Bakola, E

English

UCL Discovery

The Classical Quarterlyhttp://journals.cambridge.org/CAQAdditional services for The Classical Quarterly:Email alerts: Click hereSubscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click hereA MISSED JOKE IN ARISTOPHANES’  WASPS 1265–1274Emmanuela BakolaThe Classical Quarterly / Volume 55 / Issue 02 / December 2005, pp 609 ­ 613DOI: 10.1093/cq/bmi056, Published online: 25 April 2006Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009838805000558How to cite this article:Emmanuela Bakola (2005). A MISSED JOKE IN ARISTOPHANES’  WASPS 1265–1274. The Classical Quarterly,55, pp 609­613 doi:10.1093/cq/bmi056Request Permissions : Click hereDownloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAQ, IP address: 144.82.107.20 on 06 Sep 2012beside me and gush forth in that direction with the preliminary rendition of whatever it isyou areintending to sing in your ﬂowing performance.A CQ referee enhances the interpretation of the conceit here by relatingproanaba ´ lhtai to “the pleasure boys sometimes take in sending their urine in along, high parabolic trajectory”. Such imagery accords well with the earlier referenceto the a   nabolai´ encountered in the dung-beetle’s ﬂight-path.University of Manitoba RORY B. EGANregan@ms.umanitoba.cadoi:10.1093/cq/bmi055A MISSED JOKE IN ARISTOPHANES’WASPS 1265–1274The ode of the second parabasis of Wasps (1265–74) satirizes a certain Amynias, aprominent Athenian at the time.1 I shall argue here that none of the interpretationsoffered so far has fully grasped the point of the ode and I shall demonstrate howAristophanes builds his joke about Amynias to a climax.polla ´ kiv dh `  dox’ e   mautw ¼ ˜ 1265adexio ` v pefuke ´ nai kai` 1265bskaio ` vo u   depw ´ pote,a   ll’ "muni´av o   Se ´ llou 1267ama ˜llon, ou   kt w ˜n Krwbu ´ lou, 1267bou Ftov o   ng ’ e   gw ´ pot’ ei Idon 1268aa   nti` mh ´ lou kai` r   oa ˜v deip- 1268bnou ˜nta meta ` Lewgo ´ rou. pei-n} ˜ ga ` r} Fper "ntifw ˜n. 1270a   lla ` presbeu ´ wn ga ` re   vF a ´ rsalon w   ¼cet’.ei It’ e   kei ˜ mo ´ nov mo ´ noisitoi ˜v Pene ´ staisi xunh ˜n toi ˜vQettalw ˜n, au   to ` v pene ´ sthv 1274aw   ne   la ´ ttwn ou   deno ´ v. 1274bThe discrepancy between the different interpretations begins with vv. 1265–7b andsubsequently inﬂuences the interpretation of the whole ode. MacDowell (1971),like the earlier commentators Rogers and Starkie, supplied skaio ` v pefuke ´ nai e   doxenafter ma ˜llon of 1267b, so that Amynias is described as stupid.2 His reason is that1 J. Kirchner, PA 737. It has been suggested that he was a general in 423–422 B.C. Cf.G. Kaibel, Hermes 30 (1895), 441–5; D. M. MacDowell, ‘Nikostratos’, CQ 15 (1965), 50–1.It certainly seems from vv. 74 and 326 (suggesting that Amynias was sitting at the front of theaudience) that he was holding an important public ofﬁce.2 D. M. MacDowell, Aristophanes’Wasps (Oxford, 1971), 295. Cf. B. B. Rogers, The Waspsof Aristophanes (London, 1875) and W. J. M. Starkie, Aristophanes:The Wasps (Amsterdam,1968, reprint of London, 1897), ad loc.; also J. Van Leeuwen, Aristophanis VespaeSHORTER NOTES 609the following verses, which for him contain the explanation of this statement (ga ` r in1270), show how Amynias ‘used to associate with rich men [like Leogoras], but nowhe has lost all his wealth’. MacDowell rejects the obvious alternative, which is tosupply dexio ` vp e ´ fuken after ma ˜llon, on the grounds that ‘hunger and poverty maybe evidence of stupidity but cannot be evidence of cleverness’.3 However, the