Book III. Edited with introd. and notes by A.W. Spratt

€ 0GG10000 I9Z1 αὶ

{1.111}

ΟΙΝΟΒΟΙ 30 ALISHSAINN

Sage oO:
Ἐν τὸ, es

e

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2008 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation

https://archive.org/details/bookiiieditedwit0Othucuoft

Φ

ἽΠΠΟΣ ΙΒ DiS

BOOK IIT

Zondon: C. J. CLAY anp SONS,
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
AVE MARIA LANE.

Glasgow: 263, ARGYLE STREET.

Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS.
New Bork: MACMILLAN AND CO.
Bombay: GEORGE BELL AND SONS.

Pitt Press Series

tae ΠΡ,

BOOK IIl

EDITED WITH

INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

BY

AoW. SERAT I, M.A;

FELLOW AND TUTOR OF ST CATHARINE’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.

CAMBRIDGE:
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1896

[4] Righis reserved.)

4) BRARS
OCT oo Bt

Sete oF oF ἐν

Cambrtdae:

PRINTED BY J. & C. F. CLAY,
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

PREEPACE.

N preparing for the Syndics of the Cambridge University

Press this edition of the third book of Thucydides, free

use has been made not only of the larger commentaries but

also of the monographs and critical disquisitions which in

the course of the last 50 years have increased so largely the
mass of Thucydidean literature.

To the great work of Poppo, and to the editions by
Goller, Classen, Stahl, Kriiger, Bohme, and Duker, I am
much indebted, as also to the critical works of Cobet,
van Herwerden, Dobree, Naber, Steup, and Badham, and
above all to Professor Hude’. To the writers in the
American Journal of Philology, and to Professor Gildersleeve
in particular, I must acknowledge my especial obligations’.
Nor can I omit a passing word of thanks to Mr G. B. Grundy
for his most interesting and instructive article on the city of
Plataea’®.

1 Commentarii Critici ad Thucydidem pertinentes. 1888.

2 It isa matter of much regret to me that the scholarly edition of
Bk 111. by Professor C. F. Smith did not come into my hands until my
own commentary was completed.

3 Published by John Murray for the Royal Geographical Society.

Sur. b

vi PREFACE.

If amidst the number of authorities consulted, I have
unconsciously failed in any instance to mention the source
of my information, I can most honestly assure those to
whom the credit of originality is due that my sin has been
one of omission rather than commission.

Lastly, I would express my thanks to my friend and
former pupil Mr R. R. Conway for his invaluable help in
correcting proofs, and to the members of the Cambridge
University Press for their unfailing punctuality and precision.

ST CATHARINE’S COLLEGE,
February 10, 1896.

CONTENTS.

PAGES
PREFACE Ξ : : : - Vv, vi
INTRODUCTION : : : - ix—xxvii
ABBREVIATIONS ὁ ; : ΧΧΥΠΙ
TEXT : : : . : I—98
NOTES : - : : . 909-300
APPENDIX 5 ὃ . - 31I—330

INDICES : : : c 5 Bay

INT RODUCLION.

THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THUCYDIDES.

THE principal Mss. on which our text of Thucydides is based
may be enumerated as follows.

A. Cisalpinus, or Italus ; a parchment folio of the eleventh
or twelfth century, now in the National Library of Paris. After
being lost for some time, it was rediscovered by Prinz. There
is a tradition of its having been originally found in North Italy,
but the exact place is not known.

B. Vaticanus; now in the Vatican Library at Rome; a
small folio parchment of the twelfth century, collated by Bekker.
Hude has re-collated VI., VII., and VIII.

C. Laurentianus; belonging to the library of the church of
S. Lorenzo at Florence; a folio parchment of the tenth century
(g00—950). Books 11. and Iv. were collated (imperfectly) for
Arnold, and have recently received Hude’s revision.

E. Palatinus; in the library of Heidelberg: a folio parch-
ment of the eleventh century, collated by Bekker.

F. Augustanus, now in the library at Munich; a folio parch-
ment of the eleventh century; collated by Gottleber and Bauer.

G. Monacensis, in the Munich Library, a silk MS. of the
thirteenth century, much worn and decayed. Collated by Géller
and Bekker.

M. Britannicus or Londinensis, in British Museum, an
eleventh century MS., but by Montfaucon assigned to the tenth
century. It was purchased from the Abbey of S. Mary at
Florence and acquired by the Museum in 1840. It is remark-

X INTRODUCTION.

able for the beauty of the handwriting; and has been collated,
although imperfectly (see Marchant in Class. Rev. v. 22), by
Eggeling for Haase. The vilith Book has been collated by
Herwerden.

Of these Mss. C is the oldest, and has been made by Schéne
the basis of his own text of Books I. andi1. Hude and Sadée hold
it to be more trustworthy than B; but this opinion is founded,
more or less, upon a comparison of the readings of B and C
with Dionysius’ quotations.

Hude in his Introduction to his edition of VI., VII. and VIIL.,
as also in his Commentarii Critici, pronounces on the superiority
and antiquity of C, although believing A, B, E, M to be nearly
as ancient. D and F he refers to a later period, but treats the
authority of D as of small value. All are referable to one arche-
type, as is clear from community of error. M (Britannicus) he
regards as holding a midway position between two other groups,

ἢ). “ASB Ber
Ἐξ ας

Bekker places the Vatican above all others, but this is due
to his having only partially collated the Laurentian; the
readings of G are no compensation for Bekker’s neglect of C,
the more ancient MS. of the two. Thecollation made for Arnold
is partial and untrustworthy: the true value of the Laurentian
was first brought to Stahl’s notice by the revisions of Schéne and
Sadée. The most notable feature of B is its disagreement with
other MSS., especially in VII. and VIII.; it is now regarded as
derived from some superior original, and as more accurately
revised. Eggert’s account (de Vat. Cod. auctoritate, Ber. 1882)
is not satisfactory. In many cases the reading of the Vatican
shews not only the hand of an ingenious emendator, but distinct
signs of a superior archetype; but still the Ms. teems with
omissions, corrections, and transpositions. In point of agree-
ment with other MSS., C accords most closely with G, and B
with A.

The difficulty of constructing a text of Thucydides is in-
creased not only by the absence of any one archetypal manu-

INTRODUCTION. xl

script, the early practice of tachygraphy! (dating back probably
to the fourth century B.C.), the carelessness and ignorance of
scribes, difficulties of etymology, and the ancient custom of
quoting from memory, but also by the peculiar style of Thucy-
dides himself, the possible adscripts by different readers or
revisers, and the dangers of conjectural emendation, a process
which, not infrequently, only removes one difficulty to create
another: e.g. in Thuc. I. 61, § 2, the correction of ἐπιστρέψαντες
to ἐπὶ Στρέψαν.

In the first place we have no leading MS. to which we can refer
as authoritative as in the case of Aeschylus or Demosthenes.

Secondly, the grammarians themselves call attention to the
existence of two distinct classes of διφθέραι, the one, carefully
written in large letters, so heavy as to be carried by slaves, and
only to be acquired at great cost. Of the second kind we find
mention in the pages of Libanius, a sophist of the fourth century
A.D., who speaks of a MS. of Thucydides possessed by himself,
written in small letters, and quite a pleasure to carry: ie. an
edition written, with contractions, in minuscules. Both Galen
and Libanius speak of σημεῖα used by those who write εἰς τάχος.
Here, says Cobet (Miscell. Gr. p. 159), we may trace a triple
source of error in misreading the minuscules, confusing the
contractions, or attempting to supplement the deficiencies of the
well-thumbed volumes by the insertion of notes and comments
of readers. Few indeed of this high-priced class of Mss. have
come down to us; but Cobet questions their superior literary
merit”.

Thirdly, we have to reckon with the carelessness or ignorance
of scribes; for many of these Byzantine copyists knew little or
no Greek. The shortcomings of the ‘ Graeculus, ‘sciolus,’ or
‘magistellus’ are familiar to all who read the pages of Cobet
or his followers. But that a panacea is to be found for these

1 See J. R. Harris’ review of Gomperz’s treatise (Wien, 1884) in
Am. Journal of Philology, v. 516.

2 See further, Sir E. M. Thompson’s Manual of Paleography,
p- 83 foll.

xil INTRODUCTION.

cardinal vices of ἀβλεψία, διττογραφία, et id genus omne, in a
doctrine of ἐμβλήματα, or adscripts, is more than doubtful.
Cobet’s Novae Lectiones and Variae Lectiones will give num-
berless instances of the practical application of this principle.
Students will find in Dr Rutherford a strenuous advocate of the
doctrine of adscripts, but for a more temperate discussion of
the question may be referred to the introductory remarks of
Professors Tucker and Goodhart prefixed to their respective
editions of Bk. vill. (See Tucker, p. xxiii. sqq., Goodhart, xxvi.
544.)

But, in expunging a supposed ἔμβλημα we may be uncon-
sciously extirpating a Thucydidean characteristic. Thucydides’
own regard for accuracy not infrequently underlies apparent
repetitions or pleonasms. The ἦθος τοῦ γράφοντος, his very love
of variety, is at once a help and a hindrance when we come to
compare the author with himself: there is no stereotyping the
phraseology of Thucydides. Why, for instance, does he always
write μᾶλλον ἢ πρότερον, and yet leave οὐδὲν ἧσσον without sup-
plement? Who shall decide to what extent Thucydides’ own
πολύνους βραχυλογία is or is not responsible for such additions?
Who shall determine when and where the writer is to express
himself at length or in brief? Are all articular epexegeses to
disappear, all explanatory parentheses to be rejected ?

The absence of any principle of determination (except in the
case of such obvious errors as appeal to ordinary judgment) can
only result in giving a wider scope to the judgment of the
individual. From the same materials different scholars will
produce different results, different palaeographists will elicit
different readings. Is it not fresh within the memory of some
how a certain savant evolved a legend from that which proved
to be merely a representation of the feet of men and horses
broken off from the upper portion of the stone?

In point of etymology, the difficulties of itacism, of Ionism,
and doubtful spellings still remain to a certain extent. In-
scriptions have their use, but the spelling of the stonemason is
not infallible, whether in ancient or modern times. Again, may
not the difficulties of the scribe have been largely increased by

INTRODUCTION. Xlil

the pronunciation (or mispronunciation) of a reader? The
constant confusions between τὴν and τιν, ε and εἰ, and the like,
would point to such an element of disturbance. Indeed, palaeo-
graphy, in some ways, serves to the scholar the function of the
microscope to the physician: it reveals in greater intensity the
infinite possibilities of corruption only to shew the impossibility
of successfully overcoming the difficulty.

That much practical advantage can result from further col-
lation of the existing MSS. of Thucydides is highly problematical.
For my own part, I incline to the opinion that more is to be
looked for from the study of Ionisms and examination of the
works of Thucydidean imitators. So far at least, Thucydides
has suffered not a little at the hands of those learned editors
(quos honoris causa nomino), who have endeavoured to correct
his sentences by the application of their ‘ fluent Atticism.’

THE LIFE AND CHARACTER OF THUCYDIDES.

Our knowledge of the life of Thucydides is derived from the
scanty facts supplied by himself, supplemented by tradition or
inferences drawn from his own statements. All that he tells us
himself amounts to thus much: (1) his father’s name was Olorus
(Iv. 104); (2) he survived the close of the Peloponnesian war,
aio Oavopevos Te TH ἡλικίᾳ Kal προσέχων THY γνώμην ὅπως ἀκριβές
τε εἴσομαι (V. 26); (3) he was appointed to a command, as one
of the ten strategi, in the year 424 B.C.; (4) in consequence of
the loss of Amphipolis he was an exile for twenty years (V. 26).
Beyond this, with the single exception of the fact that he not
only witnessed the ravages of the plague, but was also himself
stricken, he tells us nothing.

His birth probably took place somewhere between 471 and
456 B.c.: Unger would place it as late as 450. His death, as he
makes no mention of the famous eruption of Etna which Dio-
dorus assigns to the year 396, is assumed to have occurred
before that date.

Out of much that is problematical Unger accepts the follow-
ing particulars: (1) that Thucydides married a wealthy woman

Ss. T. ε

XIV INTRODUCTION.

from Σκαπτὴ ὕλη ; (2) that he was accused of treason by Cleon,
and spent many years in exile in Thrace ; (3) that he was granted
permission to return to Athens on the proposal of Oenobius ;
(4) that he died a natural death in Thrace, probably at his place
of exile; (5) that the sepulchral monument at Athens, to which
we find allusions made, was only a cenotaph. Whether his
exile was voluntary—as in the case of Demosthenes, III. 98, and
Pythodorus and Sophocles, Iv. 68—or not, we have no means
of determining. Of his being brought to trial on any specific
charge we have no record: whether his recall was sanctioned
by special vote, or due to some general amnesty, or the simple
result of the expiration of his term of banishment, we are
powerless to decide.

It needs small critical sagacity to reject some of the state-
ments of the so-called ‘lives’ or to disparage others ; e.g. the
story of Thucydides being moved to tears by the recitation of
Herodotus, his seeking refuge with Archelaus, his grinding the
faces of the Aeginetans! as a usurer, or composing his history
beneath a plane-tree. Apart from these lives, our only sources
of information are Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Plutarch, Pau-
sanias, and the Scholia.

The education of Thucydides was probably just that of the
wealthy young Athenian of his time. Tradition assigns to
Anaxagoras his instruction in philosophy and to Antiphon his
education in the art of rhetoric. Some confidently appeal to
Thucydides’ own words (VIII. 68) in proof of his devotion to a
master’s memory. But what evidence does this passage contain
of personal affection for the peAlynpus”Adpacros*? Philostratus
confidently asserts that Thucydides borrowed from Gorgias τὸ
μεγαλώνυμον καὶ τὴν ὀφρύν, and Spengel even sees proof of the
influence of Gorgias’ συνώνυμα. There is, of course, the proba-
bility that Thucydides did avail himself of Gorgias’ ὀρθοέπεια, as
well as of the theories of Protagoras, and that the presence of
Anaxagoras in Athens induced the young Athenian to seek the
philosophic guidance of the instructor of Pericles.

1 Forbes, Introduction to Thue. 1. p. xxis
2 Plato, Phaedrus, 269 A.

INTRODUCTION. XV

Independently of the allusion to Antiphon in VIII. 68, and a
certain reflection of his style observable in Thucydides, nothing
is more probable than that the historian availed himself of the
instruction of the first Aoyoypados of his day. We know, by
tradition at least, that Antiphon established a school in which
the art of rhetoric was formally taught, and that, in accordance
with the prevailing practice of the day, he wrote a τέχνη or
‘system of rhetoric.’ He also is credited with having been the
first to commit speeches to writing, either to be delivered from
memory by any litigant incapable of constructing a speech for
himself, or for the purpose of rendering the efforts of oratory
more accessible to the general public. The very fact of the
existence in Thucydides’ speeches of a certain number of
common topics points to the influence of a master who was
an adept in the employment of such commonplaces}.

The extent to which Thucydides played any active part in
public life it is impossible from his own writings to determine.
That he was at least in touch with practical politics is sufficiently
attested by his election as strategus. At the same time there is
reason to believe that his private interests in Thrace may have
largely interfered with his residence at Athens. The greater
portion of the first seven years of the war he probably spent in
the city, but whether his presence there during the visitation of
the plague is to be referred to any public engagements is ex-
tremely doubtful. He was, in all likelihood, an eyewitness of
the Mytilenean debate and present at the discussion about Pylus.
It is further suggested that he may have taken part in Phormio’s
expedition, which he describes with much minuteness of detail
(11. 80—92), or served with Demosthenes in Aetolia and Acar-
nania (III. 94). The period of leisure afforded by his exile was
probably spent in visiting Sicily, Italy, and the islands.

The character of the master seems strongly reflected in his
great pupil. As we find Antiphon? never, if he could avoid it,
taking part in any public contest, though willing to render service

1 The recurrence of such common topics in the speeches of Thucy-
dides is remarkable.

2 Thue. vitt. 68 § 1.

€2

Xvi INTRODUCTION.

when his advice was sought, so we find Thucydides not chal-
lenging public attention, not pushing his way to the front, but
ready at the call of duty to serve his country’s need. True to
the self-containment of his nature, his role would appear to have
been eminently that of a σώφρων, a self-contained man, one who
could watch the heat of a debate or forecast the issues of a
proposal with as calm a judgment and as keen an eye as he
could note defects of drill or discipline on the field of battle! or
anticipate the results of a tactical or strategical move. Holding
as he did an independent middle course between oligarchy
and democracy, he could naturally make his influence felt as a
σωφρονιστής, whether of high-handed δυνατοί or progressive δη-
μοτικοί. From this point of view we shall naturally assign to
Thucydides a place in the ranks of of μέσοι τῶν πολιτῶν, the
fraternity of those who loved the δημόθρους ἀναρχία as little as
they affected the παρανομία οὐ δημοτική, lovers of their country
and constitution, yet not blind to its defects, regardful, not only
of the laws of Athens as binding Athenians, but also of the prin-
ciples of justice and equity in their more extended relations to
their fellow-men.

Yet amidst much which suggests the soundest political
morality, we are now and again confronted by suggestions
of hardness and cynicism. Might is right ; justice is expe-
diency and expediency is justice; providence is on the side
of the big battalions ; the one guarantee of good faith is τὸ avri-
παλον δέος ; the tendency whether of gods or men is to assert
their rule; at times he even condescends to sophistry, e.g.
11. 64 ὃ 4. But this is more than compensated by the high
views the historian takes of duty, self-sacrifice, self-respect, gene-
rosity, the true relation of the individual to the state and of the
citizen to the law, and of the human being to the unwritten
principles of humanity.

The charge of atheism against Thucydides rests on as slender
ground as that of want of patriotism. It must not be forgotten
that the free speculations of Ionian and Eleatic philosophers

i Thuc, v.71.

INTRODUCTION. ΧΡ

had not been without effect upon the religious feeling of Hellas,
Heraclitus had fallen foul of Homeric myths, comedians had
travestied gods and derided heroes, δῖνος was king!, and the place
of Zeus knew him no more. By the time of Pericles ancient
creeds had been severely shaken : what wonder then that Thu-
cydides should have rebelled against a ‘deus ex machina,’ or,
like Protagoras?, ‘set gods on one side whether they be or not’?
Indeed, in Thucydides, we see the revolt of a penetrating intellect
against an unreasoning superstition: unlike Herodotus, he is not
content with θεῖόν τι or δαιμόνιόν τι, or even a θεός. On the
contrary, he seeks to trace natural effects to natural causes. His
sober judgment discards all miracles and prodigies, although
natural phenomena evidently impress him; oracles he can
expound for himself and can appreciate at their true value these
πολυεπεῖς τέχναι. Yet. he is not regardless of rites and cere-
monies, and is keenly alive to the respect due to the dead%,
Again and again in Thucydides we are called upon to recog-

nise the principle that God helps him who helps himself, that
man is for himself the architect of his own fortunes. But,
though so fully alive to the capacities of human intellect and its
power of will, he still recognises a κρεῖσσόν τι, ἃ παράλογος τοῦ
βίου (VIII. 24), a τύχη which man cannot control, an undefined
cause, but still a cause. This τύχη is not the mere ‘ destiny’ of
Herodotus, but a τύχη ἐκ τοῦ θείου (V. 104). The perversity of
human nature he freely acknowledges, but while admitting this
weak element he finds in τὸ σῶφρον a safeguard against the
delusive effects of ἔρως and ἐλπίς. The dangers of unexpected
prosperity, the uncertainties of fortune, are clearly set forth to
impress on us the necessity of limiting our aspirations by our
means, of avoiding arrogance, and accepting as inevitable the
common lot of mankind. Beneath the historian lies the philo-
sophic μεσότης of the powerful thinker. There is a divine
justice, but that justice does not of necessity intervene in all
cases; there is a κρεῖσσόν te which ‘shapes our ends,’ but

1 Aristoph. Nub. 380.

3 Plato, Theaet. 162 D.

8 See further, Forbes, Introdn. p. xxiy.

xvill INTRODUCTION.

none can reckon on its favour. The strife of opposites still
continues in the mind of the historian, but is controlled by ἃ.
calmness of judgment which nearly approaches the perfect
ἐποχή of a Stoic.

Now it is just this marvellous self-repression, this admirable
self-containment, which has gained for Thucydides the character
of inhuman and unsympathetic. With what injustice is evident
to all who know his writings. Has he no word of pity for
the undeserved misfortunes of Nicias, for the wretched rem-
nants of the great Athenian army in the quarries of Syracuse,
for the victims at Mycalessus or Corcyra? Does his language
suggest no sympathy with the worn and wearied Spartans at
Sphacteria ἢ

True, he is no sentimentalist, with ready tears at command,
but the very tone of his narrative will frequently tell us what his
real feelings were, whether admiration, indignation or pity. The
brutalities of ancient warfare would naturally have a hardening
effect, and in a man of such absolute self-command sympathy is
all the more valuable for its very rarity.

Just fifty years ago F. W. Ullrich promulgated his own
theory of the composition of Thucydides’ history. It is as
follows : on the conclusion of the peace of Nicias which termi-
nated the first ten years of the war, Thucydides began to commit
his work to writing. The first, second, third, and first half of
the fourth book, he wrote in exile without knowledge of the
later events of the war. Towards the middle of the fourth book
he broke off his task to await further developments, making pre-
paration meanwhile for its completion by collecting facts and
prosecuting enquiries. Finally, after a break of some ten or
eleven years (from the outbreak of the Decelean war to his
recall) he resumed his narrative.

Classen, on the other hand, holds that the eight books as
we have them were committed to writing after the close of the
twenty-seven years’ war from notes and observations made
during the whole course of its duration, but that all parts of the
work did not receive equally careful revision. While Ullrich’s
theory is accepted by Steup, Cwiklinski, Miiller-Striibing and

INTRODUCTION. XIX

others, Stahl, Kriiger, and Herbst incline to Classen’s theory.
The last, in an article of great power (Philologus, Vol. XX XVIII),
contends that Thucydides divided the war into three periods ;

(1) The ten years’ war to the peace of Nicias.

(2) The period of doubtful peace.

(3) The last seven years, from the fresh outbreak to the
war’s end.

He further maintains that Thucydides composed his history
in the years following the close of the twenty-seven years’ war,
that in Books 11., 111. and Iv. (to chap. 23) he deals with the ten
years’ war only, but with full knowledge of the events of later
years.

THE PREDECESSORS OF THUCYDIDES.

First in the list of Greek historians comes Cadmus of Mile-
tus, the author of a κτίσις Μιλήτου, based on oral traditions and
local myths. His date would be about B.c. 540. Next comes
Acusilaus of Argos, a Dorian by descent, although he used the
Ionic dialect. He was really a compiler of legends, not a his-
torian at all; he was succeeded by Hecataeus of Miletus, the
author of a περίοδος γῆς, as well as of a work called ‘histories’
or ‘genealogies.’ He was a great traveller, and is now and
again cited and corrected by Herodotus’, who, in one place,
indulges in a boyish fling at Hecataeus’ family tree. After
Hecataeus comes Pherecydes of Leros, about the time of the
Persian war; he also dealt largely with myths. Fifth is Charon,
of Lampsacus, who continued the researches of Hecataeus, and
wrote an account of the Persian war—not mentioned by Hero-
dotus. Sixth comes Hellanicus of Mytilene, almost a con-
temporary of Herodotus, sixty years of age at the outbreak of
the Peloponnesian war. He was the author of the ‘ Priestesses
of Hera of Argos,’ a list of victors in the Spartan Carneia, and
accounts of Persia, Phoenicia, and Egypt. Seventh on the list
comes Xanthus, a contemporary of Hellanicus, a Lydian, who
wrote in Ionic, and is quoted by Strabo and Dionysius of
Halicarnassus.

ἘΞ ΉῊΝΕ 11 Χ15.

xx INTRODUCTION.

Of all these λογόγραφοι, the works of Hecataeus would pre-
sumably have been of paramount importance, if preserved,
although it is with Hellanicus’ early history of Hellas that
Thucydides has most in common. As for the rest, the fragments!
preserved to us present foolish stories of a bitch giving birth to
a stump, of a glutton who ate his own wife—apparently in sleep,
for he woke to find his wife’s hand in his throat—of dancing
horses utilised for purposes of warfare. Although in Hecataeus
we see a rationalising tendency, e.g. to explain Cerberus as a
great serpent inhabiting Taenarum, yet to the majority the
words of Dionysius may well apply, ‘they are full of local tradi-
tions, fables and tragic catastrophes (θεατρικαὶ περιπέτειαι). All
affect the same style, concise, appropriate, devoid of rhetorical
artifices, but not without its charm.’

But it is in Herodotus that we first detect a distinct advance
upon his predecessors Hellanicus and Charon, the first signs
of that πραγματικὴ ioropia—the practical adaptation of historical
research—the development of which, although stimulated by
Thucydides, was reserved for the days of the later literature of
ancient times.

‘Herodotus, to quote Dionysius, ‘has the advantage of
Thucydides both in his choice of a subject (a κοινὴ ἱστορία), and
in his ἀρχή (the Persian aggressions). Thucydides is at fault
both in his selection of an ἀρχή (the misfortunes of Hellas) and
his τέλος (Cynossema). In Herodotus we get relief from time
to time, in Thucydides we have only μάχη ἐπὶ μάχῃ; παρασκευὴ ἐπὶ
παρασκευῇ. Again, in the mere order of his narrative, Thucy-
dides χρόνοις ἀκολουθεῖ (cp. Thuc. V. 26), whereas Herodotus
follows ταῖς περιοχαῖς τῶν πραγμάτων." In point of style he regards
Thucydides as the more concise, though both are equally ex-
plicit (ἐναργεῖς) ; Thucydides is the more ‘pathetic,’ but Hero-
dotus a better delineator of character ; Thucydides is the more
impressive, Herodotus the more enjoyable ; Herodotus is more
natural in expression, Thucydides the more skilful: in short

1 Partly in fragments of the authors themselves, partly in quotations,
e.g. in Athenaeus.

INTRODUCTION. Xxl

the main distinction is that Herodotus’ style is cheerful (ἱλαρός),
Thucydides’ sombre (φοβερός). This ancient critic, while taking
no exception to the general testimony to Thucydides’ accuracy
and impartiality, yet sees signs of a resentful temperament (διά-
θεσις πικρὰ καὶ τῇ πατρίδι τῆς φυγῆς μνησικακοῦσα) ; for instance,
all Athenian reverses he duly records with great minuteness of
detail, whereas successes he dismisses with the briefest notice.
His great defect lies in the handling of the material at his
disposal (τὸ οἰκονομικόν). He is constantly interrupting his
narrative, e.g. the siege of Plataea, which breaks off short at II.
78, is not continued until 111. 20; his chronological method is
peculiar to himself; his tendency is to exaggerate trivial things
and to ignore the gravity of more important matters; e.g. con-
trast 11. 85—95 with I. 100; his descriptions fluctuate between
pathos and triviality ; he is inconsistent ; e.g. to the victims of
a βραχεῖα ἱππομαχία he devotes a lengthy oration (the funeral
speech of Pericles), whereas to the memory of those who fell at
Pylus he pays no tribute, although that victory brought Sparta
on her knees to Athens.

He further credits Thucydides with the choice of an archaic
and figurative style, although some regard this archaic style as
appropriate to the dignity of history; in choice of words he
affects γλῶσσαι (obsolete expressions) and πεποιημένα ; his com-
position is severe, sententious, condensed, and figurative to a
degree. He is always polishing and hammering out; some-
times the sentence becomes one word, sometimes one word
expands into a sentence ; the verbal form replaces the nominal
or the nominal the verbal ; actives are interchanged with pas-
Sives: singulars are confounded with plurals, feminines with
masculines, neuters with either, to the great disturbance of the
natural train of thought ; substantival and participial inflexions
he treats either πρὸς τὸ σημαῖνον or πρὸς TO σημαινόμενον, Con-
necting particles and prepositions he handles with all a poet’s
freedom. His alteration of persons, his interchange of tenses,
as well as of the ordinary meaning of words, are apparently
solecisms. He gives us ‘res pro persona’ and ‘ persona pro re,’
he disturbs the sequence of thought by parentheses and by

xxii INTRODUCTION.

needless involutions and complications. Rhetorical figures
(carried to excess by Gorgias, Polus and Licymnius) abound.
His four great devices (pyava) are : (1) τὸ ποιητικὸν τῶν ὀνομάτων,
(2) τὸ πολυειδὲς τῶν σχημάτων, (3) τὸ τραχὺ τῆς ἁρμονίας, (4) τὸ
τάχος τῆς σημασίας. His characteristics (ypdmara=features) are
τὸ στρυφνόν (stiffness), τὸ πυκνόν (closeness), τὸ αὐστηρόν (a dry
precision), τὸ ἐμβριθές (gravity), τὸ δεινόν, τὸ φοβερόν, and especi-
ally τὸ παθητικόν.

But most characteristic of him is his condensation, his
endeavour to compress in brief much thought, thus leaving his
reader unsatisfied, expecting more—hence obscurity results.

But in his speeches his natural power is most clearly shewn,
although in spite of their originality we see a lack of artistic
development : these, like his narrative, are marred by γλῶσσαι
and λέξεις πεποιημέναι as well as by needless involutions of con-
struction. He is at his best when he deviates least from
common phraseology, at his worst when he allows τὰ ξένα καὶ
βεβιασμένα καὶ ἀνακόλουθα to intrude. What motive had he for
this affected style, for which we find no parallel even in Anti-
phon? Was it merely to outdo others (rod διαλλάσσειν) "Ὁ Yet,
continues Dionysius, so long as he keeps within reasonable
limits, he is simply incomparable (οὐδὲ συγκριτικός).

In this critique there is much that is judicious and to the
point ; but when Dionysius proceeds to attack the historical
method of Thucydides, to analyse his vocabulary, to reconstruct
his syntax, and rewrite his sentences, he then betrays his in-
accuracy and incompetence. His quotations are incorrect, and
his grammatical analysis is inexact; ordinary grammatical
liberties, such as collective expressions, or middle uses of pas-
sive perfects, or the substitution of intransitive verbs for passive,
provoke his displeasure ; case uses he does not discriminate, the
significance of words he fails to distinguish, and by his proposed
corrections emasculates his author. The charge of inconsistency
which he brings against the writer recoils upon the critic him-
self, when we find him reproducing in his own works the very
forms of expression he condemns, All these treatises betray to
a strange extent that ἀπαιδευσία and βραχύτης γνώμης which a

INTRODUCTION. XXill

study of Thucydides should have led him to avoid. ‘The
treatise of Dionysius,’ says Professor Jowett, ‘throws a striking
light on the narrow and feeble intelligence of the Graeco-Roman
rhetorician and historian of the first century B.c. and of the age
for which he wrote.’ Even the sober Poppo is roused into the
exclamation ‘pro hominem balbutientem et caecutientem !’

The style of Thucydides is essentially his own, whether in
respect of diction or construction. As contrasted with Hero-
dotus, we see at once the transition from the λέξις εἰρομένη to the
λέξις κατεστραμμένη in process. The simple connected sentence
of Herodotus with its poetical wealth of particles, its smooth
Ionic vowel-system, gives place to a semi-periodic sentence, a
subordination of parataxis to hypotaxis, which, nevertheless,
instead of discarding absolutely the old coordination retains it
with greater variety of features.

In the choice of words, Thucydides’ extreme precision led
him, like Antiphon, to select a certain number of words and
phrases from the old Ionic vocabulary, and to combine with
such ὀρθοέπεια Prodicus’ use of synonyms.

Even in the order of words we see the master mind subordi-
nating to its dictates the ordinary usage of language: e.g.

(1) the accusative precedes, emphasizing by its position!
the principal object of the sentence, striking, as it were, the
key-note to the whole: cp. III. 15, ὃ I καὶ τὴν ἐς ᾿Αττικὴν ἐσβολήν
K.T.A.

(2) the genitive is placed before the noun on which it
depends ; or the objective genitive may stand between the pre-
position and the noun on which it depends: e.g. III. 23 διὰ τοῦ
χειμῶνος τὸ μέγεθος.

(3) two clauses closely related, e.g. two objects of the same
verb connected by a copula, are separated by some other word
of importance : e.g. I. 69, § 4 οὐ τῇ δυνάμει τινὰ ἀλλὰ TH μελλήσει
ἀμυνόμενοι.

(4) the ‘initial’ use of the dative: e.g. Vv. 3, ὃ 4 καὶ αὐτοῖς
τὸ μὲν Πελοποννήσιον ἀπῆλθεν k.T.X.

1 Classen, Introduction ᾿χχχὶ. 566.

XXIV INTRODUCTION.

(5) an adverbial expression is retained until the end of the
sentence, either for emphasis or connexion: e.g. 1. 77, ὃ 5 ἡ δὲ
ἡμετέρα ἀρχὴ χαλεπὴ δοκεῖ εἶναι εἰκότως τὸ παρὸν yap ἀεὶ βαρὺ τοῖς
πολεμίοις : SO also an adjective, e.g. I. 16, § 1 ἀξιόλογον, the εἰ
py Clause being parenthetical.

(6) a logical connexion supersedes the grammatical: e.g.
III. 39, ὃ 2 pera τῶν πολεμιωτάτων ἡμᾶς στάντες διαφθεῖραι, Or, Vice
versa, the grammatical supersedes the logical, e.g. 1. 35, ὃ 4 ἣν
ov δίκαιον k.T.d.

To meet the requirements of his τάχος τῆς σημασίας, observe
how Thucydides uses enallage of moods or tenses, coordination
of different cases, clauses, and constructions, as with the con-
struction πρὸς τὸ σημαινόμενον. As compared with Antiphon,
whose style he is held most closely to reflect, both are cited as
masters of the αὐστηρὸς χαρακτήρ, Or αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία, i.e. ‘a clear
and definite mode of expressing a clear and definite conception!’
—a style all the more vigorous from its very freshness and power,
although wanting in the fluency which results from practice.
Both are remarkable for ἀκριβολογία, accuracy of expression ;
witness the distinction of κριταί from δοξασταί, of γνωρισταί from
δικασταί (Ant. Herod. ὃ 94), of ἀπόστασις from ἐπανάστασις (III.
39, § 2), the analysis of ἔλεος and ἐπιείκεια (11. 40, ὃ 3). In
both the tendency to λέξις ἀντικειμένη is strong ; e.g. in the free
use of sentences connected by μέν...δέ, καί,..καί, re...kal, ἤ...ἤ.
Both prefer a consecutive form of sentence, copulative, disjunc-
tive, or adversative, to a combination of principal and subordi-
nate clauses. In Antiphon especially symmetry (σύνθεσις évap-
μόνιος) is the leading feature of many sentences; although the
use of this device frequently results in the sacrifice of coherence
of thought to mere paronomasia or parechesis: cf. Ant. Her.
§ 91 ἀπολῦσαι... ἀπολέσαι, with Thuc. Iv. 61 εὐπρεπώς ἄδικοι...
εὐλόγως ἄπρακτοι. The rhetor Caecilius credits Antiphon with
freer use of figures of speech than of figures of thought, the
latter being, in his judgment, of more rare occurrence, and
unpremeditated even when they do occur. Such figures of
thought display themselves in climax, aposiopesis, ἀπορία, μετά-

1 Miiller’s Lit, of Greece, 11. 108.

INTRODUCTION. XXV

νοια, ἀνάκλασις. But such display of feeling ill accords with the
self-contained style of Antiphon or Thucydides: in the latter
we have only one instance of a rhetorical burst of feeling, πῶς
ov δεινὰ εἴργασθε, 111. 66, § 2.

Thucydides makes free use of the descending and ascending
period alike: in the one, the result is placed first in the sentence,
the cause or motive being expressed by causal sentences, cir-
cumstantial participles, prepositional constructions, or coordi-
nations of the loosest kind : in the other the process is reversed :
cf. Thuc. I. 1 Θουκυδίδης ξυνέγραψε with I. 2 τῆς yap ἐμπορίας
kA. Such a style is difficult to follow, and may be simplified
either by adopting Dionysius’ suggestion of transferring the
subordinate clauses from the middle of the sentence to the end,
thus forming an appendix, or by resolving the continuous sen-
tence into separate short clauses: but the one expedient destroys
the vigour of the sentence, the other disturbs the unity of the
thought.

Antiphon differs from Thucydides :

(1) in collocation of particles: οὗ... ἐνταυθοῖ, καί πού τε, ὅμως
μέντοι γε, αὐτίκα (exempli gratia), ἦ καὶ πάνυ τοι; τοῦτο μέν...τοῦτο
δέ.

(2) in words : βλάβος, μερίς, φάρμακον (metaphorical), βαρυδαι-
μονία, καταδοχθείς, ἐπίθεσις, εἰκότερον, διαγνώμων (adj.), ἀναποκρίτως,
ἐπίδοξος.

(3) in inflexions : e.g. οἴδαμεν, ἔφησε.

(4) in constructions : ὅπως ἄν with optative, I. § 17. ὡς for
ὥστε, 1. ὃ 28, Her. ὃ 63. οὐ πρότερον...ἢ ποιήσωνται, Tetral. A. a.
§ 2. οἷόν τε ἦν αὐτῇ σωθῖναι, 1. § 8. ἀρκοῦσά ἐστι (for ἀρκεῖ)
unless we treat ἀρκοῦσα as purely adjectival. See Thuc. II.
44, § 2.

Antiphon agrees with Thucydides :

(1) in construction : e.g. of ἐνθυμεῖσθαι with genitive, διαχρή-
σασθαι with accus., ἐπεξιέναι with accus. (Ant. I. § 11).

(2) in straining the dative: e.g. τούτῳ τῷ λόγῳ διισχυρίζεται;
Her. ὃ 32. οὐ τῷ φεύγειν ἄν, Her. καὶ 8.

(3) in modal enallages: e.g. Ant. I. § 4 ἔλθῃ...ποιήσεται.

ΧΧΥῚ INTRODUCTION.

Tetral. IT. a. ὃ 4 εἰ διώκοιμεν... ἕξομεν. Tetral. A. a. ὃ 10 εἶεν ἄν...
ei ἐλέγχονται.

(4) in false coordination: e.g. κακοῦργος ἀπέφυγον... ἀλλ᾽ ov
τοῦ φόνου τὴν δίκην, Her. ὃ 16. ἀπέκτειναν τὸν μηνυτὴν οὔτε τῆς
πόλεως ψηφισαμένης οὔτε αὐτόχειρα ὄντα, Her. § 47.

(5) in the use of ἐν ᾧ (realistic) without ἄν, cf. Her. § 43.

5 » Of ev ᾧ μή, Her. ὃ 28.
3 » Of ὅπου ὁπότε, ὅς adversative, and ὃ δέ intro-
ductory.

(6) in forcing the use of the epexegetic infinitive: e.g. αἴτιος
ἢ πεμφθῆναι ἄγγελον, Her. ὃ 23.

(7) in special phrases : ἐπιφέρειν αἰτίαν, Her. ὃ 38. αἴσθησιν
ποιεῖν (παρέχειν Th.). ἐν ἐλπίδι εἶναι, Tetral. A. y. ὃ 6. τὸ θυμού-
μενον τῆς γνώμης...κιτ.λ.

Professor Jebb holds the cardinal points of distinction be-
tween Thucydides and Antiphon to be that,

(1) Thucydides’ tendency is to a more pregnant brevity.

(2) he affects, with a view to emphasis, peculiar arrangement
of words.

(3) he comprises within the compass of a single sentence a
greater number of clauses, in order to present in one view the
complex thought.

See Jebb, Attic Orators, I. 18—44.

Yet, amidst all these ‘terrible shadows’ of Thucydides, we
catch now and again a glimpse of sunlight flitting across the
page. The lion has his gentler moods!. The legend of Tereus
(11. 29) and the story of Harmodius and Aristogeiton (VI. 54—57)
are striking instances of his lighter style of narrative; while in
the speech of the Plataeans (III. 53—59) he has left us an
admirable example of simple and pathetic oratory.

Some indeed, and those not a few, would claim for the
speeches the place of honour. But, well as they may serve
the purpose of emphasizing any serious political conjuncture,
admirably as they reflect the ἦθος τοῦ λέγοντος, it can hardly be
said that in these rhetorical efforts Thucydides is seen at his

1 ἐγέλασεν ὁ λέων.

INTROD UCTION. XXVil

best. Those however who look for clearness of argument,
nervous strength of diction, or incisive power of retort, will
find all these and something more—they will find ‘writ large’
the lesson of democratic brutality, of oligarchic mala fides, of
diplomatic shiftiness and over-reaching astuteness. From more
than one passage will they realise for themselves the true
relation of the subject allies to the τύραννος πόλις to whom
nothing was just that was not expedient, nothing unreasonable
that served its end}.

The credibility of Thucydides has of late years been much
questioned, e.g. in his account of the Peisistratids”, the revolu-
tion of the Four Hundred’, the Lesbian revolt*, the Corcyraean
civil war®, and the assessment of Thera and Melos®. His
account of the Plataean siege? has been condemned as incon-
sistent and unintelligible, on questions of topography and
chronology he is alleged to be at fault, and furthermore is
condemned as controverting the evidence of inscriptions.
Kirchhoff indeed contends that one particular inscription®
points to no less than thirty-one variations between the record
of the stone and Bekker’s text of Thucydides; on what slender
ground, may be realised by reference to Jowett’s Thucydides,
vol. II. p. 311.

In deciding the question of the historian’s credibility, due
allowance must be made for his sources of information®. Of
his veracity and strict impartiality small doubt remains.
Whatever his demerits as a historian, whether in omission or
exaggeration, or in lacking sense of due proportion, his
supremacy as a writer remains unchallenged.

VI. 85.

VI. 54—57, and Aristotle (?) AQ. Πολ, 18.
VIII, 67 sqq.

III. 2 sqq.

Ill. 70 544.

II. 8, 111. ΟἹ.

II. 75 sqq., III. 20 546:

ν. 47.

Holm, Hist. Gr. 11. 461.

eweonrdr’seaauwnrk ὦ wy "

ABBREVIATIONS.

The letters A, B, C, E, F, G, M refer to the mss. as enumerated
in Introduction p. ix.

J. represents the Junta edition of 1526.
A. J. P.=American Journal of Philology.

Bad. = Badham.

Bek. = Bekker.

Boh. = Bohme.

Cl. = Classen.

Cob. =Cobet.

Dobr. =Dobree.

Duk. = Duker.

Goll. =Géoller.

Her. =van Herwerden.
Hud. =Hude.

Kriig. =Kriiger.
Madv. =Madvig.
Mein. = Meineke.
Nab. = Naber.

Popp. =Poppo.
Rauch. =Rauchenstein.
Rk. S. =Shilleto.

St. =Stahl.
Valckn. = Valckeniar,

GOYRYAIAOY 2 YPFPACH= T.

/
I. ΤΟΥ͂ δ᾽ ἐπιγωυγνομένου θέρους Πελοποννήσιοι 5.6.
ΝΣ “ ay > ΄ 2 , 428
καὶ οἱ ξύμμαχοι ἅμα τῷ σίτῳ ἀκμάζοντι ἐστράτευσαν
> x ’ i € a N > “Ὁ > / ¢
és τὴν ᾿Αττικήν" ἡγεῖτο δὲ αὐτῶν ᾿Αρχίδαμος ὁ Ζευ-
,
ξιδάμου Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλεύς. καὶ ἐγκαθεζόμενοι
> “ \ a \ / vA 7/7
ἐδήουν τὴν γῆν: καὶ προσβολαί, ὥσπερ εἰώθεσαν,
- / / 7
ἐγίγνοντο τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ἱππέων ὅπῃ παρείκοι, καὶ
\ lal dA lal nN 3 \ \ /
TOV πλεῖστον ὕμίλον TOV ψιλῶν εἶργον TO μὴ προεξιόν-
lal \ an / lal
Tas τῶν ὅπλων τὰ ἐγγὺς τῆς πόλεως κακουργεῖν.
- \ > ,
ἐμμείναντες δὲ χρόνον οὗ εἶχον τὰ σιτία ἀνεχώρησαν 2
Ν \ ,
καὶ διελύθησαν κατὰ πόλεις.
II. Μετὰ δὲ τὴν ἐσβολὴν τῶν Ἰ]ελοποννησίων
7 ? Ξ
εὐθὺς Λέσβος πλὴν Μηθύμνης ἀπέστη ἀπ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίων,
βουληθέντες μὲν καὶ πρὸ τοῦ πολέμου, GAN οἱ Λακε-
δαιμόνιοι οὐ προσεδέξαντο, ἀναγκασθέντες δὲ καὶ ταύτην
\ > Ud * lal
τὴν ἀπόστασιν πρότερον ἢ διενοοῦντο ποιήσασθαι.
ἴω , fal fal f
τῶν τε γὰρ λιμένων τὴν χῶσιν καὶ τειχῶν οἰκοδόμησιν 2
fal ,ὔ lol a
Kal νεῶν ποίησιν ἐπέμενον τελεσθῆναι, καὶ ὅσα ἐκ TOU

CuHap. I. § 1. οἱ Πελοπ. Herbst.—eipyov διά C, perhaps, Hude
suggests, from corruption of 6’ αὐτὸ μή into διὰ τὸ μή resulting in
omission of διά ; cf. Iv. 55 § 4. With the exception of vi. 1 ὃ 2 there
is no other example in Thuc. of εἴργειν followed by τὸ μή with infinitive
(Hude, Comm. Crit. p. 1). διὰ τό G, either a gloss, or an attempt
to explain accusative, or a confusion with τοῦ μή.

§ 2. ὅσου Nab. ὅτου Kr.

Sp ate ry

2 GOOTKTAIAOT

/ / lal) ε
Πόντου ἔδει ἀφικέσθαι, τοξότας τε καὶ σῖτον, καὶ ἃ
/ n
3 μεταπεμπόμενοι ἦσαν. Τενέδιοι yap ὄντες αὐτοῖς διά-
φοροι καὶ Μηθυμναῖοι, καὶ αὐτῶν Μυτιληναίων ἰδίᾳ
” \ / / > / \ /
ἄνδρες Kata στάσιν, πρόξενοι ᾿Αθηναίων, μηνυταὶ yiy-
vovtat τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις ὅτι ξυνοικίζουσί τε τὴν Λέσβον
> \ M λ' , Bi \ \ \ “
ἐς τὴν Μυτιλήνην βίᾳ, καὶ τὴν παρασκευὴν ἅπασαν
μετὰ Λακεδαιμονίων καὶ Βοιωτῶν ξυγγενῶν ὄντων ἐπὶ
ἀποστάσει ἐπείγονται" καὶ εἰ μή τις προκαταλήψεται
> \ οἱ r
ἤδη, στερήσεσθαι αὐτοὺς Λέσβου. III. οἱ δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖοι
¢ a n
(ἦσαν yap τεταλαιπωρημένοι ὑπό TE τῆς νόσου καὶ τοῦ
πολέμου ἄρτι καθισταμένου καὶ ἀκμάζοντος) μέγα μὲν
” ες a s / ,
ἔργον ἡγοῦντο εἶναι Λέσβον προσπολεμώσασθαι vav-
τικὸν ἔχουσαν καὶ δύναμιν ἀκέραιον, καὶ οὐκ ἀπεδέχοντο
πρῶτον τὰς κατηγορίας, μεῖζον μέρος νέμοντες τῷ μὴ
/ 3 n = ’ Ἂν; , \ /
βούλεσθαι ἀληθῆ εἶναι" ἐπειδὴ μέντοι καὶ πέμψαντες
> ” \ / ,
πρέσβεις οὐκ ἔπειθον τοὺς Μυτιληναίους τήν τε ξυ-
\
νοίκισιν Kal THY παρασκευὴν διαλύειν, δείσαντες προ-
a > ΄ \ ΄ 5 ΄,
2 καταλαβεῖν ἐβούλοντο. καὶ πέμπουσιν ἐξαπιναίως
τεσσαράκοντα ναῦς al ἔτυχον περὶ Ἰ]ελοπόννησον
. / fal - / (
παρεσκευασμέναι mre: Κλεϊππίδης δὲ ὁ Δεινίου
3 τρίτος αὐτὸς ἐστρατήγει. ἐσηγγέλθη γὰρ αὐτοῖς ὡς
εἴη ᾿Απόλλωνος Μαλόεντος ἔξω τῆς πόλεως ἑορτή, ἐν
7 πανδημεὶ Μυτιληναῖοι ἑορτάζουσι, καὶ ἐλπίδα εἶναι
> / > al v \ Dy \ A «ς
ἐπειχθέντας ἐπιπεσεῖν ἄφνω": καὶ ἢν μὲν ξυμβῇ ἡ
a / a a
meipa,—et δὲ μή, Μυτιληναίοις εἰπεῖν ναῦς τε Tapa-
11. § 2. μεταπεπεμμένοι Cob. ; cf. 11. 78 ὃ 3 and Cob. V. L. 253.
Ill. § 13. τὸ πρῶτον G. § 2. Κλεινιππίδης, Diod. Sic. ΧΙ]. 55.
§ 3. αὐτοῖς om. F.—elvac om. E.—Badham (Mnem. VIII. 123)
fills in a large lacuna; Cobet ‘leniore remedio’ supplies one line of
MS. after ἄφνω, “ καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἐρῆμον οὖσαν KaradaBeiy.—Bad. obtains

construction for εἰπεῖν by supplying προσετάχθη οὖν αὐτοῖς. St. Cl.
Her. retain text.—7 πεῖρα del. Καὶ

EYTITPA®HS I. 3

nr \ δ “ \ , \ “
δοῦναι καὶ τείχη καθελεῖν, μὴ πειθομένων δὲ πολεμεῖν.
\ e \ fal v \ δὲ n M / δέ
καὶ αἱ μὲν νῆες ὥχοντο" τὰς δὲ τῶν Μυτιληναίων δέκα
, A \ \ n δὴ AS
τριήρεις, al ἔτυχον βοηθοὶ παρὰ σφᾶς κατὰ τὸ Evppa-
a a \ 7
χικὸν παροῦσαι, κατέσχον οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι καὶ τοὺς ἄνδρας
a , lal 4
ἐξ αὐτῶν és φυλακὴν ἐποιήσαντο. τοῖς δὲ Μυτιληναίοις
SN a A \ " \ A
ἀνὴρ ἐκ τῶν ᾿Αθηνῶν διαβὰς ἐς Εὔβοιαν καὶ πεζῇ ἐπὶ
/ > A
Γεραιστὸν ἐλθών, ὁλκάδος ἀναγομένης ἐπιτυχών, TAD
χρησάμενος καὶ τριταῖος ἐκ τῶν ᾿Αθηνῶν ἐς Μυτιλήνην
’ 4 > / \ 5 / e \ A ? \
αφικόμενος ἀγγέλλει τὸν ἐπίπλουν. οἱ δὲ οὔτε ἐς TOV
Μαλόεντα ἐξῆλθον, τά τε ἄλλα τῶν τειχῶν καὶ λιμένων
\ €
πέρι τὰ ἡμιτέλεστα φραξάμενοι ἐφύλασσον. IV. καὶ
oy a 9 Lo , Cs SON
οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ov πολὺ ὕστερον καταπλεύσαντες ὡς ἑώρων,
> ΄ \
ἀπήγγειλαν μὲν οἱ στρατηγοὶ Ta ἐπεσταλμένα, οὐκ
> / \ A fe > / ’
ἐσακουόντων δὲ τῶν Μυτιληναίων ἐς πόλεμον καθί-
» / \ e na \ 5 "}
σταντο. ἀπαράσκευοι δὲ οἱ Μυτιληναῖοι καὶ ἐξαίφνης
» / rn
ἀναγκασθέντες πολεμεῖν, ἔκπλουν μέν τινα ἐποιήσαντο
a a \ “ Ἂ
τῶν νεῶν ὡς ἐπὶ ναυμαχίᾳ ὀλίγον πρὸ τοῦ λιμένος,
/ “Ὁ Lal “Ὁ /
ἔπειτα καταδιωχθέντες ὑπὸ τῶν ᾿Αττικῶν νεῶν λόγους
a a , \ nr
ἤδη προσέφερον τοῖς στρατηγοῖς, βουλόμενοι Tas ναῦς
. ῃ « , a?
TO παραυτίκα, εἰ δύναιντο, ὁμολογίᾳ τινὶ ἐπιεικεῖ ἀπο-
, τ ec \ A > , ᾽
πέμψασθαι. καὶ οἱ στρατηγοὶ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ἀπε-
4 \ > \ ΄ \ » 5 Nic /
δέξαντο καὶ αὐτοὶ φοβούμενοι μὴ οὐχ ἱκανοὶ ὦσι Λέσβῳ
, fal /
πάσῃ πολεμεῖν. καὶ ἀνοκωχὴν ποιησάμενοι πέμπουσιν

§ 4. παρὰ σφᾶς del. Kr.

§ 6. περί vulg. corr. Meineke, but suggests περίξ (Hermes III.
351), Haase, Luc. Th. 48, πέρι.---ἐφυλάσσοντο Steup, Her. The
latter, in Mnemos. I. 80, rewrites “τά Te ἄλλα, τῶν τειχῶν Kal λιμένων
μέρη τὰ ἡμιτέλεστα φραξάμενοι, ἐφυλάσσοντο."

IV. § τ. πολλῷ ΒΟα.--ἐφώρμουν Nab.—oi στρατηγοί del. Cob.
‘the relations of μέν---δέ point to an adscript.’

8.2. ναυμαχίαν (.--ἀποτρίψασθαι Her. needlessly.

§ 4. ἀνακωχήν MSS., but see Her. Stud. 154.

1S)

4 OOTKTAIAOT

és tas ᾿Αθήνας of Μυτιληναῖοι τῶν te διαβαλλόντων
“ 2 / yy \ ” yy y \
ἕνα, ᾧ μετέμελεν ἤδη, Kal ἄλλους, εἴ πως πείσειαν τὰς
ς ναῦς ἀπελθεῖν ὡς σφῶν οὐδὲν νεωτεριούντων. ἐν τούτῳ
δὲ ἀποστέλλουσι καὶ ἐς τὴν Λακεδαίμονα πρέσβεις
, , \ ne at) 7 i? \
τριήρει, λαθόντες TO τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ναυτικόν, ob ὥρμουν
ἐν τῇ Μαλέᾳ, πρὸς βορέαν τῆς πόλεως" οὐ γὰρ ἐπίστευον
ῇ 1, πρὸς βορέαν τῆς ews’ οὐ γὰρ
6 τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων προχωρήσειν. καὶ οἱ μὲν ἐς
\ / 4 \ a ,
τὴν Λακεδαίμονα ταλαιπώρως διὰ τοῦ πελάγους κομι-
/ ’ “ ” ¢/ / (va ΄
σθέντες αὐτοῖς ἔπρασσον ὅπως τις βοήθεια ἥξει. V. οἱ
, “Ὁ A
δ᾽ ἐκ τών ᾿Αθηνῶν πρέσβεις ὡς οὐδὲν ἦλθον πράξαντες,
ἐς πόλεμον καθίσταντο οἱ Μυτιληναῖοι καὶ ἡ ἄλλη
Λέσβος πλὴν Μηθύμνης: οὗτοι δὲ τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις
, a
ἐβεβοηθήκεσαν, καὶ Ἴμβριοι καὶ Λήμνιοι καὶ τῶν
Μ ’ / \ / ἈΝ Μ /
2 ἄλλων ὀλίγοι τινὲς ξυμμάχων. καὶ ἔξοδον μέν τινα
\ > ! e a 3 \ \ a >
πανδημεὶ ἐποιήσαντο οἱ Μυτιληναῖοι ἐπὶ τὸ τῶν ᾿Αθη-
ναίων στρατόπεδον, καὶ μάχη ἐγένετο, ἐν ἣ οὐκ ἔλασσον
” « Ὁ v > / » > ,
ἔχοντες οἱ Μυτιληναῖοι οὔτε ἐπηυλίσαντο οὔτε ἐπίστευ-
,’ n / ΄
4 σαν σφίσιν αὐτοῖς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνεχώρησαν" ἔπειτα οἱ μὲν
c / > / \ 3. ΑΓ a
ἡσύχαζον, ἐκ Πελοποννήσου καὶ μετ᾽ ἄλλης παρασκευῆς
, 7 \ \
4 βουλόμενοι, εἰ προσγένοιτό τι, κινδυνεύειν (καὶ yap
a lal ¢ /
αὐτοῖς Μελέας Λάκων ἀφικνεῖται καὶ “Eppacovdas
A t Ν Ὁ) , ,
Θηβαῖος, of προαπεστάλησαν μὲν τῆς ἀποστάσεως,
/ \ 2 , \ Ὁ 5 , 5 /
φθάσαι δὲ οὐ δυνάμενοι τὸν τών ᾿Αθηναίων ἐπίπλουν
f /
κρύφα μετὰ τὴν μάχην ὕστερον ἐσπλέουσι τριήρει, καὶ
7 >
παρήνουν πέμπειν τριήρη ἄλλην Kal πρέσβεις μεθ
a J a \
ἑαυτῶν" Kal ἐκπέμπουσιν). VI. ot δὲ ᾿Αθηναῖοι πολὺ

Ἢ 5. ἐν ταὐτῷ Nab.—év τῇ Μαλέᾳ del. Ηοτ.---ἰΑθηνών Bekk. ed.
32: apparently treating τοῖς as masculine.

: 8.2. σχόντες Cob. Ηετ.---ἐπιηυλίσαντο C pr. man.

§ 3. eee GC.

§ 4. μετὰ τὴν μάχην del. Her.—éxréurew N.

EYTTPA®HS I. 5

ἐπιρρωσθέντες διὰ τὴν τῶν Μυτιληναίων ἡσυχίαν ξυμ-
ε \ - a
μάχους τε προσεκάλουν, of πολὺ θᾶσσον παρῆσαν
ὁρῶντες οὐδὲν ἰσχυρὸν ἀπὸ τῶν Λεσβίων, καὶ περιορμι-
lal Δ
σάμενοι τὸ πρὸς νότον τῆς πόλεως ἐτείχισαν στρατόπεδα
δύο ἑκατέρωθεν τῆς πόλεως, καὶ τοὺς ἐφόρμους ἐπ᾽
ἀμφοτέροις τοῖς λιμέσιν ἐποιοῦντο. καὶ τῆς μὲν θαλάσ-
Ss \ fal , a A
ons εἶργον μὴ χρῆσθαι τοὺς Μυτιληναίους, τῆς δὲ γῆς
τῆς μὲν ἄλλης ἐκράτουν οἱ Μυτιληναῖοι καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι
Λέσβιοι προσβεβοηθηκότες ἤδη, τὸ δὲ περὶ τὰ στρατό-
> \ A ens rn , \
πεδα οὐ πολὺ κατεῖχον οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ναύσταθμον δὲ
fal » al rn
μᾶλλον ἣν αὐτοῖς πλοίων καὶ ἀγορᾶς ἡ Μαλέα. καὶ
\ \ \ / “ > a
τὰ μὲν περὶ Μυτιλήνην οὕτως ἐπολεμεῖτο.
\ > r
VII. Κατὰ δὲ τὸν αὐτὸν χρόνον τοῦ θέρους τούτου
> Lal \ bd] / lal 5 / Ul
᾿Αθηναῖοι καὶ ἐς Πελοπόννησον ναῦς ἀπέστειλαν τριά-
, /
κοντα καὶ ᾿Ασώπιον τὸν Φορμίωνος στρατηγόν, κελευ-
, ’ / lal / / / /
σάντων ᾿Ακαρνάνων τῶν Φορμίωνός τινα σφίσι πέμψαι
ἢ υἱὸν ἢ ξυγγενῆ ἄρχοντα. καὶ παραπλέουσαι αἱ νῆες
τῆς Λακωνικῆς τὰ ἐπιθαλάσσια χωρία ἐπόρθησαν.
ἔπειτα τὰς μὲν πλείους ἀποπέμπει τῶν νεῶν πάλιν ἐπ᾽
Μ cs , ἌΝ 3. ἐν , , i >
οἴκου ὁ ᾿Ασώπιος, αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἔχων δώδεκα ἀφικνεῖται és
, >’ na ΄
Ναύπακτον, καὶ ὕστερον ᾿Ακαρνᾶνας ἀναστήσας παν-
δημεὶ στρατεύει ἐπ᾿ Οἰνιάδας, καὶ ταῖς τε ναυσὶ κατὰ
Ν ? lal »Μ XN ¢ \ “Ὁ \ > “
τὸν ᾿Αχελῴον ἔπλευσε καὶ ὁ κατὰ γῆν στρατὸς ἐδήου
’ \
τὴν χώραν. ὡς δ᾽ οὐ προσεχώρουν, Tov μὲν πεζὸν
’ ͵ , f
ἀφίησιν, αὐτὸς δὲ πλεύσας ἐς Λευκάδα Kai ἀπόβασιν és
Νήρικον ποιησάμενος ἀναχωρῶν διαφθείρεται αὐτός τε
VI. §1. τῆς πόλεως del. Cob. (Mnem. VIII. 124).

