Studies in Fourth-century Tragedy

Citation preview

To m y parents

Preface The present work has two purposes. First, to be a monograph on the development o f Greek tragedy in the fourth century B. C., and, secondly, to provide translations and commentaries on the preserved fragments. The study is based on a survey of both direct ahd indirect evidence, i. e. the book - fragments and the papyri as well as the information contained in texts, inscriptions and vases. The scanty evidence very often does not allow to suggest solutions to the many problems relating to post-classical tragedy. Thus this study is mainly concerned to describe the preserved material and trace, as far as possible, the tendencies which characterize fourth-century tragedy. In earlier works on drama, such as those of Kayser, Welcker, Walker, and recently in that of G. A. Seeck,1 post-classical tragedy was studied according to the traditional, historical method; namely separate, brief discussions were attempted of each tragedian’s life, style and of the fragments preserved from his plays. In this way, information on postEuripidean tragedy remained scattered and disconnected, and consequently it was not possible to trace the literary tendencies which characterize the tragedy of that period. Moreover, repetitions and tautologies could not be eschewed. To give but one example : in discussing Theodectes, the rhetorical features of his tragedy were stressed; similarly, occasional remarks on rhetorical expressions were made for Astydamas, Moschion and Carcinus. No attempt, however, has so far been made to show the influence of rhetoric on fourth-century tragedy as a whole, and to determine the origin and development of such an influence. For the above mentioned reasons, in the present work fourth-century tragedy is studied not historically, but systematically, according to themes and ideas. Thus, after the intro­ ductory chapter which refers to the general trends in dramatic form and production, the whole material is divided into pathetic, melodramatic and rhetorical motifs, narrative passages and fragments dealing with religious, moral, social and political ideas. Such a division certainly cannot give a full picture of fourth-century tragedy, since it is determined by the form of the poorly preserved material and, moreover, as will be seen2, corresponds to the persoual interests and aims of the authors who preserved our book-fragments. Nevertheless, the discussion made in the last chapter of some characteristic fragments on papyrus attributed to post-classical plays often confirms the literary trends observed when discussing the book fragments. Accordingly, this method may enable the literary tendencies of fourth-century tragedy to be traced more surely, since they are drawn from a systematic survey of the available evidence, and not from separate cases. The scope, style and quality of the 1. L. Kayser, Historia Critica Tragi eorum Graecorum, Göttingen 1845; for the others, see the bibliography. 2. Below, pp, 24ff.

Preface preserved material can thus be appreciated and, as far as possible, a picture of literary development can be drawn. Accordingly, concerning its form and especially its motifs, fourth-century tragedy is seen here both as an interesting form of drama with some noticeable, new tendencies, and as a transition from classical tragedy to Hellenistic literature. This book is based on research made in the period 1974-76, which was submitted as a qualification for the degree of Ph.D. at the University of London. Since 1976 the study has been compressed and revised to a great extent, especially as regards the setting of the material and the structure of the chapters. There were also added an English translation of the fragments, a summary of every chapter in Greek, and recent bibliogra­ phical references. For valuable advice and suggestions on either the initial or the later stages of this work, I am deeply grateful to Professors C. Trypanis, E. W, Handley, C. Collard, A. A. Long and A. W. H, Adkins. Professor Trypanis had the patience to read through my manuscript in its revised form and Professor Collard checked through the English translation of the majority of the fragments. Both saved the book from fauits but for such errors as remain I am responsible. Professor Handley supervised my work in England and Professor Long was one of my external examiners. I am especially indebted to both o f them for many useful suggestions and criticism as well as for their cordial recommendation of this work. I am also in debt for encouragement in the initial stages of this study to Professors H.D.F. K itto, Th. Tzannetatos and G.M. Sifakis. Special thanks are due to Professors C. Trypanis and J. Theodoracopoulos for supporting this work. I am also grateful to the Senate of the Academy of Athens who decided on its publication. My work in the Center for the Edition of Ancient Greek Texts has greatly helped me to study the various sources relating to post-classical drama. I thank the Director and my colleagues for their cooperation. My special thanks also go to Mrs. H. Sofianou and Mr. G, Vallianatos for their help in the correction of the proofs. Finally, I thank my parents and ray husband for their continuous support and help. My debt to my husband is far more complicated than I can assess since he helped me in many ways from the first to the last stage of my work.

CONTENTS

Abbreviations Introduction I

xv 1

GENERAL TRENDS ]. THE FALL O F SERIOUS DRAMA. THE PANHELLENIC IDEA, THE EXPANSION OF THEATRICAL ACTIVITY. 2. NEW DEVELOPMENTS. DISINTEGRATION OF DRAMATIC FORMS. 3. SUBJECTS 4. DRAMATIC TECHNIQUE AND THE POETICS 5. PRODUCTION: PERFORMANCES OF NEW AND OLD TRAGEDIES 6. SOURCES

3 6 15 18 20 24

A. Aristotle B. Stobaeus C. Athenaeus D. Others 7. POST-EURIPIDEAN AND ROMAN TRAGEDY

24 25 25 26 26

8. THE POPULARITY OF EURIPIDES

28

II

PATHETI C MOTIFS DEVIATIONS FROM CLASSICAL TREATMENS. ESPECIALLY EURIPIDES 1. THE MEDEA OF CARCINUS ' 2. THEODECTES’ PHILOCTETES AND CARCINUS* ALOPE 3. THE ALC M EO N OF ASTYDAMAS A type o f Aristotle's best kind o f tragedy. '4: THE AND RO M ACH E OF ANTIPHON

Athens, November 1980.

III

35 36 38 41

MELODRAM ATIC M OTIFS FOURTH - CENTURY ROMANTIC PLAYS 1.

47

THE ANTIGONE OF ASTYDAMAS

A. Date. Sources. Outline of the Plot. B. Evidence on the Antigone of Euripides i. The AncientTestimony ii. The Fragments

C. Evidence on the later version i. Hyginus ii. The Vases

48 50 50 51 52 52 53

Contents

xii

Contents 2. THE LYN C EU S OF THEODECTES Source. Outline of the Plot. 3. FEATURES SUGGESTING THE MELODRAMATIC CHARACTER OF THE ANTIGONE AND THE LYN C E U S

IV

LEGAL AND R H E T O R I C A L M O T IFS THE INFLUENCE OF RHETORIC ON FOURTH ■CENTURY TRAGEDY !. LEGAL DISTINCTIONS The Alcmeon and Orestes of Theodectes 2. DRAMATIC DEBATES The Alcmeon and Ajax of Theodectes. The Pheraioi of Moschion. 3. SCENES OF DRAMATIC TRIAL The Orestes, Lynceus and Helen of Theodectes. The Medea of Carcinus,

V

NARRATIVE

53 55

PHILOSOPHIC MOTIFS REFLECTIONS ON RELIGION, MORALITY, SOCIETY AND POLITICS 1. HUMAN PROGRESS The Concept of Progress and Moschion’s Account 2. RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. SUPERNATURAL FACTORS. A. Human Condition after Death B. Divine Retribution C. Μοίρα - ’Ανάγκη D. G ods-M en E. Τύχη F. Time 3. MORAL BELIEFS À. Φρόνησις - ‘Αφροσύνη B. ’Αλήθεια - Ψβΰδος C. Σ ιγή - ‘Αδολεσχία D. Εγκράτεια - Τρυφή Ε. Φιλοτϊονία - Ραθυμία F. ’Αναίδεια G. 'Υπεροψία Η . Φθόνος I. 'Αρετή. Εύτυχία Κ. Εύγένεια

149 150 153 154 157 158 159 160

59

V II 63 65 66

PASSAGES

1. CHAEREMON’S OENEUS (fr. 14 N.*/Sa.) Chaeremon’s Account and Euripides’ Bacchae 683ff. 2. CHAEREMON’S ALPHESIBOEA (fr. 1 N.a/Sn.) 3. MOSCHION’S fr. 9 N .a /Sn. 4. CARCINUS’ fr. 5 N.a /Sn. 5. IMAGES DRAWN FROM NATURE 6. PASSAGES IN THE FORM OF A RIDDLE VI

4, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL VIEWS A. Women and Marriage B. Social Relations C. Wealth - Poverty D. Παρρησία E. Qualities of a Magistrate F. Tyranny G. Cosmopolitanism

xiii

71 77 79 84 87 90 97 103 105 116 120 120 123 126 130 132 135 136 137 139 140 141 142 143 144 144 345 147

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

PAPYRUS FRAGM ENTS THE HECTOR OF ASTYDAMAS: RECONSTRUCTION AND MOTIFS OENEUS MEDEA CHAEREMON’SCENTAUR (7) OTHER PAPYRUS FRAGMENTS FROM POST-CLASSICAL TRAGEDY

162 169 173 177 179

ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ (SUMMARY IN GREEK)

185

BIBLIOGRAPHY

203

INDICES

a. Locorum b. Rerum c. Greek words and Phrases ILLUSTRATIONS

219 237 244

ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE The full title of works cited in the text and the footnotes is given in the bibliography at the end. References to modern works are made by the author’s name and the date of pub­ lication. Ancient authors are quoted from the Oxford Classical Texts or the Bibliotheca Teubneriana, unless otherwise stated. In the case of fragmentary works and isolated citations, the edition used in this book is named in the text and the indices. For Greek authors and their works as well as for papyrological publications and general abbrevia­ tions on the whole, I have followed the abbreviations used in the revised (1925-40) edition of Liddel and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon (LSJ). Latin authors and their works are abbreviated according to the Index of the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. The abbreviations of periodicals are adopted from V Année Philologique. Nevertheless, the following should be noted: PERIODICALS

BPhW Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift, 1881-1920. JAW Bursian’s Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der Altertumswissenschaft, Leipziz 1873-1955. LCM Liverpool Classical Monthly. RIGI Rivista Indo-Greca-Italica di filologia, lingua, antichità. GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS

ib. = ibidem (i. e. in thesame literary work, ancientor modern). ibid. = ibidem (i, e. in the same bookor passage ofan ancient literary work). id. - idem. loc. cit. == loco citato, locis citatis. Σ = Scholia.

Introduction

There is little to encourage us to take an interest in fourth-century tragedy: we have the testimony of Aristophanes - who was often an unfair, partial critic - in the Frogs,1 and the silent judgement of the Alexandrine critics who made the Canon as well as later similar judgements,2 that the great fifth-century tragic poets left no worthy successors. From the very beginning the post-Euripidean tragedians were excluded from an or do established by literary criticism. Accordingly, from ancient to modern times we often hear of a decline3in the quality of tragic art. This is mainly due to the fact that we are accustomed to comparing post-classical tragedy with the works of the three great tragic poets who were already established in the fourth century B.C. as "classic”.4 The study of some characteristic aspects of the tragedy of this era will perhaps suggest that we should avoid the vague term "decline” and use a more illuminating one, say "change of direction” . We are not here to deal with a question of a better or worse kind of tragedy but with a different attitude to tragedy. Tragedy was still alive : new forms existed alongside the old ones and in some cases completely replaced them. The novelties in the handling of the plot seem to be, to a remarkable extent, the result of a significant change of mood f novelties in the expression of motifs already handled by fifth-century tragedy were the result of new emotional and intellectual developments.®123456 1. 89 ff. HP. ούκουν ίτερ’ Ιστ* ένταΰθα μειρακύλλια ( τραγφδίας ποιοΰντα πλεϊν ή μύρια, / Εύριπίδου πλεϊν ή σταδίφ λαλίστερα. / ΔΙ. επιφυλλίδες ταντ’ έστI καί στωμνλματα, / χελιδόνων μουσεία, λωβηταί τέχνης, / γάρ ijc0a] Maas Π 12 c[ot. Lobel : c{ol ονμπας) Maas, Körte : e[ot· 0' οίκο»·] Page || 13-14 Traces ; κ^εάνων τεδ [ c. 12] με [Lobel || 15 ο[Λο]άκ πνρί δα[ιό)μεν\_or Lobel || 16 «ai] Lobel |] 17 //['ρκί/ίοΐ']... [crejpctvac Lobel |[ 18 χθρ[νοΰ Ίδα(αο) Lobel ] ôfc/oi1] Lobel H 20 à($[o«]j?ra Lobel | a t "Not ατλητα or äm eta or ατερπνα" Lobel : ihitia Blumenthal : άτηρά (with erasis of και) Beazley ]] 21 δμ[μ Τρ]οηάοιν Lobel || 22 ήδη) Page : ] Körte j] 1. First observed by Lobel, op. cit., 298. The attribution to Antiphon was suggested by: Morel, op. cit., 560; Körte, op. cit., lOlf. ; Webster, 19541( 300, 1968, loc. cit., 196% 32,; Schmidt-Stählin, Or. Lit. Gesck. I. 3, 405f. n. 10; F. Stoessl, Der Kleine Pauly I, 1964, 397f. (4.A). Blumenthal’s ascription (op. cit.) to S. Polyxena is intelicitous, since his argument, that the late date of the papyrus (1st cent. A.D.) is better suited to Sophocles (whose Polyxena, as he remarks, was still read in that age, in view of de S u b i 15.7) than to a minor tragedian, can hardly overthrow the lexical evidence; cf. Calder ΙΠ, 1966, 51. Kamerbeek’s (op. cit., 349) identification of the fragment with a Hellenistic tragedy was rejected by Webster, !9541} loc. cit.

The Andromache of Antiphon

Pathetic Motifs

44

à t â h t \ r[ ~ u u ± 6 ] τυ μ β ο ια μ ό [ , \ ψ Tàc càc Οοηνεϊν, [δύοτη]?ε} τ ύ χ α ύ ’ u u - ] j ’î , τέκνον, crείχε , [ u ----- ,·^ 6] βάα,ν εϋθύν[ω]ν μ ε τ ά μητρόα όμ[οΰ . τή ο ) γειναμένη[ο' π ] ο ΐ μ * ώ ψ ιλ [ία ]

25

Τρώ ω [ν,,, 23 ίΜτΙρέψο)] Maas :■ èm τ[οΐe γάο] Bïumentbal : râri t{oïc cotej Page ] /.w[ν}ψ Page ; po{t} î> Blumenthal : pà[?W Maas is not the reading of 77 jj 24 Mcnflre Lobet : [οννέβη] με. Page || 25 mcrrj]M Page : >Ap«>iTKörte : ννν}ψμ· Blumenthal is not the reading of 77 \ [ttqôc ohovc] More! : rUoyvdv] Körte : ere?*’ Mferutimi Page (but "μ [ or possibly [" Lobe!) j| 26-27 όμ[ον τίμ] γειναμ ά φ Maas, Blumenthal : ί!μ[ως ον} γενα μ êvq[c Lobet || 27 π]οΓ μ' ?»λ|7α] Lobel || 28 Τοωω[ν [ν χώρα Körte.

Cojtimn ϊ (not printed here) appears to give the endings of 19 iambics and includes a dialogue (cf. v. 14). Then vv. 20f. of column I, written like prose, constitute the beginning of the passage that mainly concerns us. which continues, still written in prose, as column II (printed above, pp. 43f.). This is an anapaestic lament, expressed, as the context suggests, by a woman, and mainly addressed to Hector. She accounts her misfortune after the death of Hector, the sunlight of her life and of the whole country; with him the happiness of their home is perished. Their chamber, the hall of Priam(?), so happy before, and the sacred Trojan land have been burnt; because of Helen’s unholy marriage the Trojan maidens, lying beside the Achaean ships, are destined to hear unexpected news (vv. 10-22). At the end of this preserved part, the lamenting woman induces her child to walk with her away from Hector’s tomb, where she alone had been bewailing his unhappy fate (23ff.). The similarities suggested1 between this anapaestic lament and the great lament in Ennius’ Andromacha Aechmalotis are not certain, despite the probable adaptations of fourth-century plays by Latin dramatists.2 The woman of this papyrus-fragment may have been warned about Calchas’ prophecy, that Astyanax had to be killed and herself depart with her new master, in an iambic scene3 followed by the pathetic lament. She seems more likely to be Andromache4 than Hecuba,6 in view of clues in the phrasing and the sentiment of the lament in general: νυμφίδιον 1. By Morel, op. cit., 559f., followed by Körte, op. cit., 102; cf. Leo, 1967, 189 andn.2;but see also the reservations of Webster, 1954lf 299f., Page, op. rit„ p. 165, and Jocelyn, 1967, 238. The Andromache of Euripides was erroneously believed to be the model for Ennius: Jocelyn, op. cit., 236ff. 2. Cf. above, Ch. 1.7. 3. Esp. col. J. 1-14. The change of speakers is denoted by a colon in v. 14. Lobel, op. cit., 297, suggests Talthybius as the first speaker. The reference to ,-?«/; (v.3) may suggest that the woman was informed of the decision of the Greeks to kill Astyanax. 4. Thus Körte, op. cit., 101 ; Morel, op. cit., 559; Blumenthal, op. cit,, 64; Webster, I954j, 299,1969j, 32; Funke, 1965/66, 234. 5. Page, op. cit., 163f.

45

(v. 4),1 φθίμενού μελέα σέΟεν, "Εκτορ (ν. 10) or έμοί μέγα φώς (Π ) are better suited to Andromache than Hecuba. Moreover, it is worth noting that the lament of Andromache in Euripides’ play of the same title (vv. 103-16)2 and that in the papyrus emphasize the same themes: lament for Hector, blame of Helen’s marriage, and the burning of Troy. In view of the evidence mentioned so far (with the due reservations concerning the attribution of the papyrus to Antiphon), some suggestions regarding the plot can be advanced: Andromache, is warned about the impending death of Astyanax and possibly her own capture; she laments Hector beside his tomb; she hides her son possibly among shepherds in the woods;3 it is possible that at the end the child is discovered by Odysseus and, in the traditional manner, thrown from the Trojan walls. It seems likely therefore that Antiphon inserted, the hiding-motif of Euripides’ Andromache, which is not handled in the Troades, in the story of the heroine at Troy before her capture, namely in a plot parallel to that of the Troades. Interestingly, in Seneca’s Troades (426-523) Andromache expresses her fears for the safety of her son and, after consultation with an aged man, hides the boy in his father’s tomb. The hiding of Astyanax by his own mother to escape death and the danger hanging over the child’s life4 are, as in the case of Carcinus’ Medea, purely pathetic5 and dramat­ ically effective themes, which correspond to the literary taste of the fourth century. Andromache, as depicted by both Euripides and Antiphon, is the incarnation of maternal affection, and probably the most heroic and noble of the female epic figures whose stories provided themes for tragedy. In Carcinus’ Oedipus (Snell, TrGFlO F If) the action appears to involve similar motifs. As we know from Arist. Rhet. 3.16, l4l7blBf., Iocasta “del ντησχνειται πννθανομένον τον ζητοϋντος τόν νίόν \ "continually makes professions in answer to the inquiries of the man who is searching for the son’. This implies that Iocasta, like Andromache and

1. For the suggested supplement λέχος ci. E. Med. 999, Ale. 885f., Hipp, 1140f. Χάρη' might also be another restoration since it is commonly used in a purely erotic sense and also of conjugal relations: Horn. II. XI 243; A. Ag. 1206; adeep. fr. 402 N.2; Pi. fr. 128.1 Sn.; PJ. Pkdr. 254a. 2. On this elegiac threnos see Page in Greek Poetry and Life (above, p. 42 n, 5), 206-30. 3. According to Accius’ frr. IX-XIR.3 The terracotta relief on the monument of Numitorius (Bieber, 1961, fig. 588), which represents an elderly man (Odysseus?) bringing bad news to an oriental woman who holds a boy by the hand (Andromache and Astyanax?), was thought to illustrate Accius’ A styanax or its source (Webster, 1954i, 299 n. 4). 4. Similar cases in Euripides of children entangled in serious dangers with threats against their lives : Heracl, 48ff., II.F. 622ÎÎ., Med, 1273ff., Telephus as shown on the vase-paintings (but for the last case cf. Handley and Rea, 1957, 27). In such cases, the scale of the pathetic element is amplified, and probably for this reason Euripides multiplied such scenes in his plays: Masqueray, 1908,93H.; Decharme, 1966, 275ff„ and (especially on Molossos and Andromache) 279ff.; Romilly, 1961, 32ff. Similarly, in New Comedy the appearance of infants is usually associated with threats against them; cf. the infant’s fate in Men. Epitrepontes, which is linked with that of his parents. 5. Πάθος is among the few undeniable qualities of E. Andromache also, which was rated as "rw r ύεντέρωι-" already by ancient critics (second argument to the play); seeKitto, 1961,233f.,Lesky, 1965,157, Stevens, 1971,27f. Like the Hecuba and the Troades, the Andromache exhibits a direct and violent expression of the pathetic.

46

Pathetic Motifs

Medea, may have hidden the infant Oedipus from someone (Laius ?) who was seeking him out (to kill him?), and had to account (to Laius?) for the child’s disappearance. In Sophocles, Oedipus, given by his own mother to a slave to be exposed in the wilds of Mount Cithaeron and rescued by a pair of shepherds, was brought up by the king and queen of Corinth. Accordingly, the attitude of Iocasta in Carcinus provides a further deviation from classical treatments of the legend, which, besides its plausibility, also accords with the milder humanity of the age.

