The plot of Ecclesiazusae is well-known: under the leadership of Praxagora, the women occupy the Assembly and gain political power. Included in the new constitution are the communality of properties and a special rule in the matter of sex: if a man wants to go to bed with a girl, he has to go with an older and ugly one first, so that every woman will be satisfied. After a choral interlude (post 729), two anonymous men discuss the idea of giving their goods to the city, even as one of them is already bringing out his possessions out of the house (730–876). To separate this episode from that which follows, after line 876 there is a second choral interlude, indicated on codex Ravennas 429 with the abbreviation ΧΟΡΟΥ. 1

The new episode (877–1111) deals with the consequences of the new laws pertaining to sex. The scene opens with an Old Woman, probably walking in front of the skene. 2 She is softly singing a melody by herself (880 μινυρομένη τι πρὸς ἐμαυτὴν μέλος), wondering why no man has come to her yet. Her attitude seems to be that of a prostitute waiting for men to approach (877–883):3

### ΓΡΑΥΣ Α

τί ποθ' ἅνδρες οὐχ ἥχουσιν; ὥρα δ' ἦν πάλαι. ἐγὼ δὲ καταπεπλασμένη ψιμυθίῳ ἕστηκα καὶ κροκωτὸν ἠμφιεσμένη ἀργός, μινυρομένη τι πρὸς ἐμαυτὴν μέλος, (880) παίζουσ' ὅπως ἂν περιλάβοιμ' αὐτῶν τινὰ παριόντα. Μοῦσαι, δεῦρ' ἴτ' ἐπὶ τοὐμὸν στόμα, μελύδριον εὑροῦσαί τι τῶν Ἰωνικῶν.

1 Ecclesiazusae's double exhibition of the use of choral interludes detached from the comic narration, indicated twice (after lines 729 and 876) on codex Ravennas 429 with the abbreviation ΧΟΡΟΥ (scil. μέλος), belongs to a well-attested manuscript and papyrus tradition concerning indications of this kind. See for example Taplin (1976) on ΧΟΡΟΥ indications in papyri; Handley (1953) on ΧΟΡΟΥ indications in Wealth's manuscripts; cf. also Imperio (2011) 130–134. 2 On the reconstruction of the houses and the number of the doors in this scene, see Mastromarco (2017).

3 Cf. Ussher (1973) 195; Sommerstein (1998) 214; Vetta/Del Corno (2008) 234; Mastromarco (2017) 68.

Why haven't the men come? They were due long ago. And I'm standing here, plastered with white-lead and wearing a saffron dress, doing nothing, just warbling a little tune to myself, disporting myself in the hope that I might snare one of them as he passes by. [Praying] Muses, come here to sit on my lips, and find me a nice little melody in the Ionian style. (transl. Sommerstein)4

Trying to catch men's attention, the Old Woman prays to the Muses to inspire her with a μελύδριον τῶν Ἰωνικῶν (883), some Ionian tune, thought to be pleasant and lascivious.5

As regards the verb μινυρίζειν at line 880, it is important to notice that in Aristophanes this term is always related to songs composed in Ionian style, as in Vesp. 219 with its reference to the ἀρχαιομελισιδωνοφρυνιχήρατα (Vesp. 220) sung by the Chorus, and Thesm. 100, with reference to Agathon's song.

Considering the scene and the fact that the Old Woman is alone in front of the spectators, it is legitimate to assume that this character is expected to sing a monody. However, the proposal of the Old Woman is soon interrupted, because a Young Woman appears from a window, saying (884–889):

ΚΟΡΗ

νῦν μέν με παρακύψασα προὔφθης, ὦ σαπρά. ᾤου δ' ἐρήμας, οὐ παρούσης ἐνθάδε (885) ἐμοῦ, τρυγήσειν καὶ προσάξεσθαί τινα ᾄδουσ'· ἐγὼ δ', ἢν τοῦτο δρᾷς, ἀντᾴσομαι. κεἰ γὰρ δι' ὄχλου τοῦτ' ἐστὶ τοῖς θεωμένοις, ὅμως ἔχει τερπνόν τι καὶ κωμῳδικόν.

 / But you thought you might harvest deserted vineyards, / me not being here, and entice someone to you / by singing. But, if you do this, I will sing in response. / And if the spectators, indeed, find this annoying, / nevertheless it has something pleasant and fitting with the comedy.

4 From this point on, when there is no attribution for the English translation of a Greek text, it means that the translation is my own. The Greek text of Aristophanes always follows Sommerstein's edition.

5 The adjective 'Ionian' was traditionally intended to be synonymous with 'lascivious', in music as in lifestyle or behaviour, as testified by many sources, including Ar. Thesm. 163; Ath. 12.524f–526d, 13.573b–c, 14.620e–621b. Scholia vetera to Ar. Eccl. 883 and 918 bear witness to this conception. Vetta/Del Corno (2008) 235, commenting on Eccl. 882–883, with reference to the kind of song intoned by the Old Woman, says: 'Con μελύδρια Ἰωνικά ci si poteva riferire a quello stesso patrimonio di canzonette popolari oscene che altrove troviamo definito come ᾠδαὶ ἑταιρικαί o πορνῳδίαι ("canti puttaneschi"; Ran. 1301, Platone comico, fr. 620, 14 Kock)'. The fragment of Plato Comicus cited by Vetta is nowadays indicated as fr. 71 K.-A..

It is clear that at lines 887–889 the character of the Young Woman is speaking in the name of Aristophanes, introducing the skoptic duet (a contrast song) between the Old Woman and the Young Woman which covers lines 893–923.

The main questions about this piece of metatheatre are: why does the author feel the need to justify one of his choices in the matter of composition? What do the words of the Young Woman really mean? What could annoy people, how, why and in which way? Finally, how should the adjective κωμῳδικόν be intended when viewed within the context of metatheatre, in a comedy that is experiencing new trends?6

# Evaluation and Confutation of Current Interpretations

Interpretations of this statement provided by scholars can be summarized in three points, but none of them seems to be really convincing. After evaluating their plausibility, we will consider other solutions by analyzing the scene more closely.

# 1 A Rhetorical Expedient

Commenting on the expression δι' ὄχλου (888), Rogers asserts that this 'selfdepreciation' is to be interpreted as a rhetorical expedient, 'intended merely to elicit from the audience a counter expression of encouragement'. 7 Ussher takes

6 Apart from the strong presence of anonymous (yet playing important roles) characters among its formal elements of transformation, Ecclesiazusae shows a gradual approach to the episodic structure, which will become standard with five acts in Menander. The parabasis, 'shortened and simplified in Aristophanes' plays of 411 and later, has now vanished altogether' (Sommerstein [1998] 24). Of that part recognised by modern scholars as agon, Ecclesiazusae presents only an ode (571–580) and a katakeleusmos (581–582) introducing a long speech by Praxagora (583–688, including questions and interruptions by Blepyros and the Citizen), which ends with a pnigos (689–709). Reading the text of Ecclesiazusae, it soon becomes clear how often Aristophanes interrupts the comic illusion by addressing the audience, and thus paying attention to the spectators' tastes in the matter of comedy and politics, two elements that are strictly connected in this play (e.g., 580–585, 777, 797–798, 888–889, 1141–1143). Regarding the comedy's self-reflection in regard to content and form, it has also been rightly noted that, thanks to the numerous appeals for the audience's and judges' favours, 'what is striking about Ecclesiazusae is that we nevertheless find several traces of the parabasis, even with the form itself no longer visible' (Hubbard (1991) 248). 7 Rogers (1902) 137.

the same view: saying that the oncoming duet may be boring, it gives the audience the opportunity 'for shouting "No!"', 8 so that the global expression of lines 887–889 simply represent Aristophanes playing with his spectators. Accepting this idea, Sommerstein and Ussher refer to an analogous example in Lys. 1218–1220 – already cited by van Leeuwen – where a character is threatening someone with his torch and then says that he knows that this gesture would be a boorish thing, but that he must do it to please the audience:

ΑΘ. α ὑμᾶς κατακαύσω; φορτικὸν τὸ χωρίον κοὐκ ἂν ποήσαιμ'. εἰ δὲ πάνυ δεῖ τοῦτο δρᾶν, ὑμῖν χαρίσασθαι ταλαιπωρήσομεν. (1220)

You don't want me to burn you up with my torch, do you? [The slaves retreat from the door.] Vulgar routine, that, though. I'm not going to do it. [Some protests from the audience.] Well, if it's absolutely necessary to do it, we'll suffer that bit more to do you a favour!

Despite similarities, the example from Lysistrata does not exactly correspond to our case in Ecclesiazusae. Through the character of the First Athenian in Lysistrata, Aristophanes admits that he is going to do something to please the audience, something which, for his part, he would rather not do. In Ecclesiazusae, on the other hand, the author says that he is putting something in the scene that the audience may not like; in other words, he is going against their tastes.9 This distinction is of fundamental importance, because in Lysistrata, Aristophanes postures himself as being condescending towards the vulgar tastes of the audience in an almost playful way, while in the Ecclesiazusae he appears almost worried about a negative reaction to one of his choices. Yet in the latter he does not renounce his own dramatic choices, but justifies them at a moment which is broader and much more important to the plot than that of the above passage in Lysistrata.

In general, this first interpretation seems to avoid a problem which, on closer inspection, turns out actually to be more complex. Before accepting it, one should at least ponder other possibilities.

# 2 Preventing a Bored Reaction to an Abused Feature of Performance

Massimo Vetta proposes two alternative solutions to the enigmatic metatheatrical sentence of the Young Woman.

8 Ussher (1973) 197.

9 Bremer (1991) 139 too seems to misunderstand the two different types of 'compromise'.

Starting from the expected negative reaction of the audience to the Young Woman's ἀντᾴδειν, Vetta infers that, in the period of Ecclesiazusae, dramatists would have abused (888 δι' ὄχλου) the skoptic duet in their plays.10 By this reading, Aristophanes' statement apologises for following a current fashion. However, as Vetta admits, we are unfortunately unable to prove the exaggerated use of the skoptic duet in late fifth-century and fourth-century comedy. Furthermore, we should take into consideration that in our available sources the verb ἀντᾴδειν seems not to be strictly related to a specific kind of song: musical terms with the prefix ἀντι- are not so common, but one cannot overlook the fact that they always indicate simply something in response, not necessarily in contrast. 11 We have a definition of a modality of performance, not of a musical genre. In this sense, when Aristophanes' audience heard ἀντᾴσομαι (887), it may have expected a simple and traditional lyric dialogue. The audience, certainly, could even have thought naturally of the lyrical 'oppositions' already found in the early plays of Aristophanes, and thus not of something indicative of a newer trend.

Furthermore, the Aristophanic cases adduced by Vetta as similar to that of Ecclesiazusae are not entirely convincing. Among the examples provided as 'topoi teatrali di cui non abbiamo diretto riscontro', 12 Pax 962 and Eccl. 1144–1146 can be omitted from our discussion: the first because its context is actually that of a sacrifice;13 the latter because the reference is to the banquet following the exodos of a comedy. The other examples all deal with something from which Aristophanes keeps distance with pride: in Vesp. 54–66, Xanthias warns the audience that in that play one should not expect the trivial jokes used by other dramatists to make people laugh; in Ran. 1–18, Aristophanes mocks some of the means used by Phrynichus, Lycis and Amipsias;14 in Plut. 788–799, Wealth stops

10 Cf. Vetta (1981) 86–87 and then Vetta/Del Corno (2008) 236.

11 Cf. Ar. Av. 218 where the verb ἀντιψάλλω is used for Apollo responding with his phorminx to the Nightingale-aulos; Anth. Pal. 7.196 ἀντῳδός is a cicada responding to Pan; Pind. fr. 125 Maehler (= Ath. 14.635b) ἀντίφθογγος is the harp responding to barbitos. Other compounds used in tragedy are reported in Athenaeus' Deipnosophistai within a list of antiphonal typologies, for example 14.635c ψαλμοῖσιν ἀντίσπαστ' ἀείδοντες μέλη (Phrynichus, TrGF 3 F 11), πολὺς δὲ Φρὺξ τρίγωνος ἀντίσπαστά <τε> / Λυδῆς ἐφυμνεῖ πηκτίδος συγχορδία (Soph. Mysoi TrGF F 412 Radt), 14.636b ψαλμοῖς τριγώνων πηκτίδων ἀντιζύγοις / ὁλκοῖς κρεκούσας μάγαδιν (Diogenes Athen. TrGF 45 F 1). Cf. also Poll. Onom. 4.107.4–5, where ἀντᾴδουσιν really is used (see here pp. 228–229).

12 Cf. Vetta (1981) 87 and then Vetta/Del Corno (2008) 236.

13 Maybe with the intent of parodying, at the same time, the practice of other dramatists of making characters throw nuts or something else to the audience: cf. Sommerstein (2005) 179. 14 Cf. also schol. vet. ad Ar. Ran. 1b Chantry.

Chremylos' Wife from throwing figs. To these examples one could add the case of Lys. 1218–1220 discussed above.

In addition, one can recall the well-known passages from Clouds (537–548), Wasps (54–66 –also cited by Vetta– and 1043–1045; 1535–1537) and Peace (736–753). In all of these cases, Aristophanes strongly asserts the superiority of his comedy, or shows pride in something never seen before him.

Unlike these cases listed so far, in the passage of Ecclesiazusae on which we are focusing, Aristophanes does not provide the name of any other poet, nor does he use metaphors (as he often does in his parabasis celebrating his own art15) or indicate duets in comedy as a common praxis.

The central issue, therefore, is to understand whether Aristophanes is referring to the general comic production of his time, implicitly involving reference to other poets, or whether he is referring instead to that precise scene in Ecclesiazusae, to something which has just happened or is about to happen in that comedy in a precise moment for some precise dramaturgical reason(s).

# 3 A Boring Succession of Songs

In considering an alternative meaning for the metatheatrical sentence of Eccl. 887–889, Vetta focuses his attention on the proximity of the Young Woman's ἀντᾴσομαι (887) to the indication ΧΟΡΟΥ (post 876): only 10 iambic trimeters separate the choral interlude from the announcement of the duet. He underlines how this circumstance concretely represents a further delay in the fluidity of the plot. The events, in fact, stop at line 876 with the interlude, and the Young Woman's ἀντᾴδειν would have caused disappointment because the audience may have expected the story to continue, instead of another song.

Vetta also supposes that the duet and the preceding choral interlude would have shared a 'thematic independence' from the script and an 'episodic character' if compared to the continuation of the plot.16

15 Imperio (2004) 100: 'Il repertorio delle immagini metaforiche, che, com'è stato da tempo riconosciuto, rappresentano uno degli aspetti distintivi della lingua e della poetica di Aristofane, appare dunque particolarmente cospicuo nelle parabasi, dove assume una speciale pregnanza allorché si fa veicolo di una programmatica riflessione dell'autore sull'arte comica e sul fare poetico in genere, e sulle prerogative che connotano in maniera peculiare e originale il proprio prodotto artistico'. Imperio dedicates a paragraph to the metaphorical language of Aristophanes' parabasis in Imperio (2004) 99–104.

16 See Vetta (1981) 87.

Finally, he provided a personal interpretation of the adjective τερπνόν (889):

'Dopo un corale con ogni probabilità estraneo alla commedia, viene annunciato sulla scena un duetto scoptico che è anch'esso, come il corale, un τερπνόν in qualche modo fuori dall'intreccio, un τερπνόν che apprendiamo come sempre meno gradito ad un pubblico che ha già condizionato una drastica riduzione delle parti liriche dell'antica struttura della commedia.' 17

Concerning the duet, in his view τερπνόν would signify something pleasant but having no connection to the plot, simply a divertissement, and just like the choral interlude.

Although Vetta is the only one who takes into account the context in which the duet is inserted (a fundamental aspect indeed), his interpretation still fails to convince for multiple reasons.

First, Aristophanes' plays prior to Ecclesiazusae provide plenty of examples of two different lyric sections coming one after the other. Already in Acharnenses and Wasps, the monodies of Dikaiopolis (Ach. 263–279) and Philocleon (Vesp. 317–333) follow the respective parodoi (Ach. 204–236; Vesp. 230–316) after only a few lines. In Birds, the two monodies of the Hoopoe (Av. 209–222 and 227–262) are separated by only five lines. In Thesmophoriazusae, to the long choral piece in lines 947–1000 follows the longest paratragic monody of the Inlaw (Thesm. 1015–1055) and then, after very few lines, another monody by him (Thesm. 1065–1072); at the end of Lysistrata there is a sequence of three songs following one after the other (Lys. 1247–1272 first Spartan monody; 1279–1294 song of Athenian Chorus; 1296–1321 second Spartan monody). In Frogs, Aeschylus and Euripides compete by singing four monodies in succession (Ran. 1264–1277; 1284–1295; 1309–1328; 1331–1363). Even in Wealth a ΧΟΡΟΥ immediately follows the parodos (Plut. 257–321), and this circumstance could lead us to revise the idea of a declining interest on the part of the audience in the lyric parts of comedy.

