern_; P. Gardner, _The Scenery of the Greek Stage_ +(J. Hell. Stud., 1899); Devrient, _Das Kind auf der antiken Bühne_; +Dignan, _The Idle Actor in Aeschylus_; Völker, _Berühmte Schauspieler im +griechischen Alterthum_; J. W. White, _An Unrecognized Actor in Greek +Comedy_ (Harvard Stud. Class. Phil., 1906); Hense, _Die Modificirung der +Maske in der griechischen Tragödie_; Körte, _Das Fortleben des Chors im +griechischen Drama_ (Neue Jahrb. für Philol., 1900); Navarre, _Utrum +Mulieres Athenienses scenicos ludos spectaverint_; Römer, _Über den +litterarisch-aesthetischen Bildungsstand des attischen Theaterpublikums_; +Foucart, _Le Culte de Dionysos en Attique_; besides the reviews of +many of these works, and the introductions and notes to Starkie’s, +Rogers’s, Sharpley’s, and van Leeuwen’s editions of a number of plays of +Aristophanes, and various articles in Pauly-Wissowa, _Real-Encyclopädie_. + + A. W. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE. + +BALLIOL COLLEGE, _January, 1907_. + + + + +CONTENTS + + + PAGE + + CHAP. I. DRAMATIC CONTESTS AT ATHENS 1 + + § 1. General Character of the Contests 1 + + § 2. Earliest history of Dramatic Competitions 5 + + § 3. The City Dionysia 6 + + § 4. Tragedy at the City Dionysia 10 + + § 5. Comedy at the City Dionysia 20 + + § 6. Order of Contests at the City Dionysia 23 + + § 7. The Lenaea 24 + + § 8. Rural Dionysia and Anthesteria 29 + + § 9. The Judges 31 + + § 10. The Prizes 38 + + § 11. Contests between Actors 40 + + § 12. Records of Dramatic Contests 44 + + CHAP. II. THE PREPARATION FOR THE CONTESTS 49 + + § 1. The Poets 49 + + § 2. The Choregi 53 + + § 3. Selection of the Actors 57 + + § 4. The Training of the Chorus 60 + + § 5. The Expenses of the Choregia 63 + + § 6. The Performances in the Theatre 67 + + § 7. Reproduction of Old Plays 71 + + CHAP. III. THE THEATRE 78 + + § 1. Introductory 78 + + § 2. The old Wooden Theatres at Athens 80 + + § 3. The Stone Theatre 86 + + § 4. The Auditorium 90 + + § 5. The Orchestra 101 + + § 6. Ruins of the Stage-buildings at Athens 112 + + § 7. The Earlier Stage-buildings 116 + + § 8. The Later Stage-buildings of the pre-Roman period 120 + + § 9. Puchstein’s Theory of the Stage-buildings 130 + + § 10. The Stage-buildings in Roman Times 133 + + § 11. Exceptional Stage-buildings 137 + + § 12. Wieseler’s Theory of the Greek Stage 140 + + § 13. Dörpfeld’s Theory of the Greek Stage 144 + + § 14. Various Details 174 + + CHAP. IV. THE SCENERY 179 + + § 1. General Character of the Scenery 179 + + § 2. Mechanical Arrangements for the Scenery 186 + + § 3. The Entrances to the Stage 188 + + § 4. Changes of Scene 195 + + § 5. Stage Properties, &c. 199 + + § 6. The Ekkyklema 201 + + § 7. The Mechane and Theologeion 209 + + § 8. Other Mechanical Contrivances 217 + + CHAP. V. THE ACTORS 221 + + § 1. Rise of the Actor’s Profession 221 + + § 2. The distribution of the Parts among the Actors 230 + + § 3. Extra Performers 234 + + § 4. Costume of the Tragic Actors 237 + + § 5. Costume of Satyric Actors 255 + + § 6. Costume of Comic Actors 257 + + § 7. Speech, Song, and Recitative 266 + + § 8. Importance of the Voice in Greek Acting 272 + + § 9. Style of Greek Acting 275 + + § 10. The Actors’ Guild 278 + + § 11. Social Position of Actors 281 + + § 12. Celebrated Athenian Actors 282 + + CHAP. VI. THE CHORUS 285 + + § 1. History of the Chorus 285 + + § 2. Size of the Chorus 288 + + § 3. Costume of the Chorus 290 + + § 4. Arrangement of the Chorus 298 + + § 5. The Delivery of the Choral Part 305 + + § 6. The Dancing 311 + + § 7. The Music 319 + + CHAP. VII. THE AUDIENCE 323 + + § 1. Composition of the Audience 323 + + § 2. Price of Admission 329 + + § 3. The Distribution of the Seats 334 + + § 4. Various Arrangements in connexion with the Audience 341 + + § 5. Character of Attic Audiences 343 + + APPENDIX A. Arguments, &c., to Plays 349 + + APPENDIX B. Dramatic Inscriptions 352 + + APPENDIX C. The Original Place of the Lenaea 368 + + APPENDIX D. Inscriptions from Delos 379 + + GREEK INDEX 382 + + GENERAL INDEX 386 + + + + +LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS + + + FIG. + + 1. Theatre at Athens from the East _Frontispiece._ + + 2. Theatre at Athens from the North to face p. 78 + + 3. Ground-plan of Theatre at Athens page 91 + + 4. Part of the auditorium in the theatre at Athens ” 95 + + 5. Coin with view of the theatre at Athens ” 99 + + 6. Ground-plan of the theatre at Epidaurus ” 104 + + 7. Theatre at Epidaurus from the North-East to face p. 104 + + 8. Gates in the theatre at Epidaurus page 111 + + 8 A. Diagram of pillars, &c., of proscenia ” 122 + + 9. Part of the hyposkenion in the theatre at Epidaurus ” 124 + + 10. Front of the stage-buildings at Aspendos ” 134 + + 11. Ground-plan of the theatre at Megalopolis ” 138 + + 12. Ground-plan of the theatre at Delos ” 139 + + 13. Scene from a Comedy of the Phlyakes ” 155 + + 14. Scene from a Comedy of the Phlyakes ” 156 + + 14 A. Diagram of the Ekkyklema, according to Exon ” 206 + + 15. Relief with three tragic actors ” 241 + + 16. Statuette of tragic actor ” 243 + + 17. Tragic masks ” 246 + + 18. Tragic masks ” 247 + + 19. Scene from a tragedy, showing the size of the cothurni ” 249 + + 20. Tragic scene ” 253 + + 21. Tragic scene ” 253 + + 22. Actors in a satyric drama ” 255 + + 23. Actors in the Old Comedy ” 257 + + 24. Two statuettes of actors in the Old Comedy ” 258 + + 25. Masks of the New Comedy ” 264 + + 26. Masks of the New Comedy ” 264 + + 27. Scene from the New Comedy ” 265 + + 28. Members of a satyric chorus ” 292 + + 29. Members of a satyric chorus ” 293 + + 30. A chorus of Birds ” 297 + + 31. Diagram illustrating the entrance of the chorus ” 299 + + 32. Lead admission-coin ” 332 + + 33. Ivory admission-coin ” 333 + + 34. Bronze admission-coin ” 334 + + 35. Throne of the priest of Dionysus ” 338 + + + + +THE ATTIC THEATRE + + + + +CHAPTER I + +DRAMATIC CONTESTS AT ATHENS + + +§ 1. _General Character of the Contests._ + +The Attic drama, like most ancient forms of art and poetry, was +originally the offspring of religious enthusiasm. It was developed out +of the songs and dances in honour of Dionysus, the god of wine and +vegetation. In course of time, as it assumed a regular dramatic shape, +its range of subject was extended far beyond the limits of the Bacchic +mythology. Its religious significance was also gradually diminished, +and it began to be written more and more from the purely human point +of view. But in spite of these changes, its outward connexion with the +Bacchic worship was preserved unimpaired throughout the whole period +of its history. Dramatic representations at Athens were confined, from +first to last, to the great festivals of Dionysus. They were regarded +as a religious ceremonial, as an act of homage to the god. They never +became, as with us, an ordinary amusement of everyday life. During the +greater part of the year the Athenians had to be content with other forms +of entertainment. It was only when the annual festivals of Dionysus +came round that they were able to gratify their passion for the stage. +On such occasions their eagerness and enthusiasm were proportionately +great. The whole city kept holiday, and gave itself up to pleasure, and +to the worship of the wine-god. Business was abandoned; the law-courts +were closed; distraints for debt were forbidden during the continuance +of the festival; even prisoners were released from gaol, to enable them +to share in the common festivities.[1] The theatre, the chief centre +of attraction, was thronged with spectators; and the number of plays +provided was large enough to compensate for their scarcity at other +periods. Several days in succession were devoted to the drama. Tragedies +and comedies followed one another without intermission from morning +till evening. In the midst of these pleasures the religious aspect of +the performance, as a ceremony in honour of Dionysus, established in +obedience to the direct commands of the oracle,[2] was not forgotten. The +audience came with garlands on their heads, as to a sacred gathering. +The statue of Dionysus was brought to the theatre, and placed in front +of the stage, so that the god might enjoy the spectacle along with his +worshippers.[3] The chief seats in the theatre were mostly occupied by +priests, and the central seat of all was reserved for the priest of +Dionysus.[4] The performance of plays was preceded by the sacrifice of +a victim to the god of the festival. The poets who wrote the plays, the +choregi who paid for them, and the actors and singers who performed them, +were all looked upon as ministers of religion, and their persons were +sacred and inviolable. The theatre itself possessed all the sanctity +attaching to a divine temple. Any form of outrage committed there was +treated, not merely as an offence against the ordinary laws, but as a +sacrilegious act, and was punished with corresponding severity. The +ordinary course of law was not considered sufficient, and they were +dealt with under an exceptional process at a special meeting of the +Assembly.[5] It is recorded that on one occasion a certain Ctesicles +was put to death for merely striking a personal enemy during the +procession.[6] Merely to eject a man from a seat which he had taken +wrongfully was a piece of sacrilege punishable with death.[7] These +various characteristics of the Attic drama—its limitation to certain +annual festivals, and its religious associations—have no parallel on +the modern stage, apart from isolated survivals like the performance +at Ober-Ammergau. The modern theatre has long since been divorced from +ecclesiastical influence, and is unrestricted as to season. But its +original surroundings were not dissimilar. The Mysteries and Miracle +Plays from which it is descended, and which were performed year by year +for the instruction of the people on the great Feast-days of the Church, +suggest many points of comparison with the exhibitions at the Attic +Dionysia. + +Another remarkable feature of the ancient theatre is the fact that almost +all the dramatic representations were arranged in the form of a contest. +Prizes were offered by the managers of the festival, and poets and actors +exhibited their plays in competition with one another. The victory was +awarded by the decision of a carefully selected jury. It is curious to +notice how strongly implanted in the Greek nature was this passion for +anything in the shape of a contest. It was not peculiar to the drama, or +to the Athenian festivals, but prevailed throughout Greece in all festal +gatherings where music and poetry were performed. Every Greek city of any +importance had its annual meetings, with a long list of competitions. +There were contests in choral singing of various kinds; contests in +original poetry, and in the recitation of ancient epics; contests between +harp-players, flute-players, trumpeters, and heralds. In this respect a +Greek festival was not unlike a Welsh Eisteddfod, with its rival bards +and choruses. In the case of the drama the element of competition must +have added largely to the interest of the entertainment, and must have +acted as a powerful stimulus upon the minds of poets and performers +alike. The fertility of the old Attic dramatists, and the energy which +enabled them to produce, in extreme old age, such masterpieces as the +Agamemnon of Aeschylus, the Oedipus Coloneus of Sophocles, and the +Bacchae of Euripides, may have been partly due to the invigorating +influence of the contests, and the rivalry which they engendered. + +The management of the dramatic performances was in the hands of the +State, and was entrusted to the same official who had the general control +of the festival. The superintendence which he exercised was not merely a +formal one. His duties were important and carefully defined. He had to +select the poets who took part in the competitions, and the plays which +they exhibited. He had to choose the actors, and distribute them among +the different poets. He was also responsible for seeing that the work of +preparation was carefully carried out. The expense of the performance +was one of the regular public burdens, and was imposed in turn upon the +richer citizens. In modern times there is no example of a theatre so +entirely dependent upon the State. In England the drama is left solely to +private enterprise. In countries like France and Germany, though certain +theatres receive subventions from the State, and are subject to a code +of rules, the government takes little part in the direction of their +affairs. But the Athenian drama stood on a different footing. As a sacred +ceremonial, closely connected with the religious worship of the State, +it was naturally placed under public control. Even from the secular +point of view it was considered a fitting object for the attention of +statesmen. To provide for the amusement and instruction of the people +was, according to the Greeks, one of the regular duties of a government; +and they would have thought it unwise to abandon to private venturers an +institution which possessed the educational value and wide popularity of +the drama. For the audience to which the Athenian poet addressed himself +was in reality a gathering of the whole body of his fellow countrymen. +The theatre of Dionysus was capable of containing nearly twenty thousand +people. Books were not plentiful, and their use was confined to a limited +class. The ordinary Athenian depended for his literary pleasures upon the +various public performances and recitations of poetical compositions. The +drama was, therefore, much more to him than to a modern playgoer. At the +present day, when continual supplies of fresh literature are accessible +to every one, it is hard to realize the excitement and expectancy with +which an Athenian looked forward to the annual exhibition of dramas +at the Dionysia. It was here that his taste for novelty in literature +was gratified. It was here that he found an equivalent for the books, +magazines, and newspapers of modern civilization. Hence he was able to +sit day after day, from morning to evening, listening to tragedy and +comedy, without any feeling of satiety. The enthusiasm with which the +drama was regarded, and the direct manner in which the author was brought +into contact with the whole body of his countrymen, contributed to make +the vocation of the dramatic writer one of the very greatest importance. +The leading tragic poets especially exercised a most profound influence +upon the national mind and character. They were the teachers of the +people. Their writings were invested with an almost Homeric sanctity, and +appealed to as authorities on questions of science and morality. Maxims +and quotations from their plays were upon every one’s lips. Many passages +in Aristophanes and Plato prove the enormous influence for good and evil +which was exercised by the Greek tragic poets, and there is probably no +other instance in history of a drama which was so thoroughly popular, and +formed so essential a part of the national life.[8] + + +§ 2. _Earliest history of Dramatic Competitions._ + +The establishment of these dramatic contests under State management +dates, not from the earliest period of the drama, but from the time +when it had begun to assume a fixed and definite shape. Originally +there were no public competitions. The various innovations upon the old +hymns to Dionysus, out of which the drama was evolved, were carried +out at first by voluntary effort. Thespis is said to have introduced +tragedy into Athens. But his earliest exhibitions were given on his own +responsibility, and as a private speculation.[9] The development of +comedy was also the result of individual enterprise. The performance was +for a long time left to amateurs, and regarded as of no importance. It +was only when the drama had attained a certain pitch of excellence, and +become widely popular, that it was taken in hand by the State, and annual +contests introduced.[10] The date of their institution cannot always be +determined exactly. It differed in the case of different festivals, and +in the case of tragedy as compared with comedy. But there is sufficient +evidence to show that no contest was earlier in date than the latter half +of the sixth century. + +All these competitions, as we have seen, were confined to the festivals +of Dionysus.[11] In Attica these were of four kinds. There were the Rural +Dionysia, celebrated in the various Attic denies; and there were the +feasts held in Athens itself, the Anthesteria, the City Dionysia, and the +Lenaea.[12] The importance of these gatherings from the theatrical point +of view varied considerably. The Anthesteria seems at no time to have had +much connexion with the drama. The Rural Dionysia were merely provincial +celebrations, and depended almost entirely for their supply of plays upon +the Athenian theatre. The City Dionysia and the Lenaea were the really +significant festivals in the history of the ancient stage. It was here +that the great Attic poets exhibited their works, and it was here that +the drama was first brought to perfection. Each festival had its peculiar +character. At the City Dionysia tragedy held the chief place; at the +Lenaea comedy was of most importance. Various indications show that this +was the case. In the list of proceedings at the City Dionysia tragedy +is placed last of all, as being the chief attraction; while in the list +referring to the Lenaea the same place is assigned to comedy, and for the +same reason.[13] Again, the dithyramb, the original source of tragedy, +was from the first a prominent feature at the City Dionysia, though +unknown at the Lenaea till a late period.[14] On the other hand the +comic actors’ contest was introduced into the Lenaea long before it was +extended to the City Dionysia. This difference between the two festivals, +as regards the type of drama preferred by each, was probably due to some +original difference in the cult of the two deities, Dionysus Eleuthereus +and Dionysus Lenaeus, to whom they were respectively consecrated.[15] + + +§ 3. _The City Dionysia._ + +The City Dionysia, the feast of Dionysus Eleuthereus,[16] was the most +famous and magnificent of all the Bacchic festivals, and was therefore +also called the Great Dionysia, or simply the Dionysia, without any +further epithet.[17] It was held from the first inside the city, at the +sacred enclosure of Eleuthereus[18] on the south of the Acropolis. Hence +the name City Dionysia, to distinguish it from the Anthesteria and the +Lenaea, which, at any rate in early times, were celebrated outside the +walls. A poet who brought out his plays at this festival was said to +exhibit them ‘in the city’; if successful, he was said to have won ‘a +city victory’.[19] The feast lasted for at least five days, and possibly +for six. It took place in the month Elaphebolion, at a date corresponding +to the end of March.[20] The spring was then just beginning, and the sea +had again become navigable.[21] Consequently the city was crowded with +visitors from all parts of Greece. It was at this season that the allies +came to Athens to pay the annual tribute. Ambassadors from foreign states +often chose this time for the transaction of diplomatic business. Large +numbers of strangers were attracted by mere pleasure, and the celebrity +of the festival. Aeschines, in his rhetorical language, describes the +audience in the theatre at the City Dionysia as consisting of the ‘whole +Greek nation’.[22] The presence of so many strangers gave a lively +appearance to the streets, in marked contrast to the quietness which +prevailed at the winter festival of the Lenaea.[23] The Athenians gladly +seized this opportunity of displaying before foreign Greeks the glories +of their city. The various spectacles provided, the religious ceremonial, +the trains of sacrificial victims, the choral songs and dances, the +tragedies and comedies exhibited before countless multitudes in the vast +open-air theatre, were all calculated to impress strangers with the +wealth, public spirit, and artistic supremacy of Athens. + +The first day of the festival was devoted to a grand religious +procession, in which the ancient image of Dionysus Eleuthereus, preserved +in one of his temples at the foot of the Acropolis, played a prominent +part.[24] There was a tradition that this statue, together with the cult +of the deity, had been originally brought to Athens from Eleutherae, a +border town between Attica and Boeotia. The procession was instituted to +commemorate this sacred event. The statue was taken out of its shrine, +and carried along the road to Eleutherae as far as a certain temple near +the Academy. It was then brought back again, following on its return +the actual route traversed on its first entrance into Athens.[25] As a +spectacle, this procession was the most magnificent part of the whole +festival. Athenians of every class, men, women, and even girls, came out +to witness or take part in it. The casual encounters which took place +on these occasions might serve as a foundation for the plots of the New +Comedy.[26] The members of the procession were dressed in brilliantly +coloured garments. Some of them wore ornaments of gold, and had masks +upon their faces. The rich drove in chariots; the poorer classes walked +on foot.[27] In front came the archon, the manager of the festival, +attended by various magistrates and priests. The ephebi, equipped with +shields and spears, acted as escort to the sacred image.[28] A long +train of victims followed, partly provided by the State, partly offered +by individuals, or by different classes of the population.[29] The +canephori, young virgins bearing upon their heads the baskets containing +the sacrificial implements, formed one of the most picturesque features +in the show. The choregi were also there, attended by their respective +choruses, all dressed in striking costume. When Demosthenes served as +choregus to his tribe, he had a gold crown and embroidered mantle made +specially for use at the procession. Alcibiades on a similar occasion was +dressed in purple, and excited much admiration by his beauty.[30] From +these few details, which happen to have been recorded, we may form some +notion of the general splendour of the spectacle. The route followed by +the procession was as follows. On leaving the Temple of Dionysus it came +first to the market-place, where a halt was made, and a chorus danced +and sang before the statues of the twelve gods.[31] It then marched out +through the city gates along the road to Eleutherae. When it reached the +Academy the statue of the god was placed on a pedestal, and the different +victims were sacrificed. The rest of the day was spent in feasting and +merriment.[32] At nightfall they returned to Athens by torchlight. But +the sacred image, instead of being restored to its shrine, was carried +to the theatre by the ephebi, and set up in the orchestra, so as to be +present at the entertainments given on the following days.[33] + +These entertainments were of two kinds. There were the dramatic contests, +in tragedy, comedy, and satyric drama; and there were the lyrical +contests, at which dithyrambs were performed.[34] The dithyramb was a +hymn in honour of Dionysus, sung to the accompaniment of the flute by +a chorus of fifty members. The chorus stood in a circular form round +the altar, and was therefore called a ‘cyclic’ chorus. At the City +Dionysia there were two of these lyrical contests, one between five +choruses of boys, and the other between five choruses of men.[35] The +first contest of men took place in B.C. 509-508, in the Archonship of +Lysagoras, though the system of choregia was probably not introduced +till a few years later.[36] Each chorus was provided by one of the ten +Attic tribes. Hence all ten tribes took part in one or other of the two +competitions.[37] The contest was essentially a tribal one. The members +of each chorus, together with the choregus, were selected exclusively +from the tribe which they represented.[38] The victory of the chorus +was a victory for the tribe. The prize of victory, the tripod, though +given to the choregus, and erected in some public place at his expense, +was regarded as equally the property of the tribe.[39] In the records +of dithyrambic competitions the name of the victorious tribe was always +placed in the most prominent position. The dramatic contests, on the +other hand, had no connexion with the tribes. Actors, choruses, and +choregi were chosen indiscriminately from the whole population.[40] +The performers competed in their own interest solely, and not as +representatives of any other body. The records of dramatic victories give +merely the names of the choregus, the poet, and the principal actor.[41] +It is important to keep this difference between the two kinds of contest +clearly in view, since many mistakes have been caused by attributing to +the dramatic kind features which belong exclusively to the dithyrambic. + + +§ 4. _Tragedy at the City Dionysia._ + +Of the dramatic performances at the City Dionysia, which we have next +to consider, the tragic were the most important. The City Dionysia was +specially connected with the growth of the tragic drama, and it was here +that the earliest public contests in tragedy were established. The first +competition was held in B.C. 535, and was rendered doubly memorable by +the fact that Thespis, now an old man, took part in the performance, and +won the prize of victory.[42] Shortly before this time Pisistratus, who +was a great patron of art and literature, had returned from exile, and +begun his last tyranny. It must have been under his auspices, therefore, +that tragedy was first officially recognized by the State, and made an +annual institution. As to the character of these early contests, and +the arrangements concerning the number of poets and plays, nothing has +been recorded.[43] It is uncertain whether the regulations were the same +as those which afterwards prevailed during the fifth century. But we +are told that the tragic poet Choerilus, who began to exhibit in 523, +composed no less than a hundred and sixty plays.[44] The largeness of +the number would seem to show that even in the sixth century it was +the custom for each competing poet to bring out several plays at each +festival. + +When we turn to the fifth century, the information is fairly complete. +Several records have been preserved, referring chiefly to the three +great tragic poets, and giving a more or less detailed account of the +results of the competitions. It may be interesting to mention some of +these records. The earliest refers to the year 499, and tells us that +three poets—Aeschylus, Choerilus, and Pratinas—took part in the tragic +contest.[45] From the next we learn that in 472 Aeschylus won the first +prize, and that the plays he exhibited were the Phineus, Persae, Glaucus, +and the satyric drama Prometheus.[46] In 467, Aeschylus was first with +the Laius, Oedipus, Septem contra Thebas, and the satyric play Sphinx; +Aristias was second with the Perseus, Tantalus, and the satyric play +Palaestae, written by his father Pratinas; Polyphradmon was third with +the Lycurgean tetralogy.[47] The name of one of the plays of Aristias +has doubtless dropped out accidentally, as there is no other instance of +poets competing at the same festival with a different number of plays. +A very interesting record is that for the year 458, when Aeschylus +was again victorious, this time with the Orestean group of plays, +the Agamemnon, Choephori, Eumenides, and satyric Proteus.[48] In 438 +Sophocles was first; Euripides was second with the Cressae, Alcmaeon in +Psophis, Telephus, and Alcestis. In 431 Euphorion was first, Sophocles +second, and Euripides third with the Medea, Philoctetes, Dictys, and +satyric play Theristae. In 428 Euripides was first (the Hippolytus being +one of his plays), Iophon second, Ion third.[49] Among the last of the +notices is that for the year 415, when Euripides, who produced the +Alexander, Palamedes, Troades, and satyric drama Sisyphus, was defeated +for the first prize by an obscure poet called Xenocles, who produced +the Oedipus, Lycaon, Bacchae and satyric play Athamas. After Euripides’ +death, in B.C. 406, his Iphigenia in Aulis, Alcmaeon, and Bacchae were +produced by his son at the City Dionysia.[50] The evidence of these +various records, when compared with one another, proves conclusively +that during the whole, or almost the whole, of the fifth century there +was no variation in the arrangement of the tragic contests at the City +Dionysia. The rule as to the number of poets and plays was as follows. +At each festival three poets appeared as competitors,[51] and each poet +was required to exhibit four plays, consisting of three tragedies and a +satyric drama.[52] If the number seems surprising, we should remember +that an ancient drama was only about half the length of a modern one, +and that four plays of this type could easily have been got through in +a single day. On one occasion the rule just mentioned appears to have +been partially relaxed. In 438 Euripides was allowed to substitute the +Alcestis, a tragedy with a slightly comic tinge, for the usual satyric +drama. Whether this practice ever became common in the fifth century +is uncertain. The records give no further instance. In all other cases +where they mention the names of the four plays produced, the last is a +satyric play. It was this custom of concluding the three tragedies with +the licentious merriment of the satyrs which suggested to Ion of Chios +his well-known remark, that virtue, like a tragic poet’s group of plays, +should always contain a satyric element.[53] + +The four plays exhibited by each poet might be composed on two different +systems. They might form independent works of art, and have no inner +connexion with one another; or they might deal with successive phases of +the same legend, and be fused into a single artistic whole. The general +name for the group of plays was ‘didascalia’, or a ‘teaching’[54], +because in ancient times the author had to teach them to the actors. But +when they were connected together by unity of subject, they were denoted +by a special term. The four plays were called a ‘tetralogy’;[55] the +three tragedies, regarded apart from the satyric drama, were called a +‘trilogy’. As applied to the drama, however, both words first occur at +a comparatively late date:[56] and as, to judge from their etymology, +they seem properly to denote groups of speeches rather than groups of +plays, it is possible that their dramatic application is a secondary +one, and that the grammarians applied to the drama the word ‘tetralogy’ +which properly denoted such groups of four speeches about fictitious +cases as those of Antiphon, and afterwards formed the word ‘trilogy’ by +analogy to denote three plays connected in subject with each other but +not with the satyric play. In earlier times such collective titles as +Lycurgeia, Oresteia, and the like were used.[57] The practice of writing +plays in trilogies and tetralogies is chiefly associated with the name +of Aeschylus. Whether it was invented by him, or inherited from his +predecessors, is uncertain. We have no information as to the manner in +which the poets of the sixth century were accustomed to combine their +plays together. But whatever the origin of the system may have been, it +was undoubtedly Aeschylus who first perceived the various developments +of which it was capable, and brought it to perfection. In his hands it +became a mighty instrument for the inculcation of religious truths. The +central idea in the moral system of Aeschylus was the disastrous effect +of sin, not only upon the sinner himself, but also upon his remote +descendants. The curse entailed in the sinful act clung to a family from +one generation to another. In the trilogy, with its wide range of time +and subject, he was able to trace the whole course of this hereditary +evil, and to follow the crime from its original commission down to +the period of its final expiation. The Orestean trilogy, which has +fortunately been preserved, is a magnificent example of his method. The +Agamemnon depicts the murder of the returning chieftain by his adulterous +wife. In the Choephori vengeance is taken on the murderess, after years +of waiting, by her own son. In the Eumenides the matricide, a prey to +remorse, is hunted from place to place by the Furies of his mother, until +their rage is at length appeased by divine intervention. These successive +pictures of crime and vengeance form a series of unapproachable grandeur. +The general effect of the whole may be appreciated even by a modern +reader. But in the ancient theatre the impression produced must have been +far more vivid, as one play followed another upon the stage, and the +dark scenes of guilt were unfolded in due sequence before the very eyes +of the audience. + +Apart from the Oresteia, very little is recorded about the tetralogies +written by Aeschylus. He is known to have composed a Lycurgeia, on the +fate of Lycurgus, the Thracian king and opponent of Bacchus; and an +Oedipodeia, on the fortunes of the house of Oedipus. It is also fairly +certain that he treated the legends about Hector, Ajax, Prometheus, +and the daughters of Danaus in trilogic form. But these are the only +instances for which there is clear evidence. No doubt most of his plays +were written as tetralogies. Still, he does not seem to have adhered to +the system on every occasion. The plays which he exhibited in 472—the +Phineus, Persae, Glaucus, and satyric drama Prometheus—had apparently +no connexion with one another.[58] There are also, among the titles of +his lost dramas, several, such as the Sisyphus and the Atalanta, which +seem to stand in an isolated position, and to be hardly capable of +combination. In some cases, again, he may have adopted the tetralogic +form only in part. The three tragedies may have formed a trilogy, while +the concluding satyric drama was on a different subject. Thus the satyric +Prometheus was produced, not with the Promethean trilogy, as we should +have expected, but in a different combination altogether. There is no +less uncertainty as to the structure of the lost tetralogies. It would +be a mistake to assume that they were all as perfect in arrangement as +the Oresteia. Even from the few remains and notices preserved we can +see that the tetralogy was a flexible form of art, and could be treated +in various ways. The connexion between the parts might be tightened or +relaxed at will. In the Theban trilogy—the Laius, Oedipus, and Septem +contra Thebas—there was a long lapse of years between the separate plays. +In the Oresteia the intervals of time are much shorter. In the Lycurgeia, +which described the invasion of Thrace by Dionysus, his defeat, capture, +and final victory, the three plays followed so closely in point of time, +that they must have been like successive acts in a single drama. Again, +the trilogies might differ in respect of artistic completeness. The +Oresteia forms a perfect whole. The legend is traced to its conclusion, +and ends satisfactorily with the purification of Orestes. But the Theban +trilogy was treated more in the chronicle fashion. It closed abruptly at +a point where the course of events was still unfinished. The final scene +of the Septem is full of forebodings of impending calamity. So marked is +this feature, that before the discovery in recent years of the record +which proves that the Septem was the last play of the three, all critics +were agreed that it must have been followed by another tragedy.[59] This +example shows us the necessity of caution in dealing with the whole +subject of tetralogies. Since there is so much uncertainty as to the +number of them written by Aeschylus, and the manner in which he wrote +them, it is dangerous to go beyond the limits of direct evidence. Various +schemes have been propounded by scholars, in which the titles of the lost +plays are all arranged in tetralogic groups. But these systems must be +regarded as entirely conjectural. + +The satyric drama, by which the three tragedies were followed, was a +survival from the primitive period of the Bacchic worship. With its +strange medley of incongruous elements, of valour and cowardice, passion +and merriment, heroic dignity and coarse indecency, it reproduced the +various qualities of the ancient dithyramb. The chorus was always +composed of satyrs. The leading characters consisted partly of heroes +from the tragic stage, partly of semi-ludicrous personages, such as +Silenus, Autolycus, and Polyphemus. The presence of the tragic kings and +heroes in the midst of these disreputable associates and undignified +surroundings was one of the most curious features in the performance. It +had to be managed with great tact by the poet. The dignity of the heroes +was not to be unduly lowered, and yet they must not seem too exalted for +their company.[60] In the case of a tetralogy the awkwardness of the +situation would be greatly intensified. Here the satyric drama dealt +with the same legend as the preceding tragedies, but from a humorous +point of view. It often happened that the very same hero whose disastrous +fate had just been exhibited in the trilogy was reintroduced under +a sportive aspect. In the satyric play Lycurgus, which concluded the +Lycurgean tetralogy, the chief part must have been taken by Lycurgus +himself. In the Sphinx, the last play of the Oedipodeia, Oedipus must +have appeared in person. This practice of concluding the tragic spectacle +with a burlesque representation of the same or similar characters and +incidents seems a questionable proceeding to modern taste. It would be +difficult to defend it on artistic grounds. It originated not so much in +the desire to provide a comic relief after the tragedies as in religious +conservatism. The dramatic performances were part of a Bacchic festival. +But the Bacchic element had long been discarded by tragedy. The satyric +play, which still remained true to the primitive type, was therefore +retained in the programme, in order to appease the god and to keep up the +religious associations of the drama. + +During the earlier part of the fifth century the practice of writing +plays in tetralogies seems to have been generally adopted, not only +by Aeschylus, but by all other tragic poets. One such tetralogy, the +Lycurgeia of Polyphradmon, happens to have been recorded. It was +Sophocles who first gave up the system, and regularly composed his four +plays on independent subjects.[61] The example set by Sophocles was +followed by the younger generation. Even as early as 467, when Aeschylus +brought out his Oedipodeia, and Polyphradmon his Lycurgeia, the third +poet, Aristias, competed with a group of disconnected plays. After the +death of Aeschylus the tetralogy speedily went out of fashion. It was +never attempted by Euripides. In fact during the latter half of the fifth +century only three tetralogies are mentioned. A Pandionis was written +by Philocles, the nephew of Aeschylus, who naturally followed in his +uncle’s footsteps. An Oedipodeia was composed by Meletus, the prosecutor +of Socrates. Plato is also said to have written a tetralogy before he +abandoned poetry for philosophy.[62] After the end of the fifth century +all traces of the tetralogy disappear. One reason for its decline in +popularity and rapid discontinuance may have been the increased length +of plays. A tragedy of the later poets was considerably longer, and +contained much more incident, than a tragedy of Aeschylus. A trilogy +composed of dramas of this bulk would have been a vast and laborious +undertaking. Another reason may have been the gradual change in religious +sentiment. The doctrine of the hereditary curse in families, which the +trilogy was admirably adapted to exemplify, no longer held a prominent +place in the moral ideas of post-Aeschylean poets. The chief motive of +their tragedy was human passion rather than religious truth. In such +circumstances the trilogy, as a form of art, had no advantages sufficient +to compensate for the unwieldiness of its size. + +It has been worth while to discuss in some detail the arrangement of the +tragic contests at the City Dionysia during the fifth century, because +this was the great period of Attic tragedy. The fourth century is of less +importance. For the first half of the century there is a complete blank +in our information on the subject. But when we come to the latter half, +we have the evidence of an interesting inscription, which contains a full +record of the tragic performances at the City Dionysia for the years 341 +and 340.[63] From this record it appears that considerable changes had +now been made in the annual programme. The old system, by which each +of the three poets was required to exhibit a satyric play, had been +abandoned. A single specimen of this type of drama was now considered +sufficient, and was produced at the commencement of the proceedings. The +satyric drama, with its primitive coarseness, had little attraction for +the more refined taste of the fourth century; and it was only religious +scruples which caused it to be retained at all. The satyric play was +followed by an old tragedy, written by one of the three great tragic +poets. In 341 the play chosen was the Iphigeneia of Euripides, in 340 +it was the Orestes. This practice was also a new departure.[64] In the +fifth century the exhibition of old tragedies was, with rare exceptions, +unknown at the City Dionysia. After these two preliminary performances +came the contest with original plays. The number of poets was still +there, as in former times. But the number of plays was diminished, and +seems to have varied from year to year. In 341 each poet exhibited three +tragedies; in 340 each poet exhibited two. Theodectes, who flourished +in the middle of the fourth century, wrote fifty tragedies and engaged +in thirteen contests.[65] Aphareus wrote thirty-five admittedly genuine +tragedies, and engaged in eight contests, between 368 and 341.[66] This +seems to imply that in most of the contests they produced four plays; but +the conclusion is not certain, for they may have written plays which were +never intended for the stage, as their contemporary Chaeremon did.[67] +The reduction in the number of original plays points to a gradual decline +in the vitality of the tragic drama at Athens. These various changes must +have been made in the course of the sixty years preceding the period +of the inscription. But the exact date of their introduction cannot be +determined. + +With the close of the fourth century the famous period of Athenian +tragedy came to an end. After this date the only tragic poets of any +celebrity were those who flourished at Alexandria. But though the genius +of the Attic poets was exhausted, there was no immediate cessation in +the production of new plays. The contests were still maintained. A long +series of inscriptions shows that, down even to the Christian era, +‘original tragedies’ continued to be the chief ornament of the City +Dionysia. The names of several Athenian tragic poets belonging to this +period have been preserved in theatrical records. One of them was a +descendant of Sophocles. As to the character of the contests, and the +proportion of old tragedies to new ones, nothing is known. After the +first century A.D. the composition of original tragic dramas for the +stage was finally discontinued in all parts of Greece, and must therefore +have been abandoned at the City Dionysia. But the festival itself still +continued to flourish; and the reproduction of old plays may have lasted, +there as elsewhere, for one or two centuries later.[68] + + +§ 5. _Comedy at the City Dionysia._ + +Very little is known about the early history of the comic contests at +the City Dionysia. The date of their first institution can only be +fixed approximately. Aristotle tells us that they were of later origin +than those in tragedy.[69] This being so, they cannot have reached back +further than about 500 B.C. On the other hand, there is an inscription +which proves that they were already in existence in 463.[70] Their +establishment must therefore be assigned to some period within the first +four decades of the century. The number of poets who were allowed to +compete differed at different epochs. In the fifth century it was always +three, as in tragedy.[71] But early in the fourth century it was raised +to five, both at the City Dionysia and at the Lenaea, and this continued +ever afterwards to be the regulation number.[72] The increase was +probably due, partly to the growing popularity of the comic drama, partly +also to the fact that, owing to the curtailment of the chorus, comedies +were now less expensive to produce, and took less time to perform. Each +poet competed with a single play. This was the invariable practice on the +comic stage, both at the City Dionysia and at the Lenaea. The exhibition +of groups of plays, after the manner of the tragic poets, was unknown +in the history of comedy. Still, in spite of this rule, an author was +sometimes enabled to bring out two plays at the same festival. But in +order to do so he had to take the place of two poets, and to compete +as it were against himself. The number of comedies remained the same. +Thus in 422 Aristophanes made a double appearance, and was first with +the Prelude, and second with the Wasps. Leucon, his sole antagonist, +was third with the Ambassadors.[73] In 288 Diodorus was second with +the Corpse, and third with the Madman.[74] Such cases, however, were +apparently very rare, and must have been due either to some exceptional +dearth in the supply of dramatists, or to the marked inferiority of the +other poets who had applied for permission to compete. + +We have seen that comedy was much later than tragedy in obtaining +official recognition from the State. It also continued to grow and +develop much longer. A sure symptom of decline, both in tragedy and +comedy, was the tendency to fall back upon the past, and to reproduce +old plays, instead of striking out new developments. In the case of +tragedy this custom had already begun to prevail as early as the middle +of the fourth century. But comedy was still at that time in the height +of its career. A fresh direction was being given to the art, under the +leadership of Menander and Philemon, by the evolution of the New Comedy, +a comedy of manners and everyday life. There was no desire as yet to have +recourse to the ancient poets. In a record of comic contests for the +year 288,[75] the plays exhibited are all new ones. But when we reach +the second century the custom of performing old comedies is found to +have been fully established. Numerous records of the comic performances +during that period have been preserved, and in every case the five new +comedies are preceded by an old one.[76] There had been occasional +revivals before this, for instance in the year 340, but these seem to +have been exceptional.[77] Among the plays reproduced are Menander’s +Ghost and Misogynist, Philemon’s Phocians, and Posidippus’ Outcast. It is +noticeable that all these revivals were limited to the New Comedy. There +is no trace of a reproduction of plays from the Middle and the Old. Nor +is this surprising. The comedy of early times was so local and personal +in its allusions, and depended so much for its interest upon contemporary +events, that it could not be expected to attract the ordinary public of a +later generation. + +From the records just referred to it is evident that during the second +century B.C. comedy still flourished as vigorously as ever at the City +Dionysia. The festival had sometimes to be abandoned, owing to the +pressure of war and other calamities. But whenever there was a contest, +five new plays were exhibited. After the second century the notices about +this festival come to an end. But it is well known that in other parts +of Greece original comedies continued to form a part of the programme +at various festal gatherings down to the first century of the Christian +era.[78] We may therefore conclude without much doubt that they were +retained at the City Dionysia for an equally long period. + + +§ 6. _Order of Contests at the City Dionysia._ + +Before leaving the subject of the City Dionysia, it may be interesting +to say a few words about the performances as a whole, and the order in +which they took place. The programme to be gone through was a long one. +In the fifth century it consisted of five choruses of boys, five choruses +of men, three comedies, and three groups of tragedies, each containing +four plays. As to the arrangement of these various items there is not +much information.[79] But one thing seems certain, that the three groups +of tragedies must have been exhibited on three successive days. It is +difficult to see what other system was possible. Two groups, consisting +of eight dramas, would have been far too much for a single day.[80] Nor +can we suppose that plays belonging to the same group were performed on +different days. If this had been the case, the value of the tetralogic +form of composition would have been almost entirely destroyed. Further +than this, there is a passage in Aristophanes which seems to prove that +tragedies and comedies were produced on the same day. In the Birds,[81] +which was brought out at the City Dionysia, the chorus remark that it +would be a delightful thing to have wings. They say that if one of the +spectators was tired with the tragic choruses, he might fly away home, +have his dinner, and fly back again in time for the comic choruses. It +appears to follow from this that the comedies were performed after the +tragedies. As there were three comedies during the fifth century, and +three groups of tragedies, the arrangement must have been that each +tragic group was performed in the morning of three successive days, and +was followed in the afternoon by a comedy. The festival as a whole lasted +for five or six days. The first day was taken up by the procession. Three +more were taken up by the tragedies and comedies. The remaining one or +two days would be devoted to the dithyrambs. Such was the system during +the life-time of Aeschylus and Sophocles. In the fourth century, when +the number of comedies had been raised to five, the number of tragedies +diminished, and a satyric drama and an old tragedy placed at the head of +the tragic contests, various rearrangements would be necessary. But there +is nothing to show how they were carried out.[82] + + +§ 7. _The Lenaea._ + +The Lenaea was a festival in honour of Dionysus Lenaeus.[83] It was +celebrated, at any rate, during the earliest times, in a sacred enclosure +called the Lenaeum.[84] Hence the feast was also termed the ‘Contest at +the Lenaeum’, or the ‘Epilenaean Dionysia’; and the poet who won a prize +there was said to have been ‘victorious at the Lenaeum’.[85] The site of +the Lenaeum is unfortunately a matter in much dispute, and no certain +conclusion has been arrived at. Except that it was in or close to the +market-place, the site of which is itself uncertain, nothing definite can +be said about it. + +The Lenaea was a winter gathering. It was held in the month of Gamelion, +at a time corresponding to the end of January.[86] The weather was still +often stormy, and the sea was not yet considered safe for voyagers.[87] +Consequently there were few visitors in Athens. The festival was a +domestic sort of holiday, confined to the Athenians themselves. The +proceedings were simple and unpretentious, as compared with the splendid +ceremonial and vast audiences at the City Dionysia. Aristophanes, in +the Acharnians, which was produced at the Lenaea, says he can now abuse +Athens as much as he likes, without being accused of degrading her in the +eyes of foreign Greeks.[88] The entertainments at the Lenaea consisted of +a procession, and of contests in tragedy and comedy.[89] The procession +was not an impressive spectacle, like that at the City Dionysia, but was +conducted in primitive fashion by men who drove about in wagons, and +assailed the bystanders with abuse and ridicule.[90] The festival as a +whole was much shorter than the City Dionysia. + +The early history of tragedy at the Lenaea is veiled in obscurity. The +first piece of information on the subject which we possess belongs to +the latter part of the fifth century. It consists of a record of the +tragic performances at the Lenaea for the years 419 and 418.[91] In both +these years the number of poets who competed was two, and each of them +exhibited three tragedies.[92] There is no mention of a satyric play. +Again, we are told that in 416 Agathon won a tragic victory at the +Lenaea.[93] These two notices comprise all that is known about tragedy +at this festival during the fifth century. They appear to prove that +towards the close of the century the tragic contests had become a regular +institution, though the number of poets and plays was much smaller than +at the City Dionysia. Whether the contests were of recent origin, or +reached back for many years, cannot be ascertained. During the fourth +century new tragedies continued to be produced at the Lenaea without +any cessation. In 367 Dionysius, the tyrant of Syracuse, won the tragic +prize there. Aphareus, who flourished about 350, exhibited there on two +occasions. Theodectes, the pupil of Aristotle, obtained one victory at +the Lenaea; Astydamas, his contemporary, obtained seven.[94] As to the +arrangement of the contest during this period, and the number of plays +produced, there is no information. But it is probable that the new +tragedies were preceded by an old one, as at the City Dionysia. After +the fourth century nothing further is known about the connexion of the +Lenaea with the tragic drama.[95] The festival continued to be celebrated +down to the second century A.D., and possibly later.[96] But whether +tragedies, either old or new, were still included in the programme, is +quite uncertain. + +Comedy was the special product of the Lenaea, and was regarded as of more +importance than tragedy. It was doubtless at this festival that comic +contests were first regularly organized. The date is not recorded. But +they must have been in existence at any rate as early as 463,[97] since +at that time they were already included in the City Dionysia. There is +also another piece of evidence. Chionides, one of the early comic poets, +is said to have begun to exhibit plays in 487. It is unlikely that the +exact year of his first appearance would have been remembered, unless it +had referred to a regular public contest. Hence we may probably assume +that comic contests had been established as early as 487; and if so, +they may have been established at the Lenaea.[98] But they cannot go +back beyond about 500, since comedy in general was a later institution +than tragedy. The first definite and dated record of a comic contest +at the Lenaea is for the year 425, when Aristophanes produced his +Acharnians.[99] From this time forward the history of comedy at the +Lenaea is much the same as its history at the City Dionysia. During the +fifth century there were three competing poets, and each brought out a +single play.[100] In the fourth century the number of poets was varied to +five.[101] The practice of exhibiting an old comedy as a prelude to the +new ones was introduced in the course of the next hundred years.[102] In +the second century original comedy was still flourishing as vigorously as +ever at Athens, though none of the records so far dated with certainty +refer to the Lenaea.[103] There is no evidence as to its later course. + +A few remarks may be made here on the relative importance of the Lenaea +and the City Dionysia from the theatrical point of view. The City +Dionysia was much the most splendid and imposing gathering of the two. It +was attended by larger crowds of people, and was subjected to stricter +regulations. Aliens were not allowed to take part in the choruses; metics +were forbidden to serve as choregi.[104] No such prohibitions existed at +the Lenaea. It must obviously have been a much greater honour for a poet +to produce his plays at the City Dionysia, before the vast concourse of +citizens and strangers, than in the comparative privacy of the Lenaea. +In tragedy this was more particularly the case. The great tragic poets, +after their fame had been once established, seem to have mostly confined +themselves to the City Dionysia. Sophocles, for instance, won eighteen +victories there, and only two or six at the Lenaea.[105] The Lenaea would +be generally reserved for inferior poets, or for youthful authors who had +still their reputation to make. Thus in 418 one of the competitors was an +obscure poet called Callistratus.[106] In 416 the victor was Agathon, who +had never yet obtained a tragic prize.[107] Foreign poets may also have +been generally confined to this festival. It was here that Dionysius, +the tyrant of Syracuse, won his solitary success.[108] The circumstances +were rather different in regard to comedy. The leading comic poets seem +to have made little distinction between the two festivals. Aristophanes +produced his plays indifferently at both.[109] Cratinus won six Lenaean +victories as opposed to three in the City, Teleclides five as opposed to +three.[110] In explanation of this fact we should remember that comedy +was the chief feature at the Lenaea, tragedy an appendage. Also, as +the competitors in comedy only produced one play at a time, a poet of +a fertile mind would need two contests in the year in order to exhibit +what he had written. Still, in spite of the more equal distribution of +the comic poets between the two festivals, there can be little doubt that +even in comedy a ‘City victory’ was always the highest distinction.[111] + + +§ 8. _Rural Dionysia and Anthesteria._ + +The Rural Dionysia were provincial festivals, held about the end of +December[112] in the country districts of Attica. Originally they +were very simple in character.[113] The villagers, holding aloft the +phallus, marched in procession to the altar of Dionysus, where a goat was +sacrificed, and songs and dances performed in honour of the god. Then +came various country sports; and the day ended in drinking and merriment. +Later on, as the people advanced in wealth and refinement, the dignity +of many of these festivals was much increased. Dramatic contests began +to be introduced, in imitation of those already established in Athens. +Eventually, by the end of the fifth century, all the larger Attic towns +appear to have provided themselves with theatres and annual theatrical +exhibitions. The most important of these local gatherings was that in the +Peiraeeus, which was supported by contributions of money from the state +treasury, and attended by large crowds from Athens and the neighbouring +districts. The procession, with which the proceedings commenced, must +have been a striking spectacle. The whole body of the ephebi took part +in it. Then there were contests in tragedy and comedy. The fame of +these contests is shown by the fact that even distinguished poets, such +as Euripides, occasionally appeared as competitors; and that foreign +ambassadors, if present in Athens at the time, were invited to attend +as a matter of course.[114] Among other festivals which seem to have +acquired more than a local celebrity, we may mention those of Collytus +where Aeschines acted the part of Oenomaus in the play of Sophocles,[115] +Eleusis,[116] Salamis,[117] and Icaria, and at these proclamation was +made of crowns which had been bestowed on deserving citizens.[118] +At Aixone there were performances of comedies, but tragedies are not +mentioned.[119] At Phlya there were dramatic performances, probably +of both kinds.[120] The remains of a theatre have been found at +Thoricus.[121] + +The plays produced at these rustic Dionysia were mostly old ones, which +had already been successful on the Athenian stage. The exhibition of new +and original dramas was exceptional, and confined to a few important +towns.[122] Usually the proceedings took the form of a contest between +troupes of actors, who competed with plays of established reputation. +Prizes were offered by the different demes, and companies were formed in +Athens for the purpose of touring the country, and contending against +one another. Aeschines in his youth served as tritagonist in a troupe +of this kind, having been hired for a provincial tour by ‘the ranters’, +Simylus and Socrates.[123] These constant revivals of old plays at the +Rural Dionysia are a fact of some importance in the history of the Attic +drama. It was in this way that the Athenian audience was familiarized +with the masterpieces of the past, which might otherwise have been +forgotten. In Athens itself there were not many opportunities of seeing +them acted. There were only two dramatic festivals in the year, and these +were mostly given up to original compositions. Yet the audience was +obviously well acquainted with the older dramas. The frequent parodies +and allusions in Aristophanes prove that this was the case.[124] It was +at the Rural Dionysia that they acquired their knowledge. The spectators +in the Athenian theatre consisted partly of natives of Athens, partly +of citizens from the country districts. For the natives there were the +festivals of the adjoining demes, such as Collytus and the Peiraeeus; +for the provincials there were their own local gatherings. Both classes +therefore would have many chances of witnessing the reproduction of +celebrated plays. + +The Anthesteria had so little connexion with the drama that it is +unnecessary to describe the manner in which it was celebrated.[125] +Regular performances of plays were apparently unknown there during the +classical period. The only trace of anything theatrical is a certain +contest between comic actors, which took place on the Chytri, the +last day of the festival. The victor at this contest was allowed the +undisputed right of acting at the forthcoming City Dionysia a month +later.[126] Probably the performance consisted in the recitation of +selected portions of a comedy by the different competitors. The contest +had fallen into disuse during the latter part of the fourth century, but +was restored by the orator Lycurgus. In much later times, during the +first century A.D., we hear of ‘tragic monodies’ and ‘comic parabases’ +being performed at the Anthesteria.[127] But the notice is too slight and +vague to enable us to judge as to the general character of the exhibition. + + +§ 9. _The Judges._ + +The institution of the dramatic contests at the different Attic +festivals has now been described in detail. As regards the management +of the competition many points still remain to be considered, viz. the +selection of the judges, the mode of giving the verdict, the prizes for +poets and actors, and the public records of the results. First as to the +judges. The number of the judges in the comic contests was five.[128] +The number in the tragic contests was probably the same, but there is +no direct evidence upon the subject. The process of selection seems to +have been as follows.[129] Several days before the actual commencement +of the festival the Council, assisted by the choregi, elected by vote +a preliminary list of judges. A certain number of names were selected +from each of the ten tribes of Attica. The different choregi, as was +natural, endeavoured to get their own partisans upon the list. The names +of the persons chosen were then inscribed upon tablets, and the tablets +were placed in ten urns, each urn containing the names belonging to a +single tribe. The urns were then carefully locked up and sealed in the +presence of the prytanes and choregi, handed over to the custody of +the treasurers, and deposited in the Acropolis. The preliminary list +of judges was kept a secret from every one except the Council and the +choregi, in order that no improper influence might be brought to bear +upon them. The penalty for tampering with the urns was death. It is not +known from what class the nominees were selected, or whether any property +qualification was necessary. Obviously the judges in the dramatic and +dithyrambic contests had a very delicate office to perform. If their +verdict was to be of value, it was necessary that they should be men of +culture and discernment. It is most likely therefore that there was some +limitation upon the number of persons qualified to act in this capacity. + +Until the time of the festival the preliminary list of citizens remained +sealed up in urns in the Acropolis. On the first day of the competitions +the ten urns were produced in the theatre, and placed in some prominent +position. The persons whose names were contained in the urns were all +present in the theatre. Probably they received a special summons from +the archon shortly before the festival. At the commencement of the +contest the archon proceeded to draw a single name from all the urns +in succession. The ten persons whose names were drawn constituted the +second list of judges, and each of them represented one of the ten +tribes of Attica. After being selected by lot in the manner described, +they were called forward by the archon, and took a solemn oath that they +would give an impartial verdict.[130] They were then conducted to seats +specially appointed for them, and the contest began.[131] At the end of +the performances each of them gave his vote, writing upon a tablet the +names of the competitors in order of merit.[132] These tablets, ten in +number, were then placed in an urn, and the archon proceeded to draw +forth five of them at random. The result of the competition was decided +in accordance with these five lists, and the persons whose tablets were +drawn from the urn constituted the ultimate body of five judges. It thus +appears that up to the very last the judges who recorded their votes +were not sure whether the votes would eventually have effect, or turn +out to be so much waste paper. This uncertainty was of course a great +obstacle to intimidation and bribery. After the competition was over, +and the verdict announced, the names of the five judges, whose votes had +decided the day, were not kept secret. It was known how each of them had +voted. But the other votes, which had been recorded but not drawn from +the urn, were destroyed without being made public.[133] It was naturally +considered a much greater honour to win a victory by the unanimous vote +of all five judges than by a mere majority of one.[134] But it is very +doubtful whether any public record was kept of the number of votes by +which a victory was gained. + +Whether the decision of the judges was generally given with discernment, +and how far it corresponded with the ultimate verdict of posterity, is +a question of some interest. Both Aeschylus and Sophocles were usually +successful, and this speaks highly for the taste of the judges. Aeschylus +won thirteen victories; and as he produced four plays on each occasion, +it follows that no less than fifty-two of his plays obtained the first +prize. Whether the total number of his plays was seventy or ninety, +the proportion of victories was very large.[135] Sophocles was equally +fortunate. He won eighteen victories at the City Dionysia, and at least +two at the Lenaea.[136] The number of his plays, as given by different +authorities, varies from a hundred-and-four to a hundred-and-thirty.[137] +Thus on the lowest estimate considerably more than half his plays gained +the first position. Euripides was not so successful. He only won five +victories, though he wrote between ninety and a hundred plays.[138] His +failure was partly due to the fact that he often had the misfortune +to contend against Sophocles. He was beaten by Sophocles in 438 and +431, and probably on many other occasions of which no record has been +preserved.[139] But at other times he was defeated by very inferior +poets. In 415 he was beaten by Xenocles, and on another occasion by the +obscure poet Nicomachus.[140] But the most surprising verdict of which +there is any record is the defeat of the Oedipus Tyrannus of Sophocles by +Philocles, the nephew of Aeschylus.[141] Of course the other three plays, +along with which the Oedipus Tyrannus was produced, may not have been of +equal merit. Still it must always seem an extraordinary fact, and a proof +of the fallibility of Athenian judges, that a play which is generally +allowed to be one of the greatest dramas of antiquity should have been +defeated by a third-rate poet such as Philocles. + +Verdicts of this indefensible character might be due to various causes. +The judges might be corrupt, or might be intimidated. The spirit of +emulation ran very high at these contests, and men were often not very +particular as to the means by which they obtained the victory. There is +an instance in one of the speeches of Lysias. The defendant is showing +that the prosecutor had been on very friendly terms with him a short +time before. The proof he brings forward is that when he was choregus +at the City Dionysia he got the prosecutor appointed on the preliminary +list of judges for the express purpose of voting for his own chorus. +The prosecutor was pledged to vote for the chorus of the defendant, +whether it was good or bad. He appears to have actually done so; but +unfortunately, at the final drawing, his name was not selected, and +his vote was therefore of no value.[142] Another example of the use of +corruption is afforded by the case of Meidias, who is said to have won +the victory with his chorus of men at the City Dionysia by bribing or +intimidating the judges.[143] Similarly at a contest of boys’ choruses, +Alcibiades, in spite of his outrageous conduct in assaulting a rival +choregus, won the first prize, because some of the judges were afraid +to vote against him, and others had been bought over to his side.[144] +The verdict of each individual judge was made public. Hence it is easy +to see that judges might often be afraid to incur the hostility of rich +and unscrupulous citizens by voting against them. The above instances +all refer to dithyrambic contests. No doubt in these cases, as the whole +tribe was concerned with the result, party feeling ran exceptionally +high. In the dramatic competitions only individuals were engaged, and +there was less general excitement about the result. Yet even here corrupt +influences were sometimes employed. Menander, the greatest comic poet of +his time, was often defeated by Philemon owing to jobbery and intrigue +similar to that described above.[145] + +One not unfrequent cause then of unfair verdicts must have been +corruption and intimidation. There is also another point to be kept in +view in estimating the value of the decisions of the ancient judges. The +plays of Sophocles and Euripides were no doubt immeasurably superior, +as literary works, to the plays of Philocles, Xenocles, and Nicomachus, +by which they were defeated. And yet in these and similar instances the +verdicts of the judges may perhaps have had some justification. One +is apt to forget the importance of the manner in which the play was +presented upon the stage. Even in modern times an inferior play, if well +mounted and acted, is more impressive than a good play badly performed. +This must have been still more the case in the ancient drama, where +the singing and dancing of the chorus formed such an important element +in the success of the performance. It can easily be seen that, however +well a play was written, if it was ill-mounted, and if the chorus was +badly trained, this would greatly diminish the chances of success. Now +the ancient poet was dependent upon his choregus for the mounting of +the piece and for the selection of the chorus. If the choregus was rich +and generous the play was put upon the stage in the very best manner, +with all the advantages of fine dresses and a well-trained chorus. An +ambitious choregus spared no pains to do his part of the work thoroughly. +But if the choregus was a miserly man he tried to do the thing as cheaply +as possible. He hired inferior singers, and cut down the prices of the +dresses and other accessories. Hence the success of a play depended +nearly as much upon the choregus as upon the poet. Several examples +illustrate this fact. Demosthenes, shortly before his death, is said to +have dreamt that he was acting in a tragedy in a contest with Archias; +but although he was highly successful, and produced a great impression +upon the audience, he was defeated in the contest because of the wretched +manner in which the play was mounted upon the stage.[146] Then there is +the case of Nicias. He was a man of great wealth, but not of commanding +talents. Accordingly he tried to win popularity by the magnificence +with which he performed his duties as choregus. The result was that he +obtained the victory in every competition in which he engaged.[147] +Antisthenes is another instance of a rich choregus who, although he +knew nothing about music and poetry, was always successful in his +contests, because he spared no expense in the preparations.[148] There +is an example of a different kind of choregus in one of the speeches of +Isaeus. A certain Dicaeogenes regarded his office of choregus merely +as a burden, and tried to perform it in the most economical manner. +The consequence was that he was always unsuccessful. He engaged in a +dithyrambic and tragic contest, and in a contest of pyrrhic dancers. On +the first occasion he was last but one, on the other two occasions he +was last.[149] Obviously the tragic poet who had the misfortune to be +associated with Dicaeogenes would have a very small chance of success. +The above examples show very clearly that the money of the choregus was +almost as important towards securing victory as the genius of the poet. + +The best critics would attend mainly to the merits of the piece in +itself, apart from the splendour of the accompaniments. But the mass of +the spectators would be dazzled by gorgeous dresses and effective singing +and dancing. And the mass of the spectators had a great deal to do with +the verdict. If they were strongly in favour of a particular poet, it +was difficult for the judges to act in opposition to their wishes. The +judges were liable to prosecution and imprisonment if their verdict was +supposed to be unjust; and the case would be tried before a jury chosen +from the very audience which they had thwarted.[150] That the multitude +on occasions made their wishes known most emphatically, and brought +great pressure to bear upon the judges, is shown by Aelian’s account +of the first performance of the Clouds. The story is a fable, but is +interesting as an illustration of the occasional behaviour of an Athenian +audience. It is said that the people were so delighted with the Clouds, +that they applauded the poet more than they had ever done before, and +insisted on the judges placing the name of Aristophanes first upon the +list.[151] Plato laments on several occasions the despotism exercised by +the audience in the theatre. In former times, he says, the verdict was +not decided by ‘hisses and unmusical shouts, as at the present day, nor +by applause and clapping of hands’, but the rabble were compelled by the +attendants to keep quiet. In another place he says that the judge should +be the instructor, not the pupil, of the audience, and should refuse +to be intimidated by their shouts into giving a false verdict. But at +the present day, he adds, the decision rests with the multitude, and is +practically decided by public vote, and the result is the degeneracy +of poets and spectators alike.[152] These passages of Plato prove how +much the judges were under the dominion of the audience; and a general +audience would be especially likely to be carried away by the splendour +of the choregic part of the exhibition, by the music, dancing, and +scenery. But on the whole, in spite of occasional cases of corruption, +and in spite of the despotism of the multitude, one would be inclined +to say, arguing from results, that the judges performed their duties +well. The best proof of their fairness lies in the continued success of +Aeschylus and Sophocles.[153] + + +§ 10. _The Prizes._ + +When the contest was ended, and the decision of the judges had been +announced, the names of the victorious poet and of his choregus were +publicly proclaimed by the herald, and they were crowned with garlands +of ivy in the presence of the spectators. The crowning probably took +place upon the stage, and was performed by the archon.[154] There is no +mention of any special prize for the choregus, in addition to the honour +of the crown and the public proclamation of his victory. It is often +stated that the successful choregus received a tripod from the State, +which he was expected to erect upon a monument in some public place, +with an inscription recording his victory. But this was only the case in +the dithyrambic contests. In these contests each choregus appeared as +the representative of one of the ten tribes of Attica; the tripod which +he received belonged really to the tribe, and was intended to serve as +a tribal monument.[155] The dramatic choregi had no such representative +character, nor were they provided with any memorial of victory by the +State. + +As to the rewards for the poets, the tradition was that in the earliest +times the prize for tragedy was a goat, the prize for comedy a basket +of figs and a jar of wine.[156] After the dramatic contests had been +regularly organized, each of the competing poets received a payment of +money from the State, differing no doubt in amount, according to the +place he gained in the competition.[157] Nothing is known as to the value +of these prizes. But as the ancient dramatist had not only to write +his plays, but also to superintend their production, the demands upon +his time and energy must have been very great, and the rewards would +be correspondingly large. Some idea of the scale on which the amounts +were graduated, according to the place of each poet in the competition, +may be gathered from the analogy of the dithyrambic contests instituted +by Lycurgus in the Peiraeeus. In these contests not less than three +choruses were to take part, and the prizes were to be ten minae for +the first chorus, eight for the second, and six for the third.[158] +The payment of the dramatic poets was probably arranged in a somewhat +similar proportion. Towards the end of the fifth century the prizes +were reduced in amount by certain commissioners of the Treasury, named +Archinus and Agyrrhius. Accordingly in the Frogs of Aristophanes these +two statesmen are placed in the list of bad men who are not allowed to +join the chorus of the initiated.[159] The fact that all of the competing +poets received a reward of money need cause no astonishment. They were +the poets chosen, after selection, to provide the entertainment at the +annual festivals. They were not selected until their plays had been +carefully examined by the archon and found to be of the requisite merit. +To be allowed to exhibit at all was a considerable distinction. There +was nothing dishonourable for an ordinary poet in being placed last in +the competition. No doubt for one of the great dramatic writers such +a position was regarded as a disgrace. When Aristophanes was third it +is spoken of as a distinct rebuff.[160] But to obtain the second place +was always creditable. It is mentioned as a proof of the greatness of +Sophocles that he ‘obtained twenty victories and was often second’. +When he was defeated for the first place by Philocles, the disgrace +consisted, not in his being second, but in his being beaten by such an +inferior poet.[161] At the same time to be second was never regarded as a +‘victory’. The title of victor was reserved for the first poet. This is +proved by the passage about Sophocles just quoted, and also by the fact +that in the list of victors at the City Dionysia only the names of the +first poets in the tragic and comic contests are enumerated.[162] It is +clearly owing to an error that the second poet is sometimes spoken of as +a victor.[163] + + +§ 11. _Contests between actors._ + +In addition to the rewards just mentioned, prizes for acting were +instituted in later times. At first the principal competitors in the +dramatic contests were the choregus and the poet. Upon their efforts +the success of a play mainly depended. It was to them that the rewards +of victory were assigned, and it was their names which were recorded in +the public monuments. But as time went on the profession of the actor +gradually increased in importance. Eventually the success of a play came +to depend principally upon the actors. The competition was extended to +them. A prize was offered for the most successful actor as well as for +the most successful poet. The name of the victorious actors began to be +recorded in the official lists. As regards the date of these innovations +the following facts may be gathered from existing monuments. At the +City Dionysia contests between tragic actors were established for the +first time about the year 446 B.C.[164] Contests between comic actors +at this festival are not mentioned in the inscriptional records of +performances during the fifth and fourth centuries.[165] In the second +century they seem to have become a regular institution, but nothing +certain can be ascertained concerning the intervening period.[166] At the +Lenaea, contests between tragic actors can be traced back as far as 420 +B.C.,[167] and contests between comic actors as far as about 289 with +certainty,[168] and considerably earlier with fair probability.[169] + +These contests were limited to the principal actors or protagonists in +each play. The subordinate actors, the deuteragonist and tritagonist, +had nothing to do with them. The principal actor in a Greek play was a +much more important personage than even the ‘star’ in a modern company. +The actors in a Greek play were limited to three in number, and each +of them had to play several parts in succession, by means of changes +in dress and mask. Hence the protagonist had to perform not only the +principal part, but also several of the subordinate ones. Besides this, +the composition of most Greek tragedies was designed with the express +purpose of bringing out into strong relief the character of the principal +personage. The incidents were intended to draw forth his different +emotions: the subordinate characters were so many foils to him. As a +consequence, the success of a Greek play depended almost wholly upon the +protagonist. In the ordinary language of the times he was said to ‘act +the play’, as if the other performers were of no importance. To take an +example from existing inscriptions, it is recorded that in 340 ‘Astydamas +was victorious with the Parthenopaeus, acted by Thessalus, and the +Lycaon, acted by Neoptolemus’.[170] This is the regular form of the old +records both in tragedy and comedy. Demosthenes uses similar language. +Referring to the Phoenix of Euripides, he says that ‘Theodorus and +Aristodemus never acted this play’. The form of the language is proof of +the overwhelming importance of the protagonist.[171] The only other point +to be noticed is that the success of the actor was quite independent of +the success of the play in which he was performing. Thus in one of the +comic contests of the second century the prize for acting was won by +Onesimus. But the play in which he acted, the Shipwrecked Mariner, only +won the second place. The successful comedy, the Ephesians, was acted by +Sophilus. Similarly in the tragic contests of the year 418 the prize for +acting was won by Callippides; but the poet Callistratus, whose three +tragedies he performed, was only second. The tragedies of the successful +poet were acted by Lysicrates.[172] + +The actors’ contests which we have hitherto been describing took place +at the performance of new tragedies and comedies, and existed side by +side with contests between poets and choregi. But there were other +occasions in which actors met in competition. The reproduction of old +plays generally took the form of contests between actors. These contests +were of two kinds. In the first kind each actor performed a different +play. At the same time the victory was decided, not by the merits of the +play, but by the skill of the actor. There are several references to +competitions of this sort. For instance, before the battle of Arginusae, +Thrasyllus is said to have dreamt that he was engaged in a contest in +the theatre at Athens, and that he and his fellow generals were acting +the Phoenissae of Euripides, while their opponents were acting the +Supplices.[173] The most frequent occasion for reproductions of old +plays in this manner must have been afforded by the Rural Dionysia +in the different townships of Attica. The dramatic performances at +these festivals were mostly confined, as we have already seen, to the +exhibition of old tragedies and comedies. The town offered a prize for +acting, and the leading Athenian actors came down with their companies +and took part in the contest, each performing a different play. But at +the great Athenian festivals, the Lenaea and the City Dionysia, there are +no traces of such competitions to be found in the records. They may have +been introduced in late times; but during the more flourishing period of +the drama, when the older poets were reproduced at these festivals, one +play seems to have been considered sufficient.[174] + +The second kind of competition with old plays differed from the first +in this respect, that each actor performed the same play. For instance, +Licymnius, the tragic actor, is said to have defeated Critias and +Hippasus in the Propompi of Aeschylus. Andronicus, another tragic actor, +was successful in the Epigoni on one occasion; and it is implied that his +opponents acted the same play.[175] In contests of this description it is +not probable that the whole play was acted by each of the competitors, +but only special portions of it. The contest would be useful for purposes +of selection. When the custom arose of prefacing the performances of new +tragedies and new comedies by the reproduction of an ancient drama, it +would be necessary for the state to choose the actor who was to manage +the reproduction. Very probably the selection was made by a competition +of the kind we are describing, in which a portion of an old play was +performed by each of the candidates. The contests between comic actors at +the Chytri have already been referred to.[176] Most likely they were of +the same description. + + +§ 12. _Records of dramatic contests._ + +It is difficult in modern times to realize fully the keenness of the +interest with which the various dramatic contests were regarded by the +old Athenians, and the value which was attached to victories obtained +in them. The greatest statesman was proud to be successful with a +chorus in tragedy or comedy. It was a proof both of his taste and of +his munificence. The tragic poet held as high a place in the popular +estimation as the orator or the general. Victorious competitors were not +content with the mere temporary glory they obtained. Every care was taken +to perpetuate the memory of their success in a permanent form. Elaborate +records were also erected by the state. A description of the various +kinds of memorials, of which fragments have been preserved, will be a +convincing proof of the enthusiasm with which the drama was regarded in +ancient times. + +First, as to the private monuments. These were erected by the victorious +choregi, and appear to have differed widely in style and costliness, +according to the wealth and taste of the individuals. Thus the mean +man in Theophrastus, when he had been successful with a tragic chorus, +was content to erect a mere wooden scroll in commemoration of his +victory.[177] Another cheap device was to dedicate some article of +theatrical costume, such as an actor’s mask.[178] But the ordinary form +of memorial, in the case of the dramatic contests, consisted of a marble +tablet, containing a painting or sculptured relief.[179] At first, no +doubt, these tablets were of small size and simple workmanship; but in +course of time, with the growth of luxurious habits, they began to assume +a more elaborate form. For instance, the monument set up by Xenocles +in 306 was about fourteen feet high, the tablet being enclosed in a +magnificent architectural structure, with columns and entablature.[180] +The paintings and reliefs upon the tablets were no less variable. Some +of them depicted masks, or crowns of victory, or similar emblems; others +contained representations of Dionysus or Silenus. Sometimes groups of +figures were portrayed, such as a chorus of singers with the choregus in +the centre. Sometimes a scene was inserted from the tragedy or comedy in +which the victory had been obtained.[181] But though the tablets differed +in magnificence, the inscriptions upon them were generally simple and +concise, and consisted merely of the names of the poet and choregus, +and of the archon for the year, with the addition in later times of the +name of the actor. The record inscribed by Themistocles in honour of his +tragic victory in 476 ran as follows:[182]— + + Choregus, Themistocles of Phrearria: + Poet, Phrynichus: + Archon, Adeimantus. + +As regards public memorials, we can hardly doubt that from the earliest +period records of the different contests were preserved in the official +archives. But in addition to these documentary registers, elaborate +monuments of stone were erected by the state in or near to the theatre of +Dionysus. Considerable fragments of these monuments have been discovered +by recent excavations. They may be divided into three classes. The first +class consisted of records of all the contests at some one particular +festival. Such records were of the most general description, and +contained merely a list of victors’ names. Fragments have been discovered +of the records of the contests at the City Dionysia during the fifth +and fourth centuries.[183] The style is the same throughout. The boys’ +choruses are mentioned first, then the choruses of men, then comedy, +and tragedy last of all. In the dithyrambic contests the names of the +victorious tribe and choregus are given; in the dramatic contests the +names of the victorious choregus and poet. The only difference between +the earlier and later portions of the record is that towards the middle +of the fifth century the name of the tragic actor begins to be appended. + +The second class of public monuments was devoted to the record of one +particular kind of contest at a particular festival. Records are extant +of tragedy at the Lenaea in the fifth century, and at the City Dionysia +in the fourth; also of comedy at the Lenaea in the third century, and +at the City Dionysia in the second.[184] The names of all the competing +poets are given, together with the titles of the plays they produced, and +the names of the actors who performed them. At the end comes the name of +the actor who won the prize for acting. If there was any reproduction of +an old tragedy or comedy, the name of the play is given, together with +the name of the actor. + +The third class of monument consisted of lists of tragic and comic +actors, and tragic and comic poets, with numerals after each of them, +denoting the number of victories they had won in the course of their +career. There were separate lists for the City Dionysia and the Lenaea. +There were consequently eight lists in all, four for each festival. +Numerous fragments have been discovered, but unfortunately the most +interesting parts are not always the best preserved.[185] Still, they +throw light upon several small points in connexion with the drama. +One fragment confirms the statement of Diodorus, that the number of +Sophocles’ victories was eighteen. At any rate that is proved to have +been the number of his victories at the City Dionysia. Cratinus is +represented as having won three victories at the City Dionysia and six at +the Lenaea. This tallies exactly with the account of Suidas, who gives +the total number of his victories as nine.[186] + +None of the public monuments, of which fragments have been recovered, +appear to have been erected before the third century, or, at the +earliest, the latter part of the fourth century B.C. But there can +be no doubt that similar monuments existed at a much earlier period. +These earlier records, together with the choregic inscriptions and the +documents in the public archives, must have been the source from which +Aristotle derived the information contained in his two books about +the contests at the Dionysia. Of these two books the first was called +‘Dionysiac Victories’, and though it is never quoted by ancient writers, +it probably contained the same sort of information as the first and third +classes of public monuments. The other book was called the ‘Didascaliae’, +and is very frequently referred to and quoted from.[187] It contained +lists of the poets who competed at each festival, together with the names +of the plays they produced. It was therefore similar to the second class +of monuments. ‘Didascalia,’ in its dramatic sense, meant originally the +teaching and training of a chorus. It then came to denote the play or +group of plays produced by a poet at a single festival.[188] Lastly, it +was used to denote a record concerning the production of a play or group +of plays. It is in this sense that Aristotle used it as the title of his +book. The work would not be a mere compilation from existing records and +monuments. It must have required some care and research. For instance, +when a poet had his plays brought out vicariously, we cannot doubt that +the name of the nominal author was entered in the public records, and +not that of the real poet. Aristophanes usually brought out his plays in +this manner. Then again a poet’s plays were sometimes brought out after +his death in the name of his son. In these and similar cases it would +be the duty of the compiler of a work like Aristotle’s to correct the +mistakes of the public records, and to substitute where necessary the +name of the real author of the play. Corrections of this kind were no +doubt made by Aristotle and his successors. The Didascaliae of Aristotle +is the ultimate source of our information as to the production and the +success of the plays of the great Athenian dramatists. Callimachus, +the grammarian of Alexandria, wrote a book of a similar kind, based +upon Aristotle’s work.[189] It was from Callimachus that Aristophanes, +the grammarian, derived the information which he incorporated in his +Arguments to the Greek plays.[190] The existing Arguments are mainly +fragments of the work of Aristophanes.[191] Thus the process of +derivation from Aristotle can be traced step by step. The list of victors +at the City Dionysia for the year 458, which was dug up at Athens a few +years ago, tallies in every particular with the facts recorded in the +Argument to the Agamemnon of Aeschylus.[192] + + + + +CHAPTER II + +THE PREPARATION FOR THE CONTESTS + + +§ 1. _The Poets._ + +Dramatic performances at Athens, as was pointed out, were entirely in +the hands of the state. They were sacred institutions in honour of +Dionysus, and their regulation was as much the duty of the government as +the management of any other religious ceremonial. Of the two festivals +to which they were confined, the City Dionysia was superintended by the +archon eponymus, the Lenaea by the archon basileus. These two archons +were therefore responsible for the dramatic exhibitions at their +respective festivals.[193] They had not much to do with the details of +preparation. Their function was rather one of general supervision. They +had to select the proper persons, set them to work, and see that they +performed their work efficiently. At Athens this was a complex matter, +and required a good deal of arrangement. The requisite number of poets +had to be chosen and their plays approved. Choregi had to be appointed to +pay the expenses of the different choruses. Actors had then to be engaged +and distributed among the poets. It was the duty of the archon to make +all these selections, and to bring poets, actors, and choregi together. +In the present chapter we shall explain in detail the manner in which +these various arrangements were carried out. + +When a poet wished to compete at one of the festivals, he sent in his +application to the archon, together with copies of the plays he proposed +to exhibit. As it was a great honour to be allowed to take part in +the competitions, there was usually no lack of applicants. The archon +then read through the plays submitted to him, and proceeded to select, +from among the various candidates, the number of poets required by +the particular festival. If it was tragedy at the City Dionysia which +he was providing for, he would choose three poets; if it was tragedy +at the Lenaea, he would choose two. In comedy the number of poets was +originally three, and in later times five. When the archon accepted a +poet’s application, and placed him on the official list of competitors, +he was said to ‘grant him a chorus’, because the next step was to provide +him with a choregus, who paid the expenses of his chorus. In the same +way, when a poet applied for permission to exhibit, he was said to ‘ask +for a chorus’.[194] The task imposed upon the archon of deciding between +the rival claims of the dramatic poets must have been a very difficult +and a very invidious one. Even if he acted with the best intentions, he +could hardly avoid giving offence. Sometimes there were manifest cases +of jobbery and favouritism. One archon refused a chorus to the great +comic poet Cratinus; another gave a chorus to a certain Cleomachus in +preference to Sophocles.[195] But it is unlikely that instances of this +kind were very common. Probably in most years the poets of the highest +reputation were chosen. In a city like Athens, where the magistrates were +entirely at the mercy of the people, it would be impossible for them to +disregard popular opinion in a very flagrant manner. + +Some of the old scholiasts say that a poet was not allowed to exhibit +till he had reached the age of thirty or forty.[196] But this is clearly +a mistake. The only limit of age in any of these Bacchic contests was +that which prohibited a man under forty from serving as choregus to a +chorus of boys. As for the dramatic poets, they were free to compete +as soon as they had reached twenty, passed their dokimasia, and been +enrolled as full citizens. Most of the great poets seem to have begun +their career at a very early age. Aeschylus was only twenty-five when he +made his first appearance. Sophocles began to exhibit at twenty-eight, +Euripides at twenty-six,[197] while Aristophanes must have been even +younger when he brought out the Knights.[198] + +It was not uncommon at Athens for a poet to have his plays produced by +a friend, instead of coming forward in his own person. Various motives +might lead him to do so. A young poet, feeling diffident about his +powers, might wish to make his first experiments anonymously. This was +apparently the reason why the first three plays of Aristophanes—the +Banqueters, Babylonians, and Acharnians—were brought out by +Callistratus.[199] It was not till 424, when the Knights was exhibited, +that Aristophanes applied for a chorus in his own name. In the parabasis +to this play he explains that the reasons which made him keep in the +background at first were caution and timidity, and a feeling that one +ought to proceed warily in the business of comic writing, and advance +by slow degrees, just as a steersman begins by serving as a rower.[200] +Sometimes, again, a poet wrote a play for his son, and allowed him to +bring it out and get the credit of the authorship, so as to give him a +successful start in his dramatic career. Aristophanes for this reason +entrusted his two last comedies to his son Araros; and Sophocles is said +to have entrusted his son Iophon with tragedies.[201] It occasionally +happened also that a wealthy citizen, with literary ambitions, bought a +play from a clever but needy author and exhibited it as his own. Plato, +the poet of the Old Comedy, is said to have made an income by sales of +this kind.[202] Probably, however, the commonest reason for vicarious +production was the mere desire to escape trouble and responsibility. +The older poets had superintended in person everything connected with +the bringing out of a play. In later times, as play-writing became +more and more a purely literary pursuit, it was natural for authors +occasionally to transfer the theatrical part of the business to other +shoulders. They hired stage-managers to look after the rehearsals, and +they got theatrical friends to make the necessary arrangements with the +archon. Aristophanes, in the middle of his career, entrusted many of his +comedies to Philonides and Callistratus.[203] The Autolycus of Eupolis +was brought out by Demostratus; Philippus, son of Aristophanes, is said +to have competed frequently with plays of Eubulus.[204] Aphareus, the +rhetorician and tragic poet of the fourth century, though he exhibited in +eight contests, never brought out a play in his own name.[205] In these +and similar cases it is difficult to suggest any other motive than love +of ease. + +As regards the relationship between the poet and the friend who produced +his plays for him, there are one or two points which deserve notice. It +was the nominal poet who applied to the archon, received the chorus, +and undertook the whole responsibility. At the same time the name of +the real poet was often quite well known. Of course, if secrecy was an +object, this would not be so. When a father wrote plays for his son, or +a needy author sold plays to a literary aspirant, the real authorship +must have been concealed, at any rate for a time. But in other cases +it seems to have been an open secret from the first. Aristophanes, in +the Knights, says that many people had been asking him why he gave his +plays to Callistratus instead of applying for a chorus in person.[206] +In the Wasps, which is generally supposed not to have been brought out +by himself, he refers to the author of the play in terms only applicable +to himself.[207] Here, then, there was no attempt at concealment. At the +same time the nominal author must have been the one officially recognized +by the state. It must have been he who received the rewards of victory, +and whose name was stated as victor in the public records. It is true +that in the records which have been preserved the practice is to give the +name of the real author, and to add as a note that the play was actually +brought out by such and such a person. But this can hardly have been the +original form of the entry. It must be due to the corrections of the +grammarians who collected and edited the notices. + + +§ 2. _The Choregi._ + +The next point to consider is the nomination of the choregi, who provided +the choruses. In the case of the dithyrambic contests, which were tribal +in character, the choregi were appointed by the separate tribes, the +appointment taking place one month after the last festival.[208] But as +the drama had no connexion with the tribal system, the dramatic choregi +were taken indiscriminately from the general mass of citizens. They were +nominated by the archon in charge of each festival immediately after his +accession to office in July.[209] This, at any rate, was the original +system. But about the middle of the fourth century a change was made in +the case of the comic choregi. Their appointment was transferred from the +archon to the tribes.[210] Ten choregi were required every year, and each +tribe had to supply one. By this innovation the election of the comic +choregi was assimilated to that of the dithyrambic. But the change was +a mere piece of administrative detail, and had no further significance. +The comic contests remained, as before, independent of the tribal +arrangement, and the name of the tribe never appears in the records of +the contests.[211] + +The choregia was one of the public burdens which had to be undertaken in +turn by the richer citizens. Any man of sufficient wealth might be called +upon after he had reached the age of twenty, though no one under the age +of forty could be choregus to a boys’ chorus.[212] The order was fixed by +law. But a citizen of unusual generosity and ambition might volunteer for +the office out of his proper turn. The defendant in one of the speeches +of Lysias tries to favourably impress the jury by explaining to them that +he has supplied eight choruses in nine years, in addition to such burdens +as the war-tax and the trierarchy.[213] Sometimes, however, there was a +difficulty in finding, even among those who were liable, a sufficient +number of rich men to fill the office. This was especially the case +towards the end of the Peloponnesian War, when there had been long and +heavy drains upon the resources of the state.[214] Accordingly in 406 it +was found necessary to lighten the burden. A law was passed that, each +dramatic chorus at the City Dionysia should be provided by two choregi +instead of one, thus diminishing the cost to individuals by half. This +law was only intended as a temporary expedient. It was not applied to the +Lenaea[215]; and even at the City Dionysia it was repealed in the course +of the next fifty years.[216] + +The institution of the choregia lasted till nearly the end of the +fourth century.[217] But about the year 318 it was abolished, and a new +system adopted in its place.[218] The providing of the choruses was +now undertaken by the state, and an officer called the Agonothetes was +elected annually to carry out the arrangements. This official had the +general management of the musical and dramatic contests, and had to +perform all the duties which had previously fallen to the choregi, and +even to erect the tripods and other memorials of victory.[219] Though +assisted by contributions from the state, he had to bear the greater +part of the expenses himself, and was always chosen on account of his +wealth.[220] At this time the cost of the tragic and comic choruses +would not be very great, as the choral part of the drama had begun to +disappear. But there were other expenses connected with the dramatic +choregia, all of which he would have to meet. The change of system was +no doubt rendered necessary by the circumstances of the time and the +dearth of rich citizens. But it must have robbed the festivals of much +of their interest. In former days the keenness of the rivalry between +the individual choregi had contributed largely to the vitality of the +contests. All this source of excitement was now lost by the substitution +of a single all-powerful official. The name of the Agonothetes occurs +frequently in inscriptions during the third century. After this date +there is no mention of any further changes till about the first century +A.D., when there seems to have been a sort of antiquarian revival, and an +attempt was made to reintroduce the old choregi.[221] But the Agonothetes +was still retained as general manager of the competitions. + +When the archon had selected the poets who were to exhibit, and had made +up his list of the choregi who were to supply the choruses, the next +thing necessary was to arrange choregi and poets together in pairs. Each +choregus had one poet assigned to him, for whose chorus (or choruses) he +was responsible. The process of pairing was a matter of great importance +to the competitors. A choregus who obtained an inferior poet would be +severely handicapped in the contest; and a poet who was joined to a +mean and parsimonious choregus would be equally unfortunate. If the +arrangement had been left to the magistrate, it would have given numerous +opportunities for corruption and favouritism. The Athenians, as usual, +evaded this difficulty by the use of the lot. + +There is, indeed, no definite information as to the manner in which the +assignment was carried out in the case of tragic and comic choruses. +But in the case of the dithyrambic choruses there are full accounts of +the manner in which similar arrangements were made; and it will not be +difficult, from the analogy of these proceedings, to form a fairly clear +conception of the proceedings in regard to tragedy and comedy. Some +time before the festival a meeting of the ecclesia was held, at which +the distribution took place under the superintendence of the archon. +The proceedings were quite public, and any Athenian citizen who wished +could be present. The choregi first drew lots for order of choice, and +then each chose his own flute-player. The choregus who had obtained the +privilege of choosing first selected the flute-player whom he considered +to be the best of the ten. So they went on till all the flute-players +were chosen. The scene was a lively one. The success of the choregus, +and in consequence the success of his tribe, depended to a certain +extent upon his luck in getting a good or bad flute-player. Hence the +whole process was followed with the greatest interest by the crowds +of spectators present. As each lot was drawn, the result was greeted +with expressions of triumph or disappointment by the partisans of the +different choregi.[222] The above information is derived from the account +given by Demosthenes, in the speech against Meidias, of the preliminary +arrangements for the dithyrambic contests. Nothing is there said about +the choice or assignation of the poets. Probably in this contest only +old dithyrambs were reproduced, and there were no poets to be assigned. +That such was often the case is proved by inscriptions.[223] But when +the contest was with original dithyrambs, and poets were required, they +seem to have been allotted to the choregi in much the same manner as the +flute-players. The defendant in one of the speeches of Antiphon says +that, when he was choregus to a chorus of boys at the Thargelia, the poet +Pantacles was assigned to him by lot[224]. + + +§ 3. _Selection of the Actors._ + +Poets and choregi having been associated together in pairs, there still +remained the selection and appointment of the actors. The manner in which +they were appointed differed very considerably at different periods. To +take the case of tragic actors first. Before the time of Aeschylus, when +tragedy was more a lyrical than a dramatic performance, consisting of +long choral odes interspersed with recitatives, actors did not exist as +a separate class. Only one actor was required in each play, and his part +was taken by the poet.[225] But when Aeschylus increased the number of +actors to two, and converted tragedy from a lyrical into a dramatic form +of art, the poets ceased to perform in their own plays, and the actor’s +profession came into existence. For the next fifty years or so it does +not appear that the state took any part in the selection of the actors. +It left the matter in the hands of the poets. Particular actors are found +to have been permanently connected with particular poets. Aeschylus is +said to have first employed Cleander as his actor, and to have afterwards +associated a second actor with him in the person of Mynniscus.[226] +Tlepolemus acted continuously for Sophocles.[227] It is stated, on the +authority of Ister, that Sophocles was accustomed to write his plays +with a view to the capacities of his actors.[228] This story, whether +true or not, shows that he chose his actors himself, at any rate during +the earlier part of his career. But as the actors grew in importance, +their selection was no longer left to the choice of individual poets, but +was undertaken by the state. Henceforth we cease to hear of particular +poets and actors being permanently associated together. The statement of +Thomas Magister, that Cephisophon was the actor of Euripides, appears to +be a mere conjecture, as Cephisophon is nowhere else described in that +way.[229] The change in the method of selection was probably introduced +about the middle of the fifth century, when the contests in acting +were established, and the position of the actors received its first +official recognition. Under the new arrangement, three protagonists +were first of all selected by the archon. There is no information as +to the way in which they were selected. They may have been chosen by +means of a small competition, similar to that between comic actors at +the Chytri. The subordinate actors were apparently not chosen by the +state, but each protagonist was allowed to provide his own deuteragonist +and tritagonist.[230] When the three leading actors had been chosen +they were assigned to the three competing tragic poets by lot. Probably +the system was the same as in the assignation of the flute-players to +the dithyrambic choruses. The poets would first draw lots for order of +choice, and then each poet would choose his actor. The actor performed +all the tragedies of the poet to whom he was allotted. Thus in 418 the +three tragedies of Callistratus were acted by Callippides; the three +tragedies of his rival were acted by Lysicrates.[231] The actor who won +the prize for acting was permitted to compete as a matter of course at +the next festival without having to submit to the process of selection +by the archon. Such was the system adopted during the latter half of the +fifth century.[232] How long it lasted cannot be determined; but when +we come to the middle of the fourth century, a further alteration is +found to have been introduced. By this time the importance of the actors +had increased to a still greater extent. In fact, Aristotle says that +in his day the success of a play depended much more upon the actor than +the poet.[233] It was probably felt that under the old arrangement the +poet who obtained by lot the greatest actor had an unfair advantage over +his rivals. A new system was therefore introduced, by which the talents +of the actors were divided with perfect equality among the poets. Each +tragedy was performed by a separate actor. All the actors appeared in +turn in the service of each of the poets. Thus in 341 Astydamas exhibited +three tragedies. His Achilles was acted by Thessalus, his Athamas by +Neoptolemus, his Antigone by Athenodorus. The three tragedies of each of +his competitors were performed by the same three actors.[234] By this +arrangement no poet had any advantage over his rivals, but as far as +the excellence of the actors was concerned all were on exactly the same +level. The system just described appears to have been retained without +alteration during the remaining period of Attic tragedy. + +The mode of distributing the actors in comedy was much the same as that +in tragedy. During the earlier part of the fifth century the poets were +left to choose their own actors. Thus the comic poet Crates is said +to have begun his career as actor to Cratinus. But in later times no +instances are to be found of comic actors being permanently connected +with particular poets. The story that Philonides and Callistratus were +actors of Aristophanes is a mere fiction of one of the old commentators, +based upon a misunderstanding.[235] It is evident, therefore, that the +state began to undertake the selection and appointment of the comic +actors about the same time that a corresponding change was made in +regard to tragedy. No doubt the mode of distribution was identical. +The actors were first appointed by the state, and the poets then drew +lots for them. As the comic poets competed with single plays, only one +method of distribution was possible, and there was no need of the further +alteration which was afterwards made in tragedy. The number of poets +in the comic contests was originally three, and in later times five. A +corresponding number of actors would be required. Sometimes, however, a +smaller number was selected, and one actor appeared in two comedies. In +288 Aristomachus was the actor assigned both to Simylus and Diodorus. +About B.C. 160 Damon is found occasionally acting in two comedies at the +same competition.[236] It is not likely that such a course was adopted +except on occasions when it was impossible to obtain five comic actors of +fairly equal merit. + + +§ 4. _The Training of the Chorus._ + +The archon had now for the present finished his part of the business. He +had seen that the proper number of poets, actors, and choregi had been +chosen. He had seen that each choregus was provided with his own poet +and actor. It was now the duty of choregus and poet to attend to the +subsequent preparations. The choregus was responsible for the selection +and payment of the chorus. He had also to provide a room for them to +rehearse in.[237] Very little is known concerning the relations between +the choregus and his chorus. Such few details as have been recorded refer +rather to the dithyramb than to the drama. The dithyrambic choruses +were selected exclusively from the tribes which they represented in +the competition. Each tribe had a specially appointed agent, who was +employed by the choregus to collect his chorus for him.[238] But the +drama having nothing to do with the tribes, there was no limitation upon +the selection of the dramatic choruses. Aristotle happens in one place to +remark that a tragic and a comic chorus often consisted of much the same +individual members.[239] It is quite clear, therefore, that the dramatic +choruses were chosen from the general body of citizens, and that a man +might serve in two of them at the same time. There was probably a class +of professional singers who made their livelihood by serving in these +choruses. A rich choregus would have a great advantage over his rivals +by offering higher pay, and so securing better singers. The stories +about the boarding and lodging of the choreutae also refer mainly to +the dithyrambic choruses. The choregus in Antiphon’s speech lodged his +chorus in his own house, and gave special directions that every delicacy +which was ordered by the trainer should be provided for them.[240] But +this was a chorus of boys. The professionals who served in the dramatic +choruses are not likely to have been lodged in the house of the choregus, +especially as they were often in the service of two choregi at the same +time. However, it seems that the diet of the choruses was well attended +to, so that the members should appear in the best possible condition on +the day of the contests. Plutarch mentions eels, lettuce, garlic, and +cheese as delicacies provided for this purpose. The appetite of the Attic +choreutae passed into a proverb.[241] + +During the earlier period of the Athenian drama the principal part +in the training and instruction of the chorus was undertaken by the +poet himself. In fact, the regular name at Athens for a dramatic or +dithyrambic poet was didaskalos, or ‘the teacher’, owing to the part he +took in teaching his play or poem to the chorus. In the same way, when +a poet brought out a tragedy or a comedy, the technical expression was +that he ‘taught’ such and such a play. The play, or group of plays, +exhibited by a single poet was called a ‘teaching’[242]. In addition +to the evidence supplied by these expressions, there is also no lack +of direct testimony as to the important part taken by the older poets +in the production of their plays. In fact, they were quite as much +stage-managers as poets. The older dramatic writers, such as Thespis, +Pratinas, Cratinus, and Phrynichus, were called ‘dancers’, not only +because of the prominent part which the chorus and the dancing filled +in their plays, but also because they gave instruction in choric +dancing.[243] Aeschylus is said to have superintended personally the +whole of the training of his choruses, and to have invented many +new dances and movements for them. His innovations in regard to the +scenery and the dresses of the actors entirely transformed the outward +appearance of the drama.[244] This intimate connexion between the poet +and the stage, between the literary and the theatrical part of dramatic +production, continued to exist during the great period of Athenian drama. +Sophocles appeared personally in some of his plays. In the Thamyris he +played the harp. In the Nausicaa he won great applause by the skill with +which he played ball in the scene where Nausicaa is sporting with her +maidens.[245] Euripides also seems to have superintended the training of +his choruses in person, as there is a story in Plutarch which represents +him as singing over one of his odes to the choreutae.[246] + +The poet was assisted in his task by a subordinate, who looked after the +routine part of the work, and was called a hypodidaskalos, or ‘assistant +teacher’. This was the proper term to denote the professional trainer, +as opposed to the didaskalos, or poet.[247] But towards the end of the +fifth and the beginning of the fourth century the practice in these +matters underwent a change. Poetry and stage-management began to be +sharply discriminated from one another. A class of literary dramatic +writers arose, such as Theodectes and Aphareus, who were quite as much +rhetoricians as poets. They knew nothing about the details of training a +chorus, or preparing a play for representation. In these circumstances +the greater part of the management was undertaken by the professional +instructor. The term didaskalos, which had originally been confined +to the poet, was now applied to these hired trainers.[248] A class +of men came into existence who made choral instruction their regular +business. One of these, named Sannio, is mentioned by Demosthenes, +and was celebrated for his skill in training tragic choruses.[249] +These professional teachers were hired and paid by the choregus. A +rich choregus had a great advantage in being able to secure the best +assistance. Xenophon mentions the case of a certain choregus called +Antisthenes, who knew little or nothing about music and choruses himself, +but was always successful in his competitions, because he took care to +provide himself with the most skilful trainers procurable.