Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:08:04.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SOLDIERS ON STAGE: ATHENIAN ATTITUDES TOWARDS MERCENARIES IN MENANDER'S COMEDIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2023

Simone Agrimonti
Simone Agrimonti*
Affiliation:
Independent researcher, Italy
*
[email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In many of his comedies, Menander puts on stage the figure of the mercenary soldier. A survey of extant plays confirms that these characters are no lawless brutes but sympathetic figures, good Athenian citizens who act according to the laws and social norms of the polis. Previous scholarship has interpreted Menander's characterization of soldiers as a stylistic innovation from the stock type of the braggart soldier. Instead, I argue that his comedies reflect Athenian popular perception of mercenary service. A comparison with the depiction of mercenaries in Isaeus’ speeches confirms that Athenians did not look down on individuals who chose to serve abroad for money.

Keywords

mercenariesMenandersoldierscomedyfourth centuryAthensIsaeus
Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 70 , Issue 1 , April 2023 , pp. 1 - 19
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association

The fourth century bce saw a number of important changes in Greek warfare, to the point that Demosthenes could say: ‘I believe that nothing has been innovated and improved more than the art of war’ (Dem. 9.47).Footnote 1 One of the most significant innovations was the rise of mercenaries.Footnote 2 While this was not an absolute innovation, since Greeks had served as mercenaries for centuries at home and abroad, at this time the phenomenon took a new dimension, both in terms of scale and of importance. Mercenaries feature prominently in the armies of dynasts and tyrants like Cyrus the Younger, Dionysios of Syracuse, and Jason of Pherai.Footnote 3 Poleis also started making use of them with increasing frequency. The Athenian condottieri often led armies combining citizen soldiers and mercenaries, and the Phokians employed large numbers of hired soldiers during the Third Sacred War (356–46).Footnote 4 Both Philip and Alexander employed mercenaries in their campaigns, and, after the death of Alexander, mercenaries served in the armies of the diadochs.Footnote 5

While participation by mercenaries in different campaigns is well attested, there is one aspect on which our evidence is limited. What was the Greek perception of these soldiers?Footnote 6 Some partial answers come from the texts of fourth century authors, in particular those thinking about politics and war. In his treatise on sieges, Aeneas Tacticus takes the presence of mercenaries in the city for granted but warns the reader not to trust them completely. As people who fight for money, they are always ready to change sides and they should be kept under close surveillance.Footnote 7 Athenian orators are ambivalent as well. Isocrates recognizes their fighting skills, but despises their lack of loyalty and calls them ‘the common enemy of mankind’ (Isoc. 8.46).Footnote 8 Demosthenes does not trust mercenary leaders, but suggests deploying some contingents alongside Athenian citizens.Footnote 9 However, some of Isaeus’ speeches paint a more nuanced picture. As I will explain later in detail, in his corpus the profession of mercenary is openly discussed and bears no social stigma.

In order to shed further light on this problem I introduce new evidence on the perception of mercenaries – the comedies of Menander. The character of the soldier has an important role in Menander's plays, but has rarely been discussed as historical evidence.Footnote 10 Scholars have traditionally studied soldiers from a literary or dramaturgical perspective only, explaining Menander's positive depiction of soldiers on stage as a theatrical choice, a way to break free from the traditional stock character and achieve originality.Footnote 11 I instead argue that the analysis of mercenaries in Menander's comedies can provide a helpful insight into Athenian attitudes towards this category in the late fourth century bce.Footnote 12 In the following pages I study depictions of soldiers and mercenary service in four comedies of Menander. I show that Menander consistently presented soldiers in a positive light in these works, and that he depicted mercenaries as good citizens. Finally, through a comparison with Isaeus’ legal speeches, I demonstrate that Menander's on-stage depiction of soldiers was not just the inversion of a theatrical stereotype but reflected popular perceptions of mercenaries. His plays thus provide us with valuable insight into Athenian views on this category.

I now analyse four comedies that depict mercenary soldiers favourably and show that these individuals were well-integrated into Athenian civic life. In the first scene of the Aspis, the slave Daos discusses his Athenian master Kleostratos, a mercenary now presumed dead. He tells the audience that he and his master were part of a mercenary army on an expedition against the Lykians.Footnote 13 After a successful battle, Kleostratos sent Daos back to Athens with his spoils but was then captured in a surprise attack, during which his tent-mate was killed while holding Kleostratos’ shield. By the time reinforcements arrived, the corpse was so badly decomposed that the tent-mate was assumed to be Kleostratos on the basis of the shield, and Daos proceeded to Athens thinking his master dead.

The whole context suggests we should take Daos’ words at face value. Not only the speech, but the entire first scene of the play has a very sombre and almost tragic tone. As scholars pointed out, Daos’ speech has several formal aspects that usually appear in tragedy. These include specific phrases, but also metrical resolutions.Footnote 14 Through these tragic parallels, which never become parody,Footnote 15 the audience is encouraged to sympathize with the unhappy circumstances that have struck the family, in particular with Kleostratos’ death, and thus to side with them in their efforts. Moreover, Daos himself is not a laughable character or a buffoon. Conversely, throughout the play we get to appreciate both his loyalty to the family and his resourcefulness.Footnote 16 The gullible negative character and main target of jokes is Smikrines, Kleostratos’ uncle.

The beginning of Daos’ speech highlights the dutiful nature of Kleostratos’ military service. Daos laments the death of his master, while stressing the gap between his past expectations and the present grim reality.

I thought you would come back from the campaign safe and covered in glory, that you'd live out the rest of your life in some style and dignity, with the title of General or Counsellor, and that you'd see your sister, for whose sake you went off on campaign, married to a man worthy of yourself.Footnote 17

Daos’ words shed light on some relevant aspects of mercenary service. We learn that Kleostratos joined the expedition with the goal of providing a dowry for his sister. As the audience will realize, their father is dead and Kleostratos is therefore her legal guardian (kyrios), and, according to Athenian custom, it fell to him to provide her with a dowry.Footnote 18 By serving abroad, Kleostratos was not chasing selfish dreams of wealth, but was trying to provide for his family.Footnote 19 Through Daos’ words, Menander is reminding his audience that for Kleostratos mercenary service was a way to fulfil his social and civic duty as a kyrios of his sister, who would otherwise have trouble finding a husband. Scholars have stressed the political importance of marriage in comedy, as a way to create lawful heirs and benefit not only the household but the polis as well.Footnote 20 Therefore, Menander is portraying Kleostratos’ choice to serve as a mercenary as deeply tied to civic life in Athens, and to his social duties as an Athenian citizen.

Moreover, in the dramatic fiction, Daos assumes Athenian public opinion on mercenary service to be quite positive. He mentions that if only his master had come home, he would have been held in great esteem (εὐδοξοῦντα). He also suggests that his fellow citizens would have valued his military experience and elected him to the office of general or counsellor.Footnote 21 In Daos’ imagined scenario, Athenians respect military experience, independently of whether it was acquired as a mercenary. In the Aspis, Menander portrays mercenary service as not bearing any social stigma. Conversely, it allows individual citizens to provide for their family and to improve their social status, thus supporting Athenian civic life.

Kleostratos’ on-stage appearance further supports the positive characterization already developed in the opening speech. Although the text cuts off and few lines survive, he salutes his native land, and seems to be thinking about his sister.

