INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from .a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph andreproducethis document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand

markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as

received.

Xerox University Microfilms

. ., 300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
 || 73-30,454
|1 OLCOTT, Jr., Douglas Worth, 1944-
ARISTOPHANES' PEACE: PROBLEMS OF STAGING
K AND STAGE ACTIOi:
h"
[l
f Stanford University, Ph.D., 1973
Language and Literature, classical

| University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Q 1973

by

Douglas Worth O l c o t t , J r .

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.

ARISTOPHANES' PEACE: PROBLEMS OF STAGING AND STAGE ACTION

A DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS

AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES

OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

By

Douglas Worth Olcott, Jr.

June 1973
I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my
opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

//A^
(Principal Adviser)

I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my

opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

'iJWgWU

I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my

opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as
a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

d (Classics)

Approved for the University Committee

on Graduate Studies:

ofiMtrb TiAtwtt
Dean of Graduate Studies

i±(X,
 NOTE

The lineation used in this dissertation is that of the edition

of M. Platnauer (Oxford, 1964) unless otherwise indicated. The numbers

of Euripides' fragments refer to Nauck's Tragioorum Graeaorum fragmented-

(1889); those of the comic poets to Kock's Comioorum Attioorvm

fragmenta (1880).

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
The Problem 1
The Fifth-Century Theater 8
The Archaeology of the Site 8
The Evidence of Vase Painting 21
The Terras Skene, Skenographia 28
The Evidence of the Plays 35
Paraskenia 50
On the Question of a Raised Stage 52
The Ekkuklema 54
The Meehane 62
II. THE PEACE 67
III. CONCLUSION 181
BIBLIOGRAPHY 188

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Plan of the southwest corner of the auditorium, after

Dorpfeld, Praktika, 1925-26, pp. 25-32, fig. 1 vi

2. Plan of the theater, after Travlos, Bitdlexioon zur

Topographie des antiken Athen (Deutsches
Archaeologische Institut, 1971), fig. 678 vii

3. Plan of the late fifth-century theater as proposed in

this thesis viii

v
Pi<atfrs~

p\r> e, t a a

_ X3 sj—C5 O O - T 1
u/' W

•vi
 fijtfrt a^-

g j . A ^ A ^ f . A -C Ar^^^_-J3J>-ji^f^. JULJl-^-'U?:
0AD ttHPti OF
ell DIOAJVJPS

A/£w i"£/Hft-£
Of
Diouysos

vii^
viij
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Problem

The staging and the related stage action of Aristophanes* Peace

have been a much-debated problem. The history of scenic theories about

Peace is a guide to the history of scenic theories about Greek drama in

general. Most commentators on Greek drama before the appearance of

Dorpfeld and Reisch's Das griechische Theater, Athens, 1896, supposed a

high raised stage for all of fifth-century drama.1 This traditional

view, however, was based on the late evidence of Vitruvius, Horace, and

a few passages in scholiasts and lexicographers (collected and discussed

by Dorpfeld-Reisch, op. cit., pp. 277-305).2 Dorpfeld and Reisch argued

that there is no contemporary evidence for an area especially reserved

for the actors in the fifth century (no raised stage), basing their

arguments on the archaeology of the theater, the external literary tra-

dition, and the internal evidence of the plays themselves.

1
For a review of the general controversy, see N. Hourmouziades,
Production and Imagination in Euripides (Athens, 1965), pp. 59ff.;
P. Arnott, Greek Scenic Conventions in the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford,
1962), pp. If.
2
The honor of first challenging the traditional view goes to
Hopken, de theatro attico saecuii a. Chr.- quintv (Bonn, 1884), who
uses the internal evidence of the plays.

1
 2

Dorpfeld's theory was known for some years before the publica-

tion of his book,1 to Ed. Capps, for example, who published his support

of this view.2 A "compromise solution" of a low stage still permitting

communication between actors and chorus was maintained for a while by

A. E. Haigh.3 Sir Arthur Pickard-Cambridge, however, again argued

emphatically against the presence of any stage in the fifth-century

theater.1* Certain scholars have recently returned to the theory of a

low stage, adding in support new arguments.5 These arguments are

discussed in the Introduction to the thesis.

C. Robert6 used the Peace as evidence for the existence of a

staircase in the center of the orchestra, which he thought was the

location of the cave out of which Peace was pulled, and that the stair-

case was reached by an underground passage leading from the stage

buildings, either identical with or similar to the Xapxiovxoi KAfuoxes

of Pollux IV.132. He assumed there was a two-level stage, that Zeus'

house was on a higher level than the house of Trygaios, and that Hermes

and Trygaios directed the pulling-up operation from the front of this

higher-raised stage. This view was adopted by Sharpley in his edition

1
G. M. Sifakis, Studies in the History of the Hellenistic Drama
(London, 1967), p. 126, n. 4.
2
"The Greek Stage According to the Extant Dramas," TAPhA XXII
(1891), 64f.; "Vitruvius and the Greek Stage," Univ. of Chicago Studies
in Class. Philol. I (1895), 03-H5.
3
In the first edition of his Attic Theatre (London, 1889).
k
The Theatre of Dionysos in Athens (Oxford, 1946), pp. 69ff.
5
T. B. L. Webster, Greek Theatre Production (London, 1956 and
1970), p. 7 (= GTP~); Arnott, Greek Scenic Conventions, pp. 1-41;
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 58-74.
^Hermes XXXI (1896), 551-57.
 3

of Peace (London, 1905). Subsequent archaeology has shown, however,

that "Charon's steps" or anything similar to them are not attested for

the fifth-century theater.1

The question whether there is a two-level stage, whether there

are separate houses for Trygaios and Zeus, and if so where they are

located is really an interrelated set of questions. The typical

nineteenth-century commentator makes provision at the beginning of the

play for all subsequent scenic requirements. All commentators before

A. M. Dale assume separate houses for Trygaios and Zeus, located either

one on each side of a representation of a cave in the center of the

stage or one above the other.2 Dale argues, however, that no play of

Aristophanes requires more than one door, since the same door can serve,

in successive moments, for, e.g., "the door of the beetle-house, of

Trygaios' house, and of Zeus' house, and at the appropriate time open to

reveal (on the eccyclema platform left inside) the pile of stones which

cover the pit where Peace has been cast."3 Dale also argues that "the

action of the chorus in pulling up Peace inevitably places Heaven on the

ground floor."1* In my discussion of Peace I include a general discus-

sion of the nature of "action" on the roof in fifth-century drama.

though they are attested for the theaters at Eretria, Sikyon,

Corinth, Philippoi, and Segesta; the earliest of these is Eretria,
which Fiechter, Das Theater in Eretria (Stuttgart, 1937), p. 41, dates
to ca. 300 B.C. (= second reconstruction). See Sifakis, Hellenistic
Drama, p. 129, n. 6, for bibliography on these theaters.
2
van Herwerden (Leiden, 1906), Vol. I, pp. xix-xxxix, typically
accepts the Vitruvian episcenium (Vitr. VII.v.5) as certain for the
fifth-century Greek theater and interprets it to be a second story.
3
JHS LXXVII (1957), 205-11 (= Collected Papers [Cambridge, 1969],
pp. 103ff.).
^Ibid.
 4

Platnauer (ed., Peace [Oxford, 1964]) accepts Dale's argument

that "heaven" is really on the ground floor but supposes a cave in the

center of the stage, a house for Trygaios and a beetle pen on the spec-

tators' right, and a house for Zeus on the left. Newiger1 points out

the near impossibility of a crane being able to hoist rider and beetle

from one end of an approximately 20m stage and deposit them at the

other end and so follows Dale in envisioning that Trygaios is swung to

one side but set down again in front of the same house. Nevertheless,

he requires three doors for the play, arguing that the occupation of

the central door by the platform supporting the representation of the

cave makes another door necessary for Polemos to come out of; thus

Hermes exits by the door at the opposite end of the stage as Polemos

comes out and thus the daughters of Trygaios come out of one of these

side doors while their father is suspended on the beetle over the cen-

tral portion of the skene out of which he has been raised.

W. Jobst2 has recently collected the representations of caves

on Greek vases and has sought to prove that the style of representation

is influenced by scene painting on the stage, and that the passages of

tragedy, comedy, and satyr play which mention a cave, such as Pa. 224f.,

show .that a cave was actually represented on the stage in these plays by

more than a mere screen or backdrop.

A recent reexamination of the precinct of the theater of

Dionysos3 has produced a new date for the younger temple of Dionysos,

1
RhM CVIII, Hft. 3 (1965), 229-54.
2
SAAW 268, Bd. 2 (1970), 15ff.
3
P. G. Kalligas, DelUon XVIII (1963), Chron. 14ff.
 5

second half of the fourth century, and has led the excavator to con-

clude that the earliest theater foundations, which are also constructed

of breccia, are no earlier than the mid-fourth century and probably

Lycurgan. This redating clearly affects the theorizing about the nature

of the scenic background to the plays.

The preceding survey, which is not intended to be exhaustive,

illustrates a continuing diversity of opinion on the staging of Peace

in particular and on some of the fundamental principles of staging in

the Greek theater. It is important to note, if only generally, what

common ground the more recent commentators share which indicates that

there has been an advance from the position of the older commentators.

The great increase in the number of theaters fully excavated and in the

number of dramatic monuments collected and catalogued has resulted in a

general recognition of the principle of illusion, or perhaps one should

say economy or simplicity, in the ancient production of Greek plays.

Most of the theaters which have been excavated have been found to be

Hellenistic in date, yet the more precise knowledge about the later

history of the theater makes possible better guesses about the fifth-

century theater in Athens, such as the knowledge that "Charon's steps"

could not have existed there. Most of the known dramatic monuments

have been conveniently catalogued in Supplements of the Bulletin of the

London Institute of Classical Studies (BICS). Separate catalogues

exist for Monuments of Tragedy and Satyr Play (MTSP - 2nd ed., BICS,

Suppl. 20, 1967, compiled by T. B. L. Webster), Old and Middle Comedy

QIOMC7- = 2nd ed., BICS, Suppl. 23, 1969, Webster), New Comedy (MNC2

= 2nd ed., BIOS, Suppl. 24, 1969, Webster), and Phlyax Vases (PhV2
 6

= 2nd ed., BICS, Suppl. 19, 1967, compiled by A. D. Trendall).1 The

classification of the material is by date, type of performance, and

geographical region, a classification which it is hoped will be kept

by future collectors of dramatic material. A number of philological

studies of the plays themselves, particularly of Euripides, have also

contributed to a growing recognition of the simplicity of fifth-

century production.

W. Beare2 attempts to define the fundamental problem concerning

staging thus:

The innumerable theories as to the Greek stage scenery which

have been put forward may be arranged in two main groups.
The common principle of the first group is that the actor's
house, otherwise called the skene or permanent scene-building,
was itself specifically adapted to the needs of each play.
The principle of the second group is that the permanent scene-
building was concealed by "sets."

Thus in Peace, for example, where Jobst3 would adapt for the duration

of the play the central part of the skene to resemble a cave opening,

Webster1* would represent the "rocks" said to cover the cave opening

simply by a screen placed on the moveable platform (ekkuklemd) employed

commonly in tragedy, the platform rolling out the indication of the

cave from the central door at the moment Hermes first draws attention

to the cave (Pa. 224), and being used later to pull out the goddess

x
Cf. also the catalogue in Webster, GTP. Webster, op. ait.,
pp. xv-xvi, acknowledges his debt to previous collectors of the material.
z
Roman Stage2- (London, 1955), p. 275.
3
SAAW 268, Bd. 2, pp. 15f.
''GTP, pp. 17-19, where see for other passages where he postu-
lates the use of the screen-platform combination. There is the notable
similarity of the hauling scene in Netfishers, where Danae's chest must
be hauled in "from the sea." The hauling scenes of Peace and Netfishers
are discussed fully in the body of the thesis.
 7

herself. The latter theory of staging does not require the skene to be

adapted specially for this play, except perhaps for the addition of

portable panels to the facade on which were painted indications of

scenery.

The "principle of the second group" has been taken to its

logical conclusion in the theory of A. M. Dale,1 that Old Comedy

requires but one door, indeed, gains in humor thereby, since the need

for comic stage business is thus greatly increased. Her theory of a

single door for comedy follows her argument that a single door was suf-

ficient for the performance of fifth-century tragedy.2 K. J. Dover

questions both arguments.3 He attempts to show that Acharnians, Clouds,

and Ecalesiazusae all require more than one door and therefore that one

should reverse the assumption that the multiple dwellings of comedy

were actually adapted to the simpler convention of tragedy: "When a

building is constructed to meet two different purposes" (the matter of

satyr play is not brought into the discussion but it is clearly presumed

to have a simpler staging than comedy) ". . . it is normal practice and

common sense to meet the purpose for which the requirements are more

numerous."1* He thus concludes that the permanent scene building of

tragedy or comedy had provision for more than one door.

I shall therefore review in the Introduction the literary and

archaeological evidence for the late fifth-century theater of Dionysos

^•Collected Papers, pp. 103-18.

2
"Seen and Unseen on the Greek Stage," WS LXIX (1956), 96-106
(= Collected Papers, pp. 119-29).
3
PCPhSUo. 192 (N. S. 12) (1966), 2-17.
"ibid., p. 7.
 8

at Athens (the theater of Euripides and Aristophanes), including inci-

dentally discussion of the earlier fifth-century theater, as most

theories about the late fifth-century theater are based upon a definite

conception of the evolution of that theater. The review attempts to

answer the questions what were the "permanent" (permanent in the sense

of conventional) features if any of the late fifth-century theater,

what sort of changes were made in it to adapt it to the staging of indi-

vidual plays, whether in fact any such changes occurred. The scope of

my paper limits me to a critical, not complete, review of the evidence.

More detailed studies of the evidence are referred to in the course of

the discussion.

The object of the dissertation is first to establish the prob-

able staging of Peace and the movements of actors and chorus and then

to show that the findings are relevant for the question of the staging

of Old Comedy in general. The concluding chapter summarizes the basic

similarities and differences in the staging of Old Comedy (or more

properly, Aristophanes) and fifth-century tragedy.

The Fifth-Century Theater

The Archaeology of the Site

The earliest remains of a theater in the area of the present

theater of Dionysos are a few short pieces of masonry. Which of them

should be connected with one another and what purpose each of them

served is a matter of dispute. Dinsmoor1 defends Dorpfeld's original

1
Vi. B. Dinsmoor, "The Athenian Theater in the Fifth Century,"
in Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson, I (St. Louis, 1951), 309ff.
 9

contention that a circle should be drawn through (R1 = SMI2) and (Q=J3)

and completed to form the earliest circle of the orchestra.3 The cen-

ter of this circle is 12.60m southeast of the present orchestra circle

and 2.90m east of the present north-south axis of the orchestra. That

it is the wall of the orchestra itself or the terrace wall of the

orchestra cannot be determined from the present evidence. Dinsmoor

finds evidence for parodoi in this theater in what he argues is a long

terrace wall (D = SM3) to the west of the orchestra supporting the ramp

which formed the west parados, and in the rockcut bed (V) which lies in

the present east parodos. (D =SM3) therefore should not be used as evi-

dence for an approach passing upwards to the orchestra terrace from the

old temple of Dionysos, as some reconstructions would have it.

Dorpfeld's excavations in the present auditorium in 18891*

reveal that the height and steepness of the auditorium were twice

increased by the heaping up of earth. Hardly any of the pottery in the

earlier mass of earth is later than 500 B.C. The pottery thus suggests

a date around 500 B.C. for the first theater with an auditorium on the

Acropolis slope.

1
Fiechter's notation, Das Dionysostheater in Athen (3 vols.,
Stuttgart, 1955-36).
2
Dorpfeld's notation, Praktika. Cf. Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre
of Dionysos, fig. 6.
3
The combination of materials in the linking of the short arc
of Acropolis limestone of polygonal masonry (R = SMI) with the short
western wall fragment (Q = J3) which is of diverse materials including
poros can be paralleled in the sixth-century polygonal wall running up
the west side of the Acropolis and in the retaining wall of 488 B.C.
south of the Parthenon (Dinsmoor, "The Athenian Theater," p. 312, n. 3 ) .
The inclusion of SM2 in the arc of this circle is more problematical.
^Das griechische Theater, pp. 30-31.
 10

Webster argues from late literary evidence (lexicographers

and scholiasts2) that the earliest site of performances of tragedy was

before the old temple of Dionysos. Notices of the collapse of the

ikria, meaning wooden stands,3 are consistent with the interpretation

that ikria (and a single black poplar from which the audience viewed

the performance) were located in front of the old temple of Dionysos,

the collapse of which resulted in the creation of an auditorium in the

steepened slope of the Acropolis."* The association in the sources of

the collapse of the ikria with Aeschylus' journey to Sicily is the con-

version of a chronological sequence into a causal connection. Aeschylus

is recorded as having gone to Sicily between 472 and 467 B.C.; Pratinas

is known to have died shortly before 467 B.C.; this evidence then gives

a terminus ante quern of just before 472 for the move to the new theater,

a lower date for this new theater than most archaeologists have postu-

lated. It should be pointed out, in defense of Webster's theory, that

the notice in the Suda s.v. Pratinas does not say that the collapse of

ikria occurred in the Seventieth Olympiad (500-497 B.C.).

Dorpfeld originally assumed that the old orchestra circle

served until the building of the stone theater by Lycurgus (338-

326 B.C.). Furtwangler (1901) first proposed the period of the Peace

1
BRL XL (1959-60), 493-509.
2
R. E. Wycherley, The Athenian Agora, Vol. Ill: Testimonia
(Princeton, 1957), nos. 722f.; cf. Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of
Dionysos, pp. 11-12.
3
Some notices speak of ikria as wooden seats, referring to the
wooden seats of the auditorium on the Acropolis slope.
**Notices of ikria in connection with dramatic contests in the
Agora are interpreted by Webster (BRL) as evidence for the location of
the Lenaion in the Agora.
 11

of Nicias (421-415 B.C.) as the time of the westward shift of the

orchestra. Dorpfeld, after his discovery in 1925 of stone support

walls for the auditorium earlier than the stone paraskenia (which he

still presumed to be Lycurgan), proposed 442-430 B.C. as the period of

the shift of the theater.

The logical date for the shift of the orchestra has of recent

date been generally assumed to be the period of the construction of

the Odeum, 446-442 B.C.,1 which naturally prevented eastward expansion

of the orchestra. This shift would explain and thereby date the second

steepening of the auditorium. Recent cleaning and examination of the

precinct of Dionysos by the Greek Archaeological Service, however, has

produced the view that the earliest breccia foundations, the material

of the foundations of the surviving scene building, are Lycurgan.

The redating to the second half of the fourth century of the

earliest surviving foundations affects Webster's theory that the con-

ventional background of doorway with columns and pediment, observable

in the plays themselves, is derived from the facade of the old temple

of Dionysos, before which he argues the earliest tragic performance

took place.2

x
For the date and reconstruction of the Odeum, see J. T. Allen,
"On the Odeum of Pericles and the Periclean Reconstruction of the
Theater," Univ. of California Publ. in Class. Archaeol. I, No. 7 (1941),
173-77.
2
"The assumed width (sc. of the old temple of Dionysos) is very
close to the preserved width of T, the projecting foundation of the
Periclean stage-building" (BRL, p. 498). There is the additional prob-
lem with this explanation that the evidence of the plays indicates that
the stage building did not have columns in antis, which the old temple
of Dionysos most certainly did (Dorpfeld*s measurements o£ this temple
were confirmed in the investigation of the sanctuary in 1961-62 dis-
cussed below). For a different theory of the origin of the scene
 12

There is evidence, as indicated above, of two different periods

of construction of a scene building in the extant stone foundations of

the theater and the supporting wall of the auditorium. Dorpfeld's plan

of the excavations in 19251 of the southwest corner of the auditorium

(fig. 1; see my fig. 1, supra, p. vi) shows almost no room for a paro-

dos between the west projecting wing ("paraskenion," indicated by K1-

K1*) of what he assumes to be the Lycurgan theater and the southernmost

supporting wall of the auditorium (C1-Clt). This support wall is there-

fore earlier than the paraskenion. A second support wall, running

roughly parallel to C1-Clt and to the north of it ( A ^ A 2 ) , leaves ample

room for a parodos between it and the "Lycurgan" wing. This second

support wall runs north and parallel to the northward extension of C 1 -

C1* and supports it with the aid of buttresses, still partially visible.

The southern part of the support wall of the auditorium (C 1 -^) was

thus demolished to make way for the "Lycurgan" wing and parodos. The

foundations of this wall are all that remain; they consist of large

breccia blocks, the same material employed in the foundations of the

stoa, the footing wall behind it (H) which forms a terrace wall for the

orchestra, and the platform T protruding northward from the breccia

footing wall and erected simultaneously with it. All these construc-

tions must be contemporary with one another and earlier than the

theater represented by the stone paraskenia.

building, see 0. Broneer, "The Tent of Xerxes and the Greek Theater,"
Univ. of California Publ. in Class. Archaeol. I, No. 12 (1944),
305-12.
l
Praktika, 1925-26, pp. 25-32.
 13

Dinsmoor has shown beyond doubt that the sequence of construc-

tion is (1) the stoa; (2) the footing wall and platform.1 The toicho-

bate course of the stoa once turned inward at a point just short of the

axis of the theater and passed northward through the breccia footing

wall behind.2 The stoa therefore is earlier than the footing wall but

perhaps by only a few days.

The breccia platform is 6.53m wide and projects 3.26m northward,

though its exact original extent is unknowable since the finished

course is missing. The footing wall, 28m in length, has on its north

side slots at 2.56m intervals, five on each side of foundation T; two

more holes are often restored in the back of founcation T. The slots

are clearly meant for vertical beams with a width of from 0.40 to 0.79m.

This wall with its post holes is generally regarded as evidence for a

wooden scene building. Dinsmoor3 restores a second row of twelve tim-

bers, placed 2.56m in front of the back row, their faces just within

the north edge of the finished platform T. The two central timbers

would be supported by the platform, the others would rest on individual

bases containing sockets. Xen. Cyr. VI.i.54, where the beams of a

wooden tower are compared in thickness to the beams of the "tragike

skene," is often cited as evidence for heavy wooden beams comprising

the fa?ade of the scene building. Dinsmoor thinks the central platform

^'The Athenian Theater," pp. 309f.

2
The Fiechter-Schleif-Dinsmoor thesis, that the area of pene-
tration into the footing wall behind was intended for a passage at a
low level through the rear wall of the orchestra leading to a flight
of steps up to the scene building, is not certain. See Webster, BRL,
pp. 500-1.
3
"The Athenian Theater," p. 326.
 14

was intended to support either a wooden central pavilion (or aedicula')

or the moveable ekkuklema; we shall return to the evidence for the

latter. Webster similarly regards the platform as evidence for a cen-

tral projecting stage building.1 Dinsmoor, however, differs from

Webster in restoring a third row of columns for projecting lateral

pavilions, which he terms paraskenia. The subject of paraskenia will

also be treated separately. Let it be said here that there is no real

evidence in the remains for projecting wings or paraskenia having a

function similar to that of the central portion of the stage building

in the theater which employed platform T and wall H.

Dinsmoor argues that the similarity of materials in the founda-

tions of the stoa, scene building, and the younger temple of Dionysos

(see my fig. 2, supra, p. vii) is enough to guarantee the contemporane-

ity of these structures. The absence of exact parallelism in the

orientation of the younger temple of Dionysos and the stoa can be

ignored in the comparison, since it is to be expected that the temple

would be oriented toward the ritual associated with it. One notes the

location and orientation of the large altar just to the south and east

of the temple and clearly associated with it. Recent investigation of

the precinct by P. G. Kalligas and the Greek Archaeological Service2

has led to a redating to the mid-fourth century B.C. of the earliest

period of construction of the newer temple of Dionysos and thus of the

stoa and scene building assumed to be contemporary with it.

l
BRL, pp. 500-3; GTP, p. 6.
2
Deltion, pp. 14ff.
 15

The easternmost wall of the temple shows subsequent masonry

work, implying later rebuilding of the east section of the temple.

The evidence of masonry is confirmed by the discovery of a lack of

continuity in the ditch of the foundation of the temple and by pottery

finds in the temple, those found in the west section of the temple

belonging to the second half of the fourth century, those in the east

section to the beginning of the third century B.C. The traditional

reconstruction of the east anteroom of the temple as having four Doric

columns in front, plus an additional column on either side, forming a

continuous prostyle of six columns, must now be discarded because of

the discovery in the region of the temple of four parts of Ionic

geisae the proportions of which accord with those of the temple and a

corrected fourth-century chronology.

The redating of the newer temple of Dionysos appears to confirm

Dorpfeld's original contention that all constructions employing breccia

foundations are not earlier than the mid-fourth century, since breccia

is not used as a foundation material in the fifth-century buildings on

the Acropolis but almost without exception in buildings of the fourth

century. Kalligas attempts to reconcile the new dating of the newer

temple of Dionysos with Pausanias* statement (I.xx.3) implying that

the statue of Dionysos in gold and ivory was made for this temple by

Alkamenes, whose last recorded work was executed for Thrasybulus in

403 B.C., by supposing that the dedication was made in anticipation of

the building of the new temple, which, however, was in fact postponed

for half a century or more. To the question where was this statue

housed in the meantime, Travlos hypothesizes there may have been a

 16

second Dionysos temple in the fifth century to house temporarily the

statue of Alkamenes.1 Travlos explains the construction of breccia /

wall H and foundation T, made useless by the stone paraskenia and con-

necting stone foundation, by supposing two reconstructions of the

theater in the late fourth century, one Lycurgan, one "end of the

fourth century."2 In fact we know that the Athenian theater must have

been rebuilt before 292 B.C., when Demetrios Poliorketes entered like

the tragic actors through the upper parodoi;3 the stone paraskenia of

the Lycurgan theater do not have provision for upper parodoi; so pre-

sumably Travlos restores a staircase in each wing of the theater postu-

lated for the end of the fourth century (= his Phase IV), for which

there is some evidence in the heavy foundations at these points.

There are still problems connected with this redating of the

stoa and scene building represented by wall H and foundation T. First,

the earliest, clearly datable, example of the use of breccia as a foun-

dation material is in the base of the Dexileos-relief, dated close to

394 B.C. The next example is the retaining wall behind the Stoa of

Zeus, dated to the end of the fifth century.1* The retaining wall, by

the use of a number of blocks of conglomerate amongst, for the most

1
Travlos, Bildlexicon zur Topographie des antiken Athen
(Deutsches Archaeologische Institut, 1971), p. 537 (= BTA~).
z
Ibid.; Phases III and IV, respectively, on his fig. 685,
p. 548.
3
Webster, GTP, pp. 173-74, note on pp. 21f.; cf. Sifakis,
Hellenistic Drama, pp. 126-32. The new theater with upper parodoi is
now the typical Hellenistic theater which employed the proskenion as
a stage.
**R. Stillwell, Hesperia II (1933), 115 and fig. 4; H. Thompson,
Hesperia VI (1937), 55f., 69; H. Froning, Gnomon, Sonderdruck aus Band
45 (1973), 79-80.
 17

part, soft creamy poros also used in the foundations of the Stoa, and

by the pottery found behind it, is to be dated somewhat later than the

Stoa itself. Breccia is also used in the fifth-century temple of

Rhamnous (436-432 B.C.), where it is not used for foundations but as

underpinning for floors and thus apparently as an experiment. Dinsmoor

theorizes that its use in foundations began as a result of the economic

stress of the Peloponnesian War.1 Dinsmoor provides a possible link

with architecture at Athens by theorizing that the architect of the tem-

ple at Rhamnous and of the Hephaesteum at Athens were the same.2 Thus

the wall H with postholes and its continuation in platform T can be

dated to the early fourth century and possibly even to the late fifth.

Secondly, Ktibler, in association with Fiechter's excavation of

the theater, found only fifth-century sherds or older under the founda-

tions of the footing wall of the stoa and the platform T.3 Thirdly,

Dinsmoor argues that an inscribed poros block, cut down to a height of

0.44m and used upside-down in the southwest corner of the present audi-

torium wall, bearing the inscription £QAH> YPHPETQN,1* is part of a

series of inscribed stones, the others being seven of the ceiling slabs

of the upper section of the drain and the two northernmost wall blocks

of the drain,5 which were originally used as seats and as supports for

lM
The Athenian Theater," p. 317.
2
Architecture of Ancient Greece* (London and New York, 1950),
pp. 181-82. The temple of Poseidon at Sunium is also by the same
architect.
3
Published in Fiechter, Das Dionysostheater III, 43-49.
2
\rG, I , 879. Cf. Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos,
fig. 8.
5
The present upper section of the drain was dropped to a deeper
level so that it would pass beneath the footing wall and the stoa. The
 18

the ikria1 in the "Periclean" theater.2 The characters of IG, I 2 , 879

are partly pre-Euclidean, partly post-Euclidean; it has been argued

that the latter type was in frequent use before the official recogni-

tion of the Ionic alphabet in 404 B.C.3 Kirchhoff dates the inscrip-

tion to the end of the fifth century. It implies an auditorium

employing stone in construction of seats later than the earliest audi-

torium and before the reconstruction of the stoa and the theater asso-

ciated with it, called "Lycurgan," which employed this block of stone

in the southwestern support wall of the auditorium. There is no evi-

dence for stone being used in the construction of seats in the earliest

auditorium on the slope of the Acropolis.

Fourthly, Kalligas assumes that Pausanias says (I.xx.3) he saw

in the new temple of Dionysos wall paintings (ypoujiaf) depicting

Hephaestus brought back to Olympus, the punishment of Pentheus and

that of Lycurgus, Ariadne asleep, Theseus taking ship and Dionysos

arriving. M. Robertson is quite sure that these paintings formed a

single cycle which inspired several surviving imitations in ceramics

dated firmly to the last decades of the fifth century.1* Pausanias

ceiling slabs for this portion of the drain are earlier in date than
the stoa (Dinsmoor, "The Athenian Theater," pp. 321-22).
x
ikria are attested still for the late fifth century by Ar.
Th. 395 (411 B.C.).
2
The flat slabs were the actual seats of the first row, the
proedria, and included the special seats for the Council (Ar. Av. 793-
795 speaks of a special section reserved for the Council; Pa. 887f.
implies one), the upright slabs supported the seats of the second row
(Dinsmoor, "The Athenian Theater," pp. 328-29 and fig. 3 ) .
3
Cf. Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, p. 20.
"*"Monocrepis," Greek3 Romany and Byzantine Studies XIII, No. 1
(1972), 47.
 19

actually says only that he saw the paintings aOxdOi, which could mean

either in the old temple, the new temple, or in the precinct as a whole.

Kalligas interprets IG, II 2 , 995, which records a decree of the Council

and the people to transfer eiKOVot irfvaKes from the temple (unspecified)

to the stoa (unspecified), as referring to the new temple of Dionysos.1

The natural sense of eikonikoi pinakes, however, is portrait paintings,

as eikonikos in Callix. 1, Plu. Lys. 1, and the inscription should not

be taken to refer to mythological scenes which Pausanias is clearly

describing. There is no evidence therefore that the paintings which

Pausanias describes were in the temple of Dionysos. The natural place

for displaying such paintings would be the stoa forming the northern

boundary of the sanctuary,2 which is some evidence for the stoa dating

from the end of the fifth century. There is no reason to suppose a

temporary temple was erected for such a magnificent statue, which on

the face of it seems unlikely, or to suppose that the old temple of

Dionysos housed Alkamenes' statue; that temple dates from the end of

the sixth century and was intended for the ancient Sjdavov of Dionysos,

as is generally deduced from the notice of its being brought to Athens

by the legendary Pegasos of Eleutherae. I suggest that the chamber at

the west end of the stoa, the purpose of which has so far remained

unexplained, was intended temporarily to house t\e statue until the new

temple could be built.

Previously dated to the period 168/67-130/29 B.C. He also

interprets IG, II 2 , 1035, which speaks of cleaning the sanctuaries,
among which is that of Dionysos, as referring to this same transferral
of paintings.
2
See Robertson, "Monocrepis," p. 47, n. 37, for references to
discussion of painted panels in the Stoa Poikile.
 20

In sum, the stoa and the scene building contemporary with the

backing wall of the stoa may have been built at the end of the fifth

century as the first stage in the rebuilding of the sanctuary which

was not completed until after the middle of the fourth century. Such

a delay in carrying out a building program is well attested for the

first half of the fourth century. If we knew definitely the axis of

the late fifth century auditorium, which there is reason to believe

was not the same auditorium as existed on the slope of the Acropolis in

the early part of the fifth century, we would know whether it was iden-

tical with the axis of the central projection of wall H and with the

later stone auditorium, and thus whether the present foundation H was

fifth century or had obliterated a fifth-century foundation. The

desired information is still lacking.

Xen. Cry. VI.i.54 is evidence that the TpayxKri OKnvfi of at

least the first half of the fourth century was characterized by thick

beams in its facade. The evidence to be examined of the plays suggests

a wooden building as background to the theater. Some sort of stone

foundation would appear to be necessary for the beams of the scene

building. The possible parallel of the fifth-century Corinth theater

is discussed below under the heading of the question of a raised stage.

The theater at Pergamon, which Dinsmoor compares for his reconstruction

of two rows of columns in front of the row sunk in wall H, shows the

existence of permanent stone blocks in which the bases of the wooden

columns were fixed.1

1
Db'rpfeld-Reisch, Das griechische Theater, pp. 150-53.
 21

The Evidence of Vase Painting

Dorpfeld-Reisch1 first used the evidence of fourth-century

South Italian vases to argue that a wooden aedicula or porch-like

structure was the background to fifth-century plays at Athens.

Pickard-Cambridge2 includes a discussion of these vases and rejects

them as evidence for Attic theater practice in the fifth century and

specifically as evidence that interior scenes were commonly played on

a porch in front of the central door.3 While accepting the evidence

for the influence of the stage on the costumes of some of the prin-

cipals portrayed and on minor details of iconography, he makes the

following objections to the theory of the influence of staging:

(1) an aedicula does not occur on Attic fifth-century vases when the

subject is one also treated by the dramatists; (2) the events por-

trayed on the South Italian vases are often events which in the theater

could only be narrated; (3) some of the vases represent several scenes

taking place simultaneously, or (4) introduce characters or actions

unknown in the extant plays. Webster, in an article in 1948,** however,

argues that most of these scenes and others which he adds are at least

symbolic of actual stage performance, that is, derived from the

theater.

1
Ibid., pp. 207f.
2
Theatre of Dionysos, pp. 80f.
3
The theory of K. Rees, CPh X (1915), 117-38.
*CQ XLII (1948), 15ff., where see.for references complete to
1948. See now A. D. Trendall and T. B. L. Webster, Illustrations of
Greek Drama (London, 1971). (= IGD)
 22

The representation of the temple of Delphi on the Eumenides

vase,1 which depicts a wooden aedicula with four Ionic columns support-

ing a pediment with akroteria, may reasonably be taken as a representa-

tion of the central portion of the skene which remained basically

unchanged from the fifth century in Athens down to the late fourth

century in South Italy. Pickard-Cambridge argues that this is only a

conventional representation of a temple. Webster, however, asks,

"Where did the convention come from except from the theater?" This

vase is one of a group of vases with polychrome decoration on black

ground, made in Tarentum around the middle of the fourth century,

which includes the fragment with the meeting of Jason and Pelias, the

fragment with the tragic actor holding his mask, and various vases

with pictures of comic actors, and thus has a special connection with

the theater.2

An Attic red-figure kalyx-krater by the Iphigeneia Painter3 is

thought by Webster to come very close to representing the actual appear-

ance of the stage building. Webster comments:

In this simple wooden structure [the artist] is thinking more

of the central door of the stage building than of Euripides'
description, which supposes an elaborate stage building.
Inside the shrine the primitive idol of Artemis is shown
because Iphigeneia will take it back to Greece. . . . The
wide steps on which [the shrine] stands are the stage.
Iphigeneia stands on the left, wearing the sleeved tragic cos-
tume. The painter alludes to different moments of the play.1*

1
Gnathia kalyx-krater by the Konnakis Painter, ca. 360-350 B.C.,
Leningrad St. 349; MTSP1, GV2 and pp. 129, 140; BICS XV (1968), 5; IGD
III.1.10; Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, fig.
2
Webster, CQ XLII, 15, where see for further references.
3
Ferrara, Spina T 1145, 400-380 B.C.; ARV2, 1440, No. 1; MTSP2,
AV32 and pp. 116, 159; IGD III.3.27.
**Trendall and Webster, IGD, p. 91.
 23

Several other vases are generally thought to have been inspired by

this play.1 Though differing in details of the architecture, the cen-

tral aedicula is in the majority of cases simpler than an actual temple.

The simplest form of aedicula, columns and pediment without an

indication of a door opening inward (such as is occasionally found in

these representations of a building), Webster argues is a symbol of

the central stage door, pointing to its frequent occurrence on Apulian

vases of the second half of the fourth century. There is a marked simi-

larity between the simple form of aedicula and the shrines of heroized

dead as represented on these vases. Fragments of a volute-krater from

Ruvo 2 show a scene in Hades with Orpheus in tragic dress. It is logical

to assume that this and other representations on vases of scenes in

Hades derive from tragedies with settings in Hades. Thus the painter

may allude to a funeral shrine at the same time he is indicating that

his scene is inspired by a stage performance.

The conventional form of aedicula is indicated on the well-

known Wiirzburg fragment depicting the meeting of Jason and Pelias,

which, however, appears to show two projecting paraskenia or wings.

x
Cf. the Apulian volute-krater by the Baltimore Painter, ca.
330-320 B.C., Leningrad St. 420 (inv. 1715); IGD III.3.29; Pickard-
Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, fig. 15; the Apulian kalyx-krater, Cir-
cle of the Darius Painter, ca. 350-340 B.C., Moscow 504; IGD 111.3.30(a);
PickardrCambridge, ibid., fig. 16. The circle of the Darius Painter
paints a similar background with columns and pediment on the Apulian
volute-krater depicting Eur. Hypsipyle, ca. 350-340 B.C., Naples 3255
(inv. 81394); MTSP2, 75, TV8 and pp. 158-59; IGD III.3.26.
2
Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, fig. 29.
Representation of Eur. Stheneboia; Wiirzburg H 4696 + 4701,
fragments of a Gnathia bell-krater by the Konnakis Painter, ca. 360-
350 B.C.; MTSP2, GV1, 163; BICS XV, 5; IGD III.3.43; Pickard-Cambridge,
Theatre of Dionysos, figs. 55-56.
 24

In each of the doors at the back of the porches a daughter of Pelias

is shown listening. Bulle and Pickard-Cambridge take this arrangement

as a literal representation of the theater; the latter (see his fig. 57)

reconstructs the ground plan of the fourth-century theater at Tarentum

thus as having paraskenia and no central door, with a colonnade connect-

ing the two side porches, and insists that this fragment has no rele-

vance for the fifth-century theater at Athens. But Webster points out1

that a palace with no central door is unthinkable; thus the painter

has simply left out the central door, for the artistic reason that it

would have provided a poor background for Jason and Pelias and has put

the two daughters at opposite ends of the palace to suggest the idea

of a contrasted pair.

