Chapter V · THE ACTORS (continued 2)

Such being the requirements of the Greek stage, it was necessary that the actors should receive a musical education as elaborate as that of a professional singer in modern times. Cicero informs us that the Greek tragic actors spent many years in the training of their voices, and used to test them, before each performance, by running over all their notes from the highest to the lowest.[810] They had to be careful and abstemious in their diet, as excess in eating and drinking was found to be inconsistent with the possession of a good voice.[811] The importance attached to this particular quality in the actor’s art was not always beneficial in its results. Actors were sometimes inclined to violate good taste by intruding into their performances mere exhibitions of skill in the manipulation of the voice. They were ready to catch the applause of the populace by startling effects, such as imitations of the rushing of streams, the roaring of seas, and the cries of animals.[812] Moreover, it was a common fault among the ancient actors that, as a result of excessive training, their voices sounded artificial and unnatural. There was a special term to denote the forced tone of voice which was caused by too much exercise. Aristotle remarks that one of the principal excellences of the tragic actor Theodorus was the thoroughly natural character of his delivery. Unlike other actors, he seemed to speak with his own voice.[813]

§ 9. Style of Greek Acting.

Both in tragic and comic acting a loud and exceedingly distinct utterance must have been a matter of necessity. But in comedy the tone of voice adopted appears, as was only natural, to have been much less sonorous than that of the tragic actors, and to have approached far more closely to the style of ordinary conversation.[814] In tragedy, on the other hand, it was the conventional practice to declaim the verses with a loud and ringing intonation, and to fill the theatre with a deep volume of sound. Ancient authors often refer to the sonorous utterances of the tragic stage.[815] With bad actors the practice would easily degenerate into mere bombast. Pollux mentions a series of epithets, such as ‘booming’ and ‘bellowing’, which were applied to actors guilty of such exaggeration. Socrates and Simylus, the tragic actors with whom Aeschines went on tour in the country districts of Attica, derived their nickname of ‘the Ranters’ from a fault of this kind.[816]

Another point which was required from ancient actors was great distinctness in the articulation of the separate words, and a careful observance of the rhythm and metre of the verses. In this respect the Athenians were a most exacting audience. Cicero speaks of their ‘refined and scrupulous ear’, their ‘sound and uncorrupted taste’.[817] Ancient audiences in general had a much keener ear for the melody of verse than is to be found in a modern theatre. A slovenly recitation of poetry, and a failure to emphasize the metre, would not have been tolerated by them. Cicero remarks on the fact that, though the mass of the people knew nothing about the theory of versification, their instinctive feeling for rhythmical utterance was wonderfully keen. He says that if an actor should spoil the metre in the slightest degree, by making a mistake about a quantity, or by dropping or inserting a syllable, there would be a storm of disapproval from the audience.[818] No such sensitiveness is to be found in modern theatres. It is common enough at the present day to hear blank verse declaimed as if it were prose. But among the ancient Greeks the feeling for correctness of rhythm in poetical recitations was just as instinctive as is the feeling for correctness of tune among ordinary musical audiences at the present time. If an actor in a Greek theatre made a slip in the metre of his verses, it was regarded in much the same way as a note out of tune would be regarded in a modern concert-room. As a consequence the mode of declamation practised on the ancient stage must have been much more rhythmical than anything we are now accustomed to, and the pauses and movements of the metre must have been much more clearly emphasized.

