Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:34:12.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Four Deadly Sins?(Arist. Wasps 74–84)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Dwora Gilula
Affiliation:
Hebrew University, Jerusalem

Extract

The two slaves, Xanthias and Sosias, posted by their master's son to guard his ‘sick’ father Philocleon, challenge the audience to guess the nature of the mysterious and strange disease &nuó&sgr&ogr&nu ⋯&lambda&lambdaó&kappa&ogr&tau&ogr&nu, 71) on account of which the father must be kept inside the house. When the correct answer to the riddle is finally disclosed, Philocleon is revealed to beis revealed to be φιληλιαστ⋯σ (88), namely a man ‘who loves to be a juror’ and to spend his days in the law-courts passionately pursuing the infatuation of which his son tries to cure him by locking him up away from the law-courts and from his fellow jurors. The joke owes its comic effect to incongruity, termed the ‘humour of inappropriateness’ by MacDowell, who writes: ‘It is funny when addiction to being a juror is called a disease (87–88), because “disease” is a word which is not generally applied to such conditions’. It should, however, be stressed that in order to create this sense of incongruity the previously mentioned diseases must form a class with certain common characteristics fundamentally different from those of Philocleon's, thus gradually moulding the audience's expectations and channelling them in a completely different direction.

Type
Research Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1983

Access options

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

References

1 MacDowell, D. M., Aristophanes: Wasps (Oxford, 1971), 12Google Scholar.

2 Starkie, W. J. M., Aristophanes: The Wasps (London, 1897), 406Google Scholar; but cf. MacDowell, , op. cit. 38 n. 3Google Scholar; see also Pickard-Cambridge, A., The Dramatic Festivals of Athens 2 (Oxford, 1968), 149 n. 4Google Scholar; Starkie adopts Meineke's line-division, in deference to a theory of symmetry, which as he himself comments ‘elsewhere can produce but little evidence in its favour’ (p. 405).

3 F. W. Hall–W. M. Geldart, Aristophanis Comoediae 2 (Oxford, 1906, repr. 1949); so also B. B. Rogers in his translation in the Loeb series (1924).

4 von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., ‘Über die Wespen des Aristophanes’, SB Preuss. Akad., Ph-hist. Kl. 23 (1911), 514–15Google Scholar = Kleine Schriften I (Berlin, 1935), 333–4Google Scholar; Wilamowitz argues that a dialogue would have contained clear references of the speakers to one another, but the text contains references only to the audience; see also his discussion of the other instances of οὔκ, ⋯λλ' in theWasps (lines 9, 635, 1143, 1372).

5 For what it may be worth, still another possibility of line-distribution and of staging may be advanced: Xa. 54–73; So. 74–76 reports to Xa. what Amynias says (that he is a dice-lover, 74–75a), and comments on it (‘What he says is foolish, by Zeus, for he conjectures it from his own disease’ 75b–76). Whereupon Xa. in line 77 addresses Amynias directly: ‘No, but etc’

6 , MacDowell, op. cit. 140Google Scholar, who quotes Turner, E. G., CQ 60 (1946), 57Google Scholar.

7 Idem, op. cit. 141.

8 Starkie, op. cit., ad loc. takes it to mean ‘superstitious’, quoting the schol. &phgr&iota&lambda&ogrθ⋯&tau&alpha&iota &egr⋯&sgr&igra⋯e&nu &ogrΊ &delta&egr&iota&sgr&iota&delta&alpha&iacute&mu&ogr&nu&egr&sgr, &kappa&alpha&igra⋯e H⋯&ogr&nu&sgr&iota&nu ⋯&egr&igra⋯e &tau&ogr&icirc&sgr θ&egr&ogr&icirc&sgr, &nu&ogr&mu&igra⋯e&xgr&ogr&nu&tau&egr&sgr, ⋯&kappa &tau&ogr⋯&tau&ohgr&nu ⋯&beta&lambda&alpha&beta&egr&icirc&sgr ἔ&sgr&egr&sgrθ&alpha&iota. such interpretation, however, seems biased, for one's man supersitition is another's religion.

9 cf. , Hes. Theog. 525 ff.Google Scholar for an aetiological explanation of the animal sacrifice which reserves for human consumption the best part of the victim; see also Stengel, P., Die griechischen Kultusaltertumer 3 (München, 1898), 95Google Scholar; Harrison, J. E., Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion 1 (Cambridge, 1922Google Scholar, repr. 1955, Meridian Books, New York), 56 ff.; Nilsson, M. P., Geschichte der griechischen Religion 3 I (München, 1967), 89, 143 ffGoogle Scholar.

10 Entretiens Hardt 27 (1980), 30Google Scholar; and more succinctly, p. 26: ‘sacrifier, c'est fondamentalement tuer pour manger’.

11 Kaibel3 fr. 148, apud Athen. II. 36C.

12 Bain's, D. translation in his book Actors and Audience (Oxford, 1977), 220–1Google Scholar.

13 cf. Henderson, J., The Maculate Muse (New Haven and London, 1975),210Google Scholar; Dover, K. J., Greek Homosexuality (Cambridge, Mass., 1978), 142 ffGoogle Scholar. This is the way that the schol. on Arist. Wasps 82 understands the term katapugon: ⋯ &phgr&iota&lambdaó&xgr&egr&nu&ogr&sigma ⋯&kappa&ohgr&mu&ohgr&delta&egr&icirc&tau&ogr ὡ&sgr &pgró&rgr&nu&ogr&sgr ‘Philoxenos was ridiculed as a male prostitute’.

14 On the differences between the intercrural copulation of legitimate homosexual eros and the submissiveness of a pornos to anal penetration, cf. Dover, , op. cit. 91 ff., esp. 106–7Google Scholar; on the widespread feeling that the passive role is despicable, cf. Bremmer, J., ‘An Enigmatic Indo-European Rite: Paederasty’, Arethusa 13 (1980), 279 ffGoogle Scholar.

15 cf. Rusenbusch, E., σΌλωνοσ NΌμοι, Historia Einzelschrift 9 (1966)Google Scholar F. 103 = 325 , Martina (Solon, Testimonia Veterum, 1968)Google Scholar; for a discussion of Aeschines’ ‘Against Timarchos’, cf. Dover, , op. cit. 19 ff.Google Scholar

16 cf. Dover, , op. cit. 34Google Scholar.

17 Dover, K. J., Aristophanes: Clouds (Oxford, 1969), 185Google Scholar.

18 Eup. 235, quoted by the schol. on Wasps 82.