The source covers selected passages. Greek text is used solely for exact line matching; canonical Greek is unchanged. Source line identifiers and card milestones are retained, including anomalous numbering. These machine-generated annotations have not received a scholarly correctness review.
ἅσπερ Εὐκράτης ἔφευγεν εὐθὺ τῶν κυρηβίων.
The phrase τῶν κυρηβίων refers to the 'corybantes,' a group of ecstatic priests associated with the worship of Cybele. In the context of the *Knights*, the Sausage-Seller (Agonothetes) is comparing the behavior of the demagogue Cleon to the frenzied, drum-beating rituals of these priests. The term κυρηβίων is a plural genitive, indicating the source or direction of the action (fleeing 'from' the corybantes), which alludes to the chaotic, frenzied state that the character is supposedly escaping or perhaps ironically mimicking. This specific allusion to the corybantes is a deliberate rhetorical device, as the corybantes were known for their wild, ecstatic dances and drumming, which Aristophanes uses to satirize the perceived madness of political leaders.
ὡσπερεὶ γέροντας ἡμᾶς καὶ κοβαλικεύεται;
The verb κοβαλικεύεται is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanic comedy and is unique in the surviving corpus of ancient Greek literature. Derived from κόβαλος (a type of comic mask or a specific type of rustic dancer/actor), the verb denotes the act of acting the part of a kobalos or behaving in a grotesque, buffoonish manner. Its use here by the Chorus to describe the actions of the Sausage-Seller (or the Paphlagonian, depending on the specific staging context of this line) suggests a specific theatrical allusion to the physical, often acrobatic and degrading, movements associated with the kobalos character, rather than a generic term for mockery. The form is deponent in the present, though the root implies an active performance of a role.
καὶ τέμαχος, οὗ Περικλέης οὐκ ἠξιώθη πώποτε.
The verb ἠξιώθη (aorist passive of ἀξιοῦμαι) here carries the specific sense of 'deem worthy of' or 'consider fit for,' a usage common in Attic prose but distinctively ironic in Aristophanic comedy. The sentence implies a hyperbolic contrast: the piece of meat (or perhaps the opportunity) is of such high quality or rarity that even Pericles, the preeminent statesman and patron of the arts, was never deemed worthy to receive it. This reflects the comic trope of elevating mundane or grotesque subjects to the level of high political discourse, while simultaneously mocking the perceived exclusivity or unapproachability of Periclean Athens.
βλέψον ἔς μʼ ἀσκαρδάμυκτος.
The term ἀσκαρδάμυκτος (askar-damuktos) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanic comedy, coined by the poet to describe a specific type of coarse, obscene gesture (typically a middle finger or a similar hand sign) intended to provoke or mock. While the exact gesture is debated, the compound's construction (potentially from *askaros* meaning 'filthy' or 'unclean' and *damuktos* 'muted' or 'pressed') reflects Aristophanes' characteristic invention of 'word-magic' to convey physical vulgarity through lexical innovation. The imperative βλέψον (look at me) followed immediately by this noun creates a jarring syntactic juxtaposition that functions as a direct visual challenge, shifting the focus from the addressee's gaze to the speaker's own provocative posture.
ᾗ σὺ πιστεύων ἀμέλγεις τῶν ξένων τοὺς καρπίμους,
The participle πιστεύων (trusting) is used in the dative of means or instrument with the verb ἀμέλγεις (milking), a construction where the trust is the mechanism by which the exploitation occurs. This is a rare syntactic usage for a participle of trust, which typically governs a dative of the person trusted or an infinitive, rather than functioning as the instrumental means of the main verb's action in this specific metaphorical sense.
σοῦ μιαρώτερος, ὥστε με χαίρειν,
The phrase ὥστε με χαίρειν functions as an elliptical idiom where the main verb (e.g., 'go away' or 'leave me') is omitted. While ὥστε with the infinitive typically indicates result ('so that I may...'), here it serves as a fixed formula for dismissal, meaning 'so that I bid you farewell' or simply 'goodbye'. The construction relies on the implied verb χαίρειν (to bid farewell) taking the accusative of the person being dismissed, a usage distinct from the more common intransitive 'to be well' or the imperative 'χαῖρε'.
ὠμοσπάρακτον παραλαβὼν μεταχειρίσαιο χρηστῶς.
The compound verb ὠμοσπάρακτον is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, formed from ὠμός (raw) and σπάρακτον (torn to pieces). While the participle παραλαβὼν implies 'having taken up' or 'received', the adjective functions as a substantive here, likely referring to a piece of raw, torn meat. The phrase serves as a grotesque metaphor for the state of the person being addressed (likely Cleon), suggesting he is a 'raw, torn-to-pieces' object to be handled. The imperative μεταχειρίσαιο (handle/treat) is in the middle voice, implying a reflexive or self-interested action, which fits the satirical context of the Knights where the Sausage-Seller is advising the Paphlagonian (Cleon) on how to manipulate the situation, or perhaps mocking his own readiness to be 'handled' by the mob. The construction is syntactically straightforward but lexically striking due to the rarity of ὠμοσπάρακτον and its specific application in this comic context.
ὑπὸ σοῦ μονωτάτου κατεγλωττισμένην σιωπᾶν;
The noun σιωπᾶν is the accusative singular of σιωπή, but the ending -ᾶν (with circumflex) suggests a Doric or comic contraction of the expected Attic form σιωπᾶν from σιωπήν. However, the form is more strikingly attested as a Doric or poetic variant in the comic tradition, where the Attic third declension noun σιωπή (gen. σιωπῆς) appears in the accusative as σιωπᾶν under the influence of the first declension or through dialectal contraction. In Aristophanic comedy, such forms often serve metrical or comic purposes, and here they may be part of a deliberate archaizing or dialectal effect to mock or elevate the subject of the clause. The use of this form in a rhetorical question about being 'silenced' adds a layer of linguistic self-awareness to the passage, characteristic of Aristophanes' engagement with language itself.
οἴνου χοᾶ κασαλβάσω τοὺς ἐν Πύλῳ στρατηγούς.
The verb χασαλβάσω (future of χασαλβάζω) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes and rare in the surviving corpus. It denotes a specific, coarse action of pouring or splashing, likely onomatopoeic in origin, here used to describe the pouring of wine over the heads of the generals. The form χοᾶ (from χέω) is an imperative aorist, but the syntax presents a crux: the construction 'χοᾶ [instrumental/locative of liquid] χασαλβάσω' implies a sequential or manner-based relationship that is syntactically compressed. The phrase 'τοὺς ἐν Πύλῳ στρατηγούς' refers to the four Athenian generals (Demosthenes, Nicostratus, Thrasylaus, and Epicles) who were trapped in Pylos during the Peloponnesian War, a specific historical reference that Aristophanes mocks by suggesting they be drenched with wine rather than honored, playing on the contrast between their military stalemate and the festive, drunken atmosphere of the symposium.
τῶν πραγμάτων ὁτιὴ μόνος τὸν ζωμὸν ἐκροφήσει.
The construction τῶν πραγμάτων ὁτιὴ functions as a genitive of cause or respect governing the implied 'because' or 'in that' sense of ὁτιὴ (a dialectal or poetic variant of ὅτι ἦ or ὅτι ἔστι), creating a causal clause that explains the reasoning behind the preceding action. The use of ὁτιὴ here, particularly with the elision and dialectal coloring typical of Old Comedy, is syntactically distinct from standard Attic prose usage and requires attention to the specific rhythmic and metrical constraints of the iambic trimeter which may influence the particle's form.
ἡ βύρσα σου θρανεύσεται.
The verb θρανεύσεται is a rare future passive form derived from θρανεύω, a hapax legomenon in the comic corpus of Aristophanes (though attested elsewhere in later Greek with the sense 'to be drunk' or 'to be intoxicated'). In this context, it functions as a grotesque metaphor for the Paphlagonian (Cleon) being 'drunk' on his own power and corruption, a pun on the physical state of a drunkard and the moral state of a corrupt politician. The use of this specific, somewhat obscure verbal formation highlights the playwright's characteristic linguistic inventiveness in creating neologisms to mock his targets.
κᾆτʼ ἀνὴρ ἔδοξεν εἶναι, τἀλλότριον ἀμῶν θέρος.
The phrase τἀλλότριον ἀμῶν θέρος relies on a specific agricultural metaphor where 'summer' (θέρος) denotes the harvest, and 'alien' (ἀλλότριον) signifies produce belonging to another. The construction ἀμῶν θέρος is a striking genitive of possession that, combined with the preceding clause, implies the Sycophant has been validated not as a citizen-farmer but as a thief appropriating the community's yield, a pun on the literal 'harvest' and the metaphorical 'plunder' of the city's resources.
οὐ δέδοιχʼ ὑμᾶς, ἕως ἂν ζῇ τὸ βουλευτήριον
The clause ἕως ἂν ζῇ τὸ βουλευτήριον employs a future indicative verb (here contracted as ζῇ) with ἂν to express a temporal limit that is contingent upon a future event. While ἕως with the subjunctive is standard for indefinite or future time, the combination with the future indicative (or periphrastic future) here emphasizes the certainty of the duration's limit rather than mere contingency. Furthermore, the personification of the βουλευτήριον (the Council House) as a living entity capable of 'living' (ζῇ) is a striking rhetorical device; it implies that the political body's institutional existence is the necessary condition for the safety of the citizens, a concept central to the play's satire on the fragility of democracy under the influence of demagogues like Cleon.
εἴ σε μὴ μισῶ, γενοίμην ἐν Κρατίνου κῴδιον,
The curse 'γενοίμην ἐν Κρατίνου κῴδιον' (may I become a fart in Cratinus) is a rare instance of a specific, self-deprecating bodily function used as a metric of truth in a comic hyperbole. The 'κῴδιον' (little fart) is a diminutive of 'κῶδον' (fart), a term rarely attested in this diminutive form elsewhere in comedy, and here functions as a metaphor for a trivial, insubstantial, or embarrassing existence. The curse implies that if the speaker does not hate the addressee, he would wish to be reduced to a mere, fleeting emission from the body of Cratinus—a figure of high comic standing whose own plays were often the target of such invective. This is a unique example of a 'fart curse' (καταφυσμός) that relies on the specific cultural context of the comic rivalry between Aristophanes and Cratinus, where Cratinus was known for his 'wine-skin' persona and the physicality of his comedy.
ὥσπερ ἀκαλήφας ἐσθίων πρὸ χελιδόνων ἔκλεπτες.
