Aeschylus' "Amymone" Ferrin Sutton, Dana Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1974; 15, 2; ProQuest pg. 193

Aeschylus' Amymone 
Dana Ferrin Sutton 

}iCHYLUS' Amymone is shown to have been a satyr play by the 
didascalic notice P.Oxy. 20.2256 fr.3, according to which it was 
produced with the Danaides trilogy (Supplices, Aegyptioi, 

Danaides) no earlier than 468 B.C., as Sophocles, who began his career 
then, competed against this tetralogy.1 The fragments of this play are 
meager and uninformative and scarcely permit a reconstruction.2 

Nevertheless, on the basis of versions of the myth of Amymone re­
tailed by the mythographers,3 we have a general idea of the contents 
of the play. 

Poseidon, angry at Inachus, permitted the springs of Argos to grow 
dry. Danaus, comfortably settled in the land after the adventurous 
wanderings depicted in the trilogy, sent his daughter Amymone to 

fetch water. As the story is usually told, on the way she threw a dart 
at a deer but hit a sleeping satyr.' He wanted to rape, or even marry,S 
her, and she called out to Poseidon for help. He frightened the satyr 
away, and Amymone gave herself to her rescuer. From this union 
sprang Nauplius. When Amymone, at the command of the god, drew 
out his trident, which had been planted in a rock, the threefold spring 
at Lerna gushed out, and the drought was thus ended; in later times 
this spring was called "the spring of Amymone." 

There is no reason to think that any mythographer's version of the 
Amymone myth is directly derived from Aeschylus' play, and hence 
one cannot pretend to any precise understanding of how Aeschylus 

1 The best study of this notice and the problems it presents (which do not concern the 
Danaides tetralogy) is Albin Lesky, "Die Dateriung der Hiketiden und der Tragiker Mesa­
tos," Gesammelte Schriften (Bern/Munich 1967) 220-33; the best modern discussion of the 
trilogy is A. F. Garvie, Aeschylus' Supplices, Play and Trilogy (Cambridge 1969) 163-233. 

2 Hans Joachim Mette, Die Fragmente der Tragodien des Aischylos (Berlin 1959) 45f. 
3 The principal sources are Ps.-Apollod. Bibl. 2.1.4 and Hyg. Fab. 169-69A (Rose). Other 

relevant passages are Eur. Phoen. 187fi'; Luc. Dial.Mar. 6; Philostr. Imag. 1.8; schol. on II. 
4.17l; Prop. 3.18.47f; Strabo at 8.6.8; Paus. 2.38.1 and 4. For the play, see Peter Guggisberg, 
Das Satyrspiel (Zurich 1947) 83f with refi'., from whom the following mythological outline 
is adopted. 

" In Hyg. Fab. 169A (Rose), the satyr merely surprises her while sleeping. 
II Fr.131 (Mette)-"it is your fate to be my wife, mine to be your husband"-could be 

spoken by either Poseidon or 'the satyr' (i.t'. Silenus). 

193 



194 AESCHYLUS' AMYMONE 

dramatized the myth. Only one point can be made with assurance. In 
a satyr play Amymone would not be pursued by <a satyr'. If the ob­
ject is an enforced marriage, probably the situation would be the same 
as in Aeschylus' Dictyulci, in which Silenus, with the assistance of the 
Chorus of Satyrs, tries to wheedle and bully Danae into a marriage. 
If the object is merely rape, Amymone could have been threatened 
by a gang-rape by Silenus and the entire Chorus: that they are capa­
ble of such behavior is shown by Euripides' Cyclops 179-81, where this 
occurs to them as the fitting punishment for Helen. 

Monumental evidence cannot be used to clarify this or any other 
problem concerning the dramaturgy of Amymone. There exists a 
series of Amymone satyr vases, collected and studied by Frank 
Brommer,6 but for several reasons they do not constitute reliable 
evidence. First, the series begins abruptly only about 440 B.C. Even 
conceding that there is often an interval between the production of a 
play and the appearances of vases inspired by that play, this chrono­
logical discrepancy is difficult to explain if Aeschylus' play is the 
source of inspiration. Recognizing this, Brommer speculated that the 
actual source was a second, otherwise unknown, Amymone play.' 
Second, in just those particulars of greatest importance for recon­
structing the play-characters, setting, etc.-the vases do not agree 
with each other. Hence, for example, although Amymone required a 
minimal dramatis personae of Amymone, Poseidon, Silenus and the 
satyrs, monumental evidence is no reliable guide to the possible 
presence of additional characters.8 

