Close
USC Libraries
University of Southern California
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected 
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
 Click here to refresh results
 Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Folder
From Demeter to Dionysos: laughter as a vehicle for transformation in archaic cult ritual and Attic Old Comedy
(USC Thesis Other) 

From Demeter to Dionysos: laughter as a vehicle for transformation in archaic cult ritual and Attic Old Comedy

doctype icon
play button
PDF
 Download
 Share
 Open document
 Flip pages
 More
 Download a page range
 Download transcript
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Request accessible transcript
Transcript (if available)
Content 
 1
 
 
 From
Demeter
to
Dionysos:
Laughter
as
a
Vehicle
for
 Transformation
in
Archaic
Cult
Ritual
and
Attic
Old
Comedy
 Devon
Harlow
 Classics
Department
 Faculty
of
the
USC
Graduate
School
 Ph.D.
 University
of
Southern
California
 August
9,
2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2
 
 
 Table
of
Contents:
 
 Introduction:
Ritual
Laughter

 
 
 
 
 
 
 3
 Chapter
One:
Demeter
and
Eleusis
 
 
 
 
 
 16
 Chapter
Two:
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
 
 
 
 
 67
 Chapter
Three:
Laughter
and
Transformation
in
Aristophanes
 
 89
 Chapter
Four:
Aristophanes,
Pedagogy,
and
the
Transformed
City

 131
 Conclusion
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 168
 Appendix
A:
Other
Festivals
to
Demeter
 
 
 
 
 173
 Appendix
B:
Frogs
Initiate
Chorus
Quote


 
 
 
 
 178
 Bibliography

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 185
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3
 
 Introduction:
Ritual
Laughter
 This
project
is
concerned
with
a
specific
type
of
Greek
laughter:
ritual
laughter
and
 its
relationship
with
transformation.

This
laughter
traces
a
fascinating
path
through
Greek
 literature
and
religious
practice
from
the
archaic
period
into
the
fifth
century
and
the
 flowering
of
Athenian
drama.

It
connects
worlds
as
disparate
as
Mount
Olympus
in
the
 Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
and
the
bawdy,
politically
charged
satire
of
Aristophanes
on
the
 festival
stages
of
the
Athenians.

Ritual
laughter
is
distinct
from
other
forms
of
laughter
in
 its
relationship
to
both
“obscenity” 1 
and
transformation,
on
both
individual
and
group
 levels.

The
transformative
nature
of
this
laughter
is
documented
in
the
archaic
Homeric
 Hymn
to
Demeter
and
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
as
well
as
the
cult
practice
to
Demeter.
 This
cult
practice
was
still
thriving
several
centuries
later
when
Aristophanes
used
ritual
 laughter
and
its
attendant
aischrologia
and
transformation
as
a
literary
tool
in
his
 comedies;
as
a
device
for
plot
development,
and
more
importantly,
as
a
pedagogical
aid
to
 enact
a
transform
the
minds
of
the
Athenian
demos.

 
 Overview
 My
plan
is
to
work
chronologically,
starting
with
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
to
 fully
understand
the
beginnings
of
ritual
laughter
and
the
tradition
that
Aristophanes
was
 drawing
upon
when
using
ritual
laughter
in
his
comedies.

The
first
chapter
will
look
at
the
 























































 1 
I
am
using
this
word
to
refer
to
words
in
the
aizd‐
group
in
Greek:
ai0dw/j, ai0sxro/j, ai0sxu/nh, ai0sxu/nomai, etc.
However,
this
is
just
a
placeholder
word,
as
I
feel
it
does
not
 accurately
translate
the
sense
of
the
Greek
word.
Instead
it
reflects
a
modern
sensibility
 about
sexual
and
scatological
jokes,
talk,
etc.
I
will
return
to
this
point
at
length.
 
 4
 plentiful,
though
very
contested
evidence
for
the
cult
of
Demeter
at
Eleusis
and
how
The
 Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
can
help
us
traverse
this
evidence.

The
beginning
of
the
chapter
 will
also
delve
into
the
specific
methodology
for
a
holistic
and
experiential
reading
of
the
 Hymn
that
I
think
gives
us
the
clearest
picture
of
the
poem’s
thematic
concerns.

The
poem
 and
the
material
evidence
together
layout
the
paradigm
I
will
be
working
with
for
the
rest
 of
the
project:
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm.
I
will
also
explore
 aischrologia
in
a
ritual
setting
and
the
figure
of
Iambe
who
embodies
this
type
of
speech.
 Then
in
Chapter
Two
I
will
look
at
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
and
how
laughter
 and
transformation
work
in
the
poem.

Hermes’
many
aspects
as
a
god
are
all
very
 connected
to
transformation:
he
leads
the
souls
of
the
dead
to
the
underworld,
he
coveys
 messages
from
one
realm
to
another,
he
protects
travelers
at
cross‐roads,
and
he
is
 involved
in
the
coming
of
age
of
Greek
young
men.

The
Hymn
outlines
Hermes’
own
 journey
from
an
infant
to
a
god
in
full
command
of
his
powers
and
the
various
necessary
 transformations
along
the
way,
all
punctuated
with
divine
laughter
in
the
poem.

I
will
also
 explore
what
the
Hymn
might
tell
us
about
the
Hermaia,
festivals
to
Hermes,
and
the
 ancient
concerns
around
coming
of
age.
 Chapters
Three
and
Four
will
look
at
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
 paradigm
in
Aristophanes’
comedies.

This
transition
to
a
vastly
different
literary
genre
is
 not
arbitrary.

Comedy
is
where
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
that
we
 can
see
in
the
ritual
interests
of
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
and
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
 Hermes
becomes
a
literary
trope
of
its
own.

The
genre
of
comedy
is
especially
suited
to
the
 joining
of
ritual
and
literature,
since
it
takes
place
at
a
festival,
but
is
not
a
text
that
is
 specifically
tied
to
one
deity
and/or
a
specific
ritual
that
they
are
part
of.

Aristophanes’
 
 5
 comedies
are
the
site
where
ritual
laughter,
aischrologia,
and
transformation
converge.
If
 we
can
understand
the
origins
and
implications
of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
 paradigm,
now
a
literary
trope
we
can
more
fully
understand
transformation
in
comedy
 and
the
claims
that
Acharnians,
Knights,
Frogs
make
about
what
good
comedy
is
and
the
 role
it
should
play
in
Athens’
civic
life.
Understanding
the
paradigm’s
literary
force
can
also
 help
us
escape
from
the
binary
democratic
vs.
conservative
debate
about
comedy.

Comedy
 as
a
form
is
neither
–
it
is
transformational.

It
can
therefore
be
an
ideological
tool
and
at
 the
same
time
fulfill
ritual
concerns
of
renewal
and
rebirth;
giving
Aristophanes’
comedies
 the
chance
to
remake
the
demos
and
reboot
their
political
views.
 
 
 Key
Terms
 First
I
think
it
would
be
useful
to
discuss
and
define
several
key
concepts:
ritual
 laughter
and
aischrologia.

As
Halliwell
has
pointed
out,
ritual
laughter
is
a
phenomenon
 that
was
recognized
by
the
ancient
Greeks. 2 
This
is
not
a
modern
concept
that
I
am
 mapping
back
on
to
the
ancient
sources.

Both
Plato
in
Laws
I.637a
and
Aristotle
in
Politics
 Book
7
reference
ritual
jesting
and
ritual
laughter
to
their
audiences
as
a
mutually
 understood
concept
to
help
illustrate
their
main
point.

This
clearly
demonstrates
that
 ritual
laughter
was
a
concept
that
most,
if
not
all,
Greek
people
would
have
been
familiar
 with;
otherwise
it
would
be
useless
as
an
illustration
or
metaphor.

 























































 2 
Stephen
Halliwell,
Greek
Laughter:
A
Study
of
Cultural
Psychology
from
Homer
to
Early
 Christianity
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
2008),
159.
 
 6
 The
most
important
and
most
difficult
term
to
pin
down
is
aischrologia
 ai0sxrologi/a.

The
word
is
a
compound
of
ai0sxro/j and
logoj and
is
often
translated
 simply
as
“obscenity,
crude
language,
or
abuse.”

However,
this
translation
is
completely
 colored
by
modern
sensibilities
about
sex
and
bodily
fluids,
desires,
and
processes,
which
 have
been
heavily
influenced
by
Christian
attitudes
about
these
topics.

In
contemporary
 Western
culture
these
things
are
seen
as
dirty,
shameful,
obscene,
and
disgusting.

 However,
there
is
no
evidence
that
the
Greeks
saw
them
this
way.
In
fact
there
is
 considerable
evidence
to
the
contrary.
Henderson
traces
the
root
of
the
English
word
 obscenity
from
the
Latin
obscenus.
He
contends
that
the
Romans
did
have
similar
notions
 about
the
“shamefulness”
of
sex
and
bodies,
but
also
notes
that,
“the
stringent
prohibitions
 of
Puritanism
and
Victorianism
have
influenced
modern
feelings.” 3 
 In
the
Art
of
Rhetoric,
Aristotle
has
an
extended
explanation
of
“ποῖα
δ᾽
αἰσχύνονται
 καὶ
ἀναισχυντοῦσιν,
καὶ
πρὸς
τίνας
καὶ
πῶς
ἔχοντες,
The
causes
of
shame
and
 shamelessness, 4 
and
in
front
of
whom
and
in
what
frame
of
mind
men
feel
them.” 5 

Even
 though
Aristotle
began
the
Art
of
Rhetoric
twenty
years
after
Aristophanes
last
play
and
 possibly
as
much
as
three
centuries
after
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
was
composed
his
 insight
into
the
nature
of
what
makes
something
aischros
to
the
Athenians
is
certainly
 much
more
accurate
than
the
modern
terms
with
their
centuries
of
bias
against
the
body
 handed
down
by
the
Christian
church.


 























































 3 
Jeffery
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse:
Obscene
Language
in
Attic
Comedy
(New
Haven:
 Yale
University
Press,
1975),
3.
 4 
I
am
using
shame
here,
although
I
do
not
agree
with
the
translation
because
there
is
no
 comparable
word
in
English.
All
translations
are
my
own.
 5 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.1
 
 7
 Aristotle
takes
his
reader
through
eight
examples
of
actions
or
groups
of
actions
 that
are
aischros
because
they
are
outward
signs
of
inward
character
flaws.

They
are:
1)
 “τὸ
ἀποβαλεῖν
ἀσπίδα
ἢ
φυγεῖν:
ἀπὸ
δειλίας
γάρ
throwing
away
one’s
shield
or
fleeing:
for
 this
is
on
account
of
cowardice”; 6 
2)
“τὸ
ἀποστερῆσαι
παρακαταθήκην
ἢ
ἀδικῆσαι:
ἀπὸ
 ἀδικίας
γάρ
or
withholding
a
deposit,
for
this
is
on
account
of
injustice”; 7 
3)
“τὸ
 συγγενέσθαι
αἷς
οὐ
δεῖ
ἢ
οὗ
οὐ
δεῖ
ἢ
ὅτε
οὐ
δεῖ:
ἀπὸ
ἀκολασίας
γάρ
illicit
relations
with
 anyone
at
forbidden
times
and
places:
for
that
is
on
account
of
licentiousness”; 8 

4)
“καὶ
τὸ
 κερδαίνειν
ἀπὸ
μικρῶν
ἢ
αἰσχρῶν
ἢ
ἀπὸ
ἀδυνάτων,
οἷον
πενήτων
ἢ
τεθνεώτων,
.
.
.
καὶ
τὸ
μὴ
 βοηθεῖν,
δυνάμενον,
εἰς
χρήματα,
ἢ
ἧττον
βοηθεῖν.
.
.πάντα γὰρ ἀνελευθερίας ταῦτα σημεῖα, 
 and
making
a
profit
out
of
what
is
petty
and
shameful
,
or
out
of
the
weak,
 such
as
the
poor
worker
or
the
dead
.
.
.
and
refusing
aid
in
money
matters,
when
we
are
 able
to
give
it,
or
giving
less
than
we
can
.
.
.
for
all
these
are
on
account
of
stinginess”; 9 
5)
 “τὸ
δ᾽
ἐπαινεῖν
παρόντας
κολακείας,
καὶ
τὸ
τἀγαθὰ
μὲν
ὑπερεπαινεῖν
τὰ
δὲ
φαῦλα
 συναλείφειν,
καὶ
τὸ
ὑπεραλγεῖν
ἀλγοῦντι
παρόντα,
καὶ
τἆλλα
πάντα
ὅσα
τοιαῦτα:
 κολακείας
γὰρ
σημεῖα.
And
to
praise
people
when
they
are
present,
and
to
overpraise
their
 good
qualities
and
gloss
over
their
bad,
and
to
show
excessive
grief
at
another
person’s
 suffering
when
they
are
present,
and
all
similar
actions,
for
they
are
on
account
of
 flattery”; 10 
6)
“καὶ
τὸ
μὴ
ὑπομένειν
πόνους…
πάντα
γὰρ
μαλακίας
σημεῖα
and
to
not
 patiently
abide
toils
…
for
all
these
are
signs
of
softness”; 11 
7)
“καὶ
τὸ
ὑφ᾽
ἑτέρου
εὖ
 























































 6 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.3
 7 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.3
 8 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.4
 9 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.5‐7
 10 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.8
 11 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.9
 
 8
 πάσχειν,
καὶ
τὸ
πολλάκις,
καὶ
ὃ
εὖ
ἐποίησεν
ὀνειδίζειν:
μικροψυχίας
γὰρ
πάντα
καὶ
 ταπεινότητος
σημεῖα
and
to
accept
favors
from
another,
often,
and
then
to
throw
them
in
 his
face,
for
all
these
are
signs
of
smallness
and
baseness”; 12 
8)
“καὶ
τὸ
περὶ
αὑτοῦ
πάντα
 λέγειν
καὶ
ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι,
καὶ
τὸ
τἀλλότρια
αὑτοῦ
φάσκειν:
ἀλαζονείας
γάρ.
And
to
talk
all
 the
time
about
oneself
and
to
make
all
kinds
of
assertions,
for
this
is
boastfulness.” 13 
 

Seven
of
these
eight
actions
have
nothing
to
do
with
the
body
or
sex.

And
the
one
 example
that
does
is
the
third,
not
first
in
Aristotle’s
list.

If
aischros
were
the
same
as
 obscenus
or
obscenity
surely
Aristotle
would
start
with
sexual
licentiousness
and
most
of
 the
other
actions
would
not
even
be
mentioned.

Aristotle
seems
to
be
describing
 something
that
is
closer
to,
although
not
synonymous
with,
the
English
word
taboo.

The
 actions
that
he
describes
all
break
the
social
contract
of
Greek
society
in
some
way.

The
 opposite,
or
honorable
actions
from
the
Rhetoric,
bravely
standing
in
battle,
generosity
in
 financial
matters,
speaking
one’s
mind
(without
flattery),
are
all
building
blocks
of
a
just
 and
orderly
society,
Aristotle
and
I
agree
on
this.

Something
that
is
aischros
is
therefore
 something
that
breaks
social
convention.

No
wonder
the
sexual
joking
and
abuse
which
 Athenian
women
engage
in
during
festivals
to
Demeter
is
referred
to
as
aischrologia,
not
 because
it
is
dirty
or
shameful,
but
because
it
is
breaking
social
convention
for
these
 women
to
talk
about
sex
and
because
it
violates
the
more
common
“religious
requirement
 of
euphemia
(auspicious,
pure
speech,
often
equated
with
silence).” 14 


 To
correctly
understand
what
is
aischros
and
how
aischrologia
works
we
really
have
 to
take
to
heart
the
“shame”
that
Aristotle
is
describing:
the
feeling
that
keeps
us
all
(even
 























































 12 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.10
 13 
Aristotle,
Rhetoric
II.6.11
 14 
Halliwell,
Greek
Laughter,
215.

 
 9
 in
a
modern
context)
from
breaking
most
social
rules.
That
wiggling,
nagging,
unpleasant
 knowledge
of
what
would
happen,
how
people
would
view
us
if
we
acted
outside
of
the
 accepted
norms
(i.e.
stopped
showering
despite
working
in
a
very
professional
 environment,
talked
loudly
on
our
cell
phones
in
the
“quiet”
car
of
the
commuter
train,
took
 kickbacks
from
a
shady
professional
acquaintance,
etc.).

But
let’s
not
confuse
this
feeling
 with
the
idea
that
the
body
and
sexual
appetites
are
somehow
polluted
or
“bad”.
As
 Konstan
writes,
“the
ancient
Greek
emotional
lexicon
does
not
map
neatly
onto
modern
 English
concepts.” 15 

We
have
to
carefully
attune
ourselves
to
the
evidence
the
Greeks
left
 us,
and
attempt
to
see
the
notion
of
aischros
through
their
eyes
in
order
to
correctly
 interpret
aischrologia. 16 
 
 Aristophanes
and
aischrologia
 Henderson
rightly
notes
that
Aristophanes
vehemently
maintained
that,
his
own
 “use
of
the
obscene
comedy
was
different
from
that
of
his
(he
says)
less
gifted
 contemporaries.

Aristophanes
maintains
that
he
avoids
kaka\ kai\ fo/rton kai\ bwmoloxeu/mat’ a0yennh~,
lowness,
vulgarity
and
sordid
clowning
(P
748)
and
ponhra\ skw/mmata,
evil
scurrility
(N
542).” 17 

However,
Henderson
wants
to
understand
this
only
 in
the
context
of
the
sophistication
and
skill
of
Aristophanes’
comedies.

While
it
certainly
 























































 15 
David
Konstan,
“Shame
in
Ancient
Greece,”
Social
Research
70
(2003):
1033.
 16 
David
Konstan
and
Douglas
Cairns
have
very
successfully
shown
the
difference
between
 aid­
words
and
aisch­
words.

The
former
describes
the
feeling
that
keeps
people
from
 behaving
in
unacceptable
ways,
and
the
latter
describes
the
feeling
one
has
after
acting
in
 violation
of
your
society’s
norms.
Aisch­
nouns
therefore
describe
actions
or
circumstances,
 which
would
make
one
feel
an
emotion
with
an
aisch­
verb.


 17 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
9.
 
 10
 applies,
I
think
Aristophanes
is
also
referring
to
the
unique
type
of
laughter
paradigm
 that
he
is
drawing
on
from
cult
practice
in
fertility
rituals
to
Demeter.

He
is
not
using
 aischrologia
to
get
a
cheap
laugh,
he
is
using
it
for
the
same
reason
that
cult
practitioners
 did,
it
was
special
speech,
outside
the
realm
of
their
normal
discourse
and
that
made
it
very
 powerful.


 
 The
Homeric
Hymns
and
Laughter
 Ritual
laughter
is
attested
in
several
literary
and
plastic
sources
for
the
worship
of
 Demeter
at
Eleusis.

The
most
clear
and
direct
evidence
comes
from
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
 Demeter
and
the
interaction
between
the
goddess
and
Iambe,
a
maid
in
the
household
of
 the
Eleusinian
king.

The
laughter
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
is
rather
unique;
the
 only
other
Hymn
that
has
any
laughter
at
all
is
the
Hymn
to
Hermes.
This,
perhaps
should
 not
be
surprising,
Hermes
is
devious,
wily,
a
jokester.



And
in
both
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
 Demeter
and
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
laughter
is
a
structural
theme,
framing
and
 further
elucidating
the
deities’
relationship
with
their
own
laughter
and
the
laughter
of
 mortals.

A
close
reading
of
these
two
Homeric
Hymns
is,
I
believe,
the
first
step
in
really
 understanding
how
laughter
functioned
in
cult
practice
and
what
the
mythology
can
reveal
 that
the
ritual
may
not. 18 


 The
laughter
(gela/w
in
both
texts)
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
and
the
 Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
is
unusual
simply
because
there
is
no
other
laughter
in
the
corpus
 























































 18 
Sarah
Iles
Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poets:
The
‘Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes’
and
Its
 Performative
Context,”
Classical
Philology
97
(2002):
111.
 
 11
 of
the
Homeric
Hymns 19 .

Aphrodite
is
given
the
epithet
laughter‐loving,
although
she
 never
laughs
and
there
are
some
smiles
but
no
other
divine
laughter.

Hesiod
is
even
 grimmer.

There
is
no
laughter
at
all
in
the
Works
and
Days;
good
cheer
arrives
with
the
 birth
of
the
Muses
and
Graces
in
line
907.

Only
Zeus
laughs
in
the
Theogony
and
that
is
 right
before
he
makes
Pandora
and
unleashes
her
on
the
unsuspecting
world.

Then,
if
it
is
 rare
for
the
(archaic)
gods
to
laugh
we
must
pay
careful
attention
to
the
moments
when
 they
do.
 When
we
parse
the
laughter
that
occurs
in
the
Hymns
to
Demeter
and
Hermes
a
 pattern
begins
to
emerge.

It
is
not
laughter
by
itself
that
tells
us
something
about
these
 gods
and
the
ritual
practices
for
their
cults,
it
is
how
the
laughter
works.

Laughter
in
these
 two
hymns
is
part
of
a
three‐element
paradigm.

Laughter
goes
along
with
a
revelation— something
that
is
usually
hidden;
an
action,
or
a
certain
type
of
speech,
or
body
part,
etc.
is
 laid
bare.
These
two
narrative
components
then
compel
a
transformation.

The
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm,
present
in
both
Hymns,
is
the
key
to
 understanding
both
Hermes
and
Demeter.

Both
are
integral
to
the
most
significant
 transformations
in
human
life.

Demeter
controls
the
agricultural
year,
the
seasons,
and
the
 transformation
of
seeds
into
full‐grown
crops.

Hermes
is
the
psychopomp,
the
god
of
the
 crossroads,
and
the
messenger
from
Olympus
to
the
realm
of
mortal
men,
a
god
who
seems
 to
live
in
liminal
spaces.

It
is
no
wonder
than
that
these
two
gods
would
have
the
unusual
 instances
of
laughter
in
the
Homeric
Hymns
in
their
poems,
not
because
they
are
more
 























































 19 
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Dionysus
doesn’t
involve
laughter
(although
many
Athenian
 rituals
for
Dionysus
do).

However,
the
hymn
centers
on
Dionysus’
power
to
transform
the
 non‐believing
pirates
into
dolphins,
and
therefore
by
extension
the
power
to
transform
any
 mortal
life.

 
 12
 likely
to
laugh,
but
because
laughter
is
an
essential
ingredient
to
the
transformation
 paradigm
and
they
are
gods
of
transformation.
 
 The
ancient
Greek
festivals
for
Demeter
had
a
number
of
instances
of
aischrologia
 and
ritual
laughter.

These
festivals
centered
on
the
agricultural
calendar
and
the
changing
 needs
of
the
farmer
in
different
seasons.

The
aischrologia
and
laughter
at
these
festivals
 were
linked
with
both
the
mythological
basis
for
the
festivals—the
rape
of
Persephone
and
 Demeter’s
journey
to
ensure
her
daughter’s
return—and
to
the
specific
transformations
of
 the
agricultural
and
seasonal
moment.
The
Thesmophoria,
for
example
had
time
for
ritual
 mourning,
like
that
of
Demeter
for
Kore,
but
also
time
for
the
women
to
make
sacred
 fertilizer
that
would
be
mixed
with
seed
and
given
out
to
Athenian
citizens.


 
 The
worship
of
Demeter
at
Eleusis
also
had
a
particular
relationship
with
 aischrologia,
laughter,
and
transformation.

This
is
highlighted
by
the
figure
of
 Iambe/Baubo,
a
slave
woman
who
according
to
various
traditions,
jokes
with
Demeter,
 either
by
engaging
in
aischrologia
or
by
making
a
gesture
of
anasyrma,
pulling
up
her
skirts
 to
reveal
her
genitals
and
sometimes
her
breasts
as
well.

The
joking
wakes
Demeter
from
 her
deep
grief
over
the
loss
of
Persephone
and
allows
her
to
reengage
with
the
world.

 Unlike
other
festivals
to
Demeter,
transformation
in
Eleusinian
worship
did
not
hinge
on
 the
agricultural
year
or
focus
on
a
specific
moment
in
the
lifecycle
of
the
seed.

Instead
the
 cult
at
Eleusis
offered
transformation
to
individuals
and
through
this
transformation
a
 better,
happier
afterlife.

Aischrologia
and
laughter
were
part
of
the
mediating
journey
from
 Athens
to
Eleusis,
initiate
to
initiated,
just
as
they
were
a
part
of
Demeter’s
journey
from
 virtual
death
(while
mourning
Persephone)
back
to
life.


 
 13
 
 The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
offers
a
tantalizing
glimpse
into
how
the
ancient
 Greeks
may
have
viewed
the
anxieties
and
process
of
a
young
man
coming
of
age.

There
is
 very
little
surviving
evidence
for
Hermaia,
festivals
to
Hermes,
which
usually
had
athletic
 contests
for
young
men.


However,
the
Hymn
ties
the
god
so
firmly
to
laughter
and
 transformation
it
is
necessary
to
delve
into
the
hymn
to
see
if
it
can
inform
either
the
 Hermaia
themselves,
or
Greek
attitudes
about
transformation
as
part
of
the
coming
of
age
 process
for
young
men,
and
to
more
clearly
understand
Hermes’
ties
to
ritual
laughter
and
 transformation.
 
 Old
Comedy
and
Ritual
Laughter
 The
scholarly
exploration
of
laughter
and
Old
Comedy
has
largely
ignored
the
role
of
 ritual
laughter
in
comedy
or
how
evoking
rituals
tied
with
laughter
in
comedic
plots
might
 cue
the
Greek
audience
that
a
specific
type
of
laughter
is
either
occurring
on
stage
or
 required
of
the
audience.

It
seems
very
significant
to
me
that
the
action
of
a
third
of
 Aristophanes’
extant
plays
either
take
place
during
a
festival
or
have
festival
episodes,
 while,
of
course,
being
part
of
a
festival
themselves.

Clearly
ritual
and
laughter
are
a
major
 theme
in
his
poetic
work.


 Halliwell,
in
his
2008
book
on
laughter
says
that
Aristophanes
has
“left
us
a
gelastic
 conundrum” 20 
and
that
we
cannot
ever
tell
if
laughter
in
Old
Comedy
is
ritual
laughter.

But
 I
find
this
very
unsatisfying
and
overly
broad.

Halliwell
uses
only
three
textual
examples
 for
this
section
and
they
are
only
from
the
Frogs
and
the
Acharnians.

And
while
his
 following
chapter
on
Old
Comedy
focuses
on
shameful
speech
and
its
role
in
comedy
and
 























































 20 
Halliwell,
The
Maculate
Muse,
214.
 
 14
 the
democracy
at
large,
Halliwell’s
focus
has
shifted
away
from
laughter
itself
to
humor
 and
what
makes
something
funny,
not
how
the
laughter
from
the
jokes
may
be
functioning.

 Understanding
Aristophanes’
use
of
ritual
laughter
and
the
transformation
 paradigm
is
absolutely
essential
for
a
complete
understanding
of
his
plays.

Rosen,
in
his
 book
Old
Comedy
and
the
Iambographic
Tradition
argues
that
Aristophanes
was
very
aware
 of
the
connections
that
he
was
making
between
his
own
“literary
iambos
and
its
ritual
 origins;” 21 
and
I
certainly
agree.

If
the
poet
is
conscious
of
these
connections
and
is
using
 context,
or
setting,
or
specific
characters
to
present
these
connections
to
the
audience,
than
 it
is
certainly
essential
that
modern
readers
are
aware
of
this
relationship
as
well.


 In
her
work
on
iambos,
Nancy
Worman
writes,
“Attic
comedy
does
combine
 communal
insult
(i.e.
iambos)
with
revelry
(komos)
in
a
state‐run
medium,
thereby
 transforming
looser
festive
modes
into
an
official
ritual”. 22 

Taking
both
Rosen
and
 Worman’s
observations,
I
think
we
can
begin
to
see
a
complex
but
comprehensible
 structure
underneath
the,
sometimes
messy,
abuse
and
jesting
in
Aristophanic
comedy.

 These
texts
are
the
bridge
between
laughter,
abuse,
and
aischrologia
in
a
ritual
setting
and
 the
use
of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
as
a
literary
trope.


 The
ancient
audience
would
have
had
at
least
some
familiarity
with
the
ritual
 associations
with
laughter
and
transformation
and
the
use
of
this
paradigm
in
a
literary
 text
would
carry
specific
associations
with
it.

This
is
very
similar
to
Susan
Lape’s
 























































 21 
Ralph
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
and
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
(Atlanta:
Scholars
Press,
 1988),
26.
 22 
Nancy
Worman,
Abusive
Mouths
in
Classical
Athens
(New
York;
Cambridge
University
 Press,
2008)
68.
 
 15
 methodology
of
the
komos
as
an
embedded
genre 23 
in
Menander.
As
she
writes,
“Just
as
 embedded
literary
genres
import
their
own
conventions
and
ideology
the
installation
of
the
 komos
in
comedy
would
have
produced
new
meaning
in
accordance
with
its
regularized
 conventions.” 24 

In
exactly
the
same
manner
the
introduction
of
the
ritual
laughter
and
 transformation
paradigm
into
Old
Comedy
is
the
beginning
of
an
important
literary
 concept
that
becomes
essential
to
the
significance
of
Aristophanic
comedy
to
Athens,
as
the
 texts
themselves
claim.

In
comedy
this
trope
serves
both
small
and
weighty
functions;
it
 can
transform
individual
characters,
settings,
and
moments
to
move
the
plot
of
the
play
 forward,
and
it
can
function
as
a
meta‐theatrical
idea,
a
metaphor
of
how
comedy
works
on
 an
audience
to
change
their
worldview.
 
 























































 23 
For
more
on
embedded
genre
see
Leslie
Kurke,
“Pindar’s
Sixth
Pythian
and
the
Tradition
 of
Advice
Poetry,”
Transactions
of
the
American
Philological
Association
120
(1990)
and
 Richard
P.
Martin,
“Hesiod,
Odysseus,
and
the
Instruction
of
Princes,”
Transactions
of
the
 American
Philological
Association
114
(1984).
 24 
Susan
Lape,
“The
Poetics
of
the
“Komos”‐Chorus
in
Menander’s
Comedy,”
The
American
 Journal
of
Philology
127
(2006):
93‐94.
 
 16
 
 Chapter
One:
Demeter
and
Eleusis
 Introduction
 This
chapter
will
focus
on
the
interplay
between
myth,
ritual,
and
the
Homeric
 Hymn
to
Demeter.

This
will
provide
the
cultural
background
that
is
necessary
to
 understand
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
that
was
deeply
ingrained
in
 the
Athenian
consciousness.

The
cultural
underpinnings
of
this
paradigm
will
allow
us
to
 explore
how
laughter
works
in
the
Athenian
theater
and
how
Aristophanes
is
able
to
play
 with
this
paradigm
and
use
it
as
a
narrative
tool
for
his
comedies.


 Only
by
going
back
to
the
roots
of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
 are
we
able
to
make
sense
of
why
it
was
such
a
potent
and
recognizable
instrument
for
 later
literary
works.

If
it
was
an
insignificant
model
or
one
only
know
to
a
small
group
of
 people
it
would
not
have
been
the
effective
literary
device
it
becomes
in
Athenian
theater
 and
also
later
in
Greek
philosophy,
poetry,
and
Roman
prose.

The
rituals
at
Eleusis
and
the
 myth
of
Demeter
losing
and
then
reclaiming
her
daughter
were
widely
practiced
and
 hugely
popular,
and
because
of
this
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
was
 firmly
established
in
the
Athenian
and
more
broadly
Greek
imagination.

 There
is
a
great
deal
of
scholarly
debate
about
the
relationship
between
myth
and
 ritual;
how
exactly
do
the
two
interact,
how
literally
should
myth
be
interpreted
when
we
 attempt
to
reconstruct
ritual
worship,
and
what
is
the
value
of
using
a
literary
text
–
can
we
 discover,
through
textual
analysis,
elements
of
ritual
that
are
not
available
in
the
 archeological
and
historical
record?

Myths
are
often
mined
for
social
values
and
norms
of
 
 17
 the
society
in
which
they
were
produced,
or
used
as
maps
on
which
scholars
trace
the
 routes
(sometimes
even
literally)
of
a
ritual
practice
and
the
rites
that
worshipers
 enacted. 25 

There
are
even
those
who
say
that
religion
and
festivals
cannot
be
viewed
in
 this
abstract
manner
but
deal
only
with
the
practical
needs
of
the
practitioners;
that
 reconstructing
social
history
and
re‐evaluating
narrative
history
are
the
same
 undertaking. 26 


 All
of
these
approaches
have
certain
merits
for
scholars
attempting
to
understand
 and
advance
our
collective
knowledge
about
myth,
ritual,
festivals,
and
the
ancient
peoples
 who
participated
in
these
rites
and
ceremonies,
as
I
will
discuss.

However,
I
would
also
like
 to
propose
two
other
methods
for
delving
into
the
relationship
between
ritual
and
myth,
 what
I
am
calling
the
thematic
and
experiential
method.

The
myth
itself,
the
narrative,
or
 text
is
not
only
a
tool
to
be
examined
word‐by‐word,
but
also
must
be
considered
as
a
 whole.

Viewed
in
its
entirety
we
can
tease
out
thematic
elements
of
the
narrative
that
can
 illuminate
ritual.

And
when
we
consider
the
myth
or
text
as
an
embodied
experience, 27 
a
 performance
taken
as
a
whole,
we
may
also
be
able
to
shed
some
light
on
the
ritual
 practices
of
the
ancient
Greeks.
 
 Myth
and
Ritual
 
 Many
scholars
use
myth
as
a
sociological
or
anthropological
tool
to
gain
a
deeper
 understanding
of
the
social
mores
and
customs
of
ancient
Greek
culture.


 























































 25 
Walter
Burkert,
Homo
Necans:
The
Anthropology
of
Ancient
Greek
Sacrificial
Ritual
and
 Myth,
trans.
Peter
Bing
(Berkley:
University
of
California
Press,
1986).
 26 
Noel
Robertson,
Introduction
to
Festivals
and
Legends:
The
Formation
of
Greek
Cities
in
 the
Light
of
Public
Ritual,
(Toronto:
University
of
Toronto
Press,
1992),
xiii.
 27 
See
below
for
a
more
in
depth
discussion
of
this
idea.
 
 18
 “All
narrative,
including
mythic
narrative,
participates
in
the
creation
and
reflection
of
 socio‐cultural
structures.” 28 

Therefore,
by
understanding
the
mythic
narratives
of
the
 Greeks
it
is
possible
to
see
this
double
loop
of
socio‐cultural
structures;
both
how
those
 structures
were
reinforced
and
produced
and
how
the
social
norms
imprinted
themselves
 on
the
mythic
narratives
the
Greeks
transmitted
from
one
generation
to
the
next.

This
 method
of
analysis
seems,
to
me,
to
be
the
standard
(and
often
very
useful)
model.

This
 model
enables
us
to
look,
for
example,
at
the
plays
of
Euripides
and
see
the
socio‐cultural
 structures
he
is
questioning
and
inverting
by
carefully
tracking
how
he
transforms
classic
 mythic
narrative
in
his
dramatic
texts.

And
through
this
type
of
investigation,
open
even
 more
fissures
in
the
Athenian
socio‐cultural
landscape
for
scholars
to
explore.
 
 Tyrrell
and
Brown
have
a
similar
approach.
They
propose
that,
“myths
are
a
verbal
 expression
of
beliefs,
concepts
and
practices
operating
in
all
aspects
of
culture.” 29 

This
 takes
us
one
step
further
into
the
complex
interplay
between
myth
and
ritual.

Mythic
 narrative
not
only
tells
us
about
the
larger
socio‐cultural
structures
of
a
society, 30 
but
also
 the
practices
of
the
people
in
that
specific
cultural
milieu.

This
emphasis
on
practices
is
an
 essential
element
for
the
study
of
ancient
ritual,
especially
for
mystery
cults,
since
often
 there
is
little
primary
material
that
deals
directly
with
the
specifics
of
ritual
practices
 and/or
the
sources
are
late
or
written
by
Christian
authors
hostile
to
‘pagan
religion.’

 Mythological
narrative
not
only
tells
us
what
social
norms,
anxieties,
and
structures
a
 























































 28 
Ingrid
Holmberg,
“The
Signs
of
Metis,”
Arethusa
30
(1997)
1.
 29 
William
Tyrrell
and
Frieda
Brown,
Athenian
Myths
and
Institutions:
Words
in
Action,
 (New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
1991),
12.
 30 
These
larger
socio‐cultural
structures
may
also
have
very
important
information
for
 ritual
practice,
i.e.
who
was
allowed
to
participate,
what
socio‐cultural
norms
they
may
be
 transgressing
within
the
ritual
context,
what
larger
cultural
concern
did
a
ritual
attend
to,
 etc.
 
 19
 culture
found
fundamental,
but
it
can
also
help
us
piece
together
the
actual
ritual
 practices
that
a
group
of
people
enacted
to
ensure
that
norms
were
upheld,
anxieties
eased,
 and
structures
maintained.
 
 A
lot
of
scholarly
attention
has
been
focused
not
only
on
how
myth
and
ritual
impact
 each
other
–
but
also
how
one
led
to
the
other.

I
do
not
believe
that
either
could
take
shape
 without
the
other
and
that
there
must
have
been
an
organic
give
and
take
between
the
two
 just
as
there
is
even
now
between
myth
and
ritual.

While
it
is
not
the
aim
of
this
project
to
 delve
into
the
origins
of
myth
and
ritual
–there
is
nevertheless
a
need
to
review
the
myth‐ ritual
debate
so
that
we
may
go
beyond
it
in
our
analysis.
 
 Eric
Csapo
and
Robert
A.
Segal
both
trace
the
beginnings
of
theories
about
myth
and
 ritual
to
the
influence
of
the
work
of
Emile
Durkheim
on
ancient
scholars
in
the
late
 nineteenth
century. 31 


His
theories
of
social
evolution
then
inspired
both
James
Frazer
and
 William
Robertson
Smith
to
apply
this
theory
to
ancient
religions
of
the
Semitic
peoples
 and
of
the
Greeks
respectively.

Smith’s
Lectures
on
the
Religion
of
the
Semites
is
often
called
 the
first
myth‐ritualist
theory.



The
major
idea
of
his
theory
was
that
myth
developed
 subsequently
to
ritual.


And
that
ritual
was
rigidly
handed
down
from
generation
to
 generation.
 For
those
of
mythological
details
had
no
dogmatic
value
and
no
binding
authority
 over
faith,
it
is
to
be
supposed
that
nothing
was
put
into
a
Mac
which
people
at
the
 time
were
not
prepared
to
believe
without
offense.
But
so
far
is
the
way
of
thinking
 expressed
in
the
myth
was
not
already
expressed
in
the
ritual
itself,
it
had
no
 properly
religious
sanction;
the
myth
apart
from
the
ritual
of
Ford’s
only
a
doubtful
 and
slippery
kind
of
evidence.
Before
we
can
handle
myths
with
any
confidence,
we
 























































 31 
Eric
Csapo,
Theories
of
Mythology
(Malden:
Wiley‐Blackwell,
2005).

 



Robert
A.
Segal,
The
Myth
and
Ritual
Theory:
An
Anthology
(Malden:
Wiley‐Blackwell,
 1998).
 
 20
 must
have
some
definite
hold
of
the
ideas
expressed
in
the
ritual
tradition,
which
 incorporated
the
only
fixed
and
statutory
elements
of
the
religion. 32 
 
Smith
sees
myth
as
developing
out
of
ritual
practice
and
then
continuing
to
evolve
on
its
 own.
Therefore
in
his
lectures
he
first
investigates
ritual
and
the
evidence
that
is
available
 independent
of
mythology.
 The
conclusion
from
all
this
as
to
the
method
of
our
investigation
is
obvious.

When
 we
study
the
political
structure
of
an
early
society,
we
do
not
begin
by
asking
what
 is
recorded
of
the
first
legislators,
or
what
theory
men
advanced
as
to
the
reason
of
 their
institutions;
we
try
to
understand
what
the
institutions
were,
and
how
they
 shaped
men’s
lives.
In
like
manner,
in
the
study
of
Semitic
religion,
we
must
not
 begin
by
asking
what
was
told
about
the
gods,
but
what
the
working
religious
 institutions
were,
and
how
they
shape
the
lives
of
the
worshipers. 33 
 Smith’s
conclusions
are
clear,
when
studying
myth
and
ritual,
one
must
delve
first
into
the
 ritual
and
then
into
the
mythology.
He
views
ritual
as
very
static
and
myth
as
much
more
 susceptible
to
the
changing
views
of
society.
 
 
James
Frazer
dedicated
The
Golden
Bough
to
Smith
“In
Gratitude
and
Admiration.”
 However
Frazer’s
views
on
myth
and
ritual
are
slightly
different.

In
Frazer’s
theory,
myth
 and
ritual
work
together
both
growing
out
of
the
narrative
of
the
god
dying
in
the
fall
and
 being
reborn
in
the
spring
just
like
vegetation.

He
uses
mythology
from
all
over
the
world
 and
from
various
time
periods
to
show
this
commonality
between
many
religions,
 including
Christianity.

For
Fraser
myth
and
ritual,
all
over
the
world
and
from
all
different
 time
periods,
grow
out
of
the
agricultural
cycle,
practitioners
use
ritual
to
manipulate
the
 god
of
vegetation
and
thereby
ensure
the
cycle
of
the
seasons
and
the
return
of
spring.

 From
this
one
common
narrative
many
diverse
rituals
and
myths
are
born,
however
at
the
 























































 32 

William
Robertson
Smith,
Lectures
on
the
Religion
of
the
Semites
(Chestnut
Hill:
Adamant
 Media
Corporation,
2005)

 33 
Smith,
Lectures
on
the
Religion
of
the
Semites,

 
 21
 very
start
myth
and
ritual
work
together–one
does
not
take
precedence
over
the
other
in
 Frazer’s
theory.


 
 
The
Golden
Bough
inspired
many
scholars
of
religion
and
played
a
key
role
in
the
 work
of
the
Cambridge
Ritualist
School,
which
consisted
of
Jane
Harrison,
A.B.
Cook,
F.M.
 Cornford,
and
Gilbert
Murray;
and
of
Bronislaw
Malinowski.

The
Cambridge
Ritualists,
as
 their
name
implies,
placed
an
emphasis
on
ritual
as
the
spark
which
led
to
myth
and
even
 early
dramatic
performance.

They
saw
the
ritual
calendar
made
up
of
celebrations
of
a
 “year
god”
and
all
myth
springing
from
the
rituals
surrounding
his
life,
death,
and
rebirth.

 “The
works
of
Murray
and
Cornford
on
the
rise
of
tragedy
and
comedy
started
a
new
way
 of
looking
at
literature
and
especially
at
the
theater.
It
is
‘one
and
the
same
impulse
that
 sends
man
to
the
church
and
to
the
theater.’” 34 
 Walter
Burkert,
writing
several
decades
later,
saw
myth
and
ritual
springing
up
 separately
but
in
dialogue
with
one
another.
His
explanation
of
the
relationship
between
 myth
and
ritual
stresses
the
inextricable
link
that
the
two
have.

 Nevertheless
myth
and
ritual
can
form
an
alliance
for
mutual
benefit,
indeed
a
 symbiosis,
as
lichens
are
formed
by
a
symbiosis
between
algae
and
fungi:
they
are
 propagated
separately,
but
they
nearly
form
a
new
species
.
.
.
To
speak
without
 allegory:
The
defect
of
ritual,
in
a
human
society,
is
the
apparent
nonsense
inherent
 in
its
redirection
of
activity,
the
‘as‐if’
element;
here
a
tale
may
supply
a
plausible
 context
and
fill
the
vacant
places.

The
defect
of
the
traditional
tale
is
its
lack
of
 seriousness
and
stability;
here
ritual
may
supply
a
basis;
for
the
serious
character
of
 ritual
is
guaranteed
by
the
role
of
anxiety
controlled
by
it,
and
its
stability
is
secured
 even
by
explicit
sanctions. 35 

 
 























































 34 
Michael
Desplan
review
of
the
Myth
and
Ritual
School:
J.G.
Frazer
and
the
Cambridge
 Ritualists,
by
Robert
Ackerman,
Numen
50
No.
4
(2003),
479‐481.
 35 
Walter
Burkert,
Structure
and
History
in
Greek
Mythology
and
Ritual
(Berkley:
University
 of
California
Press,
1979),
57.
 
 22
 If
 a
 traditional
 tale,
 or
 mythic
 narrative,
 finds
 its
 stability
 and
 seriousness
 in
 its
 relationship
with
ritual,
than
in
the
transmission
of
the
tale—which
Burkert
notes
is
more
 important
than
its
origin—the
myth
must
incorporate
elements
of
the
ritual
to
mark
its
tie
 with
the
practice,
thereby
ensuring
its
seriousness.
 
 Indeed,
this
is
how
Burkert,
and
many
others
read
myths,
“The
hymn
to
Demeter
 makes
the
goddess
perform
what
must
have
been
a
part
of
the
initiation
ritual:
sitting
 down
on
a
stool
covered
with
a
fleece,
veiling
her
head,
keeping
silence,
then
laughing
and
 tasting
the
kykeon.” 36 
The
myth
provides
direct
evidence
for
the
practices
of
the
initiates
at
 Eleusis.



 I
am
not
condemning
these
methodologies,
I
think
using
myth
and
ritual
to
probe
 the
 concerns
 and
 structures
 of
 a
 society,
 and
 myth
 to
 reveal
 ritual
 practices
 can
 be
 incredibly
productive
and
fruitful.

And
certainly
I
would
not
say,
as
Noel
Robertson
does,
 “Nowadays
it
is
the
fashion
to
interpret
festivals
and
other
ritual
as
a
figurative
language
 for
expressing
the
more
abstract
values
and
attitudes
of
a
given
set
of
people.

Every
 fashion
has
an
element
of
truth,
but
in
this
one
it
is
relatively
small.” 37 

However
I
would
 like
to
propose
two
additional
models
for
understanding
how
myth
and
ritual
impact
each
 other
and
the
value
of
studying
myth
to
uncover
and
make
more
apparent
elements
of
 ritual.
 Both
 of
 my
 models
 involve
 approaching
 a
 myth
 holistically
 and
 imagining
 the
 experience
of
the
ancient
listener
who
would
have
heard
the
entire
Homeric
Hymn
recited
 in
one
sitting.

First
I
want
to
explore
the
Hymn
thematically
and
look
at
what
literary
 























































 36 
Walter
Burkert,
Ancient
Mystery
Cults
(Cambridge:
Harvard
University
Press,
1987),
77.
 37 
Robertson,
Festivals
and
Legends,

xiv.

 
 23
 themes
resonate
with
ritual
practice.

How
might
an
initiate,
or
would‐be
initiate,
gain
a
 deeper
understanding
of
the
ritual
from
listening
to
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter?

I
 believe
that
not
only
would
an
initiate
recognize
ritual
actions
in
the
actions
of
the
gods
 and
mortals
in
the
Hymn,
but
he
or
she
would
also
see
resonance
with
the
larger
concerns
 of
the
poem.

The
poet
makes
clear
in
the
themes
of
the
poem
what
is
also
essential
to
the
 ritual.
 
 And
in
that
vein,
the
second
model
I
would
like
to
propose
is
an
experiential
model,
 which
is
how
the
experience
of
the
listener
might
mimic
the
lived
experience
of
the
initiate
 or
practitioner.

Are
there
resonances
between
the
events
in
the
poem
and
the
sequence
of
 actions
in
the
ritual?


I
think,
at
least
in
the
case
of
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
the
myth,
 in
fact,
stands
in
as
a
smaller
model
of
the
ritual
experience.

The
listener
undergoes
the
 same
experience
as
the
initiate,
but
on
a
less
dramatic
scale.


 
 Theory
of
Mind
and
the
Human
Response
to
Art
and
Ritual
 
 
 This
idea
of
a
holistic
and
experiential
approach
to
the
poem
is
underscored
by
 recent
work
on
cognitive
neuroscience,
social
cognition,
and
the
role
of
cognition
in
 religious
teaching
and
initiation.

For
the
past
sixty
years
developmental
psychologists
and
 cognitive
scientists
have
posited
a
theory
about
how
“the
cognitive
capacity
to
attribute
 mental
states
to
self
and
others” 38 
works.

This
theory,
which
today
is
called
Theory
of
Mind
 (ToM),
deals
not
only
with
emotions
but
also
with
beliefs,
desires,
intentions,
and
 mindreading.

ToM
presents
a
scientific
basis
for
my
more
literary
hypothesis
and
allows
us
 























































 38 
Alvin
Goldman,
“Theory
of
Mind”
in
The
Oxford
Handbook
of
Philosophy
of
Cognitive
 Science,
ed.
Eric
Margolis
et
al.
(New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
2012),
402.
 
 24
 to
explore
on
a
very
basic
and
human
level
how
our
brain
structure
and
cognition
may
 play
into
how
we
experience
literature,
theater,
and
religious
experiences.


 
 ToM
has
gone
through
several
models,
but
the
most
recent
approach
and
structure
 also
make
the
most
sense
in
terms
of
how
humans
interact
with
art
and
religion.

Referred
 to
as
Simulation
Theory
(ST),
Goldman
explains
it
as
the
mental
process
that
a
chess
player
 playing
another
human
(not
a
computer)
must
undertake,

 they
visualize
the
board
from
the
other
side,
taking
the
opposing
pieces
for
their
 own
and
vice
versa.

They
pretend
that
their
reasons
for
action
have
shifted
 accordingly.

Thus
transported
in
imagination,
they
make
up
their
mind
what
to
do
 and
project
this
decision
onto
the
opponent. 39 
 
 
Imagination
is
the
key
in
this
example,
it
is
what
enables
the
attempt
to
step
into
an
 opponent’s
mind
and
predict
his/her
actions.

And
this
in
turn
has
huge
consequences
for
 how
we
think
about
the
transmission
of
religious
beliefs
and
rituals
(such
as
those
at
 Eleusis)
and
how
our
brains
process
art.


 
 Harvey
Whitehouse
lays
out
in
Modes
of
Religiosity
just
how
ToM
can
help
us
to
 understand
the
communication
of
religious
beliefs
from
the
initiated
to
the
uninitiated.

He
 breaks
religious
transmission
down
into
two
modes:
the
doctrinal
and
the
imagistic.
 Doctrinal
religions
are
characterized
by
very
frequent
and
highly
routinized
rituals,
 (perhaps
weekly
or
even
more
often),
and
the
frequent
repetition
of
doctrine
and
narrative
 that
reinforce
the
rituals.

Imagistic
religions
have
much
less
frequent
rituals
(yearly
for
 example)
but
these
rituals
are
also
what
Whitehouse
terms
“highly
arousing”.

That
is
they
 























































 39 
Goldman,
“Theory
of
Mind,”
412.
 
 25
 have
ecstatic,
highly
dramatic,
or
dangerous
elements. 40 

Greek
religion
in
general
and
 the
practices
at
Eleusis
specifically
do
not
fit
the
doctrinal
mode
but
rather
the
imagistic.


 
 Imagistic
religions
use
the
imaginative
element
highlighted
in
ST
to
heighten
the
 experience
for
practitioners.
This
helps
creates
memories
that
“
can
be
so
vivid
and
 detailed
that
they
can
take
the
form
of
(what
some
psychologists
call)
flashbulb
memories.

 It
is
almost
as
it
a
camera
has
gone
off
in
one’s
head,
illuminating
the
scene,
and
preserving
 it
forever
in
memory.” 41 

These
flashbulb
memories
can
presumably
then
be
replayed
in
an
 initiate’s
mind
and
by
“seeing”
them
again
the
ritual
is
reinforced.


 This
observation
is
key
for
understanding
how
the
imagination
and
memory
work
in
 the
flashbulb
memories
of
the
initiates
mentioned
above
and
the
ancient
people
listening
to
 The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter.

Listening
to
the
poem
and
creating
the
visual
world
in
one’s
 mind
would
create
“memories”
that
could
be
revisited,
which
would
in
turn
prompt
the
 neural
response
again.

Therefore
listening
to
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
does
in
fact
 create
a
mini‐initiation.

The
listener
would
not
have
the
dramatic
flashbulb
memories
of
a
 person
who
actually
underwent
the
process
of
initiation,
but
they
would
have
“memories”
 of
the
important
actions
of
the
poem.
 
 The
Eleusinian
Ritual
 This
section
will
layout,
in
great
detail,
the
surviving
evidence
for
the
worship
of
 Demeter
at
Eleusis.

I
believe
this
is
necessary
to
really
understand
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
that
the
literary
works
I
will
explore
are
 























































 40 
Harvey
Whitehouse,
Modes
of
Religiosity:
A
Cognitive
Theory
of
Religious
Transmission
 (Walnut
Creek:
AltaMira
Press,
2004),
65‐74.
 41 
Whitehouse,
Modes
of
Religiosity,
70.
 
 26
 drawing
on.

The
Homeric
poet
in
both
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
and
the
Homeric
 Hymn
to
Hermes
uses
ritual
transformation;
and
then
Aristophanes
will
take
this
a
step
 further
in
his
use
of
ritual
settings
and
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
in
 his
comedies.


 The
Mysteries
that
were
celebrated
at
Eleusis
for
well
over
a
thousand
years
have
 been
the
subject
of
countless
books,
articles,
and
reconstructions.

So
many
so,
that
at
times
 it
is
difficult
to
see
through
the
imaginings,
assumptions,
and
educated
guesses
to
the
 evidence
that
we
have
from
antiquity.

Also,
due
to
the
nature
of
the
evidence 42 
–
there
are
 bound
to
be
as
many
interpretations
as
there
are
scholars
who
have
scrutinized
the
 remaining
clues
about
the
rites
of
Demeter
and
Persephone.

I
have
attempted
in
the
 following
description
to
explicate
what
evidence
is
available
and
how
it
has
been
evaluated
 by
a
number
of
scholars,
myself
included.

 The
worship
of
Demeter
and
her
daughter
Persephone,
in
the
Greek
world,
centered
 around
the
town
of
Eleusis,
which
by
the
early
sixth
century
had
been
annexed
by
Athens. 43 

 There
are
legendary
accounts
of
an
earlier
war
between
the
two
cities
when
Erechtheus
 ruled
Athens
and
Eumolpos,
Eleusis.


Pausanias
(1.36.4
and
1.38.3),
Apollodoros
(3.15.4‐5)
 and
Thucydides
(2.15)
all
refer
to
this
war
in
their
work
and
scholars
often
point
to
this
as
 evidence
of
longstanding
and
ongoing
tension
between
the
two
cities.

Despite,
or
even
 perhaps
because
of
this
political
tension,
the
annexation
of
Eleusis
by
Athens
created
new
 























































 42 
The
evidence
about
the
celebrations
at
Eleusis
from
the
ancient
world
include,
reliefs,
 vase
paintings,
inscriptions,
literary
sources,
and
later
Christian
authors
–
who
are
 attempting
to
discredit
‘pagan’
religions.

Each
of
these
types
of
evidence
has
room
for
 interpretation
–
there
is
no
straightforward
account.

Therefore
it
is
hardly
surprising
that
 so
many
versions
of
the
ritual
events
have
been
postulated.
 43 
Foley
1994,
169;
Meyer
1987,
17;
Parke
1986,
60;
Zaidman
and
Panel
1989,
132.
 
 27
 ritual
elements
for
the
worship
of
the
two
goddesses,
which
linked
Athens
and
Eleusis
 spiritually
as
well
as
politically.

The
main
celebration
of
Demeter
and
Persephone,
the
 Great
Mysteries,
occurred
in
the
month
of
Boedromion
from
day
fifteen
through
twenty‐ one,
the
entire
third
week
of
the
month
and
part
of
the
fourth. 44 

However,
for
those
who
 wished
to
be
initiated
into
the
cult
the
journey
began
earlier,
in
the
spring,
at
the
 celebration
of
the
Lesser
Mysteries.


 The
Lesser
Mysteries
were
celebrated
at
Agrai
–
a
town
outside
of
Athens
to
the
 southwest
in
the
second
half
of
the
month
of
Anthesterion. 45 

Participation
was
a
necessary
 prerequisite
for
those
who
wanted
to
be
initiates
at
the
Greater
Mysteries
the
following
 year. 46 

The
ritual
took
place
in
the
metroon,
near
the
bank
of
the
Illissos
River;
the
temple
 was
simply
dedicated
to
the
Mother
‐
who
some
scholars
say
was
Demeter, 47 
and
some,
 Rhea. 48 

There
is
a
great
deal
of
conjecture
about
what
exactly
occurred
at
Agrai.

There
was
 a
purification
and
a
sacrifice;
and
by
the
fifth
century,
it
was
a
necessary
first
step
before
 























































 44 
This
correlates
approximately
with
the
end
of
September
or
beginning
of
October.
 45 
The
second
half
of
Anthesterion
correlates,
approximately,
to
early
March.
 46 
The
Greek
year
began
in
the
month
of
Hekatombaion
(approximately
mid
July).

So
those
 who
wished
to
be
initiates
in
the
Great
Mysteries
would
attend
the
Lesser
Mysteries
in
the
 spring
(at
the
end
of
the
Greek
calendar
year)
and
then
in
the
following
fall
(a
new
year
in
 the
Greek
calendar
system)
be
initiated
into
the
rites
at
Eleusis.
It
is
interesting
to
note
that
 in
both
the
Ancient
Greek
and
modern
western
calendar,
new
year
is
during
the
season
 when
farming
is
impossible
because
of
the
weather
 47 
Herbert
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians
(Utica:
Cornell
University
Press,
1977),
58;
 Martin
Nilsson,
“Early
Orphism
and
Kindred
Religious
Movements,”
The
Harvard
 Theological
Review
28
(1955):
667‐9.
 48 
Helene
Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter:
Translation,
Commentary,
and
Interpretive
 Essays
(Princeton:
Princeton
University
Press,
1993),
66;
Erika
Simon,
The
Festivals
of
the
 Athenians:
An
Archeological
Commentary
(Madison:
University
of
Wisconsin
Press,
1983),
 26.
Parke
does
note
that
the
temple
at
Agrai
was
dedicated
simply
to
The
Mother
–
 however
she
identifies
this
goddess
as
Demeter
not
Rhea.
 
 28
 becoming
a
mystai
at
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries. 49 

The
purification
was
held
on
the
banks
 of
the
Illisos
and
perhaps
the
participants
ritually
bathed
in
the
river
itself 50 
before
 sacrificing
a
piglet.

According
to
legend
the
purification
at
Agrai
was
first
held
for
the
 benefit
of
Herakles
who
had
to
be
cleansed
of
his
bloodguilt 51 
before
being
initiated
at
 Eleusis. 52 


The
relief
on
the
Lovatelli
urn
is
often
used
as
further
evidence
of
this,
it
depicts
 three
scenes;
Demeter
seated
and
crowned
with
grain
and
Persephone
standing
next
to
her
 with
a
torch;
Herakles,
his
feet
on
a
fleece
(you
can
see
the
ram’s
horn
by
his
foot),
veiled
 and
seated,
being
ritually
cleansed;
and
Herakles
holding
a
piglet
while
the
Daduchos 53 
 pours
a
libation
over
the
sacrificial
offering.


 Exactly
when
and
how
the
rituals
at
Agrai
were
first
joined
to
the
rites
at
Eleusis
is
 not
certain.

It
seems
that
the
two
were
linked
in
the
festival
calendar
after
the
political
 union
of
Athens
and
Eleusis.

Brumfield
argues
that
there
must
have
been
more
than
simply
 a
political
reason
to
tie
the
two
festivals
together,
and
therefore
the
rites
at
Agrai
must
have
 had
some
resonance
with
the
Eleusinian
mysteries. 54 

Her
reasoning
that
the
timing
of
the
 Lesser
Mysteries
at
Agrai
and
the
Greater
at
Eleusis
occur
at
the
two
high
points
of
the
 agricultural
year

(sprouting
and
sowing,
respectively)
seems
very
plausible.

The
 celebration
at
Agrai
may
have
originally
included
rites
not
only
to
The
Mother,
but
also
to
 























































 49 
Plut.
Demetr.
26.1
 50 
Ludwig
Deubner,
Attische
Feste:
Mit
40
Tafeln
(Georg
Olms,
1932),
70.
 51 
Herakles
had
killed
the
Centaurs
and
had
to
be
cleansed
before
becoming
an
initiate
–
 since
no
one
who
had
committed
murder
could
be
admitted
to
the
initiation
ritual
of
the
 Greater
Mysteries.
 52 
Aristophanes.
Scholiast
Plutus
845,
1013
 53 
Simon
identifies
the
figure
as
a
Daduchos
because
of
his
winnowing
fan
in
the
relief.
124
 54 
Allaire
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter
and
Their
Relation
to
the
Agricultural
 Year
(Ayer
Co.
Publishing,
1981),
143.
 
 29
 Persephone
and
perhaps
to
Zeus
Meilichios
whose
festival
was
celebrated
at
Agrai
in
the
 third
week
of
Anthesterion. 55 


 What
does
seem
clear
from
these
various
bits
of
evidence
is
that
the
political
 alliance
between
Athens
and
Eleusis
is
mirrored
in
this
ritual
alliance.
Nilsson
and
Park
 discuss
the
possibility
that
the
procession
of
the
holy
things
from
Eleusis
to
Athens
during
 the
Greater
Mysteries
may
have
demonstrated
a
desire
on
the
part
of
the
Athenians
for
the
 cult
to
be
moved
to
Athens.

However,
the
association
of
Demeter
with
Eleusis
was
simply
 too
strong.

The
mythological
etiology
of
the
Lesser
Mysteries
at
Agrai
in
the
Herakles
myth
 provides
a
useful
link
between
Agrai
and
Eleusis
other
than
political
annexation
and
 supplied
the
mysteries
of
Demeter
with
a
very
famous
Pan‐Hellenic
initiate 56 ,
which
could
 only
further
the
reputation
of
the
Mysteries
as
a
Pan‐Hellenic
event.
 Once
initiates
had
taken
part
in
the
Lesser
Mysteries
in
the
spring
they
could
then
 be
initiated
into
the
Greater
Mysteries.

There
were
two
levels
of
initiation
at
Eleusis.

In
the
 first
year
of
initiation
participants
became
a
mu/sthj
mystes
“an
initiate”
and
then
the
next
 year
an
initiate
could
become
an e0po/pthj
epoptes
“one
who
sees”.

After
completing
the
 final
level
of
initiation
cult
members
could
become
a
mu/stagwgo/j mystagogos
“a
teacher”
 and
guide
to
those
who
were
not
yet
epoptoi
along
their
journey
of
initiation. 57 
 























































 55 
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
141
n.
11.
 56 
Parker
notes
that
the
Dioskouri
are
also
famous
mythological
initiates
into
the
cult
at
 Eleusis.