Another significant example of artistic license in the depic-

tion of a scene from the stage is the scene on a volute-krater in

Boston2 depicting Achilles with his older, distressed companion Phoenix

seated on a couch placed in a building; the body and severed head of

Thersites are placed below them; Agamemnon is shown wearing the tragic

costume. The dramatic source for this painting has plausibly been

identified as a tragedy about Achilles by the fourth-century poet

Chaeremon. Pickard-Cambridge's objection that no one scene from the

play is being performed here is not sufficient objection to the idea

of dramatic inspiration. It is extremely interesting that Achilles is

shown sitting in an aedicula which must represent his tent at Troy.

1
CQ, p. 16.
Apulian volute-krater, ca. 350-340 B.C.; Boston 03.804; MTSP2,
2

74, TV2; IGD III.4.2; Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, fig. 17.

 25

The aedicula is further particularized by the depiction of Achilles'

shield, greaves, and helmet, and the spare wheels of his chariot,

hanging at the back of the building. The representation suggests a

direct parallel with the representation of Ajax's hut in Ajax and the

military huts in Hecuba, Trojan Women, and Iphigeneia at Aulis. The

central portion of the stage building was, in the case of each of

these plays, adapted to the imagined setting by the addition of "props"

such as these.

The focusing of the composition on the aedicula in almost every

one of these South Italian vase scenes which has an indication of being

inspired by a stage performance is strong evidence for the existence of

a central porch with door in the fifth- and fourth-century theater.

Problems do arise, however, when the details of the correspondence

between the stage and the representations on vases are pressed closely.

Many of these vases show a platform under the aedicula of one or two

steps. Webster1 views this as an indication of a stage. In his 1959-

1960 article on the stage he gives the dimensions of the stage (the

acting area) as lm deep by 7.53m wide, the same width as the foundation

T. But it is a difficult problem to interpret the habit of certain of

these vase painters of extending the lower step to include another

figure or prop involved in the action. Examples are the extension for

a Fury on the Eumenides vase, Odysseus on a pelike from Naples,2 and

Artemis shown seated on the Moscow kalyx-krater; each representation

1
BRL, p. 506.
2
Pickard-Carabridge, Theatre of Dionysos, fig. 12.
 26

could be interpreted either as a departure from stage realism (accord-

ing to which the step or steps would be only as wide as the projecting

aedicula) in the interest of the narrative, or as a conventionalized

representation of the stage which in fact had more width than simply

that of the central porch.

Secondly, there can be little doubt that certain painters

sometimes actually represented a temple in the background of a scene

inspired by tragedy. Examples are the scene on the Apulian volute-

krater in Naples by the Iliupersis Painter, showing a temple in simple

perspective with the doors thrown open,x and the volute-krater in Milan,

also by the Iliupersis Painter, on which the temple is again shown in

simple perspective with the doors thrown open.2

Thirdly, some vases depict only a colonnade in the background,

without pediment. An example is the Apulian volute-krater depicting

the dying Meleager being brought into the house.3 In a case such as

this it is difficult to tell whether the artist intends a view of the

exterior or of the interior of the palace, and whether this vase is

evidence for a colonnade in the theater extending laterally from the

central porch.

The evidence of South Italian vases cannot be regarded as the

best evidence for the appearance of the fifth-century stage. There

x
Eur. Iph. in Taur., 370-360 B.C., Naples 3223 (inv. 82113);
MTSP2, 75, TV6; IGD III.3.28; Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos,
fig. 19.
2
Eur. Andr., ca. 370 B.C., Milan, Torno coll. (ex Ruvo, Caputi
239); IGD III.3.9; Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, fig. 18.
3
Eur. Meleager, second quarter of the fourth century, Suckling
Group, Naples Stg. 11; MTSP2, 161; IGD III.3.40; Pickard-Cambridge,
Theatre of Dionysos, fig. 22.
 27

are the problems indicated above, as well as the fundamental fact that

the painter never intends a mere photograph of a stage scene, the vari-

ations in style from painter to painter, the spatial limitations of

the vase surface, and the local conditions and probable influence of

South Italian stage practice to consider.

It may be objected to this whole discussion that these vases

as well as the "Phlyax" vases which depict scenes from the comic stage

are contemporary with Attic Middle and New Comedy and thus have no

necessary connection with Attic fifth-century drama. Few would doubt

that the subject matter of fifth-century tragedy influenced fourth-

century Italian drama as represented on these vases; Old Comedy, how-

ever, is thought to be a different case because of its topical subject

matter. Webster, however, has at least shown that the comic costume

and mask of New Comedy can be traced back to Middle Comedy and to a

few examples of the late fifth century in Athens.1 The Lyme Park

relief,2 for example, dated ca. 380 B.C., shows a slave mask in the

poet's lap which is very common on South Italian comic vases and

Attic terra cottas of comic actors.

The evidence of the "Phlyax" vases for the question of a

raised stage and the evidence of the vases for the representation of

a cave in the background of the theater are treated separately below.

x
Webster, CQ, pp. 17f. Cf. also Webster, "Attic Comic Costume:
A Re-Examination," Arch. Eph., 1953-54, pp. 195-201.
2
IGD IV.7A. Cf. IGD IV.26.
 28

The Terms Skene,, Skenographia

The history of the term aicnvn and the compound cfKTivoYpa<j>fax

shows several definite shifts of meaning, yet is still useful for the

establishing of the background to the fifth-century plays. The earli-

est and most common meaning of skene is "tent" or "booth," constructed

of wood and coverings,2 sturdily built,3 not a permanent construction

but definitely a habitation, ** having a special connection with festi-

vals,5 and resembling sometimes even a royal residence.6 Plato Legg.

VII, 817: \xr\ <5nfidSjiteriu&s pa6fo)s ye ofaxws Ou&s TOTE irap' nytv eSaeiv

ai<nv<Ss X E iiri^avTas icax ayopav Kai" KaXXi<j>c3vous ImoKpixas EiaaYayoufivous,

associates actors with tents in the Agora, which may indicate the

earliest form of booths for the actors and their location.

The earliest evidence of the word used in a theatrical context

is Ar. Pa. 731, where the chorus bid each other hand over their imple-

ments to their attendants to guard: tos EiuJBaax ydtXiaxa / nepX xas

OKnvas TrXEtaxox KXeYuai KWrx&Ceiv Ka\" KaKOiroistv. Skenai here clearly

means a building where stage properties are kept, but the plural could

mean either a building with various structures7 or more than one

1
For which see Dorpfeld-Reisch, Das griechische Theater,
pp. 283-90.
2
Hesych., Etym. mag. s.v. skene.
3
Eur. Ion, 1128.
''Hesych., too. cit.
5
Ar. Th. 658; Pa. 880.
6
Cf. the tent of Alexander the Great (see Chares and Phylarchus
in Athen. XII, 538c. 539d) and the structures of Ptolemaios II and
Ptolemaios IV (described by Kallixenos in Athen. V, 196. 204d).
7
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 39, compares the
use of gwiiof, u£Aa8pa, O I K O I , etc., where the plural originally signi-
fies a structure composed of different parts.
 29

structure.1 Xen. Cyr. VI.i.54, where the beams of a wooden tower are

compared to those of a xpayiKrl OKfivfi, implies that skene already

denotes a certain background, not just a building or buildings for

storing props.2 The thick beams of a tragic skene imply a wooden

building as background, a fajade with columns certainly and possibly

also a porch with roof, though not necessarily an upper story, as

Dorpfeld-Reisch argues.3

The question arises what is the relationship between the common

meaning of skene and its use in a theatrical context. Broneer1* observes

that its nontheatrical meanings, "tent," "booth," "hut," etc., are not

much earlier than the fifth century. The earliest dramatic perform-

ances in the theater of Dionysos are dated to the beginning of the

fifth century. The invention of the term, he argues, must therefore

have something to do with the use of a tent as a theatrical background.

Broneer*s most valuable piece of evidence is Pausanias' statement

(I.xx.4) that he saw near the sanctuary of Dionysos and the theater a

structure made in imitation of the tent of Xerxes. Broneer*s explana-

tion of its presence there is that it was the earliest skene in the

theater. There is an important reason, however, why this argument is

not conclusive. Not only do the majority of the tragic plays, as is

shown in the discussion of Euripides, have a palace or temple as set-

ting, but there are definite references in the plays to architectural

1
Mazon's interpretation, however, different structures at dif-
ferent times, certainly cannot be deduced from this passage.
2
Vallois, "Les theatres Grecs: skene et skenai," REA XXVIII
(1926), 171ff.
3
Das griechische Theater, p. 284.
^"The Tent of Xerxes," pp. 309f.
 30

features appropriate only to the exterior of a palace or temple. The

use by actors of tents in performances in the Agora and possibly by

tragic actors before the official recognition of tragedy, as well as

the association of tents with festivals, may have resulted in the

transferral of the word to the background of the theater. The term,

however, is quite flexible and can include the idea of a magnificent

establishment as well as that of a humble hut, which might be the real

reason it was chosen to describe the background commonly described in

the plays in suggestive and vague terms.

By the time of Aristotle the term skene had clearly broadened

in meaning. The phrase in Aristotle, oi oaro aicnvfjs, refers to the

actors, never to the chorus; cf. the contrast between xopot) and OCTT5

OKnvfjs in Aristotle Poet. 12. 1452b. Dorpfeld-Reisch's explanation is

that whereas the actors come out of the skene or background building,

the chorus normally do not. The meaning therefore of the term in these

passages is the actors' house.1

Skene in the phrase first found in the fourth century, 'em

aicrivfis,2 however, has a different meaning. The phrase is used of

either chorus or actors, and refers to the vicinity of the background,

where either chorus or actors can be found, thus practically equal to

"the acting area," "the place of performance." Its use with eiri gives

it a meaning similar to eirx with the genitive, dative, or accusative of

any habitation, "in front of, by the house." Cf. schol. Hipp. 514 and

172 where eiri (xfis) OKTivfis is contrasted with IvSov. Skene in either

1
Dorpfeld-Reisch, Das griechisahe Theater, p. 284.
2
See Aristotle Poet. 1453a 27-30, 1455a 26-29, 1459b 22-26, and
1460a 14-17.
 31

of these phrases cannot be made to signify a raised stage or

platform.1

Already in the inscriptions of the lepoiroiof of Delos dating

to 296 and 274 B.C.2 the plural skenai means painted wooden panels

employed for background decoration. Sifakis3 has shown that in the

case of the Delian inscriptions the use of the terms OKrivfi, irpocrKfyviov,

and mxpaaKfy\na is not as loose as Pickard-Cambridge1* and previous com-

mentators seem to think. In these inscriptions relating to the repair

of the theater at Delos the singular skene refers to the whole of the

rectangular stage building, which has a stoa running continuously

around it on all four sides. The front part of this stoa, to which are

attached fourteen Doric half-column pilasters, is the proskenion; the

colonnade running along the sides is the paraskenion. The plural skenai

always means decorative panels, which naturally were attached to the

front of the skene in the intercolumniations. The proskenion consti-

tutes a raised stage for the actors; the plural paraskenia refers to

painted wooden panels intended to be attached between the pilasters of

the lower part of the paraskenion and possibly also to the lateral

extensions of the skene before which the actors performed. The date

296 B.C. should be regarded as a terminus ante quern: skene probably

had the meaning painted panel already in late fifth-century Athens.5

l
Ibid., pp. 284-86.
2
IG, XI.1: 154A.43; 199A.63, and 89-97, respectively.
3
Hellenistic Drama, pp. 45f.
^Theatre of Dionysos, pp. 206f.
5
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 40.
 32

The meaning of skene is widened further by scholiasts and

later writers generally. One group of passages collected by Dorpfeld-

Reisch gives the meaning "the place of the dramatic action," "the

setting of the play," a signification which is clearly related to that

of another group of passages, "the decoration," "the background of the

play."1 The idea of the scenery alone is probably that assumed in the

joking words about Demetrios Poliorketes and Lysimachos which distin-

guish the xpayiKri from the KWUIK?) aKnvfi.2 They imply a background

decorated differently in each case, not a different construction for

tragedy and comedy. So, too, Xen. Cyr. VI.i.54 refers to a background

the thick timbers of which would not be changed for comedy but the

decoration of which would emphasize the timbers and thus the appropriate

idea of a palace facade.

There are two ancient notices of great authority bearing on the

meaning of skenographia. Aristotle Poet. 1449a 18f. says Sophocles

first introduced skenographia. Vitr. VII, Praef. 11 states that

Agatharchus of Samos "made a tragic set" for a production of Aeschylus:

primum Agatharchus Athenis Aeschylo docente tragoediam scaenam fecit.

It has been customary to interpret these notices as meaning the paint-

ing of the stage building was first begun in the lifetime of Aeschylus

and Sophocles. But A. Rumpf, in an article in JHS LXVII (1947), 13ff.,

has shown convincingly that Agatharchus' activity belongs after the

middle of the century, not earlier as previously argued, and preferably

in the 430's. Vitruvius' source therefore must have referred to a

^Das griechische Theater, p. 287.

2
For references see ibid., p. 288.
 33

fifth-century revival of an Aeschylean drama. Vitruvius also says of

Agatharchus that he wrote a commentary on his scene-making; whether that

treatise was entitled TTEpt OKnvfiS, as Dorpfeld-Reisch suggests, or irEpx

0KTiV0YPa<Kas cannot be determined, though if the former it would mean

that skene already in the fifth century had the meaning of painted

scenery. Agatharchus' commentary inspired Democritus and Anaxagoras to

work out the rules of perspective in the painting of buildings which

are to appear to recede into the background. This information relating

Agatharchus' activity to Democritus' and Anaxagoras' interest in the

painting of architecture in perspective means that the skenographia of

Agatharchus was almost certainly painting of architecture in perspec-

tive. Regarding the Delian inscription of 296 B.C. as a terminus ante

quern, it is easy to suppose that Agatharchus' contribution was to paint

architectural details in perspective on wooden panels which would then

be hung in the intercolumniations to add to the architectural effect

of the existing wooden architecture.J

There was probably painting of background scenery before the

introduction of illusionistic architecture to the theater. Dr. Hedwig

Kenner finds evidence in vases as early as the second quarter of the

fifth century, i.e., the theater of Aeschylus, of influence from scene

painting in the theater.2 Thus Vitruvius' notice about Agatharchus

cannot mean that he merely began the practice of painting the background

building.

a
Vitruvius' definition of scaenographia (I.ii.2), with its
mention of frons and latera is further evidence that skenographia
originally referred to the painting of illusionist architecture.
2
Das Theater und der Realismus in der griechischen Kunst
(Vienna, 1954), pp. 102ff.; the period is that of Polygnotus.
 34

There is evidence already in the third century Delian inscrip-

tions of two types of painted panels, in the distinction between the

TTX"voices and OKTivaf of the logeion level. The latter were the larger

painted panels. Sifakis1 suggests that Agatharchus' perspective paint-

ing was responsible for the creation of these large skenai panels.

The evidence suggests that scenic decoration was not included

in the expenses of the choregia. It is unlikely, therefore, that a

set was normally designed for a single play. The set painted by Aga-

tharchus for a revival of a play of Aeschylus appears to be an unusual

circumstance. This striking creation, as well as the treatise explain-

ing how to create such effects and the additional influence of Democri-

tus and Anaxagoras must have made the painting of architectural effects

in the background a regular practice soon after the initial experiment,

perhaps resulting in the creation of architectural "sets."2 One can

see in the nature of Agatharchus' painting of the background and in the

treatises of Democritus and Anaxagoras how the term skenographia later

came to signify "paint in perspective" even in a nontheatrical context,

as in a text of unknown authorship dating probably to the end of the

second or beginning of the first century B.C.3 An intermediate stage

of meaning seems to be represented by Polybius XII, 28a.1 (middle of

the second century B.C.), who differentiates historical and declamatory

1
Hellenistic Drama, pp. 44f. and 50, n. 3.
2
The idea of changeable sets is almost confirmed for the Delian
theater as early as 296 B.C. by the mention of attaching skenai to the
stage front with pegs in IG, 199A.64 (Sifakis, Hellenistic Drama.
p. 49).
3
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 40, where it is
noted that the passage is quoted and discussed by P. M. Schul, Platon
et I'art de son temps (Paris, 1933), pp. 74f.
 35

writings by comparing the difference between xci rax* aXi^8exav

aKoSounueva <ax KaxEaKeuaaueva and those depicted E V xats OKrivoypa^faxs.

The word in this context must mean the scene painting or scenery itself.

The Evidence of the Plays

Recent studies of the scenic background to the plays of

Euripides present the strongest argument for a conventionalized back-

ground of temple or palace fagade.2 Identification of the background

in Euripides is frequently made in suggestive language which means

nothing more than "building," "dwelling," etc. The language of course

has the necessary tragic elevation: Sduos, Sduox, <5&ua, 6d3uaxa,

A A

OIKOS, OXKOX, etc. These terms are used no matter what the particular

character of the background is. A limited number of more specific iden-

tifications is sometimes used, such as voids, oivxpov, OKTivff, etc., but

the more general and suggestive identifications are frequently substi-

tuted for them. Examples are the Hecuba, where the military hut is
A

called OKnvirj twice, aKnvrtiiaxa once, but Sduos six times, OXKOS three

times, axEyax four times; the I.T., where the temple is called vads or
A

avakxopov eleven times, but fiduos and OXKOS more than fifteen times.

There is little difference between nondramatic and dramatic literature

in this respect. Cyclop's cave in Od. IX is called ctvxpov and OXKOS.

Its entrance is described (Od. 9.243) as Otipctx, and the cave has a

deep ocOXfi (9.239). Hermes' cave in h. Horn. Merc, is sometimes called

l
Ibid.
2
Jeanne Roux, "A propos du decor dans les tragedies d'Euripide,"
REG LXXIV (1961), 25-60; Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination.
3
Hourmouziades, op. cit., p. 13.
 36

"cave," sometimes simply 6coua. The tortoise is said to have fallen in

Hermes* way iif oeOXefnox Oupncrx (vs. 26). The phrase bi|>npetf>e"os Svxpoxo

in vs. 23 is suggestive of a man-made abode: cf. Ar. Nub. 306 where

the adjective is used of a vads; II. 9.582, where it is used of a

SdXayos. Cyclops' cave in Eur. Cyclops is described by similarly sug-

gestive vocabulary, axeVax or ue"Aa0pa (in Cyc. 29, 491); the entrance

is called TrtJAn. in vs. 667. From the similarity of terms used to

describe different settings in both dramatic and nondramatic literature

we can conclude that an imaginative description of the setting of the

play was expected by the audience and that it was not necessary to have

a representation of a particular type of setting in the background of

the performance.

What is to prevent one from concluding that the background of

the theater was not particularized in any way? One argument is that

of the extant plays and fragments of Euripides, and of all fifth-

century tragedy, the setting is most commonly a palace or temple. Of

the surviving plays of Euripides, the scene represents: (a) a palace—

Alcestis, Hippolytos, Heracles, Helen, Phoenissae, Orestes, Bacchae;

(b) temple—Heracleidae, Supplices, Iphigeneia in Tauris; (c) palace +
temple—Andromache; (d) private house—Medea; (e) rustic h u t — E l e c t r a ;

(f) military huts—Hecuba, Troades, Iphigeneia at Aulis; (g) cave—

Cyclops.1 Only the Andromeda of the extant plays of Euripides has a

possible scene shift within the play itself,2 which is a possible

x
Ibid., pp. 11-12, where see for discussion of the scanty evi-
dence of the fragments*.
2
After Andromeda's rescue, the action possibly shifted from the
coast to Kepheus* palace. See discussion of the various views on the
 37

argument in favor of a conventionalized skene. This change, as well

as the occasional scene changes in Aeschylus and Sophocles, are ex-

plained by Webster with the use of the ekkuklema, for discussion of

which see below.

The Andromache is unusual in having a dual simultaneous set-

ting, palace + temple. An altar is clearly referred to as belonging

to a temple of Thetis which is described as situated "next door" to

the palace. There is typically suggestive language concerning the

setting: the heroine's sanctuary is described as a guilds, SCOTSSOV or

&5pa, vads, 6duos-Swya, and avdkxopov. The latter term always denotes

a temple in Euripides; thus there can be no question that the setting

is a temple and not simply an altar.1 Hourmouziades suggests a temple

was illustrated on a section of the background, which does not require

an alteration of the basic building; I cannot agree with his further

suggestion that a side door was perhaps needed to represent the

entrance to the temple. There is, significantly, no reference in the

play to an entrance into or exit from this temple, actions which would

of course require a door. Andromache is shown at the beginning of the

play taking refuge at the altar, a "discovered" situation which does

not require her to enter from the door of the temple.

A strong argument for a conventional skene with a central prac-

ticable door is the observable need for a door for exits and entrances

in every play of Euripides except Supplices. Even here the gates of

staging in L. Sechan, Etudes sur la tragedie grecque dans ses rapport

avec la ceramique (Paris, 1926), pp. 264-73.
1
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 50, where see
for line references.
 38

the temple are mentioned in vs. 104. 2 The door in Euripides is gener-

ally denoted by iriJAn. or irdXax, that is, simply "gate" or "outer door."

Roux, who does not explicitly state whether she thinks the permanent

background for Euripides' plays was a palace or temple fagade, never-

theless argues convincingly that every play with a palace setting

shows a single entrance which represents, as in real life, the entrance

to the palace precinct; representation of more than one entrance, such

as an entrance to the guest quarters, would violate realism in the

sense that one wishing to enter any of the several habitations of the

palace precinct must first pass through the outer gate.2 Her distinc-

tion between Otipct and TrtJXr) is partly correct: the former term does

refer to the actual leaves of the door.3 Her use of these terms, how-

ever, to distinguish when the "inner" door (i.e., the door of the

habitation itself) is being referred to from when the outer gates of

the palace are being referred to, that is, when we are to imagine that

we are in the inner courtyard of the palace and when outside the palace,

is not valid. OOpctx can sometimes stand for the TrtJXax of the palace.1*

Both terms are part of the general convention of a suggestive descrip-

tion of the background.

W. Beare, in an appendix to his Roman Stage3 (pp. 275-84), shows

that the door of the skene can be assumed to be exactly like the ordi-

nary house-door, i.e., double-leaved and opening inward. A. M. Dale

'•Ibid., p. 14.
2
"les tragedies d'Euripide," pp. 31-32, 38.
3
Cf. the references in LSJ s.v. 0dpa to this word in connection
with the frequent "knock," "rap," "shove," of comedy.
^ourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 4.
 39

has shown in her study of Ar. Vesp. 136-210,x that there is no reason

to assume that the door of comedy was any different from the door of

tragedy. The double door opening inward is frequently shown on the

South Italian vases which depict scenes inspired by the theater. The

question of its dimensions is taken up in the discussion of the

ekkuklema below.

The plays of Euripides refer to definite architectural features

appropriate to the facade of a temple or palace. These features are:

(a) columns, (b) pediment, (c) triglyphs, (d) cornices, (e) 'syftoXa,

"the long cross-pieces which rest upon the columns of the facade and

compose the architrave,"2 and (f) irapaaxctSes.3 The latter word has

given ancient scribes much trouble, iraaxdax (from iraaxa's) should

probably be read for the MSS' irapotaxdax at Xen. Hiero XI.2 (so Ernesti).

The scribe of P at Iph. in Taur. 1154, perhaps in ignorance of the some-

what rare word uapaoTcts, has written the dative of irapaaxaaxs, a word

which cannot fit the context.1* LSJ s.v. irapaaxcts gives the different

meanings (1) anything that stands beside; in the plural, doorposts,

also pilasters or returns; (2) the space enclosed within the parastades,

i.e., the vestibule, entrance. At Iph. in Taur. 1153f., Thoas appears

entering from the side almost simultaneously with the exit from the

temple of Iphigeneia who carries the £dctvov (vs. 1156). She tells

Thoas to hold at the irapoiaxci6es, meaning of course the entrance to the

1
Collected Papers, pp. 103-18.
2
Dodds, ed., Bacchae2 (Oxford, 1960), ad Ba. 591.
3
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, where see for line
references.
**Platnauer, ed., Iph. in Taur. (Oxford, 1938), ad Iph. 1159.
 40

temple. The parastades then are typical features of the exterior of

a temple or palace.

It is significant that the sense of the background as the

exterior of the palace or temple is established early in the plays

of Euripides, either by the prologue speaker (e.g., the very explicit

description of the background at the beginning of Bacchae), or by the

entrance from the parodos of the chorus who typically are not inhabi-

tants of the palace, or by casual references to architectural features

of the palace.1 The initial relation of the action to the exterior of

the palace thus corresponds to the actual representation of the palace

as a facade with a single door. Subsequent scenes may allude to the

imaginary layout of the interior of the palace, once this sense of

the main entrance to the palace has been established.

The parodos of the Ion is the most elaborate extant descrip-

tion of the exterior of the background and is unusual also in that

the poet departs from his usual practice of casual reference, by one

of the actors, to the features of the background for a detailed

description by the chorus. The various sculptural compositions which

the women of the chorus claim to see on the facade of the temple could

not possibly have been actually represented there. Archaeologists

have traditionally used this description of the sculptural decoration

of the temple at Delphi to reconstruct the sculpture of both the east

and west pediments.2 The chorus are thus here blending together what

1
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 10-13.
2
See ibid., pp. 53-56 for bibliography on the reconstruction
of the pedimental sculpture of the temple at Delphi.
 41

they might actually see on the east facade of the temple and what

they could only imagine lay on the west facade. The parodos of the

Ion demonstrates the freedom possible in the description of the back-

ground by chorus or actors and also that the description is not

basically inconsistent with what the audience could see as the

background.

The references to the entrance to the palace assume it to be

not just a simple door but in fact a small edifice, with Doric

triglyphs and pediment. The occasional use of the term irdXtoUCt best

describes this edifice. The audience must assume that the door,

effectively emphasized by this edifice, conceals the porters' quarters,

and an ctuXfi which leads to a courtyard with portico, which in turn

leads to the king's habitation, the guest quarters, etc.1 There are

no passages in Euripides or the other dramatists which definitely

prove the existence of a "secluded" place separating the area in

front of the door from the rest of the acting area. Pickard-Cambridge2

has shown that the term irpdSupov, often used to describe this hypo-

thetical secluded place, does not always refer to a columned porch in

front of an entrance. Nevertheless, it can be argued that a projecting

central portion of the skene would be useful as (a) setting off the

central door and thus emphasizing its significance, (b) emphasizing

the connection of the skene (i.e., the actors) with the orchestra

(i.e., the chorus), and (c) a "hiding-place," in scenes such as

1
Roux, "les tragedies d'Euripide," p. 34; see her discussion
(pp. 43f.) of the meaning of frctoxcts and the common features of Athenian
and Olynthian houses and the "Mycenean" (i.e., Homeric) palace.
2
Theatre of Dionysos, pp. 75ff.
 42

Hipp. 600f. where Phaedra remains invisible to Hippolytus during his

conversation with the nurse, and should thus perhaps hide behind a

column of the porch.1 There is further the evidence of the vases

which we have discussed above.

Hourmouziades' conclusion on the question of the number of

doors in the skene is that none of the plays "would be seriously

impaired" by being produced with a single-door background.2 This

conclusion seems slightly ambiguous. Hourmouziades points out that

there are no explicit references in Euripides to more than one door.

The passages which suggest to him the possibility of more than one

opening in the skene are (1) I.A. 885f., (2) Phaethon's prologue,3

(3) Helen 1165f., (4) Hecuba 53, or rather, 164f., and (5) Trojan

Women 153f. My examination of these passages, however, shows that

indeed none of them, and therefore none of the plays of Euripides, do

require more than one practicable door for their staging.

Concerning passage (1) it may well be, as Hourmouziades sug-

gests,1* that the text is interpolated, as Page5 has argued other parts

of the text are interpolations. It does not seem plausible that the

Old Man at vs. 855f. should address Achilles as if the latter were

leaving when Achilles has just announced he is going inside "this

house" to look for Agamemnon. There is no doubt that the Old Man is

hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 28.

z
Ibid., p. 34.
3
Supplementum Euripideum, ed. by H. von Arnim (Bonn, 1913),
pp. 69f (Phaethon vs. 9-12).
1
*0p. cit., p. 22, n. 1.
^Actors' Interpolations in Greek Tragedy (Oxford, 1934),
pp. 122-29.
 43

meant to be coming out of the palace (cf. vs. 1-2, 863, Oxford ed.).

The scene cannot be made to make sense, however, simply by the addi-

tion of a second door in the skene for the Old Man to come out of, for

whatever door Achilles intends to enter would still have to be con-

sidered part of the house or palace of Agamemnon. If we go on the

assumption that the text is basically sound and examine the positions

and movements of the actors in this scene, we discover that the scene

can plausibly be staged with one entrance. Achilles tries to sooth

Clytemestra in her distress in vs. 849f. but she is beyond comfort.

She gives him a farewell greeting (vs. 851) indicating she will go

inside but in fact she does not go inside, just as Achilles does not

go inside to look for Agamemnon, before the Old Man appears at the

gates. The Old Man bids them both wait (vs. 855-86).x Achilles asks,

"Who has come stealthily through the gates calling us?" irtiXas Trapox*£as

cannot mean "has opened a side-door"; the rest of the line shows the

Old Man is frightened (<I)S XExapgriK&s KCtXex*) which in visual terms means

he should enter by only partially opening the door.2 The rest of the

The sudden interruption by the Old Man with the plea "Wait"
emphasizes what is certainly a theme in the play of waiting or delay:
cf. specific references to waiting at vs. 804, 813, 815 (especially),
818, 831, 861. This seems to me an argument for the genuineness of
this passage.
2
For irapoxYvdvcu in this sense, cf. Pa. 30 where it is used
with a partitive genitive xrys Gupas, indicating perhaps an even more
cautious action than this verb with the accusative. The sense of
para- can be studied by comparison with irapoucdiTxexv used Th. 797 of
peeping out of a window, Pa. 982ff. of peeping from inside through the
outer door of a house, also Ec. 884, 924. The kuptein implies stoop-
ing to look in or out, the para, motion along or beside the door,
which is its natural meaning with the accusative. Thus one still
clings to the leaf of the door, as the daughter of Pelias does in the
Wiirzburg fragment (Wiirzburg H 4696 + 4701; shown listening at the door)
rather than appearing with the leaves of the door thrown wide open.
 44

dialogue between Achilles and the Old Man shows that all three of

them form a group before the central door. To the Old Man's state-

ment that he is speaking of the fate of "this woman here in front of

the house," Achilles replies, "We stand [or "We will stay"]; show,

if you desire to, why you are detaining me." The Old Man then asks,

"Are you indeed the only ones present and standing at these gates?"

This line certainly would not make sense unless all three were in

fact standing before or near the same gates, naturally the central

gates. Achilles bids the Old Man come out of the house at vs. 863;

this is additional evidence that the Old Man has been afraid to show

himself completely (i.e., open wide the gates). The scene is thus to

be played with the Old Man peering through the central gates and

Clytemestra and Achilles further "downstage." Achilles in vs. 853-54

only points to the skene, not to any specific door, when he indicates

he is going in. The fact that neither he nor Clytemestra go in after

indicating they intend to leave the stage (which, if carried out, would

require separate exits) demonstrates that the poet must keep the action

centered on the central part of the skene, before the central door.

In passage (3) the dramatic situation is the following:

Theoclymenos has just arrived at the palace and gives the order to his

servants (vs. 1169-70) to take in the dogs and hunting-gear. They pre-

sumably carry out his command. Then he suddenly notices that Helen is

not on the steps of the tomb and in an outburst of rage shouts for the

doors to be opened (vs. 1180). The problem to Hourmouziades is why use

the formula (vs. 1180), which normally refers to the doorkeeper or the

people inside the house, when Theoclymenos' servants have just gone in
 45

and could presumably open the door? Hourmouziades suggests then that

we need a side entrance for the exit of the servants with the dogs

and gear. The following study of the passage argues that there is a

departure from strict realism here which is too great to be made more

plausible by the simple addition of another door in the skene.

At vs. 1180 Theoclymenos orders the doors to be unlocked,

the stables opened, and his chariot-team brought out. He probably

"bangs imperiously on the door of the skene"1 as he orders the doors

to be unlocked and it is probably the opadoi who are to be imagined as

doing this and going to the imaginary stables in the courtyard. (As

Theoclymenos sees Helen coming to the doorway he calls after them to

cancel his order.) One could ask, Why order the doors to be unlocked

if they have just been opened to admit the servants with the dogs?

Now Theoclymenos is standing before the outer gates of the palace; the

courtyard is meant to be imagined as behind the gates. Thus to have

the servants with the dogs enter a door in the skene destroys the

illusion just created of the master before the gates. Secondly, if we

accept the probability of a low stage in the theater, the question of

which is discussed below, the picture of servants with the dogs and

gear climbing the steps of the stage to enter a door in the skene

would appear to be an awkward distraction from the interest focused on

Theoclymenos. What probably occurred was that the servants with the

dogs and gear left by the opposite parodos and were to be imagined as

entering through the "servants' entrance" at the back of the palace,

X
A. M. Dale, ed., Helen (Oxford, 1967), p. 143 (ad 1180f).
 46

or, better yet, are simply forgotten. All attention is focused on

Theoclymenos after he gives his command, vs. 1169-70, preparatory to

the focusing of our attention on the approach of Helen to the central

door (she appears at vs. 1184).

Concerning passage (4), the scholiasts ad Hec. 87 raise the

problem of how Hecuba can be imagined as coming out of Agamemnon's

hut without knowing where her daughter is:

Both of them agree that Cassandra is not in the hut, because

she has gone to the sea for a purification bath, something
that Hecuba does not know since she is staying in another hut.
Therefore, the scholiasts conclude, she appears first through
another door (TTPOEXSEXV E K xfis OKnvfis xuv axxuaXwxf Swv), then
enters Agamemnon's hut ( E X O E X O E X V xe EXS xftv OKTIVTW AYauEyvovos)
and finally comes out of it. They only disagree as to when
these movements take place. Thus one thinks that 53 indicates
that she is leaving Agamemnon's hut, while the other believes
that she is entering it. 1

The scholiasts' proposals for solving this problem are of course non-

sense, as Hourmouziades notes. Imaginative use of the limitations of

the stage is evident in this scene. The ghost of Polydoros at the end

of his prologue (vs. 52-53) announces he will run out of the way of

the old woman Hecuba, who is described as passing "under the foot of

the tent of Agamemnon, in fear of my ghostly form." When Hecuba later

indicates that she is troubled by dreams concerning her son Polydoros

and her daughter Polyxena, we realize that this ghost who has been

talking to us was also to be imagined as troubling Hecuba in the

interior of the tent. Hecuba's entering anapests perhaps also confirm

the notion that she is coming out of her tent, supported by her female

attendants.

hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 33-34.

 47

At vs. 172f. Hecuba ends her long lament by calling out her

child Polyxena: "Come out, come out of the house [OXKOX]." When

Polyxena enters she asks what new thing she is heralding which has
A

startled her out of the house (OXKOX) like a bird. We note no attempt

in either case to create the illusion of a tent or separate tents for

Hecuba and her daughter. The "house" is where they both are being

kept. It is no objection to ask why Polyxena has no knowledge of her

mother's distress if she has spent the night in the same tent. The

mother has just risen from her bed and gone out of the tent to express

her distress, which has resulted, we are told, from the visions she

has just received in the night. Time is dramatically compressed here,

just as spatial limitations were ignored at the moment of Hecuba's

entrance. At vs. 169f. Hecuba addresses her wretched foot to lead her

"to this aule." The emphasis at this moment is not on a destination

different from the door from which she earlier exited but on the

picture of Hecuba herself, the wretchedness of her life, and the sad-

ness of her task in having to tell her daughter her fate. The visual

counterpart to the words is Hecuba being supported again by her

attendants or else dragging herself along. The description of the

background as an ault is, like the other designation oikoi, suggestive

and poetical rather than strictly descriptive (cf. the description

Ph. 153, lyrics, of the cave as an aulB). When the chorus of Trojan

women enter, vs. 98f. (not the same as Hecuba's attendants), they

indicate they have just left "their masters' tents," where they have

heard the debate over how to honor Achilles' tomb. They clearly enter

through the parodos. Yet strict realism is not observed here if

 48

Agamemnon's hut is located on the stage and the huts of the Greeks in

the direction of one of the parodoi.

Concerning passage (2), Phaethon's prologue, at the end of

the probable conversation between Phaethon and Clymene he tells his

mother to go to the house, for the women servants of the house (the

chorus) are coming out of the house. Verse 9 definitely indicates

that Phaethon wants to avoid the women. How then can the chorus come

out unless by another door? Webster1 thinks the chorus actually come

up the parodos and are to be imagined as coming from the servants'

quarters into the near courtyard of the palace. He compares Trojan

Women (discussed below) where "the chorus come up the parodos in the

usual way but they are supposed to be occupying huts adjacent to

Hekabe's hut, from which she summons them."

The Trojan Women passage (5) indicates the chorus enter in

two groups. The first group tell us as they enter that they have

heard Hecuba's lamentation <5xa y£Xct0pa)V (154). At 164f. the women of

the first group call another group of captives (the other semi-chorus)

"out of the house." At vs. 175 the second semi-chorus enters, announc-

ing they have left OKnvaS xda5' 'AYOiysyvovos. The prologue speaker

has told us that Hecuba is lying before the "gates" (vs. 37); later

Hecuba herself mentions OKTivats £<J)€6pous AYayEyvovfaxs (vs. 139).

