ἄκληρος, ἀκληρία
(Antiatt. α 19, Antiatt. α 20, Poll. 6.197)

D. General commentary

Two Antiatticist entries (A.1, A.2) deal with the possessive compound adjective ἄκληρος (see below for its various meanings) and the noun ἀκληρία (‘misfortune’) derived from it, apparently focusing on their semantics. On possessive compounds in ἀ- in Atticist lexica, see AGP vol. 2, Word formation, forthcoming. Antiatt. α 20 (A.2) also discusses a further noun derived from the same root as the previous two forms, εὐκλήρωμα (‘good fortune’; on the noun’s form, see F.1). The three forms will be dealt with individually in the following paragraphs.

ἄκληρος is a possessive compound adjective derived from the noun κλῆρος (‘lot’, ‘land (assigned by lot)’, ‘property’) + ἀ- privative; see DELG, EDG s.v. Its first attestation is in Homer (C.1), where it designates a ‘landless’, and therefore ‘poor’ or ‘deprived’ person (see also B.1). This is the primary meaning of the term, attested in Attic texts (cf. e.g. Aesch. Eum. 352; Pl. Lg. 924e.4; Is. 1.20, 2.46) and, in the imperial period, in e.g. Luc. DMort. 26.1 and 3, which quotes the Odyssey passage (C.1), Ios. BJ 2.295, and Apoll. Met.Ps. 48.21, 68.17. In addition, it is also used with a passive meaning (‘unassigned’, ‘without an owner’): cf. h.Hom.Ven. 123, Eur. Tr. 32. ἄκληρος is subsequently attested, though rarely, with the sense ‘unlucky’: cf. C.5, a passage of Diodorus Siculus describing the merciless end of the members of the Acridophagi people, and I.Egypte métriques 45.7 [Leontopolis, 20 BCE?]) a Jewish funerary epigram dated to the early imperial period. Finally, the term is listed among the interpretamenta of the adjective δείλαιος added by a later hand in the Synagoge transmitted by MS B (Par. Coisl. 345), which Bachmann included in his edition (1828 vol. 1, 189.20–1: δείλαιος· ἄθλιος. ἄκληρος. ἀμέτοχος. ἄμμορος. μέλεος, ‘δείλαιος (‘wretched’): [It means] ‘miserable’, ‘unlucky’ (ἄκληρος), ‘not having share (of good fortune)’, ‘ill-fated’, ‘unhappy’); see Cunningham (2023, 63). The semantic shiftSemantic shift of ἄκληρος from ‘landless’, ‘poor’ to ‘unlucky’ may have occurred as a straightforward logical development – he who is poor is unfortunate; cf. Pearson (1917 vol. 3, 130) – or it may derive from a different interpretation of the adjective, starting from the meaning of κλῆροςκλῆρος as ‘lot’: ἄκληρος is one who has not participated in (good) fortune. The latter interpretation is also suggested by the parallel between ἀκληρία and εὐκλήρωμα (‘good fortune’) in A.2; see Olson (2023, 65).

Probably on the basis of a lost locus classicus, in A.1 the Antiatticist seems to defend the use of the adjective meaning ‘unlucky’, against the view of other, stricter Atticists (Phrynichus?), who rejected any meaning not attested in classical sources. In this regard, it is worth noting that Pollux (A.3) includes ἄκληρος in a list of adjectives and expressions denoting poverty.

Moving on to the noun ἀκληρία discussed in A.2, it is a derivative of the adjective ἄκληρος, but unlike the latter it is not attested before the Hellenistic period, except in the two fragments – one from Sophocles (C.2) and one from Antiphanes (C.3) – cited in B.2 and in A.2, respectively. It is therefore difficult to determine whether the Antiatticist, in mentioning Antiphanes’ use of the word (C.3), sought to vouch for the admissibility of the term as such, or rather to defend its use in the sense of ‘misfortune’ (for the semantic shift from ‘poverty’ to ‘misfortune’, see above), which is attested in literary passages from the Hellenistic period onwards (cf. e.g. C.6; in Plb. 22.8.9 the term instead seems to indicate more concretely a state of ‘misery’; Agatharch. 21.3 (GGM 1.119), 89.12 (GGM 1.180), D.S. 17.69.6). The same interpretative uncertainty also applies to B.2, which cites Sophocles (C.2) in support and probably derives from a parallel lexicographical tradition, as well as to B.3, which adduces an unattributed fragment as evidence (other entries in the Suda concerning terms built on the same root as ἀκληρία show that the meaning ‘misfortune’ was widespread from koine Greek onwards: Su. α 895: ἀκληρήμασι· συμφοραῖς, δυστυχίαις. [...], ‘ἀκληρήμασι (dat. plur.): [It means] ‘misfortunes’, ‘adversities’. […]’; Su. α 897: ἀκληρούντων· δυστυχούντων. [...], ‘ἀκληρούντων (ptcp. pr. gen. plur.): [It means] ‘being unlucky’. […]’. These entries are followed by quotations from Polybius’ fragments. It must be noted, however, that in Pollux’s Onomasticon (A.3) ἀκληρία appears in a list of nouns derived from adjectives and participles – among which ἄκληρος is also included (see above) – to denote the state of poverty. This suggests that the term, when used with this meaning, may have been admissible. Nonetheless, we cannot exclude the possibility that some strict Atticists banned its use altogether because of its absence in authors belonging to a more selective canon (on the Antiatticist’s frequent use of quotations from Antiphanes, cf. Table 2 in Tribulato 2022, 927).

