Having blockaded the gods, stopped humans from sacrificing, had the birds build a Babylonian wall for Nephelokokkygia, and having performed the foundation sacrifice for his new city — not, however, without the hindrance of would-be intruders into this new 'paradise'[1] —, Peisetairos, it would seem, is set to enjoy the fantastic bird world he created. But this does not happen. Someone penetrates these newly made walls, whose very reality Peisetairos himself comically doubts at 1167, ‡!a går élhy«! fa€neta€ moi ceÊde!in. The perpetrator, however, is no menacing, brute force as the rush of the chorus's dochmiacs at 1189 might suggest: pÒlemo! a‡retai, pÒlemo! oÈ fatÚ!…. It is Iris, Zeus' own messenger, flying across the stage by the theatrical crane, in a costume that is ridiculous even for comedy, on her way to earth to tell mortals to sacrifice to the Olympian gods (p°tomai...frã!ou!a yÊein to›! ÉOlump€oi! yeo›!, 1230-1). Finding Iris trespassing in Nephelokokkygia is Peisetairos' first encounter with the Olympians he is blockading. If this encounter is paradigmatic of another cosmic battle, that between the Olympians and Titans or Olympians and Giants, the opponent offers little challenge.

The Iris-scene, 1202-1261, serves as the beginning of the last half of the play, in which "the results of the decision reached in the first half [of the play] by the agôn"[2] are illustrated by a series of iambic scenes. That is, Peisetairos has accomplished what he set out to do at 172ff. — establish a city in the air that allows him to starve out the Olympians and rule humans. He must also, however, defend his creation against would-be intruders wanting to enjoy his success. There are scenes and typologies in Aristophanes' other plays that are similar to the Iris-scene and they help to understand how our scene fits into the structure of the play and into the 'consciousness' of the comic world.

In Acharnians, for example, Dikaiopolis must defend his (e)utopia[3] against a sycophant (818-828), and the otherwise unknown Nikarchos (910-928) and Derketes (1018-1034). Trygaios in Peace wards off an oracle-monger named Hierokles[4] (1045-1121), an armor merchant (1210-1265) and two boys who turn out to be the sons of Lamachos and Kleonymos respectively. Notable in these scenes is the violence which the protagonists use to rid themselves of these pests. This sort of violence Peisetairos also uses with Iris. In Acharnians when the sycophant arrives to expose the Megarian 'pig' farmer and says to Dikaiopolis oÈ går fan« toÁ! polem€ou!, Dikaiopolis says, klãvn ge !Ê,/efi mØ 't°rv!e !ukofantÆ!ei! tr°xvn (827-8). And the sycophant, threatened with violence, exits. Peisetairos, having harangued Iris with an entourage of verbal sexual abuse,[5] says to Iris before she exits, oÎkoun •t°rv!e petom°nh/ kataiyal≈!ei! t«n nevt°rvn tinã (1260-1), a near echo of Dikaiopolis' words and grammatically identical. In Peace Trygaios handles Hierokles roughly when the latter tries to partake of the sacrifice that celebrates the return of Peace: Ã pa›e pa›e tÚn Bãkin…pa›' aÈtÚn §p°xvn t«i jÊlvi, tÚn élazÒna. Clouds 1507 is not far from these examples when, having set Sokrates' phrontisterion on fire, Strepsiades exclaims d€vke, pa›e, bãlle, poll«n oÏneka. In each of these scenes the physical violence the protagonists use arises from their rejuvenation in the second half of the play.[6] They are newly empowered within their individually established (e)utopias. In this regard Iris challenges, though unwittingly, Peisetairos' new power and rejuvenation. Later in the play, the father-beater, Kinesias, the nameless sycophant, Poseidon, Herakles, the Triballian, and even Prometheus have a similar function.

In addition to the threat of violence, there is a typology of rape in satyr-plays that has parallels in the Iris-scene.[7] This typology strengthens Peisetairos' and the birds' claim to power over the gods and men by emphasizing the potency of their sexuality. Thanks to the discovery of a new kalyx krater, we now have evidence suggesting that throughout the play the bird chorus wears erect phalluses and has costumes similar to those of satyrs.[8] The costumes and the sexual language of violence replete in the Iris-scene also point in the direction of satyr-plays whose chorus of satyrs is the physical embodiment of male sexuality.

Peisetairos' new power and sexual potency[9] are brought out against the first (violent)[10] contact he and the Nephelokokkygians have with the gods in what has been billed passim[11] in Birds as a kind of Titanomachy or Gigantomachy. Against Peisetairos' sexual advances, Aristophanes has set and unwilling Iris, whose conservative and paratragic language make her look out-of-place and prudish, amidst a virtual satyr gang-bang.

One further consideration for our scene is the comic typology of rape as a punishment for transgression. There is a sort of consciousness in comedy (no doubt a reflection of the real world of Athens) that females out of place should be punished with sex. Iris, though a goddess, intrudes into the male world of Peisetairos' Nephelokokkygia and is subject to this 'rule'. There are two other pertinent examples from the Aristophanic corpus. In Acharnians, during the procession for the Rural Dionysia that he celebrates, Dikaiopolis sings a song of praise to Phales (263-79). In this song Dikaiopolis compares the rewards of peace with kl°ptou!an eÍrÒny' …rikØn ÍlhfÒron [her name is Thratta, a common slave name][12]…m°!hn labÒnt', êranta, katabalÒnta katagigart€!ai. The peace obtained from the war is even sweeter than this, he says. The violence of the slave girl's punishment is clear from the use of words like lambãnein, which indicates sexual aggressiveness,[13] and bãllein, which indicates sexual penetration.[14] Rape is no doubt implied from katagigart€!ai, to deflower.[15] In Wasps, after Philokleon has sworn not to go §n to›!i dika!ta›! (758-9), he asks that he still be allowed to judge, to which request Bdelykleon responds d€kaze to›!in ofik°tai!. An example case for him (768-9) is a !hk€!, slave girl, who got out of the house without permission. The punishment: taÊth! §pibolØn chfie› m€an mÒnhn (769). Here again we see the violence of sexual penetration in a word formed from bãllein. The Iris-scene has this typology as well. At 1253-56, the end of his long harangue, Peisetairos says, !Á d' efi me lupÆ!ei! ti, t∞! diakÒnou [a divine slave][16]/pr≈th! énate€na! t∆ !k°lei diamhri«/tØn âIrin aÈtÆn, À!te yaumãzein ˜pv!/oÏtv g°rvn Ãn !tÊomai tri°mbolon. Here the 'punishment' for Iris' continued harassment of Peisetairos is rape.

Because Iris is female her presence in Birds is unlike that of Prometheus, Poseidon, Herakles or the Triballian. As we have already seen, Aristophanes' treatment of her depends largely on this.[17] But generally Iris stands out in three ways. First, she stands out in her appearance, that is, her costume. While there has been much debate about exactly how she looks (and in this chapter I offer my opinions), it is certain that her costume is comically exaggerated,[18] and this comic exaggeration lowers her integrity. Second, Iris enters the stage by the mechane or crane. When the crane is employed in comedy it is a spoof of its use in tragedy. Typically, in tragedy the device was reserved for heroes and gods either at the beginning or the end of the play. Iris, however, enters midway through Birds, an unusual time, and her wild frantic movements on the machine foreshadow the lack of control she herself has when confronting Peisetairos. The third way is the kind of language Iris uses throughout the scene: not only her paratragic lines but also her prim language comically stand out.

But there is much to be considered before arriving at this reading of the scene. First I discuss Iris' entrance by the mechane, as well as her costume, then possible dramatic influences for the scene, and finally how Iris' actions and words are set in contrast to Peisetairos'. What will emerge from my discussion is a picture of Iris that is quite different from the one she has outside the play in literary and plastic sources.

Iris appears on stage in Birds via the mechane[19] a few moments before Peisetairos exclaims at 1199,

aÏth !Ê, po› po› po› p°tei; m°n' ¥!uxo!:

¶x' étr°ma! aÈtoË: !t∞y': §p€!xe! toË drÒmou.

These comments make sense only if Iris is swinging somewhat wildly about from the mechane. She is probably aloft throughout the scene: at 1244 she obviously swings about when Peisetairos says a second time, ¶x' étr°ma.[20] No doubt at 1261 she exits by the mechane as well.[21] But how usual is it, in comedy, that a divinity come on stage in this way and at this point in the play? Gods in tragedy usually appear at the very beginning or end of a play, and not in the middle. Aristophanes' use of the crane for this scene is significant both because it occurs near the middle of the play, and because it mocks tragedy and Iris. An examination of the uses of the machine in comedy and tragedy determines more accurately how a fifth-century audience might have responded to the appearance of a goddess from the mechane just over half-way through the comedy.

When comedy employs the mechane, in almost every instance it does so in order to mock the machine's use in tragedy, and often to mock Euripides' use of the device. Aristophanes uses the mechane for Sokrates in Clouds (Strepsiades sees Sokrates in the machine at 218) in order to mock those who study tå met°vra. He uses it for Trygaios on his dung beetle in Peace (cf. esp. 79-179) to parody Euripides' Bellerophon,[22] and in his lost play Daidalos for a character who cries out, "operator,[23] since you wish your pulley to leave me aloft, say 'farewell, sunlight!'"[24] These lines are probably paratragic.[25] There are, in addition, testimonia about the mechane in the fragments of comedy.[26] Worthy of mention is Antiphanes' Poiesis (fr. 191 PCG) which compares the relatively easy job the tragic poet has to that of the comic who must make his own plots and not rely on the convenience of the mechane to resolve some tight issue.[27] The tone of this fragment indicates a kind of general comic hostility toward tragedy's use of the crane and seems further to illustrate why, in some instances, comedy might have used the crane in a mocking fashion.

