DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.13851#0779
A SHORT HISTORY OF GRECIAN LITERATURE.
43
bear with fortitude the calamities of life, he subdues and unmans it by pictures of dis-
tress and excess of feeling. On this account he has been styled by Aristotle the most tra-
gic of all poets. Of eighty plays which he wrote, only nineteen have reached us. The
titles of these are the following, the Hecuba, Orestes, Phenissae, Medea, Hippolytus,
Alcestes, Andromache, Supplices, Iphigenia in Aulis, Iphigenia in Tauris, Rhesus,
Troades, Bacchae, Cyclops, Heraclidae, Helena, Ion, Hercules furens, Electra.
OF COMEDY.
The first appearance of comedy, as has beeu already remarked, was when the in-
habitants of Attica assembled at their village festivals, and attacked each other in
strains of raillery and humour, upon any of their foibles or weaknesses of character.
It was a considerable time before any written comedy was given to the world, Epi-
charmps, who lived about four hundred and fifty years before Christ, being account-
ed the first. To him succeede I Eupolis, Cratinus and Aristophanes, who are gene-
rally termed writers of the old comedy. Of the two first we have scarcely any thing
remaining to enable us to judge of the character of their works. Of the latter we
have several plays, extremely valuable, as the only complete specimen of the ancient
Greek comedy.
aristophanes.
Both the birth-place and parentage of Aristophanes are doubtful. He is supposed,
with great probability, to have been a native of ^gina, and acquired by his talents the
privileges of an Athenian citizen. Though he attacked with great severity many of
the most eminent men at Athens, he was too strongly supported by the favour of the
populace, to dread their resentment. The most unwarrantable and unjust instance of
this kind, was levelled against Socrates, whom he ridiculed in his comedy of the
Clouds. This attack upon a man, not more distinguished for the correctness of his
moral conduct, than the purity and excellence of his philosophical opinions, affixes a
stigma to the character of the poet, which no sophistry can ever efface. Aristo-
phanes could not be so blind, as to confound the doctrines of that philosopher with
the dogmas of the sophists, which were fair subjects of ridicule. We must therefore
impute his conduct either to levity, and a kind of privileged license, which the Athe-
nians were foolish enough to allow him, or to enmity and malevolence, which probably
arose from some rebukes he received from Socrates, upon account of the obscenity and
licentiousness of some of his plays. With the same spirit he attacked Euripides, the
friend and pupil of that philosopher, and endeavoured, by every kind of ridicule and
degradation of his character and abilities, to lower him in the estimation of his coun-
trymen.
No public character, however powerful, escaped the severity of his satire. Against
the demagogue Cleon in particular, a man who was both despised and trusted by the
Athenians, he directed his most poignant shafts, ^itb an intrepidity and discernment that
entitled him to praise : and had he confined himself to such characters, he would have
merited the esteem of posterity. _
His comedies are reckoned the standard of tke Athenian language, such as it wa3
spoken by men of the first eminence, in the most refined period. His style, ho\v*ever,
is varied according to the nature of his subject, and the characters he has introduced.
He makes a clown speak like a clown, and a man of letters and information deliver
himself with elegance and ease. It is to be lamented, that on many occasions he scru-
ples not to offend by gross obscenity, indelicate expressions, and even puns and quib-
bles. It is probable that he introduced these to please the taste of his audience, which,
unless they had been excessively corrupted, would not have tolerated, far less ap-
plauded such offences, against propriety and decency. Throughout his pieces he has
shewn a wonderful versatility of talent, rising at once from coarse rusticity, to the
most sublime and elegant expressions in some of his choruses.—Much of his wit and
satire has not the same point and keenness to modern readers, as it must have had to
an Athenian audience, who knew the characters and objects against whom they were
levelled. Without a complete knowledge of all the.facts alluded to, and the private
history of the personages whom be attacked, it is impossible to form a fair estimate of
his powers of wit and ridicule. What to an Athenian would have appeared pointed
and severe, may to us seem insipid and puerile. But it cannot be denied that many of
his parodies, however well executed, are unjust and malicious ; his allegories, with
scarcely any point of resemblance, were intended to vilify and degrade ; and his per-
sonal satire, to gratify the licentious levelling tempers of his patrons,
43
bear with fortitude the calamities of life, he subdues and unmans it by pictures of dis-
tress and excess of feeling. On this account he has been styled by Aristotle the most tra-
gic of all poets. Of eighty plays which he wrote, only nineteen have reached us. The
titles of these are the following, the Hecuba, Orestes, Phenissae, Medea, Hippolytus,
Alcestes, Andromache, Supplices, Iphigenia in Aulis, Iphigenia in Tauris, Rhesus,
Troades, Bacchae, Cyclops, Heraclidae, Helena, Ion, Hercules furens, Electra.
