Page images

to think, that all which the musician did, while the dialogue was going on, was to mark the time. The opposition which Plutarch makes between λέγεσθαι παρὰ κροῦσιν and ᾄδεσθαι, excludes all notion of singing from the first expression. Hermann thinks that only those trimeters were sung, which were in the midst of the choric songs, or closely connected with them; while the others were pronounced to the sound of the flute'. If only one performer on the flute was employed on these occasions, (which seems to have been the case) he could hardly have played without intermission through a whole tragedy.

It appears that the musician occasionally played a symphony or ritornel, while the Chorus was silent. Hesych. Ataúλiov. ὁπόταν ἐν τοῖς μέλεσι μεταξὺ παραβάλλῃ μέλος τι ὁ ποιητὴς, παρασιωπήσαντος τοῦ χοροῦ. παρὰ δὲ τοῖς μουσικοῖς τὰ τοιαῦτα μεσαύλια. For ποιητὴς should be read αὐλητής. Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 1282. φασὶ δὲ διαύλιον λέγεσθαι, ὅταν, ἡσυχίας πάντων γενομένης, ἔνδον ὁ αὐλητὴς ᾄσῃ.


On the Parts of Tragedy.

The component Parts of Tragedy, according to Aristotle, are

1. Prologue; i. e. all that precedes the Parodos of the Chorus.

2. Episode; i. e. all that intervenes between entire choric


3. Exode; that entire portion, after which there is no choric song.

4. The Choric part, consisting of a. the Parodos, or first discourse of the whole Chorus. b. the Staismon (Stationary) or choric song without anapasts or trochees (whence its name.) c. the Commus, or lamentation, whether uttered by the Chorus and the Actors.

'The iambic foot was adapted to song, for there was a particular instrument appropriated to it; see Hesych. v: Ιαμβίς, Παριαμβίδες, Ἰαμβύκαι.


Of the Prologue.

The student will not confound the póλoyos of the Greek Tragedy with the prologus of the Latin Comedy, which was an address of the poet to the audience. It was the business of the prologue to introduce to the spectator the subject of the drama, whether tragedy or comedy. The necessary information could be communicated, either indirectly in the course of the action itself, or by a direct account given to the audience. The former plan, being the more agreeable to probability, was followed by Eschylus and Sophocles; the latter by Euripides. Aristotle in his Rhetoric describes the Prologue as being deiyua λόγου, and ὁδοποίησις τῷ ἐπιόντι, and its nature and office, as Mr. Twining observes, are well described by Terence, at the conclusion of his prologue to the Adelphi.

Dehinc ne expectetis, argumenta fabulæ,

Senes, qui primi venient, hi partim aperient,
In agendo partim ostendent.

VOL. II. NO. 7.

Speaking of Comedy, Aristotle says (Poet. V.)" who invented. masks, or prologues, or a number of actors, is unknown." For προλόγους Hermann contends that we should read λόγους, i. e. arguments. But Twining maintains, and I think, rightly, that poxoyous is the true reading; for that anciently, the Chorus began the drama, as bearing the principal part in it; and one or more émetσódia, were introduced for variety; and that the poλoyos was prefixed, when the drama assumed a regular shape, by way of introduction. And this was no doubt the real state of the case. The whole of Twining's chapter on this subject is very good. The póλoyos of a drama answers to the poolμov or introduction of an oration, and to the poaúλiov or prelude of a piece of instrumental music.



Of the Episodes.

The ̓Επεισόδιον was so called, from the entrance upon the stage of an actor in addition to the Chorus. Suidas; ̓Επεισόδιον: τὸ εἰς τὰ δράματα εἰσαγόμενον κατὰ προσθήκην τινα καὶ αὔξησιν τοῦ δράματος. His other definition seems applicable to the early stage of tragedy; ̓Επεισόδιον: τὸ εἰσφερόμενον τῷ δράματι γέλωτος χάριν, ἔξω τῆς ὑποθέσεως όν. Pollux IV. 108. έπεισόδιον δὲ ἐν δράμασι πρᾶγμα πράγματι συναπτόμενον. In fact the έπεισόδια properly comprehend all the action or drama, introduced at first by way of relief, between the Choric songs, to which were added, the πρόλογος for an introduction, and the odos for a conclusion; hence the Latins called them actus. The definition of Pollux appears to refer to the words of Aristotle (§. x.) λέγω δὲ ἐπεισοδιώδη μῦθον, ἐν ᾧ τὰ ἐπεισόδια μετ ̓ ἄλληλα οὔτ ̓ εἰκὸς οὔτ ̓ ἀνάγκη εἶναι, where the incidents are unconnected. In f. xvii. he says, that the poet should take care that his Episodes should be pertinent to the plot. He adds, that the Episodes are short in the drama, and long in epic poetry: e. g. in the Odyssey, the story itself is briefly summed up: A man is absent from home many years his domestic affairs are ruined by the suitors of his wife; and his son is plotted against. He returns home, and kills his enemies. This is the subject matter of the poem; all the rest is episode.

Of the Exodos.

