ἐπιστάτης
(Antiatt. ε 100)

D. General commentary

The Antiatticist (A.1) states that ἐπιστάτης (literally ‘one who stands over’, see LSJ s.v.) was used by Antiphanes (C.6) to indicate the teacher (διδάσκαλος).

In its earliest literary attestation (C.1), ἐπιστάτης denotes the person who stands by someone else in order to be heard or to receive something, therefore corresponding to ‘suppliant’ or ‘beggar’ (see e.g. Murray 1919, 185). All later occurrences date from the 5th century BCE onwards and show a wide variety of meanings for ἐπιστάτης, some of which more straightforwardly based than others on the literal sense of ‘one who stands over’. In tragedyTragedy, it occurs more than once in expressions indicating a superintendent who commands something, mostly in a military context. Examples include Aesch. Pers. 379 ὅπλων ἐπιστάτης (‘commander of the arms’), Soph. El. 792 ἁρμάτων ἐπιστάται (‘commanders of the chariots’), Eur. Hel. 1267, 1413 ἐρετμῶν ἐπιστάτας (‘commander of the oars’; see Garvie 2009, 190); metaphoricalMetaphors usages can be found in Soph. Ai. 27, where the dogs are called ποιμνίων ἐπιστάται (‘overseers of the flocks’; see also Su. ε 2616) and Soph. El. 75−6 (καιρὸς γάρ, ὅσπερ ἀνδράσιν μέγιστος ἔργου παντός ἐστ’ ἐπιστάτης, ‘for the occasion [has come], which is the greatest commander of every human enterprise’, see also Su. ε 2615). Similarly, Aesch. Th. 817 has the simple οἱ δ’ ἐπιστάται, ‘the superintendents’, hence ‘the commanders’ (see Hutchinson 1985, 177). According to Poll. 3.145Poll. 3.145, Sophocles (fr. 1047) used the term in the sense of ‘judge at the games’ (a meaning listed also by Hesychius, B.4). The word also belongs to Athenian administrative vocabulary, since it was used to indicate various officials, such as supervisors of public building projects (B.2) and administrators of sacred funds (see Rhodes 1997). Moreover, Aristotle (Ath. 44.1−3) attests to the existence of chairmen of the prytaneis called ἐπιστάται (see Rhodes 1993, 531−4), and his discussion is quoted or implied in erudite works dealing with this meaning of the word from Pollux (8.96)Poll. 8.96, Harpocration (ε 114, π 92 [= Phot. π 1209]), and the Atticist Telephus of Pergamum (quoted by Eustathius, B.8, possibly through a lost scholium to Od. 17.455, C.1; see Pagani 2009 and Sickinger 2020), down to later lexicographers (see Phot. ε 1721 [= Su. ε 2611, ex Σ′′]; Et.Gen. A^IIB s.v. ἐπιστάτης [= EM 364.41−9, ~ Phot. ε 1722, Su. ε 2612, ex Σ′′]; Δικῶν ὀνόματα 188.22−3; Lexeis Rhetorikai 244.31−245.2). For the epigraphic attestations of the word, see Rhodes (1997). In addition, ἐπιστάτης is also a technical termTechnical language for soldiers occupying specific positions within the formation of an armed troop (see X. Cyr. 3.3.50, 8.1.10, Arr. Tact. 6.4.1−3 Roos−Wirth: ὁ μὲν δὴ τοῦ λοχαγοῦ κατόπιν ἑστὼς ἐπιστάτης καλεῖται, ‘the one who stands behind the troop commander is called ἐπιστάτης’, and Su. ε 2610).

However, two other usages of ἐπιστάτης were at the centre of the ancient scholarly debate: one was the use of the word as a synonymSynonyms of ‘teacher’ (see below), the other was the use found in Aristophanes’ Birds (C.4: εἰς τὸν ἱπνὸν εἴσω πλησίον τοὐπιστάτου). The context of the line does not clarify what exactly the object called ἐπιστάτης was, and ancient scholars proposed different interpretations (see schol. Ar. Av. 436a−b−cα [= Su. ε 2614, ~ Phot. ε 1720]; the possibility that the genitive τοὐπιστάτου might go back to a hypothetical ἐπίστατον or ἐπίστατος is explored in Dunbar 1995, 302−3).