Xen.
Hell.
6.3.6
and
Plut.
Thes.
33.
Also
a
very
late
source,
Stephanus
of
Byzantium
 reports
that
the
ritual
at
Agrai
was
“an
imitation
of
the
story
of
Dionysus.”
Parker
1989
 Dionysus
at
Agrai
 57 
For
an
excellent
and
very
detailed
analysis
of
the
use
of
initiation
vocabulary
in
Plato
see
 Clinton
2003,
59.
 
 30
 The
Mysteries
were
administered
by
a
large
cast
of
priests,
priestesses,
and
even
 children.

The
most
important
male
Eleusinian
officials
who
presided
over
both
the
Lesser
 and
the
Greater
Mysteries
also
reflected
the
annexation
of
Eleusis
by
Athens.

Two
clans,
 the
Eumolpidai,
who
claimed
to
be
descended
from
a
line
of
Eleusinian
kings
and
the
 Athenian
Kerykes,
provided
the
three
chief
male
officiants.

The
Eumolpidai
supplied
the
 high
priest
of
Eleusis,
the
Heirophantes,
“teacher
of
the
sacred
rites”
and
he
held
this
office
 for
life. 58 

The
Kerykes
clan
supplied
both
the
Daduchos
“torchbearer”
and
the
Hierokeryx
 “herald
of
the
sacred
rites.”

There
were
also
two
Hierophantides,
high
priestesses,
one
the
 priestess
of
Demeter
and
Kore 59 
and
the
other
the
Priestess
of
Plouton.
The
Priestess
of
 Demeter
and
Kore
was
a
married
woman
with
children,
and
it
is
unclear
if
the
office
was
 held
for
life. 60 
The
priests
and
priestesses
were
helped
by
the
panageis
“all
holy
ones,”
 female
attendants
sometimes
called
melissai
“bees.” 61 

The
Archon
Basileus
oversaw
the
 bureaucratic
elements
of
registration,
fees,
and
perhaps
the
acquisition
of
the
necessary
 piglets
for
the
sacrifice
at
Athens.

Four
citizens
were
designated
each
year
as
his
helpers
–
 























































 58 
George
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries
(Cyceon
Tales,
2010),
230;
Carl
 Kerenyi,
Eleusis:
Archetypal
Image
of
Mother
and
Daughter
(Princeton:
Princeton
University
 Press,
1991),
22‐23.;
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
27.
 59 
The
Priestess
of
Demeter
and
Kore
also
presided
over
other
festivals
to
Demeter,
which
I
 will
discuss
later
in
this
chapter.


 60 
For
a
wonderful
and
very
in
depth
discussion
of
The
Priestess
of
Demeter
and
Kore,
 including
the
evidence
for
historical
women
who
served
in
this
office
see
Joan
Connelly,
 Portrait
of
a
Priestess:
Women
and
Ritual
in
Ancient
Greece
(Princeton:
Princeton
University
 Press,
2009):
64‐69.
 61 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
232;
Julian
Rhet.
V.173,
CIA
iv,
p.203
1.81.
 (corpus
inscriptionum
atticarum);
Mara
Lynn
Keller,
“The
Eleusinian
Mysteries
of
Demeter
 and
Persephone:
Fertility,
Sexuality,
and
Rebirth,”
Journal
of
Feminist
Studies
in
Religion
4
 (1988):
33.
 
 31
 two
from
the
citizen
body
at
large
and
one
from
the
Kerykes
clan
and
one
from
the
 Eumolpidai. 62 

 
The
Eleusinian
priests
had
special,
highly
decorated
vestments
called
ependytes
 and
Thracian
boots.
The
Daduchos
wore
his
hair,
which
he
tied
up
in
a
special
headband,
 and
beard
long
the
entire
year.

Most
of
what
we
know
about
the
appearance
of
the
priests
 comes
from
vase
painting
and
representations
of
Eumolpos
or
Kerykes,
the
legendary
 figures
who
are
said
to
be
the
ancestors
of
the
two
clans
that
provided
the
Hierophant
and
 Daduchos.

There
are
not
as
many
representations
of
the
Priestesses,
but
Connelly
 mentions
one
black‐figure
cup
that
may
have
a
depiction
of
the
Priestess
to
Demeter
and
 Kore;
she
seems
to
be
dressed
in
a
very
similar
manner
to
the
female
worshippers
also
on
 the
cup
–
so
perhaps
her
costume
was
not
as
elaborate
as
her
male
counterparts’. 63 


 The
Greater
Mysteries
took
place
in
the
fall
during
the
month
of
Boedromion
right
 before
the
planting
(so
that
initiates
then
had
time
to
travel
home
before
the
planting
 needed
to
take
place).


The
Hierophant
called
a
sacred
truce
for
fifty‐five
days
around
the
 festival,
allowing
all
those
in
the
Greek
world
who
wanted
to
celebrate
the
Mysteries
to
 travel
to
Athens
and
then
home
again
safely.

In
Metageitnion,
the
month
before
 Boedromion,
the
Hierophant
would
send
messengers,
spondophoroi,
throughout
the
Greek
 world
to
proclaim
the
truce
and
invite
people
to
Athens
and
Eleusis
for
the
mysteries. 64 

 The
celebration
began
on
the
fourteenth
of
Boedromion
when
the
Priestess
of
Demeter
and
 























































 62 
Aristotle
Ath
Con
57;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
229;
Brumfield,
The
 Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
192‐3;
Burkert,
Ancient
Mystery
Cults,
37.
 63 
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
27;
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
58:
Kerenyi,
Eleusis,
162‐ 163,
fig.
50,
Ninion
tablet
fig.15,
figs.
24,
25;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries4
 230‐233;
Connelly,
Portrait
of
a
Priestess,
66
Fig.
3.2;
Plutarch
Aristides
5.

 64 
Wilhelm
Dittenberger,
Sylloge 
 inscriptionum
graecarum
(Germany:
S.
Hirzelium,
1883),
 vol.
3,
No.
1019
and
vol.
1,
No.
83;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
230.
 
 32
 Kore
and
the
Priestess
of
Plutos,
accompanied
by
the
ephebes
from
Athens,
carried
ta\ i9era, the
hiera,
or
“the
Sacred
Things”
in
a
procession
from
Eleusis
to
Athens.

The
 priestesses
carried
the
hiera
in
special
round
baskets
called
kistai
so
that
none
of
the
 uninitiated
could
see
them.

When
they
arrived
in
Athens
the
hiera
were
placed
in
the
 Eleusinion,
a
small
temple
built
on
a
rocky
outcropping
on
the
northern
slope
of
the
 acropolis 65 
and
the
Phaidryntes
“the
Cleaner
of
the
Two
Goddesses” 66 
went
to
the
acropolis
 and
announced
to
the
priestess
of
Athena
Polias
that
the
hiera
were
in
Athens.


 Initiation
into
the
Mysteries
was
open
to
any
person
who
could
speak
Greek
(i.e.
 anyone
who
was
not
a
Barbarian)
and
who
had
not
committed
murder.
Both
free
men
and
 women
and
slaves
took
part. 67 
Although
the
mysteries
were
open
to
a
large
group
of
people
 there
were
fees
associated
with
joining.
By
the
late
fourth
century
the
fees
totaled
fifteen
 drachmas,
which
Parke
estimates
as
ten
days’
wages. 68 
Therefore,
although
most
could
 have
participated,
for
poorer
initiates
the
fee
would
require
planning
and
saving
over
the
 course
of
the
previous
year.

These
fifteen
drachmas
accounted
for
various
fees
that
 covered
payments
to
the
priests
and
priestesses
as
well
as
expenses. 69 
It
seems
that
the
 necessary
sacrificial
animals
were
covered
in
this
fee. 70 


 The
first
four
days
of
the
festival
were
celebrated
at
Athens
and
the
Archon
Basileus
 was
in
charge.

Aristotle
writes,

 























































 65 
For
a
very
detailed
analysis
of
the
various
archeological
finds
at
the
City
Eleusinion
see
 Miles
1998.
 66 
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
60.
 67 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
254;
Walter
Burkert,
Greek
Religion:
 Archaic
and
Classical
(New
York:
Wiley‐Blackwell,
1991),
285‐6.
 68 
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
61.
 69 
Connelly,
Portrait
of
a
Priestess,
65;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
233;
 Dittenberger,
Sylloge,
vol.
1,
No
42
c;
Leges
Graecorum
Sacrae,
No.
3,
Col.
C,
p.
12
 70 
For
more
see
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians.
 
 33
 ὁ
δὲ
βασιλεὺς
πρῶτον
μὲν
μυστηρίων
ἐπιμελεῖται
μετὰ
τῶν
ἐπιμελητῶν
ὧν
ὁ
 δῆμος
χειροτονεῖ,
δύο
μὲν
ἐξ
Ἀθηναίων
ἁπάντων,
ἕνα
δ᾽
ἐξ
Εὐμολπιδῶν,
ἕνα
δ᾽
ἐκ
 Κηρύκων.
 The
Archon
Basileus
is
in
charge,
first,
of
the
Mysteries
along
with
managers
who
 have
been
elected
by
the
people,
two
from
the
whole
Athenian
citizenry,
one
from
 the
Eumolpidai
and
one
from
the
Kerykes.
 71 








 The
first
day
was
called
o9 a0gurmo/j
the
Agyrmos
(gathering)
and
it
was
held
on
the
full
 moon
of
the
fifteenth
of
the
month. 72 

All
grades
of
initiates
and
would‐be
initiates
gathered
 at
the
Stoa
Poikile.


 On
the
day
following
the
Agyrmos
the
initiates
bathed
in
the
sea
near
Piraeus
to
 purify
themselves
and
according
to
an
anecdote
from
Plutarch,
they
also
washed
the
piglet
 they
would
later
sacrifice. 73 

Several
inscriptions
preserve
the
phrase
a$lade mu/stai
“to
the
 see
mystai”
that
Mylonas
says
was
also
shouted
through
the
city.

Plutarch
tells
of
a
sea‐ monster
(perhaps
a
shark)
biting
an
initiate
in
half
as
he
washed
his
pig.

 μύστην
δὲ
λούοντα
χοιρίδιον
ἐν
Κανθάρῳ
λιμένι
κῆτος
συνέλαβε
καὶ
τὰ
κάτω
μέρη
 τοῦ
σώματος
ἄχρι
τῆς
κοιλίας
κατέπιε,
And
a
huge
fish
seized
a
mystic
washing
his
 pig
in
the
harbor
at
Cantharus
and
completely
devoured
the
parts
of
his
body
below
 the
belly. 74 

 
 Presumably
initiates
didn’t
often
have
encounters
with
sharks
in
the
sea
–
but
it
still
must
 have
been
quite
a
sight
to
see
initiates
and
their
piglets
writhing
in
the
harbor.
Properly
 purified,
the
initiates
went
back
to
Athens.

Some
scholars
think
that
the
initiates
sacrificed
 























































 71 
Aristotle,
Ath.
Con,
57.
 72 
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
195
n.
9;
Deubner,
Attische
Feste,
72.
 73 
A$lade e!lasij IG
II 2
 847.20;
e~([[i]
a$lade e[)x]selau/nosin oi( mu/stai
IG
I 2 
94.35
=
SIG
93;
 Polyaenus
Strat.
III.ii.2;
Schol.
Aeschines
iii.130;
Plut
Phoc.
28.
See
Also
Burkert,
Homo
 Necans:
The
Anthropology
of
Ancient
Greek
Sacrificial
Ritual
and
Myth
trans.
Peter
Bing
 (Berkley:
University
of
California
Press,
1986),
258;
Burkert,
Greek
Religion,
78;
Brumfield,
 Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
195;
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
32;
and
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
 Athenians,
62‐3.

Pigs
were
commonly
sacrificed
to
Demeter
and
feature
in
other
rites
of
the
 Mysteries
as
well
as
other
festivals
to
Demeter
that
I
will
discuss
furthering
Appendix
B.
 74 
Phocion
28.3
 
 34
 their
piglets
that
afternoon
after
washing
in
the
sea
and
some
think
that
the
sacrifice
 happened
on
the
following
day.

It
seems
to
me
that
it
would
be
rather
odd
to
put
a
purified
 piglet
back
into
a
pigpen
before
sacrificing
it,
however
there
is
no
real
evidence
one
way
or
 another. 75 

There
is
likewise
no
direct
evidence
for
what
happened
on
the
17 th 
of
 Boedromion.

It
seems
clear
that
there
were
citywide
sacrifices
held
at
the
Eleusinion
and
 performed
by
the
Archon
Basileus 76 
during
the
celebrations
at
Athens,
and
that
this
most
 likely
took
place
on
the
17 th ,
but
the
individual
sacrifice
of
the
piglets
cannot
be
placed
with
 any
certainty. 77 


 The
18 th 
of
Boedromion
was
most
likely
the
day
that
the
Epidauria
was
held.

 According
to
Philostratus
it
was
held
in
honor
of
Asclepius
who
arrived
from
Epidarus
too
 late
for
the
initiation,
but
was
allowed
to
be
initiated
anyway.


 ἦν
μὲν
δὴ
Ἐπιδαυρίων
ἡμέρα.
τὰ
δὲ
Ἐπιδαύρια
μετὰ
πρόρρησίν
τε
καὶ
ἱερεῖα
δεῦρο
 μυεῖν
Ἀθηναίοις
πάτριον
ἐπὶ
θυσίᾳ
δευτέρᾳ,
τουτὶ
δὲ
ἐνόμισαν
Ἀσκληπιοῦ
ἕνεκα,
ὅτι
 δὴ
ἐμύησαν
αὐτὸν
ἥκοντα
Ἐπιδαυρόθεν
ὀψὲ
μυστηρίων.

It
was
the
day
of
the
 Epidauria,
at
which
it
is
still
customary
for
the
Athenians
to
hold
the
initiation
at
a
 second
sacrifice
after
both
proclamation
and
victims
have
been
offered;
and
this
 custom
was
instituted
in
honor
of
Asclepius,
because
they
still
initiated
him
when
on
 one
occasion
he
arrived
from
Epidaurus
too
late
for
the
mysteries. 78 

 
 Pausanias
confirms
that
the
Athenians
gave
a
day
of
the
celebration
of
the
Mysteries
to
 Asclepius,
but
he
doesn’t
say
why.



 























































 75 
Both
Lysias
6.4
and
Philostratus
VA
4.18
mention
the
sacrifices
at
Athens
in
passing
–
but
 neither
gives
a
clear
date
or
an
indication
of
when
these
sacrifices
took
place
on
either
the
 second
or
third
day
at
Athens.
 76 
Lysias
6.4
 77 
Mylonas
also
posits
that
the
17 th 
was
a
day
of
citywide
sacrifice,
although
he
thinks
that
 the
piglets
were
also
sacrificed
on
this
day.
See
also
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
62‐63
 and
Kerenyi,
Eleusis,
60‐62
who
also
says
that
the
piglets
were
sacrificed
on
the
17 th .
Paul
 Foucart,
Les
mysteres
d’Eleusis
(Paris:
Picard,
1914),
however,
says
that
the
Epidaria
was
 celebrated
on
the
17 th .
 78 
VA
4.18

 
 35
 τοῦτο
μὲν
γὰρ
Ἀθηναῖοι,
τῆς
τελετῆς
λέγοντες
Ἀσκληπιῷ
μεταδοῦναι,
τὴν
ἡμέραν
 ταύτην
Ἐπιδαύρια
ὀνομάζουσι
For
the
Athenians,
who
say
that
they
gave
a
share
of
 the
rites
to
Asclepius,
call
this
day
the
Epidauria. 79 

 
 
And
Aristotle
says
that
during
this
procession
for
Asclepius
the
initiates
stayed
inside.

 “πομπῶν
δ᾽
ἐπιμελεῖται
τῆς
τε
τῷ
Ἀσκληπιῷ
γιγνομένης,
ὅταν
οἰκουρῶσι
μύσται,
And
he
 [The
Archon]
supervises
processions,
the
one
that
is
held
for
Asclepius,
when
the
mystai
 keep
watch
at
home”
. 80 
Parke
surmises
the
initiates
used
this
day
to
solemnly
prepare
for
 the
coming
procession
to
and
rites
at
Eleusis 81 .

It
does
seem
clear,
from
Aristotle,
that
the
 initiates
were
separated
from
the
rest
of
those
celebrating
the
Epidauria
–
although
why,
 Aristotle
does
not
make
clear.
 On
the
19 th 
of
Boedromion
the
initiates,
initiated,
and
the
Eleusinian
priests
and
 priestesses
walked 82 
in
a
grand
procession
from
Athens
to
Eleusis.

The
mystai
gathered
in
 the
Kerameikos
between
the
Dipylon
and
the
Sacred
Gate
at
the
Pompeion. 83 
The
Sacred
 Gate
opened
onto
the
Sacred
Way
–
the
fourteen‐mile
road
that
lead
from
Athens
to
Eleusis
 down
which
the
procession
wound.

The
procession
was
led
by
the
Eleusinian
officials
with
 the
hiera
and
the
ephebes,
the
Daduchos
with
torches,
and
a
priest,
the
Iacchagagos,
 carrying
a
statue
of
Iacchos
from
the
temple
that
Pausanias
says
was
near
by.

 ἐσελθόντων
 δὲ
 ἐς
 τὴν
 πόλιν
 οἰκοδόμημα
 ἐς
 παρασκευήν
 ἐστι
 τῶν
 πομπῶν,
 ἃς
 πέμπουσι
τὰς
μὲν
ἀνὰ
πᾶν
ἔτος,
τὰς
δὲ
καὶ
χρόνον
διαλείποντες.
καὶ
πλησίον
ναός
 ἐστι
Δήμητρος,
ἀγάλματα
δὲ
αὐτή
τε
καὶ
ἡ
παῖς
καὶ
δᾷδα
ἔχων
Ἴακχος
Entering
into
 























































 79 
2.26.8

 80 
Aristotle,
Ath
Con
56.4
 81 
For
more
on
the
political
reasons
for
the
inclusion
of
Asclepius
see
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
 Athenians,
63‐64.
 82 
By
the
fourth
century
it
had
apparently
become
something
of
a
problem
that
the
rich
 rode
in
carriages
instead
of
walking,
because,
according
to
Plutarch,
in
his
life
of
Lykourgos,
 Lykourgos
forbid
anyone
to
ride
in
a
carriage
and
attached
a
heavy
fine
as
a
penalty.


 83 
The
Pompeion,
or
Hall
of
Processions
was
a
building
that
housed
clothing
and
other
 ritual
objects
used
in
the
processions.
Demosthenes
34.39;
Diogenes
Laertius
2.43,
6.22.


 
 36
 the
 city
 there
 is
 a
 building
 for
 the
 preparation
 of
 processions,
 which
 are
 conducted
in
some
cases
regularly
every
year,
and
in
other
cases
at
longer
intervals
 of
time.
Nearby
is
a
temple
of
Demeter
with
statues
of
the
goddess
herself
and
her
 daughter
and
Iacchos
holding
a
torch. 84 

 
 In
fact
the
procession
was
called
the
Iacchos
procession
and
the
mystai
called
out
“i0axh!
 i0axh!” 85 

There
has
been
a
great
deal
of
scholarly
(and
even
perhaps
ancient)
discussion
 and
confusion
about
the
relationship
between
Iacchos
and
Bacchos
(Dionysus).

That
the
 two
names
sound
very
similar
may
have
only
added
to
the
perplexity.

Most
scholars
do
 now
accept
the
association
and
blending
of
Dionysus
with
Iacchos. 86 

However,
some
 earlier
scholars
say
that
Iacchos
is
the
personification
of
the
joyful
cry
of
the
mystai 87 
and
 Strabo
says
that
Iacchos
is
a
name
given
to
both
Dionysus
and
the
leader
of
the
Eleusis
 procession.
“Ἴακχόν
τε
καὶ
τὸν
Διόνυσον
καλοῦσι
καὶ
τὸν
ἀρχηγέτην
τῶν
μυστηρίων,
τῆς
 Δήμητρος
δαίμονα:
And
they
give
the
name
Iacchos
to
both
Dionysus
and
the
leader
of
the
 Mysteries,
who
is
the
spirit
of
Demeter.” 88 

And
to
add
to
the
confusion
both
Iacchos
and
 Dionysos
are
call
by
ancient
sources
the
son
of
Persephone. 89 

Burkert,
Metzger
and
 Mylonas
all
see
an
increasing
prominence
of
Dionysos
at
Eleusis
in
the
fourth
century
–
so
 perhaps
the
two
were
once
distinct
and
became
linked
or
perhaps
the
Dionysian
elements
 of
this
deity
became
more
important.
 























































 84 
Pausanias
1.2.4
 85 
IG
II 2 
1078.20‐33;
Brumfeld,
Attics
Festivals
to
Demeter,
195
n.14;
Deubner
73;
Kerenyi,
 Elesusis,
65;
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
66.
 86 
Ismene
Lada‐Richards,
Initiating
Dionysus:
Ritual
and
Theater
in
Aristophanes’
Frogs
 (New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
1999),
49.
 87 
Deubner,
Attische
Feste,
73;
Walter
Burkert,
Lore
and
Science
in
Ancient
Pythagoreanism
 (Cambridge:
Harvard
University
Press,
1972),
279.
 88 
Strabo
X.iii.10
 89 
See
Burkert,
Homo
Necans,
289:
also
Lowell
Edmunds,
Celon,
Knights
and
Aristophanes’
 Politics
(Lanham:
University
Press
of
America,
1987),
139;
and
Kevin
Clinton,
The
Sacred
 Officials
of
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries
(The
American
Philosophical
Society,
1974),
66‐7.
 
 37
 
 The
procession
was
quite
large 90 
and
it
seems
to
have
been
very
joyful,
there
 were
flute
players
and
groups
of
singers 91 
interspersed
through
the
crowd.

The
 participants
carried
bacchoi;
bundles
of
myrtle
leaves
tied
with
either
a
strand
of
wool
or
 held
together
by
rings, 92 
and
wore
myrtle
leaf
crowns.

Along
the
way
the
mystai
performed
 sacrifices
and
dances
and
held
other
ritual
observances. 93 

One
of
the
most
detailed
 contemporary
accounts
of
the
procession
from
Athens
to
Eleusis
comes
from
a
decidedly
 comedic
rather
than
solemn
source.

In
Aristophanes’
Frogs
Dionysos
and
his
slave
 Xanthias,
while
in
the
underworld
looking
for
the
recently
deceased
Euripides,
have
an
 encounter
with
a
procession
of
dead
Eleusinian
Initiates.
 
 Xanthias
and
Dionysos
hear
pipes,
smell
torches,
and
suspect
it
is
the
Eleusinian
 Initiates
that
they
have
been
told
about.
Then
the
Iacchos
Hymn
begins
and
they
are
sure.

 However,
Dionysos,
ever
cautious
in
the
beginning
of
the
Frogs,
decides
they
should
hide
 and
make
sure
it
is
the
Initiates
before
revealing
themselves.

From
their
hiding
place,
the
 two
witness
many
of
the
hallmarks
of
the
Iacchos
procession
as
well
as
the
three
elements
 of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm.

The
chorus
mentions
that
it
will
joke
 and
laugh
as
is
proper
for
a
ritual
to
Demeter. 94 

They
also
sing
that
they
have
just
seen
an
 attractive
young
woman
in
the
procession
whose
breast
has
peaked
out
of
her
robes, 95 
and
 they
close
with
a
reminder
of
their
transformation,
which
allows
them
to
happy
in
the
 























































 90 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
254;
and
Foucart,
Les
mysteres
d’Eleusis,
 326.
 91 
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
66.
 92 
Sch.
Ar.
Ran
333;
Bacchoi
Sch.
Ar.
Eq.
406;
Simon
32
n.55
 93 
Plutarch,
Alcibiades
34.3
ἀλλὰ
καὶ
θυσίαι
καὶ
χορεῖαι
καὶ
πολλὰ
τῶν
δρωμένων
καθ᾽
ὁδὸν
 ἱερῶν,
ὅταν
ἐξελαύνωσι
τὸν
Ἴακχον,
ὑπ᾽
ἀνάγκης
ἐξελείπετο.
Also
Faucart
,
Les
mysteres
 d’Eleusis,
331.
 94 
Frog
375,
389‐93
 95 
Frogs
411‐15
 
 38
 underworld. 96 

These
three
components
of
the
paradigm
appear
and
remind
the
 audience
of
the
play
of
their
importance
to
the
rituals
for
Demeter
and
also
the
importance
 of
transformation
in
the
Frogs. 97 
 Aristophanes’
chorus
of
Initiates
in
the
Frogs
gives
us
a
window
into
the
mood
and
 perhaps
some
of
the
ritual
observances
of
the
procession.

It
is
impossible
to
know
exactly
 what
blend
of
elements
from
the
procession,
the
ritual
at
Eleusis,
and
even
perhaps
from
 rituals
to
Dionysus
(since
he
is
the
god
on
stage
for
this
exchange,
and
the
god
to
whom
the
 play
is
being
offered)
Aristophanes
is
mixing
together
in
this
giddy,
joyful
chorus.

There
 are,
however,
thematic
concerns
and
ritual
events
in
the
passage
(see
Appendix
A)
that
 have
common
characteristics
with
other
ancient
accounts
of
the
procession
from
Athens
to
 Eleusis. 98 


 The
procession
in
the
Frogs
is
clearly
the
Iacchos
procession,
as
the
chorus
 frequently
invokes
Iacchos
in
their
hymn.

They
mention
that
he
is
wearing
a
myrtle
 crown 99 
as
the
initiates
did
in
the
actual
procession. 100 

Iacchos
is
called
the
“μέλος
ἑορτῆς
 ἥδιστον
εὑρών,
inventor
of
the
sweetest
festival
song”
–he
is
both
the
personification
of
the
 song
and
its
author
and
he
(as
a
god
and
as
a
song)
is
the
force
that
will
help
the
initiates
 through
the
day‐long
walk
to
Eleusis.

Many
of
the
other
elements
of
Aristophanes’
Iacchos
 hymn
have
more
to
do
with
the
events
at
Eleusis
(the
nocturnal
torchlight
dance),
or
with
 the
worship
of
Demeter
more
generally
(the
smell
of
roasting
pigs).


However,
the
mood
of
 























































 96 
Frogs
454‐59
 97 
I
will
return
to
this
idea
in
Chapters
3
and
4.
 98 
I
will
discuss
the
Frogs
in
much
greater
depth
in
Chapters
Three
and
Four.
 99 
Frogs
330/1
 100 
Parke,
festivals
of
the
Athenians,
65;

Jennifer
Larson,
Ancient
Greek
Cults:
A
Guide,
(New
 York:
Routledge,
2007),
75;
Kerenyi,
Eleusis,
64;
and
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
 Mysteries,
252.
 
 39
 joyful
anticipation
seems
very
appropriate,
the
mood
of
the
ritual
would
turn
darker
the
 following
day
in
the
Telesterion
at
Eleusis.
 Over
the
course
of
the
day
the
procession
crossed
two
bridges,
the
first
one
spanned
 the
streams
of
the
Rhetoi,
the
second,
the
river
Kephissos.

Each
bridge
had
a
specific
ritual
 associated
with
it.

Rivers
and
boundaries
are
liminal
points
in
any
geography,
but
 especially
in
a
ritual
geography.

They
mark
out
where
something
begins
spatially,
a
city,
 personal
property,
or
a
new
vista.

And
within
the
context
of
a
ritual,
geographical
 boundaries
often
mark
a
moment
when
something
changes,
both
for
the
celebration
itself
 (i.e.
a
new
segment
of
the
ritual
has
begun)
and
for
an
individual
participant’s
ritual
 growth,
transformation,
or
new
beginning.

Pausanias
writes:
 οἱ δὲ Ῥειτοὶ καλούμενοι ῥεῦμα μόνον παρέχονται ποταμῶν, ἐπεὶ τό γε ὕδωρ θάλασσά ἐστί σφισι: πείθοιτο δὲ ἄν τις καὶ ὡς ἀπὸ τοῦ Χαλκιδέων Εὐρίπου ῥέουσιν ὑπὸ τῆς γῆς ἐς θάλασσαν κοιλοτέραν ἐμπίπτοντες. λέγονται δὲ οἱ Ῥειτοὶ Κόρης ἱεροὶ καὶ Δήμητρος εἶναι, καὶ τοὺς ἰχθῦς ἐξ αὐτῶν τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν ἔστιν αἱρεῖν μόνοις. οὗτοι τὸ ἀρχαῖον, ὡς ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι, πρὸς Ἀθηναίους τοὺς ἄλλους ὅροι τῆς γῆς Ἐλευσινίοις ἦσαν, καὶ διαβᾶσι τοὺς Ῥειτοὺς πρῶτος ᾤκει Κρόκων, ἔνθα καὶ νῦν ἔτι βασίλεια καλεῖται Κρόκωνος. The
Rheitoi
are
called
streams
only
because
they
exhibit
currents,
since
their
water
 is
seawater,
it
is
a
reasonable
belief
that
they
flow
under
the
earth
from
the
Euripus
 of
the
Chalcidians
and
flow
down
into
the
sea
harbor.

The
Rheitoi
are
said
to
be
 sacred
to
Kore
and
Demeter
and
only
the
priests
of
these
goddesses
are
allowed
to
 catch
fish
from
them.
I
learned
that
anciently
these
streams
were
the
boundaries
 between
the
lands
of
the
Eleusinians
and
the
lands
of
the
other
Athenians,
and
that
 Krokon
was
the
first
to
live
on
the
other
side
of
the
Rheitoi,
where
now
there
is
the
 place
called
the
palace
of
Krokon. 101 


 
 At
the
streams
of
the
Rheitoi,
the
ancient
boundary
between
Athens
and
Eleusis,
there
was
 an
important,
ancient,
and
somewhat
obscure
ritual.

After
passing
over
the
boundary
into
 what
was
anciently
Eleusis
and
the
territory
of
Krokon
each
initiate
had
a
saffron
colored
 























































 101 
Pausanias,
Description
of
Greece
1.38‐39
 
 40
 piece
of
thread
tied
to
their
right
hand
and
left
lower
leg 102 
by
a
member
of
the
Krokadai
 –
the
family
with
ties
to
the
legendary
King
Krokos. 103 

Deubner
accurately
points
out
that
it
 would
have
taken
quite
a
long
to
time
to
mark
each
initiate
this
way,
and
suggests
that
the
 saffron
threads
were
tied
around
the
initiates
limbs
before
they
left
Athens. 104 

However,
I
 agree
with
Mylonas
that
this
could
have
been
perhaps
a
perfect
point
in
the
procession
to
 rest
and
take
some
time
so
that
the
procession
could
arrive
at
Eleusis
after
nightfall
with
 torches
lit.
 105 
This
was
also
most
likely
where
the
initiates
again
bathed
in
salt
water,
since
 the
streams
of
the
Rheitoi
are
salt
water
as
Pausanias
attests
above.

However,
I
will
return
 to
the
ritual
bath
after
discussing
the
other
bridge
ritual.
 
 The
Kephissos
River
had,
in
antiquity,
two
branches,
one
in
Athenian
territory
and
 one
that
flowed
through
the
Nysian
Plain
in
Eleusis.

It
is
difficult
to
tell
from
the
ancient
 sources
which
branch
of
the
river
hosted
the
ritual
of
gephurismos. 106 

I
think
it
is
 important
to
look
at
all
the
evidence
that
we
have
and
then
I
will
comment
on
the
 conclusions
that
can
be
drawn
directly
from
our
ancient
sources.


 
 Pausanias
in
his
journey
through
Greece
follows
the
Sacred
Way
from
Athens
to
 Eleusis
and
mentions
both
the
Athenian
and
Eleusinian
Kephissos.

However,
he
does
not
 mention
the
gephurismos.
He
instead
mentions
other
monuments
near
the
two
rivers
and
 























































 102 
Bekker,
Anecdota,
273
“Krokou~n: oi( mu/stai kro/kh katadou~ntai th/n decia\n xei~ra kai to\n a0riste/ron po/da, kai tou~to le/getai krokou~n. 103 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
256;
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
66;
 Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
67;
and
Kerenyi,

Eleusis,
65.
 104 
Deubner,
Attische
Feste,
77.
 105 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
256.
 106 
Sch.
Ar.
Plut
1014;
Pausanias
1.37.3‐1.38.6;
Hesychius,
Lexicon;
Strabo
9.1.24
ποταμοὶ
δ᾽
 εἰσὶν
ὁ
μὲν
Κηφισσὸς
ἐκ
Τρινεμέων
τὰς
ἀρχὰς
ἔχων
ῥέων
δὲ
διὰ
τοῦ
πεδίου,
ἐφ᾽
οὗ
καὶ
ἡ
 γέφυρα
καὶ
οἱ
γεφυρισμοί,
See
also
Brumfeld,
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
195
and
Parke,
 Festivals
of
the
Athenians,

66.

Also
Plutarch
uses
this
verb
to
mean
“to
abuse”
in
Sulla
6.12
 
 41
 the
association
of
the
Eleusinian
Kephissos
with
the
kidnapping
of
Kore 107 .

From
 Pausanias’
description
it
is
impossible
to
tell
where
the
gephurismos
took
place.

The
 Kephissos
located
in
Eleusis
does
seem
to
have
more
associations
with
the
mythology
of
 the
Mysteries,
however
that
could
simply
be
because
it
is
located
very
close
to
the
 sanctuary.


 ποταμοὶ
δ᾽
εἰσὶν
ὁ
μὲν
Κηφισσὸς
ἐκ
Τρινεμέων
τὰς
ἀρχὰς
ἔχων
ῥέων
δὲ
διὰ
τοῦ
 πεδίου,
ἐφ᾽
οὗ
καὶ
ἡ
γέφυρα
καὶ
οἱ
γεφυρισμοί,
διὰ
δὲ
τῶν
σκελῶν
τῶν
ἀπὸ
τοῦ
 ἄστεος
εἰς
τὸν
Πειραιᾶ
καθηκόντων
ἐκδίδωσιν
εἰς
τὸ
Φαληρικόν,
χειμαρρώδης
τὸ
 πλέον,
θέρους
δὲ
μειοῦται
τελέως.
The
rivers
(of
Attica)
are
the
Kephissos,
which
 begins
 in
 the
 deme
 of
 Trinemeis,
 it
 flows
 through
 the
 plane,
 thus
 the
 bridge
 (gephura)
and
the
gephurismos,
and
then
through
the
legs
of
the
long
walls,
which
 go
from
the
city
down
to
the
Piraeus,
it
empties
into
the
Bay
of
Phalerion,
it
is
full
 and
torrential,
but
in
the
summer
it
decreases
completely.
 108 

 
 From
Strabo’s
account
it
is
clear
that
the
gephurismos
took
place
as
the
river
was
crossing
 a
plain,
and
from
this
description
it
appears
that
he
is
talking
about
the
plain
within
 Athenian
territory,
since
after
the
river
flows
through
the
plain
Strabo
then
describes
it
as
 flowing
through
the
Long
Walls
that
ran
from
Athens
to
the
Piraeus.

 
 The
Hellenistic
grammarian
Hesychius,
writing
in
the
fifth
century
AD
defined
 gefu/rij
and
gefuristai
in
his
lexicon
in
this
way:
 Gefuri/j: po/rnh tij e0pi\ gefu/raj, w9j tw~n H9rakle/wn: a)/lloi de/ ou0 gunai~ka, a0lla\ a0/ndra e0kei~ kaqezo/menon tw~n e0n E0leusi~ni mustthri/wn sugkalupto/menon e)c o0no/matoj skw/mmata le/gein ei0j tou\j e0ndo/couj poli/taj. –––
 Gefuristai/: oi9 skw~ptai: e0pei\ e0n E0leusi~ni e0pi\ th~j gefu/raj toij musthri/oij kaqezo/menoi e0/skwpton tou\j pario/ntaj. Gephuris:
some
say
a
prostitute
was
on
the
bridge,
like
 Herakleon,
and
others,
say
it
was
not
a
woman,
but
a
man
encamped
on
the
bridge,
 in
 Eleusis
 for
 the
 Mysteries,
 with
 his
 face
 covered,
 and
 throwing
 jests
 at
 the
 esteemed
citizens,
calling
them
by
name.

Gephuristai:
the
jesters
who
encamp
on
 the
bridge
at
Eleusis
for
the
Mysteries. 109 
 
 























































 107 
Pausanias,
Description
of
Greece,
1.38.3‐5
 108 
Strabo
9.1.24
 109 
Hesychius,
Hesychii
Alexandrini
Lexicon
 
 42
 Hesychius’
collected
descriptions
make
it
sound
as
though
the
gephurismos
took
place
 on
the
bridge
over
the
Kephissos
in
Eleusis.

However,
he
is
a
slightly
less
reliable
source,
 since
he
has
done
just
that,
collected
descriptions,
not
travelled
to
or
participated
in
the
 ritual
himself.

He
is
also
writing
far
later
than
either
Strabo
or
Pausanias.


 
 Based
on
the
evidence
we
have,
although
it
seems
impossible
to
be
absolutely
 certain,
I
would
like
to
propose
a
ritual
timeline
that
places
the
gephurismos
on
the
bridge
 over
the
Athenian
Kephissos,
followed
by
the
ritual
saffron
string
tying
and
bathing
in
the
 salt
streams
of
the
Rhetoi. 110 

The
ritual
of
gephurismos
is
in
keeping
with
other
rituals
for
 Demeter
that
engage
in
aischrologia.

Men
or
women,
perhaps
masked,
waited
at
the
bridge
 to
lob
jokes
and
insults
at
the
passing
citizens,
calling
them
out
by
name.

Just
as
the
ritual
 at
the
Rhetoi
marks
a
boundary
and
the
entrance
into
a
new
geographical
space,
the
ritual
 of
gephurismos
marks
the
initiates’
journey
into
a
new
spiritual
space.

The
joking,
playing,
 laughing
at
the
bridge
indicates
that
they
are
no
longer
in
the
world
of
everyday
life,
but
in
 a
Demetrian
ritual
world;
one
that
will
free
them
from
the
fear
of
death
and
a
miserable
 afterlife.

It
would
make
sense
for
the
ritual
if
the
gephurismos
took
place
at
the
very
 beginning
of
the
procession,
as
an
entryway
into
the
initiation
at
Eleusis.

Placing
the
 gephurismos
after
the
ritual
at
the
Rhetoi,
also
poses
some
logistical
problems
for
the
end
 of
the
procession.


 
 The
rituals
at
the
Rhetoi
must
have
taken
some
time.

Tying
a
saffron
string
to
the
 arm
and
leg
of
every
participant
certainly
would
have
been
time
consuming
and
the
ritual
 bath
in
the
salt
water
also
would
have
created
a
delay
in
the
procession.

The
ritual
bath
at
 























































 110 
Mylonas’
suggestion
that
the
gephurismos
that
Strabo
is
referring
to
is
a
ritual
that
took
 place
as
people
made
their
way
back
to
Athens
after
the
rites
at
Eleusis
were
over
seems
 rather
odd.
 
 43
 the
Rhetoi
would
give
the
initiates
a
chance
to
cool
off
and
get
physically
clean
after
their
 long
and
dusty
walk 111 
from
Athens.

Mylonas
interestingly
proposes
that
the
delay
would
 have
been
welcome
because
then
the
sun
would
set
and
the
initiates
could
arrive
in
Eleusis
 by
torchlight. 112 

It
certainly
seems
that
the
initiates
did
arrive
in
Eleusis
by
torchlight, 113 
 and
there
is
nothing
to
suggest
that
the
gephurismos
happened
after
nightfall.

The
one
 author
who
could
have
given
us
some
sure
sense
of
the
timeline
of
the
various
rituals
 carried
out
during
the
procession
is
Pausanias,
who
not
only
walked
the
Sacred
Way
but
 also
was
initiated
into
the
Mysteries,
however
he
was
warned
in
a
dream
not
to
reveal
the
 celebrations
to
the
uninitiated
and
he
apparently
took
this
advice
seriously
and
left
no
 account
of
the
Mysteries.
 Once
the
torch
light
procession
reached
the
sanctuary
at
Eleusis
the
statue
of
 Iacchos
was
welcomed. 114 

Then
the
initiates
most
likely
participated
in
the
kernephoria 115 
 eating
seeds,
peas,
and
grains
out
of
special
vessels
known
as
kernos,
which
had
many
tiny
 cups.

Then
the
women
and
perhaps
men
as
well
took
part
in
a
pannychris,
an
all
night
 























































 111 
Herodotus
says
that
the
dust
formed
a
cloud
that
could
be
seen
floating
out
over
the
Bay
 of
Eleusis
toward
Salamis
8.65.
 112 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
256;
Brumfeld
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
 Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
and
Kerenyi,
Eleusis
also
place
the
ritual
of
 gephurismos
before
the
ritual
salt
bath.
 113 
The
Ninnion
tablet
and
the
representation
of
the
Daduchos
in
the
procession
(Mylonas,
 Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
fig.
78)
both
have
lit
torches.

And
the
Chorus
of
 Initiates
in
the
Frogs,
likewise,
are
carrying
lit
torches.
 114 
IG
II 2 
847.21
The
inscription
details
the
duties
of
the
ἐπιμεληταὶ of
the
Archon
Basileus from
215/4.
 115 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
256;
Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
 67;
Larson,
Ancient
Greek
Cults,
75.
 
 44
 festival,
which
included
singing
and
dancing. 116 

Euripides’
chorus
in
the
Ion
describes
 the
scene:
 εἰ παρὰ καλλιχόροισι παγαῖς λαμπάδα θεωρὸν εἰκάδων ὄψεται ἐννύχιος ἄυπνος ὤν, ὅτε καὶ Διὸς ἀστερωπὸς ἀνεχόρευσεν αἰθήρ, χορεύει δὲ σελάνα καὶ πεντήκοντα κόραι Νηρέος, αἱ κατὰ πόντον ἀενάων τε ποταμῶν δίνας, χορευόμεναι τὰν χρυσοστέφανον κόραν καὶ ματέρα σεμνάν: if
he
the
sleepless
watcher
by
night
 shall
see
the
torch
light
procession
on
the
twentieth
 beside
the
Kallichorn
spring,
 when
the
starry
sky
of
Zeus
joins
in
the
dance
 and
the
moon
dances,
and
the
fifty
daughters
of
Nereus,
 in
the
sea
and
the
eddies
of
the
ever
flowing
rivers,
 dancing
in
honor
of
the
golden
crowned
maiden,
 and
her
august
mother. 117 
 
 The
chorus
is
clearly
referring
to
a
torchlight
procession
and
dances
in
honor
of
Demeter
 and
Kore,
and
they
mention
two
things
that
tie
this
passage
specifically
to
the
worship
of
 the
two
goddesses
at
Eleusis.

The
first
is
the
Kallichorn
spring,
or
the
“spring
of
the
 beautiful
dances”
which
was
in
the
courtyard
of
the
sanctuary
at
Eleusis
and
the
torchlight
 procession
on
the
twentieth. 118 

This
incredibly
beautiful
choral
ode
and
the
comic
chorus
 























































 116 
Ar.
Frogs
342‐352;
Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
67,
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
 Eleusinian
Mysteries,
257;
Brumfeld,
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
195;
and
Larson,
Ancient
 Greek
Cults,
75.
 117 
Euripides,
Ion,
1076‐1086.
 118 
The
torchlight
procession
and
the
dances
in
the
courtyard
at
Eleusis
are
on
the
20 th 
day
 of
Boedromion
because
the
Greeks
counted
each
day
from
sunset
to
sunset
(Mylonas,
 Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
256
n.
151,
Jon
Mikalson,
Athenian
Popular
Religion
 (Chapell
Hill:
The
University
of
North
Carolina
Press,
1983),
59;
Simon,
The
Festivals
of
 Attica,
1983,
19
n.9,
Deubner,
Attische
Feste,
72
n.
7
and
93
n.3
 
 45
 of
the
Frogs
together
give
us
a
taste
for
the
texture
of
the
procession
and
dancing
at
 Eleusis;
it
was
a
mixture
of
reverence,
joy,
joking
and
raucousness.
 The
following
day,
during
the
daylight
hours
of
the
20 th 
of
Boedromion,
the
initiates
 fasted
and
presented
sacrifices
to
Demeter
and
Kore
and
the
other
Eleusinian
deities.

They
 offered
a
large
pelanos
(pelanoj),
or
grain
cake
made
from
grain
harvested
from
the
 Rharian
plain
to
the
two
goddesses
and
other
offerings
of
the
first
fruits
(aparxai)
given
 to
Demeter
and
Kore. 119 

Some
scholars
think
that
at
the
end
of
this
day
the
initiates
broke
 their
fast
with
the
ritual
drink
kykeon,
some
think
that
the
initiates
perhaps
drank
the
 kykeon
after
the
procession
reached
Eleusis
the
previous
night,
perhaps
they
drank
kykeon
 both
times
since
it
was
a
drink
specifically
associated
with
Demeter
and
the
Mysteries
at
 Eleusis. 120 

After
the
initiates
broke
their
fast
the
main
ceremony
in
the
Telesterion
began,
 the
ceremony
of
revelation
and
initiation.



 























































 119 
IG
II 2
 140
 120 
Kykeon,
the
ritual
drink
of
Eleusis,
is
described
by
Demeter
herself
in
the
Homeric
 Hymn.

She
says
that
it
consists
of
water
and
barley
and
pennyroyal
(mint)
HH
208­9.

 There
has
been
quite
a
bit
of
conjecture
over
the
properties
of
kykeon
and
if
it
had
any
sort
 of
hallucinatory
effect
on
the
initiates.

Wasson,
Hofmann,
and
Ruck
even
wrote
a
book
 dedicated
to
the
theory
that
the
barley
for
the
drink
contained
a
hallucinogenic
mold,
ergot
 like
the
one
allegedly
responsible
for
the
Salem
witch
trials
in
Colonial
America.

And
one
 modern
scholar
even
likened
the
taste
to
breast
milk.

I
have
a
slightly
different
theory,
that
 kykeon
was
similar
to
beer.

Beer
was
traditionally
brewed
with
water,
a
grain
(often
 barley
because
of
its
propensity
for
producing
sugar
needed
for
the
wild
yeast
to
ferment
 the
drink)
and
an
herb
for
flavor.

Hops
were
not
added
to
beer
as
a
matter
of
course
until
 around
800AD
(Oliver
2001,
48),
so
the
lack
of
them
in
kykeon
does
not
mean
that
the
 substance
was
not
similar
to
beer.

The
Egyptians
brewed
beer
in
great
quantities
(Samuel
 1996)
(Strabo
17.1.14)
and
beer
was
also
brewed
in
ancient
Mesopotamia.

I
do
not
want
to
 belabor
this
point
since
it
is
certainly
not
necessary
for
my
argument
or,
indeed,
even
able
 to
be
finally
resolved,
however,
if
you
presented
the
three
ingredients
of
kykeon
to
a
 brewer
and
asked
what
they
could
have
been
drinking
at
Eleusis
the
brewer
would
most
 certainly
tell
you
it
was
beer.

It
would
be
a
bit
like
asking
a
baker
what
substance
could
be
 
 46
 One
of
the
largest
frustrations
in
studying
the
Mysteries
of
Demeter
and
Kore
at
 Eleusis
is
that
our
ancient
sources
took
the
vow
of
secrecy
very
seriously;
and
therefore
 most
of
the
sources
we
do
have
are
hostile
Christian
sources
written
by
men
who
never
 took
part
in
the
Mysteries
and
were
hoping
to
discredit
them.

Accordingly,
we
have
to
 tread
very
carefully
when
evaluating
the
evidence
from
antiquity
about
what
happened
in
 the
Telesterion
at
Eleusis
when
the
Mysteries
were
revealed
and
the
initiates
initiated.
 The
floor
plan
and
architecture
of
the
Telesterion
was
very
different
from
that
of
the
 standard
Greek
temple.

By
the
Periclean
Era
it
measured
51.5m
in
length
by
49.45m
in
 width 121 
with
steps
around
each
wall
for
initiates
to
sit
or
stand
on
and
six
doors,
two
on
 the
north,
south,
and
east
sides. 122 

Aside
from
these
six
entry
points
the
Telesterion
was
 completely
walled,
unlike
most
open‐air
Greek
temples.

Close
to
the
center
of
the
building
 was
the
Anaktoron
a
rectangular
enclosure
with
one
small
entrance
next
to
the
throne
of
 the
Hierophant. 123 

It
seems
likely
that
the
Hierophant
conducted
the
ceremony
from
this
 central
location.

What
exactly
he
revealed
to
the
initiates
is
impossible
for
us
to
know,
 however
there
are
hints
from
antiquity.

 Plutarch
compared
the
ceremony
of
initiation
into
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries
to
a
 student
learning
philosophy.


 























































 made
from
flour,
yeast,
water
and
a
little
sugar
–
they
would
look
at
you
askance
and
tell
 you
it
was
bread.
 121 
The
temple
grew
larger
and
larger
from
the
time
of
Solon
through
the
Roman
period.
 Presumably
to
hold
more
and
more
initiates
as
the
popularity
of
the
cult
increased.
 122 
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
115.
 123 
The
Anaktoron
remained
in
the
same
place
through
out
the
centuries
that
the
Mysteries
 were
celebrated
at
Eleusis,
even
as
the
Telesterion
was
reconstructed
around
it
several
 times.

The
throne,
with
the
inscription
IEROFANTHS was
reconstructed
and
situated
by
 I.N.
Travlos.
 
 47
 ὥσπερ γὰρ οἱ τελούμενοι κατ᾽ ἀρχὰς μὲν ἐν θορύβῳ καὶ βοῇ συνίασι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὠθούμενοι, δρωμένων δὲ καὶ δεικνυμένων τῶν ἱερῶν προσέχουσιν ἤδη μετὰ φόβου καὶ σιωπῆς, οὕτω καὶ φιλοσοφίας ἐν ἀρχῇ καὶ περὶ θύρας πολὺν θόρυβον ὄψει καὶ λαλιὰν καὶ θρασύτητα, ὠθουμένων πρὸς τὴν δόξαν ἐνίων ἀγροίκως τε καὶ βιαίως ὁ δ᾽ ἐντὸς γενόμενος καὶ μέγα φῶς ἰδών, οἷον ἀνακτόρων ἀνοιγομένων, ἕτερον λαβὼν σχῆμα. καὶ σιωπὴν καὶ θάμβος ὥσπερ θεῷ τῷ λόγῳ ταπεινὸς ξυνέπεται καὶ κεκοσμημένος. 
 Just
as
people
who
are
being
initiated
into
the
Mysteries
at
the
beginning
throng
 together
in
confusion
and
shouting,
and
jostle
against
one
another,
but
when
the
 sacred
rites
are
being
performed
and
brought
to
light
the
people
are
immediately
 attentive
in
awe
and
silence,
so
too
at
the
beginning
of
philosophy;
around
its
 threshold
you
will
see
great
tumult
and
chatter
and
arrogance,
as
some
ignorantly
 and
violently
try
to
jostle
their
way
towards
the
reputation
it
bestows:
but
he
who
 has
been
born
within,
and
has
seen
a
great
light,
as
though
the
Anaktoron
were
 opened,
adopts
another
form
of
silence
and
amazement,
and
humble
and
orderly
 attends
upon

reason
as
upon
a
god. 124 
 
 From
Plutarch’s
description
it
seems
that
during
the
performance
of
the
Mysteries
the
 crowd
looked
on
in
awe
and
silence
and
there
was
a
great
light
perhaps
produced
when
the
 Anaktoron
was
opened.


Themistius
also
described
the
Mysteries
in
his
essay
On
the
Soul
a
 part
of
which
has
survived
in
Stobaeus:

 The
soul
[at
the
point
of
death]
has
the
same
experience
as
those
who
are
being
 initiated
into
the
great
mysteries
.
.
.
at
first
one
wanders
and
wearily
hurries
to
and
 fro,
and
journeys
with
suspicion
through
the
dark
as
one
uninitiated:
then
come
all
 the
terrors
before
the
final
initiation,
shuddering,
trembling,
sweating,
amazement:
 then
one
is
struck
with
a
marvelous
light,
one
is
received
into
pure
regions
and
 meadows,
with
voices
and
dances
and
the
majesty
of
holy
sounds
and
shapes:
 among
these
he
who
has
fulfilled
initiation
wanders
free,
and
released
and
bearing
 his
 crown
 joins
 the
 divine
 communion,
 and
 consort
 with
 pure
 and
 holy
 men,
 beholding
those
who
live
here
uninitiated,
an
uncleansed
horde,
trodden
under
foot
 of
him
and
huddled
together
in
mud
and
fog,
abiding
in
their
miseries
through
fear
 of
death
and
mistrust
of
the
blessings
there. 125 
 
 At
first
glance
this
passage
seems
to
support
the
Plutarch
passage
above
and
even
give
 more
insights
into
the
activities
of
the
initiates
at
Eleusis.

Mylonas
argues,
we
simply
do
 not
know
how
much
of
this
is
Themistius’
knowledge
of
the
Mysteries
and
how
much
is
 























































 124 
Progress
in
Virtue,
81e
 125 
Stobaios,
IV.
 
 48
 conjecture,
or
even
if
he
has
conflated
several
accounts
of
different
mystical
 initiations. 126 

Foucart,
in
contrast
to
Mylonas,
took
this
passage
very
seriously
and
 postulated
that
there
must
have
been
a
period
of
the
initiation
ceremony
that
terrified
the
 initiates
as
if
they
were
near
death,
and
in
the
underworld
itself. 127 


 Initiation
rituals
and
associations
with
the
underworld
are
particularly
potent
 because
they
provide
a
clear
linear
narrative
of
the
initiate’s
experience:
the
initiate’s
old
 self
dies,
he
or
she
goes
to
the
underworld,
and
is
then
reborn
with
new
insight.

I
am
only
 one
in
a
long
line
of
scholars 128 
to
see
the
parallels
between
a
katabasis
and
initiation,
and
 although
I
do
take
Edmunds
point
that,
“A
katabasis
does
not
necessarily
imply
an
initiation
 nor
an
initiation
a
katabasis,” 129 
in
the
instance
of
Eleusis
a
journey
to
the
underworld
and
 back
would
not
be
out
of
place
with
the
mythology
of
Persephone’s
yearly
journey
from
 Hades.



 What
exactly
it
was
that
terrified
the
initiates
or
represented
a
katabasis
is
 impossible
to
know.

Clement
of
Alexandria,
writing
at
the
end
of
the
second
century
CE,
 claimed
that
there
was
a
ritual
drama, 130 
and
if
there
was
perhaps
this
performance
took
 the
initiates
on
a
journey
to
the
underworld. 131 

A
relief
showing
Demeter
seated
on
a
 























































 126 
Progress
in
Virtue,
81e
 127 
Foucart,
Les
mysteres
d’Eleusis,
382‐3.
 128 
Mircea
Eliade,
The
Sacred
and
The
Profane:
The
Nature
of
Religion
(New
York:
Harcourt
 Brace
Jovanovich,
1987);
Jane
Harrison,
Themis:
A
Study
of
the
Social
Origins
of
Greek
 Religion
(London:
Merlin
Press,
1912);
Lada‐Richards,
Initiating
Dionysus.
 129 
Radcliffe
Edmunds,
Myths
of
the
Underworld
Journey:
Plato,
Aristophanes,
and
the
 'Orphic'
Gold
Tablets
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
2005),
114.
 130 
Protrepticus
2.12.2
 131 
Most
of
the
sources
we
have
for
the
actual
ritual
in
the
Telesterion
are
late,
Christian,
 and
very
hostile.

We
therefore
have
to
use
their
claims
with
extreme
caution.

Mylonas
 even
goes
so
far
as
to
suggest
that
we
discount
these
sources
all
together.
Tertullian
claims
 that
the
Priestess
of
Demeter
is
raped,
as
Demeter
was
(ad
Nat.
2.7)
–
but
as
Brumfield
 
 49
 throne,
watching
as
two
adult
figures,
one
male
and
one
female
(perhaps
the
Hierophant
 and
the
Priestess
of
Demeter
and
Kore)
with
torches
hold
flames
over
a
scared
child
could
 represent
a
possible
moment
of
extreme
initiatory
fear. 132 

Perhaps
the
initiates
were
 threatened
with
fire
or
perhaps
the
“child
from
the
hearth” 133 
stood
in
for
all
of
the
initiates
 and
they
were
all
terrorized
as
the
child
was
symbolically
purified/threatened
by
fire.


 This
is
all
conjecture,
but
the
architecture
of
the
Telesterion
indicates
that
there
was
 a
great
fire
that
burned
on
the
top
of
the
Anaktraton
and
the
smoke
and
flames
exited
 through
a
skylight
in
the
roof
of
the
Telesterion.

No
doubt
this
was
the
source
of
the
light
 that
illuminated
the
sacred
object
or
objects
that
the
initiates
were
shown
by
the
 Hierophant.

Like
so
many
aspects
of
the
Mysteries,
the
identity
of
this
sacred
object
has
 been
the
subject
of
hundreds
of
pages
of
speculation.

Clement
suggests
that
the
revelation
 was
lewd
and
sexual,
Polemon,
preserved
by
Athenaios
(XI,
56)
says
that
the
Hierophant
 distributed
something
that
was
tasted
by
the
initiates,
or
perhaps
it
was
Kore
herself
who
 appeared
before
the
initiates, 134 
or
an
ear
of
wheat, 135 
or
a
phallos. 136 
 























































 points
out
The
Priestess
of
Demeter
was
also
the
Priestess
of
Kore,
who
would
be
much
 more
likely
to
be
the
goddess
who
was
raped
in
any
ritual
drama
that
took
place.
 132 
GRR
plate
45.2.

Nilsson
calls
it
the
“Feuerreinigung
des
Demophon”
(fire
purification
of
 Demophon),
but
it
could
be
the
child
of
the
hearth
standing
in
for
Demophon,
especially
 since
Demeter
herself
is
not
conducting
the
purification,
but
is
a
seated
observer
of
the
 ritual.

 133 
One
child
every
year
was
initiated
in
to
the
Mysteries
as
the
“hearth
initiate”.

There
are
 dedicatory
inscriptions
commemorating
the
children
who
served
in
this
office
starting
in
 the
late
second
century.
The
children
were
from
aristocratic
families,
mostly
the
 Eumolpidai
and
the
Kerykes:
in
the
classical
period
the
chosen
child
was
male
and
in
the
 Hellenistic
period
female.
The
archon
basileus
chose
the
child
by
lot
from
those
nominated
 by
their
families.

For
more
see
Clinton,
The
Sacred
Officials
of
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries
and
 Eleusis:
The
Inscriptions
on
Stone,
Documents
of
the
Sanctuary
of
the
Two
Goddesses
and
 Public
Documents
of
the
Deme;
Connelly,
Portrait
of
a
Priestess;
and
Mikalson,
Athenian
 Popular
Religion.
 134 
Papyrus
d.
R
–
University
of
Milan
 
 50
 Although
we
can
only
guess
at
the
specifics,
darkness,
fire,
and
the
revelation
of
 the
sacred
objects
were
all
part
of
the
main
initiation
ceremony.

The
two
names
given
to
 the
two
grades
of
initiate,
mystai,
one
“who
keeps
silence
or
closes
the
eyes” 137 
and
epoptes,
 one
“who
has
seen”,
also
emphasize
the
importance
of
sight
and
the
revelation
of
the
 sacred
objects.

Many
scholars
also
think
that
the
epoptes
stayed
in
the
Telesterion
for
a
 further
revelation
after
the
initiation
of
the
mystai. 138 

Clement
of
Alexandria
claimed
that
 there
was
a
sacred
formula
that
all
those
who
had
been
initiated
knew

 e)nh/steusa, e!pion to\n kukew~na, e!labon e)k ki/sthj, e)rgasa/menoj a)peqe/mhn ei)j ka/laqon, kai\ e)k kala/qou ei)j ki/sthj I
have
fasted;
I
have
drunk
the
kykeon;
I
have
 taken
(it)
from
the
chest
(kiste);
having
done
the
work,
I
have
placed
(it)
in
the
 basket
(kalathos),
and
from
the
basket
into
the
chest. 139 


 
 This
passage
indicates
that
the
initiates
themselves
performed
some
sort
of
“work”
with
 the
sacred
objects
while
in
the
Telesterion,
and
that
this
work
was
part
of
their
 transforming
experience.


 
Aristotle
(preserved
by
Synesius
of
Cyrene),
in
contrast
explains
the
initiation
in
the
 Telesterion
not
in
terms
of
work
or
learning,
but
as
an
experience
that
produces
an
 emotional
response.

The
initiate
does
not
“do”
anything
but
is
made
to
feel
a
certain
way,
 and
that
this
emotional
response
itself
is
what
the
initiation
was.
 kaqa&per 0Aristote/lhj a)cioi= tou_j teloume/nouj ou) maqei=n ti/ dei=n, a)lla_ paqei=n kai\ diateqh~nai, dhlono&ti genome/nouj e0pithdei/ouj: 
 























































 135 
Hippol.
Haer.
5.8.39
 136 
Tert.
Valent.
1
 137 
K.
Dowden,
“Grades
in
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries”
RHR
197
(1980),
414;
Clinton
Eleusis:
 The
Inscriptions
on
Stone,
50;
Foley
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
66.
 138 
Clinton,
Eleusis:
The
Inscriptions
on
Stone;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
 274;
Larson,
Ancient
Greek
Cults,
76.
 139 
Clem.
Protrep.
21.2
 
 51
 Just
as
Aristotle
thinks
the
initiates
do
not
need
to
learn
anything,
 but
to
experience
and
be
arranged,
manifestly
while
coming
into
a
 suitable
new
state
of
being. 140 
 
 Here
Aristotle
is
drawing
a
contrast
between
active
learning
and
the
changes
that
occur
 during
an
initiatory
experience.

The
mystes
are
not
learning
dogma
but
rather
through
 their
participation
in
the
initiation
they
are
changed
into
the
new
state
of
being
that
is
 required
of
them.


 On
the
final
day
of
the
celebration
at
Eleusis
initiates
made
offerings
to
the
 underworld.

They
used
special
vessels
called
plemachoi
and
each
initiate
filled
two
with
 water,
tipped
one
to
the
east
and
one
to
the
west
while
reciting
a
ritualistic
formula 141 
 which
Burkert
says
was
the
ritual
cry
that
Hippolytus
tells
us
about,
“Rain!
Conceive!
Hye!
 Kye!”
although
it
isn’t
clear
that
this
was
the
moment
Hippolytus
was
talking
about.

On
this
 final
day
the
initiates
would
also
dedicate
the
special
clothes
they
had
worn
at
the
 Mysteries
to
the
Goddesses
and
some,
after
the
dedication,
took
them
back
home
to
wrap
 around
their
infant
children. 142 


 
 The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
 
 The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
was,
most
likely,
written
at
the
end
of
the
six
or
 beginning
of
the
fifth
century
BCE
(650‐550).