ﬁnalstanza about Amynias’ embassy to Thessaly shows that he ‘showed himself to beclever: although almost everyone is superior to him, he was ingenious enough to dis-cover some friends with whom he could associate on equal terms, so as to get a mealout of them’. So, he concludes (297), ‘the song, which seemed at ﬁrst to be paying acompliment to Amynias, turns out to be an insult after all’.Sommerstein,4 however, like Green and Blaydes,5 supplies dexio ` vp e ´ fuken afterma ˜llon. His interpretation of the passage (ﬁrst three stanzas 1265–70) is that‘Amynias is being described as very clever because, though a poor man, he hasfound a way of keeping well fed by sponging on rich men like Leogoras’.6Sommerstein further thinks that the fourth stanza, which describes Amynias’embassy to Thessaly (1271–4), again demonstrates his cleverness, since ‘Amyniashas shown himself clever by ﬁnding a diplomatic role to which a poor man likehimself was ideally suited, when on the face of it he did not seem an appropriateambassador to send to an aristocratic state like Thessaly’.7 He concludes that ‘thetreatment of Amynias is thus sarcastic from the start’.8MacDowell’s interpretation forces the Greek. The wording of the passagepolla ´ kiv dh `  dox’ e   mautw ¼ ˜ ... (the chorus on itself) a   lla ` ... ma ˜llon (the choruson Amynias) suggests that the same verb should be supplied with (and the samequality recognized in) both subjects, that is dexio ` vp e ´ fuken, or, better still, dexio ` vpefuke ´ nai e   doxen. For MacDowell’s interpretation we would expect a   ll’ ou   k"muni´av or the like. Sommerstein is right to supply dexio ` vp e ´ fuken (or dexio ` vpefuke ´ nai e   doxen). He is also right to argue that the praise is offered sarcastically.However, as I shall show, sarcastic praise is offered only in the ﬁrst three stanzas ofthe ode. After this build-up, in the closing verses and with telling use of bathos,Aristophanes subverts even this ‘praise’ and produces a more devastating put-down of his target.In the ﬁrst verses of the ode the chorus claims that Amynias has surpassed them incleverness. His epithets o   Se ´ llou ‘son of Hotair’ and ou   kt w ˜n Krwbu ´ lou ‘he of theHairbun family’ (1267), which suggest that Amynias exhibits self-importance,9 area hint at the kind of ‘cleverness’ which the chorus attributes to him. This becomesclear in the verses which follow: Amynias has become successful in social climbing10(Lugduni-Batavorum, 1893), 137. This reading ultimately follows the ancient scholia, which onou   kt w ˜n Krwbu ´ lou note: e   k tou ˜ proeirhme ´ nou proslhpte ´ on to ` “skaio ` v moi e   doxen”V GAld.3 MacDowell on 1267, 296. Cf. his note on 1270.4 A. Sommerstein, Wasps (Warminster, 1983), 231–2 and in his earlier article ‘Notes onAristophanes’ Wasps’, CQ 27 (1977), 275–6.5 W. C. Green, Aristophanes: The Wasps (London, 1891) and F. H. M. Blaydes, AristophanisVespae (Halis Saxonum,1893), ad loc.6 Sommerstein (n. 4), (1983) on 1267, 231. Cf. (1977) 275–6. Leogoras was well known forhis wealth and was satirized by the comic dramatists for spending his money on pleasures andluxurious living, cf. Aristophanes, Clouds 109 cum schol., Plato, Perialges fr. 114, Eupolis,Autolycus fr. 50. Cf. Kirchner, PA 9075.7 Sommerstein (n. 4), (1983) on 1273, 232. Cf. (1977) 276.8 Sommerstein (n. 4), (1977) 276.9 For Amynias’ hair cf. Wasps 466 with MacDowell ad loc.SHORTER NOTES 610by sponging on rich men like Leogoras (1269),11 although he himself has only ‘poor’means (1268b, cf. 1270, 1274).12 