The Johns Hopkins University Press The Classical Weekly

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 4

Review

Reviewed Work(s): The Origin of Attic Comedy by F. M. Cornford


Review by: Roy C. Flickinger
Source: The Classical Weekly, Vol. 8, No. 28 (May 22, 1915), pp. 221-223
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4387119
Accessed: 12-07-2018 21:09 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Classical Weekly

This content downloaded from 181.110.149.226 on Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:09:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 221

phallic procession, just as its obscenity is due to the


a whole to the general reader or the young student.
sexual magic; and it is likely that this ritual justification
For such a reader Hogarth's Philip and Butcher's little was well known to an audience familiar with the phallic
book are still the best introduction to the life of Demos- ceremony itself.
thenes. This book is for the mature and serious stu-
dent, and for him it will be of very great value. I believe these quotations to represent sound con-

DARTMOUTH COLLEGE. CHARLES D. ADAMS. clusions. Now, if the phallic ceremonies continued
until Aristotle's day and if their connection with

The Origin of Attic Comedy. By F. M. Cornford. comedy had always been recognized, the hypothesis

London: Edward Arnold; New York: Longmans, that comedy always harked back to this primitive

Green, and Co. (I914). Pp. xii + 252. $2.40 net. ritual is not so fantastic as it would otherwise be.

The present reviewer is free to confess that he took In my opinion, our author is correct also in tracing the

up this book with a distinct prejudice. Mr. Cornford agon and the parabasis of Old Comedy, as well as its

belongs to a group of English classicists the brillance physical violence and horseplay, back to the magical

of whose scholarship is second only to their intrepidity. aversion of evil in the phallic rites. I regret to state

Much as Mr. Gilbert Murray, Miss Jane Harrison, that, with minor exceptions, this marks the limit of

Professor William Ridgeway, and the rest may differ in the concessions I can make to Mr. Cornford's views.

other respects, they agree in seeking light upon clas- Writers on the origin of Attic comedy are fairly
sical problems from anthropological lore and in stick- well agreed upon one point, that only some features

ing at no exegesis which will contribute to this happy of it are indigenous and that it has been greatly modified

consummation. Then, when I read in the first para- by importations from Sicily and the Peloponnesus.

graph of Mr. Cornford's Preface that "the constant But, when they undertake to separate the foreign and

features of the Aristophanic play were inherited from the native elements, concord flies out of the window.

a ritual drama" and recalled how disingenuously the Yet even this single point of unanimity is unacceptable

same author, in his Thucydides Mythistoricus, had to Mr. Cornford, who maintains that every part of Old

resolved the three appearances of Cleon on that Comedy is Attic and would reduce the Dorian influence
historian's pages into "the complete outline of a drama", to a minimum. He acknowledges adherence to Profes-
my misgivings did not lessen. If I add that with fur- sor Murray's theory concerning the origin of tragedy
ther reading my prejudice against Mr. Cornford's and constructs a very similar hypothesis, mutatis
volume has vanished, I must not be understood as mutandis, for comedy. Comedy, then, was derived
accepting to any great extent his conclusions. But from sympathetic magic, from "the fertility drama of
with the exception of his statement that "it is tempt- the marriage of the Old Year transformed into the
ing to see in the two half-choruses of twelve in Attic New". Every year a stereotyped series of incidents
Comedy, the twelve months of the Old and the New was repeated. The ritual began with an agon be-

