Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T12:02:46.512Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Was there a decree of Syrakosios?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Jeremy Trevett
Jeremy Trevett*
Affiliation:
York University, Toronto, jtrevett@yorku.ca
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A much-discussed fragment of Phrynichos’ comedy Monotropos, together with the comments of the scholiast on Aristophanes who preserves it, have often been taken to indicate that at some point before the production of the play, in spring 414 B.C., the Athenian politician Syrakosios moved a decree that restricted the right of comic playwrights to satirize individual Athenians. The relevant passage (schol. ad Arist. Aves 1297 = Phrynichos F 27 K–A) reads as follows (I reproduce the text of Kassel and Austin):

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , December 2000, pp. 598 - 600
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 For full discussion and bibliography of previous scholarship, see Sommerstein, A. H., ‘The Decree of Syrakosios’, CQ 36 (1986), 101–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar; more generally, Halliwell, S., ‘Comic satire and freedom of speech’, JHS 111 (1991), 48–70 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 59–63. Both these works are cited hereafter by author's name alone.

2 See Halliwell, 59–60.

3 Halliwell, 59, n. 48 is sympathetic to this view.

4 So Kock. Halliwell (p. 60 n. 49) canvasses the possibility that we are dealing with quotations from two different parts of the parabasis of the play.

5 It seems clear from the wording that the scholiast inferred the existence of a decree of Syrakosios from the fragment.

6 So Halliwell, 59: ‘The fragment as a whole is manifestly corrupt or garbled.’

7 See e.g. Sommerstein, 101–2.

8 Droysen, J. G., RhM 3 (1835), 161–208 Google Scholar, at 161.

9 Atkinson, J. E., ‘Curbing the comedians: Cleon versus Aristophanes and Syracosius’ decree’, CQ 42 (1992), 56–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 But Halliwell, 61–3 produces strong arguments against the view that there ever was a decree of Syrakosios.

11 The Athenian contingent included 1,500 hoplites, 700 marines, 400 archers, 30 cavalry (reinforced during winter 415/14), together with the trierarchs and crews of 100 triremes, and a number of ancillary personnel (Thuc. 6.43–44, 93.4).

12 Cf. the possibility entertained by Sommerstein (106–7) that Syrakosios was responsible for prosecuting and securing the death or exile of some of those involved in the scandals of the previous years. ‘Such a connexion would be quite sufficient pretext for Phrynichos to damn Syrakosios for depriving him of the opportunity (rather than the right) to satirize the victims of his choice.’

13 One might usefully compare the lack of overt political comedy in Birds. It is possible that political activity in 414 was in general somewhat restrained, as the Athenians waited nervously for news from Sicily.

14 Kühner and Gerth II.l p. 14(§348[a]2).

15 In comedy, as in other literary genres, personal names are found both with and without an article: see Kühner and Gerth II.l pp. 598–602 (§462[a]).

16 In addition, this emendation would not remedy the metrical problems of the fragment.

17 Herman, G., Ritualised Friendship and the Greek City (Cambridge, 1987), 21.Google Scholar An obvious example is the pro-Spartan Kimon, who named one of his sons Lakedaimonios (Plut. Cim. 16.1).

18 It is in any case striking that Syrakosios should feature in comedy at precisely the time of the war against Syracuse.

19 I should like to thank Arnd Kerkhecker and the journal's referee for their helpful comments and criticisms.