ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα
(Phryn. PS 11.22–3)

D. General commentary

This entry of the Praeparatio sophistica (A.1) is devoted to the unique expression ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα ‘to have a noiseless mouth’. Phrynichus characterises it with the evaluative terms σεμνός and πολιτικός, a pair that finds a parallel only in PS 11.13Phryn. PS 11.13 (see entry ἄπαρνος, ἔξαρνος). This judgement provides an interpretative key for the attribution of the expression to a lost literary text and for its linguistic interpretation.

Kock (CAF vol. 3, 626) cautiously treated the lemma as a comic adespoton (com. adesp. fr. 1310 CAF) but noted in the apparatus that the gloss should perhaps have been attributed to tragedy (‘videtur tamen potius tragoediae esse’). Both the comic interpretation and the doubts pertaining thereto are echoed in de Borries (1911, 11). The lemma was ultimately included in TrGFr, vol. 2 as a tragic adespoton (C.1), and so it does not feature in the comic adespota of PGC, vol. 8. Attempting to make sense of Phrynichus’ judgement of ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα, Kannicht and Snell (TrGFr vol. 2, 105) interpret σεμνός as ‘tragic’ and πολιτικός as ‘comic’. While the attribution of σεμνός to tragic language is likely correct, the interpretation of πολιτικός as a comic allusion is surely erroneous, as it disregards the use of πολιτικός in the PS and generally in Greek stylistic terminology.

σεμνός conveys a sense of ‘dignity’ and ‘nobility’. It is one of the qualities of style discussed in Hermogenes’Hermogenes On Styles (see Patillon 1988, 223–7, who translates it as ‘noble’ throughout) and the awe that it evokes derives from a combination of linguistic expression, thought, and topic (see Easterling 2014 for its association with divine phenomena in the Sophoclean scholia). πολιτικός is employed as a general adjective for everything connected to the life of the πόλις: it may thus evoke the qualities of civil men (including their manner of expression) or the specific language of statesmen and politicians. Isocrates (9.10)Isoc. 9.10 identifies the use of πολιτικὰ ὀνόματα as one of the major differences between oratory and poetry; Arist. Rh. 1450bArist. Rh. 1450b frames the πολιτικῶς composing of old writers as in opposition to the ῥητορικῶςῥητορικῶς of modern writers. In Greek rhetorical thought, πολιτικός assumes a specialised connotation in the notion of πολιτικὸς λόγος, which may denote oratoryOratory more broadly or one of its sub-genres (with different understandings in different authors, on which see Brandtstätter 1893, 133–203). All these nuances may have been present in Phrynichus’ use of πολιτικός as a stylistic evaluative term, to judge, at least, from the extant entries that employ it: on civility and educated language, see entries ἄπαρνος, ἔξαρνος and αἰκάλλοντης; a specific reference to oratory is likely in the entry on αὐθέντης; meanwhile, the entry ἀμαξιαῖα ῥῆματα demonstrates the way in which the πολιτικός register is associated with prose composition and in opposition to poetry. In conclusion, there is no reason to perceive an allusion to comedy in Phrynichus’ evaluation of ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα as πολιτικός.

Given that the expression does not have any known parallels, to interpret Phrynichus’ judgement, we must turn to its individual constituents before considering it as a whole. The first two occurrences of the adjective ἄψοφος are found in 5th-century tragedy (Soph. Tr. 967, C.2; Eur. Tr. 887, C.3). In both instances, the adjective metaphoricallyMetaphors characterises a noiseless motion: a βάσις in Sophocles (cf. Easterling 1982, 196 for the image), a κέλευθος in Euripides (a line from ‘Hecuba’s prayer’ that is frequently quoted by later authors, including Plutarch, Plotinus, Themistius, Synesius, and others: see Kovacs 2018, 270–2, for a commentary on the passage). Callimachus maintains the association between ἄψοφος and treading (with ἴχνος at in Apoll. 12; a second occurrence at in Del. 302 refers to Delus instead), and Aelian (NA 13.11, with πούς). Nonnus also uses the adjective several times (with ὕδωρ, ἴχνος, ῥόος, gods, humans, etc.).

However, ἄψοφος is not exclusive to poetry: several occurrences are attested in prose texts, largely technicalTechnical language or philosophical in nature. This distribution depends largely on Aristotle's employment of the adjective in On Soul, in which the quality of ‘soundlessness’ is applied to that which can take on sound (418b.27) and to air in particular (420a.8 = C.4). ἄψοφος is thus frequently attested in commentaries on this Aristotelian work (with ἀήρ, see Them. in de An. 5.3.64.22, Simp. in de An. 11.144, Phlp. in de An. 15.366.30, etc.). Galen, a contemporary of Phrynichus, also uses ἄψοφος. Interestingly, he also employs the adjective to describe breath (De utilitate respirationis 4.478.10 Kühn, De locis affectis 8.271.3 Kühn, and others).

The distribution of ἄψοφος allows us to make sense of Phrynichus’ πολιτικός. While not a very rare word, ἄψοφος is certainly less common than the adjectives ἄφωνος and ἥσυχος, with which Phrynichus glosses it. The association of ἄψοφος with poetry and its use in intellectual discourse (Aristotle, Galen) may have informed the perception that it was a cultivated word, appropriate to a style that aspired to distinction while not being overly recherché. Thus Phrynichus would use πολιτικός, not in its more technical meaning of ‘belonging to political discourse, fit for political oratory’ (on this, see Hermog. Id. 2.10Hermog. Id. 2.10, with discussion in Patillon 1988, 281–2; Rutherford 1998, 37–9) but as a more general label for ‘urbane’ language that is appropriate to various genres and styles (on πολιτικός in Greek theories of style, see Brandstätter 1893, 133–203; Rutherford 1998, 43–7).

