216 ON THE REPRESENTATION OF led to the absurd supposition that the chorus in that play consisted of three only, refers to the coryph^us and his two immediate subalterns ^ When the whole chorus was drawn up in three lines, these two subalterns stood immediately behind the coryph^us in the second and third ranks respectively, and were called TrapaaraTTj^; and TpcT0(rTaT7}<; with reference to their leader 2. It is clear that the three actors, who were termed TrpcoTayco- viorT7](;, Bevrepaycovcarri^;, and rpLTaycovi(TTT]<; respectively^, were always regarded as a distinct troop or company, and that each retained his relative rank. Thus Ischander was regularly a Sevre- paycovtcTTr)^ of the TrpoyraycovicrTr)'; Neoptolemus"^, and ^schines never rose to a higher rank than that of a TpLTayavto-rrf^^. The first actor was regarded as the representative and manager of his troop; he carried the inferior actors with him, received for himself the prize of victory, and, though he may have given a share of this and of the other honours of the performance to his second performer, it is probable that the tritagonist was obliged to be con- tented with his pay^. Before a troop could be regarded as generally entitled to perform it must have gained a prize. Other- wise it was obliged to encounter some previous scrutiny, which was waived in the case of any actor who had succeeded in a com- petition"^. It is reasonable also to conclude that the protagonist of a successful troop was free from the risk of drawing lots for his poet. At least we hear that the eminent actors Oleander and Myniscus attached themselves almost exclusively to ^schylus®; that Sophocles almost monopolized the services of Tlepolemus ■^ V. 135 : ^yeip' ^eipe Kal ai/ ttji/5' iyu: d^ (re. 2 Aristot. Polit. III. 4, 6 : dvayKr] /ult] ixlav elvai rrjv tQ)v ttoKltuv iravTuiv aper-qv, (Sffirep ov5k ruu xopeurcDj' Kopvtpalov /cat irapacrTaTov. Metafh. IV. ii, p. lorSb. 28: dlov Trapaa-TaT-qs TpLToaraTOV wporepov Kal irapav-qTr) v'qrrjr iuda fikv yap 6 Kopv(pa7os, iu6a 5^ 7] fiovT] dpxv. Jul. Pollux, IV. § 106, seems to call the TrapaaxdTrjs 6ei/re- /oofl-raTTjs. 3 Above, p. 54, note 4. ^ Dem. de Fals. Legal, p. 344, 7. ^ See the passage quoted at the end of this chapter. ^ Dem, de Coron. p. 314; Lucian, Navlg. ad fin., Icaromen. 29; Plutarch, Prcucept. Polit. p. 816 ad fin. ^ Hesychius and Suidas, s. v. : ve/x-qaeLS vvoKpiTwV oi iroiriTal eap.^avov rpeTs vtto- Kpcras KX-qpCf} ve/x-qO^vras' cSu 6 viK-qcras els rovwibv dKpiriVS (-ros Suid.) TrapeXafi^dvero. Where Hemsterhius conjectures irapeXdix^ave and renders the passage {ad Luciani Tim. c- 5O' "quorum poetarum qui superior discessit, in posterum sine discrimine suos sibi actores legebat." But the context shows that the relative refers to the actors and not to the poets. 8 Hermann in Aristot, Poet. p. 193.
