>*. / /tAst'-fi The Birds of Aristophanes A THEORY OF INTERPRETATION. SCARBOROUGH. X9 . THE Birds of Aristophanes: A THEORY OF INTERPRETATION. % Paper Read before the American Philological Association at its Annual Meeting at Sage College, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., July 13, 1886, by W. S. SCARBOROUGH, M.A., LL.D., PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT LANGUAGES AND LITERATURE IN WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY, OHIO ; MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN PHILOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION, OF THE MODERN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, AND OF THE AMERICAN SOCIAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION. 3^.0 Published for the Author : J. S. CUSHING & CO., PRINTERS, BOSTON. 18 86. Copyright, 1886, By W. S. SCARBOROUGH. THE BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES: A THEORY OF INTERPRETATION. The three periods of the national and political exist¬ ence of Athens — from 448 to 404^.0.; from 404 to 338 b.c.; from 338 to 260 b.c. — characterize more or less the three stages of Attic comedy, — the old, the middle, and the new. The old comic poetry, as exem¬ plified by Aristophanes, assumed unlimited license. " It incarnated the freedom of the democracy, carica¬ turing individuals, criticising constitutional changes, and, through all its extravagances of burlesque and fancy, maintaining a direct relation to politics." 1 As the old grammarians assert, there was no party except the old Athenian democracy, that would have tolerated for a moment the outspoken and personal features of this element of the drama. It is related that the coun¬ try people in Attica, when injured by the people in the city, used to come at night and sing personal lampoons at the doors of the aggressors, to bring the crime home to them, and to excite public censure. This practice seems to have operated well for a time, and was once made a law. But amid the triumphs and defeats of the 1 Vide Greek Poets, chap. xix. — J. A. Symonds. 4 BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. Athenian democracy, enactments passed at one time as a restraint upon libel of individuals were at another abrogated : especially was this the case between 440 and 404 B.C. One Syracosius1 (Ol. 91, 1) is said to have been the author of a law that forbade these personal abuses; yet Aristophanes, in the Birds, satirizes this same per¬ son, and calls him a "jay," probably because of his chattering qualities (xvpakoa-la 8e kltto). In Horace (Epist. II. i. 145^155) we find references made to a. similar practice among the Romans, and a law prepared by the decemviri to prevent such personal attacks :1— Fescennia per hunc inventa licentia morem Versibus alternis opprobria rustica fudit, Libertasque recurrentes accepta per annos Lusit amabiliter, donee jam saevus apertam In rabiem coepit verti jocus et per honestas' Ire domos impune minax. Doluere cruento Dente lacessiti; fuit intactis quoque cura Condicione super communi; quin etiam lex Poenaque lata, malo quae nollet carmine quemquam Describi; vertere modum, formidine fustis Ad bene dicendum delectandumque redacti. In Virgil (Eclogue III.) there is another instance of the extent to which personal libel was carried with 1 This second decree (of Syracosius) is inferred by Droysen to have had special reference to those then charged with profanation of the mys¬ teries, and to have restrained comic satire as likely to prejudice the courts against them. As the old comedy always treated the events of the day such a provision would deprive it of its main interest. — Makaffy (footnote). BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. 5 impunity. Two shepherds, Menalcas and Damoetas, while trying their musical skill, do not hesitate to use the coarsest invectives, and at the same time to black¬ guard each other. The Romans seemed fond of this style of abuse during their Saturnian festival, which, in fact, constituted one of the earliest forms of the Latin drama. Aristophanes, as far as we have any historical knowl¬ edge of his life and public career, was a man of an independent spirit. He boldly attacked and fearlessly assailed the political vices and corruptions of his times. Symonds,1 in speaking of him, says: " His license is large, serene, sane, statuesque, self-approved. His sen¬ suality is nonchalant and natural — so utterly devoid of shame, so thoroughly at home and well contented with itself, that it has no perturbation, no defiance, no mys¬ terious attractiveness. His aTre^wXrjiJbevoL and evpv- irpo)KToi promenade in noonday, and get laughed at instead of being stoned and hooted down." Plato, in his Symposium, speaks of him as a man fond of pleasure, an aristocrat of high breeding. He was known to be a man of liberal culture, member of good society, con¬ servative in politics, literature, and philosophy. He advocated the old Athenian policy, opposed innovations, and appeared as a " bitter antagonist to any intrusion against his settled convictions." The demagogues and sophists found in him an uncompromising opponent. 