Άγχίσης (Anchises)
(‘Anchises’)

49

Discussion Meineke 18391.369; 1840 III. 162; 1847. 575; Bothe 1855. 419; Kock
1884 11.137; Kassel-Austin 1991 11.240; Sanchis Llopis et al. 2007. 240
Title Eubulus is the only other poet known to have written a play with
this title. Plays named for heroes of mythology/early epic are common in
the fourth century (e. g. Eubulus Ganymedes·, Antiphanes Oinomaos·, the
various Helen plays of Alexis; etc.) but seem to have been particularly fa-
voured by Anaxandrides (e. g. Achilleus, Herakles, Theseus, Lykourgos, etc.).
See Introduction.
Anchises appears in early epic primarily as the lover of Aphrodite and
the father of Aeneas (e.g. Η. II. 2.819-21; 5.311-13; Hes. Th. 1008-10); the
affair with Aphrodite is given extended treatment in the Homeric hymn to
her. Although a member of the Trojan royal family, Anchises (like Aeneas
[Η. II. 20.188-9]; cf. Paris at Luc. lud. Dear. 13-14) is often depicted as a rustic
cowherd (e.g. Η. II. 513; hVen. 54-5); see Olson 2012. 2-4. The allusion at H.
II. 5.268-9 to Anchises ‘stealing’ the divine horses of Laomedon by secret-
ly mating mares with them may point to the existence of stories in which
Anchises played the role of a trickster (like e. g. Odysseus and Sisyphus).
Perhaps relevant in light of fr. 4 are Anchises’ wild changes of fortune (from
cowherd to lover of a goddess; from Trojan royalty to refugee). In general, see
Worner in Roscher 1884-1937 1.337-9; LIMC 1.1.761-2.
Very unlikely is any connection between the title and either of the other
known holders of the name: (1) the father of Echepolus of Sikyon, known
only from Η. II. 23.296, and (2) the Athenian eponymous archon of 488/7 (PA
182; PAA 107680), one of a tiny number of examples of a human bearing the
name of a hero.
Content The obvious possibility for the plot is that it concerned some aspect
of Anchises’ affair with Aphrodite, and it may have exploited the hero’s ap-
parent rustic background. Hunter 1983 ad loc. presumes as much for Eubulus’
play of the same name, comparing Plautus, Truculentus for the ‘meeting of
an unsophisticated peasant and a beautiful lady’ and suggesting that ‘any
comic version of the meeting of Anchises and Aphrodite probably made the
goddess behave like a hetaira’. Plautus, Amphitryo might be a better parallel,
or Anaxandrides’ play may have not involved Aphrodite at all. The surviving
fragments offer little guidance. Fr. 4, the only substantial fragment, discusses
the role in Fortune in changing circumstances, a generic observation applic-
able to a variety of situations but perhaps particularly appropriate for Anchises.