Scholars
date
the
hymn
to
this
period
based
 on
stylistic
elements
of
the
poem
and
interpretation
of
aspects
of
the
hymn
(such
as
the
 























































 140 
Patrologiæ
cursus
completus
[Series
Græca],
66.1133‐1136
 141 
Athenaeus
496a‐b;
Hippolytus
5.7.43;
Burkert
Homo
Necans,
289;
Larson,
Ancient
Greek
 Cults,
76;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
279;
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
 Athenians,
71.
 142 
Ar.
Wealth
844‐5;
Mylonas,
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries,
279
 
 52
 temple
that
is
described)
in
the
context
of
the
historical
and
archeological
record. 143 

 There
is
still
a
great
deal
of
debate
about
how
closely
the
poem’s
version
of
the
hymn
can
 be
tied
to
the
cult
at
Eleusis
and
if
we
can
consider
the
hymn
the
“official”
version
of
the
 story.

In
the
previous
section
about
the
evidence
we
have
for
the
worship
of
Demeter
and
 Kore
at
Agrai
and
Eleusis
there
was
one
piece
of
evidence
that
I,
perhaps
conspicuously,
 ignored
–
the
Homeric
Hymn.

This
is
because
I
want
to
look
at
the
poem
as
a
whole,
and
 unpack
several
important
literary
themes
in
the
poem
rather
than
break
it
down
into
small
 fragments.

It
is,
in
fact,
the
only
“whole”
piece
of
evidence
that
we
have
for
the
worship
of
 Demeter
and
Kore.

Everything
else
is
fragmentary;
the
remains
of
the
temples,
the
pieces
 of
pots,
friezes,
sarcophagi,
figurines
and
tablets,
and
the
sections
of
literary
texts
or
 lexicons
that
make
reference
to
Eleusis.

However
the
hymn
is
(almost) 144 
completely
intact
 –
and
therefore
offers
us
a
unique
view
into
the
worship
at
Eleusis,
and
the
thematic
 elements
that
the
myth
in
the
hymn
and
the
ritual
share.
 
 The
ritual
at
Eleusis
is
centered
around
one
major
concept,
the
transformation
of
 the
mystes
and
epoptes
through
the
several
days
of
celebration,
ritual
purification,
and
the
 revelation
of
the
mysteries
in
the
Telesterion.


The
poem,
likewise,
is
full
of
 transformations:
Persephone’s
shift
from
maiden
to
wife,
Demeter’s
flight
from
Olympus
 and
her
mortal
disguise,
her
reawakening
after
her
deep
grief
over
Persephone’s
abduction,
 Demeter’s
revelation
of
her
divine
status
to
Metenaira,
the
destruction
and
then
 rejuvenation
of
the
natural
world,
Persephone’s
return
to
her
mother,
the
creation
of
the
 agricultural
cycle
and
the
establishment
of
the
Mysteries
at
Eleusis.

Many
of
these
 























































 143 
See
Robert
Parker,
“The
‘Hymn
to
Demeter’
and
the
‘Homeric
Hymns’”,
Greece
&
Rome
 38
(1991),
Foley,
Richardson,
and
Janko
for
more
on
the
dating
of
the
poem.
 144 
There
are
very
small
lacunas
in
the
text
at
lines
236‐7,
344‐5,
387‐401,
and
462‐478.
 
 53
 transformations
are
deliberate
manipulations,
either
by
Demeter
to
her
own
physical
 form,
or
to
the
natural
world
through
her
powers
as
the
goddess
of
fertility.
 The
first
of
Demeter’s
purposeful
shifts
occurs
after
the
kidnapping
of
Persephone.

 Angry
with
Zeus
for
giving
her
daughter
to
Hades
without
her
knowledge
or
consent
she
 leaves
Olympus
and
“w!?xet’ e)p’ a)nqrw&pwn po&liaj kai_ pi&ona e!rga ei}doj a)maldu&nousa polu_n xro&non: she
went
to
the
cities
and
the
rich
fields
of
men,
concealing
her
form
for
a
 long
time
(93‐94).” 145 

This
change
is
clearly
motivated
by
Demeter
herself
–
and
in
fact
is
 more
of
a
disguise.

She
is
concealing
her
true
self
rather
than
fundamentally
changing
who
 she
is.

 In
a
very
similar
vein,
she
disguises
her
true
form
from
Kallidike,
Kleisidike,
Demo,
 and
Kallithoe,
the
four
daughters
of
Metenaira
and
Kelios.


 e(&zeto d’ e)ggu\j o9doi~o fi/lon tetihme/nh h0~tor. . . th\n de\ i(&don Keleoi~o E0leusini/dao qugatrej . . . a0gxou! d’ i9sta/menai e0/pea ptero/enta proshu/dwn: Ti/j po/qen e0ssi\ grhu\ palaigene/wn a0nqrw/pwn; She
sat
by
the
road,
grieving
in
her
dear
heart
.
.
.
 and
the
daughters
of
Kelios,
son
of
Eleusis,
saw
her
.
.
.
and
standing
near
her
they
 spoke
winged
words,
“Who
are
you,
old
woman,
of
those
full
of
years?” 146 

 Just
like
the
previous
passage,
this
physical
alteration
is
a
disguise,
a
mask,
to
hide
her
 divine
nature
and
allow
her
to
remove
herself
completely
from
Olympus
and
inhabit
the
 human
realm.

It
doesn’t
change
her
essential
self,
but
is
like
a
cloak
that
she
can
easily
cast
 aside.
 Indeed,
Demeter
effortlessly
reverts
from
elderly
nursemaid
to
immortal
goddess
 when
Metenaira
discovers
the
goddess’s
nighttime
ritual
of
plunging
Demophon
into
the
 glowing
embers
of
the
hearth
and
screams.


 























































 145 
I
am
using
the
Greek
text
from
Foley’s
1994
commentary.

All
of
my
translations
of
the
 Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
are
adapted
from
Foley’s
translations.
 146 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
98,
101,
112‐3.
 
 54
 qea_ me&yeqoj kai_ ei}doj a!meiye gh~raj a)pwsame&nh, peri& t’ a)mfi& te ka&lloj a!nto: o0dmh_ d’ i(mero&essa quhe&ntwn a0po_ pe&plwn ski&dnato, th~le de_ fe&ggoj a0po_ xroo_j a0qana&toio la&mpe qea~j, canqai_ de_ ko&mai katenh&noqen w!mouj, au)gh~j d’ e_plh&sqh pukino_j do&moj a)steroph~j w$j. The
goddess
changed
her
size
and
form,
thrusting
 away
old
age.
And
her
beauty
breathed
all
around
her,
and
a
lovely
fragrance
was
 dispersed
from
her
sweet‐smelling
robes;
and
a
far
off
light
shone
from
the
 goddess’s
immortal
skin,
and
her
flaxen
hair
lay
upon
her
shoulders.

And
the
well‐ built
house
was
filled
with
shining
light
like
lightening. 147 
 
 Here
again
Demeter
is
facilitating
her
own
change;
she
is
the
one
changing
her
form
and
 thrusting
away
old
age.
The
choice
to
assume
her
divine
form
is
her
own,
and
it
is
a
 revelation
of
her
true
nature,
rather
than
a
change
that
impacts
who
Demeter
is
or
how
she
 thinks.
 However,
two
of
the
transformations
in
the
poem
are
not
purposeful.

The
being
that
 is
changed
is
caught
off
guard
and
transformed
in
spite
of
themselves.


These
two
shifts,
 preceded
by
laughter,
are
distinctly
different
from
the
transformations
I
mentioned
in
 previous
paragraphs.
Both
Demeter
and
Persephone
are
subject
to
unbidden
 transformations.

These
changes
are
not
merely
a
goddess
exchanging
her
shape
for
that
of
 a
young
man,
or
a
bird,
as
Athena
frequently
does
in
the
Iliad
and
Odyssey, 148 
or
a
young
 mortal
woman,
as
Aphrodite
does
to
woo
Anchises. 149 

They
are
transformations
that
 change
the
essence
and
identity
of
the
two
goddesses.

The
unbidden
nature
of
these
two
 transformations
parallels
Aristotle’s
ideas
about
the
role
of
the
initiates
at
Eleusis.

That
is,
 it
is
the
experience
itself
that
changes
Persephone,
Demeter,
and
the
mystes.

They
do
not
 intend
to
change
or
learn
to
change,
but
are
passively
arranged
by
their
experiences
and
 come
into
a
new
state
of
being.


 























































 147 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
275‐280.

 148 
Iliad
22.226‐247,
Odyssey
1.102‐105,
Odyssey
1.319‐320,
etc
 149 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Aphrodite
81‐3
 
 55
 The
poem
opens
with
the
rape
of
Persephone.

She
is
introduced
as
Demeter’s
 daughter,
“h$n A)i+dwneu_j h$rpacen, dw~ken de_ baru&ktupoj eu0ru&opa Zeu&j, whom
Hades
 kidnapped,
whom
heavy‐thundering,
far‐seeing
Zeus
gave.” 150 

Her
impending,
unwilling
 transformation
is
her
very
identity
in
this
poem.

Zeus
and
Hades
conspire
and
have
Gaia
 create
a
hundred‐headed
narcissus,
as
a
snare
for
Persephone.

When
the
flower
blooms,

 “pa~j d’ ou0rano\j eu0ru\j u$perqe gai~a/ te pa~s’ e0ge/lasse kai\ a9lmuro\n oi^dma qala/sshj. The
 whole
wide
heaven
above
and
the
earth
and
the
salty
wave
of
the
sea
laughed.” 151 

This
 universal
laughter
occurs
the
moment
before
Persephone
is
kidnapped
by
Hades
and
 transformed
from
a
maiden
to
a
wife;
however
unwillingly.


 It
is
very
significant
that
the
Homeric
poet
begins
the
hymn
with
Persephone’s
 transformation.

There
is
no
time
wasted,
the
laughter
of
the
universe
and
Persephone’s
 rape
occur
within
the
first
twenty
lines.

The
poet
is
showing
the
audience
the
thematic
 importance
of
both
laughter
and
transformation
and
their
link.

This
divine
laughter
 highlights
the
potential
danger
of
laughter;
it
is
not
necessarily
a
benevolent
force
–simply
 a
powerful
one.

The
laughter
of
the
earth
and
the
sea
and
the
heavens
sets
the
stage
for
 Persephone’s
transformation
and
the
reader
can
almost
imagine
the
cracks
in
the
earth
 that
must
appear
if
all
of
these
entities
laugh.


If
the
sea,
earth,
and
heavens
laugh
 everything
is
unsettled,
physically
and
psychically.

And
indeed
cracks
do
appear
in
the
 Nysian
plain
through
which
Hades
emerges,
and
into
which
(in
some
versions
of
the
myth)
 Eumolpus
pigs
fall.
 























































 150 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
2‐3.
 151 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
13‐14.
 
 56
 The
poet
may
be
using
this
scene
to
evoke
the
ritual
joking
and
laughter
that
 accompanied
wedding
ritual.

Halliwell
and
Burkert
both
see
laughter
at
weddings
in
the
 context
of
fertility
ritual 152 
used
to
ensure
the
continuation
of
life.

I
certainly
agree
that
 laughter
was
used
to
facilitate
the
change
from
daughter
to
wife,
maiden
to
mother;
 however
I
think
it
is
useful
to
consider
about
laughter
and
transformation
on
a
larger
scale.

 It
is
necessary
to
look
at
individual
instances
of
laughter
and
then
to
look
for
the
larger
 pattern.

The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
is,
naturally,
focused
on
fertility
(both
human
and
 agricultural)
and
the
transformations
we
see
within
the
poem
mirror
those
concerns.

But
 laughter
is
not
limited
to
fertility
ritual;
rather
fertility
and
agricultural
ritual
are
part
of
a
 larger
group
of
practices
that
call
upon
laughter
to
facilitate
their
desired
transformations.


 After
the
loss
of
her
daughter,
Demeter
turns
her
back
on
her
divine
status
and
 wanders
the
earth
looking
for
Persephone.

Disguised
as
a
mortal
woman,
Demeter
 becomes
the
nurse
of
the
infant
son
of
the
king
of
Eleusis.

When
she
first
arrives
at
King
 Keleos’s
house
Demeter
is
so
consumed
by
her
grief
for
her
missing
daughter
that
she
is
 unable
to
do
anything
but
sit
on
a
stool
in
Keleos’
house.

She
sits,
“a0ge/lastoj a!pasatoj e0dhtu/oj h9de\ poth~toj, unlaughing,
abstaining
from
food
and
drink.” 153 

However
the
maid
 Iambe
makes
jokes
and
causes
Demeter
“μειδῆσαι γελάσαι τε καὶ ἵλαον σχεῖν θυμόν, [to] smile,
and
laugh,
and
hold graciousness
in
her
heart.” 154 

Demeter’s
own
laughter
 triggers
her
transformation
from
a
grieving,
almost
dead
old
woman
(she
won’t
eat
or
 drink
and
is
wasting
with
desire
for
her
daughter)
to
a
nurturing
mother
figure
for
young
 Demophon.


 























































 152 
Halliwell,
Greek
Laughter,
179
n.74,
198,
400
501.

 153 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
200.
 154 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
204.
 
 57
 This
moment
is
the
second
transformation
that
occurs
without
the
prior
 knowledge
and
explicit
will
of
the
character
that
is
transformed.

In
contrast
with
 Persephone’s
transformation,
Demeter
is
transformed
by
her
own
laughter.

And
in
this
 respect
her
experience
inspires/mirrors
the
experience
of
the
initiates
at
Eleusis,
rather
 than
that
of
a
bride
(as
Persephone’s
experience
arguably
does).

This
interaction
is
one
of
 the
most
important
moments
in
the
narrative
of
the
myth.

It
is
Demeter’s
initiation.


 Not
only
is
this
a
significant
moment
for
the
narrative,
it
is
marked
as
a
unique
scene
 by
its
meter.

Richardson
writes,
“
The
line
is
progressive:
first
Demeter
smiles,
then
she
 laughs,
and
finally
she
is
in
a
propitious
mood.

The
form
is
that
of
a
‘tricolon
crescendo’
 [Foley
also
notes
this
tricolon
crescendo].
The
rhythm
at
the
end
of
the
line,
with
three
 spondees
and
a
monosyllable
in
the
second
half
of
the
fifth
foot,
is
unusual”. 155 

The
 crescendo
of
the
meter
mirrors
the
crescendo
of
Demeter’s
mood
and
the
stepping‐stones
 of
her
return
to
life.

One
can
even
imagine
that
the
goddess’s
physicality
reflects
this
 ascent
as
she
rises
from
a
still,
veiled
figure
with
her
head
bowed,
to
a
form
with
rising
 focus,
looking
up
at
Iambe,
and
finally
a
fully
upright
person,
straightening
her
back
and
 laughing.


 Iambe
has
two
roles
in
the
poem;
she
operates
as
both
a
character
and
a
metaphor.

 Her
name
is
the
feminine
form
of
iambos,
a
type
of
poetry
that
is
often
linked
with
poetic
 abuse
and
ribaldry.

I
am
following
Rosen
and
using
“the
term
‘iambos’
to
indicate
a
poetic
 genre,
distinguished
by
content
rather
than
meter,
although
as
the
word
implies,
most
 























































 155 
N.
J.
Richardson,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
(New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
 1979)
222‐3.

 
 58
 iamboi
were
composed
in
iambics”. 156 

This
type
of
poetry
may
seem
a
bit
out
of
place
 both
as
a
literary
stand‐in
for
a
potentially
illiterate
slave
woman
and
as
a
character
in
an
 epic
poem.

It
is
precisely
this
odd
pair
of
juxtapositions
that
should
make
the
reader
pause
 and
take
note.

This
interaction,
a
slave
entertaining
a
goddess,
and
the
character
of
Iambe
 both
violate
the
norms
of
the
epic
genre
of
the
Homeric
Hymn. 157 


 Iambe’s
function
in
the
poem
as
a
character
is
to
get
Demeter
to
laugh,
and
in
 laughing
leave
her
grief
behind.

After
her
encounter
with
Iambe
Demeter
not
only
lays
 aside
her
sorrow,
but
she
is
altered
and
transformed
by
the
experience.

The
verb
that
the
 Homeric
poet
uses
is
tre/pw
–
turn,
divert,
alter,
change;



 pri/n g’ o#%te dh\ xleu/h|j min I0ambh ke/dn’ ei@dui~a polla\ para\ skw/ptous’ e)tre/yato po/tnian a(gnh\n meidh~sai gela/sai te kai i(/laon sxei~n qumo/n: 158 
 
 and
although
the
poem
makes
sense
with
any
of
these
translations
it
is
most
often
 translated
as
“alter
or
change”
when
the
verb
is
in
the
middle
voice,
as
it
is
here. 159 

Since
 the
Greek
can
contain
all
of
these
possibilities,
an
ancient
person
listening
to
or
reading
the
 























































 156 
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
and
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
3.
 157 
I
am
contending
that
Iambe,
as
a
stand
in
for
abuse
poetry
and
as
an
unusual
host
for
a
 goddess
(surely
she
should
be
catered
to
by
the
nobles
in
Keleos’
household)
does
violate
 generic
norms
for
epic
poetry.
In
private
correspondence,
Helene
Foley
has
pointed
out
to
 me
that
she
is
a
bit
like
Thersites
in
the
Iliad.
And
I
think
that
perhaps
the
two
do
serve
 similar
narrative
functions.
They
are
unusual
characters,
the
slave
woman
and
the
ugly,
 lowborn
man,
who
dare
to
interact
with
characters
far
above
their
social
strata,
i.e.
 Demeter
and
Agamemnon.
I
think
in
both
instances
their
interactions
indicate
an
important
 moment
in
the
narrative
–
Demeter
is
forever
altered
by
her
interaction
with
Iambe
and
the
 rites
for
Eleusis
are
born
out
of
this
moment.

Thersites
speaks
only
what
many
in
the
 Greek
army
appear
to
be
thinking.
But
when
he
speaks
and
is
violently
rebuked
by
 Odysseus
he
takes
on
the
role
of
scapegoat
for
the
army
–
who
can
then
laugh
at
him
and
 turn
from
an
unruly
group
of
men,
unhappy
with
their
leadership,
to
a
biddable,
 dependable
army
once
again
(Iliad
II.211‐77).

 158 
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
202‐204.
 159 
See
also
Thucydides
1.140
and
Plu.
2.71e
 
 59
 poem
would
understand
the
palimpsest
of
meaning
and
realize
that
the
tense
of
the
verb
 is
coloring
the
sense
–
Demeter
wasn’t
simply
diverted
from
her
mourning
by
Iambe,
but
 altered
and
this
change
is
what
allows
her,
“to
smile
and
laugh
and
hold
a
gracious
heart.”


 
 Demeter
is,
in
fact,
the
first
initiate
into
her
own
cult.

After
her
encounter
with
 Iambe
the
goddess
comes
back
to
life.

She
is
given
a
new
life
after
her
death‐like
state
of
 mourning
for
Persephone
just
as
the
Eleusinian
initiates
are
given
a
good
afterlife;
and
she
 becomes
a
model
of
female
fertility
as
she
cares
for
Demophon 160 
just
as
her
rites
promise
 continued
human
and
agricultural
fertility;
and
she
begins
to
instruct
the
people
of
Eleusis
 in
the
proper
observance
of
her
rites.


 The
Homeric
Hymn
is
not
the
only
evidence
for
the
importance
of
laughter
to
 Demeter’s
rebirth
from
her
death‐like
grief.

There
are
a
number
of
ancient
references
to
a
 figure
called
Baubo.

In
many
ways
she
is
similar
to
Iambe
and
in
some
versions
of
 Demeter’s
journey
Baubo
is
the
one
who
revives
the
grieving
Demeter
and
makes
her
 laugh.

Scholars
often
point
to
one
key
difference
between
Iambe
and
Baubo:
Iambe
jests
 with
words
and
Baubo
lifts
her
skirts,
using
her
physical
body
to
“tell”
a
joke.

The
two
 written
sources
we
have
for
Baubo’s
bodily
joke
and
role
in
the
transformation
of
Demeter
 are
both
early
Christian
sources:
Clement
of
Alexandria
and
Arnobius.

The
sources
cite
 Orphic
texts
and
although
both
men
claim
to
directly
quote
Orpheus
they
present
two
 slightly
different
versions
of
the
Orphic
Baubo
story. 161 

In
addition,
both
Christian
sources
 























































 160 
Demeter
feeds
and
protects
Demophon
as
any
mortal
mother
or
nursemaid
would.

 However,
she
does
not
accomplish
these
tasks
in
the
typical
mortal
fashion
(breastfeeding
 and
attentiveness),
but
in
an
immortal
manner,
feeding
him
ambrosia
and
carefully
placing
 him
in
the
hearth‐fire
to
burn
away
his
mortality.


 161 
It
is
entirely
possible
that
Arnobius,
writing
a
century
after
Clement,
could
have
used
 Clement’s
text
and
altered
the
Orphic
quote,
although
his
motivations
for
leaving
out
the
 
 60
 begin
their
Orphic
quotes
indicating
that
Baubo
has
just
finished
speaking
and
then
lifts
 her
skirts.

So
it
seems
this
distinction
is
not
really
clear‐cut.
Clement
of
Alexandria
writes,

 A0lwme/nh ga\r h/ Dhw\ kata\ zh/thsin th~j qugatro\j th~j Ko/rhj peri\ th\n E)leusi~na th~j A0ttikh~j de/ e)sti tou~to to\ xwri/on a)poka/mnei kai\ fre/ati e)pikaqi/zei lupoume/nh. Tou~to toi~j muoume/noij a)pagopeu/etai ei)se/ti nu~n, i$na mh\ dokoi~en oi( ghgenei~j: o)no/mata au)toi~j Baubw\ kai\ Dusau/lhj kai\ Tripto/lemoj, e!ti de\ Eu)bouleu/j: bouko/loj o( Tripto/lemoj h}n, poimh\n de\ o( Eu!molpoj, subw/thj de\ o( Eu)bouleu/j: a0f5 w{n to\ Eu0molpidw~n kai\ to\ Khru/kwn to\ i(erofantiko\n dh\ tou~to A)qh/nsi ge/noj h!nqhsen. kai\ dh\ ou) ga\r a)nh/sw mh\ ou)xi ei)pei~n’ ceni/sasa h( Baubw\ th\n Dhw\ o)re/gei kukew~na au)th~; th~j de\ a)nainome/nhj labei~n kai\ piei~n ou)k e)qelou/shj ‘penqh/rhj ga\r h{n’ perialgh\j h( Baubw\ genome/nh, w(j u(peroraqei!sa dh~qen, a)naste/lletai ta\ ai)doi~a kai\ e)pideiknu/ei th~ qew~: h( de\ te/rpetai th~ o!yei h( Dhw\ kai\ mo/lij pote\ de/xetai to\ poto/n, h(sqei~sa tw~| qea/mati. Tau~t’ e!sti ta\ kru/fia tw~n A0qhnai/wn musth/ria. Tau~ta toi kai\ O0rfeuj a)nagra/fei. Paraqh/somai de/ soi au)ta\ tou~ O0rfew/j ta\ e!ph, i$n’ e!xhj ma/rtura th~j a)vaisxunti/aj to\n mustagwgo/n; w$j ei)pou~sa pe/plouj a)nesu/reto, dei~ce de\ pa/nta sw/matoj ou0de pre/ponta tu/pon: pai~j d’ h{en I!akxoj, xeiri/ te/ min r(i/ptaske gelw~n Baubou~ju(po\ ko/lpoij: h( d’ e)pei\ ou}n mei/dhse qea/, mei/dhj’ e)ni\ qumw~, de/cato d’ ai)o/lon a!ggoj, e)n w{| kukew\n e)nekeito. For
Demeter,
wandering
and
searching
for
her
daughter
Kore,
grew
quite
weary
 near
Eleusis,
a
place
in
Attica,
and
grieving
sat
down
on
a
well.

This
is
now
still
 forbidden
to
the
initiates
least
they
should
seem
to
imitate
the
weeping
goddess.
 The
 earthborn
 inhabitants
 who
 then
 lived
 in
 Eleusis
 were
 named
 Baubo,
 and
 Dusaules
and
Triptolemus;
and
also
Eumolpus
and
Eubouleus.
Triptolemus
was
a
 cowherd
and
Eumolpus
a
shepherd,
and
Eubouleus
a
swineherd;
from
whom
the
 Eumolpidae
and
the
Kerkyes,
the
race
of
hierophants
who
flourished
at
Athens.

And
 indeed,
for
I
shall
not
refrain
from
speaking,
Baubo
receives
Demeter
and
offers
 kykeon
to
her,
she
refused
to
take
it
and
to
drink,
unwilling
for
she
was
very
 sorrowful,
and
Baubo
changes,
thinking
herself
looked
down
upon,
and
she
lifted
up
 her
skirts
and
showed
her
pudenda
to
the
goddess.
Demeter
is
gladdened
by
the
 view
and
only
just
then
she
takes
the
drink
and
delights
in
the
sight.
These
are
the
 concealed
mysteries
of
the
Athenians,
these
Orpheus
describes.
I
shall
provide
for
 you
the
very
words
of
Orpheus,
so
that
you
might
have
an
instructing
witness
of
the
 shamelessness.
“Thus
she
spoke
and
she
pulled
up
her
peplos
and
she
brought
to
 light
the
whole
unseemly
[unseemly
because
it
was
not
an
appropriate
gesture,
not
 because
her
body
was
irregular
in
some
way]
figure
of
her
body,
and
the
child
 Iacchos
was
there
laughing
and
putting
his
hand
under
Baubo’s
breasts,
and
then
in
 fact
the
goddess
grinned
and
smiled
in
her
heart
and
received
the
gleaming
cup
that
 contained
the
kykeon.” 162 

 























































 infant
Iacchos
are
unknowable.

Of
course,
the
two
could
simply
have
seen
different
Orphic
 texts
that
related
different
versions
of
the
myth.
 162 
Clement,
Protrepticus,
2.20‐2.21
 
 61
 
 
 
 Clement
leaves
out
(or
perhaps
did
not
know)
Baubo’s
dialogue
in
his
quote
of
the
 Orphic
text,
thus
it
is
impossible
to
compare
it
to
Iambe’s
joking
in
the
Homeric
Hymn.

But
 this
quote
adds
several
interesting
dimensions
to
Baubo’s
character.

She
is
tied
to
both
the
 ritual
at
Eleusis
and
to
the
fertility
and
child
rearing
elements
of
Demeter’s
powers
through
 her
interaction
with
the
child
Iacchos.

For
Iacchos
is
the
personification
of
the
cry
“Iacche”
 that
 the
 initiates
 shout
 during
 the
 procession
 from
 Athens
 to
 Eleusis
 on
 the
 19 th 
 of
 Boedromion,
 indeed
 the
 procession
 was
 called
 the
 Iacchos
 procession.
 
 In
 several
 important
ways
it
also
ties
the
figure
of
Baubo
to
Iambe
in
the
Homeric
Hymn.

Both
 women
are
nursemaids
and
most
crucially
both
women
and
their
verbal
or
nonverbal
 joking
make
Demeter
laugh.


 
 25.1 In istius conquisitionis errore Eleusinios etiam pervehitur fines. Pagi istud est nomen regione in Attica constituti. 2. Qui<nque> illud temporis has partes incolebant terrigenae, quibus nomina haec fuerant: Baubo Triptolemus Eumolpus Eubuleus Dysaules: boum iugator Triptolemus, capellarum Dysaules custos, Eubuleus porcorum, gregis lanitii Eumolpus, a quo gens ecfluit Eumolpidarum et ducitur clarum illud apud Cecropios nomen et qui postea floruerunt caduceatores, hierophantae atque praecones. 3. Igitur Baubo illa, quam incolam diximus Eleusinii fuisse pagi, malis multiformibus fatigatam accipit hospitio Cererem, adulatur obsequiis mitibus, reficiendi corporis rogat curam ut habeat, sitientis ardori oggerit potionem cinni, cyceonem quam nuncupat Graecia: aversatur et respuit humanitatis officia maerens dea nec eam fortuna perpetitur valetudinis meminisse communis. 4. Rogat illa atque hortatur contra, sicut mos est in huiusmodi casibus, ne fastidium suae humanitatis adsumat: obstinatissime durat Ceres et rigoris indomiti pertinaciam retinet. 5. Quod cum saepius fieret neque ullis quiret obsequiis ineluctabile propositum fatigari, vertit Baubo artes et quam serio non quibat allicere ludibriorum statuit exhilarare miraculis: partem illam corporis, per quam secus femineum et subolem prodere et nomen solet adquirere genetricum, longiore ab incuria liberat, facit sumere habitum puriorem et in speciem levigari nondum duri atque histriculi pusionis. 6. Redit ad deam tristem et inter illa communia quibus moris est frangere ac temperare máerorss retegit se ipsam atque omnia illa pudoris loca revelatis monstrat inguinibus. Atque pubi adfigit oculos diva et inauditi specie solaminis pascitur: tum diffusior facta per risum aspernatam sumitatque ebibit potionem, et quod diu nequivit verecundia Baubonis exprimere propudiosi facinoris extorsit obscenitas. 
 62
 26.1. Calumniari nos improbe si quis forte hominum suspicatur, libros sumat Threicii vatis, quos antiquitatis memoratis esse divinae, et inveniet nos nihil neque callide fingere neque quo sint risui deum quaerere atque efficere sanctitates. 2. Ipsos namque in medio ponemus versus, quos Calliopae filius ore edidit Graeco et cantando per saecula iuri publicavit humano: 3. sic effata simul vestem contraxit ab imo obiecitque oculis formatas inguinibus res: quas cava succutiens Baubo manu - nam puerilis ollis vultus erat - plaudit, contrectat amice. 4. Tum dea defigens augusti luminis orbes tristitias animi paulum mollita reponit: inde manu poclum sumit risuque sequenti perducit totum cyceonis laeta liquorem. In
her
wanderings
on
that
quest,
she
passed
through
the
boundaries
of
Eleusis—
 that
is
the
name
of
a
region
in
Attica.
At
that
time
these
parts
were
inhabited
by
 indigenous
 people
 named
 Baubo,
 Triptolemus,
 Eubuleus,
 Eumolpus,
 Dysaules:
 Triptolemus,
who
yoked
oxen,
Dysaules,
a
keeper
of
goats;
Eubuleus,
of
swine;
 Eumolpus,
of
sheep,
from
whom
also
flows
the
race
of
Eumolpidae,
and
from
whom
 is
 derived
 that
 name
 famous
 among
 the
 Athenians,
 and
 those
 who
 afterwards
 flourished
as
torchbearers,
hierophants,
and
heralds.
So,
then,
that
Baubo
who,
we
 have
said,
dwelt
in
the
region
of
Eleusis,
hospitably
receives
Ceres,
worn
out
with
 ills
of
many
kinds,
fawns
on
her
with
pleasing
attentions,
beseeches
her
to
restore
 her
body
because
of
her
toil,
brings
to
quench
her
thirst
wine
thickened
with
spelt,
 which
the
Greeks
call
kykeon.
The
goddess
in
her
sorrow
turns
away
from
the
 kindly
offered
services,
and
rejects
them;
nor
does
her
misfortune
allow
her
to
 remember
what
the
body
always
requires.
Baubo,
on
the
other
hand,
begs
and
 exhorts
her
—
as
is
usual
in
such
emergencies
—
not
to
despise
her
humanity;
Ceres
 remains
utterly
immoveable,
and
tenaciously
maintains
an
invincible
austerity.
But
 when
this
was
done
several
times,
and
her
fixed
purpose
could
not
be
worn
out
by
 any
attentions,
Baubo
changes
her
plans,
and
determines
to
make
merry
by
strange
 jests
her
whom
she
could
not
win
by
earnestness.
That
part
of
the
body
by
which
 women
both
bear
children
and
obtain
the
name
of
mothers,
this
she
frees
from
long
 neglect:
she
makes
it
assume
a
cleaner
appearance,
and
become
smooth,
not
yet
 hard
and
rough
with
hair.
She
returns
to
the
sorrowing
goddess;
and
while
trying
 the
common
expedients
by
which
it
is
usual
to
break
the
force
of
grief,
and
moderate
 it,
she
uncovers
herself,
and
baring
her
groins,
displays
all
the
parts
which
decency
 hides;
and
then
the
goddess
fixes
her
eyes
upon
these,
and
is
pleased
with
the
 strange
form
of
comfort.
Then
becoming
more
cheerful
after
laughing,
she
takes
and
 imbibes
the
drink
spurned
before,
and
the
indecency
of
a
shameless
action
forced
 that
which
Baubo's
modest
conduct
was
long
unable
to
win.
If
any
one
thinks
that
 we
 are
 speaking
 wicked
 calumnies,
 let
 him
 take
 the
 books
 of
 the
 Thracian
 soothsayer,
which
you
speak
of
as
of
divine
antiquity;
and
he
will
find
that
we
are
 neither
cunningly
inventing
anything,
nor
seeking
means
to
bring
the
holiness
of
the
 gods
into
ridicule,
and
doing
so:
for
we
shall
bring
forward
the
very
verses
which
 the
son
of
Calliope
uttered
in
Greek,
and
published
abroad
in
his
songs
to
the
human
 race
throughout
all
ages:

"
With
these
words
she
at
the
same
time
drew
up
her
 garments
from

the
lowest
hem,

and
exposed
to
view
the
things
shaping
the
groin,

 Which
Baubo
strikes
with
her
hand,
for
their
appearance
was
infantile,
touches
 gently.

Then
the
goddess,
fixing
her
orbs
of
august
light,
and
softening,
lays
aside,
 
 63
 for
a
little,
the
sadness
of
her
mind;
then
she
takes
the
cup
in
her
hand,
and
with
a
 laugh,
drinks
off
the
whole
draught
of
kykeon
with
gladness." 163 
 Arnobius’
account
also
quotes
the
Orphic
text
beginning
just
after
Baubo
stops
speaking.

 There
is
no
infant
in
this
account,
it
is
simply
Baubo’s
exposure
that
persuades
Demeter
to
 laugh
and
drink
the
kykeon.


 There
has
been
much
scholarly
ink
spilled
over
the
difference
between
Baubo
and
 Iambe
and
their
joking,
however,
I
think
first
it
is
profitable
to
look
at
the
similarities
 between
the
two.

The
two
figures
are
essentially
doing
the
same
thing.

Iambe
jokes
and
 Baubo
exposes
herself,
however,
both
figures
are
engaging
in
a
type
of
aischrologia
in
 differing
modes
of
communication.

Interestingly
the
key
to
their
particular
“language”
is
in
 their
names.

Iambe
is
the
feminine
form
of
iambos,
abuse
poetry,
and
therefore
naturally,
 Iambe
uses
her
verbal
talents
to
make
Demeter
laugh
and
initiate
her
transformation.

 Baubo
is
linguistically
connected
to
the
verbs

 baubao
mean[ing]
‘sleep’
but
also
‘put
to
sleep,’
and
baubalizo,
‘to
rock
[a
baby].’
 Baukalao,
semantically
linked
to
the
preceding
verbs,
also
designates
the
action
of
 ‘putting
to
sleep
by
rocking
and
singing.’

Two
different
names
of
objects
are
derived
 from
this
verb:
‘cradle’
(baukale),
and
baukalion,
‘a
vase
with
a
narrow
neck
so
that
 it
gurgles
when
emptied
or
filled,’
a
sound
that
may
perhaps
recall
the
singing
of
a
 nurse. 164 
 
 Baubo
is
therefore
firmly
tied
to
the
physical
world,
the
rocking
motion
of
the
nurse
or
 cradle
or
the
humming
of
a
nurse
or
a
vase;
and
as
a
physical
being,
she
uses
the
language
 of
her
body
to
joke
with
Demeter.
 Even
though
it
does
seem
clear
that
Iambe
is
firmly
tied
to
the
verbal
world
and
 Baubo
to
the
physical,
either
gesture
(verbal
or
physical),
makes
the
hidden
visible
and
 























































 163 
Arnobius,
Adversus
Nationes,
25.1‐26.4
 164 
Froma
Zeitlin,
et
al.
Before
Sexuality
(Princeton:
Princeton
University
Press,
1991),
98.
 
 64
 violates
the
cultural
norms
of
female
behavior.

The
gestures
are
part
of
the
larger
ideas
 of
laughter
and
transformation,
which
the
rituals
at
Eleusis
are
working
within,
that
is
the
 three‐part
 paradigm
 of
 laughter/revelation
 (here
 aischrologia), 165 
 and
 finally
 transformation.


 This
literary
initiation
of
Demeter
would
have
allowed
the
ancient
listener
to
have
a
 small
window
into
the
initiatory
rituals
for
the
Mysteries
of
Eleusis.

As
they
listened
to
the
 narrative,
each
person
would
have
imagined
the
world
of
the
poem.
Within
this
world
they
 would
have
“watched”
the
characters
carrying
out
the
actions
that
the
poet
describes.

By
 “watching”
Iambe
and
Demeter
jesting
and
laughing
the
listeners
would
laugh
themselves.

 This
laughter
would
have
been
a
catalyst
allowing
the
listener
to
transform
along
with
 Demeter.
 The
two
major
status
shifts
in
the
poem,
engendered
by
laughter,
ensure
the
 narrative
of
the
poem
and
myth
continue.

Without
the
rape
of
Persephone,
she,
her
maiden
 friends,
and
Demeter
would
remain
on
the
Nysian
plain
gathering
flowers.

Likewise
if
 Demeter
remains
locked
in
her
grief
for
her
daughter
the
narrative
would
come
to
a
 screeching
halt
and
the
cult
at
Eleusis
would
not
have
its
mythological
storyline.


Not
only
 are
these
events
of
paramount
importance
to
the
rituals
to
Demeter
at
Eleusis
and
the
 Homeric
Hymn,
but
they
also
have
important
connections
to
the
ideas
present
in
the
 























































 165 
Some
scholars
have
hypothesized
that
aischrologia
and
other
aischros
behaviors
 common
during
the
various
rituals
to
Demeter
were
to
make
women
feel
more
sexually
 aroused
and
therefore
increase
the
potential
for
intercourse
and
offspring.
This,
however,
 seems
slightly
prosaic.

Of
course
the
aischrologia
could
have
had
this
effect
on
the
women
 involved
in
the
ritual,
although
oftentimes
the
rituals
were
conducted
without
men
present
 or
the
women
would
be
away
from
home
for
several
days,
making
it
rather
unlikely
that
 the
aphrodisiac
effect
of
the
dirty
jokes
would
last
until
they
were
reunited
with
their
 husbands.

This
interpretation
also
takes
the
aischrologia
completely
out
of
the
ritual
 context
within
which
it
is
uttered.
 
 65
 worship
to
Demeter
more
generally.


The
paradigm
of
 laughter/revelation/transformation
isn’t
only
used
at
Eleusis
but
in
many
rituals
to
 Demeter
and
it
tells
us
something
important
about
the
goddess
and
her
rituals.
 Demeter’s
grief,
the
loss
of
her
daughter
(even
in
the
final
resolution
of
the
poem
the
 two
must
live
apart
for
three
months
of
the
year),
and
her
own
transformation
as
an
 initiate
of
the
Mysteries
underscore
her
important
mythical
relationship
with
change.

A
 goddess,
who
is
supposed
to
be
unchanging,
in
the
space
of
five
hundred
lines
must
endure
 the
marriage
of
her
daughter
against
both
of
their
wills
and
renounces
and
then
revives
her
 divine
status.

And
through
this
shift
in
Demeter
and
Persephone’s
lives
comes
the
cyclical
 agricultural
change
of
the
year
that
structured
the
lives
of
the
residents
of
Attica.

The
myth
 is
substantiating
Demeter’s
connection
to
change
and
therefore
her
role
in
the
 transformation
of
the
initiates
and
their
afterlives.

All
of
this
sounds
very
serious
–
and
yet
 the
key
to
unlocking
these
transformations
is
laughter.

Demeter’s
laughter
in
the
moment
 of
her
deep
grief
is,
“the
subject
looki[ing]
at
itself
like
an
abject
object
and
instead
of
 weeping
bitter
tears,
it
laughs
and
finds
consolation
therein”. 166 

It
is
the
moment
of
 realizing
the
absurdity
of
the
ego,
the
construction
of
self
–
almost
like
a
small
death.
 Indeed
the
whole
poem
reverberates
with
change
and
transformation.

Not
only
do
 the
two
main
goddesses
experience
huge
shifts,
the
world
changes
–
twice:
the
order
of
 Olympus
sways
as
Demeter
asserts
her
dissatisfaction,
and
ultimately
mortals’
 relationships
with
both
Demeter
and
agriculture
are
transformed.

Change
as
a
poetic
 theme
unifies
the
many
episodes
of
the
poem
and
for
the
ancient
listener
(and
indeed
the
 























































 166 
Simon
Critchley,
On
Humour
(London:
Rutledge,
2002),
102.
 
 66
 modern
reader)
this
stands
out
as
the
major
concern
of
the
poem.


 
 67
 
 Chapter
Two:
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
 Introduction
 This
chapter
will
focus
on
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
and
the
important
role
 laughter
and
transformation
play
in
this
text.

The
Homeric
Hymns
as
a
corpus
have
very
 little
laughter,
only
the
Hymn
to
Demeter
discussed
in
the
last
chapter
and
the
Hymn
to
 Hermes
have
characters
that
laugh.

Both
of
these
hymns
also
have
significant
thematic
 relationships
with
transformation;
for
Demeter
it
was
initiation
and
agricultural
change,
 for
Hermes
it
is
the
transformation
of
a
child
into
a
man.

Laughter
is
in
the
text
of
the
Hymn
 to
Hermes
and
it
also
has
infused
its
structure.

I
will
look
at
how
the
structure
of
the
hymn
 as
a
whole
can
influence
our
understanding
of
who
Hermes
is
and
his
significance
for
the
 ancient
Greek
audience
of
this
poem.


 I
will
continue
to
use
the
holistic
and
experiential
reading
methodology
that
I
 employed
for
the
Hymn
to
Demeter.

This
model
works
particularly
well
for
the
Hymn
to
 Hermes,
because
the
hymn
is
a
unique
window
into
ancient
Greek
ideas,
anxieties,
and
 expectations
around
boys
coming
of
age
in
the
archaic
period.

And
although
we
cannot
 point
to
specific
instances
in
the
poem
and
correlate
them
to
known
coming
of
age
rites
or
 ritual
worship
of
Hermes
(as
we
could
with
specific
rituals
to
Demeter
in
the
last
chapter),
 this
model
of
inquiry
allows
the
modern
reader
to
encounter
the
poem
in
as
close
a
manner
 as
possible
to
the
ancient
listener.

I
will
also
continue
to
look
at
the
scientific
work
on
 cognition
and
ToM
in
my
examination
of
laughter
and
transformation
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
 to
Hermes.
 
 68
 The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
 Laughter
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
structures
the
stages
of
Hermes’
growth
 from
infant
to
brother‐god
of
Apollo
to
an
adult
god,
fully
recognized
in
his
own
right
by
 Zeus.

In
fact
one
of
the
very
first
things
Hermes
does
after
his
birth
is
laugh
at
the
tortoise
 with
whose
shell
he
will
create
the
first
lyre.

After
stealing
some
of
Apollo’s
sacred
cattle
 Apollo
comes
looking
for
Hermes
and
laughs
at
the
child‐god’s
trickery.

Apollo’s
laughter
 marks
Hermes
as
a
fellow
god,
for
certainly
Apollo
would
not
laugh
at
a
mortal
who
had
 tricked
him,
and
Apollo
then
carries
Hermes
to
Olympus
to
state
both
their
cases
in
front
of
 Zeus.

This
interaction
moves
the
poem
to
the
divine
sphere
(for
even
though
the
narrative
 has
been
following
Hermes
it
has
all
taken
place
on
Earth)
and
Hermes
is
now
an
equal
of
 Apollo
–their
dispute
cannot
be
decided
by
either
of
the
two
half‐brothers,
but
needs
the
 mediation
of
their
father
Zeus.


 Baby
Hermes’
crafty
defense
on
Mount
Olympus
makes
Zeus
laugh.

And
it
seems
 that
he
is
laughing
at
his
son,
so
soon
living
up
to
his
qualities
of
trickster
and
thief.

It
is
 Hermes
coming
into
his
own
as
a
full
god
that
makes
Zeus
laugh.

However,
the
 transformation
from
baby
in
swaddling
clothes
to
god
is
not
quite
complete
until
Hermes
 and
Apollo
strike
a
bargain
and
each
god
receives
from
the
other
emblematic
objects
and
 powers.

Apollo,
not
surprisingly,
laughs
with
joy
when
he
hears
the
lyre
for
the
first
time.

 His
desire
for
the
lyre
and
Hermes’
for
Apollo’s
whip
and
herd
lead
to
their
exchange
in
 which
Apollo
gets
the
lyre
and
Hermes’
oath
not
to
steal
anything
else,
and
Hermes
receives
 Apollo’s
cattle
and
his
characteristic
staff.

Through
each
laughing
encounter
Hermes
has
 grown
up
and
acquired
the
traits
and
objects
that
the
god’s
adult
self
is
know
for.


 The
first
laughter
in
this
poem
is
Hermes’
own
laughter
as
a
newborn,
barely
out
of
 
 69
 his
mother’s
womb.


 
 
 
 ὃς
καί,
ἐπειδὴ
μητρὸς
ἀπ᾽
ἀθανάτων
θόρε
γυίων,

 οὐκέτι
δηρὸν
ἔκειτο
μένων
ἱερῷ
ἐνὶ
λίκνῳ,

 ἀλλ᾽
ὅ
γ᾽
ἀναΐξας
ζήτει
βόας
Ἀπόλλωνος

 οὐδὸν
ὑπερβαίνων
ὑψηρεφέος
ἄντροιο.

 ἔνθα
χέλυν
εὑρὼν
ἐκτήσατο
μυρίον
ὄλβον:

 Ἑρμῆς
τοι
πρώτιστα
χέλυν
τεκτήνατ᾽
ἀοιδόν:

 ἥ
ῥά
οἱ
ἀντεβόλησεν
ἐπ᾽
αὐλείῃσι
θύρῃσι

 βοσκομένη
προπάροιθε
δόμων
ἐριθηλέα
ποίην,

 σαῦλα
ποσὶν
βαίνουσα:
Διὸς
δ᾽
ἐριούνιος
υἱὸς

 ἀθρήσας
ἐγέλασσε

 When
he
sprang
from
his
mother’s
immortal
womb
 He
did
not
stay
sleeping
for
long
in
his
holy
cradle
 But,
he
sprang
up
and
was
seeking
the
cattle
of
Apollo.
 Stepping
over
the
threshold
of
the
high‐roofed
cave,
 There
he
found
a
tortoise
and
gained
boundless
delight.
 For
it
was
Hermes
who
first
made
the
tortoise
a
bard,
 For
it
met
with
him
by
chance
at
the
opening
to
the
cave,
 Feeding
on
the
luxurious
grass
at
the
door
of
the
house,
 Waddling,
going
along
on
its
feet;
when
he
saw
it
 The
luck‐bringing
son
of
Zeus
laughed.
(20‐24)
 The
discovery
of
the
turtle
and
Hermes’
laughter
are
the
beginnings
of
his
evolution
from
 infant
to
god.

The
revelation
that
goes
with
Hermes’
laughter
and
proceeds
the
radical
 transformation
of
the
tortoise
takes
place
in
Hermes’
mind.

The
tortoise’s
potential
is
 revealed
to
him,
and
through
this
ingenious
moment
of
invention
on
Hermes’
part
the
first
 glimmers
of
his πολύτροπος polytropos nature
are
revealed
to
the
audience
or
reader.


 
 Hermes
realizes
that
the
tortoise
would
make
an
amazing
musical
instrument.

 ὡς δ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ ὠκὺ νόημα διὰ στέρνοιο περήσῃ /ἀνέρος,
ὅν τε θαμειαὶ ἐπιστρωφῶσι μέριμναι, /ἢ ὅτε δινηθῶσιν ἀπ᾽ ὀφθαλμῶν ἀμαρυγαί, /ὣς ἅμ᾽ ἔπος τε καὶ ἔργον ἐμήδετο κύδιμος Ἑρμῆς. Just
as
when
a
swift
thought
drives
through
the
heart
of
a
 
 70
 man
when
thick
cares
visit
him,
or
when
a
sparkling
glance
whirls
from
eye
to
 eye,
so
glorious
Hermes
planned
both
thought
and
deed
at
the
same
time
(43‐46). 167 


 
 He
kills
the
creature
and
scoops
out
the
body,
fitting
the
shell
with
a
neckpiece
and
strings
 (40‐50).
The
tortoise
is
transformed
into
the
first
lyre.

And
Hermes
is
transformed
from
a
 baby
to
a
resourceful
inventor.

We
are
beginning
to
see
the
god
he
will
become
by
the
end
 of
the
poem.
 
 After
creating
the
lyre,
Hermes,
naturally,
plays
the
instrument
and
sings.

There
are
 two
very
interesting
things
to
note
in
this
passage.

First,
“θεὸς δ᾽ ὑπὸ καλὸν ἄειδεν /ἐξ αὐτοσχεδίης πειρώμενος, ἠύτε κοῦροι /ἡβηταὶ θαλίῃσι παραιβόλα κερτομέουσιν, the
god
 sang
sweet
random
snatches
as
he
tried
it,
just
as
young
men
taunt
with
double
meanings
 at
festivals
(54‐56).”
The
poet
is
referencing
ritual
joking
and
laughter,
making
a
point
of
 comparing
Hermes
in
this
moment
to
the
young
men
who
take
part
in
sanctioned
 aischrologia
and
ritual
laughter.

This
indicates
that
the
idea
of
transformation
is
at
the
 forefront
of
this
comparison,
because
the
comparison
is
not
to
a
poet,
or
singer,
or
 musician,
but
to
young
men
involved
in
ritual
joking.

Both
Hermes
and
the
young
men
the
 poet
is
referencing
are
supplying
the
two
conditions
necessary
for
transformation:
 aischrologia
and
laughter. 168 

Second,
Hermes
is
beginning
to
build
his
own
mythology;
he
 puts
his
parent’s
romance
and
his
own
conception
and
birth
to
music.

By
doing
this
he
is
 proclaiming
that
his
story
is
worthy
of
song,
he
is
no
mere
mortal
offshoot
of
Zeus,
but
one
 























































 167 
I
am
using
the
Greek
text
from
Evelyn‐White’s
1914
commentary.
All
translations
are
 my
own,
unless
otherwise
noted.
 168 
Halliwell
notes
the
association
of
komastic
performance
and
Hermes’
first
song
in
Greek
 Laughter,
102.
See
also
S.
Eitrem,
“Die
homerische
Hymnus
an
Hermes,”
Philologus
19
 (1906):
252‐3
and
F.
Cassola,
Inni
Omerici
Milan:
1981),
520‐1.
 
 71
 of
the
immortal
Olympians. 169 
This
is
the
beginning
of
his
quest
to
be
accepted
by
the
 gods
as
an
equal.
 
 The
transformation
of
the
tortoise
onto
the
lyre
also
substantiates
in
physical
terms
 the
transformation
from
baby
to
adult
god
that
Hermes
is
slowly
undertaking.

Roy
 Rappaport
writes
about
the
importance
of
sacral
objects
in
the
transformation
of
 individuals
and
in
the
life
of
a
liturgical
community,
“both
the
act
producing
the
object
and
 the
object
itself
are
significant.” 170 

This
certainly
applies
to
Hermes’
invention
of
the
lyre
 from
the
tortoise.

The
act
of
producing
the
lyre
has
several
layers
of
significance
in
the
 Hymn;
is
a
transformation
–
signaling
a
key
theme
in
the
poem,
but
also
this
moment
 demonstrates
an
essential
element
of
who
Hermes
is,
he
is
a
god
who
can
transform,
 objects
and
humans
(leading
them
from
the
mortal
realm
to
Hades).

The
episode
also
 illuminates
his
craftiness.
Since
the
lyre
will
be
a
key
part
of
his
“treaty”
with
Apollo
sealing
 their
friendship
and
assuring
that
the
two
gods
will
treat
each
other
fairly
in
all
future
 interactions.
 
 Once
he
laid
the
groundwork
for
his
immortality
with
his
song, 171 
Hermes
needs
to
 get
the
attention
of
the
gods.

In
order
to
do
this,
Hermes
steals
Apollo’s
cattle,
stealthily
 driving
them
backwards
and
hiding
them
in
a
cave.

In
the
cave
he
makes
a
fire
and
 























































 169 
Of
course
there
is
also
a
very
nice
moment
when
Hermes
in
the
hymn
is
doing
exactly
 what
the
poet
reciting
the
hymn
is
also
doing:
singing
of
the
birth
and
pedigree
of
Hermes.

 E.
E.
Sikes
and
Thomas
Allen,
The
Homeric
Hymns
(London:
MacMillan
&
Co.,
Ltd.,
1904)
 note
that
Hermes
appears
to
be
singing
on
one
theme
while
devising
his
cattle
raid,
“This
 implies
that
he
sang
to
an
audience”
–
just
like
the
poet
of
the
hymn.

 170 
Roy
Rappaport,
Ritual
and
Religion
in
the
Making
of
Humanity
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
 University
Press,
1999),
147.
 171 
Athanassios
Vergados,
The
“Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes”:
Introduction,
Text,
and
 Commentary
(Berlin:
Walter
de
Gruyter,
2013),
4
writes,
“This
hymn‐within‐the‐Hymn
is
 clearly
a
new
beginning”.

Although
he
doesn’t
remark
on
the
transformation
paradigm
I
 have
laid
out,
he
clearly
sees
the
result,
“a
new
beginning”.
 
 72
 sacrifices
to
the
twelve
Olympian
gods,
twelve,
because
he
is
including
himself
as
one. 172 
 “ἔνθ᾽ ὁσίης κρεάων ἠράσσατο κύδιμος Ἑρμῆς: /ὀδμὴ γάρ μιν ἔτειρε καὶ ἀθάνατόν περ ἐόντα /ἡδεῖ᾽: ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὥς οἱ ἐπείθετο θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ, Then
glorious
Hermes
longed
for
the
 sacrificial
meat,
for
the
sweet
smell
weakened
him,
even
though
he
was
a
god;
but
his
 proud
heart
was
not
persuaded
(130‐133).”

This
moment
is
a
slightly
odd
one,
but
it
fits
 nicely
into
the
timeline
of
Hermes’s
quest
to
become
an
immortal
god.

He
wants
to
eat
the
 meat,
like
a
human
sacrificing
to
the
gods
would.

But
his
heart
won’t
let
him,
and
this
is
for
 the
best;
he
needs
to
be
like
the
gods
and
only
receive
sacrifice,
not
eat
the
meat
in
order
to
 be
recognized
by
them. 173 

Hermes
then
returns
to
his
mother’s
cave
to
wait
for
Apollo
to
 notice
that
his
cattle
are
missing.
 
 Apollo
observes
that
the
cattle
are
missing
the
following
morning
and
after
 receiving
an
omen
that
tells
him
the
thief
was
a
son
of
Zeus
(214‐5)
he
hurries
to
Maia’s
 cave
to
find
Hermes.

When
he
hears
Apollo
approaching,
Hermes
pretends
to
be
just
a
 harmless
infant
in
his
crib
(235‐242).

This
deceit
doesn’t
fool
Apollo
and
he
harangues
 Hermes
and
threatens
him
with
violence
(243‐259).

Hermes
finally
answers
Apollo
but
 maintains
his
innocence
and
even
swears
an
oath
to
this
effect
(274‐5). 174 

As
Cathy
 























































 172 Sikes
and
Allen
follow
Gemoll
here
and
say,
“this
is
the
first
reference
to
a
system
of
 twelve
gods,
of
whom
Hermes
is
one
.
.
.
Hermes
is
consciously
claiming
his
prerogative,
 and
is
himself
instituting
the
ritual
which
is
hereafter
to
be
observed
by
men.”


 173 
Vergados,
The
“Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes,”
5.
 174 
This
oath
to
Apollo
and
the
later
oath
that
Hermes
swears
to
Zeus
are
fascinating
 moments
that
many
scholars
have
noted
and
debated,
since
it
seems
that
Hermes
is
 perjuring
himself
to
both
his
brother
and
father.

However
Cathy
Callaway,
in
her
1993
 article,
“Perjury
and
the
Unsworn
Oath”
in
Transactions
of
the
American
Philological
 Association
proves
that
the
oaths
are
unsworn
and
therefore
not
gross
behavioral
errors
on
 Hermes’
part,
but
indicative
of
his
wily
nature
(her
article
also
discusses
other
gods
and
 their
unsworn
oaths).

Judith
Fletcher,
in
her
2008
article
“A
Trickster’s
Oaths
in
‘The
 Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes’”
in
The
American
Journal
of
Philology
contends
that
these
oaths
 
 73
 Callaway
has
argued,
this
oath
(which
is
patently
false)
is
“unsworn”,
as
Hermes
only
 offers
to
swear,
using
the
future
tense
(o0mou~mai
274)
but
never
actually
swears
the
oath. 175 
 
 Despite
the
scholarly
debate
about
this
oath,
Apollo
clearly
recognizes
the
trickery
 of
his
young
half‐brother
and
laughs.
“τὸν
δ᾽
ἁπαλὸν
γελάσας
προσέφη
ἑκάεργος
Ἀπόλλων:
 /ὦ
πέπον,
ἠπεροπευτά,
δολοφραδές,
but
far‐shooting
Apollo,
laughing
softly,
spoke,
‘O
my
 dear
little
wily
deceiver
(281‐2).’”

This
is
not
the
response
of
either
a
boob,
duped
by
a
 false
oath,
or
an
enraged
god
who
has
been
offended
by
perjury.

Apollo
clearly
recognizes
 Hermes
for
who
he
is,
a
wily
deceiver,
and
even
uses
pe/pon
(282),
a
diminutive
 endearment
in
Homeric
texts 176 
indicating
he
is
not
very
angry.


 
 The
laughter
and
revelation
for
the
transformation
at
this
stage
of
Hermes’
coming
 of
age
go
hand‐in‐hand.

Apollo
laughs
as
he
sees,
and
then
names
the
true
character
of
 Hermes
that
the
trickster
infant
is
attempting
to
hide.

The
second
stage
of
Hermes’
journey
 from
infant
to
full
god
is
therefore
complete.

After
the
revelation
and
laughter
Apollo
 acknowledges
Hermes
as
one
of
the
immortals
and
gives
him
a
title,
“τοῦτο
γὰρ
οὖν
καὶ
 ἔπειτα
μετ᾽
ἀθανάτοις
γέρας
ἕξεις.
/ἀρχὸς
φηλητέων
κεκλήσεαι
ἤματα
πάντα.
For
in
fact,
 hereafter,
this
shall
be
your
title
among
the
immortal
gods;
to
be
called
the
King
of
Thieves
 for
all
time
(291‐2).”

This
recognition
from
Apollo
even
goes
a
step
further.

Not
only
does
 he
include
Hermes
in
the
ranks
of
the
gods,
but
he
also
concedes
his
parentage
a
few
lines
 later
(310)—thereby
binding
himself
to
Hermes
as
a
half‐brother.


 























































 are
part
of
a
larger
pattern
of
oath
taking
in
the
hymn
including
the
oaths
of
friendship
that
 Hermes
and
Apollo
take
at
the
end
of
the
poem.
Sowa
is
less
forgiving
and
rigorous,
and
so
 simply
states
that
the
oaths
are
false
oaths
(172).

Allen
and
Sikes
also
believe
that
Hermes’
 oath
to
Apollo
is
a
false
oath
(176).
 175 
Callaway,
“Perjury
and
the
Unsworn
Oath,”
23.
 176 
George
Autenreith,
A
Homeric
Dictionary
for
Schools
and
Colleges
(New
York:
Harper
and
 Brothers,
1891).
 
 74
 
 Apollo
and
Hermes
make
their
way
to
Olympus
to
have
Zeus
mediate
their
 dispute
about
the
missing
cattle.

For
Hermes
this
is
an
ideal
turn
of
events
because
the
 final
recognition
that
Hermes
needs
is
from
his
father.

Both
gods
make
their
case
to
Zeus
 and
Hermes
is
very
careful—he
again
offers
to
swear
an
oath
using
the
future
tense
 e0pidw/somai
(383) 177 
and
this
time
he
is
also
painstaking
in
the
language
he
uses.

“The
wily
 god
has
chosen
his
words
carefully;
neither
here
nor
later,
in
the
presence
of
Zeus,
does
he
 actually
perjure
himself:
he
never
drove
the
cows
through
the
door.” 178 
Zeus,
as
we
might
 expect
from
the
all‐knowing
god,
seems
to
enjoy
both
the
offered
oath
and
the
very
precise
 language.
For
as
soon
as
Hermes
finishes
speaking,
Zeus
laughs
(389),
recognizing
as
 Apollo
did
the
hidden
clever
nature
of
Hermes.
And
then
gives
his
judgment
to
his
two
 sons.


 
 Hermes,
in
addition
to
carefully
avoiding
a
literal
lie
begins
his
speech
by
addressing
 Zeus
as
his
father
(368).

At
the
end
of
the
encounter
the
poet
refers
to
Apollo
and
Hermes
 as,
“Διὸς
περικαλλέα
τέκνα
the
very
beautiful
children
of
Zeus”
(397).

Hermes
has
attained
 another
step
on
his
journey
of
transformation;
his
father
has
acknowledged
him
and
has
 treated
him
as
Apollo’s
equal.

He
is
no
longer
just
a
baby
in
a
cave
who
can
claim
divine
 parentage
without
confirmation.
He
is
the
son
of
Zeus,
an
immortal
god
with
a
title.


 
 All
that
is
left
on
this
journey
is
for
Hermes
to
acquire
his
whip
and
staff,
his
 characteristic
props.

Hermes
leads
Apollo
to
his
lost
cattle,
just
as
Zeus
instructed
him.

 However
the
two
have
an
altercation;
Apollo
is
wary
of
what
Hermes
might
be
able
to
do
 























































 177 
Callaway,
“Perjury
and
the
Unsworn
Oath,”
23.
 178 
Jenny
Straus
Clay,
Politics
of
Olympus:
Form
and
Meaning
in
the
Major
Homeric
Hymns
 New
York:
Bristol
Classical
Press,
2006),
134;
A.
Baumeister,
Hymni
Homerici
(Leipzig,
 1860),
229;
Gemoll
236,
and
Allen
and
Sikes,

The
Homeric
Hymns,
176
also
note
the
very
 precise
vocabulary
Hermes
uses
to
avoid
perjury.


 
 75
 next,
since
he
is
so
powerful
at
such
a
young
age
and
attempts
to
bind
his
wrists.

 However,
the
binds
do
not
hold
Hermes
and
drop
to
the
ground
where
they
begin
to
grow
 (409a‐414).

