Νηρεύς (fr. 31)

147

Metre lambic trimeter.

Discussion Dobree 1833 11.315; Meineke 1839 1.372; 1840 III.174; 1847. 580;
Bothe 1855. 423; Meineke 1857 V.clxxviii; Naber 1880. 54; Kock 1884 II. 145—6;
Zacher 1886. 713; Kock 1888 III.737; Blaydes 1890a. 82; Herwerden 1893.157-8;
Blaydes 1896. 122; Herwerden 1903. 97; Leo 1912. 239; Wilamowitz 1925. 145
n. 1; Edmonds 1959 11.56—7; Webster 1970. 66, 83 n. 1; Nesselrath 1990. 248 n.
16, 256, 301-2; Kassel-Austin 1991. 252; Willis 1991. 350; Wilkins 2000.18, 390;
Sanchis Llopis et al. 2007. 252-3
Text Naber’s emendation of the paradosis κατοικεί in 4 to κατοικώ is not
without merit, since it fits the boasting character often associated with cooks
(i. e. the god as a cook, not the actual cook of that name as Naber believed),
and the corruption would be easy. Without additional context, however, the
change is unwarranted. A possible further difficulty is that the hero of the
play would then be the speaker of the prologue (assuming that is a correct
assumption) and so would be describing himself and his background, a task
normally left to others in tragic antecedents and later comedy, but common
in Aristophanes (e. g. Ac/z.; Nu.\
Interpretation Leo 1912. 239 (cf. Nesselrath 1990. 248 n. 16) cites this as an ex-
ample of a fragment from a prologue (an observation made already at Meineke
18391.372; contrast Wilamowitz 1925.145 n. 1); its expository character makes
this likely. In contrast to normal Aristophanic practice, and presumably that
of fifth-century comedy generally, which avoids an expository monologue and
delays naming the hero of the play (see Olson 1992), this fragment, together
with other more or less contemporary examples (e. g. Henioch. fr. 5; Eub.
fr. 68; Alex. fr. 255), suggests that by the middle of the fourth century the
structure and exposition of comic plots at least occasionally resembled that
familiar from New Comedy, and that comedy had already adopted elements of
tragedy beyond mere parody (note the view of Wilamowitz 1925.145 n. 1 that
the language is tragic; cf. Cobet 1873. 359). For divinities speaking prologues,
cf. on fr. 58; Ar. fr. 331 (Th. II); adesp. com. fr. 1062 (with introductory note of
Olson 2007. C2).
The depiction of Nereus perhaps echoes that of Proteus in H. Od. 4.399-
424, although the image of a sea-god surrounded by sea-creatures (here more
implicit than explicit) is applicable to any sea-god.