9 - Towards a Byzantine Theory of the Comic?

Summary

In the last decades scholars have gone some way towards dismantling the prejudice that there was no room for laughter in Byzantine society. In so doing, they have combed the sources looking for tangible evidence of humour or jokes, either verbal or practical. In other cases, the focus has been on the scant traces pointing to the survival of well-defined genres such as mime and satire. Less reflection has been devoted to tracing a ‘Byzantine theory of the comic’, looking at rhetorical or philosophical works. Admittedly such a task is made difficult by the absence of explicit, comprehensive theorisations. As pointed out by Stephen Halliwell, no ancient thinker ever aspired to create a universalising theory of laughter. The same surely applies also to Byzantine texts. Statements about laughter and humour are multi-faceted and often change according to the social or historical background and relevant genres. There are some constants, however. Even if we cannot grasp a unifying theory of humour we can nevertheless isolate and identify overarching concerns or piece together fragments of theory. Even though these partial statements are often to be found in texts that do not deal primarily with humour, it is nevertheless possible to single out developments characterising the Byzantine approach to comic discursive features. In my chapter I will focus on such ‘fragments’ of theory. In so doing I will first examine what rhetorical handbooks say about comic discourse. In this first part I will highlight the logic-discursive features of the comic as perceived in rhetorical contexts. Second, I will examine the much-discussed case of tenth-century scholar Arethas of Caesarea.

Arethas’ work has been regarded for a long time as a turning point in Byzantine attitudes towards laughter. My analysis will lead to a more nuanced evaluation of his views on laughter and humour and will also introduce the idea of an ‘integrated theory’ of the comic. Finally I will focus on the twelfth century in order to show how the terms previously used in anti-gelastic contexts are capsized in their meaning, thus leading to a new appreciation of laughter.