1 Greek Poets. 6 BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. Even the Gods1 themselves did not escape his keen satire and burlesque. The comedies of Aristophanes were both satirical and didactic. There was always some underlying purpose beneath the surface of his most exaggerated effusions. It was about 427 B.C., in the fourth year of the Peloponnesian war, that Aristophanes appeared as a comic writer. He ridiculed the follies of ex¬ travagance ; praised the manners, customs, and sen¬ timents of former times, but contemned modern life (as in the Banqueters). The Babylonians, in which he satirized the magistracies and Cleon the dema¬ gogue, appeared in the year following the Banqueters. For this he was accused and prosecuted by Cleon, who also attempted to deprive him of the rights of citizen¬ ship. Aristophanes refers to the circumstance in the Acharnians (377-388).2 This play was written 425 B.C. The design of the poet was to expose the folly of the war between Athens and Sparta; to defend the party that favored peace against the intrigues of those who advocated war. The specific object of the Knights, which appeared in 424 B.C., was another attack upon Cleon. The "Athenian demos was personified as an easy-going, lazy, dull-witted old man, with Nikias, Demosthenes, and Cleon among the slaves, among 1 "Non licebat poetis tragicis deos religionis vulgaris, nedum majorum gentium, malos pravosque exhibere et depingere, ut licitum erat comoedia eos ludibrio laedere."— Toepelmann. 2 avris t ifiavrby inrb KAeWoy airaBov iirlffTdfuai Sib tt)i> ircpvtri KWfjLwbiav, etc. birds of aristophanes. 7 whom the latter has attained a tyrannical ascendancy by alternate bullying his fellows and flattering his master." 1 The Clouds, which aimed at the Sophists, and Soc¬ rates in particular as a representative of that sect, appeared in 423 b.c. In 422 b.c. the Wasps appeared, in which attacks on the popular courts of justice were made. Three years later the Peace made its appearance. Aristophanes returns to the subject of the Peloponnesian war, which is ridiculed as only the poet can ridicule. The Frogs, Amphiaraus, the Lysistrata, Plutus, Ecclesiazusae, have each, as the poet's other plays, a specific mission, and to this end he bends every nerve. Of all the works of Aristophanes now extant, however, the Birds, though more delightful and entertaining, has given rise to the greatest discussion. I give some of the theories held by scholars as to the object aimed at in the plan — "The Birds came out in the spring of 4x4 B.C., in the year following the sending out of the Sicilian expedition, the panic about the Hermae, and the recall and banishment of Alcibiades. The law of Syracosius, limiting the freedom of lampooning in comedy, was doubtless connected with the public excitement of the time, when the gibe of a comedian might bring upon any man suspicion, prosecution, and exile. It is doubtless to these circumstances that we may ascribe the political vagueness of this piece, which is a general satire upon the vain hopes and wild expectations of young Athens, and ridicules their ideal empire in the western Mediterranean, which contrasted so 1 Mahaffy. 8 BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. strongly with the poet's conservative notions about the Attic purity, dignity, and simplicity."—Mahaffy. "The Birds caricature in the liveliest manner the Sicilian expedition then being meditated, but which proved so utter a failure."— Chambers' Encyclopedia. " There is no doubt but that Aristophanes intended in the Birds to ridicule the ambition of the Athenians and their in¬ veterate gullibility. Peisthetaerus and Euelpides represent in comic caricature the projectors, agitators, schemers, flatterers, who, led by Alcibiades, had imposed upon the excitable vanity of the nation. Cloudcuckootown is any castle in the air or South Sea bubble which might take the fancy of the Athenian mob. But it is also more especially the project of western dominion connected with their scheme of the Sicilian conquest. Aristophanes has treated his theme so poetically and largely that the interest of the Birds is not like that of the Wasps or the Knights, almost wholly confined to the Athens of his day. It transcends those limitations of place