§ 2. προβεβοηθηκότες Hud. --ἀγορά Kr. Her.
VII. §1. περὶ Πελοπ. Her. from G assuming loss of περί from

§ 2. περιπλέουσαι Her. Stud. 38.
§ 4. ἀνὰ rov’Ax. Cob. Her.—édgouv G,.

io>)

6 OOTKTAIAOT

\ a a ΄ ς tal
Kal τῆς στρατιᾶς TL μέρος ὑπὸ τῶν αὐτόθεν τε ξυμβοη-
“ “ 5
6 θησάντων καὶ φρουρῶν τινῶν ὀλίγων. καὶ ὕστερον
΄ Ἐ).9 “
ὑποσπόνδους τοὺς νεκροὺς ἀποπλεύσαντες οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι
- ,ὔ /
mapa τῶν Λευκαδίων ἐκομίσαντο.
a \ ΄
ΨΙΠΠ. Οἱὲ δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς πρώτης νεὼς ἐκπεμφθέντες
Μυτιληναίων πρέσβεις, ὡς αὐτοῖς οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι
εἶπον ᾿Ολυμπίαζε παρεῖναι, ὅπως καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι ξύμμαχοι
2 , , ᾽ nr > \ 3,
ἀκούσαντες βουλεύσωνται, ἀφικνοῦνται ἐς τὴν ᾿Ολυμ-
\ 12 \
miav: nv δὲ ᾿Ολυμπιὰς ἣ Δωριεὺς “Ρόδιος τὸ δεύτερον
ἐνίκα. καὶ ἐπειδὴ μετὰ τὴν ἑορτὴν κατέστησαν ἐς
λόγους, εἶπον τοιάδε.
IX. “TO μὲν καθεστὸς τοῖς “Ἑλλησι νόμιμον, ὦ
ΠῚ ὃ mN ὃ \ , ” \ \
ἄνδρες Λακεδαιμόνιοι καὶ ξύμμαχοι, ἴσμεν" τοὺς yap
/ tal
“ἀφισταμένους ἐν τοῖς πολέμοις καὶ ξυμμαχίαν τὴν
“ \ > , ε ὃ , θ᾽ “ \ >
πρὶν ἀπολείποντας οἱ δεξάμενοι, καθ᾽ ὅσον μὲν ὠφε-
« a Sse no / \ 4 ,
λοῦνται, ἐν ἡδονῇ ἔχουσι, νομίζοντες δὲ εἶναι προδότας
a “ / ε la}
2 “τῶν πρὸ τοῦ φίλων χείρους ἡγοῦνται. Kal οὐκ ἄδικος
( “ texte / , b] 2 / \ ’ , “
αὕτη ἡ ἀξίωσίς ἐστιν, εἰ τύχοιεν πρὸς ἀλλήλους οἵ τε
« τ / \ » > va ὃ / ΕΣ \ nr
ἀφιστάμενοι Kal ab ὧν διακρίνοιντο ἴσοι μὲν TH
“γνώμῃ ὄντες καὶ εὐνοίᾳ, ἀντίπαλοι δὲ τῇ παρασκευῇ
“καὶ δυνάμει, πρόφασίς τε ἐπιεικὴς μηδεμία ὑπάρχοι
3 “τῆς ἀποστάσεως" ὃ ἡμῖν καὶ ᾿Αθηναίοις οὐκ ἦν. μηδέ
Ge a / /
“rm χείρους δόξωμεν εἶναι εἰ ἐν TH εἰρήνῃ τιμώμενοι
« ς 7 ᾽ Lad > na ὃ lal ον te θ x \ \
ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐν τοῖς δεινοῖς ἀφιστάμεθα. . περὶ yap
« n 7, ΧΟ 2: a n γ}. \
τοῦ δικαίου Kal ἀρετῆς πρῶτον ἄλλως τε καὶ ξυμ-

8 5. αὐτόθι.

VIII. παριέναι (οΡ.---βουλεύσονται Cob. N. L. 702.—6 ῥόδιος Β.--
τάδε.

IX. ὃ τ. καθεστώς Her. Stud. 123, but the Attic form is -os,
cf. Soph. O. T. 633, Thuc. Iv. το.---ἄνδρες del. Cob. om. CG.—
πολεμίοις AF.

§2. οἱ ἀφ᾽ ὧν Nab.—érwola Hud.—pnh δὲ μία C,—xal ἡμῖν καί C,

ΞΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ Τὶ qi

“ ,ὔ ὃ / \ [ θ ὃ / ” Υ
μαχίας δεόμενοι τοὺς λόγους ποιησόμεθα, εἰδότες οὔτε
« ῃ ἄτι ἢ , , ” ,
φιλίαν ἰδιώταις βέβαιον γιγνομένην οὔτε κοινωνίαν
“ / > )δέ 2 \ tJ ue n ὃ ’ > ’ ,
πόλεσιν ES οὐδέν, εἰ μὴ [LET ἀρετῆς δοκουσῆὴς ἐς ἀλλη-
“ , \ My ς , 5 > τ
Rous γίγνοιντο καὶ τἄλλα ὁμοιότροποι [εἶεν]" ἐν γὰρ
- a e a
“τῷ διαλλάσσοντι τῆς γνώμης καὶ αἱ διαφοραὶ τῶν
cov θί ς lal δὲ \ "AB 7 /
ἔργων καθίστανται. ἡμῖν δὲ καὶ ᾿Αθηναίοις ξυμμαχία 2
“ ἐγένετο πρῶτον ἀπολιπόντων μὲν ὑμῶν ἐκ τοῦ Μηδικοῦ
WN \ ῇ
“ πολέμου, παραμεινάντων δὲ ἐκείνων πρὸς τὰ ὑπόλουπα
an » /
“τῶν ἔργων. ξύμμαχοι μέντοι ἐγενόμεθα οὐκ ἐπὶ κατα- 3
“ δουλώσει τῶν ᾿Ελλήνων ᾿Αθηναίοις, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐλευθε-
ς nr lal /
“ρώσει ἀπὸ τοῦ Μήδου τοῖς “λλησι. καὶ μέχρι μὲν 4
«2 \ a ς a θ / ¢€ / 0 i > δ} δὲ
ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου ἡγοῦντο, προθύμως εἱπόμεθα" ἐπειδὴ δὲ
“ce a > \ \ \ la) M "ὃ ” θ 2 /
ἑωρῶμεν αὐτοὺς τὴν μὲν τοῦ Μήδου ἔχθραν ἀνιέντας,
“- /
“τὴν δὲ τῶν ξυμμάχων δούλωσιν ἐπαγομένους, οὐκ
Gime a » > ᾽ , Nu, Semen /
ἀδεεῖς ἔτει ἦμεν. ἀδύνατοι δὲ ὄντες καθ᾽ Ev γενόμενοι 5
“ διὰ πολυψηφίαν ἀμύνεσθαι οἱ ξύμμαχοι ἐδουλώθησαν
« \ ep in \ / ε a \ Cee Nigh \
πλὴν ἡμῶν καὶ Χίων: ἡμεῖς δὲ αὐτόνομοι δὴ ὄντες Kal
an ,
“ ἐχεύθεροι τῷ ὀνόματι ξυνεστρατεύσαμεν. Kal πιστοὺς 6
“οὐκέτι εἴχομεν ἡγεμόνας ᾿Αθηναίους, παραδείγμασι
“ τοῖς προγιγνομένοις χρώμενοι" οὐ γὰρ εἰκὸς ἦν αὐτοὺς
ἃ γ an 7
“οὺς μὲν μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἐνσπόνδους ἐποιήσαντο καταστρέ-
Ν᾽ Ἂν /
“hacOat, τοὺς δὲ ὑπολοίπους, εἴ ποτε dpa ἐδυνήθησαν,
(a4 \ an a \ 2 \ > / yy 9
μὴ δρᾶσαι τοῦτος ΧΙ. καὶ εἰ μὲν αὐτόνομοι ἔτι ἦμεν
WA / Ἂ a a
“ἅπαντες, βεβαιότεροι ἂν ἡμῖν ἦσαν μηδὲν νεωτεριεῖν"

X. 8ὃτ. δοκήσεως Her. (Stud. 38). --ὁμοιότροποι εἶεν Bekk. Popp.
cet. Has εἶεν crept in by dittography? cf. 44 § 2.

§ 2. ἀπελθόντων Cob. but cf. Dio Cass. XXXVII. 40.

8. 3. ἀλλ᾽, “Ελλησι G om. man. pr.

§ 4. ἐπειγομένους Bekk. Haas. Her.—xaé’ ἕν, vid. Haa. Luc. 30,
on double meaning ‘separatim aut coniunctim.’—7@ ὀνόματι del. Her.

ὃ 6. δυνηθεῖεν Kr. from Dobree’s δυνηθείησαν. Class. St. Boh.
retain vulgate.

4

8 OOTKTAIAOT

“at , A (32. \ / ee JERR A) \ la
ὑποχειρίους δὲ ἔχοντες τοὺς πλείους, ἡμῖν δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ
“ov « a , 5. τ ” "
ἰσου ομιλοῦντες, χαλεπώτερον εἰκότως ἔμελλον οἴσειν
“ καὶ πρὸς τὸ πλεῖον ἤδη εἶκον τοῦ ἡμετέρου ἔτι μόνου
3, \ ¢
“ἀντισουμένου, ἄλλως τε Kal ὅσῳ δυνατώτεροι αὐτοὶ
na a / \
“αὑτῶν ἐγίγνοντο καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐρημότεροι. τὸ δὲ ἀντί-
΄ / c
“παλον δέος μόνον πιστὸν és ξυμμαχίαν: ὁ yap παρα-
« yd / lal \ / Xn > a
βαίνειν τε βουλόμενος τῷ μὴ προέχων ἂν ἐπελθεῖν
3 if hy / > 5,
“ἀποτρέπεται. αὐτόνομοί τε ἐλείφθημεν οὐ δι’ ἄλλο
« \ of PLS aos) \ > \ > / ΄ \
τι ἢ ὅσον αὐτοῖς ἐς τὴν ἀρχὴν εὐπρεπείᾳ TE λόγου Kal
« t n AN) fd a> ΄ \ ΄ 2 /
γνώμης μᾶλλον ἐφόδῳ ἢ ἰσχύος τὰ πράγματα ἐφαίνετο
if b) a \ >
“καταληπτά. ἅμα μὲν yap μαρτυρίῳ ἐχρῶντο μὴ av
« ͵ > ΄ ” > , »,Ὸ 7 :
τούς γε ἰσοψήφους ἄκοντας, εἰ μή τι ἠδίκουν οἷς
“ἐπῇσαν, ξυστρατεύειν᾽ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ δὲ καὶ τὰ κράτιστα
fol \
“ἐπί Te τοὺς ὑποδεεστέρους πρώτους ξυνεπῆγον Kal τὰ
( na / “ yA / >
τελευταία λυπόντες τοῦ ἄλλου περιῃρημένου ἀσθε-
“νέστερα ἔμελλον ἕξειν. εἰ δὲ ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἤρξαντο,
“ἐχόντων ἔτι τῶν πάντων αὐτῶν τε ἰσχὺν καὶ πρὸς ὅ τι
“χρὴ στῆναι, οὐκ ἂν ὁμοίως ἐχειρώσαντο. τό τε ναυ-
« NL eh en yy, , 7 » ἃ ,
τικὸν ἡμῶν παρεῖχέ τινα φόβον μή ποτε καθ᾽ ἕν γενό-
« Ai wel ΤΑ ὙΦ Αι 5), / , 7ὔ
μενον ἢ ὑμῖν ἢ ἄλλῳ τῷ προσθέμενον κίνδυνον σφίσι
\ \ fal nr
“παράσχῃ. τὰ δὲ Kal ἀπὸ θεραπείας τοῦ τε κοινοῦ
lal lal ᾽ ἊΝ
“αὐτῶν καὶ τῶν ἀεὶ προεστώτων περιεγιγνόμεθα. οὐ
« / 5 \ / > “Δ 25 fal ὃ (ae > \ ς
μέντοι ἐπὶ πολύ γ᾽ ἂν ἐδοκοῦμεν δυνηθῆναι, εἰ μὴ ὁ
/ / an
“πόλεμος ὅδε κατέστη, παραδείγμασι χρώμενοι τοῖς ἐς
Ἃ
“τοὺς ἄλλους. XII. τίς οὖν αὕτη ἢ φιλία ἐγίγνετο
τὸ ἊΝ 2 ΄, ΣῊΝ ἢ \ ΄ ? 7 ε
ἢ ἐλευθερία πιστή, ἐν ἣ παρὰ γνώμην ἀλλήλους ὑπε-
XI. §1. καί (before πρὸς τὸ πλεῖον) del. Dob. Adv. 1. γ.---τῷ μὴ
προέχειν ἂν ἐπελθών Nab.
§ 3. ἑκόντας Cob.—redevraia Her. St. Kr. omit τά. Herbst de-
fends (Philol. for 1860, 342 sqq.).

XII. 8 x. Cf. Dio. Hal. gor. 39 τίς οὖν ἡ τοιαύτη φιλία καὶ
πίστις ; πιστή del. (}.---ἀλλήλοις ΑΙ ΒΕ.---ὑπηρχόμεθα Cob. Ha. Her.—

ETITPA®HS I. 9

“δεχόμεθα, καὶ οἱ μὲν ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ δεδιότες
77 20 Δ « al δὲ > / > Lol ¢ ,ὔ \ > \
ἐθεράπευον, ἡμεῖς δὲ ἐκείνους ἐν TH ἡσυχίᾳ TO αὐτὸ
τέ .3 fa Ake - Μ / A i
ἐποιοῦμεν" ὃ TE τοῖς ἄλλοις μάλιστα εὔνοια πίστιν
a ral r id / \ rn ,
« βεβαιοῖ, ἡμῖν τοῦτο [Ὁ] φόβος ἐχυρὸν παρεῖχε, δέει τε
tess , Ἃ , , , 3 ᾿ \
TO πλέον ἢ φιλίᾳ κατεχόμενοι ξύμμαχοι ἡμεν᾽ Kal
« « / lal / > / / Φ
ὁποτέροις θᾶσσον παράσχοι ἀσφάλεια θάρσος, οὗτοι
« , ΄, \ / 4 “ "»
πρότεροί τι καὶ παραβήσεσθαι ἔμελλον. ὥστε εἴ τῷ
a > lal
“ δοκοῦμεν ἀδικεῖν προαποστάντες διὰ τὴν ἐκείνων μέλ-
ἴω « ων fal >
“Anow τῶν ἐς ἡμᾶς δεινῶν, αὐτοὶ οὐκ ἀνταναμείναντες
an a 7 a a
«σαφῶς εἰδέναι el Te αὐτῶν ἔσται, οὐκ ὀρθῶς σκοπεῖ.
( > \ Wo > ὍΝ τον Ν > an
εἰ yap δυνατοὶ ἦμεν ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου καὶ ἀντεπιβουλεῦσαι
ie We Y's a so Can > eke y πα
καὶ ἀντιμελλῆσαι, τί ἔδει ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου ἐπ
> / 3 ’ >’ a al
“ ἐκείνοις εἶναι; ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνοις δὲ ὄντος ἀεὶ TOD. ἐπιχειρεῖν
« ΝΣ εξ δ 3 ἈΝ ͵
καὶ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν εἶναι δεῖ τὸ προαμύνασθαι.
XIII. “Τοιαύτας ἔχοντες προφάσεις καὶ αἰτίας,
5 ee / \ , > vA a \
ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι καὶ ξύμμαχοι, ἀπέστημεν, σαφεῖς μὲν
ial > Ὁ
“Trois ἀκούουσι γνῶναι ὡς εἰκότως ἐδράσαμεν, ἱκανὰς
\ « a an ’
“ δὲ ἡμᾶς ἐκφοβῆσαι καὶ πρὸς ἀσφάλειάν τινα τρέψαι,
<< , \ \ ΄, Ψ ” 2 a Se,
βουλομένους μὲν καὶ πάλαι, OTE ETL EV TH εἰρηνῃ
Ets: / id «ς lal . > / ¢ lal \ >
ἐπέμψαμεν ὡς ὑμᾶς περὶ ἀποστάσεως, ὑμῶν δὲ οὐ
/ / fa) \
“προσδεξαμένων κωλυθέντας" viv δὲ ἐπειδὴ Βοιωτοὶ
\
“προυκαλέσαντο εὐθὺς ὑπηκούσαμεν, καὶ ἐνομίζομεν
/ an 3 A
« ἀποστήσεσθαι διπλῆν ἀπόστασιν, ἀπό Te τῶν ᾿λλή-
ταὐτόν Her.—ziorw del. Her. πιστόν Bad.—é φόβος, is the article
necessary ?-—Opdcos vulg.

§ 2. κινδύνων (for τών dewwv) G.—adv ἀναμείναντες F.

§ 3. ἀντιμελλῆσαίτι St. τοι Bad. ἀντιμελλῆσαι most Mss. probably by
confusion with ἀντεπιβουλεῦσαι.---ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου del. Her. Haase (Luc. 84)
sees an oxymoron; i.e., a contrast of ‘ius aequum’ with ‘in potestate
eorum.’—ém’ ἐκείνοις εἶναι del. St. ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνοις Cob. ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνους ἰέναι Kr.

XIII. § τ. Cobet finds three adscripts (1) καὶ αἰτίας, so also Her.

(2) ὡς εἰκότως ἐδράσαμεν, (3) ὅτε... ἀποστασέως, the last being from his
point of view a repetition of 2 § τ.---κωλυθέντες CEFG.—ivykakwo-

3

10 OOTKTAIAOT

a lal > ᾽
“νων μὴ ξὺν κακῶς ποιεῖν αὐτοὺς pet ᾿Αθηναίων ἀλλὰ
“-“ “ ’ , \ ᾽ lal
“ ξυνελευθεροῦν, ἀπό Te Αθηναίων μὴ αὐτοὶ διαφθαρῆναι
“ὑπ ἐκείνων ἐν ὑστέρῳ ἀλλὰ προποιῆσαι. ἡ μέντοι
“ἀπόστασις ἡμῶν θᾶσσον γεγένηται καὶ ἀπαράσκευος"
lal \ ‘ 7 « lal SX
“ἡ καὶ μᾶλλον χρὴ ξυμμάχους δεξαμένους ἡμᾶς διὰ
“ce / 40 , / “ / θ ᾽ Υ ,
ταχέων βοήθειαν ἀποστέλλειν, ἵνα φαίνησθε ἀμύνοντές
fai Φ ὃ -“ \ εἰ fal Ψ »“ ‘ / /
τε οἷς δεῖ καὶ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ τοὺς πολεμίους βλάπτοντες.
Ν \ \

“ καιρὸς δὲ ὡς οὔπω πρότερον. νόσῳ τε yap ἐφθάραται
“᾿Αθηναῖοι καὶ χρημάτων δαπάνῃ, νῆές τε αὐτοῖς αἱ
\ . ἴ, Lal
“ μὲν περὶ τὴν ὑμετέραν εἰσὶν ai δ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν τετάχαται,

dA 2 \ ? / fo 3 δ ς lal
“ ὥστε οὐκ εἰκὸς αὐτοὺς περιουσίαν νεῶν ἔχειν, ἢν ὑμεῖς
“2 TO θέ ι AY) / \ ζ “ΟΝ > B tr.
ἐν τῷ θέρει τῷδε ναυσί TE καὶ TECH ἅμα ἐπεσβάλητε
τ τ , > De Ages: > > n > Ἵ
τὸ δεύτερον, GAN ἢ ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἀμυνοῦνται ἐπιπλέοντας
a , > 2: / >
“ἢ ἀπ᾿ ἀμφοτέρων ἀποχωρήσονται. νομίσῃ τε μηδεὶς
Ὁ , A / Se / “ 2 \
αλλοτρίας γῆς πέρι οἰκεῖον κίνδυνον ἕξειν. @ yap
“δοκεῖ μακρὰν ἀπεῖναι ἡ Λέσβος, τὴν ὠφελίαν αὐτῷ
c
<2 ͵ “ » \ > an tS na » c
ἐγγύθεν παρέξει. ov yap ἐν τῇ ᾿Αττικῇ ἔσται ὁ
vA 2 « > na
“πόλεμος, ὥς τις οἴεται, ἀλλὰ δι’ ἣν ἡ ᾿Αττικὴ ὠφελεῖ-
7 tal ΄ n , ς
“ται. ἔστι δὲ τῶν χρημάτων ἀπὸ τῶν ξυμμάχων ἡ
Μ᾿ ΄ an ΄
“πρόσοδος, καὶ ἔτι μείζων ἔσται, εἰ ἡμᾶς καταστρέψον-
> \ , €
“σαι οὔτε yap ἀποστήσεται ἄλλος τά TE ἡμέτερα
“προσηγενήσεται, πάθοιμέν T ἂν δεινότερα ἢ οἱ πρὶν
“δουλεύοντες. βοηθησάντων δὲ ὑμῶν προθύμως πόλιν

ποιεῖν Kr. from CM, cf. Attic ἀντευποιεῖν, ἀντευπάσχειν. For μετά
with ξύν Hude compares 11. 13 § 1. But the compound is as offensive
as the tmesis. Did Thuc. write μὴ οὖν ye? cf. vill. gt ὃ 3. ΟΥΝ and
OTN are easily confused, so also I with II and € with Ὁ. C from
correct. shews ξυγκακῶς.---προτερῆσαι Cob., cf. 1. 33 ὃ I. προαπολέσαι
Bad. προποιῆσαι Nab. from Dio Cass. XXXVI. 11.

§ 4. σχεῖν (for ἔχειν) Cob.

§ 5. οὐκ οἰκεῖον Hud., cf. IV. 95 ἃ 2.- ὠφέλειαν Her., but see
Meisterhans, p. 44.---ἐστίν Cob.

ETEVPA@H> I. ΠῚ

“ / θ \ Μ / a « al
τε προσλήψεσθε ναυτικὸν ἔχουσαν μέγα, οὗπερ ὑμῖν
“ U ὃ fal \ ’ 0 ’ὔ ea ΄
μάλιστα προσδεῖ, καὶ ᾿Αθηναίους ῥᾷον καθαιρήσετε
“ὑφαιροῦντες αὐτῶν τοὺς ξυμμάχους (θρασύτερον γὰρ
- /
“πᾶς τις προσχωρήσεται), τήν τε αἰτίαν ἀποφεύξεσθε
“ἣν εἴχετε μὴ βοηθεῖν τοῖς ἀφισταμένοις. ἢν δ᾽ ἐλευθε-
« πὰ , \ , a / ,
ροῦντες φαίνησθε, τὸ κράτος τοῦ πολέμου βεβαιότερον
“ἕξετε. XIV. αἰσχυνθέντες οὖν τάς τε τῶν ᾿Ελλήνων
“ἐς ὑμᾶς ἐλπίδας καὶ Δία τὸν ᾿Ολύμπιον, ἐν οὗ τῷ
τε © a mM \ . 7 > / > , /
ἱερῷ ἴσα καὶ ἱκέται ἐσμέν, ἐπαμύνατε Μυτιληναίοις
, , \ \ a a »
“ξύμμαχοι γενόμενοι, καὶ μὴ προῆσθε ἡμᾶς ἴδιον μὲν
“πὸν κίνδυνον τῶν σωμάτων παραβαλλομένους, κοινὴν
« \ \ > a A > 7, “ ,
δὲ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ κατορθῶσαι ὠφελίαν ἅπασι δώσοντας,
«Ὁ \ ΄ \ , 2 \ θ , ς a
ἔτι δὲ κοινοτέραν THY βλάβην, εἰ μὴ πεισθέντων ὑμῶν
“σφαλησόμεθα. γίγνεσθε δὲ ἄνδρες οἵουσπερ ὑμᾶς οἵ
> fa) c
“re Βλληνες ἀξιοῦσι καὶ τὸ ἡμέτερον δέος βούλεται."
a X e lal
XV. Τοιαῦτα μὲν ot Μυτιληναῖοι εἶπον. οἱ δὲ
Λακεδαιμόνιοι καὶ οἱ ξύμμαχοι ἐπειδὴ ἤκουσαν, προσ-
΄ \ ΄ ,
δεξάμενοι τοὺς λόγους ξυμμάχους τε τοὺς Λεσβίους
2 / \ \ > \ > \ 5 \ nr
ἐποιήσαντο, Kal THY ἐς THY ᾿Αττικὴν ἐσβολὴν τοῖς τε
/ lal \ / Μ eid > ‘
ξυμμάχοις παροῦσι κατὰ τάχος ἔφραζον ἰέναι ἐς Tov
lal ΄ /
ἰσθμὸν τοῖς δύο μέρεσιν ὡς ποιησόμενοι, Kal αὐτοὶ
πρώτοι ἀφίκοντο, καὶ ὁλκοὺς παρεσκεύαζον τῶν νεῶν ἐν
a lal ς / a
τῷ ἰσθμῷ, ὡς ὑπεροίσοντες ἐκ τῆς Κορίνθου ἐς τὴν πρὸς
? ,ὔ ΄ \ \ \ a cd > ,
Αθήνας θάλασσαν καὶ ναυσὶ καὶ πεζῷ ἅμα ἐπιόντες.

8 7. καθαιρήσετε vid. Cob. V. L. 35.--ὠαφαιροῦντες Her.—éxere
Cob. Her. from BG.

XV. 8ι:. καὶ of ξύμμαχοι del. Her.; cf. Kr. on VII. 59 § 2.—
παροῦσι om. G.—Her. proposes to place τὴν ἐσβολὴν ὡς ποιησόμενυ.
after ἐποιήσαντο καί, connecting ἔφραζον with ἀφίκοντο. Cob. regards
ὡς ποιησόμενοι as an attempt at correction, and would excise the words,
but insert ἐπί (reading κἀπί in lieu of Herw.’s καὶ ἐπί) before τήν. But
the text is sound.

12 OOTKTAIAOT

\ € \ , n " Ε « NE oP
2 καὶ ol μὲν προθύμως ταῦτα ἔπρασσον" οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι
ξύμμαχοι βραδέως τε ξυνελέγοντο καὶ ἐν καρποῦ
A - = fal
ξυγκομιδῇ ἦσαν Kal ἀρρωστίᾳ τοῦ στρατεύειν.
XVI. Αἰσθόμενοι δὲ αὐτοὺς οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι διὰ κατά-
ey , a A
γνωσιν ἀσθενείας σφών παρασκευαζομένους, δηλῶσαι
f “ 9 > a > Υ > Get, ae iii) \
βουλόμενοι ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθῶς ἐγνώκασιν ἀλλ᾽ οἷοί τέ εἰσι μὴ
nr NG 3 LA / \ \ \ , \
κινοῦντες TO ἐπὶ Λέσβῳ ναυτικὸν καὶ τὸ ἀπὸ Τ]ελοπον-
Ul \ / nr
νήσου ἐπιὸν ῥᾳδίως ἀμύνεσθαι, ἐπλήρωσαν ναῦς ἑκατὸν
5
ἐσβάντες αὐτοί τε πλὴν ἱππέων καὶ πεντακοσιομεδίμνων
if; >
καὶ οἱ μέτοικοι, καὶ παρὰ τὸν ἰσθμὸν ἀναγαγόντες ἐπί-
/ la) / “
δειξίν τε ἐποιοῦντο καὶ ἀποβάσεις τῆς Πελοποννήσου
/ al e \ c nr \
2% δοκοίη αὐτοῖς. ot δὲ Λακεδαιμόνιοι ὁρῶντες πολὺν
\ 7 / c \ A / e 4 c Leal
τὸν παράλογον Ta Te ὑπὸ τῶν Λεσβίων ῥηθέντα ἡγοῦντο
οὐκ ἀληθῆ, καὶ ἄπορα νομίζοντες ὡς αὐτοῖς καὶ οἱ
, 7 ’ A
ξύμμαχοι ἅμα ov παρῆσαν καὶ ἠγγέλλοντο καὶ ai περὶ
\ 7; A ἴω - / \ /
τὴν Πελοπόννησον νῆες TOV ᾿Αθηναίων τὴν περιοικίδα
3 αὐτῶν πορθοῦσαι, ἀνεχώρησαν ἐπ᾽ οἴκου. ὕστερον δὲ
by / ΄
ναυτικὸν παρεσκεύαζον ὅ τι πέμψουσιν ἐς τὴν Λέσβον,
καὶ κατὰ πόλεις ἐπήγγελλον τεσσαράκοντα νεῶν πλῆθος"
καὶ ναύαρχον προσέταξαν ᾿Αλκίδαν, ὃς ἔμελλεν ἐπιπλεύ-
a) = Ἔ Ν
4 σεσθαι. ἀνεχώρησαν δὲ καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ταῖς ἑκατὸν
/ 3 \
ναυσίν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ἐκείνους εἶδον. XVII. καὶ κατὰ
τὸν χρόνον τοῦτον ὃν αἱ νῆες ἔπλεον ἐν τοῖς πλεῖσται

τοιαῦτα N.—dppwoia Bad., cf. Lonic ἀρρωδίη, and see VIII. 83 8 2.

XVI. §1. καί before τὸ ἀπό del. Cob.—avrol re om. G.

§ 2. τριάκοντα (before νῆες) vulg. del. Her. St. Cl.

XVII. Classen and Steup (Rhein. Mus. XXIv. 50) condemn the
whole chapter as spurious.

§ x. ἄλλαι ἄλλῃ Her. (vid. St. Rh. Mus. XVI. 62). κάλλει del. Kr.
suggesting καὶ πλήρεις. Bad. (Mnem. VIII. 404) proposes καὶ ἄλλαι.
Cobet treats all from παραπλήσιαι to τοῦ πολέμου as an adscript from
reminiscence of II. 13 ὃ 9. Stahl omits δέ after παραπλήσιαι but
inserts ἢ before ἀρχομένου (cf. Campe, conject. 19) reading ἄλλαι ἄλλῃ.

— i

ETIVPA®H> -T. 13

a 5» a Ν /
δὴ νῆες ἅμ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἐνεργοὶ κάλλει ἐγένοντο, παραπλή-
σιαι δὲ καὶ ἔτι πλείους ἀρχομένου τοῦ πολέμου. τήν 2
τε γὰρ ᾿Αττικὴν καὶ Εὔβοιαν καὶ Σαλαμῖνα ἑκατὸν
2 / \ \ / «“ id Ἂς
ἐφύλασσον, καὶ περὶ 1]ελοπόννησον ἕτεραι ἑκατὸν
- \ \ ec \ / \ >, rn ”
ῆσαν, χωρὶς δὲ αἱ περὶ Ποτίδαιαν καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις
/ e rn
χωρίοις, ὥστε al πᾶσαι ἅμα ἐγίγνοντο ἐν ἑνὶ θέρει
/ \ “
διακόσιαι καὶ πεντήκοντα. καὶ τὰ χρήματα τοῦτο 3
7 ce / \ / / \
μάλιστα ὑπανήλωσε μετὰ Ἰ]Ποτιδαίας. τήν τε yap
/ / € lal > y id lal \ ‘
Ποτίδαιαν δίδραχμοι ὁπλῖται ἐφρούρουν (αὑτῷ yap Kat
[4 / \ / nr ε / , \
ὑπηρέτῃ δραχμὴν ἐλάμβανε τῆς ἡμέρας) τρισχίλιοι μὲν
οἱ πρῶτοι, ὧν οὐκ ἐλάσσους διεπολιόρκησαν, ἑξακόσιοι
\ \ y \ , Δ A a eons
δὲ καὶ χίλιοι μετὰ Φορμίωνος, of προαπῆλθον᾽ vijés TE 4
« »"» io
αἱ πᾶσαι τὸν αὐτὸν μισθὸν ἔφερον. τὰ μὲν οὖν χρή-
ματα οὕτως ὑπανηλώθη τὸ πρῶτον, καὶ νῆες τοσαῦται
δὴ πλεῖσται ἐπληρώθησαν.
XVIII. Μυτιληναῖοι δὲ κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν χρόνον ὃν
c / \ \ > \ > > \ /
of Λακεδαιμόνιοι περὶ τὸν ἰσθμὸν ἦσαν ἐπὶ Μήθυμναν
» \ =
ὡς προδιδομένην ἐστράτευσαν κατὰ γῆν αὐτοί τε καὶ οἱ
3 / \ ΄ lal / 5 \ »
ἐπίκουροι. καὶ προσβαλόντες τῇ πόλει, ἐπειδὴ οὐ
> / e / > rn 5 4.95 / \
προὐχώρει ἣ προσεδέχοντο, ἀπῆλθον ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αντίσσης καὶ
\ a
Πύρρας καὶ “Epécov, καὶ καταστησάμενοι τὰ ἐν ταῖς
/ ¢ / \ / 4 \
πόλεσι ταύταις βεβαιότερα καὶ τείχη κρατύναντες διὰ
τάχους ἀπῆλθον ἐπ᾽ οἴκου. ἐστράτευσαν δὲ καὶ οἱ 2
Μηθυμναῖοι ἀναχωρησάντων αὐτῶν ἐπ᾽ "Αντισσαν᾽ καὶ
ἐκβοηθείας τινὸς γενομένης πληγέντες ὑπό τε τῶν
> / ἈΝ A τ᾿ / 5 / / \
Αντισσαίων καὶ τῶν ἐπικούρων ἀπέθανόν τε πολλοὶ
Ν τὶ ,’ e \ \ , e x 3 lal
καὶ ἀνεχώρησαν οἱ λοιποὶ κατὰ τάχος. οἱ δὲ ᾿Αθηναῖοι 3

§ 2. καὶ περὶ... ἦσαν omit G m. pr. περὶ Ποτείδαιαν del. Her. St.
§ 3. μετὰ Ποτείδαιαν Nab. ‘urbs enim iamdudum capta erat,’ vid.

Cob. V. L. 18ο.---περιεφρούρουν Her.—édauBavé τις Her. Stud. p. 39.
XVIII. §2. ᾿Αντισσέων Cob. from Hyperides, 46.

14 OOTKTAIAOT

/ “ 4 7 “Ὁ fol
πυνθανόμενοι ταῦτα, τούς τε Μυτιληναίους τῆς γῆς
κρατοῦντας καὶ τοὺς σφετέρους στρατιώτας οὐχ ἱκανοὺς
ὄντας εἴργειν, πέμπουσι περὶ τὸ φθινόπωρον ἤδη ἀρχό-

5
μενον Ἰ]άχητα τὸν ᾿ὑπικούρου στρατηγὸν καὶ χιλίους
΄ »"»Ἥ / / lal fal
ὁπλίτας ἑαυτῶν. οἱ δὲ αὐτερέται πλεύσαντες τῶν νεῶν
5» fal \ / / ΕῚ ΄
αφικνοῦνται καὶ περιτειχίζουσι Μυτιλήνην ἐν κύκλῳ
“Ὁ » Ξ / \ “ Lal
ἁπλῷ τείχει" φρούρια δὲ ἔστιν ἣ ἐπὶ τῶν καρτερῶν
> / \ id \ / \ /
ἐγκατῳκοδομήθη. καὶ ἡ μὲν Μυτιλήνη κατὰ κράτος
nO ’ / θ Ἃ, > na \ 5 / 7
ἤδη ἀμφοτέρωθεν καὶ ἐκ γῆς Kal ἐκ θαλάσσης εἴργετο,
id
καὶ ὁ χειμὼν ἤρχετο γίγνεσθαι.
XIX. ἹΠροσδεόμενοι δὲ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι χρημάτων ἐς
\ / » ΄ a
τὴν πολιορκίαν, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐσενεγκόντες τότε πρῶτον
9 \ / / , / \ » Ν \
ἐσφορὰν διακόσια τάλαντα, ἐξέπεμψαν καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς
, > , A ͵ \ ,
ξυμμάχους ἀργυρολόγους ναῦς δώδεκα καὶ Λυσικλέα
/ , e \
πέμπτον αὐτὸν στρατηγόν. ὁ δὲ ἄλλα TE ἠργυρολόγει
\ ig \ lal ᾽ὔ Ε] lal a, \ \
Kal περιέπλει, καὶ τῆς Καρίας ἐκ Μυοῦντος ἀναβὰς διὰ
τοῦ Μαιάνδρου πεδίου μέχρι τοῦ Σανδίος λόφου, ἐπιθε-
͵7 fal lal Wwe) a - ΄
μένων τῶν Καρῶν καὶ ᾿Αναιιτῶν αὐτός τε διαφθείρεται
καὶ τῆς ἄλλης στρατιᾶς πολλοί.
XX. Τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ χειμῶνος οἱ Π]λαταιῆς (ἔτι γὰρ
> a ς \ a , \ A
ἐπολιορκοῦντο ὑπὸ τῶν [Πελοποννησίων καὶ Βοιωτῶν)
- , “-
ἐπειδὴ τῷ τε σίτῳ ἐπιλιπόντι ἐπιέζοντο καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν
§ 4- τῶν νεῶν, del. Cob. from Aelian Dionysius, cf. vi. οἱ 8 4.—
oi, St. from better Mss. οὗ, Hude from ὅπου C. In vil. 26 οἷπερ
has been corrected to οὗπερ or ἥπερ; see Haase, Luc. 71, who notes
the correct use εἰσὶν οἵ of persons.—éykaTwKodéunra, vulg. which
Cl. defends. Bekker’s emendation is given in text. ἐγκατοικοδομεῖται,
Bl. Her. ἐγκατῳκοδόμητο Haase, Luc. 71. The compendium for τὸ is
almost undistinguishable from ται, cf. Bast. p. 808. Perhaps the καί
following has caused confusion.
XIX. § 2. Σανδίου vulg. corr. Mein. Herm. 111. 363; cf. Cob.

N. L. 338.---ἄλλης om. F.
XX. δι. ἐπιλείποντι Nab.—elonynoapévon Ὁ.

EBTITPA®HS ΓΤ. 15

᾿Αθηνῶν οὐδεμία ἐλπὶς ἦν τιμωρίας οὐδὲ ἄλλη σωτηρία
ἐφαίνετο, ἐπιβουλεύουσιν αὐτοί τε καὶ ᾿Αθηναίων οἱ
ξυμπολιορκούμενοι πρῶτον μὲν πάντες ἐξελθεῖν καὶ
ὑπερβῆναι τὰ τείχη τῶν πολεμίων, ἢν δύνωνται βιά-
σασθαι, ἐσηγησαμένου τὴν πεῖραν αὐτοῖς Θεαινέτου τε
τοῦ Τολμίδου ἀνδρὸς μάντεως καὶ Εὐμολπίδου τοῦ
Δαϊμάχου, ὃς καὶ ἐστρατήγει" ἔπειτα οἱ μὲν ἡμίσεις
ἀπώκνησάν πως τὸν κίνδυνον μέγαν ἡγησάμενοι, ἐς δὲ
ἄνδρας διακοσίους καὶ εἴκοσι μάλιστα ἐνέμειναν τῇ
ἐξόδῳ ἐθελονταὶ τρόπῳ τοιῷδε. κλίμακας ἐποιήσαντο
ἴσας τῷ τείχει τῶν πολεμίων" ξυνεμετρήσαντο δὲ ταῖς
ἐπιβολαῖς τῶν πλίνθων, ἧἣ ἔτυχε πρὸς σφᾶς οὐκ ἐξαλη-
λιμμένον τὸ τεῖχος αὐτῶν. ἠρίθμουν[ το] δὲ πολλοὶ
ἅμα τὰς ἐπιβολάς, καὶ ἔμελλον οἱ μέν τινες ἁμαρτή-
σεσθαι οἱ δὲ πλείους τεύξεσθαι τοῦ ἀληθοῦς λογισμοῦ,
ἄλλως τε καὶ πολλάκις ἀριθμοῦντες καὶ ἅμα οὐ πολὺ
ἀπέχοντες, ἀλλὰ ῥᾳδίως καθορωμένου ἐς ὃ ἐβούλοντο
τοῦ τείχους. τὴν μὲν οὖν ξυμμέτρησιν τῶν κλιμάκων
οὕτως ἔλαβον, ἐκ τοῦ πάχους τῆς πλίνθου εἰκάσαντες
τὸ μέτρον. ΧΧΙ. τὸ δὲ τεῖχος ἦν τῶν Πελοποννησίων
τοιόνδε τῇ οἰκοδομήσει. εἶχε μὲν δύο τοὺς περιβόλους,
πρός τε ᾿Ϊλαταιῶν καὶ εἴ τις ἔξωθεν ἀπ᾽ ᾿Αθηνῶν ἐπίοι,
διεῖχον δὲ οἱ περίβολοι ἑκκαίδεκα πόδας μάλιστα ἀπ᾽
ἀλλήλων. τὸ οὖν μεταξὺ τοῦτο [οἱ ἑκκαίδεκα πόδες]

§ 2. qu. ἐθελοντί; cf. vill. 2 § 1. Hude supplies after ἐξόδῳ,
ἐξῆλθον δέ, suspecting that ἐθελονταί conceals some word implying ‘sor-
titio’; cf. Demosth. (?) 59. 103. See Hu. Comm. Crit. p. 94.

§ 3. ἠριθμοῦντο, vulg. probably a confusion of the compendium for τὸ
with δέ.---τἀληθοῦς Cob.—Aoycpot Her. suspects, Cob. excises ‘non enim
λογισμός erat sed ξυμμέτρησις᾽--ἃ hypercriticism.—améxovros Didot;
Hu. approves.—écov St. és ὃ ὁρᾶν C. F. Smith (Am. J. Phil. x. 209).

XXI. § 2. οἱ ἑκκαίδεκα πόδες, Haack suspects, Cob. excises.

2

3

4

16 OOTKTAIAOT

n ͵ > + ΄ > ΄ \
τοῖς φύλαξιν οἰκήματα διανενεμημένα φκοδόμητο, καὶ
5 a ὦ a , a Sietoit a7
ἣν ξυνεχῆ ὥστε ev φαίνεσθαι τεῖχος παχὺ ἐπάλξεις
» > ΄ \ 7 στ ͵ 53

3 ἔχον ἀμφοτέρωθεν. διὰ δέκα δὲ ἐπάλξεων πύργοι ἦσαν
μεγάλοι καὶ ἰσοπλατεῖς τῷ τείχει, διήκοντες ἔς τε τὸ
ἔσω μέτωπον αὐτοῦ καὶ οἱ αὐτοὶ καὶ ἐς τὸ ἔξω, ὥστε

/ \ 3 \ / > \ ᾽ » fal /
πάροδον μὴ εἶναι, [παρὰ πύργον] adda δι’ αὐτῶν μέσων
lal io «ς
4 διῆσαν. τὰς οὖν νύκτας, ὁπότε χειμὼν εἴη νοτερός, τὰς
\ > , ἄν ty, > \ a ͵ ” >
μὲν ἐπάλξεις ἀπέλειπον, ἐκ δὲ τῶν πύργων ὄντων δι
> / \ Μ A Ν \ ᾽ lal
ὀλίγου καὶ ἄνωθεν στεγανῶν τὴν φυλακὴν ἐποιοῦντο.
\ 5 a e a “-
τὸ μὲν οὖν τεῖχος ᾧ περιεφρουροῦντο οἱ Π]λαταιῆς
nr S e > > Ἁ , - “
τοιοῦτον ἦν. XXII. οἱ δ᾽, ἐπειδὴ παρεσκεύαστο αὐτοῖς,
τηρήσαντες νύκτα χειμέριον ὕδατι καὶ ἀνέμῳ καὶ ἅμα
? al « a an
ἀσέληνον ἐξῇσαν" ἡγοῦντο δὲ οἵπερ καὶ τῆς πείρας
αἴτιοι ἦσαν. καὶ πρῶτον μὲν τὴν τάφρον διέβησαν
« a 5 5 -“ a
ἣ περιεῖχεν αὐτούς, ἔπειτα προσέμιξαν τῷ τείχει τῶν
/ / \ ΄ > \ sf \ \
πολεμίων, λαθόντες τοὺς φύλακας, ἀνὰ τὸ σκοτεινὸν μὲν
- > lal f an la)
οὐ προϊδόντων αὐτῶν, ψόφῳ δὲ τῷ ἐκ τοῦ προσιέναι
, “ a
αὐτοὺς ἀντιπαταγοῦντος TOU ἀνέμου οὐ κατακουσάντων᾽
“ \ \ / Ἁ 3 cd \ a \
2 ἅμα δὲ καὶ διέχοντες πολὺ ἦσαν, ὅπως τὰ ὅπλα μὴ
’ \ ” yy / = \
Kpovojeva πρὸς ἄλληλα αἴσθησιν παρέχοι. ἦσαν δὲ
a ae \ ΄
εὐσταλεῖς τε τῇ ὁπλίσει καὶ τὸν ἀριστερὸν πόδα μόνον
¢ / > 7, “ Ὁ \ \ /
ὑποδεδεμένοι ἀσφαλείας ἕνεκα τῆς πρὸς τὸν πηλόν.
= , /
3 κατὰ οὖν μεταπύργιον προσέμισγον πρὸς Tas ἐπάλξεις,
¢ / > fal e
εἰδότες ὅτι ἔρημοί εἰσι, πρῶτον μὲν οἱ τὰς κλίμακας
§ 3. καὶ οἱ αὐτοί del. Her. καί del. Cl. 5:1.---παρὰ πύργον del. St.
XXII. § 2. ἅμα... ἦσαν om. Ἐ..---πολύ Kr. suspects, πολλοί ABF.—
ὅπως μὴ τὰ ὅπλα Cob.—rov ἀριστερὸν μόνον πόδα CJ (vid. Hud. Comm.
Cr. 94).—Her. strikes out ἀνέβαινον in each case, putting full stop at
ἀνέβη (with comma at προσέθεσαν) and full stop at πύργων. Stahl
places full stop at προσέθεσαν, Cl. a comma only: both St. and Cl.

transpose ἀνέβαινον and ἐχώρουν from their position in Bekker’s text
(see Weil, Rey. de Phil. 11. 89) ; Kr. Boh. follow Bekker.

BYDEPA®H?) T. τ

ΝΜ,

φέροντες, καὶ προσέθεσαν: ἔπειτα ψιλοὶ δώδεκα ξὺν
δί Ν fa} , ’ 8 e « Cal ΑΙ / c
ξιφιδίῳ καὶ θώρακι ἀνέβαινον, ὧν ἡγεῖτο ᾿Αμμέας ὁ
/ al
Κοροίβου καὶ πρῶτος ἀνέβη" μετὰ δὲ αὐτὸν οἱ ἑπόμενοι
A NO, Ἐς Ἢ a ΄ 5. ἡ BEG \
ἕξ ἐφ᾽ ἑκάτερον τῶν πύργων ἀνέβαινον" ἔπειτα ψιλοὶ
wv \ / \ 7 > / ᾿ ied
ἄλλοι μετὰ τούτους ξὺν δορατίοις ἐχώρουν, ols ἕτεροι
\ ᾽ / ¢ - a
κατόπιν Tas ἀσπίδας ἔφερον, ὅπως ἐκεῖνοι ῥᾷον Tpoc-
/ al
βαίνοιεν, καὶ ἔμελλον δώσειν ὁπότε πρὸς τοῖς πολεμίοις
- ς \ ov , Sey, v © (5 A
elev. ὡς δὲ ἄνω πλείους ἐγένοντο ἤσθοντο οἱ ἐκ τῶν
/ a “-“
πύργων φύλακες" κατέβαλε γάρ τις τῶν Πλαταιῶν
> , ᾽ \ a > / / \
ἀντιλαμβανόμενος ἀπὸ τῶν ἐπάλξεων κεραμίδα, ἣ
a / b) / \ x ee, \ a \ \
πεσοῦσα ψόφον ἐποίησε. καὶ αὐτίκα Bon ἦν, τὸ δὲ
στρατόπεδον ἐπὶ τὸ τεῖχος ὥρμησεν" οὐ γὰρ ἤδει ὅ τι
“5 \ a a
ἣν TO δεινὸν σκοτεινῆς νυκτὸς καὶ χειμῶνος ὄντος, καὶ
J A Ὁ a
ἅμα ot ἐν TH πόλει τῶν Πλαταιῶν ὑπολελειμμένοι ἐξέλ-
΄ a / a
θόντες προσέβαλον τῷ τείχει τῶν Πελοποννησίων ἐκ
ἡ Re al ¢
τοὔμπαλιν ἢ οἱ ἄνδρες αὐτῶν ὑπερέβαινον, ὅπως ἥκιστα
πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὸν νοῦν ἔχοιεν. ἐθορυβοῦντο μὲν οὖν κατὰ
/ / lal \ b) \ Ε] , > a > lal
χώραν μένοντες, βοηθεῖν δὲ οὐδεὶς ἐτόλμα ἐκ τῆς αὐτῶν
aA ᾽ > 9 ᾽ , 3 yu) \ ,
φυλακῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν ἀπόρῳ ἦσαν εἰκάσαι TO γιγνόμενον.
καὶ οἱ τριακόσιοι αὐτῶν, οἷς ἐτέτακτο παραβοηθεῖν εἴ
/ a /
τι δέοι, ἐχώρουν ἔξω τοῦ τείχους πρὸς τὴν βοήν.
φρυκτοί τε ἤροντο ἐς τὰς Θήβας πολέμιοι" παρανῖσχον
e f lal “
δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως Ἰ]λαταιῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ τείχους
, ’
φρυκτοὺς πολλοὺς πρότερον παρεσκευασμένους ἐς AUTO
an oy τ A al a lal
τοῦτο, ὅπως ἀσαφῆ τὰ σημεῖα τῆς PpvKTwpias τοῖς
/ a \ \ an Μ , \
πολεμίοις ἢ καὶ μὴ βοηθοῖεν, ἄλλο TL νομίσαντες TO
, 3 a Ge? e f
γυγνόμενον εἶναι ἢ τὸ Ov, πρὶν σφῶν οἱ ἄνδρες οἱ ἐξιόντες
8 4. δοῦπον Bekk. from A. ψόφον BEG.
8 5. προσέβαλλον (.---ἐκ τοὔμπαλιν ἢ ἣ Cob., see Shill. on 1.
60 ὃ 3.

§ 7. ἑαυτῶν GJ. προσετέτακτο Cob. ἐπετέτακτο Her. —téwbev CN.
§ 8. εἴη (for 7) Nab.

Sh ale 2

18 OOTKTAIAOT

SD lo!
διαφύγοιεν καὶ τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς ἀντιλάβοιντο. XXIII. οἱ
δ᾽ ὑπερβαίνοντες τῶν Πλαταιῶν ἐν τούτῳ, ὡς οἱ πρῶτου
lal ‘ nr /
αὐτῶν ἀναβεβήκεσαν Kai τοῦ πύργου ἑκατέρου τοὺς
͵ / > 7 ΄΄ /
φύλακας διαφθείραντες ἐκεκρατήκεσαν, τάς TE διόδους
lel / ᾿] / > Ἂν > / ΄ »
τῶν πύργων ἐνστάντες αὐτοὶ ἐφύλασσον μηδένα δι
> A 2 - x / / > A a
αὐτῶν ἐπιβοηθεῖν, καὶ κλίμακας προσθέντες ἀπὸ τοῦ
-“ /
τείχους τοῖς πύργοις καὶ ἐπαναβιβάσαντες ἄνδρας
< Lal »"
πλείους, οἱ μὲν ἀπὸ τῶν πύργων τοὺς ἐπιβοηθοῦντας
καὶ κάτωθεν καὶ ἄνωθεν εἶργον βάλλοντες, οἱ δ᾽ ἐν
, te / \ , / de \
τούτῳ οἱ πλείους πολλᾶς προσθέντες κλίμακας ἅμα καὶ
\ Ν rn
τὰς ἐπάλξεις ἀπώσαντες διὰ τοῦ μεταπυργίου ὑπερέ-
Ὥ \ / be το ’ \ lal ,
2 βαινον" ὁ δὲ διακομιζόμενος ἀεὶ ἵστατο ἐπὶ τοῦ χείλους
fol / \ 5 lal 5 / / \ ba / ”
τῆς τάφρου, καὶ ἐντεῦθεν ἐτόξευόν τε καὶ ἠκόντιζον, εἴ
τις παραβοηθῶν παρὰ τὸ τεῖχος κωλυτὴς γίγνοιτο τῆς
3 διαβάσεως. ἐπεὶ δὲ πάντες διεπεπεραίωντο, οἱ ἀπὸ
τῶν πύργων, χαλεπῶς οἱ τελευταῖοι, καταβαίνοντες
/ Ἵ
ἐχώρουν ἐπὶ τὴν τάφρον, καὶ ἐν τούτῳ οἱ τριακόσιοι
> Nae 15 , ’ ” ε \ 3
4 αὐτοῖς ἐπεφέροντο λαμπάδας ἔχοντες. οἱ μὲν οὖν {{λα-
ταιῆς ἐκείνους ἑώρων μᾶλλον ἐκ τοῦ σκότους ἑστῶτες
ἂν \ a ᾽ὔ na , \ 5 , / \ -
ἐπὶ τοῦ χείλους τῆς τάφρου, καὶ ἐτόξευόν τε καὶ ἐση-
κόντιζον ἐς τὰ γυμνά, αὐτοὶ δὲ ἐν τῷ ἀφανεῖ ὄντες ἧσσον
A f / a
5 διὰ τὰς λαμπάδας καθεωρῶντο, ὥστε φθάνουσι τῶν
fal 7 \ /
Πλαταιῶν καὶ οἱ ὕστατοι διαβάντες τὴν τάφρον, yare-
nr Ν \ / / / \ 2 ΄ ΕῚ
πῶς δὲ καὶ βιαίως: κρύσταλλος τε yap ἐπεπήγει οὐ
1 rn a 2 δ
βέβαιος ἐν αὐτῇ ὥστ᾽ ἐπελθεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ οἷος ἀπηλιώτου [ἢ
XXIII. §1. ὅσοι ABE. Her. has repented him of his proposed
heroic treatment of this sentence, cf. Her. Stud. p. 39 with Hermes
Iv. 422. His text now agrees essentially with Stahl’s.
§ 2. del διακομιζόμενος Cob.
§ 3. Dobree, Adv. 1. 33, suggests of ἀπὸ τῶν πύργων καταβαίνοντες
ἐχώρουν, ‘reliqua ex sequentibus orta: ipsam vocem καταβαίνοντες

suspectam habeo.’ οἱ before ἀπό del. St. οἱ before τελευταῖοι del. Her.
—xal ἐντεῦθεν ἃ.

EYTITPA®HS YI. 19

βορέου] ὑδατώδης μᾶλλον, καὶ ἡ νὺξ τοιούτῳ ἀνέμῳ
ig / \ Nek > ? lal > / ἃ /
ὑπονιφομένη πολὺ TO ὕδωρ ἐν αὐτῇ ἐπεποιήκει, ὃ μόλις
Φ. / > Δ » / \ \ € /
ὑπερέχοντες ἐπεραιώθησαν. ἐγένετο δὲ Kal ἡ διάφευξις
αὐτοῖς μᾶλλον διὰ τοῦ χειμῶνος τὸ μέγεθος. XXIV. ὁρ-
, Nee N a , ε A V7
μήσαντες δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς τάφρου οἱ Π]λαταιῆς ἐχώρουν
ς / \ » ’ ΄ ς / 2 CoN LY
ἁθρόοι τὴν ἐς Θήβας φέρουσαν ὁδόν, ἐν δεξιᾷ ἔχοντες
\ ee, δα / c a / vA a
τὸ τοῦ ᾿Ανδροκράτους ἡρῷον, νομίζοντες ἥκιστα σφᾶς
ταύτην αὐτοὺς ὑποτοπῆσαι τραπέσθαι τὴν ἐς τοὺς
πολεμίους" καὶ ἅμα ἑώρων τοὺς ἸΤελοποννησίους τὴν
a \ -
πρὸς Κιθαιρῶνα καὶ Δρυὸς κεφαλὰς τὴν ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αθηνῶν
φέρουσαν μετὰ λαμπάδων διώκοντας. καὶ ἐπὶ μὲν ἕξ ἢ
ἑπτὰ σταδίους οἱ [[λαταιῆς τὴν ἐπὶ τῶν Θηβῶν ἐχώ-
ρησαν, ἔπειθ᾽ ὑποστρέψαντες ἦσαν τὴν πρὸς τὸ ὄρος
¢ ,
φέρουσαν ὁδὸν ἐς ᾿Ερύθρας καὶ Ὑσιάς, καὶ λαβόμενοι
τῶν ὀρῶν διαφεύγουσιν ἐς τὰς ᾿Αθήνας, ἄνδρες δώδεκα
καὶ διακόσιοι ἀπὸ πλειόνων" εἰσὶ γάρ τινες αὐτῶν οἱ
« ® ᾽
ἀπετράποντο ἐς τὴν πόλιν πρὶν ὑπερβαίνειν, εἷς δ᾽ ἐπὶ
τῇ ἔξω τάφρῳ τοξότης ἐλήφθη. οἱ μὲν οὖν Πελοπον-
νήσιοι κατὰ χώραν ἐγένοντο τῆς βοηθείας παυσάμενοι"
οἱ δ᾽ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως Π]λαταιῆς τῶν μὲν γεγενημένων
, a /
εἰδότες οὐδέν, τῶν δὲ ἀποτραπομένων σφίσιν ἀπαγγει-
, / τ
λάντων ὡς οὐδεὶς περίεστι, κήρυκα ἐκπέμψαντες, ἐπεὶ
ἡμέρα ἐγένετο, ἐσπένδοντο ἀναίρεσιν τοῖς νεκροῖς, μα-
Ν \ 5. \ > , e \ \ fal an
θόντες δὲ τὸ ἀληθὲς ἐπαύσαντο. οἱ μὲν δὴ τῶν Πλαταιῶν
Μ Ὁ € / >) /
ἄνδρες οὕτως ὑπερβάντες ἐσώθησαν.
8 5. ἢ βορέου del. St. ‘merum scholium,’ Dob. Adv. 1. 33; is ὑπό
lost before ἀπηλιώτου ὑδατώδης μᾶλλον, Class. Nab. suspect.—ézo-
νειφομένη ABCE, an itacism, vid. Cob. V. L. 86.

XXIV. § 1. ἥκιστ᾽ ἂν Cob. Her. The compendium is often omitted
with μάλιστα, κάλλιστα, K.T.d.

§ 2. ὁδὸν del. Her.

§ 3- qu.? ἀναιρεῖν τοὺς νεκρούς ἡ- τῶν Πλαταιῶν del. Her. Stud.
p- 40.—UepBdyres, an adscript from c, 20 (Cobet).

2—2

3

A.C,
227:

20 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΟΥ͂

XXV. "Ex δὲ τῆς Λακεδαίμονος τοῦ αὐτοῦ χειμῶνος
τελευτῶντος ἐκπέμπεται Σάλαιθος ὁ Λακεδαιμόνιος ἐς
Μυτιλήνην τριήρει. καὶ πλεύσας ἐς Πύρραν καὶ ἐξ

>’ a tal \ , / φ ε ‘ > \
αὐτῆς πεζῇ κατὰ χαράδραν τινά, ἣ ὑπερβατὸν HY τὸ
/ \ > / > \ /
περιτείχισμα, διαχλαθὼν ἐσέρχεται ἐς τὴν Μυτιλήνην,
\ ” Lal / ad οἱ fi “ > \
Kat ἔλεγε τοῖς προέδροις OTe ἐσβολὴ τε ἅμα ἐς τὴν
᾿Αττικὴν ἔσται καὶ ai τεσσαράκοντα νῆες παρέσονται
“ yy “Ὁ 3 Lal nr ἊΝ , Ν
ἃς ἔδει βοηθῆσαι αὐτοῖς, προαποπεμφθῆναί τε αὐτὸς
τούτων ἕνεκα καὶ ἅμα τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιμελησόμενος. καὶ
οἱ μὲν Μυτιληναῖοι ἐθάρσουν τε καὶ πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αθη-
ναίους ἧσσον εἶχον τὴν γνώμην ὥστε ξυμβαίνειν. ὅ τε
χειμὼν ἐτελεύτα οὗτος, καὶ τέταρτον ἔτος τῷ πολέμῳ
> vA an ἃ / /
ἐτελεύτα τῷδε OV Θουκυδίδης Evvéyparvev.
fal ’ / f e
XXVI. Tod δ᾽ ἐπιγιγνομένου θέρους ot Πέλοπον-
, > \ Ν > \ / “ Ν ,
νήσιοι ἐπειδὴ τὰς ἐς τὴν Μυτιλήνην δύο καὶ τεσσαρά-
Ξ sary ” > , ἃ 3 > =
κοντα ναῦς ἀπέστειλαν ἔχοντα ᾿Δλκίδαν, ὃς ἦν αὐτοῖς
ναύαρχος, προστάξαντες, αὐτοὶ ἐς τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν καὶ οἱ
iy > lal
ξύμμαχοι ἐσέβαλον, ὅπως οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἀμφοτέρωθεν
͵ i n \ > \ 7)
θορυβούμενοι ἧσσον ταῖς ναυσὶν ἐς τὴν Μυτιλήνην
καταπλεούσαις ἐπιβοηθήσωσιν. ἡγεῖτο δὲ τῆς ἐσβολῆς
ταύτης Κλεομένης ὑπὲρ Ἰ]αυσανίου τοῦ Πλειστοάνακτος
[υἱέος] βασιλέως ὄντος καὶ νεωτέρου ἔτι, πατρὸς δὲ

XXV. §1. ὑποβατὸν Her.—dyua om. N.

§ 2. ἐτελεύτα before τῷδε del. Her. ἀπὸ ταὐτομάτου. The formula
is constant in Thuc.

