ἔξηβος
(Phryn. PS 65.20–1)

D. General commentary

Phrynichus’ entry in the PS (A.1) underlines the rarity of the adjective ἔξηβος (‘past his youth’) in comparison to ἔξωρος (‘out of age’). Phrynichus’ statement is correct: ἔξηβος is a hapax in Classical Greek, known only from Aesch. Th. 11 (C.1). It belongs to a small group of compounds in -ηβος from ἥβηἥβη ‘youth’, such as ἔφηβοςἔφηβος (‘ephebus’, ‘come to man’s age’; on ἐφηβεῖα see Henderson 2020, 1–19), and ἄνηβος (‘not yet come to man’s age’). While these words are not necessarily rare, several of these compounds aroused the interest of ancient and Byzantine scholars. Eustathius (B.3), for instance, queries why these forms end in -ος and not in -ης (see also πρώθηβος, a variant of πρωθήβηςπρωθήβης ‘in the prime of youth’, discussed in Eust. in Il. 2.629.20, in Od. 1.74.6, on which see DELG s.v. ἥβη).

The rarity of ἔξηβος, remarked on by Phrynichus, pairs with the disputed meaning attributed to this form in the Aeschylean passage (C.1) that constitutes its sole attestation. The scholia to AeschylusAeschylus are unequivocal in associating ἔξηβος with old age and usually gloss it with γέρων (‘old man’), identifying an elderly man who is henceforth too old to fight (B.2). Meanwhile, Hesychius’ entry (which goes back to Cyril’s Lexicon, B.1), associates the word with a grown man who has passed his youth but is not yet old. Similarly, modern scholars have failed to reach a consensus, variously interpreting ἔξηβος to mean a man from his early twenties on, a full-grown man or an elder (see F.1 for a detailed discussion of the various interpretations).

A thorough study of ἔξηβος requires that the analysis be extended to include ἔξωρος (‘out of age’) and its occurrences. Phrynichus compares ἔξηβος and ἔξωρος (A.1, see also schol. Aesch. Th. 11i, B.2) and, in treating them as a rare and a current form, respectively, likely implies that they are synonymsSynonyms, distinguished only by their frequency of use. The formation of ἔξωρος is identical to that of ἔξηβος: the prefix ἐξ- denotes distance, meaning that something is ‘untimely’ or that someone is ‘out of age’ ‘too old’ (LSJ, s.v. ἔξωρος, for an opposite interpretation of the value assumed by the prefix ἐξ-, see F.1). Lexica agree on the meaning of ἔξωρος and gloss it with ‘old’: see Hsch. ε 4008 (*ἐξώροις· γραίαις [AS] ἢ γέρουσιν, ‘ἐξώροις: old women or old men [dat.]’), Hsch. ε 4009 (ἔξωρον· τὸν παρηκμακότα, ἄκαιρον [AS] ἢ παλαιόν, ‘ἔξωρον: someone who has passed his prime, something untimely, or ancient’), Su. ε 1850 (ἔξωρος· ὁ γεγηρακώς. ἢ ἄκαιρος, ‘ἔξωρος: someone who has become old, or something untimely’).

Nevertheless, the equation ἔξωρος = ‘old’ is simplistic, as may be inferred from the two classical occurrences of the adjective. Whereas in Soph. El. 618Soph. El. 618 it carries the negative sense of ‘untimely’ (ἔξωρα πράσσω κοὐκ ἐμοὶ προσεικότα, ‘I do things which are untimely and unbecoming to me’), in Aeschin. 1.95.7–8Aeschin. 1.95.7–8 (οὑτοσὶ δ’ ἔξωρος ἐγένετο, ἐδίδου δ’ εἰκότως οὐδεὶς ἔτι οὐδέν, ‘he had become too old, and nobody would give him anything any longer, as it was to be expected’), its meaning is more nuanced. Aeschines does not state that Timarchus has become too old as such but rather that he has become too old to prostitute himself as he did when he was a boy; ἔξωρος thus describes Timarchus as an adult ‘who has passed the age’ (that is, the young age that is befitting of prostitution, see Aeschin. 1.94.4–6: τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἡμαρτηκέναι τι περὶ τὸ σῶμα παιδὸς εἶναί φησι, τὸ δὲ τὰ πατρῷα κατεδηδοκέναι ἀνδρός, ‘He [i.e. Demosthenes] says that the act of prostituting befits a boy, while the act of eating up one’s own substance befits a man’). A scholion on this passage of Aeschines’ clearly states this meaning (schol. Aeschin. 206.1: ἔξωρος· ἔξωρος ἔξω τῆς ἡλικίας. ὑπερεβεβήκει τὴν ὥραν, τουτέστι τὴν ἀκμὴν τῆς ἡλικίας, ἀνὴρ ἤδη ἐγεγόνει, ‘ἔξωρος: ἔξωρος means out of age. He has gone beyond the right age – that is, the peak of youth – he has already become a man’).

