34

’Αγροίκοι (Agroikoi)
(‘Rustics’)

Discussion Meineke 1839 1.369; 1840 III.161; Bothe 1944. 34-5; Meineke
1847. 574; Bothe 1855. 418; Kock 1884 11.135; Ribbeck 1885. 9-10; Breitenbach
1908. 76 n. 198; Edmonds 1959 11.44—5; Webster 1970. 56, 178; Kassel-Austin
1991 11.238; Fisher 2000. 357; Wilkins 2000. 222-3; Konstantakos 2005; Sanchis
Llopis et al. 2007. 238; Rusten 2011. 463
Title Anaxilas, Antiphanes, Augeas, Menander and Philemo all wrote an
Αγροίκος; Plautus an Agroecus·, Pomponius a Rusticus. Anaxandrides is the
only comic poet who certainly wrote an Αγροίκοι; Antiphanes may have as
well (cf. Antiph. frr. 3 (?); 4; 7; 69), although the references may be to more
than one play entitled Αγροίκος (cf. Breitenbach 1908. 76 n. 198; Konstantakos
2004. 9-13).
Ancient grammarians distinguished between αγροίκος, one who lives in
the countryside, and αγροίκος, one who is backwards in his manners (e. g.
Ammon. 6 [cf. Valckenaer ad loc. (= 3 Valek.); Poll. 9.12; Hdn. Gr. 1.151.13);
for similar pairs, cf. αίσχρος/αίσχρός; γέλοιος/γελοϊος; μόχθηρος/μοχθηρός;
πόνηρος/πονηρός. In comedy, however, there is little reason to make the dis-
tinction, since the two senses are often blurred and one rarely exists with-
out some suggestion of the other. Ancient grammarians also explained the
different accentuations of this and similar words as a dialectal distinction:
see Chandler 1881 §387-8, citing inter alios Thomas Magister p. 40 Ritschl
(quoted by Fix at Stephanus 1831-1865 s.v. αγροίκος [1.495d]) to the effect
that the adjective is always proparoxytone in Attic, although he had earlier
(§260-1) claimed that the substantive is generally properispomenon; Probert
2006. 74-5, 260, 263.
The character of the αγροίκος appears in fifth-century comedy (e.g.
Strepsiades in Ar. Nu.), but the evidence of titles suggests that it came to the
fore only in the fourth century. The αγροίκος is described at Thphr. Char. 4 as
an ignorant boor; for the view that Theophrastus’ Characters was derived from
a treatise on comedy, see Rostagni 1920; Navarre 1924. 207-11; Ussher 1977. In
comedy, the dominant characterization is more a lack of sophistication due to
ignorance (e. g. Men. Georg, fr. 5 Sandbach [fr. 3 Κό.] είμι μεν αγροίκος, καυτός
ούκ άλλως έρώ, / και των κατ’ άστυ πραγμάτων ού παντελώς / έμπειρος [Τ
am a rustic; I don’t deny it and am completely unfamiliar with city affairs’]),
perhaps combined with forthrightness (cf. Ar. dub. fr. 927 [= adesp. com.
fr. 227 K.] αγροίκος είμι· τήν σκάφην σκάφην λέγω [Τ am a rustic: I call a
spade a spade’]; MacEeod 1978. 508 n. 5 tentatively assigns this fragment to a