This part is considered as preparatory to the departure of the actors and chorus from the stage, the l'envoy of the drama. It seems that they marched off to a certain tune. Suidas ; ̓Εξόδιοι νόμοι: αὐλήματα, δι ̓ ὧν ἐξῄεσαν οἱ χοροὶ καὶ οἱ αὐληταί. οὕτω Κρατῖνος. Τοὺς ἐξοδίους ὑμῖν ἵν ̓ αὐλῶ τοὺς νόμους. Pollux IV. 108. καὶ μέλος δέ τι ἐξόδιον, ὃ ἐξιόντες ᾖδον. Aristophanes alludes to the ἐξόδιοι νόμοι, Vesp. 579.


Κἂν αὐλητής γε δίκην νικᾷ, ταύτης ἡμῖν ἐπίχειρα, Εν φορβειᾷ τοῖσι δικασταῖς ἔξοδον ηὔλησ ̓ ἀπιοῦσιν, where the Scholiast says, ἔθος ἦν ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς (ἐξόδοις) τῶν τῆς τραγῳδίας χορικῶν προσώπων προηγεῖσθαι αὐλητὴν, ὥστε αὐλοῦντα προπέμπειν. An instance of the ἐξόδιον μέλος may be seen in the concluding song of Eumenides, which as Hermann observes, partakes more of the nature of the Parodos, than of the Stasimon.


Of the Choric part.


1. Πάροδος. We have seen Aristotle's definition. Scholiast on the Phoenissæ, v. 212. says, πάροδος δέ ἐστιν ᾠδὴ χοροῦ βαδίζοντος, ᾀδομένη ἅμα τῇ εἰσόδῳ, ὡς τὸ—-σῖγα λεπτὸν ἴχνος ἀρβύλης τιθεῖτε. (Orest. 140. τίθετε.)


It is plain that this account does not agree with that given by Aristotle. If the words quoted from the Orestes are spoken by Electra, they cannot be the parodus, which appears to me to begin at v. 310. There is no objection however to supposing that they were spoken by the chorus. Hermann contends that the parodus begins at 805. because, by some tolerably violent alterations, he converts the concluding verses (824839. Pors.) into Antistrophies, and leaves the three preceding verses as a mesode, or as he expresses it epodum in medio carminis; which he considers to be peculiar to the parodus. But Aristotle's definition is very simple, and comprehensive ; parodus is the first speech of the whole chorus.' If therefore, the choric song at v. 310. of the Orestes, be a song of the whole chorus, as undoubtedly it is, either it is the parodus, or Aristotle is wrong. But there is great difference amongst the grammarians on the subject of the parodus. Pollux says (IV, 108.) καὶ ἡ μὲν εἴσοδος τοῦ χοροῦ πάροδος καλεῖται. Hephæstio (p. 128. Gaisf.) ἐν ταῖς παρόδοις τῶν χορῶν--μετὰ δέκα ἀναπαιστικὰ, λόγου χάριν, καὶ κατάληξιν, ἐπάγουσιν εὐθὺς ὅμοια μὲν, καὶ ἀναπαιστικὰ, οὐ μέντοι τῶν ἴσων συζυγιῶν. where the Scholiast says of the parodus, οὕτως καλεῖται ἡ πρώτη τῶν χορῶν ἐπὶ τὴν σκηνὴν εἴσοδος. The fact seems to be, that Aristotle uses the term, in its strict acceptation, to signify the first proper song of the entire chorus


which was, at first, the beginning of the play; all the interlocutory parts of the chorus which precede it, and all that was recited, and not sung, being considered a part of the prologue whereas the later grammarians took the parodus to be the first appearance of the chorus on the stage. And perhaps it may have been the case, that the whole chorus did not come upon the stage in regular order till the parodus was to be sung, but only the Coryphæus and one or two more. Aristotle says of the whole chorus ;" for in those short choric systems which were interposed in the action of the play, the Coryphæus alone sang.


The parodus was sometimes interrupted by anapæstic verses, which the Coryphæus recited; an instance of which is pointed out by Hermann' in the parodus of the Antigone, but these did not form a part of the parodus, which, says Aristotle, was sung by the whole chorus.

2. The Stasimon; a song of the whole chorus without anapæsts or trochees;" i. e. not interrupted by anapæstic systems, or trochaic tetrameters; for there are many anapæstic feet, and short trochaic verses interspersed in the regular chorusses. Etymol. Μ. p. 725, 2. Στάσιμον: τὸ μέλος τοῦ χοροῦ. ὅταν γὰρ ὁ χορὸς μετὰ τὴν πάροδον διατίθηται τι μένων ἀκίνητος, πρὸς τὴν ὑπόθεσιν ἂν εἰκότως στάσιμον λέγοιτο. Schol. Eurip. Phoeniss. 209. τοῦτο τὸ μέλος στάσιμον λέγεται. ὅταν γὰρ ὁ χορὸς μετὰ τὴν πάροδον λέγῃ τι μέλος ἀνῆκον τῇ ὑποθέσει, ἀκίνητος μένων, στάσιμον


[ocr errors]


The compiler of the Etymologicon, having met with this, or some similar definition, and not understanding the words ἀνῆκον τῇ ὑποθέσει ‘relating to the subject,” has made nonsense of them. Hermann says that the Stasimon was So called, not because the chorus stood still when they sang it, which they did not, but from its being continuous, and uninterrupted by anapasts or trochees; and, as we should say, steady; it seems to be derived from στάσις, a set, στάσις μελῶν, a set of choric songs,' i. e. a strophe and antistrophe, and perhaps an epode. Aristoph. Ran. 1314. Mǹ, πρiv y


1 In Aristot. Poet. p. 143.

« PreviousContinue »