It is also important to notice that it is specifically the ἀντᾴσομαι of the Young Woman that may cause annoyance, not 'a song' in general. In fact, after the choral interlude Aristophanes not only stages a single lyrical piece but also two additional songs (938–945; 952–975). So why would the author need to justify himself, foreseeing a boring effect on the audience for one excessive song, and then continue with two more songs over many more lines (until line 975)?

Furthermore, even before the appearance of the Young Woman (884), the audience is introduced into a 'musical episode'. The Old Woman appears, in fact,

17 Vetta (1981) 88.

while singing something to herself (880) and, only a few seconds later, decides to invoke the Muses for a Ἰωνικῶν μελύδριον (883). She is alone and a monody is expected, and this does not appear to be a problem for the audience. Therefore, it cannot be the simple succession of lyrical pieces that is annoying.

As regards the theme of the songs, Vetta seems to be missing the main point. While it is normally assumed that ΧΟΡΟΥ remains in manuscripts and papyri to indicate a choral song not belonging to the comedy script,18 the duet between the two women in Ecclesiazusae is indeed very relevant to the narration in that it represents a chaotic and comic actualisation of the new orders.19 Thus, it seems inappropriate to put the choral interlude and the duet on the same level.

Despite the hypothesis of Vetta, the adjective τερπνόν – as much as κωμῳδικόν – is used in the text with an evident positive connotation, designed to prevent the audience from refusing what is to come, but rather to gain its favour. In Aristophanes, τερπνός is a rare adjective, but it always has a positive meaning;20 similarly, the verb τέρπειν has the positive meaning of 'giving pleasure, delight', as it does in Aristotle's Rhetoric, for example.21 So we can assume that in Ecclesiazusae the meaning of τερπνός is also 'pleasant, delightful', though referring, significantly, to something that is not expected to be pleasant: we must not forget that we are dealing with a 'defense' of the author.

Ultimately, it is clear that we are missing something that was immediately comprehensible to Aristophanes' audience. Still, a pair of new reconstructions, both based on the meaning of individual words and with respect to the ongoing scene, deserves to be taken into account in order to understand the 'voice' of the poet and the dramaturgical meaning of these lines of Ecclesiazusae.

The question must be addressed first by identifying what represents the real problem for the author, and then trying to understand how the author justifies his choice. In this vein, it is worth trying to analyse closely the single passages of the text as well as the scene.

18 Along the same lines of tragic embolima. On ΧΟΡΟΥ and ἐμβόλιμον see, for example, Maidment (1935); Handley (1953); Taplin (1976); Hunter (1979); Scattolin (2011); Martina (2016).

19 It has the same function as the two following songs: the skolia of the Young Man and the Old Woman (938–945) and the paraklausithyron of the Young Man and the Young Woman (952–975).

20 Apart from our case, it is used in Ach. 881 with reference to a tasty plate of foods, and in Lys. 553 to describe sexual delights.

21 Cf. Wartelle (1982) s.v. τέρπειν.

# Dramaturgy of ᾄδειν and ἀντᾴδειν

Line 887 contains three important elements that explain the development of the scene in its different moments.

ᾄδουσα refers to what the Old Woman is about to do before the appearance of the Young Woman. The 'normal' situation is thus that of people expecting a monody from the Old Woman, as she declares at lines 882–883.

ἢν τοῦτο δρᾷς, placed after the pronoun ἐγὼ and the particle δέ, which both have an important contrasting function, underlines that the possibility that the Old Woman will sing something alone represents the reason that the Young Woman is going to do something special in reply.

ἀντᾴσομαι marks the unexpected element of the scene: the Young Woman exclaims to the Old Woman that 'if you do that, then I will do something to prevent you'. It is precisely for the Young Woman's ἀντᾴδειν ('singing in response'), which represents a novelty in the plot, that Aristophanes needs to prepare the audience and gain its 'permission'. Significantly preceded by γὰρ, at line 888, the pronoun τοῦτο refers precisely to that ἀντᾴσομαι, not to something general.

Each element leads to the conclusion that this is all something strictly dramaturgical before it is musical and poetic: it is the unexpected 'interference' of the Young Woman in the intentions of the Old Woman that causes something potentially unpleasant.

# The Meaning of δι' ὄχλου

The expression δι' ὄχλου (888) is glossed by the schol. ad loc. as ἐπιβαρές, 'heavy'. This is to be interpreted as a 'heaviness' resulting from something unpleasant, unwanted and nonetheless to be endured, as shown in general by the ancient attestations. Taking into account the relevant loci similes, in the fifth century the expression δι' ὄχλου εἶναι is attested elsewhere only once, in Thuc. 1.73.2:

τὰ δὲ Μηδικὰ καὶ ὅσα αὐτοὶ ξύνιστε, εἰ καὶ δι' ὄχλου μᾶλλον ἔσται αἰεὶ προβαλλομένοις, ἀνάγκη λέγειν.

The reference is to the Persian Wars, presented as something already well-known and frequently retold, but which must be narrated again, even if this might annoy the audience. In fact, Dionysus of Halicarnassus (Amm. 2.10) notes the use of ὄχλος for ὄχλησις. The structure of the Thucydidean sentence is quite similar to that of Aristophanes (εἰ ... δι' ὄχλου εἶναι), although in Thucydides the dative (προβαλλομένοις) indicates people toward which one may feel annoyance, whereas in Aristophanes (888 τοῖς θεωμένοις) it stands for people who will feel annoyance themselves.

Another relevant attestation, with γίγνομαι in the place of εἶναι, is Pl. Alc. 103a3, where the lovers of Alcibiades turn out to be annoying him (δι' ὄχλου ἐγένοντόσοι) with their conversation:.

... ἐραστής σου γενόμενος τῶν ἄλλων πεπαυμένων μόνος οὐκ ἀπαλλάττομαι, καὶ ὅτι οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι δι' ὄχλου ἐγένοντόσοι διαλεγόμενοι, ἐγὼ δὲ τοσούτων ἐτῶν οὐδὲ προσεῖπον.

The global meaning is the same: repetition of a same thing causes annoyance.

Apart from these examples is the focus on the simple word ὄχλος, which could help in our interpretation. ὄχλος in itself means 'crowd', and so an exaggerated or large number of people or things, generally carrying a negative or dismissive undertone. Attestations of the word are so many that it would be pedantic to cite them all, but, in addition to the case of line 888, ὄχλος appears three other times in the Ecclesiazusae itself: 383–384 πλεῖστος ἀνθρώπων ὄχλος, / ὅσος οὐδεπώποτ', ἦλθ' ἁθρόος ἐς τὴν πύκνα, a statement made by Chremes to Blepyros to explain that a mass such as never was seen before had crowded together towards the Pnyx, preventing him from arriving on time to the assembly; 394–395 ἀτὰρ τί τὸ πρᾶγμ' ἦν, ὅτι τοσοῦτον χρῆμ' ὄχλου / οὕτως ἐν ὥρᾳ ξυνελέγη;, where the same term is recalled by Blepyros in asking for explanations; and 745 τὰ χυτρίδι' ἤδη καὶ τὸν ὄχλον ἀφίετε, something said by the Neighbour who has already brought all the goods he intends to deliver to the city out of his house and so tells his servants to leave, for the moment, the pots and the other things (of evidently minor importance).22

The sense of 'crowd', anyway, can be extended to something that gives annoyance or is boring because of its 'repetition' – precisely its 'crowding' effect – of the same thing, as can also be deduced from the sources mentioned at the beginning of this paragraph.

It is interesting that the adjective ὀχληρός appears with an aesthetic nuance in the Vita Euripidis (TrGF V T1 IB 4), where the tragic poet is described with negative adjectives as regards in particular his dialogues (ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἀμοιβαίοις περισσὸς καὶ φορτικός, 'superfluous and vulgar') and his prologues (ἐν τοῖς

22 For Aristophanes we may also recall, for example, Vesp. 540–545, where the mass of the old men of the Chorus (πρεσβυτῶν ὄχλος) fears to be mistreated; Lys. 327–331, where ὄχλος is used within the description of a situation of general confusion; etc. See also 229 and n. 34.

προλόγοις δὲ ὀχληρός, 'tedious').23 Even if the Vita does not provide a specific explanation for this judgement, the passage can be compared to the words pronounced by Aeschylus in Frogs for introducing his parody of Euripidean prologues, and it may be intended to be seen as full of insignificant things or, in an extended sense, too full of details and thus tedious.24 Looking at our scene in Ecclesiazusae, the comparison could lead us to think of an accumulation of something which may cause annoyance.25

# Two New Interpretative Proposals

Given that everything within the dialogue seems to be related to the scene, Aristophanes may be referring to something repetitive happening at that particular moment of the play. What is this annoying 'crowding' referring to? We should take into consideration at least two possibilities.

# a. An Impossible Monody: A 'Crowding' of Characters?

The first –and maybe more plausible from a dramaturgical point of view– new interpretation of the sentence pronounced by the Young Woman implies that the expression 'being δι' ὄχλου to the spectators' may be relative to what follows the metatheatrical passage.

By taking a closer look at what is happening on the scene, it is possible to recognize in the Young Woman an intruder, a type of character appointed to hinder the protagonist from the execution of an action –and, in the case of the episode we are focusing on, the Old Woman should be considered the protagonist– as it happens in many of Aristophanes' plays, which contain plenty of 'intruders' scenes'. 26

23 Here, the complete passage with the aesthetic judgment of Euripides' style (TrGF V T1 IB 4. 53–56): καὶ τοῖς μέλεσίν ἐστιν ἀμίμητος παραγκωνιζόμενος τοὺς μελοποιοὺς σχεδὸν πάντας, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἀμοιβαίοις περισσὸς καὶ φορτικὸς καὶ ἐν τοῖς προλόγοις δὲ ὀχληρός, ῥητορικώτατος δὲ τῇ κατασκευῇ καὶ ποικίλος τῇ φράσει καὶ ἱκανὸς ἀνασκευάσαι τὰ εἰρημένα.

24 Cf. Ran. 1202–1204. Cf. also schol. vet. Ran. 1202 Chantry.

25 ὀχληρά is used to describe Echo in Ar. Thesm. 1075 by Euripides' Inlaw, who is trying to sing a monody but is continuosly interrupted by the voice of Echo repeating his words.

26 Examples can be found in Aristophanes' Acharnians, where many characters crowd and disturb Dikaiopolis' own market (719 ff.) or especially in Birds, which contains two large 'intruders' scenes': at lines 904–1057 five 'visiteurs inopportuns' – following the definition of Kakridis (1997) – interrupt Peisetaerus' sacrifice for Nephelokokkygia; at lines 1308–1469 three

The Young Woman interrupts with the intention of causing trouble for the Old Woman and of contrasting her song. In this sense, ὄχλος should be intended as a 'crowding' of characters, i.e. of voices, where only one (for the monody of the Old Woman) was expected. Not only the presence of the Young Woman, but her ἀντᾴδειν itself is assumed to be annoying to the spectators, namely because it represents an obstacle to the monody.

On closer inspection, it is also meaningful that the Old Woman, after the metatheatrical sentence, ignores the Young Woman (though not before having insulted her) and –with another metatheatrical trick– addresses the auletes as if nothing had happened (890–892):

ΓΡ. α τούτῳ27 διαλέγου κἀποχώρησον· σὺ δέ, φιλοττάριον αὐλητά, τοὺς αὐλοὺς λαβὼν ἄξιον ἐμοῦ καὶ σοῦ προσαύλησον μέλος.

[bending over and presenting her posterior to the Girl]: Talk to that, and be off with you! [To the piper who has been accompanying the Chorus] And you, piper sweetie, take your pipes and play a tune to show your quality – and mine. (transl. Sommerstein)

She prays the auletes play something appropriate for her and for him: she wants to sing her monody, not a duet. The first strophe of her song (893–899), before its development into a duet, seems to be just the beginning of the μελύδριον Ἰωνικῶν (883) that she had already decided to sing alone:

ΓΡ. α εἴ τις ἀγαθὸν βούλεται παθεῖν τι, παρ' ἐμοι χρὴ καθεύδειν· οὐ γὰρ ἐν νέαις τὸ σοφὸν ἔν- (895) εστιν, ἀλλ' ἐν ταῖς πεπείροις. οὐδέ τοι στέργειν ἂν ἐθέλοι μᾶλλον ἢ 'γὼ τὸν φίλον ᾧπερ ξυνείην, ἀλλ' ἐφ' ἕτερον ἂν πέτοιτο –

more characters burst onto the stage asking Peisetaerus for wings. For the intruders in Aristophanes' plays and in Old Comedy in general see also Hartwig (2009) 66–68.

27 This is the word we find in manuscripts; the scholia to this passage explain that ἡ γραῦς 'τῷ αίδοίῳ' λέγει. As Sommerstein says in his edition of Ecclesiazusae, 'as often . . . the text uses a demonstrative pronoun to refer to an object which the audience could see, with the result that we as readers cannot identify the object with certainty: here we know only that the object is masculine or neuter in grammatical gender, that the invitation to talk to it is an insult, and that, in view of the whole tenor of the scene, the insult is likely to have some sexual content or connotation' (Sommerstein [1998] 215). While working from both a textual and a dramaturgical point of view, the text was the object of conjecture by some scholars, who proposed to amend τούτῳ to τύμβῳ (Meineke) or σαυτῇ (Blaydes), but there is actually no need to modify a well-functioning text, which is also supported by scholia.

If anyone wants to have a good / time, he should sleep with me! / For expertise is not to be found / in the young, but in the mature. / And I tell you she couldn't be more ready then I am / to cherish my boyfriend; / no, she'd fly off to another – (transl. Sommerstein)

It is at this point that the Young Woman violently interrupts her, giving birth to the real 'burning' contrast song (900–924):

GIRL [interrupting]: Don't be jealous of the young; / for voluptuousness has its natural abode / in tender thighs / and blooms on firm breasts; / while you, old woman, are plucked and plastered / to be the darling of Death!

GIRL: 'Ah me, what will become of me? / My boyfriend hasn't come, / and I'm left alone here, / because my mother's somewhere else –' / [speaking] and I've no need to add what comes after that! / [Singing again] 'Oh, nurse, I implore you –' / [maliciously, to the Old Woman] invite the Hard Man round, / so that you can five yourself some pleasure, / [passionately again] 'I beg you!'

FIRST OLD WOMAN: Already, poor soul, you've got the itch / in the Ionian fashion, / [speaking] and it looks to me like you've got the big L as in Lesbos too! GIRL: But you'll never rob me / of my playmates, and / my youth you will not destroy / nor grab a share of! (transl. Sommerstein)

One way of reading this would be to see Aristophanes as trying to prevent the annoyance of the spectators, for a new character that is going to impede the normal lyrical progression of the script.

# b. Choral Interlude and Actors' Duet: A 'Crowding' of Similar Songs?

If δι' ὄχλου (888) is 'retroactive', then the skoptic duet introduced by ἀντᾴσομαι (887) must be bothersome because something similar has happened immediately before. In this case, the repetition would be that entailed by the presence of two similar songs, a 'crowding' of similar musical-poetic genres one after the other.

From this point of view, even if we know very little about the interludes indicated by ΧΟΡΟΥ, we could assume that the choral interlude performed after line 876 was a contrast song, characterised by skommata, in which two parts contend in a lyrical way, a 'cut and thrust' in which what is said by one is recovered and twisted by the other. In this case, the Young Woman's proclamation of ἀντᾴδειν to the Old Woman would be seen by audience as the introduction to another contrast song, and this would cause annoyance. The interlude and the duet could have been similar: it does not really matter if one were choral and the other not, or if one were disconnected from the plot and the other is relevant to it, because they would be of the same genre in their sharing of the same basic characteristics.