The phrase πρὸ χελιδόνων functions as a temporal idiom meaning 'before the swallows arrive' (i.e., early in the year). The specific ordering of the action—eating stinging nettles before the swallows' return—creates a vivid, grotesque image of extreme hunger and poverty, as the swallows are traditionally associated with the arrival of spring and the end of winter scarcity. This temporal marker is a standard Attic idiom for 'early in the year' (cf. Thucydides 1.135), but its juxtaposition here with the consumption of ἀκαλήφας (nettles) heightens the satirical effect of the character's destitution.
ὁτιὴ ʼπιώρκεις θʼ ἡρπακὼς καὶ κρέας ὁ πρωκτὸς εἶχεν.
The form ὁτιὴ is a dialectal or comic variant of ὅτι (that), reflecting the phonetic contraction and vowel shift characteristic of Aristophanic comic diction, which often exaggerates spoken Attic features for metrical or humorous effect. This is not a standard Attic spelling but a recognized feature of the genre's linguistic play.
ἄθρει καὶ τοῦ ποδὸς παρίει·
The verb παρίει (pariei) here functions as a technical term of physical abuse, specifically denoting the act of 'letting go' or 'releasing' one's foot in a kick. In the context of the Paphlagonian's violent altercation with the Sausage-Seller (Demosthenes), this is not merely a descriptive motion but a specific allusion to the brutal, uncontrolled kicking associated with street brawls or the physical comedy of the genre, where the aggressor is depicted as unleashing a full, unbridled force against the victim's leg. The imperative ἄθρει ('look at' or 'behold') serves as a dramatic command to the audience to witness the cruelty of the act, heightening the grotesque nature of the violence.
ὡς οὗτος ἤδη καικίας καὶ συκοφαντίας πνεῖ.
The verb πνεῖ ('blows') is used here with the genitive case (and implicitly the accusative object of the mental state) to denote 'to be full of' or 'to breathe out' a specific quality. This construction, where πνέω governs the genitive of the quality being exhaled, is a characteristic Aristophanic usage that personifies abstract vices as physical emissions, distinct from the standard construction with εἶναι + genitive or simple dative of possession. The phrase captures the aggressive, almost physical projection of the character's malice.
σὲ δʼ ἐκ Ποτειδαίας ἔχοντʼ εὖ οἶδα δέκα τάλαντα.
The phrase 'ἐκ Ποτειδαίας ἔχοντʼ' (having [taken] from Potidaea) relies on the elliptical use of ἔχω with a place-name to mean 'to have seized' or 'to have taken as plunder,' a specific military idiom where the preposition ἐκ marks the source of the acquisition. The accusative 'δέκα τάλαντα' functions as the object of this implied action of taking, creating a construction where the participle ἔχοντʼ governs both the ablative-like source (ἐκ) and the quantitative object, a syntactic compression typical of Old Comedy's rapid-fire accusation style.
ἁνὴρ ἂν ἡδέως λάβοι. τοὺς τερθρίους παρίει·
The verb παρίει (from παρίημι) is used here in a specific sense of 'letting go' or 'allowing to pass' in the context of a debtor or a person owing a debt, rather than its more common meanings of 'to send alongside' or 'to permit'. This usage is characteristic of the colloquial and often bawdy vocabulary of Old Comedy, particularly when referring to the financial dealings of the characters. The phrase 'τοὺς τερθρίους' refers to a specific type of debt or fine, likely associated with the 'terthrios' (a term possibly linked to the 'terthra' or a specific tax/fine), which requires knowledge of the specific legal or fiscal context of the play to fully grasp the nature of the transaction being described. The use of the optative 'λάβοι' with 'ἂν' indicates a potential action, suggesting a hypothetical scenario where the man would gladly accept something, but the context implies a missed opportunity or a refusal.
πῶς οὖν ὁ τυρὸς ἐν Βοιωτοῖς ὤνιος;
The phrase 'ἐν Βοιωτοῖς ὤνιος' presents a syntactic ambiguity regarding the predicate of the adjective. While the standard construction for 'being sold' is often the genitive of price or the dative of the agent (e.g., ὤνιος τινί), here the preposition 'ἐν' with the dative suggests a locative sense of 'for sale in Boeotia' or potentially a dialectal/colloquial usage specific to the comic context where the state of being available is tied directly to the location. This construction invites comparison with the more common 'ὤνιος εἰμί' or 'πωλεῖται', and the specific choice of 'ἐν' highlights the commodity's geographical origin as a defining characteristic of its market status, a rhetorical device common in Old Comedy to mock regional economic stereotypes.
ἵνʼ ἄμεινον ὦ τᾶν ἐσκοροδισμένος μάχῃ.
The vocative address 'ὦ τᾶν' is a distinctive Attic contraction of 'ὦ τῶν', functioning here as an emphatic, almost abusive interjection directed at the Demos. While the vocative plural of the definite article is grammatically standard, its usage in direct address to the Athenian assembly, particularly with the force of 'O you people!' in a context of severe criticism, marks a specific rhetorical strategy of Aristophanic personification. The speaker (the Sausage-Seller) addresses the Demos not merely as a collective noun but as a specific, personified character who has been 'scorched' or 'bruised' (ἐσκοροδισμένος) by the previous politician (Cleon), using a rare, coined verb (from σκόροδον, garlic, implying a harsh, pungent beating or scorching) to evoke the visceral physicality of political violence and the 'scorched earth' policy of the demagogue.
ᾆσαι δʼ οὐκ ἦν ἐν ξυμποσίῳ πλὴν Δωροῖ συκοπέδιλε,
The vocative form Δωροῖ is irregular; the standard vocative of the proper name Δῶρος is Δῶρε. This form is attested elsewhere in Attic comedy (e.g., Aristophanes, *Knights* 1333) as a deliberate metrical adjustment or a colloquialism, though some editors have conjectured Δῶρε or treated it as a corruption. The adjective συκοπέδιλε (sycopede) is a rare compound, literally 'fig-shoe,' functioning as a pejorative epithet for a thief or informer who steals figs (a common small-time crime in Athens) or, more broadly, a low-class swindler. The term is highly specific to the social satire of the period, targeting the informer Hyperbolus (or a type of informer) with a pun on his alleged lowly origins or criminal past.
αἴρεσθʼ αὐτῷ πολὺ τὸ ῥόθιον, παραπέμψατʼ ἐφʼ ἕνδεκα κώπαις
The phrase ἐφ' ἕνδεκα κώπαις is a specific idiom for the death penalty by the paddle (or oar), referring to the method of execution carried out by the Eleven (οἱ ἕνδεκα), the Athenian magistrates responsible for executions. The number 'eleven' functions as a metonym for the officials themselves, and 'paddles' (κώπαις) refers to the instrument of torture used to beat the condemned to death, often by drowning or beating on the floor, distinguishing this from the more common 'hemlock' (σικύνη) or the sword. This specific formulation highlights the brutal, bureaucratic nature of the state's violence, contrasting the 'paddle' with the more 'honorable' death by poison.
μισθοφόροι τριήρεις,
The phrase employs the noun μισθοφόρος (mercenary) as an attributive adjective modifying τριήρεις (triremes), a usage that personifies the ships as hired soldiers. This is a specific instance of the metonymic 'soldier-ship' metaphor found in Old Comedy, where the trireme is treated as a citizen-soldier paid for service, reflecting the contemporary political discourse in Athens regarding the professionalization of the navy and the criticism of demagogues (like Cleon) who allegedly treated the fleet as a source of employment rather than a state instrument. The construction is syntactically elliptical, omitting the verb of being or action, relying on the reader to supply the sense of 'trières that are mercenaries' or 'mercenary triremes'.
ἠρίθμησεν, ἀλλʼ ὁ θυμὸς εὐθὺς ἦν Ἀμυνίας·
The clause ὁ θυμὸς εὐθὺς ἦν Ἀμυνίας relies on a colloquial elliptical construction where the preposition (likely ἐν or ἐπί) is omitted before the proper name. While 'to be' with a dative or genitive of person is common, the specific phrasing 'the temper was [at] Aminus' (implying Aminus was the source or location of the anger) reflects the comic poet's tendency to treat abstract nouns as concrete entities inhabiting specific locales. This construction is attested in later Greek prose but here serves a metrical and colloquial purpose, personifying θυμός as if it were a traveler arriving at a destination.
Νίκην, ἣ χορικῶν ἐστιν ἑταίρα
The phrase χορικῶν ἐστιν ἑταίρα is a precise technical reference to the role of Victory (Nike) in the dithyrambic and comic choruses, where she was traditionally invoked as a companion or 'female associate' of the chorus. The genitive plural χορικῶν (of the chorus members) functions as a possessive genitive, while ἑταίρα here carries its specific social connotation of a female companion or partner in ritual performance, distinct from a mere 'friend' (φίλη). This reflects the ritualized relationship between the chorus and the deity they invoke, particularly in the context of Aristophanic comedy where the chorus often interacts directly with divine personifications.
εἴ τις ἐξέρποι θύραζε κἀκ βυθοῦ θηρώμενοι·
The construction ἐξέρποι (aorist middle optative of ἐξέρχομαι) combined with the present middle participle θηρώμενοι ('while hunting' or 'while being hunted') creates a syntactic tension regarding the temporal scope of the participle. While the optative in the protasis suggests a hypothetical or potential future scenario, the present tense of the participle implies an action simultaneous with the main verb's hypothetical occurrence. In the context of the Knights, where the Paphlagonian (Cleon) is depicted as emerging from a dark, subterranean pit, the participle likely functions not merely as a temporal marker but as a descriptive of the Paphlagonian's state as he is drawn out—simultaneously 'hunting' (i.e., preying on the demos) and being 'hunted' (by the Sausage-Seller's counter-aggression). This simultaneity underscores the chaotic, inverted nature of the scene where the predator becomes the prey.
κρημνοὺς †ἐρείδων† καὶ ξυνωμότας λέγων
The text presents a well-known crux at this juncture. The verb ἐρείδων (leaning/supporting) is metrically and syntactically awkward in this context, leading scholars such as Hermann and Dindorf to propose the conjecture ἐρείδων for ἐρείδων, or more commonly, to emend the text to κρημνοὺς ἐρείδων (supporting the cliffs) as a metaphor for 'fomenting' or 'propping up' the state's foundations, though others like Dobree have suggested ἐρείδων might be a corruption of ἐπείδων (following/attacking) or related to a lost phrase. The most widely accepted solution, supported by the context of the Demos's corruption by the Paphlagonian (Cleon), is to read κρημνοὺς as a metaphor for 'precipices' or 'ruin' and ἐρείδων as 'supporting' in the sense of 'propping up the state's foundations' (i.e., maintaining a precarious position), but the manuscript tradition is corrupt here, and the exact sense of the verb in relation to 'cliffs' remains a subject of textual debate.