OF COMEDY.
The first appearance of comedy, as has beeu already remarked, was when the in-
habitants of Attica assembled at their village festivals, and attacked each other in
strains of raillery and humour, upon any of their foibles or weaknesses of character.
It was a considerable time before any written comedy was given to the world, Epi-
charmps, who lived about four hundred and fifty years before Christ, being account-
ed the first. To him succeede I Eupolis, Cratinus and Aristophanes, who are gene-
rally termed writers of the old comedy. Of the two first we have scarcely any thing
remaining to enable us to judge of the character of their works. Of the latter we
have several plays, extremely valuable, as the only complete specimen of the ancient
Greek comedy.
aristophanes.
Both the birth-place and parentage of Aristophanes are doubtful. He is supposed,
with great probability, to have been a native of ^gina, and acquired by his talents the
privileges of an Athenian citizen. Though he attacked with great severity many of
the most eminent men at Athens, he was too strongly supported by the favour of the
populace, to dread their resentment. The most unwarrantable and unjust instance of
this kind, was levelled against Socrates, whom he ridiculed in his comedy of the
Clouds. This attack upon a man, not more distinguished for the correctness of his
moral conduct, than the purity and excellence of his philosophical opinions, affixes a
stigma to the character of the poet, which no sophistry can ever efface. Aristo-
phanes could not be so blind, as to confound the doctrines of that philosopher with
the dogmas of the sophists, which were fair subjects of ridicule. We must therefore
impute his conduct either to levity, and a kind of privileged license, which the Athe-
nians were foolish enough to allow him, or to enmity and malevolence, which probably
arose from some rebukes he received from Socrates, upon account of the obscenity and
licentiousness of some of his plays. With the same spirit he attacked Euripides, the
friend and pupil of that philosopher, and endeavoured, by every kind of ridicule and
degradation of his character and abilities, to lower him in the estimation of his coun-
trymen.
No public character, however powerful, escaped the severity of his satire. Against
the demagogue Cleon in particular, a man who was both despised and trusted by the
Athenians, he directed his most poignant shafts, ^itb an intrepidity and discernment that
entitled him to praise : and had he confined himself to such characters, he would have
merited the esteem of posterity. _
His comedies are reckoned the standard of tke Athenian language, such as it wa3
spoken by men of the first eminence, in the most refined period. His style, ho\v*ever,
is varied according to the nature of his subject, and the characters he has introduced.
He makes a clown speak like a clown, and a man of letters and information deliver
himself with elegance and ease. It is to be lamented, that on many occasions he scru-
ples not to offend by gross obscenity, indelicate expressions, and even puns and quib-
bles. It is probable that he introduced these to please the taste of his audience, which,
unless they had been excessively corrupted, would not have tolerated, far less ap-
plauded such offences, against propriety and decency. Throughout his pieces he has
shewn a wonderful versatility of talent, rising at once from coarse rusticity, to the
most sublime and elegant expressions in some of his choruses.—Much of his wit and
satire has not the same point and keenness to modern readers, as it must have had to
an Athenian audience, who knew the characters and objects against whom they were
levelled. Without a complete knowledge of all the.facts alluded to, and the private
history of the personages whom be attacked, it is impossible to form a fair estimate of
his powers of wit and ridicule. What to an Athenian would have appeared pointed
and severe, may to us seem insipid and puerile. But it cannot be denied that many of
his parodies, however well executed, are unjust and malicious ; his allegories, with
scarcely any point of resemblance, were intended to vilify and degrade ; and his per-
sonal satire, to gratify the licentious levelling tempers of his patrons,