XXVI. §1. δύο καὶ del. Her. susp. Kr.—dpxovra Cl. St.—rpos-
τάξαντες del. Cob.; cf. Her. Stud. 40. Her. would also excise
in toto és ἦν...προστάξαντες together with καὶ οἱ ξύμμαχοι---" pannus
male assutus’ ex τό ὃ 3. For position of ἔχοντα, cf. v. 71 ὃ 3. Cob.
holds that the words ἀπέστειλαν ᾿Αλκίδαν ἔχοντα ναῦς τεσσαράκοντα
contain all that is essential to the narrative, also that οἱ ξύμμαχοι must
be included in Πελοποννήσιοι.

§ 2. wuéos, om. Gm. pr. del. Her. vid. Meisterhans, p. 47 n. 413 Ὁ.

ETTTPA®HS T. 21

“Ὁ a , ’
ἀδελφὸς ὦν, ἐδήωσαν δὲ τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς τά τε πρότερον 3
, \ ” > ’ \ v4 5 “Ὁ
τετμημένα [καὶ] εἴ τι ἐβεβλαστήκει, καὶ ὅσα ἐν ταῖς
lal \ «ς Ν "
πρὶν ἐσβολαῖς παρελέλειπτο: καὶ ἡ ἐσβολὴ αὕτη
χαλεπωτάτη ἐγένετο τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις μετὰ τὴν δευτέραν.
, a , lal
ἐπιμένοντες yap ἀεὶ ἀπὸ τῆς Λέσβου τι πεύσεσθαι τῶν 4
a yy c » 5 lal \ \
νεῶν ἔργον ws ἤδη πεπεραιωμένων, ἐπεξῆλθον τὰ πολλὰ
Ὁ a
τέμνοντες. ὡς δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἀπέβαινεν αὐτοῖς ὧν προσε- 5
δέχοντο καὶ ἐπελελοίπει ὁ σῖτος, ἀνεχώρησαν καὶ
, \ /
διελύθησαν κατὰ πόλεις.
XXVII. Οἱὲ δὲ Μυτιληναῖοι ἐν τούτῳ, ὡς at τε

a ’ a ’ © > \ a , ᾽ \
νῆες αὐτοῖς οὐχ ἧκον ἀπὸ τῆς LleNomovynaov adda
> / \ ς lal > , 5 /
évexpoviov καὶ ὁ σῖτος ἐπελελοίπει, ἀναγκάζονται

> 7
ξυμβαίνειν πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους διὰ τάδε. ὁ Σάλαιθος 2
/ 7 a
Kal αὐτὸς οὐ προσδεχόμενος ETL τὰς ναῦς ὁπλίζει TOV
δῆμον πρότερον ψιλὸν ὄντα ὡς ἐπεξιὼν τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις"

e \ 2 \ » “ YA ’ a x nN
οἱ δὲ ἐπειδὴ ἔλαβον ὅπλα, οὔτε ἠκροῶντο ETL τῶν 3
γ᾽ / ἡ lal
ἀρχόντων, Kata ξυλλόγους τε γιγνόμενοι ἢ τὸν σῖτον
ba \ \ / b \ \ \
ἐκέλευον τοὺς δυνατοὺς φέρειν ἐς τὸ φανερὸν καὶ δια-

; ᾽
νέμειν ἅπασιν, ἢ αὐτοὶ ξυγχωρήσαντες πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους
[ἔφασαν] παραδώσειν τὴν πόλιν. XXVIII. γνόντες
δὲ οἱ ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν οὔτ᾽ ἀποκωλύειν δυνατοὶ ὄντες,
εἴ T ἀπομονωθήσονται τῆς ξυμβάσεως κινδυνεύσοντες,
lal A €
ποιοῦνται κοινῇ ὁμολογίαν πρός τε Ἰ]άχητα καὶ τὸ
WA Ὁ if a a
στρατόπεδον, ὥστε ᾿Αθηναίοις μὲν ἐξεῖναι βουλεῦσαι
\ / id na v , \ \
περὶ Μυτιληναίων ὁποῖον av te βούλωνται καὶ τὴν

Inscriptions of the 4th century B.C. omit the iota: ‘nemo in talibus
addit vids’ (Cob.).—67 Her. St.

§ 3. καὶ del. Bek. Dind. St. Her. ἐπεβεβλαστήκει, ‘repullula-
verat’ Dob.

XXVIII. §2. φίλον (for ψιλὸν) ABE.

§ 3. ἔφασαν del. Cob. %...7) point to a zeugma.

XXVIII. § 1. μηδὲ ABE.—droxwdXtev St. Her. Bek. Cl. retain
future.

22 @OTKTAIAOT

An “9 \ , 7 > ͵ , τ
στρατιὰν ἐς τὴν πόλιν δέχεσθαι αὐτούς, πρεσβείαν δὲ
\ > , n
ἀποστέλλειν ἐς τὰς ᾿Αθήνας Μυτιληναίους περὶ ἑαυτῶν"
ἐν ὅσῳ δ᾽ ἂν πάλιν ἔλθωσι, ἸΪάχητα μήτε δῆσαι Μυτι-
ληναίων μηδένα μήτε ἀνδρωποδίσαι μήτε ἀποκτεῖναι.
ἡ μὲν ξύμβασις αὕτη ἐγένετο. οἱ δὲ πράξαντες πρὸς τοὺς
Λακεδαιμονίους μάλιστα τῶν Μυτιληναίων περιδεεῖς
»" c ia Ἁ » Ὁ“ » , , 9. - ,’ Ν
ὄντες, ὡς ἡ στρατιὰ ἐσῆλθεν, οὐκ ἠνέσχοντο GAN ἐπὶ
\ \ ¢ Ἢ , apie) a
τοὺς βωμοὺς ὅμως καθιζουσι' Mayns δ᾽ ἀναστήσας
αὐτοὺς ὥστε μὴ ἀδικῆσαι, κατατίθεται ἐς Τένεδον μέχρι
an / i
οὗ τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις τι δόξῃ. πέμψας δὲ καὶ ἐς τὴν
” 7 / \ ἊΝ Ν \
Αντισσαν τριήρεις προσεκτήσατο, Kal τἄλλα τὰ περὶ
τὸ στρατόπεδον καθίστατο ἧ αὐτῷ ἐδόκει.
XXIX. Οἱ δ᾽ ἐν ταῖς τεσσαράκοντα ναυσὶ Πελο-
ποννήσιοι, ods ἔδει ἐν τάχει παραγενέσθαι, πλέοντες
/ > \ \ / >? / x \
περί τε αὐτὴν τὴν Πελοπόννησον ἐνδιέτριψαν, Kal κατὰ
\ » lal an ΄ \ \ > fol
Tov ἄλλον πλοῦν σχολαῖοι κομισθέντες τοὺς μὲν ἐκ τῆς
πόλεως ᾿Αθηναίους λανθάνουσι, πρὶν δὴ τῇ Δήλῳ ἔσχον,
MY. \ > ’ > fol A > / \ /
προσμίξαντες δὲ am’ αὐτῆς τῇ Ἰκάρῳ καὶ Μυκόνῳ
πυνθάνονται πρῶτον ὅτι ἡ Μυτιλήνη ἑάλωκε. βουλό-
μενοι δὲ τὸ σαφὲς εἰδέναι κατέπλευσαν ἐς "Ἔμβατον τῆς
/ / 4 A
"EpvOpaias: ἡμέραι δὲ μάλιστα ἦσαν τῇ Μυτιλήνῃ
ε / c ay ef > Ny Si /
ἑαλωκυίᾳ εἐπτὰ OTE ἐς τὸ EPaTov κατέπλευσαν. TU-
/ \ Ν \ > Ἂ τὶ a /
θόμενοι δὲ τὸ σαφὲς ἐβουλεύοντο ἐκ τῶν παρόντων,
a / n
καὶ ἔλεξεν αὐτοῖς Τευτίαπλος ἀνὴρ ᾿Ηλεῖος τάδε.
XXX. “᾿Αλκίδα καὶ Πελοποννησίων ὅσοι πάρεσμεν
“ἄρχοντες τῆς στρατιᾶς, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ πλεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ

XXIX. §1. Vulg. προσέσχον : after λανθάνουσι von Velsen sees a
lacuna (cf. von Velsen Schedae Criticae, p. 5 sqq.-).

Ildpw Haase, Luc. 23. Κλάρῳ Popp. For reversal of position cf.
MaceeA. τς τὸ ((St-)=

ὅτε ἐς TO"EuBarov κατέπλευσαν del. Her.

XXX. §1. ἡμᾶς del. Cob.

ἘΥΤΤΡΑΦΗΣ Τ', 93

<< ΄, Ne AS , a “ »
Μυτιλήνην πρὶν ἐκπύστους γενέσθαι, ὥσπερ ἔχομεν.
« \ \ NaN > a \ , Sef \
κατὰ yap TO εἰκὸς ἀνδρῶν νεωστὶ πόλιν ἐχόντων πολὺ
πολ Σου ἢ ἐν \ ange \
TO ἀφύλακτον εὑρήσομεν, κατὰ μὲν θάλασσαν καὶ
ec ΄ Cae yas ar τ ey. > L ”
πάνυ, ἣ ἐκεῖνοί τε ἀνέλπιστοι ἐπιγενέσθαι ἄν τινα
“ ΄, L een ἘΠῚ" \ , ΄
σφίσι πολέμιον καὶ ἡμῶν ἡ ἀλκὴ τυγχάνει μάλιστα
Ξ᾿ a ’
“otca’ εἰκὸς δὲ Kal TO πεζὸν αὐτῶν κατ᾽ οἰκίας ἀμε-
͵ > 6
“χέστερον ὡς κεκρατηκότων διεσπάρθαι. εἰ οὖν προσ-
({ / BA \ / > " A a », ὃ
πέσοιμεν ἄφνω τε καὶ νυκτός, ἐλπίζω μετὰ τῶν ἔνδον,
ἐξς Κ » ΕΝ δὲ ? \ e / yA θῇ
εἴ τις ἄρα ἡμῖν ἐστὶν ὑπόλοιπος εὔνους, καταληφθῆναι
ἡ / \ /
“dp τὰ πράγματα. Kal μὴ ἀποκνήσωμεν TOV κίνδυνον,
« ῃ > ” 3 \ \ a ͵ Ἀ
νομίσαντες οὐκ ἄλλο τι εἶναι τὸ καινὸν τοῦ πολέμου ἢ
a ἃ A s
“ τὸ τοιοῦτον, ὃ εἴ τις στρατηγὸς ἔν TE αὑτῷ φυλάσσοιτο
a lal lal > aA
“Kal τοῖς πολεμίοις ἐνορῶν ἐπιχειροίη, πλεῖστ᾽ ἂν
“ὀρθοῖτο.᾽ XXXI. ὁ μὲν τοσαῦτα εἰπὼν οὐκ ἔπειθε
τὸν ᾿Αλκίδαν" ἄλλοι δέ τινες τῶν aT ᾿Ιωνίας φυγάδων
\
καὶ οἱ Λέσβιοι < oi > ξυμπλέοντες παρήνουν, ἐπειδὴ
aA \ / fal a > 3 / ,
τοῦτον τὸν κίνδυνον φοβεῖται, τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιωνίᾳ πόλεων
an > /
καταλαβεῖν τινα ἢ Κύμην τὴν Αἰολίδα, ὅπως ἐκ πόλεως
ε , \ Ἢ] / ᾽ / (ἐλ (ὃ δ᾽ εἶν ι"
ὁρμώμενοι τὴν ᾿Ιωνίαν ἀποστήσωσιν (ἐλπίδα iva
> \ \ ? ,ὔ > lal ἣν Ἂν / 4
οὐδενὶ yap ἀκουσίῳ ἀφῖχθαι) καὶ τὴν πρόσοδον Tav-
, 5 "AG / € aN Neen x
THY μεγίστην οὖσαν ηναίων ὑφέλωσι, καὶ ἅμα, ἢν
ἐφορμῶσι σφίσιν, αὐτοῖς δαπάνη γίγνηται" πείσειν τε

§ 2. ἀποῦσα Kr. ἀργοῦσα Gertz. μαλακὴ οὖσα Her. μόλις παροῦσα
Hud. from confusion of μόλις with μάλιστα (frequent in B), ‘nostrae
vires re vera aegre aderunt’ (adsunt). Cobet defends text ; see Herbst
Philol. xvi. 305, Hud. Comm. Crit. p. 95. Kiippers (Cur. Crit. p. το)
suggests λαθοῦσα, ‘impetus noster optime celari potest.’

§ 4. κενὸν C with ac superadscript. Scholia point to either κενά or
καινά: for κενά as πανικά cf. Cic. ad Att. v. 20 ὃ 3; vid. Cl. App. 195.
κἀν Nab.

XXXI. §1. of ξυμπλέοντες Μαᾶν.---ἀποστήσουσιν Cob., of which
Mss. show no trace.—dkovolw Lindau. ἀκουσίους Hud. Comm. Crit. 96.
-ὠοφέλωσι AB Bek.—#v (before ἀφέλωσι) del. Cl. Boh. ἐφορμῶσιν all

24 OOTKTAIAOT

2 οἴεσθαι καὶ Πισσούθνην ὥστε ξυμπολεμεῖν. ὁ δὲ οὐδὲ
ταῦτα ἐνεδέχετο, ἀλλὰ τὸ πλεῖστον τῆς γνώμης εἶχεν,
5 \ lel /
ἐπειδὴ τῆς Μυτιλήνης ὑστερήκει, ὅτι τάχιστα τῇ [Τελο-
ποννήσῳ πάλιν προσμῖξα. XXXII. ἄρας δὲ ἐκ τοῦ
BR , 7 \ \ , ~
μβάτου παρέπλει, καὶ προσσχὼν Μυοννήσῳ τῇ
aA \ > an

Τηΐων τοὺς αἰχμαλώτους ods κατὰ πλοῦν εἰλήφει
/

2 ἀπέσφαξε τοὺς πολλούς. καὶ ἐς τὴν "Ἔφεσον καθορ-
/ > an / tal > > / ᾽ if
μισαμένου αὐτοῦ Σαμίων τῶν ἐξ ᾿Αναίων ἀφικόμενοι
/ - lal 3 la)
πρέσβεις ἔλεγον οὐ καλῶς τὴν “Ελλάδα ἐλευθεροῦν
, ΕΣ “ (
αὐτόν, εἰ ἄνδρας διέφθειρεν οὔτε χεῖρας ἀνταιρομένους

7 if ? / AS Ae: a ΟΝ, f f
οὔτε πολεμίους, ᾿Αθηναίων δὲ ὑπ᾽ ἀνάγκης ξυμμάχους"
εἴ τε μὴ παύσεται, ὀλίγους μὲν αὐτὸν τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἐς
φιλίαν προσάξεσθαι, πολὺ δὲ πλείους τῶν φίλων πολε-

/ “ \ ς \ > if \ / ”

3 μίους ἕξειν. καὶ ὁ μὲν ἐπείσθη τε καὶ Χίων ἄνδρας
ὅσους εἶχεν ἔτι ἀφῆκε, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τινάς" ὁρῶντες

Ἂν; \ fal c v 5» vy > \
yap Tas ναῦς οἱ ἄνθρωποι οὐκ ἔφευγον ἀλλὰ προσε-
χώρουν μᾶλλον ὡς ᾿Αττικαῖς, καὶ ἐλπίδα οὐδὲ τὴν
> / 2. , > an ,
ἐλαχίστην εἶχον μὴ ποτε ᾿Αθηναίων τῆς θαλάσσης Kpa-

4 rn / > 9 / -“
τούντων ναῦς [Πελοποννησίων ἐς ᾿Ιωνίαν παραβαλεῖν.
XXXIII. ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς ᾿Εφέσου ὁ ᾿Αλκίδας ἔπλει κατὰ

/ \ \ a Lad Μ \ ig \ n
τάχος καὶ φυγὴν ἐποιεῖτο" ὠφθη yap ὑπὸ τῆς Σαλα-
μινίας καὶ Ἰ]αράλου ἔτι περὶ Κλάρον ὁρμῶν (αἱ δ᾽ ἀπ᾽
᾿Αθηνὼν ἔτυχον πλέουσαι), καὶ δεδιὼς τὴν δίωξιν ἔπλει

better Mss. Kr. St. Cl.—o@low del. Boh. Kr. against ABCE.—ylyverat B.
γίγνεσθαι Parm, a 15th century MS., which also shews δαπάνην, a reading
which accords with Lindau’s suggestion καὶ dua ἂν ἐφορμοῦσιν αὐτοῖς
δαπάνην γίγνεσθαι, a suggestion which met with small consideration
at Poppo’s hands. Other variants are αὐτούς EF m. sec.. σφίσι
δαπάνη G, vulg. On the whole passage see Haase, Luc. p. 4 sqq.
and App.

XXXII. § 2. διαφθείρει Cob.—Xelous ἕξειν ἐχθρούς N.

§ 3. ἐξαφῆκε Nab. finding ἔτι inexplicable; surely τοὺς πολλούς
gives a sufficient clue.

EYTTPA®Hs I. 25

διὰ τοῦ πελάγους ὡς γῇ ἑκούσιος οὐ σχήσων ἄλλῃ ἢ
γ ὙΠ xX") ΤΠ 7)
a \ / a ’
Πελοποννήσῳ. τῷ δὲ Ilaynte καὶ τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις
fol > a
ἦλθε μὲν καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Ερυθραίας ἀγγελία, ἀφικνεῖτο δὲ
an
καὶ πανταχόθεν: ἀτειχίστου yap οὔσης τῆς ᾿Ιωνίας
/ \ / > / x 2 € /
μέγα TO δέος ἐγένετο μὴ παραπλέοντες οἱ Ἰ]ελοποννή-
clot, εἰ καὶ ὡς μὴ διενοοῦντο μένειν, πορθῶσιν ἅμα
προσπίπτοντες τὰς πόλεις. αὐτάγγελοι δ᾽ αὐτὸν ἰδοῦσαι
a r 2
ἐν τῇ Κλάρῳ ἥ τε ἸΙάραλος καὶ ἡ Σαλαμινία ἔφρασαν.
ὁ δὲ ὑπὸ σπουδῆς ἐποιεῖτο τὴν δίωξιν: καὶ μέχρι μὲν
ἸΠάτμου τῆς νήσου ἐπεδίωξεν, ὡς δ᾽ οὐκέτι ἐν καταλήψει
᾿ ?
> / 3 / / \ > / > \ >
ἐφαίνετο, ἐπανεχώρει. κέρδος δὲ ἐνόμισεν, ἐπειδὴ οὐ
μετεώροις περιέτυχεν, ὅτε οὐδαμοῦ ἐγκαταληφθεῖσαι
/ al \
ἠναγκάσθησαν στρατόπεδον ποιεῖσθαι καὶ φυλακὴν
σφίσι καὶ ἐφόρμησιν παρασχεῖν. XXXIV. παρα-
πλέων δὲ πάλιν ἔσχε καὶ ἐς Νότιον τὸ Κολοφωνίων, οὗ
, ΄ aA ” fi e 7 e \
κατῴκηντο Κολοφώνιοι τῆς ἀνω πόλεως ἑαλωκυίας ὑπὸ
>] , \ a / Ἁ I? 3,
Itapavouvs καὶ τῶν βαρβάρων κατὰ στάσιν ἰδίᾳ
by , . er \ / “ 4 ς /
ἐπαχθέντων" ἑάλω δὲ μάλιστα αὕτη ὅτε ἡ δευτέρα
x >
Πελοποννησίων ἐσβολὴ és τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν ἐγίγνετο. ἐν
a ,
οὖν τῷ Νοτίῳ οἱ καταφυγόντες καὶ κατοικήσαντες
αὐτόθι αὖθις στασιάσαντες, οἱ μὲν παρὰ ἹΠισσούθνου
> / ’ U Ἂν lal , 5 /
ἐπικούρους ᾿Αρκάδων τε καὶ τῶν βαρβάρων ἐπαγόμενοι
, an a "
ἐν διατειχίσματι εἶχον, καὶ τῶν ἐκ τῆς ἄνω πόλεως
,
Κολοφωνίων οἱ μηδίσαντες ξυνεσελθόντες ἐπολίτευον,
XXXIII. § 1. Ἴκαρον Popp. Bekk. vid. Haase, Luc. p. 34.—
ἑκουσίως F.—dAN ἢ Cob. Her.
§ 2. ws del. Her. ἴσως Badh.—dua, ‘quid 5101 vult ?’ (Cob.), ‘malim
ἀλλά (saltem)’ Her.—Ikdpw Bek. Goll.
§ 3. ἐγκαταλήψει C m. pr. οὐκ ἐν καταλήψει, ‘quod praestat’ Nab.
Cf. Dio Cass. 55. 1.—‘Corrige, sodes, ws φυλακὴν σφίσι, et ne pueri
quidem haerebunt’ (Nab.).

XXXIV. §1. ἰδίαν Bek. vulg.
§ 2. ξυνελθόντες F; cf. 110 8 2.

26 @OOTKTAIAOT

[2 /
ot δὲ ὑπεξελθόντες τούτους Kal ὄντες φυγάδες τὸν
/ > / c \ , > ΄
3 ΠΠάχητα ἐπάγονται. ὁ δὲ προκαλεσάμενος ἐς λόγους
«ς / lal τ “ ΓΑ > U
Ἱππίαν τῶν ἐν τῷ διατειχίσματι ᾿Αρκάδων ἄρχοντα,
ὥστε, ἢν μηδὲν ἀρέσκον λέγῃ, πάλιν αὐτὸν καταστήσειν
> \ a lal A Me, na ς Ν 5 ““ , ») / - oT]
ἐς TO τεῖχος σῶν Kal ὑγιᾶ, ὁ μὲν ἐξῆλθε παρ᾽ αὐτόν, ὁ ὃ
ἐκεῖνον μὲν ἐν φυλακῇ ἀδέσμῳ εἶχεν, αὐτὸς δὲ προσ-
βαλὼν τῷ τειχίσματι ἐξαπιναίως καὶ οὐ προσδεχομένων
e n / > , \ “ / “ 8. Δ
αἱρεῖ, τούς τε ᾿Αρκάδας καὶ τῶν βαρβάρων ὅσοι ἐνῆσαν
διαφθείρει" καὶ τὸν Ἱππίαν ὕστερον ἐσαγαγὼν ὥσπερ
ἐσπείσατο, ἐπειδὴ ἔνδον ἦν, ξυλλαμβάνει καὶ κατα-
4 τοξεύει. ἸΚοχλοφωνίοις δὲ Νότιον παραδίδωσι πλὴν τῶν
¢ 3 a
μηδισάντων. καὶ ὕστερον ᾿Αθηναῖοι οἰκιστὰς πέμψαντες
\ a ‘
κατὰ τοὺς ἑαυτῶν νόμους κατῴκισαν TO Νότιον, Evva-
/ lal
yayovtes πάντας ἐκ τῶν πόλεων, εἴ πού τις ἦν Κολο-
φωνίων.
XXXV. ‘O δὲ Πάχης ἀφικόμενος ἐς τὴν Μυτιλήνην
, , \oov / \ ,
τὴν τε [Πύρραν καὶ ρεσον παρεστήσατο, καὶ Saratov
λαβὼν ἐν τῇ πόλει τὸν Λακεδαιμόνιον κεκρυμμένον
» / b] \ 3 / " \ > n /
ἀποπέμπει es tas ᾿Αθήνας, καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῆς Τενέδου
Μυτιληναίων ἄνδρας ἅμα ods κατέθετο, καὶ εἴ τις ἄλλος
fal rn ᾽ nd
2 αὐτῷ αἴτιος ἐδόκει εἶναι τῆς ἀποστάσεως" ἀποπέμπει
δὲ καὶ τῆς στρατιᾶς τὸ πλέον. τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς ὕπο-
/ / \ \ \ , \ \
μένων καθίστατο τὰ περὶ τὴν Μυτιλήνην καὶ τὴν
ἄλλην Λέσβον ἣ αὐτῷ ἐδόκει. XXXVI. ἀφικομένων
Ὁ a “ 4 > a \
δὲ τῶν ἀνδρῶν καὶ τοῦ Σαλαίθου οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τὸν μὲν
/ av / , ’
Σάλαιθον εὐθὺς ἀπέκτειναν, ἔστιν ἃ παρεχόμενον, τά τ
lal x fa
ἄλλα καὶ ἀπὸ Ildataév (ἔτει yap ἐπολιορκοῦντο)
’ U / \ δὲ a > ὃ “Ὁ /
2 ἀπάξειν Πελοποννησίους" περὶ δὲ τῶν ἀνδρῶν γνώμας
§ 3. προσκαλεσάμενος AG vulg.—rdv ἐν τῷ vulg. corr. Cob,—é δ᾽
ἐξῆλθε ABCEF.—éorevoro Cob.

XXXV. § 1. τὸν Λακεδαιμόνιον del. Cob.
XXXVI. § 1. προισχόμενον Dobr. Adv. 1. 34.

SYTTPA®HS TP. 27

> le Ne - Ν 9 a ” ? a ’ \ ΄
ἐποιοῦντο, καὶ ὑπὸ ὀργῆς ἔδοξεν αὐτοῖς οὐ τοὺς παρόντας
/ > a > \ Ν ΝΣ. ἦα; ,
μόνον ἀποκτεῖναι εἐλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἅπαντας Μυτιληναίους
a a \ r > ,
ὅσοι ἡβῶσι, παῖδας δὲ καὶ γυναῖκας ἀνδραποδίσαι,
> a / » 3 , ing 9 > ,
ἐπικαλοῦντες τὴν TE ἄλλην αποόστασιν OTL οὐκ ἄρχο-
v4 eC: 2sh. > , \ ω
μενοι ὥσπερ οἱ ἄλλοι ἐποιήσαντο, καὶ προσξυνεβάλετο
οὐκ ἐλάχιστον τῆς ὁρμῆς αἱ Πελοποννησίων νῆες ἐς
Ἰωνίαν ἐκείνοις βοηθοὶ τολμήσασαι παρακινδυνεῦσαι"
/ ᾽
οὐ γὰρ ἀπὸ βραχείας διανοίας ἐδόκουν τὴν ἀπόστασιν
ποιήσασθαι. πέμπουσιν οὖν τριήρη ὡς ΠΠάχητα ayye- 3
λον τῶν δεδογμένων, κατὰ τάχος κελεύοντες διαχρή-
σασθαι Μυτιληναίους. καὶ τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ μετάνοιά τις 4
> \ 3 "ὰ rn \ > \ > \ \ / \
εὐθὺς ἣν αὐτοῖς Kal ἀναλογισμὸς ὠμὸν TO βούλευμα Kal
μέγα ἐγνῶσθαι, πόλιν ὅλην διαφθεῖραι μᾶλλον ἢ οὐ
\ Sa ὦ ¢ eh) ἴω “ / ς
τοὺς αἰτίους. ὡς δ᾽ ἤσθοντο τοῦτο τῶν Μυτιληναίων oi ς
, / \ 6 5 a lal -» /
παρόντες πρέσβεις καὶ οἱ αὐτοῖς τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων Evp-
’ >
πράσσοντες, παρεσκεύασαν τοὺς ἐν τέλει ὥστε αὖθις
γνώμας προθεῖναι" καὶ ἔπεισαν ῥᾷον, διότι καὶ ἐκείνοις
ἔνδηλον ἦν βουλόμενον τὸ πλέον τῶν πολιτῶν αὖθίς
/ > a 4 ,
τινα σφίσιν ἀποδοῦναι βουλεύσασθαι. καταστάσης 6
> > \ > / Μ lal ’ 5 « f
δ᾽ εὐθὺς ἐκκλησίας ἄλλαι τε γνῶμαι ap ἑκάστων
ἐλέγοντο, καὶ Κλέων ὁ Κλεαινέτου, ὅσπερ καὶ τὴν
/ > A 3
προτέραν ἐνενικήκει ὥστε ἀποκτεῖναι, ὧν Kal ἐς τὰ
Μ / A a n / Ἂς
ἄλλα βιαιότατος τῶν πολιτῶν τῷ τε δήμῳ παρὰ
\ a 5 »
πολὺ ἐν τῷ τότε πιθανώτατος, παρελθὼν αὖθις Ereys
/
τοιάδε.

XXXVII. “ΠΟΛΛΑΚΙ͂Σ μὲν ἤδη ἔγωγε καὶ

§ 2. καὶ ὅτι Cl. to which Grossmann (N. Jahrb. 1884, Pt 5) objects.
- προσξυνελάβοντό ye B, which Kr. accepts. F shews -ero, m. pr.
ascript. C -ovro (vid. Hud. Comm. Crit. 96).

§ 4. αὐτοῖς om. B.

§ 5. κἀκείνοις Cob.—rtuwas vulg. corr. Cob.

8 6. wore ἀποκτεῖναι del. Her.—radda Her.

28 COTKTAIAOT

7 ” ΄ “ 5 , ΠΕΡ. ἘΝ,
ἄλλοτε ἔγνων δημοκρατίαν ὅτι ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν ἑτέρων
Ὗ
«cm f 8 b) “ a c / \
ἄρχειν, μάλιστα δ᾽ ἐν τῇ νῦν ὑμετέρᾳ περὶ Μυτιλη-
ee ἢ , ΩΣ \ \ Bae ὝΕΣ \
ναίων μεταμελείᾳ. διὰ yap TO καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἀδεὲς Kal
“ ἀνεπιβούλευτον πρὸς ἀλλήλους καὶ ἐς τοὺς ξυμμάχους
(« Ν >) x ” \ dé x a ’ θέ € >
TO αὐτὸ ἔχετε, καὶ ὅ TL ἂν ἢ λόγῳ πεισθέντες ὑπ᾿
“αὐτῶν ἁμάρτητε ἢ οἴκτῳ ἐνδῶτε, οὐκ ἐπικινδύνως
an lal τὶ \ an
“ἡγεῖσθε ἐς ὑμᾶς Kal οὐκ ἐς τὴν τῶν ξυμμάχων χάριν
lal “
“ μαλακίζεσθαι, οὐ σκοποῦντες ὅτι τυραννίδα ἔχετε τὴν
᾽ν
“ἀρχὴν καὶ πρὸς ἐπιβουλεύοντας αὐτοὺς καὶ ἄκοντας
τ e x
“ἀρχομένους, <ol> οὐκ ἐξ ὧν ἂν χαρίζησθε Bra-
« if 5 \ , a [2 -“ > δὲ... e x , 7.
TTOMEVOL AVTOL ἀκροῶνται ὑμῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ὧν ἂν ἰσχυΐ
“μᾶλλον ἢ τῇ ἐκείνων εὐνοίᾳ περιγένησθε ἵν δὲ
μᾶλλον ἢ τῇ ἐκείνων εὐνοίᾳ περιγένησθε. πάντων δὲ
/ € fal ΄ (2 )
“δεινότατον εἰ βέβαιον ἡμῖν μηδὲν καθεστήξει ὧν ἂν
, , “ >’
“δόξῃ πέρι, μηδὲ γνωσόμεθα ὅτι χείροσι νόμοις ἀκινή-
“τοῖς χρωμένη πόλις κρείσσων ἐστὶν ἢ καλῶς ἔχουσιν
“ 5 , 3, 7] 3,5 / 3 A
ἀκύροις, ἀμαθία Te μετὰ σωφροσύνης ὠφελιμώτερον ἢ
(44 , \ ’ 7ὔ “ / A 7
δεξιότης μετὰ ἀκολασίας, οἵ τε φαυλότεροι τῶν ἀν-
΄ « “-
“θρώπων πρὸς τοὺς ξυνετωτέρους ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πλεῖον
“ἄμεινον οἰκοῦσι τὰς πόλεις. οἱ μὲν γὰρ τῶν τε νόμων
΄. 72 nr -»
“ σοφώτεροι βούλονται φαίνεσθαι τῶν τε ἀεὶ λεγομένων
«2? \ \ / Cao nwesy ΄ >
ἐς TO κοινὸν περιγίγνεσθαι, ὡς ἐν ἄλλοις μείζοσιν οὐκ
“ἂν δηλώσαντες τὴν γνώμην, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ τοιούτου τὰ
“πολλὰ σφάλλουσι τὰς πόλεις" οἱ δ᾽ ἀπιστοῦντες τῇ
XXXVII. §1. ἀδύνατος Cob. vulg. but against Mss.—juerépg AEF.
-Ο-Ο᾽ ὐἨμελείᾳ AB.
§ 2. ταὐτόν Her.—évddvres Her.—paraxliecbe ΑΒ.
ἄκοντες ἀρχόμενοι ὡς St. ‘violenta satis mutatio’ (Hud.): all the better
MSS. shew ἄκοντας ἀρχομένους. of wanting in better Mss. prob. from
confusion of οι, ov (cf. Bast. p. 247), but shewn in inferior mss. and IE
and admitted in text by Bek. Kr. οὐκ ἐξ Cl., with colon after ἀρχο-
μένους. οὐδ᾽ ἐξ Her.—dxpodévto BF.—ge AEF.—7 τῇ ἐκείνων εὐνοί
ρ ς Ὥ ᾳ
del. Nab.

§ 3. ἐπιτοπλεῖστον B vulg.

ΞΥΓΓΡΑΦΗ͂Σ ΓΤ. 29

Ἐξ.9 c lal , > / \ lal U ᾽ nr
ἐξ ἑαυτῶν ξυνέσει ἀμαθέστεροι μὲν τῶν νόμων ἀξιοῦσιν
«c 5 ᾿ \ a lal > , /
εἶναι, ἀδυνατώτεροι δὲ TOD καλῶς εἰπόντος μέμψασθαι
τέ πε ἡ δὲ ὁ ae a» a a 29
λόγον, κριταὶ O€ OVTES απὸ τοῦ ἰσου μᾶλλον ἢ ayo-
“γνισταὶ ὀρθοῦνται τὰ πλείω. ὡς οὖν χρὴ καὶ ἡμᾶς 5
“ ποιοῦντας, μὴ δεινότητι καὶ ξυνέσεως ἀγῶνι ἐπαιρο-
Ν a lal
“ μένους παρὰ δόξαν τῷ ὑμετέρῳ πλήθει παραινεῖν.
i ς -
“XXXVIII. ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν ὁ αὐτός εἰμι τῇ γνώμῃ καὶ
“θαυμάζω μὲν τῶν προθέντων αὖθις περὶ Μυτιληναίων
“λέγειν καὶ χρόνου διατριβὴν ἐμποιησάντων, ὅ ἐστι
“ \ a 1) / a ς \ \ a /
πρὸς τῶν ἠδικηκότων μᾶλλον (ὁ yap παθὼν τῷ Spa-
« Ἂν Br / a > “Ὁ » ξέ > / 0 δὲ
σαντι ἀμβλυτέρᾳ τῇ ὀργῇ ἐπεξέρχεται, ἀμύνασθαι δὲ
an a > >
«τῷ παθεῖν ὅτι ἐγγυτάτω κείμενον ἀντίπαλον [ὃν]
“μάλιστα τὴν τιμωρίαν [ἀνα]λαμβάνει), θαυμάζω δὲ
“ καὶ ὅστις ἔσται ὁ ἀντερῶν καὶ ἀξιώσων ἀποφαίνειν
, lal
“τὰς μὲν Μυτιληναίων ἀδικίας ἡμῖν ὠφελίμους οὔσας,
“τὰς δ᾽ ἡμετέρας ξυμφορὰς τοῖς ξυμμάχοις βλάβας
“καθισταμένας. καὶ δῆλον ὅτι ἢ τῷ λέγειν πιστεύσας 2
“oO πάνυ δοκοῦν ἀνταποφῆναι ὡς οὐκ ἔγνωσται ἀγω-
“γίσαιτ᾽ ἄν, ἢ κέρδει ἐπαιρόμενος τὸ εὐπρεπὲς τοῦ
“λόγου ἐκπονήσας παράγειν πειράσεται. ἡ δὲ πόλις 3
“ 3 Lal lal ὃ , [2 A \ 10 e / ὃ ,
ἐκ τῶν τοιῶνδε ἀγώνων τὰ μὲν ἄθλα ἑτέροις δίδωσιν,
§ 4. τῇ ἐξ ἑαυτῶν MSS. except BG, which shew τῇ ἐξ αὑτῶν. τῇ
ἑαυτῶν Bek. Her.—rév τοῦ καλῶς Nab. from Stobaeus.
§ 5. τὸ δόξαν Her. from Ullrichs. παράδοξα παραινεῖν Badh.
XXXVIII. § τ. del 6 αὐτός Nab.—autverda vulg. τἀμύνασθαι
Cob. ‘aegre desidero articulum.’—ov del. Her. Haase, Kr. Cl. St.
Shilleto retains, see Shill. on 1. 20, p. 25.—AapuBadver St., but schol. av
would point to λαμβάνοι (Hud. Comm. Cr. 98).—éorly Her.—ov τοῖς
ξυμμάχοις Poppo from οὐ adscript in H. A ‘reductio ad absurdum’
says Cob. “οἱ ξύμμαχοι non sunt of δουλεύοντες, sed ἐλεύθεροι καὶ αὐτό-
νομοι. Fuerunt qui de suo adderent οὐ: legendum τὰ δ᾽ ἡμέτερα ξύμφορα
‘quae nobis prosunt.’ But cf. 56 § 3. Perhaps the allusion to ai τῶν

πέλας ξυμφοραί has affected the text here.
§ 3. τοῖς ῥήτορσι (for ἑτέροις) C.

30 OOTKTAIAOT

CC ES TON \ δ > ͵ " "τς κ
4 “ αὐτὴ δὲ τοὺς κινδύνους ἀναφέρει. αἴτιοι δ᾽ ὑμεῖς κακῶς
> fal tal
“ἀγωνοθετοῦντες, οἵτινες εἰώθατε θεαταὶ μὲν τῶν λόγων
τα > \ \ a oo \ \ ,
γίγνεσθαι, ἀκροαταὶ δὲ τῶν ἔργων, τὰ μὲν μέλλοντα
al / la)
“ἔργα ἀπὸ τῶν εὖ εἰπόντων σκοποῦντες ὡς δυνατὰ
δ : \ \ / ” ) \ \
γίγνεσθαι, τὰ δὲ πεπραγμένα ἤδη, οὐ τὸ δρασθὲν
« , " , ΕἾ er \ oN a
πιστότερον ὄψει λαβόντες ἢ TO ἀκουσθὲν ἀπὸ τῶν
5 “λόγῳ καλῶς ἐπιτιμησάντων' καὶ μετὰ καινότητος μὲν
« , Ε na » \ , \ ‘
λόγου ἀπατᾶσθαι ἄριστοι, μετὰ δεδοκιμασμένου δὲ μὴ
“ ξυνέπεσθαι ἐθέλειν, δοῦλοι ὄντες τῶν ἀεὶ ἀτόπων, ὑπερ-
6 “ὅπται δὲ τῶν εἰωθότων, καὶ μάλιστα μὲν αὐτὸς εἰπεῖν
ce , ͵ > \ , >
ἕκαστος βουλόμενος δύνασθαι, εἰ δὲ μή, ἀνταγωνι-
a a oi γ -
“ ζόμενοι τοῖς τοιαῦτα λέγουσι μὴ ὕστεροι ἀκολουθῆσαι
“δοκεῖν τῇ γνώμῃ, ὀξέως δέ τι λέγοντος προεπαινέσαι,
( \ / / τὰ \ /
καὶ προαισθέσθαι τε πρόθυμοι [εἶναι] τὰ λεγόμενα
« \ an na N: b > a ᾽ ,ὔ
καὶ προνοῆσαι βραδεῖς τὰ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀποβησόμενα:
«( ἴω us ” e > - Eee) e lal lal
7 “ ζητοῦντές τε ἄλλο TL ὡς εἰπεῖν ἢ ἐν οἷς ζῶμεν, φρονοῦν-
fal f lal rn
“τες δὲ οὐδὲ περὶ τῶν παρόντων ἱκανῶς" ἁπλῶς TE
“ ἀκοῆς ἡδονῇ ἡσσώμενοι, καὶ σοφιστῶν θεαταῖς ἐοικότες
na δ
“καθημένοις μᾶλλον ἢ περὶ πόλεως βουλευομένοις.
δι , f a
“XXXIX. ὧν ἐγὼ πειρώμενος ἀποτρέπειν ὑμᾶς, ἀπο-

§ 4. ἔργα del. Her.—oxoroivres before ἀπό F.—Oecadév (in place
of δρασθὲν) J vulg.: all good Mss. δρασθὲν.---λόγων vulg.

§ 5. paoro Nab. from Dio Cass. 45. 8.

§6. τοιαῦτα del. Her.—ére λέγοντος Dob. ‘pro λέγοντος fortasse
melius λέγοντας ad τοῖς τοιαῦτα λέγουσι relatum scribitur’ (Hud.).—
προαρπάσαι Cob, from Plat. Gorg. 454 6. προεπαΐσαι Reiske. προε-
πινοῆσαι Kr. προσέσθαι Her. (Stud. p. 41, Thuc. Iv. 108 § 4). Her.
assumes a corruption of προσέσθαι by dittography to προσεσθέσθαι, cor-
rected to προαισθέσθαι---ἃ change probable from the corrupt pronunciation
of non-classical times, which confused e with αὐ and at with e.—elvax del.
Her. Pop. St. But πρόθυμοι εἶναι might = προθυμεῖσθαι.

$7- τιάλλο C.—eixores Her. Stud. 124. Cob. Mnem. II. 145; V. 264.

XXXIX. § 1. ἀποφανῶ Her. needlessly.

ΞΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ T’. 31

\
“«φαίνω Μυτιληναίους μάλιστα δὴ μίαν πόλιν ἠδικη-
a \ \
“κότας ὑμᾶς. ἐγὼ γάρ, οἵτινες μὲν μὴ δυνατοὶ φέρειν 2
Ἂ Ν a
“στὴν ὑμετέραν ἀρχὴν ἢ οἵτινες ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων
᾽ ΄ , fol
“ἀναγκασθέντες ἀπέστησαν, ξυγγνώμην ἔχω" νῆσον δὲ
\ lal \ ‘
“οἵτινες ἔχοντες μετὰ τειχῶν, Kal κατὰ θάλασσαν
ee. Ἦ ΄ Av J ske ΄ , 2 @ \
μόνον φοβούμενοι τοὺς ἡμετέρους πολεμίους, ἐν ᾧ Kal
a 2
“αὐτοὶ τριήσων παρασκευῇ οὐκ ἄφρακτοι ἦσαν πρὸς
/ > nr ’
“αὐτούς, αὐτόνομοί τε οἰκοῦντες καὶ τιμώμενοι ἐς τὰ
“στρῶτα ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν τοιαῦτα εἰργάσαντο, τί ἄλλο οὗτοι ἢ
« 3 / / \ > / fal * , /
ἐπεβούλευσάν τε καὶ ἐπανέστησαν μᾶλλον ἢ ἀπέστη-
“σαν (ἀπόστασις μέν γε τῶν βίαιόν τι πασχόντων
“ἐστίν), ἐζήτησάν τε μετὰ τῶν πολεμιωτάτων ἡμᾶς
« ͵ a 7ὔ , , 5) ues »
στάντες διαφθεῖραι; καίτοι δεινότερόν ἐστιν ἢ εἰ καθ
“αὑτοὺς δύναμιν κτώμενοι ἀντεπολέμησαν. παράδειγμα 3
“ \ >? a ΝΜ ¢ a / \ 2 a Ὁ“
δὲ αὐτοῖς οὔτε αἱ τῶν πέλας ξυμφοραὶ ἐγένοντο, ὅσοι
“ἀποστάντες ἤδη ἡμῶν ἐχειρώθησαν, οὔτε ἡ παροῦσα
« 635 , Ἴ " anaes > 5 Dr
εὐδαιμονία παρέσχεν ὄκνον μὴ ἐλθεῖν ἐς τὰ δεινά
« , \ \ \ , a \ ,
γενόμενοι δὲ πρὸς τὸ μέλλον θρασεῖς καὶ ἐλπίσαντες
͵ \ a , > ΄ \ a ,ὕ
“ μακρότερα μὲν τῆς δυνάμεως ἐλάσσω δὲ τῆς βουλήσεως,
, a /
“πόλεμον ἤραντο, ἰσχὺν ἀξιώσαντες τοῦ δικαίου προ-
“ lal) < 2 - \ DE / > / came
θεῖναι" ἐν ᾧ yap ὠήθησαν περιέσεσθαι, ἐπέθεντο ἡμῖν
“ >? 3 / y \ lal ‘ e Ἂ /
οὐκ ἀδικούμενοι. εἴωθε δὲ τῶν πόλεων αἷς ἂν μάλιστα 4
3 /
“καὶ Ov ἐλαχίστου ἀπροσδόκητος εὐπραξία ἔλθη, ἐς

§ 2. τριηρῶν vulg.—dapapxro Her. asthe older ἔουτη. ---καίτοιτοῦτο Her.

§ 3. δι᾽ ἡμῶν E (om. 76y).—ph οὐκ ἐλθεῖν Her. τοῦ μή E.

8 4. εὐπραγία Her. from Photius (Nab. ed. p. 233).

Weil (Rev. de Phil. 11. 90) and Her. place μάλιστα καὶ after ἔλθῃ
—but this gives no relief (Hud. Comm. Cr. 98). Gelzer (Gott. 1869)
places δι᾽ ἐλαχίστου before és ὕβριν. Cobet from Clem. Alex. 618 D,
who quotes the passage as it stands in the received text, as well as
from a comment of Philistus’, “εἰώθασι yap μάλιστα οἱ παρὰ δόξαν εὖ
πράσσοντες eis ὕβριν τρέπεσθαι, argues for the soundness of the text.
Cf, the schol. 7 παρ᾽ ἀξίαν τιμή with Dem. Olynth. I. ὃ 23.

32 @OOTKYAIAOT

« 14 A
“ὕβριν τρέπειν" Ta δὲ πολλὰ «τὰ» κατὰ λόγον τοῖς
κὲ 5 θ , ι εὖ DVT a φ λέ ΩΝ \ 50

ἀνθρώποις εὐτυχοῦντα ἀσφαλέστερα ἢ παρὰ δοξαν,

Ν / id >’ Lal en 5» cr
“Kal κακοπραγίαν ὡς εἰπεῖν ῥᾷον ἀπωθοῦνται ἢ εὐδαι-
ς “ μονίαν διασώζονται. χρῆν δὲ Μυτιληναίους καὶ πάλαι
fal v > “ “-
« μηδὲν διαφέροντας τῶν ἄλλων ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν τετιμῆσθαι,
x f / πὶ 5)
« καὶ οὐκ av ἐς τόδε ἐξύβρισαν" πέφυκε yap Kal ἄλλως
> \ nr ς rn \
«ἄνθρωπος TO μὲν θεραπεῦον ὑπερφρονεῖν, τὸ δὲ μὴ
lal / \ r
6 “ὑπεῖκον θαυμάζειν. κολασθέντων δὲ καὶ νῦν ἀξίως
(( fal io / \ \ a \ 2 / ς 3:..ἕ τῇ n
τῆς ἀδικίας, καὶ μὴ τοῖς μὲν ὀλίγοις ἡ αἰτία προστεθῇ,
an > / an
«πὸν δὲ δῆμον ἀπολύσητε. πάντες yap ἡμῖν γε ὁμοίως
᾽ na « ς “ rn ΄
«ἐπέθεντο, οἷς γ᾽ ἐξῆν ὡς ἡμᾶς τρεπομένοις νῦν πάλιν
an 3 \ fal
«ἐν τῇ πόλει εἶναι. ἀλλὰ TOV μετὰ τῶν ὀλίγων κίνδυνον
ς / / an
7 “ἡγησάμενοι βεβαιότερον ξυναπέστησαν. τῶν τε ξυμ-
͵ “ > a lal
“μάχων, σκέψασθε, εἰ τοῖς Te ἀναγκασθεῖσιν ὑπὸ τών
a an > a
« πολεμίων καὶ τοῖς ἑκοῦσιν ἀποστᾶσι Tas αὐτὰς ζημίας
« ie / ” θ «“ ᾽ bal ,
προσθήσετε, τίνα οἴεσθε ὅντινα οὐ βραχείᾳ προφάσει
«ἀποστήσεσθαι, ὅταν ἢ κατορθώσαντι ἐλευθέρωσ:ς ἢ ἢ
εὐτυχοῦνται Hud. εὐτυχοῦσι Bad. The schol. appears to have had
a second article in his text, e.g. Ta δὲ πολλὰ τὰ εὐτ. : confusions of A
and τ are frequent (Bast. p. 768). But did Thuc. write τὰ εὖ τυχόντα ὃ
—ra παρὰ δόξαν Bad., who also inserts πάντες before ἀπωθοῦνται.

§ 5. χρή most of the better Mss.—diagepoyrws Her. from EM.—
ἅνθρωπος Cob. Her.

8 6. κολασθήτωσαν Cl. Kr. Boh. retain as a form not unknown
to old Attic. It is of reputed Macedonian origin, and not found in
inscriptions until 308 B.c. Classen, however, distinguishes between
the uses of official documents and literary Greek (vid. Stahl Qu. Gr.
p. 18; Meisterhans, p. 132; Her. Stud. p. 116; Kriig. on Thue. 1.
34 § 1; Class. Vol. 111. 201).-ο-ὑὑμν ACEFM. ἡμῖν Β.---τραπομένοις
St.—dvra (for πάλι) Her. Stud. 143. τὰ πρῶτα Cob. cf. Hdt. VI. roo.
—rov om. C.

§ 7. ὑπότε ABEF vulg. Does τε conceal ye? (Hud.). προθήσετε
Cob. on analogy of προκεῖσθαι.

“ ἡ

ἡ ἢ. The natural pause at ἢ relieves the harshness of the juxta-
position.

ETTTPA®HS I. 33

/ lal a ‘
“σφαλέντι μηδὲν παθεῖν ἀνήκεστον; ἡμῖν δὲ πρὸς 8
“ἑκάστην πόλιν ἀποκεκινδυνεύσεται τά τε χρήματα
“ \ ς 7, αἱ “ \ on ᾽ θ /

καὶ αἱ ψυχαί. καὶ τυχόντες μὲν πόλιν ἐφθαρμένην
, a Ld ε
“παραλαβόντες τῆς ἔπειτα προσόδου, δι’ ἣν ἰσχύομεν,
“στὸ λοιπὸν στερήσεσθε, σφαλέντες δὲ πολεμίους πρὸς
“τοῖς ὑπάρχουσιν ἕξομεν" καὶ ὃν χρόνον τοῖς νῦν καθε-
« / a > a >? 7ὔ ων ᾽ /
στηκόσι δεῖ ἐχθροῖς ἀνθίστασθαι, τοῖς οἰκείοις Evp-
“μάχοις πολεμήσομεν. ΧΙ, οὔκουν δεῖ προθεῖναι
« ὅλ, (ὃ » Ν it, \ A / > / «
ἐλπίδα οὔτε λόγῳ πιστὴν οὔτε χρήμασιν ὠνητήν, ὡς
, a 7
“ξυγγνώμην ἁμαρτεῖν ἀνθρωπίνως λήψονται. ἄκοντες
“μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἔβλαψαν, εἰδότες δὲ ἐπεβούλευσαν"
“ ξύγγνωμον δ᾽ ἐστὶ τὸ ἀκούσιον. ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν καὶ τότε 2
“πρῶτον καὶ νῦν διαμάχομαι μὴ μεταγνῶώναι ὑμᾶς τὰ
“προδεὸ ἔνα δὲ τρισὶ τοῖς ἀξυ l ἢ
προδεδογμένα, μὴ ρ ς μφορωτάτοις τῇ
’ a ¢ an
“ἀρχῇ, οἴκτῳ καὶ ἡδονῇ λόγων Kal ἐπιεικείᾳ, ἁμαρτά-
\ a «ς fa
“pew. ἔλεός TE γὰρ πρὸς TOUS ὁμοίους δίκαιος ἀντιδί- 3
\ \ > ἴω
“Soc@at, καὶ μὴ πρὸς τοὺς οὔτ᾽ ἀντοικτιοῦντας ἐξ
“ἀνάγκης τε καθεστῶτας ἀεὶ πολεμίους" Of Te τέρποντες
“ , ΕΓ “ Neve ” bs / > a
λόγῳ ῥήτορες ἕξουσι Kai ἐν ἄλλοις ἐλάσσοσιν ἀγώνα,
/ “-“
“ καὶ μὴ ἐν ᾧ ἡ μὲν πόλις βραχέα ἡσθεῖσα μεγάλα ζη-
a > lal \ a
“μιώσεται, αὐτοὶ δὲ ἐκ τοῦ εὖ εἰπεῖν TO παθεῖν εὖ
2 , A ee) , \ \ 7
ἀντιληψρονται καὶ ἡ ἐπιείκεια πρὸς τοὺς μέλλοντας
“ ἐπιτηδείους καὶ τὸ λοιπὸν ἔσεσθαι μᾶλλον δίδοται ἢ

8 8. τῆς ἐκεῖθεν προσόδου Ullr. ἐπετείου Weil, Her.; cf. Her.
Stud. p. 41.--ἐστερήσεσθε Her.

XL. 8 1. προθεῖναι EFGM, al. προσθεῖναι. προτεῖναι Her.—
πειστήν Her.; cf. Ar. Nub. 77. κτητήν Bad. ποριστήν Kr. οἰστήν
Kiipp.—éxévres Cob. omitting οὐκ. See Herbst in Philol. xiir. 715.
v. Holzapfel (Rhein. Mus. ΧΧΧΥΊΙ. p. 454).

§ 2. πρῶτον del. Cob. Her.

8 3. ἀεὶ ποτέ Cob. from loss of ποτέ in πολε.---ημιωθήσεται G,
which omits αὐτοί.---ὁμοίως Thiersch, Cl. St.

Sauk. 3

34, ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΟΥ͂

«πρὸς τοὺς ὁμοίους τε καὶ οὐδὲν ἧσσον πολεμίους ὑπο-
“λειπομένους. ἕν δὲ ξυνελὼν λέγω: πειθόμενοι μὲν
“ ἐμοὶ τά τε δίκαια ἐς Μυτιληναίους καὶ τὰ ξύμφορα
“ἅμα ποιήσετε, ἄλλως δὲ γνόντες τοῖς μὲν οὐ χαριεῖσθε,
«ὑμᾶς δὲ αὐτοὺς μᾶλλον δικαιώσεσθε. εἰ γὰρ οὗτοι
“ὀρθῶς ἀπέστησαν, ὑμεῖς ἂν οὐ χρεὼν ἄρχοιτε. εἰ δὲ
“Oy καὶ οὐ προσῆκον ὅμως ἀξιοῦτε τοῦτο δρᾷν, παρὰ τὸ
“εἰκός Tot καὶ τούσδε ξυμφόρως δεῖ κολάζεσθαι, ἢ
“παύεσθαι τῆς ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἀκινδύνου ἀνδραγαθί-
“ξεσθαι. τῇ τε αὐτῇ ζημίᾳ ἀξιώσατε ἀμύνασθαι καὶ
“μὴ ἀναλγητότεροι οἱ διαφεύγοντες τῶν ἐπιβουλευ-
«“σάντων φανῆναι, ἐνθυμηθέντες ἃ εἰκὸς Hv αὐτοὺς
“ποιῆσαι κρατήσαντας ὑμῶν, ἄλλως TE καὶ προῦπαρ-
“ἕαντας αδικίας. μάλιστα δὲ οἱ μὴ ξὺν προφάσει τινὰ
“κακῶς ποιοῦντες ἐπεξέρχονται καὶ διόλλυνται, τὸν
“κίνδυνον ὑφορώμενοι τοῦ ὑπολειπομένου ἐχθροῦ" ὁ γὰρ
“un ξὺν ἀνάγκῃ τι παθὼν χαλεπώτερος διαφυγὼν τοῦ
“ἀπὸ τῆς ἴσης ἐχθροῦ. μὴ οὖν προδόται γένησθε ὑμῶν
“αὐτῶν, γενόμενοι δ᾽ ὅτι ἐγγύτατα τῇ γνώμῃ τοῦ
“πάσχειν καὶ ὡς πρὸ παντὸς ἂν ἐτιμήσασθε αὐτοὺς
«χειρώσασθαι, νῦν ἀνταπόδοτε μὴ μαλακισθέντες πρὸς
“70 παρὸν αὐτίκα μηδὲ τοῦ ἐπικρεμασθέντος ποτὲ
“ δεινοῦ ἀμνημονοῦντες. κολάσατε δὲ ἀξίως τούτους τε,
“καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ξυμμάχοις παράδειγμα σαφὲς κατα-
“στήσατε, ὃς ἂν ἀφιστῆται, θανάτῳ ζημιωσόμενον.

§ 4. ἕν τε C only; cet. ἕν δέ.---πιθόμενοι ἨΥ.---δικαιώσετε Her.
from Elmsley.—rolvuy (for τοι) E, νι]ρ.---υμφόρως ‘ridiculum em-
blema’ Her.—xuvdvvovu B.

8 6. διολλύναι Cob. Cl. St. Her. Shilleto suggests διολλύντες,
cf. 1.62 ὃ 6. καὶ διόλλυνται Kr. del.

§ 7. ξὺν δίκῃ inferior MSs.—aapaurixa Her.—rore Cob.

§ 8. ὡς ds ἄν Meineke, cf. Plato Rep. 612 Ὁ.---ζημιωσόμενοι Mein.
from 67 ὃ 6.

ΞΥΨΕΡΆΦΗΣΙ ΙΝ 35

“ “ὃ. Ν wn lal ἫΝ a fd γ᾽ ,
τόδε Yap ἢν γνῶσιν, ἧσσον τῶν πολεμίων ἀμελήσαντες
“Ὁ ΄ > a ral /
“ τοῖς ὑμετέροις αὐτῶν μαχεῖσθε ξυμμάχοις."

XLI. Τοιαῦτα μὲν ὁ Κλέων εἶπε. μετὰ δ᾽ αὐτὸν 2

͵ > A
Διόδοτος ὁ Εὐκράτους, ὅσπερ καὶ ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ
> / ’ / , \ ? a
ἐκκλησίᾳ ἀντέλεγε μάλιστα μὴ ἀποκτεῖναι Μυτιλη-

ἐ

/ \ \ / Μ /
ναίους, παρελθὼν καὶ τότε ἔλεγε τοιάδε.

XLII. “OTTE τοὺς προθέντας τὴν διαγνώμην
“αὖθις περὶ Μυτιληναίων αἰτιῶμαι, οὔτε τοὺς μεμφο-
« / \ ‘ \ a / /

μένους μὴ πολλάκις περὶ TOV μεγίστων βουλεύεσθαι
“2? a η Se δ ’ Ν 5 , ᾽ , -
ἐπαινῶ, νομίζω δὲ δύο τὰ ἐναντιώτατα εὐβουλίᾳ εἶναι,

, e \ 5 ta
“πάχος τε Kal ὀργήν, ὧν TO μὲν μετὰ ἀνοίας φιλεῖ
ὩΣ ΞΡ δ ΝΣ Nee § ͵ \ ,

γίγνεσθαι, τὸ δὲ μετὰ ἀπαιδευσίας καὶ βραχύτητος
“γνώμης. τούς τε λόγους ὅστις διαμάχεται μὴ διδα- 2

“σκάλους τῶν πραγμάτων γίγνεσθαι, ἢ ἀξύνετός ἐστιν

ἊΝ 397 5 a ΄ 2 ͵ / > »

“ἢ ἰδίᾳ τι αὐτῷ διαφέρει' ἀξύνετος μέν, εἰ ἄλλῳ τινὶ

“ἡγεῖται περὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος δυνατὸν εἶναι καὶ μὴ

“ ἐμφανοῦς φράσαι, διαφέρει δ᾽ αὐτῷ, εἰ βουλόμενός τι

lal 3 “ ’ ὶ a a

“ αἰσχρὸν πεῖσαι εὖ μὲν εἰπεῖν οὐκ ἂν ἡγεῖται περὶ τοῦ

ral , 53 \ > A > ,

“ μὴ καλοῦ δύνασθαι, εὖ δὲ διαβαλὼν ἐκπλῆξαι ἂν τούς
“σε ἀντεροῦντας καὶ τοὺς ἀκουσομένους. χαλεπώτατοι 3

\ ΄- /

“δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐπὶ χρήμασι προκατηγοροῦντες ἐπίδειξίν

4 x c

“τινα. εἰ μὲν yap ἀμαθίαν κατῃτιῶντο, ὁ μὴ πείσας

6.2 / a / 3 ὮΝ ’ / , / -
ἀξυνετώτερος ἂν δόξας εἶναι ἢ ἀδικώτερος ἀπεχώρει

/
“ἀδικίας δ᾽ ἐπιφερομένης πείσας τε ὕποπτος γίγνεται
y »

“Kal μὴ τυχὼν μετὰ ἀξυνεσίας Kal ἄδικος. ἥ τε πόλις 4

“οὐκ ὠφελεῖται ἐν τῷ τοιῷδε: φόβῳ γὰρ ἀποστερεῖτα
UK € ν τῷ τοιῷ ω γὰρ ἀποστερεῖται

XLII. 8 1. νομίζω re ABCF, Cl. Her. 8ι.---τἀναντιώτατα Her.

§ 2. διαφέροι (for 2nd διαφέρει) ACEG.—dcadaBav E.