ἐγένεθʼ ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ ψευδατραφάξυος πλέα,
The adjective ψευδατραφάξυος is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, constructed as a compound of ψευδής, ἀτράξ (or ἀτράκτος, 'distaff'), and ὕξυος (or ὕξυς, 'wooden'), creating a neologism describing someone who is 'deceptively distaff-made' or 'counterfeitly wooden.' This coinage likely mocks the character's artificiality or constructed nature within the play's satirical context, as no exact parallel exists in extant Attic prose or poetry.
κἄγωγʼ ὅτε δὴ γʼνων ἐνδεχομένην τοὺς λόγους
The phrase κἄγωγʼ ὅτε δὴ γʼνων ἐνδεχομένην τοὺς λόγους presents a syntactic crux regarding the participle ἐνδεχομένην. While the participle is in the feminine accusative singular, agreeing with the implied subject of the infinitive (or the subject of the main clause if the construction is interpreted differently), the verb ἐνδέχομαι typically governs an accusative of the thing expected or a genitive of the person from whom it is expected. Here, τοὺς λόγους is accusative, suggesting 'expecting the words' or 'the words being expected,' but the construction lacks a clear governing verb in the finite form that would license the participle's case and number in this specific context. The δὴ γʼ is a common emphatic particle combination, but the syntactic relationship between the participle and the preceding clause requires careful analysis to determine whether the participle modifies the subject of the main clause or stands as an independent temporal clause.
Βερέσχεθοί τε καὶ Κόβαλοι καὶ Μόθων,
The verb βερέσχεθαι is a hapax legomenon in extant comedy, appearing only here in Aristophanes. While the form is clearly a middle/passive present indicative second person plural, the root is obscure. It is often conjectured to be related to βερέσχειν (to be angry or vexed), but the semantic fit in this list of names is difficult; some scholars suggest a dialectal form or a corruption for a different verb, perhaps related to dancing or leaping, given the context of a procession of rustic figures. The lack of clear attestation makes this a significant crux for textual critics.
ἐκ δεξιᾶς ἀπέπαρδε καταπύγων ἀνήρ.
The verb ἀπέπαρδε (aorist active indicative of παρδαίνω) is a rare hapax legomenon in extant literature, formed from the compound of παρά and the root of πέρδομαι (to fart). Its usage here is a deliberate comic neologism characteristic of Aristophanic grotesquerie, where the prefix παρά intensifies the action to imply 'farting off to the side' or 'farting with a sideways motion,' enhancing the physical absurdity of the scene where a man is depicted defecating or flatulating while moving. This construction exemplifies the playwright's tendency to coin verbs to describe specific, often scatological, bodily functions with precise, exaggerated directional nuance.
εἶτʼ ἐστεφάνουν μʼ εὐαγγέλια· κἀγὼ φρασα
The verb φράζω here is used in its specialized legal sense of 'to deliberate' or 'to take counsel' (often followed by a clause of what is being decided), rather than its more common meanings of 'to show' or 'to tell'. In the context of the Paphlagonian (Cleon) and the Sausage-Seller's contest for power, the Sausage-Seller's response 'and I deliberated' implies a moment of political calculation or strategic decision-making in response to the flattery of 'good news' (εὐαγγέλια), highlighting the cynical, pragmatic nature of the political maneuvering at the heart of the play's satire.
οἱ δʼ ἀνεκρότησαν καὶ πρὸς ἔμʼ ἐκεχήνεσαν.
The verb ἐκεχήνεσαν derives from κηχάνω, a rare verb meaning 'to hiss' or 'to make a hissing noise,' specifically used to describe the sound of disapproval made by an audience. Its use here, paired with ἀνεκρότησαν ('they clapped'), creates a vivid auditory contrast between approval and rejection, a common feature of the comic chorus's interaction with the protagonist.
τῇ δʼ Ἀγροτέρᾳ κατὰ χιλιῶν παρῄνεσα
The phrase 'κατὰ χιλιῶν' (according to thousands) is an elliptical construction where the preposition 'κατά' governs the genitive plural to indicate a rate or measure of action, here meaning 'by the thousand' or 'in thousands.' This usage is characteristic of the colloquial, hyperbolic style of Old Comedy, where precise numerical quantification is often replaced by vague, exaggerated magnitudes for comic effect. The construction parallels other idiomatic uses of 'κατά' + genitive to denote a standard or measure (e.g., 'κατὰ μύρια' for 'in myriads'), but its specific application here to the act of advising ('παρῄνεσα') creates a syntactic tension that requires the reader to infer the implied object of the quantification (i.e., the number of people advised).
ἅπαντα τά τε γήτεἰ ὅσʼ ἦν ἐν τἀγορᾷ·
The word γήτεἰ is a textual crux. The manuscript tradition offers γήτεἰ (or γητεῖ) in this position, which is grammatically difficult as an accusative plural of γήτειος (magical) would not fit the context of 'everything in the agora' without a clear antecedent, while γητεῖ (dative singular of γητεύς, 'ploughman') is syntactically awkward with ἅπαντα. Editors have proposed γητεῖ as a corruption of γητεύς (perhaps referring to the agricultural context of the marketplace) or, more likely, a corruption of γητεύειν (to farm) used substantively, or alternatively γητεῖ (from γητεύω) as a noun for 'those who farm'. However, the most widely accepted conjecture, supported by the context of the Knights' satire on the demagogues' manipulation of the masses, is that the text should read γητεῖς (ploughmen/farmers) or that γήτεἰ is a corruption of γητεῖς. The scholia suggest a reading γητεῖ, but the sense 'all the magicians' (from γητεύς in the sense of 'one who treads the earth' or 'a sorcerer') is less coherent with the immediate context of the agora's commercial activity. The most plausible emendation, restoring sense to the passage, is to read γητεύς (or γητεύων) in the plural, 'all the farmers who were in the agora,' reflecting the social composition of the Athenian assembly. Alternatively, if γήτεἰ is retained, it may be a rare accusative plural of γητεύς meaning 'ploughmen,' but the spelling is highly irregular. The crux lies in whether the text refers to 'magicians' (a metaphor for the demagogues) or 'farmers' (the actual populace).
ἀποροῦσιν αὐτοῖς προῖκα κἀχαριζόμην.
The particle κἀ- is a contraction of καὶ ἄρα, where ἄρα functions as an inferential or confirmatory particle. While καὶ often simply connects clauses, the presence of ἄρα here (indicated by the elision in the contraction) suggests a nuance of 'and so' or 'and indeed,' reinforcing the speaker's assertion of their own benevolent action in the face of the opponents' distress. The construction κἀχαριζόμην (with the augment) confirms the imperfect indicative, emphasizing the continuous or habitual nature of the speaker's generosity ('I was constantly doing them a favor') contrasted with their current state of being at a loss.
ἀπολῶ σε νὴ τὴν προεδρίαν τὴν ἐκ Πύλου.
The oath 'νὴ τὴν προεδρίαν τὴν ἐκ Πύλου' (by the presidency from Pylos) is a rare and specific attestation of a formulaic curse in Old Comedy. While oaths by the gods or abstract concepts are common, swearing by a specific political office ('proedria') is highly unusual. This likely alludes to the specific role of the 'proedroi' (presidents) in the Athenian Council (Boule) or Assembly, a position of significant administrative power and prestige during the Peloponnesian War. The reference to Pylos ('ek Pylos') connects the oath to the decisive Athenian victory at Pylos (425 BCE), suggesting the speaker is invoking the glory of that specific military triumph as a guarantee of their threat's severity, or perhaps mocking the officialdom associated with the post-war political climate. The construction itself serves as a hyperbolic threat, grounding the speaker's anger in the tangible authority of the state's leadership and a recent, celebrated victory.
ἐπὶ τῷ φάγοις ἥδιστʼ ἄν; ἐπὶ βαλλαντίῳ;
The particle ἄν with the optative φάγοις (aorist active optative of φαγεῖν) in this interrogative context expresses a potential or hypothetical condition, roughly 'would you rather eat...?' The construction ἐπὶ + dative here denotes the sphere of preference or the 'basis' for the choice ('on the basis of the [food]?', 'on the basis of the [purse]?'), a usage that shifts the prepositional meaning from spatial to abstract preference, a nuance specific to the comic register of Aristophanes.
ὅ τι; †τῶν στρατηγῶν ὑποδραμὼν τῶν ἐκ Πύλου, †
The text is corrupted at this point in the manuscript tradition. The symbols † indicate a lacuna or a corrupt reading in the primary manuscripts (specifically the 'A' and 'E' families). Most editors reconstruct the phrase as ὑποδραμὼν τῶν στρατηγῶν τῶν ἐκ Πύλου ('having run under the feet of the generals from Pylos') or similar, but the exact wording is uncertain. The participle ὑποδραμὼν (aorist active participle of ὑποδραμω) is rare in this specific construction with the genitive of the person 'run under,' though the metaphor of 'running under' (subservience or cowardice) is a known Aristophanic trope. The corruption likely obscures the specific object of the participle or a preceding preposition, making the syntactic relationship between the generals and the action ambiguous without conjecture.
ἕψοντος ἑτερου τὴν χύτραν ὑφειλόμην.
The verb ὑφειλόμην (aorist middle of ὑφείλω) is rare in the comic corpus and here functions with a specific causal nuance: 'I would have taken it [to the potter's] to be boiled, had another not been boiling the pot.' This construction implies a missed opportunity or a specific condition of dependency that is characteristic of Aristophanic hyperbole regarding the absurdity of the Paphlagonian's domestic encroachments. The form ὑφειλόμην, while etymologically related to 'to take under' (ὑφίημι), here carries the sense of 'to entrust' or 'to take for the purpose of,' a usage clarified by the context of the χύτρα (cooking pot) being the object of the action.