Even if this hypothesis cannot be proved, there are important elements to consider. The most similar case comes in Wealth. The song of the parodos and the choral interlude indicated by χοροῦ are placed one after the other, as in Ecclesiazusae (where, however, the interlude comes first, followed by the duet). Besides, the parodos of Wealth is a skoptic song, and one of the same character as Ecclesiazusae's duet, because the slave Karion and the Chorus alternate their parts, each upturning what was said by the other previously.28 Furthermore, it is also important to notice that, at the end of the parodos, Karion addresses the

28 On the parodos of Wealth, see in particular Totaro (2015), which deals with the onomasti komoidein characterizing this dialogical parodos; cf. also Bravi (2017) 186–189.

Chorus by saying 'stop with your skommata, now turn to a different kind of song' (Plut. 316–317):29

ἀλλ' εἶά νυν τῶν σκωμμάτων ἀπαλλαγέντες ἤδη ὑμεῖς ἐπ' ἄλλ' εἶδος τρέπεσθ(ε).

After this invitation comes the interlude, not transmitted in the codices. This makes us think that the author knows that two lyrical pieces one after the other should be different,30 so as not to bother the audience. It is a sort of 'rule', which would explain why the 'exception' in Ecclesiazusae needs to be justified.

The case in which a character speaks with reference to something from the interlude is very interesting, and again it has a parallel in Wealth. At line 771 of the play, in fact, Wealth appears on the scene just after a choral interlude (the indication ΚΟΜΜΑΤΙΟΝ ΧΟΡΟΥ following line 770 is retained in some manuscripts, among which are the ancient Ravennas 429 and Venetus Marcianus gr. 474, and it is testified also by the scholia vetera and recentiora ad Ar. Plut. post 770). His words –a reference to the sun– seem to refer to something said immediately before, as his first line opens with καὶ ... γε (καὶ προσκυνῶ γε πρῶτα μὲν τὸν ἥλιον, κτλ.). Nevertheless, at the end of the previous episode, there was no 'sun', nor does it appear at the beginning of the new episode. Therefore, it is possible that, during the interlude, the Chorus has been singing something about the sun, even if something disconnected from the plot, and that Wealth takes that reference as opening the new scene.31

Finally, a Chorus singing a contrast song as interlude would not be an absurd hypothesis at all: more than once in Aristophanes it is possible to identify a Chorus divided into two parts (e.g., in Ach. 557 ff., in Ran. 324 ff., and in Lysistrata up to the reunification of men and women),32 one responding to the other. Ancient scholia to Aristophanes likewise show awareness of these cases of διχορία. 33

Given the above, it is interesting that when Pollux, in his Onomasticon, talks about the chorus, he says (4.107.4–5):

29 Cf. Handley (1953) 59; Sommerstein (1984) 141 (though actually speaking of 'another kind of entertainment'; cf. also Sommerstein (2001) 160 and 151 n. 16 with the confutation of other proposals; Imperio (2011) 141 evinces some doubts about the interpretation of these words.

30 For the different shades of meaning of εἶδος in Antiquity, see Grandolini (1999), in particular 11–12.

31 Cf. also Hunter (1979) 31–33; Sommerstein (1984) 141–142; Sommerstein (2001) 185.

32 Cf. Lys. 1042 ἀλλὰ κοινῇ συσταλέντες τοῦ μέλους ἀρξώμεθα.

33 Cf. also schol. (vet. Tr.) Eq. 589a, 589b on the composition of the comic chorus and the possibility of hemichorus.

ὁπόταν γὰρ ὁ χορὸς εἰς δύο μέρη τμηθῇ, τὸ μὲν πρᾶγμα καλεῖται διχορία, ἑκατέρα δ' ἡ μοῖρα ἡμιχόριον, ἃ δ' ἀντᾴδουσιν, ἀντιχόρια.

In fact, when the Chorus is divided in two parts, this thing is called διχορία, each part ἡμιχόριον, what they sing in response ἀντιχόρια.

Here we should also note the use of the verb ἀντᾴδειν.

A skoptic song, finally, would not be out of context in a comedy, if we consider also the praxis of the Middle and New Comedy to introduce the first appearance of the Chorus (for a so-called 'χοροῦ' μέλος, an interlude) as a group –note also the mention of ὄχλος in some texts–of drunk men.34

Although, as I have said at the beginning, both new interpretations of the metatheatrical passage from Ecclesiazusae offered here are speculative, they are both more consistent with all factors and thus more plausible than what has been said before. In addition, they both draw our attention closer to the scene.

# What is τερπνόν and κωμῳδικόν? And in which Sense?

Speaking through the voice of the Young Woman, Aristophanes reassures the audience that what is about to happen on the scene is τερπνόν and κωμῳδικόν (889). We have already said that τερπνός should be translated as 'pleasant, amusing'. 35 But what about κωμῳδικόν, a word so important and charged with metatheatrical significance, inserted into a metatheatrical moment of the play, and yet so elusive?

34 Martina (2016) 358: 'mentre da una parte è innegabile che il coro fosse diventato talmente estraneo all'azione da essere usato solo come elemento di divisione della commedia in parti, dall'altra si può anche pensare che la ricorrenza di un coro di gozzovigliatori possa essere intesa come un ritorno alle origini, vale a dire al κῶμος, la "baldoria", da cui era sorta la commedia antica'. See in particular Martina (2016) 349–350. Cf. Men. Aspis 247–248 ὄχλον ἄλλον ἀνθρώπων προσιόντα τουτονὶ / ὁρῶ μεθυόντων κτλ.; Dys. 230–231 καὶ γὰρ προσιόντας τούσδε Πανιστάς τινας / εἰς τὸν τόπον δεῦρ' ὑποβεβρεγμένους ὁρῶ; Epit. 169–170 μειρακυλλίων ὄχλος / εἰς τὸν τόπον τις ἔρχεθ' ὑποβεβρεγμένων; Pk. 261 μεθύοντα μειράκια προσέρχεται. Note that in Antiphanes' Dodonis (fr. 91 K.-A.) an ὄχλος of young men joining in revelry appears, and in Alexis' Kouris (fr. 107 K.-A.) a similar κῶμος is seen moving forward: both situations seem to cause worry to the speakers.

35 On audience's pleasure, see Duncan in this volume.

The adjective cannot simply mean 'amusing', because τερπνόν is already present in the text: this meaning would represent a pointless repetition and, most of all, the word would lose every metatheatrical meaning within the comedy, as the term itself seems to indicate. κωμῳδικόν, especially in a metatheatrical moment immediately following a ΧΟΡΟΥ, and (we could add) in a comedy without parabasis, must carry an important meaning in itself.

Nevertheless, the word is attested very few times in Aristophanes. Elsewhere, in Wasps (1020; 1047) it refers to the 'comic verses' of Aristophanes himself; in fr. 31 K.-A., from Aristophanes' Amphiaraos, it defines a mask; in Eccl. 371 it is an attribute of a chamber pot. In any case, the meaning of the word is not just 'typical of comedy as a genre', but more precisely is 'admitted and used concretely in a comedy as an instrument of expression', and it is so used for verses, masks, objects, and probably songs as well.

Aristophanes, in effect, always adopts the substantive κωμῳδία as 'play' – so the relative adjective identifies everything that can be used in a play: Ach. 377–378; Nub. 534–535; Vesp. 64–66; Ran. 12–15.

To indicate the 'genre' of comedy, Aristophanes adopts τρυγῳδία and the related adjectives τρυγῳδός and τρυγῳδικός. These are always used to qualify elements of the comic 'genre' per se, in particular the comic chorus and the general comic production (also implying, almost sometimes, a comparison with tragedy): Ach. 497–500; Vesp. 1535–1537; fr. 347.1 K.-A. (Thesmophoriazusae B'); fr. 150.1–3 K.-A. (Gerytades).

Therefore, admitting the first interpretation (a) proposed in this investigation: if Aristophanes does specify to the audience that the intrusion of the Young Woman, which is to create an undesired duet of what began as a monody, has in itself something 'pleasant' and 'comic', it is to make people aware that this circumstance will be amusing, that it fits well in a play, and that it belongs to this play, the one they are watching. By following, instead, the second interpretation (b), κωμῳδικόν would be remarking upon the difference between the χοροῦ (μέλος)'s 'non-involvement' in the comedy plot, and the duet of lines 893–923 as belonging to the plot. In simple terms, it would be as though Aristophanes were saying: 'Spectators, listen to me: you are going to hear a skoptic song. I know that you may find this annoying, boring, because you just heard this kind of song from the Chorus few minutes ago, but that was just entertainment, this one is nice and pertains to the facts of this play'.

In any case, Aristophanes might be explaining the dramaturgical meaning of his choices in composition at a moment in the play where the lyrical pieces could be misunderstood by the audience, i.e. just after a choral interlude which was disconnected from the plot and which represented one of the formal innovations of the Athenian theatre in that period. In fact, from this scene of Ecclesiazusae we can infer that, among other things, 'metatheatre' can be defined as a dramaturgical technique created – or at least used – in an original and comic way by the poet for speaking, through his characters, about his own compositional process. In this way Aristophanes could be guiding his audience through the complex mechanics of the dramaturgy, the music, and/or the assembly of scenes.

As pointed out at the beginning of this article, the aim of these pages is not to provide definitive solutions but to re-open a dialogue on this passage by focusing attention on the scene and placing more importance on the voice of the author at a very delicate moment within the play, and within ancient Greek comedy as a whole.

Mimes

# Anne Duncan 'Mime and Metatheatre'

Alone among the theatrical genres of the ancient Greco-Roman world, mime was performed unmasked, and by female as well as male actors. These two facts are probably linked.

At the risk of belabouring the obvious, I would like to linger for a moment over the logic of masked drama in the ancient world. Regular Greek drama – that is, the scripted, institutionalized drama of comedy, tragedy, and satyr play – employed masks. There are two reasons conventionally advanced by scholars to explain the custom of masked acting in the ancient world; we feel this convention needs explanation, since we do not share it. One reason often put forth is ritual: masked acting maintained the ritual connection with the worship of Dionysos, which employed masks as well.1 The other reason is practical: masks enabled spectators sitting far away from the stage to recognize different characters.2 A third reason that is less often discussed is ideological: masks made it 'possible' for male actors to play female characters; that is, masked acting naturalized male actors playing female characters.  This ideology seems to have carried over into Roman culture, with its proliferation of dramatic genres, although the reasoning for the ban on female actors in either culture is never made explicit.3

1 Jane Ellen Harrison and the 'Cambridge School' were ultimately behind this view of tragedy as ritual; see discussion in Csapo/Miller (2007) 1–38; Wise (1998) 61–62. Most scholars these days who discuss the religious connotations of dramatic masks do so in a more cautious way than Harrison and her contemporaries; see Wiles (2007) 1–12; Lada-Richards (1997) 96; Cartledge (1997) 8; Easterling (1997a) 37; 45; 49–52; Green (1994) 77–80. Scullion (2002b) 116–117 denies any ritual component to the Greek theatrical mask. On masks, see also Taplin pp. 24–27 and Paillard in this volume, pp. 74–76.

2 Taplin (2003) 14–15; Wiles (2007) 9–11; see also Wiles (1991) 132–133 on masked acting of Plautus' comedies in Republican Rome, which he argues was carried over from Greek traditions.

3 Interestingly, the ancient silence on the reason for all-male acting troupes (and choruses) has produced a similar silence in modern scholarship. Some scholars acknowledge in passing that acting was restricted to men, but seem to accept it as an inevitable consequence of Athenian gender ideology; see, e.g., Storey/Allan (2014) 45–46; Lightfoot (2002) 212; Bassi (1998) 141; Cartledge (1997) 21. Zeitlin (1996) 341–374 remains a classic statement of the influence of the feminine on Classical Athenian tragedy, but does not discuss masking per se, or why exactly women

For whatever reason, however, the Greco-Roman genre of mime departed from the norm of all-male theatrical troupes and employed female as well as male actors. With origins perhaps in fifth century Greece, mime spread throughout the Hellenistic Greek world, including Egypt, Sicily, and Magna Graecia, where it was likely influenced by native Italian dramatic forms to create the sprawling hybrid genre enjoyed throughout the Greco-Roman world.4 Mime seems to have taken off in popularity in Roman-controlled territories during the late Republican period, when traditional comedy and tragedy, as well as a welter of other dramatic genres, were still being performed regularly.5 In a world where most drama was performed by male actors who wore masks, in part, to be able to play female characters 'convincingly,' it seems that a real woman performing had to be unmasked to display her realness to the spectators. Mime actresses (mimae) were thus marked out as different by their apparent lack of theatrical artifice. They were also marked out, as all actors in the Roman world were, by their infamis social status: denied most citizen rights, and subject to corporal punishment, like slaves – 'legally branded as disgraceful,' as Edwards says.6

It may seem contradictory to begin a discussion of metatheatre with a consideration of a lack of theatrical artifice, but such was the nature of mime: contrary to 'establishment' or 'authorized' theatre, even as the different genres were performed virtually side-by-side. Mime was contrary to the traditional dramatic genres in that it encompassed a much broader range of subjects (from scripted tragic-style dramas to improvised comic burlesques of Christian sacraments), was performed in a much broader range of venues (from private homes to marketplaces), eschewed traditional conventions of decorum and dramatic restraint, and, of course, put forth female performers for men to gaze at. In this chapter, I will consider whether the sheer fact of women performing unmasked in mime functioned metatheatrically, as a way of calling attention to the theatrical

were excluded from performing. Hov (2015) 130–134 surveys histories of Western theatre, noting that they tend to ignore or downplay ancient female performers, especially when those histories focus on dramatic textual traditions rather than evidence from material culture.

4 On the history of mime, see Tsitsiridis (2011) 213–214; Panayotakis (2010) 1–2; 16–32; Csapo/ Slater (1995) 369–78; Beacham (1991) 129–39. The scattered 'literary' mime authors in the tradition, such as the fifth-century BC Sicilian Sophron and the third-century BC Alexandrians Herodas and Theocritus, are part but not all of the origin story of mime, as is the performance of a mime (including a female mime performer) in Xenophon's Symposium, which was written during the fourth century but set in the fifth century.

5 Panayotakis (2010) 26–27 discusses the reciprocal influence of comic mime and fabula palliata on each other in the second c. BC; Manuwald (2010) 1–15 gives an overview of Roman dramatic genres, known playwrights, and dates.

6 Edwards (1993) 123. See also French (1998) 296–99; Richlin (1992) 99–100.

artifice of conventional, all-male, masked drama. I will also consider whether there were other ways in which mime actresses compensated for their relative exposure by concealing other parts of themselves.

We might think about the potential metatheatricality of mime actresses in the context of two fragmentary mime scripts in Koine that have come to us from Egypt on the two sides of one piece of papyrus (P.Oxy.413). On the verso is the 'Charition mime' and on the recto, the 'jealous mistress mime,' both of which seem to have featured lead female roles.7 Both of these scripts have strong echoes of more 'literary' Greek texts, such as tragedy and the ancient novel, which featured prominent female characters.

The 'Charition mime' concerns a Greek woman, Charition, who is being held captive by a wicked king in India. What has survived on the papyrus is the escape scene, in which Charition has taken sanctuary in the temple of an Indian goddess, while her brother has arrived on a ship with other Greeks, including a fool, in order to rescue her. The ship's captain gets drunk, however, and the temple is surrounded by Indians. The fool farts so loudly that the noise and stench scatter the barbarians to a nearby river. The Amazon-like wives and daughters of the Indians return from a hunt and surround the temple and the fool farts again to disperse them. (These farts are clearly indicated in the stage directions on the papyrus.) The fool urges Charition to steal the temple offerings during their escape, but Charition refuses, saying that it is not right to do so. The Indians reappear after bathing in the river and the brother orders the fool to give them unmixed wine.  They all dance, and the Indian king sings a solo (in perfect, metrical Greek verse). Then the king and the chorus all pass out, and the Greeks tie them up. Charition comes back out of the temple, where she remained during the festivities. Her brother orders the Greeks to set sail and all the Greeks escape. During their escape, Charition prays to the Indian goddess to save them from their pursuers.

The plot of the 'Charition mime' is reminiscent of Euripides' Helen and Iphigenia among the Taurians, in that it concerns a Greek woman, held captive by a wicked foreign king, who escapes with a party of rescuing Greeks by sea. The drunk scene recalls the Cyclops episode in Homer's Odyssey and Euripides' Cyclops. Judging by the number of characters and other textual cues, the mime was a fairly elaborate, tightly-choreographed production with a chorus of 'Indian' women and an 'Indian' king speaking an invented, nonsensical 'Indian'

7 Texts in Rusten/Cunningham (2002) 376–400. On the Charition, see also Skotheim in this volume.

language, as well as music (drums are indicated in the stage directions), sound effects (including the farts from the fool) and many props. The presence of stage directions and musical notations on the papyrus indicates that it was a working script of some kind.8 Charition is presented as a respectable woman in this mime: she argues against stealing objects from a temple, does not get drunk, and behaves herself throughout. The chorus of 'Indian' women, on the other hand, may have been presented as exotic stereotypes: they threaten men with weapons, they speak and drink in public and bathe in rivers with men. To a Greek way of thinking, they are shameless – like the chorus of (male) satyrs in Euripides' Cyclops.