To
diffuse
the
tension,
Hermes
picks
up
the
lyre
and
plays
it
for
Apollo,
and
 “γέλασσε
δὲ
Φοῖβος
Ἀπόλλων
/γηθήσας,
Phoebus
Apollo
laughed,
rejoicing”
(420‐1).
This
 revelation
of
the
lyre,
an
instrument
previously
unknown
to
Apollo
in
the
narrative
of
the
 Hymn
since
Hermes
has
just
invented
it
earlier
that
day,
and
Apollo’s
laughter
trigger
the
 final
stage
of
Hermes’
transformation;
a
trade
between
the
two
gods.

They
agree
that
 Hermes
will
give
Apollo
the
lyre
and
Apollo
in
turn
will
give
Hermes
his
whip,
and
also
 name
him
Keeper
of
the
Herds
(498).

The
two
then
return
to
Olympus,
where
Zeus
makes
 them
friends
(506‐7)
and
Apollo
gives
Hermes
a
golden,
three‐branched
staff
(530).


 
 The
moments
of
laughter,
each
coming
after
a
revelation,
all
mark
important
 transitions
in
Hermes’
quest
to
become
a
god.

By
the
end
of
the
poem
Hermes’
true
nature
 has
been
revealed,
he
has
been
recognized
as
a
god,
son
of
Zeus,
and
he
has
obtained
the
 two
props
that
he
is
known
for
both
in
literature
and
in
pictorial
representations
on
 architectural
decorations
and
pottery.

Hermes
has
come
of
age.
 The
instances
of
laughter
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
are
not
the
only
unusual
 aspects
of
the
Hymn.
The
overall
structure
and
tone
of
the
hymn
have
received
quite
a
bit
 of
scholarly
attention.

Many
scholars
feel
that
the
tone
is
too
base,
and
that
the
narrative
is
 too
choppy. 179 

As
Johnston
writes,
“Textual
critics
have
run
wild,
excising
or
rearranging
 portions
in
attempts
to
impose
thematic
unity.” 180 

The
text
is
certainly
more
humorous
 























































 179 
Allen,
Halliday
and
Sikes,
The
Homeric
Hymns
(Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press,
1936),
 Sarah
Iles
Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet:
The
“Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes”
and
Its
 Performative
Context,”
Classics
Philology
97
(2002)
110.
 180 
Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet,”
109.
 
 76
 and
episodic
than
many
of
the
other
Homeric
Hymns.

However,
perhaps
this
is
 purposeful
and
the
poet
wants
the
audience
to
learn
something
about
Hermes
from
the
 structure
of
the
hymn
as
well
as
the
narrative.
 I
agree
with
Radermacher,
Janko,
and
Richardson
that
perhaps
the
text
is
more
like
 a
comedy.

Old
Comedy
is
often
episodic
and
while
most
of
the
hymns
describe
one
event
in
 a
god
or
goddess’
mythology
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
attempts
to
account
for
 numerous
stories
about
Hermes,
his
inventions,
and
his
characteristic
personality
traits
 and
props.

Richardson
even
believes
that
we
should
view
the
text
as
a
“forerunner
of
later
 comedic
genres.” 181 
 If
we
look
at
the
hymn
as
a
comedic
text
it
would
certainly
help
account
for
all
the
 laughter
and
why
Apollo
and
Hermes
are
both
treated
with
a
mixture
of
reverence
and
 derision.

This
explanation
of
the
structure
of
the
text
would
also
help
explain
the
oracular
 fart
or
burp
(there
has
been
quite
a
bit
of
debate
as
to
which
it
is)
that
Hermes
emits
when
 Apollo
first
picks
him
up
from
his
cradle
(295‐6).

A
proto‐comedy
could
easily
get
away
 with
poking
fun
at
Zeus’
two
sons
and
using
scatological
humor.

The
hymn
therefore
does
 not
simply
lay
out
the
attributes
of
the
god
it
is
celebrating
or
give
an
episodic
list
of
his
 exploits
as
Allen,
Halliday,
and
Sikes
charge,
but
the
generic
elements
of
the
text
give
the
 listener
the
essence
of
the
character
of
the
god
himself.

“Rather
than
simply
repeating
the
 messages
that
a
ritual
conveys,
a
myth
may
ensure
that
they
are
delivered
in
their
full
 























































 181 
Nicholas
Richardson,
Three
Homeric
Hymns:
To
Apollo,
Hermes,
and
Aphrodite
 (Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
2010),
19.
Of
course,
not
all
comedy
is
episodic,
 but
it
is
often
a
feature
of
Old
Comedy.

The
episodic
nature
of
the
Hymn
and
the
laughter
in
 the
text
point
to
an
affinity
with
comedy.
 
 77
 complexity.” 182 

The
myth
underscores
Hermes’
nature
in
both
its
form
and
its
subject
 matter.
 
 













Hermaia
and
coming­of­age
 There
is
little
evidence
for
the
worship
of
Hermes
in
the
ancient
world.

The
 Hermaia,
athletic
competitions
for
young
men
are
the
most
well
attested
festivals
to
 Hermes
who
otherwise
is
most
often
worshiped
at
festivals
in
conjunction
with
other
 gods. 183 

“Athletic
festivals
called
Hermaia,
which
eventually
were
celebrated
all
over
the
 Greek
world,
particularly
stress
Hermes’
connection
to
maturing
males
in
this
setting,
for
 cases
where
we
have
more
than
a
passing
reference
to
Hermaia,
it
becomes
clear
that
they
 focused
on
pai~dej, neani/skoi, ne/oi, and
e!fhboi.” 184 

Therefore
the
only
festivals
that
we
 know
of
that
were
dedicated
solely
to
Hermes
are
for
young
men
to
prove
their
physical
 strength
and
athletic
endurance.



 The
Hermaia
and
their
concerns
of
athletic
prowess,
which
are
not
frivolous
 concerns
for
a
society
that
relied
on
its
citizen
army
to
defend
its
land
and
economic
 























































 182 
Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet,”
111.
 183 
The
Anthesteria
is
a
good
example
of
this.

Although
the
three‐day
festival
is
mostly
in
 honor
of
Dionysos,
some
sources
tell
us
that
on
the
third
day
(Pot
Day)
Hermes
is
offered
 the
food
cooked
in
the
pots.

However,
it
is
unclear
if
Hermes
is
a
later
addition
to
this
 festival
or
if
the
Anthesteria
and
an
older
festival
to
Hermes
were
on
the
same
days
and
 over
time
the
two
distinct
festivals
became
one
and
both
observances
continued
in
a
 confusing
(for
the
historian)
hodgepodge.


 184 
Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet,”
116.
See
also
Aeschines
1.10,
Plato
Lys
206d,
and
 Jon
Mikalson,
religion
in
Hellenistic
Athens
(Berkley:
University
of
California
Press,
1998).

 Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet,”
115,
notes
the
pictorial
evidence
from
Attic
vases
from
 the
6 th 
century
BCE
onward
of
Hermes’
interest
in
the
maturation
of
young
males.

See
also
 G.
Baudy,
Hermes
(Stuttgart,
1998);
G.
Costa,
“Hermes
dio
delle
iniziazioni”
CCC
3
(1982);
 and
Ph.
Gauthier
and
M.
B.
Hatzopoulos,
“La
Loi
gymnasiarchique
de
Beroia”
Melemata
16
 (1993).
 
 78
 interests,
mirror
the
concerns
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes.

Hermes’
raid
on
Apollo’s
 cattle
did
not
reflect
current
coming‐of‐age
rituals
in
archaic
Greece
when
it
was
 composed. 185 

But
the
anxieties
are
the
same:
are
the
young
men
mature
enough,
physically
 and
mentally
to
inherit
the
control
of
a
society.

Under
the
watchful
eye
of
Hermes,
young
 men
attempted
to
prove
that
they
were
ready
and
able
to
navigate
the
transformation
from
 child
to
man. 186 


 Johnston
argues
very
convincingly
that
the
poem
could
have
been
a
part
of
the
 Hermaia
since
the
myth
and
the
ritual
are
so
closely
tied
in
their
attention
to
the
coming
of
 age
of
young
men.

“In
the
climate
of
boys’
and
young
men’s
festivals
such
as
the
Hermaia,
a
 story
of
maturation
would
have
rung
true
in
the
same
way
that
the
stories
about
 mythological
and
historical
heroes
rang
true
when
sung
by
young
men
at
symposia.” 187 
 Whether
or
not
the
poem
was
recited
at
the
Hermaia,
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
has
 quite
a
bit
in
common
with
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
since
both
inspire
in
their
 listener
the
feelings
and
anxieties
that
the
rituals
to
their
titular
gods
also
stir.
 This
is
where
ToM
(theory
of
mind)
plays
an
important
role
in
our
understanding
of
 the
poem
and
its
relationship
with
the
rituals
to
Hermes
concerning
young
men.

Like
a
 person
listening
to
the
Hymn
to
Demeter,
mirror
neurons
and
the
visual,
imaginative
 element
of
the
mind
that
one
uses
when
listening
to
a
narrative
would
create
the
“world”
of
 























































 185 

The
Hymn
is
usually
dated
to
the
late
6 th 
century
BCE.

In
private
correspondence
 Helene
Foley
has
also
pointed
out
to
me
that
Nestor’s
story
in
Book
11
(670‐82)
of
the
Iliad
 seems
to
imply
that
cattle
raiding
was
part
of
the
coming
of
age
tradition.
Or
at
least
it
was
 when
he
was
young.
 186 
For
more
on
athletic
competition
and
maturation
see
A.
Brelich,
Paides
e
Parthenoi
 (Rome,
1969)
450‐6;
M.
Dickie,
“Phaeacia
Athletics”
Papers
of
the
Liverpool
Latin
Seminar
4
 (1984);
and
H.
Jeanmarie,
Couroi
et
Couretes
(Lille,
1939),
413‐8.
 187 
Johnston,
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet,”
119.
 
 79
 the
poem
in
the
listener’s
head.

While
listening
to
and
visualizing
the
actions
of
Hermes
 and
the
other
gods
the
listener
would
have
a
neural
response
to
the
actions
they
“watched”
 the
characters
in
the
poem
perform.

In
fact,
this
level
of
active
engagement
is
not
even
 necessary.

In
order
for
sense
making
to
work
all
the
listener
needs
to
“do”
is
to
experience
 the
emotions
of
the
character
with
whom
they
identify.
This
neural
response
to
actions
 actually
creates
the
same
reaction
in
the
brain
as
it
would
if
the
listener/watcher
were
 performing
the
actions
themselves.

(Remember
this
is
part
of
what
makes
religious
rituals
 so
engaging
–
even
watching
them
the
worshipper
feels
as
if
they
are
carrying
out
the
 actions
of
the
priest
or
priestess.) 188 

 If
the
ancient
person
listening
to
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
experienced
the
 action
of
the
poem
along
with
the
young
god,
they
would
have
been
taken
on
a
journey
of
 initiation
and
transformation.

Even
though
most
Greeks
didn’t
practice
cattle
raiding
as
an
 initiatory
ritual 189 
the
exhilaration,
fear,
and
anxiety
that
Hermes
feels
in
the
poem
would
 have
been
palpable
to
the
poem’s
audience.

Those
emotions
would
also
mirror
the
feelings
 of
the
young
men
who
participated
in
the
athletic
contests
of
the
Hermaia. 190 
But
anyone
 listening
has
a
sense
of
the
metaphorical
journey
from
boyhood
to
adulthood.


 Gallese,
Lakoff,
and
Glenberg’s
discovery
that
the
Mirror
Mechanism
not
only
works
 when
a
person
observes
an
action
in
real
time
(like
a
ritual)
but
also
works
with
action
 























































 188 
See
more
detailed
explanation
in
Chapter
One
and
also
Goldman,
Theory
of
Mind,
11
and
 Whitehouse,
Modes
of
Religiosity,
65‐74.
 189 
For
modern
cattle
raiding
and
coming
of
age
on
Crete
see
Michael
Herzfeld,
The
Poetics
 of
Manhood:
Contest
and
Identity
in
a
Cretan
Mountain
Village
(Princeton:
Princeton
 University
Press,
1988).
 190 
I
am
not
making
any
claims
that
the
poem
was
recited
at
the
Hermaia,
there
is
simply
no
 evidence
either
way,
but
I
do
agree
with
Johnston
that
these
festivals
to
Hermes
would
 have
been
a
very
appropriate
moment
for
the
performance
of
the
Hymn.


 
 80
 words
as
a
person
imagines
an
action
(as
when
a
person
listens
to
a
narrative
and
 animates
the
story
in
their
own
mind)
means
that
not
only
did
the
poem’s
audience
feel
the
 emotions
of
the
characters,
they
also
had
an
embodied
sense
of
the
action.

Their
brains
 experienced
Hermes’
cattle
raid
in
the
same
way
their
brains
remembered
actions
the
 audience
member
had
accomplished
with
his
or
her
own
body.

Even
though
Hermes’
 initiatory
experience
in
the
Hymn
was
not
what
a
sixth
or
fifth
century
Greek
boy
would
 have
undertaken
(first
because
Hermes
is
a
god
and
second
because
cattle
raiding
was
not
 practiced
in
mainland
Greece,
at
least
by
this
time);
a
young
man
hearing
this
poem,
no
 matter
the
setting,
would
have
an
embodied
sense
of
cattle
raiding
as
well
as
an
emotional
 impression
of
what
that
initiation
would
have
been
like.

 Classical
Athens
did
not
have
any
initiation
rituals
for
ephebes,
instead
all
young
 men
served
in
the
military
for
a
period
of
time
defending
the
polis
from
her
enemies. 191 

 However,
many
scholars
believe
that
Apollo
had
a
very
close
relationship
with
ephebic
 transformation
before
the
classical
period.

Walter
Burkert,
in
his
1975
article
revitalized
a
 theory
of
the
connection
between
Apollo’s
Doric
name
Apellon,
the
month
of
Apellaios
and
 the
Apellaia,
ceremonies
in
which
young
men
were
ritually
introduced
to
the
adult
male
 community. 192 

He
was
drawing
on
the
work
of
Jane
Harrison
on
representations
of
Apollo
 as
a
young
man
with
unshorn
hair,
which
she
connected
to
an
ephebe
about
to
undergo
 ritual
hair‐cutting
as
part
of
his
initiation. 193 

Burkert
further
developed
this
argument
in
 























































 191 
See
Pierre
Vidal‐Naquet
and
Jean‐Pierre
Vernant,
Mythe
et
Tragedie
en
Grece
ancienne
 (Paris:
La
Decouverte,
1986).
 192 
Anton
Bierl,
“Apollo
in
Greek
Tragedy:
Orestes
and
the
God
of
Initiation,”
in
Apollo:
 Origins
and
Influences,
ed.
Jon
Solomon
(Tuscon:
The
University
of
Arizona
Press,
1994),
 84‐5.
 193 
For
more
on
this,
see
Harrison,
Themis,
1912.
 
 81
 Greek
Religion
and
Versnel
built
on
this
work
even
further
to
show
many
disparate
 aspects
of
Apollo’s
sphere
of
influence
connect
back
to
his
role
as
an
ephebic
god. 194 
 Hermes’
relationship
with
Apollo
in
the
Hymn
is
therefore
even
deeper
than
two
 brothers
finding
their
balance
of
powers
and
jockeying
for
their
father’s
attention
and
 affection.

Apollo
is
Hermes’
guide
through
the
journey
from
boyhood
to
the
company
of
 adult
men.

He
even
accompanies
Hermes
as
he
goes
to
Olympus
for
the
first
time
and
is
 presented
to
all
the
gods,
most
importantly
Zeus,
whose
approval
and
acknowledgment
 Hermes
needs
to
join
the
Olympian
ranks.


The
initiatory
aspect
of
the
poem
would
not
be
 as
clear
if
Hermes
was
raiding
the
cattle
of
Ares
or
Dionysos
and
forcing
them
to
bring
him
 to
Zeus
for
arbitration.
 As
a
coming
of
age
poem
the
Hymn’s
primary
focus
is
the
transformation
of
Hermes
 from
a
newborn
to
an
Olympian
god.

This
transformation
is
facilitated
through
revelation
 and
laughter,
like
the
initiatory
transformation
at
Eleusis.

This
paradigm
was,
therefore,
 part
of
a
larger
idea
about
laughter
and
the
power
it
wielded
in
the
Greek
world;
it
was
not
 simply
a
notable
phenomenon
in
the
Eleusinian
cult
to
Demeter,
but
has
larger
application.

 Laughter,
in
circumstances
when
it
is
accompanied
by
a
revelation
seems
to
lead
to
 transformation.

And
the
Homeric
poet,
when
composing
a
song
that
is
supposed
to
tell
its
 audience
about
the
essential
nature
of
a
god
or
goddess
used
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
over
and
over
to
tell
his
audience
that
 Hermes
is
a
god
of
transformation.

The
paradigm
is
a
signpost
to
indicate
one
of
the
most
 important
characteristics
of
Hermes
–
and
therefore
the
relationship
between
laughter,
 revelation,
and
transformation
must
have
been
a
widely
understood
and
accepted
concept.


 























































 194 
Bierl,
“Apollo
in
Greek
Tragedy,”
1994.
 
 82
 
 












Hermes
the
psychopomp
 Although
the
poem
tells
the
story
of
Hermes’
transformation
from
boy
to
adult
male
 god,
this
was
not
the
only
transformation
that
Hermes
was
concerned
with.

Hermes
was
 most
often
represented
on
pottery 195 
as
an
adult
god
in
one
of
his
two
main
roles:
 psychopomp
or
messenger.

As
the
psychopomp
he
was
in
charge
of
leading
moral
souls
 from
the
realm
of
the
living
to
the
afterlife
in
Hades.

He
was
also
often
pictured
on
vases
 portraying
Herakles’,
Odysseus’,
or
Orpheus’
heroic
journeys
to
the
underworld
before
 their
deaths
and
Persephone’s
return
from
Hades
to
Demeter
in
the
spring.


 The
journey
to
the
underworld
is
perhaps
the
most
profound
transformation
in
a
 human
being’s
lifecycle
and
Hermes
is
at
the
center
of
this
momentous
change.

Between
 death
and
coming
of
age,
Hermes
was
the
guide
and
witness
to
two
of
the
most
important
 changes
of
a
Greek
man’s
life.

His
essential
nature
is
completely
bound
up
with
 transformation;
and
to
illustrate
this
fact
the
Homeric
poet
used
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm.

The
paradigm
was
such
a
culturally
 understood
phenomenon
that
it
could
be
used
to
communicate
an
idea
to
a
Greek
audience.
 Hermes’
ability
to
travel
between
worlds
was
not
limited
to
his
role
as
psychopomp.

 He
also
served
as
Zeus’
messenger
–
carrying
his
father’s
directives
from
Olympus,
the
 realm
of
the
immortals,
to
the
mortal
world.

Of
course
the
other
gods
can
and
do
move
 between
these
two
planes
of
existence,
however
Hermes
makes
this
journey
with
greater
 frequency
than
any
other
god.

He
also
is
one
of
the
only
gods
to
regularly
negotiate
the
 























































 195 
This
assertion
is
based
on
my
research
in
the
Beazley
Archive
looking
at
over
two
 thousand
images.


 
 83
 passage
between
the
mortal
or
immortal
world
and
Hades.

In
fact,
most
of
the
 immortals,
other
than
Persephone,
never
go
to
Hades.

Hermes
facility
with
transformation
 seems
to
enable
him
to
move
between
realms
with
ease.


 This
ability
to
cross
boundaries
and
navigate
liminal
spaces
can
even
be
seen
in
the
 etymology
of
the
god’s
name
–
herma,
“a
pile
of
stones”.

These
stone
piles
were
used
to
 demarcate
boundaries
“between
fields
or
territories”. 196 
Hermes
not
only
negotiates
the
 metaphysical
boundaries
between
the
worlds
of
gods,
the
living,
and
the
dead,
but
also
 plays
a
role
in
physical
boundaries
in
the
everyday
life
of
archaic
Greek
people.

His
 protection
can
help
cross
or
maintain
a
border. 197 
 
 













Hermes
and
Odysseus
 Hermes’
close
relationship
with
transformation
is
illustrated
in
an
episode
of
the
 Odyssey
when
he
makes
it
possible
for
Odysseus
to
avoid
a
transformation.

In
Book
Ten,
 Odysseus
and
his
remaining
men,
recently
escaped
from
the
cave
of
the
Cyclops
and
the
 massacre
of
their
comrades
by
the
Laestrygonians,
land
on
Circe’s
island.

They
draw
lots
 and
a
company
of
the
men
set
off
to
investigate
the
large
house
Odysseus
has
discovered
 and
its
mistress.

Circe
invites
the
men
in
and
they
eagerly
accept,
except
the
wise
 Eurylochus
who
hides.

Circe
then
feeds
the
men
a
potion,
transforms
them
into
swine,
and
 imprisons
them
in
pens
outside
her
house.

After
hearing
Eurylochus’
report
of
the
 encounter
Odysseus
sets
off
to
rescue
his
men.


 























































 196 
Marinatos
2003
141.

 197 
Marinatos
notes
that
this
is
his
role
in
both
the
Iliad
and
Odyssey;
helping
humans
 navigate
dangerous
boarders
in
the
human
realm
and
traveling
between
mortal
and
 immortal
worlds.
 
 84
 Immediately
before
entering
Circe’s
domain
Odysseus
is
intercepted
by
Hermes.

 Hermes
scolds
Odysseus
for
thinking
that
he
can
overpower
Circe
and
free
his
men,
and
 tells
him
that
without
the
god’s
help
he
would
be
transformed
and
put
in
a
pig
sty
himself.

 However
Hermes
has
a
tool
for
Odysseus
that
will
allow
him
to
be
impervious
to
Circe’s
 power
to
transform
him.

This
tool
is
the
Moly
root
–
 
ῥίζῃ
μὲν
μέλαν
ἔσκε,
γάλακτι
δὲ
εἴκελον
ἄνθος:
μῶλυ
δέ
μιν
καλέουσι
θεοί:
χαλεπὸν
 δέ
τ᾽
ὀρύσσειν
ἀνδράσι
γε
θνητοῖσι,
θεοὶ
δέ
τε
πάντα
δύνανται.
The
root
was
black
 and
but
the
blossom
was
like
milk:
the
gods
call
it
Moly
and
it
is
difficult
for
mortal
 men
to
dig
up,
but
the
gods
are
able
to
do
anything.
Odyssey
10.304‐6
 Homer
refers
to
the
plant
as
a
pharmakon
–
a
drug,
and
it
is
both
difficult
for
mortals
 to
procure
and
its
powers
are
only
know
to
the
gods. 198 
 What
is
noteworthy
in
this
episode
for
this
discussion
is
the
close
tie
again
of
 Hermes
and
transformation.

Odysseus
has
not
asked
for
help
from
Hermes
or
any
other
 god.

Hermes
simply
takes
pity
on
Odysseus
whom
he
sees
as
“wretched”
(Od.
10.281).

 However,
this
unique
problem
is
well
within
Hermes’
purview
as
a
god.

He
knows
all
about
 transformation
and
can
help
in
the
opposite
case
as
well,
staying
oneself
in
the
face
of
 potentially
transforming
circumstances
or
powerful
magic.


 Just
as
quickly
as
he
appears
Hermes
is
gone,
back
to
Olympus.

Odysseus
is
now
 able
to
save
himself
and
his
crew,
who
Circe,
by
means
of
another
potion,
transforms
back
 into
men;
although
they
are
now,
“νεώτεροι
ἢ
πάρος
ἦσαν,
καὶ
πολὺ
καλλίονες
καὶ
μείζονες
 εἰσοράασθαι
younger
than
they
were
formerly,
and
more
beautiful
and
powerful
to
look
at
 (Od.
10.395‐6).”

The
men
forgive
Circe
and
are
thrilled
to
see
Odysseus,
and
the
whole
 























































 198 
For
more
on
what
Moly
is
and
the
gods’
relationship
with
special
herbs
see
Jerry
 Stannard,
“A
Plant
Called
Moly”
Osiris
14
(1962)
for
an
in
depth
survey
of
the
literature
 about
Moly,
see
Jenny
Clay,
“The
Planktai
and
Moly:
Divine
Naming
and
Knowing
in
Homer”
 Hermes
100
(1972).
 
 85
 company
stays
and
feasts
in
Circe’s
house
for
a
year.


 Hermes’
role
in
this
book
of
the
Odyssey
is
very
straightforward,
as
a
god
who
is
 intimately
connected
to
transformation
he
naturally
saves
Odysseus
from
a
potentially
 disastrous
conversion
into
a
pig.

Hermes
also
matches
the
method
of
transformation.

 Unlike
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
where
transformation
happens
as
part
of
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
characteristic
of
ritual
experience,
here
 Hermes
complements
Circe’s
use
of
pharmakon
(236)
with
a
drug
of
his
own,
the
Moly
root.

 Since
Hermes
is
not
in
anyway
a
god
of
drugs,
or
herbs,
or
potions
the
reason
for
him
to
 appear
to
Odysseus
and
not
any
other
god
is
his
link
with
transformation.
 
 












Hermes
and
Comedy
 This
link
is
also
evident
in
Hermes
appearance
in
Aristophanes’
Peace. 199 

He
 oversees
the
central
episode
of
the
play—the
transformation
of
the
Greek
world
from
a
 state
of
war
to
a
time
of
peace.

Like
the
transformations
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
 Aristophanes
uses
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
to
accomplish
the
 transformation
in
the
world
of
the
play
and
to
communicate
with
the
audience
through
 their
shared
cultural
understanding
of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
 as
a
part
of
ritual
practice
to
both
Demeter
and
Hermes.


 In
the
Peace
Hermes
tells
Trygaeus
how
to
rescue
Peace,
who
has
been
entombed
by
 War,
and
then
the
two
create
a
ritual
to
free
her
and
unite
Greece.

The
ritual,
beginning
on
 























































 199 
I
am
anticipating
Chapters
3
and
4
here.

The
ideas
are
discussed
in
greater
detail
in
 both,
however
I
want
to
establish
Hermes’
connections
with
transformation
across
genres
 and
in
both
the
Archaic
and
Classical
eras
before
moving
on
to
my
discussion
of
 Aristophanes.
 
 86
 line
433
involves
a
libation
and
then
a
call
and
response
between
Hermes
and
Trygaeus
 of
joke
set‐ups
and
punch
lines
with
Hermes
serving
up
the
opening
of
the
joke
and
 Trygaeus
delivering
the
funny
quip
to
end
the
witticism.


 Ἑρμῆς σπονδὴ σπονδή εὐφημεῖτε εὐφημεῖτε σπένδοντες εὐχόμεσθα τὴν νῦν ἡμέραν Ἕλλησιν ἄρξαι πᾶσι πολλῶν κἀγαθῶν, χὤστις προθύμως ξυλλάβοι τῶν σχοινίων, τοῦτον τὸν ἄνδρα μὴ λαβεῖν ποτ᾽ ἀσπίδα. Τρυγαῖος μὰ Δί᾽ ἀλλ᾽ ἐν εἰρήνῃ διαγαγεῖν τὸν βίον, ἔχονθ᾽ ἑταίραν καὶ σκαλεύοντ᾽ ἄνθρακας. Ἑρμῆς ὅστις δὲ πόλεμον μᾶλλον εἶναι βούλεται Τρυγαῖος μηδέποτε παύσασθ᾽ αὐτὸν ὦ Διόνυσ᾽ ἄναξ ἐκ τῶν ὀλεκράνων ἀκίδας ἐξαιρούμενον. Hermes
 Libation,
libation:
 Use
words
of
good
omen.
 Let
us
pray,
offering
libation
that
this
day
 Is
the
first
of
many
happy
days
for
all
Greece,
 And
that
he
who
is
eager
to
help
with
the
ropes
 Will
never
again
need
to
lift
his
shield.
 Trygaeus
 God
no,
but
let
us
spend
our
life
in
peace,
 Holding
our
mistress
and
poking
her
coals.
 Hermes
 May
he
who
would
prefer
war
–
 Trygaeus
 Oh
Lord
Dionysos,
may
he
never
stop
 Pulling
arrowheads
out
of
his
elbow. 200 
 
 This
ritual
is
actually
a
duet
of
jokes
designed
to
elicit
laughter
from
the
audience,
one
of
 the
necessary
components
in
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm.


 
 The
second
element
that
is
necessary
for
the
paradigm
is
some
sort
of
a
revelation
 























































 200 
Aristophanes,
Peace
 
 87
 or
aischros
behavior
or
language
–something
outside
of
the
usual
bounds
of
socially
 accepted
behavior.

In
the
Peace
this
is
the
appearance
of
three
nude
women
on
stage, 201 
 Peace,
Cornucopia,
and
Festival.

These
three
metaphorical
characters
represent
the
 resumption
of
normal
life,
with
all
of
Greece
in
harmony
and
not
at
war.

Hermes
is
in
 charge
of
welcoming
these
three
characters
and
giving
the
different
women
to
various
male
 characters
and
the
council.

This
of
course
leads
to
many
sexually
explicit
jokes
and
more
 laughter.

Once
the
women
have
been
properly
paired
with
their
respective
male
 counterparts
the
transformation
is
complete
and
Greece
is
now
at
peace.

The
main
 transformation
of
the
play
is
achieved
through
the
comedic
use
of
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm. 202 
 
 Hermes
is
a
god
of
transformation;
he
is
a
guide
and
mentor
to
young
Greek
men,
he
 leads
souls
to
the
afterlife
and
he
is
the
god
who
moves
most
freely
through
the
three
 realms
of
the
mythological
world.

Therefore
the
use
of
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
is
not
 surprising.

This
interpretation
of
the
poem
also
negates
the
need
to
rearrange
the
episodes
 in
the
poem
or
dismiss
the
poem
as
an
inferior
Hymn.

Rather
we
can
look
at
the
instances
 of
laughter
in
the
poem
as
our
key
to
unlocking
the
essential
themes
of
the
poem
and
a
 central
characteristic
of
Hermes’
power.
 
 























































 201 
See
Chapter
Three
for
more
on
nudes
in
the
theater.


 202 
This
is
the
only
surviving
instance
of
Aristophanes
using
Hermes
to
spearhead
the
 transformation
in
a
play.

More
often
he
uses
the
rituals
to
Demeter
and
Dionysos
as
a
ritual
 backdrop
for
his
character
and
plot
transformations,
as
I
will
discuss
in
the
following
 chapters.
 
 
 88
 In
the
next
two
chapters
I
will
be
looking
at
ritual
laughter,
transformation,
and
Old
 Comedy.

This
may
seem
like
a
leap,
however
Aristophanes
is
drawing
on
the
paradigm
I
 have
traced
in
these
two
Hymns
and
the
rituals
at
Eleusis,
as
well
as
other
rituals
to
 Demeter,
to
create
plots,
characters,
and
plays
full
of
transformation.

In
fact
this
project
 began
with
my
investigation
of
transformation
in
Aristophanes
and
only
through
studying
 his
texts
and
ideas
about
laughter
in
ancient
Attica
did
I
realize
that
the
roots
for
this
 paradigm
could
be
traced
back
to
the
archaic
period,
Demeter,
and
Hermes.

I
have
 presented
the
earlier
evidence
first
as
the
necessary
foundation
to
fully
grasp
the
 complexity
of
laughter
and
transformation
in
Aristophanes’
work.
 
 89
 
 Chapter
Three:
Laughter
and
Transformation
in
Aristophanes
 Introduction
 Aristophanes’
characters
are
not
stable
beings;
they
shift
alliances,
change
 gender,
and
swap
statuses.

Their
psychological
and
physical
contortions
are
often
 the
sources
of
humor
in
Aristophanes’
plays,
and
thereby
the
cause
of
the
audiences’
 laughter.

However
this
is
not
a
simple
one‐to
one
transaction.

On
closer
inspection
 Aristophanes’
audience’s
laughter
precedes
the
characters’
transformations.

The
 laughter
is
elicited
by
a
revelation,
something
aischros 203 
in
nature
that
then
spurs
 the
characters’
transformations.

This
revelation
and
the
burst
of
laughter
that
 follows
is
the
seed
that
allows
the
audience
to
see
the
world
(or
at
least
the
world
of
 the
play)
in
a
new
light.
The
transformative
and
revelatory
nature
of
laughter
has
 shifted
their
perspective.

Aristophanes
is
actually
working
within
a
well‐established
 paradigm
that
I
have
traced
through
the
last
two
chapters.

The
transformational
 power
of
laughter
that
is
harnessed
in
ritual
context
is
put
to
work
in
his
comedies
 to
move
the
action
of
the
plays
forward,
to
alter
characters,
and
to
engage
the
 audience
in
the
process
of
transformation
as
well
–
to
modify
their
understanding
of
 an
idea,
social
construct,
political
policy,
or
current
event.
 























































 203 
I
discussed
the
use
of
aischrologia
in
rituals
to
Demeter
in
Chapter
One;
in
 Aristophanes’
plays
the
paradigm
opens
up
a
bit.

In
addition
to
aischrologia
there
 are
also
jokes
making
use
of
the
visual
possibilities
in
theater.


 
 90
 While
it
could
be
argued 204 
that
the
laughter
during
Aristophanes’
comedies
 should
be
considered
ritual
laughter,
since
it
takes
place
at
either
the
City
Dionysia
 or
the
Lenaia
(both
theatrical
festivals
in
honor
of
Dionysos),
there
should
be
a
 distinction
between
laughter
used
as
a
specific
step
in
a
ritual
and
laughter
at
the
 theater.
Although
Aristophanes
is
using
the
same
paradigm
and
was
potentially
 hoping
to
facilitate
the
learning
of
the
demos
through
the
transformative
effects
of
 laughter
there
is
a
subtle
difference
between
the
two
instances
of
laughter.

The
 laughter
during
a
ritual
is
a
necessary,
proscribed
step
in
completing
the
ritual
 properly.
At
the
theater,
Aristophanes
is
using
the
ritual
paradigm,
and
laughter
is
 necessary
for
the
paradigm
to
work
properly,
but
the
ritual
to
Dionysos
(i.e.
The
City
 Dionysia
or
the
Lenaia)
is
not
ruined
if
no
one
laughs
during
a
play
(although,
it
 would
make
for
a
rather
dull
comedy).


 
 Theories
of
Laughter

 
 The
comedies
of
Aristophanes
and
his
use
of
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
are,
in
fact,
very
complex.

There
are
 several
layers
of
ritual
and
several
layers
of
laughter
to
sort
through.

As
I
stated
 above
the
first
ritual
layer
is
the
larger
context
of
a
comedic
performance,
either
the
 City
Dionysia
or
the
Lenaia,
both
large
rituals
performed
in
honor
of
Dionysos.

 Within
Aristophanic
comedies
the
action
of
a
play
often
occurs
during
or
at
another
 























































 204 
Halliwell
does
in
fact
classify
this
as
ritual
laughter.
However,
I
don’t
think
his
 explanation
of
this
is
clear
or
deep
enough.

He
simply
looks
at
all
laughter
in
the
 theater
as
the
same
(audience
laughter
and
the
characters
laughing
within
the
world
 of
the
play),
and
mentions
the
use
of
ritual
settings
in
Aristophanic
comedies
 (especially
rituals
tied
to
Demeter
–
where
he
rightly
sees
ritual
laughter)
as
proof
 that
there
is
a
ritual
connection.
 
 91
 ritual
to
Dionysos
or
a
ritual
to
Demeter.

This
is
the
second
layer
of
ritual
and
it
is
 essential
to
note
if
any
laughter
is
specifically
tied
to
these
ritual
settings
within
the
 play.

In
a
few
instances
there
are
even
laughter
rituals
from
specific
festivals
 portrayed
on
stage
–
adding
a
third
ritual
level
to
this
investigation.


 
 Likewise,
not
all
laughter
at
the
theater
is
the
same.

There
are
two
broad
 laughter
categories:
audience
laughter,
and
characters
laughing
within
the
context
 of
the
action
on
stage.

Both
can
and
should
be
further
divided
to
allow
for
a
precise
 interpretation
of
how
and
when
Aristophanes
uses
the
paradigm
of
laughter
and
 transformation.

The
audience
can
laugh
both
with
and
at
the
play.

That
is,
they
can
 laugh
at
an
absurd
predicament
or
statement
(i.e.
the
wit
of
the
poet),
or
they
could
 laugh
 in
 sympathy
 with
 (putting
 themselves
 in
 the
 shoes
 of)
 one
 or
 more
 characters 205 .

The
characters
in
the
play
can
laugh
at
another
character
(just
like
 the
audience),
laugh
at
their
own
joke,
or
even
laugh
in
the
ritual
contexts
that
 Aristophanes
uses
as
settings.

Of
course,
not
all
of
the
laughter
that
happens
at
the
 theater
can
be
part
of
the
paradigm
that
I
am
tracing,
however,
I
believe
a
significant
 part
is
and
that
the
ritual
connections
are
not
coincidental,
but
part
of
the
way
that
 Aristophanes
attempted
to
communicate
with
his
audience.

 
 Both
Plato
and
Aristotle’s
investigations
and
thoughts
about
laughter
can
 help
us
think
about
the
role
of
laughter
in
Athenian
theater.

Aristotle’s
views
on
 laughter
are
less
well
defined
than
Plato’s
–
one
has
to
read
between
the
lines
to
get
 























































 205 
For
more
on
the
pendulum
swings
in
how
scholars
have
theorized
laughter
see
 Stuart
Tave,
The
Amiable
Humourist
(Chicago:
The
University
of
Chicago
Press,
 1960).
 
 92
 a
sense
of
his
evaluation
of
the
role
of
laughter 206 .

In
Nicomachean
Ethics
4.8
 Aristotle
divides
men
into
three
types
in
relation
to
their
sense
of
humor
and
jokes
 diagwgh/ paidih/ (playful
amusement/conversation):
first,
the
buffoons
or
vulgar
 jokers
(bwmolo/xoi or
 fortikoi/),
second
the
witty
(eu0tra/peloj),
and
third
the
 uncultivated
and
harsh
(a!groikoj and
 sklhpoi/).

These
three
types
of
men
are:
 either
too
eager
and
coarse
in
their
joking,
pleasant
to
be
around
and
a
valid
and
 necessary
part
of
the
relaxation
needed
in
life,
or
those
who
are
too
serious
with
 absolutely
no
sense
of
humor. 207 


 
 Although
Aristotle
does
not
address
laughter
directly
in
this
passage
his
 evaluations
of
the
three
types
of
men
give
some
indication
of
what
he
thinks
of
the
 laughter
that
might
result
from
jokes
made
by
them.

The
humorless
men,
naturally,
 wouldn’t
make
jokes
and
therefore
conversation
with
them
would
be
devoid
of
 laughter.

However
for
the
first
two
Aristotle
gives
his
reader
a
comparison,

 ἴδοι
δ᾽
ἄν
τις
καὶ
ἐκ
τῶν
κωμῳδιῶν
τῶν
παλαιῶν
καὶ
τῶν
καινῶν:
τοῖς
μὲν
γὰρ
 ἦν
γελοῖον
ἡ
αἰσχρολογία,
τοῖς
δὲ
μᾶλλον
ἡ
ὑπόνοια:
διαφέρει
δ᾽
οὐ
μικρὸν
 ταῦτα
πρὸς
εὐσχημοσύνην.

Comparing
old
comedy
might
see
the
difference
 and
new;
for
aischrologia
was
amusing
to
the
former,
and
innuendo
is
better
 for
the
latter.
This
makes
no
small
difference
concerning
decorum. 208 
 
 That
 is,
 the
 buffoons
 are
 like
 the
 aischrologia
 in
 Old
 Comedy
 –
 funny
 but
 not
 decorous
or
what
a
person
should
aspire
to,
nor
by
implication,
laugh
at.

Aristotle
 























































 206 
Halliwell
has
a
very
clear
and
detailed
explanation
of
Aristotle
and
laughter
as
it
 applies
to
his
megalopsuchos.

However,
he
does
not
really
go
into
Aristotle’s
 evaluation
of
Old
Comedy
(Halliwell
himself
notes
that
he
will
not
be
doing
this).
 207 
Aristotle,
Nicomachean
Ethics

1128a4‐11.
 208 
Aristotle,
Nicomachean
Ethics
4.8

 
 93
 doesn’t
give
the
reader
much
more
here
about
why
this
type
of
humor
and
laughter
 isn’t
desirable;
simply
that
it
is
outside
the
bounds
of
normative
behavior. 209 
 Plato,
in
a
much
more
straightforward
manner;
expressed
grave
doubts
 about
the
wisdom
of
engaging
in
laughter.

He
writes
in
Book
III
of
The
Republic,

 ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ φιλογέλωτάς γε δεῖ εἶναι. σχεδὸν γὰρ ὅταν τις ἐφιῇ ἰσχυρῷ γέλωτι, ἰσχυρὰν καὶ μεταβολὴν ζητεῖ τὸ τοιοῦτον.
Again,
they
 [the
guardians
of
the
city,
i.e.
the
men
of
Athens]
must
not
be
prone
to
 laughter.
For
ordinarily
when
one
abandons
himself
to
violent
laughter
he
 seeks
such
a
violent
change.
 
 Samuel
Weber
writes
that
this
danger
expressed
by
Plato
is
twofold;
“because
of
its
 tendency
to
get
out
of
hand” 210 
and
because,
 Rather
than
deciding
or
choosing
to
laugh,
‘one
abandons
oneself
to’
it,
and
it
 is
 this
 necessity
 of
 self‐abandonment
 no
 doubt,
 that
 explains
 why
 the
 ‘condition’
of
laughter
would
tend
to
be
‘violent’,
as
well
as
to
provoke
‘a
 violent
reaction’.

Laughter
is
violent
and
dangerous
.
.
.
because
it
tends
to
 ‘overpower’
those
who
laugh. 211 
 
 























































 209 
Aristotle
and
I
actually
agree
on
this
point
of
normative
behavior.

Aischrologia
 was
not
something
that
happened
in
everyday
life
and
that
is
precisely
what
makes
 it
heightened
and
part
of
the
transformation
paradigm.
For
a
discussion
of
the
 problematic
use
of
this
passage
to
trace
a
linear
trajectory
from
Old
Comedy
to
New
 see
Eric
Csapo,
“From
Aristophanes
to
Menander?
Genre
Transformation
in
Greek
 Tragedy”
in
Matrices
of
Genre:
Authors,
Canons,
and
Society,
ed.
Mary
Depew
and
 Dirk
Obbink
(Cambridge:
Center
for
Hellenic
Studies,
2000)
and
also
“Review
of
H.‐ G.
Nesselrath,
Die
attische
Mittlere
Komodie
Ihre
Stellung
in
der
antiken
 Literaturkritik
und
Literaturgeschichte”
Phoenix
47
(1993)
where
he
wrote,
“The
 changes
in
comedy
from
the
fifth
to
the
fourth
centuries
are
best
understood,
not
as
 a
succession
of
qualitatively
distinct
products,
but
as
a
shift
in
the
dominance
of
one
 style
over
another.”

See
also
Kenneth
Dover,
Greek
Comedy
(Oxford:
Clarendon
 Press,
1968),
145‐46;
W.G.
Arnott,
“Tout
est
probleme
au
subject
de
la
Comedie
 Moyenne”
Classical
Review
42
(1992)
60‐1;
and
Jefffrey
Henderson,
Beyond
 Aristophanes:
Transition
and
Diversity
in
Greek
Comedy
(Atlanta:
Scholars
Press,
 1995)
181.

However,
here
Aristotle
is
not
making
claims
about
the
development
of
 comedy,
but
rather
the
proper
and
normative
things
for
a
person
to
laugh
at.
 210 
Samuel
Weber,
“Laughter
in
the
Meanwhile”,
MLN
Vol.
102,
No.
4,
French
Issue
 (Sep.,
1987)
693.
 211 
Webber,
“Laughter
in
the
Meanwhile,”
693.
 
 94
 The
other
danger
of
“abandoning
oneself”
to
laughter
is
losing
oneself
altogether.

 This
is
certainly
an
uncanny
effect
of
laughter.

While
laughing
a
person
is
 suspended,
taken
out
of
him
or
herself
and
given
over
to
the
laughter.

 

 This
departure
from
oneself
(similar
to
ek‐stasy)
occurs
not
only
when
an
 individual
laughs,
but
also
when
participating
in
the
laughter
of
others;
the
 paradigm
of
transgression/laughter/transformation
is
a
dangerous
one,
as
Plato
 says
because
of
the
potential
it
has
for
massive
change.

Halliwell
agrees
that
Plato
 finds
abandoning
yourself
to
laughter
very
troubling
and
notes
that
it
is
because
of
 “the
vicarious
quality
of
the”
laughter
in
Comedy.” 212 
This
vicarious
feature
of
 laughter
that
Plato
is
talking
about
is
made
clear
in
Book
10
of
his
Republic.

Socrates
 is
discussing
the
effect
that
poetry
has
on
the
listener.

His
first
observation
is
to
 relate
to
his
interlocutor
and
the
assembled
listeners
that
poetry
unleashes
 emotions
that
had
been
properly
repressed
by
the
soul.
His
listeners
agree.
He
then
 continues,
and
offers
the
observation
that
participating
in
any
activity
that
provokes
 laughter,

 ὅτι,
ἃν
αὐτὸς
αἰσχύνοιο
γελωτοποιῶν,
ἐν
μιμήσει
δὲ
κωμῳδικῇ
ἢ
καὶ
ἰδίᾳ
 ἀκούων
σφόδρα
χαρῇς
καὶ
μὴ
μισῇς
ὡς
πονηρά,
ταὐτὸν
ποιεῖς
ὅπερ
ἐν
τοῖς
 ἐλέοις;
that
if
in
comedic
imitations, 
 or
for
that
matter
in
private
talk, 
 you
 take
intense
pleasure
in
buffooneries
that
you
would
blush
to
practice
 yourself,
and
do
not
detest
them
as
base,
you
are
doing
the
same
thing
as
in
 the
case
of
the
piteous
(i.e.
tragedy)? 213 

 
 has
the
same
effect,
unleashing
the
inner
comedian
in
this
instance.

Both
of
these
he
 goes
on
to
explain
should
be
avoided
because
they
foster
strong
emotions
and
base
 























































 212 
Halliwell,
Greek
Laughter,
n.91
p.
300.
 213 
Plato,
Republic
606c.

This
is
adapted
from
John
Burnet’s
translation.
 
 95
 comic
jokes
respectively,
which
are
both
detrimental
to
the
soul
of
the
person
 participating
in
them,

 τρέφει
γὰρ
ταῦτα
ἄρδουσα,
δέον
αὐχμεῖν,
καὶ
ἄρχοντα
ἡμῖν
καθίστησιν,
δέον
 ἄρχεσθαι
αὐτὰ
ἵνα
βελτίους
τε
καὶ
εὐδαιμονέστεροι
ἀντὶ
χειρόνων
καὶ
 ἀθλιωτέρων
γιγνώμεθα.
For
it
waters 
 and
increases
these
feelings
when
 what
we
ought
to
do
is
to
dry
them
up,
and
it
establishes
them
as
our
rulers
 when
they
ought
to
be
ruled,
to
the
end
that
we
may
be
better
and
happier
 men
instead
of
worse
and
more
miserable. 214 
 
 Modern
literary
critics
have
also
noticed
this
vicarious
element
of
laughter
 that
Plato
is
concerned
about.

Bataille
writes,
“Seeing
laughter,
hearing
laughter,
I
 participate
from
within
the
emotion
of
the
one
who
laughs.

It
is
this
emotion
 experienced
from
within
which,
communicating
itself
to
me,
laughs
within
me.” 215 
 This
explanation
of
the
contagious
nature
of
laughter
resonates
with
Nicholas
 Royle’s
writing
on
what
he
calls
“the
telepathy
effect”.

Royle
argues
in
his
book
The
 Uncanny
that
what
has
been
traditionally
called
the
“omniscient
narrator”
is
really
 “something
like
narrative
telepathy”
as
it
“involves
the
familiar‐unfamiliar
logic
of
a
 narrator
‘enter[ing
a
character’s]
consciousness’,
becoming
temporarily
amanuensis
 to
their
‘inmost,
unexpressed
thought.’” 216 

The
ability
of
the
narrator
to
enter
a
 character’s
consciousness
is
like
Bataille’s
explication
of
experiencing
within
himself
 the
emotion
of
another
person.

The
emotion
engulfs
both
people
and
the
beholder
 or
listener
temporarily
enters
the
consciousness
of
another.
 
 Royle’s
discussion
of
the
omniscient
narrator
is
centered
on
literature
that
 one
reads
silently
to
oneself.

But
with
Bataille’s
idea
of
“participat[ing]
from
within
 























































 214 
Plato,
Republic
606d.
This
is
adapted
from
John
Burnet’s
translation.
 215 
George
Bataille,
L’Erotisme
Paris:
Les
Editions
de
Minuit,
2011),
169.
 216 
Nicholas
Royle,
The
Uncanny
(New
York:
Routledge,
2003)
262.
 
 96
 the
emotion
of
the
one
who
laughs” 217 
mediating
between
literature
and
theater
I
 think
it
is
possible
to
see
how
Royle’s
paradigm
of
entering
a
character’s
 consciousness
also
applies
to
Aristophanic
comedy.

Aristophanes’
characters
often
 make
direct
addresses
to
the
audience,
or
verbalize
their
internal
thoughts,
and
 through
both
of
these
means
the
audience,
each
individual
member
as
well
as
the
 collective
whole,
can
step
inside
the
character’s
consciousness
and
experience
the
 character’s
emotions
as
their
own.

 More
often
than
not,
Aristophanic
characters
address
the
audiences
or
 verbalize
internal
thoughts
for
comic
effect.
The
comic
aspect
of
these
quips
enables
 a
further
element
of
theatrical
telepathy:
laughter.

If,
as
Bataille
and
Plato
write,
 upon
seeing
or
hearing
laughter
we
participate
“from
within”
the
emotion
of
 another,
the
audience
laughing
as
a
group
is
experiencing
a
mass
emotion.

If
the
 actor
on
stage
laughs
and
the
audience
participates
in
his
or
her
emotion
the
aspect
 of
telepathy
is
increased
even
further.

Then
the
audience
is
not
communally
 laughing
at
the
play
(in
telepathic
connection
with
each
other
as
they
were
 formerly),
but
they
are
“within”
the
emotion
of
the
character
and
therefore
 somehow
within
the
play 218 .


 The
idea
of
the
audience
being
“within”
the
play
is
also
evident
in
Samuel
 Taylor
Coleridge’s
thinking
about
poetry.

He
famously
wrote
in
Biographia
Literaria
 























































 217 
Bataille,
L’Erotisme,
169.
 218 
If
we
return
to
the
tenants
of
embodied
cognition
we
can
enlarge
this
 phenomenon
even
further.

This
doesn’t
only
happen
in
the
theater,
but
can
happen
 anytime
a
person
is
watching
or
listening,
e.g.
in
a
religious
ceremony,
at
a
poetic
 reading,
while
people
watching,
etc.
Ian
Ruffell,
Politics
and
Anti­Realism
in
Athenian
 Old
Comedy
(Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press,
2012)
also
writes
about
identification
 with
the
laughter
a
character
experiences
in
the
plot
of
the
play
–
the
breaking
of
the
 fourth
wall
is
not
a
necessary
part
of
the
recognition.

 
 97
 that
literature
requires,
“that
willing
suspension
of
disbelief
for
the
moment,
which
 constitutes
poetic
faith.” 219 
The
difference
between
Coleridge’s
idea
and
the
nature
 of
laughter
is
precisely
the
“willing
suspension.”

While
reading
or
watching
a
play
 the
reader
or
audience
member
actively
participates
in
the
suspension,
however
 laughter
is
not
as
biddable.

It
bursts
forth
as
an
instantaneous
response;
laughter
 overtakes
and
seizes
us.

As
we
have
seen
in
Plato’s
Republic,
the
theory
of
laughter
 has,
for
a
long
time,
been
concerned
with
the
dangerous
side
of
laughter.


 There
have
been
many
attempts
to
define
exactly
what
laughter
is
in
the
 vocabulary
of
physical
science.

Simon
Critchley
writes
in
his
book
On
Humour,
“It
is
 important
to
recall
that
the
succession
of
tension
by
relief
in
humour
is
essentially
a
 bodily
affair
.
.
.
Laughter
is
a
muscular
phenomenon,
consisting
of
the
spasmodic
 contraction
and
relaxation
of
the
facial
muscles
with
corresponding
movements
in
 the
diaphragm.” 220 
This
very
recent
description
focuses
on
the
physical
 manifestations
of
laughter.
Aristotle
likewise,
saw
a
connection
between
the
 physical
and
the
mental
in
laughter,
in
Parts
of
Animals
he
wrote
about
purely
 physical
reasons
that
may
transfer
to
a
mental
state
and
cause
a
person
to
laugh,
 namely
tickling
and
being
struck
on
the
chest
in
battle. 221 


Freud,
taking
a
physical
 and
psychological
approach
wrote,
“We
should
say
that
laughter
arises
if
a
quota
of
 psychical
energy
which
has
been
earlier
used
for
the
cathexis
[which
is
in
Freud’s
 vocabulary
the
concentration
or
accumulation
of
mental
energy
in
a
particular
 























































 219 
Samuel
Taylor
Coleridge,
Bioraphia
Literaria,
ed.
J.
Shawcross
(London:
Electric
 Book
Co.,
2001)
272.
 220 
Critchley,
On
Humour,
7‐8.
 221 
Aristotle,
Parts
of
Animals
3.10,
367a8
and
28
 
 98
 channel] 222 
of
particular
psychical
paths
has
become
unusable,
so
that
it
can
find
 free
discharge.” 223 
This
explanation
of
laughter
sounds
rather
painful,
as
though
 laughter
forces
energy
out
of
the
body.

However
even
in
colloquial
speech
we
use
 volatile
verbs
to
talk
about
laughter.

We
say,
he
burst
into
laughter,
the
room
 exploded
in
laughter,
bust
a
gut,
split
my
side,
in
French
éclater
de
rire.

The
Greek
 muse
of
Comedy
Thalia
gets
her
name
from
the
Greek
verb
thallo,
“to
bloom,
sprout,
 grow”
she
is
explosive
and
generative
just
like
the
genre
she
represents.

 There
is
something
essential
at
the
heart
of
this
danger,
the
explosion
and
 self‐abandonment
 of
 laughter.
 Samuel
 Weber
 writes,
 “In
 both
 cases,
 joke
 and
 laughter
do
not
emerge
gradually,
they
are
not
the
product
of
long
and
continuous
 processes:
rather,
they
are
simply
“there”,
all
of
a
sudden.” 224 
The
theory
of
laughter
 closely
ties
it
with
death—not
only
because
of
its
explosive
force
and
sudden
arrival
 but
as
Mikkel
Borch‐Jacobsen
writes,
“Laughter,
truly
major
and
sovereign
laughter,
 only
bursts
forth,
solar
and
ravishing,
on
the
condition
of
dying
of
laughter,
of
letting
 oneself
be
ripped
apart
by
the
hiccoughs
of
the
impaling
stake.” 225 

To
laugh
then
is
 to
look
death
in
the
face.

“It
is
a
glance
at
tragedy
as
tragedy,
in
its
tragic
truth:
 namely,
that
immortality
comes
only
with
death,
as
death
itself.

Laughter
is
the
 























































 222 
OED
Online,
December,
2008
<
http://dictionary.oed.com/entrance.dtl>
 223 
Sigmund
Freud,
Jokes
and
Their
Relation
to
the
Unconscious,
ed.
and
trans.
James
 Strachey
(New
York:
W.W.
Norton
&
Co.
Inc.,
1960)
147.
 224 
Weber,
“Laughter
in
the
Meanwhile,”
703.
 225 
Mikkel
Borch‐Jacobsen,
“The
Laughter
of
Being”,
MLN
Vol.
102,
No.
4,
French
 Issue
(Sep.,
1987):
739.
 
 99
 knowledge
of
this
truth,
and
therefore
the
highest
consummate
knowledge.” 226 
No
 wonder
the
warrior
in
Aristotle
laughs
when
receiving
a
chest
wound.
 
 Laughter
both
simulates
the
feeling
of
the
void
by
requiring
self‐ abandonment
and
allows
the
psyche
to
glimpse
death.

It
is
a
physical
act
as
 Critchley
postulates
and
also
psychological
exploration.

If
we
repeatedly
abandon
 ourselves
briefly
to
the
nothingness
of
laughter
we
can
see
our
lives
dotted
with
tiny
 ruptures,
a
very
uncanny
thought.

We
leap
from
life
to
laughter
and
back
to
.
.
.
what
 exactly,
the
same
life
–perhaps,
but
also
perhaps
not.

For
Aristophanes’
characters
 the
answer
is
they
are
not
the
same
and
they
experience
a
new
life
in
the
wake
of
 laughter.


 
 Transformation
at
work
in
Aristophanes
 
 Investigating
laughter
and
transformation
in
Aristophanes’
comedies
we
are
 already
further
removed
from
ritual
than
when
we
looked
at
the
Homeric
Hymns.

 The
Hymns
are
very
tied
to
the
gods
they
are
written
for
and
also
closely
bound
up
 in
the
rituals
that
were
performed
for
these
gods.

Certainly,
as
I
have
said
above
all
 theater
was
performed
for
Dionysos
at
a
festival
in
his
honor,
so
perhaps
we
could
 stretch
the
definition
of
ritual
laughter
to
cover
all
laughter
at
a
theatrical
festival,
 but
I
think
this
is
overly
broad
and
would
end
up
being
vague
and
very
unsatisfying.


 
 The
transformations
in
the
comedies
that
I
will
look
at
in
this
chapter
are
still
 transformations
of
presence.

That
is
they
involve
the
transformations
of
 individuals,
characters
in
stage
changing
from
human
to
animal,
male
to
female,
 























































 226 
Jean‐Luc
Nancy,
“Wild
Laughter
in
the
Throat
of
Death”,
MLN
Vol.
102,
No.
4,
 French
Issue
(Sep.,
1987):
724.
 
 100
 hero
to
heroine,
etc.

However,
I
will
also
being
to
investigate
the
transformation
of
 texts,
in
this
case
the
tragedies
of
Euripides.

The
purpose
of
this
is
to
look
at
how
 the
revelation/laughter/transformation
paradigm,
so
intimately
connected
with
 ritual
in
the
literary
texts
of
the
Homeric
Hymns
becomes
a
literary
topos
of
its
own,
 functioning
outside
of
a
specific
ritual
context.

The
paradigm
continues
to
have
 strong
ritual
undertones
and
associations
because
of
its
birth
in
ritual,
but
it
can
be
 applied
more
broadly.
 
 For
laughter
to
still
have
its
power,
as
it
does
in
ritual,
it
needs
to
be
closely
 tied
with
something
aischros.
As
we
have
seen
previously
in
the
writing
of
Plato
and
 Aristotle
it
is
this
type
of
laughter,
the
laughter
at
something
aischros
that
is
usually
 to
be
avoided
because
it
is
powerful
and
has
a
transformative
nature.

This
potent
 combination
of
aischros
things
(objects
or
words)
and
laughter
is
what
ritual
 harnesses
and
what
good,
skillful
literature
also
employs
when
it
uses
the
 revelation/laughter/transformation
paradigm
as
a
topos.
 
 In
a
literary
context,
then
the
ancient
audience
would
have
been
alerted
to
 this
paradigm
when
they
saw
or
heard
the
three
elements
together.
And
we
as
 modern
readers
or
audience
members
should
be
too.

It
will
deepen
our
 understanding
of
an
ancient
text
if
we
can
identify
this
paradigm
and
examine
the
 multiple
ways
in
which
it
is
being
employed.
Just
as
we
look
at
ancient
tragedy
and
 how
different
mythological
stories
are
tailored
to
fit
each
plot
and
how
that
may
 have
resonated
with
an
audience
in
a
particular
year,
in
comedy
we
can
look
for
the
 revelation/laughter/transformation
paradigm
and
how
it
functions
in
various
 
 101
 plots. 227 
This
is
where
we
can
use
the
idea
of
an
embedded
genre 228 
of
the
ritual
 associations
with
laughter
and
transformation
or
a
formalizing
of
earlier,
looser
 festival
joking
into
a
recognized
literary
trope
to
investigate
the
form
of
comedy
 more
comprehensively.
 
 Aristophanes’
plays
can
be
broadly
divided
into
two
categories:
plays
with
 ritual
connections; 229 
either
because
rituals
are
heavily
referred
to
or
because
they
 are
set
during
a
ritual,
and
non‐ritual
plays. 230 

Both
types
of
plays
have
character
 transformations
facilitated
by
the
now
familiar
revelation/laughter/transformation
 paradigm;
however,
the
ritual
plays
have
a
higher
concentration
of
these
 transformations,
often
several
in
one
play.

It
is
not
surprising
that
the
ritual
plays
 should
have
a
higher
rate
of
transformations
since
this
paradigm
seems
to
originate
 in
cult
practice.

But
it
is
only
through
the
careful
investigation
of
each
 transformation
that
we
can
say
with
any
certainty
what
each
transformation
is
 doing
for
the
play
and
the
audience
and
why
they
might
be
present
in
Aristophanes’
 work.

I
think
it
is
best
to
look
first
at
the
ritual
plays
where
the
phenomenon
of
 transformation
seems
most
predictable
(the
characters
are
after
all
taking
part
in
 rituals
that
emphasized
transformation):
and
then
to
turn
our
attention
to
the
non‐ ritual
plays
and
the
transformations
that
have
no
direct
correlation
with
a
ritual
or
 connection
to
a
festival.
 
 























































 227 
This
can
even
include
moments
when
transformation
is
expected
or
attempted
 but
doesn’t
work
for
some
reason.

 228 
Lape,
“The
Poetics
of
the
“Komos”‐Chorus,”
93‐94.
 229 
These
plays
are:
Acharnians,
Thesmophoriazusae,
and
Frogs.
 230 
These
plays
are:
Knights,
Clouds,
Wasps,
Peace,
Birds,
Lysistrata,
Assembly
Women,
 and
Wealth.
 
 102
 The
Acharnians
 Beginning
chronologically
then,
the
first
transformation
in
a
ritual
play 231 
is
 an
early
scene
in
Acharnians,
which
features
the
transformation
of
two
Megarian
 girls
into
pigs.

The
scene
takes
place
at
Dicaeopolis’
private
market
that
he
has
 opened
after
securing
his
personal
peace
treaty
with
Athens’
enemies.

A
Megarian
 merchant,
out
of
desperation
and
a
desire
to
save
his
daughters
(korh)
from
 starvation,
has
put
them
in
a
sack
and
is
attempting
to
sell
them
as
sacrificial
piglets,
 perfect
for
the
Mysteries
to
Demeter.

These
piglets
were
part
of
an
initiate’s
 propitiation
of
Demeter
and
helped
facilitate
the
initiation
into
her
cult.
 The
scene
begins
with
the
Megarian
merchant
giving
his
daughters
a
choice
–
 be
sold
or
starve
to
death.