ὅτοισι τόνδʼ ὑπερβαλεῖ. ποικίλος γὰρ ἁνὴρ
The particle γάρ introduces a causal explanation for the preceding imperative or prediction, yet the subject of the main clause (ὅτοισι τόνδʼ ὑπερβαλεῖ) is a relative pronoun with a dative plural form that functions as the indirect object of the verb ὑπερβαλεῖ ('will surpass them'). The construction relies on the colloquial Attic usage where ὅτοισι (dative plural of ὅς) serves as a relative pronoun referring back to an implicit or previously mentioned group (likely the 'knights' or the 'cavalry' of the title), while the verb ὑπερβαλεῖ is a future indicative active third person singular. The phrase ποικίλος γὰρ ἁνὴρ ('for the man is versatile/multicolored') uses the adverbial form ἁνὴρ (dialectal or poetic for ἄνθρωπος) with the article omitted, a common feature in Aristophanic dialogue to maintain metrical rhythm while emphasizing the character's unpredictability. The causal link between the man's 'variety' (ποικίλος) and his ability to 'surpass' the others suggests a specific rhetorical strategy where the character's moral or behavioral fluidity is presented as a tactical advantage rather than a defect.
ἐπὶ ταυτησὶ κατακνησθείην ἐν μυττωτῷ μετὰ τυροῦ,
The verb κατακνησθείην is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, formed from a rare root *κνησ-* (related to scratching or itching) with the intensive prefix κατα-. The optative mood here expresses a wish for a gruesome fate, while the dative μυττωτῷ (in the *myttōtēs*, a vessel for mixing wine and water, or possibly a pun on the 'mixture' of the crowd) with τυροῦ (cheese) creates a grotesque image of being crushed or suffocated in a cheese-filled wine-mixing bowl, a hyperbolic curse typical of the comic genre's focus on visceral degradation.
καὶ τῇ κρεάγρᾳ τῶν ὀρχιπέδων ἑλκοίμην ἐς Κεραμεικόν.
The phrase τῶν ὀρχιπέδων (of the testicles) is a striking example of Aristophanic grotesque realism, where the abstract concept of punishment is concretized through the most vulnerable part of the male body. While the genitive is grammatically standard for possession or reference, the semantic force here relies on the specific cultural understanding of the κρεάγρα (meat-market) not merely as a place of commerce, but as a location of slaughter and dismemberment. The humor derives from the hyperbolic threat of being dragged by one's testicles to the potters' quarter (Κεραμεικόν), a district associated with the production of pottery and, in a grimly literal sense, the burial of the dead, thereby combining physical mutilation with social death.
σὲ γάρ, ὃς Μήδοισι διεξιφίσω περὶ τῆς χώρας Μαραθῶνι,
The verb διεξιφίσω is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, formed from εἰς (into) + ἵσχω (to hold/keep) + the intensive prefix δια-. The compound verb, meaning 'to hold out against' or 'to defend resolutely', appears here in the future indicative active. While the future tense is standard for the periphrastic future construction common in comedy, the specific lexical formation is notable for its vividness in describing the defensive stance at Marathon, emphasizing the thoroughness of the defense rather than merely the act of fighting.
καὶ νικήσας ἡμῖν μεγάλως ἐγγλωττοτυπεῖν παρέδωκας,
The verb ἐγγλωττοτυπεῖν is a hapax legomenon in extant Greek literature, a coinage by Aristophanes combining ἐν- (in) + γλῶττα (tongue) + τυποῦν (to stamp/impress). In this context, it functions as a technical metaphor for the act of 'stamping' or 'imprinting' a specific rhetorical style or political stance onto the audience, rather than the literal sense of 'engraving on a tongue.' The formation is a rare example of the poet's neologistic creativity using a compound that mimics the morphology of technical terms for engraving (τυπο-), yet applies it to the ephemeral medium of speech, highlighting the coercive nature of the political victory mentioned.
κᾆτα καθίζου μαλακῶς, ἵνα μὴ τρίβῃς τὴν ἐν Σαλαμῖνι.
The phrase τὴν ἐν Σαλαμῖνι functions as a substantive elliptical construction, referring to the 'saddle' or 'seat' associated with the Battle of Salamis. The humor relies on the audience's recognition of the specific topographical and historical memory of the battle, where the Athenian triremes (and by extension, the sailors or generals commanding them) were central, while the comic context here absurdly transfers the location of a naval battle to the physical comfort of a saddle, mocking the general's (likely Cleon's) martial pretensions or the physical reality of his chariot travel.
καὶ πῶς σὺ φιλεῖς, ὃς τοῦτον ὁρῶν οἰκοῦντʼ ἐν ταῖς φιδάκναισι
The adjective φιδάκναισι (dative plural) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes and extremely rare in the entire corpus of Ancient Greek, occurring only here in the extant texts. While etymologically related to φίδις (snake) or φίδιον, its specific meaning in this context—referring to the 'snaky' or 'woven' reed mats used for bedding or flooring in humble dwellings—is clarified only by the scholia and the immediate context of the character's poverty. The dative plural here functions as a locative, indicating the squalid living conditions of the person being observed, contrasting sharply with the claim of friendship.
ὡς τοῦτον δεῖ ποτʼ ἐν Ἀρκαδίᾳ πεντώβολον ἡλιάσασθαι,
The verb ἡλιάσασθαι (aorist middle of ἡλιάω) is a rare comic neologism or specialized legal term meaning 'to be brought before the heliaia' (the popular court). Its formation from ἥλιος (sun, metonymy for the court, which sat in the open air) is a characteristic example of Aristophanic wordplay, conflating the etymological root of the court's name with the verb of sitting or judging, while the phrase πεντώβολον (for a fine of five drachmas) specifies the exact penalty for the charge of 'sophistry' or 'corrupting the youth' often levied against intellectuals in the late 5th century. The construction combines a future necessity (δεῖ... δεῖ) with a specific, likely ironic, legal outcome for the character Paphlagon (representing Cleon), projecting his current corruption onto a future trial where he will be fined rather than acquitted.
καὶ χῖδρα φαγὼν ἀναθαρρήσῃ καὶ στεμφύλῳ ἐς λόγον ἔλθῃ,
The verb στεμφύλλομαι (here used in the form στεμφύλῳ ἐς λόγον ἔλθῃ, literally 'to come to speech on a steiphylon') is a rare hapax legomenon in this specific construction. While στεμφύλλον generally refers to the wild pomegranate (punica granatum) or its fruit, here it functions as a metonym for a specific type of rustic food or perhaps a specific setting associated with rustic simplicity and lack of sophistication. The phrase implies a transition from a state of fear (indicated by χῖδρα φαγὼν, 'after eating a chidra') to a state of rhetorical confidence, but the exact nature of the 'steiphylon' in this context is debated: some scholars suggest it refers to a specific dish made from the fruit, while others argue it is a reference to a specific type of meal or gathering. The use of this obscure term highlights Aristophanes' penchant for using rare and specialized vocabulary to create a specific comedic effect, contrasting the crude, rustic nature of the food with the sophisticated art of rhetoric.
γνώσεται οἵων ἀγαθῶν αὐτὸν τῇ μισθοφορᾷ παρεκόπτου·
The verb παρεκόπτου (aorist imperative of παρεκόπτω) is used here in the specific political sense of 'to corrupt' or 'to pervert' (the public good or the citizen's judgment) through financial inducement, rather than its literal sense of 'to break in' or 'to interrupt'. In the context of the Demos's relationship with the Paphlagonian Sausage-Seller, this term encapsulates the central accusation of the play: that the politician has diverted the state's resources and the citizen's will through bribery (μισθοφορᾷ). The construction with the genitive of the quality (οἵων ἀγαθῶν) denotes the nature of the goods from which the corruption has occurred.
ὦ πόλις Ἄργους κλύεθʼ οἷα λέγει. σὺ Θεμιστοκλεῖ ἀντιφερίζεις;
The vocative Ἄργους is an elliptical form of Ἄργους πόλις, a common but potentially confusing contraction in tragedy and comedy where the noun is omitted but the case ending implies it. More critically, the address 'O city of Argos' to the Athenian polis is a deliberate ironic inversion: the Demos (the Athenian people) is being addressed as if they were the citizens of Argos, a traditional rival of Athens and a city often associated in Old Comedy with cowardice or instability. This rhetorical device underscores the speaker's accusation that the Athenian Demos is behaving with the treachery or inconsistency attributed to Argos, while simultaneously questioning their capacity to recognize their own identity in the face of the Sausage-Seller's (or Paphlagon's) manipulations.
καὶ πρὸς τούτοις ἀριστώσῃ τὸν Πειραιᾶ προσέμαξεν,
The verb προσέμαξεν (aorist of προσμάσσω) is a rare hapax legomenon in this specific form within the extant corpus of Aristophanes. While the root μάσσω (to smear) is common, the compound προσμάσσω, meaning 'to smear upon' or 'to besmirch,' is employed here with a specific rhetorical force: it depicts the Paphlagon (the slave) as literally coating the Piraeus with his slanders or corruption. This usage transforms a physical action into a metaphor for the overwhelming nature of his political attacks, a technique characteristic of Aristophanic hyperbole where abstract political influence is rendered as a visceral, material substance.
κἀκεῖνος μὲν φεύγει τὴν γῆν σὺ δʼ Ἀχιλλείων ἀπομάττει.
The verb ἀπομάττει (from ἀποματτόω) is rare in Aristophanes and here carries a specific technical sense of 'fending off' or 'repelling' an attack, likely with a weapon or shield, rather than the more general 'driving away'. The construction with the accusative τὴν γῆν (the land/earth) as the direct object of 'fleeing' is a notable instance of the verb φεύγει taking a direct object denoting the territory being abandoned, a usage that emphasizes the totality of the flight from the physical space rather than just a direction. This syntactic pairing highlights the contrast between the enemy's total retreat from the land and the protagonist's active, martial defense of it.
μυστιλᾶται τῶν δημοσίων.
The verb μυστιλᾶται (from μυστιλάω) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes and rare in the comic corpus, meaning 'to steal' or 'to embezzle' (specifically of public funds). Its formation from μύστης ('initiate' or 'member of a secret cult') is a pun: the Demos is accused of being 'initiated' into the secret society of thieves who are stealing the public money. This lexical choice blends the technical sense of embezzlement with the religious connotation of mystery cults, a typical Aristophanic wordplay on the corruption of the polis.
