Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:46:25.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Identification of Speakers in Greek Drama

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

† G.R. Manton
† G.R. Manton*
Affiliation:
Gruyère, Vic., Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I am sure I was not the only student who, when he first made his way stumblingly through the opening lines of the Persae, called to mind the raising of the curtain on the first act of The Mikado. But Aeschylus tells us a good deal more in his opening lines than the identity of the chorus of elders. They are the men left behind when the Persian host went to Greece, and they have been appointed by King Xerxes, son of Darius, to guard the wealth and splendour of the royal palace and oversee the land.

What I want to show in this paper is that what seems so natural in the Persae is achieved throughout tragedy and old comedy through a conscious adherence, as far as the identity of characters is concerned, to a convention. It is a convention which arises from the nature of Greek drama as a literary form primarily designed for performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 16 , 1982 , pp. 1 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © Australasian Society for Classical Studies 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Taplin, O., The Stagecraft of Aeschylus: The Dramatic Use of Exits and Entrances in Greek Tragedy (Oxford 1977).Google Scholar

2 Melchinger, S., Das Theater der Tragödie: Aischylos, Sophokles, Euripides auf der Bühne ihrer Zeit (Munich 1974).Google Scholar

3 Andrieu, J., Le Dialogue antique: structure et présentation (Paris 1954).Google Scholar See especially chapter XI.

4 Lowe, J.C.B., ‘The Manuscript Evidence for Changes in Speaker in Aristophanes’, BICS 9 (1962), 27–42.Google Scholar

5 West, M., Textual Criticism and Editorial Technique (Stuttgart 1973), 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also Reynolds, L.D. and Wilson, N.G., Scribes and Scholars (Oxford 1968), 4.Google Scholar

6 Oxford Classical Texts: I have used the editions of Aeschylus by Denys Page (1972), of Sophocles by A.D. Pearson (revised 1928), of Euripides by Gilbert Murray, 3 vols. (revised 1913), and of Aristophanes by F.W. Hall and W.M. Geldart( 1906–7). I have not consulted the new edition of Euripides by J. Diggle, which is still in course of publication.

7 L’Eschilo Laurenziano: Facsimile with preface by Rostagno, E. (Florence 1896).Google Scholar The text and scholia of this manuscript and the attributions to speakers are fully recorded in volume 1 of Wecklein’s edition of Aeschylus (Berlin 1885).

8 Papyrus Bodmer IV: Ménandre: Le Dyskolos published by Martin, V. (Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, Cologny-Genève 1958).Google Scholar Critical editions by Bingen, J. (Leiden 1960);Google Scholar W. Kraus (Vienna 1960); H. Lloyd-Jones (Oxford 1960); E.W. Handley (London 1965). See especially Martin 11, Kraus 12 f., Lloyd-Jones p.v, Handley 44 f.

9 Hourmouziades, N.C., Production and Imagination in Euripides: Form and Function of the Scenic Space (Athens 1965).Google Scholar

10 For plans see, among others, Pickard-Cambridge, A., The Theatre of Dionysus in Athens (Oxford 1946);Google ScholarDilke, O.A.W., ‘The Greek Theatre Cavea’, BSA 43 (1948), 125–92. Google Scholar

11 Pickard-Cambridge 141.

12 See Dinsmoor, W.B., ‘The Athenian Theater of the Fifth Century’ in Studies Presented to Robinson, D.M. ed. Mylonas, G.E. (Saint-Louis 1951);Google ScholarPohlmann, E., ‘Die Proedrie des Dionysos theaters im 5 Jahrhundert und das Buhnenspiel der Klassik’, MH 38 (1981), 129–46.Google Scholar

13 Pollux 9. 44; cf. Dilke 143.

14 Hdt. 3. 68 etc. Atossa appears at Pers. 159. The scholiast’s note in M is at the bottom of the page containing lines 125–69.

15 The name has been added later before the word κήρυξ in the list of characters following the hypothesis in M.

16 Il. 1. 320 etc.

17 Septem 24.

18 Ag. 26, 42, 523.

19 ibid. 783.

20 ibid. 1246.

21 Prom. 589.

22 ibid. 695.

23 Phil. 219.

24 ibid. 263.

25 Alc. 233.

26 Hipp. 125 ff.

27 ibid. 373.

28 Eur. El. 31 ff.

29 Sept. 861–74.

30 Part 1: 875–960, Part 2:961–1004: named respectively ΘΡΗΝΟΣ A and ΘΡΗΝΟΣ B Groeneboom.

31 Refrain: 975–7 = 986–8.

32 Wilamowitz (1914), Mazon (1920–63) and Groeneboom (1938) put square brackets round both passages in their texts. Page (1972) lets them stand in the text but follows Bergk in rejecting not only 861–74 and 1005–78 but also 961–1004. Italie (1950) argues that 861–75 must stand or fall with 1005–78.