and time, and is the everlasting allegory of foolish schemes and flimsy ambition." — Symonds. "The spirit of parody and burlesque, which is a general trait of the Aristophanic drama, here displays itself most freely and amusingly. Even the solemn genius of Pindar does not escape entirely the poet's whimsical perversions. The dithy- rambic poets in general are unsparingly ridiculed; the philos¬ ophers and men of science are not allowed to pass untouched; while profligates and impostors of every class and description are here (in the Birds), as well as in the Clouds, held up to scorn and contempt." — Felton} K. O. Miiller thinks the play in some respects only a general satire on Athenian frivolity. Schlegel says it 1 Revised by Goodwin. BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. 9 is merely a "Lustspiel," full of imagination and the marvellous, with amusing touches at everything, but with no particular object. Kochly advances an argu¬ ment to prove that the analogy from other plays compels us to believe that Aristophanes sympathizes with those whom he makes victorious (Peisthetaerus and the Birds). W. C. Green, in his introduction to the Birds, says that Kochly means to convey the idea that the poet recom¬ mends a new Athens, despairing of the old, and the type of this place is in the air. It is to be a democracy, but yet to have a head, — a Periclean democracy. The head hinted at (in spite of his being under accusation, if not condemned) was Alcibiades. In support of this, v. 1431 (Frogs) is quoted (Ye ought not to rear a lion's cub ; but, if such be reared, submit to his ways). Vogelin and Droysen both oppose Kochly, and regard the Birds as simply a poetical composition with no par¬ ticular object. Kock says : "The relation in which the comedy stands to reality and facts is neither one of contradiction nor agreement. Reality and facts by the feelings they produced called forth the poem, and so far had an influence on it; but the poem is independent of the passions which first started it." Kennedy regards the play as an antidote to the reli¬ gious fanaticism of Athens at that time. In a Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology, published in England over a quarter of a century ago, W. G. Clark, in his criticism of Siivern's position, gave the latter's main points as follows: " Over and above the avowed and IO BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. patent purpose of ' exhibiting to the public eye a view of the extreme corruption, perversity, and vanity of the Athenian life and manners in general, particularly the licentiousness of the demagogues, etc,' Aristophanes," says Siivern, "had a special and less obvious design of exposing the Sicilian expedition 'as essentially a chi¬ merical phantom, which none but a vain, ambitious population, of inflammable, giddy, and volatile men, could have been induced to pursue; and besides several serious admonitions which are scattered about here and there, he clearly shows the selfish views in which it was conceived, and in the accomplishment of which it is likely to end'; that is to say, that Alcibiades had con¬ ceived the expedition with a view to make himself despot of Athens, and, through Athens, of Greece." In Siivern's own language : — "Aristophanes hat nun sein Thema so behandelt, dass er das Unternehmen durch dessen ganze Einkleidung als ein in seinem Ursprunge durchaus sophistisches, seinem Wesen nach windiges und chimarisches Project, wie es nur einem eiteln, herrschsuchtigen Volke entziindbarer, leichtfertiger, vogelartiger Menschen eingeredet werden mochte, darstellt, und, ausser mehrern einzeln eingestreuten ernsten Warnungen, ganz beson- ders den eigensiichtigen Zweck klar macht, worin es gemeint sei, und in dessen Ausfuhrung es endigen konne." 1 This same writer (Siivern), in his elaborate essay, says that the Birds of the play represent the Athenian people; 1 Uber Aristophanes Vogel von Hrn. Siivern. (Published in the "Transactions of the Royal Academy of Sciences," at Berlin, in 1830 ) BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. II the Gods, the Spartans and their principal allies; the men, the smaller dependent Greek states collectively; Peisthetaerus combines the chief characteristics of Alci- biades and Gorgias; Euelpides represents the credulous populace of Athens, in conjunction with Polus of Agri- gentum; and the Epops is meant to represent Lamachus. To the close reader and observer there is a resemblance between the character of Alcibiades and that of Peis¬ thetaerus, notwithstanding the disparity of their ages. This likeness is seen in more than one passage, and especially where the character of Alcibiades is con¬ trasted with