τί θαλαττοκοπεῖς καὶ πλατυγίζεις,
The verb θαλαττοκοπέω is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, a coined compound combining θαλαττο- (sea) and -κοπέω (to cut/trim, from κόπτω). Here it functions as a vivid metaphor for 'trimming one's beard to look like a sailor' or 'acting the part of a sea-faring man,' reflecting the specific Athenian anxiety about naval strategy and the visual identity of the demagogues who rose to power on naval platforms. The second verb, πλατυγίζεις, is a rare compound from πλατύς (broad) and γιγνώσκω (to make known/grow), likely meaning 'to spread oneself out' or 'to act pompously/broadly,' creating a parallelism of physical posturing with political posturing that mocks the defendant's (Cleon's) perceived arrogance and self-aggrandizement.
δωροδοκήσαντʼ ἐκ Μυτιλήνης
The phrase refers to the bribery of the Athenian general Phormio (or potentially a collective reference to commanders) by the Mytilenians during the Mytilenean debate or the subsequent naval operations, a specific historical allusion that Aristophanes exploits for satirical effect. The participle δωροδοκήσαντʼ (having accepted bribes) is in the aorist active, implying a completed act of corruption that serves as the causal basis for the preceding accusation or narrative context in the play, specifically targeting the perceived venality of Athenian imperial administration.
ἕως ἂν ᾖ τῶν ἀσπίδων τῶν ἐκ Πύλου τι λοιπόν.
The phrase ἕως ἂν ᾖ with the subjunctive expresses a future indefinite time clause ('until there remains'), a construction standard in Attic for temporal limits. The genitive plural τῶν ἀσπίδων functions as a partitive genitive dependent on the implied 'something' (τι) of the predicate, specifying the remainder of the shields. The specific reference to 'shields from Pylos' (τῶν ἐκ Πύλου) alludes to the capture of Spartan hoplites at the Battle of Sphacteria (425 BCE), where Athens seized a significant number of shields and helmets. The humor of the passage relies on the hyperbolic implication that the Spartan forces are so depleted that not even a single shield from that specific, famous defeat remains, or conversely, that the Athenian claim to victory is so absolute that the very existence of any remaining Spartan equipment is the only thing left to discuss.
καὶ τυροπῶλαι· τοῦτο δʼ εἰς ἕν ἐστι συγκεκυφός,
The phrase εἰς ἕν is a rare idiom for 'in one place' or 'together' (lit. 'into one'), which appears here to describe the crowd of cheese-sellers gathered as a single, chaotic mass. The verb συγκεκυφός (perfect passive participle of συγκεκύφω) is a hapax legomenon in this exact form within the extant corpus of Aristophanes, derived from κεκύφω (to be bent/curved), metaphorically describing the crowd as 'bent together' or 'huddled.' This construction emphasizes the physical density and the singular, unified nature of the mob, a typical Aristophanic exaggeration of the comic chorus or crowd scenes.
ὥστʼ εἰ σὺ βριμήσαιο καὶ βλέψειας ὀστρακίνδα,
The noun ὀστρακίνδα (ostrakinda) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes and a rare Atticism derived from ὄστρακον (pottery shard). In this context, it functions as a direct object of the verb βλέπειας, but its usage here is syntactically elliptical and semantically charged: it likely refers to the act of 'looking at' or 'considering' ostraka (shards) in the context of the Athenian ostracism procedure. The phrase thus evokes the threat of ostracism—a political mechanism used to exile prominent figures for ten years—without explicitly naming the procedure, relying on the audience's familiarity with the visual symbol of the shard as an instrument of political judgment. The use of the optative βριμήσαιο ('if you were to be fierce') and βλέπειας ('if you were to look') in a conditional clause with ὥστε ('so that') creates a hypothetical scenario where the speaker warns the addressee that his aggression will lead to him being scrutinized or targeted by the democratic process. The lexical choice of ὀστρακίνδα, rather than the more common ὄστρακα, adds a poetic and slightly archaic flavor, possibly signaling a deliberate allusion to the ritualistic nature of ostracism in the Athenian imagination.
ὅσον με παρεκόπτου χρόνον τοιαῦτα κρουσιδημῶν.
The compound verb κρουσιδημῶν is a hapax legomenon in the extant corpus of Aristophanes, formed from κρούω (to strike, beat) and δῆμος (the people). The construction is a vivid coinage suggesting the Paphlagon (the slave character) is 'beating the people' or 'pounding them into submission' through his flattery and manipulation. While the prefix κρουσ- appears elsewhere in comedy to denote violent or frantic action, its specific combination with δῆμος here creates a unique semantic nuance of physicalizing political oppression, requiring the audience to parse the portmanteau to grasp the metaphor of the demagogue as a physical batterer of the citizenry.
ταῖς ἐμβάσιν φάσκων φιλεῖν;
The phrase ταῖς ἐμβάσιν is a dative of means or instrument, but the noun ἐμβάσις (from ἐμβάλλω) is rare in the Attic comedy of this period, appearing elsewhere primarily in medical or technical contexts referring to 'putting in' or 'insertion'. Here, it likely functions as a colloquialism or metaphorical extension, possibly alluding to the act of bribing or 'inserting' oneself into political favor, a usage that sharpens the satirical edge of the clause. The construction is syntactically sound but lexically marked, requiring attention to its non-standard semantic field in this context.
ζεῦγος πριάμενος ἐμβάδων τουτὶ φορεῖν δίδωμι.
The verb ἐμβάδων is a hapax legomenon in the extant corpus of Aristophanes (and indeed in most of Attic comedy), appearing only here in the genitive plural. It is an adverbial form derived from ἐμβάς, meaning 'on foot' or 'walking', used here in the phrase ἐμβάδων φορεῖν to denote the act of carrying something while walking. The construction is syntactically irregular for the time, as the genitive of manner is rare in comedy and typically reserved for specific idiomatic expressions. This usage highlights Aristophanes' tendency to coin or repurpose words for metrical or comedic effect, particularly in the context of the character's boast about carrying a heavy load.
ἔπαυσα τοὺς βινουμένους, τὸν Γρύττον ἐξαλείψας.
The participle ἐξαλείψας ('having erased') is used metaphorically for the political act of ostracism or the formal removal of a name from the citizen lists, a usage attested in the context of the political struggles of the late 5th century BCE. While the verb can mean 'to wipe out' generally, here it specifically targets the political standing of Gryttos, a figure associated with the demagogic faction, illustrating the playwright's satirical conflation of administrative erasure with physical violence or death.
τοῖσιν τρόποις τοῖς σοῖσιν ὥσπερ βλαυτίοισι χρῶμαι.
The adjective βλαυτίοισι (dative plural) is a hapax legomenon in extant comedy, derived from βλαύς (blauōs), meaning 'stupid' or 'foolish' (cf. βλακώδης). Its usage here is semantically charged: the Knight (Demus) claims to use the Paphlagonian's 'stupid ways' to defeat him, creating a paradoxical irony where the master of the game adopts the very incompetence of his rival as a tactical tool. This lexical rarity and the specific semantic weight of the term—distinguishing it from more generic terms for foolishness like μωρός—warrant note for its contribution to the play's satire of political incompetence.
οὐκ ἐς κόρακας ἀποφθερεῖ βύρσης κάκιστον ὄζων;
The phrase οὐκ ἐς κόρακας functions as a fixed idiom meaning 'to perish utterly' or 'to be destroyed completely,' literally 'to go to the crows.' While the idiom itself is attested elsewhere (e.g., in Aristophanes' *Knights* 1074, *Clouds* 1074), its usage here in a question expecting a negative answer ('he won't go to the crows?') creates a specific rhetorical effect: it emphasizes the speaker's certainty that the subject (the Sausage-Seller, in context) is too vile or protected to suffer such a fate, or conversely, that his corruption is so profound he is already beyond the reach of standard destruction. The verb ἀποφθερεῖ (future active indicative of ἀποφθέρνω, 'to destroy') is used in a context where the Sausage-Seller is accused of being the worst of the skins (βύρσης), yet the speaker suggests he will not be destroyed but rather will continue to flourish or persist in his depravity. The construction is a rhetorical question that functions as a strong assertion.
ἰδοὺ δέχου κέρκον λαγῶ τὠφθαλμιδίω περιψῆν.
The adjective περιψῆν (peripsēn) is a hapax legomenon in the extant corpus, formed from περι- (around) and ψῆν (a rare form related to ψῆχος or perhaps a dialectal variant of ψῆμα, 'to spread' or 'to cover'). In this context, it functions as a compound epithet describing the hare, implying a 'well-spread' or 'fluffed-up' appearance, likely alluding to the theatrical convention of stuffing costumes to exaggerate the animal's form for comedic effect. The lexical rarity and the specific theatrical implication of the compound make this a crucial point of semantic clarification.
ἐμπλήμενος φθαίης ἔτʼ εἰς
The form φθαίης is a second aorist subjunctive active of φθίνω (to perish, waste away), not the more common present φθείης. This aorist form, while attested in comedy (e.g., Aristoph. Eq. 1096, Thesm. 658), creates a semantic tension with the imperative ἐμπλήμενος (having been filled) in the same clause, suggesting a periphrastic or idiomatic construction where the 'filling' is immediately followed by the 'perishing' or 'wasting away' of the subject, likely in a context of overindulgence or gluttony. The syntax is rare for the aorist subjunctive following a perfect participle in this specific semantic configuration.
ἐναποπνιγείης.
The verb ἐναποπνιγείης is a first aorist optative middle of ἐναποπνίγω, a compound formed with the prefix ἐν- ('in') and the root of πνίγω ('to choke'). In this context (Knights 1074), the character Demos uses it as a wish against the Paphlagonian (Cleon): 'may you be smothered in the mud.' The prefix ἐν- here intensifies the action to the point of total submersion, a usage that distinguishes it from the simple πνίγω. The optative form ἐναποπνιγείης, rather than the imperative, marks this as a third-person optative of wish (often used in curses), a construction that Aristophanes deploys for dramatic effect to convey the speaker's intense desire for the enemy's destruction.
ἀγαθὸς πολίτης, οἶος οὐδείς πω χρόνου
The phrase οἶος οὐδείς πω χρόνου is a striking example of an elliptical construction where the temporal genitive (or dative of time) 'χρόνου' functions adverbially with the superlative force of 'οἶος' (the only one), implying 'the only one in all time' or 'unrivaled in history.' This construction, while attested, relies on a specific rhetorical compression common in comic hyperbole but distinct from standard comparative syntax, requiring the reader to supply the implied 'in the span of' or 'of' to grasp the absolute nature of the claim.
ἀνὴρ γεγένηται τοῖσι πολλοῖς τοὐβολοῦ.
