Christopher Ell, Brown University
Aristophanes Wasps 1197-1264, which describes Bdelycleon teaching his father Philocleon how to comport himself in a high-society symposion, is prominent in sympotic scholarship (e.g. Vetta 1983; Cooper and Morris 1990: 77-78; Murray 1990a: 150, 2018 [1991]: 302, 2003: 17; Dalby 1996: 14; Bowie 1997: 10; Fisher 2000: 356-357; Steiner 2002: 351; Collins 2004: 99-110; Węcowski 2014: 90), though there is not consensus on the passage’s significance. In this paper, I offer a close reading of lines 1208-1215, in which Bdelycleon corrects his father's clumsy reclining. The passage admits of two possible interpretations: either Philocleon is entirely unaccustomed to dining and drinking while reclining (as opposed to sitting) and requires instruction on this matter, or he is accustomed to reclined conviviality but requires a primer on how to do so with the grace that would be expected at a high-society symposion employing costly klinai. I argue for the latter interpretation, on the grounds that the exchange between father and son takes the premise of reclining as a given and focuses on how to do so elegantly; Philocleon never expresses surprise or consternation about reclining, nor does he make rudimentary mistakes (such as reclining on the right elbow instead of the left) that would indicate he was unaccustomed to sympotic reclining (cf. Wilkins 2001: 207). Furthermore, in lines 1219-1249 he exhibits a virtuosity in the sympotic game skolion (Collins 2004: 99-110) that suggests extensive familiarity with sympotic drinking. Most scholarship on lines 1208-1215 falls into two camps. Some (e.g. Cooper and Morris 1990: 77-78, Dalby 1996: 14, Steiner 2002: 351) argue contrary to my position that Philocleon was unfamiliar with reclined banqueting and see the passage as evidence that reclined symposia were the exclusive prerogative of high society in 5th century Athens. Others (e.g. Murray 1990a: 150, 2018 [1991]: 302, 2003: 17; Bowie 1997: 10; Biles and Olson 2016 ad loc.) are more ambiguous and write in ways that admit of either possibility. This paper argues that it is untenable to interpret Wasps 1208-1215 as suggesting that Philocleon was unfamiliar with reclined symposia. This conclusion has implications that go beyond the interpretation of the play: a point of general debate in sympotic scholarship is the extent to which symposia were restricted to the wealthy elite. Whereas some strongly associate sympotic drinking with high society (e.g. Murray 1983a, 1983b: 196, 1990a, 1990b, 2018 [1991]: 295-296 and 302; Cooper and Morris 1990; Davidson 1997: 53-61; Węcowski 2014 passim; Filser 2017: 173-209, 234-235, 568-572), others argue that the non-elite also enjoyed reclined conviviality, though generally without costly klinai (e.g. Bowie 1997; Schäfer 1997: 41-68; Fisher 2000; Pütz 2003; Wilkins and Hill 2006: 70; Lynch 2007: 244, 2011: 170-173, 2012: 532-533; Corner 2015: 237-239). My paper offers Wasps 1208-1215 in support of the latter position, which is often argued on the basis of the material and iconographic record or on the belief that the sympotic humor of Attic Comedy presupposes wide familiarity with sympotic drinking among the audience.