C H A P T E R III

M ELODRAM ATIC M OTIFS

FOURTH-CENTURY ROMANTIC PLAYS

To qualify a romance, a melodrama or a tragicomedy, a play must be distinct in structure and treatment from both tragedy and comedy. Moreover, one has to distinguish tragicomic or melodramatic scenes, which occur in the drama of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides1 and relax the seriousness of pure tragedy, from romantic-intrigue plays as conscious, deliberate creations, which are to be found first in Euripides. A prime aim of the dramatist in romantic plays is to create an effective stagepiece,Theatrical reality replaces the universal reality of serious drama. The Helen and the Iphigeneia are based on a supernatural, miraculous substitution, the Alcestis and the Ion on a miraculous rescue. Dramatic resources are exploited for their own sake, not for expressing the tragic idea. Accordingly, the tragic μνθος, the serious theme, could no longer develop. Genuine tragic emotions cannot arise from conventional, fictitious sit­ uations. Only a mild sentimentality can be aroused. The appeal is to the audience’s curiosity, expectation, intellect, and the happy ending replaces the tragic κάθαρσις. Recognition forms the height of complication and leads to the solution. Surprise, suspense and curiosity are thus created, and Euripides knows how to maintain them by exploiting the expectation of his audience that a particular convention would be handled in the time-honoured way. The recognition-scene is, accordingly, expected with intense interest after a series of perplexities which aim at keeping the action constantly on the move. Moreover, Antiphanes’ criticism that the audience is a priori informed of the action (fr. 191 K.) does not apply to these plays: in the Helen, for instance, the playwright filled out the details of a relatively unfamiliar myth, and in the Orestes he invented much of the story himself. The exploitation of the sentimental and melodramatic is a further marked characteris­ tic of romantic plays and of the most important developments in drama during the later fifth century. The sentimentality of Euripides in the treatment of old tales3 established him 1. Cf., for instance, the watchman's monologue in A. Ag. Iff.; the peasant messenger’s account in S. Ant. 223ff.; the would be rejuvenation of Iolaus who insists on setting off to battle in E. Herad. 680/L; Teiresias and Cadmus, though old, indulge in a bacchic dance at Ba. 184ff., 322ff, For the comic elements in the Bacchae see recently Seidensticker, 1978. 2. Cf. Barnes, 1964-65,128ff., who discusses the particular features of each play of the kind, including the Cyclops. 3. On Euripides’ different handling of the love-motif in the Antigone see below, sect. 3, pp. 55f.

48

Melodramatic Motifs

as the founder of love-drama and the forerunner of New Comedy and the romantic drama of Modern Europe. He was the first tc make the theme of love - cither in romantic plays, such as the Antigone, Alcestis and Andromeda, or in pathetic tragedies, such as the Medea, Hippolytus, Stheneboea, Aeolus, Chrysippus, and Cretans, — the ruling motive for the action. Fourth-century romantic plays seem, as the following discussion will show, to continue the literary pattern that was introduced by Euripides and developed in the form ofNew Comedy and Greek romance. The average type of man without heroics is glorified in both Euripidean tragicomedies and later plays of the kind. In working out his plots of Athenian private life, which had not changed essentially in a hundred years, Menander could borrow from late fifth-century tragedies1 realistic incidents mirroring everyday life. Euripides, a great realist and, at the same time, a master of romance and fantasy, bridged the chasm between tragic seriousness and anti-tragic psychological intrigue, paving the way for later romantic compositions. It seems accordingly safe to remark that in regard to μύθος the tragedy of the fourth century further^devëîoped the two opposite characteristics of the drama of Euripides; namely pathetic and disctinctly tragic themes, often involving the undeserved fall of the tragic hero, in plays like the Alcmeon of Astydamas and Theodectes, the Alope and Medea of Carcinus, Theodectes’ Philoctetes and Antiphon’s Andromache',1 and melodramatic intrigues with excitement and coups de théâtre in romantic plays like the Lynceus of Theodectes and the Antigone of Astydamas. 1. THE ANTIG ONE OF ASTYDAMAS A. Date, Sources. Outline of the Plot. As we know from by the valuable inscription discussed above,8 the Antigone of Astydamas was performed in 342/41 B. C. and, with the Achilles and Athamas, won the first prize for its author. The evidence about this later version of the Antigone-story seems to be of two kinds; an Apulian amphora of 340/20 B.C.,4 and Hyginus fab. 72 which runs as follows; “ Creon Menoecei filius edixit ne quis Polynicem aut qui una venerunt sepulturae traderet, quod patriam oppugnatum venerint; Antigona soror et Argia coniunx clam noctu Polynicis corpus sublatura in eadem pyra qua Eteocles sepultus est imposuerunt. 2. quae cum a

1. Dover, 1968., 149f., aptly points out some improbabilities involved in assuming a one-way influence of tragedy on New Comedy, and in not seeing the latter as a product of a long-standing con­ vergence of comedy and tragedy. The tragic affinities of New Comedy are summarized by Satyrus (F. Bur. = PO xy. 9.1176 fr. 39 col. vii). 2. See Chs II and IV. 1,2. 3. 'Ch. I. 5, 8, pp. 21, 30. 4. Ruvo Ja tia 423; Séchan, 1926, fig. 85, p. 274 and n. 1 for references; Pickard-Cambridge, 1956, fig. 13; see also Webster, 1954lt 304f., 1968, 93f., 1969x, 63, M TSP2, p. 165; Jebb, Sophocles Antigone (1962), p. xl; not discussed by Trendall andWebster, 1971; (here fig. 10).

The Antigone of Astydamas

49

custodibus deprehensae essent, Argia profugit, Antigona ad regem est perducta ; ille eam Haemoni cuius sponsa fuerat dedit interficiendam. Haemon amore captus patris imperium neglexit et Antigonam ad pastores demandavit, ementitusque est se eam inter­ fecisse. 3. quae cum filium procreasset et ad puberem aetatem venisset, Thebas ad ludos venit; hunc Creon rex quod ex draconteo genere omnes in corpore insigne habebant cognovit, cum Hercules pro Haemone deprecaretur ut ei ignosceret, non impetravit; Haemon se et Antigonam coniugem interfecit. 4. at Creon Megaram filiam suam Herculi dedit in coniugium, ex qua nati sunt Therimachus et Ophites.” It is also probable that a second illustration on an Apulian amphora of 340/20 S.C., preserved in the Berlin Museum,1 is inspired by the same play. The main figures, Creon, Heracles, Antigone, Haimon, Maion (the son of Haimon and Antigone), and the situation involved seem to coincide in both vases, and the variants between them are not note­ worthy.2 But there are no good grounds for associating with this dramatic version a further illustration on a presumably Apulian fragment,3 showing the head of a woman named Eurydice and a part of a second head marked by the letters ΑΙΩΝ. That a play dealing with the story of Antigone provided the source of Hyginus and the vase-paintings has been shown convincingly.4 On the basis of Hyginus and the Ruvo vase the outline of the plot could be sketched: Haimon, ordered by Creon to kill Antigone for burying Polyneices, hid her among shepherds and told his father that he had killed her. The play must have opened when their son was old enough to come to Thebes for the local games. For reasons of dramatic economy, all the preceding events, partly known from Euripides’ Antigone and partly from Hyginus, were probably narrated in a pro­ logue.56In Thebes Creon recognized Maion, and, furious at Haimon’s disobedience, ordered the execution of the couple.® Heracles intervened7 to save Haimon and Antigone. This is the moment which both vases represent. But according to Hyginus he did not succeed; Haimon took his own and Antigone’s life. However, unsuccessful intervention of Heracles seems unlikely, and it may be that the memory of Sophocles diverted Hyginus here. If 1. Furtwaengler 3240; Séchan, op. cit., fig. 86, p. 275 and n. 1, for references; Huddilston, 1899, fig, 2, p, 195 and n. 1; Webster, M TSP 3, loc. cit.·, (here fig. 11). 2. A detailed description of both vases is given by Séchan, op. cit., 274f., Huddilston, op. cit,, 192ft., and need not be repeated here. 3. In Carlsruhe Museum; Séchan, op. cit., fig. 87, pp. 275f. and n. 2 with references; Huddilston, op. cit., fig. 3, pp. 197ff.; Webster,MTSP", loc. cit. The fragment is Apulian in technique; its provenance is unknown; cf. Huddilston, op. cit., 197. 4. On the recognition scene implied by Hyginus5 words "C reon... ex draconteo genere.., insigne... cognovit'5 see below, p. 56 and n. 5. As regards the vase-paintings, Séchan, op. cit., 277 n. 4, noted some features suggesting a play, such as the costumes of the represented persons, the decoration with the central building (aedicula, on the Ruvo vase), probably symbolizing Créons palace, and the three central figures (on the Ruvo vase again), thought to represent the three actors. 5. Cf. the prologue of E. Alexandras as reconstructed by Snell, 1937, 24ff., Hanson, 1964, 179, Webster, 1967, 166f., Coles, 1974, 23f., and others (cf. below, p. 55 n. !). It refers to the birth and exposure of Alexandros up to the organization of the games. 6. In both vases Antigone is represented with her hands bound and in charge of a guard. 7. In both vases Heracles is represented in the centre (in the Ruvo vase he is inside the aedicula), standing as an intercessor between the two parties. 4

50

The Antigone of Astydamas

51

Melodramatic Motifs

Heracles intervened as a deus ex machina, he could hardly have failed. Even as a mortal,1 he is unlikely to have mediated unsuccessfully, All the recorded cases of the hero inter­ vening to save the lives of his fellowmen, such as in A. Prometheus Unbound and E. Alcestis, tell against such an unhappy mediation here. Since the relevant sources contain no hint about the author of the play, there is a serious problem which has often concerned scholars in the past, as to which dramatic version of the Antigone - story provided the source for Hyginus and the vase *painters. However, as recent studies have established the victorious play of Astydamas as the probable source,2 our purpose is to show, starting from a comparative survey of all the relevant evidence, that there are no grounds for assuming any other version3 but that of Astydamas, the only known treatment of the story after Euripides. The inconsistencies discussed below, between the evidence concerning Euripides’ play on the one hand and the version known from Hyginus and the vases on the other, show that the action in Euripides’ play must have preceded that in the later version. --^S . Evidence on the Antigone of Euripides i. The Ancient Testimony The available evidence for the play of Euripides as contrasted with that of Sophocles is provided by two passages: the Hypothesis of Aristophanes of Byzantium to the Antigone of Sophocles... κεΐται ή μνθοποιία καί παρά Ευριπίδη έν Αντιγόνη’ πλήν εκεί φωραθεΐσα μετά τον Αϊμονος δίδοται προς γάμον κοινωνίαν και τέκνον τίκτει τον M alovaf and the Scholion to Sophocles’ Antigone 1350: ότι διαφέρει τής Εύριπίδον *Αντιγόνης αϋτη, δτι φωραθεϊσα έκείνη δια τον Αϊμονος έρωτα έξεδόθη προς γάμον, ένταν6α δέ τουναντίον} Some of the scholars who held that Hyginus contains the Euripidean version argued 1. Such an alternative accords with Hyginus’ words "Hercules pro Haemone deprecaretur ut ei ignosceret” for a god, even a half-god as Heracles, could hardly beg a mortal. 2. Astydamas was first suggested by G. Müller, Sent, contr. 4, appended to his dissertation de L. Annaei Senecae quaesi, nat., Bonn 1886; Baton, 1901, and Séchan, 1926, 277ff., after a careful survey of the evidence, raised sensible objections against an attribution to Euripides, and thought of Astydamas; see more recently Webster, loc. cit. (p. 48 n. 4). 3. Euripides’Antigone was widely-and erroneously-thought to be the play t'o which Hyginus refers: Welcker (pt. 2, 1839, 563ff., pt. 3, 1841, 15881Î.), who did not take into account the vase-paintings, was followed, among others, by Mayer, 1883, 73-77, Huddilston, op. cit., 190if., Robert, 1915,1, 381ff.; cf. also Lucas, 1968,167. A post-Euripidean version was also assumed, and attributed either to Meletus, the author of an Oedipodeia (Wagner, 1878, 657) or to Theodectes, especially in view oi the coincidences in the action of his Lynceus and of this version of the Antigone (Wecklein, 1878,3 90f.).However,Theodectes is not known to have written an Antigone, and the Oedipodeia of Meletus, the "ί/>υ#ρός” and "φαύλος ποιητής” (Sud. μ 495; Σ PI. A p. 18b; cf. OCD2 ν. Meletus I), could hardly have been known and inspired thib Italian painters many years later. 4. Naucks, p. 405 footnote, in view of Horn. II. IV 394, corrected the readings of the codd. M at μονά or ΑΙμονα toMalova. 5. It has been noticed that the Scholiast seems to follow Aristophanes closely.

that these statements have no reference to the main action but only to the preceding events, which were narrated in a prologue.1 The phrase, however, κεΐται ή μνθοποιία in Aristophanes’ Hypotheseis usually2 refers to the general treatment of the story, and not to minor details.3 A reference to a prologue should be suggested in a particular way and not in the ordinary formula.4 Moreover, a summary of a dramatic prologue is not found elsewhere in Aristophanes’ Hypotheseis. Accordingly, it can safely be inferred from the ancient testimony that the time of action in Euripides’ A n tigone corresponded in general with that of the play of Sophocles, and that both plays certainly contained the burial of Polyneices. But in Euripides, Antigone had the assistance of Haimon, was given in marriage to him and bore him the child Maion, ii. The Fragments Apart from the ancient testimony, the majority of the fragments of Euripides’ Antigone allude to a time of action which corresponds to that of the Sophoclean play. The fr. 176 N.2 deals with the futility of vengeance upon a dead body, and in a Antigone such verses can refer only to Creon’s impious treatment of the body of Poly­ neices, whose burial, as the Hypothesis attests, was contained in the Euripidean version, The sentiment of the fragment could hardly suit in a version concerned with events long after the burial of Polyneices, and cannot thus find a place in the narrative of Hyginus. Haimon’s love for Antigone is clearly implied in frr. 161-62 N.2 while the general statement on marriage in fr. 164 N .2 is obviously referred to them both. Similarly, the words of the beautiful fr. 170 and of frr. 171-73 N.2 seem likely to have been uttered by Antigone herself when rejecting Creon’s decree.5 Fr. 168 Ν.2 ονόματι μεμπτόν τό νόθον, ή φύσις δ’ ίση and fr. 166 Η 2 τό μωρόν αύτω τον πατρυς νόσημά ένΐ' / φάει γάρ ούτως ίκ κακών είναι κακούς were regarded by Welcker and his followers as indicative of the presence of Maion as a grown boy, and thus as corresponding to Hyginus’ narrative. However, even these two much discussed fragments cannot convincingly suggest that Maion participated in the play of Euripides. To νόθον was supposed to refer to Maion6 but such an assumption is not supported by any further indication of Maion’s share in the action. Moreover, the phrase in the Hypothesis "καί τέκνον τίκτει τον Maiova’ could hardly suggest that the boy participated in Euripides’ play where it is more likely that his birth was merely referred to. On the other hand, the word νόθον in a play dealing with the fate of Oedipus’ children is not unlikely to refer to Antigone as the child of an illegal marriage.7 Similarly, there

1. Welcker, pt. 2,1839, 564ff.; Mayer, op. cit., 76; Huddilston, op. cit., 186, 201. 2. As in those to A. P.V., S. Phil., E. Ph. 3. Cf. Paton, op. cit., 269, Séchan, op. cit., 286 and n. 3; also Weil, 1889, 329, Mesk, 1931,9. 4. On the stock-construction of Aristophanes' Hypotheseis see von Cohn, R E IIi 998ff. 5. Cf. Webster, 3967, 183, Séchan, op. cit., 281 and n. 5. 6. Mayer, op. cit., 73f.; Huddilston, op. cit., 189. Demcas in Men. Sarnia 1311. seems to have in mind this passage; see Webster, 19 δμματι πρόσΟε πά­ θος. In the second case the Sun is explicitly asked,as in Theodectes, to attest something of great importance for the appealed person. Forensic competition is alluded to by such technical terms as αγώνα, κρίσιν, κατη­ γορεί, κατηγορονσί μου, èv λόγοισι (probably meaning'through speaking debate’), which are remarkably frequent in so few lines. Moreover, the three-fold rhetorical contest is distinctly implied by the speaker’s naming the two prosecutors: a woman and a man (vv. 5f.). From all the known plays of Theodectes this unnamed passage more likely belongs to the Helen.* The three-fold άγών of the Troades, which may find an echo in the Helenfragment, appears to be clearly shaped here: Helen, the defendant, is complaining about the accusations made against her by her own husband, "τυγχάνει πόσις”6 (v. 6), and a 1. For the apostrophes to nature by Greek tragic figures at climactic moments see Pelzer Wagener, 1931, esp. 89-91. 2. For examples see Soutar, 1939, 176ff., Wagener, op. cit.; 82, 87. For the personification of the sun as a man with a torch cf. Ennius’ Medea Exul fi\ XII R-.a, with Jocelyn’s note (p. 380) citing Latin parallels. 3. The lines were probably adapted by Accius, PÄ.581ff. (fr. 1) R.3The same image "φλόγα είλίσσειν' flammam explicas” was used by the three dramatists. Haslam, 1975, among other evidence, uses these instances to show that Ph. If. are post-Euripidean. 4. Snell (TrGF, p. 235 n. 10) assumed the Alcmeon, and del Grande (1934,200,209) the Orestes. But neither the mythological sources nor the dramatic treatments of the stories of Alcmeon and Orestes allude to a debate involving three persons and in such a relation as that which is explicitly referred to in our fragment. 5. The pronoun μου may have been omitted either for metrical reasons or for euphony, since it occurs both in the previous and the next verse. Moreover, often in tragedy, πόσις occurs without μου — or any other pronoun - whenever the meaning allows it; cf. E. A le. 36, 233, 464,Andr. 8f., 33, 205, 456, Tr. 730, El. 61.

69

woman, possibly Hecuba, who must have previously accused her to Menelaus, as the εΐρηκε implies. In. the Medea of Carcinus, on the basis of the heroine’s self-defence as survivingin the Rhetoric,3 a trial scene seems also to have taken place. Creon and Jason may have been the prosecutors while Medea was the defendant, as Aristotle clearly attests: ol μεν κατηγοροϋαιν... ή aï μεν αυτών εις άπείρονα στρατόν άνθέων άλογχον εστράτενσαν, ήδοναϊς θηρώμεν(αι χ )οντα λειμώνων τέκνα 1 ενθ* άΐ μέν Meineke : ένθεμεν Ath. || 2 αλογχον Meineke : άλόχων Ath.: άλόγχων Hermann jj 3 0ηρώμεν(αι χ ~)ona Snell : θηρώμενον τά Ath.: Θηρώμεναι κομώντα Hermann (βρνοντα Ellis, Οάλλοντα Cobet, Nauck, γελώντα F. G. Schmidt).

'Thereupon some of the maidens campaigned against the endless and spearless army of flowers hunting with delight the... children of the meadows’. The unmetrical third verse obviously contains another metaphor for flowers, but its metrical restoration is difficult. For flowers as " λ ε ι μ ώ ν ω ν τ έ κ ν α ” cf. A. Pers. 618 άνθη τε πλεκτά, παμφόρον γαίας τέκνα. The descriptive imagery of the passage, possibly depicting girls campaigning against the boundless army of flowers, has a precedent in E. Hyps. fr. 754 N.3 (Bond, pp. 34ff.) where the baby Opheltes είς/τδν λει­ μώνα καθίσας έδρεπεν, / 'έτερον εφ>ετέρω f αιρόμενος / άγρενμ’ άνθέων ήδομένα ψνχδ.. Noteworthy is again, as in fr. 8, the combination of epic adjective, α π ε ί ρ ω ν , and the unique ά λ ο γ χ ο ν for the common άοπλος (ανοπλος). A common image recurs with the further description of wreaths as ε ύ φ η μ ί α ς κ ή ρ υ κ α ς (cf. άγγελοι ευφημίας in fr. 6, above, ρ. 91) in the second fragment from the Centaur (II, ap. Ath. 15,676 E): ol παΐδες στεφάνους έτοιμάζουσιν, οϋς ευφημίας κήρυκας ευχαϊς προύβάλοντο δαιμόνων 2 ευχαϊς Dalechamps : ευχαι Ath. | προνβάλοηο Canter : προύβύλλοντο Ath.

'The boys prepare wreaths which, as heralds of holy silence, they throw forward as a protection upon their prayers to the gods’. The uncertain text of the Minyadcs fr. 12 (Ath. 13,608 F) gives a less clear meaning: πολλήν οπώραν Κνπριδος εισοράν παρήν άκραισι περκάζονσαν οϊνάνθαις χρόνον 2 χρόνον Ath.: γέννν Kaibel : χρόα Wilamowitz : όβραϊσι περκάζονσιν οϊνάνθαις ομον Meineke.

'Cypris’ summer could be seen in abundance darkling at the tip of young grapes at time’s decree’.

94

Narrative Passages

’Ο π ώ ρ α ν K ύ π ρ ι δ ο ς seems to imply both beauty and sexual ripeness, and such a meaning is supported by parallels (quoted by Collard, 1970, 28 and n. 50). The poet’s partiality for sensuous language is again revealed here (cf. the Oeneus and the Alphesiboea fragments). O lv ά ν θ η , the flowering of the grape-vine (Hsch., Σ E. Ph. 229 Schw.), metaphorically used, also denotes the time of ripeness as in Pi. N. 5.6 : oikτω γένυσι φαίνων τέρειναν j μοτέρ’ οϊνάνΟας οπώραν. The concept of this couplet of Chaeremon echoes also Pi. I. 2.4f.: ...Άφροδίτας / ... άδίσταν οπώραν. Moreover, π ε ρ κ ά ζ ε ι ν , first traceable in Chaeremon — with the exception of Horn. Od. VII 126 νποπερκάζονσι - is used especially of grapes beginning to "turn dark” (Thphr. H.P. ix.11.7, C.P. iii.16.3); there is a metaphorical use in Call. Lav.Pall. (v)75f.... άρτι γένεια / περκάζων where the Scholiast renders : περκάζο:ν, ήτοι μελαινόμ&νος νπδ της εκφύσεως των τριχών. The variant πέρκαίνειν in E. Cret. 15, regarded as a hapax (see, for instance, Cantarella’s note ad loc., Barlow, 1971, 136), is shown by Hesychius’ gloss διαποικίλλεσθαι καί τά δμοια to have perhaps been the current form; cf. Zawadska, 1962, 109. - Χ ρ ό ν ο ν involves difficulties of interpretation, and Bartsch’s (1843,38) "de tempore progrediente” would be better suited to a dative χρόνφ: cf. E. Alexandros fr. 44.1 N.12, Theodect. fr. 11.3-4 N.2/Sn. (Ch. VI.3.E). With Kaibel’s emendation γ έ ν ν v, the comparison of the darkening beard to the colour of the grape suggests a reference to a young man (cf. Collard, op. cit., 28 and n. 49), and echoes again earlier poetry: P . N. 5.6 (cited above); E. Ba. 438, Ph. 1160, Cret. 15 (where it refers to a bull). Roses are associated not only with spring (cf. fr. 9 above, pp. 92f.), but also with the collective word for seasons (7Ω ρ a i) in the sole fragment (13, ap. Ath. 13,608 E) from the Odysseus; κόμαισιν ώρών σώματ’ ενανθή ρόδα εϊχον, τιθήνημ’ έαρος έκπρεπέστατον 1 σώματ’ Ath.: θρέμματ’ Nauck (Ind.