In tragedy, the mechane is used only for gods and heroes who usually appear at the end of the play, often — as Antiphanes complained above — to resolve some impasse; when the gods do appear to mortals by the crane it represents a divine epiphany. The only certain instance of the crane in Sophocles' corpus is Herakles' appearance on the roof of the skene at the end of Philoctetes (1409-1426). For Aischylos we cannot be sure he used the crane at all. Pollux 4,130 (cf. TrGF iv pp. 375-6) alone tells us that in Psychostasia Aischylos used the crane for Eos, who, having descended to stage level, ascends with the body of her dead son Memmon.[28] We do not know at what point in the play this happened. Okeanos appears by the crane to Prometheus at Prometheus Bound 284ff.[29] But, as we shall see further in the discussion of how the presentation of Prometheus in that play affects our understanding of Prometheus in our play, Prometheus Bound probably does not belong to Aischylos but to an author of the 430s.[30] That Prometheus Bound has a god appear early in the play may be evidence of Euripidean influence, and so for an author more contemporaneous with Euripides, whose use of the machine far exceeds that of Aischylos and Sophokles.[31] Excepting Prometheus Bound, only Euripides used the crane at any time other than the end of a play. Therefore, when gods did appear in tragedy, they rarely did so midway through the performance whether or not by mechane. When they did, it was unusual.[32]

In extant tragedy, only Iris and Lyssa in Euripides' Herakles (416? see note 38) appear midway by means of the mechane.[33] In Birds Iris' appearance is the only entrance of a divinity in extant comedy by means of the mechane. From this it has been suggested that the appearance of Iris in Birds (414), only slightly over midway through the play, may be a parody of the appearance of Iris in Euripides' Herakles. The only matter to suggest parody is Iris' appearance by the mechane midway through each play.[34] However, in Herakles Iris lands on the roof of the skene, while Iris in Birds never leaves the crane before she departs. In Herakles Iris is sent by Hera, while in Birds she is sent by Zeus. In Herakles Euripides has both Iris and Lyssa (whether or not by the mechane) appear at a height, and Iris soon exits to leave Lyssa to her task. In Birds Iris comes alone to perform her assignment. If Aristophanes had wanted to parody this play, he might somehow have made fun of the nature of the scene: either of the presence of two deities or of Iris' role as an escort. Furthermore, in Birds Iris is concerned with delivering Zeus' message to mortals so that they may sacrifice to the Olympians;[35] she is not concerned with punishment and its dispensation as she is in Herakles. For these reasons I do not think that Aristophanes intended his audience to recall Herakles at this point in Birds. We must look elsewhere to discover Aristophanes' intentions.

To sum up my argument thus far: Aristophanes' use of the mechane for Iris in Birds is different from its standard use both in tragedy and comedy. Tragedians, if they used the crane all, typically used it for divinities at the end of a play. The instances quoted at the beginning of this discussion show that Aristophanes used the mechane to propel human characters — the 'comic heroes' — into the heights and in so doing made fun of the machine's use for human heroes in tragedy. In Birds, however, Aristophanes pokes fun at the use of the crane in tragedy for gods and goddesses — but he especially makes fun of tragedy by using it for a divinity in the middle of the play, and by having her swing about with no control. In doing this Aristophanes mocks Iris and the significance of her mission, and with that the claims of the Olympians themselves.

Having established the impact and significance of Iris' appearance by the crane, we may ask again whether Aristophanes has modeled and parodied Iris' appearance on a dramatic source. There need not be a literary or dramatic predecessor to influence Aristophanes' decision to include the goddess,[36] but it is important that we entertain this possibility. Hofmann, in his important study of Birds, Mythos und Komödie, suggests that Iris' presence in the play is a logical choice due to the nature of the message she brings. He compares Iris in Birds to Iris in the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, lines 314-323.[37] In the hymn, Zeus sends Iris to Demeter to convince her to come to Olympos so she might stop her 'blockade' against the earth and the production of crops.[38] In Birds, Zeus sends Iris down to mortals to tell them to sacrifice to the gods (but they have no idea of Peisetairos' blockade or the establishment of Nephelokokkygia). Furthermore, Iris is unsuccessful in the hymn just as she is in Birds. While these parallels might seem strong, Hofmann's arguments would be more convincing if Birds were non-dramatic and meant only to be visualized in the mind's eye, as the scene for the hymn to Demeter is. But Birds is a dramatic performance whose main impact was created by the appearance and actions of characters on stage. If there is a precedent here, it more likely lies in the theater.

To this end we may look to several vases that depict scenes from a series of satyr-plays in which Iris plays a role.[39] They date from before the last quarter of the sixth century to around 350. Because these vases span several decades, they probably do not reflect a particular play conceived by an individual author,[40] but rather plays severally conceived by different authors. The thin outline of a plot emerges from these vases.[41] Iris is sent (by Hera?)[42] to intercept an Olympian sacrifice to Dionysos[43] whose loyal satyrs, in turn, attempt to thwart Iris' theft. Most of the vases depict this scene. On a cup in London by the Brygos Painter (henceforth the London cup; Boardman ARFVArch 252.1 and 252.2.), we have another scene, in addition to the Iris/satyrs scene: Hermes[44] and Herakles[45] apparently try to hold off another group of satyrs who approach Hera. (Did the satyrs dare to attack the queen of heaven?) We cannot be certain that the two scenes are from the same play, but as E. Simon notes, "sides A and B on cups of the Brygos Painter's circle mostly form a unity."[46] Perhaps, then, as is typical in satyr-plays,[47] there was a problem (the recent popularity of Hera's stepson, the new god Dionysos?), a confrontation (Iris' quest, at the command of Hera, to thwart the sacrifice to Dionysos, and the struggle between Dionysos/satyrs and Hera, who is protected by Hermes and Herakles?), a consequent resolution of the problem, and then a celebration.[48] I think these vases probably do represent the similar plot of different satyr-plays by different authors over a long period, so that a common dramatic story of Iris was popular for the better part of the fifth century.[49]

The most popular version of an Iris satyr-play may have come from Achaios,[50] who alone, in addition to Ion and the regular triad, was admitted by the Alexandrians into the tragic canon.[51] Knowing this adds some validity to the possible popularity of his production. We cannot, however, be certain of the play's date. Brommer has suggested 450[52] and Simon "at least two generations later than the play pictured"[53] in the London cup, which she dates to "between 490 and 480."[54] (That is, between 430 and 420, if not later depending on whether one counts a generation as 30 or 40 years). The Suda dates Achaios' birth to the 74th Olympiad, about 484/3-481/0, making him slightly younger than Sophokles, and dating his first production, along with that of Euripides, to the 83rd Olympiad, about 448/7-445/4.[55] Yet, because the dates of most of the vases I have mentioned are earlier than what the Suda gives for Achaios' first performance, it is not impossible to suppose that Achaios' Iris satyr-play was put on at a date closer to that of Birds.[56] Finally, while the fragments from Achaios are few and uninformative, Iris' appearance and actions in this play (as we can gather from the vases), nevertheless, share affinities with her appearance and actions in Birds.[57] It is likely that the theme of Iris sent by Hera to steal a sacrifice away from Dionysos and his satyrs was common, and judging from the fairly numerous representations, a popular and memorable one. I believe that this scene from an Iris satyr-play influenced Aristophanes and would have been more easily recognizable to the audience than Iris' appearance in Euripides' Herakles or the Homeric Hymn to Demeter.

There are three main points that can help to illustrate the affinities between the Iris satyr-play and our scene in Birds. The first is the obvious similarity of 'snatching' Iris between the two plays. At Birds 1205 Peisetairos shouts, tauthn€ ti! oÈ jullÆcetai énaptãmeno! tr€orxo!; to which Iris replies rather coyly, §m¢ jullÆcetai; Iris is obviously still attached to the mechane since Peisetairos wants some tr€orxo! to fly up and snatch her.[58] This scene reflects what we have on the London cup as well as several other vases.[59] On the London cup, however, we have more detail. Iris has stolen the sacrifice and is seized by two satyrs — one jumps over the altar/thymele[60] and grabs her arm and chiton; on her other side, another satyr grabs the sacrifice and her left arm. What has not been noticed is that Iris attempts to fly away as she is attacked. Her right foot is still on the ground while her left is raised about twelve inches. This gives the impression that she is taking off in flight. While we have no evidence for it, it would not be impossible for the author of this play to have used the mechane for Iris' escape. If this were sure, we could also be certain of Aristophanes' source for the Iris-scene; since it is not sure, we must be content to observe that the satyrs' snatching Iris on the vases is suspiciously similar to the tr€orxo!'s snatching Iris in Birds.

Secondly, the tr€orxo! in Birds and the seizing satyrs of the vases share affinities. No one need be reminded of the erect phalloi that the satyrs of satyr drama sport, but we must examine more closely the appearance of the tr€orxo! in Birds. First, the very word has implications that point toward a phallus. The word literally means "three-balled" or "with three testicles".[61] This may, of course, be a figure of speech and not point toward any physical attribute of the actor-bird. Even so, it is striking that a bird with an extraordinary phallic nature, much like that of the satyrs, be chosen to grab Iris.[62] But the term tr€orxo! may not be a mere verbal double entendre. We now have a vase in the Getty Museum (acquired in 1982) that provides interesting evidence for the costumes of the birds in our play.[63] On the Getty vase, two birds wear erect phalloi. If, as J. R. Green suggests, these birds represent the chorus from our play, then the tr€orxo! at 1206 should look similar to these birds, which being ithyphallic resemble satyrs.[64] In addition, the Getty birds resemble satyrs in the construction of their costumes. The actors wear a pair of shorts with an erect phallus attached just as actors of satyr drama do.[65] It is also interesting to note that both Green and Taplin point to the similarity of the Getty birds to satyr-plays. Green suggests that Birds "was to some degree intended as a mock satyr-play for the Tereus itself,"[66] and Taplin, though certain that the vase does not depict Birds but Right and Wrong argument from Clouds 888ff.,[67] still adds that "some comedian [could have] invented the satyralektryon, and produced a whole chorus of them."[68] While we cannot be certain that the entire bird chorus was erect throughout the play, it is interesting to note the many erotic elements in the play that might suggest it was. At 696-99 in the parabasis, the birds trace their lineage to ÖErv![69] and explain that they associate with lovers (704) and help them to persuade unwilling conquests (705 -6).[70]