Greetings, oh dearest land…I pray to/for you…I, saved from many [dangers?]. If…I am here, [having found?] safety, …I see [my sister not?] in need…and/but if by good fortune Daos has escaped…I'd think myself [blessed?].Footnote 22

Both the salutation to the homeland, traditional in theatre, and the reference to his sister once again depict Kleostratos as a decent man who cares about the city and his family.Footnote 23

Finally, the play is dotted with further indications of Kleostratos’ good character. A cook mentions that, inside the house, the women of the family are mourning the fallen soldier (lines 226–8). Shortly after, his other uncle, Chairestratos, wishes Kleostratos had survived to marry his daughter and inherit half of his fortune (279–81). These references confirm that Kleostratos was beloved by all members of his household. In the Aspis nothing points to a negative depiction of mercenary service and soldiers. Conversely, Kleostratos’ figure and his service abroad are portrayed positively and in agreement with Athenian civic values.

The plot of Sikyonioi, unfortunately very fragmentary, revolves around the identification of the two main characters as free Athenian citizens.Footnote 24 Stratophanes, a soldier from Sikyon, is now in Athens with his household. Among them is Philoumene, Athenian by birth, who was kidnapped by pirates as a child and sold as a slave. Stratophanes bought her and raised her, and is now in love with her. Philoumene, however, runs away and seeks refuge as a suppliant in the sanctuary of Eleusis. There the slave Dromon convinces the assembled crowd that she is in fact a free Athenian. An assembly then takes place, in which Stratophanes himself, the young Moschion (also in love with Philoumene), and a third unidentified man argue about who should be the girl's guardian. In the end, the assembled Eleusinians decide to keep her under the supervision of the priestess of Demeter until her father is found. After an argument between Moschion and Stratophanes, it is confirmed that the latter is an Athenian citizen as well (and actually Moschion's brother). In the last act, Philoumene's father appears, and Stratophanes can obtain his permission to marry the girl.

One important scene for the characterization of Stratophanes is the assembly that takes place in front of the Eleusinian sanctuary, described through the speech of an Eleusinian messenger who took part in it (193–271). This speech has many close parallels with Euripides’ Orestes, in which a messenger recalls the Argive assembly deciding the fate of Orestes.Footnote 25 However, references to Euripides do not turn into parody, and the scene is serious overall.Footnote 26 Even before we hear Stratophanes’ words in the debate, the messenger's narrative marks him as a man to admire and pity. The Eleusinians did not particularly like Moschion, who just spoke. ‘He wasn't totally repulsive, but we didn't like him much – he rather seemed an adulterer’ (209–10).Footnote 27 In fact, when he first approaches the crowd, Moschion is described as ‘a pale, smooth-faced, and beardless lad’ (200–1).Footnote 28 All these features characterize him as the stereotype of the effeminate young man.Footnote 29 His shortcomings as a citizen and a public speaker are evident. He first starts speaking too quietly and then blushes noticeably (201–2, 208). Conversely, the messenger first describes Stratophanes as ‘someone quite manly in appearance (215).Footnote 30 Thanks to the comparison with Moschion, Stratophanes’ physical appearance acquires a moral value, marking him as a decent man. Additionally, the genuine feelings he has for Philoumene appear as soon as he sets his eyes on her. ‘But as he looked up [this girl] so close to him, he suddenly [let flow] a stream [of tears], and passionately ran his fingers through [his hair (?)], groaning the while. …gripped the people standing there’ (218–22).Footnote 31 The description of Stratophanes’ tears must have made him a quite sympathetic figure, and several scholars have suggested restoring the text accordingly: ‘[Now pity(?)] gripped the people standing there’.Footnote 32

In his speech, Stratophanes then shows respect for Athenian political and religious institutions and social conventions. First, he acts generously, giving the slave Dromon to Philoumene, and cancelling all the expenses he had during her upbringing (235–7). Then, when addressing the crowd, he does not try to get Philoumene back, but makes a more popular proposal.

Let her find her father and her relatives. I've no objections. ‘Fine’, we cried. ‘Hear my proposal, gentlemen’, he said. ‘You are her guardians, I've removed that fear from her, so place her with the priestess. She can guard that girl for you.’ This won great favour, as was proper. They all cried ‘That's fair!’ and then ‘Go on!’.Footnote 33

After quickly mentioning that he now believes himself to be Athenian, Stratophanes goes on.

Don't dash my hopes now, but if I as well am shown to share my citizenship with this girl, whom I protected for her father, let me ask him for her hand in marriage. None of my opponents must take charge of her before he's found! We cried ‘That's right and fair, that's right!’.Footnote 34

Through both words and actions Stratophanes shows the utmost respect for the rules of Athenian civic life. First, he does not try to oppose the assembled citizens and makes no boastful threats. Conversely, he values the institution enough to acknowledge that they are now the girl's temporary kyrioi. Moreover, he suggests placing her with the priestess of Demeter, one of the most respected religious figures in Athenian religious life.Footnote 35 Finally, he makes clear that the girl should ultimately be reunited to her father, her proper kyrios. It is to him that Stratophanes will ask permission to marry Philoumene. Far from being a violent foreigner, Stratophanes allows the girl to be placed under the protection of Athenian political and religious institutions and adheres to social conventions. A confirmation of the positive value of his words comes from the reaction of the assembly. After showing little appreciation for Moschion, they loudly welcome Stratophanes’ proposal (239, 245, 257–8), never mocking the soldier or rejecting his suggestions. Stratophanes’ successful participation in a pseudo-democratic institution like the informal assembly of the Eleusinians confirms that the figure of the mercenary is not in conflict with the democratic values of the polis. Stratophanes displays the characteristics of the proper citizen, who knows how to address the assembly and makes honest proposals.

Stratophanes’ treatment of Philoumene during the assembly is not an isolated instance, but a reflection of the type of character Menander develops throughout the play. I suggest that he is to be identified with the ‘very nice commander’ who bought Philoumene and Dromon as slaves, mentioned near the beginning of the play.Footnote 36 Moreover, throughout the play we learn that he raised her like a free woman and, most importantly, that she is still a virgin.Footnote 37 Stratophanes’ behaviour receives particular emphasis when he finally meets with the girl's father, Kichesias. In what must have been a memorable scene, Kichesias first shows great relief when hearing about his daughter's virginity and then thanks the soldier (377–81).

Stratophanes does not display these positive traits only now that he has learned he is an Athenian citizen. Even before, he never acts like a braggart soldier.Footnote 38 We instead see him in great distress when he receives news that his (adoptive) mother died (125–7). Nothing points to a transformation of the character from violent foreigner soldier to well-integrated citizen. Menander consistently depicts Stratophanes the soldier as a positive figure throughout the whole play.

The plot of Misoumenos (The Hated One) is only partially known to us because the papyri from which it is reconstructed are lacunose. It opens with the soldier Thrasonides pacing through the night in front of his own door. He is outside because Krateia, a slave he acquired during a campaign, and whom he loves and has been treating like a wife, now hates him. Her hatred for Thrasonides (which gives the name to the play) originates from a misunderstanding: the soldier has brought back the sword of a man he killed in battle. Krateia believes that to be her own brother, who is still alive but missing. Meanwhile, her father, Demeas, arrives into town looking for her. When the two are reunited, Demeas is also convinced that Thrasonides killed his son and denies him permission to marry the girl. Desperate, Thrasonides might have tried to commit suicide or simulated it in order to change Krateia's mind.Footnote 39 It is only at the end of the play that the misunderstanding is somehow resolved, and the soldier can finally take the girl in marriage.

Even in the surviving fragments of the play, Thrasonides consistently displays positive characteristics. His civic disposition is attested by his intention of marrying Krateia, making her his lawful wife. At the very beginning of the play we hear that Thrasonides was already treating Krateia like a wife, making her the mistress of the house and placing her in charge of other slaves: ‘That captive girl. I bought [her], promised her her freedom, made her my house[keeper], gave her servants, jewellery [and clothes], considered her my wife’ (37–40).Footnote 40 Once he then hears that her father is in town, his first thought is whether he will agree to their marriage.