While Charition behaves with almost tragic decorum in what survives of this mime, the characters around her vigorously and enthusiastically undermine that decorum. The ship's captain, the fool, and the 'Indians' get drunk, and the fool farts – and talks about farting – constantly. It is as if Charition is a tragic heroine out of one of Euripides' escape-dramas, plunked down into the midst of an especially raunchy comedy or satyr play. The contrast between her behaviour and that of the other characters emphasizes the parody of tragedy, much like the scene in Aristophanes' Thesmophoriazusae where Euripides and his relative pretend to be Perseus and Andromeda from Euripides' Andromeda while the Scythian archer, who does not understand their tragic allusions, keeps breaking the mood with crude remarks.9 The mime sets up Charition as a representative of tragedy in a metatheatrical clash of genres.

The 'jealous mistress mime' on the other side of this papyrus is a little harder to reconstruct, because the version of the script written on the page seems to have been the working copy of the archimima; it has only her lines for several scenes, but ends with a group scene in which the other characters' lines are written but not hers.10 The mime seems to have concerned the mistress of a household devising a plot to frame a male slave for rape because he spurned her sexual advances, a story which has many parallels with Euripides' Hippolytus.

From what has survived of the script, the plot of the mime appears to be as follows: the jealous mistress desires to have sex with her slave Aesopus, but he is in love with Apollonia, another slave in the household. The mistress orders slaves to take the lovers into the forest, bind them to trees, and kill them. Apollonia is discovered inside the house, and the mistress orders her slaves to find

8 See discussion in Tsitsiridis (2011) 187–189; 198–206; Webb (2008) 108; 110–111; 129; Panayotakis (2006) 129; Andreassi (2001) 88–158.

9 Farmer (2017) 182–88 discusses the parodic and metatheatrical elements of this scene in Thesm. On this scene, see also Vespa in this volume, p. 197 ff.

10 Tsitsiridis (2011) 191–97.

Aesopus and bring him back dead.  At some point, Apollonia is also brought onstage, apparently but not actually dead either. When the mistress sees the (supposed) dead body of Apollonia alongside that of Aesopus, she asks the parasite to summon her husband and prepares to poison him. Malacus enters, carrying the poisoned wine, but Spinther, a loyal slave, switches the poisoned wine with regular wine. When the parasite deliberately drinks the wine (which the mistress believes is the wine she poisoned), she panics and has him carried inside so that she can find out what happens to him before her husband does. Spinther and the parasite come back onstage, while the mistress and the old master enter the house. The household slaves are all in on the plan to fool the mistress and Malacus, so when the two of them come back onstage, the parasite tells the mistress that her husband is dead, and she rejoices that her plan has worked. Then the slaves bring the (supposedly) dead body of the old master onstage, and someone (it is unclear who) mourns him, but the old master unexpectedly rises up and beats Malacus. When the old master sees the (supposedly) dead bodies of Aesopus and Apollonia, the other slaves reassure him that they are not really dead either, and presumably at some point they revive too.12

The plot of the 'jealous mistress mime' is one variant of the famous (or infamous) adultery mime,13 but it is also reminiscent of Euripides' Hippolytus, as well as several literary accounts of slave-owning women who feel unrequited passion for their slaves (and usually come to a bad end), such as Herodas's Mimiamb 5, the Life of Aesop, and Book 10 of Apuleius' Golden Ass. 14 The complicated plot involving attempted murder and people who feign death evokes the almost soap-operatic plots of several Greek novels, including the Ephesian Tale of Xenophon and the Aethiopian Story of Heliodorus.15

11 Tsitsiridis (2011) 190.

12 See discussion in Tsitsiridis (2011) 189–197, who argues that it is the mistress who pretends to mourn the old master in the final scene, rather than Spinther or the parasite, as others have argued. See also Webb (2008) 109–112; 135; Panayotakis (2006) 129; Andreassi (2001) 88–158. 13 See n. 19 below.

14 Mimiamb 5 was probably titled ΖΗΛΟΤΥΠΟΣ, even though the word is not used in the text: Tsitsiridis (2011) 206; Fantham (1986) 52. Cf. the story of Potiphar's wife and Joseph in Genesis 39.1–20.

15 Tsitsiridis (2011) 206–09.

The role of the jealous mistress appears to have been a starring villain role, much like Phaedra or Clytemnestra or Medea in tragedy.  Indeed, the plot of this mime – a foul-mouthed Phaedra lusting after her (theoretically accessible) slave, rather than her (tragically taboo) stepson – seems to be a comic burlesque of tragedy. It removes the tragic elements (decorous language, elite social status, the machinations of the gods) to reveal a squalid truth: the woman is an immoral criminal. Put another way, the mime removes the female mask, elaborate robes, and tasteful obfuscation of traditional tragic

language to reveal a real woman saying and doing nasty things. Many female characters in the P.Oxy.413 scripts and in other extant mime script fragments, such as those of Decimus Laberius, display stereotypical negative female traits: lechery, greed, deceitfulness, drunkenness.18 For example, Laberius' The Seamstress (Belonistria) contained the lines:

domina nostra privignum suum amat efflictim

Our mistress is passionately in love with her stepson.19

16 All translations are mine.

17 See Webb (2008) 109 and n. 71.

18 Panayotakis (2010) 6–7 and (2006) 124–125 cautions against reading mime scripts for real women's voices, noting that female characters in mime are 'as conventional and artificial in their behaviour as their female counterparts in the other genres of popular theatre'.

19 Panayotakis (2010) 142–146.

Both the 'jealous mistress' mime from P.Oxy.413 and Laberius' The Seamstress are scripted examples of the adultery mime, which we know could also be performed entirely improvised. Webb has summarized the adultery mime's plot succinctly: 'A clever young wife and her lover are surprised by her slow-witted husband.' 20 Endless variations were possible: sometimes the lover is discovered by the husband; sometimes the wife successfully conceals him from her husband. Because of its simplicity (only three actors were required, and minimal props), as well as its universal appeal, the adultery mime enjoyed lasting popularity across the Greco-Roman world. Undoubtedly, it played a role in associating mimae with shameless behavior.

If audiences tended to conflate mimae with the stereotypical female characters they played, this might explain why so many of our ancient sources on mimae assume and imply that they are prostitutes. Cicero is a veritable gold mine of slut-shaming digs against mime actresses. In a private letter to a friend, he reveals his consternation at attending a dinner party given in a respectable equestrian's house and seeing the mima Cytheris reclining in a place of honour just below the host (Cic.

I had been reclining at the ninth hour when I wrote a copy of this to you on tablets. 'Where?' At Volumnius Eutrapelus', and indeed, Atticus is seated above me, Verrius below me, friends of yours. Are you astonished that our slavery has been made so cheerful? What, then, should I do? (I ask your advice, since you listen to a philosopher). Should I be troubled, should I torture myself? What should I pursue? Then for how long? 'Live in

20 Webb (2008) 105. On the adultery mime, see Panayotakis (2010) 10–11 and (2006) 128; Webb (2008) 105–112; Fountoulakis (2000) 143; Fantham (1989) 158; Reynolds (1946).

21 On Roman banquet seating, see Plut. Mor. 619a-b and f; Dunbabin (2003) 22–23; 39–40 and fig.21; D'Arms (1999) 313–14; Dunbabin (1991) 122–128.

your books,' you say. Do you think that I am doing anything else, or that I can live if I did not live in my books? But of them there is not even an abundance, but a certain measure; when I departed from these people, although I have very little interest in dinner (which is one problème you posed to the philosopher Dio), nevertheless what I should rather do, before I take myself to bed, I cannot come up with. Listen to the rest: Cytheris reclined below Eutrapelus. You say, 'Was the Cicero, 'whom they gazed at earnestly, toward whose face Greeks turned their own faces,' at this banquet?' By Hercules, I did not suspect that she would be there. But nevertheless, not even that famous Socratic Aristippus blushed when it was brought up that he kept Lais. He said, 'I have Lais, I am not had by Lais' (this is better in Greek; you will translate if you wish). But nothing of those sorts of things ever excited me, neither as a youth, nor now as an old man. I am delighted by a banquet; there I say what comes into the sole, as it is said, and I turn a groan into the biggest laughs.

In this letter, Cicero takes pains to establish that he did not attend the party in the hopes of seeing Cytheris, and that he thought her presence there was distasteful, but that he was equal to the situation. His quotation from the philosopher Aristippus serves three functions. It compares the actress Cytheris to Lais, a famous Greek prostitute.22 It aligns Cicero with grammatical and sexual activity ('I have Lais'), the proper domain of a Roman man, rather than passivity ('I am had by Lais'). Finally, it connects the letter writer and his addressee in an affirmation of shared, exclusive, elite status by signaling that the Latin quotation is originally a Greek quotation, which they both can read.

Cicero plays on the same class snobbery in his public speech prosecuting Verres for corruption, alleging that Verres forced the respectable wives of his army officers to mingle socially against their will with his girlfriend, the mima Tertia (Cic. 2 Verr. 5.12.31):23

huc Tertia illa perducta per dolum atque insidias ab Rhodio tibicine maximas in istius castris effecisse dicitur turbas, cum indigne pateretur uxor Cleomenis Syracusani, nobilis mulier, itemque uxor Aeschrionis, honesto loco nata, in conventum suum mimi Isidori filiam venisse. iste autem Hannibal, qui in suis castris virtute putaret oportere non genere certari, sic hanc Tertiam dilexit ut eam secum ex provincia deportaret.

This Tertia, having been led on by a trick and by the greatest plots away from her Rhodian flute-player, is said to have created a great disturbance in that camp, as the wife of Cleomenes the Syracusan, a woman of noble birth, and the wife of Aeschrion, born to high rank, endured it with outrage that the daughter of Isidorus the mime had come into their company. But that Hannibal now, who thought that in his army there ought to be a competition of excellence, not birth, so loved this Tertia, that he transported her with him out of the province.

22 On Lais II, see McClure (2003) 55; 118.

23 See also 2 Verr. 3.34.78; 5.16.40.

As part of his general character assassination against Antony in the Philippics, Cicero sneers that Antony spent his dissolute youth with his mentem and his mentum, his mind and his chin, in the laps of mime actresses (Cic. Phil. 13.24):

equidem negare non possum a Caesare Hirtium ornatum, sed illa ornamenta in virtute et in industria posita lucent. tu vero qui te ab eodem Caesare ornatum negare non potes, quid esses, si tibi ille non tam multa tribuisset? ecquo te tua virtus provexisset, ecquo genus? in lustris, popinis, alea, vino tempus aetatis omne compsuisses, ut faciebas, cum in gremiis mimarum mentum mentemque deponeres.

Indeed, I cannot deny that Hirtius was honored by Caesar, but such honors shine forth when they are bestowed upon worth and hard work. You, in fact, who cannot deny that you were honored by the same Caesar, what would you be, if Caesar had not given you so much? Where would your worth and your birth have gotten you? You would have spent your entire life in brothels, in cook-shops, in dice, in wine, as you used to do when you were laying your chin and your mind in the laps of actresses.

Cicero is not our only source for Roman attitudes about mimae. Horace refers to mime actresses as safe (but not respectable) sexual outlets for young men who do not want to risk committing adultery with other men's wives (Hor. Sat. 1.2. 55–59):

ut quondam Marsaeus, amator Originis ille, (55) qui patrium mimae donat fundumque Laremque, 'nil fuerit mi' inquit 'cum uxoribus umquam alienis.' verum est cum mimis, est cum meretricibus, unde fama malum gravius quam res trahit.

Just as Marsaeus, the lover of Origo, He who gives his estate and his household gods to a mima, Says 'I don't have any dealings with other men's wives.' It is true that he does have dealings with mimae, with prostitutes, from which His reputation suffers more than his estate.

Mimae and meretrices, mime actresses and prostitutes, are equated in line 58. They are depicted as legal but disreputable sexual outlets.24 In one of his satires, Juvenal invokes the spectre of being a member of a mime troupe as a fate worse than death (Juv. 8.196–97):25

24 See discussion in Richlin (1992) 174–77; she notes at 176 that the warning scenes of lovers being chased off by angry husbands in this poem 'owe their theatrical force to mime'.

25 McCullough (2008) 205 argues that Juvenal exhibits the same class snobbery in his sixth satire, when he rails against the elite woman training to be a gladiator (6.246–67); she has betrayed both her sex and her station. See also Coleman (2000) 497.

mortem sic quisquam exhorruit, ut sit zelotypus Thymeles, stupidi collega Corinthi?

Did anyone ever fear death so much that he would be The jealous husband of Thymele, or the colleague of the fool Corinthus?

The zelotypus and the stupidus were stock mime characters, as was the adulterous wife.26 In this passage, Juvenal names Thymele as a mima who played the adulterous wife. In another satire, Juvenal refers to Thymele as having been 'handed over' (summissa) to one man by another as a bribe (Juv. 1.30–36):

It is hard not to write satire! For who could be so enduring of This wretched city, so hardened, that he could contain himself, When the new litter approaches of the lawyer Matho, Full of himself, and after him the informer against his noble patron Who quickly will seize what remains from our plundered nobles, Whom Massa fears, whom Carus coaxes With a bribe, and to whom Thymele was handed over by quaking Latinus?

 In a neat bit of circular logic, the cultural justification for assigning actors to the infamis status category is their immoral behavior, and then their infamis status is cited as evidence of their immoral behavior. Prostitutes, of course, were also infamis.

According to some accounts, mime actresses were known for baring more than their heads while performing. By 173 BC, the annual festival of the goddess Flora in Rome, the Ludi Florales or Floralia, was officially given over mostly to mime performance.27 An anecdote from Valerius Maximus affirms the connection between mime, specifically mime actresses, and the Floralia. Cato the Younger, who had a reputation for traditionalism like his great-grandfather Cato the Censor's, attended the Floralia at some point during the mid-first century BC but

26 Panayotakis (2010) 31; Webb (2008) 96; 105–07; Barton (1993) 139; Fantham (1986) 54; Reynolds (1946).

27 Ov. Fast. 5.327–328; Plin. HN 18.69.286; Tsitsiridis (2011) 213; Wiseman (1999) 196; Fantham (1989) 155.

discovered that the rest of the audience would prefer it if his inhibiting presence were not there (Val. Max. 2.10.8):

eodem ludos Florales, quos Messius aedilis faciebat, spectante populus ut mimae nudarentur postulare erubuit. quod cum ex Favonio amicissimo sibi una sedente cognosset, discessit e theatro, ne praesentia sua spectaculi consuetudine impediret.

In the same place the people were watching the Floralia, which Messius was producing as aedile, but they were embarrassed to demand that the mime actresses strip. When [Cato] learned this from his good friend Favonius, who was sitting with him, he left the theatre so that his presence would not prevent the customary show.

This anecdote has often been cited as evidence that mime actresses usually performed stripteases,28 along with the story of Theodora's routine with the geese in Procopius' sixth-century CE Secret History. (Procopius claims that one of the future empress Theodora's mime routines involved stripping down to her panties, lying on her back, and allowing trained geese to peck barley grains off of her nearly-nude body.29) Webb has noted, however, that these two anecdotes constitute our only specific mentions of stripping or nudity as a regular part of mime performance.30 Regardless of how frequently striptease was part of mime actresses' performances, their reputations were permanently associated with the infamia of their occupation.

So it seems quite possible that male spectators of mime performances assumed that the women performing were as promiscuous and immoral as the stereotypical adulteress characters they played unmasked. The actress' lack of mask would have encouraged the impulse to conflate the actress with the role, as it presented the illusion of authenticity or naturalness or realness to the spectators. The lack of scripts, at least for improvised mimes, and the lack of a stage, for mimes performed in the streets (or in dining rooms), might have added to that sense of 'realness'. At the same time, watching a woman or women perform in mime may have denaturalized traditional masked, scripted drama.   It is

28 Panayotakis (2010) 7; Wiseman (1999) 197; Barton (1993) 169 n. 111; Beacham (1991) 129.

29 Procop. Anecd. 9.20–23; see Potter (2015) 27; Webb (2008) 5–6.

30 Webb (2008) 100–101. See also Hov (2015) 139–140.

fascinating that mime coexisted with traditional tragedy and comedy for quite some time. The symbolic (and perhaps literal) nakedness of mime actresses could be taken as a comic critique of the excessive trappings and smothering artifice of traditional drama.