The discussion so far has focused on the use of the mechane in the Iris-scene and a dramatic source for Iris' appearance in Birds. Let us now turn to the problem of Iris' costume.[71] Peisetairos tells us that the goddess looks somehow like a ship and a hat. When she sweeps down toward Peisetairos, and he asks who she is and where she is from, he exclaims, ¯noma d° !oi t€; plo›on µ kun∞;[72] How Iris could look like a ship or a hat has produced many explanations. But this kind of question with this kind of abstract language is common in Aristophanes. At Wasps 1509 Philokleon says to one of Karkinos' sons who, presumably, dances with Philokleon at the play's end, tout‹ t€ ∑n tÚ pro!°rpon; Ùj‹! µ fãlagj; At Lysistrata 982 Kinesias asks the just-arrived Spartan herald, !Á d' e‰ pÒteron ênyrvpo! µ kon€!alo!.[73] At Ekklesiazousai 1072f. the young man, when he sees the third old woman who wants to have sex with him, is shocked by her ugliness and asks, pÒteron p€yhko! énãplev! cimuy€ou,/ µ graË! éne!thku›a parå t«n pleiÒnvn; These examples show that the main point of this kind of joke is associating the person ridiculed with abstract ideas that their appearance suggests. Furthermore, Dikaiopolis, at Acharnians 95, thinks Pseudartabas looks like a war ship (naÊfrakton bl°pei!), probably because his mask was comically exaggerated. Had Dikaiopolis not made the remark, Pseudartabas' resemblance to a war ship may not have been readily apparent to the audience.[74] The scholia for Birds explain that Iris looks like a ship because her chiton is flowing in the breeze as she swings about and that her wings resemble oars. The skeuopoios could have accomplished this by making Iris' dress and wings extra-large so that when the mechanopoios swung her around, the dress and wings flapped about.[75] That Iris here in Birds wears a lengthy chiton with plenty of garment, and that she is winged, accords well with her depiction in vases, in most of which Iris wears a long, flowing chiton, and only rarely is pictured without wings.[76]

It is more difficult, however, to imagine how Iris looked like a kune. The scholia tell us that in this scene she in fact wore a petasos (which is called a kune in the Peloponnesos) on her head as Hermes is accustomed to do. Since both Hermes and Iris are messengers of the gods, the scholia assume that it was natural for Iris also to wear the kune/petasos.[77] To prove this point, they quote a line from Sophokles' Inachos in which Hermes supposedly addresses a woman wearing a kune, whom the scholia says is Iris. The line quoted from Sophokles' lost play is corrupt and we cannot be certain just what it said; many alternatives have been offered. It is probable that it was more or less, "Who is this woman who's stolen an Arcadian kune?"[78] Were it not for the scholia on this line of Birds, we would have no clue to who the woman is, and Sommerstein has recently suggested that she is not Iris.[79] Even if Iris did appear in Inachos and were wearing a kune — which seems to contradict the vases —, it does not prove that in Birds Peisetairos refers to a real hat on her head.

Furthermore, in all of our representations of Iris she never wears the petasos of Hermes. While we do not necessarily need a representation of Iris with a petasos to believe that she wears one in Birds, we are nevertheless left with an inconsistency in Peisetairos' comment, "What's your name? Are you a ship or a hat?" For if it is clear that Iris' chiton and wings resemble the sails and oars of a ship — certainly Peisetairos' suggestion that they do helps the audience imagine them in this way[80] —, then it follows that Peisetairos thinks somehow Iris' costume also resembles a kune.

Most commentators of this play generally agree that Iris does not wear the petasos of Hermes.[81] Kock-Schroeder, Merry, Coulon and Cantarella all agree that Iris is wearing some sort of halo that resembles the petasos. Blaydes, van Leeuwen, Zanetto and Kakridis think she resembles a helmet with plumes or a petasos because of her wings and feathers.[82] Sommerstein argues that "there is no reason to believe that she wears any unusual head gear."[83] Most recently, however, Dunbar has written (p. 615), "Iris is wearing a hat … which resembles one of the hat styles of Hermes…." But Aristophanes characteristically parodies the received or traditional image of his chosen subject: the farmer angry at the machinations of the city (Dikaiopolis, Strepsiades, Trygaios); the marginal "sophist" (Sokrates); the overzealous jurist (Philokleon), etc. In the Iris-scene, Aristophanes, by exaggeration, makes fun of the appearance of Iris that the audience knew through myth, vase paintings, and dramatic performances. This appearance, as we have stated, was the long flowing chiton (xit∆n podÆrh!) and wings with neither petasos nor kune.[84]

Pace Dunbar and the scholia, it is probable, then, that Iris does not wear the petasos of Hermes. The proof that Iris actually wears a hat, and does not merely look like one, rests on a corrupt line from Inachos. We can, then, imagine (with Blaydes et al.) that Iris' costume, a combination of her wings and feathers and over-abundant clothing, resembles the aspect of a kune, with its broad brim and unusually large size.[85] This exaggeration makes Iris look ridiculous in relation to her usual garb, as could be seen regularly, for example, on the west pediment of the Parthenon, and therefore lowers her credibility before she even speaks her first lines. Iris' words and actions, as we shall see, do not belie her appearance.

We have already stated that Iris' physical appearance in Birds is a parody of her traditional iconography. What of her actions? Are they similar (even if comically distorted) to her actions in other texts and dramas? By examining Iris' appearance elsewhere we can obtain a background against which to compare her actions in Birds. What will be discussed here may or may not be what Aristophanes' audience knew about Iris; however, it is what we can know about Iris and, therefore, a minimum for what could be known by Aristophanes and his audience.

Iris' first appearance in Greek literature is Homer's Iliad. (She does not make an appearance in the Odyssey, where the messenger from the gods is always Hermes.) In the Iliad, as in Birds, she is the messenger of the gods, namely Zeus and Hera. She relays messages to both humans and immortals, sometimes in disguise, sometimes as herself. She appears in disguise in 3,121ff. where she takes on the semblance of Laodike and tells Helen of the duel between Menelaos and Alexandros. She appears as herself to Achilles in 18,166ff., and out of sight (apparently) in 24,171ff. when she addresses Priam and encourages him to seek the body of Hektor from Achilles.

Her actions are typically mandated by the message she gives, yet on several occasions she interacts with the god or mortal to whom she delivers a message. Frequently, she adds to the original message, something unusual for messengers.[86] While insurance of success is important, Iris' additions also tell us something extra about the goddess: they reveal a small hint of character.[87] In the delivery of her messages Iris displays an almost presumptuous and arrogant attitude. When speaking both to Hera and Athena in book 8, Iris singles out the grey-eyed goddess and offers her harsher words.[88] It is Hera, convinced perhaps more by Iris' reprimand of Athena than Zeus', who then recalls their advance toward Olympos. Both Poseidon[89] and Achilles[90] bend to Iris' prudent advice — one in accordance with the will of Zeus, the other against and without his knowledge. In Homer, Iris is resourceful and cunning.[91] She is a goddess who can not only deliver a simple message but who can also speak discreetly or crudely in order to achieve her primary goal.[92]

Further instances of Iris in literature are scattered and few. She does, however, appear in Hesiod's Theogony and it will be useful to look there briefly. Hesiod (Theogony 265ff.) has Iris descended from Thaumas and Elektra, daughter of Okeanos. As M. L. West points out, Iris' affinity with the rainbow points to her connection with Thaumas.[93] Iris is listed first among the children with the epithet »ke›a and she is the sister of the lovely-haired Harpies (±ukÒmoi ÜArpuiai), Aello (ÉAell≈) and Okypetes (ÉVkup°th!). The Harpies do not appear to have any connections with Thaumas and Elektra but only with Iris as regards swiftness and wings.[94] While this kind of inconsistency is common in archaic literature,[95] it also emphasizes the kinship between Iris and the Harpies.

This kinship deserves further investigation. Does it suggest something about the nature of Iris' divinity or office as messenger? Hesiod only stresses the swiftness of Iris and her sisters, but it may not be imprudent to assume more similarities with these "spirits of evil."[96] We should recall that it is Iris who escorts Lyssa to the house of Herakles in Euripides' play.[97] It is also Iris who in that play not only repeats the grievances of Hera but also agrees with them.[98] We have already seen Iris' bitter words directed toward Athena in the Iliad as well as her cunning persuasion in the case of Poseidon and Achilles. That Iris is related to the Harpies, themselves agents of divine vengeance,[99] is telling since it reveals a nature in Iris that has the potential of rendering destruction, at least in a go-between role, as she does in Euripides' Herakles.

Our contemporary association of the rainbow with beauty and fortune (i.e. with pleasant ideas) can mislead into thinking that Iris is necessarily good-natured.[100] In reality, as our discussion has shown, she is a good deal more complex, and her character cannot be defined as so one-sided. Rather we may say that her traits are liminal. She is at once the servant[101] of Hera and Zeus but at the same time an independent voice. It is not so unusual that a goddess be vocal but her vitriolic retorts, presumptuous actions and willingness to render destruction (as in the case of Herakles) do little to preserve a purely subservient character.

Her actions are perhaps explained by her representation on several vases dating from the early sixth to the middle of the fifth century. In each of these Iris is depicted wearing a short skirt, not the long flowing one in which she is usually depicted.[102] This short skirt gives her an almost masculine appearance[103] and may help explain Iris' seemingly liminal role (one that verges between the feminine and the masculine): a loyal servant but also a self-reliant, apt messenger (whether tactful or not).

We have already discussed Iris' appearance in the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, the Iris satyr-play (whether or not by Achaios), and Euripides' Herakles. These are the references to Iris earlier than the production of Birds.[104] Therefore, we can now turn to our play and compare what we have learned with Aristophanes' presentation of Iris.

In relation to this evidence outside of the play, Iris' responses to Peisetairos are our best judge of how she appeared to the audience and how Aristophanes "created" her presence on stage. As we have seen, Peisetairos begins with a line of questions, "What is your name? Are you a ship or a helmet?", to which Iris responds, "I am Iris the swift" (âIri! taxe›a).[105] Peisetairos, thinking she has replied affirmatively to his ship question,[106] asks, "Are you the Paralos or the Salaminia?"[107] Peisetairos, frustrated by being detained in his sacrificial duties in Nephelokokkygia by a poet, oracle-monger, Meton, an Inspector, and a Decree-Seller at 903-1057, immediately begins to harass the goddess. He wants her seized, hurls the epithet miarvtãth at her (1209) — common enough in comedy, but not typically of gods —, makes sexual innuendoes (!frag›d' ¶xei! parå t«n pelarg«n; at 1213 and oÈd¢ !Êmbolon §p°balen Ùrn€yarxo!; at 1214f.[108]), mocks her words,[109] sentences her to death (1221ff. and 1224ff.), and overtly and perversely threatens rape (1253ff.).