Third, even assuming that some one or more of these vases (but 
which ones 1) accurately reflect Aeschylus' Amymone, allowance must 
be made for artistic liberties. One vase, for example, depicts Amy­
mone hotly pursued by a gang of satyrs (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches 
Mus. iv.lOll), but this warrants no conclusion about the situation in 

6 Frank Brommer, "Amymone," AthMitt 63-64 (1938-39) 171-76 with figs. 67-70. 
7 Ibid. 176. 
8 Most notably, one krater (Syracuse 44 291, for which cf Beazley, ARV1 I041 no.9) adds 

Aphrodite and another (Rome, Vatican Mus. U 13) Hermes. Others collected by Brommer 
add Eros or a sister (or handmaiden) of Amymone. Louis Sechan, Etudes sur la tragedie 
grecque dans ses rapports avec la ceramique2 (Paris 1967) 337, shows that a Berlin amphora 
(Furtwangler, Vasensamml. no.3257) sometimes thought to be inspired by Amymone is 
actually an illustration of the death ofHippolytus, presumably inspired by EUripides' play. 
For a paralld instance of a satyr added to a scene reflecting a tragedy, if. the lost Apulian 
Iphigenia vase described by S. Reinach, Repertoire des vases peints grecs et errusques I (Paris 
1922) 133. 



DANA FERRIN SUTTON 195 

the play. If in Amymone Silenus had designs on the girl, perhaps desir­
ing to marry her, and if he had the assistance of the Chorus, a painter 
might well take the liberty of translating this into a scene in which 
she is pursued by the satyrs indiscriminately. 

Although the details of dramaturgy are beyond recall, clearly this 
play bears a strong resemblance to another Aeschylean satyr play, 
Dictyuld.9 The general situation in both plays is the same: a woman is 
in distress because she is threatened with some form of sexual bond­
age by Silenus and the satyrs, a situation from which she is saved by a 
rescuer (Poseidon, Dictys). Both plays possibly concluded with a mar­
riage between the distressed woman and her savior, so that both 
could have adhered to the same scheme: machinations of Silenus and 

. . h . 10 satyrs ... wrong marnage ... rescue ... fIg t marnage. 
Both plays employ a remarkable reversal of roles. The Greek satyr 

play is notorious for reliance on a relatively few stereotypes of sub­
ject, theme, characterization, etc.,n and apparently Silenus and the 
satyrs were routinely cast in the role of oppressed slaves, so that part 
of the happy endings of many satyr plays would be their regaining 
their freedom and being allowed to rejoin their proper master Diony­
sus, as in CyclopS.12 But in these two plays they seek to reduce some­
body else to bondage. Likewise in plays like Cyclops because they are 
oppressed they are presented as essentially sympathetic, for all their 
shortcomings, and they are allied with the sympathetic central 
character, such as Odysseus. This too would seem to be the usual way 
of presenting them, but in Amymone and Dictyuld they are the villains. 
In a similar inversion, in Aeschylus' satyric TheOToi OT Isthmiastai they 
seek to escape from Dionysus, rather than back to him. The evidence 
is fragmentary and generalizations are dangerous, but Aeschylus is 

8 For this play cf M. Werre-deHaas' Aeschylus' Dictyulci (Leiden 1961). 
10 A seeming fault of Werre-de Haas' reconstruction of Dictyulci (supra n.9) 73f. is that the 

possibility that the play concluded with a marriage of Dictys and Danae is not considered. 
To this one could respond that according to Werre-deHaas' reconstruction Dictyulci is 
already 930 lines long. and the addition of a marriage might make the play too long for a 
satyr play (Cyclops has 709 lines, Sophocles' Ichneutai probably had not much more than 
800). But the length of EUripides' prosatyric Alcestis provides some sort of parallel, and one 
feature of Dictyulci's happy ending surely was some provision for Danae's future. 

11 Guggisberg. op.cit. (supra n.3) 60-73 with references to earlier observations; so also 
Jacqueline Duchemin. Le Cyclope, edition critique et commentee (Paris 1945) xv-xvii; D. J. 
Conacher, Euripidean Drama (Toronto 1967) 322-26; Anne Newton Burnett, Catastrophe 
Survived: Euripides' Plays of Mixed Reversal (Oxford 1971), index s.v. "satyric motifs"; D. F. 
Sutton. The Date of Euripides' Cyclops (Ann Arbor 1974) 104-26. 