In conclusion, ἔξωρος, which was originally used to indicate that someone had passed the appropriate age for a given activity (Aeschin. 1.95.7–8), was later employed with the more general and widely attested meaning of ‘old’. ἔξηβος may have suffered the same fate, being understood as ‘old’ despite the fact that it was originally applied to a grown man who has passed his youth. Its original meaning still surfaces in Lib. Or. 64.59 (C.2, in which dance is described as potentially presenting the danger of corruption for young boys but not for grown men, for whom it is said to be harmless): here, ἔξηβος functions more specifically as a synonym of ἀνήρ (‘man’), meaning ‘grown man’ as opposed to νέος (‘young’). Neither Aeschylus nor Libanius uses the term to refer to old men: rather, they are describing grown men who have long surpassed their ἥβη.

Phrynichus’ entry (A.1) is also interesting for the study of the Atticist literary canon. Unparalleled in other Atticist lexica, ἔξηβος is derived from tragedy, a field from which the Atticists drew less frequently than comedy. Phrynichus’ selection, alongside that of the Antiatticist, is the richest in tragic material (see Vessella 2018, 35). Aeschylus – despite the archaism and magniloquence of his style, which provoked Quintilian’s negative judgement (Inst. 10.1.66–7) – warrants a place in the Atticists’ selections; according to Photius (Bibl. cod. 158.101b.13–4), in the PS, Phrynichus turned to Aeschylus precisely for his grandiloquence. Given that the entry in the PS (A.1) is paralleled by schol. Aesch. Th. 11i (B.2) in associating ἔξηβος with ἔξωρος, this analogy likely originates from a knowledge of Aeschylean exegesis on Phrynichus’ part (or that of an intermediate source), particularly given that Seven Against Thebes was among Aeschylus’ best-known plays.

The entry also preserves evaluative terminology that is invaluable for the study of Phrynichus’ theories of style. This is the only case in which καινός is contrasted with another evaluative term (καθωμιλημένος). In describing ἔξωρος as a word in current usage, Phrynichus likely reflects a use that was common during his lifetime: according to TLG data, attestations of ἔξωρος peak in the 2nd century CE (in Lucian, for instance, it occurs a dozen times). καινότης occurs as an evaluative criterion in six items of the PS (Phryn. PS 65.20–1Phryn. PS 65.20–1; 75.19Phryn. PS 75.19; 94.21–95.4Phryn. PS 94.21–95.4; 99.14–9Phryn. PS 99.14–9; 116.9–13Phryn. PS 116.9–13; 120.1–2Phryn. PS 120.1–2) and is often associated with rare words. Two items in particular offer interesting parallels for A.1, in that they compare an ‘innovative’ word with a more common synonymSynonyms: Phryn. PS 75.19Phryn. PS 75.19, where ἰσῆλιξἰσῆλιξ is presented as more original than ἡλικιώτης (‘equal in age’), and 99.14–9Phryn. PS 99.14–9, where πολιτοκοπεῖνπολιτοκοπέω is said to have greater claim to originality than δημοκοπεῖν (‘to court the mob’, see entry πολιτοκοπεῖν). While other occurrences of καινότης in the Praeparatio did not survive the process of epitomisation, they can be retraced in the indirect tradition, surfacing in the Synagoge and in Photius’ lexicon (see entry πολιτοκοπεῖν for a list). It is not immediately clear whether καινότης has a positive or negative connotation in the individual entries. On the one hand, it may refer to rare forms that provided those who use them with a polished and elegant effect. On the other hand, καινότης may be used to exemplify words that may sound eccentric and inappropriate. It is most likely that the entry on ἔξηβος (A.1) is neither prescriptive nor proscriptive but endorses the adjective on the grounds that it is stylistically noteworthy for its originality.

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

The status of ἔξηβος did not change over time: it remains a quasi-hapax. With the exception of two late-antique occurrences – in Libanius (Or. 64, C.2) and Cyril (in Io. 1.400.31) – it survives only in lexica and scholia. Its only Byzantine occurrence is its presence in Eustathius’ commentaries (B.4). ἔξωρος, meanwhile, lives on in Byzantine Greek, in which it is frequently employed: its use is particularly common in works by Michael Choniates (circa twelve occurrences), a sign that the word was deemed perfectly suited to the higher register.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

(1)    Aesch. Th. 10–6 (C.1)

