BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 161 before P Oxy. 663 begins to become clear, whether lines 6–12 are recording a parodos or a parabasis (I suspect the former), and whether they speak to the spectators “about the poets” (my preference) or “about adopted sons.” Even though she argues for the comedy as mythological burlesque, she does allow for a political strand, but would see that strand as connecting Dionysus and Pericles. I would see it as connecting Dionysus and Alexandros—after all these are the two characters combined in the title. As for the date, she does (300, n. 27) mention that Mattingly and I prefer 437, but rejects this in favour of the traditional date of Dionysia of 429 on the grounds that there is no “positive evidence” for an early date. But if “the war” in the last line of the hypothesis is the Peloponnesian War, how does the Trojan War (“a war fought for a woman”) apply? We know from Plutarch (Pericles 25) that Pericles was criticised for involving Athens in the Samian War (440/39) to gratify his mistress Aspasia—this makes the Samian War a much more appropriate match for the Trojan War. As for Plutoi, much of what Bakola says (208–220) is persuasive, except I am not convinced by a late date for the prosecution of Pheidias or at F 171.22–23 that, when the chorus of Titans say that “now tyranny is ended and the people rule,” they are referring to Pericles’ removal from power in 430/29. I see the point as being that in Heaven, just as at Athens in 510, tyranny (that of Zeus) has been appropriately replaced by democracy. Her final chapter, on staging and visual personification, seems something of an addendum . She has good things to say about the opening of Cratinus’ plays and persuasively has Odysses begin with an actual boat on stage, like the opening scene of The Tempest. In Pytine Bakola attractively sees Cratinus’ wife, Comedy, as an epikleros whom Cratinus has abused by neglect, hence the accusation of kakosis. For Dionysalexandros she develops Ebert’s suggestion that the Judgement scene had Hermes, Dionysus-Alexandros, and Aphrodite as speaking roles, with mute figures Tyrannis and Eupsychia (I prefer Euthychia) symbolising the bribes of Hera and Athena.4 But surely a beauty contest needs all three participants present. While Bakola’s study is well researched and meticulously argued and does make a strong case for Cratinus as the “Aeschylus” of comedy, it remains a collection of studies and is not the general and systematic introduction to this important comic poet. Some comedies are hardly treated—I wanted more on Odysses, Archilochoi, and Cheirones—while discussion of others (e.g., Dionysalexandros and Plutoi) occurs in five different places throughout the work. I would have preferred an overall introduction to Cratinus, with separate discussions of each play, followed by these essays (slimmed down) or, indeed, a separate volume of studies. Trent University Ian C. Storey Abusive Mouths in ClassicalAthens. By Nancy Worman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2008. Pp. xi, 385. The Greeks, it transpires, had an oral fixation; a preoccupation with the mouth and what went in and out of it was characteristic of the iambic mode. In Abusive Mouths, 4 J. Ebert, “Das Parisurteil in der Hypothesis zum Dionysalexandros des Kratinos,” Philologus 122 (1978) 177-182. 162 PHOENIX Nancy Worman charts this phenomenon at classical Athens, where the correlation between oral consumption and expulsion and social conduct/character that marked Homeric and sympotic invective spilled out into the democratic arena. Here, it became embroiled in the denigration of social habits and/or political attitudes on the dramatic and forensic stages, and progressed into the philosophical repertoire to characterize Socratic and sophistic interlocution, and even to theorize oratorical style. By following through the diverse associations forged between talking, eating, drinking, and sexual practice, Worman deftly exposes the mouth’s operation as a site for contestable action. Epic, lyric, and tragedy provide the starting-point for Worman’s investigation (Chapter One). Already in the Homeric poems, two of the mouth’s primary functions, the ingestion of food and emission of words, were paired to signal character: the...
Read full abstract
Mar 1, 2011
Reed Winegar 
Open Access