11 So Guggisberg, op.cit. (supra n.3) 62f. 



196 AESCHYLUS' AMYMONE 

notable for being the only poet who can be observed inverting such 
routine generic stereotypes. Possibly a Greek audience would find 
such inversions amusing and this kind of humor was specifically 
Aeschylean.I3 

Another striking parallel between Amymone and Dictyulci is the 
relationship of these two satyr plays to their respective trilogies. 
Dictyulci was almost certainly presented with a Perseus trilogy con­
taining, inter alia, Polydectes. A major event in that trilogy, probably 
in this play. must have been Polydectes' attempt to force Perseus' 
mother Danae into an involuntary marriage. Werre-deHaas has 
pointed out that Silenus' attempt to bully Danae into an enforced 
marriage in Dictyulci is a parody of Polydectes' action in the trilogy.l4 
The function of Dictyulci within its tetralogy is therefore to provide 
comic relief by burlesquing a situation in the preceding trilogy. This 
seems to fit into a more general pattern of satyr plays or other fourth­
place plays parodying a tragedy with which they were produced. 
Sophocles' Ichneutai bears several striking resemblances to his Ajax, 
and especially in view of the fact that both plays are by common con­
sent assigned to the middle or late 44O's. these seem best explained 
according to the theory that they were written together and that 
Ichneutai was intended to parody elements in Ajax.I5 Euripides' 
satyric Sisyphus was produced with the Trojan trilogy of 415, and there 
are reasonable grounds for suspecting that it was contrived as a parody 
of a tragedy in that trilogy. Alexander.Is Above all, there are several 
extremely strong resemblances between Euripides' Cyclops and 
Hecuba. Polymestor's blinding is paralleled by that of Polyphemus. 
both in point of general situation and details of diction. The theme of 
nomos and xenia is equally prominent, and handled in an identical 
way. in both plays. and both feature parallel sequences where an 
appeal for mercy on idealistic grounds is parried with a brutallecture 
about expediency. The various arguments advanced in favor of dating 

11 There is a similar inversion in Dictyulci: our final fragment breaks off in the middle of 
marching anapaests of the type usually found at the end of a play, celebrating the marriage 
of Silenus and Danae. But this must be a false ending, and Dictys subsequendy reenters to 

rescue Danae (Werre-deHaas, op.cit. [supra n.9] 74). 
It Werre-deHaas, op.cit. (supra n.9) 74f. 
16 Sutton, op.cit. (supra n.ll) 157-66; cf Arethusa 4 (1971) 60-67. 
18 Gilbert Murray, "The Trojan Trilogy of Euripides," Melanges Glot~ II (Paris 1932) 646; 

John Ferguson, "Tetralogies, Divine Paternity and the Plays of 414," TAPA 100 (1969) 110; 
Sutton, op.cit. (supra n.ll) 166-68. 



DANA FERRIN SUTTON 197 

Cyclops significantly later than 424 B.C., the probable date of Hecuba 
(most importantly, the higher percentage of iambic resolution in 
Cyclops) can be shown to be insufficiently cogent to pose a real ob­
stacle to the conclusion that these two plays were written together,l7 

In the same way, Euripides' Helen and Andromeda were both pro­
duced in 412 B.C.,IS and Helen goes over much the same dramaturgic 
and thematic material as does Andromeda, although in a more light­
hearted spirit. This is an extremely odd relationship, and I do not 
know of a case in which one tragedy is written as a lighthearted 
equivalent, if not downright parody, of another in the same trilogy. 
But this relationship would be less difficult to comprehend according 
to the Wilamowitzian theory that Helen is a fourth-place prosatyric 
play of the Alcestis type, and there are several reasons for so thinking, 
principally because it uses a plot, themes and characterizations that 
are recognizably assembled out of precisely the same stereotypes that 
are the routine fare of satyr plays. 

Situations in which a satyr play (or substitute for a satyr play) paro­
dies a tragedy in the same set are extreme examples of the function of 
the satyr play, as admirably defined by Wilhelm Schmid:I9 "Oem 
ausgereiften Satyrspiel der klassischen Zeit ist der ausgesprochen 
humoristische und marchenhafte Charakter ohne personliche, ag­
gressive Satire und die parodistische Behandlung der My then eigen 
... das Satyrspiel ist nicht selten, vielleicht sogar regelmassig. 
demselben Stoffgebiet wie die vorangehende Inhaltstrilogie entnom­
men [wobei] sich die Tragodie gewissermassen selbst ironisiert und 
sich dadurch Indemnitat flir das Obermass der leidvollen Affekte 
erwirkt, die sie entfesselt hat." 