How does Iris respond to this treatment? How would the Iris of Homer, Achaios, or Euripides have responded? Each of these Irises was (at least potentially) headstrong and aggressive. But Iris here seems only able to respond indignantly to Peisetairos' comments: "What is this?" when Peisetairos asks if she is the Paralos or Salaminia; "Seize me?" when Peisetairos orders her seized; "This is quite out of the ordinary!" when Peisetairos threatens to beat her; "What the devil is this?"[110] and then, "You are in your right mind, aren't you?" when Peisetairos makes a sexual innuendo. These responses reveal an Iris quite different from the one we have seen presented by other Greek authors. She is not vindictive or pushy or even potentially dangerous. She is rather flabbergasted and appalled at Peisetairos, unable to make an effective rebuttal, but quite self-righteous. Iris does, it must be said, warn Peisetairos about his attitude. But the speech, as we shall see, is also ineffective and only highlights Peisetairos' daring and Iris' inability to ward off his insolence. While we cannot expect Iris to stop Peisetairos, what remains funny is the fact that she acts quite differently from the Iris the audience would have known, for example, from Homer and Euripides.

At 1238ff. she delivers a paratragic speech to Peisetairos when he states that the birds are now men's gods.

"You foolish, foolish man, stir not the dark mind of the gods

lest Justice overthrow your race, destroy it all, with the strong ax of Zeus,

and burn your very body to a cinder with smoking flames,

and these walls around your homes with blows like those that struck Likymnios."[111]

These lines are probably taken from a variety of tragedies[112] and are meant to evoke a pathetic tone.[113] They are, however, stock lines[114] that are meant to emphasize the outrageousness both of Peisetairos' statement and his plan to dethrone the Olympian gods. They may remind the audience of the Iris of Euripides' Herakles — in so far as she states the claims of her employer — but nothing in them reminds the audience of the traditional, self-confident actions of the Iris we have seen elsewhere.

At 1257 Iris also speaks harshly to Peisetairos after he had threatened her with a tri°mbolon or a "triple-decker hard-on."[115] She says diarrage€h!, Œ m°l', aÈto›! =Æma!in. This is insulting,[116] and recalls the scene in Iliad 8,398ff. where Iris calls Athena a kÊon éde°!. But what of the neatly inserted Œ m°le? What is its tone?

In a false etymology, ancient 'opinion' (scholia on Knights 669) says that m°le is an Attic address for Œ kãki!te µ kakodaimon°!tate µ ofiktrÒtate.[117] While these words can deliver a bite when used as adjectives, they are somewhat milder as vocatives. Even so, when the corpus of Aristophanes is examined, the result is that the word has a certain familiar though polite tone.[118] An immediately relevant example is Wasps 1400ff. where the értop«li! uses the address for Philokleon when he intends to tell her an insulting story — the old lady had accused Philokleon of ruining her bread stand. She says to him, må D€a mØ 'moi g' Œ m°le. This is again a kind of sarcastic politeness since (as the old woman no doubt realized) the story turns out to be offensive.[119] This example accords with our scene in Birds where a woman (this time a goddess!) is also insulted by an old man. Furthermore, it should be considered in light of the scene topology discussed at the beginning of this chapter where we saw the comic protagonist treating females, and particularly foreign slaves, in a consistent manner in several of Aristophanes' plays. Iris' use of the address, however, amidst a more scurrilous reply is comical precisely because the audience did not expect her to speak or act this way. They may have expected something like kÊon éde°!, which Iris uses for Athena at Iliad 8,398ff., or the harsh words she uses against Herakles in Euripides' play by that name, performed two years earlier at the Dionysia. All this shows Iris to be more flustered and politically formal than she is elsewhere depicted. Iris' 'diplomacy' is set in stark contrast to Peisetairos' sexual crudity.

When Iris leaves the stage she leaves the same way she entered, by the mechane: as the machine carries her off, she tells Peisetairos that her father, Zeus, will put a stop to his outrageous actions. But Peisetairos has the last word: "Damn it, won't you fly away and burn some younger man to a cinder!" The scholia say that we should understand Peisetairos to mean "burn with erotic passion,"[120] and that he speaks to Iris as if she were a "•tair€dion." This is partly true. Iris used the same word for "burn to cinder" (kataiyalãv) at 1242 in her paratragic speech, and so it is also likely that Peisetairos here mocks Iris' words as he did at 1220 (her words are at 1210); his mocking emphasizes his dismissal of Iris' threat at 1238ff.[121] His comment also emphasizes an aspect of Iris that has appeared in our discussion. Peisetairos has already indicated his own sexual inclination (if only for insult) towards Iris at 1253ff., she herself having made no advances toward him.[122] Although the evidence does not suggest that Iris seemed like an Athenian courtesan, nowhere else is a free unmarried female so insulted in comedy. Therefore, another part of the humor in the scene is that Iris does not appear as a courtesan, but Peisetairos comically taunts her as if she were.

The presentation of Iris' character demonstrates one of the main features of comedy, that extremes in appearance or character are essential for humor, whether they constitute hyperbole or inversion of traditional conceptions.[123] So who is the Iris Aristophanes presents to us in Birds? The evidence we have inspected leaves us with an Aristophanic creation meant to stand in contrast to the confident, conquering hero of the play. She is not the bold messenger of Homer, the relative of the Harpies in Hesiod, or the co-conspirator of Lyssa in Euripides' Herakles. Her costume, wild movements in the crane, and her inability to answer Peisetairos with forceful retorts (as would otherwise befit the goddess we know from these other sources) create a goddess whose physical appearance and actions differ in their exaggeration of her traditional iconography and representation in literature. We have also seen two elements brought out from this scene that have previously received little attention from scholars. The first is the general comic typology of raping female transgressors; Iris, though a goddess (and this makes her treatment in Birds all the more outstanding), is subjected to Peisetairos' sexual aggression as punishment for her intrusion into Nephelokokkygia. Secondly, we have seen that within the typology of rape our scene draws its dramatic influence from a scene in a satyric 'Iris' play in which Iris is seized by ithyphallic satyrs just as she is seized at Peisetairos' command by an ithyphallic bird. Both of these elements work together to produce a contrast between Iris and Peisetairos that establishes his new power among the birds and over the gods. Furthermore, just moments after Iris swings off stage, the messenger who had earlier been sent to mortals returns and announces Peisetairos' preeminence among humans (esp. 1278). At this moment in the play Peisetairos has control over the birds, the gods, and mortals. All that follows the Iris-scene shows this control at work.

[1] The intruding poet describes the city as tån eÈda€mona at 905.

[2] DTC2, 209. The agon in Birds (451-638) consists of Peisetairos' convincing the birds that they were once rulers of the universe and that they should reclaim their rightful place from the Olympians. In the sphragis, the birds are resigned to do Peisetairos' bidding, ˜!a d¢ gn≈mhi de› bouleÊein, §p‹ !o‹ tãde pãnt' énãkeitai (637).

[3] See below pp. 64-70 and notes 350 and 351 for discussion of utopias.

[4] Trygaios calls him an élaz≈n. The oracle-monger who interrupts Peisetairos' foundation sacrifice is also called an élaz≈n (983), as is Meton (1016). In the fifth century, the word applies to people who think they know what they are talking about but in fact do not. Cf. MacDowell, "The Meaning of élaz≈n," in E. Craik (ed.), Owls to Athens (Oxford 1990), 287-292.

[5] Cf. the interesting, but highly speculative article by Michael Vickers, "Alcibiades on Stage: Aristophanes' Birds," Historia 38 (1989) 267-299 in which he discusses Peisetairos' harangue at 1243-1261 from the angle that Peisetairos is meant to represent Alkibiades and Alkibiades' peculiar lisp; this, according to Vickers, adds a very different, even more vulgar, spin to Peisetairos' words.

[6] Cf. Pax 860 where the chorus say of Trygaios: zhlvtÚ! ¶!ei g°rvn/aÔyi! n°o! Ãn pãlin, mÊrvi katãleipto!.

[7] Most recently, E. W. Scharffenberger, "Peisetaerus' 'Satyric' treatment of Iris: Aristophanes Birds 1253-6," JHS 115 (1995) 172-3, has made a small but significant contribution to further understanding this scene within a satyric context.

[8] J. R. Green, "A Representation of the Birds of Aristophanes," Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum 2 (1985) 95-118, esp. p. 111, and below pp. 17-25.

[9] Though he is probably not ithyphallic like the chorus. Cf. Scharffenberger, op. cit., p. 173 n. 8: "It is unlikely that Peisetaerus was ithyphallic…In this regard Peisetaerus would have differed from his satyric counterparts with, I imagine, humorous obviousness." Peisetairos' 'triple-decker hard on' (1256) and the many other sexual references and double entendres make this 'obviousness' unlikely. W. T. MacCary, "Philokleon Ithyphallos. Dance, Costume and Character in the Wasps," TAPA 109 (1979) 137-147 treats Philokleon of Wasps in the same way I would treat Peisetairos here, seeing the music (meter) and dance of the finale as a kind of ithyphallic representation of Philokleon's sexual potency; something his costume did not convey. (Comic figures are almost never ithyphallic on painted vases: cf. below n. 67.)

[10] Cf. again 1184-95 where the chorus, when it has learned of an intruder into Nephelokokkygia, sings in dochmiacs (which themselves herald the arrival of Iris specifically by the crane): pÒlemo! a‡retai, pÒlemo! oÈ fatÚ!/prÚ! §m¢ ka‹ yeoÊ!.

[11] See Appendix IV for references to the Titano- Gigantomachy in Birds.

[12] Vesp. 828, Pax 1138, Thesmo. 279-94.