The plural is ambiguous: does it mean a single hut belonging to

Agamemnon, a group of huts belonging to Agamemnon, or a group of huts

one of which belongs to Agamemnon? The idea of a hut (or huts) and a

1
The Tragedies of Euripides (London, 1967), p. 222.
(= Euripides')
 49

house are used interchangeably here and thus it is almost impossible to

decide where the two semi-choruses are meant to be coming from. The

use of anapests by each entering semi-chorus perhaps is an argument for

a "normal" entrance through the parodos. Even if each chorus group

enters from the skene, there is no reason why each group cannot use the

central door. Verse 154 seems the best evidence for an entry through

the door. Cf. also vs. 32f. where we are told that those women who

are not yet allotted are "under this roof," a reference probably pre-

paring for the later entrance of the chorus.

The plays of Euripides therefore do not require more than one

practicable door. Use of suggestive rather than descriptive language

for the background as well as for the opening in the background and

the focusing of the action on the central part of the skene exploit

this limitation.

We have mentioned in connection with the Andromache the adapta-

tion of the skene with single door to a double setting (two simultane-

ous settings), by the probable use of painted panels hung on the back

wall. Wall hangings such as are visible on the Achilles Thersitoktonos

vase could also be used to particularize a scene. Semele's tomb is

clearly a prop in Eur. Bacchae; a statue of Artemis beside an altar,

and a statue of Aphrodite opposite the statue of Artemis are clearly

identifying additions to the skene of the Hippolytos. Apollo and

Hermes are most often addressed in the plays as inhabiting the palace,

which corresponds to a real-life situation of placing this pair of

statues at the doorway to the palace.1 In Hipp. Artemis and Aphrodite

1
Roux, "les tragedies d'Euripide," pp. 35-36.
 50

replace Apollo and Hermes, but they would not be placed, unnaturally,

in vaxOKOX (paraskenia) at opposite ends of the stage, as Roux suggests.

Paraskenia
The question of the number and position of the doors in the

tragic skene inevitably involves the question of projecting side-wings,

often designated paraskenia. The evidence of the plays does not

require additional doors, as we have indicated. The earliest use of

the term paraskenia occurs in Demos, in Meid. 17, where Meidias is

accused of barricading the paraskenia and so nailing up private prop-

erty: xct TrapaaKfivxa (Jjpctxxwv, irpoariXfiv x6x<5xr|S u>v xa 6nydaxa. Ulpian's

commentary agrees with Didymus (as quoted by Harpocr. s.v. paraskenia)

that Meidias' object was to force the chorus to enter by the public

parodos and so appear late and embarrass Demosthenes as choregus;1 the

chorus thus could sometimes enter by these paraskenia, which does

imply some sort of concealed entranceway. The reference to nailing up

the paraskenia clearly implies a wooden construction. Theophrastus,

as quoted in Harpocr. ibid., appears to identify them as the place

where the props and other equipment for the performance were kept,

which agrees basically with the meaning of skenai at Ar. Pa. 731. The

next earliest occurrence of the term paraskenia is in the inscriptions

relating to the repair of the theater at Delos dated to ca. 274 B.C.,

where, as we have explained, the singular refers to the lateral

extensions of the central portion of the skene which form a stoa

around the inner stage building, and the plural to painted panels

Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, p. 24, n. 1.

 51

which hung on these extensions or between the piers of the proskenion

level. There are no projecting wings in the Delos theater. The

earliest theater at Delos, dating from ca. 300 B.C., consisted of

wood built over stone foundations, in its second phase (ca. 274 B.C.),

partly of wood, partly of stone.1 Thus the paraskenion at Delos in

the early third century was constructed of wood, which agrees with

the notices of the paraskenia in the theater at Athens.

The paraskenia may be part of the wooden skene building, but

there is no application of this term to doorways. The excavations of

the theater at Athens reveal stone foundations for buildings to

either side of the central skene as represented by platform T and

foundation wall H (see my fig. 2, supra, p. vii). The walls are

less thick than those of the stoa which they adjoin> and are thus

clearly intended for a wooden superstructure. A column base has been

found in the westward-looking wall of the east building (J on Dorpfeld-

Reisch's Tafel III). Both buildings appear to have been made useless

by the building of the stone projecting wings and the staircases lead-

ing to them. The masonry of the walls is similar to that of the stoa.

One notices the striking dissimilarity in their shapes. The east

building clearly conforms to the line of the east supporting wall of

the auditorium which, unlike the west supporting wall, appears not to

have been rebuilt when the west wall was built further northward.2

The location of the west building is appropriate to the more southward

1
Sifakis, Hellenistic Drama, pp. 42-44. The earliest wooden
theater at Delos is probably to be dated to the late fourth century.
2
Dinsmoor, "The Athenian Theater," p. 318.
 52

location of the earlier west supporting wall of the auditorium which

antedates the building of the stone paraskenia. The pair of buildings

appear then to antedate the building of stone paraskenia; they could

be Lycurgan in date (so Travlos restores them in his Phase III of the

theater) if the stoa and footing wall are to be dated to the second

half of the fourth century, or late fifth century if the latter foun-

dations are to be dated to the late fifth century. The archaeologi-

cal evidence of stone foundations for wooden buildings with an entrance

leading onto the acting area agrees with the literary references on

the nature of the paraskenia. Whether or not the date of these foun-

dations is late fifth century, one notes that these buildings were not

intended to contain doorways which faced the audience, as the central

door did; their size and orientation appears to be suitable for the

storage of props or an exit "to the wings" which does not involve an

obvious entrance into the palace. If these foundations are in fact

fourth century, then there probably were fifth-century prototypes of

basically similar shape and function.

On the Question of a Raised Stage

The earliest theater at Corinth, dated from pottery finds to

ca. 415 B.C.,1 is the nearest surviving theater in date to the theater

of Dionysos at Athens and is valuable for the possible evidence it

provides of a raised stage in the fifth century. The Corinth theater

has no stone foundations, rather a row of holes cut in the base-rock

X
R. Stillwell, The Theater of Corinth: Results of the
Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at
Athens, Vol. II (Princeton, 1952).
 53

to the north of the orchestra, intended to take wooden uprights, and

a second row of holes cut some 4m in front of these. The parallel

rows of holes suggest either (1) that they supported front and back

walls of a stage-building with a wooden floor between them, as Still-

well says, or (2) that they supported the timbers of a raised stage;

cf. Arnott,1 who points to the northern row of holes being generally

1.1m higher than the southern. Following Arnott's argument, the

northern holes would support the uprights of the skene front, from

which horizontal traverses would run to the support posts in the

southern row. The terrain of the Corinth theater makes a raised

stage necessary; unfortunately, the same argument cannot be made for

the theater at Athens. The absence of any sort of projecting wings

at Corinth is evidence that they did not exist in the fifth-century

Athenian theater either.

Webster2 adduces as evidence for the raised stage in Athens a

red-figured Attic oinochoe, dated 425-400 B.C.,3 which depicts a comic

actor dressed as Perseus dancing on a stage which has three steps lead-

ing up to it as in certain "phlyax" vases which show a raised stage.1*

This evidence could be regarded as conclusive if only there were not

some doubt whether what is depicted here is an actual performance under

normal conditions.

1
Arnott, Greek Scenic Conventions, pp. lOf.
2
CQ LXII (1948), 18-19; GTP, p. 7.
3
Athens, Vlastos; GTP B 1 (pi. 14); IGD IV, 1.
•*Examples: London B.M.F. 151 (IGD IV, 35); London B.M.F. 269
(IGD IV, 21); Sicilian kalyx-krater from Lentini, ca. 340-330 B.C.,
Lentini, Mus. Arch. (IGD IV, 24); Bari 2970 (IGD IV, 20). A. D.
Trendall (Phlyax Vases: BICS, Suppl. 8 [1959], p. 11) distinguishes
three different types of stage represented on these vases.
 54

The texts themselves cannot be made to prove the existence of

a raised stage. We have discussed above the phrases cVirb oicrivfis and

ETTX OKTivfis. ava$ax*vexv occurs in Ar. Ach. 732, Eq. 149, KaxagafvEXV

in Vesp. 1514, Eccl. 1152, but these words are capable of more than one

interpretation in their contexts.1

There is therefore no direct evidence for a raised stage in

the fifth-century theater. There are, however, the arguments that a

raised stage would be advantageous in certain scenes in Euripides where

the attention is focused on characters who are sitting, kneeling, or

even lying in prostration, and the evidence of the frequency of occur-

rences in Euripides of choral "detachment" or isolation during the

episodes, suggesting a separate (i.e., elevated) space for the actors.2

The Ekkuklema
A wooden platform mounted on wheels ("ekkuklema"), which could

be rolled out of the skene door, has been postulated as a means of

achieving scene changes without altering the basic scenic background

of large central door and porch. Admittedly, no archaeological evi-

dence exists for this device, but there is literary and epigraphical

evidence. The relevant passages have been collected by Pickard-

Cambridge.3 The strongest evidence is the occurrence of forms of the

verb EKKUKXetv at Ar. Ach. 408f. (+ schol.) and Th. 96 (+ schol.), in

x
See Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 64, n. 4,
for bibliography on the controversy.
2
Ibid., pp. 58-74. Haigh, Attic Drama3 (London, 1907); pp.-
168f., reduces the number of examples collected by Dorpfeld-Reisch and
Capps of supposed "free intermingling between chorus and actors."
3
Theatre of Dionysos, pp. 100-19.
 55

the technical sense of "appear by means of the ekkuklema," the sort of

direct, humorous reference to stage machinery one expects in comedy.1

Against Pickard-Cambridge's contention that nothing more than a couch

on wheels is required in either case is the Acharnians passage, where

a platform is necessary not only for Euripides' couch but also for

whatever displayed the masks clearly referred to in the text, and pos-

sibly also for the heap of rags from which Dicaeopolis extracts those

belonging to Telephos.2

An interlinear stage-direction ("parepigraphe") in the Ravennas

Ms at Th. 276 (cf. the scholium) says that at this point "the women

raise a ritual cry" (bXoXtfcouax) "and the shrine is pushed out" (xb

XEpbv &0£txcu, accepting Fritzsche's emendation). Pickard-Cambridge

and others raise questions about this "stage-direction." They object

that only 6XoX0"?ouax is the stage-direction, i.e., that it alone is

required to be added to the text, to explain the hurried breaking-off

of the conversation between Euripides and Mnesilochos. But the

scholium to this parepigraphe would be incomprehensible if it applied

only to part of the preserved parepigraphe. The parepigraphe itself

is one of a select number of interlinear stage-directions preserved in

the Ravennas and attested in the metrical commentary of Heliodorus

(first century A.D.). Their intent is to supply information to the

reader not obvious from the text itself, but the majority of them are

also reflected in the spoken text. The scholia to these parepigraphae

x
Cf. also Th. 265, EXOKUKXriactxa). Agathon is abruptly wheeled
in, an action which draws attention to the use of the device.
2
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 101.
 56

generally begin with the statement, "This is a parepigraphe," or

something similar, and then give a paraphrase of the generally brief

interlinear notice which is also an explanation of why it is there.

There is no reason to suppose that the scholium to Th. 276 does not

fit this pattern.1

It is plausible from the text that a shrine, the thesmophorion,

is pushed forward through the central door at this point. An altar,

which is part of the shrine, is immediately required for Mnesilochos'

offering and later at about vs. 695 when he takes refuge there. The

evidence here of something being pushed through the skene has been

connected with the statement by Pollux (IV.129) that the ekkuklema is

the same as the exostra (f) E^dxrxpa). The Delian inscription of 274 B.C.

(IG, XI, 199) lists xa E^uiaxpa together with a ladder and altars as

stage properties in need of repair. This is additional evidence for

the moveable platform but raises an additional problem: there is

clearly more than one ekkuklema referred to. 2 This evidence can pos-

sibly be compared to Pollux IV.128 where it is stated that each door

has an ekkuklema. Pollux's interest, however, is mainly philological,

not historical or archaeological. He mixes material of all dates3 and

thus we do not know to what period of the theater he is referring. The

1
See further on parepigraphae K. von Holzinger, Uber die Pare-
pigraphae zu Ar. (Vienna, 1883); W. G. Rutherford, A Chapter in the
History of Annotation, Vol III of Scholia Aristophanica (London, 1905),
pp. 101-14 (= Schol. Ar. Ill), where see for history of the development
of the term; Koster, "Ad Aristophanis Thesmophoriazusarum fragmenta:
de parepigraphe," Acme VIII (1955), 96f; J. C. B. Lowe, "The MS Evidence
for Changes of Speaker in Aristophanes," BICS IX (1962), 36.
2
Sifakis, Hellenistic Drama, p. 51.
3
von Gerkan, Das Theater von Priene (Munich, 1921), pp. 119-20.
 57

Delian inscription refers to the Hellenistic theater. The very clear

references in Aristophanes to the ekkuklema all involve an appearance

through the central door. In Thesm., for example, the scene from vs.

276 on is before the thesmophorion; it would be very strange not to

play so much of the play before the center of the background. It is

interesting that the scene at the beginning of the play is before the

house of Agathon. The pushing out of the new setting shows that the

play should be performed before the central opening.

The scholium to Eur. Hipp. 171 appears to attribute to Aris-

tophanes of Byzantium, an important scholar, the ascription of the

device to Euripides. To take two of the best known scholia, the

schol. Eum. 64 and schol. Ag. 346 think these scenes were managed by

the use of the ekkuklema. At Eum. 64 the adyton of the temple is

meant to be displayed, around which are grouped Apollo, Orestes grasp-

ing the omphalos, Hermes, and the sleeping Furies, represented neces-

sarily by a few of their number. This is basically a static tableau.

In the Ag'ax the hero is shown sitting in his tent (the tent =

the skene), surrounded by slaughtered animals. Pickard-Cambridge has

basically two objections or alternatives to the ekkuklema here:

(1) the interior of Ajax's hut is shown simply by opening the door;

(2) the scholium ad. loc. is without value since it says literally,

"A sudden disclosure is made" (EKKukXTiuct xx Y^£Tal-» etc.), which is

a late usage of the verb EKKUKXETV not implying the use of any kind

of machinery. But an Ajax sitting just inside the door of the skene

would not be visible to much of the audience. Further, if we compare

the other scenes where the ancient commentators have postulated an

 58

ekkuklema we see that this is a typical tableau-scene requiring the

use of the moveable platform. Sophocles, in contrast to Euripides,

generally conceals the employment of a technical expedient. Preceding

the scene just mentioned, Ajax groaning from within the Tecmessa and

the chorus commenting on his utterances from outside create the illu-

sion that direct communication is only a matter of opening the door.

The chorus are convinced that Ajax has recovered his senses, and ask

for the hut to be opened. Tecmessa answers that she will open the door.

After five lyric verses sung by Ajax, the coryphaeus or chorus speak a

couplet suggesting that the interior is visible. Thus the poet pre-

sents the appearance of the tableau as the natural result of a series

of dramatic incidents.1 Once Ajax is revealed he remains "in the hut,"

while the others are conversing with him from "outside"; the two sec-

tions of the dramatic space remain separate, making it difficult to

detect the use of the ekkuklema here.

Hourmouziades contrasts the use of the ekkuklema by Euripides

by discussion of the scene in Herakles where a statis tableau is

revealed of Herakles asleep, bound to a broken pillar, and lying in

front of him the bodies of his wife and children. Euripides does not

attempt to disguise the use of the ekkuklema. Once the ekkuklema has

been intruded into the acting area it gradually loses all connection

with the interior and becomes identified with the area of the chorus.2

The sight of all these figures on the ekkuklema is not meant to be an

illustration of the interior of the palace as described by the herald

hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 99-100.

2
Ibid., p. 103.
 59

just previously but an "illustration post factum of a catastrophe which

in progress was conveyed by the spoken word."1 Note further that at

vs. 1089 Herakles opens his eyes and stares at the "sky, earth, and

sun" as if he were outside the palace, and at the end of the play, as

he is departing supported by Theseus, he turns his head back for the

last time and bids his father "take the bodies of his children into

the house." One cannot object, therefore, to the inconsistency of the

appearance of a broken pillar on the outside of the palace nor, there-

fore, to the use of the platform.

Pickard-Cambridge objects to the ekkuklema as failing of con-

sistent definition, i.e., it does not always strictly indicate a

revealed interior. He says, for example, concerning Aristophanes that

"whereas Agathon is expressly wheeled back into his house (1. 264),

Euripides simply orders the doors to be shut, as if he is theatrically

inside all the time."2 Both these scenes begin with the idea of an

interior being rolled out, but in the case of Agathon it gradually

becomes apparent that he has been rudely thrust out into the sunshine

and so must be hurriedly rolled back in again at the end of the scene.

The ekkuklema-space has become identified with the "outside" just as

in the case of the Herakles. The boundary between "inside" and "out-

side" is deliberately blurred.

The schol. Nub. 184 and the Argum. iii ad Nub. envision the

students of the phrontisterion being revealed on the ekkuklema.

K. J. Dover, however, in his recent edition of Clouds denies that this

x
Dale, Collected Papers, p. 124.
2
Theatre of Dionysos, p. 103.
 60

is the case.1 He sees no evidence for the ekkuklema here and prefers

to represent the front of the phrontisterion by "a light wooden screen,

perforated by a door. This is the door at which Strepsiades knocks,

and the guide-student pulls it shut behind him when he emerges."2

When Strepsiades cries "Open the door," vs. 181f., the guide-student

turns toward the screen, makes a sweeping gesture, and the screen is

immediately carried off, revealing the students fixed in their extra-

ordinary positions, with the three large pieces of apparatus lying

about on the ground. Now it is true that all this could be set up

behind a screen, but the fact that a typical static tableau is

revealed does argue for the use of the ekkuklema. Pickard-Cambridge

objects to the use of the ekkuklema here because of the way the scene

ends: at vs. 195f. the guide-student orders the students to "go in";

Strepsiades protests but the student reminds him that the other stu-

dents cannot stay too long "outside" (scil. in the sun, since as

Socrates' students they are pale and emaciated). How then can they

be going "inside" when the interior of the school has supposedly been

revealed by the ekkuklema? The answer to Pickard-Cambridge's objection

is simply that this is an instance of the same spatial ambiguity

observed in the case of the Herakles and the Thesmophoriazusae.

Webster argues that the platform in conjunction with a screen

or screens could represent unusual features of scenery or scenic

changes, such as the "lofty crag" of the P.V. which seems to be with-

drawn at the end of the play, the wild sea-coast setting of at least

1
(Oxford, 1968.)
2
Ibid., pp. lxxv-lxxvi.
 61

the first part of the Andromeda, the cave of the Cyclops, etc.1 The

ekkuklema must also have been used, he argues, in the hauling-scenes

in Aeschylus' Netfishers and Aristophanes' Peace, the hauling in of

Danae's chest in the first instance and the statue of Peace in the

second.

In conclusion, the use of the ekkuklema in fifth-century

tragedy, comedy, and satyr play cannot be doubted. The sense of a

revealed interior is its basic purpose but it has other purposes as

well. The static tableau-scenes of comedy and tragedy can all be got

on a platform of moderate size. Webster finds the requirements of

such scenes in agreement with the maximum dimensions of 2.55m wide X

1.30m deep for the ekkuklema which he deduces from the known width and

depth of the foundation T and allowance for the opening of the double-

leaved doors.2 This is surely more than a coincidence; if the plat-

form T is fourth century then the fifth-century door must have had

approximately identical dimensions.

Pollux IV.128 speaks of a high platform ekkuklema but this

cannot be connected with any other evidence. The schol. Ach. 399

is certainly correct (in contrast to the schol. Ach. 410) to inter-

pret avapd6nv to mean Euripides appears with his feet up, and not that

he is being wheeled out of the front of an upper story. Pickard-

Cambridge connects xa 'g^axrxpa in the Delian inscription with the men-

tion in that same inscription of a proskenion, interpreting the latter

X
GTP, pp. 8-9, 17-19. Cf. Hourmouziades, Production and Imag-
ination, pp. 43-57, and specifically p. 48 where he shows the similar-
ity of the scenic elements of Andromeda and Cyclops.
2
BRL, pp. 501-3.
 62

to mean upper story, but Sifakis has shown that proskenion cannot have

this meaning.1 The frequent description by the ancient commentators

of the motion of the ekkuklema as "revolving" ([7repx]oTp£<j>£*a0ax) can be

explained as a confusion of Hellenistic with fifth-century practice.

The Mechane

The crane is a theatrical device definitely attested for

Euripides (the Medea, 431 B.C.) and Aristophanes (the Peace, 421 B.C.).

The parody of Bellerophon's flight in Euripides' play of that name

by the flight of Trygaios in the Peace perhaps shows that the device

was especially associated with Euripides. Likewise, the manner of

Socrates' arrival in the Clouds and Iris' in the Birds may indicate

increasing use of the device during Euripides' career. The device

has been postulated for scenes in Aeschylus, however. Pollux IV.130

describes the Y^P aV0S > which is generally assumed to be identical with

the yrixavn,2 and illustrates its use with the example of Aeschylus'

Psychostasia, in which he says the crane descended and was used by

Eos to remove the body of Memnon. Webster3 notes that Eos probably

herself appeared in the air carrying the body. The use of the mechane

cannot definitely be documented before 431 B.C.; the Psychostasia

may be a-later revival.1* A late fifth-century South Italian vase 5

1
Hellenistic Drama, p. 51.
2
0n the probability that the Kp&Sn of comedy, discussed by
Pollux IV.128, is the same as the mechane, see the body of the thesis,
the discussion of Pa. 78.
3
GTP, p. 12.
••Webster, BRL, p. 499.
5
New York 16.140; South Italian bell-krater, 400-380 B.C.;
GTP, A 26.
 63

shows Sleep and Death carrying off Sarpedon and has been used as evi-

dence for the crane in Aeschylus' Carians or Europa, which would

also be revivals under different circumstances. The monuments in

general do not document the use of the crane before the early fourth

century.

The probable late introduction of the mechane to the fifth-

century theater is some evidence for a "Periclean reconstruction" of

the theater. The reconstruction probably occurred over a number of

years, but the use of the mechane in 431 B.C. and apparently more

frequently thereafter suggests the stage building at least was

rebuilt shortly before 431 B.C.

The literary references show that the principal function of

the mechane was to show heroes flying, i.e., an actual movement through

the air and over the skene (cf. Pollux IV.128). Pollux's choice of

examples to illustrate its use is significant: Perseus (in the Andromeda)

and Bellerophon (in the play of that name).1 Ar. fr. 188, from the

Daedalus, also supports this conception: not only is the title sig-

nificant but the sense of the fragment is clearly of a cue, framed in

paratragic language, to the crane operator to begin winding the rope

so that the actor may depart. Ar. Th. 925f. is evidence that Perseus

appeared flying in the Andromeda from off stage.

x
The akroteria on the Wiirzburg fragment (H 4696 + 4701) show
Bellerophon appearing on Pegasus in the center (i.e., on the mechane);
to the left a man runs away in horror, to the right a man storms
against him (Proitos?); this must be the end of the play when B.
appears on the mechane and Proitos storms against him as Jason storms
against Medea at the end of that play (Trendall-Webster, IGD III.3,
43).
 64

The term mechane occurs several times in fourth-century

writings.1 From these passages the following essential information

concerning the mechane can be added: the figures (a) were lifted up;

(b) were suspended in the air; and (c) spoke their parts from a high

level. These passages show that at least one type of divine epiphany

was accomplished by means of the mechane. On the question of epiph-

anies Pollux (IV.130) attributes the geranos (i.e., mechane) to the

Psychostasia and clearly thinks of the theologeion and mechane as

distinct from one another, the former being the place where the god

or gods appear and speak when they appear "from on high" by means of

the crane.2

Pollux locates the mechane toward the left parodos, from which

he says it projected over the skene. A few lines before (IV.127) he

refers to the left parodos as the one leading "from abroad" (the

right parodos leads "from the country, or from the harbor, or from the

city"). Hourmouziades3 has shown, however, that while the "first

seeds" of such a conventional signification for the parodoi can be

found in the plays of Euripides, that signification for the two paro-

doi was by no means fixed as early as the period of Euripides. Thus

we find that the topography is hardly ever taken for granted at the

1
The passages are collected and discussed by Hourmouziades,
Production and Imagination, pp. 148-49.
2
Ibid., pp. 147, 155. Hourmouziades concludes from his survey
of roof scenes, pp. 29-34, that the superstructure necessary for the
theologeion was of moderate size, basically a screen behind which the
crane could lift up the divine figure and disclose him on a level
higher than the roof. This type of construction is clearly different
from the massive episcenium or second story imagined by most
nineteenth-century editors.
3
Ibid., pp. 128-36.
 65

beginning of the play. There is no archaeological evidence for the

crane in the Hellenistic theater.1 Thus Pollux appears to be deducing

the use and location of the crane from the plays themselves.

Webster2 argues that the holes found in the foundation T (which

we have argued may date to the late fifth century), the western one

measuring 70cm x 70cm, the eastern one 1.25m X 70cm, were intended for

the mast of the crane and the winch which worked it; therefore, that

the crane was located inside the stage building. Webster's theory

of the location of the crane has the advantage that heroes or gods

could be swung on from either direction, which might be necessary if

each play could vary the signification of the parodoi (relevant in

the case of the flight of heroes). The fullest ancient description of

the several types of hoisting device, Vitruvius X.ii.1-4,3 does not

include one which has a swiveling base, which would permit a lateral

swing of 28m, the length of the stage as deduced from the post holes

in wall H. If a mere jib was'used for such al/l«^?T?k.l/-T?r5wement, the

latter could not be very far, an observation which agrees with our

later demonstration that Trygaios and his beetle-steed are raised from

behind and landed in front of the same door.

Pollux IV.131 is evidence that the words of the text showed

that the machine had ropes from which figures were suspended. Bekker,

Anecd. 1.232, adds the information that there was also a hook for

1
Sifakis, Hellenistic Drama, pp. 51-52.
2
BRL, p. 500.
3
Cf. the discussion and figures 55a-57 of A. D. Drachmann,
The Mechanical Technology of Greek and Roman Antiquity (Copenhagen,
1963), pp. 141ff.
 66

attaching the rider. Simple or compound pulleys would be employed.

The Daedalus fragment (Ar. fragm. 188) mentions a winch (o xpoxds).

There is not space to discuss every aspect of the physical

setting of the theater and the "areas of imagination" such as off-

stage area, but the main features of the theater should be clear.

The fifth-century theater at Athens had a fixed background represent-

ing a temple or palace front, a columned porch framing a large cen-

tral opening before which the action was centered. The background

could be altered by the use of the ekkuklema, screens on the ekkuklema,

altars, statues, votive offerings and other objects hung on the walls,

painted wooden panels, and of course changes in the costume of the

actors (which we do not have space to discuss). The evidence of the

plays, particularly the plays of Euripides, is decisive on the question

of the fixed background, even if the evidence of foundations for the

building and stage is eliminated.

Let us turn now to an analysis of the staging and stage action

of the Peace, as a study specifically of the nature of the stage of

comedy. The question of whether any alteration of the skene of

tragedy is necessary for comedy is here examined in detail.

 CHAPTER II

THE PEACE

Prologue vs. 1-300

The Peace begins with a situation in progress: two slaves are

preparing food for and feeding a voracious dung-beetle. The situation

eventually calls for an explanation. Lively action and dialogue thus

arouse the audience's interest, as at the beginning of Eq., V., and

Av., where also a character steps out of the situation to explain.

Several of Aristophanes' plays open as here with an indication that

someone is in distress: Ach., Eq., Nub., Th., and Pi.1

The distribution of roles, i.e., of the action, between the

two slaves at the beginning of the play has been a much-debated Prob-
st
lem. The scholiast to Venetus Pa. 1: axpE says, "There are two slaves,

one of whom feeds the dung-beetle, the other of whom kneads. The

feeding-slave then speaks to the kneading-slave" (thus giving the

crucial attribution of the first line). 2 Dobree uses this scholium

as a basis for the distribution of parts Pa. 1-20 and is followed by

most subsequent editors, including most recently Platnauer. Rogers

(London, 1902), however, returns to the arrangement of the editors

before Dobree, notably Blaydes. He says init. Peace, "the whole manual

x
See Dover ad Nub. 1-3.
2
Cf. the schol. Ven. Pa. 2: xSoti, who says this is a "parepi-
graphe."

67
 68

work is performed by the second servant; the first merely directs and

superintends the operation, as the steward or confidential servant of

Trygaios." He points to lines 23 and 27 as "of themselves sufficient

to show that no such division of labor [scil. as postulated by the

scholiast] . . . was really intended by Aristophanes."

In lines 22-23 one of the slaves says, "For there is nothing

more wretched than kneading and supplying food for a dung-beetle."

A

The f)V 'dp' of line 22 is an idiomatic use of the imperfect, explained

by Denniston, p. 36 (ii), as "denoting that something which has been,

and still is, has only just been realized." Cf. Pa. 676. The slave's

statement applies to what he has just now been doing, and to what has

been and still is his general situation. In this sense it may be

compared with Pa. 25-28 where the slave says, "This creature gives

himself airs and disdains to eat unless I knead and set before him

all day long [scil. a dung-cake] kneaded nice and round as if for a

lady."1 irapExEXV in line 23 has the very general meaning of "supply"

or "provide." The slave can say he has been supplying food to the

beetle even if he has had help from another at the beginning of the

play. Trapa0u) in line 27 has the more specific meaning of "set before"

as of a meal, humorously in this context. It does not refer especi-

ally to the action at the beginning of the play but as in the case of

lines 22-23 to the slave's general predicament. The dramatic purpose

of the action at the beginning of the play is comically to speed up

the slave's task and to increase his discomfort to the point where the

1
J. Taillardat, Les images d'Aristophane (Paris, 1965),
par. 166,suggests the meaning "as if made by the hand of a woman,"
comparing Com. adesp. 968.
 69

action is brought to an end. The attention of the audience is focused

on the action itself and by extension on the beetle who is benefitting

from all the action, not on the characterization of the slaves involved.
A
The schol. Ravennas Pa. 1: axpE cites as a parallel use of
A

the word TL. 6.264 \xf\ yox oxvov OExpE, "hand me etc." Platnauer, who

accepts this interpretation, compares among other passages infra 1227.

I can find no instance of the imperative of this verb in which the

speaker is not referring to himself as the indirect object of the

action, xu KotvO&py in line 1, therefore, is an ethical dative.1

One slave is clearly "in distress" in contrast to the other,

otherwise the curse which the one slave hurls at the back of the

retreating slave at line 19 would have no point. The distinction

between the slaves, however, is clear from Dobree's distribution of

the parts. The jokes by the slave who speaks lines 9-10 (he is sti-

fled by the smell) and 13-14 (he cannot be accused of eating prepared

dungl) show that this slave is associated with the kneading tub. He

is constantly exhorted by his fellow-slave to hand over more and more

cakes; all the while he must continue to knead more and more cakes.

Thus it would make no sense if he were to leave the tub to pass cakes

directly to the beetle inside the house. At line 17 he protests that

he is no longer able to stand over the tub (see discussion of lines

17-18 below), at which point the other slave announces he will snatch

up the tub itself and take it to the beetle.

x
The suggested emendation of J. Jackson, Marginalia Scaenica
(Oxford, 1955), p. 108, of auxy in line 2 to auxds, "give it to him
yourself," envisions the line as addressed to the slave's retreating
back, and certainly gives it more point. It would not affect Dobree's
division of the roles.
 70

The problem of attribution in the opening scene does not end

with line 20. The slave (Slave I) who snatches up the tub must exit

at line 18, and at line 49 one slave must exit1 while the other

remains to give the logos to the audience. Where does Slave I return?

There are no certain indications in the text. Platnauer very plausibly

brings him back at line 32 where there is an expression of extreme dis-

gust over the beetle, logical after a direct encounter with the beetle

and slightly redundant for the slave who has just been giving a lively

verbal and visual picture of the beetle's eating habits. The slave

who has just come from inside where the beetle is located thus parti-

cipates actively in the discussion of who is responsible for the

beetle's presence (see Platnauer's note on irpoagoXn, line 3 9 ) . 2

Whatever the correct distribution of lines 38-49 may be, by

line 49 it is clear that both slaves are agreed on the disgusting

and comical nature of the beetle. Thus the situation of the beginning

of the play, in which one slave appeared willingly to be doing his

master's bidding, is now over after a brief span. No special rela-

tionship with the master, as argued by Rogers, is necessary for the

slave who gives the logos. This slave is naturally the one who earlier

gained the audience's approval by roundly cursing his departing fellow-

slave at line 19, and who again established a relationship with the

audience by imitating for their benefit the eating habits of the

beetle, vs. 31-37.

x
His "excuse" for exiting makes the most of the situation:
Sdoao) TTXEXV, "c'est-a-dire pour uriner," (Coulon).
2
Rogers, by contrast, gives only xoO Y ^ P E°"T J line 41, to
Slave I in this section.
 71

The slave who exits at line 49 is needed to play another role.

The other slave (Slave II) remains, as we have said, to give the logos,

line 50f., more serious than the pseudo-explanation of to pragma in

lines 38-49 yet which still mocks the audience. This slave remains

the greater part of the play at his master's house. He engages in

dialogue with Trygaios as soon as his master appears, line 82f.

He appears soon after the conclusion of the parabasis when Trygaios

returns to "earth" with his prizes, and behaves boldly, the typical

slave of Old Comedy, in the iambic scenes of the second half of the

play. No special relationship is necessary for the slave in any of

these later scenes.1

At line 851 the slave asks his master, EITTE" yox 6ui KaxatjiaYexv /

xatixp xx; Platnauer comments ad loc. that KaxacpaYetv generally means

"to devour" but here simply "to eat," as at Eq. 706, Pi. 1137 and 1174.

He might also point to (f>aY£XV in line 852 which is apparently synonymous

with KaxoK|>aY£XV in the previous line. But Professor John Herington has

pointed out to me that the enjambement of line 851 puts emphasis on

xocdxp xx, giving the meaning "to this one something?" It is therefore

probable that the slave is making a humorous reference to the action at

the beginning of the play in which two slaves were involved in feeding

a beetle described in line 6 as "devouring" (Kax£"<j>aY£V) his food.2

x
The opening of Eq. provides a contrast: there is considerable
preparation, with political overtones, for the appearance of the slave
who does have a distinct characterization, the Paphlagon-slave, who has
cajoled and beaten his way into a special relationship with his master.
2
Line 6 is divided by Dobree between the two slaves. Some may
object to the separation of ou . . . yd, which gives the sense of "he
hasn't eaten it, has he?"—an astonished statement. In defense of the
reading, Sharpley quotes Shilleto, ed., Dem. On the Fraudulent Embassy^
 72

This reference to the action at the beginning of the play shows the

emphasis on action rather than on characterization: two slaves were

involved in this action yet one slave can make reference to the whole

of the action. In sum, the action of the opening of the play changes

much too rapidly for the participants to build up a distinct charac-

terization.

Pa. 16-18

Slave I has been demanding that the other hand him more and

more cakes and that he keep kneading more as well. Slave II, who

has the more disagreeable task, is finally "fed up." He declares he

will no longer keep doing this, then utters the line ending UTT£ps"x£XV

xfis avxXfas which is suspected by some editors. Platnauer obelizes

xfis avxXfas line 18 and remains suspicious of line 17. D. M. McDowell

in an article in CR XV, No. 1 (1965), 17ff. has argued that the lines

should be kept. His view is accepted in the following discussion.

It is difficult to argue in favor of reading avxXfa in both

line 17 and 18 if, as the scholiast Rav. Pa. 17: U7T£p£*xexv interprets

the line, antlia in line 17 appears to mean the bilge or the muck.

Antlia normally means the hold of the ship where the bilge-water is

located, o SvxXos being the bilge itself. But by extention, we can

argue that antlia means in this context the container of sewage just

as antlos, if used here, would mean the sewage itself.1

(Cambridge, 1886), Appendix C for the meaning of such phrases as yoi xbv
Ax'dXXcc, the second half of line 6: they are "negative, inasmuch as
they object to the preceding phrase as not being strong enough, whilst
they agree with its general meaning and enhance its force." For paral-
lels see PI. 110-11, V. 172-73, Eq. 336, and Pa. 439.
McDowell, CR XV, 17f.
 73

Schol. Rav. Pa. 17 glosses uirepExexv as avxfexsxv Kax"

TTEpxYXVEaOax xfis bayfis ("endure and overcome" or "survive the smell") .

McDowell points out that uirspEXEXV is elsewhere applied to a person

whose head, though not the rest of him, is above something (example:

Th. 3.23.5). Line 18 thus translates, "I can't stand over this dung-

tub any longer."

The scholiast Rav. offers the synonyms aYY^ov 1 and OKd$r\2

for avxXta. These are both portable objects. Thus Slave I can say

in line 18, "I shall pack up the dung-tub itself and bring it to the

beetle." The point of line 18 is the contrast between the slave hand-

ing single cakes to the other slave for the beetle and bringing the

beetle his food all at once, that is, the dung-tub itself. Thus line

18 begins with auxffv, which puts the emphasis on the tub itself and

surely guarantees the soundness of xfiv avxXfav.3

Pa. SOf.

The logos spoken by Slave II explains the situation "discovered"

in the opening of the play and also prepares for the appearance of

Trygaios. The audience's attention is kept focused on the central

portion of the skene continually until that appearance. The central

portion has represented since the beginning of the play Trygaios' house.

1
For 6cYY£?ov cf. Hdt. 4.2: made of wood.
2
The word has several forms. At Hdt. 7.182, Th. 1.50 it means
"hull of a ship." Van Leeuwen substitutes Kapfioirov for antlian, which
should be in Platnauer*s apparatus since he suspects antlian. Schol.
Rav. Nub. 669 glosses Kapfiorros by OKa<j)X*6xov; there have been several
archaeological publications on the former. See Dover ad Nub. 669.
3
McDowell, CR, anticipated by Herington, Phoenix, 1965, p. 75.
 74

The slave accounts for what has happened and what he is about

to describe by his master's new sort of "madness" (vs. 54: yax*VEXax).

It is characteristic for some character in a play of Aristophanes to

have some "madness," or more accurately a "craze" or passionate desire

for something. It is often termed a "sickness,"1 vdaos, such as vdaos

xinTXKfi, Nub. 243, or the nosos of V. 71, 87, 114, 651 (the "judging

craze"), but also simply yavfa, Nub. 350. The "judging craze" char-

acteristic of the Athenians and made famous by the Wasps is perhaps

referred to in Pa. 55, as schol. Rav. ad loc. says. Trygaios' "completely

new kind of madness" is to gape up into the heavens (and here the

slave imitates his master) and rail at Zeus, asking him, in his own

country idiom, why he is "sweeping Greece clean of inhabitants."