You say Krateia's father [just] arrived? You'll either make me happy now, or quite the most heartbroken of all living creatures. Suppose he doesn't approve of me, or give her formally in marriage. Then Thrasonides is done for.Footnote 41

Thrasonides immediately thinks of marriage and does not try to defend his ownership claims over the girl, to Getas’ surprise (715–6). We are then told that Demeas’ denial made Thrasonides quite desperate.Footnote 42 Formalizing his union with Krateia is for Thrasonides not an afterthought, but a constant desire, advertised throughout the play. This intention marks his sensitivity as very civic, because of the close ties between marriage and the citizen community. Marriage has as its main goal the procreation of lawful heirs and, especially in Athens, the transmission of citizenship.Footnote 43 The audience is reminded of this aim at the end of the play, when Demeas uses the traditional Athenian betrothal formula, which specifically mentions the procreation of children: ‘I give to you my daughter, to have and hold, to harvest lawful children, and with her a dowry of two talents’ (974–6).Footnote 44 Such formula also suggests the characters may all be Athenian citizens.Footnote 45 In the character of Thrasonides there is no contradiction or tension between his occupation as a soldier and the desire to participate in the civic community through marriage. The two aspects coexist from the very beginning of the play.

Additionally, throughout the play Menander depicts Thrasonides not as a boastful soldier but as a desperate lover. In a powerful opening scene, he is outside of his own house, in a stormy night, weeping because Krateia does not seem to love him anymore (1–248). In this scene, which seems to have been quite popular in antiquity, Menander plays with traditional poetic elements and the expectations of his audience.Footnote 46

First, we see a twist to the traditional theme of the paraklausithyron (lament beside a door). As a desperate lover he is shut out of his own door, and by his own doing, because the story he made up to test Krateia's love now keeps him out of the house.Footnote 47 Thrasonides is conscious of his legal power over the girl, but he rejects such power and chooses to stay outside: ‘She's in there – in my house. I've got the chance, I want it just as much as the most ardent lover – yet I don't…I'd rather stand here shivering beneath a wintry sky’ (10–14).Footnote 48 This powerful display of self-control and sincere affection goes against the stereotype of the lustful soldier. Second, his desperate love is for a woman who, at least until recently, was his slave, in a position of subordination to him. Now, however, Thrasonides is enslaved by the love for his own prisoner.Footnote 49 Such reversals of traditional tropes have the overall effect of depicting Thrasonides as a likeable and sympathetic character.Footnote 50 To these, many scholars add the fact that, despite being a soldier, Thrasonides can deliver such a sentimental speech.Footnote 51 The evidence, however, from the other plays I have so far examined suggests caution. We should not be too surprised at seeing a soldier behave more like a desperate lover than a violent braggart. What appears on stage throughout the play should make us disregard the words of Choricius of Gaza, who describes Thrasonides as an example of swaggering and boastful character.Footnote 52 Choricius may have been misled by the soldier's name, taking it at face value.Footnote 53

Despite his name, in the Misoumenos Thrasonides does not fit the stereotype of the mercenary, a braggart soldier in radical opposition to the city. Conversely, with his interest in lawfully marrying Krateia he appears to comply with specific civic values. Moreover, in the surviving parts of the play he behaves like a concerned lover, not a violent boaster.

The Perikeiromene (The Girl Cropped Short) provides a slightly different perspective on mercenaries. In it, both references to war and military language occur with a certain regularity, and the soldier Polemon is closer to the stereotype of the violent soldier. In the first scene we hear that, after seeing his concubine Glykera embrace another man, Polemon forcefully cut her hair short.Footnote 54 What he ignores is that the man was Glykera's brother, Moschion, who still does not know about her identity. Angry at Polemon for the humiliation of the hair-cutting and for being unjustly suspected, Glykera leaves and finds shelter at her brother's house. Polemon first reacts angrily and stages a mockery of a siege to the house, then sends the reasonable Pataikos to try to convince her to come back. It will turn out that Pataikos is actually Glykera's father, also a Corinthian. In the end, the misunderstanding is resolved, and the two citizens can marry.

Polemon's identity as a soldier is frequently stressed throughout the play, in several ways. He is straightforwardly referred to as a στρατιώτης (soldier, 371) a ξένος (foreigner/mercenary, 361), a χιλιάρχος (commander of 1,000 men, 294), or a σοβαρὸς πολεμικός (soldierly braggart, 172). Moreover, both acts two and three have recurring insults and jokes on the theme of soldiering and warfare. First, in the exchange between the slaves Daos and Sosias we see terms like τετρώβολος and τετράδραχμος (soldier worth 4 obols and soldier worth 4 drachmas, 381–2), or τὰ πελτιά (shields, 392) and σάρισα (sarissa, 396).Footnote 55 Then, during the mock siege, we have further use of military terms and double entendre jokes based on them.Footnote 56 Although these do not solely refer to Polemon, they contribute to set the tone and to remind the audience of his occupation.

But, despite his occupation, Polemon himself is a nuanced character.Footnote 57 Cutting Glykera's hair is his only true violent act and does not reflect his real character, as the goddess Agnoia (Ignorance) tells the audience in the opening scene:

All this trouble has erupted toward a good end, so that he would lose his temper – he's not really like that, but I made him, so that the chain of events would be set in motion.Footnote 58

These words, coming from a goddess herself at the very beginning of the play, warn the audience not to take future descriptions of Polemon and of soldiers at face value. The ultimate positive goal of Polemon's behaviour reappears at the very end of the play, where Pataikos admits: ‘Your foul temper turned out to be the beginning of our good fortune’ (101–2).Footnote 59 Menander reminds the spectators that a goddess put all this in motion by changing Polemon's usual character. The negative portrayal of soldiers, like the complaint voiced by Glykera's maid, then become examples of dramatic irony.Footnote 60 The spectators can laugh at the old woman's disdain for mercenaries, having just being told by a goddess that the stereotype is false. Polemon's behaviour on stage for the rest of the play confirms the exceptionality of the hair-cutting. He acts like an unhappy lover, crying and declaring that he cannot live without his beloved Glykera.Footnote 61

In the Perikeiromene, Menander puts on stage a soldier who acts violently (although only once) and some jokes against mercenaries. However, he immediately undermines this criticism by making Polemon's actions part of a divine plan that will benefit the main characters. Naturally a good man and citizen, Polemon does not need any ‘civic education’ to marry Glykera happily.Footnote 62

In the previous pages I have shown that Menander gives a consistent portrayal of soldiers in his extant comedies. Far from being violent outcasts and braggart brutes, these soldiers are positive characters, young men in love with whom the audience can sympathize. More importantly, there is no radical opposition between them and the society and values of the polis. With no trace of irony, Menander has soldiers behave like good citizens, abiding the city's laws and respecting its customs.

