“Two Phaedras: Euripides and Aristophanes? ”, in: S.D. Olson (ed.), Ancient Comedy and...

J.R. Green

Two Phaedras: Euripides and Aristophanes?

Abstract: A “new” vase with a comic scene at the Nicholson Museum in Sydney isunique in its subject-matter. It shows a parody of tragedy, arguably of Phaedra andher Nurse from Euripides’ Hippolytus. It should be dated to about 400 BCBC or even alittle before. While important for its own sake, it also prompts discussion of thestaging of Euripides’ play.

The Nicholson Museum at the University of Sydney has recently been presented witha Lucanian red-figured bell-krater that bears an unusual comic scene (Figs 1–4).1 Itis 28.3cm high and has a diameter at the lip of 28.8/29.1cm.2 The vase has been put

I am happy to express my debt to Francesca Silvestrelli for her help on issues relating to early Lucanianred-figure, aswell as to SophieMorton in Sydney formuchpractical assistance in the preparation of thisarticle.AlanSommersteinhasmade invaluablecommentsonanearlierversionof thisarticle. I alsomakegrateful acknowledgement to the following for photographs and permission to publish them: S. Paspa-las and C. Avronidaki (Athens), M. Fodor (Boston), H. Pflug (Heidelberg), C. Sutherns (London),L. Grissom (Malibu), T.E. Cinquantaquattro, S. Saviana and A. Villone (Naples), A. Taylor (Oxford),T. Leroux (Paris), A. Pavone (Taranto), K.B. Zimmer (Tübingen) and I. Jung (Vienna).

Abbreviations:Green-Handley, Images = R. Green and E. Handley, Images of the Greek Theatre (London: British

Museum Press, 1995)Hart, Art Theater = M.L. Hart, The Art of Ancient Greek Theater (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum,

2010)IGD = A.D. Trendall and T.B.L. Webster, Illustrations of Greek Drama (London: Phaidon, 1971)LCS Suppl. 3 = A.D. Trendall, The Red-Figured Vases of Lucania, Campania and Sicily, Supplement 3,

BICS Suppl. 41 (London: Institute of Classical Studies, 1983)MNC = J.R. Green and A. Seeberg, revised and enlarged edition of T.B.L. Webster’s Monuments

Illustrating New Comedy, i–ii, BICS Suppl. 50 (London: Institute of Classical Studies, 1995)Rusten, Birth of Comedy = J. Rusten (ed.), The Birth of Comedy. Texts, Documents and Art from the

Athenian Comic Competitions, 486–280 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011)RVAp = A.D. Trendall and A. Cambitoglou, The Red-Figured Vases of Apulia, i (Oxford: Oxford Uni-

versity Press, 1978), ii (Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press, 1982)Taplin, Pots & Plays = O. Taplin, Pots & Plays. Interactions between Tragedy and Greek Vase-painting of

the Fourth Century BB..CC.. (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2007)Wieseler, Theatergebäude = F. Wieseler, Theatergebäude und Denkmäler des Bühnenwesens bei den

Griechen und Römern (Göttingen: Vandenhoech & Ruprecht, 1851)1 Inv. 2013.2, presented by James Ede in my honor. I seek to repay his kindness in acknowledging hishelp and friendship (and that of his father) over many years. The photographs and the profile drawingare by Rowan Conroy. I am grateful too to Michael Turner for facilitatingmy access to the vase.2 The difference is due to the pressure exerted on the sides of the vase by the application of the handleswhile the vase was leather-hard.

Brought to you by | De Gruyter / TCSAuthenticated | [email protected]

Download Date | 1/27/14 3:55 PM

together from four or perhaps five large, sharp-edged fragments. Fortunately thejoins do not occur at any critical points so far as the decoration is concerned. On thefront, a break runs through the thighs of the right-hand figure; there is possiblysome slight surface damage to the right hand of the left figure. On the reverse, anangled line runs through the right arm and shoulder of the left youth; there is someminor surface wear to the stele; on the right youth, a near-vertical line comes acrosshis head, through his shoulder and down to the toes of his left foot. None of thismakes any serious difference; in effect, the vase is near intact and in good condi-tion.

Fig. 1: Lucanian red-figure bell-krater, University of Sydney, Nicholson Museum 2013.2, gift ofJames Ede in honour of Professor J.R. Green.

Two Phaedras: Euripides and Aristophanes? 95



Fig. 2: Detail of Fig. 1.

Fig. 3: Reverse of Fig. 1.

96 J.R. Green



Fig. 4: Profile drawing of the bell-krater.

The shape of the vessel is clear from the drawing (Fig. 4). In terms of its attributionand dating, we should note a pronounced in-curve in the upper wall. The zonerunning round the upper wall below the lip is offset above and below. There is a sharpedge at the top of the inner face of the lip. The handles are just slightly in-turned(a useful chronological indicator). The inner face of the foot meets the underside ofthe floor at a sharp angle, and there is also a fairly sharp carination at what one mightcall the shoulder of the inner face.

The clay is well worked, without obvious inclusions, and has a smooth finish; itis a pale reddish brown (Munsell 7.5YR 6/4 light brown). There are faint traces of apreliminary sketch for the right-hand figure, particularly in the area of her raised arm,but its use is not readily detectable elsewhere.

The black glaze is lustrous and fairly thickly applied, although less so on thehandles, where it has fired more metallic. There is some crackling of the glaze in the




area below the bed on side A, and the glaze is slightly misfired in an area behind theupper body of the left-hand figure. Reserved are the inner faces of the handles and thehandle-zones, a band at the junction of upper wall and lip on the inner face, andanother just within the edge of the lip; also bands above and below the raised zonebelow the lip, an incised groove at the junction of stem and foot, the vertical face ofthe foot and the whole of the underside. There is no evidence of added color in thefigure-work, nor is there any trace of labels for the figures.

All the reserved surfaces are reddened, in places somewhat unevenly, except forthe underside where there are, however, two short strokes of strong red, probablyancient, on either side of the floor; their purpose is uncertain. There is also a moderndrilled hole where a clay sample has been taken. There are no graffiti.

Side A has a two-figure composition with a female figure moving across from theleft toward a woman who leans back on a bed. Their clothing comes to the ground, sothat one sees nothing of their feet. The hands are simply done. There is plentiful use ofrelief line for details, and we may note it especially for the webbing on the horizontalframe of the bed and to show the roughness of the hair of the figure on the left. Thereis no relief contour.

The reverse has two cloaked youths about a stele. The hair of the left youth iscurlier than that of the right. The form of his ear is original and not due to damage. Onthe reverse, the right youth has obvious footwear; for the left figure, shoes areindicated only by an oblique line on the left foot. (What seems to be a line on the rightfoot is in fact a minor crack.) Note that the outer edges of their cloaks are vertical so asto provide a clear edge to the scenes. The right youth has a zigzag in the bunch ofdrapery hanging behind him. In the laurel above the head of the left youth is a blob ofmiltos with a fine glaze line about it at the right. I do not know what, if anything, itwas meant to represent.

There is a band of maeander with two saltire squares under the figure-scenes oneach side; they do not extend around the vase, nor is there any decoration below thehandles. Running round the vase in the zone below the lip is a band of laurel.3

To try to pin down the vase’s date and stylistic context, it is worth looking brieflyfor other works by the same hand. Since the principal scene is so individual, it iseasier to begin with the reverse, which has a standard scheme of cloaked youthsfacing each other about a stele. The hand seems to be the same as that on the bell-krater in the Getty Museum, 80.AE.139.2 (Fig. 5a).4 Compare the handling of the

3 I use the term “laurel” in a conventional sense, regardless of whether it is laurel, olive ormyrtle.4 LCS Suppl. 3, 22 no. 306e, pl. 3, 4–5; CVA (4) pl. 213. For work on early South Italian vase-paintingsince Trendall, see e.g. M. Denoyelle and M. Iozzo, La céramique grecque d’Italie méridionale et deSicile : Productions coloniales et apparentées du VIIIe au IIIe siècle av. J.-C., Vol. 4 (Paris: Picard 2009);M. Denoyelle, “La ceramica. Appunti sulla nascita delle produzioni italiote,” in: Atene e la MagnaGrecia dall’età arcaica all’ellenismo. Atti del quarantasettesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia(Taranto 27–30 settembre 2007) (Taranto: Istituto per la storia e l’archeologia della Magna Grecia,

98 J.R. Green



drapery, the treatment of the hair, the drawing of the eyes, the slightly curious form ofthe ears, the placement of the ear of the left-hand figure, even the style of the band ofmaeander below. The front of the vase (Fig. 5b) also has a number of elements incommon with what we see on the Sydney piece. The footwear of the right-hand figureof the reverse and the satyr of the front is of a kind common in this stylistic area.Trendall thought the Getty vase was probably “by a follower of the Amykos Painternearing the Creusa Painter.” Elements of the drawing, for example the “dropped ear,”occur in work by the Creusa Painter. The drawing on the reverse of our vase is alsoclose to that of a fragmentary bell-krater in the Getty, 82.AE.39.7 (Fig. 6).5 Trendall,quoting a number of parallels, saw this as early work by the Creusa Painter himself.The drawing of the eyes in this case is comparable with that seen in his moredeveloped work.

Another piece that comes close is the bell-krater formerly in the Borowski collec-tion on which one of the youths on side B pours wine from a chous. (Side A has anexperimental but not very successful scene of Dionysus attended by a satyr andmaenad). Trendall saw it as a useful example of the painter’s early work, particularlyin the handling of the youths on the reverse.6

The drawing on our vase seems to me to stand very close to the early work of theCreusa Painter. It would therefore date to around 400 BCBC or even a little before. Suchan attribution and date are supported by analysis of the shape of the vase which, asFrancesca Silvestrelli points out to me, seems to be consistent with bell-kratersproduced in the later stages of the Amykos workshop, as is also suggested by theslightly up-turned handles. Those decorated by the Creusa and Dolon Painters ingeneral represent something of a later development. The Creusa Painter himselfseems normally not to have left the vertical edge of the foot of the vase reserved,except in his earliest work, and one may notice the unusual direction of the laurel onthe lip.

2008), pp. 339–49; F. Silvestrelli, “L’officina dei pittori di Creusa, di Dolone e dell’Anabates a Meta-ponto,” in: E. Lippolis (ed.), Arte e artigianato in Magna Grecia (Naples: Electa Napoli, 1996), pp. 400–2; and, “Le fasi iniziali della ceramica a figure rosse nel Kerameikos di Metaponto,” in: M. Denoyelle,E. Lippolis, M. Mazzei, C. Pouzadoux (eds.), La céramique apulienne. Bilan et perspectives. Actes de laTable Ronde organisée par l’École française de Rome en collaboration avec la Soprintendenza per i BeniArcheologici della Puglia et le Centre Jean Bérard de Naples (Naples, Centre Jean Bérard, 30 novembre–2 décembre 2000) (Naples: Centre Jean Bérard, 2005), pp. 113–23. One should also bring Trendall’sno. 306f into the equation, not least for its reverse which is close to ours. It stands in a similarrelationship to earliest Creusa Painter.5 LCS Suppl. 3, 46 no. C31; CVA (4) pl. 214.6 LCS Suppl. 1, 15 no. 422a, pl. 5, 1–2; LCS Suppl 3, 44 no. C4; N. Leipen et al., Glimpses of Excellence(Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum, 1984) no. 18; Royal-Athena Galleries (New York), Art of the AncientWorld XII (2001) no. 239 and currently (2013) back with Royal-Athena. The form of this bell-krater is ofthe broader type with spreadingwall.