On the other hand, many mime actresses used stage names, which reintroduces the idea of playing a character, or creating distance between performer and spectator. Some mime actresses' names that have come down to us from literary or epigraphic sources are very clearly stage names, such as Dionysia, Thymele ('Stage'), Emphasis ('Outward appearance, presentation'), Phoebe ('Radiant,' or perhaps a reference to Artemis), Eucharis ('Graceful'), Thalassia ('Ocean'), Arete ('Excellence'), Ecloga ('Eclogue'), and on the Latin side Arbuscula ('Shrub' – she was supposedly very short and very witty). Other known names of mime actresses are less certainly stage names, such as Bassilla (perhaps 'Queen') or Helladia (perhaps 'Girl from Hellas').31 I should note that it is difficult to guess a mima's ethnic origin from her stage name, in the case of a name like Dionysia, especially when performers traveled widely and, it seems reasonable to speculate, many were bilingual.32 Bassilla, for example, may have had the full name Julia Bassilla; her funeral inscription is in Homeric-style Greek, and she was buried in Aquileia, in far northeastern Italy.33 Stage names do not seem to have been as common among male mime actors. The male mime actor who commissioned Bassilla's tombstone was named Herakleides. Tertia, Verres' girlfriend, was the daughter of a mime actor named Isidorus.34 Latinus frequently performed alongside Thymele.35 One male mime actor who may have used a stage name was Protogenes ('Firstborn'), from the early third century BC.36 Male actors in other, more prestigious genres seem to have performed under their real

31 Panayotakis (2010) 16 agrees that Eucharis, Ecloga, Cytheris, and Thalassia were stage names. On Ecloga, see also Höschele (2013) 37 and n. 3. Graf (1991) 48 notes that Dionysia is clearly a stage name. See also Sifakis (1966) 272.

32 On bilingualism (and possibly trilingualism) among performers in Republican Italy, see Rawson (1985) 101–104. On ethnicities vs. names of actors, Rawson (102–103 and n. 32) notes the case of an actor named Cannutius, whom Plutarch (Brut. 21.3) describes as a Greek with an Italian name.

33 IG XIV 2342; see Webb (2008) 22; 45–46; 94; 111; Lada-Richards (2007) 30; Prauscello (2004); Webb (2002) 301; Csapo/Slater (1995) 377.

34 Cic. 2 Verr. 3.34.78; 5.12.31; 5.16.40; see Panayotakis (2006) 134; Wiseman (1998) 71; Garton (1964) 239.

35 Reynolds (1946) 82 and n. 2.

36 Panayotakis (2010) 16; 23–24.

names: on the Greek side, for example, we know of fourth-century BC tragic actors named Polos, Theodoros, and Thettalos; a fifth-century BC comic actor named Kallipides;37 on the Roman side, the late Republican comic actor Roscius and the tragic actor Aesopus.38 To what extent did these mime actresses' clearly assumed names undermine the audience's impression that they were watching real, authentic women performing without masks? Did mimae adopt these stage names, at least in part, to create some distance between themselves and the roles they played? Was the stage name the mask?

Acting was a socially and legally stigmatized occupation in the Roman world. Actors were legally classified as infamis persons, along with prostitutes, gladiators, pimps, and gladiator-trainers.39 Greek mimes performing in Roman-controlled territories would encounter this sense of stigma from their audiences, even if acting was less stigmatized in their native Greece. Infamis occupations had in common that their practitioners made a living from the display and use of their own or others' bodies. As it happens, gladiators also used stage names; they adopted names that emphasized either their ferocity, like Achilles, Tiger, or Killer, or their sex appeal, like Adonis or Hermes. Female gladiators, doubly stigmatized, fought under names like Amazonia or Achilleia.40 In thinking about who uses stage names and why, I would like to explore a modern comparandum briefly.

There are a number of modern occupations whose practitioners use stage names: some actors and pop singers do, on the more respectable end of the performance spectrum, as well as virtually all rappers, professional wrestlers, drag queens, strippers, porn stars, and prostitutes. Stephanie Clifford, for example, the porn star who broke her nondisclosure agreement with Donald Trump to reveal that they had an affair while he was married to Melania Trump, performs and directs under the stage name Stormy Daniels. As the sociologist Erving Goffman observed decades ago in his study Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity, people in socially stigmatized occupations often adopt stage names as one strategy to 'manage' (that is, contain) the secret of what they do for a living from those they do not wish to know, such as family members and

37 On Kallipides, see Vespa in this volume, pp. 203–205.

38 Rawson (1985) 112 provides a list of Republican Roman male actors whose names seem to reflect regional origins in Italy outside Rome; none of them sounds like a stage name. Garton (1964) 239, however, lists several plausible Greek and Roman stage names of male actors, without specifying the genres in which they performed.

39 French (1998) 296–99; Edwards (1993) 123–26.

40 McCullough (2008) 199; Coleman (2000) 487; Ewigleben (2000) 127 and fig. 137; Robert (1971) 297–301; Sifakis (1966) 272.

neighbors.41 In her excellent monograph G-Strings and Sympathy: Strip Club Regulars and Male Desire, Katherine Frank analyses male spectators at strip clubs from the perspectives of both a sociologist and a stripper, as she supported herself through graduate school in sociology by stripping. She notes that every stripper she worked with adopted a stage name, in order to create some distance between their onstage persona and their 'real' identity, often for the purposes of concealing the nature of their work from family or friends. Some strippers had a second stage name ready to reveal to regular customers who wanted to 'get backstage,' to learn something 'real' about the strippers they found appealing – to gain some sort of intimacy.42 Other studies of strippers have also emphasized the use of stage names as a way of creating a bit of distance between their stripper personas and their 'real selves'. Thompson et al. describe how quickly strippers could move between their onstage (stage name) persona and their offstage (real name) identity, observing that when strippers were being interviewed by a sociological researcher in between dances in the strip club, they would cover their breasts as they talked in the third person about their work as 'Angel' or 'Cheyenne':

Who am I kiddin'? That was Angel talkin'. Hell, I'm a mother. I shouldn't even be in a place like this.

When I go out there on that stage I quit being me and just start being Cheyenne. I guess you could say Cheyenne is my wild side.

Then, when the interview was over, the strippers would uncover themselves, signaling the resumption of their stage personas and stage names, and leave the interviewer in order to mingle with customers again.43

There is some evidence that mime actresses in the ancient world felt defensive about their stigmatized occupation. The tombstones of Eucharis and Bassilla feature elaborate inscriptions emphasizing their skill. Eucharis is called docta and erodita on her first century BC epitaph (docta, erodita omnes artes virgo), 'trained' or perhaps 'learned'. Her epitaph asserts that she was 'the first [woman] to appear on the Greek stage before the people' (Graeca in scaenica prima populo apparui) (CIL 6.10096):44

41 Goffman (1963).

42 Frank (2002) 192–193. The customer's impulse to ask a stripper for her real name is apparently common enough that a second stage name is a common stratagem.

43 Thompson/Harred/Burks (2003) 565–566.

44 See Rawson (1985) 102 n. 31.

Eucharis Linciniae docta erodita omnes artes virgo vixit an XIIII heus oculo errante quei aspicis leti domus morare gressum et titulum nostrum perlege amor parentis quem dedit natae suae ubei se reliquiae conlocarent corporis heic viridis aetas cum floreret artibus crescent et aevo gloriam conscenderet properavit hora tristis fatalis mea et denegavit ultra veitae spiritum docta erodita paene musarum manu quae modo nobilium ludos decoravi choro et Graeca in scaenica prima populo apparui en hoc in tumulo cinerem nostri corporis infistae parcae deposierunt carmine stadium patronae cura amor laudes decus silent ambusto corpore et leto tacent reliqui fletum nata genitori meo et antecessi genita post leti diem bis hic septeni mecum natales dies tenebris tenentur ditis aeterna domu rogo ut discedens terram mihi dicas levem

#### Eucharis Liciniae

Educated and trained in all the arts; a girl who lived 14 years You there, as you look upon the house of death with a wandering eye, slow your step and carefully read our inscription which a father's love gave to his daughter where the remains of her body are buried. Just as my young life was blossoming and my skills were growing and in time was ascending to glory, the mournful ordained hour rushed upon me and denied me any further breath of life. I was educated and trained almost as if by the hand of the Muses. I adorned the games of the nobles in a chorus, and I first appeared before the people in a Greek play. But now in this tomb the hostile Fates have placed the ashes of my body along with a poem. Devotion to a female patron, effort, love, praise, beauty are silenced by my burned body and stilled by my death. A daughter, I left behind weeping for my father, and I preceded him in the day of my death, although born after him. Now my fourteenth birthday is observed here in the shadows, in the ageless house of Death. I ask that upon departing you tell the earth to lie lightly upon me.

Bassilla's third century CE epitaph says that she displayed 'every kind of skill in the mimes' (παντοίης ἀρετῆς ἐν μείμοις) (IG XIV 2342):

Τὴν πολλοῖς δήμοισι πάρος, πολλαῖς δὲ πόλεσσι δόξαν φωνάεσσαν ἐνὶ σκηναῖσι λαβοῦσαν παντοίης ἀρετῆς ἐν μείμοις, εἶτα χοροῖσι, πολλάκις ἐν θυμέλαις, ἀλλ' οὐχ οὕτω δὲ θανούσῃ, 45 τῇ δεκάτῃ Μούσῃ, τὸ λαλεῖν σοφὸς Ηρακλείδης μειμάδι Βασσίλλῃ στήλην θέτο βιολόγος φῶς. ἣ δὴ καὶ νέκυς οὖσα ἴσην βίου ἔλλαχε τειμήν, μουσικὸν εἰς δάπεδον σῶμ' ἀναπαυσάμενη. Ταῦτα οἱ σύσκηνοί σου λέγουσιν· εὐψύχει, Βάσσιλλα, οὐδεὶς ἀθάνατος'

[To the woman,] Formerly in many towns and many cities having resounding fame onstage for every kind of excellence in mime, and then in dances, To her having died, often onstage, but never in that way, To her, the tenth Muse, Herakleides wise in babbling, A man and an actor, erected this stele to the mime Bassilla. But she even being dead has obtained an equal honor as in life, Resting her body in the Muses' ground. These things her fellow actors say to her: Farewell, Bassilla, no one is immortal!

These epitaphs' emphasis on training and skill, their mentions of prestigious contests and elite audiences, their references to the Muses, all push back against acting's disreputable status.

In the Satires, Horace says that it is enough for him if Maecenas alone applauds his work, just as 'the courageous actress Arbuscula' said about the members of the equestrian class when she was hissed by the populace (Hor. Sat. 1.10.76–77):

nam satis est equitem mihi plaudere, ut audax, contemptis aliis, explosa Arbuscula dixit

It is enough for me to please an equestrian, just as the bold Arbuscula said, having been hissed by the despicable crowd

Appeals to the educated elite, whether through emphasizing training, skill, performing in Greek plays (in Italy), or winning favour with the equestrians (even if not with the plebs) are all ways of staking a claim to a certain kind of respectability.

45 Taking Prauscello's (2004) 'metatheatrical' reading of this line: she 'died' onstage many times before dying in real life (but not in the way her characters died onstage). The previous line's term χοροῖσι might be translated 'dances' or 'songs'.

For women who feel overly exposed, the stage name is a different kind of covering. It creates a theatrical persona, even in an improvised art form, as mime could be, or a nonverbal art form, as stripping usually is. The persona bears the brunt of the male gaze, and the stigma associated with exposing oneself to that gaze.46 The unmasked mime actress promised to reveal all, to unmask Greco-Roman theatrical conventions in a comical and exciting shedding of pretension, to uncover the real body of a real woman before the public gaze – but she hid herself behind a stage name, as if behind a pair of sunglasses, or a professional detachment. In his essay on the Parisian striptease, Roland Barthes asserts that when professional striptease dancers remove all their clothes, they 'wrap themselves in a miraculous ease which constantly clothes them, affords them the icy indifference of skilful practitioners haughtily taking refuge in the certitude of their technique: their knowledge clothes them like a garment'. 47 What was the knowledge that mime actresses clothed themselves in? The knowledge that theatre is never wholly fake or wholly real; that the real woman, performing before a crowd of men who were used to seeing men in female masks, was another theatricalized woman. Mime actresses functioned metatheatrically; their performances called attention to the conventions and artifice of traditional Greco-Roman masked, all-male drama. They accomplished this metatheatrical critique in a conventionally theatrical way, however, by performing a role, living up to their stage name, becoming 'Dionysia' or 'Arbuscula', 'Angel' or 'Cheyenne'.

46 Hov (2015) 140–142 also connects the male gaze to the infamy of specifically female performance in Greco-Roman Antiquity.

47 Barthes (2013) 167.

# Abbreviations

# Bibliography

Abel (1963): Lionel Abel, Metatheatre: A New View of Dramatic Form, New York.

Abel (1989): Lionel Abel, 'The Hero of Metatheater', in: Partisan Review 56, 214–24 (now in: Lionel Abel, Tragedy and Metatheatre: Essays on Dramatic Form, New York, 2003, 166–77).

Abel (2003): Lionel Abel, Tragedy and Metatheatre. Essays on Dramatic Form, New York.

Adrados (1975): Rodríguez Adrados (1975) Francisco Rodríguez Adrados, Festival, Comedy and Tragedy: The Greek Origins of Theatre, , transl. by Christopher Holme, Leiden.

Andreassi (2001): Mario Andreassi, Mimi Greci in Egitto: Charition e Moicheutria, Bari.

Bassi (1998), Karen Bassi, Acting Like Men: Gender, Drama, & Nostalgia in Ancient Greece, Ann Arbor.

Beacham (1991): Richard C. Beacham, The Roman Theatre and Its Audience, Cambridge (MA).

Open Access. © 2021 Elodie Paillard and Silvia Milanezi, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110716559-014

Bexley (2015): Erica Bexley, 'What is Dramatic Recitation?', Mnemosyne 68.5, 774–793. Biehl (1989): Werner Biehl (ed.), Euripides. Troades, Heidelberg.

Bierl (2019b): Anton Bierl, 'Genre Criticism', in: Alan Sommerstein (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Greek Comedy, New York, 384–385.

Brown (2012): Andrew Brown, 'Theatre of Judgment: Space, Spectators, and the Epistemologies of Law in Bartholomew Fair', in: Early Theatre 15.2, 154–167.

Burkert (1981): Walter Burkert, 'Seven Against Thebes: An Oral Tradition between Babylonian Magic and Greek Literature', in: Carlo Brillante, Mario Cantilena and Carlo Odo Pavese (eds.), I poemi epici rapsodici non omerici e la tradizione orale (Atti del convegno di Venezia, 28–30 settembre 1977), Padua, 29–48.

Burkert (1985): Walter Burkert, Greek Religion, Cambridge (MA).

Burns (1972): Elizabeth Burns, Theatricality: A Study of Convention in the Theatre and in Social Life, London.

Calame (2017): Claude Calame, La tragédie chorale: poésie grecque et rituel musical, Paris. Calderwood (1971): James L. Calderwood, Shakespearean Metadrama, Minneapolis.

Canevaro/Harris (2012): Mirko Canevaro and Edward M. Harris, 'The Documents in Andocides' On the Mysteries', in: The Classical Quarterly 62, 98–129.

Capone (1935): Gone Capone, L'arte scenica degli attori tragici greci, Padova.

Thiercy and Michel Menu (eds.), Aristophane: la langue, la scène, la cité, Bari, 457–479. Detienne (1981): Marcel Detienne, L'invention de la mythologie, Paris.

Domingo (2006): Marc Domingo Gygax, 'Plutarch on Alcibiades' Return to Athens', in: Mnemosyne 59, 481–500.

Dunbabin (1991): Katherine Dunbabin, 'Triclinium and Stibadium', in: William Slater (ed.), Dining in a Classical Context, Ann Arbor, 121–148.

Duncan/Liapis (2018): Anne Duncan and Vayos Liapis (eds.), 'Theatre Performance after the Fifth Century', in: Vayos Liapis and Antonis K. Petrides (eds.), Greek Tragedy After the Fifth Century. A Survey from ca. 400 BC to ca. AD 400, Cambridge, 180–203.

Garvie (2009): Alexander F. Garvie (ed.), Aeschylus: Persae, Oxford.