The phrase τοὐβολοῦ is a colloquial contraction of τὸν ὀβολόν, the smallest silver coin in circulation. While the genitive case here functions adverbially to denote price or cost ('at the price of an obol'), the use of the accusative form in the genitive slot (or the perception of the oblique case as a fixed idiom) reflects the specific syntactic habits of Old Comedy, where the genitive of price often appears with the article in a way that blurs the distinction between the accusative of respect and the genitive of value. More significantly, the phrase as a whole is a well-known idiom for 'a cheap man' or 'a miser,' yet the literal syntax 'a man has become of the obol' (i.e., 'has become worth only an obol') relies on the specific economic context of the Athenian *deme* and the *demos* itself, where an obol was the daily wage for a laborer, implying a reduction of a citizen's status to the bare minimum of subsistence.
δημοῦ βοείου θρῖον ἐξωπτημένον.
The phrase 'δημοῦ βοείου θρῖον' (the hair of a bullock's head) is a striking example of Aristophanic grotesque realism, where the poet reduces the 'hair' (θρῖον) of a sacrificial ox to a mere 'tuft' or 'scruff' to emphasize the meager and despicable nature of the food, contrasting with the grandeur of the sacrificial animal. The participle 'ἐξωπτημένον' (roasted) is used in a context where the cooking method is secondary to the insult, highlighting the lowly status of the meal served to the Demos.
ψωλὸν γενέσθαι δεῖ σε μέχρι τοῦ μυρρίνου.
The phrase ἕως τοῦ μυρρίνου (until the myrrh) is a specific chronological marker referring to the end of the day, likely the time when myrrh was burned in the evening or the time of the 'myrrh' festival (perhaps related to the Anthesteria or general symposiastic closing), rather than a literal reference to the plant itself. The idiom relies on the cultural practice of burning myrrh at dusk, marking the transition from day to night activities.
δοῖδυξ οὐδὲ τορύνη.
δοῖδυξ (doîdyx) and τορύνη (torýnē) are technical military terms for specific types of spears or javelins; their pairing here serves as a synecdoche for military equipment, but the specific distinction between the two weapons (the former likely a lighter javelin, the latter a heavier thrusting spear) is crucial for understanding the satirical precision of the text regarding the hoplite's armament.
Γλάνιδος, ἀδελφοῦ τοῦ Βάκιδος γεραιτέρου.
The phrase γεραιτέρου is the comparative of γέρων, but here it functions not merely as an adjective meaning 'older' but as a substantive title or nickname. In the context of the Knights, Aristophanes is satirizing the demagogues by assigning them ridiculous, often animalistic or diminutive names. Γλάνις (Glanis) and Βάκις (Bakis) are not historical figures of note but are likely invented or caricatured names. The use of the comparative here, 'Glanis, Bakis's older brother,' suggests a specific familial relationship that serves the comic logic of the play, possibly alluding to a real or perceived rivalry or hierarchy among the lower-class Athenian populace, which Aristophanes is mocking. The grammatical construction is straightforward, but the semantic weight lies in the deliberate absurdity of the names and the triviality of the relationship being highlighted for comic effect.
σῴζεσθαί σʼ ἐκέλευσʼ ἱερὸν κύνα καρχαρόδοντα,
The phrase ἱερὸν κύνα καρχαρόδοντα functions as a periphrastic apposition identifying the subject of the infinitive σῴζεσθαι. Here, 'dog' (κύνα) is not a metaphor for a generic guard but a specific reference to the 'sacred dog' of the deme of Collytus, a known figure in Athenian local cult and comedy who was often associated with the character of the Paphlagonian or the demagogue Cleon in the play. The adjective καρχαρόδοντα ('jaws-tearing' or 'ferocious') is a compound adjective formed with the aorist participle of καρχαρόω, a rare formation that emphasizes the animal's violent nature, contrasting with the sacred status implied by ἱερόν. This specific epithet and the appositional structure serve to satirically elevate a real, perhaps infamous, local animal to the status of a divine protector, a typical Aristophanic technique of conflating the mundane with the sacred to mock political figures.
ὥσπερ θύρας σοῦ τῶν λογίων παρεσθίει.
The phrase τῶν λογίων refers specifically to the Pythia's oracles at Delphi, a specialized technical usage of λογίων (oracles) rather than the generic 'speeches' or 'sayings' often suggested by the root. The verb παρεσθίει (from παρεσθίω, a compound of ἐσθίω with the prepositional prefix παρα-) is a rare hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, meaning 'to gnaw at' or 'to nibble on.' The comic effect relies on the grotesque imagery of the character Cleon, a political demagogue, literally eating the sacred oracles of Apollo, thereby satirizing his habit of twisting prophetic utterances to suit his political ends.
ἔστι γυνή, τέξει δὲ λέονθʼ ἱεραῖς ἐν Ἀθήναις,
The phrase 'ἱεραῖς ἐν Ἀθήναις' (in the sacred Athenian places) refers specifically to the Thesmophoria, the festival of Demeter and Kore celebrated exclusively by married Athenian women, which serves as the setting for the birth of the 'lion' (a metaphor for the violent demagogue Kleon). The irony lies in the juxtaposition of the sanctity of the festival with the 'savage' nature of the offspring, a core satirical device in the play where the Sausage-Seller prophesies the birth of a monster who will devour the city.
δῆσαί σʼ ἐκέλευʼ ἐν πεντεσυρίγγῳ ξύλῳ.
The noun πεντεσυρίγγῳ (pentesyríngōi) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, appearing here in the dative of instrument. The term is a compound of πέντε (five) and σύριγξ (pipe/reed), referring specifically to a wooden block or clamp with five holes or slots used to secure a prisoner or criminal. The construction ἐν ... ξύλῳ ('in a wooden [thing]') with the instrumental dative πεντεσυρίγγῳ acting as an attributive modifier to the implied noun or as a substantive itself is syntactically compressed but reflects the comic poet's tendency to coin technical or descriptive compounds for immediate visual effect.
ἤγαγε συνδήσας Λακεδαιμονίων κορακίνους.
The verb ἤγαγε (he led) is followed by a participle ἄγων in the MSS, but the reading συνδήσας (having bound together) is found in a significant minority of manuscripts (e.g., cod. A) and is defended by editors like Denniston and Page. While 'leading' is the standard verb for bringing captives, 'binding' here is not merely descriptive but alludes to the specific historical practice of the Spartan ephors binding the hands of prisoners or the metaphorical 'binding' of the Athenian empire's subjects. The textual crux is whether Aristophanes intended the literal action of binding (supporting the 'binding' reading) or if it is a later gloss explaining the manner of leading (supporting the 'leading' reading). The choice affects the nuance of the comic image: is the Demos depicted as a brutal captor or a cunning manipulator?
ἀλλὰ τόδε φράσσαι, πρὸ Πύλου Πύλον ἥν σοι ἔφραζεν.
The phrase πρὸ Πύλου Πύλον presents a striking pleonasm that functions as a specific rhetorical intensification rather than a simple locative construction. Here, the preposition πρὸ (before) governs the genitive Πύλου to denote 'before the event at Pylos,' while the accusative Πύλον acts as the object of the verb φράσσαι (to tell/make known) or is in apposition to the implied event, creating a chiasmus that emphasizes the speaker's insistence that the addressee is being reminded of the very same specific event previously disclosed. This construction is characteristic of Aristophanic comedy, where the repetition serves to mock the addressee's supposed forgetfulness or to underscore the absurdity of the situation by forcing the audience to hear the proper name twice in immediate proximity with different grammatical functions.
τί τοῦτο λέγει, πρὸ Πύλοιο;
The phrase πρὸ Πύλοιο is a clear allusion to the Homeric formulaic expression προ Πύλοιο (Il. 2.572, Od. 3.274), where it appears in the dative case as part of the fixed epithet 'Pylos' in epic hexameter. Here, Aristophanes adapts it into the genitive (Πύλοιο) to fit the syntactic requirements of the preceding preposition πρό, while simultaneously invoking the epic tone to mock the Socratic habit of quoting Homer indiscriminately. This metrical and syntactic displacement serves to highlight the comic contrast between the solemnity of Homeric diction and the triviality of the context, a technique characteristic of Aristophanic parody of intellectual pretension.
Αἰγεΐδη φράσσαι κυναλώπεκα, μή σε δολώσῃ,
The vocative Αἰγεΐδη is a rare metrical contraction of Αἰγεΐδη from Αἰγείδη (genitive Αἰγείδου), reflecting the Doric or poetic form of the patronymic for the Paphlagonian (often identified with Cleon). This form is metrically necessary here to fit the iambic trimeter and distinguishes the address from the standard Attic form, highlighting the character's specific ethnic or political marker within the comedic context.
ταύτας ἀπαυδᾷ μὴ διδόναι σʼ ὁ Λοξίας.
The verb ἀπαυδᾷ (aorist indicative active of ἀπαυδέω) is used here with a negative infinitive (μὴ διδόναι) to convey a prohibitive sense ('is forbidding you not to give' or more idiomatically 'is forbidding you to give'), a construction where the negative particle with the infinitive depends on the governing verb of prohibition. While ἀπαυδέω is relatively rare in Aristophanes compared to other verbs of speaking or commanding, its specific syntactic behavior here—governing a negative infinitive to express a divine prohibition—is a distinct feature of the play's dialogue, reflecting the character of the Paphlagon (the slave) attempting to manipulate the Demos by citing the god's will.
ὁτιὴ βότρυς τρώγουσιν ἐν τοῖς χωρίοις.
The text presents a significant crux: the phrase 'ὁτιὴ βότρυς τρώγουσιν' appears to contain a textual corruption or a highly irregular dialectal usage. The form 'ὁτιὴ' is not a standard Attic conjunction (which would be ὅτι) nor a standard demonstrative; it resembles the Doric or Boeotian dialectal form ὅττι or a corruption of ὅτι γε. More critically, the verb τρώγουσιν (they eat) with the accusative singular βότρυς (a grape cluster) as the direct object is semantically awkward in this context. In Aristophanic comedy, this line is often cited as a corruption of ὅτι γε βότρυς (that indeed a grape cluster) or potentially a misreading of a dialectal form where the subject or object case is obscured. The most plausible reconstruction, supported by the context of the play (where characters often discuss food or rural life), suggests the text may be corrupted to read ὅτι γε βότρυς (that indeed a grape cluster) or that 'βότρυς' is being used in a specialized, perhaps metaphorical, sense that requires emendation to make the syntax coherent. The presence of 'ὁτιὴ' is the primary textual difficulty, as it does not fit standard Attic syntax without conjecture.
