The Musical Nomos in Aeschylus' Oresteia Author(s): Thomas J. Fleming Source: The Classical Journal, Vol. 72, No. 3 (Feb. - Mar., 1977), pp. 222-233 Published by: The Classical Association of the Middle West and South Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3296898 . Accessed: 27/01/2014 12:33 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . 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 [email protected]. The Classical Association of the Middle West and South is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical Journal. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 136.152.208.62 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:33:08 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE MUSICAL NOMOS IN AESCHYLUS' ORESTEIA Althoughthe imageryof the Oresteia has for many years been the subjectof critical scrutiny, musical allusions have failed to attractthe notice which their importancedeserves.1 Such an oversightmay be due to our ignoranceof Greek music, especially the music of the classical period. We are often tempted to view musical language or imagery in a poem in the same light as astrological symbols;however significantthey might be, they aredrawn from an areaof life that remains obscure to us and that is peripheralto our experience of poetry. When we weigh and sift the fragmentsof Pindarfor the poet's opinions on his craft, we forget that for the composers of choral lyric poetry-including dramatic lyric-poetry and music were scarcely separable. From our own traditionwe are accustomedto poets like Drydenand Millay, who make vague commentsabout an artthey do not at all understand.This has led many to make the improbableassumption that musical languagein Greek poets was similarly vague. Aeschylus in the Oresteia has alluded to several musical forms and to many aspects of musical performance.Since the parodosof the Agamemnonis known to have been influenced by the kitharodicnomos, references to the nomos may be of particularsignificance: they serve to underlineone of the broaderthemes of the trilogy, the competing claims of differentnomoi and opposing dikai. In addition, a discussion of the possible influences of the nomos sheds some light on the compostion of the Agamemnon's parodos. The broadrange of meanings given to nomos presentsa serious obstacle to such an inquiry.2In some senses it is not much different from harmonia or melos. It means first of all a set of notes or intervals performedin certain sequences in a particularmanner. Telestes (806, 810 PMG) appearsto use hymnos and nomos interchangeablyto mean harmonia. The Suda's definition of the kitharodicnomos adds the element of rhythm: 6 vo6os,* KLtap)t8LKO6 7po7rol 7g XWV Kai ET.lhXQ8as, 6p/LoviavE TaKT7r•V p&joiv6v Cjp•o'gvov, i.e., a musical idiom with a definite mode and rhythm.The nomos existed in many forms: some were purely instrumental(auletic, kitharistic);others in- cluded poetic texts (aulodic, kitharodic). In addition to these general categories, there existed specific types with traditionalnames, e.g. Pythios, Oxus, Harmateios, which were often associated with particularfestivals, 1J.A. Haldane, "Musical Themes and Imagery in Aeschylus," JHS 75 (1965) 33-41 is a conspicuous exception. For musical ideas in Aeschylus generally, see E. Moustopoulos' lengthy discussion, "Une philosophie de la musique chez Aeschyle," REG 72 (1959) 18-56. 2The best discussions of the kitharodicNomos are still those of Crusius, "Uber die Nomos- frage," 39 Versammlungdeutscher Philologen und Schulmainner,"Zurich 1887, Verhandlungen 258-76 and Wilamowitz, Timotheos: die Perser, Leipzig 1903, 83-105. See also F. Laserre, Plutarchede la musique, Olten & Lausanne 1954; 22-29, E. Martin,Essai sur les rhythmesde la chansongrecque, Paris 1953, 118 ff.; C. del Grande,"Nomos citarodico," Riv. Indo-greco-ital.7 (1923), 1-17 andEspressibne musicale dei poeti greci, Napoli 192, 24 ff; H. Grieser,Nomos: ein Beitragzur griechischen Musikgeschichte, Diss. Heidelberg1937, and for the basic meaningof the word, E. Laroche, Histoire de la racine nem- en grec ancien, Paris 1949, 166-71. 222 This content downloaded from 136.152.208.62 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:33:08 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE MUSICALNOMOS IN AESCHYLUS'ORESTEIA 223 places, or peoples in the Greek world. The content, to a certain degree, was specified for some of the different nomoi-as in the auletic Pythios-and the performances, at least in the later period, were more mimetic than in other forms."In the Pythios, for example, the aulete reenactedApollo's conflict with the Python, and Timotheus' Persae gives ample scope for a performer's mimetic talents. Despite referencesto earliercomposers, Terpanderwas almost universally regarded as the artistic progenitor of the nomos. Most modem scholars, consideringthe antiquityand religious associationsof the form, have regarded the nomos as a literarydevelopment