Πρωτεσίλαος (fr. 42)

217

assimilated to the feast itself; the accusatives in 23-9 are all in apposition to
φερνάς. Despite attempts to distinguish different senses for the two words for
a dowry, προίξ and φερνή (e. g. Page 1938 on E. Med. 956 claims that the former
means ‘money-settlement’ and the latter ‘personal goods and outfit’), the real
difference between the two seems to be that the latter is mainly poetic and
the former is not (cf. Schaps 1979. 100); for the dowry in general, see Schaps
1979. 74-88, 99-107. Although the subject is not expressed, and Iphicrates has
not been mentioned since 3, the placement of this phrase, particularly with
φερνάς in the emphatic first position, immediately calls to mind the bride-
groom. λαμβάνω seems to be the standard verb for the bridegroom receiving
the φερνή (e. g. E. Ion 298; Aeschin. 2.31; cf. Plb. 28.20.9).
23-4 δύο μέν ξανθών / 'ίππων άγέλας Horses are stereotypically
ξανθός already in Homer (e. g. II. 9.407; 16.149 [a proper name] with Janko
1992 ad loci) and commonly thereafter (e. g. S. fr. 475; E. Phaeth. 74 with Diggle
1970 ad loc.·, Denniston 1939 on E. El. 476-7; cf. the proper name Xanthippos)
and are associated with the Thracians already in Homer (e. g. II. 13.4). In the
latter part of the fifth century, a horse of good quality cost 12 minae (Ar. Nu.
21,1224; cf. [Lys.] 8.10), while one of poor quality could be had for 3 minae (Is.
5.43). Thus, two herds of horses, even of middling quality, is a very extragavant
gift. For further discussion, see Wyse 1904 on Is. 5.43.
24 αιγών τ’ αγέλην After the horses, the goats are a shift from the
elevated to the banal; Diggle notes that ‘the feeble repetition of άγέλη perhaps
supports the point, together with the bareness of both αιγών and άγέλην
unqualified.’ In the fourth century, goats, at least in sacrificial contexts, cost
between 10 and 12 drachmae per head; see Pritchett 1956. 258-9.
25 χρυσούν τε σάκος σάκος is hair-cloth and, by extension, anything
made from this cloth, usually a sack or similar container. At Hippon. fr. 57
and Poll. 6.19 (where coupled with ύλιστήρ and τρύγοιπος), however, the
word has the sense ‘strainer’; cf. Hdt. 4.23.3 σακκέουσι ίματίοισι; Olson 2015
on Eup. fr. 476. Here the word must refer to the implement regardless of the
material it is made from;94 the adjective perhaps alludes to the reputation of
Thrace as a major gold-producing region, but in any case fits the extravagant
ostentation of the scene. Since the σάκος was normally made of goat-skin,
it forms a skillful transition from the livestock of the previous lines to the
drinking vessels of those that follow.
There is probably word-play with σάκος, the neuter noun meaning ‘shield’;
thus Bothe’s translation, ‘aureum scutum’. Since the word is largely confined

94

Gulick’s translation, ‘a golden sack’, has little merit.