Antiphanes Comicus fr. 189

μακάριόν ἐστιν ἡ τραγῳδία
ποίημα κατὰ πάντ’, εἴ γε πρῶτον οἱ λόγοι
ὑπὸ τῶν θεατῶν εἰσιν ἐγνωρισμένοι
πρὶν καί τιν’ εἰπεῖν, ὥσθ’ ὑπομνῆσαι μόνον
δεῖ τὸν ποητήν· Οἰδίπουν γάρ † φῶ, (5)
τὰ δ ̓ ἄλλα πάντ’ ἴσασιν· ὁ πατὴρ Λάιος,
μήτηρ Ἰοκάστη, θυγατέρες, παῖδες τίνες,
τί πείσεθ’ οὗτος, τί πεπόηκεν. ἂν πάλιν
εἴπῃ τις Ἀλκμέωνα, καὶ τὰ παιδία
πάντ’ εὐθὺς εἴρηχ’, ὅτι μανεὶς ἀπέκτονε (10)
τὴν μητέρ’, ἀγανακτῶν δ’ Ἄδραστος εὐθέως
ἥξει πάλιν τ’ ἄπεισι – x – ⏑ –
⟨ἔπει⟩θ ̓ ὅταν μηθὲν δύνωντ’ εἰπεῖν ἔτι,
κομιδῇ δ’ ἀπειρήκωσιν ἐν τοῖς δράμασιν,
αἴρουσιν ὥσπερ δάκτυλον τὴν μηχανήν, (15)
καὶ τοῖς θεωμένοισιν ἀποχρώντως ἔχει.
ἡμῖν δὲ ταῦτ’ οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλὰ πάντα δεῖ
εὑρεῖν, ὀνόματα καινά, – x – ⏑ –
x – ⏑ – κἄπειτα τὰ † διῳκημένα
πρότερον, τὰ νῦν παρόντα, τὴν καταστροφήν, (20)
τὴν εἰσβολήν. ἂν ἕν τι τούτων παραλίπῃ
Χρέμης τις ἢ Φείδων τις, ἐκσυρίττεται·
Πηλεῖ δὲ πάντ’ ἔξεστι καὶ Τεύκρῳ ποεῖν

iambic trimeter

1 ⟨εἶτ ̓ οὐ⟩ Reinhardt || 2 εἴ γε Ath. ACE : ἧς γε Hirschig | πρῶτον Ath. ACE : πρότερον Wilamowitz || 4 ὥσθ’ Ath. CE : ὥς Ath. A || 5 γάρ φῶ Ath. ACE : γ ̓ ἂν φῶ ⟨μόνον⟩ Kaibel (⟨μόνον⟩ iam Dindorf) : γὰρ φ⟨ήμ ̓ ἐγ⟩ώ Peppink : γ ̓ ἂν φῇ ⟨μόνον⟩ Coulon (φῇ iam Richards) || 5-6 γὰρ ⟨ἄν γε⟩ φῶ, / καὶ τἄλλα Meineke (γὰρ ⟨ἄν γε⟩ φῶ iam Musurus) : γὰρ ⟨ἂν⟩ φ⟨ράσ⟩ω, / τά γ ̓ ἄλλα Kock || 9 Ἀλκμέωνα Dindorf : Ἀλκμαίωνα Ath. ACE || 10 εἴρηχ’ Grotius : εἴρηκ(εν) Ath. ACE | μανεὶς ἀπέκτονε Ath. ACE : μανεῖτ ̓ ἀπεκτονὼς Immisch || 11 δὲ Ἄδραστος Ath. A : δὲ δράσας Kock || 12-13 ταπεισιθ’ ὅταν Ath. A : suppl. Casaubon : τ’ ἄπεισιν, ⟨εἶθ ̓ ἥξει πάλιν, / ἔπει⟩θ’ ὅταν Herwerden : τ’ ἄπεισιν, ⟨ὅθεν ἦλθεν πάλαι, / ἔπει⟩ θ’ ὅταν Naber || 14 ἀπειρήκωσιν Dindorf : ἀπειρηκόσιν Ath. A || 18-19 lac. indic. Kaibel, quam e.g. sic explevit ⟨καινὰ πράγματα, / καινοὺς λόγους⟩ || 19 διῳχημένα Herwerden : διωκημένα Ath. ACE : διακείμενα Richards : τᾠκονομημένα Kock || 21 ἂν Ath. ACE : κἂν Wilamowitz | παραλίπῃ Ath. CE : παραλείπῃ Ath. A || 22 Φείδ(ων) Ath. CE : φιδων Ath. A || 23 ταῦτ’ Ath. A : πάντ’ Ellebodius | ἔξεστι Ath. BQMPMus : ἔξεστιν Ath. A

Since, dear Timocrates, you continually ask for conversations among the learned banqueters, because you think we invent new things, we will remind you of what Antiphanes says in Poetry along the lines of the following:

Blessed poetry is tragedy
in every way: first of all, the subjects
are well known to the audience
before anyone speaks, and the poet
has only to remind them. For † I say Oedipus                      (5)
and they know everything else: the father is Laius,
the mother Jocasta, who the daughters and sons are,
what he will suffer, what he has done. If someone
then says Alcmeone, he immediately said
also all the sons, that mad he killed                                      (10)
his mother, and that at once enraged Adrastus
will come and again leave – x – ⏑ –
then they can say no more
and have absolutely nothing more to say in the dramas,
they lift the machine like a finger                                         (15)
and that is enough for the spectators.
But we do not have these things, but have to
invent everything: new names, – x – ⏑ –
x – ⏑ – and then what † happened before,
the present situation, the ending,                                          (20)
the proem. If a Chremes or a Pheidon neglects
even one of these points, he is whistled at,
but Peleus and Teucer are allowed to do everything.