The "madness" of Trygaios eventually includes his attempt to ride a

dung-beetle "straight to Zeus." Trygaios' "craze" may also therefore

be part of the parody of Bellerophon in the play of that name.

Bellerophon probably had a passionate desire to ascend to heaven and

determine whether the gods existed and also to extract from them an

answer to the riddle of life.2

After quoting Trygaios' rebuke of Zeus, the slave gives an

indication that he hears a noise inside (la E*a, line 60) and then we

actually hear a sample from Trygaios himself, from behind the skene,

of his questioning of Zeus. A result of hearing from Trygaios himself

1
See Taillardat, Les images, par. 307. Cf. the plural yavfax,
Pa. 65, Nub. 832; also yavx*a voOaos, Hdt. 6.75. The expression was
thus a current idiom.
2
Cf. M. Pohlenz, Die Griechisahe Tragoedie2 (Gottingen, 1954),
pp. 291f.
 75

is to establish his location in the house and to create the illusion

that communication with him is only a matter of opening the door. Thus

we are prepared when the slave looks in the door at line 78 to see what

his master is doing only to find him raised in the air on the beetle,

over the house. Soph. Ag . is another example of how an imminent appear-

ance at or near the central door is prepared for or made plausible,

given the limitations of the skene which is basically a facade with

little interior space. The audience hears Ajax groaning from within

and Tecmessa and the chorus commenting from outside just before Ajax

is revealed at the central opening sitting among the sheep.

Also within the slave's narrative, vs. 72f., we hear that

the master "went out yesterday, gone to hell, I don't know where, and

brought home [eiariyccf' ] a giant Aetnaean1 beetle, and then forced me

to groom it like a horse." At vs. 78 the slave interrupts himself to

stoop and peep in to see what his master is doing. The slave earlier

drew our attention to the central door and house at vs. 29f., where

he interrupted himself to say he would open part of the door and look

carefully2 to see whether the beetle had finished eating. All these

actions and descriptions focus attention on the central portion of the

1
For the fullest account of the evidence for the meaning of
Aetnaean beetle see E. Fraenkel, Beobachtungen zu Aristophanes (Rome,
1962), pp. 53-57. In addition to the literary sources there is the
famous tetradrachmon from Aetna dated about 470-460 B.C. which has a
beetle in the exergue (C. Seltman, A Book of Greek Coins2 [London,
1955], pi. 25).
2
aK&poyax, implying a lengthy or careful examination, in con-
trast to btyoyax, Pa. 78, where the action is a brief one. The slave
at Pa. 29f. clearly remains peering through the door as he describes
the beetle's eating-habits. For OKETTXEOOax, cf. Eq. 419 where the
Sausage-seller describes how as a young man he told the cooks to "look
carefully, lads," and while they scanned the heavens for signs of
spring he stole a piece of their meat.
 76

skene. When the slave at vs. 78 looks inside the door to see what

his master is doing, there is a frank acceptance of convention: there

is no reason, realistically speaking, why Trygaios should be assumed

to be just inside the door and visible to the slave if he is "at home,"

just as there is no reason for the beetle to be right behind the door

at the beginning of the play and able to receive cakes directly from

one of the slaves or to be observed by the slave at vs. 29f. when he

peeps through the door.

Pa. 78f.
When the servant at vs. 78 peeps into the house he is surprised

to find the master suspended in the air riding horse-fashion on the

beetle. Commentators agree that Trygaios and the large wooden beetle

are suspended aloft by means of the mechane, and that the whole scene

is a parody of the flight of Bellerophon on Pegasus in Euripides'

play Bellerophon. The comparison with Pegasus is made explicit in

vs. 76, whatever the exact reading of the line (Schol. Rav. says it

is a quotation from the Bell.). Pegasus is there called Y^vvatov

irxspdv, a tragic phrase from the Bell, (so Schol. Rav.) which antici-

pates the slave's appropriately paratragic reaction, at line 79, ofyox

xdXas, to the sight of Trygaios hoisted aloft in the style of a tragic

hero, and the basically tragic phraseology of Trygaios* initial ana-

pests vs. 82f.1 Anapests themselves are appropriate to address to a

x
The phraseology is tragic except for the surprise KavOwv at
the end of vs. 82 and the deliberately and comically prosaic lines 87-
89. Trygaios in general shows a propensity for mixing tragic and
"rustic" language (cf. vs. 58-59 and 62-63), which is parallel to the
incongruity of a dung-beetle qua Pegasus. For an analysis of the tragic
diction (and the extent of the parody) in this scene, see P. Rau, Para-
tragoedia, Zetemata 45 (Munich, 1967), pp. 89f.
 77

"Pegasus" who is flying or about to fly; the anapests are resumed by

Trygaios, beginning with a quotation from the Bell., when he wishes

his mount to "launch himself boldly from the earth" at vs. 154f. It

is certain that Bellerophon in Euripides* play was actually shown fly-

ing (see fragm. 306-8, Nauck2, and Pi. I.7.44f). It is probable that

in Euripides' play Bellerophon went into the house to fetch Pegasus

after his conversation with Iobates and then departed from the house

by means of the crane.1

There is some question about the exact manner of the beetle's

appearance at vs. 79f. and the extent and duration of its flight.

Schol. Ven. Pa. 82: npdya KavOwv imagines Trygaios saying lines 82f.

from inside the house, already mounted on the beetle and raised aloft.

Rogers' view of the action here is similar: "The servant throws open

the doors and Trygaios is discovered sitting astride the beetle, which

is just preparing to fly." It is best, however, to imagine the beetle

as being hoisted through the roof of the house and being swung over

the roof, as A. M. Dale argues.2

yEXEwpos axpExax in line 80 is significant. Lines 80 and 81

are enjambed but the hiatus at the end of vs. 80 gives the line a full

stop; the phrase is thus set off metrically by the caesura and verse-end,

doubtless for emphasis. Does the phrase mean "is raised aloft" or "is

being raised aloft"? The latter and strict meaning is to be preferred

in view of the occurrence of the phrase Spas y£X£*wpov, "having raised

(him) aloft," at Eq. 1362. Further, Neil may be right in maintaining

1
Webster, Euripides, p. 109, n. 115. Cf. Hourmouziades, Pro-
duction and Imagination, pp. 151f.
2
Collected Papers, p. 117.
 78

in his note on Eq. 1362 that yEXEwpos afpsxax refers to the hoisting

of slaves or criminals for punishment and that this is part of the fun

at Pa. 80. (Among several parallels he claims the frequent rapio

sublimem in Plautus is a translation.)

The sense of Trygaios' initial anapests vs. 82f. is that he

is already trying to "rein in" his mount and thus that he is worried

about the precariousness of his position. The movement of the crane

is rough. This idea would hardly be appropriate if the beetle were

still inside the house. The slave after stooping to look into the

house suddenly looks up to see his master suspended in the air over the

roof. In calling for the neighbors at vs. 79, he is certainly no

longer looking through the door.

The evidence of other plays indicates that a partial roof was

a permanent feature of the scene-building. There was a need for a

flat area to support no more than two or three persons and the need for

easy access between this roof and the interior, by means of a ladder

or ladders located inside the building.1 There was, therefore, a space

between the roof located toward the front of the central stage-building

x
See Dale's discussion of Ar. V. 136-210, JHS LXXVII (1957),
205-11 (= Collected Papers, 103-18). Bdelycleon, who has been asleep
on the roof at the beginning of the play, calls to one of the slaves to
"run around here quick; my father has got into the kitchen and is scurry-
ing around like a mouse inside; see that he doesn't get out through the
waste-hole." This slave disappears round the side of the house, to
take up position as Philocleon inside, while the other slave is told
to keep pushing against the door. Bdelycleon says, "I'll be down there
in a minute myself," and thereupon must disappear down the back of the
roof, using a ladder as required on occasion by tragedy (Ag., P.V.,
Psychostasia, H.F., Or., Phoen.). Cf. Hourmouziades, Production and
Imagination, pp. 29-33, for the roof in Euripides. The movement up to
or down from the roof is always inside the house.
 79

and the back wall, and it is through this space that the mechane hoists

the beetle and rider.

The schol. Ven. Pa. 80 says the mechane is called EfiSpnya

( = axaipnya, Duebner). EV auxf} SE Kaxftyov xoOs 0 E O O S KOX xoOs EV a^px

XaXoOvxas. Ecopriya (or axuipriya) does not seem to be a separate machine

but another term for the machine of both comedy and tragedy, judging

from the scholiast's explanation. What other evidence is there that

the machine used in comedy is the same as that in tragedy? Pollux

V.128 lists a Kp&6r) (literally, the "fig-branch") as the hook1 from

which the actors in tragedy made their appearance (see Pickard-

Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, p. 127, for supporting references).

The word, however, sounds like a quotation from some lost comedy, a

guess recently confirmed.by the discovery of a papyrus commentary

on Kratinos' Seriphioi (P. Oxy. 2742, second century A.D.), a play

which evidently parodied Perseus* arrival on the mechane in Euripides'

Diktys. A word-list of this sort can be paralleled in Alexandrian

times. It is a list of the Old Comedy plays which employed the krade.

While one notes with chagrin Pollux's failure to mention comic actors

in his definition of the krade, it is nevertheless clear that his

sources are word-lists such as this one which ultimately go back to

Alexandrian times, and that his interest is philological and not

archaeological, as van Gerkan has demonstrated without the benefit of

this new papyrus. It is therefore likely that there were a variety of

terms used in comedy to describe the machine (e.g., mechane, geranos,

1
aYKUpx*s, also called otpTra?.
 80

eorema, krade) which, however, referred to only one machine. It is

a priori likely that comedy would employ the same machine to parody

its use in tragedy, as in the case of the Peace and the Seriphioi.

The parody would be achieved by rough movements of the crane emphasiz-

ing its use and its innate awkwardness, both of which tragedy would

attempt to conceal.

The word mechane is attested for the fifth century in the com-

pound ynxawrcno's found at Pa. 174 and Ar. fragm. 88 (from the

Daedalus). The word loSpriya perhaps has its origin in such passages

as Eur. Hel. 353, where it means "hanging cord" or "noose," and Or.

984, meaning "hanging slings" or "chains." The comic possibilities of

"noose" are endless (cf. Neil's interpretation of ysxEWpos ax"p£xax

given above).

Platnauer, commenting on Trygaios being hoisted aloft by means

of a crane, thinks Trygaios, seated on the beetle, appears at line 82

above the "stable wall." He places a low wooden wall (see his p. xii)

next to the house of Trygaios and furnishes it with a practicable

door.1 The low wooden wall, however, would not hide the beetle with

Trygaios seated upon it from the upper seats in the auditorium and

would thus spoil the surprise of vs. 82f. Droysen2 has a similar sug-

gestion. He postulates a separate pen for the beetle, a "hog's pen,"

which is again a wall on the edge of which Trygaios and the beetle

are supported when they first appear. But the idea of a separate pen

1
Cf. Jobst, SAAW, p. 148, who puts the beetle's pen and
Trygaios' house on either side of a central cave.
2
Quaest. de Ar. re scaen. (doctoral dissertation, Bonn, 1868),
pp. 48ff.
 81

for the beetle, a "hog's pen," is against the sense of vs. 74f. where

the slave explains that his master has forced him to groom the beetle

like a horse and in general to treat it as if it were a "Pegasus."

One does not put a Pegasus in a hog's pen. The slave has said that

his master just "brought home" the beetle. The expression is conversa-

tionally vague but corresponds to a real life situation, i.e., that

one stabled one's horse in one's house.

Archaeology has revealed several kinds of domestic Greek archi-

tecture, yet in the more spacious varieties the stables are part of the

interior of the house. Vitruvius in a famous passage describes the

Greek house (VI.7) as including ex una parte equilia (Joe; aequalia H)

ex altera ostiariis cellas. It must be admitted that his "Greek house

represents a degree of elaboration and luxury which very few Hellenic

or even Hellenistic houses can have attained."1 Archaeological investi-

gation of Olynthus has uncovered houses of the fifth-fourth centuries,2

of which one type, characterized by the pastas, had a narrow paved room

which may have been a stable. This type of house is found also at

Delos, which makes it more likely to have existed at Athens. Rulers'

X
R. E. Wycherley, How the Greeks Built Cities2 (London, 1962),
p. 221, where see bibliography on the Greek house. A. Rumpf, Jahr. I
(1935), If., finds an example of a Vitruvian-type house in the House of
the Masks at Delos.
2
D. M. Robinson, Excavations at Olynthus (8 vols.; Baltimore,
1929-46), VIII, by D. M. Robinson and J. W. Graham. See also Robinson
in Pauly-Wissowa, Suppl. vii (1938), col. 223f.; L. B. Holland, Hesperia
XIII (1944), 91f.,on the houses at Colophon; ancient accounts of well-
furnished country houses in Th. 2.65.2 and Isoc. Areop. 52. The
Athenian houses of the fifth-fourth centuries do not fit neatly into
the categories formulated by J. W. Graham in Phoenix XX (1966), 3f.
(H. Thompson and R. E. Wycherley, The Agora of Athens, Amer. School of
Class. Studies at Athens, XIV [Princeton, 1972], 180.)
 82

houses built round courtyards and incorporating megara have been dis-

covered at Larisa in Aeolis and Vouni in Cyprus, dating to the archaic

and classical periods. They are thought to have had stables adjacent

to the courtyard. In the fourth-century houses found at Colophon,

store-rooms and stables occupied the sides of the court. It seems then

that the houses of both wealthy rulers and ordinary people had stables

within them.

Several passages in tragedy refer to the imagined lay-out of

the interior of the building behind the skene. In Helen 1180, which

we discussed in the Introduction, when Theoclymenos says ya\&Te

KXf|0pa he means the ordinary outer doors, and the audience is to assume

that the horse-chariot which he orders out is to come from the stables

located somewhere in the courtyard. Similarly, in the Bacchae, Diony-

sos is led away to the side to be imprisoned in the "nearby xmrxKat

<f>dxvax,Ml yet when he reappears to the announcement that he is wrecking

the palace he appears at the central door. The possible incongruity is

ignored. Dionysos' description vs. 616f. of his escape from the

stables implies that the latter are part of the palace precinct.2

We have no surviving elaborate descriptions of the interior of

a house in comedy, and this is perhaps significant; that is, the

convention of representing a house by a rather shallow building with

x
For mangers as stables, cf. Hipp. 1240, where the messenger
describes Hippolytos as crying out to his horses, "Stand, 0 horses
reared at my mangers [<J>6Vrvaxax]"; the phrase xinrxKa (jxSxvris, Hel.
1180-81.
2
Dale, Collected Papers, p. 126. Cf. Hourmouziades, Production
and Imagination, pp. 83-92.
 83

large central door is there more frankly accepted than in tragedy. Thus

Trygaios' beetle seems ready to burst out of the house at any minute,

despite the fact that he is supposed to be in the stables (this is one

of the effects resulting from the slave peeping into the house and not

wanting to be seen). The humor of this effect is obviously destroyed

by a representation of a pen outside of the house. SxaKtiiJjas in Pa.

78 cannot be used, pace Merry and others, as evidence for a low door

or low wall with practicable door behind which is the beetle. The

notion of stooping expresses the idea of peeking in surreptitiously.

At Pa. 79 the slave calls for the neighbors to come. We need

not suppose that any "neighbors" actually come running or that we need

side doors to represent the neighbors' houses. At Nub. 1322

Strepsiades calls for his neighbors, relations, and even members of

his deme (Cf. Ecc. 1115, Praxagora's maid addresses the chorus as

neighbors and fellow-demesmen). Dover ad loo. points to Dem. I.xxii.lO

as showing the fact that they can all be supposed to be within earshot

and that the situation is a real-life one. Similarly, Pa. 79 is an

indication of Trygaios' country surroundings as they would be in real

life, not as they are actually represented on the stage.

The "system" of anapestic dimeters begun vs. 82 continues until

vs. 101. Does Trygaios keep flying during all this time? At vs. 92

the slave asks his master: "Why then yEXEwpoKOTTEts?" ("are you beat-

ing the air?"). Schol. Rav. explains yEXEwpoKOirefs as Trspx" xa yExfeupa

•n€xn Kat ydxnv Kax* aisfexuxsKdyvsxs and identifies it as a metaphor from

rowing. Platnauer compares similar KOTfEXV-compounds at Ar. Eq. 830 and

S. Ag. 236. The word may also mean "beat the air metaphorically"
 84

("waste one's efforts on wild and futile schemes," Platnauer). Yet

there should be no doubt that there is a visual counterpart to this

joke, i.e., that the beetle appears to be rowing through the air.

This would be represented by the legs on each side being operated as

a unit by means of the pulleys. Cf. the joke at vs. 142-43 where the

beetle is compared to a "Naxian kantharos," kantharos being both a

beetle and a famous type of Naxian ship. The idea of beating the air

in vain was expressed visually, that is, the beetle was otherwise

motionless except for the rhythmical moving back and forth of his legs.

Thus Trygaios and the beetle are probably in motion vs. 82-89 but

stationary except for the "futile" movement of the beetle's legs dur-

ing the dialogue between Trygaios and his slave at vs. 90-101.

A final bit of evidence that Trygaios and the beetle are

indeed aloft and not just supported on the edge of a wall are the

fourth-century references to the use of the machine, collected by

Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 148-49. They have in

common the idea of figures being lifted up (note the striking recur-

rence of axpsxv) and being suspended in the air. If the normal appear-

ance of a tragic actor by means of the machine presents a figure

speaking while suspended in the air, one would expect a parody of such

an appearance, i.e., Trygaios in the Peace, to present the actor speak-

ing or singing his lines while suspended in the air.

Pa. 102 f.

The dialogue between the slave and his master changes from

paratragic anapests to iambics. The reason is not necessarily because

the beetle's smooth rise since vs. 82 comes to an end, as Platenaur thinks,
 85

but because the iambic trimeters are appropriate to the colloquial

tone of the conversation from this point on. Trygaios gives char-

acteristically offhand answers to the slave's urgent questions in this

section, and the slave becomes extremely bold, as when he asserts, for

example, at vs. 102 that he will not keep quiet as previously requested

(see vs. 96-101) unless Trygaios tells him where he is intending to fly.

Trygaios answers casually, "Where else, except to visit Zeus in heaven?"

Trygaios appears to strike a Panhellenic note at vs. 105-6 (cf. pre-

viously vs. 93-94) in answer to the question what his purpose is by

replying that he will ask Zeus what he intends to do about the Greeks,

each and every one of them. The slave then asks, "And what if he won't

tell you plainly?" Trygaios replies, "I shall indict him for betraying

Greece to the Mede." The admirable Panhellenic sentiment of vs. 105-6

turns comically to an expression of hybris under the slave's continued

questioning. The slave at this point makes a very bold statement: "By

Dionysos, never while I'm alive!"

The schol. Ven. Pa. 109 understands here OUXE iropEtiap O U X E

Ypdi|fli t$vxos Eyou. Sharpley and Platnauer, however, understand only

TTExnaEX. The latter commentators are certainly right in understanding

that the slave does not want his master to fly off. This is clear from

the next line, in which Trygaios casually answers, "There is no other

way but this," meaning that of course he is going to fly to Zeus, and

from vs. llOf. where the slave calls out Trygaios' children to stop

him from going away. But it also is logical to assume that Trygaios'

answer at vs. 107-8 motivates the slave's desperate oath. The point

of vs. 107-8 is that Trygaios' promise to indict Zeus expresses the

 86

height of "madness" which the slave obviously feels is serious enough

to call for a bold response. The scholiast is right therefore in the

sense that the idea of indicting Zeus is also present in the slave's

mind.

The commentators on vs. 107-8 have given over-ingenious inter-

pretations, searching for material outside the context of the lines,

and consequently missing the main point. Paley follows Rogers in

commenting on vs. 108: "This, while given as a specimen of Trygaios'

madness, is a satire on the foolish panic that was so prevalent in

Athens at the time, in consequence of real or supposed Spartan negotia-

tions with Persia. Compare Vesp. 9." Th. IV.50, referring to the

winter of 425, is adduced in support of this improbable view. The

schol. Pa. 107-8 adds to the confusion by seeing a hit here at the

Athenians as <}>xXd5xK0X. He is followed by Bergler, Rogers, and

Sharpley. Paley, commenting on the otixs YP&IJ(1 portion of the scholium

to Pa. 109 suggests further that the slave's reply means that he "is

a secret friend of the Medizing party, and will not have their designs

thwarted if he can help it." All of these comments ignore the con-

trast between vs. 105-6 and 107-8, and the contrast between the para-

tragic anapests and the "rustic" iambics. Much of what is said by

Trygaios in vs. 90-101 is repeated in vs. 102-8, such as Trygaios'

Panhellenic ambitions, but now in the iambic section the true propor-

tions of Trygaios' madness become clear, for comic effect of course.

The threat to indict Zeus represents the climax of this gradually

developing idea.
 87

It is not necessary to suppose with some commentators that

Trygaios must be within reach of the slave as evidenced by his oath

at vs. 109. Platnauer, for example, says "The slave may here attempt

to drag his master off the beetle's back." First, we have argued

above that the sense of the words vs. 78f. is that Trygaios is sus-

pended at a fairly good height above the stage. Secondly, Trygaios'

casual response to the slave's oath does not indicate he is about to

be dragged off his beetle. The futility of the slave's effort to

prevent his master from leaving is better presented if there is no

chance of the slave physically preventing him from leaving.

No commentator to my knowledge has commented on the slave

swearing by Dionysos in vs. 109. The heightened emotion of lines

107-9 makes it unlikely that the oath is without point. The oath is

not especially appropriate to a slave but is to the actor who here

half steps out of his role to swear by his patron god. In being made

aware for a moment of the actor qua actor we may also think of the

poet and his allegiance to Dionysos. I think the oath to Dionysos

here is a half-humorous keynote suggesting the Dionysiac-Peace imagery

of the play, just as at Ran. 42 the oath by Demeter sworn by Herakles,

which is also the first oath in the play except for the common appeal

to Zeus, anticipates the scene with the Initiates, etc.1 The context

of the oath is important. The oath by Dionysos follows Trygaios'

aggressive threat, just as at vs. 1277 Trygaios* oath by Dionysos

follows the boy's "warlike" Homeric hexameters. In the case of

1
See Rogers' note on Ran. 42 for this interpretation of the
oath at Ran. 42.
 88

vs. 1277, the actor is also stepping out of his dramatic role to speak

on behalf of the poet.

Pa. 114-48

The slave, having failed on his own to stop his master from

attempting to fly to heaven, cries for the children of Trygaios to

come out and entreat their father not to leave. At vs. 114 the

children come out through the door, while the slave leaves, probably

to the side or else stands at their side until they all exit vs. 148.

The slave does not appear again until vs. 824, which is after the

parabasis. The actor is needed for the Polemos-Kudoimos scene in

which two actors are required in addition to Trygaios, who is already

on the stage.1
A

The slave in ending his supplication of the children with ui

KaKofiafyova emphasizes the humorous, bathetic quality of this scene

(cf. also his cry, xoi) toO xod, at vs. 110 and for a close parallel
A

to vs. 113 Trygaios addressing the son of Lamachus at vs. 1271 as a)

xpxoKaKdfiaxyov). The slave describes in an exaggerated way in vs.

111-12 the father's action as abandoning his children. Metrically,

vs. 113 anticipates the children's paratragic dactyls vs. 114f. Still

technically an iambic trimeter like the preceding verses, it neverthe-

less contains three and possibly four audible dactyls, scanning - -uu-u/

-uu//-uu-u u. It serves almost as an actor's "cue."

!
I do not agree with Pickard-Cambridge, Dramatic Festivals2,
p. 151, that the part of Slave I and Trygaios were taken by the same
actor or with the division of parts which thus results. There is
usually one part longer than the rest in Aristophanes' plays—the
part of the "hero," which thus should be reserved for the irpwxaYwvxaxfis.
 89

The children begin their entreaty of their father with a per-

verted quotation of Euripides' Aeolus (fragm. 17, Nauck 2 ), of which

A

the original seems to have run, according to schol. Rav., ap' E"XUUOV

(fjdxxv EYVWV./AX'OXE, O' Euvd^sxv XE*KVa (fjfXxaxa;. The situation of fragm.

17 of the Aeolus is a pathetic one, suitably parodied here. The

chorus of maidens ask Aeolus, "Is it true, Aeolus, that you are going

to marry off [£Ovd?EXV, which has the literal meaning "put to sleep"

and thus strikes an ominous note] your children?"1 Platnauer surely

demands too much of the audience in expecting them to understand

EOvdgEXV in the parody in the Peace and arguing that thus the children

regard their father's desertion as tantamount to their own death.

Schol. Pa. 114 regards the children as a irapaxopffYriua, or

extra provision by the choregos.2 This is a plausible assumption but

it does not solve the problem of how many children sing the dactyls

vs. 114f. or who really sings these lines. Dindorf sensibly comments

on these lines, "manifestum est plures hie in scaenam productas esse

The fragment has generally been regarded as coming from the

parodos,
2
There is no fifth-century authority for the term; it appears
in only four scholia and a confused and probably corrupt passage of
Pollux (see Pickard-Cambridge, Dramatic Festivals, p. 137, n. 3 ) .
But there is certainly evidence for the practice itself: cf. the
Megarian's daughters in the Ach. The scholiast's attribution of- a para-
choregema may be mistaken, as schol. Ran. 209, who says the chorus of
frogs is a paraohoregema which does not appear in the orchestra but
imitates frogs from inside; Sifakis, Parabasis and Animal Choruses
(London, 1971), pp. 94-96, has recently argued for their presence in
the orchestra and thus their identity with the later chorus of Initi-
ates, involving a mere change of costume. It is not clear from the
scholia what the relationship is between this extra provision and the
mutae personae who are a not infrequent phenomenon in the plays (e.g.,
Opora and Theoria in the Peace). For the history of the term para-
ohoregema, see Rees, CPh II (1907), 387f.
 90

puellas (vide 1.119), etsi una tantum loquitur." Most editors have

mistakenly assumed that this proves that one child sings the dactyls

vs. 114f. The evidence of the text is not explicit on the number of

children present on the stage. Vs. 112 has uyas spfiyous, a plural, but

vs. Ill irai6i" and vs. 119 Kdpax may be plural or dual vocatives. Vs.

116 has eiie, vs. 118 ys, but one can readily compare the convention of

the chorus as a group speaking in the first person singular. Platnauer

notes on vs. 137 y€X', &v (cf. the app. crit.), "y^Xs, like x&v, is an

indeclinable vocative, used in familiar address to both sexes. . . .

Scribes often write \iiXe for ysY, and it looks as though some MSS. had

MEAEAN which was taken by Ev as y£Xs"a and regarded as a feminine dual

of that adjective." He concludes that there is no reason to suppose

that the parachoregema numbered only two, but one could also conclude

that there is no reason why the children could not be two in number.

Euripides' practice of presenting children in his plays might

conceivably have some relevance to Pa. 114f. In four plays of Euripi-

des, brief singing parts are assigned to young children.1 A.fai.Dale,

introd. Alcestis, xixf., argues for an adult actor taking the part off

stage of the child in the Andromache, the actor of Peleus playing the

boy, and the child's part in the Alcestis being taken by the actor

playing the dead Alcestis whose head would be comfortably propped up

on the couch. She notes (ibid., 85) that at Ale. 393-415 as at Andr.

505f. "the child sings the sentiments its elders feel for it," which

suggests an actor actually taking the part. The difficulty of a sing-

ing part and the availability of an actor are perhaps the determining

x
See Pickard-Cambridge, Dramatic Festivals, p. 144, for these
passages.
 91

factors in Euripides' employment of this device. In the case of Peace

we also have a free actor, the one who formerly played Slave I and

who is free until he appears as Hermes at vs. 180f. and then probably

as Kudoimos in vs. 255f.

The boys who later play the parts of the sons of Lamachus and

Cleonymous at Pa. 1270f., however, probably play the part of the

children here.1 Whereas Euripides may wish to have a professional

actor take the part of a child for the sake of the music and the

poetry, Aristophanes would not wish to conceal the humor of the boys

playing the part of the daughters of Trygaios, who would wear the

proper masks and clothing which yet would emphasize the incongruity.

If boys can chant Homeric hexameters they can certainly chant these

lines. Further, the parody of the maiden chorus in Aeolus is clearer

if the children chant in unison.

The meter shifts at vs. 118 from dactylic tetrameters, the

meter of the Aeolus parody, to dactylic hexameters. Trygaios answers

the children in five lines of hexameters. Dale, The Lyric Metres of

Greek Drama2- (Cambridge, 1968), p. 27, calls lys / Is in vs. 116 "a

case of hiatus at colon-end without period close . . . the lines thus

divide into two dissimilar pairs of lyric tetrameters, rounded off

into a major period by the following hexameter." The meter changes

again, to tragic trimeters at vs. 124f., for the close dialogue

between Trygaios and his children. Lines 124-36 are continuously

paratragic until the final word of vs. 136, xpaYXKfiJXEpos, a

X
K. J. Dover, Aristophanic Comedy (London, 1972), p. 136.
 92

surprise.1 Lines 137-48 are a mixture of tragic and comic trimeters.

Trygaios' reply vs. 137-39 is in comic trimeters, fitting his "dis-

gusting" joke. The children resume in tragic trimeters vs. 140-41;

Trygaios answers in comic trimeters vs. 142-43, making a joke while

pointing to his phallos. The children sing one line of tragic trimeter;

Trygaios echoes them with one line of tragic trimeter, echoing them

specifically in the word Xxyftv. The children give their final advice

in tragic trimeters, vs. 146-48, which fittingly contains a reference

to providing Euripides with a logos ("plot") and to becoming a xpaY^)6fa.

Lines 124-48 illustrate the rapidity or "fluidity" of change from

tragic pathos to comic awareness of realities which is typical of the

comedy as a whole.

Pa. 154-79

Trygaios says farewell to his children, who exit at vs. 149.

He immediately turns to the audience and humorously forbids them

X
G. Dottin, Revue de Philologique (1901), Part IV., pp. 197f.
gives evidence which shows that xadxriv xftv bS6v in vs. 125 does not vio-
late tragic practice (i.e., "Porson's Law"). He considers the demonstra-
tive in this position to be "une composee syntactique." Sharpley's sug-
gestion of xfivSE for xaOxnv here is therefore unnecessary. The parody
in vs. 124-48 broadens to include some of Euripides' other tragic situ-
ations. Schol. Ven. Pa. 126 claims iTXTrvbs iropEtfasx comes from either
the Stheneboia or the Bellerophon; the former is more likely since
Stheneboia was ditched in the sea while Bellerophon fell in Lycia. Vs.
129-34 mock Aesop's fable of the eagle and the beetle. Vs. 135 is a
reference to the yoking of Pegasus (irxEpov as at vs. 76) and appearing
to the gods, i.e., the Bell. Schol. Ven. Pa. 140-41 thinks the idea of
falling into the sea either ridicules "the tragic poets on account of
what is said about Icarus" (Platnauer without warrant sees a reference
here to a play Icarus, for which there is no evidence; in any case this
guess of the scholiast is probably wrong in not involving a play speci-
fically of Euripides), or is a reference to the wife of Proitos being
hurled into the sea in the Stheneboia (see above on Pa. 126). Platnauer
incorrectly thinks here of Bell. The Stheneboia is the-correct reference.
Vs. 147 is a reference to Euripides as a xwXoiroxds (cf. Aoh. 411, Ran.
846, and the heroes Bellerophon, Philoctetes, Telephos).
 93

uiy 36EXXE yri^E yp^B' for three days so that the beetle will not "return

to pasturage" (3oUKoXria£xax) and throw him headlong down. "You, on

whose behalf I suffer these toils" is the audience conceived of as all

the Greeks, a Panhellenic note like that expressed paratragically in

vs. 93-94 but here mixed with ridicule. Trygaios' language here and

in the following lines is a mixture of Pegasus-imagery and references

to his dung-beetle such as to give the impression that he is riding a

beetle-horse, a hybrid, which is yet both horse and beetle. One

compares C. Whitman's study1 of Aristophanes' habit of creating

"grotesque" compounds of man and beast. A similar hybrid is the image

of the poet as bird in the Birds.2

At vs. 154f. Trygaios abruptly turns to urging on his mount,

the meter changing to anapestic dimeters as at vs. 82f. x(^P£'1 Xal*Pwv

Rogers translates as "merrily, cheerily," but Platnauer compares

Ran. 1500, Pluto's valediction to Aeschylus, 'dye Sri yaxprn, AXOXCXE,

XCOpEX. The words at vs. 154-55 are a quotation, in which the key adjec-

tive is transferred,of a line in the Bell., according to schol. Ven.

who gives the original line (see Platnauer's note). At vs. 157f.,

Aristophanes and the Comic Hero (Cambridge, Mass., 1964),

pp. 42-58, 106.
2
See D. J. Stewart, "The Poet as Bird in Aristophanes and Horace,"
CJ LXII, No. 1 (1966), 357-61, who notes striking resemblances between
the imagery of Birds and Hor. 11.20. He does not argue that Horace is
directly imitating Aristophanes but that both poets (Horace's biformis
vates) axe expressing the idea of man-plus-bird which is not the Ovidian
type of metamorphosis but is related to true myth (cf. Plato's chariot-
soul myth in the Phaedrus). There is of course a different emphasis in
the use of the myth by the different poets. In Horace's case there is
a certain embarrassment about the undertaking of the new and grander
topics of Book III and thus the biformis notion expresses perfectly his
ambiguous attitude toward the task.
 94

however, the hero turns to more prosaic thoughts concerning the beetle:

"Where are you turning your nostrils? Toward the latrines?" At vs.

164f. Trygaios rebukes an imaginary resident of the Peiraius for

"sabotaging" his flight. The alternation between tragic and prosaic

thoughts continues in the anapests until at vs. 173f. the meter

changes to the comic trimeter and Trygaios, "no longer joking,"

addresses the crane-operator himself. What are the actual movements

of the crane during this passage?

The movement of the crane is never smooth, as fitting the

parody of its movement in tragedy. The words of vs. 82f. do not imply

a very stable movement, as we have indicated. The machine probably

halts at vs. 90f. yet the illusion of flying is continued through the

movement of the beetle's legs. "The first part of the ascent [real

or pretended] is over at line 101" (Sharpley). The meter changes to

iambics at this point for the dialogue between Trygiaos and the slave.

The beetle and rider are suspended but do not find support during

these lines, 102-53. The focus is on the children and Trygaios from

vs. 114f., a dialogue scene in which the flight is still halted. The

children exeunt at vs. 149 and at vs. 154 Trygaios urges on his mount

in anapests, as at vs. 82f., employing language from the Bell. The

movement of the crane therefore begins again at this point.

Trygaios is now alone on the stage. The effect of this is to

cause the audience to forget the background building which has repre-

sented the house of Trygaios and to concentrate on Trygaios' flight

to heaven. The "scene change" is thus effected by focusing of the

audience's attention.
 95

Continuous movement is indicated in the next twenty-five lines.

If, as I think, the mechane is located in the central stage building,

the flight of the beetle is simply toward the left parodos and back.

The movement of the crane is particularly jerky in this section. Lines

157-58 indicate that the beetle's head can be manipulated, undoubtedly

causing greater instability in the beetle's movement. At vs. 159

Trygaios urges the beetle paratragically, "Launch yourself boldly from

the earth"; he wishes the beetle-steed to "run straight to the halls of

Zeus" (see Platnauer's note for this interpretation of 6p0bs E X S ad vs.

161, and cf. for the idea Pa. 68f., 77, 84). The movement of the crane

should be nearly the exact opposite of Trygaios' desire. The jokes at

vs. 157-58 and 164f. indicate that the beetle still "inclines" toward

the earth, while Trygaios' imagining that he can see a man defecating

in Peiraius seems to depend on the illusion of great height.1 The

crane, therefore, moves abruptly up and down, which leads to the joke

about the possible results of "turning" flatus in Trygaios's stomach at

vs. 173f.

For an explanation of the joke about the city of the Chians

paying a fine in the event of Trygaios* fall, see Platnauer*s note ad
Pa. 171. A more specific reference is possible rather than just the
general hostility to the Chians evidenced in the events narrated in
. 4.51. An inscription (IG, II 2 , 38.1-5) shows, according to
Wilhelm's restoration, that a fine of five talents was assessed any
allied city in which an Athenian citizen was killed. R. Meiggs (CR
[1949], p. 10) suggests there is a topical reference here to a "recent
case in which Chios was held responsible for an Athenian citizen's
death." Cf. the friendlier attitude toward the Chians evidenced in
Av. 880 (plus scholium quoting Theopompos, Eu; .lis, and others).
Chian(-Ionian) jokes in this play would form the subject of a separate
dissertation. Cf. Pa. 45-48, 929-33, 603, and Photius s.v. Xxir€pvnxES
(sio), 1176, and Hesychius s.v. KU£XKnvxKot, 835 (Ion of Chios).
 96

At vs. 173 the actor is concerned for himself—another instance

of an actor suddenly stepping out of-character—and appeals to the

crane-operator to pay attention. The text indicates a few line of

flight left, so it is probable that this appeal to the technician is a

"cue" for him to lower the beetle to the ground.1 Dale's argument about

the action of the chorus in pulling up Peace also shows that "heaven" is

really on ground level (or, strictly speaking, logeion level).

Trygaios at vs. 178 thinks he is "near the gods." Kat 6f|

KaOopffi xfiv 0XKX*av xfiv xoC Axds (vs. 179). Kat 6T\ combines the ideas of

connection and immediacy (Denniston, p. 249, who would put a colon or

full-stop before the particles and assume an asyndeton); the line is

thus emphatic but also ironic. In the following line he calls for the

porters in language which he thinks is appropriate to the palace of

Zeus (for E V Axbs Otfpaxaxv, cf. the phrase Axds sts auXds, vs. 161),

yet in the previous line he has called what he "spies" xfiv olKl*av xfiv

xoO Axds. The meter of the first half of vs. 179 is also tragic in

contrast to the more prosaic comic trimeter of vs. 178. The humor of

the passage is clear only if the "palace of Zeus" is the same as the

ordinary stage house of comedy, the house of Trygaios. One notes that

Trygaios cannot remain in a consistent paratragic pose even in vs. 179

as he brusquely asks for the doors to be opened.