Students of Aeschylus have repeatedly appreciated that, in a general 
way, there is a similar relationship of parody between Amymone and 
the Danaides trilogy.20 Both deal with the theme of cpvgavopla, with 
the attempt of women to avoid sexual servitude forcibly imposed. 

17 This is the conclusion revived in my Date of Euripides' Cyclops; see Henri Gregoire, 
"L'Authenticite du Rhesus d'Euripide," AntCI 2 (1933) 131, and Eduard Delebecque, 
Euripide et la Guerre du Peloponnese (Paris 1951) 165-77. 

18 Schol. on Ar. Thesm. 1012, 1060. 
19 Schmid-Stahlin, GGL 1.2.82f. 
20 First suggested by Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Aischylos Interpretationen 

(Berlin 1914) 23, and Aeschyli Tragoediae (Berlin 1914) 381; so also Kurt von Fritz, "Die 
Danaidentrilogie des Aischylos," Philo!ogus 91 (1936) 268f; Schmid-Stahlin, GGL 1.2.199 n.9; 
Guggisberg, op.cit. (supra n.3) 32; R. P. Winnington-Ingram, "The Danaid Trilogy of Aes­
chylus," ]HS 61 (1961) 147 and 151. 



198 AESCHYLUS' AMYMONE 

But this is scarcely the only way in which contents of the trilogy are 
parodied in the satyr play. Even if we know little about the details of 
its dramaturgy, on the basis of the Amymone myth we may deduce 
with reasonable assurance that the play must have contained certain 
elements. By comparing these with the known contents of the trilogy, 
particularly the extant Supplices, one may suggest that Amymone 
parodied much more than just the general idea of cpvgavopla. 

I shall begin with points of comparison between the satyr play and 
the trilogy that seem sufficiently self-evident to warrant one's speak­
ing of them with virtual certainty, and then I shall discuss other pos­
sible points of comparison in what seems a decreasing order of 
probability. For the sake of a complete argument, we should investi­
gate all possible ramifications of the relationship between Amymone 
and its trilogy. 

All of those who have commented on the relationship between the 
satyr play and the trilogy have commented on the common thematic 
denominator of cpvgavopla. Curiously, the equally obvious parallel of 
dramatic situation has not provoked such unanimous comment. In 
both the satyr play and the trilogy one or more women are beset by 
one or more individuals who seek to reduce them to a situation of 
sexual bondage. In Supplices the Danaids perceive their Egyptian 
cousins as wanton, lascivious, even subhuman,21 which is of course 
exactly how Amymone's pursuers would be portrayed in the satyr 
play, a typical characterization of Silenus and the satyrs.22 In the tril­
ogy, the pursuers have a spokesman, the Egyptian Herald, who is 
boorishly, imperiously arrogant. He finds an obvious and exact paral­
lel in the satyrs' spokesman, Silenus.23 In the trilogy, the pursued 
maidens cry to the gods-above all to Zeus Protector of Suppliants­
for aid, and find a protector in the king of the region, Pelasgus. In the 
satyr play, Amymone cries to Poseidon for aid and finds a protector in 
the god himself. In contrast to the sexual bondage the pursuers at­
tempt to impose, both the trilogy and the satyr play present the pic­
ture of a proper sexual relationship, based on consent rather than 
force (Hypermestra and Lynceus, Amymone and Poseidon). 

II Cf esp. 174f, 750-53, 757-59. 
II! For Silenus' typical characterization, cf Guggisberg, op.cit. (supra n.3) 53-56. 
23 That Silenus is capable of behaving in this hectOring way is shown, for instance, by 

Soph. Ichn. 130-206. The satyrs hear Hermes' lyre and are overcome with dread. Silenus 
tries to bully them back to work until he himself hears the lyre and becomes more panic­
stricken than the Chorus. 



DANA FERRIN SUTTON 199 

These initial observations make clear that Aeschylus has made Cl 

remarkable choice in selecting the subject for his Nachspiel: a myth 
that is connected with that of the trilogy, and that substantially dupli­
cates the trilogy's dramatic situation and raises very much the same 
thematic issues. Aeschylus' choice of subject, therefore, insures a 
situation in which the satyr play substantially parodies its trilogy. 