Fig. 5a–b: Lucanian red-figure bell-krater, Malibu. J. Paul Getty Museum, Villa Collection 80.AE.139.2.Gift of Robert Blaugrund.

Fig. 6: Fragmentary Lucanian red-figure bell-krater, Malibu. J. Paul Getty Museum,Villa Collection 82.AE.39.7. Gift of Herbert L. Lucas.

100 J.R. Green



We cannot for the moment demonstrate that the scene on the front is by the same handas the reverse. Vase-painters in this part of the world sometimes collaborated on asingle vessel, at times even on a single side of a single vessel; but even if the two sidesturn out to be by two different hands, it is a reasonable asumption that the work wascarried out in physical proximity, in a single shop within the space of a single day.7

That the vase was made in Metaponto rather than Taranto, for example, isimportant in many respects. For one, in a continuation of Adamesteanu’s explorationof the site in the 1960s, which included the discovery of potters’ workshops, seriouswork is going on at the moment defining and exploring the local product, and it isincreasingly clear that at this period, the years shortly before and after 400 BCBC, the citywas just as active as Taranto and just as closely in touch with Athens in terms of bothvase-painting and performances of theater.8

We may now look more closely at the front of the vase (Fig. 2). The style and thedetail of the figures make it clear that we are dealing with a scene from contemporarycomedy. The composition is simple: a female moving forward from the left (her left legis forward) toward awomanwho appears to be falling back on a bedwith a pillow at itshead. The scene is unique, and this is itself worth emphasizing. There is no otherexample of a scene of this date anywhere that concentrates on women in this way.Indeed, the absenceofwomen fromrepresentations of comedyat this period, as distinctfrom later, has been noticed by both Jeffrey Henderson and me.9 Most of what we havefrom this phase is male-dominated and often depicts physical action, with figuresrunning around and hitting one another (or threatening to). One thinks of the little

7 For collaboration on a single vase in Metaponto, see e.g. M. Denoyelle, “Style individuel, style localet centres de production: retour sur le cratère des ‘Karneia’,” Mélanges de l’Ecole française de Rome.Antiquité 114 (2002), pp. 587–609. For collaboration on a single side of a single vase in Metaponto, seeM. Denoyelle and F. Silvestrelli,MMJ, forthcoming.8 For a recent discussion of theatrical links between Athens and Metaponto, see M. Nafissi, “Atene eMetaponto: ancora sullaMelanippe Desmotis e i Neleidi,” Ostraka 6 (1997), pp. 337–57. For reference totragic themes in this area in early South Italian red-figure, see in addition to Taplin, Pots & Plays,M. Denoyelle, “Il mito greco in Occidente nel V. secolo: Metaponto ed Herakleia,” in: Immagine e mitonella Basilicata antica (Potenza, Museo Provinciale, dicembre 2002–marzo 2003) (Venosa: Osannaedizioni d’arte, 2002), pp. 104–12.9 J. Henderson, “Pherekrates and theWomen of Old Comedy,” in: D. Harvey and J. Wilkins (eds.), TheRivals of Aristophanes. Studies in Athenian Old Comedy (London: Classical Press of Wales, 2000),pp. 135–50, examines the slowness of female characters to appear, and in doing so points out that whatwe have of Aristophanes is the political plays. Henderson includes a checklist of plays in which womenseem likely to have had speaking-parts, grouped by character-types or role. In “Strumpets on Stage:The Early Comic Hetaera,” Dioniso 1 (2002), pp. 78–87, he gives an overview of the use of hetairai onthe stage of Old Comedy. There is nothing in particular on staging or physical presentation here, butthe article forms a handy general point of reference on the literary evidence. I independently madesome comments on the same issues from the point of view of the material evidence in “Comic Cuts:Snippets of Action on the Greek Comic Stage,” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 45 (2001),pp. 37–64.




Lucanian calyx-krater in Berlin with one figure making as if to hit another, whom heholds tethered by a rope round his neck;10 the vigorous scene from the so-called GoosePlay on the calyx-krater in New York (now being shown to have Metapontine connec-tions);11 the Apulian bell-krater in Sydney with a pretend Heracles pursuing a realHeracles as he runs off with a piece of bread or cake;12 and the old man Chiron beingheaved up the steps to the stage on the bell-krater in the British Museum.13 Even theChoregos Vase seems to show lively argument involving movement about the stage.14

10 Berlin F 3043, said to be from Apulia; AZ 7 (1849), pp. 42–3, pl. 5, 1 (Panofka); M. Bieber, DieDenkmäler zum Theaterwesen im Altertum (Berlin, Leipzig: Vereinigung wissenschaftlicher Verleger,1920), p. 152 no. 154, pl. 85d; and The History of the Greek and Roman Theater (Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press, 19612), p. 140 fig. 513; LCS p. 43 no. 212, pl. 16, 5–6; Hart, Art Theater, p. 106 fig. 3.2;L. Todisco, La ceramica a figure rosse delle Magna Grecia e della Sicilia (Roma: “L’Erma” di Bretschnei-der, 2010), pl. 8, 5; K. Bosher (ed.), Theater outside Athens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2012), p. 293 fig. 14.1 (Green). The subject made Panofka think of Pherecrates’ Doulodidaskalos. He hadbought it in Naples in 1847. I made something of the same point about styles of presentation inP. Easterling and E. Hall (eds.), Greek and Roman Actors. Aspects of an Ancient Profession (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 93–126.11 New York 1924.97.104, from Ruvo; AJA 56 (1952), pp. 193–5, pl. 32 (Beazley); EAA iii, 706–7 figs.864–5 (Trendall); Phoenix 51 (1997), pl. 2b (Csapo); Antike Kunst 41 (1998), pl. 5, 2 and pl. 6, 1 (Schmidt);A.C. Montanaro, Ruvo di Puglia e il suo territorio. Le necropoli (Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, 2007),pp. 910–11 no. 324.5, fig. 876; C.A. Picon et al., Art of the Classical World in the Metropolitan Museum ofArt (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, Yale University Press, 2007), p. 158 fig. 179 (color); Taplin,Pots & Plays, p. 13 fig. 5 (color); Brill’s Companion to the Study of Greek Comedy (Leiden: Brill, 2010),p. 76 fig. 3 (Green); Hart, Art Theater, p. 112 no. 50 (color ill.); Rusten, Birth of Comedy, p. 454 (ill.);RVAp i, 46 no. 3/7. Martine Denoyelle and Francesca Silvestrelli demonstrate in an article forthcomingin MMJ that the vase is not by the Tarporley Painter, as has long been believed, but by the DolonPainter, whowas normally based in Metaponto.12 Sydney, Nicholson Museum 88.02, A.D. Trendall, “A Phlyax Bell-Krater by the Lecce Painter,” in:A. Cambitoglou and E.G.D. Robinson (eds.), Classical Art in the Nicholson Museum (Mainz: von Zabern,1995), pp. 125–31, pll. 39, 40, 1 and color pl. 5, 1; Easterling and Hall, Greek and Roman Actors (above,n. 10), p. 112 fig. 21 (Green); Green et al., Ancient Voices, Modern Echoes. Theatre in the Greek World(Exhib.Cat., Sydney: Nicholson Museum, 2003), pp. 49–50 no. 17 (color ills.); CVA (1) pll. 16–17; RVApSuppl. ii, 28 no. 5/200b. Ian Storey, “The Curious Matter of the Lenaia of 422 BC,” in: D.J. Phillips andD. Pritchard (eds.), Sport and Festival in the Ancient Greek World (Swansea: Classical Press of Wales,2003), pp. 281–92, would link the scenewith Leukon’s Presbeis, but the grounds seem tome tenuous.13 London 1849.6–20.13 (F 151), e.g. Wieseler, Theatergebäude, p. 60, pl. IX, 13; Bieber, Denkmäler(above, n. 10), pl. 145 no. 109, 82; LIMC iii, Cheiron *103; Taplin, Comic Angels, pl. 12, no. 6; Green-Handley, Images, p. 54 fig. 28 (color); M. McDonald and J.M. Walton (eds.), The Cambridge Companionto Greek and Roman Theatre (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 259 fig. 27; Hart, ArtTheater, p. 116 no. 53; Rusten, Birth of Comedy, p. 441 (ill.); Bosher, Theater outside Athens (above,n. 10), p. 297 fig. 14.3 (Green); RVAp i, 100 no. 4/252.14 In Rome, on deposit with the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali. RVAp Suppl. ii, 7–8 no. 1/124, pl. 1, 3; A Passion for Antiquities: Ancient Art from the Collection of Barbara and Lawrence Fleisch-man (Malibu: J. Paul Getty Museum, 1994), pp. 125–8 no. 56 (color ill.); Green, Theatre in Ancient GreekSociety (London: Routledge, 1994), p. 46, fig. 2.21; P.E. Easterling (ed.), The Cambridge Companion toGreek Tragedy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 75 fig. 9 (Taplin); Antike Kunst 41

102 J.R. Green



From Athens itself around 415–410 BCBC we have the set of polychrome jugs with a rangeof lively topics including a man rowing a fish, two running obeliaphoroi, a runningparasite and two gesticulating naked figures named Dionysos and Phor[mio].15

Because of the limits imposed by the available space on our vase, the scene ismore compact or squashed together than it would have been onstage. Thus thewoman on the right is lying or in the act of falling back on her bed, which would ofcourse have been longer onstage in the original performance. Indeed, the director ofthe play would doubtless have used a real bed rather than something speciallyconstructed and abnormally short. The bed is of a type still seen quite commonly onthe Indian subcontinent, little more than a frame with cross-webbing. The figureapproaching from the left must be a servant or slave. She wears a simple garmentwithout any tie around the waist, and more particularly, her mask is ugly and her hairrough—very close in appearance to that of male slaves. She has never been near ahairdresser (even within the house). As part of the definition of her character, she isgiven large ears, a sure sign of stupidity for contemporary Athenians. Her patentstupidity alone is probably enough to make for humorous dialogue, even if we cannotknow how well she spoke Greek.16 We may note in passing the way the actor’s sleevescome down to the wrist (as also on the left arm of the woman on the bed); this isstandard costume as well as further confirmation, should it be needed, that we aredealing with a comic performance.