The
two
eagerly
choose
slavery
and
he
gives
them
 hooves
and
snouts
to
wear
and
puts
them
in
a
sack.

He
then
invites
Dicaeopolis
to
 inspect
his
wares,
“xoi/rouj e2gw/nga mustika/j
I’ve
got
piggies
for
the
Mysteries.” 232 

 Here
we
have
all
the
necessary
ingredients
for
transformation:
a
revelation
of
 something
usually
hidden
(in
this
case
the
daughters’
naked
bodies)
and
laughter
 (from
the
audience
as
the
Megarian
merchant
tells
the
audience
and
his
daughters
 of
his
plan).

This
transformation
of
the
girls
from
human
to
pig
is
both
 instantaneous
and
slow
to
develop;
instantaneous
because
of
the
disguise
(as
soon
 as
they
put
on
the
hooves
and
snouts)
and
the
joking
and
laughter
from
the
 audience,
which
enable
the
quick
transformation.
However,
it
also
takes
some
 convincing
before
Dicaeopolis
sees
the
girls
as
piggies
and
necessitates
lots
of
joking
 























































 231 
I
am
only
looking
at
transformations
in
the
complete
extant
plays
of
 Aristophanes,
not
in
the
fragments
because
the
fragments
simply
do
not
have
 enough
context
to
adequately
assess
if
and
how
transformations
take
place.
 232 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians,
763.
 
 103
 with
double
meaning
before
he
accepts
them
as
piggies
and
purchases
them.

The
 association
with
the
Mysteries
and
Demeter
also
enhance
the
transformation
in
this
 scene.

The
shift
from
human
to
pig
creates
a
sacrificial
tool
(i.e.
the
suckling
piglets)
 that
Dicaeopolis
or
someone
in
his
household
could
then
use
to
facilitate
their
own
 initiation
and
transformation
as
part
of
the
cult
worship
to
Demeter.


 However,
in
Aristophanic
comedy
piglets
are
not
simply
livestock
or
 sacrificial
animals.

The
Greek
work
for
piglet
xoi=roj is
a
common
slang
word
for
 the
hairless
female
genitalia.

As
Henderson
notes,
“the
entire
Megarian
scene
of
 Acharnians
is
built
around
its
double
meaning.” 233 

Indeed
it
is,
but
the
necessity
of
 the
double
meaning
goes
even
deeper
than
the
double
entendre/joke
that
 Henderson
explains
in
his
“Note
on
Aristophanes
Acharnians
834‐35”,
where
he
 explains
the
overlapping
meaning
of
pai/ein
as
both
eat
and
a
slang
term
for
sexual
 intercourse. 234 

Dicaeopolis
is
consuming
the
two
girls
as
either
piglets
for
sacrifice
 (and
then
a
meal)
or
as
sexual
objects,
as
is
the
audience
–
a
point
I
will
elaborate
on
 shortly.





 First
it
is
worthwhile
to
think
about
who
would
have
played
these
parts;
are
 they
played
by
male
actors
in
padded
“nude”
female
costumes
or
could
these
two
 characters
be
mute,
nude
women? 235 
Zweig
thinks
that
the
parts
could
have
been
 portrayed
by
either
group.

She
strongly
believes
that
there
were
mute
nude
hetairai
 























































 233 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
131
–
for
further
explanation
of
the
slang
term
 see
his
excellent
and
thorough
explication.

 234 
Jeffrey
Henderson,
“A
Note
on
Aristophanes
Acharnians
834‐5”
Classical
 Philology
68
(1973).

 235 
For
a
summary
of
the
scholarly
discussion
of
the
mute
nude
female
see
Cedric
H.
 Whitman
Aristophanes
and
the
Comic
Hero
(Cambridge:
Harvard
University
Press,
 1971);
Henderson
The
Maculate
Muse
and
Laura
M.
Stone,
Costume
in
Aristophanic
 Poetry
(New
York:
Ayer
Co.
Publishing,
1981).
 
 104
 on
stage
although
she
argues
that
sometimes
it
worked
best
for
comic
relief
if
the
 actors
were
men
dressed
and
padded
as
nude
women
instead
of
naked
hetairai. 236 

 She
believes,
in
this
instance,
the
comedy
of
sexually
explicit
double
speak
between
 the
Megarian
Merchant
and
Dicaeopolis
would
have
been
enhanced
by
men
 costumed
to
look
like
naked
women.

However,
it
is
certainly
interesting
to
also
 consider
the
striking
and
frankly
honest
representation
of
male
domination
over
 female
sexuality
in
fifth
century
Athens,
if
the
characters
were
portrayed
by
women.







 If
the
Piggies
are
two
naked
hetairai
wearing
hooves
and
snouts 237 
it
is
very
 clear
to
the
audience
that
these
“piggies”
are
for
consumption;
by
Dicaeopolis,
by
the
 audience,
by
Demeter
(as
a
sacrifice).

And
since
they
are
an
object
for
consumption
 or
a
tool
for
sacrifice
they
are
not
equal.

Zweig
is
absolutely
right
that,

 rather
than
joyfully
celebrating
the
sexuality
that
brings
forth
life,
as
the
 sexual
play
in
women
fertility
rituals
seems
to
have
done,
.
.
.
in
these
scenes
 there
is
no
mutuality,
no
interaction
between
two
active
agents,
there
is
not
 even
sexuality.

In
each
scene
the
female
is
an
object
gazed
at,
lusted
after,
 and
manipulated
by
a
subject. 238 


 
 In
fact,
the
naked
hetairai
or
men
costumed
to
look
like
naked
women
also
serve
as
 a
tool
for
the
joke
and
the
transformation
in
the
play
from
human
to
animal.

They
 not
only
provide
the
necessary
visual
backdrop
for
the
sexual
banter,
but
also
serve
 as
the
revelatory
element
necessary
for
transformation,
that
is
they
display
what
is
 normally
hidden,
female
genitalia.

This
scene
shows
the
audience
how
 transformation
works.

It
clearly
illustrates
all
the
necessary
elements
and
ties
the
 























































 236 
Bella
Zweig,
“The
Mute
Nude
Female
Characters
in
Aristophanes’
Plays”
in
 Pornography
and
Representation
in
Greece
and
Rome
ed.
Amy
Richlin
(New
York:
 Oxford
University
Press,
1992),
78.
 237 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians,
740
and
744.
 238 
Zweig,
“The
Mute
Nude
Female
Characters
in
Aristophanes’
Plays,”
87.
 
 105
 human/animal
transformation
closely
with
a
ritual
that
a
Greek
audience
would
 closely
associate
with
transformation.


 This
scene
also
dovetails
with
ToM
and
the
idea
of
the
audience’s
telepathy
 with
certain
characters
in
a
play.

The
audience
in
this
instance
looks
at
the
scene
 from
the
perspective
of
Dicaeopolis.

They
are
also
consuming
the
bodies
of
the
two
 hetairai
and
see
them
as
both
sexual
objects
and
tools,
although
for
the
audience
 they
are
tools
for
the
transformation
(and
the
illustration
of
how
it
works)
rather
 than
sacrificial
animals
for
the
Mysteries
of
Demeter.


 
 The
Thesmophoriazusae
 The
Thesmophoriazusae,
a
ritual
play
set
in
Athens
at
the
autumn
festival
to
 Demeter 239 
also
has
numerous
transformations.

One
works
as
an
individual
 transformation
and
a
notable
set
work
together
to
ensure
a
favorable
outcome
of
 the
play
for
the
two
main
male
characters,
Euripides
and
his
Kinsman.

The
theme
of
 transformation
(and
its
impact
on
identity)
runs
through
the
play
and
is
underlined
 and
supported
by
the
setting
of
the
Thesmophoria.

The
autumnal
ritual
to
Demeter
 is
all
about
the
cycle
of
the
agricultural
calendar
and
both
the
harvest
of
summer
 crops
in
the
fall
and
the
fall
planting
for
crops
that
will
need
the
winter
rainy
season
 to
grow. 240 


 























































 239 
See
Appendix
1
for
more
information
on
festivals
to
Demeter
other
than
the
 Eleusinian
Mysteries.
 240 
Greece’s
Mediterranean
climate
allowed
(and
still
allows)
for
year
round
 planting,
unlike
Western
Europe
and
most
of
the
United
States.

This
difference
in
 agricultural
practices
has
lead
to
some
confusion
about
and
conflation
of
the
Ancient
 and
modern
agricultural
seasons
and
therefore
assumptions
about
the
festivals
to
 
 106
 
 In
an
early
scene
of
the
Thesmophoriazusae,
Euripides’
Kinsman,
his
father‐ in‐law,
undergoes
a
radical
transformation
from
an
Athenian
man
to
an
Athenian
 women
and
participant
in
the
Thesmophoria.

This
transformation
happens
at
 Euripides’
request,
as
he
needs
an
insider
to
protect
him
from
the
wrath
of
the
 Athenian
women
whom
he
has
slandered
in
his
plays.

Euripides’
first
choice
is
the
 effeminate
poet
Agathon.

However
Agathon
refuses
and
Euripides
is
left
to
either
go
 himself
or
send
his
Kinsman
in
disguise.


 
 The
process
of
disguising
Kinsman
has
ample
opportunities
to
cause
the
 audience
to
burst
into
laughter.
 























































 Demeter.

For
more
on
this
see
the
excellent
dissertation,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
 Demeter
and
Their
Relation
To
The
Agricultural
Year
by
Allaire
Chandor
Brumfield.
 
 107
 Eu)ripi/dhj e)negka/tw tij e)/ndoqen da=|d' h)\ lu/xnon. e)pi/kupte: th\n ke/rkon fula/ttou nun a)/kran. Mnhsi/loxoj e)moi\ melh/sei nh\ Di/a, plh/n g' o(/ti ka/omai. oi)/moi ta/laj. u(/dwr u(/dwr w)= gei/tonej. pri\n a)ntilabe/sqai prwkto\n th=j flogo/j.
 Eu)ripi/dhj qa/rrei. Mnhsi/loxoj ti/ qarrw= katapepurpolhme/noj; Eu)ripi/dhj a)ll' ou)k e)/t' oi)de\n pra=gma/ soi: ta\ plei=sta ga\r \a)popepo/nhkaj. Mnhsi/loxoj fu= i)ou\ th=j a)sbo/lou. ai)qo\j gege/nhmai pa/nta ta\ peri\ th\n tra/min. Eu)ripi/dhj mh\ fronti/sh|j: e(/teroj ga\r au)ta\ sfoggiei=. Mnhsi/loxoj oi)mwceta)/r' ei)/ tij to\n e)mo\n prwkto\n plunei=. Eu)ripi/dhj )Aga/qwn, e)peidh\ sauto\n e)pidou=nai fqonei=j,a)ll' i(ma/tion gou=n xrh=son h(mi=n toutw|i\ kai\ stro/fion: ou) ga\r tau=ta/ g' w(j ou)k e)/st' e)rei=j. ) Aga/qwn lamba/nete kai\ xrh=sq': ou) fqonw=. Mnhsi/loxoj ti/ ou)=n la/bw; )Aga/qwn o(/ ti; to\n krokwto\n prw=ton e)ndu/ou labw/n. Mnhsi/loxoj nh\ th\n )Afrodi/thn h(du/ g' o)/zei posqi/ou. su/zwson a)nu/saj. ai)=re nu=n stro/fion. Euripides
Stand
up;
I
am
now
going
to
remove
your
hair.
Bend
down.
 Kinsman
Alas!
By
the
god!
They
are
going
to
 grill
me
like
a
pig.
 Euripides
Come
now,
a
torch
or
a
lamp!
Bend
down
and
watch
out
for
the
tender
 end
of
your
tool!

 Kinsman
Aye,
aye!
But
I'm
on
fire!
oh!
oh!
Water,
water,
neighbor,
or
my
ass
will
be
 alight!

 Euripides Keep
up
your
courage!

 Kinsman Keep
my
courage,
when
I'm
being
burnt
up?

 Euripides Come,
stop
your
whining,
the
worst
is
over.
 Kinsman Oh!
it's
really
black,
all
burnt
down
there!

 Euripides Don't
worry!
Satyrus
will
wash
it.

 Kinsman Woe
to
him
who
dares
to
wash
me!

 Euripides Agathon,
you
refuse
to
devote
yourself
to
helping
me;
but
lend
me
a
tunic
 and
a
belt.
You
cannot
say
you
do
not
have
them.
Agathon
Take
them
and
use
them
 as
you
like;
I
consent.
 Kinsman
What
shall
I
take?

 Agathon
First
put
on
this
long
saffron‐colored
robe.
 Kinsman
By
Aphrodite!
What
a
sweet
sent!
How
it
smells
of
young
male
tools!
Hand
 it
to
me
quickly. 241 
 























































 241 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae,
237‐256.
 
 108
 
 To
begin,
the
situation
of
depilating
one’s
father‐in‐law
is
funny.
Then
the
specific
 obstacles
that
Euripides
and
Kinsman
encounter
add
to
the
humor
of
the
situation.
 Kinsman
has
to
keep
his
penis
and
ass
out
of
the
way
of
the
flame
that
is
singeing
his
 body
hair
off. 242 
Then
his
penis
turns
black
from
the
soot.

Of
course
the
stage
 picture
would
also
add
to
the
humor
of
the
scene
because
Kinsman
would
be
bent
 over
making
an
exaggerated
show
of
his
giant
costume
genitals
to
Euripides
and
 perhaps
also
to
the
audience.
 Something
that
is
familiar
has
become
unfamiliar,
and
therefore
funny. 243 

 That
is
depilation,
a
normal
activity
for
a
Greek
woman
has
been
subverted
by
it
use
 on
a
man.

And
something
that
is
hidden
has
been
revealed,
namely
Kinsman’s
 genitals.
The
laughter
of
the
audience
at
this
scene
is
an
example
of
the
collective
 whole
laughing
together
and
experiencing
theatrical
telepathy
with
each
other.

 They
are
laughing
at
the
play,
however,
and
are
therefore
not
experiencing
the
effect
 that
Bataille
described
as
being
within
the
emotion
of
the
character.


 
 The
laughter
has
served
as
a
catalyst
and
several
lines
later
Euripides
 exclaims,
“ἁνὴρ μὲν ἡμῖν οὑτοσὶ καὶ δὴ γυνὴ τό γ᾽ εἶδος,
man,
you
have
a
female
 























































 242 
Colin
Austin
and
Douglas
Olsen,
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae
(Oxford:
 Oxford
University
Press,
2004),
133;
Lesley
Ferris,
Acting
Women:
Images
of
Women
 in
Theatre
(New
York:
Palgrave
MacMillan,
1989),
28;
Lauren
Taafe,
Aristophanes
 and
Women
(London:
Routledge,
1993),
79
and
84;
Elizabeth
Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
 of
Roles:
Playacting
and
Privilege
in
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae”
in
The
City
 as
Comedy:
Society
and
Representation
in
Athenian
Drama,
ed.
G.W.
Dobrov
(Chapel
 Hill:
The
University
of
North
Carolina
Press,
1997),
179.
For
more
on
the
word
play
 of
house
fires
see
Plu.
Rom.
20.6;
Quint.
Decl.
12.6;
Prop.
iv.
8.
58;
Sen.
Ep.
17.3;
Juv.
 3.198.
Taafe,
Aristophanes
and
Women,
84‐85;
Ferris,
Acting
Women,
28.
 243 
Freud
called
this
juxtaposition
of
familiar
and
unfamiliar
the
Uncanny.
 
 109
 shape
indeed!” 244 ;
Kinsman’s
transformation
is
complete.

After
this
laughter
the
 world
is
not
the
same
for
Kinsman.

He
must
go
to
the
Thesmophoria
like
a
good
 Athenian
woman
and
attempt
to
navigate
in
a
female
world,
which,
of
course,
goes
 horribly
awry. 245 
 
 We
can
clearly
see
ritual
ties
in
the
Thesmophoriazusae,
although
the
 transformation
of
Kinsman
does
not
make
him
a
tool
to
use
in
the
ritual
like
the
 Megarian
girl/piggies
in
Acharnians.

The
key
concept
to
note
is
that
the
 transformation
of
Kinsman
introduces
change
as
an
important
theme
in
the
play
and
 calls
to
mind
important
rituals
of
transformation
that
took
place
at
the
 Thesmophoria,
with
which
every
Athenian
citizen,
and
most
likely
any
Greek
 watching
the
play
would
have
been
familiar. 246 
This
scene
and
the
ensuing
 transformation
would
have
made
the
audience
think
of
the
ritual
abuse
and
jesting
 that
was
an
integral
part
of
the
Thesmophoria.

In
addition
the
audience,
no
doubt,
 would
have
made
the
further
connection
of
transformation
with
the
ritual
fertilizer
 























































 244 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
266.
Austin
and
Olsen,
Aristophanes’
 Thesmophoriazusae,
140
and
Seager,
CJ
3
(1890)
499.
On
the
participle
see
GP
251‐ 2;
cf.
213‐14
n.
For
more
on
men
“acting
like”
women
see
Eric
Handley,
“Acting,
 Action
and
Words
in
New
Comedy”
in
Greek
and
Roman
Actors:
Aspects
of
an
Ancient
 Profession,
ed.
Pat
Easterling
and
Edith
Hall
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
 Press,
2002).
 245 
For
a
very
thorough
discussion
of
Comic
costume
see
Helene
Foley’s
“The
Comic
 Body
in
Greek
Art
and
Drama”
in
Not
the
Classical
Ideal:
Athens
and
the
Construction
 of
the
Other
in
Greek
Art,
ed.
Beth
Cohen
(Boston:
Brill,
2000).
Foley
also
discusses
 the
particulars
of
Kinsman’s
transformation
in
terms
of
the
specific
costuming
 elements
that
the
actor
would
have
worn.
 246 
This
is
not
to
say
that
the
male
audience
would
know
about
the
specifics
of
the
 rites,
which
were
kept
secret,
but
that
they
would
have
been
aware
of
the
general
 idea
of
the
Thesmophoria
celebrations;
i.e.
that
they
were
connected
to
Demeter,
the
 cycles
of
the
agricultural
year,
and
fertility.

Unlike
the
rituals
at
and
before
Eleusis
 for
the
Mysteries,
each
city‐state
celebrated
the
Thesmophoria
in
its
own
way,
 although
certain
similarities
naturally
occur.
 
 110
 that
was
created
at
the
festival
with
rotten
pig
remains, 247 
which
is
both
a
literal,
 material
transformation 248 
and
a
palimpsestic
metaphor
of
change.

The
piglets
 sacrificed
and
put
in
a
huge
hole
in
the
ground
several
days
earlier
are
retrieved
and
 made
into
fertilizer,
the
fertilizer
indicates
the
change
of
season
and
the
fall
planting
 that
is
about
to
begin,
the
cycle
of
life
and
death,
the
transformation
of
seed
into
 food,
etc.

The
rituals
and
Kinsman’s
transformation
serve
to
back
each
other
up
and
 strengthen
the
theme
of
transformation
in
the
play.
The
later
series
of
 transformations
even
parallels
(although
not
perfectly)
Demeter’s
search
for
 Persephone
and
her
eventual
release
from
Hades
for
nine
months
of
the
year
with
 Euripides’
attempts
to
free
Kinsman
from
the
women
of
Athens. 249 


 
 After
Kinsman’s
arrival
at
the
Thesmophoria
the
women
quickly
become
 suspicious
of
him
and
his
disguise,
and
attempt
to
have
him
arrested
and
brought
to
 trial
for
sacrilegiously
attending
a
female‐only
festival. 250 

In
order
to
free
himself
 Kinsman,
and
then
Kinsman
and
Euripides
use
a
series
of
plots
(and
lines)
from
four
 of
Euripides’
tragedies:
Telephus,
Palamedes,
Helen,
and
Andromeda.

In
doing
so
 they
set
off
a
series
of
transformations,
an
infant
turns
into
a
wineskin,
Kinsman
and
 Euripides
become
various
tragic
heroes
and
heroines,
tragedy
becomes
comedy,
and
 finally,
Kinsman
becomes
male
again.

This
set
of
transformations
works
as
a
whole
 to
undo
the
topsy‐turvy
power
dynamic
of
the
play
where
women
are
calling
the
 























































 247 
See
Appendix
A
for
more
on
the
specific
events
that
took
place
during
the
 Athenian
Thesmophoria.

 248 
This
I
again
an
example
of
Rappaport’s
idea
about
both
the
ritual
to
change
and
 object
and
the
changed
object
both
being
important.
 249 
Angeliki
Tzanetou,
“Something
to
Do
with
Demeter:
Ritual
and
Performance
in
 Aristophanes'
Women
at
the
Thesmophoria,”
The
American
Journal
of
Philology
123
 (2002):
342.
 250 
Taafe,
Aristophanes
and
Women,
74
and
Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles,”178.
 
 111
 shots
and
exercising
their
power
over
both
Kinsman
(they
can
have
him
arrested)
 and
Euripides
(they
are
condemning
him
to
death) 251 
and
reassert
the
patriarchal
 system.

It
also
is
a
key
part
of
an
ongoing
conversation
that
Aristophanes
is
having
 with
the
Athenian
audience
about
genre
and
intertextuality. 252 


 Transformation
and
intertextuality
in
the
Thesmophoriazusae
have
some
 very
clear
common
ground.

One
of
the
main
purposes
of
the
intertextual
scenes
is
 to
facilitate
the
transformation
of
Kinsman
and
Euripides
to
enable
their
escape
 from
the
wives
of
Athens.

Intertextuality
in
Aristophanes
is,
in
fact,
a
subset
of
 transformation.

Aristophanes
uses
snippets
of
Euripides’
texts
and
segments
of
his
 plots
to
re‐imagine
them
as
comedy
and
to
transform
their
meaning.
Platter
argues
 that
Aristophanes
makes
the
intertextual
plots
sometimes
successful
and
sometimes
 unsuccessful
to
create
a
matrix
of
ambivalence
about
tragedy
and
how
the
wisdom
 from
it
can
be
applied.
Zeitlin
sees
intertextuality
in
the
Thesmophoriazusae
as
part
 of
an
investigation
of
theater
and
identity
through
mimesis,
gender,
and
genre. 253 

 Intertextuality
in
Aristophanes'
Thesmophoriazusae
can
certainly
be
a
method
for
 investigating
both
of
these
things,
however,
it
is
also
very
much
about
 























































 251 
Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles,”
177;
Frances
Muecke,
“Playing
with
the
Play:
 Theatrical
Self‐consciousness
in
Aristophanes,”
Antichthon
11
(1977);
and
Froma
 Zeitlin,
“Travesties
of
Gender
and
Genre
in
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae”
in
 Reflections
of
Women
in
Antiquity,
ed.
Helene
Foley
(New
York:
Gordon
&
Breach,
 1981).
 252 
See
Charles
Platter,
Aristophanes
and
the
Carnival
of
Genres
(Baltimore:
Johns
 Hopkins
University
Press,
2006)
for
more
on
intertextuality
in
other
Aristophanes
 plays.
For
the
links
between
gender
and
intertextuality
see
Froma
Zeitlin,
Playing
 The
Other:
Gender
and
Society
in
Classical
Greek
Literature
(Chicago:
The
University
 of
Chicago
Press,
1985).

I
will
elaborate
on
the
ideas
of
genre
and
intertextuality
in
 Chapter
4.
 253 
Froma
Zeitlin,
Playing
the
Other:
Gender
and
Society
in
Classics
Greek
Literature
 (Chicago:
University
of
Chicago
Press,
1985)
esp.
Chapter
9,
“Travesties
of
Gender
 and
Genre
in
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae.”
 
 112
 transformation.

At
a
festival
dedicated
to
seasonal
change
and
agricultural
 transformation
a
male
character
changes
gender
(four
times!)
and
employs
the
plots
 of
tragedies
within
a
comedic
contest,
and,
as
Zeitlin
points
out, 254 
by
using
these
 abduction/rescue
plots
from
Euripides
transforms
the
mythological
tale
that
forms
 the
backbone
of
the
Thesmophoria,
the
rape
of
Persephone
by
Hades
and
her
 seasonal
rescue
by
her
mother.


 The
first
Euripidean
tragedy
the
Kinsman
employs
in
an
attempt
to
escape
 from
the
women
at
the
Thesmophoria,
who
by
this
time
have
seen
through
his
 costume,
is
the
Telephus. 255 

Euripides’
Telephus
did
not
survive
intact;
we
have
only
 fragments
and
Aristophanes’
parody
of
the
play.

It
presumably
involved
the
kidnap
 and
threatened
death
of
baby
Orestes
with
a
positive
outcome
for
Telephus, 256 
 because
Kinsman
employs
the
same
strategy.


He
grabs
Mica’s
baby
and
claims
he
 will
kill
the
baby
if
the
women
do
not
let
him
go
(692‐695).

The
scene
is
 unsuccessful
in
several
ways,
first
the
“baby”
turns
out
to
be
a
wineskin
that
Mica
 has
been
drinking
from,
second
the
wineskin
is
“sacrificed”
by
Kinsman,
(unlike
the
 baby
Orestes
in
Telephus),
and
thirdly
Kinsman
does
not
have
a
successful
 























































 254 
Zeitlin,
Playing
the
Other,
375‐416.
 255 
Harold
Miller,
“Euripides’
Telephus
and
the
Thesmophoriazusae
of
 Aristophanes,”
Classical
Philology
43
(1948):
182‐3;
P.
Rau,
“Die
Tragodienspiel
en
 den
‘Thesmophoriazusen,’”
in
Aristophanes
und
die
Alte
Komodie,
ed.
Hans‐Joachim
 Newiger
(Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft,
1975);
Zeitlin,
“Travesties
 of
Gender
and
Genre,
”184;
Taafe,
Aristophanes
and
Women,
94‐5;
Alan
 Sommerstein,
Aristophanes:
Thesmophoriazusae
(Warminster:
Aris
&
Phillips,
1994),
 212
and
223;
and
Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles,”
184.
 256 
Telephus
was
wounded
by
Achilles
in
a
battle
as
the
Achaeans
made
their
way
to
 Troy
to
reclaim
Helen.
When
the
wound
wouldn’t
heal,
Telephus
went
to
Delphi
to
 ask
the
oracle
for
advice
and
was
told,
“he
that
wounded
shall
heal”.

When
the
 Achaeans
at
first
would
not
help
him,
he
snatched
the
baby
Orestes
and
threatened
 to
kill
him
if
the
Achaeans
didn’t
help.

Ultimately,
Odysseus
figured
out
how
to
heal
 the
wound
(with
Achilles’
spear)
and
Orestes
was
returned
unharmed.


 
 113
 conclusion
to
his
standoff
with
the
women
(Telephus’
standoff
with
the
Achaeans
 ends
in
his
favor). 257 

Despite
a
revelation:
the
baby
is
unswaddled
and
revealed
to
 be
a
wineskin 258 
and
much
joking
and
double
entendres
that
would
have
elicited
 laughter
the
transformation
that
Kinsman
is
hoping
for,
from
prisoner
to
free
man,
 does
not
occur.

Certainly
the
scene
is
rife
with
transformative
language
and
 allusions;
Mica
threatens
to
change
Kinsman
into
a
piece
of
charcoal
by
burning
him
 (729),
the
baby
“changes”
from
an
infant
to
a
wineskin
(730‐734),
and
Kinsman
 makes
reference
to
the
Anthesteria, 259 
a
festival
to
Dionysos
that
celebrated
the
 successful
aging
of
grape
juice
into
wine
(745‐6),
however
Kinsman
has
to
try
 another
tragic
plot
in
the
hopes
of
escaping.
 Kinsman
realizes
that
since
Euripides
got
him
into
this
mess
he
should
turn
 to
Euripides
for
help
and
decides
to
use
a
method
of
silently
getting
a
message
to
 Euripides
from
his
recent
Palamedes.

In
the
play,
which
does
not
survive,
 Palamedes’
brother
Oeax
scratches
a
message
to
their
father
into
oar
blades
and
 drifts
them
back
to
Greece.

In
the
absence
of
oars,
Kinsman
uses
wooden
votive
 tablets
which
he
sends
off
with,

“βάσκετ᾽
ἐπείγετε
πάσας
καθ᾽
ὁδοὺς
Away!
Hasten
 down
every
road” 260 
rather
than
the
sea.
This
second
parody
carries
through
the
 parabasis
in
which
the
women
of
Athens
offer
their
defense
of
themselves
against
 























































 257 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
695‐764.
For
the
specifics
of
tragic
language
 used
here
see
Austin
and
Olsen,
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae,
244‐5.
 258 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
730‐734.
 259 
Austin
and
Olsen,
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae,
254;
Euripides,
Iphigenia
in
 Taurus,
947‐60;
Arthur
Pickard‐Cambridge,
the
Dramatic
Festivals
of
Athens
(Oxford:
 Clarendon
Press,
1989),
10‐12;
Deubner,
Attische
Feste,
93‐122;
Richard
Hamilton,
 Choes
and
Anthesteria:
Athenian
Iconography
and
Ritual
(Ann
Arbor:
The
University
 of
Michigan
Press,
1992),
5‐62.
 260 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
783.
 
 114
 men’s
common
complaints
about
them.

The
women
are
defending
themselves
from
 what
they
claim
are
false
accusations,
just
like
Palamedes
in
Euripides’
play,
who
 has
been
set
up
by
Odysseus
and
charged
on
the
basis
of
false
evidence.
Like
 Palamedes,
they
are
doomed
to
pay
the
price
for
these
charges,
as
it
doesn’t
seem
 like
men
will
stop
their
complaints
and
at
the
end
of
the
comedy
any
power
the
 women
have
has
been
taken
away
from
them,
as
I
will
discuss
in
more
detail
shortly.

 At
the
close
of
the
parabasis
Kinsman
is
still
waiting
for
Euripides
and
decides
if
he
 really
wants
to
be
rescued
he
had
better
try
another
plot,
because
although
 Palamedes
has
been
transformed
for
comedy
Kinsman
is
still
a
prisoner.
 Although
he
has
been
unmasked
(figuratively)
as
a
man
in
women’s
clothing,
 Kinsman
decides
that
since
he
is
already
costumed
as
a
woman
he
will
try
 reasserting
his
womanhood
and
use
Euripides’
Helen
and
star
as
Helen
for
his
next
 escape
plan. 261 

Critylla,
the
leader
of
the
women
during
the
festival
takes
part
in
 this
scene
as
a
disbelieving
audience,
the
straight
man,
who
can’t
quite
catch
up
to
 the
literary
parody
by
Kinsman
and
Euripides.
And
finally
Euripides
arrives
dressed
 as
a
shipwrecked
Menelaus
to
rescue
Kinsman/Helen.

However,
despite
their
 attempts
to
draw
Critylla
into
the
plot 262 
she
blocks
their
escape
as
the
Marshal
and
 Archer
arrive
to
guard
Kinsman.
 























































 261 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
850‐1.
See
also
Austin
and
Olsen,
Aristophanes’
 Thesmophoriazusae,
lx‐lxi
and
279;
A.
M.
Bowie,
Aristophanes:
Myth,
Ritual
and
 Comedy
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
1993),
218‐9;
Taafe,
Aristophanes
 and
Women,
95;
and
Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles,”
184.
 262 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
874‐6;
881‐4;
892‐4;
896‐99;
918‐23.
For
 more
on
Aristophanes’
parody
of
tragic
conventions
see
Peter
Arnott,
Greek
Scenic
 Conventions
in
the
Fifth
Century
B.C.
(Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press,
1962),
62.
 
 115
 The
council
has
decreed
that
Kinsman
must
be
tied
to
a
plank
while
still
in
 women’s
cloths
and
executed. 263 

And
this
set‐up
allows
Kinsman
to
try
one
more
 tragic
plot
to
evade
his
fate,
Euripides’
Andromeda.

Just
like
the
eponymous
heroine
 he
is
bound
and
suspended,
skirts
fluttering.

Kinsman
makes
a
plea
to
the
women
to
 free
him
and
then
Echo
arrives.

In
Euripides’
tragedy
Andromeda
is
imprisoned
in
 Echo’s
cave,
however
Echo’s
vocal
quirks
here
only
serve
comedy,
in
fact
she
is
a
 jester
who
claims
to
have
helped
Euripides
last
year
when
he
put
up
Andromeda. 264 

 Echo
begins
to
interrupt
and
repeat
Kinsman,
who
quickly
becomes
angry
and
the
 two
trade
the
same
insults
back
and
forth.

Then
the
archer
enters
and
he
quickly
 falls
into
the
same
trap.

Finally
Euripides
arrives
as
Perseus,
however
this
time
it
is
 the
Archer,
who
is
portrayed
as
too
foreign/stupid
to
understand
the
parody.

Again
 Euripides
is
forced
to
retreat
without
Kinsman.


 The
final
strategy
Kinsman
and
Euripides
employ
is
not
a
Euripidean
tragedy
 at
all,
but
a
comedy.

Euripides,
dressed
as
a
madam,
brings
a
slave
girl
(a
mute
nude
 hetaira)
to
distract
the
Archer.

He
offers
the
women
a
deal
–
if
they
allow
him
to
 rescue
Kinsman
he
won’t
say
anything
bad
about
them
in
the
future
and
if
they
don’t
 agree
he
will
tell
their
husbands
what
they
have
been
up
to
while
the
husbands
have
 been
away.

The
women
agree
and
Euripides
begins
his
comedy.

The
Archer
is
 easily
diverted
from
his
task
of
guarding
Kinsman
by
the
beautiful
slave
girl,
which
 allows
Kinsman
and
Euripides
to
escape.


 























































 263 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
929‐34.
 264 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
1059‐63.
Taafe,
Aristophanes
and
Women,
97
 and
Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles,”
185.
 
 116
 This
series
of
parodies,
transformations,
and
failed
transformations
was
 often
categorized
by
scholars
of
comedy
as
a
hodgepodge,
an
instance
of
comic
fun
 with
no
real
substance
and
dismissed
it
in
favor
of
other
Aristophanes
plays
with
 women
in
charge
or
ritual
associations. 265 

However,
I
agree
with
Zeitlin
that
the
 play
and
this
series
of
parodies
are
cohesive
and
purposeful.

First,
and
perhaps
 most
obviously,
we
have
the
triumph
of
comedy
over
tragedy. 266 

Or
at
the
very
least
 comedy
is
revealed
to
be
more
useful
than
tragedy,
since
it
is
not
until
Euripides
and
 Kinsman
employ
a
comic
rather
than
a
tragic
plot
that
they
are
able
to
escape. 267 


 However
this
series
goes
much
deeper
than
a
criticism
of
theatrical
 aesthetics
and
generic
concerns.
There
are
certain
characters
who
understand
the
 parody
and
revelation/laughter/transformation
paradigm
and
therefore
the
 conventions
of
the
theater
and
certain
characters
who
do
not.

Crytilla
and
the
 Archer
play
the
same
role
in
the
two
parodies
of
Helen
and
Andromeda
and
are
 linked
in
their
thick
misunderstanding
of
what
is
happening. 268 

Only
Kinsman
and
 























































 265 
Zeitlin
discusses
this
in
Playing
the
Other;
Harriott
Poetry
and
Criticism
Before
 Plato;
Snell
“Aristophanes
and
Aesthetic
Criticism”
in
The
Discovery
of
the
Mind:
The
 Greek
Origins
of
European
Thought;
Whitman
Aristophanes
and
the
Comic
Hero
are
 all
examples
of
scholarly
work
that
either
shortchanges
Thesmophoriazusae
in
favor
 of
the
other
“women’s
plays”
(Lysistrata
and
Assemblywomen)
or
overlooks
 Thesmophoriazusae
in
favor
of
other
ritual
plays
(Frogs).

 266 
I
am
certainly
not
the
only
person
to
see
this
triumph
of
comedy.

See
also
Anton
 Bierl,
“Dionysos
und
die
griechische
Tragodie.
Politische
und
 ‘metatheatricalische’Aspekte
im
Text”
Classica
Monacensia
1
(1991);
Thomas
 Hubbard,
The
Mask
of
Comedy:
Aristophanes
and
the
Intertextual
Parabasis
(Ithaca:
 Cornell
University
Press,
1991),
182‐99;
Bowie
1993
217‐25;
Taafe,
Aristophanes
 and
Women,
98‐9;
Henderson,
Three
Plays
by
Aristophanes,
96‐7;
Zeitlin,
Playing
the
 Other,
387‐99;
and
Tzanetou,
“Something
to
do
with
Demeter,”
355‐9.


 267 
I
will
return
to
this
idea
of
usefulness
and
to
what
use
Aristophanes
was
putting
 his
comedies
in
Chapter
4.
 268 
Joseph
Dane,
“Aristophanic
Parody:
“Thesmophoriazusae”
and
the
Three‐Actor
 Rule,”
Theatre
Journal
36
(1984):
78
also
notes
that
Crytilla
and
the
Archer
are
 
 117
 Euripides
understand
and
can
play
with
the
conventions
of
genre,
costume,
and
 transformation.

This
complete
confusion
on
the
part
of
the
leader
of
the
women
in
 the
play
and
her
connection
with
the
buffoon‐like
Archer
greatly
undermine
the
 power
of
the
women
in
the
play
and
are
a
significant
element
in
the
“re‐aligning”
of
 the
power,
into
its
“proper”
sphere.

 At
the
start
of
Thesmophoriazusae
the
women
are
in
charge.

They
have
taken
 over
the
ritual
space
on
the
Pnyx
(as
was
customary
during
the
Thesmophoria).

But
 their
power
is
not
limited
to
the
ritual
space
or
to
the
ritual
at
hand.

Instead
they
 have
decided
to
hold
a
trial
of
Euripides
and
to
determine
if
he
will
be
put
to
 death. 269 

Even
though
in
reality
a
trial
could
not
be
held
on
ritual
days
and
certainly
 not
by
a
group
of
women;
in
the
world
of
the
play
the
power
structure
is
topsy‐ turvy.

By
the
time
Kinsman
is
unmasked
as
a
man
and
taken
prisoner
by
the
women
 the
women’s
power
has
reached
it
zenith.
They
have
control
over
both
the
male
 protagonists
and
the
power
to
put
them
to
death.

It
is
only
through
the
series
of
 parodies
that
Euripides
and
Kinsman
are
able
to
topple
the
women’s
administration
 and
reassert
their
dominant
roles.


 This
is
accomplished
in
part
by
their
mastery
of
transformation.

Even
though
 the
play
is
set
during
a
festival
of
transformation
controlled
by
women,
the
leader
of
 their
religious
practices
does
not
seem
to
understand
transformation
at
all.

 Crytilla’s
interactions
with
Kinsman/Helen
and
Euripides/Menelaus
are
ploddingly
 























































 linked
in
their
misunderstanding
of
the
parody.
Although
he
believes
that
the
 audience
would
side
with
Crytilla
and
the
Archer,
I
do
not
agree.

Audiences
usually
 identify
with
the
hero
of
the
play
and
in
this
instance
either
Euripides
or
Kinsman
 (or
perhaps
both)
are
the
Comic
Hero(es).
See
also
Taafe,
Women
and
Aristophanes,
 96
and
101
on
Thesmophoriazusae
uniting
men
against
women.
 269 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
81‐85.
 
 118
 prosaic
and
literal.

When
Kinsman
tells
Euripides
that
they
are
in
the
halls
of
 Proteus,
Crytilla
insists
that
Proteus
has
been
dead
for
10
years
–
and
is
clearly
 referring
to
a
former
acquaintance,
not
the
mythical
Proteus
from
the
Trojan
 cycle. 270 

When
Euripides
(still
playing
the
part
of
shipwrecked
Menelaus)
asks
 where
he
has
landed
and
Kinsman/Helen
tells
him
they
are
in
Egypt,
Crytilla
still
 does
not
understand
the
parody
and
insists
they
are
in
the
Thesmophorium. 271 

This
 basic
exchange
continues
(Euripides
and
Kinsman
acting
their
roles
and
Crytilla
 taking
them
literally)
until
Crytilla
decides
that
Euripides
is
a
criminal
like
Kinsman
 (although
still
never
recognizing
him
as
either
Euripides,
the
playwright
the
women
 have
just
been
talking
about
at
length,
or
as
Menelaus)
and
at
the
entrance
of
the
 Marshall
and
the
Archer
Euripides
runs
away
to
think
up
another
strategy.
 In
the
subsequent
parody
of
Andromeda,
the
Archer
is
the
bumbling
prosaic
 straight
man
who
doesn’t
understand
what
Euripides,
Echo,
and
Kinsman
are
up
to.

 By
having
these
two
scenes
with
Crytilla
and
the
Archer
fulfilling
the
same
role
back
 to
back
the
association
of
the
two
and
the
underlying
message
is
clear:
women
and
 foreigners
do
not
understand
transformation
and
cannot
interact
with
 transformation
on
the
same
level
of
mastery
as
Athenian
men
are
able
to. 272 
 























































 270 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
874‐6.
 271 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
877‐880.
 272 
Many
scholars
talk
about
these
parodies
as
failed
and
I
agree
–
they
do
not
 facilitate
transformation.

They
do
fail
to
set
Kinsman
free
or
smooth
over
the
rift
 between
Euripides
and
the
women
of
Athens.

However,
if
we
look
at
them
in
terms
 of
transformation
they
can
give
us
very
useful
information
about
what
a
failed
 transformation
is.
Euripides
and
Kinsman
are
transformed
into
various
characters.
 Where
they
fall
short
is
audience
transformation.

All
of
the
Euripidean
plots
while
 clear
to
an
ancient
audience
watching,
and
a
modern
reading
audience,
are
opaque
 to
their
intended
audiences
within
the
play
(the
Chorus,
Crytilla,
and
the
Archer).

 And
this
is
a
noteworthy
element
of
transformation
for
the
theater
–
nothing
will
be
 
 119
 
 In
fact,
in
the
play
men
are
so
much
more
in
control
of
transformation
that
 Euripides
is
able
to
use
the
series
of
parodies
to
get
exactly
what
he
wants.

When,
 after
four
of
his
tragic
plots
have
been
unsuccessful,
he
enters
dressed
as
an
old
 woman
with
a
flute
girl
in
tow
it
is
clear
that
Euripides
is
now
parodying
comedy.
 Immediately
he
tells
the
women
that
they
should
make
a
deal
with
him
because
he
 now
has
figured
out
a
foolproof
way
to
rescue
Kinsman
and
evade
the
women’s
 punishment.

In
the
space
of
the
four
tragic
parodies
the
women
have
lost
 considerable
power.

Euripides
offers
them
a
deal,
 Εὐριπίδης γυναῖκες εἰ βούλεσθε τὸν λοιπόν χρόνον σπονδὰς ποιήσασθαι πρὸς ἐμέ, νυνὶ πάρα, ἐφ᾽ ᾧτ᾽ ἀκοῦσαι μηδὲν ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ μηδαμὰ κακὸν τὸ λοιπόν. ταῦτ᾽ ἐπικηρυκεύομαι. Χορός χρείᾳ δὲ ποίᾳ τόνδ᾽ ἐπεσφέρεις λόγον; Εὐριπίδης ὅδ᾽ ἐστὶν οὑν τῇ σανίδι κηδεστὴς ἐμός. ἢν οὖν κομίσωμαι τοῦτον, οὐδὲν μή ποτε κακῶς ἀκούσητ᾽: ἢν δὲ μὴ πίθησθέ μοι, ἃ νῦν ὑποικουρεῖτε τοῖσιν ἀνδράσιν ἀπὸ τῆς στρατιᾶς παροῦσιν ὑμῶν διαβαλῶ. Χορός τὰ μὲν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἴσθι σοι πεπεισμένα: Euripides Women, if you will be reconciled with me, I am willing, and I undertake never to say anything ill of you in future. Those are my proposals for peace. Chorus And what impels you to make these overtures? 























































 accomplished
or
even
be
comprehensible
if
you
do
not
transform
your
audience
as
 well.

The
transformation
of
the
audience
is
an
idea
I
will
return
to
in
the
next
 chapter.
In
a
private
email
Helene
Foley
noted
that
she
believes
they
fail
because
 they
are
neither
tragedy
nor
comedy.

I
think
this
is
an
intriguing
idea
and
could
 have
further
development
with
the
trugodia
discussed
in
the
next
chapter.
See
also
 Bobrick,
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles,”
188‐9
and
Edith
Hall,
“The
Archer
Scene
in
 Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae,”
Philologus:
Zeitschrift
fur
das
klassische
Alterum
 133
(1989).
Also
see
Zeitlin,
Playing
the
Other,
69
on
the
role
of
women
as
useful
 tools
to
help
along
the
plot
of
a
comedy.
 
 120
 Euripides This unfortunate man, who is chained to the post, is my father-in-law; if you will restore him to me, you will have no more cause to complain of me; but if not, I shall reveal your pranks to your husbands when they return from the war. Chorus We accept peace. 273 His
proposal
to
the
women
is
half
compromise
and
half
threat.

And
since
they
are
 about
to
loose
all
of
their
leverage
the
women
have
no
choice
and
are
forced
to
 agree
to
Euripides’
terms,
luckily
they
do
get
a
promise
of
no
more
misogyny. 274 

As
 Zeitlin
and
others
have
argued,
at
the
close
of
the
play
we
see
the
patriarchal
power
 structure
restored.

This
would
happen
in
reality
at
the
close
of
the
Thesmophoria,
 when
the
women
left
the
Pnyx
and
resumed
their
normal
lives
in
the
home,
far
from
 any
courts
or
other
powerful
institution.

The
difference
I
want
to
highlight
is
that
it
 is
only
through
the
authoritative
use
of
transformation
that
the
two
Athenian
men
 are
able
to
restore
their
own
autonomy
and
by
extension
the
“correct”
power
 structure
for
all
of
Athens.


 
 The
Frogs
 Aristophanes’
Frogs
has
many
well‐documented
ritual
moments
representing
 and
reinterpreting
festivals
to
both
Demeter
and
Dionysos.

Despite
the
fact
that
this
 play
has
been
dissected
and
discussed
for
centuries
I
don’t
think
there
has
been
a
 























































 273 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
 274 
Zeitlin
in
Playing
the
Other
also
argues
that
the
women
are
about
to
loose
all
of
 their
bargaining
power.
 
 121
 compelling
argument
for
why
there
are
two
choruses
and
why
the
first
chorus
is
a
 group
of
frogs.

However,
I
do
believe
that
if
we
look
at
this
play
with
the
theme
of
 transformation
in
mind
there
is
a
cohesive
and
compelling
reason
for
the
two
 choruses
and
that
this
theme
carries
through
to
the
contest
between
the
great
 tragedians:
Euripides
and
Aeschylus.


 The
first
transformation
of
the
play
takes
place
before
the
action
commences.

 Dionysos
enters
wearing
his
own
customary
garments
with
a
lion
skin
over
the
 top. 275 

He
has
attempted
to
transform
into
Herakles
in
order
to
make
his
way
down
 into
 the
 underworld
 to
 retrieve
 Euripides,
 who
 has
 recently
 died. 276 
 
 This
 transformation
is
interesting
from
the
perspective
of
my
paradigm;
it
has
partially
 occurred
–
but
doesn’t
quite
work
and
needs
some
fine‐tuning.
Herakles
when
he
 sees
the
disguised
Dionysos
can’t
stop
laughing 277 
and
doesn’t
recognize
himself
in
 the
costume
Dionysos
has
devised. 278 

However
this
laughter
and
then
the
revelation
 by
Herakles
of
how
to
get
to
Hades 279 
seem
to
do
the
trick
because
once
in
Hades
 Dionysos
is
mistaken
for
Herakles
by
Aeacus 280 
who
yells
at
him
and
threatens
to
 beat
him
up
for
mistreating
Cerberus
last
time
he
was
in
Hades
(Herakles
was
 actually
the
one
to
manhandle
Cerberus).


 After
this
initial
mis‐recognition
of
Dionysos‐Herakles
there
is
a
whole
series
 of
transformations
as
Dionysos
and
his
slave
Xanthias
swap
the
lion
skin
back
and
 























































 275 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
45‐48.
 276 
Dionysos
has
a
powerful
craving
for
Euripides’
poetry,
such
as
one
might
have
 for
thick
soup (ἔτνος).
Frogs
63.

 277 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
42‐45.
 278 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
108‐9.
 279 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
109‐164.
 280 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
465‐9.
 
 122
 forth
and
each
in
turn
get
mis‐recognized
as
the
Herakles.

This
series
follows
a
 more
standard
formula
of
revelation
and
laughter
and
then
transformation.

First
 Dionysos,
terrified
of
Aeacus,
defecates
all
over
himself
and
after
several
jokes,
 reveals
his
ass
to
the
audience
in
an
effort
to
clean
up.

This
enables
Xanthias
to
take
 the
lionskin,
and
then
in
turn
he
is
mistaken
for
Herakles
by
the
Maid,
who
promises
 him
 dancing
 girls
 and
 a
 delicious
 feast
 (to
 uproarious
 laughter
 no
 doubt). 281 

 Dionysos
then
snatches
back
the
lionskin
cloak,
only
to
be
taken
for
Herakles
by
the
 angry
Innkeeper
who
reminds
“Herakles”
how
much
damage
he
did
to
the
inn
and
 how
much
he
ate
last
time
he
was
in
Hades
all
without
payment. 282 
Xanthias
and
 Dionysos
proceed
to
each
attempt
to
force
the
other
to
wear
the
lionskin
and
then
 both
claim
to
be
a
god,
which
leads
to
a
flogging
contest. 283 

However,
the
set‐up
for
 this
quick
back
and
forth
is
the
standard:
revelation
and
laughter,
the
combination
 of
which
engenders
a
transformation.


 These
scenes
and
the
transformations
of
Dionysos
and
Xanthias
into
(and
out
 of)
Herakles
are,
strictly
speaking,
the
only
transformations
in
the
play.
However,
 the
entire
play
is
about
transformation
as
we
can
see
when
we
look
at
the
two
 Choruses
that
Aristophanes
has
written
into
the
play:
the
Frogs
and
the
Initiates
 (they
have
been
initiated
into
the
cult
of
Demeter
at
Eleusis).

 Dionysos
encounters
the
Frogs
as
he
is
rowing
himself
across
the
Styx 284 
on
 his
way
to
Hades
to
retrieve
Euripides.

The
scene
is
funny,
strange,
and
for
a
 modern
reader
a
bit
confusing;
why
is
there
a
chorus
of
Frogs?
What
does
it
mean
 























































 281 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
503‐518.
 282 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
549‐578.
 283 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
635‐671.
 284 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
205
and
following.
 
 123
 for
the
play
as
a
whole,
and
what
do
they
represent?
I
am
certainly
not
the
first
 person
to
investigate
the
scene
between
Dionysos
and
the
Frogs
and
look
for
an
 explanation.
Nancy
Demand
writes,

 In
most
of
the
plays
of
Aristophanes
the
choruses
are
clearly
related
 to
the
play
as
a
whole.

The
birds
and
the
clouds
and
the
wasps
are
 intrinsic
 parts
 of
 their
 plays,
 and
 one
 need
 not
 question
 why
 Aristophanes
chose
choruses
of
women
for
the
Thesmophoriazusae,
 the
Ecclesiazusae,
and
the
Lysistrata,
and
the
choruses
of
the
country
 folk
 for
 the
 peace
 plays,
 the
 Peace
 and
 the
 Acharnians.
 Even
 the
 central
chorus
of
initiates
in
the
Frogs
seems
a
reasonable
enough
 choice
for
a
trip
to
Hades.

However,
the
case
is
very
different
with
the
 other
chorus
in
this
play,
the
chorus
of
frogs,
which
participates
in
 only
one
brief
episode
and
yet
lends
its
name
to
the
play. 285 

 
 David
Campbell
notes
that,
“most
recent
critics
find
relevance
in
the
scene
and
see
 the
contest
between
the
Frogs
and
Dionysos
as
in
some
way
an
anticipation
of
the
 contest
between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides;
or
they
regard
the
song
of
the
Frogs
as
an
 unfavorable
comment
on
contemporary
writers.” 286 

I
certainly
agree
that
there
is
a
 resonance
 between
 the
 contest
 between
 the
 frogs
 and
 Dionysos
 and
 the
 later
 contest.

However,
as
Demand
observed,
usually
the
animal/nonhuman
chorus
in
 some
way
relates
to
the
play
overall
and
is
“intrinsic”.


 
 I
believe
the
key
to
figuring
out
why
the
frogs
are
in
the
play
and
why
 Aristophanes
named
the
play
for
them
is
in
the
very
beginning
of
the
scene
itself.

As
 the
frogs
begin
their
song
they
exhort
each
other,

 























































 285 
Nancy
Demand,
“The
Identity
of
the
Frogs,”
Classical
Philology
65
(1970):
83.
 286 
David
Campbell,
“The
Frogs
in
the
Frogs,”
The
Journal
of
Hellenic
Studies
104
 (1984):
164.
For
more
on
the
scene
as
parody
of
the
skill
of
other
poets
see:
 Demand,
“The
Identity
of
the
Frogs”;
Leo
Strauss,
Socrates
and
Aristophanes
 (Chicago:
The
University
of
Chicago
Press,
1966);
and
Alexis
Solomos,
The
Living
 Aristophanes
(Ann
Arbor:
The
University
of
Michigan
Press,
1974).
 
 124
 λιμναῖα
κρηνῶν
τέκνα,

 ξύναυλον
ὕμνων
βοὰν

 φθεγξώμεθ᾽,
εὔγηρυν
ἐμὰν
ἀοιδάν,

 κοὰξ
κοάξ,


 ἣν
ἀμφὶ
Νυσήιον

 Διὸς
Διόνυσον
ἐν

 Λίμναισιν
ἰαχήσαμεν,

 ἡνίχ᾽
ὁ
κραιπαλόκωμος

 τοῖς
ἱεροῖσι
Χύτροισι

 χωρεῖ
κατ᾽
ἐμὸν
τέμενος
λαῶν
ὄχλος.

 Children
of
the
marsh
and
spring,
 Let
us
sound
a
song
in
concert
with
the
flute,
 Our
own
sweet‐sounding
song,
 Koax
Koax
 Which
once
we
sounded

 About
Nysian
Dionysos,
son
of
Zeus
 In
Limnae
when
the
crowd
of
drunken
revelers,
on
sacred
Pot
Day,

 travelled
through
my
sacred
precinct. 287 
 
 The
frogs’
song
has
a
number
of
clues
about
why
they
are
the
chorus.
First
is
the
 holiday
that
they
mention:
Chytroi
or
Pot
Day.

This
was
the
third
day
of
the
three‐ day
festival
for
Dionysos
in
the
spring,
the
Anthesteria.

The
Anthesteria
celebrated
 the
“arrival
of
Dionysos
to
the
city”
through
several
ritual
observances.

Someone,
 most
likely
the
Archon
Basileus,
dressed
as
Dionysos,
or
perhaps
a
cult
image
of
 Dionysos
arrived
at
the
port
of
Athens
by
boat/chariot
and
was
brought
into
the
city
 in
a
procession. 288 

This
most
likely
occurred
on
the
first
day
of
the
festival,
the
 Pithogia
(opening
of
the
casks). 289 

Also
on
this
day
the
casks
of
new
wine
that
had
 been
fermenting
since
the
previous
harvest
were
opened
in
the
sacred
precinct
to
 Dionysos
southwest
of
the
acropolis, 290 
the
Limnaion,
the
temple
of
Dionysos
e0n 























































 287 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
211‐219.
 288 
See
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
94,
Figure
12
for
a
black
figure
skyphos
painted
 with
this
procession.
 289 
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
93.
 290 
Thucydides,
The
History
of
the
Peloponnesian
War,
ii.
15.
 
 125
 li/mnaij
or
in
the
Marshes.

This
precinct
was
only
open
during
the
Anthesteria,
so
 presumably
wildlife,
like
frogs
would
have
been
free
to
colonize
the
area
all
other
 parts
of
the
year.

It
seems
reasonable
that
a
precinct
in
the
marshes
would
have
had
 a
good
number
of
frogs,
especially
one
that
was
very
rarely
used
for
celebration.
 And
the
Athenian
audience
would
have
been
well
aware
of
this
and
the
association
 of
frogs
with
Dionysos
and
the
Anthesteria
may
not
have
been
so
strange. 291 
 
 This
explanation
however,
does
not
go
far
enough
to
justify
Aristophanes
 using
them
for
the
first
chorus
and
naming
the
play
for
them.

The
second
clue
is
in
 the
very
nature
of
a
frog’s
life
cycle.
Frogs
are
not
born
or
hatched
fully
formed;
 instead
a
mature
female
frog
lays
a
group
of
eggs
that
then
hatch
as
tadpoles.

Over
 the
next
few
weeks
the
tadpoles
sprout
four
legs,
slowly
lose
their
tails,
and
begin
to
 breathe
out
of
the
water,
until
they
transform
into
frogs.

So
unlike
many
other
 animals
frogs
are
not
born
as
tiny
versions
of
their
mature
selves
but
as
a
wholly
 other
type
of
being
that
is
transformed.

Indeed,
this
is
the
link
between
the
two
 choruses
–
they
are
both
choruses
of
transformed
beings.


 
 The
frogs
mention
their
presence
at
the
Anthesteria
both
perhaps
as
an
“in‐ joke”
that
only
a
celebrant
at
Athens
would
understand,
but
also
to
remind
the
 audience
of
the
transformative
nature
of
that
festival.

Dionysos
arrives
in
a
literal
 way
at
Athens
with
the
boat
and
procession,
and
he
also
arrives
in
the
new
wine,
or
 transformed
grape
juice.

And
this
transformation
is
the
main
reason
for
the
 Anthesteria
and
the
opening
of
the
precinct
at
Limnae.

During
the
first
day
the
 casks
of
wine
are
opened
and
a
jug
is
given
to
every
household
that
wants
one.
The
 























































 291 
Parke,
The
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
108
agrees
with
me
that
the
association
 between
the
frog
chorus
and
the
Anthesteria
would
have
been
natural.
 
 126
 second
day
of
the
festival,
Choes
or
Wine
Jug
Day, 292 
revolves
around
private
 drinking
parties
and
contests
in
Athenian
homes
and
the
city
held
a
citywide
 drinking
contest. 293 


 
 The
chorus
and
the
title
of
the
Frogs
is
neither
baffling
nor
does
it
require
a
 tortuous
explanation
when
we
look
at
it
through
the
lens
of
transformation.

Viewed
 this
way
the
frogs
are
clearly
intrinsic
to
the
play
and
are
a
comedic
counterpoint
to
 their
co‐chorus,
the
Eleusinian
Initiates,
just
as
their
contest
with
Dionysos
is
a
 comedic
foreshadowing
of
the
tragic
contest
between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides. 294 
 
 The
Birds
 
 The
transformation
of
Euelpides
and
Peisetaerus
in
Aristophanes’
Birds 295 
is
 a
species
transformation
rather
than
a
gender
or
identity
conversion.

The
two
 elderly
men
have
left
Athens
in
search
of
Tereus,
the
man
who,
after
raping
and
 mutilating
his
sister‐in‐law,
was
turned,
by
the
gods,
into
a
bird.

Finally
the
two
 Athenians
find
Tereus
and
his
kingdom
and
convince
the
birds
that
they
do
not
wish
 to
harm
them
but
instead
to
join
them 296 
and
help
them
overthrow
the
gods.

Once
 























































 292 
The
only
remaining
literary
evidence
for
this
day
of
the
festival
is
the
Acharnians
 and
a
story
from
Timaeus.
Although
there
are
numerous
representations
on
wine
 jugs
see
Henry
Immerwahr,
“Choes
and
Chytroi,”
Transactions
and
Proceedings
of
 the
American
Philological
Association
77
(1946).
 293 
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
95.
 294 
I
will
discuss
this
scene
between
Dionysos,
Aeschylus
and
Euripides
in
much
 greater
detail
in
Chapter
4.
 295 
The
Knights
is
chronologically
the
first
non‐ritual
play
to
have
a
transformation
 as
a
major
part
of
the
action
in
the
play.

However,
this
play
explains
and
illustrates
 a
much
larger
project
of
Aristophanes’.

So
I
will
look
at
it
in
the
following
chapter.
 296 
Aristophanes
Birds,
ed.
and
trans
Alan
H.
Sommerstein
(Oxford:
Oxbow
Books,
 1987)
62‐64.
 
 127
 the
birds
are
persuaded
of
the
Athenians’
good
intentions
they
give
Euelpides
and
 Peisetaerus
lunch
and
an
erotic
show
before
their
transformation
into
birds.
 
 Χορός
 τούτους μὲν ἄγων μετὰ σαυτοῦ
 ἀρίστισον εὖ: τὴν δ᾽ ἡδυμελῆ ξύμφωνον ἀηδόνα Μούσαις κατάλειφ᾽ ἡμῖν δεῦρ᾽ ἐκβιβάσας, ἵνα παίσωμεν μετ᾽ ἐκείνης. Πισθέταιρος
 ὦ τοῦτο μεντοι νὴ Δί᾽ αὐτοῖσιν πιθοῦ:
ἐκβίβασον ἐκ τοῦ βουτόμου τοὐρνίθιον. Ἐυελπίδης
 ἐκβίβασον αὐτοῦ πρὸς θεῶν αὐτήν, ἵνα
 καὶ νὼ θεασώμεσθα τὴν ἀηδόνα. Ἔποψ ἀλλ᾽ εἰ δοκεῖ σφῷν, ταῦτα χρὴ δρᾶν. ἡ Πρόκνη
 ἔκβαινε καὶ σαυτὴν ἐπιδείκνυ τοῖς ξένοις. Πισθέταιρος 
ὦ Ζεῦ πολυτίμηθ᾽ ὡς καλὸν τοὐρνίθιον, 
ὡς δ᾽ ἁπαλόν, ὡς δὲ λευκόν. Ἐυελπίδης 
ἆρά γ᾽ οἶσθ᾽ ὅτι ἐγὼ διαμηρίζοιμ᾽ ἂν αὐτὴν ἡδέως; Πισθέταιρος ὅσον δ᾽ ἔχει τὸν χρυσόν, ὥσπερ παρθένος. Ἐυελπίδης
 ἐγὼ μὲν αὐτὴν κἂν φιλῆσαί μοι δοκῶ. Πισθέταιρος 
ἀλλ᾽ ὦ κακόδαιμον ῥύγχος ὀβελίσκοιν ἔχει. Ἐυελπίδης
 ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ ᾠὸν νὴ Δί᾽ ἀπολέψαντα χρὴ
 ἀπὸ τῆς κεφαλῆς τὸ λέμμα κᾆθ᾽ οὕτω φιλεῖν. CHORUS‐LEADER:
Take
these
men
with
you,
and
give
them
a
good
lunch;
but
bring
 out
here
the
nightingale,
the
sweet‐voiced
fellow‐songstress
of
the
Muses,
and
leave
 her
with
us,
so
that
we
can
disport
ourselves
with
her.


