Pa. 180-235

Trygaios probably knocks loudly at the door as he calls for

the opadoi in tragic language and meter at vs. 179. 2 There is no clear

hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 150.

2
For the customary loud knocking cf. Ach. 395, 403, Ran. 38-39,
et saep. The door is normally locked from inside (see P. 136-210),
 97

indication in the text where Trygaios dismounts or where the beetle

is withdrawn. The scholia do not comment on his having dismounted

until vs. 234, where Trygaios refers to "running off" to avoid Polemos,

which is the last possible moment for him to dismount. The scholia

thus have no special knowledge of the situation. Hermes' reaction to

the beetle and the joking involved in it are over by about vs. 190,

where Trygaios at last "formally" identifies himself, and Platnauer

plausibly suggests this is where the beetle is withdrawn. Trygaios

may have dismounted as soon as he knocked on the door. The actors

note only much later, at vs. 721f., that the beetle has been withdrawn.

In answer to Trygaios' call and knocking, Hermes surprisingly

enters through the door. The action centered on the door, Trygaios'

"running off" at vs. 232, and the rapid movement of the Polemos-

Kudoimos scene which follows, all indicate that the action of vs.

180f. takes place stage level and not on the roof. Further evidence

for this view is to be found in a survey of scenes in comedy and

tragedy where action on the roof has been postulated to take place.

Plat. Com. fragm. 112K mentions xb SxfipES OTTEpfJoov, and Pollux

IV. 129 gives a definition of n 6x0XEYX*a, which appear to provide evi-

dence for a second story to the stage building.1 Pollux' definition of

distegia, which employs examples from tragedy and comedy, equates it

with an upper story (6xfipss 6a)ydxxov) with tiled roof (K^payos), a<p'

which in the case of a "palace" makes a doorkeeper necessary. If a

character enters from one of the parodoi he of course merely calls
for the doors to be opened, as Theoclymenos at Hel. 1180.
x
See Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, pp. 54f., who
therefore thinks the house consisted of "a lower story with a flat
roof, upon which there was set a slightly smaller upper story."
 98

ou $dXXouax xui KEpdyw, and an opening through which Tropvo3oaKol* xx

KaxoirxEO*ouaxv fi YP&Sxa n ytfvaxa KaxagXSiTEX. Antigone watching the army

in the Phoenissae is his apparent example. Hourmouziades, however,

shows1 that despite the mention of a SxfipES soxaxov in vs; 90 no second

story is necessary. The Pedagogue, who appears on the roof after the

exit of locasta, first addresses Antigone who is still unseen. As soon

as he makes sure that nobody is around the palace he calls Antigone to

climb up. The elaborate description of the climbing suggests that it

takes place inside, by means of a ladder. At vs. 192 Antigone is fin-

ishing her prayer-song when she is interrupted by the Pedagogue, who

bids her "go into the house" because a mob of women are approaching the

house. The illusion of a room on the second floor is thus ignored.

The characters are merely standing on the roof. We want to be able

to see the Pedagogue describe to Antigone what is going on in the

Argive camp, not just see their two heads at a window.

Pollux' notice that in comedy prostitutes look down from the

second story has been taken as a reference to Eoal. Cf. Pickard-

Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, pp. 67f., who thinks "the Old Woman and

the Young Courtesan display themselves on the flat roof surrounding the

upper story."2 But Dover3 questions the assumption that the women in

Ecol. axe courtesans and not just ordinary people of modest means. He

points out that prostitutes soliciting would not be a reversal of the

hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 30f.

2
Pickard-Cambridge's view is based on that of E. Fraenkel,
"Dramaturgical Problems in the Ecalesiazusae," in Greek Poetry and Life:
Essays Presented to Gilbert Murray (London, 1936), pp. 255f.
3
PCPhS No. 192 (N.S. 12), 1966, pp. 14f.
 99

existing social order which is the point of the play. Secondly, Dale

argues that the two women are defying each other from window to window

and that the windows are located in the one house with the one door,

placed where the metopic band normally was in the tragic skene. She

thinks £*axr]Ka in vs. 879 shows that the actors were actually standing

on ladders.

Pollux' notice of a tiled roof suggests comparison with the

end of Clouds where at vs. 1485 Strepsiades calls to the slave to come

out with a ladder and mattock and dig up the roof of the phrontisterion,

and he himself runs up there with a lighted torch. The command to

"dig up the roof" at vs. 1488 strongly suggests a tiled roof. It is

unlikely, however, that a roof would actually be set afire in the

theater, so that the idea of a tiled roof may be only an illusion.

Socrates and the disciples appear at the windows screaming their pro-

test. Dale argues that since our attention is focused on the roof and

the windows, the upper part of the house momentarily represents the

phrontisterion and no thought is given to the inconsistency, from a

rationalist point of view, of the slave of Strepsiades coming out of

the door which formerly was the door of the phrontisterion.3

Pollux may possibly be thinking of Ach. when he speaks of

women looking down from the second story, of the passage where the

1
The two women looking down from windows on the Paestan kalyx-
krater from Lipari, ca. 360-350 B.C. (Lipari inv. 927, Lipari T 367)
are identified by their masks as a hetaira (XR) and kore (S) (IGD IV, 11).
2
Collected Papers, pp. HOf.
3
Dover, PCPhS, pp. 10f., has a different view of the end of
Clouds and the number of doors necessary for the play. On the number of
doors in Clouds see the Conclusion.
 100

mother watches the procession from the roof. But no second story with

windows is needed for this scene. Philocleon in the Wasps actually

gets out, or half out, of the window of his house, which shows that

the window or windows would not have been at a very great height.

A representation of a second story was thus occasionally necessary in

comedy. It consisted primarily of a representation of windows; the

actors appeared at these standing on ladders, so that they were not

at a strictly realistic height above the ground for a second story.

It, like the theologeion of tragedy discussed in the Introduction,1

was a simple and temporary construction which was to be used only when

the central stage building did not radically change its character dur-

ing the course of the play, as shown by Clouds, Wasps, and Ecclesiazu-

sae.2 That is, it was a construction which had to be put up before

the start of the play and could not be put up during it.

A number of scenes in tragedy require a flat place above the door

of the house on which figures can stand. The watchman at the beginning of

Ag. claims he is "lying on his elbows" on the roof. He is probably

merely leaning on the edge of the facjade representing the pediment of

the typical palace front. Though naturally he would be lying on the

tiles of a pitched roof, the pitched roof could not have extended the

x
k theologeion is necessary for the weighing of the souls in
the Psychostasia and the arrival of Apollo in Orestes. See Hourmouzi-
ades, Production and Imagination, pp. 30, 33-34, and Appendix II, pp.
146-69. The "weighing of souls" could only take place somewhere
unrelated to the acting area, in the territory of the gods, so that we
need a high platform for such scenes. He suggests a wooden super-
structure screens the lifting up and revealing of Apollo on a level
higher than the three persons on the roof.
2
The house in Eoclesiazusae changes ownership during the course
of the play but always remains a private house or houses.
 101

full depth of the roof area since there would have been no place for

figures to stand. K. Reinhardt1 has shown that Prometheus in the

P.V. must be in front of the skene, not on the roof, and that the

chorus of Oceanids must appear from behind him, that is, out of the

skene and not on or over the roof, since the text clearly indicates

that Prometheus cannot see them. In the Psychostasia the roof sup-

ported a theologeion which in turn supported the figure of Zeus weigh-

ing the souls of Achilles and Memnon, flanked on either side by the

figures of Eos and Thetis. In the Hercules Furens Iris and Lyssa

arrive together in the chariot, by means of the mechane. Lyssa

alights on the roof and departs by plunging into the house (by means

of a ladder) while Iris must leave by a different route and thus in

the chariot.2

The scene of the entrance of the Phrygian messenger in the

Orestes (vs. 1366f.) has been explained by Dale3 not as involving an

"acrobatic" entrance "over the balconies and Doric triglyphs" of the

facade of the palace (i.e., over the top of the skene) but as an

explanation of the imagined interior scene. The chorus indicate in a

typical way that the character is coming out of the central door: they

note the noise of the attempt to unlock the door and thus ask for

silence, announcing that one of the Phrygian slaves is coming out.

The slave, once in front of the palace, describes his escape out of

the interior apartments while the attempt to kill Helen was in progress.

1
Aischylos als Regisseur und Theologe, 1949, pp. 77f.
2
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 162
3
Colleoted Papers, pp. 126-27.
 102

The Orestes does have a scene on the roof. At the end of the

play Orestes appears on the roof of the palace with his co-conspirator

Pylades, who holds torches in hand, ready to set fire to the cornices

of the palace. Orestes holds a knife to the throat of his captive

Hermione. Thus there are three people on the roof. Electra is inside,

ready to set fire to the palace from below.1 Menelaos rages below

before the palace gates.

In none of the scenes of tragedy or comedy which employ the

roof or the theologeion atop the roof is there any mention of the use

of a door or of a separate house on the second level, or of any real

action, action involving movement, on the roof. Since the Hermes-

Trygaios scene and particularly the following Polemos-Kudoimos scene

involve rapid movement and several exits and entrances, it is thus

probable that Pa. 180f. was not played on the roof of the house, or

before any representation on a second level of the house of Zeus.

Jobst2 has recently revived the theory of R. C. Flickinger3

that the action of Pa. 280f. takes place "im Oberstock."1* He imagines

the fagade of Zeus' palace as easily represented on this higher level

with the aid of skenographia. It must be objected to this theory that

the representation of such a structure over the house of Trygaios on

the ground level would seem implausible to the audience at the beginning

1
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, p. 30.
2
SAAW, p. 148.
3
The Staging of Aristophanes' Pax: Melanges offerts a M. 0.
Navarre (Toulouse, 1935), pp. 191f.
**The scholiasts Ven. Pa. 180 and 727 also think there is a
second story for the house of Zeus.
 103

of the play, when it is not needed, and would need explanation by a

prologue speaker. Secondly, we have indicated^that a palace facade

with door on the second level is not needed for any other scenes taking

place on the roof. Thirdly, the action of Pa. 280f. makes it plausible

that it took place on the ground level.

The appearance of Hermes as the gatekeeper is somewhat of a

surprise, though Trygaios' arrival on the beetle is more of a surprise

to him and is the initial emphasis of the scene. A comparison of simi-

lar scenes in Aristophanes where the gatekeeper or doorkeeper first

appears shows that the appearance is usually a surprise, a sort of

stock joke. At Av. 60, for example, the xpoxx*Xos appears in answer

to the call for the Stroiji. Bird and man are equally terrified of one

another. At Ran. 35 Dionysos indicates that after tramping for so long

he is finally near the portal where he can turn in, and yells for the

doorkeeper (iraxfifov). Out comes Herakles, who asks in a threatening

manner, "Who banged the door?", and then more humorously, "How like a

centaur he drove against it, whoever he is!" At Ran. 464 it is pos-

sible that Aiakos answers the door in response to the irat irat. His

abusive language in vs. 465-66 is similar to that of Hermes in Pa.

182-83. Aiakos, the grandfather of Achilles and Ajax, the great

Aeginetan hero who Apollo prophesied would take the city of Troy (cf.

Pi. 0. 31-46), who is associated with Minos and Rhadymanthus as judges

of the dead (cf. PI. Gorg. 524A), is here comically demoted to a door-

keeper. It must be noted that the identity of the doorkeeper is not

always certain. In the Ravennas MS of Ran. the character who appears

at vs. 464 is called Aiakos but the Venetus has only THEPA for ©Epdirwv,
 104

"slave." The scholia refer to the character only as "one of those in

the underworld." Cf. at vs. 605: the MSS RV think Aiakos arrives

here, but the scholia offer two alternatives. At Ach. 395 the iden-

tity of the person answering "Euripides'" door is given by the schol.

Rav. as Kephisophon, by the MS R only as 0 E (pairtov) . The student who

answers the door of the phrontisterion in answer to Strepsiades' call

for the irax6x*ov at Nub. 132 may be the famous student of Socrates,

Chairephon, but this is not certain.1

How then is Hermes identified as the one who answers the door

at Pa. 180? He is not specifically addressed as Hermes but the joke

at vs. 192f. makes it clear who he is. There, in answer to the ques-

tion, "Why have you come?", Trygaios offers him some meat (xocuxx* in

the text) which suddenly converts him from hostility to fawning

cooperation. The scholiast ad Pa. 402, where there is a joke about

thieves, reminds us that Hermes was the patron god of thieves and

Pi. 1125f. plays on the common conception of Hermes as a glutton and

A

thief.2 Hermes calls Trygaios at vs. 193 u) 6EXXOKPX*(J0V, which Hesychius

and the scholiast note is a pun on Kp^a. Trygaios in turn calls Hermes
A
w yWayjim), "0 greedy one." Thus Hermes is identified by a well-known

Dover, introd. Nub. p. xcx, notes that Chairephon has a hidden

role in the preserved play and that Nub. 1465, in particular, suggests
Chairephon was a character in the first version of the play, as
Socrates' equal. For other possibly surprise appearances at the door,
cf. Eq. 725f., the appearance of Demos; Rogers comments that "hence-
forth the Demus in the auditorium contemplates itself as Demus on the
stage"; Th. 36f., Agathon's servant prepares to sacrifice; Pi. 1097f.,
Hermes hides at the entrance of Cario; and see the article in Pauly-
Wissowa on Janitor.
2
Cf. the joke at Pa. 924b. I think, pace Platnauer, that the
participle y£ycj)dy£VOV is the middle and not the passive, meaning
"grumbling at," a joke on Hermes' gluttony.
 105

characteristic. It is probable that Hermes was identifiable by his

typical attributes, the petasos and caduoeus; perhaps he wore the

"ph x" costume of the Hermes on the Attic red-figured kalyx-krater

dated soon after 400 B.C. (IGD IV, 19).

The comic costume is more appropriate to a Hermes who has

been "domesticated" in being made the doorman of Zeus. The verbal

identification of Hermes appears to be done in a leisurely way, the

initial emphasis being on the beetle and Trygaios. One notes in Ran.

that Dionysos encounters Herakles at the door at vs. 35 but does not

bother to explain his mission until vs. 68f., namely, that he has a

"craving" to go to Hades and find Euripides. The opportunity is used

for much comic banter. Herakles' initial antagonism to the intruder

is dissolved in a manner similar to the conversion of Hermes when

Herakles actually breaks into laughter at the sight of Dionysos

dressed up as himself.2

The initial surprise of Hermes answering the door is turned to

further comic account in vs. 200-2. There Hermes is asked why he alone

has been left behind while the gods "went out," and he replies that he

has been left to watch their OKEUdpxa . . . xUTP^xa Kat aavfSxa/

x
Cf. Whitman, Aristophanes, pp. 114-15: "Hermes seems to have
been chosen for a reason; for the recovery of Peace is a theft, and
Hermes is a god of thieves."
2
The scholia ad Ran. 467, 470, 473, and 475 raise the possibil-
ity that the hostile gatekeeper scene may be borrowed from tragedy.
They think the appearance of Herakles is a parody of Euripides' Theseus,
where Minos is threatened by Theseus, but this view is opposed by Rau,
Paratragoedia, pp. 115f. for lack of verbal parallels. Wilamovitz,
Kl. Sohr. I, 19, earlier removed from the Theseus 383-84N2 containing
the threats of an underworld official to an intruder, Theseus, arguing
that the scholiasts mistakenly identified the former as Minos.
 106

Kay(j>op£X*Sxa. The rhyming diminutives emphasize the way comedy con-

cretizes the roles of its characters, reducing Hermes here to a

domestic, and also prepares in this play for the following scene in

which the dread Polemos appears as a cook ready to pound up the

"cities" in a mortar.

The varying characterizations of Hermes both popular and

literary are used as a means of unifying the play. Hermes, commonly

the messenger and servant of the gods and particularly of Zeus, is

here reduced to a doorkeeper. Hermes as doorkeeper is humorously

suggested at Pi. 1153 where he is hoping to gain admittance to the

house of Chremylus by virtue of one of his special characteristics,

the "hinge-god" (axpotjiatos), "so called because his statue was placed

close to the hinge" (Rogers ad loc). Pi. 1153f. also parodies the

versatility of the god (see also Rogers' note on Ran. 1144 for an

enumeration of his offices). At Pa. 204f. we are impressed with the

knowledge Hermes possesses, his didacticism, when he is explaining why

the gods are angry with the Greeks and why they have installed War in

their house. We get a brief preview in vs. 211-19 of the explanation

of the causes of the war, explained more fully later with Hermes acting

as the "interpreter" of the goddess visible on stage (vs. 602-47 the

more serious troch. tetr.). Hermes is here perhaps anticipating his

role of psychopompos, which explains his taking charge of the restora-

tion of Peace, and which is well known from, for example, Iliad XXIV.1

1
Perhaps related to his role of psychopompos is his well-known
kindness to man, "the companion of man," as described to him by Zeus,
his father, in II. XXIV, 334f. Here perhaps was another reason the
poet chose Hermes to aid Trygaios in restoring Peace, which restoration
is described as beneficial to all mankind. Hermes' kindness to man is
exaggerated in the choral antistrophe Pa. 389b-99.
 107

Needless to say, Hermes already has a semi-humorous identity in the

literary tradition, the Homeric Hymn to Hermes.

At vs. 223 Hermes, still standing before the central door,

answers Trygaios' question, "But where has Peace disappeared?", by

explaining that Polemos has thrown her into an avxpov 3a0ti. Trygaios

asks, "What sort of cave?" Hermes replies, "EXS xouxt xb Kdxoj. And

you see how many stones he has piled up on top, so that you may never

get her out again." The "cave" is conceived of as extending downward,

under the earth, and Peace is to be imagined as buried under the

stones. "Down" here, therefore, does not refer to Hermes and Trygaios

standing on the roof looking down to the stage level. What must actu-

ally happen here is that at the mention of the deep cave the doors of

the house are thrown open and screens, or a screen, representing the

rocks are pushed by means of the ekkuklema to just inside the

entrance.x The dark background behind the open doors thus aids the

illusion of a deep cave. Trygaios at vs. 427 instructs the chorus to

"go in" to drag away the stones and the Exaxdvxss should on no account

be emended.2 Trygaios means "go into the stage-house" which shows that

the cave opening is located just inside the door. The "pulling up" of

Peace must be managed by the ekkuklema pulling the statue out of the

entrance to the house. No alteration of the background building is

necessary for the representation of the cave, which is also the loca-

tion successively of the house of Trygaios and of Zeus.3

x
So Dale, Collected Papers, p. 117.
A A
2
Bachmann emends to the hortatory EX*idvxES, Kock to £ia irdvxES.
3
Boarding up of the house, as probably done in the Wasps and
Clouds where windows are represented and there is the idea of keeping
 108

C. Fensterbusch1 reacts to the mention of a cave by positing

side by side on the orchestra level the house of Trygaios and the

house of Zeus, flanking the "grotto" of Peace in the center. This is

an unnecessary elaboration of the skene which can represent at suc-

cessive moments each of these three locations.

Hedwig Kenner wants something even more elaborate,2 three

vertical levels, the house of Trygaios on the ground level, the "grotto"

of Eirene "im Mittelstock," and the house of Zeus "im Oberstock." She

thinks two doors are necessary for Zeus' house, one for Polemos' exit

at Pa. 236 and one for Hermes' entrance into the house at the same

point. As evidence for the three-level background she cites the

Archelaos relief from Priene (her abb. 12, London, British Museum,

B.B. pi. 50), depicting the apotheosis of Homer. One is not at all

certain, however, about the relevance of this monument to the stage,

and its date is too late to be used as direct evidence for the fifth-

century theater. She takes Kaxx*6w in vs. 361 literally to mean that

Trygaios must be looking down from a higher level into the opening of

the cave, but the word does not necessarily have its literal meaning,

rather, the more general meaning "spy" as at Pa. 178 (Trygaios is by

now on the same level as the "house of Zeus"), Nub. 326, Hat. 7.194.

Jobst3 has collected the evidence of vase-paintings to support

the thesis that a cave or "grotto" was actually represented in the

someone shut in, would not be done in Peace, though it might aid the
illusion of a deep cave, simply because the background must also repre-
sent the palace of Zeus.
1
Die Buhne des Aristophanes (Leipzig, 1912).
2
Das Theater, pp. 118f.
3
SAAW, esp. pp. 61-68, 110-18, 148.
 109

center of the skene wherever a cave is mentioned in the plays. He

does away with the central stage house and posits, much like

Fensterbusch, the house of Trygaios and the beetle's stall as "Ortlich-

keiten" on either side of a representation of a cave, but also, much

like Hedwig Kenner, a house of Zeus over the house of Trygaios where,

he imagines, the beetle lands. All the evidence, however, points to

the fact that Trygaios lands on the stage and the action takes place

there from that point on.

There are problems connected with the evidence Jobst has

collected. The krater in Dresden,1 dated 450 B.C., shows a scene

remarkably like the one in Peace. The scene depicted is Pherephatta

(her name inscribed) rising out of the ground from within the repre-

sentation of an arched cave. Hermes stands to one side observing her,

his mouth open (speaking, or in surprise?). Pans are represented

climbing on rocks around the cave. Jobst thinks this scene reflects

a satyr drama, but there are no definite indications of a dramatic

performance; F. Brommer has declared himself against the identification

of Pans with satyr play (cf. Froning, Gnomon, p. 82). The Pan to the

right of the cave appears to be leaning over the cave, one figure on

the bell krater in Syracuse2 is partially hidden behind the cave, and

there are similar indications of depth in the cave represented on the

x
Dresden 350, ibid., abb. 12, after P. Hermann, Erwerbungen der
Antikensammlungen (Dresden, 1891), AA 7, 1892, 166, abb. 33; Nilsson,
Gesch. Gr. Rel. I, Taf. 39; Beazley, ARV, 1056, 95.
2
Second quarter of the fourth century, Jobst, abb. 18, Philoc-
tetes on Lemnos, definitely a dramatic representation; after B. Pace,
"Filottete," Ausonia X (1920-21), 152, fig. 2; Trendall, Red-figured
Vases, 204, no. 32.
 110

bell krater in Valetta,1 the bell krater in London,2 and the krater

from Capua in Berlin.3

The satyrs in the bell krater from Valetta, however, are shown

dancing round the back of the cave out of which a female figure is

rising, so that, if this scene is influenced by the stage, the cave

could not have been something built into the back of the skene but

must have been something pushed out onto the stage. The stage would

have been transformed for this performance merely by the pushing out

of the cave on the ekkuklema, plus the addition of panels on each side

of the central opening showing rocky landscape. The cave in each of

the representations mentioned above has about the same size in relation

to the figures around it, not too large to fit into the central door.

The Dresden crater dated 450 B.C. initiates a style of representing

the cave which for the first time is frontally presented, with a high

arch. This conventionalized form of cave may indeed be influenced by

stage representation,1* but it seems likely that it could be a "set"

which could be pushed out on the ekkuklema.5 While the idea of a

1
Beginning of the fourth century, Jobst, abb. 14; after
A. Cambitoglou, "Three Attic Vases in the Museum of Valetta," JHS LXXV"
(1955), pi. Ill; Beazley, ARV, 1436.
2
End of the fifth, beginning of the fourth century, Jobst, abb.
15, a rising chthonic Dionysos; from St. Agata dei Goti; after H. Metzger,
"Dionysos chthonien," BCH LXVIII-LXIX (1944-45), 297.
3
Beginning of the fourth century, discussed by Jobst, SAAW, pp.
118-19: the Eros figure to the left identifies the rising woman as
Aphrodite; Beazley, ARV, 1443, 6; Berlin F 2646.
^Cf. the more common drawing in outline of the cave in the
series of Andromeda-vases (IGD III, 3, 10; III, 3, 11-12), and the
Prometheus Lyomenos-va.se (IGD III, 1, 27).
5
Cf. Eur., fr. 124, which speaks of a cliff to which Andromeda
is bound and of Echo in the cave behind her.
 Ill

"rocky cave" or "rocky landscape" is represented on these vases, no

idea of a rocky landscape is suggested in Peace. The only indication

of a cave is the pile of rocks which are described as blocking up the

entrance to the cave. The minimum necessary to represent the cave in

Peace, therefore, is a screen pushed out on the ekkuklema. Note

against Jobst's thesis that there is a difference between the typical

setting of comedy and of satyr-play. The former is always at some

point concerned with a house, while a satyr-play can be set entirely

in a wilderness setting.

What is the significance of the notion that there is a cave in

the center of the stage for the question of the number and position of

doors? Newiger1 argues that the ekkuklema which supports the statue

of Peace and the screen representing the rocks now blocks the entrance

and exit through the central door and thus when Polemos enters at vs.

236f. he must come out of a side door. There is no reason to suppose

Polemos could not step over the platform which need not be completely

shielded by the screen. We only need enough "rocks" to cover an

imaginary hole containing Peace and later when Peace is pulled out

there is still room on either side of her for the figures of Opora and

Theoria. Another objection to the sufficiency of a single entrance

might be that it is inappropriate for Polemos (and then Kudoimos) to

come in and out of the same entrance which represents the entrance to

the cave, but when one asks the question where exactly is the cave

located, one realizes that strict realism is ignored. Wherever Polemos

is he is in the house of Zeus (vs. 205) and thus if we were to press

x
RhM CVIII, 238f.
 112

for an explanation of where the mouth of the cave is we would have to

admit that it is also in the house of Zeus. There is another improba-

bility in the fact that the cave is meant to be thought of as extend-

ing down to Hades: cf. the joking reference to the dead Cleon as

Cerberus blocking the rescue of Peace in vs. 313-15, and the expres-

sions E X S (Jifis av£X0Etv in vs. 445 and EXS xb (fjfis avEXKtfaax in vs. 307

concerning the return of Peace. No one asks the question, however, how

a cave could be thought of as extending all the way from "heaven" to

"hell." Thus the representation of the cave by means of the platform

and screen does not necessitate the addition of a door in the skene.

At vs. 232 Hermes interrupts himself to announce he "is going"

A

(Exyx), "for I think he [Polemos] is about to come out [££XE"vax]. He

is definitely making a clamor [0opU(BE?] inside." Hermes' language is

intentionally vague. He simply goes off to the side, not necessarily

into any door. Polemos is clearly coming out of the central door.

The Odpugos is perhaps a comic exaggeration of the typical indications

of noise preparatory to the entrance of a character in Euripides.1

Trygaios announces immediately after Hermes' exit, "Come let me get

away [airoSpw] from him." This line would only make sense if Trygaios

has been standing before the door out of which Polemos will enter, i.e.,

the central door. Trygaios' words are reflected in vs. 240, where he

says, "Is this really the one we flee?" The visual counterpart to this

language must be Trygaios getting out of the way of Polemos' exit.

1
I do not mean by this that there must be parody of Euripides
here but that the plays of Euripides are evidence for noise associated
with the operation of the door and the entrance of a character. See
Hourmouziades, Production and Imagination, pp. 136f., and Beare, Roman
Stage2, pp. 289f. on the operation of the door.
 113

Pa. 236-300

At vs. 228f. Hermes explains that Polemos one evening brought

home an enormous mortar (cf. Trygaios' bringing home an enormous

beetle), in which he intends to pound up (xpfgsxv) the cities.1 At vs.

236 Polemos enters, carrying his huge mortar, and proceeds to threaten

in a parody of the Homeric style the audience as mortals.

Paley ad Pa. 236 and 287 suggests Polemos enters and exits on

the ekkuklema seated at his huge mortar. The ekkuklema was certainly

used to carry in heavy objects such as he imagines the mortar to be,

but the text does not support his interpretation. KaOfiysvos in vs.

266 may not mean Polemos has been seated all along; it is a perfect

participle standing for a present. The line means Polemos, if he gets

his pestle, will "stir up" the cities at his leisure (so Platnauer).

At vs. 287-88 P. commands K. to carry off xa cn<e*ori. These must be the

baskets and vessels for the salad ingredients. Why would K. be com-

manded to take them off if the ekkuklema were present which could do so?

The repetitious rhythm of Polemos' opening line is perhaps an

illustration of the 0OEX*as c|>0EYua TroX£yxoxnpx*as referred to by Trygaios

in the previous lines as what he heard inside. It suggests the action

A

of pounding in a mortar. It is perhaps echoed in the i5i (RV OJ) Mgyotpa

MEYCXP' of vs. 246 and mimicked by Trygaios in the 3a3at 3a3axd£ of the

next line. Polemos as a dramatis persona perhaps has its origin in the

personification of War in Ach. 979-87; Diallage in Ach. 987-89 is one

1
The "cities" (irdXsxs) at V. 924 are the Sicilian only. The
difference illustrates the Panhellenic emphasis of Peace.
 114

of the models for Peace. On this subject see further Newiger, Metapher

und Allegorie, Zetemata 16 (Munich, 1957), pp. 114f.

Trygaios has indicated he has run off but is found giving humor-

ous "asides" to the audience all during the action of this scene.

Almost immediately upon seeing Polemos he stops running to the side.

He exclaims on the size of the mortar and the evil "look" (xb 3X€yya)

of War 2 but then immediately asks, "Is this really the one we flee?",

o Ssxvds, o xaXodpxvos, o Kaxa xotv OKEXOXV (the ending is a surprise,

indicating mock fear). Trygaios is clearly mimicking Polemos' Homeric

language and Rogers thinks we have in addition in vs. 240-41 a parody

of an existing description of War.3 Whether or not this is so,

Trygaios' description of War in vs. 241 here is similar to the descrip-

tion of Lamachus in Ach. 964 (cf. also Ach. 1132, TToXsyxcxripxos is

applied to Lamachus' thorax and is uttered by Lamachus at his first

entrance at Ach. 572f.). The point of Trygaios' remarks is that Polemos*

appearance is not as threatening as his language. Since also Lamachus'

warlike appearance is ridiculed in Ach. (cf. especially vs. 575, 581-

82),"* it is probable that Polemos was given a comical appearance, though

unfortunately there is no indication in the text what his "look" is

except for the fact that he is carrying a huge mortar.

x
Cf. Aoh. 572f. for KU6oiyds.
2
Cf. Platnauer's note for editorial uncertainty over whether
o"aov Koxbv goes with the following genitives.
3
He compares Hor. Carm. iii.2.13f.; the second line of this
stanza is known to have been borrowed from Simonides (Stobaeus Anth.
118.6). Cf. Simonides fragm. 12.
^Cf. also the scene on an Apulian kalyx-krater by the Varrese
Painter, ca. 350 B.C. (London B.M. F 269; IGD IV, 21) which shows a
duel between Daedalos and Enyalios; Enyalios wears a plumed and crested
helmet.
 115

Polemos at vs. 242f. proceeds to pour in several ingredients

for a salad, each of which represents a Greek polis. The idea that

he is making a yuxxcoxds is evidenced in the comic formulation

KaxayEyUxxwxEOyEVa at vs. 247 (Platnauer: Kaxa- = "to destruction").

At vs. 242 P. intones x& Ilpacrxat xpxad0Xxax, etc., and throws in some

leeks (rrpdoa, a homonym). At vs. 246 he intones xcb (or w) Mgyapa M£yap',

etc., and throws in some garlic (Megara's staple product). At vs. 250

xco ExKsXx*a signals his throwing in of cheese (for which Sicily was

famous), and at vs. 252 he threatens to pour in Attic honey. With

each of these actions (real or pretended) by Polemos, Trygaios makes

a humorous aside. At vs. 224-25 he assures the audience (conceived of

momentarily as Athenians) that Prasiae is no concern of theirs, "for

this is an evil for Laconia" (the scholiast informs us that there are

two towns called Prasiae, one on the Laconian coast, the other on the

Attic coast). At vs. 248-49 he exclaims with amazement, "3a3at 3a3axd5,

what great and bitter tears Polemos has thrown in for the Megarians!"

— a n allusion to the pungency of garlic. At vs. 251 he exclaims:

"What a great polis [Sicily] will be grated up/destroyed"

(SxaKvaxaOfjOExax, transferred from cheese). Finally, at vs. 253, he

addresses Polemos, in a familiar tone, with "Hey you, I advise you to

use some other honey; this costs four obols. Be sparing of the Attic!"

— a n allusion to the very fine Hymettan honey and to the majority of

the audience's natural concern for Athens.

Schol. RV give an explanation of War's action at each of these

points. At vs. 250 they say, xaCxa irdvxa Trap£TTXYPa<j>fi laxxv, which some

commentators have taken to mean that the scholiasts' comments on the

 116

action were originally stage-directions written between the lines of

the text. Von Holzinger, who did a special study of parepigraphe,

thinks that such an interlinear stage-direction originally stood over

line 250, from which all the rest were deduced.1 These "stage-

directions," however, are not attested in the metrical comments of

Heliodorus as are the five and perhaps six parepigraphae that appear

in the Ravennas between the lines of text, and one notes that the

scholiast's comment on vs. 251 is wrong, incorrectly imagining that P.

here once again grates up cheese; the line should be given to Trygaios.

It is true that only Attic honey of the four ingredients is actually

mentioned in the text, so that some sort of comment would be necessary,

but the identity of the ingredients is not a difficult matter to deter-

mine and hardly calls for additional notes between the spoken lines of

the text by the poet himself. The same four salad ingredients are

given by the schol. Eq. 771 where only cheese is mentioned in the text.

He is clearly cognizant of this passage in Peace, yet makes no mention

of parepigraphae supplying the information. For Sicily as synonymous

with cheese, cf. V. 838, 897, Philemon Com. 76. For garlic as a prin-

cipal ingredient of the salad, cf. Ach. 174; for its identification

with Megara, Ach. 729f. and 524-25 in the explanation of the "causes"

of the war. The latter joke is repeated in Peace in the hauling scene,

1
Parepigraphae, p. 32, echoed by Rutherford, Schol. Ar. II,
58. I prefer to interpret the notice at Pa. 250 as meaning that all
these lines of the text indicate stage action.
2
So first by Dobree and adopted by most subsequent editors.
Hermann thinks Trygaios also spoke u>s Spxytfs in vs. 257 as an aside,
noting that the Ravennas has a paragraphos-mark before ofyox.
 117

vs. 500f., where the goddess is said to hate the Megarians, "remember-

ing, for you [Megarians] first primed her with garlic [scil. like a

fighting cock]."

At vs. 255 Polemos calls out his "slave" Kudoimos.1 Kudoimos

is personified already in Homer where he is associated with Ares and

Enyo, It. 5.592-93, and with Eris and Ker, H. 18.535, therefore is

appropriately associated with Polemos here (cf. also Ach. 572f.).

Like Hermes, Kudoimos is reduced to the requirements of the comic

stage, made a servant of War. Polemos immediately accuses him when

he enters of standing around idle, then hits him with his knuckles,2

which gives occasion for another joke about the garlic. This little

bit of "slapstick" reinforces the impression that these two repre-

sentatives of war are worthy of contempt.

Polemos' impatience with Kudoimos also has the purpose of

setting a rapid pace of action which is continued throughout the rest

of the scene. At vs. 259 P. orders K. to "run and fetch" a pestle

(aXExpl*3avos). K. replies that they do not have one since they moved

in only yesterday. P. then orders him to run quickly to the Athenians

and get one. K. then exits but returns after only five lines spoken

by Trygaios to the audience. K. again returns speedily when commanded

to fetch a "Lacedaimonian pestle," being told vs. 275-79 to hurry.

His returns are comically compressed in time. It is the general con-

vention in tragedy also for distances and time to be compressed, but

x
Cf. Newiger, Metapher, p. 113, n. 1: Kudoimos is not the
son but the servant of War.
2
Pa. 256, OVJXOOX* aox KdvSuXos: schol. Ven. records a
"parepigraphe."
 118

not to the degree that it occurs here. What dramatic and thematic

purpose does the rapidity of this scene serve? Dramatically, it must

be a short scene since we have not yet reached the point of the paro-

dos. Thematically, the opening line of the parodos, urging all to run

"straight to salvation," is echoed throughout the play and is the

theme that peace and salvation are directly at hand now that an actual

peace between the Athenian and Spartan allies is being signed. Cf.

Trygaios' "crazy" desire to go "straight to Zeus" in vs. 68f. When

K. returns empty-handed a second time, P. announces he will go in and

make another pestle (vs. 288). Trygaios converts this impending

threat of war for the Greeks to an occasion for joy at being given an

opportunity to recover Peace (= peace). This is done in the very

humorous and obscene address to the audience by Trygaios at vs. 289f.

which eventually turns into a call for the chorus to enter. Trygaios

begins, 'Now comes that well-known business, the song of Datis."

A. E. Raubitschek1 has shown that the reference is to the Persian

satrap at Marathon (the scholiasts record two different explanations)

who probably sent a message to the Athenians from Euboia and whose

bad Greek thus become notorious (see vs. 291). The *b &*E<j>dy£Vds in

vs. 290 is a masturbation-joke and is probably "cued" by Polemos' say-

ing in vs. 288, "I shall go in and make a 6ox*5u£" (pestle = an erection).

The obscenity and the joking reference to Datis symbolize the light-

hearted spirit of the moment. The occasion is a happy one because it

is an opportunity to "pull up Peace" and be freed from war; cf. the

frequent start with vOv, vs. 289, 292, 300.

1
Charites (Bonn, 1957), pp. 234-42.
 119

The reference to the moment before Marathon is a reference

to the most famous moment in Greek history when "salvation" was won by

quick and decisive action. Thus, it is appropriate for this part of

the action of the play. The mention of the "song of Datis" and thus

by implication Marathon underscores the Panhellenic nature of Trygaios'

appeal for help. At vs. 292 Trygaios, facing the audience, calls

oovSpES EXXTIVES, a Panhellenic sentiment which prepares for his extend-

ing the initial invitation to the chorus as "0 farmers" (scil. of

Greece). The schol. Rav. explains the list of those summoned in vs.

296-98 as all those groups which have suffered from the war: "the

farmers were kept from farming, the merchants from trading, etc."

One compares Pa. 625, in the goddess' "instruction" of the farmer-

chorus through her interpreter Hermes, where the gain for the farmers

(not restricted to either the Athenian or Spartan farmers) is said to

have been bad as a result of the Spartan leaders' accepting bribes

from certain unscrupulous persons who thus shamefully "hurled aside"

Peace. Some of the groups in the list in vs. 296-98 are described from

the Athenian point of view: the SrjyxoupYOX*, the metics, the £EVOX (cf.

