Interpretación de las manifestaciones rupestres de Chakatira

It is my contention that the Clouds is reflecting more than an awareness among the Athenian citizen population that they were increasingly listening to rhetorically polished speeches as they sat on the jury-benches. Within the Clouds, an analysis is advanced of the consequences of utilising rhetoric in the judicial sphere. Through the activities o f Strepsiades, the Worse Argument and Pheidippides, the utilisation o f rhetoric is presented as ultimately leading to the negation of justice. Furthermore, this outcome is strongly censured and condemned through the dramatic momentum of the final third of the play and the moral epithets and associations that are attached to the practitioners of rhetoric.

S ee A r.fr.2 0 5 , 233 K -A . A t Ai.Nub.52%-9, the ch o ru s p resu m e th a t th e e a rlie r su c c e ss o f th e

Babyloniansw ould h a v e guaranteed the success o f the first version o f th e Clouds,giv en th eir sim ilarity o f them es (see D over (1968a) 166, Som m erstein (1982) 187).

59 ArA cA.685-89.

^9 T h e p ara b asis goes o n to rec o u n t the prosecution o f th e elderly T h u cy d id es so n o f M e lesias by the yo u n g E u ath lu s and also refers to youthful A lcibiades as a contem porary young p ro sec u to r (A r.A c/i.703- 18 w ith S o m m e rste in (1980) 191-3). E uathlus an d A lcib iad e s a re d e sc rib e d as XaXoç (705, 71 6 ), A lcib ia d e s as eOpOnpcoKioç (716 cf. Ar.A/w6.1089-90) an d y o u n g p ro sec u to rs g en e rally as àVSpeç noi/ripoi (700). O n the relationship betw een Ac/j.665-718 and the w ider c o n tex t o f th e p lay , see B o w ie (1982) 3 5 -7 , H ubbard (1991) 53-6.

O n th e Knights,se e p.4 2 above and pp. 121-2 below. O n the Wasps, see pp. 129-30. S ee p p .4 1 -2 on P e ise ta e n is’ rhetorical ab ih d es, w hich he uses to persuade the B irds to bvàld Nephelokokkugia.

5: The Clouds, Rhetoric and Judicial Practice 102

Strepsiades is presented throughout as fully cognisant that his brilliant idea to use rhetoric in the jury court entails the negation of justice. He admits at several points that he is not only desiring to learn an argument which is ‘worse (fiTTCOv)’ but which is actually an ‘unjust argument (6 âôiKOç He longs to ‘twist justice (QTpeijJOÔLKeîv)’ and to argue against ‘all the just things (n a v ia tq ÔLKaïaj’.^^ He has no compunction about his non-payment to his creditors of legitimately acquired debts.64 Indeed, the comic hero’s name and the series of puns generated around it underscore Strepsiades’ commitment to evade his debts: Strepsiades ‘the twister’ is bent on ‘twisting’ his way out of the debts he owes his creditors.65 From Strepsiades’ perspective, the consequence of deploying rhetorical ability in the jury court is to negate justice, in this case, to his own advantage. Secondly, as has been described above (see Chapter 5.1), the Worse Argument’s rhetorical ability rests on a substructure of intellectual relativism. At the heart of this relativism is a rejection of ‘the customary values and justified pleas (ol vopoL kqi al 6iKai)’ in favour of the demands o f ‘nature ((puaLç)’.66 With this intellectual framework in place, the Worse Argument can reason that adultery is not an unjust course of action because the satisfaction of nature has become the paramount arbiter of actions.67 The audience now sees that rhetorical ability, founded upon intellectual relativism, results not only in the negation o f justice in the jury court, but in the wider moral arena. Thirdly in the agon between Strepsiades and Pheidippides, the later uses his recently acquired rhetorical skills to invert traditional norms of justice. Pheidippides repeatedly maintains that father-abuse is just, much to Strepsiades’ incredulity.68 Pheidippides then embarks on a series o f verbally skilful and relativistic arguments to demonstrate to Strepsiades and the chorus that

62 O n th ree o cc asio n s, S trepsiades adm its that le arn in g the W o rse A rg u m e n t is ac tu a lly a n ‘aSiKog

KoyoC (M .N u b.ll6, 657, 884-5). S om m erstein com m ents on the u se o f this term as follow s; ‘by u sin g it, he ad m its th a t is p la n fo r avoiding p aym ent o f his debts is im m o ral an d fra u d u le n t (S o m m erste in (1982) 166).

