Τηρεύς (Tereus)
(‘Tereus’)

245

Discussion Meineke 18391.373; 1840 III. 191; 1847. 587; Bothe 1855. 430; Kock
1884 11.156; Edmonds 1959 11.70—1; Webster 1970. 40; Nesselrath 1990. 195,
216-18; Kassel-Austin 1991 11.265 (cf. 1983 IV.59); Sanchis Llopis et al. 2007.
266
Title Tereus was the eponym of comedies by Cantharus and Philetaerus,
as well as a major character in Aristophanes’ Aves; tragedies were written
about him by Sophocles, Philocles I, possibly Carcinus (cf. TrGF 70 F 4 with
app. crit.), Livius Andronicus, and Accius. The standard version of the myth,
known from numerous sources, is that Tereus raped Philomela, sister of his
wife Procne, and then cut out her tongue to prevent her from disclosing his
crime; but Philomela depicted the events in a tapestry, which was made known
to Procne. In revenge, the sisters slaughtered Itys, son of Tereus and Procne,
and served him to his father; when Tereus discovered what had happened and
pursued them, all three were transformed into birds: Tereus into a hoopoe,
Procne into a nightingale, and Philomela into a swallow. For a succinct account
of the story, see Apollod. 3.14.8; for fuller accounts, including variants, see
Touloupa in LIMC VII. 1.527-9; Hofer in Roscher 1884-1937 V.371-6; Pearson
1917, introduction to S. Tereus (frr. 581-95); Dunbar 1995 on Ar. Av. 15. For
Tereus in Athenian drama, see Dobrov 1993.
Content of the comedy The transformation of Tereus in itself clearly offers
scope for comic treatment, notably in Aristophanes’ portrayal of Tereus in
Aves; Nesselrath 1990. 216-18 argues that this play offered a rationalization of
the myth. His interpretation hinges on the acceptance of δρνις as a nickname
(cf. on fr. 46.1) with relevance to the plot as a whole rather than simply as a
passing joke, and he concludes (217) that Tereus here is not the Thracian king
of myth but rather ‘ein harmloser athenischer Ehemann, der vielleicht ein
zu grofies Interesse an der Schwester seiner Frau bekundet hatte, fur diese
Verirrung dann aber bei beiden Damen in Ungnade fiel hatten, sich schliefilich
in fr. 45 [46 K.-A.] auch noch anhoren mufite, dafi er als Mann, der Frauen
gegenuber den kurzeren zog, kunftig δρνις hiefien werde.’ Nesselrath’s sug-
gestion is a relatively detailed example (apparently developed independently)
of the general interpretative framework for mythological plays proposed in
passing at Winkler 1982.
Date The play has been dated to ca. 350 BC or shortly thereafter (cf. Nesselrath
1990. 195; Webster 1970. 40) on the basis of suggested identifications of the
Polyeuctus in fr. 46.3 (see ad loc.), although the evidence is far from compel-