Προσπάλτιοι (fr. 267)

363

όργάζειν (cognate with έργον, “deed”, and ερδω, “do”, as well as with
English “work”, German Werk, wirkeri) is Attic-Ionic vocabulary (in Ionic at
Hdt. 4.64.2 (of working skin soft); Hp. Mui. 206 = 8.398.18, 400.21 Littre).

fr. 267 K.-A. (249 K.)
Σ™ Pl. Mx. 235e (pp. 182-3 Greene)
Κρατϊνος (fr. *259) δέ f Όμφάλη τύραννον αύτήν καλεϊ χείρων t Εύπολις Φίλοις (fr.
294)· έν δέ Προσπαλτίοις Ελένην αύτήν καλεϊ
But Cratinus (fr. *259) t in Omphale calls her tyrannos worse t Eupolis in Philoi (fr.
294); whereas in Prospaltioi he calls her Helen
Discussion Goossens 1935b. 344-6; Schwarze 1971. 122; Storey 2003. 243;
Wright 2007. 428
Citation context From a richly informed biographical note on Aspasia-
seemingly much condensed in the form in which it has come down to us—that
also includes a reference to fr. 110 (n.); presumably drawn from a catalogue of
kdmdidoumenoi. Another version of the same material, but without reference
to this fragment, is preserved at Harp. p. 67.2-10 = A 249 Keaney.
Kassel-Austin take the initial part of the scholion to be a reference to
Cratin. fr. *259 (from Cheirones), although Cratinus lunior in fact seems to
have written an Omphale (frr. 4-5).
Interpretation Sometime in the mid-440s BCE, the Athenian statesman
Pericles (PA 11811; PAA 772645) divorced his wife—the mother of his sons
Xanthippos (PA 11170; PAA 730515) and Paralos (PA 11612; PAA 765275)—and
began to live with Aspasia the daughter of Axiochos of Miletus (PAA 222330;
Nails 2002. 58-62). Whether Aspasia was a free person is an open question,
although her son Pericles II was at least eventually treated as legitimate (cf. fr.
110 n.) and she herself is said elsewhere in Σ Pl. (citing at this point Aeschines
Socraticus and—assuming that Dindorf’s correction of the text is correct—Call.
Com. fr. *21, from Pedetai) to have married the Athenian politician Lysikles
(PA 9417; PAA 614815) after Pericles’ death in 429 BCE, all of which suggests
that she was not a slave. The reference to Aspasia as “Helen” is most naturally
taken to mean that Eupolis identified her not just as a beautiful seductress
but as the cause of the Peloponnesian War, much as Dicaeopolis at Ar. Ach.
526-39 claims that the conflict had its roots in Pericles’ anger over two prosti-
tutes who belonged to Aspasia and were supposedly kidnapped by Megarians
(showing that she could still be mentioned onstage after Pericles’ death). Cf.
[fr. *101.7] with n. and Cratinus’ Dionysalexandros, where if Dionysus/Paris