Δήμοι (Introduction)

309

invented this unit, as well as the provisioning controversy that supposedly ac-
companied it, on the basis of fr. 99.12-14. But the same style of argument could
be used to put any group anywhere at any time in order to explain a difficult
text—which is to say that the thesis offers no positive reason to place Demoi
in 410 BCE. This is even more the case because Telo-Porciani themselves
maintain that the hypothetical posting of special units on the Long Walls in
411 BCE was likely a short-lived measure, making it difficult to understand
why Eupolis’ chorus would treat the situation as a matter of contemporary
interest (even using the present tense είσιν) at a dramatic festival in the first
half of the next year. Second, the Greek of fr. 99.12-14 appears to render the
proposed interpretation of the text impossible. The nature of Telo-Porciani’s
objection to taking fr. 99.12-13 έν μακροΐν / τειχοΐν (literally “in [the] two
long walls”) to mean “in the area enclosed by the two Long Walls” is unclear,
especially given their apparent willingness to accept And. 1.45 έν μακρω τείχει
in the sense “in the area enclosed by the Long Wall (conceived as a collective
whole)”. More important, while έν + dative can mean “upon” in reference
to a surface used for drawing, carving, painting or the like (e. g. Ar. Ach.
144 έν τοΐσι τοίχοις έγραφ’ “Αθηναίοι καλοί”; Αν. 450 προγράφωμεν έν τοϊς
πινακίοις; Lys. 513 έν τή στήλη παραγράψαι; Ra. 933 σημεϊον έν ταϊς ναυσίν
... ένεγέγραπτο), it cannot mean “on top of”—which is presumably why (as
Telo-Porciani themselves note) no one has previously suggested translating
the preposition in Eupolis that way. The individuals to whom the chorus of
Demoi refer are thus not located on top of the walls (as guards might be) but
within them (like refugees, as on the standard reading of the passage).199
In addition, the Telo-Porciani interpretation of fr. 99.12-14 as evidence
for placing Demoi in 410 BCE contradicts some of the most basic information
we have regarding Eupolis’ biography. According to Suda ε 3657 (= test. 1),
the poet “died in a shipwreck in the Hellespont during the war against the
Peloponnesians”, which is most naturally taken to suggest that he was killed in
a naval battle. Although the evidence is less complete than we would like, none
of Eupolis’ dated comedies belongs after 412 BCE (see the general introduction
to this volume), and not one of the almost 500 individual fragments refers to
a person known to have been active exclusively after that date or refers to
an event that took place then. Eupolis’ death is therefore usually connected
with the loss of fifteen Athenian ships at the Battle of Cynosema in 411 BCE,
which would mean that he was killed a bit more than a year after the generally
accepted date for Demoi and (more to the point) close to a year before the

199 Cf. Tuci 2014. 22-3, who notes most of the same weaknesses in the thesis advanced
in Telo-Porciani 2002, but treats the question in a more summary fashion.