A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

102 WEUPOLIS.- EUPOMPIDAS.
being alluded to by Thucydides or any other- trust- abuse, for there are still extant some lines of his, in?
worthy historian, the answer of Cicero is. conciu- which Cimon is most unmercifully treated. (Plut.
sive, that Eratosthenes mentioned plays produced Cim. 15; Schol. ad Aristeid. p. 515.) It is
by Eupolis after the Sicilian expedition. (Ad Att, hardly necessary to observe that these attacks were
vi. 1.) There is still a fragment extant, in which mingled with much obscenity. (Schol ad Aristoph.
the poet applies the title rparrTdV to Aristarchus, Pac. 741, 1142, Nub. 296, 541.)
whom we know to have been rpepa'rsy6s in the A close relation subsisted between Eupolis and
year B. C. 41-, that is, four years later than the Aristophanes, not only as rivals, but as imitators
date at which the common story fixed the of each other. Cratinus attacked Aristophanes for
death of Eupolis. (Schol. Victor. ad. Iliad. xiii. borrowing from Eupolis, and Eupolis in his BdirTrat
353.) The only discoverable foundation for this made the same charge, especially with reference to
story, and probably the true account of the poet's the Knights, of which he says,
death, is the statement of Suidas, that he perished KdKiCLovS TOvs'Irweas
at the Hellespont in the war. against the Lacedae- vveVrobIaa r rpaiaKp4 troi-0TC K IdIwpA771V.
monians, which, as Meineke observes, must refer The Scholiasts specify the last Parabasis of the
either to the battle of Cynossema (B. c. 411), or to Knights as borrowed from Eupolis. (Schol. ad
that of Aegospotami (B. c, 405). That he died in Aristoph. Equit. 528, 1288, Nub. 544, foll.) On
the former battle is not improbable, since we never the other hand, Aristophanes, in the second (or
hear of his exhibiting after s. c. 412; and if so, it third) edition of the Clouds, retorts upon Euis very likely that the enemies of Alcibiades might polis the charge of imitating the Knights in his
charge him with taking advantage of the confusion Maricas (NAub. 1. c.), and taunts him with the
of the battle to gratify his revenge. Meineke further indignity of jesting on his rival's baldness.
throws out a conjecture that the story may have There are other examples of the attacks of the two
arisen from a misunderstanding of what Lysias poets, upon one another. (Aristoph. Pax, 762,
says about the youngAlcibiades (i. p. 541). There and Schol.; Schol. ad Vesp. 1020; Schol. ad
are, however, other accounts of the poet's death, Platen. p. 331, Bekker; Stobaeus, Serm. iv. p.
which are altogether different. Aelian (N. A. x. 53.)
41) and Tzetzes (C!ril. iv. 245) relate, that he died The number of the plays of Eupolis is stated by
and was buried in Aegina, and Pausanias (ii. 7. Suidas at seventeen, and by the anonymous writer
~ 4) says, that he saw his tomb in the territory of at fourteen.. The extant titles exceed the greater
Sicyon, Of the personal history of Eupolis nothing of these numbers, but some of them are very
more is known. Aelian (1. c.) tells a pleasant tale doubtful. The following fifteen are considered by
of his faithful dog, Augeas, and his slave Ephialtes. Meineke to be genuine: ATyes,'ArpaTrevro 7
The chief characteristic of the poetry of Eupolis'Av6poyva, A3rdAtKos, BdarTa.r, A4ome, A.asircV,
seems to have been the liveliness of his fancy, and E7lAuITer, K6Aaces, MapLKis, NouvxAvias, ldAeis,
the power which he possessed of imparting its IlpoeardAT'roi, TatfapXot,'TgpLr'rao8cal, Xpv2aovv
images to the audience. This characteristic of his 7yvor. An analysis of these plays, so far as their
genius influenced his choice of subjects, as well as subjects can be ascertained, will be found in the
his mode of treating them, so that he not only ap- works quoted below, and especially in that of
pears to have chosen subjects which other poets Meineke. The following are the plays of Eupolis,
might have despaired of dramatizing, but we are the dates of which are known: —
expressly told that he wrought into the body of his B. c. 425. At the Lenaea. NovuwvtaL. Third
plays those serious political views which other Prize. 1-st. Aristophanes,'AXapves.
poets expounded in their parabases, as in the 2nd. Cratinus, Xesqa'oga6,oi.
Zl/yOLL, in which he represented the legislators of,, 423 or 422.'Arpdr'u'oit.
other times conferring on the administration of the,, 421. Mapics. Probably at the Lenaea.
state. To do this in a genuine Attic old comedy,,,,, Kas, At the great Dionysia.
without converting the comedy into a serious phi- First Prize. 2nd. Aristoph. E'ips,'2V.
losophic dialogue, must have been a,great triumph,, 420. AJTrdhvnos.
of dramatic art. (Platon. de Div. Char. p. xxvi.) Eupolis, like Aristophanes and other comic
This introduction of deceased persons on the stage poets, brought some of his plays on the stage in
appears to have given to the plays of Eupolis a the name of another person, Apollodorus. (Athen.
certain dignity, which would have been inconsistent v. p. 216, d.)
with the comic spirit had it not been relieved by Hephaestion (p. 109, ed. Gaisf.) mentions a
the most graceful and clever merriment. (Platon. peculiar choriambic metre, which was called Eu1. c.) In elegance he is said to have even sur- polidean, and which was also used by the poets of
passed Aristophanes (Ibid.; Macrob. Sat. vii. 5), the middle and of the new comedy.
while in bitter jesting and personal abuse he The names of Eupolis and Eubulus are often
emulated Cratinus. (Anon, de Conm. p. xxix.; confounded.
Pers. SaX. i. 124; Lucian. Joy. Ace. vol. ii. p. 832.) (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vql. ii. pp. 445-448;
Among the objects of his satire was Socrates, on Meineke, Frag. Corn. Graec. vol. i. pp. 104-146,
whom he made a bitter, though less elaborate vol. ii. pp. 426-.579; Bergk, Comment. de Reliq,
attack than that in the Clouds of Aristophanes. Cor. Att. Ant. pp. 332-366; Clinton, Fast.
(Schol. adAristoph. Nub. 97, 180; Etym. Mag. p.18. Hellen. vol. ii. sub annis.) [P. S.]
10; Lucian. Pisc. vol. i. p. 595.) Innocence seems EUPO'MPIDAS (EJrourrflasJ), son of DaYmato have afforded no shelter, for he attacked Auto- chus, one of the commanders in Plataea during its
lycus, who is said to have been guilty of no crime, siege by the Lacedaemonians, B. c. 429-8. He
and is only known as having been distinguished with Theaenetus, a prophet, in the winter followfor his beauty, and as a victor in the pancratium, ing this second year, devised the celebrated plan
as vehemently as Callias, Alcibiades, Melanthius, for passing the lines of circumvallation, which, oriend others, Nor were the dead exempt from his ginally intended for the whole number of the be