[13] Henderson MM2 p. 156 no. 236 with note 25.

[14] ibid. p. 170 no. 301.

[15] Literally, to 'de-pit'; ibid., p. 166 no. 285.

[16] Used of religious attendants; cf. LSJ s.v. Used also as an epithet of Hermes at SEG 30.326.8 (Athens , i A.D.) as s.v. in LSJ Revised Supplement (Oxford 1996).

[17] Much work has been done lately on the treatment of women in drama. Among a large bibliography, I cite Froma Zeitlin's collection of essays, Playing the Other. Gender and Society in Classical Literature (Chicago 1996). Attention may be brought to her chapter 8, "Playing the Other: Theater, Theatricality, and the Feminine in Greek Drama," pp. 341-374 (a revised and updated version of the same titled essay in John J. Winkler and Froma Zeitlin (edd.) Nothing to Do with Dionysos?). Though speaking mainly about tragedy, Zeitlin's comments reflect the perception of the general theater audience in Athens. One of her comments illuminates our scene in which, as we shall see, Iris is a foil to Peisetairos' new-found authority and sexual rejuvenation: "[the demands of a woman] for identity and self-esteem [which Iris tries desperately to maintain] are still designed primarily for exploring the male project of selfhood in the large world" (p. 347).

[18] Perhaps in a way that references tragedy. Cf. the recently discovered Tarentine red-figured bell-krater (New York, coll. Fleischman F 93; nicely represented in Taplin, Comic Angels (Oxford 1993), frontispiece and fig. 9.1; the vase dates to about 380 but seems to reflect an Athenian comedy of the late fifth century — cf. generally Green, Theatre in Ancient Greek Society (London and New York 1994), p. 46f. and Taplin, op. cit., pp. 55-63). On this piece the painter has depicted three comic figures (as their dress, with phalluses, clearly shows), one of whom whispers (?) advice to a youngish looking man. The painter designates the man as Aigisthos and depicts him not in comic clothing but as he would have appeared on the tragic stage. Exactly what is going on in the scene has been debated, but that it represents an Athenian comedy is sensible. Interestingly, Taplin, op. cit. p. 60, notes "that the only portrayal of a goddess [Hera, cf. Bieber History, fig. 485] on a comic vase seems to be 'serious'…" This is how I would see Iris, whose costume, as we shall see, is similarly ornate beyond comic convention, though no less funny because it is out of place.

[19] D. J. Mastronarde's article in Classical Antiquity 9 (1990) 247-294 (hereafter Mastronarde) is fundamental for the study of the crane in fifth-century drama.

[20] So C. F. Russo, Aristophanes An Author for the Stage (London and New York 1994), 161-2, Sommerstein Birds at 1206, p. 279, and Mastronarde, p. 287.

[21] So, e.g., Sommerstein Birds, p. 149 in the stage directions of his translation. Only Kock-Schroeder (p. 140) think Iris does not enter by the crane: "Mit ihren Flügelarmen rudernd (zu 1229) — eine Flugmaschine, wie der 'Pegasus' Frie 126 ff. 154. 174, ist nirgends angezeigt — mag sie sich, wie die zwei von den vier prächtig geschmückten Statisten auf den lÒfo! hinter der Orchestra … hinaufgeschwungen haben, im Begriff weiterzuziehn." Emphasis added.

[22] At 173, Trygaios complains metatheatrically to the mhxanopoiÒ! that his ride is too rough. Peisetairos' lines quoted above also suggest that the mhxanopoiÒ! gave Iris a rough ride.

[23] At Aristophanes fr. 160 an actor says, "the operator ought to have deployed the crane as quickly as possible" (trans. J. Henderson in J. Rusten et al., trans. The Birth of Comedy: Fragments of Greek Drama 520-250 B.C. (Baltimore forthcoming)).

[24] Fr. 192: ı mhxanopoiÒ!, ıpÒte boÊlei tÚn troxÚn/§lçn énekã!, l°ge, Xa›re, f°ggo! ±l€ou. Is the speaker Ikaros? Additionally, some have argued (see Mastronarde p. 288 n. 10) that in Thesmophoriazousai Euripides himself flies by in the crane at 1016ff., pretending to be Perseus while Mnesilochos pretends to be Andromeda in a rescue scene that parodies Euripides' Andromeda. Mastronarde rejects the use, but cf. 1015, where Mnesilochos hopes that Euripides will save him and that he would not just fly by (oÈ går ín par°pteto).

[25] Cf. Eur. fr. 316 Nauck2, kalÚn m¢n f°ggo! ≤l€ou tÒde.

[26] Mastronarde p. 289 has a brief discussion of select testimonia for the crane.

[27] a‡rou!in [tragic poets] À!per dãktulon tØn mhxanØn. (Arnott, Greek Scenic Conventions, p. 73 notes that this suggests a "counter-balance jib with the actor dangling from the end.") Cf. also Pl. Cra. 425d for a similar sentiment.

[28] Euripides may have had this scene in mind when conceiving Rhes. 885-982 (if this play belongs to him as is generally believed — see, e.g., Heinrich Kuch's art., pp. 548ff. with n. 13 in Sommerstein et al. [edd.], Tragedy, Comedy and the Polis [Bari 1993]): Rhesos' mother, a muse, descends and ascends via mechane with her dead son in her arms, much the same way Eos ascends with hers.

[29] Griffith, Prometheus Bound ad loc., p. 140), Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysus in Athens (Oxford 1946), p. 127f. and Mastronarde p. 287. Did Aischylos also use the machine for Athena at Eum. 403ff? Cf. Arnott, Greek Scenic Conventions (Oxford 1962), p. 74; Mastronarde rejects the idea.

[30] See below pp. 54ff. Whatever the real case, Aischylos, like Sophokles was reserved in his use of the machine, if in fact it existed during his lifetime and he was able to use it. For a skeptical view of the use of stage machinery in the fifth century cf. Lefkowitz, Hermes 112 (1984) 143-53.

[31] Euripides seems to have used the crane most often to move gods onto the roof of the skene: in Hippolytus for Artemis (1283-1443); Andromache for Thetis (1226-83); Supplices for Athena (1183-1234); Elektra for Kastor and Polydeukes (1233-1359); Herakles for Iris and Lyssa (815-73); Troades for Athena (48-94); IT for Athena (1435-89); Ion for Athena (1549-1618); Helen for Dioskouroi (1642-97); Bacchae for Dionysos (1330-78); IA fr. 857 TrGF for Artemis; Rhesos for one of the nine muses who is Rhesos' mother (885-982); Erechtheus fr. 65 Austin for Athena. He also less often used the crane to swing characters about without having them land: Andromeda fr. 124 TrGF for Perseus; Bellerophon fr. 306-8 TrGF for Bellerophon; and for Apollo and a mute Helen in Orestes (1225-90). A quick glance at the line numbers above confirms that most uses of the crane occurred at the end of a play. Only Herakles, Troades and Rhesos are different in this respect. However, there are instances of the appearance of gods in prologues (cf. Troades above): e.g., does Athena appear via mechane or simply stand on the theologeion (a probable anachronism, found first and only in Pollux, for the roof of the skene) in Soph.'s Aias? (Probably not: cf. Barrett in R. Carden (ed.), The Papyrus Fragments of Sophocles (Berlin and New York 1974), p. 185 and Mastronarde, p. 282.) Instead of arriving by the crane, gods in prologues probably stepped out onto the roof of the skene and remained there (if they appeared at a height at all). In their appearance, the gods, like Aphrodite in Euripides' Hippolytos, usually provide the audience with information about events (future and past) outside of the play. Cf. Arist. Poet. 1454b2, mhxan∞i xrh!t°on §p‹ tå ¶jv toË drãmato! and D. W. Lucas' Oxford (1968) commentary on the Poetics at [14]54b1, p. 163f. Already one can see that Iris' appearance in Birds is significantly different from these examples.

[32] Barrett in Carden, op cit., n. 11, p. 184, notes (in addition to the appearance of Artemis and Apollo in Sophokles' Niobe which Barrett there discusses) Iris' and Lyssa's entrance in Euripides' Herakles (discussed below), [Euripides'] Rhesos where Athena appears to Odysseus and Diomedes, encouraging them to attack Rhesos who had recently arrived at Hektor's camp, and Aischylos' Xantriai (fr. 169 Nauck2 = 368 Mette) where Lyssa appears (not by crane; Mastronarde, p. 284) in order to drive the Bacchae insane (§piyeiãzou!a ta›! bãkxai!, so the Suda s.v. Ùkt≈poun).

[33] K. H. Lee, "The Iris-Lyssa Scene in Euripides' Heracles," Antichthon 16 (1982) p. 44, thinks their entrance midway was "striking" and that the mechane was used; Barrett in Carden, op. cit. note 11, p. 184 is less enthusiastic about the unusual nature of the scene; Arnott, Greek Scenic Conventions, p. 73, thinks the mechane was used, as does Mastronarde, p. 283; Pickard-Cambridge, Theatre of Dionysus in Athens, p. 55 does not.

[34] McLeish, The Theatre of Aristophanes (London 1980), p. 47 suggests that Aristophanes has Herakles in mind. Dearden, The Stage of Aristophanes (London 1976), p. 81 suggests this at first but dates Herakles to sometime after Birds. He ultimately prefers Euripides' Phaethon as the source of inspiration for the scene in Birds: he believes that Iris may have been the messenger who reports Phaethon's ride and death, and thinks that Iris' paratragic speech in Birds at 1238ff., "if considered as a parody of the Phaethon fits neatly into the context of the burning corpse [of Phaethon]." But this is not convincing. It is unlikely that Euripides used a divine messenger for this sort of thing and Diggle in his commentary on Phaethon (Cambridge 1970, p. 41) comes to the conclusion that "the messenger belongs to the household of Clymene, that he accompanied Phaethon on his journey to Helios' palace," and that "such a rôle is Phaethon's paidagogos." For the dating of Herakles cf. Wilamowitz, Herakles2 (Berlin 1895), ii, 132ff., who puts the play between 422 and 415, and Godfrey Bond, Euripides' Herakles (Oxford 1981), p. xxxi, who thinks that either 416 or 414 are possible (415 being occupied by Alexandros, Palamedes and Troades).