Aristophanes of Byzantium is the first known scholar to have dealt with the term ἐπιστάτης and its various meanings, in his work On words suspected of not having been said by the ancients (B.1). The discussion is preserved by Eustathius (B.8), who reports a direct quotation (ἐνταῦθα δὲ μνηστέον τοῦ γραμματικοῦ Ἀριστοφάνους, εἰπόντος οὕτω ῥητῶς κτλ), drawn from an epitome of Aristophanes’ work (see van der Valk 1971, LXVII−LXVIII; Slater 1986, XIV; Tosi 1997, 172 n. 3). In the excerpt, Aristophanes states that some unidentified scholars (τοῖς πολλοῖς) acknowledged only two meanings for ἐπιστάτης, namely that of ‘beggar’, found in Homer (C.1), and the meaning χυτρόπουςχυτρόπους, ‘pot stand’, i.e. one of the ancient interpretations of τοὐπιστάτου in Birds (C.4, see schol. Ar. Av. 436a). These scholars, however, ignored (ἀγνοοῦσι) the term’s use for the gymnastic master (παιδοτρίβης; see LSJ s.v.).

Although Et.Sym. (B.7) links the meaning παιδοτρίβης for ἐπιστάτης to Plato (C.5, see also below and F.1), the locus classicus generally assumed to underlie Aristophanes’ statement on this meaning of the word is Pherecr. fr. 240 (C.3), quoted in Photius’ lexicon (B.6). The lexicographer introduces the playwright’s usage of the word by underlining its uniqueness (τὸν παιδαγωγὸν καὶ παιδοτρίβην ἰδίως λέγουσι, ‘they call [thus] the pedagogue and the athletic trainer, in an unusual way’; on ἰδίωςἰδίως in the jargon of ancient scholarship, see Nünlist 2009, 260). A very similar phrasing is found also in Eustathius (B.8: οἱ δὲ παλαιοὶ τὴν λέξιν καὶ ἐπὶ παιδαγωγοῦ καὶ παιδοτρίβου οἴδασι τεθεῖσθαι), a few lines before the direct quotation from the epitome of Aristophanes’ work. Tsantsanoglou (1984, 142) rightly supposed that the common source from which Photius and Eustathius drew the equivalence ἐπιστάτης = παιδαγωγὸς καὶ παιδοτρίβης was Aelius DionysiusAelius Dionysius or Pausanias the AtticistPausanias Atticista (see also Theodoridis 1998, 165: ‘gl. Aelio Dionysio attribui’). In turn, this common source relied to some degree on Aristophanes’ discussion of ἐπιστάτης in On words suspected of not having been said by the ancients (see Tosi 1997, 172 n. 3).

More specifically, while in the excerpt quoted directly by Eustathius (B.1) Aristophanes says that ἐπιστάτης means παιδοτρίβης (‘trainer’), in the common source of Photius and Eustathius the term is said to be equivalent to both παιδαγωγός (‘pedagogue’) and παιδοτρίβης (‘trainer’). This discrepancy has been highlighted (see Tosi 1997, 172 n. 3) but no explanation has yet been offered for it. One possibility is that the addition of παιδαγωγός is due to the common source of Photius and Eustathius, originating either from an erroneous extension of the equivalence ἐπιστάτης = παιδοτρίβης postulated by Aristophanes, or from comparison with another passage not considered by the Hellenistic scholar.

In B.8, after quoting Aristophanes of Byzantium, Eustathius says τὸ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων καθηγητῶν τάττειν οὔ φημι πάντως τὴν χρῆσιν δεικνύναι (‘by no means am I saying that the usage proves that it is also used for other teachers’). With this sentence, the Byzantine scholar appears to distance himself from the interpretation of the source he calls οἱ παλαιοίοἱ παλαιοί (i.e., Aelius Dionysius or Pausanias, see above). Indeed, unlike Aristophanes, they admitted the use of ἐπιστάτης not only for the trainer (παιδοτρίβης) but also for the pedagogue (παιδαγωγός) and the manager of the gymnastic school (γυμνασίου […] ἐπιμελητής) – i.e. those who Eustathius calls ἄλλοι καθηγηταί – but, according to the Byzantine scholar, the χρῆσις (‘the usage’, ‘the attestations’) did not prove that ἐπιστάτης could be extended to these meanings as well (I thank Lucia Prauscello for drawing my attention on this sentence and sharing with me her precious insights).

