DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.800#0550
APPENDIX. 527
without impropriety bo said to bo filled, i.e. with sacrifices, so that the whole city
shone with the fires upon them. For they have at all events nothing to do with
the theatre, as they were erected in the streets (av ao-rv). This passage, there-
fore, can hardly form an exception to Lobock's remark that he did not remember
to have found 6vix.iX.rj in the sense of orchestra in tho ancient writers ; and no
other is adduced by Dr. Donaldson in support of tho very precise description
which he has given of the arrangement of the orchestra, but only a reference
to a German periodical (Jahrb. f. Phil. u. Padag. li. i. pp. 22-32), which wo
have not at hand. The reader who has perused the preceding pages will seo
that his account is taken from Suidas, and that ho has thus applied to the
classic period the orchestral arrangements that prevailed in tho decline of tho
drama.
Schlegel, also, in his third lecture on the ancient drama, adopts the thymele
as the station of the chorus, and affirms that it rose " as high as the stage,"
without indicating its length or breadth.1 But he gives no authorities.
Miiller, in his ' Dissertation on the Eumenidcs,' has devoted a section to
the thymele. He correctly points out from Suidas tho change which tho
thymele of the theatre underwent ;2 though perhaps it would be more correct
to say that it was the logeium, not tho thymele, that was altered. Ho seems to
think, however—for he does not express himself very clearly—that in the
classical times part of the chorus stood upon the thymele, that is, on the steps
of the altar; and that at least the hegemon of the chorus took his station on
it, he being in tho middle of the left file of choreutse; and that from this
station he spoke with the persons on tho stage over the heads of the two other
files, posted in straight lines between the thymele and tho stage.
Hermann, in his review of Miiller's work, ridicules this arrangement. But
as his own hypothesis is founded on the account of Suidas, which he applies to
the theatre of the classical times, it becomes still more absurd.3 Ho adepts
Suidas' name of Kovia-rpa for the orchestra; the thymele, he thinks, was a large
altar, with steps in tho middle of the conistra; that the flute players stood on
the steps ; that tho altar was, perhaps, movable, which indeed was probably
the case; that in tho performance of dithyrambs the altar was surrounded
with a low planking for tho use of the chorus, which gave occasion to tho
name of orchestra for tho whole conistra. But such a planking, he observes,
would not have served for the regular drama. Vitruvius says (v. 8 (7) ) that
the stage was not less than ten nor more than twelve feet above the orchestra—
that is, the conistra. Hence, according to Hermann, it necessarily follows that
the tragic and comic chorus, which had often not only to speak with the actors,
1 See Donaldson's Gr. Theatre, p. 171. "■ p. 250, Eng. trans.
3 Opuscnln, t. ii. p. ii. p. 152 »c|q.
without impropriety bo said to bo filled, i.e. with sacrifices, so that the whole city
shone with the fires upon them. For they have at all events nothing to do with
the theatre, as they were erected in the streets (av ao-rv). This passage, there-
fore, can hardly form an exception to Lobock's remark that he did not remember
to have found 6vix.iX.rj in the sense of orchestra in tho ancient writers ; and no
other is adduced by Dr. Donaldson in support of tho very precise description
which he has given of the arrangement of the orchestra, but only a reference
to a German periodical (Jahrb. f. Phil. u. Padag. li. i. pp. 22-32), which wo
have not at hand. The reader who has perused the preceding pages will seo
that his account is taken from Suidas, and that ho has thus applied to the
classic period the orchestral arrangements that prevailed in tho decline of tho
drama.
Schlegel, also, in his third lecture on the ancient drama, adopts the thymele
as the station of the chorus, and affirms that it rose " as high as the stage,"
without indicating its length or breadth.1 But he gives no authorities.
Miiller, in his ' Dissertation on the Eumenidcs,' has devoted a section to
the thymele. He correctly points out from Suidas tho change which tho
thymele of the theatre underwent ;2 though perhaps it would be more correct
to say that it was the logeium, not tho thymele, that was altered. Ho seems to
think, however—for he does not express himself very clearly—that in the
classical times part of the chorus stood upon the thymele, that is, on the steps
of the altar; and that at least the hegemon of the chorus took his station on
it, he being in tho middle of the left file of choreutse; and that from this
station he spoke with the persons on tho stage over the heads of the two other
files, posted in straight lines between the thymele and tho stage.
Hermann, in his review of Miiller's work, ridicules this arrangement. But
as his own hypothesis is founded on the account of Suidas, which he applies to
the theatre of the classical times, it becomes still more absurd.3 Ho adepts
Suidas' name of Kovia-rpa for the orchestra; the thymele, he thinks, was a large
altar, with steps in tho middle of the conistra; that the flute players stood on
the steps ; that tho altar was, perhaps, movable, which indeed was probably
the case; that in tho performance of dithyrambs the altar was surrounded
with a low planking for tho use of the chorus, which gave occasion to tho
name of orchestra for tho whole conistra. But such a planking, he observes,
would not have served for the regular drama. Vitruvius says (v. 8 (7) ) that
the stage was not less than ten nor more than twelve feet above the orchestra—
that is, the conistra. Hence, according to Hermann, it necessarily follows that
the tragic and comic chorus, which had often not only to speak with the actors,
1 See Donaldson's Gr. Theatre, p. 171. "■ p. 250, Eng. trans.
3 Opuscnln, t. ii. p. ii. p. 152 »c|q.