Abstract

In the only surviving fragment of Aristias’ Antaeus a difficulty arises when one tries to make sense of the proper name ∫Antaiov, which, in the only source that transmits the fragment, is featured just before what is usually considered to be the beginning of the fragment itself. Snell’s interpretation of ∫Antaiov as a piece of information provided by Herodian about the identity of the persona loquens is not convincing; however, the expunction of the word preferred by both Lehrs and Lentz is not justified either. Instead of interpreting ∫Antaiov as a word introduced by Herodian or as an explanatory gloss, this article suggests incorporating the proper name in Aristias’ verse and interpreting this new text as an acatalectic iambic tetrameter. As in dramatic poetry this kind of metre is found only in satyr play, it is worth reconsidering the evidence for attributing the Antaeus - the plot of which is far from certain - to this literary genre.