X X V I),

Collard: ΰμματ’ Kaibel : χρώματ Ellis, alii alia.

Τη their hair they wore the bodies of the Seasons, blooming roses, nurslings of the spring-time, most distinguished of all’. The personification of the seasons is an old one: Webster, 1954^, 20. The parallel ιίόωρ... ποταμού σώμα in fr. 17 (discussed immediately below) may support the reading of the mss σ ώ μ α τ ’, and reveals Chaeremon’s proneness to apply human qualities ( σώ­ μα) to abstractions or inanimates (seasons, river). Τ ι θ ή ν η μ ’ ë a ρ ο ς, much more poetic than the common τέκνον in fr. 9, is a vox Euripidea {Hyps. fr. 60.Î.10 Bond). The untitled fr. 17 N.2/Sn., parodied by Eubulus (incert. fr. 151 K., ap. Ath. 2,43 C; cf. Eust. Σ Od. V 453 [1545.50]), though lacking any reference to flowers, shows plainly that again natural scenery provided the spur to Chaeremon’s imagination : έπεϊ ôè σηκών περίβολός ήμείψαμεν νδωρ τε ποταμού σώμα διεπεράσαμεν ‘After we had passed the boundaries of the sheepfold and had crossed the water, body of the river’.

Images Drawn from Nature

95

Π ε ρ ι β ο λ ή (or περίβολος), though not recorded in Aeschylus and Sophocles, is fairly frequent in Euripides (7 occurrences in various senses): see Bond, 1963, 138. " Υ δ ω ρ π ο τ α μ ο ύ σ ώ μ α recalls Choerilus fr. 2 (λίθοισι) γης όστοϊσιν... and fr. 3 N.2/Sn, (ποταμοί) γής φλέβες1 as well as Gorgias’ (fî 5a DK II 284) swollen periphrases in [Long.] De Subi. 3.2 where such pompous diction in tragedy is disap­ proved of. It is, however, worth noting that even in such an ultra-artificial expression Chaeremon avoids his predecessors’ harshness and obscurity.2 By adding ύδωρ as the first term of the comparison, he is far from Choerilus’ unintelligible periphrasis^? φλέβες, similarly implying rivers. Such strange periphrases, involving a tendency to pompous and elaborate diction, are frequent in Middle and New comedy: cf. Men. Dysc. 946f. (with parallels cited'by Handley, ad loc.). Remarkable reminiscences of Euripides in both language and concept, and partiality for metaphors are also found in two short fragments of' Astydamas and Moschion, in which nature plays again a prime role. Athenaeus, again the exclusive source, quotes (2, 40 B) an untitled couplet of Astydamas (fr. 6 N.2/Sn.) after one similar passage from E. Bacchae (771ff.) and before another from Antiphanes ( incert. fr. 271 K .): (Διόνυσος) X - υ - θνητοΐσι τήν ακεσφόρον λύπης έφηνεν οίνομήτορ’ άμπελον Ή© revealed to mortals the vine, mother of wine, that brings a cure for sorrow’. The belief that the vine —or wine ( ο ί ν ο μ ή τ ω ρ * is unique) - releases from care and grief { α κ ε σ φ ό ρ ο ς has a unique precedent in E. Ion 1005) is prevalent from the archaic age onwards.45In one of the orphie hymns (50.6 Quandt), addressed to Dionysus, the god is called in language very similar to Astydamas’ “πανσίπονον θνητοΐσι ... ακο?” . Dionysus was called Λναιος or Λνσιος5 denoting the'loosener or deliverer from care’ (cf. Plut. quom. adul. 27,68 D with reference to Pi. fr. 248 Sn.). Also Dionysus was traditionally held to bring joy through wine : "πολνγηθής” (πολνγαθής) is found in early literary sources.6 The traditional association of wine and gaiety is not lacking in plays of satyric tone (E. Ale. 788, Cyc. 168, 530, 537); it reappears in two fragments of 1. For the comparison of parts of the earth to parts of the human body see Koster, 1951,30f., Waern 1953, 9SÎU 2. Choerilus’ obscurity of diction seems well known in antiquity. Aristotle (Top. 8.1, 357al4ff.) distinguishes this dramatist’s unfamiliar expressions from Homer’s παραδείγματα οίκεΐα. 3. Similarly, in Pi. N . 9.52 wine is called "the son of the vine”, and in A. Pers. 614f. the vine is wine’s "wild mother’’. 4. For instances from Alcaeus and Archilochus see Lloyd-Jones, 1973, 42. 5. Cf. Farneil, V, 1909, 120 and note b ; Dodds, 1963, 76f„ 273, and 279f. n. 19 (for various inter­ pretations of this attribute). 6. Hes.Erg. 614, Th. 943, fr. 70.6 (M.-W.) ; Pi. fr. 29.5,153 (Sn.). In//.X IV 325 Dionysus is called "χάρμα βροτοΐσιν", but in Sc. 400 (=Hes. fr. 239.1 M.-W.) his gifts are χάρμα and άχθος. For this antithetical association see Bielohlawek, 1940, 19, 23.

96

Narrative Passages

Chaeremon (16.15 Sn.), discussed above (p. 90), where, however, wisdom and prudence are added to the effects of wine. Both language and thought seem to echo some characteristic passages from E. Bacchae: την πανσίλνπον άμπελον1 δούναι βροτοΐς (sc. Dionysus, ν. 772);... . λόγχη), used as a metaphorical substitute for the warriors armed with spears, and is not recorded before E. Ph. 441f. Such collective singulars (e. g. Ίππος, άσπίς, δόρυ) are very frequent in tragedy: A. Pers. 302; S. O.C. 1525; E. Ph. IS, Heracl. 275f.; Ezekiel Exagogi 195 Sn. The dramatically effective antithesis of βαιός and μνριος - or their synonyms - has also parallels in tragedy: S. O.C. 397, 498, Nauplius fr. 434.1 P.; E. Bellerophontes fr. 286.10-12 N.2; Sosith. Aethlius fr. 1.1 N.2/Sn. The first two verses strongly recall, in point of vocabulary and imagery, the pathetic opening of E. Medea, especially vv. 3f. μηδ’ èv νάπαισι ΠηλΙου πεσεϊν ποτέ / τμηθείσα πεύκη. Moreover, the sentiment is closely similar to E. Archelaus fr. 243 Ν.2 ολίγον αλκιμον δόρυ j κρείσσον στρατηγού μυρίου στρατεύματος. In the Persae of Aeschylus every emphasis is given on the vast power and the final debacle of the Persians. The idea of the Greeks defeating with few men and arms the huge Persian forces, epigrammatically expressed in Moschion’s fragment, is developed in the messenger’s account of the naval battle (vv. 337-432), which is remarkable for its brevity, restraint and impartiality.1 The concept of the utter defeat and desolation of the formerly powerful Persians reaches its height in the final scene (907-1076) with the appearance of Xerxes.2 It is unfortunate that such elaborately written passages from fourth-century tragedy are not preserved to a greater extent so as to allow us a more detailed and useful comparison with fifth-century dramatic treatments of similar themes. 6. PASSAGES IN THE FORM OF A RIDDLE Wording in the form of a riddle, which in fourth-century tragedy appealed par1. For a careful analysis see Broadhead, 1960, xviiif,; cf. also Lloyd-Jones, 1973, 88f. 2. Cf. Broadhead, op. ci I., xxiiif., also citing relevant literature. 7

Passages in the Form of a Riddle 98

99

Narrative Passages

ticularly to Theodectes, appears to have been a favourite way of expression in drama from that age onwards. Among the poets of Middle Comedy Antiphanes (Riddle fr. l94,Sapphoir. 196 K.), Eubulus (Sphingocarionfr. 107 K.)and Alexis {Sleep fr. 240K.) seem to like enigmatic wording. As for contemporary tragedy we are told that Carcinus depicted Orestes answering in riddles in regard to his matricide (Snell, TrGF 70 F lg). His name thus gave rise to a proverb, a 'poem by Carcinus’,1 which came to be used as an equivalent for anything obscure and unintelligible. His general style, however, as may be seen in the existing fragments,8 is clear and straightforward. A century later, Lycophron in the Alexandra showed a proneness to tortuous composition and extremely riddling style. The slave informs us that Cassandra will speak in riddles "copying the voice of the dark sphinx” (v. 7). She then indulges in endless enigmatic prophecies in a deliberately contorted wording.3 Athenaeus, in his long discussion of puzzles, quotes the sole passage preserved from Theodectes’ Oedipus (10,451 F; fr. 4 N.8/Sn.), and also the same dramatist’s untitled fr. 18 N.2/Sn. (451 E), which both contain riddles in hexameters. The riddle in the Oedipusfragment, with a metaphor from family relations, alludes, as Athenaeus tells us, to the succession of night and day : slal κασίγνηται δισσαί, ών ή μία τίκτει τήν έτέραν, αυτή ôè τεκονσ’ υπό τήσδε τεκνονται4 1 δισσαί Tryph.: διτταϊ Ath. A, Moschop.: δύ' άδελφεαί' ή μία Α.Ρ.

'There are two sisters of whom the one gives birth to the other while she herself, after giving birth, is brought forth by the other’. The puzzle, as expressed, reflects the widespread concept of personified Day and Night. Each of them is here regarded as bringing forth the other. From Hesiod onwards5*Day was regarded as the child of Night and not vice versa, since day represents a more de­ veloped stage than night. This basic order of succession does not vary in Greek thought. Theodectes must have been induced by a special dramatic purpose to introduce this variant. Figuratively in an Oedipus-play, the ceaseless succession of Night and Day, each bringing forth the other, may imply Oedipus’ incest with his own mother and the tangled kinship with his own children and at the same time brothers and sisters. This might well have been an extreme development of tragic irony, and if so, the riddle must have been propounded before the recognition of the blood-relations; 1. See Phot, and Sud. (κ 397) μ. Καρκίνον ποιήματα' Μένανδρος Ψευδηρακλεϊ' (fr. 457 Kö.) cd«* γματώδη. 2. Cf. esp. the fr. 5 discussed above, pp. S7ff.. 3. On the content, style and the political implications of the Alexandra see Webster, 1964,132-35. 4. The puzzle is also quoted by Tryphon, Trop, 8, 734, 7 (Walz); Moschop. op. 75; Georg. Choerob. n. τρόπ. 8, 816, 7 (Walz); A , P. xiv. 40, where the two verses added "ώστε κασιγνήτας οϋσας άμα καί σννομαίμους / αντοκασιγνήτας κοινή και μητέρας είναι’ have been expelled by editors as late additions; ci. also ibid., xiv. 41. 5. Th. 124 (with West’s note); also Bacch, 7.If.; similarly. Dawn comes from Night in A. Ag. 265 (with parallels cited by Fraenkel ad loc.).

Hermippus,1 in his work MOn the Disciples of Isocrates”, attested (ap. Ath. 10,451 E) that "Theodectes was very good at discovering the answers to riddles put to him, and himself cleverly propounded riddles to others, like the following one on the shadow” (fr. 18 N.2/Sn.): τις φνσις o ffl δσα γαϊα φέρει τροφός o ffl δσα πόντος ούτε βροτοΐσιν εχει γνίων ανξησιν όμοίαν, άλλ’ εν μεν γενέσει πρωτοσπόρφ έστί μεγίστη, εν ôè μέσαις άκμαΐς μικρά, γήρα, ôè προς αύτω μορφή και μεγέθει μείζων πάλιν έστϊν απάντων; 1 τις φύσις Porson ; τής φύσεως A || 5 μείζων C : μείζον Α.

'What creature is that which is not among the things that Earth, the nurse, brings forth, nor the Sea, nor has any growth in its limbs like that of the mortals, but in the time of its first begotten generation is largest, at its midmost height is small, and at old age itself is again largest in shape and size?’ The passage, in view of its content, hexametrical form and vocabulary, seems to be a variant of the Sphinx’s riddle as quoted in verse by several ancient authorities:2 έστι ÔÎπουν επί γης καί τετράπον ον μία φωνή, / και τρίπον' άλλάσσει Ôè φνήν μόνον, δσσ’ έπΐ γαιαν / ερπετά γίνονται άνά τ ’ αιθέρα καί κατά πόντον. / άλλ’ όπόταν πλεόνεσσιν ερειδόμενυν ποσι βαίνη, / ένθα μένος γνίοισιν άφανρότερον πέλει αυτόν. The three main stages of man’s gradual growth and decline, "τετράπον... δίπονν... τρίπον", are parallel to those of the shadow in Theodectes’ passage, "è v ... γενέσει..., èv ... μέσαις άκμαϊς ..., γή ρ φ \ The hexameter led scholars3 to assign the passage to Theodectes’ Oedipus, the only certain fragment of which is also composed, as has been said, in hexameters. Such an ascription, however, though supported by metre4 and context, runs into difficulties which emerge from the evidence and the text of Athenaeus where we are explicitly told that according to Hermippus "Theodectes himself propounded the riddle about the shadow to others” . No hint is given about the play in which the riddle was included. As regards the text of Athenaeus itself, the fact that the Oedipus-hagmQnt immediately follows our passage (451 E-F) and that the new lemma is introduced with a clear definition '’κάν τω ΟΙδίποδι ôè τη τραγωδία" seems to suggest that Athenaeus intended to distinguish the origin of the two passages and assign them todifferentfields of Theodectes’

1. On the Περιπατητικός or Ιίαλλιμάχειος Hermippus see Pfeiffer, 1968, 150f., and 129 η. 1 for literature. 2. Argument to E. Phoenissae and Σ on v. 50 (Schw.)j Argument to S. O.T.; Athenaeus, 10, 456 B, ascribes this form of the riddle to Asclebiades, a pupil of Isocrates ; Tzetzes Σ on Lyc. Alex. 7; A .P . xiv.64. For the riddle of the Sphinx cf. also Apollod. iii.5.8, D. S. ίγ.64.3-4, S. 0.2’. 391-98, E. Ph. 45-50, Paus. ix.26.2-4, Hyg, fab. 67, Sen. Oed. 92-102. 3. Ravenna, 1903, 798; Webster, 1954:, 303 n. 7. 4. In a fragment on papyrus of E. Oedipus (83.20k Austin) the Sphinx also recites her riddle in hexameters: ]άΐνιγμ' ή μιαιφ[όνοο κόρη | ê]çemovc* ££d[/

Narrative Passages

Passages in the Form of a Riddle

prolific activity.1 This is supported by the explicit definition "τή τραγωδία,“, which cannot be found in similar lemmata from drama in this author where usually the title of the play is merely quoted beside the name of the dramatist.2 It thus seems plausible that fr. 18 does not belong to the Oedipus or to any other play and that Theodectes, as Hermippus clearly attests, simply propounded this riddle, without attempting to include It in any of his plays. His reputation for skill at riddles seems to have lasted down to Hermippus’ own time.3 Of distinctly Euripidean inspiration is a pleasantly written fragment from an un­ named play of Theodectes (6 N.2/Sn.) which contains an illiterate4 rustic’s description of the characters that make up Theseus* name. It is cited by Athenaeus (10,454 E) in a topic of iambic descriptions of letters - a part of the general discussion of puzzles-, where it follows Euripides’ Theseus fr. 382 N.2 and Agathon’s Telephus fr. 4 N.2/Sn. γραφής δ πρώτος ήν μαλακόφθαλμος κύκλος' έπειτα δισσοϊ κανόνες Ισόμετροι πύνν, τούτους δέ πλάγιος διαμέτρου σννδεΐ κανών, τρίτον δ* ελικτφ βοστρύχου προσεμφερές. έπειτα τριόδους πλάγιος ώς έφαίνετο, πέμπται β ο ο τ ο ί ς ” given by SMA in Stob. 4.57.5 for μ α θ ε ϊ ν - ε υ μ α ­ θ έ ς , which is given by A in Stob. 4.52b.23, seems to be an interpolation : C. Wachsmuth and O. Hense ad loc.\ Nauck2, p. 410. ' 3. Friis Johansen, 1959, 45, compares for the questions A. Th. 584ff. and Supp. 226. 4. Ch. IV. 2, p. 66. 5. Cf. Duchemin, 1968, 85. 6. This was often assumed : Meineke, 1855, 103 ; Ribbeck, 1875lt 159 ; Symmonds, 1893, II, 123 ; Ravenna, 1903, 76!ff., esp. 766 ; Walker, 1923, 223, 225 ; Duchemin, op. ciu, 106. Such an ascription is, however, difficult to prove in view of the very restricted knowledge concerning this poet’s poetic activity: only three titles (Themistocles, Telephus and Pheraioi) are preserved. 7. Above, sect. 1, w . 30-33 n. 8. Thus Meineke, 1855, 106. 9. Cf. Ribbeck, 1875χ, 155ff.; Schramm, 1929, 68 : Martin, 1952, 7; del Grande, 1962, 188ff. 10. For the murder of Alexander and the outrage of his body see Conon, Narrai. 50 (FGrHist. 26), Plut. Pel. 35, Σ Horn. //. XXIV 428 (FGrHis! . 115, 352).

123

been prominent also in this play. The contrast between the cruelty of the dead tyrant and the demand for the application of burial-rites, this general humanitarian custom, must have created strong dramatic effects. The title Pheraioi 1 most probably points to a chorus of inhabitants of Pherae. Parallels are recorded from extant plays, such as A. Persae, S. Trachiniae, E. Troades and Phoenissae, A. Acharnians, while titles of later lost plays such as Agathon’s Musoi, Dicaeogenes* Cyprioi, and Lycophron’s Marathonioi seem to imply choruses of Musians, Cyprians and so on . 8 The evidence for plural titles is not lacking in Middle Comedy also,3 but their number gradually decreases from the later fifth century onwards, which can only suggest a shift of emphasis from chorus to actors.4 Plural titles seem to support what is suggested by other indications, 5 namely that the tragic chorus did not entirely fail to participate in the action. As regards the Pheraioi especially, a chorus of old men of Pherae 8 - that of the Pherian old men of E. Alcestis may have served here as a model - seem likely to have approved the demand for respect for the dead (frr. 3, 7, 6.30-33) in view of the traditionally favourable attitude of the chorus towards such demands; cf. S. Aj. 1040ff., 1091f., 1374f.;E. Supp. 51 If., 564f. And Moschion, in spite of his occasional liking for new ideas, is on the whole a traditionalist (in matters of style and also in his treatment of metre). B. Divine Retribution Stobaeus in a discussion of justice Π.3.22) cites a well-written passage from an unnamed play of Theodectes (fr. 8 N.2 /Sn,), which is of considerable interest for the religious beliefs it reflects: δστις ôè θνητών μέμφετat τά θεΐ’, δη ονκ ενθυς αλλά τφ χρόνος μετέρχεται τοδς μη δικαίους, πρόψασιν είσακονσάτον

3. The lemma Μοαχίωνος έκ Φεραιών, given by ΜΑ of Stobaeus - in S the title of the play is omitted - (see the apparatus criticus by Wachsmuth and Hense at Stob. 4.57.3), was corrected to Φα­ ραιών by Meineke {op. cit., 102) and was thus printed by Wachsmuth and Hense. Thence Nauck and Snell printed a title ΦΕΡΑΙΟΙ, not Φ ΕΡΑΙΛΙ which would imply a female chorus, as Welcker had suggested (pt. 3, 1841, 1049). By all means, a male chorus seems more appropriate in a dramatization of the story of Alexander the tyrant. 2. In using, however, plural titles as evidence of the presence of a chorus in later plays, one has also to remember that Menander’s Im brioi was so called not after a chorus but after two men, and his Synarislosai after three women. 3. See Webster, 1952, 25f., who cites instances from Timocles, Eubulus, Alexis and Antiphanes, and remarks that comic plays were probably named after the chorus at least until 320 B.C., which ’’implies that at least the leader of the chorus was present throughout the action.’ 4. Cf. Ch. I. 2, pp. 12ff. 5. See Ch. I. 2, pp. lOff. 6. There is n unanimous agreement among scholars on the setting of the play at the Thessalian Pherae.

Religious Beliefs. Supernatural Factors.

124

Philosophic Motifs εϊ μεν γάρ αντίκ' ήσαν αι τιμωρίας πολλοί (5ια φόβον κον διό ευσεβή τρόπον θεούς άν ηύξον νυν δε τής τιμωρίας (ίπωΰεν ούσης τή φύσει χρώνται βροτοί' όταν δε φωραΘώσιν *j* όφθέντες κακοί, τίνονσι ποινάς ύστέροισιν εν χρόνοις

4 γόη αντίκ' vulgo : γάρ ηαρ 5 κού F : και ον P J| ηνξοι· 7 umvOr.v P'- : änoOev FP1*|J FP : ίίρξαντες κακά Meinekc

ο

αντίκ' FP : παααυτίκ Nauck1, Wachsmuth | yoar vulgo : finur Nauck j| Meinckc : ηνςαντο FP2 : ηνξατο P1 ; σέβαιντ' üv Welcker, Kayscr Π 8 βονραΟωσιν P1 : φωρασΟώσιν Wclcker, Kayser J οφΟεντε; corruptum : erßonaç κακά F. G. Schmidt.