Years" (p. I29, n. 2), Mr. Cornford rides his anthro- tween the good principle and the bad principle (the
pological hobbyhorse with comparative discretion. New Year versus the Old, Summer versus Winter,
In fact this is the only utterly preposterous sugges- Life versus Death, etc.), was continued either by the
tion that I have noted. Of still greater consequence defeat and death of the latter, followed by a sacri-
than the sober application of his viewpoint, however, is fice and feast of thanksgiving; or by the death of the
the fact that there is a certain factor which differen- former, who was slain, dismembered, cooked,and eat-
tiates the origin of comedy from most other studies in en in the communal feast, only to be triumphantly
origins. resurrected. In either case-, the festivities are inter-
This factor is brought out in Aristotle's statement rupted by a succession of "unwelcome intruders" con-
that "comedy originated with the leaders of the phal- sistiAg of stock characters like the buffoon, the doctor
lic ceremonies, which still survive as institutions in or cook, the soldier, the old man, the old woman, etc.
many of our cities". Mr. Cornford finds the best illus- These are just the characters that are required for
tration of these ceremonies in Aristophanes, Acharn. the fixed plot of the fertility drama. Finally, in
24I ff., and concludes from this and other evidence the exodus occurs a "sacred marriage" (together with
that the phallic rites had a double object-that they a comus song and procession), derived from a sexual
were both a "positive agent of fertilization" and- a union which originally was consummated, or feigned,
"negative charm against evil spirits". The former in order that all the natural powers of fertility might
result was obtained by the invocation of friendly pow- be stimulated to perform their function. The reg-
ers: as to the latter, ular series of incidents, as outlined, forms the frame-
work of Aristophanes's eleven plays, however diverse
the simplest of all methods of expelling such malign
inifluences of any kind is to abuse them with the most their themes. At first blush this statement must
violent language. No distinction is drawn between appear absolutely incredible to every reader, but Mr.
this and the custom of abusing, and even beating, Cornford displays the most amazing ingenuity in main-
the persons or things which are to be rid of them . . .
taining it.
There can be no doubt that the element of invective
and personal satire which distinguishes the Old Comedy Tragedy and comedy, he continues, have both come
is directly descended from the magical abuse of the from a ritual drama which was "the same in type and

This content downloaded from 181.110.149.226 on Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:09:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
222 THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY

content, though not necessarily performed at the same ford's argument. Our author is troubled because,
time of the year". They differ in that, whereas com- though the contents of epirrheme and antepirrheme in
edy retains the whole series of canonical incidents, the the parabasis are "iambic" (i. e. lampooning), the
Aeschylean trilogy stops with the happy ending of meter is not iambic. But iambic meter was invented
the hero's resurrection, the series being concluded by by Archilochus, while the magical abuse of the phal-
the satyric drama. These conventional features are lic ceremonies must have started centuries before.
what Aristotle had in mind when he declared that Pages 5I and I83. The first actor in comedy, Mr.
comedy 'already had certain definite forms when the Cornford argues, was a projection of the vaguely
record of its poets begins'. personified genius of the Phallic rites, Phales. But
All criticism implies the existence of some standard in my opinion this would place the introduction of
of comparison, in this case the possibility of pointing actors at far too early a date. See the preceding
out, or of establishing for one's self, a more satisfac- note.
tory hypothesis. The latter alternative I intend to Pages 62 ff. Mr. Cornford makes the North G.reece
avail myself of in a forthcoming book on the Greek carnivals progenitors of comedy, as Ridgeway and
Theater and its Drama; accordingly, there is the less others have made them the prototype of tragedy. But,
need of indulging in constructive criticism here. since Mr. Cornford postulates practically the same
Nevertheless, I entertain no false hopes of setting up source for both tragedy and comedy (compare pages
unassailable results. The evidence at hand is too 68, 190, I95, 246, etc.), the disagreement is only ap-
scanty for that. Mr. Cornford truly remarks (p. parent. If the premises be granted, the original iden-
220): tity of tragedy and comedy logically follows. So

