The Attic Theatre

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.]