[35] At 1230 Iris says prÚ! ényr≈pou! p°tomai parå toË patrÚ!/frã!ou!a yÊein to›! ÉOlump€oi! yeo›!…

[36] It could be that Aristophanes had originally wanted Hermes but due to the recent incident with the herms the summer before felt that his appearance would be in poor taste; however, Aristophanes jokes about the 'hermokopidai' at Lys. 1193-4 (cf. Henderson Lysistrata, p. 194 ad loc.), and it is more likely that Aristophanes' first choice was to parody a scene from a dramatic source. Cf. Dearden, The Stage of Aristophanes, p. 80: "the very fact that Iris appears on the mechane … may be evidence for an intended parody." More generally, cf. Newiger, "Ekkyklema e Mechané" Dioniso 59 (1989) p. 175 n. 9 who states that "la scene di Iride negli Uccelli è intessuta abbondantemente di formule tratte da un'intera serie di tragedie." Cf. also Rau, Paratragodia (München 1967), p. 197f. for probable sources for the lines of this entire scene. All of this will be considered in more detail below.

[37] In addition to Hofmann, Dunbar also brings attention to the hymn; cf. her commentary p. 9 and p. 612 ad 1196-1261. Her insights are drawn from Hofmann. Iris also appears in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (102-114) discussed in note 108.

[38] Esp. Hymn. Hom. Cer. 310ff.: ka‹ nÊ ke pãmpan ˆle!!e [DhmÆthr] g°no! merÒpvn ényr≈pvn/limoË Íp' érgal°h!, gerãvn t' §rikud°a timØn/ka‹ yu!i«n ≥mer!en ÉOlÊmpia d≈mat' ¶xonta!… oÈ m¢n gãr pot' ¶fa!ke yu≈deo! OÈlÊmpoio/pr€n g' §pibh!e!yai, oÈ pr‹n g∞! karpÚn énÆ!ein,/pr‹n ‡doi Ùfyalmo›!in •Øn eÈ≈pida koÊrhn.

[39] Brommer, Satyrspiele2(Berlin 1959), p. 73 nrr. 28-34; LIMC Iris I 105-120 and 167. There is the similar theme of a woman being chased by satyrs on vases representing Aischylos' Amymone (figs. 15 and 16 of Brommer) and Atalantis (a satyr-play? cf. Brommer, p. 48 and fig. 41). See also chapter 3, n. 274, and E. Simon, "Satyr-plays on Vases in the Time of Aeschylus," in Donna Kurtz & Brian Sparkes (eds.), The Eye of Greece. Studies in the Art of Athens (Cambridge 1982) pp. 125-129.

[40] Though they might if the author was famous: the evidence is scanty, but it seems likely that productions were regularly re-performed; though perhaps not the same performance over a hundred years. Cf. recently Csapo and Slater (eds.) The Context of Ancient Drama (Michigan 1995), p. 3 and esp. nrr. 18 and 19, p. 12.

[41] Simon, op. cit., 125-9 presents a plot for this play in light of the most attractive and informative piece depicting this play, the London cup, E 65 by the Brygos Painter.

[42] LIMC Iris I 111 and 117.

[43] Simon, op. cit., tells us that the first element of an Olympian sacrifice was the burning of tongues (cf. Hom. Od. 3,332ff.) and that this we can assume was what Iris is supposed to steal. But the object Iris is holding in the London cup may in fact be, pace Simon, a tail; cf. Euboulos fr. 18 (Incerta Fragmenta, Meineke), aÈto›! d¢ to›! yeo›! tØn k°rkon mÒnhn ka‹ mhrÚn, À!per paidera!ta›! yÊete, where no mention is made of tongues; cf. Burkert, "Greek Tragedy and Sacrificial Ritual," GRBS 7 (1966): 104f.: "The thigh-bones, the tail, the fat and the gall-bladder are burnt for the gods in whose honour the sacrifice is held," compiling his evidence from Homer and Hesiod; and lastly LIMC Iris I 113 (and the descriptions of 115 and 116) where Iris, holding what must be a tail (contrary to Simon, p. 127 with nn. 22 and 23; what Iris holds seems to be about two feet long), is menaced by two satyrs. cf. Scharffenberger, E. W. "Peisetaerus' 'satyric' treatment of Iris: Aristophanes Birds 1253-56" JHS 115 (1995) 172 n. 1, for a view similar to mine.

[44] He wears a petasos (the typical traveler's hat) while Iris on the other scene of the cup does not.

[45] Herakles is dressed in Skythian garb (the Skythians being the official police of the Athenians) with bow in one hand and club in another.

[46] op. cit., p. 126 n. 18.

[47] cf. Dana Sutton's "The Satyr-play" in P. E. Easterling & E. J. Kenney (eds.), The Cambridge History of Classical Literature, vol. 1, pt. 2, Greek Drama (Cambridge 1989) p. 100, who says that "almost by definition a satyr-play must have a happy ending."

[48] Cf. Simon, op. cit., p. 127: "The action will rather run into a festival of reconciliation, such as is typical of satyr-plays."

[49] Simon, op. cit., and Bieber History, p. 14 suggest that these early vases may depict a satyr-play put on by Pratinas. But cf. LIMC Iris I 118 which dates to sometime between 450 and 440.

[50] TrGF, i, F 19-23.

[51] Lesky, History of Greek Literature, p. 411.

[52] Satyrspiele2, p. 28.

[53] op. cit. pp. 127- 8

[54] ibid. p. 125. Sutton in his Greek Satyr Play (Meisenheim am Glan 1980) does not suggest a date for this play.

[55] The testimonia are collected in TrGF, v. 1, p. 115.

[56] According to a scholion on Wasps 1081 and one on Frogs 184, Aristophanes quotes Achaios from his Momos and Aithon respectively. The quotation from Wasps is repeated again at Pax 357. Were Momos and Aithon put on close to the date of Wasps and Frogs?

[57] M. Mayer in Roscher, s.v. 'Iris', p. 345, notes Aristophanes' familiarity with Achaios' work (he notes that Aristophanes Frogs 184 comes from Achaios 11 [Nauck2] and that Frogs 847 seems to recall Achaios 14, éll' …! tãxi!ta <m°lana> deur' émnÚn f°rein/ koinÒn te xrØ krat∞ri ka‹ kulixn€da!, though Nauck himself does not acknowledge the Aristophanes passage); however, he does not go so far to say that Aristophanes is directly alluding to Achaios' Iris satyr-play. Aly in Roscher, s.v. 'Satyrspiel' when mentioning Achaios' Iris alludes immediately to the Iris scene in Birds; and Weicker, RE s.v. 'Iris', 2041. Neither of these two indicate just how the Iris satyr-play is like Aristophanes' Iris-scene. Dunbar (pp. 612-3) spends some time presenting the evidence for an Iris satyr-play, and admits its relevance "to the tone of Aristophanes' scene."

[58] Dearden, The Stage of Aristophanes, notes that she hangs motionless throughout the scene; Dunbar ad loc., p. 617, suggests that Iris either still hangs from the crane or (contra Mastronarde, p. 287) has been set on the roof of the skene.

[59] Cf. LIMC Iris I 114, where Iris raises her skirt rather sarcastically to two satyrs, one of whom looks aghast (with his hand on his head), while the other seems to want to attack her but remains uncertain. She is apprehended at LIMC Iris I 113 and it seems that attempts are being made at 117 and 120. Brommer, Satyrspiele2, fig. 17 is nearly identical to the actions of the London cup.

[60] Its presence on the vase points to its being a representation of a dramatic performance. Cf. DTC2, p. 71 (citing Etymol. Magn., s.v. thymele): "the sacrifices were cut up on it…. It was the table on which they stood and sang in the fields, when tragedy had not yet been organized."

[61] Cf. Henderson MM2 p. 125 where he calls the tr€orxo! "a particularly well-endowed bird" and indicates the potent significance of the number three in comedy.

[62] Peisetairos also makes advances toward Iris when he says he has a "triple-decker hard-on" (1256) for Iris; n.b. the reference to "three" again. These overt sexual advances are in direct contrast to the prudishness of Iris' character and are thus the source of humor for the scene.

[63] J. R. Green, "A Representation of the Birds of Aristophanes," 95-118; DFA2, pp. 363-3, and Oliver Taplin "Appendix I. The Getty Birds," in his Comic Angels. Taplin would have the vase depict the two Logoi of Aristophanes' Clouds I (taking direction from scholia at Nub. 839). While Taplin makes a good argument against a representation of Birds by pointing out, e.g., that the erect phallus almost never occurs in vases depicting comedies (an old man may have an erect phallus on a vase in the Michael C. Carlos Museum at Emory University, fig. 13.10 in Taplin — the vase dates to sometime between 375-350 BC) and that consequently it is usually reserved for scenes of arousal (e.g., Euelpides and the aulos-player in Birds [658ff.]), Green, on the other hand, shows that it is likely that a chorus could be ithyphallic. Compare the possibility of erect choruses in Aristophanes' Wasps, the Satyroi of Ekphantides, Phrynichos and Kratinos, and Kratinos' Dionysalexandros.

[64] It is generally believed that the chorus of Birds is variously dressed to represent individual species. But Green, op. cit., demonstrates convincingly to the contrary. Cf. esp. p. 112 where Green shows that the existing vases that depict animal choruses (there are 15) depict choruses that differ only slightly in costume. Cf. also Green, "On Seeing and Depicting," GRBS 32 (1991) p. 22 n.19 for two additional vases that depict uniformly dressed choruses, and p. 27 for general comments on this topic.

[65] Cf. Green, "Representation of the Birds" p. 116, fig. 24 for satyrs wearing these shorts.

[66] "Representation of Birds," p. 118. In "Seeing", Green further emphasizes "the connexion with satyr-play in the staging of Birds" (p. 30 n. 51). See also G. Dobrov, "The Tragic and Comic Tereus," AJP 114 (1993) 189-234 for discussion of the fragments of Tereus: he argues that Aristophanes' Tereus responds to the innovative Sophoklean Tereus.