Many literary critics seem to think that an hypoth- irrational a result ought to open our eyes to the fact
esis about obscure and remote questions of history that arguments drawn from sympathetic magic can-
can be refuted by a simple demand for the production not be unreservedly traced to their utmost implica-
of moreevidence than in fact exists. The demand is as
tions. The ancient equation Tpa-ySta8 =,rpvUy3ta was
easy to make as it is impossible to satisfy. But the
true test of an hypothesis, if it cannot be shown to con- due to a\ false etymology, and its modern analogue
flict withknown truths, is the number of facts that it cor- is equally impossible. The present-day carnivals
relates and explains. The question left for the reader's are too full of later accretions to be safely employed
consideration is whether, after following our argu- as evidence for the sixth century B. C. and earlier;
ment, he understands better the form and features of
this strange phenomenon, Aristophanic Comedy. against the possibility of tragedy springing from
them still stronger objections lie (see Classical Phil-
The fact is that, if the true development of Greek ology 8. 282 if). Furthermore, the contention (246)
drama were divinely revealed to some one, he would that tragedy and satyric drama divided between
be unable to formulate a cogent proof for it. Not- them the ritual outlines which comedy preserve(, in
withstanding, in spite of these considerations and their entirety must give us pause. What has become
without deprecating the value of anthropological par- of the "choral agon" (the parabasis) in the division?
allels, it is still possible to comment in all fairness And what convincing traces of a "sacred marriage"
upon certain features of Mr. Cornford's conclusions. do Euripides's Cyclops and Sophocles's Ichneutae
Pages 3-7 deal with some current theories of the afford? I have too great respect for Mr. Cornford's
origin of comedy. It is unfortunate that Mr. Corn- ingenuity to assert that none can be found, but
ford is apparently unacquainted with the two latest at least they are not at once discernible to the anthro-
attempts, except his own, to treat the subject. I re- pologically unsophisticated.
fer to Professor Capps's paper in Lectures on Greek Pages 67 f. Mr. Cornford accepts Farnell's deri-
Literature (I912), I24 ff., and Professor Navarre's vation of tragedy from the worship of Dionysus of
paper in Revue des ttudes anciennes, I9lI, 245 f. the Black Goatskin and from the duel between Xan-
These authorities closely agree in their results and thus and Melanthus. Compare my criticism of this
differentiate Attic and Dorian influences most sen- theory in Classical Philology 8. 270.
sibly. Page 89. "The legends ultimately based on this
Page 32. For the interpretation of Aristophanes's ritual, the stories of Pelops, Pelias, Aeson, and the rest,
Ranae 790 compare Transactions of the American have come down to us in forms which date from a
Philological Association 40. 93 ff. time when their original meaning had been forgotten".
P. 36. For Aristotle's Poetics I449a 37 ff. Mr. Corn- I suppose this holds true also of the myths of Oedi-
ford should consult Professor Capps, in the Univer- pus, Perseus and Andromeda, Heracles and Hesione,
sity of Chicago Decennial Publications, Volume 6, and Pentheus, which are the outgrowth of the same
especially pages 266 if. Professor Capps made it seem fertility ritual (58 and 66). Now, so far as fifth cen-
tury dramatists treated these themes, they helped to
very clear that 7rp6cwra, prologues, and a plurality of ac-
tors were introduced after 487 B. C., not before. More- fix the forms in which these stories "have come down
over, he has informed me by letter that he believes to us". Consequently, according to Mr. Cornford's
zrp6crwra in this passage to mean not 'masks' but 'charac-
own admission, the "original meaning" of these had
ters'. All this has a direct bearing upon Mr. Corn- already been lost sight of at that period. Similarly,

This content downloaded from 181.110.149.226 on Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:09:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 223