'Whoever among mortals blames the gods for not pursuing the unjust immediately but later, should listen to the following plea: if punishment followed instantly, many people would honour the gods from fear and not from a pious character. But now since punishment is far off, their behaviour is dictated by their nature. When, however, they are detected as villains, they pay the penalty at a late time'. The widespread concept that divine retribution is infallibly, even if not immediately, accomplished is expressed from the archaic age onwards. The man who has done injustice is punished, sooner or later, either in his own person or in that of his descendants.1 The concept is echoed already in Hes. Erg. 282-85, and more extensively throughout the first part of Solon’s Prayer to the Muses where the emphasis lies on justice and the sure retribution which sooner or later follows (fr. 33, esp. vv. 17-32 West; cf. fr. 4.15f. West). The thought recurs in Theognis (199-208): wrongdoers are always punished in the end; men are, however, deceived, since the gods do not always exact the penalty when the offence is committed. Later (731-52) one of the writers of the Theognid corpus complains that the sinner himself, and not his children, should pay for his misdeeds straightaway. The Aeschylean concept is that the gods take in due time a terrible revenge for unrighteous acts (Eu. 538-44, Sapp. 732f.), while 'The doer shall suffer” represents a firm, not only Aeschylean, but traditional Greek conviction8 (Ch. 313, Ag. 1564). In Euripides the cases of Lycus (H.F. 727ff.), Aegisthus (El. 771ff.), Polyphemus (Cyc. 693), as well as instances from lost 3 plays, provide characteristic assertions of a belief in sure, though sometimes late, retribution. The existence of an overruling Providence which punishes the wicked and rewards the good is strongly, asserted (A. Supp. 402-406; E. Ion 1619-22). Fourth-century prose adopted and further developed the belief m the punishment of the unjust. For Demosthenes (Olynth. ΙΓ10) unrighteous deeds are detected in the end. 1, For this peculiar characteristic of retribution sec: Dodds, 1963,33f>, relating this idea of inherited guilt tothe archaic belief in family solidarity, and 53 n. 25 with references to Solon, Theognis, Herodotus and Sophocles (cf. Webster, 1969ο, 31 and η. 1); Greene, 1963, passim ; Adkins, I960, 68 ; Lloyd-Jones, 1973, 87,.99,314, 123,149,161, also refers to Aeschylus (esp. ihs Agamemnon) and Euripides. 2, For a rich list of parallels from Greek literal are on the whole, see Thomson’s note at Ch. 313; cf. also Guthrie ΙΙΓ, 1969, 113 and n. I, and 1251'. 3, A ndvp. frr. 222-23, /lrclichm.s fr. 255, Ornomruts fr. 577, incerf. fr. 979 ΝΛ The sentiment and the phraseology of the passage of Theodectes recall, to some extent, Phrixus fr. 835 N.s; cf. also adesp. fr.r. 4-86.3Î., 493, 499 N A'

125

According to Plato (Lg. 4, 7l6a-b) the insolent man is abandoned by god, and, though he may appear to many to be great, not long after Justice visits him with full retri­ bution which involves not only his own downfall but the utter ruin of his house and country. From fourth-century tragic fragments an excerpt conjecturally assigned to Dionysius the tragedian (fr. 5 N.2/Sn.)-Stobaeus (1.3.19) and Theophilus1 (adAutol. 2,37) simply cite Διονύσιος- expresses briefly the main concept of Theodectes’ passage : 6 τής Δίκης όιρΟαλμυς ώς όι} ήσυχου j λενσσων προσώπου πώ'θ’ όμως del βλέπει.2 Δ ί κ η ς ο φ θ a λμ ό ς became proverbial (cf. Pib. xxiii.10.3): S. A jax Locros fr. 12P.; adesp. fr.42i N.2 (with Nauck’s note);. Plut. Sept. Sap. Cono. 18, 161F.; Cere. fr. 4,18f. (Powell). The present passage of Theodectes seems to contain a reaction against criticisms of the late accomplishment of divine justice. The convincing argument, echoing this poet's rhetorical training, refers to three stages: action according to one’s own nature, illustrated by the antithesis between immediate and later retribution (vv. 4-7); detection of the injustice; final punishment (vv. 8 f.). The point is that, if punishment followed instantly, men would honour the gods for purely prudential reasons,3 and not from piety. But since punishment is delayed, their behaviour is dictated by their nature in an ethical sense, namely whether they are good or bad men. Φ ν σ eg 4 (v. 7) refers back to τ ρ ό π ο ς (V. 5), and thus the speaker of the passage puts full responsibility for the action not on the divine but squarely on the human agent. A difficult point remains: does " ύ σ τ έ ρ ο ι σ ι ν ε ν χ ρ ό ν ο ι ς ” imply that the sinner will be punished in this life or the punishment will be inflicted after death? In the latter case two alternatives arc possible: either his descendants will be punished for his misdeeds, which points to the widespread archaic belief mentioned above, or he will pay his debt personally in another life.5 Phraseology such as " ύ σ τ έ ρ ο ι σ ι ν èv χ ρ ό ν ο ι ς” and ”ä π ω θ ε ν ' could not be of much help, since it seems to convey a general notion of late punishment and, moreover, our evidence in general on whether retribution occurs in this or the next life is divided. The typical Greek belief from Homer onwards was that wrongdoers should be punished visibly in this life. 0 Since the dominant 1. For Theophilus of Antioch see R E VA2 2149. 2. 0C ήσυχου FP- : 6' ήσυχου P1 : ώς ôtà ακότον F. G. Schmidt 1! 2 όμως Canter : όμως, FP : πανάς ομύααι εϊ βλέπει Theoph. 3. The approval of a pious character for fear in paying honour to the gods is different from such beliefs as those we find in the Aeschylean tragedy whore it is declared that the grace of gods comes from violence (xlg·. 182 ; cf. Lloyd-Jones, 1973, 92f.), and that people arc kept from wrongdoing by the habit of fear and reverence for justice (Eu. 522-25, 699, 690-92). 4. For a recent historical survey of the various usages of φύσις see : Adkins, 1970,79ff., esp. 83ff. ; Guthrie, II, 1965, 351-53 (on φύσις esp. in fifth-century writers). 5. A third alternative would be reincarnation, a doctrine propagated by the. Pythagoreans and systematized by Plato, according to which every human soul was paying for crimes committed in former lives. On reincarnation see Dodds, 1963, 150ff., Guthrie, I, 1962, passim. 6. Ψνχαί, according to the Homeric belief, are too insubstantial to be punished for the misdeeds of this life, though occasional allusions to posi-morlem punishment are not lacking: Od, XI 568ff., II. Ill 278if., XIX 259f. (perjurers are punished in the last two cases); cf. Nilsson, 1955,1, 677 n. 4, Lloyd-Jones, 1973, 87. For the impropriety of treating such Homeric beliefs as interpolations sec: Dodds, 1963,137, and 158 n. 10, 12 ; Dover, 1974, 263 and n. 25.

Religious Beliefs. Supernatural Factors. Philosophic Motifs strain of thought assumes that this life is all and in the next life there is nothing more than a neutral, shadowy existence,1 it follows that justice, reward or punishment, guar­ anteed by the gods, must also occur in this life. 2 Nevertheless, fifth-century authorities refer to a different stream of thought: Aeschylus, Pindar and Aristophanes3 allude to a future punishment or reward according to man’s actions in this life (without any reference to initiation in mystic cults). Allusions involved in fourth-century rhetorical texts (D. Epitaph. 34, Timocr. 104, Aristog. I 52f.)4 imply that a large part of the citizen-body may have been familiar with the belief in a Last Judgement. However, it is Plato who in this age systematically developed the doctrine of a future retribution. Some of the Platonic myths, in particular the great eschatological ones (Gorg. 523a-524a, Pkd. 107b-114c, Rep. 10, 614b-621d), refer to the soul as re­ warded or punished in places which are simply versions of earthly scenes; the gods infallibly dispense justice to the soul.5 In Plato’s outlook, the future life provides the setting of divine and inexorable justice. Accordingly, in the fourth century the belief in post-m ortem sanction, alluded to by rhetorical sources and explicitly mentioned by Plato, seems to have been more wide­ spread and systematized than before. This fact makes an echo of it in the passage of Theodectes possible. Moreover, Theodectes, as a pupil of Plato,® may well have been familiar with his master’s relevant speculations. C. Motpa - ’Ανάγκη The Telephus is the only recorded play of Moschion to deal with a mythological theme. The sole fragment (2 N.a/Sn.) is quoted by Stobaeus in a discussion of Necessity, ’Α ν ά γκ η (1.4.1). ώ καί Θεών κρατούσα κα ί θνητώ ν μόνη μ ο ί ρ ώ λ ιτα ΐς ά τρω τε δυστήνω ν βροχών, 2 μοίρ’ ώ Grotius : μοίρα FP j άτρωτε FP : άτεγκτε Nauck : άπωτε Tucker : άτρεπτε Headlam, alii alia I λιταΐς άτρωτβ μοίρα transposuit Jacobs Π 1. Cf. the remarks on the Pheraioi fr. 3, above, p. 120. 2. Cf. Adkins, 1960, 138ff., 164f., 1970, 84 ; Dover, op. cit., 267. 3. Eu. 267-75, Supp. 228-31; Ο. 2.55ÎI: lawless spirits suffer punishment after death, while good souls dwell in perpetual happiness. In P c. 145-51 certain special offenders are said to be plunged in ever­ lasting mud ; cf. Adkins, 1960, 143f. 4. Cf. Dover, op. cit., 263ff. 5. In Gorg. 523cff.. Zeus points to the inadequacies of human justice, and appoints Minos, Radamanthys and Aeacus to judge the soul on its own and naked ; for the judges after death in Plato cf. A p. 41a; for the extension of the belief in afuture Judgement and the underworld judges see Dodds’ note at Gorg. 523a-527e, pp. 372ff. In Rep. 10, 615cff. it is said that tyrants are duly punished after death for their iryustice committed in this life. Moreover, in Phdr. 249a (on the reincarnation of souls) the ψνχαί in their cycle of lives on earth are, at the end of each life, judged for the deeds of that life and rewarded or punished accordingly. 6. See above, Ch. IV, p. 62.

127

πάντολμ’ ανάγκη, στυγνόν ή κατ’ αυχένων ημών έρείδεις τήσδε λατρείας ζυγόν 3 πάντολμ' ανάγκη Tyrwhitt, Porson : παν τολήμ* ανάγκης FP : παν τλήμ' όνάγκης Grotius, Kayser || 4 τήσδε Ruhnken : τής re FP | ζυγών (-όν supra scr. pr. m.) F,

'Fate, you that alone have power over both gods and men, you, that are impervious to the prayers of wretched mankind, all-cruel necessity, who oppress ournecks with this hated yoke of servitude*. The speaker must be involved in adverse circumstances. His apostrophe to the almighty Μ ο ί ρ α and the all daring Ά v ά γ κ η follows the tendency from Homer onwards to attribute to an impersonal Tate’ the responsibility for events, whatever arises to thwart human prosperity .1 That Μ ο ί ρ α is the only existing power that rules not only human action but is superior even to the gods, 2 is an early Greek belief, echoed also in the adesp.h. 503 N.a (ap. Stob. 1.5.8) μόνη γάρ èv θεοΐσιν ον δεσπόζεται j μοΐρ’, ούδ’ èv άνθρώποισιν, άλλ’ αυτή κρατεί. Μοίρα, sometimes oppressive to man, limits not only his own behaviour to what is κατά μοίραν, 'in accordance with his own share’, but also the behaviour of the gods: Hdt. i.91.1 τήν πεπρωμένην μοίραν αδύνατά èaxt άποφνγεειν καί Θεφ (the gods are ruled by Μοίρα, to some extent, and cannot save even their worshippers, as in this case involving Apollo and Croesus);3 A. P,V 518 οϋκονν äv έκφύγοι τήν πεπρωμένην Prometheus says of Zeus.4 On the other hand, despite the vehemence of such state­ ments, frequently Μοίρα and the gods seem to be interchangeable in their functions, and the will especially of Zeus is often connected, and sometimes equated, with Μοίρα, 6 the chief dispenser of good and evil, of man’s prosperity and sufferings.® In the second verse, there is no reason to alter the reading of the mss ά τ ρ ω τ ε , 'invulnerable’: the adjective is not unparalleled, and a contrast, dramatically welcome, may be implied between the wounded Telephus and Necessity which remains invulnerable, untouched by men’s supplications. ’Α ν ά γ κ η , like Μοίρα, is a vaguer power than the personified gods ; it represents an inevitable force, external to man’s will and decision, and acting not for his prosperity.7

1. Cf. Greene, 1963, I2f.; Adkins, 1960, 127; Dover, 1974, 80, 138-41, remarks that this tendency echoes the reluctance to attribute cruel actions to the gods themselves, supposed to be good and just. 2. For the authority of Fate in Greek literature from Homer to Aristotle and later authors see: Greene, op. cit., passim ; Adkins, 19728, 1-3, 16 (referring to the Homeric poems especially), 3. For this statement cf. Greene, op. cit., 85f.; Dodds, 1963, 34, 53 n. 29; Adkins, op. oil., 18. 4. Such fatalism is ridiculed by Lucian, JTr. 25, 32. 5. II. XXI 82-84 (Greene, op. cit., 15 and n. 27, cites further instances from Homer); A. Fers. 101, Ag. 1026, Eu. 3045f.; Pi. TV. 4.61; S. Phil. 1466-68 (with Webster's note); Sol. fr. 13.30 (West); B. 5.50-55, 33.1-2, 16.24 (Jebb). 6. For these two conceptions oi Μοίρα as an arbitrary power, more powerful than the gods, or equated with the will of Zeus, see also Dover, 1974, 139-41, with instances esp. from late fifth and fourthcentury texts. 7. For the Greek conception of ανάγκη see Hirzel, 1966, 426ff., and for an extensive discussion, Schreckenberg, 1964.

Philosophic Motifs ία this passage of Moschion the personified ’Ανάγκη is said to be untouched by human supplications, λ ι τ α ϊ ς . Traditionally, from Homer onwards the gods show mercy and are appeased when men approach them with prayers and sacrifices. A n a l are thought to be the daughters of Zeus,1 the god of suppliants ('Ικέσιος Ζευς), and an early Greek religious belief persisting in the following centuries is that piety, ευσέβεια, is associated with prayers and sacrifices.2 No prayer, however, can reach ’Ανάγκη. Since supplications and sacrifices are the means of men’s contact with divinity, ’Ανάγκη seems to be a super­ natural force without any cult, an impersonal, shapeless power rather than a divine entity able to receive supplications. The concept recalls the impressive ode of the Alcestis (962-82), in which ’Ανάγκη is portrayed as omnipotent, superior to Orphic and Asclepian herbs of healing, the only goddess whose altar and statue are inaccessible to man,3 and who remains unmoved by human entreaties accompanied by sacrifices ("cu5 σφαγίων κλύει” v. 975, coinciding with "λ i τ a Xς ά τ ρ ω τ ε ” in Moschion’s fragment, and Epicur. Ep. 3 p. 65 Usener : "απαραίτητος άνάγκη", ‘inexorable necessity’). Π ά ν­ τ ο λ μ ο ς à v ά γ κ η is a later association (A.P. ix.l 1.5, xvi,15a.5), which cannot be found before Moschion. The metaphor of ’Ανάγκη imposing a hateful yoke is traceable from Bacchylides (10.45f. Jebb) onwards, and on this model other deities of destiny are represented with this symbol of slavery and humiliation.4 The image, dramatically effective as it is, is commonplace in tragedy, but its frequency does not entail poetic weakness. Since necessity is a standard spur to tragic action, such yoking-metaphors seem a natural and effective way of communicating that idea, and appear different in different contexts5: A. Ag. 218, 1071, P.V. 108;c S. Phil. 1025; E. Or. 1330, Licym niusfr.475N?, L A .443, TIeracl. 885f. The proverbial character of the metaphor is attested by Julian (c.Sall. 8 , 246 B), while its persistence in late Hellenistic times is shown in the anonymus anapaests in Page’s GLP 93.17 where the reference is to Hecuba’s slavery. Similarly, in E. Or. 488 the victims of ’Ανάγκη are thought to be mere slaves, and in our Telephus Ανάγκη is connected with service. The imagery recalls E. Bee. 376 άλγεϊ δ’ ανχέν’ έντιθείς ζνγφ, where Polyxena laments over her slavery (357ff.). As regards the subject-matter of Moschion’s Telephus, to attempt to draw conclusions on the theme of a lost play from a single preserved quatrain would indeed be hazardous. Nevertheless, the content of the preserved fragment in relation to the reconstructed Euripidean Telephus1 may support some speculations concerning the dramatic situation involved.

1. Horn· 11. IX 502-504 "ΛιταΙ are halting and wrinkled, and of eyes askance, always following ".-It?/” ; ci. Greene, op. cit., 21, and on the metaphor see Webster, 19542, 11, 15,18. 2. Cf. Adkins, 1960, 63, 134f. 3. However, Pausanias (ii.4.6) mentions a temple of Ανάγκη and Bla. at Acrocorinthos. 4. For examples see Schreckenberg, 1964, 78. 5. Cf. Barlow, 1971, 106ff., on repetition of images in Euripides. 6. For the yoke-metaphor in Aeschylus see Dumortier, 1935, 13if., esp. 22ff. 7. Handley and Rea, 1957, with a discussion of the evidence of papyri, book-fragments, Aristophanes, and Latin dramatists; Webster, 1967, 43ff.

Religions Beliefs. Supernatural Factors.

129

In Moschion’s passage the speaker seems to be Telephus himself, as the pathetic address to Fate and Necessity suggests.1 The opening of the Euripidean version, according to the proposed reconstruction, contains a speech of the hero himself after his arrival in Ar,gos> in which he recounts his origin (P. Mediol. I - fr. 102 Austin), and refers, as in Moschion’s fragment, to his own misfortunes and poverty (frr. 697-98 N.2; cf. Ennius’ Telephus frr. I,III R.3). Telephus refers to his poverty also in fr. 703 N.2, parodied in Ar. Ach. 497f., echoed in Ennius fr. II R.89,and placed in the first episode. 2 Similarly, in Accius’ version (fr. VI R.8) Telephus says that Fortune has robbed him of his kingdom and wealth but not of his "virtus” .3 Moreover, λ α τ ρ ε ί α ς ζ υ γ ό ν in Moschion’s passage may be connected with the portrait of Telephus in Euripides as a beggar, dressed in rags,4 though λατρεία in its literal sense as hired service does not signify beggary. On the basis, however, of Tzetzes’ note on Ar. Nu. 922 ” ... μετά πηριδιον έλΟόντα προσαίτην καί τής Άγαμέμνονος αυλής μόλις ποτέ πυλωρόν γεγονότα” , Webster5 suggested that Tzetzes does indeed think of the Euripidean Telephus as accepted into a post in the royal household, and Handley5 connects with this suggestion one of the book fragments (.714 N.2), in which the hero appears to be content with a "modest daily wage” . If this motif was used by Moschion, it would explain λ α τ ρ ε ί α . But it is not certain that Euripides did in fact repre­ sent Telephus as one of Agamemnon’s servants and, consequently, that Moschion followed this example. In any case Moschion, in representing the hero as λάτρις afflicted by the utmost adversity, seems to have followed, at least in general lines, in the footsteps of Euripides, whose originality in using, or at least in elaborating on, the beggar-king motif is most probable: Aristophanes’ parody speaks for itself.7 Moreover, the Euripidean8 version was by far the best known, which explains its influence on later poetry, as ev­ idenced by the Latin adaptation of Ennius and (less certainly).by that of Accius.® 1. Cf. above, p. 127. The motif of the lamenting "servant" who addresses abstractions ("servant”, in a literal or metaphorical sense) is used elsewhere in drama: E. El. 54ff., and esp. Men. Asp. 213-15, Dysc. 208f. 2. Handley and Rea, op. cit, 33, 40; Webster, 1967, 44. On the Aristophanic parody see Starkie, 1968, Excursus VI. 3. Probably modelled on E. incert. fr. 1066N.2; see Handley and Rea, op. cit.,26, Webster, op.cii., 45. 4. There is ample evidence (cited by Nauck2, pp. 579k) for this innovation of Euripides ; but it is uncertain whether Telephus did in fact wear rags or whether this was a comic device of Aristophanes to attack the realism of Euripides in character-portrayal: see Webster, 1970a, 39; Handley and Rea, op, cit., 29. 5. According to Handley and Rea, op. oil., 33 f.; cf. Webster, 1967, 45. 6. Op. cit., 32. 7. See Rau, 1967, 19-50. 8. The story of Telephus was also dramatized by : Aeschylus {Telephus frr. 238-40 N.2); Sophocles {Telcpheia which consisted of the Alcadae, theM ysoi and the Assembly of the Achaians or Eurypylus·, the latter seems to have stronger claims than the former to be the third play of the trilogy in the light of the convincing ascription of the Berlin papyrus to E. Telephus : see Handley and Rea, op. cit., but cf. also Webster, 1967, 43, 1969s, 199f.) ; Agathon (cf. Ch. V. 6, p. 101) ; Iophon (Sud. t 451 ); and in the fourth century, by Cleophon (cf. 1.3, p. 16). 9. See Handley’s discussion, op. cit., 25-7, who refers to the suggestions concerning the Greek models, 9

Religions Beliefs. Supernatural Factors. 130

131

Philosophic Motifs ΔΑ: D. Gods - Men

Another excerpt of Theodectes (fr. 7 N.12/Sn., ap. Stob. 1.1.1) assumes, like his fragment on Δίκη,1 a tone of conservative piety. άπό τών θεών αρχήν ôè ποιεΐσθαι πρέπον άπό Stob.: "εκ malim” Nauck. 'It beseems to begin with the gods’. Invocation of a god (here of the gods in general) constitutes a stock opening in poetry of every kind and of every period from Homer downwards. ’Άρχεσθαι is the technical word for such customary invocations: Aleman f r .29 (Page); Hes. Th. 1,36, fr. 305.4 (M.-W.); Horn. h. Cer. 1, h. Dion. I7f. ; Thgn. Iff.; Ion Eleg. fr. 2.6 (Diehl). Arat. Phoen. 1 has èx Δώς άρχώμεσθα, quoted with due acknowledgement by Cicero {leg. 2,7). The same verse occurs in Theoc. 17.1 (see Gow’s note ad loc.), and a variant of it it is traced in A.R. Arg. 1. The motif provides a tag favoured by Roman writers: Vergil, Eel. 3, 60 "Jove principium Musae”, probably adopts the line of Aratus and Theocritus; Ov. Fast. 5.111. In dramatic poetry, a close parallel is that in E. Hel. 1024 where Theonoe advises Helen and Menelaus εκ των θεών 5' άρχεσθαι.’ Two excerpts, one from Chaeremon (fr. 42 Sn.) and another from Carcinus (5a Sn.), dealing with the unexpected misfortunes sent by the gods, are included in Act III of Menander’s Aspis: Daos, a slave, and former παιδαγωγός, ornaments his report of Chaerestratus’ illness with serious quotations from tragedy (cf. 329f. δει τραγφδήσαι πάθος I άλλοϊον υμάς) in order to excite Smicrines, the old man, to realize that something very serious has happened.® Daos planned to divert Smicrines from claiming the heiress of his nephew Cleostratus, who had died in the war, by announcing that Chaerestratus, Smicrines’ brother, was dead, and thus making Smicrines turn his attention to the new and richer heiress, the daughter of Chaerestratus. Thus, the girl, Smicrines’ previously intended bride, would be free to marry the man who loved her, Chaereas, Chaerestratus’ stepson. Noteworthy is the veiled irony of these tragic quotations, since the passage also serves to characterize Daos as a learned teacher.*

426 δ α ίμ ο ν [ ε ΰ ά ] ώ ρ ι ο α ν Vitelli : δ α ίμ ο ν [.> „ ] ω ρ ιε α ν Fx; δ α ιμ ό ν ω ν [B: fortaase δ α ιμ ό ν ω ν Austin ]! 427 τόδε Χαιρήμονοο agnovit Handley: τοδεχα [B.