The interpretation of this Aeschylean passage and the assumed meaning of ἔξηβος have been subject to much dispute. Following the scholiasts’ doctrine (B.2), these lines have traditionally been considered to portray Eteocles addressing two groups of men who are distant in age: those who are respectively too young and too old to fight. Scholars have often read line 12 as a reference to an ambiguous ‘abundant bodily growth’ (Sommerstein 2009, 155) or even to body fat. West (1990, 98), for instance, supposes a comic allusion to those who are ‘old and fat, or old and flabby’ (‘people do, after all, more often grow fatter with advancing years than thinner. Earthy Aeschylean humour, if you like’). Meanwhile, McCulloch and Cameron (1980, 9), identifying ἥβηἥβη as the four-year period between sixteen and twenty years of age, state that ἔξηβος likely denotes someone who has just passed his ἥβη – a young man from his early twenties on (until his sixties or thereabouts). According to this interpretation, Eteocles in line 12 describes the full bodily vigour attained by warriors in their prime (on this, see also Hutchinson 1985, 44). McCulloch and Cameron (1980, 6) attach particular importance to Hesychius’ testimony, which (B.1) explains the adjective as deriving from ἔξω (‘out’) + ἥβη (‘youth’) and describes the ἔξηβος as a thirty-five-year-old man. A third interpretation was advanced by Lattman (2013, 7–10), according to whom the prefix ἐξ- in ἔξηβος rather carries an intensive meaning, indicating someone who is at the peak of his ἥβη. As such, ἔξηβος (‘in the blush of youth’), would parallel adjectives such as ἔκδηλος (‘evident’) and ἔκδιψος (‘very thirsty’). Given that adjectives with the intensive ἐξ- are created as backformations from compound verbs (see Schwyzer, Debrunner 1950, 462), Lattman (2013, 8–9) supposes ἔξηβος to be a backformation from an unattested *ἐξηβάω (denominative from ἥβη). Again, line 12 would thus describe the vigorous strength of warriors in a positive light. Nevertheless, Lattman’s theory should be regarded with caution, given that it is at odds with all ancient scholarship on this passage.

ἔξηβος is not the only rare word to occur in these Aeschylean lines. The noun βλαστημόςβλαστημός, which is connected with βλάστη (‘growth’, in poetry often associated with children as ‘birth’, see below), is also a quasi-hapax, occurring only three times and exclusively in Aeschylus: see Supp. 318 and fr. 332a, both times meaning ‘offspring’. In Supp. 318: τίν’ οὖν ἔτ’ ἄλλον τῆσδε βλαστημὸν λέγεις; ‘Who else do you now name as her offspring?’ (transl. Sommerstein 2009, 331), βλαστημός is used in reference to Belus, Libya’s son. In Aesch. Th. 12, it does not seem likely that βλαστημός refers to body fat (let alone that it is comic in tone: see West’s understanding). Two other interpretations seem more appropriate. Scholia are unanimous in giving the noun a positive meaning and, in particular, schol. Aesch. Th. 12f (going back to Thomas Magister’s activity on Aeschylus’ text) describes it as follows: ‘βλάστιμον· ἤτοι τὸν αὔξησιν καὶ προκοπὴν αὔξοντα καὶ βλαστάνοντα σωματικὴν ὡς ἀκμαῖον καὶ νεανικὸν εἶναι πρὸς μάχας. […]’ (θ T) (‘βλάστιμον: That is [someone] who develops and nourishes the growth and the progress of [his] body to be in his prime and vigorous for battles. […]’). ἔξηβος would thus refer to a grown man who, despite having passed the time of his youth, remains strong and ready for battle (a good target for Eteocles’ speech). Alternatively, βλαστημός may denote ‘offspring’, ‘progeny’: the ἔξηβος would thus be a grown man who raises ‘an abundant offspring of [his] body’. Headlam (1900, 109), although inclined to discount line 12 as an interpolation, was the first to propose this, stating, ‘and the only point that I can find in it is this: that the aged father of many sons can contribute them to the service of his country’. McCulloch and Cameron (1980, 11–2), although connecting ἔξηβος to young men and proposing to suppress line 13, arrived at the same conclusion concerning βλαστημός as ‘offspring’. The noun βλάστη for ‘birth’ (which βλαστημός would replace, according to schol. Aesch. Th. 12b) is not rare in tragedy: see Soph. OT 717–8: παιδὸς δὲ βλάστας οὐ διέσχον ἡμέραι | τρεῖς (‘It had not even been three days from the infant’s birth’); Soph. OC 972–3: ὃς οὔτε βλάστας πω γενεθλίους πατρός | οὐ μητρὸς εἶχον (‘I who was not born yet from my father and mother’). The same applies to βλάστημα, which is used to mean ‘offspring’ in Aesch. Th. (see 533: Ἄρεως τόδ’ αὐδᾶι μητρὸς ἐξ ὀρεσκόου | βλάστημα, ‘He says that this is Ares’ offspring from a mountain-dwelling mother’).