(1998), pl. 7, 1–2 (Schmidt); Colloque Le théâtre grec antique: la tragédie. Actes, Cahiers de la Villa‘Kérylos’ no. 8 (Paris, 1998), p. 202 fig. 5 (color) (Pasquier); Taplin, Pots & Plays, p. 28 fig. 7 (color);McDonald and Walton, Cambridge Companion (above, n. 13), p. 213 fig. 17; L. Godart and S. De Caro(eds.), Nostoi. Capolavori ritrovati: Roma, Palazzo del Quirinale, Galleria di Alessandro VII, 21 dicembre2007–2 marzo 2008 ([Rome]: Segretariato generale della Presidenza della Repubblica, 2007), no. 45(color ill.); Repatriated Masterpieces. Nostoi; New Acropolis Museum, 24–9 to 31–12–2008 (Athens:Ministry of Culture, General Directorate of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage, 2008), no. 51 (color ill.).15 M. Crosby,Hesperia 24 (1955), pp. 76–84; T.B.L. Webster,Hesperia 29 (1960), pp. 261–3.16 For barbarian slaves in comedy, see V. Ehrenberg, The People of Aristophanes. A Sociology of OldAttic Comedy (Oxford: Blackwell, 1951), pp. 165–91 (still valuable); T. Long, Barbarians in GreekComedy (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1986), pp. 108–25. Thracian nurses werefamous, and one thinks of the women named Thratta, real or imagined, at Ach. 273, V. 828, Th. 279ff.But while male slaves were often given ethnic names or names like Xanthias and Pyrrhias in comedy,females normally were not; see e.g. D. Wiles, “Greek Theatre and the Legitimation of Slavery,” in:L.J. Archer (ed.), Slavery and Other forms of Unfree Labour (London: Routledge, 1988), pp. 53–67;I.E. Stefanis, Ο δούλος στις κωμωδίες του Αριστοφάνη. Ο ρόλος του και η μορφή του (Thessalonike:Aristotelio Panepistemio Thessalonikes, 1990). Cf. D. Lewis, Classical QuarterlyNS 61 (2011), p. 94. Thecostume and masks of Old to Middle Comedy gave great attention to grooming in distinguishingcharacters, and upper-class free men have carefully barbered hair, whereas that of slaves is rough andspiky. For comparable aspects of real life, see S. Lewis, “Barbers’ Shops and Perfume Shops. ‘Symposiawithout Wine’,” in: A. Powell (ed.), The Greek World (London – New York: Routledge, 1995), pp. 432–41. On the barber’s as a favorite place for male gossip, see also V. Hunter, “Gossip and the Politics ofReputation in Classical Athens,” Phoenix 44 (1990), pp. 299–325.




Fig. 7: Apulian red-figure oinochoe with comic scene, University of Sydney, Nicholson Museum 75.02.

104 J.R. Green



Fig. 8: Apulian red-figure bell-krater with comic scene, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum IV 466.

To return to the woman on the bed, within the terms of the depiction, her dress is finerand more elegant, and there is a headband around her curly hair. She is not beautiful:she has the mask of a wife. In Greek comedy of the later 5th and the 4th centuries,wives (as distinct from lovers or what one might describe as women wanted as wives)are never beautiful or attractive. They are given blunt noses, not straight ones. Theirhair is usually shown as a tight curly mop without elegance or style and is often heldby a simple, undecorated band around the head. Their mouths are wide with heavylips. And in some scenes, such as that on an Apulian red-figure jug also in theNicholson Museum (Fig. 7), made a generation or two later, they talk a lot and can bedomineering.17 One might compare an amusing scene on a bell-krater in Vienna

17 Sydney 75.02, Münzen und Medaillen (Basle), Auktion 51 (14 March 1975), no. 177 (ill.); U. Höck-mann & A. Krug (eds.), Festschrift für Frank Brommer (Mainz 1977), pp. 67–76, pl. 22 (Cambitoglou);Green et al., Ancient Voices (above, n. 12), p. 52 no. 19 (color ill.); CVA (1) pll. 48–9; RVAp i, 118 no. 5/141, pl. 39, 5. Attributed to the Truro Painter; toward themiddle of the 4th century.




of the second quarter of the 4th century (Fig. 8),18 or the man wearing a pilos inconfrontation with his wife on an oinochoe in Taranto (Fig. 9).19 Compare also thewife on a fragment of a bell-krater in Tübingen (Fig. 10).20

Another point these examples demonstrate is that despite the paucity of represen-tations of housewives in the surviving evidence for comedy at the transition from Oldto Middle Comedy, the mask-type was already firmly established and changed littleover the next half-century. As an aside, it is interesting that Helen is given the samehairstyle, if a very different kind of face, as she sits on Leda’s knee holding the egg ofNemesis (from which she was born) on an Apulian red-figure calyx-krater in Taranto(Fig. 11).21 The vase dates to the beginning of the 4th century. Although Helen must inpoint of fact have been regarded as young here and still as it were “at home,” thepainter nonetheless thought of her as the wife of Menelaus who appears in the upperpart of the scene with Thersites.

The body language exhibited on our vase is fascinating. The painter is attemptingto convey to the viewer the character, movement, action and even dialogue as theywere enacted. In doing so, since he cannot show a sequence of gestures, he gives acompacted view. Two arms, two gestures, all in addition to the way the body is shown.As we have seen, the servant is given a short, stocky body; she is graceless. Thegesture of her left hand, toward the chin, is a common one of shock or dismay,prompted here by the sight of her mistress’ condition. With her right hand, she makes

18 Vienna IV 466, PhV2 47 no. 66; G. von Lücken, Gr.Vasen (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1923), pl. 119;A. Bernhard-Walcher (ed.), Alltag, Feste, Religion. Antikes Leben auf griechischen Vasen (Exhib.Cat.Innsbruck-Klagenfurt-Vienna-Linz: Kunsthistorisches Museum, 1991–1992), pp. 120–1 no. 62 (ill.);M.M. Grewenig (ed.), Antike Welten. Meisterwerke griechischer Malerei aus dem KunsthistorischenMuseumWien (Ostfildern-Ruit: Verlag Gerd Hatje, 1998), p. 73 (color ill.); RVAp i, 265 no. 10/36, pl. 88,1–2. Attributed to the Painter of Heidelberg U 6.19 Taranto 54724, from Taranto, via Duca degli Abruzzi t. 50. PhV2 64 no. 121; BdA 49 (1964), p. 18fig. 7 (Lo Porto); O. Touchefeu-Meynier, Thèmes odysséens dans l’art antique (Paris: De Boccard, 1968),p. 234 n. 20, pl. 36; A. Alessio et al., Catalogo del Museo Nazionale di Taranto I, 2 (Taranto: La Colomba,1990), pl. 6b (color); B. Andreae and C.P. Presicce (eds.), Ulisse. Il mito e la memoria (Exhib.Cat. Rome:Progetti Museali, 1996), p. 440 no. 6.12 (color ill.); A. Hoffmann, Grabritual und Gesellschaft: Gefäßfor-men, Bildthemen und Funktionen unteritalisch-rotfiguriger Keramik aus der Nekropole von Tarent, Inter-nationale Archäologie Band 76 (Rahden/Westf.: Lidorf, 2002), p. 236, Grave 252 no. 1, pl. 31, 2;A. D’Amicis et al., Attori e maschere del teatro antico. La documentazione del Museo di Taranto (Exhib.Cat. Taranto: Museo Archeologico Nazionale, 2004–2005), p. 36 upper left. Sometimes taken, e.g. by LoPorto, to be Odysseus and Penelope (or Calypso), but the fact that the man wears a pilos need not makehim Odysseus. The woman certainly cannot be Calypso. I take the man to be a traveler returned home;note that he wears a wreath.20 Tübingen S./10 1680, from Taranto. PhV2 72 no. 150; CVA (7) pl. 3, 4. Mid-4th century; perhaps to beattributed to the Cotugno Painter.21 Taranto 52230, from Via G. Giovine, 4 August 1952. Attributed to the workshop of the Painter of theBirth of Dionysos. E. Paribeni, Immagini di vasi apuli (Rome: Associazione fra le Casse di RisparmioItaliane, 1964), no. 11, pll. 12–13; RVAp i, 39, 2/25, pl. 12, 2a–b; Lippolis, Arte e artigianato (above, n. 4),pp. 415–16 no. 354. Both Leda andHelen are labeled.

106 J.R. Green



the well-known gesture of asking a question that really needs an answer, indeed apositive answer. The gesture still survives in Greek lands and to some extent else-where.22

The wife leans or collapses back against her pillow, this in itself indicatingweakness or a lack of authority in front of her servant, or else giving some sense offainting, whether for joy or grief or both. Her left hand for some reason (the stupidityof her servant? the hopelessness of her own situation?) makes a gesture of despair.Her right hand comes over the back of her head. This gesture with her right hand iswell known from representations of the symposium, particularly when there is musicin addition to the wine. It describes a condition one might describe as swooning (touse an old-fashioned term) or (metaphorically) being carried away. There are manyexamples from the heyday of symposium-scenes in Athens in the early 5th century. Anexample from near the time of our vase is an extract from a symposium on an Atticred-figure bell-krater fragment found in Naukratis (Fig. 12).23 Our woman is thus atthe very least carried away, in a high emotional state. Whether she is fainting for joy,in ecstatic pleasure or in grief at tragic news, is a question we must leave open for themoment.

The painter is employing gestures well known in art to convey what is happening.We cannot guarantee that the actor on stage on the occasion the painter recalls madeidentical gestures, but in broad terms it seems likely. Gestures in art recall gestures inlife, and if an actor in a Greek theater wanted to make his meaning clear, he wouldtend to use the same conventions. He was acting to a large audience in a large space,and was wearing a mask that did not permit facial expression. While a good actorcould persuade people to see change of expression by the way he angled the mask tothe light (of the sun) and shifted his shoulders, he would reinforce it with gesture, notleast for the members of the audience sitting in the top rows.

Who is this emotional woman? Aristophanes and visual sources suggest twoprime candidates from the tragic stage: Stheneboea and Phaedra. Both fancied menwho were portrayed as innocent of wrong-doing, who indeed had their minds else-where. In her passion for Bellerophon, Stheneboea was not only contemplatingadultery, but breaking the codes of honor in a situation of guest-friendship. In orderfor the story to continue with Bellerophon’s encounter with the Chimaera in Lycia, herfalse accusation to her husband Proetus was a necessary component, but she seemsgenerally to have been presented as filled with lust and then spite, without muchsoul-searching such as we seem to have in our parody.

22 On the gesture of this style of question, seemy notes in “Comic Cuts” (above, n. 6).23 Oxford, AshmoleanMuseumAN 1896-1908-G.732, CVA (2) pl. 67, 8. The item is listed, described andillustrated with the registration number AshmLoan.350 in the British Museum’s website Naukratis:Greeks in Egypt, compiled by a group led by Alexandra Villing (see “online research catalogues”). It isdated to about 410 BCBC..




Fig. 9a–b: Apulian red-figure oinochoe with comic scene, Taranto 54724, from Taranto.Su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali – Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologicidella Puglia – Archivio fotografico.

Fig. 10: Fragment of Apulian red-figure bell-krater with comic scene, Tübingen S./10 1680,from Taranto.

108 J.R. Green



Fig. 11: Apulian red-figure calyx-krater, Taranto 52230, from Taranto. Detail with Ledaand Helen. Su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali – Soprintendenzaper i Beni Archeologici della Puglia – Archivio fotografico.

Fig. 12: Attic red-figure bell-krater fragment. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum AN 1896-1908-G.732,from Naukratis. © Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford. Photography by British Museum staff.




Fig. 13: Apulian red-figure stamnos, Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 1900.349, from Gela.Stheneboea, Proetos, Bellerophon and Pegasus. Photograph© 2013. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

Although Euripides’ Stheneboea does not survive, it was evidently hugely popular. In2007, Taplin in his Pots & Plays counted about 20 examples of the story, manydoubtless inspired by the play at one level or another.24 Euripides’ tragedy, probablyproduced around 430 BCBC, became notorious for its portrayal of an adulterous woman.The best-known depiction is probably the Ariadne Painter’s stamnos in Boston ofabout 400 BCBC or soon after (Fig. 13).25 It shows Proetus handing the letter to Bellero-

24 Taplin, Pots & Plays, pp. 201–4. See earlier IGD III.3, 44–6.25 Boston 1900.349, from Gela. RVAp 1/104; LIMC vii, s.v. Proitos 3*; IGD III.3, 45; J.M. Padgett et al.,Vase-Painting in Italy (Boston: MFA, 1993), no. 8, 62–4 and color pl. 2; N. Kaltsas (ed.),Agon (Exhib.Cat.Athens: Hypourgeio Politismou, Ethniko Archaiologiko Mouseio, 2004), pp. 302–3 no. 179; Taplin,Pots & Plays, p. 202 no. 72 (ill.).