At the same time, in the whole of the third stanza(1268–70) the chorus describes Amynias as a successful sponger by stressing oneelement with which a kolax is usually associated in Comedy: food.13 SinceAmynias is ‘poor’ he would be dining only on very simple food, like ‘apple andpomegranate’.14 But he is very hungry,15 and now he manages to ﬁll his stomachby sponging on Leogoras’ lavish dinners. Here, then, as elsewhere in ﬁfth-centurycomedy, the kolax is described in terms which resemble those of the parasitos inlater literature. The content of this ode is, therefore, thematically related to the preced-ing episode, where Philocleon is given a lesson on sympotic behaviour with hishypothetical symposiasts being well-known kolakes (vv. 1219–48).16The claim about Amynias’ ‘clever’ social climbing and his big appetite, as aparasitos, has prepared the climax of the joke in the ﬁnal stanza: Amynias contrivedto be sent in an embassy to Thessaly. But that nation was notorious for one thing,which in the interpretations of this passage has so far been disregarded. Accordingto Athenaeus 418c,pa ´ ntev Qettaloi` w   v polufa ´ goi dieba ´ llonto,the Thessalian people were known for their voracious appetites.Athenaeus (418c–e) cites numerous examples of this jocular stereotype from AtticComedy, which show that it was extremely common:Crates, Lamia fr. 21:10 Earlier in the play Amynias had already been called a social climber (326): to ` nS e ´ llou/tou ˜ton to ` n yeudama ´ maxun (‘Mr Son of Hotair, that lying climber-vine’). Cf. MacDowell ad loc.11 We know that Cratinus in his Seriphioi (fr. 227) also satirized Amynias as a kolax.12 Poverty is a prominent element in the portrayals of kolakes in comedy, cf. J. Wilkins, TheBoastful Chef: The Discourse of Food in Ancient Greek Comedy (Oxford, 2000), 83. Therefore,I think that the chorus’s claim for Amynias’ poverty should not be taken at face value. It isunlikely that anyone known to an Athenian audience as Amynias was (so as to become akomodoumenos) was destitute, or even on a moderate income. What matters here, as generallyin Old Comedy,is howan individual is depictedratherthanhis realstatus, and Amynias is depictedas a kolax. Perhaps he was bye ´lite standards only moderately well off and had the habit of exploit-ing his connections with the rich in order to achieve a lifestyle which he could not otherwise afford.13 Cf. the portrayal of kolakes in Eupolis’ homonymous play of the following year askoiliodai´monav (fr. 187) and taghnoknisoqh ´ rav (‘those who can sniff out the smell of hot fatfrom a frying-pan’, fr. 190) and the description of their habits in fr. 172.11ff. and fr. 175;see I. Storey, Eupolis (Oxford, 2003), 189–92. Such portrayals help understand how the tran-sition from the kolax of Old Comedy to the parasitos of later comedy came about. For thecommon ground of the two terms see Wilkins, 73–7; N. Fisher, ‘Symposiasts, ﬁsh-eatersand ﬂatterers: social mobility and moral concerns in Old Comedy’, in D. Harvey andJ. Wilkins (edd.), The Rivals of Aristophanes (London, 2000), 372–3.14 The phrase a   nti` mh ´ lou kai` r   oa ˜v probably typiﬁes ‘cheap and not very nutritious’ or ‘cheapand very common’ food, as noted by Sommerstein and MacDowell. Contra cf. F. Delneri, ‘Ar.Vesp. 12688 ss.’ Eikasmos 13 (2002), 86–915 The climax of this claim is pein} ˜ ga ` r} Fper "ntifw ˜n (1269–70). We do not know whoAntiphon is; he may have been the famous orator who at that time was at the peak of hiscareer, but we cannot be sure, since Antiphon was a common name. If this is indeed thewell-known orator, Aristophanes points out how big Amynias’ hunger is (because of his‘poor’ means), by comparing it to—and laughing at—Antiphon’s big appetite (probably inthe context of his lavish living; for the sense of peina ´ w ‘to have a big appetite’; cf. Antiph.fr. 249.2, Eub. fr. 9.4); cf. MacDowell on 1270, 297. Antiphon, then, is a collateral targethere. Sommerstein (n. 4), (1977), 275–6 gives a different interpretation (‘in spite of hispoverty he [Amynias] manages to be no hungrier than a rich man like Antiphon’).16 Cf. Fisher 374.SHORTER NOTES 611e   ph triph ´ ch Qettalikw ˜v tetmhme ´ naand explains: tou ˜to d’ ei Ipen w   vt w ˜n Qettalw ˜n mega ´ la kre ´ a temno ´ ntwn.So, Philetaeros, Torch-Bearers fr. 10:kai` ceirobare ` v sarko ` vu   ei´av Qettalo ´ tmhton kre ´ avAlso, Hermippus, Fates fr. 42:o   Zeu ` vd e ` tou ´ twn ou   de ` ne   nqumou ´ menovmu ´ wn xune ´ platte Qettalikh ` nt h ` ne   nqesinAristophanes’ Masters of the Frying-pan fr. 507:(A.) ti´ pro ` vt a ` Ludw ˜n dei ˜pna kai` ta ` Qettalw ˜n;(B.) ta ` Qettalika ` me ` n polu ` kapanikw ´ tera17Athenaeus says that among the Thessalians, the people of Pharsalus were especiallynotorious for gluttony (kai` Farsa ´ lioi de ` kwmw ¼dou ˜ntai w   v polufa ´ goi: 418b). He givesan example from Mnesimachus, Philip fr. 8:tw ˜n Farsali´wnh   kei tiv, i na kkai`l ta ` v trape ´ zav katafa ´ g};(B.) ou   dei`vp a ´ restin. (A.) eu I ge drw ˜ntev. a Ira ´ pouo   pth ` n katesqi´ousi po ´ lin "caiı ¨kh ´ n;There are several more passages from Attic Comedy which exploit the same stereo-type about the Thessalians: Antiphanes, Inc. Fab. 249 (¼Athen. 2.47B), Ephippus,Artemis 1( ¼Athen. 3.112F), Eriphus, Peltast 6, and Alexis, Running-Mates 216(¼Athen. 4.137C–D). The occurrence of the stereotype in Plato Crito 53D–Efurther establishes how widely known it was:h   xeiv de ` ei v Qettali´an para ` tou ` vx e ´ nouv tou ` v Kri´twnov; e   kei ˜ga ` rd h ` plei´sth a   taxi´a kai` a   kolasi´a,...e   to ´ lmhsavou   tw gli´scrwve   piqumei ˜nz h ˜n, no ´ mouv tou ` v megi´stouv paraba ´ v, ou   dei`vo   ve   rei ˜; ...ti´poiw ˜nh   eu   wcou ´ menov e   n Qettali´a ¼, w   sper e   pi` dei ˜pnon a   podedhmhkw ` ve i  v Qettali´an;The wording of this passage suggests that eu   wcou ´ menov e   n Qettali´a ¼ was probably acontemporary proverbial expression for wild self-indulgence. Otherwise the phrasee   n Qettali´a ¼ in this passage seems redundant and odd.18In the Wasps ode, when the chorus makes his next remarka   lla ` presbeu ´ wn ga ` re   vF a ´ rsalon w   ¼cet’.,it looks as if the parasite Amynias is going to receive even more ‘praise’.19 Given his‘poverty’, his hunger and his love for lavish food, in the world of comedy Amyniasmust have been considered very lucky to achieve an embassy to the gluttonousThessalians. Going to the Land of the Gourmands, one thing he would deﬁnitelyget out of them would be good feasts.17 Aristophanes plays here with the Thessalian idiom, too, by using the idiomatic wordkapane, which is what the Thessalians called the chariot, cf. Xenarchus, Scythai fr. 11.18 Cf. H. Tredennick and H. Tarrant, The Last Days of Socrates: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito,Phaedo/Plato (London, 1993), 211. It is interesting that one editor of Crito, Schanz (Leipzig,1875), deleted e   n Qettali´a ¼ as superﬂuous.19 The a   lla ` ...ga ` r marks a difference between what precedes, which is subsidiary, and whatfollows, which is primary or decisive: ‘And, as a matter of fact, he even went ...’