The view of the παλαιοί (i.e. that ἐπιστάτης may be used for the παιδοτρίβης, the παιδαγωγός, and the ἐπιμελητής γυμνασίου) is perhaps mirrored (at least in part) in the Antiatticist (A.1). Indeed, in the entry dedicated to ἐπιστάτης, the lexicographer states that the noun corresponds to the commonly used διδάσκαλος and refers to a lost passage by Antiphanes (C.6), a playwright well represented within the inclusive canon of this lexicon (26 entries in total, see e.g. entry μεῖζον μεῖζον, μικρὸν μικρόν). Although διδάσκαλος and παιδαγωγός are by no means synonyms (see e.g. Aeschin. 1.187: τί δ’ ὄφελος παιδαγωγοὺς τρέφειν ἢ παιδοτρίβας καὶ διδασκάλους τοῖς παισὶν ἐφιστάναι;, ‘what good is it to support pedagogues or trainers and assign teachers to the children?’), it is plausible that the Antiatticist based his entry on ἐπιστάτης (also) on the παλαιοί, if one accepts their identification with either Aelius Dionysius or Pausanias the Atticist (see above; on the Antiatticist’s dependence on these two lexicographers, see Valente 2015, 39–41). In A.1, the adverb ὁμολογουμένως is a reference to the συνήθεια (see Valente 2015, 50 n. 94), so while Photius (B.6, see above) stresses the peculiarity (ἰδίως) of Pherecrates’ use of ἐπιστάτης in the meaning ‘teacher’, the Antiatticist underlines that διδάσκαλος is the common form. Slater (1987, 27) considered A.1 ‘the only gloss where Aristophanes seems contradicted by the Antiatt.’, however Tosi (1997, 172) takes the view that the Antiatticist does not contradict any rule allegedly formulated by Aristophanes, but rather expands the semantic value of the term based on a passage that the Hellenistic scholar apparently overlooked (see also Valente 2015, 169).

Some ancient scholars did not agree with the equivalence between ἐπιστάτης and διδάσκαλος, and distinguished rigidly between the two terms, limiting the first to the realm of ἔργα and the second to that of λόγοι. This distinction is found in the synonymic lexicon ascribed to Ammonius (B.3): the condensed wording (διδάσκαλος καὶ ἐπιστάτης διαφέρει. διδάσκαλος μὲν γάρ ἐστι λόγων, ἐπιστάτης δὲ ἔργων) suggests that the source is an epitomisation of a more articulate doctrine, surely belonging to an Atticist source (see Tosi 1997, 171−2). The point of the gloss seems to be the proscription of the meaning ‘teacher’, allowed by the Antiatticist, and the limitation of the usage of ἐπιστάτης to the sense of ‘superintendent’ or ‘supervisor’ of practical works. This meaning is supported also by Pollux (B.2), who adduces as evidence the compound ἐργεπιστάτης, found in Epicharmus (an all the more interesting choice, since the use of ἐπιστάτης for ἔργα is defined as a specifically Attic feature: οἱ μὲν Ἀττικοὶ ἐπιστάτας ἔργων λέγουσιν).

The Atticist proscription of ἐπιστάτης in the sense of ‘teacher’ was not adopted in later lexicography. Indeed, Orion (B.5) admits this meaning (πολλάκις δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ διδάσκοντός τι ἁπλῶς) along with those of ‘supervisor’ and ‘beggar’, as does Hesychius (B.4), who lists a long series of meanings of ἐπιστάτης, including not only the more generic ‘commander’, ‘beggar’, and ‘teacher’, but also the more specific βραβευτής (‘judge at the games’, attested in Soph. fr. 1047, see above) and ἄρχων τις Ἀθήνησι (on this meaning, see above). The Etymologicum Symeonis is of particular interest since it refers to two occurrences of ἐπιστάτης in authors who are seemingly disregarded by other erudite sources: on the one hand Plato (Cri. 47b = C.5), as regards the equivalence ἐπιστάτης = παιδοτρίβης (see Burnet 1924, 272), on the other hand Theopompus, the playwright or the historian (see F.1), as regards the use of ἐπιστάτης as a technical termTechnical language of the jargon of Athenian administration. The material of the entry is surely derived from a more ancient source which is no longer recoverable, but may be identifiable with the rhetorical source described by Reitzenstein (1897, 257). The juxtaposition of multiple sources is evident also in Eustathius (B.8), who – as already mentioned – draws from at least four different authorities, namely an Atticist lexicon (either Aelius Dionysius or Pausanias), the epitome of Aristophanes of Byzantium (B.1), the grammarian Telephus of Pergamon, and the scholia to Aristophanes (see schol. Ar. Av. 436a−b−cα. On Eustathius’ knowledge of this scholiastic corpus, see van der Valk 1971, LXXXV).

