TRĂBEA. [[Toga].]
TRĂGOEDIA (τραγῳδία), tragedy. (1) Greek. The tragedy of the ancient Greeks as well as their comedy confessedly originated in the worship of the god Dionysus. The peculiarity which most strikingly distinguishes the Greek tragedy from that of modern times, is the lyrical or choral part. This was the offspring of the dithyrambic and choral odes from which, as applied to the worship of Dionysus, Greek tragedy took its rise. The name of Tragedy (τραγῳδία) is probably derived from the goatlike appearance of the Satyrs who sang or acted with mimetic gesticulations (ὄρχησις) the old Bacchic songs, with Silenus, the constant companion of Dionysus, for their leader. The Dionysian dithyrambs were sometimes of a gay and at other times of a mournful character: it was from the latter that the stately and solemn tragedy of the Greeks arose. Great improvements were introduced in the dithyramb by Arion, a contemporary of Periander. Before his time the dithyramb was sung in a wild and irregular manner; but he is said to have invented the Cyclic chorus, by which we are to understand that the Dithyramb was danced by a chorus of fifty men round an altar. The choral Dithyrambic songs prevailed to some extent, as all choral poetry did, amongst the Dorians of the Peloponnesus; whence the choral element of the Attic tragedy was always written in the Dorian dialect, thus showing its origin. The lyrical poetry was, however, especially popular at Sicyon and Corinth. In the latter city Arion made his improvements; in the former “tragic choruses,” i.e. dithyrambs of a sad and plaintive character, were very ancient. From the more solemn Dithyrambs then, as improved by Arion, ultimately sprang the dramatic tragedy of Athens, somewhat in the following manner. The choruses were under the direction of a leader or exarchus, who, it may be supposed, came forward separately, and whose part was sometimes taken by the poet himself. We may also conjecture that the exarchus in each case led off by singing or reciting his part in a solo, and that the chorus dancing round the altar then expressed their feelings of joy or sorrow at his story, representing the perils and sufferings of Dionysus, or some hero, as it might be. The subjects of this Dithyrambic tragedy were not, however, always confined to Dionysus. Even Arion wrote Dithyrambs, relating to different heroes, a practice in which he was followed by succeeding poets. It is easy to conceive how the introduction of an actor or speaker independent of the chorus might have been suggested by the exarchs coming forward separately and making short off-hand speeches, whether learnt by heart beforehand, or made on the spur of the moment. [[Chorus].] But it is also possible, if not probable, that it was suggested by the rhapsodical recitations of the epic and gnomic poets formerly prevalent in Greece: the gnomic poetry being generally written in Iambic verse, the metre of the Attic dialogue. This however is certain, that the union of the Iambic dialogue with the lyrical chorus took place at Athens under Pisistratus, and that it was attributed to Thespis, a native of Icaria, one of the country demes or parishes of Attica where the worship of Dionysus had long prevailed. The alteration made by him, and which gave to the old tragedy a new and dramatic character, was very simple but very important. He introduced an actor, as it is recorded, for the sake of giving rest to the chorus, and independent of it, in which capacity he probably appeared himself, taking various parts in the same piece, under various disguises, which he was enabled to assume by means of linen masks, the invention of which is attributed to him. Now as a chorus, by means of its leader, could maintain a dialogue with the actor, it is easy to see how with one actor only a dramatic action might be introduced, continued, and concluded, by the speeches between the choral songs expressive of the joy or sorrow of the chorus at the various events of the drama. With respect to the character of the drama of Thespis there has been much doubt: some writers, and especially Bentley, have maintained that his plays were all satyrical and ludicrous, i.e. the plot of them was some story of Bacchus, the chorus consisted principally of satyrs, and the argument was merry. But perhaps the truth is that in the early part of his career Thespis retained the satyrical character of the older tragedy, but afterwards inclined to more serious compositions, which would almost oblige him to discard the Satyrs from his choruses. That he did write serious dramas is intimated by the titles of the plays ascribed to him, as well as by the character of the fragments of Iambic verse quoted by ancient writers as his. It is evident that the introduction of the dialogue must also have caused an alteration in the arrangement of the chorus, which could not remain cyclic or circular, but must have been drawn up in a rectangular form about the thymele or altar of Bacchus in front of the actor, who was elevated on a platform or table (ἐλεός), the forerunner of the stage. The lines of Horace (Ar. Poet. 276):—
“Dicitur et plaustris vexisse poemata Thespis,
Quae canerent agerentque peruncti faecibus ora”—
are founded on a misconception of the origin of the Attic tragedy, and the tale about the waggons of Thespis probably arose out of a confusion of the waggon of the comedian Susarion with the platform of the Thespian actor. The first representation of Thespis was in B.C. 535. His immediate successors were the Athenian Choerilus and Phrynichus, the former of whom represented plays as early as B.C. 524. Phrynichus was a pupil of Thespis, and gained his first victory in the dramatic contests B.C. 511. In his works, the lyric or choral element still predominated over the dramatic, and he was distinguished for the sweetness of his melodies, which in the time of the Peloponnesian war were very popular with the admirers of the old style of music. The first use of female masks is also attributed to him, and he so far deviated from the general practice of the Attic tragedians as to write a drama on a subject of contemporary history, the capture of Miletus by the Persians, B.C. 494.—We now come to the first writer of Satyrical dramas, Pratinas of Phlius, a town not far from Sicyon, and which laid claim to the invention of tragedy as well as comedy. For some time previously to this poet, and probably as early as Thespis, tragedy had been gradually departing more and more from its old characteristics, and inclining to heroic fables, to which the chorus of Satyrs was not a fit accompaniment. But the fun and merriment caused by them were too good to be lost. Accordingly the Satyrical drama, distinct from the recent and dramatic tragedy, but suggested by the sportive element of the old Dithyramb, was founded by Pratinas, who however appears to have been surpassed in his own invention by Choerilus. It was always written by tragedians, and generally three tragedies and one Satyrical piece were represented together, which in some instances at least formed a connected whole, called a tetralogy (τετραλογία). The Satyrical piece was acted last, so that the minds of the spectators were agreeably relieved by a merry after-piece at the close of an earnest and engrossing tragedy. The distinguishing feature of this drama was the chorus of Satyrs, in appropriate dresses and masks, and its subjects seem to have been taken from the same class of the adventures of Bacchus and of the heroes as those of tragedy; but of course they were so treated and selected, that the presence of rustic satyrs would seem appropriate. In their jokes and drollery consisted the merriment of the piece; for the kings and heroes who were introduced into their company were not of necessity thereby divested of their epic and legendary character, though they were obliged to conform to their situation and suffer some diminution of dignity, from their position. Hence Horace (Ar. Poet. 231) says:—
“Effutire leves indigna Tragoedia versus
Intererit Satyris paulum pudibunda protervis.”—
alluding in the first line to the mythic or epic element of the Satyric drama, which he calls Tragoedia, and in the second representing it as being rather ashamed of its company. The “Cyclops” of Euripides is the only Satyric drama now extant.—The great improvements in tragedy were introduced by Aeschylus. This poet added a second actor, diminished the parts of the chorus, and made the dialogue the principal part of the action. He also availed himself of the aid of Agatharchus, the scene-painter, and improved the costume of his actors by giving them thick-soled boots (ἐμβάται), as well as the masks, which he made more expressive and characteristic. Horace (Ar. Poet. 278) thus alludes to his improvements:—
“personae pallaeque repertor honestae
Aeschylus, et modicis instravit pulpita tignis