CHAPTERONE THE CRITICAL HISTORY OF ORESTES: AN OVERVIEW ORESTES IN ANTIQUITY The critical fortunes of Orestes have been remarkably diverse. Evidence for the work's popularity in the years following its initial production is abundant.I In a well-known fragment, the comic poet Strattis refers to the play as a 'most clever drama' (apaµa aetiwTaTOV),2 and the number of parodies or echoes of the work in the productions of the comic poets amply testifies to the audience's familiarity with and appreciation of the piece. Aristophanes clearly has Orestes in mind in several passages of Frogs (most notably in the oft-cited reference to the actor Hegelochus' notorious slip in the delivery of Orestes 279: Frogs 303-04),3 while echoes of other passages of the play can be found in Eubulus, Alexis, and elsewhere.4 That the play was popular enough for successful revivals to be staged is attested by inscriptional evidence5 as well as by references in the scholia to innovations on the part of later producers.6 Orestes was familiar enough to a late fourth-century audience 1 See Chapouthier/Meridier (ed.) 22-27, Willink (ed.) Ivii-Ixiv. For a general discussion of Euripides' popularity in the century following his death see Pertusi (1956), Kuch (1978), Xanthakis-Karamanos (1980). 2 Frg. 1.2 (Kassel/Austin), reasonably dated to soon after 408. (Unless otherwise indicated, fragments of the comic poets will be cited according to Kassel/Austin [1983-J.) 3 This blunder also provides material for the comic poets Strattis (frgs. 1 and 63) and Sannyrion (frg. 8); see Stanford (1963) and Dover (1993) on Frogs 303-04, Daitz (1983), Borthwick (1968), and Willink (ed.) on Or 279. Other echoes of Or can be found at Frogs 883-84 and 1331-64. Willink (ed.) lxiii n. 119 suggests a possible echo of Or 285-87 at Plut. 8-10. 4 Eubulus frgs. 64 and 75.6, Alexis frg. 3, Apollodorus frg. 6. See as well Nicolaus frg. 1 (a parody of Euripides' genealogical prologues, with direct echoes of Or 5 and 10), ~ Or 234 and 742. (On~ Or 554, see below, p. 142 n. 144.) 5 See Snell (1971) DID A 2a.18-19 (Dionysia of 340 B.C.) and DID B 11.1-2 (Tegea, victory in the Dionysia at Athens, c. 276-219 B.C.). 6 See Chapouthier/Meridier (ed.) 24: on Or 51 we are told of a dumbshow of Helen's arrival performed before the prologue; on 268 of an alternate staging for the bow scene; on 643 of the portrayal of Menelaus during Orestes' plea for aid; on 1366 of the entry of the Phrygian slave. Not all such references should be taken as evidence for actual productions, however: see Malzan (1908), Elsperger (1908) 72-75, Page (1934) 41ff., Hamilton (1974), Dihle (1981), and cf. the discussion of 1366-68 below, pp. 192ff. 2 CHAPTER ONE for Menander to compose an extended imitation of lines 866ff. at Sicyonius 176ff.,7 and its influence on other dramatists of the period­ both comic and tragic- is likely. 8 Turning from drama to the prose authors of the fourth century, we find Orestes cited with a good deal of freedom in the writings of Aristotle.9 The work's continued popularity in later ages is attested by the number of papyrus fragments, 10 by the play's representation in art (to a severely limited degree), 11 and by its selection for inclusion in the so-called Byzantine triad of Euripides' plays. 12 Despite its popular success in antiquity, however, Orestes was not without its detractors, particularly (it appears) among the Peripatetics. Aristotle refers directly to the work on two occasions in the Poetics, each time criticizing the portrayal of Menelaus in the play as an example of 'baseness of character not required for the story' (1rovr,p£as µ.ev ~0ovs µ.~ civayKalas). 13 This criticism occurs, initially, in the midst of Aristotle's discussion of the types of characters suitable for tragedy (as opposed to those appropriate to comedy), and stems from his insistence that tragedy portray characters who are 'good' WTJUTOS or, more often, CT1Tovf>a'i:os). 14 7 See Katsouris (1975) 29-54, Belardinelli (1984), W. G. Arnott (1986) 3ff., Willink (ed.) Ix.iii, Hurst (1990) 101-03, Goldberg (1993). (Note the further echo of Or922 at Epit. 910. Or 866 and 871 also are the object of a more overtly parodic passage in Alcaeus frg. 19.) Further allusions to Or can be found at Asp. 424-25 and 432, and Sam. 326. (For a possible echo of Or 396 see below, p. 307 n. 29.) 8 Comedies on the Orestes theme are attested for Alexis, Dinolochus, and Timocles ('OpeuravroK>..ei.li71v); phlyakes for Rhinthon and Sopater; tragedies for Euripides II, Carcinus II, Theodectas, Aphareus, Timesitheus and (perhaps) one unknown author (Adespota F 8c [Snell]). These works need not have been inspired by Euripides' play; see, however, Xanthakis-Karamanos (1979) 70-71 and (1980) 63ff. on the tragic Orestes of Theodectas and note, e.g., the similarity of frg. 5 (Snell) to Orestes' arguments before Tyndareus. (Note, in addition, the similarity between Theodectas frg. 2 [Snell] and Or 538- 39, and see Xanthakis-Karamanos [1979] 73-76 and [1980] 66-70 for a discussion of the popularity enjoyed in the fourth century by dramatic trial scenes such as that in Or). 9 Poet. 1454a 28-29 and 1461b 19-21 are discussed below. For further references see, e.g., EN 1169b 7-8 (Or 667; cf. Mag. Mor. 1212b 27-28), Rhet. 1371a 26-28 (Or 234; cf. EE 1235a 16, EN 1154b 28-29) and 1405b 20-23 (Or 1587-88); see as well Rhet. 1397a 29-30 for a possible echo of Or 538-39. 10 See Diggle (1991) 115-20 and Bouquiaux-Simon/Mertens (1992). 11 On the wall-painting at Ephesus (c. A.O. 180-90) of the play' s opening sickbed scene, see W. G. Arnott (1983) 13 n. 5. Chapouthier/Mtridier (ed.) 27 and Willink (ed.) lxiii-liv note other possible allusions. 12 The play' s popularity under the Empire and in late antiquity is illustrated by the copious testimonia in Biehl (ed.) 108-33. Cf. Patin (1913) 1.243 and 251-52. 13 Poet. 1454a 28-29 (Bywater's translation); cf. 1461b 19-21. 14 See esp. Poet. 1454a 16ff. and, in general, Golden (1965), Adkins (1966a), Smithson (1983), and Held (1984); cf. Poet. 1448a lff., 1448b 24-27 (cf. 1449a 32-34), 1454b 8-15. (Cf. Michelini [1987] 52ff., where the suggestion is made that Euripidean drama as a whole represents a deliberate 'recusatio of the spoudaion. ') It long has been customary to criticize Aristotle's misunderstanding of Menelaus' role in the play: see, e.g., Hartung (1843) 2.497-.