[250] It is +obvious that in these later times, when the poets ceased to attend to the +details of stage-management, the importance of the professional trainers +must have been very much increased. The hiring of a good trainer would be +one of the first conditions of success. + + +§ 5. _The Expenses of the Choregia._ + +It will now be possible to form some conception of the expenses which +the choregus had to meet. The principal item was the hire of the chorus +during the whole period of training. This part of the expenditure +was borne entirely by the choregus without any assistance from the +state.[251] Then again, he had to provide an instructor for his chorus. +As the competition between rich choregi was of the keenest character, the +services of a really good instructor must have been expensive. In the +third place, a flute-player was required. In the dithyrambic choruses +the flute-players were selected by the state, and assigned by lot to the +choregi. But in the dramatic choruses they appear to have been chosen by +the choregus himself, who would therefore have to pay their salary.[252] +Fourthly, the various mute characters that appeared upon the stage, such +as the attendants upon kings and queens, were supplied by the choregus. +This is proved by the story in Plutarch of a tragedian at Athens who +was going to act the part of a queen, and who refused to perform unless +the choregus would provide him with a train of female attendants +dressed in expensive fashion.[253] The number and splendour of the mute +characters would add greatly to the magnificence of the spectacle, and +form a considerable item in the expenses of a wealthy choregus. It is +also probable that in early times, when the actors were chosen by the +poets, their salary was paid by the choregus. But later the selection +and payment of the actors were undertaken entirely by the state.[254] +The principal part then of the expenditure of the choregus consisted in +paying the salaries of the various persons just mentioned. In addition to +this, he had to provide the dresses of the chorus, which were often very +magnificent. For example, the comic poet Antiphanes mentions the case of +a choregus who ruined himself by dressing his chorus in gold. Demosthenes +supplied his chorus of men with golden crowns.[255] Sometimes the love +of splendour degenerated into mere vulgar ostentation. Unnecessary +magnificence in the appointments of a comic chorus is mentioned by +Aristotle as a proof of vulgarity. On the other hand, economical +choregi saved expense by hiring second-hand dresses from the dealers in +theatrical costumes.[256] Another item in the expenses of the choregia +was the supply of dresses for the various mute characters and subordinate +personages. With the dresses of the actors themselves the choregus had +probably nothing to do. As for the ordinary kinds of scenery, they were +part of the permanent fixtures of the theatre, and would be provided by +the lessee. But when anything very special in the way of scenery was +required by the necessities of a particular play, it is most probable +that the expenses were borne by the choregus. As far, then, as can be +gathered from ancient notices, the expenses of the choregia consisted in +the hire of the chorus, the instructor, the flute-player, and the mute +characters; in providing dresses for the chorus and the mute characters; +and in supplying such exceptional scenery as the theatre did not possess. + +A choregus who was anxious for victory, and who was ready to spend money +over the production of the play, would easily be put to very considerable +expense. The defendant in one of the speeches of Lysias tells us that a +tragic chorus cost him thirty minae, a comic chorus sixteen, a chorus +of boys fifteen. It follows that a comic chorus was only about half as +expensive as a tragic one, and cost about the same as a chorus of boys. +On the other hand, a chorus of men at the City Dionysia cost fifty minae. +These figures bear out the statement of Demosthenes, that a chorus of men +was much more expensive than a tragic chorus. The chorus of men consisted +of fifty members; and the payment of so large a number, together with the +dresses and crowns which the choregi used to provide them with, would +easily account for the expense. A tragic chorus consisted of only fifteen +members, and yet it cost about twice as much as a comic chorus, which +consisted of twenty-four. But we must remember that the tragic chorus +had to perform in several plays, the comic chorus in only one. Also it +does not appear to have been customary to spend very much money upon a +comedy. In another speech of Lysias, a certain Aristophanes is said to +have expended fifty minae over two tragic choruses. He was therefore +rather more economical than the person mentioned above, who spent thirty +minae over one.[257] It would be very interesting to be able to form +some conception of the amount which these sums would represent at the +present day. It appears that in the time of Aristophanes the daily wages +for common and unskilled labour were three obols.[258] If we take as a +modern equivalent the case of the agricultural labourer who gets ten +shillings a week, or one shilling and eightpence per day, it follows that +three obols in ancient Attica were equivalent to about one shilling and +eightpence at the present time. If this calculation is anywhere near the +mark, then a choregus who spent thirty minae on a tragic chorus would be +spending a sum equivalent to about £500 of our money. The sixteen minae +paid for a comic chorus would represent about £266. Comparisons of this +kind are very conjectural; but they enable one to form some idea of the +immense sums of money which must have been spent at Athens in the course +of a single year upon dramatic and choral performances. There were eight +dramatic and ten dithyrambic choruses at the City Dionysia. There were +seven or eight dramatic choruses at the Lenaea. Besides this there were +dithyrambic choruses at the Thargelia, Prometheia, and Hephaesteia; and +dithyrambic and pyrrhic choruses at the Panathenaea. The expenses of all +these choruses were drawn from a single small state, about the size of +an English county, in which wealth was by no means abundant. It is easy +therefore to see that there was not much exaggeration in the complaint of +Demosthenes, that the Athenians spent more upon their festivals than they +ever spent upon a naval expedition.[259] + +If the choregi neglected their duties, and were careless about the +efficiency of their choruses, it was the duty of the archon to bring +pressure to bear upon them.[260] But such interference was not often +necessary. On the contrary the rivalry between the choregi was so +keen, and their desire for victory so great, that it often led them +into expenses which they could not afford. Demosthenes says that men +frequently spent all their property upon these competitions.[261] +The choregus in Antiphanes has already been referred to, who reduced +himself to beggary by his extravagance in providing golden dresses for +his chorus. Besides the mere spirit of emulation there was another +inducement to lavish vast sums upon these choregic displays. For a +wealthy politician it was an easy means of gaining popularity, and +increasing his influence in the state. Nicias is said to have owed a +great deal of his power to the splendour of his choruses, upon which he +spent more money than any of his contemporaries or predecessors.[262] +With the double motives of ambition and emulation at work, it was natural +that considerable jealousy should be excited between the rival choregi, +the ‘anti-choregi’, as they were called. Sometimes this hostility ended +in blows. When Taureas and Alcibiades were competitors with choruses of +boys, a dispute having arisen as to the parentage of one of the boys +in Alcibiades’ chorus, the matter ended in a personal conflict in the +orchestra.[263] Demosthenes, in his speech against Meidias, cites many +examples of the bitterness and animosity with which choregi regarded one +another. He adds that there would have been some excuse for the assault +of Meidias upon himself if it had been caused by the jealousy of a rival +choregus.[264] + + +§ 6. _The Performances in the Theatre._ + +When the preparations were all completed, a few days before the actual +festival there was a preliminary ceremony called the Proagon. It took +place in the Odeum, a sort of smaller theatre to the south of the +Acropolis, not far from the theatre of Dionysus. The Proagon was a +kind of show or spectacle, and served as an introduction to the actual +performances at the festival. Each of the tragic poets who were about +to compete in the approaching contest appeared upon the stage in the +presence of the people, accompanied by his choregus, his actors, and +the members of the chorus. All of them wore crowns upon their heads; +but the actors were without their masks and their stage dresses. As +they paraded upon the stage some announcement was made to the people, +of which the exact nature is not known. But it is very likely that this +occasion was taken for making known to the people the names of the poet +and his actors, together with the titles of the tragedies shortly to be +performed, and other information of a similar character. At the same +time the people would have an opportunity of becoming acquainted with +poets and actors who were making their first appearance. The splendour +of the dresses of choruses and choregi, upon which great sums of money +were spent, would make a spectacle of some magnificence, and appeal +to the popular taste. At the Proagon which followed shortly after the +death of Euripides, it is said that Sophocles appeared upon the stage +in a dark-coloured dress, and introduced his actors and chorus without +the usual crowns. It is nowhere definitely stated that the comic and +dithyrambic poets and choruses took part in the Proagon. But the whole +of our information about the ceremony is derived from one or two +brief and casual notices, in which very few details are given. It is +hardly probable that only tragedy was represented. The magnificence +of the spectacle would be very much increased by the large and +gorgeously-dressed choruses of boys and men.[265] + +During the period of the actual contests the audience met in the theatre +every morning soon after daybreak. Considering the number of plays +which had to be produced, it was necessary that the proceedings should +begin at an early hour.[266] The vast gathering of spectators, like all +public meetings at Athens, was first of all purified by the offer of a +small sacrifice. Then libations were poured in front of the statue of +the god Dionysus.[267] If the festival was the City Dionysia, before +the tragedies began the opportunity was taken to proclaim the names of +citizens upon whom crowns had been bestowed, together with the services +for which they had been granted. The proclamation before such a vast +multitude of citizens was naturally considered a very great honour.[268] +During the period of Athenian supremacy another striking ceremony +preceded the tragedies at the City Dionysia. The tribute collected from +the dependent states was divided into talents, and solemnly deposited in +the orchestra.[269] Then the orphans whose fathers had been killed in +battle, and who had been educated by the state, and had now reached the +age of manhood, were brought forward upon the stage equipped in complete +armour. The herald made a proclamation, recounting what the state had +done for them, and they were then publicly discharged from state control +to take their place as ordinary citizens.[270] After these preliminaries +had been gone through the dramatic performances commenced. The order +in which the different plays were to be performed was determined by +lot.[271] Each poet, as his turn came, was summoned by name by the public +herald and ordered to produce his play.[272] The summons to each poet was +accompanied in later times by the blowing of a trumpet, a custom which +originated as follows. On one occasion an actor called Hermon had left +the building, expecting that his comedy would come on late. But as it was +called for sooner than he expected, there was a hitch in the proceedings +owing to his absence. The blowing of the trumpet was therefore instituted +to mark the commencement of each new performance, and let people in +the neighbourhood of the theatre know at what rate the contest was +progressing.[273] The order in which the poets competed was determined by +lot, as stated above. It was considered an advantage to be drawn last, +as the latest performance left the most vivid impression upon the minds +of the judges. This would be especially the case in such competitions as +lasted over three days. The Ecclesiazusae of Aristophanes was drawn first +for performance. The poet therefore, in the course of this play, implores +the judges not to let the ballot damage his chances, but to judge the +choruses on their merits, unlike the courtesans, who forget all except +their latest lovers.[274] + +At the end of each competition the judges wrote their verdicts upon +tablets. Five of these tablets were drawn by lot, and decided the result. +The names of the victorious poet and choregus were then proclaimed by +the herald, and they were crowned with a chaplet of ivy in the presence +of the spectators. At the conclusion of the festival the successful +poet celebrated his victory by a solemn sacrifice, followed by a grand +banquet, at which most of his friends were present. The members of the +chorus were also there, and probably the choregus and the actors. The +scene of Plato’s Symposium is laid in Agathon’s house the day after the +banquet in honour of his first tragic victory. Socrates had avoided the +banquet itself, because of the crush of people, but came next day to a +more private gathering.[275] A victory, especially at the City Dionysia, +was regarded as a splendid distinction. On one occasion Ion of Chios, +after winning the first prize in both the tragic and the dithyrambic +contests at the same festival, showed the extent of his joy by making a +present of a jar of Chian wine to every Athenian citizen.[276] + +The next day but one after the conclusion of the City Dionysia a special +assembly of the people was convened in the theatre of Dionysus to discuss +matters connected with the festival. No doubt a similar assembly was held +after the Lenaea, though the fact is nowhere actually stated. At this +assembly the conduct of the archon, who had had the management of the +festival which was just over, was taken into consideration. Any neglect +of his duties, or any unfairness in the choice of poets and actors, would +be punished. At the same time crowns and other distinctions were voted +in honour of officials who had performed their duties in connexion with +the festival satisfactorily. It has been pointed out that the judges +in the dramatic and dithyrambic contests were liable to prosecution +and punishment if they were suspected of dishonesty in their verdicts. +Probably such charges were brought forward and decided at this assembly +in the theatre. Then came the hearing of complaints as to any violation +of the sanctity of the festival.[277] The aggrieved person stated his +charges before the assembled people: the defendant made his reply: the +people then proceeded to vote. If they acquitted the defendant there was +an end of the matter. But if they voted against him the prosecutor then +carried the case before the ordinary law-courts, where, of course, the +previous verdict of the people weighed very much in his favour.[278] + + +§ 7. _Reproduction of Old Plays._ + +At Athens, during the fifth century, when the drama was in its most +flourishing state, plays were usually exhibited once, and once only. +There were only two festivals in the whole year at which regular +theatrical performances could be held. Consequently, as long as the +creative period of the drama lasted, the few days given up to them barely +sufficed even for a single performance of the various new compositions. +Nor were repetitions necessary. The theatre at Athens was of enormous +size, so that every man had a chance of seeing a play when it was first +brought out. If it was successful, and he wished to see it again, he +had numerous opportunities of doing so at the Rural Dionysia, where +reproductions were the rule. For these reasons the Athenian stage of the +fifth century was confined almost exclusively to original works. When a +play had once been performed, it was never seen again, as far as Athens +was concerned, unless it happened to be of extraordinary merit. It is +stated on the authority of Dicaearchus that the Frogs of Aristophanes +‘was so much admired on account of its parabasis that it was actually +repeated’.[279] The language here used implies that such a repetition was +a very unusual circumstance. It is true that when the Capture of Miletus, +the historical play of Phrynichus, caused so much commotion in the +theatre the Athenians are said to have passed a law that ‘for the future +no one should exhibit this drama’.[280] But the law must have referred to +its reproduction at the Rural Dionysia. + +At Athens then during the fifth century even successful plays were only +exhibited once. But if a play was unsuccessful, the poet was allowed +to revise and rewrite it, and to compete with it again in its improved +shape.[281] The revision of unsuccessful plays seems to have been a +common practice with the Athenian dramatic writers. It is mentioned as +rather a peculiarity in the comic poet Anaxandrides, that when one of +his comedies was unsuccessful, he used to destroy it at once, without +taking the trouble to emend it and try his fortunes with it a second +time.[282] Many plays were revised and re-exhibited in this manner, +and in consequence many plays existed in ancient times in a double +form. Such was the case with the Lemnian Women of Sophocles, and the +Autolycus and Phrixus of Euripides.[283] The Hippolytus of Euripides +which we at present possess is a revised edition pruned of its original +defects.[284] The Clouds of Aristophanes on its first appearance was very +unsuccessful, and was altered in many important particulars before it +reached the form in which it has come down to us.[285] Among the other +plays of Aristophanes, the Peace, the Plutus, and the Thesmophoriazusae +were brought out a second time in a corrected form.[286] Instances of +the revision of plays are not uncommon among the writers of the Middle +and New Comedy. Sometimes the original title was retained in the revised +version, as for instance in the Heiress of Menander. Sometimes a new +title was adopted. Thus the Braggart Captain of Diphilus appeared +subsequently as the Eunuch.[287] + +One remarkable exception to the general practice demands notice. In the +Life of Aeschylus it is said that the Athenians felt such an admiration +for him, that they passed a decree after his death that any one who +offered to exhibit his plays should receive a chorus from the archon. +This does not mean that his plays were to be performed as a mere isolated +exhibition, apart from the regular contests, but that any person might +be allowed to compete at the ordinary tragic contests with plays of +Aeschylus instead of new plays of his own. If any one offered to do so, +the archon was bound to give him a chorus. He would then take his place +as one of the three competing poets; but while his rivals exhibited new +and original tragedies, he would confine himself to reproducing tragedies +of Aeschylus. Probably the men who undertook these revivals were in most +cases celebrated actors. In this way the plays of Aeschylus were often +brought into competition with the plays of later writers, and appear to +have been generally successful. Philostratus refers to the custom.[288] +He says that the Athenians invited Aeschylus after his death to the +festivals of Dionysus, and that his plays were acted over again, and +were victorious a second time. This passage makes it quite clear that +the tragedies of Aeschylus were exhibited in the ordinary contests, and +not as a separate performance by themselves. There is a reference in the +beginning of the Acharnians to a competition of this kind. Dicaeopolis +had come to the theatre to see the tragic contests.[289] He was expecting +that the performance would commence with plays of Aeschylus; but to his +disgust the frigid Theognis was the first to be called upon.[290] Here +then is a picture of a contest in which the tragic poet Theognis was +opposed by a competitor who exhibited, not plays of his own, but plays of +Aeschylus. It is to the practice of reproducing his plays after his death +that Aeschylus alludes in the Frogs, when he remarks that his poetry has +not died with him, like that of Euripides.[291] Quintilian refers to the +same custom, though his language is not quite accurate. He says that +the tragedies of Aeschylus were sublime, but rough and unfinished; and +therefore the Athenians permitted subsequent poets to polish and revise +them, and exhibit them at the competitions in their amended form; and in +this way many of them won the prize.[292] This story, however, of the +revision of the plays of Aeschylus by subsequent poets (as distinct from +their corruption by actors) is not otherwise supported.[293] + +From this reproduction of old plays of Aeschylus must be carefully +distinguished those instances where plays, which Aeschylus had left +unpublished at his death, were produced for the first time by his son +Euphorion. It is said that Euphorion won four victories with his father’s +unpublished tragedies. In a similar manner the Oedipus Coloneus of +Sophocles was produced for the first time by his grandson four years +after the poet’s death. And after the death of Euripides, his Iphigeneia +in Aulis, Alcmaeon, and Bacchae were brought out by his son at the +City Dionysia.[294] On such occasions as these, although no doubt the +real authorship of the plays was perfectly well known at the time, the +relative appeared as the nominal author. He asked for a chorus from +the archon in his own name. The plays he produced were new ones. There +is therefore no similarity between instances of this kind and those +occasions when a man asked for a chorus, not in his own name, but in +order to produce old plays of Aeschylus. + +It was not till the fourth century that the reproduction of old plays +developed into a regular custom. The practice was at first confined +to tragedy. This branch of the drama had passed beyond the period of +healthy growth, and already showed symptoms of decay. The three great +tragic poets of the fifth century had in their several lines exhausted +the capabilities of Attic tragedy. Their successors were mostly feeble +imitators of Euripides. Under such circumstances the tendency to fall +back upon the early drama naturally became more prevalent. In the records +of the City Dionysia during the latter half of the fourth century it +is found that the series of new tragedies was invariably preceded by +the performance of an old one.[295] The same practice was also no doubt +adopted at the Lenaea. The actors who had the privilege of conducting +these revivals would be selected by the archon, probably after a +small preliminary competition of the kind described in the previous +chapter.[296] It appears that these actors, in preparing the old plays +for reproduction, were sometimes inclined to tamper with the text, and +to introduce what they considered improvements, just as the plays of +Shakespeare were adapted for the stage by Garrick in the last century. A +law was passed by the orator Lycurgus to put a stop to this practice. It +was enacted that a public copy should be made of the works of Aeschylus, +Sophocles, and Euripides, and deposited in the state archives; and that +the actors, in their performances, should not be allowed to deviate from +the text of the copy.[297] It is very probable that this authorized +version eventually found its way to Alexandria. Ptolemy the Third was a +great collector of manuscripts. He borrowed from the Athenians an old +copy of the works of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, promising to +return it after he had made a transcript, and depositing fifteen talents +as security. The transcript was made in the best possible style. Ptolemy +then proceeded to keep the original manuscript for himself, and sent back +merely the transcript to Athens. The Athenians had to console themselves +with the fifteen talents which were forfeited. This old copy of the +tragic writers was most probably that made in accordance with the law of +Lycurgus.[298] + +Athenian comedy, as was previously pointed out, continued to grow and +develop long after tragedy had been reduced to a state of stagnation. The +need for the reproduction of old comedies was therefore not felt until a +much later epoch. The first recorded instances of revivals of this kind +belong to the second century B.C. The system which was then introduced +appears to have been identical with that adopted in the case of tragedy. +A single old comedy was exhibited at each festival as a prelude to the +new ones. As far as our information goes the specimen selected was taken +in every case from the works of Menander and his contemporaries.[299] + +To turn once more to tragedy. The fourth century was an age of great +actors, just as the fifth century had been an age of great poets. The +principal actors of the fourth century filled a more important place in +the history of tragedy than the dramatic poets themselves. Their fame +was chiefly derived from their impersonations of characters out of the +great tragedies of the past. A novel interpretation of a celebrated +rôle, such as that of Antigone or Medea, was a much greater event in +dramatic circles, and excited far more discussion, than the production +of a new play. In exactly the same way the great English actors of the +last hundred years or so are remembered, not so much for the new dramas +which they brought out, as for their impersonation of parts like Hamlet +and Othello. From the numerous references to Athenian actors of the +fourth century, and to the old tragedies which they exhibited, it is +possible to glean some interesting facts in regard to these revivals. +We are able to trace the course of the popular taste, and to discover +who were the favourite poets, and which were the plays in most demand. +The three great masters of tragedy, Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, +occupied a position by themselves in popular estimation, and quite +overshadowed all other poets. This is proved by the law of Lycurgus. But +though the existence of the law shows that the tragedies of Aeschylus +were occasionally reproduced, and were therefore liable to corruption, +it does not appear that in this later age Aeschylus was very popular +upon the stage. The only allusion to a particular revival of his plays +is that which occurs in one of the letters of Alciphron, where the +tragic actor Licymnius is said to have been victorious in the Propompi +of Aeschylus.[300] On the other hand, the reproductions of plays of +Sophocles and Euripides are very frequently referred to. And it is a +significant fact that when the actor Satyrus was consoling Demosthenes +for the ill-success of his first speech before the assembly, and wished +to point out to him the defectiveness of his elocution, he asked him to +repeat ‘a speech out of Sophocles or Euripides’, implying that these were +the two poets whom every one knew.[301] In the Poetics of Aristotle the +laws of the drama are based upon the plays of Sophocles and Euripides, +while Aeschylus is comparatively disregarded. The simplicity of his +plots and the elevation and occasional obscurity of his language were +distasteful to an age which looked for ingenuity in the management of +the incidents, and rhetorical facility in the style. These qualities +were found to perfection in Euripides, and there can be no doubt that +he was the favourite poet of the fourth century. The records of the +tragic performances at the City Dionysia for the years 341-339 B.C. show +that in each of these years the old tragedy selected for exhibition +was one by Euripides. In 341 it was the Iphigeneia, in 340 it was the +Orestes. The title of the play produced in 339 is lost, but the author +was Euripides.[302] Other plays of his which were favourites at this +time were the Cresphontes, the Oenomaus, and the Hecuba, in all of +which Aeschines is said to have played the part of tritagonist. The +Oenomaus and the Hecuba are also mentioned as plays in which the great +actor Theodorus was especially effective. In the dream of Thrasyllus +before the battle of Arginusae the plays which were being acted were +the Phoenissae and the Supplices of Euripides.[303] Though the story +of the dream is apocryphal, these two tragedies were doubtless popular +ones during the fourth century. As to the plays of Sophocles, it is said +that Polus, the contemporary of Demosthenes, and the greatest actor of +his time, was celebrated for his performance of the leading parts in the +Oedipus Tyrannus, the Oedipus Coloneus, and the Electra. The Antigone +of Sophocles was often acted by Theodorus and by Aristodemus. A certain +Timotheus used to make a great impression in the part of Ajax. Lastly, +the Epigoni of Sophocles is mentioned in connexion with Andronicus, +another contemporary of Demosthenes.[304] It is interesting to observe +that of the plays which the popular taste of the fourth century had begun +to select for revival by far the greater number are among those which are +still extant. + + + + +CHAPTER III + +THE THEATRE + + +§ 1. _Introductory._ + +The theatre at Athens, whether regarded from the historical or the +architectural point of view, is one of the most interesting buildings +in the world.[305] It was apparently the first stone theatre erected +in Greece, and may therefore be regarded as the prototype of all other +ancient theatres, both Greek and Roman. It cannot indeed claim to have +been contemporary with the most glorious period of the Attic drama. +Recent investigations have shown that the greater part of it cannot be +dated before the middle of the fourth century with any certainty. Still, +it occupied almost exactly the same site as the old wooden theatre +in which the plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides were first +exhibited. It no doubt reproduced in a more permanent form the main +features and characteristics of that ancient theatre. It was itself the +scene of those great revivals of Attic tragedy in the fourth century +to which we have already alluded. In connexion with a building of such +importance the smallest details are not without interest. The object of +the chapter will be, firstly, to give an account of the existing remains +and present condition of this theatre; secondly, to determine what must +have been its original form and appearance, before the primitive design +had been obscured by later alterations; thirdly, from the evidence thus +collected, and from other sources, to draw such inferences as seem +possible concerning the older theatre of the fifth century. It will be +necessary at the same time to make occasional references to various other +Greek theatres, both for the purpose of illustration and comparison, +and also in order to fill up the gaps in our information caused by the +ruinous condition of the Athenian theatre. Many of these other theatres +have lately been excavated in a thorough and systematic manner, at +Epidaurus, Megalopolis, Delos, Eretria, and elsewhere. The discoveries +made in the course of the excavations have added greatly to our knowledge +of the Greek stage. + +[Illustration: _To face p. 78._ + +FIG. 2. THEATRE AT ATHENS, FROM THE NORTH.] + +The construction and general arrangement of a Greek theatre differed +widely from any form of theatre to be found at the present day. The +Greek theatre was exposed to the open air, and had no roof or covering +of any kind. It was generally built upon the slope of a hill in or +near the city. It was of enormous magnitude, compared with a modern +theatre, being intended to contain at one and the same time the whole +theatre-going population of the city. The largest part of it consisted of +the auditorium, or tiers of seats for the spectators. These seats rose +one above the other like a flight of steps, and were arranged in the +form of a semicircle with the two ends prolonged. The flat space at the +bottom of the auditorium, corresponding to the stalls and pit in a modern +theatre, was called the orchestra or ‘dancing-place’, and was used by +the chorus only, the spectators being entirely excluded from it. At the +further end of the orchestra, facing the tiers of seats, rose the stage +and the stage-buildings. The stage was a long platform, much narrower +than a modern stage, and was reserved for the actors, as opposed to the +chorus. The open-air building, the performance in broad daylight, the +vast crowds of spectators, the chorus grouped together in the centre, the +actors standing on the narrow stage behind them—all these characteristics +of a Greek theatrical exhibition must have combined to produce a scene +to which there is no exact parallel at the present day. This fact should +be kept clearly in view, in discussing all questions connected with +the Greek stage. Many errors have been caused, and many unnecessary +difficulties have been raised, owing to the failure to realize the +essential difference between the external features of the ancient and the +modern drama. + + +§ 2. _The old Wooden Theatres at Athens._ + +The type of theatre described above was of course only developed very +gradually by the Athenians. It came into existence side by side with the +growth of their drama. At first there was no permanent theatre. Attic +tragedy grew out of the dithyrambs performed by choruses in honour of +Dionysus. For such exhibitions all that was required was an orchestra, +or circular dancing-place. The chorus performed in the middle, the +spectators ranged themselves all round the ring. The first innovation was +the introduction of a dialogue between the coryphaeus and the choreutae +in the intervals of the choral odes. For the purpose of carrying on +this dialogue the coryphaeus used to mount upon the sacrificial table +which stood beside the altar in the centre of the orchestra.[306] Such +sacrificial tables are often found in ancient vase paintings by the side +of the regular altars, and were used for cutting up the victims, or for +receiving various bloodless offerings such as cakes and vegetables.[307] +Both the table and the altar were called by the same name, Thymele.[308] +This table, on which the coryphaeus took his stand, surrounded by the +choristers, was the prototype of the stage in the later Greek theatre. +The next step in the development of the drama and of the theatre was +the introduction of a single actor by Thespis. This actor took the part +in the dialogue previously played by the coryphaeus. But the part was +now much expanded and developed. The actor, instead of remaining in the +centre of the orchestra throughout the performance, used to come and go, +and appear in many roles in succession, using a different costume on each +occasion. A booth was erected just outside the orchestra, for him to +change his dress and mask in. The platform on which he stood during the +delivery of the dialogue was removed from the centre of the orchestra, +and placed immediately in front of the booth, to facilitate his exits and +entrances. This change led inevitably to others. The chorus, which had +previously stood in a circle round the coryphaeus, now drew themselves +up in lines facing the actor’s platform, so as to converse with him in +a natural manner. The spectators, instead of being ranged all round the +orchestra, were confined to two-thirds of it. The remaining portion was +taken up by the stage. + +Such then was the arrangement of the theatre in the latter part of the +sixth century. There was a booth with a small platform for the actor. In +front of it lay the orchestra, occupied by the chorus. The audience sat +in rows round the orchestra, facing the platform. At this early period +the seats provided for the audience were only temporary erections. They +were called ‘ikria’, and consisted of wooden benches rising in tiers +one above the other, and resting on wooden supports.[309] The booth and +platform were also mere temporary constructions of wood. But in these +rude erections, hastily put up each year for the annual performances, +were already to be found all the essential parts of the later Greek +theatres. Nothing more was required than to change the material from +wood to stone, and to introduce greater elaboration into the design. In +course of time the old wooden benches developed into the magnificent +amphitheatres of which the remains still survive. The booth and platform +were converted into imposing stage-buildings. The recollection of their +origin was preserved in their name. Even in the latest times, when the +stage-buildings of a Greek theatre had come to be elaborate structures of +stone, they were still called by the name ‘skene’, which means properly a +booth or tent. + +In this sketch of the early history of the Greek theatre one point +deserves especial notice. The most important part of the whole building, +and that which formed the starting-point in the process of development, +was the orchestra, or place for the chorus. The auditorium and the +stage-buildings were only later additions. In all theatres of purely +Greek origin the orchestra continued to maintain its prominent position. +All other parts were subordinated to it. The general conception of a +Greek theatre was that of a building with a circular dancing-place in +the centre, and with tiers of seats arranged round two-thirds of the +ring, while the remaining side was occupied by the stage. The result was +that all the spectators had an equally good view of the orchestra, while +many of them had only a very poor view of the stage. This arrangement +was no doubt quite natural at first, when the chorus was still the most +conspicuous feature in the drama. But it may seem remarkable that it +should have been retained in later times. We should remember, however, +that ancient theatres were built, not only for the drama, but also for +choral and musical competitions of the most various kinds. Among the +Greeks these latter were held solely in the orchestra, and had nothing +to do with the stage. As they far exceeded the dramatic performances in +number, it was essential in a Greek theatre that every member of the +audience should have a clear and direct view of the orchestra; the view +on to the stage was a matter of secondary importance. In Roman theatres +the case was different. Here all performances, choral, musical, and +dramatic, were transferred to the stage; the orchestra was given up to +the spectators. The arrangements were, therefore, considerably modified. +The orchestra and auditorium were reduced in size to a semicircle.[310] +The consequence was that the stage became a much more prominent object, +and that all the spectators had a fairly good view of it. + +To return to the wooden theatres of the sixth century. As regards the +place in which they were erected, there is some difficulty. The remains +of an old orchestra belonging to the sixth century were discovered not +many years ago in the enclosure of Dionysus Eleuthereus at the foot of +the Acropolis. It follows, therefore, as a matter of practical certainty +that the dramatic performances at the City Dionysia must have been given +from the first in this orchestra, within the enclosure of the god of the +festival. No doubt in the same way the Lenaeum was the original site of +the performances at the Lenaea;[311] but the site of the Lenaeum itself +is much disputed. The most probable view is that it was in or adjoining +the market-place: but it is not certain where the market-place itself +lay.[312] There was an old proverb in use at Athens, by which a bad seat +at any spectacle was called the ‘view from the poplar’. The grammarians, +who apparently follow Eratosthenes, give the following explanation. They +say that at the old dramatic exhibitions the wooden benches for the +spectators reached as far as a certain poplar; and that the people who +could not get seats on the benches used to scramble up the poplar.[313] +It is possible that the story is an attempt to account by conjecture for +a current proverbial expression; but it may represent a genuine tradition. + +Till the end of the sixth century the Athenians were contented with the +rough temporary erections just described. But in 499, the year in which +Aeschylus made his first appearance, there was an accident at one of +their dramatic performances. The wooden benches on which the spectators +were sitting collapsed. In consequence of this accident, as Suidas +tells us, they resolved to build a more permanent theatre.[314] It was +generally supposed, until quite recent times, that the theatre here +mentioned was the great stone theatre still in existence. But Dörpfeld +has made it certain that at least a great part of this building is not +earlier than the middle of the fourth century; and though Puchstein +is possibly right in seeing traces of a stone theatre dating from the +end of the fifth century, this does not take us back to the time of +Aeschylus.[315] What then was the building to which Suidas refers? The +answer to this question has been supplied by a recent discovery of a +very interesting kind. On digging down into the earth foundations of +the present auditorium it has been ascertained that these foundations +consist of two layers. The upper one belongs to the fourth century, as +is shown by the fragments of pottery embedded in it; the lower one +is proved by similar evidence to be not later than the fifth.[316] It +follows, therefore, that the Athenians must have built earth embankments +for the support of the auditorium as early as the fifth century, and +it is doubtless to this work that Suidas alludes. The innovation +adopted in 499, in consequence of the accident, was not the erection +of a stone theatre, but the substitution of solid earth foundations +for the ‘ikria’ or wooden supports on which the seats had previously +rested. The new theatre still resembled the old one, in that the benches +and the stage-buildings were made of wood; but greater security and +permanence were afforded by the erection of the embankments. The site +chosen for this new theatre was the enclosure of Eleuthereus, where the +City Dionysia, the most important of the dramatic festivals, was held. +From this time forward all theatrical performances were transferred to +the same enclosure. The Lenaeum was abandoned as a place of dramatic +entertainment. The contrary opinion, that the old wooden theatre at the +Lenaeum continued to be used for the Lenaean festival until the erection +of the stone theatre in the fourth century,[317] is most improbable. The +need for a secure auditorium in place of the previous ‘ikria’ would be +felt just as much at the Lenaea as at the City Dionysia. But there is no +trace or record of a permanent theatre at the Lenaeum. The recurrence of +the expression ‘contests at the Lenaeum’ down to the latter part of the +fourth century proves nothing.[318] The phrase might easily have been +retained, after its local significance was gone, by a kind of survival +common in all languages. In just the same way the performances at the +City Dionysia were still distinguished from all others as performances +‘in the city’, when the reason for the distinction had long since +disappeared. + +A few faint traces of this theatre of the fifth century are still to +be discerned amid the remains of the later building, and will be found +indicated in the plan (Fig. 3).[319] The orchestra was the same as +that which had already existed in the sixth century. Its position is +determined by two fragments of the border, marked _q_ and _r_, and by +some excavations in the rock at _i_. It lay a few yards to the south-east +of the later orchestra. One peculiarity of this orchestra of the sixth +and fifth centuries is that, when it was originally constructed, its +southern portion stood about six feet above the level of the adjacent +ground. It was, therefore, supported and enclosed on this side by a +wall of the same height, to which the fragments _q_ and _r_ belong. +Later on the inequality of level was removed by piling up earth along +the border-wall. Probably this alteration was made towards the end of +the sixth century, when stage-buildings began to be erected; though +it is possible that at first the gap between the orchestra and the +stage-buildings was merely covered over with a wooden flooring. A similar +instance of an orchestra built on a slope, and ending on one side in a +raised terrace, has been found at Thoricus.[320] But in this case, as +there were no stage-buildings, the inequality was allowed to remain. Very +likely the theatre was not used for dramatic purposes. As regards the +auditorium of the fifth century, the earth embankments for the reception +of the seats have already been described. Three pieces of ancient +masonry, marked _k_, _l_, and _m_ in the plan, may perhaps be regarded as +parts of the supporting walls which terminated these embankments on each +wing. The stage-buildings, being made of wood, have left no trace behind +them of any kind. Their probable character will be discussed later on. + +It is evident, from the above description, that the theatre of the +fifth century was a far less imposing structure than was once supposed. +The result of recent excavations has been to modify largely all our +previous notions as to the great period of the Athenian drama. In place +of the majestic stone theatre, in which it was once thought that the +plays of Sophocles and Euripides were produced, we have now to picture +to ourselves a simple wooden building, resting on earth foundations, +and devoid of all architectural ornament. The difference is no doubt +a great one. Still, it is not perhaps so great as might appear at +first sight. The impressiveness of the old Greek drama, regarded as +a spectacle, depended on other considerations than the magnificence +of the building in which it was exhibited. When the vast roofless +amphitheatre was filled from end to end with the concourse of citizens +and strangers, it would make little difference in the significance of +the scene whether the benches were of wood or stone. The orchestra of +a Greek theatre was always much the same in character, in the grandest +as well as in the simplest theatres; and the graceful evolutions of the +chorus under the open sky would be equally effective in both. The long +scenic background, with its painted decorations, cannot have varied much +in appearance, whether it rested on a wall of stone or on a wall of +timber. Although, therefore, the theatre of the great Athenian dramatists +was an unpretentious structure, as compared with those which were +erected in after times, it is unnecessary to suppose that there was any +corresponding inferiority in the outward splendour of the performances. + + +§ 3. _The Stone Theatre._ + +The stone theatre, which we have now to describe, is ascribed by Dörpfeld +to about the middle of the fourth century. His reasons for assigning +this date to it are as follows.[321] In all the older portions of +the building, which belong to the original plan, there is a certain +similarity in the style of the workmanship, and in the nature of the +materials employed, which points to the fourth century as the date of +erection. We have seen, too, that the upper foundations of the auditorium +are proved to be not earlier than the fourth century by the fragments +of pottery which they contain. Further than this, various minute pieces +of evidence, leading to the same conclusion, have been discovered in +different parts of the building. One of the stones used in the western +wing of the auditorium bears, as a mason’s mark, the Ionic letter Omega—a +letter which was not introduced into Athens before the year 403 B.C. +(It must, however, be admitted that the argument drawn from this stone +is not quite conclusive, as it is probable that the Ionic alphabet was +in private use before the archonship of Euclides in 403.[322]) Another +stone in the same wing contains an inscription, and has been built into +the wall with the inscription inverted.[323] As the inscription itself +is not earlier than the middle or end of the fifth century, the wall for +which the stone was employed must obviously belong to a later period. +Again, part of the basis of a statue has been found in the theatre, +inscribed with the first half of the name ‘Astydamas’. The basis is +shown by its shape to have fitted on to the inside corner of the west +wing of the auditorium. As it is known that a statue of Astydamas was +erected in the theatre about the year 340, it follows that this portion +of the auditorium must have been finished at that date.[324] These +archaeological indications are supported by literary evidence. A decree +of the people has been preserved, belonging to the year 330 B.C., in +which a vote of thanks is passed to a certain Eudemus of Plataea for +lending a thousand yoke of oxen for ‘the construction of the Panathenaic +race-course and the theatre’.[325] There is also the series of decrees +and notices, referring to the finance administration of the orator +Lycurgus, and ascribing to him, among other things, the ‘completion of +the theatre’.[326] Lycurgus was finance minister between 338 and 326, +and died about 325. The evidence shows beyond doubt that Lycurgus did +important work in connexion with the theatre, and that the theatre +was considerably changed, in the third quarter of the fourth century +B.C.[327] But it has been recently argued by Puchstein that there are +traces of a stone theatre of earlier date, which he assigns to the last +years of the fifth century. He would throw back to this date a great part +of the work generally termed Lycurgean, and would ascribe to Lycurgus +the construction of the stage-buildings generally termed Hellenistic and +assigned to the first or second century B.C. The evidence for this must +be considered later. The theory is not improbable, and would solve some +difficulties; but at the same time it is not so certain as to justify +the definite rejection of the older view, and it will be more convenient +to discuss it separately.[328] + +In the so-called Hellenistic reconstruction of the stage-buildings +which has been referred to, the essential feature was the building of a +stone-columned proscenium or stage front, and it is this which Puchstein +now refers to Lycurgus. In the first century A.D. the stage-buildings +were again reconstructed. Part of the frieze still remains, with an +inscription dedicating the work to the Emperor Nero.[329] About two +centuries later a certain Phaedrus erected a new stage, and commemorated +the fact by some verses on one of the steps.[330] At this point all +traces of the history of the theatre are lost. During the Middle Ages it +disappeared so completely from view that its very site was forgotten. +For a long time modern travellers knew nothing upon the subject. The +true site was first pointed out by Chandler in 1765. In 1862 excavations +were commenced by the German architect Strack, and continued for three +years. The theatre was again exposed to view, and large portions of it +were found to have been preserved. Some further discoveries were made in +1877. Lastly, in 1886, 1889, and 1895 new excavations have been carried +on under the direction of Dörpfeld, acting for the German Archaeological +Institute. The result of these latest investigations has been to clear up +many doubtful points in the history of the building, and the arrangement +of its various parts. + +The new theatre, like the old one, was erected in the enclosure of +Dionysus Eleuthereus. This enclosure lay at the foot of the Acropolis, +by which it was bounded on the northern side. Its southern boundary may +possibly be identical with certain fragments of an old wall, marked x in +the plan. Within the enclosure were two temples of Dionysus, of which the +foundations have recently been discovered. The oldest, marked _t_, was +the nearest to the Acropolis, and is assigned by Dörpfeld to the sixth +century. It contained the ancient image of Dionysus Eleuthereus which was +carried in the annual procession at the City Dionysia. The more recent +temple (_u_) lay a few yards to the south of the old one. In it stood a +gold and ivory statue of Dionysus made by Alcamenes towards the end of +the fifth century. The temple itself was probably of the same date.[331] +Near this temple are the remains of a square foundation (_w_), also of +the fifth century, which possibly served as the basis for an altar.[332] +The site chosen for the new theatre was almost identical with that of +the old one, but lay a few yards further to the north-west. The reasons +for this change were apparently twofold. By bringing the auditorium +closer to the Acropolis, it was possible to make a more extensive use of +the slope of the hill as a support for the tiers of seats. At the same +time a larger space was left between the orchestra and the old temple +of Dionysus, and so afforded more room for the stage-buildings. In one +respect the position of the theatre differed from that usually adopted +in later times. The auditorium faced almost directly towards the south. +This arrangement was generally avoided by the Greeks, and Vitruvius +expressly warns architects against the danger of adopting it, because of +the terrible heat caused by the midday sun glaring into the concavity of +the theatre.[333] But at Athens there were special reasons on the other +side. If the theatre was to be built in the enclosure of Eleuthereus, the +only natural position was along the slopes of the Acropolis, and facing +towards the south. The rising ground supplied an excellent foundation for +the central portion of the auditorium. The choice of any other situation +would have involved the erection of costly and elaborate substructures. +The Athenians, therefore, from motives of economy, preferred the southern +aspect, in spite of its obvious disadvantages. The same course was also +adopted in the theatres of Eretria and Syracuse. + +In proceeding to describe in detail the form and construction of +the theatre it will be convenient to take the different portions in +succession. A Greek theatre is naturally divided into three parts, the +auditorium, the orchestra, and the stage-buildings. In the following +description the auditorium will be considered first, the orchestra next. +The stage-buildings, as forming the most difficult part of the whole +subject, will be reserved for the last. + + +§ 4. _The Auditorium._ + +The auditorium, or the portion of the theatre containing the seats +for the spectators, was called the ‘cavea’ in Latin; but there was no +technical name for it in Greek. In almost all Greek theatres it was built +upon the side of a hill, so that the natural slope of the ground might +serve as a foundation for the tiers of seats. At Athens, as we have seen, +the rising ground at the foot of the Acropolis was utilized for this +purpose, and supported the central part of the building. It was only at +the two wings, on the east and west, that artificial substructures were +necessary, in order to bring the back seats up to the proper height. +The walls by which the auditorium was bounded on the outside have been +preserved to a certain extent, and suffice to mark clearly the original +shape of the building. On the western side of the theatre, from _a_ to +_b_ in the plan (Fig. 3)[334], where a strong support was required for +the embankment, a device was adopted which is still commonly employed +at the present day. If a single wall had been erected, it must have +been of enormous width. As a substitute two narrow walls were built in +parallel lines, with cross-walls at intervals, and the intervening space +was filled up with earth. Thus the same result was obtained at a less +expense. Along the north-western curve of the theatre, between _b_ and +_c_, a single wall proved sufficient, owing to the diminishing size of +the embankment. At the point _c_ the rock of the Acropolis abutted upon +the theatre, and was hollowed out into a regular curve. This is without +doubt the portion of the theatre referred to by the ancients as Katatome, +or ‘the Cutting’.[335] In the rock at this place is a natural grotto +enlarged by artificial means, and 34 ft. long by 20 ft. broad. Here +Thrasyllus erected an elaborate monument to commemorate his victory with +a chorus of men in 319 B.C. In front of the grotto stood three columns +supporting an entablature, and surmounted by a statue of Dionysus. On the +architrave was an inscription recording the victory of Thrasyllus. Inside +the grotto were statues of Apollo and Artemis destroying the children +of Niobe. In modern times the grotto has been converted into a chapel +of Our Lady. The columns and entablature were in excellent preservation +when Stuart visited Athens, but they were shattered by a mine during the +Greek revolution. Above the grotto are two columns, which were erected +to commemorate victories with dithyrambic choruses. On the capitals can +still be seen the holes made to receive the legs of the tripods.[336] +After the Katatome the eastern boundary wall, from _f_ to _g_, is very +peculiar in shape. But the reason of the irregularity has not yet been +explained, owing to the scantiness of the remains in this part of the +theatre. The two wings of the auditorium are terminated on the south by +the walls marked _a-a_ and _g-g_. These walls are of unequal length, the +eastern wall being about 111 ft., the western only 88 ft. They are not in +the same straight line, but if continued inwards would meet in an obtuse +angle in the orchestra. This arrangement was the one generally adopted by +the Greeks. + +[Illustration: FIG. 3. GROUND-PLAN OF THEATRE AT ATHENS.] + +The above description, together with the plan, will give a fair idea of +the general outline of the auditorium. If we compare it with the theatre +of Epidaurus (Fig. 6), which was built at the end of the fourth century, +and designed on one harmonious plan, we shall perceive at once the great +inferiority of the Athenian theatre in point of grace and symmetry of +outline. In most Greek theatres the auditorium was of the same width +from one end to the other, and was shaped in a symmetrical curve. In +the theatre at Athens the two wings of the auditorium are narrowed so +considerably towards the south as to be less than half the depth of the +central part. The outside boundary does not run in a regular curve, but +is very much flattened where it encounters the rock of the Acropolis, +and terminates in a straight line at each of the southern corners. But +the strangest point of all is that the eastern wing, at its termination, +is several yards wider than the western wing—an arrangement utterly +destructive of symmetry of design. The theatre at Athens was built for +use rather than for show. Its shape was determined by the conformation +of the ground and by the situation of the adjoining rocks. Although, +therefore, it is the most interesting of Greek theatres on account of +its historical associations, in point of mere beauty it cannot take the +highest rank. + +We now come to the interior of the auditorium. The boundary between the +auditorium and the orchestra is denoted by the dark line in the plan. It +will be observed that in the theatre of Dionysus the inside boundary of +the auditorium consists of a semicircle with the two ends prolonged in +parallel straight lines. This was not the plan usually followed in Greek +theatres. In most of the later theatres the two ends of the semicircle +were prolonged in the same curve as before, so that the inside boundary +of the auditorium formed about two-thirds of a regular circle. The effect +of this arrangement was that the spectators sitting at the extremities of +the two wings faced towards the centre of the orchestra, and away from +the stage. Nor is this surprising. It was previously pointed out that in +Greek theatres, where the choral and musical contests greatly outnumbered +the dramatic, the orchestra was always the most important part of the +whole building. But the arrangement adopted at Athens, of prolonging +the two ends of the semicircle in a straight line, had the advantage of +giving the spectators in the wings a much better view of the stage. The +same plan was also adopted in the theatre of the Peiraeeus, and in the +theatres of Assos, Acrae, and Termessos. At Epidaurus and Magnesia a +third plan was pursued, differing from both the above. The two ends of +the semicircle were prolonged, not in a straight line, nor yet in the +same curve as before, but from a new centre, and with a longer radius, +so that while they converged to a certain extent, they did not converge +so much as in the ordinary Greek theatres. This arrangement, which may +be regarded as a compromise between the other two, is perhaps the most +beautiful of them all. It is apparently recommended by Vitruvius, though +the passage in which he refers to it is extremely ambiguous and has been +interpreted in various other ways.[337] + +The interior of the auditorium consisted of a series of stone seats +rising tier above tier in a gentle slope from the boundary of the +orchestra to the outside extremities of the building. Immediately under +the cliff of the Acropolis the seats were carved out of the living +rock. With this exception they were made of Peiraic limestone. In some +of the upper portions of the theatre they were fixed upon conglomerate +foundations. But in most parts they were placed directly upon the bare +earth, and were therefore easily capable of being removed. For this +reason the greater number of them have disappeared, having been taken +away during the Middle Ages for building purposes. All that remain are +from twenty to thirty rows in the bottom of the theatre, and portions of +a few rows at the top. From these, however, it is possible to obtain a +clear conception of the style and arrangement of the auditorium. In order +to make the following description more intelligible, an illustration +is here inserted, consisting of a restoration of the extremity of the +eastern wing (Fig. 4). In this illustration _a_ is the orchestra, _b_ the +eastern entrance into the orchestra, _c_ the southern boundary wall of +the east wing of the auditorium.[338] + +[Illustration: FIG. 4.] + +To proceed with the description of the seats. The lowest step of the +auditorium rose about ten inches above the level of the orchestra, and +then sloped gently upward towards the front row of seats, where it +reached a height of fourteen inches. It was built of large slabs of +stone, and formed a sort of passage between the orchestra and the seats. +The curve of the seats did not coincide exactly with the curve of the +orchestra, but was drawn from a centre rather more to the south, and +receded slightly on the two wings. As a consequence the passage was wider +at the sides than in the centre, the width at the sides being about eight +feet, the width at the centre only four. The same variety of curve is +found in the theatre at the Peiraeeus; and Dörpfeld supposes that it was +adopted in order to give more room at the entrances of the passage, where +the press of people would be the greatest.[339] The first row of seats +was far superior to the others, and consisted of marble thrones with +backs to them. Each throne was about 25 inches wide and 23 inches deep. +In the centre was the throne of the priest of Dionysus, slightly larger +than the others, and elaborately and beautifully carved. This throne, +unlike the rest, was provided with a canopy resting on wooden posts, +the holes for which are still visible. Many of the thrones, including +that of the chief priest, had receptacles in front of them in which +footstools might be placed. The thrones were originally sixty-seven in +number, but only sixty of them are now preserved. Fourteen of these were +no longer standing in their proper position at the time of the first +excavations. Some of them had been designedly removed in Roman times, +when certain alterations were made in the front row; others had been +accidentally displaced. Most of them have now been restored to their +original sites. That the thrones were erected at the latest by the time +of Lycurgus appears to be proved by the excellence of the workmanship. +Each of them has an inscription in the front, recording the title of the +priest or official for whom the seat was reserved. These inscriptions +are all of the Hellenistic or Roman period; but behind them are faint +traces of older inscriptions, which may possibly go back to the fourth +century. The practice of erecting superior seats in the first row for +people of distinction was a common one in Greek theatres. At Megalopolis, +for example, the front bench was provided with a back, though it was not +divided into separate seats, as at Athens. In the theatre of Epidaurus +there were three rows of superior workmanship, one at the bottom of the +auditorium and two others half-way up the slope, one on each side of +the longitudinal passage. But the most peculiar arrangement was that +adopted at Oropus and Priene. At Oropus five magnificent thrones were +placed inside the ring of the orchestra itself, and well in front of +the lowest tier of seats, each throne standing a few yards distant from +the other. At Priene a long stone bench with a back was erected in the +same position, and in this bench five thrones were inserted at regular +intervals.[340] + +Immediately behind the line of thrones there was a vacant space about +33 inches wide. Then came what appears to be a small step. But Dörpfeld +has shown that this step is merely the back part of an ordinary seat, +of which the front portion has been removed. In the original theatre +there was a regular tier of seats following closely on the thrones. But +in later times the front half of this tier was taken away. The object +of the change, as Dörpfeld thinks, was to open out a wide space for the +reception of a row of wooden thrones, which might serve as a supplement +to the marble ones.[341] After the step, which we have just described, +began the first of the ordinary tiers of seats, which were continued in +exactly the same style from this point up to the top of the building. +The shape of the seats is very much the same as in other Greek theatres. +Their dimensions are as follows. Each seat was 13 inches high, and was +hollowed out slightly in front, so that the person sitting on it might +have more freedom for his legs. The surface of the seat was 33 inches +across, and was divided into three distinct portions. The first part was +for sitting upon, and was 13 inches deep. The second part was 2 inches +lower, and was intended to receive the feet of the persons upon the seat +above. It was 16 inches across. The third part was merely a narrow edge, +of the same level as the first part, and 4 inches deep. The height of the +tiers, as we have seen, was 13 inches. If we add to this the 2 inches +of the depression in front, it raises the height of the actual seat to +15 inches. A seat of this kind would be rather low for a man of average +size. But it was the practice of the Greek spectator to provide himself +with a cushion, which would raise the surface to a more comfortable +level. The structure of the tiers in the manner described appears to have +been due to a desire for economy in the use of space. In a Greek theatre, +where an immense number of people had to be accommodated with seats in +tolerable proximity to the orchestra and stage, it was necessary to place +them as close together as possible. If the surface of each tier had been +perfectly flat from front to back, the distance between the successive +tiers must have been considerably increased, in order to obtain a height +of 15 inches. The depression in the tiers provided the requisite height, +while allowing a much smaller interval. Along the front of the rows of +seats were two sets of vertical lines engraved in the stone. The lines +in the first set were 13 inches apart; the lines in the second, which +are rather fainter, were at intervals of 16 inches. Probably the second +series of lines was intended to mark off the separate seats. In the first +series the intervals are too narrow for this purpose, and can only have +served as general measures of distance. + +For the purpose of giving access to the different parts of the auditorium +a series of passages ran in divergent lines, like the spokes of a wheel, +from the orchestra up to the outside boundary. The passages were fourteen +in number, and the two upon the extreme south at each side adjoined +immediately upon the boundary walls. In theatres of large size, such as +those of Epidaurus and Aspendos, it was usual to insert extra passages in +the upper part of the auditorium. The manner in which they were arranged +will be seen by looking at the plan of the Epidaurus theatre (Fig. 6). At +Athens the upper portion of the building has so entirely disappeared that +it is impossible to say whether it ever contained additional passages of +this kind. But the great size of the theatre makes it probable that such +was the case. These vertical passages were always very narrow, in order +to save room. At Athens they were only about 27 inches in width, the +result being that not more than one person could ascend at a time. The +arrangement of the steps along the passages in the Athenian theatre was +altogether exceptional, and is only paralleled at the Peiraeeus. In all +other Greek theatres each tier of seats had two steps corresponding to +it in the vertical passages. But at Athens, and also at the Peiraeeus, +there was only one step for each tier of seats. As the seats were 13 +inches high, while the steps were only 8½, it was necessary to make up +the difference by building the steps with a sloping surface. The surface +was furrowed over, to make the ascent more easy. The fourteen passages +divided the auditorium into thirteen blocks. Such blocks were called +‘cunei’ or ‘wedges’ in Latin, because of their shape. In Greek they were +called ‘kerkides’, from their resemblance to the ‘kerkis’, a tapering +rod used in weaving.[342] The front row in each ‘kerkis’ contained five +marble thrones, with the exception of the two ‘kerkides’ on the extreme +south of each wing, which contained six thrones each; so that the total +number of marble thrones was sixty-seven. + +In addition to the vertical passages all Greek theatres of any size +were also intersected by one or two longitudinal passages, called +‘praecinctiones’ in Latin. These passages divided the auditorium +into sections, called ‘belts’ or ‘girdles’ in Greek technical +terminology.[343] A passage of this kind may still be traced in the +upper part of the theatre of Dionysus. Its course is determined by the +foundations at _d_, by certain excavations in the rock at _e_, and by +the two entrances at _b_ and _f_. The great width of the passage—about +15 feet—is explained by the fact that it was also intended to serve as +a road. From ancient times there had been a road at the foot of the +Acropolis, running from east to west. Traces of this old road have been +discovered during the excavations of 1889, and lie about 26 feet below +the level of the present auditorium. When its course was intercepted by +the erection of the theatre, this passage was constructed on a larger +scale than usual, to serve as a substitute. On ordinary occasions, when +the theatre was empty, it would be used as a public highway.[344] That it +formed a conspicuous object in the midst of the auditorium is shown by a +coin in the British Museum (Fig. 5), which contains on one side a rude +representation of the theatre at Athens.[345] On this coin, in spite of +the roughness of the design, the passage stands out very prominently. +Whether there was a second longitudinal passage in the Athenian theatre +is uncertain. But the space to the north of the existing passage is so +small when compared with the space to the south of it, that it seems +reasonable to infer that there was another passage lower down, dividing +the under part of the auditorium into two sections. It was the fashion +in Roman theatres to erect a portico along the top of the auditorium, +following the line of the uppermost tier of seats.[346] But there are +no traces of such a portico in the theatre at Athens, or in any other +theatre of purely Greek origin. + +[Illustration: FIG. 5.] + +The following facts and measurements will give some idea of the size and +capacity of the Athenian theatre. The distance between the inside corners +of the auditorium was 72 feet. The distance between the outside corners +was 288 feet. In the centre of the auditorium, from north to south, it +is calculated that there must have been 78 tiers of seats. Of course on +each of the two wings the number of tiers would be considerably less than +half that amount. The arrangements throughout were designed with the +view of bringing together the largest possible number of people within +the smallest possible compass. The vertical passages were little over +2 feet in width. The seats were constructed in such a manner that the +spectators could be packed tightly together, without any space being +wasted. As the theatre was in the open air the close crowding of the +audience was no doubt much less intolerable than it would have been in a +covered building. At the same time the situation of the spectator cannot +have been a very comfortable one. He had to remain cramped up in one +position, with no back to lean against, and with very little opportunity +of moving his limbs. That the Athenians were willing to put up with +such inconveniences for several days in succession is a proof of their +enthusiastic devotion to music and the drama. The total number of people +who could be accommodated in the theatre at Athens is shown by recent +calculations to have been about 17,000.[347] The theatres at Epidaurus +and Megalopolis held nearly the same number.[348] Plato, referring to +the wooden theatre of his own time, speaks of ‘more than thirty thousand +spectators’.[349] But this must have been an exaggeration. The old +theatre of the fifth century is not likely to have been larger and more +capacious than the theatre of Lycurgus. + +The auditorium, unlike the rest of the building, was subjected to very +little alteration in later times. The parts of it which are still +preserved remain in much the same state as in the age of Lycurgus. The +various successive changes in the style of the dramatic performances, +while they led to corresponding changes in the orchestra and the +stage-buildings, had naturally no effect upon the structure of the +auditorium. A few innovations were introduced in the Roman period, mostly +for the purpose of increasing the comfort of the more distinguished +spectators. We have seen that in the old theatre the only person provided +with a canopy was the priest of Dionysus. The same luxury was now +extended to all the people in the front benches. An awning was erected +on wooden posts to protect them from the sun. Three lines of holes for +the reception of the posts may still be traced in the stone-work, one in +front of the thrones, one behind, and one in the second row of ordinary +seats. It seems that about this date there was an increase in the number +of people for whom seats of honour were required. The front row of the +ordinary benches was removed, in the way already described, to supply the +necessary space. Single marble thrones were also set up here and there in +the rows further back. Another change, which involved some disfigurement +of the building, was made about the same time. A large stone basis, +approached by steps, was erected in front of the sixth vertical passage, +thus closing the approach to that passage, and also necessitating the +removal of four of the marble thrones, which were placed elsewhere. The +basis was probably intended as a sort of royal box, and held a special +throne reserved for people of imperial rank. A similar basis was also +erected, probably for the same purpose, behind the seat of the priest of +Dionysus. + + +§ 5. _The Orchestra._ + +After the auditorium the next great division of the theatre is the +orchestra. This was the name given to the flat surface enclosed between +the stage-buildings and the inside boundary of the auditorium. It was +called the orchestra, or dancing-place’, because in Greek theatres it +was reserved for the performances of the chorus.[350] In later times it +was also called the Sigma, because its shape resembled the semicircular +figure which was adopted in the fourth century as the symbol of the +letter sigma.[351] In one place the word ‘konistra’ is employed to +denote the orchestra.[352] Konistra means properly the arena of a +wrestling-school. It would hardly be applicable as a term for the early +Greek orchestras, which were used for music and dancing, but not for +gymnastic contests. Probably therefore this meaning of the word was of +late origin, and first arose in the Roman period, when Greek theatres +occasionally became the scene of gladiatorial contests. Among the Romans +the orchestra was given up to the spectators, and the performances of +singers and dancers took place upon the stage. Hence the later Greek +commentators and grammarians often used the word ‘orchestra’ improperly +to denote the stage, which in Roman theatres had now become the actual +dancing-place. This later signification of the term has given rise to +much confusion. When a Greek scholiast speaks of the orchestra, it is +necessary to look carefully to the context, to see whether he means the +stage, or the orchestra in its proper sense.[353] + +The orchestra in the Athenian theatre is mostly of very late date, and +contains but few traces of the original structure. Our knowledge of +the early Greek orchestra has to be derived from other sources. Before +proceeding to discuss this part of the subject, it will be convenient in +the first place to give a brief description of the existing remains in +the theatre at Athens. The only portion of the old orchestra of Lycurgus +which has been preserved is the gutter. This gutter, which was intended +to drain off the water from the tiers of seats, ran immediately inside +the border-line of the auditorium. It was made of limestone, and was +about a yard in width. At the western corner it was 31 inches deep, but +increased in depth all the way round to the eastern corner, where the +depth was 43 inches. Here it made a sudden drop of about a yard, and then +ran off in a south-easterly direction underneath the stage-buildings. +It had no covering, except opposite the vertical passages, where it was +bridged over with slabs of limestone. Apart from this gutter the greater +part of the present orchestra belongs to the time of Nero. At this date +considerable changes were made. The stage was probably pushed forward as +far as the two corners of the auditorium. The orchestra, having been thus +largely reduced in size, was covered over with the marble pavement which +still remains. This pavement consists for the most part of rectangular +slabs, placed in lines parallel to the stage. But in the centre there +is a large rhombus-shaped figure, bordered with two strips, and paved +with small slabs also of a rhombus shape. In the middle of the figure +is a block containing a small circular depression, which was probably +intended to receive an altar of Dionysus. At the time when the pavement +was constructed, the gutter was also covered over entirely with slabs +of marble, with rosette-shaped openings at intervals. Some of these +openings have been preserved, and are indicated in the plan. At the +same time a marble balustrade was erected in front of the first step of +the auditorium. It is marked by the dark line in the plan. Most of it +is still standing, and consists of marble slabs bound together by iron +clamps, and 43 inches high. The purpose of the balustrade must have been +to serve as a protection to the spectators in the front rows, when the +orchestra was given up to gladiatorial combats or similar exhibitions. +After these innovations of the Neronian period the orchestra seems to +have been untouched until about the end of the third century A.D., when +Phaedrus erected his new stage. It was then made water-tight, for the +purpose of holding mimic sea-fights in it. The gutter was filled up, and +the rosette-shaped openings closed. Traces of the pipes used for letting +on and letting off the water for the sea-fight have been discovered in +various parts of the building. + +In the course of recent excavations underneath the orchestra two +discoveries have been made. It appears that at some unknown period +certain tunnels of irregular shape, and too small to serve as passages, +were bored through the rock, but filled up again as soon as made. Also, +just in front of the Roman stage, the rock was cut away in a straight +line, and the cutting was continued as far as the stage-buildings, the +interval being filled up with earth. The purpose of both these works is +quite uncertain.[354] + +It will be seen, from the above description, that the remains of the +Athenian theatre throw very little light upon the character of the +ancient orchestra. Fortunately, during the last ten or fifteen years, a +large number of other theatres have been excavated, which suffered less +from reconstruction, and in which the orchestras have been left more +or less in their original condition. The finest and best preserved of +these is the theatre of Epidaurus, which was built at the end of the +fourth century.[355] It is described by Pausanias as the most beautiful +theatre in the world.[356] A plan of the building (Fig. 6) is here +inserted, together with a view taken from the north-east (Fig. 7).[357] +The evidence derived from this and other theatres will enable us to clear +up many questions in connexion with the orchestra, to which the Athenian +theatre supplies no answer. + +[Illustration: FIG. 6.] + +In the early Greek theatres, as already pointed out, the seats of the +spectators were so arranged that every one had an excellent view of the +orchestra, while the view of the stage was in many cases a very poor one. +When the Romans gave up the orchestra to the spectators, and transferred +all the performances to the stage, they made various alterations in the +arrangement and proportions of the theatre. They largely diminished the +size of the orchestra by bringing the stage several yards forward; and at +the same time they cut off considerable portions from the two ends of the +auditorium. In this way they were enabled to make the stage much deeper, +so as to accommodate a larger number of performers. By shortening the +wings of the auditorium they abolished those seats which looked away from +the stage. Vitruvius gives some interesting directions for determining +the proper proportions of a Greek and Roman theatre.[358] According +to his figures the orchestra in a Roman theatre constituted an exact +semicircle. The front line of the stage coincided precisely with the +diameter of the orchestra. In a Greek theatre the stage was placed much +further back. The distance between the central point of the front line +of the stage and the central point in the opposite circumference of the +orchestra was six-sevenths of the diameter of the orchestra. In a Greek +theatre therefore, according to this statement, if the circumference of +the orchestra was prolonged so as to form a complete circle, it would +be found that the front line of the stage only intersected a very small +portion of that circle. None of the existing theatres coincide exactly +with the rules laid down by Vitruvius. Sometimes the stage stands +further back than he directs, as at the Peiraeeus. Sometimes it reaches +further forward, as at Megalopolis. But in most cases the deviation is +very slight, and his description, taken as a general statement, may be +regarded as approximately true. The fact is instructive. The largeness of +the space allotted to the orchestra by the arrangement above described +enables us to realize very clearly the subordinate position of the stage +in Greek theatres. + +[Illustration: _To face p. 104._ + +FIG. 7. THEATRE AT EPIDAURUS, FROM THE NORTH-EAST.] + +Vitruvius in the above account uses the word ‘orchestra’ in its ordinary +sense, to denote the whole space included within the border-line of +the auditorium. But we may limit the meaning of the word, and confine +it to the actual dancing-place, excluding the gutter which usually ran +inside the auditorium. If this is done, it will be found that in many +Greek theatres the circumference of the orchestra, when prolonged, +forms a complete circle, without touching the stage. The theatre of +Epidaurus (Fig. 6) offers a good example.[359] The dancing-place is +here surrounded by a circular kerbstone, fifteen inches wide, which only +reaches within a yard of the stage-buildings. It has been contended +that all Greek theatres were constructed on this principle; that the +stage was pushed back sufficiently far to allow the orchestra, in its +narrower sense, to form a complete circle. The line of the orchestra +might be marked out in stone, or it might not; but there was always room +for it.[360] This, however, is an exaggeration. There are many Greek +theatres, such as those of Delos, Assos, and Sicyon, in which the circle +of the actual dancing-place could not be completed without encroaching +upon the stage.[361] At Megalopolis (Fig. 11), if such a circle was +completed, about a third of it would be intersected. Here the orchestra +was unusually large, and the stage was therefore brought further forward, +in order to be within a reasonable distance of the auditorium. These +examples show that the Greeks had no pedantic feeling on the subject of +the orchestra circle. No doubt in ancient times, before the development +of the drama, their orchestras formed complete circles; and possibly +they were enclosed all round with a kerbstone. The old orchestra at +Athens seems to have been so encircled. But when regular theatres with +stage-buildings began to be erected the architects appear to have +discarded the stone border, and with it the imaginary circle, and to have +contented themselves with allowing a sufficient space for the chorus, +according to the requirements of each particular theatre. In many cases, +as it happened, they left room enough for a full circle. At Epidaurus +such a circle was actually marked out in stone. But this is the only +known example; and there are several theatres in which the stage was so +placed as to make a complete circle impossible. + +At Athens, as we have seen, there was an interval of several feet between +the front row of benches and the circuit of the orchestra. The interval +was filled by a broad sloping step, which served as a passage to the +auditorium. A similar passage is found at the Peiraeeus. But in most +Greek theatres there was no passage of this kind, and the line of seats +bordered immediately on the orchestra and the gutter by which it was +encircled. The gutter was a regular feature in Greek orchestras, and was +constructed in various styles. The Athenian type, with its broad and deep +channel, and bridges at intervals, seems to have been exceptional and +antique, and is not found elsewhere except at Sicyon and the Peiraeeus. +In some places, such as Megalopolis, the gutter was much narrower, so +as to need no bridges. At Epidaurus and Eretria, on the other hand, it +was very broad and very shallow, and might be used as a passage to the +auditorium in dry weather. The gutter at Epidaurus is no less than 7 +feet across, and only 8 inches deep. The surface of the orchestra was +in most cases, as at Athens, a few inches below the level of the front +row of seats. It used often to be asserted that the surface was boarded +over with planks. But this is an error, due to the fact that the Greek +grammarians often used the word ‘orchestra’ to denote the stage.[362] +The evidence of the theatres lately excavated shows that in almost every +case the Greek orchestra consisted simply of earth beaten down hard and +flat. It is true that the orchestra at Eretria was paved with slabs of +limestone, and that at Delos, which lay on the rock, was covered with +a ‘coating’ of some kind or another.[363] But in all other instances, +as far as we know, the surface was merely of earth. Marble pavements +are never found in Greek theatres, except when they had been built or +reconstructed in the Roman fashion. Lines were sometimes marked on the +floor of the orchestra, to assist the chorus in their evolutions.[364] +Similar lines are used on the modern stage when complicated ballets are +produced. Aristotle mentions cases of orchestras being strewed with +chaff, and remarks that when this was done the choruses were not heard +so well. But it is uncertain to what theatres or to what occasions he is +referring.[365] + +In every Greek orchestra there was an altar of Dionysus. The fact +is proved by the express testimony of ancient writers, and also by +the circumstance that the dramatic performances were preceded by a +sacrifice.[366] However, there is only one theatre, that of Priene, in +which any remains of an altar have been discovered. In this theatre, +which was excavated for the first time in the year 1897, the altar is +still found standing in its original position. It is placed just in +front of the first row of seats, and exactly opposite the centre of +the stage.[367] Whether this was the usual position of the altar in a +Greek theatre seems doubtful. In the earliest period, when the drama was +still a purely lyrical performance, the altar stood in the centre of the +orchestra, and the chorus danced round about it. The evidence supplied +by the remains at Athens and Epidaurus rather favours the view that in +these theatres it still occupied the same position. In the middle of +the theatre at Epidaurus there is a round stone, 28 inches in diameter, +let into the ground, so as to be on the same level with the surrounding +surface. In the middle of the stone is a circular hole. A similar hole, +as we have seen, is found in the later Athenian orchestra. The only +plausible explanation of these holes is that they were intended for +the reception of small stone altars. It is probable, therefore, that +the practice varied in regard to the situation of the altar. In some +theatres, such as those of Athens and Epidaurus, it may have been placed +in the middle of the orchestra, after the ancient fashion. In others, +such as that of Priene, it may have been drawn further back towards +the auditorium, so as to leave a clear space for the evolutions of the +chorus. The altar of the theatre was called the Thymele, because of the +sacrifices offered upon it. It is called by this name in a fragment of +Pratinas.[368] In later times the use of the word was extended, so as +to denote, not only the altar, but also the space round about it; and +‘thymele’ became a regular name for an orchestra.[369] Later still, when +the Romans substituted the stage for the orchestra, the word ‘thymele’, +having become identical in meaning with the word ‘orchestra’, was +employed in similar fashion to signify the ‘stage’.[370] + +In one or two Greek theatres subterranean passages have been discovered, +leading from the stage-buildings to the middle of the orchestra. These +passages are generally rather more than six feet in height, and from +two to three feet wide. There is one in the theatre of Eretria, with a +flight of steps leading down to it at each end.[371] Another has been +found at Magnesia; but as only a small portion of it still remains, it +is impossible to say where it began and where it ended, or whether it +had any exit into the orchestra.[372] The passage at Sicyon is rather +peculiar. A small drain runs underground from the auditorium to the +centre of the orchestra, where it falls into a square tank. From the +tank onwards there is a regular vaulted passage, which is continued as +far as the back of the stage-buildings, and finally ends in a tunnel +in the rock. Where it passes under the stage, a flight of steps leads +down to it; but no traces of an entrance from the orchestra can be +detected.[373] These three passages, when first discovered, were thought +to have some connexion with the dramatic performances; and it was +supposed that they might be used to enable ghosts to appear suddenly +in the middle of the orchestra. But this theory seems to be untenable, +for the following reasons. In the first place, no traces of such +passages have been found at Athens, and Epidaurus, and other theatres +where excavations have been carried on. But if they had been a regular +contrivance in dramatic exhibitions, it is impossible to suppose that +the Athenians would not have made use of them. Secondly, the passage +at Sicyon not only reaches as far as the stage, but also runs right +on to the back of the stage-buildings, where it would have been of no +use for the purpose suggested. Thirdly, there is no decisive evidence +that the passages at Sicyon and Magnesia opened out into the orchestra. +Fourthly, similar passages of Roman workmanship have been discovered at +Tralles and at Magnesia, the passage in the latter place having been +substituted for the previous Greek one. But these Roman passages had +no exit into the orchestra, as the remains clearly show. After running +from the stage-buildings to the middle of the orchestra, they branched +off to right and left like the letter T, and then stopped.[374] The fact +then that the Romans built tunnels of this kind, which had no connexion +with performances in the orchestra, is a strong reason for assuming +that the Greeks might do the same. What the purpose of the tunnels was, +whether Greek or Roman, has not yet been explained, and remains very +mysterious.[375] + +[Illustration: FIG. 8.] + +In all Greek theatres the front of the stage-buildings was separated +from the wings of the auditorium by a vacant space several feet in +width. Two open passages, one on the right and one on the left, led into +the orchestra. The passages were closed on the outside by large gates, +and these gates formed the only architectural connexion between the +auditorium and the stage-buildings.[376] In some theatres, such as those +of Epidaurus and Assos, the gates which led into the orchestra stood +side by side with other gates leading into the stage-buildings.[377] +Sufficient remains of the gates at Epidaurus have been preserved to admit +of a complete restoration of them. The present illustration represents +the two gates on the western side of the theatre (Fig. 8). The gate to +the right leads into the orchestra; that to the left leads into the +stage-buildings.[378] In the Athenian theatre, owing to the defective +character of the remains in this part, it is impossible to determine +whether there were two gates on each side or only one. The passages at +Athens measured nine feet across on the outside. But they grew gradually +wider, as one approached the orchestra, because of the oblique position +of the boundary walls of the auditorium. These orchestral passages +answered a double purpose. In the first place, they formed the principal +entrance to the theatre for the general public. In many theatres they +were the only entrances. In Athens there were two others at the upper +end of the auditorium; but the main approaches in all theatres were +those between the auditorium and the stage-buildings. The spectators +came in by the orchestra, and then ascended the vertical passages to +their proper seats. In the second place, it was by these passages that +the chorus entered the orchestra at the commencement of each play. The +technical name for the passages was ‘parodoi’ or ‘eisodoi’.[379] In +Roman theatres they were of course done away with, as the Roman stage +was brought much more forward than the Greek, and the two ends coalesced +with the wings of the auditorium. In place of the old open passages the +Romans built vaulted entrances underneath the auditorium, and parallel +with the stage. Later Greek writers, misled by the analogy of the Roman +theatres, sometimes apply the terms ‘vault’ and ‘archway’ to the open +side-entrances of the Greek theatre. But such language is inaccurate.[380] + + +§ 6. _Ruins of the Stage-buildings at Athens._ + +The third and last division of the theatre consists of the +stage-buildings, the ‘skene’, as they were called. This word has a +curious history in connexion with the drama. Originally it meant the +booth or tent in which the single actor of the Thespian period used to +change his costume. Then as this booth gradually developed into a large +and elaborate structure, the word ‘skene’ extended its meaning at the +same time, and came to be the regular term for the stage-buildings of a +theatre.[381] Later on it began to be applied not only to the whole of +the buildings, but also to the more important parts of them. It was used +to denote the stage or platform on which the actors performed[382]; and +also the back-scene, with its painted decoration, in front of which they +stood.[383] Eventually it was employed as a general term for the scene of +action, or for the portions or scenes into which a play was divided.[384] +These last three meanings of the word are still retained in its English +derivative. + +The question as to the structure of the stage-buildings in a Greek +theatre is one of the greatest interest, because of its intimate +connexion with many disputed points of dramatic history. Unfortunately, +it is a subject upon which the information supplied by the existing +ruins is very defective. In all the remaining theatres of purely Greek +origin little has been left of the stage-buildings beyond the mere +foundations, and it is impossible from such evidence to go very far in +the process of conjectural reconstruction. Our knowledge of the upper +part of the building has to be derived mainly from casual notices in the +old grammarians. In treating this question it will be best to follow the +same arrangement as in the case of the orchestra, and to begin by giving +a short account of the ruins in the theatre of Dionysus at Athens. The +stage-buildings at Athens were very frequently altered and reconstructed +in the course of their history, and the task of distinguishing between +the confused remains of the different periods has been by no means an +easy one. The recent investigations of Dörpfeld have for the first time +placed the matter in a fairly clear light. The results of his discoveries +are indicated in the plan of the theatre already given. + +The oldest stage-buildings, which Dörpfeld dates soon after the middle +of the fourth century and Puchstein at the end of the fifth, are marked +by cross-shading in the plan, and denoted by the letter _n_. They +consisted, as will be seen, of a long and narrow rectangular structure. +In the front, towards each end, were two projecting side-wings. The +length of the building was 152 feet, and its depth, measured between the +wings, 21 feet. The wings themselves were 25 feet wide, and projected +about 17 feet on the inside. The roof of the building was originally +supported by a line of columns running along the centre, of which some +traces still remain. At the back of the building there was a low narrow +wall, running immediately in front of the supporting wall, and fitted +with square holes at regular intervals. The purpose of the wall is very +obscure; but Dörpfeld conjectures that the upper story was of wood, and +not of stone, and that it rested on wooden beams which were placed in +these holes. Puchstein, on the other hand, believes that there was an +upper story of stone. The evidence is not sufficiently clear to render +a decision possible.[385] As regards the appearance of the building in +the front nothing can be ascertained with certainty. The space between +the side-wings evidently contained the stage, but no traces of it are +to be found. It must therefore have been a temporary erection of wood. +Dörpfeld supposes that the front of the two side-wings, and the front +of the wall between them, were decorated with columns and entablatures +about thirteen feet high.[386] But the evidence for this opinion is far +from conclusive. It is founded on the fact that the stylobates used in +the later side-wings were not originally designed for that position, +but had obviously been used somewhere else before. Dörpfeld supposes, +perhaps correctly, that they stood at first in front of the Lycurgean +side-wings.[387] But this is no justification for assuming that the wall +between the wings in the Lycurgean building was also decorated in the +same way. The stylobate used for this part of the later building was +a new one, and not an old one rearranged; and this fact seems to show +that there was no such stylobate in the building of Lycurgus. Otherwise +there would have been just as much reason for using it, as for using +the two stylobates from the wings. On the whole then it is clear that +we know very little about the old stage-building of the fourth or late +fifth century beyond the shape of its ground-plan. As to its height, the +material used in its upper stories, and the manner in which its front was +embellished, there is no certain evidence. + +The history of the stage-buildings during the next two hundred years +or so is a blank. Nothing can be ascertained on this subject from the +ruins. The first great alteration of which traces remain was carried out +in the course of the first or second century B.C. according to Dörpfeld, +the fourth century according to Puchstein. A permanent stone proscenium +was then erected in the space between the wings. It is marked _o_ in +the plan. The front of this proscenium consisted of a row of columns +supporting an entablature. Its height, as may be calculated from the +traces of the columns, was about 13 feet; its depth between 9 and 10 +feet. It was covered on the top with a wooden platform, resting on beams, +the holes for which are still visible in fragments of the architrave. In +the centre of the front part of the proscenium was a door leading out +into the orchestra. This door varied in width at different periods from +4½ to 5½ feet, but there is nothing to show which was the earlier and +which the later of the two widths. Traces of a smaller door, to the west +of the central one, have also been discovered; but there are no traces +of a door to the east. As this new stage was only about ten feet deep, +smaller side-wings were required. The old wings of the earlier theatre +were therefore thrown back about 5½ feet, thus adding several feet to the +width of the ‘parodoi’. Beyond the construction of the stone proscenium +no further remains of new erections belonging to this reconstruction have +been discovered; but it is probable that the upper part of the building +was considerably altered at the same time. + +The second great reconstruction of the stage-buildings took place in the +reign of Nero, after a lapse of perhaps two hundred years. The whole +of this part of the theatre was then adapted to the Roman fashion. An +elaborate architectural façade, consisting of columns and entablatures, +was erected at the back of the stage, the old Lycurgean wall _n_ being +used as a foundation. A portion of the frieze from this façade is still +in existence, and contains the dedication to Nero which has already been +referred to.[388] Two of the columns are also preserved in part. Behind +the columns and frieze a wall was erected, according to the Roman custom; +and at the same time new side-wings were built, slightly diminishing +the length of the whole structure. The foundations of these erections +are marked _p_ in the plan. In Roman theatres, as we have seen, the +stage projected much further forward than in the Greek. It was also +reduced in height to five feet, so that the spectators in the orchestra +might be able to see over the top. A stage of this type was doubtless +erected in the Athenian theatre at the time of these reconstructions, +though it has now entirely disappeared. But part of it seems to have +been used for the existing stage, that of Phaedrus, by which it was +replaced in the third century A.D. This stage, which is four feet three +inches high, is adorned in front with a bas-relief. The bas-relief has +obviously been constructed out of old materials, and has been much cut +about, and curtailed several inches in height, before being placed in +its present situation. It seems clear that it was intended originally +for the Neronian stage, which must therefore have been about five feet +high. The position of the front-wall in the Neronian stage cannot be +determined from the ruins, but was probably much the same as in the stage +of Phaedrus (_h-h_). One peculiarity of the Neronian reconstruction is +the fact that the old Greek side-wings, with their rows of columns, were +allowed to remain. But how they harmonized with the new Roman wings and +columns it is difficult to conjecture.[389] + +The last change of which we have any trace or record was that effected by +Phaedrus about two centuries later. The stage was then lowered several +inches, and the front-wall erected in its present position. Half of it +still remains, together with a flight of steps leading down from stage +to orchestra. Such steps were common in Roman theatres, and had no doubt +existed previously in the Neronian theatre. The bas-relief, which had +formerly been a continuous one, was cut into sections, and arranged with +recesses at intervals, the recesses being filled with stone figures. One +of these—a kneeling Silenus—has been preserved. As to the purpose of +this reconstruction by Phaedrus there is much uncertainty. But Dörpfeld +conjectures that it may have been due, partly to the ruinous condition +of the old Neronian stage, partly to a desire to make the orchestra +water-tight for the purpose of holding mimic sea-fights in the manner +already described.[390] + + +§ 7. _The Earlier Stage-buildings._ + +We have now described the various traces of stage-buildings in the +Athenian theatre down to the time of Phaedrus. It remains to consider +the subject from a more general point of view, and to supplement and +illustrate the previous narrative by evidence derived from other +sources. The first and most interesting question concerns the structure +of the stage-buildings during the great period of the Attic drama from +Aeschylus to Aristophanes. On this point the existing remains throw very +little light. Still there are a few general conclusions which seem to +be fairly well established. It is evident, in the first place, that the +stage-buildings from the fifth down to the middle of the fourth century, +if Dörpfeld’s dates are adopted—those of the greater part of the fifth +century, according to Puchstein—must have been made of wood, and not of +stone. If they had been made of stone, it is difficult to believe that +they would have left no traces behind them. As regards their shape, they +probably resembled in general outline the earliest stone structure, +and consisted of an oblong building with projecting side-wings. These +side-wings were called ‘paraskenia’, because they lay on each side of the +‘skene’ or stage, and are actually mentioned by Demosthenes in his speech +against Meidias as forming a part of the theatre at that time.[391] But +though the stage-buildings of the fifth century were constructed of wood +only, they must have been firm and substantial erections, and at least +two stories in height. The use of such contrivances as the ‘mechane’ and +the ‘theologeion’, by which gods were exhibited high up in air, would +require buildings of not less than two stories, and of considerable +solidity. Hence we may also conclude that they were permanent structures, +and that they were not put up and taken down at each festival. No doubt, +in the course of a century and a half, they were often renewed, and often +changed and modified in detail, as experience suggested. During the first +years of the fifth century, when there was only one actor, they must +have been much smaller than they afterwards became, when the number of +the actors had been raised to three. But after the middle of the fifth +century, when they had reached their full size, it is unlikely that they +should have been pulled down and re-erected more often than was rendered +necessary by the mere process of decay. Whether the stage in these +early buildings was protected by a roof or covering, running from one +side-wing to the other, is uncertain. But a roof of this kind would have +been a distinct advantage, for the purpose of concealing the crane-like +mechanism by which the deus ex machina was exhibited. + +To consider next the character of the early stage. The stage in Greek was +called ‘skene’, for the reason already mentioned[392]; and ‘okribas’, +because it consisted originally of a wooden platform.[393] It was also +called ‘logeion’, or the ‘speaking-place’, because the actors stood +there and carried on the dialogue. It was opposed to the orchestra, or +dancing-place, in which the chorus went through their performances.[394] +Another name for it was the ‘proskenion’, from its position in front +of the ‘skene’, or back-wall.[395] As regards the shape of the early +stage, there is even less archaeological evidence than in the case of the +stage-buildings. The stage continued to be constructed of wood long after +the rest of the building had begun to be made of stone. As a result, all +traces of it have disappeared. But certain inferences may be drawn from +the structure of the earliest stage-buildings represented in the ruins. +If we look at the outline of these buildings (_n-n_), we shall see that +the side-wings project about seventeen feet. But in the reconstruction +which Dörpfeld assigns to the Hellenistic period, Puchstein to the +fourth century, when a stone stage (_o-o_) was erected, the wings were +drawn back about five feet on each side. It follows almost as a matter +of certainty that the wooden stage of the earlier theatre must have +been about fifteen feet deep, so as to fill up the space between the +wings.[396] This conclusion is confirmed by the remains of the original +stage-buildings at Eretria, which are the oldest hitherto found outside +Athens, and which apparently belong to the same period as the earliest +ruins found at Athens.[397] Here too we find the same outline and +dimensions. There is a long narrow building, with wings projecting about +seventeen feet on each side.[398] From this evidence we are justified +in assuming that the early Greek stage was considerably deeper than the +later one, and was not less than about fifteen feet across. As to its +height, we have no information beyond that which is supplied by the +existing dramas. These dramas however show that in the theatre of the +fifth century it was easy for the actors on the stage to converse with +the chorus in the orchestra; and that there was nothing to prevent actors +and chorus from passing from stage to orchestra and from orchestra to +stage whenever they desired. Hence the stage of the fifth century cannot +have been raised many feet above the level of the orchestra. The object +of the stage was to place the actors in a prominent position, and to +ensure that they should not be hidden from view by the chorus in front of +them. This purpose would easily be effected by a stage of only a few feet +in height. Some easy means of communication between stage and orchestra +must have been provided, to enable actors and chorus to pass to and fro. +A long flight of steps, or a sloping ascent, may have been used for the +purpose. + +Such then, as far as we can tell, was the character of the stage +and stage-buildings during the early period of the Greek drama. The +stage-buildings consisted of a long and narrow rectangular structure, +made entirely of wood, not less than two stories high, and with +side-wings at each end. Between the wings was a platform about fifteen +feet deep, and a few feet in height, connected with the orchestra by a +flight of steps or in some similar way. This type of building lasted till +the end of the fifth or middle of the fourth century. A new departure +was then made. Stage-buildings began to be constructed of stone, at +any rate in the lower stories. The earliest known examples are those +at Athens and Eretria. But the stage itself still remained a wooden +one.[399] Its depth was still about fifteen feet. As to its height we +have no information.[400] The fourth century was a period of transition +and development in the history of the Greek theatre; and it was probably +during this century that various new experiments were made in the +structure and arrangement of the stage and stage-buildings. But the first +steps in the process cannot be traced in detail, owing to the lack of +evidence. The final results of the various experiments, as exemplified in +the theatres of a later period, will be discussed in the next section. + + +§ 8. _The later Stage-buildings of the pre-Roman period._ + +In describing the ruins of the stage-buildings in the Athenian theatre +we showed that the first great alteration made in the older structure +was the erection of a stone stage. This stage was about thirteen feet +high, and from nine to ten feet deep, and was enclosed between shallower +side-wings. The change effected at Athens is a type of similar changes +which were carried out in most of the other Greek theatres with which we +are acquainted. The recent excavations at Megalopolis, Delos, Eretria, +and many other places, show that from the beginning of the second century +onwards, and probably earlier, stone proscenia of the kind just described +became a regular feature in ordinary Greek theatres.[401] Moreover there +is evidence to prove that as early as the beginning of the third century +proscenia made of wood, but resembling the later stone ones in height and +depth, had begun to be erected in various cities. The theatre at Sicyon +was built about this period, and the stage-buildings were to a large +extent excavated out of the rock. The slopes which led up to the stage +on each side, being cut out of the rock, still remain, and prove that +the stage was about eleven feet above the level of the orchestra. The +old wall which served as a foundation for the wooden proscenium is also +partly preserved, and runs along the line of the later stone erection. In +it are holes for the posts on which the wooden stage was supported.[402] +At Eretria, again, the theatre was reconstructed about the beginning of +the third century, and the orchestra was sunk about eleven feet into +the rock, but the stage-buildings were left at their original level. +Hence the wooden stage built in front of them must have been eleven feet +high.[403] The theatre at Priene is somewhat exceptional. Here there +are the remains of a proscenium belonging to the third century, but +built of stone like those of later times. This, however, is the only +instance yet discovered of a stone proscenium which can be ascribed with +certainty to such an early period.[404] From these various indications +it seems probable that the tall and narrow stage of the later type began +to become general at the close of the fourth century, though at first +it was usually made of wood. In the course of the second and first +centuries this wooden stage was replaced in most theatres by a permanent +one of stone. The evidence derived from the ruins as to the size and +shape of the later stage corresponds, in most cases, with the statement +of Vitruvius, the Roman architect, who wrote about the end of the first +century B.C. In his account of the Greek theatre of his own time he lays +it down as a rule that the proscenium should be from ten to twelve feet +high, and about ten feet deep.[405] + +[Illustration: FIG. 8 A.] + +From the numerous remains of these later stone proscenia which have +been excavated during the last few years it is possible to obtain +a fairly accurate conception of their general character. The upper +surface, or stage proper, was made of wood. The front seems to have +consisted in every case of a series of stone columns supporting an +entablature. The spaces between the columns were filled in with painted +boards or ‘pinakes’, these, like the stage, being made of wood for +acoustic reasons.[406] The columns themselves were adapted sometimes +more and sometimes less carefully, to the purpose for which they were +required.[407] In some cases, as at Athens and Sicyon, they consisted +simply of entire columns. In others, the columns were provided with +rims running down the centre of each side, to hold the pinakes, as at +Megalopolis and Eretria. In others, the place of the columns was taken by +half-columns resting against pillars, as more convenient for holding the +pinakes. These pillars were in some cases without grooves or projections +for the pinakes, as at Epidaurus; in others, as at Priene, New Pleuron, +and Delos, they were regularly provided with them.[408] A diagram is +here given (Fig. 8 A, after Puchstein) representing the shapes of these +supports. The row of pillars would not only serve as a support to the +stage, but would serve as a background for the choral performances in +the orchestra so far as one was needed.[409] Dörpfeld, who believes that +the dramatic performances also took place entirely in the orchestra, +supposes that the pinakes were painted in scenic fashion so as to serve +as a background to the actors. There is not a particle of evidence to +support this view.[410] Not only would a back-scene interrupted by +columns be peculiar; but the accounts of the theatre of Delos in the +third century B.C. appear to demonstrate that the pinakes were not used +for this purpose. We find there that the joiner who made a single pinax +received 30 drachmae, while the painter who painted two only received 3 +drachmae 1 obol.[411] The smallness of the latter sum seems a clear proof +that the painting was not of the artistic kind we should expect in a +back-scene, but a very simple affair, suitable to the supporting wall of +a stage. It is very probable that the pinakes were painted in imitation +of folding-doors, or of wood-work divided into panels. Puchstein +conjectures that the stone structures found at Priene and Termessos, made +to resemble such doors or panelled work, are reminiscences of the earlier +pinakes, and similar instances of vacant spaces made to imitate doors +are common on Lycian grave[412] monuments and Pompeian wall-paintings. +This architectural front was called the ‘hyposkenion’, from its position +beneath the ‘skene’ or stage. Pollux says it was adorned with ‘columns +and small statues’.[413] Statues, however, were not used as a decoration +during the pre-Roman period. In Roman times they appear to have been +sometimes inserted in the intercolumnia, in place of the painted boards. +At Epidaurus, for instance, the space between the columns in the +side-wings was filled in at some late period with groups of sculpture. +At Delos, statues and other votive erections were placed along the +front of the proscenium.[414] Possibly Pollux may be referring to these +later customs; or he may have been thinking of the Roman stage, which +was sometimes decorated in front with a sculptured frieze, like that +of Phaedrus in the Athenian theatre. It is evident from the ruins that +there was no permanent means of communication between the orchestra and +the top of the stage. As regards the connexion with the interior of the +stage the custom seems to have varied. At Priene there were three doors +leading out into the orchestra.[415] At Athens the proscenium had one +door in the centre, and another smaller one on the western side. But +in most theatres there was only a single door, that in the centre; and +this door varied in width from 3 feet 3 inches at Delos to 4 feet at +Epidaurus.[416] At Megalopolis, however, and also at Thespiae, there is +no door of any kind leading out from the front of the proscenium into the +orchestra.[417] Probably most theatres had doors leading from the end +of the stage-buildings into the ‘parodoi’ or side-entrances, though they +cannot always be traced, owing to the scantiness of the remains. Their +position would no doubt vary, according to the structure of the different +theatres. At Epidaurus doors of this kind were placed immediately beyond +the side-wings, at each extremity of the proscenium. The illustration +which is here inserted (Fig. 9) will give a clear idea of the appearance +of these proscenia. It represents a restoration of one end of the +hyposkenion at Epidaurus. The front of the proscenium is denoted by the +letter _a_, the side-wing by _b_, while _c_ marks the door leading out +into the parodos.[418] + +[Illustration: FIG. 9.] + +In size these proscenia usually conformed to the rules of Vitruvius, and +were about ten feet deep, and from ten to twelve feet high. But sometimes +they were much lower than he directs. The proscenium at Oropus was only 8 +ft. 2 in. in height, that at Priene only 8 ft. 8 in.[419] The proscenium +at Delos is given variously as 8 ft. 3 in. and 9 ft. 2 in.[420] On the +other hand, the stages at Athens and at the Peiraeeus were thirteen feet +above the level of the orchestra.[421] The wings by which the stage was +enclosed on each side sometimes projected a few feet beyond the front +line of the proscenium, as at Athens. Sometimes, as at Eretria, there +was no projection, and the front of the wings was continuous with that +of the stage. In many theatres, again, such as those of Megalopolis and +Sicyon, there were no permanent side-wings, and the stage was terminated +at each end by a mere wall.