ΣΜ:

"ονκ ëcrtv ονδεν δεινόν ώ φρένας F.G. Schmidt : παγείσας < νουΟετήμοσι. > φρένας NVelcker H 3 καιρόν BC.

’It was not he who drove him out of his senses; for there is no opportunity that could cause the inborn, disciplined (rightly fixed) mind to err’. The excerpt, as preserved in Harpocration, seems most likely to come, like Theo­ dectes’ fr. 18,1 from some non-dramatic source. Έ ξ έ σ τ η σ ε must govern something which is mentioned in the lost previous lines, and which seems to be relevant to the φρένας referred to immediately afterwards. Έ μ φ ύ τ ο ν ς ί ό ρ θ ώ ς π α γ ε ί σ α ς . . . φ ρ έ ν α ς , the certainly transmitted part of the fragment, implies φρένας that are σω, i. e. the condition of σωφροσύνη in its literal sense. This concept of the inborn σω­ φροσύνη is echoed in E. Hipp. 79f.2 δσοις διδακτόν μηδέν, άλλ” èv τή φύσει I τό σωφρονειν εϊληχεν ές τα πάνθ’ όμως (or εις τά πάντ’ αεί).34 The belief in φύσις as the sole source of σωφροσύνη harks back to the old aristocratic notion, to which the διδακτή αρετή of Socrates was opposed. Έ κ σ τ ή ν α ι φ ρ έ ν ω ν , implied here in view of the following φρένας, and normally used of persons out of their minds, makes a welcome contrast with the notion of σωφροσύνη expressed just after. This and similar expressions are frequent, especially in Euripides and Menander: Ba. 359, 850, Or. 1021, Hipp. 935, H.F. HAÏ.\Asp. 422 (cf. ib., 308Γ), Bpitr. 893, Sam. 279, 620f.; cf. also Isoc. Ph. 18; Plb. xv.29.7, xxxii.15.8.

3. MORAL BELIEFS Aphorisms referring to human merits and demerits constitute the majority of fourthcentury gnomic fragments. Some of them, if connected, develop exactly antithetical notions 1. Cf. above, p. 117, That the emphasis is mainly laid on "απ’ αρχής χρόνφ\ the cultural de­ velopment in course of time, lias recently been discussed by Bubut, 1977. 2, Ravenna, 1903, 801; E. Diehl, RE VA* 1728.

1. Sec above, Ch. V, 6, pp. 99f. 2. Cf. Barrett, 1964, ad loc., pp. 172ff. 3. Cf. E. Ba. 316 which is regarded as an interpolation from Hipp. 79 : Page, 1934,105 ; Barrett, op. vit., 175; Dodds, I960, lllf. 4. For έκστασις and its various connotations in Greek, in both the classica! and the Christian period, see Dodds, 1965. 70ff. ; for έκατιισις and Dionysiae ritual cf, also Dodds, 1963, 77f., and 94f. n. 84.

Philosophic Motifs

Moral Beliefs

In Stobaeus’ chapter headed ΤΤερϊ φρονήσεως (3.3.17) Chaeremon’s fr. 23 Sn. runs as follows:

'They do not live who understand nothing of wisdom’. 'Before you have learned wisdom you know how to feel contempt’. 'No one who has failed is thought to have counselled weir. The verses seem to cohere with each other and all, or at least the last two, may belong to the same play. The Trincavellian text omits any lemma after fr. 24, but on the basis of the lemma τον αντον (Χαιρήμονος), prefixed by MA to 3,4.15, 17, Nauck and Snell attributed to Chaeremon the verses which appear as frr. 25,26. The sentiment in the first line again has philosophical overtones. Prosperity is entirely lacking in the unwise ; cf. Cic. Tusc. 5, 30 non igitur facile concedo neque Bruto ... nec veteribus illis, Aristoteli, Speusippo, Xenocrati, Polemoni, ut ... idem dicant semper beatum esse sapientem. The concept in the second verse partly corresponds to that in E. inceri. fr. 1032 N .2 (attributed to A. Phryges by G. Hermann).

τό τοι κράτιστον πανταχον τιμητέον' 6 γάρ φρονών εν πάντα συλλαβών έχει 'The best should be honoured everywhere; for the wise mail has all things in his possession’. The idea in the first line recurs in Tzetz. iamb. 143 (p. 514 Kiessl.) οϋτωτάκρείττο) πανταχον τιμητέα, and an identical verse is found in adesp. fr. 518.2N.2 The line, omitted by MA, is ascribed to Chaeremon by the Trincavellian text,1 which runs thus: ονχ ώ; νομίζεις το φρονεϊν εϊπας κακώς. / Χαιρήμονοζ' τό τοι κράτιστόν πανταχον τιμητέον / ό γαο φρονών εν πάντα συλλαβών έχει. Accordingly, though the authorship of the first line is entirely unknown (adesp.fr. 518.1 N2.), there may be grounds for assigning the last two verses to Chaeremon and they are printed as such by Hense and Snell. The authorship of the last line is further indicated by G. Pachym. in Rhct. 1,553, 21 (Walz): Χαιρήμων («Tr. 40N.2)&p?7' πάντα τά άγαθά εν μόνφ τω φρονεϊν εστιν ... Moreover, the sense given by these two verses is quite logical : τό κ ρ ά τ ι σ τ ο ν refers to the φ ρ ο ν ώ ν ε ϋ in the next line, and this coincides-with S. Aj. 1252 ... οι φρονονντες εϋ κρατονσι πανταχον. The idea that wisdom includes every virtue and that the wise man is honoured every­ where accords with contemporary philosophical thinking: Plato saw in φρόνησις the chief of the four cardinal virtues (Lg. 1,631c), naming second σωφροσύνη, third δικαιο­ σύνη and fourth ανδρεία. All four are comprised under the general name of άρετή (ib. 3, 688 b; note also ib., 12,963a, where νους stands for φρόνησις). The predominance of φρόνησις in Plato is implied by phrases like τήν φρόνησιν και τήν άλλην αρετήν : Sm.p. 184d, 209a. Diogenes the Cynic (ap. D.L. 6,72) similarly maintained that all things are the property of the wise; cf. also Iambi, ap. Stob. 3.3.26: τήν ήγεμόν* οϋσαν των άρετών φρόνησιν καί χρωμένην αύταΐς δλαις. Dramatic poetry expressed the belief in a simpler language: E, Antiop. fr. 199.2f. N.2; Men. Imbrioi fr. 213, Rapizomene fr. 360 Kö., and m.on. 14, 74, 565 J. Tolerance of ordinary adversities is defined as a quality of the wise man in one of Chaeremon’s self-contained verses (fr. 37 N.2 /Sn., Stob. 4.44.3), which seems, to some degree, to foreshadow Stoic thinking: crôfctç έπί σμικροισι λνπεϊται σοφός 'No wise man grieves for trifles’. Three gnomic monosticha of Chaeremon, the second being a word-play, (frr. 24-26 N2./Sn. ap. Stob. 3.4.14,15, 17) deal with αφροσύνη, 'thoughtlessness’. fr. 24 ον ζώσιν of τι μή σννιέντες σοφόν 25 πριν γάρ φρονεϊν εϋ, καταφρονεϊν επίστασαι 26 σφαλείς γάρ ούδείς εϋ βεβονλενσθαι δοκεϊ

B. Αλήθεια - Ψεϋδος The sole verse from Astydamas’ Alcmeon 1 (Snell, TrGF60F 1c), cited first under the chapter-heading on ΔΟΚΕΙΝ and ΕΙΝΑΙ in Stobaeus (2.15.1), is formulated in antithe­ tical terms echoing a common usage, consolidated by philosophical insight. o( v ) τοϋ δοκεϊν μοι, τής δ1 άληθείας μέλει ο suppi. Gaisford. 'Not opinion but the truth is my concern’. The statement, as restored, coincides with the prime object of philosophical thinking: the searching after truth per se, independently of δόξα, personal opinion ; cf. Plato’s dis­ tinction between δόξα (πίστις, εικασία) and νόησις (έπιστήμη, διάνοια) in the definition of the method of Dialectic (Rep. 7. 533d-534), In Lg. 2, 663e (cf. D.L. 3, 40) αλή­ θεια, i.e. philosophical truth, is praised as fair and durable, and Aristotle opposes (APo 1.19, 81M8-23) σνλλογίζεσθαι κατά δόξαν καί προς αλήθειαν; cf. Cic. not. door. 1 , 61 ... esse deos persuaderi mihi non opinione solum, sed etiam ad veritatem plane velim. The distinction between δ ο κ έ tv and ε ί ν α ι became proverbial: A. Th. 592 ού γάρ δοκεϊν άριστος, άλλ’ είναι θέλει (referred to in PI. Rep. 2, 361b), and also E. Pkoeniic fr, 809, Telephus fr. 698 N .2 (parodied inA r. Ach. 440f.); Philem. inceri. fr. 94.8 K.; PI. Ap. 36d, G-org. 527b. The belief is emphatically reversed in E. Or. 236 κρεϊσσον δε τό δοκεϊν, κάν άλ.ηθείας άπή, which seems to reflect sophistic principles (for Protagoras every δόξα was true : PI. Cra. 386a; Arist, Melaph. K. 6 , 1062bl2ff.), though the Scholiast ad Or. 235 compares a similar earlier statement by Simonides (fr. 93 P.) το δοκεϊν καί τάν άλάθειαν βιάται (reiterated by Plato, Rep. 2, 365c). Telling lies is said to be unfitting for good men in Chaeremon’s monostichon fr. 27 N.2/Sn. ap. Stob. 3.12.15: ψευδή δε τοΐζ εσθλοΐσιν ον πρέπει λέγειν The same statement applies to εύγενής in S. Aleadae fr. 79 P.

]. Namely the editio princeps of the An tholngium, Venice 1536 : see the edition by Wachsmuth and Hense, vol. I, Prolegomena XXXI.

139

1. Sec Ch. II. 3.

140

Moral Beliefs Philosophic Motifs C. Σιγή - ’Αδολεσχία

Silence is commended as curing misfortunes and characterizing wise conduct in Carcinus" unnamed fr. 7 N 12./Sn. ap. Stob. 3.33.1. πολλοις γάρ ανθρώποισι ψάρμακον κακών σιγή' μάλιστα δ} έστι σώφρονος τρόπον πολλοις SM : πολλών Nauck | κακών S B r: κακόν Μ.

Silence is similarly associated with σωφροσύνη in E. Ileracl. 476 (cf. S. Acrisius fr. 64 P.), and characterizes wise men in E. incert. fr. 977N.2( ä Men. mon. 307J.). Wise silence is commonly praised: S. Aleadaeir. 81 P.; A. Promethei fr. 188 N .2 Φ ά ρ μ α κ ο ν κ α κ ώ ν σ ι γ ή recalls A. Ag. 548 πάλαι το σιγάν ψάρμακον βλάβης εχω. The sentiment recurs in a fragment conjecturally assigned to Dionysius, the tyrant (fr. 6 N.2 /Sn., Stob. 3.34.1): ή λέγε τι σιγής κρεΐσσον ή σιγήν έχε 'Say something better than silence or be silent’. The thought, commonly adopted by poets and philosophers, is proverbial: A. Th. 619, Ch. 582, Prometheus Π ν ρ ψ ό ρ ο ς fr. 208 N.2; E. Or. 638f.; Men. mon. 258, 306, 409, 709, 710, Men. et P h il comp. I 129 J.; Pythagoras ap. Stob. 3.34.7-8; Cleobulus, Solon and Bias in Vors. 10 [73a] DK I 63,3,1 63,16 and 1 65,7 respectively. Of comic1 flavour is the language in a self-contained verse of Astydamas {incert. fr. 7 N 2./Sn. ap. Stob. 3.36.4), which defines α δ ο λ ε σ χ ί α as γ λ ώ σ σ η ς π ε ρ ί ­ π α τ ο ν , 'garrulity is language’s exercise’. The charge of α δ ο λ ε σ χ ί α , 'idle talk", was commonly brought against phi­ losophers by the comic poets. It was especially made against Socrates, no doubt because of the apparently vain repetitions in' his dialectic method : Ar. N u. 1480 with Σ ad loc. ; Eup. incert fr. 352.1 K. Elsewhere άδολεσχαi refers indiscriminately both to Socrates and the Sophists : Ar. Nu. 1485, Broilers fr, 490 K.; Eup. incert. fr. 353 K. In Plato the word often characterizes philosophical occupation: Tht. 195c (said by Socrates of him­ self), Prm. 135d, Spk. 225d, and is sometimes coupled with μετεωρολογείν or μετεωροσκοπειν, used of cosmological speculations: Phdr. 270a, Cra. 401b, Rep. 6 , 488e, Pit. 299b; in X. Oec. 11,3 it is again used by Socrates of himself. In Plato also the term often suggests a rejection of prejudices against Socrates and his school (cf. Pkd. 70c), and is applied to the genuine philosopher. Π ε ρ ί π α τ ο ς means discussion of a theme, particularly a philosophic one, carried on while walking (cf. obviously the Peripatetic school of Aristotle). Comic parody is widely attested : Ar. Ra. 942, 953; Alexis Meropis fr. 147.2 K. άνω κάτω τε περιπατονσ’

\. Nauck2, ad loc., p. 780, suspected that the line was comic, but it could well belong to one of Astydamas’ satyric plays, as the Heracles Satyricus.

141

ώσπερ Πλάτων. Luc. JTr. 1 ώ Z εν, τί σύννονς ... σαντφ λαλεΐς, / ώχρός περίπατων, φιλοσόφου τό χρώμ3 δχων; In Astydamas, metaphorically used, it seems to denote 'exercise’, as in Hp. Epid. vi,5.5 ψυχής περίπατος φροντις άνθρώποισιν. D. ’Εγκράτεια - Τρυφή Αύτάρκειa, 'self-sufficiency’, and ascetic mode of life were strongly commended by the Cynics.1 Accordingly, the antithesis between temperance, έγκράτεια, and luxury, τρυφ ή,-the Cynics had even personified Continence and Incontinence2- is developed in fragments assigned to Diogenes, Philiscus and Crates.3 In Stobaeus’ chapter headed Περί εγκράτειας (3.17,5), a fragment of dubious authorship (6 Sn. “ adesp. fr. 522 N.2) is of distinctly Cynic character. όσοι δέ φιλοσοφοϋντες εκμοχθοΰσί τι, ένταϋθ* υπάρχει τω βίφ γαστρός κρατεϊν διδάσκαλος γάρ ηύτέλεια των σοφών καί των άρίστων γίγνεται βουλευμάτων 3 ηύτέλεια Snell: οΰσα ή εύτέλεια S: ευτέλεια Grotius || 4 γίγνεται Meineke : γίνεται S.

'All those who labour to accomplish something through philosophy, are able in that to master gluttony in their lives; for simplicity is the teacher of wise men and of the best counsel’. Crates also commends simplicity and practical asceticism: "prefer not the oyster to the lentil, to bring us to confusion” runs fr. 6 (Diels). Simplicity and good judgement must replace luxury and extravagance, and Ε ύ τ ε λ ί η is commended as "the offspring of famed Prudence” (fr. 12 D.). The concept of temperance was handled in a similar way by Euripides. Temperance as regards the appetite for food, a concept parallel to " γ α σ τ ρ ό ς κ ρ α τ ε ϊ ν ”, characterizes τό χρηστόν in Supp. 865f., while gluttony marks the slave (Alexandras fr. 49 N.2) and the bad citizen (Antiop. fr. 201 N.a). A strict censure of gluttony as engendering every evil is expressed in E. in cert fr. 915 N.a Exactly the same recom­ mendation of γαστρός κρατεϊν as an accomplishment of the well-born occurs in Ino fr. 413.4 N.3, and Chares ap. Stob. 3.17.3. The sentiment in v. 3 coincides with Philostr. VA VI, 10 p. I l l (Kays.) εντέλεια γάρ διδάσκαλος μεν σοφίας, διδάσκαλος δε αλήθειας, and Men. mon. 662 J. Πάντως γάρ ό σοφός εύτελείας ανέχεται. An attack on luxury has been attributed to Diogenes (incert. fr. 1 N.2/Ih Sn.) by Clemens Alexandrinus, ström. 2,20 (2,178,6 Stählin), who defines τρυφή as "φιλήδονον λιχνείαν και πλεονασμόν περίεργον προς ήδνπάθειαν άνειμένων'\

1. See Dudley, 1937, Ch. Π (for αντάρκεια and fourth-century Cynicism), and passim; for at’· τάρκεια in relation to the Cynic political theory see Bayonas, 1970, passim. 2. See Webster, 19542, 19. 3. See Snell, TrGF, 88, on dubia.

Philosophic Motifs ol τής άνανδρου και διεσκατωμένης τρυφής ύφ’ ήδοναϊσι σαχθέντες κέαρ πονεΐν Οέλοντε; υνδε βαιά - 2 σαχθέντες Meineke : άχθέντες L. || 3 Οέλοντεζ Sylburg : έθέλοντες L,

Diogenes substituted αύτάρκεια for ηδονή. Moreover, a passage of Teles, from his diatribe "77 ε ρ l τ ο ν μ ή ε ί ν α ι τ έ λ ο ς η δ ο ν ή ν ” (Tel. rei.12 ρ. 49 Hense), ap. Stob. 4.34.72, attributes to Crates an attack on hedonistic doctrines. ' Η δ ο ν ή was commended as the ultimate good by Aristippus (D.L. 2, S7-88). It may be worth noting that such a purely Cynic principle was again foreshadowed by Euripides : in Alexandros fr. 54 N .2 wealth and excessive luxury ("al άγαν τρυφαί”) are censured with the same vehemence as hindering εύανδρία (cf. ά ν ά ν δ ρ ο ν τ ρ υ φ ή ς in our fragment) while πενία is praised. Ε. Φιλοπονία - ραθυμία Φιλοπονία, 'diligence’, is recommended and ξ>φθυμία, 'sluggishness’, is decried in an unnamed fragment of Theodectes (11 N.3/Sn., Stob. 3.29.35), for those who wish to be glorious and honoured. πολλά δε I μοχΟεϊν τδν ήξοντ* εις έπαινον ενκλεώς' ρρθυμία ôè τήν παραυτίχ’ ηδονήν λαβοϋσα λύπας τψ χρόνφ τίκτειν φιλεϊ 'The man who is to come gloriously into honour must labour greatly; sluggishness, catching momentary pleasure, loves to produce griefs in course of time*. The phrase ή ξ ό ν τ ’ ε ί ς έ π α ι ν ο ν ε ύ κ λ ε ώ ς , with some such meaning as 'coming gloriously into honour’, has been emended, rather improperly, to ή κ λ έ ο ς (F. G. Schmidt) or ε ύ κ λ ε ά (Wecklein). The adverb ε ν κ λ ε ώ ς is not simply pictorial but it obviously alludes to the opposite way of coming to honour άκλεώς, αϊσχρώς; cf. Wil. ms.1 "m ulti enim alia via quamvis ignominiosa ad laudem perveniunt”. That labour and not a pleasant life is the prerequisite of a good reputation is pro­ claimed by Euripides in a very similar language, especially in the Archelaus : frr. 238, 237.2f., 240.If. N.2; cf. ib.} frr. 233, 236, Andromeda fr. 134, incert. fr. 1043 N . 2 (Stob. 3.29.31 ).Similarly, Labour is the father of fame, εύκλειας πατήρ, in Licymnius fr.

1. This abbreviation («Wilamowitz ms.) is taken from Snell, TrGF, p. 235, and is clarified ib., ρ. X II: "eiusdem notae editionibus Nauckianis adieciae ( qui libri in seminario philologico Berolinensi asservabantur)'’, 2. The verse is attributed variously to Euripides and to Carcinus in the codices of the Anthologium. The existence of a lacuna in Stobaeus has been shown by O. Hense ad loc.’, cf. also O. Hense ad Stob. 4.24.9 (-Snell, TrGF 52 F 3).

Moral Belief

143

474 N .2 Euripides seems to favour the coupling of the notions μόχθος - εύκλεια, and ρα,θνμίa - δνσκλεια (cf. Med, 217f.). Beyond, however, lexical affinities the motif is traditional : cf. Hesiod’s verses on άρετή and έργασία (Erg. 289-92); Simon, fr. 74 P.; Pi. fr. 227 Sn.; A. incert. fr. 315.2 N .2 Αρετή and άγαθά are achieved in labour: E. Heracl. 625, Erechtheus fr. 364 N2.; Aristotle on Άρετά: πολύμοχθε γένειβροτείω (fr. 675.1 R.3); Prodicus’ account of Heracles’ choice in X. Mem. ii.l.21ff. The insistence on πόνος in education was a traditional Greek practice, differently viewed by Spartans and Athenians: cf. Th. ii.39.1. F. ’Αναίδεια Another reflective, untitled fragment of Theodectes (12 N.2/Sn. ap. Stob. 3.32.14) deals with man’s ever growing impudence. Theodectes’ rhetorical training is echoed, as in his Dike fragment,1 in the convincing development of an idea : άπαντ1 εν άνθρώποισι γηράσκειν 'έφν καί πρός τελευτήν έρχεται τα{κ)τον χρόνου, πλήν, ώς έοικε, τής άναιδείας μόνον’ αϋτη δ’ δσφπερ αϋξεται θνητών γένος, τοσφδε μείζων γίγνεται καθ’ ήμέραν 2 τακτοΰ Buecheler : τά τον SML Br.: τήν τοΰ Tr., vulg., Welcker || 3 μόνον libri : μόνης Meineke 4 αϋτη S : αύτή ML Br. || 5 γίγνεται libri, Tr.: γίνεται S.