110 J.R. Green



phon as a lively Pegasus waits ready. Stheneboea stands in front of a doorway, her lefthand forward, her right hand plucking at the shoulder of her chiton. Aphrodite doessomething similar as she attracts or enjoys Adonis’ attention on the squat lekythos inParis decorated by Aison.26 Stheneboea’s head is not covered (unlike the goddessAphrodite’s). A relationship to a doorway is a common convention in the depiction ofwives and hetairai, indicating a relationship to the/a house in general or indeed to thedoorway to her quarters from the courtyard within the house or palace. In this case,this must be the principal door, as the context makes clear. At the same time, thedepiction of her head is interesting, with all it implies about her character (see below),as is the way she pulls at her clothing.

The case of Phaedra was not dissimilar. There is again a passion for another manpresent in the household, although in this case Hippolytus, her husband’s son by hisearlier relationship with Antiope, is present as a member of the household. In thiscase, however, the wife’s pretence of a relationship with the presumably handsomeyoung man prompts Theseus’ curse and Hippolytus’ death. This outcome is integralto the story, and fore-knowledge of it prompts a different attitude on the part of theaudience toward the sequence of events and the behavior of Phaedra.

Euripides wrote two Hippolytus plays. In the first version, Hippolytus Calyptome-nus, he is said to have taken a traditional line and to have presented Phaedra as awicked woman. A number of his early plays seem to have involved “bad women,”including Aigeus, Phoinix and Peleus as well as Stheneboea and Bellerophon.27 In hissurviving Hippolytus (Stephanephorus) of 428 BCBC, Euripides rehabilitated Phaedra, asGorgias was to do with Helen within a few years’ time and Euripides with his Helen of412 BCBC..28 In this case, Euripides made it Aphrodite who prompted Phaedra to fall inlove with Hippolytus against her natural instincts and upbringing. At first Phaedraresists, in that major scene at lines 170ff, finally admitting her dilemma to her nurse.The latter then tells Hippolytus, and the poet has him launch into a fierce denuncia-tion of women, a passage that became something of a locus classicus for misogyny. Itis tempting to see our lady as Phaedra, both because of her highly emotional state andbecause of the involvement of the servant or nurse: she is important here, whereas shehas no visible involvement in the Bellerophon story.29

26 Paris, Louvre MNB 2109, from Athens, ARV2 1175, 7; L. Burn, The Meidias Painter (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1987), pl. 25b–d; H.A. Shapiro, Personifications in Greek Art (Zurich: Akanthus, 1993),figs. 137–8.27 The last cannot be later than 426 BCBC because of the reference in Acharnians. See for exampleT.B.L. Webster, The Tragedies of Euripides (London: Methuen, 1967), pp. 77–86.28 There is also Isocrates to consider. On these issues and their relative chronology, see recentlyI.C. Storey, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 55.2 (2012), pp. 1–19, esp. 12.29 The apparent agony, not to say aporia of the woman suggests the surviving Hippolytus as the playand scene parodied rather than Euripides’ earlier version.




Fig. 14: Apulian red-figure calyx-krater, London 1870.7-10.2 (F 272), from Anzi.© The Trustees of the British Museum.

In interpreting the scene on our vase, we are concerned not so much with Euripides’play and our reactions to it—a matter on which there is a huge bibliography—but withcontemporary ancient reactions. Kovacs, for example, has explicitly pursued such anapproach in his discussions of the play.30 In terms of the material evidence, a finevase in the British Museum takes us some way, even though it is half a centuryor more later than ours (Fig. 14).31 The decoration on the front is divided into tworegisters. In the lower part are centaurs behaving badly at the wedding of Peirithous,

30 D. Kovacs, The Heroic Muse: Studies in the Hippolytus and Hecuba of Euripides (Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press, 1987), esp. pp. 9–10.31 British Museum 1870.7–10.2 (F 272), from Anzi. E. Bielefeld, Zur griechischen Vasenmalerei des 6.bis 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Halle: M. Niemeyer, 1952), fig. 45; A.D. Trendall, South Italian Vase Painting(London: British Museum, 1966), color pl. A; IGD III.3, 24; D. Williams, Greek Vases (London: BritishMuseum Press, 1985), p. 61 fig. 69 (color); A.D. Trendall, Red Figure Vases of South Italy and Sicily

112 J.R. Green



the friend of Theseus, and the theme (although obvious) is identified by labels. Theupper register (Fig. 15), despite a number of difficulties, has often been interpreted asreflecting the theme of Euripides’ Hippolytus. (The link between the two levels isperhaps to be found in Theseus himself and problems with the marital condition.) Inthis respect, it is interesting that the object in the middle of the upper scene is the royalmarriage-bed—and there we can already detect a link with our vase. Oliver Taplinfollowed Trendall in arguing that the female posing extravagantly in front of it is thegoddess Aphrodite, and although I cannot agree with all aspects of his interpretation,he is surely correct in this. Note her long curling hair, and contrast it with the hair of theother women, which is covered and shorter (apart from that of the servant or slave onthe far left, who in these terms does not count). Her hair is also gathered on top of herhead, a mark of a physically attractive woman and a style often given to Eros in thisperiod.32 Note too the prominent earrings and the necklace, the pose and the diapha-nous drapery that shows off her body. The vase-painter reasonably took Aphrodite tobe the driving force behind this story, and it is instructive that he saw the play this way;indeed, this is an important link between pot and play.33 The goddess speaks theprologue, and her annoyance at Hippolytus’ devotion to Artemis and his disregard ofher underpins the storyline.

The old servant to the right (visible in Fig. 14) has a crucial role in the later part ofthe play, when he vividly reports the disaster that overtook Hippolytus as he tried toescape (Hipp. 1173–1254).34 It is interesting that the majority of the seven or eightknown depictions of the scene imagined from this report belong to the middle and

(London: Thames and Hudson, 1989), fig. 195; LIMC vii, Phaidra *11; RVAp ii, 480–1 no. 18/14, pl.171.1–3: Laodamia Painter. Ca. 350–340 BCBC.32 In the 4th century, a version of it is used for the mask of the type of hetaira that eventually becomesknown as the pseudokorê (Mask V).33 Cf. D. Kovacs, “Euripides Hippolytus 100 and the Meaning of the Prologue,” Classical Philology 75(1980), pp. 130–7, for a fuller discussion of the role of Aphrodite.34 There are several depictions in both Apulian and Sicilian red-figure that are based on thismessenger-speech: for discussions, see J.H. Oakley, “‘The Death of Hippolytus’ in South Italian Vase-Painting,” Numismatica e antichità classiche 20 (1991), pp. 63–83; Taplin, Pots & Plays, pp. 135–8. Addthe example published by M.-C. Chevallier, “La mort d’Hippolyte sur un vase apulien inédit,” Histoirede l’art 46 (juin 2000), pp. 3–12. See earlier IGD III.3, 22–4. The most vivid but unfortunately least wellpreserved is the large calyx-krater in Lipari, inv. 340 bis, where the incident occurs under Aphrodite’sgaze. The waves and shore are shown at the bottom of the scene; Hippolytus attempts to retain controlas the yoke breaks, his chariot collapses and the horses run wild. The horses are shown alternately inwhite, red-figure, purple and red-figure: LCS Suppl. 3, 275 no. 46h (with refs.); LIMC ii, s.v. Aphrodite1527 = v, s.v. Hippolytus-1, 102; L. Bernabò Brea and M. Cavalier, La ceramica figurata della Sicilia edella Magna Grecia nella lipàra del IV sec. a.C. (Muggiò: Oreste Ragusi Editore, 1997), pp. 72–5 figs 67–8(color); U. Spigo, “Composizione e racconto: documenti di cultura pittorica nella ceramica siceliota delIV secolo a.C. dalla necropoli di Lipàra,” in: M. Barra Bagnasco &M.C. Conti (eds.), Studi di ArcheologiaClassica dedicati a Giorgo Gullini per i quaranti anni di insegnamento (Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso,1999), pp. 175–95, fig. 2.




third quarters of the 4th century, when popular interest had shifted to messenger-speeches and tour-de-force presentations by skilled actors.35 Reception reflects theinterests of its period.

The key figure for us is seated on the left (Fig. 15). This is Phaedra, and she isattended by the fluttering figure of Eros together with her old nurse, whose hands areraised in surprise and/or dismay. As a wife, Phaedra has bunched, curly hair heldwith a single band, a more elegant version of the style discussed earlier. Her shawl isdrawn up over the back of her head, exhibiting modesty, and one recalls that thescript of the play has her wanting it off her head, then on again. She uses a small chestas a footrest and sits on an elaborate, decorated stool. The chest, like this kind ofstool, is of a kind regularly shown in depictions of women in their own quarters inboth Attic and South Italian red-figure.36 It occurs with women on their own, in scenesof mistress and maid, carried by Nike presumably as an intended gift for a woman,and in wedding scenes. In Apulian, it is also shown with women in naiskos scenes asa characteristic item. Such chests must typically have held objects precious to awoman, including jewelry.37 Whatever the case in Apulian, in Attic and therefore, onemay suppose, on the Athenian stage, a chest of this type is associated with thewomen’s quarters within the house, the implication being that it appears here as apiece of paraphernalia in an indoor scene.

35 See e.g. Green, “Tragedy and the Spectacle of the Mind: Messenger Speeches, Actors, Narrative,and Audience Imagination in Fourth-Century Vase-Painting,” in: B. Bergmann and C. Kondoleon(eds.), The Art of Ancient Spectacle, Studies in the History of Art 56, National Gallery of Art, SymposiumPapers XXXIV (Washington: Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts, 1999), pp. 36–63.36 On the role of such items, see E. Brummer, “Griechische Truhenbehalter, ” Jahrbuch des DeutschenArchäologischen Instituts 100 (1985), pp. 1–168; H. Cassimatis, “Cosmétique et funéraire sur les vasesapuliens,” in: S. Marchegay, M.-T. Le Dinahet and J.-F. Salles (eds.), Nécropoles et pouvoir. Idéologies,pratiques et interprétations. Actes du colloque … Lyon 21–25 janvier 1995 (Paris: De Boccard, 1998),pp. 155–66; and most importantly F. Lissarrague, “Women, Boxes, Containers: Some Signs and Meta-phors,” in: E.D. Reeder (ed.), Pandora. Women in Classical Greece (Baltimore–Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1995), pp. 91–101. A woman holds one in what is taken to be a wedding context on ared-figure lekythos attributed to the Phiale Painter published by G. Schwarz, “Hochzeitsbilder derParthenonzeit. Die Bostoner Loutrophoros und zwei Lekythen des Phialemalers,” in: W. Alzinger andG.C. Neeb (eds.), Pro Arte Antiqua. Festschrift H. Kenner, ii (Vienna: 1985), pp. 319–25 with pll. 52–3.37 On the red-figure lekythos in the Louvre, CA 2220, such a chest seems to have held a substantialpapyrus roll that is being read by a female. She is often taken to be a muse, but because of the chest it istempting to see her as a mortal. Attributed to the Klügmann Painter. ARV2 1199, 25; Paralipomena,p. 462; Addenda2, p. 343; F. Lissarrague, Greek Vases, The Athenians and their Images (New York:Riverside Book Company, 2001), p. 59 fig. 49 (color). There is a chest drawn in just the same way in adomestic scene with two women on a lekythos by the same painter, formerly in the Bastis collection,then with Dimitri Bizoumis, Los Angeles: ARV2 1200, 2; Paralipomena, p. 462; B. von Bothmer et al.,Antiquities from the Collection of Christos G. Bastis (Mainz: von Zabern, 1987), no. 168 (ill.); Sotheby’s(New York), Sale Cat., 9 December 1999, no. 140 (color ill.).