8 3. καί before οἱ, del. Ηετ.---χαλεπώτατοι δ᾽ ἐκεῖνοι of Bad.

προκατηγοροῦντες Her. from (.---ὠαἀὀντίδειξιν GM, from which Bad.
would correct ἀντιλέξειν, but Thuc. would write ἀντέρεῖϊν .--ξυνετώτερος
Ε.-- πείσας δέ C.

3

36 @OOTKTAIAOT

lal lal > » > lal ’

“cov ξυμβούλων. καὶ πλεῖστ᾽ ἂν ὀρθοῖτο ἀδυνάτους
«λέγειν ἔχουσα τοὺς τοιούτους τῶν πολιτῶν" ἐχάχιστα
> an / Ν \ \ Ἵ
«γὰρ ἂν πεισθεῖεν ἁμαρτάνειν. χρὴ δὲ τὸν μὲν ἀγαθὸν

r \ > σ΄
«πολίτην μὴ ἐκφοβοῦντα τοὺς ἀντεροῦντας aX ἀπὸ
« ny ,ὔ θ v λέ \ δὲ /
τοῦ ἴσου φαίνεσθαι ἄμεινον λέγοντα, THY O€ σώφρονα
« , A a 5 / \ ,
πόλιν τῷ τε πλεῖστα εὖ βουλεύοντι μὴ προστιθέναι
“Ὁ lal «ς
«τιμήν, ἀλλὰ μηδ᾽ ἐλασσοῦν τῆς ὑπαρχούσης, καὶ τὸν
« \ ,ὕ , > ad “Ὁ » A >
μὴ τυχόντα γνώμὴς οὐχ ὅπως ζημιοῦν ἀλλὰ pnd
“ ἀτιμάζειν. οὕτω γὰρ ὅ τε κατορθῶν ἥκιστα ἂν ἐπὶ τῷ
“ἔτι μειζόνων ἀξιοῦσθαι παρὰ γνώμην τι καὶ πρὸς
“χάριν λέγοι, ὅ τε μὴ ἐπιτυχὼν ὀρέγοιτο τῷ αὐτῷ,
’ , al
“«χαριζόμενός TL Kal αὐτός, προσάγεσθαι TO πλῆθος.
@ Cos > a :
“XLIII. ὧν ἡμεῖς τἀναντία δρώμεν, καὶ προσέτι ἢν τις
« \ (2 / UZ ὃ \ ν x / δὲ
καὶ ὑποπτεύηται κέρδους μὲν ἕνεκα τὰ βέλτιστα δὲ
, / / a
“Gums λέγειν, φθονήσαντες τῆς οὐ βεβαίου δοκήσεως
a a \ \
“τῶν κερδῶν τὴν φανερὰν ὠφελίαν τῆς πόλεως ἀφαιρού-
“μεθα. καθέστηκε δὲ τἀγαθὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐθέος λεγόμενα
> Led a lal
“μηδὲν ἀνυποπτότερα εἶναι TOV κακῶν, ὥστε δεῖν
ς , Ν - ΄
“ ὁμοίως τόν τε τὰ δεινότατα βουλόμενον πεῖσαι ἀπάτῃ
A a \
“προσάγεσθαι TO πλῆθος καὶ τὸν Ta ἀμείνω λέγοντα

§ 4. λέγειν om. CN.

πεισθείη Madv. (Adv. 1. 315), Her. πεισθείη ἄν Dob. Kriig. objects
to the insertion of a second ἄν so close to the first. πείσειαν ἄν (sc. οἱ
τοιοῦτοι) Her. fr. Cl. πεισθεῖεν St. corr. from false Ms. form πεισθείησαν
(St. Ou ἄγ. Ρ. 18).

§ 5. πιστὰ ξυμβουλεύοντι Weil, Her. ἄριστα Cob.

γνώμης del. Her. τῆς γνώμης Rauch, al.

8 6. ἐπὶ τό BEFM. This use of ἐπί though common with sub-
stantive in accusative is only found in Thuc. with dative form of
infinitive (St.).—dpéyorr’ ἂν ἀντιχαριζόμενος, or αὐτῴ ἀντιχαριζόμενος
Bad. Kr. however expunges χαριζόμενός τι καὶ αὐτός as ἃ mere gloss
on τῷ αὐτῷ, so also Cobet.

XLIII. § 2. εὐθέως E.—Bovdevopevoy ABEF (cf. Vir. 72 § 2).

ETITPA®HS IP. 37

\ / /
“hevoapevoy πιστὸν γενέσθαι. μόνην τε πόλιν διὰ 3
“σὰς περινοίας εὖ ποιῆσαι ἐκ τοῦ προφανοῦς μὴ ἐξα-
, ¢ \ \ A
“«“πατήσαντα advvatov' ὁ yap διδοὺς φανερῶς τι
͵ , a / iy

“ἀγαθὸν ἀνθυποπτεύεται ἀφανῶς πῃ πλέον ἕξειν. χρὴ 4
“δὲ πρὸς τὰ μέγιστα καὶ ἐν TH τοιῷδε ἀξιοῦν τι
“ἡμᾶς περαιτέρω προνοοῦντας λέγειν ὑμῶν τῶν δι
ΤῸΝ , " \ Sey \

ὀλίγου σκοπούντων, ἄλλως TE καὶ ἀνεύθυνον τὴν

, \ > , \
“παραίνεσιν ἔχοντας πρὸς ἀνεύθυνον τὴν ὑμετέραν
\ ud ’ὔ ς

“ἀκρόασιν. εἰ yap ὅ τε πείσας καὶ ὁ ἐπισπόμενος 5
« © 7) ᾽ ͵ὕ / x 9 , a

ὁμοίως ἐβλάπτοντο, σωφρονέστερον ἂν ἐκρίνετε" νῦν
“ δὲ \ > \ iA >’ Ἃ / δ Ὡ he

é πρὸς ὀργὴν ἥντιν᾽ ἂν τύχητε ἔστιν ὅτε σφαλέντες

fo) / “

“πὴν τοῦ πείσαντος μίαν γνώμην ζημιοῦτε, καὶ οὐ τὰς
WG ἢ >A ᾽ \ 5 ,

ὑμετέρας αὐτῶν, εἰ πολλαὶ οὖσαι ξυνεξήμαρτον.
“XLIV. ἐγὼ δὲ παρῆλθον οὔτε ἀντερῶν περὶ Μυτιλη-
«ναίων οὔτε κατηγορήσων. οὐ γὰρ περὶ τῆς ἐκείνων
« , / id Ὁ ς , ,ὔ > ἴω ᾽ \ \ an

ἀδικίας ἡμῖν ὁ aywv, εἰ σωφρονοῦμεν, ἀλλὰ περὶ τῆς
rt τ᾿ / ’ i ” \ 2 , / iO

ἡμετέρας εὐβουλίας. ἤν τε yap ἀποφήνω πάνυ ἀδι- 2

lol an 3 a

“« κοῦντας αὐτούς, οὐ διὰ τοῦτο Kal ἀποκτεῖναι κελεύσω,
τ δας ἐν t » \ + , 5

εἰ μὴ ξυμφέρον" ἤν τε καὶ ἔχοντάς τι ξυγγνώμης Τεῖναι
“ἐν τῇ πόλει εἰ μὴ ἀγαθὸν φαίνοιτο. νομίξω δὲ περὶ 3

an an lal , x la)

“Tod μέλλοντος ἡμᾶς μᾶλλον βουλεύεσθαι ἢ τοῦ
« , \ nr ἃ i lke / > 7

παρόντος. καὶ τοῦτο ὃ μάλιστα Κλέων ἰσχυρίζεται,

§ 4. ἀξιοῦντι Mss. corr. Kr. vid. Haase Luc. 36 5η6.---ὠἀνυπεύ-
θυνον Her.

§ 5. ἐπισπώμενος vulg.—7vTw’ dv St. ἤν twa Madv. with B,
perhaps a correction. at (for ei) Cob. Madv. Kr. comp. Valla’s version.
ἦν τινος Dissen, cf. V. 110. ἦν τι ἀτυχῆτε Gertz. ἤν τι τύχητε σφαλέντες
ἔστιν ὅτε or ἔστιν ὅτε σφαλέντες Her.—viv ἐξήμαρτον E.

XLIV. § 1. ἀντερῶν ὑπέρ Weil: but Attic freely interchanges περί
and ὑπέρ.

§ 2. ἐᾶν Lindau. ἐλεεῖν Firnhaber. ἀφεῖναι Bad. ἀνεῖναι Kr.
ἔχοντες εἶεν Bek. Classen’s colloquial εἶεν is quite inadmissible. There
appears to be a direct quotation of Cleon’s own words: cf. 39 § 6.

Go

38 OOTKTAIAOT

\
“ἐς τὸ λοιπὸν ξυμφέρον ἔσεσθαι πρὸς τὸ ἧσσον adi-
“στασθαι θάνατον ζημίαν προθεῖσι, καὶ αὐτὸς περὶ τοῦ
“2 \ L Ass > ΄ >
ἐς TO μέλλον καλώς ἔχοντος ἀντισχυριζόμενος τάναν-
2 n lal n “ lal
“tla γιγνώσκω. Kal οὐκ ἀξιώ ὑμᾶς τῷ εὐπρεπεῖ τοῦ
“ἐκείνου λόγου τὸ χρήσιμον τοῦ ἐμοῦ ἀπώσασθαι.
x fal e a
“δικαιότερος yap ὧν αὐτοῦ ὁ λόγος πρὸς τὴν νῦν
τος Ἴ 5) er) , hie ie Wa ee) , 3
ὑμετέραν ὀργὴν ἐς Μυτιληναίους τάχ᾽ ἂν ἐπισπάσαιτο
«ft lal \ ’ / Ν 5 / dd lal ͵ὔ
ἡμεῖς δὲ οὐ δικαζόμεθα πρὸς αὐτούς, ὥστε τῶν δικαίων
a » -
“ δεῖν, ἀλλὰ βουλευόμεθα περὶ αὐτῶν, ὅπως χρησίμως
“ἕξουσιν. XLV. ἐν οὖν ταῖς πόλεσι πολλῶν θανάτου
« / / Ν ,’ Μ RY) > > ,
ζημία πρόκειται, καὶ οὐκ ἴσων τῴδε ἀλλ᾽ ἐλασσόνων
Cit U . ὦ δὲ a > (ὃ ? , ὃ
ἁμαρτημάτων᾽ ὅμως δὲ τῇ ἐλπίδι ἐπαιρόμενοι κινδυ-
᾽ 7ὔ \ a \
“νεύουσι, Kal οὐδείς πω καταγνοὺς ἑαυτοῦ μὴ περιέ-
“σεσθαι τῷ ἐπιβουλεύματι ἦλθεν ἐς τὸ δεινόν. πόλις
΄ Ul “ a
“re ἀφισταμένη Tis πω ἥσσω TH δοκήσει ἔχουσα τὴν
Ἂ 5) »
“παρασκευὴν ἢ οἰκείαν ἢ ἄλλων ξυμμαχίᾳ τούτῳ
“ἐπεχείρησε; πεφύκασί τε ἅπαντες καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ
ς ε
“δημοσίᾳ ἁμαρτάνειν, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι νόμος ὅστις ἀπείρξει
“«πούτου, ἐπεὶ διεξεληλύθασί γε διὰ πασῶν τῶν LOV
nye
“ot ἄνθρωποι προστιθέντες, εἴ πως ἧσσον ἀδικοῖντο
“ ὑπὸ τῶν κακούργων. καὶ εἰκὸς τὸ πάλαι τῶν μεγίστων
“ ἀδικημάτων μαλακωτέρας κεῖσθαι αὐτάς, παραβαινο-
τ δὲ a , 2 \ ἢ ε \
μένων δὲ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐς τὸν θάνατον αἱ πολλαὶ
> lal
“ἀνήκουσι" καὶ τοῦτο ὅμως TapaPaireTat. ἢ τοίνυν
XLV. §1. θανάτων G. θάνατος Cob. Ηει.--- ζημίαι C, ‘exquisitius
scriptum’ (Hud.) πρόκεινται, so also GN.—dAN’ ἐλασσόνων ἁμαρτημάτων
del. Cob. Her.: “οὐκ ἴσων in utramque partem accipitur, ut sit aut
μεῖζον aut ἔλασσον (Cob.).—r7 ἐλπίδι ἐπαιρόμενοι del. Cob.
8 2. ξυμμαχίαν vulg.—roiro ABEF.
§ 3. ἐπειδή Ἐ..---διεληλύθασι Bad. ἐξεληλύθασι Ἐ. ---προτιθέντες *pro-
ponendo’ Bad. Her. τὰς ζημίας, ‘corrigendum, nisi velis participium

expungere’ (Nab.).—apaBawopévay τῶν νόμων Bad. qu. παρατεινο-
μένων ᾿---τοῦτο del. Her. ταῦτα, i.e. ‘talia facinora’ Hud. κἀν τούτῳ Kr.

ETTITPA®PHS YT. 39

« , , , 7 ¢ , > , Ἃ ,
δεινότερόν τι τούτου δέος εὑρετέον ἐστίν, ἢ τόδε γε
“ ᾽ \ "ἢ / > > « \ / 5 / Ν
οὐδὲν ἐπίσχει, ANN ἡ μὲν πενία ἀναγκῃ τὴν τόλμαν
“παρέχουσα, ἡ δ᾽ ἐξουσία ὕβρει τὴν πλεονεξίαν καὶ
“ , - > ὧν [ 2 lal a > /
φρονήματι, ai δ᾽ ἄλλαι ξυντυχίαι ὀργῇ τῶν ἀνθρώπων,
« ὡς ἑκάστη τις κατέχεται ὑπ᾽ ἀνηκέστου τινὸς κρείτ-
« ow > \ , ¢ ᾽ \ Sw nl
Tovos, ἐξάγουσιν ἐς τοὺς κινδύνους. ἥ TE ἐλπὶς καὶ ὁ
cw aN Laie \ ε , Css , \
ἔρως ἐπὶ παντί, ὁ μὲν ἡγούμενος ἡ δ᾽ ἐφεπομένη, Kat
Prams \ \ > \ 3 , ¢ \ \ > γ
ὁ μὲν τὴν ἐπιβολὴν ἐκφροντίζων ἢ δὲ τὴν εὐπορίαν
cA t ς a a ' ΝΠ ἢ
τῆς τύχης ὑποτιθεῖσα, πλεῖστα βλάπτουσι, καὶ ὄντα
an 7 an a
«ἀφανῆ κρείσσω ἐστὶ τῶν ὁρωμένων δεινῶν. καὶ ἡ
, > 5» a
«χύχη ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς οὐδὲν ἔλασσον ξυμβάλλεται ἐς TO
« ἐπαίρειν" ἀδοκήτως γὰρ ἔστιν ὅτε παρισταμένη καὶ ἐκ
“roy ὑποδεεστέρων κινδυνεύειν τινὰ προάγει, καὶ οὐχ
«ἧσσον τὰς πόλεις, ὅσῳ περὶ τῶν μεγίστων, ἐλευθερίας
δ v. 9. fal δ
«ἢ ἄχλων ἀρχῆς, καὶ μετὰ πάντων ἕκαστος ἀλογίστως
ἘΞ ΄ ς a 50. 7 ς a > ,
ἐπὶ πλέον τι αὑτῶν ἐδόξασεν. ἁπλώς TE ἀδύνατον
“Ὁ , °
« καὶ πολλῆς εὐηθείας, ὅστις οἴεται τῆς ἀνθρωπείας φύ-
rn »
«σεως ὁρμωμένης προθύμως τι πρᾶξαι ἀποτροπήν τινα
“ἔχειν ἢ νόμων ἰσχύι ἢ ἄλλῳ τῳ δεινῷ. XLVI. οὔκ-
( \ v a , an / ς > ,
ουν χρὴ οὔτε τοῦ θανάτου TH ζημίᾳ ws ἐχεγγύῳ
«πιστεύσαντας χεῖρον βουλεύσασθαι, οὔτε ἀνέλπιστον
a “ n 4 a
«καταστῆσαι τοῖς ἀποστᾶσιν ὡς οὐκ ἔσται μεταγνῶναι
«καὶ ὅτι ἐν βραχυτάτῳ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν καταλῦσαι.
“ J, \ a a \ 4 wid a ͵
σκέψασθε yap ὅτι νῦν μὲν, ἤν τις καὶ ἀποστᾶσα TONS
§ 4. Toye better Mss.—xal φρόνηματι, ‘lectoris additamentum’
(Her.). τὸ φρόνημα * praestabit (Nab.).—dpyqv (sc. παρέχουσα) St.
ὀργάς Rauch, perhaps ὁρμῇ; cf. ὃ 7 ὁρμωμένης.---τῶν ἀνθρώπων ΠΕ St.
τὸν ἄνθρωπον Cl. τὸ ἄνουν Her. from confusion with τῶν aviv (1.6.

τῶν ἀνθρώπων).---ἕκαστος Kr. Campe.—dvixjrov Camp.—rod Dobr.—
ἐνάγουσιν Badh.

§ 5. ἐπιβουλήν CM. ἐπιβολήν Her.

8 6. μεγίστων re C.—airév ABEFM. αὑτόν Kr. Cl. Her., perhaps
αὑτοῦ, ‘ultra suas ipse vires.’

40 POTKTAIAOT

« n \ ,ὔ BA » > / \
γνῴ μὴ περιεσομένη, ἔλθοι ἂν ἐς ξύμβασιν δυνατὴ
/ > fal id
«οὖσα ἔτι τὴν δαπάνην ἀποδοῦναι Kal TO λοιπὸν ὑὕπο-
« ALS > / δὲ / yy θ vA ’ ” \
τελεῖν" ἐκείνως δὲ τίνα οἴεσθε ἥν τινα οὐκ ἄμεινον μὲν
Ὦ lal / a
“ἢ νῦν παρασκευάσεσθαι, πολιορκίᾳ τε παρατενεῖσθαι
᾽ lal \
“ἐς τοὔσχατον, εἰ τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται σχολῇ Kal ταχὺ
Ὁ a a / n /

3 “ ξυμβῆναι; ἡμῖν τε πῶς οὐ βλάβη δαπανᾷν καθημένοις
“διὰ τὸ ἀξύμβατον, καὶ ἢν ἕλωμεν πόλιν, ἐφθαρμένην
« lal \ lal ὃ \ \ ,’ >’ >] na

παραλαβεῖν Kal THs προσόδου TO λοιπὸν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς
« / > , δὲ \ \ / DO
στέρεσθαι; ἰσχύομεν δὲ πρὸς τοὺς πολεμίους τῷδε.

4“ ὥστε οὐ δικαστὰς ὄντας δεῖ ἡμᾶς μᾶλλον τῶν ἐξαμαρ-
« , δ a ͵ A ἜΣ ἧς, τὸ > \

τανόντων ἀκριβεῖς βλάπτεσθαι, ἢ ὁρᾷν ὅπως ἐς τὸν
an “

“ ἔπειτα χρόνον μετρίως κολάζοντες ταῖς πόλεσιν ἕξομεν

“ἐς χρημάτων λόγον ἰσχυούσαις χρῆσθαι, καὶ τὴν

« \ \ SEEN a , al , ᾽ a

φυλακὴν μὴ ἀπὸ τῶν νόμων τῆς δεινότητος ἀξιοῦν

« a > 3. 4.5. - Ad. Asp a AS r 2

5 “ποιεῖσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων τῆς ἐπιμελείας. οὗ

« a > 7 ὃ n ” 2 Oe Ν βία > Γ᾿
νῦν τἀναντία δρώντες, ἤν τινα ἐλεύθερον καὶ βίᾳ ἀρχό-

/ 9
“ μενονᾳεἰκότως πρὸς αὐτονομίαν ἀποστάντα χειρωσώ-
« a 7 a tal \ \

6 “μεθα, χαλεπώς οἰόμεθα χρῆναι τιμωρεῖσθαι. χρὴ δὲ
“τοὺς ἐλευθέρους οὐκ ἀφισταμένους σφόδρα κολάζειν,
“ ἀλλὰ πρὶν ἀποστῆναι σφόδρα φυλάσσειν καὶ προ-
« , “ 5. 5 3. , "

καταλαμβάνειν ὅπως μηδ᾽ ἐς ἐπίνοιαν τούτου ἴωσι,
« ῃ , “ yor) ee 2 \ on, 3 ,
κρατήσαντάς τε ὅτι ἐπ᾿ ἐλάχιστον τὴν αἰτίαν ἐπιφέρειν.
a x lal
“XLVI. ὑμεῖς δὲ σκέψασθε ὅσον ἂν καὶ τοῦτο ἅμαρ-

XLVI. § 2. παρασκευάσασθαι ABCEFG. Cob. keeping aorist,
adds ἄν : see Cob. V. L. 97; Shill. on 1. 26; Jebb, Soph. Elect. 443;
Tucker, Introd. to Thuc. VIII. p. xviii. ; Goodw. M. T. § 127.
Cobet and Madvig would correct all instances: carelessness of scribes
renders MS. authority practically of small value. For aorist in oratio
recta as vivid future, see Good. M. T. § 61. In the present instance
παρατενεῖσθαι renders the correction to future almost certain.

ἤ (for el) AEFM.

§ 3. τῇδε (sc. τῇ προσόδῳ) Her.

ὃ 5. τοὐναντίον C, Hudecomp. 58§ 4. τἀναντία ABFN.

ETITPA®HS T. 41

/ A A c n
“πάνοιτε Κλέωνι πειθόμενοι. νῦν μὲν yap ὑμῖν ὁ δῆμος 2
“2 , a , ” > , ar ae ,
ἐν πάσαις ταῖς πόλεσιν εὔνους ἐστί, καὶ ἢ οὐ Evvadi-
“ lal > / Ὁ ΦΙΛῚ fal « an ΕῚ
σταταῖι τοῖς ὀλίγοις ἢ ἐὰν βιασθῆ ὑπάρχει τοῖς ἀπο-
, ’ a > /
“στήσασι πολέμιος εὐθύς, Kal τῆς ἀντικαθισταμένης
a ΄
“πόλεως τὸ πλῆθος ξύμμαχον ἔχοντες ἐς πόλεμον
“ἐπέρχεσθε. εἰ δὲ διαφθερεῖτε τὸν δῆμον τῶν Μυτιλη- 3
ει, A f ,
“ναίων, ὃς οὔτε μετέσχε τῆς ἀποστάσεως, ἐπειδή τε
“ὅπλων ἐκράτησεν, ἑκὼν παρέδωκε τὴν πόλιν, πρῶτον
ρ / ? ρ if} ee
“ μὲν ἀδικήσετε TOUS εὐεργέτας κτείνοντες, ἔπειτα κατα-
“στήσετε τοῖς δυνατοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὃ βούλονται
« ἔχ ἘΠ᾽ a \ \ ὌΝ \ δὴ OD
μάλιστα" ἀφιστάντες γὰρ Tas πόλεις τὸν δῆμον εὐθὺς
oad Ψ , Chin \ LN
ξύμμαχον ἕξουσι, προδειξάντων ὑμῶν τὴν αὐτὴν
“ζημίαν τοῖς τε ἀδικοῦσιν ὁμοίως κεῖσθαι καὶ τοῖς μή.
«ὃ κῶν \ > γὼ 7 \ aA “ a ,
εἴ δὲ καὶ εἰ ἠδίκησαν μὴ προσποιεῖσθαι, ὅπως ὃ μόνον 4
ἘΣ aN
“ἡμῖν ἔτι ξύμμαχόν ἐστι μὴ πολέμιον γένηται. καὶ 5
ing fn a / ¢ lal 2 \ /
τοῦτο πολλῷ ξυμφορώτερον ἡγοῦμαι ἐς τὴν κάθεξιν
A fal € A a Ἂ
“τῆς ἀρχῆς, ἑκόντας ἡμᾶς ἀδικηθῆναι, ἢ δικαίως ods μὴ
“δεῖ διαφθεῖραι καὶ τὸ Κλέωνος τὸ αὐτὸ δίκαιον καὶ
, “Ὁ , ς a
“ξύμφορον τῆς τιμωρίας οὐχ εὑρίσκεται, ἐν αὐτῷ δυνα-
“τὸν ὃν ἅμα γίγνεσθα. XLVIII. ὑμεῖς δὲ γνόντες
>
“ ἀμείνω τάδε εἶναι, Kal μήτε οἴκτῳ πλέον νείμαντες μήτ᾽
Ων an " a \
“ ἐπιεικείᾳ, οἷς οὐδὲ ἐγὼ ἐώ προσάγεσθαι, ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν δὲ

XLVII. 8:1. ἁμάρτοιτε πιθόμενοι Cob.

§ 2. καὶ οὐ (omitting ἤ) (.---λόγοις (for ὀλίγοις) (.---ἀνθισταμένης
Her.—épxeoGe Bad. ἐσέρχεσθε Mein.: but cf. Iv. 25 § 9.

§ 3. τὸν Μυτιληναίων many good mss., Bek. vulg.—x«reivovres Her.
suspects.—opolws del. Her.

§ 4. ἔδει Kr.

§ 5. ἀδικηθῆναί τι Cob. holding that H has absorbed ΤΊ.--- δυνατόν
om. Ν.---ταὐτῷ Kr. τῷ αὐτῷ Dob. Bad.

XLVIII. §1. πλέον suggests that in 3 § 1 μέρος is an adscript.—
παράγεσθαι For confusion of πρός and παρά see Bast. 837.

42 @OOTKTAIAOT

- /, “
“τῶν παραινουμένων, πείθεσθέ μοι Μυτιληναίων ods
« \ U ? Ψ « ,’ a - >
μὲν Ilayns ἀπέπεμψεν ὡς ἀδικοῦντας κρῖναι καθ
- ἐς , \ > + 29 5... Lin ! ee)
2 “ἡσυχίαν, τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλους ἐᾷν οἰκεῖν. τάδε yap ἔς τε
\ ? \ lal
“τὸ μέλλον ἀγαθὰ καὶ τοῖς πολεμίοις ἤδη φοβερά"
/ \ / \
“ὅστις yap εὖ βουλεύεται πρὸς τοὺς ἐναντίους κρείσσων
“ ἐστὶν ἢ μετ᾽ ἔργων ἰσχύος ἀνοίᾳ ἐπιών."
“ « fal
XLIX. Τοιαῦτα δὲ ὁ Διόδοτος εἶπε. ῥηθεισῶν δὲ
lal fel , / ? , \ > ,
TOV γνωμῶν τούτων μάλιστα αντύπάλων πρὸς ἀλλήλας
οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἦλθον μὲν ἐς ἀγώνα ὅμως τῆς δόξης καὶ
/ a >
ἐγένοντο ἐν τῇ χειροτονίᾳ ἀγχώμαλοι, ἐκράτησε δὲ ἡ
“ ’
2 τοῦ Διοδότου. καὶ τριήρη εὐθὺς ἄλλην ἀπέστελλον
κατὰ σπουδήν, ὅπως μὴ φθασάσης τῆς προτέρας εὕρωσι
, \ , i a een) \ \
διεφθαρμένην τὴν Todw* προεῖχε δὲ ἡμέρᾳ καὶ νυκτὶ
U \ al
3 μάλιστα. παρασκευασάντων δὲ τῶν Μυτιληναίων
Wd a - ae Siw, \ U ς
πρέσβεων τῇ νηὶ οἶνον καὶ ἄλφιτα, καὶ μεγάλα ὑὕποσχο-
μένων εἰ φθάσειαν, ἐγένετο σπουδὴ τοῦ πλοῦ τοιαύτη
“ + , “ > ’ ” Wee / ow
ὥστε ἤσθιόν τε ἅμα ἐλαύνοντες οἴνῳ καὶ ἐλαίῳ ἄλφιτα
εἰ ¢ r
πεφυραμένα, καὶ οἱ μὲν ὕπνον ἡροῦντο κατὰ μέρος οἱ δὲ
4 ἤλαυνον. κατὰ τύχην δὲ πνεύματος οὐδενὸς ἐναντιω-
a , \ > A
θέντος, Kal τῆς μὲν προτέρας νεὼς οὐ σπουδῇ πλεούσης
lal ῇ
ἐπὶ πρᾶγμα ἀλλόκοτον, ταύτης δὲ τοιούτῳ τρόπῳ ἐπει-
a df
γομένης, ἡ μὲν ἔφθασε τοσοῦτον ὅσον Ilaynta aveyvo-
κέναι τὸ ψήφισμα καὶ μέλλειν δράσειν τὰ δεδογμένα, ἡ
δ᾽ ὑστέρα αὐτῆς ἐπικατάγεται καὶ διεκώλυσε μὴ δια-
lal fal ¢
φθεῖραι. παρὰ τοσοῦτον μὲν ἡ Μυτιλήνη ἦλθε κινδύνου.

§ 2. 76Kr. Mein. The insertion is needless.

XLIX. §1. δή Rauch; from D only, Her.

ὁμοίως (sc. οὐχ ἧσσον) Hud. ὁμόσε Bad.; cf. VIII. 92 § 10.

§ 2. ἑτέρας inferior MSs.

§ 3. προπαρασκευασάντων Ναὺῦ.---φθάσειαν corr. Her., vulg. φθά-
σαιεν. Cf. Her. Stud. 112; St. Qu. Gr. 1.8.-- πεφυρμένα E.

§ 4. κακοῦ (for κιν δύνου) B.

ATITPA®H> PL. 43

c ’ , «
L. τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλους ἄνδρας ods ὁ Πάχης ἀπέπεμψεν ὡς
αἰτιωτάτους ὄντας τῆς ἀποστάσεως Κλέωνος γνώμῃ
a ’ὔ
διέφθειραν οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι" ἦσαν δὲ ὀλίγῳ πλείους χιλίων.
fal I
καὶ Μυτιληναίων τείχη καθεῖλον Kai ναῦς παρέλαβον.
/ / \
ὕστερον δὲ φόρον μὲν οὐκ ἔταξαν Λεσβίοις, κλήρους δὲ 2
ποιήσαντες τῆς γῆς πλὴν τῆς Μηθυμναίων τρισχιλίους
τριακοσίους μὲν τοῖς θεοῖς ἱεροὺς ἐξεῖλον, ἐπὶ δὲ τοὺς
ΕΣ Ὁ » “Ὁ 4 ‘ / > ,
ἄλλους ohav αὐτών κληρούχους τοὺς λαχόντας ἀπέ-
/ ~ Φ , , / / ἴω /
πέμψαν᾽" ois ἀργύριον Λέσβιοι ταξάμενοι τοῦ κλήρου
ἑκάστου τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ δύο μνᾶς φέρειν αὐτοὶ εἰργάζοντο
\ A / \ \ \ > a 4,9. ᾽ὔ
τὴν γῆν. παρέλαβον δὲ καὶ τὰ ἐν τῇ ἠπείρῳ πολίσματα 3
ιν cal v4 lal b , Ν ¢ ,
οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ὅσων Μυτιληναῖοι ἐκράτουν, καὶ ὑπήκουον
[cA 5 / \ \ \ / ee > ΄
ὕστερον ᾿Αθηναίων. τὰ μὲν κατὰ Λέσβον οὕτως ἐγένετο.
LI. Ἔν δὲ τῷ αὐτῷ θέρει μετὰ τὴν Λέσβου ἅλωσιν
> a / fal , la) > ,
᾿Αθηναῖοι Νικίου τοῦ Νικηράτου στρατηγοῦντος ἐστρά-
τευσαν ἐπὶ Μίνωαν τὴν νῆσον, i) κεῖται πρὸ Μεγαάρων᾽"
lal 3 fal e “Ὁ
ἐχρώντο δὲ αὐτῇ πύργον ἐνοικοδομήσαντες οἱ Μεγαρῆς
φρουρίῳ. ἐβούλετο δὲ Νικίας τὴν φυλακὴν αὐτόθεν δι᾿ 2
> ‘ - 3 / \ \ τ \ -“ , \
ἐλάσσονος τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις καὶ μὴ ἀπὸ τοῦ Βουδόρου Kat
iid Ἕν >\, - “ / Π / e XN
τῆς Σαλαμῖνος εἶναι, τούς τε Πελοποννησίους, ὅπως μὴ
ποιώνται ἔκπλους αὐτόθεν λανθάνοντες τριήρων τε, οἷον
καὶ τὸ πρὶν γενόμενον, καὶ λῃστῶν ἐκπομπαῖς, τοῖς τε
ral ad \ > lal « \ s 3 Ν an
Μεγαρεῦσιν ἅμα μηδὲν ἐσπλεῖν. ἑλὼν οὖν [ἀπὸ τῆς 3
/ - , , , a >
Nicatas] πρῶτον δύο πύργῳ προέχοντε μηχαναῖς ἐκ
θαλάσσης, καὶ τὸν ἔσπλουν ἐς τὸ μεταξὺ τῆς νήσου

L. ὃ. 2. ἱερούς del. Cob.

LI. 81. πύργωμα Mein.

§ 2. τοῦ τε IleXorovynclov Hud. ἔς τε τούς Bad. σκοπῶν τοὺς
Πελ. 51.-ὁ πως μὴ ποιῶνται ἔκπλους ἀπὸ τῆς Νισαίας, C. F. Miiller, who
also expunges αὐτόθεν.--- τὸν πρὶν γενόμενον Kr. πρῴην (for πρίν) Cob.
‘nuper id factum erat; πρίν de longiore intervallo.’—xed7jrwy (for λῃστῶν)
Nab.; cf. Xen. Hell. 1. 6. 26.

§ 3. ἀπὸ τῆς Νισαίας del. Cob.

44 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΟΥ

΄ ,’ la Ν Ν Ε] a 5 / Φ Ν
ἐλευθερώσας, ἀπετείχιζε καὶ τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἠπείρου, ἣ κατὰ
/ \ / >’ / 3 ial ‘ ’ 4
γέφυραν διὰ τενάγους ἐπιβοήθεια ἦν. τῇ νήσῳ ov πολὺ
4 διεχούσῃ τῆς ἠπείρου. ὡς δὲ τοῦτο ἐξειργάσαντο ἐν
ἡμέραις ὀλίγαις, ὕστερον δὴ καὶ ἐν τῇ νήσῳ τεῖχος
> \ \ \ > / nr an
ἐγκαταλιπὼν καὶ φρουρὰν ἀνεχώρησε τῷ στρατῷ.
Ὁ , lal / /
111. Ὑπὸ δὲ τοὺς αὐτοὺς χρόνους Tod θέρους τούτου
\ ᾳ lol > / ” rn , \ ἢ
καὶ οἱ Ἰϊλαταιῆς οὐκέτι ἔχοντες σῖτον οὐδὲ δυνάμενοι
ον / lal / fal
πολιορκεῖσθαι ξυνέβησαν τοῖς Πελοποννησίοις τοιῷδε
la . rn an / ec \ 9 5] vA
2 τρόπῳ. προσέβαλον αὐτῶν τῷ τείχει, οἱ δὲ οὐκ ἐδύ-
5» / \ ἣν € la v
vavto ἀμύνεσθαι. γνοὺς δὲ ὁ Λακεδαιμόνιος ἄρχων
τὴν ἀσθένειαν αὐτῶν Bia μὲν οὐκ ἐβούλετο ἑλεῖν᾽ (εἰρη-
: τ / / > nip
͵ \ 3 "δ 3 0
μένον yap ἦν αὐτῷ ἐκ Λακεδαίμονος, ὅπως, εἰ σπονδαὶ
/ al /
γίγνοιντό ποτε πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους καὶ ξυγχωροῖεν ὅσα
πολέμῳ χωρία ἔχουσιν ἑκάτεροι ἀποδίδοσθαι, μὴ
ἀνάδοτος εἴη ἡ Ἰ]λάταια ὡς αὐτῶν ἑκόντων προσχωρη-
“Ὁ ~ Ἵ»
σάντων") προσπέμπει δὲ αὐτοῖς κήρυκα λέγοντα εἰ
βούλονται παραδοῦναι τὴν πόλιν ἑκόντες τοῖς Λακεδαι-
fal /
μονίοις καὶ δικασταῖς ἐκείνοις χρήσασθαι, τούς τε
> / if \ / Ἄ ’ / lal Ν
3 ἀδίκους κολάζειν, παρὰ δίκην δὲ οὐδένα. τοσαῦτα μὲν
« Lal s - e \ > \ " > an 9 /
ὁ κῆρυξ εἶπεν" οἱ δὲ (ἦσαν yap ἤδη ἐν τῷ ἀσθενεστάτῳ)
7 Ν \ \ / ba ΄
παρέδοσαν τὴν πόλιν. καὶ τοὺς ΠΠλαταίεας ἔτρεφον οἱ
a ,
Πελοποννήσιοι ἡμέρας Twas, ἐν ὅσῳ οἱ ἐκ τῆς Λακεδαί-
/ / v ’ / / \
4 μονος δικασταί, πέντε ἄνδρες, ἀφίκοντο. ἐλθόντων δὲ
a >
αὐτῶν κατηγορία μὲν οὐδεμία προετέθη, ἠρώτων δὲ

κλῃθρώσας (for ἐλευθερώσας) Cl. Mein. ‘neque aptum sententiae, neque
Graecum’ (Nab.). Cf. Dio Cass. XLII. 12. 2; Procop. de Oed. p. 313-
10.—70 (before ἐκ τῆς ἠπείρου) del. Mein. Herm. 111. 346.

111. § 1. ὁπλίζεσθαι ‘armorum pondus ferre’ (Nab.).

οὐδὲ δυνάμενοι πολιορκεῖσθαι an adscript from 11. 70 (Cob.).

§ 2. ἠδύναντο all better MSs. except AE.—yap ἣν del. Cob. Her.
But the schol. had γάρ in his text.—\éfovra Mein.—wore τούς τε
ἀδικοῦντας Her. Stud. 44, Bad.—kodaoew Kr.

ΞΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ T. 45

᾽ \ > / A / ”
αὐτοὺς ἐπικαλεσάμενοι τοσοῦτον μόνον, εἴ Te Λακεδαι-
U lal / an a
μονίους καὶ τοὺς ξυμμάχους ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ τῷ καθεστῶτι
, / € >”
ἀγαθόν τι εἰργασμένοι εἰσίν. οἱ δ᾽ ἔλεγον, αἰτησάμενοι 5
, Lal Lal > nr .
μακρότερα εἰπεῖν Kal προτάξαντες σφών αὐτών ᾿Αστύ-
, \ > , \ A , \ AN /
μαχόν τε TOV ᾿Ασωπολάου καὶ Λάκωνα τὸν ᾿Αειμνήστου
πρόξενον ὄντα Λακεδαιμονίων. καὶ ἐπελθόντες ἔλεγον
τοιάδε.
1.111. “ΤΗΝ μὲν παράδοσιν τῆς πόλεως, ὦ Λακε-
Ζ , , ig “ »
“ δαιμόνιοι, πιστεύσαντες ὑμῖν ἐποιησάμεθα, οὐ τοιάνδε
τ δ. wa Cher , 2 »
δίκην οἰόμενοι ὑφέξειν, νομιμωτέραν δέ τινα ἔσεσθαι,
« 5 a ᾽ 2 yy , a \
καὶ ἐν δικασταῖς οὐκ ἐν ἄλλοις δεξάμενοι, ὥσπερ Kal
ΠῚ / / θ A ¢ a if , \ Μ / οἱ »
ἐσμέν, γενέσθαι ἢ ὑμῖν, ἡγούμενοι TO ἴσον μάλιστ᾽ ἂν
lal τ /;
«φέρεσθαι. viv δὲ φοβούμεθα μὴ ἀμφοτέρων ἅμα 2
ρ
/ > a \ Ὁ /
“ἡμαρτήκαμεν" τόν TE yap ἀγῶνα περὶ τών δεινοτάτων
«ς a \ > \
“εἶναι εἰκότως ὑποπτεύομεν, Kal ὑμᾶς μὴ οὐ κοινοὶ
lal / ¢ fal >
“ἀποβῆτε, τεκμαιρόμενοι προκατηγορίας TE ἡμῶν οὐ
«“ U4 a \ b - b) ’ 5) \ ,
προγεγενημένης ἣ χρὴ ἀντειπεῖν, (ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοὶ λόγον
{3 ΄ θ , 2 , B Ney a \ \
ἡτησάμεθα,) TO τε ἐπερώτημα βραχὺ ὄν, ᾧ τὰ μὲν
“ ἀληθῆ ἀποκρίνασθαι ἐναντία γίγνεται, τὰ δὲ ψευδῆ

¢

<r » , \ » a
ἔλεγχον ἔχει. πανταχόθεν δὲ ἄποροι καθεστῶτες 3

|

«2 , ‘ > , a 3 » /
ἀναγκαζόμεθα καὶ ἀσφαλέστερον δοκεῖ εἶναι εἰπόντας

« , \ \ ς δ \ l an eo
TL κινδυνεύειν" καὶ γὰρ ὁ μὴ ῥηθεὶς λόγος τοῖς ὧδ

8.4. αὐτῶν del. Cob.—pévorv del. (09.---τί (after ἀγαθόν) del. Bad.
§ 5. οἱ δὲ λόγον... μακρότερον Her. Sacorraphos.—mpoordéayres Hud.
—kxat before ἐπελθόντες del. Her.

LIT. §1. ἔσεσθαι del. Her. But the change of subject is quite
| Thucydidean.—ovx ἄν Kr. Her. For repetition of preposition St.
compares VI. 82 ὃ 4; which, however, Hude holds not to be a case
in point (Hud. Comm. Cr. 103).—ovmep Bad. ὥσπερ καὶ ἐσμέν del.
Her.

| § 2. τεκμαιρόμενοι Bad. suspects.—karnyoplas Cob.; cf. 52 § 4.—
| ἐναντίον corr. Cl. Her. Mss. ἐναντία. The structure probably changes
with the δέ clause: but perhaps the first article τά is at fault.

46 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΊΔΟΥ

cw 3. (ἢ Sy ΄ ε > ΄ θ ,
ἔχουσιν αἰτίαν ἂν παράσχοι ὡς εἰ ἐλέχθη σωτήριος
{ ἃ > a δὲ », δὰ συ \ a aN ee,
4 “av nv. χαλεπῶς O€ EXEL ἡμῖν πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ ἢ
« , > an \ \ ” > ΄ >
πειθώ. ἀγνῶτες μὲν yap ὄντες ἀλλήλων, ἐπεισενεγ-
« / , δ Υ ea > Ν 4 θ᾽ ap a
κάμενοι μαρτύρια ὧν ἄπειροι ἦτε ὠφελούμεθ᾽ ἀν" νῦν
“δὲ πρὸς εἰδότας πάντα λελέξεται, καὶ δέδιμεν οὐχὶ
“μὴ προκαταγνόντες ἡμῶν τὰς ἀρετὰς ἥσσους εἶναι
« a ¢ / Μ > \ an > \ An pm:
τῶν ὑμετέρων ἔγκλημα AUTO ποιῆτε, AAXa μὴ ἀλλοις
« ΄ par ΄ / /
χάριν φέροντες ἐπὶ διεγνωσμένην κρίσιν καθιστώμεθα.
ἐξ cA Av Ul ’
“LIV. παρεχόμενοι δὲ ὅμως ἃ ἔχομεν δίκαια πρός τε
“ra Θηβαίων διάφορα καὶ ἐς ὑμᾶς καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους
«“Βλληνας, τῶν εὖ δεδραμένων ὑπόμνησιν ποιησόμεθα
t \ \ \ \ ’
2 “καὶ πείθειν πειρασόμεθα. φαμὲν yap πρὸς TO ἐρώ-
“ \ , ” ὃ 7 \ \ ΄
τημα τὸ βραχύ, εἴ τι Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ τοὺς ξυμμά-
« > Ὁ J “ ’ \ / > \
yous ἐν TO πολέμῳ τῷδε ἀγαθὸν πεποιήκαμεν, εἰ μὲν
c an ΕῚ , n ς n \ φ
“ὡς πολεμίους ἐρωτᾶτε, οὐκ ἀδικεῖσθαι ὑμᾶς μὴ εὖ
« , f- \ / 5) \ G ͵΄
παθόντας, φίλους δὲ νομίζοντας αὐτοὺς ἁμαρτάνειν
« A \ [4 Lal > / \ δ᾽ 3 “Ὁ
3 μᾶλλον τοὺς ἡμῖν ἐπιστρατεύσαντας. τὰ ἐν Τῇ
“εἰρήνῃ καὶ πρὸς τὸν Μῆδον ἀγαθοὶ γεγενήμεθα, τὴν
/ fa) f n \ /
«μὲν οὐ λύσαντες νῦν πρότεροι, τῷ δὲ ξυνεπιθέμενοι
a , , “-
4 “τότε ἐς ἐλευθερίαν τῆς ᾿᾿λλάδος μόνοι Βοιωτῶν. καὶ
« \ ’ a / 7 : ΄ Yom YE)
yap ἠπειρώταί τε ὄντες ἐναυμαχήσαμεν ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αρτε-
« 7ὔ , na > in pe L - 7
μισίῳ, μάχῃ τε τῇ ἐν τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γῇ γενομένῃ παρε-
Ἵ - Ἂν ΄ / 93
“χενόμεθα ὑμῖν te καὶ Ilavoavia: εἴ τέ τι ἄλλο κατ

8 4. ἀλλήλοις Β. ἄλλων Βαΐ.--- λέξεται C.

φερόντων, or φέροντες καθίστητε ἡμᾶς Her. Cobet suspects a lacuna,
e.g. κρίνητε ἡμᾶς κιτ.λ.---ἐγνωσμένην Her. who compares Isocr. Archid.
1o ‘locus per itacismum corruptus.’ But Thuc. affects διαγνώμη for
γνώμη. προδιεγνωσμένην Nab. from Joseph. Ant. XVII. 5. 3.

LIV. ὃ 1. πρὸς τά Bad. omitting τε. He further suggests ex-
punging ποιησόμεθα and καί before πείθειν.---δεδρασμένων vulg.; but
cf. Her. Stud. 124.

§ 2. τούς before ἡμῖν del. Cob. § 3. ἐπ᾿ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἃ.

8.4. γῇ ἀεὶ. Her.—kara δύναμιν Nab.

BYTITPA®PH: IT. 47

fal / > / a_¢
« ἐκεῖνον τὸν χρόνον ἐγένετο ἐπικίνδυνον τοῖς “ἴὕλλησι,
, Nw 2¢ lal τὰ
«πάντων παρὰ δύναμιν μετέσχομεν. καὶ ὑμῖν, ὦ Λακε- 5
© \ / / /
«δαιμόνιοι, ἰδίᾳ, ὅτεπερ δὴ μέγιστος φόβος περιέστη
« \ , \ \ \ a > 1A , IBYDN fi
τὴν Σπάρτην μετὰ Tov σεισμὸν τών ἐς ᾿Ιθώμην Kio
᾽ Ν / / « a ᾽ n ’
«των ἀποστάντων, TO τρίτον μέρος ἡμῶν αὐτών ἐξε-
/ e ’ SN > a
“πέμψαμεν ἐς ἐπικουρίαν: ὧν οὐκ εἰκὸς ἀμνημονεῖν.
« \ \ \ \ \ if a ᾽ ft
LV. καὶ τὰ μὲν παλαιὰ καὶ μέγιστα τοιοῦτοι ἠξιώ-
/ \ 5 , [2 « lal
“σαμεν εἶναι, πολέμιοι δὲ ἐγενόμεθα ὕστερον. ὑμεῖς
\ / “ a c an
« δὲ αἴτιοι" δεομένων yap ξυμμαχίας ὅτε Θηβαῖοι ἡμᾶς
al \ N > /
«ἐβιάσαντο, ὑμεῖς ἀπεώσασθε καὶ πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους
ς \ ” «ς a \ \
“ ἐκελεύετε τραπέσθαι ὡς ἐγγὺς ὄντας, ὑμῶν δὲ μακρὰν
a / ’ b /
« ἀποικούντων. ἐν μέντοι TO πολέμῳ οὐδὲν ἐκπρεπέσ- 2
« ς Nae JE. A » > 10 » b) ΝΑ , > δ᾽
τερον ὑπὸ ἡμῶν οὔτε ἐπάθετε οὔτε ἐμελλήσατε. εἰ

LoS)

a / c Ὁ
« ἀποστῆναι ᾿Αθηναίων οὐκ ἠθελήσαμεν ὑμῶν κελευ-

“oa ἐκ ἠδικοῦμεν᾽ καὶ γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι ἐβοήθουν ἡμῖν
σάντων, οὐκ ἠδικοῦμεν γὰρ ή ἡμ
Ξ a " a an
« ἐναντία Θηβαίοις ὅτε ὑμεῖς ἀπωκνεῖτε, Kal προδοῦναι
Ss » a i /
« αὐτοὺς οὐκέτι ἦν καλόν,---ἄλλως τε Kal οὺς εὖ παθών
᾽ / / U \
“Tig Kal αὐτὸς δεόμενος προσηγάγετο ξυμμάχους Kal
,
“ πολιτείας μετέλαβεν,---ἰέναι δὲ ἐς τὰ παραγγελλόμενα
“εἰκὸς nv προθύμως. ἃ δὲ ἑκάτεροι ἐξηγεῖσθε τοῖς 4
“ξυμμάχοις, οὐχ οἱ ἑπόμενοι αἴτιοι εἴ τι μὴ καλώς
« ) an 2 >] e ” 5) ‘ \ \ >? θῶ ”
ἐδρῶτο, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ ἄγοντες ἐπὶ τὰ μὴ ὀρθῶς ἔχοντα.
“LVI. Θηβαῖοι δὲ πολλὰ μὲν καὶ ἄλλα ἡμᾶς ἠδίκησαν,
« \ \ a 4 ἘΝ ͵ 5 we: \ 1
τὸ δὲ τελευταῖον αὐτοὶ ξύνιστε, δι’ ὅπερ Kal τάδε
Ἂ ,
“πάσχομεν. πόλιν γὰρ αὐτοὺς τὴν ἡμετέραν KaTa- 2
lal 4 n
“λαμβάνοντας ἐν σπονδαῖς Kal προσέτι ἱερομηνίᾳ ὀρθώς

LV. §1. ὡς before ἐγγύς om. C.

§ 3. ἀδικοῦμεν Cob.; cf. 65 § 2.

§ 4. ἐδρᾶτο Her. from Bek. Anecdota 143, for Mss. ἐδρᾶτε.
LVI. § 1. δι’ ὅπερ Her.

§ 2. ὀρθῶς τε anticipating καὶ νῦν οὐκ ἄν vulg. Cob., but ABEFG
omit Te.

48 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΊΔΟΥ

“ ἐτιμωρησάμεθα κατὰ τὸν πᾶσι νόμον καθεστῶτα τὸν
“ ἐπιόντα πολέμιον ὅσιον εἶναι ἀμύνεσθαι" καὶ νῦν οὐκ
con , / ὃ > » \ Br / θ 3 \ lal > /
3.“ av εἰκότως Ov αὐτοὺς βλαπτοίμεθα. εἰ yap τῷ αὐτίκα
“ «ς lal
“χρησίμῳ ὑμῶν τε Kal ἐκείνων πολεμίῳ τὸ δίκαιον
“λήψεσθε, τοῦ μὲν ὀρθοῦ φανεῖσθε οὐκ ἀληθεῖς κρυταὶ
\ a
4 “ὄντες, TO δὲ ξυμφέρον μᾶλλον θεραπεύοντες. καίτοι εἰ
« lal ce » / ὃ a “ \ Nice. a Ν
νῦν ὑμῖν ὠφέλιμοι δοκοῦσιν εἶναι, πολὺ καὶ ἡμεῖς καὶ
Ul f lal
“ οἱ ἄλλοι “ἕλληνες μᾶλλον τότε ὅτε ἐν μείζονι κινδύνῳ
Ss n Ἂς \ / Cs a J
“nTe. νῦν μὲν yap ἑτέροις ὑμεῖς ἐπέρχεσθε δεινοί" ἐν
« 5 , \ a - of A 7ὔ ΠΕΣ ς
ἐκείνῳ δὲ τῷ καιρῷ, ὅτε πᾶσι δουλείαν ἐπέφερεν ὁ
“ / 2 3 ᾽ a 3 \ / [ n
5 “βάρβαρος, οἵδε pet αὐτοῦ ἦσαν. καὶ δίκαιον ἡμῶν
an fa « > nr 4
“τῆς νῦν ἁμαρτίας, εἰ dpa ἡμάρτηται, ἀντιθεῖναι τὴν
΄ /
“τότε προθυμίαν᾽ καὶ μείζω τε πρὸς ἐλάσσω εὑρήσετε,
“ \ > a id / 3 na € , \
καὶ ἐν καιροῖς οἷς σπάνιον nv τῶν ᾿λλήνων τινὰ
( Ψ \ n = / ὃ / > / θ νι > lal /
ἀρετὴν τῇ ἘΞέρξου δυνάμει ἀντιτάξασθαι, ἐπηνοῦντό τε
“μᾶλλον οἱ μὴ τὰ ξύμφορα πρὸς τὴν ἔφοδον αὑτοῖς
“ἀσφαλείᾳ πράσσοντες, ἐθέλοντες δὲ τολμᾷν μετὰ
« , \ ῃ σαν , Cohen , \
6 “κινδύνων τὰ βέλτιστα. ὧν ἡμεῖς γενόμενοι καὶ τιμη-
“θέντες ἐς τὰ πρώτα νῦν ἐπὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς δέδιμεν μὴ
- > la / a
“διαφθαρῶμεν, ᾿Αθηναίους ἑλόμενοι δικαίως μᾶλλον

πολεμίον del. Her.

§ 3. χρησίμῳ del. Bad. Bake. Cob. agrees, regarding χρήσιμον and
ξυμφέρον as identical; the retention of χρησίμῳ would thus render the
words φανεῖσθε τὸ ξυμφέρον θεραπεύοντες a meaningless addition.

πολεμίως Kr. from Iv. 17 ὃ 3, retaining χρησίμῳ.

‘Pulcerrimo oxymoro quae tria in iudicando plurimum valent,
utilitas, amicitia, iustitia, in eodem verbo diversis formis coniunguntur’
(Haase, Luc. 84). Hude suggests the development of πολεμίως from
πολεμίων, a mere gloss on ἐκείνων (Comm. Crit. 104).

§ 5. εἰ dpa τι Cob. ‘non est Graecum ἁμαρτία ἡμάρτηται.. But the
verb may be impersonal. ἡμάρτηταί τι G vulg.—avrots vulg. πρὸς τὴν
σφίσιν αὐτοῖς ἀσφάλειαν Bad. Cob. (Mnem. 1. 82): ‘vulgata lectio prorsus
sensu caret.’

ETTTPA®H> I. 49

COS a / / \ ΟΡ ΤΑΝ, \ a > tal
ἢ ὑμᾶς κερδαλέως. καίτοι χρὴ ταὐτὰ περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν 7
«- Κ᾿ / / , Ν \ / \
ὁμοίως φαίνεσθαι γιγνώσκοντας, καὶ TO ξυμφέρον μὴ
δ a , a ᾽ a 7
«ἄλλο TL νομίσαι ἢ τῶν ξυμμάχων τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ὅταν
“ἀεὶ βέβαιον τὴν χάριν τῆς ἀρετῆς ἔχωσι καὶ τὸ πα-
“ραυτίκα που ἡμῖν ὠφέλιμον καθιστῆται. LVII. προ-
“σκέψασθέ τε ὅτι νῦν μὲν παράδειγμα τοῖς πολλοῖς
a , /
“τῶν “EXAnvev ἀνδραγαθίας νομίζεσθε: εἰ δὲ περὶ
a ᾽ , τὰ \ 2 fal a
“ἡμῶν γνώσεσθε μὴ τὰ εἰκότα (οὐ yap ἀφανὴ κρινεῦτε
“rnp δίκην τήνδε, ἐπαινούμενοι δὲ περὶ οὐδ᾽ ἡμῶν
a fal Δ an
“ WEMTTOV,) ὁρᾶτε ὅπως μὴ οὐκ ἀποδέξωνται ἀνδρῶν

“ἀγαθῶν πέρι αὐτοὺς ἀμείνους ὄντας ὠπρεπές τι ἐπι-
“νῴναι, οὐδὲ πρὸς ἱεροῖς τοῖς κοινοῖς σκῦλα ἀπὸ ἡμών
“σῶν εὐεργετῶν τῆς ᾿᾿λλάδος ἀνατεθῆναι. δεινὸν δὲ 2
“δόξει εἶναι ἸΙ]λάταιαν Λακεδαιμονίους πορθῆσαι, καὶ
“τοὺς μὲν πατέρας ἀναγράψαι ἐς τὸν τρίποδα τὸν ἐν
“Δελφοῖς δι’ ἀρετὴν τὴν πόλιν, ὑμᾶς δὲ καὶ ἐκ παντὸς
“cod ᾿Ελληνικοῦ πανοικησίᾳ διὰ Θηβαίους ἐξαλεῖψαι.
“ἐς τοῦτο γὰρ δὴ ξυμφορᾶς προκεχωρήκαμεν, οἵτινες 3
“Μήδων τε κρατησάντων ἀπωλλύμεθα καὶ νῦν ἐν ὑμῖν
“σοῖς πρὶν φιλτάτοις Θηβαίων ἡσσώμεθα, καὶ δύο
“ἀγῶνας τοὺς μεγίστους ὑπέστημεν, τότε μέν, τὴν πόλιν

§ 7. ὁμοίως Her. suspects.—ol ἂν ἔχωσι Kr. Bad. ἔχουσι (dat. of
particip.) Cl. St. ἔχωσι Dobr. from schol. making 1[Ξ- παρέχωσι, and
continuing κἂν μή. Kr. suspects a lacuna.

Campe suggests μὴ ἄλλο τι νομίσαι ἢ τὸ δίκαιον μηδὲ ὀργίζεσθαι κ.τ.λ.
Her. proposes κἂν τὸ παραυτίκα τοῦθ᾽ ἡμῖν ὠφέλιμον μὴ καθίστηται.
Classen’s suggestion κἀν ἀνθίστηται has not found admission into his
text.

LVII. §1. προσσκέψασθε Her. St. Mein.—ddave’s C. F. Miiller.
--οὐδαμῶς μεμπτῶν Nab.—dmodééovra C only, Cob. Her.—yvavae for
ἐπιγνῶναι Hud. suspecting a dittography ct1, eT! (Comm. Crit. 104).

8.2. πανοικεσίᾳ ΒᾺΝ, But in II. 16, nearly all Mss. shew πανοι-
κησίᾳ (Duk.).

ἘΞ ΠΝ: 4

50 POOTKTAIAOT Σ

/ lal A
“εἰ μὴ παρέδομεν, λιμῷ διαφθαρῆναι, viv δὲ θανάτου
« , \ , > ͵ κ ε
4 “ κρίνεσθαι. καὶ περιεώσμεθα ἐκ πάντων Τ]λαταιῆς οἱ
“παρὰ δύναμιν πρόθυμοι ἐς τοὺς “EXXnvas ἐρῆμοι καὶ
“ἀτιμώρητοι᾽ καὶ οὔτε τῶν τότε ξυμμάχων ὠφελεῖ
“ οὐδείς, ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς, δέδιμεν
Ὁ ft 3 “
“μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε. LVIII. καίτοι ἀξιοῦμέν γε καὶ
“θεῶν ἕνεκα τῶν ξυμμαχικῶν ποτὲ γενομένων καὶ τῆς
5 Ὁ n A n Lal
“ἀρετῆς τῆς ἐς τοὺς “EXAnvas καμφθῆναι ὑμᾶς, Kal
“c Ἐν » ς \ Θ / > ,ὔ θ t
μεταγνῶναι εἴ τι ὑπὸ Θηβαίων ἐπείσθητε, τήν τε
“ \ e ΡῈ
“ δωρεὰν ἀνταπαιτῆσαι αὐτοὺς μὴ κτείνειν ods μὴ ὑμῖν
/ n ΄
“πρέπει, σώφρονά τε ἀντὶ αἰσχρᾶς κομίσασθαι χάριν,
« \ \ ς \ ' ” , ᾽ \ >
Kal μὴ ἡδονὴν δόντας ἄλλοις κακίαν αὐτοὺς ἀντιλα-
ce » \ \ \ \ ¢ / ΄ an
2 “βεῖν. βραχὺ yap τὸ τὰ ἡμέτερα σώματα διαφθεῖραι,
Kos \ \ , Sinmun ἦν BS , >
ἐπίπονον δὲ τὴν δύσκλειαν αὐτοῦ ἀφανίσαι. οὐκ
« 5 \ \ ears 5.5. δ ͵ > ? ”
ἐχθροὺς yap ἡμᾶς εἰκότως τιμωρήσεσθε, ἀλλ᾽ εὔνους,
3 “κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην πολεμήσαντας. ὥστε καὶ τῶν σωμάτων
77 ΄-- 4 > a
“ἄδειαν ποιοῦντες ὅσια ἂν δικάζοιτε, Kal προνοοῦντες
v4 f / lal - id
“ὅτι ἑκόντας τε ἐλάβετε καὶ χεῖρας προϊσχομένους (ὁ
, fal f \ » Ν
“ δὲ νόμος τοῖς “ἄλλησι μὴ κτείνειν τοὐτουςῚ, ἔτι δὲ καὶ
(44 , / / \ / > / \
4 “ εὐεργέτας γεγενημένους διὰ παντός. ἀποβλέψατε yap
a c
“és πατέρων τῶν ὑμετέρων θήκας, ods ἀποθανόντας
τιν Ἵ \ “ ᾽ nf 7 > an
ὑπὸ Μήδων καὶ ταφέντας ἐν τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ ἐτιμῶμεν
“κατὰ ἔτος ἕκαστον δημοσίᾳ ἐσθήμασί τε καὶ τοῖς

§ 3. λιμῷ δέ (.---θανάτου δίκῃ AEFGJ. δίκῃ del. Haack.