that of Nicias : — Kal firjv fj.a tov AC ov)(l vvcrra£eiv y en o)pa cttIv rjp.iv ovBt fieWoviKiav, aAA.' rj kpvyava, Kal TovvofC rifuv (ftpdaarov.1 If Peisthetaerus 2 (Jleio-OeTaipo?, IIeiOeraipos, Ilet- a-eraipoi?) means the eloquent pleader, as the name might imply, then most assuredly he has a counterpart in Alcibiades. Grote tells us (Vol. VIII.) that in cour- 1 Birds, lines 638-6 2 IIe«.0€Lpv 'Ep/Awv ovSiv, aXXoiV 8k ayaXfjLarwv TrtpLKOirai nves irporepov vtto veo)T€poiv fi€ta TraiSias Kal olvov yeyevrjfJLevai, /cat to. jMva-T^pia a/A a a>s TTOLeiTCU iv ot/ctats e' vfipu • wv Kal tqv 'AA/ct^StaSiyv hrp- TiStvro. Kat aura VTroXafifiavovTes^ot /xaAtora tm 'AA./a/JiaSy ayfio- fjLevoi ifMroBoiv ovti s €7rl hrjfiov KaraXvcrei ra re jxvcrriKa Kal r/ rwv 'EpfiStv irepi- Koirrj yevoLTO kou ovSkv ct7j avra>v o ri ov [xer inetvov kirpa^r), yovres TeKfirjpuL rrjv aXXr/v avrov is ra imrrjSevfiara ov 8r)fJLoriKr)v irapavofiiav." 1 Catana, now Catania, a city of Sicily, was founded by a colony from Chalcis in Euboea five years after the settlement of Carthage. The inhabitants were trans¬ ferred by Hiero to Leontini, but after his death they returned and reoccupied the place. Dionysius, who afterward got possession of the city, sold a part of the inhabitants as slaves, and settled here a body of merce¬ naries called Campani. It was here that the ship i Thuc. Bk. vi. 28* 22 .BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. " Salaminia" (SaXaficvla) came from Athens for Alci- biades, — to order him to sail back and defend himself against the charges which the state had brought against him,—and for some others of the soldiers, who with him had been informed against as being guilty of impiety with regard to the mysteries, and some of them with regard to the Mercuries also. For the Athenians, after the armament had sailed away, made no less inves¬ tigation into what had been done in the case of the mysteries than in that of the Mercuries; and as they did not test the character of the informers, but in their suspicious mood admitted all who came forward, on the credit of unprincipled men, they arrested and threw into prison very excellent men (citizens), thinking it more expedient to sift the matter, and find it out, than that, in consequence of the bad principle of an informer, an accused person, even though he had a good character, should be unquestioned, and should escape.1 Then again we observe that while dismay, terror, and wrath beset the Athenian mind at home, the Athenian forces set sail from Catana for Messana, expecting its betrayal to themselves ; but in this they were deceived, as the intrigues attempted did not come to anything. Alcibiades, who was now summoned home, had left his command, and supposing that he would be outlawed, gave information of the intended movement, to which he was privy, to the friends of the Syracusans in Messana, 1 Thu.c. VI. 53. Literally, rather than freely translated by Dale, for¬ merly of Oxford. BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. 23 thus acting the part of a traitor. He well knew the awful consequences that would follow his return home. And yet, as Grote remarks, " in considering the conduct of the Athenians toward Alcibiades, they were guilty of no act of injustice. He had committed — at least there was fair reason for believing that he had committed — an act criminal in the estimation of every Greek, — the divulgation and profanation of the mysteries. This act — alleged against him in the indictment very distinctly, divested of all supposed ulterior purpose, treasonable or otherwise — was legally punishable at Athens, and was universally accounted guilty in public estimation, as an offence at once against the religious sentiment of the people, and against the public safety, by offending the two goddesses, Demeter and Persephone, and driving them to withdraw their favor and protection." Grote thinks that there is no ground for reproaching the Athenians ; for the uniform tendency of Christian legis¬ lation has been to use legal punishment for sacrilegious crimes. In support of his assertion, he quotes very freely from a work on French criminal jurisprudence, — Jousse, Traits de la Justice Crwiinelle, Paris, i/yi, part iv. tit. 27, Vol. III. p. 672 ; also part iv. tit. 46, n. 5, 8, 10, 11, Vol. IV. pp. 97~99- I simply call attention to the passages without comment. Alcibiades, on being informed that he had been condemned to death, in his absence, is said to have exclaimed, " I shall show them that I am alive!"1 As' is well known, the recall and 1 Vide Plutarch, Alcibiades, c. 22, for further particulars as tc how he redeemed his word. 24 birds of aristophanes. banishment of Alcibiades proved in