114 J.R. Green



Fig. 15: Detail of Fig. 14 with the characters from Hippolytus.

Fig. 16: Fragment of an Apulian red-figure bell-krater. Antikenmuseum der UniversitätHeidelberg. 26.87. Patroclus outside Troy. Courtesy of the Institute for Classical Archaeology,University of Heidelberg. Foto: Hubert Vögele.




Fig. 17: Lucanian red-figure amphora of panathenaic shape, Naples 82140. Electra at the grave ofAgamemnon.

At the same time, we must not let the representation mislead us; sitting with one legover the other and with fingers interlaced about the upper knee is not a relaxed pose,as we might suppose from a modern Western standpoint. In the classical world, theposture revealed inner tension. We see it, for example, in a depiction of the embassyto Achilles on his refusal to re-enter the field of battle outside Troy (Fig. 16).38 He sits

38 Fragment of an Apulian red-figure bell-krater. Heidelberg 26.87, attributed to the Sarpedon Painter,ca. 380 BCBC. M. Robertson,History of Greek Art (London: Cambridge University Press, 1975), fig. 134a;Die

116 J.R. Green



on a couch playing a lyre, his armor hanging behind. Odysseus, Ajax and Phoenixstand to the left; it must be Patroclus who sits on a chair in this pose. A satyr sits insuch a pose on a red-figure pelike attributed to the Syriskos Painter of about 470 BCBC.He is worried at the prospect of a more dominant satyr confronting him on theother side of the vase.39 One thinks also of Ares, god of war, on the east frieze of theParthenon,40 but nearer our concerns and the date of our vase is the anxiety of Electraas she sits on the steps of the tomb of her father Agamemnon, unaware of theapproach of her brother Orestes (Fig. 17).41 The intertwining of fingers also appearsnot uncommonly among the surviving family members shown on Attic grave reliefs ofthe 4th century.42 Later, in a painting from Herculaneum thought to reflect a Hellenis-tic original, the interlaced fingers of Medea, prominently placed, reveal her tension asshe holds the sword with which she will kill her children (Fig. 18).43 We may alsorecall that, in discussing figurines of slaves of New Comedy, Bieber took claspedhands and feet crossed at the ankle as symptoms of “fear and anguish or at least atense mood.”44

griechische Klassik: Idee oder Wirklichkeit; eine Ausstellung im Martin-Gropius-Bau, Berlin, 1. März–2. Juni 2002 und in der Kunst- und Ausstellungshalle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bonn, 5. Juli–6. Oktober 2002 (Mainz: von Zabern, 2002), p. 343 no. 228; RVAp i, 165 no. 7/5. For Attic examples onthis theme, see recently E. Langridge-Noti, “Sourcing Stories: the Embassy to Achilles on AtticPottery,” in: J.H. Oakley and O. Palagia (eds.), Athenian Potters and Painters, Volume II (Oxford:Oxbow, 2009), pp. 125–33, with earlier refs.39 Genoa inv. 1150, ARV2 262, 37; F. Gherchanoc and V. Huet (eds.), Vêtements antiques. S’habiller, sedéshabiller dans les mondes anciens (Arles: Editions Errance, 2012), p. 172 (Lissarrague).40 East IV.27. See also A.M. Nicgorski, “Interlaced Fingers and Knotted Limbs: The Hostile Posture ofQuarrelsome Ares on the Parthenon Frieze,” in: A.P. Chapin (ed.), Charis. Essays in Honor of SaraA. Immerwahr, Hesperia Suppl. 33 (Princeton: American School of Classical Studies, 2004), pp. 291–303.41 Lucanian red-figure amphora of panathenaic shape, Naples 82140 (H 1755), connected with theBrooklyn-Budapest Painter. Ht 66cm. About 380 BCBC. LCS 115 no. 597; A.W. Pickard-Cambridge, TheDramatic Festivals of Athens (Oxford: Clarendon, 1953), fig. 178; J.-M. Moret, “Un ancêtre du phylactère:le pilier inscrit des vases italiotes,” Revue archéologique (1979), p. 235 no. 20, figs. 2–3; Knoepfler, Lesimagiers de l’Orestie (Kilchberg: Akanthus, 1993), p. 61, pl. 9; Taplin, Pots & Plays, p. 52; Hart, ArtTheater, p. 64, no. 21 (color ill.).42 T. Dohrn, “Gefaltete und verschränkte Hände. Eine Studie über die Gebärde in der griechischenKunst,” Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 70 (1955), pp. 50–80.43 Naples 8976, e.g. E. Pfuhl, Malerei und Zeichnung der Griechen (Munich: F. Bruckmann, 1923),p. 102 fig. 134; LIMC vi, s.v. Medea, no. *11 (M. Schmidt); R. Ling, Roman Painting (Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press, 1991), p. 137 fig. 141; G. Sena Chiesa and E.A. Arslan (eds.), Miti greci (Milan:Electa, 2004), pp. 40–1 no. 4 (color ill.); J.-M. Croisille, La peinture romaine (Paris: Picard, 2005), pl. 14,1. For others that seem to reflect the same archetype, see LIMC nos. *21 and *22.44 M. Bieber, “A Bronze Statuette of a Comic Actor,” Record of the Art Museum, Princeton University 9.2(1950), p. 10.




Fig. 18:Wall-painting from Herculaneum, Naples 8976.Medea contemplating the death of her children.

Margot Schmidt showed that a calyx-krater once in a private collection in Genevareflects the Hippolytus (Fig. 19).45 It has been dated to ca. 335–330 BCBC and attributedto the Darius Painter as work of his mature period. In the upper register are Aphroditebeing wreathed by Eros, Athena with her armor, and Hermes who, the gesture of his

45 Whereabouts unknown, formerly Geneva, coll. Sciclounoff. M. Schmidt, Journal of Hellenic Studies106 (1986), p. 256 (review of RVAp and Suppl. 1); RVAp Suppl. 1, 74 and 79, no. 18/64b, pl. 13, 1–2;C. Aellen – A. Cambitoglou – J. Chamay, Le peintre de Darius et son milieu (Geneva: Hellas et Roma,1986), pp. 161–5; LIMC Hermes *680, Hippolytos I, 77; Taplin, Pots & Plays, pp. 133–4, fig. 40.Schmidt’s argument is developed by Taplin.

118 J.R. Green



right hand suggests, is addressing the others, perhaps reporting events in the world ofmortals. It may be significant that Aphrodite holds a iynx, an instrument used forlove-spells. At the more constricted lower, human level we have, from right to left,Hippolytus, Phaedra and the nurse. The young hero is given a naked body, a horse-man’s cloak, a broad-brimmed hat (petasos) and the club-ended stick (lagobolon)often used by young hunters. Phaedra is associated with a piece of furniture, presum-ably indicating her quarters but neatly separating her from Hippolytus, who occupiesa separate space. She is wrapped modestly in her shawl, which also covers her head,while from the left the white-haired nurse gestures to her, asking a question. Anincense-burner (thymiaterion) stands between them; its significance for the momentremains obscure.46 As with our other example, the vase does not attempt to depict anactual scene, but rather pictures the key characters of the play. On the other hand, asSchmidt pointed out, the way Phaedra’s head is covered indicates her shame at thepassion that has overtaken her, and it could be taken as recalling her words at 243ff—but that may be too precise an interpretation.

The scene is framed by Ionic columns carrying victory tripods. They may indicatea sanctuary (and thus perhaps account for the thymiaterion), but given the use of suchcolumns in Athenian and then Apulian vase-painting from the late 5th century on,they perhaps indicate specifically the sanctuary of Dionysus, bringing to the viewer’smind dedications after successful performances in the theater and thus specificallyEuripides’ play rather than the myth of Hippolytus generally.

This vase tells us less than the other, but there is nonetheless an emphasis onPhaedra’s torment. Another piece of evidence is the well-known exchange betweenAeschylus and Euripides in the second half of Aristophanes’ Frogs of 406/405 BCBC.From around line 1040, Aristophanes has the character Aeschylus list a number ofparadeigmatic heroes who appeared in his plays and then say, “But by god I nevercreated Stheneboeas or Phaedras as harlots, nor did I ever create a character of awoman in love,” to which the character Euripides replies (1046), “No indeed, younever gave any part to Aphrodite.” And so on. A great deal has been written about thispassage over the years, but for our purposes we may note that Euripides’ treatment ofthese two women seems to have remained notorious in 405 BCBC, 20 years or more aftertheir initial presentation. We cannot know how often the plays were re-performed indeme theaters in the interim or whether Aristophanes and others had played their partin keeping the memory alive, as a kind of short-hand reference for these kinds ofattitudes to women and/or playwrights. At the very least, Aristophanes must havefound some resonance with the audience.

46 There are useful observations on the presence of thymiateria by E. Simon, “Archäologisches zuSpende und Gebet in Griechenland und Rom,” in: F. Graf (ed.), Ansichten griechischer Rituale. Geburts-tags-Symposium fürWalter Burkert (Stuttgart–Leipzig: Teubner, 1998), pp. 127–42, 495–500.




Fig. 19: Apulian red-figure calyx-krater, Switzerland, priv. coll. The characters of Euripides,Hippolytus. After C. Aellen et al., Le peintre de Darius et son milieu.

There is another important point in these representations. The calyx-kraters in Figs. 15and 19 depict Phaedra as relatively modest, her head and shoulders covered as theyshould be for a “proper”married woman.47 They give her the appropriate hairstyle. Byand large, the same is not true of Stheneboea, who is much closer in appearance to ahetaira (see e.g. Fig. 13). Indeed, if one did not know the story, one would be hard-

47 Even if the Phaedra of Fig. 15 wears earrings, necklace and bangles. Note the important article byE.B. Harrison, “Hellenic Identity and Athenian Identity in the Fifth Century B.C.,” in: S.J. Barnes andW.S. Melion (eds.), Cultural Differentiation and Cultural Identity in the Visual Arts (Washington: Na-tional Gallery of Art, 1989), pp. 41–61, esp. 53, who points out in her discussion of the Parthenon friezethat maidens wear their back hair long, whereas married women appearing in public have their hairbound up and coveredwith a kerchief.

120 J.R. Green



pressed to believe that she is a wife. The woman on our vase (Fig. 3b) is patently awife, as we have seen; this is another reason for believing her to be Phaedra ratherthan Stheneboea.

The comic scene represented on our vase is surely a parody of the key scene atHippolytus 170ff. with its dialogue between Phaedra and the nurse. It exaggerates andsimplifies the nature of the scene, as parody regularly does, an aspect made clear bycomparison with the vase in the British Museum (Fig. 15). It is also an example of theway this kind of treatment, much like mythological comedy, seeks to expose “reality”by delivering it in everyday, lower-class human terms.