78.

33 The arguments against authenticity are fairly summarized by Lloyd-Jones, >H. in ‘The End of the Seven Against Thebes’, CQ 9 (1959), 80–115.Google Scholar

34 See Diehl’s, article ‘Κομμοί’ in RE 21 Halbband (1921), 1195–1207.Google Scholar

35 Alexiou, M., The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition (Cambridge 1974). Google Scholar

36 Il. 24. 718–75.

37 Od. 11. 277–80.

38 Sept. 828.

39 Lloyd-Jones (above, n. 33), 114 f. lists 58 references in his bibliography, which has two omissions: Schneidewin (Philologus 1848) and Pötscher (Eranos 1958). Some thirty more discussions have appeared since, including 12 substantial articles.

40 Kohl, R., ‘Zum Schluss von Aischylos Sieben gegen Theben’, Philologus nf 30 (1920), 208–13.Google Scholar

41 Flickinger, R.C., The Greek Theater and its Drama4 (Chicago 1936), 175.Google Scholar

42 AR. Ran. 1126–8, 1172–3; Schol. Pind. Pyth. 4. 145; Schol. Eur. Alc. 768.

43 Hes. Theog. 383–403.

44 Ar. Nub. 1214 ff. and 1259 ff.

45 See Dover ad loc. (ed. Oxford 1968).

46 Nub. 1478–85. Strepsiades addressing ώ φίλ’‘Έρμη is clearly speaking to the statue of Hermes which stood at the door of the house. He asks for advice as to how to deal with those in the School. After affecting to listen to the statue he thanks the god for his advice to burn down the building.

47 See Andrieu (above, n. 3), 304–7.

48 Plato Theaet. 143 b, c (Cornford’s translation).

49 See Wilson, N.G., ‘Indications of Speaker in Greek Dialogue Texts’, CQ 20 (1970), 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar On Theodoretus see RE s.v. 1.

50 Ag. 489–502. Some editors, e.g. Page in Denniston/Page (1957) and OCT (1972), attribute the first 12 lines to Clytemnestra and the final couplet to the chorus.

51 ibid. 587.

52 See Fraenkel, Eduard in his edition of Agamemnon (Oxford 1950), 2.253 (ad v. 501).Google Scholar

53 Taplin (above, n. 1), 296.

54 Aeschylus: Agamemnon, ed. Denniston, J.D. and Page, Denys (Oxford 1957), 116 ff., ad loc.Google Scholar

55 Dale, A.M., ‘The Chorus in the Action of Greek Tragedy’ in Classical Drama and Its Influence: Essays Presented to H.D.F.Kitto (London 1965), 17–27, at 22.Google Scholar Reprinted in Dale, A.M., Collected Papers (Cambridge 1969), 215.Google Scholar

56 Ant. 572.

57 Sophocles: Antigone, ed. Jebb, R.C. (Cambridge 1888) ad loc.Google Scholar

58 Gellie, G.H., Sophocles: A Reading (Melbourne 1972), 40.Google Scholar

59 Ag. 587–614.

60 ibid. 810–974.

61 ibid. 1654–61, 1672 f.

62 Cho. 900–2.

63 O.T. 634–77.

64 ibid. 950.

65 ibid. 1110–85.

66 Phoen. 446–637.

67 I.T. 726–899.

68 Melchinger‘s book (above, n. 2) has not to my knowledge been reviewed in English. Reviews have appeared in AC 44 (1975), 697–9 (van Looy);Erasmus 27 (1975), 875–8 (Lasserre); Arcadia 11 (1976), 298–300 (Simon); Dioniso 47 (1976) (del Corno); DLZ 98 (1977), 319–22 (Kuch). Melchinger supports his theory of a skene out of sight of the spectators below the orchestra terrace wall by comparing the terrain at Thorikos, where there is a similar space below the orchestra level. Van Looy objects that he has disregarded the existence of a number of tombs dating from the same period ‘à proximité immédiate du mur de soutènement de l’orchestre’. In this he is mistaken. Hackens, the author of the excavation reports on the theatre and the tombs in Thorikos II (1967), 77–102 and III (1967), 75–96, makes it clear that there is a space of 20 metres between the terrace wall and the tombs. This can be seen clearly on the site. The space would have been more than adequate for the skene envisaged by Melchinger.

69 Hammond, N.G.L., ‘The Conditions of Dramatic Production to the Death of Aeschylus’, GRBS 13 (1972), 387–450;Google ScholarHammond, N.G.L. and Moon, W.G., ‘Illustrations of Early Tragedy at Athens’, AJA 82 (1978), 371–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

70 O.C. 19.

71 ibid. 192. αύτοπέτρου is Musgrave’s generally accepted correction of the very doubtful reading of MSS. αντιπέτρου (or αντί πετρου), which the scholiast, in spite of valiant efforts, fails to explain.