63 S ee Aki.Nub.434 a n d 888, Strepsiades tells S ocrates th a t P heid ip p id es m u st b e able to sp e ak a g a in st

‘navTQ TQ SiKQia’.

64 A r.# w 6 .117-8, 24 4 -5 , 434, 7 38-9, 1154-66, 1250-52 (rebuttal to F irst C red ito r), 1283-4 & 1292-97 (rebuttal to S econd Creditor).

65 S ee th e references to the verb aipecpeu/ and its cognates w hich is applied in referen ce to S trepsiades a t Aki.Nub.36, 88 , 4 3 4 , 450, 776, 792, 1455 together w ith D over (1968a) xxv a n d S o m m erste in (1982) 161.

66 S ee ArJVwZ). 1038-40 and p.94. T his relativism can also be seen in the W o rse A rg u m e n t’s claim that ju s tic e d o es n o t ex ist (see 902-6). In contrast, the B e tte r A rg u m en t espouses ‘l a SiKoia Xeycov ’ (900)

an d rem em bers w ith fondness the days w hen such argum ents flourished (961-2).

67 Ar.A^w6.1075-82. F o r the W orse arg u m en t’s reputation that his pupils le a m a n ‘qSlkoç Àoyoç’, see p.92.

68 F o r P h e id ip p id e s’ statem ents that father-beating is ju s t (ei/ 6iK%. ôikqloç), see Aki.Nub.1332, 1377-9, 1405; fo r S tre p sia d es’ indignant response, see 1333, 1338-41,1380.

father-abuse is indeed a just course of a c t i o n . B y the end of the agon, Strepsiades is forced to concede that: ‘It seems to me, my contemporaries, that he (i.e. Pheidippides) speaks just things, and I think we should concede what is reasonable to these people. For it is fair that we (i.e. the older generation) weep if we do not do just t h i n g s . T h e theme of justice and its relation to rhetoric resurfaces repeatedly throughout the Clouds. The utilisation o f rhetoric by Strepsiades, the Worse Argument and Pheidippides ultimately leads to a negation of justice. This outcome is strongly censured and condemned, firstly in the dramatic momentum of the remaining third of the play and secondly in the moral vocabulary and associations which are consistently attached to the practitioners of rhetoric.

The sharp contrast in dramatic momentum of the final third of the Clouds with the preceding two-thirds provides a means to censure this outcome o f deploying rhetoric. The dramatic structure o f the preceding two-thirds o f the play could be labelled as a typical comic escapist fantasy, similar to that of the Acharnians, Peace or

Birds.'^^ The hero is oppressed by an aspect of contemporary society: in this case by his

creditors and the debts that his son’s equine affliction have g e n e r a t e d . T h e hero conceives o f a brilliant idea: here, the acquisition of rhetorical skills which guarantee judicial success and thus liberation from his oppressive creditors.^^ The hero pursues

his brilliant idea, in spite of opposition: in this case, Pheidippides’ unwillingness to pursue and his own inability to grasp rhetorical training.'^^ The realisation o f his brilliant idea heralds a new era of gratification and self-assertion for the hero, in this instance by feasting and by the total disregard and abuse of his creditors when they threaten or serve s u m m o n s e s . I f the Clouds were to finish at this point while the chorus exited dancing, then one might conclude that such a dramatic structure presents

S ee A r. Nub.l40S-35 w ith specific references to 8iKaioç a t 1411 an d 1419. F o r th e c h o ru s ’ dem an d th a t P h eid ip p id es proves to them that father-abuse is ‘SiKOLog’, see 1397-8.

[iei/. coi/5peç n^iK eç, 8oKeT KeYCLv 8iKaia, Kaiioiye auYX.copeTi/ 8okéÎ ToxjiOLat lànieiKTi-

K\a^iv Yap Tiuâç eiKoç è a i ', pu p p 8iKaia 8pcoiJiei/’ (Ar.A^wfc. 1437-9 tr. S o m m erstein , adapted). N ote th e p lay o n 8iKaioç in this passage.

O n a g en eralised A ristophanic p lo t structure an d the p lo t o f the Peace, see pp.39-40. C o m p are p.91 w ith ArAch.l-39 fo r exam ple.