\\

ΆΙ1 things among men age by nature and come to their appointed end, except, it seems, shamelessness alone: this gets daily greater, the more the human race increases’. The sense of the second verse, which is read "inter lineas" in codex S of the Antho­ logium (the line is athetized by Nauck but accepted by Snell), seems not incompatible with the context. The reading μ ό ν ο ν of the mss in v. 3 does not need to be altered to μόνης: cf, Theodect. fr. 13.2 (below, pp. 150L) ahdHdt. 1.200. The phrasing of the last two verses echoes E. incert. fr. 1029.4f. N .2 άρετή δ} δσφπερ μάλλον äv χρήσθαι θέλης, j τοσφδε μείζων αϋξεται τελούμενη,2 The concept is reminiscent of Thgn. 291f., 647f.: ή δή νυν αϊδώς μεν εν άνθρώποισιν Ηλωλεν, I αύτάρ άναιδείη γαϊαν έπιστρέφεται, and Ε. Med. 47If. άλλ’ ή μεγίστη τών εν άνθρώποις νόσων / πασών, αναίδεια. Menander goes so far as to deify Αναίδεια (Karine fr. 257 K., 223 Kö. with the notes of the editors ad loc.). ’Α ν α ί δ ε ι α is in action the counterpart of παρρησία in speech. Accordingly, the concept characterizes the Cynics and has been shown to be the most likely origin of the nickname κύων, since according to the Greek view shamelessness was the peculiar characteristic of the dog.

1. Discussed above in this chapter, sect. 2. B. 2. Nauck2, ad loc., p. 688, thinks that Meineke’s emendation καθ' -ήμέραν for τελονμένη is supported by Theodectes’ passage.

Moral Beliefs

145

Philosophic Motifs G. 'Υπεροψία Chaeremon’s self-contained verse (fr. 30 N.8 /Sn.) in Stobaeus' chapter headed Περί ύπεροψίας (3.22.10) runs as follows: ΰλως τό κρεΐσσον ονκ εφ φρονεΐν μέγα λως τό κρεΐσσον SMA : ΰλως γάρ τό κρεΐσσον Br.: εσθλονς τό κρεΐσσον F.G . Schmidt.

Ίη short, the more powerful do not allow one to be arrogant’. The meaning seems to be cleared up if το κ ρ ε ΐ σ σ ο ν is, as often, substantival for θεός: A. Ag. 60 δ κρείσσων j ... Ζευς. The gods are commonly called κρείττονες, "das Göttlicheist das κρεΐττον uns gegenüber”, as Wilamowitz pointed out.1 Xenophanes (A 28 DK 1117,3) defined κ ρ α τεΐν^ the very characteristic of τό θειον; cf. Men. Karine fr. 223. 3 Kö. (Stob. 3.32.11) τό κρατούν γάρ νυν νομίζεται θεός, and Artem. Onirocrit. II 36 and 69 τό κρατούν γάρ δύναμιν 'έχει θεού. Moreover, language and sentiment strongly recall Hdt. vii.10 E ου γάρ èâ ψρονέειν μέγα ό θεός άλλον ή εωντόν,&τιά E. Andr. 1007f. (with Σ ad loc.) έχθρών γάρ άνδρών μοίραν εϊς αναστροφήν j δαίμων δίδωσι κούκ εφ φρονεΐν μέγα. A more expansive lament concerning vain arrogance is made in an excerpt (3 N.2/Sn. ap. Stob. 3.22.3) of Sosiphanes, most probably a fourth-century tragedian.3, ώ δυστυχείς μέν πολλά, παϋρα δ’ όλβιοι βροτοί, τ ί σεμνύνεσθε ταΐς εξουσίαις, &ς εν τ ’ έδωκε φέγγος ëv τ ’ άφείλετο; ήν δ’ εντυχήτε μηδέν δντες ευθέως ϊσ’ ούρανφ φρονείτε, τόν δέ κύριον "Αιδην παρεστώτ’ ούχ ορατέ πλησίον

'έπειτα δ’ ούδέ τούτο γιγνώσκεις, δτι τοΐς ούδέν ούσιν ουδέ εϊς δλως φθονεί; i γιγνώσκεις : Gaisford et Meineke: γινώσκεις SMA Br,

'And don’t you even know this then, that absolutely no one envies a nobody?’. fr.

8

(Dion. com. fr. 10 [2,428] K.) αυτός πενόμένος τοΐς εχουσι μή φθάνει

αυτός πενόμενος A need. Boiss. : αύτός πενωθείς (vel στενωθείς) Men. mon. : λιτός γενόμενος Stob. | τοΐς Ιχουσι Stob., Men. mon. : εδτνχοϋσι Anecd. Boiss.

5

1 ώ SMA: ώς Μ sec. Dind., Tr. |j 2 ταΐσιν ούσίαις Nauck || 3 άφείλατο A || 4 i)v Wagner: âv libri || 6 άδψ ΜΑ2: άόή SA1 | προεστώτ’ Μ | πλησίον ΜΑ2: πλούσιον SA1. Η. Φθόνος

8

T rejoice to see that you harbour spite, for I know that of all its effects there is one that it just : this feeling itself stings those who cherish it’. Language and sentiment are closely similar to Philem. incert. fr. 131 K.: ό φθόνος εν αντφ τοΰθ’ εν επιεικώς (or επιεικές) ποιεί, / τόν αίρετιστήν (or έρεθιστην) όντα των αυτού τρόπων / λυμαίνεται μάλιστα διά παντός σννών. The thought recurs in E. Oedipus fr. 551 N .2 where envy is said to corrupt the human mind. In Ino fr. 403 N .2 there is a reference to the horrors of δυσώνυμος φθόνος, the μεγίστη πασών τών εν άνθρωποις νόσων. Two excerpts also dealing with envy (Stob. 3.38.2, 6 ) have been attributed to Diony­ sius the tyrant (frr. 7, 8 N.2 /Sn.), though they very probably belong to Dionysius from Sinope, the comic poet: in other passages in Stobaeus where the tyrant is intended, he is described as such (for instance, frr. 2-4, ap. Stob. 4.34.29, 4.41.2, 4.8.8, respectively). fr. 7 (Dion. com. fr. 7 [2,427] K.)

That φθονεϊν deservedly vexes those who feel it is stated in Carcinus’ unnamed fr. N.2/Sn. ap. Stob. 3.38.18. χαίρω σ’ δρών φθονούντα, τοϋτ’ εϊδώς δτι ëv δρδ. μόνον δίκαιον ών ποιεί φθόνος' λυπεί γάρ *]* αυτό τό κτήμα τούς κεκτημένονς

1 χαίρειν σ' εώ F. G. Schmidt || 2 δίκαιον Porson : ίδιον SMA : ήδίον Br.: σπονόαίον Ellis |] 3 The unmetrical last line has elicited several conjectures : αυτό κτήμα, Wakefield, Gaisford : α δ τό κτ. Welcker : αυτούς κτ. F.G. Schmidt : αυτόχρημα Nauck: oth’ το κτ. Ellis : αντο τοντο τούς κεκτη μένους C. E. S. Headlam. 1. 1959, I, 38. 2. Morm. Par. B 15. The phrase in Sud. σ 863 ϊστι ôè καί αυτός εκ των ζ’ τραγικών, οΐπνες ώι-ομάσϋησαν Πλειάς is interpolated, referring to the later Sosiphanes : Snell, TrGF 92 T 1,103 T 2.

'Though you are poor don’t be jealous of the wealthy’. In the first fragment the repetition of negative particles gives a comic colouring. Note Epich. fr. 285 (Kaibel) where the same conceptis expressed in closely similar phraseology: τις δέ κα λφη γενέσθαι μή φθονούμενος, φίλοι;1/ δήλον ώς ανήρ παρ’ ούδέν έσθ’ ό μή φθονούμενος' / τυφλόν ήλέησ’ Ιδών τις, έφθόνησε δ’ ούδέ εϊς. Nevertheless, the reflection can also be traced in tragedy: E. Bellerophontes fr. 294; adesp. frr. 5302-31 N .2 The second excerpt recurs slightly varied in Men. mon. 52 J. and in Anecd. Boiss. 1,153. It seems to be a τόπος : Agathon fr. 23 N.2/Sn.; Chares fr. 3 N .2 (Stob. 3.38.3); Men. mon. App. 33.18 J. I. ’Αρετή. Ευτυχία ’Αρετή in general is mentioned in a paraenetic passage of Carcinus (fr. 4N . 2 /Sn.), cited by Stobaeus in his discussion of prosperity (4.39.3):

3. 2.

φίλυις Kaibel. The verse has been assigned to Dionysius ; see Nauck2. ad loc., p. 943. 10

146

Philosophic Motifs άσκεΐν μεν άρετήν, εύτνχεϊν δ’ αΐτεΐν θεούς' εχων γάρ αμφω ταϋτα μακάριος θ’ άμα κεκλημένος ζην κάγαθός δννήσετat 2 εχων libri : οΰχων Herwerden | θάμα Μ J| 3 τύγαθος Α.

'Practice virtue and ask the gods to keep you in prosperity; for a man who has both will be able to live and be called both blessed and good’. The mss of Stobaeus unanimously present the lemma as Καρκίνος Τυρεύς. The title Τνρώ is due to Nauck’s emendation. Plays of the same title were written by Sophocles (Pearson, 1963, II, 270ff.), and (in the fourth century) by Astydamas (Sud. a 4265 s.v., Snell, TrGF 60 T 1). An interesting coupling of values is involved here : α γ α θ ό ς and μ α κ ά ρ ι ο ς , "good and blessed9, is the man who practices αρετήν and asks the gods to keep him in pros­ perity. Α ρετή and αγαθός commend the highest standard in the system of Greek values. ’Αγαθός, the best specimen of human being, traditionally does καλά and shuns αισχρά; however, the nature of καλά and αισχρά is not the same from Homer to the fourth century ;1 different kinds of action and different kinds of individuals are commended by άρεταί over this period. ’Αρετή (cf. πάσα αρετή) commends human excellence in general, ‘the whole of virtue*.2 Such a general usage always existed alongside the specialized mean­ ing of excellence in various skills,3 successful competition, results rather than good intention: note Pindar’s verses, P. 10.22ff. εύδαίμων δε καί ύμνη- j τός ούτος άνήρ γίνε­ ται σοφοις, / δς άν χερσίν ή ποδών άρετρ κρατήσαις / τά μέγιστ’ άέθλων ίλη τόλμα τε και σθένει. The interesting point in Carcinus* passage is that αρετή seems to imply not only good results, as in Pindar, but good intentions revealed in good results. This notion is suggested by the phrase ά σ κ ε ΐ ν ά ρ ε τ ή ν : a man is here called άγαθός in virtue of his practising άρετή. The use of άσκεΐν to express the practice of a moral virtue or vice, though untraceable in early Greek literature, is fairly frequent in fifth-century texts and especially in dramatic poetry: S. O.C. 913 δίκαι ασκούσαν (cf. Hdt. i.96.2); E. Ba. 641, incert. fr. 1067.2 N.a; note also A. P.Y. 1066, S. Tr. 384, E. Ba. 476, tfeU 130f. In drama exactly the same expression άρετήν άσκεΐν is only found 4*in E. incert. fr. 853N.2, ascribed by Stobaeus (3.1.80) to the Heracleidae : τρεις εΐσίν άρεταί τάς χρεών άσκεΐν, τέκνον, / θεούς τε τιμάν τούς τε φύσαντας γονής / νόμους τε κοινούς Ελλάδος' και ταϋτα όρων I κάλλιστον έξεις στέφανον εύκλειας άεί. 1. For a historical survey of the qualities implied in the pattern αρετή -‘άγαθός see Adkins, 1960, 46ff., 156ff., 172ff., and passim; also id., 1970 and 1972i, passim. 2. Cf. Dover, 1974, 68f. 3. Usually by means of a genitive, an accusative or infinitive; cf., for instance, Horn.//. XV 641 f., XX 411. 4. In Phocylides’ maxim fr. 9 D., quoted in PI. Rep. 3, 407a Φωκνλίδον ... ονκ ακούεις πώς φησί δεϊν, όταν τφ ήδη βίος ή, αρετήν άσκεΐν, the original line is δίζησθαι βιοτήν, άρετήν δ \ όταν ή βίος ήδη. As Adam pointed out (at Rep., ad loc.), Plato for his own purposes represents Phocylides as stressing αρετή?1 άσκεΐν rather than δίζησθαι βιοτήν, which in fact is emphasized. Ά σκεΐν άρετήν as a moral excellence is found in Plato : e.g. E uth yd . 283a, Gorg, 527e; cf. in the fourth century also X. Mem. i.2.19f., Isoc. Panath. 214. For αρετή?» άσκεΐν cf. also Biehl, 1965,100 (on E. Or. 922).

Moral Beliefs

147

In both passages, the display of άρετή defines άγαθός; but Euripides refers to the fundamental άρεταί in a manner which clearly shows their moral quality,1 while Carcinus mentions άρετή without giving any explicit hint of a moral usage of the term. This vagueness, however, is certainly due to the lack of context. In fourth-century tragedy the earlier use of άρετή, which denotes and commends success at games or war, is reflected in the sole fragment from Antiphon’s Meleager (2 N.2/Sn.), preserved in Arist. Rhet. 2. 23, 1399b26ff. (cf. and Σ ad loc.): σννήλθον τφ Οίνεΐ... ol εκκριτοι των Αίτωλών ονχ ϊνα κάνωσι θήρ’, όπως ôè μάρτυρες / άρετής γένωνται Μελεάγρφ προς Ελλάδα. {’Αρετή here denotes prowess in hunting the Calydonian boar). On the other hand, by the middle of that century rhetorical texts show that αγαθός was the man who possessed specific moral excellences, such as justice (Lys. xxv 19, Ant. v 4), political loyalty (Lys. xii 75, xiii 2), generosity (And. i 118), gratitude (Lys. xxxv 234 B) and courage (Lyc. Leocr. 49, 104).2 Thus, in the present case, though the context is lost, it is not unlikely that άρετή αγαθός have a moral use. The second statement " ε ύ τ ν χ ε ϊ ν ôf α ΐ τ ε ϊ ν θ ε ο ύ ς ” reflects a concept of conservative piety, which is further attested by dramatic parallels: A. Tk. 625 (= Men. mon. 351 J.) θεόν ôè δώρόν έστιν εύτνχεϊν βροτούς, 417f.,422; E. incert. fr. 1025.1 N .2* (»=Men. mon. 344 J.; cf. A.P. x.107.1). A man who gains prosperity in this way and practices α ρ ε τ ή ν is not only α γ α θ ό ς but also μ α κ ά ρ ι ο ς . The formation of the adjective is fairly new, and this may be due to its metrical form ( u υ wo ): untraceable before Euripides, where it is astonishingly frequent8 (μάκαρ was used in earlier literature), it became a stock word in Plato. K. Ευγένεια New democratic aspirations are reflected in an unnamed passage of Astydamas (fr. 8 N.2/Sn.), cited by Stobaeus when arguing that ευγένεια depends on αρετή, and not on noble birth (4.29.3). γένους δ’ έπαινός έστιν ασφαλέστατος κατ’ άνδρ’ έπαινειν, δστις άν δίκαιος fj τρόπους τ ’ άριστος' τούτον εύγενή καλεϊν. j* èv εκατόν έστιν εύρεΐν ανδρ’ ένα, κεϊ τούτον οι ζητονντες εΐσί μνρίοι. 3 κάλει Papabasilius |j 4 εν εκατόν ίστιν εύρεΐν ΐίνδρ' h a Hanse ad Stob. (cf. Ion 382f.), ai.ii alia \j 5 κε\ Porson : xal SMA: xch»... wen Grotius. 1. For the importance of this fragment for the fifth-century moral use of αρετή see Adkins, 1960, 176. Both the moral use of άρετή, irrespective of socia! conditions, and its conscious practice are echoed in E. incert. fr. 1029 N.s 2. Cf. Dover, 1974, 165f., 235f., and for αρετή associated with specific moral virtues in fourthcentury epitaphs, see ib., 67f. 3. See for all occurrences the Concordance of Allen and Italic, and Collard's Supplement s. v. Moschion (incert. fr, 10 N.8/Sn.) used the superlative μακαηιώτατος. De Heer, 1968, collects and classi­ fies examples down to the end of the fifth century.

Philosophic Motifs The safest praise of a family is the praise of each man individually, whether he is just and of good character; this man should be called well-born. In a hundred, one scarcely could be found even if countless people are looking for him’. Justice and αρετή in the mode of life ("τ ρ ό π ο υ ς α ρ ι σ τ ο ς"), rather than high birth, are here commended as the moral prerequisites of ευγένεια. It may be of interest as showing the values of the age that Theodectes, Astydamas’ contemporary, seems to have conceived of ευγένεια in the same way in his unnamed fr. 15 N.12 /Sn., cited in the same chapter of the Anthologium (4.29.5) : έγώ μεν οϋποτ* ευγένειαν ήνεσα / την προστάταισι χρωμένην άναξίοις. On the other hand, the lines preserved from his Helen1 show that the traditional pattern of noble origin - άρετή persists. The belief, vehemently expressed in this passage of Astydamas, seems to reject the traditional attitude to αρετή, which commended noble origin and wealth, 2 and is mainly recorded by Homer, Theognis, Pindar and Aeschylus, though moral uses of άρετή are not completely lacking3 over this period. What matters now is the individual and his own merits per se, irrespective of descent ("κ a t ’ ä v δ ρ’ ε π α ι ν ε ί ν \ cf. "gentem lauda ex uno homine bono” Wil. ms.) .4 It is indicative of the coincidence of moral values in the later fifth and fourth centuries that Euripides clearly stressed the practice of άρετή (or its cooperative excellences, such as άνδρεία and δικαιοσύνη) as the fundamental attribute of ευγένεια. His contemporary Sophocles seems to make no real attempt to break with tradition in his use of ενγενής (cf. P h il 874, O.C. 728), though it sometimes appears that the traditional link of high birth and άρετή is not beyond dispute (Tyro fr. 667 P., Phil. 1284, Ant. 38). Sophocles may mark the beginning of the attempt to make the display of the moral excellences the attribute of ενγενής. On the other hand, in the Euripidean theatre, Orestes, referring to the nobility of Electra’s peasant husband (E l 368ff.),5 declares that εύανδρία has no connection whatever with high birth, wealth, poverty, military profession and political influence (cf. ib., 551, Meleager it. 527 N.2). The criterion for distinguishing τούς ενγενεΐς βροτούς is ομιλία, the company they keep, and ήθη, the moral lives they lead. Similarly, a simple but magnanimous farmer supports Orestes in his trial before the council of the Argives (Or. 917-30). Fragments from lost plays reflect views of ευγένεια which are strikingly similar to that in

1. See Ch. IV. 3, p. 67. 2. The question of such new usages of value-terms of the society, which mainly occurred from the later fifth century onwards, was discussed, among others, by Adkins, 1960, 172ff. (on Euripides esp., pp. 176ff.), 1972!, 112ff.; cf. also Guthrie, III, 1969, 152ff., on social equality. 3. Theognis, living in a time of economic and political turmoil, was considerably advanced in ad­ mitting that a man can become άγαθός in virtue of his δικαιοσύνη alone (vv. 147f.; cf. Adkins, 1960, 78f., but also Lloyd-Jones, 1973 , 47f0, though the rest of his poetry makes it abundantly clear that for him άγαβός and εύγενής denote "of the right class” . For Pindar's concept of άρετή and justice see recently Lloyd-Jones, op. cit,, 49ff. 4. For the abbreviation see above, p. 142 n. 1. 5. On the suspected interpolation of vv. 373-79 and 386-90 see Page, 1934, 74f„ and Friis Johansen, 1959, 95f. n. 140, who follow Wilamowjtz, 1875, 190-92; for a different view cf. Denniston, ad loc. {I960, 94ff,). However, the certain part of the passage suffices to show the novelty of Euripides’ ideas.