. Cf. J. D.Denniston, The Greek Particles (Oxford, 1954), 101.SHORTER NOTES 612Out of all the Thessalians, however, Amynias with his skaio ´ thv managed to spendhis time in the company of the only ones he should not: he was hosted only by thePenestai, the serfs—‘Poorboys’—of the area, as the chorus sneers:ei It’ e   kei ˜ mo ´ nov mo ´ noisitoi ˜v Pene ´ staisi xunh ˜n20 toi ˜vQettalw ˜n, au   to ` v pene ´ sthv 1274aw   ne   la ´ ttwn ou   deno ´ v. 1274bThe poet has contrived the bathos through a pun: the Penestai of Thessaly were notliterally ‘paupers’, but a social class without citizen rights, often compared to theSpartan helots.21 Since, however, the obvious connotation of their name is that ofpoverty, it serves the poet, ﬁrst of all, to sneer at Amynias’ ridiculous stupidity tomeet the sole Thessalians who would very obviously not be able to provide himwith the food he wanted;22 secondly, to insult him once more by reminding him ofhis own ‘straitened circumstances’. Bathos is a typical humour technique ofAristophanic comedy,23 and most importantly, it is once more employed in the epir-rheme corresponding to this ode (1275–83): there the chorus builds up the praise toAutomenes for his ‘artistically talented children’, to tell us only in the ﬁnal verse thatthe talent they mean for his third son is sexual perversion.Needless to say, since things are so, the allegation that Amynias had contactswith the Penestae need not be literally—that is, historically—true, butAristophanes could have just fabricated it for the sake of the joke.24 The satirewould have been particularly amusing if Amynias was sitting at the front in thetheatre, as vv. 74 and 326 suggest, so that the chorus was facing and pointing athim when they sang this song.25University College London EMMANUELA BAKOLAe.bakola@ucl.al.ukdoi:10.1093/cq/bmi05620 xunh ˜n has apparently the convivial sense that it has in v. 1256 of the same play, cf. Starkieon 1272, 378. Contra cf. F. Delneri (n. 14).21 So Theopompus, FGrH 115 F122. The difference from the Helots was that the penestaibelonged to individual Thessalian aristocrats and were not public slaves. Dionysius ofHalicarnassus (2.9.2) compares them to the thetai of Athens and Pollux 3.83 characterizesthem as metaxu ` e   leuqe ´ rwn kai` dou ´ lwn. Very obviously, their name is etymologically associatedto the word pe ´ nhv.22 While writing this paper, I realized that Starkie has mentioned the stereotype about the‘luxury and the gluttony of the Thessalians’ in his commentary on 1271; he has failed,however, to connect it with the sarcasm about Amynias’ stupidity, believing that this isexplained by the claim that Amynias has become poor. Cf. Starkie on 1267, 376.23 Cf. e.g. Lysistrata 1043–57, 1058–71, 1189–1202, and 1202–15, Ecclesiazousae 1140–8, Clouds 169–73 and 175–9.24 For a literal interpretation of this allegation see J. S. Morrison, ‘Meno of Pharsalus,Polycrates and Ismenias’, CQ 36 (1942), 64; cf. Starkie on 1272, 378. A. W. Gomme, AHistorical Commentary on Thucydides, Vol. 3 (Oxford, 1956), 622–3, found it possible butuncertain whether it reﬂected a real event.25 I would like to thank C. Carey, A. Grifﬁths, L. Prauscello, and R. Rawles for their adviceand suggestions, and also the Saripolou Bequest the AHRB and the A. G. Leventis Foundationfor successively funding parts of my research.SHORTER NOTES 613

A missed joke in Aristophanes' 'Wasps' 1265-1274

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UCL Discovery