[67] Cf. S Nub. 839 that says Right and Wrong come on stage d€khn Ùrn°vn; Taplin, "Phallology, Phlyakes, Iconography and Aristophanes," PCPhS 33 (1987) 92-104 and idem, Comic Angels, 101-4.

[68] op. cit., p. 104.

[69] and Xão!, a word that derives from, among other words, the group of xa€nein and xã!kein, to gape. This gaping is a negative description of the Athenian demos in Eq. 1111-119 where the demos is chided, prÚ! tÒn te l°gont' ée‹ k°xhna!. The birds are also described as such at the beginning of the play (165), but, I think, develop beyond that to work together with Peisetairos toward his goal of regaining their former glory and establishing him as their leader.

[70] Arrowsmith, "Aristophanes' Birds," pp. 130-31.

[71] Stone Costume, pp. 320-22 discusses Iris' outfit but merely states the problem. Cf. 201-2 where Stone more explicitly states that "Pisthetaerus' words are not limited merely to the headgear of Iris, but rather describe her entire costume."

[72] Sommerstein Birds, 1203-4, would print,

Pei!. ˆnoma d° !oi t€; Pãralo! µ Salamin€a;

Ir. âIri! taxe›a.

Pei!. <pÒtera> plo›on µ kÊvn;

following the suggestion of C. Robert (Hermes 33 [1898] 567-7.). Sommerstein hopes to avoid the problem of Iris' appearance with this suggestion, and it is attractive: "The fundamental objection to the transmitted text is that "boat" and "hat" are not names; … Nor has it been plausibly explained why Iris should be compared to a hat." But Dunbar (pp. 615-4) sees no problem here, "Peisetairos shifts the sense of ˆnoma from proper name to word…." Nor does she see a problem with the paradosis, and changing it eliminates the punch line, "Are you the Paralos or the Salaminia?" which is only funny once the audience has in their heads the suggestion, planted first by Peisetairos, that Iris resembles a ship.

[73] Konisalos, inter alia, "was a phallic creature associated with Priapos" (Henderson Lysistrata ad 982, p. 185; the herald had a huge erection under his cloak).

[74] Cf. also Eq. 631 (nçpu bl°pein) and Vesp. 643 (!kÊth bl°pein).

[75] If Iris' costume is exaggerated in this way, this is good evidence for her being suspended throughout the scene since it would have been too difficult for an actor to walk about on stage with such a cumbersome costume.

[76] Simply browse through Iris' entry in LIMC to see her shown in this way. Contra Stone Costume, p. 322, Iris appears unwinged more than once: LIMC Iris I 34, 49? (the vase is fragmentary), 124, 127, 146; and fig. 107 of T. H. Carpenter's Art and Myth in Ancient Greece (London 1991). She is pictured with a short skirt at LIMC Iris I 36, 42, 99, 124 and 160.

[77] Ismeme wears a Thessalian kune at Soph. OC 314; this indicates that she has been traveling.

[78] Radt, TrGF 272 prints gunØ t€! ¥de, !ulå! ÉArkadÚ! kun∞!; following Pfeiffer's conjecture (Die Netzfisher des Aischylos und der Inachos des Sophokles. Zwei Satyrspiel-Funde, in Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Abteilung, Heft 2 (1938) [pp. 23-62 = "Inachos "] p. 35).

[79] Sommerstein Birds 278-9 follows M. Mayer in Roscher (s.v. 'Iris') who suggests that the character may not be Iris but Io. Mayer argues that Hermes knew full well who Iris was (Mayer does not consider that Hermes may speak to Iris facetiously) and that it is more likely that he addresses Io, to whose horns he metaphorically refers when he mentions a kune. Sommerstein Birds at 1203-4 raises Mayer's point. Cf. also Pfeiffer, op. cit., p. 34f., who would see Hermes surprised at the appearance of Iris in his hat. However, he also notes the importance of Kopfbedeckungen in the play and esp. Io's Kuhhörner. In any case, Hermes is surprised to see this person in a kune, and, if it is Iris, the text suggests that he thinks it unusual that she wear one. Are we meant to see a parallel between Inachos and Birds in this respect?

[80] That the audience allowed the words of drama sometimes to help create visual effects, cf. Green "Seeing" p. 17 and esp. 27ff.; and more generally, the first chapter of Sifakis' Parabasis and Animal Choruses (London 1971).

[81] It is worth noting that Pearson in his Fragments of Sophocles (Cambridge 1917), on fr. 272, p. 202, commenting on the line from Inachos quoted by the scholiast on Av. 1203, thinks that Iris wears a hat like Hermes' petasos and that since they are both messengers of the gods this is appropriate. He does not comment on the fact that Iris is never pictured wearing such a hat.

[82] No doubt they have in mind a helmet much like the one Athena wears (cf. Bieber Griechische Kleidung (Berlin and Leipzig 1928), Plate IV 1 and 2). At Lys. 742ff. a woman tries to deceive Lysistrata — in order to leave the acropolis and have sex with her husband — by putting the holy kune of Athena under her chiton and feigning pregnancy. Strepsiades at Nub. 268, when the clouds are about to make their entrance, complains that he left his kune at home.

[83] Sommerstein Birds, p.278 at 1199-1261. This comment is made independently from his suggested reading (kun∞ for kÊvn, see note 76 above).

[84] And also the kerkyreion, though there is no mention of it in Birds.

[85] Such as soldiers and Athena wore. In addition, Iris' mask was probably not much different from those of Trendall Illustrations IV,17, IV,24 (though I doubt Iris had long hair in our play), IV,27, and IV 35. It may also be that Iris is costumed not in comic but in tragic fashion (her gown may be comically exaggerated, but Peisetairos' suggestion that her gown is extraordinarily flowing is probably more the point than Iris' costume): cf. Taplin, Comic Angels, p. 59ff. (and esp. p. 60 where he says that "the only portrayal of a goddess [Hera] on a comic vase [in Bieber History, fig. 485] seems to be 'serious'").

[86] Cf. G. S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary. Books 5-8 (Cambridge 1990), on 387, p. 284.

[87] Character being an aspect that distinguishes one person from another, i.e., a m€mh!i! ényr≈pvn to use Aristotle's words. It's function in comedy is different from that in tragedy. Cf. Poetics 50a-b and esp. a13, oÎkoun ˜pv! tå ≥yh mimÆ!vntai prãttou!in, éllå tå ≥yh !umparalambãnou!in diå tå! prãjei!. (This scene in the Iliad is not necessarily comical but since Iris adds a personal element, it draws our attention in an unusual and unexpected way.) Cf. W.B. Yeats' essay, "The Tragic Theatre," in John P. Frayne and Colton Johnson (edd.), Uncollected Prose by W.B. Yeats, vol. 2 (London 1975) pp. 384-92; esp. p. 386: "I saw that…tragedy must always be a drowning and breaking of the dykes that separate man from man, and that it is upon these dykes comedy keeps house." He then quotes William Congreve who "defines 'humour' itself, the foundation of comedy, as a 'singular and unavoidable way of doing anything peculiar to one man only, by which his speech and actions are distinguished from all other men'" (from Congreve's "Concerning Humour in Comedy" in John C. Hodges (ed.), William Congreve. Letters and Documents (New York 1964), p. 182). See also M. S. Silk, "The People of Aristophanes," in C. B. R. Pelling (ed.), Characterization and Individuality in Greek Literature (New York 1982).

[88]At Il. 8,398ff., Zeus sends Iris to Athena and Hera in order to stop them from approaching him about fighting in the Trojan war. She repeats what Zeus has told her but independently adds her own warning to Athena, éllå !Ê g' afinotãth, kÊon éde°!, efi §teÒn ge/ tolmÆ!ei! DiÚ! ênta pel≈rion ¶gxo! ée›rai. The insult kÊon is used elsewhere only by men. At 11,362 Diomedes uses it for Hektor, §j aÔ nËn ¶fuge! yãnaton, kÊon, and Achilles repeats the phrase again for Hektor at 20,449. The addition of éde°!, however, seems to be an insult for women by women, but it is none other than Hera, DiÚ! afido€h parãkoiti!, who uses it for Artemis at 21,481. Iris has boldly plucked a power phrase from the mouths of men and the queen of the gods.

[89] At Il. 15,172ff. Iris is quite cunning: "oÏtv går dÆ toi, gaiÆoxe kuanoxa›ta,/ tÒnde f°rv Di‹ mËyon éphn°a te kraterÒn te,/ ∑ ti meta!tr°cei!; !trepta‹ m°n te fr°ne! §!yl«n./ o‰!y' …! pre!but°roi!in ÉErinÊe! afi¢n ßpontai" (201-03). Poseidon responds, §!ylÚn ka‹ tÚ t°tuktai, ˜t' êggelo! a‡!ima efid∞i (207), and yields.

[90] Il. 18,172ff.

[91] These are the instances in which there is interaction between Iris and the recipient of her message. Iris also appears in these places in the Iliad (though she does not hold a conversation with any of the recipients of her messages): 2,786ff. where she appears in disguise to Priam's son, Polites; 3,121ff. where she appears in the guise of Laodike to Helen; 5,353ff. where she drives the wounded Aphrodite to Olympos; 11,185ff. where she speaks to Hektor; 23,198ff. where she hears Achilles plea for winds to kindle the pyre of Patroklos, and flies to the winds herself to make his request.

[92] Iris' main role is that of messenger, and we cannot, therefore, compare her actions in other capacities as we can her messenger counterpart, Hermes, who plays many different roles. Her tactics, then, as messenger are the best means by which to study her character.

[93] (Oxford 1966) p. 242. Cf. also M. Mayer in Roscher s.v. 'Iris', p. 333-34 who discusses the relevance of Iris as a rainbow.

[94] Cf. Theog. 268ff.: a„ =' én°mvn pnoi∞i!i ka‹ ofinvno›! ëm' ßpontai/ »ke€hi! pterÊge!!i: metaxrÒniai går ‡allon.

[95] Cf. West, ibid., on 94-97, p. 186.