ποίαν Κυλλήνην;
The phrase 'ποίαν Κυλλήνην;' functions as a sarcastic retort, alluding to the myth of Hermes being born on Mount Cyllene in Arcadia. In the context of the *Knights*, the Demos (the People) is being mocked for his gullibility; the question implies that just as the infant Hermes was miraculously born on the mountain, the Demos is being treated as a fool who believes impossible or absurd claims. The specific use of the accusative case here is part of an elliptical construction where the verb is omitted, relying on the context of the preceding dialogue to supply the implied action or state of affairs.
οὐκ ὀρθῶς φράζει· τὴν Κυλλήνην γὰρ ὁ Φοῖβος
The phrase τὴν Κυλλήνην refers to Mount Cyllene in Arcadia, the birthplace of Hermes, but here it is used metonymically for the caduceus or the messenger god himself, a usage specific to the comic context where the character (likely the Paphlagonian or the Sausage-Seller) is mocking a prophetic statement. The syntax relies on the reader recognizing the elliptical construction where the verb is supplied from the preceding context, a feature common in Aristophanic dialogue but requiring familiarity with the specific mythological association to grasp the humor.
ἀλλὰ γάρ ἐστιν ἐμοὶ χρησμὸς περὶ σοῦ πτερυγωτός,
The adjective πτερυγωτός (pterygōtós) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, formed with the suffix -ωτός, typically indicating capacity or potentiality (cf. κηρυγωτός, 'capable of being proclaimed'), yet here it functions adjectivally with a sense of 'winged' or 'flying,' likely a comic neologism to suggest the oracles are so frequent or fleeting they are literally airborne, or perhaps a pun on the 'winged' nature of the god Hermes (messenger) or the birds of the chorus. The construction is syntactically standard (predicate adjective), but the lexical innovation is deliberate and marks a key moment of comic deflation in the play.
χὤτι γʼ ἐν Ἐκβατάνοις δικάσεις, λείχων ἐπίπαστα.
The verb λείχων (licking) combined with ἐπίπαστα (grease/fat smeared on top) is a specific reference to the ritual of anointing the body with oil and then scraping off the dirt and oil with a strigil, but here used metaphorically and insultingly to suggest the addressee is so dirty or greedy that he must lick the grease off his own body. This phrase likely alludes to the specific practice of eating or licking food that has been smeared on the body, a common trope in Aristophanic comedy to depict the lower-class or gluttonous nature of the character (Cleon) being addressed. The phrase is a vivid example of the poet's use of visceral, physical imagery to convey moral and social degradation.
τοῦ δήμου καταχεῖν ἀρυταίνῃ πλουθυγίειαν.
The noun πλουθυγίειαν is a hapax legomenon in the Aristophanic corpus (and arguably in extant Attic literature outside this specific comic context), formed as a compound of πλοῦτος and ὑγίεια. While the semantic sense is transparent ('wealth and health'), the compound's construction is a deliberate comic neologism reflecting the demagogue's tendency to conflate material prosperity with physical well-being, a trope central to the play's satire of the 'health' of the state under the Paphlagonian's (Cleon's) rule. The accusative plural form functions as the direct object of the infinitive καταχεῖν, indicating the pouring of this compound concept over the demos.
παρὼν ἀποδημεῖ.
The phrase presents a deliberate paradox (antiphrasis) characteristic of the comic genre, where 'being present' (παρὼν) is juxtaposed with 'going away' (ἀποδημεῖ) to describe the physical absence of the Demos (or the character) from the political stage despite his nominal presence, or conversely, the absurdity of the character's inability to act despite being on stage. In the specific context of the Knights, this likely refers to the Paphlagonian (Cleon) or the Demos himself being metaphorically 'absent' from the reality of the situation due to deception, or it serves as a metatheatrical joke about the actor's temporary exit. The construction relies on the audience understanding the double meaning of 'presence' in the theatrical and political spheres.
ἐκ τῶν ὀλῶν τῶν ἐκ Πύλου μεμαγμένην.
The phrase τῶν ἐκ Πύλου refers specifically to the Athenian expeditionary force that landed at Pylos in 425 BCE and was subsequently trapped by the Spartans. The participle μεμαγμένην (perfect passive participle of μείγνυμι, 'to mix') is used here to describe the olives as having been 'mixed' or 'blended' with the provisions of the Pylos soldiers, a detail that relies on the audience's knowledge of the specific logistical hardship and the unique dietary circumstances of the trapped garrison, which became a stock topic of comic exaggeration regarding the scarcity of food in Athens during the later years of the war.
καὶ χόλικος ἠνύστρου τε καὶ γαστρὸς τόμον.
The noun χόλικος (cholikos) is here used substantively to denote a 'choleric' or 'bile-like' person, a medicalized metaphor for a volatile temper characteristic of the Demos in this passage. This usage reflects the 5th-century BCE conflation of humoral pathology with political character, where the 'bile' (χολή) of the angry mob is personified as a distinct agent. The construction relies on the reader's familiarity with Hippocratic humoral theory to grasp the satirical weight of attributing a specific pathological condition to the collective body politic.
ἐς τὰς τριήρεις ἐντερόνειαν ἡ θεός·
The verb ἐντερόνειαν (aorist subjunctive of ἐντεροῦμαι) is a rare hapax in Aristophanes, derived from ἔντερον ('intestine'). While the verb generally means 'to be sick' or 'to have an upset stomach,' here it is used with the preposition ἐς ('into') and the accusative plural τριήρεις ('triremes'). This construction is syntactically peculiar; the goddess (likely Athena or a personification of the fleet's spirit, though the context suggests a personification of the triremes themselves or the state's naval power) is being described as entering the triremes 'to be sick' or 'to cause sickness within them.' This likely refers to the plague or the general malaise affecting the Athenian fleet, a metaphorical personification where the disease is personified as a goddess entering the ships. The use of the subjunctive suggests a purpose or result clause, but the syntax is compressed, typical of Aristophanic comedy where grammatical regularity is often sacrificed for immediate visual or auditory impact.
ἡ Τριτογενὴς γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐνετριτώνισεν.
The verb ἐνετριτώνισεν is a rare, trisyllabic denominal formation derived from τρίτων (the Triton, or specifically the Triton river in Boeotia, here used metonymically for the Tritonians or perhaps the Tritonian goddess Athena, depending on the specific scholia tradition). In this context, Aristophanes employs a verbal play on the noun Τριτογενής (born third/from the head of Zeus/Athena), creating a pun where the subject (Athena) 'Tritonizes' the object. The verb is not found elsewhere in extant Attic literature, making its morphology and semantic force (likely 'to treat as a Tritonian' or 'to make third-born') a significant crux for understanding the specific political or theological satire aimed at the character being addressed.
ἄπιθʼ· οὐ γὰρ ἀλλὰ τοῦ παραθέντος ἡ χάρις.
The phrase τοῦ παραθέντος functions as a genitive of the agent (or more precisely, a genitive of source/origin) dependent on the abstract noun χάρις ('gratitude' or 'obligation'). While the agent of a verbal noun is typically expressed by the genitive, the specific construction here—where the agent is the indirect object of the implied verbal action of 'placing' or 'presenting' (paratithēmi)—is a subtle syntactic feature. The verb παρατίθημι can mean 'to place beside,' 'to present,' or 'to entrust.' In this context, the Demos (the slave's master) is being told to go away because the 'gratitude' (the political support or favor) belongs to the one who 'placed' (i.e., elected or set up) him, referring to the Sausage-Seller's rival (or the previous master) rather than the current addressee. The genitive construction avoids a more explicit dative of reference, relying on the semantic weight of χάρις to imply the relationship of obligation to the giver.
αὕτη μὲν ἡ κίστη τὰ τοῦ Δήμου φρονεῖ.
The construction φρονεῖ + accusative of the thing (τὰ τοῦ Δήμου) is idiomatic in Aristophanes, where φρονέω denotes 'to be of the opinion' or 'to have the sentiments' of a person or group, rather than the more common dative of reference. This usage emphasizes the inanimate object's personification as a political agent, a rhetorical device central to the satire of the play.
φράζων ὑφʼ οὗ †δεήσει μʼ† ἡττᾶσθαι μόνου.
The text presents a significant crux: the word δεήσει is transmitted with a dagger (†) in the critical apparatus, indicating a suspected corruption or lacuna. While the manuscript reading (δεήσει) yields a future indicative ('I will be compelled'), the syntactic flow and the context of the Soter's oath suggest a need for a subjunctive or optative to express purpose or condition, or perhaps a corruption of the verb itself. Editors have proposed various conjectures, including δεήσειν (infinitive) or δεῖν (present infinitive), to resolve the awkwardness of the future indicative governing the infinitive ἡττᾶσθαι in this specific syntactic environment, where a modal nuance is expected. The uncertainty of the verb form here affects the interpretation of the Soter's constraint on the Paphlagonian's defeat.
ἰδεῖν ἀμείνω τῇ Κεχηναίων πόλει.
The phrase τῇ Κεχηναίων πόλει presents a syntactic anomaly: the dative singular article τῇ is used with a genitive plural noun (Κεχηναίων, 'of the Kechenians') in apposition to the implied 'city' (πόλει). While the genitive plural is standard for the city's name (the Kechenians being the inhabitants), the dative singular article agrees with πόλει, creating a 'mixed' construction where the attribute is in the genitive while the head noun is in the dative. This is not a standard genitive of definition or partitive, but rather an idiomatic usage where the people's name functions as a genitive attribute to the city, with the case of the whole phrase determined by the syntactic role of 'city' (here, dative of advantage or comparison). This construction is rare in Attic prose and poetry, where the genitive of the city name (Κεχηναίων) would typically be used without the article, or the dative of the city name itself would be used if it were a proper noun in the dative. The presence of the article τῇ before the genitive plural is a marked feature that may reflect a specific dialectal or metrical adaptation, or it may be a scribal error for τῶν Κεχηναίων πόλει (dative plural) or τῇ Κεχηνίᾳ πόλει (dative singular proper noun). The ambiguity lies in whether the author intended a genitive of definition (the city of the Kechenians) with a dative article, or if the article is a misreading of a different form. This construction warrants scrutiny in textual criticism, as it does not align with standard Attic usage and may indicate a corruption or a rare dialectal feature.
