184

Eupolis

Late 5th-/early 4th-century comedies named after real contemporary indivi-
duals (i. e. rather than mythological figures) are rare, although cf. Phrynichus’
and Ameipsias’ Konnos; Pherecrates’ Korianno·, Plato Comicus’ Kleophon,
Hyperbolas and Peisandros; and Strattis’ Kinesias. Personal names shared by
real historical individuals and mythological characters are also extremely un-
common in this period. It is thus worth considering the possibility (mooted at
Storey 2003. 85-6) that the title-character of Eupolis’ play was—superficially,
at least—not Autolykos the son of Lykon but Autolykos the father of Odysseus
and arch-liar and -thief (Od. 19.394-7; for stories associated with Autolykos,
see in general Gantz 1993. 109-10; Mangidis 2003. 71-107). It is accordingly in-
triguing that the most substantial surviving fragment of Euripides’ satyr-play
Autolykos—of which there are also supposed to have been two versions, nei-
ther dated—is specifically an attack on athletes (fr. 282). Euripides and Eupolis
are sometimes confused in the manuscript tradition (see fr. 430 n.), and the
disturbing possibility emerges that some of the fragments treated here might
belong to the tragic poet and/or vice versa.91
Content The victory of Autolykos son of Lykon of the deme Thorikos (PA
2748; PAA 239835) in the boy’s pankration at the Panathenaic festival probably
in 422 BCE92 (cf. Ath. 5.187f) is the occasion for the—clearly at least partially
fictionalized—dinner party described in Xenophon’s Symposium, for which
Autolykos’ lover Callias III son of Hipponicus II (see introductory note to
Kolakes, Content) served as host. Xenophon (Smp. 1.8) calls Autolykos beau-
tiful and modest, and the first point at least may well be accurate. Nothing
else is known of his life until he became embroiled in a very public quar-
rel with Eteonicus of Sparta (Poralla #2 8 3)93 over a bit of real estate when

91 Were the other three fragments of Euripides’ Autolykos-plays assigned by the man-
uscripts of the authorities that transmit them to Eupolis instead, it seems unlikely
that any questions would be raised about their authorship: frr. 282a (ap. Phot, a
1760) μηδέν τω πατρί / μέμφεσθ’ άωρον άποκαλούντες άνδρίον (“find no fault
with your father by denouncing him as a out-of-date little man!”); 283 (ap. Poll.
10.111) τούς όνους τούς λαρκαγωγούς εξ όρους ο’ίσειν ξύλα (“the donkeys fitted
with charcoal-baskets will bring wood from the mountain”); 284 (ap. Poll. 10.178)
f σχοινίνας γάρ ϊπποισι φλοΐνας ήνίας πλέκει f (“f for he/she is weaving reins
made of phloos-reeds for horses f”). The claim that there were two versions of
Euripides’ satyr play may well also represent confusion with Eupolis’ comedy.
92 Not 421 BCE (Rusten 2011. 224), when the festival—held only every fourth year-
was not celebrated.
93 Poralla omits mention of this incident. Eteonicus had apparently been nauarch in
406/5 BCE and was therefore ineligible to serve again in 405/4 BCE, making him
subordinate to Lysander. Whether he was partially responsible for Autolykos’