[422] In such cases it is probable that during +the dramatic performances temporary side-wings of wood were erected. The +theatres of Epidaurus, Oropus, Sicyon, and the later buildings at Eretria +exhibit a peculiar feature in the shape of certain ramps or sloping +passages visible to the audience and leading up from the parodos and the +outside of the stage-buildings to the door in the walls terminating the +ends of the stage. The position of those ramps is clearly shown in the +plan of the Epidaurian theatre (Fig. 6). It is possible that they were +used by the chorus for the purpose of descending from the first floor of +the stage-buildings to the entrance of the parodos. But probably they +served mainly for the entrance of actors who represented persons supposed +to be coming from a distance. The objection of Robert and Dörpfeld[423] +that the actor would have to come up the ramps and wait at the door of +the side-wings in view of the audience for his cue, before he could +enter—which they justly say would be a ridiculous sight—assumes what +it is quite unnecessary to assume, namely, that plays were performed +without practice or proper stage-management. Very little rehearsal would +be required in order that the actor’s arrival might be duly timed. A +different device for the entrance of such actors is found at Priene and +Assos. There are no side-wings, but the stage is rather longer than the +back-scene or the buildings of which the back-scene formed the face, and +is continued for some distance down each side of the buildings. The ends +of the stage are terminated by a wall containing no door. The idea seems +to have been that the persons supposed to come from a distance should +make their way down one of the passages on each side of the skene, and so +come round the corner of the stage. The theatres at Delos, Termessos, and +Ephesus seem to have employed variations of this device.[424] + +When we turn from the stage to the stage-buildings of this period, our +information is very incomplete owing to the scanty nature of the ruins. +But it is probable that the stage-buildings began about this period to +assume a more imposing appearance than in former times. We have seen that +in the case of the earlier buildings there is some doubt whether the +upper stories were made of wood or of stone. After the beginning of the +third century it is probable that stone began to be used for all stories +alike.[425] The buildings must also have been of a considerable height, +to allow of a suitable back-scene above the tall proscenium.[426] As to +the decoration of the wall at the back of the stage nothing is known. +In the later Greek theatres, built in the Roman fashion, this wall was +constructed in an elaborate architectural design. It usually consisted +of two or three rows of columns, rising one above the other, and each +surmounted with appropriate entablatures and pediments. Its height was +often as great at the top of the auditorium—an arrangement which was +found to improve the acoustic properties of the theatre. Back-walls of +this sumptuous character are still in part preserved in the Graeco-Roman +theatres of Aspendos, Tauromenium, and various other cities. But it is +uncertain how far they can be traced back into or beyond the Hellenistic +period.[427] It is still keenly disputed whether the supporting walls +for the stage-buildings, found in the ruins of different theatres, are +really strong enough to bear the weight of two stories. As regards the +doors which led from the back-wall on to the stage there is no positive +evidence to be obtained from the existing ruins. But Pollux and Vitruvius +state that they were three in number.[428] + +The most essential difference between the theatre which we are +considering and that of the fifth century lay in the substitution of +a tall and narrow stage for a low and comparatively deep one. This +change was far more important than a mere change of material from wood +to stone. The question naturally arises, what was the reason for the +alteration? The answer is to be found in the fact that the Greek drama +itself passed through a no less radical transformation at the same time. +In the course of the fourth century it was gradually transformed from a +choral to a non-choral drama. When we come to the third century we find +that the chorus, which once played the chief part both in tragedy and +comedy, had sunk into insignificance. It was often discarded altogether. +When retained, it had nothing to do but to sing interludes between the +successive acts. Its presence no more implied that the play was a choral +play than the presence of the band in a modern theatre implies that the +performance is an opera. The old intercourse between actors and chorus +was a thing of the past.[429] The low deep stage was no longer necessary, +to enable actors and chorus to converse together, or to supply room, when +required, for the presence of the chorus by the side of the actors. Under +these circumstances it would obviously be an advantage to make the stage +as high as possible, in order to improve the view of the upper rows of +spectators. The ancient theatres were of enormous size. At Athens, for +example, the topmost tier of seats was 300 feet distant from the stage, +and 100 feet above the level of the orchestra. In such a theatre, the +higher the stage, the better would be the view of the majority of the +audience. It was doubtless for this reason that the stage was raised to +about ten or twelve feet in the course of the third century. At the same +time its depth was necessarily diminished, in order that the spectators +in the lowest rows might be able to see down to the end of it. The loss +of depth was of no importance in the acting of a play, because of the +practical exclusion of the chorus from the stage. + +In connexion with this subject a difficulty has been raised by some +scholars which deserves consideration. It is generally admitted that the +Vitruvian stage was well adapted for the later kind of drama. But from +the fourth century down to Roman times the theatre was used quite as much +for the revival of old plays as for the representation of new ones. It is +contended that the ancient plays, with their intimate connexion between +actors and chorus, could not possibly have been exhibited on a stage +which was raised twelve feet above the level of the orchestra. In answer +to this objection it may be pointed out that the only ancient plays which +were ever revived during the period with which we are now dealing were +those of Sophocles and Euripides. Aeschylus and Aristophanes had gone +out of fashion. The plays of Sophocles and Euripides could easily have +been adapted for the Vitruvian stage by excisions and modifications in +the choral part. If the chorus, as sometimes happened, took an important +share in the dialogue, its part on such occasions might be given to extra +characters on the stage. That the old plays were revised and adapted in +this manner at a later period is proved by the express testimony of Dion +Chrysostomus,[430] and there is no improbability in assuming that the +same practice had begun to prevail as early as the third century B.C. +It might, however, sometimes be necessary, during the revival of the +ancient dramas, to provide a means of communication between stage and +orchestra. In such cases temporary wooden steps were placed in front of +the proscenium. There is ample evidence for the use of this contrivance. +Pollux tells us that when the players entered by the orchestra they +ascended the stage by means of steps.[431] Athenaeus, the writer on +military engines, speaks of the steps which were placed in front of the +stage for the use of the actors.[432] Steps of this kind are depicted +in several vase-paintings from Magna Graecia, belonging to the third +century B.C., and representing theatrical scenes.[433] There is also +a wall-painting at Herculaneum, which shows us one of these flights of +steps standing by itself, with an actor’s mask at the top.[434] From +these indications we see that, although there was no permanent means of +communication between stage and orchestra in the Hellenistic theatres, a +temporary connexion could always be supplied when necessary. + + +§ 9. _Puchstein’s Theory of the Stage-buildings._ + +The theory of Puchstein, already so often alluded to, ascribes to +Lycurgus the construction of the proscenium consisting of stone columns +and pinakes, and throws back to the end of the fifth century the +Lycurgean structures usually so called. His principal ground for this +change of date lies in the development which he traces in the form of +the columns in question.[435] He thinks it certain that the use of full +columns must have preceded that of half-columns, and that columns without +special contrivances for holding pinakes must be earlier than simple +ones. Thus the full columns of the proscenia of Athens, Sicyon, and the +Peiraeeus, which have no such contrivances, will belong to the earliest +period of stone proscenia; they will be earlier than those of Megalopolis +and Eretria, which have rims for holding the pinakes, and still earlier +than the plain half-columns of Epidaurus and the grooved half-columns +of Priene, Assos, Delos, Pleuron, Oropus, &c. The proscenia of Priene, +Pleuron, and Delos appear to belong to the third century B.C.; and +Puchstein accordingly throws back the Athenian columned proscenium to the +latter half of the fourth century, the time of Lycurgus. The theory is at +least plausible; but it is not certain. Development is not always in a +straight line or in logical order, and does not always require intervals +of many years between one stage and another; different experiments +may be tried simultaneously in different cases, and recurrence to old +types, or preservation of them after new ones have been invented, is a +common thing in the history of architecture. The form of the proscenium, +therefore, cannot be used with certainty as a chronological criterion, +though it may be very suggestive. It follows, in Puchstein’s view, from +the earlier dating of the stone proscenium, that the so-called Lycurgean +stage-building, with its deep side-wings, must have been erected some +time before Lycurgus, towards the end of the fifth or beginning of +the fourth century. The date which Puchstein suggests for the stone +proscenium at Athens is certainly more probable on _a priori_ grounds +than that given by Dörpfeld. According to Dörpfeld’s chronology, the +earliest stage-buildings at Athens were apparently later than those at +Eretria and other Greek cities. Dörpfeld has conceded that the old skene +at Eretria is of the fourth or fifth century, and may be older than the +Lycurgean.[436] But it is hard to believe that the city in which the +drama was first developed should not have been the first also to provide +itself with a permanent stage. + +Professor E. A. Gardner also shows reasons of a technical character in +favour of the earlier date.[437] The foundations of the chryselephantine +statue of Dionysus by Alcamenes are of conglomerate and breccia. +Alcamenes was at work during the latter half of the fifth century; and +the later temple in the precinct below the theatre was built to contain +this statue. Now, as Professor Gardner points out, it is unlikely that +the Athenians would have undertaken so costly a work in the later part +of the Peloponnesian war. On the other hand, there is no trace of the +use of breccia in foundations in the Periclean age. The temple probably +therefore dates from the time between the Peace of Nicias in 421 B.C. and +the Sicilian expedition in 415 B.C. And if the temple was built then, it +is not unlikely that the theatre may have been begun at the same time. +The fact that the architectural technique of the theatre, particularly in +the use of conglomerate blocks, is the same as that of the temple points +the same way. The work may have begun about B.C. 420, and progressed +gradually and continuously up to the time of Lycurgus. The exact year in +which the higher stage was erected cannot, of course, be fixed.[438] + +Puchstein also doubts whether the whole of the existing auditorium +was built in the time of Lycurgus.[439] There is a fragment of a wall +(not marked) in front of _a—a_ in the plan, which Dörpfeld does not +mention in his text, though he marks it in one of his plans.[440] This, +Puchstein suggests, is the supporting wall of an auditorium older than +the Lycurgean. Besides this he finds evidence of stone seats in the +fifth century. It has already been mentioned that a stone built into the +western wing of the auditorium contains a fifth-century inscription.[441] +This inscription consists of the words βολῆς ὑπηρετῶν, and was probably +part of a seat-step, reserved for the servants of the βουλή. If so, there +must have been a stone auditorium before the time of Lycurgus. + +A further point in Puchstein’s theory concerns the height of the stage +in the building which he assigns to the fifth century.[442] The only +possible purpose of the deep side-wings was to enclose a stage. The +analogy of later theatres of the same type, such as those of Tyndaris +and Segesta, where traces of the stage still remain, render any other +conclusion indefensible. No other hypothesis has any support from any +monuments whatever. This stage may have been of wood, proscenium and all, +and this would account for its disappearance; or it may have had slight +stone supports, which might easily have left no trace. The height of +this old stage at Athens may be determined approximately by a comparison +with the almost contemporary stage-buildings at Eretria, where there is +evidence to show that the stage must have been not less than nine or ten +feet from the ground. But this does not mean that still earlier the stage +was not, as previously contended,[443] a comparatively low one, such +as would be suitable for the plays of Aeschylus and the earlier plays +of Aristophanes. Nor is the existence of a high stage about 400 B.C. +inconsistent with the presence of a chorus, as Dörpfeld thinks.[444] The +decision depends not on the presence of a chorus, but on the intimacy of +the connexion between the chorus and the actors. As long as they freely +commingled together, the stage must have been moderately low. But when +the chorus ceased to take any active part in the play, the raising of the +stage would do no harm, and would be an advantage, as giving the audience +a better view of the actors. Now it was precisely towards the end of the +fifth century that the chorus began to lose its old significance, and +to assume the functions of mere singers of interludes.[445] Hence there +would be nothing surprising if it were proved, and not merely rendered +likely, as by Puchstein, that at this date the stage began to be of a +greater height than formerly. + + +§ 10. _The Stage-buildings in Roman Times._ + +We have now followed the development of the stage-buildings from the old +wooden erections of the fifth century to the more solid and elaborate +structures of the Hellenistic period. All that remains is to trace their +history during the later ages of Roman supremacy. We have shown that +at Athens the stage-buildings were practically reconstructed after the +Roman fashion in the time of Nero. The same tendency had already become +prevalent in other places at a much earlier period. After the middle +of the first century B.C. most of the new theatres built by the Greeks +were constructed in the Roman style. The majority of the old ones began +about the same time to be altered and modified under Roman influence. +This latter process, however, was never carried out universally. It was +confined mainly to the more outlying parts of the Hellenic world, such +as Sicily and Asia Minor. In Greece proper it was a comparatively rare +occurrence. Athens and Argos are the only cities on the Greek mainland +which are known to have Romanized their theatres. Still, looking at +the Greek world as a whole, it may be said that from the time of the +Christian era the great majority of Hellenic theatres were adapted to +the Roman model. It was at this period that the stage-buildings began +to be constructed on a more lofty scale, and their front adorned with +the gorgeous architectural embellishments which we have previously +described. Some idea of their magnificence may be obtained from the +existing remains, and especially from those of the theatre at Aspendos, +which is well preserved. A restoration of part of the interior of this +theatre (Fig. 10) is here inserted.[446] The back-wall erected at Athens +in the time of Nero was of the same type, though smaller in size. Façades +of this imposing character may perhaps be thought too elaborate for the +back-wall of a theatre. When dramas were being performed, and they +were covered with painted scenery, their architectural beauty would be +concealed from the eyes of the spectators. But ancient theatres were +regularly used, not only for dramatic performances, but also for various +other purposes, both artistic and political. On such occasions, when the +stage was without scenic decoration, the architectural grandeur of the +back-wall would add greatly to the beauty of the stage-buildings, and +form a pleasing object to the eye. Probably, too, at many of the dramatic +exhibitions, when the action was laid before a temple or palace, painted +scenery was dispensed with, and the architectural façade supplied an +appropriate background. + +[Illustration: FIG. 10.] + +It will be seen from the illustration that in the theatre of Aspendos +there were five doors at the back of the stage. There was a large door +in the centre, and two smaller ones on each side. The same arrangement +was generally adopted in Graeco-Roman theatres. But Pollux and Vitruvius +speak of three doors as the regulation number.[447] Possibly, therefore, +the five doors of the later theatres were not all used during the +dramatic representations. When the stage was prepared for the performance +of a play, the two doors on the outside may have been covered up with +scenery; or temporary side-wings may have been erected in front of them. +Another noticeable feature in the theatre of Aspendos is the roof over +the stage. Traces of a similar roof are also found at Orange, and justify +the conclusion that in most theatres of the Roman type the stage was +covered over.[448] Whether the same practice prevailed in the Hellenistic +theatres there is no evidence to show. But the convenience of the +arrangement is so obvious, that we can hardly doubt that it began to be +employed at a comparatively early period. + +In a large number of cases the process of Romanizing the Greek theatres +was not carried out completely. Many theatres, whether built or +reconstructed on the new model, still retained features which were +essentially Greek. This was the case at Athens. The Greek stage was +usually the same length as one diameter of the orchestra. The Roman stage +was twice as long, and extended some distance into the wings of the +auditorium on each side. There was no open space between the auditorium +and the side-wings; the place of the old Greek ‘parodoi’ was supplied +by vaulted subways. But at Athens, when the Neronian alterations were +made, the stage was not prolonged in the Roman style, but remained of the +same length as before. The entrances into the orchestra at _a_ and _g_ +were thus left open (Fig. 3). In many other places, especially in Asia +Minor, the Romanization was of a still more partial kind. In theatres +such as those of Termessos, Perge, and Sagalassos the general outline +of the building was hardly affected by the change. The front line of +the stage was not pushed forward; the orchestra still remained nearly a +complete circle; open passages were left between the auditorium and the +stage-buildings. The only important alteration was in the size of the +stage, which was lengthened at each end, and deepened by throwing the +front of the stage-buildings farther back. The height of the stage was +but slightly diminished. In a Roman theatre it was usually five feet. +But the stages at Termessos, Sagalassos, and Patara vary from eight feet +to nine, and were therefore very little lower than the ordinary stage of +the Vitruvian type.[449] + +These examples show how trifling in many cases was the difference between +the Graeco-Roman theatres and those of the purely Greek type. They also +throw some light on another question of considerable interest. In Roman +theatres all performances were confined to the stage; the orchestra was +given up to spectators of distinguished rank. It may be asked whether +the Greeks, when they built their theatres in the Roman style, adopted +the same custom. The answer seems to be that they did not. It is most +improbable that theatres should have been constructed in Asia Minor with +the old full-sized orchestra, unless this orchestra had been intended +as a place for choral performances. The fact that in many of these +theatres the stage was eight or nine feet high proves the same thing. If +the spectators had been placed immediately in front of it, their view +would have been very much obstructed. We know, too, that in the Athenian +theatre, even after the Roman stage had been introduced, the marble +thrones round the orchestra continued to be the chief seats of honour. +Hence it is evident that the orchestra must have been still a place for +the performers, and not a place for distinguished spectators. The chief +purpose of the Greeks, in Romanizing their theatres, was to provide +a deep and capacious stage for spectacles of the Roman type, such as +pantomimes and pyrrhic ballets. The old Greek performances were given as +before in the orchestra. As far as the drama is concerned, the orchestra +would seldom be required at this period, the lyrical part of tragedy and +comedy having now practically disappeared. But the choral and musical +competitions still flourished as vigorously as ever, and these were kept +to their original place, and not transferred to the stage. + + +§ 11. _Exceptional Stage-buildings._ + +The stage-buildings which we have hitherto described have been those +of the normal type. But there are several places in which peculiar and +exceptional structures were erected, either for reasons connected with +the nature of the ground, or for mere love of variety. Some of these may +be worth mentioning. The theatre at Pergamon was apparently built about +the beginning of the second century B.C.[450] But the stage-buildings, +instead of being made of stone, as was usual at that period, consisted +of temporary wooden erections, which were put up and taken down at +each festival. Stone blocks were let into the ground, with holes for +the reception of the beams by which the building was supported. When +the performances were over, the whole apparatus might be removed in a +short time. It was only at a later period that permanent stage-buildings +were constructed. The reason for this curious arrangement, according to +Dörpfeld, was to leave the way open to a temple in the neighbourhood. +As the auditorium lay on a terrace, with not much room in front of it, +permanent stage-buildings would have filled up the whole space, and +blocked the passage to the temple. + +Another remarkable instance of deviation from the ordinary practice is +supplied by the theatre at Megalopolis.[451] In this theatre (Fig. 11) +the place of the stage-buildings was taken by a vast council-chamber, +called the Thersilion, which faced towards the auditorium. Its façade +consisted of a vestibule, 26 feet high, and resting on a flight of five +steps. Originally, when dramas were to be performed, a temporary wooden +stage was erected in front of the Thersilion. The foundation-wall for +a stage of this kind has been discovered, and lies at a distance of 24 +feet from the columns of the vestibule. It is obvious therefore that +the vestibule cannot itself have formed the background. A stage 24 feet +across would have been far too deep for a Greek theatre. Temporary +scenic decorations must have been erected some feet in front of the +council-chamber. In later times a stone proscenium of the ordinary type +was erected on the site of the old wooden one. But when this was done, +it is probable that the Thersilion had fallen into ruins. Otherwise the +beauty of its appearance would have been altogether marred by the stone +structure in front of it. + +[Illustration: FIG. 11.] + +But the most peculiar of the stage-buildings which have hitherto been +discovered is that at Delos. A representation of the ground-plan (Fig. +12) is inserted on the next page.[452] This building consisted of a +single oblong room. In front of it was an ordinary proscenium, about +ten feet deep, and eight or nine feet high, resting on half-columns. +The spaces between the columns were filled, as usual, with painted +boards. The curious feature is that this same proscenium was continued +in a modified form round the rest of the building, so as to serve as a +portico. On the sides and in the rear it rested on rectangular pillars +instead of on columns. The spaces between the pillars were considerably +wider than the spaces between the columns, and were left open, instead +of being filled up with boards. Porticoes of this kind were often +erected close to the stage-buildings, as a shelter from the rain; but +the position of the one at Delos is altogether exceptional. Another +remarkable feature in this building is the fact that the proscenium was +open at each end, and was not even enclosed with a wall. When dramas +were being performed, wooden side-wings must have been put up for the +occasion.[453] + +[Illustration: FIG. 12.] + + +§ 12. _Wieseler’s Theory of the Greek Stage._ + +In a Greek dramatic performance the relative position occupied by actors +and chorus was quite unlike anything to be seen in a modern theatre. +The actors appeared upon a raised platform, the chorus performed in the +orchestra underneath. When the actors were present, and the dialogue +was proceeding, the chorus stood with their backs towards the audience, +and their faces towards the stage.[454] In the early period the stage +was only of moderate height, and communication between stage and +orchestra was therefore a matter of no difficulty. Later on, when the +chorus began to be excluded from all share in the action, the stage +was raised several feet, and the actors were thus placed some distance +above the heads of the chorus. But both in the earlier and the later +period, and whether the stage was a high or a low one, there was always +a clearly marked distinction between the normal position of actors and +chorus respectively. This fact places prominently before us the radical +difference between a Greek chorus and that of a modern opera. It shows +us that in the groupings of actors and chorus in a Greek theatre there +could be none of that realistic imitation of ordinary life which is +sometimes seen upon the modern stage. To produce effects of this kind +would be impossible, where the chorus was standing beneath the actors, +and with their backs towards the audience. This position of the chorus +in the Greek theatre, which seems peculiar to our modern notions, was +not due to any abstract considerations of propriety, but was merely +the result of the peculiar circumstances under which the Greek drama +was developed. Originally the performance was almost entirely lyrical, +and the stage and the actors were a mere appendage. The chorus, being +the principal performers, and the most prominent object of attention, +occupied the central position in the orchestra. The actors were placed on +a stage behind them, so as to be visible to the spectators. Eventually +the dialogue between the actors completely overshadowed the songs of the +chorus, and the lyrical element in the performance was treated as a kind +of interlude. But the chorus still continued to occupy that prominent +position in the theatre which its original importance had assigned to it. + +Since the beginning of the last century various difficulties have been +raised in connexion with this subject, and various theories have been +invented for the purpose of removing the supposed difficulties. All +this speculation appears to have had its origin in the same source. +Until quite recent years it was assumed by every scholar that the stage +of the fifth century must have been of the same height and structure +as the later stage described by Vitruvius. But it was felt that the +dramas of the fifth century could not possibly have been written for +a theatre in which the actors were raised about twelve feet above the +level of the chorus. The relationship between actors and chorus in these +early dramas is far too close to allow it to be supposed that they were +separated by a barrier of this kind. Still, there was the testimony of +Vitruvius, who said the stage was about twelve feet high, and whose +measurements were supposed to apply to all theatres, early as well as +late. The first attempt to meet the difficulty was made by Hermann, at +the beginning of the century; and his theory was afterwards adopted and +developed by Wieseler. According to this view the chorus did not stand +upon the level of the orchestra, but upon a sort of subsidiary platform, +erected immediately in front of the twelve-foot stage. The height of +the platform, they said, was so arranged as to bring the chorus into +moderate proximity to the actors, without concealing them from the view +of the audience. This platform for the chorus was generally accepted by +writers upon the Greek drama until about ten years ago. Its existence +was defended, partly on general grounds, partly by an appeal to certain +passages in ancient authors. To take the ancient authorities first. +Hermann supposed that the platform was called ‘orchestra’ in a narrower +sense. He cited a passage in Suidas, where the orchestra is described +as coming next to the ‘skene’, and as being a wooden erection on which +mimes performed. But in this passage the context clearly proves that +the word ‘orchestra’ is used in its later sense as the ‘stage’.[455] +Wieseler endeavoured to prove that the platform for the chorus was +denoted by the word ‘thymele’. Now ‘thymele’, as we have seen, was a +word which had a great many meanings in connexion with the theatre. It +denoted, first, the altar of Dionysus; secondly, the orchestra; thirdly, +the stage.[456] If the passages are carefully examined in which it is +asserted that ‘thymele’ denotes a platform for the chorus in front of the +stage, it will be found that in the majority of them the word is much +more naturally explained as meaning the stage itself, or the orchestra. +In one or two cases the language used is apparently due to a confusion +between the different meanings of the term. In no case is there a clear +and definite description of a platform standing half-way up between the +orchestra and the stage.[457] If such a platform had really existed, +it seems incredible that there should have been no mention of it. As +far, then, as ancient authorities are concerned, the theory as to the +existence of a platform for the chorus finds no support. + +On general grounds there are several fatal objections to the theory. In +the first place, if it were correct, we should have to believe that the +Greeks first of all constructed an orchestra for the chorus to perform +in; then built a stage twelve feet high; then, finding they had made +their stage a great deal too lofty, got out of the difficulty by erecting +a platform each year, to bring the chorus within reach of the actors. To +suppose that the Greeks acted in this way would be to suppose that they +were altogether deficient in common sense. In the second place, it must +not be forgotten that the performances at the City Dionysia consisted +of dithyrambs as well as dramas. The dithyrambic chorus consisted of +fifty members, and stood in a circular position. They must therefore +have required a very considerable space for their performances. The +oblong platform in front of the stage would not have been large enough +to accommodate them, but would have been large enough to encroach very +extensively upon the orchestra, and to drive the dithyrambic choruses +into one end of it. That such was the case is most improbable. In the +third place, in the recently excavated Greek theatres there are no traces +of any appliances for the erection of the supposed platform. We should +have expected to find holes in the floor of the orchestra, and sockets +in the hyposkenion, for the reception of the beams by which the platform +was supported. But there is no theatre in which any such traces are to +be found. Fourthly, on the floor of the orchestra at Epidaurus a large +circle is marked out with a stone border immediately in front of the +stage (Fig. 6). It is difficult to resist the conclusion that this circle +was intended for the performances of the chorus. For these reasons, +combined with the silence of ancient writers, there appears to be no +doubt that the platform for the chorus in front of the stage must be +regarded as a fiction of modern times. + +All the difficulties which this platform was invented to explain +will disappear, if we assume that the stage of the fifth century was +considerably lower than that of later times. It was only in the earlier +period of the drama that a close communication between actors and chorus +was required. In the subsequent epoch the existence of a lofty stage +presents no difficulty. And the assumption of a low stage for the period +of Aeschylus and his immediate successors is on general grounds the most +natural one. We are told that originally, when the drama was still a +lyrical performance, the coryphaeus used to mount upon a small table, +in the intervals between the odes, in order to converse with the rest of +the chorus. Later on, an actor was substituted for the coryphaeus. Later +still, in the course of the fifth century, a second and a third actor +were introduced. Now it is absurd to suppose that, while the coryphaeus +was replaced in this tentative way by a gradually increasing number of +actors, the old table on which he performed should have been suddenly +converted into a complete Vitruvian stage, twelve feet high, and fifty +feet long. It is much more natural to imagine that the development of +the stage was also a slow and experimental process, and that in the +fifth century its size was intermediate between the low table of the +sixth century and the tall proscenium of later times. The few traces of +archaeological evidence which we possess concerning the early stage are +distinctly in favour of this view. It is also supported by the well-known +description in Horace. Horace, in his account of the development of Greek +tragedy, tells us that Aeschylus ‘erected a stage on beams of moderate +size’.[458] Horace’s information, as we know, was derived from Greek +sources. Hence it appears that the ordinary Greek tradition favoured the +belief that the early stage was a low one, and that it contrasted in this +respect with the stage of later times. + + +§ 13. _Dörpfeld’s Theory of the Greek Stage._ + +Another theory of a far more revolutionary kind has been propounded in +recent years by Höpken[459], and amplified and developed by Dörpfeld. +Dörpfeld assumes, like Wieseler, that the proscenium of the fifth century +must have been of the same height as that described by Vitruvius. But he +gets out of the consequent difficulty by supposing that the proscenium +was intended, not as a stage for the actors, but as a background. He +denies the existence of a stage in purely Greek theatres either of the +earlier or of the later period. He believes that in all Greek theatres +the actors and the chorus performed together in the orchestra. The +proscenium represented the palace or other building before which the +action took place. The front-wall of the stage-buildings immediately +behind the proscenium represented merely the sky. This theory has +been the subject of much discussion and controversy during the last +twenty years. As it has been accepted by several scholars, it will be +necessary to consider it in detail. I propose in the present section to +explain the grounds on which, as it seems to me, it must be regarded as +untenable; and to discuss at length the evidence on which the belief in +the existence of a Greek stage is founded. In dealing with this subject +it will be convenient to divide the period covered by the Greek drama +into two parts, and to consider first the later part, from about 300 B.C. +onwards; and then to return to the earlier period, that of the fourth and +fifth centuries. The evidence in the two cases is somewhat different, and +will be more clearly understood if taken separately. + +1. THE LATER STAGE.—First, then, as to the later or ‘Hellenistic’ period. +Recent excavations, as was previously pointed out, have now given us a +fairly clear idea as to the shape and structure of the stage-buildings +during this period. We now know that from the beginning of the third +century onwards, or, if Puchstein is right, from a considerably earlier +date, the stage-buildings in an ordinary Greek theatre, though varying +in detail, conformed to the same general type. They consisted of a long +rectangular structure, in front of which was a narrow platform, usually +about twelve feet high and ten feet deep. This platform was called the +‘proskenion’. In the third century it appears to have been generally made +of wood. But in the course of the second and first centuries, or in the +fourth century, if Puchstein is right, a stone proscenium was substituted +for the old wooden ones in almost every theatre. What then was the +purpose of this proscenium, this long platform, twelve feet high and ten +feet deep, which we find in all Greek theatres after the fourth century? +For an answer to this question we naturally turn to Vitruvius, who wrote +a book about architecture towards the end of the first century B.C., +and in the course of it gave a detailed description of Greek and Roman +theatres. Vitruvius tells us that every Greek theatre has a stage, and +that this stage is from ten to twelve feet high and about ten feet deep. +Its narrowness is due to the fact that it is only used by the actors in +tragedy and comedy; all other performers appear in the orchestra.[460] He +adds that the Roman stage is much lower and much deeper, and this for two +reasons. It had to be deeper, because all the performers appeared upon +it. It had to be lower, because in a Roman theatre the spectators sat in +the orchestra, and would not therefore have been able to see over the +top of a twelve-foot stage.[461] Here then we seem to have a clear and +final answer to our question. The proscenium which we find in all Greek +theatres after about 300 B.C., and in some perhaps a century earlier, +answers exactly to the description of Vitruvius. It must therefore have +been intended to serve as a stage. + +Dörpfeld, it is well known, refuses to accept this conclusion. But his +method of dealing with the testimony of Vitruvius has changed since he +wrote his book on the Greek theatre. He then supposed that Vitruvius +had been guilty of an error. While admitting that he was correct in +his measurements of the Greek proscenium, he asserted that he had made +a mistake as to its purpose; that he had confused the background of +the Hellenistic theatre with the stage of the Roman.[462] But this +explanation is one which it is impossible to accept. It is absurd to +suppose that Vitruvius was mistaken. He was a professional architect, +writing about his own special subject, and writing at the very time when +many of these Greek proscenia were being erected. His remark about the +Greek stage is not introduced as an _obiter dictum_, but is made the +basis of the distinction which he draws between Greek and Roman theatres. +He had evidently therefore thought about the subject. But even if we +suppose that he could make a mistake of this kind, even if we suppose +that he had never been in Greece, and never seen a Greek play acted +there, still it is incredible that such an absurd error should have +remained uncorrected in his book. The connexion between Greece and Rome +was so intimate, that there must have been thousands of people in Rome +who had seen Greek plays performed in a Greek theatre, and knew how it +was done. If Vitruvius had made this absurd blunder, some one would have +been sure to point it out to him, and he would have had it corrected. + +Since the publication of his book Dörpfeld has shifted his ground on +this question.[463] He now suggests a new method of explaining away +the testimony of Vitruvius. He supposes that Vitruvius, when speaking +of the stage in the Greek theatre, was referring, not to the ordinary +Greek theatre, but to the peculiar type of Graeco-Roman theatre found in +various cities of Asia Minor, such as Termessos and Sagalassos. These +theatres, as we have shown, exhibited a sort of transition between the +Greek and the Roman model. While their general design was Greek, their +stages were partially lowered and deepened, so as to come nearer to the +Roman practice.[464] In theatres of this kind Dörpfeld admits that the +actors performed upon the stage; and he contends that it is to them +that Vitruvius refers, and not to the regular Greek theatres, in which +the actors always appeared in the orchestra. But in the first place it +is difficult to believe that Vitruvius, when he speaks of the ‘Greek’ +theatre, should mean something quite different. Why should he describe +as ‘Greek’ a type of building which was not found in Greece proper, and +which was essentially a combination of Greek and Roman attributes? In +the second place, the evidence of the existing remains is inconsistent +with the new hypothesis. Vitruvius says that the proscenium in the Greek +theatre should be from ten to twelve feet high, and in ordinary cases +about ten feet deep. Now what do we find in the remains of the regular +Greek theatres? We find that in the great majority of cases the height +and depth answer exactly to this description. But when we turn to the +Asia Minor theatres what do we find? The average height is from eight +to nine feet, the average depth from twelve to eighteen. In the face of +these measurements it is useless to contend that Vitruvius is alluding +to the Asia Minor theatres. The type which he describes is the ordinary +Hellenistic type.[465] + +The two facts already mentioned—first, the fact that Vitruvius tells us +that every Greek theatre should possess a stage of a certain height, +and secondly, the fact that all Greek theatres after about 300 B.C. are +found to possess a stage corresponding to his description—these two +facts appear sufficient in themselves to decide the whole question. But +there is no lack of further evidence. Various ancient writers may be +cited as witnesses. Pollux, in his description of the Greek theatre, +says that ‘the stage is appropriated to the actors, the orchestra to the +chorus’.[466] Later on he says that the actors, when they ‘enter by the +orchestra, ascend the stage by means of steps’.[467] The scholiasts to +the extant dramas often speak of the performance in a Greek theatre as +being partly in the orchestra and partly on the stage. The commentator +on the Frogs asserts that the scene with Charon and the ferry-boat must +be ‘either upon the logeion, or in the orchestra’. Later on he says that +Dionysus here appears ‘not on the logeion, but in the orchestra’. The +scholiast on the Knights discusses the question why the sausage-seller +should ‘ascend from the parodos on to the logeion’. There are other +scholia to the same effect, which it would be tedious to quote.[468] In +these passages from the scholiasts and from Pollux the point to notice +is the following. They do not merely say that there was a stage in Greek +theatres, but they describe the performance as one partly on the stage, +and partly in the orchestra. Dörpfeld says they are all mistaken; that +they lived after the Christian era, and were confusing the Greek theatre +with the Roman. But this would not account for their mistake, if mistake +there were. In Roman theatres all performances were confined to the +stage; the orchestra was occupied by senators and other distinguished +persons. How then can Pollux and the scholiasts have got this notion of +a performance in which stage and orchestra were used at the same time? +There was nothing in the Roman practice to suggest it. It can only have +been derived from the Greek theatre. But apart from this, the suggestion +that Pollux and the scholiasts were misled by their recollection of Roman +customs is not a fortunate one. It implies that their writings were +the result of personal observation. But no one can read a page of them +without perceiving that they were merely compilations from Alexandrian +sources. The scholiasts in many cases mention their authorities, and +these authorities often go back as far as Aristophanes and Aristarchus, +and even beyond. They do indeed confuse the evidence a good deal, when +they try to reconcile different statements, or when they misapply +statements of earlier authorities to particular passages, and explain the +passages wrongly; but the statements themselves are due to Alexandrian +tradition, not to their own observations. When they say that Greek dramas +were performed partly on the stage and partly in the orchestra, it is +evident that the Alexandrians thought the same. The testimony of Pollux +and the scholiasts is really testimony of the third century B.C. + +Another writer whose words appear to be decisive on this question +is Horace. His statement about Aeschylus, to the effect that he +‘erected a stage on beams (or posts) of moderate size’, has already +been quoted.[469] It is true that Horace is often inaccurate in his +description of the early Greek drama. It may be contended, therefore, +that his account of the reforms of Aeschylus is only of doubtful +authority. But one thing is certain, that Horace, in describing the +development of the Greek theatre, would never have mentioned the +erection of a stage, unless a stage had been a regular part of the +Greek theatres of his own day. Dörpfeld, in dealing with this passage, +offers two alternatives. He first suggests that ‘pulpitum’ means the +‘stage-buildings’. But he cites no authority for such a meaning, and +none is to be found. The word ‘pulpitum’ in Latin always means a stage +or platform. Then, if the first alternative seems unsatisfactory, he +suggests that Horace has made a slip, and that he was confusing the Greek +stage with the Roman.[470] But Horace, as we know, was for a long time +in Athens, and must have often seen Greek plays performed. It is hardly +conceivable, therefore, that he should have made a mistake on such a +simple matter as the presence or absence of a stage. + +To turn next to the archaeological evidence. Excavations have brought to +light several facts which bear closely upon this subject of the stage. +The evidence derived from this source appears to be even more fatal to +the new theory than the literary testimony. One of the most convincing +proofs is that afforded by the structure of the stage-buildings at +Sicyon, Eretria, and Oropus.[471] We have seen that, according to +Dörpfeld’s view, the proscenium was the background, and the action of the +drama took place in front of it, in the orchestra. Obviously, if this +was so, the most important part of the stage-buildings must have been +the rooms immediately behind the proscenium, or in other words, behind +the back-scene. Now what do we find at Sicyon? We find that one-third of +the space behind the proscenium consisted of solid rock. The Sicyonians, +in order to save the expense of erecting a lofty auditorium, excavated +their theatre out of the rock to a depth of about twelve feet. But +they attached so little importance to the rooms behind the proscenium, +that they did not take the trouble to excavate the whole of this part. +They left one-third of it as it was. It was only when they came to the +first floor of the stage-building, the floor on a level with the top of +the proscenium, that they provided clear room from end to end of the +structure. Their conduct, on Dörpfeld’s theory, was very peculiar.[472] +But the people of Eretria acted in a still stranger manner. They too +excavated their theatre out of the rock. But they left the whole of the +space behind the proscenium unexcavated. Consequently at Eretria the +ground-floor of the stage-buildings was on a level, not with the floor +of the orchestra, but with the top of the proscenium. There could hardly +be a more decisive proof that at Eretria the actors appeared, not in +front of the proscenium, but on the top of it. Then there is the case +of Oropus. Here the stage-buildings were built upon the ground, and +the rooms behind the proscenium were originally open from end to end. +But later on the Oropians proceeded to fill up the greater part of the +space with earth, and left only a narrow passage immediately behind the +proscenium. Such conduct is irreconcilable with the supposition that the +proscenium was the back-scene.[473] + +Another proof is afforded by the height of the proscenium. The normal +height, as already shown, was about twelve feet. But some proscenia, such +as those at Athens and the Peiraeeus, were as much as thirteen feet. +On the other hand others were considerably less. That of Oropus, for +instance, was only about eight feet high; and the columns which supported +the entablature were only six feet six inches.[474] On Dörpfeld’s view +these proscenia, with their architectural front, represented the palace +or other building before which the action took place. What then are we to +think of a palace about fifty feet long, and only eight feet in height? +The background at Oropus during the performance of a tragedy must have +been a most peculiar one. We should remember that the Greek tragic actor +walked upon ‘cothurni’, which added about six inches to his stature. He +also wore a mask with a lofty ‘onkos’, which raised his height by another +six inches. Consequently the Greek tragic actor, when equipped for the +stage, can hardly have stood less than about six feet six. This being so, +if Dörpfeld’s view is correct, it follows that the actor who took the +part of the king at Oropus must have been just about the same height as +the columns which supported the roof of his own palace. When he made his +entrance through the central door of the palace, he would have to bend +his head, in order to avoid knocking it against the cross-beams. Surely +the theory is a weak one which involves such ridiculous consequences. If +the Greeks had adopted a background of this absurdly diminutive height, +without any reason for doing so, this fact alone would have been strange +enough. But it must appear stranger still that, having once adopted it, +they should proceed to add about twelve inches to the stature of their +actors, in order to make the disproportion between the size of the actors +and the size of the palace still more preposterous.[475] + +The reason which Dörpfeld gives for the lowness of the proscenium—the +background, as he calls it—is as follows. He says that such proscenia +were first erected at Athens in the fifth century, and were intended to +represent an ordinary house of that period. But the ordinary Athenian +house of the fifth century was, he asserts, about twelve feet high.[476] +To this theory there are several answers. In the first place, as we +have seen, some proscenia were only about eight or nine feet in height; +which is far lower than any ordinary Greek house, either at Athens or +elsewhere. In the second place there is no clear evidence to show that +the Athenian house of the fifth century was twelve feet high. From the +remains lately discovered at Delos it appears that in the better class +of houses there even the first story was more than twelve feet.[477] +But granting, for the sake of argument, that an Athenian house of the +fifth century was of the size which Dörpfeld supposes, it is difficult +to see what this has got to do with the height of the scenic background. +The Athenian theatre, we should remember, was developed originally as +a place for tragedy rather than as a place for comedy. The background +therefore must have been intended to represent, in most cases, a palace +or a temple. But why should this palace or temple have been made the same +height as an ordinary house? Moreover, the proportions must have appeared +extraordinary. A structure about fifty feet long, and twelve feet high, +would be altogether unlike any palace or temple. Dörpfeld replies to +this that it is impossible on the stage to represent buildings as large +as they really are; that in modern scene-paintings the representations +of palaces and temples are much reduced in size as compared with the +originals.[478] This is quite true. But they are reduced to scale, and +in a proper proportion. A modern scene-painter, in representing St. +Paul’s, would no doubt have to make his representation much smaller than +the actual St. Paul’s. But in diminishing the height he would diminish +the width at the same time. No modern scene-painter would produce a +temple fifty feet long and twelve feet high; nor can we suppose that the +ancients would have put up with a similar disproportion. + +Again, there is the question as to the doors in the proscenium. If it was +the background, it ought to have had three doors, the usual number in +a Greek back-scene, as Pollux and Vitruvius tell us. But in most of the +proscenia discovered there is only one door. In two of the proscenia, +those at Megalopolis and Thespiae, there is no door of any kind. Even the +single door, when it is found, is very narrow for the central door of +the back-scene. At Epidaurus it is only four feet wide, at Oropus only 3 +feet 8 inches, at Delos only 3 feet 3 inches.[479] A door so narrow as +this would be altogether unsuitable as the central door of the palace, +and quite inconsistent with the use of the ekkyklema. When we come to +the Graeco-Roman theatres, where the wall at the back of the stage has +in many cases been preserved, there we find everything corresponding +closely with the descriptions of the grammarians. There is always the +requisite number of doors, and the central door is of considerable width. +At Termessos it is about seven feet.[480] As regards the absence of the +three doors in the proscenium Dörpfeld gives the following explanation. +These Hellenistic proscenia, as we see from the remains, consisted of +an entablature resting on columns. The spaces between the columns were +filled in with wooden boards. Dörpfeld suggests that when doors were +required they might be provided _ad libitum_ by removing the intervening +boards.[481] But if three doors were regularly required in the dramatic +performances, it is most improbable that they should not have been +provided as a permanent fixture in the proscenium. It is most improbable +that the Greeks should have put themselves to the trouble of opening +out these temporary doors at each festival. In any case we can hardly +doubt that, if the proscenium had been the back-scene, the Greeks would +always have provided at least one permanent door, and would not, as at +Megalopolis and Thespiae, have erected proscenia in which there was no +door of any kind. The absence of a door in these two places seems to +prove conclusively that communication between the orchestra and the +space behind the proscenium was a matter of no importance. + +[Illustration: FIG. 13.] + +Another piece of archaeological evidence is supplied by the +vase-paintings found in the Greek cities of South Italy.[482] Two +specimens are here inserted.[483] These paintings, which have already +been briefly referred to, belong to the third century B.C. They represent +comic scenes acted by the Phlyakes. The Phlyakes were a sort of farcical +comedians, whose performances were not unlike those of the oldest Attic +comedy. In many of these paintings they are represented as acting on a +stage.[484] The stage, in most cases, is obviously made of wood, and +varies in character from a rude and simple platform to an erection +of some solidity. In one or two instances, however, it is a tall and +elaborate structure, apparently built of stone, and adorned with columns +in front, just like the proscenia we have been discussing.[485] Often +there is a flight of steps leading down to the orchestra.[486] In one +case the action is taking place partly on the stage and partly in the +orchestra. One of the actors is represented as actually ascending the +steps to the stage.[487] This evidence seems to prove beyond a doubt +that in the Greek cities of South Italy, during the third century B.C., +performances were sometimes given in theatres with a tall stage, and +that both stage and orchestra were employed for the purpose, and were +connected by steps. + +[Illustration: FIG. 14.] + +Dörpfeld now admits that this was the case. But he contends that the +arrangement was an exceptional one, intended only for the farces of the +Phlyakes. For these performances, he allows, wooden stages were erected, +and the exhibition took place partly on the stage and partly in the +orchestra. But the regular dramas—the tragedies, and the comedies—were +performed solely in the orchestra.[488] All this, however, is the purest +assumption.[489] There is not a particle of evidence to support it. It +is altogether improbable that a different arrangement should have been +adopted in the case of these farces, and in the case of the regular +drama. Besides this, as we have already pointed out, in one or two of the +paintings the stage on which the Phlyakes are performing is apparently +a permanent stone erection, and not a mere temporary platform of wood. +It seems certain, therefore, that the Greeks of South Italy during the +third century B.C. provided a stage for their actors in all dramatic +performances; and, this being so, we can hardly doubt that the same was +the case in Greece generally. + +One or two further objections to the new theory may be briefly mentioned. +If we look at the plan of the theatre at Epidaurus (Figs. 6 and 7), it +will be found that the stone border of the circular orchestra reaches to +within two or three feet of the proscenium. If the actors had performed +in front of the proscenium, they would have been sometimes inside the +stone border, and sometimes outside of it; and the whole arrangement +strikes one as awkward and unsymmetrical. Again, in the theatre at Delos +(Fig. 12), statues and other votive offerings were erected immediately in +front of the columns of the proscenium. The bases on which they rested +still remain.[490] But, if the proscenium had been the background, it +is difficult to suppose that this place would have been chosen for such +erections. When the proscenium was uncovered by scenery, and represented +an ancient palace, these votive offerings and statues would have been +altogether inappropriate as a part of the back-scene. When painted +decorations were to be set up, they would have formed an inconvenient +obstacle in the way of the mechanical arrangements. And if they were +required to serve as scenery, why were they only employed at Delos? The +probability therefore is that they were a mere architectural decoration +of the stage-front.[491] + +We have now gone through the principal arguments, literary and +archaeological, which demonstrate the existence of a stage during the +Hellenistic period. It remains to consider the reasons which induce +Dörpfeld, in spite of this apparently overwhelming evidence, to deny the +existence of such a stage. And in judging this question we must remember +the fact already mentioned, that the chorus, at this time, had ceased +to take an active share in the play, and that its functions were hardly +more important than those of a band of musicians in a modern theatre. +To turn now to Dörpfeld’s reasons. He says, in the first place, that +these proscenia of the Vitruvian type would have been too narrow for +the performance of a play.[492] But their narrowness has often been +exaggerated, owing to inaccurate calculations. None of them, as it now +appears, were less than from nine to ten feet in depth.[493] But a stage +about ten feet deep, and from fifty to sixty feet long, would be amply +sufficient for the performance of a Greek play, when the chorus was +confined to the orchestra. The fact has been proved by actual experiment. +Most English scholars have probably seen the Greek plays produced in the +open-air theatre at Bradfield. The stage there is only ten feet deep and +thirty feet long. Yet every one who has been present at one of these +performances must admit that there was plenty of room upon the stage. +I am informed that on one occasion, in the funeral procession in the +Alcestis, as many as sixty people were brought upon the stage at the same +time, and without any inconvenient crowding.[494] It is clear then that +the Vitruvian stage, which was just as deep and twice as long as that +at Bradfield, would have been large enough to accommodate the chorus as +well as the actors in an ancient Greek drama, and would have been more +than large enough for the performance of a play in which the chorus was +practically confined to the orchestra. + +Dörpfeld further objects that these Hellenistic proscenia were too high +to have served as a stage, since the spectators in the front rows would +have been too far below the actors to see the latter properly.[495] It +is only in the Asiatic theatres, where the front seats of the auditorium +were raised so as to give a good view of the actors, that he will allow +that the actors appeared on the high stage; in such cases the height of +the seats would make a ten-foot stage virtually equivalent to a five-foot +one, such as the Romans employed. But in the first place, we find that at +Mantinea also the lowest seats were raised four feet above the orchestra, +so that this is not a peculiarity of Asiatic theatres.[496] In the +second place, if these proscenia were too high for a stage, they would +have been much too low for a background. Their height varied from eight +to thirteen feet; and a stage of thirteen feet would be far less of an +anomaly than a back-scene of eight feet. Further, it has been shown by +Maass[497] that the height of the proscenium varies very regularly with +the distance of the proscenium from the central point of the circle of +the auditorium. The nearer this point, the lower the stage. The object +of this can only have been to accommodate the height of the stage to the +view of the audience. It would be inexplicable unless the actors were on +the top of the proscenium. It seems also to be proved that in most cases +the greater part of the actor’s person would easily be visible from the +greater number of seats,[498] including the lowest or front rows. When it +was necessary, as it was through the greater part of the fifth century, +for chorus and actors to communicate more or less intimately with one +another, the stage was lower, and the view from some seats therefore +less good; but when the chorus ceased to take a share in the dialogue, it +became both possible and natural to raise the height of the stage and so +improve the view. + +Another objection of Dörpfeld’s is that in the existing proscenia there +is no trace of any means of communication between the stage and the +orchestra.[499] But we have shown that such communication was seldom +required at this time, owing to the insignificance of the chorus; and +that, when it was wanted, it was supplied by temporary wooden steps. +Dörpfeld replies that, if the stage was thirteen feet high, the steps +must have been so large as to project a long way into the orchestra, and +produce an unsightly appearance. But this result could have been avoided +without difficulty. Where the stage was exceptionally lofty, the steps +might have been placed in a parallel line to it. At Tralles, where there +is a proscenium of the Graeco-Roman type, and nearly ten feet high, such +steps are actually found, lying parallel to the stage, and on each side +of the door which leads out from the front wall of the stage into the +orchestra.[500] A similar arrangement might easily have been adopted, +when necessary, in the Hellenistic theatres. + +In support of his theory Dörpfeld brings forward an argument based on +the theatre at Megalopolis (Fig. 11). We have already described the +peculiar construction of this theatre, in which the Thersilion took the +place of the ordinary stage-buildings. In front of the Thersilion, and +twenty-four feet distant from it, is the foundation-wall of a wooden +proscenium. This proscenium, however, appears to have been of later date +than the original theatre. Dörpfeld supposes that, before its erection, +the actors performed their parts immediately in front of the Thersilion, +and on the level of the orchestra. He bases his belief on the following +grounds. The façade of the Thersilion rested on a flight of five steps, +each about thirteen inches high. To one side of the Thersilion was +a building, apparently called the Skanotheka, and probably used for +storing the scenic decorations. In this building are the remains of a low +wall, running in the same straight line as the bottom of the flight of +steps, and about the same length as the stage must have been. Dörpfeld +supposes that this wall was used, in the original state of the theatre, +for working a ‘scaena ductilis’. He supposes that, when dramas were to +be performed, a wooden scene-painting was pushed out along this wall +immediately in front of the lowest step of the Thersilion, and served as +a background. The actors in front of it must have been on the floor of +the orchestra.[501] But this arrangement appears to be impossible. If +the back-scene had been placed in the position he supposes, immediately +in front of the steep flight of steps, the representation of dramas +would have been little short of ridiculous. The actor entering from +the back-scene would have had to come down these steps to reach the +threshold of the door. At first little more than his legs would have been +seen, at any rate by the spectators in the upper part of the theatre. +His whole person would hardly have become visible until he reached the +lowest step. For a tragic actor to make his entrance in this way would +have been far from dignified. Also, in plays like the Hippolytus and +the Alcestis, when a sick woman on a couch had to be carried out, it +would have been extremely awkward to have to carry her down a flight of +steps as steep as those at Megalopolis. The ekkyklema would, of course, +have been quite impossible to work. Again, it seems certain that the +supposed ‘scaena ductilis’ would itself be quite unworkable. Is it likely +that a huge painted board, more than a hundred feet long and more than +twenty-five feet high, was pulled out in front of the Thersilion to +serve as a back-scene? The ‘scaena ductilis’ (cf. Serv. ad Verg. Georg. +iii. 24), which Dörpfeld thinks was such as has been described, was +not a contrivance of this sort, but was a small affair, a variety of +the ‘scaena versilis’ or periaktos; it was drawn _apart_, to disclose +a new scene behind, and was not drawn across the stage. Moreover, the +construction of ancient theatres, even of those with side-wings, shows +that there was no room and no opportunity for the hauling to and fro +of huge boards such as Dörpfeld imagines. It is true that much remains +obscure in regard to the theatre at Megalopolis; but this solution at +least is out of the question.[502] Although, therefore, the Skanotheka at +Megalopolis may very likely have been used for the storage of scenery, +it is clear that this scenery, when used, cannot have been put up in the +place which Dörpfeld suggests. + +Another argument against the ordinary theory is based by Dörpfeld on the +remains of the theatre at Delos (Fig. 12). We have shown that at Delos +the proscenium was continued, though in a different form, round the sides +and back of the stage-buildings.[503] Dörpfeld argues that it cannot +have been a stage, as it would be absurd to erect a stage all round the +stage-buildings.[504] If this is so, we might reply that it cannot have +been a background either, since it would be equally absurd to construct a +background in the same position. But as a matter of fact there is nothing +in the arrangement at Delos which conflicts in any way with the ordinary +opinion about the Greek stage. The erection at the sides and the back of +the stage-buildings, though of the same height as the erection in front, +was different in structure, and formed an open portico. The erection +in front was like the usual Hellenistic proscenium, and must have been +designed for the same purpose. If the proscenium in other theatres was +intended for a stage, it must have been intended for a stage at Delos. + +Dörpfeld has a theory about the origin of the Roman stage, which he +brings forward as a strong argument in favour of his other views. +According to Vitruvius the Roman stage was developed out of the Greek. +The difference in size was due to the following reasons. The Romans +preferred to give up the orchestra to the spectators and to transfer +all performances to the stage. It was necessary, therefore, to deepen +the stage, in order to find room for the additional performers. It was +also necessary to lower it, in order to allow the spectators in the +orchestra to have a clear view.[505] Dörpfeld says that this account of +the matter is erroneous. According to his theory the Roman stage was +discovered by accident rather than by design. The Romans, when they +first began to adapt the Greek theatre to their own purposes, found +the orchestra too large, and consequently divided it in two. The half +nearest the auditorium they dug out to a depth of five feet, and placed +spectators there. The other half they used for theatrical and other +performances, just as it had been used by the Greeks. In this way they +found that they had got what was practically a stage five feet high; and +for the future, instead of digging out the nearer half of the orchestra, +they started on the level, and built a raised stage. The Roman stage +therefore represents, not the Greek proscenium, but the further half of +the Greek orchestra; and this fact proves that it was in the orchestra +that the Greek actors performed.[506] This theory is no doubt extremely +ingenious. But unfortunately it appears to be inconsistent with the facts +of the case. If it was true, we should expect to find the stage in all +Roman theatres occupying the site of one half of the Greek orchestra, +and the back of the Roman stage corresponding to the front of the Greek +proscenium. Now in the normal Roman theatre this is more or less the +case. The Romans eventually reduced their orchestra to a semicircle, +and brought their stage forward to the position described by Dörpfeld. +But the Graeco-Roman theatres of Asia Minor, to which we have already +referred, fail entirely to correspond to his hypothesis. These theatres +were among the earliest to be built in the Roman fashion, and might +therefore be expected, more than any others, to exemplify the process +of transition which he describes. But what do we find? We find that the +stage, so far from occupying one half of the orchestra, stands in exactly +the same position as the old Greek proscenium. The orchestra in these +theatres still forms nearly a complete circle. The stage is deepened by +pushing the back-scene more into the rear. Further than this, the height +of the stage is not five feet, as it ought to be, but from eight to nine +feet.[507] These examples seem to prove that Vitruvius is more correct +than Dörpfeld in his view of the matter; and that the Roman stage was +really a modification of the Greek. When we find in these Asia Minor +theatres a Roman stage standing in exactly the same position as the +proscenium in the Greek theatres, and differing only in being longer and +deeper, and two or three feet lower, we can hardly resist the conclusion +that the Greek proscenium was the prototype of the Roman, and that it was +intended for the same purpose. + +The proscenium in a Greek theatre was called, among other names, the +‘logeion’ or ‘speaking-place’. It is so called by Vitruvius, and the word +‘logeion’ occurs in Delian inscriptions as early as the third century +B.C.[508]. This being so, we are naturally led to ask how this fact +is to be reconciled with Dörpfeld’s theory. If the proscenium was the +background, and not the stage, why should it have been called ‘logeion’ +or the speaking-place? Dörpfeld gives the following answer. He says +that in Greek tragedies the gods, when exhibited in a supernatural +manner, used to make their appearance on the palace roof, or, in +other words, on the proscenium; and that it was therefore called the +‘theologeion’, or for shortness the ‘logeion’.[509] But this statement +will not bear examination. The usual device for revealing gods in +supernatural splendour was the mechane, and not the theologeion. Even +when the theologeion was employed, there is no evidence to show that it +was identical with the palace roof.[510] The contrivance for enabling +actors to stand on the roof of a palace or other building was called the +‘distegia’. Instances of its employment are rare. In the extant dramas +there are only eight or nine certain examples.[511] If, therefore, the +proscenium really represented the building in the background, the top +of it cannot have been called the ‘speaking-place’ because the actors +spoke from it. Eight or nine instances out of forty-four dramas are +insufficient to justify us in regarding it as a regular speaking-place. +The plain statement of Vitruvius, that the ‘pulpitum’ of the actors was +in Greek called ‘logeion’, Dörpfeld attempts to get round by supposing +that the place which had been the ‘theologeion’, or, more shortly, +‘logeion’—the speaking-place of gods—retained its name by a natural +conservatism when employed by actors. This is ingenious; but it is surely +far more natural to suppose that it was called ‘logeion’ all along +because it was the regular speaking-place for all actors, and not only +for occasional gods.[512] + +We have now considered the principal arguments which can be brought +forward on either side concerning this stage question, as far as it +relates to the later period. Some minor points have been omitted; but +they would not affect the question very much either way. The result +appears to show that, at any rate as far as the later period is +concerned, the evidence in favour of a stage altogether outweighs any +considerations which can be adduced on the other side. + +2. THE EARLIER STAGE. We now come to the earlier and more important +period, the period of the fifth century, when the drama was still in +reality a choral drama, and the fourth century, during which the chorus +was rapidly declining in importance, but was still commonly employed. + +For the fourth century we have the testimony of Aristotle. Aristotle in +many places speaks of the songs of the actors as τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς, in +opposition to the songs of the chorus, τὰ τοῦ χοροῦ.[513] Further he +speaks of the actor’s part as being played ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς.[514] According +to the usual interpretation of these passages, he means that the actors +played their part ‘upon the stage’, and sang their songs ‘from the +stage’. Dörpfeld, however, proposes in these cases to translate the word +σκηνή as the ‘background’, and not as the ‘stage’. He supposes Aristotle +to mean that the actors performed ‘at the background’, and sang their +songs ‘from the background’. He denies that the two expressions imply the +existence of a stage.[515] Now the translations which he suggests may be +possible, as far as the Greek is concerned. But it is very difficult +to believe that they are the right translations in these particular +passages of Aristotle. Aristotle’s words seem to clearly imply that +there was some essential and conspicuous difference between the position +of the actors and that of the chorus.[516] But if, as Dörpfeld thinks, +they all performed together in the orchestra, there would be no such +distinguishing mark. It is true that the actors might, for the most part, +be rather nearer to the stage-buildings; and the chorus might, for the +most part, be rather more distant from them. But practically they would +be standing in the same place; there would be no pronounced difference. +Aristotle’s words appear to be explicable only on the supposition that +the actors appeared upon a stage, the chorus in the orchestra. + +For the fifth century we have the evidence supplied by the use of certain +words in Aristophanes. In three places, where an actor is approaching +the back-scene, he is said to ‘mount up’ (ἀναβαίνειν).[517] In two +other places, where he is leaving the back-scene, he is said to ‘go +down’ (καταβαίνειν).[518] In all these passages there is nothing in the +circumstances of the drama to suggest that the action was taking place +on raised ground. The expressions can only refer, as the scholiast says, +to the stage. It has been proposed to translate the two words as ‘come +on’ and ‘depart’ respectively.[519] But such a usage of the terms is +otherwise unknown in Greek. Moreover, in one place—the scene in the +Knights—this translation is proved to be impossible. Here Demosthenes +calls out to the sausage-seller, ‘mount up here’ (ἀνάβαινε δεῦρο). He +then shows him the people, the markets, and the harbours; and tells +him that he will be lord of all. But this is not enough. He says, ‘you +have not seen all yet’, and bids him ‘mount up on to this table also’; +and then proceeds to show him the islands round about.[520] These words +show conclusively that ἀναβαίνειν must mean ‘mount up’ in the previous +passage, and likewise determine the meaning of this word, and of +καταβαίνειν, in the parallel passages. + +The extant dramas have been carefully ransacked during the last few +years,[521] and it is not likely that many new points will now be +discovered. Much of the evidence that has been brought forward on +both sides of the question is really of little value. It depends upon +a too scrupulous and literal interpretation of the text, or upon a +forgetfulness of the fact that there is much that is conventional in all +dramatic performances. For instance, when old men are approaching the +palace, and complain of the steepness of the way, this fact is supposed +to be a proof of the existence of a stage.[522] It is suggested that +they enter by the orchestra, and that the ascent of which they complain +is the ascent on to the stage. But, if this was so, these old men must +have timed their entrance very exactly, so as to reach the foot of the +stage just when they came to the verses in which they began to grumble +about the ascent. And this, combined with the obvious inadequacy of the +ascent on to the stage to represent a really fatiguing road, would make +the whole proceeding rather ludicrous. It seems more natural to assume +that their remarks had no reference to the stage, and that the steepness +of which they complain was left to the imagination of the spectators. +Then again, the appearances of ghosts and spectres are cited as evidence +in favour of a stage. It is said that they could not be made to appear +from underground, unless there was a raised platform out of which they +ascended. Now there is no doubt that in the later theatre ghosts were +made to arise from beneath the earth. Pollux gives a description of the +mechanism by which it was done. But there is no certain proof that they +made their appearance in this way during the fifth century. It would be +unsafe, therefore, to infer anything from these spectral apparitions +concerning the structure of the early theatre. Again, there are those +scenes in which the chorus might be expected to enter the palace, but +fail to do so. For instance, when Medea’s children are being murdered, +and call out for help, the chorus, after proposing to rush to their +assistance, eventually remain where they are and sing an ode.[523] But it +is unnecessary, in this and in similar cases, to explain their inaction +by supposing that there was any difficulty in passing from the orchestra +to the palace because of the stage which lay between. A sufficient reason +is to be found in the fact that, if they had gone into the palace, the +scene of action would have been left empty. + +It will be best to disregard all evidence of this inconclusive kind, and +to confine our attention to those points which really throw light upon +the question as to the relative position of actors and chorus during the +fifth century. The following facts seem to be established. It is evident +that the chorus sometimes entered and sometimes departed through the +back-scene. Instances are not very common; there are only about six in +the extant dramas.[524] Still, they undoubtedly occur. It is evident, +too, that the actors sometimes entered by the orchestra. They must have +done so when they entered along with the chorus, and they probably did +so when they entered in chariots or wagons.[525] This gives us about +seven instances where the actors came in by the orchestra. They may have +done so much more frequently. This is a point which will be considered +later on. But these seven cases are the only ones for which there is +any convincing evidence. On the other hand, it was a common thing for +actors and chorus to depart together through the orchestra. Many plays +end in this way, such as the Eumenides and the Septem. In Aristophanes +it is a favourite form of conclusion for actors and chorus to go off +through the orchestra in a joyful procession.[526] The general result +then is this, that it was plainly permissible in the fifth century for +the chorus to enter or leave by the back-scene, and for the actors to +enter or leave by the orchestra; though the last of these practices is +the only one of which there are many certain examples. But when we pass +on from these entrances and exits, and look at the rest of the play, we +find that it is very unusual, during the course of the action, for the +chorus to come on the stage, or for the actors to go into the orchestra. +The instances in which, apart from entrances and exits, the actors and +the chorus can be shown to have come into close physical contact with +one another, are remarkably few. We may mention, as examples, the scene +in which the chorus tries to prevent Creon from seizing Antigone, and +the scene where the farmers mount the stage to draw the statue of Peace +out of the well. Opinions may differ as to individual cases, but the +total number of instances of this kind does not amount, at the outside, +to more than about fifteen.[527] The conclusion we may draw from this +evidence is as follows. There was nothing in the fifth century theatre to +prevent the actors from moving into the place occupied by the chorus, and +there was nothing to prevent the chorus moving into the place occupied +by the actors. But, except when they were entering or leaving the scene +of action, they do not appear to have done so usually, but to have kept +apart from one another. + +What then does all this prove as regards the stage? On the one hand, it +proves conclusively that the stage of the fifth century cannot have been +as high as the ordinary later or Hellenistic stage. If the fifth-century +stage had been twelve feet above the level of the orchestra, there would +have been the greatest awkwardness in actors and chorus passing from +one place to the other. But, on the other hand, it does not in any way +exclude the possibility of there having been a stage of some kind or +another. If we suppose that the fifth-century stage was lower and deeper +than that of later times, and that it was connected with the orchestra +by a long flight of steps, or by a sloping ascent, all difficulties +about the performance of the extant dramas disappear. Actors and chorus +could easily pass from stage to orchestra, or vice versa. The fact that +they so seldom came into contact with one another, except when entering +or leaving the theatre, is a strong confirmation of the view that there +was a stage of some kind, and that it was reserved in most cases for the +actors, while the usual place for the chorus was in the orchestra. + +The main reason for the employment of a stage must have been to make the +actors clearly visible to the audience, and to prevent the view of them +being impeded by the chorus in the orchestra. A few feet of elevation +would be sufficient to produce this result. Dörpfeld, it is true, denies +that any such precaution was necessary. He denies that the actors, even +without a stage, would have been hidden from view by the chorus.[528] +But if we look at the plan of a Greek theatre, it is clear that if the +actors were in the orchestra, and the chorus stood in front of them, the +chorus must have obstructed the view of a great many of the spectators. +In fact we have ancient testimony to that effect. The tragic chorus stood +in three rows. We are told that the worst and most ungainly choristers +(the ‘laurostatae’, as they were called) were placed in the middle +row, because they were not clearly seen by the spectators.[529] But, +however the chorus stood, there could only have been _one_ row between +these ‘laurostatae’ and the audience. If, then, the actors had been in +the orchestra, with _three_ rows of choristers in front of them, the +obstruction to the view would obviously have been very much greater. +And it is important to remember that the spectators who would have +suffered most by this arrangement would have been the occupants of the +lowest tiers of seats. Now these seats were reserved as seats of honour, +and were confined to high officials and distinguished citizens. Hence, +if Dörpfeld’s theory is correct, the distinction which the Athenians +bestowed upon their leading citizens cannot have been one of very much +value. The benches which they assigned to them must have been the worst +seats for view in the whole theatre.[530] + +Dörpfeld further objects that, if we suppose a low stage at Athens in the +fifth century, the history of the Greek stage becomes a very fantastic +and peculiar affair. We have first a stage of five or six feet, then in +the next period it rises to about twelve feet, then later on in the Roman +period it suddenly drops to five again. His own theory, he says, is much +simpler. There was no stage at all till the Roman period, and then a +stage of five feet was erected.[531] But the figures given by Dörpfeld +are quite fallacious. There was no sudden rise and fall of the kind he +describes. We have no means of determining the exact height of the stage +during the fifth century. But when we come to the later period we find +that it was not fixed at twelve feet, but varied from eight to thirteen. +There was no settled rule. Architects naturally tried new experiments. +Different heights were adopted in different places. Probably there was +just the same variety and love of experiment in the early period. Again, +when we come to the Roman period, we do not find that the height of the +stage was suddenly fixed at five feet. In many places it was as much as +eight or nine. Wherever we look in the history of the Greek theatre, we +perceive a gradual transition from one type of stage to another; and the +reasons for the successive changes are generally to be explained by the +varying circumstances of the contemporary drama. + +The archaeological evidence on the subject of the early stage has already +been discussed.[532] Unfortunately it amounts to very little. The oldest +stage-buildings, being made of wood, have disappeared without leaving +any trace behind them. However, such evidence as can be obtained tends +to confirm the testimony of the dramas themselves, and to show that the +stage of the fifth century was lower and deeper than that of subsequent +times. There is also this point to be taken into consideration. The +existence of a lofty stage during the Hellenistic period and perhaps +from the fourth century onwards appears to be now proved by irresistible +testimony. This being so, it is altogether improbable on general grounds +that there should have been no stage at all during the preceding period. +To suppose that the Greeks began without any stage of any kind, and then +after so long a time suddenly erected a stage about twelve feet high, is +a most unlikely hypothesis. But if we imagine that a stage existed from +the first, and that it was a low one in the fifth century, and was then +gradually raised in consequence of the changed character of the drama, +the process becomes much more intelligible. The presence of a stage +during the later period is strong presumptive evidence in favour of an +earlier one.[533] + +The last few years have been prolific in new theories on the subject of +the stage. Most of them may be regarded as developments or modifications +of Dörpfeld’s views. Before leaving this subject it may be well to give +a brief account of the more important of them. Bethe considers that +there can no longer be any doubt as to the existence of the Hellenistic +stage. He also agrees that the passages in Aristophanes prove the use +of a low stage at the time when Aristophanes wrote. But for the greater +part of the fifth century he denies its existence. He considers that +the first Greek stage was erected in 427 or in 426, and that this date +was an important epoch in the development of the theatre. He founds his +belief on the fact that after this date there is no further instance of +the use of the ekkyklema, while before this date there is no example of +the use of the mechane, the theologeion, and the drop-scene.[534] But, +in the first place, it is by no means clear why the presence or absence +of these contrivances should involve the existence or non-existence of +a stage. In the second place, his dates are open to question. There is +no proof, as we shall see later on, that the machinery which he mentions +was introduced or discontinued at the time specified. Another theory has +been put forward by Weissmann. He, too, accepts the Hellenistic stage, +but agrees with Dörpfeld that in the fifth century actors and chorus +performed on the same level. However, he thinks that the passages in +which old men complain of the steepness of the road prove that there must +have been a raised platform which they had to ascend. As one of these +passages—that in the Hercules Furens—is spoken by the chorus, he comes +to the conclusion that there was a large platform for actors and chorus +combined. This platform extended from the back-scene over a considerable +part of the orchestra, and on it stood the actors and chorus, both on +the same level.[535] To this it may be answered, that the evidence on +which he relies is far too slight a justification for such a sweeping +hypothesis. Also on general grounds it is inconceivable that the Greeks, +when they already possessed an orchestra which was admirably adapted +for choral performances, should have taken the trouble to erect a huge +platform on the top of it. Christ agrees in the main with Weissmann. He +accepts the Hellenistic stage for the later period, and also the platform +for the chorus in the orchestra during the fifth century. But he thinks +the passages in Aristophanes prove that the actors even then stood higher +than the chorus. He therefore supposes two stages: one immediately before +the back-scene, for the actors; and another larger and lower one in the +orchestra, for the use of the chorus.[536] He thus eventually comes +round to the same conclusion as Wieseler, though by a very different +process. His theory, however, is open to the same objections as that of +Weissmann. This orchestral platform is utterly improbable in itself, and +is unsupported by any sufficient evidence. Lastly, there is Robert’s +hypothesis. Robert denies the existence of a stage during the fifth +century; but supposes that one was erected in the course of the fourth +century for the performance of new plays, in which there was practically +no chorus. Henceforth new plays were acted on the stage, old plays in +front of it, in the orchestra.[537] But it is impossible to suppose that +in the same theatre, and at the same festival, the proscenium should have +served at one time as a stage, and at another time as a background. Nor +is there anything in the ancient authorities to support such a view. + + +§ 14. _Various Details._ + +To return to the subject of the construction of the theatre in general. +It is obvious that, considering the enormous size of the building, and +the immense numbers of spectators which it was intended to accommodate, +the greatest attention must have been bestowed upon its acoustic +properties. Vitruvius is most emphatic upon the necessity of keeping +this object in view, when choosing a site for a theatre. The situation +against the side of a hill, and the gentle and symmetrical upward slope +of the tiers of seats, are mentioned as qualities by which acoustic +excellence was ensured. The height of the stage-buildings was also of +great importance. It was found that the best results were obtained +by making them exactly the same height as the uppermost parts of the +auditorium.[538] That this was the ordinary practice during the Roman +period is proved by the remains of various theatres, such as those of +Aspendos and Orange. But whether, at any time during the Greek period, +stage-buildings were constructed on this enormous scale is very doubtful. +Another matter on which the ancient architects insisted was the wooden +flooring of the stage, which tended to make the voices of the actors more +audible. When Alexander the Great wished to have a stage built entirely +of bronze, it was pointed out to him that this material would be fatal +from the acoustic point of view.[539] Vitruvius mentions a peculiar +practice which was adopted for the purpose of adding resonance to the +voices of the actors. Hollow vessels of bronze, of different tones, were +suspended in niches in various parts of the auditorium. When a sound was +uttered of the same tone as that of any of the vessels, its resonance +was increased. He states that this custom, though not adopted in Rome, +existed in many Greek and Italian theatres; and that Mummius, after +his capture of Corinth, brought back several of these vessels from the +theatre there.[540] In the remains of the existing theatres no traces are +to be found of the niches he describes. It is probable that the whole +plan was merely an experiment adopted in a few special cases. As far as +Athens was concerned, no such extraneous assistance to the voice was +necessary. Experiments at the present day have shown that the acoustic +properties of the theatre of Dionysus are excellent; and this must have +been still more the case when the stage-buildings were standing. Probably +therefore, in spite of the vast numbers of the audience, the persons in +the back rows could hear the words spoken in the orchestra and upon the +stage much more clearly than might at first have been supposed. + +Another point mentioned by Vitruvius in connexion with the theatre is +the advantage of erecting porticoes in the rear of the stage-buildings, +to serve as a shelter for the people in case of a sudden shower of rain, +and also for the convenience of the choregi. He adds that at Athens +there were three buildings close to the theatre, which served admirably +for this purpose. These were the Odeion, the temple of Dionysus, and +the Portico of Eumenes.[541] The Odeion here referred to was that built +by Pericles, which probably stood on the eastern side of the theatre, +though its exact site has not yet been determined with certainty.[542] +The temple of Dionysus mentioned by Vitruvius is apparently the older +of the two temples, marked _t_ in the plan, and lying to the south-west +of the stage-buildings. The Portico of Eumenes is supposed to have been +built by Eumenes II, in the beginning of the second century, and it is +thought that traces of it are to be found stretching westwards from the +theatre.[543] Immediately to the south of the stage-buildings are the +foundations of a long rectangular erection, belonging to the same date as +the stage-buildings themselves, and marked _s_ in the plan. This erection +was no doubt a portico, built in the fourth century for the purpose +described by Vitruvius. In the theatre itself there was no protection for +the general mass of the people either from the sun or from the rain. The +huge canvas awnings, suspended upon masts, which the Latin writers refer +to, were an invention of the Italians, and were only adopted in Greek +theatres at a very late period.[544] + +The interior of the theatre at Athens was decorated with the statues +of various public persons, some distinguished, others not. In the +time of Lycurgus bronze statues were erected in honour of Aeschylus, +Sophocles, and Euripides.[545] Pausanias mentions that in his time +there were several statues of dramatic poets in the theatre, but, with +the exception of Sophocles, Euripides, and Menander, they were all +very obscure individuals.[546] The base of Menander’s statue, with an +inscription recording his name and the name of the sculptor, has been +discovered near the western parodos. Its original site, however, is +unknown.[547] Astydamas, the tragic poet, was voted a statue in the +theatre on account of the excellence of his tragedy called Parthenopaeus. +He wrote an epigram to be inscribed upon the base, regretting that +he had not been born in the time of the great tragic writers, so as +to be able to compete with worthy antagonists. The Athenians were so +disgusted with his conceit, that they refused to allow the epigram to be +inscribed, and the expression, ‘to praise one’s self like Astydamas,’ +passed into a proverb.[548] The statue of Astydamas originally stood +at the inside corner of the auditorium on the western side, and there +was probably a corresponding statue on the eastern side.[549] One of +the grammarians says that there were also statues of Themistocles and +Miltiades in the theatre, each with a captured Persian standing beside +him. But his statement is probably a fiction, invented to explain the +passage on which he was commenting, and which he misunderstood.[550] +In later times, it is stated, a statue of Eurycleides the conjuror was +erected in the theatre.[551] It is probable that during the reign of +Hadrian thirteen statues of him were placed in the thirteen different +blocks of the auditorium. The inscriptions on the bases of four of these +statues have been found in the existing remains of the theatre.[552] +In addition to the statues, various votive offerings were erected in +the two side-entrances. Many of the bases were still in their original +position when the theatre was first excavated, but they have now mostly +disappeared. Four of them, however, still remain. One of them supported +the memorial erected by Xenocles in 306, to commemorate his services as +Agonothetes. The other three belong to the Roman period.[553] There were +also various inscriptions and tablets connected with theatrical affairs. +A copy of the decree of the Amphictyonic Council, conferring certain +privileges upon the Athenian actors, was inscribed on stone and put up in +the theatre.[554] Numerous records of dramatic and dithyrambic contests +were erected either in the theatre or in the immediate neighbourhood. +There were lists of the victors in all the competitions at the Lenaea and +the City Dionysia. There were lists of all the tragedies and comedies +ever produced in the theatre at Athens. There were lists of all the poets +and actors who had competed there, with the number of their victories +appended to each name. An account of these various records has already +been given at the end of the first chapter. + +Before concluding this description of the theatre of Dionysus it may +be interesting to give some account of the various other purposes for +which it was used at different times, in addition to its primary object +as a place for dramatic representations and contests of dithyrambic +choruses. The recitations of the rhapsodists, and the competitions +between the harp-players, were also transferred to the same place from +the Odeion, in which they had been held previously.[555] Besides this, +various ceremonies unconnected with art took place in the theatre during +the festivals of Dionysus. Those which took place at the commencement +of the City Dionysia have already been mentioned.[556] The annual +cock-fight in commemoration of the Persian invasion was also held in the +theatre.[557] But the most important of the non-dramatic purposes for +which the theatre came to be used was that of a meeting-place for the +assemblies of the people. In the fifth and fourth centuries the regular +place of assembly was the Pnyx. But already at a very early period +special assemblies used to be held in the theatre after each festival +of Dionysus, to discuss matters connected with the festival.[558] These +semi-religious meetings probably paved the way for the later practice +of holding ordinary meetings there. As early as the year 411, on the +occasion of the overthrow of the Four Hundred, Thucydides mentions that +an assembly of the people was held in the theatre.[559] It was in the +theatre that the meeting was convened which condemned Phocion and his +friends to death in 317 B.C.[560] In 295 Demetrius, after capturing the +city, summoned a gathering of the people in the theatre.[561] These +meetings were all of a special character, and were not regular assemblies +of the people; but they served as precedents for the use of the theatre +for political, as opposed to religious and artistic, purposes. Similarly, +we are told on the authority of Aristotle that the Ephebi received their +shields and spears from the state at assemblies of the people in the +theatre.[562] After the middle of the third century the theatre became +the regular meeting-place. The Pnyx henceforward was only used for +assemblies for the election of magistrates.[563] In this later period +the theatre was also used for various exhibitions which seemed unworthy +of its character as a temple of Dionysus. Sword-swallowers, conjurors, +and exhibitors of puppet-shows are mentioned among the entertainers who +occupied the stage which had formerly been dignified by Euripides.[564] +But the greatest degradation which the theatre at Athens ever suffered +was when, under the influence of Roman custom, it was given up to +gladiatorial combats. This was a pollution which called forth indignant +protests from writers such as Philostratus and Dion Chrysostom.[565] + + + + +CHAPTER IV + +THE SCENERY + + +§ 1. _General Character of the Scenery._ + +In the production of a play the chief objects on which care and money +were bestowed were the training of the chorus, the payment of the +actors, and the supply of suitable dresses. The scenery was never made +a prominent feature of the exhibition. All that was required was an +appropriate background to show off to advantage the figures of the +performers. The simplicity in the character of the ancient scenery +was a necessary result of the peculiar construction of the stage. The +Attic stage, though from sixty to seventy feet long, was apparently +never more than about fifteen feet in depth, and was still further +contracted in after times. On a long and narrow platform of this kind, +any representation of the interior of a building would be out of the +question. All those elaborate spectacular illusions, which are rendered +practicable by the great depth of the modern stage, were impossible. +Nothing more was required than to cover over the wall at the back with a +suitable view. Again, not only were the mechanical arrangements simple, +but the number of scenes in use upon the Attic stage was very limited. +Not only was a change of scene in the course of the same play practically +unknown, but there was often very little difference between one play and +another as regards the character of the scenery required. Each of the +three great branches of the drama had a background of a conventional +type, specially appropriated to itself, and this typical background was +the one usually adopted. When therefore a series of tragedies was being +exhibited, or a series of comedies, it must often have happened that the +same scenery would do duty for several plays in succession. + +The use of painted scenery, natural as it appears to us, was only +invented very gradually by the Athenians. For a long time the erection +at the back of the stage continued to retain its original character. It +was regarded, not as a back-scene, but merely as a retiring-place for the +actors. The notion of covering it over with painted scenery, in such a +way as to make it represent the supposed scene of action in the play, was +a development of comparatively late times. The old drama had no scenic +background. The action was supposed to take place in some open region; +the decorations were confined to such properties as could be put up on +the stage; the wooden hoarding in the rear was nothing more than the +front of the actors’ room. Things were still in this primitive condition +when Aeschylus wrote his four earlier plays. The progress of the art +of scenic decoration can be traced very distinctly by comparing these +plays with his later tragedies. In the first four there is no mention of +any scenery, no clear definition of the exact spot where the action is +taking place. The scenic appliances are limited to properties erected +in front of the hoarding. In the Supplices the scene is laid in an open +district at some distance from the city. In the centre is an altar of +the gods, at which the suppliants take refuge.[566] Otherwise there is a +total absence of local colouring. In the Persae, the next in order of his +plays, the action is also laid at a distance from the palace. The only +object mentioned as actually in sight is the tomb of Darius.[567] In the +Septem the performers are gathered together within the walls of Thebes +beside an altar on some rising ground, from which the towers of the city +are visible.[568] But there is no clear definition of the scene, and no +mention of any palace or other building from which the actors make their +entrance. In the Prometheus the action takes place in a rocky region of +Scythia. But in all probability the cliff to which Prometheus is chained +was merely built up upon the stage. There is nothing in the play to +suggest an elaborate representation of the view. In these four plays the +background was still a bare wall with doors for the actors. It had no +scenic significance. But when we come to the Oresteia, the last dramatic +production of Aeschylus, a great change is noticeable. The scene is +now laid in front of a building which is clearly defined and frequently +referred to. In the first two tragedies it is the palace of Agamemnon at +Argos; in the third it is the temple of Apollo at Delphi, and later on +the temple of Athene at Athens.[569] The contrast between these plays +and the earlier ones, as regards local colour and allusions to the scene +of action, is very marked and conspicuous, and denotes a considerable +advance in the art of mounting a play. The old actors’ booth had now +become a regular scenic background.[570] The bare hoarding was covered +with painting, to represent a palace, or a temple, or whatever else might +be required. This conclusion, which may be deduced from the extant dramas +themselves, is confirmed by the ancient traditions as to the introduction +of scene-painting. Aristotle says it was invented by Sophocles; Vitruvius +apparently ascribes it to Aeschylus.[571] Whichever statement be correct, +it is clear, from the fact of its being attributed to both poets, that +it must have been introduced at that particular period when both were +exhibiting upon the stage. It cannot be placed earlier than the first +appearance of Sophocles in 468, or later than the last appearance of +Aeschylus in 458. Moreover Sophocles, if he really invented it, is +not likely to have done so immediately on his first appearance. The +most probable date, therefore, is some period not very long before the +production of the Oresteia, and subsequent to the production of the four +early plays of Aeschylus. + +By the middle of the fifth century, then, we may regard the use +of painted scenery as fully established. Taking this date as our +starting-point, it will be interesting to consider the question as to +the number and character of the scenes most in use upon the Attic stage. +Our principal authority will be the Greek plays still in existence. +Vitruvius divides scenery into three classes—tragic, comic, and satyric. +According to his description, the salient features in a tragic scene were +columns, pediments, statues, and other signs of regal magnificence. In +comedy the scene represented a private house, with projecting balconies, +and windows looking out upon the stage. The scenery in the satyric drama +consisted of a rustic region, with trees, caverns, mountains, and other +objects of the same kind.[572] The above list is not intended to be an +exhaustive one. It merely describes in general outline the type of scene +which was most characteristic of each of the three great branches of the +drama. At the same time, it is more exhaustive than might at first sight +be supposed. If the extant Greek dramas are examined, it will be found +that in the great majority of cases the scenery conforms to the general +type described by Vitruvius. To take the tragic poets first. Twenty-five +tragedies by Sophocles and Euripides have been preserved. In no less than +seventeen out of the twenty-five the scene is laid in front of a palace +or temple.[573] In all these cases the general character of the scenery +would be exactly such as Vitruvius describes. The prominent feature +would be a magnificent building, with columns, pediments, and statues. +Of the remaining eight tragedies, there are four in which the scene +consists of an encampment, with tents in the background.[574] The other +four all require special scenery. In the Philoctetes the scene is laid +in front of a cavern in a desert island. In the Ajax it is laid partly +before the tent of Ajax, partly in a solitary quarter by the sea-shore. +The background in the Oedipus Coloneus consists of a country region, +with the sacred enclosure of the Eumenides in the centre. Finally, the +Electra of Euripides is altogether exceptional in having its scene laid +before a humble country cottage. On the whole, the evidence of the extant +tragedies tends to confirm the statement of Vitruvius, and exemplifies +the conventional character of Greek tragic scenery. In the great majority +of instances the background would be an imposing pile of buildings, +adorned with various architectural embellishments. As to the satyric +drama, the Cyclops of Euripides is the only specimen of this class of +composition which has been preserved. The scene there corresponds exactly +to the descriptions of Vitruvius, and consists of a country region, with +the cave of Polyphemus in the centre. There can be little doubt that in +most satyric dramas the background was of much the same character. As +the chorus always consisted of satyrs, whose dwelling was in the forest, +the scene of the play would naturally be laid in some deserted country +district. The scene in the New Comedy was almost invariably laid in front +of an ordinary private house, as is proved by the adaptations of Plautus +and Terence. As to the Old Comedy, in six out of the eleven comedies of +Aristophanes, the background consists merely of a house, or of houses +standing side by side.[575] In four others the principal part of the +action takes place before a house. In the Thesmophoriazusae the scene +consists of a house and a temple standing side by side. In the Lysistrata +there is a private house, and near it the entrance to the Acropolis. In +the Acharnians the opening scene takes place in the Pnyx; the rest of the +action is carried on before the houses of Dicaeopolis, Euripides, and +Lamachus. The scene in the Knights is laid partly before the house of +Demos, and partly in the Pnyx. The only comedy in which the scenery is of +an altogether exceptional character is the Birds, in which the background +consists of a wild country region, filled with rocks, and trees, and +bushes. It appears, therefore, that even in the Old Comedy there was not +much variety in the scenery. + +As regards the style of the ancient scene-painting, and the degree +of perfection to which it was eventually brought, it is difficult to +speak with any certainty. But in the fifth century, at any rate, there +can be little doubt that the scenery was of the simplest description. +Landscape-painting was still in its infancy, and altogether subordinated +to the painting of the human figure. When landscapes were introduced into +a picture, they were suggested rather than worked out in detail.[576] +A city was represented by a few houses, a forest by a few trees, and +so on. The paintings for the stage were probably of the same general +type. The scenes most in use were front views of temples, palaces, and +dwelling-houses. In such cases a rough indication of the different +buildings would be considered sufficient. That they were depicted with +any completeness and realism is far from likely, though the newly +discovered art of perspective was undoubtedly applied to architecture and +the painting of architectural scenes much earlier than to landscape.[577] +It is true that the personages in the extant dramas often use words +which seem to imply an elaborate architectural background. They speak +of columns, triglyphs, cornices, and pediments.[578] In the Ion they +even admire in detail the bas-reliefs with which the temple front was +decorated.[579] But it is not certain that the objects mentioned were all +of them actually represented upon the stage. Many of them may have been +left to the imagination. As for natural scenery, there was probably very +little of this in the early theatre. If the action was laid in a country +region, as in the Philoctetes and the Oedipus Coloneus, and in the +generality of satyric plays, the necessary effect might be produced by a +few rocks, and trees, and other similar objects. In later times it was +customary, when the background represented a palace or temple, to insert +a landscape on either side.[580] Even in the plays of the fifth century +there are occasional references to such landscapes. Helen, standing +before the palace of the Egyptian king, points to the ‘streams of the +Nile’ as flowing close by. The old man in the Electra, when he reaches +the palace of the Atreidae, shows Orestes the country round about, with +Argos and Mycenae in the distance. The Trojan captives descry, from the +Greek encampment, the smoke and flames of burning Troy.[581] But here +again we may doubt whether, on the contemporary stage, these places were +really visible to the spectators. At any rate, if they were delineated +at all, it was probably in a slight and symbolical fashion. As time went +on the art of scenic decoration was much improved and elaborated. In +the Hellenistic period it seems to have reached a fairly high degree of +development. Natural phenomena were now depicted with more realism. Seas +and rivers, earth and sky, are mentioned among the objects delineated. +Even regions in Hades and Tartarus were represented upon the stage.[582] +The progress of landscape-painting in general among the later Greeks +naturally produced its effect upon the work of the scenic artists. But it +would be an anachronism to attribute efforts of this ambitious kind to +the contemporaries of Sophocles and Euripides. + +The introduction of magnificent decorations appears to be always a +later development in the history of the drama. On the Elizabethan stage +the back-scene consisted of a bare wall, and anything in the way of +spectacular effect was provided by the movements and groupings of the +actors. To produce an impression by scenic means would have been alien +to the taste of the Athenians of the fifth century. In the dramatic +performances of that period the conspicuous feature was the chorus in +the foreground, with its graceful arrangement and picturesque dresses. +Above the chorus, on the narrow stage, stood the actors and mute figures, +arranged in line, and dressed in brilliant colours. The long scene in +the rear was so far decorated as to form a pleasing background, and show +off the persons of the actors to advantage. But no attempt was made +to produce a realistic landscape, or to convey the ideas of depth and +distance. In its general effect the scene upon the stage resembled a long +frieze or bas-relief, with the figures painted in brilliant colours, +rather than a picture with a distant perspective. + + +§ 2. _Mechanical Arrangements for the Scenery._ + +The scenery consisted of painted curtains or boards, attached to the wall +at the back of the stage.[583] As the mechanical arrangements for fixing +them up have not been described by any of the ancient writers, a detailed +account of the matter is impossible. But some facts can be deduced from +the testimony of the existing dramas. In every Greek play the action +was supposed to take place in the open air. The scene was generally +laid before some building or tent, or in a country district with a rock +or cavern in the background. The upper portion of the painted scene +represented merely the sky, and was probably the same in all dramas. The +lower portion delineated the building or landscape which the particular +play required. It used to be commonly supposed that this lower portion +projected two or three feet in front of the upper; that the back-scene +was not a flat surface from top to bottom, but that a narrow ledge or +platform ran across from wing to wing about half-way up.[584] The object +of this hypothesis was to provide room for the ‘distegia’. The distegia +was a contrivance which enabled actors to take their stand upon the roof +of a palace or private house.[585] Eight or nine instances of its use are +to be found in the existing Greek plays. Thus the Agamemnon of Aeschylus +opens with the watchman sitting upon the roof of the palace at Argos, and +waiting for the beacon’s signal. In the Phoenissae of Euripides Antigone +and the attendant mount upon the roof to get a view of the army encamped +outside the city. In the concluding scene of the Orestes Hermione, +Orestes, and Pylades are seen standing upon the roof of the palace. +Examples also occur in comedy. In the Acharnians the wife of Dicaeopolis +views the procession from the roof of the house. At the commencement of +the Wasps Bdelycleon is seen sleeping upon the roof, and later on his +father Philocleon tries to escape through the chimney. At the end of the +Clouds Strepsiades climbs up a ladder to the roof of the phrontisterion, +in order to set it on fire. In the Lysistrata Myrrhina and Lysistrata are +seen upon the battlements of the Acropolis. The distegia may also have +been used in that scene of the Supplices where Evadne appears upon the +summit of a cliff, and then flings herself down.[586] In all these cases +it used to be imagined that the standing-room for the actor was provided +in the way described; that the lower part of the scene projected two or +three feet, and so furnished a permanent platform in the background. +But this theory is improbable on several grounds. We have seen that the +distegia was only employed in comparatively few instances. It seems +unlikely, therefore, that an elaborate structure of this kind should have +been erected merely to meet these occasional requirements. Further than +this, if the scene had been divided in half by a horizontal line, and the +lower half had protruded several feet, this arrangement, though suitable +enough when the background was a palace, would have been absurdly +inappropriate when a country district was to be represented. It is also +questionable whether the ancient stage was wide enough to permit the +arrangement. If may have been possible in early times; but the Vitruvian +stage, which was only ten feet across, can hardly have been encroached +upon to the extent of two or three feet. It is far more probable that +the back-scene was flat from top to bottom. This supposition is more +in harmony with the simple style of the ancient scenery. As for the +distegia, it was provided most likely by a projecting balcony or upper +story, which might be introduced when required, without encroaching upon +the narrow stage. Such balconies were not uncommon in Greek and Roman +houses.[587] And that they were used in the theatre is expressly stated +by Vitruvius, who tells us that the houses in comedy were of the type +called ‘Maeniana’, or houses with projecting galleries.[588] In ordinary +cases the distegia would resemble a structure of this kind. But where the +surroundings were exceptional, as in the Lysistrata, it might easily be +decorated in such a way as to conform to the rest of the scenery. + +If the scene represented a dwelling-house, there were windows in the +upper story, out of which the characters could peer upon the stage. Such +windows are mentioned by Vitruvius, and instances of their use occur in +the extant comedies. For example, Philocleon, in the Wasps, tries to +escape out of an upper window, and in the Ecclesiazusae the old woman +and the young girl are seen looking out of one.[589] It need hardly +be remarked that the doors of the building represented by the painted +scenery would correspond more or less closely with the permanent doors +in the back-wall, so as to admit of easy ingress and egress to the +actors. In the same way, if the scene was a cavern in a country region, +the entrance to the cavern would be made to correspond with the central +door in the wall at the back. Concerning the manner in which the scenery +was finished off at the top nothing can be laid down for certain. It +is not even known whether the stage was covered with a roof or not. +But the analogy of Roman theatres, and the general convenience of the +arrangement, are in favour of such a covering.