Another point that must be made now is that although the acting is outdoors,onstage, the scene is set indoors. This seems obvious enough from the bed, but it isalso emphasized by the fact that the mistress has her arms exposed and her hairuncovered, even if it is bound.48 No respectable woman would go out, into the publicgaze, not fully dressed. There is much one could say about the perception of hair andhairstyles in the ancient Greek world, and these conventions were regularly employedon the comic stage, even if in a simplistic form, to indicate the character or style of theperson concerned, especially when women were presented. To show an indoor sceneon the ancient stage, the playwrights made use of a platform that was rolled outthrough the central doorway, the ekkyklêma.

In terms of staging, it seems highly likely that the scene, both in the originalEuripidean production and as a consequence in this parody, involved use of theekkyklêma.49 Many literary critics object to this, consciously or unconsciously influ-enced by Pickard-Cambridge’s view of the “purity” of Athenian performance, but theirgrounds are outweighed by other considerations.50 For one, it is serious business toignore the authority of Aristophanes of Byzantium when he tells us that the ekkyklêmawas used here. This is not a late scholiast making banal deductions from the text;Aristophanes knew about theater performance, at least at a general level even if he

48 There are good observations on the underlying issues of exposing the private life of women onstageby B. Seidensticker, “Die Frau auf der attischen Bühne,” Humanistische Bildung 11 (1987), pp. 7–42,esp. 16–17.49 For an authoritative survey of identified cases of the use of the ekkyklêma, see E. Csapo andW.J. Slater, The Context of Ancient Drama (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995), pp. 270–3,under nos. 78 and 79. Earlier, see A.W. Pickard-Cambridge, The Theatre of Dionysus in Athens (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1946), pp. 100–22, 111–12, on this passage.50 In the late 1940s, some scholars still refused to acknowledge what they saw as the unacceptablyrude nature of comic costume. We may discount too Pickard-Cambridge’s idea that Phaedra waswheeled out on the couch. It was improbable enough in the first place, but now we can be sure that theparody would have made fun of such an oddity as a couch on wheels. Nevertheless, V. Di Benedettoand E. Medda, La tragedia sulla scena. La tragedia greca in quanto spettacolo teatrale (Turin: Einaudi,1997), pp. 22–4, bizarrely extend this idea, to have Euripides and Agathon emerge through the door onwheeled couches in Acharnians and Thesmophoriazousae, respectively. It would be interesting to see acontemporary illustration of such a thing.




had not seen Hippolytus performed. Indeed it can be argued that he is more convin-cing precisely because this is not a self-evident case; he had a point to make, as eventhe somewhat corrupt text makes clear.51

There has been continuing discussion of the question, including important con-tributions from Newiger, Hölscher and Russo.52 In her discussion of the use of theekkyklêma, I am not sure that Belardinelli takes Webster’s argument in the spirit inwhich it was written.53 He was in fact reacting in a not-atypical way to what he saw asBarrett’s pedestrian or even pedantic insistence (in his note on Hipp. 811) that theekkyklêma is used only to bring the interior of a house into view. (If one is going to besilly, let’s give a silly answer.) Webster therefore suggested that if one is arguing atthat sort of level, Alcestis and Phaedra move from an inner room into the courtyard ofthe palace and the ekkyklêma brings the courtyard into view. Indeed, the well-knownremark of Σ Acharnians 408 explaining the ekkyklêma could not unreasonably betaken as a general rule about the presentation of scenes thought of as taking placeindoors.54

In addition, the fundamental point is that it was hardly proper for a woman tobe brought out on her bed (wheeled or carried) into what is effectively the street(and certainly public view), as she would be thought to be if she were brought outof the stage-door (the door of the palace), especially in the case of an upper-classwoman like Phaedra. Whatever exceptions one might make in particular circum-stances, the prevailing view was that “citizen” women, and especially women of theupper levels of society, belonged in the house and that the world of women was nota public one.55 There were limits as to what a married woman might do on foot;

51 On the difficulty of the text, see W.J. Slater, Aristophanis Byzantii Fragmenta (Berlin: De Gruyter,1986), pp. 150–1 no. 390; Csapo and Slater, Context (above, n. 48), p. 271 on 78E. I too would favor theirfirst alternative, that Ar. Byz. found Euripides’ κομίζουσ᾿ redundant.52 H.-J. Newiger, “Ekkyklema e mechané nella messa in scena del dramma greco,” Dioniso 59 (1989),pp. 173–85 (= “Ekkyklema und Mechané in der Inszenierung des griechischen Dramas,” WürzburgerJahrbücher für die Altertumswissenschaft 16 (1990), pp. 33–42); U. Hölscher, “Schrecken und Lachen.Über Ekkyklema-Szenen im attischen Drama,” in: A. Bierl and P. von Möllendorf (eds.), Orchestra.Drama, Mythos, Bühne (Festschrift H. Flaschar, Stuttgart-Leipzig: Teubner, 1994), pp. 84–96; C.F. Rus-so, Aristophanes, an Author for the Stage (London: Routledge, 1994), pp. 51–5, 58, 257 n. 7. M.G. Bonan-no, “L’ekkyklema di Aristofane: un dispositivo paratragico?,” in: E. Medda, M.S. Mirto, andM.P. Patto-ni (eds.), Komoidotragoidia: intersezioni del tragico e del comico nel teatro del V secolo a.C. (Pisa:Edizioni della Normale, 2006), pp. 69–82, provides a somewhat restricted state-of-play.53 A.M. Belardinelli, “A proposito dell’uso dell’ekkyklema: Eur. Hipp. 170–266, 808–1101; Men. Asp.309–399, Dysc. 689–758a,” Seminari Romani di cultura greca 3 (2000), p. 247; T.B.L. Webster, TheTragedies of Euripides (London: Methuen, 1967), pp. 49–50.54 ἐκκύκλημα δὲ λέγεται μηχάνημα ξύλινον τροχοὺς ἔχον, ὅπερ περιστρεφόμενον τὰ ἔνδονὡς ἐν οἰκίᾳδοκούντα διαπράττεσθαι καὶ τοῖς ἔξω ἐδείκνυε, λέγω δὴ τοῖς θεαταῖς.55 On what one might term the exceptions, see e.g. W. Scheidel, “The Most Silent Women of Greeceand Rome: Rural Labour andWomen’s Life in the AncientWorld,”Greece and Rome 42 (1995), pp. 202–17, and 43 (1996), pp. 1–10. For the world of women’s religion, see e.g. M. Dillon, Girls and Women in

122 J.R. Green



compare, for example, what Rhode’s husband has to say to her in Menander fr. 813,or even more striking, Lycurgus In Leocratem 40, on the city’s women going outinto the street anxiously seeking news of their loved ones in the aftermath ofChaeronea. When it came to women on a bed—respectable women that is—thewider world, whether in the form of the audience in the theater or the largercommunity, was not supposed to witness such a thing.56 Males ideally did not seewomen other than members of their own family in bed or even in their ownquarters, as Lysias 3.6, for example, makes clear from the women’s point of view:“They (the speaker’s sister and nieces) are ashamed to be seen even by theirkinsmen.” Even from the changed world of the later 4th century and the maleviewpoint, one finds Dyscolus 871–3, where Gorgias expresses embarrassment at theidea of being in the same room as the women, to which Sostratus says not to besilly, it’s all family now. Inspired by the work of Elam, Luigi Enrico Rossi hastouched on the question of spatial codes in performance insofar as they grow out ofsuch codes specific to the social interaction of particular communities or groups(even groups within communities), but he did not deal with this point.57 A systema-tic study along these lines would be valuable.

As a number of modern commentators, including Kovacs and Scodel, haveemphasized, at this point in Euripides’ play Phaedra was constructed and perceivedas a proper, well-behaved woman, protective of her social standing.58 The attitudes

Classical Greek Religion (London: Routledge, 2002); J.B. Connelly, Portrait of a Priestess. Women andRitual in Ancient Greece (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007); but all this needs to be seenwithin the parameters well put by J.P. Gould, “Law, Custom and Myth. Aspects of the Social Position ofWomen in Classical Athens,” Journal of Hellenic Studies 100 (1980), pp. 38–59, e.g. 48–9 on how poorwomen went to work. F.I. Zeitlin, Playing the Other: Gender and Society in Classical Greek Literature(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), p. 243, makes some excellent points on Euripides’exploitation of the scenic conventions of inside and outside, and on how being outside allows dramaticaction inHippolytus.56 A point deserving more consideration is that we have no scenes involving the marriage-bed ondrinking vessels.57 L.E. Rossi, “Livelli di lingua, gestualità, rapporti di spazio e situazione drammatica sulla scenaattica,” in: L. De Finis (ed.), Scena e spettacolo nell’antichità. Atti del Convegno… Trento 1988 (Florence:Olschki, 1989), pp. 63–78; K. Elam, The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama (London–New York: Methuen,1980). More recently, note the introductory section of A.K. Petrides, “Proxemics and Structural Symme-try in Euripides’Medea,” Logeion 2 (2012), pp. 35–48.58 Kovacs, Heroic Muse (above, n. 30); R. Scodel, An Introduction to Greek Tragedy (Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press, 2010). Also M.R. Halleran (ed.), Hippolytus Euripides (Warminster: Aris andPhillips, 1995), pp. 43–5, the section “Reputation, Shame, and Honor.” See earlier D. Kovacs, “Shame,Pleasure, and Honor in Phaedra’s Great Speech (Euripides, Hippolytus 375–87),” American Journal ofPhilology 101 (1980), pp. 287–303, and esp. his conclusions. K.J. Dover, Greek Popular Morality in theTime of Plato and Aristotle (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974), pp. 226–9, remains fundamental. For the “ideal”woman, see e.g. E. Specht, Schön zu sein und gut zu sein. Mädchenbildung und Frauensozialisation imantiken Griechenland (Vienna: Wiener Frauenverlag, 1989); S. Moraw, “Unvereinbare Gegensätze?Frauengemachbilder des 4. Jahrhunderts v.Chr. und das Ideal der bürgerlichen Frau,” in: R. von den




ascribed to her are in line with contemporary concepts and personifications ofEukleia and Eunomia as seen on pottery of this period that seems to have beendesigned for a female market, and perhaps a relatively well-to-do one at that.59 Evenif we reckon that there was nothing particularly new about it, behavior that incorpo-rated such values seems to have been brought to the fore at this period, possibly inresponse to the difficult conditions and threats to stability experienced in thecommunity as a result of the War. If nothing else, Euripides was surely taking theseattitudes into account in creating this Phaedra. Given all that, even the well-intentioned if somewhat challenged nurse would never be conceived as draggingher out into public gaze as envisaged in the production. The only way for theaudience to see her was to use the ekkyklêma, to bring the inside out. Just asEuripides was perceived as over-doing use of the crane (mêchanê), so too he wasthought to be over-clever in his attempts to make interior scenes, traditionallyreported rather than seen, visible, rendering the impossible possible, playing gameswith accepted standards.60

It is worth pursuing the issue of the bed a little further. If we take depictions oncontemporary red-figure pottery as generally reflecting the attitudes of Atheniansociety, or at least the attitudes of those classes that might be thought to have usedelaborate decorated pottery, beds (as distinct from the couches found at symposia oron which poets recline with their feet up) are shown in only a limited range ofcircumstances. They primarily depict the marriage bed and are a not-infrequentelement of wedding scenes on vases of the last third of the 5th century, contemporarywith our plays. A select list of representations includes:

