Αστράτευτοι ή Ανδρόγυνοι (fr. 42)

173

reflecting the apparently effeminate nature of the chorus (for which, see the
general introduction to the play).
1 Cf. Ar. Nu. 575 ώ σοφότατοι θεαταί, δεύρο τον νούν προσέχετε
(“Exceptionally wise spectators, pay attention here!”; from the beginning of
the parabasis epirrhema). Here the use of εταίροι represents a different strat-
egy of persuasion, not flattering the audience directly but instead suggesting
the existence of an easy intimacy that both allows a man to speak freely and
ensures that his words will get the best reception possible; cf. below on the
tone in 2. For friendship, see the general introduction to Philoi, and add to the
bibliography cited there Penniston 1990/1991. For the audience addressed as
άνδρες, cf. frr. 201 with n.; 239 (on the seemingly pleonastic use of the word).
δεύρο i. e. “to our words, to what we intend to say”.
την γνώμην προσίσχετε For the expression, cf. Ar. Ec. 600; Th. 2.11.2;
5.26.5; 7.15.2, 23.1; Aeschin. 1.116. προσέχω τον νούν is the more common
idiom (e.g. Cratin. fr. 315; Pherecr. fr. 84.1 άνδρες, προσέχετε τον νούν; Ar.
Nu. 1010, 1122; Pax 983; Antiph. fr. 57.2; And. 1.30; X. HG 7.1.41).
2 εί δυνατόν marks this as an exceedingly polite, deferential request
(cf. Pi. N. 9.28; X. HG 5.4.30; Cyr. 5.5.13, and εί βούλει at e. g. X. An. 3.4.41; Pl.
Smp. 214d; Timocl. fr. 6.8), with the idea unpacked at greater length in the
rest of the verse: this gift of attention will be possible only if the addressees’
minds are not already occupied with other, doubtless more significant subjects.
γνώμη is to be supplied as the subject of τυγχάνει from 1.
3 ξυνεγιγνόμην d’Arnaud compared the use of the verb in the extended
sense “eat” at Telecl. fr. 40.1, to which Bergk added the use of σύνειμι at
Pherecr. fr. 62.1, and Kock added fr. 99.43 and στεμφύλω εις λόγον έλθη at
Ar. Eq. 806.
τοίς άγαθοΐς φάγροισιν For the φάγρος (“sea-bream”), which is often
included in banquet catalogues and the like (e. g. Metag. fr. 6.6; Straff, fr. 26;
Antiph. fr. 191.3) and was—rightly—regarded as a delicacy, see Thompson 1957.
273-4; Davidson 1981. 74-89; Olson-Sens 2000 on Archestr. fr. 27.1. Here the
fact that the word stands at the end of the line suggests that it comes as a
surprise after the ambiguous ξυνεγιγνόμην: the speaker “was together” with
good ... bream, not because they were friends, but because he ate them for
dinner. Cf. in general fr. 315 n. (on the proverbial idea of “good” individuals
dining with the similarly “good”, and variants thereof), and note the echo of
the idea of friendship and companionship in 1 (regardless of where the two
verses stood in the original parabasis). The adjective is not commonly applied
to food, but cf. Ar. Nu. 339; Antiph. fr. 36.2; Philem. fr. 42.5; Archestr. frr. 36.12;
37.7; 42.6.