Thucydides was not only the first scientific historian, but also an artist, who heightened the dramatic effect in his narrative by often using antilogia and contrast. As he described the Peloponnesian War as an antagonism between two different kind of cities, Athens and Sparta, the readers probably were able to understand more easily the harshness and cruelty of the war. The constitutions, education, morals, namely all ways of life, were entirely different in the two cities. And the comparison of the different characters of Athens and Sparta is found in the speeches of the Corinthian envoy (I, 68-71), the Athenian visitor into Sparta (I. 74-78), Archidamos (I. 80-85) and Pericles (I. 140-144, II. 35-46). There Thucydides' arguments of the antilogia and contrast, which may be the influence of the sophists, were most effectively developed. It seems that the speech of the Athenian visitor is an antilogia against the Corinthian envoy and that the speeches of Pericles are the antilogias against Archidamos. Again the speech of Archidamos is an antilogia against the Corinthian envoy. On the other hand, it is the Greek way in literature to treat both antagonists with impartiality and equality. As for the antilogia, it is more dramatic if the arguments of both sides are developed with almost equal power and confidence. But how are the substances of the arguments in the speeches of the Spartan side by Thucydides? The Corinthian envoy accused the Spartans as being leisurely, conservative and old-fashioned, while the Athenians were quick, bold and progressive. Archidamos defenced the character of the Spartans in his speech and praised their thoughtfulness, bravery, discipline, etc. But the concepts of the character of the Spartans in contrast with Athenians in those speeches are found also in the tragedies of Sophocles and Euripides (as J. H. Finley showed them in his article "Euripides and Thucydides", Harvard Studies in Cl. Phil. 49). And the analysis of the powers and expected strategies of Athens and Sparta by Archidamos is repeated by Pericles more accurately in his first speeches. It is likely that Thucydides inserted the Athenian view on Sparta and its way of life, which was popular among the Athenian citizens since the ascendancy of democracy and the aggravation of rivalry against Sparta. Therefore, the antilogias of the Spartan side in those speeches were not so confident in comparison with the Athenian side. And Thucydides, the democrat and real Athenian, was peeping out, although Thucydides made an effort to treat Athens and Sparta with impartiality in his History.

抄録全体を表示

In this paper I allude to the wealth of material and potential for comparison between even such disparate genres as the comedy of democratic Athens and the kyogen skits of feudal Japan While the former genre is of a complex nature, high lyricism and increasingly sophisticated plots and stagecraft, the latter is a brief and light vignette of life, a skit sandwiched between the more serious and poetical No dramas This type of plays has never developed into a western style of comedy Both genres, though to a greater or lesser degree literary, preserve many elements of popular culture My examples focus particularly on the agora, the market-place and the colourful characters that populate it I suggest that Aristophanes kept an eye on non-literary genres (about which we know very little indeed) when he looked at the agora with its scheming tricksters, loud female-vendors, or good-for-nothings loitering around it all day long Markets and fairs must have attracted a great deal of popular amusements of all sorts and A istophanes probably used much of this material Kyogen too found inspiration in market sellers, shysters waiting at the market for country bumpkins, temple visitors during fairs, and so on All these characters frequently feature in kyogen plays and the Japanese genre may in many ways help us refine our perception of Aristophanes I start with a Megarian scheme in Aristophanes' Akharnians (729ff) and compare it to the kyogen play Wakame The Japanese counterpart also depends on the recognizable tricksters of the market-place and their heavy punning I then go on to show how knowledge of kyogen can help us appreciate popular elements in Greek comedy Not only in subject matter with kyogen, we may still admire the actors' cleverness in devising efficient ways of moving in a fluid space without a fixed stage Now the stage is of course uniform and fixed, but movement on it reflects and preserves much of the early practice The art of kyogen exits and entrances, and generally of movement in space is truly intriguing and it may be of some value when reflecting on early Greek practice Folk motifs are a kind of metaphor in Anstophanic comedy The playwright likes to connect disparate images into a humorous but meaningful and evocative whole In order to appreciate such images and their impact on the audience we cannot afford to ignore other available traditions of folk comedy Finally, I briefly hint at New Comedy where too we find hints at panourgoi of earlier comedy However unlike in Aristophanes, they are not at the centre of humorous and unattached episodic scenes, but form an inseparable part of well-wrought plots, often significantly contributing to the resolution that consists of restored domestic bliss-something the panourgos of Anstophanic comedy was hardly ever interested in Here is a domestic version of panourgia, a compassionate trickster, and this bourgeoisification carried with it significant consequences for western literature