Hoff and S. Schmidt, Konstruktionen von Wirklichkeit. Bilder im Griechenland des 5. und 4. Jahrhundertsv. Chr. (Stuttgart: Steiner, 2001), pp. 211–23.59 The route was marked out by H.A. Shapiro, Personifications in Greek Art. The Representation ofAbstract Concepts 600–400 B.C. (Kilchberg: Akanthus, 1993), pp. 70–85 (on Eukleia and Eunomia).Others have followed, including B.E. Borg, “Eunomia or ‘Make Love Not War’? Meidian Personifica-tions Reconsidered,” in: E. Stafford and J. Herrin (eds.), Personification in the Greek World: fromAntiquity to Byzantium (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), pp. 193–210; A.C. Smith, Polis and Personification inClassical Athenian Art, Monumenta Graeca et Romana 19 (Leiden: Brill, 2011), pp. 71–6. See also in thecontext of weddings and marriages Chr. Avronidaki, “Η Εύκλεια και η Ευνομία σε ένα θραύσμααρυβαλλοειδούς ληκύθου από τον κύκλο του Ζωγράφου του Μειδία,” in: Κεραμέως παῖδες. Αντίδωροστον Καθηγητή Μιχάλη Τιβέριο από τους μαθητές του (Thessalonike: Hetaireia Andrion Epistemonon,2012), pp. 109–16.60 For ancient references to themechanê, see in addition to Newiger, “Ekkyklema e mechané” (above,n. 51), Csapo and Slater (above, n. 48), pp. 268–70 under no. 77. For a good overview of the physicalaspects of what can now be known of the construction and management of the crane in the Theater ofDionysus at Athens, see C. Papastamati – vonMoock, “The Theatre of Dionysus Eleuthereus in Athens:New Data and Observations on its ‘Lycurgan’ Phase,” in: E. Csapo, J.R. Green, H. Goette, P. Wilson(eds.), The Greek Theatre in the Fourth Century BC (Berlin, forthcoming). There is also evidence forth-coming from the theater at Sicyon.

124 J.R. Green



1. Epinetron attributed to the Eretria Painter. Athens NM 1629, from Eretria.(Fig. 20)ARV2 1250-1, 34; P.E. Arias, M. Hirmer, B.B. Shefton, A History of Greek VasePainting (London: Thames and Hudson, 1962), pl. 203a; A. Lezzi-Hafter, DerEretria-Maler (Mainz: von Zabern, 1988), pll. 168–9; C. Reinsberg, Ehe, Hetären-tum und Knabenliebe im antiken Griechenland (Munich: Beck, 1989), p. 69fig. 24; A. Kauffmann-Samaras, “Le lit d’Héra dans l’Héraion d’Argos,” Ktema 15(1990 [1994]) pp. 185–94, pl. 2, 6; J.H. Oakley and R. Sinos, The Wedding inAncient Athens (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993), pp. 127–8 figs.128–30; R. Kousser, “The World of Aphrodite in the Late Fifth Century B.C.,” in:C. Marconi (ed.), Greek Vases: Images, Contexts and Controversies: Proceedingsof the Conference sponsored by the Center for the Ancient Mediterranean atColumbia University, 23–24 March 2002 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), pp. 97–112 withfig. 8.1.Alcestis at the bedchamber, leaning against the bed. Ca. 420 BCBC.

2. Loutrophoros. Boston 03.802R.F. Sutton Jr., “On the Classical Athenian Wedding,” in: R.F. Sutton Jr. (ed.),Daidalikon: Studies in Memory of Raymond V. Schoder, S.J. (Wauconda: Bolchazy-Carducci, 1989), pp. 336 pl. 29, 341 pl. 32; Oakley and Sinos (above, item 1),pp. 109–11 figs. 105–7, with fig. 107 showing the doorway with the bed inside;M. Baggio, “La sera delle nozze,” in: I. Colpo, I. Favaretto and F. Ghedini (eds.),Iconografia 2001. Studi sull’immagine (Atti del Convegno di Padova 30 maggio–1 giugno 2001) (Rome: Quasar, 2002), p. 195 fig. 5.The groom leading his bride to the bed-chamber. Ca. 425–420 BCBC.

3. Loutrophoros attributed to the Painter of Würzburg 537. Würzburg L. 506ARV2 1224, 2; E. Langlotz, Griechische Vasen in Würzburg (Munich: J.B. Obernet-ter, 1932), pl. 174; Reinsberg, Ehe, Hetärentum (above, item 1), p. 79 fig. 31.Bed in the context of a wedding, with the youth holding out a box or small chest.Last quarter of the 5th century BCBC.

4. Loutrophoros hydria attributed to the Marlay Painter. Athens, Benaki Museum35495ARV2 1277, 17; CVA (1) pl. 27; N. Kaltsas and A. Shapiro (eds.),Worshiping Women.Ritual and Reality in Classical Athens (New York: Onassis Foundation, 2008),pp. 320–1 no. 143 (color ills., with further refs.).The bed visible within the bed-chamber.? Ca. 430–420 BCBC.

5. Lebes gamikos. Quebec, Musée national des beaux-arts 66.226J.H. Oakley, “Classical Athenian Ritual Vases,” in: J. M. Fossey and J.E. Francis(eds.), The Diniacopoulos Collection in Québec (Montreal: Concordia, 2004),




pp. 40–1 fig. 3.5, cat. no. 21; Kaltsas and Shapiro, (above, item 4), p. 293 fig. 3a–b.(Sabetai).Doorwaywith bedwithin (groom leading the bride to the bedchamber). Ca. 440 BCBC.

6. Pointed amphora attributed to the Copenhagen Ptr. New York, priv. coll.D. von Bothmer, (ed.), Glories of the Past, Ancient Art from the Shelby White andLeon Levy Collection (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1991), pp. 168–70no. 121 (color ills.); H.A. Shapiro, Myth into Art, Poet and Painter in ClassicalAthens (London: Routledge, 1994), p. 103 figs. 68–9; E.D. Reeder (ed.), Pandora.Women in Classical Greece (Baltimore: Walters Art Gallery, 1995), p. 348 no. 109;LIMC vii, s.v. Peleus no. *210; Oakley and Sinos (above, item 1), pp. 112–14figs. 108–11.Chiron greeting the divine procession bringing Peleus and Thetis to the bridalchamber. The bed is shown as within the building, a torch-bearer in front of it;richly decorated coverlets. Note battle of Lapiths and Centaurs on the shoulder.Ca. 480–470 BCBC.

7. Calyx-krater attributed to the Nekyia Painter. Vienna IV 1026ARV2 1087, 2;CVA (3) pll. 102–3, 104, 1–2;OakleyandSinos (above, item1), figs. 46–9; F. Lissarrague, “Regards sur le mariage grec,” in: O. Cavalier (ed.), Silence etfureur. La femme et le mariage en Grèce. Les antiquités grecques du Musée Calvet(Avignon: Fondation duMuséum Calvet, 1997), p. 431 fig. D (roll-out drawing).Battle with the Centaurs at the wedding of Peirithous and Hippodameia; the bedshowing through a partially open door ? Ca. 450–440 BCBC.

8. Squat lekythos attributed to the Painter of the Frankfurt Acorn. Malibu, GettyMuseum 91.AE.1o (formerly Lausanne, priv. coll.)ARV2 1317, 3; LIMC ii, s.v. Aphrodite, no. *1192; B. Gilman (ed.), Masterpieces ofthe J. Paul Getty Museum, Antiquities (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 1997)no. 47; Baggio, “La sera delle nozze” (above, item 2), pp. 190 fig. 2, 192 fig. 4.Perhaps an end-view of a bed by a doorway. Ca. 410 BCBC.

9. Relief squat lekythos. Once BerlinA. Brueckner, Anakalypteria (64. BWPr, 1904) pl. 1; whence Reinsberg, Ehe, He-tärentum (above, item 1), p. 65 fig. 20.Bridal couple on the bed, accompanied by attendants and Eros. Mid-4th century BCBC.We may also note:61

61 I am not sure if the piece of furniture on which a bride is sitting on the pyxis attributed to theWashing Painter, Würzburg 541, from Attica, is a matrimonial bed rather than a fine couch: ARV2 1133,196; Robertson fig. 235; A. Kauffmann–Samaras, “Le lit d’Héra dans l’Héraion d’Argos,” Ktema 15(1990 [1994]), pl. 2, 7; Oakley and Sinos, p. 65 figs. 24–5.

126 J.R. Green



Fig. 20: Attic red-figure epinetron, Athens NM 1629. Detail with Alcestis by her bridal chamber.© Hellenic Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, Culture and Sports/ArchaeologicalReceipts Fund.

Fig. 21: Attic red-figure pyxis, Paris, Louvre CA 587. A wife seated in her quarters.© RMN-Grand Palais (musée du Louvre)/Les frères Chuzeville.




10. Pyxis attributed to the Painter of the Louvre Centauromachy. Paris, LouvreCA 587, from Greece (Fig. 21)ARV2 1094, 104; Bazant, Les citoyens sur les vases athéniens (Prague: RozpravyČeskoslovenské akademie vĕd. Rada společenských vĕd 95,2, 1985), pl. 24, 39;American Journal of Archaeology 87 (1983), pl. 16, 8 (L. Clark); P. Veyne, F. Lissar-rague and F. Frontisi-Ducroux, Les mystères du gynécée (Paris: Gallimard, 1998),p. 162 figs. 16a–b.Woman (wife, not hetaira) seated with mirror in her quarters, bed visible throughdoorway in background. The bed identifies her status. Ca. 440 BCBC.

11. Calyx-krater attributed to the Triptolemos Painter. St Petersburg B 1602 (St. 1723),said to be from CerveteriARV2 360, 1; Reeder, Pandora (above, item 6), pp. 269–70 (with many refs.);J.-J. Maffre, “Une nouvelle représentation de Danaé reçevant la pluie d’or,” in:E. Böhr and W. Martini (eds.), Studien zu Mythologie und Vasenmalerei. Festschriftfür Konrad Schauenburg zum 65. Geburtstag am 16.4.1986 (Mainz: von Za-bern, 1986), pp. 71–4; F. Lissarrague, “Danaé, métamorphoses d’un mythe,” in:S. Georgoudi and J.-P. Vernant (eds.), Mythes grecs au figuré de l’antiquité auBaroque (Paris: Gallimard, 1996), pp. 105–33.Danae receiving the shower of golden rain. Although she is imprisoned in anunderground chamber, through the action of Zeus the bed becomes her marriage-bed, shown as elaborate with fine coverings. Ca. 490–480 BCBC.

12. Hydria attributed to the Nausicaa Painter. New York 25.28. ARV2 1110, 41; Shapiro,Myth into Art (above, item 6), p. 109 fig. 75; T. Mannack, The Late Mannerists inAthenian Vase-Painting (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pl. 3; J. Neils andJ.H. Oakley (eds.), Coming of Age in Ancient Greece, Images of Childhood from theClassical Past (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), pp. 70, 212 no. 10 (colorill.); J. Mertens, How to Read Greek Vases (New York: The Metropolitan Museumof Art, 2010), pp. 121, 123.Heracles and Iphicles with the snakes on the marriage bed between Amphitryonand Alcmene, Athena standing by. Ca. 460–450 BCBC. The bed recalls the closenessof Amphitryon and Alcmene despite the intervention of Zeus, as well as itsimportance in the myth.