The use of appropriate gesture, in the case of Greek acting, was especially important, since facial expression was prevented by the mask, and the actor had to depend solely on the tones of his voice, and the effectiveness of his movements. In comedy, as might be expected, the gesticulation was of a free and unconstrained character, and is exemplified in numerous works of art. In tragedy, on the other hand, a more dignified style was adopted. The nature of the tragic actor’s dress was sufficient in itself to make a realistic type of acting impossible. Of course it is easy to exaggerate the cumbersomeness of the ancient costume. It would be a mistake to suppose that it hampered the actor’s limbs to such an extent as to prevent him moving about like an ordinary human being. Many passages in the ancient dramas prove that this was not the case. Actors could walk rapidly off the stage, or fly for refuge to an altar, or kneel down in supplication, without any difficulty.[819] They could even fall flat on the ground. Philoctetes sinks to the earth in a fainting-fit, overcome by the pain of his wound. Iolaus is knocked down by the Argive herald, while trying to protect the children of Hercules. Ajax throws himself on his sword, and Evadne flings herself from a rock on to the funeral pyre beneath. Hecuba, at the beginning of the Troades, lies stretched upon the earth in an agony of grief; and later on, when she hears the doom of Cassandra, she again falls prostrate.[820] But although, as we see from these examples, the tragic actor was not debarred from the ordinary use of his limbs, still the character of his dress must have made violent and impetuous movements a matter of great difficulty. Even if they had been easy, they would have been inconsistent with the tone of the tragic stage. The world of Greek tragedy was an ideal world of heroes and demigods, whose nature was grander and nobler than that of human beings. The realistic portrayal of ordinary human passions was foreign to the purpose of Greek tragedy. Scenes of physical violence or of abject prostration, such as those which have just been mentioned, are of rare occurrence. To be in harmony with this elevation of tone it was necessary that the acting should be dignified and self-restrained. Violent movements were usually avoided. A certain statuesque simplicity and gracefulness of pose accompanied the gestures of the tragic actor. On the long and narrow stage the figures were arranged in picturesque and striking groups, and the successive scenes in the play presented to the eye of the spectator a series of artistic tableaux. The representations of tragic scenes and personages in ancient works of art are characterized by a dignity and a repose which call to mind the creations of the sculptor. This sober and restrained style of acting was developed under the influence of Aeschylus and Sophocles during the great period of Attic tragedy. In later times a tendency towards realism and exaggeration in the gestures and the movements began to show itself. The actors of the fourth century were censured by many critics for having degraded the art of acting from its former high level, and for having introduced a style which was unworthy of the dignity of the tragic stage. Callippides was called an ape by the old actor Mynniscus because of the exaggerated vehemence of his manner.[821] But as the tragic costume, with its burdensome accompaniments, was retained with little alteration, it must have prevented any great advance in the direction of realism and violent gesticulation. The statuesque style of acting continued on the whole to be characteristic of the tragic stage, and was indeed the only proper style for Greek tragedy.

§ 10. The Actors’ Guild.

In the course of the fourth century the members of the theatrical profession at Athens, together with the performers in the various lyric and musical contests, formed themselves into a guild, for the purpose of protecting their interests and increasing their importance. The members of the guild were called The Artists of Dionysus. Poets, actors, and chorus-singers, trainers, and musicians all belonged to the guild. When it first came into existence is not known for certain. Sophocles is said to have formed a sort of literary club, which may have been the prototype of the guild; but it is possible that there was no connexion between the two. At any rate it was fully established in the time of Aristotle, by whom it is mentioned.[822]

The guild was of great value in maintaining and enforcing the various privileges of the members. These were very considerable. Musical and dramatic contests among the Greeks were confined almost entirely to the great religious festivals, and regarded as celebrations in honour of the gods. The professionals who took part in them were ministers engaged in the service of the gods, and their presence was necessary for the due performance of the various observances. To enable them to fulfil their engagements, many of the ordinary laws and regulations were relaxed. In the first place actors and musicians were permitted to travel through foreign and hostile states for the purpose of attending the festivals. Even in time of war their persons and property were ensured from violation. Owing to this custom the actors Aristodemus and Neoptolemus were able to travel frequently to and fro between Athens and Macedonia during the height of the war, and to assist materially in the negotiation of the peace.[823] In the second place actors and musicians claimed to be exempt from naval and military service, in order to pursue their professional avocations in Athens and elsewhere. In the time of Demosthenes this immunity from service was occasionally granted, but had not yet hardened into an invariable custom. Demosthenes mentions the cases of two musicians who were severely punished for avoiding military service. One of them was Sannio the chorus-trainer, and the other was Aristides the chorus-singer. Meidias also is said to have used the most strenuous exertions to prevent the chorus of Demosthenes from being exempted from service.[824] At this time, therefore, it seems that such immunity was sometimes granted and sometimes not. Later on the Guild of Artists of Dionysus succeeded in getting the Amphictyonic Council to pass a decree, by which the Athenians were bound as a religious obligation to grant exemption from military service to all members of the dramatic and musical profession. In the same decree the duty of allowing them a safe passage through their territories was enforced upon the Greek nation generally. This decree was renewed towards the beginning of the third century at the request of the Guild. A copy of the decree was engraved on stone and erected in the theatre at Athens, and has fortunately been preserved.[825] A translation of the more important passages will be of interest, as throwing light upon the position of the theatrical profession at Athens. It ran as follows: ‘It was resolved by the Amphictyonic Council that security of person and property, and exemption from arrest during peace and war, be ensured to the artists of Dionysus at Athens; ... that they enjoy that exemption from military service and that personal security which have previously been granted to them by the whole Greek nation; that the artists of Dionysus be exempt from naval and military service, in order that they may hold the appointed celebrations in honour of the gods at the proper seasons, and be released from other business, and consecrated to the service of the gods; that it be unlawful to arrest or seize an artist of Dionysus in time of war or peace, unless for debt due to a city or a private person; that, if an artist be arrested in violation of these conditions, the person who arrests him, and the city in which the violation of the law occurs, be brought to account before the Amphictyonic Council; that the immunity from service and personal security which are granted by the Amphictyonic Council to the artists of Dionysus at Athens be perpetual; that the secretaries cause a copy of this decree to be engraved on a stone pillar and erected in the temple, and another sealed copy of the same to be sent to Athens, in order to show the Athenians that the Amphictyonic Council is deeply concerned in the observance of religious duties at Athens, and is ready to accede to the requests of the artists of Dionysus, and to ratify their present privileges, and confer such other benefits upon them as may be possible.’ In this decree it is very noticeable that dramatic and musical performances are treated throughout as divine observances in honour of the gods, and the actors and other professionals are described as ministers consecrated to the service of religion. The maintenance of their privileges is therefore a sacred obligation in which the Amphictyonic Council is deeply interested.