The fragment is handed down in the Deipnosophists of Athenaeus of Naucratis (VI 222c-223a), within a short section in which Athenaeus compares his own narration to tragedy, as both only have to recount known material (the dialogues of the diners/myths), rather than invent new stories. Fr. 189 K.-A. is the first in a list of three comic fragments from the 4th-3rd century BC (followed by Diphil. fr. 29 K.-A. and Timocl. fr. 6 K.-A.). The text in iambic trimeter can probably be traced back to the prologue, spoken perhaps by the personification of Comedy or Dramatic Poetry or by a character speaking on behalf of the comic poets in general (see now Olson 2022: 340, 341), and constitutes a ‘lament’ of the advantages tragedy has over comedy.
In vv. 1-12, the speaker expresses the consideration that tragic poets are to be considered fortunate in that they have themes, motifs and characters from the mythical and epic tradition known to the audience; thus, the latter, as soon as they hear a name (e.g. Oedipus, Alcmeon, with reference to the sagas of the Labdacids and Epigones, cf. Po. 1435a17-22), they understand how the plot will develop and end. For this reason, tragic poets have a decidedly greater advantage than their fellow comic playwrights.
In vv. 13-16 mention is made of the mēchanē, a favourite tool of tragic performances from the end of the 5th century BC, particularly in the theatre of Euripides: the flying machine allowed the quick resolution of complicated plots through the deus ex machina, i.e. the intervention of a character belonging to the divine dimension who appeared in a flashy twist to resolve the situation (cf. Arist. Po. 1454a37-1454b5). Tragic poets, therefore, when they can no longer go on with the plot, give up and resort to easy solutions (cf. Pl. Crat. 452d, adesp. com. fr. 1089, 12-13 K.-A.). This is followed by a contemptuous remark to the audience, who only need this to be satisfied with the performance.
In vv. 17-23, the speaker sets out the efforts that, in contrast, comic poets must make in creating their works; we move on to a defence of the originality necessary for comedy (Ar. Nu. 534-562 is a clear example of this) in the face of the convenience of composing tragedy. Firstly, the playwrights have to invent everything from scratch (names, topics, themes and motifs); secondly, since they do not have the cultural background that tragedy has, they are pressed not only by the need to explain all the facts and background so that the audience can follow and understand the plot, but also by the need to take into account their tastes and expectations (cf. Pl. Lg. 659b-c, 700e). All this is to prevent the staging of the comic play from being a resounding failure. The fragment of Antiphanes concludes with the bitter (or supposedly so) statement that, unlike heroes as well-known as Peleus and Teucer, who are allowed to neglect explanations and clarifications of all kinds (cf. Diph. fr. 29, 4-5 K.- A.), for comic heroes like Chremes and Pheidon (names that can be found in Aristophanes’ Clouds and Ecclesiazuse respectively) such a situation is practically an aporia, since they risk suffering the punishment of the dissatisfied audience.

R. KASSEL – C. AUSTIN (edd.), Poetae Comici Graeci, II: Agathenor-Aristonymus, Berolini-Novi Eboraci 1991, 418-419; S. D. OLSON, Antiphanes. Zakynthios-Progonoi. Translation and Commentary , Fragmenta Comica 19.2, Göttingen 2022, 337-348.

A. ROSTAGNI, Da Aristofane e da Antifane ad Aristotele, in Studi in onore di Gino Funaioli, Roma, Angelo Signorelli, 1955, 60-75; O. BIANCO, Il frammento della Ποίησις di Antifane ed un prologo anonimo, «RCCM» 3, 1961, 91-98; U. REINHARDT, Mythologische Beispiele in der Neuen Komödie (Menander, Plautus, Terenz), I, Diss. Mainz, 1974, 101-105; J.L. SANCHIS LLOPIS, Testimonios polémicos de la tragedia postclásica en la comedia del s. IV a. C., in Primeras Jornadas Internacionales de Teatro Griego, Valencia, Nau Llibres, 1995, 75-90; I. AMOUROUX, Antiphane et les themes de la comedie moyenne, Thèse de doctorat, Université Paul-Valéry-Montpellier, 1995, 149-166; D. DEL CORNO, Come si deve fare una commedia: programmi e polemiche nel teatro Ateniese, in F. Conca (a c. di), Ricordando Raffaele Cantarella: miscellanea di studi, «Quaderni di Acme» 36, Bologna, Cisalpino, 1999, 119-133; I.M. KONSTANTAKOS, This Craft of Comic Verse: Greek Comic Poets on Comedy, «Archaiognosia» 12, 2004, 11-53, in part. 21-30; S.D. OLSON, Broken Laughter: Select Fragments of Greek Comedy, Edited with Introduction, Commentary, and Translation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007, 172-175 (D6); J. HANINK, Literary Evidence for New Tragic Production: The View from the Fourth Century, in E. Csapo, H.R. Goette, J.R. Green, P. Wilson (eds.), Greek Theatre in the Fourth Century B.C., Berlin-Boston, De Gruyter, 2014, 197-199; V.L. NAVARRO MARTÍNEZ, Comedia vs. Tragedia: el fragmento 189 K.-A. de Antífanes y la banalización del género trágico, in M.F. Silva, M.C. Fialho, J.L. Brandão (edd.), O Livro do Tempo: Escritas e reescritas. Teatro Greco-Latino e a sua recepção, I, Coimbra, Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, 2016, 245-256.

comedy, mesē, Antiphanes, Poiēsis, Athenaeus of Naucratis, Deipnosophists, tragedy, mēchanē, iterary reflection, poetic rivalry.

[Vivian Navarro]