[590] + + +§ 3. _The Entrances to the Stage._ + +The question as to the number and the character of the entrances leading +upon the stage is of some importance in connexion with the Greek drama. +In order to avoid confusion in dealing with this subject, it is necessary +to distinguish carefully between the permanent doors in the walls +surrounding the stage, and the temporary doors or entrances which were +left when the scenery had been put up. First, as to the permanent doors. +We have shown already that the remains of the purely Greek theatres +are so defective, that it is impossible, from the evidence which they +supply, to come to any conclusion as to the number of these doors. But +it is evident, from the statements of Pollux, that the Hellenistic type +of theatre, which is the one he describes, must have possessed at least +five such doors. It must have had three doors in the wall at the back +of the stage, and two doors at the sides, one leading from each of the +wings. Probably the same plan was adopted in the older buildings of the +fourth and fifth centuries, whether of stone or wood. In later times, +when the Graeco-Roman theatres were erected, the stage was considerably +lengthened, and in consequence the number of the doors in the wall at +the back was raised to five. But it has been pointed out in the last +chapter that in all probability only three of these doors were used in +the course of the actual performances, and that the two outer ones were +either covered over by the scenery, or concealed by temporary side-wings +of wood.[591] + +The next point to be considered is the number of the entrances which +had to be provided when the scenery was erected, and the stage was made +ready for a dramatic performance. Pollux and Vitruvius, in speaking +of the scenery and stage decorations, agree in saying that there were +three doors at the back of the stage.[592] But this statement is much +too universal. In the majority of cases, no doubt, there were three such +doors. When the scene represented a palace, or temple, or dwelling-house, +three doors appear to have been always used. But when the scene was of +an exceptional character, the number of the entrances from the back of +the stage would vary according to the requirements of the play. For +instance, in the Philoctetes there would only be a single entrance, that +from the cavern. In the first part of the Ajax the only entrance would +be that leading out of the tent; in the second part there would be no +entrance at all, the background consisting merely of a solitary region +by the sea-shore. In the Cyclops, the only opening at the back of the +stage was the mouth of Polyphemus’ cave. In such plays as the Prometheus +of Aeschylus, and the Andromeda of Euripides, the background consisted +of rocks and cliffs, and there was no entrance from that quarter. It is +clear, therefore, that the statement that a Greek scene was provided with +three doors or entrances at the back is not universally true, but only +applies to the majority of cases. + +Some details concerning the character of the three doors may be gathered +from the statements in Pollux and Vitruvius.[593] When the scene was +a palace, the central door was decorated with regal grandeur. The +side-doors were supposed to lead to the guest-chambers. Occasionally +one of the side-doors led to a guest-chamber, the other to a slaves’ +prison. In comedy, the character and arrangement of the doors would vary +considerably, according as the scene was laid in front of one, or two, or +three dwelling-houses. In the last case, of which an example is supplied +by the Acharnians, there would be one door for each of the three houses. +Sometimes one of the side-doors represented the way into an outhouse, +or workshop, or stable. Sometimes it led into a temple, as in the +Thesmophoriazusae. In comedy, no doubt, there was much greater diversity +as to scenic details than in tragedy. + +A curious regulation concerning the usage of these three doors is +mentioned by Pollux.[594] He says that the central door was reserved +for the principal character, the door to the right for the secondary +characters, the door to the left for those of least significance. It +is plain that this statement must be taken with very considerable +deductions. In the first place, it only applies to tragedy, and only +to those plays in which the background represented a palace or similar +building. Even then it cannot have been by any means universal. In fact +it only applies to dramas of the type of the Oedipus Tyrannus, in which +the principal character is at the same time a person of the highest +rank. In such cases it is very likely that his rule about the doors was +observed. It would be in harmony with the statuesque and conventional +character of Greek tragedy. But there are many plays in which it would +be absurd to suppose that any such regulation was adopted. For instance, +in the Antigone it can hardly be imagined that the tyrant Creon entered +only by a side-door, while the central door, with its regal splendour, +was reserved for the oppressed heroine Antigone. Similarly, in the +Electra, it is ridiculous to suppose that Clytaemnestra entered from the +inferior part of the palace, Electra from the more magnificent. There +can be no doubt that Pollux, in his statement about the doors, has been +following his favourite practice, and has made a general rule out of a +few special instances. + +The openings at the back of the stage always led out of some building, +tent, cavern, or other dwelling-place. They could only therefore be used +by persons who were supposed to be inside the dwelling-place. People +coming from the neighbourhood, or from a distance, had to enter the +stage in a different way. For this purpose doors in the side-wings were +provided.[595] The subject of these side-entrances on to the stage has +been much discussed in recent years.[596] Many scholars have endeavoured +to prove that they were a late invention, confined to the Hellenistic +theatre, and that they never existed in the fifth century. They suppose +that in the old Athenian theatre the only side-entrances were those in +the orchestra, and that the actors who entered or departed otherwise than +through the back-scene always used the orchestra for this purpose. Now it +is no doubt true, as we have already shown, that they used it sometimes. +There are about twenty cases in which actors and chorus leave together +in a sort of procession, chiefly at the end of a play[597]; and there +are two cases in which they enter together.[598] There are also those +scenes—about five in number—when the actors enter in chariots.[599] On +all these occasions it can hardly be doubted that the actors entered +and departed through the orchestra. But the other examples which have +been brought forward are entirely conjectural. It is said that, when +the actors and the chorus were supposed to come from the same place, +they must always have used the same entrance. In the Philoctetes, for +example, Odysseus, Neoptolemus, and the chorus all come from the ship. +If, therefore, the sailors entered by the orchestra, the two heroes must +have done the same. But there is no necessity for such an assumption. It +would be absurd to demand this minute accuracy in the representation of a +play. Then there are cases where an actor on the stage sees another from +a distance; but about ten lines intervene before the second actor comes +near enough to enter into conversation with the first.[600] It is argued +that he must have had a long way to go, and must therefore have come +round by the parodos. But in all these places there is nothing to show +that the person approaching was seen by the audience as soon as he was +descried from the stage. He may have received his ‘cue’ some time after +his advent was announced. It is common enough on the modern stage, when +the scene is in the open air, for an actor’s approach to be announced +some time before he actually appears. Also, there are several cases in +the ancient dramas when an actor begins to converse with the people on +the stage only two or three lines after he is first seen.[601] These +passages might be cited to prove that he had only a short way to go, and +must therefore have come in by the stage. But in reality all inferences +of this kind are far too subtle to be of any value. We can hardly imagine +the ancient dramatists counting the number of yards to be walked before +they settled the number of verses to be spoken. Another set of instances +are those in which a character, after coming into sight, takes a long +time to reach the point he is aiming at. Euelpides and Peisthetaerus +stumble about during the delivery of fifty-three lines before they +reach the hoopoe’s dwelling-place. Dionysus and Xanthias converse for +thirty-five lines before coming to the house of Hercules.[602] They +too, it is said, must have entered by the orchestra, otherwise they +would have reached their destination much sooner. But there is no need +to suppose, in these and similar cases, that the characters were moving +straight forward all the time. Any actors of ordinary experience would +know how to arrange their progress in such a way as to come to the right +place at the right moment. Lastly, there are scenes in which an actor, +on making his entrance, fails to perceive at once another actor on the +stage; or addresses the chorus before the actor; or is seen by the chorus +before he is seen by the actor.[603] All this is said to prove that he +must have come in by the parodos, and that the other actor was at first +concealed from view by the intervening side-wings. But in the first place +the ancient stage was so low and narrow that, as soon as an actor had +fairly entered the orchestra, he could not fail to see the persons on the +stage just as well as those in the orchestra. In the second place these +arguments all depend on the same fallacy. They assume that in a dramatic +performance, when an actor comes in, the question as to whom he shall see +first, and which person he shall address first, is decided, not by the +convenience of the poet, but by the science of optics. The experience of +the modern stage is sufficient to prove that this is not the case. + +It would be unsafe then to lay any stress on the instances just cited. +The cases in which there are adequate grounds for supposing that the +actors entered or departed by the orchestra amount to no more than about +thirty. The question is whether these cases are sufficient to justify +a wider inference. Are we to assume that, because the actors sometimes +used the parodoi, they did so always? On the one hand it may be said that +in the early theatre, with its low stage and easy communication between +stage and orchestra, there was nothing to stand in the way of such a +practice. On the other hand there is the fact that in the later Greek +theatre the actors, when coming from a distance, usually entered by the +side-wings.[604] Of course in this later theatre, with its twelve-foot +stage, there were obvious reasons for doing so. Still, the existence of +the practice in late times is a presumption in favour of its existence +previously. Moreover, when side-wings had once been introduced, nothing +could be more natural than to use them as entrances. The convenience to +the actors would be very great. It is difficult to see why they should +have been compelled to go all round by the parodoi when there was an +easier mode of entrance close at hand. On the whole, therefore, it seems +most probable that the side-entrances were generally used by the actors +even as early as the fifth century, and that the orchestra was only +employed in special cases, such as processions with the chorus. + +As regards the use of these side-entrances the Athenians had a special +regulation which was due entirely to local causes. The theatre at Athens +was situated in such a position that the western side looked towards +the city and the harbour, the eastern side towards the open country. In +consequence of this fact the side-entrances upon the Athenian stage came +to acquire a peculiar significance. If a man entered by the western side, +it was understood that he was coming from the city where the scene of the +action was laid, or from the immediate neighbourhood; or else that he +had arrived from distant parts by sea, and was coming from the harbour. +The eastern entrance was reserved for people who had journeyed from a +distance by land. The same regulation was applied to the entrances to +the orchestra. If a chorus came from the city, or the harbour, or the +suburbs, it used the western parodos; if it came by land from a distance, +it used the eastern.[605] It is obvious that at Athens, where play-bills +were unknown, a conventional arrangement of this kind would be of great +assistance to the audience, and would enable them to follow the action +of the piece with greater ease and intelligence than they could otherwise +have done. The custom originated in the topographical situation of the +Athenian theatre, but was afterwards adopted in all other Greek theatres, +and became a conventional rule of the Greek stage. The entrances to the +right of the audience were used by persons from the neighbourhood; the +entrances to the left by persons from a distance. + + +§ 4. _Changes of Scene._ + +A change of scene during the actual progress of a play was a practice +almost unknown upon the Greek stage during the classical period. In the +extant tragedies only two instances are to be found, one in the Eumenides +of Aeschylus, the other in the Ajax of Sophocles. It does not appear +that in either case very much alteration in the scenery was required. In +the Eumenides the earlier part of the action takes place in front of the +temple of Apollo at Delphi, the latter part before the temple of Athene +at Athens.[606] All that was here necessary was to change the statue in +front of the temple. The background doubtless remained the same during +both portions of the play. There is no reason to suppose that any attempt +was made to depict the actual scenery of Delphi or of Athens. Such a +supposition would be inconsistent with the rude and undeveloped state +of scenic decoration during the Aeschylean period, and moreover minute +accuracy of that kind was foreign to the Athenian taste. In the Ajax the +play begins in front of the tent of Ajax, but ends in a solitary region +by the sea-shore. Here again a very slight alteration in the scenery +would have been sufficient. Probably in the opening scene the tent of +Ajax was represented in the centre, and there may have been some slight +suggestion of a coast view on either side. During the latter part of +the play the tent would be made to disappear, leaving only the coast +view behind. A change of this kind might have been easily carried out, +without much mechanical elaboration. It is to be noticed that in each of +the above cases, while the scenery was being changed, both orchestra and +stage were deserted by the performers. In the Eumenides it was not until +Apollo had retired into the temple, and the Furies had set out in pursuit +of Orestes, that the change from Delphi to Athens took place. Similarly +in the Ajax both Tecmessa and the chorus had disappeared in search of +Ajax before the scene was transferred to the sea-shore. + +The Old Comedy was a creation of the wildest fancy, utterly unfettered +by any limitations of fact or probability. The scene of the action in +the plays shifts about from one place to another in the most irregular +fashion. All considerations of time and space are disregarded. But it +may be taken for certain that on the actual stage no attempt was made to +represent these changes of scene in a realistic manner. The scenery was +no doubt of the simplest and most unpretending character, corresponding +to the economical manner in which comedies were put upon the stage. In +all the extant plays of Aristophanes a single background would have been +sufficient. For instance, in the Frogs the action takes place partly +before the house of Hercules, partly in Hades before the house of Pluto. +The background probably represented the houses standing side by side, or +a single house may have done duty for that of Hercules and that of Pluto +in turn. The opening scene of the Acharnians takes place in the Pnyx; +the rest of the play is carried on before the houses of Dicaeopolis, +Euripides, and Lamachus. Most likely the three houses stood in a row, +the Pnyx being sufficiently represented by a few benches upon the stage. +The fact that the house of Dicaeopolis was supposed to be sometimes in +the town, and sometimes in the country, would be of very little moment +in a performance like the Old Comedy, where the realities of existence +were totally disregarded. In the Lysistrata the action is rapidly +transferred from the front of a house to the front of the Acropolis. In +the Thesmophoriazusae it takes place partly before a house, partly before +the temple of Demeter. It is not necessary, in either of these plays, +to suppose any change in the scenery. The house and the Acropolis in +the one case, and the house and temple in the other, would be depicted +as standing side by side. In the Knights the background throughout the +play consisted of the house of Demos; and the Pnyx, as in the Acharnians, +was represented by a few benches. As far then as the Old Comedy is +concerned it is probable that changes of scenery in the course of a play +were seldom or never resorted to. In the New Comedy, to judge from the +adaptations of Plautus and Terence, they appear to have been equally +infrequent. + +The only appliances for changing scenery that are mentioned by the +ancient Greek writers are the ‘periaktoi’.[607] These were huge +triangular prisms, revolving on a socket at the base. Each of the three +sides of the prism consisted of a large flat surface, shaped like an +upright parallelogram. One of these prisms was placed at each end of +the stage, in such a manner as to fit in exactly with the scene at the +back, and continue it in the direction of the side-wings. Each of the +three sides was painted to represent a different view, but care was +taken that in every case the painting should coincide exactly with the +painting in the back-scene.[608] As the periaktos was turned round, it +presented a different surface to the spectators. Accordingly it was +possible, by revolving both the periaktoi, to make a change in the +character of the scenery at each end of the stage, while the scene in the +background remained the same as before. The periaktos to the right of +the audience depicted views in the immediate neighbourhood of the city +where the action was taking place. The periaktos to the left represented +a more remote country. This fact corresponds exactly with the regulation +already referred to, that the entrances to the right of the audience were +reserved for people from the immediate neighbourhood, while people from a +distance came in by the left. + +The principal use of the periaktoi must have been to produce a change of +scene in cases where the prominent feature of the background remained +the same. For instance, if the action had been taking place in front of +a temple or palace, and was to be transferred to a temple or palace in a +different country, the requisite alteration might easily be carried out +by means of the periaktoi. The building in the background would remain +the same, but the scenery on each side would be altered. Occasions for +using the periaktoi might sometimes occur during the course of a single +play. But such cases, as we have seen, were extremely rare. It must have +been chiefly in the intervals between successive plays that the periaktoi +were employed. Most Greek tragedies and comedies took place before a +temple, a palace, or a private house. If therefore a series of plays was +being exhibited, it might be convenient to retain the same scene in the +background, and produce the necessary distinction between the different +plays by altering the scenery at each side. The usage of the periaktoi +was regulated by a curious conventional custom. If only one periaktos was +turned round, the alteration in the scenery was, of course, confined to +one end of the stage. This was done when the change of scene was supposed +to be a slight one, and was merely from one part of the same district to +another. But when the action was transferred to an entirely new district, +then both the periaktoi were turned round, and the scenery was changed +at each end. The representation of scenery on the periaktoi was probably +of the simple and symbolical character which marked Greek stage scenery +in general; a rock would stand for a mountainous district, a waved blue +line and a dolphin for the sea, a river god perhaps, holding a vessel +of water, for a river.[609] Besides their use in effecting a change of +scene, the periaktoi were also employed to introduce sea-gods and objects +too heavy for the mechane. It is not said how this was managed. But it +is possible that, of the two sides of the periaktos which were out of +sight of the audience, one contained a small ledge or balcony, on which +the sea-god took his stand. As the machine rolled round, he would come +suddenly into view.[610] + +It is difficult to say when the periaktoi were first introduced, and +whether they were used at all during the classical period of the Greek +drama. They are mentioned by one grammarian among a list of stage +appliances which might be ascribed to Aeschylus,[611] and it is true +that they might have been used in producing the change of scene in the +Eumenides from the temple at Delphi to the temple at Athens. But they +could have been easily dispensed with. In fact, as far as the extant +Greek dramas are concerned, there are no occasions on which it is +necessary to suppose that they were used, and there are no passages in +which they are referred to.[612] + +The periaktoi, as stated above, are the only appliances for changing +scenery that are mentioned in Greek writings. Servius describes another +kind of contrivance, by means of which the scene was parted asunder in +the middle, and then drawn aside in both directions, so as to disclose a +new scene behind.[613] But it is probable that this invention dated from +comparatively late times. There is nothing in the existing Greek dramas +to suggest that such a contrivance was in use during the classical period. + + +§ 5. _Stage Properties, &c._ + +In addition to the scenery in the background, the stage was of course +decorated with such objects and properties as were required by the +particular play. Aeschylus is said to have been the first to adorn the +stage in this manner.[614] If the scene was a palace or temple, statues +of the gods were generally placed in front of it, and are frequently +referred to in the course of the drama. For instance, there was the +statue of Athene in front of her temple in the Eumenides, and the statues +of the tutelary deities before the palace of the Atreidae in the Electra +of Sophocles. In the Hippolytus there were two statues in front of the +palace of Theseus, one of Artemis the huntress, and the other of Cypris, +the goddess of love. When Hippolytus returns from the hunt, he offers +a garland of flowers to the statue of Artemis, but refuses to pay any +homage to the statue of Cypris, in spite of the remonstrances of his +attendant. Again, in the country region depicted in the Oedipus Coloneus +the statue of the hero Colonus stood in a conspicuous position.[615] +Other examples of the practice of decorating the stage with statues are +often to be met with both in tragedy and in comedy. Altars, again, were +very common objects upon the Greek stage. In the Supplices of Aeschylus +the fugitive maidens take refuge round an altar. The Oedipus Tyrannus +opens with the spectacle of a group of Thebans kneeling in supplication +before the altar of Apollo.[616] Another constant feature in the stage +decoration was the stone obelisk in honour of Apollo of the Highways. It +was an ordinary practice among the Greeks to place such obelisks in front +of their houses. Their presence upon the stage is often referred to by +the dramatic poets.[617] Various other objects were occasionally required +by particular plays. There was the tomb of Darius in the Persae, and the +tomb of Agamemnon in the Choephori. In the Oedipus Coloneus a rocky ledge +was needed for Oedipus to rest himself upon. In the Acharnians and the +Knights a few benches must have been erected upon the stage to serve as +a rude imitation of the Pnyx. Walls, watch-towers, and beacon-towers are +mentioned by Pollux; and the presence of other similar decorations and +erections can be inferred from the extant tragedies and comedies.[618] + +There was one piece of realism which the Greeks were not averse to, +and that was the presence of horses and chariots in the theatre. We +have already referred to the instances in tragedy where persons from +a distance arrive in chariots drawn by horses or mules. The vast size +of the Greek theatre made it peculiarly suitable for displays of this +character. In the Agamemnon of Aeschylus, Agamemnon and Cassandra +approach the palace in a chariot; Agamemnon remains seated there for +a considerable time, while he converses with Clytaemnestra; he then +dismounts and enters the palace, leaving Cassandra still in the chariot. +In the Electra of Euripides, when Clytaemnestra comes to visit her +daughter at the country cottage, she arrives in a chariot, accompanied by +Trojan maidens, who assist her to dismount.[619] Animals for riding were +also occasionally introduced. In the Prometheus there is the winged steed +upon which Oceanus makes his entrance; and in the Frogs of Aristophanes +Xanthias rides in upon a donkey.[620] + + +§ 6. _The Ekkyklema._ + +Several mechanical contrivances are mentioned in connexion with the Greek +stage. The most peculiar of these, and the one most alien to all our +modern notions of stage illusion, is the ekkyklema.[621] We have seen +that in a Greek theatre the action always took place in the open air, +before some temple or dwelling-place. It was impossible to transfer the +scene to the inside of the building because of the continual presence +of the chorus in the orchestra. Still, it might sometimes happen that +a powerful dramatic effect could be produced, if a deed accomplished +indoors was exposed to view. The most natural way of doing this would +have been to draw aside the back-scene, and reveal a portion of the +interior. But in the Greek theatre, owing to the narrowness of the +stage-buildings, such a device was hardly practicable. Even if the +stage-buildings had been made deeper, there were obvious objections in +the way. The relative position of the auditorium and the stage was such +that, if a room had been opened out behind the back-scene, a large part +of the audience would not have been able to see into it. In any case, +the back part of the room would have been almost in the dark. Further +than this, the whole arrangement was far too elaborate for the simple +notions of the ancient stage-managers. For these reasons a more primitive +device was adopted. Scenes inside the house or palace were revealed by +means of the ekkyklema. This was a small wooden platform, rolling upon +wheels, which was kept inside the stage-buildings. When it was required +to be used, one of the doors in the background was thrown open, and it +was pushed forward on to the stage. Upon it was arranged a group of +figures, representing in a sort of tableau the deed or occurrence which +had just taken place inside the building. It was mostly used in cases +where a murder had been committed. The ekkyklema was rolled out upon +the stage, and on it were seen the corpses of the murdered persons, the +murderers standing beside them with the bloody weapons in their hands. It +might be rolled through any of the three doors at the back of the stage. +The contrivance was of course a purely conventional one, due to the +necessities of the Greek theatre. All pretence of realism and illusion +was abandoned. But this was a point on which the Greeks did not lay very +much stress. In such matters custom is everything. To a modern spectator, +used to elaborate stage effects, the device would appear intolerable. But +the Greeks, living at a time when stage decoration was in its infancy, +were less exacting in their demands. And when they had once accepted the +ekkyklema as a conventional contrivance for exhibiting interiors their +plastic genius would enable them to use it to the best advantage. The +sudden spectacle of the murderer standing beside his victim’s body, with +the instrument of death in his hands, might easily be formed into a most +impressive tableau. + +The ekkyklema was probably invented towards the middle of the fifth +century, about the time when the actor’s booth was first converted +into a regular back-scene. It is used twice in the Oresteia. In the +Agamemnon, after the murder has been committed, the platform rolls out, +and reveals the person of Clytaemnestra, standing over the dead bodies +of Agamemnon and Cassandra. In the Choephori there is a parallel scene. +Orestes is brought into view standing beside the bodies of Aegisthus +and Clytaemnestra, and pointing to the net in which his father had been +entangled and slaughtered many years ago. He is seized with frenzy, +descends from the ekkyklema, and hastens away to the temple of Apollo at +Delphi. The platform is then withdrawn into the palace.[622] During the +rest of the century there are many instances of the use of the ekkyklema +in tragedy. In the Ajax the interior of the tent is exposed to view by +this contrivance; and at the end of the Antigone the body of Eurydice is +exhibited, lying beside the altar at which she has stabbed herself. In +the Hippolytus, after the suicide of Phaedra, her dead body is displayed +upon the ekkyklema, and Theseus takes from it the letter in which she +makes her charge against Hippolytus. In the Electra of Sophocles the +door is thrown open at the command of Aegisthus, and the platform rolls +out and exhibits Orestes and Pylades standing beside the corpse of +Clytaemnestra, which is covered with a cloth. Aegisthus himself removes +the cloth, and then Orestes and Pylades descend to the stage, and the +platform is drawn back again. In the Hecuba the sons of Polymestor, who +have been slaughtered inside the tent, are made visible to the spectators +by means of the ekkyklema. In the Hercules Furens Hercules is exhibited +lying prostrate between the bodies of his wife and children, with his +face covered up, and his limbs chained to the broken column which he had +thrown down in his frenzy. Amphitryon then comes out of the palace, and +loosens his chains. Later on Theseus arrives, and uncovers his face and +helps him to rise. He then descends to the stage, and the ekkyklema is +rolled back into the palace. Lastly, in the Electra of Euripides, the +bodies of Aegisthus and Clytaemnestra are shown to the audience by means +of this device.[623] + +The ekkyklema is also occasionally used in Comedy. Aristophanes, on two +occasions, employs it in a burlesque sort of way, when he is introducing +tragic poets on the stage. In the Thesmophoriazusae, Euripides and +Mnesilochus call at the house of Agathon to borrow some female clothing. +Agathon is rolled out on the ekkyklema, lends them some articles which +are brought to him from inside the house, and then, when he is tired +of their importunity, orders himself to be ‘rolled in again as fast as +possible’. In the Acharnians Dicaeopolis goes to the house of Euripides +to borrow a tragic dress. Euripides is upstairs in his study writing +tragedies, and cannot come down, but allows himself to be rolled out, and +supplies the necessary dresses.[624] These two passages in Aristophanes, +where the mechanism of the apparatus is carefully emphasized in order +to add to the ridicule, are very valuable as evidence concerning the +structure of the ekkyklema. The device is also used in the Clouds to show +the inside of the phrontisterion. The disciples of Socrates are seen +hard at work on their studies, with globes, diagrams, black-boards, and +other scholastic materials round about them. In the Knights, when the +Propylaea is thrown open, and reveals a vision of ancient Athens, with +Demos dressed up in the antique style, the spectacle may possibly have +been produced by means of the ekkyklema.[625] + +From the examples of the use of the ekkyklema which have just been +cited we may gather some further particulars as to its character and +construction. It appears that persons upon the ekkyklema could easily +descend to the stage, and that persons on the stage could easily touch +those on the ekkyklema. It follows that it must have been a low platform, +not much above the level of the stage. As regards its length and breadth, +it was evidently large enough to support several persons. At the same +time it cannot have been of any very great size. Its width must have been +less than the width of the doors in the background, to permit of its +being rolled through them. Its depth cannot have been very great, because +of the narrowness of the Greek stage. In the Acharnians, when Euripides +is rolled out, he is represented as still sitting in his room upstairs. +But it is unlikely, as some suppose, that in this case the platform was +made taller than usual, to produce the effect of an upper story. As +Euripides has to hand various articles to Dicaeopolis, who is standing on +the stage, there cannot have been much difference of level between the +two. The exact mechanism of the ekkyklema, however, remains uncertain. +It is practically undisputed that the grooves or rails found at Eretria, +running on to the later stage straight from its back-scene were intended +for some such contrivance to run on.[626] On the other hand it has been +argued from the use of certain words in the scholiast’s descriptions +that the ekkyklema must have revolved on a pivot,[627] and it has been +suggested that the mechanism was like that of which a diagram is given in +the accompanying figure, where _ss_ is the stage, _ww_ the back-scene, +_a_ shows the ekkyklema at rest and not in use, _b_ shows it in process +of being rolled round for use, _c_ shows it after being rolled out. This, +however, finds no confirmation in anything in the ruins; the straight +rails at Eretria are against it, and the words referred to may be +explained by the use of a windlass or similar mechanism used in rolling +out the ekkyklema. Judging from the width of the rails at Eretria, the +width of the ekkyklema may have been about ten feet, and the doors must +therefore have been rather larger. The suggested revolving ekkyklema +might afford more standing room, but there is not sufficient evidence of +its existence. + +[Illustration: FIG. 14 A.] + +In addition to the passages already mentioned, there are two other +places in the extant dramas where the scholiasts say that the ekkyklema +was employed. But they appear to have been mistaken in both cases. The +first instance is in the Thesmophoriazusae. The action of this play +begins before Agathon’s house, but after about three hundred lines is +transferred to the front of Demeter’s temple, where the women hold their +assembly. At this point there is a stage-direction to say that ‘the +Thesmophorion is rolled out’.[628] If these words mean that the scene was +laid in the interior of the temple, and that the ekkyklema was rolled +out in order to represent it, the suggestion is undoubtedly wrong. It +would be absurd to imagine that the rest of the play was transacted on a +small platform like the ekkyklema. But possibly the author of the note +was referring, not to the ekkyklema, but to some mechanism by which he +believed that the necessary change of scene was brought about. The second +place is the well-known scene at the beginning of the Eumenides.[629] +The play opens with the speech of the priestess, delivered in front +of the temple. Then, when she departs, the interior of the temple is +suddenly brought into view, and shows us Orestes kneeling before the +altar, with the sleeping Furies round about him, and Apollo and Hermes +standing close by. To suppose, as the scholiast suggests, that this +effect was produced by the ekkyklema, is hardly possible. The platform +would have been far too small to accommodate a whole tragic chorus, +together with three actors. At the same time, though the explanation of +the scholiast appears impracticable, it is difficult to suggest any other +way in which the scene might have been acted. We cannot assume that the +back-scene was drawn apart, and disclosed the inside of the temple in a +set-piece, after the modern fashion. This mode of revealing interiors was +apparently never used on the Greek stage. If it had been possible, there +would have been no need to invent the ekkyklema. It has been suggested +that the spectacle was not really exhibited to the audience; that Apollo, +Hermes, and Orestes appeared alone in front of the temple; that the ghost +of Clytaemnestra called to the Furies through the temple door; and that +it was not until then that the Furies came into sight, rushing out in +obedience to her summons. But the general character of the scene, and +the expressions used in the course of the dialogue, appear to be fatal +to this supposition.[630] In fact, the difficulty is one for which no +satisfactory solution has yet been found. + +The ekkyklema seems to our notions such a rude device, that many critics +have been led to deny its existence, at any rate during the classical +period. They allow that it must have been used in later times, as it is +described in detail by Pollux: but they refuse to believe that it could +have been tolerated by the Athenians of the fifth century.[631] The +evidence, however, in its favour is too strong to be set aside in this +way. The passages in which it is parodied by Aristophanes correspond so +closely with the descriptions of Pollux that they must obviously refer +to the same mechanical device.[632] There are also the numerous other +scenes in which an interior is revealed. It is difficult to see how the +Greeks, with their peculiar stage arrangements, could have acted these +scenes, except by some such contrivance as the ekkyklema. Those who deny +its existence explain away these passages in various ways. They say that +in many cases the bodies might have been carried out on to the stage, or +arranged just outside the door, so as to be visible to the spectators. +On other occasions they suppose that the back-scene was drawn aside, +and showed the interior of the building. But there are several scenes +to which none of these explanations would apply. In the Hercules Furens +Hercules is shown chained to the broken column, and we cannot suppose +that the column was carried out on to the stage. Nor can the spectacle +have been exhibited inside the palace front. It must have been outside; +since Amphitryon, as soon as Hercules begins to rouse himself, proposes +to fly within the palace for refuge.[633] In the same way the scholars +of Socrates cannot have been carried out, along with their globes and +diagrams. Yet they too must have appeared upon the stage, and not inside +the building; for it is explained to Strepsiades that they cannot remain +long ‘in the open air outside’.[634] It is impossible, therefore, to +account for these and other scenes in the way suggested.[635] They must +have been effected by the ekkyklema. As for the objection that the +ekkyklema was a device too clumsy for the refined taste of the fifth +century, though admissible in later times, this is a kind of argument +which is not supported by experience. The history of the drama in many +countries shows that the greatest literary and dramatic excellence +may coexist with the utmost simplicity and clumsiness in the stage +arrangements. It was so in England and it was so in France. The drama of +these two countries reached its highest point at a period when the art of +stage decoration was in a most primitive condition. On general grounds it +would be more reasonable to assume that the ekkyklema was impossible to +the Hellenistic Greeks, than that it was impossible to the Greeks of the +time of Sophocles. If the former could tolerate it, the latter are not +likely to have made any difficulty. + +A contrivance called the exostra is occasionally referred to by the +grammarians, and is mentioned in a Delian inscription of the third +century B.C. The name implies that it was something which was ‘pushed +out’ upon the stage. The metaphorical use of the word in Polybius and +Cicero proves it to have been a platform on which objects were exhibited +in a conspicuous manner. It is probable, therefore, that the statement +of the ancient writers is correct, and that the exostra was merely the +ekkyklema under another name.[636] + + +§ 7. _The Mechane and Theologeion._ + +Another appliance of even greater importance than the ekkyklema, and +one very frequently employed upon the Greek stage, was the ‘mechane’ or +Machine.[637] It consisted of a sort of crane with a pulley attached, +by which weights could be raised or lowered. It was placed in the left +or western corner of the stage, at the very top of the back-scene. It +was used when the characters of a play had to appear or disappear in a +supernatural manner. By its means a god or hero could be lowered from +heaven down to earth, or raised up from earth to heaven, or exhibited +motionless in mid-air. Sometimes the god was represented as sitting +in a chariot, or on a winged steed; but in most cases he was simply +suspended from the rope by means of a hook and bands fastened round his +body. The strength of the mechane must have been considerable, since it +was powerful enough to support two or three people at the same time. As +to the way in which it was worked, and the manner in which the actors +were made to disappear from view at the top of the stage, there is no +information. Unfortunately the construction of the upper part of the +stage-buildings is a subject about which we are entirely ignorant. It +is useless therefore to hazard conjectures concerning the exact nature +of the arrangements adopted. The grammarians also speak of two other +contrivances, the Crane and the Fig-branch, as used for moving people +through the air. But whether they were really distinct from the mechane +is far from certain. The Fig-branch is said to have been designed +specially for comedy. It appears, however, from the description to have +been much the same as the mechane, and was probably only a comic name +for it.[638] The Crane is described as an instrument for conveying the +bodies of dead heroes up into the sky. Possibly the Crane also was merely +another name for the mechane; or it may have been a separate contrivance, +placed at the other end of the back-scene, and used exclusively for the +removal of dead bodies. In any case it cannot have differed very much +from the mechane in structure.[639] There are one or two passages in the +ancient writers where the mechane is described as a ‘kind of ekkyklema’, +and persons are said to have been rolled out by means of it.[640] It is +uncertain in these cases whether the grammarians are confusing the two +machines; or whether they are thinking of the theologeion, which, as we +shall see later on, may have been worked by mechanism similar to that of +the ekkyklema. + +Examples of the use of the mechane are fairly common both in the extant +dramas and in the records of the grammarians. At the same time there is +often a doubt, when a personage makes his appearance on high, whether +he was exhibited by means of this device or in some other way. For the +present, therefore, we will confine ourselves to those cases where the +person is described as moving through the air, and where it seems clear +that, if any machinery was employed, it must have been the mechane. The +earliest instance is probably that in the Prometheus. Oceanus descends +on a ‘winged quadruped’, converses some time with Prometheus, and then +rides away again, saying as he goes that his steed yearns to ‘skim +with its wings the smooth paths of air’. We are told also that in the +Psychostasia, the lost play of Aeschylus, the body of Memnon was carried +by Dawn into the sky.[641] Both these instances have been doubted, +but merely on general grounds, and without adequate reason. But there +are two other supposed examples in Aeschylus which are far more open +to question. There is the scene in the Eumenides where Athene arrives +from Troas, and where it is thought that she descends from the sky. The +language, however, in which she describes her journey is ambiguous and +full of difficulty. In three successive lines she appears to say that +she has walked, flown, and driven in a chariot.[642] It would be unsafe +in a case like this to draw any inference as to the exact manner in +which she made her entrance on to the stage. There is also the scene in +the Prometheus where the Oceanides enter in a ‘winged car’, halt in +front of Prometheus for about a hundred and fifty lines, and then, at +his bidding, dismount from their ‘swift-rushing seat’ and descend into +the orchestra.[643] Here, too, the mechane has been suggested. But it is +scarcely credible that a whole tragic chorus should have been suspended +in front of Prometheus during the delivery of a hundred and fifty +lines. Even if the machinery had been strong enough to support twelve +or fifteen choristers, the spectacle would have been ludicrous.[644] It +is much better to suppose that the car was rolled in along the stage, +its previous flight being left to the imagination of the spectators. +After the time of Aeschylus there are many instances of the use of the +mechane. Euripides often employs it to wind up his plays. At the end of +the Andromache Thetis comes into view ‘voyaging through the bright air’. +At the end of the Electra the Dioscuri arrive by a ‘path impossible to +mortals’, and depart later on ‘through the regions of the sky’. Medea’s +appearance with her children in the aerial car may be safely regarded +as a further example, though there is no mention in this case of any +ascent or descent.[645] The device is also introduced in other parts of +a play. In the Hercules Furens Iris and Lyssa come down from heaven in a +chariot; then Iris re-ascends, while Lyssa goes on into the palace. In +the Bellerophon the hero rode up to heaven on the winged steed Pegasus; +and in the Andromeda Perseus flew down through the air to the foot of the +cliff where the heroine was chained.[646] The mechane is also parodied +in many places by Aristophanes. In the Clouds, Socrates is seen hanging +in a basket in mid-air, and studying astronomy. Iris, in the Birds, +comes floating down from the sky in such an irregular and eccentric +fashion that Peisthetaerus has the greatest difficulty in bringing her +to a standstill. In a fragment of the Daedalus the actor who is going to +ascend entreats the man in charge of the machinery to give him warning, +before he begins to haul up the rope, by exclaiming ‘hail, light of the +sun’. The ascent of Trygaeus upon a beetle in the Peace was intended as a +parody upon the Bellerophon of Euripides. The speech of Trygaeus, in the +course of his aerial journey, consists of a ludicrous mixture of phrases +from the Bellerophon, shouts to the beetle to keep his head straight, and +terrified appeals to the stage-manager to look after the security of the +pulley.[647] + +In addition to the mechane there was also another appliance in +use upon the Greek stage for the purpose of exhibiting gods in a +supernatural manner. It was called the theologeion, and represented +the gods as stationary in heaven, and not as moving through the air. +It consisted, apparently, of a narrow platform in the upper part of +the back-scene.[648] Probably it was similar in construction to the +ekkyklema, and was usually invisible, but was pushed forward through +an opening at the back when required. It has been suggested that the +theologeion was in reality nothing more than the palace roof. But this +theory is hardly a plausible one. When the gods were to be exhibited +in celestial splendour in the sky, it would have been undignified and +incongruous to place them on the roof of a human habitation. Also the +position of the theologeion is expressly described as being high up +above the stage.[649] As regards its usage, the only recorded instance +is that in the Psychostasia of Aeschylus. Zeus was there represented as +sitting in heaven, holding scales in his hands, in which were placed the +destinies of Achilles and Memnon respectively. On each side of him stood +Thetis and Dawn, supplicating for the lives of their sons. The scene +was in imitation of that in the Iliad, where Zeus weighs the fates of +Achilles and Hector.[650] It is probable that the theologeion was also +used in the Peace, in the scene where Trygaeus ascends to heaven, and +converses with Hermes in front of the palace of Zeus.[651] + +The relationship between the theologeion and the mechane has been much +discussed during the last few years, and various theories have been +brought forward on the subject. Some of the critics think the mechane +was the older and more primitive device, and that the theologeion was +invented towards the end of the fifth century, to serve as a substitute, +and avoid the awkwardness of the previous arrangement.[652] Others take +exactly the opposite view, and regard the theologeion as the simple +contrivance of the early drama, and the mechane as a later and more +picturesque piece of machinery.[653] Neither of these views can be +maintained except by a somewhat arbitrary treatment of the evidence. We +have clear testimony as to the existence both of the mechane and of the +theologeion in the time of Aeschylus; and it seems uncritical to reject +this testimony in the one case, and accept it in the other. As regards +the question of priority, it is impossible to come to any decision, +owing to the paucity of the early dramas which have been preserved. +But there is one point which deserves consideration. We have seen that +there are several cases at the close of a play in which the mechane was +unquestionably used to introduce the god who solved the difficulties +of the plot. The god’s arrival is described in language which leaves +no doubt upon the subject. But there are many other cases in which he +appears for a similar purpose, and in which he is simply described as +standing in some elevated position, and nothing is said about any flight +through the air.[654] There are also several plays at the end of which +the god appears abruptly, without any notice as to his standing-place, +or the manner in which he arrived; but in which it is evident, from the +analogy of the other dramas, that he appeared above the heads of the +ordinary actors.[655] In both these latter classes of play there is some +uncertainty as to the nature of the machinery employed. The question +may be raised whether, when there is no mention of any movement through +the air, the god was introduced by the mechane or by the theologeion. +Was he floated down from the sky, or pushed out through the back-scene? +Some scholars maintain that the theologeion was the device used in +these particular cases; and the supposition is no doubt possible. But, +on the other hand, the fact that there is no allusion to the mechane +in the course of the dialogue proves nothing as to its presence or +its absence. There are many places in which, though the ekkyklema was +obviously employed, the text contains no reference to it. Also it is +clear that from the beginning of the fourth century the mechane became +the regular contrivance for introducing gods at the close of a drama. +Plato remarks that the tragedians, when in a difficulty, ‘have recourse +to the mechane, and suspend their gods in mid-air.’ Antiphanes, the comic +poet, ridicules the practice of hanging out the mechane at the end of a +tragedy. Aristotle speaks of the mechane as the invariable device on such +occasions. The phrase ‘deus ex machina’ appears already in the fourth +century as a proverbial expression for an unexpected benefactor.[656] +It seems more probable, therefore, that the mechane was regularly used, +even in the fifth century, for the same purpose. We have several cases in +which it must have been so employed, and none in which it is necessary +to introduce the theologeion. The only known example of the use of the +theologeion is that in the Psychostasia. Any further cases in which its +presence is assumed must be purely conjectural. + +Before leaving this subject a few remarks may be made on the general +question of the appearances of the gods in tragedy. In the early +drama the gods often played an important part in the action of the +piece. They came down to earth and mixed with mankind after the old +Homeric fashion. Their arrivals and departures might be conducted in a +supernatural manner, but when they were once on the stage they moved +about like ordinary human beings. Such is still the case in plays like +the Eumenides of Aeschylus. But later on, as the tone of the drama became +more entirely human, the gods began to be excluded more and more from any +real share in the plot. Their occasional presence at the scene of action +was managed with more dignity and splendour. It is rare to find them +appearing side by side with human beings, as Athene apparently does in +the Rhesus and in the opening scene of the Ajax.[657] The Bacchae is an +exceptional case, since Dionysus is there disguised as a young man. But +usually, in the later drama, the intervention of the gods was restricted +to the beginning and the end of the play, when they came forward to +speak the prologue and the epilogue. In such cases they no longer join +with mortal men in the free and easy intercourse of the Homeric period. +Their movements are more dignified and celestial. It is true that in the +prologues, when they are alone, and no human beings have yet intruded +on the stage, they make their entrance on foot, and walk the earth like +ordinary men.[658] But at the end of the play, when the stage is occupied +by mortals, they disdain to tread the same ground with them, and are +exhibited in the sky by means of the mechane. Even in the prologues it +appears that the same practice was introduced in the course of the fourth +century, and that henceforth all apparitions of the gods, both at the +beginning and the end of a play, were made equally supernatural.[659] +This formal introduction of deities at the beginning and the close, which +was now practically the sole survivor of the old divine participation +in the drama, is the subject of a well-known criticism by Aristotle. +He allows that it is perfectly legitimate, when the gods are carefully +excluded from the action, and are brought in merely to give information +about the past, or to predict the future. But he strongly censures the +later practice of employing them at the end of a tragedy to solve the +difficulties of the plot. He says that in a well-constructed play the +conclusions should be the natural result of the preceding incidents, and +there should be no need of any supernatural agency.[660] Euripides has +generally been regarded as the chief offender against his rule, and as +the author of the custom which he condemns. But it will be found, on +examining his plays, that there are very few of them in which the god is +really used as a last resort. There are only two instances in which he +can be said to solve the problems of the situation. In the other cases +he is introduced, not so much to set matters right, as to inform the +characters of the destiny which awaits them. His function is confined to +announcing the future course of events.[661] These, therefore, are what +Aristotle would call permissible uses of the ‘deus ex machina’. + + +§ 8. _Other Mechanical Contrivances._ + +Several other devices in use upon the Attic stage are briefly mentioned +by Pollux, but his descriptions are so meagre and obscure that little +can be inferred as to their exact character. Charon’s Steps was a +contrivance for bringing ghosts and spectres up from the other world. It +can hardly have been anything else than a flight of steps leading out +upon the stage from underneath. The ‘anapiesma’ was used by river-gods, +Furies, and other subterranean beings for the purpose of appearing above +ground. The word ‘anapiesma’ seems to mean something which was pushed +back. It is probable, therefore, that the contrivance was merely the +ordinary trap-door of the modern theatre, through which the spectral +being was raised on to the stage.[662] Whether these two devices were +used as early as the fifth century is somewhat doubtful. There are +few occasions in the extant plays and fragments where they would have +been serviceable, and none where they are absolutely necessary. The +ghost of Darius in the Persae arises out of his tomb, and the ghost of +Achilles in the lost Polyxena of Sophocles apparently revealed himself +in the same way.[663] In these two cases it is needless to suppose any +special apparatus beyond the tomb itself. The ghost of Clytaemnestra in +the Eumenides, and that of Polydorus in the Hecuba, may possibly have +risen from underground. But there is nothing in the text of the plays +to show that this was the case, and an entrance in the ordinary manner +would have satisfied all requirements. Some critics suppose that in +the Prometheus the punishment which had been threatened by Hermes was +actually carried out before the eyes of the spectators, and that the +tragedy ended with the disappearance of Prometheus beneath the stage. But +a melodramatic conclusion of this kind seems far from probable, and out +of keeping with the character of the ancient drama. It is more likely +that when the play was over the actor simply walked off the stage, or was +concealed from view by a curtain. Or he may have remained in position +until the beginning of the next piece, the Prometheus Unbound, in which +he was again represented as chained to a cliff. The ‘bronteion’ was a +device for imitating the noise of thunder behind the scenes, and was of +a very simple character. Pebbles were poured out of a jar into a large +brazen vessel; bags were filled with stones and flung against a metal +surface; or leaden balls were dropped upon a sheet of leather stretched +tight.[664] The ‘keraunoskopeion’ was obviously intended to imitate +lightning, though the description in Pollux is unintelligible. But Heron, +the mathematician, speaks of a device used in automaton theatres, by +which a plank, with a flash of lightning painted on a dark background, +was shot out of a box into a receptacle below. Possibly Pollux may be +alluding to an arrangement of this kind.[665] The ‘stropheion’ was some +sort of revolving machinery, by which heroes were exhibited in heaven, +or deaths at sea or in battle were represented. The ‘hemikyklion’ was +semicircular in shape, and gave a distant view of a city, or of a person +swimming in the sea. The ‘hemistrophion’ is merely mentioned by name, and +no description of it is appended.[666] + +The question whether a drop-scene was used in the Athenian theatre +during the great period of the drama is one which has not yet been +satisfactorily settled. In Roman theatres a drop-scene was invariably +used between the different plays, the mechanism being exactly the reverse +of that employed in modern times. When a play was going to begin, the +curtain was let down into a narrow crevice in front of the stage, and +at the end of the performance was drawn up again.[667] There can be +no doubt that similar curtains were used in Greek theatres at a later +period; but the question is whether they were used at Athens during the +fifth and fourth centuries. There are no references to anything of the +kind in the extant Greek dramas, and there are no passages in ancient +writers which can be held to prove the existence of a drop-scene in the +early Athenian theatre.[668] The question must therefore be discussed +on general grounds. To our modern notions a drop-scene appears to be +almost a necessity in the case of plays which commence with the actors +already in position upon the stage. In the Greek drama such plays are not +infrequent. For instance, in the opening scene of the Oedipus Tyrannus +the Thebans are discovered kneeling at the altar before the palace of the +king. In the Troades, when Poseidon comes forward to speak the prologue, +he sees Hecuba stretched upon the ground in an attitude of despair. The +Orestes of Euripides opens with Orestes stretched upon a bed in front +of the palace, and his sister Electra watching beside him. Many other +examples might be cited of plays which begin with the actors already in +a fixed position. Unless, therefore, a drop-scene was used between the +plays, it would have to be supposed that the actors came on the stage in +full view of the people, took up the required position, and then began +the dialogue. There would be a great sacrifice of illusion in such a +mode of commencement. Besides this, the drop-scene would of course be +a natural and obvious mode of concealing the stage from view while the +scenery was being altered between the different plays. For these reasons +it has been inferred that the Athenians cannot have done without one. +But, on the other hand, it has already been pointed out that it is a +great mistake to apply our modern notions of propriety to an ancient +dramatic performance. The Greeks did not lay very much stress upon +realism and illusion in their scenic arrangements. They were satisfied +with simple and conventional methods of representing events upon the +stage. Such devices as the ekkyklema and the periaktoi would never have +been tolerated by them, if their aim had been to produce an illusion by +the accurate imitation of real objects. Hence it is possible that in the +dramas just referred to they were quite content for the actors to come +forward and take up their position in full view of the audience, before +the play actually commenced. That such a supposition is not inadmissible +is proved by the custom of the early English drama. On the Elizabethan +stage we know for a fact that there was no drop-scene, and that in many +cases a tableau had to be arranged before the eyes of the spectators +before the action could begin. Yet the audience of those days was not +dissatisfied. The Athenians may have been equally indifferent in the +matter of the drop-scene. At the same time there is no evidence to prove +that such was the case. And the drop-scene is a very convenient device, +and one that would naturally suggest itself. On the whole therefore +it seems safest, until further evidence is forthcoming, to regard the +question as an open one.[669] + + + + +CHAPTER V + +THE ACTORS + + +§ 1. _Rise of the Actor’s Profession._ + +Before proceeding to give an account of the actors in the ancient Greek +drama, there are one or two points which ought to be made clear, in order +to avoid possible misconceptions. In the first place the actors and the +chorus were entirely distinct from one another. The chorus was chosen and +paid by the choregus, and performed in the orchestra. The actors were +hired by the state, and their proper place was upon the stage. The term +‘hypokrites’, or ‘actor’, was never applied to the members of the chorus. +It was not even applied to all the performers upon the stage, but only to +such of them as took a prominent part in the dialogue. The various mute +characters, such as the soldiers and attendants, and also the subordinate +characters who had only a few words to say, were not dignified with +the title of ‘actor’. In the second place it should be remembered that +the Greek actors invariably wore masks, and were consequently able to +appear in several parts in the course of the same performance. When, +therefore, it is said that in the early history of Greek tragedy only +a single actor was employed in each play, this does not imply that the +number of characters was limited to one. All it implies is that only one +character could appear at a time. The number of actors in a Greek play +never exceeded three, even in the latest period. But the effect of this +regulation upon the capacities of the Greek drama was less cramping and +restrictive than might have been supposed. There was no limitation to the +number of mute and subordinate characters which might be introduced at +any time upon the stage. There was no restriction upon the number of the +more prominent characters, provided they were not brought upon the stage +simultaneously. The only limitation was this—that not more than three of +the more prominent characters could take part in the dialogue in the +course of the same scene. + +The principal function of the actors was to carry on the dialogue and +work out the action of the play. The principal function of the chorus +was to sing the odes which filled up the pauses in the action. Of course +very frequently the chorus took part in the dialogue; but, speaking in +general terms, the dialogue was the business of the actors. Such was +the condition of things during the best period of the Attic drama. But +in former times the case had been very different. At first the whole +performance was a choral one, and consisted simply of the songs and +hymns chanted at the festivals of Dionysus. There were no actors and +there was no dialogue. The history of the early development of the drama +is in other words the history of the gradual introduction of actors +and dialogue into a choral entertainment, and the gradual increase in +the importance of the dialogue, until eventually it overshadowed the +choral part altogether. The first step in the process by which a lyrical +performance was converted into a dramatic one was as follows. The custom +arose of filling up the intervals between the different portions of the +choral songs with recitations by the leader of the chorus, and dialogues +between him and the other members. For this purpose the leader of the +chorus used to mount upon a small table. The subject of the recitations +and the dialogues would be the same as the subject of the ode, and would +in most cases refer to the adventures of the god Dionysus. In these +interludes by the leader of the chorus lay the germ of the drama. The +performance as a whole was still essentially lyrical, but the practice +of inserting dialogue had been established.[670] In the case of tragedy +the next step forward was taken by Thespis. He introduced a single +actor, who took the part which had previously been taken by the leader +of the chorus, and filled up the pauses in the choral odes either with +monologues or with dialogues between himself and the leader.[671] Not +much is known about the drama of Thespis except that it was still +essentially lyrical. But as he is said to have employed masks, it is +clear that the single actor might appear in different characters in +successive scenes, and in this way some approach might be made to a +dramatic representation of a story.[672] The decisive innovation was due +to Aeschylus. He introduced a second actor, and effected a total change +in the character of the performance. Henceforward the intervals between +the choral odes were filled with dialogues between the two actors upon +the stage, instead of dialogues between the single actor and the leader +of the chorus. At the same time Aeschylus cut down the length of the +choral odes, and made the dialogue the essential and prominent feature of +the performance.[673] The result was a radical change in the nature of +tragedy: it became a dramatic instead of a lyrical form of art. During +the greater part of his career Aeschylus was contented with two actors. +Three at least out of his seven extant plays are written for performance +by two actors only.[674] This limitation upon the number of the +performers necessitated great simplicity in the construction of the play, +since it was impossible for more than two personages to take part in the +dialogue at the same time. Hence the earlier plays of Aeschylus, though +essentially dramatic in comparison with anything which preceded them, are +simple in plot and lyrical in tone when compared with the tragedies of +his successors. The different scenes rather serve to unfold a series of +pictures than to develop a complicated plot. Descriptive speeches take +the place of animated dialogue. Sophocles added greatly to the capacities +of the drama by introducing a third actor.[675] He was thus enabled to +give much greater variety and spirit to the dialogue. In his hands +for the first time tragedy became completely dramatic, and the lyrical +element was thrust still further into the background. The innovation of +Sophocles was adopted by Aeschylus in his later years, and the Orestean +trilogy—the last and most elaborate of his works—requires three actors. +Under Sophocles tragedy received its full development. The number of +actors in tragedy was henceforward limited to three. + +The satyric drama was intimately connected with tragedy, and the number +of actors was apparently the same. Thus the Cyclops of Euripides, +the only extant satyric play, requires three actors. In the Naples +vase-painting, which represents the performers in a satyric play, three +actors are depicted.[676] It is true that the Alcestis of Euripides, +which was performed in place of the usual satyric drama, only requires +two actors. But the number in this case was probably due to the choice of +the poet, and not to any official regulation. In regard to comedy, very +little is known as to the steps by which it was developed. The source of +comedy lay in the phallic songs performed at the festivals of Dionysus. +The dramatic element originated in the interludes by the leader of the +chorus. The process of development must have been much the same as in +tragedy; but the names of the persons who introduced actors and dialogue +into comedy were forgotten even in Aristotle’s time. The only piece of +information upon the subject is to the effect that Cratinus was the first +to limit the number of actors to three, and that before his time there +was no regulation as to the number of persons introduced upon the stage. +After the time of Cratinus there were no further innovations, and the +number of the actors in comedy was permanently fixed at three.[677] + +This number was never exceeded either in comedy or in tragedy. All the +extant Greek plays could be performed by three actors. It is sometimes +said that the Oedipus Coloneus of Sophocles requires four actors; but +this is not the case. Although there are several occasions on which +Ismene appears upon the stage simultaneously with three other personages, +still on each of these occasions she does not say a word, but is merely +a mute figure. It is evident therefore that during this portion of the +play her part was taken by a ‘super’, while at the beginning and end +of the play, where she had speeches to make, the part was acted by the +tritagonist.[678] It might at first sight appear that the comedies of +Aristophanes require more than three actors; but investigations have +shown that there is not one of his plays which could not be performed by +this number, assisted by a supply of ‘supers’.[679] + +The smallness of the number of the actors necessarily limited the +capacities of the Greek drama. The realistic effect produced by a +promiscuous conversation between a large group of persons was impossible +upon the Greek stage. Sometimes a certain awkwardness was caused by +the limitation in the number of the performers. For instance, at the +end of the Orestes of Euripides, Orestes is seen upon the roof of the +palace threatening to kill Hermione, and Pylades is standing beside +him. Menelaus from below makes a piteous appeal to Pylades, but Pylades +says not a single word in reply, but leaves Orestes to answer for him. +His silence is very unnatural, and is only to be accounted for by the +fact that there was no actor to spare, and therefore the poet could not +put any words in his mouth. Two of the actors were already employed in +playing the parts of Orestes and Menelaus, and the third was required +for Apollo, who comes on the scene immediately afterwards. Consequently +the part of Pylades had to be taken by a mute personage. Again there is +the scene at the end of the Electra of Euripides. Orestes has heard his +fate, and as he leaves the stage he bids farewell to Pylades, and urges +him to marry his sister Electra. Pylades maintains a stolid silence, +and the Dioscuri reply on his behalf. Here again his silence is due to +the necessities of the case. The three actors with whom the poet was +supplied were all employed, and Pylades was merely a dumb figure. Similar +instances of awkward and almost ludicrous silence on the part of certain +characters will occur to all readers of the Greek drama. But they are +not so numerous as might have been expected, and it is astonishing to +find how successfully the Greek drama, keeping within its own peculiar +limits, was able to accomplish its ends with three actors only. + +There were several advantages in the smallness of the number. In the +first place the dialogue gained in clearness and simplicity, owing to the +fewness of the persons taking part in it. This simplicity was especially +well suited to the severe and statuesque character of Greek tragedy, in +which the rapid movement of a dialogue between a large number of persons +would have been altogether inappropriate. In the extant Greek tragedies +even the three actors permitted by custom are used with considerable +reserve. In most cases one of them stands by in silence, while the other +two carry on the dialogue. The two change from time to time, but it is +only on rare occasions and for brief periods that all three converse +promiscuously together. There was another obvious advantage in the +restriction. As only three actors were needed, it was easy to ensure that +they should all be performers of first-rate excellence. In modern times +the large number of actors required constitutes a great difficulty. It +is rare to see the subordinate characters in a play of Shakespeare even +tolerably performed. The effect of the piece is spoiled by the feebleness +of the princes, dukes, lords, and ladies who crowd the stage. In the +Greek drama, owing to the limitation upon the number of the performers, +this difficulty was avoided, and a high standard of excellence maintained +throughout the play. It was all the more necessary, among the Greeks, to +take some precaution of this kind, since the size of the theatre demanded +unusual powers in the actor. In a modern theatre an actor, however poor, +can at any rate usually be heard. But in the vast open-air theatre at +Athens it required a man with an exceptionally clear and powerful voice +to make himself audible to the vast multitude of spectators. It cannot +have been an easy task to find actors who combined histrionic talent with +voices of sufficient power, and if a large number had been required, +there would have been great difficulty in meeting the demand. + +The original Greek word for an actor was ‘hypokrites’. Etymologically +the word seems to have meant ‘one who answers’.[680] In the times +before Aeschylus, when there was only one actor, all the dialogue was +necessarily carried on between the actor and the chorus. It is therefore +not improbable that the duty of replying to the questions and remarks +of the chorus may have been regarded as the salient feature in the +performance of the actor, and have given rise to his name, as the old +grammarians assert. In the course of the fourth century the old Attic +word for an actor went out of use, and a new one was substituted. +Henceforward actors were generally called ‘artists’, or ‘artists of +Dionysus’.[681] + +As far as tragedy is concerned, the art of acting may be said to have +commenced in the time of Thespis. But actors did not come into existence +as a separate class until many years afterwards. Before the period of +Aeschylus, when only a single actor was required, his part was taken +by the poet. It is expressly said that Thespis was ‘himself acting, +according to ancient custom’, at that performance which excited the +disapproval of Solon.[682] But when a second actor was introduced by +Aeschylus, then the actor’s profession became of necessity distinct +from that of the poet. For some time afterwards the poets continued +to act occasionally in their own tragedies, side by side with the +professional actors. But the practice went gradually out of fashion in +the course of the earlier part of the fifth century. Aeschylus appears, +from the statement in his Life, to have abandoned the stage even before +the introduction of a second actor.[683] Sophocles was prevented from +appearing as an actor by the weakness of his voice. It is true that he +sometimes performed in public. In the Thamyris he played the harp, and +in the Nausicaa he delighted the spectators by his skill with the ball. +But it is not likely that on either of these occasions he took a regular +actor’s part. He probably appeared upon the scene merely as a mute +character, in order to show his skill with the harp and the ball.[684] +After the time of Sophocles there are no further instances of tragic +poets performing in their own plays.[685] As to the early history of +comic acting very little is known. Cratinus is mentioned as one of the +old poets who were called ‘dancers’, and it is therefore probable that +he acted in his own comedies. Crates is said to have begun his career +as an actor of Cratinus.[686] But after his time there is no certain +instance of a comic poet appearing upon the stage. The professional actor +was universally employed. The statement that Aristophanes acted the part +of Cleon in the Knights is due to a misconception on the part of the +scholiast.[687] + +It appears then that it was in the beginning of the fifth century that +the profession of the actor came into existence as a distinct occupation. +It grew very rapidly in importance. At first the actors who took part in +the competitions were regarded as mere subordinates, and had no share +in the honours and rewards. But towards the middle of the century a +change was made, and prizes began to be instituted for the best actors, +as well as for the best poets. The names of the actors began to be +recorded in the official lists of victors, side by side with those of +the poets and choregi.[688] In the fourth century the actors sprang +into still greater prominence. The art of acting tended to outshine the +art of dramatic writing. An age of great actors succeeded to an age +of great poets. The same phenomenon is not uncommon in the theatrical +history of other nations. In England, for instance, a period of dramatic +productiveness was followed by a period of sterility and insignificance, +and from the time of Garrick downwards the names of the great actors, +who have made themselves famous by interpreting the masterpieces of +Shakespeare, are more conspicuous than the names of dramatic authors. In +Athens the fourth century was the period when acting was brought to the +greatest perfection. To such an extent had the importance of the actor’s +profession increased, that in Aristotle’s time a play depended more for +its success upon the skill of the actor than upon the genius of the poet. +The effect upon dramatic writing was most pernicious. The poets began to +write their plays with a view to exhibiting the capacities of the actors. +Scenes which had no connexion with the plot were introduced for the sole +purpose of enabling an actor to make a display of his talents.[689] +Sophocles is said by one of the old grammarians to have been guilty of +the same sort of practice. But if there is any truth in the statement, +the evil effects are not very apparent in the extant tragedies.[690] +The charge might be brought with more plausibility against the monodies +of Euripides, which are often feeble from a literary point of view, but +would enable an actor with a fine voice to make a great impression. +However, it was not until the fourth century that the influence of the +actors became so universal as to inflict distinct injury upon the art of +dramatic writing. + +The selection of the necessary number of actors for each dramatic +performance was, except in very early times, undertaken by the state. The +details in connexion with this arrangement have already been discussed +in a previous chapter.[691] The main points may be recapitulated here. +During the early part of the fifth century the poets chose their own +actors. Certain poets and certain actors were permanently associated +together. But as the actors increased in importance, they were placed +on the same footing as the poets and choregi, and were appointed by +the state. They were then distributed among the poets by lot. In the +course of the fourth century the use of the lot was discontinued in the +case of tragedy, and a new arrangement was adopted, which was rendered +possible by the fact that each tragic poet exhibited several tragedies +at the same time. Under the new system each tragedy was performed by a +different actor, and in this way all the competing poets enjoyed in turn +the services of all the actors. In comedy, as each poet exhibited only a +single play, the old system of distribution by lot was retained. If an +actor was engaged for one of the great Athenian festivals, and failed +to put in an appearance, he was fined by the state. On one occasion +Athenodorus, the great tragic actor, was hired to perform at the City +Dionysia. But he failed to keep his engagement, as he preferred to be +present and perform at the festivities held by Alexander the Great in +Phoenicia, after his return from Egypt. A heavy fine was inflicted upon +him in consequence, and was paid by Alexander.[692] + + +§ 2. _The distribution of the Parts among the Actors._ + +It has been shown that the number of the actors in a Greek play was +limited to three. The principal actor was called the protagonist; next in +importance came the deuteragonist; the tritagonist played the inferior +characters.[693] The importance of the protagonist on the Greek stage +has been pointed out already.[694] In the ordinary theatrical language +of the time a play was said to be ‘acted by’ the protagonist, as if the +other actors were of no account. The protagonist was publicly appointed +by the state, but was allowed to choose the second and third actors +at his own discretion. In the same way the prize for acting at each +festival was confined to the protagonists. In tragedy more especially +the protagonist was a person of the greatest importance. The whole +structure of a Greek tragedy was designed with the object of fixing the +interest upon some grand central figure. The significance of the other +characters consisted mainly in their capacity to excite the passions +and draw forth the sentiments of the leading personage. This being so, +it was essential that the protagonist should concentrate the interest +upon himself; otherwise the harmony and balance of the play would have +been destroyed. Hence the subordinate actors were strictly forbidden to +attempt to outshine the protagonist. Even if they had finer voices than +the protagonist, they were made to moderate and restrain their powers, +so as to allow the protagonist to retain the superiority, and rivet the +attention of the spectators upon the central character.[695] The jealousy +of protagonists towards their fellow-actors is well exemplified by the +story about Theodorus, who had a theory that the first speaker in a play +always attracted the sympathies of the audience, and therefore would +never allow any other actor, however inferior, to appear upon the stage +before himself.[696] + +The distribution of the different parts among the actors was undertaken +by the poet if the play was a new one.[697] But if an old play was being +reproduced, the matter would be arranged by the protagonist who had the +management of the performance. The three actors between them filled all +the parts in a play, appearing in various characters successively. Such +a practice was rendered possible by the use of masks. An actor had only +to change his mask and his dress, and he could then reappear in a new +character. Changes of this kind could be effected in a very few moments, +as is shown by the one or two traditions on the subject which have been +preserved by the ancient scholiasts. For example, in the opening scene of +the Phoenissae Jocasta speaks the prologue, and then leaves the stage. +Thereupon Antigone and an old attendant mount by a staircase on to the +roof of the palace, in order to view the Argive army encamped outside +the walls. The scholiast tells us that the protagonist played the parts +both of Jocasta and of Antigone. It was necessary, therefore, after +Jocasta had left the stage, that there should be a slight interval before +Antigone appeared upon the palace roof, to give the actor time to change +his mask and dress. Euripides managed this by making the attendant come +out alone upon the roof at first, and look about him to see that the +coast is clear, while he addresses a few words to Antigone, who is still +inside the palace. When he sees that all is safe, he calls on Antigone to +follow after him, and she thereupon mounts the staircase, and appears to +the spectators. The speech of the attendant, while he is looking about +upon the roof, consists of only fifteen iambic lines. Thus the space of +time required to speak fifteen lines was enough to enable an actor to +change from one character to another.[698] There is a further instance +which shows that even less time was necessary. In the Choephori, when +Aegisthus is murdered, a servant rushes out upon the stage and calls to +Clytaemnestra. As Clytaemnestra comes out, he apparently runs back into +the palace. Clytaemnestra speaks five lines, and then Orestes hastens out +of the palace, followed by Pylades. In the scene which ensues Pylades has +three lines to speak; and the scholiast says that his part was taken by +the servant who had just left the stage, so as to avoid the necessity of +four actors. The servant must therefore have changed his mask in a very +few moments.[699] + +In the distribution of parts the protagonist took the principal +character. The parts of Oedipus, Electra, and Antigone, in the plays +of the same name by Sophocles, are specially mentioned as having been +acted by celebrated protagonists. Orestes in the play of Euripides is +also described as the part of the protagonist.[700] Usually, as in the +above instances, the chief personage gave the name to the piece. But +this was not always the case. In the Oenomaus of Sophocles the part of +Oenomaus was played by the tritagonist Aeschines. In the Cresphontes of +Euripides the principal character was Merope, and was taken by Theodorus. +The part of Cresphontes fell to Aeschines as tritagonist.[701] In the +Agamemnon of Aeschylus most likely the protagonist played the part of +Clytaemnestra, as this is certainly the most impressive character in the +play, though not the one with which the spectators are in sympathy. The +protagonist had also to take his share of the subordinate characters when +he could be spared. It has already been mentioned that in the Phoenissae +of Euripides the protagonist appeared in the part of Antigone as well +as in that of Jocasta. At times he took even the smallest characters +if the necessities of the play demanded it. Plutarch states that the +protagonist, in the part of a messenger or an attendant, often gained +more applause than the actor who bore the sceptre and the crown.[702] +It was, in fact, the chief advantage of the Greek system that even the +subordinate characters were played with as much excellence as the more +important ones. The tritagonist took what in modern times would be +called the ‘heavy’ parts. It was his special privilege, as Demosthenes +remarks, to play the tyrant and the sceptred monarch.[703] Aeschines, +in his career as tritagonist, often had to act gloomy tyrants of this +kind, such as Creon, Cresphontes, and Oenomaus. Such characters did not +require great powers in the actor. There was no pathos to be excited, no +play of conflicting emotions to be exhibited. All that was necessary was +a powerful voice, and a capacity for declaiming verses. Most likely for +the same reason the tritagonist usually spoke the prologues, which also +did not require much more in the actor than good powers of elocution. +Thus the ghost of Polydorus, which speaks the prologue in the Hecuba of +Euripides, was acted by Aeschines as tritagonist.[704] The deuteragonist +took the parts which, in point of interest, were intermediate between the +leading characters and the heavy parts which fell to the tritagonist. +There are not, however, any traditions as to particular characters having +been played by the deuteragonist. Attempts have been made in modern times +to assign the characters in the extant Greek dramas to the protagonist, +deuteragonist, and tritagonist respectively.[705] Such speculations are +interesting, in so far as they show that all the existing plays could be +perfectly well performed by three actors. Otherwise they are not of very +great value. There is generally no difficulty in deciding which was the +leading character. But it is obvious that the subordinate parts might be +distributed in various ways; and no doubt the arrangement differed at +different periods. There are no traditions on the subject in addition to +those already mentioned. Any attempt, therefore, to reproduce the exact +arrangement adopted at a particular period must depend more or less upon +conjecture. + + +§ 3. _Extra Performers._ + +For every Greek play a chorus was provided by the choregus, and three +actors were supplied by the state. But in most plays a certain number +of additional performers was required. The parts which these extra +performers had to fill may be divided, roughly speaking, into three +classes. In the first place there were the various mute personages, who +simply appeared upon the stage, and did nothing more. The second class +consisted of minor characters with only a few words to say. In these +cases extra performers were required, either because the regular actors +were already occupied, or because the part was that of a boy or girl, +which the regular actor would be unable to take. Thirdly, in many cases +a small subordinate chorus was required, in addition to the ordinary +one. The general name for the persons who undertook these parts was +‘parachoregemata’.[706] This word obviously means something which is +supplied by the choregus in addition to his ordinary expenditure. It +follows, therefore, that the cost of the extra performers was borne by +the choregus. Properly he was only responsible for the chorus; but if +additional men were required, he had to supply them. This conclusion is +confirmed by Plutarch’s story of a certain tragic actor who was going +to appear as a queen, but refused to proceed with the part, unless the +choregus provided him with a train of female attendants.[707] Extra +performers were especially necessary in the Old Comedy, in which a great +number of characters appear upon the stage. + +It remains to consider more in detail the three classes of +‘parachoregemata’[708]. The mute personages appeared most frequently +in the shape of attendants, body-guards, crowds of people, and so on. +The Oedipus Rex opens with a number of suppliants kneeling at the altar +before the palace of the king. In the Choephori Orestes and Pylades +are accompanied by attendants. The judgement scene in the Eumenides +requires twelve performers to play the parts of the members of the +Areopagus. In the Agamemnon, when the king and Cassandra arrive in the +chariot, servants stand ready to spread carpets beneath their feet.[709] +Probably in many other instances great personages were accompanied by +attendants, although there is no special reference to them in the play. +Not infrequently more prominent characters appeared upon the stage as +mute figures. Pylades says nothing throughout the Electra of Sophocles +and the Electra of Euripides. In the latter play one of the Dioscuri +must also have been a dumb figure, since two actors were already upon +the stage when the Dioscuri make their appearance. The person of Force +in the Prometheus Vinctus is another example. A very frequent occasion +for the employment of mute characters was in pathetic scenes between +parents and their children. The children appear as silent figures, but +give occasion for touching speeches by their parents. There is an example +in the Ajax of Sophocles, where Ajax addresses his son Eurysaces. But the +instances in Euripides are much more frequent. There is the celebrated +scene in the Medea, where Medea half relents at the sight of her +children. There is the address of Megara to her children in the Hercules +Furens. Other examples are to be found in the introduction of Manto, the +daughter of Teiresias, in the Phoenissae, and of Polymestor’s children +in the Hecuba.[710] Mute figures were also very useful in occasionally +personating one of the regular characters of the play, when the actor +of the character was temporarily required for another purpose. It has +already been pointed out that in the middle of the Oedipus Coloneus the +part of Ismene is played by a dumb personage, to enable the previous +actor of the part to appear in another character. In the final scene of +Orestes, most of the prominent characters are brought upon the stage +together, after the fashion of a modern drama. But only three of them +can speak: Helen, Hermione, Electra, and Pylades are all mute figures. +The silence of Pylades is especially unnatural. In cases of this kind an +attempt is made to produce effects which were hardly compatible with the +limited resources of Greek tragedy. + +The second class of extra performers took all those minor parts in which +there was a certain amount of speaking or singing, but which it was +impossible for the regular actors to take. In tragedy such performers +were mostly required for the boys’ parts, which were unsuitable for +grown-up actors. Euripides was especially fond of introducing boys upon +the stage. In the Alcestis Eumelus bewails his mother’s death in a short +ode. Another example is the mournful dialogue between Andromache and her +little son Molossus.[711] In the Old Comedy these additional actors were +frequently needed to perform small parts at times when the three regular +actors were already on the stage. Examples are very numerous. There are +the daughters of Trygaeus in the Peace, and the daughters of the Megarian +in the Acharnians. The herald and Pseudartabas are additional examples +from the Acharnians.[712] + +In the third place an extra chorus was sometimes required. The Propompi +in the Eumenides, and the chorus of boys in the Wasps, both appear side +by side with the regular chorus, and must therefore have been personated +by extra performers. An additional chorus, consisting of shepherds, was +also required in the Alexander of Euripides.[713] Sometimes the extra +chorus was not visible to the spectators, but sang behind the scenes. In +such cases the singing might be done by members of the regular chorus, +if they had not yet entered the orchestra. Examples are to be found in +the chorus of frogs in the Frogs of Aristophanes, and Agathon’s chorus in +the Thesmophoriazusae.[714] Their part would be taken by members of the +regular chorus. In the opening scene of the Hippolytus a band of huntsmen +sing a short ode to Artemis upon the stage. Immediately after their +disappearance the regular chorus, consisting of women of Troezen, enters +the orchestra. In this case the huntsmen cannot have been personated by +members of the regular chorus; but it is possible that the singing was +done by the chorus behind the scenes, while the huntsmen were represented +by mute figures.[715] + + +§ 4. _Costume of the Tragic Actors._ + +The dress of the actors in tragedy was always entirely distinct from +that of the chorus. The chorus consisted originally of satyrs, the +half-human followers of Dionysus. Later on it came to be composed in most +cases of ordinary citizens, and was dressed accordingly. But the actors +represented from the first the gods and heroes of the old mythology. For +them a different costume was required. The practice of the Greeks in +regard to this costume was totally opposed to all modern notions upon +the subject. Historical accuracy and archaeological minuteness in the +mounting of a play were matters of complete indifference to the Greeks. +Accordingly, when bringing these heroic characters upon the stage, +they never made any attempt to produce an accurate imitation of the +costume of the Homeric period. At the same time they were not content +that the heroes and gods of their tragedy should appear upon the scene +in the garments of ordinary life. Such an arrangement would have been +inconsistent with the ideal character of Greek tragedy. A special dress +was therefore employed, similar to that of common life, but more flowing +and dignified. The garments were dyed with every variety of brilliant +colour. The bulk of the actor was increased by padding his chest and +limbs, and placing huge wooden soles under his feet. Masks were employed +in which every feature was exaggerated, to give superhuman dignity +and terror to the expression. In this way a conventional costume was +elaborated, which continued for centuries to be the regular dress of the +tragic actors. All the leading characters in a Greek tragedy were dressed +in this fashion, with only such slight variations and additions as the +particular case required. + +The origin of this tragic costume is a subject about which very little +is known. According to the later Greek tradition it was invented almost +entirely by Aeschylus.[716] But this is probably an exaggeration. +Aeschylus was no doubt mainly instrumental in developing and improving +the costume, and giving it a definite shape. But that the whole idea of +it was his own creation is hardly credible. Most likely it had existed, +though in a less elaborate form, long before his time. As for its origin, +the most plausible view seems to be that it was derived from the old +traditional garb of the Bacchic cultus, worn by Dionysus himself and by +his chief attendants.[717] Several indications point in this direction. +In early works of art Dionysus and his followers often appear in a long +flowing robe, not unlike that of the tragic stage. They also wear a tall +hunting boot, which was sometimes called the cothurnus, and which may +have been the prototype from which the tragic cothurnus was developed. +The custom of disguising the features with a mask or some similar device +was always a regular institution in the mummeries connected with the +Bacchic worship. The old comic actors, before the invention of the +theatrical mask, used to smear their faces with wine, or cover them with +fig-leaves. Masks were regularly worn in the processions of Dionysus down +to the latest times. The Latin peasantry, at their Bacchic festivals, +used to cover their faces with masks made out of the bark of trees.[718] +All these facts are in favour of the conclusion that the tragic dress, +with its mask, its cothurnus, and its flowing robe, was not so much the +invention of the fifth century as a development from the old festal +costume.[719] This theory has also the advantage of ascribing a parallel +origin to the dresses of the chorus and those of the actors. While the +chorus, in the older drama, appeared in the guise of satyrs or rustic +votaries of Dionysus, the actors, whose part was more dignified, assumed +the garb of Dionysus himself and of his chief attendants. One ancient +tradition asserts that the tragic dress was copied in later times by +the hierophants and torch-bearers at the Eleusinian mysteries.[720] +Some scholars have twisted this tradition round, and suggested that it +was from the hierophants and torch-bearers that the first notion of the +tragic dress was borrowed. But neither view can be regarded as probable. +That the two costumes were not dissimilar seems to be proved by the +existence of the tradition referred to. But it is unlikely that the garb +used at the performances in honour of one deity should have been borrowed +from the cultus of another. The resemblance may be better explained by +the supposition that both costumes were ancient religious dresses, used +in the worship of Dionysus and Demeter respectively. + +[Illustration: FIG. 15.] + +Whatever may have been the origin of the tragic costume, there is no +doubt that the form of it which eventually prevailed upon the Greek stage +dates from the time of Aeschylus. His creative genius revolutionized +every department of Greek tragedy. It was he who transformed it into an +essentially dramatic species of art, and gave it the characteristics +of grandeur and terror. It was necessary to make a corresponding +improvement in the dresses of the actors, and this reform also was +effected by Aeschylus. The type of costume which he gradually developed +was so well adapted to its purpose, that it continued unchanged in its +principal characteristics throughout the remaining history of Greek +tragedy. Subsequent generations, while making various small additions +and alterations, never altogether abandoned the original design. Our +knowledge of the subject is derived partly from the descriptions of +Pollux and others, partly from works of art. Few of these works, +unfortunately, are of early date. There is the Naples vase, belonging to +the end of the fifth century, and depicting the performers in a satyric +play. The two actors who take the heroic parts in this performance (Fig. +22) are dressed more or less closely in the tragic style. There is also a +votive relief (Fig. 15) from the Peiraeeus, of the early fourth century, +in which three tragic actors are depicted in stage costume, two of them +with their masks in their hands.[721] But the work in this relief is +so bare and devoid of detail, that it adds little to our knowledge. +The Andromeda vase, of the same date, exhibits Andromeda chained to a +rock, with Perseus and other figures on each side of her, and dressed +in a costume which was evidently suggested by that of tragedy, though +it is not a complete theatrical dress.[722] Numerous vases from Magna +Graecia, belonging mostly to the fourth century, represent scenes out of +tragedies.[723] But these too are not portrayed as theatrical scenes; +and the costumes of the characters, though often resembling those of the +tragic stage, cannot be regarded as regular actors’ costumes. Still, all +these paintings are valuable, as exhibiting in a general way some of +the main features of the tragic dress. Apart from examples of the above +kind, the works of art on which we have to depend are all of late date, +and mostly of Italian origin.[724] But Greek tragedies were commonly +performed in Italy even in imperial times; and Roman tragedy was in all +respects a mere reproduction of the Greek. Hence delineations of tragic +scenes and figures, though Italian in origin, present the characteristics +of the Greek stage. It would be unsafe to depend upon them for points +of minute detail. But they correspond in the main with the descriptions +of Pollux, and it is possible to obtain from them a fairly trustworthy +picture of the general appearance of the Greek actors. The accompanying +figure of a tragic actor (Fig. 16) is copied from an ivory statuette +found in the ruins of a villa near Rieti.[725] On comparing together +these various representations, which range in date over a period of +five or six hundred years, it is interesting to find that they all bear +a strong family resemblance to one another. The pictures of the tragic +actor, whether found on Greek vases, Etruscan mosaics, or wall-paintings +of Cyrene and Pompeii, obviously belong to one common type. In spite of +considerable differences in point of detail they portray the same general +conception. This fact confirms the ancient tradition, that the costume +of the tragic stage, in all its more important features, was definitely +settled by Aeschylus in the course of the fifth century. + +The contrast between the ancient and the modern actor is marked by +nothing so conspicuously as by the use of masks. These masks, or similar +devices, were a regular feature in the old Dionysiac worship, and were +probably inherited as such by the tragic stage, and not invented of set +purpose. With the growth of tragedy they soon acquired a new character. +Thespis, the earliest of tragic actors, is said at the commencement of +his career to have merely painted his face with white lead or purslane. +Later on he employed masks; but these were of a very simple character, +consisting merely of linen, without paint or colouring. Choerilus +introduced certain improvements which are not specified. Phrynichus set +the example of using female masks.[726] Aeschylus was the first to employ +painted masks, and to portray features of a dreadful and awe-inspiring +character. Though not the inventor of the tragic mask, as some ancient +writers assert, he was the first to give it that distinctive character +from which in later times it never varied except in detail.[727] After +the time of Aeschylus there is no further mention of any radical +alterations or improvements in the manufacture of masks. + +The use of masks is indissolubly connected with the style and character +of Greek tragedy. It is said to have added resonance to the actor’s +voice; and this was a point of great importance in the vast theatres of +the ancients.[728] Also without masks it would have been impossible +for one actor to play several parts, or for men to play the parts of +women. At the same time the practice had its inconvenient side. The +Greek actor was deprived of any opportunity for displaying those powers +of facial expression which are one of the chief excellences in modern +acting. It was only by his gestures that he could emphasize the meaning +of what he had to say: his features remained immovable. But niceties of +facial expression would have been scarcely visible in the huge expanse +of a Greek theatre. The tragic mask, on which were depicted in bold and +striking lines the main traits in the character represented, was really +much more effective, and could be seen by the most distant spectator. +Then again it must have been difficult, if not impossible, for a Greek +actor to delineate finely drawn shades of individual character. The masks +necessarily ran in general types, such as that of the brutal tyrant, +the crafty statesman, the suffering maiden, and so on. The acting would +have to correspond. It would be difficult to imagine the part of Hamlet +acted in a mask. But the characters of Greek tragedy were mostly types +rather than individuals. The heroes and heroines were drawn in broad +general outlines, and there was little attempt at delicate strokes +of character-painting. The use of masks no doubt helped to give this +particular bent to Greek tragedy. + +[Illustration: FIG. 16.] + +Masks were generally made of linen. Cork and wood were occasionally +used.[729] The mask covered the whole of the head, both in front +and behind.[730] Caps were often worn underneath, to serve as a +protection.[731] The white of the eye was painted on the mask, but the +place for the pupil was left hollow, to enable the actor to see.[732] +The expression of the tragic mask was gloomy and often fierce; the mouth +was opened wide, to give a clear outlet to the actor’s voice. One of +the most characteristic features of the tragic mask was the onkos,[733] +a cone-shaped prolongation of the upper part of the mask above the +forehead, intended to give size and impressiveness to the face, and +used where dignity was to be imparted. It varied in size according to +the character of the personage. The onkos of the tyrant was especially +large; that of women was less than that of men. A character was not +necessarily represented by the same mask throughout the piece. The +effects of misfortune or of accident had often to be depicted by a fresh +mask. For instance, in the Helen of Euripides Helen returns upon the +stage with her hair shorn off, and her cheeks pale with weeping. Oedipus, +at the end of the Oedipus Tyrannus of Sophocles, is seen with blinded +eyes and blood-stained face. In such cases a change of mask must have +been necessary. There are a few occasions in the extant tragedies where +a change of facial expression seems to be demanded by the circumstances, +but was rendered impossible by the mask. Thus in the Electra of +Sophocles, the heroine is unable to show her joy at her brother’s return, +and the poet has to get over this as best he can. He makes Orestes bid +her show no signs of joy for fear of arousing suspicion, while she +declares that there is no risk of this, for hatred of her mother has +become too engrained in her for her expression to change suddenly, and +her joy itself will bring tears and not laughter.[734] + +The number and variety of the masks used in tragedy may be seen from +the accounts in Pollux. For the ordinary tragic personages there were +regular masks of a stereotyped character. Pollux enumerates twenty-eight +kinds.[735] His information was derived from Alexandrian sources, and +his list represents the number of masks which were employed on the later +Greek stage for the ordinary characters of tragedy. It is not likely +that in the time of Sophocles or Euripides the use of masks was reduced +so completely to a system as in the later period; but the descriptions +in Pollux will give an adequate idea of the style of the masks used in +earlier times. Of the twenty-eight masks described by Pollux six are for +old men, eight for young men, three for attendants, and eleven for women. +The principal features by which the different masks are discriminated +from one another are the style of the hair, the colour of the complexion, +the height of the onkos, and the expression of the eyes. To take a few +examples. The strong and powerful man, such as the tyrant, has thick +black hair and beard, a tall onkos, and a frown upon his brow. The man +wasted by disease has fair hair, a pale complexion, and a smaller onkos. +The handsome youth has fair ringlets, a light complexion, and bright +eyes. The lover is distinguished by black hair and a pale complexion. The +maiden in misfortune has her hair cut short in token of sorrow. The aged +lady has white hair and a small onkos, and her complexion is rather pale. +Attendants and messengers are marked by special characteristics. One of +them wears a cap, another has a peaked beard, a third has a snub nose +and hair drawn back. One sees from these examples how completely Greek +tragedy was dominated by conventional rules, in this as in all other +respects. As soon as a personage entered the stage, his mask alone was +enough to give the spectators a very fair conception of his character and +position. + +[Illustration: FIG. 17.] + +The twenty-eight tragic masks enumerated by Pollux were used for the +ordinary characters of tragedy, and formed a regular part of the stock +of the Greek stage-manager. But special masks were required when any +unusual character was introduced. Pollux gives a long list of such +masks.[736] In the first place there were numbers of mythological beings +with strange attributes. Actaeon had to be represented with horns, Argo +with a multitude of eyes. Evippe in the play of Euripides had the head +of a mare. A special mask of this kind must have been required to depict +Io with the ox-horns in the Prometheus Vinctus of Aeschylus. A second +class of special masks was needed to represent allegorical figures such +as Justice, Persuasion, Deceit, Jealousy. Of this kind are the figures of +Death in the Alcestis of Euripides, and Frenzy in the Hercules Furens. +Lastly, there were personifications of cities, rivers, and mountains. +Five specimens of ancient tragic masks are given in figs. 17, 18. The +first is the mask of a youth, the fifth that of a man; the second and +third are probably masks of women. The fourth is an example of one of +the special masks, and depicts Perseus with the cap of darkness upon his +head.[737] + +[Illustration: FIG. 18.] + +We come now to the dress of the tragic actors. Nothing is known as to +the appearance of this dress in the time of Thespis and his immediate +successors. Our information refers solely to the tragic costume as +modified and developed by Aeschylus in the course of the fifth century. +The object of Aeschylus in these innovations was to add fresh splendour +to the costume, and make it worthy of the colossal beings by which his +stage was peopled. For this purpose he employed various devices. Among +these was the cothurnus, or tragic boot, which was intended to increase +the stature of the actors, and to give them an appearance of superhuman +grandeur. It was a boot with a wooden sole of enormous thickness attached +to it. The wooden sole was painted in various colours.[738] According +to some grammarians Aeschylus invented the boot altogether;[739] others +say his innovation consisted merely in giving increased thickness to the +sole, and so raising the height of the actors.[740] This latter view +is probably the correct one. The original of the cothurnus, as already +remarked, may very likely have been the hunting boot of the same name +worn by Dionysius, which was a boot reaching high up the calf, but +with soles of ordinary size. After the time of Aeschylus the tragic +cothurnus continued to be a regular feature in theatrical costume down +to the latest period of Greek and Roman tragedy.[741] It varied in +height according to the dignity and position of the wearers, a king, for +instance, being provided with a larger cothurnus than a mere attendant. +In this way the physical stature of the persons upon the stage was made +to correspond to their social position. In the accompanying illustration +(Fig. 19), representing a tragic scene, the difference between the +cothurnus of the servant and that of the hero is very conspicuous.[742] +Whether the cothurnus was worn by all the characters in a tragedy, or +only by the more important ones, is uncertain. There was another tragic +boot called the ‘krepis’, of a white colour, which was introduced by +Sophocles, and used by the chorus as well as by the actors. Possibly +this may have been a boot more like those of ordinary life than the +cothurnus, and may have been worn by the subordinate characters.[743] The +illustrations show that the cothurnus was rather a clumsy contrivance, +and that it must have been somewhat inconvenient to walk with. The tragic +actor had to be very careful to avoid stumbling upon the stage. Lucian +says that accidents were not infrequent. Aeschines met with a misfortune +of this kind as he was acting the part of Oenomaus at Collytus. In the +scene where Oenomaus pursues Pelops he tripped up and fell, and had to +be lifted up again by the chorus-trainer Sannio.[744] The use of the +cothurnus, combined with the onkos, or prolongation of the crown of +the mask, added greatly to the stature of the tragic actor. To prevent +his seeming thin in comparison with his height, it was found necessary +to increase his bulk by padding. His figure was thus made to appear of +uniformly large proportions.[745] + +[Illustration: FIG. 19.] + +The garments of the tragic actor were the same as the ordinary Greek +dress, but their style and colour were more magnificent. They consisted +of an under-garment or tunic, and an over-garment or mantle. The tunic +was brilliantly variegated in colour. Sometimes it was adorned with +stripes, at other times with the figures of animals and flowers, or +similar ornamentation. A special tunic of purple was worn by queens. The +ordinary tragic tunic reached down to the feet. But the tunics worn by +females upon the stage were sometimes longer than those worn by men, and +trailed upon the ground, as the name ‘syrtos’ implies. On the other hand, +it appears from various illustrations that shorter ones were occasionally +provided for attendants and other minor characters. The tunic of the +tragic actor was fastened with a broad girdle high up under the breast, +and flowed down in long and graceful folds, giving an appearance of +height and dignity. It was also supplied with long sleeves reaching +to the waist. In ordinary life sleeves of this kind were considered +effeminate by the European Greeks, and were mostly confined to the Greeks +of Asia. The general character and appearance of the tragic tunic is well +exemplified in the illustrations already given.[746] + +The over-garments were the same in shape as those worn off the stage, +and consisted of two varieties. The ‘himation’ was a long mantle +passing round the right shoulder, and covering the greater part of the +body. The ‘chlamys’ was a short cloak flung across the left shoulder. +As far as shape was concerned all the tragic mantles belonged to one +or the other of these two classes, but they differed in colour and +material. Pollux gives a list of several of them, but does not append +any description.[747] The mere names prove that they were very gorgeous +in colour. There were mantles of saffron, of frog-green, of gold, and +of purple. Queens wore a white mantle with purple borders. These were +the colours worn by tragic personages under ordinary circumstances. But +if they were in misfortune or in exile, the fact was signified to the +spectators from the very first by dressing them in the garb of mourning. +In such cases the colours used were black, dun, grey, yellow, or dirty +white. + +Coverings for the head were not usually worn by the Greeks except when +they were on a journey. The same practice was observed upon the stage. +Thus in the Oedipus Coloneus, Ismene arrives from Thebes wearing a +‘Thessalian hat’. Ladies also wore a ‘mitra’, or band for binding the +hair. In the scene in the Bacchae, where Pentheus is dressed up as a +female, one of the articles mentioned is the hair-band.[748] + +Such was the tragic costume as settled by Aeschylus, and universally +adopted upon the Greek stage. No stress was laid upon historical +accuracy; no attempt was made to discriminate one rank from another by +marked variety in the dress. The same garb in its main features was +worn by nearly all the characters of a Greek tragedy. In some instances +special costumes were invented for particular classes of men. Soothsayers +such as Teiresias always wore a woollen garment of network, which covered +the whole of the body. Shepherds were provided with a short leathern +tunic. Occasionally also heroes in great misfortune, such as Telephus +and Philoctetes, were dressed in rags.[749] But the majority of the +characters wore the regular tragic costume, with slight additions and +variations; and the only means by which the spectators were enabled to +identify the well-known personages of mythology, and to discriminate +between the different ranks of the characters, was by the presence of +small conventional emblems. For instance, the gods and goddesses always +appeared with the particular weapon or article of dress with which +their names were associated. Apollo carried his bow, and Hermes his +magic wand. Athene wore the aegis.[750] In the same way the well-known +heroes of antiquity had generally some speciality in their costume which +enabled the spectators to recognize them as soon as they came upon the +stage. Hercules was always conspicuous by means of his club and lion’s +skin; Perseus wore the cap of darkness, as depicted in the illustration +already given.[751] Kings in a similar manner were distinguished by the +crown upon their head, and the sceptre in their hand. They also had a +special article of dress, consisting of a short tunic with a swelling +bosom, worn over the ordinary tunic.[752] Foreigners were discriminated +by some one particular attribute, rather than by a complete variety in +their costume. For example, Darius wore the Persian turban; otherwise he +was probably dressed in the ordinary tragic style.[753] Warriors were +equipped with complete armour, and occasionally had a short cloak of +scarlet or purple wrapped round the hand and elbow for protection.[754] +Old men usually carried a staff in their hands. The staff with a curved +handle, which occurs not infrequently in ancient works of art, was said +to be an invention of Sophocles.[755] Crowns of olive or laurel were worn +by messengers who brought good tidings; crowns of myrtle were a sign +of festivity.[756] The above examples illustrate the mode in which the +different characters and classes were discriminated upon the Greek stage +by small varieties in their equipment. But in its main features the dress +of the majority of the characters was the same, and consisted of the +elaborate Aeschylean costume. + +[Illustration: FIG. 20.] + +[Illustration: FIG. 21.] + +The tragic costume, after having been once elaborated, was retained +for centuries without any important innovation. The tragic actor must +have been an impressive, though rather unnatural, figure, upon the +stage. His large stature and bulky limbs, his harsh and strongly-marked +features, his tunic with its long folds and brilliantly variegated +pattern, his mantle with its gorgeous colours, must have combined to +produce a spectacle of some magnificence. We must remember that he was +intended to be seen in theatres of vast dimensions, in which even the +front rows of spectators were a considerable distance from the stage, +while the more distant part of the audience could only discern general +effects. For such theatres the tragic costume of the Greeks was admirably +adapted, however unwieldy and unnatural it may have appeared on a closer +inspection. Its magnificence and dignity were especially appropriate to +the ideal figures which move in the dramas of Aeschylus and Sophocles. +In the Frogs of Aristophanes Aeschylus is humorously made to declare +that it was only right that the demigods of tragedy should wear finer +clothes, and use longer words, than ordinary mortals. The tragedy of +Euripides was altogether more human in tone, and a more ordinary costume +would have been better suited to it. But the Greeks, with their strong +feeling of conservatism in matters of art, clung to the form of dress +already established. The result was not altogether satisfactory. The +attempt to exhibit human nature pure and simple upon the Greek stage +was bound to appear somewhat incongruous. It often happened that the +speeches and actions of the heroes in Euripides were highly inconsistent +with the superhuman grandeur of their personal appearance. In any case +the step from the sublime to the ridiculous was a very short one in the +case of the Greek tragic actor. The play had to be elevated in tone, +and the performance of a high standard, to carry off the magnificence +of the actor’s appearance. Otherwise his unwieldy bulk and gloomy +features excited laughter rather than tears. Lucian is especially +fond of ridiculing the tragic actors of the time. He laughs at their +‘chest-paddings and stomach-paddings’, ‘their cavernous mouths that look +as if they were going to swallow up the spectators’, and the ‘huge boots +on which they are mounted’. He wonders how they can walk across the +stage in safety.