S ee p p .91-3 and com pare w ith Ar.Ac/j. 174-203.

In itia lly P h eid ip p id es refuses to enter the Phrontisterion {A x.N ub.lS-\3\), so S tre p sia d e s en ro ls h im s e lf, b u t fails to co m p re h en d the course o f in stru c tio n (78 3 -7 9 0 ) an d so fin a lly P h e id ip p id e s is p e rsu a d e d to en ter (814-88). D icaeopolis is o p p o se d by the ch o ru s o f A ch arn ian s fro m rea lisin g h is b rilh a n t id e a o f a private peace w ith Sparta (see A r Ac/i.204-627).

F eastin g ; Ax.NubA2\2-3\ abuse o f creditors: 1214-1302. In resp o n se to S tre p sia d es’ p h y sical abuse, the second creditor cries ‘w itn e ss’ (1297) and describes S trepsiades’ actions as hubris (1299), suggesting th a t h e is c o n sid erin g b ringing a graphe hubreos ag a in st S trepsiades (see S o m m erste in (1982) 223). S tre p sia d e s is o f c o u rse now to tally o blivious to th e th re a t o f su ch le g al a c tio n s (1 2 9 9 -1 3 0 3 ). S ee p .2 8 n .3 9 o n graphe hubreos. In com parison, see D icaeo p o lis’ entry in to a fantastical p arad ise o f feasting (A rA c/j. 1085-1142) and the banishm ent o f his adversaries (910-28, 1014-68).

5: The Clouds, Rhetoric and Judicial Practice 104

Strepsiades’ utilisation o f rhetoric to guarantee judicial success remains uncensored7^ However, the Clouds ends not on Strepsiades’ triumph, but veers sharply towards tragedy as the comic hero’s brilliant idea rebounds on him with an overwhelming violence.

The reversal of Strepsiades’ fortunes is sudden and severe in the final third of the play. He suffers the outrage and humiliation of being beaten by his own son,'^'^ who then proceeds to transgress further by openly discussing his father’s death and by contemplating violence against his own mother.^^ Strepsiades is left nursing his bruises and wishing a state-criminal’s death upon the son who was to have been his salvation.'^^ Fundamental social norms are transgressed, not in the hero’s favour, as in the scene with his creditors, but to his detriment. Furthermore, Strepsiades is not only subjected to filial violence but is forced to concede by Pheidippides that father-beating is just (see p. 103 above). It is made very clear that Pheidippides’ violence towards his father and its justification is a direct result of the education he received at the Phrontisterion. Pheidippides comments that: ‘for I, when I used to devote my attention only to chariot- racing, I was not able to say three words before making an error. Now, since this man himself stopped all that and I am familiar with subtle ideas, arguments and thoughts, I think that I can prove that it is just to beat your father’ while Strepsiades adds that: ‘I certainly have had you taught, by Zeus my good man, to argue against the just things, if indeed you intend to convince us of this, that it is just and right for the father to be beaten by his scms.’Bi This connection can also be seen in the extent to which the structure of agon between Strepsiades and Pheidippides mirrors the agon between the

two logoi,^^ and in Pheidippides’ adoption of the Worse Argument’s delight in morally

negative epithets and his relativistic intellectual f r a m e w o r k . I t is almost impossible

S ee p 9 0 n .2 o n the tw o versions o f the Clouds an d M acD ow ell (1995) 145 fo r the su g g e stio n th a t the firs t v e rsio n en d ed a t this point. S uch a la ck o f censure is q u ite no rm al a t th e e n d o f a co m ed y . F o r ex a m p le D icaeopolis retains his ‘selfish ’ m onopoly o f p eace (see previous no te), P h ilo cleo n is le ft to his ca v o rtin g exp lo its (Ar. Vigjp. 1474-1537) an d P e ise ta e n is’ w anton se lf-a g g ra n d isem en t is p ra ise d a t the en d o f th e Birds (Ar.Av. 1706-65).

77 ArJVwh. 1353-76.

78 Ai.Nub. 1435-6, 1443. R eckford (1976) 108-110 on the shocking n ature o f P h e id ip p id e s’ su g g estio n s an d D o v e r (1974) 2 73-4 on the im portance o f care o f parents in traditional m orality.