§ 4. παρεώσμεθα Cob.; cf. 67 §6, Noy. Lect. 160 on the distinction
of map, πέρ (i.e. παρά, περί). MS. evidence is valueless. J almost in-
variably confuses the two forms.—éBavos Her.

LVIII. §1. τότε (ΟΡ.---κναμφθῆναι C. γναμφθῆναι Duk. Haack, ex
margine Steph., expulit Bek. (Ατη.).---ὠἀπαιτῆσαι ὃ cf. Plat. Phaedr. 241 A.
αν, αντ- point to a dittography: but Thuc. affects compounds with ἀντί,

§ 3. ws (for ὥστε) Μ.---ὁ δὲ vduos...rovrous del. Cob.

§ 4. εὐσεβήμασι Mein. θύμασι Her.—émipépew B.—6é before ὁμαί-
χμοις om. F.—Sdpdcere C.

ΞΥΓΕΡΆΦΗΣ, T. 51

¢ n ς a > / « -
“ἄλλοις νομίμοις, ὅσα τε ἡ γῆ ἡμῶν ἀνεδίδου ὡραῖα,
« > \ ) , 5 \ ? os
πάντων ἀπαρχὰς ἐπιφέροντες, εὖνοι μὲν ἐκ φιλίας
«ς \ / Ka
“χώρας, ξύμμαχοι δὲ ὁμαίχμοις ποτὲ γενομένοις. ὧν
- ᾿ 2 Ὁ he ,
“ὑμεῖς τοὐναντίον av δράσαιτε μὴ ὀρθῶς γνόντες. σκέψ-
« θ δέ: Π , \ \ “0 ᾽ \ ,
ασθε δέ: ἸΤαυσανίας μὲν γὰρ ἔθαπτεν αὐτοὺς νομίζων
Pan's a ͵ θέ \ Joe a , F
ἐν γῇ τε φιλίᾳ τιθέναι καὶ Tap ἀνδράσι τοιούτοις
ΠΕ δὴ εὐ a con \ ͵ ΠΝ AS
ὑμεῖς δὲ εἰ κτενεῖτε ἡμᾶς καὶ χώραν τὴν [[λαταιΐδα
.Λ' \
«Θηβαΐδα ποιήσετε, τί ἄλλο ἢ ἐν πολεμίᾳ τε Kal παρὰ
a \ ¢ l4 \ an
“rois αὐθένταις πατέρας τοὺς ὑμετέρους Kal ξυγγενεῖς
Ὁ ΔΌΞΕΙΣ ~ 2 a + Mer ἵ δ δὲ
ἀτίμους γερῶν ὧν νῦν ἴσχουσι καταλείψετε ; πρὸς δὲ
a if ,
“καὶ γῆν ἐν 7 ἠλευθερώθησαν οἱ “EXAnves δουλώσετε,
ὯΝ i fa} a τ algae M ἠδ 2 / >
ἱερά τε θεών, οἷς εὐξάμενοι Μήδων ἐκράτησαν ἐρη-
lal lal) e /
“μοῦτε, Kat θυσίας Tas πατρίους τών εἱσαμένων Kal
’ \ a c ,ὕ
“κτισάντων ἀφαιρήσεσθε. LIX. οὐ πρὸς τῆς ὑμετέρας
\ aA
“δόξης, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, τάδε, οὔτε ἐς τὰ κοινὰ τῶν
«we? 7 , \ > \ / ¢€ /
λλήνων νόμιμα καὶ ἐς τοὺς προγόνους ἁμαρτάνειν,
(74 ” ς a \ » , ’ , 4 Μ᾿ θ Ν
οὔτε ἡμᾶς TOUS εὐεργέτας ἀλλοτρίας ἕνεκα ἔχθρας μὴ
- ,
“αὐτοὺς ἀδικηθέντας διαφθεῖραι, φείσασθαι δὲ καὶ
n a , " ΄ , \
“ἐπικλασθῆναι TH γνώμῃ οἴκτῳ σώφρονι λαβόντας, μὴ
la) ’
“ὧν πεισόμεθα μόνον δεινότητα κατανοοῦντας, ἀλλ
( x ¢e ᾽ ΄
“οἷοί τε ἂν ὄντες πάθοιμεν καὶ ὡς ἀστάθμητον τὸ
« fal lal Φ / > Ἃ \ » / ,
τῆς ξυμφορᾶς, ᾧτινί ποτ᾽ ἂν καὶ ἀναξίῳ ξυμπέσοι.
a € / Ἔα ὧν \ ς ε
“ἡμεῖς τε, ὡς πρέπον ἡμῖν καὶ ὡς ἡ χρεία προάγει,
ec “ \ «
“αἰτούμεθα ὑμᾶς, θεοὺς τοὺς ὁμοβωμίους καὶ κοινοὺς

8 5. ἐκτενεῖτε Β.---Θηβαΐδα om. ABF, m. pr. τὴν Θηβαΐδα AB,
m. rec. written over Πλαταιίδα.---αοὐτοένταις Cyril Lex. Μ5.---ἐρημώσετε
Her. ἐρημοῦντες St.—éooapévwv Bek. vulg. ἑσαμένων Arn. from Goller.
καὶ κτισάντων del. Her.

LIX. § τ. μὴ αὐτοὺς ἀδικηθέντας del. Cob. ‘bis idem dicitur,’
—olkrov σώφρονα vulg.—karavootvras del. Her. κατανοοῦντες C.

§ 2. αἰτούμεθα ὑμᾶς del. Her.—etca τάδε del. Her., inserting τε
after προφερόμενοι, so also St. retaining πεῖσαι τάδε, Cl. places colon

4—2

2

52 @OTKTAIAOT

lal € “
“τῶν λλήνων ἐπιβοώμενοι, πεῖσαι τάδε, πιροφερόμενοι
“<@> ὅρκους ods οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν ὦμοσαν μὴ ἀμνη-
a ¢ lal a
“ μονεῖν, ἱκέται γιγνόμεθα ὑμῶν τῶν πατρῴων τάφων,
“καὶ ἐπικαλούμεθα τοὺς κεκμηῶτας μὴ γενέσθαι ὑπὸ
“Θηβαίοις μηδὲ τοῖς ἐχθίστοις φίλτατοι ὄντες παρα-
“δοθῆναι. ἡμέρας τε ἀναμιμνήσκομεν ἐκείνης ἣ τὰ
> ? Cal γ “ lal
“λαμπρότατα pet αὐτῶν πράξαντες νῦν ἐν τῇδε τὰ
“ δεινότατα κινδυνεύομεν παθεῖν. ὅπερ δὲ ἀναγκαῖόν τε
« \ , » e »” / col
καὶ χαλεπώτατον τοῖς ὧδε ἔχουσι, λόγου τελευτᾷν,
, \ ἴον / ς / a
“διότι Kai TOD βίου ὁ κίνδυνος ἐγγὺς μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, παυό-
/ > /
ἥμενοι λέγομεν ἤδη ὅτι οὐ Θηβαίοις παρέδομεν τὴν
τ Wi “7 \ x , / O28 ,
πόλιν (εἱλόμεθα γὰρ ἂν πρό γε τούτου τῷ αἰσχίστῳ
46, / “ a ig lal \ /
ὀλέθρῳ λιμῷ τελευτῆσαι,). ὑμῖν δὲ πιστεύσαντες προσ-
7
“ἤλθομεν (καὶ δίκαιον, εἰ μὴ πείθομεν, ἐς τὰ αὐτὰ
‘ f rn a
“καταστήσαντας τὸν ξυντυχόντα κίνδυνον ἐᾶσαι ἡμᾶς
x 4 an
“αὐτοὺς ἑλέσθαι), ἐπισκήπτομέν τε ἅμα μὴ ΠΙλαταιῆς
wor ¢ , \ δια τ ͵
ὄντες οἱ προθυμότατοι περὶ τοὺς “Ελληνας γενόμενοι
/ an c al - a
“Θηβαίοις τοῖς ἡμῖν ἐχθίστοις ἐκ τῶν ὑμετέρων χειρῶν
\ a ,
“Kal τῆς ὑμετέρας πίστεως, ἱκέται ὄντες, ὦ Λακεδαι-

αἱ τάδε, assuming an asyndeton. Haase, Luc. p. 14, treats ἱκέται γιγνό-
μεθα as a mere substitute for αἰτούμεθα, to avoid repetition (just as in
IV. 48 διεφθάρησαν resumes and repeats σφὰς αὐτοὺς διέφθειραν), ὅρκους
προφερόμενοι having the same connection with its verb as in Iv. 48,
παραιρήματα ποιοῦντες with ἀπαγχόμενοι. It must be noted that the
terminations -μεθα, -uévos, -μένοι are subject to frequent confusion.
μὴ ἀμνημονεῖν del. Cob. Her., but insert πρός before τῶν πατρῴων
τάφων (Cob. N. L. 346). Classen’s treatment of the passage Cob.
regards as ‘neque Graeci neque humani sermonis.’—ye6’ αὑτῶν ABEF.
μεθ᾽ ἑαυτῶν MN.

§ 3. λόγου τελευτᾷν del. Ηετ.---ἀλγίστῳ Her. excising λιμῷ. οἷ-
κτίστῳ Nab.; cf. Hom. Od. x11. 342. κακίστῳ Mein. from Dio, Hal.
Cf. Hermes III. 364.

τοῦ ξυντυχόντ᾽ ἄν Hud.; cf. Dem. xxill. §§ 15, 17.

|

ἘΥΤΤΡΑΦΗΣ ΓΤ. 53

“ 0d δοθῆ έσθαι δὲ σωτῆρας ἡμῶ ὶ
μόνιοι, παραδοθῆναι, γενέσθαι δὲ σωτῆρας ἡμῶν καὶ
» na « a
«μὴ τοὺς ἄλλους “Ελληνας ἐλευθεροῦντας ἡμᾶς διο-
“λέσαι."
LX. Τοιαῦτα μὲν οἱ Πλαταιῆς εἶπον. οἱ δὲ
a \ a \
Θηβαῖοι δείσαντες πρὸς τὸν λόγον αὐτῶν μὴ οἱ Aaxe-
ὃ , , ᾽ ὃ lal 06 ΝΜ \ > \
αἰιμόνιοί τι ἐνδῶσι, παρελθόντες ἔφασαν καὶ αὐτοὶ
al \ ’,
βούλεσθαι εἰπεῖν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ἐκείνοις παρὰ γνώμην τὴν
a / a \ Ν ,ὔ
αὐτῶν μακρότερος λόγος ἐδόθη τῆς πρὸς τὸ ἐρώτημα
» / id > > / »» 4
ἀποκρίσεως. ὡς δ᾽ ἐκέλευσαν, ἔλεγον τοιάδε.
LXI. “ΤΟΥΣ μὲν λόγους οὐκ av ἠτησάμεθα εἰπεῖν,
« > \ a / \ > θὲ > / \ Ἁ
εἰ καὶ οὗτοι βραχέως τὸ ἐρωτηθὲν ἀπεκρίναντο καὶ μὴ
a , /
«ἐπὶ ἡμᾶς τραπόμενοι κατηγορίαν ἐποιήσαντο καὶ περὶ
a lal “ ἈΝ /
«αὑτῶν ἔξω τῶν προκειμένων Kal ἅμα οὐδὲ ἠτιαμένων
( \ \ > / \ yy φ >) \ > 2
πολλὴν τὴν ἀπολογίαν καὶ ETTALVOY ὧν OVOELS ἐμεμ-
( “Ὁ δὲ Ν x \ > lal ὃ nr A δὲ
ψατο. νῦν δὲ πρὸς μὲν τὰ ἀντειπεῖν δεῖ, τῶν δὲ
««Ὑ / 7 , eae / ᾽ \ ΄
ἔλεγχον ποιήσασθαι, ἵνα μήτε ἡ ἡμετέρα αὐτοὺς κακία
- \ a]
«ὠφελῇ μήτε ἡ τούτων δόξα, τὸ δ᾽ ἀληθὲς περὶ ἀμφο-
“- Ἂν a
“réowy ἀκούσαντες κρίνητε. ἡμεῖς δὲ αὐτοῖς διάφοροι
“ { « Aa /
«ἀγενόμεθα πρῶτον ὅτε ἡμῶν κτισάντων Ἰ]λάταιαν
«ὕστερον τῆς ἄλλης Βοιωτίας καὶ ἄλλα χωρία μετ᾽
74 > fol «Ὁ / > θ / 5 x Δ »”
αὐτῆς, ἃ ξυμμίκτους ἀνθρώπους ἐξελάσαντες ἔσχομεν,
/ a
«οὐκ ἠξίουν οὗτοι, ὥσπερ ἐτάχθη TO πρῶτον, ἡγεμο-
€ lal “ Y r
«ψεύεσθαι ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν, ἔξω δὲ τῶν ἄλλων Βοιωτῶν
«παραβαίνοντες τὰ πάτρια, ἐπειδὴ προσηναγκάζοντο,
« F Nyt) f \ ᾽ sy κ᾿ \
προσεχώρησαν πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους καὶ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν πολλὰ
Ὁ τὸ >
« ἡμᾶς ἔβλαπτον, ἀνθ᾽ ὧν καὶ ἀντέπασχον. LXII. ἐπει-
LX. προελθόντες Ullr. Hud.
LXI. § 1. αὐτοί mss. and edd. Corr. Hud. Gertz οὗτοι (sensu
forensi) “τοὶ, ---πρὸς τὸ ἐρωτηθὲν Cob.—yjriacpévwy vulg., qu. πολλήν
τινα ὃ

§2. τὸ πρῶτον AGN. ὅτε Cob. ‘si causas inimicitiarum indicare
voluisset, scripsisset πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι."

54 POOTKTAIAOT

\ € 9 «
“δὴ δὲ καὶ ὁ βάρβαρος ἦλθεν ἐπὶ τὴν “Ελλάδα, φασὶ
/ A
“μόνοι Βοιωτῶν οὐ μηδίσαι, καὶ τούτῳ μάλιστα αὐτοί
, , lal lal “
“τε ἀγάλλονται καὶ ἡμᾶς λοιδοροῦσιν. ἡμεῖς δὲ μη-
“δίσαι μὲν αὐτοὺς οὐ φαμὲν διότι οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίους, τῇ
“τ Say ΚΟ “ > > , a \
μέντοι αὐτῇ ἰδέᾳ ὕστερον ἰόντων ᾿Αθηναίων ἐπὶ τοὺς
““Ἑλληνας μόνους αὖ Βοιωτῶν ἀττικίσαι. καίτοι σκέψ-
( > “, " € / € fal lal yw
ασθε ἐν οἵῳ εἴδει ἑκάτεροι ἡμῶν τοῦτο ἔπραξαν.
τ Ξε τ τα \ \ ¢ ͵ , 5.7) ” 5.5
ἡμῖν μὲν γὰρ ἡ πόλις τότε ἐτύγχανεν οὔτε κατ᾽ ὀλι-
/ /
“γαρχίαν ἰσόνομον πολιτεύουσα οὔτε κατὰ δημοκρατίαν᾽
/ / , \ \ “-
“ὕπερ δέ ἐστι νόμοις μὲν καὶ τῷ σωφρονεστάτῳ ἐναν-
΄ /
“τιώτατον, ἐγγυτάτω δὲ τυράννου, δυναστεία ὀλίγων
> “ ΄
“ ἀνδρῶν εἶχε τὰ πράγματα. καὶ οὗτοι ἰδίας δυνάμεις
, a rn , a
“ἐλπίσαντες ETL μᾶλλον σχήσειν εἰ τὰ τοῦ Μήδου
᾿ “ \ fol
“κρατήσειε, κατέχοντες ἰσχύϊ τὸ πλῆθος ἐπηγάγοντο
5. τὰ} e ΄ >
“αὐτόν" καὶ ἡ ξύμπασα πόλις οὐκ αὐτοκράτωρ odca
{ἘΞ fal Pad ἢ 70)». OW ᾽ Ag, ,ὔ a \
ἑαυτῆς τοῦτ᾽ ἔπραξεν, οὐδ᾽ ἄξιον αὐτῇ ὀνειδίσαι ὧν μὴ
« Ne ἡ « > SS an Ψ A ony
μετὰ νόμων ἥμαρτεν. ἐπειδὴ γοῦν 6 Te Μῆδος ἀπῆλθε
N; / / >
“καὶ τοὺς νόμους ἔλαβε, σκέψασθαι χρή, ᾿Αθηναίων
“ὕστερον ἐπιόντων τήν τε ἄλλην “Ελλάδα καὶ τὴν
c 7 ͵ , lal “
“ἡμετέραν χώραν πειρωμένων ὑφ᾽ αὑτοῖς ποιεῖσθαι καὶ
, » lal
“κατὰ στάσιν ἤδη ἐχόντων αὐτῆς τὰ πολλά, εἰ μαχό-
/ τ
“μενοι ἐν Κορωνείᾳ καὶ νικήσαντες αὐτοὺς ἠλευθερώ-
« \ , Ν \ » fal /
σαμεν τὴν Βοιωτίαν καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους νῦν προθύμως
“ "
“ ξυνελευθεροῦμεν, ἵππους τε παρέχοντες καὶ παρα-
“σκευὴν ὅσην οὐκ ἄλλοι τῶν ξυμμάχων. καὶ τὰ μὲν
“ἐς τὸν μηδισμὸν τοσαῦτα ἀπολογούμεθα: LXIII. ὡς
LXII. 8.3. νόμος Ο.---εώφρονι Cob. τῷ σώφρονι τρόπῳ Kr. τῷ
σωφρονεστέρῳ Hud. πάντων ἐναντιώτατον Her.
§ 4. καὶ οὐχ ἡ ξύμπασα Her. with Cobet’s approval: his change of
οὐκ to οὐδέ before αὐτοκράτωρ Cob. condemns.

ὃ 5. εἰπόντων ABEF.—im7ovus ‘stulta lectio; dixisset saltem ἱππέας ;
verum videtur ἵππον ; cf. 1. 62, 11. 12” (Cob.).—a\Anv C.

ἘΥΤΤΡΑΦΗΣ 1. 55

a a , \ /
«δὲ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλόν τε ἠδικήκατε τοὺς “EAAnvas καὶ
tla / Late) t / , ? /
ἀξιώτεροί ἐστε πάσης ζημίας, πειρασόμεθα ἀποφαίνειν.
“2 , : θ eA a ¢ / , ς / "A@ 7
ἐγένεσθε ἐπὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ τιμωρίᾳ, ὡς φατε, ηναίων
lal lal Ὁ Ν € a
“ξύμμαχοι καὶ πολῖται. οὐκοῦν χρῆν τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς
a >
«μόνον ὑμᾶς ἐπάγεσθαι αὐτοὺς καὶ μὴ ξυνεπιέναι μετ
«αὐτῶν ἄλλοις, ὑπάρχον γε ὑμῖν, εἴ τι καὶ ἄκοντες
« ͵ Gao © , a a ὃ ,
προσήγεσθε ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίων, τῆς τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων
(a4 lal v τι Ν a , ,ὔ / a
τῶνδε ἤδη ἐπὶ TO Μήδῳ ξυμμαχίας γεγενημένης, ἣν
« , a / / e / 3 «ς “
αὐτοὶ μάλιστα προβάλλεσθε" ἱκανὴ γε ἣν ἡμᾶς τε
«ὑμῶν ἀποτρέπειν, καί, τὸ μέγιστον, ἀδεῶς παρέχειν
« βουλεύεσθαι. ἀλλ᾽ ἑκόντες καὶ οὐ βιαζόμενοι ἔτι
A a \
«εἵλεσθε μᾶλλον τὰ ᾿Αθηναίων. καὶ λέγετε WS αἰσχρὸν
«ἣν προδοῦναι τοὺς εὐεργέτας" πολὺ δέ γε αἴσχιον καὶ
«2 , \ ' “ a e
ἀδικώτερον τοὺς πάντας “EAnvas καταπροδοῦναι, ois
« ξυνωμόσατε, ἢ ᾿Αθηναίους μόνους, τοὺς μὲν καταδου-
«χουμένους τὴν ᾿Εὐλλάδα, τοὺς δὲ ἐλευθεροῦντας. καὶ
«οὐκ ἴσην αὐτοῖς τὴν χάριν ἀνταπέδοτε, οὐδὲ αἰσχύνης
r / ΄
« ἀπηλλαγμένην. ὑμεῖς μὲν γὰρ ἀδικούμενοι αὐτούς, ὡς
«φατέ, ἐπηγάγεσθε, τοῖς δὲ ἀδικοῦσιν ἄλλους ξυνεργοὶ
,
«κατέστητε. καίτοι Tas ὁμοίας χάριτας μὴ ἀντιδι-
“ces > \ a n \ \ ῃ \
δόναι αἰσχρὸν μᾶλλον ἢ Tas μετὰ δικαιοσύνης μὲν
2 4 fal
«ὀφειληθείσας, ἐς ἀδικίαν δὲ ἀποδιδομένας. LXIV. δῆ-
“cy! ? , OX a ne , o ͵
Nov τε ἐποιήσατε οὐδὲ τότε τών ENANVY ἕνεκα μόνον
3 / an “-“ lal
“ov μηδίσαντες, GAN ὅτι οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, ὑμεῖς δὲ τοῖς

LXIII. § 1. ἠδικήσατε G.

8. 2. ὑπάγεσθαι ABEF vulg. For ὑπάρχον... Cobet suggests παρέχον
γε ὑμῖν τῆς ξυμμ. γεγεν. μετέχειν. ὑπάρχοντες E. ὑπάρχον te ABF vulg.

ἢ ἱκανή γε Reiske, Bad. Her. γάρ Hud. from one inferior Ms. We
might suggest ἱκανήν ye, but the asyndeton is quite defensible.

§ 4. καίτοι οὐ τό Camp. conject. 17. καίτοι τί Να)».---ἀνταποδιδόναι
Her.; cf. 67 § 5.—7 (for 7) Hud. vid. Comm. Crit. 107.

LXIV. § τ. ἡμεῖς δὲ BEF. ὑμεῖς ACG; the latter appears

3

56 GOTKTAIAOT

« A , A / ΄“ Lal \ » / \ »“"
μὲν ταὐτὰ βουλόμενοι ποιεῖν τοῖς δὲ τἀναντία. καὶ νῦν
r , »
“ἀξιοῦτε, ἀφ᾽ ὧν δι’ ἑτέρους ἐγένεσθε ἀγαθοί, ἀπὸ
“τούτων ὠφελεῖσθαι. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ εἰκός, ὥσπερ δὲ ᾿Αθη-
/
“patovs εἵλεσθε, τούτοις ξυναγωνίζεσθε, καὶ μὴ προ-
“φέρετε τὴν τότε γενομένην ξυνωμοσίαν, ὡς χρὴ ἀπ᾽
“αὐτῆς νῦν σῴζεσθαι. ἀπελίπετε γὰρ αὐτὴν καὶ παρα-
“βάντες ξυγκατεδουλοῦσθε μᾶλλον Αἰγινήτας καὶ
“ἄλλους τινὰς τῶν ξυνομοσάντων ἢ διεκωλύετε, καὶ
“ταῦτα οὔτε ἄκοντες ἔχοντές τε τοὺς νόμους οὕσπερ
“ μέχρι τοῦ δεῦρο, καὶ οὐδενὸς ὑμᾶς βιασαμένου ὥσπερ
n \ /
“ἡμᾶς. τὴν τελευταίαν τε πρὶν περιτειχίζεσθαι πρό-
U na ¢, ,
“Know ἐς ἡσυχίαν ὑμῶν, ὥστε μηδετέροις ἀμύνειν, οὐκ
ἡ a / an a
“ ἐδέχεσθε. τίνες ἂν οὖν ὑμῶν δικαιότερον πᾶσι τοῖς
cd a Y, eek n> ! Aes
λλησι μισοῖντο, οἵτινες ἐπὶ τῷ ἐκείνων κακῷ avopa-
«“ ,ὔ , NG TaN eee, τιν
γαθίαν προύθεσθε ; καὶ ἃ μέν ποτε χρηστοὶ ἐγένεσθε,
(Geet la > / “- Σ ὃ / “δ δὲ ς 7 4
ὡς φατέ, οὐ προσήκοντα νῦν ἐπεδείξατε, ἃ δὲ ἡ φύσις
“ἀεὶ ἐβούλετο, ἐξηλέγχθη ἐς τὸ ἀληθές" μετὰ γὰρ ᾿Αθη-
€
“ναίων ἄδικον ὁδὸν ἰόντων ἐχωρήσατε. τὰ μὲν οὖν ἐς
Ν ε
“τὸν ἡμέτερόν τε ἀκούσιον μηδισμὸν καὶ τὸν ὑμέτερον
“ ἑκούσιον ἀττικισμὸν τοιαῦτα ἀποφαίνομεν. LXV. ἃ
nr a / »-“
“ δὲ τελευταῖά φατε ἀδικηθῆναι (παρανόμως γὰρ ἐλθεῖν
“ἡμᾶς ἐν σπονδαῖς καὶ ἱερομηνίᾳ ἐπὶ τὴν ὑμετέραν
δε Ἐν ᾽ / 29> > ΄ € on A
πόλιν), οὐ νομίζομεν οὐδ᾽ ἐν τούτοις ὑμῶν μᾶλλον
preferable. Could we repunctuate, putting colon after ᾿Αθηναῖοι, re-
taining ὑμεῖς, destroying full stop at τἀναντία, and giving καὶ νῦν the
force of ‘nunc iterum,’ with special allusion to II. 71 ὃ 5? Her.
excises both ὑμεῖς δέ and ποιεῖν, the first being omitted in Valla’s
version.
§ 3. ἀπελείπετε EF οεἰ.---μᾶλλον om. G.—7 διεκωλύετε, ‘addita-
mentum frigidum, ineptum, absurdum,’ Cob.—juwy BCFG.— pnd ἑτέροις
St. from B, vulg. μηδετέροις.

ὃ 5. ἀκούσιον A.
LXV. §1. ἱερομηνίας (gen. sing.) or lepounvig Mein.: so Her. St.

EYPEePADH>) EF. 57

dene a > \ \ ge ars ae N , \ ,
ἁμαρτεῖν. εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἡμεῖς αὐτοὶ πρὸς τε τὴν πόλιν 2
ae? , ᾽ , θ \ \ δ 25 a ς ,
ἐλθόντες ἐμαχόμεθα καὶ τὴν γῆν ἐδηοῦμεν ὡς πολέμιοι,
a . a c aA \ 7
«ἀδικοῦμεν: εἰ δὲ ἄνδρες ὑμῶν οἱ πρῶτοι καὶ χρήμασι
« \ , ΄ a \ ” , OA
καὶ γένει, βουλόμενοι τῆς μὲν ἔξω ξυμμαχίας υμᾶς
«παῦσαι ἐς δὲ τὰ κοινὰ τῶν πάντων Βοιωτῶν πάτρια
a e / / > fal
«καταστῆσαι, ἐπεκαλέσαντο ἑκόντες, τί ἀδικοῦμεν ;
lal cat lal /,
«οἱ yap ἄγοντες παρανομοῦσι μᾶλλον τῶν ἑπομένων.
oc ? ’ ἢ. 9 Σ al ε ¢ - / "θ᾽ «ς fate
ἀλλ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἐκεῖνοι, ὡς ἡμεῖς κρίνομεν, OVO μεῖς" 3
a «ς a \ / ’
“πολῖται δὲ ὄντες ὥσπερ ὑμεῖς, καὶ πλείω παραβαλλο-
- a / \ \ «ς a
“μενοι, TO ἑαυτῶν τεῖχος ἀνοίξαντες Kal ἐς THY αὑτῶν
/ > 4 /
« πόλιν φιλίως, οὐ πολεμίως κομίσαντες, ἐβούλοντο TOUS
a a / U
“re ὑμῶν χείρους μηκέτι μᾶλλον γενέσθαι τούς TE
Ὧ oF. a ,
“ ἀμείνους τὰ ἄξια ἔχειν, σωφρονισταὶ ὄντες τῆς γνώμης,
A a » >
“Kal TOV σωμάτων τὴν πόλιν οὐκ ἀλλοτριοῦντες ἀλλ
ἔξ .3 \ / ’ “ 5 θ \ 7) \ θ
ἐς τὴν ξυγγένειαν οἰκειοῦντες, ἐχθροὺς οὐδενὶ καθι-
/ ,
«στάντες, ἅπασι δ᾽ ὁμοίως ἐνσπόνδους. LXVI. τεκμή-
v9 \ ς > / > , ΝΜ \
ριον δὲ [ws οὐ πολεμίως ἐπράσσομεν}]" οὔτε yap
«2 s Os , ͵΄ \ ,
ἠδικήσαμεν οὐδένα, προείπομέν τε τὸν βουλόμενον
«κατὰ τὰ πάντων Βοιωτῶν πάτρια πολιτεύειν ἰέναι
« val ¢ a ΄
“πρὸς ἡμᾶς. καὶ ὑμεῖς ἄσμενοι χωρήσαντες καὶ ξύμ- 2
“ Baow ποιησάμενοι τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἡσυχάζετε, ὕστερον
/ e a /
«δὲ κατανοήσαντες ἡμᾶς ὀλίγους ὄντας, εἰ apa Kal
fol ΄ fal rf
«ἐδοκοῦμέν τι ἀνεπιεικέστερον πρᾶξαι ov μετὰ τοῦ
« ξ “-“ > / \ \ ig “ > >
πλήθους ὑμῶν εἰσελθόντες, τὰ μὲν ὁμοῖα οὐκ ἀντα-

8 2. ἀδικοῦμεν, see Heindorf, Plato Protag. 310 Ὁ.

§ 3. φιλίους, πολεμίους Steup, Qu. Th. p. 34.—qu. μὴ ἐπὶ μᾶλλον
γενέσθαι (or νέμεσθαι) Hude suspects some verb with force of ἰσχύειν
in place of γενέσθαι. Would μεγαλύνεσθαι serve his purpose? cf. v. 98.
σωφρονισταὶ ὄντες τῆς γνώμης, οὐ τῶν σωμάτων, τὴν πόλιν οὐκ ἀλλο-
τριοῦντες Weil.

LXVI. 8 τ. ὡς οὐ πολεμίως ἐπράσσομεν del. Mein. (Herm. III. 365).—
τῶν πάντων C,

58 OOTKTAIAOT

Cea Cla ͵ , ov ͵ ͵
πέδοτε ἡμῖν, μήτε νεωτερίσαι ἔργῳ λόγοις τε πείθειν
/ > ἃ
“bate ἐξελθεῖν, ἐπιθέμενοι δὲ παρὰ τὴν ξύμβασιν--οὺς

/ ς nr
“μὲν ἐν χερσὶν ἀπεκτείνατε, οὐχ ὁμοίως adyoupeEV, κατὰ
a lal ”
«νόμον yap δή Twa ἔπασχον, ods δὲ χεῖρας προῖσχο-
/ / lal
“ μένους καὶ ζωγρήσαντες ὑποσχόμενοί τε ἡμῖν ὕστερον
\ Lal “
“un κτενεῖν παρανόμως διεφθείρατε, πῶς οὐ δεινὰ
“εἴργασθε ;---καὶ ταῦτα τρεῖς ἀδικίας ἐν ὀλίγῳ πρά-
ce / lal id / \ ~ » lal
Eavtes, τήν τε λυθεῖσαν ὁμολογίαν Kai τῶν ἀνδρῶν
¢i ‘ \ A a
«σὸν ὕστερον θάνατον καὶ THY περὶ αὐτῶν ἡμῖν μὴ
«κτείνειν ψευσθεῖσαν ὑπόσχεσιν, ἢν τὰ ἐν τοῖς ἀγροῖς
lal a Χ e a a
«ὑμῖν μὴ ἀδικῶμεν, ὅμως φατὲ ἡμᾶς παρανομῆσαι καὶ
« ’ Wet “ \ 3 ὃ a δί » BJA a
αὐτοὶ ἀξιοῦτε μὴ ἀντιδοῦναι δίκην. οὔκ, ἤν γε οὗτοι
“τὰ ὀρθὰ γιγνώσκωσι' πάντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἕνεκα κολα-
’ “ cs
“gOncecOe. LXVII. καὶ ταῦτα, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι,
‘ r δ , ¢ \ ¢ lol fal
«τούτου ἕνεκα ἐπεξήλθομεν, Kal ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν Kal ἡμῶν,
“ \ lol ’ A“
“ta ὑμεῖς μὲν εἰδῆτε δικαίως αὐτῶν κατωγνωσόμενοι,
“ » « / \ \
« ἡμεῖς δὲ ETL ὁσιώτερον τετιμωρημένοι, καὶ μὴ παλαιὰς
“ἀρετάς, εἴ τις ἄρα καὶ ἐγένετο, ἀκούοντες ἐπικλασθῆτε,
Ω al , 5 a
«ἃς χρὴ τοῖς μὲν ἀδικουμένοις ἐπικούρους εἶναι, τοῖς
« \ > ͵ a ΄ / “ ᾽ >
δὲ αἰσχρόν τι δρῶσι διπλασίας ζημίας, ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ
“προσηκόντων ἁμαρτάνουσι. μηδὲ ὀλοφυρμῷ καὶ οἴκτῳ
ἐς 59 , / U “-“ « / >
ὠφελείσθων, πατέρων τε τάφους τῶν ὑμετέρων ἔπι-
« βοώμενοι καὶ τὴν σφετέραν ἐρημίαν. καὶ γὰρ ἡμεῖς
« ἀνταποφαίνομεν πολλῷ δεινότερα παθοῦσαν τὴν ὑπὸ

§ 2. πείθειν Cl. from vulg. πείσειν. πεῖσαι one MS. only (L).

§ 3. ταύτας Hud. κἀνταῦθα Nab.—xreveiv Her. vid. St. Qu. Gr. 8.
Gertz and Hude propose placing ὕστερον after μὴ κτενεῖν. Cobet con-
demns ἡμῖν μὴ κτενεῖν as a gloss.

ὑπόθεσιν ΑΒΕ.

§ 4. πάντων δὲ...κολασθήσεσθε an interpolation (Nab.).

LXVII. $1. ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν Her.

§ 2. διπλασίας --αἰτίας -- ζημίας Mein.

ὠφελείσθωσαν vulg. εκ.

EBTITPA®HS I. 59

“ , « / c a ὃ Q / Ld ‘ € \
τούτων ἡλικίαν ἡμῶν διεφθαρμένην, ὧν πατέρες οἱ μὲν
« \ ς ca) \ B / » > 40 > K
πρὸς ὑμᾶς τὴν Βοιωτίαν ἄγοντες ὠπέθανον ἐν Kopw-
eter © Q\ a Ἵ \ Pile ”
vela, of δὲ πρεσβῦται λελειμμένοι καὶ οἰκίαι ἔρημοι
«πολλῷ δικαιοτέραν ὑμῶν ἱκετείαν ποιοῦνται τούσδε
“τιμωρήσασθαι. οἴκτου τε ἀξιώτερον τυγχάνειν οἱ 4
> ‘ a « \ ‘

“ ἀπρεπές τι πάσχοντες τῶν ἀνθρώπων" οἱ δὲ δικαίως,
[ δ, / \ lal
“ ὥσπερ olde, τὰ ἐναντία ἐπίχαρτοι εἶναι. καὶ τὴν νῦν 5

“2 , sere \. » ᾿ \ \ on. FP
ἐρημίαν δι’ ἑαυτοὺς ἔχουσι" τοὺς yap ἀμείνους Evp-
, > / ᾽
“μάχους ἑκόντες ἀπεώσαντο. παρενόμησαν τε οὐ προ-
( , Ὁ ᾽ c lal , \ / “Ὁ ᾽ὔ /
παθόντες Up ἡμῶν, μίσει δὲ πλέον ἢ δίκῃ κρίναντες,
“ , r »

“Kal οὐκ ἂν ἀνταποδόντες νῦν τὴν ἴσην τιμωρίαν,
“ἔννομα γὰρ πείσονται καὶ οὐχὶ ἐκ μάχης χεῖρας
- , ’ ’ 5 \ U
“ προϊσχόμενοι, ὥσπερ φασίν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ ξυμβάσεως ἐς

rn 5 > 3
“δίκην σφᾶς αὐτοὺς παραδόντες. ἀμύνατε οὖν, ὦ 6
n ia « Ὁ
“ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, καὶ τῷ τῶν ᾿ἰῶολλήνων νόμῳ ὑπὸ τῶνδε
Εν Ἂν b) a 2
“παραβαθέντι, καὶ ἡμῖν ἄνομα παθοῦσιν ἀνταπόδοτε
« , , 2 t ͵ \ \ a
χάριν δικαίαν ὧν πρόθυμοι γεγενήμεθα, καὶ μὴ τοῖς
“ lal Con U \ o
“«πῶνδε λόγοις περιωσθῶμεν ἐν ὑμῖν, ποιήσατε δὲ τοῖς
ἐ“Βλλησι παράδειγμα οὐ λόγων τοὺς ἀγώνας προθή-
- ᾽ 5. Ἂν e > a \ ” a
covtes ἀλλ᾽ ἔργων, ὧν ἀγαθῶν μὲν ὄντων βραχεῖα
« > Wh ? tal ε / δὲ λό ”
ἡ ἀπαγγελία ἀρκεῖ, ἁμαρτανομένων δὲ λόγοι ἔπεσι
x e
“κοσμηθέντες προκαλύμματα γίγνονται. ἀλλ᾽ ἢν οἱ 7
ε / an ¢ aA ͵ \
“ἡγεμόνες, ὥσπερ νῦν ὑμεῖς, κεφαλαιώσαντες πρὸς TOUS
τ , ᾽
«ξύμπαντας διαγνώμας ποιήσησθε, ἧσσόν τις ἐπ,
«-« 207 » ͵ \ , "7
ἀδίκοις ἔργοις λόγους καλοὺς ζητήσει.

LXVIII. Τοιαῦτα δὲ οἱ Θηβαῖοι εἶπον. οἱ δὲ

§ 3. ἔχοντες F.

§ 5. παρηνόμησαν MSS. ‘barbarum’ (Her. St. 124).—ovK« ἂν ἀνταπο-
δόντες Dobr. Her. ἀνταποδώσοντες St.

ὃ 6. προκάλυμμα Nab.

$7. ὥσπερ del. Bad.—mpés τὸ ξύμπαν Weil (Rev. de Phil. 11. 91).

LXVIII. §1. 67 Her.

60 OOTKTAIAOT

Λακεδαιμόνιοι δικασταὶ νομίζοντες τὸ ᾿ἐπερώτημα σφίσιν
ὀρθῶς ἕξειν, εἴ τι ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἀγαθὸν
πεπόνθασι, διότι τόν τε ἄλλον χρόνον ἠξίουν δῆθεν
αὐτοὺς κατὰ τὰς παλαιὰς Παυσανίου μετὰ τὸν Μῆδον
σπονδὰς ἡσυχάξειν, καὶ ὅτε ὕστερον ἃ ἘΠῚ τοῦ ἡπερέτεις-
χίξεσθαι προείχοντο αὐτοῖς, κοινοὺς εἶναι κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνα,
ὡς οὐκ ἐδέξαντο, ἡγούμενοι τῇ ἑαυτῶν δικαίᾳ βουχησεῖ
ἔκσπονδοι ἤδη ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν κακῶς πεπονθέναι, αὖθις τὸ
αὐτὸ ἕνα ἕκαστον Ων καὶ ἐρωτῶντες, εἴ τι
Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ τοὺς ξυπμέχους ἀγαθὸν ἐν τῷ
πολέμῳ δεδρακότες εἰσίν, ὁπότε μὴ φαῖεν, ἀπάγοντες
2 ἀπέκτεινον, καὶ ἐξαίρετον ἐποιήσαντο οὐδένα. διέφθει-
ραν δὲ ΤἸ]λαταιῶν μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐλάσσους διακοσίων,
᾿Αθηναίων δὲ πέντε καὶ εἴκοσιν, of ξυνεπολιορκοῦντο"
3 γυναῖκας δὲ ἠνδραπόδισαν. τὴν δὲ πόλιν ἐνιαυτὸν μέν
τινα [Θηβαῖοι] Μεγαρέων ἀνδράσι κατὰ στάσιν ἐκπεπ-
τωκόσι, καὶ ὅσοι τὰ σφέτερα φρονοῦντες Πλαταιῶν
ἘΠ ἔδοσαν ἐνοικεῖν" ὕστερον δὲ καθελόντες on
és ἔδαφος πᾶσαν ἐκ τῶν θεμελίων ὠκοδόμησαν πρὸς τῷ
‘H ραίῳ καταγώγιον διακοσίων ποδῶν πανταχῇ, κύκλῳ
οἰκήματα ἔχον κάτωθεν καὶ ἄνωθεν, καὶ ὀροφαῖς καὶ

ὅτι Pop. Bad. Her., the last continuing, ὅτι ὕστερον... ὃ προείχοντο
«οὐκ ἐδέξαντο. ἃ del. Heilm. so also Cl. St., but inserting δὲ after ὡς,
Hude suggests ὅτε ὕστερον ἃ προείχοντο... οὐκ ἐδέξαντο.

ἐκείνας Bad. Dobr. placing colon at ἐδέξαντο: ‘possis etiam delere a,
servata vulgata distinctione’ (Dob.). Most edd. destroy both & and ὡς.
Kuppers proposes καὶ ὡς. C. F. Smith (Am. J. Phil. x. 210) οὐδ᾽ ds.
τῇ ἑαυτῶν δικαίᾳ βουλήσει del. Arn.—zapdyovres G and inferior Mss.

§ 2. ξυνεπεπολιόρκηντο Mein. Her. Cobet regards the words
οἱ guver. as an adscript from 11. 78.

ὃ 3. ἕνα (for τινα) Mein. Cob. ‘praestat ἕνα τινά (Nab.). Θηβαῖοι
del. Cl. St.—éxardumedov Ο,

SYTTPAPHS TI. 61

θυρώμασι τοῖς τῶν Ιλαταιῶν ἐχρήσαντο, καὶ τοῖς
ἄλλοις ἃ ἢν ἐν τῷ τείχει ἔπιπλα, χαλκὸς καὶ σίδηρος,
nr \
κλίνας κατασκευάσαντες ἀνέθεσαν τῇ Ἥρᾳ, καὶ νεὼν
« la / > / , Ὁ \ ἣν (οὶ
ἑκατόμποδον λίθινον ὠκοδόμησαν αὐτῇ. τὴν δὲ γῆν
δημοσιώσαντες ἀπεμίσθωσαν ἐπὶ δέκα ἔτη, καὶ ἐνέμοντο
Θηβαῖοι. σχεδὸν δέ τι καὶ τὸ ξύμπαν περὶ Ἰ]λαταιῶν 4
εἰ 7
οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι οὕτως ἀποτετραμμένοι ἐγένοντο Θη-
εν \ v
βαίων ἕνεκα, νομίζοντες ἐς τὸν πόλεμον αὐτοὺς ἄρτι
, ἣν
τότε καθιστάμενον ὠφελίμους εἶναι. καὶ τὰ μὲν κατὰ
rn ya
Πλάταιαν ἔτει τρίτῳ καὶ ἐνενηκοστῷ ἐπειδὴ ᾿Αθηναίων
ξύμμαχοι ἐγένοντο οὕτως ἐτελεύτησεν.

LXIX. Αἱ δὲ τεσσαράκοντα νῆες τῶν Ἰ]ελοποννη-
σίων αἱ Λεσβίοις βοηθοὶ ἐλθοῦσαι, ὡς τότε φεύγουσαι
\ a , »” Cet) , > aA
διὰ τοῦ πελάγους Ex τε τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ἐπιδιωχθεῖσαι
καὶ πρὸς τῇ Κρήτῃ χειμασθεῖσαι [καὶ] am αὐτῆς
σποράδες πρὸς τὴν [Πελοπόννησον κατηνέχθησαν,
καταλαμβάνουσιν ἐν τῇ Κυλλήνῃ τρεισκαίδεκα τριήρεις
Λευκαδίων καὶ ᾿Αμπρακιωτῶν καὶ Βρασίδαν τὸν Τέλλι-
dos ξύμβουλον ᾿Αλκίδᾳ ἐπεληλυθότα. ἐβούλοντο γὰρ 2
€ , .ς A / ie ΄ fi?
οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ὡς τῆς Λέσβου ἡμαρτήκεσαν, πλέον
τὸ ναυτικὸν ποιήσαντες ἐς τὴν Κέρκυραν πλεῦσαι στα-
σιάζουσαν, δώδεκα μὲν ναυσὶ μόναις παρόντων ᾿Αθηναίων

\ / \ ἊΝ vA > Ὁ ? an
περὶ Ναύπακτον, πρὶν δὲ πλέον τι ἐπιβοηθῆσαι ἐκ τῶν
᾿Αθηνῶν ναυτικόν, ὅπως προφθάσωσι" καὶ παρεσκευ-

la a
afovto 6 τε Βρασίδας καὶ ὁ ᾿Αλκίδας πρὸς ταῦτα.
\ A
LXX. οἱ yap Κερκυραῖοι ἐστασίαζον, ἐπειδη of αἰχμά-

8 4- περὶ del. Her., unless ἀτεράμονες or ἀτέραμνοι be read in place
of ἀποτετραμμένοι.---ὀγδοηκοστῷῴ Grote G. Hist. Pt. Iv. c. 31.

LXIX, §1. ᾿Αθηνῶν inferior Mss.—xal before dm del. Cl. Her.
--ἰΑλκείδᾳ C m. pri.—émurdéovra Nab.

§2. ὅπως προφθάσωσι del. Her.

62 GOOTKTAIAOT

> “ al ’
λωτοι ἦλθον αὐτοῖς οἱ ἐκ τῶν περὶ ᾿πίδαμνον ναυμα-
cal “< \ / τ / “ Ν 3 "
χιῶν ὑπὸ Κορινθίων ἀφεθέντες, τῷ μὲν λόγῳ ὀκτακοσίων
ταλάντων τοῖς προξένοις διηγγυημένοι, ἔργῳ δὲ πεπεισ-
μένοι ἹΚορινθίοις Κέρκυραν προσποιῆσαι. καὶ ἔπρασσον
ο a a /
οὗτοι, ἕκαστον τῶν πολιτῶν μετιόντες, OT WS ἀποστή-
᾿] / \ / \ 5 / 3 Lal
2awow ᾿Αθηναίων τὴν πόλιν. καὶ ἀφικομένης ᾿Αττικῆς
\ \ / / > lal \ > /
τε νεὼς καὶ Κορινθίας πρέσβεις ἀγουσῶν, καὶ és λόγους
΄ b) / a , / \
καταστάντων, ἐψηφίσαντο Κερκυραῖοι ᾿Αθηναίοις μὲν
‘ f th
ξύμμαχοι εἶναι κατὰ Ta EvyKeipeva, Πελοποννησίοις δὲ
" \ ,
3 φίλοι ὥσπερ Kal πρότερον. καὶ (ἦν yap Πειθίας ἐθελο-
fal / r ,
πρόξενός τε τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ τοῦ δήμου προειστήκει),
ς Sa by ?
ὑπάγουσιν αὐτὸν οὗτοι οἱ ἄνδρες ἐς δίκην, λέγοντες
rn e \
4 A@nvaiows τὴν Κέρκυραν καταδουλοῦν. ὁ δὲ ἀποφυγὼν
ἀνθυπάγει αὐτῶν τοὺς πλουσιωτάτους πέντε ἄνδρας,
φάσκων τέμνειν χάρακας ἐκ τοῦ τε Διὸς τοῦ τεμένους
\ fa > / = iY \ ’ e , ,
καὶ τοῦ ᾿Αλκίνου" ζημία δὲ καθ᾽ ἑκάστην χάρακα
5 ἐπέκειτο oTaTHp. ὀφλόντων δὲ αὐτών καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἱερὰ
ἱκετῶν καθεζομένων διὰ πλῆθος τῆς ζημίας, ὅπως ταξά-
, lal « / >) / \ \ a
μενοι ἀποδῶσιν, ὁ Ἰ]ειθίας (ἐτύγχανε yap καὶ βουλῆς
Δ / “ an u c 2 > A a
6 ὧν) πείθει ὥστε TH νόμῳ χρήσασθαι. οἱ δ᾽ ἐπειδὴ TO
, > Ἷ, \ vA > , \ /
τε νόμῳ ἐξείργοντο Kal ἅμα ἐπυνθάνοντο τὸν Πειθίαν,
© rn , na /
ἕως ἔτι βουλῆς ἐστί, μέλλειν TO πλῆθος ἀναπείσειν τοὺς
\ 9.
αὐτοὺς ᾿Αθηναίοις φίλους τε καὶ ἐχθροὺς νομίζειν,
7 , \ ‘ 5» , 5 / >
ξυνίσταντό τε Kai λαβόντες ἐγχειρίδια, ἐξαπιναίως ἐς
\ \ lf /
τὴν βουλὴν ἐσελθόντες, τόν τε Πειθίαν κτείνουσι καὶ
na nr an
ἄλλους τῶν TE βουλευτῶν καὶ ἰδιωτῶν ἐς ἑξήκοντα. οἱ
A 9A , x ͵ κ
δέ τινες τῆς αὐτῆς γνώμης τῷ Πειθίᾳ ὀλίγοι ἐς τὴν

LXX. §1. ἀποστήσουσιν Her. Cob.
8 4. ἔκ τε τοῦ Διὸς τεμένους καὶ τοῦ ᾿Αλκίνου (Cob.). τοῦ τεμένους

ACEF.
8 5. ὀφειλόντων ABEF.

ETTCTPA®HS I. 63

᾿Αττικὴν τριήρη κατέφυγον ἔτι παροῦσαν. LXXI. δρά-
σαντες δὲ τοῦτο καὶ ξυγκαλέσαντες ἹΚερκυραίους εἶπον
μή Le) Ν᾿ / ΝΜ \ v4 > ΕΝ lal
ὅτι ταῦτα καὶ βέλτιστα εἴη καὶ ἥκιστ᾽ ἂν δουλωθεῖεν
ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίων, τό τε λοιπὸν μηδετέρους δέχεσθαι ἀλλ᾽
y ta \ ¢ ifo Ν δὲ λέ λέ ς a 0
) μιᾷ νηὶ ἡσυχάζοντας, TO δὲ πλέον πολέμιον ἡγεῖσθαι.
« - fal
ws δὲ εἶπον, καὶ ἐπικυρῶσαι ἠνάγκασαν THY γνώμην.
/ \ SV Pas, \ > / > \ / /
πέμπουσι δὲ καὶ ἐς Tas ᾿Αθήνας εὐθὺς πρέσβεις περί τε
τῶν πεπραγμένων διδάξοντας ὡς ξυνέφερε, καὶ τοὺς ἐκεῖ
καταπεφευγότας πείσοντας μηδὲν ἀνεπιτήδειον πράσ-
σειν, ὅπως μή τις ἐπιστροφὴ γένηται. LXXII. ἐλθόν-
\ 3 n / ie ¢ [4
των δὲ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τούς τε πρέσβεις ὡς νεωτερίζοντας
/ \ “ » / > Μ,
ξυλλαβόντες, καὶ ὅσους ἔπεισαν, κατέθεντο ἐς Αἴγιναν.
> \ ie - / © ior \ fy
ἐν δὲ τούτῳ τῶν Κερκυραίων οἱ ἔχοντες Ta πράγματα
>» tA / , \ ΄ /
ἐλθούσης τριήρους Κορινθίας καὶ Λακεδαιμονίων πρέσ-
> fy A , \ , See
βεων ἐπιτίθενται TO δήμῳ: Kal μαχόμενοι ἐνίκησαν.
> / \ \ e \ fel 5 \ > / \
ἀφικομένης δὲ νυκτὸς ὁ μὲν δῆμος ἐς THY ἀκρόπολιν Kal
τὰ μετέωρα τῆς πόλεως καταφεύγει, καὶ αὐτοῦ ξυλλε-
e \ « - , \
γεὶς ἱδρύθη, καὶ τὸν Ὑλλαϊκὸν λιμένα εἶχον" οἱ δὲ THY
> \ , - . \ ” > a
τε ἀγορὰν κατέλαβον, οὗπερ οἱ πολλοὶ ὠκουν αὐτών,
\ \ \ fol \ »
καὶ TOV λιμένα τὸν πρὸς αὐτῇ καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἤπειρον.
LXXII. τῇ δ᾽ ὑστεραίᾳ ἠκροβολίσαντό τε ὀλίγα,
\
καὶ ἐς τοὺς ἀγροὺς περιέπεμπον ἀμφότεροι τοὺς δούλους
παρακαλοῦντές τε καὶ ἐλευθερίαν ὑπισχνούμενοι" καὶ
A \ / A > ny δ; a / /
τῷ μὲν δήμῳ τῶν οἰκετῶν TO πλῆθος παρεγένετο Evp-
a ΄ a /
Bayo, τοῖς δ᾽ ἑτέροις ἐκ τῆς ἠπείρου ἐπίκουροι ὀκτα-
; :
κόσιοι. LXXIV. διαλιπούσης δ᾽ ἡμέρας μάχη αὖθις
a ς A
γίγνεται, καὶ νικᾷ ὁ δῆμος χωρίων τε ἰσχύι καὶ πλήθει
προέχων" αἵ τε γυναῖκες αὐτοῖς τολμηρῶς ξυνεπελά-
βοντο βάλλουσαι ἀπὸ τῶν οἰκιῶν τῷ κεράμῳ καὶ παρὰ

LXXIV. §1. χωρίων δὲ C.

2

64 OOTKTAIAOT

/ ig / \ / / δὲ fol
2 φύσιν ὑπομένουσαι Tov θόρυβον. γενομένης δὲ τῆς Tpo-
lal \ , > / / Φ.. 5, / \ > \.
πῆς περὶ δείλην ὀψίαν, δείσαντες οἱ ὀλίγοι μὴ αὐτοβοεὶ ὁ
A nr \ la)
δῆμος τοῦ τε νεωρίου κρατήσειεν ἐπελθὼν Kal σφᾶς δια-
“- ah \ / n rn
φθείρειεν, ἐμπιιμπρᾶσι τὰς οἰκίας Tas ἐν κύκλῳ τῆς ἀγορᾶς
\ \ t “ \ a / A ὦ
καὶ τὰς ξυνοικίας, ὅπως μὴ ἢ ἔφοδος, φειδόμενοι οὔτε
δ. τ ” > / ny. \ ΄ Ἀ.
οἰκείας οὔτε ἀλλοτρίας" ὥστε καὶ χρήματα πολλὰ ἐμ-
/ rn
πόρων κατεκαύθη καὶ ἡ πόλις ἐκινδύνευσε πᾶσα δια-
lal > yA > / “ Ν > t >
φθαρῆναι, εἰ ἄνεμος ἐπεγένετο τῇ φλογὶ ἐπίφορος ἐς
3 αὐτήν. καὶ οἱ μὲν παυσάμενοι τῆς μάχης ὡς ἑκάτεροι
a Ὁ \ ,
ἡσυχάσαντες THY νύκτα ἐν φυλακῇ Hoav’ Kal ἡ Κορινθία
n cal / ‘ \ r
ναῦς τοῦ δήμου κεκρατηκότος ὑπεξανήγετο, Kal τῶν
, , e Nimes \ yA / ,
ἐπικούρων οἱ πολλοι ἐς THY ἤπειρον λαθόντες διεκομίσ-
lal > ΄ me / /
θησαν. LXXV. τῇ δ᾽ ἐπυγιγνομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ Νικόστρατος
- , > ͵ \ ,

ὁ Διιτρέφους ᾿Αθηναίων στρατηγὸς παραγίγνεται Bon-
a > , , \ \ 7
θῶν ἐκ Ναυπάκτου δώδεκα ναυσὶ καὶ Μεσσηνίων

- 7ὔ
πεντακοσίοις ὁπλίταις ξύμβασίν τε ἔπρασσε, καὶ
πείθει ὥστε ξυγχωρῆσαι ἀλλήλοις δέκα μὲν ἄνδρας
τοὺς αἰτιωτάτους κρῖναι, οἱ οὐκέτι ἔμειναν, τοὺς δ᾽

a δ

ἄλλους οἰκεῖν σπονδὰς πρὸς ἀλλήλους ποιησαμένους
Ν Ν ᾿ / v4 \ > \ 2 \ ‘
καὶ πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους, ὥστε τοὺς αὐτοὺς ἐχθροὺς καὶ
2 φίλους νομίζειν. καὶ ὁ μὲν ταῦτα πράξας ἔμελλεν ἀπο-
πλεύσεσθαι" οἱ δὲ τοῦ δήμου προστάται πείθουσιν
αὐτὸν πέντε μὲν ναῦς τῶν αὑτοῦ σφίσι καταλιπεῖν,
ὅπως ἧσσόν τι ἐν κινήσει ὦσιν οἱ ἐναντίοι, ἴσας δὲ αὐταὶ
, > a ᾽ a “ἢ Niet \
πληρώσαντες ἐκ σφῶν αὐτῶν ξυμπέμψειν. καὶ ὁ μὲν
" « \ ΄, κα
ξυνεχώρησεν, οἱ δὲ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς κατέλεγον ἐς τὰς ναῦς.

oy \ > “-“ Ἁ > Ἂν ’ / > -“
δείσαντες δὲ ἐκεῖνοι μὴ ἐς τὰς ᾿Αθήνας ἀποπεμφθώῶσι

§ 2. περὶ τὸ δειλινόν Μ. --ἐμπιπρᾶσι vulg. ἐμπιμπρᾶσι corr. Her.
--ὧὥστε om. G.

LXXV. §1. Διειτρέφους Her. ; cf. Meist. p- 40, another case of
itacism. Διοτρέφη VIII. 64 ὃ 2.

§ 2. ξυμπέμπειν ἃ.

ἘΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ ΓΤ. 65

/ » \ r / in / /
καθίζουσιν ἐς TO τῶν Διοσκόρων ἱερόν. Νικόστρατος 4
δὲ αὐτοὺς ἀνίστη τε καὶ παρεμυθεῖτο. ὡς δ᾽ οὐκ
" ig fal ΄ \ > \ lal 7 / 2
ἔπειθεν, ὁ δῆμος ὁπλισθεὶς ἐπὶ τῇ προφάσει ταύτῃ, ὡς
οὐδὲν αὐτῶν ὑγιὲς διανοουμένων τῇ τοῦ μὴ ξυμπλεῖν
» ,ὔ / “ 3 A > a > n Μ \
ἀπιστίᾳ, τά Te ὅπλα αὐτῶν ἐκ τῶν οἰκιῶν ἔλαβε, Kal

a \
αὐτῶν τινὰς οἷς ἐπέτυχον, εἰ μὴ Νικόστρατος ἐκώλυσε,

/ « lal
διέφθειραν ἄν. ὁρῶντες δ᾽ of ἄλλοι τὰ γιγνόμενα καθί- 5
Ν a
ζουσιν ἐς τὸ Πραῖον ἱκέται, καὶ γίγνονται οὐκ éXaaoous
τετρακοσίων. ὁ δὲ δῆμος δείσας μή τι νεωτερίσωσιν
» , /
ἀνίστησί τε αὐτοὺς πείσας Kal διακομίζει ἐς THY πρὸ
fal «ς fol a a
tov Ἡραίου νῆσον, καὶ τὰ ἐπιτήδεια ἐκεῖσε αὐτοῖς
διεπέμπετο.

LXXVI. Τῆς δὲ στάσεως ἐν τούτῳ οὔσης, τετάρτῃ
x / a an a
ἢ πέμπτῃ ἡμέρᾳ μετὰ τὴν τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐς τὴν νῆσον
διακομιδήν, αἱ ἐκ τῆς Κυλλήνης Πελοποννησίων νῆες

Ν \ Qn ἴω 5
μετὰ τὸν ἐκ τῆς ᾿Ιωνίας πλοῦν ἐφ᾽ ὅρμῳ οὖσαι Trapa-

tA a A 5)
γίγνονται τρεῖς καὶ πεντήκοντα" ἦρχε δὲ αὐτῶν ᾿Αλκίδας
ὅσπερ καὶ πρότερον, καὶ Βρασίδας αὐτῷ ξύμβουλο

ρ ρότερον, καὶ Βρασίδας αὐτῷ ξύμβουλος
s/s « ΄ ΝΞ Sey ͵ A ᾽ ὔ
ἐπέπλει. ὁρμισάμενοι δὲ ἐς Σύβοτα λιμένα τῆς ἠπείρου
ἅμα ἕῳ ἐπέπλεον τῇ Κερκύρᾳ. LXXVII. οἱ δὲ πολλῷ
θο Ye} \ β / 4 ᾽ > a ‘NEL \ \

ρύβῳ, Kai πεφοβημένοι τά T ἐν TH πόλει καὶ τὸν
ἐπίπλουν, παρεσκευάζοντό τε ἅμα ἑξήκοντα ναῦς καὶ

\ \ /
Tas ἀεὶ πληρουμένας ἐξέπεμπον πρὸς τοὺς ἐναντίους,
παραινούντων ᾿Αθηναίων σφᾶς τε ἐᾶσαι πρῶτον ἐκ-

nr /

πλεῦσαι καὶ ὕστερον πάσαις ἅμα ἐκείνους ἐπιγενέσθαι.
ς \ A -" 3 «
ὡς δὲ αὐτοῖς πρὸς τοῖς πολεμίοις ἦσαν σποράδες αἱ 2

8.3. Διοσκουρίων ABEFG. Διοσκούρων vulg. (see Lobeck, Phryni-
chus p. 235).