Mlr. Cornford says that tragedy borrowed


that Socrates in the Apologyfrom
could haveheroic
attribu-
legends such stories as illustrate the fundamental ted to the Clouds so much of the feeling against him,
conception of the old ritual plot, which explains if every one had known that Aristophanes, like another
Aristotle's statement "that 'Tragedies are restricted Procrustes, was merely forcing his contemporaries
to a small number of (heroic) families . . . in which to lie in the places of conventionalized, stock charac-
such horrors have occurred', but he couild not know the
ters? The exigencies of this argument compel Mr.
reason" (p. 21I and n.). The words which I have ital- Cornford to maintain (i68) that of all the historical
icized in these two quotations are a necessary con- characters in comedy "the only one represented by
cession; but, as has already been pointed out in the anything like a recognizable portrait is Cleon" (!). Of
second paragraph of this review, they relinquish the course, he has to grant that "it is just in this case that
only consideration that could make M\r. Cornford's Aristophanes explicitly says that the mask worn by
argument plausible. If so much can not be postu- the actor was not a portrait of the demagogue's real
lated for any part of his argument, that part is seri-
features". Ile tries to break the force of so damning
ously impaired. It is partly because this can be a statement by alleging that "the excuse that no cos-
postulated for the physical violence and obscenity of could be found who was willing to make any-
tumer
Old Comedy that I am willing to accept Mlr. Corn- thing so terrific as a portrait-mask of Cleon, is a joke
ford's reasoning at that point. Now, if Aristotle and not to be taken literally". But "so terrific" here
knew nothing of the ritual plot, neither did fourth is due to a misinterpretation of Aristophanes, for
century playwrights; and we have just seen that fifth 7rb -roi lUous refers to fear of Cleon's vengeance.
century tragedians were equally ignorant. It fol- With this correction the "joke" disappears, and the
lows that, if Aeschylus and Euripides when drama- whole argument collapses.
tizing the Pentheus myth, for example, were no more Pages IOO-102. Mr. Cornford considers the scat-
conscious of dependence upon a ritual plot than was tering of sweetmeats to the spectators in Old Comedy
Marlowe in writing Doctor Faustus, the influence of to be a survival of the communal meal. I venture to
primitive ritual upon mature tragedy must have been believe that I gave a simpler explanation, and all
nonexistent or negligible. Then the question takes that is required, at Iowa City last spring; compare
another form-did the tragic poets unconsciously fol-The Classical Journal I0.212 f.
low a fixed series of incidents? When this notion Page 2I7. 'ATdKTWs in Tzetzes does not, I believe,
leads Mr. Cornford to allege that the agon between mean "without orderly arrangement", but "in an
Admetus and Pheres in Euripides's Alcestis is "barely undifferentiated crowd". In note I more of Tzetzes's
intelligible except in the light of the old ritual con- text ought to be quoted.
flict of the Young King claiming to supersede the out- Despite my inability to accept the major part of
worn Old King" (p. 78), I for one am not impressed. Mr. Cornford's theories, including his two main the-
In comedy he fares no better: compare the sugges- ses that Attic comedy was entirely indigenous and
tion that in Aristophanes's Frogs Euripides's com- that Old Comedy closely followed the outlines of a
plaint at being 'left for dead' in the underworld "gains ritual plot, I concede that he has written a valuable
point if we suppose a reminiscence that such had or- and stimulating work, one that will repay eareful study
iginally been the Antagonist's fate" (82). Mr. Corn- and will add permanently to its auithor's reputation.
ford is constantly insisting that the strength of his It abounds in shrewd deductions and sutbtle observa-
arguments rests in its cumulative effect. But when tions. I regret that the 'Length to wlich this review
this arises from such details as these, one's faith grows has already attained will prevent my citing any of
less rather than greater. Upon comedy, however, these. The style and presentation are so attractive
our author evidently believes the fixed plot of primitiveas scarcely to permit one to lay the volume down be-
ritual to have exercised a conscious influence. Such fore the last page is reached.
an unchanging plot would naturally result in a set ofNORTHWESTERN UNIV'ERSITY. Roy C. FLICKINGER.
stock characters. Therefore, the heroes of comedy
-"especially certain very important ones, who bearLivy. Books I, XXI, and XXII. Edited with brief Intro-
historical names-are made to wear one or another duction and Comnmentary and Numerous Illustra-
of a definite set of stock masks. They are, to the tions by Emory B. Lease. Boston: D. C. Heath
and Company (1914). Pp. xl A- 352.
almost complete sacrifice of realistic portraiture, con-
This new edition of Professor Lease's Livv is well
formed to the traditional traits of these masks"(I54). described in the Preface as a revised edition, for
Lamachus and Aeschylus (!) are adaptations of the much of the material of the first edition (I905)
Miles Gloriosus, Socrates and Euripides of the has been recast, later retLarns have changed some of
Learned Doctor, Agoracritus of the Cook, Cleon the statistical, totals, while in other cases there
are distinctly honorable omissions. The eclitor's
of the Parasite, etc. All tliis implies conscious justification of a new edition lies in numerous re-
adaptation on the part of the comic poet and per- quests to him "to meet the needs of the less advanced
fect tunderstanding by the public of what lhe student".
was The broader features of the first edi-
doing. Now is it conceivable that Cleon would tion are retained, with altere(d proportions. In-
stead of the 72 pages of Introduction, 38 now suf-
have been so stung by Aristophanes's attacks and
fice, and they appear in greatly improved form. In

This content downloaded from 181.110.149.226 on Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:09:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy