310
Eupolis
date Telo-Porciani propose for the comedy. Telo-Porciani acknowledge this
difficulty only in a footnote, in which they suggest that the battle in which
Eupolis died might have been not Cynosema but Aegospotamoi in 406 BCE,
and Telo in his full edition of the play adds as a further possibility the Battle
of Arginusae in 405 BCE.200 But Aegospotamoi is near Lesbos rather than in
the Hellespont, and although Arginusae resulted in the destruction of much
of the Athenian fleet, the battle was fought not at sea but on the shore. The
Suda might simply be misinformed. But this is a desperate argument of a sort
that ought to be deployed only when no other option is available, and here the
more economical conclusion is that on this count as well the Telo-Porciani
hypothesis should be rejected.
There is thus no positive reason to follow Storey in pushing the date for
Demoi back to 417 or 416 BCE and considerable incentive to resist his argu-
ments, while the attempt by Telo-Porciani to put the play in 410 BCE fails
on multiple counts. Instead, Demoi seems to belong where it has traditionally
been placed, in 412 BCE, in the immediate aftermath of the Sicilian disaster but
before the overthrow of the democracy, with Mantineia (cf. fr. 99.30-2) and the
legal proceedings associated with the supposed defamation of the Eleusinian
Mysteries (cf. fr. 99.81-9) in the past and Deceleia occupied (cf. fr. 99.12-14).
This conclusion finds a bit of further support in the reference in fr. 103 (n.) to
Demostratos (PA 3611; PAA 319245) as αλιτήριος, an extremely hostile term
that would be timely and appropriate if Demoi was written and performed
not long after news of the Sicilian Expedition’s final failure reached Athens.
For the date of Demoi, see also Geissler 1925. 54-5 + 1969. xvi; Storey
1990. 24-7; Beta 1994; Chiavarino 1995. 19-20; Storey 2000. 173-5; Bertelli
2005. 78-9; Nesselrath 2005; Kyriakidi 2007. 25-9; Torello 2008b (pointing out
additional weaknesses in the hypothesis of Telo-Porciani 2002); Storey 2011.
97; Tuci 2012. 246-8; Tuci 2014. 19-24.
The following have also been assigned to Demoi: frr. 326 (Storey); 328
(Edmonds); 331 (Storey); 333 (Meineke; = Demoi fr. *49 Telo); 334 (Edmonds);
336 (Edmonds; = Demoi fr. *50 Telo); 340 (Edmonds); 342 (Runkel); 367 (Storey);
384 (Walpole); 389 (Telo = his Demoi fr. *52); 397 (Telo = his Demoi fr. *51);
424 (Edmonds); and adesp. com. frr. 154 (Meineke); 1105 (Luppe); 1151 (Storey,
following Kassel-Austin, who merely give it to Eupolis); POxy. 2743 fr. 11.5-7
(Luppe 1971a. 121).
200
Telo-Porciani 2002. 39 n. 63; Telo 2007. 23-4 n. 49.
Eupolis
date Telo-Porciani propose for the comedy. Telo-Porciani acknowledge this
difficulty only in a footnote, in which they suggest that the battle in which
Eupolis died might have been not Cynosema but Aegospotamoi in 406 BCE,
and Telo in his full edition of the play adds as a further possibility the Battle
of Arginusae in 405 BCE.200 But Aegospotamoi is near Lesbos rather than in
the Hellespont, and although Arginusae resulted in the destruction of much
of the Athenian fleet, the battle was fought not at sea but on the shore. The
Suda might simply be misinformed. But this is a desperate argument of a sort
that ought to be deployed only when no other option is available, and here the
more economical conclusion is that on this count as well the Telo-Porciani
hypothesis should be rejected.
There is thus no positive reason to follow Storey in pushing the date for
Demoi back to 417 or 416 BCE and considerable incentive to resist his argu-
ments, while the attempt by Telo-Porciani to put the play in 410 BCE fails
on multiple counts. Instead, Demoi seems to belong where it has traditionally
been placed, in 412 BCE, in the immediate aftermath of the Sicilian disaster but
before the overthrow of the democracy, with Mantineia (cf. fr. 99.30-2) and the
legal proceedings associated with the supposed defamation of the Eleusinian
Mysteries (cf. fr. 99.81-9) in the past and Deceleia occupied (cf. fr. 99.12-14).
This conclusion finds a bit of further support in the reference in fr. 103 (n.) to
Demostratos (PA 3611; PAA 319245) as αλιτήριος, an extremely hostile term
that would be timely and appropriate if Demoi was written and performed
not long after news of the Sicilian Expedition’s final failure reached Athens.
For the date of Demoi, see also Geissler 1925. 54-5 + 1969. xvi; Storey
1990. 24-7; Beta 1994; Chiavarino 1995. 19-20; Storey 2000. 173-5; Bertelli
2005. 78-9; Nesselrath 2005; Kyriakidi 2007. 25-9; Torello 2008b (pointing out
additional weaknesses in the hypothesis of Telo-Porciani 2002); Storey 2011.
97; Tuci 2012. 246-8; Tuci 2014. 19-24.
The following have also been assigned to Demoi: frr. 326 (Storey); 328
(Edmonds); 331 (Storey); 333 (Meineke; = Demoi fr. *49 Telo); 334 (Edmonds);
336 (Edmonds; = Demoi fr. *50 Telo); 340 (Edmonds); 342 (Runkel); 367 (Storey);
384 (Walpole); 389 (Telo = his Demoi fr. *52); 397 (Telo = his Demoi fr. *51);
424 (Edmonds); and adesp. com. frr. 154 (Meineke); 1105 (Luppe); 1151 (Storey,
following Kassel-Austin, who merely give it to Eupolis); POxy. 2743 fr. 11.5-7
(Luppe 1971a. 121).
200
Telo-Porciani 2002. 39 n. 63; Telo 2007. 23-4 n. 49.