[757] In Philostratus there is an amusing story of the +extraordinary effect produced upon a country audience in Spain by the +appearance of a tragic actor before them for the first time. It is said +that as soon as he came upon the stage they began to be rather alarmed +at his wide mouth, his long strides, his huge figure, and his unearthly +dress. But when he lifted up his voice and commenced his speech in the +loud and sonorous clang of the tragic stage, there was a general panic, +and they all fled out of the theatre as if he had been a demon.[758] In +order to give an idea of the style and character of Greek tragic acting, +two representations of tragic scenes (Figs. 20 and 21) are inserted, the +first of which obviously represents Medea hesitating about the murder of +her children.[759] + + +§ 5. _Costume of Satyric Actors._ + +[Illustration: FIG. 22.] + +Tragedy and the satyric drama were sister forms of art, descended +from the same original. But while tragedy advanced in dignity and +magnificence, the satyric drama retained all the wild licence and +merriment which in early times had characterized the dithyrambic +performances in honour of Dionysus. Its chorus invariably consisted +of satyrs. Of the characters upon the stage, with which we are at +present concerned, one was always Silenus, the drunken old follower +of Dionysus; the rest were mainly heroes out of mythology, or other +legendary beings. In the Cyclops of Euripides, the only extant specimen +of a satyric play, the characters consist of Silenus, Odysseus, and the +Cyclops. Concerning the costume of the actors the notices of Pollux are +exceedingly brief. But it is possible to obtain fairly clear conceptions +on the subject from several works of art, and more especially from the +well-known vase-painting at Naples.[760] From this painting we see that +the characters in a satyric drama, with the exception of Silenus, were +dressed in much the same way as in tragedy. Their masks exhibit the +same features, and their garments are of the same general description. +The tunic appears to have been rather shorter, to facilitate ease of +movement, as the acting in a satyric play was no doubt less dignified +and statuesque than in tragedy. For the same reason the tall cothurnus +of tragedy does not appear to have been worn. It is not depicted in +the works of art; and although this fact in itself is perhaps hardly +decisive, since even in representations of tragic scenes the cothurnus +is occasionally left out, still on general grounds it appears to be +most improbable that the cothurnus should have been worn in the satyric +drama. But, on the whole, the heroic characters in satyric plays were +dressed in much the same fashion as in tragedy. As to Silenus, his mask +always represents a drunken old man, with a half-bestial expression. +His under-garments, as depicted in works of art, are of two kinds. +Sometimes he wears a tight-fitting dress, encasing the whole of his +body with the exception of his head, hands, and feet. At other times +he wears close-fitting trousers, and a tunic reaching to the knees. +All these garments are made of shaggy materials, to resemble the hide +of animals.[761] Certain over-garments are also mentioned by Pollux as +having been worn by Silenus, such as fawn-skins, goat-skins, imitation +panther-skins, mantles of purple, and mantles inwoven with flowers or +animals.[762] The figures in the illustration (Fig. 22), which is taken +from the vase-painting already referred to, represent the three actors in +a satyric drama. The first is playing the part of some unknown hero of +mythology. His tunic is rather short, and he has no cothurnus; otherwise +he exhibits the usual features of the tragic actor. The second figure +represents Hercules. His tunic is still shorter, and barely reaches to +the knees. The third figure is that of Silenus. His body is covered with +a single close-fitting garment, and he carries a panther-skin over his +shoulders. All these figures are holding their masks in their hands. + + +§ 6. _Costume of Comic Actors._ + +[Illustration: FIG. 23.] + +The Old Comedy was essentially the product of a particular time and +place. With its local allusions and personal satire it was unsuited +for reproduction or imitation among later generations. Consequently +very few traditions were preserved concerning the style of the masks +and dresses used in it. The literary evidence is extremely scanty, and +we have to depend almost entirely on works of art for our knowledge of +the subject. We have already referred to the vase-paintings from Magna +Graecia (Figs. 13 and 14), depicting comic scenes acted by the Phlyakes. +These Phlyakes represented one branch of the old Doric comedy, and their +performances evidently originated in the same phallic exhibitions out +of which Attic comedy was developed. There are many points in common +between the two. In both the phallus was regularly worn. In both a +frequent source of ridicule was found in parodies of tragic dramas, or of +legendary fables.[763] On these grounds it was long since suspected that +the costume of the Phlyakes might resemble that of the old Attic comedy, +and might be used to illustrate it. This opinion has been confirmed by +recent investigations.[764] An Attic vase (Fig. 23) of the early fourth +century, previously overlooked, throws much light upon the subject. It +gives us a picture of three comic actors dressed in their stage costume, +and holding their masks in their hands.[765] There are also a number of +terra cotta statuettes, of Attic workmanship, and belonging to the end +of the fifth and the beginning of the fourth centuries, which apparently +represent figures from the comic stage. Copies of two of these statuettes +(Fig. 24) are here inserted.[766] The costume found on the vase and +in the statuettes is much the same as that depicted in the Phlyakes +paintings. It seems certain, therefore, that the dress of the Phlyakes +was akin to that used in the old Athenian comedy; and it is now possible, +from the sources just enumerated, to determine the general character of +this latter costume. + +[Illustration: FIG. 24.] + +The Old Comedy was the direct descendant of the boisterous phallic +performances at the festivals of Dionysus. Coarseness and indecency +were an essential part of it. The actors therefore regularly wore the +phallus.[767] This fact, which is expressly stated by the grammarians, +is confirmed by the evidence of the paintings and statuettes. It is +true that Aristophanes in the Clouds takes credit to himself for having +discarded this piece of indecency, and for having introduced a more +refined style of wit into his comedy. But whatever he may have done +in the Clouds—and it is doubtful how far his words are to be taken in +the literal sense—there are numerous passages to show that in most of +his other plays he followed the ordinary custom.[768] Another constant +feature in the old comic dress was the grotesque padding of the body in +front and behind. The figures of the actors, women as well as men, were +stuffed out into an extravagant and ludicrous shape. The padding, as we +see from the works of art, was enclosed in a tight-fitting under-garment, +which covered the whole of the actor’s person except his head, hands, and +feet.[769] This under-garment was made of some elastic knitted material, +so as to fit close to the figure. In most cases it was dyed a flesh +colour and represented the skin. But in some of the Phlyakes vases (e.g. +Fig. 14) the arms and legs of the actors were ornamented with stripes, +and a tight jersey was worn over the body, and painted in imitation of +the naked figure. Apart from the under-garment the clothes worn by the +actors were the tunic and mantle of ordinary life. References to various +kinds of mantles and tunics are common in the plays of Aristophanes.[770] +But it appears from the paintings and statuettes that in most cases these +garments were cut shorter than those of real life, so as to display the +phallus. + +The masks of the Old Comedy fall into two classes, those for real +characters, and those for fictitious ones. When real individuals were +introduced upon the stage, such as Socrates and Euripides, the masks +were portraits of the actual persons. Before a word was spoken the +character was recognized by the audience. When Aristophanes brought out +the Knights, the general terror inspired by Cleon was so great, that the +mask-makers refused to make a portrait-mask of him, and an ordinary mask +had to be worn. Socrates, during the performance of the Clouds, is said +to have stood up in his place in the theatre, to enable the strangers +present to identify him with the character upon the stage.[771] The +fictitious masks, as we learn from the grammarians, were grotesque and +extravagant in type.[772] They are represented as such in the works of +art. The mouth is large and wide open, and the features twisted into a +grimace. At the same time the masks in the Attic representations are less +distorted and unnatural than those of the Phlyakes vases. The expression +on the masks is mostly of a cheerful and festive kind; but sometimes +crafty, thoughtful, or angry features are portrayed. Not infrequently in +the Old Comedy figures of a fanciful and absurd character were introduced +upon the stage. Thus Pseudartabas, the King’s Eye, had a mask with one +huge eye in the centre of it. The trochilus in the Birds created laughter +by its immense beak. The epops was provided with a ridiculously long +crest, but seems otherwise to have been dressed like a human figure. Iris +in the Birds came on the stage with outspread wings, swelling tunic, +and a head-covering of enormous size, so as to cause Peisthetaerus to +ask her whether she was a ship or a hat. Prometheus, with his umbrella, +and Lamachus with his nodding crests, are further examples of grotesque +costume.[773] The covering for the feet was not, as in the later comedy, +of one conventional type, but varied according to the sex and position +of the character. Several kinds of boot and shoe are referred to in +Aristophanes.[774] + +As regards the origin of the actor’s costume which we have been +describing nothing is known from tradition. But Körte has a very +plausible conjecture on the subject.[775] He points out that in the early +Attic representations of Bacchic scenes there are no traces of figures +resembling those of the old comic actors. The followers of Dionysus +consist of Sileni and (later on) of satyrs. On the other hand, in the +numerous Bacchic vases found at Corinth there are no satyrs and Sileni; +their place is taken by a group of curious beings who resemble the old +comic actors in these two respects—the phallus and the exaggerated bulk +of the lower part of the body. These figures have no generic name; but +their individual names are inserted on one of the vases, and show that +they were not human beings, but creatures of the goblin type.[776] +Similar figures are also found in vases from the Kabeirion at Thebes, +but in this case they appear as burlesque actors taking part in Bacchic +festivities.[777] Körte suggests that these goblin followers of Dionysus +were the prototype of the actors in the Old Comedy; that it was in the +neighbourhood of Corinth that they were first transformed into performers +of farce and burlesque; and that this species of comedy, together with +the ludicrous garb of the actors, then spread over various other parts +of Greece, such as Athens, Thebes, and Magna Graecia. That the old Attic +comedy was largely indebted to that of the northern Peloponnese is shown +by various traditions; and the debt may very well have consisted in the +introduction of these farcical comedians, and their combination with the +old Attic choruses. If this theory is correct—and there is much to be +said in its favour—it points to a curious antithesis between the early +history of tragedy and comedy. The satyrs and the Corinthian goblins were +both of them semi-human votaries of Dionysus, and both of them played +an important part in the development of the drama. But while the satyrs +became the chorus of tragedy, the goblins changed into the actors of the +comic stage. + +The New Comedy was of much longer duration than the Old Comedy, and +was much more widely spread. It continued to flourish at Athens itself +as late as the imperial epoch, and was transferred to Rome in the +translations of Plautus and Terence and the other comic writers. There is +no lack of information as to the costumes generally in use.[778] In the +first place all the actors wore masks, just as in the other branches of +the Greek drama. As far as abstract fitness goes, the masks might well +have been dispensed with. As the New Comedy was essentially a comedy of +manners and everyday life, and its chief excellence lay in the accurate +delineation of ordinary human character, it is probable that a style +of representation after the fashion of the modern stage would have +been much more appropriate to it. In a theatre of moderate size, with +actors untrammelled by the use of masks, all the finer shades in the +character-painting might have been exhibited clearly to the spectators. +But in ancient times such a thing was impossible. To the Greek mind the +use of masks was inseparably associated with the stage; and the Greeks +were in such matters extremely tenacious of ancient custom. It is also +very questionable whether in their enormous theatres masks could possibly +have been dispensed with. At any rate they were invariably retained in +the New Comedy. But it is a strange thing that, although in all other +respects the New Comedy was a faithful representation of ordinary life +and manners, the masks employed should have been of the most ludicrous +and grotesque character. The fact is expressly stated by Platonius, and +is borne out by the evidence of numerous works of art.[779] There was +a total disregard for realism and fidelity to nature. The exaggerated +eyebrows and distorted mouths gave an utterly unnatural expression to the +features. Such masks were perfectly in keeping with the tone of the Old +Comedy, in which parody and caricature predominated. But it is strange +that they should have been adopted in the New Comedy, which otherwise +was praised for holding the mirror up to nature. The reason probably lay +in the size of the theatres. The excellence and humour of a finely-drawn +mask would have been lost upon an audience seated at a great distance +from the stage. Of course the statement of Platonius has to be taken with +some qualification. The masks were not invariably distorted. Some of the +young men and women were depicted with handsome, though strongly-marked, +features, as in tragedy. But the comic characters always wore masks of +the grotesque kind just referred to. Copies of four comic masks (Figs. 25 +and 26) are given on the next page.[780] + +Pollux supplies a long list of the masks in ordinary use in the New +Comedy, with accurate descriptions of each of them.[781] His list +comprises masks for nine old men, eleven young men, seven slaves, three +old women, and fourteen young women. In this list are included all +the stock characters of the New Comedy, such as the harsh father, the +benevolent old man, the prodigal son, the rustic youth, the heiress, +the bully, the pimp, the procuress, and the courtesan. For all these +characters there are regular masks with strongly characteristic features. +In the plays of the New Comedy, as each personage stepped upon the stage, +he must have been recognized at once by the audience as an old friend. +Constant repetition must have rendered them familiar with the typical +features of each sort of character. Certain kinds of complexion, and +certain styles of hair and eyebrow, were appropriated to particular +classes. White or grey hair was of course the regular sign of old age. +Red hair was the mark of a roguish slave. Thick curly hair denoted +strength and vigour. Miserly old men wore their hair close-cropped, +while soldiers were distinguished by great shaggy manes. The hair of the +courtesans was bound up with golden ornaments, or brilliantly-coloured +bands. Beards were distinctive of manhood or middle age, and were not +used in the masks of youths or old men. The complexion was always a +prominent feature in the mask. A dark sun-burnt complexion was the sign +of rude health, and was given to soldiers, country youths, or young men +who frequented the palaestra. A white complexion denoted effeminacy; +pallor was the result of love or ill-health. Red cheeks, as well as red +hair, were given to rogues. The eyebrows were strongly marked and highly +characteristic. When drawn up they denoted pride or impudence, and were +used in the masks of young men and of parasites. The hot-tempered old +father, who alternated between fits of passion and fits of affection, +had one eyebrow drawn up and the other in its natural position, and +he used to turn that side of his face to the audience which was best +in keeping with his temper at the moment. Noses were generally of the +straight Greek type; but old men and ‘parasites’ occasionally had hook +noses, and the country youth was provided with a snub nose. Sometimes the +ears showed signs of bruises, to denote that the person had frequented +the boxing-school. The modern equivalent would be a broken nose, but +among Greek boxers the ear was the part principally aimed at. The above +abstract of the account in Pollux, together with the illustrations on +the previous page, will give some idea of the different styles of mask +employed in the later comedy. + +[Illustration: FIG. 25.] + +[Illustration: FIG. 26.] + +[Illustration: FIG. 27.] + +The costume of the actors in the New Comedy was copied from that of +ordinary life. The covering for the foot was the same for all the +characters, and consisted of a light sort of shoe, which was merely drawn +on, without being tied in any way.[782] Pollux gives a short account of +the dresses used in the New Comedy, from which it appears that particular +colours were appropriated to particular classes.[783] White was worn by +old men and slaves, purple by young men, black or grey by parasites. +Pimps had a bright-coloured tunic, and a variegated mantle. Old women +were dressed in green or light blue, young women and priestesses +in white. Procuresses wore a purple band round the head. The above +statements are to a certain extent corroborated by the testimony of the +works of art, but there are numerous exceptions. They cannot therefore be +regarded as an exhaustive account of the subject. Other details of dress +and costume are mentioned by Pollux. Old men carried a staff with a bent +handle. Rustics were dressed in a leather tunic, and bore a wallet and +staff, and occasionally a hunting-net. Pimps had a straight staff, and +carried an oil flask and a flesh-scraper. Heiresses were distinguished +by fringes to their dress. Considered as a whole the costume of the New +Comedy seems to have been even more conventional than that of tragedy. +The colour of a person’s dress, the features of his mask, and small +details in his equipment, would tell the spectators at once what sort of +a character he was intended to represent. A scene from a wall-painting +(Fig. 27) is here inserted, as a specimen of the style and outward +appearance of the New Comedy.[784] + + +§ 7. _Speech, Song, and Recitative._ + +The profession of acting in ancient times required a great variety of +accomplishments. The words of a play were partly spoken and partly sung, +and it was necessary that the actor should have a knowledge of music, +and a carefully cultivated voice. He had to combine the qualities of a +modern actor with those of an operatic singer. In fact the Greek drama +was not unlike a modern comic opera in this particular respect, that +it consisted of a mixture of speaking and of singing. The question +as to the mode in which the different portions of the dialogue were +delivered, and the proportion which speech bore to song in the parts of +the actors, is a matter of very great interest. In the first place there +can be little doubt that, with few exceptions, all that portion of the +dialogue which was written in the ordinary iambic trimeter was merely +spoken or declaimed, with no musical accompaniment whatsoever. This of +course constituted by far the larger part of the dialogue. Some remarks +of Aristotle in the Poetics may be cited in proof of the above statement. +Aristotle expressly says that in certain portions of the drama there +was no music at all. In another place he remarks that when dialogue was +introduced into tragedy, the iambic trimeter was naturally adopted as +the most suitable metre, since it is ‘better adapted for being spoken’ +than any other.[785] A second argument is to be found in the practice of +the Roman stage. In two of the manuscripts of Plautus there are marks +in the margin to discriminate between the portions of the play which +were spoken, and the portions which were sung. The result is to show +that, while the rest of the play was sung, the iambic trimeters were +always spoken.[786] As Roman comedy was a close and faithful imitation +of the Greek, it follows almost as a matter of certainty that the iambic +trimeters were spoken in the Greek drama also. It is true that in one +place Lucian contemptuously remarks about the tragic actor, that he +‘occasionally even sings the iambic lines’.[787] But this statement, at +the very most, cannot be held to prove more than that in Lucian’s time +iambic passages were sometimes sung or chanted. It is no proof that such +a practice ever existed in the classical period. It is quite possible +that in the second century A.D., when the chorus had either disappeared +from tragedy, or been very much curtailed, some of the more emotional +portions of the iambic dialogue were sung or chanted as a sort of +equivalent. But Lucian himself speaks of the practice with disapproval, +as a sign of bad taste and degeneracy. In the best period of the drama +there can be little doubt that the ordinary iambics were spoken. The only +exception was in cases where iambic lines occurred in close connexion +with lyrical metres. For instance, iambics are sometimes inserted in the +midst of a lyrical passage. At other times speeches in iambics alternate +with speeches in a lyrical metre, and the pairs of speeches are bound +up into one metrical system. In such cases the iambics were probably +given in song or recitative. But the regular iambic dialogue, and in +consequence the greater part of the play, was spoken without musical +accompaniment. + +The lyrical portions of a Greek play were almost always sung. In an +actor’s part the lyrical passages consisted either of solos, or of duets +and trios between the characters on the stage, or of joint performances +in which actors and chorus took part alternately. These musical passages +were in tragedy confined mainly to lamentations and outbursts of +grief.[788] In general it may be said that, both in tragedy and comedy, +song was substituted for speech in those scenes where the emotions were +deeply roused, and found their fittest expression in music. + +In addition to the declamation of the ordinary dialogue, and the singing +of the lyrical passages, there was also a third mode of enunciation +in use upon the Greek stage. It was called ‘parakataloge’, and came +half-way between speech on the one hand, and song on the other. Its +name was due to the fact that it was allied in character to ‘kataloge’, +or ordinary declamation. It corresponded closely to what is called +recitative in modern music, and consisted in delivering the words in a +sort of chant, to the accompaniment of a musical instrument. On account +of its intermediate character it was sometimes called ‘speech’, and +sometimes ‘song’. It was first invented by Archilochus, and employed by +him in the delivery of his iambics, which were partly sung, and partly +given in recitative. A special kind of harp, called the klepsiambos, +was originally employed for the purpose of the accompaniment. Recitative +was subsequently introduced into the drama, as Plutarch expressly +states.[789] It is not easy to determine, by means of the slight and +hazy notices upon the subject, what were the particular portions +of a play in which recitative was employed. But there are certain +indications which seem to show that it was used in the delivery of +iambic, trochaic, and anapaestic tetrameters, and of regular anapaestic +dimeters. Thus it is distinctly recorded of the actor Nicostratus that +he gave trochaic tetrameters in recitative to the accompaniment of the +flute.[790] Then again, the two sets of trochaic tetrameters, which +came at the end of the parabasis, cannot have been sung, as their very +name implies. The probability therefore is that they were given in +recitative.[791] Thirdly, there is a passage in the Peace where the +metre changes abruptly from lyrics to trochaic tetrameters without any +break in the sentence.[792] It is difficult to suppose that in such a +case a transition was made suddenly from song to mere speech. But the +transition from song to recitative would have been quite feasible. +Fourthly, it is asserted that on those occasions when the speech of an +actor was accompanied by dancing on the part of the chorus, the metres +employed were mostly iambic and anapaestic tetrameters.[793] But as it is +impossible, in the case of Greek performers, to imagine dancing without +a musical accompaniment, the verses must have been given in recitative. +Fifthly, in the parabasis to the Birds the nightingale is asked to lead +off the anapaests with the flute; and the scholiast remarks that ‘the +parabasis was often spoken to the accompaniment of the flute’.[794] +This statement means that the anapaestic tetrameters, which constitute +the parabasis proper, were given in recitative. Lastly, there is the +fact that the terms ‘speech’ and ‘song’ are both used of anapaests, +implying that they occupied an intermediate position.[795] For these and +other similar reasons it appears probable that recitative was employed +in passages written in the metres already specified, that is to say, in +iambic, trochaic, and anapaestic tetrameters and in regular anapaestic +dimeters. It seems too that on certain rare occasions it was used in +lyrical passages.[796] + +It may be interesting to collect together in this place such information +as we possess concerning the musicians and musical instruments employed +in the Greek drama. The instrument generally used for the accompaniment +both of the singing and of the recitative was the flute.[797] The +harp had formerly been employed very frequently. But it was found +that the flute, being a wind instrument, harmonized better with the +human voice.[798] However, the harp was occasionally introduced. In +the Frogs Aeschylus calls for the harp, when he is going to give a +specimen of the lyrics of Euripides. Similarly, in the parody of the +choruses of Aeschylus, the recurrence of the refrain ‘phlattothrat’ +points to an accompaniment on the harp. A harpist is depicted on the +Naples vase, side by side with the flute-player.[799] In the beginning +of the Birds, when the chorus makes its entrance, the regular chorus +of twenty-four birds is preceded by four others, the flamingo, cock, +hoopoe, and gobbler. These were apparently musicians; and the instrument +which they played must have been the harp; since later on, when the +parabasis is going to begin, Procne has to be sent for specially to play +the flute-accompaniment.[800] As regards the number of musicians and +instruments, the ordinary provision for a tragedy or comedy was a single +flute-player. In the Delphic inscriptions of the third century, which +give the names of the performers in the various contests at the Soteria, +we find that in every dramatic exhibition only one flute-player was +provided. Works of art never depict more than one; and one is the number +mentioned by the grammarians.[801] But extra music might be supplied in +special cases. Harpists, as we have seen, were occasionally employed, and +as many as four of them seem to have been used in the Birds. Probably +in the same way, when a special effect was to be produced, the number +of the flute-players might be augmented. As to the costume of the +musicians very little is known. In works of art they never appear in +masks. But in the Birds it is clear that the flute-player and the four +harpists were disguised as birds, and wore masks of an appropriate kind. +Possibly in the Old Comedy the musicians were often arrayed in the same +fashion as the chorus. But in tragedy and satyric drama the evidence of +the vase-paintings would seem to show that they had no masks, but were +dressed either in ordinary costume or in the long and ornamental tunic of +the actors.[802] Their position during the performance was naturally in +the orchestra, close to the chorus. In the Birds Procne has to come down +from the stage to the orchestra, in order to accompany the parabasis. We +are told also that at the end of a drama the flute-player marched out +at the head of the chorus.[803] Hence we may conclude that he entered +in front of them at the beginning of a play; and this supposition is +confirmed by the manner in which the four harpists make their entrance in +the Birds. Very probably the usual place for the musicians was near the +altar of Dionysus. + + +§ 8. _Importance of the Voice in Greek Acting._ + +In ancient acting the possession of a fine musical voice was a matter +of absolute necessity. Several considerations will make it evident that +the voice of the actor, upon the Greek stage, must have been far more +important than it is at present. In the first place a considerable +portion of the words in every Greek play was either sung or delivered +in recitative. In the second place each actor had to play several parts +in succession, and to appear sometimes as a man, and sometimes as a +woman. It would be essential, therefore, to mark the difference between +the various personages by a corresponding variety in the tone of voice +employed; and for this purpose an organ of great flexibility and compass +must have been required. In the third place the whole character of +Greek acting was largely modified by the costume of the performers. A +modern actor adds force and emphasis to his speeches by means of the +variety of his facial expression. A single glance, a slight movement +of the features, is often enough to produce a very great effect. But +to the Greek actor this mode of impressing the spectators was denied, +owing to the use of masks. His features bore the same settled expression +throughout the play. Even his gestures, in the case of tragedy, must have +been much more restricted than in modern times, owing to the nature of +the dress which he had to wear. On account of these limitations he was +compelled to rely mainly upon his voice for the purpose of expressing +all the fleeting emotions of the character he represented. Great skill +and variety in the modulation of his tones were needed to counterbalance +the absence of facial movement. Lastly, the Greek actor required a voice +of enormous power, in order to make himself heard. When it is remembered +that the theatre of Dionysus was in the open air, and was capable of +holding nearly twenty thousand spectators, it will easily be seen that, +in spite of the excellence of the acoustic arrangements, the demands upon +the actor’s voice must have been excessively great. + +For these various reasons the first and most essential requisite in a +Greek actor was a powerful and expressive voice. As a matter of fact, +whenever an actor is mentioned by an ancient author, he is referred to +in language which at the present day would seem much more appropriate to +a notice of an operatic singer. It is always the excellence of the voice +which is emphasized, little regard being paid to other accomplishments. +And it is not so much the quality as the strength of the voice which is +commended. The highest merit, on the Greek stage, was to have a voice +that could fill the whole theatre. Numberless passages from ancient +authors might be quoted in proof of this assertion, but a few specimens +will suffice. Of Neoptolemus, the great tragic actor, it is said that +‘his powerful voice’ had raised him to the head of his profession.[804] +Licymnius, the actor mentioned in one of the letters of Alciphron, won +the prize for acting at a tragic contest on account of ‘his clear and +resonant utterance’.[805] Dionysius, the tyrant of Syracuse, on a certain +occasion, being covetous of distinction as a dramatic writer, dispatched +a company of actors to the Olympic festival, to give a performance of +one of his tragedies. As he wished to ensure that the exhibition should +be of the highest excellence, he was careful to choose ‘actors with the +best voices’.[806] In a similar manner the emperor Nero prided himself on +his talents as an actor. He instituted a tragic contest at the Isthmian +festival, in order to display his powers. At this contest the actor +Epeirotes ‘was in splendid voice, and as his tones were more magnificent +than ever, he won the greatest applause’.[807] The above passages are in +reference to particular actors. Remarks about acting in general are of +the same type. Demosthenes is reported to have said that ‘actors should +be judged by their voices, politicians by their wisdom’. According to +Zeno an actor was bound to have ‘a powerful voice and great strength’. +Aristotle defines the science of acting as being ‘concerned with the +voice, and the mode of adapting it to the expression of the different +passions’. Lucian remarks that the actor is ‘responsible for his voice +only’. Plato would expel ‘the actors with their beautiful voices’ from +his ideal state.[808] Finally, there is the curious fact recorded by +Cicero, that in the performance of a Greek play, when the actors of the +second and third parts ‘had louder voices’ than the protagonist, they +used to moderate and restrain their tones, in order to leave him the +pre-eminence.[809] These passages, and others of the same kind which +might be quoted, read like notices about operatic singers and musical +performances, and prove conclusively the supreme importance of the voice +among the ancient Greek actors. + +Such being the requirements of the Greek stage, it was necessary that +the actors should receive a musical education as elaborate as that of a +professional singer in modern times. Cicero informs us that the Greek +tragic actors spent many years in the training of their voices, and +used to test them, before each performance, by running over all their +notes from the highest to the lowest.[810] They had to be careful and +abstemious in their diet, as excess in eating and drinking was found to +be inconsistent with the possession of a good voice.[811] The importance +attached to this particular quality in the actor’s art was not always +beneficial in its results. Actors were sometimes inclined to violate good +taste by intruding into their performances mere exhibitions of skill in +the manipulation of the voice. They were ready to catch the applause of +the populace by startling effects, such as imitations of the rushing of +streams, the roaring of seas, and the cries of animals.[812] Moreover, +it was a common fault among the ancient actors that, as a result of +excessive training, their voices sounded artificial and unnatural. +There was a special term to denote the forced tone of voice which was +caused by too much exercise. Aristotle remarks that one of the principal +excellences of the tragic actor Theodorus was the thoroughly natural +character of his delivery. Unlike other actors, he seemed to speak with +his own voice.[813] + + +§ 9. _Style of Greek Acting._ + +Both in tragic and comic acting a loud and exceedingly distinct utterance +must have been a matter of necessity. But in comedy the tone of voice +adopted appears, as was only natural, to have been much less sonorous +than that of the tragic actors, and to have approached far more closely +to the style of ordinary conversation.[814] In tragedy, on the other +hand, it was the conventional practice to declaim the verses with a loud +and ringing intonation, and to fill the theatre with a deep volume of +sound. Ancient authors often refer to the sonorous utterances of the +tragic stage.[815] With bad actors the practice would easily degenerate +into mere bombast. Pollux mentions a series of epithets, such as +‘booming’ and ‘bellowing’, which were applied to actors guilty of such +exaggeration. Socrates and Simylus, the tragic actors with whom Aeschines +went on tour in the country districts of Attica, derived their nickname +of ‘the Ranters’ from a fault of this kind.[816] + +Another point which was required from ancient actors was great +distinctness in the articulation of the separate words, and a careful +observance of the rhythm and metre of the verses. In this respect the +Athenians were a most exacting audience. Cicero speaks of their ‘refined +and scrupulous ear’, their ‘sound and uncorrupted taste’.[817] Ancient +audiences in general had a much keener ear for the melody of verse than +is to be found in a modern theatre. A slovenly recitation of poetry, +and a failure to emphasize the metre, would not have been tolerated by +them. Cicero remarks on the fact that, though the mass of the people knew +nothing about the theory of versification, their instinctive feeling for +rhythmical utterance was wonderfully keen. He says that if an actor +should spoil the metre in the slightest degree, by making a mistake about +a quantity, or by dropping or inserting a syllable, there would be a +storm of disapproval from the audience.[818] No such sensitiveness is to +be found in modern theatres. It is common enough at the present day to +hear blank verse declaimed as if it were prose. But among the ancient +Greeks the feeling for correctness of rhythm in poetical recitations +was just as instinctive as is the feeling for correctness of tune among +ordinary musical audiences at the present time. If an actor in a Greek +theatre made a slip in the metre of his verses, it was regarded in +much the same way as a note out of tune would be regarded in a modern +concert-room. As a consequence the mode of declamation practised on the +ancient stage must have been much more rhythmical than anything we are +now accustomed to, and the pauses and movements of the metre must have +been much more clearly emphasized. + +The use of appropriate gesture, in the case of Greek acting, was +especially important, since facial expression was prevented by the +mask, and the actor had to depend solely on the tones of his voice, and +the effectiveness of his movements. In comedy, as might be expected, +the gesticulation was of a free and unconstrained character, and is +exemplified in numerous works of art. In tragedy, on the other hand, a +more dignified style was adopted. The nature of the tragic actor’s dress +was sufficient in itself to make a realistic type of acting impossible. +Of course it is easy to exaggerate the cumbersomeness of the ancient +costume. It would be a mistake to suppose that it hampered the actor’s +limbs to such an extent as to prevent him moving about like an ordinary +human being. Many passages in the ancient dramas prove that this was not +the case. Actors could walk rapidly off the stage, or fly for refuge to +an altar, or kneel down in supplication, without any difficulty.[819] +They could even fall flat on the ground. Philoctetes sinks to the earth +in a fainting-fit, overcome by the pain of his wound. Iolaus is knocked +down by the Argive herald, while trying to protect the children of +Hercules. Ajax throws himself on his sword, and Evadne flings herself +from a rock on to the funeral pyre beneath. Hecuba, at the beginning +of the Troades, lies stretched upon the earth in an agony of grief; +and later on, when she hears the doom of Cassandra, she again falls +prostrate.[820] But although, as we see from these examples, the tragic +actor was not debarred from the ordinary use of his limbs, still the +character of his dress must have made violent and impetuous movements a +matter of great difficulty. Even if they had been easy, they would have +been inconsistent with the tone of the tragic stage. The world of Greek +tragedy was an ideal world of heroes and demigods, whose nature was +grander and nobler than that of human beings. The realistic portrayal +of ordinary human passions was foreign to the purpose of Greek tragedy. +Scenes of physical violence or of abject prostration, such as those +which have just been mentioned, are of rare occurrence. To be in harmony +with this elevation of tone it was necessary that the acting should be +dignified and self-restrained. Violent movements were usually avoided. +A certain statuesque simplicity and gracefulness of pose accompanied +the gestures of the tragic actor. On the long and narrow stage the +figures were arranged in picturesque and striking groups, and the +successive scenes in the play presented to the eye of the spectator a +series of artistic tableaux. The representations of tragic scenes and +personages in ancient works of art are characterized by a dignity and +a repose which call to mind the creations of the sculptor. This sober +and restrained style of acting was developed under the influence of +Aeschylus and Sophocles during the great period of Attic tragedy. In +later times a tendency towards realism and exaggeration in the gestures +and the movements began to show itself. The actors of the fourth century +were censured by many critics for having degraded the art of acting +from its former high level, and for having introduced a style which was +unworthy of the dignity of the tragic stage. Callippides was called an +ape by the old actor Mynniscus because of the exaggerated vehemence +of his manner.[821] But as the tragic costume, with its burdensome +accompaniments, was retained with little alteration, it must have +prevented any great advance in the direction of realism and violent +gesticulation. The statuesque style of acting continued on the whole to +be characteristic of the tragic stage, and was indeed the only proper +style for Greek tragedy. + + +§ 10. _The Actors’ Guild._ + +In the course of the fourth century the members of the theatrical +profession at Athens, together with the performers in the various lyric +and musical contests, formed themselves into a guild, for the purpose of +protecting their interests and increasing their importance. The members +of the guild were called The Artists of Dionysus. Poets, actors, and +chorus-singers, trainers, and musicians all belonged to the guild. When +it first came into existence is not known for certain. Sophocles is said +to have formed a sort of literary club, which may have been the prototype +of the guild; but it is possible that there was no connexion between the +two. At any rate it was fully established in the time of Aristotle, by +whom it is mentioned.[822] + +The guild was of great value in maintaining and enforcing the various +privileges of the members. These were very considerable. Musical and +dramatic contests among the Greeks were confined almost entirely to +the great religious festivals, and regarded as celebrations in honour +of the gods. The professionals who took part in them were ministers +engaged in the service of the gods, and their presence was necessary +for the due performance of the various observances. To enable them to +fulfil their engagements, many of the ordinary laws and regulations +were relaxed. In the first place actors and musicians were permitted to +travel through foreign and hostile states for the purpose of attending +the festivals. Even in time of war their persons and property were +ensured from violation. Owing to this custom the actors Aristodemus and +Neoptolemus were able to travel frequently to and fro between Athens and +Macedonia during the height of the war, and to assist materially in the +negotiation of the peace.[823] In the second place actors and musicians +claimed to be exempt from naval and military service, in order to pursue +their professional avocations in Athens and elsewhere. In the time of +Demosthenes this immunity from service was occasionally granted, but had +not yet hardened into an invariable custom. Demosthenes mentions the +cases of two musicians who were severely punished for avoiding military +service. One of them was Sannio the chorus-trainer, and the other was +Aristides the chorus-singer. Meidias also is said to have used the most +strenuous exertions to prevent the chorus of Demosthenes from being +exempted from service.[824] At this time, therefore, it seems that such +immunity was sometimes granted and sometimes not. Later on the Guild of +Artists of Dionysus succeeded in getting the Amphictyonic Council to pass +a decree, by which the Athenians were bound as a religious obligation +to grant exemption from military service to all members of the dramatic +and musical profession. In the same decree the duty of allowing them a +safe passage through their territories was enforced upon the Greek nation +generally. This decree was renewed towards the beginning of the third +century at the request of the Guild. A copy of the decree was engraved +on stone and erected in the theatre at Athens, and has fortunately +been preserved.[825] A translation of the more important passages will +be of interest, as throwing light upon the position of the theatrical +profession at Athens. It ran as follows: ‘It was resolved by the +Amphictyonic Council that security of person and property, and exemption +from arrest during peace and war, be ensured to the artists of Dionysus +at Athens; ... that they enjoy that exemption from military service +and that personal security which have previously been granted to them +by the whole Greek nation; that the artists of Dionysus be exempt from +naval and military service, in order that they may hold the appointed +celebrations in honour of the gods at the proper seasons, and be released +from other business, and consecrated to the service of the gods; that +it be unlawful to arrest or seize an artist of Dionysus in time of war +or peace, unless for debt due to a city or a private person; that, if +an artist be arrested in violation of these conditions, the person who +arrests him, and the city in which the violation of the law occurs, be +brought to account before the Amphictyonic Council; that the immunity +from service and personal security which are granted by the Amphictyonic +Council to the artists of Dionysus at Athens be perpetual; that the +secretaries cause a copy of this decree to be engraved on a stone pillar +and erected in the temple, and another sealed copy of the same to be sent +to Athens, in order to show the Athenians that the Amphictyonic Council +is deeply concerned in the observance of religious duties at Athens, and +is ready to accede to the requests of the artists of Dionysus, and to +ratify their present privileges, and confer such other benefits upon them +as may be possible.’ In this decree it is very noticeable that dramatic +and musical performances are treated throughout as divine observances in +honour of the gods, and the actors and other professionals are described +as ministers consecrated to the service of religion. The maintenance +of their privileges is therefore a sacred obligation in which the +Amphictyonic Council is deeply interested. + +Another inscription has been preserved referring to the Athenian Guild +of Artists of Dionysus.[826] It appears that the Guild had a sacred +enclosure and altar at Eleusis, where they were accustomed to offer +libations to Demeter and Kore at the time of the Eleusinian mysteries. +During the disturbances of the Sullan campaigns the altar was dismantled, +and the yearly celebrations discontinued. The inscription is a decree of +the Guild thanking a certain Philemon for his exertions in restoring the +altar and renewing the annual ceremonies. + +From the time of the fourth century onwards guilds of actors similar +to that at Athens were rapidly formed in various places throughout the +Greek-speaking world. In this way the masterpieces of Greek tragedy were +made familiar to the most remote districts to which Greek civilization +had penetrated. But it is beyond the scope of the present work to +trace the progress of the Greek drama outside the limits of Athens and +Attica.[827] + + +§ 11. _Social Position of Actors._ + +In Greece the profession of the actor was an honourable one, and there +was no suspicion of degradation about it, as there was in Rome.[828] +Actors and other dramatic performers were regarded as ministers of +religion. In the dramatic exhibitions at Athens the actors were placed on +the same level as the poets and choregi. Their names were recorded in the +public archives, and in commemorative tablets; and competitions in acting +were established side by side with the competitions between the poets. +It is true that Aeschines is very frequently taunted by Demosthenes with +his theatrical career, but the taunts are due to the fact, not that he +was an actor, but that he was an unsuccessful one. Actors at the head of +their profession occupied a very distinguished position. Aristodemus, the +tragic actor, was on two occasions sent as ambassador to Macedon by the +Athenians, and was largely instrumental in negotiating the peace.[829] +The great Athenian actors were much sought after by the monarchs of the +time. Aristodemus and Neoptolemus were frequently at the court of Philip, +and Thessalus and Athenodorus at the court of Alexander.[830] Thessalus +was a great favourite with Alexander, and was employed by him on delicate +missions.[831] The leading actors seem to have made large incomes. For +instance, Polus told Demosthenes that he was paid a talent for acting +during two days, only.[832] It is not stated whether the performance +to which he refers took place at Athens, or elsewhere; but in all +probability it was in some foreign state. There is no evidence to show +what salaries were paid to the actors at the great Athenian festivals. + +As for the lower ranks of the profession, the tritagonists, +chorus-singers, musicians, and so on, though there was nothing +dishonourable about their calling, their reputation does not seem to +have been very high. Their strolling and uncertain manner of life +seems to have had a bad effect upon their character. Aristotle, in his +Problems, asks the question why it is that the artists of Dionysus are +generally men of bad character. He thinks the reason is partly due to the +vicissitudes in their fortunes, and the rapid alternations between luxury +and poverty, partly to the fact that their professional duties left them +no time for general culture.[833] His remarks of course apply mainly to +the lower grades of the profession. + + +§ 12. _Celebrated Athenian Actors._ + +Before concluding this account of Greek acting some notice of the +principal Greek actors may not be out of place. Unfortunately in most +cases little more is known about them than their names. Several tragic +actors of the fifth century are referred to by ancient writers, such as +Cleander and Mynniscus, the actors of Aeschylus, and Cleidemides and +Tlepolemus, the actors of Sophocles.[834] But no details are recorded as +to their individual characteristics and different styles. One interesting +fact is known about Mynniscus, to the effect that he considered the +acting of his successors as deficient in dignity and over-realistic. +He was especially severe upon Callippides, the representative of the +younger generation of actors.[835] This Callippides was notorious for his +conceit. On one occasion, when he was giving himself airs in the presence +of Agesilaus the Spartan, he was considerably disconcerted by being +asked by the latter whether he was ‘Callippides the pantaloon’.[836] +Another tragic actor of the same period was Nicostratus, who was +especially excellent in his delivery of the long narrative speeches +of the messengers. His style was so perfect that to ‘do a thing like +Nicostratus’ came to be a proverbial expression for doing it rightly.[837] + +But it was in the age of Demosthenes that the most celebrated group +of tragic actors flourished. Among them was Polus of Aegina, who was +considered to be the greatest actor of his time, and whose name is very +frequently referred to by later writers. He was one of the actors who had +the credit of having taught elocution to Demosthenes.[838] At the age of +seventy, and shortly before his death, he performed the feat of acting +eight tragedies in four days.[839] A well-known story is told about him +to the following effect. Soon after the death of a favourite son, he +happened to be acting the part of Electra in the play of Sophocles. In +the scene in which Electra takes in her hands the urn supposed to contain +the ashes of Orestes, and pours forth a lamentation over his death, +Polus came upon the stage with the urn containing the ashes of his own +son, and holding it in his hands proceeded to act the scene with such +profound depth of feeling as to produce the greatest impression upon the +audience. As Gellius remarks, the acting in this case was no fiction, but +a reality.[840] Another of the great actors of this time was Theodorus, +about whom a few facts are recorded. The exceedingly natural tone of his +delivery, and his habit of never permitting any of the subordinate actors +to appear upon the stage before himself, have already been referred +to. He considered that tragedy was much more difficult to act in than +comedy, and once told the comic actor Satyrus that it was easy enough to +make an audience laugh, but to make them weep was the difficulty.[841] +His own powers in this respect were very great. Once when acting in +Thessaly he produced such an effect upon the brutal tyrant Alexander of +Pherae that Alexander was compelled to leave the theatre, because, as he +afterwards told Theodorus, he was ashamed to be seen weeping over the +sufferings of an actor, while he was perfectly callous about those of +his countrymen.[842] The tomb of Theodorus, close to the banks of the +Cephisus, was still to be seen in the time of Pausanias.[843] + +The other leading tragic actors of this period were Aristodemus, +Neoptolemus, Thessalus, and Athenodorus. The two former were frequently +at the court of Philip, and took a large part in bringing about the peace +of Philocrates. They are therefore denounced by Demosthenes as traitors +to their country, and advocates of Philip’s interests.[844] Neoptolemus +was the actor who, at the banquet held in Philip’s palace on the day +before his assassination, recited a passage out of a tragedy bearing upon +the uncertainty of human fortune, and the inexorable power of death. The +fact was afterwards remembered as an ominous coincidence.[845] Thessalus +and Athenodorus were often rivals. At Tyre, after the return of Alexander +from Egypt, they were the principal competitors in the great tragic +contest, in which the kings of Cyprus were the choregi, and the chief +generals of the army acted as judges. On this occasion Athenodorus won, +to the great grief of Alexander, who said he would have given a part of +his kingdom to have ensured the victory of Thessalus.[846] The same two +actors were also competitors at the City Dionysia in the year 341, but +both of them were then beaten by Neoptolemus.[847] + +Among the Greeks the distinction between the tragic and the comic actors +was as complete as that between the tragic and comic poets.[848] There +are no instances during the classical period of an actor attempting both +branches of the profession. Still less is recorded about the great comic +actors than about the actors of tragedy. A few names are mentioned, but +there is almost a total absence of details concerning their style and +mannerisms. We are told that one of Hermon’s jests was to knock the heads +of his fellow-actors with a stick, and that Parmenon was celebrated for +his skill in imitating the grunting of a hog.[849] Interesting criticisms +on the acting and the actors in comedy are unfortunately nowhere to be +found. + + + + +CHAPTER VI + +THE CHORUS + + +§ 1. _History of the Chorus._ + +The history of the chorus in the Greek drama is a history of gradual +decay. In the earliest period, when both tragedy and comedy were mainly +lyrical, the members of the chorus were the sole performers. After the +introduction of actors and dialogue the chorus still continued for a time +to play the leading part. But from the beginning of the fifth century +it began slowly to dwindle in importance, until at length it either +disappeared altogether, or sank to the position of the band in a modern +theatre. As far as tragedy is concerned the process of decline can be +traced with clearness in the existing dramas. It takes various forms. +In the first place there is a gradual diminution in the length of the +part assigned to the chorus. In the Supplices, the oldest of existing +Greek tragedies, the choral part forms no less than three-fifths of the +whole composition. In the other plays of Aeschylus, with the exception +of the Prometheus, it amounts on the average to about a half. In the +tragedies of Sophocles and Euripides the size is very much reduced. +The choral part in Sophocles varies from about a quarter of the whole +in the Ajax and the Antigone to about a seventh in the Electra and the +Philoctetes. In Euripides it varies from about a quarter in such plays +as the Bacchae and Alcestis to about a ninth in the Orestes. It appears +therefore that in the fifth century the part of the chorus was gradually +but continuously diminished in size. Then again there is a constant +tendency throughout the century to reduce the importance of the chorus +by severing its connexion with the plot. In the lyrical tragedies of +the earliest period the chorus was no doubt on most occasions the +principal object of interest, and took the leading part in the play. This +is still the case in some of the extant tragedies of Aeschylus. In the +Supplices, for instance, the whole subject of the plot is the destiny +of the fugitive maidens who form the chorus. It is their adventures +which excite the sympathy of the audience; the other characters are of +very little significance. In the Eumenides the interest centres chiefly +round the conduct and feelings of the Furies. Even in the Septem and the +Persae, though the chorus play a less prominent part, their connexion +with the plot is still a very close one. Their destiny is involved in +that of the principal characters. But in the other plays of Aeschylus +the chorus begins to take much the same position as it occupies in +Sophocles, and in the earlier plays of Euripides. It was at this period +that Attic tragedy reached its highest perfection, and the question as +to the proper place of the chorus in the plot was solved in the manner +most consistent with the genius of Greek drama. The chorus is now thrown +much further into the background, and appears in most plays, not as a +participant in the action, but merely as a sympathetic witness. While +the dialogue is proceeding, it follows the course of events with the +keenest interest, but seldom actively interferes. In the pauses between +the action it moralizes on the significance of the incidents which have +just occurred. Such is its position during the middle of the century. It +has been removed from the stress and turmoil of the action into a calmer +and more remote region, though it still preserves its interest in the +events upon the stage. But in the later plays of Euripides a further +development is noticeable. The chorus begins to lose even its interest +in the action. In the pauses between the dialogue it sings odes of a +mythological character, which have only the remotest connexion with the +incidents of the plot. In the course of the dialogue itself it converses +less frequently with the actors than it had done hitherto. There is +also a tendency to transfer much of the music from the orchestra to the +stage. The old duets between actors and chorus are reduced both in size +and number, and their place is taken by solos and duets sung exclusively +upon the stage. This tendency to exclude the chorus from the play was +carried still further by Agathon, who gave up all pretence of connexion +between the plot and the songs of the chorus, and converted his odes +into professed interludes. In the time of Aristotle this practice had +become universal. The choral odes were now regarded in much the same +light as the pieces of music performed between the acts in a modern +theatre.[850] Whether the chorus still took any part in the dialogue is +not stated. But we can hardly doubt that the tendency already strongly +marked in Euripides had been developed to its natural results, and that +the tragic chorus of the later fourth century was practically excluded +from all share in the conduct of the play. After the fourth century very +little is known about its history. But the evidence seems to show that +it was sometimes discarded even as early as the third century; and in +later times this came to be more and more the ordinary custom. Even when +retained, its functions were merely those of the modern band.[851] + +The history of the comic chorus is very similar. If we look at the extant +plays of Aristophanes, we find that in the first nine, which were all +produced in the fifth century, the chorus is an important and conspicuous +element. But in the tenth, the Ecclesiazusae, which was brought out in +392, there is a great change. The parabasis has disappeared, and the +functions of the chorus are mainly confined to the singing of three +or four odes, of no great length. In the Plutus, produced in 388, the +decline of the chorus is still more marked. It has only about forty +lines assigned to it in the course of the dialogue; and in the pauses +between the dialogue it sang interludes unconnected with the plot.[852] +During the rest of the century the comic chorus seems to have still +lingered on in a position similar to that which it holds in the Plutus. +The grammarians who say that it was abolished entirely by the Middle +Comedy apparently exaggerate the state of affairs.[853] There was still a +comic chorus in the time of Aristotle.[854] Even in the New Comedy the +earlier poets, such as Menander and Philemon, appear to have retained +it in some of their plays, though merely for the purpose of providing +interludes.[855] After the fourth century there are few traces of its +presence. It is true that it was regularly used in the comedies at the +Delphic Soteria during the third century.[856] It is mentioned in the +accounts of the Hieropoioi at Delos in 279 B.C.[857] It is found also in +one comedy of Plautus, the Rudens. But in Terence there are no signs of +it. This fact, combined with the statement of the grammarians that the +New Comedy had no chorus, makes it certain that after the third century +it had practically disappeared.[858] + + +§ 2. _Size of the Chorus._ + +The tragic chorus, being a direct descendant of the old dithyrambic +choruses, originally consisted of fifty members.[859] After all connexion +between tragedy and the dithyramb had been severed, the number of the +choreutae in a tragic chorus was reduced to twelve. It has been suggested +that this number was due to the practice of each poet exhibiting four +tragedies at a time. It is supposed that the original chorus of fifty was +divided as equally as possible among the four tragedies, so that each +chorus came to consist of twelve members. The conjecture is a plausible +one, but cannot be regarded as certain, owing to the scantiness of our +information concerning the early history of tragedy. The size of the +tragic chorus remained unaltered until the time of Sophocles, and in all +the earlier plays of Aeschylus twelve choreutae are employed. Sophocles +raised the number from twelve to fifteen.[860] After his time there was +no further change during the great period of the Attic drama. The tragic +chorus was always composed of fifteen persons. The various technical +terms which refer to the arrangement of the tragic chorus are all based +on the supposition that it is a chorus of fifteen. It is not quite +certain whether the innovation of Sophocles was adopted by Aeschylus in +his later plays. The Oresteia of Aeschylus was brought out ten years +after the first appearance of Sophocles; and it has been contended that +the chorus in this trilogy contained fifteen members. There is hardly +sufficient evidence to determine the matter with any certainty.[861] On +general grounds it seems probable that Aeschylus should have followed +the example of Sophocles. At any rate there is no doubt that after the +middle of the fifth century the number of the choreutae was fixed at +fifteen.[862] The satyric chorus was of the same size as the tragic—a +natural result of the intimate connexion between tragedy and the satyric +drama.[863] The comic chorus, as long as it continued to be an integral +part of the play, invariably consisted of twenty-four members. All the +authorities are unanimous on the subject.[864] These were the numbers +adopted in the various kinds of drama throughout the classical period +of Greek literature. But in later times, after the dramatic choruses had +been reduced to insignificance, and merely provided the music between +the successive acts, their size, at any rate in some theatres, appears +to have been diminished. Thus the comic chorus at the Delphic Soteria +contained only seven members; and the tragic chorus depicted on the +wall-painting at Cyrene is also a chorus of seven.[865] Whether these +cases were exceptional, or whether seven had now come to be the usual +number of a theatrical chorus, there is no evidence to show. + +The size of the chorus in the Greek drama was regulated by conventional +rules, and no change was made to suit the requirements of a particular +play. For instance, in the Supplices of Aeschylus the number of the +Danaides was fifty, but the chorus probably consisted of twelve maidens +who did duty for the fifty. In the Supplices of Euripides the actual +suppliants were the seven wives of the slaughtered chieftains, but +the chorus was raised to its proper number by the addition of female +attendants. It has sometimes been suggested that in the Eumenides, where +the Furies are twelve or fifteen instead of three, legendary tradition +was sacrificed to theatrical requirements. But, as there is no evidence +to show that the number of the Furies had been settled at three as early +as the time of Aeschylus, it is quite possible that in this case the +usual size of the chorus was not inappropriate. + + +§ 3. _Costume of the Chorus._ + +The costume of the chorus, as already pointed out, was entirely distinct +from that of the actors. The tragic, comic, and satyric choruses all +wore masks, in accordance with the usual Bacchic tradition.[866] In +other respects their costume had nothing in common, but was designed in +accordance with the spirit of the respective types of drama. The tragic +chorus was usually composed of old men, or women, or maidens. In such +cases they wore the ordinary Greek dress, consisting of a tunic and a +mantle. No attempt was made to give them an impressive appearance by +the use of strange and magnificent costumes, similar to those worn by +the actors. Such costumes were perfectly appropriate to the heroes and +gods upon the stage, but would have been out of place in the chorus, +which was generally supposed to represent the ordinary public. The +masks of the tragic chorus would of course be suitable to the age and +sex of the persons represented. A special kind of white shoe, said to +be the invention of Sophocles, was worn by the tragic chorus.[867] Old +men usually carried a staff.[868] Various little details in dress and +equipment would be added according to circumstances. Thus the chorus of +bereaved matrons in the Supplices of Euripides were dressed in black +garments, and had their hair cut short, as a sign of mourning; and +carried branches twined with wool, the symbol of supplication, in their +hands. The chorus of maidens in the Choephori, who had come to offer +libations at the tomb of Agamemnon, were also dressed in black.[869] +In some cases the tragic chorus was altogether of an exceptional +character, and required a special costume. In the Supplices of Aeschylus +the daughters of the Egyptian Danaus appear to have been dressed as +foreigners. Probably the same was the case with the Persian Elders in +the Persae. The Bacchantes in the play of Euripides carried tambourines +in their hands, and were doubtless also provided with fawn-skins and +wands of ivy.[870] But no tragic chorus ever caused a greater sensation +than the chorus of Furies in the Eumenides of Aeschylus. Their costume +was designed by Aeschylus himself, and the snakes in the hair, which +afterwards became one of their regular attributes, were specially +invented for the occasion. As they rushed into the orchestra, their black +dresses, distorted features, and snaky locks are said to have inspired +the spectators with terror.[871] But this chorus was of a very unusual +kind. In most cases the tragic chorus was composed of ordinary men and +women, and their dress was that of everyday life. + +[Illustration: FIG. 28.] + +The choruses of goat-like satyrs who sang the dithyrambs in honour of +Dionysus were the original source both of tragedy and of the satyric +drama. These satyrs appear to have been an importation from the +Peloponnesus. They are unknown to the oldest Ionic traditions. Among the +primitive Ionians their place is taken by the Sileni—beings of a similar +type, but resembling horses rather than goats.[872] Thus in the Homeric +hymns it is the Sileni who are mentioned as companions of Dionysus, and +there is no reference to the satyrs.[873] In the earliest Attic vases +satyrs are never depicted, but only the horse-like Sileni. That the +satyrs, with their goatish horns and tails, were a Doric conception +is proved by various indications. In a fragment of Hesiod, where they +are mentioned for the first time, the account of their genealogy which +is given connects them with Argos.[874] We hear of ‘goat choruses’ as +an ancient institution at Sicyon.[875] Pratinas, the first celebrated +writer of satyric drama, was a native of Phlius. As for the costume of +the satyrs who formed the chorus of the primitive drama there is not +very much evidence of an early date. Vases depicting Bacchic scenes are +sufficiently common, but few of them can be shown to have any connexion +with a dramatic performance. The earliest reliable testimony is that +supplied by the Pandora vase.[876] This vase, which belongs to the middle +of the fifth century, contains a scene from the Pandora myth, and also +a representation of a group of masked satyrs (Fig. 28) dancing round +a flute-player. The satyrs are portrayed as half men and half goats. +They have goat’s horns upon their heads, and goat’s hoofs instead of +feet; and their tails are those of goats. Such seems to have been the +appearance of a satyric chorus at the time the vase was painted. The next +representation in point of date is that of the Naples vase (Fig. 29), +which is about fifty years later. Here there is a considerable change +in the make-up of the satyrs. The goatish element is less conspicuous. +The goat’s horns and hoofs have disappeared, and the tail is more like +that of a horse. In fact the type begins to approximate to that of +the old Ionic Sileni, or horse-deities. The only part which resembles +a goat is the shaggy skin round the loins. The style of satyr here +depicted is the one which eventually prevailed in the theatre. Later +representations of satyric choruses portray them in much the same way as +the Naples vase, with goat’s loins and horse’s tails, but without hoofs +or horns.[877] This evidence shows us that the satyr of the fourth and +subsequent centuries was a modification of the original conception. The +earliest stage satyrs were genuine goat-deities of the Doric type. But +in the course of the fifth century there was a reaction in favour of the +indigenous Sileni or horse-deities. The two types were mixed together, +and so produced the conventional satyr of the later theatre.[878] Some +scholars maintain that the type was the same from the first, and that the +old dancers in the tragic and satyric drama resembled Sileni more than +satyrs.[879] But this theory is scarcely compatible with the evidence of +the Pandora vase. The fact, too, that tragedy was called the ‘goat-song’ +seems to prove decisively that the oldest choruses were composed of +goat-like beings.[880] There is also a fragment of a satyric play by +Aeschylus in which one of the chorus-singers is actually addressed as +a goat.[881] With this evidence before us we can hardly doubt that the +Doric satyrs were the original performers in Attic tragedy and satyric +drama, and that the Ionic element was introduced later on. + +[Illustration: FIG. 29.] + +Some other points in connexion with the satyr’s costume have still to +be mentioned. The phallus, the regular symbol of Dionysiac worship, was +invariably worn. The goat-skin round the loins was often replaced by a +conventional substitute, consisting of drawers of some woven material, to +which the tail and phallus were attached. Drawers of this kind are worn +by all the satyrs in the Pandora vase, and by one satyr in the Naples +vase, and are also found in a later painting.[882] Apart from the drawers +and the goat-skin, the satyrs are represented in the works of art as +perfectly naked.[883] But probably in the theatre they had flesh-coloured +tights, similar to those used by the comic actors. Slippers were no doubt +also used, and may in early times have been made in imitation of a hoof, +as in the Pandora vase. In addition to the regular satyric costume the +satyrs occasionally wore other clothes, suited to the part they played in +the particular drama. Thus the satyrs in the Cyclops of Euripides, being +servants of Polyphemus, were dressed in the ordinary leather jerkin of +the serving-man.[884] Silenus, the head of the troop, was not a member of +the chorus, but appeared upon the stage with the other actors. His dress +has been described already. He was a sort of elderly satyr, and is to be +distinguished from the old Ionic Sileni, whose appearance was entirely +different. His origin is rather obscure; but he may perhaps have been a +later development, suggested by the requirements of the satyric drama. + +The chorus in the Old Comedy, unlike that of the satyric drama, was +of the most varied and fanciful character, and was drawn from every +possible source. All classes and professions were introduced at some +time or another.[885] There were choruses of Poets, Sophists, Athletes, +Trades-women, Sorcerers, Knights, Drummers, and so on. Foreign nations +were often represented, such as Persians, Macedonians, and Thracian +women. Even individuals were multiplied into a species, and produced +choruses of Hesiodi and Archilochi. When the members consisted of human +beings, they were dressed in the tunic and mantle of ordinary life, +with such slight additions as were necessary to mark the different +professions and nationalities. The mantle was laid aside for the purpose +of dancing, as the dances of the Old Comedy were of a wild and energetic +character, and required freedom of action.[886] The masks were of a +ludicrous type, with the features distorted.[887] In addition to the +human choruses there were also those composed of mythological beings, +such as Furies, Amazons, Sphinxes, and Sirens. These would be dressed no +doubt in the traditional costume. Many choruses consisted of fanciful +and ridiculous personifications. There were choruses of Towns, Islands, +and Merchant ships; of Clouds and Seasons; of Dramas and Epistles. In +all these cases the dress and general make-up appear to have been of +a grotesque character, and only in a remote degree emblematic of the +ideas and objects personified. For instance, the Clouds of Aristophanes +appeared as women dressed in gaily coloured garments, and wore masks +of a ridiculous type, with long noses and other exaggerations. The only +resemblance to Clouds was in the colours of the dresses.[888] Probably +in other similar cases the personification was carried out in the same +rough-and-ready manner. Another class of choruses was composed of various +kinds of animals. We have the Birds and Wasps of Aristophanes; and we +hear of other poets introducing Goats, Frogs, Vultures, Storks, Ants, +Fishes, Bees, Nightingales, and so on. Choruses of this kind appear to +have been a favourite institution among the Athenians, quite apart from +the drama. A theory has been propounded that they were survivals of an +old theriomorphic form of worship, and that they were the original source +of the comic chorus.[889] As for their connexion with a primitive type of +religion, this is a speculative subject with which we have no concern. +But the notion that they were the prototype of the comic chorus is not +sufficiently supported by evidence. This chorus consisted originally +of the ‘comus’, or band of revellers, who led the phallic processions +in honour of Dionysus; and there is no reason to suppose that these +revellers were dressed otherwise than as men. The varied character of the +later chorus was due to the fancy and imagination of the Attic poets, who +introduced all kinds of eccentric beings upon the stage, and among them +choruses of animals. These latter, however, were only a small proportion +of the whole, and it seems hardly justifiable to choose them out from +the rest as specially connected with the origin of comedy. As regards +the costume of these animal choruses, it would be highly interesting to +know how it was managed. There are five vase-paintings of the early fifth +century which depict such choruses dancing to the accompaniment of a +flute-player; though it is doubtful whether in any case the performance +is of a dramatic kind. One of these choruses consists of men disguised as +horses, with knights riding on their shoulders; and it has been suggested +that the chorus of Knights in Aristophanes was represented in this +way.[890] Two others depict men riding on ostriches or on dolphins.[891] +In these pictures, however, the whole conception is far too fanciful +and unreal to throw any light on the question of the costume actually +used in the theatre. In another vase the dancers are tall figures, with +heads like those of a cock, and bodies enveloped in long cloaks.[892] +A dress of this kind might have been employed upon the stage; but +unfortunately the cloaks conceal so much of the dancer’s person that the +evidence of the vase is not very instructive. The best painting for our +present purpose is one which represents a chorus of birds, and which is +here reproduced (Fig. 30).[893] The costume is clearly delineated. The +bodies of the choreutae are covered with a close-fitting dress, made in +rough imitation of feathers. Two long ends hang down from each side of +the waist, and a bunch of feathers is affixed to each knee. The arms +are provided with wings. A row of upright feathers is attached to the +crown of the head, and the mask is made with a long and pointed nose, +suggestive of the beak of a bird. From this painting we may obtain a +fairly clear idea of the manner in which animals were imitated in the +Old Comedy. We see that there was none of the realism one meets with +in a modern pantomime. The imitation was only carried so far as to be +generally suggestive of the animal intended. The body and legs were +left unfettered, to allow of free movement in the dance. At the same +time, to judge from the specimen before us, the costumes seem to have +been designed with a great deal of spirit and humour, and to have been +extremely well adapted to the purpose for which they were intended. + +[Illustration: FIG. 30.] + + +§ 4. _Arrangement of the Chorus._ + +Except on rare occasions the dramatic choruses were drawn up in +formations of military regularity, both on their first entrance, and +during the progress of the play. They presented a perfectly symmetrical +appearance in the orchestra. In this respect they offer a contrast to +the choruses in a modern opera, and to the crowds which are introduced +upon the modern stage. As a rule no attempt was made to imitate the +fluctuating movements and haphazard grouping of an ordinary crowd. The +chorus marched into the orchestra, and took up its position before the +stage, with the regularity and precision of a body of soldiers. In all +dramatic choruses—tragic, comic, and satyric—the rectangular formation +was invariably adopted, as opposed to the circular arrangement of the +dithyrambic choruses.[894] This quadrangular formation was probably +of Doric origin.[895] Every dramatic chorus, when drawn up in this +way, consisted of a certain number of ‘ranks’, and a certain number of +‘files’. For instance, the tragic chorus, with its fifteen members, +contained five ranks of three men each, and three files of five men each. +Similarly the comic chorus, which was composed of twenty-four persons, +contained six ranks of four men each, and four files of six men each. +According to the Attic phraseology a chorus was said to be drawn up ‘by +ranks’ when the different members of the same rank stood one behind the +other. It was said to be drawn up ‘by files’ when the members of the +same file were one behind the other. Accordingly, when a tragic chorus +was drawn up ‘by ranks’, the men stood five abreast and three deep. When +it was drawn up ‘by files’, they stood three abreast and five deep. The +same regulations applied to the comic chorus. It might be arranged ‘by +ranks’, with the men six abreast and four deep; or ‘by files’, with the +men four abreast and six deep.[896] The arrangements throughout were +of this military character. In fact the training of a choreutes was +considered by many of the ancient writers to be an excellent preparation +for warlike service.[897] + +[Illustration: FIG. 31.] + +In the great majority of cases the chorus was supposed to consist of +persons from the neighbourhood, and therefore entered the orchestra +by the western passage. Their right side was towards the stage, and +their left side towards the spectators. As a consequence, the left side +of the chorus was much the most conspicuous and important, and the +best-trained choreutae were placed there.[898] The tragic chorus might +enter five abreast and three deep, or three abreast and five deep, +according as the formation was by ranks or by files. As a matter of fact +the arrangement by files was the one almost invariably adopted. There +are several technical terms in connexion with the tragic chorus, and +they all refer to a chorus which is supposed to be entering from the +western side, and to be drawn up three abreast and five deep. An oblong +formation of this kind would evidently be more convenient in the narrow +side-entrances, and would present a broader surface to the spectators +and to the stage. The diagram (Fig. 31) represents a tragic chorus +entering three abreast from the western parodos. The members of the first +file were called ‘aristerostatae’, or ‘men on the left’, and consisted +of the handsomest and most skilful of the choreutae. The middle file +was the least important of the three, as it was most out of sight of +the spectators. The worst choreutae were placed in this file, and were +called ‘laurostatae’, or ‘men in the passage’. The third file was the +one nearest to the stage. Occasionally, if the chorus wheeled completely +round, it came in full view of the spectators. It was therefore of +more importance than the middle file, and a better class of choreutae +were placed in it. They were called the ‘dexiostatae’, or ‘men on the +right’.[899] The six men who composed the front and hindmost ranks—nos. +1, 6, 11, 5, 10, and 15 in the diagram—were styled ‘kraspeditae’, +or ‘fringe-men’.[900] Finally, the three files had different names, +according to their relative proximity to the spectators. The members of +the left file were called ‘front-line men’; the members of the middle +and right-hand files were called ‘second-line men’ and ‘third-line men’ +respectively.[901] + +The central position, no. 3 in the diagram, was occupied by the +coryphaeus, or leader of the chorus.[902] The post of the leader was an +extremely arduous one. While the dialogue was in progress, he had to +carry on conversations with the actors upon the stage. During the choral +odes he had to give the note to the choreutae, and superintend the dances +and manœuvres. At the same time his own dancing and mimetic gestures were +supposed to be a conspicuous feature in the performance. Demosthenes, +speaking of dithyrambic choruses, says that the loss of the coryphaeus +means the ruin of the chorus; and this must have been still more the +case in a dramatic performance.[903] On the other hand the possession +of a skilful leader would contribute very largely to the success of the +chorus and of the drama. The choreutae on each side of the leader, nos. 2 +and 4 in the diagram, were called his ‘parastatae’, or ‘assistants’, and +were next in importance to the leader himself. The two choreutae on the +outside, nos. 1 and 5 in the diagram, were called the ‘third men’.[904] +As already remarked, the coryphaeus, together with the other four members +of the left file, constituted the pick of the whole chorus. + +Concerning the formation in which the comic chorus entered the orchestra +there is not much information. Like the tragic chorus, it might enter +either by ranks or by files; that is to say, it might come in six abreast +and four deep, or four abreast and six deep. There can be no doubt that +the oblong formation of four abreast and six deep was the one usually +adopted. It would be more suitable from every point of view. Both the +tragic and the comic choruses were probably preceded into the orchestra +by the flute-player.[905] On certain rare occasions the formal entrance +in a rectangular body was dispensed with, and an irregular mode of +entrance was adopted, in order to produce a dramatic effect. The best +example is in the Eumenides of Aeschylus. When the Furies made their +second appearance, they came rushing into the orchestra one by one, +in hot pursuit of Orestes, and created a profound sensation by their +movements and appearance.[906] There is another instance in the Birds of +Aristophanes. The birds begin by entering one by one. The flamingo comes +first, and its appearance is criticized by the actors upon the stage. +The cock follows, and is similarly criticized. Then comes the hoopoe, +and after it the glutton-bird. These, as we have seen, were probably +musicians. Finally, the chorus of twenty-four birds come fluttering in +together, so as to block up the side-entrances.[907] In the Lysistrata +the chorus is divided into two halves, one consisting of men, the other +of women. The chorus of men enters first; the chorus of women follows +after an interval.[908] But instances of this kind were very rare and +exceptional. Usually the chorus entered in a rectangular body, with the +precision of a troop of soldiers. + +In most cases the entrance of the chorus took place at the conclusion +of the ‘prologue’ or introductory scene upon the stage; and the march +in was accompanied by a chant, which was called the ‘parodos’, or +entrance-song.[909] However, in a considerable number of plays there +was no parodos at all, but the chorus entered the orchestra in silence, +while the first act of the drama was in progress, and then commenced a +musical dialogue with the actors upon the stage. Instances of this mode +of entrance are to be found in such tragedies as the Electra of Sophocles +and the Orestes of Euripides.[910] A few plays do not conform to either +of these two conventional types. Occasionally, for instance, there is +no prologue, and the play begins with the parodos, as in the Supplices +and Persae of Aeschylus. This was no doubt the old-fashioned mode of +commencement, derived from the times when the drama was still entirely +lyrical. Then again, in the Eumenides the parodos is sung on the second +entrance of the Furies, after their arrival at Athens. In the Supplices +of Euripides the chorus are seen kneeling upon the stage in supplication +when the play commences. There they remain in silence during the +performance of the prologue, and then proceed to sing an ode, in place +of the usual parodos, from their position on the stage. In the Clouds it +appears that the chorus chant the first two odes behind the scenes, and +then enter the orchestra silently. The Rhesus commences with a dialogue +in anapaests between Hector and the chorus. + +The next point to be considered is the position taken up by the chorus +after entering the orchestra. On most occasions, as already stated, the +chorus came in by the western side, drawn up in rectangular formation, +with the stage on its right hand and the spectators on its left. It +advanced half-way into the orchestra, then came to a halt, and each +member of the chorus turned round to the right, so as to face the stage. +By this manœuvre the whole chorus was made to look towards the stage, and +the arrangement by files was converted into one by ranks. For instance, +the tragic chorus, which had entered three abreast and five deep, now +stood before the stage five abreast and three deep. The coryphaeus and +principal choreutae stood in the back line, and retained their position +nearest to the spectators, and furthest away from the stage. This +position they kept throughout the performance.[911] In a similar manner +the comic chorus, after entering the orchestra four abreast and six +deep, would halt in front of the stage, go through the manœuvre just +described, and convert itself into a body standing six abreast and four +deep. There is no information as to the position of the coryphaeus in the +comic chorus. But there can be no doubt that, like the tragic coryphaeus, +he stood in the back row, as near as possible to the spectators. + +While the actors were upon the stage, and the dialogue was in progress, +the chorus continued to stand with their backs towards the spectators, +and their faces towards the stage, so as to follow the course of the +action.[912] This was their normal position during the play, and, +although it may seem strange to our modern ideas, it was a necessary +consequence of the peculiar circumstances under which the Greek drama +was developed. When the stage was empty, the pauses between the acts +were filled up by the choral odes called stasima. There is no reliable +information as to the position and movements of the chorus during the +performance of the stasima. As the singing was accompanied by dancing, +the choreutae must have been moving to and fro. But in the absence of +evidence it seems useless to venture on conjectures as to the exact +nature of the evolutions. One thing may be regarded as certain, that +during the performance of the stasima the chorus did not continue to +face towards the empty stage, and turn their backs upon the audience. +Such a position would have been quite unnatural and unmeaning. In the +Old Comedy there was a peculiar sort of interlude called the parabasis, +which came during a pause in the action, and consisted of a series of +lyrics and addresses, delivered by the chorus, and dealing with ordinary +topics of the day. While reciting the first part of the parabasis the +chorus wheeled completely round so as to face the spectators. Hence the +name ‘parabasis’, which means ‘a turning aside’. The latter part was +antistrophical in form, and during its delivery the chorus separated into +two divisions, which stood facing one another. The different portions of +the parabasis were then given by each division in turn.[913] + +Sometimes, though not often, in the course of a play the chorus left the +orchestra for a short period, and made a second entrance later on.[914] +The instances of the practice which occur in the Eumenides and the Ajax +were necessitated by the change of scene in those plays.[915] There is +another example in the Helena of Euripides. Helen and the chorus retire +into the palace, to inquire about the fate of Menelaus from Theonoe. In +their absence Menelaus enters the stage, and recounts his adventures +to the audience. Then Helen and the chorus return, and the recognition +gradually takes place.[916] Similar temporary departures of the chorus +are to be found in the Alcestis and the Ecclesiazusae; but they seem to +have been of very rare occurrence.[917] At the end of the play the chorus +retired by the passage from which it had entered, and was preceded by +the flute-player.[918] In the Seven against Thebes the chorus leave the +orchestra in two divisions, one following the body of Polyneices, the +other that of Eteocles. But in most cases they probably marched but in +the same rectangular formation in which they had entered. + + +§ 5. _The Delivery of the Choral Part._ + +As regards the delivery of the words, the chorus, like the actors, was +not confined to one manner only, but used song, speech, and recitative +by turns, according to the varying character of the metre. The lyrical +portions of the drama were almost invariably sung. The ordinary iambic +trimeters were spoken. The systems of anapaestic dimeters, and the +iambic, trochaic, and anapaestic tetrameters were delivered in recitative +to the accompaniment of the flute.[919] A question now arises which is +of great interest and importance in connexion with the choral part of +the performance. It is obvious to any reader of a Greek play that many +of the speeches and songs assigned to the chorus were not intended to be +delivered by the whole of the chorus, but by individual members. This +fact is patent to every one. But when any attempt is made to settle the +exact character of the distribution the greatest diversity of opinion +prevails. Attempts have been made to portion out the choral odes +between different members and sections of the chorus on the strength of +indications supplied by the metre, or by the sense of the words.[920] +But it is plain that inferences based on evidence of this kind must be +very uncertain in character. As a matter of fact different investigators +have arrived at the most contradictory conclusions. Hence in the present +state of our knowledge any detailed account of the matter is out of +the question. It will be necessary to be content with certain general +conclusions, which are based on actual evidence, or are so plausible in +themselves as to be very widely accepted. + +First, then, as to the part taken by the chorus as a whole. In ordinary +circumstances the parodos and the stasima appear to have been sung by +the whole chorus together. The parodos, as already explained, was the +song of the chorus on its first entrance. The stasima were the long and +important odes inserted between the successive divisions of the play, in +order to fill up the pauses in the action. It is natural in itself to +suppose that these portions should have been sung by the whole chorus, +and the supposition is borne out by the statements of Aristotle.[921] +Sometimes there were exceptions. For example, the chorus in the Alcestis, +on its first entrance, is divided into two half-choruses, which sing +successive passages of the parodos alternately. In the Ion the parodos +is obviously sung by subdivisions or by individuals, and not by the +whole chorus. In the Frogs a long speech by the coryphaeus is inserted +in the middle of the parodos. In the Lysistrata the chorus is divided +throughout the play into two half-choruses, one of men, the other of +women.[922] But in the majority of cases the parodos and the stasima were +given by the whole body of the chorus. Not infrequently, in the middle of +the dialogue, small odes were inserted which resembled stasima in their +general character, but differed from them in point of brevity, and from +the fact that they came in the course of the dialogue, and not during +a pause in the action. They were often songs of triumph or exultation, +occasioned by sudden developments in the plot; and were accompanied by +a lively dance.[923] These short odes were no doubt sung by the whole +chorus, in the same manner as the stasima. It has been suggested that the +strophes and antistrophes in the stasima were delivered by half-choruses +in succession, and that the epode was given by the whole chorus. But +there is no real evidence in support of this hypothesis, and epodes are +only rarely to be met with in dramatic choruses. + +In the second place some of the words assigned to the chorus were +actually delivered by the coryphaeus. There is no direct testimony to +this effect, but the matter hardly admits of doubt. On a great many +occasions the chorus drops the tone of lyrical exaltation, and converses +with the persons on the stage in an easy and familiar manner. It plays +the part of an ordinary actor. In all such cases it is evident that +the chorus must have been represented by the coryphaeus alone. The +dialogues between the actors and the coryphaeus were a peculiar and +distinctive feature of the old Greek drama. They were, in fact, a direct +survival from the early period, when there was only a single actor upon +the stage, and when the dramatic element in a play was necessarily +confined to conversations between the actor and the chorus. In addition +to the dialogues just mentioned, there are several other portions of +the chorus which may be assigned to the coryphaeus with a fair amount +of certainty. Such are the anapaests with which the approach of a new +personage is announced at the end of a choral ode in tragedy. These +anapaests, being delivered in recitative, would make a gentle transition +from the song of the chorus to the speech of the actors. Then again, it +is probable that in comedy all the anapaestic tetrameters were spoken by +the coryphaeus, including the speech to the people at the commencement +of the parabasis, and speeches such as that which is inserted in the +parodos of the Frogs.[924] In comedy also the coryphaeus had frequently +to address words of exhortation and remonstrance to the rest of the +chorus.[925] As regards the anapaests at the beginning and the end of +a play, the question is far more doubtful. It was the old fashion in +tragedy for the entrance song of the chorus to commence with a series of +anapaests. The custom is retained in the Persae, Supplices, and Agamemnon +of Aeschylus, and the Ajax of Sophocles. Most Greek plays also conclude +with a few anapaests. It has been suggested that the verses in each case +were delivered by the coryphaeus alone; but the suggestion is hardly a +plausible one. If chanted in combination by the whole body of the chorus +they would make its entrance and departure much more impressive. It need +hardly be remarked that, when the chorus was divided into half-choruses, +the part generally taken by the coryphaeus was in this case taken by the +leaders of the two halves. For example, throughout the Lysistrata the +chorus of men and the chorus of women were represented in the dialogue +by their respective leaders. In the Seven against Thebes the concluding +anapaests would be spoken by the leaders of the hemichoria. It is also +highly probable that the two sets of trochaic tetrameters, which come at +the end of the parabasis, were recited, not by the half-choruses, but by +their leaders. + +Thirdly, certain portions of the chorus were occasionally spoken or sung +by individual choreutae. The best known example is in the Agamemnon, +during the murder of the king, when the chorus stands outside the palace, +debating helplessly as to what it ought to do, and each of the old men +pronounces his opinion in turn. There is another instance in the lyrical +ode at the commencement of the Eumenides. The Furies wake up, find that +Orestes is gone, and reproach Apollo in a series of brief, detached +sentences, each being sung by one member of the chorus.[926] The above +examples admit of no doubt. Whether the practice was a common one, and +whether the choral parts were frequently distributed among individual +choreutae, is a matter of great uncertainty. It is manifestly unsafe to +infer that it was done in all cases where the choral passage is full of +mutual exhortations and addresses, and the language is broken up into +disconnected sentences. For example, in the parodoi in Aristophanes the +members of the chorus often address one another by name, and exhort +one another to greater activity. But it does not therefore follow, as +has been supposed, that these passages were delivered in portions by +individuals. A chorus might be perfectly well chanted by the whole body, +though written in vivid and dramatic style.[927] It is hardly safe +therefore to distribute choral passages among individual choreutae except +on very strong evidence. The extent to which the practice prevailed in +the ancient drama must be regarded as an open question. + +Fourthly, the division into half-choruses was not infrequent.[928] It +might be done in two ways. In the first place the chorus throughout +the whole play might be composed of two separate divisions, differing +from one another in point of age, sex, or position. The chorus in the +Lysistrata, consisting of one body of men, and one body of women, is an +example. In the second place the chorus might be divided temporarily +into half-choruses, either because of the special requirements of the +play, or merely for purposes of singing and recitation. There are several +certain examples in tragedy. In the Ajax of Sophocles the sailors +hasten off, some to the east and some to the west, in search of Ajax. +They return after a time from opposite sides of the orchestra, bringing +word that they have not found him. In the Orestes, while Helen is being +attacked within the palace, Electra keeps watch outside, and posts the +chorus in two divisions at each end of the orchestra, to guard against +surprise.[929] The examples in the Alcestis and the Seven against Thebes +have already been referred to. In comedy the practice was not at all +uncommon, if the testimony of certain manuscripts is to be accepted. +Various choral passages in the comedies of Aristophanes are distributed +between half-choruses, including the two odes at the end of the +parabasis, and other lyrical pieces of an antistrophic character.[930] + +A suggestion has been made that the divisions into ranks and files were +utilized for musical purposes; that in tragedy, for instance, successive +passages were delivered in turns by ranks of three men, or files of five +men; and that the ranks and files of the comic chorus were used in the +same manner. This is pure conjecture. It may or may not have been the +case; but there is no evidence one way or the other. As to the musical +duets it is impossible to speak with certainty. Whether they were mostly +given by the whole chorus, or by halves, or smaller subdivisions, or +by individual choreutae, or by the coryphaeus, is a matter concerning +which there is no trustworthy information.[931] Such indications as are +supplied by varieties in metre, grammar, or subject, are too vague and +uncertain to lead to any definite conclusion. Unless, therefore, further +evidence of a distinct character is discovered, this particular question +will have to be regarded as an unsettled problem. + + +§ 6. _The Dancing._ + +In the ancient Greek drama, as in modern opera, the three sister arts +of Music, Poetry, and Dancing were all brought into requisition. +But there was this difference—in the Greek drama the poetry was the +principal feature of the performance; the music and the dancing were +subordinate. Moreover, dancing was seldom introduced by itself as a +mere spectacle; it was mainly used in combination with singing, to +interpret and add vividness to the words of the song. The music, the +poetry, and the dancing were blended together into one harmonious whole, +each part gaining an advantage by its combination with the other two. +Most, if not all, of the choral songs were accompanied by dances of one +sort or another. To the Greek mind there was an inseparable connexion +between song and dance, and the notion of choral singing unaccompanied +by dancing would have appeared strange and unusual. The two arts had +grown and developed simultaneously, as appears from the fact that many +of the technical terms in metrical phraseology referred originally to +the movements of the dance. For instance, the smallest division of a +verse was called a ‘foot’. A verse of two feet was styled a ‘basis’, or +‘stepping’. The words ‘arsis’ and ‘thesis’, which denoted the varying +stress of the voice in singing, originally referred to the raising +up and placing down of the foot in marching and dancing. These terms +show how closely the two arts of dancing and singing were associated +together in ancient Greece. A choreutes who was unable to accompany a +song with expressive dance-movements was looked down upon as an inferior +performer.[932] Dancing therefore, as might have been expected, played +a most important part in tragedy, comedy, and the satyric drama. It was +held among the Greeks in the greatest estimation, and there was none of +that feeling of degradation about it which was common among the Romans. +A man might dance in public without any loss of dignity, provided the +dance was of a graceful and becoming character. Sophocles himself, the +great tragic poet and fellow general of Pericles, was not ashamed to +appear in a dance in one of his own tragedies.[933] + +At the same time it should be remembered that dancing in ancient Greece +was a very different thing from dancing in modern times. It included +a great deal more. The word ‘dancing’ in English necessarily implies +movement with the feet. It would be impossible in English to say that a +man was dancing, if he continued to stand in the same position. But in +Greek dancing this was not necessarily the case. The word ‘orchesis’, +which we translate as ‘dancing’, had in reality a much wider meaning. +Greek dancing originated, according to Plato, in the instinctive tendency +of mankind to accompany speech and song with explanatory movements of +the body.[934] It was essentially a mimetic performance. It included, +not only all such motions as are denoted by dancing in the modern sense +of the word, but also every kind of gesture and posture by which various +objects and events can be represented in dumb show. Its principal +function was to interpret and illustrate the words of poetry. For this +purpose nothing could be more important than appropriate gesticulation. +Hence in Greek dancing the movements of the hands and arms played a +larger part than the movements of the feet. The same was the case +in Roman dancing also. A few quotations will illustrate this fact. +Telestes, the celebrated dancer employed by Aeschylus, was said to be +able to ‘depict events with his hands in the most skilful manner’.[935] +Demetrius the Cynic, after witnessing the performance of a celebrated +dancer, exclaimed that he ‘spoke with his hands’.[936] Ovid, in his Art +of Love, when advising a lover to show off his best qualities before +his mistress, tells him to sing if he has a good voice, to dance ‘if +his arms are flexible’.[937] The flourishes and gesticulations with +which a professional carver cut out a hare were called ‘dancing’ by the +ancients.[938] Quintilian, speaking of the gestures used in oratory, +gravely says that there ought to be a considerable difference between the +orator and the dancer; that the gestures of the orator should represent +the general sense of the words, rather than the particular objects +mentioned.[939] The bare fact of his comparing an orator with a dancer is +a proof of the vital difference between ancient and modern dancing, and +the importance of mere gesticulation in the former. + +The purpose, then, of ancient dancing was to represent various objects +and events by means of gestures, postures, and attitudes. In this kind +of mimicry the nations of southern Europe are particularly skilful, +as may be seen at the present day. The art was carried by the Greeks +to the highest perfection, and a good dancer was able to accompany a +song with such expressive pantomime as to create a visible picture of +the things described. Aristotle defines dancing as an imitation of +‘actions, characters, and passions by means of postures and rhythmical +movements’.[940] His language indicates very clearly the unlimited +capabilities of Greek dancing. Its general character will be well +exemplified by the following account from Plutarch’s Symposiaca. Dancing, +it is there stated, might be divided into Motions, Postures, and +Indications. Motions were of the greatest use in depicting actions and +passions. Postures were the attitudes in which each motion terminated. +For example, a dancer might halt in such a posture as to suggest Apollo, +or Pan, or a Bacchante. Indications were not mimetic at all, but +consisted in merely pointing out certain objects, such as the heaven, the +earth, the bystanders. Dancing might be defined as poetry without words. +The combination of poetry and dancing, of words and gestures, produced +a perfect imitation.[941] In the above account from Plutarch we have a +clear exposition of the Greek conception of dancing as the handmaid of +poetry. Its function was to delineate and to emphasize the creations of +the poet. This was the part which it played in the Greek drama. It is +most important, therefore, when speaking of dancing in connexion with +the old dramatic performances, to remember the essential difference +between the ancient and modern meaning of the words. + +Some few facts have been recorded concerning the history of dancing in +connexion with the drama. In the earliest times it consisted mainly +of movements with the feet. The use of the hands and arms in dancing, +and the introduction of elaborate gesticulation, was a development due +to a later period.[942] In the old-fashioned dramas of Thespis and +his immediate successors dancing necessarily played a very important +part. Both tragedy and comedy were at that time mainly lyrical, and +the long choral odes were accompanied throughout by dances. The early +dramatists, such as Thespis, Phrynichus, Pratinas, and Cratinus, were +called ‘dancers’ as well as poets, because one of their principal +duties consisted in training their choruses in the art of dancing.[943] +Phrynichus, in an epigram of which two verses are still preserved, boasts +of having discovered more figures in dancing than there are waves in a +stormy sea.[944] The tragic dance of the sixth century, to judge from +the specimens given by Philocleon at the end of the Wasps, was of a +wild and lively character.[945] The tone of solemnity, by which it was +afterwards distinguished, was due to the innovations of Aeschylus. It was +probably in the time of Aeschylus that dancing in tragedy reached its +highest pitch of excellence. His long choruses gave ample opportunities +for the display of the dancer’s skill. Moreover, the training of the +chorus was personally superintended by Aeschylus, and he is said to have +himself invented a great number of postures and attitudes to be used +in dancing.[946] Towards the end of the fifth century the art appears +to have declined in significance, along with the general decrease in +the importance of the chorus. It began to lose something of its mimetic +character. Plato, the comic poet, who flourished at the end of the fifth +century, contrasts the mediocrity of the choral dancing in his day with +the excellence of that of a former period. In old times, he says, a good +dancer was a sight worth seeing; but the choreutae of the present day +stand in a row, like so many cripples, and bawl out their songs, without +any attempt at appropriate motions and gestures.[947] This deterioration +was a necessary consequence of the tendency to thrust the chorus more and +more into the background. + +The general character of the dancing in the Greek drama has already +been described. As far as details are concerned our information is very +defective, and only slight indications are to be obtained from the +existing plays. It is probable that, when the parodoi commenced with +a series of anapaests, the chorus only marched in, without dancing. +But all parodoi written in lyrical metres were undoubtedly accompanied +with a dance. The iambic and trochaic tetrameters, in which many of +the parodoi in Aristophanes are written, seem to have been generally +intended for choruses which entered running, and with an appearance +of great haste.[948] The stasima, or long choral odes between the +acts, are said by many of the scholiasts to have been unaccompanied by +dancing, and to have been delivered by the chorus standing perfectly +still.[949] The statement is no doubt an error, due to false etymology. +The stasima, or ‘stationary songs’, were so called, not because the +chorus stood still during their delivery, but because it remained all +the time in the orchestra. They were therefore opposed to the parodoi, +which were delivered while the chorus was coming in, and to the exodoi, +which were delivered while it was going out.[950] That the stasima were +accompanied by dancing is proved by several references to dancing which +they contain.[951] A tradition has been preserved by one scholiast +concerning the manœuvres of the chorus in the stasima. It is said that +during the strophe they moved to the right, during the antistrophe +to the left; and that during the epode they remained standing in the +same position as at first.[952] This description, however, has probably +been applied to the drama by mistake. A manœuvre of the kind mentioned, +though suitable to the circular chorus of the dithyramb, would be out of +place in the rectangular formations of the dramatic choruses. Also it is +comparatively rare to find epodes in the stasima. As for the incidental +odes, which occur in the middle of the dialogue, many of those were +written in the lively hyporchematic style, to mark the joy of the chorus +at an unexpected turn of fortune. Some of the regular stasima were of +the same type.[953] The dances by which these odes were accompanied were +extremely brisk and energetic, in tragedy as well as in comedy.[954] The +exodoi, or concluding utterances of the chorus, were not usually attended +with dancing, but were delivered in recitative as the chorus marched +out. There is an exception in the Wasps and the Ecclesiazusae, which are +terminated by the chorus dancing out of the orchestra. But Aristophanes +himself remarks that this was an innovation.[955] There is no reason to +suppose that in tragedy the kommoi, or musical dialogues between actors +and chorus, were unaccompanied with dancing. But naturally, if this was +the case, the dance would be of a quiet and sober kind, consisting more +of appropriate gestures and motions than of dancing in the modern sense +of the word. + +During a large part of every Greek play the chorus had nothing to say +or sing, but merely stood watching the actors, and listening to the +dialogue. It would be absurd to imagine that they remained stolid and +indifferent during all this period. Chorus and actors were supposed to +form one harmonious group, and no doubt the chorus followed the events +upon the stage with a keen appearance of interest, and expressed their +sympathy with the different characters by every kind of gesture and +by-play. Occasionally the long descriptive speeches delivered from +the stage were accompanied with a mimetic dance on the part of the +chorus.[956] The events described by the actor were represented in dumb +show by the choreutae. In comedy it was a regular practice to introduce +descriptive speeches of this sort, the metres used being iambic or +anapaestic tetrameters, which were especially suitable for dancing +to. There is an example in the Clouds, where Strepsiades describes +his quarrel with Pheidippides. The various phases of the quarrel were +represented in dumb show by the chorus, keeping time with the recitative +of the actor.[957] Again, we are told that Telestes, the dancer employed +by Aeschylus, ‘danced the Seven against Thebes’ so successfully as to +bring the various events before the very eyes of the spectators. The +statement no doubt refers to the dumb show with which he accompanied the +long descriptive speeches that abound in that play.[958] + +Each of the three different species of the drama had its own special kind +of dance. The tragic dance was called the ‘emmeleia’. It was grave and +majestic in its motions, and was one of the two dances approved of by +Plato, and admitted into his ideal republic.[959] Some of the postures or +figures in the tragic dance are mentioned by the ancient writers. One of +them represented a man in the act of thrusting with the sword; another +depicted a man in an attitude of menace, with clenched fist. The rest +are a mere list of names, of which the meaning is uncertain. But it is +plain from the existence of such lists that the art of tragic dancing was +reduced to a regular system, and that the various attitudes and postures +were taught in a methodical manner.[960] We can hardly be mistaken in +assuming that as a rule the movements of the tragic dance were slow and +deliberate, and more like walking than dancing in the modern sense. +The odes called ‘hyporchemata’, with their lively motions, were only +adopted in tragedy on special occasions, to show the excessive joy of +the choreutae.[961] The kommos at the conclusion of the Persae gives +us a vivid picture of the general style of a tragic dance. The Persian +Elders follow Xerxes on his way to the palace, bewailing the ruin of the +empire in mournful strains. At each fresh exclamation of grief they fall +into some new posture, first beating their breasts, then plucking their +beards, then rending their garments, then tearing their hair; and in this +manner they gradually make their exit from the orchestra.[962] + +The comic dance was called the ‘kordax’. Its movements were coarse and +lascivious, and its general style was suggestive of the phallic songs +out of which comedy had been developed. It was a dance for drunken +people, and no one but a man without any sense of shame would dance it +when he was sober. It was considered vulgar and disgraceful by Plato, +and excluded from his commonwealth.[963] Aristophanes, in the Clouds, +takes credit to himself for having abandoned it in that play; but, as +the scholiast remarks, he frequently introduces it elsewhere.[964] In +the comic dances the wildest movements were admissible. The chorus, at +the end of the Wasps, when encouraging the sons of Carcinus to fresh +exertions, bid them ‘whirl round like tops, and fling their legs up into +the sky’. Occasionally the circular dance of the dithyrambic chorus was +adopted in comedy.[965] + +The dance used in the satyric drama was called the ‘sikinnis’. It was +mainly a parody and caricature of noble and graceful dances, and was +very violent and rapid in its movements. One of the postures used in the +satyric dance was called the owl, and is variously explained by the old +grammarians as having consisted in shading the eyes with the hands, or in +turning the head to and fro like an owl.[966] + + +§ 7. _The Music._ + +The music of a Greek play was simple in its character, and altogether +subordinate to the poetry. As Plutarch remarks, it was a sort of +seasoning or relish, the words being the main attraction.[967] Any +comparison therefore between a Greek play and a modern opera, as far as +the music is concerned, must be entirely illusive. In the first place +all Greek choral singing was in unison. The use of harmony in choral +compositions was apparently unknown to the Greeks. Even in modern times +Greek Church Music has retained the practice of chanting in unison. +Consequently the general style of the music in a Greek drama must +have been exceedingly simple and severe compared with the intricate +combinations of modern music. In the second place, the music was fitted +to the words, instead of the words being subordinated to the music. Each +note of the music corresponded, in most cases, to a separate syllable of +the verse, and the time of the music was determined entirely by the metre +of the verse. The ode was chanted in unison, syllable after syllable, +by the whole body of the choreutae. The modern practice of adapting the +words to the exigences of the music, and making different parts of the +chorus sing different words at the same time, was altogether unknown. +Hence it is probable that the words of a Greek chorus were heard with +considerable distinctness by the whole audience. When all the singing +was in unison, and the notes of the music corresponded to the syllables +of the verse, there was no reason why this should not be the case. In +modern choral singing the poetry is so far sacrificed to the music that +even the general drift of the words cannot usually be distinguished +with much clearness. But this could never have been the case in the +ancient drama, where the lyrical portions of the play often contained +the finest poetry and the profoundest thoughts of the whole composition. +The choreutae were doubtless made to sing with great precision and +distinctness of utterance; and this training, combined with the simple +character of the music, would make it possible for the words of an +ancient chorus to be heard without difficulty. In the third place, the +instrumental accompaniment was limited in amount, and was never allowed +to predominate. As a rule it was given by a single flute or harp, and +was the same, note for note, as the melody. In lyrical, as opposed to +dramatic, poetry there was a tendency for the flute to overpower the +voices. Pratinas, in a lyrical fragment still preserved, complains of +this practice, saying that ‘the Muse has made Poetry the mistress: let +the flute play the second part; it is but the servant of Poetry’.