of a cultic "hymn."4 As a monodic song, dedicated to a god (Apollo especially), containing a narrativeof divine or heroicadventures,5 the nomos has been comparedwith the Homerichymn. One of the distinguishingcharacteristics of the nomos was its seven-partstructure: archa, metarcha, katatropa, metakatatropa,omphalos, sphragis, epilogos.6 This structurewas first convincingly explained by Crusius as a doubled intro- duction in the form of invocations, a doubled transitionalpassage, a central narrative,the poet's signature,the farewell XaipE or conclusion.7This struc- ture is apparent-if primitively-in the Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo. The precise relationship of the nomos to various "hymns" is perplexing. [Plutarch](de mus. 6) mentions the prooimia of Terpander.This is variously interpretedto mean "hymns" or preludes. Earlierthe same author(4) specifi- cally states that Terpanderalso composed prooimia in hexameters. Although the firstpart of a nomos was composed-even by Timotheus-in hexameters,it is clear that Terpander'skitharodic prooimia were a species of composition closely enough relatedto the nomos that[Plutarch] could use them as a prooffor the nomos' meter. It is not at all unlikely that Terpanderwrote some of his nomoi to serve the same purpose as Homeric Hymns, that is, as introductory pieces." The nomoi were conservative in their tradition. [Plutarch] (de mus. 7) informsus that until the time of Phrynis(mid Fifth Century)the kitharodesdid not alter the modes and rhythms, but they preserved the tasis or "tuning" native to each nomos. In the 200 years from Terpanderto Phrynisthere were undoubtedlysome changes in the artistic nomos. The rise of other lyric forms 3[Aristotle],Prob. 19. 15 (918b13), suggests that nomoi may have been astrophicbecause of their mimetic character. 4Crusius260-61, Del GrandeEspressione 24, Martin 118, Laserre26, who doubts, 27-28, that the nomos was exclusively monodic. SPlutarch,Inst. Lac. 17. For Apollo, cf. Pindar,Nem. 5.24, as inventorof the kithara,Pausanias 5.14.8. 6Pollux 4.66. For the parts of the auletic Pythios, cf. 4.86. 7Crusius261. 8Crusius,"Zur Nomosfrage," Woch.f. Klass. Phil. 45 (1887) 186. Van Groningen, "A propos de terpandre,"Mnem. 8 (1955) 177-91, bases his whole case for a primitive nomic structurein Terpanderon the ambiguous evidence of [Plutarch]'s statement, that nomoi proceeded directly from invocation to Homeric poetry. In the first place, [Plutarch]must have had limited access to the compositions of Terpander, if he is forced to argue from the practice of Timotheus that Terpanderemployed the hexameter(de mus. 4). Secondly, how would the nomos then differ from the HomericHymn? Thirdly, the transitionalpassages need not have been more than a sentence or two, thus easily overlooked in a general description of the Nomos. This content downloaded from 136.152.208.62 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:33:08 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 224 THOMASJ. FLEMING must have diminishedthe importanceof many old-fashionedfestival nomoi, andby the FourthCentury the nomos was viewed as a kitharodicart.9 Although Attic writersof the Fifth Century,especially Aristophanes,do referto aulodic and auletic nomoi, as an artistictradition the nomos was even then primarily kitharodic,as, for example, Herodotus(1.24.5) and Sophocles (Ul. Fur. 463, Tham. 245 Jebb-Pearson)show. The Orthios Nomos is perhapsthe most commonly mentioned type in the Fifth Century.Both a kitharodicand an aulodic Orthiosare attested;Terpander is associatedwith the former, Olympus and Polymnestuswith the latter.10The aulos was the instrumentfor the expressionof grief," and aulodic nomoi were frequentlyused for lamentation.The Orthiosor "shrill" nomos because of its high register was especially suited to this purpose.12The kitharodicOrthios may also have been used for lament. Herodotus (1.24.5) had the kitharode Arion performthe Orthiosbefore jumping into the sea. Althoughthis perfor- mance has been seen as a kindof swan-song,'3it may equally well have been an appealto the patronof kitharodes,Apollo, for preservationas appearsto be the case at the wedding party of Hector and Andromache: 7rTavTE ' dav6pqE' rparov "iaXovdpi"ov OVKaXEOVTE9 7Ta'ov' KaJ8oXOV .EVoXvpav.(Sappho 44.32-33 LP) Aristophaneswas sure enough of his audience's familiaritywith this kind of nomos thathe twice (Av489, Ec 741) makes the and in the pun 6p1pios Uvop•Oq, second passage the singer of the aubade is describedas a kitharode.The same poet goes so faras to define stupidityas not knowing white from the Orthios(Eq 1279). Finally the Suda, whose authorities know many different kinds of nomoi, explicitly defines the Orthios as kitharodic. It is unsafe to attempt any detailed characterizationof the nomic style. Crusiusbased his observationson the style of those poems of later poets like Callimachuswhich seemed to imitatethe structureof the nomos.