Since such a relationship of parody is guaranteed by the use of the 
Amymone myth, we may at least suspect that Aeschylus exploited 
the inherent parody of situation and theme in writing Amymone. To 
judge by the Amymone myth, the play could well have contained 
three scenes parodying scenes in the Danaides trilogy. 

The first is Amymone's appeal for aid. She was in fact a suppliant, 
and her cries for assistance could very easily have been contrived in 
recognizable imitation of the Danaids' appeals in Supplices. More than 
this, the setting of Supplices is before an altar common to several gods 
(223f) , at which the suppliant Danaids take refuge. Amymone must 
have had a pastoral setting, typical of satyr plays,24 and the likeliest 
setting might be in front of a rustic altar or shrine sacred to Posei­
don.25 To this, in an action parallel to that of Supplices, Amymone 
would come seeking refuge from Silenus and the satyrs. Just as the 
Danaids find a protector in the region's political master, Pelasgus, so 
Amymone would find a protector in the tutelary god of the vicinity. 
So her appeal for help could imitate that of Supplices both in writing 
and in staging. 

Second, Amymone very likely contained a scene in which Poseidon 
confronted Amymone's tormentors, and this would require an angry 
clash between Poseidon and Silenus and the satyrs, which would be 
c~t to a pattern similar to the confrontation of Pelasgus and the 
Egyptian Herald in Supplices (911-53). 

Third, thanks to fr.125 (Mette), we know that Aphrodite appeared 
in the last play of the trilogy, Danaides, and it is agreed that she 
appeared as the spokeswoman for the institution of marriage, i.e. of 
sexuality properly conducted (more about this later). In the fragment 
she speaks of the fructifying power of Eros (Smyth's translation): 

The holy heaven yearns to wound the earth, and yearning layeth hold 
on the earth to join in wedlock; the rain, fallen from the amorous 

2' Vitro De Arch. 5.6.9. 
25 For what it is worth (cf. the remarks on the value of monumental evidence supra), one 

Amymone satyr vase shows an altar: the Syracusan krater Syr. 44 291. 



200 AESCHYLUS' AMYMONE 

heaven, impregnates the earth, and it bringeth forth for mankind the 
food of flocks and herds and Demeter's gifts; and from that moist 
marriage-rite the woods put on their bloom. Of all these things I am 
the cause. 

In the myth of Amymone, the consummation of the union of 
Poseidon and Amymone leads to the discovery of the springs of Lerna 
and the refertilization of Argos. Hence Amymone, like Danaides, prob­
ably contained a scene in which the ideas of proper sexuality and fruit­
fulness were closely conjoined. 

On the thematic level, both the trilogy and the satyr play dealt 
with sexuality. Two sexual themes common to both are rpvgavop{a 

and the fertilizing powers of Eros, and we can detect a third. Both the 
trilogy and the satyr play presented contrasting portraits of right and 
wrong sexual relationships. In the lost plays of the trilogy, the Dan­
aids were forced to marry their cousins and killed them on the 
wedding night. One, Hypermestra, refused to do this and formed a 
genuine marriage with Lynceus. Hence the contrast between the rela­
tion of the Danaids and the Egyptians and that of Hypermestra and 
Lynceus finds a parallel in the contrast of the relation of Amymone 
and the satyrs and Amymone and Poseidon. Winnington-Ingram has 
attempted to define the nature of this contrast as Eros allied with 
force versus Eros allied with persuasion.26 This is attractive, but is 
probably not the only possibility. But whatever the precise thematic 
nature of the contrast, we may speculate that it was the same in both 
trilogy and satyr play. 

A notorious problem concerning Supplices is that although the 
Danaids' violent rejection of their Egyptian cousins is clear enough, 
their reason for it is not.27 This is sometimes considered a fault of the 
play, but possibly their motivation was made clearer in later plays of 
the trilogy. Besides the passages to which I have already alluded that 
stress the bestial nature of the Egyptians, probably the most illumin­
ating is 103Q-42 (Smyth): 

DANAios: May pure Artemis look upon this band in compassion, 
and may wedlock never come through constraint of 
Cytherea. This prize be mine enemies! 

26 Winnington-Ingram, Zoc.cit. (supra n.20). 
27 Besides Garvie, op.cit. (supra n.1) 215-23. the best discussion is by Herbert Weir Smyth. 

AeschyZean Tragedy (Berkeley 1924) 55-58. 



DANA FERRIN SUTTON 

HAND- Yet thereis no disdain of Cypris in this our friendly hymn; 
MAIDENS: for she, together with Hera, hath power most dear to Zeus, 

and for her august rites the goddess of varied wiles is held 
in honour. 