 PEISETAERUS:
Oh,
yes,
by
Zeus,
do
this
as
they
ask;
bring
the
little
birdie
out
of
the
 sedges.





















































































































 EUELPIDES:
Yes,
in
the
gods’
name,
bring
her
out,
so
that
we
two
can
have
a
look
at
 the
nightingale.





















































































































 TEREUS:
Well,
if
that’s
what
the
two
of
you
want,
that’s
what
we
must
do.
Procne!
 Come
outside
and
show
yourself
to
our
visitors.


























































 [Procne
comes
out.
She
has
a
woman’s
body
with
a
bird’
head,
and
is
equipped
as
a
 piper.]


















































































































 PEISETAERUS:
Holy
Zeus,
what
a
lovely
birdie!
How
fair,
how
tender!










 EUELPIDES:
Do
you
know,
I’d
have
great
pleasure
in
spreading
her
legs
for
her?

 PEISETAERUS:
And
what
a
lot
of
gold
she’s
wearing,
like
a
real
young
miss!
 EUELPIDES:
I
think
I’d
like
to
kiss
her.























































 PEISETAERUS:
But,
you
silly
fool,
she’s
got
a
pair
of
spits
for
a
beak!










 EUELPIDES:
Why,
then,
we’ll
just
have
to
peel
her
like
an
egg
–
strip
the
shell
firmly
 off
her
head
and
kiss
her
like
that. 297 
 























































 297 
Aristophanes,
Birds
658‐674.
 
 128
 The
chorus
leader
of
the
Birds
directs
this
strange
little
scene
that
precedes
 Euelpides
and
Peisetaerus’
transformation
from
men
to
birds.

For
Tereus
tells
them
 in
line
654,
“mhde\v fobhqh1j e!#sti ga/r ti r9izi/on, o# diatrago/nt’ e!sesqon e0rterwme/vw. Don’t
be
afraid.
There
is
a
small
root
which
you
can
chew
and
you
will
 have
wings.”

But
instead
of
immediately
going
with
Tereus
to
get
this
root
the
 Chorus
Leader
presides
over
the
Athenians’
lunch.


 
 The
lunch
scene,
although
lunch
is
called
for,
does
not
center
on
food,
but
the
 woman/nightingale
Procne,
who
in
all
likelihood
would
have
been
a
hetaira,
nude
 except
for
her
bird
mask. 298 

She
is
called
out
of
her
hiding
place
to
dance
for
the
 Athenian
men
and
other
birds.

The
chorus
leader
has
set
the
tone
for
the
scene
by
 saying
that
they,
Euelpides
and
Peisetaerus
and
the
birds
can
pai/zw or
play
 amorously
with
Procne.

The
men
then
admire
her
and
Euelpides
makes
several
 erotic
jokes
about
parting
Procne’s
legs
and
peeling
her
like
an
egg
(stripping
her)
 so
that
he
can
kiss
her.

This
sexual
banter
combined
with
the
stage
action
of
 Euelpides
trying
to
kiss
the
beaked
Procne
and
failing
would
certainly
elicit
laughter
 from
the
audience.

And
indeed
right
after
Euelpides
fails
to
kiss
Procne
(the
 comedic
climax
of
the
scene)
Tereus
leads
the
two
Athenians
away
to
consume
the
 root
and
transform
into
birds. 299 
 























































 298 
Zweig,
“The
Mute
Nude
Female
Characters
in
Aristophanes
Plays,”
77.
On
hetairai
 appearing
in
Old
Comedy
see
also
Madeleine
Henry,
Menander’s
Courtesans
and
the
 Greek
Comic
Tradition
(Frankfurst:
Peter
Lang,
1985),
13‐31
and
Eva
Keuls,
The
 Reign
of
the
Phallus:
Sexual
Politics
in
Ancient
Athens
(Berkley:
The
University
of
 California
Press,
1993),
191.
 299 
Bowie,
Aristophanes,
159;
Taafe,
Aristophanes
and
Women,
41‐2;
and
F.
E.
Romer,
 “Good
Intentions
and
the
o(do\j h( e)j ko/rakaj,”
in
The
City
as
Comedy,
ed.
G.
W.
 Dobrov
(Chapel
Hill:
The
University
of
North
Carolina
Press,
1997),
58.
 
 129
 
 The
laughter
of
the
audience
in
the
Birds
pre‐transformation
scene
is
slightly
 different
from
the
scene
of
Kinsman’s
transformation
and
the
parody
scenes
in
the
 Thesmophoriazusae.

Like
the
audience
at
the
Thesmophoriazusae,
the
Birds
viewers
 would
have
laughed
together
creating
an
audience
wide
theatrical
telepathy.

 However,
they
still
would
have
been
laughing
at
the
play
and
not
along
with
the
 characters
in
the
play.
But,
the
scene
in
the
Birds
is
organized
differently.
Euelpides
 and
Peisetaerus
as
the
audience
for
Procne’s
performance
are
in
effect
in
the
same
 position
as
the
audience
of
the
play.

This
parallel
role
allows
the
audience
to
go
 through
the
scene
as
the
characters
do.


Thereby
experiencing
the
Royle/Bataillian
 telepathy
with
the
characters
in
the
play.

They
are
also
watching
Procne
and
the
 jokes
pull
each
audience
member
into
the
play
so
that
they
laugh
from
within
it. 300 

 Procne
is
not
only
a
visually
titillating
nude
woman,
but
also
a
necessary
tool
for
the
 transformation
of
the
two
men.

Despite
the
fact
that
they
have
been
told
that
their
 transformation
is
a
simple
matter
of
eating
a
root
this
scene
allows
for
the
 transformation
paradigm
to
play
out
before
the
two
are
lead
off
stage,
including
the
 audience
in
the
“ritual”
of
transformation.


 
 All
of
these
transformations
are
examples
of
Aristophanes
employing
the
 power
of
laughter
and
transformation,
usually
seen
in
a
ritual
context,
to
change
a
 character,
plot,
or
genre
in
one
of
his
plays.

Not
surprisingly,
many
are
from
plays
 that
already
have
strong
resonance
with
rituals
of
transformation
because
of
their
 setting
(the
Thesmophoriazusae
and
the
Frogs)
or
because
of
their
characters
 (Dionysos).

The
transformation
in
The
Birds
is
a
nice
example
of
the
literary
topos
 























































 300 
Nicholas
Royle,
The
Uncanny
(New
York:
Routledge,
2003)
262.

 
 130
 now
functioning
by
itself,
outside
of
an
explicitly
ritual
context.

The
episode
has
the
 three
ingredients
of
the
revelation/laughter/transformation
paradigm,
but
it
is
no
 longer
tied
to
its
original,
ritual
setting.

 
 Seeing
how
the
literary
trope
of
the
revelation/laughter/transformation
 paradigm
works
outside
of
an
explicitly
ritual
setting
can
allow
us
to
look
at
a
larger
 issue
in
Aristophanes’
comedy:
didactic
transformation.
Several
texts,
Acharnians,
 Knights,
and
Frogs
make
specific
claims
about
teaching
the
people
of
Athens
and
 convincing
them
of
certain
beliefs
through
Comedy.

The
next
chapter
will
look
at
 these
three
plays
for
examples
of
how
this
larger
didactic
project
worked
and
how
 laughter
and
revelation
played
a
part.


 
 131
 
 
 
 Chapter
Four:
Aristophanes,
Pedagogy,
and
the
Transformed
City
 Introduction
 The
first
three
chapters
of
this
project
have
all,
in
some
way,
served
to
set‐up
 the
revelations
of
this
final
chapter.

I
have
traced
a
laughter
paradigm
from
archaic
 myth,
ritual,
and
literature
into
the
Classical
period
and
onto
the
comedic
stage.

I
 think
this
longstanding
relationship
between
something
aischros,
laughter,
and
 transformation
in
the
Greek
imagination
is
enormously
important
for
 understanding
and
interpreting
Old
Comedy
in
general
and
Aristophanes
in
 particular.

Understanding
the
laughter/transformation
paradigm
can
help
us
 appreciate
the
ideology
of
the
form
of
Old
Comedy
even
more
clearly,
and
also
 comprehend
the
theatrical
project
of
didactic
transformation
of
the
Athenian
 citizens’
political
opinions.
 This
chapter
will
focus
on
the
larger
didactic
and
meta‐theatrical
use
of
the
 revelation/laughter/transformation
paradigm
in
both
the
second
half
of
the
Frogs
 and
in
the
Knights.

In
these
plays
the
characters
and
the
chorus
in
the
parabases
 make
the
case
for
using
the
paradigm
to
enable
didactic
transformation
of
the
 audience.

In
essence
the
entire
experience
of
an
Aristophanic
play
for
the
viewer
is
 the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
writ
large.

Their
experience
is
 one
full
of
laughter,
revelations,
and
aischrologia
and
through
their
encounter
with
 comedy
they
are
altered
in
some
way
themselves.

The
ultimate
goal
for
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
writ
large
is
to
transform
the
views
 
 132
 of
the
demos
of
Athens;
all
of
the
smaller
transformations
within
the
plot
of
the
 comedies
and
the
ritual
settings
of
many
of
Aristophanes’
plays
serve
this
larger
 purpose.


 The
Frogs
and
the
Knights
highlight
this
meta‐theatrical
use
of
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
most
clearly,
so
I
will
use
these
two
 plays
to
layout
what
I
see
as
the
larger
pedagogical
and
thematic
concerns
in
 Aristophanes’
comedies.

The
Knights
especially,
as
it
is
one
of
Aristophanes’
earliest
 plays 301 
and
the
play
he
wrote
directly
after
the
Babylonians
and
the
Acharnians
and
 their
political
aftermath,
seems
to
offer
a
unique
window
into
the
craft
behind
 Aristophanes’
productions,
the
evolving
mind
of
the
playwright,
and
his
view
of
 what
role
theater
should
play
in
the
Athenian
democracy.


 
 Politics,
Cleon,
and
Aristophanes
 First
it
is
crucial
to
trace
some
of
the
political
and
thematic
roots
of
the
 Knights
through
both
the
Acharnians
and
the
Babylonians.

These
two
earlier
plays
 and
their
reception
in
Classical
Athens
are
both
part
of
the
driving
force
behind
the
 Knights
and
its
inspiration.

The
Knights
defends
and
solidifies
one
brand
of
 Aristophanes’
comedy,
and
attacks
the
forces
that
the
chorus
says
are
ensnaring
and
 enfeebling
the
demos
of
Athens.

The
play
is
a
natural
progression
of
the
ideas
about
 comedy
that
Aristophanes
is
working
with
in
the
Acharnians
and
the
Babylonians,
 























































 301 
The
Knights
was
Aristophanes’
fifth
play,
which
he
produced
for
the
Lenaea
in
 424
BCE.
 
 133
 and
also
a
clear
product
of
the
growing
animosity
between
Aristophanes
and
 Cleon. 302 
 Although
the
Babylonians
is
not
extant,
there
are
clues
in
the
Acharnians
and
 the
Scholia 303 
about
its
political
content,
“Babylonians
evidently
criticized
Athenian
 imperial
policies,
and
attacked
Cleon
personally,
prompting
the
politician
to
indict
 the
poet
.
.
.
on
charges
of
having
slandered
the
magistrates,
Councillors,
and
the
 people
of
Athens
in
the
presence
of
foreign
allies.” 304 

The
Acharnians,
written
 directly
after
the
Babylonians,
offers
absolutely
no
apology
about
the
pointed
 critique
of
Athens
in
the
Babylonians
but
defends
the
role
of
comedy
in
the
political
 life
of
the
city
and
foreshadows
Aristophanes’
much
sharper
attack
of
Cleon, 305 
 which
he
launched
in
the
Knights
the
following
year.


 Previous
scholarship
on
the
Knights
has
focused
on
the
politics
of
the
play, 306 
 as
well
it
should
–
it
is
an
intensely
political
play;
however,
there
has
been
very
little
 investigation
of
how
this
political
satire
would
work
to
change
the
audience
or
 convince
its
members
that
the
play’s
point
of
view
is
the
correct
one.

For
surely
 there
were
larger
concerns
then
just
making
fun
of
political
figures
or
eliciting
 laughter
without
any
meaningful
critique
of
the
current
political
circumstances.

 























































 302 
Although
there
are
clear
allusions
to
this
very
public
quarrel,
the
play
cannot
be
 reduced
to
just
this
–
as
I
will
discuss
in
much
greater
detail.
 303 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians
377‐382,
502‐508,
with
Schol;
T
1.21‐29
 304 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
13.
 305 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians
299‐302.
 306 
See
Edmunds,
Cleon,
Knights,
and
Aristophanes’
Politics,
and
David
Littlefield
in
 “Metaphor
and
Myth:
The
Unity
of
Aristophanes’
Knights,’”
Studies
in
Philology
65
 (1968)
notes
that,
“I
follow
the
traditional
practice
of
referring
to
the
First
and
 Second
Slaves
as
Demosthenes
and
Nicias,
respectively”,
indicating
the
intense
and
 entrenched
scholarly
assertion
that
Knights
must
be
political
and
must
conform
to
 certain
rigid
academic
assumptions.
 
 134
 There
is
a
real
sense
in
both
plays
that
something
dangerous
is
happening
that
could
 have
actual
consequences
in
the
real
world
of
Athens,
outside
of
the
theater. 307 

The
 Knights
is
actually
very
direct
in
its
aims
–
the
point
of
all
the
aischrologia,
laughter,
 and
revelation
is
transformation
of
Athens,
of
the
demos
itself.

And
this
holds
true
 throughout
Aristophanes’
canon
–
the
point
of
the
smaller
transformations
is
to
 remind
the
viewer
that
a
larger
transformation
is
at
work,
the
one
that
will
have
an
 effect
on
him.

 The
Acharnians
explains
rather
clearly
what
comedy
should
do
and
defends
 Aristophanes’
brand
of
political
comedy
as
necessary
to
the
city’s
wellbeing.

 Dicaeopolis,
whose
very
name
suggests
that
he
will
counsel
the
city
about
the
right
 course
of
action,
early
in
the
play,
defends
his
own
endeavors
(negotiating
a
 separate
peace
with
the
Spartans)
to
the
chorus. 























































 307 
Edmunds,
Cleon,
Knights,
and
Aristophanes’
Politics
notes
that
there
were
two
 decrees,
“that
sought
to
blunt
the
effect
of
comedy.

In
the
archonship
of
Morychides
 (440/39
B.C.)
a
decree
forbade
kwmw|dei~n i.e.
ridicule;
it
was
rescinded
after
three
 years
in
the
archonship
of
Euthymenes
(437/6
B.C.)
(school.
Ar.
Ach.
67).

In
415
B.C.
 a
decree
was
passed
mh\ kwmw|dei~sqai o0nomasti tina ‘that
no
one
be
ridiculed
by
 name.’”(60).
And
in
his
Apology
Plato
emphatically
lays
blame
on
Aristophanes’
 Clouds
as
part
of
the
reason
Socrates’
reputation
has
been
damaged
with
the
citizens
 of
Athens.
18b‐19c
and
23c‐d.
 
 135
 μή
μοι
φθονήσητ᾽
ἄνδρες
οἱ
θεώμενοι,

 εἰ
πτωχὸς
ὢν
ἔπειτ᾽
ἐν
Ἀθηναίοις
λέγειν

 μέλλω
περὶ
τῆς
πόλεως,
τρυγῳδίαν
ποιῶν.

 τὸ
γὰρ
δίκαιον
οἶδε
καὶ
τρυγῳδία.

 ἐγὼ
δὲ
λέξω
δεινὰ
μὲν
δίκαια
δέ.

 οὐ
γάρ
με
νῦν
γε
διαβαλεῖ
Κλέων
ὅτι

 ξένων
παρόντων
τὴν
πόλιν
κακῶς
λέγω.

 αὐτοὶ
γάρ
ἐσμεν
οὑπὶ
Ληναίῳ
τ᾽
ἀγών,

 Do
not
bear
me
ill
will,
gentlemen
spectators,

 Although
I
am
a
beggar,
if
I
am
ready
to
speak
to
the
Athenians

 About
the
city,
while
making
comedy.
 For
comedy
knows
about
what’s
right,

 What
I
will
say
is
terrible,
but
right
 And
now
Cleon
will
not
accuse
me
of

 Slandering
the
city
with
foreigners
present,

 For
we
are
here
by
ourselves
at
the
Lenaean
Festival. 308 

 
 























































 308 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians
496‐504.
 
 136
 There
are
two
appeals
here:
first,
Dicaeopolis
is
defending
himself
to
the
chorus 309 
 and
second,
is
a
defense
of
the
craft
of
comedy. 310 

The
previous
spring
after
the
 production
of
Babylonians
at
the
City
Dionysia,
Cleon
charged
Aristophanes
with
 adikaia
(wrongdoing)
for
slandering
the
city
and
its
officials
in
front
of
foreigners, 311 
 and
the
Acharnians
was
Aristophanes’
public
rebuttal.


 
 I
think
it
is
important
to
be
very
clear
about
the
difference
between
 interpreting
the
literary
themes,
meter,
structure,
tone,
etc.
of
Aristophanes’
work
 and
claiming
to
have
access
to
authorial
intention.

While
we
can
look
at
 Aristophanes’
extant
corpus
in
depth
and
with
the
historical,
social,
and
cultural
 milieu
that
it
was
created
within,
we
have
no
evidence
(letters,
Aristophanes’
own
 notes
on
the
plays,
etc.)
that
can
direct
us
to
his
intention.

What
is
left
than
is
to
 























































 309 
Dicaeopolis
is
dressed
as
a
beggar
because
Aristophanes
is
using
plot
elements
 from
Euripides’
Telephus.

For
more
on
the
intertextuality
of
the
Acharnians
see
 Helene
Foley,
“Tragedy
and
Politics
in
Aristophanes’
Acharnians,”
The
Journal
of
 Hellenic
Studies
108
(1988);
also
Simon
Goldhill,
The
Poet’s
Voice:
Essays
on
Poetics
 and
Greek
Literature
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press,
1991)
esp.
188‐200.

 310 
Hubbard
writes
in
The
Mask
of
Comedy,
31,
“Each
.
.
.
parabasis
encapsulates
an
 overview
of
the
poet’s
entire
career
and
thus
relates
his
intentions
in
the
present
 play
to
those
of
earlier
works
and
of
his
dramatic
oeuvre
as
a
whole.”
There
is
also
a
 very
interesting
pun
in
this
passage.

Dicaeopolis
refers
to
kwmwdia (comedy) as trugwdia,
a
word
that
only
appears
in
Aristophanes
and
appears
to
be
half
 tragwdia (tragedy)
and
half
kwmwdia.
LSJ:
“Variously
explained
by
Gramm:
either
 because
the
actors
smeared
their
faces
with
lees (τρύξ) or
because
new
wine
was
 given
as
a
prize,
cf.
Sch.adloc,
Anon.Proll.Com.
in
CGFp.7
K.,
etc.;
or
because
comedy
 was
acted
at
the
season
of
vintage (τρύγη),
Ath.
2.40b).”

However,
this
word
seems
 to
be
doing
exactly
what
Dicaeopolis
is
doing
–
blending
comedy
and
tragedy.
For
 more
on
this
pun
see
Paulette
Ghiron‐Bistagne,
“Un
calembour
méconnu
 d’Aristophane:
Acharniens
400,
Oiseaux
787,”
Revue
des
Etudes
Grecques
86
(1973);
 O.
Taplin,
“Tragedy
and
Trugedy,”
The
Classical
Quarterly
33
(1983);
Kenneth
 Reckford,
Aristophanes’
Old­And­New
Comedy:
Volume
1:
Six
Essays
in
Perspective
 (Chapel
Hill:
The
University
of
North
Carolina
Press,
1987);
and
Foley,
“Tragedy
and
 Politics
in
Aristophanes’
Acharnians”.
 311 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians
377‐82.
And
fragment
of
a
scholion
on
the
Ox.
Pap.
vi
 856,
esp.
25‐7.
 
 137
 figure
out
how
a
text
is
working
and
what
is
being
conveyed
to
an
audience?
 Scholars
no
longer
uncritically
accept
that
the
parabasis
is
Aristophanes
speaking
 directly
to
the
Athenian
people. 312 
 
 In
addition
to
countering
Cleon’s
charges
in
Acharnians
the
parabasis
also
 lays
out
what
a
good
comedy
should
do.

In
the
parabasis
the
choral
leader
steps
 forward
and
tells
the
audience
that
the
poet
asks
to
defend
himself
(from
Cleon’s
 accusations).

And
the
Chorus
Leader’s
remarks
about
what
Aristophanes
has
done
 for
the
city
are
a
“how‐to”
of
good
comedy.

“φησὶν
δ᾽
εἶναι
πολλῶν
ἀγαθῶν
ἄξιος
 ὑμῖν
ὁ
ποιητής,
παύσας
ὑμᾶς
ξενικοῖσι
λόγοις
μὴ
λίαν
ἐξαπατᾶσθαι,
μήθ᾽
ἥδεσθαι
 θωπευομένους,
μήτ᾽
εἶναι
χαυνοπολίτας.
The
poet
asserts
that
he
is
worthy
of
great
 reward
from
you,
since
he
stopped
you
from
being
thoroughly
deceived
by
 foreigner’s
speeches,
from
delighting
in
flattery,
and
from
being
openmouthed
 idiots.” 313 

In
addition
to
this
the
Choral
Leader
reports
that
the
poet
promises
to
 continue
giving
the
city
the
best
direction. 314 

So
it
seems
there
are
two
essential
 undertakings
for
just
comedy:
to
mock
the
city’s
shortcomings
so
that
the
citizens
 are
able
to
curb
their
bad
behavior
and
to
give
counsel
to
the
city
to
ensure
that
it
 stays
on
the
correct
path.


 
 























































 312 
Goldhill,
The
Poet’s
Voice,
191
notes
that
the
very
fact
that
the
parabasis
took
 place
within
a
theatrical
event
“fractures”
the
voice
of
the
poet.
Bowie
1982:29
 argues
for
a
more
intimate
connection
between
the
poet
and
the
comic
hero.

De
Ste
 Croix
1972
argues
that
“Dicaeopolis
alone”
can
be
indentified
with
Aristophanes
and
 Foley
1988
also
sees
this
close
connection.

This
may
well
be
the
case
–
because
here
 we
can
see
the
close
connection
in
the
text,
and
there
is
no
need
to
surmise
about
 authorial
intention.
 313 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians
633‐5.
 314 

Aristophanes,
Acharnians
656.
 
 138
 The
Knights
 
 The
comedy
Aristophanes
produced
for
the
following
Lenaea
in
424
BCE
the
 Knights
is
a
scathing
send‐up
of
demagogic
politicians
and
how
they
have
brought
 Athens
to
its
knees. 315 

Demos
(representing
the
people
of
Athens)
is
an
old
man
and
 his
house
(Athens)
is
being
run
by
a
flattering
slave
who
takes
credit
for
work
that
 isn’t
his 316 
and
is
scheming
behind
Demos’
back
to
steal
food
and
luxuries
and
 tribute
from
him. 317 

This
slave
named
Paphlagon
represents
Cleon
even
though
 Aristophanes
never
explicitly
states
this 318 
and
he
is
brought
down
by
a
Sausage
 Seller
who
beats
him
at
his
own
demagogic
games.
 The
Knights
in
addition
to
being
an
attack
on
Cleon
and
all
demagogic
 politicians
is
an
illustration
of
the
type
of
comedy 319 
that
Aristophanes
outlined
in
 the
Acharnians.

It
is
a
comedy
that
“knows
what’s
right” 320 
and
makes
sharp
use
of
 mockery
to
help
the
city
see
its
own
shortcomings.

In
fact
the
entire
play
is
one
 























































 315 
Alan
Sommerstein,
“Platon,
Eupolis
and
the
‘demagogue‐comedy,’”
in
The
Rivals
 of
Aristophanes:
Studies
in
Athenian
Old
Comedy,
ed.
David
Harvey
and
John
Wilkins
 (London:
Duckworth
Publishers
and
The
Classical
Press
of
Whales,
2000),
438
 argues
that
Knights
is
Aristophanes’
only
demagogue‐comedy
and
that
the
subgenre
 offers
very
little
room
for
creativity.

This
is
a
similar
(if
more
sophisticated)
 argument
to
the
belief
that
Knights
is
“less”
of
a
play
because
of
its
attack
on
Cleon.
 However,
Sommerstein
falls
into
the
trap
of
thinking
that
Aristophanes’
plays
are
a
 direct
mouthpiece
and
not
a
constructed
text
and
in
reality
deserving
interpretation
 and
careful
reading
just
like
the
rest
of
Aristophanes’
corpus.
For
the
first
study
of
 the
subgenre
of
demagogue‐comedy
see
H.
Lind,
Der
Gerber
Kleon
in
den
Rittern
des
 Aristophanes:
Studien
zur
Demagogenkomodie
(Frankfurt:
Peter
Lang,
1991),
235‐ 52.
 316 

Aristophanes,
Knights
52‐3.
 317 
Aristophanes,
Knights
1218‐20.
 318 
Nial
Slater,
Spectator
Politics:
Metatheatre
and
Performance
in
Aristophanes
 (Philadelphia,
The
University
of
Pennsylvania
Press,
2002),
70.
Henderson,
The
 Maculate
Muse,
237.
 319 
Sommerstein,
“Platon,
Eupolis
and
the
‘demagogue‐comedy’”.
 320 
Aristophanes,
Acharnians
500.
 
 139
 large
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm.

By
the
end
of
the
stage
action,
 Demos
has
been
transformed
and
is
no
longer
a
crabby
old
man 321 
but
a
beautiful
 young
man
again. 322 

The
result
of
the
comedy
is
that
the
demos
of
Athens
is
pure
 again.

Knights
could
not
be
clearer
about
what
good
comedy
should
do
(purify
the
 city)
and
therefore
the
necessity
of
comedy
for
the
city.
 Much
of
the
recent
scholarship
on
the
Knights
has
focused
on
the
demophilic
 relationship
between
Paphlagon,
the
Sausage
Seller,
and
Demos
or
on
the
specifics
 of
the
political
satire
(i.e.
decoding
the
very
dense
puns,
aspersions,
and
allusions
in
 the
text).

Andrew
Scholtz
writes
that
Aristophanes,
“
by
sexualizing
this
topos
[the
 demophilic
topos]”
and
making
the
relationships
pederastic
where
Paphlagon
and
 the
Sausage
Seller
are
would
be
erastes
(older
lovers)
and
Demos
is
the
eromenos
 (younger
beloved);
“discovers
within
the
dysfunctional
give
and
take
of
 “demophilic”
politics
a
whole
tangle
of
contradictory
reciprocities,
symmetries,
and
 asymmetries—strategies,
in
other
words,
whereby
power
is
got
through
surrender,
 and
dominance
through
subservience.” 323 

Although
the
pederastic
elements
in
the
 























































 321 
Aristophanes,
Knights
40‐3.
 322 
Aristophanes,
Knights
1321‐1334.
 323 
Andrew
Scholtz,
“Friends,
Lovers,
Flatterers:
Demophilic
Courtship
in
 Aristophanes’
“Knights,’”
Transactions
of
the
American
Philological
Association
134
 (2004):
264‐5.
For
more
on
the
pederastic
relationship
between
the
three
main
 characters
see
also
Manfred
Landfester,
Die
Riter
des
Aristophanes:
Beobachtungen
 zur
dramatischen
Handlung
und
zum
komischen
Stil
des
Aristophanes
(B.R.
Gruner
 Publishing,
1967);
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
66‐70;
Paul
Ludwig,
Eros
and
 Polis:
Desire
and
Community
in
Greek
Political
Theory
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
 University
Press,
2006);
and;
Victoria
Wohl,
Love
among
the
Ruins:
The
Erotics
of
 Democracy
in
Classical
Athens
(Princeton:
Princeton
University
Press,
2002),
73‐123.
 For
more
on
Cleon
and
political
jokes
see
Edmunds,
Cleon,
Knights,
and
Aristophanes’
 Politics
and
Carl
Anderson,
“Themisticles
and
Cleon
in
Aristophanes’’
Knights,”
The
 American
Journal
of
Philology
110
(1989).
 
 140
 Knights
are
very
clear
I
believe
they
are
only
one
component
in
a
larger
commentary
 on
the
power
of
comedy.
 
 The
vitriol
and
invective
in
the
Knights
is
strikingly
sharp
and
relentless.
 Rosen
and
Henderson
also
note
this
“extreme
quality” 324 
and
the

“savage
 indictment” 325 
of
the
politicians
in
the
play. 326 

The
vast
majority
of
the
action
of
the
 play
consists
of
the
Sausage
Seller
and
Paphlagon
insulting
each
other
in
an
 increasingly
sexually
suggestive
or
scatological
manner.

There
is
no
intertextuality
 with
tragedy,
as
there
so
often
is
in
Aristophanes’
plays;
and
the
plot
is
deceptively
 simple.

So
minimal
that,
in
fact,
is
has
often
been
maligned
by
scholars
who
see
the
 play
as
a
distastefully
obscene
rant
by
Aristophanes
against
Cleon. 327 
 
 The
simple
plot
serves
to
highlight
two
elements
of
the
Knights:
the
 aischrologia
and
the
agwn
(contest).

These
two
elements
are
not
just
important
for
 























































 324 
Cedric
Whitman,
Aristophanes
and
the
Comic
Hero
(Cambridge:
Harvard
 University
Press,
1971),
80;
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
64
n.
 15;
and
Scholtz,
“Friends,
Lovers,
Flatterers”.
 325 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
221.

 326 
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
61
also
notes
that
many
 scholars
find
this
element
of
the
play
to
be
a
serious
flaw;
see
Gilbert
Norwood,
 Greek
Comedy
(New
York:
J.W.
Luce,
1932),
207‐8;
Wilhelm
Schmid,
Geschichte
der
 griechischen
Litteratur
(Toronto:
University
of
Toronto
Libraries,
2011),
231;
and
 Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
66‐67.
Malcolm
Heath,
Political
Comedy
in
 Aristophanes
(Gottingen,
Vandenhoeck
&
Ruprecht,
1987),
323
also
notes
the
 invective,
but
makes
no
judgment
on
its
use.
 327 
Bowie,
Aristophanes,
77;
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
79
and
 82;
Reckford,
Aristophanes’
Comedy,
113‐4,
and
Littlefield,
“Metaphor
and
Myth,”
3,
 agree
with
me
that
Knights
is
much
more
than
a
screed
of
hatred
for
Cleon
that
can
 be
written
off,
but
that
the
extreme
satire
is
part
of
Aristophanes
argument
about
 the
nature
and
use
of
comedy.

For
more
on
views
that
the
play
has
serious
plot
 flaws
see
Gilbert
Murray,
Aristophanes:
A
Study
(Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press,
 1993),
50;
M.
Pohlenz,
“Aristophanes’
Ritter,”
Nachrichten
der
Akademie
der
 Wissenschaften
2
(1965):
122;
Octave
Navarre,
Les
Cavaliers
d’Aristophane;
etudes
et
 analyse
(Parise:
Editions
Mellottee,
1956),
152;
Whitman,
Aristophanes
and
the
 Comic
Hero,
80‐4;
and
Norwood,
Greek
Comedy,
207‐8
calls
the
play,
“trash,
hardly
 worth
reprinting,
certainly
not
translating.”
 
 141
 the
Knights,
but
are
the
two
of
the
most
basic
and
essential
constituents
of
comedy.

 The
aischrologia,
as
noted
above,
is
particularly
venomous
and
heavy‐handed.

 Henderson
writes,
“the
real
purpose
of
Knights
is
to
attack
and
degrade
Cleon
in
the
 most
violent
possible
ways.” 328 
While
certainly
Aristophanes
is
degrading
Cleon
 through
the
medium
of
his
play,
I
think
it
is
vital
not
to
dismiss
the
play 329 
as
a
hate
 letter. 330 

The
Knights
is
a
stripped
down
play
whose
purpose
is
to
display
(in
an
 amusing
way)
the
nature
of
comedy
and
its
fundamental
building
blocks.


 
 This
also
helps
explain
not
only
the
savagery
of
the
aischrologia
but
also
its
 preponderance
in
the
Knights.

Unlike
all
of
the
other
extant
plays
of
Aristophanes
 the
Knights
has
remarkably
few
episodes
and
primarily
focuses
on
the
contest
 between
the
Sausage
Seller
and
Paphlagon
for
Demos’
love
and
esteem. 331 

The
 contest
for
all
intents
and
purposes
begins
with
the
entrance
of
the
chorus
on
line
 242
and
continues
until
the
Sausage
Seller
get
the
better
of
Paphlagon
on
line
1253
 –
virtually
the
entirety
of
the
play.

While
contests
are
often
part
of
the
action
in
 























































 328 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
67.
 329 
I
find
it
a
troubling
trend
in
Aristophanic
scholarship
to
dismiss
any
of
the
extant
 plays
as
“simply
x”
or
as
“a
hodgepodge”
with
no
structure
or
internal
cohesion.

I
 think
this
is
part
of
a
leftover
bias
that
favors
tragedy
over
comedy
and
sees
the
 former
as
a
more
“serious”
undertaking
and
unjustly
writes
off
the
latter
because
of
 its
jokes
and
connection
to
laughter
instead
of
tears.
See
Whitman
1964
81.
 330 
Knights
is
often
described
as
one
of
the
most
“factual”
plays
in
Aristophanes’
 oeuvre.

See
Norwood,
Greek
Comedy,
207‐8;
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
 Tradition,
60‐1;
Reckford,
Aristophanes
Comedy
Old­and­New,
120;
and

Henderson,
 The
Maculate
Muse,
66.
I
think
this
assumption
is
the
result
of
the
false
view
that
the
 Knights
is
not
a
“good”
play
and
that
there
isn’t
anything
more
complex
going
on
in
 its
structure.

 331 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
67.
 
 142
 Aristophanes 332 
no
other
play
has
such
a
sustained
and
unyielding
contest.

Here
 again
the
simplicity
is
deceptive.

The
contest
stands
in
for
the
comedic
contest
that
 Aristophanes
and
the
Knights
are
part
of
at
the
Lenaean
Festival.

Like
aischrologia,
 the
competition
is
necessary
to
comedy
and,
as
this
contest
between
Paphlagon
and
 the
Sausage
Seller
demonstrates,
is
for
the
good
of
the
city.
 
 The
scholarly
emphasis
on
the
“historicity”
of
the
Knights
has
led
to
a
good
 deal
of
debate
about
Aristophanes’
self‐presentation
in
the
play.

Some
scholars,
 most
notably
de
Ste.
Croix, 333 
want
to
make
a
one‐to
one‐connection
between
the
 legal
battle
between
Cleon
and
Aristophanes
mentioned
in
the
Acharnians
and
the
 Knights
and
the
characters
who
talk
about
it:
making
them
the
mouthpiece
of
the
 poet
–
speaking
his
lines.

Reckford
takes
a
more
metaphorical
approach,
arguing
 that
the
Sausage
Seller
“is
a
disguise
of
Aristophanes
himself.” 334 

For
Rosen
this
 means
not
that
the
Sausage
Seller
is
a
puppet
mouthing
the
words
of
the
poet,
but
 that
he
plays
the
same
metaphorical
role
as
the
comic
poet;
the
one
who
“because
he
 experiences
the
same
Dionysian
revival
of
spirit
that
he
shares
with
us
–
can
.
.
.
 remain
what
he
is:
a
good
steward,
a
nurturing
cook,
and
an
honest
public
 servant.” 335 

Heath
takes
the
opposing
view
and
argues
that
the
persona
 Aristophanes
puts
forward
in
a
number
of
plays
(the
Knights
included),
as
the
savior
 























































 332 
See
the
contests
in
the
Frogs
first
between
the
Frogs
and
Dionysos
and
then
 between
Euripides
and
Aeschylus;
the
struggle
between
Euripides
and
Kinsman
and
 the

 333 

G.E.M.
de
Ste.
Croix,
The
Origins
of
the
Peloponnesian
War
(Ithaca:
Cornell
 University
Press,
1972),
363,
“Dicaeopolis

.
.
.
is
carefully
and
explicitly
identified
by
 the
poet
with
himself”
(emphasis
is
de
Ste.
Croix’s).

 334 
Reckford,
Aristophanes
Comedy
Old­and­New,
120.
 335 
I
will
return
to
this
idea
–
I
think
Reckford
has
it
almost
right,
but
there
is
 something
even
more
complicated
going
on
in
Aristophanes’
self
presentation.
 
 143
 of
Athens
and
victor
in
his
fight
against
Cleon
and
other
demagogic
politicians,
is
 either
“blatantly
untrue”
or
internal
to
the
action
of
the
play,
intending
and
having
 no
political
impact
since
“the
comic
poet
was
not
in
direct
competition
with
the
 {politician}. 336 ”

I
think
in
some
sense
all
of
these
scholars
are
correct
(although
I
do
 find
Heath’s
hostile
tone
puzzling);
because
there
isn’t
just
one
Aristophanes
or
 anything
as
straightforward
as
self‐presentation
–there
are
multiple
“Aristophanes”
 who
serve
different
functions
in
various
plays. 337 


 In
Knights
Aristophanes’
explicit
“self‐presentation”
is
in
the
parabasis
(507‐ 550). 338 

However,
it
is
delivered
by
a
third
party
–
Aristophanes
himself
doesn’t
 stride
out
onto
the
stage;
the
choral
leader
reports
what
Aristophanes
“asked”
the
 chorus
to
convey
to
the
audience.

But
yet
again
the
flow
of
information
is
not
simply
 from
the
poet
to
the
chorus
to
the
audience
because
the
choral
leader
also
adds
his
 own
commentary
on
both
the
poet
and
the
information
he
has
been
asked
to
pass
 on.

Despite
the
fact
that
Aristophanes
wrote
each
word,
he
has
carefully
crafted
the
 























































 336 
Heath,
Political
Comedy
in
Aristophanes,
238‐9.
 337 
Goldhill,
The
Poet’s
Voice.
 338 
Many
scholars
have
focused
exclusively
on
Aristophanes’
“arrogance”
and
self‐ promotion.

Heath
is
especially
vitriolic,
writing
that
Aristophanes
had
a
habit

“of
 making
blatantly
untrue
statements
about
himself”
(see
also
Whitman,
Aristophanes
 and
the
Comic
Hero,
82‐3).
I
agree
with
Reckford
that
this
is
more
a
generic
 necessity,
and
moreover
I
feel
that
by
only
looking
at
Aristophanes’
boasts
about
his
 own
comedy
these
scholars
are
missing
what
is
actually
at
stake
in
the
parabasis:
 the
emphasis
on
the
importance
of
mockery
and
the
important
role
the
comic
poet
 has
in
educating
the
city.
See
Littlefield,
“Metaphor
and
Myth”
for
a
discussion
of
 metaphor
in
the
parabasis
and
Douglas
MacDowell,
“Aristophanes
and
Kallistratos,”
 The
Classical
Quarterly
32
(1982);
Stephen
Halliwell,
“Aristophanes’
 Apprenticeship,”
The
Classical
Quarterly
30
(1980);
and
G.
Mastromarco,
“L’esordio
 “segreto”
di
Aristofane,”
Quaderni
di
Storia
10
(1979)
for
discussions
of
the
 historical
nature
of
the
parabasis
(i.e.
Aristophanes
and
his
producer
Callistratus).

 See
Reckford,
Aristophanes’
Old­and­New
Comedy,
202‐04
for
a
refutation
of
older
 scholarship
that
treats
Aristophanes’
plays
as
a
whole
(not
just
the
parabases)
as
 plays
with
just
one
idea
in
them
–
therefore
robbing
the
plays
of
their
complexity.


 
 144
 parabasis
to
seem
as
though
the
choral
leader
is
choosing
how
to
present
the
ideas
 of
the
author
and
“his
own”
impressions
of
Aristophanes.

By
doing
this
 Aristophanes
has
doubled
himself
–
he
is
both
the
author
and
a
character
in
the
 play. 339 
 Both
of
these
personas
serve
a
purpose:
each
one
introduces
an
element
of
 comedy
that
the
Knights
is
making
an
argument
about.

The
author
Aristophanes,
 the
one
who
so
carefully
crafted
the
second
Aristophanes,
is
creating
on
stage
a
 replica
Athens,
what
Reckford
calls
a
transformation
of
reality,
“the
Athenians
are
 presented
with
an
absurd,
distorted,
grotesque 340 
version
of
their
‘real’
world.” 341 

I
 agree
with
Reckford
that
this
heightened
and
farcical
Athens
allows
the
audience
to
 see
their
own
folly
more
clearly. 342 


 The
“authorial
Aristophanes”
with
this
creation
of
a
same‐but‐different
 Athens
is
infusing
the
play
with
the
idea
of
transformation.

Athens
on
stage
is
a
 transformed
version
of
the
everyday
reality
of
the
audience.

The
audience
can
see
 themselves
in
the
world
of
the
play
–
and
therefore
their
foibles
and
faults
more
 clearly
too.

In
the
case
of
the
Knights
this
is
not
just
an
idea
for
this
play,
but
an
 argument
about
how
comedy
functions,
since
the
entire
play
is
a
metaphor
for
the
 role
and
composition
of
comedy;
didactic
transformation
is
essential
to
a
good
 























































 339 
Hubbard,
The
Mask
of
Comedy
and
Goldhill,
The
Poet’s
Voice.
 340 
The
idea
of
the
grotesque
and
Attic
comedy
has
a
very
long
scholarly
history.

See
 Anthony
Edward’s,
“Historicizing
the
Popular
Grotesque:
Bahktin’s
Rabelais
and
 Attic
Old
Comedy”
in
Theater
and
Society
in
the
Classical
World,
ed.
Ruth
Scodel
(Ann
 Arbor:
University
of
Michigan
Press,
1993)
who
rightly
argues
that
Old
Comedy
 cannot
be
called
grotesque
in
the
Rabelaisian
sense.

 341 
Reckford,
Aristophanes
Old­and­New
Comedy,
197‐8.
 342 
See
Ruffell,
Politics
and
Anti­Realism
for
a
very
clear
use
of
cognitive
and
 narrative
theory
to
explain
jokes.

Especially
181‐211
for
the
“doubling”
of
the
world
 of
Athens
and
the
necessary
identification
of
the
audience
with
the
comic
hero.
 
 145
 comedy.
If
the
audience
can’t
grasp
something
new
about
themselves
and
they
city
 and
change
for
the
better
a
didactic
comedy
has
failed.
 The
“character”
Aristophanes,
the
one
who
the
choral
leader
tells
the
 audience
about
is
both
part
of
the
real/not
real
world
of
Athens
on
stage
(what
 would
Athens
be
without
an
Aristophanes!)
and
he
also
introduces
two
important
 ideas
for
comedy:
the
importance
of
mockery
and
the
didactic
role
of
the
comedic
 poet.

The
choral
leader
reveals
that
Aristophanes
was
slow
to
produce
his
own
 comedies
because
of
how
the
Athenians
treated
older
comedic
poets 343 
and
because
 he
wanted
to
make
sure
that
he
knew
what
he
was
doing. 344 


 Reckford
sees
Aristophanes’
parabases
in
general
as
introducing
the
 “organizing
ideas”
of
his
plays.

The
parabasis
in
the
Knights
is
no
exception.
He
sees
 the
Knights
as
a
“comedy
of
ideas”
and
the
two
he
identifies
are
the
development
of
 comedy
and
the
poet
as
teacher. 345 

For
Reckford
the
ideas
about
comedy
that
 Aristophanes
is
grappling
with
mostly
have
to
do
with
jokes
and
the
witticisms
 Aristophanes
is
so
skilled
at
creating.

I
agree
with
his
idea
that
the
Knights
is
a
 comedy
of
ideas.

The
parabasis
is
very
clear;
the
poets
that
Aristophanes
claims
 were
treated
badly
by
the
Athenian
public
(part
of
his
reluctance
to
produce
his
own
 work)
because
in
their
old
age
they
could
no
longer
mock
(skw/ptw). 346 

This
is
their
 























































 343 
Knights
was
the
first
play
Aristophanes
produced
himself,
as
was
customary
for
 comedic
poets.

Callistratus
produced
both
Acharnians
and
Babylonians.
 344 
Lines
541‐44
Aristophanes
uses
a
naval
metaphor
to
explain
that
a
poet
should
 work
his
way
up
to
the
top
position
(producer),
first
learning
the
various
skills
 necessary
to
make
a
good
play.
 345 
Reckford,
Aristophanes
Old­and­New
Comedy,
123‐130.
 346 
See
also
Zachary
Biles,
“Aristophanes’
Victory
Dance:
Old
Poets
in
the
Parabasis
 of
‘Knights,’”
Zeitschrift
fur
Papyrologie
und
Epigraphik
136
(2001):
196
and
 
 146
 primary
duty
as
comedic
poets
and
when
they
can
no
longer
perform
this
function
 Athens
scorns
them.

Aristophanes
is
scolding
the
Athenians
for
their
desertion
of
 these
poets,
not
because
they
don’t
enjoy
plays
without
mockery,
but
because
they
 should
appreciate
and
venerate
the
comic
poets’
earlier
work
when
they
could
 execute
this
important
duty
for
the
city.
It
is
clear
from
the
parabasis
that
comedy
is
 no
longer
any
good
when
the
mockery
is
subpar.
 The
association
of
comedy
and
mockery
is
often
discussed
in
terms
of
 carnival
and
the
work
of
Bakhtin.

As
Goldhill
writes,
the
ideas
around
carnival
have
 been
especially
fruitful
for
classicists
and
the
study
of
Old
Comedy. 347 

This
 investigation
of
carnival
has
allowed
scholars
to
link
together
ideas
of
reversal,
 liminality,
theater,
and
ritual.

Many
argue
that
in
the
liminal
space
of
ritual
(or
the
 theater)
this
hierarchical
reversal
allows
for
true
subversive
possibilities. 348 

Others
 dispute
this
assertion
and
allege
that
the
reversal
in
a
festival
context
allows
the
 oppressed
to
“blow
off
steam”,
but
eventually
the
dominant
hierarchy
reasserts
 itself.

In
fact,
under
this
“release‐valve”
theory
the
dominant
culture
allows
the
 freedom
of
reversal
to
ensure
the
ultimate
return
to
the
status
quo. 349 
 However
there
has
always
been
a
stumbling
block
when
applying
this
idea
to
 Old
Comedy
–
the
question
of
license
and
the
state
sanction,
and
indeed
sponsorship
 























































 Hubbard,
The
Mask
of
Comedy,
116‐33,
and
77‐82
who
says
that
this
is
a
critique
of
 the
Athenians
for
not
adhering
to
traditional
values.
 347 
Goldhill,
The
Poet’s
Voice,
176.
See
Meyerhoff
1978
for
the
argument
that
comic
 reversal
can
indicate
a
number
of
distinct
possibilities
about
power
structures
and
 hierarchies
in
a
society.

 348 
For
more
on
this
perspective
see
Thompson
(1972);
Marx
(1978);
Bakhtin
 (1940);
Burke
(1978);
Le
Roy
Ladurie
(1979);
Davis
(1978);
Carriere;
Schareika.
 349 
For
more
on
this
perspective
see
Reckford’s
argument
in
Aristophanes’
Old­and­ New
Comedy
that
the
world
of
the
festival
is
insulated
from
everyday
life
and
has
no
 bearing
on
it
–
therefore
poets
could
mock
politicians
and
have
no
impact
479.
 
 147
 of
theatrical
festivals. 350 

With
this
in
mind
can
we
truly
call
Old
Comedy
 carnivalesque?
Edwards
argues
that
the
writers
of
Old
Comedy
are
primarily
 conservative
in
their
message,
not
“mocking
the
powerful,
which
comedy
had
 probably
always
done,
because
they
attacked
the
demos
and
the
democracy
through
 its
leaders
and
criticized
their
policies,
while
suggesting
alternative
policies.” 351 

I
 agree
with
his
assessment
that
because
of
this
and
the
element
of
state
sponsorship
 of
the
theatrical
festivals
Old
Comedy
cannot
truly
be
called
carnivalesque.
 However,
Edwards
goes
on
to
argue
that
the
ideology
of
the
form
of
comedy
 is
democratic;
even
if
its
authors
began
to
use
it
against
the
very
democracy
it
was
 intended
to
support. 352 

That
is
to
say
that
Old
Comedy
grew
out
of
rituals
of
 mockery
and
abuse
–
tools
of
the
democratic
carnival,
and
not
subject
to
the
 oversight
of
the
power
of
the
state.

Using
this
binary
vocabulary
of
conservative
vs.
 democratic
ideology
Edwards
makes
the
most
convincing
assessment
of
the
 theories
of
Bakhtin
and
their
relationship
to
Attic
Old
Comedy
in
the
current
 scholarship.


 The
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
I
am
tracing
in
this
 project
offers
another
alternative
to
the
dualistic
concept
of
conservative
vs.
 democratic
ideology
in
Old
Comedy.

Comedy
messages
through
this
use
of
ritual
 laughter;
the
form
of
comedy
is
transformational.

It
doesn’t
conform
only
to
the
 narrow
idea
of
democratic
ideology
through
mockery,
but
ties
into
the
very
early
 























































 350 
Edwards,
“Historicizing
the
Popular
Grotesque”
very
clearly
articulates
this.


 351 
Edwards,
“Historicizing
the
Popular
Grotesque,”
101.
 352 
Edwards,
“Historicizing
the
Popular
Grotesque,”
103‐4.
 
 148
 and
deeply
ingrained
uses
of
laughter
in
ritual
practice. 353 

It
can
therefore
be
an
 ideological
tool
and
at
the
same
time
fulfill
ritual
concerns
of
renewal
and
rebirth;
 giving
Aristophanes’
comedies
the
chance
to
remake
the
demos
and
reboot
their
 political
views.
 The
idea
of
the
poet
as
teacher
is
one
that
Reckford,
Edmunds 354 ,
and
I
all
 agree
on.

This
idea
is
present
in
Aristophanes’
first
extant
play
the
Acharnians,
as
I
 discussed
above
and
the
Knights’
parabasis
furthers
this
argument;
making
claims
 about
the
necessity
of
mockery
in
comedy 355 
and
the
need
for
the
poet
to
be
an
 expert,
not
an
inexperienced
newbie. 356 

Rosen
also
agrees
and
sees
the
dual
role
of
 comedy
to
“amuse
and
enlighten.” 357 


However,
although
all
of
these
observations
 about
the
comic
poet
as
teacher
are
correct
and
very
important
they
do
not
go
quite
 far
enough
–
the
ultimate
role
of
the
didactic
function
of
comedy
is
to
transform.


 Transformations
in
the
Knights
are
both
explicit
and
implied.

As
I
will
 discuss
at
length
in
a
moment,
Demos
is
transformed
at
the
end
of
the
play.
There
 are
also
hints
at
other
character
and
audience
transformations.

Edmunds
points
out
 that
in
the
parabasis
Aristophanes
manages
to
align
himself
not
only
with
the
elite
 knights,
but
also
the
“nautical
activities
of
the
Athenian
lower
class.” 358 

Thereby
 uniting
all
members
of
the
audience
with
the
poet
and
chorus.

These
three
 seemingly
disparate
entities
have
common
cause
in
the
triumph
of
the
Sausage
 























































 353 
See
Chapter
One
and
Appendix
1
 354 
Edmunds,
Cleon,
Knights,
and
Aristophanes’
Politics,
59.
 355 
Aristophanes,
Knights
525‐540.
 356 
Aristophanes,
Knight
541‐544.
 357 
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
82.


 358 
Edmunds,
Cleon,
Knights,
and
Aristophanes’
Politics,
41.
 
 149
 Seller
over
the
demagogic
Paphlagon.

All
three
are
also
caught
up
in
another
 transformation
plot
that
runs
through
the
play.


 This
transformation
plot
is
the
slow
transformation
of
the
Sausage
Seller
 himself.

Bowie
points
out
that
the
Sausage
Seller
is
about
the
same
age
as
the
 ephebic
Knights,
and
that
the
play
is
all
about
“the
rites
of
passage”
to
maturity. 359 

If
 the
Knight
chorus
is
part
of
this
transforming
group,
so
is
the
audience
through
their
 previously
established
link
with
the
chorus.

As
the
ephebes
and
the
Sausage
Seller
 mature
and
transform
through
the
play,
so
potentially
can
the
audience.

The
 Sausage
Seller
doesn’t
have
a
single
moment
of
transformation,
however
the
 character
at
the
end
of
the
play
is
distinctly
different
than
at
the
beginning.

He
 begins
as
a
lowly
tradesman,
a
demagogue
who
can
out‐flatter,
steal,
cheat,
and
 deceive
even
Paphlagon
(134‐137).

However,
by
the
end
he
is
“
the
noble
 Agoracritus,” 360 
the
even‐headed
transformer
of
Demos.

Reckford
also
describes
 this
transformation, 361 
but
he
is
silent
on
just
how
the
transformation
took
place.

 The
process
that
got
the
Sausage
Seller
to
his
final
character
was
the
process
of
the
 play
itself,
and
its
fierce
agon
filled
with
aischrologia.

 























































 359 
Bowie,
Aristophanes,
45
and
52.
This
has
very
interesting
overlap
with
the
 transformation
of
Hermes
in
the
HH
to
Hermes
discussed
in
Chapter
2.

Both
young
 men,
Hermes
and
the
Sausage
Seller
mature
over
the
course
of
their
respective
texts
 through
multiple
encounters
with
a
rival
(Paphlagon
or
Apollo)
and
the
resulting
 laughter
from
these
interactions.
Coming
of
age
transformations
in
both
of
these
are
 underscored
with
laughter.

 360 
Reckford,
Aristophanes’
Old­and­New
Comedy,
119.
 361 
He
notes
that
the
Sausage
Seller
slowly
moves
up
in
the
world
from
Sausage
 Seller
to
butcher
to
“Magic
Cook”
or
the
embodiment
of
Comedy
–
and
by
the
end
of
 the
play
the
Sausage
Seller
certainly
seems
to
be
the
embodiment
of
comedy
or
at
 the
very
least
the
orchestrator
of
comedy.
 
 150
 
 Once
the
Sausage
Seller
is
deemed
the
victor
of
the
very
long
contest
against
 Paphlagon,
Demos
and
the
Sausage
Seller
go
into
Demos’
house
and
the
chorus
sings
 about
how
to
properly
insult
bad
people.

Suddenly,
the
Sausage
Seller
returns
to
the
 stage
and
proclaims, εὐφημεῖν
χρὴ
καὶ
στόμα
κλῄειν
καὶ
 


μαρτυριῶν
ἀπέχεσθαι,

 καὶ
τὰ
δικαστήρια
συγκλῄειν
οἷς
ἡ
πόλις


 


ἥδε
γέγηθεν,

 ἐπὶ
καιναῖσιν
δ᾽
εὐτυχίαισιν
παιωνίζειν

 


τὸ
θέατρον.
 Use
words
of
good
omen,
everyone;

 Close
your
mouths
abstain
from

 Testimony,
shut
up
the
law
courts
that

 This
city
rejoices
in,
and
on
the
occasion

 Of
our
unforeseen
good
luck,
 Let
the
audience
sing
a
paean! 362 

 This
complete
change
in
tone
is
because
he
has
transformed
Demos.

Demos
is
now
 young
and
beautiful
again,
and
his
home
(Athens)
is
also
transformed
several
lines
 later.


 
 The
Sausage
Seller
says
that
he
has
a0deyh/saj (purified
by
boiling)
Demos
 and
that
this
has
made
Demos
kalo/j (beautiful)
rather
than
ai0sxro/j (ugly,
 shameful,
out
of
the
natural
order
of
things).

In
this
one
simple
line
Aristophanes
 has
distilled
both
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
and
the
 pedagogical
aims
of
comedy.

Conceivably,
the
Sausage
Seller
means
that
when
they
 were
in
the
house
he
literally
boiled
down
Demos
and
therefore
purified
him.

 However,
we
could
take
this
line
to
mean
(and
I
think
we
should)
that
through
the
 process
of
the
play
and
the
aischrologia
and
laughter
Demos,
the
character,
and
the
 























































 362 
Aristophanes,
Knights
316‐9.
 
 151
 demos
of
Athens,
there
at
the
theater
have
been
“boiled”
and
transformed
e0c ai0sxrou~ out
of
or
through
something
aischros.

And
the
something
aischros,
in
this
 case,
is
the
play
itself
and
its
heavy
use
of
aischrologia
as
I
(and
many
others)
noted
 above.

Through
the
transformation
of
Demos
Athens
itself
is
changed
back
to
the
 Athens
of
old. 363 

The
a0gwn (contest)
of
aischrologia
that
the
Sausage
Seller
and
 Paphlagon
undertook
transformed
the
character
Demos
and
by
watching,
 understanding,
and
most
importantly
laughing
at
comedy
during
a
festival
contest
 the
demos
of
Athens
can
be
likewise
changed
for
the
good.
 
 The
transformation
of
Demos
is
seen
by
many
scholars
as
strange,
out
of
 nowhere,
“feeble, 364 ”
and
only
a
“plot‐device. 365 .

This
criticism
smacks
of
the
 dismissal
of
Aristophanes,
the
Knights,
and
Old
Comedy
in
general
that
I
have
been
 arguing
against
for
two
chapters.

These
attacks
fail
to
see
the
central
theme
of
 transformation
in
the
Knights
(and
much
of
Aristophanes’
poetry)
and
gloss
over
the
 arguments
in
the
Knights
about
how
comedy
should
be
made
and
how
it
should
 function
in
the
discourse
of
the
polis.

The
transformation
of
Demos
is,
in
fact,
the
 only
rational
ending
for
the
Knights
because
it
is
the
goal
and
purpose
of
comedy.

 Aristophanes
makes
that
explicit
in
the
Knights
the
play
that
lays
out
most
clearly
 and
simply
his
ideas
about
what
makes
a
good
comedy.
 The
Knights
won
at
the
Lenaea
of
424
BCE.

And
Aristophanes
continued
to
 refer
to
the
Knights
and
his
skill
and
daring
in
subsequent
plays. 366 

This
pride
in
his
 























































 363 
Aristophanes,
Knights
1325‐1330.
 364 
Whitman,
Aristophanes
and
the
Comic
Hero,
84
and
102.
 365 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
88.
 366 
Aristophanes,
Clouds
549‐62.
 
 152
 work
is
definitely
at
odds
with
modern
critics
who
dismiss
the
Knights
as
simply
a
 vindictive
attack
on
Cleon
after
his
legal
action
against
the
poet.

I
believe
this
 disconnect
is
the
direct
result
of
reading
the
Knights
on
its
most
superficial
level
and
 not
seeing
the
deeper
claims
about
comedy
and
its
essential
role
in
civic
life.
 
 The
Frogs
 The
Frogs,
produced
almost
twenty
years
after
the
Knights,
has
a
much
more
 layered,
nuanced,
and
in‐depth
approach
to
theater
and
transformation.

While
the
 Knights
laid
the
foundation
of
Aristophanes’
pedagogical
program,
the
Frogs
 explicitly
links
ritual
transformation
through
the
use
of
its
two
choruses
with
 theatrical
transformation,
and
carries
on
an
extensive
investigation
of
both
tragedy
 and
comedy
and
how
these
dramatic
forms
and
their
poets
transform
the
city
of
 Athens.
 The
two
choruses
in
the
Frogs,
the
Frogs
and
the
Initiates,
are
one
of
the
 many
signals
to
the
audience
that
the
main
theme
of
the
play
is
transformation,
 since
both
groups
change
their
physical
or
spiritual
selves
during
their
lifetimes. 367 

 Many
scholars
have
stumbled
over
why
the
play
has
two
choruses
and
some
even
 gloss
over
the
fact
that
there
are
two
–
treating
the
frogs
as
just
another
character
in
 one
episode
of
the
play. 368 

Many
recent
readings
of
the
play
see
ritual
connections
 























































 367 
See
Chapter
Three
for
an
in
depth
discussion
of
the
Frog
chorus
and
 transformation.
 368 
W.
B.
Stanford,
Aristophanes:
Frogs
(London:
Bristol
Classical
Press,
1958)
xxi
 and
Kenneth
Dover,
Frogs
(Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press,
1997),
28‐9.
 
 153
 as
the
link
between
the
two
choruses; 369 
the
frogs
explicitly
mention
the
Anthesteria
 and
the
Initiates
are
part
of
the
dense
use
of
Eleusinian
ritual
in
the
play.

Although
 this
is
true,
the
two
choruses
are
related
in
a
much
more
direct
way
–
 transformation.

This
relationship
is
the
key
to
understanding
this
incredibly
dense
 and
layered
text.
 The
Chorus
of
Initiates
is
not
explicitly
labeled
as
Eleusinian
Initiates,
and
 this
has
allowed
some
scholars
to
hypothesize
other
specific
ritual
connections 370 
or
 to
see
the
Chorus
as
a
general
mystery
religion
chorus.

I
agree
with
Bowie
and
Graf
 that
there
are
far
too
many
Eleusinian
specifics
in
the
text 371 
to
think
that
the
 Chorus
of
Initiates
could
be
anything
but
initiates
into
the
Mysteries
of
Demeter
at
 Eleusis.
Certainly,
the
theme
of
transformation
would
still
be
relevant
if
the
chorus
 were
initiates
into
another
mystery
religion,
however,
since
the
Mysteries
at
Eleusis
 were
the
largest
mystery
cult
in
the
Greek
world
it
makes
sense
that
Aristophanes
 chose
them
for
the
chorus
since
many
people
in
his
audience
would
have
personal
 initiatory
experience
from
their
own
journeys
to
Eleusis.
 There
is
also
a
very
interesting
overlap
between
Dionysos
and
Eleusis
that
 the
play
makes
use
of,
the
confusion
and
partial
merging
of
Bacchos
and
Iacchos.

As
 























































 369 
See
Lada‐Richards,
Initiating
Dionysus,
esp.
45‐121;
Edmunds,
Myths
of
the
 Underworld
Journey;
and
Rosen,
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
Tradition,
esp.
25
 370 
See
T.G.
Tucker,
The
Frogs
of
Aristophanes
(New
York:
MacMillan
&
Co.,
1906)
 and
Charles
Segal,
“The
Character
and
Cults
of
Dionysus
and
the
Unity
of
the
Frogs,”
 Harvard
Studies
in
Classical
Philology
65
(1961)
for
discussion
of
the
Chorus
as
a
 group
from
Agrae
and
M.
Tierney,
“The
Parados
in
Aristophanes’
‘Frogs,’”
 Proceedings
of
the
Royal
Irish
Academy
42
(1934)
and
M.
Guarducci,
“Le
Rane
di
 Aristofane
e
la
topografia
ateniese,”
Studi
in
onore
di
A.
Colonna
(1982)
for
 arguments
that
it
is
the
procession
at
the
Lenaea.


 371 
See
Bowie,
Aristophanes,
228‐30
and
Fritz
Graf,
Greek
Mythology:
an
Introduction
 (Baltimore:
Johns
Hopkins
University
Press,
1996),
40‐50
for
very
in
depth
 discussions
of
the
Eleusinian
rituals
specifically
mentioned
in
Frogs.