In the past, scholars have often dismissed this portrayal of soldiers as just a purely theatrical choice. By putting on stage sensitive and good-hearted mercenaries, Menander was playing with the stock character of the soldier, which had an established tradition in Attic comedy.Footnote 63 However, the sheer number of positive depictions of soldiers and the consistency of their characterization suggests that originality was not the main goal. Among surviving plays, good soldiers are the standard. The figure of the braggart soldier is so exceptional that we only know of one possible case, the poorly attested Bias in the Kolax.Footnote 64

Moreover, similar positive depictions of mercenaries and mercenary service abroad appear in other fourth century sources, in particular some of Isaeus’ legal speeches. A comparison with this material proves that Menander's portrayal of soldiers is not just a stylistic choice and that he instead reflects the Athenian popular opinion on the subject. Scholars have previously pointed out that forensic oratory can help determine whether comic depictions relate to popular culture.Footnote 65 Just like in the theatre, the target audience of popular courts was predominantly non-elite.Footnote 66 Moreover, they directly determined who would win the case, and so speakers were pressured to consider what their audience wanted to hear.Footnote 67 A comparison with oratory also allows us to move away from the problematic questions of a playwright's political ideas and whether his personal views aligned with those of his audience.Footnote 68

In our case, Isaeus’ forensic speeches offer a valuable parallel, one relatively close in time to Menander's activity.Footnote 69 Several of his speeches mention mercenary service to different extents. In some cases, the speaker recalls his campaigns as a mercenary, while other speeches deal with the inheritance of Athenian citizens who made their fortune by serving abroad as mercenaries.Footnote 70 In all these instances, the profession of mercenary is openly discussed, and bears no social stigma. The speakers never describe it as something unworthy of an Athenian citizen, nor do they provide any kind of apology or excuse for their relatives’ choice. Mercenary service abroad simply does not have negative connotations. Because of the reasons mentioned above, we can assume Isaeus’ speeches confirmed the perceptions the Athenian people had of their fellow citizens who chose to serve as mercenaries.

The parallel between forensic oratory and Menander's plays shows that the playwright confirmed popular perceptions on mercenaries and mercenary service. When depicting soldiers as well-integrated citizens and positive characters, Menander was not simply innovating on a traditional stock character but confirming the views the Athenian demos had of this category. Menander's works thus constitute valuable evidence on Athenian attitudes towards mercenaries at the end of the fourth century bce. The overall image we get is a positive one. Mercenaries are law-abiding citizens, respectful of the city's institutions and customs. These soldiers are not outcasts or violent outsiders; indeed, service abroad is a way to support one's relatives, or just a temporary occupation before a stable marriage and return to life in the city.

Menander's work significantly improves our understanding of Athenian perception of mercenaries, by helping us draw a more nuanced picture. On the one hand, foreign mercenaries were seen as unreliable and untrustworthy. Politicians like Isokrates and Demosthenes warned their audience of the risks involved in hiring these men, despite their value in war. On the other hand, both Menander and Isaeus show that mercenary service itself was not a dishonest occupation for a fellow citizen. Athenians did not look down upon those among them who chose to make a living this way.

Footnotes

I would like to thank Mitch Brown and Marion Kruse for their helpful comments and advice and the two anonymous readers of G&R for their insightful feedback. An earlier version of this article was delivered at the 2019 CAMWS Annual Meeting; I thank the audience for their valuable suggestions. All errors remain entirely my own.

References

1 Οὐδὲν ἡγοῦμαι πλέον ἢ τὰ τοῦ πολέμου κεκινῆσθαι κἀπιδεδωκέναι. Among the numerous innovations were the introduction of new units and weapons, such as peltasts (Best, J. G. P., Thracian Peltasts and their Influence on Greek Warfare [Groningen, 1969]Google Scholar) and the Macedonian phalanx (Bosworth, A. B., The Argeads and the Phalanx [Oxford, 2010]Google Scholar), and artillery (Keyser, P. T., ‘The Use of Artillery by Philip II and Alexander the Great’, AncW 25 [1994], 27–59Google Scholar). Military treatises, such as Xenophon's On the Cavalry Commander (Petrocelli, C., Ipparchico. Manuale per il comandante di cavalleria [Bari, 2001]Google Scholar; Delebecque, É., Le commandant de la cavalerie [Paris, 1973]Google Scholar) and Aeneas Tacticus’ How to Survive Under Siege (see below, n. 7), demonstrate not only the increased complexity of warfare, but also the interest in military theory. On the evolution of warfare, cf. Ducrey, P., Warfare in Ancient Greece, transl. by J. Lloyd (New York, 1986), 79–112Google Scholar; Anderson, J. K., Military Theory and Practice in the Age of Xenophon (Berkeley, CA, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 General works on Greek mercenaries: P. Ducrey, Polemica. Études sur la guerre et les armées dans la Grèce ancienne (Paris, 2019), 283–300, 311–28; M. Bettalli, Mercenari. Il mestiere delle armi nel mondo greco antico (Rome, 2013); M. Trundle, Greek Mercenaries: From the Late Archaic Period to Alexander (London, 2004); S. Yalichev, Mercenaries of the Ancient World (London, 1997); G. Tagliamonte, I figli di Marte. Mobilità, mercenari e mercenariato Italici in Magna Grecia e Sicilia (Roma, 1994); G. F. Seibt, Griechische Söldner im Achaimenidenreich (Bonn, 1977); A. Aymard, Études d'histoire ancienne (Paris, 1967), 487–98; G. T. Griffith, The Mercenaries of the Hellenistic World (Cambridge, 1935); H. W. Parke, Greek Mercenary Soldiers from the Earliest Times to the Battle of Ipsus (Oxford, 1933). Specifically on the fourth century: Bettalli, 71–146 (Athens), 147–95 (rest of continental Greece), 303–16 (Persian empire), 331–64 (Sicily); M. Trundle, ‘The Business of War’, in B. Campbell and L. A. Tritle (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Warfare in the Classical World (Oxford, 2013), 335–6; D. Gómez-Castro, Relaciones internacionales y mercenariado griego (Barcelona, 2012); A. M. Prestianni Giallombardo, ‘Il ruolo dei mercenari nelle dinamiche di guerra e di pace in Sicilia tra fine V e metà del III sec. a.C.’, in M. A. Vaggioli (ed.), Guerra e pace in Sicilia e nel Mediterraneo antico. Arte, prassi e teoria della pace e della guerra (Pisa, 2006), 107–29 (on Sicily); L. A. Burckhardt, Bürger und Soldaten: Aspekte der politischen und militärischen Rolle athenischer Bürger im Kriegswesen des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Stuttgart, 1996) (cf. A. S. Chankowski, ‘Review of Burckhardt 1996’, Topoi [Dordrecht] 7 [1997], 331–48); P. L. Marinovic, Le mercenariat grec au IVe s. av. n.è. et la crise de la polis, transl. by J. and Y. Garlan (Paris, 1988). On the ‘mercenary explosion’ during this period, see Trundle 2004, 40–79 and esp. 44–46; H. F. Miller, ‘The Practical and Economic Background to the Greek Mercenary Explosion’, G&R 31 (1984), 153–60.

3 On Cyrus’ mercenaries in the Anabasis, see Bettalli (n. 2), 261–95; J. W. I. Lee, A Greek Army on the March. Soldiers and Survival in Xenophon's ‘Anabasis’ (Cambridge, 2007); R. J. Lane Fox, The Long March. Xenophon and the Ten Thousand (New Haven, 2004) (esp. the contributions by Hornblower, Ma, Roy, and Whitby); A. Dalby, ‘Greeks Abroad: Social Organization and Food Among the Ten Thousand’, JHS 112 (1992), 16–30; S. Perlman, ‘The Ten Thousand: A Chapter in the Military, Social, and Economic History of the Fourth Century’, RSA 6–7 (1977), 241–84; G. B. Nussbaum, The Ten Thousand. A Study in Social Organization and Action in Xenophon's Anabasis (Leiden, 1967); ‘The Captains in the Army of the Ten Thousand: A Study in Political Organisation’, C&M 20 (1959), 16–29; J. Roy, ‘The Mercenaries of Cyrus’, Historia 16 (1967), 287–323; Parke (n. 2), 23–42. On Dionysios’ use of mercenaries, see Bettalli (n. 2), 338–45; S. Péré-Noguès, ‘Mercenaires et mercenariat d'occident: réflexions sur le développement du mercenariat en Sicile’, Pallas 51 (1999), 111–17; J. A. Krasilnikoff, ‘The Power Base of Sicilian Tyrants’, ActaHyp 6 (1995), 171–84; A. Mele, ‘Arché e basileía: la politica economica di Dionisio I’, in A. Stazio, M. Taliercio Mensitieri, and S. Ceccoli (eds.), La monetazione dell'età dionigiana (Rome, 1993), 3–38; Parke (n. 2), 63–72. Our main ancient source is Diod. Sic. 13–14. On Jason's mercenary army, see Xen. Hell. 6.1.5–6, cf. Bettalli (n. 2), 180–1; Parke (n. 2), 100–4. On Jason, see S. Sprawski, Jason of Pherae. A Study of History of Thessaly in Years 431–370 BC (Krakow, 1999); J. Mandel, ‘Jason: The Tyrant of Pherae, Tagus of Thessaly as Reflected in Ancient Sources and Modern Literature’, RSA 10 (1980), 47–77.

