Aristophanes Peace 605

Peace. Aristophanes. . 2026-09-08.

Current edition Experimental

Commentary (Sanjaya, generated; selected passages) (OCR draft) (English) (Source: pnadelofficial/aristophanes-sanjaya, commit c319590c139e5603e71f0699caa0663d823af8ad. Machine-generated source annotations retained; see Sanjaya import audit for coverage and limitations.)

Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.

Editions (1)
Εἰρήνη Perseus (Aristophanes. Aristophanis Comoediae, Vol. 1. Hall, F. W. and Geldart, William M., editors. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906.) — 657-728 focus
Translations (2)
Peace (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Anonymous; 1938 compilation). Migrated from Perseus legacy XML; source wording and notes retained. See TEI header and migration inventory.) — 601 focus
English (Sanjaya, generated; selected passages) (OCR draft) Experimental (Source: pnadelofficial/aristophanes-sanjaya, commit c319590c139e5603e71f0699caa0663d823af8ad. Machine-generated source annotations retained; see Sanjaya import audit for coverage and limitations.) — 601 focus

Commentary

Commentary (Sanjaya, generated; selected passages) (OCR draft) (Source: pnadelofficial/aristophanes-sanjaya, commit c319590c139e5603e71f0699caa0663d823af8ad. Machine-generated source annotations retained; see Sanjaya import audit for coverage and limitations.) focus

605. mvp-tlg0019-tlg005-sanjaya-com-eng1-11

Line 605

πρῶτα μὲν γὰρ †αὐτῆς ἦρξεν† Φειδίας πράξας κακῶς·
The text presents a significant crux: the phrase 'αὐτῆς ἦρξεν' (he began it) is transmitted in some manuscripts with the particle 'μὲν' following the verb, while the critical edition (following Wilamowitz and others) brackets 'αὐτῆς' as a corruption or dittography, or emends 'ἦρξεν' to 'ἦρξε' with 'αὐτῆς' referring to the Parthenon. The most serious issue, however, is the presence of the dagger symbol (†) in the prompt's text, indicating a lacuna or a word deemed spurious by editors. The standard reading, supported by the context of the 'Peace' (421 BCE) and the historical timeline of Phidias, requires identifying what 'αὐτῆς' refers to. If 'αὐτῆς' refers to the war, it is a bold irony, as Phidias is the sculptor of the statue of Athena Promachos, not a general. The scholia suggest the text might be corrupt, possibly reading 'πρῶτα μὲν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἔργον ἦρξεν' (he began her work) or referring to the statue's construction. The phrase 'πράξας κακῶς' (having done badly) is also problematic; Phidias was accused of embezzlement and died in prison, but the connection to 'beginning' (ἦρξεν) is syntactically tight yet historically opaque without resolving the textual corruption regarding the object of the verb. The critical edition (e.g., Kock, Arnott) often treats 'αὐτῆς' as an interpolation or emends the verb to 'ἔθηκεν' (placed), making the sentence 'Phidias first placed it, having done badly,' which is a clumsy but possible reading, or accepts the emendation 'ἔφθειρεν' (he ruined) or similar. The dagger in the prompt likely signals the word 'αὐτῆς' or the entire clause as suspect. A robust commentary must address the textual instability: does Phidias 'begin' the war (ironic?), the statue, or is the text simply corrupted? The most accepted scholarly view (e.g., by Dover or Arnott) is that the text is corrupt and that the intended meaning is likely that Phidias was the first to be accused or punished, or that the statue's construction was the 'beginning' of his troubles. The specific crux here is the identity of 'αὐτῆς' (her) and the verb 'ἦρξεν' (began), which together create a historical and grammatical puzzle that cannot be resolved without textual criticism. The phrase 'πράξας κακῶς' is a standard idiom for 'doing badly' or 'failing', but its connection to the 'beginning' of the action is the core issue.