Social and Political Views

149

Astydamas’ passage : an unidentified character in the Dictys (fr. 336 N.2) stresses that nobility depends on virtue and justice rather than birth .1 Moreover, in Aristotle’s dialogue on nobility (fr. 94 R.8, Stob. 4.29.52) Euripides is said to have defined ευγένεια as deriving not from "των εκ πάλαι σπουδαίων” but from mere άρετή ; cf. H.F. 696f., Alexandras fr. 53 N.a Justice and ανδρεία characterize the ενγενεϊς in Melanipp. Desmotis fr. 495.40-3 N .2 Similar ideas were entertained by the Sophists; Antiphon 87 [80] B 44 B col. 2, lOff. DKII 353; Lycophron 2 ap. Arist. fr. 91 R .3 (=Stob. 4.29.24) asserted that "in truth there is no difference between low-born and high-born": cf. E. Alexandros fr. 52 ΝΛ Entries in Stobaeus, attributed to Socrates, show the change in the use of ευγένεια: 4.29.20; ibid., 29.23 ... oifτε ανδρα σπουδαϊον ... τον è£ έπιφανονς οντα γένους (sc. κρίνομεν), αλλά τον ύπαρχοντα τφ τρόπο) κρείττονα (cf. τρόπους άριστος in our passage). According to the Platonic division of nobility (D.L. 3, 88-89), the highest form of εύγένεια is not that depending on excellent, princely or illustrious ancestors, but that due to the individual’s own καλοκαγαθία. Similarly, in Aristotle αρετή is said to be the basic criterion for distinguishing τούς εύγενεϊς (P o l 1. 6 , 1255a39ff.);3 in fr. 92 R .3 (=Stob. 4.29.25) the sentiment closely corresponds to that in Astydamas’ fragment: σπουδαϊον δέ γε φαμεν έκαστον κατά την αύτοϋ αρετήν είναι, ό')στε και γένος σπουδαϊον ώσαύτως ... Δήλον άρ’, ... δτι έστιν ή ευγένεια άρετή γένους. Sometimes, however, the old value continues to exist alongside the new one, and emphasis is placed on upbringing: E. H el 940-43, Archelaus fr. 232 N.2, El. 336-38, I.T. 609f. Nevertheless, applications of the new usage of εύγένεια in rhetorical texts4 suggest that it gained currency in the fourth century, though the earlier pattern of εύγένεια equated with high birth continues to exist in orators also.5 In passages, however, from later drama and especially of Menander, it seems that the traditional concept of the value is being attacked: Sam. 140-42,® Hero fr. 3 and incert. fr. 612 (Sandb.). 4. SOCIAL AND POLITICAL VIEWS The gnomic fragments discussed here refer to matters of everyday life, such as the attitude towards women, the dangers and honours of wealth, civic rights, the best ways of governing, and reflect, as some of those discussed before, the secularized thought of the age. Some of these concepts (such as those of wealth and women) foreshadow motifs of the New Comedy. 1. For the dramatic situation possibly involved here sec Webster, ] 967, 63Γ. Note, however, a reflec­ tion of the belief in the inheritance of virtues and vices in Antigone fr. .166, Dictys fr. 333, Antiope fr. 215, incert. fr. 1068 N.2, and cf. Dover's (1974, 91 ) cautious remarks. 2. For Lycophron see Guthrie, III, 1969, 313f. 3. Cf. Ch. IV. 3, p. 67. 4. D. A mat. 8 ap. Stob. 4.29.56; Isoc. Dem. 7 : the possession of άρετή is more useful than high birth ; but in Isocrates, in general, efyémct keeps its traditional connotation of noble lineage: cf. Bous. 10, Evag. 13, Hel. 44 etc. On the other hand, the sole occurrence of the term in Aeschines, F.L. 157, εύγενής και μεγαλόψυχο;, implies the new sense of nobility of character. 5. Cf. Dover, 1974, 93-95, for both usages of ευγένεια in drama and oratory. 6. Stobaeus 4.29.10, ascribes the verses to Men, finidia ( —fr. 248 Kö.).

150

Philosophic Motifs À. 'Women and Marriage

Remarkably many dramatic aphorisms involve strong reproaches against women and marriage. The position of women in society always proved a favourite theme for maxims in tragedy. The influence on dramatists of professedly satyrical writers, such as Archilochus and Semonides, should not be neglected. However, such attacks against women, which became a well-known feature of Euripidean drama, were in most cases imposed by dramatic necessity. Thus, the speech of Medea, which follows Creon5s exit (364-409) and contains high emotional tension, ends with a general statement that women are particularly gifted for doing evil ; the forceful censure of women, made probably by Bellerophontes in the Stheneboea (fr. 6 6 6 N .2) ,1 is also justified by action itself. In Hipp. 616-50 the denunciation of the female sex, though compatible with the dramatic situation, is formulated in rhetorical generalities, and the connection between general and special sphere is loose. As regards fourth-century fragments, the ignorance of both the context and — often —even of the title of the plays does not allow, except in a few cases, to consider the dramatic situation involved. Consequently, as earlier in this chapter, the discussion here will be mainly confined to the social views themselves. In the following self-contained verse of Chaeremon (fr. 32 N.2/Sn. ap. Stob. 4.22.50) γυναίκα θάπτειν κρεϊττόν έστιν ή γαμεΐν, 'better to bury a woman than marry her5, the far-fetched, cynical antithesis θάπτειν - γαμειν (cf. Hippon. fr. 68 West) colours the statement either with a highly pathetic or, more likely, with a comic tone, since the reflection became a commonplace of later drama, especially comedy·. Philem. incert. fr. 198 K. (-Men. mon. 147 J.), Hippothoon incert. fr. 3 N .2 (=Men. mon. 282 J.), Men. incert. fr. 576 Kö., Antiph. incert. fr. 292 K., Men. mon. 72, 591 J. For the general pattern of denunciation of marriage cf. E. Oedipus fr. 546 N .2 "a wife is always less than her husband even if the basest man marries a noble woman” , Melanipp. Desmotis fr. 502.3f., Oedipus fr. 543.1 N .2 The disadvantages of marriage are referred to at length in Hipp. 616-68.2 The evils brought about by dwelling with woman-kind had been emphasized already in A. Th. 187ff. Pace Bartsch,8 who placed the fragment in Chaeremon’s dubia, and Meineke,456who went so far as to suppose a graphic error changing Χαιρήμονος to Φιλήμονος (fr. 236 K.= Men. mon. 151 J.), the authenticity of the verse is adequately suggested by the fact that the lemma Χαιρήμονος is confirmed by all three codices of the Anthologium (A,M ,S), which represent three separate traditions, and by Chaeremon5s propensity to impressive, artificial phraseology and light, untragic overtones.6 ■ The sentiment is developed in a milder way in Theodectes5 fr. 13 N.2 /Sn., cited in the same chapter of the Anthologium (4.22.67). In contrast to Chaeremon and Carcinus,® Theodectes, as a sagacious lawyer, knows to distinguish the two sides of the case : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

See Nauck2 ad loc,, and ci. Webster, 1967, 83. For a formal analysis of the discussion see Friis Johansen, 1959, 125 n. 75. 1843, 50. F C G 4, 690. See esp., Ch. V. 1,2,5. See below, p. 152.

Social and Political Views

151

ό'ταν γάρ αλοχον είς δόμους άγη πόσις, ουχ ώς δοκεΐ γυναίκα λαμβάνει μόνον, όμοϋ δε rfjÔ’ ër* είσκομίζεται λαβών και δαίμον* ήτοι χρηστόν ή τουναντίον 2 μόνην Nauck || 3 τηδ’ £τ' είσκομίζεται Jacobs, Nauck : τή(ι)δέ τ' SM : χηδ' Α.

'When a husband leads his wife home, he doesn’t get, as it seems, only a wife but together with her brings in as well his destiny, whether good or the reverse5. The distinction between virtuous and wicked women, and consequently the concept of marriage as a question of mere chance,1 is a literary commonplace, probably first occurring in Hesiod (Erg. 702-705), who was followed by Semonides (fr. 6 West). It was also handled by Sophocles (Phaedra fr. 682 P.), Epicharmus (fr. 35 Lor.), and very frequently by Euripides (Protesilaus fr. 657.3L, Melanipp. Desmotis fr, 494 N.2, Or. 602-604; cf. also incert. frr. 1056-57 N 2.), Euripides dwelt on the nature of women, attributing them brains and therewith the knowledge of both evil and good. The first fragment preserved from the Alcmeon of Theodectes2 (Snell, TrGF 72 F la) contains distinctly Euripidean echoes. It has survived in Porph. Φ ι λ ό λ ο γ ο ς Ά κ ρ ό α σ ι ς fr. 3 ap. Eus. PE 10,3,19, where it is cited just after E. Med. 231, and runs thus: σαφής μεν èv βροτοϊσιν ύμνεΐται λόγος ώς ούδέν Ιστιν άθλιώτερον φυτόν γυναικός 'A clear saying is repeated by mortals that there is no creature more miserable than women5. ’Α θ λ ι ώ τ ε ρ ο ν φ υ τ ό ν , used of the female sex, recalls in language and concept E. Med. 230f. πάντων δ’ ΰσ* εστ’ έμψυχα και γνώμην όχει / γυναϊκές εσμεν άθλιώτατον φυτόν. What suggests a direct influence of Euripides’ imagery here is that φυτόν was used to denote women’s social inferiority first in the Medea. Medea laments women’s low social status, their sad plight in society, while in Hipp. 630 6 δ’ αΰ λαβό)ν ατηρόν ες δόμους φυτόν%Hippolytus’ contemptuous stricture implies the excessively low morality of the female sex. This sense is given not only by the context, but by ατηρόν, 'mischievous, baneful5, which in this case seems to allude to the serious harm that women cause to men .(cf. Andr. 353f,). In an Alcmeon-play such a statement must refer to Eriphyle, Alcmeon’s hated

1. Decharme, 1966, 114Î., discussed the view in relation to the social conditions oi marriage in Euripides* age. 2. Cf. Ch. IV. 1, 2. 3. Κακόν, given by LPV for φντό\\ is probably, as Barrett suggested {ad loc., p. 279), nothing more than a substitution of the simple word for the unusual. For φντόν applied to women cf. also Men. mon. 398 J.

Social and Political Views

153

Philosophic Motifs fr. mother, and is more likely to have been uttered by Alphesiboea1 than by Alcmeon2 himself (in a conjectural attack on his mother before the murder) or by Eriphyle lamenting her plight (in a conjectural attempt to move her son) .8 The last two suggestions would presuppose a bipartite structure of the play, dealing in its first part with the events in Argos before the matricide, and in the second with the events in Psophis, as the presence of Alphesiboea in the second fragment suggests.4 It seems, however, unlikely that Theodectes neglected the principles of dramatic unity, following the single example of A. Eumenides, Alphesiboea, if she is the speaker of the fragment, may well have expressed concern for the sad social conditions of the female sex (the complement άΟλιώτατον, as in the Medea, conveys a notion of pity), possibly in the stichomythia with Alcmeon, which we know of from the second preserved fragment. The tone of strong attack on women is also assumed in a couplet of Carcinus 3 (N.2/ Sn.), which is explicitly stated by Athenaeus (13, 559 F) to have come from his Semele : Καρκίνος δ’ 6 τραγικός êv Σεμέλη, ής αρχή "ώ νύκτες” (fr. 2 N.2 /Sn.) φησίν ώ Ζεν, τί χρή γυναίκας εξ είπε ΐν κακόν; άρκοϋν äv εΐη, κάν γνναΐκ’ εΐπης μόνον 'Zeus, why need one say evil of women in detail? It were enough if you say merely woman’. In the S u d a (k 394) a title Σεμέλη o r ’Αρχή was erroneously deduced. *Ω ν ύ κ τ ε ς seems likely to be the opening of the play according to the common device of apos­ trophizing impersonal powers in the prologue (cf. especially the opening of Men. Misumenus). There are close affinities in wording and sentiment with E. Stheneboea fr. 666 and Aeolus fr. 36 N .2 The powerful denunciation of the female sex in Hipp. 616ff. is similarly formulated in an apostrophe to Zeus. 5 These are quasi-soliloquies of the type often used in tragedy to avoid a direct denunciation of an individual, by substituting an apostrophe to a god (cf. E. Med. 516ff.) or to an abstraction (E. Andr. 3l9ff.; S. O.T. 380ff.).6 On the other hand, a virtuous wife is commended in two lines (frr. 9-10 N.2 /Sn.) of Dionysius the tyrant. They are, like all the rest of the tyrant’s dramatic work, bitterly ridiculed by Lucian (ind. 15), who alone preserves them. fr. 9 Αωρϊς τέθνηκεν ή Διονυσίου γυνή Δωρις τέθνηκεν C. F, Hermann : Δωρικόν ηκεν libri : Δωρίδιον ήκεν Suess.

10

οϊμοι γυναίκα χρησίμην άπώλεσα

'Alas, a useful wife I’ve lost’. Nauck 1 deduced that the verses do not belong to a play. Walker’s 2 suggestion, however, that they come from a drama since the speaker in fr. 9 is a person other than the speaker-Dionysius himself-of fr. 10, is not unlikely. The lines recall parallel instances in E. Alecs tis. In regard to the f irst verse Dionysius probably had in mind the pathetically expressed utterance of the chorus (v. 392) "βέβηκεν, ούκέτ’ εστιν, Άδμήτου γυνή", and that of Admetus’ son (394f.) "βέβακεν, ούκέτ’ έστιν, ώ / πάτερ, νφ’ άλίφ". Moreover, what the chorus says to Admetus (418) "γυναικός έσθλής ήμπλακες” does not differ much from the sentiment in the second verse. Despite verbal parallels in comedy (Ar. Ach. 174, Men. et Phil. comp. II 198-99 J.), these lines contain nothing ridiculous. Lucian’s mockery may derive from the fact that Dionysius and his family were in themselves regarded as beneath the dignity of tragedy. A play dramatizing the life and death of Dionysius’ wife,3 namely dealing, like Theodectes’ Mausolus, with contemporary characters, is possible. If Dionysius himself played a role in it, as the second verse suggests, this would be a remarkable novelty, foreshadowing Seneca’s Octavia. Nevertheless, though Dionysius won the first prize at the Lenaea with the UE κ τ oρ ο ς Α ύ τ ρ a in 367 B.C., his plays were generally represented as very poor work .4 They are ridiculed, besides Lucian, by poets of the Middle Comedy (such as in Eubulus’ Dionysius and Ephippus fr. 16.1 K.) while instances of his misuse of words in accord­ ance with fanciful etymologies are given by grammarians.5 B. Social Relations A theme of relations among fellowmen is developed in an unnamed fragment of Moschion (8 N,2/Sn. ap. Stob. 4.49.10). ήν 5ρα τρανός αίνος ανθρώπων δδε, ώς τον πέλας μεν νουθετεΐν βραχύς πόνος, αυτόν δ’ ΙνεγκεΙν ϋβριν ήδικημένον πάντων μέγιστον των εν άνθρώποις βάρος 1 όρο bbri I) 2 τονς πέλας Burges | πόνος SM : χρόνο; A II 3 αυτόν S : αυτόν MA Tr.

'Then it is really clear this saying of men that advising one's neighbour is short work but enduring injustice and insult oneself is the greatest of men’s burdens’.

'Doris, Dionysus’ wife, is dead’. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Cf. Welcker, pt. 3, 1841, 1075. Thus Ravenna, 1903, 794. Thus del Grande, 1924, 38, 1934, 195. See Ch. IV. 2. For the instance see Barrett, 1964, 274ff., Schadewaklt, 1966, 118f.f. Cf. Barrett, op. cit., 275.

1. ad l o c 796. 2. 1923, 189. 3. Doris of Locri was one of Dionysius' three wives, the other two being Hermocratcs' daughter and Aristomache of Syracuse. His successor was Doris' eldest son. 4. Cramer, Aneal. Par. i.303; D.S. xv. 6, 74.4. 5. See Snell, TrC.F 76 F 12.

Social and Political Views

Philosophic Motifs The proverbial character of the sentiment, namely that it is easier to advise and comfort somebody else than to endure a serious offense oneself, is implied by the phrase ή ν ... τ ρ a v o ς α ί ν ο ς ... / ώ ς..., which has a close precedent in E. Danae it. 321.1 N .3 For similar phrasing again in a proverb cf. Cratin. Deliades fr. 24 K. and Archil, fr. 174.1 (West). The introductory ήνάρα(άρα), marking realization of the truth, emphasizes in tragedy (e.g. E. ffel. 746) the evidence given in the following lines.1 The earliest occurrence of the belief echoed in this fragment occurs in A. P.V. 263-65 ελαφρόν Saxκ πημάχων έξω πόδα / έχει παραινεΐν νονθετειν τε τούς κακώς / πράσσοντας, which partly coincides with adesp. fr. 342 N .234Euripides often follows the pattern: Ale. 1078 (=Men. mon. 693 J.), H.F. 1249, Alexandras fr, 44.2 N .2 The proverb, given in Bekker Anecd. p. 38 ελαφρόν παραινεΐν τφ κακώς πεπραγότι, is constantly reiterated in later prose and poetry: D.C. xxxviii.18.2; Ter. And. II 1,9 (309) Facile omnes, quom valemus, recta consilia aegrotis damus. C. Wealth - Poverty A partly corrupt quatrain of Chaeremon (fr. 36N.2/Sn.,Stob.4.31.9) commends the honours and the influence which wealth, though indignified ( ά σ ε μ ν ο ς ) , brings to men. πλούτος δε πρός μέν “j* τάς άλας τιμάς Ιών ούκ έσχεν όγκον ώστε καί δόξης τυχεϊν, άλλ’ έστ’ άσεμνος' èv ôè Ί* δόσει βροχών ήδύς συνοικεϊν καί τιν* είληχώς χάριν

Euripides : ευγένεια, high birth, does not count any more; only wealth matters now (Aeolus fr. 22, Alcmene fr. 95, Erechtheus fr. 362.14-17 N . 2).1 However, that wealth confers honours and social reputation and, consequently, the ability to be effective in the public sphere is widely recognized by its opponents: poverty, says Theognis (173ff.), deprives the αγαθός of effectiveness and accordingly of prestige, leading him unable to exert any public influence; on the other hand, "πλούτος πλείστψ πδσιν έχει δύναμιν” (718). The belief is stressed again in E. Ph. 439Ϊ., Andromeda fr. 142, Danae fr. 324 and Eurystheus fr. 378 N . 2 Similarly, in Carcinus’ fr. 10 N. 2 /Sn. (ap. Stob. 4.31.63) wealth, though decried as entailing misfortune, is thought to be intensely pursued: f ώ πολλά πλούτος δυστνχέστατος κυρών δμως μεγιστον ζήλον èv βροτοις έχει i & libri: 6 Grotius : ώς Valckenaer :

1. 2. 3. 4.

Cf. Friis Johansen, 1959, 58 and n. 12 ; Denniston, GPi , 36f., 45. Cf. Adkins, 1972if 24ff., 35. Above, p. 146 n. 4. Adkins, op. cit., 49f.

Nauck : ώ servat Meineke scribens έχεις in v. altero.

The original reading may have been ώ (or ώ exclamatory as often) π ο λ λ ά π λ ο ύ ­ τ ε 2 ... έ χ ε ι ς , and πλούτος may then have been attracted by the close δ ν σ τ ν χ é σ τ a τ ο ς.3 The notion conveyed by δ ν σ τ ν χ έ σ τ α τ ο ς π λ ο ύ τ ο ς is more fully developed in E. Phoenix fr. 813 N . 2 ώ πλούθ’, δσφ μεν ρφστον εΐ βάρος φέρειν, / πόνοι ôè κάν σοΙ και φθοραί πολλαΐ βίου / sveto”... Similarly, πλούτος is called δδννηρός in Ph. 566, while the evils of wealth are named in Men. et Phil. comp. II 59-67 J. A stronger censure is passed on wealth in a self-contained verse of Carcinus (fr. 9 N, 2 /Sn., Stob. 4.31.60): - u δειλόν εσθ” δ πλούτος καί φιλόψυχον κακόν

1 τάκόλαστα (Headlma) πας (Tucker) Ιών : τάς πόλεως τιμάς Meineke, alii alia j| 3 άσεμνος Tucker: έστι σεμνός libri | δόσει SA : δώσει Μ : δώμασιν Hense : λφοσιν Näuck : σώφροσιν Headlam, alii alia.

Despite the corruption, the main notion clearly emerges: wealth is both commended as conferring honours (π ρ ό ς ...δ λ α ς τ ά ς τ ι μ ά ς Ιών), and decried as lacking in dignity (δ γ κ ο v) and good repute (δ ό ξα ). Praise of wealth is reflected in Hesiod’s poetry 2 (Erg. 308ff.): by working men become wealthy;... άρετή and fame accompany wealth; cf. Phoc. fr. 9 D .,3 Hor, Epist. i.l.53f. Wealth is first disparaged by Theognis (315-20, 699f.). His attitude reflects the conflict between the wealthy landowners, the old aristocracy of the Homeric world, and the new rich who gained wealth from trade. The possession of wealth, sometimes in an unfamiliar way, upset the old order in society.4 Like Theognis, Solon distrusts the new "leaders of the people” who became rich by indiscriminate means (fr. 4.11 West). This disruption of the traditional social ranks is still obvious in

155

δειλόν Gesner : Ösivdv ΜΑ, eel. om, S.

'Wealth makes men cowardly and faint-hearted’. The line is a word for word repetition of E. Ph. 597 (Stob. 4.31.75), which was probably in Aristophanes’ mind when he wrote (PI. 202f.) ... άλλα καί λεγουσι πάντες ώς j 'δειλότατόν έσθ” 6 Πλούτος (cf. ib., 558-61). An explanation of δ ε ι λ ό ς , 'devoid of courage’, said of the rich, is given in the Scholion on E. Ph., loc. cit. (δειλόν ό πλοΟτος : παρόσον οι πλούσιοι δειλοί εισι πρός θάνατον, ώς μεγάλων αγαθών στερούμενοι'), and in that on Ar. PI. 203. The notion that wealth engenders softness seems to be common:4 Hes. Erg. 6 8 6 ; Bacch. 1.49-51 ; E. Archelaus fr. 235 N . 3 1. For parallel instances of the disapproval of wealth in Menander and the orators see Dover, 1974, 111 . 2. For the pattern of invocations of abstract notions, such as τύχη, ιρι'ισις, δόξα, and πλοντος in Euripides especially, sec Schadewaldt, 1966, 122ff. 3. Attractio inversa ("πλούτε δς δυστνχέστατος κνρεϊς"): Kühner-Gerth, Griechische Grammatik, II, 413ff. 4. Dover (1974, lllf.) remarks that the belief was given substance by Greek superiority in battle to the wealth of the Persian Empire, and refers especially to fourth-century echoes of the idea.

Philosophic Motifs Φ ί λ ό ψ ν χ ο ς 1 (unparalleled in poetry before E. Hec. 348) is the man who is fond of his own life, and hence the 'coward, the faint hearted’. A predilection for com­ pounds with φίλο-, starting in the second half of the fifth century, characterizes the Sophists and particularly Gorgias2 (cf. DK ΙΠ, 455ff.). That the rich are deprived of bravery and energy, and are generally men of low morality and mental powers, is often asserted by Euripidean heroes: Alexandras frr. 54-55, Phactk. fr. 776 N.2, vv. 364f, D. (with further parallels cited by Diggle). However, such a direct imitation of a Euripidean line as that of the Phoenissae by Carcinus should raise suspicions about Carcinus’ authorship; even a lesser dramatist could hardly have indulged in such copying. This is supported by the omission of the verse in codex S. Could a histrionic interpolation on the basis of the repetition be justified ? 3 An actor, aware of the Euripidean line, may have reiterated it in a similar context of a play by Carcinus. The antithetical notion of poverty is pathetically expressed in a fragment attributed conjecturally to Diogenes the Cynic4 (dub. fr. 4 Sn. ~ adesp. fr. 284 N.2). A couplet of personal lament, cited, among others, by D.L, 6 , 38 and (slightly varied) by Ael. V.H. 3, 29, runs thus: απολις, αοικοζ, πατρίδος υστερημένος, πτωχός, πλανήτης, βίον £χων εφήμερον 1 άπολις D.L., Jul.: πλάνης Ael. || 2 πλανήτης D.L., Gnom.: δνσείμων Ael. | έφήμερον Gnom. : τόν εφήμερον (τόν delevit Jacobs) Ael. : τονφ’ ήμέραν D. L. I ap. Jul. post ν. 1 sequitur ούκ όβολόν, ον δρα­ χμήν, ούκ οΐκέτψ εχων.