Pa. 644, Ach. 505-8), and perhaps the vnaxwxax ("islanders" often

denote the subject-allies of Athens: cf. the KXnxfip vnaxwxxKds, Av.

1422). x The list ends with the very broad <5) irdvxes XE<£. No incon-

sistency is noted in combining a Panhellenic and Athenian point of

view, just as the chorus in the play is sometimes the farmers of all

The tektones may also be described from the Athenian point of

view: cf. Plut. Per. 12.8 where the tektones are distinguished from
the lithourgoi as workers or builders in wood.
 120

Greece and sometimes the Attic farmers. G. M. Sifakis1 sums this up

well when he says "the distinction between Panhellenes, on the one

hand, and Athenian farmers, on the other, is incorrect, for it is not

the Athenian farmers but the farmers of all Greece who actually liber-

ate Peace" (cf. Pa. 508f.).

For another contemporary reference to the spirit of the year

421 one notes the occurrence of the term "Panhellenic" in Eur. Suppl.

526. The play is dated on metrical grounds to the period 427-417 B.C.2

In the Suppl. the Thebans are characterized as violating the customs of

all Greece by refusing burial to the dead.

There is one further problem connected with this section.

During Kudoimos' second absence in search of a pestle, Trygaios appeals

to the audience, "If any of you happen to be initiated in Samothrace"

(scil. in the mysteries of the Kabeiroi), "now is the time to pray for

averting [?] the messenger's feet" (vs. 277-79). Platnauer lists as

the popular places of worship of the Kabeiroi Samothrace, Lemnos, and

the coastal towns of Asia Minor, and sees the relevance of the refer-

ence in the fact that the Kabeiroi were "especially the protectors of

sailors and travelers, so that Riot would be subject to their influence."

He omits mention of Thebes, some of whose representatives would be in

the audience for the negotiations for peace (for the time of the nego-

tiations which resulted in the Peace of Nicias, see Th. 5.20.1; Peace

was performed at the City Dionysia when foreigners were admitted).

'•Parabasis, pp. 31-32. See his special excursus, pp. 29-32,

on the problem of the dramatic identity of the chorus in Peace.
2
Webster, Euripides, pp. 4 and 124f., based on Zielinski's
statistics for resolutions in the iambic trimeter.
 121

The Kabeiroi are especially connected with the worship of Hekate and

Demeter. At Thebes the Great Goddess was named Demeter Cabeiria. By

a slight extension they should be interested in the restoration of

Peace who in this play is represented as Kore or chthonic Dionysos.

There is also a special connection between Kabeiroi and comedy, as

shown by the famous series of vases from the Kabeirian sanctuary in

Thebes.1 The allusion to the Kabeiroi is thus appropriate on several

levels.

Pa. 300-45: Parodos

The last two lines of-Trygaios1 summons to the chorus shift

to trochaic tetrameters. The chorus' own trochaic tetrameters and the

language of vs. 301f. indicate the chorus enter running (in measured

steps, of course). They urge themselves on with TTSS y&pe\ in vs. 301

and 3on0nowy£V in vs. 302. It is important to note that though they

come in answer to the appeal from the comic hero they do not need to

be told why they have been summoned, as in the case of the entering

chorus in Nub. and Av., for example.2 It is clear from Trygaios'

These vases are dated alternatively in the second half of the

fifth century or the first half of the fourth century. See G. Bruns,
AA (1964), p. 235, for a reexamination of the Theban Kabeirion;
P. Walters and G. Bruns, Das Kabirenheiligtum bei Theben (Berlin, 1940);
A. Fairbanks, Catalogue of Greek and Etruscan Vases, I (Boston MFA), lxx,
no. 564. Pausanias1 use of the term Spwysva in his description of
Kabeiric ritual (IX.25.5) is evidence for at least part of the ceremony
being dramatic.
2
Sifakis, Parabasis, pp. 23f., distinguishes four types of comic
parodos. He groups Peace with Eq. on the basis that the chorus come to
the aid of the hero knowing why they have been called. But one may make
distinctions even between these two parodoi: the words of the entering
chorus in Eq. are ironical in view of the ironical nature of the "comic
hero" in that play; the chorus of Eq. comes more in an attitude of
attack, in anticipation of the later formal agon {Peace does not have a
 122

reaction in Pa. 309 and from the chorus' own words at vs. 318-19 that

the chorus chant their anapests loudly to indicate their joy (see also

vs. 311, 321). Trygaios' pleas that they desist, as when in vs. 313-15

when he insists they must avoid rousing Cerberus-Paphlagon below, are

ignored until they can finish their dance. Vs. 322f. (cf. vs. 323

schemata in the sense of "figures" of a dance; cf. V. 1485 for this

sense) show the chorus is dancing vigorously. At vs. 324 they protest

that their legs dance of themselves, dp' n6ovf)S. When they finally

agree to stop dancing it is only to be allowed to "drag this one fig-

ure and no more," yet they then "drag" another, which involves "hurling"

or "kicking high" one leg and then another ({bfyavxES in vs. 332;

cf. V. 1530, 'ptiTXE OK£"Xos oupdvxov). The dancing is as noisy as the

shouting (vs. 322-23). The mood of joy, initiated in Trygaios* joke

about Datis and the call to the chorus, is continued throughout the

anapests in which the chorus first run up the parodos in measured steps

and then dance vigorously in the orchestra, and climaxes in the chorus'

lyric strophe vs. 346-60 in a mixture of trochaic and cretic-paeonic

meters. Such a vigorous dance by an entering chorus is unparalleled

in Aristophanes.

The chorus' identity is the farmers of all Greece. At certain

moments they appear to be Athenian farmers, as in the "Second Para-

basis" vs. 1127-90, but the ancient commentators were wrong in giving

formal agon, which is indicative of the imminence of the appearance

of Peace). It is clear, therefore, that an element of the play such
as the parodos is related to a whole complex of variables in the
play.
exclusively the more narrow definition to the chorus, and in failing

to see how its identity could change to fit the changing context. At

the crucial moments of the chorus' role, such as the parodos and the

final hauling up of Peace, it is a Panhellenic chorus. What were its

visible attributes? The chorus are urged at vs. 299 to bring "shovels,

crowbars, and ropes." Crowbars (mochloi) are mentioned again at vs.

307, together with mechanai ("other implements"; Platnauer adduces

parallels for a combination such as this of generic and specific).

Shovels (amai) are mentioned again at vs. 426 when the chorus are told

to enter and remove the stones. Use of ropes is implied by the phrase

at vs. 458, KdxaYE xotoxv, and by the ensuing hauling scene. At vs.

552 the chorus are commanded to take their georgika skeue into the

fields; this command is repeated in the exodos of the play, vs. 1318,

though there (vs. 1342) it is indicated that at least some members of

the chorus carry Trygaios and his bride aloft in the procession. The

chorus say they are giving over their skeue to their attendants (xots

OKOXOV30OXS) to guard at the beginning of the parabasis vs. 729 and

since they do not need them for any activity in the second half of the

play we should assume that their implements are not returned to them

except perhaps to some of them at the end of the play, when the ser-

vants bring out torches for the procession. The mention after the

parodos of these ropes and implements indicates that the chorus enter

carrying them, as part of their identifying themselves. One might

x
The chorus is identified in the dramatic personae of Ven. and
the Aldine edition as YE^pYtov AOyovEWV, which is clearly a deduction
from Trygaios' demotic Pa. 190, 919. Hyp. I to RVrald has chorus of
"Attic farmers."
 124

compare the marble relief in Athens, in which a chorus of soldiers

is shown dancing, each chorus-member holding a spear. The soldiers

in the Athens relief wear long, pointed beards to show they are

elderly; the chorus of farmers in Peace are also elderly (cf. vs.

335-36) and presumably also wear beards and perhaps also the short

chiton and himation as on the Athens relief.

At vs. 566f., when the chorus are told to reform (i.e., take

up their normal position in the orchestra) for the formal welcoming

ode to the goddess, their implements are described as wooden beetles2

(sphurai) and three-pronged forks (thrinakes). Editors have puzzled

over how the identity of the chorus' implements could change. In

addition, there is doubt over what £?0J7rXxay€vn in vs. 566 means:

"borne as a weapon" or simply "prepared" (see Platnauer's note). The

context.shows that Trygaios is imagining his return to the country and

thus, whatever the meaning of the disputed word in vs. 566, this is an

example of a momentary change achieved by purely verbal means. The

implements Trygaios mentions are appropriate to the actual farming of

the land and not to the hauling up of Peace. There is no reason, there-

fore, to suppose that the chorus actually have these implements.

The chorus upon entering bid Trygaios show them what they must

do, KapxxxEKxdvEX (vs. 305). Sharpley translates this "be our foreman"

in the sense of head-workman; the word does not mean architect in the

modern sense. Sharpley compares Hdt. 3.60, apxxxEKxeov xoO 6pCyyaxos,

which perhaps shows the particular relevance of this title for the work

Athens, B.H.T. 181, F.C.F. 103, MNC AS 3, Webster, GTP, p. 31a.

2
or hammers. See discussion below, p. 138.
at hand. After Trygaios wins over Hermes to aid in the hauling up of

Peace and instructs the chorus to go in to remove the stones, the

chorus flatter Hermes by bidding him supervise1 their work and show

them what they must do, SriyxoupYXKtos (vs. 429). This recalls the

description of the entering chorus as 6nyxoupYOt* in vs. 297. The

term is probably being used in the technical Athenian sense, for which

its occurrence at Plut. Per. 13.2 is a parallel (the context is the

Periclean building program). One could not express the fundamental

idea here better than by referring to Burnett's note on demiourgoi at

PI. Ap. 22c9, that the Greeks did not distinguish between "manual

laborers" and "artists" like Pheidias and Polygnotos. Trygaios and

Hermes, whom the chorus alternately appoint as their "foreman," are

meant to be active participants in the work. This point is brought

out in the hauling scene, Pa. 458f. in which the chorus remind Trygaios

and Hermes that they are expected to pull, too (vs. 469).

Another perhaps technical Athenian term is used to describe

the relationship between the chorus and Trygaios when at vs. 359, at

the end of their joyous song, the chorus again ask Trygaios to show

them what to do (their eagerness to restore Peace is an important part

of the poet's theme): O E Y « P oeuxoKpdxop' / E'fXEX* dY«0r1 xxs nytv xO"xn.

Van Leeuwen and Sharpley note that the term autokrator was used in a

technical sense at Athens, nearly always of ambassadors and civil

officials with the sense "plenipotentiary" (they compare Av. 1595;

^(JJEOXCJS in vs. 429 means "standing by" or "near," appropri-

ately in this context, as the chorus enter the cave to remove the
stones, but also in the sense of the person in authority, the officer
in command, as at X. Oec. 21.9, S. Ag'. 1072.
 126

Lys. 1010; Th. 5.27, 6.72.5; Arist. Ath. Pol. 31.2). The context of

the song is the chorus momentarily conceived of as Athenians, recalling

their suffering under Phormio, and the marching back and forth to the

Lyceum. Mazon boldly supplies strategon at Pa. 359 and compares Th.

6.72.5 where the adjective autokrator with strategos has the meaning

"with absolute powers." Cf. the notion of "election" in vs. 360. The

work of hauling up Peace requires organization and leadership. No

inconsistency is noticed in having military discipline in the service

of peace. The use of particularly Athenian terms to describe the rela-

tionship between chorus and Trygaios or Hermes is an instance of the

fluctuation in the identity of the chorus as the dramatic situation

changes (see further on autokrator in the discussion of Pa. 346-600).

The language of Trygaios' summons to the chorus contains some

striking resemblances to what is generally regarded as the summons to

the chorus to enter in a fragment of Aeschylus' satyr-play Diktyoulkoi

(PSI 1209).x The fragment of the Dikt. begins "All farmers, ditchers,

herdsman, and shepherd, any local inhabitant,"2 etc. At Pa. 302 the

chorus urge themselves on with 3on.9Tio'0jyEV; at Dikt. 15 (Page) we have

3pfi. Pfeiffer notes from the number of parallels that 3off is almost a

a technical term for cries for help in such "emergencies." Webster3

X
D. L. Page, Greek Literary Papyri (London, 1942), no. 2, where
see for further bibliography; R. Pfeiffer, SB (Munich) II (1938), 12f,;
H. J. Mette, Suppl. Aesch. (Berlin, 1939); Newiger, Metapher, pp. 114-
15; R. Stark, Rhein Mus. 102 (1959), 3. Fragments from the later part
of the play are P. Oxy. 2161.
2
E 1 xfs kax' [E]YX<fipi-oS> Page, pp. 16f. = Pfeiffer, pp. 18f.
Page translates "anyone in the place" which might be interpreted as the
speaker stepping out of his dramatic role. The list continues, "people
of the coast."
3
Euripides, p. 18.
has pointed to the similarity of the staging arrangements in the plays:

in each there is a hauling scene involving a supposedly heavy object,

which must be managed by means of the ekkuklema. In the Dikt. it is

Danae's chest which the fishermen seek help in pulling out of the sea.

The use of a painted screen is made probable by the necessity of the

free actor (Aeschylus in satyr-plays employs only two actors) going

out, changing into female mask and clothing, and getting into position

to appear as Danae rising out of the "chest," all this without being

seen by the audience. The chest is thus actually a screen placed on

the ekkuklema. In Peace the ekkuklema is needed first to push forward

the screen representing the rocks under which Peace is imagined as

buried and then to roll out the statue of Peace.

Thus there is the probability that more plays had hauling

scenes in which the chorus was summoned to come aid in the hauling and

in which the ekkuklema was used to bring out the object. One cannot,

however, press the relationship between Dikt. and Peace; the latter

cannot be conceived as a parody or extensive borrowing from the

netfishers' summons.1 The Panhellenic nature of the summons in Peace

has no parallel in the Dikt. The words of the entering chorus in Dikt.

axe not preserved but Pfeiffer compares S. Ichn. 32f. to show that

there is no reason to assume that the trimeter changed to trochaic

tetrameters as at Pa. 299f.

pfeiffer, SB (1938), pp. 18f.

 128

Pa. 346-600

The next section of the play is a series of "irregular" scenes

formally bound together by a metrical system of mixed trochees and

cretic-paeonics in which there is approximate responsion (see Platnauer

ad Pa. 346-60 for the scansion). Trygaios, encouraged by the chorus,

considers where to remove the stones blocking the entrance to the cave

but is immediately stopped by Hermes who appears suddenly and says

that this action is forbidden by Zeus. Trygaios and the chorus, how-

ever, convert Hermes to their point of view, using Hermes' "human"

weaknesses, and all are assigned their tasks for the hauling up of

Peace. The chorus, or some of the chorus, enter the "cave" and remove

the stones, while Trygaios and Hermes make libation and prayer to the

gods. The work of hauling begins at vs. 458f. with the first of three

attempts, with everyone pulling at the ropes, until finally Peace

appears vs. 520, joined immediately by two attendants, Opora and

Theoria. The group are greeted and described by Trygaios and Hermes.

Trygaios is then instructed by Hermes to release the farmers to return

to their homes. They return to their proper formation in the orchestra

(vs. 564, <5)S KaXbv xb axt<j>os aOxcov <j>ax*VExax) to sing and dance their

welcome and prayer to the goddess.

At the end of their joyous strophe beginning at vs. 346 the

chorus encourage Trygaios by asking for instructions and declaring that

some good fortune has chosen him "general with full powers" over them.

He responds by immediately considering where they shall drag away the

stones, the meter changing to iambics at vs. 361f. in anticipation of

a scene of action. Paley's retention of the reading of the MSS at

 129

vs. 361, TTOX, appears to me to be correct. Boissonade alters it to

Trp, which is paleographically similar, and comments that the question

is not "where" but "how" to remove the stones. He is generally fol-

lowed by subsequent editors. The MSS reading, as interpreted by Paley,

however, gives the line comic point which thus translates, "Come then,

let me see to what vacant part of the stage we shall drag away the

stones." The joke is a slight dropping of pretense about the nature

of the cave. Tit] does not make sense because Trygaios told the chorus

to bring implements whereby they could remove the stones when he first

summoned them (vs. 299-300). There is never any doubt in Trygaios'

mind how to do things in this play.

Whatever the proper reading in vs. 361, Trygaios says "we shall

remove" the stonestwhich shows that he intends to participate in the

recovery of Peace and makes it unlikely, if further evidence were

needed, that he is standing on the roof of the house on a higher level

than the chorus, which would make his participation in the removal of

the stones and the hauling on the ropes nearly impossible.1 It is

true that the chorus are the ones who go in to remove the stones at

vs. 426f., but this is a further stage of the action when Hermes has

appeared on the scene and thereby reminded Trygaios that he must honor

the gods before beginning the work. Thus he and Hermes are occupied

with the prayer and libation while the chorus are permitted to go in,

remove the "stones," attach the ropes, and get into position for the

hauling.

1
Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysos, p. 62.
 Hermes suddenly appears on the scene (coming quickly from the
A

side) and reacts with apparent hostility, with language (u> yxapE Kat

xdXynpE) which is reminiscent of his earlier hostile reaction to

Trygaios' arrival, vs. 182f. Hermes says Trygaios will be destroyed

(aTfdXojXas, E^oXtoXas, vs. 366) if he removes the stones, and informs him

of Zeus' threat to destroy anyone found digging up Peace. Trygaios is

jocular and fearless. In general, he responds to Hermes' exaggerated

fear of Zeus with exaggerated confidence. Among his many jokes is the

thought that his fate will be decided by lot for Hermes is the god of

the lottery. In vs. 378-79, beginning with his oath "by the meat"

which is a surprise for "by the gods" he refers again to his earlier

claim that his purpose in coming was really to bring Hermes meat. At

vs. 383 Trygaios rebukes the chorus for standing there "dumb-struck"

and bids them not to remain silent. This is their cue to begin the

antistrophe and is also a joke on the convention of their proceeding

formally, singing at regular intervals. The chorus in the antistrophe

A

entreat Hermes in an exaggerated fashion, calling him u cfuXavOpwrrdxaxE

Kat UEYaXoSwpdxaxE Saxydvwv, and promise to honor him always. Then it

is Trygaios' turn again to try to persuade him. His story about the

moon and the sun betraying Greece to the barbarians is finished by

Hermes himself with the idea that they have been "stealing days and

nibbling at the cycle" (see Platnauer's note). The story is thus

meant to appeal to Hermes' very human weaknesses of thievery and

gluttony which have been played upon before. Trygaios now invites him

to pull with them. He promises that all the great festivals will be

rededicated to Hermes (vs. 418f.). Hermes is finally won over not so

 131

much by entreaties and promises, however, as by the "concrete" action

of being bribed by a gift of a gold phiale, the more comical solution

(schol. Ven. records a "parepigraphe" at vs. 424, xn*vfi'). Hermes in

vs. 425 comments how he always has taken pity on gold: XPuaf°"u)V is a

surprise for XKEXWV and is a joking reminder of the chorus' earlier

entreaty of H. in the antistrophe (cf. vs. 400).

Hermes' acceptance of the phiale is the signal for the assign-

ing of tasks for the hauling up of Peace. Trygaios bids the chorus

enter the "cave" (i.e., the mouth of the door) and "remove the stones

with their shovels" (they need only take the screen inside). The

chorus accept this assignment in vs. 428f. and continue the flattery

of Hermes, calling him "0 wisest of gods" and appointing him to super-

vise their work SnyxoupYXKWS (the following line also shows, in addition

to the idea expressed by demiourgikos, that Hermes is meant to be a

fellow-worker). At vs. 431f. Trygaios wishes to make use of the phiale

by asking Hermes to hold it under to receive the wine. Either Hermes

or Trygaios chants the ritual utterance for the libation and then for

the prayer. They pray that "this day will be the beginning of many

good things for all Greeks," a Panhellenic redoing of what the scholi-

ast sees as a reference to the words spoken ten years earlier by the

Spartan envoy, Melesippus, as recorded by Th. 2.12.3: "This day will

be the beginning of great evils for the Greeks." The prayer signifi-

cantly places Hermes at the head of a list of deities to be honored

(the Graces, Hours, Aphrodite, and Pothos) in contrast to those who

are to be ignored (Ares, Enyalios).

 132

There are few indications in the text or the marginal notation

for the distribution of parts in vs. 433-519.x The schol. RV at

vs. 441 say that in what follows one actor begins with the words of

prayer, the other with the words of a curse. The humorous contrast

of prayer and curse is clear enough but who speaks the lines is less

certain. Dobree, followed by Platnauer, gives vs. 435-38 to the

chorus, thus making them participate in the prayer and libation, while

the MSS continue Hermes as the speaker. The question is really whether

the chorus actually go into the door of the stage when they are

instructed to do so at vs. 426-27, or whether they remain in the

orchestra during the prayer and thus are still in the orchestra when

the hauling is begun.

The Oxford editors give not only vs. 435-38 to the chorus but

have them as the respondent after each prayer; they conceive vs. 441f.

as a dialogue between actor and chorus. Immediately at the end of the

prayer, which ends with a rush (cf. the antilabe, vs. 457), the chorus

are in position for the hauling on the ropes. This action, inter-

rupted several times, finally ends in success at vs. 520 and in vs.

564f. the chorus are described as making a proper formation (scil. in

the orchestra). For this reason, it is probable that some of the

chorus do go into the door of the house and take up positions along the

ropes in what is usually the actor's area, while the rest perhaps are

An indication that there was ancient controversy over the

attribution of roles in this section or that the commentators had
different texts in front of them can be found in the schol. Rav.
Pa. 459: "They [the commentators?] would have Hermes start the others
off here too."
 133

on the steps and in the orchestra. The absence of a high stage makes

a link between the door of the skene and the orchestra plausible.

KdxaYE xotaxv in vs. 458 is a nautical metaphor, used of hauling a

ship to shore (one supplies Expfivriv in place of the expected vaOv).

The nautical metaphor is continued in the advice of Hermes vs. 506-7,

"If you are eager to pull her up, move a little closer to the sea."

The scholia are probably right to be reminded of Themistocles* maxim,

av0EKXsa xfjs 0aXdaons (Th. 1.93.4), and to think of the line as a bit

of political advice to the Athenians. It should also have a visual

counterpart in the chorus-members moving closer to the door of the

skene, which is the direction of the sea as established by the meta-

phor at vs. 458. They will thereby naturally get more leverage on

the object they are pulling. One notes that in Netfishers the skene

door indicated the direction of the sea.

The hauling scene has a certain metrical structure, almost a

strophe-antistrophe correspondence in the similarity of vs. 459-72 and

486-99. "Where the lines are not mere exclamations they are ana-

pestic. Their decidedly spondaic character indicates strong physical

effort on the haulers' part" (Platnauer). Since the ekkuklema is ulti-

mately used to wheel out the statue of Peace, one supposes that the

chorus and actors only feign strenuous effort here.

The work of pulling on the ropes is twice interrupted for

lack of progress. The lack of progress in pulling up Peace is

imaginary, as we have indicated. It affords the poet, through the

actors, an opportunity for some political barbs at those who have

appeared to block efforts toward peace. At vs. 472, for example, the
chorus remark that the work is not progressing. Lamachus is blamed

for EyiroScbv KaOfiysvos, just as he is ridiculed in the Ach. as a war-

monger. At vs. 491-93 Trygaios notes that some are pulling one way,

some another; the Argives are immediately identified as the culprits,

a reference to their studied neutrality (see Th. 2.9.2). 1 The

"Megarians" are accused of not helping at vs. 481-82, where they are

pictured as clinging to the rope out of hunger, and at vs. 500f. where

they are described as hated by the goddess, a reference to their suf-

fering which resulted from the "Megarian Decree" as revealed by the

goddess through her interpreter Hermes at vs. 603f. At vs. 503 even

"the Athenians" are asked to drop out, being told to cease "hanging on

[to the rope] and pulling from your present stance" (Platnauer). By

vs. 508f. only "the farmers" are still pulling and the work suddenly

begins to progress. It was customary for older editors to imagine

"supers" representing each of these groups which are eliminated one by

one. It is generally recognized now that these "groups" such as the

Argives are really momentary identifications of parts of the chorus

itself, a realization which comes from the study of the imaginary

fluctuations in the identity of the chorus in the play as a whole.2

One of the most debated questions concerning the staging of

this play is the representation of the goddess herself. The text of

the play provides no explicit information on the question. The only

x
See Platnauer's note ad Pa. 475-77 and p. xvi of his Introduc-
tion: this joke is important as evidence for the date of this play
being in the year 421, since in 420 Argos becomes an ally of Athens.
2
Sifakis, Parabasis , pp. 23f.
 135

possibly ancient testimony has dubious value: schol. PI. Ap. 19c says

K<juy(j)5£xxax S£ (scil. Aristophanes) 'dxx Kat xb xfis Expfivris KOXOOOXKOV

ISnpsv aVaXya. EtiiroXxs AuxoXuk^). IlXdxwv NfKaxs. Eupolis therefore .

ridiculed Aristophanes in his Autolykos and Plato Com. in his Nikai

for raising up (or out) a KOXOOOXKOV ctyaXya of Peace, but it is prob-

able that we do not have the original words of the comic poets. Rumpf1

has argued that the word KoXoaods is used of images of different mate-

rial and size and does not have the sense of a statue of gigantic

size until the Hellenistic period, when it is influenced by the con-

struction of the "Colossus" at Rhodes in the third century B.C. The

adjective KOXOOOXK6S in the scholium may be a reformulation of the word

KoXoaods found in the comic poets mentioned, meaning simply "statue."2

Those commentators who imagine a gigantic statue of Peace being hauled

out and being addressed by Hermes standing on a second story have no

evidence for their view. We have already argued that the words

describing the relationship between the chorus and Trygaios and Hermes

imply that they work together in removing the goddess from the cave,

which joint action would be nearly impossible if the actors were

standing on a second story.

At vs. 657 Trygaios, who has heard the goddess' "explanation"

of the causes of her disappearance through her intermediary Hermes

(in the formal troch. tetr.), asks the goddess herself why she is

silent. The goddess of course does not answer, as she is a statue,

1
Arohaeologie II (1956), 18f.
2
The word agalma also has too wide a range of meanings to be
of much use in the discussion.
 136

and Hermes invents the reason that she is angry with the audience for

what she has suffered from them and so will not speak. But he asks

the goddess to explain to him confidentially and at vs. 663 pretends

that she is whispering in his ear. This joke indicates that Hermes'

head must be at approximately the same height as the goddess', and

since we have argued that she is not a gigantic statue reaching to the

second story, she must either be life-size or slightly larger, or else

a bust with head and shoulders only. (The scholia here mistakenly

understand Peace to be a muta persona like her attendants.) Hermes

would have to step up on the ekkuklema to get close enough to hear her

whisper, which would momentarily reduce the impressiveness of her

appearance, but at her first appearance in vs. 520f. the ekkuklema

must have aided the impressiveness of her appearance.

There is a second joke based on the fact that Peace is a

statue at vs. 682, where Trygaios is amazed to see the goddess turn

her head around. The head of the statue therefore swivels and indi-

cates further that she is a three-dimensional object and not just a

painted screen.

Vs. 923 in the second half of the play is further evidence

that Peace is represented by a statue, for there Trygaios indicates

that she must be dedicated (x6pux€ov). Every indication is that we

are dealing with a normal dedication as in cult. See further dis-

cussion of this passage below.

A. M. Dale1 argues that Peace is represented as a bust, "as it

were emerging from the underground, since only so could she be supposed

1
Collected Papers, p. 118.
 137

to whisper in Hermes' ear (663)." An "emerging" goddess is attested

on vases showing scenes of Buschor's "Feldmause" type1 dating from

before to after the period of this play. We have noted above the

occurrence of the anodos of a full size or nearly full size female

figure on the Dresden krater discussed by Jobst. This type of scene

occurs also on vases which do not depict a cave in the background.

Two vases of the "Feldmause" type seem to have special rele-

vance for the visualization of the goddess in Peace. A hydria in

Brussels, dated 400-375 B.C.,2 shows the large head of a female figure

rising out of the ground. Two satyrs dance round in ecstasy, each one

holding a pick. Two winged Erotes in the background identify her as

Aphrodite. Miss Harrison3 explains, "They [the satyrs] have hacked

open the ground to help the Earth-Maiden to rise." This vase can be

compared to a vase of a much earlier date, a black-figure lekythos in

the Cabinet des Medailles,1* dated 490-480 B.C. The latter depicts the

emergence of a large female head (Kore?), one upraised hand also visi-

ble, with a satyr on either side shown hammering (the painter imagines

her rising up directly underneath the descending hammer). Vine ten-

drils form part of the background, an association with Dionysos. The

scene is framed by a single Doric column on either side, which perhaps

indicates a ritual performance in front of a temple (cf. the single

:
E. Buschor, "Feldmause," SB (Munich) I (1937).
2
R 286, Kertsch style, Schefold, Untersuchungen, Taf. I, 1;
Beazley, ARV2, 1472/3; Buschor, GV (1969), Taf. 260.
z
Themis2 (Cambridge, 1927), p. 422, fig. 126.
"*298, Athena Painter, Beazley,ABV 522/87; H. Metzger, L'imagerie
athenienne (Paris, 1965), p. 12, pi. III/l and 2; Buschor, "Feldmause,"
pp. 10f., fig. 5; Nilsson, Archiv. XXXII (1935), 134, n. 9.
 138

column on the side of the Pronomos vase in Naples depicting satyrs and

maenads dancing to a flute-player). The vine tendrils in the back-

ground are similar to a scene on a white-ground lekythos in Athens1

showing three satyrs dancing round a phallos oculatus to the accompani-

ment of a satyr who plays the lyre, which is in turn similar to a

lekythos depicting satyr and maenad dancing round the head of Dionysos.2

The relationship in our play between Peace and Dionysos is a

near identity. Cf. the first words Trygaios addresses to her as she
A

becomes fully visible at vs. 520: w irdxvxa 3oxpud&op£. Trygaios at

vs. 554, in releasing the farmers to return to their homes, excitedly

proclaims that "everything here is already full siprivns oairpas"

("mellow" as if wine). Trygaios' name and occupation are an obvious

clue to the meaning of the play, and there are countless other examples.

The two vases discussed above showing large female heads emerging from

the ground and which have a relationship with Dionysos and perhaps also

satyr-play are evidence for Dale's thesis of an "emerging" goddess in

Peace.3 We have indicated that although the bust of Peace is actually

drawn out of the stage house, it was meant to be thought of as emerging

from a cave which extended downward, to Hades, in fact. Thus the scene

of a large bust presented on the platform would preserve this illusion

that she had emerged from directly below. There is perhaps a further

comment on the anodos-type with satyrs in the carrying by the farmers

of shovels, similar to the picks used by the satyrs to dig out the

1
Athens 9690, the Painter of Athens 9690, Beazley,ABV 505/1.
2
The Metzger lekythos, Lyons, Metzger, BCH (1944-45), p. 299,
pi. 25; Beazley, ABV 502/97.
3
Cf. the hammerers on Cabinet des Medailles 298 with the pos-
sible meaning hammer for sphyra in Pa. 566.
figure from rocky ground and the hammers used to uncover the figure

from level ground.

Jobst (SAAW) puts too much emphasis on the cave aspect as

establishing the type for Peace. He revives the mistaken theory of

C. Robert, "Pandora," Hermes XLIX (1914), 20f., that Aristophanes was

thinking of the statue of the grieving Demeter which Pausanias saw

placed in a cave in Arcadian Phigalia. She was shown, according to

Pausanias (VIII, 42.2-4), with a woman's form but with the head of a

horse. There is little relation between Peace and this primitive

representation of Demeter.

The "hauling up" of Peace is a lengthy scene, yet the goddess

does not begin to appear until vs. 516. This is explainable by the

poet's idea to show the work not progressing until the farmers alone

are left to pull the ropes. The hauling scene thus illustrates the

idea expressed in the summons to the chorus to enter, which placed

the farmers first as those who have suffered most from the war and

who would be most anxious for peace, as the scholiast there indicates.

The delay in the appearance of Peace may also be a result of the fact

that she is represented by a bust. A full-length statue would be

difficult to raise up at the last moment and yet it would have to be

since we note that the head of the goddess must appear first, as is

natural if she is emerging from below.

Webster argues (GTP, p. 19) that Peace "is in fact a carnival

giant of the same kind of construction as the fat man and hairy satyr

on the black-figured-cup (scil. in Florence)."1 This comparison is

X
F 2 in GTP = Florence 3897.
 140

suggested not only because of the probable large size of the bust of

Peace but also because of the joke at Pa. 682 which notes that the

head swivels. This suggests that someone, perhaps Hermes himself,

manipulates the head, which is an easy matter with a large "puppet."

This is not to suggest that Peace was ludicrous in appearance.

The joke at Pa. 617-18 seems to depend upon Peace being represented as

a beautiful woman. Trygaios comments on the goddess' explanation of

Pheidias' responsibility for the war (Pericles, to cover up for his

friend's chicanery and afraid for his own self, "threw in the spark of

the Megarian decree" which was fanned into a general war) that he has

never heard before that Pheidias was related to Peace. The chorus picks

up on one of the two possible meanings of the word TrpoofiKOx in vs. 616,

suggesting actual blood-relationship: "This then is why she is so

beautiful." The schol. Ven. understands that the reference is to

Pheidias1 art: "Since Pheidias is an artist Eirene is introduced as

being beautiful; as then the beautiful statue [n £dava] is related to

Pheidias." This is perhaps the only scholium which shows knowledge of

the fact that Peace was represented by a statue. The word £dava i s

not attested in classical Greek and its more usual form £davov in its

later use and possible use here does not necessarily mean "image of

wood."

Many commentators have been surprised that so little seems to

be said in the play about the appearance of Peace herself. Meineke,

noting also the homoeoteleuton of vs. 523-24 and the homoeoarche of

A ,

vs. 524-25, emends &> Oexopfa, end of v s . 524, to Exprivn ffjfXr); cf.
Blaydes, who emends to d) <>
| x*Xri 0£ds. In defense of the MSS reading, I
 141

think Paley should be followed in understanding that Opora is addressed

in vs. 525 and that the addressing of Theoria is a natural balancing

of impressions, the "sight" of Theoria (a pun here?) versus the "smell"

of Opora (again a sort of joke). Peace is described in this section,

though in the imaginative way of comedy. Peace is the subject of the

verb of vs. 528 and is meant by xaOxriS in vs. 530. Peace "smells" of

the harvest (but oirtopas seems strange here), welcomings, Dionysiac

festivals, Sophocles' songs, Euripides' epullia, scenes of country life,

etc. Instead of a realistic description of Peace we get a "fantastic"

one which suggests the symbolic nature of Peace. One compares the

description of the entering chorus as if they were present at Marathon.

The "fantastic" nature of the description of Peace is suggested

already by Trygaios' first words on seeing her; he wonders in his

"rustic" way, how he could get a pfjya yupxdy<j>opov to describe her. The

description which follows is a good try. It is not so much the sight

of Peace which impresses as the significance of her arrival for the

farmers and for the populace.

Following the discussion of Peace by Trygaios and Hermes, Hermes

bids Trygaios release the farmers to return to their homes. Trygaios

does this by beginning with the formula for a public proclamation. The

farmers as chorus of course cannot yet leave the theater. Trygaios

shifts in the midst of his "proclamation" from iambics to the excited

troch. tetr. which is then picked up by the chorus in vs. 556f., much

as Trygaios gives the cue to the entering chorus by shifting to troch.

tetr. at vs. 299. An acceleration into troch. tetr. is a common

feature in late Euripides where it is perhaps borrowed from scenes

such as this. Trygaios reminds the chorus at vs. 560f. that they

must address the goddess in prayer. They are then described as

reassembling in the orchestra while Trygaios closes the tetrameter

with a pnigos. The chorus then sing and dance their welcome or

prayer in the final antistrophe of the section.

Pa. 601-728
At vs. 601 the chorus shift from lyrics to recitative trochaic

tetrameters, which are a katakeleusmos to Hermes to explain the god-

dess' long absence from them. The long trochaics in which Hermes

correspondingly answers are appropriate to the more elevated role

which he now assumes.

Pickard-Cambridge2 terms the section vs. 610-56 a "quasi-

half agon." A. Rossbach and R. Westphal3 discovered the epirrhematic

form of the agon. Th. Zielinski1* first studied it in its chronological

development. The long meter of vs. 603-50, which is concluded by a

pnigos of troch. dim. in vs. 651-56, is similar to the epirrhema of an

epirrhematic syzygy, but the antepirrhema, ode, and antode of such a

system are lacking here. T. Gelzer5 demonstrates that the form of the

agon of Ach., Peace, and Th. , which do not have a formal agon, is

adapted to the needs of the plot of each play. G. M. Sifakis6

X
W. Krieg, Philol. XCI (1936), 42f.
2
Dithyramb3 Tragedy, and Comedy2 (Oxford, 1962), p . 221.
3
Griechisohe Metrik3 (Leipzig, 1889).
''Die Gliederung d. altattischen Komoedien (Leipzig, 1885).
s
Das epirrhematische Agon bei Aristophanes, Zetemata 23
(Munich, 1960), pp. 116f.
^Parabasis, p. 54.
 143

demonstrates that this observation is a general principle in Aris-

tophanes. Content determines form,expecially in the agon, more so

than in the parabasis where antode and antepirrhema "represent simply

a reduplication of form which is not imposed by content."

The lack of any real opposition to the position favoring peace

in this play explains, therefore, why there is no formal agon in the

play, a major structural element which usually comes between the

parodos and the parabasis. Cleon (the Athenian "pestle") and Brasidas

(the Spartan "pestle") are early discovered to be dead. The chorus of

farmers enter eager and knowing their task beforehand. They do not

need to be converted to the position of the comic hero as usually in

Ar. The threatened opposition of Zeus and the gods is easily dis-

pensed with by bribing their very "human" representative Hermes.

