Αύτόλυκος ά β' (Introduction)

183

Interpretation A ludicrous story, which tells us little except that a tradition of
hostility between Eupolis, on the one hand, and Lykon and Autolykos, on the
other hand, most naturally traced to a vague, general recollection of the plot
of the Autolykos plays (cf. test, i χλευάζει τήν νίκην τού Αύτολύκου, “(Eupolis)
makes fun of Autolykos’ victory”), persisted into the Imperial period. Cf. the
equally ridiculous tale about the supposed conflict between Alcibiades and
Eupolis over Baptai (test, iii-vi). For the charge of ξενία (in this case followed
by conviction and sale, the penalty in such cases), cf. the similarly spurious
account of Cleon’s attack on Aristophanes in the aftermath of the staging of
Babylonians in the anonymous Life (Ar. test. 1.19) ~ Ar. Ach. 378.

Introduction
Discussion Meineke 1826 1.41-2; Runkel 1829. 94-5; Bergk 1838. 342-7;
Meineke 1839 1.116-18; Stievenant 1849. 125-6; Wilamowitz 1870. 41-9;
Wilamowitz 1873. 145-6; Kock 1880 1.267-8; Brandes 1886. 39-40; Miiller-
Strübing 1890. 545-6; Zelle 1892. 47-8; Kaibel 1907 p. 1233.29-44; Breitenbach
1908. 15-19; Geissler 1925. 42-3; Emonds 1941. 341; Schiassi 1944. 95-9;
Schmid 1946. 122-3; Storey 1990. 28-9; Chiavarino 1995. 18; Fisher 2000. 375;
Storey 2003. 81-94; Nesselrath 2005; Kyriakidi 2007. 141-5; Storey 2011. 68-9;
Zimmermann 2011. 748-9; Marshall 2012. 58-9
Title The plays are most naturally taken to be named after Autolykos the
son of Lykon (see Content),90 seemingly confirming Herodicus’ claim (test, i)
that he was their major target (or at least among their targets). All of Eupolis’
other comedies except Marikas and Chrysoun genos have titles in the plural,
presumably reflecting the identity of their choruses, and Chrysoun genos may
well mean “Members of the Golden Race”, leaving Marikas as the only other
exception to the rule. In the latter case, the play’s divided chorus perhaps made
the standard naming strategy too cumbersome to adopt. Whether this was also
true of the Autolykos plays is impossible to say, since we have no hints as to the
chorus’ identity. Müller-Strübing thought that Autolykos I might be identical
with Kolakes, Autolykos II identical with Philoi. As Breitenbach and Geissler
note, in that case one would expect occasional ancient references to the plays
by a double-title (cf. Aristophanes’ Dramata e Niobos, Dramata e Kentauros;
Philyllios’ Nausikaa e Plyntriai), which we do not have.

90 Not to be confused with the hero Autolykos of Sinope (one of the Argonauts), as
in Firicel-Dana 2007. 517 n. 18.