The Attic theatre : $b a description of the stage and theatre of the Athenians, and of the dramatic performances at AthensHaigh, A. E. (Arthur Elam)
History
The Attic theatre : $b a description of the stage and theatre of the Athenians, and of the dramatic performances at Athens
Haigh, A. E. (Arthur Elam)
Athens (Greece) -- Intellectual life; Greek drama -- History and criticism; Theater -- Greece -- Athens -- History -- To 500
The two facts already mentioned—first, the fact that Vitruvius tells us
that every Greek theatre should possess a stage of a certain height,
and secondly, the fact that all Greek theatres after about 300 B.C. are
found to possess a stage corresponding to his description—these two
facts appear sufficient in themselves to decide the whole question. But
there is no lack of further evidence. Various ancient writers may be
cited as witnesses. Pollux, in his description of the Greek theatre,
says that ‘the stage is appropriated to the actors, the orchestra to the
chorus’.[466] Later on he says that the actors, when they ‘enter by the
orchestra, ascend the stage by means of steps’.[467] The scholiasts to
the extant dramas often speak of the performance in a Greek theatre as
being partly in the orchestra and partly on the stage. The commentator
on the Frogs asserts that the scene with Charon and the ferry-boat must
be ‘either upon the logeion, or in the orchestra’. Later on he says that
Dionysus here appears ‘not on the logeion, but in the orchestra’. The
scholiast on the Knights discusses the question why the sausage-seller
should ‘ascend from the parodos on to the logeion’. There are other
scholia to the same effect, which it would be tedious to quote.[468] In
these passages from the scholiasts and from Pollux the point to notice
is the following. They do not merely say that there was a stage in Greek
theatres, but they describe the performance as one partly on the stage,
and partly in the orchestra. Dörpfeld says they are all mistaken; that
they lived after the Christian era, and were confusing the Greek theatre
with the Roman. But this would not account for their mistake, if mistake
there were. In Roman theatres all performances were confined to the
stage; the orchestra was occupied by senators and other distinguished
persons. How then can Pollux and the scholiasts have got this notion of
a performance in which stage and orchestra were used at the same time?
There was nothing in the Roman practice to suggest it. It can only have
been derived from the Greek theatre. But apart from this, the suggestion
that Pollux and the scholiasts were misled by their recollection of Roman
customs is not a fortunate one. It implies that their writings were
the result of personal observation. But no one can read a page of them
without perceiving that they were merely compilations from Alexandrian
sources. The scholiasts in many cases mention their authorities, and
these authorities often go back as far as Aristophanes and Aristarchus,
and even beyond. They do indeed confuse the evidence a good deal, when
they try to reconcile different statements, or when they misapply
statements of earlier authorities to particular passages, and explain the
passages wrongly; but the statements themselves are due to Alexandrian
tradition, not to their own observations. When they say that Greek dramas
were performed partly on the stage and partly in the orchestra, it is
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account