4 On Athenian condottieri, see Bettalli (n. 2), 89–103; W. K. Pritchett, The Greek State at War, vol. 2 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1974), 59–116. A good overview of the Sacred War is J. Buckler, Philip II and the Sacred War (Leiden, 1989); on the recruitment of mercenaries by the Phokians, see Bettalli (n. 2), 186–95; R. T. Williams, The Silver Coinage of the Phokians (London, 1972), 54; Parke (n. 2), 133–43.

5 On mercenaries serving under Philip and Alexander, see Bettalli (n. 2), 377–99; Griffith (n. 2), 8–32; Parke (n. 2), 186–98. On Hellenistic mercenaries, see A. Chaniotis, War in the Hellenistic World. A Social and Cultural History (Oxford, 2005), 78–101; J. -C. Couvenhes, ‘Les cités grecques d'Asie Mineure et le mercenariat à l’époque hellénistique’, in J. -C. Couvenhes, H. -L. Fernoux, and P. Ducrey (eds.), Les cités grecques et la guerre en Asie Mineure à l’époque hellénistique (Tours, 2004), 77–113; É. Foulon, ‘Μισθοφόροι et Ξένοι Hellénistiques’, REG 108 (1995), 211–18; M. Launey, Recherches sur les armées hellénistiques (Paris, 1949–50), esp. 794–812; Griffith (n. 2). With the creation of semi-professional armies in the Hellenistic period, the distinction between different categories of soldiers becomes less clear, see Trundle 2013 (n. 2), 331; Parke (n. 2), 208–9.

6 M. Bettalli, ‘L’ immagine del mercenario nella Grecia del IV secolo a.C.’, in M. A. Vaggioli (ed.), Guerra e pace in Sicilia e nel Mediterraneo antico. Arte, prassi e teoria della pace e della guerra (Pisa, 2006), briefly addresses this issue, but without any reference to New Comedy.

7 Aen. Tact. 12–13 on the need to mistrust mercenaries; 10.18–19 on tough discipline; 18.13, 23.7–11, and 28.5 are examples of mercenaries sneaking into a city. Overall, Aeneas shows a ‘constant apprehensiveness about mercenaries,’ see D. Whitehead, How to Survive under Siege (London, 2002), 136. On mercenaries in Aeneas’ work, see also J. Roy, ‘Mercenaries in Aineias Tacticus’, in M. Pretzler and N. Barley (eds.), Brill's Companion to Aineias Tacticus (Leiden, 2018), 206–13; J. Boëldieu-Trevet and K. Mataranga, ‘Étrangers et citoyens: le maintien de l'ordre dans une cité assiégée selon Énée le Tacticien’, in M. Molin (ed.), Les régulations sociales dans l'Antiquité (Rennes, 2006), 257. On Aeneas and his work, see Pretzler and Barley (eds.), Brill's Companion to Aineias Tacticus (Leiden 2018); for translation and commentary, see Whitehead; M. Bettalli, La difesa di una città assediata (Poliorketika) (Pisa, 1990).

8 However, see C. Bouchet, ‘Isocrate et la question des mercenaires’, Studia Humaniora Tartuensia 11 (2010), 1–25, on how Isocrates’ views on mercenaries are actually more nuanced.

9 Dem. 4.16–46, on the need for Athenians and mercenaries to fight side by side. Dem. 23.139, against mercenary commanders. Dem. 6 and 9 contain several references to Philip's large use of mercenaries.

10 On soldiers and military elements in Menander's comedies, see W. E. Major, ‘The Pre-History of the Miles Gloriosus in Greek Drama’, in H. and C. W. Marshall (eds.), Greek Drama V. Studies in the Theatre of the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BCE (London; New York, 2020), 215–24; N. W. Slater, ‘Stratophanes the Ephebe? The Hero's Journeys in Menander's Sikyonioi’, in H. and C. W. Marshall (eds.), Greek Drama V. Studies in the Theatre of the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BCE (London; New York, 2020), 205–14; M. Lamagna, ‘Military Culture and Menander’, in A. H. Sommerstein (ed.), Menander in Contexts (New York, 2014), 58–72; P. G. McC. Brown, ‘Soldiers in New Comedy: Insiders and Outsiders’, LICS 3.8 (2004); W. T. MacCary, ‘Menander's Soldiers: Their Names, Roles, and Masks’, AJPh 93 (1972), 279–98. A. Blanchard, La comédie de Ménandre. Politique, éthique, esthétique (Paris, 2007); S. Lape, Reproducing Athens: Menander's Comedy, Democratic Culture, and the Hellenistic City (Princeton, 2004); and W. E. Major, ‘Menander in a Macedonian World’, GRBS 38 (1997), 41–73 use soldiers, along with other evidence, to discuss Menander's political sympathies; cf. below, n. 68.

11 The two main studies on the topic are Brown (n. 10) and MacCary (n. 10). Other scholars see soldiers as a reversal of a traditional stock character: see I. M. Konstantakos, ‘On the Early History of the Braggart Soldier: 1, Archilochus and Epicharmus’, Logeion  5 (2015), 1 n. 1; A. K. Petrides, Menander, New Comedy, and the Visual (Cambridge, 2014), 213–16; N. Zagagi, The Comedy of Menander. Convention, Variation, and Originality (London, 1994), 29–35, 38–40; P. G. McC. Brown, ‘Masks, Names, and Characters in the New Comedy’, Hermes 115 (1987), 188–90; R. L. Hunter, The New Comedy of Greece and Rome (Cambridge, 1985), 66–69; S. M. Goldberg, The Making of Menander's Comedy (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1980), 45–53; W. Hoffmann and G. Wartenberg, Der Bramarbas in der antiken Komödie (Berlin, 1973), 32–39, 43–45, 49–50. On Menander's innovative handling of traditional characters, see Zagagi, esp. 15–45; on Menander's ‘good hetairai’, see M. M. Henry, Menander's Courtesans and the Greek Comic Tradition (Frankfurt, 1985) (but now cf. A. E. Traill, Women and the Comic Plot in Menander [Cambridge, 2008], 3–9, who questions the traditional view). For a different interpretation, see Lape (n. 10), 171–201, who interprets the soldiers of the Misoumenos and Perikeiromene as symbols of the military power of the Hellenistic kingdoms. In both plays, before the soldier can marry his beloved and enter the civic community, he has to go through a ‘reform or civic education’ (p. 173), in a triumph of civic virtues over martial values (cf. Major 2020 [n. 10]; and Slater [n. 10]). However, as I will show, in all plays soldiers display positive civic virtues from the very beginning (cf. Brown [n. 10], 14, n. 66). They are no threat to the polis and need no education. Moreover, since the publication of Lape's book, scholars have shown that poleis kept waging war with both civic and mercenary contingents and paid attention to the military sphere (J. L. Friend, The Athenian Ephebeia in the Fourth Century BCE [Leiden, 2019]; Chaniotis [n. 5], esp. 18–26; Couvenhes [n. 5]; J. T. Ma, ‘Une culture militaire en Asie Mineure hellénistique?’, in J. -C. Couvenhes, H. -L. Fernoux, and P. Ducrey [eds.], Les cités grecques et la guerre en Asie Mineure à l’époque hellénistique [Tours, 2004], 199–220; ‘Fighting Poleis of the Hellenistic World’, in H. van Wees [ed.], War and Violence in Ancient Greece [Swansea, 2000], 337–76). Despite the gap in power, Hellenistic kings did not have a monopoly on violence.

12 On the challenges of using comedy as a historical source, see C. Pelling, Literary Texts and the Greek Historian (London, 2000), 123–40. I follow the methodology of D. Pritchard, Athenian Democracy at War (Cambridge, 2019), 109–37, who takes Aristophanes’ positive portrayal of sailors as an accurate depiction of their place in Athenian popular culture.

13 Daos’ statement that Kleostratos had left to get money for his sister (lines 5–9) reveals the mercenary nature of the expedition. This is later confirmed when Kleostratos’ tent-mate is called a ξένος (foreigner/mercenary; 102). Cf. P. Ingrosso, Menandro. Lo scudo (Lecce, 2010), 30; S. Ireland, Menander. The Shield (Aspis) and Arbitration (Epitrepontes) (Oxford, 2010), 74; D. C. Beroutsos, A Commentary on the ‘Aspis’ of Menander 1: Lines 1–298 (Göttingen, 2005), 14, 24, 27; C. Cusset, Ménandre ou La comédie tragique (Paris, 2003), 128; J. -M. Jacques, Ménandre. Le bouclier (Paris, 1998), XVIII.

14 For precise references to the many tragic parallels, see Ingrosso (n. 13), 123–70; Ireland (n. 13), 73–79; Beroutsos (n. 13), 21–41; Cusset (n. 13), 54–66. The first nineteen lines of the speech have a tragic metre (Cusset, 128–32), as there is no resolution of a short element into two shorts or any resolution of the second or third anceps. The passage also shows consistently the tragic caesura after the fifth or seventh element, and it observes Porson's bridge. On the Aspis as Menander's most metatheatrical play, see K. J. Gutzwiller, ‘The Tragic Mask of Comedy: Metatheatricality in Menander’, ClAnt 19 (2000), 122–34.

15 Ingrosso (n. 13), 123: ‘La rhesis di Davo, il cui tono luttuoso priva di qualsiasi connotazione comica l’incipit del dramma, si caratterizza per la fitta presenza di elementi tragici’; Ireland (n. 13), 73: ‘This [unexpected tragic beginning] was clearly designed to arrest the audience's attention’; Beroutsos (n. 13), 11: ‘Unlike in Old Comedy, tragic language and meter in New Comedy may enhance a mood of genuine sadness and heighten the serious emotional impact of a scene’; Goldberg (n. 11), 23: ‘The suggestion of tragedy works…like the opening of the Aspis with its own solemn messenger, as a signal to the audience that these events have a serious side’; 33: Daos’ ‘mournful report…opens the play with a combination of exposition and spectacle calculated to evoke the image and response of genuine tragedy’.

16 Beroutsos (n. 13), 13 and n. 7: ‘the most dutiful clever slave (servuus callidus) who appears in the extant specimens of the genre.’ In particular, see lines 189–204, where he refuses to help Smikrines in his plot, and 238–45, where another slave makes fun of him for not running away after the Lycian campaign. On this last episode for Daos’ positive characterization, see S. Lape and A. Moreno, ‘Comedy and the Social Historian’, in M. Revermann (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Greek Comedy (Cambridge, 2104), 366–7; R. K. Sherk, ‘Daos and Spinther in Menander's Aspis’, AJPh 91 (1970), 341–43.

17 Lines 4–10, ὤιμην γὰρ εὐδο[ξο]ῦντα καὶ σωθέντα σε ἀπὸ στρατείας ἐν βίωι τ' εὐσχήμονι ἤδη τὸ λοιπὸν καταβιώσεσθαί τινι, στρατηγὸν ἢ σύμβουλον ὠνομασμένον, καὶ τὴν ἀδελφήν, ἧσπερ ἐξώρμας τότε ἕνεκα, σεαυτοῦ νυμφίωι καταξίωι συνοικιεῖν ποθεινὸν ἥκοντ' οἴκαδε (transl. Ireland [n. 13]). The Greek text of the plays is based on F. H. Sandbach, Menandri. Reliquiae Selectae (Oxford, 1972).

18 For a kurios to provide a dowry was somewhat expected, but not a legal obligation, see A. Groton, A Commentary on Menander's Aspis 1–163 (Ann Arbor, 1982), 46; A. R. W. Harrison, The Law of Athens, I: The Family and Property (Oxford, 1968), 48. On dowries, see C. A. Cox, Household Interests: Property, Marriage Strategies, and Family Dynamics in Ancient Athens (Princeton, 1998), esp. 116–20.

19 Daos was followed on stage by a group of Lykian captives with pack animals carrying the booty (lines 88–9; cf. W. G. Arnott, Menander I [Cambridge, MA, 1979], 12–13). This immediately showed the audience that Kleostratos’ adventure had been a financial success.

20 Lape (n. 10), 13–17; N. J. Lowe, Comedy (Cambridge, 2008), 71–2.

21 The office of strategos would make perfect sense for someone with actual military experience. The only mention of σύμβουλοι in Athens is in Dem. 58.27; they seem to have had a more legislative function. This second office may just be meant to generally point to a respectable magistracy.

22 Lines 491–8, ὦ φιλτάτη γῆ, χαῖρ[ε προσεύχομαι σοι…πόλλ' ὃν σεσωκὼς…πάρειμι τὴν σωτηρ[ίαν] ὁρῶ δεομένην τὴν…εἰ δ' αὖ διαπεφευγ…ὁ Δᾶος εὐτυχῶς…νομίσαιμ' ἐμαυτό[ν.] (transl. Ireland [n. 13]).

23 On the salutation as recurring in theatre, see Ingrosso (n. 13), 383.

24 On this play, see A. Blanchard, Ménandre 4. Les Sicyoniens (Paris, 2009); Traill (n. 11), 16–25; W. G. Arnott, Menander III (Cambridge, MA, 2000), 193–321; A. M. Belardinelli, Sicioni (Bari, 1994).

25 On the Euripidean parallels in this scene, see Cusset (n. 13), 201–10; A. M. Belardinelli, ‘L'Oreste di Euripide e i Sicioni di Menandro’, Orpheus 5 (1984), 396–402. The fullest study of Menander's use of Euripides is A. G. Katsouris, Tragic Patterns in Menander (Athens, 1975). Cf. G. Zanetto, ‘La Tragedia in Menandro: dalla paratragedia alla citazione’, in A. Casanova (ed.), Menandro e l'evoluzione della commedia greca (Firenze, 2014), 83–103; Cusset (n. 13); L. Leurini, ‘Echi Euripidei in Menandro’, Lexis 12 (1994), 87–95; M. Poole, ‘Menander's Comic Use of Euripides’ Tragedies’, CB 54 (1978), 56–62.

26 Cusset (n. 13), 201–10; F. H. Sandbach, ‘Menander's Manipulation of Language for Dramatic Purposes’, in E. G. Turner (ed.), Ménandre. Sept exposés suivis de discussions (Vandœuvres-Genève, 1970), 129: there is ‘no attempt to make fun of Euripides’.

27 [κοὐ] παντελῶς ἦν βδελυρός, οὐ σφόδρ' ἤρεσεν [ἡ]μ̣ῖν δέ, μοιχώδης δὲ μᾶλλον κατεφάνη.