$4. ὀργισθείς Cob.
ὃ 5. τἀπιτήδεια Her.

> ow

LXXVI. ἐφορμοῦσαι Mein. Her. ἐν ἐφόρμῳ οὖσαι Kr. ἐφ᾽ ὅρμῳ St.
Mein. denies the existence of a substantive ἔφορμος,

Ssh Its

tort

3

2

66 @OOTKTAIAOT

a /
νῆες, δύο μὲν εὐθὺς ηὐτομόλησαν, ἐν ἑτέραις δὲ ἀλλή-
ἢ ‘ tal
Nous οἱ ἐμπλέοντες ἐμάχοντο, ἦν δὲ οὐδεὶς κόσμος τῶν
\
ποιουμένων. ἰδόντες δὲ οἱ ]Πἐλοποννήσιοι τὴν ταραχὴν
\ \ lal
εἴκοσι μὲν ναυσὶ πρὸς τοὺς Κερκυραίους ἐτάξαντο, ταῖς
\ “-“" \ \ ! rn fal 3 / e
δὲ λοιπαῖς πρὸς τὰς δώδεκα ναῦς τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων, dv
a ΄ὔ Ἕ
ἦσαν αἱ δύο Σαλαμινία καὶ Udparos. LXXVIII. καὶ
οἱ μὲν Κερκυραῖοι κακῶς τε καὶ κατ᾽ ὀλίγας προσπί-
> / \ > ig 4 « 3.5 lal
MTOVTES ἐταλαιπώρουν TO καθ᾽ αὑτούς" οἱ δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖοι
\ “ \ \ 4 e /
φοβούμενοι TO πλῆθος Kal THY περικύκλωσιν ἁθρόαις
Ν / “-“
μὲν οὐ προσέπιπτον οὐδὲ κατὰ μέσον ταῖς ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς
/ ,
τεταγμέναις, προσβαλόντες δὲ κατὰ κέρας καταδύουσι
μίαν ναῦν. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα κύκλον ταξαμένων αὐτῶν
/ n 5
περιέπλεον Kal ἐπειρῶντο θορυβεῖν. γνόντες δὲ οἱ
\ a \
πρὸς τοῖς Κερκυραίοις, καὶ δείσαντες μὴ ὅπερ ἐν Nav-
/ / fa) fi /
πάκτῳ γένοιτο, ἐπιβοηθοῦσι" Kal γενόμεναι ἁθρόαι ai
A a ἈΝ > / na > ip > rn eo
νῆες ἅμα τὸν ἐπίπλουν τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις ἐποιοῦντο. οἱ ὃ
lj / , n
ὑπεχώρουν ἤδη πρύμναν κρουόμενοι, καὶ ἅμα τὰς τῶν
7 a
Κερκυραίων ἐβούλοντο προκαταφυγεῖν ὅτι μάλιστα
“ a \ a
ἑαυτῶν σχολῇ TE ὑποχωρούντων καὶ πρὸς σφᾶς τε-
lal /
ταγμένων τῶν ἐναντίων. ἡ μὲν οὖν ναυμαχία τοιαύτη
: ’
γενομένη ἐτελεύτα ἐς ἡλίου δύσιν.
ς a
LXXIX. Kai ot Κερκυραῖοι δείσαντες μὴ σφίσιν
/ fal e /
ἐπιπλεύσαντες ETL τὴν πόλιν WS κρατοῦντες οἱ πολέμιοι
FY \ > a , ᾽ , BY Ν
ἢ τοὺς ἐκ τῆς νήσου ἀναλάβωσιν ἢ καὶ ἄλλο TL νεω-
n ‘ c -“
τερίσωσι, τούς τε ἐκ τῆς νήσου πάλιν ἐς τὸ ραϊον
, \ \ / 5 Ud e ? 3 \ \
διεκόμισαν καὶ τὴν πόλιν ἐφύλασσον. οἱ δ᾽ ἐπὶ μὲν

LXXVIII. § 1. ἐταλαιπώρουν τὸ καθ᾽ αὑτούς Haase Luc. p. 43-
St. inserts τό, but keeps middle ἐταλαιπωροῦντο.

§ 2. πρὸς τοὺς Κερκυραίους Her., making πρός τε κατά.

§ 3. τετραμμένων Hud.; cf. vill. 92 ὃ 4, where τετραμμένων has
become τεταγμένων.

EYTTPAPHS YL. 67

τὴν πόλιν οὐκ ἐτόλμησαν πλεῦσαι κρατοῦντες TH ναυ-
lal / fal a /
μαχίᾳ, τρεῖς δὲ καὶ δέκα ναῦς ἔχοντες τῶν Κερκυραίων
ἀπέπλευσαν ἐς τὴν ἤπειρον, ὅθενπερ ἀνηγάγοντο. τῇ 3
Ν a /
δ᾽ ὑστεραίᾳ ἐπὶ μὲν τὴν πόλιν οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ἐπέπλεον,
> lal fl /
καίπερ ἐν πολλῇ ταραχῇ Kal φόβῳ ὄντας, καὶ Βρασίδου
παραινοῦντος, ὡς λέγεται, ᾿Αλκίδᾳ, ἰσοψήφου δὲ οὐκ
Μ e > \ \ \ / Nis. / > /
ὄντος" ἐπὶ δὲ τὴν Λευκίμμην τὸ ἀκρωτήριον ἀποβάντες
Ὁ x ry r
ἐπόρθουν τοὺς ἀγρούς. LXXX. ὁ δὲ δῆμος τῶν Kep-
/
κυραίων ἐν τούτῳ, περιδεὴς γενόμενος μὴ ἐπυπλεύσωσιν
a a / a
αἱ νῆες, τοῖς τε ἱκέταις ἦσαν ἐς λόγους Kal τοῖς ἄλλοις
ὅπως σωθήσεται ἡ πόλις. καί τινας αὐτῶν ἔπεισαν ἐς
Tas ναῦς ἐσβῆναι" ἐπλήρωσαν yap ὅμως τριάκοντα. οἱ 2
\ / /
dé Πελοποννήσιοι μέχρι μέσου ἡμέρας δῃώσαντες τὴν
“ \ Ψ ra
γῆν ἀπέπλευσαν, καὶ ὑπὸ νύκτα αὐτοῖς ἐφρυκτωρήθησαν
a 9 ΄
ἑξήκοντα νῆες ᾿Αθηναίων προσπλέουσαι ἀπὸ Λευκάδος"
ῆ lal , ᾽
ἃς οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι πυνθανόμενοι τὴν στάσιν καὶ τὰς μετ
> “ i a
Αλκίδου ναῦς ἐπὶ Κέρκυραν μελλούσας πλεῖν ἀπ-
, \ > , \ ΄ ΄
ἐστείλαν, καὶ ὐρυμέδοντα τὸν Θουκλέους στρατηγόν.
e a
LXXXI. οἱ μὲν οὖν Πελοποννήσιοι τῆς νυκτὸς εὐθὺς
κατὰ τάχος ἐκομίζοντο ἐπ᾽ οἴκου παρὰ τὴν γῆν" καὶ
\ la) oe
ὑπερενεγκόντες τὸν Λευκαδίων ἰσθμὸν τὰς ναῦς, ὅπως
N / 5 fal » / Ta)
μὴ περιπλέοντες ὀφθῶσιν, ἀποκομίζονται. ἹΚερκυραῖοι 2
, ’ fal
δὲ αἰσθόμενοι τάς τε ᾿Αττικὰς ναῦς προσπλεούσας τάς
τε τῶν πολεμίων οἰχομένας, λαβόντες τούς τε Μεσση-

LXXIX. $2. ἑλόντες Nab.

LXXX. §1. ὅμως, ‘non sollicito, sed si codex diceret ὁμοῦ, locus
esset deliberationis ’ (Dobr.).

After τριάκοντα the words προσδεχόμενοι τὸν ἐπίπλουν are added in
margin of BF; om. A, del. Bek. Popp. St. restituit Bad.

§ 2. μεσούσης Bad.

Qu. ai ἑξήκοντα, with comma at Λευκάδος Ὁ

LXXXI. 8.2. λαβόντες del. Cl. λαθόντες Hud.

68 OOTKTAIAOT

7 ’ \ / ” , ” v \ Ἁ
νίους ἐς τὴν πόλιν ἤγαγον πρότερον ἔξω ὄντας, καὶ τὰς
la) ἴον “Ὁ ,
ναῦς περιπλεῦσαι κελεύσαντες ἃς ἐπλήρωσαν ἐς τὸν
“ δ / lal “
Ὑλλαϊκὸν λιμένα, ἐν ὅσῳ περιεκομίζοντο, τῶν ἐχθρῶν
’ 5 n a
εἴ τινα λάβοιεν, ἀπέκτεινον" Kal ἐκ τῶν νεῶν ὅσους
- 9 na WW fs lal
ἔπεισαν ἐσβῆναι ἐκβιβάζοντες ἀπεχρῶντο, ἐς τὸ Hpatov
- lal ¢ 7
τε ἐλθόντες τῶν ἱκετῶν ὡς πεντήκοντα ἄνδρας δίκην
ὑποσχεῖν ἔπεισαν καὶ κατέγνωσαν πάντων θάνατον.
« ‘ \ r ΄ Lal / > > / Ἑ em:
οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ τῶν ἱκετῶν, ὅσοι οὐκ ἐπείσθησαν, ὡς ἑώρων
\ / , » rn Φ rn c A > /
Ta γυγνόμενα, διέφθειραν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἀλλήλους,
“ ’ , [3
καὶ ἐκ τῶν δένδρων τινὲς ἀπήγχοντο, οἱ δ᾽ ὡς ἕκαστοι
’ fa “δ ᾽ id
ἐδύναντο ἀνηλοῦντο. ἡμέρας TE ἑπτά, ἃς ἀφικόμενος ὁ
Εὐρυμέδων ταῖς ἑξήκοντα ναυσὶ παρέμεινε, Kepxupaior
“Ὁ lal A 3 /
σφῶν αὐτῶν τοὺς ἐχθροὺς δοκοῦντας εἶναι ἐφόνευον, τὴν
μὲν αἰτίαν ἐπιφέροντες τοῖς τὸν δῆμον καταλύουσιν,
\ li
ἀπέθανον δέ τινες Kal ἰδίας ἔχθρας ἕνεκα, Kai ἄλλοι
‘ ΄ >? / « \ lal 4
χρημάτων σφίσιν ὀφειλομένων ὑπὸ τῶν λαβόντων.
a ͵ a7 , / \ - ΠῚ A
πᾶσά τε ἰδέα κατέστη θανάτου, καὶ οἷον φιλεῖ ἐν τῷ
j Ἵ θ ἡδὲν ὅ οὐ ξυνέβη, καὶ ἔτ
τοιούτῳ γίγνεσθαι, οὐδὲν ὅ τι οὐ ξυνέβη, ΐ
\ a > ᾽
περαιτέρω. καὶ γὰρ πατὴρ παῖδα ἀπέκτεινε, καὶ ἀπὸ
“Ὁ “Ὁ A“ \ ᾽ Qn /
TOV ἱερῶν ἀπεσπῶντο Kal πρὸς αὐτοῖς ἐκτείνοντο, οἱ δέ
τινες καὶ περιοικοδομηθέντες ἐν τοῦ Διονύσου τῷ ἱερῷ
ἀπέθανον. LXXXII. οὕτως aun <)> στάσις πρου-

ἀπεχρῶντο Her. Cl. from margin of F. mss. shew ἀπεχώρησαν,
which Bek. retains with vulg. Why not dvexpjcavto? vid., however,
Suidas, Θουκυδίδης" ἀπεχρῶντο ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀνήρουν (Duk.).

§ 3. διέφθειρον one inferior Ms. only.—év τῷ ἱερῷ perhaps an
adscript.

§ 4. ὅτι καταλύουσιν Mady. Adv. I. 316, or ὡς karan. vid. Hud.
Comm. Crit. p. 110. Have τοῖς and τήν changed places? e.g. τοῖς μὲν
αἰτίαν ἐπιφέροντες τὴν τοῦ δήμου κατάλυσιν.

LXXXII. 8 1. wun ἡ στάσις Kr. Cl. St. Her. Boh. without Ms.
authority.—7od perhaps lost before τούς,

ETTITPA®PHS YI. 69

΄ ἊΨ Δ an / > nA / > /
χώρησε, καὶ ἔδοξε μᾶλλον, διότι ἐν τοῖς πρώτη ἐγένετο,
bd Ν 0. / \ a ¢ ’ a GH ry) \ b
ἐπεὶ ὕστερον ye Kal πᾶν ὡς εἰπεῖν TO ᾿ϑλληνικὸν ἐκι-
nr “ Lal Lal “ /
νήθη, διαφορῶν οὐσῶν ἑκασταχοῦ τοῖς τε τῶν δήμων
/ \ > / > / Ν a > /
προστάταις τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους ἐπάγεσθαι καὶ τοῖς ὀλύγοις
τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους, καὶ ἐν μὲν εἰρήνῃ οὐκ ἂν ἐχόντων
᾿] -“ >
πρόφασιν, οὐδ᾽ ἑτοίμων παρακαλεῖν αὐτούς, πολεμου-
\ ul / A
μένων δέ, καὶ «κατὰ; ξυμμαχίας ἅμα ἑκατέροις TH
a a a ᾽ a
τῶν ἐναντίων κακώσει Kal σφίσιν αὐτοῖς ἐκ TOD αὐτοῦ
, “
προσποιήσει, ῥᾳδίως αἱ ἐπαγωγαὶ τοῖς νεωτερίζειν τι
/ > he \ > / \ \
βουλομένοις ἐπορίζοντο. καὶ ἐπέπεσε πολλὰ καὶ χα-
λεπὰ κατὰ στάσιν ταῖς πόλεσι, γιγνόμενα μὲν καὶ αεὶ
5 / “ » Mt ’ \ 4 > Λ) τ n \
ἐσόμενα ἕως av ἡ αὐτὴ φύσις ἀνθρώπων 7, μᾶλλον δὲ
an f >
καὶ ἡσυχαίτερα καὶ τοῖς εἴδεσι διηλλαγμένα, ὡς ἂν
ἕκασται ai μεταβολαὶ τῶν ξυντυχιῶν ἐφιστώνται. ἐν
μὲν γὰρ εἰρήνῃ καὶ ἀγαθοῖς πράγμασιν αἵ τε πόλεις καὶ
οἱ ἰδιῶται ἀμείνους τὰς γνώμας ἔχουσι διὰ τὸ μὴ ἐς
3 c
ἀκουσίους ἀνάγκας <éo>Tintew* ὁ δὲ πόλεμος
/ “ c ,
ὑφελὼν τὴν εὐπορίαν τοῦ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν βίαιος διδάσκα-
\ ἊΝ lal a a
Ros, Kal πρὸς τὰ παρόντα τὰς ὀργὰς TOV πολλῶν ὁμοιοῖ.
> ΤΑ / 5 \ lal , \ Nua / ,
ἐστασίαζέ τε οὖν τὰ τῶν πόλεων, καὶ τὰ ἐφυστερίζοντά
a /
TOU πύστει TOV προγενομένων πολὺ ἐπέφερε τὴν ὑὕπερ-
τολμώντων Her. ἐτόλμων Volgraff (Mnem. Vol. x. Pt. iv.).—xal

ξυμμαχίας Mss. and edd.—After ἑκατέροις Her. inserts οὔσης ἐπί,
‘praepositio ΕΤΤῚ inter consimiles literas CTH facile periit’ (Her. Stud.
47). Snow suggests προκειμένης.

§2. τῶν before ἀνθρώπων B only.—padrdov δὲ καὶ ἧσσον Hud.,
inserting χαλεπά from Dio. Hal. Antiq. το. 2. ἀτηρά or ἄγρια
Gertz. Does -χαίτερα conceal καὶ ἕτερα ᾿---ἤθεσι διηλλαγμένα ἕως A.—
ἑκάσταις (sc. ταῖς πόλεσιν) Hud. ἑκάστοις Kr.

ἄμεινον Her. ἀνάγκας ἐσπίπτειν Her. πίπτειν να]ρ.--- βίου Kr. inserts
before βίαιος, cf. Her. Stud. 47.

§ 3. δ᾽ οὖν Hud.; cf. vil. 59 ὃ 2.—7odAq Dio. ΗΔ].---τὴν ὑπερ-
βολὴν del. Bad. és τὸ καινοῦσθαι St. who also reads ἐπιπύστει.

70 OOTKTAIAOT

βολὴν τοῦ καινοῦσθαι τὰς διανοίας τῶν τ᾿ ἐπιχειρήσεων

, < rn lal "ὦ ,’ὔ \ \

4 περιτεχνήσει Kal τῶν τιμωριῶν ἀτοπίᾳ. καὶ τὴν

> “ =) / fel » > en, 3 ,

εἰωθυῖαν ἀξίωσιν τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐς Ta ἔργα ἀντήλλαξαν

τῇ δικαιώσει. τόλμα μὲν γὰρ ἀλόγιστος ἀνδρία φιλέ-

» / ΄ \ \ / , ,

ταιρος ἐνομίσθη, μέλλησις δὲ προμηθὴς δειλία εὐπρεπής,

τὸ δὲ σῶφρον τοῦ ἀνάνδρου πρόσχημα, καὶ τὸ πρὸς

“ S Ε] \ a) 3 , \ ? > , > \

ἅπων ξυνετὸν ἐπὶ πᾶν ἀργόν. τὸ δ᾽ ἐμπλήκτως ὀξὺ
> \ ‘ / > , \ \

ἀνδρὸς μοίρᾳ προσετέθη, ἀσφαλείᾳ δὲ TO ἐπιβουλεύ-

Ε] lel s / ” \ c

5 σασθαι ἀποτροπῆς «ἦν» πρόφασις εὔλογος. Kal ὁ

\ ὟΝ \ Da td ¢ > 5 / , CA

μὲν χαλεπαίνων πιστὸς GEL, O ὃ ἀντιλέγων αὐτῷ ὕπο-

πτος. ἐπιβουλεύσας δέ τις τυχών «τε» ξυνετὸς καὶ

c U »” , , SCZ \

ὑπονοήσας ἔτι δεινότερος" προβουλεύσας δὲ ὅπως μηδὲν

a n /
αὐτῶν δεήσει, τῆς τε ἑταιρίας διαλυτὴς καὶ τοὺς ἐναν-
/ a c
τίους ἐκπεπληγμένος. ἁπλῶς ὁ φθάσας τὸν μέλλοντα
“Ὁ “ ε

κακόν τι δρᾷν ἐπῃνεῖτο, καὶ ὁ ἐπικελεύσας τὸν μὴ δια-

\ \ \ \ ral nw

6 νοούμενον. καὶ μὴν Kal TO ξυγγενὲς τοῦ ἑταιρικοῦ

͵ \
GANOTPLOTEPOV ἐγένετο διὰ TO ἑτοιμότερον εἶναι ἀπρο-
a ᾽ a

φασίστως τολμᾷν" οὐ γὰρ μετὰ τῶν κειμένων νόμων

nr Ἢ n

ὠφελίας ai τοιαῦται ξύνοδοι, ἀλλὰ Tapa τοὺς καθεστῶ-

Tas πλεονεξίᾳ: καὶ τὰς ἐς σφᾶς αὐτοὺς πίστεις οὐ τῷ
, an ͵ > n A

θείῳ νόμῳ μᾶλλον ἐκρατύνοντο ἢ τῷ κοινῇ TL Tapavo-

8 4. φιλαίτερος AG.

ὠνομάσθη Her., vid. Bad. Mnem. 11. 18.

ἀσφάλεια Hud. from best Mss. τοῦ from inferior Mss. But St.
Her. Cl. Boh. Mein. all keep ἀσφαλείᾳ. M shews dobévera.—For
ἀποτροπῆς Her. suggests ἀποστροφῆς. Has this last syllable -ns
caused loss of jv?

8 5. πάντ᾽ ἐπαινῶν Rauch.—rvxav τε St.—aaGs τε Haase, Her.
St.—éaixwdvoas Her.; cf. vi. 17 ὃ 5.

8 6. ἀνετοιμότερον Bad. Her. — ὠφέλειαι, πλεονεξίαι Vollgraff.
ὠφελίᾳ St. Cl. ὠφελίας Μ55.---πλεονεξίᾳ St. Cl.

τῷ ὁσίῳ καὶ νομίμῳ Dob.; cf. Cob. V. L. 357.

ἘΞἘΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ Γ. 71

Lal , ν᾽ Ὁ nw
μῆσαι. τά TE ἀπὸ TOV ἐναντίων καλῶς λεγόμενα 7
/ a ΕἸ
ἐνεδέχοντο ἔργων φυλακῇ, εἰ προύχοιεν, καὶ οὐ γενναι-
> /
OTNTL. ἀντιτιμωρήσασθαί τέ τινα περὶ πλείονος ἦν ἢ
> \ a
αὐτὸν μὴ προπαθεῖν. καὶ ὅρκοι εἴ που apa γένοιντο
ξυναλλαγῆς, ἐν τῷ αὐτίκα πρὸς τὸ ἄπορον ἑκατέρῳ
διδόμενοι ἴσχυον οὐκ ἐχόντων ἄλλοθεν δύναμιν" ἐν δὲ
a , ξ θ (3 0 ’ ’ 16 Μ
τῷ παρατυχόντι ὁ φθάσαι θαρσήσας, εἰ ἴδοι ἄφρακτον,
ἥδιον διὰ τὴν πίστιν ἐτιμωρεῖτο 7) «κἂν» ἀπὸ τοῦ
fal \ / > \ 2 / \ a ’ /
προφανοῦς, καὶ TO TE ἀσφαλὲς ἐλογίζετο Kal OTL ἀπάτῃ
᾽ iol
περιγενόμενος ξυνέσεως ἀγώνισμα προσελάμβανε. ῥᾷον
> € \ a ” \ vs x 9 a
δ᾽ οἱ πολλοὶ κακοῦργοι ὄντες δεξιοὶ κέκληνται ἢ ἀμαθεῖς
’ θ ΄ \ a \ > / > ΝΥ δὲ a > tAX
ἀγαθοί, καὶ τῷ μὲν αἰσχύνονται, ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ ἀγάλλονται.
΄ > ’ a Μ > \ « Ν / \
πάντων δ᾽ αὐτῶν αἴτιον ἀρχὴ ἡ διὰ πλεονεξίαν καὶ 8
7 > > ’ a \ 2 Ν -
φιλοτιμίαν" ἐκ δ᾽ αὐτῶν καὶ ἐς τὸ φιλονεικεῖν καθιστα-
a 7
μένων τὸ πρόθυμον. οἱ γὰρ ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι προστάντες
’ fal ᾽
μετ᾽ ὀνόματος ἑκάτεροι εὐπρεποῦς, πλήθους τε ἰσονομίας
a , \
πολιτικῆς καὶ ἀριστοκρατίας σώφρονος προτιμήσει, TA
\ \ Ἢ , 3 » cal MY \
μὲν Kowa ACy@ θεραπεύοντες GOAa ἐποιοῦντο, παντὶ δὲ
τρόπῳ ἀγωνιζόμενοι ἀλλήλων περιγίγνεσθαι ἐτόλμησάν
ρόπῳ ἀγωνιζόμ ή ριγύγνεσ η
> a / \ 4
τε τὰ δεινότατα ἐπεξῆσάν τε τὰς τιμωρίας ETL μείζους,
“ a /
οὐ μέχρι τοῦ δικαίου Kai τῇ πόλει ξυμφόρου προτι-
- \ eet
θέντες, és δὲ TO ἑκατέροις που ἀεὶ ἡδονὴν ἔχον ὁρίζοντες,
5 / Ἂ \
καὶ ἢ μετὰ ψήφου ἀδίκου καταγνώσεως ἢ χειρὶ κτώμενοι
- “ 3 hs /
τὸ κρατεῖν ἑτοῖμοι ἦσαν THY αὐτίκα φιλονεικίαν ἐκπιμ-

§7. φθάσας θαρσῆσαι MSS. φθάσας θαρσήσει RS; cf. v. 7281
φθάσαι τῇ mpoouléer.—Does not the contrast of real with assumed case
call for ἄν Its loss may easily have occurred from failure to note
compendium A. The confusion of H with Κ is common (vid. Bast.
Ρ- 112). I would therefore suggest ἢ Kav.

8 8. αἴτιον del. Madv.—i del. Hud. ‘per dittographiam.’ ἡ λίαν
πλεονεξία Weil: but cf. 1. 77 § 3-

72 OOTKTAIAOT

/ “ 5 Τὰ N > / > / ,
πλάναι. ὥστε εὐσεβείᾳ μὲν οὐδέτεροι ἐνόμιζον, εὐπρε-
ff ἣ / e 4 5 / i:
meia δὲ λόγου οἷς ξυμβαίη ἐπιφθόνως τι διαπράξασθαι,
ἄμεινον ἤκουον. τὰ δὲ μέσα τῶν πολιτῶν UT ἀμφοτέ-
ρων, ἢ ὅτι οὐ ξυνηγωνίζοντο ἢ φθόνῳ τοῦ περιεῖναι,
διεφθείροντο. LXXXIII. οὕτω πᾶσα ἰδέα κατέστη
7 Ν \ / aie an \ \
κακοτροπίας διὰ τὰς στάσεις τῷ ᾿Βιλληνικῷ, καὶ τὸ
εὔηθες, οὗ τὸ γενναῖον πλεῖστον μετέχει, καταγελασθὲν
’ A
ἠφανίσθη, τὸ δὲ ἀντιτετάχθαι ἀλλήλοις TH γνώμῃ
5 ΄, SEN \ / 5 > \ x ς /
ἀπίστως ἐπὶ πολὺ διήνεγκεν" ov yap ἦν ὁ διαλύσων
A / > \ v ῳ , / A
οὔτε λόγος ἐχυρὸς οὔτε ὅρκος φοβερός, κρείσσους δὲ
” vA a > \ > / fal ,ὔ
ὄντες ἅπαντες λογισμῷ ἐς τὸ ἀνέλπιστον τοῦ βεβαίου
μὴ παθεῖν μᾶλλον προεσκόπουν ἢ πιστεῦσαι ἐδύναντο.
/ / /
καὶ οἱ φαυλότεροι γνώμην ὡς τὰ πλείω περιεγίγνοντο᾽
a lal 5 \ an ,
τῷ yap δεδιέναι TO TE αὑτῶν ἐνδεὲς καὶ TO TOV ἐναντίων
ef rn
ξυνετόν, μὴ λόγοις TE ἥσσους ὦσι Kal ἐκ τοῦ πολυ-
lal n /
τρόπου αὐτῶν τῆς γνώμης φθάσωσι προεπιβουλευόμενοι,
lal \ \ nr
τολμηρῶς πρὸς τὰ ἔργα ἐχώρουν. οἱ δὲ καταφρονοῦντες
κἂν προαισθέσθαι, καὶ ἔργῳ οὐδὲν σφᾶς δεῖν λαμβάνειν
ἃ γνώμῃ ἔξεστιν, ἄφρακτοι μᾶλλον διεφθείροντο.
νυ io rn r
LXXXIV. Ἔν & οὖν τῇ Κερκύρᾳ ta πολλὰ αὐτῶν
/ \ «ς / ΕΝ Ὁ“ \ > /
προετολμήθη, Kai ὁπόσα «ἂν» ὕβρει μὲν ἀρχόμενοι
δ / \ fal \
TO πλέον ἢ σωφροσύνῃ ὑπὸ τῶν τὴν τιμωρίαν παρα-
/ , Ὁ
σχόντων οἱ ἀνταμυνόμενοι δράσειαν, πενίας δὲ τῆς
, /
εἰωθυίας ἀπαλλαξείοντές τινες, μάλιστα δ᾽ ἂν διὰ
r ἈΝ Led
πάθους ἐπιθυμοῦντες Ta τῶν πέλας ἔχειν, Tapa δίκην
, “ \ > \ / > \ ἐπ Ν
γιγνώσκοιεν, οἵ τε μὴ ἐπὶ πλεονεξίᾳ, ἀπὸ ἴσου δὲ
καταγνώσεως del. Her. Hud. λόγου, here Cl. places comma.
LXXXIII. §1. ἄπιστον Rauch.
§ 2. λογισμῷ, after this word a comma (Boh.). The schol. suggests
ῥέποντες ἐς TO ἀνέλπιστον. 8.4. ἄφαρκτοι Her.

LXXXIV. This chapter, as an ancient ‘suspect,’ has escaped
critical ‘sollicitation.’

BrVreaon> 1. 73

/ > / > / > nr Lal ΕῚ /
μάλιστα ἐπιόντες, ἀπαιδευσίᾳ ὀργῆς πλεῖστον ἐκφερό-
fal /
μενοι, ὠμῶς Kal ἀπαραιτήτως ἐπέλθοιεν. ξυνταρα-
nr \ fa) a /
χθέντος Te τοῦ βίου ἐς τὸν καιρὸν τοῦτον TH πόλει, καὶ
aA , , aA
TOV νόμων κρατήσασα ἡ ἀνθρωπεία φύσις, εἰωθυῖα καὶ
παρὰ τοὺς νόμους ἀδικεῖν, ἀσμένη ἐδήλωσεν ἀκρατὴς
a / an
μὲν ὀργῆς οὖσα, κρείσσων δὲ τοῦ δικαίου, πολεμία δὲ
τοῦ προύχοντος" οὐ γὰρ ἂν τοῦ τε ὁσίου τὸ τιμωρεῖσθαι
fa) a /
προυτίθεσαν τοῦ τε μὴ ἀδικεῖν TO κερδαίνειν, ἐν ᾧ μὴ
/ > \ 3 \ lal b lal / \
βλάπτουσαν ἰσχὺν εἶχε TO φθονεῖν. ἀξιοῦσί τε τοὺς
a /
κοινοὺς περὶ τῶν τοιούτων οἱ ἄνθρωποι νόμους, ἀφ᾽ ὧν
“ > \ € / a XN > \ ,
ἅπασιν ἐλπὶς ὑπόκειται σφαλεῖσι κἂν αὐτοὺς διασώ-
> ” / 4 \ \
ζεσθαι, ἐν ἄλλων τιμωρίαις προκαταλύειν, καὶ μὴ
f 5 /
ὑπολείπεσθαι, εἴ ποτε ἄρα τις κινδυνεύσας τινὸς δε-
ήἤσεται αὐτῶν.
e 5 \ A
LXXXV. Οἱ μὲν οὖν κατὰ τὴν πόλιν ἹΚερκυραῖοι
> an rn
τοιαύταις ὀργαῖς ταῖς πρώταις ἐς ἀλλήλους ἐχρήσαντο,
\ c > ἐδ \ e ΞΝ θ lal $1 / lal
καὶ ὁ Εὐρυμέδων καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἀπέπλευσαν ταῖς
, a δὲ ε ͵ a ͵
ναυσίν" ὕστερον δὲ οἱ φεύγοντες τῶν Κερκυραίων (διε-
/ \ aA ΄
σώθησαν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐς πεντακοσίους) τείχη τε λαβόντες,
\ a 7, na an
ἃ ἦν ἐν TH ἠπείρῳ, ἐκράτουν τῆς πέραν οἰκείας γῆς, Kal
n ς / rn
ἐξ αὐτῆς ὁρμώμενοι ἐλήζοντο τοὺς ἐν TH νήσῳ Kal
\ 14 Ἂ \ \ a
πολλὰ ἔβλαπτον, καὶ λιμὸς ἰσχυρὸς ἐγένετο ἐν TH πόλει.
Ie
ἐπρεσβεύοντο δὲ καὶ és τὴν Λακεδαίμονα καὶ Κόρινθον
\ / a
περὶ καθόδου" καὶ ὡς οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς ἐπράσσετο, ὕστερον
΄ - \
χρόνῳ πλοῖα Kai ἐπικούρους παρασκευασάμενοι διέ-
2 \ na ΄ ,
βησαν ἐς τὴν νῆσον ἑξακόσιοι μάλιστα οἱ πάντες, Kal
\ a 2 / “ > [/ 3 a ΓΚ
τὰ πλοία ἐμπρήσαντες, ὅπως απογνοια ἢ τοῦ ἄλλο τι
x a n a » \ ’
ἢ κρατεῖν τῆς γῆς, ἀναβάντες ἐς TO ὄρος τὴν ᾿Ιστώνην,
LXXXV. 8:1. ἐν τοῖς πρῶτοι Her.

ἐλήιζον EFHN for ἐλήζοντο. But the active form has no authority.
§ 4. ‘aut τὸ ὄρος aut τὴν ᾿Ιστώνην redundat’ Her.

3

oS)

74 ®OOTKTAIAOT

al > / ΝΜ \ > a / \
τεῖχος ἐνοικοδομησάμενοι ἔφθειρον τοὺς ἐν TH πόλει καὶ
τῆς γῆς ἐκράτουν.

LXXXVI. Τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θέρους τελευτῶντος ᾿Αθη-
ναῖοι εἴκοσι ναῦς ἔστειλαν ἐς Σικελίαν, καὶ Λάχητα
τὸν Μελανώπου στρατηγὸν αὐτῶν καὶ Χαροιάδην τὸν

2 Εὐφιλήτου. οἱ γὰρ Συρακόσιοι καὶ Λεοντῖνοι ἐς πόλε-
7
μον ἀλλήλοις καθέστασαν. ξύμμαχοι δὲ τοῖς μὲν
Συρακάσίοις ἡ noav Bae Καμαριναίων αἱ ἄλλαι Sigel
πόλεις, sae καὶ πρὸς τὴν τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων τὸ
πρῶτον ἀρχομένου τοῦ πολέμου ξυμμαχίαν ἐπ χθησαῖς
οὐ μέντοι ξυνεπολεμήσάει γε, τοῖς δὲ Λεοντίνοις αἱ
Χαλκιδικαὶ πόλεις καὶ Καμάρινα: τῆς δὲ Ἰταλίας
Λοκροὶ μὲν Συρακοσίων ἦσαν, Ῥηγῖνοι δὲ κατὰ τὸ
3 ξυγγενὲς Λεοντίνων. ἐς οὖν τὰς ᾿Αθήνας πέμψαντες
a /
ot τῶν Λεοντίνων ξύμμαχοι κατά Te παλαιὰν ξυμμαχίαν
\ “ ” ὯΝ / \ > 7 /
καὶ ὅτι Ἴωνες ἦσαν πείθουσι τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους πέμψαι
σφίσι ναῦς" ὑπὸ γὰρ τῶν Συρακοσίων τῆς τε γῆς
Ὑ \ a / \ ν. Sp) a
4 εἴργοντο καὶ τῆς θαλάσσης. καὶ ἔπεμψαν οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι
τῆς μὲν οἰκειότητος προφάσει, βουλόμενοι δὲ μήτε σῖτον
ἐς τὴν Πελοπόννησον ἄγεσθαι αὐτόθεν, πρόπειράν τε
΄ > / ὃ \ Μ AeA, ALS / ,
ποιούμενοι εἰ σφίσι δυνατὰ εἴη τὰ ἐν τῇ Σικελίᾳ πρά-
5 γματα ὑποχείρια γενέσθαι. καταστάντες οὖν ἐς “Ῥήγιον
τῆς ᾿Ιταλίας τὸν πόλεμον ἐποιοῦντο μετὰ τῶν ξυμμάχων.
\ \ f? b) /
6 καὶ TO θέρος ἐτελεύτα.
LXXXVII. Τοῦ δ᾽ ἐπιγιγνομένου χειμῶνος ἡ
/ \ 4 2 / lal > / > lal
νόσος τὸ δεύτερον ἐπέπεσε τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις, ἐκλιποῦσα
΄ /
μὲν οὐδένα χρόνον τὸ παντάπασιν, ἐγένετο δέ τις ὅμως
, ¢ ’ γ.
2 διοκωχή. παρέμεινε δὲ τὸ μὲν ὕστερον οὐκ ἔλασσον
> lal Ν Ν / \ ὃ / ΝΜ, vA "AG /
ἐνιαυτοῦ, TO δὲ πρότερον καὶ δύο ἔτη, ὥστε ηναίων

LXXXVI. § 3. τῆς τε γῆς om. G,

= CLrPA®H> T. 75

\ 3 Ὁ a > / \ /
γε μὴ εἰναι ὃ TL μᾶλλον ἐκάκωσε τὴν δύναμιν. τετρα- :

/ \ ¢ tal \ , , /
κοσίων Yap ὁπλιτῶν καὶ τετρακισχιλίων οὐκ ἐλάσσους
» a ,ὔ « / n
ἀπέθανον ἐκ τῶν τάξεων καὶ τριακοσίων ἱππέων, TOD δὲ

3

ἄλλου ὄχλου ἀνεξεύρετος ἀριθμός. ἐγένοντο δὲ καὶ of 4

πολλοὶ τότε σεισμοὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔν τε ᾿Αθήναις καὶ [ἐν]
7 / \ 3 Ὁ \ 7 ] ’ fal fal
Εὐβοίᾳ καὶ ἐν Βοιωτοῖς, καὶ μάλιστα ἐν Ορχομενῷ τῷ
Βοιωτίῳ.
LXXXVIII. Καὶ οἱ μὲν ἐν Σικελίᾳ ᾿Αθηναῖοι καὶ
€ Lal fal > fal aA
Ῥηγῖνοι τοῦ αὐτοῦ χειμῶνος τριάκοντα ναυσὶ στρατεύ-
ρ
> \ \ ᾽ ’ / / \
ovow emt Tas Αἰόλου νήσους καλουμένας" θέρους yap
’ / > ,
δι’ ἀνυδρίαν ἀδύνατα ἦν ἐπιστρατεύειν. νέμονται δὲ
a > \ / ” ” > na 2] >
Λιπαραῖοι αὐτὰς Κνιδίων ἄποικοι ὄντες. οἰκοῦσι δ᾽ ἐν
a Lal / 5 / Lal \ , \ \
μιᾷ τῶν νήσων οὐ μεγάλῃ, καλεῖται δὲ Λιπάρα: τὰς δὲ
” 5) , c , a ͵ \
ἄλλας εκ ταύτης ὁρμώμενοι γεωργοῦσι, Διδύμην καὶ
t Nye ne , / \ εν" / »
Στρογγύλην καὶ ‘Tepav. νομίζουσι δὲ οἱ ἐκείνῃ ἄνθρω-
> ac a) τς ce / “ \ ,
ποι ἐν TH Ἱερᾷ ws ὁ Ἥφαιστος χαλκεύει, ὅτι τὴν νύκτα
φαίνεται πῦρ ἀναδιδοῦσα πολὺ καὶ τὴν ἡμέραν καπνόν.
a \ ig Ὁ 2 \ \ a \
κεῖνται δὲ αἱ νῆσοι αὗται κατὰ τὴν Σικελῶν καὶ Meo-
fe n
σηνίων γῆν, ξύμμαχοι δ᾽ ἦσαν Συρακοσίων. τεμόντες
Os Lal Ὁ ,
δ᾽ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τὴν γῆν, ὡς οὐ προσεχώρουν, ἀπέπλευ-
σαν ἐς τὸ Ῥήγιον. καὶ ὁ χειμὼν ἐτελεύτα, καὶ πέμπτον
7 a a /
ἔτος τῷ πολέμῳ ἐτελεύτα τῷδε ὃν Θουκυδίδης Evvé-
γραψεν.

LXXXVII. § 2. τούτου before μᾶλλον om. in best MSS. τούτους
C, vid. Hud. Comm. Crit. p. 115.

§ 4. οἱ πολλοὶ σεισμοὶ τότε C. τῆς γῆς del. Her.—é before Εὐβοίᾳ
ΒΟ.---Ἐρχομένῳ Inscr.

LXXXVIII. 8.2. ὄντες om. G.

ὃ 3. νομίζουσι... καπνόν ‘una litura delendum’ (Valckn.), ‘si Thu-
cydidis sunt, legendum τὸν Ἥφαιστον xadxevew’ (id.).

ἐκεῖ Cob. Her.

§ 4. καὶ ὁ χειμὼν... .ξυνέγραψεν : on the genuineness of this sentence
see Hermes XII. 76.

[5]

4

76 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΊΔΟΥ

a ᾽ ye
LXXXIX. Tod δ᾽ ἐπιγυγνομένου θέρους Medorov-
/ \ ΄ / / lal -
νήσιοι καὶ οἱ ξύμμαχοι μέχρι μὲν τοῦ ἰσθμοῦ ἦχθον ὡς
2 \ > \ a a
es τὴν ᾿Αττικὴν ἐσβαλοῦντες, "Ayibdos τοῦ ᾿Αρχιδάμου
ς / / fal
ἡγουμένου Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλέως, σεισμῶν δὲ γε-
/ >
νομένων πολλῶν ἀπετράποντο πάλιν καὶ οὐκ ἐγένετο
> / \ \ , AY Lal lal
2 ἐσβολή. καὶ περὶ τούτους τοὺς χρόνους τῶν σεισμῶν
/ fal ᾽
κατεχόντων, τῆς υβοίας ἐν ᾿Οροβίαις ἡ θάλασσα
3 lal \ Ὁ a lal
ἀπελθοῦσα ἀπὸ τῆς τότε οὔσης γῆς Kal κυματωθεῖσα
> AAO a 4, / \ \ \ 4 \
ἐπῆλθε τῆς πόλεως μέρος TL, Kal TO μὲν κατέκλυσε TO
>) / lal
δ᾽ ὑπενόστησε, καὶ θάλασσα viv ἐστὶ πρότερον οὖσα
a. \ ’ Va fal
yi} καὶ ἀνθρώπους διέφθειρεν ὅσοι μὴ ἐδύναντο φθῆναι
\ \ / >
3 πρὸς τὰ μετέωρα ἀναδραμόντες. καὶ περὶ ᾿Αταλάντην
\ \ a o ? a
τὴν ἐπὶ Λοκροῖς τοῖς ᾿᾽Οπουντίοις νῆσον παραπλησία
/ > / \ an / an 3 7]
γίγνεται ἐπίκλυσις, καὶ τοῦ τε φρουρίου τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων
παρεῖλε καὶ δύο νεῶν ἀνειλκυσμένων τὴν ἑτέραν κατέ-
> / \ \ ᾽ / / > /
4 ἄξεν. ἐγένετο δὲ καὶ ἐν Ἰ]επαρήθῳ κύματος ἐπαναχώ-
/ , a
ρησίς τις, οὐ μέντοι ἐπέκλυσέ γε" καὶ σεισμὸς TOD
/ , \ \ an Ae) 2 f
τείχους τι κατέβαλε Kal TO πρυτανεῖον Kal ἄλλας οἰκίας
> / » δ᾽ ” / a / 2.3
5 ὀλίγας. αἴτιον δ᾽ ἔγωγε νομίζω τοῦ τοιούτου, H ἰσχυ-
\ / la
potatos ὁ σεισμὸς ἐγένετο, κατὰ τοῦτο ἀποστέλλειν TE
\ / \ bp] , / > / /
τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ ἐξαπίνης πάλιν ἐπισπομένην βιαιό-
τερον τὴν ἐπίκλυσιν ποιεῖν" ἄνευ δὲ σεισμοῦ οὐκ ἄν μοι
δοκεῖ τὸ τοιοῦτο ξυμβῆναι γενέσθαι.
XC. Τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θέρους ἐπολέμουν μὲν καὶ ἄλλα

LXXXIX. 8.2. ἐπελθοῦσα vulg. ἐπανελθοῦσα Her. St. Cl. Boh.
éravaxwpotoa Mein. Herm. Ill. 353. ποτέ Mein.

§ 5. τὸ κατὰ τοῦτο Mein. ἀναστέλλειν Cob.

ἐπισπωμένης Her. (Stud. 146) understanding σεισμόν as subject of
infin, on account of active form ποιεῖν. qu. ἐπισπομένην ἢ cf. 43 ὃ 5.

XC. § 1. ἄλλα (for vulg. ἄλλοι) Popp. Mein. (Herm. 111. 354).
Madvig (Adv. I. 317) suggests ἄλλοι, expunging καὶ before αὐτοὶ οἱ Dux.
-Οἀντιπόλεμοι Kr., cf. Her. Stud. 124, Dio Cass. 36. 24.

SP RPAH >: My. (ilk

Ὁ « / / ’ a / \ ᾽ \ ΄
ὡς ἑκάστοις ξυνέβαινεν ἐν τῇ Σικελίᾳ, καὶ αὐτοὶ οἱ
Σικελιῶται ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλους στρατεύοντες καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι
\ a , , aN \ , ͵
ξὺν τοῖς σφετέροις ξυμμάχοις" ἃ δὲ λόγου μάλιστα
v δ \ Lal > / « , Ψ ΩΝ
ἄξια ἢ μετὰ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων οἱ ξύμμαχοι ἔπραξαν ἢ
\ \ > / « ’ / , ͵
πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους οἱ ἀντιπολέμιοι, τούτων μνησθή-
U \ ΝΜ “ΠΣ / la
σομαι. Χαροιάδου yap ἤδη Tod ᾿Αθηναίων στρατηγοῦ
/ \ /
τεθνηκότος ὑπὸ Συρακοσίων πολέμῳ, Λάχης ἅπασαν
7 a Aa \ > \ “A
ἔχων TOV νεῶν THY ἀρχὴν ἐστράτευσε μετὰ τῶν ξυμ-
, 5 Ἂ \ \ a 4 ΝΜ \ /
μάχων ἐπὶ Μυλὰς tas τῶν Μεσσηνίων. ἔτυχον δὲ δύο
φυλαὶ ἐν ταῖς Μυλαῖς τῶν Μεσσηνίων φρουροῦσαι καί
τίνα καὶ ἐνέδραν πεποιημέναι τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν. οἱ δὲ
» a Ν ε , 7, > A > ,
A@nvaior καὶ of ξύμμαχοι τούς τε ἐκ τῆς ἐνέδρας
/ \ / , \ fal > /
τρέπουσι καὶ διαφθείρουσι πολλούς, Kal τῷ ἐρύματι
, SL aes, ς ͵ ῃ ? ,
προσβαλόντες ἠνάγκασαν ὁμολογίᾳ THY τε ἀκρόπολιν
a \ > XN / ἴω
παραδοῦναι καὶ ἐπὶ Μεσσήνην ξυστρατεῦσαι. καὶ
\ a > / c / a ᾽ /
μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπελθόντων of Μεσσήνιοι τῶν τε ᾿Αθηναίων
rf \ , ς
καὶ τῶν ξυμμάχων προσεχώρησαν καὶ αὐτοί, ὁμήρους
τε δόντες καὶ τἄλλα πιστὰ παρασχόμενοι.
fa! ΕΝ] fal -
XCI. Τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θέρους οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τριάκοντα
nr , 2
μὲν ναῦς ἔστειλαν περὶ Πελοπόννησον, ὧν ἐστρατήγει
> Ὁ ς
Δημοσθένης τε ὁ ᾿Αλκισθένους καὶ Ἰ]ροκλῆς ὁ Θεοδώρου,
lal /
ἑξήκοντα δὲ ἐς Μῆλον καὶ δισχιλίους ὁπλίτας" ἐστρα-
an ς ,
τήγει δὲ αὐτῶν Νικίας ὁ Νικηράτου. τοὺς γὰρ Μηλίους
/ ς ΕΣ
ὄντας νησιώτας καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντας ὑπακούειν οὐδὲ ἐς
N > A \ ΞΡ > , 7
τὸ αὐτῶν ξυμμαχικὸν ἰέναι ἐβούλοντο προσαγαγέσθαι.
rn lal “Ὁ ’ v
ws δὲ αὐτοῖς δῃουμένης τῆς γῆς οὐ προσεχώρουν, ἄραντες
> A LA ’ \ \ 7 2 > \ a
ἐκ τῆς Μήλου αὐτοὶ μὲν ἔπλευσαν ἐς ᾿Ωρωπὸν τῆς
“oA t > \
Γραϊκῆς, ὑπὸ νύκτα δὲ σχόντες εὐθὺς ἐπορεύοντο οἱ
8 4. τῶν τε ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ τῶν ξυμμάχων, manifestum emblema:

gen. absol. ‘nullum patitur additamentum’ (Her.).
XCI. § 3. τῆς πέραν γῆς MSS. corr. Her.; cf. 11. 23 § 3.

tN

τ:
ϑ

3

78 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΟΥ͂

id -" , \ Lal aA Lal > 2 ΄-“ ’
οπλῖται απὸ τών νεῶν πεζῇ ἐς Tavaypay τῆς Βοιωτίας.
« 3. 15 fal / Fe Mic “ ¢ ,
4 οἱ δ᾽ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως πανδημεὶ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, Ἱππονίκου τε
lal / “ \ 5 / “
τοῦ Καλλίου στρατηγοῦντος καὶ Εὐρυμέδοντος τοῦ
Θουκλέους, ἀπὸ σημείου ἐς τὸ αὐτὸ κατὰ γῆν ἀπήντων.
5 καὶ στρατοπεδευσάμενοι ταύτην τὴν ἡμέραν ἐν τῇ
Τανάγρᾳ ἐδήουν καὶ ἐνηυλίσαντο. καὶ τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ
μάχῃ κρατήσαντες τοὺς ἐπεξελθόντας τῶν Ταναγραίων
καὶ Θηβαίων τινὰς προσβεβοηθηκότας καὶ ὅπλα λα-
βόντες καὶ τροπαῖον στήσαντες ἀνεχώρησαν, οἱ μὲν
6 ἐς τὴν πόλιν, οἱ δὲ ἐπὶ τὰς ναῦς. καὶ παραπλεύσας
« , n .«." \ a ͵ Syn
ὁ Νικίας ταῖς ἑξήκοντα ναυσὶ τῆς Λοκρίδος τὰ ἐπιθα-
λάσσια ἔτεμε καὶ ἀνεχώρησεν ἐπ᾽ οἴκου.
XCII. Ὑπὸ δὲ τὸν χρόνον τοῦτον Λακεδαιμόνιοι
Ὁ 2 ᾿ 2 τ » , , SEN
Ηράκλειαν τὴν ἐν Τραχινίᾳ ἀποικίαν καθίσταντο ἀπὸ
lal / fal e / > \ \ /
2 τοιᾶσδε γνώμης. Μηλιῆς οἱ ξύμπαντες εἰσὶ μὲν τρία
μέρη, ἸΠαράλιοι ἱἹερῆς Τραχίνιοι" τούτων δὲ οἱ Τρα-
' λέ 3 fa} , - \ Οἱ f e / ΝΜ
χίνιοι πολέμῳ ἐφθαρμένοι ὑπὸ Οἰταίων ὁμόρων ὄντων,
Ν lal , ’ / “-“ la)
TO πρῶτον μελλήσαντες ᾿Αθηναίοις προσθεῖναι σφᾶς
αὐτούς, δείσαντες δὲ μὴ οὐ σφίσι πιστοὶ ὦσι, πέμπουσιν
J / « / \ /
3 ἐς Λακεδαίμονα, ἑλόμενοι πρεσβευτὴν Ticapevov. Evve-
πρεσβεύοντο δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ Δωριῆς, ἡ μητρόπολις τῶν

8 5. ἐν τῇ Ταναγραίᾳ Mein. Herm. 111. 365; but qu. del. ἐν, reading
τὴν Tavaypalay ?

ἐς Tas ναῦς B.

XCII. § 1. Τραχῖνι Bad. ἐς ἀποικίαν καθίσταντο Bad.; but vill.
29 § 1 is a very doubtful parallel.

8 2. προστιθέναι Her. who corrects the vulg. προσθεῖναι on the
ground of Thuc.’s invariable use of either fut. infin. or pres. infin. with
μέλλω. In v. 98 he would also alter γενέσθαι to γενήσεσθαι. But
Aristoph. Aves 366 τί μέλλετέ μ᾽ ἀπολέσαι defies correction. Soph. has
nine exx. of either pres. or fut., one only of a possible aorist (O. R. 967).

Aeschylus prefers the future (Rutherford, New Phrynichus, 420—425).
§ 3. ἡ μητρόπολις τῶν Λακ. del. Cob. as an adscript from I. 107.

ETITPA®HS I. 79

la) lal , -
Λακεδαιμονίων, τῶν αὐτῶν δεόμενοι" ὑπὸ γὰρ τῶν
Οἰταίων καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐφθείροντο. ἀκούσαντες δὲ οἱ Λακε-
> / val
δαιμόνιοι γνώμην εἶχον τὴν ἀποικίαν ἐκπέμπειν, τοῖς
7 - “ fal
τε Tpayiviow βουλόμενοι Kat τοῖς Δωριεῦσι τιμωρεῖν.
\ a iol \ » if , lal ᾽ fal
Kal ἅμα τοῦ πρὸς ᾿Αθηναίους πολέμου καλῶς αὐτοῖς
, ς / / n ΄
ἐδόκει ἡ πόλις καθίστασθαι" ἐπί τε γὰρ τῇ Εὐβοίᾳ
Ν Ὁ ΄
ναυτικὸν παρασκευασθῆναι ἄν, ὥστ᾽ ἐκ βραχέος τὴν
/ / a 32 N U / /
διάβασιν γίγνεσθαι, τῆς τε ἐπὶ Θράκης παρόδου χρησί-
Ὁ“ / /
μως ἕξειν. τό τε ξύμπαν ὥρμηντο τὸ χωρίον κτίζειν.
lal \ i > a \ \ J /
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν ἐν Δελφοῖς τὸν θεὸν ἐπήροντο,
ee We SY f \ >? / ς fal \
κελεύοντος δὲ ἐξέπεμψαν τοὺς οἰκήτορας αὑτῶν τε Kal
lal \ Lal
τῶν περιοίκων, Kal τῶν ἄλλων “EXAHvaY τὸν βουλό-
2 ,ὔ [4 \ > / \ 3 a \
μενον ἐκέλευον ἕπεσθαι πλὴν ᾿Ιώνων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν καὶ
” φ ” > fal > \ \ a ΄
ἔστιν ὧν ἄλλων ἐθνῶν. οἰκισταὶ δὲ τρεῖς Λακεδαιμονίων
»
ἡγήσαντο, Λέων καὶ ᾿Αλκίδας καὶ Δαμάγων. κατα-
στάντες δὲ ἐτείχισαν τὴν πόλιν ἐκ καινῆς, ἣ νῦν
Ἡράκλεια καλεῖται, ἀπέχουσα Θερμοπυλῶν σταδίους
μάλιστα τεσσαράκοντα, τῆς δὲ θαλάσσης εἴκοσι. νεώριά
/ 5
Te παρεσκευάζοντο, καὶ εἶρξαν τὸ κατὰ Θερμοπύλας
> \ an
KAT αὐτὸ TO στενόν, ὅπως εὐφύλακτα αὐτοῖς εἴη.
6 \ » lal lal U
XCIII. οἱ δὲ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τῆς πόλεως ταύτης ἕξυνοικι-
\ a a
ζομένης τὸ πρῶτον ἔδεισάν τε Kal ἐνόμισαν ἐπὶ TH
5 / /
Εὐβοίᾳ μάλιστα καθίστασθαι, ὅτι βραχύς ἐστιν ὁ

8 4. καλῶς av αὐτοῖς Her. Stud. 48. Stahl protests against the
insertion: of av.

§5. τὸν ἐν Δελφοῖς θεὸν Cob. ‘quasi Pythius Apollo alibi etiam
consuli potuisset.’

τετρακισχιλίους οἰκήτορας Nab. from Diod. Sic. XII. 59.
Cob. suspects.—rAj γε Bek. from A, so also Goll.

8 6. δὲ before θαλάσσης best MSS. om.

ἤρξαντο all good Mss. except E, which shews ἦρξαν τό. κατὰ Θερμο-
πύλας del. Her. The reading in the text is that of Cl. and St.

ἐκέλευον

4

80 POOTKTAIAOT

U A \ / Lal ’ 7 Μ /
διάπλους πρὸς TO Κήναιον τῆς EvBoias. ἔπειτα μέντοι
\ / > a > / - ᾽ \ pLaelZ b ’ Ψ A
mapa δόξαν αὐτοῖς ἀπέβη" ov yap ἐγένετο am αὐτῆς
a
2 δεινὸν οὐδέν. αἴτιον δὲ ἦν᾽ of Te Θεσσαλοὶ ἐν δυνάμει
if lal “2 / Ka lel
ὄντες TOV ταύτῃ χωρίων, καὶ ὧν ἐπὶ TH γῆ ἐκτίζετο,
/ \ / / >’ lel Μ
φοβούμενοι μὴ σφίσι μεγάλῃ ἰσχύι παροικῶσιν, ἔφθει-
\ \ \ >
pov καὶ διὰ παντὸς ἐπολέμουν ἀνθρώποις νεοκαταστάτοις,
Uy / \ lal
ἕως ἐξετρύχωσαν γενομένους TO πρῶτον Kal πάνυ
/ an / lf > U
πολλούς" πᾶς yap τις Λακεδαιμονίων οἰκιζόντων θαρ-
/ ” / / \ / ᾽ ͵
4 σαλέως ἤει, βέβαιον νομίζων τὴν πόλιν. οὐ μέντοι
€ U a lal ’
ἥκιστα OL ἄρχοντες αὐτῶν τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων οἱ ἀφ-
\ / / ” nie 2 >
LKVOUMEVOL τὰ πράγματώ τε ἔφθειρον καὶ ἐς ὀλυγανθρω-
/ “ > Ud \ “ ᾽ν
πίαν κατέστησαν, ἐκφοβήσαντες τοὺς πολλούς, χαλεπῶς
ἌΝ “Ὁ > n 2 “ id cn bu
τε Kal ἔστιν ἃ οὐ καλῶς ἐξηγούμενοι" ὥστε ῥᾷον ἤδη
, “ e / > 4
αὐτῶν οἱ πρόσοικοι ἐπεκράτουν.
“ ᾽ “Ὁ / >
XCIV. Tod δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θέρους, καὶ περὶ τὸν αὐτὸν χρό-
ἃ Ε] a / Ce, »" , \ ΠΑΡ \
νον ov ἐν τῇ Μήλῳ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι κατείχοντο, καὶ οἱ ἀπὸ
lal lal ’ lal
τῶν τριάκοντα νεῶν ᾿Αθηναῖοι περὶ Πελοπόννησον ὄντες
πρῶτον ἐν ᾿Ελλομένῳ τῆς Λευκαδίας φρουρούς τινας
/ G
λοχήσαντες διέφθειραν, ἔπειτα ὕστερον ἐπὶ Λευκάδα
“ / “5. ᾽ a / a “Δ \
μείζονι στόλῳ ἦλθον, ᾿Ακαρνᾶσί τε πᾶσιν, οἱ πανδημεὶ
πλὴν Οἰνιαδῶν ξυνέσποντο, καὶ Ζακυνθίοις καὶ Kepar-
a /
2 λῆσι Kal Kepxupalwy πεντεκαίδεκα ναυσί. Kal οἱ μὲν
a tal a \ lel
Λευκάδιοι, τῆς Te ἔξω γῆς δηουμένης καὶ τῆς ἐντὸς TOU
” > e \ ς , 5 \ \ « \ “ΟΣ /
ἴσθμου, ἐν ἣ καὶ ἡ Λευκᾶς ἐστι Kal TO ἱερὸν τοῦ ᾿Απόλ-
͵ , > an
Awvos, πλήθει βιαζόμενοι ἡσύχαζον" οἱ δὲ ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες
es / \ \ - 3 / >
ἠξίουν Δημοσθένη tov στρατηγὸν τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων arro-
, 939 ἃ a
τειχίζειν αὐτούς, νομίζοντες ῥᾳδίως T ἂν ἐκπολιορκῆσαι
> “Ὁ
3 πόλεώς τε ἀεὶ σφίσι πολεμίας ἀπαλλαγῆναι. Δη-
XCIII. 8.2. οἱ γὰρ Θεσσαλοὶ Her. ‘nihil mutandum’ Cob.
XCIV. §1. Κλυμένῳ Forchhammer. ᾿ΑΔρκαδίας ABFG.

§ 2. καὶ πόλεως C.

ΞΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ ΓΤ. 81

/ ’ > , \ \ / ἴω ς Ν
μοσθένης δ᾽ ἀναπείθεται κατὰ τὸν χρόνον τοῦτον ὑπὸ
/ « Ν nr a
Μεσσηνίων ὡς καλὸν αὐτῷ στρατιᾶς τοσαύτης ξυνει-
, Lal
λεγμένης Αἰτωλοῖς ἐπιθέσθαι, Ναυπάκτῳ τε πολεμίοις
- Ἀδὰ / 3, fal « / \ \ »” ’
οὖσι, Kal NY κρατήσῃ αὐτῶν, ῥᾳδίως Kal TO ἄλλο ἠπει-
>
ρωτικὸν τὸ ταύτῃ ᾿Αθηναίοις προσποιήσειν. τὸ yap 4
\ 3 \ aA a
ἔθνος μέγα μὲν εἶναι τὸ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν Kal μάχιμον,
fal \ /
οἰκοῦν δὲ κατὰ κώμας ἀτειχίστους, Kal ταύτας διὰ
πολλοῦ, καὶ σκευῇ WAT χρώμενον, οὐ χαλεπὸν ἀπέ-
\ lol fol Lal
φαινον, πρὶν ξυμβοηθῆσαι, καταστραφῆναι. ἐπιχειρεῖν 5
-“ 3 , -“
δ᾽ ἐκέλευον πρῶτον μὲν ᾿Αποδώτοις, ἔπειτα δὲ ᾿Οφιονεῦσι
7 lal δ
καὶ μετὰ τούτους Εὐρυτᾶσιν, ὅπερ μέγιστον μέρος ἐστὶ
a > a bd / \ “ Nie! ΄
τῶν Αἰτωλῶν, ἀγνωστότατοι δὲ γλῶσσαν καὶ ὠμοφάγοι
> / e / / \ / € / \
εἰσίν, ὡς λέγονται" τούτων yap ληφθέντων ῥᾳδίως καὶ
r ς A
τἄλλα προσχωρήσειν. XCV. ὁ δὲ τῶν Μεσσηνίων
/ \ a lel
χάριτι πεισθείς, Kat μάλιστα νομίσας ἄνευ τῆς τῶν
> , lal
Αθηναίων δυνάμεως Tots ἠπειρώταις ξυμμάχοις [μετὰ
a a 4 n -
τών Αἰτωλῶν] δύνασθαι ἂν κατὰ γῆν ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ Βοιω-
\ lal lal A“
τοὺς διὰ Λοκρῶν τῶν ᾿Οζολῶν ἐς Κυτίνιον τὸ Δωρικόν,
- f “
ἐν δεξιᾷ ἔχων τὸν ἸΪαρνασσόν, ἕως καταβαίη ἐς Φωκέας,
ἃ / 2O7 \ \ > , Sow
ot προθύμως ἐδόκουν κατὰ τὴν ᾿Αθηναίων ἀεί ποτε
, 4 x Xv / A Ωγ
φιλίαν ξυστρατεύσειν ἢ κἂν βίᾳ προσαχθῆναι (καὶ
fal “ id l“ > Vd
Φωκεῦσιν ἤδη ὅμορος ἡ Βοιωτία ἐστίν), ἄρας οὖν
al 7 \ fal
ξύμπαντι TO στρατεύματι ἀπὸ τῆς Λευκάδος ἀκόντων
᾿Ακαρνάνων παρέπλευσεν ἐς Σόλλιον. κοινώσας δὲ τὴν 2
an - id / “
ἐπίνοιαν τοῖς ᾿Ακαρνᾶσιν, ὡς οὐ προσεδέξαντο διὰ τῆς
\ / > Νὴ a n a
Λευκάδος τὴν ov περιτείχισιν, αὐτὸς TH λοιπῇ στρατιᾷ,

8 5. πρωχωρήσειν ἘΝ.

ΧΟΝ. πεισθείς del. Her.—pera τῶν Αἰτωλῶν del. St. Her.—Ilap-
νασόν Her., a form which Buttmann repudiates.

Evotparetoat M. ξυστρατεύειν al. vid. St. Qu. Gr. p. 8.—ij δή A.
- ξὺν παντὶ BEF.—rév before ᾿Ακαρνάνων C.

ST. 6

Ww

2

82 OOTKTAIAOT

Κεφαλλῆσι καὶ Μεσσηνίοις καὶ Ζακυνθίοις καὶ ᾿Αθη-
ναίων τριακοσίοις τοῖς ἐπιβάταις τῶν σφετέρων νεῶν
(αἱ γὰρ πεντεκαίδεκα τῶν Κερκυραίων ἀπῆλθον νῆες),
> / ee | > ¢ ς lal A 33 > cal na
ἐστράτευσεν ἐπ᾽ Αἰτωλούς. ὡρμᾶτο δὲ ἐξ Οἰνεῶνος τῆς
/ 3
Λοκρίδος. οἱ δὲ ᾿᾽Οζόλαι οὗτοι Λοκροὶ ξύμμαχοι ἦσαν,
καὶ ἔδει αὐτοὺς πανστρατιᾷ ἀπαντῆσαι τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις
ἐς τὴν μεσόγειαν" ὄντες γὰρ ὅμοροι τοῖς Αἰτωλοῖς καὶ
c , > / 2Q/ om /
ὁμόσκευοι μεγάλη ὠφελία ἐδόκουν εἶναι ξυστρατεύοντες
μάχης τε ἐμπειρίᾳ τῆς ἐκείνων καὶ χωρίων. XCVI. αὐ-
λισάμενος δὲ τῷ στρατῷ ἐν τοῦ Διὸς τοῦ Νεμείου
nr c - ΕῚ e “ / ες sy / ε \ fal
TO ἱερῷ, ἐν ᾧ Ἡσίοδος ὁ ποιητὴς λέγεται ὑπὸ τῶν
ταύτῃ ἀποθανεῖν, χρησθὲν αὐτῷ ἐν Νεμέᾳ τοῦτο παθεῖν,
“ 2 of ” > / > \ > ΄, \
ἅμα τῇ ἕῳ ἄρας ἐπορεύετο ἐς τὴν Αἰτωλίαν. καὶ
΄ -“ ll , c / / \ Lal ’
αἱρεῖ τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ Ἰ]οτιδανίαν καὶ τῇ δευτέρᾳ
fol / / ’ fal \
Κροκύλειον καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ Τείχιον, ἔμενέ τε αὐτοῦ Kai
fal / > / ‘
τὴν λείαν ἐς Εὐπάλιον τῆς Λοκρίδος ἀπέπεμψε" τὴν
γὰρ γνώμην εἶχε τἄλλα καταστρεψάμενος οὕτως ἐπὶ
᾿Οφιονέας, εἰ μὴ βούλοιντο ξυγχωρεῖν, ἐς Ναύπακτον
ἐπαναχωρήσας στρατεῦσαι ὕστερον. τοὺς δὲ Αἰτωλοὺς
¢ \ fe a
οὐκ ἐλάνθανεν αὕτη ἡ παρασκευὴ οὔτε OTE TO πρῶτον
ε ΄ A
ἐπεβουλεύετο, ἐπειδή TE ὁ στρατὸς ἐσεβεβλήκει, πολλῇ
Ἀπ J / / v4 \ ey ? /
χειρὶ ἐπεβοήθουν πάντες, ὥστε καὶ οἱ ἔσχατοι Odiovéwy
c \ \ \ , ΄ aA \
οἱ πρὸς τὸν Μηλιακὸν κόλπον καθήκοντες Βωμιῆς καὶ
Καλλιῆς ἐβοήθησαν. XCVII. τῷ δὲ Δημοσθένει
/ / lal
τοιόνδε TL οἱ Μεσσήνιοι παρήνουν, ὅπερ καὶ TO πρῶτον"
μ > a fal
ἀναδιδάσκοντες αὐτὸν τῶν Αἰτωλῶν ὡς εἴη ῥᾳδία ἡ
+ 7, > “ \
αἵρεσις, ἰέναι ἐκέλευον OTL τάχιστα ἐπὶ τὰς κώμας Kal
\ , ne *» ΄ > ,
μὴ μένειν ἕως av ξύμπαντες ἀθροισθέντες ἀντιτάξωνται,
\ > \ > “ r ,
τὴν δ᾽ ἐν ποσὶν ἀεὶ πειρᾶσθαι αἱρεῖν. ὁ δὲ τούτοις
§ 2. νῆες del. Cob. § 3. ὡρμᾶτο dé om. G.
XCVI. § 3. an legendum οὐδ᾽ ὅτεῦ

2 PP DPAGH> TL. 83

\ \ a / > ' 4 ον ᾽ fal ἂν
τε πεισθεὶς καὶ τῇ τύχη ἐλπίσας, ὅτι οὐδὲν αὐτῷ ἠναν-
“- ’ / ¢ ~
τιοῦτο, τοὺς Λοκροὺς οὐκ ἀναμείνας ods αὐτῷ ἔδει
- “Ὁ ’ a
προσβοηθῆσαι (ψιλῶν yap ἀκοντιστῶν ἐνδεὴς ἣν μά-
λιστα)ὴ ἐχώρει ἐπὶ Αἰγιτίου, καὶ κατὰ κράτος αἱρεῖ
> / ς / \ ς ” \ > / > \
ἐπιών. ὑπέφυγον yap οἱ ἄνθρωποι καὶ ἐκάθηντο ἐπὶ
τῶν λόφων τῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως" ἢν γὰρ ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλών
χωρίων, ἀπέχουσα τῆς θαλάσσης ὀγδοήκοντα σταδίους
μάλιστα. οἱ δὲ Αἰτωλοὶ (βεβοηθηκότες γὰρ ἤδη ἦσαν
\ - > a
ἐπὶ τὸ Aiyitiov) προσέβαλλον τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις καὶ τοῖς
ξυμμάχοις καταθέοντες ἀπὸ τῶν λόφων ἄλλοι ἄλλοθεν
\ > / \ “ Ν > / \ a ᾽ /
καὶ ἐσηκόντιζον, Kat OTE μὲν ἐπίοι TO τών ᾿Αθηναίων
στρατόπεδον, ὑπεχώρουν, ἀναχωροῦσι δὲ ἐπέκειντο" καὶ
9 ͵ ͵
nv ἐπὶ πολὺ τοιαύτη ἡ μάχη, διώξεις τε καὶ ὑπαγω-
,ὔ Σ᾽ τ ’ f “ > ο΄» lal
yai, ἐν οἷς ἀμφοτέροις ἥσσους ἦσαν οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι.
5 / 5
XCVIII. μέχρι μὲν οὖν οἱ τοξόται εἶχόν τε τὰ βέλη
’ fal an “ /
αὐτοῖς Kai οἷοί Te ἦσαν χρῆσθαι, οἱ δὲ ἀντεῖχον (τοξευό-
μενοι γὰρ οἱ Αἰτωλοὶ ἄνθρωποι ψιλοὶ ἀνεστέλλοντο)"
> \ \ a / ? / a2
ἐπειδὴ δὲ τοῦ τε τοξάρχου ἀποθανόντος οὗτοι διεσκε-
δάσθησαν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐκεκμήκεσαν [καὶ] ἐπὶ πολὺ τῷ
αὐτῷ πόνῳ ξυνεχόμενοι, οἵ τε Αἰτωλοὶ ἐνέκειντο καὶ
ἐσηκόντιζον, οὕτω δὴ τραπόμενοι ἔφευγον, καὶ ἐσπίπτον-
Y4 / 3
τες ἔς τε χαράδρας ἀνεκβάτους καὶ χωρία ὧν οὐκ ἦσαν
ἔμπειροι διεφθείροντο" καὶ γὰρ ὁ ἡγεμὼν αὐτοῖς τῶν
« A , ς , Sey: , ε \
ὁδῶν, Χρόμων ὁ Μεσσήνιος, ἐτύγχανε τεθνηκώς. οἱ δὲ
, a a
Αἰτωλοὶ ἐσακοντίζοντες πολλοὺς μὲν αὐτοῦ ἐν TH τροπῇ

XCVII. § 2. ὑπέφευγον vulg. corr. Her.

χωρίων Kr. suspects.

§ 3. ἤδη om. Ν.---προσέβαλον CG.

κατά (for ἀπό) Her.

XCVIII. § 1. οἵδε vulg.—av@pwroa ψιλοὶ del. Her.—éoxeddcOn-
σαν Ν. --καὶ (before ἐπὶ) del. Bek.

6—2

84. ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΟΥ͂

κατὰ πόδας αἱροῦντες ἄνθρωποι ποδώκεις καὶ ψιλοὶ
/ \ \ / al € fal € 7 \

διέφθειρον, τοὺς δὲ πλείους τῶν ὁδῶν ἁμαρτάνοντας καὶ
/ A

és τὴν ὕλην ἐσφερομένους, ὅθεν διέξοδοι οὐκ ἦσαν, πῦρ

3 κομισάμενοι περιεπίμπρασαν: πᾶσά τε ἰδέα κατέστη

a Ὁ \ a ’ / led / Lal ,’
τῆς φυγῆς καὶ τοῦ ὀλέθρου τῷ στρατοπέδῳ τῶν ᾿Αθη-
/ / > \ \ / \ \ > “ na
ναίων, μόλις τε ἐπὶ THY θάλασσαν καὶ τὸν Οἰνεῶνα τῆς
AN /

4 Λοκρίδος, ὅθεν περ Kat ὡρμήθησαν, οἱ περιγενόμενοι

κατέφυγον. ἀπέθανον δὲ τῶν τε ξυμμάχων πολλοὶ

\ ᾽ “- > / ¢ - \ » , \

καὶ αὐτῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ὁπλῖται περὶ εἴκοσι μάλιστα Kal

ἑκατόν. τοσοῦτοι μὲν τὸ πλῆθος καὶ ἡλικία ἡ αὐτὴ

Aa , \ ” > a / A > r

οὗτοι βέλτιστοι δὴ ἄνδρες ἐν TO πολέμῳ τῷδε ἐκ τῆς
/ > /

ς ᾿Αθηναίων πόλεως διεφθάρησαν. ἀπέθανε δὲ Kai ὁ
ἕτερος στρατηγὸς Ἱ]ροκλῆς. τοὺς δὲ νεκροὺς ὑπο-
σπόνδους ἀνελόμενοι παρὰ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν καὶ ἀναχω-
ρήσαντες ἐς Ναύπακτον ὕστερον ἐς τὰς ᾿Αθήνας ταῖς

iN ? / or \ \ /
ναυσὶν ἐκομίσθησαν. Δημοσθένης δὲ περὶ Ναύπακτον
fal / lal ,
καὶ τὰ χωρία ταῦτα ὑπελείφθη, τοῖς πεπραγμένοις
φοβούμενος τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους.
\ U

XCIX. Κατὰ δὲ τοὺς αὐτοὺς χρόνους καὶ οἱ περὶ
Σικελίαν ᾿Αθηναῖοι πλεύσαντες ἐς τὴν Λοκρίδα ἐν ἀπο-
βάσει τέτινι τοὺς προσβοηθήσαντας Λοκρῶν ἐκράτησαν,

\ / « a es: aN aed n
καὶ περιπόλιον αἱροῦσιν ὃ ἦν ἐπὶ TO “Αληκι ποταμῷ.

C. Τοῦ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θέρους Αἰτωλοὶ προπέμψαντες

, by / \ > / /
πρότερον ἔς τε Κόρινθον καὶ ἐς Λακεδαίμονα πρέσβεις,
Τόλοφόν τε τὸν ᾿Οφιονέα καὶ Βοριάδην τὸν Evputava

§ 2. ἐκφερομένους Bek. Cob.—éodo Her. Stud. 48.

§ 3. τῶν στρατοπέδων MSS. corr. Reiske.

§ 4. The punctuation here given is that of Haase, Bad. Her. Boh.
St. Cl. Kr. Haase, Luc. p. 7, calls attention to three points, ‘numerus,
aetas, virtus occisorum.’

ἡλικία αὕτη Dob. ἡ πρώτη Hud.—ovra del. Dob.—davdpes del. Bad.
C. §1. Βοιάδην Her.

ἘΥΓΤΡΑΦΗΣ YP. 85

καὶ TicavSpov τὸν ᾿Απόδωτον, πείθουσιν ὥστε σφίσι
, \ > \ , A \ r > /
πέμψαι στρατιὰν ἐπὶ Ναύπακτον διὰ τὴν τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων
> , \ > / / \ \
ἐπαγωγήν. καὶ ἐξέπεμψαν Λακεδαιμόνιοι περὶ τὸ
φθινόπωρον τρισχιλίους ὁπλίτας τῶν ξυμμάχων. τού-
τῷ / > ¢ , fal > a
tov ἦσαν πεντακόσιοι ἐξ Ἡρακλείας τῆς ἐν Τραχῖνι
πόλεως τότε νεοκτίστου οὔσης" Σπαρτιάτης δ᾽ ἦρχεν
» -“ Ὁ “-“
Εὐρύλοχος τῆς στρατιᾶς, καὶ -ξυνηκολούθουν αὐτῷ
Μακάριος καὶ Μενεδάιος of Σπαρτιᾶται. CI. ἔξυλλε-
γέντος δὲ τοῦ στρατεύματος ἐς Δελφοὺς ἐπεκηρυκεύετο
Εὐρύλοχος Λοκροῖς τοῖς ᾿Οζόλαις" διὰ τούτων γὰρ ἡ
ὁδὸς ἦν ἐς Ναύπακτον, καὶ ἅμα τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ἐβούλετο
ἀποστῆσαι αὐτούς. ξυνέπρασσον δὲ μάλιστα αὐτῷ
τῶν Λοκρῶν ᾿Αμφισσῆς, διὰ τὸ τῶν Φωκέων ἔχθος
δεδιότες καὶ αὐτοὶ πρῶτον δόντες ὁμήρους καὶ τοὺς
Μ ” A 7. \ > ,
ἄλλους ἔπεισαν δοῦναι φοβουμένους τὸν ἐπιόντα στρα-
τόν, πρῶτον μὲν οὖν τοὺς ὁμόρους αὐτοῖς Μυονέας
4 \ / ¢ 7 ΝΜ > /
(ταύτῃ yap δυσεσβολώτατος ἡ Aoxpis), ἔπειτα ‘Imveas
καὶ Μεσσαπίους καὶ Τριταιέας καὶ Χαλαίους καὶ Τολο-
/ Ne U \ > / Ka \
φωνίους καὶ Ἡσσίους καὶ Οἰανθέας. οὗτοι καὶ Evve-
“ / > o \ ¢ / \ 4
στράτευον πάντες. "Odrrator δὲ ὁμήρους μὲν ἔδοσαν,
? 50 δὲ 7 \ Ὥ a > gS ε / \
ἠκολούθουν δὲ οὔ" Kal “Tato οὐκ ἔδοσαν ὁμήρους πρὶν
αὐτῶν εἷλον κώμην Πόλιν ὄνομα ἔχουσαν. CII. ἐπειδὴ
δὲ παρεσκεύαστο πάντα καὶ τοὺς ὁμήρους κατέθετο ἐς
Κυτίνιον τὸ Δωρικόν, ἐχώρει τῷ στρατῷ ἐπὶ τὴν Ναύ-
πακτον διὰ τῶν Λοκρῶν, καὶ πορευόμενος Οἰνεῶνα αἱρεῖ
αὐτῶν καὶ Ἑὐπάλιον: οὐ γὰρ προσεχώρησαν. γενό-
μενοι δ᾽ ἐν τῇ Ναυπακτίᾳ, καὶ οἱ Αἰτωλοὶ ἅμα ἤδη
/ 5 / \ A \ \ ,
προσβεβοηθηκότες, ἐδήουν τὴν γῆν καὶ TO προάστειον
8.2. Μενεδάιος Dindorf, vulg. Μενεδαῖος.
CI. § 2. πρῶτοι Κι.---φοβούμενοι Nab.—otv del. Her.—opjpous
after ἔδοσαν del. Her.

2

[Ὁ]

2

86 OOTKTAIAOT

ἀτείχιστον ὃν εἷλον" ἐπί τε Μολύκρειον ἐλθόντες τὴν
/ fal
Κορινθίων μὲν ἀποικίαν ᾿Αθηναίων δὲ ὑπήκοον αἱροῦσι.
ΕἾ a *
3 Δημοσθένης δὲ ὁ ᾿Αθηναῖος (ἔτι yap ἐτύγχανεν ὧν μετὰ
\ > a > / \ 4 /
τὰ ἐκ τῆς Αἰτωλίας περὶ Ναύπακτον) προαισθόμενος
fal a \ / ? fal > \ if 9 ἡ
τοῦ στρατοῦ καὶ δείσας περὶ αὐτῆς, ἐλθὼν πείθει ᾿Ακαρ-
νᾶνας, χαλεπῶς διὰ τὴν ἐκ τῆς Λευκάδος ἀναχώρησιν,
n , \ L > 92 nl een
4 βοηθῆσαι Ναυπάκτῳ. καὶ πέμπουσι μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ
al a € a 2
τῶν νεῶν χιλίους ὁπλίτας, οἱ ἐσελθόντες περιεποίησαν
τὸ χωρίον. δεινὸν γὰρ ἦν μή, μεγάλου ὄντος τοῦ
τείχους, ὀλίγων δὲ τῶν ἀμυνομένων, οὐκ ἀντίσχωσιν.
> 4 \ \ € Ε] ’ lal € v \
5 Βυρύλοχος δὲ καὶ of μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ὡς ἤσθοντο τὴν oTpa-
τιὰν ἐσεληλυθυῖαν καὶ ἀδύνατον ὃν τὴν πόλιν βίᾳ ἑλεῖν,
> , <2. ΟῚ \ / 2 ᾽ > \ >’
ἀνεχώρησαν, οὐκ ἐπὶ Πελοποννήσου, adr ἐς τὴν Αἰο-
λίδα τὴν νῦν καλουμένην Καλυδῶνα καὶ Πλευρῶνα καὶ
> \ / / in 9 ΄ lel > / e
6 ἐς Ta ταύτῃ χωρία Kal ἐς Lpocyiov τῆς Αἰτωλίας. οἱ
γὰρ ᾿Αμπρακιῶται ἐλθόντες πρὸς αὐτοὺς πείθουσιν
ὥστε μετὰ σφῶν "Apye τε τῷ ᾿Αμφιλοχικῷ καὶ ᾿Αμφι-
λοχίᾳ τῇ ἄλλῃ ἐπιχειρῆσαι καὶ ᾿Ακαρνανίᾳ ἅμα, λέγον-
OEY 1) XN PUD COTE,
an > \
τες OTL ἢν τούτων κρατήσωσι, πᾶν TO ἠπειρωτικὸν
Ψ / , \ « \ 7 /
7 Λακεδαιμονίοις ξύμμαχον καθεστήξει. καὶ ὁ μὲν Εὐρύ-
\ x \ > \ γ᾽ \ « / Lal
λόχος πεισθεὶς καὶ τοὺς Αἰτωλοὺς ἀφεὶς ἡσύχαζε τῷ
στρατῷ περὶ τοὺς χώρους τούτους, ἕως τοῖς ᾿Αμπρακιώ-
/ a
ταις ἐκστρατευσαμένοις περὶ TO ΓΑργος δέοι βοηθεῖν.
καὶ τὸ θέρος ἐτελεύτα.
CIII. Οἱ δ᾽ ἐν τῇ Σικελίᾳ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τοῦ ἐπιγιγνο-
/ a ᾿Ὶ , Ἁ nr id / /
μένου χειμῶνος ἐπελθόντες μετὰ τῶν “Ελλήνων ξυμμά-

CII. § 3. περὶ αὐτῇ ὃ Bek.; cf. VIII. 93 § 2.---χαλεπῶς δὲ Her.

§ 4. ἐκ τῶν νεῶν Β.--- μεγάλου μὲν N.

§ 5. ἐς before τὰ ταύτῃ del. Her. Stud. p. 48.

CIII. § 1. ἐξελθόντες Hud.—camd Συρακοσίων del. Her. St.—pocé-
BaXov corr. G.

EYTTPAPH> YT. 87

Nie CF sy a \ / > / ς Ν
χων, καὶ ὅσοι Σικελῶν κατὰ κράτος ἀρχόμενοι ὑπὸ
, Ε] , aA
Συρακοσίων καὶ ξύμμαχοι ὄντες ἀποστάντες αὑτοῖς
TN , , ὌΝ \
[ἀπὸ Συρακοσίων] ξυνεπολέμουν, ἐπ᾽ "Ivnooav τὸ Σικε-
Ν Ὄ
λικὸν πόλισμα, οὗ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν Συρακόσιοι εἶχον,
΄ \ (< 3 > , ς - ’ lal >
προσέβαλλον, καὶ ὡς οὐκ ἐδύναντο ἑλεῖν ἀπῇσαν. ἐν
fal > lal
δὲ τῇ ἀναχωρήσει ὑστέροις ᾿Αθηναίων τοῖς ξυμμάχοις
> fal a
ἀναχωροῦσιν ἐπιτίθενται of ἐκ τοῦ τειχίσματος Συρα-
/ fal
κόσιοι, Kal προσπεσόντες τρέπουσί τε μέρος TL TOU
στρατοῦ καὶ ἀπέκτειναν οὐκ ὀλίγους. καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο
᾿ an a ' ,’ a \
ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν ὁ Λάχης καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι és τὴν Λοκρίδα
[} -“"
ἀποβάσεις τινὰς ποιησάμενοι κατὰ τὸν Katkivoy ποτα-
, \ fal a \ / n
μόν, τοὺς προσβοηθοῦντας Λοκρῶν μετὰ Τ]ροξένου τοῦ
Καπάτωνος ὡς τριακοσίους μάχῃ ἐκράτησαν καὶ ὅπλα
λαβόντες ἀπεχώρησαν.
la) ’ “ A
CIV. Tod δ᾽ αὐτοῦ χειμῶνος καὶ Δῆλον ἐκάθηραν
’ a \ N , > U \ Ν \
Αθηναῖοι κατὰ χρησμὸν δή τινα. ἐκάθηρε μὲν yap καὶ
/ , f
Πεισίστρατος ὁ τύραννος πρότερον αὐτήν, οὐχ ἅπασαν
> Sey, 3 AY lal ec nr ’ ἴω lol / / \
ἀλλ᾽ ὅσον ἀπὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἐφεωρᾶτο τῆς νήσου" τότε δὲ
a , a A J fal
πᾶσα ἐκαθάρθη τοιῷδε τρόπῳ. θῆκαι ὅσαι ἦσαν τῶν
/ > / / ’ las \ x \
τεθνεώτων ἐν Δήλῳ, πάσας ἀνεῖλον, καὶ TO λοίπον
la) an 7 /
προεῖπον μήτε ἐναποθνήσκειν EV τῇ νήσῳ μήτε ἐντίκτειν,
ε Aas: ς
ἀλλ᾽ ἐς τὴν Ῥήνειαν διακομίζεσθαι. (ἀπέχει δὲ ἡ
lal , ε
Ῥήνεια τῆς Δήλου οὕτως ὀλίγον ὥστε Ἰ]ολυκράτης ὁ
Σαμίων τύραννος, ἰσχύσας τινὰ χρόνον ναυτικῷ καὶ τῶν
,
Te ἄλλων νήσων ἄρξας Kal τὴν 'Ῥήνειαν ἑλών, ἀνέθηκε
lal A \ an
τῷ ᾿Απόλλωνι τῷ Δηλίῳ ἁλύσει δήσας πρὸς τὴν Δῆλον.)
Ν δὴ
καὶ τὴν πεντετηρίδα τότε πρῶτον μετὰ τὴν κάθαρσιν
fal , / \
ἐποίησαν of ᾿Αθηναῖοι [τὰ Anda]. Av δέ ποτε Kai TO
§ 3. Kapkivov? Her. Καϊκῖνον Bek.—rov προξένου N.

CIV. § 1. ἀφεωρᾶτο G.
$2. τὰ Anda del. Her.

3

2

3

os” " POOTKTAIAOT

4 \ a aA
πάλαι μεγάλη ξύνοδος és τὴν Δῆλον τῶν ᾿Ιώνων τε Kat
περικτιόνων νησιωτῶν" ξύν τε γὰρ γυναιξὶ καὶ παισὶν
> / a lal > \ ᾿ , vv ‘ % \
ἐθεώρουν, ὥσπερ νῦν ἐς τὰ ᾿᾿φέσια “lwves, καὶ ἀγὼν
ἐποιεῖτο αὐτόθι καὶ γυμνικὸς καὶ μουσικός, χορούς τε
4 ἀνῆγον αἱ πόλεις. δηλοῖ δὲ μάλιστα “Ὅμηρος ὅτι
“ lal “-“ /
τοιαῦτα ἦν ἐν τοῖς ἔπεσι τοῖσδε, ἅ ἐστιν ἐκ προοιμίου
᾿Απόλλωνος"

ἄλλοτε Δήλῳ, Φοῖβε, μάλιστά γε θυμὸν ἐτέρφθης,
μὲ ε 4 > / > /

ἔνθα τοι ἑλκεχίτωνες ᾿Ιάονες ἠγερέθονται

σὺν σφοῖσιν τεκέεσσι γυναιξί τε σὴν ἐς ἀγυιάν"
ἔνθα σε πυγμαχίῃ καὶ ὀρχηστυῖ καὶ ἀοιδῇ

If 9 , an Te
μνησάμενοι τέρπουσιν, ὅταν καθέσωσιν ἀγῶνα.

5 ὅτι δὲ καὶ μουσικῆς ἀγὼν ἦν καὶ ἀγωνιούμενοι ἐφοίτων,
ἐν τοῖσδε αὖ δηλοῖ, ἅ ἐστιν ἐκ τοῦ αὐτοῦ προοιμίου
τὸν γὰρ Δηλιακὸν χορὸν τῶν γυναικῶν ὑμνησας ἐτε-
λεύτα τοῦ ἐπαίνου ἐς τάδε τὰ ἔπη, ἐν οἷς καὶ ἑαυτοῦ
ἐπεμνήσθη"

ἀλλ᾽ ἀγεθ᾽, ἱλήκοι μὲν ᾿Απόλλων ᾿Αρτέμιδι ξύν,
χαίρετε δ᾽ ὑμεῖς πᾶσαι. ἐμεῖο δὲ καὶ μετόπισθε
μνήσασθ᾽, ὁππότε κέν τις ἐπιχθονίων ἀνθρώπων
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἀνείρηται ταλαπείριος ἄλλος ἐπελθὼν

“ὦ κοῦραι, τίς δ᾽ ὕμμιν ἀνὴρ ἥδιστος ἀοιδών
“ἐνθάδε πωλεῖται, καὶ τέῳ τέρπεσθε μάλιστα ;”
ὑμεῖς δ᾽ εὖ μάλα πᾶσαι ὑποκρίνασθ᾽ eidypws

“cc Ν > / 3 “a Ν /, μὲ ’ 7)
τυφλὸς ἀνήρ, οἰκεῖ δὲ Χίῳ ἔνι παιπαλοέσσῃ.

8 4. ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε ABCEFG. ἀλλὰ σύ vulg.
ὀρχηθμῷ νυϊρ.---στήσωνται vulg.

8 5. ἂν εἴρηται (. ἀνήρτηται B.

ξεῖνος ταλαπείριος ἐλθών vulg.

ἐϊφήμως Her.

ὃ 6, μεθ᾽ ἱερείων Her.

EYTTPA®H:> I. 89

r eal ᾽ / “ 5 .Ἶ \ /
τοσαῦτα μὲν Ὅμηρος ἐτεκμηρίωσεν ὅτι ἣν Kal TO πάλαι 6
͵ , \ fe wes . t τ \ \
μεγάλη Evvodos καὶ ἑορτὴ ἐν TH Δήλῳ᾽ ὕστερον δὲ τοὺς
μὲν χοροὺς οἱ νησιῶται καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι μεθ᾽ ἱερῶν
ἔπεμπον, τὰ δὲ περὶ τοὺς ἀγῶνας καὶ τὰ πλεῖστα κατε-
λύθη ὑπὸ ξυμφορῶν, ὡς εἰκός, πρὶν δὴ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι
lal / ¢
τότε TOV ἀγῶνα ἐποίησαν Kal ἱπποδρομίας, ὃ πρότερον
οὐκ ἦν.
nr 3 “ a lal
CV. Tod δ᾽ αὐτοῦ χειμῶνος ᾿Αμπρακιῶται, ὥσπερ
/
ὑποσχόμενοι Εὐρυλόχῳ τὴν στρατιὰν κατέσχον, ἐκ-
στρατεύονται ἐπὶ “Apyos τὸ ᾿Αμφιλοχικὸν τρισχιλίοις
ς fi \ > f > \ > /
οπλίταις, Kal ἐσβαλόντες ἐς τὴν ᾿Αργείαν καταλαμ-
, ” va) Ὁ ΣΝ / > δὰ \ a
Bavovow Ὄλπας, τεῖχος ἐπὶ λόφου ἰσχυρὸν προς τῇ
θαλάσσῃ, ὅ ποτε “Axapvaves τειχισάμενοι κοινῷ δικα-
Σ na > a
στηρίῳ ἐχρῶντο" ἀπέχει δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς ᾿Αργείων πόλεως
7
ἐπιθαλασσίας οὔσης πέντε καὶ εἴκοσι σταδίους μάλιστα.
οἱ δὲ ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες οἱ μὲν ἐς “Apyos ξυνεβοήθουν, 2
οἱ δὲ τῆς ᾿Αμφιλοχίας ἐν τούτῳ τῷ χωρίῳ ὃ
7s μ jie) ὦ PD ὑ ἀρ, ὦ
Κρῆναι καλεῖται, φυλάσσοντες τοὺς μετὰ Εὐρυλόχου
Πελοποννησίους μὴ λάθωσι πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αμπρακιώτας
διελθόντες, ἐστρατοπεδεύσαντο᾽ πέμπουσι δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ 3
Δημοσθένην τὸν ἐς τὴν Αἰτωλίαν ᾿Αθηναίων στρατη-
͵ “
γήσαντα, ὅπως σφίσιν ἡγεμὼν γίγνηται, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς
", lal , / «“ » Ν /
εἴκοσι ναῦς ᾿Αθηναίων αἱ ἔτυχον περὶ Πελοπόννησον
> Ka > > ΄ ς ΄ \
οὖσαι, wy ἦρχεν ᾿Αριστοτέλης τε ὁ Τιμοκράτους καὶ
« an κι / > / \ Ni a3,
lepopav ὁ ᾿Αντιμνήστου. ἀπέστειλαν δὲ Kal ἄγγελον 4
fal /
ot περὶ Tas Ὄλπας ᾿Αμπρακιῶται és τὴν πόλιν κελεύ-
/ tal / / \ ς ᾽
οντες σφίσι βοηθεῖν πανδημεί, δεδιότες μὴ οἱ μετ
> Lal lal
Εὐρυλόχου οὐ δύνωνται διελθεῖν τοὺς ᾿Ακαρνᾶνας καὶ
CV. § 1. ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες καὶ ᾿Αμφίλοχοι F. Niese from Steph. Byz.

(Hermes, Vol. xtv.).
8 4. διελθεῖν τοὺς ᾿Ακαρνᾶνας λαθόντες Nab.

90 OOTKTAIAOT

, A θ Lal c if é aA > “-“
σφίσιν ἢ μονωθεῖσιν ἡ μάχη γένηται ἢ ἀναχωρεῖν βου-
λομένοις οὐκ ἡ ἀσφαλές. CVI. οἱ μὲν οὖν μετ᾽ Εὐρυ-
λόχου Πελοποννήσιοι ὡς ἤσθοντο τοὺς ἐν "Ὄλπαις
᾿Αμπρακιώτας ἥκοντας, ἄραντες ἐκ τοῦ Προσχίου ἐβοή-
θουν κατὰ τάχος, καὶ διαβάντες τὸν ᾿Αχελῷον ἐχώρουν
ὃ ᾽ BA / wv ? , ὃ \ \ > » ΄

“ ᾿Ακαρνανίας οὔσης ἐρήμου διὰ τὴν ἐς "Ἄργος βοή-
θειαν, ἐν δεξιᾷ μὲν ἔχοντες τὴν Στρατίων πόλιν καὶ τὴν
\ ? a > > a \ \ ν) > /
φρουρὰν αὐτῶν, ἐν ἀριστερᾷ δὲ τὴν ἄλλην ᾿Ακαρνανίαν.
2 καὶ διελθόντες τὴν Στρατίων γῆν ἐχώρουν διὰ τῆς
Φυτίας καὶ αὖθις Μεδεῶνος παρ᾽ ἔσχατα, ἔπειτα διὰ
Λιμναίας" καὶ ἐπέβησαν τῆς ᾿Αγραίων, οὐκέτι ᾿Ακαρ-
3vavias, φιλίας δὲ σφίσι. λαβόμενοι δὲ τοῦ Θυάμου
” ds) , / ὕ ᾽ > la \ /
ὄρους, 0 ἐστιν ᾿Αγραικόν, ἐχώρουν δι᾿ αὐτοῦ Kal κατέβη-
σαν ἐς τὴν ᾿Αργείαν νυκτὸς ἤδη, καὶ διεξελθόντες μεταξὺ
ἢ μ
a ? Me / \ a > \ , > ,
τῆς τε Ἀργείων πόλεως καὶ τῆς ἐπὶ Kpnvats ᾿Ακαρνά-
νων φυλακῆς ἔλαθον καὶ προσέμιξαν τοῖς ἐν "᾽Ολπαις
᾿Αμπρακιώταις. CVII. γενόμενοι δὲ ἁθρόοι ἅμα τῇ
«ς , / SEEN \ 4 / \
ἡμέρᾳ καθίζουσιν ἐπὶ τὴν Μητρόπολιν καλουμένην καὶ
στρατόπεδον ἐποιήσαντο. ᾿Αθηναῖοι δὲ ταῖς εἴκοσι
ναυσὶν οὐ πολλῷ ὕστερον παραγίγνονται ἐς τὸν ᾿Αμ-
\ ON θ lo) Tad oA a / \ A
πρακικὸν κόλπον βοηθοῦντες τοῖς ᾿Αργείοις, καὶ Anpo-

/ / \ »” / ς / € /
σθένης Μεσσηνίων μὸν ἔχων διακοσίους ὁπλίτας, ἑξή-

Ν / > ,ὔ \ ς Ν fal \ \
2 κοντα δὲ τοξότας ᾿Αθηναίων. καὶ ai μὲν νῆες περὶ Tas
μ
‘ /
Ὄλπας τὸν λόφον ἐκ θαλάσσης ἐφώρμουν: οἱ δὲ Axap-
νᾶνες καὶ ᾿Αμφιλόχων ὀλίγοι (οἱ γὰρ πλείους ὑπὸ
μ γ

ZN A / / > \ A = γὸ
μπρακιωτῶν βίᾳ κατείχοντο) ἐς τὸ “Apyos ἤδη

CVI. 8.2. Φοιτίας Steph. Byz. and Inscr.—ovdér E.

§ 3. ἀγροῖκον BEF. ἄγροικον cet. corr. O. Miiller.

CVII. §1. κόλπον ACG del. St. wrongly; cf. I. 29 § 3, 55
§ 1, 11. 68 § 3, IV. 49.

§ 2. τὸν λόφον del. Her. St. 147.

ΞΥΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ ΓΤ. 91

/ / « / -"
ξυνεληλυθότες παρεσκευάζοντο ὡς μαχούμενοι τοῖς
/ a \ A € a
ἐναντίοις, καὶ ἡγεμόνα τοῦ παντὸς ξυμμαχικοῦ αἱροῦν-
a lal € \
tat Δημοσθένη μετὰ τῶν σφετέρων στρατηγῶν. ὁ δὲ 3
fal 4
προσαγαγὼν ἐγγὺς τῆς "Ολπης ἐστρατοπεδεύσατο"
ce € \
χαράδρα δ᾽ αὐτοὺς μεγάλη διεῖργε. καὶ ἡμέρας μὲν
/ ig , a > 7 ΕῚ / ᾽ , «ς ᾽
πέντε ἡσύχαζον, τῇ δ᾽ ἕκτῃ ἐτάσσοντο ἀμφότεροι ὡς ἐς
, ,ὔ a Ni a
μάχην. καί, μεῖζον yap ἐγένετο Kal περιέσχε TO τῶν
Πελ é ἡπεδον, ὁ A θένης δεί )
ελοποννησίων στρατόπεδον, ὁ Δημοσθένης δείσας μὴ
κυκλωθῇ λοχίζει ἐς ὁδόν τινα κοίλην καὶ λοχμώδη
c / \ \ la > /
οπλίτας καὶ ψιλοὺς ξυναμφοτέρους ἐς τετρακοσίους,
UY \ , a a ΄
ὅπως κατὰ τὸ ὑπερέχον τῶν ἐναντίων ἐν τῇ ξυνόδῳ
» fol /
αὐτῇ ἐξαναστάντες οὗτοι KATA νώτου γίγνωνται. ἐπεὶ 4
\ 4 3 > a
δὲ παρεσκεύαστο ἀμφοτέροις, ἦσαν ἐς χεῖρας, Δημο-
θέ \ \ ὧδ \ , ” \ , \
σθένης μὲν τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας ἔχων μετὰ Μεσσηνίων καὶ
᾽ 7 -
Αθηναίων ὀλίγων: τὸ δὲ ἄλλο ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες ὡς ἕκαστοι
τεταγμένοι ἐπεῖχον καὶ ᾿Αμφιλόχων οἱ παρόντες ἀκον-
/ / \ \ > lal 3 \
τισταί, [Πελοποννήσιοι δὲ καὶ ᾿Αμπρακιώται ἀναμὶξ
, a ,
τεταγμένοι πλὴν Μαντινέων" οὗτοι δὲ ἐν τῷ εὐωνύμῳ
ἴω A 9 \ / v yy ¢ / 3
μᾶλλον, καὶ οὐ τὸ κέρας ἀκρον ἔχοντες, ἁθρόοι ἦσαν,
> ᾽ 3 x 5S \ 9. ἐγ \ ε 3
ἀλλ᾽ Εὐρύλοχος ἔσχατον εἶχε τὸ εὐώνυμον καὶ οἱ μετ
’ a x «
αὐτοῦ, κατὰ Μεσσηνίους καὶ Δημοσθένη. CVIII. ὡς
δ᾽ > \ af) yy i A bs e ΤΠ
ἐν χερσὶν ἤδη ὄντες περιέσχον τῷ κέρᾳ οἱ ἸΤελοπον-
, nr a 7 ᾽ a
νήσιοι καὶ ἐκυκλοῦντο τὸ δεξιὸν τῶν ἐναντίων, οἱ ἐκ τῆς
5 / “
ἐνέδρας ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες ἐπιγενόμενοι αὐτοῖς κατὰ νώτου
" 5
προσπίπτουσί τε καὶ τρέπουσιν, ὥστε μήτε ἐς ἀλκὴν
ς a la >’ \ \ \ / Los
ὑπομεῖναι φοβηθέντας τε ἐς φυγὴν καὶ TO πλέον τοῦ
στρατεύματος καταστῆσαι" ἐπειδὴ γὰρ εἶδον τὸ κατ᾽
? an
Εὐρύλοχον καὶ ὃ κράτιστον ἦν διαφθειρόμενον, πολλῷ
8 3. οὕτω Hud.

8.4. ἐπεῖχον om. B.
CVIII. §1. ὃ καὶ κράτιστον transp. Hud.

92 OOTKTAIAOT

nr , wr
μᾶλλον ἐφοβοῦντο. καὶ οἱ Μεσσήνιοι ὄντες ταὐτῃ
μετὰ τοῦ Δημοσθένους τὸ πολὺ τοῦ ἔργου ἐξῆλθον. οἱ
et al \
δὲ ᾿Αμπρακιῶται καὶ of κατὰ τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας ἐνίκων τὸ
θ᾽ ς \ \ \ \ JIN 5 δέ \ \
Kal’ ἑαυτοὺς καὶ πρὸς τὸ “Apyos ἐπεδίωξαν" καὶ yap
μαχιμώτατοι τῶν περὶ ἐκεῖνα τὰ χωρία τυγχάνουσιν
ὄντες. ἐπαναχωροῦντες δὲ ὡς ἑώρων τὸ πλέον νενικη-
/ \ ¢ Μ > “ /
μένον καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες σφίσι προσέκειντο,
tal \
χαλεπῶς διεσώζοντο ἐς τὰς ἼθΟλπας, καὶ πολλοὶ ἀπέθα-
» / ’
νον αὐτῶν, ἀτάκτως Kal οὐδενὶ κόσμῳ προσπίπτοντες
\ , 5 2 \ ͵ ΄
πλὴν Μαντινέων" οὗτοι δὲ μάλιστα ξυντεταγμένοι
\ a a > c
παντὸς τοῦ στρατοῦ ἀνεχώρησαν. Kal ἡ per μάχη
? , b] > Ζ
ετελεύτα ἐς Oe.
CIX. Μενεδάιος δὲ τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ, Εὐρυλόχου τεθ-
Ὁ ἃ / 3 \ \ \ > i?
νεῶτος καὶ Μακαρίου αὐτὸς παρειληφὼς τὴν ἀρχήν,
a a Ul
Kal ἀπορῶν μεγάλης «τῆς» ἥσσης γεγενημένης ὅτῳ
τρόπῳ ἢ μένων πολιορκήσεται ἔκ τε γῆς καὶ ἐκ θαλάσ-
lal > lal ,
ons ταῖς Αττικαῖς ναυσὶν ἀποκεκλῃμένος, ἢ καὶ ἀναχω-
- ὃ / 7 / \ nr \
ρῶν διασωθήσεται, προσφέρει λόγον περὶ σπονδῶν καὶ
ἀναχωρήσεως Δημοσθένει καὶ τοῖς ᾿Ακαρνάνων στρα-
τηγοῖς, καὶ περὶ νεκρῶν ἅμα ἀναιρέσεως. οἱ δὲ νεκροὺς
’ lal
μὲν ἀπέδοσαν καὶ τροπαῖον αὐτοὶ ἔστησαν Kal τοὺς
>
ἑαυτῶν τριακοσίους μάλιστα ἀποθανόντας ἀνείλοντο"
’ “ lal
ἀναχώρησιν δὲ ἐκ μὲν Tod προφανοῦς οὐκ ἐσπείσαντο
“ , \ , \ a ,
ὅπασι, κρύφα δὲ Δημοσθένης μετὰ τῶν ξυστρατήγων
᾿Ακαρνάνων σπένδονται Μαντινεῦσι καὶ Μενεδαΐῳ καὶ
- yi 7 tal / WO >
τοῖς ἄλλοις ἄρχουσι τών [Πελοποννησίων καὶ ὅσοι av-

ἐπεξῆλθον EG. διεξῆλθον Μ.

§ 2. ἐπεδίωξαν Haase. κατεδίωξαν Hud. ἀπεδίωξαν vulg.
§ 3. ἀτάκτως καὶ del. Her.

ἕως all Mss. except C és and F ἕως és.

CIX. §1. τῆς ἥσσης Hud.

ETITPA®HS TP. 93

a > Ε] ' ΟῚ lal \ /
τῶν ἦσαν ἀξιολογώτατοι ἀποχωρεῖν κατὰ τάχος, βου-
, a \ 5 / \ \
λόμενος ψιλῶσαι τοὺς ᾿Αμπρακιώτας τε καὶ TOV μισθο-
φόρον ὄχλον [τὸν ξενικόν), μάλιστα δὲ Λακεδαιμονίους
καὶ Ἰ]Πελοποννησίους διαβαλεῖν ἐς τοὺς ἐκείνῃ χρήζων
“Ἑλληνας, ὡς καταπροδόντες τὸ ἑαυτῶν προυργιαίτερον
ἐποιήσαντο. καὶ οἱ μὲν τούς τε νεκροὺς ἀνείλοντο καὶ 3
διὰ τάχους ἔθαπτον, ὥσπερ ὑπῆρχε, καὶ τὴν ἀπο-
χώρησιν κρύφα οἷς ἐδέδοτο ἐπεβούλευον: CX. τῷ
\ , \ ALAS a > a \
δὲ Δημοσθένει καὶ τοῖς ᾿Ακαρνᾶσιν ἀγγέλλεται τοὺς
᾿Αμπρακιώτας τοὺς ἐκ τῆς πόλεως πανδημεὶ κατὰ τὴν
πρώτην ἐκ τῶν ᾿᾽Ολπῶν ἀγγελίαν ἐπιβοηθεῖν διὰ τῶν
/ a rn
᾿Αμφιλόχων, βουλομένους τοῖς ἐν “Orrais ξυμμῖξαι,
/ n A
εἰδότας οὐδὲν τῶν γεγενημένων. Kal πέμπει εὐθὺς τοῦ 2
la) c a
στρατοῦ μέρος TL τὰς ὁδοὺς προλοχιοῦντας Kal τὰ
καρτερὰ προκαταληψομένους, καὶ τῇ ἄλλῃ στρατιᾷ
ἅμα παρεσκευάζετο βοηθεῖν ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς. CXI. ἐν
, > « A \ Ka »Μ ᾿ ’ \
τούτῳ δ᾽ οἱ Μαντινῆς καὶ ols ἔσπειστο, πρόφασιν ἐπὶ
λαχανισμὸν καὶ φρυγάνων ξυλλογὴν ἐξελθόντες, ὑπα-
πῆσαν κατ᾽ ὀλίγους, ἅμα ξυλλέγοντες ἐφ᾽ ἃ ἐξῆλθον
δῆθεν" προκεχωρηκότες δὲ ἤδη ἄπωθεν τῆς "Odmns
θᾶσσον ἀπεχώρουν. οἱ δ᾽ ᾿Αμπρακιώται καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι, 2
Ψ \ > , “ € / / «ς
ὅσοι μὲν ἐτύγχανον οὕτως ἁθρόοι ξυνελθόντες, ὡς
ἔγνωσαν ἀπιόντας, ὥρμησαν καὶ αὐτοὶ καὶ ἔθεον δρόμῳ,
ἐπικαταλαβεῖν βουλόμενοι. οἱ δὲ ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες τὸ μὲν 3

82. Mein. questions μισθοφόρον ; cf. VIII. 25 § 1 (Schaef.).—rov
ξενικόν del. Her. Cob. St.

CXI. §1. φρυγανισμὸν Her.—drobev vulg.

§ 2. μὴ (for μὲν) Hud.—rovros (for οὕτω) Hud. ἐνετύγχανον
αὐτοῖς Madv. Adv. I. 318. ὄντες (for οὕτως) Popp. μένοντες St. μονού-
μενοι Cl. μονωθέντες Camp. ἄθροοι (from α- θροῦς, a vox nihili) Hud.

ξυνεξελθόντες C, which Her. accepts; cf. Cob. on I. 3. In 3482
F gives ξυνελθόντες for ξυνεσελθύντες, See further discussion in notes.

94 ΘΟΥΚΥΔΙΔΟΥ͂

- \ ’ ,’
πρῶτον Kai πάντας ἐνόμισαν ἀπιέναι ἀσπόνδους ὁμοίως,
καὶ τοὺς Πελοποννησίους ἐπεδίωκον: καί τινας αὐτῶν
τῶν στρατηγῶν κωλύοντας καὶ φάσκοντας ἐσπεῖσθαι
“ / n
αὐτοῖς ἠκόντισέ TLS, νομίσας καταπροδίδοσθαι σφᾶς:
» / \ \ / \ \
ἔπειτα μέντοι τοὺς μὲν Μαντινέας καὶ τοὺς Πελοπον-
,’ ,
νησίους ἀφίεσαν, τοὺς δ᾽ ᾿Αμπρακιώτας ἔκτεινον. καὶ
3 \ ” \ v » ? / ’, Ὶ
ἣν πολλὴ ἔρις καὶ ἄγνοια cite Αμπρακιώτης τίς ἐστιν
εἴτε ΠΠελοποννήσιος. καὶ ἐς διακοσίους μέν τινας αὐτῶν
ἀπέκτειναν" οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι διέφυγον ἐς τὴν ᾿Αγραΐδα
“ > \ / τ) \ ec \ a
ὅμορον οὖσαν, καὶ Σαλύνθιος αὐτοὺς ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν
᾿Αγραίων φίλος ὧν ὑπεδέξατο.
CXII. Οἱ δ᾽ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ᾿Αμπρακιῶται ἀφικ-
νοῦνται ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ιδομένην. ἐστὸν δὲ δύο λόφω [ἡ ᾿Ιδομένη]
fi ,
ὑψηλώ" τούτοιν τὸν μὲν μείζω νυκτὸς ἐπιγενομένης οἱ
προαποσταλέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ Δημοσθένους ἀπὸ τοῦ στρα-
τοπέδον ἔλαθόν τε καὶ ἔφθασαν προκαταλαβόντες, τὸν
δ᾽ ἐλάσσω ἔτυχον οἱ ᾿Αμπρακιῶται προαναβάντες καὶ
9. ς \ , , ’ , \ A
ηὐλίσαντο. ὁ δὲ Δημοσθένης δειπνήσας ἔχώρει καὶ τὸ
ΕΣ , 3 Ae / 5 / ᾽ \ \ No,
ἄλλο στράτευμα ἀπὸ ἑσπέρας εὐθύς, αὐτὸς μὲν TO ἥμισυ
lal lal » lal ᾽ al
ἔχων ἐπὶ τῆς ἐσβολῆς, τὸ δ᾽ ἄλλο διὰ τῶν ᾿Αμφιλοχικῶν
ὀρῶν. καὶ ἅμα ὄρθρῳ ἐπιπίπτει τοῖς Αμπρακιώταις ἔτι
“ a ,’ / »
ἐν ταῖς εὐναῖς καὶ οὐ προῃσθημένοις τὰ γεγενημένα, ἀλλὰ
πολὺ μᾶλλον νομίσασι τοὺς ἑαυτῶν εἶναι" καὶ γὰρ τοὺς
> 4 « ,
Μεσσηνίους πρώτους ἐπίτηδες ὁ Δημοσθένης προύταξε
» fal ΄
καὶ προσαγορεύειν ἐκέλευε, Δωρίδα τε γχλώσσαν ἱέντας
a ul \
καὶ τοῖς προφύλαξι πίστιν παρεχομένους, ἅμα δὲ καὶ
Ἵ a » ¢ >
οὐ καθορωμένους τῇ ὄψει νυκτὸς ἔτι οὔσης. ὡς οὖν
“Ὁ > a \
ἐπέπεσε τῷ στρατεύματι αὐτῶν, τρέπουσι, καὶ TOUS μὲν
CXII. §1. ἡ ᾿Ιδομένη del. Her.

λαθόντες ἔφθασαν προκαταλαβόντες Cob.
ἐς τὸν δ᾽ ἐλάσσω Popp.

ETITPAPH> YL. 95

τ r \ , ,
πολλοὺς αὐτοῦ διέφθειραν, οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ κατὰ τὰ ὄρη ἐς
¢ A “Ὁ € Lal \
φυγὴν ὥρμησαν. προκατειλημμένων δὲ τῶν ὁδῶν, καὶ 6
ἅμα τῶν μὲν ᾿Αμφιλόχων ἐμπείρων ὄντων τῆς ἑαυτῶν
Ὁ \ nr \ is 7 - \ ’ / \
γῆς Kal ψιλῶν πρὸς ὁπλίτας, τῶν δὲ ἀπείρων καὶ
᾽ ’ , ”
ἀνεπιστημόνων ὅπῃ τράπωνται, ἐσπίπτοντες ES TE
, Sins VA
χαράδρας καὶ τὰς προλελοχισμένας ἐνέδρας διεφθεί-
> ban lal lal
povTo. καὶ ἐς πᾶσαν ἰδέαν χωρήσαντες τῆς φυγῆς 7
3 \
ἐτράποντό τινες καὶ és τὴν θάλασσαν οὐ πολὺ ἀπέχου-
« 2 rn
σαν, καὶ ws εἶδον τὰς ᾿Αττικὰς ναῦς παραπλεούσας
ἅμα τοῦ ἔργου τῇ ξυντυχίᾳ, προσένευσαν, ἡγησάμενοι
A lal / an
ἐν τῷ αὐτίκα φόβῳ κρεῖσσον εἶναι σφίσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν
nr / > a a x e \ Lal /
ταῖς ναυσίν, εἰ δεῖ, διαφθαρῆναι ἢ ὑπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων
7 / fal
καὶ ἐχθίστων ᾿Αμφιλόχων. οἱ μὲν οὖν ᾿Αμπρακιῶται 8
΄ , , ἘΦ. aN A 3 ᾿
τοιούτῳ τρόπῳ κακωθέντες ολίγοι ἀπὸ πολλών ἐσώθη-
2 \ / ᾽ a \ 4 \
σαν ἐς τὴν πόλιν" ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες δὲ σκυλεύσαντες TOUS
\ “-“ ’ >
νεκροὺς καὶ τροπαῖα στήσαντες ἀπεχώρησαν ἐς "Apyos.
CXIII. καὶ αὐτοῖς τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ ἦλθε κῆρυξ ἀπὸ τῶν
: ; ραίᾳ ἢ ρ
> / ἢ > a_ ’
és ᾿Αγραίους καταφυγόντων ἐκ τῆς Odmrns Αμπρακιω-
τῶν ἀναίρεσιν αἰτήσων τῶν νεκρῶν οὺς ἀπέκτειναν
lal \ Ὁ 7
ὕστερον τῆς πρώτης μάχης, ὅτε μετὰ τῶν Μαντινέων
\ Lal e / a Ὑ > ὯΝ ? ι τ
καὶ τῶν ὑποσπόνδων ξυνεξῆσαν ἄσπονδοι. ἰδὼν δ᾽ ὁ 2
A es, a > \ A , > a
κῆρυξ Ta ὅπλα τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως ᾿Αμπρακιωτῶν
2 , \ lal > \ Vv \ / 3 5 y
ἐθαύμαζε τὸ πλῆθος: οὐ yap ἤδει TO πάθος, ἀλλ᾽ ὠετο
lal \ - ay / ἊΝ Y ©
TOV μετὰ σφῶν εἶναι. καί τις αὐτὸν ἤρετο 6 TL θαυ- 3
, «ς -“ Lal , Lal
μάζοι καὶ ὁπόσοι αὐτῶν τεθνᾶσιν, οἰόμενος ad ὁ ἐρωτῶν
“5 \ / > \ a oye Ὁ. 3, ΄ ς wy
εἶναι TOV κήρυκα ἀπὸ τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιδομέναις. ὁ δ᾽ ἔφη διακο-
, ἢ e \ yo of a 3 cc
σίους μάλιστα. ὑπολαβὼν δ᾽ ὁ ἐρωτῶν εἶπεν “ οὔκουν 4

ὃ 6. ὅποι vulg.

CXIII. §1. νεκρῶν Her. suspects: ‘an legendum αἰτήσων ὧν
ἀπέκτειναν 2”

8.3. θαυμάζειν

96 @OTKTAIAOT

“ τὰ ὅπλα ταυτὶ φαίνεται, ἀλλὰ πλέον ἢ χιλίων. αὖθις
“οὐκ ἄρα τῶν μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν μαχομένων
“εἴπερ γε ὑμεῖς ἐν ᾿Ιδομένῃ

{«

δὲ εἶπ εν ἐκεῖνος
“ ἐστίν." ὁ δ᾽ ἀπεκρίνατο ‘
΄, > > € lal
“ χθὲς euayerbe.” “adr ἡμεῖς ye οὐδενὶ ἐμαχόμεθα
Uy “- ? ,
“χθές, ἀλλὰ πρῴην ἐν TH ἀποχωρήσει." “Kal μὲν δὴ
, x lal \ > \ a f / »“Ἥ
“πούτοις γε ἡμεῖς χθὲς ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως βοηθήσασι τῆς
“? a > / θ 3) ε δὲ “ ec v
Αμπρακιωτῶν ἐμαχόμεθα.᾽ ὁ δὲ κῆρυξ ws ἤκουσε
ti ¢ > fal / , /
καὶ ἔγνω ὅτι ἡ ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως βοήθεια διέφθαρται,
/ \ Ld / a
ἀνοιμώξας καὶ ἐκπλαγεὶς τῷ μεγέθει TOV παρόντων
κακῶν ἀπῆλθεν εὐθὺς ἄπρακτος καὶ οὐκέτι ἀπήτει τοὺς
͵7 ῃ \ rn a , c / >
νεκρούς. πάθος yap τοῦτο μιᾷ πόλει ᾿λληνίδι ἐν
LL \ n \ \ /
ἴσαις ἡμέραις μέγιστον δὴ τῶν κατὰ TOV πόλεμον τόνδε
> \ > lal 5»
ἐγένετο. καὶ ἀριθμὸν οὐκ ἔγραψα τῶν ἀποθανόντων,
, ” \ Aa / >’ / « \ \
διότι ἄπιστον TO πλῆθος λέγεται ἀπολέσθαι ὡς πρὸς TO
/ lal 4 3 / / “ iA >
μέγεθος τῆς πόλεως. ᾿Αμπρακίαν μέντοι οἶδα ὅτι εἰ
, >’ “ Ἂς τὰ le ᾽
ἐβουλήθησαν ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες καὶ ᾿Αμφίλοχοι ᾿Αθηναίοις
iz, na
καὶ Δημοσθένει πειθόμενοι ἐξελεῖν, αὐτοβοεὶ ἂν εἷλον"
nr 3 \ CHE “ ” , \ Ἵ
νῦν δ᾽ ἔδεισαν μὴ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ἔχοντες αὐτὴν χαλεπώ-
τεροι σφίσι πάροικοι ὦσι. CXIV. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα τρίτον
» ν a , lal > / Ἁ ΜΝ
μέρος νείμαντες τῶν σκύλων τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις τὰ ἄλλα
\ \ / h \ \ \ lal > ‘
κατὰ τὰς πόλεις διείλοντο. καὶ Ta μὲν TOV ᾿Αθηναίων
/ (bets \ \ fal > / > r > rn
πλέοντα ἑάλω, τὰ δὲ νῦν ἀνακείμενα ἐν τοῖς ᾿Αττικοῖς
ἱεροῖς Δημοσθένει ἐξῃρέθησαν τριακόσιαι πανοπλίαι,
καὶ ἄγων αὐτὰς κατέπλευσε: καὶ ἐγένετο ἅμα αὐτῷ
\ \ 5 lal > / \ ᾽ Ν / -“
μετὰ τὴν <é€x> τῆς Αἰτωλίας ξυμφορὰν ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς
, 5 / « U > a \ \ c >
πράξεως ἀδεεστέρα ἡ κάθοδος. ἀπῆλθον δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐν
ta) ” \ > -" > / >
ταῖς εἴκοσι vavow ᾿Αθηναῖοι és Ναύπακτον. ᾿Ακαρ-

8 6. πιθόμενοι Cob. maporxwor?