Another inscription has been preserved referring to the Athenian Guild of Artists of Dionysus.[826] It appears that the Guild had a sacred enclosure and altar at Eleusis, where they were accustomed to offer libations to Demeter and Kore at the time of the Eleusinian mysteries. During the disturbances of the Sullan campaigns the altar was dismantled, and the yearly celebrations discontinued. The inscription is a decree of the Guild thanking a certain Philemon for his exertions in restoring the altar and renewing the annual ceremonies.

From the time of the fourth century onwards guilds of actors similar to that at Athens were rapidly formed in various places throughout the Greek-speaking world. In this way the masterpieces of Greek tragedy were made familiar to the most remote districts to which Greek civilization had penetrated. But it is beyond the scope of the present work to trace the progress of the Greek drama outside the limits of Athens and Attica.[827]

§ 11. Social Position of Actors.

In Greece the profession of the actor was an honourable one, and there was no suspicion of degradation about it, as there was in Rome.[828] Actors and other dramatic performers were regarded as ministers of religion. In the dramatic exhibitions at Athens the actors were placed on the same level as the poets and choregi. Their names were recorded in the public archives, and in commemorative tablets; and competitions in acting were established side by side with the competitions between the poets. It is true that Aeschines is very frequently taunted by Demosthenes with his theatrical career, but the taunts are due to the fact, not that he was an actor, but that he was an unsuccessful one. Actors at the head of their profession occupied a very distinguished position. Aristodemus, the tragic actor, was on two occasions sent as ambassador to Macedon by the Athenians, and was largely instrumental in negotiating the peace.[829] The great Athenian actors were much sought after by the monarchs of the time. Aristodemus and Neoptolemus were frequently at the court of Philip, and Thessalus and Athenodorus at the court of Alexander.[830] Thessalus was a great favourite with Alexander, and was employed by him on delicate missions.[831] The leading actors seem to have made large incomes. For instance, Polus told Demosthenes that he was paid a talent for acting during two days, only.[832] It is not stated whether the performance to which he refers took place at Athens, or elsewhere; but in all probability it was in some foreign state. There is no evidence to show what salaries were paid to the actors at the great Athenian festivals.

As for the lower ranks of the profession, the tritagonists, chorus-singers, musicians, and so on, though there was nothing dishonourable about their calling, their reputation does not seem to have been very high. Their strolling and uncertain manner of life seems to have had a bad effect upon their character. Aristotle, in his Problems, asks the question why it is that the artists of Dionysus are generally men of bad character. He thinks the reason is partly due to the vicissitudes in their fortunes, and the rapid alternations between luxury and poverty, partly to the fact that their professional duties left them no time for general culture.[833] His remarks of course apply mainly to the lower grades of the profession.