28 μειράκιον…λευχόχρω[ν] ὑπόλειον ἀγένειόν τι.

29 For this type, see Poll. 4.147. On Moschion, see Blanchard (n. 24), lxxxviii–xc, with further references to these traits as effeminate; Belardinelli (n. 24), 169–71.

30 ὄ]ψει τις ἀνδρικὸς πάνυ. For a study of the opposition between the manly Stratophanes and the effeminate Moschion, see Petrides (n. 11), 203–7; Lape (n. 10), 223–7.

31 ὡς δ' ἐνέβλεψ' ἐγγύθεν [τὴν πα]ῖ̣δ', ἐξαπίνης ποταμόν τινα [ἀφίης' ο]ὗτος, ἐμπαθῶς τε τῶν [τριχῶν ἑαυτοῦ λαμ]βάνεται βρυχώμενος…ἔλαβε τοὺς ἑστηκότας (transl. Arnott [n. 24]).

32 [ἔπειτα δ’ οἶκτος] ἔλαβε τοὺς ἑστηκότας (transl. Arnott [n. 24]); B. Marzullo, ‘Annotazioni critiche al Sicionio di Menandro’, Quaderni dell'Istituto di Filologia greca 2 (1967), 15–92; K. F. Kumaniecki, ‘Bemerkungen zu den neuentdeckten Fragmenten des Σικυώνιος von Menandros’, Athenaeum 43 (1965), 154–66.

33 Lines 239–45, “ἀκούσατε καὶ τἀμὰ δ', ἄνδρες. ὄντες αὐτοὶ κύριοι ταύτης – ἀφεῖται τοῦ φόβου γὰρ ὑπό γ' ἐμοῦ – πρὸς τὴν ἱέρειαν θέσθε καὶ τηρησάτω ὑμῖν ἐκείνη τὴν κόρην. “πολλήν τινα τοῦθ', ὡς προσῆκ', εὔνοιαν εἵλκυσ'⋅ ἀνέκραγον “ὀρθῶς γε” πάντες, εἶτα “λέγε” πάντες πάλιν (transl. Arnott [n. 24]).

34 Lines 251–7, τὴν ἐλπίδα μήπω μ' ἀφέλησθ', ἀλλ' ἂν φανῶ τῆς παρθένου κἀγὼ πολίτης, ἣν ἔσωισα τῶι πατρί,

ἐάσατ' αἰτῆσαί με τοῦτον καὶ λαβεῖν⋅ τῶν ἀντιπραττόντων δ' ἐμοὶ τῆς παρθένου μηθεὶς γενέσθω κύριος πρὶν ἂν φανῆι ἐκεῖνος.” “ὀρθῶς καὶ δίκαι', ὀρθῶς” (transl. Arnott [n. 24]).

35 On the priestess of Demeter, see K. Clinton, The Sacred Officials of the Eleusinian Mysteries (Philadelphia, 1974), 68–76. On the economic importance of the sanctuary and Eleusinian coinage, see J. H. Kroll and A. S. Walker, The Athenian Agora XXVI. The Greek Coins (Princeton, 1993), 27–30.

36 Line 13, ἡγεμὼν χρηστὸς σφόδρα. For the identification of Stratophanes as this ἡγεμὼν, see Belardinelli (n. 24), 113–15 (with further bibliography); Contra Slater (n. 10); Arnott (n. 24), 211, n. 4; T. B. L. Webster, An Introduction to Menander (Manchester, 1974), 183. Blanchard (n. 24), l–lii is non-committal.

37 The upbringing of a free woman, fr. 1. The girl's virginity, a crucial issue in Athenian society, is mentioned at several points, lines 236–43, 253, and esp. 370–3, where her father explicitly asks Dromon about it; see Henry (n. 11), 86, n. 142; Belardinelli (n. 24), 182–3, 212–13.

38 Blanchard (n. 24), cli: ‘Stratophanès est présenté sous un jour très favorable’; Hoffmann and Wartenberg (n. 11), 43.

39 Webster (n. 36), 164; W. G. Arnott, Menander II (Cambridge, MA, 1996), 289.

40 ὑπὸ τῆς αἰχμαλώτου⋅ πριάμενος [αὐτήν, πε]ριθεὶς ἐλευθερίαν, τῆς οἰκίας [δέσποιν]αν ἀποδείξας, θεραπαίνας, χρυσία ἱμάτια δούς, γυναῖκα νομίϲας (transl. Arnott [n. 39]).

41 Lines 660–4, πατὴρ Κρατείας, φήις, ἐλήλυθ’ νῦν ἢ μακάριον ἢ τρισαθλιώτατον δείξεις με τῶν ζώντων ἁπάντων γεγονότα. εἰ μὴ γὰρ οὗτος δοκιμάσει με, κυρίως δώσει τε ταύτην, οἴχεται Θρασωνίδης (transl. Arnott [n. 39]). Cf. lines 699–700.

42 See lines 692–712, and his monologue at 757–808.

43 See above, n. 18.

44 παίδ[ων ἐπ’ ἀρότωι γνησίων] δίδωμι τὴν ἐμὴν θυγ[ατέρα] καὶ δύο τάλαντα προῖκα (transl. Arnott [n. 39]). This official Athenian formula appears, almost word for word, in at least three other Menandrian plays (Dys. 842–4; Pk. 1013–14; Sam. 726–7) and several fragments.

45 As also suggested by Brown (n. 10), 11. Even if the play is probably set in Corinth and the characters were not to be Athenian in the dramatic fiction, the overall atmosphere is Athenian, just like the betrothal formula and the implied legal statuses.

46 On the popularity of this scene and its many citations, see F. Sisti, ‘Il soldato Trasonide ovvero la comicità del rovescio’, Sandalion 5 (1982), 98 and n. 4; F. Bornmann, ‘Il prologo del Misoumenos di Menandro’, A&R 25 (1980), 157.

47 On the play on paraklausithyron, see Sisti (n. 46), 9–10; Bornmann (n. 46), 157; E. G. Turner, ‘Menander and the New Society, I’, in J. Harmatta (ed.), Actes du VIIe Congrès de la Fédération Internationale des Associations d’Études classiques (Budapest, 1984), 245.

48 παρ᾿ ἐμοὶ γάρ ἐστιν ἔνδον, ἔξεστίν τέ μοι καὶ βούλομαι τοῦθ᾿ ὡς ἂν ἐμμανέστατα ἐρῶν τις, οὐ ποιῶ δ'. ὑπαιθρίωι δέ μοι χειμῶνος ὄντος ἐστὶν αἱρετώτερον ἑστηκέναι τρέμοντι (transl. Arnott [n. 39]).

49 According to Turner (n. 47), 250–2, and Sisti (n. 46), 102, Thrasonides freed the girl. Even if that is the case, she was still a woman without a kyrios, and therefore in a somewhat precarious position.

50 Turner (n. 47), 246: ‘But his character is rather that of a nervous, anxious, scrupulous, and introverted man than a boaster. He calls out of sympathy.’

51 Sisti (n. 46), 9–10, 101; Turner (n. 47), 246; Bornmann (n. 46), 157.

52 Arnott (n. 39), T I (fr. 1 Sandbach): ὑπέρογκόν τι καὶ σοβαρὸν καὶ πολλή τις ἀλαζονεία στρατιώτης ἀνήρ.

53 So Turner (n. 47), 246, and Sisti (n. 46), 103, describes this as ‘inesatta generalizzazione’.

54 On whether the shearing happened on stage, see W. D. Furley, Menander. Perikeiromene or The Shorn Head (London, 2015), 13; K. J. Gutzwiller and Ö. Çelik, ‘New Menander Mosaics from Antioch’, AJA 116 (2012), 589. The latter article also discusses the evidence provided by the mosaics from Antioch depicting scene from the plays.