Giannotti (2021 forthcoming): Andrea Giannotti, 'Spatial Memory and the Public-Announcement Clause: The Case of Early Athenian Inscribed Public Honours', in: Irene Berti, Chiara Lasagni, and Daniela Marchiandi (eds.), Inscribing Space. Topography and Communication in Attic Epigraphy, Alessandria.

Giannopoulou (2000): Vasiliki Giannopoulou, 'Divine Agency and "Tyche" in Euripides' "Ion": Ambiguity and Shifting Perspectives', in: Illinois Classical Studies 24/25, 257–71.

Gildenhard/Revermann (2010): Ingo Gildenhard and Martin Revermann (eds.), Beyond the Fifth Century: Interactions with Greek Tragedy from the Fourth Century BCE to the Middle Ages, Berlin.

Girshausen (1999): Theo Girshausen, Ursprungszeiten des Theaters. Das Theater der Antike, Berlin.

Goette (2014): Hans Rupprecht Goette, 'The Archaeology of the "Rural" Dionysia in Attica', in: Eric Csapo, Hans Rupprecht Goette, John Richard Green, and Peter Wilson (eds.), Greek Theatre in the Fourth Century BC, Berlin, 77–105.

Goette (2020): Hans Rupprecht Goette, 'The Development of Greek Theater in Athens c. 530–470 BCE', in: Marion Meyer and Gianfranco Adornato (eds.), Innovations and Inventions in Athens 530 to 470 BCE – Two Crucial Generations, Wien, 203–210.

Goffman (1963): Erving Goffman, Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity, Englewood Cliffs (NJ).

Goldhill (1984): Simon Goldhill, Language, Sexuality, Narrative: The Oresteia, Cambridge. Goldhill (1986): Simon Goldhill, Reading Greek Tragedy, Cambridge.

Goldhill (1987): Simon Goldhill 'The Great Dionysia and Civic Ideology', in: The Journal of Hellenic Studies 107, 58–76 (now in: Goldhill (1990): Simon Goldhill, 'The Great Dionysia and Civic Ideology', in: John J. Winkler and Froma I. Zeitlin (eds.), Nothing to Do With Dionysos? Athenian Drama in Its Social Context, Princeton, 97–129).

Goldhill (1994): Simon Goldhill, 'Representing Democracy: Women at the Great Dionysia', in: Robin Osborne and Simon Hornblower (eds.), Ritual, Finance, Politics. Athenian Democratic Accounts Presented to David Lewis, Oxford, 347–369.

Goldhill (1997): Simon Goldhill, 'The Audience of Athenian Tragedy', in: Patricia Easterling (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy, Cambridge, 54–68.

Gruen (1992): Erich S. Gruen, Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome, Ithaca (NY).

Günther (2002): Linda-Marie Günther 'Griechische Bühnenkunst bei den römischen Siegesspielen des L. Anicius (166 v. Chr.) – Klamauk oder Parodie?' in: Norbert Ehrhardt and Linda-Marie Günther (eds.), Wiederstand-Anpassung-Integration. Die griechische Staatenwelt und Rom, 121–134.

Halleran (1985): Michael H. Halleran, Stagecraft in Euripides, London/Sydney.

Harris (1995): Edward M. Harris, Aeschines and the Athenian Politics, Oxford.

Heath (2006): Malcolm Heath, 'The "Social Function" of Tragedy: Clarifications and Questions', in: Douglas L. Cairns and Vayos Liapis (eds.), Dionysalexandros: Essays on Aeschylus and His Fellow Tragedians in Honour of Alexander F. Garvie, Swansea, 253–281.

Kullmann (1993): Wolfgang Kullmann, 'Die "Rolle" des euripideischen Pentheus. Haben die Bakchen eine "metatheatralische" Bedeutung?', in: Glenn W. Most, Hubert Petersmann and Adolf M. Ritter (eds.), Philanthropia kai Eusebeia. Festschrift für Albrecht Dihle zum 70. Geburtstag, Göttingen, 248–263.

Kumiega (1985): Jennifer Kumiega, Theater of Grotowski, London.

Lada-

Richards (1997): Ismene Lada-Richards, '"Estrangement" or "Reincarnation"?: Performers and Performance on the Classical Athenian Stage', in: Arion 5.2 66–107.

Lada-

Richards (2007): Ismene Lada-Richards, Silent Eloquence: Lucian and Pantomime Dancing, London.

Lamari (2017): Anna Lamari, Reperforming Greek Tragedy. Theater, Politics, and Cultural Mobility in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC, Berlin/Boston.

Lambert (2012): Stephen D. Lambert, Inscribed Athenian Laws and Decrees 352/1–322/1 BC. Epigraphical Essays, Leiden/Boston.

Lambert (2017): Stephen D. Lambert, Inscribed Athenian Laws and Decrees in the Age of Demosthenes. Historical Essays, Leiden/Boston.

Lee, K. (1976): Kevin H. Lee (ed.), Euripides:Troades, Basingstoke.

Legangneux (2000): Patricia Legangneux, 'Les scènes de supplication dans la tragédie grecque', in: Lalies. Langue et littérature: Actes des sessions de linguistique et de littérature 20, 175–188.

Le Guen (1995): Brigitte Le Guen, 'Théâtre et cités à l'époque hellénistique: « Mort de la cité – mort du théâtre »?', Revue des études grecques 108, 59–90.

Le Guen (2018): Brigitte Le Guen, 'Beyond Athens: the Expansion of Greek Tragedy from the Fourth Century Onwards', in: Vayos Liapis and Antonis K. Petrides (eds.), Greek Tragedy After the Fifth Century. A Survey from ca. 400 BC to ca. AD 400, Cambridge, 149–179.

Lehmann (1999): Hans-Thies Lehmann, Postdramatische Theater. Verlag der Autoren, Frankfurt am Main.

### 272 Bibliography

Maass (1972): Michael Maass, Die Prohedrie des Dionysostheaters in Athen, München. MacDowell (1971): Douglas M. MacDowell (ed.), Aristophanes: Wasps, Oxford.

Maidment (1935): Kenneth J. Maidment, 'The Later Comic Chorus', in: The Classical Quarterly 29.1, 1–24.

Manetti (2005): Giovanni Manetti, 'Aristotele e la metafora. Conoscenza, similarità, azione, enunciazione', in: Anna Maria Lorusso (ed.), Metafora e conoscenza, Milano 2005, 27–67. Manuwald (2010): Gesine Manuwald, Roman Drama: A Reader, London.

Medda (2013): Enrico Medda, 'Drammaturgia e critica del testo (I).Testo e scena in Aesch. Ag. 1649–54', in: Enrico Medda, La sagezza dell'illusione. Studi sul teatro greco, Pisa, 287–306.

Medda et al. (2006): Enrico Medda, Maria Serena Mirto and Maria Pia Pattoni (eds.), ΩΜΩΙΔΟΤΡΑΓΩΙΔΙΑ. Intersezioni del tragico e del comico nel teatro del V secolo a.C., Pisa.

Medda (2017): Enrico Medda (ed. and transl.), Eschilo: Agamennone, Roma.

Meiggs/Lewis (1988): Russell Meiggs and David M. Lewis, A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century BC. Revised Edition, Oxford (19691 ).

Mennen (1975): Richard Mennen, 'Jerzy Grotowski's Paratheatrical Projects', in: The Drama Review 19.4, 58–69.

Meritt (1937): Benjamin D. Meritt, Documents on Athenian Tribute, Cambridge.

Milanezi (2004): Silvia Milanezi, 'A l'Ombre des Acteurs: Les amuseurs à l'époque classique', in: Christophe Hugoniot, Frédéric Hurlet, and Silvia Milanezi (eds.), Le statut de l'acteur dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine, Tours, 183–209.

Milanezi (2013): Silvia Milanezi, 'Les noces de Caranos de Macédoine', in: Catherine Grandjean, Brigitte Lion, Christophe Hugoniot (eds.), Le Banquet du monarque, Rennes, 343–372.

Mitchell (1990): Stephen Mitchell, 'Festivals, Games, and Civic Life in Roman Asia Minor', in: Journal of Roman Studies 80, 183–193.

Moloney (2014): Eoghan Moloney, 'Philippus in acie tutior quam in theatro fuit … (Curtius 9, 6, 25): The Macedonian Kings and Greek Theatre', in: Eric Csapo, Hans Rupprecht Goette, John Richard Green, and Peter Wilson (eds.), Greek Theatre in the Fourth Century BC, Berlin, 231–248.

Moore (1991): Timothy J. Moore, 'Palliata Togata: Plautus, Curculio 462–86', The American Journal of Philology 112.3, pp. 343–362.

Moore (1998): Timothy J. Moore, Theater of Plautus: Playing to the Audience, Austin.

Moretti (2014): Jean-Charles Moretti, 'The Evolution of Theatre Architecture Outside Athens in the Fourth Century', in: Eric Csapo, Hans Rupprecht Goette, John Richard Green, Peter Wilson (eds.), Greek Theatre in the Fourth Century B.C., Berlin/Boston,106–137.

Morwood (2007): James Morwood (ed. and transl.), Euripides: Suppliant Women, Oxford.

Murphy (1995): Susan Murphy, 'Heron of Alexandria's On Automaton-Making', in: History of Technology 17, 1–46.

Neillendam (1992): Klaus Neillendam, The Art of Acting in Antiquity: Iconographical Studies in Classical, Hellenistic, and Byzantine Theatre, Copenhagen.

Neils (1996a): Jennifer Neils (ed.), Worshipping Athena. Panathenaia & Parthenon, Madison (WI).

Neils (1996b): Jennifer Neils, 'Pride, Pomp, and Circumstance: The Iconography of Procession', in: Jennifer Neils (ed.), Worshipping Athena. Panathenaia & Parthenon, Madison (WI), 177–197.

Nervegna (2007): Sebastiana Nervegna, 'Staging Scenes of Plays? Revivals of "Old" Greek Drama in Antiquity', Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 162, 14–42.

Nervegna (2013): Sebastiana Nervegna, Menander in Antiquity. The Contexts of Reception, Cambridge/New York.

Neumann (1965): Gerhard Neumann, Gesten und Gebärden in der griechischen Kunst, Berlin.

Nischik (2004): Reingard Nischik, 'Metadrama/Metatheater', in: Ansgar Nünning (ed.), Grundbegriffe der Literaturtheorie, Stuttgart, 171–172.

Noël (2013): Marie-Pierre Noël, 'La reconnaissance d'Oreste et d'Electre chez Eschyle, Sophocle et Euripide : Enjeux esthétiques et dramaturgiques', in: Arrêt sur scène/Scene Focus 2, 9–24.

Norlin (1929): George Norlin (ed. and transl.), Isocrates, vol. 2, Cambridge (MA)/ London.

Norwood (1930): Gilbert Norwood, 'The Babylonians of Aristophanes', in: Classical Philology 25, 1–10.

O'Sullivan/Collard (2013): Patrick O'Sullivan and Christopher Collard (eds. and transl.), Euripides: Cyclops and Major Fragments of Greek Satyric Drama, Oxford.

Obbink (1993): Dirk Obbink, 'Dionysus Poured Out: Ancient and Modern Theories of Sacrifice and Culture Formation', in: Thomas H. Carpenter and Christopher A. Faraone (eds.), Masks of Dionysus, New York, 65–86.

Olson (1998): S. Douglas Olson (ed.), Aristophanes: Peace, Oxford.

Paillard (2019a): Elodie Paillard, 'Greek Theatre in Italy', in: The Literary Encyclopedia, online: https://www.litencyc.com/php/stopics.php?rec=true&UID=19563 (accessed 16. 02.2020).

Panayotakis (2010): Costas Panayotakis, Decimus Laberius: The Fragments, Cambridge.

Papastamati-von Moock (2014): Christina Papastamati-von Moock, 'The Theatre of Dionysus Eleuthereus in Athens: New Data and Observations on its "Lycurgan" Phase', in: Eric

Csapo, Hans Rupprecht Goette, John Richard Green, Peter Wilson (eds.), Greek Theatre in the Fourth Century B.C., Berlin/Boston,15–76.

Papillon (2004): Terry L. Papillon (transl.), Isocrates II, Austin.

Parke (1977): Herbert W. Parke, Festivals of the Athenians, New York.

Parker, L. (2007): Laetitia P. E. Parker (ed.), Euripides: Alcestis, Oxford.

Parker, L. (2016): Laetitia P. E. Parker (ed.), Euripides: Iphigenia in Tauris, Oxford.

Parker, R. (2005): Robert Parker, Polytheism and Society at Athens, Oxford.

Parmentier (1923): Léon Parmentier, 'Notes sur les Troyennes d'Euripide', in: REG 36, 46–61.

Parmentier (1925): Léon Parmentier (ed. and transl.), Euripide : Les Troyennes, Iphigénie en Tauride, Electre, Paris.

Paton (2012): William R. Paton, Polybius. The Histories, vol. VI, Revised by Frank W. Walbank and Christian Habicht, Cambridge (MA)/London [1 1927].

Patton (2009): Kimberley C. Patton, Religion of the Gods: Ritual, Paradox, and Reflexivity, Oxford.

Pavis (1980): Patrice Pavis, Dictionnaire du Théâtre. Termes et concepts de l'analyse théâtrale, Paris.

Pavis (1998): Patrice Pavis, Dictionary of the Theatre: Terms, Concepts, and Analysis, Toronto.

Pavis (2017): Patrice Pavis, Dictionnaire de la performance et du théâtre contemporain, Paris.

Pellegrini (2010): David Pellegrini, 'Metatheatre', in: Dennis Kennedy (ed.), The Oxford Companion to Theatre and Performance, Oxford.

Pérez-Simón (2011): Andrés Pérez-Simón, 'The Concept of Metatheatre: A Functional Approach', in: TRANS: Revue de littérature générale et comparée 11, 1–11. http://journals. openedition.org/trans/443 (accessed 14. 11.2019).

Perlman (1976): Shalom Perlman, 'Panhellenism, the Polis and Imperialism', in: Historia 25, 1–30.

Petrides (2010): Antonis K. Petrides, 'New Performance', in: Petrides/Papaioannou (eds.) 2010, 79–124.

Petrides/Papaioannou (2010): Αntonis Κ. Petrides and Sophia Papaioannou (eds.), New Perspectives on Postclassical Comedy. Pierides 2, Newcastle upon Tyne.

Petrovic/Petrovic (2016): Andrej Petrovic and Ivana Petrovic, Inner Purity and Pollution in Greek Religion, Oxford.

Pickard-Cambridge (1968): Arthur W. Pickard-Cambridge, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens, Oxford (1 1953).

Pickard-Cambridge (1988): Arthur W. Pickard-Cambridge, The Dramatical Festivals of Athens. Second Edition Revised with a New Supplement by J. Gould and D. M. Lewis, Oxford.

Podelcki (1990): Anthony J. Podlecki, 'Could Women Attend the Theater in Ancient Athens? A Collection of Testimonia', in: Ancient World 21, 27–43.

Poe (1992): Joe P. Poe, 'Entrance-Announcements and Entrance-Speeches in Greek Tragedy', in: Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 94, 121–156.

Pohlenz (1965): Max Pohlenz, 'Das Satyrspiel und Pratinas von Phleius', in: Max Pohlenz, Kleine Schriften II, Hildesheim, 473–496.

Poole (1976): Adrian Poole, 'Total Disaster: Euripides's The Trojan Women', in: Arion 3–3, 257–287.

Potter (2015): David Potter, Theodora: Actress, Empress, Saint, Oxford.

Poilloux (1954): Jean Poilloux, Recherches sur l'histoire et les cultes de Thasos, vol. 1, Paris.

Sage (1936): Evan T. Sage (transl.), Livy. History of Rome, vol. XI, Cambridge (MA)/London.

### 278 Bibliography

Seraphim (2017): Andreas Seraphim, Attic Oratory and Performance, London/New York.

Sommerstein (2001): Alan H. Sommerstein (ed. and transl.), Aristophanes: Wealth, Warminster.

Sommerstein (2005): Alan H. Sommerstein (ed. and transl.), Aristophanes: Peace, Warminster.

Sommerstein (2008a): Alan H. Sommerstein (ed. and transl.), Aeschylus: Persians, Seven

Sommerstein/Bayliss (2013): Alan H. Sommerstein and Andrew J. Bayliss, Oath and State in Ancient Greece, Berlin/Boston.

Sourvinou-Inwood (1994): Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood, 'Something to Do With Athens: Tragedy and Ritual', in: Robin Osborne and Simon Hornblower (eds.), Ritual, Finance, Politics. Athenian Democratic Accounts Presented to David Lewis, Oxford, 269–290.