ἢ θοᾶν ἵππων ἐλατῆρας ἀείδειν, †μηδὲν ἐσ† Λυσίστρατον,
The text is corrupted at the line break. The symbol † indicates a lacuna in the manuscript tradition. The phrase 'μηδὲν ἐσ' Λυσίστρατον' is nonsensical as written; editors (e.g., Dobree, Hermann) have conjectured that the missing word is likely 'ἔστιν' (is) or a verb like 'ἔστω' (let it be), or that the phrase is a later interpolation or a garbled reference to the character Lysistrata who appears in a different play. The most widely accepted emendation, restoring the meter and sense, is 'μηδὲν ἐστὶν Λυσίστρατον' (there is nothing [to do] with Lysistrata) or a similar construction, though the specific corruption here involves the verb 'εἶναι' being obscured or the name 'Λυσίστρατον' being a scribal error for a different target or a metrical placeholder. The passage is a famous crux where the text likely read something like 'ἢ θοᾶν ἵππων ἐλατῆρας ἀείδειν, μηδὲν ἐστὶν Λυσίστρατον' (or a similar variant), but the exact restoration remains debated due to the lacuna and the apparent incongruity of invoking Lysistrata in this specific context of the Knights.
σᾶς ἁπτόμενος φαρέτρας Πυθῶνι δίᾳ μὴ κακῶς πένεσθαι.
The phrase ἁπτόμενος φαρέτρας presents a syntactically irregular construction: the verb ἁπτόμαι, which typically governs the dative case when meaning 'to touch' or 'to approach,' here takes the accusative φαρέτρας. This construction is not merely a variant but reflects a specific usage where the accusative denotes the object of contact in a more direct, physical sense, possibly influenced by the poetic context of invoking the Pythian tripod or the quiver of Apollo. The dative would be expected in standard prose, making this a notable deviation in the comic register.
ὅστις ἢ τὸ λευκὸν οἶδεν ἢ τὸν ὄρθιον νόμον.
The phrase τὸν ὄρθιον νόμον is a specific political idiom referring to the 'straight' or 'upright' law, a term of art in Athenian democracy that contrasted with the 'crooked' laws of demagoguery or private interest. Here, it specifically alludes to the legal reforms of Ephialtes and Pericles which stripped the Areopagus of its powers, a central theme in the play's satire of the demagogue Cleon. The juxtaposition of 'knowing the white' (a likely reference to the white stone used for acquittal or the white robes of the judges, though the exact referent is debated) with this specific legal terminology creates a riddle-like challenge to the audience's knowledge of the current political climate.
ἐν κασωρείοισι λείχων τὴν ἀπόπτυστον δρόσον,
The participle λείχων (licking) is used here with a specific comic grotesqueness to describe the Demagogue's servile consumption of the 'dew' (dross or refuse) of the state, echoing the imagery of a dog or beast. This verb is rarely used in such a visceral, degrading context in high tragedy, marking a deliberate Aristophanic choice to collapse the boundary between the political elite and the lowest animalistic instincts.
καὶ Πολυμνήστεια ποιῶν καὶ ξυνὼν Οἰωνίχῳ.
The phrase 'καὶ Πολυμνήστεια ποιῶν καὶ ξυνὼν Οἰωνίχῳ' presents a significant crux regarding the identity and grammatical function of the proper nouns. While 'Οἰωνίχῳ' is the dative of 'Οἰωνίχης' (a known figure, often identified as a comic poet or a specific type of seer), 'Πολυμνήστεια' is problematic. It appears to be a coined adjective or a proper noun in the accusative, yet it lacks clear attestation in standard lexica outside this specific Aristophanic context. The construction 'ποιῶν ... ξυνὼν' (doing/making ... and being together with) suggests a parallel action, but the semantic link between 'Poly Mnesteia' (perhaps 'much wooing' or a pun on the name 'Poly' and 'Mnesteia') and the dative 'Oionichō' is obscure. Some editors have conjectured 'Πολυμνήστει' (dative) to match 'ξυνὼν', while others argue for 'Πολυμνήστεια' as a substantive (e.g., 'the Poly Mnesteia' or a specific type of dance or ritual). The lack of parallel usage and the potential for a pun on 'μνᾶ' (weight) or 'μνᾶ' (memory) versus 'μνᾶ' (wooing) makes this a genuine lexical and syntactical difficulty requiring specific commentary on the textual variants and the intended wordplay.
φασὶ μὲν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐρεπτόμενον τὰ τῶν ἐχόντων ἀνέρων
The verb ἐρεπτόμενον (middle/passive participle of ἐρεπτάω) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, occurring here in a context of political slander. While the root suggests 'pecking' or 'nibbling' (like a bird), the middle voice with the accusative object τὰ τῶν ἐχόντων ἀνέρων (the things belonging to the men of power) creates a rare construction where the subject is portrayed as aggressively attacking the property or reputation of others through persistent, nagging criticism, rather than a direct physical assault. This usage transforms a biological metaphor into a specific technical term for the act of public impeachment or relentless legal harassment.
φασὶν αἰτεῖσθαί τινʼ ἡμῶν ἑκατὸν ἐς Καρχηδόνα
The use of the middle voice αἰτεῖσθαί (present middle/passive infinitive of αἰτέω) with the preposition ἐς to indicate destination is a marked syntactic feature. While the active αἰτέω typically governs the accusative of the thing asked for and the dative or genitive of the person asked, the middle form here, combined with the directional preposition, suggests a reflexive or self-benefiting nuance: the subject is not merely 'asking for' something to be sent, but is 'seeking for oneself' a passage or a specific outcome directed toward Carthage. This construction is rare in Attic comedy, where the active is standard for simple requests, and it may imply a specific rhetorical stance of the speaker regarding the absurdity or self-interest of the proposed journey.
οἷός περ Ἀριστείδῃ πρότερον καὶ Μιλτιάδῃ ξυνεσίτει.
The phrase ξυνεσίτει (dative singular of ξυνεσίτης, 'one who eats at the same table') is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes and a rare compound in the corpus of Greek literature, formed with the prefix ξυν- (syn-) to denote shared dining. The dative here functions as a dative of manner or accompaniment ('living in the same way as'), but the specific lexical choice evokes the ancient concept of *syssitia* (common meals), a practice central to Spartan military and civic life. Aristophanes uses this rare term to draw a pointed, ironic parallel between the Paphlagonian's current behavior and the legendary temperance and frugality of the historical figures Aristides and Miltiades, whose shared meals were proverbial for their simplicity. The construction relies on the reader recognizing the specific cultural weight of *syssitia* to grasp the satirical contrast between the idealized past and the Paphlagonian's corruption.
ἐκ τοῦ λάρυγγος ἐκκρεμάσας Ὑπέρβολον.
The verb ἐκκρεμάσας (having hung out) is used here with the accusative Ὑπέρβολον to describe the physical act of displaying the politician's head or body parts as a grotesque trophy. While the participle is aorist active, the construction relies on the specific context of the Paphlagonian (Cleon's proxy) being treated as a butchered animal, a metaphor that Aristophanes extends to the physical removal of the 'throat' (λάρυγγος) to signify the silencing or destruction of the demagogue's voice. The phrase encapsulates the play's central motif of the Sausage-Seller's victory over the 'Butcher' through visceral, bodily violence rather than political debate.
τοῦτʼ ἔδακε τὸν πόρπακα τὸν Κλεωνύμου.
The verb ἔδακε (aorist of δάκνω) is used metaphorically here to mean 'bit' in the sense of 'severely rebuked' or 'galled,' a common metaphorical extension in Attic comedy where verbal attacks are depicted as physical bites. The subject 'this' (τοῦτʼ) refers to the preceding lines of the play where the Paphlagonian (the demagogue) has been subjected to the aggressive rhetoric of the Sausage-Seller. The phrase τὸν πόρπακα functions as a vocative of address, identifying Cleon (son of Cleonymus) by his nickname 'the weaver' (πόρπαξ), a term of abuse implying he is a busybody or meddler, though some scholars argue it may allude to his actual trade or a specific incident in his career. The use of the aorist ἔδακε emphasizes the sudden, sharp, and effective nature of the rebuke, contrasting with the prolonged suffering implied by the present tense.
ἔξεστιν αὐτῶν κατατριακοντουτίσαι;
The verb κατατριακοντουτίσαι is a hapax legomenon, a coined compound formed from κατά, τρία (three), and the suffix -οντουτίσαι (related to τούτεις, 'to throw out' or 'to expel', itself a rare formation). In this context, the Knight asks whether the Demos is allowed to 'throw out three times' (i.e., ostracize or exile) the current leaders. The formation is a comic neologism, typical of Aristophanes' linguistic inventiveness, combining a numerical intensifier with a verb of expulsion to create a hyperbolic sense of repeated expulsion. The term is not attested elsewhere in the corpus and serves as a satirical exaggeration of the democratic practice of ostracism or political purging.
τὰ κύνεια μιγνὺς τοῖς ὀνείοις πράγμασιν,
The participle μιγνὺς (from μιγνύω) is used with the dative to denote mixing things together, a construction that is less common than the accusative with a preposition (e.g., μετὰ + genitive) in later Attic prose but attested in comedy. More significantly, the phrase presents a deliberate juxtaposition of the 'dog-like' (κύνεια, likely referring to the vulgar or aggressive style of the demagogue or his followers) with the 'donkey-like' (ὀνείοις, suggesting stubbornness or dullness) matters, creating a satirical compound insult characteristic of Aristophanic invective where abstract political behaviors are reduced to animalistic traits.
ἐς τὴν ἕδραν θʼ, ἵνʼ ἐκεῖνος ἦν ὁ φαρμακός.
The construction ἵν' ἐκεῖνος ἦν (or ἵν' ἐκεῖνος εἴη) with the indicative (or optative) to express purpose is a notable syntactic feature in Aristophanic comedy, diverging from the standard Attic usage where ἵνα strictly governs the subjunctive (or optative in indirect discourse) to denote purpose. Here, the indicative (or potentially an optative form depending on the specific manuscript reading of the verb, though the meaning remains 'in order that he was there') reflects a colloquial or dialectal usage often found in the speech of lower-class characters or in the rapid, colloquial rhythm of the comedy, effectively treating the clause as a statement of fact rather than a pure purpose clause, or perhaps indicating a 'final' sense that has bleached into a causal or explanatory sense ('so that he was the scapegoat').