246

Eupolis

exception of those that are jokingly pronounced in comedies and shown to
be either corrupt or half-complete, or those that are occasionally divided in
epic poetry out of metrical necessity”), seemingly paraphrasing Hephaestion,
Heliodorus or some intermediary source.
Text In 1, the manuscripts have expanded άλλ’ to scriptio plena άλλο to agree
with δυνατόν. Bentley’s άλλ(ά) is a more natural expression.
In 1-2, Bergk’s πρω-/βούλευμα is a product of a conviction that the final
position in the line cannot be short without word break, while Meineke’s
πρώ / βούλευμα (“early in the morning they’re weighing”) reflects an unwill-
ingness to believe that Eupolis actually divided a word in the way Hephaestion
insists he did.
For Kaibel’s τής βουλής in place of the paradosis τής πόλεως in 2, see
Interpretation.
Interpretation An objection to an idea put forward or a plan posed by an-
other party, most economically taken to be the addressee. “They” must be the
members of either a city Βουλή (Council)—perhaps but not necessarily the
Athenian Βουλή—considering what sort of a προβούλευμα to put forward
to the ’Εκκλησία (Assembly), or more likely the members of an Εκκλησία-
once again, perhaps but not necessarily the Athenian Εκκλησία—considering
how to handle a major προβούλευμα that has come to them for a decision.
Apparently the other party has suggested interfering with this body’s work,
has offered a disparaging comment about the seriousness of their administra-
tive efforts, or the like.
προβούλευμα is found in the inscriptional record already at IG I3 64
(430-420 BCE), where it is however entirely restored; cf. IG II2 243.9 (337/6
BCE, partially restored). The cognate verb, on the other hand, is attested al-
ready at IG I3 34 (448/7 BCE) and then sporadically throughout the rest of the
5th c. The word (^—<>) is not particularly difficult to fit into an iambic trimeter
line, particularly since it can be elided to προβούλευμ’ (<>—). Hephaestion
(echoed by Marius Victorinus/Aphthonius) seems to believe the division be-
tween two lines is a joke, but what is funny about it is difficult to say. The
problem is compounded by the fact that τής πόλεως in 2 seems pointless if it
modifies προβούλευμα, hence Kaibel’s baffled marginal note “τής βουλής?”,
van Leeuwen, comparing ύπό / Εύριπίδου at Ar. Th. 386-7, took the idea to
be that προ at the end of 1 initially appears to be the preposition πρό, whose
object can be expected to follow at the beginning of 2 but does not.142 Delneri
2006. 282 takes up van Leeuwen’s proposal and suggests that πρό is in fact not

142

For prepositives at line-end generally, see Maas 1962 § 136.