[96] Cecil Smith, "Harpies in Greek Art," JHS 13 (1892-3) 104 points out that the "Harpies always retained their original reputation as spirits of evil." He also notes that "the Harpy [in Greek Art] has invariably the winged figure of a woman, with no other distinguishing feature, unless it be that in one instance her hands are drawn in a method suggestive of claws" (103). This description, save the claws, can also fit Iris. Cf. esp. figs. 1 and 2.

[97] Heracl. 822ff.

[98] Cf. esp. Heracl. 832.

[99] They work in conjunction with the Erinyes. Cf., Hom. Od. 1, 241; 14,371; and 20,77f. Cf. also Il. 15,21-3, quoted above, in which Iris mentions the Erinyes.

[100] Cf. Mayer in Roscher, s.v. 'Iris', p. 321 who says that for the Greeks the rainbow "war und blieb ihm [i.e. dem Griecher] ein t°ra!, eine unruhe erweckende Monstrosität."

[101] lãtri! as at Eur., Heracl. 823.

[102] She is pictured with a short skirt at LIMC 36 (no date), 42 (ca. 500), 99 (ca. 460), 124 (ca. 580) and 160 (ca. 460).

[103] Dyfri Williams, "Sophilos in the British Museum," in Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum, Occasional Papers on Antiquity 1, vol. 1 (Malibu 1983) p. 71 describes Iris' outfit on Sophilos' vase (LIMC Iris I 124) and states, "male dress, as usual, perhaps to emphasize the sexual ambivalence of the go-between." In LIMC Iris I 82, where Iris carries the baby Hermes to Zeus, her muscles are quite manly, more so than we might normally expect. When Iris wears a short skirt, her legs are prominently muscular.

[104] Those references following the date of Birds are Kallimachos' Hymn to Delos (4,66f. and 218ff.) and Theokritos' idyll 17,133ff. Kallimachos' Iris (esp. 228ff.) is much like the Iris of Herakles since she is the devoted servant of Hera. In Kallimachos she sits like a dog (recall Sommerstein's emendation of Av. 1203/4 - he does not, however, quote Kallimachos), ears pricked, waiting for Hera's command; she sleeps by Hera's throne, always dressed and ready to serve. Theokritos' poem (ca. 270) pictures a more harmless Iris. She is ¶ti pary°no! and Gow (Theocritus, [Cambridge 1950], vol. 2, p. 346 at 17.134) wonders if this reference is not an Alexandrian conceit: "Perhaps ¶ti may merely emphasize the persistence of Iris' virginity in a context devoted to marriage." In this connection it is worth noting that on the Sophilos' vase in the British Museum, Iris is depicted conducting the gods to Peleus for his wedding to Thetis. We might also point to an archaic red-figured vase by the Syriskos Painter in which Iris pours a libation for Zeus while holding Hera's hand (Hermes is present as well): cf. Boardman ARFArch fig. 202. These examples of Iris show us the two (traditional) sides of Iris: one dark (whether she be kin to the Harpies or like to a dog) and one more purely subservient: this is her role in the Iliad, except for the instances we discussed where the "character" of Iris shown through. Cf. Lucinda Coventry, "Messenger Scenes in Iliad xxiii and xxiv (xxiii 192-211, xxiv 77-188)," JHS 107 (1987) pp. 178-180.

Furthermore, Semos of Delos (FGrH 396 F5 ap. Ath. 14,645b) in his book on Delos says that the inhabitants of the island sacrificed basyniai (a kind of wheat-flour dough cooked with honey, dried-figs and walnuts) to Iris on Hekate's island (near Delos). Cf. Eitrem, Opferritus und Voropfer (Kristiani 1915), p. 266, n. 4. The Delians may have sacrificed to Iris because of her connection with Leto — a hostile connection in Kallimachos, but cf. the Homeric Hymn to Apollo 102-114 where Iris obtains the help of Eileithyia, whom Hera prevents from helping Leto; this is further evidence of Kallimachos' bending of the myth and the polarities of the goddess. Whatever the case, Aristophanes does not appear to have made use of this information (if indeed such sacrifices were made during his time) when creating his Iris.

[105] Rogers Birds suggests that her reply is prompted by what Zeus was accustomed to say to her when sending her on a errand: bã!k' ‡yi, âIri taxe›a, ktl. which occurs at Iliad 8,399; 11,186; 15,158; and 24,144. G.S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary. Books 5-8, on 399-408, p. 330, notes that Iris does not change or augment messages when she is sent by Zeus with these words.

[106] "Ut naË! taxe›a," Blaydes at 1204.

[107] These were messenger ships for the Athenians. The Salaminia recalled Alkibiades, almost nine months earlier than Birds, from his post in the expedition to Sicily. The Paralos was sent by Konon to tell Athens of the disaster at Aigospotamoi. Cf. also Av. 147 and Dunbar ad loc., p. 180.

[108] Cf. Henderson, MM2, p. 124f. (numbers 69, 70 and 74): !frag€! is "clearly a double entendre for phallus." SÊmbolon and §pibãllein (see also Henderson, op. cit., p. 170 no. 301) work together to mean something like "rape".

[109] Peisetairos tauntingly repeats Iris' phrase (1210) oÈk o‰da må D€' ¶gvge at 1220.

[110] t€ tÚ kakÒn; (Iris has already said this at 1207 about the seizing business.) TÚ kakÒn occurs quite often in this play, usually meaning "nuisance" or "pest" (at 931 and 956 about the poet who visits Nephelokokkygia; 992 about Meton; 1037 about the decree seller and 1413 about the Informer; also at 294 where it is used to describe the parodos of the birds). Interestingly, Peisetairos has been the one to use the words at every other instance in Birds. Is the phrase openly rude or sarcastic? The latter explanation would suit the picture we are getting of Iris. Furthermore, it would suggest a reversal of roles between Peisetairos, who had tried to be diplomatic with the first visitors to Nephelokokkygia, and Iris, whose "traditional" image is harsher than here in Birds. Since this is the first encounter with the gods, it is probably no coincidence that Peisetairos is as harsh here as he is: he has identified them as the enemy nearly from the outset: cf. 180ff. and 465ff. Besides this, Peisetairos now for the first time asserts his sexual potency (one thinks also of Philokleon in Wasps), which will culminate in Peisetairos' marriage to Basileia and his rule of the universe.

[111] Translation mine.

[112] Cf. Soph. fr. 659 (Nauck2) and A. Ag. 524-6 with Fraenkel Agamemnon ad loc., vol. ii, pp. 266-7. The scholia suggest that the lines are from a Lykimnios play by Euripides. Cf. Nauck2, p. 70 for testimonia for Lykimnios.

[113] Cf. Sommerstein Birds at 1242. He suggests that Iris makes a faux pas when she says that Peisetairos may be struck by Lykimnian bolts since Lykimnios was killed by a wayward spear: "Iris' terror-striking tirade would end on a note of comic bathos," and leave, so to speak, egg on Iris' face.

[114] In so far as hubristic actions in tragedy (and elsewhere, e.g., Pindar) are often met with such admonitions.

[115] As Henderson translates, MM2 p. 121.

[116] Euelpides uses this word (diarrage€h!) in frustration to his crow at the beginning of this play.

[117] But LSJ s.v. m°le associate the word with *m°lo! and compare Latin melior. Œ m°le is best generally translated as 'sir' or 'my good man'.

[118] It is often used when an air of politeness is intended, but when frustration lingers underneath. For example, at Knights 671 the Sausage-Seller uses the address as he relates what the boule said to the Phaphlagonian when the latter told it of a Spartan envoy who had come bringing peace treaties. "Its our sardines they're after, Œ m°le," they say. The boule had been ready to throw the Phaphlagonian out at 665 and now try to maintain composure with the address — though they are obviously irritated. At Eq. 1337ff. where Demos thanks the Sausage-Seller for being rejuvenated and he in turn says, éll' Œ m°l' oÈk o‰!y' oÂo! ∑!y' aÈtÚ! pãro!, ktl. At the beginning of Clouds Strepsiades uses the address for his son when he dreams about his horse and rolling him in the dust: "Œ m°le you've already rolled me in the dust and right out of all my money" (33f.). Strepsiades is at once concerned about his son's "sanity" (when it comes to horse-racing and gambling) and annoyed about the debt he has incurred. At Nub. 1192ff. where Pheidippides explains with some frustration the "old and new day" to his father ; and 1338 where Strepsiades says to Pheidippides, "By god I really have had you taught, Œ m°le, to argue justly if you intend to persuade me that beating your father is just."

[119] Furthermore, at Pax 259ff., Riot (the slave of War) uses the address for War when he asks for a pestle to pound the Greek cities; Riot responds, éll' Œ m°le oÈk ¶!tin ≤m›n: §xy¢! efi!vik€!meya. The sarcasm in Riot's voice must have been funny since War had moments ago been beating on Riot (255): the Œ m°le sounds like a "yes sir" with clenched teeth. There are, of course further uses of the word (Pax 137, 380, 630, and 884; Lys. 56, 157 and 471; Thesm. 615; and Eccl. 120, 133, 245, 520 and 994) and these bear out the interpretation given (the word is either used straightforwardly or, as is more often the case, with a hint of indignation or sarcasm).

[120] kataiyal≈!ei! (S ad 1261). Cf. Dunbar, ad 1260-1, p. 630: "The point of t«n nevt°rvn will then be 'I myself am too old to be attracted by your attempt to seduce me (although, as already made clear, I could keep you busy if I were).'" Yes, but I think this makes Peisetairos look too gentlemanly.

[121] Rogers Birds at 1261, p. 167 assumes the same.

[122] We have no indication that Iris chased after men. There are only three references that associate her with love (Eros). One is here Av. 574ff. where Peisetairos tries to convince the chorus that several gods have wings like birds (and that, therefore, it is not so ridiculous to have wings): they are Nike, Eros, and Iris. Another is at Alkman 149 (Page) where Iris is the mother of Eros with Zephyros. And lastly Nonnos, Dion. 31,110ff. (where Hera sends Iris — who is uniformatively described — on a mission) and 47,341 makes Iris the mother of Pothos (Desire). But these associations are not confirmed elsewhere, as we have seen, nor in the plastic arts (though she may have some connection to marriage, as noted above), and at any rate they do not necessarily make Iris an amorous goddess.