79 Ar.A^wh. 1447-51. S tre p sia d es su g g e sts th a t P h eid ip p id es m ig h t as w ell th ro w h im s e lf in to the B a ra th ro n to g e th e r w ith S ocrates and the W o rse A rg u m en t, th e B a ra th ro n b ein g a g u lly in to w h ich c o n d e m n e d state-crim inals w ere throw n (see H dt.7.133, P l.G org.516d-e, Xen.Hell.l.7.20).

eyw yap ore p eu inniK^i toi/ i/o w povi] npoaeix o i/, ouo' ai/ i p i ' e in e iv pnuiaO' oioç i ' rii/ n p ii/ è ^ a p a p T € Îv vxji/l 5', eneiSfi p' oijToal xoijTCOi/ enaxjaei/ a u io ç , y i/w p a iç ÀerrTaTç kqI Xoyoïç

Çui/eipL KOI p e p ip i/a iç , c i p a i 8i8aEeii/ wç SfKQioy to v n a ie p o KoA.a{eii/’ (Ar.A^M^.1401-05).

‘e8 i6 aC ap n i/ p e i/io i ae vn Ai', ù> peX e, lo îa ii/ Sikqiglq 6i/TiXeyEii/, ei t q u t q ye peA.A.eiç à i/a n e ia e ii/, œç Slkgloi/ kqI KaÀoi/ toi/ naxepa xunxeaO ' eaxli/ uno xœi/ xiiecoi/’ (Ar.A^wfe. 1338-41).

S ee D o v e r (1968a) 247-8.

D e lig h t in m orally n egative epithets: com pare A r.//w h.908-15 w ith 1327-30; re la tiv istic in te lle ctu al fram ew ork: com pare 8 89-95 w ith 1444-5 and 901-7 (on the non -ex isten ce o f ju s tic e ) w ith 1408-19 (on sons b e a tin g fathers).

not to conclude that Strepsiades’ tragedy is a direct consequence o f his own desire to escape his debts by pursuing a rhetorical education. Any doubts that the audience may have in this regard are dispelled by the pronouncements of the chorus in the closing scenes of the play.

Enlightenment comes to Strepsiades himself through the chorus, who inform him that his pursuit of rhetoric to evade the payment of his debts is the cause o f his tragedy. In an unprecedented move, the comic chorus are transformed into dei ex m achina, giving their pronouncements a unique a u t h o r i t y . J u s t before the agon between Strepsiades and Pheidippides, the chorus foreshadows Strepsiades’ tragedy, proclaiming that he has ‘fallen in love with wicked things (épâv TTpoYliâTüv (pXaupCûv)’, that his attempt to evade his debts is ‘evil (KOKog)’ and that he may soon regret the training he has orchestrated for his son.^^ When Strepsiades appeals to the Clouds, having been beaten by his son, they inform him that he is responsible for his own tragedy because: ‘you yourself turned to evil things’. T h e y reveal to him that it is they themselves who encouraged him along this disastrous pathway so he might leam to fear the gods.^^ Strepsiades accepts these pronouncements of the Clouds as ‘difficult (TTOvnpa)’ but ‘just (ÔLKQLa)’ and admits that he should not have tried to evade his debts,^8 sentiments which are converted into action as he sets fire to the Phrontisterion (see Chapter 5.3 below). Thus we arrive at the heart of Strepsiades’ transgression: Strepsiades is censured not for his pursuit of rhetorical training, nor for his involvement in Judicial activity, but for his utilisation of rhetorical skill in the judicial sphere to evade the legitimate payment of d e b t s . T o a greater extent than any other play, the dramatic momentum of the final third of the C louds communicates a sustained message: the use of rhetoric in the jury courts to negate justice is condemned.

^ T h e ch o ru s o f C louds possesses a nebulous, cham elio n esq u e id e n tity th ro u g h o u t th e d ram a , w h ich en ab les A risto p h an es to transform them into dei ex machina a t th e e n d o f th e p la y (see D o v e r (1968a) Ixvi-lxx, H ub b ard (1991) 106-11 and Segal (1996b) 168-81).

Ar.7Vw6.1303-20. A t 1113-14, as P heidippides enters th e Phrontisterion, the chorus co m m en t th a t T th in k y o u w ill repent o f these things (oTiiai aoi la v T a u e ia u e K f ia e iv ) ’, w h ich is alm o st ce rtain ly a