These are some of the instances of the spirit of celebration rather

than agon in the play which is, however, so essential to most of the

plays.
A

Hermes begins at vs. 603 with the phrase & XxiTEpvnxES YE^PY 0 1 *

"0 poverty-stricken farmers."1 He adopts a sympathetic attitude toward

the farmers. Schol. Rav. says vs. 603 to frfjyax' in vs. 604 is a quota-

tion, with the substitution of YEWPYOX" for iroXxxax, of Archilochus

(fragm. 52). The quotation of this line from Archilochus shows that Her-

mes is addressing the farmers of all Greece, as does the sense of what

follows. Pheidias is first blamed for initiating a "chain" of events

leading to the Megarian Decree and the sudden involvement of all the

Greeks. This explanation is meant only half-seriously. Both the

1
See Platnauer's note for the arguments in favor of this
reading.
 144

Athenians and the Spartans are to blame. Only the farmers are inno-

cent (the "simple folk"; notice the contrast to the Spartan leaders

mentioned in vs. 622). The list of "causes" of the disappearance of

A

Peace is ended comically by the surprising xauxa 6'f|V & Spuv 3upooira3Xns.

Humorously the pnigos, chanted by Trygaios, is made to appear to be

Trygaios' plea to Hermes, TTOUE irai/, u 6s"aTro0' Epyfi, yfi Xiye

(beginning without a real break from Hermes' emphatic last word). One

might even see here a humorous explanation by the poet for why the

agon will not be completed.

Vs. 657f., which shift to comic trimeters and in which the

goddess is imagined as "whispering" to Hermes her opinion of the spec-

tators, are meant to be a contrast to the troch. tetr. section of vs.

603-56. The trimeter and the reference to the audience signal a

loosening of the dramatic illusion. In this section there is a joke

at vs. 657f. which draws attention to the fact that the goddess is

actually a statue. The more irreverent attitude toward the goddess

A

in this section is also signaled in her being addressed as d) YOVaxKwv

yxooiropiraKxaxdxn (vs. 662), "0 most shield-hating of women" (N.B.), a

A

contrast to the Si irdxvxa of vs. 657. The meter and language of vs. 663,

where Hermes pretends to hear the goddess whisper to him, are particu-

larly colloquial. Trygaios.' responses to the reasons for Peace's blame

are from the point of view of an Athenian. Herington1 argues that vs.
A

669, a difficult problem for the scholiast, b voCs Y « P iiyuh) f|v xdx* ev

xoxs OKCXEOXV, means "in the hide market," similar to EV XOXS XXOOOXV,

V. 789 et saep. The reference to Cleon is thus certain.

Op. oit., p. 76.
 145

Hermes at vs. 670 and vs. 679 pretends that the goddess has a

question to ask. After learning enough about what has been happening

politically during her absence she suddenly desires to know irdyiToXXa,

Kat xapxax'a Kax^Xxirsv xdxs (vs. 694). There follows a joke about the

relationship between Simonides and Sophocles and about Aristophanes'

rival Kratinos. Peace's womanly interest in all the gossip provides

the poet with an opportunity for comically expanding the frame of

reference. At vs. 705, at the end of the question-and-answer period,

A

Trygaios addresses the goddess with the more dignified d) 6€oiroxv' as

at the beginning of this section, and he speaks for all concerned in

now promising OOSETOX' . . . &<j>nodu£a0d oou.

At vs. 706 Hermes says Trygaios, on the basis of this promise,

may take Opora as his wife. "Trygaios, the vine-grower [xpUYav], is

to marry the (grape) harvest and propagate [EKiroxEtoOax; cf. Ar. Aoh.

255] grape-bunches" (Platnauer). The gift of Opora to Trygaios pro-

vides a motive for the second half of the play which will involve the

preparations for Trygaios' wedding and the wedding procession as a

climax.

At vs. 713 Hermes instructs Trygaios to take Theoria and

return her to the boule "whose once she was." In the second half of

the play Trygaios presents Theoria to the "boule," i.e., to the mem-

bers of the boule who were normally seated in the front row of the

auditorium. Trygaios' urging the girls to follow him quickly and

joking reference to the eagerness of "many" who are awaiting the girls

(laxOKdxes, vs. 728) is an anticipation of the section vs. 847f.,

where Opora and Theoria are made fun of as prostitutes.

 146

At vs. 718 Trygaios and Hermes exchange farewells. Trygaios

immediately calls for his beetle-steed but Hermes reminds him that

it is not available, a joking reference to the necessity of removing

the beetle by means of the crane after Trygaios had dismounted.

"Where has it gone?" asks Trygaios. Hermes explains, v)d>* %ipyax' EX0J&V

Znvbs aaxpaiTricfjopEt, a line which the scholiast identifies as a quota-

tion from Euripides' Bell. (vs. 314; cf. Pi. 0. 13.92). The poet

cannot resist one last joke at the expense of the Bell. To the question

how will the beetle eat, Hermes explains it will eat "the ambrosia of

Ganymede," which schol. Rav. understands is a reference to dung. The

final joke of this section, therefore, takes us back to the beginning

of the play and the scene of feeding the beetle (cf. Whitman, Aris-

tophanes, p. 107).

Trygaios at vs. 724 still needs to be told how he can get

down. Hermes replies in vs. 725-26, a much-discussed passage, "Don't

worry. Easily [note punctuation between Odppex and KaXdis], xn6t irap*

auxfiv xfiv 0£dv." This last phrase most simply means "this way, beside

the goddess herself," or "this way, close beside the goddess" (as

Sharpley, Green). The phrase is appropriate on several levels of

meaning. It is appropriate to the illusion of Peace being at the edge

of the cave. As the cave has been imagined to extend from "heaven"

down to "Hades," Trygaios can easily get back to earth by the same

route as the goddess traveled in ascending "to the light." Newiger1

puts it in a slightly different way: "durch die Hohle kommt man am

schnellsten zu Erde." The phrase also contains a practical direction

x
Metapher, p. 237.
 147

for the exit of the actors, "Step down inside off the back of the

ekkuklema" (so Dale 1 ). Trygaios then bids Opora and Theoria follow

him off quickly, giving the comic explanation discussed above.

A

The schol. Rav. wrongly interprets the MSS d) Kdpax at vs. 726

as referring to Opora, Theoria, and Peace. For this reason, and

because of the dual verb £ITEO0OV in vs. 727, Meineke emends to Kdpa.

This is unnecessary, however, since the plural can refer to only the

two and since there are cases of plural subject with dual verb.2 The

scholia in general, except perhaps for the scholiast at Pa. 617-18,

nowhere show knowledge of the actual staging of the play, that, for

example, Peace is represented by a statue. The schol. Ven. 726 quotes

an interpretation, "Some say they [scil. Opora and Theoria] do not

come down beside Peace, for they say she remains in heaven and works

her influence from there, as War does. For nowhere in what follows is

it recorded of her that she comes down. Beside then the goddess

Athena, for there was a statue of Athena in the theater." P. Arnott3

accepts the statement about the statue of Athena as fact, but it is

the product of a theory about statues in the theater which is not sup-

ported by the evidence of the texts. Cf. the schol. Ven. ad Nub. 83, who

suggests that Pheidippides' oath by Poseidon does not employ ouxos in the

usual superfluous way in oaths (e.g., ya xoOxov xbvttOKXnirxdv)but refers

to an actual statue of Poseidon which he has indoors but which we

cannot see.

'•Collected Papers, p. 118.

2
Meisterhans, Gramm. Inschr. , pp. 165, 199.
3
Greek Scenic Conventions, p. 67.
 148

Apart from the special case of Apollo OYOXEVIS (cf. V. 875,

Th. 748, and Fraenkel on A. Ag. 1081), there are passages of
tragedy which appear to require the presence of various stat-
ues in the theater. Later (1478ff. [scil. Nub.]) we shall
see that a herm stands beside Strepsiades' door, and there
are strong grounds for believing that a dinos stood beside
Socrates' door (1472ff. and p. lxxvi); why should there not
be a statue of Poseidon beside Strepsiades' door?1

Dover may be perfectly correct. One notes that all such statues pos-

tulated for tragedy and comedy are life-size, not the sort of monu-

mental thing which the scholiast's sources at Pa. 726 imagine extend-

ing up to the second floor and by which the actors could climb down.

There is no evidence in the rest of the play for a statue of Athena

on stage.

Schol. Ven. 727 thinks the actors descend into the orchestra

by means of ladders, placed on the exterior, and that Trygaios

descends holding onto Peace. "Perhaps the chorus (earlier) went up

for the bringing up of Peace." This scholium is based on the assump-

tion, which we have discarded, that "heaven" was located on a second

level. The participation of the chorus in the bringing up of Peace

is evidence for the cave being on the logeion level, as Dale argues.

Pa. 729-817

At vs. 729 the chorus bid farewell (aXX' x"0x x^pwv) to the

actors as they leave the stage. The meter now changes to the long

anapests for the start of the parabasis. Sifakis2 has recently pub-

lished a thorough study of the parabasis of Old Comedy. My discussion

will be correspondingly brief and based largely upon his conclusions.

1
Dover, ad Nub. 83.
2
Parabasis (1971).
 149

The kommation (K) vs. 729-33 begins with four anapestic

tetrameters and ends with a troch. tetr. cat. The parabasis proper

(the "anapests" [P]) is vs. 734-64. The pnigos (Pn) is vs. 765-74.

These three sections are unified from the point of view of content:

K is the link with the preceding context and the anapestic sections P

and Pn contain the praise of the poet, which is the purpose of the

parabasis as a whole. In the kommation, following the formulaic fare-

well,1 the chorus hand over xa OKEOYI to their attendants to keep, "for

there are always a lot of thieves prowling around xas OKnvas and doing

wrong. Come, keep a watch over them." Ta skeue are the ropes and

implements used in the hauling up of Peace, and since they are not

needed in the second half of the play they are thereby disposed of.

Schol. Ven. xa o<e6r\ comments, "The comic poets always make

the chorus naked, so that they can dance." This comment is similar to

the scholium at Ach. 626-27, Eq. 408-9 and the Suda s.v. dirofitivxES

where there is also reference to the chorus stripping off their outer

garments. There was probably not dancing during the parabasis, however,

and the chorus "stripping" as at Ach. 626-27 may only refer to their

throwing off their himatia.2

At vs. 734 the chorus speak as the comic poet himself irpbs xb

0£axpov irapa3as lv xots avairafaxoxs, to praise himself. This is

generally understood as the chorus coming forward to address the audi-

ence. The study of the uses of the term irapaBaxVEXV, however, reveals

x
This farewell formula (cf. Eq. 498, Nub. 510, V. 1009) has
often been incorrectly seen as indicating the parabasis originally came
at the end of .the play, incorrectly, as Sifakis argues.
2
See Sifakis, Parabasis, pp. 103-6.
 150

that it can and does here have also the metaphorical sense of "make

a digression in order to speak about oneself."1 For the use of both

senses, cf. Eq. 507-9. The point of view of the chorus in the para-

basis is momentarily narrowed to that of the comic poet himself, the

object of the eulogy of the poet being to gain the victory in the

dramatic contest (cf. Pa. 756f.).

The metrical scholium Ven. Pa. 729 notes that the parabasis

is structurally not complete. Ideally the parabasis has the following

structural (i.e., metrical) elements: kommation (K), parabasis proper

(P), pnigos (Pn) = main parabasis, ode (0), epirrhema (Ep), antode

(AO), and antepirrhema (AE) = epirrhematic syzygy.2 Certain topics

naturally belong to each of these metrical divisions, though there

may be inter-penetration.3 The parabasis of Peace lacks an Ep and AE.

Of the epirrhematic syzygy section of the parabasis, which is par-

tially missing in Peace, Sifakis says that its function is the follow-

ing: (1) the chorus presents itself to the public in its dramatic

character, in contrast to the main parabasis; and (2) it tries to

instruct the spectators straightforwardly and to influence them

politically.

It is generally commented that the function of the "second

parabasis" (vs. 1127-90) of Peace, which like the parabasis of vs. 729-

817 is not a complete parabasis, is to supply these necessary parts.1*

Rogers' comment on the odes of the "second parabasis" seems typical

also: "In this hastily constructed Comedy these [scil. odes] do not

x 2 3
Ibid., p. 65. Ibid., p. 53. Ibid., pp. 33-52.
^Cf. Platnauer, pp. xxi and 129-30.
 151

rise to the lyrical elevation attained in other plays. They are mainly

little satirical pieces, etc."

Sifakis (ibid., p. 42), however, thinks it noteworthy that

both odes of the parabasis of Peace, which has no epirrhemata, contain

personal jibes (against Karkinos, Morsimos, and his brother Melanthius).

The motif of satire generally belongs to the epirrhemata, so that what

the poet has done in Peace has been to include the satire in the odes

(Pa. 774a-817) for a more humorous effect.2

The parabasis does not create a radical break in the play. The

chorus now speak as a comic chorus defending the poet, but such fluctua-

tions in the chorus' identity (and in the actors' identities) are to

be found throughout the play. The parabasis of course has the practi-

cal purpose of filling the period of time during which Trygaios must

be imagined as making his way back to "earth." A similar purpose is

evident for the "second parabasis" for which see the discussion below.

Pa. 819-923

An important question is whether the statue of Peace remains

visible on stage during the second half of the play. Platnauer

(p. xv and n. 1) favors the view that the figure of Peace is removed

at the start of the parabasis, pointing out that xaCxnv in vs. 924a

"does not necessarily imply, as would xn"v6£, its presence on the

1
"The same is true of the odes of Frogs, where the epirrhemata
contain only admonitions" (Sifakis, Parabasis).
2
Platnauer would accept Richter's emendation of ydxoyax in
vs. 754. For an explanation of the change of viewpoint in Pa. 754-63
as being underlined by a change of tense, and thus a defense of the
text of the MSS, see Sifakis, Parabasis, p. 37.
 152

stage." Platnauer thinks the statue was conveyed to the house of

Trygaios during the parabasis in preparation for its Vfipuoxs. We have

argued, however, that there is no house of Trygaios separate from the

house of Zeus and the "cave" of Peace. Newiger,1 who is in favor of

the statue remaining in place on the stage for the second half of the

play, seeks to criticize Platnauer's first statement by collecting

examples which show that the demonstrative pronoun 6 6 E in dramatic

poetry does not always refer to a character or figure on stage, and

A
therefore by implication ouxos may. What would be more relevant would
A

be examples of the use of ouxos to refer to something on stage, xadxas

at vs. 847 does refer to the two girls present on stage, xocdxri at vs.

852 even more obviously refers to one of the girls, Opora. Therefore,

Platnauer's objection is not convincing.

Newiger's more general argument is quite compelling, namely

that the fSpuoxs of Peace referred to at vs. 924a is a normal cult-

practice which assumes the presence of a statue. Note that an altar

is brought out at vs. 938 and Peace and the altar are made the focus

of the action of the rest of the play.

The slave notices the two girls whom Trygaios has brought back

with him almost immediately at vs. 847, where there is much joking about

thinking of them as pornai, but no mention of Peace is made until vs.

923f. At this point the slave asks, "What is there still left for us

to do?" Trygaios answers in a matter-of-fact way, "What else but to

dedicate her [xocCxnv] with pots" (scil. of pulse. Cf. the scholium

and Pi. 1197). The slave then humorously asks whether she will be

l
Metapher, p. 237.
 153

satisfied with the dedication for a herm. The slave without any explan-

ation understands xatixnv in vs. 924a to refer to Peace, which fact

seems decisively in favor of the statue of Peace still being visible on

the stage.

Beginning at vs. 819f. Opora and Theoria are the center of

interest. Trygaios enters walking slowly up the parodos, accompanied

by the two girls, and upon his reaching the stage the slave suddenly

appears to greet him. Trygaios' first words at appearing were to com-

plain of the difficulty of going "straight to the gods," a joke on the

characterization of his "madness" in the first part of the play. In

the next line he makes reference to his tired legs, humorously imagined

as having carried him all the way from "heaven." The long walk implies

his entrance through the parodos, as if "from abroad." There is a

humorous contrast here between the confidence of Trygaios in the first

part of the play and the more ordinary manner of his "descent" without

benefit of the beetle-steed. Trygaios is addressing and making fun of

the audience when he thus first enters here, all of which is an indi-

cation of the more relaxed atmosphere of the second half of the play.

If, as it has been argued, the central door of the skene is

still occupied by the statue of Peace on the ekkuklema, where then

does the slave exit from when he appears at vs. 824 to greet his

master? The point is that no incongruity would be felt if he came

out of the same entrance, for, as we have indicated in the discussion

of the absence of the mention of Peace until vs. 924a, the audience is

not yet conscious of the skene as the place of dedication of Peace.

The focus of the audience's attention is forward of the skene, on the

 154

actors and the arrival of Trygaios with his two girls. The slave then

may come out of the skene almost any way. Just the fact of the slave's

appearance indicates that the setting is now Trygaios' house as at the

beginning of the play. This scene, therefore, does not require a

second door in the skene for the exit of the slave.

At vs. 843 the action centered upon the attendants of Peace

begins. Trygaios instructs the slave to take Opora inside. The slave

is to prepare the bridal bath and the marriage bed. At vs. 869c the

slave upon his return indicates that he has also arranged for the

"flat bread" to be baked and the sesame cake to be kneaded.1 There is

much sexual banter here. The ode of the iambic syzygy (vs. 856-69a)

is sung by the chorus and Trygaios in dialogue during the slave's

absence. The slave's announcement upon his return points up comically

the necessary compression of time, which is particularly appropriate

to the denouement of the play.

The delivery of Theoria to the boule, announced first in the

second half of the play at vs. 846, is not actually begun until vs. 871,

so that the "meaning" of Theoria can first be expounded to the audience

by a series of jokes. At vs. 886-87 Theoria is finally told to "drop

her OKsdn" (for Kaxaxx0E°vax in this sense, cf. Pa. 1207, where the

drepanourgos and his companions are told to enter the house). The

schol. RV identify the skeue as symbols of peace and agriculture. This

does not preclude the possibility of sexual double entendre which some

commentators have suggested (comparing f) OKEUfi, "clothes"). Trygaios

1
The scholiast comments that the sesame seeds were a symbol of
prolific union.
 155

leads the girl forward toward the section of seats reserved for the

Council (xb 3ouXeuxxKdv; cf. Av. 794).

A red-figured kalyx-krater from Lipari,1 dated 350-325 B.C.,

which shows a beautiful young woman (cf. f) irats, Pa. 869b) between two

old comics, may have been inspired by a contemporary performance or

redoing of this play. The tall female figure is dressed in a long

chiton. She holds a cornucopia in her raised right hand and dangles a

basket from her left. These could possibly be what is meant by OKeuri

at Pa. 886. The shorter male figure on either side of her wears the

phlyax costume.2 One of them is an old slave, like the slave in Peace,

and wears a phallos (cf. the jokes about the slave's phallos at Pa.

142, etc.). The old man has a white, pointed beard and holds a staff,

both of which would be appropriate to Trygaios, especially the staff

for his walk up the parodos complaining of his legs at vs. 819f. The

two male characters seem to be sharing something about the female figure

between them. The dramatic moment may be that between Pa. 871 and

904.

With the reception of Theoria by the prytanis the antistrophe

of the syzygy is sung vs. 909-23. T. is hailed as a citizen useful to

all the citizens. T. answers that they will know far better who he is

when they gather in the harvest (oxav xpUY&x'), a momentary

1
Glasgow 03.70f; B. Pace, Arte e Civilta delta Sicilia Antica,
II (1938), 469-71, figs. 339-40; H. Heydemann, Jahrbuch, I (1886), 297;
Webster, CQ XLII, 26, nos. 1, 2; BICS, Suppl. 19, 1967, no. 78 (72).
2
A. D. Trendall, Paestan Pottery (Rome, 1936), p. 27, indi-
cates that the phlyax outfit on this Lipari vase has a narrow white
stripe (a seam?) down the legs and arms, a characteristic of phlyax
outfits on Paestan vases and probably the local acting costume.
 156

anticipation of the end of the play (cf. vs. 1337-40, Coulon) and

further emphasis of T.'s symbolic meaning. The chorus then hail him

as the savior of all men, which touches the Panhellenic theme of the

play. T. replies that they will again discover this when they drink

the new wine (cf. vs. 1353-54, Coulon). Trygaios' self-praise vs. 918-

23 stresses that he is basically an Athenian: "I am Trygaios of the

deme of Athmone, who has freed the common people and the farming folk

from terrible troubles." The pride which T. exhibits is comically por-

trayed in the iambic scenes which follow, where he is portrayed as

self-providing, a master of the ritual of sacrifice, an expert cook,

in short, 8 iroXUTrpdYywv, like Peisthetairos in Aves. The purely

Athenian nature of Trygaios is stressed more in the second half of the

play, as is the character of the chorus as Athenian farmers. T., the

quintessential Athenian, is portrayed as the leader of all Greece.

The final scene of the play, Trygaios' marriage with Opora, represents

the final development of this idea. T.'s role in bringing about peace

was important in the first part of the play but was there subordinate

to the role of the goddess herself.

The scene Pa. 1021f. implies that exits "to the wings" can be

imagined as leading to the house. Since vs. 924a the central opening

has been consciously identified with Peace. An altar has been brought

out, vs. 942, in preparation for a sacrifice, and a prayer has been

addressed to the goddess at vs. 974f. At vs. 1020 the slave is sent

inside (EXOU) to sacrifice the thighs and bring them out again. The

proposed sacrifice in full view of the audience is vetoed.at the last

minute with the "excuse" that Peace does not like ocfxxYats. The comic
 157

possibilities of dummy thighs are of course greater. Trygaios remains

on stage while the slave is absent, which fact the chorus comment on,

but at vs. 1033 he himself goes in to fetch the fleshing-table, saying

proudly he does not need the slave. It is not explicitly stated that

he "goes in" but the fleshing-table, like the thighs and later the

splangchna and thulemata, axe logically inside the house. The stage

is empty, at which moment the chorus, who are facing the skene, sing

their praises of Trygaios in vs. 1034-38. We expect the imminent

return of the actors, whose absence from the stage at this point

cannot be lengthy. Trygaios and the slave suddenly reappear together

at vs. 1039. It would be very incongruous for them to come out of

the same opening as has now been so clearly identified with Peace.

Trygaios and the slave should come out by separate ways, from the

sides, otherwise they will appear to be working in harmony, which they

clearly are not (see vs. 1039). They clearly exit into the paraskenia

or side stage buildings which the evidence indicates were used to store

just such props as these.

At vs. 1040 one of the characters volunteers to return for the

inwards and sacrificial cakes. According to most editors it is the

slave who does this and who is then stopped by Trygaios with the com-

plaint that he "should have been back by now." Platnauer alters the

MSS' expfiv in vs. 1041 to as XPfiv and follows van Leeuwen in redistribut-

ing the parts. He insists that the slave is the one who must do the

cooking and that xfOsao . . . Xa3<Jov is not the proper way for the slave

to address his master. The slight alteration of vs. 1041 gives the

sense, "You ought to have got them already and been back by now."
 158

This is the sense of the half-line at vs. 1041 by either reading. The

real question is the attribution of parts. If we reexamine the dis-

tribution of most editors, we interpret XX*0EOO . . . Xa3wv as being

said boldly by the slave to the master. There are certainly enough

parallels for such boldness. The second half of vs. 1039 should mean

"Take the thighs and put them on the fire." It would not make sense

for the master to tell the slave to take (Xa3wv) the thighs if the

context shows that the slave is the one who has brought them and would

naturally give them to his master as commanded earlier in vs. 1020-22.

Vs. 1039-40 should not therefore be given to Trygaios (cf. van Leeuwen).

The slave may still dart out and return almost instantaneously with

the inwards and sacrificial cakes to speak vs. 1042 ("Look. I'm here.

I don't seem to you to be delaying, do I?"), a very funny bit of action,

even with a return to the more commonly accepted attribution of roles.

The slave simply ignores for a moment his master's complaint and tries

to make up for it by returning almost instantaneously. He probably

just does a full circle and picks up or pretends to pick up the

necessary items. The joke would be that the items are right there.

At vs. 938 the slave is told to get the sacrificial sheep, it

is not stated explicitly from where. Trygaios says he will provide an

altar for the sacrifice. Each of them presumably goes off in opposite

directions. Trygaios returns almost immediately at vs. 942 with a

portable altar. At vs. 942, thurasi, in reference to the altar he has

just brought, shows he went inside, and so presumably did the slave.

This scene, therefore, like vs. 1039f., argues that exits to the side

are employed to secure items which must be imagined as coming from the

house.
 159

Pa. 924-1126

This section consists of iambic scenes joined together by a

choric system of iambo-anapests. We have already discussed two pas-

sages from this section to show that side doors are necessary for the

action of the section, which is an imitation in exacting detail of the

dedication of a statue and the ceremony of sacrifice. Newiger argues

that the dedication scene marks the beginning of preparations for the

wedding feast and thus has a forward-looking purpose. When at vs. 1192

Trygaios returns after the conclusion of the "second parabasis" and

exclaims, "What a crowd has come for the wedding-feast!", it is clear

that the wedding-feast preparations have already been initiated in the

previous action.

At vs. 938 the slave is told to get the sacrificial sheep. He

therefore exits. Trygaios says he will provide an altar and exits but

returns almost immediately with a portable altar. The chorus' expres-

sion of awe at Trygaios* action in vs. 943-46 is "paratragic bombast"

and "no doubt intentionally a little obscure" (Platnauer). While it

is being sung, Trygaios is off stage again getting the basket contain-

ing the barley grains for sprinkling on the animal's head, the fillet

of the sacrificing priest, the sacrificial knife, and the fire-brand,

all of which he mentions in vs. 948-49. He announces that all is ready

except for the victim itself. "The chorus, in the form of a question,

bid Trygaios and his slave compete with one another in speed" (Platnauer

ad Pa. 950). The speed of the action eventually climaxes in the humor-

ous scene vs. 1039f. discussed above where the slave gets the final

items without even leaving the stage. At vs. 956 the slave returns
 160

with the sheep and is immediately instructed to take the basket and the

holy water and go quickly round the altar to the right (the auspicious

way), after which Trygaios says he will take the torch, dip it in the

water, and sprinkle the victim with water from the dripping torch.

Vs. 960, 0£X*ou crt) xax^ooS, is addressed to the victim, who thus seems

to consent to his own immolation (see schol. Rav. and Platnauer, who

quotes from parallel passages). T. then orders the slave to hand him

some of the ritual barley-grains to scatter on the animal, then tells

him to wash his hands while he himself holds the basin. The slave is

then instructed to scatter some of the barley-corns over the audience!

An opportunity is thus afforded for some obscene jesting, after which

the slave performs the equally bold action of deluging the chorus with

water (vs. 969-72), a double-edged joke on ritual and on the necessary

formality of the chorus* movements.

The ritual prayer is begun by Trygaios in vs. 974f. It con-

tains solemn, formulaic language (e.g., 974, 978), Panhellenic senti-

ments (996-99), but also humorous elements such as at vs. 979-86.

Again the forward-looking nature of this section is apparent in the

choice of epithets for Peace, 6£Oiroxva X°P^v, SEairoxva Y$-MV. These

look forward to the conclusion of the play, the wedding procession.

Cf. the reference to dancing in vs. 1319.

At the conclusion of the prayer, vs. 1017, the slave is told

to take (Xa3£tv) the knife (T. announced having brought in the knife

at vs. 948) in order to sacrifice the sheep.1 The slave objects that

1
The adverb yaYEXpxKuiS, vs. 1017, is perhaps a surprise in the
context of the ritual, is indicative of the smooth transition in the
play from ritual sacrifice to wedding feast, and is support for Newiger's
thesis discussed below.
 161

Peace does not permit her altar to be bloodied. Funny as an idea in

itself, this remark provides an excuse for transferring the time-

consuming and perhaps religiously taboo sacrifice backstage. A paral-

lel for this is Av. 1057. The slave is told to take in the sheep,

vs. 1020, and bring back out only the "thighs": convenient stage-

properties are thus substituted for the sake of the sacrifice on

stage. Trygaios makes reference to a nondramatic purpose: the sheep

is to be left for the choregus.1

The chorus commences its antistrophe at this point (vs. 1023f.).

They instruct T. he must remain outside with them, lay the faggots and

"arrange all the things due in the circumstances" (Platnauer, where

see for zeugmatic use of xx0£Vax, vs. 1024). Trygaios replies, in lyric

as he must, that the fire is arranged and is burning in an auspicious

way.

Trygaios, having been praised for his "provident and daring

intellect" (vs. 1031), boasts of his skill in arranging unaided such

an auspicious fire, says he will get the fleshing-table himself with-

out the assistance of the slave (still absent). As argued above, he

exits and returns by a different door from that of the slave, who

enters simultaneously with T. at vs. 1039. The remaining action of

the scene we have discussed in some depth.

The sacrifice is begun at vs. 1043 with the words o"irxa KaXfis

vuv auxd but is immediately interrupted by the appearance, from one

of the parodoi, of the actor representing Hierokles, a well-known

1
See, however, criticism below of Platnauer's comparison of
Pa. 1305 with Ach. 1150f. and of the idea that the chorus remains in
the theater at the end of the play for the meal given to it by the
choregos.
 162

chresmologos or collector of oracles (see Platnauer's note ad Pa.

1046-47 for the exact meaning of the title and a precise reading of

the text here). There is a similar interruption by an oracle-monger

at Av. 959f. He is wearing a crown of bay (vs. 1044) and sheepskins

as a sign of his office (vs. 1122-23). With the appearance of

Hierokles there are now three actors on stage, but the slave has very

few lines in this section (only part of vs. 1055, a single word sponde

in vs. 1110, and vs. 1122-23 just before the actors' exit) so that the

scene is really a dialogue between two actors. One notes in general

that in this play Aristophanes does not employ sustained three-

cornered dialogue among the actors.

The really humorous interest of the scene is the mimicking by

Trygaios of Hierokles' dactylic hexameters. At Trygaios' mention of

the word Eirene in vs. 1063, Hierokles immediately begins to declaim

his oracles, in the appropriate dactylic hexameter. T. turns the

ill-omened words back on him (vs. 1063), ridicules his diction (vs.

1066), interrupts frequently with surprise endings to his lines (e.g.,

vs. 1074), makes up his own Homeric parallels (vs. 1090-94), etc.

There is frequent antilabe at the beginning of this section and at

the end, wherever there is action concerning the sacrifice. Vs. 1063-

1101 by contrast is the purely verbal "contest" between T. and H.,

where the "shape" of the lines is more important. One notes that

Trygaios' interruptions occur at one of the three normal caesural

points (cf. the second antilabe in vs. 1066 by Trygaios, — uu-u u — ) .

 163

At vs. 1102 T. orders the slave to pour the libation and bring

him some of the inwards.1 Hierokles' request for a share of both is

refused, as is his next request, for the tongue. His efforts to

become part of the sacrifice are demonstrated to be sheer gluttony and

thievery (cf. also vs. 1118) and he earns the epithet of korax given

him in vs. 1125 (see schol.). One compares the earlier bribery of

Hermes by appealing to his baser instincts, but unlike Hermes, Hierokles

has no redeeming characteristics.

The audience is invited at vs. 1115 to partake of the sacrifi-

cial meat (o"uairXaYXVeO*£X£, apparently an Aristophanic coinage), an offer

which is still technically part of ritual but which also points up the

lack of any sort of "dramatic illusion" in these scenes. The offer to

the audience also serves to isolate Hierokles from the benefits which

accrue to the partisans of peace, and simply and comically defines

opposing forces, a simple division into opposites which is continued

to the end. Cf. the gift-giving scene, Pa. 1197, which the scholiast

Pa. 1204 compares to the end of Ach.

At vs. 1118 Hierokles presumably tries to take some of the meat

(schol. Ven., aXX* apirdooyax: Trap£7TXYpa<J>fi) and is struck repeatedly by

the slave with a piece of the firewood, at Trygaios' command. The

slave himself boldly threatens to "skin the sheepskins off Hierokles,

like a truffle" (for EK3OX3X&, see Paley's note). The scene ends with

T. and the slave chasing Hierokles off the stage before them. This

marks a fitting end to the sacrifice scenes, which require a rapid

1
See Platnauer on xocuxt, vs. 1110: the sentence is addressed
to the slave, not to Hierokles.
 164

pace. With the actors leaving the stage, there is an opportunity dur-

ing the beginning of the "second parabasis" to remove the numerous

props employed in the last scene (portable altar, firewood, sacrifi-

cial basket, etc.), and for the audience to imagine the preparations

for the wedding feast continuing inside. The second parabasis also

affords the second and third actors an opportunity to change into the

roles of the drepanourgos and hoplon kapelos at vs. 1197f.

Pa. 1127-90 "Second Parabasis"

In this section the chorus again come forward to address the

audience. Structurally, we have the epirrhematic syzygy (0, Ep, AO,

AE) of a full parabasis here; as with other "second parabases,"

kommation (K), parabasis proper (P), and pnigos (Pn) are lacking. It

is interesting to note with Zielinski1 that the six earliest plays of

Aristophanes have a second parabasis.

The subject-matter can also be paralleled by other second

parabases (the following is a summary of Sifakis, Parabasis, pp. 33f.,

esp. pp. 41-42). Pa. 1172f., the antepirrhema, satirizes infantry

officers without mentioning any by name (Sifakis' theme b3). Pa. 1127f.,

the ode, the chorus speaks of itself, in its dramatic character

(Sifakis' c3); this contrasts with the P and Pn of the typical main

parabasis, where the chorus refers to itself in its "real" identity as

a comic chorus, the object there being to win the prize for the poet.

Such is not the main object of the second parabasis, which is to

1
Komoedie, pp. 176f., but Ach. 971-99 as a second parabasis is
contested. See Sifakis, Parabasis, p. 35.
 165

instruct the audience as the public (in the political sense). Thus far

we have observed nothing unusual or striking about the second parabasis

of Peace.
Usually (cf. Sifakis, Parabasis, p. 42) there is a contrast

between the epirrhemata and the lyric sections of the syzygy in terms

of who is addressed, the epirrhemata instructing the public, by satire

and/or admonition, the lyric being invocation hymns and naturally not

addressed to the audience. The second parabasis of Peace, however, is

apparently more unified in view of its imaginary country setting and

account of the seasons which continues to the end of the antode, vs.

1171, where there is a deliberately sudden shift to scenes of the city

and the hated military muster.

The ode vs. 1127-39 begins with the idea of the joy of being

freed from the "three-day rations" and war. How he loves (the chorus

sings in the vivid first person) to keep drinking at the fire with

his close friends! This is a winter scene. He speaks of burning the

logs which had been "stubbed up" (accepting Bergk's reading) in the

summer. Hesiod Erga 504 (Evelyn-White) speaks of the month of Lenaion

as being the coldest month. Cf. Erga 420-21 for the best time to cut

wood.

The epirrhema vs. 1140-55 shows him, still idle, the fields

sown, the rain falling, his neighbor asking him, "0 Comarchides, what

shall we do?" Sowing was normally at the setting of the Pleiades

(Oct. 23; cf. Cert. Horn. Hes. 321; Erga 383-85, 448; at the first

sound of the cranes, advises Hesiod) the plowing extending into Novem-

ber (occasionally a late sowing in December), on cold, wet ground.

 166

Vs. 1144f. (to his wife), "Bring kidney beans from the cupboard, put

them to the fire; mix some wheat with them, and bring out some figs,

and let Syra call Manes from the farm, for today anyhow we cannot

pick off the vine leaves . . ." (vs. 1147). Erga 564 identifies the

time of pruning as between February-March and mid-May. In this section

then we are in spring. The antode, vs. 1156-71, is again a scene of

leisure and drinking and eating. Vs. 1159 mentions the cicadas.

Vs. 1162-64a mentions the "early-ripening Lemnian wine"; September was

the normal time for gathering the grapes (Erga 609). This then is a

scene of late summer. Cf. vs. 1164a-65, where the figs are described as

ripening. Vs. 1168, the farmer welcomes the first season (crop) with

the expression "Dear Seasons." The concluding anteppirrhema shows what

he would be doing in the season of war (summer), having to put up with

the swaggering taxiarch, being victimized because he is from the coun-

try, the city-dwellers getting better treatment (vs. 1185-86). The

second parabasis thus presents a picture in miniature of the three

seasons of the year, winter, spring, summer, three seasons of peace

compared with the one season of war. It is a tribute to the Seasons

who are mentioned first at Pa. 456 together with the Graces and

Aphrodite, and addressed at vs. 1168. One notes that this farmer does

not heed Hesiod's stern advice not to remain idle in the winter (Erga

493) or summer months. No scenes of work are depicted; it is a picture

of peace and prosperity which is almost that of the Golden Age (cf.

vs. .1328, the prayer to the gods "to put an end to the Iron Age"). One

compares the description of harvest-scenes at the moment Peace is

brought up (cf. vs. 530-38), in the climax of the parodos (esp. vs.
337-45) and in the exodos, an indication of a certain symmetry of

imagery in the play.

Pa. 1191-1304

A series of episodic scenes follows in which we are to imagine

the wedding feast as going on inside the house and in which Trygaios

receives a number of visitors some of whom are invited into the house

and some of whom are sent away. He is visited successively by (1) a

sickle-maker and his companion who gratefully offer him wedding gifts

and are invited in; (2) a number of angry and ruined sellers and

makers of various accoutrements of war who are insulted by Trygaios

as they try to sell their wares at any price and who at last must get

out of the way; (3) two children who are announced as belonging to

guests at the wedding feast, and who come out to practice their songs;

one of them turns out to be "the son of Lamachus," the other "the son

of Cleonymus."

As Trygaios reenters the stage after the conclusion of the

"second parabasis" he exclaims what a crowd of people has come for the

feast. The size of the crowd indicates of course the general approval

of peace. Trygaios is apparently caught by surprise. He tells the

slave who has come out with him to take something, identified in the

text only as xauxTix*, which is no longer useful for anything, and wipe

off the tables, then pile up lots of fine-meal cakes, thrushes, hare,

and small cakes (or rolls). The slave exits to carry out the orders

while Trygaios remains on stage and acts as cook for the feast.

