Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T20:08:14.403Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Function of the Euripides Scene in Aristophanes‘ Acharnians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2009

R. M. Harriott
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Starkie wrote of this scene (Ach.393–489) that it was ‘perhaps the most successful piece of Aristophanic burlesque in existence'. Recently Dearden has written that the rag-borrowing scene exists only for the sake of the Euripidean parody. ‘Euripides is introduced into the play (it becomes apparent) to provide Dicaeopolis with rags in which he can plead his case before the Acharnians – though before he actually speaks to them he finds it necessary to apologize for these very rags (498). The whole scene is an obvious and elaborate parody of the spirit of Euripides’ plays and in particular of his realism in dressing his heroes in rags and it can hardly be claimed that providing the rags is the main object: they are, rather, the means of satirizing elements of his tragedies.’ I agree that Aristophanes is making fun of Euripides here, of his parentage and personality, his tragic style and dramatic technique, his presentation of a hero who is crippled or blinded and dressed in rags. But there is more to be said for, and about, the scene than that it equips Dicaeopolis and mocks Euripides.

Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , April 1982 , pp. 35 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1982

Access options

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

References

Notes

1. The Acharnians of Aristophanes ed. Starkie, W. J. M., intro. p. xxxiiiGoogle Scholar.

2. Dearden, C. W., The Stage of Aristophanes, (London, 1976), p. 55Google Scholar.

3. The ‘rags’ are discussed below, note 7.

4. In Ach.the listing, and the actual accumulation, of objects is noteworthy: e.g. (listing) 1089–93, (accumulation) 1097–1142.

5. Comment on individual points of parody is almost entirely excluded in order to concentrate on the other elements in the scene.

6. Dicaeopolis when speaking to Euripides refers to ‘the chorus’ (416) and ‘the choreutae’ (443) not to Acharnians, perhaps partly as one theatrical professional to another.

7. The much discussed question of the ‘rags’ has two aspects, the practical problem of what actually was worn on the stage by fallen heroes (by Xerxes in the Persians of Aeschylus, by Philoctetes, by Telephus) and the reason for the mockery of Euripides. This scene shows that Euripides was ridiculed mainly because of the number of his plays with ‘ragged heroes’ (seven are named here); disapproval (if any) will be based on the association between ‘rags’ and trickery effected by disguise (see further below p. 4 and note 15), this association made by ‘Aeschylus’ at Frogs 1064–5. This scene also shows that what Dicaeopolis borrowed was a piece of cloth, lying folded in a heap of similar pieces; it was tattered, and when he held it up, Dicaeopolis could enlarge a slit, look through it and pray to Zeus ‘who sees through everything’ (435). The cloth was next draped round him (between 436 and 437) as an all-concealing cloak, which could be flung back as necessary to allow freedom of action, and which was whipped off in a second at the moment of self-declaration (after the first word, ⋯στις, in 595). Such a garment has the advantage that it conceals the wearer thoroughly (and would cover the ornate tragic chiton) and that its wearer need not look ludicrous in the company of those dressed in tragic finery.

In this scene the words for the clothes are interesting; Dicaeopolis usually says ‘rags’, once σΠαρϒάνα, referring to Telephus and the swaddling clothes associated with the exposed infant. Euripides adds λακίδες and ΠεΠλώματα (which are Aeschylean) and τρύχη to the more ordinary terms.

8. Starkie finds the plural peculiar, not realizing that cloak, hat, and staff formed a regular trio, the mention of the staff (used for support and defence) postponed here by the explanatory lines 440 f.

9. A comic reference, again as one theatrical practitioner to another, to the device, common in tragedy, whereby the audience knows more than character(s) in the play.

10. ‘Sayings’, ρημάΤια, here means both beggar's patter and Euripidean quotation: D. has combined both styles in the preceding line (446). On the use of diminutives see the following note.

11. Dicaeopolis actually uses diminutives here (as elsewhere in the scene), part contemptuously, part in beggar's wheedling tones: ‘Give me an itsy-bitsy (i.e. rotten old) basket then’. For the objects mentioned see Sparkes, B. A., JHS 95 (1975), 122 fCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Cf. Sophocles fr 752 N2 and Plato, Rep. 552DGoogle Scholar (which suggests an association between beggars and criminality).

13. For Euripides' Telephus see Handley, E. and Rea, J., BICS Supplement v, 1957Google Scholar.

14. Clouds921–2, with Dover's notes.

15. For Odysseus Homer uses the word άλήτης (e.g. Od.17.483) which is related to thecomic abusive word ⋯λαζὼν. The ‘tricky’ aspect of Odysseus, much criticized in the fifth century is like that of the alazon, often a vagrant, who seeks to impose on people by boasting and ‘putting on an act'.

16. Fenik, B., Studies in the Odyssey, (Hermes Einzelschriften, Band 30, 1974)Google Scholar discusses postponemens and retardations in the self-revelations of Odysseus.

17. Cf. 447; on each occasion the verb used suggests, like the Clouds passage quoted above, p. 4, that the beggar nourishes himself with words.

18. See Dale, A. M., Collected Papers (Cambridge, 1969), p. 288Google Scholar.

19. The preparation for the speech began (303–14) with the view that the Lacedaemonians were not solely responsible for the war and that they too had been wronged; the phrase ‘on behalf of the Lacedaemonians’ occurs at 356, 369, 482; the idea that the hero is speaking on a capital charge is dominant in the Euripides scene; an actual defence of the ‘private peace treaty’ is provided by the action of the second half of the play. An analysis of the speech shows that the first four lines express Dicaeopolis' hatred of the Laconians; fifteen lines are given to the Athenians' actions against Megara and their result, four to Pericles’ reaction. The Spartans are then at last mentioned as recipients of Megara's pleas for help.

The speech is also unexpected in that Dicaeopolis, ‘wretchedly dressed’, does not appeal for pity; the only personal note in the speech proper is the initial expression of hatred. For the proem see below, note 23.

20. ‘Literary’ interest in the speech has tended to concentrate on the parody of Herodotusand of Euripides, which is incidental to the main function of providing a ‘defence’ for a ‘traitor’ which will be sufficiently anti-Spartan without supporting the proponents of continued war.

21. ‘As a result': the connection between one act and the next is underlined by initial έντε⋯εν (or the like) at 526, 528, 530, 535, 539.

22. Cf. his ‘Homeric’ arming-scene (1097–1142), BICS 26 (1979), p. 95Google Scholar.

23. We recall that in the opening scene Dicaeopolis had ‘seen through’ pretence of various kinds (63, 87, 109, 114, 135, 151). His awareness that others are easily deceived, particularly by praise and offers of ‘friendship’ is stated in the ‘chopping-block’ speech. It is interesting that what he says there about the susceptibility of rustics to flattery is balanced by criticism. of old men as keen to convict accused persons; in context these remarks can be seen as alluding to the Acharnians, but in the next line Aristophanes refers to his prosecution by Cleon the previous year and this forces us to reconsider the bearing of the preceding comments. It seems likely that the three ‘parabatic’ passages of this play need to be taken closely together (370–82, 496–507, 628–64) and seen as an extension of Aristophanes’ defence against Cleon, a defence made problematical by the characteristics of such as the Acharnians. If so ‘Comedy too knows what is right’ (500) presents Comedy as a character on a political and legal stage.