Phrynichus’ reasons for pairing πολιτικός with σεμνός must instead be sought in the overall flavour of the expression ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα. Images with στόμα, particularly those involving the idea of refraining from speech, are topical in tragedy. Among those instances in which στόμα is the object of a verb meaning ‘to close’ (see LSJ s.v. στόμα 2), the following two examples employ an adjective that means ‘silent’ or a corresponding adverb: Eur. fr. 773.62 ἔχειν χρὴ στόμ’ ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ ‘it is necessary to have one’s mouth in silence’, Eur. Hipp. 660 σῖγα δ’ ἕξομεν στόμα ‘we shall keep our mouths silent’ (cf. also Eur. Supp. 513 and Eur. Or. 185–6; however, the latter text is problematic). Other adjectives are commonly used metaphorically to mean ‘silent’ (see e.g. the ἀχάλινα στόματα of Eur. Ba. 386, parodied by Ar. Ra. 838). Like στόμα, γλῶσσαγλῶσσα also occurs in images of restraint in tragedy. An association between γλῶσσα and ψόφος, the base word of ἄψοφος, occurs in Eur. HF 229 with οὐδὲν ὄντα πλὴν γλώσσης ψόφον – ‘being nothing more than sound of tongue’ (referring to Amphitryon). In conclusion, the tragic parallels for the image of refraining from speech and the choice of the adjective ἄψοφος – or perhaps its mere occurrence in Euripides’ famous line in C.3 – may account for Phrynichus’ choice of σεμνός as the first characterisation of ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα.

The hypothesis that, in this entry in the PS, evaluative terminology applies to different components of the lemma finds support in another entry, preserved in the Synagoge tradition but certainly from the PS (B.1). Discussing the metaphorical expression ἄθηρος ἡμέρα (‘a day without hunting’, i.e. ‘a blank day’), the entry first comments σεμνὴ πάνυ ἡ συμπλοκὴ καὶ ἀξίωμα οὐ μικρὸν ἔχουσα (‘the association [is] solemn and possesses a not little dignity’), before adding καὶ γὰρ ὁ χρησάμενος τῇ φωνῇ καὶ τῇ φράσει Αἰσχύλος ἐστὶν ἐν Τοξότισιν (‘indeed, it is Aeschylus who uses the word and the expression, in the Archeresses [fr. 241]’). This sentence introduces a distinction: φωνήφωνή is selected to refer to ἄθηροςἄθηρος as an individual word (for this usage of φωνή, see also PS 6.6Phryn. PS 6.6, PS 12.17–8Phryn. PS 12.17–8, PS 32.1Phryn. PS 32.1 with the entry ἀναρριχάομαι, PS 52.1Phryn. PS 52.1, PS 67.7Phryn. PS 67.7, etc.), while φράσιςφράσις denotes the syntagm ἄθηρος ἡμέρα (for this use of φράσις as ‘expression, idiom, phrase’ see LSJ s.v. 2 and PS 26.8Phryn. PS 26.8 re. αὐτὰ καὶ τὰ φίλτατα, PS fr. *164Phryn. PS fr. *164 re. ἀμαθίας ὕψος, PS fr. *345Phryn. PS fr. *345 re. οὐδὲν προτιμῶ σου). The thought is completed by the comment πρόσεστι δὲ τῷ σεμνῷ τῆς λέξεως καὶ τὸ πολιτικόν (‘urbanity of expression too belongs to the solemnity of style’) and a final stylistic recommendation: συγγράφων χρῶ (‘use it when writing prose’). In sum, ἄθηροςἄθηρος per se (i.e., as a φωνήφωνή) is marked as a word appropriate to urbane expression, likely because it is not exclusively poetic (see its occurrence in Hdt. 4.185 with χώρη, with further instances in Plutarch and Aelian; Poll. 5.13Poll. 5.13 mentions it in a list of compounds relating to hunting). σεμνός, instead, applies only to the φράσιςφράσις, ἄθηρος ἡμέρα. Similarly, the original entry in PS 11.22–3 (A.1) may originally have treated ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα in terms of both φωνή and φράσις. ἄψοφος alone (that is, as a φωνήφωνή) would be merely πολιτικός, while ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα (that is, as a φράσιςφράσις) would also be σεμνός.

These two lemmas of the Praeparatio sophistica (A.1, B.1) reveal Phrynichus’ recourse to a ‘register palette’ that afforded due consideration to nuances and the combination of different styles, particularly those appropriate to prose (see the συγγράφων of B.1). He selects ἄψοφος and ἄψοφον ἔχειν στόμα as suitable to a civil register that, although serious and dignified, avoids affectation. A similar reflection on the appropriateness of πολιτικά expressions to solemn style is found in Phot. Bibl. cod. 74.52a.6–8Phot. Bibl. cod. 74.52a.6–8 concerning Themistius (see Tribulato forthcoming).

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

In Byzantine texts, ἄψοφος occurs more frequently outside poetic or technical language, often used to convey the image of ‘walking silently’ (e.g., in Nicetas Choniates, George Pachymeres, Nicephorus Gregoras), notably in the expression ἀψόφῳ ποδί (incidentally, it may be worth noting that the continued use of ἄψοφος seems to be at odds with the ratio behind the entry in LSJ, which refers the reader to that on ἀψόφητοςἀψόφητος: the latter is a significantly rarer form than ἄψοφος). The adjective does not survive in Modern Greek.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

N/A