The scholiast's gloss of ir£pxK£(j)aXaxa, vs. 1193, for xauxnx',

"helmet" (he also calls this a "parepigraphe"), is suspect, primarily

 168

as possibly having a relationship to vs. 1218, which Meineke brackets

as being redundant after vs. 1193. There are several problems about

vs. 1193. First, there appears to be no reason why there should be a

helmet or anything similar on the stage. Nothing in the previous cook-

ing scene could be posited as this object. But Trygaios at vs. 1190

is coming suddenly out of his house and from the scene of the wedding-

feast from where we are to imagine he gets the object. The scholiast's

gloss of xauxnx", ir£pxK£<j>aXax*a, is a rare and almost exclusively late

word, however. One scholiast on <J>OXVXKX*S' in vs. 1173, which is a

garment, confuses it with TTEpxKEtJxxXax'a. Aristophanes uses Kpdxos, xd

for helmet (Pa. 1128; Ach. 584, 1103). The only thing that can be

said in favor of iTEpXKE^aXafa is that lophoi are one of Aristophanes'

favorite targets (cf. Pa. 1211, 14, 1172; Ach. 575, 586, etc.) and

would serve very well to wipe off a table. The only other candidate

for the feminine deictic at vs. 1193 which occurs in a nearby context

is h <j>oxvxKX*s-xSos, the soldier's x^auus, just mentioned by the chorus

in the second parabasis, vs. 1173f. and joined with lophoi.1 The

joking about xb o^nKuya, the "narrowing" or part of the helmet where

the plumes are inserted, which evidently still has its Xdcjxo (vs. 1222)

would seem to preclude the use of the same object at Pa. 1193.

Trygaios therefore probably brings out a soldier's scarlet cloak at vs.

1190 but this is only a guess. Vs. 1193 cannot be bracketed unless one

is also willing to bracket vs. 1194 ("for it is no longer good for

anything").

X
A form of <J>OXVXKX*S is almost certainly to be read at Pa. 303.
See Platnauer's note.
 The cooking scene at Pa. 1195f. has a parallel in the cooking

scene in Ach. The cooking scene in the latter play also comes after a

long choral interlude (Ach. 971-99) which some editors regard as a

second parabasis.1 The cooking scene in Peaoe, however, is much more

abbreviated, perhaps because it follows the long sacrifice scene.

Trygaios' pride in acting as cook is similar to the pride of

Dikaeopolis at Ach. 1015f. where the chorus sings, "You have heard

how yaYExpxKUS . . . SEXTTVnxxKais he ministers to his own needs." Cf.

Pa. 1017, yaYEXpxKcos; 1026, yavxxKWS.

Trygaios' exclamation upon reentering at the start of this

scene, what a crowd of people has come for the feast, and his giving

instructions to a slave to serve a long list of delicacies neatly

solves the problem of representing an interior scene. Narration is

also the method of tragedy. It makes unnecessary a large crowd of

extras and allows the poet to concentrate on the arrival or appearance

of a few representative types. (Note the discussion above about a

large group of extras being unnecessary to represent all the groups

named in the hauling scene.)

In this final series of scenes before the exodos, the action

is focused on the central door, which is the entrance to the scene

imagined as taking place behind the skene, the wedding-feast.

But see Sifakis, Parabasis, p. 35. Some editors regard it

as a stasimon. In terms of meter and content there are elements not
typical of a second parabasis. Sifakis prefers to call it a kind of
"pseudo-epirrhematic syzygy, which occupies the place of the second
parabasis but also performs the usual function of the stasima of the
part of the comedy after the parabasis in its expressions of praise
and admiration for the hero"(cf. ibid., p. 28).
 170

Trygaios controls the entrance to the building. We have argued pre-

viously that the statue of Peace is located in the central porch. No

notice of Peace, however, is made after the second parabasis. Is she

still present or do Trygaios and the others use different doors to

enter the house? There has never been given in the play an explanation

of how Peace can be imagined as occupying Trygaios' house. When she is

first noticed in the second half of the play, at vs. 924a, it is as a

statue, which Trygaios matter-of-factly indicates must be dedicated.

When they pray to the statue at vs. 974f. it is imagined once again

as the goddess herself. Occasional reference is made to the goddess

during the sacrifice scene, as at vs. 1108. The reason, I suggest,

that our attention is no longer drawn to the statue is that we are in

a much more imaginative setting at the conclusion of this play. The

"second parabasis" has created a purely imaginary setting in the

country which the following scenes now illustrate to the best of their

ability. Where is Trygaios' house located? When he appears from the

house at vs. 1316 shouting orders for the wedding procession, we must

imagine that the destination of Trygaios and his bride is the fields

(cf. vs. 1318). The marriage will be, as we have indicated above,

between the farmer and his harvest, symbolically represented here.

Peace pervades all now in this imaginary and idyllic setting which is

shown to follow immediately the dedication of Peace. The statue has

served its purpose. It is no longer necessary as the representative of

the goddess. Perhaps it may even have been withdrawn into the house

during the "second parabasis." If not, no incongruity would have been

felt when the actors stepped over the ekkuklema and passed by her on
 171

their way into the house. There simply is no notice made of the statue

to suggest the incongruity.

An example of imaginative freedom, on a somewhat lesser scale,

is Trygaios cooking outside the house. When he announces to the first

visitors that he is "stewing thrushes" it is not explained whether he

is outside or inside the house. The cook would be cooking naturally

inside the house. Here the wall of the skene serves merely to separ-

ate the cook from his guests, which is a partial concession to realism.

Trygaios, proudly doing the cooking, is also able to welcome or prevent

the entrance of visitors.

A sickle-seller enters at vs. 1197 excitedly asking for

Trygaios. His is a speaking part and he is accompanied by a companion

who is mute, a KaSoiroxds (schol. Pa. 1202; cf. vs. 1207f.). When T.

replies "I am stewing thrushes," the sickle-seller immediately exclaims

how great are the benefits which have resulted from Trygaios making

peace (he is making reference to his sudden new financial success, but

there is undoubtedly a humorous juxtaposition here with the mention of

what the audience can more readily appreciate, the cooking of delica-

cies) . At vs. 1203f. he offers T. some of the drepana and kadoi (so

the schol. on vs. 1204) without price, then adds, "Accept xauxt,"

which are, as he goes on to explain, wedding presents bought from the

profits of his trade. T. in response tells the sickle-seller and his

companion to deposit their gifts beside him (or at his house) and go

inside to dinner immediately. The cause for haste is the approach of

an angry weapons-seller.
 172

The number of interlocutors vs. 1210-64 has been a much-

discussed problem. The following discussion should be compared with

the longer one by Platnauer ad loc. Bergk first based his solution

strictly on the words of the text, ignoring the scholia and sigla

personarum.1

The index personarum of the Venetus lists a oirXoiroxds and

6opu£dos. The text (vs. 1209), however, mentions a O'TTXWV KdmiXos, a

seller, not maker, of weapons.2 This speaking character enters with

a 6opu£ds (mentioned vs. 1213) and a Kpavairoxds (addressed vs. 1255,

referred to by xouxoux* vs. 1213) who are both makers of things useful

in war and who are mute. The three-actor rule for speaking roles is

thus observed here.3 The generic term dirXoiv k. covers the lophoi

mentioned at vs. 1211f., the thorax at vs. 1224-39, and the salpingx

mentioned at vs. 1240-49; separate speakers or mutes representing these

industries are not necessary. One notes incidentally that the extra

mute parts are needed in a very pragmatic way in this scene, to carry

in the numerous props which are made the object of obscene jesting and

On the general unreliability of MSS attributions see Dover,

CR (1959), 196-99; Lowe, BICS IX (1962), 36f.
2
The seller of weapons is presumed to be more disreputable
than the maker and to deserve his downfall; thus he is the complain-
ant.
3
This is my objection to van Leeuwen's scheme, which Platnauer
regards as a possible alternative, namely that three actors cannot take
all the roles. Van Leeuwen imagines the dialogue between T. and the
hop. kap. as ending at vs. 1249, at which point the latter and his com-
panion, a 0aXTTXYY°'n'o'ld's> leave the stage, their places being taken by
the kranopoios and the doruxos, both of whom have speaking parts. There
is no opportunity for the hop. kap. to change into one of these roles,
and no opportunity for the actor of the drepanourgos to take one of
these roles either, as all the weapons-makers have been on the stage
continuously since the appearance of the hop. kap.
 173

insult. The weapons-seller, who holds only the crests, is able to

declaim and gesture forcefully (cf. the paratragic language of vs.

1224-25, vs. 1250).

At vs. 1264 the weapons-seller says he and his companions are

being insulted (which they have been throughout the scene) and announces

their exit, saying, "Let's get out of the way" (vs. 1264). Since they

have not been physically harmed by T., this remark seems at first to

be a little strange, but makes sense when T. immediately says, comi-

cally, "Yes, by Zeus, because the children are already coming out to

piss." Trygaios explains: "the children of the guests invited here,

so that they may practice [7rpoava3dXr)xax*, humorously, after oupnodysva1]

their songs."

Two children enter together vs. 1270, though one is not called

forward to sing until vs. 1295f. The first child surprises by quoting

Homeric hexameters which have martial themes. T. mimicks him, as he

did Hierokles earlier, suggesting more peace-like contexts. The first

child's identity is discovered to be the "son of Lamachus"; he is

thereupon sent forcefully from the house (off the stage). The second

child steps forward when T. asks for the son of Cleonymos (the much-

maligned pxipdoTrxs). The joke is different with this child: there is

little probability of this son of a coward quoting martial contexts

and he all too easily obliges by quoting the famous lines of Archilo-

chus' defense of cowardice (fragm. 6D).

x
Cf. Newiger, RhM, p. 243, n. 52, a defense of the text
against Platnauer ad Pa. 1266-67.
Exodos Pa. 1305-End
For clarification of the action of the close of Peace, I am

again indebted to the study by Newiger (RhM, p. 241f.). It is there

demonstrated that this problem is related to the more fundamental one

of correctly constituting the text. Newiger does a special study of

the metrical scholia (generally assumed to be Heliodoran, first cen-

tury A.D.) 1 to this part of Peace and shows, despite the problem of

their containing non-Heliodoran phraseology,2 that they correspond to

the text of MSS RV. The text as established by Newiger has less

metrical "symmetry" than in most editions but a clear understanding

is gained for the first time of its consistent thematic development.

The beginning of the exodos of the play is marked by a

metrical change to long iambics: a short "system" of these (vs. 1305-

3110) is chanted by Trygaios, then echoed by the chorus (vs. 1311-15).

In this "dyad" T., having just broken off the dialogue with the second

boy, announces their exit inside (= the exit of the remaining actors),

briefly in ia. trim. (vs. 1302-4). He then instructs the chorus that

their remaining "job" ( I P Y O V ) 3 is to remain "here" (= in the orchestra)

and enthusiastically, even violently, eat up all there is (or so he

seems to say). The chorus then are to get their share of the feast,

but why the exaggerated metaphors ("crushing," "pounding") and the

Editions of the metrical scholia: Zacher-Bachmann (Leipzig,

1909); J. W. White, The Verse of Greek Comedy (= VGC) (London, 1912),
pp. 265-67.
2
See Newiger, RhM, p. 250. There is also the problem of the
correct assignation of scholia to lines of the text.
3
This equals a reference to the "working" nature of the chorus,
at the service of Trygaios, similar to the language of the parodos.
For other examples, cf. Pa. 500, 426, 430, 359-60, 305.
 175

metaphors borrowed from rowing1 in both T.'s instructions and the

chorus' answering self-encouragement, vs. 1311-15?2 An explanation

A

for the exaggeration can be found in the telling phrase, d) irpb xoO

TTEXVUVXES, vs. 1312: a sharp contrast is intended, a contrast which

was built up in previous scenes, between the condition of war and peace.

The feast celebrating T.'s wedding is also the feast celebrating peace.

The particularly vivid rowing metaphors suggest the unified

action of the mass under the command of a single leader. Not since

the first half of the play and particularly the entrance of the

chorus at the call of T. vs. 305f. has the chorus been thus commanded

by an actor. The imagery is similar to the language of the trades

which describes the chorus as they enter. Thus we have come full

circle: the entering and exiting chorus are similarly described.

The rowing metaphors express the idea, "Pull together manfully" (cf.

vs. 1308) which is clearly a bit of indirect (indirect because uyoiv

at vs. 1305 is not actually directed to the audience) political advice

for the future such as occurs again, even with respect to the imagery

(hunger, food), in the last lines of the play (see discussion below).

Platnauer in his comments on vs. 1305 and vs. 1362 seems

fundamentally to misunderstand the conclusion of the play. He sees a

reference at vs. 1305 to the chorus as comic chorus, expecting to

receive its meal from the choregos (he compares Ach. 1150f.). Newiger

(RhM, p. 244) more plausibly suggests a joke here on the stage-convention

1
Platnauer establishes this as certain in his note ad Pa. 1306.
2
Vs. 1311-15 should be given to the chorus or choryphaios,
against the MSS.
 176

which requires actors and chorus to hold to their respective places

in the theater. One should therefore say that vs. 1305f. is ambivalent;

there may be a joke about the chorus1 nondramatic identity but, as

argued above, the chorus' dramatic identity is also important in this

section and what is said is appropriate to the theme of the play.

At vs. 1316 there is a koronis in the text, according to the

metrical scholia. T. reappears, accompanied by his bride Opora, giving

instructions concerning the wedding procession to what must be imagined

to be his household servants. Thus vs. 1316-28 should all be given to

T., as the Aldine. (It is unlikely that the pnigos vs. 1320-28 would

be spoken by a new speaker.) The meter is now anapestic tetrameters.

T. extends an invitation vs. 1317 to iras X£d3s to rejoice with and

shout encouragement to the procession.1 In the next line he says

"Now everyone should bring their implements [xa OKEUYI] again to the

fields." Though the skeue mentioned vs. 1318 might seem to refer to

the same skeue supposedly discarded by the chorus at the start of the

parabasis (vs. 729f), a careful reading shows that the chorus who are

here addressed stand for the farming population of Attica, not the

farmers of all Greece who pulled up Peace. In vs. 1317 ir&s XE65S con-

jures up a picture of the whole rural population shouting encouragement

to the wedding of Trygaios and Opora. Note that recently in the "sec-

ond parabasis" the chorus represented the Athenian farmers. The mean-

ing of this procession and return to the fields is of course also

x
See Platnauer's app. crit. and note ad Pa. 1318 for the pre-
ferred reading, KairxKEXEtfEXV.
symbolic: the marriage of Trygaios and Opora represents the union of

farmer and harvest.1

The problem of establishing the text becomes critical from

vs. 1329 to the end. The remaining cola as given by the MSS are

either the telesilleion or the reizianum (= a catalectic telesilleion).

Vs. 1341-45 (Coulon = 1342-36 Platnauer) and 1346-50 (= Platnauer

1347-51) appear to form five-line stanzas, each stanz'a"being composed

of two tels. and three reiz. and each containing a repeated refrain,

*Yyfiv, 'YuEVax, S3. This fact, and the similarity of the Hieros Gamos

song at the conclusion of Aves , has led several editors (Herwerden,

Platnauer) to postulate a system originally of eight five-line stanzas

or strophae vs. 1329-end. This meant the postulation or actual addi-

tion of lines to the received text (after vs. 1332, vs. 1334, vs. 1351,

etc., Herwerden), and the addition of a whole five-line stanza, which

was presumed lost, vs. 1337-41 (Platnauer's lineation) in place of

the four-line stanza of reiziana recorded by the metrical scholia as

having been found in some exemplars.

Heliodorus, however, describes vs. 1329-55 as "monostrophic";

the idea of an "octad" is the creation of modern editors (such as

White, VGC, p. 240). Secondly, the song at the end of Aves is funda-

mentally different from that of Peace in this one respect: the song

in Pa. is concerned with the action of the procession, whereas the

song in Aves has a central lyrical "Ruhepunkt" (Newiger, RhM, p. 245),

vs. 1731-42, of responding strophae, which is lacking in Pa. Thirdly,

1
Cf. Newiger, RhM, p. 245.
 178

the four-line stanza of reiziana (xx* SpdaoyEV auxfiv; twice; xpUYffaoyev

auxflv, twice) existed in some exemplars known to Heliodorus and is

the best reading here. It is described in the metrical scholia thus:

"Next Iv ETTEXOOEOEX X O O xopou xb xoov. . . . In some copies (or

examplars) the cola are not recorded on account of their metre (Sxa

xa yExpa)." Newiger argues that Heliodorus read a second wedding

shout after vs. 1332 (which was either dittography or a conjecture in

his text) and that the phrase xb Taov refers only to the repetition

of the same meter, not the same number (five) of lines. White (see

VGC, p. 584) therefore resisted the proposed emendations of Sxa xa

ysxpa (for these see Newiger, RhM, p. 253, n. 79; app. crit. of Coulon

or Platnauer), interpreting them as showing already ancient surprise

at finding what is clearly a four-line metrical entity here (Heliodorus,

however, perhaps recognized that metrically this entity is not alien to

its surroundings). The hypothesis of a "pentacolic structure" for the

end of Pa. thus breaks down.

Attributions in vs. 1328-end are admittedly difficult (see the

remarks of Platnauer ad loc.): The MSS cannot be trusted but a close

examination of the sense of the words yields plausible guesses. The

following discussion of this problem is again largely a summary of

Newiger's remarks.

Trygaios begins the first stanza vs. 1329f., which ends with

a wedding shout or refrain, addressing Opora. He suggests the "key"

idea of the union of farmer with harvest which is repeated vs. 1346-48,

1357-59, etc. The chorus reply vs. 1333-36, identifying the addressed

as T. with another "key" word, SxKafuiS. The four reiziana follow which
 179

we have just discussed. White (VGC, pp. 420-21) incorrectly assigned

to these cola (1337-40 Coulon = 1336-39 Platnauer) the scholion which

says that in some copies or exemplars a paragraphos occurred after

each line (number of lines not indicated) to indicate that they were

sung alternately by two half-choruses. This scholion, as Newiger

argues, should properly be assigned to vs. 1335-36 and refer to the

doubled shout or refrain. Thus Coulon's division of the four reiziana

between T. and the chorus seems best (cf. Newiger's argument, RhM,

p. 246, from the sense of the words).

The chorus clearly sings the first of the two following

stanzas vs. 1341-45 (= 1346-50), as those "in the front rank"1 carry

the bridal pair aloft. Newiger (against Wilamowitz, Coulon) thinks

the second stanza more naturally belongs to the chorus: the comic

ambivalence of aXXa OUKOXOYOOVXES is thus more evident and, secondly,

a pattern of strophic responsion between chorus and actor, for which

there is no evidence in the other stanzas (we remember that T. is

being borne aloft by the chorus here), is avoided.

Vs. 1351-54 belong together. The chorus sings vs. 1351-52,'

T. replies emphatically (<j>fiaEXS Y') V S . 1353-54, and in language

reminiscent of vs. 909-16. Newiger thinks the chorus shout the refrain,

followed by T. singing the last three lines. The scholiast Ven. com-

ments on the latter that they are addressed to the audience; Platnauer2

is criticized by Newiger for seeing here also an invitation to the

x
Pa. 1343 TrpoxEXOYyEVOx Bentley; MSS' reading unmetrical.
2
Platnauer's interpretation is to be referred to Herwerden's
edition. For a list of those whom Newiger follows here, see his
RhM, p. 248, n. 66.
 180

chorus and a second reference to the choregos' entertainment. The

imagery of these final lines is, Newiger argues, like much of the

preceding; just as T. indicated vs. 1353-54 the farmer-chorus would

discover the meaning of his name, so he indicates vs. 1357-59 the

audience will if they follow the path of peace. The ending is thus a

bit of political instruction and a significant note on which to end.

 CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION

Peace is evidence that fifth-century drama was played before

a single opening in the center of the skene. The nature of the skene

or background to the fifth-century theater has recently become more

problematical as a result of the redating of the younger Dionysos

temple and associated architecture to the second half of the fourth

century. There is some archaeological evidence, however, for the

belief that the foundations of the stoa for Dorpfeld's wall H and

foundation T date to the early fourth century and possibly to the late

fifth century. The evidence of all the surviving plays of Euripides,

the majority of the extant plays of Sophocles and Aeschylus (the fact

that the majority are set before a palace or temple), and the conven-

tions of South Italian vase paintings which have been shown to be

inspired by scenes in the theater is that the background was a fixed

architectural form, a columned porch with large central opening repre-

senting the exterior of a palace-temple type. The form of a wooden

stage building indicated by wall H with its post holes and foundation

T is the same. If these foundations are not in fact fifth century,

all the evidence indicates that they had fifth-century prototypes

making possible a stage building of approximately the same form and

dimensions as the earliest stone foundations of the theater indicate.

181
 182

Little alteration therefore of the theater could have occurred between

the late fifth century and the mid-fourth century.

The staging of Peace requires no alteration of the single-door

background of tragedy. Exploitation of the limitations of the theater

building is particularly evident in the first half of the play. The

change of setting, which generally occurs rapidly, from Trygaios'

house, to the house of Zeus, to the house of Trygaios again at the

start of the second half of the play, illustrates Dale's principle of

successive "change of ownership" of the only part of the skene which

could serve as a representation of a house, the central projecting por-

tion with its large double-leaved doors. Certain spatial relation-

ships are left undefined, such as the location of the beetle-steed's

stall within Trygaios' house and the location of the cave in which

Peace has been "buried" in relation to the house of Zeus. The opening

action of the play, the kneading and feeding of the "dung," has the

effect of the audience imagining the beetle as directly behind the

door of the house. The slaves who are involved in the action at the

beginning of the play are possibly to be imagined as in the interior

courtyard of the house near the stables area, but more probably their

spatial relationship in the real-life situation is simply ignored and

the skene is simply a barrier between the beetle-steed and the slaves.

The presence of the beetle behind the barrier which represents

Trygaios' house at this moment of the play does not violate normal

customs concerning the stabling of steeds and also allows the one

slave to "peek through" the opening in the barrier, mimic the beetle's

movements, and in general stir up comically the audience's curiosity

 183

about the beetle and its purpose. The cave in which Peace is buried

is described merely as extending under the ground and covered by a

pile of stones. No further details of its setting are given. It is

therefore possible simply to roll to the front of the door of the

skene a screen representing the rocks covering the entrance to the

cave at the moment the idea of a cave becomes necessary to the action.

The idea of a cave before this moment of the play and after Peace has

been "hauled up" is useless; one must be able to withdraw the indica-

tion of this setting when it is no longer useful. The ekkuklema is

brought out for this purpose, as well as for the hauling of the dummy

representing Peace out from the skene.

The focus of the action is on the actors themselves. This

focusing of the action and the rapid changes in the action allow cer-

tain incongruities to be ignored. For example, where is the "cave"

located in relation to the house of Zeus and Polemos' dwelling? How

can the cave be imagined as extending down to Hades? How can Peace

or the statue of Peace be imagined as being in Trygaios' house when it

has not been expressly moved from "heaven"? These questions cannot be

answered from a rationalistic point of view. Any attempt to add to

the basic form of the background, such as the addition of a cave or a

beetle's pen, only adds to the difficulty. "Heaven" and "Earth" are

one from the entrance of the chorus to the scene in which Peace is

hauled "up" from the cave, simply by virtue of the farmer-chorus'

participation. Yet later Trygaios describes his long "walk" back to

earth as he enters the theater up the parodos. In this instance, the

conventional ease of scene transition is made fun of. The appearance

 184

of the slave to greet his master is sufficient indication that the

scene is now Trygaios' house as at the beginning of the play. Some-

times purely verbal means are employed to effect a scene change, such

as Trygaios humorously announcing as he is being lowered to the area

in front of the same house that he spies the house of Zeus and, accord-

ingly, shifting his meter and diction to a suitable tragic style.

In the second half of the play two simultaneous or near simul-

taneous exits to the side are required, The two scenes which require

them are vs. 1021f. and 938f. Here it is evident that there are

certain limits on the amount of incongruity in the staging. Each of

these scenes is involved with the action which makes reference to the

statue of Peace, which has been located in the center of the skene

since its first appearance, and yet we are also conscious of the

background as the house of the master and the slave. The location of

the statue is clearly ignored in the scenes following the "second

parabasis," but in these two earlier scenes the action is focused on

the center of the skene and the presence of Peace cannot be ignored

when the actors announce their entrance into the skene.

One scene in Old Comedy has been shown by Dover to require

more than the one central door, Nub. 91-132. One door, clearly the

central door before which most of the action of the play is focused,

is pointed out in vs. 92 as "this door and house" and identified as

the entrance to the phrontisterion. We need another door at vs. 125

for Pheidippides to enter when he says, aXX" Efosxyx. He certainly

does not enter the phrontisterion at this point. This door remains

the door to the house of Pheidippides and Strepsiades for the remainder
 185

of the play (even though, as Dale has argued, it may not be necessary

for it to remain so for the final "burning" scene of the play). No

incongruity is noticed in the fact that Strepsiades is living next

door to the phrontisterion, a city establishment, even when he

announces himself at vs. 138 as living "far off in the country." This

is similar to the situation of the Ach. where Dikaeopolis enters the

house, which has earlier represented the house of Euripides, to cele-

brate the Rural Dionysia. The need for a second opening at Nub. 91-

132 is apparent whether or not Strepsiades and his son are considered

to be on the ekkuklema at the beginning of the play, because the

illusion of their being in the interior is abandoned when Pheidippides

announces at vs. 125 that he will "go in."

The side exit in this case would be represented by a painted

panel of a door, as Dover suggests. It must be emphasized that we do

not need more than one practicable door in any of these plays, which

requires a fixed foundation such as the central portion of the skene

provided. The Clouds is the only extant play which requires two doors

and has two simultaneously occupied dwellings. One may see here the

seed of the development of neighboring houses in New Comedy.

The additional door or doors would not have been in a wing.

There is no evidence that a paraskenion was intended for a door. It

would be placed at the intercolumniation of the colonnade, hung like

pinakes or skenai. A representation such as this of a door would be

clearly subordinate to the impression made by the central door with

its double leaves and projecting porch. One notes that there is never

action involving two houses at once even in Clouds, though there may be
 186

more than one entrance to the skene. The central portion of the skene

always serves to represent a three-dimensional house, if one is needed,

such as the phrontisterion in Nub. or the house of Philocleon in Wasps.

In the case of these two plays, the central porch was closed off to

give the impression that someone was locked in or trapped in. The

closed house would also be a fair representation of the more ordinary

private house of comedy. We have shown that the addition of windows

or a screen containing windows to the front of the temple facade is

enough to distinguish the comic house from the tragic palace.

E. Fraenkel1 regards the Eccl. as intermediate between Old

and New Comedy with respect to its staging. The play unquestionably

has New Comedy features: the absence of a parabasis, and private

citizens as characters. But Dale has shown that the action is still

centered on the central portion of the skene.2 The idea that there is

a street running in front of the skene is a result of the plot; it is

not like the street or distribution of houses in New Comedy where the

action does shift from side to side. Dale shows that the women in

vs. 877f. do not, as Fraenkel thinks, stand in the open on the roof,

which would imply two roofs or adjacent houses, but are standing at

windows and making angry exchanges at each other from these windows.

There are two series of owners of houses in this play who are defi-

nitely thought of as occupying houses simultaneously. The first is

Blepyrus (and his wife Praxagora) and their neighbors, and the second

1
Greek Poetry and Life, pp. 255f.
2
Colleoted Papers, pp. lllf.
 187

is the two courtesans or women. The fact that the sets of owners

change is significant, in that it is not necessary for one door to be

identified with one set of owners for the duration of the play. This

still is the convention of Old Comedy. Dale argues that whenever both

members of one set of owners are speaking, one and sometimes two

members speak from a window. This limitation is put to comic use in

the scene where the young man knocks on the one door representing the

entrance to the "houses" of both women and the undesirable woman enters.

In sum, one cannot consider Eccl. to be the turning point in the history

of staging. The change to New Comedy conventions must have been more

gradual.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following editions of Aristophanes' Peace were used for this

thesis; the asterisk (*) indicates that the author has edited not only
the Peace but the complete comedies of Aristophanes.

*Bekker, I. London, 1829.

*Bergk, T. Leipzig, 1907.

*Blaydes, H. M. Halle, 1880-93.

Coulon, V. Paris, 1924.

*Hall, T. W., and Geldart, W. M. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1956-57.

Herwerden, H., van. Leiden, 1887.

*Leeuwen, J., van. Leiden, 1904-6.

Mazon, P. Paris, 1904.

*Meineke, A. Leipzig, 1860.

Paley, F. A. Cambridge, 1873.

Platnauer, M. Oxford, 1964.

Rogers, B. B. London, 1902.

Sharpley, H. London, 1905.

Zacher, K. Leipzig, 1909.

Allen, J. T. "On the Odeum of Pericles and the Periclean Reconstruc-

tion of the Theater." Univ. of California Publ. in Class.
Archaeol., I, No. 7 (1941), 173-77.

Arnim, H., von. Supplementum Euripideum. Bonn, 1913.

Arnott, P. Greek Scenic Conventions in the Fifth Century B.C.

Oxford, 1962.

189
 190

Beare, W. The Roman Stage. 2nd. ed. London, 1955.

Bieber, M. History of the Greek and Roman Theater. 2nd. ed.

Princeton, 1961.

Broneer, 0. "The Tent of Xerxes and the Greek Theater." Univ. of

California Publ. in Class. Archaeol., I, No. 12 (1944), 305-12.

Buschor, E. "Feldmause." SB (Munich), I (1937).

Cambitoglou, A. "Three Attic Vases in the Museum of Valetta." JHS,

LXXV (1955), 7-U.

Capps, Ed. "The Greek Stage According to the Extant Dramas." TAPhA,
XXII (1891), 64ff.

. "Vitruvius and the Greek Stage." Univ. of Chicago Studies

Th~Class. Philol., I (1895), 93-113.

Dale, A. M. Collected Papers. Cambridge, 1969.

. The Lyric Metres of Greek Drama. Cambridge, 1968.

., ed. Helen. Oxford, 1967.

Demiariczuk, J. Supplementum Comicum. Cracow, 1912.

Dinsmoor, W. B. Architecture in Ancient Greece. 3rd. ed. London and
New York, 1950.'

. "The Athenian Theater in the Fifth Century." Studies Pre-

sented to D. M. Robinson. Vol. I. St. Louis, 1951.

Dodds, E. R., ed. Bacohae. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1960.

Dorpfeld, W. Praktika. 1925-26, 25-32.

., and Reisch, E. Das griechische Theater. Athens, 1896.

Dottin, G. Revue de Philologique. Paris, 1901.

Dover, K. J. Aristophanic Comedy. London, 1972.

. Clouds. Oxford, 1968.

. "Greek Comedy." Fifty Years (and Twelve) of Classical

ScHolarship. 2nd ed. New York, 1968. Pp. 123-58.

. Lustrum, II (1957), 52.

. PCPhS, No. 192 (N.S. 12), 1966.

 191

Drachmann, A. D. The Mechanical Technology of Greek and Roman

Antiquity. Copenhagen, 1963.

Duebner, F. Scholia ad Aristophanem. Paris, 1887.

Edmonds, J. M. The Fragments of Attic Comedy. Vol. I. Leiden, 1957.

Fairbanks, A., and Graham, J. W. Catalogue of Greek and Etruscan

Vases. Boston (MFA), 1928.

Fensterbusch, C. Die Buhne des Aristophanes. Leipzig, 1912.

Fiechter, E. R. Das Dionysostheater in Athen. 3 vols. Stuttgart,
1935-36.

. Das Theater in Eretria. Stuttgart, 1937.

Flickinger, R. C. The Staging of Aristophanes' Pax: Melanges offerts
a M. 0. Navarre. Toulouse, 1935.
Fraenkel, E. Beobachtungen zu Aristophanes. Rome, 1962.

. "Dramaturgical Problems in the Ecclesiazusae." Greek

Poetry and Life: Essays Presented to Gilbert Murray. London,
1936.

Froning, H. Gnomon. Sonderdruck aus Band 45, 1973.

Gelzer, T. Das epirrhematisohe Agon bei Aristophanes. Zetemata 23.

Munich, 1960.

Gerkan, A., von. Das Theater von Priene. Munich, 1921.

Graham, J. W. Phoenix, XX (1966), 3-31.

Haigh, A. E. Attic Drama. London, 1889; 3ed ed. London, 1907.

Harrison, J. Themis. 2nd ed. Cambridge, 1927.

Hermann, P. Erwerbungen der Antikensammlungen. Dresden, 1891.

Heydemann, H. Jahrbuch, I (1886), 247-48.

Holland, L. B. Hesperia, XIII (1949).

Holzinger, K., von. Uber die Parepigraphae zu Ar. Vienna, 1883.

Hopken, J. de theatro attico saeoula a. Chr. quinti. Bonn, 1884.
Hourmouziades, N. Production and Imagination in Euripides. Athens,
1965.
 192

Jackson, J. Marginalia Scaenioa. Oxford, 1955.

Jobst, W. SAAW 268, Band 2 (1970), 15ff.

Kalligas, P. G. Deltion, XVIII (1963), Chron. 14ff.

Kenner, Hedwig. Das Theater und der Realismus in der griechisohen

Kunst. Vienna, 1954.

Kock, T. Comioorum Atticorum Fragmenta. Vol. I. Leipzig, 1880.

Koster, W. "Ad Aristophanis Thesmophoriazusarum fragmenta de

parepigraphe." Acme, VIII (1955), 96ff.

Kraus, W. Testimonia Aristophanea. Denksohr. Ak. Wien, phil.-hist. Kl.

LXX-LXXII (1931).

Krieg, W. Philol., XCI (1936), 42-51.

Lesky, A. History of Greek Literature. 2nd ed. New York, 1966.

Lowe, J. C. B. "The MS Evidence for Changes of Speaker in Aristophanes."

BICS, IX (1962), 27-39.

McDowell, D. M. CR, XV, No. 1 (1965), 17.

Mette, H. J. Suppl. Aesch. Berlin, 1939.

Metzger, H. "Dionysos chthonien." BCH, LXVIII-LXVIX (1944-45),

296-339.

. Reoherohes sur I'imagerie athinienne. Paris, 1965.

Nauck, A. Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta. 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1889.

Newiger, H. J. Metapher und Allegorie. Zetemata 16. Munich, 1957.

. RhM, CVIII (1965), 229-54.

Nilsson, M. Arohiv., XXXII (1935), 13-14.

Pace, B. Arte e Civilta della Sioilia Antica. Vol. II. Florence,

1938.

. "Filottete a Lemno." Ausonia, X (1920-21), 150-59.

Page, D. L. Actors' Interpolations in Greek Tragedy. Oxford, 1934.

. Greek Literary Papyri. London, 1942.

Pfeiffer, R. SB (Munich), II (1938).

 193

Pickard-Cambridge, A. Dithyramb, Tragedy, and Comedy. 2nd ed.

Oxford, 1962.

. Dramatic Festivals. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1968.

. The Theatre of Dionysos in Athens. Oxford, 1946.

Platnauer, M., ed. Iphigenia in Tauris. Oxford, 1938.

Pohlenz, M. Die griechische Tragddie. 2nd ed. Gb'ttingen, 1954.

Rau, P. Paratragoedia. Zetemata 45. Munich, 1967.

Raubitschek, A. E. Charites. Bonn, 1957.

Rees, K. CPh, II (1907), 398f.; CPh, X (1915), 117-38.

Reinhardt, K. Aischylos als Regisseur und Theologe. Bern, 1949.

Robert, C. Hermes, XXXI (1896), 551-57.

. "Pandora." Hermes, XLIX (1914).

Robertson, M. "Monocrepis." GRBS, XIII, No. 1 (1972).

Robinson, D. M. Excavations at Olynthus. 8 vols. Baltimore, 1929-46.

Rossbach, A., and Westphal, R. Griechische Metrik. 3rd ed. Leipzig,

1889.

Roux, Jeanne. "A propos du d6cor dans les tragedies d'Euripide."

REG, LXXIV (1961), 25-60.

Rumpf, A. Archaeologie, II (1956), 18-19.

. JHS, LXVII (1947), 13-18.

Russo, C. F. Aristofane autore di teatro. Florence, 1962.

Rutherford, W. G. Scholia Aristophanica. Vol. Ill: A Chapter in

the History of Annotation. London, 1905.

Schul, P. M. Platon et I'art de son temps. Paris, 1933.

Sdchan, L. Etudes sur la tragidie grecque dans ses rapport aveo la

ciramique. Paris, 1926.

Seltman, C. A Book of Greek Coins. 2nd ed. London, 1955.

Sifakis, G. M. Parabasis and Animal Choruses. London, 1971.

 194

Sifakis, G. M. Studies in the History of Hellenistic Drama. London,

1967.

Stewart, D. J. "The Poet as Bird in Aristophanes and Horace." CJ,

LXII, No. 1 (1966), 357-61.

Stillwell, R. Jorinth: The Theater. Vol II of Corinth: Results

of the Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical
Studies at Athens. Princeton, 1952.
. Hesperia, II (1933), 110-48.

Suess, W. Aristophanes und die Nachwelt. 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1911.

. "Inkrongruenzen bei Aristophanes." RhM, XCVII (1954).

Taillardat, J. Les images d'Aristophanes. Paris, 1965.

Thompson, H. Hesperia, VI (1937), 1-226.

, and Wycherley, R. E. The Agora of Athens: American School

of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. XIV. Princeton, 1972.
Travlos, J. Bildlexicon zur Topographie des antiken Athen. Deutsches
Archaeologische Institut, 1971.

Trendall, A. D. Paestan Pottery. Rome, 1936.

. Phlyax Vases. BICS, Suppl. 8, 1959.

. Phlyax Vases. 2nd ed. BICS, Suppl. 19, 1967.

, and Webster, T. B. L. Illustrations of Greek Drama. London,

1971.
Vallois, R. "Les thdatres grecs: Ske"ne" et skenai." REA, XXVIII
(1926), 171-72.

Walters, P., and Bruns, G. Das Kabirenheiligtum bei Theben. Berlin,

1940.

Webster, T. B. L. ArchEph. 1953-54. Pp. 195-201.

. BRL, XL (1959-60), 493-509.

. CQ, XLII (1948), 15-27.

. Greek Theatre Production. 2nd ed. London, 1970.

. Monuments Illustrating New Comedy. 2nd ed. BICS, Suppl. 24,

1969.
 195

Webster, T. B. L. Monuments Illustrating Old and Middle Comedy.

2nd ed. BICS, Suppl. 23, 1969.

. Monuments Illustrating Tragedy and Satyr Play. 2nd. ed.

BICS, Suppl. 20, 1967.

. Studies in Later Greek Comedy. Manchester, 1953.

. The Tragedies of Euripides. London, 1967.

White, J. W. The Verse of Greek Comedy. London, 1912.

Whitman, C. Aristophanes and the Comic Hero. Cambridge, Mass., 1964.

Wycherley, R. E. The Athenian Agora. Vol. Ill: Testimonia.
Princeton, 1956.

. How the Greeks Built Cities. London, 1962.

Zielinski, Th. Die Gliederung der altattischen Komoedie. Leipzig,

1885.