 
 154
 I
discussed
in
Chapter
One,
this
confusion
seems
to
start
in
the
ancient
world
and
 carry
through
in
some
modern
scholarship. 372 

The
Initiates
in
the
Frogs
are
taking
 part
in
the
journey
to
Eleusis
in
a
parade
that
celebrates
Iacchos—who
becomes
 somewhat
linked
with
Dionysos
by
the
fifth
century—while
conversing
with
 Dionysos 373 
as
he
undertakes
a
journey
of
his
own,
both
a
katabasis
and
an
 initiation.
 Like
the
two
choruses,
the
character
of
Dionysos,
the
comedic
hero
of
the
 play,
is
in
a
state
of
flux.

My
earlier
discussion
of
the
play
in
Chapter
3
chronicled
his
 numerous
transformations
in
the
first
section
of
the
play.

First,
he
assumes
the
 identity
of
Herakles
with
the
aid
of
a
lionskin
cloak
and
a
club.
And
then
Dionysos
 and
his
slave
Xanthias
swap
identities
multiple
times
in
one
scene,
each
appearing
 as
Herakles
and
then
Herakles’
slave
in
rapid
succession
in
order
to
escape
the
 numerous
people
Herakles
angered
in
the
Underworld.


 The
character
of
Dionysos
also
undergoes
a
play‐long
transformation.

He
 begins
the
play
as
a
buffoon
version
of
himself,
nothing
less
than
one
might
expect
in
 a
comedy.
The
play
begins
with
a
short
exchange
between
Dionysos
and
Xanthias,
 and
then
Dionysos
encounters
Herakles
who
immediately
begins
laughing
at
him,
 























































 372 
The
Scholia
to
Frogs
482
mentions
that,
“At
the
Lenaea,
the
Daduchos
cried
‘Call
 on
the
god’
and
the
people
replied
‘Son
of
Semele,
Iacchus
giver
of
wealth.’”
If
this
is
 true
than
clearly
Iacchos
and
Dionysos
have
become
conflated.

See
Bowie,
 Aristophanes,
232‐3
for
more
archeological
and
literary
evidence
of
the
two
gods
 merging
in
the
fifth
century.



 373 
Segal,
“The
Character
and
Cults
of
Dionysus,”
208
goes
even
further
and
says
that
 Dionysos
makes
an
“appearance
as
Iacchos
in
the
Mystic
Procession.”

I
could
 certainly
imagine
a
production
playing
up
Dionysos
at
the
Iacchos
procession
–
but
 there
is
not
textual
evidence
that
the
Initiates
recognize
him
as
a
god
or,
as
 Dionysos,
let
alone
as
Iacchos.
Reckford,
Aristophanes’
Old­and­New
Comedy,
414‐5
 also
notes
the
blurring
of
the
boundary
between
Dionysos
and
Iacchos.
 
 155
 inviting
the
audience
to
do
the
same
with
his
asides
about
Dionysos’
ridiculous
 costume. 374 

Then
Dionysos
reveals
to
Herakles
that
he
needs
to
get
to
Hades
to
 retrieve
Euripides
for
whom
he
has
o9 po/qoj,
a
longing.
This
in
and
of
itself
is
not
 ridiculous,
but
he
says
he
longs
for
Euripides
the
way
one
longs
for
e!ntoj thick
bean
 soup. 375 

This
analogy
and
his
reason
for
going
to
the
underworld
are
hardly
the
 tragic
circumstances
that
usually
surround
a
katabasis
(journey
to
the
 underworld). 376 

Dionysos
seems
like
a
gadabout
–
contemplating
a
journey
to
 Hades
on
a
whim
and
dressing
in
a
ridiculous
costume
in
the
hopes
of
facilitating
 that
journey.
 Once
in
Hades,
he
is
subjected
to
a
series
of
indignities
because
no
one
there
 recognizes
who
he
is. 377 
First
he
must
row
himself
across
the
Styx; 378 
he
then
 encounters
the
frog
chorus,
who
sings
about
the
Anthesteria,
but
seemingly
has
no
 idea
that
the
god
for
whom
the
holiday
is
celebrated
is
the
one
rowing
the
boat.

 Once
across
the
Styx,
he
and
Xanthias
come
across
an
inn
where
Herakles
caroused
 when
he
was
in
Hades.

Since
Dionysos
is
dressed
in
his
Herakles
costume,
the
 innkeepers
think
he
is
Herakles
and
threaten
to
beat
him.

Dionysos
warns
them
not
 























































 374 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
42‐3,
45‐8.
 375 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
62.
As
Helene
Foley
has
pointed
out
to
me,
this
is
for
 Herakles’
sake
–
because
he
has
no
literary
taste
but
loves
food!
 376 
Orpheus
goes
to
Hades
to
retrieve
his
wife
who
died
during
their
wedding
and
 Herakles
goes
to
capture
Cerberus
as
part
of
his
labors
to
atone
for
the
murder
of
 his
wife
and
children.

Odysseus
goes
to
the
underworld
to
get
a
prophesy
from
 Tiresias
in
order
to
have
a
successful
homecoming
to
Ithaka
after
the
Trojan
War.
 All
much
more
somber
and
significant
reasons
to
visit
Hades.
 377 
The
misrecognition
of
Dionysos
is
not,
of
course,
limited
to
the
scope
of
this
play.

 It
is
a
key
part
of
the
plots
of
both
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Dionysos
and
Euripides’
 Bacchae.
 378 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
197‐206.
 
 156
 to
hurt
him
since
he
is
a
god, 379 
but
when
Xanthias
claims
the
same
thing
the
 innkeeper
can’t
tell
who
is
lying
and
beats
them
both. 380 


 Throughout
this
first
part
of
their
Underworld
journey
Dionysos
continues
to
 act
like
a
buffoon.

He
complains
nonstop
while
he
is
rowing
across
the
Styx. 381 

He
is
 a
complete
coward,
forcing
Xanthias
to
dress
in
his
Herakles
costume
after
it
 becomes
clear
the
innkeepers
are
going
to
exact
some
sort
of
revenge. 382 

And
when
 they
encounter
the
Initiate
Chorus
Dionysos
wants
to
join
in,
not
because
he
is
 impressed
or
interested
by
their
claims
of
a
happier
afterlife,
but
because
he
wants
 to
pai/zw play
with
a
half
naked
female
initiate
he
has
seen. 383 

Although
he
has
 come
across
two
different
choruses
with
the
ability
to
transform
he
himself
is
still
 the
same
Dionysos
that
he
was
at
the
beginning
of
the
play.

It
is
not
until
the
contest
 between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides
that
Dionysos
transforms.


 I
am
certainly
not
the
first
person
to
see
Dionysos’
katabasis
in
the
Frogs
as
a
 journey
of
initiation.

Segal
arguing
against
earlier
critiques
that
the
katabasis
must
 have
been
an
afterthought
on
Aristophanes
part 384 
claimed
that
the
katabasis
was,
 in
fact,
the
unifying
factor
of
the
play,
and
therefore
the
play
was
about
Dionysos’
 























































 379 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
628‐32.
 380 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
644‐673.
 381 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
221‐255.
 382 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
579‐89.
 383 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
412‐14.
 384 
This
argument
(see
B.B.
Rogers,
The
Comedies
of
Aristophanes
(London:
G.
Bell
&
 Sons,
1919);
Carlo
Russo,
“The
revision
of
Aristophanes’
‘Frogs,’”
Greece
&
Rome
13
 (1966);
and
J.T.
Hooker,
“The
Composition
of
the
Frogs,”
Hermes
108
(1980))
that
 the
element
of
katabasis
was
a
last
minute
attempt
of
Aristophanes
to
link
the
 beginning
and
end
of
the
play
I
see
as
part
of
the
dismissive
attitude
toward
Old
 Comedy
by
many
scholars.
 
 157
 own
initiation. 385 

Konstan
further
develops
this
theme
by
demarcating
three
levels
 of
the
play,
which
constitute,
“a
logical
arrangement
imitating
a
ritual
of
 initiation. 386 ”

These
discussions,
however,
don’t
name
a
specific
initiation
ritual
that
 Dionysos
is
under
going
–
they
note
the
katabasis,
the
three‐part
structure,
and
the
 Eleusinian
rituals,
but
see
Dionysos
as
the
embodiment
of
Comedy,
so
that
Comedy
 itself
is
undergoing
some
initiation.

Lada‐Richards
takes
this
theory
one
step
 further
and
claims
that
there
are
also
echoes
of
“other
initiatory
contexts,
such
as
 ephebic
rites
of
passage.” 387 
 Although
I
agree
with
this
tradition
of
seeing
Dionysos’
journey
in
the
Frogs
 as
an
initiation,
I
think
that
putting
too
much
emphasis
on
this
aspect
of
the
play
 risks
missing
the
larger
ideas
that
Aristophanes
is
presenting.

Although
the
 katabasis
can
represent
an
initiation,
and
although
there
are
specific
ritual
elements
 from
other
initiatory
journeys,
the
unifying
idea
of
the
Frogs
is
transformation;
the
 initiation
of
Dionysos
is
one
of
many
transformations
happening
in
the
play.

This
is
 a
subtle
but
important
distinction,
if
we
interpret
the
Frogs
as
just
about
Dionysos’
 initiation
we
lose
the
amazing
complexity
of
the
poetry
and
plot. 388 

Using
 























































 385 
See
also
Whitman,
Aristophanes
and
the
Comic
Hero,
236;
Richard
Morton,
“Rites
 of
Passage
in
Aristophanes’
‘Frogs,’”
The
Classical
Journal
84
(1989):
322,
and
Bowie,
 Aristophanes,
247.
 386 
David
Konstan,
“Poesie,
politique
et
rituel
dans
les
Grenouilles
d’Aristophane,”
 Metis
1
(1986):
291.
 387 
Lada‐Richards,
Initiating
Dionysus,
50.
 388 
Edmunds,
Myths
of
the
Underworld
Journey
argues
completely
against
an
 initiatory
interpretation
because
he
sees
it
as
too
narrow,
and
would
rather
 interpret
the
play
through
a
more
political
lens.
But
this
is
a
bit
like
throwing
the
 baby
out
with
the
bathwater
–using
transformation
as
the
unifying
idea
I
can
allow
 for
both
the
initiatory
aspects
of
the
play
and
the
political
–
and
therefore
not
ignore
 either
aspect,
since
both
are
so
clearly
in
the
text.
 
 158
 transformation
as
the
unifying
concept
we
can
see
the
many
layers
of
ritual,
 political,
theatrical,
and
intertextual
themes
that
Aristophanes
has
woven
together.
 The
Frogs
was
so
well
received
by
the
Athenian
public
that
the
play
won
the
 Lenaea
in
405
and
according
to
Hypothesis
I
“οὕτω
δὲ
ἐθαυμάσθη
τὸ
δρᾶμα
διὰ
τὴν
 ἐν
αὐτῷ
παράβασιν,
the
play
was
so
admired
because
of
its
parabasis
that
it
was
 produced
again”;
a
very
unusual
honor.

An
ancient
biography
of
Aristophanes
 doesn’t
mention
a
re‐performance
specifically,
but
reports
that
Aristophanes,

 “τούτου
οὖν
χάριν
ἐπῃνέθη
καὶ
ἐστεφανώθη
θαλλῷ
τῆς
 ἱερᾶς
ἐλαίας,
ὃς

νενόμισται
ἰσότιμος
χρυσῷ
στεφάνῳ,
 εἰπὼν
ἐκεῖνα
τὰ
ἐν
τοῖς
Βατράχοις
περὶ
τῶν
ἀτίμων·
τὸν
 ἱερὸν
χορὸν
δίκαιον
πολλὰ
χρηστὰ
τῇ
πόλει
 ξυμπαραινεῖν
because
of
this
[the
parabasis]
was
 praised
and
crowned
with
a
sacred
olive
branch,
which
 was
regarded
as
an
honor
equal
to
a
gold
crown,
having
 spoken
those
words
in
Frogs
about
the
men
who
had
 been
disenfranchised:
‘It
is
just
for
the
sacred
chorus
to
 offer
good
counsel
to
the
city.’ 389 .
 
 
 The
parabasis
of
Frogs
is
organized
slightly
differently
than
other
 Aristophanic
parabases.

Instead
of
the
classic
seven
parts
of
a
full
parabasis
there
 are
only
four
parts:
an
ode,
a
direct
address
to
the
audience,
an
antode,
and
a
final
 direct
address. 390 

The
tone
of
the
direct
address
to
the
audience
is
also
unusual.

 The
anapest
section
of
the
parabasis
is
missing 391 
and
this
section
is
often
the
one
 that
contains
the
most
abuse
or
grandiose
statements
of
the
author’s
own
prowess.
 According
to
Storey
and
Allan
anapestic
tetrameter
is
used
in
comedy
for
the
agon
 and
the
beginning
of
the
parabasis,
“The
anapestic
tetrameter
catalectic
seems
to
 























































 389 
Ralph
Rosen,
“Reconsidering
the
reperformance
of
Aristophanes’
Frogs,”
Trends
 in
Classics
7
(2015):
238‐9.
 390 
Stanford,
Aristophanes:
Frogs,
xlvi‐xlix.
 391 
There
is
a
section
of
anapests,
however
they
are
much
earlier
in
the
parados
354‐ 71.
 
 159
 have
been
an
elevated
meter,
suitable
for
arguments,
grand
statements,
and
 declarations,
and
by
the
ancients
was
called
‘Aristophean.’” 392 
Aristophanes
himself
 hints
at
this
in
the
Acharnians
(627)“ἀλλ᾽
ἀποδύντες
τοῖς
ἀναπαίστοις
ἐπίωμεν.
But
 let’s
strip
and
attack
the
anapests”.

With
out
the
anapestic
tetrameter,
the
parabasis
 in
Frogs
is
more
somber
than
usual. 393 
 
 The
passionate
yet
more
subdued 394 
parabasis
clearly
struck
a
chord
with
 the
Athenian
public
and
reflects
the
extremely
unsettled
social
and
political
climate
 of
405
BCE.

Athens
had
just
won
a
naval
victory
at
Arginusae
the
previous
summer,
 however
the
cost
was
incredibly
steep. 395 
They
had
rejected
the
Spartan
peace
offer,
 and
the
Athenian
economic
situation
was
very
grave
–
necessitating
the
melting
of
 the
victory
statues
in
the
Parthenon
and
the
casting
of
silver
plated
coins. 396 


 
 The
appeal
in
the
Frogs
is
for
Athenian
unity.

The
chorus
delivering
the
plea
 is
the
Chorus
of
Initiates
–
a
group
of
people
who
understand
transformation
and
 are
therefore
very
well
placed
to
urge
transformation
on
the
Athenian
public.

 Edwards
argues
that
they
are
the
perfect
group
to
deliver
this
message
because
they
 are
the
“idealized
vision
of
the
Athenian
people,” 397 
and
while
this
is
true,
what
is
 even
more
significant
is
that
they
are
ideal
because
they
have
undergone
a
 transformation.

Despite
the
subdued
tone
of
the
parabasis,
the
following
agon
 























































 392 
Storey
and
Allan,
A
Guide
to
Ancient
Greek
Drama,
291.

 393 
Reckford,
Aristophanes
Old­and­New
Comedy,
415
also
notes
the
significance
of
 moving
the
anapests.
 394 
Naturally,
this
being
comedy
there
is
still
some
mockery.
 395 
After
the
battle
a
storm
came
up
making
it
impossible
to
collect
the
bodies
of
the
 dead
or
to
rescue
survivors,
and
a
large
number
of
additional
sailors
drowned.

The
 Athenian
public
was
so
enraged
by
this
that
they
held
an
illegal
trail
and
executed
 six
of
the
generals
as
a
group
(the
remaining
two
fled).


 396 
Henderson,
Frogs,
6‐7.
 397 
Edmunds,
Myths
of
the
Underworld
Journey,
156.
 
 160
 between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides
is
full
of
mockery
and
laughter.

And
this
is
exactly
 what
the
Frogs
argues
is
necessary
–
Athens
needs
the
theater,
and
in
particular
 comedy
if
it
is
to
transform.
 The
Frogs
has
several
smaller
contests
that
foreshadow
the
main
contest
of
 the
tragedians,
the
contest
between
Dionysos
and
the
Frogs
and
the
beating
contest
 between
Xanthias
and
Dionysos.

Like
the
extended
contest
in
the
Knights,
these
 three
contests
highlight
the
agonistic
nature
of
the
theatrical
festivals
at
Athens,
 culminating
in
a
poetic
contest 398 
between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides
with
Dionysos
 as
the
undisputed
judge.

The
very
first
lines
of
the
Frogs
indicate
the
importance
of
 poetic
competition.

Xanthias
and
Dionysos
enter
bantering
back
and
forth
about
 what
joke
to
use
to
open
the
play.

They
complain
that
most
jokes
are
so
overused
 that
they
aren’t
funny
anymore.

Xanthias
even
mentions
three
of
Aristophanes’
 competitors
by
name
as
some
of
the
worst
repeat
offenders,
recycling
the
same
 jokes
over
and
over
in
their
plays. 399 


 Although
theses
jibes
are
very
good‐natured,
their
position
at
the
opening
of
 the
play
points
up
the
important
role
that
contests
will
have
throughout
the
text.

 The
first
contest,
the
one
between
Dionysos
and
the
Frogs,
as
I
discussed
in
Chapter
 Three,
foreshadows
the
more
extended
contest
later
in
the
play,
and
subtly
 introduces
the
link
between
competition
and
transformation.

Although
the
contest
 of
who
can
Brekekekex
koax
koax
longer
and
louder 400 
doesn’t
bring
about
any
 direct
transformation
in
Dionysos,
it
does
occur
as
he
crosses
the
Styx,
and
 























































 398 
Zachary
Biles,
Aristophanes
and
the
Poetics
of
Competition
(Cambridge:
 Cambridge
University
Press,
2011),
211.


 399 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
12‐15.
 400 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
260‐67.
 
 161
 transitions
from
the
land
of
the
living
to
the
home
of
the
dead,
and
it
presents
these
 two
important
themes
side
by
side,
again
anticipating
the
later,
more
extended
 contest.


 The
second
contest,
the
“beating
contest”
between
Dionysos
and
Xanthias
 also
ties
together
the
themes
of
competition
and
transformation.

Like
the
first
 contest,
although
the
two
themes
of
transformation
and
competition
are
explored
 parallel
to
each
other
the
contest
does
not
facilitate
a
transformation
in
the
 character
of
Dionysos.
The
transformation
actually
occurs
before
the
contest
and
 only
makes
things
more
confusing.

Dionysos
and
Xanthias
attempting
to
avoid
 trouble
(for
Herakles’
bad
behavior
in
Hades)
and
gain
favor
(one
of
the
maids
at
the
 inn
offers
Xanthias,
who
she
thinks
is
Herakles,
sexual
favors
and
a
feast),
end
up
 thoroughly
confusing
everyone
at
the
inn.
Therefore
the
contest
is
required
because
 of
Dionysos’
childish
and
cowardly
behavior,
but
does
nothing
to
curb
or
influence
 it.

Transformation
and
the
contest
have
occurred
in
the
wrong
order
and
produced
 no
result.


 The
final
contest
is
a
poetic
competition
between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides
to
 decide
who
will
get
maintenance
at
the
Prytaneum
and
the
right
to
sit
in
the
Chair
of
 Tragedy
to
the
right
of
Pluto, 401 
which
indicates
that
the
sitter
is
the
best
at
his
 respective
art
in
all
of
Hades.

There
was
no
one
qualified
to
judge
the
contest,
but
 luckily
Dionysos
happened
along
and
Pluto
asked
him
to
judge
the
contest,
 immediately
recognizing
him
as
a
fellow
god. 402 

This
contest
ends
up
changing
 Dionysos’
mind
about
who
he
will
take
back
to
Athens
with
him,
although
he
 























































 401 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
761‐5.
 402 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
668‐673.
 
 162
 originally
conceived
of
the
journey
to
Hades
to
get
Euripides,
when
the
two
poet’s
 lines
are
“weighed”
in
the
scales
that
Pluto
has,
Aeschylus
writes
the
more
 substantial
poetry. 403 


 What
is
it
then
that
makes
Dionysos
change
his
mind
and
crown
Aeschylus
 victor
and
take
him
back
to
Athens?

The
poetic
agon
transforms
Dionysos.

The
 contest
is
naturally
comedic,
but
also
addresses
very
serious
contemporary
 issues: 404 
the
nature
of
democracy, 405 
what
the
city
should
do
about
Alcibiades, 406 
 the
ideal
role
of
poets
in
their
society, 407 
and
if
Athens
can
be
saved. 408 

The
contest,
 full
of
comedy,
is
an
example
of
how
poetic
competition
works
on
an
audience.

Here
 Dionysos
stands
in
as
the
audience,
and
we
see
him
slowly
transform
over
the
 course
of
the
agon
from
buffoon
to
competent
judge
of
tragedy.


 At
the
beginning
of
the
competition
he
is
already
recognizable
as
himself,
he
 is
no
longer
wearing
his
Herakles
costume
and
is
seated
next
to
Pluto,
as
one
might
 expect
a
visiting
god
to
be.

The
first
exchanges
between
Aeschylus
and
Euripides
 delight
Dionysos
with
their
wit
and
sarcasm.

Then
the
poets
“weigh”
their
lines
 against
each
other
in
the
scales
made
for
this
purpose.

After
this
Dionysos
turns
 more
serious,
he
questions
each
poet
about
real
issues
facing
contemporary
Athens
 and
states
that
the
winner
will
be
the
one
with
the
best
advice.


 























































 403 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1378‐1406.
 404 
Reckford,
Aristophanes
Old­and­New
Comedy,
424.
 405 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
952‐967.
 406 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1422‐3.
 407 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1053‐56.
 408 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1441‐65.
 
 163
 This
statement
harkens
back
to
Aeschylus’
claim
that
the
poet
is
the
teacher
 of
young
men
and
women, 409 
and
Euripides’
declaration
that
poets
should
make
the
 city
better, 410 
and
cements
these
ideas
as
the
central
elements
by
which
a
poet
 should
be
(and
will
be
in
the
Frogs)
judged.

Dionysos
has
come
quite
some
distance
 from
the
silly,
cowardly,
horny
dilettante,
scampering
down
to
Hades
on
a
whim
to
 fetch
Euripides;
he
is
now
the
god
of
theater, 411 
channeling
his
desire
for
good
 theater
through
the
perspective
that
good
theater
is
also
what
is
good
for
the
city,
 not
what
is
just
entertaining
(as
poor
Euripides
is
judged
to
be).


 Henderson
argues
that
the
idea
of
tragedians
as
teachers
is
under
scrutiny
 here. 412 

I
would
like
to
expand
on
this
idea,
certainly
the
two
great
tragedians
are
 being
judged
–
but
their
judge
is
comedy,
the
comedic
Dionysos
who
has
travelled
to
 the
underworld
to
be
initiated,
transformed,
and
claim
his
rightful
role
as
the
arbiter
 of
theater.

The
implication
being,
that
if
he
can
successfully
judge
which
tragic
poet
 is
better
for
the
city,
he
can
accurately
diagnose
and
tend
to
the
ills
of
the
city
as
 well. 413 


 The
agon
in
the
Frogs,
like
the
agon
in
the
Knights,
serves
as
a
tiny
 competition
within
a
competition.

Both
are
examples
and
lessons
for
the
audience
 about
what
is
happening
to
them
as
they
watch
the
dramatic
festival
they
are
 currently
attending.

The
Frogs
is
making
a
more
specific
claim,
that
it
is
poetic
 competition,
not
just
any
contest
for
the
love
of
the
demos,
that
has
the
ability
to
 























































 409 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1053‐6.
 410 Aristophanes,
Frogs
1008‐9.
 411 
Garry
Wills,
“Why
are
the
Frogs
in
the
Frogs?”
Hermes
97
(1969):
317.
 412 
Henderson,
The
Maculate
Muse,
91.
 413 
Reckford,
Aristophanes’
Old­and­New
Comedy,
424.
 
 164
 change,
both
people’s
character,
as
it
does
for
Dionysos,
and
their
preconceived
 notions.

As
Susan
Lape
writes,
“In
the
end,
Dionysus’
decision
[to
take
Aeschylus
 back
to
Athens,
not
Euripides]
is
made
necessary
because
comedy
portrays
the
 secret
of
the
transmutable
self,
that
is,
its
ability
to
remodel
itself
or
be
 remodeled.” 414 

This
self
is
what
Dionysos
reveals
is
within
every
audience
member.
 Lape
argues
that
Aristophanes
is
concerned
with
the
transmutable
self,
the
 ability
for
identity
to
be
transformed
by
outside
forces
and
the
possibility
that
 citizens
“might
devolve
in
to
something
Other.” 415 

I
agree
that
these
are
issues
the
 Frogs
grapples
with,
however
I
want
to
add
to
this
argument.

Lape
divides
the
Frogs
 in
half
–
in
the
first
half
of
the
play
we
see
Dionysos
concerned
with
trivial
and
venal
 pursuits
and
ideas
because
of
his
exposure
to
too
much
Euripides.

The
agon
in
the
 second
half
is,
for
Lape,
the
turning
point
when
Aeschylus
wins
the
argument
that
he
 is
the
best
poet
for
Athens
at
war. 416 

 The
character
of
comedic
Dionysos
is
not
only
an
example
of
how
theatrical
 mimesis
can
alter
identity,
he
is
Comedy
–
and
the
agon
in
the
Frogs
claims
both
that
 comedy
can
undo
the
potential
damage
of
tragedy
and
that
comedy
is
the
best
 medium
through
which
to
filter
tragedy.


The
claims
for
comedy
that
this
scene
 stakes
are
incredibly
high.

Although
Dionysos
transforms
over
the
course
of
the
 poetic
competition
scene,
he
is
still
a
comedic
Dionysos.

He
is
not
the
awesome
and
 terrifying
god
of
the
Homeric
Hymn
who
changes
the
disbelieving
pirates
into
 























































 414 
Susan
Lape,
“Slavery
drama
and
the
alchemy
of
identity
in
Aristophanes”
in
 Slaves
and
Slavery
in
Ancient
Greek
Drama
ed.
Ben
Akrigg
and
Rob
Tordoff
(New
 York:
Cambridge
University
Press,
2013),
90.
 415 
Lape,
“Slavery
drama
and
the
alchemy
of
identity
in
Aristophanes,”
90.
 416 
Lape,
“Slavery
drama
and
the
alchemy
of
identity
in
Aristophanes,”
89.
 
 165
 dolphins.

Nor
is
he
the
vengeful
Dionysos
of
the
Bacchae,
humiliating
or
killing
all
of
 those
who
refuse
to
recognize
him
as
a
god.

His
last
line
of
the
play
is
a
mash‐up
of
 Euripides
and
comedic
silliness,
“τίς
οἶδεν
εἰ
τὸ
ζῆν
μέν
ἐστι
κατθανεῖν,
τὸ
πνεῖν
δὲ
 δειπνεῖν,
τὸ
δὲ
καθεύδειν
κῴδιον;
Who
knows
if
life
is
truly
death,
food
breath,
and
 sleep
a
fleecy
sheepskin?” 417 
Certainly
this
is
not
the
tragic
or
epic
Dionysos
 speaking.

 
 If
the
comedic
Dionysos
has
the
authority
to
judge
tragedy
and
the
great
 tragic
poets,
is
comedy,
then,
the
more
discerning
genre?

The
Frogs
seems
to
make
 this
claim.

Aristophanes
is
holding
a
mirror
up
to
the
entire
city;
political
life,
poetic
 competition,
transformation,
war
–
everything
is
under
the
microscope
in
comedy.

 The
episodic
nature
of
comedic
composition
allows
the
poet
to
discuss
this
 hodgepodge
of
subjects
over
the
course
of
just
one
play.

Aristophanes’
plays
 present
comedy
as
the
ideal
medium
for
instructing
the
demos.
And
this
is
why
 comedy
can
even
stand
in
judgment
of
tragedy.
 
 This
conviction
that
comedy
should
be
the
arbiter
for
the
most
vital
issues
in
 Athenian
life
is
central
to
Aristophanes’
pedagogical
program.
The
Frogs,
like
the
 Knights
makes
a
number
of
claims
about
the
power
of
theater
and
the
comedic
 chorus
specifically.

Aeschylus
poses
the
central
question
of
his
contest
with
 Euripides
asking,
“τίνος
οὕνεκα
χρὴ
θαυμάζειν
ἄνδρα
ποιητήν;
on
account
of
what
 qualities
should
a
poet
be
admired?”
and
Euripides’
answer
is,
“δεξιότητος
καὶ
 νουθεσίας,
ὅτι
βελτίους
τε
ποιοῦμεν
τοὺς
ἀνθρώπους
ἐν
ταῖς
πόλεσιν.
Cleverness
 























































 417 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1477‐8.
 
 166
 and
good
advice,
and
because
we
make
men
better
in
their
cities.” 418 

Aeschylus
 agrees
with
Euripides
and
he
then
claims
that
his
Seven
Against
Thebes,
“ὃ
 θεασάμενος
πᾶς
ἄν
τις
ἀνὴρ
ἠράσθη
δάιος
εἶναι.
Made
all
men
who
watched
it
lust
to
 be
warlike.”
Both
Aeschylus’
specific
boast
about
Seven
Against
Thebes
and
 Euripides’
assertion
concerning
theater
in
general
mirror
the
claims
made
for
 theatrical
competition
and
comedy
that
Aristophanes
makes
in
the
Knights,
just
in
 much
more
explicit
terms.
 
 The
chorus
of
initiates
in
the
Frogs
also
makes
claims
about
the
chorus’
role
 in
theatrical
productions
and
what
a
good
chorus
should
do.
“τὸν
ἱερὸν
χορὸν
 δίκαιόν
ἐστι
χρηστὰ
τῇ
πόλει
ξυμπαραινεῖν
καὶ
διδάσκειν.
It
is
righteous
and
useful
 for
the
sacred
chorus
to
help
give
good
advice
and
instruct
the
city.” 419 

This
 assertion
just
like
the
contentions
of
the
two
playwrights
above
assume
the
end
goal
 of
any
good
play
or
poet
is
a
transformation
of
the
audience.

Why
would
a
poet
or
a
 chorus
give
good
advice,
or
how
would
they
make
men
better
for
their
cities
if
not
 by
altering
their
attitudes
and
shaping
their
worldviews,
i.e.
transforming
them
over
 the
course
of
a
play.

And
even
though
Dionysus
brings
Aeschylus
back
to
help
 Athens,
it
is
comedy
that
is
the
arbiter
of
what
is
good
tragedy. 420 

The
claims
that
 Frogs
is
staking
are
not
just
for
theater
in
general,
but
very
specifically
for
the
 essentialness
of
comedy.
 























































 418 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
1008‐1010
 419 
Aristophanes,
Frogs
686‐7.
 
 420 
Even
though
in
Frogs
Aeschylus
is
rescued
from
Hades,
Aristophanes
most
 frequently
parodies
the
tragedies
of
Euripides.

Reckford
says
Aristophanes
must
 have
been
shaken
by
Euripides’
death,
which
is
of
course
unknowable.

But
it
 certainly
seems
that
good
Aristophanic
comedy
needs
good
tragedy.
Perhaps
 Aristophanes
and
Euripides
were
like
an
ancient
Ginsberg
and
Scalia
–seemingly
at
 odds,
but
good
friends
and
scholars
who
pushed
each
other’s
talents
and
intellect.
 
 167
 
 The
Knights
lays
out
this
idea
in
a
rather
heavy‐handed
way,
using
the
entire
 play
as
a
metaphor
for
theatrical
competition
and
the
city.

However,
two
decades
 later
the
idea
that
theater
should
be
transformative
has
become
woven
into
the
 tapestry
of
the
play
using
ritual,
competition,
costume,
and
the
character
arc
of
key
 figures
to
remind
Athens
that
theater
is
entertainment,
but
more
importantly
it
is
 also
the
most
valuable
form
of
instruction
possible
for
a
city.


 
 
 168
 


 
 Conclusion
 
 
 The
existence
of
ritual
laughter
in
ancient
Athens
is
something
that
many
 scholars,
especially
scholars
of
Greek
religion
have
discussed
at
length.
I
hope
I
have
 shown
that
this
phenomenon
is
only
part
of
the
story.

Ritual
laughter
is
an
element
 of
the
three‐part
transformation
paradigm
I
have
identified.

This
pattern
began
in
 Attic
cult
practices
(especially
those
to
Demeter
and
Kore)
and
is
present
in
the
 Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter
and
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
indicating
the
two
 deities
close
relationship
with
transformation
(both
human
and
agricultural).

This
 paradigm,
so
essential
to
Aristophanes’
comedies,
was
formalized
in
his
work,
which
 “appropriates
social
practices
for
use
in
a
ritualized
literary
sphere.” 421 
This
 appropriation
converted
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
from
a
 ritual
and
festival
practice
into
a
literary
trope
that,
while
retaining
its
ties
to
ritual,
 also
functioned
outside
the
ritual
realm
as
an
entity
unto
itself.
 Aischrologia
or
something
else
that
is
described
as
asichros
is
the
second
 component
of
this
paradigm.

This
is
sometimes
a
physical
revelation
of
something
 that
is
usually
hidden,
but
can
also
be
aischrologia,
spoken
by
people
who
would
 normally
either
speak
very
appropriately
or
be
silent.
However,
I
want
to
reiterate
 my
earlier
caution
about
the
association
with
asichros
and
shame.

Following
the
 definition
of
aischros
from
Aristotle
it
is
clear
that
the
shame
that
is
generated
after
 























































 421 
Worman,
Abusive
Mouths,
68.
 
 169
 aischros
speech
or
actions
is
on
account
of
violating
a
societal
norm
–
most
often
 not
one
having
to
do
with
sexual
mores.


 This
may
seem
like
an
overly
exacting
definition,
but
it
allows
us
to
fully
 understand
the
scope
of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm.

 Laughter
by
itself
does
not
always
engender
change
–
that
would
be
an
 oversimplification
of
the
many
instances
and
uses
of
laughter
in
Athenian
culture
 and
literature.

Ritual
laughter
and
aischrologia
(or
an
aischros
action)
do,
most
 often
go
together
–
the
laughter/transformation
paradigm
always
has
three
 components.

That
is
what
made
it
identifiable
for
the
ancient
Athenians
and
now
 makes
it
possible
to
trace
the
paradigm
through
cult
practice
and
into
Greek
 literature
and
the
cultural
consciousness.


 Despite
some
scholars
hesitation
to
classify
the
laughter
in
Aristophanes’
 work
as
ritual
laughter
I
believe
it
is
clear
from
the
presence
of
the
 laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
in
so
many
plays
that
these
texts
are
 deliberately
drawing
on
a
model
of
ritual
laughter
and
its
power
to
create
a
new
 identity
or
at
least
a
new
component
of
an
identity
for
the
audience
at
the
Dionysia
 and
the
Lenaea.

The
texts
are
using
a
familiar
and
powerful
tool
to
both
stimulate
 the
audience’s
awareness
of
the
claims
the
comedies
are
making
about
 transformation
and
to
engender
that
very
change
in
the
consciousness
of
the
demos.
 The
embedded
genre
of
the
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm
in
 Aristophanes’
comedy
also
made
the
paradigm
into
a
recognizable
literary
trope,
 and
the
cultural
reach
of
the
paradigm
was
not
limited
to
Old
Comedy,
in
fact
it
 permeated
Greek
poetry,
philosophy,
and
later
Roman
literature
and
theater
as
well.

 
 170
 And
because
of
the
paradigm’s
influence
on
classical
authors
and
texts
modern
 commentaries
on
the
philosophy
and
nature
of
laughter
often
note
its
relationship
 with
potentially
dangerous
power,
even
if
they
don’t
explicitly
reference
ancient
 ideas
about
laughter
and
transformation.
 This
paradigm
shows
up
in
many
other
places
in
the
ancient
world
–
often
in
 literature,
but
also
in
popular
mythology
about
initiation.

The
Arkhilokheion
on
 Paros
where
Archilochus
and
the
Muses
were
jointly
worshipped 422 
had
an
 inscribed
column
dating
to
the
third
century
BCE,
which
told
the
story
of
 Archilochus’
poetic
initiation.


 According
to
this
story,
Archilochus
received
his
verbal
powers
of
 poetry
from
the
Muses,
who
appeared
to
him
in
disguise
as
he
was
on
 his
way
to
sell
a
cow
(E1
col.
II
23‐29).
Archilochus
thinks
that
they
 are
rustic
women
leaving
the
fields
and
heading
for
the
city;
he
draws
 near
and
"ridicules"
them
(lines
29‐30:
skoptein),
but
the
Muses
 respond
with
playful
laughter
(lines
30‐31).
They
then
induce
 Archilochus
to
trade
them
his
cow
for
a
lyre;
once
the
transaction
is
 made,
they
disappear
(lines
32‐35).
He
falls
into
a
swoon,
and
when
 he
awakens
he
is
aware
that
the
Muses
have
just
given
him
the
gift
of
 poetry
(lines
36‐38). 423 

 
 Archilochus,
in
this
story,
acts
in
a
socially
transgressive
manner,
he
ridicules
 immortal
beings.

Using
Aristotle’s
definition
this
is
an
aischros
action
and
this
 aischros
action
rather
than
begetting
disaster
leads
to
laugher:
the
Muses’
laughter,
 which
then
transforms
Archilochus.
When
he
wakes
from
his
“swoon”
he
is
now
a
 poet.

This
perfect
example
of
the
tripartite
laughter/revelation/transformation
 























































 422 
See
Gregory
Nagy,
“Convergences
and
Divergences
between
God
and
Hero
in
the
 Mnesiepes
Inscription
of
Paros,”
Archilochus
and
his
Age
II
(2008)
and
Clay,
Politics
 of
Olympus.

 423 
Gregory
Nagy,
The
Best
of
the
Achaeans:
Concepts
of
the
Hero
in
Archaic
Greek
 Poetry
(Baltimore:
Johns
Hopkins
University
Press,
1979),
301.
 
 171
 paradigm
is
still
alive
and
well
about
150
miles
from
Athens
and
150
years
after
 Aristophanes’
Frogs
was
produced
in
Athens.


 
 
 Clearly
this
paradigm
spoke
not
only
to
the
Athenians
in
the
sixth
and
 fifth
centuries
BCE,
but
also
to
a
much
wider
audience
over
the
course
of
many
 hundreds
of
years
(not
unlike
the
Mysteries
to
Demeter
which
were
celebrated
at
 Eleusis
for
over
a
thousand
years).
It
became
not
only
a
model
borrowed
from
cult
 practice,
but
a
literary
trope
passed
from
genre
to
genre
and
between
cultures.
This
 may
point
to
a
larger
truth
about
the
nature
of
laughter
itself
and
how
human
beings
 process
laughter
and
its
attendant
emotions.
 
 This
is
why
the
work
of
Gallese,
Chapelle,
Lakoff,
Glenberg,
and
Whitehouse
 on
ToM
and
ST
is
interesting
to
think
with
about
how
and
why
laughter
and
 transformation
are
so
closely
tied
in
ritual
and
why
the
paradigm
is
such
a
 compelling
literary
device
not
only
in
Athens,
but
in
the
Roman
world,
and
even
the
 modern
context
of
the
philosophy
of
laughter.

Perhaps
the
neural
pathways
created
 in
a
person’s
brain
during
ritual
or
in
a
listener’s
imagination
as
they
hear
a
text
 recited,
are
different
because
of
their
association
with
laughter
–
more
memorable,
 and
therefore
more
easily
recalled
(like
a
soft
Flashbulb
memory).

 
 The
laughter/revelation/transformation
paradigm’s
move
from
social
and
 cultural
custom
to
literary
trope
(whatever
the
reason
for
its
persistence
in
Western
 literature)
in
Aristophanes’
comedy
gives
us
an
extremely
useful
tool
to
deepen
our
 understanding
of
Old
Comedy
and
how
it
was
experienced
in
its
ancient
context.
The
 ideas
about
transformation
that
the
paradigm
is
working
with
are,
in
fact,
essential
 to
understanding
how
Aristophanes’
texts
are
structured,
the
cultural
milieu
in
 
 172
 which
they
were
created,
and
the
driving
force
behind
their
aischrologia,
 political
humor,
and
laughter.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 173
 
 Appendix
A:
Other
Festivals
to
Demeter
 The
following
festivals,
the
Proerosia,
Stenia,
and
Thesmophoria
all
seem
to
have
 originally
been
celebrated
as
local
festivals,
either
in
individual
demes
or
in
small
 towns
in
Attica;
and
later
some
become
incorporated
into
the
festival
calendar
of
 Athens.

As
a
result
of
this
shift
from
local
to
state,
small
to
monumental,
the
 evidence
can
be
somewhat
contradictory
depending
on
its
age
and
if
it
refers
to
 local
practices
or
the
practices
of
the
larger
state
festivals.

I
am
including
this
 overview
so
that
my
reader
will
have
easy
access
to
the
more
detailed
evidence
for
 these
festivals,
which
I
may
not
always
repeat
in
my
larger
arguments
about
 aischrologia,
laughter,
and
transformation.


 Not
surprisingly,
the
month
of
Pyanopsion
in
the
fall
had
several
important
 festivals
to
Demeter.

In
a
Mediterranean
climate
many
crops
are
planted
in
the
fall
 and
grow
during
the
rainy
season
of
the
winter
and
the
spring 424 .


The
fall
was
 therefore
a
very
important
month
for
ensuring
the
fertility
of
the
fields
and
the
 blessing
of
Demeter.


 The
Proerosia
was
a
fall
festival
that
took
place
before
the
plowing
as
the
 name
implies,
pro and
a)ro/w 425 . Inscriptional
evidence
from
Eleusis
indicates
that
 the
festival,
at
least
in
Athens
and
Eleusis,
was
celebrated
after
the
5 th 
of
Pyanopsion
 























































 424 
For
more
on
the
agricultural
climate
of
the
ancient
Mediterranean
see
 Brumfield’s
excellent
book
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter
and
Their
Relation
to
the
 Agricultural
Year.
 425 
See
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
54
and
following,
for
more
on
the
 various
spellings
of
the
festival
in
inscriptions
and
the
controversial
conclusions
by
 Deubner
that
there
were
two
festivals,
the
Proerosia
and
Plerosia.
 
 174
 when
the
hierophant
and
the
keryx
announced
the
festival 426 
at
Athens.

Parke
 believes
that
the
Proerosia
was
primarily
an
Eleusinian
festival
that
was
imported
to
 Athens
after
the
annexation
of
Eleusis. 427 
The
actual
date
of
the
festival
is
difficult
to
 pinpoint.

Hesychius
indicates
that
the
Proerosia
took
place
after
the
rising
of
 Arktouros.

Perhaps,
as
Brumfield
suggests 428 
the
date
was
left
flexible
to
allow
for
 variations
in
the
weather
every
year,
which
would,
naturally,
vary
the
best
date
for
 the
fall
plowing.

What
actually
occurred
during
this
festival
is
also
difficult
to
 determine
with
any
certainty.

Perhaps
there
was
a
central
gathering
of
Attic
 women 429 
and
there
were
public
sacrifices
in
several
cities
including
Eleusis.

 Several
scholars 430 
believe
that
a
sacred
plowing
also
took
place
during
the
 Proerosia. 431 

Mikalson 432 
points
out
that
the
inscriptional
evidence
does
not
 indicate
that
the
Proerosia
was
an
Athenian
state
festival.

Rather,
there
are
several
 sacred
plowings,
one
at
Eleusis
(of
the
Rharian
field),
one
in
the
Piraeus
and
one
in
 the
deme
of
Myrrhinos,
leading
him
to
conclude
that
it
is
a
deme
festival.

This
 conclusion
supports
Parke’s
idea
that
the
festival
was
more
Eleusinian
than
 Athenian.

And
perhaps
it
could
also
account
for
the
various
and
scarce
evidence
for
 























































 426 
IG
II 2 
136.3‐7
 427 
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians,
74.
 428 
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
59.
 429 
IG
II 2 
1177.8
 430 
Larson,
Ancient
Greek
Cults,
72;
Deubner,
Attische
Feste;
Mikalson,
Ancient
Greek
 Religion,
68.
 431 
Brumfield
will
only
go
so
far
as
saying
that
the
sacred
plowing
could
have
taken
 place
then.
 432 
Mikalson,
Ancient
Greek
Religion,
68.
 
 
 175
 this
festival,
since
it
was
celebrated
on
a
deme‐by‐deme
basis
and
was
not
a
 larger
state
festival. 433 


 
 The
Stenia,
celebrated
on
the
9 th 
of
Pyanopsion,
was
closely
linked
to
the
 Thesmophoria
(celebrated
two
days
later 434 ),
so
much
so
that
Brumfield 435 
includes
 it
in
her
five‐day
plan
for
the
celebration
of
the
Thesmophoria,
although
she
does
 note
that
it
may
have
been
a
separate
celebration
in
earlier
times.

However,
by
the
 third
century
the
Athenian
state
sponsored
a
sacrifice
to
the
Goddesses 436 
during
 the
Stenia,
indicating
that
perhaps
this
festival,
which
had
been
separate,
was
now
 under
the
umbrella
of
the
Thesmophoria,
also
an
important
state
festival.

Both
 festivals
were
for
women
only.

The
nocturnal
Stenia
included
aischrologia
and
a
 sacrifice.

We
can’t
be
entirely
certain
what
the
sacrifice
was,
however
the
close
 association
of
the
Stenia
with
the
Thesmophoria
allows
for
the
possibility
that
the
 remains
of
piglets
and
wheat
cakes
that
were
gathered
from
pits
during
the
 Thesmophoria
may
have
been
deposited
during
the
Stenia. 437 
 The
Thesmophoria
was
a
three‐day
festival
to
Demeter
open
only
to
women,
 celebrated
in
Athens
from
11‐13 th 
of
Pyanopsion. 438 

(It
was
celebrated
on
the
10 th 
 in
Halimus. 439 

There
is
some
debate
about
whether
prostitutes
were
allowed
to
 























































 433 
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
63
and
Larson,
Ancient
Greek
Cults,
72.
 434 
Aristophanes,
Thesmophoriazusae
834.
 435 
Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter,
79.
 436 
IG
II 2 
1363.17
 437 
Parke
also
offers
this
same
conjecture
at
page
20.
 438 
Simon,
Festivals
of
Attica,
18
and
Mikalson,
Ancient
Greek
Religion,
72‐4.
 439 
Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
72
and
Mikalson,
Ancient
Greek
Religion,
 71.
 
 176
 attend
the
festival.

However
Aristophanes
makes
several
references
to
slave
 girls
being
present
in
the
Thesmophoriazusae
and
it
seems
odd
that
he
would
 include
these
characters
if
they
were
forbidden
since
his
audience
would
have
been
 well
aware
of
the
rules
of
attendance
for
the
Thesmophoria.

Which
leads
me
to
 believe
that
female
slaves
were
allowed
to
attend.


 The
name
of
the
festival,
Thesmophoria
(qesmoforia), means,
“things
laid
 down”.

Demeter
herself,
is
often
given
the
epithet,
Thesmophoros
(Qesmoforoj), which
refers
to
her
role
in
establishing
her
own
rites
at
Eleusis.

I
agree
with
 Brumfield
and
Foley
that
the
“things”
laid
down
are
the
sacred
rites,
and
think
that
 the
very
literal
reading
of
qesmoforia as
the
piglets,
pinecones,
and
cakes
deposited
 in
pits
is
a
bit
too
narrow.

However,
there
is
no
reason
that
the
name
of
the
festival
 could
not
have
included
both
meanings
at
once,
the
divine
rites
laid
down
by
 Demeter
and
the
sacrifices
to
the
goddess
that
were
thrown
into
sacred
pits
during
 the
Stenia.


 The
first
day
of
the
festival
at
Athens
was
called
the anados
(anadoj) or
 kathedos
(kaqedoj)–
“going
up”
or
“going
down”. 440 

The
scholion
to
Aristophanes
 says
the
“ascent”
refers
to
the
position
of
the
Thesmophorion
in
Athens
on
the
Pnyx,
 so
the
worshippers
would
have
had
to
ascend
the
hill.

However,
it
could
certainly
 also
describe
the
ascent
of
Persephone
from
the
underworld
to
the
human
realm
or
 the
decent
of
Demeter
from
Olympus
to
Earth.
The
second
day,
the
women
fasted
 























































 440 
Hesychius
A!nadoj,
Scol.
Ar.
Thes.
80,
585,
Alciphr.
II.37.2,
Phot,
s.v.
 qesmofori&wn. 
 177
 and
mourned. 441 

The
mourning
most
likely
had
a
mythological
connection
to
 Demeter’s
loss
of
Persephone.
Day
three
was
called,
Kallegenia,
“beautiful
offspring”
 referring
to
both
human
and
agricultural
fertility.

In
all
likelihood
the
feast
we
 know
to
have
taken
place
at
the
festival
happened
on
this
day.


 During
the
festival
women
called
Bailers
(antletriai),
who
had
purified
 themselves
for
three
previous
days
by
abstaining
from
sexual
intercourse,
went
into
 underground
pits
to
retrieve
rotted
remains
of
piglets
and
wheat
cakes
in
the
shape
 of
phalloi,
snakes,
and
pine
cones.

All
of
these
fertility
symbols
were
most
likely
 deposited
during
the
Stenia
(see
above)
rather
than
at
the
previous
year’s
 Thesmophoria
as
some
scholars
have
proposed,
since
a
year
of
decomposition
 would
have
left
nothing
but
bones.

The
rotted
remains
were
mixed
with
the
seed
 that
was
about
to
be
planted
to
ensure
a
good
growing
season
and
a
bountiful
 harvest.

There
was
also
ritual
abuse
and
jesting
–
Christian
sources
say
women
 worshiped
a
large
model
of
female
pudenda. 442 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 























































 441 
Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter;
Parke,
Festivals
of
the
Athenians;
and
 Brumfield,
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter.
 442 
Foley,
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter,
73
and
Theodoretos
of
Kyrrhos
GAC
3.84.
 
 178
 
 
 Appendix
B:
Frogs
Initiate
Chorus
Quote

 Ξανθίας οὐ κατήκουσας; Διόνυσος τίνος; Ξανθίας αὐλῶν πνοῆς. Διόνυσος ἔγωγε, καὶ δᾴδων γέ με αὔρα τις εἰσέπνευσε μυστικωτάτη. ἀλλ᾽ ἠρεμὶ πτήξαντες ἀκροασώμεθα. Χορός Ἴακχ᾽ ὦ Ἴακχε. Ἴακχ᾽ ὦ Ἴακχε. Ξανθίας τοῦτ᾽ ἔστ᾽ ἐκεῖν᾽ ὦ δέσποθ᾽: οἱ μεμυημένοι ἐνταῦθά που παίζουσιν, οὓς ἔφραζε νῷν. ᾁδουσι γοῦν τὸν Ἴακχον ὅνπερ Διαγόρας. Διόνυσος κἀμοὶ δοκοῦσιν. ἡσυχίαν τοίνυν ἄγειν βέλτιστόν ἐσθ᾽, ἕως ἂν εἰδῶμεν σαφῶς. Χορός Ἴακχ᾽ ὦ πολυτίμητ᾽ ἐν ἕδραις ἐνθάδε ναίων, Ἴακχ᾽ ὦ Ἴακχε, ἐλθὲ τόνδ᾽ ἀνὰ λειμῶνα χορεύσων ὁσίους ἐς θιασώτας, πολύκαρπον μὲν τινάσσων περὶ κρατὶ σῷ βρύοντα στέφανον μύρτων, θρασεῖ δ᾽ ἐγκατακρούων ποδὶ τὰν ἀκόλαστον φιλοπαίγμονα τιμάν, χαρίτων πλεῖστον ἔχουσαν μέρος, ἁγνάν, ἱερὰν ὁσίοις μύσταις χορείαν. Ξανθίας ὦ πότνια πολυτίμητε Δήμητρος κόρη, ὡς ἡδύ μοι προσέπνευσε χοιρείων κρεῶν. Διόνυσος οὔκουν ἀτρέμ᾽ ἕξεις, ἤν τι καὶ χορδῆς λάβῃς; 
 179
 Χορός †ἔγειρε φλογέας λαμπάδας ἐν χερσὶ γὰρ τινάσσων†, Ἴακχ᾽ ὦ Ἴακχε, νυκτέρου τελετῆς φωσφόρος ἀστήρ. φλογὶ φέγγεται δὲ λειμών: γόνυ πάλλεται γερόντων: ἀποσείονται δὲ λύπας χρονίους τ᾽ ἐτῶν παλαιῶν ἐνιαυτοὺς ἱερᾶς ὑπὸ τιμᾶς. σὺ δὲ λαμπάδι † φλέγων† προβάδην ἔξαγ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀνθηρὸν ἕλειον δάπεδον χοροποιὸν μάκαρ ἥβαν. 
 
 
 
 Xanthias
 Didn’t
you
hear
that?
 Dionysos
 What?
 Xanthias
 The
blowing
of
pipes.
 Dionysos
 Indeed,
and
a
most
mystical
vapor

 Of
torches
blew
over
me.
 But
let’s
quietly
crouch
down
and
listen.
 
 Chorus
 Iacchos!
O
Iacchos!
 Iacchos!
O
Iacchos!
 Xanthias
 This
is
it,
Master;
the
initiates
are
playing
here
somewhere,
the
ones
he
was
telling
 us
about.
 At
any
rate,
they
are
singing
the
Iacchos
hymn,
the
Diagoras
one.
 Dionysos
 I
think
so
too,
therefore
it’s
best
that
we
should
maintain
silence,
until
we
know
for
 sure.
 Chorus
 Iachhos,
O
greatly
honored,
dwelling
here
in
sanctuaries.

 Iachhos,
O
Iachhos
 Come
here
and
to
dance
up
and
down
the
meadow
with
your
hallowed
revelers.
 Shake
your
fruitful
crown,
teeming
with
myrtle
around
your
head,

 With
your
foot
the
unbridled
fun‐loving
rite
 The
Graces,
a
dance,
richly
endow
that
 Pure
and
holy
to
pious
initiates.
 
 180
 Xanthias
 O
greatly
honored
lady,
daughter
of
Demeter
 What
a
sweet
odor
of
pork
chop
just
wafted
by
me.
 Dionysos
 Then
hold
still,
and
you
may
get
sausage
 Chorus
 Awake!
Shaking
blazing
torches
in
your
hands
 Iacchos,
O
Iacchos!
 The
light‐bringing
star
of
the
nocturnal
rite,
 The
meadow
is
bright
with
flame,
 The
knees
of
old
men
leap,
 They
shake
off
pain,
 And
the
long
cycles
of
ancient
years,
 Through
the
sacred
rite.
 Blazing
up
your
torch,
 Lead
onward
to
the
flowering
meadowland
 Our
dancing
youth,
blessed
one.
 
 
 
 Χορός
 εὐφημεῖν
χρὴ
κἀξίστασθαι
τοῖς
ἡμετέροισι
χοροῖσιν,

 ὅστις
ἄπειρος
τοιῶνδε
λόγων
ἢ
γνώμῃ
μὴ
καθαρεύει,

 ἢ
γενναίων
ὄργια
Μουσῶν
μήτ᾽
εἶδεν
μήτ᾽
ἐχόρευσεν,

 μηδὲ
Κρατίνου
τοῦ
ταυροφάγου
γλώττης
Βακχεῖ᾽
ἐτελέσθη,

 ἢ
βωμολόχοις
ἔπεσιν
χαίρει
μὴ
ν᾽
καιρῷ
τοῦτο
ποιοῦσιν,

 ἢ
στάσιν
ἐχθρὰν
μὴ
καταλύει
μηδ᾽
εὔκολός
ἐστι
πολίταις,

 ἀλλ᾽
ἀνεγείρει
καὶ
ῥιπίζει
κερδῶν
ἰδίων
ἐπιθυμῶν,

 ἢ
τῆς
πόλεως
χειμαζομένης
ἄρχων
καταδωροδοκεῖται,

 ἢ
προδίδωσιν
φρούριον
ἢ
ναῦς,
ἢ
τἀπόρρητ᾽
ἀποπέμπει

 ἐξ
Αἰγίνης
Θωρυκίων
ὢν
εἰκοστολόγος
κακοδαίμων,

 ἀσκώματα
καὶ
λίνα
καὶ
πίτταν
διαπέμπων
εἰς
Ἐπίδαυρον,

 ἢ
χρήματα
ταῖς
τῶν
ἀντιπάλων
ναυσὶν
παρέχειν
τινὰ
πείθει,

 ἢ
κατατιλᾷ
τῶν
Ἑκαταίων
κυκλίοισι
χοροῖσιν
ὑπᾴδων,

 ἢ
τοὺς
μισθοὺς
τῶν
ποιητῶν
ῥήτωρ
ὢν
εἶτ᾽
ἀποτρώγει,

 κωμῳδηθεὶς
ἐν
ταῖς
πατρίοις
τελεταῖς
ταῖς
τοῦ
Διονύσου:

 τούτοις
αὐδῶ
καὖθις
ἀπαυδῶ
καὖθις
τὸ
τρίτον
μάλ᾽
ἀπαυδῶ

 ἐξίστασθαι
μύσταισι
χοροῖς:
ὑμεῖς
δ᾽
ἀνεγείρετε
μολπὴν

 καὶ
παννυχίδας
τὰς
ἡμετέρας
αἳ
τῇδε
πρέπουσιν
ἑορτῇ.
 
 Χορός
 χώρει
νυν
πᾶς
ἀνδρείως

 ἐς
τοὺς
εὐανθεῖς
κόλπους

 λειμώνων
ἐγκρούων

 κἀπισκώπτων

 
 181
 καὶ
παίζων
καὶ
χλευάζων,

 ἠρίστηται
δ᾽
ἐξαρκούντως.
 ἀλλ᾽
ἔμβα
χὤπως
ἀρεῖς

 τὴν
Σώτειραν
γενναίως

 τῇ
φωνῇ
μολπάζων,

 ἣ
τὴν
χώραν

 σῴζειν
φήσ᾽
ἐς
τὰς
ὥρας,

 κἂν
Θωρυκίων
μὴ
βούληται.
 
 
 
 
 Chorus
Leader
 Be
silent
and
stand
aside
from
our
dances,
 Any
one
who
is
ignorant
of
sacred
language,
or
has
not
cleansed
their
mind,
or
who
 has
not
seen
or
dances
the
secret
rites
of
the
noble
Muses,
or
who
has
not
 performed
the
Bacchic
revelry
of
bull‐eating
Cratinus’
language,
or
who
delights
in

 Vulgar
language
from
those
who
speak
at
the
wrong
time,
or
who
does
not
destroy
 hated
factionalism
and
act
peaceably
with
other
citizens,
but
ignites
and
fans
civil
 unrest
desiring
personal
gain,
or
any
official
who
betrays
the
city
for
bribes
when
 she
is
storm‐tossed,
or
who
gives
up
our
forts
and
ships
to
the
enemy,
or
who
sends
 off
forbidden
items
to
Aegina
like
Thorycion
the
evilly
ingenious
tax
collector,
 sending
padding
and
flax
and
pitch
to
Epidaurus,
or
who
persuades
anyone
t
hand
 over
supplies
to
the
ships
of
our
enemies,
or
who
shits
on
the
shrine
of
Hecate
while
 singing
dithyrambic
choruses,
or
any
politician
who
nibbles
at
the
reward
of
the
 poets
for
being
lampooned
in
the
ancestral
rites
of
Dionysus,
to
all
these
I
renounce
 once
and
renounce
again
and
thrice
I
strongly
renounce,
stand
aside
from
out
mystic
 dances,
but
you,
you
rouse
the
song
and
our
night‐long
rituals
that
befit
the
festival.
 
 
 
 Chorus
 Go
forward
now
everyone,
filled
with
courage
 Onto
the
flowery
bosom
of
the
meadow
 Stomping
and
playing
and
laughing
and
jesting
 You
have
breakfasted
enough.
 Go
quickly
and
be
sure
you
extol
 The
Savior
Goddess
nobly
 Singing
of
her
with
your
voices
 She
who
claims
to
save
our
land
in
the
passing
seasons
 Even
against
the
will
of
Thorycion
 
 
 
 182
 Χορός
 ἄγε
νυν
ἑτέραν
ὕμνων
ἰδέαν
τὴν
καρποφόρον
βασίλειαν

 Δήμητρα
θεὰν
ἐπικοσμοῦντες
ζαθέαις
μολπαῖς
κελαδεῖτε.
 
 Χορός
 Δήμητερ
ἁγνῶν
ὀργίων

 ἄνασσα
συμπαραστάτει,

 καὶ
σῷζε
τὸν
σαυτῆς
χορόν,

 καί
μ᾽
ἀσφαλῶς
πανήμερον

 παῖσαί
τε
καὶ
χορεῦσαι:
 καὶ
πολλὰ
μὲν
γέλοιά
μ᾽
εἰ‐

 πεῖν,
πολλὰ
δὲ
σπουδαῖα,
καὶ

 τῆς
σῆς
ἑορτῆς
ἀξίως

 παίσαντα
καὶ
σκώψαντα
νικήσαντα

 ταινιοῦσθαι.
 ἄγ᾽
εἶα
νῦν

 καὶ
τὸν
ὡραῖον
θεὸν
παρακαλεῖτε
δεῦρο

 ᾠδαῖσι,
τὸν
ξυνέμπορον
τῆσδε
τῆς
χορείας.
 Ἴακχε
πολυτίμητε,
μέλος
ἑορτῆς

 ἥδιστον
εὑρών,
δεῦρο
συνακολούθει

 πρὸς
τὴν
θεὸν

 καὶ
δεῖξον
ὡς
ἄνευ
πόνου

 πολλὴν
ὁδὸν
περαίνεις.

 Ἴακχε
φιλοχορευτὰ
συμπρόπεμπέ
με.
 σὺ
γὰρ
κατεσχίσω
μὲν
ἐπὶ
γέλωτι

 κἀπ᾽
εὐτελείᾳ
τόδε
τὸ
σανδαλίσκον

 καὶ
τὸ
ῥάκος,

 κἀξηῦρες
ὥστ᾽
ἀζημίους

 παίζειν
τε
καὶ
χορεύειν.

 Ἴακχε
φιλοχορευτὰ
συμπρόπεμπέ
με.
 καὶ
γὰρ
παραβλέψας
τι
μειρακίσκης

 νῦν
δὴ
κατεῖδον
καὶ
μάλ᾽
εὐπροσώπου

 συμπαιστρίας

 χιτωνίου
παραρραγέν‐

 τος
τιτθίον
προκύψαν.