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

ἐπιστάτης is well attested throughout Byzantine literature (see e.g. Theodorus Studites Μεγάλη κατήχησις 54.385.16–7 Papadopoulos Kerameus; Michael Psellus Or. 14.21–2 Littlewood; Manuel Philes Carmina 2.84.3–4). The sense is mostly ‘supervisor’, ‘commander’ and ‘judge’ (see also Kriaras, LME s.v.). The word remains in use in Modern Greek in the sense of ‘supervisor’ (e.g. of a group of workers on a building site) and ‘employee’, see LKN s.v.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

(1)    Et.Sym. ε 679 (B.7)

Before the edition of Baldi (2013, 302), this entry of the Etymologicum Symeonis appeared in the notes of Gaisford’s edition of the Etymologicum Magnum (1848, 1044). Nevertheless, the quotation ascribed to ‘Theopompus’ (ἐν τῇ Θεοπόμπου εἴρηται· ‘πρυτάνεώς τε καὶ προσέτ’ ἐπιστάτης’) has to date been neglected: it is absent from FGrHist and from both editions of BNJ, as well as from PCG and the latest commentary on the fragments of the playwright Theopompus (see Farmer 2022). Neither the entry’s wording nor the fragment’s content provide any decisive evidence for the identification of the author quoted: the reference to the prytanis and the ἐπιστάτης could appear as credibly in a historical work as in a comedy. Some text has likely been lost, which would explain the feminine article present without a corresponding noun. If the author is identified with the historian (the elision in προσέτ’ is attested in prose, see D. 16.22.1, 24.47.5), the feminine article should refer to an implied βίβλος, and one should presuppose the omission of a book number (see e.g. schol. Thuc. 1.13.6a ἡ ἱστορία δήλη ἐν τῇ αʹ Ἡροδότου, schol. Aristid. 1.111.1 ἡ ἱστορία ἐν τῇ γʹ Θουκυδίδου) and perhaps also of a book title (see e.g. Theo RhG 2,66.13 ἐν τῇ εἰκοστῇ Θεοπόμπου τῶν Φιλιππικῶν, 2,68.12−3 ἐν τῇ ἐνάτῃ τῶν Φιλιππικῶν Θεοπόμπου). On the other hand, if the Theopompus quoted is the comic playwright, the feminine article could have been linked to a feminine play-title, later omitted (seven of Theopompus’ twenty extant play-titles are feminine: Ἀλθαία, Ἀφροδίτης, Βατύλη, Εἰρήνη, Νεμέα, Παμφίλη, Πηνελόπη). The text of the fragment as transmitted does not scan, and some degree of conjectural intervention would be required to restore a correct iambic trimeter. The historian Theopompus is quoted much more often than the playwright in ancient sources (411 fragments against 108). As regards grammatical-lexicographical sources, the types of work from which Et.Sym. is likely to have drawn the quotation, Herodian refers to the historian 121 times, while he never quotes the playwright; Harpocration cites the historian 38 times and the playwright only twice, and the Antiatticist has five quotations from the historian, one from the playwright and one of dubious attribution. Pollux, however, quotes the playwright 24 times according to the count in Farmer (2022, 12), and the historian only four times. This new fragment’s authorship deserves further investigation and is best dealt with in a separate, future contribution. With regard to the Platonic passage alluded to in the entry with Πλάτων μέντοι τὸν αὐτὸν παιδοτρίβην καὶ ἐπιστάτην καλεῖ, Baldi identifies it with Prot. 312d.4−7, but there the term evidently means ‘expert’: εἰ δέ τις ἐκεῖνο ἔροιτο, ‘ὁ δὲ σοφιστὴς τῶν τί σοφῶν ἐστιν;’ τί ἂν ἀποκρινοίμεθα αὐτῷ; ποίας ἐργασίας ἐπιστάτης; — τί ἂν εἴποιμεν αὐτὸν εἶναι, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἢ ἐπιστάτην τοῦ ποιῆσαι δεινὸν λέγειν; ‘If a man should ask for what the matters of the sophist are wise, how should we answer him? What sort of workmanship is he master of?’ (translation by Lamb 1924, 105, with adaptations). The passage the entry refers to is in fact Cri. 47a−b (C.5), where it is said that an athlete should listen only to his trainer, who is his ἐπιστάτης.