And in the train of their mother are Desire and she to 
whom nothing is denied, even winning Persuasion; and to 
Harmonia hath been given a share of Aphrodite, and to the 
whispering dalliances of the Loves. 

201 

Is it possible that in the latter plays of the trilogy there was some 
special connection between the Danaids and Artemis, and a conflict 
between the claims of the two divinities Artemis and Aphrodite? 

On the admittedly slender basis of the version of the myth of the 
Danaids given by Pausanias at 2.19.6, many think that the trilogy con­
cluded with a trial, although opinion is divided about who was on 
trial for what. Either the Danaids are on trial for murder with Aphro­
dite prosecuting, or Hypermestra is on trial for refusing to act with 
her sisters and Aphrodite is defending.28 Both possibilities present 
difficulties, and one can easily imagine a satisfying, dramatically 
powerful conclusion with no tria1.29 

But, argumenti causa, let us assume a trial scene. Eumenides is a doubt­
ful guide to the possible substance of such a trial, but a more reliable 
guide to its format, being an index of Aeschylus' understanding of the 
judicial process and how to translate it into theatrical terms. For such 
a trial would only succeed in the theater under certain conditions. A 
theatrical trial scene is only interesting if it is suspenseful, if there is 
something to be said (no matter how tendentious) for each side, and 
if the sides are reasonably well matched; and it provides a satisfying 
conclusion only if it genuinely resolves the issues at stake. 

For these reasons, if Danaides ended with a trial, two divinities prob­
ably participated. Any trial in which a divinity upholds one position 
and mere mortals the other would not be dramatically interesting 
because the sides would be too unbalanced. And if one divinity were 

28 Garvie, op.cit. (supra n.1) 204-11; D. J. Robertson, "The End of the Supplices Trilogy of 
Aeschylus," eR 38 (1924) 51-53, remains provocative. 

29 Assuming that the Egyptians were killed at the end of the second play or near the 
beginning of the third, Hypermestra could refuse to participate in the murder and stand by 
Lynceus; her sisters and their father turn on her and threaten to lynch her; she appeals to 

Aphrodite and there is a fine irony in the fact that the former suppliants are now the pur­
suers; Aphrodite appears in a final theophany, rescues her, and lays down a theodiey about 
the institution of marriage, of which fr.125 (Mette) is a part. 



202 AESCHYLUS' AMYMONE 

onstage representing, indeed personifying, one opposing principle, 
balance could be achieved only by having a second divinity represent­
ing the other. If this is true and Danaides numbered two divinities 
among its dramatis personae, the second would surely be Artemis.3o 

Hence Supplices 1030-42 is possibly a prefiguration of a conflict appear­
ing later in the trilogy, in the same way that mention of the Erinyes 
in Agamemnon foreshadows later developments in the Oresteia. 

This is relevant to our inquiry because there is reason for thinking 
Amymone might have been presented as a devotee of Artemis in the 
satyr play, so that something of the same conflict between the claims 
of Artemis and Aphrodite would reappear in the satyr play. One can­
not prove that Aeschylus followed the commonest form of the Amy­
mone myth, according to which she caught the attention of <the satyr' 
by hitting him with a misaimed dart while hunting a deer; but if this 
were the case she would probably have been characterized as a sort of 
Amazon,31 and consequently as a special devotee of Artemis. 

To sum up, by the very act of employing the myth of Amymone as 
his subject Aeschylus created a situation in which the satyr play was 
bound to parody the accompanying theme in terms of both theme 
and dramatic action. The principal area of uncertainty is to what ex­
tent he made this parody all the more explicit by carrying it down to 
the level of dramaturgic detail. Even assuming that he made no such 
effort, which is scarcely likely, the audience no doubt recognized and 
appreciated the fact that important elements of the trilogy 
reappeared in the satyr play in humorous form. 

CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND 

January, 1974 

30 This is all the more possible because the tetralogy is conceivably written late enough 
to employ the third actor introduced by Sophocles. If there was a trial scene, who was the 
jury? The likeliest answer is the demos of Argos, not because of the analogy of Eumenides, 
but because of the situation in Supplices, in which the demos, not Pelasgus, ultimately de­
cides to receive the suppliants. Cf. Anthony J. Podlecki, The Political Background of Aeschylean 
Tragedy (Ann Arbor 1966) 45-52. This would provide a nice and (I think Podlecki would 
concur in saying) politically significant balance.