 Ἴακχε
φιλοχορευτὰ
συμπρόπεμπέ
με.
 Διόνυσος ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἀεί πως φιλακόλου- θός εἰμι καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτῆς παίζων χορεύειν βούλομαι. Ξανθίας κἄγωγε πρός. …
 
 183
 
 Chorus
Leader
 Come
now
sing
a
different
form
of
hymn
to
the
harvest
queen,
the
Goddess
Demeter
 decorating
her
with
sacred
songs.
 Chorus
 Demeter,
lady
of
the
pure
rites
 Be
with
us
 And
keep
safe
your
chorus
 And
may
I
play
and
dance
all
day
safely
 And
may
I
say
many
funny
things
and
many
serious
things,
as
is
worthy
of
your
 festival,
 And
may
I
play
and
joke
and
win
and
wear
the
victor’s
crown.
 Come
now
 Hither
invoke
the
seasonable
god

 Our
partner
in
this
dance.
 Highly
honored
Iacchos,
 inventor
of
the
sweetest
festival
song,
 Follow
along
with
us
to
the
goddess,
and
show
us
how
you
travel
the
long
road
 without
effort
.
 Iacchos
lover
of
choruses,
lead
me
on.
 For
you,
to
provoke
laughter
and
for
economy
split
my
sandal
and
my
ragged
 clothing,
 So
that
you
discovered
a
way
to
play
and
dance
for
free.
 Iacchos,
lover
of
the
chorus,
lead
me
on.
 For
just
now
I
got
a
sidelong
glance
at
a
very
gorgeous
girl,
a
playfellow
 And
through
a
tear
in
her
robe
 I
saw
a
titty
peaking
out.
 Iacchos,
lover
of
the
chorus

 Lead
me
on.
 
 Dionysus
 I
am
always
ready
for
fun

 And
I
want
to
dance
while
playing
with
her!
 
 Xanthias
 Me
too!
 
 Χορός
 χωρεῖτε
νῦν

 ἱερὸν
ἀνὰ
κύκλον
θεᾶς,
ἀνθοφόρον
ἀν᾽
ἄλσος

 παίζοντες
οἷς
μετουσία
θεοφιλοῦς
ἑορτῆς:

 ἐγὼ
δὲ
σὺν
ταῖσιν
κόραις
εἶμι
καὶ
γυναιξίν,

 οὗ
παννυχίζουσιν
θεᾷ,
φέγγος
ἱερὸν
οἴσων.
 
 184
 χωρῶμεν
ἐς
πολυρρόδους

 λειμῶνας
ἀνθεμώδεις,

 τὸν
ἡμέτερον
τρόπον

 τὸν
καλλιχορώτατον

 παίζοντες,
ὃν
ὄλβιαι

 Μοῖραι
ξυνάγουσιν.
 μόνοις
γὰρ
ἡμῖν
ἥλιος

 καὶ
φέγγος
ἱλαρόν
ἐστιν,

 ὅσοι
μεμυήμεθ᾽
εὐ‐

 σεβῆ
τε
διήγομεν

 τρόπον
περὶ
τοὺς
ξένους

 καὶ
τοὺς
ἰδιώτας
 
 Chorus
 Onward
now
 To
the
sacred
circle
of
the
goddess,
to
the
flowery
grove,
playing
with
all
those
who
 partake
in
the
festival,
dear
to
the
gods.
 I
will
go
with
the
women
and
the
girls
 Where
they
dance
all
night
for
the
goddess,
 Bearing
the
sacred
torch.
 Let
us
go
to
the
flowery
meadows,
 Abundant
with
roses,
 Playing
in
our
own
style
 Of
beautiful
dance,
 Which
the
blessed
Fates
draw
together.
 For
us
alone
there
is
the
sun
and
cheerful
light,
 For
us
who
have
been
initiated,
 And
follow
the
path
of
piety
towards
strangers
and
the
uninitiated.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 185
 
 Bibliography
 
 Ackerman,
Robert.
2002.
The
Myth
and
Ritual
School:
J.G.
Frazer
and
the
Cambridge
 Ritualists.
Subsequent
edition.
New
York:
Routledge.
 Akrigg,
Ben,
and
Rob
Tordoff,
ed.
2013.
Slaves
and
Slavery
in
Ancient
Greek
Comic
Drama.
 New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Alexiou,
Margaret.
2002.
The
Ritual
Lament
in
Greek
Tradition,
2nd
Edition.
Edited
by
 Dimitrios
Yatromanolakis
and
Panagiotis
Roilos.
2
edition.
Lanham,
MD:
Rowman
&
 Littlefield
Publishers.
 Amy
Richlin,
ed.
1992.
Pornography
and
Representation
in
Greece
and
Rome.
1
edition.
 New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Anderson,
Carl
A.
1989.
“Themistocles
and
Cleon
in
Aristophanes’
Knights,
763ff.”
The
 American
Journal
of
Philology
110
(1)
(April
1):
10–16.
doi:10.2307/294948.
 Aristophanes.
1998a.
Aristophanes:
Acharnians.
Knights.
Translated
by
Jeffrey
Henderson.
 Revised
edition.
Cambridge,
Mass:
Harvard
University
Press.
 ———.
1998b.
Aristophanes:
Clouds.
Wasps.
Peace.
Translated
by
Jeffrey
Henderson.
First
 Edition
edition.
Cambridge,
Mass:
Harvard
University
Press.
 ———.
2000.
Aristophanes:
Birds;
Lysistrata;
Women
at
the
Thesmophoria.
Translated
by
 Jeffrey
Henderson.
1
edition.
Cambridge,
Mass:
Harvard
University
Press.
 ———.
2002.
Aristophanes:
Frogs.
Assemblywomen.
Wealth.
Translated
by
Jeffrey
 Henderson.
Cambridge,
Mass:
Harvard
University
Press.
 Arnott,
Peter.
1962.
Greek
Scenic
Conventions
in
the
Fifth
Century
B.C.
Oxford:
Oxford
 University
Press.
 Arnott,
W.G.
1992.
“Tout
Est
Probleme
Au
Sujet
De
La
Comedie
Moyenne.”
Classical
 Review
42:
60–61.
 Atkinson,
J.
E.
1992.
“Curbing
the
Comedians:
Cleon
Versus
Aristophanes
and
Syracosius’
 Decree.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
42
(1).
New
Series
(January
1):
56–64.
 Austin,
Colin,
and
S.
Douglas
Olsen.
2004.
Aristophanes
Thesmophoriazusae.
1
edition.
 Oxford ;
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Autenrieth,
George.
1891.
A
Homeric
Dictionary
for
Schools
and
Colleges.
New
York:
 Harper
and
Brothers.
 Bataille,
Georges.
2011.
L’érotisme.
MINUIT
edition.
Paris:
Les
Editions
de
Minuit.
 Baudy,
G.
1998.
“Hermes.”
In
Der
Neue
Pauly
Enzklopadie
Der
Antike,
426–31.
5.
Stuttgart.
 Baumeister,
A.
1860.
Hymni
Homerici.
Leipzig.
 Beazley,
J.
D.
1948.
“Hymn
to
Hermes.”
American
Journal
of
Archaeology
52
(3)
(July
1):
 336–340.
doi:10.2307/500415.
 Benardete,
Seth.
2008.
The
Bow
and
the
Lyre:
A
Platonic
Reading
of
the
Odyssey.
Rowman
 &
Littlefield
Publishers.
 Bierl,
Anton.
1991.
“Dionysos
Und
Die
Griechische
Tragödie.
Politische
Und
 ‘metatheatralische’
Aspekte
Im
Text.”
Classica
Monacensia
1.
 https://www.academia.edu/5407692/Dionysos_und_die_griechische_Trag%C3%B6 die._Politische_und_metatheatralische_Aspekte_im_Text_T%C3%BCbingen_Gunter_ Narr_1991_Classica_Monacensia_1_.
 
 186
 ———.
1994.
“Apollo
in
Greek
Tragedy:
Orestes
and
the
God
of
Initiation.”
In
Apollo:
 Origins
and
Influence.
Tuscon:
University
of
Arizona
Press.
 ———.
2015.
Der
Chor
in
Der
Alten
Komödie.
Ritual
Und
Performativität
(unter
 Besonderer
Berücksichtigung
Von
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusen
Und
Der
 Phalloslieder
Fr.
851
PMG),
München/Leipzig:
K.
G.
Saur
(former
Teubner)
2001
(BzA
 126).
Accessed
October
5.
 https://www.academia.edu/5407886/Der_Chor_in_der_Alten_Kom%C3%B6die._Rit ual_und_Performativit%C3%A4t_unter_besonderer_Ber%C3%BCcksichtigung_von_ Aristophanes_Thesmophoriazusen_und_der_Phalloslieder_fr._851_PMG_M%C3%BC nchen_Leipzig_K._G._Saur_former_Teubner_2001_BzA_126_.
 Biles,
Zachary
P.
2001.
“Aristophanes’
Victory
Dance:
Old
Poets
in
the
Parabasis
of
 ‘Knights’.”
Zeitschrift
Fur
Papyrologie
Und
Epigraphik
136:
195–200.
 ———.
2011.
Aristophanes
and
the
Poetics
of
Competition.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
 University
Press.
 Boardman,
John.
2003.
The
Archaeology
of
Nostalgia:
How
the
Greeks
Re­Created
Their
 Mythical
Past.
Thames
&
Hudson.
 Bobrick,
Elizabeth.
1997.
“The
Tyranny
of
Roles:
Playacting
and
Priveledge
in
 Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae.”
In
The
City
as
Comedy:
Society
and
 Representation
in
Athenian
Drama,
edited
by
G.
W.
Dobrov.
Chapel
Hill:
The
 University
of
North
Carolina
Press.
 Borthwick,
E.
K.
1969.
“Cleon
and
the
Spartiates
in
Aristophanes’
Knights.”
The
Classical
 Quarterly
19
(2).
New
Series
(November
1):
243–244.
 ———.
1970.
“The
Riddle
of
the
Tortoise
and
the
Lyre.”
Music
&
Letters
51
(4)
(October
 1):
373–387.
 Bowie,
A.
1982.
“The
Parabasis
in
Aristophanes:
Prolegomena,
Acharnians.”
Classical
 Quarterly
32
(1):
27–40.
 Bowie,
A.
M.
1993.
Aristophanes:
Myth,
Ritual
and
Comedy.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
 University
Press.
 Brelich,
A.
1969.
Paides
e
Parthenoi.
Rome.
 Brock,
R.
W.
1986.
“The
Double
Plot
in
Aristophanes’
Knights.”
Greek,
Roman
and
 Byzantine
Studies
27:
15–27.
 Brown,
Norman
Oliver.
1990.
Hermes
the
Thief:
The
Evolution
of
a
Myth.
Lindisfarne
 Books.
 Brumfield,
Allaire
Chandor.
1981.
The
Attic
Festivals
of
Demeter
and
Their
Relation
to
the
 Agricultural
Year.
Ayer
Co
Pub.
 Burkert,
Walter.
1972.
Lore
and
Science
in
Ancient
Pythagoreanism.
Harvard
University
 Press.
 ———.
1975.
“Apellai
Und
Apollon.”
Rheinisches
Museum
Fur
Philologie
Neue
Folge
(118,
 Bd.,
H.
1/2):
1–21.
 ———.
1979.
Structure
and
History
in
Greek
Mythology
and
Ritual.
University
of
 California
Press.
 ———.
1984.
“Sacrificio‐sacrilegio:
Il
‘Trickster’
Fondatore.”
Studi
Storici
25
(4)
(October
 1):
835–845.
 ———.
1986.
Homo
Necans:
The
Anthropology
of
Ancient
Greek
Sacrificial
Ritual
and
 Myth.
Translated
by
Peter
Bing.
University
of
California
Press.
 
 187
 ———.
1987.
Ancient
Mystery
Cults.
Cambridge,
Mass.:
Harvard
University
Press.
 ———.
1991.
Greek
Religion:
Archaic
and
Classical.
Translated
by
John
Raffan.
New.
 Wiley‐Blackwell.
 Cairns,
Douglas.
1993.
Aidos:
The
Psychology
and
Ethics
of
Honour
and
Shame
in
Ancient
 Greek
Literature.
1
edition.
New
York:
Clarendon
Press.
 Cairns,
F.,
ed.
1983.
Papers
of
the
Liverpool
Latin
Seminar.
Fourth.
Liverpool.
 Callaway,
Cathy.
1993.
“Perjury
and
the
Unsworn
Oath.”
Transactions
of
the
American
 Philological
Association
(1974­)
123
(January
1):
15–25.
doi:10.2307/284322.
 Campbell,
David
A.
1984.
“The
Frogs
in
the
Frogs.”
The
Journal
of
Hellenic
Studies
104:
 163–5.
 Cassola,
F.
1981.
Inni
Omerici.
2nd
Edition.
Milan.
 Clay,
Jenny.
1972.
“The
Planktai
and
Moly:
Divine
Naming
and
Knowing
in
Homer.”
 Hermes
100:
127–131.
 Clay,
Jenny
Strauss.
2006.
Politics
of
Olympus:
Form
And
Meaning
in
the
Major
Homeric
 Hymns.
2nd
ed.
Bristol
Classical
Press.
 Clinton,
Kevin.
1974.
The
Sacred
Officials
of
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries.
First
Edition.
The
 American
Philosophical
Society.
 ———.
2005.
Eleusis:
The
Inscriptions
on
Stone,
Documents
of
the
Sanctuary
of
the
Two
 Goddesses
and
Public
Documents
of
the
Deme.
Archaeological
Society
at
Athens
 Library
236.
Athens.
 CLINTON,
KEVIN.
2004.
“Epiphany
in
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries.”
Illinois
Classical
Studies
 29
(January
1):
85–109.
doi:10.2307/23065342.
 Cohen,
Beth,
ed.
2000.
Not
the
Classical
Ideal:
Athens
and
the
Construction
of
the
Other
in
 Greek
Art.
Boston:
Brill.
 Connelly,
Joan
Breton.
2009.
Portrait
of
a
Priestess:
Women
and
Ritual
in
Ancient
Greece.
 Princeton
University
Press.
 Cook,
Arthur
Bernard.
1895.
“The
Bee
in
Greek
Mythology.”
The
Journal
of
Hellenic
 Studies
15
(January
1):
1–24.
doi:10.2307/624058.
 Cosmopoulos,
Michael
B.,
ed.
2003.
Greek
Mysteries:
The
Archaeology
of
Ancient
Greek
 Secret
Cults.
Routledge.
 Costa,
G.
1982.
“Hermes
Dio
Delle
Iniziazioni.”
CCC
(3):
277–85.
 Critchley,
Simon.
2002.
On
Humour.
1st
edition.
London:
Routledge.
 Croix,
G.
E.
M.
De
Ste.
1972.
The
Origins
of
the
Peloponnesian
War,.
Ithaca:
Cornell
 University
Press.
 Cropp,
Martin,
Kevin
Lee,
David
Sansone ;
with
The
Cooperation
Of
Eric
C.
2000.
 EURIPIDES
AND
TRAGIC
THEATRE
IN
THE
LATE
FIFTH
CENTURY.
Stipes
Publishing.
 Crudden,
Michael.
2002.
The
Homeric
Hymns.
Oxford
University
Press,
USA.
 Csapo,
Eric.
1993.
“Revew
of
H.‐G.
Nesselrath,
Die
Attische
Mittlere
Komodie
Ihre
 Stellung
in
Der
Antiken
Literaturkritik
Und
Literaturgeschichte.”
Phoenix
47
(4):
 354–57.
 ———.
2000.
“From
Aristophanes
to
Menander?
Genre
Transformation
in
Greek
 Tragedy.”
In
Matrices
of
Genre:
Authors,
Canons,
and
Society,
edited
by
Mary
Depew
 and
Dirk
Obbink.
Center
for
Hellenic
Studies
Colloquia
4.
Cambridge:
Harvard
 University
Press.
 ———.
2005.
Theories
of
Mythology.
1
edition.
Malden,
MA:
Wiley‐Blackwell.
 
 188
 Dane,
Joseph
A.
1984.
“Aristophanic
Parody:
‘Thesmophoriazusae’
and
the
Three‐ Actor
Rule.”
Theatre
Journal
36
(1)
(March
1):
75–84.
doi:10.2307/3207361.
 Delwen,
Samuel.
1996.
“Archaeology
of
Ancient
Egyptian
Beer.”
Journal
of
the
American
 Society
of
Brewing
Chemists
54:
3–12.
 Demand,
Nancy.
1970.
“The
Identity
of
the
Frogs.”
Classical
Philology
65
(2)
(April
1):
83– 87.
 Depew,
Mary,
and
Dirk
Obbink,
ed.
2000.
Matrices
of
Genre :
Authors,
Canons,
and
Society.
 Cambridge:
Center
for
Hellenic
Studies.
 Despland,
Michel.
2003.
“Reviewed
Work:
The
Myth
and
Ritual
School.
J.g.
Frazer
and
the
 Cambridge
Ritualists
by
Robert
Ackerman.”
Numen
50
(4):
479–481.
 Deubner,
Ludwig.
1932.
Attische
Feste:
Mit
40
Tafeln.
Georg
Olms.
 Dickey,
Eleanor.
2007.
Ancient
Greek
Scholarship:
A
Guide
to
Finding,
Reading,
and
 Understanding
Scholia,
Commentaries,
Lexica,
and
Grammatical
Treatises :
From
 Their
Beginnings
to
the
Byzantine
Period:
From
Their
Beginnings
to
the
Byzantine
 Period.
An
American
Philological
Association
Book.
 Dickie,
M.
1983.
“Phaeacian
Athletics.”
In
Papers
of
the
Liverpool
Latin,
Seminar,
4:237– 76.
Liverpool.
 Dittenberger,
Wilhelm.
1883.
Sylloge
inscriptionum
graecarum.
apud
S.
Hirzelium.
 http://archive.org/details/syllogeinscript03dittgoog.
 Dobrov,
G.
W.,
ed.
1995.
Beyond
Aristophanes:
Transition
and
Diversity
in
Greek
Comedy.
 Atlanta,
Ga:
Scholars
Press.
 Dobrov,
Gregory
W.,
ed.
1997.
The
City
as
Comedy:
Society
and
Representation
in
Athenian
 Drama.
Chapel
Hill:
The
University
of
North
Carolina
Press.
 Dodd,
David,
and
Christopher
A.
Faraone,
ed.
2012.
Initiation
in
Ancient
Greek
Rituals
and
 Narratives:
New
Critical
Perspectives.
Reprint
edition.
London:
Routledge.
 Dover,
Kenneth.
1968.
“Greek
Comedy.”
In
Fifty
Years
(and
Twelve)
of
Classical
 Scholarship,
123–56.
Oxford:
Clarendon
Press.
 Dover,
Kenneth,
ed.
1997.
Frogs.
Oxford :
New
York:
Clarendon
Press.
 Dowden,
K.
1980.
“Grades
in
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries.”
RHR
197:
409–427.
 Dubner,
Friedrich.
2015.
“Scholia
Graeca
in
Aristophanem.”
Internet
Archive.
Accessed
 October
20.
https://archive.org/details/ScholiaGraecaInAristophanem.
 Duchemin,
Jacqueline.
1960.
“Dieux
Pasteurs
Et
Musiciens :
Hermès
Et
Apollon.”
 Comptes­rendus
Des
Séances
De
l’Académie
Des
Inscriptions
Et
Belles­Lettres
104
(1):
 16–37.
doi:10.3406/crai.1960.11121.
 Dunbar,
Nan.
1995.
Aristophanes
Birds.
Oxford :
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Durand,
Jean‐Louis.
1986.
Sacrifice
et
labour
en
Grece
ancienne:
Essai
d’anthropologie
 religieuse.
Paris :
Rome:
Ecole
francaise
de
Rome.
 Easterling,
Pat,
and
Edith
Hall,
ed.
2008a.
Greek
and
Roman
Actors:
Aspects
of
an
Ancient
 Profession.
Reprint
edition.
Cambridge,
U.K.;
New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 ———.
2008b.
Greek
and
Roman
Actors:
Aspects
of
an
Ancient
Profession.
Reprint
edition.
 Cambridge,
U.K.;
New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Edmonds,
Radcliffe
G.
2005.
Myths
of
the
Underworld
Journey:
Plato,
Aristophanes,
and
the
 “Orphic”
Gold
Tablets.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 
 189
 ———.
2010.
The
“Orphic”
Gold
Tablets
and
Greek
Religion:
Further
Along
the
Path
[
 THE
“ORPHIC”
GOLD
TABLETS
AND
GREEK
RELIGION:
FURTHER
ALONG
THE
PATH
 BY
Edmonds
III,
Radcliffe
G.
(
Author
)
Nov­01­2010.
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Edmunds,
Lowell.
1987.
Cleon,
Knights,
and
Aristophanes’
Politics.
Lanham:
University
 Press
of
America.
 Edwards,
Anthony.
1993.
“Historicizing
the
Popular
Grotesque:
Bahtin’s
Rabelais
and
 Attic
Old
Comedy.”
In
Theater
and
Society
in
the
Classical
World,
edited
by
Ruth
 Scodel.
Ann
Arbor:
University
of
Michigan
Press.
 Eitrem,
S.
1906.
“Die
Homerische
Hymnus
an
Hermes.”
Philologus
19:
248–82.
 Eliade,
Mircea.
1987.
The
Sacred
and
The
Profane:
The
Nature
of
Religion.
Translated
by
 Willard
R.
Trask.
New
York:
Harcourt
Brace
Jovanovich.
 Endsjø,
Dag
Øistein.
2000.
“To
Lock
up
Eleusis:
A
Question
of
Laminal
Space.”
Numen
47
 (4)
(January
1):
351–386.
doi:10.2307/3270305.
 Evelyn‐White,
Hugh
G.,
ed.
1914.
Hesiod,
the
Homeric
Hymns
and
Homerica
1914.
London:
 William
Heinemann
Ltd.
 Ferris,
Lesley.
1989.
Acting
Women:
Images
of
Women
in
Theatre.
New
York:
Palgrave
 Macmillan.
 Finglass,
P.
J.,
C.
Collard,
and
N.
J.
Richardson.
2007.
Hesperos:
Studies
in
Ancient
Greek
 Poetry
Presented
to
M.
L.
West
on
His
Seventieth
Birthday.
Oxford
University
Press,
 USA.
 Fletcher,
Judith.
2008.
“A
Trickster’s
Oaths
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes.”
American
 Journal
of
Philology
129
(1):
19–46.
doi:10.1353/ajp.2008.0018.
 Foley,
Helene
P.,
ed.
1981.
Reflections
on
Women
in
Antiquity.
New
York:
Gordon
&
 Breach.
 Foley,
Helene
P.
1985.
Ritual
Irony
Poetry
and
Sacrifice
in
Euripides.
Ithaca:
Cornell
 University
Press.
 ———.
1988.
“Tragedy
and
Politics
in
Aristophanes’
Acharnians.”
The
Journal
of
Hellenic
 Studies
108
(January
1):
33–47.
doi:10.2307/632629.
 Foley,
Helene
P.,
ed.
1993.
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter:
Translation,
Commentary,
and
 Interpretative
Essays.
Princeton
University
Press.
 Foley,
Helene.
2015.
“The
Comic
Body
in
Greek
Art
and
Drama.”
Accessed
September
23.
 http://www.academia.edu/13389645/The_Comic_Body_in_Greek_Art_and_Drama.
 Foucart,
Paul
François.
2011.
Les
Mystères
d’Éleusis.
University
of
Toronto
Libraries.
 Freeberg,
David,
and
Vittorio
Gallese.
2007.
“Motion,
Emotion,
and
Empathy
in
Esthetic
 Experience.”
Trends
in
Cognitive
Science
11
(5):
197–203.
 Gamel,
Mary‐Kay.
2002.
“From
Thesmophoriazousai
to
the
Julie
Thesmo
Show:”
 American
Journal
of
Philology
123
(3):
465–499.
doi:10.1353/ajp.2002.0033.
 Gauthier,
Ph.,
and
M.
B.
Hatzopoulos.
1993.
La
Loi
Gymnasiarchique
De
Beroia.
Melemata
 16.
Athens.
 Ghiron‐Bistagne,
Paulette.
1973.
“Un
calembour
méconnu
d’Aristophane :
Acharniens
 400,
Oiseaux
787.”
Revue
des
Études
Grecques
86
(411):
285–291.
 doi:10.3406/reg.1973.4025.
 Gilbert,
John.
2000.
“Falling
in
Love
with
Euripides.”
In
Euripides
and
Tragic
Theater
in
 the
Late
Fifth
Century.
Champaign,
IL:
Stipes
Publishing.
 
 190
 Golden,
Mark.
2015.
Children
and
Childhood
in
Classical
Athens.
Baltimore:
Johns
 Hopkins
University
Press.
 Goldhill,
Simon.
1991.
The
Poet’s
Voice:
Essays
on
Poetics
and
Greek
Literature.
 Cambridge ;
New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Goldman,
Alvin.
2012.
“Theory
of
Mind.”
In
The
Oxford
Handbook
of
Philosophy
of
 Cognitive
Science,
edited
by
Eric
Margolis,
Richard
Samuels,
and
Stephen
P.
Stich.
 New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Graf,
F.
1974.
Eleusis
Und
Die
Orphische
Dichtung
Athens
in
Vorhellenisticher
Zeit.
Berlin
 and
New
York.
 Graf,
Fritz.
1979.
“Apollo
Delphinius.”
Museum
Helveticum
36:
2–22.
 ———.
1996.
Greek
Mythology:
An
Introduction.
Reprint
edition.
Baltimore:
Johns
 Hopkins
University
Press.
 ———.
2009.
Apollo.
New
York:
Routledge.
 Greene,
Elizabeth
S.
2005.
“Revising
Illegitimacy:
The
Use
of
Epithets
in
the
Homeric
 Hymn
to
Hermes.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
55
(2)
(December
1):
343–349.
 Guarducci,
M.
1982.
“Le
Rane
Di
Aristofane
e
La
Topografia
Ateniese.”
Studi
in
Onore
Di
A.
 Colonna:
167–72.
 Haft,
Adele.
1996.
“‘The
Mercurial
Significance
of
Raiding’:
Baby
Hermes
and
Animal
 Theft
in
Contemporary
Crete.”
Arion
4
(2).
Third
Series
(October
1):
27–48.
 Hägg,
Tomas.
1989.
“Hermes
and
the
Invention
of
the
Lyre
an
Unorthodox
Version.”
 Symbolae
Osloenses
64
(1):
36.
 Hall,
E.
1989.
“The
Archer
Scene
in
Aristophanes’
Thesmophoriazusae.”
Philologus:
 Zeitschrift
Für
Das
Klassische
Altertum
133:
38–54.
 Halliwell,
Stephen.
1980.
“Aristophanes’
Apprenticeship.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
30
(1):
 33–45.
 ———.
2008.
Greek
Laughter:
A
Study
of
Cultural
Psychology
from
Homer
to
Early
 Christianity.
New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Hamilton,
Richard.
1992.
Choes
and
Anthesteria:
Athenian
Iconography
and
Ritual.
Ann
 Arbor:
University
of
Michigan
Press.
 Handley,
Eric.
2002.
“Acting,
Action
and
Words
in
New
Comedy.”
In
Greek
and
Roman
 Actors:
Aspects
of
an
Ancient
Profession,
edited
by
Pat
Easterling
and
Edith
Hall.
 Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Harrell,
Sarah
E.
2011.
“Apollo’s
Fraternal
Threats:
Language
of
Succession
and
 Domination
in
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes.”
Greek,
Roman,
and
Byzantine
Studies
 32
(4)
(February
15):
307–329.
 Harriott,
Rosemary.
2015.
Poetry
and
Criticism
before
Plato.
S.l.:
Routledge.
 Harrison,
Jane
E.
1912.
Themis:
A
Study
of
the
Social
Origins
of
Greek
Religion.
London:
 Merlin
Pr.
 Harvey,
David,
and
John
Wilkins,
ed.
2000.
The
Rivals
of
Aristophanes.
London:
 Duckworth
Publishers
and
The
Classical
Press
of
Whales.
 Heath,
Malcolm.
1987.
Political
Comedy
in
Aristophanes.
Gottingen:
Vandenhoeck
&
 Ruprecht.
 Henderson,
Jeffrey.
1973.
“A
Note
on
Aristophanes
Acharnians
834‐35.”
Classical
 Philology
68
(4)
(October
1):
289–290.
 
 191
 ———.
1995.
“Beyond
Aristophanes.”
In
Beyond
Aristophanes:
Transition
and
 Diversity
in
Greek
Comedy,
175–83.
Atlanta,
Ga:
Scholars
Press.
 ———.
2010.
Three
Plays
by
Aristophanes:
Staging
Women.
2
edition.
Abingdon,
Oxon
 England;
New
York:
Routledge.
 Henderson,
Jeffery.
1975.
The
Maculate
Muse:
Obscene
Language
in
Attic
Comedy.
New
 Haven:
Yale
University
Press.
 Henry,
Madeleine.
1985.
Menander’s
Courtesans
and
the
Greek
Comic
Tradition.
Frankfurt:
 Peter
Lang.
 http://www.peterlang.com/index.cfm?event=cmp.ccc.seitenstruktur.detailseiten&s eitentyp=produkt&pk=25025.
 Herzfeld,
Michael.
1988.
The
Poetics
of
Manhood:
Contest
and
Identity
in
a
Cretan
 Mountain
Village.
Princeton:
Princeton
University
Press.
 Hesychius,
Moritz
Schmidt.
1867a.
Hesychii
Alexandrini
lexicon.
Sumptibus
Hermanni
 Dufftii
(Libraria
Maukiana).
 http://archive.org/details/hesychiialexand00schmgoog.
 ———.
1867b.
Hesychii
Alexandrini
lexicon.
Sumptibus
Hermanni
Dufftii
(Libraria
 Maukiana).
http://archive.org/details/hesychiialexand00schmgoog.
 Holmberg,
Ingrid.
1997.
“The
Sign
of
Metis.”
Arethusa
30
(1):
1–33.
 doi:10.1353/are.1997.0003.
 Homer.
2005.
Die
homerischen
Hymnen:
Herausgegeben
und
Erläutert
von
Dr.
Albert
 Gemoll.
Adamant
Media
Corporation.
 Homer,
and
Ludwig
RADERMACHER.
1931.
Der
Homerische
Hermes
Hymnus.
Erläutert
 Und
Untersucht
Von
L.
Radermacher,
Etc.
Wien ;
Leipzig.
 Homer,
E.
E
Sikes,
W.
R
Halliday,
and
Thomas
W
Allen.
1936.
The
Homeric
Hymns;
Edited
 by
T.W.
Allen,
W.R.
Halliday
and
E.E.
Sikes.
(Oxford):
Oxford
University
Press.
 Homerus,
Penelope
Proddow,
and
Barbara
Cooney.
1971.
Hermes,
Lord
of
Robbers:
 Homeric
Hymn
Number
Four.
Doubleday.
 Hooker,
G.
T.
W.
1960.
“The
Topography
of
the
Frogs.”
The
Journal
of
Hellenic
Studies
80:
 112–117.
 Hooker,
J.
T.
1980.
“The
Composition
of
the
Frogs.”
Hermes
(108):
169–82.
 Van
Hoorn,
G.
1951.
Choes
and
Anthesteria.
Leiden:
E.J.
Brill.
 “How
to
Make
Zotero
Bibliography
‐
Google
Search.”
2016a.
Accessed
April
1.
 https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+make+zotero+bibliography&ie=utf‐ 8&oe=utf‐8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en‐US:official&client=firefox‐a.
 ———.
2016b.
Accessed
April
1.
 https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+make+zotero+bibliography&ie=utf‐ 8&oe=utf‐8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en‐US:official&client=firefox‐a.
 Hubbard,
Thomas
K.
1991.
The
Mask
of
Comedy:
Aristophanes
and
the
Intertextual
 Parabasis.
Ithaca:
Cornell
University
Press.
 Hyde,
Lewis.
1999.
Trickster
Makes
This
World:
Mischief,
Myth,
and
Art.
North
Point
Press.
 Immanuel
Bekker.
1814.
Anecdota
graeca.
apud
G.C.
Nauckium.
 http://archive.org/details/anecdotagraeca00bekkgoog.
 Immerwahr,
Henry
R.
1946.
“Choes
and
Chytroi.”
Transactions
and
Proceedings
of
the
 American
Philological
Association
77
(January
1):
245–260.
doi:10.2307/283460.
 
 192
 Jacoby,
Felix.
1993.
Die
Fragmente
Der
Griechischen
Historiker:
(F
GR
HIST).
Leiden ;
 New
York:
E.J.
Brill.
 Jaillard,
Dominique.
2007.
Configurations
d’Hermes:
Une
Theogonie
Hermaique.
Centre
 International
d’Etude
de
la
Religion
Grecque
Antique.
 James
Robson.
2009.
Aristophanes:
An
Introduction.
London:
Bristol
Classical
Press.
 Janko,
Richard.
1981.
“The
Structure
of
the
Homeric
Hymns:
A
Study
in
Genre.”
Hermes
 109
(1)
(January
1):
9–24.
 ———.
“Homer,
Hesiod,
and
the
Hymns:
Diachronic
Development
in
Epic
Diction”.
 Cambridge
[Eng.] ;
New
York:
University
of
Cambridge.
 Jeanmarie,
H.
1939.
Couroi
Et
Couretes.
Lille.
 Johnston,
Sarah
Iles.
1999.
Restless
Dead:
Encounters
Between
the
Living
and
the
Dead
in
 Ancient
Greece.
1st
ed.
University
of
California
Press.
 ———.
2002.
“Myth,
Festival,
and
Poet:
The
‘Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes’
and
Its
 Performative
Context.”
Classical
Philology
97
(2)
(April
1):
109–132.
 Jung,
C.
G.
2005.
Science
of
Mythology:
Essays
on
the
Myth
of
the
Divine
Child
and
the
 Mysteries
of
Eleusis.
2nd
ed.
Routledge.
 Katz,
Joshua
T.
1999.
“Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes
296.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
(New
 Series)
49
(01):
315–319.
doi:10.1093/cq/49.1.315.
 Keller,
Mara
Lynn.
1988.
“The
Eleusinian
Mysteries
of
Demeter
and
Persephone:
Fertility,
 Sexuality,
and
Rebirth.”
Journal
of
Feminist
Studies
in
Religion
4
(1)
(April
1):
27–54.
 doi:10.2307/25002068.
 Kenyon,
FG,
ed.
1904.
Aristotle
on
the
Athenian
Constitution.
Translated,
with
Introduction
 and
Notes,
by
F.
G.
Kenyon
by
Aristotle
and
Frederic
George
Kenyon.
G
Bell
London.
 Kerényi,
Carl.
1991.
Eleusis:
Archetypal
Image
of
Mother
and
Daughter.
Translated
by
 Ralph
Manheim.
Princeton
University
Press.
 Kern,
Otto.
2012.
Inscriptiones
Graecae.
Collegit
Otto
Kern.
Ulan
Press.
 Keuls,
Eva.
1993.
The
Reign
of
the
Phallus:
Sexual
Politics
in
Ancient
Athens.
Berkeley:
 University
of
California
Press.
 Konstan,
David.
1986.
“Poesie,
Politique
Et
Rituel
Dans
Les
Grenouilles
d’Aristophane.”
 Metis
1:
291–308.
 ———.
2003.
“Shame
in
Ancient
Greece.”
Social
Research
70
(No.
4):
1031–1060.
 Kowalzig,
Barbara.
2008.
Singing
for
the
Gods:
Performances
of
Myth
and
Ritual
in
Archaic
 and
Classical
Greece.
Oxford
University
Press,
USA.
 Kugel,
James
L.
1991.
Poetry
and
Prophecy:
The
Beginnings
of
a
Literary
Tradition.
Cornell
 Univ
Pr.
 Kurke,
Leslie.
1990.
“Pindar’s
Sixth
Pythian
and
the
Tradition
of
Advice
Poetry.”
 Transactions
of
the
American
Philological
Association
120:
85–107.
 Lada‐Richards,
Ismene.
1999.
Initiating
Dionysus:
Ritual
and
Theatre
in
Aristophanes’
 Frogs.
Oxford
University
Press,
USA.
 Landfester,
Manfred.
1967.
Die
Ritter
des
Aristophanes:
Beobachtungen
zur
dramatischen
 Handlung
und
zum
komischen
Stil
des
Aristophanes.
B.R.
Grüner
Publishing
Company.
 Lang,
Andrew.
Myth,
Ritual
and
Religion
­
Volume
1.
 Lape,
Susan.
2006.
“The
Poetics
of
the
‘Komos’‐Chorus
in
Menander’s
Comedy.”
The
 American
Journal
of
Philology
127
(1):
89–109.
 
 193
 ———.
2013.
“Slavery,
Drama
and
the
Alchemy
of
Identity
in
Aristophanes.”
In
 Slaves
and
Slavery
in
Ancient
Greek
Drama.
New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Larson,
Jennifer.
2007.
Ancient
Greek
Cults:
A
Guide.
Routledge.
 ———.
2011.
“The
Corycian
Nymphs
and
the
Bee
Maidens
of
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
 Hermes.”
Greek,
Roman,
and
Byzantine
Studies
36
(4)
(February
8):
341–357.
 Laude,
Patrick.
2005.
Divine
Play,
Sacred
Laughter,
and
Spiritual
Understanding
 [electronic
Resource].
1st
ed.
New
York:
Palgrave
Macmillan.
 Leduc,
Claudine.
1995.
“Une
Théologie
Du
Signe
En
Pays
Grec.
L’hymne
Homérique
à
 Hermès
(I).”
Revue
De
L’histoire
Des
Religions
212
(1):
5–49.
 doi:10.3406/rhr.1995.1294.
 ———.
2001.
Chanter
Les
Dieux:
Musique
Et
Religion
Dans
l’Antiquité
Grecque
Et
 Romaine.
Rennes:
Presses
Universitaires
de
Rennes.
 Levi‐Strauss,
Claude.
1995.
Myth
and
Meaning:
Cracking
the
Code
of
Culture.
Reprint
 edition.
New
York:
Schocken.
 Lincoln,
Bruce.
1999.
Theorizing
Myth:
Narrative,
Ideology,
and
Scholarship.
Chicago:
 University
of
Chicago
Press.
 Lind,
H.
Der
Gerber
Kleon
in
Den
Rittern
Des
Aristophanes:
Studien
Zur
 Demagogenkomodie.
Frankfurt:
Peter
Lang.
 Littlefield,
David
J.
1968.
“Metaphor
and
Myth:
The
Unity
of
Aristophanes’
‘Knights’.”
 Studies
in
Philology
65
(1):
1–22.
 Ludwig,
Paul
W.
2006.
Eros
and
Polis:
Desire
and
Community
in
Greek
Political
Theory.
 Cambridge ;
New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press.
 MacDowell,
Douglas
M.
1972.
“The
Frogs’
Chorus.”
The
Classical
Review
22
(1).
New
 Series
(March
1):
3–5.
 ———.
1982.
“Aristophanes
and
Kallistratos.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
32
(1):
21–26.
 Margolis,
Eric,
Richard
Samuels,
and
Stephen
P.
Stich,
ed.
2012.
The
Oxford
Handbook
of
 Philosophy
of
Cognitive
Science.
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Martin,
Richard
P.
1984.
“Hesiod,
Odysseus,
and
the
Intruction
of
Princes.”
Transactions
 of
the
American
Philological
Association
114:
29–48.
 Mastromarco,
G.
1979.
“L’esordio
‘Segreto’
Di
Aristofane.”
Quaderni
Di
Storia
10:
153– 196.
 Meyer,
Marvin
W.,
ed.
1999.
The
Ancient
Mysteries:
A
Sourcebook
of
Sacred
Texts.
1st
 University
of
Pennsylvania
Press
Ed.
University
of
Pennsylvania
Press.
 Mikalson,
Jon
D.
1983.
Athenian
Popular
Religion.
Chapel
Hill:
The
University
of
North
 Carolina
Press.
 ———.
1998.
Religion
in
Hellenistic
Athens.
1st
ed.
University
of
California
Press.
 ———.
2009.
Ancient
Greek
Religion.
2nd
ed.
Wiley‐Blackwell.
 Miles,
Margaret
M.
1998.
The
City
Eleusinion.
Volume
XXXI.
American
School
of
Classical
 Studies.
 Miller,
Harold
W.
1948.
“Euripides’
Telephus
and
the
Thesmophoriazusae
of
 Aristophanes.”
Classical
Philology
43
(3):
174–183.
 Moorton,
Richard
F.
1989.
“Rites
of
Passage
in
Aristophanes’
‘Frogs’.”
The
Classical
 Journal
84
(4)
(May):
308–324.
 Muecke,
Frances.
1977.
“Playing
with
the
Play:
Theatrical
Self‐consciousness
in
 Aristophanes.”
Antichthon
11
(January):
52–67.
doi:10.1017/S0066477400002434.
 
 194
 Murray,
Gilbert.
1933.
Aristophanes:
A
Study.
Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Murray,
M.
A.
1934.
“Female
Fertility
Figures.”
The
Journal
of
the
Royal
Anthropological
 Institute
of
Great
Britain
and
Ireland
64
(January
1):
93–100.
doi:10.2307/2843950.
 Mylonas,
George
E.
2010.
Eleusis
and
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries.
cyceon
tales.
 Nagy,
Gregory.
1979.
The
Best
of
the
Achaeans:
Concepts
of
the
Hero
in
Archaic
Greek
 Poetry.
Baltimore:
Johns
Hopkins
University
Press.
 ———.
2008.
“Convergences
and
Divergences
Between
God
and
Hero
in
the
Mnesiepes
 Inscription
of
Paros.”
Archilochus
and
His
Age
II:
259–65.
 Navarre,
Octave.
1956.
Les
Cavaliers
d’
Aristophane;
Etudes
Et
Analyse.
Paris:
Editions
 Mellottee.
 Neils,
Jenifer,
John
Howard
Oakley,
Katherine
Hart,
Lesley
A.
Beaumont,
and
Hood
 Museum
of
Art.
2003.
Coming
of
Age
in
Ancient
Greece:
Images
of
Childhood
from
the
 Classical
Past.
Yale
University
Press.
 Newiger,
Hans‐Joachim.
1975.
Aristophanes
und
die
alte
Komodie.
Darmstadt:
 Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft,
[Abt.
Verl.].
 Nilsson,
Martin
P.
1935.
“Early
Orphism
and
Kindred
Religious
Movements.”
The
Harvard
 Theological
Review
28
(3)
(July):
181–230.
 NILSSON,
Martin
P.
1961.
Geschichte
Der
Griechischen
Religion.
Beck.
 Norwood,
Gilbert.
1932.
Greek
Comedy.
J.W.
Luce.
 Oliver,
Garrett,
ed.
2011.
The
Oxford
Companion
to
Beer.
1st
ed.
Oxford
University
Press,
 USA.
 Ouvaroff,
M.
1992.
Essay
on
the
Eleusinian
Mysteries.
Holmes
Pub
Grou
Llc.
 P,
Rau.
1967.
Paratragodia:
Untersuchung
Einer
Komischen
Form
Des
Aristophanes.
 Munich:
Zetemata.
 Parke,
Herbert
W.
1986.
Festivals
of
the
Athenians.
Cornell
University
Press.
 Parker,
Robert.
1991.
“The
‘Hymn
to
Demeter’
and
the
‘Homeric
Hymns’.”
Greece
&
Rome
 38
(1)
(April
1):
1–17.
doi:10.2307/643104.
 Patrologiæ
cursus
completus
[Series
Græca]:
...
omnium
ss.
patrum,
doctorum,
 scriptorumque
ecclasiasticorum
sive
Latinorum
sive
Græcorum
...
1864.
Vol.
66.
Paris:
 Apud
Garnier
Fratres
et
J.‐P.
Migne
Successores.
 Pickard‐Cambridge,
Arthur
W.
1989.
The
Dramatic
Festivals
of
Athens.
Edited
by
John
 Gould
and
D.
M.
Lewis.
2
edition.
Oxford :
New
York:
Clarendon
Press.
 Pierris,
Apostolos.
2014.
“Baubo:
A
Case
of
Ambiguous
Genitalia
in
the
Eleusinian
 Mysteries.”
Accessed
March
18.
 https://www.academia.edu/2167881/Baubo_A_case_of_ambiguous_genitalia_in_the _Eleusinian_Mysteries.
 Platnauer,
Maurice.
1968.
Fifty
Years
(and
Twelve)
of
Classical
Scholarship.
Oxford:
 Clarendon
Press.
 Platter,
Charles.
2006.
Aristophanes
and
the
Carnival
of
Genres.
Baltimore:
JHU
Press.
 Pohlenz,
M.
1965.
“Aristophanes’
Ritter.”
Nachrichten
Der
Akademie
Der
Wissenschaften
 2.
 Postlethwaite,
N.
1979.
“Formula
and
Formulaic:
Some
Evidence
from
the
Homeric
 Hymns.”
Phoenix
33
(1)
(April
1):
1–18.
doi:10.2307/1087847.
 Rank,
Otto.
2004.
The
Myth
of
the
Birth
of
the
Hero:
A
Psychological
Exploration
of
Myth.
 Expanded
&
updated.
The
Johns
Hopkins
University
Press.
 
 195
 Ransome,
Hilda
M.
2004.
The
Sacred
Bee
in
Ancient
Times
and
Folklore.
Dover
 Publications.
 Rappaport,
Roy.
1999.
Ritual
and
Religion
in
the
Making
of
Humanity.
Cambridge:
 Cambridge
University
Press.
 Rau,
P.
1975.
“Das
Tragodienspiel
En
Den
‘Thesmophoriazusen’.”
In
Aristophanes
Und
Die
 Alte
Komodie,
edited
by
Hans‐Joachim
Newiger.
Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche
 Buchgesellschaft,
[Abt.
Verl.].
 Reckford,
Kenneth
J.
1987.
ARISTOPHANES’
OLD­AND­NEW
COMEDY;
VOLUME
1:
SIX
 ESSAYS
IN
PERSPECTIVE.
1st
edition,
edition.
Chapel
Hill:
University
of
North
 Carolina
Press.
 Richardson,
N.
J.,
ed.
1979.
The
Homeric
Hymn
to
Demeter.
Later
printing,.
Oxford
 University
Press,
USA.
 Richardson,
Nicholas.
2010.
Three
Homeric
Hymns:
To
Apollo,
Hermes,
and
Aphorodite.
1st
 ed.
Cambridge
University
Press.
 Richlin,
Amy,
ed.
1992.
Pornography
and
Representation
in
Greece
and
Rome.
1
edition.
 New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Robertson,
Noel.
1992.
Festivals
and
Legends.
University
of
Toronto
Press,
Scholarly
 Publishing
Division.
 Rogers,
B.
B.
1919.
The
Comedies
of
Aristophanes.
Vol.
5.
London:
G.
Bell
&
Sons
Ltd.
 Romer,
F.
E.
1997.
“Good
Intentions.”
In
The
City
as
Comedy.
Chapel
Hill:
The
University
of
 North
Carolina
Press.
 Rosen,
Ralph
M.
1988.
Old
Comedy
&
the
Iambographic
Tradition.
Atlanta:
Scholars
Press.
 http://www.alibris.com/Old‐Comedy‐the‐Iambographic‐Tradition‐Ralph‐Mark‐ Rosen/book/4820499.
 ———.
1991.
“Review
of
Thomas
K.
Hubbard,
The
Mask
of
Comedy.
Aristophanes
and
 the
Intertextual
Parabasis.”
Bryn
Mawr
Classical
Review
(March).
 ———.
2015.
“Reconsidering
the
Reperformance
of
Aristophanes’
Frogs.”
Trends
in
 Classics
7
(2):
237–256.
 Rosenmeyer,
Bruno
Snell;
Thomas
Gustav.
1953.
The
Discovery
of
the
Mind.
The
Greek
 Origins
of
European
Thought
...
Translated
by
T.
G.
Rosenmeyer.
Basil
Blackwell
 Oxford.
 Rotstein,
Andrea.
2010.
The
Idea
of
Iambos.
Oxford:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Royle,
Nicholas.
2003.
The
Uncanny:
An
Introduction.
New
York:
Routledge.
 Ruffell,
Ian.
2012.
Politics
and
Anti­Realism
in
Athenian
Old
Comedy.
Oxford:
Oxford
 University
Press.
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/politics‐and‐anti‐ realism‐in‐athenian‐old‐comedy‐9780199587216.
 Russo,
Carlo
Fernando.
1966.
“The
Revision
of
Aristophanes’
‘Frogs’.”
Greece
&
Rome
13
 (1)
(April):
1–13.
 Scheinberg,
Susan.
1979.
“The
Bee
Maidens
of
the
Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes.”
Harvard
 Studies
in
Classical
Philology
83
(January
1):
1–28.
doi:10.2307/311093.
 Schmid,
Wilhelm.
2011.
Geschichte
der
griechischen
Litteratur.
University
of
Toronto
 Libraries.
 Scholtz,
Andrew.
2004.
“Friends,
Lovers,
Flatterers:
Demophilic
Courtship
in
 Aristophanes’
‘Knights’.”
Transactions
of
the
American
Philological
Association
 (1974­)
134
(2)
(October
1):
263–293.
 
 196
 Scodel,
Ruth,
ed.
1993.
Theater
and
Society
in
the
Classical
World.
Ann
Arbor:
 University
of
Michigan
Press.
 Segal,
Charles
Paul.
1961.
“The
Character
and
Cults
of
Dionysus
and
the
Unity
of
the
 Frogs.”
Harvard
Studies
in
Classical
Philology
65:
207–242.
doi:10.2307/310837.
 Segal,
Robert
A.,
ed.
1998.
The
Myth
and
Ritual
Theory:
An
Anthology.
1
edition.
Malden,
 Mass:
Wiley‐Blackwell.
 Segal,
Robert
A.
2004.
Myth:
A
Very
Short
Introduction.
First
Edition,
Later
Printing
 edition.
Oxford ;
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
 Shelmerdine,
Susan
C.
2011.
“Hermes
and
the
Tortoise:
A
Prelude
to
Cult.”
Greek,
Roman,
 and
Byzantine
Studies
25
(3)
(February
22):
201–208.
 Sikes,
E.
E.
1867‐1940,
and
Thomas
W.
b
1862
Allen.
1904.
The
Homeric
Hymns.
Edited,
 with
Pref.,
Apparatus
Criticus,
Notes,
and
Appendices.
London:
MacMillan
&
Co.,
Ltd.
 Simon,
Erika.
2002.
Festivals
of
Attica:
An
Archaeological
Commentary.
1st
ed.
University
 of
Wisconsin
Press.
 Slater,
Niall
W.
2002.
Spectator
Politics:
Metatheatre
and
Performance
in
Aristophanes.
 Philadelphia:
University
of
Pennsylvania
Press.
 Smith,
William
Robertson.
2005.
Lectures
on
the
Religion
of
the
Semites.
Chestnut
Hill,
 Mass.:
Adamant
Media
Corporation.
 Solomon,
Jon,
ed.
1994.
Apollo:
Origins
and
Influence.
Tucson:
University
of
Arizona
Press.
 Solomos,
Alexis.
1974.
The
Living
Aristophanes.
Ann
Arbor:
University
of
Michigan
Press.
 Sommerstein,
A.
H.
1980.
“Notes
on
Aristophanes’
Knights.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
30
 (1):
46–56.
 Sommerstein,
Alan
H.,
ed.
1987a.
Aristophanes
Birds.
Vol.
6.
The
Comedies
of
 Aristophanes.
Oxford:
Aris
&
Phillips.
 Sommerstein,
Alan
H.,
tran.
1987b.
The
Birds.
Oxford:
Oxbow
Books.
 Sommerstein,
Alan
H.
1994.
Aristophanes:
Thesmophoriazusae.
Warminster:
Aris
&
 Phillips.
 ———.
2000.
“Platon,
Eupolis
and
the
‘Demagogue‐comedy’.”
In
The
Rivals
of
 Aristophanes:
Studies
in
Athenian
Old
Comedy,
edited
by
David
Harvey
and
John
 Wilkins.
London:
Duckworth
Publishers
and
The
Classical
Press
of
Whales.
 Sourvinou‐Inwood,
Christiane,
and
Robert
Parker.
2011.
Athenian
Myths
and
Festivals:
 Aglauros,
Erechtheus,
Plynteria,
Panathenaia,
Dionysia.
1st
ed.
Oxford
University
 Press,
USA.
 Sowa,
Cora
A.
1984.
Traditional
Themes
and
the
Homeric
Hymns.
Chicago:
Bolchazy
 Carducci.
 Stanford,
W.
B.,
ed.
1991.
Aristophanes:
Frogs.
Reprint
edition.
Bristol
Classical
Press.
 Stannard,
Jerry.
1962.
“The
Plant
Called
Moly.”
Osiris
14:
254–307.
 Stone,
Laura
M.
1981.
Costume
in
Aristophanic
Poetry.
New
York:
Ayer
Co
Pub.
 Storey,
Ian
C.,
and
Arlene
Allan.
2008.
A
Guide
to
Ancient
Greek
Drama.
John
Wiley
&
Sons.
 Strauss,
Leo.
1966.
Socrates
and
Aristophanes.
Chicago:
University
of
Chicago
Press.
 Taafe,
Lauren.
1993.
Aristophanes
and
Women.
London:
Routledge.
 Taplin,
O.
1983.
“Tragedy
and
Trugedy.”
The
Classical
Quarterly
33
(2)
(January
1):
331– 333.
 Tave,
Stuart
M.
1960.
The
Amiable
Humourist.
Chicago:
The
University
of
Chicago
Press.
 
 197
 “The
Poetics
of
Manhood:
Contest
and
Identity
in
a
Cretan
Mountain
Village:
Michael
 Herzfeld:
9780691102443:
Amazon.com:
Books.”
2016.
Accessed
March
4.
 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691102449?keywords=the%20poetics%20 of%20manhood&qid=1457129948&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8‐1.
 Tierney,
M.
1934.
“The
Parodos
in
Aristophanes’
‘Frogs’.”
Proceedings
of
the
Royal
Irish
 Academy.
Section
C:
Archaeology,
Celtic
Studies,
History,
Linguistics,
Literature
42:
 199–218.
 Travlos,
I.
N.
1950.
“To\

A)na/ktoron
Th=j
E0leusi=noj.”
In
ArchEph,
1–16.
 TUCKER,
T.
G.
1906.
The
Frogs
of
Aristophanes.
MacMillan
&
Co.,
Ltd.
 Tyrrell,
Wm
Blake,
and
Frieda
S.
Brown.
1991.
Athenian
Myths
and
Institutions:
Words
in
 Action.
Oxford
University
Press,
USA.
 Tzanetou,
Angeliki.
2002.
“Something
to
Do
with
Demeter:
Ritual
and
Performance
in
 Aristophanes’
Women
at
the
Thesmophoria.”
The
American
Journal
of
Philology
123
 (3)
(October
1):
329–367.
 Tzifopoulos,
Yannis
Z.
2000.
“Hermes
and
Apollo
at
Onchestos
in
the
‘Homeric
Hymn
to
 Hermes’:
The
Poetics
and
Performance
of
Proverbial
Communication.”
Mnemosyne
 53
(2).
Fourth
Series
(April
1):
148–163.
 Vergados,
Athanassios.
2013.
The
“Homeric
Hymn
to
Hermes”:
Introduction,
Text
and
 Commentary.
Berlin
and
Boston:
Walter
de
Gruyter.
 Versnel,
H.
S.
1990.
Inconsistencies
in
Greek
and
Roman
Religion:
Transition
and
Reversal
 in
Myth
and
Ritual.
Tome
II.
BRILL.
 ———.
1993.
Inconsistencies
in
Greek
and
Roman
Religion.
Brill
Academic
Pub.
 VIDAL‐NAQUET,
Pierre,
and
Jean‐Pierre
VERNANT.
1986.
Mythe
et
tragédie
en
Grèce
 ancienne.
Paris:
La
Découverte.
 Waele,
Ferdinand
Joseph
M.
de.
1927.
The
Magic
Staff
or
Rod
in
Graeco­Italian
Antiquity.
 Drukkerij
Erasmus.
 Walcot,
Peter.
1979.
“Cattle
Raiding,
Heroic
Tradition,
and
Ritual:
The
Greek
Evidence.”
 History
of
Religions
18
(4)
(May
1):
326–351.
 Wasson,
R.
Gordon,
A.
Albert
Hofmann,
and
Carl
A.
P.
Ruck.
2008.
The
Road
to
Eleusis:
 Unveiling
the
Secret
of
the
Mysteries.
30
Anv.
North
Atlantic
Books.
 Welsh,
David.
1990.
“The
Ending
of
Aristophanes
‘Knights’.”
Hermes
118
(4)
(January
1):
 421–429.
 Whitehouse,
Harvey.
2004.
Modes
of
Religiosity:
A
Cognitive
Theory
of
Religious
 Transmission.
Walnut
Creek,
CA:
AltaMira
Press.
 Whitman,
Cedric
H.
1971.
Aristophanes
and
the
Comic
Hero.
Cambridge:
Harvard
 University
Press.
 Wills,
Garry.
1969.
“Why
Are
the
Frogs
in
the
Frogs?”
Hermes
97
(3)
(January
1):
306– 317.
 Wohl,
Victoria.
2002.
Love
among
the
Ruins:
The
Erotics
of
Democracy
in
Classical
Athens.
 Princeton,
N.J:
Princeton
University
Press.
 Worman,
Nancy.
2008.
Abusive
Mouths
in
Classical
Athens.
New
York:
Cambridge
 University
Press.
 Zaidman,
Louise
Bruit,
and
Pauline
Schmitt
Pantel.
1993.
Religion
in
the
Ancient
Greek
 City.
Translated
by
Paul
Cartledge.
Cambridge
University
Press.
 
 198
 Zeitlin,
Froma
I.
1982.
“Cultic
models
of
the
female:
Rites
of
Dionysus
and
Demeter.”
 Arethusa
15
(1/2):
129–157.
 Zeitlin,
Froma
I.
1981.
“Travesties
of
Gender
and
Genre.”
In
Reflections
of
Women
in
 Antiquity,
edited
by
Helene
P.
Foley.
New
York:
Gordon
&
Breach.
 ———.
1985.
Playing
the
Other:
Gender
and
Society
in
Classical
Greek
Literature.
Chicago:
 University
of
Chicago
Press.
 Zeitlin,
Froma
I.,
John
J.
Winkler,
and
David
M.
Halperin.
1991.
Before
Sexuality.
 Princeton:
Princeton
University
Press.
 Zumbrunnen,
John.
2004.
“Elite
Domination
and
the
Clever
Citizen:
Aristophanes’
 ‘Archarnians’
and
‘Knights’.”
Political
Theory
32
(5)
(October
1):
656–677.
 Zweig,
Bella.
1992.
“The
Mute
Nude
Female
Characters
in
Aristophanes’
Plays.”
In
 Pornography
and
Representation
in
Greece
and
Rome,
edited
by
Amy
Richlin.
New
 York:
Oxford
University
Press. 
Asset Metadata
Creator Harlow, Devon (author) 
Core Title From Demeter to Dionysos: laughter as a vehicle for transformation in archaic cult ritual and Attic Old Comedy 
Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance) 
School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences 
Degree Doctor of Philosophy 
Degree Program Classics 
Publication Date 08/04/2016 
Defense Date 05/05/2016 
Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital) 
Tag Aristophanes,Demeter,Dionysos,Dionysus,Frogs,Hermes,initiation,Knights,Laughter,OAI-PMH Harvest,Old Comedy,Ritual,transformation 
Format application/pdf (imt) 
Language English
Advisor Lape, Susan (committee chair), Collins, James (committee member), Foley, Helene (committee member), Habinek, Thomas (committee member), Lai, Rongdao (committee member) 
Creator Email devlinharlow@gmail.com,dharlow@usc.edu 
Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-296886 
Unique identifier UC11281243 
Identifier etd-HarlowDevo-4739.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-296886 (legacy record id) 
Legacy Identifier etd-HarlowDevo-4739.pdf 
Dmrecord 296886 
Document Type Dissertation 
Format application/pdf (imt) 
Rights Harlow, Devon 
Type texts
Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection) 
Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law.  Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a... 
Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Abstract (if available)
Abstract The purpose of this project is to explore the links between laughter and transformation in Archaic and Classical Greek culture and cult practice, the use of cult paradigms and the role of laughter in Old Comedy. And how these themes reverberate in Platonic philosophy because Plato’s guarded response to laughter helps to confirm and clarify the pivotal role of laughter in Athenian transformative consciousness. He writes in Book III of The Republic, “ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ φιλογέλωτάς γε δεῖ εἶναι. σχεδὸν γὰρ ὅταν τις ἐφιῇ ἰσχυρῷ γέλωτι, ἰσχυρὰν καὶ μεταβολὴν ζητεῖ τὸ τοιοῦτον. But, they [the guardians of the city, i.e. the men of Athens] must not be laughter loving. For usually when a person abandons himself into violent laughter he is seeking such a violent change.” This very clearly shows the potential power that laughter had for an Athenian audience. And in his very criticism, Plato is giving us a glimpse of how most people saw laughter and its function in eliciting change—since he is using general opinion about laughter to prove his point concerning its danger for the men who are in charge of the polis. ❧ Laughter is, of course, an elusive subject. There is no universal agreement about what is funny, what provokes laughter, or even if human beings are the only life-form to laugh. In addition to the cerebral elements of laughter, I explore the work that has been done on cognitive and evolutionary psychology and neuroscience to see if there are valuable insights for the transformative power of laughter and how it effects and engages the brain and consciousness. This work helps to bring together the language and intellectual elements of laughter and the physical components, because laughter does not simply engage the intellect, but is also deeply bodily and sensual experience employing the muscles, lungs, neurons and voice of the person laughing. ❧ The scholarly exploration of Laughter and Old Comedy has largely ignored the role of ritual laughter in comedy or how evoking rituals tied with laughter in comedic plots might cue the Greek audience that a specific type of laughter is either occurring on stage or required of the audience. It seems very significant to me that the action of a third of Aristophanes’ extant plays either take place during a festival or have festival episodes, while, of course, being part of a festival themselves. Clearly ritual and laughter are a major theme in his poetic work. Many of the ritual scenes in Aristophanic comedy (though not all) involve the sexual exploitation of women (the marketplace scene in Acharnians, even the scene between Dionysus the Eleusinian initiates in Hades in The Frogs), and it is striking that while ritual laughter is a potent tool that women use in religious festivals, in Aristophanes’ rituals scenes often the laughter is at women’s expense or in response to planned exploitation. The institutionalization of comedy allows the state to use laughter as its own tool, reclaim its political power, and defray some of the power that was granted to women in fertility festivals. ❧ This paradigm of laugher before a transformation was not simply a literary ploy 
Tags
Demeter
Dionysos
Dionysus
Hermes
Old Comedy
transformation
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
doctype icon
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses 
Action button