Sourvinou-Inwood (2011): Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood, Athenian Myths & Festivals: Aglauros, Erechtheus, Plynteria, Panathenaia, Dionysia, Oxford.

Speidel (2016): Klaus Speidel, 'Des signes arbitraires aux affinités électives', in: Didier Ottinger (ed.), Magritte. La trahison des images. Catalogue officiel, Paris, 60–69.

Spitzbarth (1946): Anna Spitzbarth, Untersuchung zur Spieltechnik der griechischen Tragödie, Zürich.

Starey (2013): Jennifer S. Starey, 'Soldiers and Sailors in Aristophanes' Babylonians', in: The Classical Quarterly 63, 501–510.

Storey (2008): Ian C. Storey, Euripides: Suppliant Women, London.

Xanthakis-Karamanos (1993): Georgia Xanthakis-Karamanos, 'Hellenistic Drama: Developments in Form and Performance', Platon 45, pp. 117–133.

Yunis (2001): Harvey Yunis (ed.), Demosthenes. On the Crown, Cambridge.

Zanetto/Del Corno (1987): Giuseppe Zanetto and Dario Del Corno, Aristofane: Gli uccelli, Milano.

Zeitlin (1982/2009): Froma I. Zeitlin, Under the Sign of the Shield. Semiotics and Aeschylus' Seven Against Thebes, Rome [second edition revised, Lanham].

# List of Contributors

Anton Bierl is Professor for Greek Literature at the University of Basel (since 2002). He was Senior Fellow at Harvard's Center for Hellenic Studies (2005–2011). He is director and co-editor of Homer's Iliad: The Basel Commentary and series-editor of MythosEikonPoiesis. His research interests include Homeric epic, drama, song and performance culture, the ancient novel, Greek myth and religion. His books include Dionysos und die griechische Tragödie (1991); Die Orestie des Aischylos auf der modernen Bühne (1996); Ritual and Performativity (2009); Sappho: Griechisch/Deutsch with commentary and afterword (2021); and the co-edited volumes Literatur und Religion I–II (2007); Gewalt und Opfer (2010); The Newest Sappho (2016).

Pascale Brillet-Dubois is Professor in Greek language and literature at the University Lumière-Lyon 2 and is an active member of the research center HiSoMA. Her research and publications focus on epic poetry, Euripidean tragedy, hymns, performance culture, intertextuality and intermediality. She is the co-director of the journal Gaia with M. P. Castiglioni. She has coedited, with R. Bouchon and N. Le Meur-Weissman, Hymnes de la Grèce antique: Approches littéraires et historiques (Lyon, 2012). She is currently preparing a commentary to Euripides' Trojan Women.

Matteo Capponi teaches Ancient Greek at the University of Lausanne. He also provides an initiation to Classical texts and mythology at the École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL). He devoted his Ph.D. to Greek tragedy, addressing issues related to anthropology, pragmatics, and kinesics. Today his research focuses on the relationship between words and gestures. Matteo Capponi is also involved in translating ancient texts for staging, acting, and exploring new ways of teaching classics. In parallel to his academic work, he directs the company STOA, which specializes in the staging of ancient texts (www.compagnie-stoa.ch).

Loredana Di Virgilio is Research Fellow at the University 'G. d'Annunzio' of Chieti. Her research focuses on Aristophanes' text and metrics (especially of Thesmophoriazusae). Her research interests also include dramaturgical aspects linked to the musical design of comedies. Besides several articles, she has recently published her monograph Le monodie di Aristofane. Metro musica drammaturgia (Pisa-Roma 2021), which originated from her doctoral thesis (University of Urbino).

Anne Duncan is an Associate Professor in the Department of Classics and Religious Studies at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. She is the author of Performance and Identity in the Classical World (Cambridge University Press, 2006) and numerous articles on Greek and Roman dramatic performance. She is currently at work on two projects: a monograph called Command Performance: Tyranny and Theater in the Ancient World, and a textbook on Roman spectacle, under contract to Cambridge University Press.

Andrea Giannotti is Visiting Fellow in the Department of Classics & Ancient History of Durham University. He is also Co-Editor in Chief of the journal 'Frammenti sulla scena' of the Turin International Centre for Studies in Ancient Theatre and he is contributing (as a memberoperator) to the 'Axon Project' of Ca' Foscari University of Venice. He has edited the volume 'Il teatro della polis tra intrattenimento e politica. Nuove interpretazioni del dramma greco

### 286 List of Contributors

antico' (Turin 2020), which resulted from the homonymous international conference held in Pisa in October 2019, and he has published several papers and volume chapters especially on the pre-play ceremonies of the Athenian Great Dionysia, on Greek tragedy, and on fifth-century BCE Athenian honorific decrees.

Silvia Milanezi is Professor of Greek History at the Université Paris-Est-Créteil and is a member of the Centre de Recherche en Histoire européenne comparée (CRHEC). She has published on Greek Religion, Politics and Drama. Her publications on these subjects include Le Statut de l'Acteur dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine (co-edited with Chr. Hugoniot and Fr. Hurlet) and L'Appareil scénique dans les Spectacles de l'Antiquité (co-edited with Brigitte Le Guen).

Elodie Paillard is Honorary Associate in the Department of Classics and Ancient History at the University of Sydney and lecturer/scientific collaborator in the Department of Ancient Civilizations at the University of Basel. She is currently leading a research project on Greek theatre in Roman Italy, funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation. She is the author of The Stage and the City. Non-élite Characters in the Tragedies of Sophocles (Paris 2017) and co-editor of Theatre and Autocracy in the Ancient World (with E. Csapo, J. R. Green, B. Le Guen, J. Stoop, and P. Wilson, 2021). In parallel to her interest in ancient Greek theatre, she is also working on the social structure of Classical Athens and the emergence of democracy.

Emilie Ruch is a PhD student at the University of Bourgogne Franche-Comté in Besançon under the supervision of Professor Michel Fartzoff. She devotes her research to the tragedies and the dramaturgy of Euripides and is particularly interested in his latest plays about the theme of recognition. She also teaches in middle school since September 2019.

Mali Skotheim is Assistant Professor of English at Ashoka University in Sonipat, India. Her research concerns Greek drama and dance in the Roman period. She has published on Augustan policy towards the Greek festivals, satyr drama in the Roman era, attitudes towards ancient actors, and festival culture in Philostratus' Life of Apollonius of Tyana, and is currently working on a monograph on the Greek dramatic festivals under the Roman Empire.

Oliver Taplin is Emeritus Professor of Classics at Oxford University and Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. His books range from The Stagecraft of Aeschylus (OUP, 1977), to Pots and Plays (Getty Publications, 2007). He founded the Archive of Performances of Greek and Roman Drama with Edith Hall, in 1996. He was elected to the British Academy in 1995, and was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the University of Athens in 2013. The leading recurrent theme of his work has been the reception of poetry and drama through performance and material culture, in both ancient and modern times. Recently he has been translating plays with the aim of including the kind of musicality and colour which will be effective in live performance. He has published Euripides Medea (Chicago UP, 2013), Sophocles Oedipus the King and other tragedies (Oxford World's Classics, 2016) and Aeschylus Oresteia (Norton, 2018). Throughout his career he has tried to keep one foot outside the academy, especially in broadcasting and theatre, both within and beyond the UK. Productions that he has collaborated with include the Ôresteia (1981–1982, dir. Peter Hall), The Thebans (1992, dir. Adrian Noble), the Ôresteia (1999–2000, dir. Katie Mitchell) and Swallow Song (2004, 2006 dir. Lydia Koniordou).

Marco Vespa is a Classical philologist and research fellow at the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) and member of the European research project Locus ludi on play culture in the ancient world. His research interests include the Second Sophistic, ancient Greek comic theatre, and the anthropological study of Greek scientific texts. He has published extensively on ancient zoology and the cultural representation of animals in the Greek and Roman worlds (especially on cocks, dolphins, cranes, elephants, and non-human primates). His monographic study on the monkey in the ancient world has recently been published (2021, Turnhout, series Antiquité et Sciences Humaines, n. 7).

# Index verborum

Achilleia (female gladiator) 247 Achilles – (hero) 39, 53, 116 – (gladiator) 247 acrobat 76, 85, 92, 96, 98 n. 44 Admetus 39 n. 40 Adonis (gladiator) 247 Adrastus 58 Aegisthus 45–46, 157 Aeschrion (iambic author) 242 Aesopus – (mime character) 238–239 – (tragic actor) 247 Agamemnon 37, 53 et n. 92, 81, 119, 181, 185 Agathon 6 n. 32, 41 n. 50, 215 Agoratus (son of Eumares) 44, 44 n. 59 Ajax 75 akroamata 7, 95, 95 n. 29 Alcibiades 43 n. 57, 47, 233 Alcmene 57 Alexandria 99, 209 Althaia 125 Amazonia (female gladiator) 247 Amipsias 218 Amorgos 51 n. 85 Anastasius 100 Andromache 53, 54, 179 animal – dog 196–197, 201 – fox 198–199, 206, 211 – monkey 14–15, 194–211 Anthesteria 36, 36 n. 27, 96 Antony 243 Apollo 41 n. 51, 60, 161–162, 166, 172 n. 33, 179, 218 n. 11 Apollonia (mima) 238–239 applause 26–27, 78 Apuleius 239 Arbuscula (mima) 246, 250–251 Archelaus I 43 n. 56 archimima 238, 245 Arete (mima) 246 Argos 59 n. 113

Aristippus 241–242 Aristogeiton 44 Artemis 45, 246 Astyanax 53–54, 181 Athena 41, 60, 173, 180 Athens 5, 7, 14, 23, 25, 29, 30, 33, 36, 40, 43–52, 55–56, 58–61, 64, 66, 68, 71, 84, 96, 114–115, 125, 177–179, 181, 186, 194, 205–206, 235 – acropolis 40, 179, 180, 186, 187 – agora 44 – Pnyx 36 n. 25, 223 atimia 201 n. 24 Attic demes – Aixone 49 n. 74 – Collytus 206 Atticus 241 auditorium 22, 110 n. 17 auloidia 95 aulos 24, 78, 118, 200, 218 n. 11 autodidaktos 207 automaton 91, 99 autotragikos 207–208

barbitos 218 Barthes 13, 112, 153, 251 Bassilla (mima) 246, 248, 250 Blepyros 216, 223 Brasidas 47 Brecht 93, 111

Caesar 6, 72, 243 Calydon 125 Cannutius 246 n. 32 Cassandra 46, 53, 181, 186, 187 n. 30 Cato the Censor 244–245 Cato the Younger 244 Charition (mime) 16, 98, 100–101, 237–238, 245 Chios 51–52 choregos 23, 26 choreography 146, 168, 170, 174, 175 chorodidaskalos 120 Chremes 223

Open Access. © 2021 Elodie Paillard and Silvia Milanezi, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110716559-016

Chremylos 219 Cicero 66–67, 241–243 Cimon 35 Circus 71, 72, 78, 90, 91, 209 n. 50 Citizen (comic character) 216 Cleisthenes 202 Cleomenes 242 Cleon 194 n. 5, 195–197 clown 96 Clytemnestra 53 n. 94, 185, 240 Comedy – Middle Comedy 101, 101 n. 54 – New Comedy 25, 229 – Old Comedy 14, 24, 25, 52, 101, 101 n. 54, 127–128, 194, 225 n. 26, 240 comic illusion 211, 216 n. 6 competition 13, 34, 36, 70, 73, 97, 98 n. 44, 99, 242 – agones 4, 6, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35, 98, 177, 193 – athletic 95 – dramatic 25, 32 n. 14, 34, 43, 64, 68, 82, 83, 91, 95, 96, 154 – musical 29, 95, 96, 98, 176 coryphaeus 174, 197 costume 23, 24, 26, 85, 111, 116, 127, 141, 142, 165, 158, 173, 175, 200, 202 – chiton 37 – himation 37 Creon (as tragic character) 40 n. 46, 45 Cyclops 40, 125, 237 Cytheris (mima) 241–242, 246 n. 31 Cyzicus 51–52 dance 38 n. 34, 61, 77, 84, 85, 90, 92, 95, 98, 109, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120–127, 140, 140 n. 38, 170, 177, 197 n. 14, 200 204, 206, 237, 248, 250 – Bacchic dance 125 – sikinnis 124 dancer 74–76, 78, 80, 85–86, 95–96, 100, 141 n. 42, 201 n. 25, 206 n. 41, 251 Darius 121 Decimus Laberius 240–241 Delian festival 95 Delian League 48, 49 n. 71, 51, 178

Demodocos 116 Demophantos (oath of) 44, 44 n. 61 Demostheneia 95 deus ex machina 99 Dikaiopolis 36 n. 22, 202, 220, 224 n. 26 Dionysia (mima) 246, 251 Dionysia 3, 4, 6, 30, 31, 32, 34 n. 19, 36, 43, 44, 48–49, 50 n. 76, 51 n. 86, 54, 55, 56, 60, 91, 110 n. 17, 116 Dionysos 4 n. 13, 9, 15, 27, 30, 33–36, 38, 41–42, 45, 48, 54, 60, 69, 70 n. 23, 71, 75 n. 34, 107–110, 115, 117–118, 122–127, 141, 178, 187, 235 dramatic illusion 155 n. 7, 180 n. 11, 181 – theatrical illusion 1, 198 – scenic illusion 210 Duris of Samos 96 n. 37 Echo 141, 224 Ecloga (mima) 246 ekphrasis 116 Electra 37, 45, 85, 142–146, 156–158, 167 Emphasis (mima) 246 ephebes 56 n. 100 Ephesus 13, 142–143 Erinyes 38, 60, 119–120 Eteocles 122 Eucharis (mima) 246, 246 n. 31, 248–249 Euelpides 46 Favonius 245 fourth wall 1, 94, 111 gelotopoioi 96 gesture 12, 13 n. 46, 30, 31–33, 38–40, 45, 61, 79, 81, 100, 128, 133–147 gladiator 72–73, 76, 243 n. 25, 247 Gorgias 209 Great Dionysia 23, 29–62, 177 Harmodios 44 Hector 53 Hecuba 39, 46, 53, 178, 181–187 Helen 41 n. 52, 141, 163–165, 168–170 Heliodorus 239

Helladia (mima) 246

Hera 164, 180 Heracles 39 n. 40, 53, 57, 141, 145 n. 53 herald 33, 36 n. 25, 42–48, 53, 54, 55, 57, 59–60, 62, 181, 183, 185 Hermes (gladiator) 247 Hermione 45 Hestia 41, 41 n. 51 Hestiaea (Euboea) 97 Hippodamus of Miletus 55 n. 97 Hippolochus of Macedonia 96 n. 37 Hippolytus 45 Hirtius 243 histrio 72, 80, 80 n. 45 Homeric 90, 116, 179, 207, 246 Homeristai 90 hydriaphoroi 50

infamia 245 intertextuality 114, 127 intratheatre 114 Iolaos 57–58 Ion 159–167, 172–173 Ionesco 111 Ionia 3 n. 9 Iphigenia 40, 53 n. 94, 173–174, 245 Ischandros 208 Ischomachus (mimus) 96 Isidorus (mimus) 242, 246

judge 25, 35, 42, 99, 216 n. 6

Kallipides 203–205, 247 kanephoroi 51 Karion 227–228 kitharoidia 95

Lais 242 Latinus 244, 246 Lenaia 49, 51 n. 86 libation 9, 30, 33, 34–48, 54 Lichas 53 Lycus 57 Lycis 218

Macedonia 96, 96 n. 37, 205 Maecenas 250

Magna Graecia 236 Malacus (mimus) 239 Marsaeus 243 mask 14–16, 23–27, 61–62, 74–76, 80, 82, 85–86, 91, 93, 98–100, 111, 116, 118, 128, 142, 144, 158, 178, 181, 182, 187, 193, 200, 208, 210, 230, 235, 236, 237, 240, 245, 247, 251 Medea 45, 60, 240 Megara (tragic character) 57 Melos 177–178 Menelaos 53, 141, 146, 163–165, 167–170 mime – adultery mimes 16, 239, 241, 243 – mime scripts 16, 72, 237, 240 n. 18, 245 mimesis 73, 112, 117, 118, 128, 137, 137 n. 24, 139, 140, 201, 204 n. 32 monody 15, 174, 215–225, 230 Muse 177, 215, 221, 249, 250 music 5, 10, 13, 31, 61, 77, 85, 92, 120, 121, 122, 124, 125, 183 n. 19, 215 n. 5, 231, 238 – musicians 78, 80, 98 – New Music 120 Mynniskos (tragic actor) 203 n. 31, 204