[968] +These words, which only refer to a tendency in the lyrical poets of the +time, are significant as showing the Greek conception of the relative +position of instrument and voice in choral singing. In the Greek drama, +as already remarked, the instrumental portion of the music was altogether +subordinate; and the music as a whole was made subservient to the words +and the poetry. + +Greek music was written in various Modes, as they were called, concerning +the nature of which there has been much conflict of opinion. It is +uncertain whether the Modes were distinguished from one another, like +the modern major and minor scales, by the order of the intervals in the +octave, or whether the difference was one of pitch, like the difference +between the keys in modern music.[969] These Modes, whatever their exact +character, were each of them associated with a particular kind of music. +Every Mode had a special kind of metre and of melody appropriated to +itself, and a composition in a given Mode was necessarily of a certain +well-defined character. The difference between the music of the several +Modes was very much the same as that between various kinds of national +music in modern times. For example, an air in the Phrygian Mode bore the +same sort of relation to one in the Lydian as a lively Swiss song bears +to a plaintive Irish melody. Of the various Modes used in Greek music the +tragic poets selected those which were most suited to their purpose. The +Dorian and the Mixolydian Modes were the two most commonly employed in +tragedy. The Dorian was majestic and dignified in style; the Mixolydian +was pathetic. The one was used in the solemn and profound choral odes, +the other in cases where deep emotion had to be expressed.[970] Besides +these two principal Modes, certain others were occasionally employed. +The old Ionic Mode was severe and sober, before the degeneracy of the +Ionic nation had altered its character. It was therefore well adapted to +tragedy, and was used by Aeschylus.[971] The music of the Phrygian Mode +was passionate and enthusiastic, and was first introduced into tragedy +by Sophocles.[972] The Hypodorian and the Hypophrygian Modes were only +employed in the songs of the actors upon the stage, and not in choral +odes. The reason was that the style of their music was better suited +to realistic acting than to choral singing.[973] Sometimes a few notes +of instrumental music were inserted by themselves, at intervals in the +choral songs, as a sort of refrain. The ‘phlattothrat’, which recurs in +the parody of Aeschylus’s lyrics in the Frogs, is an instance of such a +refrain, the instrument used being the harp. The flute was also employed +in the same way. Such refrains were called ‘diaulia’.[974] + +During the latter part of the fifth century the character of Greek music +underwent a considerable change. The severity and simplicity of the music +of the Aeschylean period were succeeded by a style in which softness, +variety, and flexibility were the prominent features. The author of the +movement was the celebrated musician Timotheus.[975] His innovations +were regarded by the philosophers and old-fashioned critics as so many +corruptions of the art of music, and as a proof of the growing effeminacy +of the age.[976] In one of the comedies of Pherecrates the person of +Music is made to complain of the treatment she has received at the hands +of various composers, and ends her complaint by charging Timotheus with +having outraged and insulted her more than any one else had done, and +compares his florid melodies to the ‘intricate movements of ants in a +nest’.[977] The new kind of music was very generally adopted by the later +tragic poets, such as Euripides and Agathon, and is frequently ridiculed +by Aristophanes.[978] Euripides appears to have foreseen from the first +that the new style would soon become popular. On a certain occasion, when +a novel composition by Timotheus was loudly hissed in the theatre, he +told him not to be discouraged by his temporary want of success, as in a +few years he would be sure to have every audience at his feet.[979] The +prediction was verified by the result. + + + + +CHAPTER VII + +THE AUDIENCE + + +§ 1. _Composition of the Audience._ + +The theatre of Dionysus at Athens, during the period of the Lenaea +and the City Dionysia, presented a spectacle which for interest and +significance has few parallels in the ancient or the modern world. The +city kept universal holiday. The various proceedings were in reality +so many religious celebrations. But there was nothing of an austere +character about the worship of Dionysus. To give freedom from care was +his special attribute, and the sincerest mode of paying homage to his +power was by a genial enjoyment of the various pleasures of life. At +this time of universal merriment the dramatic performances formed the +principal attraction. Each day soon after sunrise the great majority of +the citizens made their way to the southern slopes of the Acropolis, +where the theatre of Dionysus was situated. The tiers of seats rising up +the side of the hill were speedily filled with a crowd of nearly twenty +thousand persons. The sight of such a vast multitude of people, gathered +together at daybreak in the huge open amphitheatre, and dressed for the +most part in white, or in red, brown, yellow, and other rich colours, +must have been exceedingly striking and picturesque. The performances +which brought them together were not unworthy of the occasion. The plays +exhibited at the festivals of Dionysus rank among the very noblest +achievements of Greek genius. For beauty of form, depth of meaning, +and poetical inspiration they have never been surpassed. It would be +difficult to point to any similar example of the whole population of a +city meeting together each year to enjoy works of the highest artistic +beauty. It is seldom that art and poetry have penetrated so deeply into +the life of the ordinary citizens. Our curiosity is naturally excited +in regard to the tone and composition of the audiences before which a +drama of such an exceptional character was exhibited. The object of the +following chapter will be to bring together and present in one view all +the available information upon this subject. + +At the Lenaea, which was held in the winter, when travelling was +difficult, the audience consisted almost exclusively of natives +of Athens. The City Dionysia came about two months later, at the +commencement of the spring, and attracted great crowds of strangers +from various parts of Greece. Representatives from the allied states +came to pay the annual tribute at this season of the year. It was also +a favourite time for the arrival of ambassadors from foreign cities; +and it was considered a mere matter of politeness to provide them with +front seats in the theatre, if they happened to be in Athens during the +celebration of the City Dionysia.[980] In addition to these visitors of +a representative character, there were also great numbers of private +individuals, attracted to Athens from all parts of Greece by the +magnificence of the festival, and the fame of the dramatic exhibitions. +Altogether the visitors formed a considerable portion of the audience +at the City Dionysia. One of the great aggravations of the offence of +Meidias was that his assault upon Demosthenes was committed in the +presence of ‘large multitudes of strangers’.[981] Apparently the natives +of foreign states were not allowed to purchase tickets for the theatre in +their own name, but had to get them through an Athenian citizen.[982] + +The composition of the purely Athenian part of the audience is a subject +upon which a great deal has been written, the principal difficulty being +the question as to the admittance of boys and women to the dramatic +performances. In the treatment of this matter scholars appear to have +been unduly biassed by a preconceived opinion as to what was right +and proper. Undoubtedly Athenian women were kept in a state of almost +Oriental seclusion. And the old Attic comedy was pervaded by a coarseness +which seems to make it utterly unfit for boys and women. For these +reasons some writers have gone so far as to assert that they were never +present at any dramatic performances whatsoever.[983] Others, while not +excluding them from tragedy, have declared that it was an impossibility +that they should have been present at the performances of comedy.[984] +But the attempt to draw a distinction between tragedy and comedy, in +regard to the admission of boys and women to the theatre, will not bear +examination. If they were present at one, they must have been present at +both. The tragic and the comic competitions frequently took place upon +the same days, and succeeded one another without any interval; and it is +difficult to suppose that, after the tragedies were over, a large part +of the audience had to be turned out before the comedies could begin. +Moreover, if women and boys had been present at the tragedies, they would +of necessity have been spectators of the satyric dramas, which were +nearly as coarse as the comedies. It is useless therefore to endeavour to +separate tragedy from comedy in the consideration of this question. + +As a matter of fact the evidence upon the subject, if considered without +prejudice, makes it practically certain that there were no restrictions +of the kind suggested. The audience at the dramatic performances, whether +tragic or comic, was drawn from every class of the population. Men, +women, boys, and slaves were all allowed to be present. The evidence +from ancient authors is too copious to be accounted for on any other +supposition. There are three passages in Plato which in themselves +are almost enough to decide the question. In one place, speaking of +poetry in general, and more especially of tragedy, Plato says it is a +kind of rhetoric addressed to ‘boys, women, and men, slaves, and free +citizens without distinction’. In another place, where he is treating +of the management of his ideal republic, he says there will be no great +readiness to allow the tragic poets to ‘erect their stages in the +market-place, and perform before women and children, and the general +public’. A passage of this kind would have very little point, unless it +was intended as a condemnation of the prevailing practice. In a third +place he declares that if there was a general exhibition of all kinds of +public amusements, and the audience were called upon to state what they +were most pleased with, the little children would vote for the conjuror, +the boys for the comic poet, the young men and the more refined sort of +women for the tragic poet.[985] These three passages of Plato are hardly +consistent with the supposition that the drama was a spectacle which boys +and women were never allowed to witness. + +In addition to the above evidence there are also several places in +Aristophanes where boys and women are referred to as forming part of the +audience. For instance, in the Clouds Aristophanes prides himself on +having refrained from introducing the phallus ‘to make the boys laugh’. +In the Peace he says that ‘both the boys and the men’ ought to wish for +his victory in the contest, because of his boldness in attacking Cleon. +In another part of the Peace, when some barley is thrown among the male +part of the spectators, Trygaeus remarks that the women have not got +any.[986] Other passages of the same kind might be quoted. That women +were present at the New Comedy is proved conclusively by a letter of +Alciphron, in which Menander is supposed to be writing to his mistress +Glycera. In this letter he says that nothing is dearer to him than to be +crowned with the ivy of Dionysus, as victor in the comic contest, ‘while +Glycera is sitting in the theatre and looking on.’[987] Other pieces of +evidence are as follows. In Lucian’s dialogue Solon tells Anacharsis +that the Athenians educate their sons by taking them to tragedies and +comedies, and showing them examples of virtue and vice, so as to teach +them what to imitate and what to avoid.[988] In the Frogs there is +the well-known passage in which Aeschylus taunts Euripides with the +immorality of his plays, which have caused women of refinement to commit +suicide from very shame. If women were never present at the performance +of the tragedies of Euripides, there would be very little meaning in +the reproach.[989] Then again we are told that when Alcibiades was +choregus, and ‘entered the theatre’ dressed in a splendid purple robe, +he was admired ‘not only by the men, but also by the women’.[990] The +shameless person in Theophrastus smuggles his sons into the theatre with +a ticket which belongs to some one else. The miser never takes his sons +to the theatre except when the entrance is free.[991] The regulation +of Sphyromachus, providing that men, women, and courtesans should sit +apart from one another, can hardly have referred to any place but the +theatre.[992] The cumulative effect of all these passages is difficult +to resist. It is impossible to explain them all away by far-fetched +interpretations. Even the story of the effect produced by the Eumenides +of Aeschylus upon the audience—of the boys dying of fright and the women +having miscarriages—such a story, though in itself a foolish invention, +could hardly have originated unless women and boys had been regularly +present at the theatre.[993] That they were admitted at a later period +is proved by the direct evidence of inscriptions in the theatre of +Dionysus, which show that in Hadrian’s time seats were specially reserved +for priestesses and other women.[994] This fact would not of course be +conclusive evidence as to the custom which prevailed in the classical +period of Athenian history. But, as far as it goes, it tends to confirm +the conclusions based upon the evidence of ancient authors. + +No doubt at first sight it appears a very startling fact that women and +boys should have been spectators of the Old Comedy. But it should always +be remembered that the comedies performed at the festivals of Dionysus +were a portion of a religious celebration, which it was a pious duty +to take part in. Ribaldry and coarseness were a traditional element in +the worship of Dionysus, handed down from rude and primitive times, and +were not lightly to be dispensed with. The Greeks in such matters were +thoroughly conservative. It was a feeling of this kind which caused +the satyric drama to be developed side by side with tragedy, in order +that the old licentious merriment of the satyrs might not be utterly +forgotten. The coarseness of the Old Comedy, being a regular part of the +celebrations in honour of Dionysus, might be witnessed by boys and women +without degradation, though their presence at similar scenes in real life +would have been regarded in a very different manner. Where the worship of +the gods was concerned, the practice of keeping women in strict seclusion +was allowed to drop into abeyance. Women and even girls were present at +the phallic processions in honour of Dionysus.[995] Their appearance +on such occasions was regarded as a mere matter of course. It need not +therefore surprise us that women and boys should have been present in the +theatre at the performances of the Old Comedy. + +Whether they were ever present in large numbers is a further question. +Even those writers who admit that their presence was not prohibited +by law, generally add that the more respectable women would in all +probability keep away.[996] But the only authority for such a notion is +to be found in a couple of passages in Aristophanes, which represent the +husband as present in the theatre, while the wife was at home.[997] There +is nothing so unusual in an occurrence of this kind as to warrant any +sweeping conclusions. Some people must necessarily have remained at home, +from the mere fact that the theatre would not have been large enough to +contain the whole population of Athens, if men, women, and children had +all been present. But it is hardly probable, for the reasons already +stated, that there was anything disreputable in a woman visiting the +theatre. Reformers like Aristotle were in advance of ordinary public +opinion in their feelings about such matters. Aristotle expresses a +strong opinion that boys should be prevented from seeing or hearing +any piece of coarseness or indecency.[998] Even if such ribaldry is an +essential feature in the worship of any particular deity, he says that +only men should be allowed to be present. The men should pay the proper +homage to gods of this character on behalf of themselves, their wives, +and their children; but boys should not be permitted to be witnesses of +comedies and similar spectacles. This passage, in which Aristotle is +combating the prevailing practice of the times, is an additional proof +that boys were present at the performance of comedies, and shows clearly +that when the worship of the gods was concerned ordinary public opinion +did not consider such spectacles improper.[999] + +Besides women and children it appears that slaves were occasionally +present at the theatre. Plato in the Gorgias mentions slaves as one +of the classes before which the tragic poets will not be allowed to +perform in his ideal commonwealth.[1000] The shameless man described by +Theophrastus takes the ‘paedagogus’ to the theatre, along with his sons, +and crowds them all into seats which did not really belong to him.[1001] +It is not, however, probable that the number of slaves among the audience +was ever very great. Their presence would depend upon the kindness of +their masters. But the two passages just quoted prove that there was no +law to prevent their attendance. + + +§ 2. _Price of Admission._ + +The dramatic entertainments at Athens were provided by the state for +the benefit of the whole people. The entrance was originally free, and +every man was allowed to get the best seat he could. But, as the drama +was extremely popular from the very first, the struggle for seats caused +great disturbances. People used to come and secure places the night +before the performance began; citizens complained that they were crowded +out of the theatre by foreigners; blows and fights were of frequent +occurrence. It was therefore decided to charge a small entrance fee, and +to sell all the seats in advance. In this way the crush of people was +avoided, and, as each man’s seat was secured for him, he was able to go +to the theatre at a more reasonable hour.[1002] The price of a seat for +one day’s performance was two obols. The same price appears to have been +charged for all the different parts of the theatre, with the exception +of the reserved seats for priests, officials, and other distinguished +persons.[1003] A gradation of prices, according to the goodness and +badness of the seat, would probably not have been tolerated by the +democracy, as giving the rich too great an advantage over the poor. + +Until the close of the fifth century every man had to pay for his place, +although the charge was a small one. But the poorer classes began to +complain that the expense was too great for them, and that the rich +citizens bought up all the seats. Accordingly, a measure was framed +directing that every citizen who cared to apply should have the price +of the entrance paid to him by the state. The sum given in this way was +called ‘theoric’ money. It used formerly to be supposed, on the strength +of statements in Plutarch and Ulpian, that this theoric system was +introduced by Pericles.[1004] But the recently discovered Constitution +of Athens has now shown that it was of much later date. The originator +of the grant was the demagogue Cleophon, who succeeded Cleon in the +leadership of the democracy. The year in which he introduced it is not +given; but it must have been in the interval between the death of Cleon +in 422 and his own death in 404. The amount of the payment was two obols, +the price of a single seat. It is said that soon afterwards Callicrates, +another demagogue, promised to raise the grant to three obols, the +object apparently being to provide an extra obol for refreshments.[1005] +But this promise was probably never carried out, as two obols is the +sum usually mentioned in later times as the theoric grant for a single +day.[1006] Of course if the festival lasted for several days, and there +were performances in the theatre on each of them, the amount given by the +state would be increased in proportion. Thus certain authors speak of a +grant of four obols, or of six; but they are referring no doubt to the +sum given for the whole festival.[1007] The theoric money was distributed +in the different townships. Every man whose name was entered on the town +lists as a full citizen might claim his share.[1008] But it is probable +that at first only the poorer classes applied. No one was allowed to +obtain the grant unless he made his application in person. A certain +Conon, who succeeded in getting the money in the name of his son, who +was absent at the time, was fined a talent for the offence.[1009] In its +original form this theoric system may seem not altogether indefensible. +The theatrical performances were a sort of religious celebration, +provided by the state; and it was unreasonable that any citizen should +be debarred from attending them by poverty. But in the course of the +fourth century the system was expanded and developed until it became a +scandalous abuse. Grants were given, not only for the Dionysia, but for +all the other Athenian festivals, to provide the citizens with banquets +and means of enjoyment. The rich began to claim the money with quite +as much eagerness as the poor. The military revenues were impoverished +in order to supply the Theoric Fund, which had now grown to huge +proportions. A law was passed making it a capital offence even to propose +to divert this theoric money to any other purpose. As a consequence the +resources of the state were crippled, and the people demoralized. The +theoric question became one of the chief difficulties which Demosthenes +had to deal with, in his efforts to rouse the Athenian people to action +against Philip.[1010] + +[Illustration: FIG. 32.] + +The tickets of admission in the ancient theatre appear to have +generally consisted of small leaden coins stamped with some theatrical +emblem.[1011] Such coins could easily be renewed and stamped afresh for +the different festivals. Many of them have been discovered in modern +times, both in Attica and elsewhere, and date from the fifth century +down to the Christian era. The specimen which is here given (Fig. +32) contains a representation of three comic masks, with the name of +the play, the Prophetess, inscribed above, and the name of the poet, +Menander, underneath.[1012] In addition to these leaden coins certain +tickets made of ivory or bone, and apparently connected with the theatre, +have also been preserved. But they are far fewer in number than the +leaden coins, and only date from the Christian era. They are found +solely in Graeco-Roman districts. They are too elaborate and permanent +in workmanship to have served as ordinary tickets, and were probably +intended for the occupants of the reserved seats in the front rows. They +usually contain some figure or emblem on the one side, and a description +of the emblem in Greek on the other, together with a number in Greek and +Latin. The specimen in the text (Fig. 33) exhibits the head of Kronos +on the obverse, with the inscription ‘Kronos’ and the number thirteen +on the reverse.[1013] The numbers never rise higher than fifteen, and +cannot therefore refer to the individual seats in the different rows. +Probably both the numbers and the emblems denote particular blocks of +seats. We know that in the theatre at Syracuse certain blocks were called +after the names of gods and princes, such as Hieron, Zeus, and Hercules; +and that in the Roman theatre Germanicus gave his name to a particular +block.[1014] It is a very plausible conjecture, therefore, that emblems +like that of Kronos refer to some similar method of designation. + +[Illustration: FIG. 33.] + +Besides the two kinds of ticket just described, a large number of +bronze coins have been found in Athens and Attica, of which the exact +significance is uncertain. But Svoronos, the latest writer on the +subject, is inclined to think that they too were intended as marks of +admission to the theatre.[1015] These coins date from the fourth to the +second century B.C. On the obverse they are generally stamped with an +image of Athene, or a lion’s head, or a group of owls. On the reverse +there is a letter of the alphabet, either single, or repeated more than +once (Fig. 34). Sometimes there is no symbol on the coin, but both the +obverse and the reverse contain the same alphabetical letter or letters. +It is possible, as Svoronos thinks, that these coins were theatrical +tickets, and that the letters, of which there are at least fifty-two +varieties, referred to various divisions of seats in the auditorium. + +[Illustration: FIG. 34.] + +The receipts from the sale of places in the theatre went to the lessee. +The arrangement in this matter was a peculiar one. The lessee was a +person who entered into a contract with the state, by which he undertook +to keep the fabric of the theatre in good repair, and in return was +allowed to take all the entrance money. If he failed to keep the theatre +in good condition, the state did the necessary repairs itself, and made +him pay the expenses. He had to provide reserved seats in the front rows +for distinguished persons, and it is uncertain whether the state paid +him for these seats or not. For all the other portions of the theatre he +was allowed to charge two obols and no more.[1016] Occasionally, towards +the end of a performance, he seems to have allowed the people free +admittance, if there was any room to spare.[1017] + + +§ 3. _The Distribution of the Seats._ + +When the theatre was full the audience numbered nearly twenty thousand +persons. As to the arrangement of this enormous mass of people some few +facts are known, and some inferences may be made; but the information +is not very complete. The great distinction was between the dignitaries +who had reserved seats in the front, and the occupants of the ordinary +two-obol seats at the back. A gradation of seats with descending +prices was, as previously stated, unknown to the ancient Athenians. +The privilege of having a reserved seat in the theatre was called +‘proedria’, and was conferred by the state.[1018] From the large number +of persons who enjoyed the distinction it is clear that several of the +front rows must have been reserved; and this conclusion is confirmed by +the inscriptions in the theatre, which show that seats were assigned +to particular individuals as far back as the twenty-fourth tier from +the front.[1019] The recipients of the honour, or at any rate the more +prominent of them, were conducted in a solemn procession to the theatre +each morning by one of the state officials.[1020] + +Foremost among the persons who had seats in the front rows were the +priests and religious officers connected with the different divinities. +That they should be distinguished in this manner was only in keeping +with the essentially religious character of the ancient Greek drama. An +inscription referring to the theatre at the Peiraeeus, and belonging +to the third or fourth century B.C., mentions the priests specially +by name as the most conspicuous members of the class who had the +‘proedria’.[1021] The inscriptions upon the seats in the theatre at +Athens, which represent for the most part the arrangement that existed +during the reign of Hadrian, place the matter in a very clear light. They +enable us to determine the occupants of sixty out of sixty-seven seats in +the front row; and it is found that of these sixty persons no less than +fifty were priests, or ministers connected with religion. Similarly, in +the rows immediately behind the front row, a large number of places were +set apart for the different priests and priestesses.[1022] Such was the +arrangement in the time of Hadrian, and there can be little doubt that +it was much the same in its general character during the period of the +Athenian democracy. + +Among state officials the nine archons and the ten generals had +distinguished places in the theatre. In Hadrian’s time the archons +occupied seats in the front row, and it is probable that this position +was assigned to them from the earliest period.[1023] The generals were +in some prominent part of the theatre, but the exact place is not known. +The snob in Theophrastus was always anxious to sit as near to them as +possible.[1024] Ambassadors from foreign states, as was previously +pointed out, were generally provided with front seats, on the motion +of some member of the Council. Demosthenes is taunted by Aeschines for +the excessive politeness which he showed to Philip’s ambassadors on +an occasion of this kind. The lessee of the theatre at the Peiraeeus, +as appears from an inscription still extant, was ordered to provide +the ambassadors from Colophon with reserved places at the Dionysia. +The Spartan ambassadors were sitting in ‘a most distinguished part of +the theatre’ when they considerately gave up a place to an old man +for whom no one else would make room.[1025] The judges of the various +contests sat together in a body, and would naturally be provided +with one of the best places in the theatre.[1026] The orphan sons of +men who had fallen in battle received from the state, in addition to +other honours, the distinction of ‘proedria’. The same privilege was +frequently conferred by decree upon great public benefactors, and was +generally made hereditary in the family, descending by succession to the +eldest male representative. An honour of this kind was bestowed upon +Demosthenes.[1027] + +With the exception of the reserved places in the front rows, the rest of +the auditorium consisted of the ordinary two-obol seats. Concerning the +arrangements adopted in this part of the theatre a few details have been +recorded. It appears that special portions of the auditorium were set +apart for the different classes of the community. There was a particular +place for the members of the Council of Five Hundred, and another place +for the Ephebi, or youths between the age of eighteen and twenty.[1028] +The women were separated from the men, and the courtesans sat apart from +the other women.[1029] It is probable that all the women sat at the back +of the theatre, at a long distance from the stage. Foreigners also seem +usually to have had a special place.[1030] The amphitheatre of seats was +divided into thirteen blocks by the passages which ran upwards from the +orchestra. It is very probable that in the arrangement of the audience +each tribe had a special block assigned to it. The blocks of seats +were thirteen from the first. The tribes were originally ten, though +they were raised in later times to twelve and thirteen. It is possible +that the three unappropriated blocks were assigned respectively to the +Council, the Ephebi, and Foreigners.[1031] But the excavations in the +theatre afford grounds for inferring that there was a connexion between +certain blocks and certain tribes, and the thing is not improbable in +itself.[1032] The tribal divisions played a large part in the various +details of Attic administration, and an arrangement by tribes would have +greatly facilitated the process of distributing the enormous mass of +spectators among their proper seats. + +[Illustration: FIG. 35.] + +Before leaving this part of the subject it may be useful to give a +complete list of the priests and officials for whom the front row was +reserved in later times. It is still possible, as already stated, to +determine the occupants of sixty out of the sixty-seven seats; and the +arrangement, with a few exceptions, is that of Hadrian’s time.[1033] +The list of names is not without interest, as it enables us, better than +any description, to form a general conception of the sort of arrangement +which was probably adopted at an earlier period. It also affords a +curious glimpse into the religious side of the old Athenian life, and +helps us to realize the variety and multiplicity of priests, deities, and +ceremonials. In the very centre of the front row, in the best place in +the whole theatre, sat the priest of Dionysus Eleuthereus, on a throne +of elaborate workmanship. A representation of the throne (Fig. 35) is +inserted on the previous page.[1034] As the theatre was regarded as a +temple of Dionysus, and the drama was a celebration in his honour, it +was only fitting that his priest should occupy the most conspicuous +and distinguished position. There is a reference to the arrangement in +the Frogs of Aristophanes, in the scene where Dionysus is terrified by +the goblins of Hades, and desperately appeals to his own priest for +protection.[1035] Of the thirty-three seats to the left of the priest +of Dionysus the occupants of twenty-six are still known, and were as +follows:— + + Priest of Zeus the Protector of the City. + The Sacrificer. + The Torch bearer. + Priest of Pythian Apollo. + The Hieromnemon.[1036] + Priest and Chief Priest of Augustus Caesar. + Priest of Hadrian Eleuthereus. + King Archon. + Chief Archon. + Polemarch. + The General. + The Herald. + Thesmothetes. + Thesmothetes. + Thesmothetes. + Thesmothetes. + The Sacred Herald. + ... and Apollo. + Diogenes the Benefactor.[1037] + Priest of Attalus Eponymus. + The Iacchus-carrier.[1038] + Priest of Asclepius the Healer. + Fire-bringer from the Acropolis.[1039] + Priest of the People, the Graces, and Rome. + Holy Herald and Priest. + Priest of Apollo of Zoster. + +All the thrones to the right hand of the priest of Dionysus have been +preserved, and were occupied by the following persons:— + + Interpreter appointed by the Pythian Oracle.[1040] + Priest of Olympian Zeus. + Hierophant. + Priest of Delian Apollo. + Priest of Poseidon the Nourisher. + Priest of the Graces, and of Fire-bearing Artemis of the Tower. + Interpreter chosen from the Eupatridae by the people for life. + Priest of Poseidon the Earth-holder and Poseidon Erectheus. + Priest of Artemis Colaenis. + Priest of Dionysus the Singer, chosen from the Euneidae. + Bullock-keeper of Palladian Zeus. + Priest of Zeus of the Council and Athene of the Council.[1041] + Priest of Zeus the Deliverer and Athene the Deliverer. + Priest of Antinous the Dancer, chosen from the Company of Actors.[1042] + Priest of Apollo Patrous. + Priest of Dionysus the Singer, chosen from the Company of Actors. + Priest of Glory and Order. + Priest of Asclepius. + Priest of the Muses. + Priest of Zeus the god of Friendship. + Priest of the Twelve Gods. + Statue-cleanser of Zeus at Pisa. + Priest of the Lycean Apollo. + Statue-cleanser of Olympian Zeus in the City. + Priest of the Dioscuri and the Hero Epitegius.[1043] + Priest of Heavenly Nemesis. + Priest of Hephaestus. + Priest of Apollo the Laurel-wearer. + Priest of Dionysus of Aulon. + The Stone-carrier.[1044] + Priest of Theseus. + Bullock-keeper of Zeus the Accomplisher. + Priest of Demeter and Persephone. + +The priests enumerated here were the principal dignitaries in the +Athenian hierarchy. Behind them sat a large gathering of inferior priests +and priestesses. Their presence in such numbers at performances like the +Old and Middle Comedy affords a curious illustration of the religious +sentiment of the Athenians, and indicates clearly that the coarseness of +the early comedy, and its burlesque representations of the gods and their +adventures, did not constitute any offence against religion, but formed +an appropriate element in the worship of Dionysus. + + +§ 4. _Various Arrangements in connexion with the Audience._ + +The performance of plays began soon after sunrise, and continued all day +long without intermission. There was no such thing as an interval for +refreshments; one play followed another in rapid succession.[1045] Apart +from direct evidence upon the subject, it is manifest that, considering +the large number of plays which had to be gone through in the time, any +delay would have been out of the question. Consequently the spectators +were careful to have a good meal before starting for the theatre.[1046] +There was also a plentiful consumption of wine and various light +refreshments in the course of the actual performances. The time for such +an indulgence was during the tedious portions of a play, but when one of +the great actors came upon the stage the provisions were laid aside, and +the audience became all attention.[1047] + +The theatre must have presented a bright and festive appearance. +Crowns were worn in honour of Dionysus by the express command of the +oracle.[1048] The gaily-coloured dresses of the spectators would add +greatly to the brilliancy of the scene. At the same time the comfort of +the audience was not very much consulted. The seats were of wood, or in +later times of stone, and had no backs; the people had to sit there all +day long, packed together as closely as was possible. Many men brought +cushions and carpets with them. Aeschines draws a contemptuous picture +of Demosthenes escorting Philip’s ambassadors to the theatre in person, +and arranging their cushions and spreading their carpets with his own +hands. The toady in Theophrastus, when he accompanies a wealthy man to +the theatre, is careful to take the cushion out of the slave’s hands, +and to insist upon placing it ready for his patron.[1049] There was +no shelter from the sun. The theatre faced towards the south, and was +entirely uncovered. But as the dramatic performances took place at the +end of the winter, or early in the spring, the heat would not usually be +excessive. Probably the sun was in many cases very welcome. If, however, +any shelter was required, hats appear to have been worn, though the +Athenians generally went bare-headed except upon a journey.[1050] It has +been suggested that small awnings were sometimes erected upon rods by +individual spectators for their own convenience, and that the ‘purple +cloths’ which Demosthenes spread out for Philip’s ambassadors were +awnings of this description.[1051] It is true that an awning was provided +for the priest of Dionysus, as the chief dignitary of the meeting. But +it is improbable that the same convenience was extended to any other +members of the audience, at any rate in the period of the democracy. In +Roman times awnings were erected for the front rows of spectators; but +this was a late innovation.[1052] + +To keep order among a gathering of about twenty thousand persons, crowded +together in a comparatively small space, must have been a matter of some +difficulty. Certain officers called ‘staffbearers’ were stationed in the +theatre for the purpose.[1053] Superintendents were also appointed to +maintain discipline among the numerous chorus-singers.[1054] Disturbances +were not infrequent, and arose from various causes. Sometimes the +rivalry between two choregi resulted in actual violence. For example, +on one occasion, when Taureas and Alcibiades were competitors in a +dithyrambic contest, a fight broke out between them, in the course of +which Alcibiades, being the stronger man of the two, drove Taureas out of +the orchestra.[1055] That the feeling between the choregi often ran very +high has already been pointed out in a previous chapter. Disputes about +seats were another fertile source of disturbance. With the exception of +the front row, the individual places were not separated from one another, +but the people sat together on the long benches. Such an arrangement was +very likely to cause confusion. Demosthenes mentions the case of a highly +distinguished citizen, who ran great risk of being put to death, owing +to his having forcibly ejected a man from his seat. Personal violence in +the theatre was regarded as a crime against religion, and was strictly +prohibited. If any dispute arose, the proper course was to appeal to the +officers; and the man who took the law into his own hands was guilty of a +capital offence.[1056] + + +§ 5. _Character of Attic Audiences._ + +The Athenians were a lively audience, and gave expression to their +feelings in the most unmistakable manner. The noise and uproar produced +by an excited crowd of twenty thousand persons must have been of a +deafening character, and is described in the most uncomplimentary +language by Plato.[1057] It was exceedingly difficult for the judges to +resist such demonstrations, and to vote in accordance with their own +private judgement. The ordinary modes of signifying pleasure or disgust +were much the same in ancient as in modern times, and consisted of +hisses and groans on the one hand, and shouts and clapping of hands on +the other.[1058] The Athenians had also a peculiar way of marking their +disapproval of a performance by kicking with the heels of their sandals +against the front of the stone benches on which they were sitting.[1059] +Stones were occasionally thrown by an irate audience. Aeschines was +hissed off the stage, and ‘almost stoned to death’, in the course of his +theatrical career. There is an allusion to the practice in the story of +the second-rate musician, who borrowed a supply of stone from a friend +in order to build a house, and promised to repay him with the stones he +collected from his next performance in public.[1060] Country audiences in +the Attic demes used figs and olives, and similar missiles, for pelting +unpopular actors.[1061] On the other hand, encores were not unknown, if +particular passages took the fancy of the audience. Socrates is said to +have encored the first three lines of the Orestes of Euripides.[1062] + +If the Athenians were dissatisfied with an actor or a play, they had +no hesitation about revealing the fact, but promptly put a stop to +the performance by means of hisses and groans and stamping with the +heels. They were able to do so with greater readiness, as several plays +were always performed in succession, and they could call for the next +play, without bringing the entertainment to a close. In this way they +sometimes got through the programme very rapidly. There is an instance +of such an occurrence in the story of the comic actor Hermon, whose play +should naturally have come on late in the day; but, as all the previous +performers were promptly hissed off the stage one after another, he was +called upon much sooner than he expected, and in consequence was not +ready to appear.[1063] If the tale about the comic poet Diphilus is true, +it would seem that even the authors of very unsuccessful plays were +sometimes forcibly ejected from the theatre.[1064] + +A few scattered notices and descriptions, referring to the spectators +in the Athenian theatre, show that human nature was very much the same +in ancient times as at the present day. Certain types of character, +which were generally to be met with among an Attic audience, will +easily be recognized as familiar figures. There was the man of taste, +who prided himself upon his superior discernment, and used to hiss +when every one else was applauding, and clap when every one else was +silent.[1065] There was the person who made himself objectionable to +his neighbours by whistling an accompaniment to tunes which happened to +please him.[1066] There were the ‘young men of the town’, who took a +malign pleasure in hissing a play off the stage.[1067] There were the +people who brought out their provisions during the less exciting parts +of the entertainment.[1068] There was the somnolent individual who slept +peacefully through tragedies and comedies, and was not even waked up by +the noise of the audience going away.[1069] Certain indications show that +the employment of the clâque was not unknown to Greek actors and poets. +The parasite Philaporus, who had recently taken up the profession of an +actor, and was anxious about the result of his first public appearance, +writes to a friend to ask him to come with a large body of supporters, +and drown with their applause the hisses of the critical part of the +audience. Philemon, in spite of his inferior talents as a comic writer, +is said to have frequently won victories from Menander by practices of +this kind.[1070] + +The character of the Athenian audience as a whole is well exemplified by +the stories of their treatment of individual poets. Although they were +willing to tolerate the utmost ribaldry upon the stage, and to allow +the gods and sacred legends to be burlesqued in the most ridiculous +fashion, they were at the same time extremely orthodox in regard to the +national religion. Any atheistical sentiments, and any violations of +their religious law, were liable to provoke an outburst of the greatest +violence. Aeschylus on one occasion was nearly killed in the theatre +itself, because he was supposed to have revealed part of the mysteries +in the course of a tragedy. He was only saved by flying for refuge to +the altar of Dionysus in the orchestra.[1071] Euripides also caused a +great uproar by beginning his Melanippe with the line, ‘Zeus, whoever +Zeus be, for I know not save by report,’ &c. In a subsequent production +of a revised version of the play he altered the line to ‘Zeus, as is +reported by truth’,[1072] &c. In the same way sentiments which violated +the moral feeling of the audience were received with intense indignation, +and sometimes resulted in the stoppage of the play. The Danaë of +Euripides is said to have been nearly hissed off the stage because of +a passage in praise of money.[1073] On the other hand, wise and noble +sentiments excited great enthusiasm. Aristophanes was rewarded with a +chaplet from the sacred olive because of the splendid passage in which +he counsels mercy to the disfranchised citizens. Sophocles is said to +have been appointed one of the generals in the Samian expedition on +account of the excellent political wisdom shown in certain passages of +the Antigone.[1074] The partiality of the Athenians for idealism in art +is shown by the reception which they gave to Phrynichus’s tragedy of +the Capture of Miletus, an historical drama in which the misfortunes of +the Ionians were forcibly portrayed. So far from admiring the skill of +the poet, they fined him a thousand drachmas for reminding them of the +miseries of their kinsfolk, and passed a law forbidding the reproduction +of this particular play.[1075] + +The enthusiasm of the Athenians for the drama was unbounded. Nowhere was +the theatre more crowded. In the words of one of the old historians, they +‘spent the public revenues on their festivals, were more familiar with +the stage than with the camp, and paid more regard to verse-makers than +to generals’.[1076] The speeches of Demosthenes are full of complaints +in the same strain. The eagerness with which dramatic victories were +coveted, and the elaborate monuments erected to commemorate them, have +already been referred to in a previous chapter. It was not, however, +till the middle of the fourth century that the devotion to this and +similar amusements grew to such a height as to become a positive vice, +and to sap the military energies of the people. The Athenians of the +fifth century showed that enthusiasm for art and music and the drama was +not inconsistent with energy of character. As a matter of fact the very +greatest period of the Attic drama is also the period of the political +supremacy of Athens. + +As far as intelligence and discrimination are concerned, the Athenian +audiences were probably superior to any audience of the same size +which has ever been brought together. Their keen and rapid intellect +was a subject of frequent praise among the ancients, and was ascribed +to the exhilarating influence of the Attic climate.[1077] They were +especially distinguished for the refinement of their taste in matters +of art and literature, and for the soberness of judgement with which +they rejected any sort of florid exuberance. That they were keenly alive +to the attractions of beauty of form and chastened simplicity of style +is proved by the fact that Sophocles was by far the most successful +of their tragic poets. Though Euripides became more popular among the +later Greeks, Sophocles in his own life-time obtained far more victories +than any other tragic writer.[1078] At the same time it is easy to +form an exaggerated idea of the refinement of an Attic audience. They +were drawn from all classes of the people, and a large proportion were +ignorant and uncultured. Plato speaks in the most disparaging terms of +them, and charges them with having corrupted the dramatic poets, and +brought them down to their own level.[1079] His evidence is perhaps +rather prejudiced. But Aristotle, who had much greater faith in popular +judgement, is not very complimentary. He divides the theatrical audience +into two classes, the refined and cultured class on the one hand, and the +mass of rough and ignorant artisans on the other. One of his objections +to the profession of an actor or musician is that he must accommodate +himself to the level of the ignorant part of his audience.[1080] He +mentions examples in the Poetics of the low level of popular taste, from +which it appears that the average spectator in ancient times was, like +his modern counterpart, fond of ‘happy terminations’. He cared little +for the artistic requirements of the composition; his desire was to see +virtue rewarded, and vice punished, at the end of a play. Then again, a +large part of the audience, Aristotle remarks, were so ignorant as to +be unacquainted with the ordinary facts of mythology, which formed the +basis of most tragedies. In judging a play, they paid more regard to the +actor’s voice than to the poet’s genius.[1081] At the same time, in spite +of depreciatory criticisms, it must be remembered that the true criterion +of a people’s taste is to be found in the character of the popular +favourites. The victorious career of Sophocles, lasting over more than +fifty years, is a convincing proof of the fact that, at any rate during +the fifth century, the dramatic taste of the Athenians was altogether +higher than that of an ordinary popular audience.[1082] + + + + +APPENDIX A + + +The information concerning the dates at which the plays of the great +Attic dramatists were produced, and the success which they met with in +the competitions, is derived from various brief notices, which occur +mostly in the Arguments prefixed to the different plays, and which +were ultimately derived from Aristotle’s Didascaliae, or from other +collections of the same kind (see chap. i. p. 47). A list of these +notices is here appended:— + + +472 B.C. + +Arg. Aesch., Persae: Ἐπὶ Μένωνος τραγῳδῶν Αἰσχύλος ἐνίκα Φινεῖ, Πέρσαις, +Γλαύκῳ, Προμηθεῖ. + + +467 B.C. + +Arg. Aesch. Septem: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Θεαγενίδου ὀλυμπιάδι οηʹ. ἐνίκα Λαΐῳ, +Οἰδίποδι, Ἑπτὰ ἐπὶ Θήβας, Σφιγγὶ σατυρικῇ. δεύτερος Ἀριστίας Περσεῖ, +Ταντάλῳ, Παλαισταῖς σατυρικοῖς τοῖς Πρατίνου πατρός. τρίτος Πολυφράδμων +Λυκουργείᾳ τετραλογίᾳ. + + +458 B.C. + +Arg. Aesch. Agamemnon: Ἐδιδάχθη τὸ δρᾶμα ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Φιλοκλέους, +ὀλυμπιάδι ὀγδοηκοστῇ ἔτει δευτέρῳ. πρῶτος Αἰσχύλος Ἀγαμέμνονι, Χοηφόροις, +Εὐμενίσι, Πρωτεῖ σατυρικῷ. ἐχορήγει Ξενοκλῆς Ἀφιδνεύς. + + +455 B.C. + +Vit. Eurip. p. 4 Dindf.: Ἤρξατο δὲ διδάσκειν (ὁ Εὐριπίδης) ἐπὶ Καλλίου +ἄρχοντος κατ’ ὀλυμπιάδα παʹ ἔτει αʹ, πρῶτον δ’ ἐδίδαξε τὰς Πελιάδας, ὅτε +καὶ τρίτος ἐγένετο. + + +450 B.C. (?) + +Arg. Eur. Rhesus: Ἐν μέντοι ταῖς διδασκαλίαις ὡς γνήσιον ἀναγέγραπται. +Schol. Rhes. 529: Κράτης ἀγνοεῖν φησι τὸν Εὐριπίδην τὴν περὶ τὰ μετέωρα +θεωρίαν διὰ τὸ νέον εἶναι ὅτε τὸν Ῥῆσον ἐδίδασκε. + + +438 B.C. + +Arg. Eur. Alcestis: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Γλαυκίνου ἄρχοντος ὀλυμπιάδι πεʹ, πρῶτος +ἦν Σοφοκλῆς, δεύτερος Εὐριπίδης Κρήσσαις, Ἀλκμαίωνι τῷ διὰ Ψωφῖδος, +Τηλέφῳ, Ἀλκήστιδι. + + +431 B.C. + +Arg. Eur. Medea: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Πυθοδώρου ἄρχοντος κατὰ τὴν ὀγδοηκοστὴν +ἑβδόμην ὀλυμπιάδα. πρῶτος Εὐφορίων, δεύτερος Σοφοκλῆς, τρίτος Εὐριπίδης +Μηδείᾳ, Φιλοκτήτῃ, Δίκτυϊ, Θερισταῖς σατύροις. οὐ σώζεται. + + +430 B.C. (?) + +Aristid. vol. ii. p. 334 Dindf.: Σοφοκλῆς Φιλοκλέους ἡττᾶτο ἐν Ἀθηναίοις +τὸν Οἰδίπουν, ὦ Ζεῦ καὶ θεοί. + + +428 B.C. + +Arg. Eur. Hippolytus: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Ἀμείνονος ἄρχοντος ὀλυμπιάδι +ὀγδοηκοστῇ ἑβδόμῃ, ἔτει τετάρτῳ. πρῶτος Εὐριπίδης, δεύτερος Ἰοφῶν, τρίτος +Ἴων. + + +425 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Acharnenses: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Εὐθύνου ἄρχοντος ἐν Ληναίοις +διὰ Καλλιστράτου· καὶ πρῶτος ἦν. δεύτερος Κρατῖνος Χειμαζομένοις· οὐ +σώζονται. τρίτος Εὔπολις Νουμηνίαις. + + +424 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Equites: Ἐδιδάχθη τὸ δρᾶμα ἐπὶ Στρατοκλέους ἄρχοντος δημοσίᾳ +εἰς Λήναια, δι’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἀριστοφάνους. πρῶτος ἐνίκα· δεύτερος Κρατῖνος +Σατύροις· τρίτος Ἀριστομένης Ὑλοφόροις. + + +423 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Nubes: Αἱ πρῶται Νεφέλαι ἐν ἄστει ἐδιδάχθησαν ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος +Ἰσάρχου, ὅτε Κρατῖνος μὲν ἐνίκα Πυτίνῃ, Ἀμειψίας δὲ Κόννῳ. + + +422 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Nubes: Αἱ δὲ δεύτεραι Νεφέλαι ἐπὶ Ἀμεινίου ἄρχοντος. + +Arg. Arist. Vespae: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Ἀμεινίου διὰ Φιλωνίδου εἰς +Λήναια· καὶ ἐνίκα πρῶτος. δεύτερος ἦν Φιλωνίδης Προάγωνι, Λεύκων Πρέσβεσι +τρίτος. (See p. 21, n. 2). + + +421 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Pax: Ἐνίκησε δὲ τῷ δράματι ὁ ποιητὴς ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Ἀλκαίου, ἐν +ἄστει. πρῶτος Εὔπολις Κόλαξι, δεύτερος Ἀριστοφάνης Εἰρήνῃ, τρίτος Λεύκων +Φράτορσι. τὸ δὲ δρᾶμα ὑπεκρίνατο Ἀπολλόδωρος ✱ἡνίκα ἑρμῆν λοιοκρότης✱. +(See p. 41, n. 2). + + +415 B.C. + +Ael. Var. Hist. ii. 8: Κατὰ τὴν πρώτην καὶ ἐνενηκοστὴν ὀλυμπιάδα ... +ἀντηγωνίσαντο ἀλλήλοις Ξενοκλῆς καὶ Εὐριπίδης· καὶ πρῶτός γε ἦν Ξενοκλῆς, +ὅστις ποτὲ οὗτός ἐστιν, Οἰδίποδι καὶ Λυκάονι καὶ Βάκχαις καὶ Ἀθάμαντι +σατυρικῷ. τούτου δεύτερος Εὐριπίδης ἦν Ἀλεξάνδρῳ καὶ Παλαμήδει καὶ Τρῳάσι +καὶ Σισύφῳ σατυρικῷ. + + +414 B.C. + +Arg. I. Arist. Aves: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Χαβρίου διὰ Καλλιστράτου ἐν ἄστει, +ὃς ἦν δεύτερος τοῖς Ὄρνισι, πρῶτος Ἀμειψίας Κωμασταῖς, τρίτος Φρύνιχος +Μονοτρόπῳ. Arg. II. Arist. Aves: Ἐπὶ Χαβρίου ... εἰς Λήναια τὸν Ἀμφιάραον +ἐδίδαξε διὰ Φιλωνίδου. + + +412 B.C. + +Schol. Arist. Ran. 53: Ἡ δὲ Ἀνδρομέδα ὀγδόῳ ἔτει προεισῆλθεν. Schol. +Arist. Thesm. 1012: συνδεδίδακται γὰρ τῇ Ἑλένῃ. + + +411 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Lysistrata: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Καλλίου ἄρχοντος τοῦ μετὰ Κλεόκριτον +ἄρξαντος. εἰσῆκται δὲ διὰ Καλλιστράτου. + + +409 B.C. + +Arg. Soph. Philoctetes: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Γλαυκίππου. πρῶτος ἦν Σοφοκλῆς. + + +408 B.C. + +Schol. Eur. Orest. 371: Πρὸ γὰρ Διοκλέους, ἐφ’ οὗ τὸν Ὀρέστην ἐδίδαξε. + + +409-407 B.C. (?) + +Arg. Eur. Phoenissae: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Ναυσικράτους (unknown, probably +‘suffectus’) ἄρχοντος ὀλυμπιάδ ... πρῶτος ... δεύτερος Εὐριπίδης, τρίτος +... ὁ Οἰνόμαος καὶ Χρύσιππος καὶ Φοίνισσαι καὶ ... σατυρ ... οὐ σώζεται. +Schol. Arist. Ran. 53: διὰ τί δὲ μὴ ἄλλο τι τῶν πρὸ ὀλίγου διδαχθέντων +καὶ καλῶν, Ὑψιπύλης, Φοινισσῶν, Ἀντιόπης; + + +405 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Ranae: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ Καλλίου τοῦ μετὰ Ἀντιγένη διὰ Φιλωνίδου +εἰς Λήναια. πρῶτος ἦν· Φρύνιχος δεύτερος Μούσαις· Πλάτων τρίτος Κλεοφῶντι. + + +— B.C. + +Schol. Arist. Ran. 67: Οὕτω γὰρ καὶ αἱ Διδασκαλίαι φέρουσι, τελευτήσαντος +Εὐριπίδου τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ δεδιδαχέναι ὁμώνυμον ἐν ἄστει Ἰφιγένειαν τὴν ἐν +Αὐλίδι, Ἀλκμαίωνα, Βάκχας. + + +401 B.C. + +Arg. Soph. O. C.: Τὸν ἐπὶ Κολωνῷ Οἰδίποδα ἐπὶ τετελευτηκότι τῷ πάππῳ +Σοφοκλῆς ὁ ὑϊδοῦς ἐδίδαξεν, υἱὸς ὢν Ἀρίστωνος, ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Μίκωνος. + + +388 B.C. + +Arg. Arist. Plutus: Ἐδιδάχθη ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Ἀντιπάτρου, ἀνταγωνιζομένου +αὐτῷ Νικοχάρους μὲν Λάκωσιν, Ἀριστομένους δὲ Ἀδμήτῳ, Νικοφῶντος δὲ +Ἀδώνιδι, Ἀλκαίου δὲ Πασιφάῃ. + + + + +APPENDIX B + + +The Athenian inscriptions bearing upon the drama and dramatic contests +are to be found, edited by Köhler, in the Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, +ii. 2. pp. 394 ff., iv. 2. pp. 218 ff. Since their publication in this +form much work has been done in reference to them by Wilhelm, Capps, and +others. The following selection gives the most important inscriptions, +with the conclusions which seem to be best warranted, omitting portions +the restoration of which seems too uncertain to be useful. + +The conjectural dates are inserted and conjectural supplements marked +off by square brackets where the evidence is reasonably good: letters +enclosed in round brackets simply expand the abbreviations contained in +the inscription. + + +I. _List of victors in the City Dionysia_ (C. I. A. ii. 971, iv. 971). + +The fragments have been arranged on the hypothesis that they formed part +of an inscription in 15 columns of 140 or 142 lines each: Columns 1, 2, +7-12 and 16 have been lost, as well as the greater part of the remainder. +Capps conjectures that the inscription began in 502-501, and that this +date was that of the beginning of choregia in tragedy and dithyramb +(Capps, Introd. of Comedy into the City Dionysia, p. 29). The heading, +of which at present only twelve letters remain (more widely spaced than +the rest of the inscription), seems to have extended over the head of the +first 6 columns, and probably ran (Capps, l.c., p. 29)— + + [ἀπὸ ........... ἐφ’ οὗ πρῶτ]ον κῶμοι ἦσαν τῶ[ν ἐν ἄστει Διονυσίων οἵδε + ἐνίκων]. + +We next have fragments of Cols. III, IV, V (971 _a_, _f_). + + Col. III. Col. IV. Col. V. + + B.C. 473-2 B.C. 460-59 + + Ξ]ενοκλείδης ἐχορήγε[ι Πανδιονὶ[ς ἀνδρῶν + Μ]άγνης ἐδίδασκεν. Κλεαίνετ[ος ἐχορήγει + τραγῳδῶν κωμῳδῶν + Περικλῆς Χολαρ(γεὺς) Θαρ[.. ἐχορήγει + ἐχορή(γει) B.C. 447-6 + Αἰσχύλος ἐδίδασκεν. ............ ...... 5 + [ἐπὶ Χάρητος] + (B.C. 472-1) [τραγῳδῶν] ...... + ............ ......... ἐχορή(γει) ...... + ............ ..... ἐδίδασκεν. Βίω[ν ἐχορήγει + ............ ἐπὶ Φιλ]οκλεόυς (B.C. 459-8) κωμ[ῳδῶν + ............ Οἰ]νηὶς παίδων, Ἀνδ[.... ἐχορήγει 10 + ............ Δημόδοκος ἐχορήγε[ι Καλ[λίας ἐδίδασκε + ...... ἐχ]ορήγει Ἱπποθωντὶς ἀνδρῶν τρα[γῳδῶν + ... ς ἐδίδ]ασκεν. Εὐκτήμων Ἐλευ(σίνιος) Θα[...... ἐχορήγει + ἐχορή(γει) + [τραγῳδῶν] κωμῳδῶν Κα[ρκίνος ἐδίδασκεν + ...... ἐχ]ορήγει Εὐρυκλείδης ἐχορήγει, ὑπ[οκριτὴς .... 15 + Πολυφράσμω]ν ἐδίδασ(κεν). Εὐφρόνιος ἐδίδασκε. ἐπ[ὶ Καλλιμάχου + ἐπὶ Πραξιέργο]υ (B.C. 471-0) + τραγῳδῶν, (B.C. 446-5) + Ἱπποθωντὶς πα]ίδων Ξενοκλῆς Ἀφιδαν(ῖος) ἐχορή(γει) + ..... ἐχο]ρήγει Αἰσχύλος ἐδίδασκεν. + ...... ων ἐπὶ Ἅβρωνος (B.C. 458-7) 20 + ... ἐχ]ορήγ[ει Ἐρεχθηὶς παίδων, + [κωμῳδῶν] ... Χαρίας Ἀγρυλῆ(θεν) ἐχορή[γει + ... ἐχορήγ]ει Λεωντὶς ἀνδρῶν + Δεινόστρατος ἐχο[ρήγει + κωμῳδῶν 25 + .... ἐχ]ορήγ[ει. + +The next fragment (971 _b_) belongs to the years B.C. 423-1, and to Col. +VII. + + [κωμῳδῶν] + ...... Παια[νιεὺς ἐχορήγει. + Ἕρμιππ]ος ἐδ[ίδασκε + τραγῳ]δῶν + ... ω]ν Παιανιε[ὺς ἐχορή]γει, + Με]νεκράτης ἐδί[δασκεν + ὑπ]οκριτὴς Μυνν[ίσκος. + ἐ]πὶ Αλκαίου (B.C. 422-1) + Ἱπποθωντὶς παίδων + Ἀρίσταρχος Δεκε(λεεὺς) ἐχορή(γει) + Αἰαντὶς ἀνδρῶν, + Δημοσθένης ἐχορήγει. + κ]ωμῳδ[ῶν + ..... ἐχορ]ήγ[ει + +We next come to Col. XIII (fr. 971 _g_), B.C. 348-6. + + [κωμῳδῶν] + ..... [ἐχορήγει + Ἄ]λεξις ἐδ[ίδασκεν. + τραγῳδῶν + Κλ]εόμαχος Ἀχα[ρν(εὺς) ἐχορήγει, + Ἀ[σ]τυδάμ[α]ς ἐδ[ίδασκεν, + ὑ[πο]κριτὴς Θ[ετταλός. + ἐ]πὶ Θεμιστοκλέους (B.C. 347-6) + Ἐρεχθηὶς παίδων. + Διονυσ .... + +The position of fr. 971 _d_ is uncertain; Capps places it B.C. 344-3, +Wilhelm, 336-5 B.C. It belongs in any case to the latter half of the +fourth century. + + Κεκροπ[ὶς παίδων + Διόφαν[τος ... ἐχορήγει + Κεκροπὶς [ἀνδρῶν + Ὀνήτωρ [ἐχορήγει + κωμῳδ[ῶν + Διοπείθ[ης .... ἐχορήγει + Προκλεί[δης ἐδίδασκεν + τραγῳδῶν + +We next have two passages at the bottom of Cols. XIII, XIV (971 _e_), the +years in the former being 343-1, and in the second 331-0. + + Col. XIII. Col. XIV. + + ......... + l. 126 ......... ἐ]πὶ Ἀριστ[ο]φάνους (B.C. 331-0) + ......... Οἰνηὶς παίδω[ν + [τραγῳδῶν] .... τος [Ἀχ]αρν[(εὺς) ἐχορή(γει) + ..... ἐ]χορή(γει) Ἱπποθωντὶς ἀνδρ[ῶν + l. 130 .... ἐ]δίδ[ασ]κε ...... ος [Π]ει[ρ]αιε[ὺς ἐχορή(γει) + ὑποκριτὴς Ἀ]θηνόδωρος. κωμ]ῳδ[ῶν + ἐπὶ Σωσιγένους (B.C. 342-1) ............... + Αἰγηὶς παίδ]ων ............... + ..... Δι]ομε[εὺς ἐχορ]ή(γει) τραγ]ῳ[δῶν + l. 135 Ἱπποθωντὶς] ἀνδρῶν + .... ἐκ Κοί]λης ἐχορή(γει) + [κωμῳδῶν] + ........ ης [ἐχορήγει + ............... + l. 140 [τραγῳδῶν] + ........ ἐχ]ορ[ήγει + Ἀστυδάμας ἐδί]δ[ασκεν + +Finally, from near the top of Cols. XIV, XV (971 _h_) we have fragments +from 341-0 and 330-28 respectively. Col. XIV includes a fragment first +printed by Wilhelm, op. cit., p. 27. + + Col. XIV. Col. XV. + + ............ ... ς Κε[.... + τρ]αγῳδῶν ἐ[χορήγ]ει + Ἀρρενείδης Παιανι(εὺς) ἐχο[ρήγει Θεόφιλος ἐδίδ[ασκεν] + Ἀστυδάμας ἐδίδα]σκεν τραγῳδῶν + ὑποκριτὴς Θεττα]λὸς Θ]ηραμένης Κηφισι[εὺς + Ἐ]πὶ Θεοφράστο[υ (B.C. 340-39) ἐχορ]ή[γει + [πα]λαιὸν δρᾶμ[α ..... .... κ]λης ἐδίδασ[κεν + π]αρεδίδαξα[ν οἱ] κ[ω]μ[ῳδοί ὑπο]κριτὴς + Ἀ]ντιοχὶς παί[δων .... Ἀθηνόδωρος + ἐπὶ Κηφισοφῶντος, (B.C. 329-8) + Ἱπποθωντὶς παί[δων + + +II. _Record of Comic Contests at the Lenaea_ (C. I. A. ii. 972, Col. I). + +The inscription of which this forms a part consists of two columns, +the first containing records of comic contests, the second of tragic +contests, at the Lenaea. The date of the contests recorded in the first +column has been generally taken to be B.C. 354-2: but Capps (The Dating +of some Didascalic Inscriptions, Amer. Journ. of Archaeology, 1900, pp. +74 ff.) has shown almost conclusively that the true date is B.C. 290-8 +(it is possibly a year or two later, see Wilhelm, Urkunden dramatischer +Aufführungen in Athen, p. 52, as the date of Diotimus’ archonship is not +absolutely certain). This column must have contained the last records +of comic contests at the Lenaea which came within the plan of this +inscription, as the next column begins the records of tragic contests. +It would appear, therefore, that the date of the transcribing of this +series of didascaliae upon stone was in all probability circ. B.C. 287. +Capps conjectures (with much reason) that C. I. A. ii. 972 formed part +of one great didascalic inscription arranged in the order (1) Tragedy +at the Dionysia, (2) Comedy at the Dionysia, (3) Comedy at the Lenaea, +(4) Tragedy at the Lenaea. The extant fragments, therefore, mark the +junction of parts (3) and (4). The original stone is now lost, and the +record depends on the copies of Fourmont and Le Bas, the latter being +apparently the more trustworthy. + + ..... τέ(ταρτος) ....]στίδι + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀριστόμ]αχος. + .... ης πέμ(πτος) Ἀνασῳζο(μένοις), + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀντ]ιφάνης. + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Ἱερ]ώνυμος ἐνίκα. + ἐπὶ Δι]οτίμου Σιμύλος (B.C. 289-8) + ... σίᾳ ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀριστόμαχος. + Διόδωρος δεύ(τερος) Νεκρῷ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀριστόμαχος. + Διόδωρος τρί(τος) Μαινομένῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Κηφίσιος. + Φο]ινικ[ίδ]ης τέ(ταρτος) Ποητεῖ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) .....]ης + + +III. _Record of Tragic Contests at the Lenaea_ (C. I. A. ii. 972, Col. +II). + +The second column of the fragment to which the last quoted list belongs; +Köhler has fixed the date beyond question. + + Π]ειρ[ιθόῳ ..... + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ..... + ὑπο(κριτὴς) [.... ἐνίκα + ἐπὶ [Ἀστυφίλου ....... (B.C. 420-19) + Ἀγα[μέμνονι ...... + ὑπ[ε(κρίνετο) ...... + Ἡρα[κ ...... + Θησ[εῖ, ......, + ὑπ[ε(κρίνετο) ... + ὑπο(κριτὴς) [..... ἐνίκα + ἐπὶ Ἀρχ[ίου ...... (B.C. 419-8) + Τυροῖ, Τ ........., + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Λυσικράτ(ης). + Καλλίστρατος ...... + Ἀμφιλόχῳ, Ἰξίονι + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Καλλιππί[δης + ὑπ]ο(κριτὴς) Καλλιππί[δης ἐνίκα + ἐπ Ἀ]ντ[ι]φ[ῶ]ντος Σ ..... (B.C. 418-7) + ....... π ...... + + +IV. _Record of Tragic Contests at the City Dionysia_ (C. I. A. ii. 973). + + παλαιᾷ.] Νε[οπτόλεμος + Ἰφιγε]νείᾳ Εὐ[ριπί]δο[υ + ποη(ταί)·] Ἀστυδάμας + Ἀχι]λλεῖ, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Θετταλός, + Ἀθάμαντι, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Νεοπτόλ[εμος, + Ἀν]τιγόνῃ, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀθηνόδω[ρος. + Εὐ]άρετος [δεύ(τερος)] Τεύκρῳ, + ὑπ]ε(κρίνετο) Ἀθηνόδωρος· + Ἀχι]λ[λ]εῖ, [ὑπε(κρίνετο)] Θετταλός· + ..... εῖ], ὑ[πε(κρίνετο) Νε]οπτόλεμος· + ...... τ]ρί(τος) [Π]ελιάσιν, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Νεοπτ]όλεμος· + Ὀρέστη[ι, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀθη]ν[όδωρος· + Αὔ[γῃ] ὑπε(κρίνετο) Θεττ[αλό]ς· + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Νεοπτόλεμος ἐνίκ[α. + ἐπὶ Νικομάχου· σατυρι(κῷ)· (B.C. 341-0) + Τιμοκλῆς Λυκούργῳ· + παλαιᾷ· Νεοπτόλεμ[ος + Ὀρέστῃ Εὐριπίδου· + π]οη(ταί)· Ἀστυδάμας + Παρθενοπαίῳ, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Θετ[ταλός· + Λυκά]ονι, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Νεοπτόλε[μος + ...... οκλῆς δεύ(τερος) Φρίξῳ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο)] Θετταλός· + Οἰδί]ποδι, ὑπε(κρίνετο) Νεοπτόλ[εμος· + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Θε]τταλὸς ἐνίκα. + ἐπὶ Θεο]φράστου· σατυ[ρι(κῷ)· (B.C. 340-39) + ..... Φορκίσ[ι. + παλαιᾷ .... ό]στρ[ατος + ....... Εὐ]ριπί[δου. + + +V. _Record of Comic Contests_ (festival uncertain). + +This inscription (which he numbers 974 _c_) was found in 1901, and is +published (with restorations) by Wilhelm, op. cit., pp. 43 ff.; it is a +record of the years B.C. 313-11. Col. I only is printed below; the second +column being too fragmentary. + + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀσκληπιόδ]ωρο[ς + Μένανδρος] πέμ(πτος) Ἡνιόχῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Κάλ]λιππος πρεσβύτ(ερος) + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Κάλλι]ππος νεώ(τερος) ἐνίκ[α + ἐπὶ Πολέμ]ωνος παλαιᾷ (B.C. 312-11) + ....... Θ]ησαυρῷ Ἀναξαν(δρίδου) + ποη(τὴς) Φιλιπ]πίδης Μύστιδι + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀσκ]ληπιόδωρος + Νικόστ]ρατος δεύ(τερος) + .....]οσκόπῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Κ]άλλιππος νεώτε(ρος) + Ἀμεινί]ας τρί(τος) Ἀπολειπούσει + οὗτος ἔ]φηβος ὢν ἐνεμήθη + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἀσκ]ληπιόδωρος + Θεόφιλο]ς (?) τέταρτος Παγκρατιασ(τῇ) + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ... ιπ]πος + ........ πέμ(πτος) Π]αιδίῳ + [ὑπε(κρίνετο) ....] + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Ἀσκληπιόδωρο]ς ἐνίκ[α. + + +VI. _Record of Comic Contests at the City Dionysia_ (C. I. A. ii. 975). + +The inscription consists of a number of fragments. The date of those +numbered _a-e_ is tolerably certain; they range from about B.C. 190-160. +The others, _f-i_, have been dated by Capps from about B.C. 308-260; +but these dates and the restorations suggested by him are disputed by +Wilhelm, who places the date of _f_, with a good deal of reason, only +shortly before that of _a_, and also dates _g-i_ (not included in the +present selection) much later. The first part of fragment _f_ is as +follows:— + + ..... Ἐρχιεῦσιν + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ...]μος (Ἱερώνυμος Capps, Νικόδημος Wilhelm.) + ἐπὶ ......] οὐκ ἐγένετο + ...... π]αλαιᾷ + .......] Φωκεῦσι Φιλή(μονος) + ποη(ταὶ) ...] κράτης Ἀπε (Κράτης Ἀπελεύθεροις Capps, + ..... ὑ]πε(κρίνετο) Νικόδημος Ἀριστοκράτης Ἀπε- Wilhelm.) + ...... Ἀ]νεψιοῖς. + +Fragments _a-e_ are arranged as forming an inscription in five columns by +Köhler (C. I. A.) as follows:— + + Col. I. Col. II. Col. III. Col. IV. Col. V. + 1st col. of _a_ 2nd col. of _a_ — — — + 1st col. of _b_ 2nd col. of _b_ _c_ _d_ + 1st col. of _e_ 2nd col. of _e_ + +Wilhelm arranges them as follows, op. cit., pp. 68 ff.:— + + Col. I. Col. II. Col. III. Col. IV. + 1st col. of _a_ 2nd col. of _a_ — — + 1st col. of _b_ 2nd col. of _b_ _c_ _d_ + 1st col. of _e_ 2nd col. of _e_ — + +It is impossible at present to decide with certainty between the two +arrangements. The former is here followed, but indications of Wilhelm’s +arrangement are also given. + +Col. I is too fragmentary to be intelligible. (It includes the 1st col. +of a.) + +Col. II (the 2nd col. of _a_). + + Τιμ]όσ[τρατος] Λυτ[ρουμένῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Διογείτων· + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Κράτης ἐνίκα + ἐπὶ Συμμάχου οὐκ ἐγ[ένετο (B.C. 188-7) + ἐπὶ Θεοξένου οὐκ [ἐγένετο (B.C. 187-6) + ἐπὶ Ζωπύρου· [παλαιᾷ· (B.C. 186-5) + Ἐράτων Με[γαρικῇ Σιμύλου (?) + ποη(ταὶ) Λαίν[ης ... + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ..... + +Then after an interval the 1st col. of _b_ (Wilhelm makes this a +continuation of Col. I of _a_, and accordingly dates it _before_ the +portion just given). + + ...... Ἐφήβοις + ὑπε(κρίνετο) .....] + ὑπο(κριτὴς) ..... ἐ]νίκα + ἐπὶ ...... οὐ]κ ἐγένετο + ἐπὶ ...... ο]υ· παλαιᾷ· + ...... Μισογ]ύνει Μενάνδρου· + ποη(ταὶ) ....]νης Ἀδελφαῖς + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ....]ς + ........ Δακτυλίῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) .....]ων + ..... Φιλ]αθην[αίῳ. + +Col. III (2nd col. of _b_; according to Wilhelm, a continuation of Col. +II, i.e. of the 2nd col. of _a_). + + ποη(ταὶ) Κρίτων Ἐφεσίοις, + ὑ]πε(κρίνετο) Σώφιλος· + Παράμονος Ναυαγῷ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ὀνήσιμος + Τιμόστρατος Φιλοικείῳ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Καλλίστρατος· + Σωγένης Φιλοδεσπότῳ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Ἑκαταῖος· + Φιλήμων νεώ(τερος) Μιλησίᾳ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Κράτης. + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Ὀνήσιμος ἐνίκ[α· + ἐπὶ Ἑρμογένου οὐκ [ἐγέ]νετο. (B.C. 183-2) + ἐπὶ Τιμησιάν[ακτος· π]αλαιᾷ· (B.C. 182-1) + Φιλόστρατο[ς Ἀποκλε]ιομένει Ποσει(δίππου)· + ποη(ταὶ) [Ἀρχικλῆς (?) Ναυ]κλῆρῳ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ...... + ........ σ]ιν + [ὑπε(κρίνετο) .....] + ...... Διαδικ]αζομένοις, + [ὑπε(κρίνετο) ......] + ...... μ]ένοις + [ὑπε(κρίνετο) ......] + ........ υ]μένῳ + +Then an interval in which only a few letters are legible, the 1st col. of +fragment _e_. + + ...... εὐ]εργετοῦντι + [ὑπε(κρίνετο) ......] + ....... ἐξ]απατῶντι, + [ὑπε(κρίνετο) ......] + ... ω]ν Συντ .... + ὑπε(κρίνετο) .....]ης + ..... Συναγωνι ... + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ...]ίδης. + ὑπο(κριτὴς) ... ξέ]νος ἐνί[κα + ἐπὶ ... παλαι]ᾷ Προ ... + +Col. IV (according to Wilhelm, Col. III), fragment _c_. + + ..... Μονοτ]ρόπῳ + ............. + ποη(ταὶ) .... Ἀν]ασῳζομέ- + [νοις, ὑπε(κρίνετο) ...] + ...... υμένῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) ....]ος + ...... Ἀγνοοῦντι, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Κριτόδ]ημος + ...... Νε]μέσει, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Σώ]νικος· + Παρά]μονος Χορηγοῦντι, + ὑπε(κρίνετο)] Μόνιμος + ὑπ]ο(κριτὴς) Κριτόδημος ἐνίκα. + ἐ]πὶ Εὐνίκου οὐκ ἐγένε[το. (B.C. 169-8) + ἐπὶ Ξενοκλέους· παλαι[ᾷ· (B.C. 168-7) + Μόνιμος Φάσματι Μεν[άνδρου. + ποη(ταί)· Παράμονος τεθνηκὼς ..... ις + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Δάμων· + Κρίτων Αἰτωλῷ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Μόνιμος· + Βίοττος Ποητεῖ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Δάμων· + Λάμπυτος .... + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Κα[βείριχος (?) + Ἐπικ[ράτης ..... + +Then after an interval 2nd col. of _e_. + + ἐπὶ] Εὐερ[γ ..... οὐκ ἐγένετο (B.C. 164-3) + ἐ]πὶ Ἐράστο[υ οὐκ ἐγένετο (B.C. 163-2) + ἐπὶ Ποσει[δωνίου οὐκ ἐγένετο. (B.C. 162-1) + ......... + ἐπὶ Ἀρισ[τόλα· παλαιᾷ (B.C. 161-0) + Ἡρακ[λε .... + πο[η(ταί) ..... + +Col. V (according to Wilhelm, Col. IV), fragment _d_. + + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Καβεί]ριχος· + Ἐπ]ιγέ[ν]ης Λυτρουμένῳ + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Καβείριχος· + ὑπο(κριτὴς) Νικόλαος ἐνίκα· + ἐπὶ Ἀνθεστηρίου οὐκ ἐγένε[το. (soon after B.C. 160) + ἐπὶ Καλλιστράτου οὐκ ἐγένε[το. + ἐπὶ Μνησιθέου· παλαιᾷ· + Δάμων Φιλαθηναίῳ Φιλιππ[ίδου· + πο(ηταί)· Φιλοκλῆς Τραυματίᾳ, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Καλλικράτης· + Χαιρίων Αὑτοῦ καταψευδομέ[νῳ. + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Δάμων· + Βίοττος Ἀγνοοῦντι, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Δάμων· + Τιμόξενος Συνκρύπτον[τι, + ὑπε(κρίνετο) Καλλικράτης· + Ἀγαθοκλῆς Ὁμονοίᾳ, + ὑπεκρίνετο Νικόλ[αος. + + +VII. _Lists of tragic and comic poets and actors, and the number of their +victories_ (C. I. A. ii. 977, iv. 977). + +This inscription was no doubt based on the Νῖκαι τραγικαὶ καὶ κωμικαί of +Aristotle, and afterwards carried on by additions into the second century +B.C.; the order of the names is that of the first victory of each poet +or actor at the contest in question, and each column of the inscription +contained seventeen names. There are over thirty fragments, and it is +not always possible to say whether the lists given in them refer to the +Lenaea or the City Dionysia. The following selection of the fragments +is based on Capps’s paper on this inscription in the Amer. Journal of +Philology, xx. pp. 388 ff.: and on the fuller study by Wilhelm, op. cit., +pp. 89 ff. + + +1. Tragic poets. + +(_a_) At the City Dionysia. + +Fragment _a_. + + Αἰ]σχύλ[ος .. + Εὐ]έτης Ι + Πο]λυφράσμ[ων ... + Νόθ]ιππος Ι + Σοφ]οκλῆς ΔΠΙΙΙ + ..... τος ΙΙ + Ἀριστ]ίας + +Fragment _b_. + + ..... ας .. + Καρκί]νος ΔΙ + Ἀστ]υδάμας Π[ΙΙ]Ι + Θεο]δέκτας ΠΙΙ + Ἀφαρ]εὺς ΙΙ + .... ν . Ι + .... ΙΙ + +(_b_) Festival uncertain. + +Fragment _c_. + + ...... ας Ι + .... δης Ι + ..... ράτης Ι + Ἀστυδ]άμας .. + .... ΙΙ + + +2. Comic poets. + +(_a_) At the City Dionysia. + +Fragments _i_ and _k_, together with two fragments first published by +Wilhelm, l.c., p. 106, and arranged by him in three columns as follows:— + + [ἀστικαὶ ποητῶν] Τηλεκλεί]δης ΙΙΙ Νικοφῶ[ν ... + [κωμικῶν] .......] ς Ι Θεόπομπ[ος + [Χιωνίδης ...] — Κη]φισό[δοτος + — — ...] ι [... + — Φερ[εκράτης .. + — ]ς Ι Ἕρμ[ιππος .. + — Ἀρι[στομένης .. + Μάγνη]ς ΔΙ Εὔ[πολις ... + ...... ο]ς Ι Κα[λλίστρατος .. + Ἀλκιμέ]νη[ς] Ι Φρύ[νιχος .. + .....]ς Ι Ἀμ[ειψίας .. + Εὐφρόν]ιος Ι Πλά[των ... + Ἐκφαν]τίδης ΙΙΙΙ Φιλ[ωνίδης .. + Κρατῖ]νος ΠΙ Λύκ[ις + Διοπ]είθης ΙΙ Λεύ[κων + Κρά]της ΙΙΙ + Καλλία]ς ΙΙ + +The following new fragment is published by Wilhelm, p. 118. + + Πο]σείδιππος ΙΙΙΙ .... + Σατυρίων Ι Νίκαρχος Ι Πο ... + Ἀ]πολλόδωρος ΙΙ Νικόμαχος Ι Ὀ ... + Φιλ]ήμων ΠΙ Ἀριστοκράτης Ι ... + Δαμ]όξενος Ι Λαίνης ΙΙΙ + Φοινικ]ίδης ΙΙ Φιλήμω[ν + +(_b_) At the Lenaea. + +This list at present consists of fragments _d-h_, which have been +arranged in four columns; one column must have preceded them in the +original, and over the head of the lost column and the present first +column the title of the list ran, of which only one or two traces remain. +It probably (according to Capps) read thus:—οἵδε ἐνίκων τὰ Λήναια ποητῶν +κωμικῶν (or τῶν κωμικῶν). The extant portions run as follows (including +conjectural restorations; cf. Wilhelm, op. cit., p. 123). See addendum to +p. 27, n. 1. According to Wilhelm the heading was Ληναικαὶ ποητῶν κωμικῶν. + + I. II. III. IV. + + Τὰ Λῆναι]α πο[ητῶν Πο ..... Ι Φίλιπ[πος ..] ΙΙ Θ .... + κωμι]κῶν Με[ταγέ]νης ΙΙ Χορη[γός .. Δι .... ος Ι + Ξ]ενόφιλος Ι Θεό[πομπ]ος ΙΙ Ἀναξα[νδρί]δης ΙΙΙ. Κλέα[ρχ]ος .. + Τ]ηλεκλείδης Π Πολ[ύζηλο]ς ΙΙΙΙ Φιλέτα[ιρο]ς ΙΙ Ἀθηνοκλῆς .. + 5 Ἀριστομένης ΙΙ Νικοφ[ῶν .. Εὔβουλος ΙΙΙ Πῦρ[ων] Ι + Κρατῖνος ΙΙΙ Ἀπολ[λοφάν]ης Ι Ἔφιππος Ι Ἀλκ[ήν]ωρ Ι + Φερεκράτης ΙΙ Ἀμ[ειψίας Ἀ]ντιφάνη[ς ΠΙΙΙ Τιμοκλῆς Ι + Ἕρμιππος ΙΙΙΙ Νι[κοχάρης .. Μ]νησίμα[χος] Ι. ΙΙ Προκλείδης Ι + Φρύνιχος ΙΙ Ξεν[οφ]ῶν Ι Ναυσ[ικράτ]ης ΙΙΙ. Μ[έν]ανδρος Ι.. + 10 Μυρτίλος Ι Φιλύλλιος Ι Ευφάνη[ς .. Φ[ιλ]ήμων ΙΙΙ. + Εὔ]πολις ΙΙΙ Φιλόνικος Ι Ἄλεξις ΙΙ ... Ἀπολλόδωρο[ς.. + ..... ς Ι Ἀρ]ιστο[φῶν .. Δίφιλος ΙΙΙ. + ..... Φιλιππίδης ΙΙ + ..... Νικόστρατος.. + ..... Καλλιάδης Ι + ..... Ἀμειν[ία]ς Ι + Κηφισόδω]ρος Ι. ..... + (Διονυσόδωρος or + Ἀσκληπιόδωρος, + Wilhelm). + + +3. Tragic actors. + +(_a_) At the City Dionysia. + +Fragment _e′_. + + ὑποκριτῶν τ[ραγικῶν ...... + Ἡρακλεί[δης .. ...... + Νικόμαχο[ς .. ...... + Μυ[ν]νίσκος .. Ν ...... + Σαώνδας ... Θε ...... + Ανδ[ρων ΙΙ Α]σ ... + Χ]αι[ρ]έ[σ]τρατος Ι. Ἀθην[όδωρος + Μενεκ]ράτης .. Ἀρι[στόδημος .. + Λεπ]τίν[ης ... + +(_b_) At the Lenaea. + +Fragments _o_, _z_, _x_ and _b′_, and two fragments published by Wilhelm, +who puts all together as follows, op. cit., p. 144. + + ὑποκριτῶν τραγικῶν Χαρίδημος .. . . . . . . . . . . + Χαιρέσ[τ]ρατος Ι Φίλιππος ... . . . . . Ε[ + Με]ν[εκρά]της Ι Φύτιος ΙΙ ..... μ]ος ΙΙ Βάκχ[... + Λεπτίν]ης ΙΙΙ Εὐπόλεμο[ς .....]ς ΙΙ Στεμφ[ύλιος + . . . . . Θρασύβο[υλος] Ι Ἐ[......]ς Ι Ξένων Ι + Μυννίσκ]ος ΙΙ Ἀριστόδ[ημος] ΙΙ Ἀρ[ιστοφ]ῶν Ι Χαρίας [ + Ἡρακλεί]δης Π Μίρων ΙΙ Πο ..... Ἀντιμέ[νης + Νικόστρα]τος ΙΙΙ Κλ]εο[δάμα]ς Ι Ν ...... Τεισίλα[ς + Θεόδωρος ΙΙΙ Ἀρχίας ... Γο[ργ ... + Ἵππαρχος ΠΙ Πραξία[ς .. Νίκων ΙΙ .. + Ἀμεινίας Ι Ἱερομν[ήμων] ΙΙΙ Ἀριστόνι[κος + Ἀν]δροσθένης Ι Φιλ[... Πύρριχος [.. + Νεο]πτόλεμος Ι Νικ[... Ἀγήτωρ + Θεττα]λός ΙΙ Ἀρι[... Θηραμέν[ης + .....]ς ΙΙ . . . . . Κλεῖτος + Ἀριστ]ίων Ι + ..... άδ]ης Ι + +Fragment _l_ (previously assigned to the list of poets; but see Wilhelm, +op. cit., pp. 161, 253, who dates the fragment before B.C. 375). + + Σάτ]υρος ΠΙ + Φι]λήμων ΙΙ + Κα]λλίστρατ[ος .. + + +4. Comic actors. + +Fragments _u_, _v_ (probably Lenaean, of the third century B.C.). + + Ἀρισταγόρας Ι Πολυ[κλῆς .. + Κάλλιππος ΙΙΙΙ Λυκίσ[κος + Ἀ]σκληπιόδωρος Π Σωσικλ[ῆς. + Π]ολύευκτος Ι Πολύζηλ[ος + Π]υρραλεύς Ι Πυθάρατος Ι + Μ]οσχίων ΙΙ Καλλίας ΙΙΙ + ..μ...ν ΙΙ Μενεκ[λῆ]ς Ι + Ἱ]ερώνυμος ΙΙΙΙ Δ[ημήτρ]ιος ΙΙ + Ἀ]ριστόμαχος ΙΙΙ Πιτθεύς Ι + Δέ]ρκετος Ι .. Ἡρακλείδης Ι[Ι.] + . . . . . . . . . + Φιλοκ[λῆς ... ρος ΙΙ + Ἀριστοκράτης Ι . . . . + Ἐμμενίδης Ι .... ΙΙ + Αὐτόλυκος Ι Δ[ημο]κράτης Ι + Φιλωνίδης Ι Φιλ[ο]στέφανος Ι + Σωκράτης Ι Ἑρμόφαντος Ι + +There are a good many other fragments, containing in some cases +(fragments _f′_, _w_, _p_, and possibly _d′_, _g′_) the names of comic +actors, while in other cases the nature of the list and its place in the +inscription is uncertain: but the above will serve as specimens. + + +VIII. The following inscriptions are also of interest:— + +1. C. I. A. ii. 1289. (Wilhelm, op. cit., p. 209; Capps, Am. Journ. Arch. +iv. p. 76.) + + Ὁ δῆμος ἐ[χορήγει ἐπὶ Ἀναξι]κράτους ἄρχοντος· (B.C. 307-6) + ἀγωνοθέ[της Ξενοκλῆς Ξ]είνιδος Σφήττιος· + ποιητὴς τραγῳδοῖς ἐνίκα [Φανόστρατος] Ἡρακλείδου Ἁλικαρνασσεύς, + ὑποκριτὴς τραγῳδοῖς ἐνίκ[α .......]ν Εὐανορίδου Κυδαθηναιεύς, + ποιητὴς κωμῳδοῖς ἐνί[κα Φιλήμω]ν Δάμωνος Διομειεύς, + ὑποκριτὴς κ[ωμῳδοῖς ἐνίκα Κάλλιπ]πος Καλλίου Σουνιεύς. + +2. Fragments (found in Rome) of a list of comic poets with their +victories at each festival arranged according to the places they won (see +Wilhelm, pp. 195 ff.). + +(_a_) I. G. xiv. 1097. + + ἐ]πὶ Ἀντιοχίδου Κύ[κλωψιν (?) ἐπὶ (B.C. 434) + ......]ς κωμῳδίᾳ. δʹ ἐν ἄ[στει ἐπὶ + ...... κω]μῳδίᾳ· ἐπὶ Τιμοκλέ[ους ... (B.C. 440) + .....] ἐπὶ Θεοδώρου Σατύροις [ἐπὶ .... (B.C. 437) + ..... Ὑπ]έροις σιδηροῖς· ἐπὶ Πυ[θοδώρου ... (B.C. 431) + ....]οις. εʹ ἐπὶ Ἀντιοχίδου [.... (B.C. 434) + Λ]ύσιππος ἐνίκα μὲν [ἐν ἄστει ἐπὶ + Γλαυκίπ]που } + _or_ Θεοπόμ]που } Καταχήναις [ἐπὶ .... (B.C. 409 or 410) + .....]αις· αὗται μόναι σῶ[αι· + .... ἐ]πὶ Διοφάντου Διονυ[σ ..... (B.C. 394) + γʹ ἐν ἄσ]τει ἐπὶ Νικοτέλους (B.C. 390) + δʹ ἐν ἄστ]ε[ι] ἐπὶ Λυσιμάχου [...... (B.C. 435) + εʹ ἐν ἄστε]ι ἐπὶ Μορυχίδου [.... ἐπὶ (B.C. 439) + ....... ο]υς Κολεοφόροις + +(_b_) All but the last two lines probably refer to the comic poet +Anaxandrides, as the plays named show. I. G. xiv. 1098. + + ..... ἐπὶ Χιώνος Μαι[νομένῳ (?) (B.C. 364) + ἐπὶ Μόλωνος] Διονύσου γονα[ῖς, ἐπὶ (B.C. 361) + Νικοφήμου] Ἀμπρακιώτιδι· γʹ ἐν [ἄστει (B.C. 360) + ἐπὶ Φανο]στράτου Ἐρεχθεῖ, ἐ[πὶ .... (B.C. 382) + ......]λεῖ, ἐπὶ Χαρισάνδρ[ου (B.C. 375) + .... ἐπὶ ἱπ]ποδάμαντος Ἰοῖ· ἐ[πὶ Φρασι- (B.C. 374, 370) + κλείδου] Ὀδυσσεῖ· ἐπὶ Κηφισοδ[ώρου (B.C. 365) + .....] ἐπὶ Ἀπολλοδώρου Ἀγ[ροίκοις (?) (B.C. 349) + ......]ξίππου· Λήναια ἐπ[ὶ + ..... π]οιῷ, ἐπὶ Ναυσιγένους [.... (B.C. 367) + ...... δʹ ἐ]ν ἄστει· ἐπὶ Χίωνος [ (B.C. 364) + ... εʹ ἐν ἄστ]ει ἐπὶ Ἀγαθοκλέ[ους (B.C. 356) + ........ ἐ]πὶ Θουδήμου Ἀ[.... (B.C. 352) + ]ου Ἀντέρωτι [...... + ...... ἐ]νίκα Λήναι[α .... + .... βʹ ἦν] ἐν ἄστ[ει ... + + + + +APPENDIX C + +THE ORIGINAL PLACE OF THE LENAEA + + +The question where the Lenaean contests took place before the building +of the great theatre of Dionysus has been unfortunately complicated with +other problems, of which no final solution can be given. For it has been +customary to assume that the Lenaeum was identical with the temple of +Dionysus ἐν Λίμναις, or at least that the latter was included in the +Lenaeum; and thus all the disputes respecting the site of the temple ἐν +Λίμναις have been regarded as applying also to the site of the Lenaeum. +Hence the discussion of the evidence for the site of the Lenaeum is more +difficult than it need be. + +I. It is to be noticed in the first place, as Miss Harrison points out +(Primitive Athens, pp. 96-7), that, on the one hand, none of those +writers who themselves saw the temple ἐν Λίμναις (and indeed hardly any +writers, the possible exceptions being considered below) speak of it as +the Lenaeum or in connexion with the Lenaeum; while on the other hand, +contemporary (and nearly all later) mentions of the dramatic contest at +the Lenaea fail to connect it with the Λίμναι. And it is obvious that, +as the precinct ἐν Λίμναις was only open once a year, on the 12th of +Anthesterion (pseudo-Dem. in Neaer. § 76, see below), the Lenaeum cannot +(any more than the temple or precinct of Dionysus Eleuthereus) have been +absolutely identical with it, though the possibility is not thereby +excluded that the Lenaeum may have been a larger precinct in a part of +which the temple ἐν Λίμναις stood. + +The passages referring to the ἐν Λίμναις, without reference to the +Lenaeum, are Thuc. ii. 15; Aristoph. Ran. 211 sqq.; pseudo-Dem. in Neaer. +§ 76; and Phanodemus ap. Athen. xi. p. 465 a: there can also be little +doubt that Paus. i. 20. 3 refers to the temple ἐν Λίμναις, though he does +not name it. I make only such comments on these passages as are necessary +for showing that they afford no ground for the identification of the +Lenaeum and the ἐν Λίμναις. + +(A) Thuc. ii. 15: τὸ δὲ πρὸ τούτου ἡ ἀκρόπολις ἡ νῦν οὖσα πόλις ἦν καὶ τὸ +ὑπ’ αὐτὴν πρὸς νότον μάλιστα τετραμμένον· τεκμήριον δέ· τὰ γὰρ ἱερὰ ἐν +αὐτῇ τῇ ἀκροπόλει καὶ ἄλλων θεῶν ἐστί, καὶ τὰ ἔξω πρὸς τοῦτο τὸ μέρος τῆς +πόλεως μᾶλλον ἵδρυται, τό τε τοῦ Διὸς τοῦ Ὀλυμπίου καὶ τὸ Πύθιον καὶ τὸ +τῆς Γῆς καὶ τὸ ἐν Λίμναις Διονύσου, ᾧ τὰ ἀρχαιότερα Διονύσια τῇ δωδεκάτῃ +ποιεῖται ἐν μηνὶ Ἀνθεστηριῶνι. + +This passage can only be used to prove the ἐν Λίμναις identical with the +Lenaeum (or closely connected) if we can identify the ἀρχαιότερα Διονύσια +with the Lenaean festival or part of it. Gilbert, Dörpfeld, and others +have attempted to do this. (It should be noted that, in the case of +Dörpfeld and his followers, this attempt is secondary to an attempt to +fix the temple ἐν Λίμναις at a particular spot, where he has discovered +the remains of a precinct of Dionysus, containing a wine-press, ληνός.) +They argue that the use of the comparative ἀρχαιότερα by Thucydides +implies that he knew only of _two_ Dionysia, one the older, the other +the later. The later must obviously be the Great or City Dionysia; and +therefore the earlier, it is argued, must be the Anthesteria, Lenaea and +Rural Dionysia, all regarded as one and the same festival; the place +of the Anthesteria must therefore be the place of the Lenaea; and as a +comparison of Thucydides with the pseudo-Dem. in Neaeram (below) proves +that the place of at least one part of the Anthesteria—that which was +celebrated on the 12th Anthesterion—was the ἐν Λίμναις, it follows that +the Lenaea must also have taken place ἐν Λίμναις, not of course in the +actual sanctuary of Dionysus, but close to it. + +Now it can be shown (1) that the stress laid on the comparative is +unwarranted, (2) that there are other grounds for refusing to identify +the Anthesteria and the Lenaea. + +(1) There are other passages in classical Greek literature in which +the comparative of words denoting age, &c., is used of the oldest, +not of two, but of several. Nilsson (Studia de Dionysiis Atticis, p. +54) collects the following, in addition to Homeric instances noted by +Kühner-Gerth (Griech. Gramm. § 349, p. 3). + +Lys. x. 5: ὁ γὰρ πρεσβύτερος ἀδελφὸς Πανταλέων ἅπαντα παρέλαβε καὶ +ἐπιτροπεύσας ἡμᾶς τῶν πατρῴων ἀπεστέρησεν. + +Lys. xiii. 67: ἦσαν τοίνυν οὗτοι, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, τέτταρες ἀδελφοί. +τούτων εἷς μὲν ὁ πρεσβύτερος κτλ. + +Xen. Cyr. v. 1. 6: ὡς δ’ ἡμῶν ὁ γεραίτερος εἶπε (where the context shows +that a good many people were concerned. The reading γεραίτερος is far +better supported than γεραίτατος). + +Theocr. xv. 139: οὔθ’ Ἕκτωρ, Ἑκάβας ὁ γεραίτερος εἴκατι παίδων. + +Other instances could probably be found, in spite of the tendency of +grammarians and editors to force these cases into the supposed orthodox +form, by emending the comparative to the superlative (as e.g. they have +done in Aelian, Var. H. ii. 41). + +All that the comparative really implies is that one individual case is +separated off from the rest, and the rest treated as a single combined +group. On this view the ἀρχαιότερα Διονύσια will be the older ceremony, +the Anthesteria, as contrasted with the group well known to be recent, +viz. the great popular festivals, the City Dionysia and the Lenaea. If +πρεσβύτερος and γεραίτερος can be used of one brother as opposed to the +rest, why not ἀρχαιότερα of one festival as opposed to the rest, these +latter being grouped together in thought as recent in comparison with the +one? + +There is, further, a note by Prof. Capps in the Trans. Amer. Philol. +Assoc. vol. xxxii, summarizing a paper in which he claims to distinguish +the meaning of ἀρχαιότερα from that of παλαιότερα, to show that previous +critics of Thucydides have confused them, and that on the true view of +ἀρχαιότερα the view of Gilbert, Dörpfeld, &c., is impossible. But the +paper has not been published as a whole. + +(2) The Lenaea was celebrated in the month Gamelion, which in other +places was called Lenaeon; the Anthesteria in Anthesterion. Gilbert’s +attempt to prove that the names of the months were changed and the +festivals transferred from one month to another breaks down entirely +(Nilsson, l.c., pp. 1-37, disproves it completely), nor would the attempt +have been made but for the necessity of providing some such explanation, +if the two festivals were to be identified. The separation in time of the +festivals is sufficient to disprove their identity. + +Again, in C. I. A. ii. 834 b (pp. 516 ff.) we have the accounts of +certain officials called ἐπιστάται Ἐλευσινόθεν καὶ ταμίαι τοῖν θεοῖν in +the year B.C. 329-8. Col. II, containing the accounts ἐπὶ τῆς Πανδιονίδος +ἕκτης πρυτανείας, includes in l. 46 ἐπιστάταις Ἐπιλήναια εἰς Διονύσια +θῦσαι ΔΔ∸, and in l. 68 εἰς Χόας δημοσίοις ἱερεῖον ΔΔ𐅂𐅂𐅂. This proves +that the Epilenaea (the same form occurs in Ath. Pol. ch. lvii, though +it is altered by editors, and probably also in C. I. A. ii. 741) was a +distinct festival from the Anthesteria, of which the Choes formed a part. +(This was shown by Körte, Rhein. Mus. lii. pp. 168 ff., and Wachsmuth, +Abh. der Sächs. Ges. der Wiss. xviii. pp. 40 ff.) A later inscription, +C. I. A. iii. 1160, date c. B.C. 193-2, separates equally clearly the +Lenaea from the Χύτροι (vide Nilsson, l.c., pp. 42-4): and Nilsson +gives other passages quite as conclusive (l.c., p. 143), of which one +is worth quoting, a gloss found in Photius, Suidas, &c., s.v. τὰ ἐκ τῶν +ἁμαξῶν σκώμματα· ἐπὶ τῶν ἀπαρακαλύπτως σκωπτόντων. Ἀθήνησι γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν +Χοῶν ἑορτῇ οἱ κωμάζοντες ἐπὶ τῶν ἁμαξῶν τοὺς ἀπαντῶντας ἔσκωπτόν τε καὶ +ἐλοιδόρουν. τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ καὶ τοῖς Ληναίοις ὕστερον ἐποίουν. + +It follows, therefore, that the Anthesteria, the ἀρχαιότερα Διονύσια of +Thucydides, cannot be identified with the Lenaea, and that whatever may +be proved from Thucydides as to the site of the temple ἐν Λίμναις, in +which the former were partly celebrated, nothing follows in reference to +the Lenaeum. + +(B) Aristoph. Ran. 211 sqq.: + + λιμναῖα κρηνῶν τέκνα, + ξύναυλον ὕμνων βοὰν + φθεγξώμεθ’, εὔγηρυν ἐμὰν ἀοιδάν, + κοὰξ κοάξ, + ἣν ἀμφὶ Νυσήιον + Διὸς Διόνυσον ἐν + Λίμναισιν ἰαχήσαμεν, + ἡνίχ’ ὁ κραιπαλόκωμος + τοῖς ἱεροῖσι Χύτροισι + χωρεῖ κατ’ ἐμὸν τέμενος λαῶν ὄχλος. + +The fact that the play was produced at the Lenaea (B.C. 405) cannot +possibly be used to prove that the Lenaea and the Chutroi, at which the +‘Frogs’ profess to have raised their hymn to Dionysus (in the _past_, it +is to be noticed), were the same festival. + +(C) Pseudo-Dem. in Neaer. §§ 73 sqq.: καὶ αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ ὑμῖν ἔθυε τὰ ἄρρητα +ἱερὰ ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως, καὶ εἶδεν ἃ οὐ προσῆκεν αὐτὴν ὁρᾶν ξένην οὖσαν, καὶ +τοιαύτη οὖσα εἰσῆλθεν οἷ οὐδεὶς ἄλλος Ἀθηναίων τοσούτων ὄντων εἰσέρχεται +ἀλλ’ ἢ ἡ τοῦ βασιλέως γυνή, ἐξώρκωσέ τε τὰς γεραρὰς τὰς ὑπηρετούσας +τοῖς ἱεροῖς, ἐξεδόθη δὲ τῷ Διονύσῳ γυνή.... § 76: καὶ τοῦτον τὸν νόμον +γράψαντες ἐν στήλῃ λιθίνῃ ἔστησαν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τοῦ Διονύσου παρὰ τὸν βωμὸν +ἐν Λίμναις (καὶ αὕτη ἡ στήλη ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἕστηκεν, ἀμυδροῖς γράμμασιν +Ἀττικοῖς δηλοῦσα τὰ γεγραμμένα).... καὶ διὰ ταῦτα ἐν τῷ ἀρχαιοτάτῳ ἱερῷ +τοῦ Διονύσου καὶ ἁγιωτάτῳ ἐν Λίμναις ἔστησαν, ἵνα μὴ πολλοὶ εἰδῶσι τὰ +γεγραμμένα· ἅπαξ γὰρ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἑκάστου ἀνοίγεται, τῇ δωδεκάτῃ τοῦ +Ἀνθεστηριῶνος μηνός.... § 78: =ὅρκος γεραρῶν.= ἁγιστεύω καὶ εἰμὶ καθαρὰ +καὶ ἁγνὴ ἀπό τε τῶν ἄλλων τῶν οὐ καθαρευόντων καὶ ἀπ’ ἀνδρὸς συνουσίας, +καὶ τὰ Θεοίνια καὶ τὰ Ἰοβάκχεια γεραίρω τῷ Διονύσῳ κατὰ τὰ πάτρια καὶ ἐν +τοῖς καθήκουσι χρόνοις. + +Here there is no hint of the Lenaeum or Lenaea at all. + +(D) Paus. i. 20. 3: τοῦ Διονύσου δέ ἐστι πρὸς τῷ θεάτρῳ τὸ ἀρχαιότατον +ἱερόν· δύο δέ εἰσιν ἐντὸς τοῦ περιβόλου ναοὶ καὶ Διόνυσοι, ὅ τε +Ἐλευθερεὺς καὶ ὃν Ἀλκαμένης ἐποίησεν ἐλέφαντος καὶ χρυσοῦ. + +(E) Athen. xi. p. 465 a: Φανόδημος δὲ πρὸς τῷ ἱερῷ φησι τοῦ ἐν Λίμναις +Διονύσου τὸ γλεῦκος φέροντας τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἐκ τῶν πίθων τῷ θεῷ +κιρνάναι, εἶτ’ αὐτοὺς (v. ll. αὐτοῖς, αὐτοί) προσφέρεσθαι· ὅθεν καὶ +Λίμναιον κληθῆναι τὸν Διόνυσον, ὅτι μιχθὲν τὸ γλεῦκος τῷ ὕδατι τότε +πρῶτον ἐπόθη κεκραμένον. + +Now it is clear that none of the above passages gives us any assistance +towards the localization of the Lenaeum. Nor do the references to the +Lenaic performances themselves. The festival is called Λήναια (Aristoph. +Ach. 1155; Athen. p. 130 d, &c.): ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ ἀγών (Aristoph. Ach. 504): +ἐπιλήναια Διονύσια (Ath. Pol. c. 57; C. I. A. ii. 834 b and probably +731), and we have such phrases as ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ νικᾶν, διδάσκειν, &c.: but +in none of these cases is there any hint of the Λίμναι (e.g. Plat. Prot. +327 d; Dem. Meid. § 10). + +For what reasons, then, drawn from literary evidence, has it been assumed +that the Lenaea and the Anthesteria (partly held ἐν Λίμναις) were +identical? + +(1) The passage of Athenaeus above quoted has been compared with Anon. +de Comoed. αʹ. l. 6 ff. (Kaibel. Fr. Com. p. 7) τὴν αὐτὴν (sc. τὴν +κωμῳδίαν) δὲ καὶ τρυγῳδίαν φασὶ διὰ τὸ τοῖς εὐδοκιμοῦσιν ἐπὶ τῷ Ληναίῳ +γλεῦκος δίδοσθαι, ὅπερ ἐκάλουν τρύγα, ἢ ὅτι μήπω προσωπείων ηὑρημένων +τρυγὶ διαχρίοντες τὰ πρόσωπα ὑπεκρίνοντο. But the two passages refer to +entirely different ceremonies. That of which Athenaeus speaks was part +of the Choes, the first drinking of the new wine at the Anthesteria. The +second refers to the prize of a bottle of new wine given to successful +poets at the Lenaea; it is a conjectural explanation of the name +τρυγῳδία. There is nothing whatever to show that the passages refer to +ceremonies in any way connected, except the use of the word γλεῦκος in +both. + +(2) Hesychius: λίμναι· ἐν Ἀθήναις [ἇς] τόπος ἀνειμένος Διονύσῳ, ὅπου τὰ +λαία ἤγετο. Editors generally, following Musurus, emend to Λήναια, but +this is not proof. The true reading may be Λιμναῖα. + +(3) The one passage which can be treated seriously is a Schol. on +Aristoph. Ach. 961, explaining the origin of the Choes: εἰς τὴν +ἑορτὴν τῶν Χοῶν· ἐπετελεῖτο δὲ Πυανεψιῶνος ὀγδόῃ· οἱ δὲ Ἀνθεστηριῶνος +⟨δω⟩δεκάτῃ. φησὶ δὲ Ἀπολλόδωρος Ἀνθεστήρια καλεῖσθαι κοινῶς τὴν ὅλην +ἑορτὴν Διονύσῳ ἀγομένην, κατὰ μέρος δὲ Πιθοιγίαν Χόας Χύτραν. καὶ αὖθις. +ὅτι Ὀρέστης μετὰ τὸν φόνον εἰς Ἀθήνας ἀφικόμενος (ἦν δὲ ἑορτὴ Διονύσου +Ληναίου), ὡς μὴ γένοιτο ὁμόσπονδος ἀπεκτονὼς τὴν μητέρα ἐμηχανήσατο +τοιόνδε τι Πανδίων ... καὶ ἀπ’ ἐκείνου Ἀθηναίοις ἑορτὴ ἐνομίσθη οἱ Χόες. +This passage as it stands undoubtedly represents the Choes as instituted +to form part of a festival of Dionysus Lenaeus. But our suspicions are +aroused when we find that the other versions of the same story make no +allusion to Dionysus Lenaeus. The corresponding expression in Schol. ad +Aristoph. Eq. 95 (which Rutherford transfers to Ach. 961) is κατέλαβεν +δὲ αὐτὸν (sc. τὸν Πανδίονα) εὐωχίαν τινα δημοτελῆ ποιοῦντα. (Other +versions are Athen. x. p. 437 b; Plut. Quaest Symp. p. 613 b and p. 643 +a; Schol. Tzetzae ad Lycophr. 1374; Suidas s.v. Χόες.) It is at least +probable, therefore, that the parenthesis ἦν δὲ ἑορτὴ Διονύσου Ληναίου is +an erroneous gloss by the compiler of the first-quoted scholium, whose +state of mind in regard to the facts concerning the festivals mentioned +is sufficiently indicated by the early part of the scholium. Rutherford +has made plain the unreliability of the scholiasts on Aristophanes, +and this single passage is of no value when compared with the weight +of evidence against the identification of the two festivals. Nilsson +(l.c., p. 57) may be right in his suggestion that Ληναίου is an error +for Λιμναίου. ΛΗΝΑΙΟΥ and ΛΙΜΝΑΙΟΥ are very much alike, and the latter, +being less familiar, might easily be changed into the former. Athen. +xi. 465 a (quoted above), quoting Phanodemus, mentions Λιμναῖος as a +name of Dionysus, especially connected with the Anthesteria. But in fact +the emendation, though highly probable, is needless so far as the case +against identifying the festivals is concerned. I do not notice some +other passages cited by Gilbert in support of the identification, because +so far as I can discover no one does or would now so use them: in any +case Nilsson’s reply is sufficient. + +II. With regard to the archaeological evidence adduced by Dörpfeld (Ath. +Mitth. 1895, Griech. Theat. p. 7) and Miss Harrison, it seems enough to +say that though the precinct discovered by the former, and identified by +them with the precinct ἐν Λίμναις, contains the remains of a ληνός, this +does not itself prove that it was a precinct of Dionysus Lenaeus, much +less that it was the Lenaeum for which we are looking. If it were the +precinct of Dionysus Lenaeus it might contain a ληνός (though this is not +necessary); but to argue the converse is quite fallacious. Nor does the +existence of other ληνοί in the neighbourhood help the argument. There is +some plausibility, indeed, in the idea that the Lenaeum may have been a +place or district in which there were many ληνοί, but (1) it is certainly +not proved that Dörpfeld’s precinct was the temple ἐν Λίμναις, and so, +even if it were the Lenaeum, the two temples would not necessarily be +identified, and (2) it is very probable that the title Λήναιος is not +derived from ληνός at all. We will first deal with these two points +before discussing such positive evidence as there is for the site of the +Lenaeum. + +(1) As to the temple ἐν Λίμναις, the first important piece of evidence +as to the site is the passage of Thucydides, and next the passages +of pseudo-Dem. in Neaeram and Pausanias, all quoted above. To take +Thucydides first. The most natural and obvious interpretation, the one +which a reader would assume if not on the look out for difficulties, +would take πρὸς τοῦτο τὸ μέρος as = πρὸς τὸ ὑπ’ αὐτὴν πρὸς νότον μάλιστα +τετραμμένον. It cannot indeed be said that it would be _impossible_ for +it to mean ‘near this original city’ (including the acropolis and the +land south of it); but, as Prof. E. Gardner points out (Ancient Athens, +p. 144), one would expect πρὸς νότῳ (or πρὸς τούτῳ τῷ μέρει) in such a +case; and such an interpretation gives us no reason why Thucydides should +have mentioned the south at all. On the most natural interpretation then +of Thucydides the temple ἐν Λίμναις was to the south of the acropolis (or +SW.), not, like Dörpfeld’s precinct, on the WNW. Pausanias, moreover, +says that the ἀρχαιότατον ἱερόν of Dionysus was πρὸς τῷ θεάτρῳ. (ἱερόν +as Carroll points out (Class. Rev. July, 1905) often means the whole +precinct, and not merely the shrine or sanctuary; several shrines may +be included in one precinct.) Carroll reminds us (l.c.) that ‘Fischbach +(Wiener Stud. xv. pp. 161-91) has shown conclusively that Pausanias was +thoroughly acquainted with Thucydides, and made extensive use of the +historian in his description of Athens; so much that he appropriates +words, phrases, and terms of expression found in Thucydides. These +stylistic resemblances exclude the acceptance of an intermediate channel. +Pausanias had also the benefit of a tradition handed down by local guides +respecting important sites. Hence when he makes a statement manifestly +based on Thucydides, the presumption is that he understood his authority +and interpreted him correctly.’ Now in the present case it is admitted +that Pausanias had Thucydides before him; and when Thucydides speaks +of the ἀρχαιότερα Διονύσια as celebrated at the temple ἐν Λίμναις, and +when the pseudo-Demosthenes (l.c.), a connecting link, speaks of the +ἐν Λίμναις as the ἀρχαιότατον ἱερόν of Dionysus, it is infinitely more +natural to suppose that Pausanias also, speaking of the ἀρχαιότατον +ἱερόν, refers to the precinct ἐν Λίμναις, and that therefore the temple +ἐν Λίμναις was πρὸς τῷ θεάτρῳ, than with Wilamowitz (Hermes, xxi) to +construct a theory of clumsy mistakes on Pausanias’ part. Of course, for +the reasons given by Wilamowitz, the ἐν Λίμναις was not the same as the +theatre or temple of Dionysus Eleuthereus, but it may well have been +within the same ἱερόν, the same sacred precinct, or quite close to it, on +the SW. of the acropolis. + +Now Miss Harrison (l.c., p. 83) writes that ‘Thucydides himself seems to +warn us. He seems to say, “not that precinct which you all know so well +and think so much of, not that theatre where year by year you all go, +but an earlier and more venerable place, and, that there be no mistake, +the place where you go on the 12th day of Anthesterion, &c.”’: and she +concludes that Pausanias was wrong in saying that the oldest sanctuary of +Dionysus was πρὸς τῷ θεάτρῳ. Thucydides, she seems to argue, would not +have been at such pains to distinguish the two ‘hiera’ if they had been +close to each other. But (if he is really intending to distinguish them) +this may just as well have been because they _were_ close to each other +and might be confused. However, so far as this passage goes, the theatre +may or may not have been near the oldest sanctuary; Thucydides would not +have any reason to think of the theatre _in either case_, for the simple +reason that it was not old enough to add anything to his argument, and +any mention of it would have been irrelevant and confusing. + +The most natural conclusion then from the words of Thucydides and +Pausanias is that the temple ἐν Λίμναις was near the theatre, and not +in Dörpfeld’s precinct to the WNW. of the acropolis. (In spite of Miss +Harrison it seems that the other temples mentioned by Thucydides can be +accommodated with sites at least as well on the view here taken as on +that taken by Dörpfeld, and I should say very much better. See Bates +(Trans. Amer. Phil. Assoc, vol. 30); E. Gardner (l.c.); Farnell (Class. +Rev. 1900, &c.).) + +I pass on to the attempt to identify the ἐν Λίμναις with Dörpfeld’s +precinct on the evidence of pseudo-Demosthenes. The passage gives the +oath taken by the γεραραί or attendants at the ceremony on the 12th of +Anthesterion. They swear that they celebrate (or will celebrate, though +I cannot find any authority for the reading γεραρῶ) the Theoinia and +Iobaccheia in the customary manner and at the customary times. Therefore, +Miss Harrison seems to wish us to argue, the Iobaccheia took place like +the ceremony on the 12th of Anthesterion in the ἐν Λίμναις, and the +Iobacchic inscription discovered in Dörpfeld’s precinct proves this +precinct to be the place of the Iobaccheia, and therefore to be the ἐν +Λίμναις. This is simply a case of _non sequitur_. Suppose a ceremony of +the English Church which required of its attendants a solemn declaration, +‘I am (or, I will be) a regular communicant,’ it could not be inferred +that the Communion Service was part of the ceremony, or took place at the +same spot. Even, therefore, if a Baccheion has been found, guaranteed +by the inscription (and of this there is no doubt), there is nothing to +prove either that it, or any older building beneath it, is the temple +ἐν Λίμναις, or that the third-century inscription on the pillar by +the altar is the representative of the far older στήλη by the altar ἐν +Λίμναις mentioned by the pseudo-Demosthenes. Prof. Ernest Gardner also +points out (l.c., p. 113) that the Iobaccheia mentioned in the oath +cannot be the same as the rites of the Iobacchi of the inscription, for +‘the one is a state ceremony, the other a private one; and, moreover, +the Iobaccheia are not among the festivals which the Iobacchi celebrate, +and of which we have a complete list’ (see Roberts and Gardner, Greek +Epigraphy, ii. pp. 236 ff.). The fact that the lower building contains +a wine-press and places for an altar and stelae does not prove that it +was the ἐν Λίμναις: it proves at most that it was an old Βακχεῖον, like +the one above it. There is no proof at all of the crucial point—that the +Iobaccheia were celebrated only, or celebrated at all, in the temple ἐν +Λίμναις: Dörpfeld’s precinct is probably only one of the many Βακχεῖα +which (as Prof. E. Gardner, l.c., notes) must have existed in Athens, +and the practice of setting up stelae was too general to allow of any +argument being drawn from the one found. On the whole, the statement +‘I celebrate (or, will celebrate) the Iobaccheia at the proper times’ +suggests that the reference is to some time _not_ the present, and +that the Iobaccheia are quite distinct from the ceremony of the 12th +of Anthesterion. The nature of the enclosure surrounding Dörpfeld’s +precinct also admits of many explanations besides the one Miss Harrison +offers. Perhaps if it _was_ the ἐν Λίμναις, only open once a year and +kept strictly secret, it would be carefully enclosed, and would have +only a small door, and would contain no votive offerings; but to argue +the converse is simply bad reasoning. Since then Dörpfeld’s precinct +was probably _not_ the temple ἐν Λίμναις, the place of the Anthesteria, +it gives us no ground for identifying the sites or the ceremonies of +the Anthesteria and the Lenaea; and we have seen that the fact that it +contains a ληνός is quite insufficient to prove that the precinct was the +Lenaeum. So that the discovery of the precinct, interesting as it is in +itself, throws no light whatever on the problem before us—the site of the +Lenaeum. + +(2) As regards the derivation of the title Λήναιος, the form of the +word suggests derivation from a feminine λήνη, not a masculine ληνός, +and this view finds support on other grounds from Ribbeck (Anfänge und +Entwickelung des Dionysos-Kult in Attika, p. 13); Farnell (Class. Rev. +1900), and Nilsson (l.c., pp. 111 ff.). Shortly, the reasons for the +derivation from λήνη are as follows. Hesychius gives us λῆναι· βάκχαι· +Ἀρκάδες: and Ribbeck, comparing this with Odyssey xix. 230 ὁ μὲν (sc. +κύων) λάε νεβρὸν ἀπάγχων, suggests that the root is λαϝ, ‘tear,’ and +that the λῆναι were bacchants of the mountains who rent a fawn in their +ecstasy. We find also the verb ληναΐζειν. If this is so, the Lenaea +probably at first included orgiastic rites, and it is significant in this +connexion that there were mysteries connected with Lenaea at Myconos; and +it may be added that in C. I. A. 834 b the fact that expenditure for the +Lenaea appears in the accounts of the ἐπιστάται Ἐλευσινόθεν has by some +been interpreted as pointing in the same direction, and suggesting in +connexion with the Lenaea mystic rites having reference to the fertility +of the ground. If so, the derivation from ληνός must give way; it is +in any case uncertain, though perhaps it was the popular derivation in +ancient times. It does not, however, seem to me to follow necessarily (as +Dr. Farnell appears to think) that because both the Anthesteria and the +Lenaea involved secret rites, they were even probably the same festival. +The arguments given by Nilsson and others, and partly reproduced above, +are a sufficient reply. + +III. Finally, we have to ask, what positive evidence have we for the site +of the Lenaeum? + +(1) It was in the ἀγορά. This seems to be a legitimate inference from two +passages of Photius, viz. ληναῖον· περίβολος μέγας Ἀθήνησιν ἐν ᾧ τοὺς +ἀγῶνας ἦγον πρὸ τοῦ τὸ θέατρον οἰκοδομηθῆναι ὀνομάζοντες ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ. +ἔστιν δὲ ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ ἱερὸν Διονύσου Ληναίου (so practically Hesych. +s.v. ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ ἀγών), and ἴκρια· τὰ ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ ἀφ’ ὧν ἐθεῶντο τοὺς +Διονυσιακοὺς ἀγῶνας πρὶν ἢ κατασκευασθῆναι τὸ ἐν Διονύσου θέατρον. Again, +Schol. ad Dem. de Cor. § 129 describes τὸ κλίσιον τὸ πρὸς τῷ καλαμίτῃ +ἥρωϊ as ἐν ἀγορᾷ, while the ἱερόν of the hero is said to be πρὸς τῷ +Ληναίῳ. Whatever is to be said about the hero, he at any rate serves to +connect the Ληναῖον and the ἀγορά. That there was anciently an orchestra +in the market-place at Athens appears also from Photius, ὀρχήστρα· πρῶτον +ἐκλήθη ἐν τῇ ἀγορᾷ, and Plato, Laws 817 c, speaks of stages erected +in the market-place by tragic poets. Socrates speaks of book-shops in +the orchestra (Plato, Apol. 26 E). But the site of the ἀγορά itself is +still so much disputed that we are left in uncertainty. The statement of +Timaeus, Lex. Plat., ὀρχήστρα τόπος ἐπιφάνης εἰς πανήγυριν ἔνθα Ἁρμοδίου +καὶ Ἀριστογείτονος εἰκόνες, does not really help, as the position of +these statues is itself disputed. It may have been at the NE. or the +NW. corner of the acropolis. We have to be content therefore with the +information that the old Lenaic performances took place in a temporary +wooden theatre in (or by) the market-place—wherever this was, and that +the particular spot in (or by) the market-place was the Lenaeum, a +περίβολος μέγας. + +(2) The Scholia on Aristophanes twice over state that the Lenaea took +place ἐν ἀγροῖς. Schol. ad Aristoph. Ach. 504 reads οὑπὶ Ληναίῳ τ’ ἀγών· +ὁ τῶν Διονυσίων ἀγὼν ἐτελεῖτο δὶς τοῦ ἔτους, τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἔαρος ἐν +ἄστει, ὅτε καὶ οἱ φόροι Ἀθήνησιν ἐφέροντο, τὸ δὲ δεύτερον ἐν ἀγροῖς ὁ ἐπὶ +Ληναίῳ λεγόμενος, ὅτε ξένοι οὐ παρῆσαν Ἀθήνησι· χειμὼν γὰρ λοιπὸν ἦν: and +Schol. id. 202 ἄξω τὰ καὶ ἀγρούς· τὰ Λήναια λεγόμενα. ἔνθεν τὰ Λήναια +καὶ ὁ ἐπιλήναιος ἀγὼν τελεῖται τῷ Διονύσῳ· Λήναιον γάρ ἐστιν ἐν ἀγροῖς +ἱερὸν τοῦ Διονύσου· διὰ τὸ πλεκτοὺς ἐνταῦθα γεγονέναι, ἢ διὰ τὸ πρῶτον +ἐν τούτῳ τῷ τόπῳ ληνὸν τεθῆναι. Μένανδρος· τραγῳδὸς ἦν ἀγών, Διονύσια. +So also Steph. Byz. Λήναιος· ἀγὼν Διονύσου ἐν ἀγροῖς ἀπὸ τῆς ληνοῦ· +Ἀπολλόδωρος ἐν τρίτῳ χρονικῶν. But the confusion of these remarks is +plain (see Nilsson, l.c. 78), and when the Scholia on Aristophanes which +comment on the Dionysiac festivals are taken altogether, it is clear that +no consistent view is to be found in them and no confidence is to be +placed in them. It is enough to note that Schol. ad Ar. Ach. 378 places +the Lenaea in autumn. The Scholiasts’ ἐν ἀγροῖς is no doubt due to the +need of distinguishing the Lenaea from the Dionysia ἐν ἄστει, properly +so called in opposition, not to the Lenaea, but to the rural Dionysia. +Religious nomenclature is not so consistent that we can assume that all +the Dionysia except the festival named ἐν ἄστει were once ἐν ἀγροῖς, but +it is still possible that the Lenaeum was once outside the walls, and +afterwards came to be included in their circuit. Hesychius (s.v. ἐπὶ +Ληναίῳ ἀγών) describes it as ἐν τῷ ἄστει. + +M. Foucart (Le Culte de Dionysos en Attique, p. 105) thinks that he has +found an indication of the site in C. I. A. IV. i. p. 66, in part of an +inscription which runs, τὸ δὲ ψήφισμα τόδε ... ἀναγράψας ὁ γραμματεὺς ὁ +τῆς βουλῆς ἐν στήλῃ λιθίνῃ καταθέτω ἐν τῷ Νηλείῳ παρὰ τὰ ἴκρια, and he +attempts (l.c., p. 109) to fix the site of this Neleion. But his proof +that παρὰ τὰ ἴκρια means ‘by the Lenaean theatre’ is very weak. + + + + +APPENDIX D + + +The following extracts are from a series of inscriptions containing the +accounts of the priests of Apollo at Delos. These priests had charge of +the various public buildings in the island, including the theatre. The +part of their accounts which refers to the theatre is of great interest, +because of the light which it throws on the theatrical architecture of +the time. A collection of the notices concerning the theatre is given by +Homolle in Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique, 1894, pp. 161 ff. The +most important passages are given below. + +290 B.C. τοῖς τὴν σκηνὴν ἐργολαβήσασι καὶ τὸ προσκήνιον ΗΗΗΗΔ. + +282 B.C. Ἡρακλείδῃ εἰς τὸ προσκήνιον γράψαντι πίνακας δύο μισθὸς δραχμαὶ +𐅂𐅂𐅂Ι· Ἀντιδότῳ τοῦ προσκηνίου γρά[ψαν]τι πίνακας δύο . . . . . . . . . . +. . Θεοδότῳ πίνακα εἰς τὸ προσκήνιον ποιήσαντι μισθὸς δραχμαὶ ΔΔΔ· εἰς +τοῦτο κατε[χρήσθη ξύλον] ἐλάτινον τῶν ὑπαρχόντων . . . . . ἀπὸ τούτων +ἠλεί[ψα]μεν τὰς θύρας πάσας . . . . . . καὶ ὅσα ἔδει τῆς σκηνῆς τῆς ἐν +τῷ θεάτρῳ. + +281 B.C. τοὺς πίνακας εἰς τὸ θέατρον ἀνενέγκασι ΙΙΙ . . . . . . . χαλκοῦ +εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν μνᾶς ΙΙ. + +279 B.C. (δραχμὰς) ἃς ἐξέτεισε Ἀρίγνωτος Ἀντιπάτρου ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐγγύης +ἧς ἠγγύητο Δίαιτον Ἀπολλοδώρου τῆς τοῦ θεάτρου περιοικοδομίας τὸ καθ’ +αὑτὸν μέρος . . . . . . τορνίσκον εἰς τὸ θέατρον ἐργασαμένῳ Ἀντιγόνῳ +Καΐκου, παρέχοντι αὐτῷ πάντα εἰς τὸ ἔργον πλὴγ ξύλων, μισθὸς . . . . . +. . τοῦ θεάτρου τὴν ὀρχήστραν καὶ τοὺς ὁλκοὺς ἀνακαθάραντι καὶ τὸν χοῦν +ἐξενέγκασι μισθωτοῖς, ἀρχιτέκτονος ἐγδόντος, μισθὸς 𐅃𐅂𐅂 . . . . . . . . +. . τῆς σκηνῆς τὸ τέγος καταλείψαντι Ἕρμωνι Δ𐅂𐅂 . . . . . . . εἰς τὸ +[λογε]ῖον τῆς σκηνῆς (ξύλον). . . . + +276 B.C. [ἐργο]λάβαις τοῦ θεάτρου τῶν ὁλκῶν τὴν δευτέραν δόσιν Χ𐅅. + +274 B.C. [ἀγαγοῦσι εἰς] τὸ θέατρον ἀπὸ τοῦ νεωκορίου λίθους οὓς εἰργάσατο +. . . . . . . συστήσαντι τὸ παρασκήνιον . . . . . . . . . . . [ἀπενέγκαντι +εἰς] τὸ θέατρον λίθους τῶν ἐκ Τήνου δύο καὶ ἐκ τοῦ σταδίου . . . . . . . +. . ἐγλαβόντι τὴν πρισμὴν τῶν στοῶν τῶν εἰς τὰς σκηνάς . . . . . τῷ τοὺς +ἥλους ἐγλαβόντι [τοὺς εἰς τὰς σκ]ηνὰς καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια τὴμ μνᾶν 𐅂𐅂 +ἀπεστησάμεθα κατὰ τὴν συγγραφὴν μνᾶς τριάκοντα ἑπτὰ μετὰ τοῦ ἀρχιτέκτονος +καὶ τῶν ἐπιμελητῶν . . . . . . . . Θεοδήμῳ τῷ ἐγλαβόντι ποιῆσαι τὴν σκηνὴν +τὴν μέσην καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια τὰ κάτω δραχμῶν ΗΗΗΗ𐅄ΔΔΔΔ𐅃𐅂𐅂𐅂𐅂 . . . . . . . . +Ἐπικλύτῃ τῷ ἐγλαβόντι τὰς σκηνὰς τὰς παλαιὰς . . . καὶ ἐπισκευάσαι καὶ τὰς +ἐπάνω σκηνὰς καινὰς ποιῆσαι δύο καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια τὰ ἄνω καινὰ ποιῆσαι δύο +καὶ τοῖς παλαιοῖς πίναξι τῶν παρασκηνίων περι . . . σαι καὶ τὰς ἐξώστρας +καὶ τὴν κλίμακα καὶ τοὺς βαθμοὺς ἐπισκευάσαι 𐅄ΔΔΔ𐅃𐅂𐅂 . . . . . . . . τοῖς +ἐγλαβοῦσι γράψαι τὰς σκηνὰς καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια τά τε ἐπάνω καὶ τὰ ὑποκάτω +δραχμῶν ΧΧ𐅅 . . . . . . . . . . τῷ ἐγλαβόντι . . . . σαι τὸ παρασκήνιον +τὸ ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ δραχμῶν ΗΗΗ𐅄ΔΔΔΔ . . . . . . . . . Θρασυλέῳ τῷ ἐγλαβόντι +ἐργάσασθαι τὸ ἐπιστύ[λιον] . . . . \ΙΟΥ . . . . . . Ἀρχέλᾳ . . . +καταχρίσαντι τὸ τεῖχος τῆς σκηνῆς κατὰ τὴν συγγραφὴν ἀπέδομεν τὸ γινόμενον +ἀρχιτέκτονος κελεύοντος καὶ τῶν ἐπιμελητῶν. + +269 B.C. τὴν σκηνὴν τὴν ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ ἀνακαθάρασι 𐅂Ι . . . . . . . . . . +παρὰ Τέλλωνος ἀτράκτους δύο ὥστε κλίμα[κα] εἰς τὸ θέατρον 𐅂𐅂𐅂𐅂 . . . . . +. . . . .Θεοδήμῳ κλιμακτῆρας παρασχόντι καὶ κατασκευάσαντι 𐅂𐅂𐅂ΙΙΙ . . . . +. . . . . Διονυσίῳ ἐγλαβόντι τὴν ὀρχήστραν τοῦ θεάτρου καταχρῖσαι τὴν +πρώτην δόσιν ἔδομεν . . . . . . . . . Σωσιμένει Ἀντιγόνου τῶν λίθων τῶν +τῆς εἰς τὸν θησαυρὸν (?) ἔδομεν . . . . . . Ἀντίκῳ τῆς διόδου τῆς ἐν τῷ +θεάτρῳ . . . . . . . . Ἀντίκῳ Καΐκου ἐγλαβόντι καθάραι τὸν τόπον τῇ διόδῳ +τῇ ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ πάντα κύκλῳ ἔδομεν . . . . . . . . . Ἀριστοκλεῖ καὶ +Καλλιμένει τῆς λιθείας τῆς εἰς τὸ παρασκήνιον ἐκ ποδῶν πεντακοσίων +ἔδομεν . . . . . . . . . . . . Φιλανδρίδει Παρίῳ τῆς [λιθείας] τῆς εἰς +τὰς κρηπῖδας [τὰς] ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ ἐγλαβόντι πόδας χιλίους ἔδομεν . . . . . . +. . . . λίθων τῶν εἰς τὸ θέατρον . . . . . . . . . + +250 B.C. τὸ θέατρον ἀνακαθάραι . . . . . . . . . κλεῖς καὶ χελώνιον ἐπὶ +τὸν Ἰνωπὸν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ Ἡράκλειον καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν σκηνήν . . . . . . . . . . . +Παρμένοντι ἀνακαθάραντι τὴν ἐπαγωγίδα τὴν ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ . . . . . . . +Ὠφελίωνι τοὺς κρουνοὺς διακαθάραντι τοὺς ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ . . . . . . . . . +Νεογένει ἐπιγράψαντι ἐπὶ τὸ προσκήνιον . . . . . . . . . . . τῆς λιθείας +τῆς εἰς τὸ θέατρον ἐξέδομεν πόδας διακοσίους, τὸμ πόδα δραχμῶν 𐅃𐅂𐅂 . . . . +. . . . . . . . τῆς ἐργασίας τοῦ ἐπιθεάτρου ἐξέδομεν πόδας διακοσίους . . +. . . . . . . Εὐκλείδει ἐργολαβήσαντι τὸν ὀρθοστάτην καὶ τὸν καταληπτῆρα +θεῖναι καὶ ἐργάσασθαι ἐν τῷ ἐπιθεάτρῳ . . . . + +180 B.C. [ξύλον . . . . κατεχρήσθη εἰς] τὴν κατασκευὴν τῶν πινάκων τῶν +ἐπὶ τὸ λογεῖον. + +The earliest notices refer to the old wooden structure. The erection of a +stone theatre was apparently begun about 275 B.C., and completed in the +course of the third century. A large part of this theatre still remains. +But the stone proscenium of the Vitruvian type, of which the foundations +are preserved, was probably a later work constructed in the second +century B.C. This proscenium is not enclosed by side-wings (παρασκήνια), +but open at both ends (see Fig. 12). But the inscription for 269 B.C. +expressly mentions τῆς λιθείας τῆς εἰς τὸ παρασκήνιον. Hence it is +probable that in the stage-buildings erected in the middle of the third +century the stage was of wood, and was terminated at each end by stone +side-wings. In the second century, when a regular stone proscenium was +erected, these side-wings were removed (see Dörpfeld, Griech. Theater, p. +148). + +The word σκηνή is used in the inscriptions in two senses. It denotes (1) +the stage-buildings as a whole, e.g. τοὺς κρουνοὺς τοὺς ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ, (2) +the wall at the rear of the stage, or the boards by which that wall was +covered, e.g. τὴν σκηνὴν τὴν μέσην καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια, τὰς σκηνὰς καὶ τὰ +παρασκήνια. This wall or boarding is called ἡ μέση σκηνή as opposed to +the παρασκήνια on each side, and αἱ ἐπάνω σκηναί in opposition to the +προσκήνιον underneath (so Homolle, l.c., p. 165). Apparently the whole +building was only two stories, and the back-scene rose one story above +the stage. Bethe, however (Prolegomena, p. 234), suggests that there were +three stories; that ἡ μέση σκηνή denoted the middle story, and αἱ ἐπάνω +σκηναί the top story, of the back-scene; the bottom story being concealed +behind the προσκήνιον. But as only two stories are mentioned in connexion +with the side-wings (τὰ παρασκήνια τά τε ἐπάνω καὶ τὰ ὑποκάτω), it seems +unlikely that the central part of the building should have had more than +two. + +Some of the technical terms are new. The lines of seats in the early +theatre are called ὁλκοί, as resembling furrows dug in the slope of the +auditorium. The horizontal passage dividing the upper belt (διάζωμα) +of seats from the lower is the δίοδος. The word περιοικοδομία seems to +denote the wall by which the outside of the auditorium was enclosed and +supported where necessary. The ἐπιθέατρον must have been the upper belt +of seats. The ὀρθοστάτης and καταληπτήρ are explained by Homolle as a +sort of balustrade and coping by which the top of the auditorium was +finished off. The κλῖμαξ and κλιμακτῆρες may have been the steps leading +up from orchestra to stage; but this is not certain. See on these points +Homolle, l.c., pp. 163 ff. + + + + +FOOTNOTES + + +[1] Dem. Androt. § 68, and schol. ad loc.; Meid. § 10, &c. + +[2] Dem. Meid. §§ 51-3. + +[3] See below, p. 9. + +[4] C. I. A. iii. 240-384. Hesych. s.v. νεμήσεις θέας. + +[5] Dem. Meid. §§ 8-10. + +[6] Ibid. § 180. + +[7] Ibid. § 178. + +[8] See esp. Aristoph. Ran. 1008 ff., 1054 ff.; Plat. Rep. 598 D, E. + +[9] Plut. Solon, p. 95 B. ἀρχομένων δὲ τῶν περὶ Θέσπιν ἤδη τὴν τραγῳδίαν +κινεῖν, καὶ διὰ τὴν καινότητα τοὺς πολλοὺς ἄγοντος τοῦ πράγματος, οὔπω δὲ +εἰς ἅμιλλαν ἐναγώνιον ἐξηγμένου κτλ. + +[10] Aristot. Poet. c. v. + +[11] For dramatic exhibitions in other parts of Greece, see The Tragic +Drama of the Greeks, p. 436. + +[12] Gilbert (Die Festzeiten der attischen Dionysien, 1872) and more +recently Dörpfeld (Das griechische Theater, p. 9) have attempted to +show that the Lenaea was only a part of the Anthesteria, and that the +Anthesteria was only the Athenian counterpart of the Rural Dionysia. +Gilbert was refuted by Schömann, Alterth. ii. 579-99. Wachsmuth, Abhandl. +der Sächs. Gesell. der Wissensch. xviii. p. 33 ff., and Körte, Rhein. +Mus., 1897, p. 168 ff., show that an inscription C. I. A. ii. 834 b +proves that there must have been a considerable interval between the +Lenaea and Anthesteria. It is an account of the sums expended by the +ἐπιστάται Ἐλευσινόθεν in B.C. 329-328. In col. ii. 46 we read ἐπιστάταις +ἐπιλήναια εἰς Διονύσια θῦσαι ΔΔ; in ii. 68, twenty-two lines later, εἰς +Χοὰς δημοσίοις ἱερεῖον κτλ. (The adjective ἐπιλήναιος is also found in +the papyrus of Ath. Pol. c. 57, and the inscription confirms the reading +ἐπιληναίων, which editors alter to ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ). [The whole subject of the +Dionysiac festivals has been investigated afresh by Nilsson (Studia de +Dionysiis Atticis, 1900), who proves at length the separateness of the +four festivals.] + +[13] Dem. Meid. § 10. + +[14] See below, p. 9. + +[15] [See articles on Dionysus in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl., and +Preller-Robert, Griech. Mythologie.] + +[16] Paus. i. 29; Philostrat. Vit. Soph. p. 549. + +[17] Διονύσια τὰ ἐν ἄστει C. I. A. ii. 341, 402, 404; Διονύσια τὰ ἀστικά +Thuc. v. 20; Διονύσια τὰ μεγάλα Athen. Pol. c. 56, C. I. A. ii. 312, 331; +Διονύσια Athen. Pol. c. 56. + +[18] This is proved by the inscription on the chief seat at the theatre, +Ἱερέως Διονύσου Ἐλευθερέως (C. I. A. iii. 240). + +[19] νίκη ἀστική Diog. Laërt. viii. 90. To produce plays at the City +Dionysia was ἐν ἄστει διδάσκειν Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 67, or εἰς ἄστυ +καθιέναι Arg. ii. Aristoph. Aves: cf. διδασκαλία ἀστική Plut. X Orat. 839 +D. + +[20] The feast of Asclepius and the Proagon were on the 8th of +Elaphebolion, Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 67; the Proagon took place ‘a few +days’ before the City Dionysia, Schol. ibid.: the City Dionysia cannot +therefore have begun before the 10th. The festival must have terminated +on the 15th, since after it came the Pandia, the next day the ἐκκλησία +ἐν Διονύσου, and the next day, when the first assembly mentioned by +Aeschines and Demosthenes took place, was the 18th. See Aeschin. Ctes. § +68; Fals. Leg. § 61; Dem. Meid. § 8. + +[21] Stormy weather sometimes interfered with the proceedings. In the +time of Demetrius a snowfall prevented the procession. Theophr. Char. 3; +Plut. Demetr. p. 894 B. + +[22] Aeschin. Ctes. § 43; cf. Dem. Meid. § 74. + +[23] Aristoph. Ach. 505, 506; Thuc. v. 23. + +[24] The procession must have been on the first day, for (1) in Dem. +Meid. § 10 it comes first in the list of proceedings, (2) it was not till +after the procession was over that the statue was placed in the theatre +to witness the dramatic and dithyrambic contests. + +[25] Paus. i. 29. 2, 38. 8; Philostrat. Vit. Soph. p. 549. + +[26] Menand. Fragm. 