a sense fatal to the, interests of Athens. It made him an angry enemy, who lost no opportunity to advise the Spartans as to the weak points of the Athenians, and assist them in bringing about the defeat of this once proud and famous city ; it stirred up those who had espoused the cause of Alcibiades, and were willing to defend him under all circumstances, favorable or unfavorable. A portion of the Sicilian armament became offended; the Argeians and Mantineians lost interest, slackeifcd their zeal, or, in the words of Thucydides (II. 6$), ra re iv t® o-rparo- 7re8(p dfjl^Xvrepa iiroiovv, k.t.X. Such was the state of things as was then existing; such was the condition of affairs as seen, and doubtless thoroughly analyzed by the comedian, Aristophanes. In line 1570 of the Birds, Aristophanes puts into the mouth of Poseidon the words, , vito Ss tov Bij/jlov tl/JL(ofi6Vopov€ Kara roov irerp&v 20) might suggest this as the place of action. irerpa and 7rerpat are often used for the tribune and seats in the Pnyx, as in the Knights. The rocks here referred to seem to constitute something of the nature of a background at the foot of which the scene takes place, and not at the summit. In line 301, where Euelpides exclaims: — " rt 17s; rt's yXavK 'A9rjva£ r/yaye; " and in line 1455, where the Sycophant uses " €V0aSe (. . . o)s av row? £evovs KaAecm/xej/os, k£.t ey/ce«A^Kajs ivdaSl, Kar av TreTw/mi 7raA.11/ CKeure)," some have thought there were clear indications that Athens is the scene of the action. In the beginning of the Birds the two Athenians (Peisthetaerus and Euelpi- 1 "The Scene is a wild desolate country, with a bare open prospect on one side and some upright rocks covered with shrubs and brushwood in the centre of the stage." — Free's view as to its representation on the stage. 30 birds of aristophanes. des) are represented as having lost their way,1 which could hardly have been the case were they in the vicinity of the Pnyx. Aristophanes seems to have wished it un¬ derstood that the scene is in mid-air, — iv peam Bi]7rov6ev d,jp ia-TL 7% (your atmosphere is midway between' earth and heaven, I suppose).2 In lines 9, 10, 11, already quoted in part, we observe that Athens could not be seen from the spot where Peisthetaerus and Euelpides were.3 It is impossible then to base this supposition upon these references. The evidence as to the time and place of the exhibition of the play seems to favor the spring of b.c. 414, and the city Dionysia.4 These festivals were celebrated at the close of every winter, as we know, — at the beginning of spring. Thucydides (V. 20) says : — " avtcli at cnrovSal iyevovro reXeVTWvros tov xeifjltovos ajxa. rjpi iic Alovvctlcov evOevs. rS>v a&TiKGtv." That is, they were celebrated about the 12th of the month Elaphebolion, which is about the last of March, or early April according to our method of reckoning. The play of the Birds was doubtless presented after the sending out of the " Salaminia," to which we have 1 aAA.' ouS' ottov yrjs 4(rfihv oTS' eycoy' en. evrevdevl tV irarplS" Uv e£e6-ois MaptAdSri, tjSri ireirpea0evKas ffv iroAi6s &v; 4vlt avevevce ' Kalroi 7' e'trr2 achrppoiv Kapydrris. ti Sal ApdicvWos nevop'i8r)s Sj TIpij/iSijs ; olSev rts v/acov ra,k/3drav' tous Xaduas ; oti (pacriv. a\\' 6 Koicrvpas* ical Aafiaxos, * 614. Quis fuerit o Kola-vpas mihi quidem nondum compertum est. Megacles Coesyrae filius, quem hie tangi arbitrantur schol. et Brunckius, pater fuit Clisthenis, qui rem publicam constituit post ejectos Pisistratidas. Hujus Megaclis ex filio Hippocrate nepos fuit alter Megacles, Periclis avunculus, avusque Alcibiadis maternus. Sed o Kouri)- pas, quem hie irridet noster, manifesto juvenis erat. Neminem Alcmaeonidarum his tem- poribus clarum invenio, praeter Euryptolemum Pisianactis filium, quem Alcibiadis dfei/uov diserte vocat Xenoph. Hist. Gr. 1, 4, 19. Ipsum Alcibiadem intelligi suadent maternum genus a Coesyra ductum, et auctoritas in republica jam inde a prima juventu^e concessa. Verum ei non conveniunt quae de aere alieno dicuntur. elm. — Dindorf. (Note on the Acharnians.) BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES. 33 a literal fact, only proves that Lamachus had got into debt in or before the year 425. There is no reason why he should be represented as "moulting" eleven years afterward. So far as we know, Lamachus never had any feathers in this sense, and therefore could not lose them. That he was poor is a well-established historical fact; but Plutarch's amplification, that when appointed general he had to charge the public a small sum et SrifioKparia, ravra 8t}t avcuTX€T& > AIKAIonOAIS. , ov Srjr' iav p.r) fj.Lado(f)Opfj ye Adjxaxos. AAMAX02. a A A.' ov v eyk /xev iraai He\oirovvri