§ 12. Celebrated Athenian Actors.

Before concluding this account of Greek acting some notice of the principal Greek actors may not be out of place. Unfortunately in most cases little more is known about them than their names. Several tragic actors of the fifth century are referred to by ancient writers, such as Cleander and Mynniscus, the actors of Aeschylus, and Cleidemides and Tlepolemus, the actors of Sophocles.[834] But no details are recorded as to their individual characteristics and different styles. One interesting fact is known about Mynniscus, to the effect that he considered the acting of his successors as deficient in dignity and over-realistic. He was especially severe upon Callippides, the representative of the younger generation of actors.[835] This Callippides was notorious for his conceit. On one occasion, when he was giving himself airs in the presence of Agesilaus the Spartan, he was considerably disconcerted by being asked by the latter whether he was ‘Callippides the pantaloon’.[836] Another tragic actor of the same period was Nicostratus, who was especially excellent in his delivery of the long narrative speeches of the messengers. His style was so perfect that to ‘do a thing like Nicostratus’ came to be a proverbial expression for doing it rightly.[837]

But it was in the age of Demosthenes that the most celebrated group of tragic actors flourished. Among them was Polus of Aegina, who was considered to be the greatest actor of his time, and whose name is very frequently referred to by later writers. He was one of the actors who had the credit of having taught elocution to Demosthenes.[838] At the age of seventy, and shortly before his death, he performed the feat of acting eight tragedies in four days.[839] A well-known story is told about him to the following effect. Soon after the death of a favourite son, he happened to be acting the part of Electra in the play of Sophocles. In the scene in which Electra takes in her hands the urn supposed to contain the ashes of Orestes, and pours forth a lamentation over his death, Polus came upon the stage with the urn containing the ashes of his own son, and holding it in his hands proceeded to act the scene with such profound depth of feeling as to produce the greatest impression upon the audience. As Gellius remarks, the acting in this case was no fiction, but a reality.[840] Another of the great actors of this time was Theodorus, about whom a few facts are recorded. The exceedingly natural tone of his delivery, and his habit of never permitting any of the subordinate actors to appear upon the stage before himself, have already been referred to. He considered that tragedy was much more difficult to act in than comedy, and once told the comic actor Satyrus that it was easy enough to make an audience laugh, but to make them weep was the difficulty.[841] His own powers in this respect were very great. Once when acting in Thessaly he produced such an effect upon the brutal tyrant Alexander of Pherae that Alexander was compelled to leave the theatre, because, as he afterwards told Theodorus, he was ashamed to be seen weeping over the sufferings of an actor, while he was perfectly callous about those of his countrymen.[842] The tomb of Theodorus, close to the banks of the Cephisus, was still to be seen in the time of Pausanias.[843]

The other leading tragic actors of this period were Aristodemus, Neoptolemus, Thessalus, and Athenodorus. The two former were frequently at the court of Philip, and took a large part in bringing about the peace of Philocrates. They are therefore denounced by Demosthenes as traitors to their country, and advocates of Philip’s interests.[844] Neoptolemus was the actor who, at the banquet held in Philip’s palace on the day before his assassination, recited a passage out of a tragedy bearing upon the uncertainty of human fortune, and the inexorable power of death. The fact was afterwards remembered as an ominous coincidence.[845] Thessalus and Athenodorus were often rivals. At Tyre, after the return of Alexander from Egypt, they were the principal competitors in the great tragic contest, in which the kings of Cyprus were the choregi, and the chief generals of the army acted as judges. On this occasion Athenodorus won, to the great grief of Alexander, who said he would have given a part of his kingdom to have ensured the victory of Thessalus.[846] The same two actors were also competitors at the City Dionysia in the year 341, but both of them were then beaten by Neoptolemus.[847]

Among the Greeks the distinction between the tragic and the comic actors was as complete as that between the tragic and comic poets.[848] There are no instances during the classical period of an actor attempting both branches of the profession. Still less is recorded about the great comic actors than about the actors of tragedy. A few names are mentioned, but there is almost a total absence of details concerning their style and mannerisms. We are told that one of Hermon’s jests was to knock the heads of his fellow-actors with a stick, and that Parmenon was celebrated for his skill in imitating the grunting of a hog.[849] Interesting criticisms on the acting and the actors in comedy are unfortunately nowhere to be found.