[204] It may be remarked in passing that this ideal character of the “New” Comedy is not, as a rule, sufficiently recognised. People speak as if they thought that the stories in Menander, for instance, represented the ordinary events of life at Athens at the end of the fourth century. It need hardly, perhaps, be remarked that it would be about as reasonable to endeavour to get an idea of the ordinary life of English people at the present day by studying an Adelphi melodrama. As long as comedy at Athens confined itself to social satire, it is obvious that the social scenes it depicted must have been, even if somewhat burlesqued, yet, on the whole, true to life. When once it had abandoned this object, and began to aim at telling an exciting story, calculated to interest its audience in proportion to the strangeness and novelty of its dénouement, it is equally obvious that it must very soon have been compelled to abandon the ordinary affairs of everyday life. In taking over the business of the Epic, Comedy took with it the license of that form of composition and of its offspring, Tragedy. While no one will deny that incidents like those described by Menander may have occasionally taken place at Athens in the fourth century, just as some of them might conceivably take place in England at the present day, there can be hardly any real doubt that the stories of romantic comedy were as little true to the ordinary life of the time they professed to depict, as, say, the novel of Xenophon was to the ordinary life of the Roman provinces under the Antonines.
[205] It is true, of course, that the “New” Comedy took over from its predecessor certain characters (e.g. the parasite or the cook) and certain other features, practically unchanged; but all this was confined to minor points of detail, and any similarity between the two forms of art which such transference of ready-made specialités may cause is a purely superficial one. The main subject of romantic comedy, and the treatment there of that main subject, are entirely distinct from everything that had gone before.
[206] Thus the Megarian Comedy dates from the expulsion of Theagenes (Arist. Poet. iii. 5), while the Athenian reappears, after a silence of some 70 years, on the expulsion of Hippias.
[207] The titles of the plays attributed to Chionides do not in themselves contradict this view. The Heroes describes life as it would be in a state engaged in war, but there is no reason to believe that the play discussed any real phase of any contemporary war. The Persae, too, to judge by its second title of Assyrii, was devoted rather to ridiculing Persian customs than to dealing with the Persian War. In like manner the Lydi of Magnes introduced the Lydian dances to Athens (cp. Hesych. λυδίζων, χορεύων, διὰ τοὺς Αυδούς sc. Μάγνητος), while the Barbatistae appears to have been equally aimed at the aesthetic tastes of some part of the community. Titles again, like Ornithes, Batrachi, and Psenes, give no suggestion of political motives, any more than does the Satyri of Ecphantides.
[208] τῷ χαρίεντι τῆς κωμῳδίας τὸ ὠφέλιμον προσέθηκε τοὺς κακῶς πράττοντας διαβάλλων καὶ ὥσπερ δημοσίᾳ μάστιγι τῇ κωμῳδίᾳ μαστίζων (Anon. de Com. p. 32). οὐ γὰρ ὥσπερ ὁ Ἀριστοφάνης ἐπιτρέχειν τὲν χάριν τοῖς σκώμμασι ποιεῖ ... ἀλλ’ ἁπλῶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν γυμνῇ κεφαλῇ τίθησι τὰς βλασφημίας κατὰ τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων (Platon. de Com. p. 27).
[209] τοιοῦτος οὖν ἐστὶν ὁ τῆς μέσης κωμῳδίας τύπος, οἷός ἐστιν ... οἱ Ὀδυσσεῖς Κρατίνου (Platon. de Com. p. 34). οἱ γοῦν Ὀδυσσεῖς Κρατίνου οὐδενὸς ἐπιτίμησιν ἔχουσι, διασυρμὸν δὲ τῆς Ὀδυσσείας Ὁμήρου (ibid. p. 35).
The elaborate details as to cookery in the fragments of this play are also very suggestive of one of the features of “Middle” Comedy.
[210] It is further to be observed that, though Cratinus nearly always indulges in personal abuse, this abuse is by no means necessarily directed against political characters. Any person, whatever his capacity, who was sufficiently well known to be recognised by the Athenian audience, was liable to be the butt of his scurrility.
[211] Arist. Poet. v. 5. As Meineke (Com. Fr. i. 59) well expresses it: “Cratetem primum apud Athenienses exstitisse qui Epicharmi exemplo comicae poeseos materiam a singulorum hominum irrisione ad generales morum notationes rerumque descriptiones traduceret.” Crates thus differs from Cratinus in that his plays were not political, while he differs from the earlier comedians in that he avoided personalities and treated of general subjects, and this is the meaning of the word πρῶτος in Aristotle, l.c.
[212] ἐζήλωκε Κράτητα. Anon. de Com. p. 29.