55 Both τετρώβολος and τετράδραχμος are insults based on what was apparently the lowest possible pay for mercenaries and officers. The other two are weapons that became widely used in the fourth century bce (Best [n. 1], 79–119; N. G. L. Hammond, ‘Training in the Use of the Sarissa and Its Effect in Battle 359–333 BC’, Antichthon 14 [1980], 53–63; M. M. Markle, ‘Use of the Sarissa by Philip and Alexander of Macedon’, AJA 82 [1978], 483–97).

56 Lines 482–4, καὶ γάρ, Ἁβρότονον, ἔχεις τι πρὸσ πολιορκίαν σὺ χρήσιμον δύνασαί τ' ἀναβαίνειν, περικαθῆσθαι, ‘Look Habrotonon, you come in handy for a siege. You can mount and embrace’. This is the first attestation of the noun πολιορκία in poetry. Menander is playing on the two meanings of the verbs ἀναβαίνειν (to scale the enemy wall, but also to sexually mount) and περικαθῆσθαι (to encircle a city and to embrace a lover). On these jokes, see Furley (n. 54), 136–7; Lamagna (n. 10), 59–60; M. D. Dixon, ‘Menander's “Perikeiromene” and Demetrios Poliorketes’, CB 81 (2005), 131–43; A. W. Gomme and F. H. Sandbach, Menander. A Commentary (Oxford, 1973), 505. Dixon tries, I believe unconvincingly, to make this a reference to Demetrios Poliorketes’ siege of Corinth in the years 304–3 bce.

57 On Polemon as a positive figure, see Goldberg (n. 11), 50; MacCary (n. 10), 282–4.

58 Lines 162–7, πάντα δ' ἐξεκάετο ταῦθ' ἕνεκα τοῦ μέλλοντος, εἰς ὀργήν θ' ἵνα οὗτος ἀφίκητ' – ἐγὼ γὰρ ἦγον οὐ φύσει τοιοῦτον ὄντα τοῦτον, ἀρχὴν δ' ἵνα λάβηι μηνύσεως τὰ λοιπά (transl. Furley [n. 54]).

59 νῦν μὲν γὰρ ἡμῖν γέγονεν ἀρχὴ [πραγμάτων] ἀγαθῶν τὸ σὸν πάροινον (transl. Furley [n. 54]). On these lines recalling Agnoia's words, cf. Furley (n. 54), 180.

60 Lines 185–7, δυστυχής, ἥτις στρατιώτην ἔλαβεν ἄνδρα. παράνομοι ἅπαντες, οὐδὲν πιστόν, ‘It's an unfortunate girl who's married to a soldier. Ruffians, all of them, unpredictable’ (transl. Furley [n. 54]).

61 Lines 172–4, 188–9, Polemon crying; 358–60, him in a wretched state; 967–8, how he cannot live without Glykera.

62 Lape (n. 10), 173. For a discussion of her thesis, see above, n. 11.

63 One only needs to think of Lamachos in Aristophanes’ Acharnians; on this figure, see I. M. Konstantakos, ‘On the Early History of the Braggart Soldier. 2, Aristophanes’ Lamachus and the Politicization of the Comic Type’, Logeion 6 (2016), 112–63, who sees a continuity between Lamachos and the soldiers of Middle, New, and Roman comedy.

64 Although the few surviving lines describe Bias as a stereotypical violent braggart, one should note that these are the words of other characters. In the fragment, the soldier himself never actually appears on stage. On this play, see Arnott (n. 39), 153–61; Webster (n. 36), 158–60.

65 Pritchard (n. 12), 110–17, 136–7 on advancing old debates; M. Heath, Political Comedy in Aristophanes (Göttingen, 1987), 8, on its value as an ‘external control’ for comedy; K. J. Dover, Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1974). On drama and legal speeches providing a similar depiction of Athenian politicians and politics, see D. Pritchard, ‘Aristophanes and de Ste. Croix: The Value of Old Comedy as Evidence for Athenian Popular Culture’, Antichthon 46 (2012), 31–9; J. Ober and B. S. Strauss, ‘Drama, Political Rhetoric, and the Discourse of Athenian Democracy’, in J. J. Winkler and F. Zeitlin (eds.), Nothing to Do with Dionysos? Athenian Drama in Its Social Context (Princeton, 1990), 237–70; for a similar depiction of social classes, see D. Pritchard, Sport, Democracy, and War in Classical Athens (Cambridge, 2013), 2–9; V. J. Rosivach, ‘Some Athenian Presuppositions about the Poor’, G&R 38 (1991), 189–98.

66 On the social status of jurors and assembly-goers, see e.g. M. Canevaro, ‘The Popular Culture of the Athenian Institutions: “Authorized” Popular Culture and “Unauthorized” Elite Culture in Classical Athens’, in L. Grig (ed.), Popular Culture in the Ancient World (Cambridge, 2017), 42–57; S. C. Todd, ‘Lady Chatterley's Lover and the Attic Orators: The Social Composition of the Athenian Jury’, in E. Carawan (ed.), Oxford Readings in the Attic Orators (Oxford, 2007), 312–58; M. H. Hansen, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes, transl. by J. A. Crook (Oxford, 1991), 125–78, 183–6; J. Ober, Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens (Princeton, 1989), 132–8, 141–7; M. M. Markle, ‘Jury Pay and Assembly Pay’, in P. Cartledge and F. D. Harvey (eds.), Crux. Essays Presented to G. E. M. de Ste. Croix on His 75th Birthday (Exeter, 1985), 281–91. On New Comedy as mass entertainment, see V. J. Rosivach, ‘The Audiences of New Comedy’, G&R 47 (2000), 169–71.

67 On the need to please the audience, see Arist. Rh. 1.9.30–1, 2.21.15, 2.22.3. On theatre-goers influencing the choice of the winner with their noise, Dem. 18.265, 21.226; Pl. Leg. 659b–c, 700c–d, Resp. 492b; cf. R. W. Wallace, ‘Poet, Public, and “theatrocracy”: Audience Performance in Classical Athens’, in E. Lowell, R. W. Wallace, and M. Bettini (eds.), Poet, Public, and Performance in Ancient Greece (Baltimore, 1997), 97–111.

68 Much has been written on whether Aristophanes’ works reflect contemporary Athenian views. For a recent and comprehensive review of the scholarship on this topic, see Pritchard (n. 12), 111–14. On Menander's political views, scholars have offered opposing theories, see W. M. Owens, ‘The Political Topicality of Menander's “Dyskolos”’, AJPh 132.3 (2011), 349–78; Major (n. 10) (pro-Macedonian); Lape (n. 10) (democratic); Blanchard (n. 10); and D. Wiles, ‘Menander's Dyskolos and Demetrius of Phaleron's Dilemma’, G&R 31 (1984), 170–9 (focus on social aspects).

69 Isaeus’ works are dated around the second quarter of the fourth century bce, see Edwards, M. J., Isaeus (Austin, TX, 2007)Google Scholar; Wevers, R. F., Isaeus. Chronology, Prosopography, and Social History (Den Haag, 1969), 9–33Google Scholar.

70 Isae. 2 and 9 have speakers who admit serving as mercenaries. Isae. 4 and 9 are about the inheritance of former mercenaries. Other mentions of ‘irregular’ military activity are at 4.29 and 11.47–8. The most important oration is Isae. 9, in which the deceased's long mercenary career is well described; on it, see Rosivach, V. J., ‘Astyphilos the Mercenary’, G&R 52 (2005), 195–204Google Scholar. Griffith-Williams, B., A Commentary on Selected Speeches of Isaios (Leiden, 2013), 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar and n. 11, dates this speech to 366 bce.