13. Calyx-krater attributed to the Group of Polygnotos. Tarquinia RC 4197ARV2 1057, 96; CVA (2) pl. 16, 1–3; F.W. Hamdorf, Dionysos, Bacchus: Kult undWandlungen des Weingottes (Munich: Callwey, 1986), p. 63, pl. 18; J. Boardman,Athenian Red Figure Vases, The Classical Period (London: Thames and Hudson,1989), fig. 163; Reinsberg, Ehe, Hetärentum (above, item 1), p. 211, fig. 120;S.B. Matheson, Polygnotos and Vase Painting in Classical Athens (Madison: Uni-

128 J.R. Green



versity of Wisconsin Press, 1995) p. 162, pl. 141; Kaltsas and Shapiro, WorshipingWomen (above, item 4), p. 271 fig. 2 (Chryssoulaki).Dionysus with satyrs approaching a house-door, within which a young womanawaits on a couch or bed; sometimes thought to recall the sacred marriage(although the god, staggering as he carries his kantharos, is manifestly under theinfluence of his wine). Ca. 440 BCBC.

These images demonstrate a perception of the symbolism of the matrimonial bed inthe Athenian mind not only in abstract terms but in visual terms as well. With this inmind, I would argue that in terms of staging, Euripides’ use of the bed had moresignificance than many literary critics have allowed. It was not incorporated into thestaging simply because the lady was unwell.62 It was a symbol of Phaedra’s marriedstatus, a status she was vainly attempting to protect.63 This is why it is placedcentrally with Aphrodite on the calyx-krater in the British Museum (Fig. 15), while onthe calyx-krater in Switzerland (Fig. 19) it is tempting to see the piece of furniture inthe center, separating Phaedra from Hippolytus, as an end-on view of the bed. Such aview would be appropriate in such a crowded composition. We should also bear inmind that marriage as an institution was a fundamental component of the socialfabric of the community, playing a vital role in the distribution and transmission ofproperty and thus in social relations as well as wealth. It needed to be protected as akey element in the maintenance of the structure of society.

The beds of these and other heroic/mythical figures are decorated and elaborate;the bed on the Sydney vase is willfully plain, again indicating the link between parodyand mythological comedy.

In terms of the further impact of Euripides bringing Phaedra onstage on her bed,it is clear that he created something of a pattern even if later examples (as so often)lack the full impact of the original; one thinks, for example, of the illustrated scenefrom Orestes64 and, perhaps more interesting, later echoes in staging, e.g. the reliefson 2nd-century ADAD lamp-discs with a youthful figure from comedy reclining on a couch

62 See among others A.M. Dale,Wiener Studien 69 (1956), p. 101 n. 7, who says of Agathon at Th. 96ff.,“wheeled out for his health, like Phaedra.” Poets reclined on couches (not beds), like those pictured inthe Hellenistic and later theoxenia reliefs. C.W. Dearden, The Stage of Aristophanes (London: AthlonePress, 1976), p. 59, in his section on the ekkyklêma, echoed Dale’s words: “where Phaedra is wheeledout for the sake of her health.” They rely on the script and not the whole performance.63 A wheeled contraption would have been even more ridiculous. The bed famously had a symbolicrole already in Odyssey 23. One thinks too of Pindar, Ol. 7.1–6 and its ὁμόφρονος εὐνᾶς, or of Alcestis’address of hermarriage-bed (E.Alc. 177–82). There are useful observations by J. Redfield, “Notes on theGreek Wedding,” Arethusa 15 (1982), pp. 181–201. Kauffmann–Samaras, “Le lit d’Héra” (above, n. 60),pp. 185–94, makes good observations on the symbolic value placed on thematrimonial bed.64 For the Orestes scene, e.g. V.M. Strocka,DieWandmalerei der Hanghäuser in Ephesos, Forschungenin Ephesos viii.1 (Vienna 1977), p. 48, no. 65 (ill.); Green–Handley, Images, fig. 71; F. Krinzinger (ed.),Ein Dach für Ephesos. Der Schutzbau für das Hanghaus 2, Österreichisches Arch. Inst. Sonderschrift 34




and another seated,65 or the well-known moulds from Athens and Ostia with a womanor youth on a couch and a slave seated at its foot, the piece in Athens associated withthe Herulian destruction of ADAD 267.66 In literature, equally well known today is thecase of Cnemon in Dyscolus 690ff., where εἰσκ]υκλεῖτ᾿ εἴσω με might reasonably berestored at 758. There are also Aspis, Synaristosae and Phasma, as Jacques hasdemonstrated.67

This is a preliminary publication, and I leave it to others to speculate on theauthorship of our parody. It seems to me for many reasons likely to be Aristophanes:there are hints of his style, and he certainly liked to play with and have his charactersexpress strong feelings on Euripidean themes, including Phaedra, as Frogs demon-strates. One might see our scene as parallel to those in Acharnians of 425 BCBC andThesmophoriazousai of 411 BCBC, which offer a likely period, given the date of our vase.The theme also falls within the restricted range of Aristophanes’ favorite plays for thiskind of attention: Telephus, Alcestis and Hippolytus.68 If the author is Aristophanes,we can point to his exaggeration (or wicked simplification) in Frogs in puttingEuripides’ Phaedra in the same bracket as his Stheneboea. Whatever the tragedianmay have done with his earlier version of the woman, by the time of Frogs his laterversion had taken hold, and indeed this parody patently depicts the later Phaedra, thegood woman in agony rather than the tart. As we have seen, this is clear from herhairstyle and costume if nothing else. On the other hand, we may overrate theimportance of Frogs, simply because we have it, and our author could be some otherpoet, not least Strattis, given his apparent fondness for tragic parody. An argumentagainst this is that the chronology would be tight, although not impossible.69

(Vienna, 2000), p. 28; N. Zimmermann and S. Ladstätter, Wandmalerei in Ephesos: von hellenistischerbis in byzantinische Zeit (Vienna: Phoibos, 2010), p. 117 fig. 205 (color).65 MNC3 6FL 4a-b (with refs.); El Teatro Romano. La puesta en escena. La Lonja, Zaragoza, abril–junio2003 (Zaragoza – Barcelona: Ayuntamiento de Zaragoza, 2004), p. 159 (color ill.); N. Savarese (ed.), Inscaena. Il teatro di Roma antica, The Theater in Ancient Rome (Rome: Electa, 2007), p. 139 left (ill.).66 MNC3 6FL 2. The example from Ostia (6FL 2c) is now also published in El Teatro Romano (see thelast note), p. 160 (color ill.).67 J.-M. Jacques, “La comédie nouvelle a-t-elle utilisé l’eccyclème?,” Pallas 54 (2000), pp. 89–101. Onthe impact of the Phaedra story in the construction of the Samia, see Sommerstein in this volume.68 See G. Mastromarco, “La paratragodia, il libro, la memoria,” in: E. Medda, M.S. Mirto andM.P. Pattoni (eds.), Komoidotragoidia: intersezioni del tragico e del comico nel teatro del V secolo a.C.(Pisa: Edizioni della Normale, 2006), pp. 137–91. Inter alia he shows that the audience’s knowledge ofthe tragedies was based on the experience of performance rather than reading, and that it was expectedto recall the music as well as the all-important element of staging. See also the same author’s “Trameallusive e memoria del pubblico (Acarn. 300–301— Caval. 314),” in: S. Boldrini et al. (eds.), Filologia eforme letterarie: studi offerti a Francesco Della Corte, i (Urbino: Università degli studi, 1988), pp. 239–43. For statistics, see R. Harriott, “Aristophanes and the Plays of Euripides,” Bulletin of the Institute ofClassical Studies 9 (1962), pp. 1–8.69 On the dates of Strattis’ activity, see e.g. C. Orth, Strattis. Die Fragmente. Ein Kommentar (Berlin:Antike e. K., 2009), pp. 18–20; S. Miles, Strattis, Tragedy, and Comedy (Diss. Nottingham, 2009),

130 J.R. Green



Others may wish to speculate on the identity of the play, or to pursue fragmentsthat would fit in such a scene. One attractive and potentially humorous possibility isAristophanes fr. 616 αἰσχρὸν νέᾳ γυναικὶ πρεσβύτης ἀνήρ, on the horrors for a youngwife of having an old man for a husband. Theseus, now into his second marriage,might easily have been referred to in that way in a context such as this, as an elementof the parody. As Kassel–Austin observed, similarly sententious lines were popularwith Euripides; they note frr. 317 γυναικί τ᾿ ἐχθρὸν χρῆμα πρεσβύτης ἀνήρ and 804.3 =Th. 410ff (esp. 413) δέσποινα γὰρ γέροντι νυμφίῳ γυνή. As Eric Handley and I onceobserved, there is another such pair of lines on the underside of a Gnathia oinochoewe found on New York’s East Side (but manufactured in South Italy’s Materano in thelater part of the 4th century), and it may be added to the examples provided in thestandard grammars.70 But this is by the way.

A more light-hearted suggestion involves Michael Vicker’s idea that in Hippolytus,Euripides was playing a game with the notion that Aspasia (Phaedra) as wife ofPericles (Theseus) had an unrequited passion for Alcibiades (Hippolytus).71 Perhapsnot, but it is surely possible that a comic poet borrowed this striking scene for aparody in such terms. For now, however, Aristophanes can have the last word(Th. 497–8):72

εἰ δὲΦαίδραν λοιδορεῖ,ἡμῖν τί τοῦτ᾿ ἔστ᾿;

Appendix 1 (http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/887/). L. Fiorentini, Studi sul commediografo Strattide(Diss. Ferrara, 2009), p. 76, sees a reference to Hippolytus. For speedy transmission to the West,compare the cases of Euripides, Heracleidae, Antiope and Cyclops: W. Allan, “Euripides in MegaleHellas: Some Aspects of the Early Reception of Tragedy,” Greece and Rome 48 (2001), pp. 67–86;O. Taplin, “Spreading the Word through Performance,” in: S. Goldhill and R. Osborne (eds.), Perfor-mance Culture and Athenian Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 33–57; and“Narrative Variation in Vase-Painting and Tragedy. The Example of Dirke,” Antike Kunst 41 (1998),pp. 33–9. On the place of paratragedy on the comic stage of the later 5th century, there are instructivecomments by A. Hartwig, “The Evolution of Comedy in the Fourth Century,” in: Csapo et al., GreekTheatre (above, n. 59).70 J.R. Green and E.W. Handley, “Gnomic Gnathia,” in: S. Gödde and T. Heinze (eds.), Skenika.Beiträge zum antiken Theater und seiner Rezeption. Festschrift zum 65. Geburtstag von Horst-DieterBlume (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2000), pp. 247–52. We referred to R. Kühner –B. Gerth,Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, I (repr. Hanover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung,19554) 158ff; Halleran on Hippolytus 191–7 refers to W. Schmid and O. Stählin, Geschichte der grie-chischen Literatur. I.3. Die klassische Periode (Munich: Beck, 1929–1948), p. 769 n. 7.71 M. Vickers, “Alcibiades and Aspasia: Notes on the ‘Hippolytus’,” Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 26.2(2000), pp. 7–17.72 See recently R. Cowan, Classical QuarterlyNS 58 (2008), pp. 315–20.




“Two Phaedras: Euripides and Aristophanes? ”, in: S.D. Olson (ed.), Ancient Comedy and...

Documents

Transcript of “Two Phaedras: Euripides and Aristophanes? ”, in: S.D. Olson (ed.), Ancient Comedy and...