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
Until the time of the festival the preliminary list of citizens remained
sealed up in urns in the Acropolis. On the first day of the competitions
the ten urns were produced in the theatre, and placed in some prominent
position. The persons whose names were contained in the urns were all
present in the theatre. Probably they received a special summons from
the archon shortly before the festival. At the commencement of the
contest the archon proceeded to draw a single name from all the urns
in succession. The ten persons whose names were drawn constituted the
second list of judges, and each of them represented one of the ten
tribes of Attica. After being selected by lot in the manner described,
they were called forward by the archon, and took a solemn oath that they
would give an impartial verdict.[130] They were then conducted to seats
specially appointed for them, and the contest began.[131] At the end of
the performances each of them gave his vote, writing upon a tablet the
names of the competitors in order of merit.[132] These tablets, ten in
number, were then placed in an urn, and the archon proceeded to draw
forth five of them at random. The result of the competition was decided
in accordance with these five lists, and the persons whose tablets were
drawn from the urn constituted the ultimate body of five judges. It thus
appears that up to the very last the judges who recorded their votes
were not sure whether the votes would eventually have effect, or turn
out to be so much waste paper. This uncertainty was of course a great
obstacle to intimidation and bribery. After the competition was over,
and the verdict announced, the names of the five judges, whose votes had
decided the day, were not kept secret. It was known how each of them had
voted. But the other votes, which had been recorded but not drawn from
the urn, were destroyed without being made public.[133] It was naturally
considered a much greater honour to win a victory by the unanimous vote
of all five judges than by a mere majority of one.[134] But it is very
doubtful whether any public record was kept of the number of votes by
which a victory was gained.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account