558 (Kock). + +[27] Plut. Cupid. Divit. 527 E. + +[28] C. I. A. ii. 420, 470, 471. + +[29] C. I. A. ii. 471, 741. + +[30] Dem. Meid. § 22; Athen. p. 534 C. + +[31] Xen. Hipparch. iii. 2. + +[32] Philostrat. Vit. Soph. p. 549. + +[33] C. I. A. ii. 470, 471. Hence Aristophanes in the Frogs selects +Dionysus as the most experienced of dramatic critics. Cf. also Aristoph. +Eq. 536 θεᾶσθαι λιπαρὸν παρὰ τῷ Διονύσῳ. Late writers (Philostrat. Vit. +Apoll. p. 161; Dio Chrys., orat. 31, p. 631 R) protest against shedding +human blood in gladiatorial combats in the very orchestra visited by the +god Dionysus. + +[34] In the lists of victors at the City Dionysia (C. I. A. ii. 971 a-e, +iv. 971 f-h) the contests enumerated are always the same, viz. παίδων, +ἀνδρῶν, κωμῳδῶν, τραγῳδῶν. Cp. Athen. Pol. c. 56 χορηγοὺς τραγῳδοῖς +καθίστησι τρεῖς ... ἔπειτα παραλαβὼν τοὺς χορηγοὺς τοὺς ἐνηνεγμένους ὑπὸ +τῶν φυλῶν εἰς Διονύσια ἀνδράσιν καὶ παισὶν καὶ κωμῳδοῖς κτλ. Dem. Meid. +§ 10 καὶ τοῖς ἐν ἄστει Διονυσίοις ἡ πομπὴ καὶ οἱ παῖδες ⟨καὶ οἱ ἄνδρες⟩ +καὶ ὁ κῶμος καὶ οἱ κωμῳδοὶ καὶ οἱ τραγῳδοί. (The words καὶ οἱ ἄνδρες have +obviously fallen out.) Cp. also C. I. A. ii. 553 (list of victors παισὶν +ἢ ἀνδράσιν). + +[35] Dem. Meid. § 156 loosely calls the choruses of men αὐληταὶ ἄνδρες, +and the author of the first Argument to the speech, misled by this, +states that there were αὐλητῶν χοροί at the City Dionysia. But other +passages in the speech, e.g. §§ 15, 17, show that the expression means +not that the men were flute-players, but that they sang dithyrambs +accompanied by the flute. See Wieseler, Das Satyrspiel, pp. 46-8. + +[36] [Marmor Par. ep. 46. For the archon v. Munro, Class. Rev. xv. p. +357. For choregia v. Capps, Introduction of Comedy to the City Dionysia, +p. 27 ff.] + +[37] Schol. Aeschin. Timarch. § 11 ἐξ ἔθους Ἀθηναῖοι [κατέστησαν] κατὰ +φυλὴν πεντήκοντα παίδων χορὸν ἢ ἀνδρῶν, ὥστε γενέσθαι δέκα χορούς, ἐπειδὴ +καὶ δέκα φυλαί. λέγονται δὲ οἱ διθύραμβοι χοροὶ κύκλιοι, καὶ χορὸς +κύκλιος. + +[38] Dem. Meid. § 13; Antiphon orat. vi. §§ 12, 13. + +[39] Lysias xxi. § 2; Dem. Meid. § 5 τῆς φυλῆς ἀδίκως ἀφαιρεθείσης τὸν +τρίποδα. The choregus of a dithyrambic chorus was said χορηγεῖν τῇ φυλῇ. +Plut. X orat. 835 B ἐχορήγησε κυκλίῳ χορῷ τῇ αὑτοῦ φυλῇ ἀγωνιζομένῃ +διθυράμβῳ: Isaeus v. § 36 οὗτος γὰρ τῇ μὲν φυλῇ εἰς Διονύσια χορηγήσας +τέταρτος ἐγένετο, τραγῳδοῖς δὲ καὶ πυρριχισταῖς ὕστατος. (Bentley’s +emendation, τέταρτος ἐγένετο τραγῳδοῖς, καὶ πυρριχισταῖς ὕστατος makes +Dicaeogenes fourth in the tragic contest, in which there were never more +than three competitors.) + +[40] In the time of Aristotle the choregi in comedy were appointed by the +tribes. But this was a late innovation, and produced no change in the +character of the contest. See chap. ii. § 2. + +[41] C. I. A. ii. 971 (printed in Appendix B). Ibid. ii. 1234 ff. + +[42] Marm. Par. ep. 43 ἀφ’ οὗ Θέσπις ὁ ποιητὴς [ἐφάνη], πρῶτος ὃς ἐδίδαξε +[δρ]ᾶ[μα ἐν ἄ]στ[ει, καὶ ἐ]τέθη ὁ [τ]ράγος [ἆθλον], ἔτη.... The date is +mutilated, but must have fallen between 542 and 520, the preceding and +subsequent epochs. Suidas s.v. Θέσπις (ἐδίδαξε δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς πρώτης καὶ ξʹ +ὀλυμπιάδος) doubtless refers to the same contest, which may therefore be +assigned to B.C. 536-5. + +[43] [Capps (The Introduction of Comedy into the City Dionysia) renders +it highly probable that choregia was not introduced until about B.C. 502.] + +[44] Suidas s.v. Χοιρίλος. The same lexicon, s.v. Πρατίνας, says that +Pratinas composed fifty plays, of which thirty-two were satyric: but +it is unsafe to draw inferences from this as to relative proportion of +satyric plays and tragedies in these early days, since the numbers may +refer merely to the plays which happened to be preserved in the time of +the grammarians. + +[45] Suidas s.v. Πρατίνας. + +[46] Arg. Aesch. Persae. + +[47] Arg. Aesch. Sept. c. Theb. + +[48] Arg. Aesch. Agam. + +[49] Args. Eur. Alcest., Med., Hippol. + +[50] Aelian Var. Hist. ii. 8; Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 67. + +[51] Athen. Pol. c. 56; C. I. A. ii. 972, 973, 975. + +[52] Cp. Diog. Laërt. iii. 56. Θρασύλλος δέ φησι καὶ κατὰ τὴν τραγικὴν +τετραλογίαν ἐκδοῦναι αὐτὸν (sc. τὸν Πλάτωνα) τοὺς διαλόγους, οἷον ἐκεῖνοι +τέτρασι δράμασιν ἠγωνίζοντο, Διονυσίοις, Ληναίοις, Παναθηναίοις, Χύτροις, +ὧν τὸ τέταρτον ἦν σατυρικόν· τὰ δὲ τέτταρα δράματα ἐκαλεῖτο τετραλογία. +Thrasyllus was a philosopher of the time of Tiberius. The passage οἷον +... τετραλογία is probably an explanatory interpolation by Diogenes +himself. The statement that the four plays of a tetralogy were performed +at four different festivals is absurd in itself, and abundantly disproved +by inscriptions and other evidence (e.g. Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 67). + +[53] Plut. Pericl. p. 154 E. + +[54] Plut. l.c.; Id. X orat. 839 D διδασκαλίας ἀστικὰς καθῆκεν ἓξ ... καὶ +ἑτέρας δύο Ληναϊκάς; Anthol. Pal. vii. 37 ἡ δ’ ἐνὶ χερσὶν | κούριμος, ἐκ +ποίης ἥδε διδασκαλίης; + +[55] That the word τετραλογία was applied only to a group of four plays +connected in subject is proved by the statement of Suidas (s.v. Σοφοκλῆς) +that Sophocles abandoned the practice of exhibiting ‘tetralogies’, +though we know that he exhibited four plays at a time; and also by the +application of the word by Greek writers to the Oresteia of Aeschylus +(Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 1155), the Pandionis of Philocles (Schol. +Aristoph. Av. 282), the Lycurgeia of Aeschylus (Schol. Aristoph. Thesm. +135), and the Lycurgeia of Polyphradmon (Arg. Aesch. Sept. c. Theb.). All +these were groups of plays on a single subject. + +[56] Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 1155 τετραλογίαν φέρουσι τὴν Ὀρεστείαν αἱ +Διδασκαλίαι (i.e. the Διδασκαλίαι of Aristotle). The other passages where +τετραλογία occurs in a dramatic sense are Diog. Laërt. iii. 56, ix. 45; +Schol. Plat. Apol. p. 330; Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 1155, where it is said +that the grammarians Aristarchus and Apollonius disregarded the satyric +plays and spoke only of trilogies; Schol. Av. 282, Thesm. 142; Arg. +Aesch. Sept. c. Theb. τριλογία is found only in Schol. Aristoph. Ran. +1155; Diog. Laërt. iii. 61; Suidas s.v. Νικόμαχος. + +[57] Aristoph. Thesm. 135, Ran. 1124. See, on these titles, The Tragic +Drama of the Greeks, p. 114. + +[58] [Donaldson, Theatre of the Greeks, p. 118, suggests possible +connexions; but they are highly conjectural.] + +[59] [Other critics, however, suppose that the final scene was added +in some later revision of the play, after Sophocles’ Antigone had been +written, or when it became customary to present single plays of Aeschylus +(see below, p. 74), which would often be shorter than those of other +poets, and might therefore be lengthened by the addition of a scene.] + +[60] Cp. Hor. Ars Poet. 225 ff. + +[61] Suidas s.v. Σοφοκλῆς· καὶ αὐτὸς ἦρξε τοῦ δρᾶμα πρὸς δρᾶμα +ἀγωνίζεσθαι, ἀλλὰ μὴ τετραλογίαν. The words seem to imply that he +exhibited only one play at each festival: but the didascalic records +show that this cannot have been the case. Probably, therefore, Suidas +has misunderstood and misquoted his authority, who meant to say that +Sophocles exhibited not single plays but groups of plays unconnected in +subject. The suggestion of Oehmichen (Philol. Wochenschr., 1887, p. 1058) +that after the reform of Sophocles each poet exhibited one of his plays +on each successive day of the competition, and that this is what Suidas +means, is rendered most improbable by the fact that tetralogies were +still occasionally written; and that Sophocles would have no power, as +poet, to make such a change in the arrangement of the festival. + +[62] Schol. Aristoph. Av. 282; Schol. Plat. Apol. p. 330 (Bekk.); Aelian +Var. Hist. ii. 30. + +[63] C. I. A., ii. 973 (quoted in Appendix B). + +[64] [If the inscription C. I. A. ii. 971 c recorded by Pittakis, +L’ancienne Athènes, p. 168, is reliable, an old tragedy was performed in +B.C. 387-386. The phrase used is παλαιὸν δρᾶμα παρεδίδαξαν οἱ τραγῳδοί: +but the interpretation of this fragment is full of difficulties, see +Wilhelm, Urkunden dramat. Aufführungen in Athen, p. 22 ff. The use of +the expression παρεδίδαξαν (cf. παραχορήγημα) seems to show that at this +date the performance of an old tragedy was exceptional; while in the +inscription recording the years 341, &c., it would seem to be treated as +a regular part of the festival.] + +[65] Suidas s.v. Θεοδέκτης; Steph. Byz. s.v. Φάσηλις. + +[66] Plut. X Orat. 839 D. + +[67] Aristot. Rhet. iii. 11. + +[68] See The Tragic Drama of the Greeks, p. 444 ff.: and (for the City +Dionysia in the second century A.D.) cp. C. I. A. iii. 78; Philostr. Vit. +Soph. p. 549; Paus. i. 29, ii. 38, 8. + +[69] Aristot. Poet. ch. v. καὶ γὰρ χορὸν κωμῳδῶν ὀψέ ποτε ὁ ἄρχων ἔδωκεν, +ἀλλ’ ἐθελονταὶ ἦσαν. + +[70] C. I. A. ii. 971 a (quoted, Appendix B) [B.C. 463 is the latest +possible date of the events referred to in this part of this inscription. +Capps (Introduction of Comedy into City Dionysia) with great probability +dates them 473-472; he fixes the date of the granting of a comic chorus +(whether at the Lenaea or City Dionysia is uncertain) by the archon +at 487, when, according to Suidas s.v. Χιωνίδης, Chionides began to +exhibit; and the date of the first choregia in tragedy at about 502. +This would justify sufficiently Aristotle’s ὀψέ ποτε. Suidas’ date for +Chionides’ first exhibition is not really inconsistent with the Dorian +tradition recorded by Aristotle that Epicharmus was πολλῷ πρότερος +Χιωνίδου καὶ Μάγνητος, since the generally recorded date of the former, +B.C. 488 onwards, is most probably a ‘floruit’ date, based on the time +of his first performances at Syracuse, not the date of the beginning of +his career at Megara Hyblaea, which may have been a good deal earlier. +Capps shows ground for believing that Aristotle and Suidas—the former +directly, the latter perhaps indirectly—obtained their knowledge from the +official records, and are therefore quite reliable. At the head of the +inscription, C. I. A. ii. 971 a, are the words πρῶ]τον κῶμοι ἦσαν τ[ῶν +..., which must originally have formed part of the general heading of +the whole inscription, whose earlier columns are lost. Capps conjectures +(with some reason) that it originally ran ἀπὸ (name of archon) ἐφ’ οὗ +πρῶτον κῶμοι ἦσαν τῶν ἐν ἄστει Διονυσίων οἵδε ἐνίκων. But κῶμοι cannot +mean ‘comedies’, as Köhler and Wilamowitz assumed when they dated the +beginning of choregia in comedy by this inscription. Cf. Wilhelm, +Urkunden dramatischer Aufführungen in Athen, pp. 11 ff, 241 ff.] + +[71] Args. Aristoph. Nubes, Pax, Aves. + +[72] Arg. Aristoph. Plutus (festival uncertain); Ath. Pol. c. 56 (City +Dionysia); C. I. A. ii. 972 (Lenaea), 975 (City Dionysia). [If C. I. G. +xiv. 1097 is rightly restored and interpreted by Wilhelm, l.c., p. 195 +ff., it would seem as if there were five competitors as early as B.C. 434 +at the Dionysia; this is very difficult to reconcile with the consistent +mention by the Arguments of three only.] + +[73] Arg. Aristoph. Vespae. [The passage, however, is almost certainly +corrupt, and most editors are now agreed that in its existing form, +according to which Philonides brought out both the Προάγων and the +Σφῆκες, it cannot stand; and that even if both plays can have been the +work of Aristophanes, they cannot both have been produced by Philonides. +For the various emendations, vide Kanngiesser, Über die alte komische +Bühne, p. 270; Petersen, Fleck. Jahrb. lxxxv. p. 662; Leo, Rhein. Mus. +xxxiii. p. 404; the introductions to Rogers and van Leeuwen’s editions of +the Wasps; and a brief summary in Excursus I of Starkie’s edition. It is +very doubtful whether there is good evidence for the practice alluded to, +as regards the fifth century B.C.] + +[74] C. I. A. ii. 972. [The inscription leaves no room for doubt here, +except for the remote possibility that there may have been two poets of +the name Diodorus. Capps, Amer. Journ. Archaeol., 1900, argues almost +conclusively that the inscription is to be dated 290-288, and not 353, +the date given by Mr. Haigh, and generally accepted until recently.] + +[75] C. I. A. ii. 972. [Mr. Haigh wrote 353, but see note on previous +page.] + +[76] C. I. A. ii. 975 (quoted, Appendix B). [If Capps is right in dating +the fragment 975 f between B.C. 308 and 290, the practice must have been +begun by that date; see Amer. Journ. Arch., 1900, p. 89 ff., but Wilhelm, +Urkunden dramat. Aufführungen in Athen, p. 68, disputes the date, and +with some reason. See also Wilhelm, ibid., p. 149. The practice is proved +for the early part of the second century by fragment a.] + +[77] [The evidence for this is a fragment of an inscription published by +Wilhelm, loc. cit., p. 27 ff., and connecting with C. I. A. ii. 971 h. +See Appendix B. The expression used παλαιὸν δρᾶμα παρεδίδαξαν οἱ κωμῳδοί +(cp. παραχορήγημα), when compared with the expressions used in 975 a, +&c., shows that the performance was exceptional, and the play is not +mentioned; cp. the parallel expressions in the case of tragedy, p. 19, +supra, n. 1.] + +[78] C. I. G. 1585, 1587, 2759; Athen. Mitth., 1894, pp. 96, 97; Ἐφημ. +Ἀρχαιολ., 1884, pp. 120, 124, 126; Rangabé, Antiq. Hellén., vol. ii. no. +965. + +[79] The fact that inscriptions (C. I. A. 971 a-e, iv. 971 f-h) +and the law of Evegorus, quoted Dem. Meid. § 10, all mention first chorus +of boys, then choruses of men, then comedy, then tragedy, proves nothing, +as there is nothing to show that the contests are being spoken of in +order of performance, rather than in order of relative importance. + +[80] Arist. Poet. ch. xxiv. suggests that an epic poem should be shorter +than the old epics, and about equal to that of the tragedies offered at +one hearing (τὸ πλῆθος τῶν τραγῳδιῶν τῶν εἰς μίαν ἀκρόασιν τιθεμένων). +A performance of four tragedies a day would give about 6,000 lines of +tragedy (including satyric drama), while the Iliad contains about 15,000 +lines, and the Odyssey about 12,000. + +[81] Aristoph. Av. 785 ff. οὐδέν ἐστ’ ἄμεινον οὐδ’ ἥδιον ἢ φῦσαι πτερά. +| αὐτίχ’ ὑμῶν τῶν θεατῶν εἴ τις ἦν ὑπόπτερος, | εἶτα πεινῶν τοῖς χοροῖσι +τῶν τραγῳδῶν ἤχθετο, | ἐκπτόμενος ἂν οὗτος ἠρίστησεν ἐλθὼν οἴκαδε, | κᾆτ’ +ἂν ἐμπλησθεὶς ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς αὖθις αὖ κατέπτετο. Müller (Griech. Bühn., p. 322) +and others take ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς to mean generally ‘to us in the theatre’. But +in that case there would be no point in the sentence. There is obviously +a contrast between ὑμεῖς, the spectators, and ἡμεῖς the comic chorus. +The same contrast is emphasized in the previous group of trochaics, vv. +753-68. Lipsius accepts the change of τραγῳδῶν to τρυγῳδῶν (‘the other +comic choruses’ as opposed to ἡμεῖς, the Birds), and infers that all the +comedies were performed in one day by themselves (Ber. der K. S. Ges. der +Wiss. zu Leipzig, philol.-histor. Classe, 1885, p. 417). But the change +is quite gratuitous and makes the whole passage feeble and obscure. + +[82] [See p. 69.] + +[83] [Either connected with ληνός ‘wine-press’ or λῆναι = βάκχαι, vid. +Appendix C.] + +[84] [See Appendix C for authorities and for a discussion of the site of +the Lenaeum and its relation to the temple of Dionysus ἐν Λίμναις.] + +[85] [See Appendix C.] + +[86] Bekk. Anecd. p. 235, 6; C. I. A. ii. 834 b, col. 2, where the +expenditure on the Lenaea is placed about the middle of the sixth +prytany, i.e. in Gamelion. [Nilsson, Studia de Dionysiis Atticis, pp. +1-37, confirms the date here given, after a very full discussion.] + +[87] Plat. Symp. 223 c; Theophrast. Char. 3. + +[88] Aristoph. Ach. 501 ff. + +[89] Dem. Meid. § 10 καὶ ἡ ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ πομπὴ καὶ οἱ τραγῳδοὶ καὶ οἱ +κωμῳδοί. That there were no dithyrambs at the Lenaea is proved by this +passage, and by C. I. A. ii. 553, which enumerates the festivals at which +dithyrambic choruses competed, viz. City Dionysia, Thargelia, Prometheia, +Hephaesteia. C. I. A. ii. 1367, recording a dithyrambic victory at the +Lenaea, is of comparatively late date. + +[90] Suidas s.v. τὰ ἐκ τῶν ἁμαξῶν σκώμματα. + +[91] C. I. A. ii. 972 (see Appendix B). + +[92] Hence in Diod. Sic. xv. 74 δεδιδαχότος Ληναίοις τραγῳδίαν (of +Dionysius’ victory in 367), the expression διδάσκειν τραγῳδίαν probably +means ‘to compete in the tragic contests’, and implies nothing as to the +number of plays presented. Cf. Plat. Symp. 173 A ὅτε τῇ πρώτῃ τραγῳδίᾳ +ἐνίκησεν Ἀγάθων, ‘won his first tragic victory’. + +[93] Athen. p. 217 A. + +[94] Diod. Sic. xv. 74; Plut. X Orat. 839 D; C. I. A. ii. 977 b, c (see +Appendix B). + +[95] [C. I. A. ii. 1289 shows that tragedy was still performed in B.C. +307-306. This is the last mention of it. (Capps, Amer. Journ. Arch., iv. +p. 76.)] + +[96] C. I. A. iii. 1160. + +[97] See above, p. 20, note 2. + +[98] [Capps (Introduction of Comedy into the City Dionysia, p. 25) shows +that whether the victory of Chionides recorded by Suidas was won at the +Dionysia or Lenaea, there is no reason for doubting the existence of +contests in 487 B.C., on the evidence of inscriptions. C. I. A. ii. 977 +d as it stands must have been preceded by another column of names of +victors, which would almost certainly take us back as far; and there was +room for the name of Chionides above that of Magnes in 977 i (Dionysian +victors) in a position which would imply an early date for his first +victory; cp. also Amer. Journ. Philol. xx. pp. 396, 397.] + +[99] Arg. to Acharn. + +[100] Args. to Acharn., Equit., Vesp., Ran. + +[101] See p. 21, note. + +[102] [If Capps is right, C. I. A. ii. 975 f proves that old comedies +were acted at the City Dionysia at a date between 308 and 290, but this +date is very uncertain; see p. 22, note. C. I. A. ii. 972, col. 1, which +Capps, followed by Wilhelm, dates soon after B.C. 290, does not show any +sign of the practice; it may have begun at the City Dionysia, and have +been afterwards extended to the Lenaea; but it is not easy to believe +this without confirmatory evidence; and the difficulty is avoided if +Capps’ date for 975 f is not accepted.] + +[103] [C. I. A. ii. 977 gives lists of tragic and comic poets and +actors. In the case of the comic poets and actors, some names (those of +Agathocles and Biottus) are known from 975 d to belong to the middle of +the second century; but it is not certain to what festival the part of +this inscription in which their names occur (fragm. m) belongs.] + +[104] Schol. Aristoph. Plut 954; Plut. Phoc. c. 30. + +[105] See The Tragic Drama of the Greeks, p. 128, note 4. + +[106] C. I. A. ii. 972, col. II. + +[107] Athen. p. 217 A; Plat. Symp. 173 A. + +[108] Diod. Sic. xv. 74. + +[109] The Acharnians, Equites, Vespae, and Ranae at the Lenaea; the +Nubes, Pax, and Aves, at the City Dionysia. + +[110] C. I. A. ii. 977 d, i. + +[111] [See Capps, Amer. Journ. Philol. xx. p. 396, who remarks that +Aristophanes (Equit. 517 ff.) referring to the great poets of the past, +omits Teleclides and Hermippus, who had been very successful at the +Lenaea, and was especially disappointed at failing to obtain a ‘City +victory’ with the Nubes in 423, after his two Lenaean victories. The +reason suggested, however, for the omission of these two poets can hardly +be correct, as Cratinus, who is mentioned, was also especially successful +at the Lenaea.] + +[112] [Nilsson (Studia de Dionysiis Atticis, p. 108) shows that the +festival was probably not celebrated in all the demes at precisely the +same time, though it always took place after the autumn sowing, being +in fact in origin a ceremony designed to secure the fertility of the +new-sown seed. Cf. Plat. Rep. v. p. 475 D ὥσπερ δὲ ἀπομεμισθωκότες τὰ ὦτα +ἐπακοῦσαι πάντων χορῶν περιθέουσι τοῖς Διονυσίοις οὔτε τῶν κατὰ πόλεις +οὔτε τῶν κατὰ κώμας ἀπολειπόμενοι. There must also have been time for the +troupes of actors to move from one place to another.] + +[113] See Aristoph. Ach. 69, 241 ff. Also Plut. de Cup. div. p. 527 D; +id. Non suav. viv. sec. Epic. p. 1098 B; Heraclitus fr. 127 Byw. + +[114] Dem. Meid. § 10; C. I. A. ii. 164, 467, 468, 589, 741; iv. 2, 834 +b; Aelian Var. Hist. ii. 13. + +[115] Dem. de Cor. § 180; Aeschin. Timarch. § 157. + +[116] C. I. A. iv. 574 b, c, g. + +[117] Ibid. ii. 469, 470, 594. + +[118] C. I. A. iv. 1282 b, 1285 b. + +[119] Ibid. ii. 585. + +[120] Isaeus viii. § 15. We also hear of such celebrations at Brauron +(Ar. Pax 874, with Schol.; Schol. in Dem. Conon. § 35; Suidas s.v. +Βραύρων); and at Myrrhinus (C. I. A. ii. 575, 578). + +[121] Dörpfeld u. Reisch, Griech. Theat. p. 109 ff. + +[122] In addition to the instance at the Peiraeeus recorded above, the +only known example is at Salamis, C. I. A. ii. 470 Διονυσίων τῶν ἐν +Σαλαμῖνι τραγῳδῶν τ[ῷ καινῷ ἀγ]ῶνι, if the restoration be correct. + +[123] Dem. de Cor. § 262. + +[124] [It must be admitted that it is not easy to reconcile this with +Aristot. Poet. ix, where it is said that even the well-known plays or +legends are well known only to few, ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ γνώριμα ὀλίγοις γνώριμά +ἐστιν, ἀλλ’ ὅμως εὐφραίνει πάντας. Aristotle may be speaking particularly +of his own day, when probably few poets or plays had the celebrity +enjoyed by the plays of the three great tragedians of the previous +century.] + +[125] [Vid. J. E. Harrison, Proleg. to the Study of Greek Religion, c. i.] + +[126] This seems to be the meaning of Plut. x orat. 841 F εἰσήνεγκε +δὲ καὶ νόμους (sc. Lycurgus), τὸν περὶ τῶν κωμῳδῶν ἀγῶνα τοῖς +Χύτροις ἐπιτελεῖν ἐφάμιλλον ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, καὶ τὸν νικήσαντα εἰς ἄστυ +καταλέγεσθαι, πρότερον οὐκ ἐξόν, ἀναλαμβάνων τὸν ἀγῶνα ἐκλελοιπότα. The +contest must be the same as the ἀγῶνες Χύτρινοι quoted from Philochorus +by Schol. ad Aristoph. Ran. 220. [See Nilsson, Studia de Dionysiis +Atticis, p. 57.] + +[127] Philostrat. Vit Apoll. p. 158. + +[128] Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 445; Suidas s.v. ἐν πέντε κριτῶν γόνασι. + +[129] There is no consecutive account in any ancient writer of the mode +of selecting the judges and of voting. Our knowledge of the subject +has to be pieced together from the three following passages: (1) Plut. +Cim. p. 483 E ἔθεντο δ’ εἰς μνήμην αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν τῶν τραγῳδῶν κρίσιν +ὀνομαστὴν γενομένην. πρώτην γὰρ διδασκαλίαν τοῦ Σοφοκλέους ἔτι νέου +καθέντος, Ἀψεφίων ὁ ἄρχων, φιλονεικίας οὔσης καὶ παρατάξεως τῶν θεατῶν, +κριτὰς μὲν οὐκ ἐκλήρωσε τοῦ ἀγῶνος, ὡς δὲ Κίμων μετὰ τῶν συστρατήγων +προελθὼν εἰς τὸ θέατρον ἐποιήσατο τῷ θεῷ τὰς νενομισμένας σπονδάς, οὐκ +ἀφῆκεν αὐτοὺς ἀπελθεῖν, ἀλλ’ ὁρκώσας ἠνάγκασε καθίσαι καὶ κρῖναι δέκα +ὄντας, ἀπὸ φυλῆς μιᾶς ἕκαστον. (2) Isocrat. xvii. § 43 Πυθόδωρον γὰρ τὸν +σκηνίτην καλούμενον, ὃς ὑπὲρ Πασίωνος ἅπαντα καὶ λέγει καὶ πράττει, τίς +οὐκ οἶδεν ὑμῶν πέρυσιν ἀνοίξαντα τὰς ὑδρίας καὶ τοὺς κριτὰς ἐξελόντα +τοὺς ὑπὸ τῆς βουλῆς εἰσβληθέντας; καίτοι ὅστις μικρῶν ἕνεκα καὶ περὶ τοῦ +σώματος κινδυνεύων ταύτας ὑπανοίγειν ἐτόλμησεν, αἳ σεσημασμέναι μὲν ἦσαν +ὑπὸ τῶν πρυτάνεων, κατεσφραγισμέναι δ’ ὑπὸ τῶν χορηγῶν, ἐφυλάττοντο δ’ +ὑπὸ τῶν ταμιῶν, ἔκειντο δ’ ἐν ἀκροπόλει, τί δεῖ θαυμάζειν εἰ κτλ. (3) +Lysias iv. § 3 ἐβουλόμην δ’ ἂν μὴ ἀπολαχεῖν αὐτὸν κριτὴν Διονυσίοις, ἵν’ +ὑμῖν φανερὸς ἐγένετο ἐμοὶ διηλλαγμένος, κρίνας τὴν ἐμὴν φυλὴν νικᾶν. +νῦν δὲ ἔγραψε μὲν ταῦτα εἰς τὸ γραμματεῖον, ἀπέλαχε δέ. καὶ ὅτι ἀληθῆ +ταῦτα λέγω Φιλῖνος καὶ Διοκλῆς ἴσασιν. ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἔστ’ αὐτοῖς μαρτυρῆσαι +μὴ διομοσαμένοις περὶ τῆς αἰτίας ἧς ἐγὼ φεύγω, ἐπεὶ σαφῶς ἔγνωτ’ ἂν ὅτι +ἡμεῖς ἦμεν αὐτὸν οἱ κριτὴν ἐμβαλόντες, καὶ ἡμῶν εἵνεκα ἐκαθέζετο. The +first of these passages refers to a dramatic contest, the third to a +dithyrambic one. It is uncertain to which the second refers. But there is +no reason to suppose (with Oehmichen, Bühnenwesen, p. 206) that the mode +of selecting the judges was different in the dramatic and the dithyrambic +contests. That there were ten urns for the names on the preliminary list +of judges is inferred from the plural ὑδρίαι in Isocrates. That a second +list of judges was appointed by lot from the larger list _before_ the +commencement of each contest, and that this second list consisted of +ten persons, one from each of the ten tribes, seems to be proved by the +words of Plutarch, κριτὰς μὲν οὐκ ἐκλήρωσε τοῦ ἀγῶνος ... ἀπὸ φυλῆς μιᾶς +ἕκαστον. That there was another selection of judges by lot _after_ the +contest, and that the number of judges who actually decided the result +was smaller than the number of those who sat through the performance and +voted, is proved by two expressions in the above passages: (1) ἔγραψε μὲν +ταῦτα εἰς τὸ γραμματεῖον, ἀπέλαχε δέ, i.e. he voted in my favour, but his +vote was not drawn; (2) ἡμῶν εἵνεκα ἐκαθέζετο. Καθίζειν and καθέζεσθαι +were the regular words used of a judge at a contest. It is clear +therefore that the person here referred to sat through the performance as +a judge, but that after the performance was over his vote was not drawn +by lot. + +The above conclusions are those of Petersen (Preisrichter der grossen +Dionysien). Mommsen (Bursian’s Jahresbericht, lii. pp. 354-8) raises some +objections. He suggests (1) that the plural ὑδρίαι is merely rhetorical, +and that there was only one urn for all the names, (2) that the selection +of a second list of judges _before_ the contest is not mentioned by +Lysias, and was probably a fiction of Plutarch’s. It may be replied that +Lysias had no occasion to refer to this preliminary ballot. He was not +giving an account of the entire system of judging, and therefore only +mentioned the points which enforced his argument. Still, it must be +confessed that the evidence about the judges is very fragmentary, and +that Petersen’s scheme depends largely on conjecture. + +[130] Dem. Meid. § 17 ὀμνύουσι παρεστηκὼς τοῖς κριταῖς. Aristoph. Eccles. +1163 μὴ ’πιορκεῖν, ἀλλὰ κρίνειν τοὺς χοροὺς ὀρθῶς ἀεί. + +[131] Special seats were assigned to the judges at Alexandria, and no +doubt the Attic custom was followed there: cp. Vitruv. vii. praef. § 5 +cum secretae sedes iudicibus essent distributae. + +[132] Aelian Var. Hist. ii. 13 καὶ προσέταττον τοῖς κριταῖς ἄνωθεν +Ἀριστοφάνην ἀλλὰ μὴ ἄλλον γράφειν. Lysias iv. § 3 ἔγραψε μὲν ταῦτα ἐς τὸ +γραμματεῖον. + +[133] This follows from Lysias iv. § 3 ἐβουλόμην δ’ ἂν μὴ ἀπολαχεῖν αὐτὸν +κριτὴν Διονυσίοις, ἵν’ ὑμῖν φανερὸς ἐγένετο ἐμοὶ διηλλαγμένος, κρίνας τὴν +ἐμὴν φυλὴν νικᾶν. νῦν δὲ ἔγραψε μὲν ταῦτα εἰς τὸ γραμματεῖον, ἀπέλαχε δέ. + +[134] Aristoph. Aves 445-7 ΧΟ. ὄμνυμ’ ἐπὶ τούτοις, πᾶσι νικᾶν τοῖς +κριταῖς | καὶ τοῖς θεαταῖς πᾶσιν. ΠΕ. ἔσται ταυταγί. | ΧΟ. εἰ δὲ +παραβαίην, ἑνὶ κριτῇ νικᾶν μόνον. + +[135] Vita Aeschyli; Suidas s.v. Αἰσχύλος. + +[136] See above, p. 28. + +[137] The number of his plays is given as 123 by Suidas, and as 104 or +130 in the Life. + +[138] Vita Eur. + +[139] Args. to Eur. Alcestis and Medea. + +[140] Aelian Var. Hist. ii. 8; Suidas s.v. Νικόμαχος. + +[141] Arg. to Soph. Oed. Tyr. + +[142] Lysias iv. § 3. + +[143] Dem. Meid. §§ 5, 17, 65. + +[144] Andocid. Alcibiad. § 20 ἀλλὰ τῶν κριτῶν οἱ μὲν φοβούμενοι οἱ δὲ +χαριζόμενοι νικᾶν ἔκριναν αὐτόν. + +[145] Aul. Gell. N. A. 17. 4. + +[146] Plut. Demosth. 859 D εὐημερῶν δὲ καὶ κατέχων τὸ θέατρον ἐνδείᾳ +παρασκευῆς καὶ χορηγίας κρατεῖσθαι. + +[147] Id. Nicias, 524 D. + +[148] Xen. Memor. iii. 4. 3. + +[149] Isaeus v. § 36. + +[150] Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 232. + +[151] Aelian Var. Hist. ii. 13. + +[152] Plato, Legg. 700 C-701 A. 659 A-C. + +[153] [Cp. Butcher, Harvard Lectures, p. 173 ff.] + +[154] Alciphron ii. 3; Plut. An seni &c. p. 785 B; Athen. p. 217 A +στεφανοῦται Ληναίοις; Aristid. vol. ii. p. 2 (Dindf.) τοῦτον στεφανοῦν +καὶ πρῶτον ἀναγορεύειν. + +[155] Dem. Meid. § 5; Lysias xxi. § 2; Schol. Aeschin. Timarch. § 11; +Isaeus vii. § 40; 2nd Arg. to Dem. Meid. p. 510. The monuments of +Lysicrates and Thrasyllus, which were surmounted with tripods (Stuart and +Revett, Antiquities of Athens, vol. i. chap. iv. pt. 3, vol. ii. p. 31), +were in honour of victories with dithyrambic choruses; cp. C. I. A. ii. +1242, 1247. + +[156] Marmor Par. epp. 39, 43. + +[157] Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 367 τὸν μισθὸν τῶν κωμῳδῶν ἐμείωσαν; Eccles. +102 τὸν μισθὸν τῶν ποιητῶν συνέτεμε; Hesych. s.v. μισθός· τὸ ἔπαθλον τῶν +κωμικῶν ... ἔμμισθοι δὲ πέντε ἦσαν. As the competitors in comedy were +five, this last passage proves that _all_ the competing poets received a +reward of money. + +[158] Plut. X orat. 842 A. + +[159] Aristoph. Ran. 367, and Schol. ad loc. + +[160] Arg. Aristoph. Nub. + +[161] Vit. Soph.; Aristid. vol. ii. p. 344 (Dindf.). + +[162] C. I. A. ii. 971 a-e, iv. 971 f-h. + +[163] Arg. Aristoph. Vesp. ἐνίκα πρῶτος Φιλωνίδης. Arg. Nub. ὅτε Κρατῖνος +μὲν ἐνίκα Πυτίνῃ, Ἀμειψίας δὲ Κόννῳ. Arg. Pax ἐνίκησε δὲ τῷ δράματι ὁ +ποιητὴς ... δεύτερος Ἀριστοφάνης Εἰρήνῃ. + +[164] C. I. A. iv. 971 f. + +[165] C. I. A. ii. 971 a-e, iv. 971 f-h. Hence Rose’s ingenious +emendation of the conclusion to the first Arg. to the Pax—τὸ δὲ δρᾶμα +ὑπεκρίνατο Ἀπολλόδωρος, ἡνίκα ἑρμῆν λοιοκρότης [ἐνίκα Ἕρμων ὁ ὑποκριτής +Rose]—must be regarded as very doubtful, as the Pax was produced at the +City Dionysia. + +[166] C. I. A. ii. 975 a-e: see also note 6 below. + +[167] C. I. A. ii. 972, col. ii. The mention of the victorious actor’s +name shows that the comic list in this inscription, like the tragic, must +refer to the Lenaea. + +[168] [C. I. A. ii. 972, col. i, as dated by Capps (Amer. Journ. Arch. +xx. p. 74 ff.), who shows almost conclusive grounds for substituting this +date for the date 354 hitherto generally accepted, and is followed by +Wilhelm.] + +[169] [Circ. B.C. 330, according to Capps, l.c. p. 84. The date depends +upon the conjectural restoration of some fragments of C. I. A. ii. +977, especially fragment u. If Wilhelm’s restoration of C. I. A. ii. +1289 is correct (Urkunden dramat. Aufführungen in Athen, pp. 149, 209 +ff.) there is evidence of contests of comic actors in B.C. 307-6; and +the inscription 974 c, elucidated by Wilhelm, l.c., p. 43, shows that +there were contests in 313-312; but it is not certain to which festival +this inscription belongs. Wilhelm, l.c., p. 253, even infers, from a +restoration of C. I. A. ii. 977 l (i′ according to his numbering), that +these contests existed as early as the beginning of the fourth or end +of the fifth century: the restoration is highly probable, and if it is +correct, contests of comic actors can be traced back nearly as far as +contests of tragic actors; but again it is uncertain to which festival +the inscription refers, and it is going too far to use the combined +evidence of this inscription, and the Arg. to the Pax, as emended, to +prove the existence of contests at the City Dionysia in 421 B.C.] + +[170] C. I. A. ii. 973. + +[171] Dem. Fals. Leg. § 246. + +[172] C. I. A. ii. 975 b, 972. + +[173] Diod. Sic. xiii. 97. + +[174] For the City Dionysia see above, pp. 18 and 24. For the Lenaea +there is no evidence, but the practice was probably much the same. See p. +26. + +[175] Alciphron iii. 48 κακὸς κακῶς ἀπόλοιτο καὶ ἄφωνος εἴη Λικύμνιος +ὁ τῆς τραγῳδίας ὑποκριτής. ὡς γὰρ ἐνίκα τοὺς ἀντιτέχνους Κριτίαν τὸν +Κλεωναῖον καὶ Ἵππασον τὸν Ἀμβρακιώτην τοὺς Αἰσχύλου Προπομποὺς κ.τ.λ. +Athen. p. 584 D Ἀνδρονίκου δὲ τοῦ τραγῳδοῦ ἀπ’ ἀγῶνός τινος, ἐν ᾧ τοὺς +Ἐπιγόνους εὐημερήκει, πίνειν μέλλοντος παρ’ αὐτῇ κτλ. + +[176] See above, p. 31. + +[177] Theophrast. Char. 22 ταινία ξυλίνη. + +[178] Lysias xxi. § 4 κωμῳδοῖς χορηγῶν Κηφισοδώρῳ ἐνίκων, καὶ ἀνήλωσα σὺν +τῇ τῆς σκευῆς ἀναθέσει ἑκκαίδεκα μνᾶς. + +[179] Plut. Themist. 114 C πίνακα τῆς νίκης ἀνέθηκε. Aristot. Pol. viii. +6 ἐκ τοῦ πίνακος ὃν ἀνέθηκε Θράσιππος. + +[180] C. I. A. ii. 1289; Bull. Corr. Hell. iii. pl. 5. + +[181] Reisch, Griechische Weihgeschenke, p. 118 ff. + +[182] Plut. Themist. 114 C. Cp. C. I. A. ii. 1280, 1285 (a metrical +inscription), 1289, iv. 1280 b, 1282 b, 1285 b, &c. + +[183] C. I. A. ii. 971 a-e, iv. 971 f-h. See Appendix B. + +[184] C. I. A. ii. 972, 973, 975. See Appendix B. + +[185] C. I. A. ii. 977, iv. 977. + +[186] Diod. Sic. xiii. 103; Suidas s.v. Κρατῖνος. + +[187] Diog. Laërt. v. 1. 26. A complete list of the quotations from +Aristotle’s Διδασκαλίαι is given in Bekker’s Aristotle, vol. v, p. 1572. + +[188] See pp. 13 (note 2), 61. + +[189] Suidas s.v. Καλλίμαχος; Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 552. + +[190] Etym. Mag. s.v. πίναξ. + +[191] Trendelenburg, Gramm. Graec. de Arte Tragica Iudiciorum Reliquiae, +p. 3 foll. + +[192] C. I. A. iv. 971 f. See above, p. 20, note 3. [It is not at all +improbable that the extant inscriptions which have been described in +this section were to a great extent based on the work of Aristotle +himself, this work being itself based on earlier records now lost. It +would only be natural that the theatre officials would take advantage of +so important a compilation as the Διδασκαλίαι and Νῖκαι Διονυσιακαί of +Aristotle, and might well have extracts from it engraved on stone in the +theatre. The fact that the last record in C. I. A. ii. 971 belongs to the +year 328 B.C. has also led some writers to conjecture that this whole +inscription represents the work of Aristotle. This view is confirmed +by the fact that Aristotle, with Callisthenes, prepared a record of +Pythian victors for the temple of Delphi, which was engraved on stone +at the public cost, B.C. 331. (Homolle, Bull. de Corr. Hell. xxii. 261, +631; Bourguet, ibid. xxiv. 504; Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscr. Gr. 915.) +Cp. Reisch in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl., Art. Didaskaliai; Wilhelm, +Urkunden dramatischer Aufführungen in Athen, pp. 13-15. The latter work +gives a very complete account of the extant inscriptions.] + +[193] Ath. Pol. cc. 56, 57. The archons superintended the various +contests themselves, but were assisted by curators in the organization of +the processions. These ἐπιμεληταὶ τῆς πομπῆς were ten in number at the +City Dionysia. Until 352 they were elected by the people from the general +mass of the citizens, and paid the expenses of the procession themselves. +After 352 they were chosen by lot, one from each tribe, and received +100 minae from the state to cover expenses. In the third century the +system of election was reintroduced. The curators at the Lenaea were also +curators of the Eleusinian mysteries (ἐπιμεληταὶ τῶν μυστηρίων), four in +number, and elected by the state, two from the people generally, one each +from the Κήρυκες and Εὐμολπίδαι. See Sandys’ notes ad loc. + +[194] Suidas s.v. χορὸν δίδωμι; Athen. p. 638 F; Cratinus fr. 15 (Kock); +cf. Aristot. Poet. c. v, Ath. Pol. l.c. + +[195] Cratinus l.c. + +[196] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 510, 530. + +[197] Suidas s.v. Αἰσχύλος; Marm. Par. ep. 56; Vita I Eurip. + +[198] Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 504; Arg. Aristoph. Equit.; cf. Suidas s.v. +Εὔπολις. [The remarkable didascalic inscription (974 c) printed by +Wilhelm, Urkunden dramat. Aufführungen in Athen, p. 45, and reproduced in +Appendix B, notices of a certain Ameinias (probably), who won the third +place with his play, that ἔφηβος ὢν ἐνεμήθη. Wilhelm shows that this +use of νέμειν and its cognates, to signify permission to compete, was a +technical one, and quotes conclusive parallels.] + +[199] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 531; Anon. de Com. (Kaibel Com. Fr. p. 8); +Suidas s.v. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος; Arg. Aristoph. Acharn. + +[200] Aristoph. Equit. 512-44; cf. Nub. 528-31. + +[201] Arg. Aristoph. Plutus; Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 73. + +[202] Suidas s.v. Ἀρκάδας μιμούμενοι. + +[203] Args. Aristoph. Av., Lysist., Vesp., Ran. + +[204] Athen. p. 216 D; Vit. Aristoph. + +[205] Plut. X orat. 839 D. + +[206] Aristoph. Equit. 512, 513. + +[207] Id. Vesp. 1016-22. + +[208] Arg. ii to Dem. Meid. + +[209] Athen. Pol. c. 56. + +[210] Ibid. + +[211] C. I. A. ii. 971 d, iv. 971 h. + +[212] Lysias xxi. §§ 1-5; Aeschin. Timarch. §§ 11, 12; Harpocrat. s.v. +ὅτι νόμος. + +[213] Lysias l.c. + +[214] In the time of Demosthenes the tribe Pandionis was for three years +unable to supply a dithyrambic choregus. Dem. Meid. § 13. + +[215] Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 406, who suggests that the system was also +extended to the Lenaea. But this is disproved by Lysias xxi. § 4, where +the defendant says he was choregus (not synchoregus) to a comic chorus in +B.C. 402. The synchoregia cannot, therefore, have been applied to both +festivals. + +[216] C. I. A. ii. 971 c (tragic choregus at City Dionysia for 387) [but +the interpretation of this fragment is very difficult]. Tragic synchoregi +occur twice in inscriptions at the beginning of the fourth century (C. +I. A. ii. 1280, iv. 1280 b); and are mentioned by Isaeus v. § 36 (B.C. +389) and Lysias xix., § 29 (B.C. 394-389); but as the festival is not +mentioned by either author, it may have been the Lenaea, and so no +inference can be drawn as to the discontinuance of the synchoregia. In C. +I. A. iv. 971 h we find a comic choregus in 329; in C. I. A. iv. 1280 b +(beginning of fourth century) and ii. 1280 b (middle of fourth century) +we find comic synchoregi, but as the latter inscription was found at a +distance from Athens, it may refer to the Rural Dionysia, at which joint +choregi were sometimes appointed; e.g. C. I. A. iv. 1282 b mentions three +tragic choregi in partnership at Icaria. + +[217] The statement of Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 406, that soon after the +institution of synchoregi the choregia as a whole was abolished by +Cinesias is disproved by Ath. Pol. c. 56, which shows that choregi were a +regular institution in the latter half of the fourth century. Capps (Am. +J. Arch. 1895, p. 316) conjectures that the scholiast’s error arose from +his misunderstanding of the epithet χοροκτόνος, applied to Cinesias as a +bad poet, not as a legislator against choruses. + +[218] There were still choregi in 319 (C. I. A. ii. 1246, 1247). But +Nicanor was appointed Agonothetes immediately after the death of +Antipater (Plut. Phoc. 31), who died in 319. + +[219] C. I. A. ii. 302, 307, 314, 331, 379. + +[220] C. I. A. ii. 314, καὶ εἰς ταῦτα πάντα ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἀναλώσας πολλὰ +χρήματα. This phrase, however, does not imply that he paid the whole +of the expenses; and the formula ὁ δῆμος ἐχορήγει, constantly found in +agonothetic inscriptions, seems to show that the people bore a part [e.g. +C. I. A. ii. 1289, quoted App. B]. + +[221] C. I. A. iii. 78 (Agonothetes and choregus together); ibid. 79, +83, 84 (choregi alone); ibid. 1, 10, 121, 457, 613, 721, 810, 1091 +(Agonothetes alone). + +[222] Demosth. Meid. §§ 13, 14; 2nd Arg. to Meidias, p. 510. + +[223] C. I. A. ii. 1246 Νικίας Νικοδήμου Ξυπεταίων ἀνέθηκε νικήσας +χορηγῶν Κεκροπίδι παίδων· Πανταλέων Σικυώνιος ηὔλει· ᾆσμα Ἐλπήνωρ +Τιμοθέου· Νέαιχμος ἦρχεν. In this case the dithyramb performed was the +Elpenor of the celebrated poet Timotheus. When old dithyrambs were +performed, and no poet was necessary, a professional trainer was hired to +look after the chorus. Such was the διδάσκαλος mentioned by Demosthenes +(Meid. § 17). + +[224] Antiphon, orat. vi. § 11 ἐπειδὴ χορηγὸς κατεστάθην εἰς Θαργήλια +καὶ ἔλαχον Παντακλέα διδάσκαλον κτλ. Pantacles was a poet, and not a +mere trainer of choruses, like the διδάσκαλος hired by Demosthenes. This +is proved by a passage in Etym. Mag. v. διδάσκαλος· ἰδίως διδασκάλους +λέγουσιν οἱ Ἀττικοὶ τοὺς ποιητὰς τῶν διθυράμβων ἢ τῶν κωμῳδιῶν ἢ τῶν +τραγῳδιῶν. Ἀντίφων ἐν τῷ περὶ τοῦ χορευτοῦ· ἔλαχόν, φησι, Παντακλέα +διδάσκαλον· ὅτι γὰρ ὁ Παντακλῆς ποιητής, δεδήλωκεν Ἀριστοτέλης ἐν ταῖς +Διδασκαλίαις. When there was a poet, a professional trainer was not +usually required. The poet undertook the training of the chorus. + +[225] Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1. + +[226] Vita Aesch. + +[227] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 1267. + +[228] Vita Soph. + +[229] Vita Eur. + +[230] Dem. Fals. Leg. §§ 10, 246; de Cor. § 262. + +[231] C. I. A. ii. 972. + +[232] Suidas s.v. νεμήσεις ὑποκριτῶν· οἱ ποιηταὶ ἐλάμβανον τρεῖς +ὑποκριτὰς κλήρῳ νεμηθέντας, ὑποκρινομένους (? ὑποκρινουμένους) τὰ +δράματα· ὧν ὁ νικήσας εἰς τοὐπιὸν ἄκριτος παραλαμβάνεται. Obviously ὁ +νικήσας denotes, not the victorious poet, nor yet the actor who acted +for him, but the actor who won the prize for acting. Τοὐπιόν apparently +means ‘the next festival’. The victorious actor was allowed to act at +the next festival as a matter of course. The ‘three actors’ are the +three protagonists required at each tragic contest, and not the three +actors required by each poet. This is proved by the words ὧν ὁ νικήσας, +which imply that the three actors mentioned all took part in the actors’ +contest. But the actors’ contest was limited to the protagonists; the +subordinate actors had nothing to do with it. See above, p. 42. + +[233] Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1. + +[234] C. I. A. ii. 973. + +[235] Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 534; Vita Aristoph. (Dindf. Prolegom. +de Comoed. p. 36). The commentator, misunderstanding the expression +that certain plays of Aristophanes were brought out by Philonides and +Callistratus (ἐδιδάχθη διὰ Φιλωνίδου κτλ.), concluded that these persons +were actors. + +[236] C. I. A. ii. 972, 975 c and d. + +[237] Xen. Hiero ix. 4, Resp. Athen. i. 13. The training-room was called +διδασκαλεῖον (Antiphon orat. vi. § 11), or χορηγεῖον (Bekk. Anecd. p. 72, +17; Pollux iv. 106, ix. 42). + +[238] Antiphon orat. vi. §§ 11-13; Pollux iv. 106. The agent was called +χορολέκτης. + +[239] Aristot. Pol. iii. 3. + +[240] Antiphon l.c. + +[241] Plutarch Glor. Athen. 349 A; Suidas s.v. φαρυγγίνδην· ὡς +ἀριστίνδην· σκώπτοντες γὰρ τὴν γαστριμαργίαν τῶν χορευτῶν Ἀττικοὶ οὕτω +λέγουσι. + +[242] Suidas s.v. διδάσκαλος; Aristoph. Ran. 1026 εἶτα διδάξας Πέρσας +κτλ.; Anthol. Pal. vii. 37 (of a mask of Antigone or Electra) ἐκ ποίης +ἥδε διδασκαλίης; Plut. Pericles 154 E ἀλλ’ Ἴωνα μὲν ὥσπερ τραγικὴν +διδασκαλίαν ἀξιοῦντα τὴν ἀρετὴν ἔχειν τι πάντως καὶ σατυρικὸν μέρος ἐῶμεν. + +[243] Athen. p. 22 A. + +[244] Athen. p. 21 C; Vit. Aeschyli; Philostrat. Vit. Apoll. p. 244. + +[245] Eustath. Odyss. p. 1553. + +[246] Plut. De Audiendo, 46 B. + +[247] Photius v. ὑποδιδάσκαλος; Plat. Ion p. 536 A. + +[248] Thus the trainer hired by Demosthenes for his chorus is called +διδάσκαλος, Dem. Meid. § 17. + +[249] Dem. Meid. §§ 58, 59. + +[250] Xen. Mem. iii. 4. 3. + +[251] Xen. Resp. Athen. i. 13 χορηγοῦσι μὲν οἱ πλούσιοι, χορηγεῖται δὲ ὁ +δῆμος ... ἀξιοῖ οὖν ἀργύριον λαμβάνειν ὁ δῆμος καὶ ᾄδων καὶ τρέχων καὶ +ὀρχούμενος ... ἵνα αὐτός τε ἔχῃ καὶ οἱ πλούσιοι πενέστεροι γίγνωνται. +First Arg. to Dem. Meid., p. 509 χορηγὸς ... ὁ τὰ ἀναλώματα παρέχων τὰ +περὶ τὸν χορόν. Plut. Glor. Athen. 349 B. The statement of the Scholiast +on Dionysius Thrax (Bekk. Anecd. p. 746), that every comic and tragic +poet was supplied with a chorus ‘supported by the state’, appears to be +merely a loose way of saying that the dramatic choruses were provided by +choregi appointed by the state. The author of the 2nd Arg. to the Meidias +says that the choregus ‘received sums of money for the support of the +chorus’. But his authority is of the weakest description. He is quite +mistaken as to the Dionysiac festivals, imagining that the Great Dionysia +was a triennial affair, as opposed to the Small or annual celebration. +Hence his testimony is of no value in the face of other authorities. + +[252] The name of the flute-player is inserted in all dithyrambic records +except the earliest, but never in the dramatic records. This seems to +show that their status was different, and that the dramatic flute-player +was not appointed officially. + +[253] Plut. Phocion p. 750 C. + +[254] The actors were assigned by the state to the poets, and not to the +choregi: hence it is quite clear that in later times the choregi did not +pay for them. See Suidas s.v. νεμήσεις ὑποκριτῶν. + +[255] Antiphanes apud Athen. p. 103 E; Dem. Meid. § 16. + +[256] Aristot. Eth. Nic. iv. 6. Pollux vii. 78 τοὺς δὲ τὰς ἐσθῆτας +ἀπομισθοῦντας τοῖς χορηγοῖς οἱ μὲν νέοι ἱματιομίσθας ἐκάλουν, οἱ δὲ +παλαιοὶ ἱματιομισθωτάς. + +[257] Lysias xxi. §§ 1-5, xix. §§ 29, 42; Dem. Meid. § 156. + +[258] Aristoph. Eccles. 307; Böckh, Public Economy of Athens, i. p. 157 +(Engl. transl.). + +[259] Demosth. Philipp. i. § 35. + +[260] Xen. Hiero ix. 4 καὶ γὰρ ὅταν χοροὺς ἡμῖν βουλώμεθα ἀγωνίζεσθαι, +ἆθλα μὲν ὁ ἄρχων προτίθησιν, ἀθροίζειν δὲ αὐτοὺς προστέτακται χορηγοῖς +καὶ ἄλλοις διδάσκειν, καὶ ἀνάγκην προστιθέναι τοῖς ἐνδεῶς τι ποιοῦσιν. + +[261] Dem. Meid. § 61. + +[262] Plutarch Nicias, p. 524 D. + +[263] Andocid. Alcibiad. § 20. + +[264] Dem. Meid. §§ 58-66. + +[265] Our knowledge of the Proagon is derived from the following +passages:—Aeschin. Ctesiph. §§ 66, 67 ὁ γὰρ μισαλέξανδρος νυνὶ φάσκων +εἶναι ... γράφει ψήφισμα ... ἐκκλησίαν ποιεῖν τοὺς πρυτάνεις τῇ ὀγδόῃ +ἱσταμένου τοῦ ἐλαφηβολιῶνος μηνός, ὅτ’ ἦν τῷ Ἀσκληπιῷ ἡ θυσία καὶ +ὁ προάγων. Schol. Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 67 ἐγίγνοντο πρὸ τῶν μεγάλων +Διονυσίων ἡμέραις ὀλίγαις ἔμπροσθεν ἐν τῷ ᾠδείῳ καλουμένῳ τῶν τραγῳδῶν +ἀγὼν καὶ ἐπίδειξις ὧν μέλλουσι δραμάτων ἀγωνίζεσθαι ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ· δι’ ὃ +ἐτύμως προάγων καλεῖται. εἰσίασι δὲ δίχα προσώπων οἱ ὑποκριταὶ γυμνοί. +Vita Euripid. λέγουσι δὲ καὶ Σοφοκλέα, ἀκούσαντα ὅτι ἐτελεύτησε, αὐτὸν +μὲν ἱματίῳ φαιῷ ἤτοι πορφυρῷ προελθεῖν, τὸν δὲ χορὸν καὶ τοὺς ὑποκριτὰς +ἀστεφανώτους εἰσαγαγεῖν ἐν τῷ προάγωνι, καὶ δακρῦσαι τὸν δῆμον. Schol. +Aristoph. Wasps 1104 οἱ δ’ ἐν ᾠδείῳ· ἔστι τόπος θεατροειδής, ἐν ᾧ +εἰώθασι τὰ ποιήματα ἀπαγγέλλειν πρὶν τῆς εἰς τὸ θέατρον ἀπαγγελίας. +That the Proagon was a contest is out of the question. The contest was +to follow some days later. Nor can it have been a dress rehearsal, as +part of one day would not have sufficed for the rehearsal of twelve +tragedies and five comedies. Προάγων denotes ‘the ceremony before the +contest’, just as πρόγαμος means ‘the ceremony before the marriage’. +The expression of the Schol. on Aeschines τῶν τραγῳδῶν ἀγών is probably +due to a misunderstanding of the word προάγων. The passage in Plato’s +Symposium 194 A (ἐπιλήσμων μεντἂν εἴην, ὦ Ἀγάθων, ... εἰ ἰδὼν τὴν σὴν +ἀνδρείαν καὶ μεγαλοφροσύνην ἀναβαίνοντος ἐπὶ τὸν ὀκρίβαντα μετὰ τῶν +ὑποκριτῶν καὶ βλέψαντος ἐναντία τοσούτῳ θεάτρῳ, μέλλοντος ἐπιδείξεσθαι +σαυτοῦ λόγους, καὶ οὐδ’ ὁπωστιοῦν ἐκπλαγέντος κτλ.) probably refers to +the Proagon. If so ἀπαγγέλλειν in the Schol. and ἐπιδείξεσθαι λόγους both +probably refer to an announcement of the plots or subjects of the plays +(λόγος is so used, Aristoph. Vesp. 54, Pax 50, and Hesych. λόγος· ἡ τοῦ +δράματος ὑπόθεσις). See Mazon, Revue de Philologie, 1903, pp. 263 ff. +That there was a Proagon before the Lenaea as well as the City Dionysia +seems natural in itself, and is implied by the use of the plural in such +inscriptions as C. I. A. ii. 307 ἐπετέλεσε δὲ καὶ τοὺς προάγωνας τοὺς ἐν +τοῖς ἱεροῖς κτλ. + +[266] Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 76 ἅμα τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἡγεῖτο τοῖς πρέσβεσιν εἰς τὸ +θέατρον. Demosth. Meid. § 74. + +[267] Suidas s.v. καθάρσιον; Pollux viii. 104; Plut. Cimon p. 482 E; +Philostrat. vit. Apoll. p. 161. + +[268] Aeschin. Ctesiph. §§ 48, 230. + +[269] Isocrat. viii. § 82. + +[270] Aeschin. Ctesiph. §§ 153, 154. + +[271] Aristid. περὶ ῥητορικῆς, vol. ii. p. 2 (Dindf.). + +[272] The passage from Philochorus (Athen. p. 464 E καὶ τοῖς χοροῖς +εἰσιοῦσιν ἐνέχεον πίνειν καὶ διηγωνισμένοις ὅτ’ ἐξεπορεύοντο ἐνέχεον +πάλιν) affords no warrant for assuming, with Müller (Griech. Bühnen, p. +373), that before the commencement of each play the poet and his chorus +entered the orchestra and offered a libation to Dionysus. [Aristoph. Ach. +11 ἀλλ’ ὠδυνήθην ἕτερον αὖ τραγῳδικόν, | ὅτε δὴ ’κεχήνη προσδοκῶν τὸν +Αἰσχύλον, | ὁ δ’ ἀνεῖπεν, εἴσαγ’, ὦ Θέογνι, τὸν χορόν, is generally taken +to refer to this point in the proceedings. But it is not likely that the +names, &c., of the poets would be unknown to the spectators, when the +Proagon had taken place only a few days before; see p. 66; and Mazon is +probably right (Rev. de Philologie, 1903, p. 264) in making the lines +refer to the Proagon itself.] + +[273] Pollux iv. 88. + +[274] Aristoph. Eccles. 1154 ff. + +[275] Plat. Symp. 173 A. 174 A. + +[276] Athen. p. 3 F; Schol. Aristoph. Pax 835. + +[277] Cf. ch. i. § 1. + +[278] Dem. Meid. §§ 8-10; C. I. A. ii. 114, 307, 420. + +[279] Arg. Aristoph. Ran. οὕτω δὲ ἐθαυμάσθη τὸ δρᾶμα διὰ τὴν ἐν αὐτῷ +παράβασιν ὥστε καὶ ἀνεδιδάχθη, ὥς φησι Δικαίαρχος. + +[280] Herod, vi. 21. + +[281] A revised edition of a play was called διασκευή, Athen. p. 110 C. + +[282] Athen. p. 374 A. + +[283] Nauck, Frag. Trag. Graec. pp. 215, 441, 627. + +[284] Arg. Eur. Hipp. + +[285] Arg. Aristoph. Nub. + +[286] Arg. Aristoph. Pax; Meineke, Frag. Com. Graec. i. pp. 1074, 1130. + +[287] Meineke, iv. 116, 377. Additional instances of revision of plays +are to be found in the Autolycus of Eupolis, the Synoris of Diphilus, and +the Phryx of Alexis. The Demetrius of Alexis appeared subsequently as the +Philetaerus, the Ἄγροικοι of Antiphanes as the Butalion. See Meineke, ii. +440; iii. 36, 403, 500; iv. 412. + +[288] Philostrat. vit. Apoll. p. 245. + +[289] [Or more probably to the Odeum to see the Proagon; see p. 69, n. 3.] + +[290] Aristoph. Acharn. 9-12. + +[291] Id. Ran. 868. + +[292] Quint. Inst. x. 1. 66. + +[293] [See, however, note on p. 16, on the Septem of Aeschylus.] + +[294] Suidas s.v. Εὐφορίων; Arg. Soph. Oed. Col.; Schol. Aristoph. Ran. +67. + +[295] See above, pp. 18 and 26. + +[296] See above, p. 31. + +[297] Plut. X orat. 841 F εἰσήνεγκε δὲ καὶ νόμους ... τὸν δέ, ὡς χαλκᾶς +εἰκόνας ἀναθεῖναι τῶν ποιητῶν, Αἰσχύλου, Σοφοκλέους, Εὐριπίδου, καὶ +τὰς τραγῳδίας αὐτῶν ἐν κοινῷ γραψαμένους φυλάττειν, καὶ τὸν τῆς πόλεως +γραμματέα παραναγιγνώσκειν τοῖς ὑποκρινομένοις· οὐκ ἐξεῖναι γὰρ αὐτὰς +ὑποκρίνεσθαι. The general meaning of the passage is clear, though the +text is corrupt. Various emendations have been proposed, e.g. παρ’ +αὐτὰς ὑποκρίνεσθαι, Wyttenbach; αὐτὰς ἄλλως ὑποκρίνεσθαι, Grysar: ἄλλως +ὑποκρίνεσθαι, Dübner. + +[298] Galen Comm. ii. on Hippocrat. Epidem. iii. (p. 607 Kühn). + +[299] See above, pp. 22 and 27. + +[300] Alciphron. Epist. iii. 48. + +[301] Plut. Demosth. p. 849 A. + +[302] C. I. A. ii. 973. + +[303] Demosth. de Cor. §§ 180, 267; Aelian Var. Hist. xiv. 40; Plut. +Fort. Alexand. 333 F; Diod. Sic. xiii. 97. + +[304] Aul. Gell. vii. 5; Stob. Flor. 97, 28 (ii. p. 211 Meineke); +Demosth. Fals. Leg. § 246; Schol. Soph. Ajax 865; Athen. p. 584 D. + +[305] Throughout the present chapter my account of the existing remains +of the Athenian theatre has been taken almost entirely from Dörpfeld and +Reisch, Das griechische Theater, 1896. Dörpfeld’s minute and admirable +description of the theatre has superseded all previous treatises on the +subject. For the old authorities see Preface to the First Edition, p. +viii. + +[306] Pollux iv. 123 ἐλεὸς δ’ ἦν τράπεζα ἀρχαία, ἐφ’ ἣν πρὸ Θέσπιδος εἷς +τις ἀναβὰς τοῖς χορευταῖς ἀπεκρίνατο. Etym. Mag. s.v. θυμέλη· τράπεζα δὲ +ἦν ἐφ’ ἧς ἑστῶτες ἐν τοῖς ἀγροῖς ᾖδον, μήπω τάξιν λαβούσης τραγῳδίας. +Dörpfeld (Griechische Theater, pp. 34, 278) thinks the ἐλεός was the +altar step, which in some cases was of great size. Cp. the specimen he +gives on p. 34. He quotes Pollux iv. 123 θυμέλη, εἴτε βῆμά τι οὖσα, εἴτε +βωμός. But this passage does not mean that Pollux thought the thymele was +partly an altar and partly a platform. It means that he was uncertain +which of the two it was. Probably he was thinking of the later sense of +θυμέλη = ‘the stage’. + +[307] Cp. Cook on the Thymele in Greek Theatres, Classical Review, +October 1895, p. 371, and below, p. 108, with notes. + +[308] Suidas s.v. σκηνή; Pollux iv. 123; Etym. Mag. s.v. θυμέλη. + +[309] Hesych. s.v. παρ’ αἰγείρου θέα ... τὰ ἴκρια, ἅ ἐστιν ὀρθὰ ξύλα +ἔχοντα σανίδας προσδεδεμένας, οἷον βαθμούς, ἐφ’ αἷς ἐκαθέζοντο πρὸ τοῦ +κατασκευασθῆναι τὸ θέατρον. Cp. Bekk. Anecd. p. 354; Hesych. and Suidas +s.v. ἴκρια; Eustath. Od. p. 1472. + +[310] All theatres, in which the orchestra consists of an exact +semicircle, are either Roman, or built under Roman influence. See Vitruv. +v. 6. + +[311] The term θέατρον Ληναϊκόν mentioned by Pollux (iv. 121) may refer +to the old wooden theatre in the Lenaeum. + +[312] See Appendix C for a discussion of the site of the Lenaeum. + +[313] Suidas s.v. ἀπ’ αἰγείρου θέα. Hesych. s.vv. αἰγείρου θέα, παρ’ +αἰγείρου θέα, θέα παρ’ αἰγείρῳ. Eustath. Od. p. 1472. + +[314] Suidas s.v. Πρατίνας ... συνέβη τὰ ἴκρια, ἐφ’ ὧν ἑστήκεσαν οἱ +θεαταί, πεσεῖν, καὶ ἐκ τούτου θέατρον ᾠκοδομήθη Ἀθηναίοις. + +[315] See below, p. 130. + +[316] Dörpfeld and Reisch, Griechische Theater, p. 31. + +[317] Wilamowitz, Hermes, xxi. p. 622. Griech. Theater, p. 9. + +[318] Aristoph. Acharn. 504; Plat. Prot. 327 D; Dem. Meid. § 10 (law of +Evegorus); C. I. A. ii. 741 (334-331 B.C.). + +[319] Griech. Theater, pp. 26 ff. + +[320] Griech. Theater, p. 111. + +[321] Griech. Theater, pp. 36 ff. + +[322] Fürtwängler, Sitzungsber. der Akad. der Wiss. zu München, 1901, p. +415. Roberts and Gardner, Greek Epigraphy, ii. Introd. p. xiii. + +[323] C. I. A. i. 499. Cp. p. 132. + +[324] Tragic Drama of the Greeks, p. 430. + +[325] C. I. A. ii. 176. + +[326] Plut. X orat. 841 C καὶ τὸ ἐν Διονύσου θέατρον ἐπιστατῶν +ἐτελεύτησε. Id. Psephism. iii. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ἡμίεργα παραλαβὼν τούς τε +νεωσοίκους καὶ τὴν σκευοθήκην καὶ τὸ θέατρον τὸ Διονυσιακὸν ἐξειργάσατο +καὶ ἐπετέλεσε. Paus. i. 29. 16 οἰκοδομήματα δὲ ἐπετέλεσε μὲν τὸ θέατρον +ἑτέρων ὑπαρξαμένων. Hyperid. or. dep. 118 Kenyon ταχθεὶς δὲ ἐπὶ τῇ +διοικήσει τῶν χρημάτων εὗρε πόρους, ᾠκοδόμησε δὲ τὸ θέατρον, τὸ ᾠδεῖον, +τὰ νεώρια, τριήρεις ἐποιήσατο, λιμένας. + +[327] [Aristoph. Thesm. 395 (B.C. 411) and Cratinus, Frag. Incert. 51 +(before B.C. 422) call the spectators’ seats ἴκρια, ‘benches’: but the +name might survive after the material had been changed from wood to +stone; and Puchstein may be right in dating this before the end of the +fifth century. See below, p. 131.] + +[328] See below, p. 130. + +[329] C. I. A. iii. 158. + +[330] C. I. A. iii. 239 σοὶ τόδε καλὸν ἔτευξε φιλόργιε βῆμα θεήτρου | +Φαῖδρος Ζωίλου βιοδώτορος Ἀτθίδος ἀρχός. + +[331] See E. A. Gardner, Ancient Athens, p. 435. + +[332] Paus. i. 20 3; Griech. Theater, pp. 10 ff. + +[333] Vitruv. v. 3. 2. + +[334] The plan is copied from that given in Griech. Theater, Tafel I. + +[335] Harp. s.v. κατατομή· Ὑπερείδης ἐν τῷ κατὰ Δημοσθένους. καὶ +καθήμενος κάτω ὑπὸ τῇ κατατομῇ. Φιλόχορος δὲ ἐν ἕκτῃ οὕτως· Αἰσχραῖος +Ἀναγυράσιος ἀνέθηκε τὸν ὑπὲρ θεάτρου τρίποδα καταργυρώσας, νενικηκὼς τῷ +πρότερον ἔτει χορηγῶν παισί, καὶ ἐπέγραψεν ἐπὶ τὴν κατατομὴν τῆς πέτρας. +Bekk Anecd. p. 270. 21 κατατομὴ ἡ ὀρχήστρα ἡ νῦν σίγμα, ἢ μέρος τι τοῦ +θεάτρου κατετμήθη, ἐπεὶ ἐν ὄρει κατεσκεύασται. + +[336] Paus. i. 21. 5; C. I. A. ii. 1247; Stuart and Revett’s Antiquities +of Athens, ii. 8. For a detailed description of the Thrasyllus monument +see Harrison and Verrall, Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens, pp. +266 ff.; E. Gardner, Ancient Athens, p. 403. + +[337] See Griech. Theater, pp. 169 ff.; Capps, Vitruvius and the Greek +Stage, pp. 18 ff. + +[338] The illustration is copied, with a few alterations, from +Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst, xiii. p. 197. + +[339] Griech. Theater, p. 51. + +[340] Gardner and Loring, Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 74; Griech. +Theater, pp. 101, 121; Schrader, Berl. Phil. Wochenschrift, April 16, +1898, p. 508. + +[341] Griech. Theater, p. 44. + +[342] Pollux iv. 123. + +[343] διαζώματα, C. I. G. 4283; ζῶναι, Malal. p. 222. The longitudinal +passages are called δίοδοι in the Delian inscription for 269 B.C. The +upper belt of seats is called ἐπιθέατρον in the inscription for 250 B.C. +See Bull. Corr. Hell., 1894, pp. 162 ff. + +[344] Griech. Theater, p. 41. + +[345] The copy is taken from Wieseler’s Denkmäler des Bühnenwesens, i. 1. + +[346] Vitruv. v. 6. 4. + +[347] Griech. Theater, p. 45. Dörpfeld obtains this result by allowing +for each person a space of 16 inches—the distance between the vertical +lines already mentioned (p. 97). If 19 inches is allowed, he calculates +that the theatre would have held about 14,000 people. + +[348] Megalopolis held about 17,000 (Gardner), or 18,700 (Schultz); +Epidaurus about 17,000 (Gardner). These calculations, however, should be +slightly reduced, as they are based on an allowance of only 13 inches for +each person (see above, p. 97), which is certainly too small, though the +experience of modern theatre managers shows that, where the seats have no +dividing arms, 14 inches is sufficient and 16 inches ample. (See Gardner, +Ancient Athens, p. 439.) See Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 69. + +[349] Plat. Symp. 175 E. + +[350] Phot. s.v. ὀρχήστρα ... τοῦ θεάτρου τὸ κάτω ἡμικύκλιον, οὗ καὶ οἱ +χοροὶ ᾖδον καὶ ὠρχοῦντο. + +[351] Bekk. Anecd. p. 270. 21 ἡ ὀρχήστρα ἡ νῦν σίγμα λεγομένη. Ibid. p. +286. 16. + +[352] Suidas s.v. σκηνή ... ἡ κονίστρα, τουτέστι τὸ κάτω ἔδαφος τοῦ +θεάτρου. The same scholium is repeated in Schol. Gregor. Nazianz. laud. +patr. 355 B. + +[353] e.g. Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 505 (of the chorus) ἑστᾶσι μὲν γὰρ +κατὰ στοῖχον οἱ πρὸς τὴν ὀρχήστραν ἀποβλέποντες· ὅταν δὲ παραβῶσιν, +ἐφεξῆς ἑστῶτες καὶ πρὸς τοὺς θεατὰς βλέποντες τὸν λόγον ποιοῦνται. Here +ὀρχήστρα obviously = λογεῖον. Cp. Suidas s.v. σκηνή; Isidor. Origg. +xviii. 44 ‘orchestra autem pulpitum erat scaenae’. [A full history of +the meanings of the word is given in A. Müller’s Untersuchungen zu den +Bühnenalterthümern, pp. 77-88.] + +[354] Griech. Theater, pp. 57, 58. + +[355] For the date see Griech. Theater, pp. 129 ff.; Christ, Sitzungsber. +bayer. Akad. der Wissen. 1894, pp. 30 ff.; Lechat, Épidaure, p. 106. + +[356] Paus. ii. 27. 5 Ἐπιδαυρίοις δέ ἐστι θέατρον ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, μάλιστα +ἐμοὶ δοκεῖν θέας ἄξιον· τὰ μὲν γὰρ Ῥωμαίων πολὺ δή τι ὑπερῆρκε τῶν +πανταχοῦ τῷ κόσμῳ, μεγέθει δὲ Ἀρκάδων τὸ ἐν Μεγάλῃ πόλει· ἁρμονίας +δὲ ἢ κάλλους ἕνεκα ἀρχιτέκτων ποῖος ἐς ἅμιλλαν Πολυκλείτῳ γένοιτ’ ἂν +ἀξιόχρεως; Πολύκλειτος γὰρ τὸ θέατρον τοῦτο καὶ οἴκημα τὸ περιφερὲς ὁ +ποιήσας ἦν. + +[357] The view is copied from a photograph taken by Prof. Ernest +Gardner, and kindly lent for reproduction. The plan is from Baumeister’s +Denkmäler, iii. p. 1735. + +[358] Vitruv. v. 6 and 7. + +[359] Other examples are found at Athens, the Peiraeeus, and Eretria. See +Fig. 3, and the plans in Griech. Theater, pp. 98 and 112. + +[360] Griech. Theater, p. 175. + +[361] See the plans in Griech. Theater, pp. 117, 144, 149. + +[362] Suidas s.v. σκηνή ... μετὰ τὴν σκηνὴν εὐθὺς καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια ἡ +ὀρχήστρα. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ὁ τόπος ὁ ἐκ σανίδων ἔχων τὸ ἔδαφος, ἀφ’ οὗ +θεατρίζουσιν οἱ μῖμοι. Here the word ὀρχήστρα clearly = λογεῖον. Cp. p. +102, note. + +[363] Griech. Theater, p. 116. Bulletin de Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 163 τὴν +ὀρχήστραν τοῦ θεάτρου καταχρῖσαι (date 269 B.C.). + +[364] Hesych. s.v. γραμμαί. + +[365] Aristot. Prob. xi. 25 διὰ τί, ὅταν ἀχυρωθῶσιν αἱ ὀρχῆστραι, ἧττον +οἱ χοροὶ γεγώνασιν; + +[366] Suidas s.v. σκηνή ... εἶτα μετὰ τὴν ὀρχήστραν (i.e. the stage) +βωμὸς τοῦ Διονύσου. Poll. iv. 123 ἡ δὲ ὀρχήστρα τοῦ χοροῦ, ἐν ᾗ καὶ ἡ +θυμέλη, εἴτε βῆμά τι οὖσα εἴτε βωμός. For the sacrifices in the theatre +see p. 68. + +[367] Schrader, Berl. Philolog. Wochenschrift, 1898, April 16, p. 509. + +[368] Suidas s.v. σκηνή ... μετὰ τὴν ὀρχήστραν βωμὸς τοῦ Διονύσου, ὃς +καλεῖται θυμέλη παρὰ τὸ θύειν. Etym. Mag. s.v. θυμέλη. Pratinas apud +Athen. 517 B τίς ὕβρις ἔμολεν ἐπὶ Διονυσιάδα πολυπάταγα θυμέλαν; + +[369] Phrynichus p. 163 (Lob.) θυμέλην· τοῦτο οἱ μὲν ἀρχαῖοι ἀντὶ τοῦ +θυσίαν ἐτίθουν, οἱ δὲ νῦν ἐπὶ τοῦ τόπου ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, ἐν ᾧ αὐληταὶ καὶ +κιθαρῳδοὶ καὶ ἄλλοι τινὲς ἀγωνίζονται· σὺ μέντοι ἔνθα μὲν κωμῳδοὶ καὶ +τραγῳδοὶ ἀγωνίζονται λογεῖον ἐρεῖς, ἔνθα δὲ οἱ αὐληταὶ καὶ οἱ χοροὶ +ὀρχήστραν, μὴ λέγε δὲ θυμέλην. + +[370] Bekk. Anecd. p. 292 σκηνὴ δ’ ἐστὶν ἡ νῦν λεγομένη θυμέλη. Schol. +Arist. Equit. 149 ὡς ἐν θυμέλῃ δὲ τὸ ἀνάβαινε. [Cp. Robert, Hermes +xxxii. p. 441; Bethe, ibid. xxxvi. p. 597, and Dörpfeld, ibid. xxxvii. +p. 249 for more recent discussions of the meaning of θυμέλη. Dörpfeld +may be right in explaining the various meanings of the word by its +having originally included not only the altar, but the broad base or +stone platform on which the altar stood, e.g. in front of a temple. +But Robert’s connexion of the word with θεμέλιον and τιθέναι instead +of with θύω is more than doubtful. See also Müller, Unters. zu den +Bühnenalterth., pp. 93-108.] + +[371] Griech. Theater, p. 116. + +[372] Ibid. p. 156. + +[373] Amer. Journ. Arch., 1891, p. 281; 1893, p. 404. + +[374] Athen. Mittheil., 1893, p. 407; Griech. Theater, p. 157. + +[375] [Sharpley (Aristoph. Pax Introd., p. 27) thinks that it is +‘trifling with words’ to say that the purpose has not been explained. +He thinks it certain that these tunnels were used for the appearance +of actors in the orchestra, and constructs a theory of the scenic +arrangements of the Pax on this hypothesis, assuming the correctness +of Dörpfeld’s theory of the stage. But if Dörpfeld’s theory of the +stage is to be rejected, owing to a balance of considerations against +it (see below), then these tunnels do remain unexplained and their +purpose mysterious. The fact that at Eretria they _could_ be used as +Sharpley suggests proves nothing as to the manner in which they _were_ +used, unless the theory of their use fits in with other evidence as to +theatrical performances. We know nothing of the performances in the +theatre at Eretria; there are no such tunnels at Athens, and there are +other ways of explaining the Pax.] + +[376] Remains of such gateways are to be found at Sicyon, Delos, and +Pergamon. See the plans in Griech. Theater, pp. 117, 144, 151. + +[377] Griech. Theater, pp. 129, 150. + +[378] The illustration is taken from Πρακτικὰ τῆς ἐν Ἀθήν. ἀρχαιολ. +ἑταιρίας for 1883. + +[379] Πάροδοι in Schol. Arist. Equit. 149; Poll. iv. 126; εἴσοδοι in +Arist. Nub. 326, Av. 296. The word πάροδος was also used to denote the +entrances on to the stage, e.g. in Plut. Demetr. 905 B; Poll. iv. 128; +Athen. 622 D. + +[380] Vitruv. v. 6. The side-entrances are called ψαλίς in Poll. iv. 123; +ἁψίς in Vit. Aristoph. (Dindf. Prolegom. de Comoed. p. 36). + +[381] e.g. τῆς σκηνῆς τὸ τέγος καταλείψαντι ... εἰς τὸ λογεῖον τῆς σκηνῆς +(Delian inscription, 279 B.C., in Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, pp. 162 ff.). + +[382] e.g. Aristot. Poet. c. 24 τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν +μέρος. Polyb. xxx. 13 πύκται τέσσαρες ἀνέβησαν ἐπὶ τὴν σκηνήν. + +[383] Plut. Demetr. 900 D ἔλεγε νῦν πρῶτον ἑωρακέναι πόρνην προερχομένην +ἐκ τραγικῆς σκηνῆς. So ἡ σκηνὴ ἡ μέση, τὰς ἐπάνω σκηνὰς καινὰς ποιῆσαι, +γράψαι τὰς σκηνάς, κ.τ.λ. (Delian inscription, 274 B.C., in Bull. Corr. +Hell. l.c.). Hence σκηνογραφία = scene-painting (Aristot. Poet. c. 4). +[Müller, Unters. zu den Bühnenalterth., pp. 1 ff., gives fully the +history of the various meanings of σκηνή.] + +[384] Arg. Aesch. Pers. καὶ ἔστιν ἡ μὲν σκηνὴ τοῦ δράματος περὶ τῷ τάφῳ +Δαρείου. Bekk. Anecd. iii. p. 1461 εἰς πέντε σκηνὰς διαιρεῖ τὸ δρᾶμα. + +[385] Puchstein, Die Griech. Bühne, p. 136. + +[386] Griech. Theater, pp. 62 ff. + +[387] Puchstein, l.c., p. 102, denies this, on the ground that these +stylobates are not long enough for the foundation walls of the Lycurgean +building, and cannot therefore have been originally made for them. + +[388] See above, p. 88. + +[389] [Dörpfeld has, since the publication of his book, changed his mind, +and now thinks that the Neronian stage was higher, and belonged to the +Vitruvian Graeco-Roman, not to the Roman type (Ath. Mitth. 1897, p. 459; +1898, pp. 330, 347). Puchstein is inclined to agree (die griech. Bühne, +p. 101). But, in fact, the evidence is insufficient to prove anything as +to the height of the stage.] + +[390] Griech. Theater, pp. 89-90. + +[391] Harpocrat. (s.v. παρασκήνια) quotes Theophrastus for the definition +of paraskenia as places on one side of the stage, used for storage +purposes. The παρασκήνια τά τε ἐπάνω καὶ τὰ ὑποκάτω mentioned along with +the σκηναί in the Delian inscription of 274 B.C. (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, +pp. 162 ff.) were doubtless side-wings. Demosthenes (Meid. § 17) accuses +Meidias of ‘nailing up the paraskenia’, and so preventing his dithyrambic +chorus from making its appearance. Probably he nailed up the doors out +of the side-wings into the parodoi. The word is also explained by the +commentators as = (1) the entrances to the orchestra (Didymus quoted by +Harpocrat. l.c.), or (2) the entrances to the stage (Phot. and Etym. Mag. +s.v.; Bekk. Anecd. p. 292; Ulpian on Dem. Meid. § 17), or (3) the doors +on each side of the main door in the back-scene (Suidas s.v. σκηνή). +But these explanations are probably false inferences from the passage +in Demosthenes, or from some other source. Cp. Müller, Unters. zu den +Bühnenalt., pp. 57-62, for the history of the word παρασκήνια. + +[392] See above, p. 112. + +[393] Hesych. s.v. ὀκρίβας· τὸ λογεῖον ἐφ’ οὗ οἱ τραγῳδοὶ ἠγωνίζοντο. +Plat. Symp. 194 A ἀναβαίνοντος ἐπὶ τὸν ὀκρίβαντα μετὰ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν. The +stage referred to in this latter passage was probably in the Odeion. See +above, p. 68, and Mazon, Rev. de Philologie, 1903, p. 265. + +[394] Delian inscription of 279 B.C. εἰς τὸ [λογε]ῖον τῆς σκηνῆς; 180 +B.C. τῶν πινάκων τῶν ἐπὶ τὸ λογεῖον (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, pp. 162 +ff.). Phryn. p. 163 (Lob.) σὺ μέντοι, ἔνθα μὲν κωμῳδοὶ καὶ τραγῳδοὶ +ἀγωνίζονται, λογεῖον ἐρεῖς. Cp. Müller, l.c., pp. 49-57, for the history +of this and similar words. + +[395] Delian inscription of 290 B.C. τὴν σκηνὴν ἐργολαβήσασι καὶ τὸ +προσκήνιον; 282 B.C. εἰς τὸ προσκήνιον γράψαντι πίνακας (Bull. Corr. +Hell. l.c.). Inscription on architrave of proscenium at Oropus (Griech. +Theater, p. 103) ἀγωνοθετήσας τὸ προσκήνιον καὶ τοὺς πίνακας. Polyb. +xxx. 13 τούτους δὲ στήσας ἐπὶ τὸ προσκήνιον μετὰ τοῦ χοροῦ. The word +προσκήνιον also denoted (1) the painted scenery at the back of the stage. +Cp. Suidas s.v. προσκήνιον· τὸ πρὸ τῆς σκηνῆς παραπέτασμα. Nannio the +courtesan (fourth century B.C.) was called ‘proskenion’ because of the +deceptive character of her beauty (Athen. p. 587 B). A representation of +Demetrius (third century B.C.) was painted ἐπὶ τοῦ προσκηνίου. (2) The +drop-scene (in late Greek). Cp. Synesius (about 400 A.D.), Aegypt. 128 C +εἰ δέ τις ... κυνοφθαλμίζοιτο διὰ τοῦ προσκηνίου. Cp. Müller, l.c., pp. +35 ff., for history of the meanings of the word. + +[396] Dörpfeld (p. 69) denies that there was ever a wooden stage between +the wings of the Lycurgean building. He thinks the space was originally +filled up with a wooden proscenium, of the same height as the later +Hellenistic one of stone; and that both these proscenia served as +backgrounds, and not as stages. He argues that if there had been a stage, +it must have been made of stone. But if he is justified in assuming the +existence of an early wooden proscenium, we are surely justified in +assuming the existence of a stage of the same material. + +[397] The theatres of Epidaurus and Megalopolis were formerly assigned to +about the middle of the fourth century. But it now appears probable that +they were not earlier than the end of that century. See Dörpfeld, Griech. +Theater, pp. 129 ff., 140. + +[398] See the plan in Griech. Theater, p. 112. + +[399] This was probably for acoustic reasons; see below, p. 122. + +[400] Dörpfeld (p. 69) argues that the original erection put up between +the wings of the Lycurgean building must have been 13 ft. high, since the +back-wall was adorned with columns and entablature of that height. But +there is no proof of the existence of these columns and this entablature. +In fact, the evidence is all the other way. See above, p. 114. Prof. E. +Gardner (Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 84) thinks there is actual proof +of the existence of a low wooden stage at Megalopolis in early times. +The question really depends on the date of the three lower steps of the +Thersilion, which he supposes to be considerably later than the stone +auditorium. Dörpfeld, however (Griech. Theater, p. 140), assigns them to +the same period. + +[401] Griech. Theater, pp. 100, 102, 113, 120, 143, 147, 150, 156. +Puchstein in many cases assigns an earlier date, e.g. at Megalopolis. +(Die Griech. Bühne, p. 90.) + +[402] Griech. Theater, p. 118. + +[403] Ibid., p. 115. There is the foundation-wall of a wooden proscenium +at Megalopolis, apparently of the third century, and running on the same +line as the later stone proscenium. But whether it was of the same height +is unknown. See Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 85. + +[404] Schrader, Berl. Philolog. Wochenschrift, 1898, April 16, p. 508. +The stone proscenium at Epidaurus has sometimes been assigned to the end +of the fourth century, when the rest of the theatre was built. Dörpfeld +thinks it more probable that it was a later structure (Griech. Theater, +p. 232). Puchstein, however, dates the stone proscenium at Megalopolis in +the third or even the fourth century. + +[405] Vitruv. v. 7. + +[406] Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, pp. 41 ff. + +[407] Ibid., pp. 17, 18. See below, p. 130. + +[408] See (besides Puchstein, l.c.) Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 87; +Griech. Theater, p. 116. Cp. ibid., pp. 103, 150, for similar traces at +Assos and Oropus. The architrave of the proscenium at Oropus bore the +inscription ἀγωνοθετήσας τὸ προσκήνιον καὶ τοὺς πίνακας (ibid., p. 102). +The Delian inscriptions of 282 B.C. and 180 B.C. mention πίνακες εἰς τὸ +προσκήνιον, πίνακες ἐπὶ τὸ λογεῖον (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 162). + +[409] [See Bethe, Jahrb. Arch. Inst. 1900, p. 79. There is nothing +absurd, as Dörpfeld seems to think (ibid. 1901, p. 22), in the proscenium +thus serving two purposes in the two different types of performance. Why +should it not?] + +[410] See Puchstein, l.c., p. 23. + +[411] Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 162. + +[412] Puchstein, l.c., p. 38. + +[413] Poll. iv. 124 τὸ δὲ ὑποσκήνιον κίοσι καὶ ἀγαλματίοις κεκόσμητο πρὸς +τὸ θέατρον τετραμμένοις, ὑπὸ τὸ λογεῖον κείμενον. When Athenaeus (631 E) +speaks of a flute-player waiting in the hyposkenion till his turn came +to perform, it is uncertain whether the word there denotes a room under +the stage, or is used generally for the whole of the stage-buildings. See +Müller, Unters. zu den Bühnenalt., pp. 62-5. + +[414] Griech. Theater, pp. 127, 147. + +[415] Schrader, Berl. Philolog. Wochenschrift, 1898, April 16, p. 509; +Puchstein, l.c., pp. 19, 50. + +[416] Griech. Theater, pp. 99, 102, 115, 125, 147, 150, 384. Dörpfeld now +thinks that there may have been three doors at Delos, but the matter is +very doubtful (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1896, p. 570). + +[417] Excavations at Megalopolis, p. 86. Chamonard, Bull. Corr. Hell. +1896, p. 296. + +[418] The illustration is taken from Baumeister’s Denkmäler, iii. plate +lxv. + +[419] Griech. Theater, 103. Bull. Corr. Hell. 1896, p. 595. + +[420] Chamonard (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1896, p. 296), judging from the width +of the supporting columns, makes the height of the Delian proscenium 8 +ft. 2 in. Dörpfeld (ibid., p. 564), arguing that these columns must have +been the same height as the pillars at the side-entrance, supposes the +proscenium to have been 9 ft. 2 in. + +[421] Griech. Theater, p. 99. + +[422] See the plans in Griech. Theater. + +[423] [Robert, Gött. Gel. Anz. 1902, p. 425; Dörpfeld, Ath. Mitth. 1903, +p. 407. The latter’s suggestion (l.c. 1898, p. 351) that they were used +to bring stage machinery into the θεολογεῖον, which he identifies with +the stage or λογεῖον, is met by the rejection of this identification; see +below, p. 164.] + +[424] Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, pp. 49, 58, &c. + +[425] The remains at Sicyon and Eretria show that at any rate the _first_ +story—that above the proscenium—was made of stone. + +[426] The phrase αἱ ἐπάνω σκηναί in the Delian inscription of 274 +B.C. appears to show that the back-scene of that time must have been +two stories high (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 162), [and the large sum +of 2,500 drachmae paid for painting the σκηναί and παρασκήνια, when +compared with the 6 drachmae 2 obols for painting the four πίνακες +ἐς τὸ προσκήνιον suggests that the former was elaborate and artistic +decoration, the latter something much simpler. See above, p. 123, and +Bethe, Jahrb. Arch. Inst. 1900, p. 64; P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. 1899, +p. 259, shows reason for thinking that the painting on the σκηναί +represented architectural decoration, perhaps of an elaborate kind.] + +[427] [Vitruvius, vii. 5. 5, says that Apaturius of Alabanda, about the +middle of the first century B.C., treated the architectural back-scene in +a fantastic manner, and it is therefore probable, though the inference +is not certain, that the style in a simpler form had been in vogue for +some time previously. A terra-cotta from the S. Angelo collection, +belonging to the first or second century B.C., presents a back-scene of +two stories (Röm. Mitth. xii. p. 140; Bethe, Jahrb. Arch. Inst. 1900, +p. 61). There is also a vase-painting from Magna Graecia in Madrid by +Assteas, representing the Mad Heracles murdering his child (Baumeister, +Denkm. 732; Bethe, l.c., p. 60), with an architectural background of two +stories enclosed on both sides, and with a roof. As Assteas painted in +the fourth century B.C. (Robert, art. Assteas, in Pauly-Wiss. Encycl.), +Bethe, l.c., argues that the architectural back-scene was known in Magna +Graecia, and probably therefore in Greece proper, at that date. But it +is uncertain whether the scene represents an actual stage performance. +The murder, so far as we know, was never presented on the stage: it took +place in a room. The scene depicted may therefore represent the scene +as narrated by a messenger, and the buildings cannot be assumed to be +a stage background. The inferences from the terra-cotta are equally +disputed. (Dörpfeld, Jahrb. Arch. Inst. 1901, pp. 27 ff.; Graef., Hermes +1901, pp. 81 ff.) Cp. note on p. 172.] + +[428] Vitruv. v. 6; Poll. iv. 124. + +[429] The point of course is not, as Dörpfeld seems to imply (Jahrb. +Arch. Inst. 1901, p. 25; Ath. Mitth. 1903, pp. 389, 406), whether there +was ever a chorus or not at this time; but that there was no longer +a chorus in close communication with the actors, as in some plays of +Aeschylus, and therefore requiring a low stage. Bethe is, however, not +justified in assuming that there was _no_ stage in Aeschylus’ time (see +below, p. 172). A low one would allow sufficient intercourse between +chorus and actors. + +[430] Tragic Drama of the Greeks, p. 452. + +[431] Poll. iv. 127. See below, p. 148. + +[432] Athen. de Mach., p. 29 (Wesch.) κατεσκεύασαν δέ τινες ἐν πολιορκίᾳ +κλιμάκων γένη παραπλήσια τοῖς τιθεμένοις ἐν τοῖς θεάτροις πρὸς τὰ +προσκήνια τοῖς ὑποκριταῖς. The meaning of this passage has been much +disputed. But Weissmann (Scenische Anweis. pp. 49 ff.) has shown +conclusively, as it seems to me, from a parallel passage in Apollodorus +περὶ κλιμάκων, that Athenaeus is referring, not to ladders used on the +stage for mounting the back-scene, but to steps about 12 feet high, +placed in front of the stage. + +[433] See Fig. 13. Other specimens are given in Baumeister, Denkmäler, +ii. pp. 819, 820; Griechische Theater, pp. 322-324. + +[434] Wieseler, Denkmäl. iv. 5. + +[435] Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, pp. 17 ff. + +[436] Griech. Theater, p. 113. + +[437] Ancient Athens, p. 435. + +[438] Fürtwängler, Sitzungsber. der Akad. der Wiss. zu München, 1901, pp. +411-6: q.v. for further arguments. + +[439] Puchstein, l.c., p. 138. + +[440] Tafel iii. + +[441] Cp. p. 87. Dörpfeld’s objection that the shape is not that of +such seat-steps is disposed of by a comparison with other seat-steps +elsewhere; Puchstein, l.c., p. 139. The inscription is C. I. A. i. 499. + +[442] l.c., p. 136. + +[443] Above, p. 119, and below, § 13. + +[444] See note on p. 128. + +[445] Aristot. Poet. c. 18, ad fin. + +[446] The illustration is taken from Lanckoronski, Städte Pamphyliens und +Pisidiens (Wien, 1892), vol. i. plate 27. + +[447] Vitruv. v. 6; Poll. iv. 124. + +[448] Müller, Bühnenalt., p. 28. + +[449] See Lanckoronski, Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens, vol. i. pp. +51 ff., and plate 14 (Perge), vol. ii. pp. 92 ff., and plates 10-13 +(Termessos), pp. 152 ff., and plate 26 (Sagalassos); Texier, Description +de l’Asie Mineure, vol. iii. plates 181 and 182 (Patara), plate 215 +(Myra). The stage at Termessos was 8 feet high, that at Patara 8½ feet, +that at Sagalassos 9 feet. At Magnesia and at Tralles, where in other +respects the theatres were more completely Romanized, the height of the +stages was 7 ft. 6 in. and 9 ft. 10 in. respectively (Griech. Theater, p. +156). See also Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, on all these theatres. + +[450] Griech. Theater, pp. 150 ff. + +[451] See Excavations at Megalopolis, Supplementary Paper published by +the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies, 1892; Puchstein, +Griech. Bühne, pp. 88 ff. The plan is copied from Griech. Theater, p. 134. + +[452] From Griech. Theater, p. 144. For the description of the theatre, +see ibid., pp. 144 ff.; Chamonard, Bull. Corr. Hell., 1896, pp. 256 ff.; +Puchstein, l.c., pp. 53 ff. + +[453] Side-wings (παρασκήνια) are mentioned not infrequently in the +Delian inscriptions for 274 and 269 B.C. (Bull. Corr. Hell., 1894, p. +162) as forming part of the theatre. But the present proscenium was +probably erected in the second century. At that date the permanent +side-wings must have been abolished. + +[454] Dindorf, Prolegom. de Comoed. p. 29 καὶ ὅτε μὲν πρὸς τοὺς ὑποκριτὰς +διελέγετο (ὁ χορὸς ὁ κωμικός), πρὸς τὴν σκηνὴν ἀφεώρα, ὅτε δὲ ἀπελθόντων +τῶν ὑποκριτῶν τοὺς ἀναπαίστους διεξῄει, πρὸς τὸν δῆμον ἀπεστρέφετο. Ibid. +p. 36 εἰσῄει (ὁ χορὸς ὁ κωμικὸς) ἐν τετραγώνῳ σχήματι, ἀφορῶν εἰς τοὺς +ὑποκριτάς. Cp. ibid. p. 21; Dübner, Prolegom. de Comoed. p. 20; Schol. +Aristoph. Equit. 505. + +[455] G. Hermann, Opusc. vi. 2, pp. 152 ff. The passage occurs in Suidas +and Etym. Mag., _s.v._ σκηνή; and in a more complete form in Schol. +Gregor. Nazianz. 355 B. The last version runs as follows:—μετὰ τὴν σκηνὴν +εὐθὺς καὶ τὰ παρασκήνια ἡ ὀρχήστρα. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ὁ τόπος ὁ ἐκ σανίδων +ἔχων τὸ ἔδαφος, ἐφ’ οὗ θεατρίζουσιν οἱ μῖμοι. εἶτα μετὰ τὴν ὀρχήστραν +βωμὸς ἦν τοῦ Διονύσου, τετράγωνον οἰκοδόμημα κενὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ μέσου, ὃ +καλεῖται θυμέλη παρὰ τοῦ θύειν. μετὰ τὴν θυμέλην ἡ κονίστρα, τουτέστι τὸ +κάτω ἔδαφος τοῦ θεάτρου. It is clear that ὀρχήστρα here means the stage. +This appears not only from the context, but also from the fact that it +is said to have been the place for the μῖμοι. Wieseler bases upon the +above passage his peculiar theory that the ‘thymele’ was the platform for +the chorus, and not an altar at all. He relies on the words τετράγωνον +οἰκοδόμημα κενόν. It is true that the passage is obscure. But if it +proves one thing more than another, it proves that the ‘thymele’ was the +altar of Dionysus, and stood in the orchestra. + +[456] See above, p. 108. + +[457] In addition to the scholium quoted in the preceding note, the +following passages are cited to prove that θυμέλη sometimes = the special +platform for the chorus, between the orchestra and the stage:—(1) Anthol. +Pal. vii. 21 πολλάκις ἐν θυμέλῃσι καὶ ἐν σκηνῇσι τεθηλὼς | βλαισὸς +Ἀχαρνίτης κισσὸς κ.τ.λ. (2) Corp. Ins. Gr. 6750 δόξαν φωνήεσσαν ἐνὶ +σκηναῖσι λαβοῦσαν | παντοίης ἀρετῆς ἐν μείμοις, εἶτα χοροῖσι | πολλάκις +ἐν θυμέλαις. (3) Schol. Aristid. iii, p. 536 (Dindf.) ὁ χορὸς ὅτε εἰσῄει +ἐν τῇ ὀρχήστρᾳ ᾗ (MS. ἣ) ἐστι θυμέλη. (4) Poll. iv. 123 ἡ δὲ ὀρχήστρα +τοῦ χοροῦ, ἐν ᾗ καὶ ἡ θυμέλη, εἴτε βῆμά τι οὖσα εἴτε βωμός. (5) Isidor. +Origg. xviii. 47 ‘et dicti thymelici, quod olim in orchestra stantes +cantabant super pulpitum quod thymele vocabatur.’ In the first and +second passages θυμέλη obviously = ὀρχήστρα. In the third passage it = +ὀρχήστρα or βωμὸς Διονύσου, according as ἥ or ᾗ is read. In the fourth +passage there is apparently a confusion of the two meanings of θυμέλη +as ‘a stage’ and ‘an altar’. In the fifth passage the two meanings of +‘orchestra’ and ‘stage’ are confused. [Cp. p. 108, n.] + +[458] Horace, Ars Poet. 278-80 ‘post hunc personae pallaeque repertor +honestae | Aeschylus et modicis instravit pulpita tignis | et docuit +magnumque loqui nitique cothurno.’ [The passage becomes still more +significant if we translate ‘tignis’ ‘posts’, i.e. uprights. It bears +this sense in Caes. B. G. iv. 17, 3. ‘Tigna bina sesquipedalia paulum ab +imo praeacuta ... in flumen defixerat.’ See P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. +1899, p. 257.] + +[459] Höpken, De Theatro Attico, Bonn, 1884. + +[460] Vitruv. v. 7 ‘ita a tribus centris hac descriptione ampliorem +habent orchestram Graeci et scaenam recessiorem minoreque latitudine +pulpitum, quod λογεῖον appellant, ideo quod eo tragici et comici actores +in scaena peragunt, reliqui autem artifices suas per orchestram praestant +actiones, itaque ex eo scaenici et thymelici graece separatim nominantur. +Eius logei altitudo non minus debet esse pedum decem, non plus duodecim.’ +Whether under ‘reliqui artifices’ Vitruvius included the dramatic +chorus is very doubtful. The dramatic chorus had almost disappeared +in his day. Moreover ‘thymelici’ as opposed to ‘scaenici’ generally +means the competitors in musical and literary contests, as opposed to +the competitors in dramatic contests. But the words of Vitruvius about +the position of the actors upon the stage are free from all ambiguity. +[Cp. Frei, de Certaminibus Thymelicis. Dörpfeld’s suggestion (Deutsche +Littztg. 1901, p. 1816) that dramatic actors were called σκηνικοί because +they were nearer the σκηνή, and musical performers θυμελικοί as being +in the centre of the orchestra, round the θυμέλη, forces the words to +fit his theory, but gives a far less natural meaning to the distinction. +According to this, the members of the chorus in the drama also ought to +be called θυμελικοί.] + +[461] Ibid. v. 6. + +[462] Griech. Theater, p. 364. + +[463] Bull. Corr. Hell. 1896, pp. 577 ff.; Athen. Mittheil. 1897, pp. 444 +ff.; 1903, p. 386, &c. + +[464] See above, p. 135. + +[465] [The discussion is continued by Bethe, Hermes, 1898, pp. 313 ff., +and Dörpfeld, Ath. Mitth. 1898, pp. 326 ff.; 1903, pp. 424 ff. The latter +admits that the Hellenistic stage corresponds better in depth with +Vitruvius’ rule, and his further arguments in support of his theory are +very unconvincing. (As regards some of them, see pp. 158 ff.) In various +other details the Hellenistic and Asiatic theatres nearly all deviate +from the exact figures given by Vitruvius, though the approximations +are in most cases close. One theatre corresponds in one point with the +figures given, one in another, as one would expect: and in most points, +other than those above mentioned, neither the Hellenistic nor the +Asiatic type has much advantage over the other in respect of precise +correspondence. (See Noack, Philologus, lviii, pp. 9 ff.) The clearest +result of Dörpfeld’s controversy with Bethe, and later with Puchstein, +is that theatres of both types varied much more than most writers have +allowed. Why should they not have done so? At the same time, Vitruvius’ +rules are as nearly in accordance with the general features of the +Hellenistic type as general rules can be reasonably expected to be.] + +[466] Poll. iv. 123 καὶ σκηνὴ μὲν ὑποκριτῶν ἴδιον, ἡ δὲ ὀρχήστρα τοῦ +χοροῦ. Dörpfeld (p. 347, and Ath. Mitth. 1903, p. 419) says that σκηνή +here = ‘the stage-buildings’. But the mention of the λογεῖον in the +previous line of Pollux, and the description of the ὑποσκήνιον, almost +immediately afterwards, as ὑπὸ τὸ λογεῖον κείμενον, clearly show that the +type of theatre described by Pollux was one which possessed a stage. If +so, this stage must have been used by the actors. + +[467] Poll. iv. 127 εἰσελθόντες δὲ κατὰ τὴν ὀρχήστραν ἐπὶ τὴν σκηνὴν +ἀναβαίνουσι διὰ κλιμάκων. Here too Dörpfeld (p. 347, and Ath. Mitth. +1903, p. 406) thinks σκηνή = the house in the background, and that the +sentence refers to cases like Aristoph. Nub. 1486, where Strepsiades +climbs on to the roof. But why should the actors have used steps to mount +the house only when they entered the theatre by the orchestra? They would +need them just as much if they entered by the doors in the back-scene. + +[468] Schol. Ran. 183 ἠλλοιῶσθαι χρὴ τὴν σκηνὴν καὶ εἶναι κατὰ τὴν +Ἀχερουσίαν λίμνην τὸν τόπον ἐπὶ τοῦ λογείου ἢ ἐπὶ τῆς ὀρχήστρας. Ibid. +299 ἀποροῦσι δέ τινες πῶς ἀπὸ τοῦ λογείου περιελθὼν καὶ κρυφθεὶς ὄπισθεν +τοῦ ἱερέως τοῦτο λέγει. φαίνονται δὲ οὐκ εἶναι ἐπὶ τοῦ λογείου ἀλλ’ +ἐπὶ τῆς ὀρχήστρας. Schol. Equit. 149 ἵνα, φησίν, ἐκ τῆς παρόδου ἐπὶ τὸ +λογεῖον ἀναβῇ. διὰ τί οὖν ἐκ τῆς παρόδου; τοῦτο γὰρ οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον. Ibid. +506 λέγεται δὲ παράβασις ... ἐπειδὴ παραβαίνει ὁ χορὸς τὸν τόπον. ἑστᾶσι +μὲν γὰρ κατὰ στοῖχον οἱ πρὸς τὴν ὀρχήστραν (i.e. the stage) ἀποβλέποντες· +ὅταν δὲ παραβῶσιν, ἐφεξῆς ἑστῶτες καὶ πρὸς τοὺς θεατὰς βλέποντες τὸν +λόγον ποιοῦνται. Vit. Aesch. p. 8 (Dindf.) τὰ γὰρ δράματα συμπληροῦσιν οἱ +πρεσβύτατοι τῶν θεῶν, καὶ ἔστι τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ τῆς ὀρχήστρας θεῖα +πάντα πρόσωπα. + +[469] See above, p. 144, and note 1. + +[470] Griech. Theater, p. 348. + +[471] Griech. Theater, pp. 103, 113-16, 118. + +[472] [Noack (Philologus, lviii. p. 6) argues that the reason was that at +the north end, where the rock is not cut away, it is much higher, and the +cutting and removal would be very expensive. But we know nothing of the +willingness or unwillingness of the Sicyonians to spend money on public +and religious objects, and the simpler theory seems to be that the space +was not wanted. The same remark applies to Noack’s explanation of the +case of Eretria by considerations of expense.] + +[473] [Noack, l.c., contends that the division of the skene and filling +of half the space with earth is later work, and throws no light on the +scheme of the Hellenistic theatre. This is very doubtful; but even if it +were proved the other cases quoted would be sufficient for the argument +in the text.] + +[474] See above, p. 125. + +[475] This point is well brought out by Chamonard, Bull. Corr. Hell. +1896, p. 296. + +[476] Griech. Theater, p. 381. + +[477] Chamonard, l.c., p. 294. + +[478] Griech. Theater, p. 381. + +[479] See above, p. 124. + +[480] Lanckoronski, Städte Pamphyliens, &c., vol. ii. plate 10. + +[481] Griech. Theater, p. 380. [Also Noack, Philologus, lviii. pp. 2 ff.; +to whom Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, pp. 30 ff., replies sufficiently. The +evidence of the vases (see below), where actors are shown acting _on_ a +stage with columns in front, is conclusive against his contention that +the _only_ proper support for a stage is a wall, and that therefore the +columns of the proscenium can only represent a back-scene.] + +[482] On the subject of these vase-paintings see especially Heydemann, +Die Phlyakendarstellungen auf bemalten Vasen, Jahrb. Kais. Deutsch. +Archäol. Inst. 1886, pp. 260 ff. Bethe, Prolegomena zur Geschichte des +Theaters, pp. 278 ff. Reisch, in Griech. Theater, pp. 311 ff. + +[483] They are taken from Wieseler’s Denkmäler, ix. 14 and 15 (= +Baumeister, figs. 1828 and 1830). + +[484] Fig. 13. Cp. the specimens in Wieseler’s Denkmäl. ix. 8; Griech. +Theater, pp. 315, 322, and 323; Baumeister’s Denkmäl., figs. 902, 903, +1826, 1827, 1829. + +[485] Fig. 14. Cp. also the specimen in Griech. Theater, p. 318. + +[486] Fig. 13. Cp. also Griech. Theater, pp. 322-4; Baumeister, figs. +902, 903. + +[487] Baumeister, fig. 903. Griech. Theater, p. 322. + +[488] Griech. Theater, p. 327. + +[489] [The same must be said of his later suggestion (Jahrb. Arch. Inst. +1901, p. 36) that the columns on the Phlyakes vases are not really +curtailed, and do not therefore point to a taller stage, but are complete +and imply a stage between three and four feet high.] + +[490] Griech. Theater, p. 147. + +[491] Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, p. 24. + +[492] Griech. Theater, p. 361. + +[493] The stage at Athens was about 9 ft. 3 in.; at Epidaurus about +10½ ft. (Griech. Theater, pp. 78, 128). That at Delos was about 10 ft. +(Chamonard, Bull. Corr. Hell. 1896, p. 306). As Lechat (Épidaure, p. 208) +points out, it is necessary, in calculating the depth, not to measure +from wall to wall, but to take into account the projecting cornice. In +some cases, as he also remarks, the wall of the back-scene may have been +narrower than the wall beneath, on which it rested; and this would add +slightly to the depth of the stage. + +[494] These facts and measurements have been kindly supplied to me by Dr. +Gray. + +[495] Griech. Theater, p. 342; Ath. Mitth. 1898, pp. 337, 345, &c. + +[496] Fougères, Mantinée et l’Arcadie, pp. 165 ff. According to +Dörpfeld’s theory that the proscenium was the back-scene, these lowest +seats would be on a level with the roof of the back-scene, which is +absurd. His argument that in cases where a removal of the lower rows +or steps of seats is certain (as at Assos, Pergamon, and Delphi), we +may assume that the theatre was converted from the supposed stageless +Hellenistic type to the Asiatic, is most unconvincing. Why were the rows +not similarly removed at Priene and Magnesia, though the high stage was +erected there? If he can suppose that in these cases seats were allowed +to remain which were bad for dramatic performances, why not in other +cases? + +[497] Wochenschr. für Klass. Phil. 1899, p. 260. + +[498] [For controversy on this point, cf. A. Müller, Unters. zu den +Bühnenalt., pp. 108 ff.; Dörpfeld, Ath. Mitth. 1899, p. 310; Müller, +Philologus, lix. p. 330. Müller accepts Maass’ conclusions, though he +corrects some of his figures. Both Müller and Dörpfeld calculate how +much of the orchestra or of the actor on the stage could be seen by the +spectators in different parts of different theatres. But any conclusions +drawn from such calculations are precarious; we have no reason to suppose +that there was a larger proportion of good seats in ancient theatres than +in modern; still less that the front seats were all necessarily better +for seeing the actors, any more than front seats or other seats of honour +are in many cases in modern theatres.] + +[499] Griech. Theater, p. 342. + +[500] Athen. Mittheil. 1893, p. 410. + +[501] Griech. Theater, pp. 138, 139. + +[502] See Puchstein, Griech. Bühne, p. 88; and P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. +1899, p. 258. + +[503] See above, p. 138. + +[504] Griech. Theater, p. 146. + +[505] Vitruv. v. 6. + +[506] Griech. Theater, pp. 385 ff. + +[507] See above, p. 135. + +[508] See above, p. 118. + +[509] Griech. Theater, p. 365. Ath. Mitth. 1903, p. 395. + +[510] On these points see below, pp. 209-15. Even if we suppose that the +theologeion was used in the cases mentioned on p. 213 to exhibit the deus +ex machina, the text of the plays shows that the god appeared _above_ +the roof, and not upon it. Cp. Ion. 1549 ὑπερτελὴς οἴκων, Orest. 1631 ἐν +αἰθέρος πτυχαῖς. + +[511] See below, p. 186. + +[512] [It is also argued (Noack, Philologus, 1899, 1; Robert, Gött. Gel. +Anz. 1902, 418; Dörpfeld, Ath. Mitth. 1903, p. 403) that, because in +all the Roman and Graeco-Roman theatres, where the actors stood on the +logeion, the back-scene which formed their background was decorated with +columns, while the proscenium was not so decorated, it follows that when +the proscenium _was_ so decorated, i.e. in the earlier periods, it and +not the wall above and behind the logeion must have been the actors’ +background, and the actors must have played in front of the proscenium. +But this is no proof at all, unless it is assumed that decorations were +_only_ employed to make backgrounds for actors, and _only_ disused +because not wanted for this purpose. This is neither likely in itself, +nor is it confirmed by anything in the evidence. + +Dörpfeld also argues (Ath. Mitth. 1903, p. 396) that the grooves for +wheels, of which traces are found leading out of the door in the +back-scene on to the logeion at Eretria, prove that the logeion was used +by gods only, as ordinary personages in chariots came only through the +side entrances into the orchestra. But all that can be argued from these +grooves is that the logeion was used for something on wheels, whether +chariots or the ekkyklema, which Dörpfeld rejects. There is nothing to +show who used the vehicle, whatever it may have been. If an actor could +do so when representing a god, he could do so when representing a mortal. +Cp. Fossum, Amer. J. Arch. 1898, p. 187; cp. P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. +1899, p. 252.] + +[513] Aristot. Probl. xix. 15 τὰ μὲν ἀπὸ σκηνῆς οὐκ ἀντίστροφα, τὰ δὲ +τοῦ χοροῦ ἀντίστροφα· ὁ μὲν γὰρ ὑποκριτὴς ἀγωνιστής, ὁ δὲ χορὸς ἧττον +μιμεῖται. Poet. c. 12 ἴδια δὲ τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ κομμοί ... κομμός δὲ +θρῆνος κοινὸς χοροῦ καὶ ἀπὸ σκηνῆς. + +[514] Poet. c. 24 διὰ τὸ ἐν μὲν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ μὴ ἐνδέχεσθαι ἅμα πραττόμενα +πολλὰ μέρη μιμεῖσθαι, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν μέρος +μόνον. Cp. cc. 13, 17. + +[515] Griech. Theater, pp. 284, 346. + +[516] [Flickinger (The Meaning of ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς in Writers of the Fourth +Century, Chicago, 1902) tries to show that ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς in Aristotle +and Demosthenes does not mean ‘on the stage’ in any sense which would +imply an elevated stage, but simply ‘at the performance’, ‘as part of +a play’, &c., like ἐπὶ θέατρον later. He succeeds in interpreting the +passages consistently with this, and in showing that in later writers +the words often bore this meaning. But the changed application of +many technical terms, e.g. ὀρχήστρα, θυμέλη, &c., in later writers +shows that no reliance is to be placed on the supposed analogy; and +the other meaning still seems by far the most natural in Aristotle. +Dörpfeld (Deutsch. Littztg. 1901, p. 1817) thinks that the absence of +the expression ἀπὸ τῆς ὀρχήστρας to balance ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς is very +significant as proving that all performers alike were in the orchestra. +It needs only the most elementary logic to dispose of this argument. Cp. +Müller, Unters. zu den Bühnenalt., for the full history of the words +σκηνή, &c.] + +[517] Equit. 148 δεῦρο δεῦρ’, ὦ φίλτατε, | ἀνάβαινε σωτὴρ τῇ πόλει καὶ +νῷν φανείς. Acharn. 732 ἄμβατε ποττὰν μᾶδδαν. Vesp. 1342 ἀνάβαινε δεῦρο +χρυσομηλολόνθιον. + +[518] Eccles. 1151 τί δῆτα διατρίβεις ἔχων, ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἄγεις | τασδὶ λαβών; +ἐν ὅσῳ δὲ καταβαίνεις, ἐγὼ | ἐπᾴσομαι κ.τ.λ. Vesp. 1514 ἀτὰρ καταβατέον +γ’ ἐπ’ αὐτούς. In the last passage καταβατέον might perhaps mean ‘I must +contend with them’. But it is more probable that the meaning here is the +same as in the other passage. + +[519] Bodensteiner, Scenische Fragen, pp. 699, 700. Capps, The Stage in +the Greek Theatre, pp. 67, 68. + +[520] Equit. 169 ἀλλ’ ἐπανάβηθι κἀπὶ τοὐλεὸν τοδί. The significance of +this line, as regards the present question, was first pointed out by +Zacher. Philologus, 1896, p. 181. Cp. Müller, l.c., pp. 1 ff. + +[521] Harzmann, Quaestiones Scenicae, 1889. White, The Stage in +Aristophanes, 1891. Capps, The Stage in the Greek Theatre, 1891. +Bodensteiner, Scenische Fragen, 1893. Weissmann, Die scenische Aufführung +der griechischen Dramen, 1893. Hampel, Was lehrt Aeschylos’ Orestie +für die Theaterfrage? 1899. Engelmann, Archäologische Studien zu den +Tragikern, 1900. Krause, Quaestiones Aristophaneae Scenicae, 1903. + +[522] Eur. El. 489, Ion 727, Herc. Fur. 119. In the last passage it is +the chorus which makes the complaint; so that in this case, if there was +any visible ascent, it cannot have been the ascent on to the stage. + +[523] Eur. Med. 1275. Cp. Agam. 1344, Cyclops 630, Hipp. 780, Hec. 1042, +&c. + +[524] Aesch. Choeph. 22, 1063; Eum. 140. Eur. Troad. 176; Hel. 385, 517. +In Aristoph. Av. 667 Procne (the flute-player of the chorus) enters from +the back-scene, and then descends into the orchestra. Several other +instances are given by Capps, pp. 9, 10; but they are all very doubtful. + +[525] See below, pp. 191, 201. + +[526] See below, p. 191. + +[527] The following instances appear to be certain—Aesch. Suppl. 208, +832; Choeph. 22 ff. Soph. Oed. Col. 826 ff. Eur. Suppl. 1, 815: Hel. 1627 +ff.: Rhesus 681; Iph. Aul. 599. Aristoph. Pax 246 ff. Many other examples +will be found in the treatises already mentioned; but the evidence for +most of them appears to be very slight. + +[528] Griech. Theater, pp. 353 ff. + +[529] Phot. and Hesych. s.v. λαυροστάται. + +[530] [Seats of honour are not of course necessarily the best for seeing +or hearing (see p. 159, note), but they are not likely to be the worst.] + +[531] Griech. Theater, p. 363. + +[532] See above, p. 118. + +[533] [Frei, De certaminibus thymelicis, traces back to the second +half of the fourth century the distinction of θυμελικοὶ and σκηνικοὶ +ἀγῶνες, and so proves the existence of a stage at that time. Engelmann, +Archäol. Stud. zu den Tragikern, supports Dörpfeld’s view by reference +to vase paintings, which he thinks were suggested by theatrical scenes, +and represent actions taking place in the orchestra, with the columnar +προσκήνιον as background. But the background could in most cases be +equally well the back of the stage; and it is not certain that the vases +in question present dramatic scenes at all. Columns, &c., are common on +all vases to indicate a house or a temple, where there is no reference to +a stage; and in black-figured vases, where all such reference is out of +the question, we find Prometheus and Odysseus tied to columns instead of +to a rock or a mast. See E. A. Gardner, Class. Rev. 1901, p. 432.] + +[534] Bethe, Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Theaters, pp. 205 ff. + +[535] Scenische Aufführung, p. 37. Jahrb. für classische Philologie, +1895, pp. 673 ff. See above, p. 167. + +[536] Jahrb. für class. Philologie, 1894, pp. 161 ff. + +[537] Hermes, 1897, pp. 450 ff. + +[538] Vitruv. v. 6. + +[539] Plut., Non posse suaviter, &c. 1096 B. + +[540] Vitruv. v. 5. + +[541] Id. v. 9. + +[542] Plut. Pericles, 160 A. Pausan. i. 14. I. See Gardner, Ancient +Athens; Harrison, Primitive Athens. + +[543] Same references. + +[544] Val. Max. ii. 4. 6. C. I. G. 4283. + +[545] Plut. X. orat. 841 F. + +[546] Pausan. i. 21. I. + +[547] Griech. Theater, p. 71. + +[548] Suidas s.v. σαυτὴν ἐπαινεῖς. + +[549] See above, p. 87. + +[550] Schol. Aristid. iii. p. 535, Dindf. So Wilamowitz, Aristoteles und +Athen, i. p. 263. Christ, however (Sitzungs. bayer. Akad. der Wissen. +1894, p. 3), thinks the statement about the statues is true, though the +scholiast was mistaken in applying it to the passage in Aristides. + +[551] Athen., p. 19 E. + +[552] C. I. A. iii. 469. + +[553] Griech. Theater, p. 70. For the inscription on the Xenocles +monument see C. I. A. ii. 1289. + +[554] C. I. A. ii. 551. + +[555] Hesych. s.v. ᾠδεῖον. + +[556] See ch. ii. + +[557] Aelian. Var. Hist. ii. 28. On the outside of the arms, in the +throne of the priest of Dionysus, there are two bas-reliefs, in which +kneeling Cupids are depicted in the act of setting cocks to fight. The +significance of the reliefs is explained by the fact that the annual +cock-fight was held in the theatre. + +[558] Dem. Meid. § 9. + +[559] Thuc. viii. 93, 94. + +[560] Plut. Phoc. 757 D. + +[561] Id. Demetr. 905 A. Müller (Bühnenalt. p. 74) is mistaken in +stating, on the authority of Diod. xvi. 84, that on the news of the +capture of Elatea in 339 the Athenians hastily assembled in the theatre. +That they met in the Pnyx is proved by the passage in Dem. de Cor. § 169. +Diodorus is merely using the language of his own time, when the theatre +was the regular meeting-place. + +[562] Harpocrat. s.v. περίπολος. + +[563] Poll. viii. 132. + +[564] Plut. Lycurg. 51 E. Athen. 19 E. Alciphron iii. 20. + +[565] Dion Chrysost. or. xxxi. p. 386 (Dindf.). Philostrat. vit. Apoll. +iv. 22. + +[566] Aesch. Suppl. 189. + +[567] Pers. 659. The palace is often referred to (159, 230, 524, 849, +1038); but this does not show that it was supposed to be visible. And the +fact that Atossa made her first entrance on a chariot (159, 607), though +coming from the palace, seems to prove that it was out of sight. + +[568] Septem 95, 240, 265, 549, 823. + +[569] Agam. 3, Choeph. 22, Eum. 35, 242. + +[570] Reisch (Griech. Theater, pp. 194, 200) thinks the actors’ booth was +originally in the side-entrance to the orchestra. He thinks the first +stage-buildings were erected about 465, when scenery was introduced; +and that these buildings were henceforth used for actors’ rooms. But it +is much simpler to suppose that the actors’ booth stood fronting the +spectators from the first, and that it was gradually converted into a +stage-building. + +[571] Aristot. Poet. c. 4 τρεῖς δὲ καὶ σκηνογραφίαν Σοφοκλῆς. Vitruv. +vii. praef. § 11 primum Agatharchus Athenis Aeschylo docente tragoediam +scaenam fecit et de ea commentarium reliquit. Prof. Jebb (Dict. Antiq. +ii. p. 816) thinks the two statements may be reconciled by supposing that +the words ‘Aeschylo docente tragoediam’ merely fix the date, without +implying that Aeschylus had anything to do with the innovation. [Prof. +P. Gardner (J. Hell. Stud. 1899, p. 253) points out that, according to +Vitruvius, Agatharchus, like Democritus and Anaxagoras, seems to have +studied perspective theoretically; and the story that he was enticed +by Alcibiades into his house, and not released till he had painted its +interior, combined with Vitruvius’ notice, suggests that he was precisely +the kind of painter for a stage; while the date suggested has nothing +chronologically against it.] + +[572] Vitruv. v. 6. + +[573] Viz. Soph. O. R., Antig., Electr., Trach.; Eur. Alc., Med., Hipp., +Herc. Fur., Phoen., Hel., Orest., Bacch., Ion, Iph. Taur., Andr., Suppl., +Heraclid. + +[574] Viz. Eur. Hec., Troad., Iph. Aul., Rhesus. + +[575] Viz. the Wasps, Peace, Clouds, Frogs, Ecclesiazusae, Plutus. + +[576] [This was so not only in vase paintings, but in such elaborate +works as those of Polygnotus at Delphi: cp. P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. +1899, p. 254.] + +[577] [See P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. 1899, pp. 255 ff.] + +[578] Bacch. 590, 1211; Orest. 1569; Iph. Taur. 113, 130. + +[579] Ion 190 ff. [It is noticeable that the occurrence of the technical +terms of architecture and other arts is particularly common in Euripides, +who shows special acquaintance with the arts and their processes. This +may perhaps confirm the otherwise uncertain tradition (Vit. Eur.) that he +was once a painter: cp. Huddilston, The Attitude of the Greek Tragedians +towards Art.] + +[580] Such scenes were depicted on the periaktoi, Poll. iv. 126, 131. See +below, p. 197. + +[581] Eur. Hel. 1, Troad. 1256; Soph. El. 4 ff. + +[582] Poll. iv. 131 καταβλήματα ... κατεβάλλετο ἐπὶ τὰς περιάκτους ὄρος +δεικνύντα ἢ θάλατταν ἢ ποταμὸν ἢ ἄλλο τι τοιοῦτον. Anon. de comoed. (xx. +28 Dübner) πολυτελέσι δαπάναις κατεσκευάζετο ἡ σκηνὴ ... πεποικιλμένη +παραπετάσμασι καὶ ὀθόναις λευκαῖς καὶ μελαίναις ... εἰς τύπον θαλάσσης +ταρτάρου ᾅδου ... γῆς καὶ οὐρανοῦ κ.τ.λ. + +[583] Poll. iv. 131 καταβλήματα δὲ ὑφάσματα ἢ πίνακες ἦσαν ἔχοντες γραφὰς +τῇ χρείᾳ τῶν δραμάτων προσφόρους· κατεβάλλετο δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς περιάκτους. +Ibid. 125 κλίσιον ... παραπετάσμασιν δηλούμενον. Suid. s.v. προσκήνιον +τὸ πρὸ τῆς σκηνῆς παραπέτασμα. Anon. de comoed. (xx. 28 Dübner) σκηνὴ +πεποικιλμένη παραπετάσμασι καὶ ὀθόναις. + +[584] So Müller, Bühnenalt. pp. 118, 142. + +[585] Poll. iv. 129 ἡ δὲ διστεγία ποτὲ μὲν ἐν οἴκῳ βασιλείῳ διῆρες +δωμάτιον, οἷον ἀφ’ οὗ ἐν Φοινίσσαις ἡ Ἀντιγόνη βλέπει τὸν στρατόν, +ποτὲ δὲ καὶ κέραμος, ἀφ’ οὗ βάλλουσι τῷ κεράμῳ· ἐν δὲ κωμῳδίᾳ ἀπὸ τῆς +διστεγίας πορνοβοσκοί τι κατοπτεύουσιν ἢ γρᾴδια ἢ γύναια καταβλέπει. + +[586] Agam. 3, Phoen. 89, Orest. 1567-75, Acharn. 262, Vesp. 68 and 144, +Nub. 1485-1503, Lysist. 864, 874, and 883, Eur. Suppl. 990. + +[587] Dict. Antiq. i. pp. 663, 666. + +[588] Vitruv. v. 6. + +[589] Vitruv. v. 6. Vesp. 379, Eccles. 924, 930, 961-3. + +[590] See above, p. 135. + +[591] See above, p. 135. + +[592] Poll. iv. 124, 126; Vitruv. v. 6. + +[593] Vitruv. v. 6 ‘ipsae autem scaenae suas habent rationes explicatas +ita uti mediae valvae ornatus habeant aulae regiae, dextra ac sinistra +hospitalia.’ Poll. iv. 124 τριῶν δὲ τῶν κατὰ τὴν σκηνὴν θυρῶν ἡ μέση +μὲν βασίλειον ἢ σπήλαιον ἢ οἶκος ἔνδοξος ἢ πᾶν τοῦ πρωταγωνιστοῦ τοῦ +δράματος, ἡ δὲ δεξιὰ τοῦ δευτεραγωνιστοῦντος καταγώγιον· ἡ δὲ ἀριστερὰ τὸ +εὐτελέστατον ἔχει πρόσωπον ἢ ἱερὸν ἐξηρημωμένον, ἢ ἄοικός ἐστιν. ἐν δὲ +τραγῳδίᾳ ἡ μὲν δεξιὰ θύρα ξενών ἐστιν, εἱρκτὴ δὲ ἡ λαιά. τὸ δὲ κλίσιον +ἐν κωμῳδίᾳ παράκειται παρὰ τὴν οἰκίαν, παραπετάσμασι δηλούμενον, καὶ +ἔστι μὲν σταθμὸς ὑποζυγίων ... ἐν δὲ Ἀντιφάνους Ἀκεστρίᾳ καὶ ἐργαστήριον +γέγονεν. Throughout this passage Pollux is guilty of his usual fault of +converting particular cases into general rules. + +[594] See the previous note. + +[595] Poll. iv. 126 παρ’ ἑκάτερα δὲ τῶν δύο θυρῶν τῶν περὶ τὴν μέσην +ἄλλαι δύο εἶεν ἄν, μία ἑκατέρωθεν, πρὸς ἃς αἱ περίακτοι συμπεπήγασιν. +Vitruv. v. 6 ‘secundum ea loca versurae sunt procurrentes, quae efficiunt +una a foro, altera a peregre, aditus in scaenam’. Phot. s.v. παρασκήνια· +αἱ εἴσοδοι αἱ εἰς τὴν σκηνήν. Schol. Aristoph. Lysist. 321 νῦν ἐστιν +ἡμιχόριον τὸ λέγον ἐκ γυναικῶν εἰσερχομένων ἄνωθεν ... τὸ δὲ ἄλλο +ἡμιχόριον ἐξ ἀνδρῶν κάτωθεν ἐπερχομένων. + +[596] See Harzmann, Quaestiones Scenicae, pp. 43 ff.; Bodensteiner, +Scenische Fragen, pp. 703 ff.; Capps, The Stage in the Greek Theatre, pp. +12 ff.; Weissmann, Scenische Aufführung, pp. 25 ff., 76. + +[597] Cf. Aesch. Suppl. 1018; Pers. 1076. Eur. Suppl. 1231; Alc. 741. +Aristoph. Acharn. 1231; Vesp. 1535; Pax 1357; Ran. 1524. For other +instances see Bodensteiner, p. 690. Only one of these cases—the funeral +procession in the Alcestis—occurs in the middle of a play. + +[598] Alcestis 861; Plutus 253. Capps (pp. 20 ff.) gives some additional +instances; but for these there is no clear evidence. + +[599] See below, p. 201. + +[600] E.g. Oed. Tyr. 1110-21; Agam. 498-503; Ion 392-401; Oed. Col. +310-24. See Harzmann, pp. 43 ff. + +[601] E.g. Trach. 178-80, 731-4; Phil. 539-42. + +[602] Av. 1-53, Ran. 1-35. + +[603] E.g. Bacch. 1216 ff.; Hec. 484 ff.; Aj. 1040 ff. See, for other +instances, Harzmann, pp. 45 ff.; Bodensteiner, pp. 716 ff. + +[604] See above, pp. 125, 126, for the various devices for such entrances. + +[605] Vitruv. v. 6 ‘secundum ea loca versurae sunt procurrentes, quae +efficiunt una a foro, altera a peregre, aditus in scaenam’. Vit. +Aristoph. (Dindf. Prolegom. de Comoed. p. 36) ὁ κωμικὸς χορὸς συνέστηκεν +ἐξ ἀνδρῶν κδʹ. καὶ εἰ μὲν ὡς ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως ἤρχετο ἐπὶ τὸ θέατρον, διὰ +τῆς ἀριστερᾶς ἁψῖδος εἰσῄει, εἰ δὲ ὡς ἀπὸ ἀγροῦ, διὰ τῆς δεξιᾶς. Poll. +iv. 126 τῶν μέντοι παρόδων ἡ μὲν δεξιὰ ἀγρόθεν ἢ ἐκ λιμένος ἢ ἐκ πόλεως +ἄγει· οἱ δὲ ἀλλαχόθεν πεζοὶ ἀφικνούμενοι κατὰ τὴν ἑτέραν εἰσίασιν. In +the Life the words ἀπὸ ἀγροῦ denote ‘from a distance’. In Pollux ἀγρόθεν +apparently means ‘from the country in the suburbs’; but the word is +obscure, and possibly corrupt. As applied to the _stage_ the words +‘right’ and ‘left’ were always used from the point of view of the actors: +cp. the account of the periaktoi in Poll. iv. 126. But as applied to the +orchestra they were sometimes used from the point of view of the actors, +sometimes from that of the audience. Hence the eastern parodos might be +called the right or the left parodos, according to the point of view from +which it was regarded. This is the reason of the apparent discrepancy +between the statements in the Life and in Pollux. The author of the Life +is looking at the orchestra from the point of view of the actors, Pollux +from the point of view of the audience. + +[606] At line 566 the scene of action is transferred in reality to the +Areopagus (cf. 685 πάγον δ’ Ἄρειον τόνδε). But this change must have been +imagined, and not represented. After Orestes and the Furies arrive in +front of the temple of Athene, they remain continuously on the stage till +the end of the trial. + +[607] Poll. iv. 126 παρ’ ἑκάτερα δὲ τῶν δύο θυρῶν τῶν περὶ τὴν μέσην +ἄλλαι δύο εἶεν ἄν, μία ἑκατέρωθεν, πρὸς ἅς αἱ περίακτοι συμπεπήγασιν, ἡ +μὲν δεξιὰ τὰ ἔξω πόλεως δηλοῦσα, ἡ δ’ ἑτέρα τὰ ἐκ πόλεως, μάλιστα τὰ ἐκ +λιμένος· καὶ θεούς τε θαλαττίους ἐπάγει, καὶ πάνθ’ ὅσα ἐπαχθέστερα ὄντα +ἡ μηχανὴ φέρειν ἀδυνατεῖ. εἰ δ’ ἐπιστραφεῖεν αἱ περίακτοι, ἡ δεξιὰ μὲν +ἀμείβει τόπον (a. l. τὸ πᾶν) ἀμφότεραι δὲ χώραν ὑπαλλάττουσιν. Vitruv. +v. 6 ‘secundum autem spatia ad ornatus comparata, quae loca Graeci +περιάκτους dicunt, ab eo quod machinae sunt in his locis versatiles +trigonoe habentes singulae tres species ornationis, quae, cum aut +fabularum mutationes sunt futurae, seu deorum adventus cum tonitribus +repentinis, versentur mutentque speciem ornationis in fronte’, &c. +Serv. on Verg. Georg. iii. 24 ‘scaena quae fiebat aut versilis erat aut +ductilis erat. Versilis tum erat cum subito tota machinis quibusdam +convertebatur, et aliam picturae faciem ostendebat’. A change of τόπος +means a change from one part of the same district to another; a change +of χώρα means an entire change of district. Niejahr (Comment. Scaen. pp. +1 ff.), Oehmichen (Bühnenwesen, p. 241), and P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. +1899, p. 262, think the passage ἡ μὲν δεξιὰ ... ἀδυνατεῖ refers, not to +the periaktoi, but to the side-doors. But (1) the run of the passage +is against this view, (2) δηλοῦσα could hardly be used of a door, (3) +Vitruvius says the periaktoi were used for introducing gods, and thus +proves that θεοὺς ἐπάγει in Pollux also refers to the periaktoi. + +[608] [P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. 1899, p. 260, disputes the view that +the periaktoi stood in line with a painted background and altered a small +part of it. He thinks that before the existence of a painted background +the periaktoi stood alone and indicated a change of scene in a merely +symbolical way.] + +[609] [Cp. P. Gardner, J. Hell. Stud. 1899, p. 261. He interprets +in this sense Pollux iv. 131 καταβλήματα δὲ ὑφάσματα ἢ πίνακες ἦσαν +ἔχοντες γραφὰς τῇ χρείᾳ τῶν δραμάτων προσφόρους· κατεβάλλετο δ’ ἐπὶ τὰς +περιάκτους ὄρος δεικνύντα ἢ θάλατταν ἢ ποταμὸν ἢ ἄλλο τι τοιοῦτον.] + +[610] The suggestion is due to Navarre, Dionysos, p. 137. [Cf. Holwerda, +Ath. Mitth. 1898, p. 386.] Possibly Plutarch may be referring to this +contrivance when he says (de Esu Carn. 996 B) μηχανὴν αἱρεῖ ποιητικὸς +ἀνὴρ σκηνῆς περιφερομένης. + +[611] Cramer, Anecd. Par. i. 19. + +[612] [P. Gardner, l.c. p. 260, thinks that so simple, conventional, and +yet effective an arrangement is quite in the manner of the fifth century, +and belongs to the same class as the ekkyklema and the mask, which were +certainly Aeschylean.] + +[613] Serv. on Verg. Georg. iii. 24 ‘scaena quae fiebat aut versilis erat +aut ductilis erat ... ductilis tum cum tractis tabulatis huc atque illuc +species picturae nudabatur interior’. + +[614] Vit. Aesch. p. 6 Dindf. καὶ τὴν ὄψιν τῶν θεωμένων κατέπληξε τῇ +λαμπρότητι, γραφαῖς καὶ μηχαναῖς, βωμοῖς τε καὶ τάφοις, σάλπιγξιν, +εἰδώλοις, Ἐρινύσι κ.τ.λ. + +[615] Aesch. Eum. 242; Soph. Electr. 1373, Oed. Col. 59; Eur. Hipp. +70-106. + +[616] Aesch. Suppl. 188-200; Soph. Oed. Tyr. 1-3, 142. + +[617] Poll. iv. 123; Aesch. Agam. 1080 ff.; Schol. Eur. Phoen. 631; +Arist. Vesp. 875. + +[618] Aesch. Pers. 684, Choeph. 4; Soph. Oed. Col. 19; Poll. iv. 127. + +[619] Aesch. Agam. 782 ff. Eur. El. 988 ff. Other instances occur in +Pers. 159 (cp. 607), Troad. 569, Iph. Aul. 600. But there is no reason to +infer from Aesch. Suppl. 181 and Pers. 1000 that chariots were actually +introduced in these two places. + +[620] Prom. 286, 395; Ran. 27. As for the horse on which Ismene is riding +(Oed. Col. 312), or the captured horses of Rhesus (Rhes. 671), or the +flocks of Polyphemus (Cycl. 82), it is most improbable that these were +brought into the theatre. + +[621] The ekkyklema is described in the following passages:—Poll. iv. +128. καὶ τὸ μὲν ἐκκύκλημα ἐπὶ ξύλων ὑψηλὸν βάθρον, ᾧ ἐπίκειται θρόνος· +δείκνυσι δὲ τὰ ὑπὸ σκηνὴν ἐν ταῖς οἰκίαις ἀπόρρητα πραχθέντα, καὶ τὸ +ῥῆμα τοῦ ἔργου καλεῖται ἐκκυκλεῖν. ἐφ’ οὗ δὲ εἰσάγεται τὸ ἐκκύκλημα, +εἰσκύκλημα ὀνομάζεται, καὶ χρὴ τοῦτο νοεῖσθαι καθ’ ἑκάστην θύραν, οἱονεὶ +καθ’ ἑκάστην οἰκίαν. (The θρόνος mentioned by Pollux must be derived from +some particular instance of the use of the ekkyklema. The epithet ὑψηλόν +is not strictly correct: cf. p. 232.) Eustath. Il. 976. 15 τὸ ἐγκύκλημα, +ὃ καὶ ἐγκύκληθρον λέγεται, μηχάνημα ἦν ὑπότροχον, ὑφ’ οὗ ἐδείκνυτο τὰ ἐν +τῇ σκευῇ ἢ σκηνῇ. Schol. Aesch. Choeph. 973 ἀνοίγεται ἡ σκηνὴ καὶ ἐπὶ +ἐκκυκλήματος ὁρᾶται τὰ σώματα. Schol. Arist. Thesm. 96 ἐπὶ ἐκκυκλήματος +γὰρ φαίνεται. Schol. Arist. Acharn. 408 ἐκκύκλημα δὲ λέγεται μηχάνημα +ξύλινον τροχοὺς ἔχον, ὅπερ περιστρεφόμενον τὰ δοκοῦντα ἔνδον ὡς ἐν οἰκίᾳ +πράττεσθαι καὶ τοῖς ἔξω ἐδείκνυε, λέγω δὴ τοῖς θεαταῖς. Schol. Aesch. +Eum. 64 καὶ δευτέρα δὲ γίγνεται φαντασία· στραφέντα γὰρ μηχανήματα +ἔνδηλα ποιεῖ τὰ κατὰ τὸ μαντεῖον ὡς ἔχει. Schol. Arist. Nub. 184 ὁρᾷ δὲ +ὡς φιλοσόφους κομῶντας, στραφέντος τοῦ ἐγκυκλήματος. Schol. Clem. Alex. +iv. 97 σκεῦός τι ὑπότροχον ἐκτὸς τῆς σκηνῆς, οὗ στρεφομένου ἐδόκει τὰ +ἔσω τοῖς ἔξω φανερὰ γίνεσθαι. Reisch (Griech. Theater, p. 236) thinks +the last four passages, in which the word στρέφειν is used, refer to a +different kind of machine, by which the back-scene was rolled apart, and +disclosed the interior. But this is to lay too much stress on the exact +words of the grammarians. They are all obviously referring to the same +device. See below, p. 206. + +[622] Agam. 1379, 1404, 1440. Choeph. 973, 981. + +[623] Ajax 346; Antig. 1293, 1301; Hipp. 808, 857; Soph. El. 1458-75; +Hec. 1051, 1118; Herc. Fur. 1029-1402; Eur. El. 1177, 1243, 1276. + +[624] Thesm. 95, 96 ΕΥ. σίγα. ΜΝ. τί δ’ έστιν; ΕΥ. Ἁγάθων ἐξέρχεται. | +ΜΝ. καὶ ποῖός ἐστιν; ΕΥ. οὗτος οὑκκυκλούμενος, 238 ἐνεγκάτω τις ἔνδοθεν +δᾷδ’ ἢ λύχνον, 265 εἴσω τις ὡς τάχιστά μ’ εἰσκυκλησάτω. Id. Acharn. 399 +αὐτὸς δ’ ἔνδον ἀναβάδην ποιεῖ, 408, 409 ΔΙ. ἀλλ’ ἐκκυκλήθητ’. ΕΥ. ἀλλ’ +ἀδύνατον. ΔΙ. ἀλλ’ ὅμως. | ΕΥ. ἀλλ’ ἐκκυκλήσομαι· καταβαίνειν δ’ οὐ +σχολή. The word ἀναβάδην usually means ‘with one’s feet up’, and is so +taken by many scholars in the present passage. But καταβαίνειν in l. 409 +seems to prove that here at least it must mean ‘upstairs’. + +[625] Nub. 181 ff., Equit. 1327. + +[626] [Fossum, Am. J. Arch. 1898, p. 188; Dörpfeld, Ath. Mitth. 1903, p. +396. See above, p. 165 n.] + +[627] [Exon, Hermathena, 1900, pp. 132 ff.; Navarre, Revue des Études +Anciennes, 1901, p. 102. The words are περιστρεφόμενον, στραφέντα, +and the variant ἐγκύκλημα (compared with ἐγκύκλιος, &c., of rotatory +movement): see above, p. 201. Exon also doubts if ἀνοίγεται ἡ σκηνή +could be used of opening a door for the ἐκκύκλημα to pass, and thinks +that the portion of the back-scene which formed part of the ἐκκύκλημα +on his theory was by the side of the door, and that there was a similar +apparatus by each door. But this is pressing the meaning of ἀνοίγεται +ἡ σκηνή too closely. The words of Pollux, however, do suggest that the +ἐκκύκλημα could be adapted to any of the three doors.] + +[628] Schol. Thesm. 284 παρεπιγραφή. ἐκκυκλεῖται ἐπὶ τὸ ἔξω τὸ +θεσμοφόριον. The words ὠθεῖται τὸ ἱερόν are inserted in the text. These +παρεπιγραφαί were stage-directions appended to the text of the plays; but +when and by whom they were written is unknown. + +[629] Schol. Eum. 64. + +[630] When Apollo (l. 67) says καὶ νῦν ἁλούσας τάσδε τὰς μάργους ὁρᾷς, it +is hardly conceivable that the Furies should not have been visible to the +audience. Also l. 179 ἔξω, κελεύω, τῶνδε δωμάτων τάχος | χωρεῖτε implies +that they were still inside the temple: but according to the theory in +the text they had come out of the temple at l. 140. + +[631] Reisch, Griech. Theater, pp. 234 ff.; Capps, The Stage in the +Greek Theatre, pp. 237 ff. Neckel (Das Ekkyklema, pp. 7 ff.) thinks the +ekkyklema was too rude a device for the taste of Aeschylus and Sophocles, +and that it was first introduced in the time of Euripides. Bethe +(Prolegomena, pp. 104 ff.) thinks it was used by Aeschylus and Sophocles, +but gradually dropped by Euripides. + +[632] Reisch (pp. 237 ff.) explains the two scenes in the +Thesmophoriazusae and the Acharnians by supposing that Agathon and +Euripides were rolled out on couches. But this theory destroys all the +point and humour of the scenes. + +[633] Herc. Fur. 1008, 1070. + +[634] Nub. 184, 198. + +[635] Additional proofs that the bodies were not _carried_ out are +(1) Agam. 1379, where Clytaemnestra says she is standing on ‘the very +spot where she struck the blow’, (2) Antig. 1301, where Eurydice is +seen lying beside the altar at which she had stabbed herself. That the +ekkyklema-scenes were _outside_ the building, and on the stage, is also +proved by Eur. El. 1245, 1276, where the Dioscuri, though standing above +the palace roof, can see the bodies of Clytaemnestra and Aegisthus. + +[636] Poll. iv. 129 τὴν δὲ ἐξώστραν ταὐτὸν τῷ ἐκκυκλήματι νομίζουσιν. +Hesych. s.v. ἐξώστρα· ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς τὸ ἐκκύκλημα. Delian inscription of +274 B.C. (Bull. Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 162) τὰς ἐξώστρας ... ἐπισκευάσαι. +Polyb. xi. 6. 8 τῆς τύχης ὥσπερ ἐπίτηδες ἐπὶ τὴν ἐξώστραν ἀναβιβαζούσης +τὴν ὑμετέραν ἄγνοιαν. Cic. de Prov. Cons. § 14 iam in exostra helluatur, +antea post siparium solebat. + +[637] Poll. iv. 128 ἡ μηχανὴ δὲ θεοὺς δείκνυσι καὶ ἥρως τοὺς ἐν ἀέρι, +Βελλεροφόντας ἢ Περσέας, καὶ κεῖται κατὰ τὴν ἀριστερὰν πάροδον, ὑπὲρ +τὴν σκηνὴν τὸ ὕψος. Schol. Luc. Philops. vii. p. 375 (Lehmann) ἄνωθεν +ὑπὲρ τὰς παρ’ ἑκάτερα τῆς μέσης τοῦ θεάτρου θύρας ... μηχανῶν δύο +μετεωριζομένων ἡ ἐξ ἀριστερῶν θεοὺς καὶ ἥρωας ἐνεφάνιζε παρευθύ, +ὥσπερ λύσιν φέροντας τῶν ἀμηχάνων. Aristoph. Daedal. fr. 9 (Meineke) +ὁ μηχανοποιός, ὁπότε βούλει τὸν τροχὸν | ἐλᾶν ἀνεκάς, λέγε, χαῖρε +φέγγος ἡλίου. The μηχανή was also called ἐώρημα, Suidas. s.v. [This +should probably be αἰώρημα.] The ropes to which the actor was suspended +were called αἰῶραι; Poll. iv. 131 αἰώρας δ’ ἂν εἴποις τοὺς κάλως οἳ +κατήρτηνται ἐξ ὕψους ἀνέχειν τοὺς ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀέρος φέρεσθαι δοκοῦντας ἥρως +ἢ θεούς. The hook by which he was fastened was ἅρπαξ or ἀγκυρίς; Bekk. +Anecd. i. 232 (of the Crane) ἅρπαξ ... ἐξ οὗ ὁ ἐσκευασμένος ὑποκριτὴς +τραγῳδεῖ. Plut. Prov. 116 (of the Fig-Branch) ἀγκυρίς, ἀφ’ ἧς οἱ +ὑποκριταὶ ... ἐξαρτῶνται ... ζωστῆρσι καὶ ταινίαις κατειλημμένοι. + +[638] Plut. Prov. 116 κράδης ῥαγείσης· νῦν οὐχ ὁ σύκινος κλάδος, ἀλλ’ ἡ +ἀγκυρίς, ἀφ’ ἧς οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ἐν ταῖς τραγικαῖς σκηναῖς ἐξαρτῶνται θεοῦ +μιμούμενοι ἐπιφάνειαν. So Hesych. s.v. κράδη. Pollux (iv. 128) makes the +κράδη the comic counterpart of the μηχανή, which is utterly improbable. +Crusius (Philologus, 1889, p. 698) suggests very plausibly that κράδης +ῥαγείσης was the beginning of a line in some comic poet, who applied the +name ‘fig-branch’ contemptuously to the hook of the μηχανή. + +[639] Poll. iv. 130 ἡ δέ γέρανος μηχάνημά ἐστιν ἐκ μετεώρου καταφερόμενον +ἐφ’ ἁρπαγῇ σώματος, ᾧ κέχρηται Ἠὼς ἁρπάζουσα τὸ σῶμα τὸ Μέμνονος. The +scholiast on Lucian (quoted on p. 209) speaks of two μηχαναί, one at each +end of the back-scene; and then proceeds to describe the ordinary μηχανή, +but says nothing about the other one. Hence Oehmichen (Bühnenwesen, p. +247) conjectures that this other μηχανή was the γέρανος. + +[640] Bekk. Anecd. i. 208 μηχανή ἐστι παρὰ τοῖς κωμικοῖς ἐκκυκλήματός τι +εἶδος ... δείξεως χάριν θεοῦ ἢ ἄλλου τινὸς ἥρωος. Lucian, Philops. 29 +θεὸν ἀπὸ μηχανῆς ἐπεισκυκληθῆναί μοι τοῦτον ᾤμην. Philostrat. vit. Apoll. +vi. 11 ἐφ’ ὑψηλῆς καὶ θείας μηχανῆς ἐκκυκλοῦσιν. + +[641] Prom. 284, 394. Pollux, iv. 130. + +[642] Eum. 403-5. + +[643] Prom. 135, 280. + +[644] That the capacities of the μηχανή were not unlimited is proved by +Pollux, iv. 126 θεοὺς θαλαττίους ἐπάγει, καὶ πάνθ’ ὅσα ἐπαχθέστερα ὄντα ἡ +μηχανὴ φέρειν ἀδυνατεῖ. + +[645] Androm. 1229, Eur. El. 1235, 1349, Med. 1317 ff. + +[646] Herc. Fur. 817, 872, 880. Eur. frags. 124, 306, 307. Poll. iv. 128. + +[647] Nub. 218, Av. 1199, Daedal. frag. 9, Pax 154 ff. + +[648] A supposed representation of a theologeion on a medallion of the +Roman period, found at Orange, is given in Baumeister, fig. 1832, and +Griech. Theater, p. 335. Jupiter, Minerva, and Victoria are depicted as +sitting on a tall and narrow stage, while Mars and Hercules confront +one another underneath. But there is nothing to show that the scene +represents a theatrical performance. + +[649] See next note. See also p. 164. + +[650] Poll. iv. 130 ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ θεολογείου ὄντος ὑπὲρ τὴν σκηνὴν ἐν ὕψει +ἐπιφαίνονται θεοί, ὡς Ζεὺς καὶ οἱ περὶ αὐτὸν ἐν Ψυχοστασίᾳ. Plut. Aud. +Poet. 17 A. + +[651] Niejahr, however (Quaest. Scaen. pp. 20 ff.), suggests that +Trygaeus only rose a short distance upon the beetle, then descended to +earth again, and that his own house then did duty as the house of Zeus. +[Cp. Sharpley’s edition of the Peace, Introduction.] + +[652] Wilamowitz, Herakles, i. p. 148. + +[653] Reisch, Griech. Theater, pp. 227 ff. Bodensteiner, Scenische +Fragen, pp. 665 ff. Bethe (Prolegomena, p. 133) thinks neither the +mechane nor the theologeion were used before about 427, when he supposes +there was a great reorganization of the scenic arrangements (see above, +p. 172). + +[654] Ion 1549, Rhesus 886, Orest. 1631. + +[655] Hipp. 1282, Iph. Taur. 1435, Eur. Suppl. 1183, Hel. 1642, Phil. +1409, Bacch. 1331. + +[656] Plat. Cratyl. 425 D οἱ τραγῳδοί, ἐπειδάν τι ἀπορῶσιν, ἐπὶ τὰς +μηχανὰς καταφεύγουσι θεοὺς αἴροντες. Antiphanes (Meineke, iii. p. 106) +ἔπειθ’ ὅταν μηδὲν δύνωντ’ εἰπεῖν ἔτι | ... αἴρουσιν ὥσπερ δάκτυλον τὴν +μηχανήν, | καὶ τοῖς θεωμένοισιν ἀποχρώντως ἔχει. Aristot. Poet. c. 15. +Demosth. p. 1025 ὥσπερ ἀπὸ μηχανῆς. Schol. Plat. Bekk. p. 381 ἀπὸ μηχανῆς +θεὸς ἐπεφάνης· Μένανδρος Θεοφορουμένῃ. + +[657] Rhesus 596 (cp. 627); Ajax 1-133. + +[658] Cp. Hipp. 53 ἔξω τῶνδε βήσομαι τόπων. Ion 76 ἐς δαφνώδη γύαλα +βήσομαι τάδε. In the Troades, though Hecuba is on the stage during the +speech of Poseidon and his colloquy with Athene, she is lying prostrate +on the ground, overcome with grief, and is unconscious of their presence. + +[659] Aristot. Poet. c. 15 ἀλλὰ μηχανῇ χρηστέον ἐπὶ τὰ ἔξω τοῦ δράματος, +ἢ ὅσα πρὸ τοῦ γέγονεν ἃ οὐχ οἷόν τε ἄνθρωπον εἰδέναι, ἢ ὅσα ὕστερον ἃ +δεῖται προαγορεύσεως καὶ ἀγγελίας. Here ὅσα πρὸ τοῦ γέγονεν apparently +refers to the prologue. For the practice of later times cp. Evanthius de +Commedia, p. 6 Reif. (quoted by Bethe, Prolegom. p. 133) ‘deinde θεοὺς +ἀπὸ μηχανῆς, id est, deos narrandis argumentis machinatos, ceteri Latini +ad instar Graecorum habent’. + +[660] Aristot. Poet. c. 15. + +[661] See the Tragic Drama of the Greeks, p. 245. + +[662] Poll. iv. 132 αἱ δὲ Χαρώνιοι κλίμακες, κατὰ τὰς ἐκ τῶν ἑδωλίων +καθόδους κείμεναι, τὰ εἴδωλα ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ἀναπέμπουσιν. τὰ δὲ ἀναπιέσματα, +τὸ μέν ἐστιν ἐν τῇ σκηνῇ ὡς ποταμὸν ἀνελθεῖν ἢ τοιοῦτόν τι πρόσωπον, τὸ +δὲ περὶ τοὺς ἀναβαθμούς, ἀφ’ ὧν ἀνέβαινον Ἐρινύες. + +[663] Pers. 659, Nauck, Trag. Graec. Frag. p. 246 προφαινομένου ὑπὲρ τοῦ +τάφου. + +[664] Schol. Nub. 292; Poll. iv. 130; Heron (in Thevenot, Mathematici +Veteres, p. 263). See Weismann, Scen. Anweis. pp. 45 ff. + +[665] Poll. iv. 130 κεραυνοσκοπεῖον ... περίακτος ὑψηλή. Heron, l.c. +p. 265. Weismann (l.c. p. 48), who was the first to draw attention to +the passage in Heron, supposes that there was a periaktos high up in +the back-scene, and that an apparatus like that of Heron’s was fastened +to all three sides of it, so that by revolving the periaktos three +successive flashes might be exhibited. + +[666] Poll. iv. 127, 131, 132. + +[667] Ovid, Met. iii. 111; Hor. Ep. ii. 1. 189. + +[668] The following passages are cited in proof of the existence of a +drop-scene:—(1) Athen. 536 A γενομένων δὲ τῶν Δημητρίων Ἀθήνησιν ἐγράφετο +ἐπὶ τοῦ προσκηνίου (ὁ Δημήτριος) ἐπὶ τῆς οἰκουμένης ὀχούμενος. Here +προσκήνιον more probably denotes the scene at the back of the stage. +(2) Suid. s.v. προσκήνιον· τὸ πρὸ τῆς σκηνῆς παραπέτασμα· ἡ δὲ τύχη +παρελκομένη τὴν πρόφασιν καθάπερ ἐπὶ προσκήνιον παρεγύμνωσε τὰς ἀληθεῖς +ἐπινοίας. Suidas has here mistaken the meaning of the passage he quotes, +in which προσκήνιον = ‘the stage’. (3) Synesius (flor. about 400 A.D.) +Aegypt. p. 128 C εἰ δέ τις ... κυνοφθαλμίζοιτο διὰ τοῦ προσκηνίου. Even +if προσκήνιον means the drop-scene in this passage, it would be no proof +of the existence of a drop-scene in classical times. (4) Poll. iv. 122 +(speaking of the theatre) ἔξεστι δὲ καὶ τὸ παραπέτασμα αὐλαίαν καλεῖν, +Ὑπερείδου εἰπόντος ἐν τῷ κατὰ Πατροκλέους· οἱ δὲ ἐννέα ἄρχοντες εἱστιῶντο +ἐν τῇ στοᾷ, περιφραξάμενοί τι μέρος αὐτῆς αὐλαίᾳ. Suidas s.v. αὐλαία, and +Bekk. Anecd. p. 463 αὐλαία τὸ τῆς σκηνῆς παραπέτασμα· κέχρηται δὲ αὐτῷ +Ὑπερείδης ἐν τῷ κατὰ Πατροκλέους. Hesych. s.ν. αὐλαία ... τὸ τῆς σκηνῆς +παραπέτασμα. Et. Mag. p. 170 λέγονται δὲ αὐλαῖαι καὶ τὰ παραπετάσματα +τῆς σκηνῆς, ὡς παρὰ τῷ θεολόγῳ. It is obvious that the grammarians +here cited were thinking of a drop-scene. But the passage they refer +to in Hypereides has nothing to do with a drop-scene. It is doubtful, +therefore, whether this testimony is of any value except for the practice +of later times. It can hardly be considered decisive for the classical +period. + +[669] Bethe (Prolegomena, pp. 198 ff.) thinks the drop-scene was +introduced into the Greek theatre about 427 B.C., at the same time as the +raised stage. His reason is that none of the plays which begin with a +tableau are previous to 427 in date. But the Agamemnon commences with the +watchman reclining on the palace roof. The Heracleidae (probably anterior +to 427) opens with a group of suppliants at an altar. The Oedipus Rex, +which also begins with a tableau, is of unknown date, and there is +nothing to show that it was later than 427. + +[670] Poll. iv. 123 ἐλεὸς δ’ ἦν τράπεζα ἀρχαία, ἐφ’ ἣν πρὸ Θέσπιδος +εἷς τις ἀναβὰς τοῖς χορευταῖς ἀπεκρίνατο. Arist. Poet. c. 4 καὶ ἡ μὲν +(τραγῳδία ἐγένετο) ἀπὸ τῶν ἐξαρχόντων τὸν διθύραμβον, ἡ δὲ (κωμῳδία) ἀπὸ +τῶν τὰ φαλλικά. + +[671] Diog. Laërt. iii. 56 ὥσπερ δὲ τὸ παλαιὸν ἐν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ πρότερον +μὲν μόνος ὁ χορὸς διεδραμάτιζεν, ὕστερον δὲ Θέσπις ἕνα ὑποκριτὴν ἐξεῦρεν +ὑπὲρ τοῦ διαναπαύεσθαι τὸν χορόν. + +[672] Suidas s.v. Θέσπις. + +[673] Aristot. Poet. c. 4 καὶ τό τε τῶν ὑποκριτῶν πλῆθος ἐξ ἑνὸς εἰς +δύο πρῶτος Αἰσχύλος ἤγαγε καὶ τὰ τοῦ χοροῦ ἠλάττωσε καὶ τὸν λόγον +πρωταγωνιστὴν παρεσκεύασεν. + +[674] Viz. the Supplices, Persae, and Seven against Thebes. In the +concluding scene of the Seven the part of Ismene would not be taken by a +regular actor. Apparently the opening scene of the Prometheus requires +three actors, unless we are to adopt the very improbable supposition that +the person of Prometheus was represented by a wooden figure, which was +nailed to the rock, and from behind which the protagonist spoke the part. +[In favour of the lay figure, see Wecklein’s Edition of the Prometheus, +Introd. p. 54; Navarre, Annales de la Faculté des Lettres de Bordeaux, +Rev. des Études Anciennes, 1901; against it, Bodensteiner, Jahrb. für +class. Philol., Suppl.-bd. xix. p. 674; Bethe, Proleg. p. 180, &c.] + +[675] Aristot. Poet. c. 4; Diog. Laërt. iii. 56; vit. Soph.; Suidas s.v. +Σοφοκλῆς. The Life of Aeschylus assigns the introduction of the third +actor to Aeschylus, but adds that Dicaearchus ascribed it to Sophocles. +The passage in Themistius (xxvi. p. 316 D) καὶ οὐ προσέχομεν Ἀριστοτέλει +ὅτι τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ὁ χορὸς εἰσιὼν ᾖδεν εἰς τοὺς θεούς, Θέσπις δὲ πρόλογόν +τε καὶ ῥῆσιν ἐξεῦρεν, Αἰσχύλος δὲ τρίτον ὑποκριτήν (a. l. τρίτον +ὑποκριτάς) is doubtful, and cannot weigh against Aristotle’s definite +statement in the Poetics. The balance of evidence is distinctly in favour +of the conclusion that the third actor was first introduced by Sophocles. + +[676] Baumeister, Denkmäler, No. 422; Eur. Cyclops 197 ff. + +[677] Arist. Poet. cc. 4, 5; Anon. de Comoed. (Dindf. Prolegom. de +Comoed. p. 27); Diomedes, p. 490 K. + +[678] Soph. O. C. 1117 ff., 1249 ff., 1500 ff. + +[679] Cp. Beer, Über die Zahl der Schauspieler bei Aristophanes, Leipz. +1844. + +[680] Phot. s.v. ὑποκρίνεσθαι· τὸ ἀποκρίνεσθαι οἱ παλαιοί· καὶ ὁ +ὑποκριτὴς ἐντεῦθεν, ὁ ἀποκρινόμενος τῷ χορῷ. So also Hesych. s.v. +ὑποκρίνοιτο, and Poll. iv. 123. Apollon. Lex. Hom. s.v. ὑποκρίναιτο· +πρωταγωνιστοῦντος γὰρ τοῦ χοροῦ τὸ παλαιὸν οὗτοι ὥσπερ ἀποκριταὶ ᾖσαν, +ἀποκρινόμενοι πρὸς τὸν χορόν. + +[681] Demosth. Fals. Leg. § 192 πάντας τοὺς τεχνίτας συνήγαγεν; Aristot. +Prob. xxx. 10 οἱ περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τεχνῖται; Polyb. xvi. 21. + +[682] Plut. Solon p. 95 C; Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1 ὑπεκρίνοντο γὰρ αὐτοὶ +τὰς τραγῳδίας οἱ ποιηταὶ τὸ πρῶτον. + +[683] The words in the Life are ἐχρήσατο δ’ ὑποκριτῇ πρώτῳ μὲν Κλεάνδρῳ, +ἔπειτα καὶ τὸν δεύτερον αὐτῷ προσῆψε Μυννίσκον τὸν Χαλκιδέα· τὸν δὲ +τρίτον ὑποκριτὴν αὐτὸς ἐξεῦρεν, ὡς δὲ Δικαίαρχος ὁ Μεσσήνιος, Σοφοκλῆς. +These words imply that he employed Mynniscus for the first time on the +occasion of his introduction of a second actor; and that previously to +this innovation, when only one actor was required, he had been accustomed +to employ Cleander, instead of acting himself. He must, therefore, have +given up acting before the production of the Supplices, and considerably +before the first appearance of Sophocles. The statement that Sophocles +was the _first_ dramatic poet to abandon acting in person can only be +true to the extent that he was the first poet who never acted at all. + +[684] Vit. Soph. πρῶτον μὲν καταλύσας τὴν ὑπόκρισιν τοῦ ποιητοῦ διὰ τὴν +ἰδίαν μικροφωνίαν; Athen. p. 20 F; Eustath. Od. p. 1533. + +[685] Müller (Griech. Bühnenalt. p. 184) states, on the authority of +Zenob. Prov. v. 100, that Astydamas the Elder acted in his own tragedy, +the Parthenopaeus. The words in Zenobius are εὐημερήσας ἐν τῇ ὑποκρίσει +Παρθενοπαίου. But this is merely a carelessness of expression, on which +no stress can be laid. In the account given by Suidas (s.v. σαυτὴν +ἐπαινεῖς) of the same occurrence the expression is εὐημερήσαντι ἐπὶ +τραγῳδίας διδασκαλίᾳ Παρθενοπαίου. The Parthenopaeus was really written +by Astydamas the Younger. See the Tragic Drama of the Greeks, p. 430. + +[686] Athen. p. 22 A; Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 534. + +[687] Vit. Aristoph. p. 34 Dindf.; Arg. ii. Equit. The story arose from a +misunderstanding of the phrase καθιέναι τὸ δρᾶμα δι’ ἑαυτοῦ. The Knights +was the first play Aristophanes produced in his own name. See Meineke, +Frag. Com. Gr. ii. 928 ff. Antiphanes is said (Müller, Die griech. +Bühnen, p. 184) to have acted one of his own comedies, the evidence +being the inscription in Corp. Ins. Att. ii. 972 [Ἀντιφάνη]ς πέμ(πτος) +Ἀνασῳζο(μένοις)· [ὑπεκρίνετο Ἀντ]ιφάνης. But it is by no means certain +that the name of the poet is rightly filled in as Antiphanes. Even if it +is, it does not follow that the actor Antiphanes was the same person. + +[688] See chap. i. p. 44. + +[689] Aristot. Poet. c. 9 λέγω δ’ ἐπεισοδιώδη μῦθον ἐν ᾧ τὰ ἐπεισόδια +μετ’ ἄλληλα οὔτ’ εἰκὸς οὔτ’ ἀνάγκη εἶναι. τοιαῦται δὲ ποιοῦνται ὑπὸ μὲν +τῶν φαύλων ποιητῶν δι’ αὐτούς, ὑπὸ δὲ τῶν ἀγαθῶν διὰ τοὺς ὑποκριτάς: +Rhet. iii. 1 μεῖζον δύνανται νῦν τῶν ποιητῶν οἱ ὑποκριταί. + +[690] Vit. Soph. p. 3 Dindf. + +[691] See chap. ii. pp. 57 ff. + +[692] Plut. Alex. p. 681 E. + +[693] Plut. Rep. Ger. 817 A; Dem. Fals. Leg. § 10; Suidas s.v. Σοφοκλῆς. + +[694] See chap. i. p. 42, ch. ii. p. 57. + +[695] Cic. Div. in Caecil. § 48 ‘ut in actoribus Graecis fieri videmus, +saepe illum, qui est secundarum aut tertiarum partium, cum possit +aliquanto clarius dicere quam ipse primarum, multum summittere, ut ille +princeps quam maxime excellat,’ &c. + +[696] Aristot. Pol. vii. 17. The story about Theodorus has caused some +difficulty. Does it mean that Theodorus, besides taking the principal +character, also played the part of the person who made the first speech +in the tragedy? If so, he would have been debarred from acting some of +the most popular tragedies of the time. For instance, the actor who +took the part of Electra in the play of Sophocles could not act the +part of the paedagogus, since Electra comes on the stage as soon as +the paedagogus leaves it. There would be the same difficulty about the +Orestes, the Medea, and many other plays. It has been suggested that the +reference is to some preliminary announcement of the title of the play, +which Theodorus preferred to make himself, instead of leaving it to a +subordinate. Such announcements were made in Greek theatres in later +times (cp. Lucian, Pseudolog. 19; Heliod. Aethiop. viii. 17; Synesius, +περὶ προνοίας, p. 128 D), and may have been customary in Athens, or in +other parts of Greece, in the time of Theodorus. But it is extremely +improbable that the reference is to any such practice. The audience would +hardly pay much attention to the voice of the person who announced the +name of the coming play. The meaning is probably that Theodorus used +to take the part of the character which spoke first, whenever it was +possible to do so. In such plays as the Electra it would be impossible. + +[697] Alciphron, Epist. iii. 71. + +[698] Schol. Eur. Phoen. 93. + +[699] Schol. Aesch. Choeph. 900. + +[700] Aul. Gell. vii. 5; Stob. Flor. 97. 28; Dem. Fals. Leg. § 246; +Strattis ap. Kock, Frag. Com. Gr. i. p. 711. + +[701] Hesych. s.v. ἀρουραῖος Οἰνόμαος; Dem. de Cor. § 180; Aelian, Var. +Hist. xiv. 40. + +[702] Plut. Lysand. p. 466 D. + +[703] Dem. Fals. Leg. § 247. + +[704] Dem. l.c., de Cor. §§ 180, 267. [Devrient, Das Kind auf der +antiken Bühne, thinks that the words spoken by children in the Alcestis, +Andromache, &c., were declaimed by the tritagonist from behind the stage, +while a real child appeared on the stage and went through the gestures.] + +[705] K. F. Hermann, De distributione personarum in trag. graec., 1842; +Richter, Die Vertheilung der Rollen der griech. Tragödie, 1842; Croiset, +Histoire de la Litt. grecq., iii. passim. + +[706] As there is some doubt about the meaning of the word παραχορήγημα, +it will be well to quote the passages where it occurs. They are (1) +Schol. Aesch. Prom. 12 ἐν παραχορηγήματι αὐτῷ εἰδωλοποιηθεῖσα Βία. (2) +Schol. Aesch. Eum. 573 ἐν παραχορηγήματι αὐτῷ εἰσιν οἱ Ἀρεοπαγῖται +μηδαμοῦ διαλεγόμενοι. (3) Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 211 ταῦτα καλεῖται +παραχορηγήματα, ἐπειδὴ οὐχ ὁρῶνται ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ οἱ βάτραχοι, οὐδὲ ὁ +χορός, ἀλλ’ ἔσωθεν μιμοῦνται τοὺς βατράχους· ὁ δὲ ἀληθῶς χορὸς ἐκ τῶν +εὐσεβῶν νεκρῶν συνέστηκεν. (4) Schol. Aristoph. Pax 113 τὰ τοιαῦτα +παραχορηγήματα καλοῦσιν, οἷα νῦν τὰ παιδία ποιεῖ καλοῦντα τὸν πατέρα· +εἶτα πρὸς οὐδὲν ἔτι τούτοις χρήσεται. (5) Poll. iv. 109 ὁπότε μὴν ἀντὶ +τετάρτου ὑποκριτοῦ δέοι τινὰ τῶν χορευτῶν εἰπεῖν ἐν ᾠδῇ, παρασκήνιον +καλεῖται τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὡς ἐν Ἀγαμέμνονι Αἰσχύλου· εἰ δὲ τέταρτος ὑποκριτής +τι παραφθέγξαιτο, τοῦτο παραχορήγημα ὀνομάζεται, καὶ πεπρᾶχθαί φασιν +αὐτὸ ἐν Μέμνονι Αἰσχύλου. The first and second instances refer to mute +personages, the third instance refers to an extra chorus, the fourth +to extra performers who say only a few words upon the stage. It is +therefore quite clear that the word παραχορήγημα included all classes +of extra performers, as distinct from the actors and the chorus. There +are no grounds for excluding the mute personages from the class of +παραχορηγήματα, as Müller (Griech. Bühnenalt. p. 179) and others have +done. Pollux appears to make the distinction between παρασκήνιον and +παραχορήγημα lie in the fact that the former sang, the latter spoke. The +distinction is a foolish one, and was probably due to Pollux’s habit of +generalizing from one particular instance. The word παρασκήνιον, in its +present sense, only occurs in the passage of Pollux. To judge from the +etymology of the word, it may have denoted performers behind the scenes. +The words ἐν Ἀγαμέμνονι Αἰσχύλου in the passage of Pollux are corrupt, +the corruption arising from the words ἐν Μέμνονι Αἰσχύλου which follow. +There is no παρασκήνιον in the Agamemnon. The reference cannot be to +the speech of Pylades in the Choephori (vv. 900-902), because (1) the +Choephori could not be called the Agamemnon, (2) the part of Pylades was +taken by one of the regular actors, as the scholiast ad loc. informs us. + +[707] Plut. Phocion, p. 750 C. + +[708] See note 2 on the previous page. + +[709] Aesch. Choeph. 713, Eum. 678 ff., Agam. 908. + +[710] Soph. Aj. 544; Eur. Med. 1021, Herc. Fur. 454, Phoen. 834, Hecub. +978. + +[711] Eur. Alc. 393, Androm. 504. + +[712] Aristoph. Pax 114, Acharn. 43, 94, 729. + +[713] Aesch. Eum. 1032; Aristoph. Vesp. 248; Schol. Eur. Hipp. 58. + +[714] Aristoph. Ran. 209, Thesm. 104. + +[715] Eur. Hipp. 61. + +[716] Athen. p. 21 E; Hor. A. P. 278; Philostrat. vit. Apoll. vi. 11; +Cramer, Anecd. Par. i. p. 19; Evanth. de trag. et com. (Gronov. Thesaur. +viii. p. 1683); Suidas s.v. Αἰσχύλος. + +[717] See Crusius, Philologus, 1889, p. 703. + +[718] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 296; Suidas s.v. θρίαμβος; Plut. Cupid. +Divit. 527 D; Verg. Georg. ii. 387. + +[719] Bethe (Prolegomena, pp. 35-46) finds an additional proof of this +theory in the Bologna vase (cp. Dümmler, Rhein. Museum, 1888, p. 355). +In this vase Dionysus is represented sitting in a boat-shaped car, with +a satyr playing a flute on each side of him. The car is drawn by two +satyrs, and two others are leading an ox. A boy and four women follow +behind. Bethe thinks this scene was part of an old tragic performance; +that the single actor of the period always played the part of Dionysus, +and therefore naturally wore his costume. He also thinks the car was +the prototype of the later stage, and is identical with the wagons in +which Thespis is said to have carried about his tragedies (Hor. A. P. +276). Unfortunately for these theories there is nothing to show that +the procession depicted on the vase had any connexion with a dramatic +performance. Such processions with Dionysus in a boat-shaped car are +known to have existed in other parts of Greece (Philostrat. vit. Soph. +i. 25; cp. Crusius, Philologus, 1889, p. 209); and though interesting as +illustrations of the Bacchic mythology, they throw no light on the early +history of the drama. + +[720] Athen. p. 21 E. + +[721] See, on the subject of this relief, Robert, Athen. Mittheil. 1882, +pp. 389 ff. + +[722] See Bethe, Jahrb. des Archaeol. Instituts, 1896, pp. 292 ff., and +pl. 2. + +[723] See especially the Medea vase (Baumeister, Denkmäler, no. 980). +Copies of many of these vases are given by Huddilston, in Greek Tragedy +in the Light of Vase-Paintings, 1898. + +[724] A list of them will be found in Müller, Griech. Bühnenalt. p. 226. + +[725] From Monumenti Inediti, xi. 13. + +[726] Suidas s.vv. Θέσπις, Χοιρίλος, Φρύνιχος. + +[727] Suidas s.v. Αἰσχύλος; Hor. A. P. 278; Evanth. de trag. et com. +(Gronov. Thesaur. viii. p. 1683). + +[728] Aul. Gell. v. 7. + +[729] Poll. x. 167; Isidor. Orig. x. 119; Suidas s.v. Θέσπις; Verg. +Georg. ii. 387; Prudent. c. Symmach. ii. 646. + +[730] Aul. Gell. v. 7. + +[731] Schol. Dem. Fals. Leg. § 256. See fig. 23. + +[732] Wieseler, Denkmäler, p. 42. + +[733] Poll. iv. 133-5, 139. + +[734] [Soph. El. 1296 ff. Other cases are Aesch. Eum. 968, 990, and +Eur. Orest. 1317. Cf. Hense, Die Modificirung der Maske in der griech. +Tragödie, ed. ii (1905), where the various cases in which a change of +mask is certain or suspected are discussed.] + +[735] Poll. iv. 133-41. + +[736] Poll. iv. 141, 142. Special masks were called ἔκσκευα πρόσωπα. + +[737] The masks in fig. 17 are copied from Wieseler, Denkmäler, v. +20, 24, 26. The first is a marble, the second and third are from +wall-paintings at Herculaneum. The masks in fig. 18 are copied from the +Archaeol. Zeitung for 1878. They are from wall-paintings at Pompeii. For +a list of the various works of art illustrating the subject see Müller, +Griech. Bühnenalt. p. 273. + +[738] The name for the tragic boot in Greek was ἐμβάτης (Suid. s.v. +Αἰσχύλος), ὀκρίβας (Lucian, Nero c. 9), or κόθορνος (vit. Aesch.). +Cothurnus was the regular name in Latin. Pollux (iv. 115) appears to be +mistaken in calling ἐμβάτης the comic boot, in opposition to the notices +in other grammarians. The sole of the cothurnus was of wood, as appears +from Schol. Lucian, Epist. Saturn. 19. Works of art show that it was +painted: see Wieseler, Denkmäler, vii, viii; and cp. Ovid. Am. ii. 18. 15 +‘risit Amor pallamque meam pictosque cothurnos’. + +[739] Suidas s.v. Αἰσχύλος; Aristot. apud Themist. or. xxvi. p. 316; +Philostrat., vit. Apoll. vi. 11; Porphyr. on Hor. A. P. 278. + +[740] Vit. Aesch. p. 7 Dindf. + +[741] Lucian, Nero c. 9, Necyom. c. 16, Iupp. Trag. c. 41, de Salt. c. +27; Martial, viii. 3, 13, &c. + +[742] The illustration is from Wieseler, Denkmäler, ix. 1. The original +is a wall-painting from Pompeii. + +[743] Vit. Soph. p. 2 Dindf. + +[744] Lucian, Somnium vel Gallus 26; vit. Aeschin. + +[745] Phot. s.v. σωμάτια; Lucian, de Salt. 27. + +[746] For the general account of the χιτών or tunic see Pollux iv. +115-18. The epithet ποικίλον shows that it was brilliantly coloured. As +to the length of the tunic see Lucian, Iupp. Trag. c. 41, Eustath. II. +p. 954. 47, and the works of art referred to on pp. 240, 241. For the +ornamentation and the girdle see the same works of art. The sleeves were +called χειρίδες (vit. Aesch. p. 6 Dindf.; Lucian, Iupp. Trag. c. 41). + +[747] Poll. iv. 116-18. + +[748] Poll. iv. 116; Soph. O. C. 314; Eur. Bacch. 833. + +[749] Poll. iv. 116, 117; Varro, Res Rust. ii. 11. + +[750] Aesch. Eum. 181, 404; Poll. iv. 117. + +[751] Poll. iv. 117. See fig. 18. + +[752] Lucian, Somn. vel Gall. 26; Poll. iv. 116. The special tunic was +called κόλπωμα. + +[753] Aesch. Pers. 661. + +[754] Poll. iv. 116, 117. The cloak was called ἐφαπτίς. + +[755] Eur. Ion 743; Vit. Soph. p. 2 Dindf. + +[756] Aesch. Agam. 493; Soph. O. R. 83; Eur. Alc. 759. + +[757] Lucian, de Salt. 27, Anachar. 23. + +[758] Philostrat. vit. Apoll. v. 9. + +[759] The illustrations are taken from Monumenti Inediti, xi. 31, 32. The +originals are wall-paintings at Pompeii. + +[760] Baumeister, Denkmäler, nos. 422 (the Naples vase), 424, 1631; +Wieseler, Denkmäler, vi. 1, 2 (the Naples vase), 3-10. See above, p. 240. + +[761] Specimens of the first kind of dress are to be found in Wieseler, +vi. 2 (= Baumeister, 422), 6, 7, 10; specimens of the second kind in +vi. 8 (= Baum. 1631), 9. The tunic was called χιτὼν χορταῖος, μαλλωτός, +ἀμφίμαλλος, and was apparently made of wool: cp. Poll. iv. 118; Hesych. +and Suid. s.v. χορταῖος; Dion. Hal. A. R. vii. 72; Ael. Var. Hist. iii. +40. + +[762] Poll. iv. 118. These articles are part of the dress of Silenus. The +other actors were dressed quite differently. The dress of the chorus is +described in the next chapter. + +[763] There does not appear, however, to be any instance of an old +Attic comedy being acted by the Phlyakes. The scene in Baumeister no. +904, where Hercules is knocking against a door, and a slave on a donkey +follows behind, was formerly supposed to be the opening scene of the +Frogs. But this is very doubtful. The character in the vase-painting is +the real Hercules, and not Dionysus disguised. + +[764] Körte, Studien zur Alten Komödie, Jahrbuch des archaeol. Instituts, +1893, pp. 61-93. + +[765] The illustration is taken from Compte Rendu de la Commission +Impériale Archéologique, 1870-1, plate iv. 1. The vase was found in the +Crimea, but is now at St. Petersburg. In the original there are two other +figures (not actors), one on each side of the group. These have been +omitted from the copy. + +[766] The two figures are from Körte, l.c. pp. 78 and 80. Both were found +at Athens. For a complete list of these statuettes see Körte, pp. 77-86. + +[767] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 538. + +[768] Aristoph. Nub. 538 οὐδὲν ἦλθε ῥαψαμένη σκύτινον καθειμένον κ.τ.λ. +Possibly Aristophanes only means that he used the φαλλὸς ἀναδεδεμένος +instead of the more indecent καθειμένος. Nub. 734 seems to show that the +φαλλός was used even in the Clouds. For its employment in the other plays +cp. Acharn. 156 ff., 1216 ff., Vesp. 1342, Pax 1349, Lysist. 928, 937, +987 ff., 1073 ff., Thesm. 59, 141, 239, 643, 1114. [Willems, Le Nu dans +la Comédie Ancienne, tries to show that Aristophanes’ use of the phallus +was exceptional, but without success. He also argues that in Vesp. 1342, +Pax 886, Thesm. 1181, Ach. 1198, Ran. 1308 mute parts were played by +ἑταῖραι absolutely nude; but the evidence is quite insufficient, and can +be otherwise explained.] + +[769] The padding was called σωμάτιον. Cp. Phot. σωμάτια, τὰ ἀναπλάσματα +οἷς οἱ ὑποκριταὶ διασάττουσιν αὑτούς. Luc. Iupp. Trag. 41 προγαστρίδια +καὶ σωμάτια. The name of the under-garment is uncertain. Müller +(Bühnenalt. p. 230) thinks it too was called σωμάτιον, on the strength of +Poll. iv. 115 καὶ σκευὴ μὲν ἡ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν στολὴ (ἡ δ’ αὐτὴ καὶ σωμάτιον +ἐκαλεῖτο). But this is very doubtful. + +[770] For the references see Müller, Bühnenalt. pp. 249 ff. + +[771] Poll. iv. 143; Platon. de Comoed. (Dindf. p. 21); Aristoph. Equit. +230; Ael. Var. Hist. ii. 13. + +[772] Poll. iv. 143 ἐπὶ τὸ γελοιότερον ἐσχημάτιστο. + +[773] Schol. Aristoph. Acharn. 97; Aristoph. Av. 62, 94, 104, 1203 (with +Schol. ad loc.), 1508, Acharn. 575 ff. + +[774] Müller, Bühnenalt. p. 253. + +[775] Jahrbuch des archaeol. Inst. 1893, pp. 89 ff. + +[776] The vase with the names (Εὔνους, Ὀφέλανδρος, Ὄμβρικος) is given by +Körte, p. 91. For another specimen see Baumeister, no. 2099. + +[777] Körte, Athen. Mittheil. 1884, pp. 346 ff. See the specimen given by +Cook in the Classical Review, 1895, p. 373. + +[778] For a list of the works of art illustrating the subject see Müller, +Bühnenalt. pp. 258, 273-6. + +[779] Platon. ap. Dindf. Proll. de Com. p. 21 ἐν δὲ τῇ μέσῃ καὶ νέᾳ +κωμῳδίᾳ ἐπίτηδες τὰ προσωπεῖα πρὸς τὸ γελοιότερον ἐδημιούργησαν ... +ὁρῶμεν γοῦν τὰ προσωπεῖα τῆς Μενάνδρου κωμῳδίας τὰς ὀφρῦς ὁποίας ἔχει, +καὶ ὅπως ἐξεστραμμένον τὸ στόμα καὶ οὐδὲ κατ’ ἀνθρώπων φύσιν. See +Wieseler, Denkmäl. v. 27-52; Baumeister, nos. 905-8. + +[780] Fig. 25 is taken from Archaeol. Zeitung, 1878, Taf. 4, and +represents the masks of a girl and a slave. The original is a +wall-painting at Pompeii. Fig. 26, which is taken from Monumenti Inediti, +xi. 32, contains two copies of terra cottas found at Pompeii. It will be +seen that the mask of the girl is not unlike a tragic mask in general +character. + +[781] Poll. iv. 143-54. Cp. Quint. Inst. xi. 3. 74. + +[782] This shoe was called ἐμβάς in Greek, and soccus in Latin: see +Ammon. de diff. vocab. p. 49; Aristoph. Nub. 858. + +[783] Poll. iv. 119-20. + +[784] The illustration is from Monumenti Inediti, xi. 32. + +[785] Aristot. Poet. c. 6 τὸ δὲ χωρὶς τοῖς εἴδεσι τὸ διὰ μέτρων ἔνια +μόνον περαίνεσθαι καὶ πάλιν ἕτερα διὰ μέλους, c. 4 λέξεως δὲ γενομένης +αὐτὴ ἡ φύσις τὸ οἰκεῖον μέτρον εὗρε, μάλιστα γὰρ λεκτικὸν τῶν μέτρων τὸ +ἰαμβεῖόν ἐστιν. + +[786] The mark C (canticum) denotes the part which was sung, D V +(diverbium) the part which was spoken. These marks are found in cod. +vetus (B), and cod. decurtatus (C), and the plays in which they occur are +the Trinummus, Poenulus, Pseudolus, Truculentus, and parts of others. See +Christ, Metrik, pp. 677 ff. + +[787] Lucian, de Salt. 27 ἐνίοτε καὶ περιᾴδων τὰ ἰαμβεῖα. + +[788] Songs by the actors were called τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς. The solos (in +tragedy) were called μονῳδίαι, the duets and trios had no special name. +Musical duets between actors and chorus were in tragedy called κόμμοι. +Suidas s.vv. μονῳδεῖν, μονῳδία; Aristot. Poet. c. 12. + +[789] Plut. Mus. p. 1140 F ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ Ἀρχίλοχος τὴν τῶν τριμέτρων +ῥυθμοποιΐαν προσεξεῦρε ... καὶ τὴν παρακαταλογήν, καὶ τὴν περὶ ταῦτα +κροῦσιν ... ἔτι δὲ τῶν ἰαμβείων τὸ τὰ μὲν λέγεσθαι παρὰ τὴν κροῦσιν, τὰ +δ’ ᾄδεσθαι, Ἀρχίλοχόν φασι καταδεῖξαι, εἶθ’ οὕτω χρήσασθαι τοὺς τραγικοὺς +ποιητάς. Athen. p. 636 B ἐν οἷς γὰρ (φησὶ) τοὺς ἰάμβους ᾖδον, ἰαμβύκας +ἐκάλουν· ἐν οἷς δὲ παρελογίζοντο τὰ ἐν τοῖς μέτροις, κλεψιάμβους. Hesych. +s.v. καταλογή· τὸ τὰ ᾄσματα μὴ ὑπὸ μέλει λέγειν. + +[790] Xen. Symp. vi. 3 ὥσπερ Νικόστρατος ὁ ὑποκριτὴς τετράμετρα πρὸς τὸν +αὐλὸν κατέλεγεν. + +[791] The two groups of trochaic tetrameters in the parabasis were called +ἐπίρρημα and ἀντεπίρρημα. See Platon. in Dindf. Prolegom. de Comoed. p. +21. + +[792] Aristoph. Pax 1171, 1172. + +[793] Schol. Arist. Nub. 1355 οὕτως ἔλεγον πρὸς χορὸν λέγειν, ὅτε τοῦ +ὑποκριτοῦ διατιθεμένου τὴν ῥῆσιν, ὁ χορὸς ὠρχεῖτο. διὸ καὶ ἐκλέγονται ὡς +ἐπὶ τὸ πλεῖστον ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις τὰ τετράμετρα, ἢ τὰ ἀναπαιστικά, ἢ τὰ +ἰαμβικά, διὰ τὸ ῥᾳδίως ἐμπίπτειν ἐν τούτοις τὸν τοιοῦτον ῥυθμόν. + +[794] Aristoph. Av. 682-4 ἀλλ’, ὦ καλλιβόαν κρέκουσ’ | αὐλὸν φθέγμασιν +ἠρινοῖς, | ἄρχου τῶν ἀναπαίστων, and Schol. ad loc. πολλάκις πρὸς αὐλὸν +λέγουσι τὰς παραβάσεις. + +[795] The exodos, mostly consisting of anapaests, is described as ἅπερ +ἐπὶ τῇ ἐξόδῳ τοῦ δράματος ᾄδεται in Schol. Arist. Vesp. 270, and as ὃ +ἐξιόντες ᾖδον in Poll. iv. 108. But in Dindf. Proll. de Com. p. 37 it +is called τὸ ἐπὶ τέλει λεγόμενον τοῦ χοροῦ. As far as the anapaestic +tetrameters are concerned, the word ᾄδοντας in Aristoph. Plut. 1209, and +Hesych.’s definition of ἀνάπαιστα as τὰ ἐν ταῖς παραβάσεσι τῶν χορῶν +ᾄσματα, show that they were not merely spoken: the expression λέξοντας +ἔπη in Aristoph. Equit. 508 proves that they were not sung. See Christ, +Metrik, pp. 680 ff. + +[796] Aristot. Probl. xix. 6 διὰ τί ἡ παρακαταλογὴ ἐν ταῖς ᾠδαῖς τραγικόν; + +[797] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 312, Vesp. 580; Aristoph. Eccles. 890-2. + +[798] Sext. Empir. p. 751, 21; Aristot. Probl. xix. 43. + +[799] Aristoph. Ran. 1286, 1304. Baumeister, Denkmäler, no. 422. + +[800] Aristoph. Av. 226 ff., 659 ff. + +[801] Lüders, Die dionysischen Künstler, pp. 187 ff. Schol. Aristoph. +Vesp. 582 ἔθος δὲ ἦν ἐν ταῖς ἐξόδοις τῆς τραγῳδίας χορικῶν προσώπων +προηγεῖσθαι αὐλητήν, ὥστε αὐλοῦντα προπέμπειν. + +[802] See Baumeister, Denkmäler, nos. 422, 424; Journal of Hellenic +Studies, xi. plate 11 (reproduced in Fig. 28). + +[803] Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 582. + +[804] Diod. Sic. xvi. 92 Νεοπτόλεμος ὁ τραγῳδός, πρωτεύων τῇ μεγαλοφωνίᾳ +καὶ τῇ δόξῃ. + +[805] Alciph. iii. 48 τορῷ τινι καὶ γεγωνοτέρῳ φωνήματι χρησάμενος. + +[806] Diod. Sic. xv. 7 ἐξαπέστειλε τοὺς εὐφωνοτάτους τῶν ὑποκριτῶν ... +οὗτοι δὲ τὸ μὲν πρῶτον διὰ τὴν εὐφωνίαν ἐξέπληττον τοὺς ἀκούοντας. + +[807] Lucian, Nero 9 ὁ δ’ Ἠπειρώτης ἄριστα φωνῆς ἔχων, εὐδοκιμῶν δ’ ἐπ’ +αὐτῇ καὶ θαυμαζόμενος λαμπροτέρᾳ τοῦ εἰωθότος. + +[808] Plut. X orat. p. 848 B τοὺς ὑποκριτὰς ἔφη δεῖν κρίνειν ἐκ τῆς +φωνῆς. Diog. Laërt. vii. 20 τὴν μὲν φωνὴν καὶ τὴν δύναμιν μεγάλην ἔχειν. +Aristot. Rhet. iii. 1. Lucian, de Salt. 27 μόνης τῆς φωνῆς ὑπεύθυνον +παρέχων ἑαυτόν. Plat. Legg. 817 C καλλίφωνοι ὑποκριταί. + +[809] Cic. div. in Caecil. § 48 ‘cum possit aliquanto clarius dicere ... +multum summittere, ut ille princeps quam maxime excellat’. + +[810] Cic. de Orat. i. § 251. + +[811] Aristot. Probl. xi. 22; Athen. p. 343 E. + +[812] Plut. Aud. Poet. 18 B. + +[813] Aristot. Rhet. iii. 2 διὸ δεῖ λανθάνειν ποιοῦντας, καὶ μὴ δοκεῖν +λέγειν πεπλασμένως ἀλλὰ πεφυκότως ... οἷον ἡ Θεοδώρου φωνὴ πέπονθε πρὸς +τὴν τῶν ἄλλων ὑποκριτῶν· ἣ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ λέγοντος ἔοικεν εἶναι, αἳ δ’ +ἀλλότριαι. + +[814] Lucian, Anachar. c. 23 αὐτοὶ δὲ (οἱ τραγῳδοὶ) μεγάλα τε ἐκεκράγεσαν +καὶ διέβαινον οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως ἀσφαλῶς ἐν τοῖς ὑποδήμασι ... οἱ δὲ κωμῳδοὶ +βραχύτεροι μὲν ἐκείνων καὶ πεζοὶ καὶ ἀνθρωπινώτεροι καὶ ἧττον ἐβόων. + +[815] Philostrat. vit. Apoll. v. 8 (p. 171 Kayser) ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐξάρας τὴν +φωνὴν γεγωνὸν ἐφθέγξατο; Lucian, l.c. See also the passages quoted on p. +273. + +[816] Pollux (iv. 114), speaking of tragic acting, says εἴποις δ’ +ἂν βαρύστονος ὑποκριτής, βομβῶν, περιβομβῶν, ληκυθίζων, λαρυγγίζων, +φαρυγγίζων. Dem. de Cor. § 262. + +[817] Cic. Orat. §§ 25, 27. + +[818] Cic. de Orat. iii. §§ 195, 196, Parad. § 26. + +[819] Antig. 76, Hel. 543, Androm. 529, Orest. 382, Hec. 339, &c. + +[820] Phil. 819, Heraclid. 75, Ajax 865, Eur. Suppl. 1070, Troad. 36, +462. Polymestor (Hec. 1058) and the Delphic priestess (Eum. 34) speak of +themselves as crawling out on all fours. But it is unnecessary to suppose +that they actually made their entrance from the back-scene in this way. + +[821] Aristot. Poet c. 26 ἡ μὲν οὖν τραγῳδία τοιαύτη ἐστίν, ὡς καὶ οἱ +πρότερον τοὺς ὑστέρους αὐτῶν ᾤοντο ὑποκριτάς, ὡς λίαν γὰρ ὑπερβάλλοντα +πίθηκον ὁ Μυννίσκος τὸν Καλλιππίδην ἐκάλει, τοιαύτη δὲ δόξα καὶ περὶ +Πινδάρου ἦν ... εἶτα οὐδὲ κίνησις ἅπασα ἀποδοκιμαστέα, εἴπερ μηδ’ +ὄρχησις, ἀλλ’ ἡ φαύλων, ὅπερ καὶ Καλλιππίδῃ ἐπετιμᾶτο καὶ νῦν ἄλλοις ὡς +οὐκ ἐλευθέρας γυναῖκας μιμουμένων. + +[822] Vit. Soph. ταῖς δὲ Μούσαις θίασον ἐκ τῶν πεπαιδευμένων συναγαγεῖν. +Aristot. Probl. xxx. 10 οἱ Διονυσιακοὶ τεχνῖται. + +[823] Dem. Fals. Leg. § 315. + +[824] Dem. Meid. §§ 15, 58-60. + +[825] C. I. A. ii. 551. + +[826] C. I. A. ii. 552. + +[827] For a complete account of these guilds see Lüders, Die dionysischen +Künstler; Foucart, Les Associations religieuses chez les Grecs. + +[828] Corn. Nep. praef. 5 ‘in scaenam vero prodire et populo esse +spectaculo nemini in iisdem gentibus fuit turpitudini’. Livy xxiv. 24 (of +Ariston the tragic actor) ‘huic genus et fortuna honesta erant; nec ars, +quia nihil tale apud Graecos pudori est, ea deformabat’. + +[829] Aesch. Fals. Leg. §§ 15-19; Dem. de Cor. § 21. + +[830] Dem. Fals. Leg. § 315, de Pace § 6; Diod. Sic. xvi. 92; Plut. Alex. +681 D. + +[831] Plut. Alex. 669 D. + +[832] Plut. X orat. p. 848 B. Gellius, N. A. xi. 9, gives the same story +about Aristodemus. + +[833] Aristot. Prob. xxx. 10. + +[834] Vit. Aesch.; Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 803, Nub. 1267. + +[835] Aristot. Poet. c. 26. + +[836] Xen. Symp. iii. 11; Plut. Ages. p. 607 D ἀλλὰ οὐ σύγε ἐσσὶ +Καλλιππίδας ὁ δεικηλίκτας; + +[837] Macar. Cent. iii. 46; Prov. Coisl. 124. + +[838] Rhet. Graec. vi. p. 35 (Walz). + +[839] Plut. an sen. 785 C. + +[840] Gell. N. A. vii. 5. + +[841] Plut. de se laud. 545 F. + +[842] Ael. Var. Hist. xiv. 40. + +[843] Pausan. i. 37. 3. + +[844] See above, p. 279. + +[845] Diod. Sic. xvi. 92. + +[846] Plut. Alex. 681 D. + +[847] C. I. A. ii. 973. + +[848] Plat. Rep. 395 B ἀλλ’ οὐδέ τοι ὑποκριταὶ κωμῳδοῖς τε καὶ τραγῳδοῖς +οἱ αὐτοί. + +[849] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 542; Plut. Aud. Poet. 18 B. [For an account +of all that is known of the celebrated Greek actors see Völker, Berühmte +Schauspieler im griech. Alterthum, 1899.] + +[850] Aristot. Poet. c. 18. + +[851] For details see the Tragic Drama of the Greeks, pp. 452 ff. + +[852] Vit. Aristoph. p. 36 Dindf. The places for the interludes are +marked χοροῦ in the text (ll. 321, 626, 801, 958). + +[853] Platon. de Comoed. p. 21 Dindf. οἱ δὲ τῆς μέσης κωμῳδίας ποιηταὶ +... τὰ χορικὰ μέλη παρέλιπον. Platon. p. 20 says the Aeolosicon of +Aristophanes had no chorus; but frag. 8 seems to show that it had. +Similarly the statement of Anon. de Comoed. p. 27 Dindf., that the Plutus +χορῶν ἐστέρηται, is not entirely true. + +[854] Aristot. Pol. iii. 3 ὥσπερ γε καὶ χορὸν ὁτὲ μὲν κωμικὸν ὁτὲ δὲ +τραγικὸν ἕτερον εἶναί φαμεν, τῶν αὐτῶν πολλάκις ἀνθρώπων ὄντων. Eth. Nic. +iv. 6 κωμῳδοῖς χορηγῶν ἐν τῇ παρόδῳ πορφύραν εἰσφέρων. Athen. Pol. c. 56, +where the appointment of χορηγοὶ κωμῳδοῖς is described. This probably +implies a chorus; though not necessarily, as a choregus would be required +to meet the other expenses of a play. [Cp. Aeschin. in Tim. § 157 πρῴην +ἐν τοῖς κατ’ ἀγροὺς Διονυσίοις κωμῳδῶν ὄντων ἐν Κολλυτῷ καὶ Παρμένωνος +τοῦ ὑποκριτοῦ εἰπόντος τι πρὸς τὸν χορὸν ἀνάπαιστον (345 B.C.).] The +substitution of an agonothetes for the choregi at the end of the fourth +century may have been connected with the decline of the chorus. See +above, p. 55. + +[855] Vit. Aristoph. p. 36 Dindf. τὸν Πλοῦτον γράψας, εἰς τὸ +διαναπαύεσθαι τὰ σκηνικὰ πρόσωπα καὶ μετεσκευάσθαι, ἐπιγράφει χοροῦ, +φθεγγόμενος ἐν ἐκείνοις ἃ καὶ ὁρῶμεν τοὺς νέους (i.e. Menander and +Philemon, cp. p. 35) ἐπιγράφοντας ζήλῳ Ἀριστοφάνους. + +[856] Lüders, Die dionysischen Künstler, pp. 187 ff. + +[857] Bull. Cor. Hell. xiv. p. 396; Körte, Neue Jahrb. 1900, pp. 83 ff. + +[858] Anon. de Comoed. p. 27 Dindf. + +[859] Poll. iv. 110. Pollux further states that the number continued to +be fifty until the Eumenides of Aeschylus was produced; and that the +people were so alarmed at the sight of the fifty Furies that they passed +a law reducing the number of the tragic chorus. The story is of course +a fiction, on a par with the statement in the Life, that Aeschylus was +banished to Sicily as a punishment for terrifying the people with his +Eumenides. + +[860] Suid. s.v. Σοφοκλῆς; Vit. Soph. p. 2 Dindf. + +[861] The decision of the question depends on the passage in the +Agamemnon, s.vv. 1344-71. There is no doubt that the twelve iambic +couplets, 1348-71, were delivered by twelve choreutae. The difficulty is +to decide whether the three trochaic tetrameters, 1344, 1346, and 1347, +were delivered by three additional choreutae, or by the coryphaeus. +Either view is plausible, and it seems impossible to determine the matter +without further evidence. The statement of Schol. Arist. Equit. 586, that +the chorus in the Agamemnon was fifteen in number, is merely an inference +from the passage just referred to. The statement of Schol. Aesch. Eum. +585, that the chorus in the Eumenides consisted of fifteen persons, is +simply grounded on the assumption that the number was the same as in +later times. In neither case is the evidence of any independent value. + +[862] Fifteen is the number given in Poll. iv. 109; Suid. s.v. χορός; +Schol. Arist. Av. 298, Equit. 586; Schol. Aesch. Eum. 585. The number is +given as fourteen in Vit. Aesch.; Bekk. Anecd. p. 746; Tzetzes, Prolegom. +ad Lycophr. p. 254 M. The explanation of the discrepancy lies in the +fact that when the chorus is said to consist of fourteen members the +coryphaeus is not included. + +[863] Tzetzes, l.c., τὴν δὲ τραγῳδίαν καὶ τοὺς σατύρους ἐπίσης μὲν +ἔχειν χορευτὰς ιαʹ (? ιδʹ). Id. apud Dübner, Prolegom. de Com. p. xxiv. +ἑκκαίδεκα δὲ σατύρων, τραγῳδίας. Though the numbers are wrong in both +passages, it is plain that the tragic and satyric choruses were of the +same size. + +[864] Poll. iv. 109; Schol. Arist Av. 298, Acharn. 219; Bekk. Anecd. p. +746, &c. + +[865] Lüders, l.c. pp. 187 ff. Wieseler, Denkmäler, xiii. 2. + +[866] Pausan. i. 28. 6; Schol. Arist. Nub. 343; Baumeister, Denkmäler, +no. 422. + +[867] Vit. Soph. + +[868] Aesch. Agam. 75; Eur. Herc. Fur. 108. + +[869] Eur. Suppl. 10, 97; Aesch. Choeph. 10, 11. + +[870] Aesch. Suppl. 234-6 ἀνέλληνα στόλον | πέπλοισι βαρβάροισι καὶ +πυκνώμασι | χλίοντα; Eur. Bacch. 58. + +[871] Aesch. Eum. 52; vit. Aesch. p. 4 Dindf.; Poll. iv. 110; Pausan. i. +28. 6. + +[872] See Fürtwängler, Annali dell’ Instituto, 1877, pp. 225 ff., 449 ff. + +[873] Hymn to Aphrodite, l. 262. + +[874] Strabo, x. p. 471. + +[875] Herod. v. 67. + +[876] Journal of Hellenic Studies, xi. plate xi, from which the present +illustration is taken by permission of the Council of the Hellenic +Society. + +[877] Wieseler, Denkmäler, vi. 3. Baumeister, Denkmäler, no. 424. In the +latter painting the tail and phallus are not visible; but this appears to +be merely owing to the position of the two satyrs. It can hardly be taken +as evidence that the tail and phallus had been discarded at this time. + +[878] See Körte, in Bethe’s Prolegomena, pp. 339 ff. + +[879] So Loeschcke, Athen. Mittheil. 1894, p. 522; Bethe, Prolegomena, p. +38. + +[880] [Miss Harrison, Proleg. to the Study of Greek Religion, p. 421, +derives τραγῳδία from τράγος in the sense of ‘spelt’; but the derivation +is more than doubtful.] + +[881] Frag. 207 (Nauck) τράγος γένειον ἆρα πενθήσεις σύ γε. + +[882] Wieseler, Denkmäler, vi. 3. + +[883] Cp. Hor. A. P. 221 ‘mox etiam agrestes Satyros _nudavit_’. + +[884] Cyclops 80 σὺν τᾷδε τράγου χλαίνᾳ. + +[885] See the list of titles of comedies in Meineke, Hist. Crit. Com. +Graec. pp. 269 ff. + +[886] Arist. Acharn. 627 ἀλλ’ ἀποδύντες τοῖς ἀναπαίστοις ἐπίωμεν; Thesm. +656 τῶν θ’ ἱματίων ἀποδύσας. + +[887] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 343. + +[888] Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 289. + +[889] Poppelreuter, De Comoed. Atticae Primordiis, 1893, p. 15. +Loeschcke, Athen. Mittheil. 1894, p. 519. Cook, Journal of Hellenic +Studies, 1894, pp. 165 ff. + +[890] So Poppelreuter, l.c. pp. 9-11. A copy of the vase is given on p. 8. + +[891] Bollettino Archeologico Napolitano, Nuova Serie, v. tav. 7. + +[892] Journal of Hellenic Studies, ii. plate xiv A. + +[893] The illustration is taken, by permission of the Council of the +Hellenic Society, from the Journal of Hellenic Studies, ii. plate xiv B. +See Mr. Cecil Smith’s interesting article on the subject. + +[894] Tzetzes, Prolegom. ad Lycophr. p. 254 M, τραγικῶν δὲ καὶ σατυρικῶν +καὶ κωμικῶν ποιητῶν κοινὸν μὲν τὸ τετραγώνως ἔχειν ἱστάμενον τὸν χορόν: +Bekk. Anecd. p. 746; Et. Mag. s.v. τραγῳδία; vit. Aristoph. (Dindf. +Prolegom. de Com. p. 36). + +[895] Athen. p. 181 C. + +[896] Poll. iv. 108, 109 καὶ τραγικοῦ μὲν χοροῦ ζυγὰ πέντε ἐκ τριῶν καὶ +στοῖχοι τρεῖς ἐκ πέντε· πεντεκαίδεκα γὰρ ἦσαν ὁ χορός. καὶ κατὰ τρεῖς μὲν +εἰσῄεσαν, εἰ κατὰ ζυγὰ γίνοιτο ἡ πάροδος· εἰ δὲ κατὰ στοίχους, ἀνὰ πέντε +εἰσῄεσαν ... ὁ δὲ κωμικὸς χορὸς τέτταρες καὶ εἴκοσιν ἦσαν οἱ χορευταί, +ζυγὰ ἕξ, ἕκαστον δὲ ζυγὸν ἐκ τεττάρων, στοῖχοι δὲ τέτταρες, ἓξ ἄνδρας +ἔχων ἕκαστος στοῖχος. + +[897] Athen. p. 628 F. + +[898] Schol. Aristid. iii. p. 535 Dindf. ὅτε εἰσῄεσαν οἱ χοροὶ πλαγίως +βαδίζοντες ἐποιοῦντο τοὺς ὕμνους καὶ εἶχον τοὺς θεατὰς ἐν ἀριστερᾷ αὐτῶν +καὶ οἱ πρῶτοι τοῦ χοροῦ ἀριστερὸν στοῖχον, p. 536 τοὺς οὖν καλοὺς τῶν +χορευτῶν ἔταττον εἰσιόντες ἐν τοῖς [τῶν] ἑαυτῶν ἀριστεροῖς, ἵνα εὑρεθῶσι +πρὸς τὸν δῆμον ὁρῶντες. + +[899] Poll. ii. 161 τάχα δὲ καὶ ὁ ἀριστεροστάτης ἐν χορῷ προσήκοι ἂν +τῇ ἀριστερᾷ, ὡς ὁ δεξιοστάτης τῇ δεξιᾷ. Phot. s.v. λαυροστάται· μέσον +τοῦ χοροῦ· οἱονεὶ γὰρ ἐν στενωπῷ εἰσιν· φαυλότεροι δὲ οὗτοι. Hesych. +λαυροστάται· οἱ ἐν τοῖς μέσοις ζυγοὶ ... μὴ θεωρούμενοι. The ὑποκόλπιον +τοῦ χοροῦ, defined by Hesych. as τῆς στάσεως χῶραι αἱ ἄτιμοι, probably +included the whole file of laurostatae, though some scholars confine it +to nos. 7, 8, and 9. + +[900] Plut. Conv. p. 678 D ὥσπερ χοροῦ, τοῦ συμποσίου τὸν κρασπεδίτην τῷ +κορυφαίῳ συνήκοον ἔχοντος. The κρασπεδῖται were also called ψιλεῖς; cp. +Suid. s.v. ψιλεύς· ἐπ’ ἄκρου χοροῦ ἱστάμενος: Hesych. s.v. ψιλεῖς· οἱ +ὕστατοι χορεύοντες. + +[901] Hesych. s.v. ἀριστεροστάτης· ὁ πρωτοστάτης τοῦ χοροῦ. Poll. iv. 106 +δεξιοστάτης, ἀριστεροστάτης, δευτεροστάτης, τριτοστάτης. [Cp. Menander +fr. 165 (Kock) ὥσπερ τῶν χορῶν | οὐ πάντες ᾄδουσ’, ἀλλ’ ἄφωνοι δύο τινὲς +| ἢ τρεῖς παρεστήκασι πάντων ἔσχατοι | εἰς τὸν ἀριθμόν, καὶ τοῦθ’ ὁμοίως +πως ἔχει. This probably means that the mute members of the chorus were +placed in the third file, the δεξιοστάται or τριτοστάται, whom Hesych. +calls ἔσχατοι (s.v. λαυροστάται· οἱ ἐν τοῖς μέσοις ζυγοὶ ... οἱ δὲ +ἐπιτεταγμένοι πρῶτοι καὶ ἔσχατοι).] + +[902] Phot. s.v. τρίτος ἀριστεροῦ· ἐν τοῖς τραγικοῖς χοροῖς τριῶν ὄντων +στοίχων καὶ πέντε ζυγῶν, ὁ μὲν ἀριστερὸς πρὸς τῷ θεάτρῳ ἦν, ὁ δὲ δεξιὸς +πρὸς τῷ προσκηνίῳ. συνέβαινεν οὖν τὸν μέσον τοῦ ἀριστεροῦ στοίχου τὴν +ἐντιμοτάτην καὶ τὴν οἷον τοῦ πρωτοστάτου χώραν ἐπέχειν καὶ στάσιν. +The coryphaeus was also called χορηγός Athen. p. 633 A, χοραγός Plut. +Apophth. Lac. p. 219 E, ἡγεμών and ἡγεμὼν κορυφαῖος Dem. Meid. § 60, +χοροστάτης Hesych., χορολέκτης Ael. Hist. An. xi. 1, χοροποιός Xen. Ages. +ii. 17. + +[903] Dem. Meid. § 60. + +[904] Aristot. Met. iv. 11 ταῦτα δ’ ἐστὶν ὅσα πρός τι ἓν ὡρισμένον +διέστηκε κατὰ τὸν λόγον, οἷον παραστάτης τριτοστάτου πρότερον, καὶ +παρανήτη νήτης· ἔνθα μὲν γὰρ ὁ κορυφαῖος, ἔνθα δὲ ἡ μέση ἀρχή. + +[905] See above, p. 271. + +[906] Poll. iv. 109; Vit. Aesch. p. 4 Dindf. + +[907] Arist. Av. 268-96. + +[908] Arist. Lysist. 254, 319. In the Ecclesiazusae the chorus probably +entered together at l. 285. The extra women in the first scene were not +members of the chorus, but παραχορηγήματα. + +[909] Arg. Aesch. Pers. τῶν δὲ χορῶν τὰ μέν ἐστι παροδικά, ὡς ὅτε λέγει +δι’ ἣν αἰτίαν πάρεστιν, ὡς τὸ “Τύριον οἶδμα λιποῦσα”. Schol. Eur. Phoen. +πάροδος δέ ἐστιν ᾠδὴ χοροῦ βαδίζοντος ᾀδομένη ἅμα τῇ εἰσόδῳ, ὡς τὸ “Σῖγα +σῖγα λεπτὸν ἴχνος ἀρβύλης τίθετε”. Aristot. Poet. c. 12 defines the +parodos as ἡ πρώτη λέξις ὅλου χοροῦ. He thus extends the meaning of the +word so as to include, not only entrance-songs in the proper sense, but +also those cases where the chorus enter in silence, and sing their odes +later on. [Masqueray, Théorie des formes lyriques de la tragédie grecque, +c. ii, analyses in detail the parodoi of the extant plays.] + +[910] Other examples are the Prom. Vinct. of Aeschylus; the Philoctetes +of Sophocles; the Medea, Heracleidae, Troades, and Electra of Euripides. + +[911] Müller (Die griech. Bühnenalt. p. 214), following Hermann (Opusc. +vi. 2, p. 144) supposes the whole chorus to have wheeled completely +round, so that the left file came to be nearest to the stage. He thinks +it more natural for the coryphaeus to have been immediately in front of +the stage, where he would be in a position to converse with the actors. +But he could do so equally well from the centre of the back row. And +it seems most improbable that care should have been taken, during the +entrance into the orchestra, to place the coryphaeus and best choreutae +in the line most conspicuous to the spectators, but that throughout the +rest of the performance they should have been stationed in a position +where the majority of the spectators would hardly have been able to see +them. + +[912] Anon. de Com. (Dindf. Prolegom. de Com. p. 29); Vit. Aristoph. +(ibid. p. 36); Schol. Arist. Equit. 505. + +[913] Schol. Arist. Equit. 505, Pax 733. As to the formation during the +latter part of the parabasis, it is almost certain that the chorus was +then divided into ἡμιχόρια. Two MSS. assign the strophe and antistrophe +to ἡμιχόρια in Nubes 563, 595, Vespae 1060, 1091, Aves 737, 769, and +the epirrhema and antepirrhema in Ranae 686, 717. See Arnoldt, Die +Chorpartieen bei Aristoph. pp. 180 ff. That the half-choruses stood +facing one another seems to be indicated by Hephaest. 14, p. 131, ἔστι +δέ τις ἐν ταῖς κωμῳδίαις καὶ ἡ καλουμένη παράβασις, ἐπειδὰν εἰσελθόντες +εἰς τὸ θέατρον καὶ ἀντιπρόσωπον ἀλλήλοις στάντες οἱ χορευταὶ παρέβαινον: +Anon. de Comoed. (Dübner, Prolegom. de Com. p. xx) ἀπελθόντων δὲ τῶν +ὑποκριτῶν πρὸς ἀμφότερα τὰ μέρη τοῦ δήμου ὁρῶν ἐκ τετραμέτρου δεκαὲξ +στίχους ἀναπαίστους ἐφθέγγετο, καὶ τοῦτο ἐκαλεῖτο στροφή. + +[914] Poll. iv. 108. The temporary departure was called μετάστασις, the +return ἐπιπάροδος. + +[915] Aesch. Eum. 235; Soph. Ajax 815. + +[916] Eur. Hel. 327 ff. + +[917] Eur. Alc. 746; Arist. Eccles. 310. + +[918] Schol. Arist. Vesp. 580. + +[919] See chap. v. pp. 270 ff. + +[920] See especially Arnoldt, Die Chorpartieen bei Aristophanes (Leipzig, +1873), Die chorische Technik des Euripides (Halle, 1878), Der Chor +im Agamemnon des Aeschylos (Halle, 1881); Christ, Theilung des Chors +im attischen Drama (München, 1877); Muff, Die chorische Technik des +Sophokles (Halle, 1877), De choro Persarum (Halle, 1878), Der Chor in +den Sieben des Aeschylos (Halle, 1882); Hense, Der Chor des Sophokles +(Berlin, 1877), Ueber die Vortragsweise Soph. Stasima (Rhein. Museum, +xxxii); Zielinski, Die Gliederung der altattischen Komödie (Leipzig, +1885). + +[921] In Poet. c. 12 he defines the πάροδος as ἡ πρώτη λέξις ὅλου χοροῦ, +implying that other odes were also sung by the whole chorus. If so, +the στάσιμα, which were far the most important of the other odes, must +have been so sung. Whether the expression ὅλα χορικὰ μέλη, applied to +the στάσιμα, means ‘sung by the whole chorus’, or merely ‘unbroken’, as +opposed to the κόμμοι, is uncertain. + +[922] Schol. Eur. Alc. 79 ἐκ γερόντων Φεραίων ὁ χορός, διαιρεῖται δὲ +εἰς δύο ἡμιχόρια. That the anapaests in Ranae 354-71, which come in the +middle of the parodos, were spoken by the coryphaeus is proved by the +concluding lines (ὑμεῖς δ’ ἀνεγείρετε μολπὴν κ.τ.λ.), in which the rest +of the chorus is commanded to begin. + +[923] When these short odes were of a lively character, they were +apparently called ὑπορχήματα by the grammarians, and regarded as a +separate class. But even stasima might be composed in the hyporchematic +style. It seems better, therefore, to regard ὑπόρχημα as a term +applicable, not to short lyrics only, but to any lyrics of a lively and +dance-like metre. See the Tragic Drama of the Greeks, pp. 357, 359. + +[924] See the previous page. + +[925] e.g. Arist. Ran. 382, Vesp. 1516, Thesmoph. 655, &c. + +[926] Aesch. Agam. 1344 ff., Eum. 140 ff., Schol. ad loc. ἀναστήσει +αὐτὰς οὐκ ἀθρόως, μιμούμενος ἐμφατικῶς τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλ’ ἐγείρεταί τις +πρώτη, ὥστε μὴ ἀθρόως τὸν χορὸν φθέγξασθαι. Müller (Griech. Bühnenalt. +p. 218) is mistaken in citing the passage in the Lysistrata, 727-80, as +an example of the delivery of words by individual choreutae. The three +women who take part in the dialogue are not members of the chorus, but +performers upon the stage. + +[927] Cp. the sensible remarks of the Schol. on Arist. Ran. 375 ἐντεῦθεν +Ἀρίσταρχος ὑπενόησε μὴ ὅλου τοῦ χοροῦ εἶναι τὰ πρῶτα· τοῦτο δὲ οὐκ +ἀξιόπιστον. πολλάκις γὰρ ἀλλήλοις οὕτω παρακελεύονται οἱ περὶ τὸν χορόν. + +[928] Poll. iv. 107 καὶ ἡμιχόριον δὲ καὶ διχορία καὶ ἀντιχόρια. ἔοικε +δὲ ταὐτὸν εἶναι ταυτὶ τὰ τρία ὀνόματα· ὁπόταν γὰρ ὁ χορὸς εἰς δύο μέρη +τμηθῇ, τὸ μὲν πρᾶγμα καλεῖται διχορία, ἑκατέρα δὲ ἡ μοῖρα ἡμιχόριον, ἃ +δ’ ἀντᾴδουσιν, ἀντιχόρια. The Schol. on Arist. Equit. 589 has a curious +note to the effect that, when the chorus was divided into two halves of +different sex or age, the older or stronger half was always slightly more +numerous. In a comic chorus there would be 13 men to 11 women, 13 women +to 11 boys, and so on. + +[929] Soph. Ajax 866 ff.; Eur. Orest. 1258 ff. + +[930] See Arnoldt, Die Chorpartieen bei Aristophanes, pp. 180 ff., where +a list is given of the passages which are assigned to half-choruses by +Rav. and Ven., e.g. Acharn. 1150, 1162, Nub. 563, 595. Vesp. 1060, 1091, +Av. 737, 769, 1058, 1088, Eccles. 290, 301, Thesmoph. 659, Lysist. 321. +[J. W. White, Harvard Stud, in Class. Phil. vol. xvii, assigns a more +important part to the leader of the second semi-chorus in comedy than has +usually been recognized, but the evidence is not conclusive.] + +[931] Bergk’s notion (Griech. Lit. iii. p. 131) that in Arist. Poet. c. +12 (κοινὰ μὲν ἁπάντων ταῦτα, ἴδια δὲ τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ κόμμοι) ἴδια += ‘sung by individuals or sections’ is clearly wrong. ἴδια = ‘not found +in all plays’, and the word to be supplied with ἁπάντων is δραμάτων, not +χορευτῶν. + +[932] Athen. p. 628 E εἰ δέ τις ... ταῖς ᾠδαῖς ἐπιτυγχάνων μηδὲν λέγοι +κατὰ τὴν ὄρχησιν, οὗτος δ’ ἦν ἀδόκιμος. + +[933] Athen. p. 20 F. + +[934] Plat. Legg. 816 A. + +[935] Athen. p. 21 F ἄκρως ταῖς χερσὶ τὰ λεγόμενα δεικνυούσαις. + +[936] Lucian, de Salt. 63 ταῖς χερσὶ λαλεῖν. + +[937] Ovid, Ars Am. i. 595 ‘si vox est, canta; si mollia bracchia, salta’. + +[938] Juv. v. 120 ‘structorem interea, ne qua indignatio desit, | +saltantem spectes et chironomunta volanti | cultello’. + +[939] Quint. Inst. xi. 3. 89 ‘abesse enim plurimum a saltatore debet +orator, ut sit gestus ad sensus magis quam ad verba accommodatus’, &c. + +[940] Arist. Poet. c. 1 καὶ γὰρ οὗτοι (οἱ ὀρχησταὶ) διὰ τῶν +σχηματιζομένων ῥυθμῶν μιμοῦνται καὶ ἤθη καὶ πάθη καὶ πράξεις. + +[941] Plut. Symp. 747 B fol. The three divisions of dancing are φοραί, +σχήματα, δείξεις. + +[942] Athen. p. 630 B πρώτη δὲ εὕρηται ἡ περὶ τοὺς πόδας κίνησις τῆς διὰ +τῶν χειρῶν. οἱ γὰρ παλαιοὶ τοὺς πόδας μᾶλλον ἐγυμνάζοντο ἐν τοῖς ἀγῶσι. + +[943] Athen. p. 22 A. + +[944] Plut. Symp. 732 F σχήματα δ’ ὄρχησις τόσα μοι πόρεν ὅσσ’ ἐνὶ πόντῳ +| κύματα ποιεῖται χείματι νὺξ ὀλοή. + +[945] Arist. Vesp. 1474 ff. + +[946] Athen. p. 21 E. + +[947] Athen. p. 628 E ὥστ’ εἴ τις ὀρχοῖτ’ εὖ, θέαμ’ ἦν· νῦν δὲ δρῶσιν +οὐδέν, | ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ ἀπόπληκτοι στάδην ἑστῶτες ὠρύονται. + +[948] Aristoph. Acharn. 204 τῇδε πᾶς ἕπου, δίωκε, καὶ τὸν ἄνδρα πυνθάνου +κ.τ.λ., Schol. ad loc. γέγραπται δὲ τὸ μέτρον τροχαϊκόν, πρόσφορον τῇ +τῶν διωκόντων γερόντων σπουδῇ. ταῦτα δὲ ποιεῖν εἰώθασιν οἱ τῶν δραμάτων +ποιηταὶ κωμικοὶ καὶ τραγικοί, ἐπειδὰν δρομαίως εἰσάγωσι τοὺς χορούς, ἵνα +ὁ λόγος συντρέχῃ τῷ δράματι. Cp. Pax 301, 325, Plutus 257. + +[949] Schol. Eur. Phoen. 202; Suidas s.v. στάσιμον, &c. + +[950] On the use of ἔξοδος in this sense see the Tragic Drama of the +Greeks, p. 352. The word was also applied to the whole of the concluding +scene of a tragedy. + +[951] Aesch. Eum. 307 ἄγε δὴ καὶ χορὸν ἅψωμεν. Eur. Herc. Fur. 761 πρὸς +χοροὺς τραπώμεθα. Arist. Thesmoph. 953 ὅρμα, χώρει | κοῦφα ποσίν, ἄγ’ ἐς +κύκλον, | χειρὶ σύναπτε χεῖρα. Other passages of the same kind are not +infrequent. + +[952] Schol. Eur. Hec. 647 (p. 211 Dindf.). + +[953] See above, p. 307, note 2. + +[954] The liveliness of these dances, even in tragedy, is proved by such +expressions as the following: Soph. Ajax 693 ἔφριξ’ ἔρωτι, περιχαρὴς δ’ +ἀνεπτόμαν. Eur. Orest. 1353 ἰὼ ἰὼ φίλαι, κτύπον ἐγείρετε, κτύπον καὶ +βοάν. El. 859 θὲς ἐς χορόν, ὦ φίλα, ἴχνος, | ὡς νεβρὸς οὐράνιον | πήδημα +κουφίζουσα σὺν ἀγλαΐᾳ. + +[955] Arist. Vesp. 1536 τοῦτο γὰρ οὐδείς πω πάρος δέδρακεν, | ὀρχούμενον +ὅστις ἀπήλλαξεν χορὸν τρυγῳδῶν, Schol. ad loc. εἰσέρχεται γὰρ ὁ χορὸς +ὀρχούμενος, οὐδαμῶς δὲ ἐξέρχεται. Eccles. 1179 αἴρεσθ’ ἄνω, ἰαί, εὐαί. + +[956] Schol. Arist. Ran. 924 ἡ πρὸς τὰς ῥήσεις ὑπόρχησις. + +[957] Schol. Arist. Nub. 1355 οὕτως ἔλεγον πρὸς χορὸν λέγειν, ὅτε τοῦ +ὑποκριτοῦ διατιθεμένου τὴν ῥῆσιν ὁ χορὸς ὠρχεῖτο. + +[958] Athen. p. 22 A Ἀριστοκλῆς γοῦν φησιν ὅτι Τελέστης, ὁ Αἰσχύλου +ὀρχηστής, οὕτως ἦν τεχνίτης, ὥστε ἐν τῷ ὀρχεῖσθαι τοὺς Ἑπτὰ ἐπὶ Θήβας +φανερὰ ποιῆσαι τὰ πράγματα δι’ ὀρχήσεως. + +[959] Plat Legg. 816 A. + +[960] Suid. s.v. ξιφισμός; Hesych. s.v. ξιφίζειν; Poll. iv. 105 καὶ μὴν +τραγικῆς ὀρχήσεως σχήματα σιμὴ χείρ, καλαθίσκος, χεὶρ καταπρηνής, ξύλου +παράληψις, διπλῆ, θερμαυστρίς, κυβίστησις, παραβῆναι τέτταρα. + +[961] See above, p. 307, note 2. + +[962] Aesch. Pers. 1038 ff. + +[963] Schol. Arist. Nub. 542 κόρδαξ κωμική, ἥτις αἰσχρῶς κινεῖ τὴν ὀσφύν. +Hesych. s.v. κόρδαξ; Plat. Legg. p. 816 A; Theoph. Char. 6. + +[964] Arist. Nub. 540 οὐδὲ κόρδαχ’ εἵλκυσεν. + +[965] Arist. Vesp. 1529 στρόβει, παράβαινε κύκλῳ καὶ γάστρισον σεαυτόν, +| ῥῖπτε σκέλος οὐράνιον· βέμβικες ἐγγενέσθων. Thesm. 953 ὅρμα, χώρει | +κοῦφα ποσίν, ἄγ’ ἐς κύκλον, | χειρὶ σύναπτε χεῖρα. + +[966] Poll. iv. 99, 103; Athen. p. 629 F-630 A; Dion. Hal. A. R. vii. 72; +Phot. s.v. σκώπευμα. + +[967] Plut. Symp. 713 C τὸ δὲ μέλος καὶ τὸν ῥυθμὸν ὥσπερ ὄψον ἐπὶ τῷ +λόγῳ, καὶ μὴ καθ’ αὑτὰ προσφέρεσθαι. + +[968] Pratinas apud Athen. p. 617 B τὰν ἀοιδὰν κατέστασε Πιερὶς +βασίλειαν· ὁ δ’ αὐλὸς | ὕστερον χορευέτω· καὶ γάρ ἐσθ’ ὑπηρέτας. + +[969] See, on the whole question, Monro’s Modes of Ancient Greek Music, +Oxford, 1894, Macran’s Aristoxenus, 1902. + +[970] Plut. Mus. 1136 D-F. + +[971] Heracleid. ap. Athen., p. 625 B; Aesch. Suppl. 69 Ἰαονίοισι νόμοισι. + +[972] Vit. Soph., p. 8 Dindf. + +[973] Aristot. Prob. xix. 30, 48. + +[974] Arist. Ran. 1286 ff.; Hesych. s.v. διαύλιον· ὁπόταν ἐν τοῖς μέλεσι +μεταξὺ παραβάλλῃ μέλος τι ὁ ποιητὴς παρασιωπήσαντος τοῦ χοροῦ. + +[975] Suid. s.v. Τιμόθεος. Plut. Mus. 1135 D. + +[976] Suid. l.c. τὴν ἀρχαίαν μουσικὴν ἐπὶ τὸ μαλακώτερον μετήγαγεν. + +[977] Pherecrat. Cheiron. frag. 145 (Kock) ᾄδων ἐκτραπέλους μυρμηκίας. + +[978] Arist. Ran. 1301 ff., Thesm. 100 μύρμηκος ἀτραπούς, ἢ τί +διαμινύρεται; Schol. ad loc. ὡς λεπτὰ καὶ ἀγκύλα ἀνακρουομένου μέλη τοῦ +Ἀγάθωνος· τοιαῦται γὰρ αἱ τῶν μυρμήκων ὁδοί. + +[979] Plut. An seni etc. 795 C. + +[980] Dem. de Cor. § 28. + +[981] Dem. Meid. § 74. + +[982] Theophrast. Char. 9 καὶ ξένοις δὲ αὑτοῦ θέαν ἀγοράσας μὴ δοὺς τὸ +μέρος θεωρεῖν. + +[983] E.g. Böttiger, Kleine Schriften, i. pp. 295 ff.; Wachsmuth, Hellen. +Alterthumskunde, ii. p. 391; Bergk, Griech. Literaturgesch. iii. p. 49. + +[984] E.g. Bernhardy, Griech. Literaturgesch. ii. 2. p. 132; Böckh, Trag. +Princip. p. 37; Meineke, Menand. et Philem. Reliq. p. 345. + +[985] Plat. Gorg. 502 B-E, Legg. 817 A-C, 658 A-D. + +[986] Aristoph. Nub. 537-9, Pax 765, 766, 962-7. Cp. also Eupolis, +Προσπάλτιοι, fr. 244 (Kock) Ἡράκλεις, τοῦτ’ ἔστι σοι | τὸ σκῶμμ’ ἀσελγὲς +καὶ Μεγαρικὸν καὶ σφόδρα | ψυχρόν. γελῶσιν, ὡς ὁρᾷς, τὰ παιδία. Arist. +Pax 50-3 ἐγὼ δὲ τὸν λόγον γε τοῖσι παιδίοις | καὶ τοῖσιν ἀνδρίοισι +καὶ τοῖς ἀνδράσι | καὶ τοῖς ὑπερτάτοισιν ἀνδράσιν φράσω | καὶ τοῖς +ὑπερηνορέουσιν. [Rogers, Introd. to the Ecclesiazusae, takes this +passage, in which women are not mentioned, to prove that they were not +present. But the point of the jest is in the enumeration of men in an +ascending scale of manliness, and to mention women, even if they were +present, would have spoiled it. The other passages which he quotes, +Eccles. 165 ff., 435 ff., 1144 ff., and the situation in the Thesmoph., +are satisfied if we suppose a large preponderance of men; but they do not +require us to assume the exclusion of women.] + +[987] Alciphron, Epist. ii. 3. [Rogers, l.c. quotes a sentence of +Glycera’s supposed reply, where she speaks of herself as standing in the +wings and watching the performance, to prove that ὁρώσης καὶ καθημένης ἐν +τῷ θεάτρῳ does not imply that women were in the audience. But καθημένης +ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ naturally and almost technically means this; and the two +passages need not be taken to refer to the same point in Glycera’s +supposed proceedings.] + +[988] Lucian, Anachar. 22. + +[989] Aristoph. Ran. 1050, 1051. + +[990] Athen. p. 534 C. + +[991] Theophrast. Char. 9 and 13. + +[992] Schol. Aristoph. Eccles. 22. + +[993] Vit. Aeschyli, p. 4 Dindf. + +[994] C. I. A. iii. 282, 313, 315, 316, 321, 322, 324, 325, 333, 342, +343, 345, 350, 351, 354, 361, &c. + +[995] Aristoph. Achar. 241-6; Menand. fr. 558 (Kock). + +[996] E.g. Müller, Die griech. Bühnenalterthümer, p. 291. + +[997] Aristoph. Av. 793-6 εἴ τε μοιχεύων τις ὑμῶν ἐστιν ὅστις τυγχάνει, | +κᾆθ’ ὁρᾷ τὸν ἄνδρα τῆς γυναικὸς ἐν βουλευτικῷ, | οὗτος ἂν πάλιν παρ’ ὑμῶν +πτερυγίσας ἀνέπτατο, | εἶτα βινήσας ἐκεῖθεν αὖθις αὖ καθέζετο. Thesm. +395-7 ὥστ’ εὐθὺς εἰσιόντες ἀπὸ τῶν ἰκρίων | ὑποβλέπουσ’ ἡμᾶς, σκοποῦνταί +τ’ εὐθέως | μὴ μοιχὸς ἔνδον ᾖ τις ἀποκεκρυμμένος. + +[998] Aristot. Pol. vii. 17 ἐπιμελὲς μὲν οὖν ἔστω τοῖς ἄρχουσι μηθὲν +μήτε ἄγαλμα μήτε γραφὴν εἶναι τοιούτων πράξεων μίμησιν, εἰ μὴ παρά τισι +θεοῖς τοιούτοις οἷς καὶ τὸν τωθασμὸν ἀποδίδωσιν ὁ νόμος· πρὸς δὲ τούτοις +ἀφίησιν ὁ νόμος τοὺς ἔχοντας ἡλικίαν πλέον προσήκουσαν καὶ ὑπὲρ αὑτῶν καὶ +τέκνων καὶ γυναικῶν τιμαλφεῖν τοὺς θεούς. τοὺς δὲ νεωτέρους οὔτ’ ἰάμβων +οὔτε κωμῳδίας θεατὰς νομοθετητέον. + +[999] [Navarre, Utrum mulieres Athenienses scenicos ludos spectaverint, +1900, discusses the evidence in detail, and comes to the same conclusions +as those which are stated in the text.] + +[1000] Plat. Gorg. 502 D. + +[1001] Theophrast. Char. 9. + +[1002] Schol. Lucian, Tim. 49; Suidas s.v. θεωρικόν. + +[1003] Dem. de Cor. § 28 ἀλλ’ ἐν τοῖν δυοῖν ὀβολοῖν ἐθεώρουν ἄν. This +passage shows that there cannot have been any alternative between the +reserved seats for distinguished persons and the ordinary two-obol seats. +Two obols is also the sum mentioned by Phot., Suid., and Etym. Mag. s. +vv. θεωρικόν; Etym. Mag. θεωρικά; Liban. Hyp. to Dem. Olynth. i; Schol. +Aristoph. Vesp. 1184. The entrance fee is given as one obol by Ulpian +on Dem. Olynth. i. § 1; and as three obols by Schol. Dem. de Cor. § +28. But both are no doubt mistaken. It is given as a drachma by Schol. +Lucian, Tim. 49; Phot. and Suid. s. vv. θεωρικά; Philochorus apud Harp. +s.v. θεωρικά. But the drachma probably denotes the aggregate fees for +successive days at one festival. Plat. Apol. 26 D has most likely no +reference to the theatre. See Appendix C. + +[1004] Plut. Pericl. 157 A; Ulpian on Dem. Olynth. i. § 1. + +[1005] Ath. Pol. c. 28 (see Kenyon’s and Sandys’s notes). + +[1006] Dem. de Contrib. § 169; Phot., Suid., Etym. Mag. s. vv. θεωρικόν; +Etym. Mag. s.v. θεωρικά; Liban. and Ulpian, ll. cc. It was called +διωβολία (Aristot. Pol. ii. 7) or διωβελία (Ath. Pol. c. 28; Bekk. Anecd. +237, 15). + +[1007] Four are mentioned in [Dem.] Prooem. 53; six in Schol. Lucian, +Tim. 49; Lucian, Encom. Dem. 36; Suid. δραχμὴ χαλαζῶσα; Suid., Harp., and +Phot. θεωρικά. + +[1008] Dem. in Leoch. § 37. + +[1009] Hyperid. in Dem. col. xxiv. + +[1010] Harp. s.v. θεωρικά; Liban. Hyp. to Dem. Olynth. i; Ammonius, de +diff. vocab., s.v. θεωρός; Dem. Olynth. i. § 19, de Cor. § 118, Philipp. +iv. § 38. + +[1011] For a full account of these theatre-tickets see Benndorf, +Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien, 1875, pp. 579-95. + +[1012] The illustration is taken from Baumeister, Denkmäler, no. 1833. + +[1013] It is taken from Baumeister, no. 1835. + +[1014] C. I. G. 5369; Tac. Ann. ii. 83. + +[1015] Svoronos, περὶ τῶν Εἰσιτηρίων τῶν ἀρχαίων, in Journal +International d’Archéologie Numismatique, 1898, vol. i, pt. 1, pp. +37-120. The illustration in the text (Fig. 34) is taken from this article. + +[1016] The lessee was generally called ἀρχιτέκτων (Dem. de Cor. § 28), +because part of his contract was to look after the buildings of the +theatre. He was also called θεατροπώλης (Poll. vii. 199), from the fact +of his selling seats; and θεατρώνης (Theophrast. Char. 11), from the fact +of his having taken the theatre on lease. The nature of the arrangement +with the lessee may be gathered from (1) C. I. A. ii. 573, in which the +lessees of the theatre at the Peiraeeus engage to keep the fabric in +good repair; (2) Dem. de Cor. § 28 ἢ θέαν μὴ κατανεῖμαι τὸν ἀρχιτέκτονα +αὐτοῖς κελεῦσαι; (3) Ulpian on Dem. Olynth. i. § 1 ὥστε λαμβάνειν ... δύο +ὀβολούς, ἵνα ... τὸν δ’ ἄλλον παρέχειν ἔχωσι τῷ ἀρχιτέκτονι τοῦ θεάτρου. + +[1017] Theophrast. Char. 30. + +[1018] Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 572. Pollux, iv. 121, states rather +doubtfully that the προεδρία in the theatre might also be called πρῶτον +ξύλον. If the expression was really used, it must have dated from the +time when the theatre was still a wooden one. + +[1019] C. I. A. iii. 240-384. + +[1020] C. I. A. ii. 589 shows that in the Peiraeeus the demarch used to +conduct the persons honoured with proedria to the theatre. A similar +practice was no doubt observed at Athens. + +[1021] C. I. A. ii. 589 καὶ εἰσαγέτω αὐτὸν ὁ δήμαρχος εἰς τὸ θέατρον +καθάπερ ἱερεῖς καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους οἷς δέδοται ἡ προεδρία παρὰ Πειραιέων. +Cp. also Hesych. s.v. νεμήσεις θέας· Ἀθηναῖοι τὰς ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ καθέδρας, +ψηφίσματι νενεμημένας προεδρίας ἱερεῦσιν. + +[1022] C. I. A. iii. 240-384. Dörpfeld, Griech. Theater, p. 47. + +[1023] The thrones of seven of the archons are still preserved (C. I. A. +iii. 254-60). Those of two of the Thesmothetae are missing, but no doubt +stood in the front row with the others. + +[1024] Aristoph. Equit. 573-6; Theophrast. Char. 5. + +[1025] Aeschin. Fals. Leg. § 111, Ctesiph. § 76; Dem. de Cor. § 28; C. I. +A. ii. 164; Cic. de Senect. § 63; Val. Max. iii. 5. + +[1026] See above, p. 33. + +[1027] Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 154; Plut. X Orat., psephisms I and II, p. 851 +A-F. + +[1028] Schol. Aristoph. Av. 795; Poll. iv. 122 βουλευτικὸν μέρος τοῦ +θεάτρου καὶ ἐφηβικόν. + +[1029] Schol. Aristoph. Eccles. 22. + +[1030] Aristoph. Pax 962-6 ΤΡ. καὶ τοῖς θεαταῖς ῥῖπτε τῶν κριθῶν. ΟΙ. +ἰδού. | ΤΡ. ἔδωκας ἤδη; ΟΙ. νὴ τὸν Ἑρμῆν, ὥστε γε | ... οὐκ ἔστιν +οὐδεὶς ὅστις οὐ κριθὴν ἔχει. | ΤΡ. οὐχ αἱ γυναῖκές γ’ ἔλαβον. Alexis, +Γυναικοκρατία, fr. 1 (Meineke, Frag. Com. Gr. iii. p. 402) ἐνταῦθα περὶ +τὴν ἐσχάτην δεῖ κερκίδα | ὑμᾶς καθιζούσας θεωρεῖν ὡς ξένας [this must +mean that foreigners were in one of the extreme _side_ kerkides (see p. +98), not at the _back_ of the theatre]. + +[1031] [Willems, Le Nu dans la Comédie Ancienne, 1901, places the Council +in the central block, the foreigners at one side of the auditorium, the +Ephebi on the other, while the tribes occupied the other ten. A clay +theatre ticket found at Megalopolis proves that blocks were assigned to +special tribes in that theatre (Castrioles, Ἐφημ. Διέθνης τῆς Νομισμ. +Ἀρχαιολ. 1900, p. 55). See also Svoronos, quoted p. 333 n.] + +[1032] In the central block, on the third step, was a statue of Hadrian, +of which the base is still preserved, erected in 112 A.D. by the +Areopagus, the Council of Six Hundred, and the people of Athens (C. I. +A. ii. 464). Besides this, the bases of three other statues of Hadrian, +erected by different tribes, are still in existence. They are all on +the second step. The first, erected by the tribe Erectheis, is in the +first block from the eastern end; the second, erected by the tribe +Acamantis, is in the sixth block from the eastern end; the third, erected +by the tribe Oeneis, is in the sixth block from the western end (C. I. +A. iii. 466-8). Thus the place of each statue in the series of blocks +corresponded exactly with the place of the tribe in the official list of +tribes. It is therefore a highly plausible conjecture that, in addition +to the statue of Hadrian in the central block, there were twelve other +statues erected by the twelve tribes in the remaining blocks; and that +each tribe had a special block appropriated to itself. See Benndorf, +Beiträge zur Kenntniss des att. Theaters, pp. 4 ff. + +[1033] Fourteen of the thrones were out of place when the theatre was +first excavated (see p. 95). The position of some of them is rather +conjectural. In the list given in the text Dörpfeld’s arrangement has +been followed (Griech. Theater, p. 47). For the inscriptions see C. I. +A. iii. 240-302. There is a very full account of the inscriptions on the +thrones in Wheeler’s article on the Theatre of Dionysus, in Papers of the +American School of Classical Studies at Athens, vol. i. pp. 152 ff. + +[1034] The illustration is taken from Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst, +vol. xiii. p. 196. On the back of the chair are depicted two Satyrs, +holding a bunch of grapes. In the front, underneath the seat, are +two Oriental figures, engaged in a fight with winged lions. On the +arms of the throne are figures of Cupids, setting cocks to fight. +The appropriateness of the Satyrs, as a decoration in the theatre of +Dionysus, is obvious. The cocks, no doubt, refer to the annual cock-fight +held in the theatre (see above, chap. iii. p. 177). The significance of +the Oriental figures has not yet been explained. + +[1035] Aristoph. Ran. 297. + +[1036] i.e. the representative of Athens at the Amphictyonic Council. + +[1037] A Macedonian commander of the third century, who restored Athens +to freedom after the death of Demetrius. + +[1038] i.e. the priest who carried the Iacchus, or sacred statue of +Dionysus, at the Eleusinian procession. + +[1039] i.e. the priest who looked after the sacrificial fire in the +temple of Athene on the Acropolis. + +[1040] He was one of the three Exegetae, or Interpreters of sacred law, +and was appointed by the Pythian oracle. A second was chosen by the +people from the Eupatridae, and also had a seat in the front row. + +[1041] They were the guardians of the βουλή, and their altars were in the +βουλευτήριον. + +[1042] This Antinous was a favourite of Hadrian’s, and was drowned in the +Nile, and afterwards deified. + +[1043] Unknown. + +[1044] Probably an official who carried a sacred stone in some +procession; but nothing is known about him. + +[1045] Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 76 ἅμα τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἡγεῖτο τοῖς πρέσβεσιν εἰς +τὸ θέατρον. Dem. Meid. § 74 ἐγὼ δ’ ὑπ’ ἐχθροῦ νήφοντος, ἕωθεν, κ.τ.λ. +Aristoph. Av. 786-9 αὐτίχ’ ὑμῶν τῶν θεατῶν εἴ τις ἦν ὑπόπτερος, | εἶτα +πεινῶν τοῖς χοροῖσι τῶν τραγῳδῶν ἤχθετο, | ἐκπτόμενος ἂν οὗτος ἠρίστησεν +ἐλθὼν οἴκαδε, | κᾆτ’ ἂν ἐμπλησθεὶς ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς αὖθις αὖ κατέπτατο. + +[1046] Philochorus ap. Athen. p. 464 E Ἀθηναῖοι τοῖς Διονυσιακοῖς ἀγῶσι +τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἠριστηκότες καὶ πεπωκότες ἐβάδιζον ἐπὶ τὴν θέαν. + +[1047] Philochor. ap. Athen. l.c. παρὰ δὲ τὸν ἀγῶνα πάντα οἶνος αὐτοῖς +ᾠνοχοεῖτο καὶ τραγήματα παρεφέρετο. Aristot. Eth. Nic. x. 5 καὶ ἐν τοῖς +θεάτροις οἱ τραγηματίζοντες, ὅταν φαῦλοι οἱ ἀγωνιζόμενοι ὦσι, τότε +μάλιστ’ αὐτὸ δρῶσιν. + +[1048] Philochor. ap. Athen, l.c. καὶ ἐστεφανωμένοι ἐθεώρουν. Dem. Meid. +§ 52. + +[1049] Aeschin. Ctesiph. § 76, Fals. Leg. § 111; Theophrast. Char. 2. + +[1050] Suidas s.v. Δράκων· ὑπὸ τῶν Αἰγινητῶν ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ, ἐπιρριψάντων +αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν πετάσους πλείονας καὶ χιτῶνας καὶ ἱμάτια, ἀπεπνίγη. + +[1051] The φοινικίδες mentioned by Aeschines (Ctesiph. § 76) were +probably coverlets or carpets. + +[1052] See above, p. 100. + +[1053] Called ῥαβδοφόροι (Schol. Aristoph. Pax 734), and ῥαβδοῦχοι (Pax +734): cp. Dem. Meid. § 179. + +[1054] Suid. ἐπιμεληταί ἐχειροτονοῦντο τῶν χορῶν, ὡς μὴ ἀτακτεῖν τοὺς +χορευτὰς ἐν τοῖς θεάτροις. + +[1055] Andocid. Alcibiad. § 20. + +[1056] Dem. Meid. §§ 178, 179. + +[1057] Plat. Legg. 700 C. + +[1058] Dem. Meid. §§ 14, 226; Alciphron, Epist. iii. 71. + +[1059] Poll. iv. 122 τὸ μέντοι τὰ ἑδώλια ταῖς πτέρναις κατακρούειν +πτερνοκοπεῖν ἔλεγον· ἐποίουν δὲ τοῦτο ὁπότε τινὰ ἐκβάλοιεν. + +[1060] Dem. Fals. Leg. § 337; Athen. p. 245 E. + +[1061] Dem. de Cor. § 262. + +[1062] Cic. Tusc. iv. § 63. Αὖθις seems to have been the word used; cp. +Xen. Symp. ix. 4 ἅμα δὲ ἐβόων αὖθις. + +[1063] Poll. iv. 88. The word for hissing an actor off the stage was +ἐκβάλλειν; to be hissed off was ἐκπίπτειν. See Dem. de Cor. § 265, Poll. +iv. 122. + +[1064] Athen. p. 583 F. + +[1065] Theophrast. Char. 11. + +[1066] Theophrast. Char. l.c. + +[1067] Alciphron, Epist. iii. 71 ἵνα, κἄν τι λάθωμεν ἀποσφαλέντες, μὴ +λάβῃ χώραν τὰ ἀστικὰ μειράκια κλώζειν ἢ συρίττειν. + +[1068] Aristot. Eth. Nic. x. 5. + +[1069] Theophrast. Char. 14. + +[1070] Alciphron, Epist. iii. 71; Aul. Gell. N. A. xvii. 4. + +[1071] Aristot. Eth. Nic. iii. 2, and Eustath. ad loc. + +[1072] Plut. Amator. 756 C; Nauck, Trag. Gk. Frag. p. 511. + +[1073] Senec. Epist. 115; Nauck, Trag. Gr. Frag. p. 457. + +[1074] Vit. Aristoph. (Dindf. Prolegom. de Com. p. 12); Arg. to Soph. +Antiq. + +[1075] Herod. vi. 21. + +[1076] Justin. 17. 9. The passage was very likely from Theopompus. + +[1077] Dem. Olynth. iii. § 15 καὶ γνῶναι πάντων ὑμεῖς ὀξύτατοι τὰ +ῥηθέντα. Cic. de Fato § 7 ‘Athenis tenue caelum, ex quo acutiores etiam +putantur Attici’. + +[1078] Cic. Orat. § 25 ‘(Athenienses) quorum semper fuit prudens +sincerumque iudicium, nihil ut possent nisi incorruptum audire et +elegans’; § 27 ‘ad Atticorum igitur aures teretes et religiosas qui se +accommodant, ii sunt existimandi Attice dicere’. + +[1079] Plat. Legg. 659 B.C. + +[1080] Aristot. Pol. viii. 7 ἐπεὶ δ’ ὁ θεατὴς διττός, ὃ μὲν ἐλεύθερος καὶ +πεπαιδευμένος, ὃ δὲ φορτικὸς ἐκ βαναύσων καὶ θητῶν καὶ ἄλλων τοιούτων +συγκείμενος. Ibid. 6 ὁ γὰρ θεατὴς φορτικὸς ὢν μεταβάλλειν εἴωθε τὴν +μουσικήν, ὥστε καὶ τοὺς τεχνίτας τοὺς πρὸς αὐτὸν μελετῶντας αὐτούς τε +ποιούς τινας ποιεῖ καὶ τὰ σώματα διὰ τὰς κινήσεις. + +[1081] Aristot. Poet. c. 13 δευτέρα δ’ ἡ πρώτη λεγομένη ὑπὸ τινῶν +ἐστι σύστασις, ἡ διπλῆν τε τὴν σύστασιν ἔχουσα καθάπερ ἡ Ὀδύσσεια καὶ +τελευτῶσα ἐξ ἐναντίας τοῖς βελτίοσι καὶ χείροσιν. δοκεῖ δὲ εἶναι πρώτη +διὰ τὴν τῶν θεάτρων ἀσθένειαν, ἀκολουθοῦσι γὰρ οἱ ποιηταὶ κατ’ εὐχὴν +ποιοῦντες τοῖς θεαταῖς. Ibid. c. 9 (of the old legends) ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ +γνώριμα ὀλίγοις γνώριμά ἐστιν, ἀλλ’ ὅμως εὐφραίνει πάντας. Id. Rhet. iii. +1 ἐκεῖ μεῖζον δύνανται νῦν τῶν ποιητῶν οἱ ὑποκριταί. + +[1082] [Cp. Römer, Ueber den litterarisch-aesthetischen Bildungsstand des +attischen Theaterpublikums, 1901.] + + + + +GREEK INDEX + + + Α + + ἀγκυρίς, 209, 210. + + ἀγορά, 377. + + ἀγῶνες Χύτρινοι, 31. + + αἰγείρου θέα, 83. + + αἰῶραι, 209. + + αἰώρημα, 209. + + ἀναβάδην, 204. + + ἀναβαθμοί, 217. + + ἀναβαίνειν, 109, 148, 166, 167. + + ἀναδιδάσκειν, 71. + + ἀνάπαιστοι, 269, 270, 295. + + ἀναπίεσμα, 217. + + ἀναπλάσματα, 259. + + ἀνδρῶν χορός, 9, 10. + + Ἀνθεστήρια, 372. + + ἀντεπίρρημα, 269. + + ἀντιχόρια, 309. + + ἀπαγγέλλειν, 68. + + ἀπ’ αἰγείρου θέα, 83. + + ἀπὸ μηχανῆς, 215. + + ἀποκρίνεσθαι, 222, 227. + + ἀποκριτής, 227. + + ἀπολαχεῖν, 32. + + ἀριστεροστάτης, 300. + + ἅρπαξ, 209. + + ἀρχιτέκτων, 334, 379. + + ᾆσμα, 56. + + αὖθις, 344. + + αὐλαία, 219. + + αὐληταὶ ἄνδρες, 9. + + αὐλητής, 271. + + αὐλητῶν χοροί, 9. + + ἁψίς, 112, 194. + + + Β + + βαθμοί, 379. + + βαρύστονος, 275. + + βῆμα, 88, 107, 142. + + βομβῶν, 275. + + βουλευτικόν, 328, 337. + + βροντεῖον, 218. + + βωμός, 80, 107, 108, 200. + + βωμὸς Διονύσου, 142. + + + Γ + + γέρανος, 210. + + γεραραί, 375. + + γλεῦκος, 371, 372. + + γραμμαί, 107. + + γραμματεῖον, 33, 34. + + γραφαί, 200. + + + Δ + + δεικηλίκτας, 282. + + δείξεις, 313. + + δεξιοστάτης, 300. + + δευτεραγωνιστής, 234. + + δευτεροστάτης, 300. + + διαζώματα, 98, 381. + + διασκευή, 71. + + διαύλιον, 321. + + διδασκαλεῖον, 60. + + διδασκαλία, 13, 61. + + διδασκαλία ἀστική, 7, 13. + + διδασκαλία Ληναϊκή, 13. + + διδασκαλία τραγική, 13. + + Διδασκαλίαι, 13, 47, 48, 351. + + διδασκαλίαν καθιέναι, 13, 32. + + διδάσκαλος, 56, 61, 62. + + διδάσκειν τραγῳδίαν, 25. + + διθύραμβος, 10, 222. + + δίοδος, 98, 380, 381. + + Διονύσια, 6, 9, 378. + + Διονύσια ἀρχαιότερα, 368-70, 374. + + Διονύσια τὰ ἀστικά, 7. + + Διονύσια τὰ ἐν ἄστει, 7, 9. + + Διονύσια τὰ ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ, 6, 372. + + Διονύσια τὰ ἐπιλήναια, 6, 370, 372. + + Διονύσια τὰ κατ’ ἀγρούς, 5, 29, 288. + + Διονύσια τὰ κατὰ κώμας, 29. + + Διονύσια τὰ κατὰ πόλεις, 29. + + Διονύσια τὰ μεγάλα, 7. + + Διονυσιακοὶ ἀγῶνες, 377. + + Διονυσιακοὶ τεχνῖται, 278. + + Διονυσιακὸν θέατρον, 87, 377. + + Διόνυσος Ἐλευθερεύς, 6, 7, 371. + + Διόνυσος Λήναιος, 24, 372, 373, 377. + + Διόνυσος Λιμναῖος, 372, 373. + + Διόνυσος ὁ ἐν Λίμναις, 371. + + διπλῆ, 317. + + διστεγία, 186. + + διχορία, 309. + + διωβελία, 331. + + + Ε + + ἐγκύκληθρον, 201. + + ἐγκύκλημα, 201, 202, 205. + + εἰς ἄστυ καθιέναι, 7. + + εἰς ἄστυ καταλέγεσθαι, 31. + + εἰσκυκλεῖν, 204. + + εἰσκύκλημα, 201. + + εἴσοδος, 112. + + ἐκβάλλειν, 344. + + ἐκκλησία ἐν Διονύσου, 7. + + ἐκκυκλεῖν, 201, 204, 205, 211. + + ἐκκύκλημα, 201, 211. + + ἐκπίπτειν, 344. + + ἔκσκευα πρόσωπα, 246. + + ἐλεός, 80, 167, 222. + + Ἐλευθερεύς, 7. + + ἐμβάς, 266. + + ἐμβάτης, 248. + + ἐν ἀγροῖς, 29, 378. + + ἐν ἄστει διδάσκειν, 7, 13. + + ἐν τοῖν δυοῖν ὀβολοῖν, 330. + + ἐξάρχειν, 222. + + ἔξοδος, 270, 271, 315. + + ἐξώστρα, 309, 379. + + ἐπαναβαίνειν, 167. + + ἐπεισκυκλεῖν, 211. + + ἐπὶ Ληναίῳ, 24, 25, 372, 377, 378. + + ἐπιθέατρον, 98, 380, 381. + + ἐπιλήναια Διονύσια, 6, 370, 372. + + ἐπιμεληταί, 343. + + ἐπιμεληταὶ τῆς πομπῆς, 49. + + ἐπιμεληταὶ τῶν μυστηρίων, 49. + + ἐπιπάροδος, 305. + + ἐπίρρημα, 269. + + ἐπιστάται Ἐλευσινόθεν, 6, 370, 377. + + εὐημερεῖν, 43, 228. + + Εὔνους, 261. + + εὐφωνία, 273. + + ἐφαπτίς, 252. + + ἐφηβικόν, 337. + + ἐώρημα, 209. + + + Ζ + + ζυγόν, 299, 301. + + ζῶναι, 98. + + ζωστῆρες, 209. + + + Η + + ἡγεμών, 301. + + ἡγεμὼν κορυφαῖος, 301. + + ἡμικύκλιον, 101, 218. + + ἡμιστρόφιον, 218. + + ἡμιχόριον, 304, 307, 309. + + + Θ + + θέα, 324, 341. + + θέα παρ’ αἰγείρῳ, 81, 83. + + θεᾶσθαι, 9. + + θεατής, 102, 348. + + θεατρίζειν, 107, 142. + + θέατρον, 81, 83, 87, 326, 348, 371, 374, 377. + + θεατροπώλης, 334. + + θεατρώνης, 334. + + θεολογεῖον, 126, 213. + + θεὸς ἀπὸ μηχανῆς, 211, 215, 216. + + θερμαυστρίς, 317. + + θεωρικόν, 331. + + θίασος, 278. + + θυμέλη, 80, 107, 108, 109, 142. + + θυμελικοί, 146, 172. + + + Ι + + ἰαμβεῖον, 267, 269. + + ἰαμβύκη, 269. + + Ἰαόνιοι νόμοι, 321. + + ἴδια ᾄσματα, 310. + + ἴκρια, 81, 83, 87, 328, 377. + + ἱματιομίσθαι, 64. + + ἱματιομισθωταί, 64. + + ἱμάτιον, 250, 295. + + + Κ + + καθάρσιον, 68. + + καθέζεσθαι, 32. + + καθιέναι, 228. + + καθίζειν, 32. + + καινὸς ἀγών, 30. + + καλαθίσκος, 317. + + καλαμίτης ἥρως, 377. + + κατὰ ζυγά, 299. + + κατὰ στοίχους, 102, 299. + + καταβαίνειν, 166. + + καταβλήματα, 185, 186, 198. + + καταλέγειν, 269. + + καταληπτήρ, 380, 381. + + καταλογή, 269. + + κατατομή, 90. + + κέραμος, 186. + + κεραυνοσκοπεῖον, 218. + + κερκίς, 98, 337. + + κίνησις, 278, 314. + + κλεψίαμβος, 269. + + κλῖμαξ, 129, 148, 379, 381. + + κλιμακτῆρες, 380, 381. + + κόθορνος, 248. + + κόλπωμα, 252. + + κόμμος, 268. + + κονίστρα, 101, 142. + + κόρδαξ, 318. + + κορυφαῖος, 300, 301. + + κράδη, 210. + + κρασπεδίτης, 300. + + κρηπίς, 248. + + κριτὴν ἐμβάλλειν, 32. + + κριτής, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36. + + κροῦσις, 269. + + κυβίστησις, 317. + + κύκλιος χορός, 10. + + κῶμος, 9, 20, 352. + + κωμῳδοί, 9, 20, 25, 108, 275. + + + Λ + + λαρυγγίζειν, 275. + + λαυροστάτης, 170, 300. + + ληκυθίζειν, 275. + + λῆναι, 24, 376. + + Λήναια, 24, 372. + + Ληναϊκὸν θέατρον, 83. + + Λήναιον, 24, 368 ff. + + ληνός, 24, 369, 373, 376. + + Λίμναι, 24, 368 ff. + + λογεῖον, 102, 107, 112, 118, 123, 126, 146, 148, 149, 379, 380. + + + Μ + + μεγαλοφωνία, 273. + + μετασκευάζεσθαι, 288. + + μετάστασις, 305. + + μηχανή, 197, 199, 209, 211, 212, 215, 216. + + μηχανοποιός, 209. + + μῖμοι, 107, 142. + + μισθός, 39. + + μονῳδία, 268. + + μυρμηκία, 321. + + μύρμηκος ἀτραπός, 321. + + + Ν + + νέμειν, 51, 58. + + νεμήσεις θέας, 2, 335. + + νεμήσεις ὑποκριτῶν, 58. + + Νῖκαι τραγικαὶ καὶ κωμικαί, 362. + + νικᾶν, 40. + + νικᾶν τὰ Λήναια, 364. + + νικᾶν τραγῳδίᾳ, 26. + + νίκη ἀστική, 7. + + + Ξ + + ξιφίζειν, 317. + + ξιφισμός, 317. + + ξύλου παράληψις, 317. + + + Ο + + ὄγκος, 244. + + ὀκρίβας, 68, 118, 248. + + ὁλκοί, 379, 381. + + Ὄμβρικος, 261. + + ὀρθοστάτης, 380, 381. + + ὄρχησις, 311, 312, 314. + + ὀρχηστής, 313. + + ὀρχήστρα, 82, 90, 101, 102, 107, 142, 148, 166, 377. + + Ὀφέλανδρος, 261. + + + Π + + παίδων χορός, 9, 10. + + παλαιὸν δρᾶμα, 19, 22. + + Παναθήναια, 12. + + παρ’ αἰγείρου θέα, 81, 83. + + παραβαίνειν, 149, 305. + + παράβασις, 149, 270, 305. + + παραβῆναι τέτταρα, 317. + + παραδιδάσκειν, 19, 22. + + παρακαταλογή, 268, 270. + + παραλογίζεσθαι, 269. + + παραπέτασμα, 118, 185, 186, 219. + + παρασκήνια, 117, 127, 139, 142, 191, 379. + + παρασκήνια τὰ ἄνω, 139, 379-81. + + παρασκήνια τὰ κάτω, 139, 379-81. + + παρασκήνιον, 235, 380. + + παραστάτης, 301. + + παραχορήγημα, 234, 235, 301. + + παρεπιγραφή, 206. + + πάροδος, 112, 149, 194, 209, 288, 302, 306. + + πεπλασμένως, 275. + + περίακτοι, 185, 191, 197, 218. + + περιβομβῶν, 275. + + περιοικοδομία, 379, 381. + + πίναξ, 45, 118, 123, 126, 186, 379, 380. + + ποικίλον, 250. + + πομπή, 9, 49. + + προάγων, 67, 68. + + προγαστρίδια, 259. + + προεδρία, 335. + + πρόλογος, 224. + + πρὸς τὰς ῥήσεις ὑπόρχησις, 317. + + πρὸς χορὸν λέγειν, 269, 317. + + προσκήνιον, 118, 127, 129, 172, 186, 219, 379-81. + + προσωπεῖον, 262. + + πρωταγωνιστεῖν, 227. + + πρωταγωνιστής, 223. + + πρῶτον ξύλον, 335. + + πρωτοστάτης, 301. + + πτερνοκοπεῖν, 344. + + πυρριχισταί, 10. + + + Ρ + + ῥαβδοῦχοι, 343. + + ῥαβδοφόροι, 343. + + ῥῆσις, 224, 317. + + + Σ + + σατυρικόν, 12. + + σάτυροι, 289. + + σαυτὴν ἐπαινεῖς, 176, 228. + + σίγμα, 90, 101. + + σιμὴ χείρ, 317. + + σκευή, 259. + + σκηναὶ αἱ ἐπάνω, 112, 126, 379-81. + + σκηνή, 108, 112, 141, 142, 148, 149, 166, 186, 199, 268, 379-81. + + σκηνὴ ἡ μέση, 112, 379-81. + + σκηνικὰ πρόσωπα, 288. + + σκηνικοί, 146, 172. + + σκηνογραφία, 112, 181. + + σκώπευμα, 318. + + στάσιμον, 306, 315. + + στοῖχος, 149, 299, 301. + + στροφεῖον, 218. + + στροφή, 305. + + σύκινος κλάδος, 210. + + σχήματα, 313. + + σωμάτιον, 249, 259. + + + Τ + + τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς ὀρχήστρας, 149. + + τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς σκηνῆς, 149, 165, 166, 268. + + τὰ ἐκ τῶν ἁμαξῶν σκώμματα, 25. + + ταινία ξυλίνη, 44. + + ταινίαι, 209. + + τάφοι, 200. + + τετραλογία, 12, 13, 17. + + τετράμετρον, 269. + + τεχνίτης, 227, 278, 317. + + τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς, 165, 166. + + τράγος, 294. + + τραγῳδοί, 9, 20, 25, 108, 275. + + τραγῳδῶν χοροί, 24. + + τράπεζα, 80, 222. + + τριλογία, 13. + + τρίμετρα, 269. + + τρίπους, 10. + + τρίτος ἀριστεροῦ, 301. + + τριτοστάτης, 300, 301. + + τροχός, 209. + + τρυγῳδία, 372. + + τρυγῳδοί, 310. + + + Υ + + ὑδρίαι, 32. + + ὑποδιδάσκαλος, 62. + + ὑποκόλπιον, 300. + + ὑποκρίνεσθαι, 227, 228. + + ὑποκριτής, 58, 148, 165, 223, 224, 227, 229, 274, 284. + + ὑπόρχημα, 307. + + ὑπόρχησις, 317. + + ὑποσκήνιον, 123, 148. + + ὑφάσματα, 186, 198. + + + Φ + + φαλλικά, 222. + + φαλλός, 259. + + φαρυγγίζειν, 275. + + φαρυγγίνδην, 61. + + φοινικίδες, 342. + + φοραί, 313. + + + Χ + + Χαρώνιοι κλίμακες, 217. + + χεὶρ καταπρηνής, 317. + + χειρίδες, 250. + + χερσὶ λαλεῖν, 312. + + χιτών, 250. + + χιτὼν ἀμφίμαλλος, 256. + + χιτὼν μαλλωτός, 256. + + χιτὼν χορταῖος, 256. + + Χόες, 370, 372. + + χοραγός, 301. + + χορευτής, 61, 80, 299. + + χορηγεῖν, 55, 56, 63. + + χορηγεῖν κωμῳδοῖς, 44, 288. + + χορηγεῖν παισί, 90. + + χορηγεῖν τῇ φυλῇ, 10. + + χορηγεῖν τραγῳδοῖς, 10. + + χορηγεῖον, 60. + + χορηγία, 37. + + χορηγός, 10, 32, 56, 63, 64, 66, 301. + + χορικὰ μέλη, 287. + + χοροκτόνος, 54. + + χορολέκτης, 60, 301. + + χορὸν αἰτεῖν, 50. + + χορὸν διδόναι, 20, 50. + + χορὸν εἰσάγειν, 69. + + χοροποιός, 301. + + χοροστάτης, 301. + + χοροῦ τυγχάνειν, 50. + + Χύτροι, 12, 31, 371. + + + Ψ + + ψαλίς, 112. + + ψιλεύς, 300. + + + Ω + + ᾠδεῖον, 67, 68, 87, 177. + + + + +GENERAL INDEX + + + A + + Acoustics, attention paid to, 174. + + Acrae, theatre at, 93. + + Acting, importance of the voice in, 272 ff. + Musical training necessary for, 274. + Style of enunciation used in, 275. + Gestures used in, 276. + + Actors, contests between, 40 ff. + Importance of protagonists, 42. + Reproduction of old plays by, 43 f. + Originally chosen by the poets, afterwards by the state, 57 ff., + 229, 230. + How assigned to the poets, 58. + Paid by the state, 64. + Tamper with the text of old plays, 74. + The first actor introduced by Thespis, 80. + Enter and depart by orchestra, 168, 169, 192 f. + Meaning of the term actor, 221. + Gradual introduction of, 222 ff. + Number of actors in tragedy, comedy, and satyric drama, 223. + Effect of small number of, 225. + The Greek names for an actor, 226 f. + Rise of the actor’s profession, 227. + Increase in the proportion of, 228, 229. + Distribution of parts among, 230 ff. + Changes of costume by, 232. + Costume of tragic actors, 237 ff.; + of satyric actors, 255 ff.; + of comic actors, 257 ff. + Importance of the voice in, 272 ff. + Musical training of, 274. + Style of Greek acting, 275 ff. + The Actors’ Guild, 278 ff. + Privileges of, 278. + Social position of, 281. + Salaries of, 281. + General character of, 282. + Celebrated Athenian actors, 282 ff. + Comic, lists of, 365. + + Aegis, the, worn by Athene, 251. + + Aeschines, acted Oenomaus, 29. + Hired by Socrates and Simylus, 30. + As tritagonist, 33. + His accident at Collytus, 249. + Taunted by Demosthenes, 281. + + Aeschylus, his first appearance as a dramatist, 11, 83. + His Oedipodeia, 11, 15. + His Oresteia, 12, 14, 15. + Trilogies and tetralogies of, 13 ff. + His Lycurgeia, 15, 17. + His Promethean trilogy, 15. + Number of his victories, 34. + Records concerning his Oresteia, 48. + Exhibits at an early age, 50. + Actors of, 57. + Trains his choruses, 61. + Reproduction of his plays after his death, 73, 76. + Text of his plays, 74, 76. + Not popular in later times, 76. + His stage, 150. + His statue in the theatre, 176. + Scenery in his plays, 180. + Said to have invented scene-painting, 181. + Invents stage decorations, 199. + Introduces a second actor, 223. + Ceases to act in person, 227. + His improvements in the tragic costume, 238, 240, 242, 248. + His choruses, 285 ff., 289 ff. + Designs the dress of the Furies, 291. + Improves the tragic dance, 314. + His Eumenides, 327. + Nearly killed for impiety, 346. + + Agathon, his first victory, 28, 70. + His treatment of the chorus, 286. + Adopts the new style of music, 321. + + Agonothetes, the, 54, 55. + + Agyrrhius, commissioner of the treasury, 40. + + Aixone, comedies at, 30. + + Alcamenes, 131. + + Alcibiades, admired for his beauty, 9, 327. + Corrupts the judges, 35. + Assaults Taureas, 66, 343. + + Alexander the Great, wishes to make a stage of bronze, 174. + + Altar, in the orchestra, 107. + On the stage, 200. + + Ambassadors, provided with front seats, 324, 336. + + Anapaests, given in recitative, 269. + Sometimes delivered by the coryphaeus, 308. + + Anapiesma, the, 217. + + Anaxandrides, never revises his comedies, 71. + + Andronicus, victorious in the Epigoni, 43. + + Anthesteria, the, distinct from the Lenaea, 6, 369 ff. + Where celebrated, 368 ff. + Dramatic performances at, 31, 44. + + Anti-choregi, 66. + + Antisthenes, his success as choregus, 37, 62. + + Apaturius, 127. + + Aphareus, engages in eight contests, 19. + Exhibits at the Lenaea, 26. + Entrusts his plays to others, 52. + Rhetorician as well as poet, 62. + + Apollonius, disregards tetralogies, 13. + + Applause, mode of expressing, 344. + + Araros, son of Aristophanes, 51. + + Archilochus, invents recitative, 268. + + Archinus, commissioner of the treasury, 40. + + Archons, the, manage the festivals, 49. + Their seats in the theatre, 336. + + Arguments, of plays, 48, 349. + + Aristarchus, disregards tetralogies, 13. + + Aristerostatae, 300. + + Aristias, competes with Aeschylus, 12. + + Aristodemus, the actor, 278, 281, 283. + + Aristophanes, the grammarian, 13. + His Arguments, 47. + + Aristophanes, the poet, competes at the City Dionysia, 21, 28; + at the Lenaea, 25, 27, 28. + Story about his Clouds, 38. + Third in a certain contest, 40. + Exhibits at an early age, 51. + Entrusts his plays to others, 51, 52. + His Ecclesiazusae, 69. + His Frogs much admired, 71. + Scenery in his plays, 183, 196. + Parodies the ekkyklema, 204. + Parodies the mechane, 212. + Discards the phallus, 259. + His choruses, 287. + Discards the kordax, 318. + Honoured with a chaplet from the sacred olive, 346. + + Aristotle, his remark on the stories of plays, 30. + His Didascaliae, 47. + Censures extravagance in choregi, 64. + His opinion concerning the deus ex machina, 216. + His definition of acting, 273. + His opinion about actors, 282. + His definition of dancing, 313. + His remarks about the admission of boys to comedies, 329. + His description of Attic audiences, 348. + + Arsis, 311. + + Artists of Dionysus, 278. + + Asia Minor, theatres in, 133 ff., 148, 163. + + Aspendos, theatre at, passages in, 97. + Back-wall at, 127, 134. + Roof in, 135. + + Assembly, the, meetings of, in the theatre, 70, 178. + + Assos, theatre at, 94, 159. + Orchestra in, 106. + Gates, 110. + Date of proscenium, 130. + + Assteas, his vase-painting, 127. + + Astydamas, his victories at the Lenaea, 26. + Statue of, 87. + Conceit of, 176. + + Astydamas, protagonist, 42. + + Athenodorus, the actor, 230, 281, 283, 284. + + Audience, the, representative character of, 4. + Enthusiasm for the drama, 4, 346. + Overrules the judges, 37, 344. + Closely packed, 97, 99. + Number of, 100. + At the Lenaea, 324. + At the City Dionysia, 324. + Includes women, boys, and slaves, 324 ff. + Distribution of seats among, 334 ff. + Price of admission, 331, 334. + Tickets of admission, 332. + The proedria, 332. + Occupants of the front rows, 335 ff. + Comfort of, 100, 342. + Their mode of expressing pleasure and disapproval, 344. + Characteristics of, 344. + Their orthodoxy, 345. + Their intelligence and taste, 347. + Preservation of order among, 343. + + Auditorium, the, originally of wood, 81, 84. + In the theatre at Athens, 90 ff. + Shape of, 92. + Interior of, 93 ff. + Passages in, 97 ff. + Size of, 99, 100. + Later history of, 100. + Puchstein’s theory of, 131, 132. + + Awnings, 95, 100. + Not generally used in Greek theatres, 176, 342. + + + B + + Back-wall, the, 126, 127. + In theatres of the Roman period, 133. + Doors in, 134, 154. + + Balconies, on the stage, 187. + + Banquets, in honour of victory, 70. + + Basis (metrical term), 311. + + Bethe, on uses of proscenium, 123. + Theory of the stage, 172, 173. + On the drop-scene, 220. + On the tragic costume, 239. + + Birds, chorus of, 297. + Their mode of entrance, 302. + + Boots, in tragedy, 248 ff. + In the Old Comedy, 260. + In the New Comedy, 266. + + Boys, admitted to the theatre, 324 ff. + + Bradfield, theatre at, 158. + + Bronteion, the, 218. + + + C + + Callicrates, promises to increase theoric distributions, 331. + + Callimachus, the grammarian, 47, 48. + + Callippides, the actor, 277, 282. + + Callistratus, exhibits plays of Aristophanes, 51, 52. + Not an actor, 59. + + Carpets, in the theatre, 342. + + Cavea, the, 90. + + Cephisophon, 57. + + Chaeremon, 19. + + Changes, of scenery, 195 ff. + Of costume, 231 ff. + + Chariots, in the theatre, 201. + + Charon’s Steps, 217. + + Chionides, 20, 26, 27. + + Chlamys, the, 250. + + Choerilus, number of his plays, 11. + Competes with Aeschylus, 11. + His improvements in masks, 242. + + Choes, 370, 372. + + Choregi, first appointment of, 11, 20, 352. + Importance of, 36. + How appointed, 53. + Age of, 53. + Replaced by synchoregi, 54; + by the agonothetes, 54. + Reintroduced, 55. + Assignation of poets to, 55 f. + Duties of, 61. + Expenditure of, 63 ff. + Rivalry between, 66. + + Choreutae, their appetite, 61. + Delivery of words by single choreutae, 308. + Decline in the excellence of, 314. + + Chorus, the, granted by the archon, 50. + Selection and training of, 60 ff. + Paid by the choregus, 63. + Its dresses supplied by the choregus, 64. + Cost of different kinds of, 64. + Decline of, 128. + Position of during the performance, 140, 148. + Supposed platform for, 141. + Occasional inaction of, 168. + Enters and departs by the back-scene, 168. + Comes into contact with the actors, 169. + Extra choruses, 237. + Gradual decline of in tragedy, 285 ff.; + in comedy, 287 ff. + Its size in tragedy, comedy, and satyric drama, 288 ff. + Its costume in tragedy, 290 ff.; + in satyric drama, 292 ff.; + in the Old Comedy, 295 ff. + Rectangular arrangement of, 298. + Its mode of entrance, 299, 301. + Irregular entrance of, 302. + The parodos, 302. + Its formation when in the orchestra, 303. + Manœuvres of, 304. + Second entrance of, 305. + Exit of, 305. + Delivery of words by the whole chorus, 306; + by the coryphaeus, 307; + by single choreutae, 308; + by half-choruses, 309. + Decline of choral dancing, 314. + Accompanies the actors’ speeches with mimetic dances, 316. + Sings in unison, 319. + + Chorus-trainers, 62. + Paid by the choregus, 63. + + Christ, theory of the stage, 173. + + Chytri, the, dramatic contests at, 31, 44, 371. + + Cinesias, said to have abolished the choregia, 54. + + City Dionysia, the, compared with the Lenaea, 6, 7, 27, 28. + Meaning of the name, 7. + Date, 7. + Character of the proceedings at, 7 ff. + Procession at, 8, 9. + Contests at, 9, 10. + Tragedy at, 10 ff. + Comedy at, 20 ff. + Order of contests at, 23, 24. + Actors’ contests at, 41. + Managed by the archon eponymus, 49. + Synchoregi at, 54. + Proclamation of crowns at, 68. + Tribute displayed at, 68. + Orphans paraded at, 68. + Where celebrated, 82, 84. + + Clâque, the, 345. + + Cleander, actor of Aeschylus, 57, 282. + + Cleidemides, actor of Sophocles, 282. + + Cleon, terror inspired by, 260. + + Cleophon, invents theoric distributions, 331. + + Clouds, chorus of, 295. + + Cock-fight, the, in the theatre, 177. + + Collytus, dramatic performances at, 29. + + Comedy, first institution of contests in, 5, 20, 26, 27. + Specially prominent at the Lenaea, 6. + Choregia in, 20. + At the City Dionysia, 20 ff., 358 ff. + Number of poets and plays in the comic contests, 20. + Reproduction of old comedies, 22. + At the Lenaea, 26, 27, 355 ff. + At the Anthesteria, 31. + Number of actors in, 224. + Costume of actors in, 257 ff. + Decline of the chorus in, 287. + Size of the chorus in, 289. + Costume of the chorus in, 295 ff. + Dances used in, 318. + Its connexion with religion, 328. + + Conjurors, in the theatre, 178. + + Contests, the dramatic, confined to a few festivals, 1. + Managed by the state, 3. + Universal prevalence of, 3. + First institution of, 5, 11, 20, 26. + Tragic contests at the City Dionysia, 10 ff. + Comic contests at the City Dionysia, 20 ff. + Tragic contests at the Lenaea, 25. + Comic contests at the Lenaea, 26. + Comic contests at the Anthesteria, 31. + The judges in, 31 ff. + Prizes for, 38 ff. + Between actors, 40 ff. + Records of, 44 ff. + Commence at daybreak, 68. + Preceded by a sacrifice, 68. + Order determined by lot, 69. + Announced by a trumpet, 69. + + Coryphaeus, the, in the early drama, 80. + Position and importance of, 301. + Delivers portions of the choral part alone, 308. + + Costume, of the tragic actors, 237 ff. + Origin of the tragic costume, 238 ff. + Improved by Aeschylus, 240. + Ancient representations of the tragic costume, 241, 243. + Tragic masks, 244 ff. + The cothurnus, 248 ff. + The tragic tunic, 250. + The tragic mantle, 250. + Head-coverings in tragedy, 251. + Special costumes in tragedy, 251, 252. + General character of the tragic costume, 252 ff. + Costume of satyric actors, 255 ff. + Costume of actors in the Old Comedy, 257 ff. + Origin of this costume, 261. + Costume of actors in the New Comedy, 261 ff. + Cumbersomeness of the tragic costume often exaggerated, 276. + Costume of the tragic chorus, 290; + of the satyric chorus, 292 ff.; + of the comic chorus, 295 ff. + + Cothurnus, the, 244 ff. + Not worn in satyric dramas, 255. + + Council, the, special seats for, 337. + + Courtesans, special seats for, 337. + + Crane, the, 210. + + Crates, actor to Cratinus, 59, 228. + + Cratinus, satirized by Aristophanes, 9. + His victories, 28, 46. + Refused a chorus by the archon, 50. + Called a dancer, 61, 228, 314. + + Crowns, proclaimed at the City Dionysia, 68. + Bestowed on victors at the contests, 69. + Worn by kings and messengers, 252. + Worn by the spectators, 342. + + Cunei, the, 98. + + Curators, at the City Dionysia and Lenaea, 49. + + Cushions, in the theatre, 96, 342. + + + D + + Dancing, importance of in the Greek drama, 311. + Its mimetic character, 312. + History of, 314. + How far employed in the drama, 315. + Used as an accompaniment to speeches from the stage, 316. + The tragic dance, 317. + The comic dance, 318. + The satyric dance, 318. + + Delivery, different modes of, 266 ff. + Louder in tragedy than in comedy, 275. + More rhythmical than in modern times, 275. + Delivery of the choral part, 305 ff. + + Delos, theatre at, orchestra in, 106, 121 ff., 139, 157. + The hyposkenion, 107, 121, 123, 124, 125, 157. + The pinakes, 123, 130. + Date of proscenium, 130. + Shape of stage-buildings, 139. + Erections in front of proscenium, 157. + Dörpfeld’s view concerning, 162. + Accounts in connexion with, 379 ff. + + Demosthenes, his choregic dress, 8. + His dream, 37. + Supplies his chorus with golden crowns, 64. + Complains of the amount spent upon choruses, 66. + His remark about actors, 273. + Assaulted by Meidias, 324. + + Deus ex machina, 215. + + Deuteragonist, 230, 234. + + Deuterostatae, 300. + + Dexiostatae, 300. + + Diaulia, 321. + + Dicaeogenes, his meanness, 37. + + Didascalia, meaning of the word, 47. + The tragic didascaliae, 13; cf. 352 ff. + + Didaskalos, 61. + + Diodorus, exhibits two comedies at one contest, 21. + + Dionysia, _see_ City Dionysia, Rural Dionysia. + + Dionysius, exhibits at the Lenaea, 26, 28. + + Dionysus, Eleuthereus and Lenaeus, 6. + His statue carried in procession, 8; + placed in the theatre, 9. + His temples, 88, 89, 175, 368 ff. + His priest, 339. + + Diphilus, ejected from the theatre, 345. + + Distegia, the, 186. + + Distribution, of the parts among the actors, 230 ff. + + Dithyrambic contests, 6, 9, 24, 39, 53, 56, 65. + + Doors, from stage to orchestra, 115, 124, 153. + Into the parodoi, 125. + In the back-wall, 125, 134, 189. + In the back-scene, 188. + From the side-wings, 189, 191. + Regulations about the doors on to the stage, 190, 194. + + Dorian Mode, the, 320. + + Dörpfeld, on date of first stone theatre at Athens, 83, 87. + On Lycurgus’s work, 87, 88, 114. + On the oldest stage-buildings, 113, 114, 117. + On date of first important reconstruction, 114, 119. + On the character of this reconstruction, 119. + On date of stone proscenium at Athens, 131. + His theory of the Greek stage, 144 ff. + Contradicted by Vitruvius, 145 ff.; + by other ancient authorities, 148 ff. + Inconsistent with the archaeological evidence, 150 ff., 171. + Arguments in favour of, 158 ff. + Early literary evidence against, 165 ff. + Evidence of the extant dramas concerning, 166 ff. + The reason for the stage, 170. + + Drawers, worn by the satyrs, 294. + + Drop-scene, the, 218. + + Duets, between actors, 268. + + + E + + Eisodoi, 112. + + Ekkyklema, the, character of, 201 ff., 205. + Instances of in the extant dramas, 203 ff., 206 ff. + Recent theories about, 205, 208. + + Eleusis, dramatic performances at, 29. + + Eleutherae, statue of Dionysus at, 8. + + Eleuthereus, title of Dionysus, 6, 8. + + Emmeleia, the, 317. + + Encores, 344. + + Entrances. _See_ Doors (above). + + Ephebi, receive their shields and spears in the theatre, 178. + Their seats, 337. + + Epicharmus, date of, 20. + + Epidaurus, theatre at, its symmetry of shape, 92. + Auditorium in, 93. + Chief seats in, 95. + Passages in, 97. + Size of, 100. + Date of, 104, 119. + Orchestra in, 105, 143, 157. + The gutter, 107. + The altar, 108. + Gates, 110. + The hyposkenion, 123-5, 154. + Side-wings, 125. + Ramps, 125. + + Epiparodos, the, 305. + + Eretria, theatre at, 89. + The orchestra, 107. + Tunnel in, 109. + Stage-buildings at, 119, 120, 121, 151, 165. + Stage in, 122, 132. + Side-wings, 125. + Date of proscenium, 130. + + Eubulus, entrusts his plays to Philippus, 52. + + Eudemus, helps in construction of theatre, 87. + + Eumenes, portico of, 175. + + Euphorion, produces plays of Aeschylus, 73. + + Eupolis, entrusts one of his plays to Demostratus, 52. + + Euripides, his Alcestis, 12, 13. + His Medea, Hippolytus, and Troades, 12. + Defeated by Xenocles, 12, 35; + by Nicomachus, 35. + His Iphigeneia in Aulis and Bacchae, 12, 76. + Reproduction of his tragedies in later times, 18, 76. + Exhibits a new tragedy at the Peiraeeus, 29. + Number of his victories, 34. + Exhibits at an early age, 51. + His relation with Cephisophon, 57. + Trains his own choruses, 62. + Text of his plays, 74. + His popularity, 71. + His statue in the theatre, 176. + Scenery in his plays, 183, 184. + His use of the deus ex machina, 216. + Often introduces children on the stage, 237. + Character of his tragedies, 254. + His choruses, 285-7. + Adopts the new style of music, 321. + Predicts the speedy popularity of Timotheus, 322. + Charged with writing immoral plays, 327. + His Melanippe, 346; + his Danaë, 346. + + Eurycleides, his statue in the theatre, 176. + + Evegorus, law of, 23. + + Exodoi, not usually accompanied with dances, 316. + + Exostra, the, 209. + + Extra performers, 235 ff. + + + F + + Fig-branch, the, 210. + + Files, in choruses, 298. + + Flute, the, regularly used in the Greek drama, 270. + + Flute-players, how assigned, 56. + Paid by the choregus, 63. + Number of, 270. + Costume of, 271. + Position of during the performance, 271. + + Foreigners, their seats, 337. + + Furies, chorus of, 291. + Its mode of entrance, 302. + + + G + + Gates, leading to the orchestra, 110. + + Generals, their seats in the theatre, 336. + + Gerarae, the oath of, 371, 375. + + Gestures, most important in the Greek drama, 276. + Restrained in character, 277. + + Ghosts, on the Greek stage, 168, 217. + + Girdles, part of the tragic costume, 250. + + Gladiatorial contests, in the theatre, 102, 178. + + Gods, manner of their appearance on the ancient stage, 215 ff. + + Graeco-Roman theatres, character of, 127, 133 ff. + Use of orchestra in, 136. + Inconsistent with Dörpfeld’s theory, 163. + + Guild, the Actors’, 278 ff. + + Gutters, in the orchestra, 102, 106, 107. + + + H + + Hadrian, statues of in the Athenian theatre, 176. + + Harp, the, occasionally employed in the Greek drama, 270. + + Harp-players, their number, costume, and position during the + performances, 270, 271. + + Hats, worn by the spectators, 342. + + Head-coverings, for the actors, 251. + + Hemichoria, 307, 319, 320. + + Hemikyklion, the, 218. + + Hemistrophion, the, 218. + + Hermon, the actor, 284, 344. + + Himation, the, 250. + + Horace, his reference to the Greek stage, 144, 150. + + Horses, in the theatre, 201. + + Hypodidaskalos, the, 62. + + Hypokrites, use of the word, 220. + Its derivation, 226. + + Hypophrygian Mode, the, 321. + + Hyporchemata, 307, 316, 317. + + Hyposkenion, the, 123 ff. + + + I + + Iambics, tetrameters, given in recitative, 269. + + Iambic trimeters, spoken without musical accompaniment, 267. + Rarely sung, 267. + + Icaria, dramatic performances at, 29. + + Ikria, the, 83, 84, 87. + + Inscriptions bearing on the drama, 352 ff. + + Iobaccheia, 375. + + Ion of Chios, his remark about virtue, 13. + His present to the Athenians, 70. + + Ionic Mode, the, 321. + + Iophon, exhibits plays of his father Sophocles, 51. + + + J + + Judges, in the dramatic contests, their number, 31. + Mode of selection, 32 ff. + The process of voting, 33. + Value of their verdicts, 34 ff. + Sometimes corrupted and intimidated, 35. + Afraid of the audience, 37. + Their seats, 336. + + + K + + Kataloge, 268. + + Katatome, the, 90. + + Keraunoskopeion, the, 218. + + Kerkides, the, 98. + Assigned to particular tribes, 337. + + Klepsiambos, the, 269. + + Knights, chorus of, 296. + + Kolpoma, the, 252. + + Kommos, the, 268. + Accompanied by dances, 316. + The kommos in the Persae, 318. + + Konistra, the, 101. + + Kordax, the, 318. + + Kraspeditae, the, 300. + + Krepis, the, 248. + + + L + + Laurostatae, the, 170, 300. + + Lenaea, the, not part of the Anthesteria, 5, 6, 372 ff. + Compared with the City Dionysia, 6, 7, 27. + Meaning of the name, 24, 376. + Date of, 25. + Where celebrated, 25, 83, 368 ff. + General character of, 25, 26. + Tragic contests at, 25, 26 ff. + Comic contests at, 26, 27. + Actors’ contests at, 41. + Managed by the archon basileus, 49. + + Lenaeum, the, 24, 25. + Site of, 368 ff. + Wooden theatre at, 83, 84. + + Lenaeus, title of Dionysus, 24, 372, 376. + + Lessee, the, 334. + + Licymnius, the actor, victorious in the Propompi, 43. + His voice, 273. + + Limnaeus, title of Dionysus, 372, 373. + + Logeion, the, 117, 163. + Not the same as the theologeion, 164. + + Lucian, ridicules the tragic actors, 254, 273. + + Lycurgus, the orator, his law concerning the Anthesteria, 31. + Institutes dithyrambic contests at the Peiraeeus, 39. + His law for preserving the text of the great tragic poets, 74. + Completes the theatre, 87. + Puchstein’s theory of, 87, 88, 130 ff. + + + M + + Maeniana, 187. + + Magna Graecia, theatres of, 127, 133, 155 ff. + + Magnesia, theatre at, its shape, 93. + Tunnel in, 109. + + Market-place, the, suggested site of the Lenaeon, 25, 377. + Dramatic performances at, 83. + + Marshes, the, temple in, 24, 368 ff. + Site of, 368 ff. + + Masks, invention of, 238, 242. + Results of the use of, 242, 243. + The tragic mask, 244, 245. + The mask of Silenus, 256. + The masks in the Old Comedy, 259, 260; + in the New Comedy, 262 ff. + The masks of the tragic chorus, 291; + of the satyric chorus, 292; + of the comic chorus, 295. + + Mechane, the, character of, 209 ff. + Instances of the use of, 211 ff. + Relation to the theologeion, 213 ff. + + Megalopolis, theatre at, chief seats in, 95. + Size of, 100. + The orchestra in, 105, 106. + The gutter, 107. + Date of, 119. + Stage in, 121, 122, 125. + No door in hyposkenion, 124, 154. + Date of proscenium, 130. + Stage-buildings in, 137. + Skanotheka and scaena ductilis in, 160 ff. + + Meidias, corrupts the judges, 35. + Assaults Demosthenes, 324. + Interferes with Demosthenes’ chorus, 117, 279. + + Meletus, his Oedipodeia, 18. + + Menander, reproduction of comedies of, 22. + Defeated by Philemon, 36, 345. + His statue in the theatre, 176. + Retains the chorus, 288. + His desire for distinction as a dramatist, 326. + + Miltiades, his statue in the theatre, 176. + + Mitra, the, 251. + + Mixolydian Mode, the, 320. + + Modes, the, 320, 321. + + Monodies, 268. + + Mummius, 175. + + Music, in the Greek drama. + The instruments employed, 269, 270. + Number of musicians, 270. + General character of, 319 ff. + The Modes, 320, 321. + Deterioration of Greek Music during the fifth century, 321. + + Musical instruments, in the Greek drama, 269, 270. + + Musicians, in the Greek drama, 270. + + Mute characters, 63, 235, 236. + + Mynniscus, actor of Aeschylus, 57, 227, 282. + Calls Callippides an ape, 277. + + + N + + Neoptolemus, the actor, 273, 279, 281, 283, 284. + + Nero, competes in the tragic contests, 273. + + Nicias, as choregus, 37, 66. + + Nicostratus, the actor, 269. + + + O + + Obelisks, on the stage, 200. + + Odeion, the, used for the Proagon, 67. + Of Pericles, 175. + Formerly used for performances by rhapsodists and harp-players, 177. + + Okribas, the, 118. + + Onkos, the, 244. + + Orange, theatre at, 135. + + Orchesis, 312. + + Orchestra, the, importance of, 80, 81. + In Roman theatres, 82. + In the market-place, 83. + The old orchestra in the Athenian theatre, 84. + Names of, 101. + The orchestra in the stone theatre at Athens, 102. + Comparison of Greek and Roman orchestras, 104. + Not always a complete circle, 106. + Passages round, 106. + The gutter, 102, 106, 107. + Floor of, 107. + Altar in, 107. + Subterranean passages in, 103, 109. + Entrances into, 110 ff. + Use of in Romanized Greek theatres, 135, 136. + Hermann’s theory concerning, 141. + Book-shops in old orchestra, 377. + + Oropus, theatre at, chief seats in, 96. + Proscenium at, 125, 130, 152, 153. + Stage-buildings in, 151. + + Orphans, paraded in the theatre, 68. + Have the proedria, 336. + + Ovid, his advice to lovers, 312. + + + P + + Pantacles, the poet, 56. + + Parabasis, delivered partly in recitative, 269. + Disappearance of, 287. + Position of the chorus during, 304. + + Parachoregemata, 235 ff. + + Parakataloge, 268. + + Paraskenia, 117, 235, 379 ff. + + Parastatae, the, 301. + + Parmenon, the actor, 284. + + Parodoi, 112, 194. + + Parodos, or entrance song, 302. + The second parodos, 305. + Given by the whole chorus, 306. + Generally accompanied with dancing, 315. + + Passages, in the auditorium, 97, 98. + Under the orchestra, 103, 109. + Round the orchestra, 106. + Into the orchestra, 110 ff., 194. + + Patara, theatre at, 136. + + Peiraeeus, the, dramatic performances at, 29. + Shape of theatre at, 93. + Passages in, 97, 98. + The orchestra, 105, 106. + The gutter, 107. + Date of proscenium, 130. + + Pergamon, theatre at, 137, 159. + + Perge, theatre at, partially Romanized, 135. + + Periaktoi, the, 197 ff. + + Phaedrus, stage of, 88, 115. + + Phallus, the, worn by comic actors, 257-9; + by the satyrs, 294. + + Pherecrates, censures the music of Timotheus, 321. + + Philemon, reproduction of comedies of, 22. + Defeats Menander, 36, 245. + Retains the chorus, 288. + + Philippus, son of Aristophanes, 52. + + Philocles, writes a Pandionis, 17. + + Philonides, exhibits plays of Aristophanes, 21, 52. + Not an actor, 59. + + Phlya, dramatic performances at, 30. + + Phlyakes, their performances, 155 ff., 257. + + Phrygian Mode, the, 320. + + Phrynichus, called a dancer, 61, 314. + His Capture of Miletus, 71. + Introduces female masks, 242. + Skilful in inventing new dances, 314. + + Pinakes, 122, 123, 127, 130. + + Pisistratus, 11. + + Plato, the philosopher, writes a tetralogy, 18. + His opinion of Attic audiences, 38, 344, 347. + Would exclude actors from his ideal state, 274. + Praises the tragic dance, 317. + Disapproves of the kordax, 318. + His remarks about the drama in connexion with boys and women, 326. + + Plato, the poet, sells his comedies, 51. + His remarks on the decline of choral dancing, 314. + + Pleuron, date of proscenium, 130. + + Plutarch, his description of Greek dancing, 313. + His remark about music, 319. + + Pnyx, the, disused as a meeting-place for popular assemblies, 178. + + Poets, influence of, 4. + Number of, at the different dramatic contests, 12, 19, 20, 25. + Age of, 50, 51. + Produce plays in other persons’ names, 51, 52. + Originally also stage-managers, 51, 61. + How assigned to the choregi, 55, 56. + Act in their own plays, 227. + Tragic, at the Dionysia, 362. + Comic, at the Dionysia, 363; + at the Lenaea, 364. + + Police, in the theatre, 343. + + Polus, the actor, his salary, 281. + Stories about, 283. + + Polycleitus, architect of the Epidaurian theatre, 104. + + Polyphradmon, his Lycurgean tetralogy, 12. + + Poplar, the, near the old theatre, 83. + + Portico, in the auditorium, 99. + At Delos, 139. + In the fourth century at Athens, 175. + Of Eumenes, 175. + + Posidippus, reproduction of his plays, 22. + + Praecinctiones, 98. + + Pratinas, number of his plays, 11. + Competes with Aeschylus, 11. + Called a dancer, 61, 314. + Complains of the flute-players, 320. + + Price of admission, two obols, 330. + Granted by the state to needy citizens, 330 ff. + + Priene, theatre at, altar in the orchestra of, 108. + Stage in, 121. + Doors in hyposkenion, 124. + Chief seats in, 96. + Proscenium in, 125. + + Priestesses, their seats, 335, 341. + + Priests, their seats, 335, 338 ff. + + Privileges, enjoyed by actors, 278 ff. + + Prizes, for choregi, 39, 69. + For poets, 39, 69. + + Proagon, the, 67. + + Probole, the, 70. + + Production, of a play, 49 ff. + Concealment of the poet’s name, 51 ff. + Formerly managed by the poet himself, 51. + Posthumous production of plays, 74. + + Proedria, the, 335. + Conferred on priests, 335; + on archons and generals, 336; + On various other persons, 336. + + Prologue, the, 302. + + Proskenion, the, 118, 122 ff. + + Protagonist, his importance, 42, 230. + Parts taken by him, 232, 233. + + Protostatae, the, 301. + + Ptolemy, the Third, a collector of manuscripts, 75. + + Puchstein, on date of first stone theatre at Athens, 83, 87, 130 ff. + On Lycurgus’s work, 87, 88, 130 ff. + On the oldest stage-buildings, 113, 114, 117, 130 ff. + On date of first reconstruction, 114, 119, 130 ff. + On character of this reconstruction, 119, 130 ff. + On pinakes, 123, 130. + On date of stone proscenium, 130 ff. + On date of stone auditorium, 131, 132. + On stage in fifth century, 132. + + Pulpitum, meaning of the word, 150. + + Puppet shows, in the theatre, 178. + + + Q + + Quintilian, his statement about Aeschylus, 73. + His comparison of the orator and the dancer, 312. + + + R + + Ramps, in the stage-buildings, 125. + + Ranks, in choruses, 298. + + Recitative, how far employed in the Greek drama, 268 ff., 305. + + Records, of dramatic contests, 44 ff., 352 ff. + Erected in or near the theatre, 176. + + Refrains, 321. + + Refreshments, in the theatre, 341. + + Religion, its connexion with the drama, 1 ff., 328. + + Reproduction, of old tragedies, 72 ff. + Of old comedies, 22. + Of plays at the Rural Dionysia, 29, 30. + By the actors, 43, 74. + Almost unknown during the fifth century, 74. + Favourite tragedies in later times, 75, 76. + On the Vitruvian stage, 129. + + Revision, of plays, 71. + + Robert, theory of the stage, 173. + + Romanization, of Greek theatres, 133 ff. + Often only partially carried out, 135. + Dörpfeld’s theory concerning, 162 ff. + + Roof, over the stage, 118, 135. + + Rural Dionysia, the, 6, 29, 30. + Old plays at, 43. + + + S + + Sagalassos, theatre at, partially Romanized, 135. + The stage, 135. + + Salamis, dramatic performances at, 29. + + Salaries of the actors, 281. + + Sannio, the chorus-trainer, 62, 279. + + Satyric drama, at the City Dionysia, 11. + Its relation to tragedy, 16. + Decline in the importance of, 18. + Number of actors in, 224. + Costume of actors in, 225. + Size of the chorus in, 256. + Origin of the satyric chorus, 289. + Costume of the satyric chorus, 292 ff. + The satyric dance, 318. + + Satyrus, the actor, 76. + + Scaena ductilis, supposed use of at Megalopolis, 161. + Character of, 199. + + Scene-painting, invention of, 181. + Character of in ancient times, 183 ff. + + Scenery, occasionally supplied by the choregus, 64. + Simple in character, 179. + Gradual introduction of, 179 ff. + Inventor of, 181. + Number of scenes not large, 182, 183. + Character of ancient scene-painting, 183 ff. + Mechanical arrangements for the scenery, 186 ff. + Entrances to the stage, 188 ff. + Regulations concerning the entrances, 190. + Changes of scene, 195 ff. + The periaktoi, 197 ff. + Stage-properties, 199. + The ekkyklema, 201 ff. + The exostra, 209. + The mechane and theologeion, 209 ff. + Various contrivances, 217. + + Sea-fights, in the orchestra, 103. + + Seats, the, originally of wood, 81. + In the Athenian theatre, 94 ff. + For distinguished persons, 94, 100. + Price of, 330. + Distribution of, 334 ff. + + Segesta, stage at, 132. + + Shepherds, their costume on the stage, 251. + + Sicyon, theatre at, the orchestra in, 106. + The gutter, 107. + Tunnel in, 108. + The stage-buildings, 120, 151. + The stage, 125. + Ramps in, 125. + The proscenium, 130. + + Side entrances, on to the stage, 191 ff. + To the orchestra, 110 ff., 194 ff. + + Side-wings, in the Athenian theatre, 113, 114. + Called paraskenia, 117. + Various shapes of, 125. + At Delos, 139. + Entrances from, 191 ff. + + Sigma, the, 101. + + Sikinnis, the, 318. + + Sileni, their relation to satyrs, 292 ff. + + Silenus, his costume, 256. + His relation to the satyrs and Sileni, 295. + + Simylus, the actor, 30, 275. + + Skanotheka, at Megalopolis, 160. + + Skene, origin of the term, 80. + Various meanings of, 141. + + Slaves, admitted to the theatre, 325, 329. + + Sleeves, in the tragic costume, 250. + + Soccus, the, 266. + + Socrates, the actor, 30, 275. + + Socrates, his behaviour during the performance of the Clouds, 260. + + Solos, by actors, 268. + + Song, used in lyrical passages, 268, 305. + + Soothsayers, their costume on the stage, 251. + + Sophocles, competes with Euripides, 12. + Abandons the practice of writing tetralogies, 17. + Number of his victories, 28, 34, 46. + Defeated by Philocles, 35, 40. + Never third in a contest, 40. + Refused a chorus by the archon, 50. + Exhibits at an early age, 51. + Entrusts plays to his son Iophon, 52. + His actor Tlepolemus, 57. + Writes for the actors, 57, 229. + Appears occasionally upon the stage, 62, 227. + His conduct at the death of Euripides, 67. + The text of his plays, 74. + Popular tragedies of, 76. + His statue in the theatre, 176. + Said to have invented scene-painting, 181. + Scenery in his plays, 182. + Introduces a third actor, 224. + Prevented from acting by the weakness of his voice, 227. + Invents the krepis, 248; + and the curved staff, 252. + His choruses, 285, 286. + Increases the size of the chorus, 289. + Appointed general, 346. + His popularity, 347, 348. + + Speech, used in the delivery of iambic trimeters, 267, 305. + + Sphyromachus, his regulation about the seats, 327. + + Staffbearers, 343. + + Stage, the, original form of, 80. + History of in the stone theatre at Athens, 113 ff. + Names for, 118, 163. + In early times, 118 ff. + In the pre-Roman period, 130 ff. + Puchstein’s theory of, 132 ff. + In theatres of the Roman period, 133 ff. + At Megalopolis, 137. + At Delos, 138. + Wieseler’s theory of, 140 ff. + Gradual development of, 144. + Dörpfeld’s theory of, 144 ff. + Literary evidence for the later stage, 145 ff. + Archaeological evidence for the later stage, 150 ff. + Dörpfeld’s arguments against the later stage, 158 ff. + Development of the Roman stage from the Greek, 162 ff. + Literary evidence for the early stage, 165 ff. + Evidence of the extant dramas concerning, 167 ff. + The reason for the stage, 170. + Varies in height at different periods, 171. + Various theories concerning, 172 ff. + Occasionally used by the chorus, 169. + + Stage-buildings, the, origin of, 80. + History of in the stone theatre at Athens, 112 ff. + Puchstein’s view of, 113, 114, 117, 130 ff. + In early times, 116 ff. + In the pre-Roman period, 126. + In theatres of the Roman period, 133 ff. + At Pergamon, 137. + At Megalopolis, 137. + At Delos, 138. + The space behind the proscenium, 151. + + Stage-properties, 199 ff. + + Stasima, movements of the chorus during, 303. + Delivered by the whole chorus, 306. + Accompanied with dancing, 315. + + Statues, in the theatre, 176. + On the stage, 200. + + Statuettes, of comic actors, 258. + + Steps, between orchestra and stage, 129, 148, 149, 156. + Charon’s, 217. + + Stropheion, the, 218. + + Sword-swallowers, in the theatre, 178. + + Synchoregia, the, 54. + + Syracuse, theatre at, 89. + + Syrtos, the, 250. + + + T + + Tablets, erected by the choregi, 44. + + Taureas, assaulted by Alcibiades, 66, 343. + + Tauromenium, theatre at, 127. + + Telestes, dancer employed by Aeschylus, 312. + Dances the Seven Against Thebes, 317. + + Temples, of Dionysus, 88, 89, 175, 368 ff. + + Termessos, theatre at, 93. + Partially Romanized, 135. + The stage, 135. + Door in the back-wall, 154. + + Tetralogies, 12, 13 ff. + Meaning of the term, 13. + Invention of, 14. + Character of, 14. + Disuse of, 17. + + Text, of old plays, officially preserved, 74. + + Theatre, the Greek, general character of, 79. + Originally of wood, 80. + Importance of the orchestra in, 81. + Compared with the Roman, 82. + Site of the old wooden theatres, 82-4, App. + Seldom faces the south, 89. + Shape of the auditorium, 90. + Passages in, 97. + The orchestra, 101 ff. + The eisodoi, 110 ff. + The stage-buildings and stage in early times, 113 ff.; + in pre-Roman times, 120 ff.; + in Roman times, 133 ff. + Reasons of changes in, 127. + Use of orchestra in later times, 136. + Exceptional stage-buildings, 137 ff. + Wieseler’s theory of the stage in, 146 ff. + Dörpfeld’s theory of the stage in, 144 ff. + Other theories of the stage, 172 ff. + Acoustic properties of, 174. + + Theatre, of Dionysus at Athens, first permanent erection at, 83 ff. + Remains of the fifth century theatre, 83, 84. + Compared with that of later times, 85. + Date of the stone theatre, 86, 87. + Later history of, 87, 88. + Site of, 88. + The auditorium, 90 ff. + The orchestra, 101 ff. + The stage-buildings, 113 ff. + Statues and monuments in, 176. + Various uses of, 177, 178. + Buildings near, 175. + + Themistocles, victorious in a dramatic contest, 45. + His statue in the theatre, 176. + + Theodectes, engages in thirteen contests, 19. + Victorious at the Lenaea, 26. + Rhetorician as well as poet, 62. + + Theodorus, the actor, always delivers the first speech in a tragedy, + 231. + Excellence of his voice, 274. + Stories about him, 283. + + Theognis, the tragic poet, 73. + + Theologeion, the, character of, 213 ff. + Its relation to the mechane, 213. + Not identical with the logeion, 126, 164. + + Theoric money, 330 ff. + + Thersilion, the, at Megalopolis, 137, 160. + + Thesis, 311. + + Thespiae, theatre at, 124, 154. + + Thespis, the inventor of tragedy, 5, 80. + His first victory, 11. + Called a dancer, 61, 314. + Acts in his own plays, 227. + His use of masks, 242. + + Thessalus, the actor, 283, 284. + + Thoricus, theatre at, 30, 85. + + Thrasyllus, his dream, 43. + + Thrones, in the Athenian theatre, 94. + Throne of the priest of Dionysus, 336. + + Thymele, in the early theatres, 80. + In the stone theatres, 107. + Various meanings of the word, 108, 142. + Wieseler’s theory concerning, 142 ff. + + Tickets, of admission to the theatre, 332 ff. + + Timotheus, author of the new style of music, 321. + + Tlepolemus, actor of Sophocles, 57, 282. + + Tombs, on the stage, 200. + + Tragedy, first institution of contests in, 5, 11, 25, 356. + At the City Dionysia, 11 ff. + Reproduction of old tragedies, 19, 72. + At the Lenaea, 25, 26, 356. + Number of actors in, 222 ff. + Costume of actors in, 237 ff. + Decline of the chorus in, 286 ff. + Size of the chorus in, 288 ff. + Costume of the chorus in, 290. + The tragic dance, 316. + + Training, of the chorus, 60 ff. + + Tralles, theatre at, tunnel in, 110. + Steps in, 167. + + Tribes, the Attic, dithyrambic contests between, 10. + Have no connexion with the dramatic contests, 10. + Certain blocks in the theatre appropriated to them, 337. + + Tribute, displayed at the City Dionysia, 68. + + Trilogies, 13, 14. + + Trios, between actors, 268. + + Tripods, the prizes in the dithyrambic contests, 39. + + Tritagonist, the, 233. + + Tritostatae, the, 300. + + Trochaic tetrameters, given in recitative, 269. + + Tunic, of tragic actors, 250. + Of satyric actors, 256. + + Tunnels, under the orchestra, 103, 109, 110. + + Turban, worn by Darius, 252. + + Tyndaris, stage at, 132. + + + V + + Vitruvius, his advice about sites of theatres, 89; + about the shape of the auditorium, 93. + Description of the Greek and Roman orchestra, 105; + of the Greek and Roman stage, 146, 163, 164. + Dörpfeld’s views about, 145 ff. + On scene-painting, 181 ff. + + Voice, importance of in the Greek drama, 272. + Its strength more regarded than its quality, 273. + Training of the voice, 274. + + + W + + Wieseler, his theory of the Greek stage, 140 ff. + + Windows, in the back-scene, 188. + + Women, admitted to the theatre, 324 ff. + Their seats, 337. + + + X + + Xenocles, defeats Euripides, 12. + + + Z + + Zeno, his remark about actors, 273. + + + + +ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA + +Transcriber’s Note: The footnote numbers in this e-text are given in +[square brackets]. + + +Page 21, note 1, _for_ C.I.G. _read_ the Roman inscription I.G. [72] + +Page 26, l. 25, _for_ It was doubtless.... But they must _read_ It is +therefore possible that it was at this festival that comic contests were +first regularly organized. If so, they must + +Page 27, note 1, _add_: Wilhelm, however (p. 123), does not believe that +the first extant column of 977d was preceded by a lost column; and if he +is right, the list of victorious poets at the Lenaea only takes us back +at most to about 450 B.C. The question turns partly on the reconstruction +of the original heading of this part of the inscription; it must, I +think, be regarded as still an open one, and with it, the question of the +date of the first comic contests at the Lenaea. [98] + +Page 41, note 3, _for_ xx. _read_ iv. [168] + +Page 48, note 4, _add_: According to Wilhelm, p. 257, Körte has proved +that the Νῖκαι of Aristotle is the direct source, not of C. I. A. ii. +971, but only of C. I. A. ii. 977. I have not yet been able to obtain +Körte’s paper: but I see no reason to doubt that 971 also has an +Aristotelian basis, even if that basis be not the Νῖκαι. [192] + +Page 51, note 2, _add_: Menander also ἐδίδαξε πρῶτον ἔφηβος ὤν (Anon. de +Com.: Kaibel, Com. Fr. p. 9). [198] + +Page 54, note 5, _add_: [Capps, however, points out (Amer. Journ. Arch. +iv. p. 85) that Plutarch does not date precisely Nicanor’s acceptance of +the office: and that C. I. A. iv. 2. 584 b mentions choregi in the year +317-316.] [218] + + _Printed wholly in England for the MUSTON COMPANY._ + + _By LOWE & BRYDONE, PRINTERS, LTD., PARK STREET, CAMDEN TOWN, + LONDON, N.W.1_ + + + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 76555 *** |