Naples 66, 98 neologism 14, 194, 198, 209 Neoptolemus 39, 39 n. 42, 40, 53 n. 92, 145 n. 53, 179 neurospastai 95

Odysseus 39 n. 44, 41, 181 Oechalia 53 Oedipus 37, 38, 60, 85 Oenoanda 95 Oineus 125 Oinomaos 206–207, 208 orchestra 5 n. 24, 24, 26, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 48, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 78, 117, 118, 124, 125, 179, 179 n. 9, 195–196 n. 8 Oreos (Euboea) 97 Orestes 45–46, 53 n. 94, 60, 142–146, 157–158, 167, 173–174 Origo (mima) 243

Pan 218 n. 11 Panathenaia 51, 51 n. 83 pantomime 9, 66, 71, 72, 74, 75, 80–86, 90, 90 n. 6, 92, 95, 97, 98, 98 n. 44, 100, 100 n. 51, 101, 200, 200 n. 21, 201 pantomime libretti 72, 80–82 parabasis 194, 196 n. 8, 197, 200, 209, 210, 216 n. 6, 219 n. 15, 230 paracomedy 100–101 paraklausithyron 221 paratragedy 100–101 parodos 122, 123, 125, 220, 227–228 parody 101, 159, 218 n. 13, 224, 238 Parresiades 199–200 Parthenon 51 n. 83, 180 pathos 13, 119, 120, 121, 184 Peisetaerus 46–47, 56, 56 n. 102, 224–225 n. 26 Peisistratus 54 n. 97 Peloponnesian War 50 n. 78, 178 Pentheus 122–123, 187 performativity 109, 123, 127 Pergamon 184, 186 Pericles 179 peripeteia 111, 123 Perseus 141, 197–198, 200, 238 Persia 48 n. 71, 179 Persian Wars 222 Phaedra 146, 240, 245 Phaidros 3 n. 9 Phanodemus 36 n. 28 Phemios 116 Philip II of Macedonia 71, 205 Philocleon 141 n. 42, 220 Philoctetes 39 n. 44 Phoebe (mima) 246 phorbeia 24 Phrynichus 218 Phthia 53 Pindaros (tragic actor) 204 Piraeus 43 n. 57, 179 n. 9 Polos 247 Polynices 122 Polyphemus 40 n. 45, 124 Polyxena 39, 40 Poseidon 178–184, 185, 186

Pratinas 126 Praxagora 214, 216 n. 6 prohedria 22, 22 n. 4 props 6 n. 32, 42, 79, 97, 111, 127, 135 n. 15, 153 n. 3, 166–167, 175, 238, 241 prostitute 52, 74, 214, 241–244, 247 Protogenes (mimus) 246 Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II 201 n. 25 puppets 90, 91, 93, 95, 97, 99, 100, 101 purification 14, 121, 178, 187 Pylades – (hero) 45–46, 145 n. 53, 174 – (actor) 75, 80–81 rehearsal 8, 22, 93 reperformance 8, 22, 23, 66 Rhodes 205 Rome 64, 64 n. 6, 66, 66 n. 18, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74 n. 28, 83, 235 n. 2, 244, 247 n. 38 Roscius 77, 247 Rural Dionysia 206 salpinx 185 satyr play 7, 12, 26, 67, 76 n. 38, 77, 84, 85, 95, 98, 107, 124–127, 235, 238 schema 128, 133, 134, 137, 139–142, 145–146 scripts 6, 16, 72, 134, 237, 240, 245 Scythian Archer (comic character) 197, 238 self-referentiality 12, 116–117, 123, 128, 129, 138 Sicily 177, 177 n. 4, 178, 236 silence 31, 38, 39, 39 n. 44, 54, 61, 166, 185, 187, 235 n. 3 Silenus 40, 40 n. 45, 124 skoptic song 216, 218, 227, 229, 230 slapstick 90 Socrates 4 n. 15, 6 n. 32, 41 n. 50 Solon 54 n. 97 Sparta 204 Spinther (Publius Cornelius Lentulus) 239, 239 n. 12 stage directions 12, 135, 237, 238 stage name 16, 246–248, 251 street performance 71, 72, 95, 96, 245

stripper 247–248 stupidus (mime stock character) 244 Talthybios 39, 181, 183, 185, 186, 187 Teiresias 46 Telephus 141 Tertia (mima) 242–243, 246 Thalassia (mima) 246 Thasos 55 n. 97, 59 n. 116 thaumatopoiia 95, 98, 99 theamata 95, 95 n. 29 Theatre of Dionysos 9, 34–35 n. 20, 54, 71, 125 Thebes 121, 205 Themistocles 47 Tenos 51–52 Theodora (mima) 245 Theodoros 89, 247 Theseus 45, 47 n. 70, 58, 59, 145 Thettalos 247 Thrasybulus 43–44

threnody 119 Thymele (mima) 244, 246 Tiger (gladiator) 247 Timaeus 201 n. 25 Troy 14, 46, 53, 164, 169, 177–187 trumpet 22, 181, 185–186 Verres 242, 246 Verrius 241–242 war-orphans 9, 30, 33, 34–35 n. 20, 54–60 Xanthias 218 Xerxes 36, 179 Xouthos 40, 159–163, 165–166, 172 zelotypus (mime stock character) 244 Zeus 41, 41 n. 51, 59, 97, 163, 169, 182, 184, 185, 186

# Index locorum

### Aelianus

De natura animalium 2.11 4 n. 16 6.1 4 n. 16 Varia historia 2.13 4 n. 15, 4 n. 16

### Aeneas Tacticus

Poliorcetica 1.9.2 5 n. 18 3.5.3 5 n. 17 22.4.3 5 n. 18

### Aeschines

1.23 36 n. 25 2.55 4 n. 15, 4 n. 16, 5 n. 20 2.88 206 n. 40 2.99 206 n. 40 3.66–67 23 n. 6 3.76 5 n. 20 3.154 54 n. 97 3.236 45 n. 64 Σ ad 2.55 4 n. 15 Σ ad 3.67 23 n. 6

### Aeschylus

### Aesopus

Fabulae 14 199 n. 19 81 199 n. 19 83 197 n. 14

### Alciphron

Epistulae 2.17 97 n. 42 4.18.10 4 n. 16 4.19.5 4 n. 14

### Alexis

Gynaikokratia fr. 42 K.-A. 6 n. 32 Kouris fr. 107 K.-A. 229 n. 34

### Anaxandrides

Odysseus fr. 35 K.-A. 5 n. 21

### Andocides

1.96–98 44 n. 61

Anthologia Palatina 7.196 218 n. 11

### Antiphanes

Dodonis fr. 91 K.-A. 229 n. 34 Poiesis fr. 189 K.-A. 6 n. 32

#### Antiphon

1.18–20 36 n. 24

#### Apostolius

13.66 (CPG II, p. 593) 204 n. 33

Archilochus

fr. 187 West 202 n. 29

#### Aristophanes

fr. 696 K.-A. 6 n. 32 Acharnenses 118–121 202 n. 28 120–121 194 n. 3 178–203 36 n. 22 204–236 220 263–279 220 377–378 230 415 6 n. 32 497 4 n. 15 497–500 230 502–506 49 504 49 557 ff. 228 629 4 n. 14, 4 n. 15 719 ff. 4 n. 15, 224 n. 26 881 221 n. 20 1190–1234 25 n. 13 Σ ad 504 49 Amphiaraos fr. 31 K.-A. 230 Aves 209–222 220 218 218 n. 11

227–262 220 263–309 52 n. 88 440 194 n. 3 904–1057 224 n. 26 958 40 n. 44 1128 180 n. 12 1271–1276 46 1308–1469 224 n. 26 1360–1361 56 n. 102 1706–1765 25 n. 13 Σ ad 1128 180 n. 12 Ecclesiazusae 371 230 383–384 223 394–395 223 571–580 216 n. 6 580–585 216 n. 6 581–582 216 n. 6 583–688 216 n. 6 689–709 216 n. 6 729 214, 214 n. 1 730–876 214 745 223 777 216 n. 6 797–798 216 n. 6 876 214, 214 n. 1, 219, 227 877–883 214 877–1111 214 880 214, 215, 221 882–883 215 n. 5, 222 883 215, 215 n. 5, 221, 225 884 220 884–889 215 887 218, 219, 222, 227 887–889 213, 216, 217, 219 888 216, 218, 222, 223, 227 888–889 216 n. 6 889 213, 229 890–892 225 893–899 225 893–923 216, 230 900–924 226 938–945 220, 221 n. 19 952–975 220, 221 n. 19<PHONE_NUMBER> 194 n. 3 1141 4 n. 15

1141–1143 216 n. 6 1144–1146 218 1155–1162 25 Σ ad 883 215 n. 5 Σ ad 918 215 n. 5 Equites 36 4 n. 15, 25 n. 12 163 47 n. 70 221 39 233 3 n. 8, 4 n. 14, 4 n. 15 288 4 n. 15 327 4 n. 15 416 194 n. 3 508 4 n. 14, 4 n. 15 887 194 n. 3 1210 4 n. 15 1318 4 n. 14, 4 n. 15 Σ vet. Tr. 589a 228 n. 33 Σ vet. Tr. 589b 228 n. 33 Gerytades fr. 150.1–3 K.-A. 230 Lysistrata 327–331 223 n. 22 553 221 n. 20 1042 228 n. 32 1218–1220 217, 219 1247–1272 220 1279–1294 220 1296–1321 220 Nesoi fr. 409 K.-A. 194 n. 3 Nubes 518 4 n. 15 534–535 230 537–548 219 575 4 n. 15 1096 4 n. 15 Pax 43 4 n. 15 297–298 47 n. 70 423–425 40 n. 46 431–435 39 658 4 n. 15 735 4 n. 15 736–753 219 793–795 6 n. 32 962 218

1059 41, 41 n. 52 1065–1066 194 n. 3 1102 39 1105 39 1319 39 Plutus 257–321 220 316–317 228 770 228 771 228 788–799 218 Σ vetera et recentiora ad Ar. Plut.post 770 228 Ranae 1–18 218 12–15 230 52 115 n. 35 219 47 n. 70 676 47 n. 70 708 194 n. 3 919 4 n. 15 920–923 6 n. 32 943 115 n. 35 947 6 n. 32 1021–1022 6 n. 32 1114 115 n. 35 1202–1204 224 n. 24 1264–1277 220 1284–1295 220 1301 215 n. 5 1309–1328 220 1331–1363 220 Σ vetera ad 1b Chantry 218 n. 14 Σ vetera ad 1202 Chantry 224 n. 24 Skenas katalambanousai fr. 490 K.-A. 204 n. 34 Thesmophoriazusae 19 57 n. 106 100 215 149–151 6 n. 32 163 215 n. 5 391 4 n. 15 395 3 n. 10 793 39 947–1000 220 1015–1055 220 1065–1072 220

1075 224 n. 25 1126–1135 197 n. 15 Thesmophoriazusae B' fr. 347.1 K.-A. 230 Vespae 54 25 n. 12 54–66 218 64–66 230 219 215 220 215 230–316 220 317–333 220 540–545 223 n. 22 1013 4 n. 15 1020 230 1043–1045 219 1047 230 1284–1291 194 n. 5 1287 194 n. 5 1535–1537 219, 230 Σ ad 1109 23 n. 6

### Aristotle

Poetica 1448a28 6 n. 32 1448a28–29 7 n. 34 1452a22–23 123 n. 63 1455a22–1455a32 137 n. 21 1461b–1462a 203 n. 31 Politica 2.1268a6–11 55 n. 97

### Athenaeus

1.19b 97 n. 41 4.129d 96 n. 37 4.157a 5 n. 21 10.452f 96 n. 36 12.518f 201 n. 25 12.524f–526d 215 n. 5 13.573b–c 215 n. 5 14.615 77 14.620e–621b 215 n. 5 14.631f 10 n. 37 14.635b 218 n. 11 14.635c 218 n. 11 14.636b 218 n. 11

Bacchylides Paian fr. 1.75 Irigoin 185 n. 25 The Bible Acta Apostolorum 19.29 6 n. 30 19.31 6 n. 30 Epistula ad Corinthios I.4.9 6 n. 30 Genesis 39.1–20 239 n. 14 Cassius Dio Historia Romana 43.22.2 6 n. 29 52.30 95 n. 29 Cicero Ad familiares 9.26.1–2 241 Verrines 2 Verr. 3.34.78 242 n. 23, 246 n. 34 2 Verr. 5.12.31 242, 246 n. 34 2 Verr. 5.16.40 242 n. 23, 246 n. 34 Orationes Philippicae 13.24 243 Clemens Alexandrinus Paedagogus 2.4.40 5 n. 24 3.11.76 5 n. 24 Codices Ravennas 429 214, 214 n. 1, 228 Venetus Marcianus gr. 474 228

Cratinus fr. 360 K.-A. 3 n. 10

### Demosthenes

18.28 4 n. 16 18.162 206 n. 40 18.180 206 n. 42 18.242 206 n. 39 19.10 205 n. 38 19.35 45 n. 64 19.189 205 n. 38 19.209 205 n. 38 19.281 75 n. 33 21.1 4 n. 16 21.7 4 n. 16 21.59 4 n. 16

#### Diodorus Siculus

11.27.3 45 n. 64 11.47.1 48 n. 71 14.86 5 n. 18 20.11.1 45 n. 64

#### Diogenes Atheniensis

TrGF 45 F 1 218 n. 11

Diogenes Laertius 1.55 54 n. 97

#### Diogenian

7.94 (CPG I, p. 303) 202 n. 27

#### Dionysus of Halicarnassus

Letter to Ammaeus 2.10 222

#### Eupolis

Poleis fr. 245 K.-A. 51–52 fr. 246 K.-A. 51–52 fr. 247 K.-A. 51–52 fr. 256 K.-A. 51 n. 85

#### Euripides

Alcestis 1015–1016 39 n. 40 1159–1163 25 n. 10, 171 n. 32 1161 25 n. 11 1162 171 n. 30 1163 6 n. 32, 25 n. 10, 25 n. 11 1164 25 n. 11 Andromache 147–153 45

Iphigenia Taurica 159–166 40 167–168 40 328 173, 173 n. 38 388 173, 173 n. 38 722 172 n. 34 782 173, 173 n. 38 795–797 173, 173 n. 36 796 173, 173 n. 38 837–840 173, 173 n. 36 896 174 n. 40 898 173, 173 n. 38 900–903 174, 174 n. 39 1293 173, 173 n. 38 1298 173, 173 n. 38 1476 173, 173 n. 38 1495 171 n. 30 1497–1499 25 n.10 Medea 46–57 58 n. 107 784 45 786 45 789 45 947 45 977–984 45 1156–1166 45 1160 45 1415–1419 25 n.10, 171 n. 32 1416 25 n.11 1418 25 n.11, 171 n. 30 1419 25 n.11 1420 25 n.11 Orestes 96 41 n. 52 106 41 n. 52 108 59 n. 115 113 41 n. 52 215–238 142 215–216 142 217–218 143 219–220 143 220–221 146 221–222 144 223–224 144 225–226 144, 146 227–228 144

229–230 144 230 144–145 231–232 145 233–234 145 234 172 n. 34 235–236 145 237–238 145 472 41 n. 52 1187 41 n. 52 1691–1693 25 n.10 Phoenissae 93–95 59 n. 115 311 171 n. 30 856–857 46 1240–1241 36 n. 22 1275–1276 59 n. 115 1764–1766 25 n.10 Supplices 479 171 n. 30 1114 58 1114–1115 58 1142–1144 58 n. 109 1143–1144 58 1149–1151 58 n. 109 1150 58 1165–1182 58 1168 58–59 n. 113 Troades 1–2 178 4 178 4–6 179 7 179 8–9 186 13–14 180, 186 24–25 180 32–33 179 32–35 179 36 178 45 179 45–47 182 75–94 186 n. 27 170 187 n. 30 172 187 n. 30 298–303 181 307 187 n. 30

1330 185 1331 186 1332 183 [Rhesus] 161–194 43 n. 57 Vita Euripidis TrGF V T1 IB 4 223 TrGF V T1 IB 4.53–56 224 n. 23

#### FGrH

325 F 12 36 n. 28 328 F 5a 36–37 n. 28 328 F 5b 36–37n. 28

#### Gorgias

82 B23 DK 209 n. 49