Finally, εὐκλήρωμα (actually εὐκλήρημα; on the debate surrounding the correct form of the noun, see F.1) likewise does not appear to be attested in the classical period, except in a letter attributed to the Macedonian king Philip II (cf. epist. 8 in Hercher 1873, 467). Later, however, it is found in, e.g., Teles Περὶ φυγῆς 26.11 Hense², Agatharch. 89.9 (GGM 1.179), D.S. 18.13.4, and Str. 5.3.7. In this case, the Antiatticist is probably defending the admissibility of the term itself rather than a particular meaning, since the noun is consistently attested with the meaning ‘good luck’. Interestingly enough, A.2 considers εὐκλήρημα a synonym of κατόρθωμα. Strictly speaking, however, the two nouns seem to denote slightly different concepts: εὐκλήρημα generally indicates good fortune, whereas κατόρθωμα refers to a success achieved through the active intervention of the person concerned (cf. e.g. [Arist.] MM 2.3.2: οἷς γὰρ μή ἐστιν ὁ λόγος ὁ σκοπῶν τὸ βέλτιστον, οὐκέτι ἂν εἴποις, ᾧ συνέβη τι κατὰ τρόπον, τοῦτον εὔβουλον, ἀλλ’ εὐτυχῆ· τὰ γὰρ ἄνευ τοῦ λόγου τοῦ κρίνοντος γινόμενα κατορθώματα εὐτυχήματα ἐστίν, ‘For in these (i.e. actions that are automatically successful) it is not reason that looks out for the best, nor can it be said that a man for whom something has gone well is full of good sense; rather, he is lucky. Indeed, success occurring without the decision-maker’s reason is a stroke of luck’; however, see Olson 2021, 280–1). More importantly, Phrynichus rejects κατόρθωμα – probably because it is not attested in the canonical authors and spread especially from the Hellenistic period onwards – recommending instead ἀνδραγάθημαἀνδραγάθημα (cf. Phryn. Ecl. 220Phryn. Ecl. 220: κατορθώματα· ἁμαρτάνουσι κἀνταῦθα οἱ ῥήτορες, οὐκ εἰδότες ὅτι τὸ μὲν ῥῆμα δόκιμον, τὸ κατορθῶσαι, τὸ δ’ ἀπὸ τούτου ὄνομα ἀδόκιμον, τὸ κατόρθωμα. λέγειν οὖν χρὴ ἀνδραγαθήματα, ‘κατορθώματα (‘success, virtuous actions’, nom./acc. plur. neut.): The rhetors are mistaken here, too, since they ignore that the verb – κατορθῶσαι – is approved, whereas the noun derived from it – κατόρθωμα – is not approved. One should therefore say ἀνδραγαθήματα’). However, Phrynichus’ defence of ἀνδραγάθημα is problematic, as this noun is also unattested in canonical authors; for a discussion on this entry, see AGP vol. 2, Nominal morphology, forthcoming.

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

N/A

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

(1)    Antiatt. α 20 (A.2), Antiph. fr. 307 (C.4)

A.2 records the noun attributed to Antiphanes in the form εὐκλήρωμα. Koppiers (1771, 7), followed by Sicking (1883, 16), emended the reading to εὐκλήρημα (cf. also LSJ s.v. εὐκλήρημα), while Kassel and Austin retained the reading transmitted by the Antiatticist. The two editors cite the parallel of Teles Περὶ φυγῆς 26.11 Hense², but in Hense’s edition the form εὐκλήρημα is printed, and εὐκλήρωμα is not even recorded as a varia lectio in the apparatus. From a morphological point of view, εὐκλήρωμα would indeed be the expected formation from the verb κληρόω; however, the compound verb from which the noun is derived is attested instead as εὐκληρέω, and the other parallel formations end in -ημα (cf. ἀκλήρημα, from ἀκληρέω, and δυσκλήρημα, from δυσκληρέω). The manuscript form εὐκλήρωμα may have arisen under the influence of the following κατόρθωμα; see Olson (2021, 280). In the light of these considerations, it seems preferable to adopt the correction εὐκλήρημα in the text of the Antiatticist.