抄録全体を表示

Both isegoria and parrhesia have the meaning "free speech", which seems to have been indispensable to the Greeks, especially the Athenians The aim of this paper is to inquire into the relationship between isegoria and parrhesia, two ways of realizing free speech at meeting It is noteworthy that the parrhesia, which came into being about the last third of the fifth century BC, came to be used widely in a short time and invaded the large sphere of the word isegoria What does this mean historically? The essence of isegoria is manifest in the expression heralds conventionally used to urge free speech in the assembly "Who wishes to address the assembly?" On the other hand, according to Aischines, the expression was formerly as follows . "Who of those above fifty years of age wishes to address the assembly?", this practice of addressing according to age was aimed at obtaining the best counsel for the polis, though it went out of fashion in Aischines' day An attitude of πολει χρηστον (rendering service to polis), which also is proclaimed in Euripides' Suppliants' "Who desires to bring good counsel for his polis to the people?", predominated among Athenians in the moderate democracy It declined remarkably, however, with the rise in radical democracy and the spread of individualism Moreover, we must consider the growth of class antagonism between οι χρηστοι and οι πονηροι, as is proven in Pseudo-Xenophon, Ath Pol 1 2, 1 6, 1 9, 3 12-13 In this situation, the word χρηστοζ might be viewed with a strong tincture of classconsciousness The multitude must have had some doubt as to whether the practice of addressing according to age and the principle of πολει χρηστον were serviceable to them or to οι χρηστοι alone They did away with that practice and introduced the parrhesia, by which every citizen could speak out on whatever he regarded as important and right, free of the restrictions of πολει χρηστον The shift in stress from isegoria to parrhesia corresponded with the momentous change in the actuality and the sense of polis-community

抄録全体を表示

Since Boeckh pioneered in the study of liturgies in the nineteenth century, many works have been published on this subject. Yet except for incidental references, none of them have dealt thoroughly with the significance of the participation of metics in the liturgies. The liturgies originated in the period of the oligarchy and, in the democratic period, began to be performed not by noble families as in the earlier days but by wealthy citizens as honourable duties. A curious fact is that both citizens and non-citizens performed them in classical Athens where each category of population enjoyed a legal status distinct from the other. Here I want to discuss the problem of the participation of non-citizens in the liturgies and consider the significance of this fact. In the Panathenaic festival, metics performed a few fixed liturgies. Perhaps originally these accorded them honour; but, as the performer was restricted only to the metics who were humble in their social standing, the liturgies assigned to them also came to be looked upon as rather humble ones. Among the encyclic liturgies, we are certain that metics performed the choregia. However, they did so only in the Lenaean festival, which was held in winter, and for this reason they did not thrive. So the supposed honour may not have been held in common by both metics and citizens. Some scholars state that citizens alone performed the trierarchy but they do not enlarge any further upon this problem. However, as Kahrstedt has shown, the role of metics in the trierarchy was important. However, they did not become official trierarchs; there is a case of a metic embarking on behalf of a citizen trierarch. I think this cannot be the solitary example. Considering the original function of the trierarchy as a measure of naval defence substituting the naucracy, the embarkation was its most essential part. Nevertheless, in this case, a citizen trierarch bore only the financial part of his duties and transferred personal service required of him to a non-citizen. This is a parallel to the fact that citizens preferred to accept mercenaries in the army than to arm themselves. Apart from its importance in the scheme of national defence, the trierarchy had a secondary effect to promote its performers in society. The citizens wanted to monopolize the honour of bearing the title of litourgos. Therefore, when they allowed metics to take part in some liturgies, they restricted the latters' participation; when they entrusted metics the essential personal service in the trierarchy, they reserved the title of trierarch by bearing the financial part of his duties. This explains some passages in the writings of contemporaries as Aristotle, Demosthenes, Lysias etc., to the effect that, while the citizens maintained the position of litourgos to be an honourable one, in fact, they did not want to perform the liturgies by themselves, but only desired the position of litourgoi in order to win fame and they discharged the financial part of their duties for fear that they should harm their reputation by failing to perform the liturgies which they had undertaken. By the time of Aristotle, the liturgies had lost their original spirit and had become detached from their original purpose. However, as they were closely related to the democratic structure of Athenian society, they survived to the end of the democratic period.

抄録全体を表示

The chorus in Agamemnon by Aeschylus takes up over half of the tragedy. The scholars have studied the chorus's responses and opinions, but they have not recognized the keyword in this play.

In this paper, I study the chorus of Agamemnon with reference to the keyword, “ϕθóvos” that the chorus employs from their entrance song to the climax of this play. Φθóvos means envy or grudge which was used by a contemporary of Aeschylus first and also Aeschylus used this word as “ϕθóvos of gods” and “ϕθóvos of people”. In their entrance song, the chorus sings about ϕθóvos of the goddess Artemis which is the reason for the victim Ipigeneia's fare. She is the daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemestra, and therefor Clytemestra kills him. In the next choral scene, the chorus sings about Agamemnon getting ϕθóvos from families who lost their family members in the war of Troy. although he is a supreme commander of this war, he survives and returns to his home.

Φθóvos appears in the dialogue of Agamemnon and Clytemestra in the climax in this play. Because of Clytemestra's recommendation, Agamemnon ended up getting ϕθóvos of the gods by walking on the purple vestments that belong to the gods. He couldn't avoid ϕθóvos and was killed by his wife.

The chorus always employs ϕθóvos as being the keyword in the evolution of this play.

抄録全体を表示