Aristophanes Ecclesiazusae 805

Table of Contents

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

Ecclesiazusae. Aristophanes. . 2026-09-08.

Current edition Experimental

English (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)
Ἐκκλησιάζουσαι Perseus (Aristophanes. Aristophanis Comoediae, Vol. 2. Hall, F. W. and Geldart, William M., editors. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907.) — 805 focus
Translations (1)
Ecclesiazusae (OCR draft) Experimental (English (Anonymous; 1938 compilation). Migrated from Perseus legacy XML; source wording and notes retained. See TEI header and migration inventory.) — 805 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

810b. mvp-tlg0019-tlg010-sanjaya-com-eng1-27

Line 810b

πλείω Καλλίου.
The phrase πλείω Καλλίου ('more than Callias') relies on the genitive of comparison following the comparative adjective πλείω. While the construction is standard, the specific reference is to Callias, son of Hipponicus, a figure notorious in Old Comedy for his immense wealth and notorious debauchery (particularly his expenditure on drinking parties and relationships with hetairai, as seen in Aristophanes' Knights and other fragments). In this context, the comparison implies that the quantity in question (likely the number of women or the absurdity of a proposal) exceeds even the legendary excesses associated with Callias, serving as a hyperbolic benchmark for extravagance familiar to the Athenian audience.

825. mvp-tlg0019-tlg010-sanjaya-com-eng1-28

Line 825

τῆς τετταρακοστῆς, ἣν ἐπόρισʼ Εὐριπίδης;
The phrase τῆς τετταρακοστῆς is a substantive use of the ordinal number, elliptically referring to a specific 'tribute' (ἀποφορά) or 'assessment' (φόρος). This alludes to the historical context of the Athenian tribute system, but the specific numerical value (forty) is likely hyperbolic or satirical rather than a literal record of a specific year's assessment, serving to mock the perceived avarice or bureaucratic complexity of the assembly's financial proposals. The relative pronoun ἣν governs the accusative feminine singular, referring to this implied feminine noun (τῆς [ἀποφορᾶς/φορολογίας]), a syntactic feature common in Attic prose but here used in comic dialogue to create a pseudo-legalistic tone.

826. mvp-tlg0019-tlg010-sanjaya-com-eng1-29

Line 826

κεὐθὺς κατεχρύσου πᾶς ἀνὴρ Εὐριπίδην·
The phrase κατεχρύσου (future of κατεχρύσοω, 'to gild') functions as a hyperbolic metaphor for the act of venerating or canonizing Euripides, suggesting that the male citizenry will not merely praise him but literally cover him in gold. This reflects the specific comedic trope in Aristophanes' later works where the absurdity of the new political order is expressed through the literalization of social values; here, the 'gilding' implies a deification or an excessive, almost idolatrous, elevation of the tragedian to the status of a civic idol, contrasting with the play's broader satire on the demagogic manipulation of public sentiment.

828. mvp-tlg0019-tlg010-sanjaya-com-eng1-30

Line 828

ὁ Διὸς Κόρινθος καὶ τὸ πρᾶγμʼ οὐκ ἤρκεσεν,
The phrase ὁ Διὸς Κόρινθος is a striking elliptical construction where the genitive of the deity (Διὸς) functions adjectivally to modify the proper noun (Κόρινθος), yet the definite article (ὁ) agrees with the implied masculine noun ἄνθρωπος ('man') or a similar agent, rather than with Κόρινθος itself, which is feminine. This construction, meaning 'the Corinthian of Zeus' (i.e., a man from Corinth associated with Zeus or perhaps a specific individual known by this epithet), relies on the audience's recognition of a specific local cult or proverbial association that is not immediately obvious from the text alone. The genitive here is not one of possession but of origin or association, a usage that requires careful parsing to avoid misidentifying the subject as the city itself.