'A cityless, homeless exile, a poor wanderer who begs his daily bread9. The words are said to have been uttered by Diogenes himself. The Cynic philosopher used to maintain that “all the curses of tragedy had alighted on him" (D.L. and Ael., loc. cit.). The first verse strongly recalls E. Hipp. 1029 απολις αοικος, φυγάς άλητενων χθόνα, a line deleted by Valckenaer and Barrett. The same thought is reflected ib., 1048. Diogenes’ β ί ο ς ε φ ή μ ε ρ ο ς became proverbial: Satyrus (ap\ Porph. Abst. p. 270 Nauck) calls him ήμερόβιον, 'living from hand to mouth’. The προσαίτησις έφημέρου τροφής is said to be the beginning of happiness for Diogenes, of freedom and repute for Crates (Plut, an vitios. 3, 499 D). The sentiment conveyed by .these two lines may find an echo in Seneca Med. 20f., and Ov. Ib. 111. Π α τ ρ ίδ ο ς έ σ τ ε ρ η μ έ ν ο ς reflects a historical fact: Diogenes was exiled for "adulterating the coinage” (D.L. 6 , 20). As regards the meaning of the phrase παραχαράτ1. Φιλοψνχέω occurs in Tyrt. 10.18 (West), Euripides, and prose-writers, whileφιλοψνχία is recorded only in prose-texts. 2. See Pfeiffer, 1968, 159 ; on ^do-compounds from Homer to Pindar see Burkert, 1960, I72ff. 3. Page, 1934, 103-5, cites instances of such interpolations (vom Euripides. 4. Various sources cited by Snell (TrGF, ad lor.., 88, p. 257), besides those quoted here, attest the authorship of Diogenes. Valckenaer (on E. Hipp. 1029) suspected that the lines were Euripidean.

Social and Political Views

157

τειντό νόμισμα, also used by Diogenes himself (D.L ,,loc. cit.), an allegorical value is quite likely;1 namely that Diogenes by his philosophy struck out false standards and values, and thus "altered the currency”. Nevertheless, the story of Diogenes’ exile is authentic, 2 whatever the reason of the exile may have been. Exiled, homeless and deprived of his civic status, Diogenes was led to philosophy (D.L. 6 , 49). On the other hand, in another couplet (dub. fr. 5 Sn. « adesp. fr. 394 N.2, ap. Plut. guaest. conv. H, 1, 632 E) the fact that Diogenes became poor and cut off from his country is attributed to the influence which Antisthenes exerted on his thought. δς (sc. Antisthenes,! με $άκη ήμπισχε κάξηνάγκασεν πτωχόν γενέσθαι κάκ δόμων ανάστατον 1 ράκη Stephanus : κάρη Plut.

Τη rags he clothed me and compelled that I be poor and from my home outcast’. D. Παρρησία Stobaeus in a discussion of παρρησία cites (3.13.30) an interesting fragment from an unnamed play of Moschion (fr. 4 N 2,/Sn.). όμως το γ } ορθόν καί δίκαιον οϋποτε σιγή παρήσω' τήν γάρ έντεθραμμένην άστοϊς Άθάνας τή τε Θησέως πόλει καλόν φυλάξαι γνησίως παρρησίαν 'But what is right and just never will I leave unspoken; for it is honourable to guard nobly the freedom of speech fostered in Athena’s citizens and the town of Theseus’. The concept of saying boldly what is right and just whenever one has to ward off injustice (vv.lf.) prevails in Euripides (Telephus fr.706, incert. fr. 1037 N.2; cf. Hipp. 604, Dictys fr. 334 N .2).3 Π α ρ ρ η σ ί α is a purely Athenian concept, a value closely related to δημοκρατία ; it denotes the freedom of speech, the free expression of thoughts and ideas between equals, and was claimed by the Athenians as their indisputable political privilege. The word is common in prose especially from the fourth century onwards. In PI. Rep. 8,557b παρρησία and εξουσία4 presuppose ελευθερία, the foundation of democracy, and both are democratic watchwords. Παρρησία is, moreover, a favourite word of

1. See Jul. e. Heracl. 7, 208 D, e. Cyn. 6, 188 A-B, 192 C ; D. L. 6, 71. Cl, Dudley, 1937, 22 ; Bayonas, 1970, 27ff. 2. Diogenes’ exile is further confirmed by C.T. Seltman s research on the παραχάραξις mentioned in summary by Dudley, op. cit., 2iff., 54ff.; von der Mühl!, 1966,238fsuggests that Diogenes was forced into exile by a pro-Persian party in Sinope, influenced by Datames, the satrap of Cappadocia, 3. For further instances of this notion in Euripides see Moutsopouios, 1962, 435 and n. II. 4. 'Εξουσία, like παρρησία, denotes and commends the freedom of political institutions in Athens; cf. PI. Gorg. 461e, Th. vii. 69. 2.

Social and Political Views Philosophic Motifs fourth-century orators (Isoc. Nie. 28, Pac. 14; Dinarch. Aristog. 1 ; D. Philipp. I I 31), and is frequently coupled with Ισηγορία to commend a genuinely democratic system, as in Plb. ii.38.6, 42.3. In literature, so far as is known, παρρησία appears first with Euripides,1 whose liberal sentiments found in it an ideal expression: the privilege of saying whatever one regards as right (παν-ρησία) was born and developed in Athens, but is accorded only to free Athenian citizens: Hipp. 421-23, Ion 670-72. The same belief in the right of παρρησία as inherent in Athenian citizenship is echoed in the passage of Moschion: the freedom of speech, as traditionally fostered in Athens, is an honour for the Athenians to guard. On the other hand, Euripides says, slaves, 23 exiles, aliens and sons of alien mothers (cf. again Ion 670-72) are deprived of this privilege of free-born citizens: PL· 390-92, Ion 673-675, Bousiris fr. 313 N .2 Aristophanes9 mockery of such Euripidean ideas (Ra. 949f. with Tzetzes adloc., Th. 540ff.) is indicative of their liberalism. It is worth recalling here Gorgias and Polus who, though wise men, were as aliens, in an inferior rank in respect of παρρησία (PI. Gorg. 487b). The attitude towards the Roman plebs, as Ennius9 Telephus fr. II R .8 shows, was similar. According, however, to fourth-century authorities (D. Philipp. ΠΙ 3, X. Rep. A ih. 1,12) the Athenians, in their opinion that freedom of speech should be enjoyed by all residents of the city, granted a measure of παρρησία and ισηγορία to aliens, metics, even to slaves. The freedom of the Athenian institutions as contrasted with those of cities oppressed by tyrannies has been proclaimed in the Supplices by Euripides in the person of Theseus, depicted as the founder of such liberal institutions (429-41 ).s Accordingly, the name of Theseus, traditionally associated with the Athenian democracy and its constituent values, is unsurprisingly invoked in the passage of Moschion which deals with παρρησία. It is therefore likely, from the emphasis led on παρρησία, that the speaker is an Athenian,45and could thus be asked whether this fragment belongs to thePkeraioi, where an Athenian seems to have spoken the words preserved (frr. 3,7,6 ) .6 This excerpt may have been the introduction 0 to his speech, in which he demanded the obsequies of the tyrant. E. Qualities of a Magistrate In the chapter headed "Περί άρχής καί περί τον όποιον χρή είναι τόν άρχοντα' Stobaeus cites two fragments by fourth-century dramatists : Chaeremon's fr. 31 N 2./Sn. (Stob. 4.5.4) defines good judgement as a quality of wise men. 1. Aeschylus (P.V, 180, Supp. 948) and Sophocles (Aj. 1258) use ελευθερόστομος - έλενθεροστομεϊν. The compound in these contexts implies that the freedom of speech is a right of the free-born only, but the value-term in its civic connotation has not yet been fully developed. In Euripides παρρησία occurs nine times in different shades of meaning. 2. For the protest against slavery as evidenced in the Euripidean drama, see Guthrie, III, 1969,157ff. 3. Cf. Moschion fr. 6, above, p. 118, and Collard, 1975#, ΙΓ, 226*28. F o r Theseus as the founder of Athenian democracy and the mythical substitute for Pericles see Supp. 352f., 381-597 (with Collard’s notes). 4. Cf. Meineke, 1855, 104, Ribbeck, 1875i, 153, Norwood, 1954, 176. 5. Above, p. 122. 6. Cf. Moschion* s fr. 5, below, p. 159.

159

σοφών γάρ άνδρών τάς άμαρτίας καλώς κρίνειν, τό δ’ εϊκή καί μετά σπονδής κακόν The general sentiment concerning καλώς κρίνειν is also echoed in E. Heracl. 179f., and in Apollodorus incert. fr. 291 K.The need for a fair judgement was expatiated on by Plato (Demodocus 383a-c ap. Stob. 4.5.64). Similarly, fair judgement is required from the magistrate in Moschion’s unnamed fr. 5 N.2/Sn. (Stob. 4.5.10). μόνον σν θυμόν χωρίς ένδεξαι λόγους οϋς. σοι κομίζω' τόν κλύοντα γάρ λαβών ο. μύθος εϋνονν ον μάτην λεχθήσεται 2 οϋς σοι Tr. : οϋς σύ S: aol Nauck.

Only do you receive without anger the words I bring to you; for when speech has a kindly hearer it will not be uttered in vain9. The phrasing and sentiment of the first two verses recallE. Andr. 1238 ών δ’ οϋνεκ* ήλθον σημανώ, σύ δ’ ένδεχον, and S, Phil. 1267 ... λόγους 6 ’ άκονσον οϋς ήκω φέρων. The idea that the ruler must always be temperate was epigrammaticaily expressed by Cato the Elder (Plut. reg. et imp. apophth. 198 F ap. Stob. 4.5.78) : κάκιστον (έλεγεν) άρχοντα είναι τόν άρχειν έαντον μή δννάμενον, while it is said of Agesilaus (Plut. apophth. Lacon. 210 F) that "έμεγαλννετο ... έπΐ τφ άρχειν έαντον μάλλον ή επί τφ βασιλεύειν'. The sense given by the last two lines corresponds to the special aim of the orator in his prooemium, i. e. to render his audience favourable towards the case he defends (cf. Arist. fr. 133 R.s: good will in the prooemium ) .1 Moreover, the main concepts involved in this and the earlier discussed παρρησία - fragment, παρρησία and όργή, are named in the prooemium of Demosthenes9 third Philippic (§ 3). The pattern is also found in Euripides rinPolyneices9 opening words in the debate of thePftoercissac (469-72) the antithesis between the άδικος λόγος, which, unsound as it is, needs cunning salves (471f.), and the plain tale of the truth (469) is parallel to the anticipatory attack on the opponent in the opening of agonistic speeches.2 These verses of Moschion seem thus to be, as those of his παρρησία-fragment, the introduction to a dramatic debate. F. Tyranny Tyranny is strongly censured as engendering injustice in a statement of proverbial character, attributed to the tyrant Dionysius the Elder (fr. 4N. 2 /Sn.) by Stobaeus (4.8.8.), Plutarch {de Alex, fort· Π, 5, 338C) and Zenobius A th.2 ,55(=Miller,Mèl. delitt. grec., p. 364). In App. Proa. 2, 99 (Paroemiograpki I, 415) the verse is cited without any lemma. ή γάρ τνραννίς αδικίας μήτηρ έφν 1. See Ch. IV, p. 62. In Wil. ms. (see above, p, 342 n. 1) it is noted on this excerpt and on that of παρρησία; "e prooemio orationis”. 2. Friis-Johansen, 3959, 138ff,} remarks that the composition of Polyneices’ speech (vv. 469-96) corresponds to the structural pattern of agonistic speeches (προοίμιον, διήγησις, άπόόειξις, επίλογος).

Philosophic Motifs

Social and Political Views

In the Phoenissae, a play rich in γνώμαι, Iocasta, when attempting to reconcile the two brothers, decries absolute monarchy, τυραννίς,1 in a magnificent expression: ενδαίμονα αδικίαν (v. 549), 'prosperous iniquity’. In the same three-cornered debate, Eteocles uses the language of Thrasymachus (PI. Rep. 1,344ff.) or that of the Athenians of the Melian dialogue (Th, 5,89ff.) to declare that Τυραννίς is the highest good (506); it follows that right and wrong are redefined in terms of the attainment of tyranny (524f.): είπεο γάρ άδικείν χρή, τυραννίδας περί / κάλλιστον άδικείν,,., On the other hand, Theseus, in his justification of democracy (Supp. 429ff.), censures the injustice which tyranny entails. To become a tyrant or to preserve the tyranny afterwards is to commit injustice, and a tyrant always fears for his own position and life : Peliades fr. 605 N.2, Ion 621-28, Bellerophontes fr. 286.5-7 N .2 Tyranny, though thought to bring prosperity - the tyrant was generally held to be the most ευδαίμων - , is an αδικία per se and as such is condemned as a political institution already from the sixth and early fifth century: Solon ap. Plut. S o l 14; Periandrus 10 [73a] DK I 65,16; Hdt. iii.142.3 ; S. O.T. 873 ; E. Auge fr. 275 N.a; D. O l I 5-6. Con­ formity to law and civic freedom distinguish βασιλεία from τυραννίς according to Socrates (X. Mem. iv.6.12). In his account of the genesis of tyranny and his description of the tyrant himself, Plato (Rep. 8,563eff.) borrowed several features from the career of Dionysius the Elder. Aristotle, more systematically than his predecessors, decries tyranny as the perversion of kingship (Pol 3.7,1279b4f.; EN 8,10, 1160bff.). The sentiment concerning tyranny in our fragment, if the latter indeed comes from Dionysius, a tyrant notorius for his injustice,2 would appear to be mere irony: this tyrant illustrated by his own actions the truth of the sentence, and provided a model for tyranny.8

'Not one tower nor one roof has my country, but towns and homes of the whole earth are prepared for us to dwell therein’. Cosmopolitanism was a prevalent concept of the Cynics, originating with Diogenes, the master of Crates. We are told (D.L. 6,72) that for Diogenes "the only true common­ wealth” (πολιτεία) "is that which is as wide as the universe” . Asked whence he came, he replied: "I am a citizen of the world”, κοσμοπολίτης (ibid., 63). A similar statement is attributed to Socrates (Plut, de ex il 5,600 F; Cic. Tusc. 5, 108). Though such a belief is certainly not alien to the fourth-century awareness of the decline of the City-State,1 the cosmopolitanism of Diogenes and the Cynics is most likely to have been a reaction against every kind of coercion imposed by the community on the individual. 2 The present fragment is regarded 3 as a parody of the words uttered by Heracles in an unknown tragedy (adesp. fr. 392 N .2 ap. Plut, de ex il 5, 600 F, Stob, 3.40,3):fΑργείος ή Θηβαίος’4 ού γάρ εύχομαι / μιας' άπας μοι πύργος 'Ελλήνων πατρίς. This again points to Crates, since the surviving fragments of his w ork 5 attest a high order of talent, particularly in the use of literary parody .6 The sentiment, however, that the entire earth is a homeland, with variations of emphasis, is common: Democr. B 247 DK II 194 άνδρί σοφφ πάσα γη βατή· ψυχής γάρ άγαθής πατρϊς ό ξύμπας κόσμος, with which cf. Meleager ap. A.P. vii. 417.5L and E. incert. fr. 1047.2 N.3, converted by Ovid (Fast. 1.493) omne solum forti patria est,...;cf. also adesp. fr. 318 N .2 r φ γάρ καλώς πράσσοντι πάσα γή πατρίς, with the same notion echoed in: Ar. P I 1151; E. Phaëth. fr. 777 N.2, 163 Diggle; Ar. ap. Stob. 3.40.2a; Lys. xxxi 6 ; Cic. Tusc. 5, 1087 (= inc. incert. fab. fr. 49 R.3: Teucer, probably in Pacuvius).

161

G. Cosmopolitanism A cosmopolitan tone is assumed in a fragment attributed to Crates the Cynic (fr. 1 N.2, Snell, TrGF 90, fr. 15 Diels) by D.L. 6 , 98. ουχ εις πάτρα μοι πύργος, ού μία στέγη, πάσης ôè χέρσου καί πόλισμα καί δόμος έτοιμος ήμΐν ένδιαιτάσθαι πάρα 1 πάτρας ante Grotium. 1. For tyranny in Euripides cf. Decharme, 1966, 176ff. 2. Plutarch, de Alex. fort. 11,5,338 B, states that Dionysius the Elder had killed more than ten thousand people and betrayed his brother to the enemy; nor could he wait for his aged mother to die, but strangled her; ibid. 1,334 C(cf. D.S. xv.6.2-4) he is said to have thrown the poet Philoxenus into the stonequarries. He banished Philistus, the Sicilian historian, who had helped him to become general and tyrant. We know from Arist. Pol. 5. 5 ,13Q5a26ff that he attained the position of tyrant by denouncing Daphnaeus (whom he finally put to death: D.S. xiii,96.3) and the rest of the rich ; his enmity to them made the people trust him as a good democrat: cf. D.S. xiii.91.4-5. Aristotle, (op. cit., 5. 11, 1313b26ff.) attests that in Dionysius’ times people were forced to pay the whole of their property to the state. 3. Cf. Mossé, 1969, 99ff., and for the concept of tyrant in fourth-century writers see, for instance, it., 133ff.

1. Cf. Ch. I, 1. 2. For the cosmopolitanism of the Cynics (esp. of Diogenes, Crates, and Bion) cf. Dudley, 1967, 34ff„ 68. 3. Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Kleine Schriften, I, 193. 4. Cf. the words of Teles ap. Stob. 3.40.8 (111 p. 745 W.-H.) ’Ηρακλής 6’ εξ ’Άργους έκηεσών Θήβας κατφκει. 5. Collected by Diels, 1901, 207ff. 6. Cf. his Πυρφόίαι in Diehl's A n th . Lyr. J:!, 121 if,, and Diels, op. cit., 2171'. 7. For further instances of cosmopolitan ideas see Dover, 1974, 283. II

The Hector of Astydamas ]πεύειν — ] 6 ορυ[ ,].v όπλων έετερημενο. .]rou ποντίαν ήκειν Θ[έτιν ...].. καλλίον* Ηφαίστου πάρα ]η.[..]πι τφ ι.[ ..] πάρεζτι μ . [

80

CHAPTER

VI I

84

PA PY RU S FRAGM ENTS

.......].[

1. THE HECTOR OF ASTYDAMAS : RECONSTRUCTION AND MOTIFS Some separate papyri of early date, a group from Hibeh,1 one Amherst2 and one Strasburg ,8 deal with the story of Hector. The certain fragment4 from the play of stydamas, modelled on the sixth book of the Iliad, shows Hector saying farewell to ndromache: he takes off his helmet lest his son be terrified. fr.

1

col.

Hibeh fr. 3 μήτε ςκι[ άλλ’ el ô^ac 2b μενει[ ήμε te tlrj[c.........] Φοίβε, τίνα κλνω τον α[ ia 6 ΰνηπόλοε [..] μάντic Έλενοζ ε. ■Ρί[· ·3ανοί · [· · -W ^αδών φόβον έχω τ ί[ πραξκ τις ήν χερόο 6τ* άλλον ένοικον [ # *

fr. 2

[

... .]...«&[ 16

« _]ί» Άχιλλέα π . [

.] ■%%ρειδ[

]■[ C. 10

0.31

Ο ϋ[

]ωμδν[

]ματ[

1. Il B.C.; P. Hib. 2.174, ed. Turner, 1955 (Brit. Mus. inv. 2947), Snell,' TrGF 60 F 1 h? ; Pack3 Π ; for references cf. Webster, 1954a, 305f., 1968, 93; F. StoessI, R E Suppl, x, 1965, 47; Snell, 1971, 10*52 ; Uebel, 1973, 334. 2. II B.C.; P. A m h. 2.10, ed. Grenfell - Hunt, Snell, TrGF 60 F li?; Pack8 169 ; cf. Page, GLP I, la ; Pickard - Cambridge, 1933, 152f.; Crönert, 1903, 355; Mekler, 1905,183f.; Weil, 1901, 737-41, and adermacher, 1902,138, first suggested independently of each other the attribution to Astydamas. 3. 1I-I B.C. ; P, S trass b. WG 304, 2, ed. Snell, 1937, 84-89, TrGF 60 F 2 a?; Pack8170 ; cf. Körte, >39, 100; Page, op. cit., 29b. 4. Ariston, (p. 125 Friedl.) in Σ A II. VI 472a, fr. 2 N.2/Sn.: δέξαι κννήν μοι πρόσπολ' Ί" έμονδε / μή) καί φοβηθώ παίς. The lines have been handed down in a corrupt form : δέξαι κοινήν μοι πρδς όλεμον δέ καί φοβηθf\ παίς. For emendations suggested see Nauck2, ad. loc.

ävdgec πρ[.]ςα[ ταΰτ* άγγελών cote ob καψ [ήδονήν δόμοκ ήκω· cb δ \ ώναξ, τήο ίκεΐ φρ[ονραο ν_ 4 φρόντιζ*, onme coi καιρίωο β[_^_ {ΕΚΤΩΡ} χώρει uqqc oïκovc όπλα τ’ ε[ καί τήν Άχιλλέωζ δοριάλωτ[ον àcnlôα. έξω γάρ αύτήν τήνδε κα[1 8 άλλ* έκποδών μοι cτήάι, μή [ ήμΐν άπαντα, καί γάρ etc λα[γώ φρέναο âyoïc âv ανδρα και τον εήϋ·α\ρεέοτατον, έγώ Y έμαντον χειρον\ is καί ποκ τ[έ&]ρανομαι