CXIV. §1. τἄλλα Her.—ras before πόλεις del. Cob,
τὴν ἐκ THs Alr. Her.

§ 2. οἵπερ MSS. corr. Hermann,

EYTITPA®H: TP, 97

’ / >
vaves δὲ καὶ ᾿Αμφίλοχοι ἀπελθόντων ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ
Δημοσθένους τοῖς ὡς Σαλύνθιον καὶ ᾿Αγραίους κατα-
“ /
φυγοῦσιν ᾿Αμπρακιώταις καὶ Πελοποννησίοις ἀναχώ-
ρήσιν ἐσπείσαντο ἐξ Οἰνιαδῶν, οἵπερ καὶ μετανέστησαν

\ / \ > \ Μ , \

παρὰ Σαλυνθίου. καὶ és τὸν ἔπειτα χρόνον σπονδὰς 3
, Μ lal
καὶ ξυμμαχίαν ἐποιήσαντο ἑκατὸν ἔτη ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες καὶ
> , \ ’ , > Ν lal “ ΄
Αμφίλοχοι πρὸς ᾿Αμπρακιώτας ἐπὶ τοῖσδε, ὥστε μήτε
> / Nets / / > \
Αμπρακιώτας μετὰ ᾿Ακαρνάνων στρατεύειν ἐπὶ ΠΠελο-
μ
nr 5 A
ποννησίους μήτε ᾿Ακαρνᾶνας μετὰ ᾿Αμπρακιωτῶν ἐπ᾽
᾿Αθηναίους, βοηθεῖν δὲ τῇ ἀλλήλων, καὶ ἀποδοῦναι
eA , ς ‘ a / * ε / At DV, /
μπρακιώτας ὁπόσα ἢ χωρία ἢ ὁμήρους ᾿Αμφιλόχων
» ΝΎ ICY ͵ \ n , a
ἔχουσι, καὶ ἐπὶ ᾿Ανακτόριον μὴ βοηθεῖν πολέμιον ὃν
, a fal / f x /
Axapvaow, ταῦτα ξυνθέμενοι διέλυσαν τὸν πόλεμον. 4
\ \ a , \ e A BJ \
μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα Κορίνθιος. φυλακὴν ἑαυτῶν ἐς τὴν
/ /
᾿Αμπρακίαν ἀπέστειλαν, és τριακοσίους ὁπλίτας, Kal
Ξενοκλείδαν τὸν Εὐθυκλέους ἄρχοντα" οἱ κομιζόμενοι
A \ Aa > / 3 My \ \ x)
χαλεπῶς διὰ τῆς ἠπείρου ἀφίκοντο. Ta μὲν κατ᾽ ᾿Αμ-
πρακίαν οὕτως ἐγένετο.

CXV. Of δ᾽ ἐν τῇ Σικελίᾳ ᾿Αθηναῖοι τοῦ αὐτοῦ
χειμῶνος ἔς τε τὴν ‘Ipepaiav ἀπόβασιν ἐποιήσαντο ἐκ
τῶν νεῶν μετὰ τῶν Σικελῶν ἄνωθεν ἐσβεβληκότων ἐς

OW. a ς / ΝΟ SE SN \ >/ ,
Ta ἔσχατα τῆς Ipepaias, καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς Αἰόλου νήσους
, ,
ἔπλευσαν. ἀναχωρήσαντες δὲ ἐς Ῥήγιον Πυθόδωρον 2
\ ’ / >’ / \ /
tov ᾿ΙΙσολόχου ᾿Αθηναίων στρατηγὸν καταλαμβάνουσιν
3 \ \ lal {4 a ¢ / > e \ >
ἐπὶ τὰς ναῦς διάδοχον ὧν ὁ Λάχης ἦρχεν. οἱ yap ἐν 3
/ re 4 54 \ ? ,ὕ
Σικελίᾳ ξύμμαχοι πλεύσαντες ἔπεισων τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους
βοηθεῖν σφίσι πλείοσι ναυσί. τῆς μὲν γὰρ γῆς αὐτῶν
e SS / > U lal δὲ θ / Wi
οἱ Συρακόσιοι ἐκράτουν, τῆς δὲ θαλάσσης ὀλίγαις
Ν
ναυσὶν εἰργόμενοι παρεσκευάζοντο ναυτικὸν ξυναγεί-

CXV. §2. στρατηγὸν ἥκοντα Her.
§ 3. πέμψαντες Hud.; cf. vi. 62 ὃ 5.

98 @®OTKTAIAOT ΞΎΓΓΡΑΦΗΣ I.

/ fal
4 ροντες WS οὐ περιοψόμενοι. καὶ ἐπλήρουν ναῦς τεσσα-
nr « “ a
paxovta οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι ὡς ἀποστελοῦντες αὐτοῖς, ἅμα
\ ς / lal Ν > a / f
μὲν ἡγούμενοι θᾶσσον τὸν ἐκεῖ πόλεμον καταλυθήσεσθαι,
“ \ / / a n an
ἅμα δὲ βουλόμενοι μελέτην τοῦ ναυτικοῦ ποιεῖσθαι.
\ \ :- “ “Ὁ n , / ,
5 τὸν μὲν οὖν ἕνα τῶν στρατηγῶν ἀπέστειλαν [{υθόδωρον
/
ὀλίγαις ναυσί: Σοφοκλέα δὲ τὸν Σωστρατίδου καὶ Kipv-
/ Ἅ @ / > \ a , ead 5 ‘
μέδοντα Tov Θουκλέους ἐπὶ τῶν TAELOVOY VEWY ἀποπεμ-
id / Yj -“
6 ψειν ἔμελλον. ὁ δὲ Πυθόδωρος ἤδη ἔχων τὴν τοῦ
“ a 3, lal “
Λάχητος τῶν νεῶν ἀρχὴν ἔπλευσε τελευτῶντος τοῦ
a \ a 4 «“ὉΝ ,
χειμῶνος ἐπὶ τὸ Λοκρῶν φρούριον, ὃ πρότερον Λάχης
- \ \ / e \ “ lal ,’ ,
εἷλε: καὶ νικηθεὶς μάχη ὑπὸ τῶν Λοκρῶν ἀνεχώρησεν.
if nr
CXVI. ᾿᾽ἘἘρρύη δὲ περὶ αὐτὸ τὸ ἔαρ τοῦτο ὁ ῥύαξ
ἴον a \ a
τοῦ πυρὸς ἐκ τῆς Αἴτνης, ὥσπερ Kal TO πρότερον, καὶ γῆν
\ BA A / “ὉὋ 3 \ “ ” a
τινὰ ἔφθειρε τῶν Καταναίων, ot ἐπὶ τῇ Αἴτνῃ τῷ ὄρει
ἴω / nr
οἰκοῦσιν, ὅπερ μέγιστόν ἐστιν ὄρος ἐν τῇ Σικελίᾳ.
if \ a” ε a la) \ > /
2 λέγεται δὲ πεντηκοστῷ ἔτει ῥυῆναι τοῦτο μετὰ TO πρό-
an \ , Ν Ὁ ΄ a
τερον ῥεῦμα, τὸ δὲ ξύμπαν τρὶς γεγενῆσθαι τὸ ῥεῦμα
id , “ a
3 af οὗ Σικελία ὑπὸ ᾿ὔλλήνων οἰκεῖται. ταῦτα μὲν
κατὰ τὸν χειμῶνα τοῦτον ἐγένετο, καὶ ἕκτον ἔτος τῷ
n A /
πολέμῳ ἐτελεύτα τῷδε ὃν Θουκυδίδης ξυνέγραψεν.

§ 5. νεών del. Her.

8 6. τών νεών del. Her.

CXVI. §1. ὑπὸ (for ἐπὶ) Mein. from CG; cf. Iv. 78 8 6.
τῷ ὄρει del. Her.

§ 2. πεντηκοστῷ πεμπτῷ Kr,

NiO a ES:

CHAPTER I.

§1. The invasion of Attica here recorded took place in the month
of May 428 B.c., the fourth year of the Peloponnesian war. It was
the third invasion, as in the preceding year 429 B.C. none took place ;
Ch) Lie yi.

θέρους, genitive of ‘time within which,’ from which is developed the
genitive absolute ; cf. Monro, Homeric Gr. § 246.

Πελοποννήσιοι Kal οἱ ξύμμαχοι, the regular phrase used by Thuc.
in describing the combined confederate forces: cf. 11. 47 § 4. Herbst
desires of Πελοποννήσιοι: but the expression is found both with and
without the article.

dpa τῷ σίτῳ ἀκμάζοντι, ‘just as the corn was beginning to ripen,’
cf, Diod. Sic. X11. 52 τὸν σῖτον ἐν τῇ χλόῃ διέφθειραν, Thue. 11. 19 § τ:
in Attica from the middle of May to middle of June, though placed by
Mommsen somewhat earlier.

The participle is temporal (Goodwin, Gk. Syntax, § 858), Kriiger,
G. G. 50, 11 8 3. Avoid the ‘perilous equation’ that ‘ participle=
infinitive’: i.e. that the verbalised form of substantive (infinitive) may
be replaced at will by the verbalised form of adjective. In the present
passage the substantival expression ἅμα τῇ τοῦ σίτου ἀκμῇ was possible,
but would suggest no notion of tense: indeed the ἅμα clause is a simple
variant on an ordinary genitive sequence, kal ἀκμάζοντος τοῦ σίτου.
On the use of the participle as expressing the verb in adjectival relations
see an interesting article in Am. Journal of Phil, Iv, 292.

[<4

100 THUCYDIDES Fiz; [1. § 1—

ἐστράτευσαν és, a pregnant construction: cf. μέχρι, 1. 70 ὃ 5. For
a strong instance cf. Hes. Op. 611.

ἡγεῖτο δὲ αὐτῶν, in accordance with the usual Spartan custom that
one of the kings should hold chief command.

Archidamus, both ξυνετὸς καὶ σώφρων (cf. I. 79) and adverse to war
(1. 80—85). He headed each of the first three expeditions against
Attica, and in 429 led a force against Plataea (11. 71). In 89 we find
him succeeded by his son Agis.

ἐγκαθεζόμενοι, sc. ‘castris stativis positis’ (Popp.); the participle
replaces an imperfect. ἐδήουν, Diod. Sic. XII. 52.

εἰώθεσαν (sc. γίγνεσθαι), cf. 1. 132 § 4. A pluperfect in form only ;
cf. the use of ἤδῃ, ὀπώπειν, and even ἐπέπαυντο, ἐλέλυντο.

ὅπῃ παρείκοι, ‘as occasion offered,’ optat. of indefinite frequency.
Goodwin, G. Gr. § 225 (cf. κατὰ τὸ παρεῖκον, Th. Iv. 36 § 2). On these
impersonal uses see Shill. on Thuc. I. 51 § 2: and cf. Theaetetus 150 D
(Kriig. ).

τὸν πλεῖστον ὅμιλον, ‘the main body’: cf. Hdt. 1. 88.

εἶργον τὸ μή, a loose use of the articular infinitive, especially
when contrasted with 6 ὃ 2. In vil. 33 § 3 the reading is doubtful, in
VII. 53 ὃ 4 τὸ μὴ προσελθεῖν is accus. of direct object.

The use of edpyew would suggest the genitive εἶργον rod μή (cf.
analogy of εἴργεσθαι θαλάσσης). The use of the accus. of the article
would, as Kriiger suggests, point to some limitation (εἔργειν τινά τι), or
result may be regarded rather than purpose, hence τό for τοῦ.

In Thuc. there is an occasional tendency to use the articular in-
finitive with verbs of a certain class, e.g. προθυμοῦμαι, but the use is
capricious. See Behrendt’s monograph, Berlin, 1866.

In Sophocles the article appears added for rhetorical effect, e.g. τὸ
δρᾶν οὐκ ἠθέλησαν, with which compare the common use of the article
in emphasising a word or expression. For purposes of the present
passage it will suffice to notice the distinction of ὥστε (eventuality) from
τοῦ (purpose). See Goodwin, M. T. 811.

τῶν ὅπλων, sc. ‘the stands of arms,’ here=‘castra’; cf. 1. 111 § 1.

τὰ ἐγγύς, accus. of direct object; cf. 11. 32 κακουργεῖν τὴν
Εὔβοιαν.

§ 2. οὗ, no need for Kriiger’s ὅτου, or Naber’s ὅσου : the genitive
is possessive, as in σιτία τριῶν ἡμερῶν (GOIl.); cf. 1. 48 $1.

i. ὃ 2] NOTES. rol

CHAPTER: ΤΕ

Revolt of Mytilene (cf. Diod. Sic. x11. 55). The complaint of the
Mytilenaeans was founded on the Athenian attempt to prevent their
centralisation (ξυνοίκισις), the very change effected by Theseus for Athens,
and forced upon the Plataeans by Thebans (cf. 11. 15 ὃ 2, ΠΙ. 61, 65).
Aristotle, Politics v. 4 § 6, says that the war was brought about by an
appeal to Athens from an Athenian πρόξενος to obtain in marriage for
his sons the two daughters of a wealthy man. See Grote VI. 299, who
refuses to admit the incident as sufficient cause for the revolt ; cf. Thirl-
wall, Hist. Gr. c. xx1. The δυνατοί were probably responsible; cf. 47
ὃ 3, 39 § 6.

Mytilene was an oligarchic state, with dependent towns, Antissa,
Pyrrha, Eresus. She had at an early period made herself mistress of
the Troad (Strabo, p. 869). In 620 B.c. Athens sent out colonists
under Phrynon to occupy Sigeum, a fort built by Mytilene. A war
of several years ensued, in which the tradition is that Pittacus overcame
Phrynon in single combat, by anticipating the art of the ‘retiarius’
(B.c. 606); cf. Rawl. Hdt. m1. 247. It is one of the few cities of the
£gean whose prosperity has continued to the present day.

8 1. βουληθέντες, sc. of Λέσβιοι (implied in Λέσβος), cf. infra
ξυνοικίζουσι τὴν Λέσβον.

καί, intensive, as in καὶ πάλαι, καὶ πάνυ.

ἀλλὰ οἱ A., note the parenthetical ἀλλά clause, a favourite Thucyd.
use ; here employed to save confusion by a double δέ clause.

προσεδέξαντο, without object, cf. τι. 70 § 2.

καὶ ταὐτην-Ξκαὶ τὴν viv. No reference to any former revolt, but
to the revolutionary intention. ταύτην is naturally thrown into agree-
ment—‘finding themselves compelled even in this instance (καὶ ταῦτα),
i.e. even when the revolt was made.’ Hude awkwardly connects with
πρότερον. (Comm. Crit. p. go.)

The Lacedaemonian refusal to accept their overtures was out of
respect for the 30 years’ treaty; cf. 1. 115 (schol.).

ὃ 2. τῶν τε γὰρ λιμένων, γάρ with reference to πρότερον ἢ διε-
νοοῦντο. ‘This sentence (as Géller remarks) explains the reason for the
long delay in revolting, the next sentence (Tevédioc γὰρ) why they
were compelled at last to precipitate matters (cf. 1. 40 88 4, 5).

χῶσιν, ‘blocking,’ by ‘moles’ (χηλαί) or ‘booms’: a device not
unknown in modern times. The article covers all three accusatives.

102 THUCYDIDES T/T. [1|. § 2—

τὴν χῶσιν τελεσθῆναι, the accus. is the subject of the epexegetic
infin., not direct object of ἐπέμενον, which in Thuc. is intransitive; cf.
infra 26 § 3, Soph. Trach. 1176. The passage is a useful instance of
the survival of the dative of purpose (Gk. infin.) even with subject in
accusative (cf. Monro H. G. § 234, § 242).

ἀφικέσθαι is parallel in structure with τελεσθῆναι Ξε καὶ ἐπέμενον ἐκεῖνα
ἀφικέσθαι ἃ ἔδει ἀφικέσθαι. In such constructions the infinitive is in
sense the verb of a dependent clause, with its subject in the accusa-
tive: indeed the accus. has no construction except as the subject of the
infinitive. The old Lat. version has rightly rendered ‘exspectabant donec
obstructi essent portus.” See Monro, Hom. Gr. ὃ 237.

τοξότας τε καὶ σῖτον kal a, appositional to ἔδει clause, ‘et, et...
praeterquam.’

μεταπεμπόμενοι ἧσαν, not a participial periphrasis for μετεπέμποντο,
a use which in Thuc. is restricted to participles used as adjectives (cf.
I. 38 ὃ 4). 1.1 is not a case in point, on account of var. lect. In
11. 67 § 1, οὗ ἣν στράτευμα πολιορκοῦν, both verb and participle retain
their own force ; cf. εἶναι περί, εἶναι ἐν θαλάσσῃ.

Translate ‘were occupied in sending for’: there is no need of emen-
dation. For the periphrasis see A. J. P. Iv. 297.

§3. Tevédior, allies of Athens. Μηθυμναῖοι, possibly as commercial
rivals: their territories adjoined.

κατὰ στάσιν, κατά and διά with accusative are at times hardly dis-
tinguishable, in Thue. at least.

μηνυταὶ γίγνονται, periphrastic for simple μηνύουσι.

ξυνοικίζουσι, the Athenian resentment was based on the fear of a
naval combination hostile to Athens. The concentration was probably
a political, not a local one.

ξυγγενῶν, with reference to Boeotians only, who claimed descent
from Aeolus, the eldest son of Hellen (cf. Arnold’s note); cf. vir. roo.

ἐπί, of purpose, or end in view.

εἰ μή τις, with indic. future, suggestive of warning (Class.), more
correctly, marking the urgency for prompt action. Once only, ἢν μή τις
vil. 11 § 3. Haase, Luc. p. 2. See A. J. P. 1X. 491, XIII. 123.

ἤδη -- ἐν τάχει, ‘forthwith.’ Cf. vill. 91 § 2.

CHAPTER 11]:

81. ἤσαν γάρ, on the construction of the γάρ sentence see Shill.
on Thue. I. 25: here treat as parenthetical.
τεταλαιπωρημένοι, middle. Thuc. uses the active form also,

i. § 3] NOTES. 103

ἄρτι καθισταμένου, cf. 68 § 3. The war was still ‘in its infancy’ as
contrasted with its 27 years’ duration. See Appendix.

μέγα μὲν ἡγοῦντο, this μέν clause is answered by μέντοι infra.

προσπολεμώσασθαι, sc. πρὸς τοῖς ὑπάρχουσι πολεμίοις, ‘insuper.’

ἀκέραιον, i.e. ‘incaedua’; cf. κεραίξω, κείρω (root ‘ker’).

οὐκ ἀπεδέχοντο, ‘refused to entertain.’ ἀποδέχεσθαι very frequently
used in sense of ‘accepting without demur,’ ‘countenancing’; cf. 57 § I.
Note the force of ἀπό in the compound.

τῷ μὴ βούλεσθαι, cf. Iv. 108. The αὐτοκράτωρ λογισμός of the
Athenian demos refused to accept the stubborn evidence of facts, ‘they
would not have it true.’ Cf. Caesar, B. G. II. 18.

ἀληθῆ, an implied agreement only; cf. 1. 7 § 1 πλωιμωτέρων ὄντων,
Iv. 20 ὃ 2 ἀκρίτων ὄντων. On the plural use, see Shill. on 1. 7 § 1.

kal πέμψαντες, ic. in spite of their going to the length of even
sending an embassy. The rule of Athens over her ξύμμαχοι was that of
the strong hand.

ἔπειθον, imperfect of unsuccessful attempt, ‘made no impression.’
Char § x

τήν τε ξυνοίκισιν Kal παρασκευήν, τε---καί ‘iuxta...ac.’ Bothe ex-
plains as ἕν διὰ δυοῖν.

δείσαντες, ‘taking alarm.’ δέος, not ‘fear’ but ‘apprehension.’ See
Shill. on Thue. 1. 36.

προκαταλαβεῖν, cf. 1. 57 § 4 προκαταλαμβάνειν τὰς ἀποστάσεις --
‘ forestall,’ ‘ prevent,’ (‘occupare’).

§ 2. al ἔτυχον παρεσκευασμέναι, ‘which had just been equipped.’
See note on 111 § 2.

§ 3. ἐσηγγέλθη γάρ, γάρ refers to ἐξαπιναίως of previous sentence.

ὡς εἴη ἑορτή...καὶ ἐλπίδα εἶναι, mark change of structure from
optative to infinitive; cf. 11. 80 ὃ τ λέγοντες ὅτι κρατήσουσι Kal ὁ περί-
πλους οὐκέτι ἔσοιτο...ἐλπίδα δ᾽ εἶναι καὶ Ναύπακτον καταλαβεῖν. Whether
such change of mood is due to looseness of co-ordination, variety of
expression, or unconsciousness, is an open question, Comparison of
parallel passages affords no clue: sometimes the optat. precedes, some-
times the infin.: but the tendency appears to be to lapse into the more
simple and natural structure of accus. with infin. The ὡς or ὅτι clause
may perhaps contain a more specific statement of the fact than the
infinitive: on this assumption, the definite statement of the ὡς or ὅτι
clause will stand in contrast to the mere suggestion of the infinitive.
See however Goodwin, Syntax § 670; Thompson, Syntax § 320. Late
Latin affords a parallel in constructions of ‘quod’; cf. Madvig, Opusc.

104 THOUCYDIBDES: JIT. [π|. § 3—

11. 235, Sat nemo refert quod Italia externis opibus indiget’ (Tac. A.
111. 54).

ΜΜαλόεντος (Steph. Byz. Μαλλόει5), a name of Apollo as ‘the
shepherd god’ Νόμιος (cf. Pind. Pyth. 1x. 66), the Doric Aristaeus.
The local reference is not to Cape Malea, which is 7o stades from
Mytilene, but to a τέμενος just to the north of the city.

ἑορτάζουσι, indicative as marking constant practice, or a comment
of the writer’s own insertion.

ἐπειχθέντας, = εἰ ἐπειχθεῖεν : the participle agrees with the assumed
subject of infinitive; hence the accusative. The suggestion is that
they would find them drunk. There was much good wine in Myti-
lene and Methymna, and special penalties were imposed in cases of
drunkenness.

ἐπιπεσεῖν ἄφνω, the emphasis is on ἄφνω, ‘there was a prospect
of taking them by surprise.’ Mark the realistic aorist without dv, in
lieu of future ; cf. 32 ὃ 3 and Thuc. construction with εἰκός ; cf. Lat.
construction of ‘spes est’ with perfect infin.

ξυμβῇ (Schol. κατορθωθῇ), ‘succeed’; cf. ἐγένετο, V. 55 § 3.

ἣν μὲν ξυμβῇ...εἰ δὲ μή, in such sentences of alternative the custom
of the Greeks is to suppress the apodosis of the μέν clause. Yet in I. 82
§ 2 the structure is complete. Iv. 13 § 3 is not a case in point, except
so far as ἢν μέν finds an irregular answer in εἰ δὲ μή. The ellipse sug-
gested in the μέν clause is sometimes ταῦτα ἄριστα (cf. 1. 82 ὃ 2) or
καλῶς ἕξει. See Shill. on 1. 82; Goodw. M. T. § 99.

εἰπεῖν finds its constrn. from an implied κελεύουσι in πέμπουσι
(Poppo) or from some verb of kindred meaning in ἐσηγγέλθη (cf. Kriig.).
The infin. is probably independent (cf. Iv. 50 ὃ 2, 11. 13 § 1, fin.) as
reflecting imperative of oratio recta, ἢν μὲν ξυμβῇ ἡ πεῖρα, καλῶς ἕξει,
εἰ δὲ μή, εἴπωμεν, κιτ.λ. But the proposal to the assembly becomes
a commission to the commander of the expedition: ‘let them (the
Athenians as represented by Cleippides) order the Mytilenaeans.’ For
εἰπεῖν (ΞΞ κελεύειν) cf. εἰπεῖν ἐκέλευον V. 46 ὃ 3, I. 78 § 4 λέγομεν.

With τείχη and vats note absence of article (as familiar objects) ;
cf. VIII. gt ὃ 3 ἄνευ τειχῶν καὶ νεῶν ξυμβῆναι.

μὴ πειθομένων, genitive absolute without definite subject, ‘in case of
their refusing to comply.’ μή hypothetical, =‘ nisi.’

καί, continuative.

§ 4. τὰς δέκα τριήρεις, the article anticipates further specification in
relative clause; cf. 22 § 5.

κατὰ τὸ ξυμμαχικόν, cf. 1. τοῦ § 4.

ul. § 6] NOTES. τοῦς

παρὰ σφᾶς παροῦσαι, Il. 34 ὃ 2 πάρεισιν ἐπὶ τὸν τάφον, on analogy
of παραγενόμεναι. For the reflexive pronoun see Goodw. ὃ 987.

ἐς φυλακὴν ἐποιήσαντο, cf. VII. 1 ὃ 4 ἐς ἀσφάλειαν ποιεῖσθαι,
pregnant construction. Cf. 1. § 1.

$5. Γεραιστόν, a promontory and harbour of Euboea to the south-
west (Mandili).

διαβάς... Ody... ἐπιτυχών ... χρησάμενος ... ἀφικόμενος, notice the
accumulation of participles. ἐπιτυχών is not connected with xp7-
σάμενος by any copula, neither of the two expressing temporal mean-
ing, but the one serving to explain the cause, the other the means.
(Poppo.)

We are asked to divide this group of five participles into two pairs,
διαβὰς καὶ ἐλθών---πλῷ χρησάμενος Kal τριταῖος ἀφικόμενος, leaving the
intermediate ἐπιτυχών without connexion, apparently that the editors
may impress on us the fact that πλῷ-- εὐπλοίᾳ. Herwerden for suggest-
ing πλῷ εὔπλῳ χρησάμενος is gently reproved by Cobet, who takes the
opportunity of contrasting πλοῦς, ἄπλοια, χειμών. In the parallel
passage, I. 137 ὃ 3, there is no proof whatever; indeed μέχρι πλοῦς
γένηται may just as well mean ‘until he set sail’ as ‘ until fair weather
came,’ secondly, the construction is plain enough ; but here Thuc. gives
us ἃ λέξις εἰρομένη with a vengeance ;—ol πόρρω διθυράμβων, so far
as regards the participial accumulation.

διαβὰς καὶ ἐλθών are temporal: of the two participles now held in
suspense, ἐπιτυχών and χρησάμενος, the one explains the other, ‘ by
falling in with a ship, so finding a passage’: καί then connects τριταῖος
ἀφικόμενος with χρησάμενος, thus explaining the means by which the news
reached Mytilene with such speed. Lit. ‘after first crossing to Euboea
and making his way by land to Geraestus, by falling in with a ship on
the point of sailing (thus) finding a passage, and so arriving at Mytilene
within three days.’ Strictly speaking, there are three participial clauses
only; the first and third compound clauses with καί, the second a clause
compounded of two participles mutually interdependent (ἐπιτυχών---χρη-
odevos) ; the first clause temporal only, the second circumstantial (Goodw.
Gk, Synt., §§ 832 sqq.). For distance see Appendix.

8.6. ovre—re, cf. Lat. ‘neque—que,’ the negative affecting the first
clause only.

τὸν Madéevra, Classen compares τὸν ᾿Ενυάλιον (IV. 67 ὃ 2), a doubt-
ful reading.

τά τε ἄλλα τῶν τειχῶν καὶ λιμένων πέρι, τὰ ἄλλα, accus. in apposi-
tion to sentence (cf. Iv. 55 § 1) =‘ praeterea,’ ‘quod ad cetera (attinebat).’

106 LHUCVDIDES 7177: [π|. 8 6—

τῶν τειχῶν καὶ λιμένων Come under a common ‘vinculum,’ hence we find
one article only : πέρι follows its case, by ‘anastrophe’ (cf. 1. 23 § 3), with
explanatory or illustrative meaning, ‘exempli gratia.’

ἐφύλασσον, intransitive =‘ custodias agebant.’

Meineke suggests περίξ on the ground that this anastrophic use of
περί is only found where the preposition stands between two genitives;
an objection which Stahl easily refutes. The φράγμα may perhaps have
been a σταύρωμα (cf. 11. 75 περιεσταύρωσε). A ‘tmesis’ of περί from
φραξάμενοι cannot be entertained. The works we know from 2 ὃ 2
were left unfinished ; hence the Mytilenaeans took measures for securing
or strengthening the weak places in their line of defence. φραξάμενοι.
Cf. vitl. 35 § 4 ὑπὸ νύκτα φραξαμένων. If περί governs the accusative
τὰ ἡμιτέλεστα, then τῶν τειχῶν will be a simple partitive genitive. Hude,
keeping the vulgate περί, translates ‘et praeterea in murorum portuum-
que operibus semiperfectis custodias agebant’ (i.e. ἐφύλασσον περὶ τὰ
ἡμιτέλ.).

CHAPTER αν

§ 1. καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι.. καταπλεύσαντες ὡς ἑώρων, the constrn. is
neither a nominative absolute ᾿Αθηναῖοι καταπλεύσαντες (5 Schol. suggests),
nor σχῆμα καθ᾽ ὅλον καὶ μέρος, i.e. apposition, replacing dependent
construction (the first subject ’A θηναῖοι resumed innew form by στρατηγοί,
in lieu of dependent genitive τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων of στρατηγοί). The ὡς is
misplaced (‘ postpositum’); cf. Iv. 78 § 1.

ὡς ἑώρων, without object; cf. ἰδόντες IV. 25 ὃ ο (Cl.). In 81 ὃ 5 τὰ
γιγνόμενα is probably an adscript.

ἐσακουόντων, note the és of compound, not ἐπί (see Shill. 1. 82 § 2).
Note also the aorists καταπλεύσαντες, ἀπήγγειλαν (result attained) as
contrasted with imperfects ἐσακουόντων (continued defiance), καθίσταντο
(commenced action).

§ 2. ἀπαράσκευοι καὶ ἐξαίφνης, for coordination of adverb with
adjective compare 13 ὃ 2. Both are predicative in construction with
ἀναγκασθέντες πολεμεῖν.

ἔκπλουν τινα, τινα qualifies and depreciates, but does not strictly
ΞΞ εἷς τις, ‘they made some sort of sally,’ ‘ made shift.’

ὡς, limiting, ‘with the intention of giving battle.’

ἐπί, of purpose (cf. 1. 48 § τ ὡς ἐπὶ ναυμαχίαν), See Herbst, Philol.
XIII. 675.

Iv. ὃ 4] NOTES. 107

πρὸ τοῦ λιμένος. There were two, the southern harbour capable of
holding 50 ships of war (Strabo).

ἔπειτα without δέ, a frequent Thuc. use, though not invariable (cf.
1. 18 § 6); here=6é in answer to μέν : cf. Tragic use of εἶτα in contrast.

καταδιωχθέντες, ‘chased into harbour’ (cf. καταπλεύσαντες sup.).

ἤδη, ‘thereupon.’

προσφέρει λόγους, ‘made overtures.’ Cf. 109 § 1.

τὸ mwapavtixa, schol. πρὸς τὸ παρόν, an accusative of limitation,
adapted for use as temporal adverb; cf. I. 27 § 1.

ἀποπέμψασθαι, ‘get rid of,’ ‘get them sent away.’

ὁμολογίᾳ ἐπιεικεῖ, instrumental dative; equivalent here to a parti
ciple ὁμολογησάμενοι, or to Latin gerund ‘paciscendo.’

ἐπιεικεῖ, strictly, ‘equitable’: equity being regarded by Aristotle as
the supplement of the law (τὸ παρὰ τὸν γεγραμμένον νόμον δίκαιον), * by
any reasonable surrender.’

§ 3. Kal οἱ στρατηγοί, καί marks the sequel, ‘whereupon.’

ἀπεδέξαντο, without object; cf. 2 § 1.

καὶ αὐτοί, cf. Iv. 73 § 4 λογιζόμενοι καὶ οἱ ἐκείνων στρατηγοί.
Both Athenians and Mytilenaeans had ground for apprehension, hence
‘ipsi quoque.’

μὴ οὐχ ἱκανοὶ ὦσι, the second negative οὐ is not only suggested by
a negative lurking in φοβούμενοι, but necessary to the sense as qualifying
ἱκανοί. The μή is not a mere particle of negation, but of connexion.
On the μὴ οὐ sequence see Thompson, Gr. Synt. § 300. Goodw. § 305.

πάσῃ, without article (Kr. G. ἃ. 50. 11. 9), ‘if combined.’

§ 4. ἀνοκωχήν, note the true form of this word (cf. κατοκωχή,
ἔνοχος, ἐποχή) =‘ induciae,’ ‘armistice.’

διαβαλλόντων, ‘ criminatores,’ ‘informants’ (the πρόξενοι of 2 ὃ 3);
the present participle, as shewing that they continued their διαβολή, or
that the διαβολή was not yet annulled.

εἴ πως, as in the Latin sequence ‘si qua,’ ‘si forte,’ so here we trace
a lurking sense of purpose. Is it a mere litotes for ὅπως ἡ Is it referable
to the interrogative el=‘ whether’? or is the ‘wish father to the thought’?
The question opens a wide field of speculation, not merely as to the
origin and use of εἰ, ἐπεί, but also in connexion with the relations of
dependent to independent constructions, and the ‘still standing puzzle’ of
the Greek optative.

tas vats ἀπελθεῖν, Cobet, Mnemosyne vill. 124, objects to per-
suasion being brought to bear on ships. But vil. 96 § 4 is a strong
instance. Treat τὰς ναῦς not as accusative of direct object, but as

108 THOCYDIDES AT. [1v. § 4—

subject of ἀπελθεῖν. The construction is (as Cl. suggests) on the analogy
of neuter pronouns ; cf. 59 § 2, 43 § 2 τὰ δεινότατα βουλόμενον πεῖσαι:
in fact the accus. with infin. becomes epexegetic, ‘to press for the ships
retiring,’ i.e. to press (the Athenians) to withdraw their fleet ; cf. supra 2
§ 2 ἐπέμενον τὴν χῶσιν τελεσθῆναι. ἀπελθεῖν = ἀποκομίζεσθαι in accord-
ance with Thuc. practice of substituting -intransitives for passives. Note
that πείθειν is used by Thuc. both with and without ὥστε. The insertion
of ὥστε usually marks attainment of result, though not invariably. [See
Monro, Hom. G. 8 232.]

ὡς σφῶν οὐδὲν νεωτεριούντων, genitive absolute, with notion of con-
dition marked more clearly by the limiting ws: the ws renders condition
clearer by restricting point of view: compare the logical use of ὡς, 9,
‘qua’ as excluding all other considerations. Note the οὐ of fact.

§ 5. ἐν τούτῳ, sc. during the armistice, ‘meanwhile’ (no need of
Naber’s ἐν ταὐτῷ).

ἐν τῇ Μαλέᾳ, the words are bracketed by some Edd. on the ground
that Malea was 70 stades from Mytilene (now St Maria), the southern
point of Lesbos. Stahl hesitates to change the text. The simple expe-
dient of construing πρὸς βορέαν with ἀποστέλλουσι saves the difficulty.
During the armistice the Athenian fleet probably withdrew to Malea,
i.e. to the south; the Mytilenaeans consequently shaped their course
northwards,

τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων, cf. 1. 127 § 1, ‘the result of the nego-
tiations with Athens.’ προχωρήσειν is epexegetic; ‘they felt no con-
fidence in the negotiations, that they would succeed.’ The parallel
passage, I. 127 ὃ 1, shews the antiptosis, οὐ γὰρ ἐπίστευον τὰ ἀπὸ τῶν
’"AOnv. προχωρήσειν : cf. 1. 50 πρὸς δὲ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἐτράποντο φονεύειν:
cf. also IV 92 ὃ 7.

86. τοῦ πελάγους, ‘the open sea,’ in contrast to the mere παράπλους.

αὐτοῖς, Popp. Kriig. and Stahl agree in referring to the Mitylenaeans,
as dependent on ἥξει, and as representing the ‘initial’ dative of the ὅπως
clause. Class. refers to Lacedaemonians, but does not explain in what
relation, InIv. 106 § 2, 110 § 2, the dative must be a dativus com-
modi. In vill. 5 ὃ 3 there is no proof that πράσσειν τινί represents
πράσσειν πρός Twa. See Appendix.

CHAPTER OY.

§ 1. ὡς, ‘postpositum’; cf. 4 ὃ I.
οὐδέν... πράξαντες, i.e. ἄπρακτοι, ‘unsped’ (old English). Cf. 113§5.
οὗτοι, ic. Μηθυμναῖοι : cf. sup. 2 ὃ 1.

v. § 4] NOTES. 109

Imbros and Lemnos were Athenian colonies; cf. VII. 57 8 2.

ἐβεβοηθήκεσαν, ‘come to their aid,’ they were constantly to the fore;
cf, Iv. 28 § 3, v. 8 § 2 (Cl.).

ὀλίγοι τινές, e.g. Tenedos, cf. supra 2 8 3 (Herbst).

§ 2. στρατόπεδον, (Schol.) τὸ ὁρμοῦν ἐν Μαλέᾳ.

πανδημεί, as citizen troops, not πανστρατιᾷ. Cf. gt § 4.

ἔχοντες, pres. on analogy of νικῶν : cf. Aesch. Choeph. 1o41 μὴ φοβοῦ
νικῶν πολύ : no need for Herwerden’s syovres—the result continues.

ἐπηυλίσαντο, the usual mode of enforcing a claim to a disputed
victory (cf. IV. 134).

οὔτε.. οὔτε, Poppo remarks on the grammatical coordination of
two ideas, one of which is logically subordinate to the other. Why so?
All that Thuc. says is ‘they neither bivouacked on the field nor shewed
self-confidence.’

§ 3. ἔπειτα, answering preceding μέν, but with temporal significance.

ἐκ Πελοποννήσου, Goll. Popp. St. Kriig. Class. all assume a repe-
tition of the εἰ προσγένοιτό τι clause, arranging the words thus: βου-
λόμενοι κινδυνεύειν εἰ προσγένοιτό τι ἐκ Πελοποννήσου καὶ per’ ἄλλης
παρασκευῆς, εἰ προσγένοιτό τι. There is no need of such contortion: καί
is intensive, not copulative: ἐκ ΠΠελοπον. claims this prominent position
as the leading idea of the sentence: their one hope of help was from the
Peloponnesian alliance (from Sparta as the head, from Thebes as Boeo-
tian kinsmen). The position is justified by the prepositional form of
predication replacing the adjectival (ἐκ Πελοπ. Ξε Πελοποννησίου): the
true order is βουλόμενοι κινδ. καὶ μετ᾽ ἄλλης ἐκ Πελ. παρασκευῆς, ‘ with
the further help of reinforcements from the Peloponnese.’

ἄλλη παρασκευή = μείξων mapacKery: cf. V. 7 ὃ 2.

εἰ προσγένοιτό τι, a purely supplementary clause, the ‘ideal condi-
tion’ expressing not merely eventuality, but also the hope or wish
implied in the original optative : the aorist = ‘si quid accessisset.’

§ 4. αὐτοῖς, cf. 1. 13 ὃ 3, not a dative of direction or ‘motion
towards, but ‘subjective’ with secondary notion of ‘dat. commodi.’
The arrival of Meleas and Hermaeondas was an accession of strength to
their counsels.

μετὰ τὴν μάχην, pleonastic, but not, of necessity, an ‘adscript’; cf. 1.
3 § 1 πρὸ τῶν Τρωικῶν πρότερον, V. 24 ἃ 2.

παρήνουν, ‘suadebant’ (VIII. 46 § 1).

τριήρη ἄλλην, as one had already been sent; cf. 4 ὃ 5.

καί, ‘thereupon.’ Mark the tense coordination, προαπεστάλησαν
μέν.. ὕστερον δὲ ἐσπλέουσι, καὶ παρήνουν πέμπειν, καὶ ἐκπέμπουσιν. The

110 THOCXDIDES 117. [ν. § 4—

presents are historic, ἐκπέμπ. coordinate with πέμπουσι : προαπεστάλ. a
pluperfect: παρήνουν coordinate with ἐσπλέουσι, as graphic imperfect,
shewing that the advice given was almost synchronous with the arrival
of Mel. and Hermaeondas,

CHAPTER VI.

81. οἱ δὲ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, δέ resuming from 5 § 3 ἔπειτα οἱ μὲν ἡσύχαζον:
the sentence is interrupted by a parenthesis (καὶ γὰρ αὐτοῖς... καὶ ἐκπέμ-
πουσινῚ.

ἔπιρρωσθέντες, ‘corroborati,’ ‘encouraged,’ VIII. τοῦ § 4.

ἡσυχίαν, ‘inaction.’

πολὺ θᾶσσον, ‘quam si vidissent ἰσχυρόν Tt’ (Popp.).

παρῆσαν, cf. 1. 47 ὃ 1-ε- παρεγένοντο.

περιορμισάμενοι, περί (as in περιέστη) = μετά, with subsidiary notion
of ‘enclosing.’ τὸ πρὸς νότον, accus. in apposition, ‘to the south of the
city.’ There is no contradiction of 4 § 5. The Athenians shifted their
position from Malea (where they had remained during the armis-
tice) to the southern harbour, entrenched themselves in two different
positions on each side of the town, and maintained a blockade at
either harbour (i.e. both north and south). The northern haven was
the larger and deeper.

ἐφόρμους ἐποιοῦντο, the usual periphrasis=épwpovr.

§ 2. καὶ τῆς μὲν θαλάσσης, note particularly the μέν...δέ clauses
here; the δέ clause answering the μέν is subdivided into a μέν and δέ
clause of its own, the 3rd δέ clause (ναύσταθμον δέ) being merely supple-
mentary.

εἶργον μὴ χρῆσθαι, the genitive θαλάσσης dependent on εἶργον, the
negative μή suggested by negative force of εἶργον (prohibition=non-
permission): the μὴ χρῆσθαι is epexegetic, as is clear from the simpler
construction of I. 14! ὃ 4 εἰργόμενοι θαλάσσης : note variant in con-
struction 1 § 1 sup. ‘They shut out the Mytilenaeans from the sea for the
non-using it.’ The English idiom marks the separation ‘from,’ but
fails to express the epexegesis, e.g. ‘they shut them out from the sea’ or
‘excluded them from making use of.’ But see Goodw. M. T. 8 807
546.

οἱ ἄλλοι Λέσβιοι, cf. 2 8 1, Methymna excepted.

προσβεβοηθηκότες, Hude (cf. Hdt. νΠ]. 144) reads προ., i.e. they
had anticipated the Athenian occupation.

τὸ ϑὲ περί, direct object of κατεῖχον, ‘castrorum viciniam,’

vil. § 5] NOTES. 111

ναύσταθμον, ‘station,’ ie. for the ‘naves onerariae,’ ‘the tenders.’
ἀγορᾶς, cf. v1. 40,=commeatus (L. and S.), i.e. ‘food-supply.’ (Kriig.
however reads ἀγορά Ξε ἃ market.’)

§ 2. μᾶλλον (ἢ στρατόπεδον Popp.) really = ‘by preference,’ i.e. in
spite of the distance of Malea from Mytilene they chose it in pre-
ference to any nearer spot, probably because of the land-locked gulf
there. St. points out that, the Athenian force being insufficient to
invest the town completely, a safe basis of supply became an impera-
tive necessity: cf. Lamachus’ selection of Megara as a ναύσταθμον, VI.
49 § 3-

τὰ περὶ Μυτιλήνην, subject to ἐπολεμεῖτο (Popp. and Class.), the
more simple construction, cf. lI. 68 § 3, though the accusative is
possible; cf, Iv. 108 § 1.

CHAPTER Vit.

81. καὶ és, καί, in addition to the Lesbian squadron. Herw. pro-
poses περί for és on the ground that περί was absorbed in Πελοπόννησον.
But ἀπέστειλαν περί is not a happy collocation.

Φορμίων, he must have died shortly after his return to Athens
(11. 103) or become infirm (Haack). See the record of his good
services in II. 69, 81, 102, a sufficient recommendation to these warlike
Acarnanians.

ἄρχοντα, predicative, ‘as commander,’ ‘in command.’

§ 2. παραπλέουσαι (Herw. περιπλέουσαι, needlessly), ‘as they
advanced’ (along the coast).

88. Ναύπακτον, the Athenian ναύσταθμον in Messenia, II. 69.

§4. ἀναστήσας, ‘putting into the field,’ ‘calling out.’ Cf. τι. 68. τ.

Οἰνιάδας, cf. 11. 102. The ruins of the place are still found on
the W. bank of Achelous, completely surrounded by morasses. The
son was attempting an enterprise his father had abandoned. Cp. I.
102.

κατὰ τὸν ᾿Αχελῷον, cf. Iv. 25 ὃ 8. ἀνά Cobet, but κατά is the
Thuc. use, although opposed to the use in κατ᾽ οὖρον, κατὰ ῥόον. Lit.
‘by way of the Achelous.’

8 5. προσεχώρουν.. ἀφίησιν, cf. sup. 5 § 2 fin.

αὐτὸς δὲ πλεύσας, in contrast to πεζός.

Νήρικον, according to Pliny and Strabo the ancient name of Leucas
(Hom. Od. xxiv. 376); not the same as Mount Neritus.

ἀναχωρῶν, sc. ἐν τῇ ἀναχωρήσει.

112 LTHOCYDIDES ΩΣ [ vir. § 5—

αὐτός τε Kal τῆς στρατιᾶς τι μέρος, appositional and supple-
mentary, cf. v. 21 ὃ 2 (Popp.); for position of τε cf. vil. 77 § 6.

τι μέρος, ‘bona pars.’

ὑπὸ τῶν αὐτόθεν ξυμβοηϑησάντων, a genitive absolute would have
expressed Thuc.’s meaning equally well, but ὑπό brings the construction
into closer connexion with the verb.

Kal φρουρῶν τινῶν ὀλίγων, ‘a handful of regulars’ (milites praesi-
diarii).

§ 6. ἀποπλεύσαντες, ‘cum paullum recessissent’ (Gdll.), ‘after
retiring,’ perhaps pointing to the terms of the σπονδαί. Cf. παραδόντες
τὰ ὅπλα ξυγχωρεῖν. ὑποσπόνδους, cf. IV. 44 ὃ 4.

CHAPTER VIL

81. τῆς πρώτης νεώς, cf. sup. 4 ὃ 5.

εἶπον, cf. 3 ὃ 3. παρεῖναι, οἴ. 6 8 1. No need of Cobet’s παριέναι.

᾿Ολυμπίαζε, not, as Buttmann held, a formation from -σδε, i.e. an
addition of δὲ (locative) to acc. plural: take, for instance, χαμᾶζε. No
plural of such a word could exist. Probably to be referred to Skt. -ya.

ὅπως βουλεύσωνται, in all these final constructions with ὅπως
Cobet insists on future indicative—‘érws ‘quo pacto,’ significans con-
iunctivum respuit, quemadmodum ὅστις in ἔπεμψε πρέσβεις οἵτινες δια-
λέξονται᾽ (Noy. Lect. 702). Poppo and Cl. retain subjunctive. Good-
win, M. T. ὃ 324, remarks on the rarity of ὅπως with pure final
clauses. It is noticeable that in Thuc. only one instance of ὡς with
subj. occurs, one only of ws ἄν, but on the other hand 114 instances of
ὅπως. (Weber.)

Δωριεύς, son of Diagoras, a Rhodian and Heracleid, thrice an
Olympic victor (cf. Pindar, Olymp. vit.), an athlete whose success
became proverbial (Cic. Tusc. 1. 46 § 111). The present (July, 428) was
the second of three successive Olympian victories, the first being won
in 432, the third in 424. In VIII. 35 we find him in command of a
squadron from Thurii, to which city he had fled upon the overthrow of
the Dorian aristocrats in Rhodes. He was captured by Athenians and
condemned to death, but liberated (Xen. Hell. 1. 5 8 19). According
to Pausanias he was the winner of 8 Isthmian and 7 Nemean victories
as well as 3 Olympian (Paus. VI. 7 ὃ 2). The typical athlete of Aris-
totle, Rhet. 1. 2 § 13.

ἐνίκα -- ἦν ὁ νικῶν. For tense cf. v. 49 §1- The imperfect marks
enduring result; cf. ἀδικῶ. Goodwin, M. T. § 27.

Ix. § 2] NOTES. 113

μετὰ τὴν ἑορτήν, the festival lasted five days, ending with the full
moon, but whether the full moon following the summer solstice is
doubtful. The date usually assigned is July 20 or 21.

κατέστησαν ἐς λόγους, cf. sup. 4 § I.

CHAPTERS IX.

81, νόμιμον, note the singular, the one instance in Thuc., though
the plural is frequent.

yap=‘namlich,’ ‘to wit,’ ‘that is to say’ (see Shill. on Thue. 1. 25).

ἐν ἡδονῇ ἔχουσι, cf. 1. 55 § 1 ἐν θεραπείᾳ εἶχον. Compare with
Il. 21 ὃ 5 ἐν ὀργῇ εἶχον, and cf. διά with genit., e.g. 11. 76 fin. οὐ διὰ
χειρὸς ἔχοντες. Tr. ‘regard with favour.’

χείρους, whether a modified positive or implied comparative
matters not: context does not always furnish a clue. (The phrase
recurs in c. Iv. 114 § 3.) Kr. Cl. explain by implication, ‘than they
would otherwise.’ For the sentiment Goll. well compares Tac. A. 1.
58 ‘proditores etiam eis, quos anteponunt, invisi sunt.’

§ 2. οὐκ ἄδικος αὕτη... ἐστιν, εἰ τύχοιεν, note the confusion caused
in modal relation by application of the general principle to the par-
ticular case. The indicative expresses the καθεστὼς νόμιμον (hence
there is no need for ἂν εἴη), τὸ καθόλου: the optative specifies the καθ᾽
ἕκαστα, the particular cases to which the general rule applies. In fine,
the one condenses, the other distributes. Such a use of optative with
indic. is by no means unusual, e.g. ἄλλ᾽ ὃν πόλις στήσειε τοῦδε χρὴ
κλύειν (Antig. 666). The constrn. is due to future force of optative.
In a conditional sentence, either protasis or apodosis may select its
own form of expression: the one may be realised at the expense of the
other: the one necessary postulate is that the relation of effect to
cause should be clearly marked. Aristotle, Ethics 1. 10 88 8, 14, will
afford exx. Platonists will recall Phileb. p. 15.

οἵ τε ἀφιστάμενοι καὶ ἀφ᾽ ὧν διακρίνοιντο, Naber adds οἱ. Cf.
93 83: Note that in these structures the relative clause may represent
either subject or object clause.

διακρίνοιντο, optat. by assimilation to τύχοιεν. Cf. Goodw. M.T. 558.

ἴσοι -- ὅμοιοι, ‘alike.’ γνώμῃ, cf. 10 ὃ 1. ‘In comprehensive sense’
says Class. Here, I think, of political ‘purpose,’ ‘policy,’ rather than
‘sentiment.’ Cf. contrast of γνώμη with ἰσχύς or ἔργον, 83 § 3.

εὐνοίᾳ, not merely ‘good will,’ but ‘loyalty’ (cf. εὔνους, δύσνους, τῇ
πόλει). Hude suggests ἐπινοίᾳ on the plea that the contrast is ‘paritas

Sai: 8

114 LAOCEDIDES Tif. [1x. ὃ 2—

potentiae’ with ‘similitudo sententiae’; surely γνώμη satisfies these con-
ditions.

τῇ παρασκευῇ καὶ δυνάμει, ‘actual’ as compared with ‘possible.’

ἐπιεικής, ‘equitable,’ ‘justifiable.’ Cf. 4 § 2.

ὅ, with reference to preceding sentence. Cf. 104 8 6.

μηδὲ δόξωμεν, deprecatory or even prohibitive (as first person of im-
perative); cf. v.9§ 7. For the sentiment cf. Tac. A. 1. 58.

εἰ, litotes for ὅτι, begging the question; cf. 32 § 3.

τιμώμενοι, for fact cf. 39 § 2.

ἐν τοῖς Sevots, i.e. in Athens’ time of peril.

CHAPTER X.

81. περὶ τοῦ δικαίου kal ἀρετῆς. No article with ἀρετῆς, as τοῦ δικ.
has all the force of a substantive. καί is corrective rather than copu-
lative, ‘or,’ ‘or rather.’ ἀρετή, ‘rectitude.’

δεόμενοι, ‘ postulantes.’

εἰδότες οὔτε φιλίαν κιτ.λ. The verbal difficulties are many: Kriig.
Popp. St. Boehme supply, with γίγνοιντο, φιλία καὶ κοινωνία as subject
(B. reading γίγνοιτο) : with εἶεν they assume a change of subject : such
change is quite possible. Gdller supplies φίλοι καὶ κοινωνοί from φιλία
and κοινωνία (improbable, as φιλία and κοινωνία are not here used in col-
lective sense). Classen makes yiyvowro=mpospépovro, and construes
with és ἀλλήλους, ‘unless they conduct themselves towards each other,’
a doubtful explanation, unless μετ᾽ dp. δοκ. be taken predicatively with
γίγνοιντο. ἐς ἀλλήλους has no direct construction either with δοκούσης or
γίγνοιντο. But these prepositional forms of predication are so complete
in themselves that their connexion with the sentence is often very loose,
e.g. περὶ τούτων ἀποστῶμεν.

γιγνομένην, an appeal to constant experience, hence no ἄν.

κοινωνία, ‘societas.’ és οὐδέν, ‘nullam in partem’ (cf. VII. 59 8 3).
és=‘in reference to’ (looking to), ‘ quoquo versus.’

δοκούσης (schol. νομιζομένης), not semblance, but conviction; ap-
proved by consent of mankind. és ἀλλήλους (practically = πρὸς ἀλλ., but
with suggestion of more intimate relations, ‘fusion’ rather than ‘ap-
proach’)=‘invicem.’ ὁμοιότροποι, here almost = ὁμογνώμονες (VIII. 92) ;
in VIII. 96 § 5 it is used of assimilation of tactics. Accepting the received
text, render ‘knowing that neither friendship between individuals nor
association between states proves permanent in any way, unless they be
contracted under conviction of mutual integrity, and unless they (the

x. § 6] NOTES. 115

contracting parties) be furthermore congenial.’ But see critical note
and Appendix.

τῷ διαλλάσσοντι, cf. 1. 36 τὸ δεδιός. Differences in principle lead
to disagreement in practice. Lit. ‘on divergence of opinion the very dis-
agreements in policy are founded.’ For ἔργων cf. ἔργων φυλακή, 82 ὃ 7.

§ 2. ξυμμαχία, cf. Herod. 1x. 106 with Thuc. I. 95. 1.

ἀπολιπόντων ἐκ, usually regarded as a substitute for ἐκλιπεῖν ἐκ, but
it is extremely doubtful whether the prepositional clause is to be pressed
into close construction with the verb. v. 4§ 4 gives no clue. ἀπολιπεῖν
in Hdt. frequently =‘ deficere,’ and is used without object (Hdt. vil.
221). éx=‘after,’ 1.6. ‘after committing yourself to the war’; hence
‘in the midst of.’ Cf. ἐκ νυκτός, ‘de nocte.’

πρὸς τὰ ὑπόλοιπα, cf. 1. 75 § 1.

ὃ 3. ξύμμαχοι μέντοι ἐγενόμεθα, in spite of vi. 76 ὃ 4 (which con-
structs καταδούλωσις with dative) make ᾿Αθηναίοις and "E\yor governed
by ξύμμαχοι, i.e. ‘ours was no private alliance with Athens, for the sub-
jugation of Hellenes; but we joined a Panhellenic confederation in the
cause of freedom.’ ‘The allusion, of course, is to the events which
followed the battle of Mycale.

§ 4. ἀπὸ tod ἴσου, Schol. κατ᾽ ἰσονομίαν. For history cf. 1. 97
(Poppo).

ἐπαγομένους (ν.1. ἐπειγομένους), but see Demosth. Conon ὃ 1; F. L.
§ 259. ‘‘ Quidni ‘adducentes’?” (Goll.). But the emendation appears
stronger: ‘urging on,’ rather than ‘attempting.’

ἀδεεῖς, ‘without apprehension’ (see Shill. on 1. 36).

8 δ. καθ᾽ ἕν, cf. inf. 11 § 4, ‘by combining.’

πολυψηφίαν, numbers suggesting conflict of interests (I. 141 § 6).

δή, sarcastic=‘scilicet.’

8 6. προγιγνομένοις, imperfect participle (v.1. rpoyevouévors) ; the con-
fusion between the two forms is frequent, but no change is necessary here.
Take παραδείγμασι as predicative, ‘appealing to their previous conduct
as a precedent’ (treating precedents as warnings); cf. Lat. use of
‘exemplum.’

καταστρέψασθαι, aorist with εἰκός, ‘uti passim’ in Thucyd. Naber’s
suggestion, δράσειν, ignores this usage. The first of the two aorists is
retrospective (the fact accomplished), the second anticipative.

εἴ ποτε ἐδυνήθησαν, Kriig. from Dobree’s δυνηθείησαν reads δυνηθεῖεν.
St. defends text. The indicative marks the historic fact, the optative
(δυνηθεῖεν) would point rather to the subjective or hypothetical
point of view, taken by Lesbians. The form of the sentence is simple;

8—2

116 THUCYDIDES 111 [x. 6 Ξ

the substitution of the relative with aorist for the direct object (ods ἐποιή-
σαντο for τοὺς ἐνσπόνδου5) may account for the use of the aorist ἐδυνήθη-
σαν, as balancing ἐποιήσαντο. The clue may be found in a construction
κατὰ σύνεσιν: e.g. οὐ yap εἰκότως ἂν τοὺς ἐνσπόνδους κατεστρέψαντο, τοὺς
δὲ ὑπολοίπους οὐκ ἂν ἔδρασαν τοῦτο, εἰ ἐδυνήθησαν. The realistic ἄρα
seems to speak for itself. Other solutions are possible: (1) the εἴ ποτε
clause parenthetical; cf. Cic. ad Att. x11I. 27 ‘aliter enim fuissemus et
in hos inofficiosi et in nosmet ipsos, si illum offensuri fuimus, paene
periculosi,’ where the sz clause is clearly parenthetical, ‘ a/z¢er’ account-
ing for the constrn, ; (2) ellipse, ‘a poor crutch to prop a lame conceit’;
(3) a mixed construction, realised fact )( realistic futurity ; (4) assimila-
tion; (5) in the absence of any tense of optative to express the pluperfect
of indicative, regard ἐδυνήθησαν as pluperfect: see Goodw. M. T. § 230.

CEA PA Reel

§ 1. βεβαιότεροι, in personal relation, cf. 1. 40 ὃ 4 (Class.).

ἡμῖν, the so-called ‘dativus iudicantis,’ really subjective or ethic.

νεωτεριεῖν, epexegetic infin., rare in future tense; ‘we should have
had a stronger guarantee that they would attempt no new departure.’
νεωτερίζειν, ‘res novas moliri,’ to disturb the terms of the alliance.

ὑποχειρίους δέ, note double δέ sequence, the first δέ in contrast with
μέν clause, the second supplementing the sentence.

καὶ πρός, Dobree wrongly expunges καί, ‘etiam.’ πρός of com-
parison or contrast. τὸ ἡμέτερον, neuter, common in these ethnic
specifications.

τὸ πλεῖον, Samians, Byzantines, Naxians, &c. (Schol.).

αὐτοὶ αὑτῶν, degree of increase measured by comparison with subject
itself; a favourite Herodotean device.

ἀντίπαλον δέος, cf. Hdt. 1. 74 ἄνευ yap ἀναγκαίης ἰσχυρῆς συμβάσιες
ἰσχυραὶ οὐκ ἐθέλουσι συμμένειν. Steup would strike out δέος.

προέχων, cf. 82 § 7 εἰ προὔχοιεν.

ἀποτρέπεται, sensu rhetorico: ‘is deterred,’ ‘discouraged.’

§ 2. οὐ Sv ἀλλο τι ἢ ὅσον, the ὅσον sequence replaces the ordinary
ὅτι construction (cf. 11. 65 § 12) =limiting accusative,

és τὴν ἀρχήν, lit. ‘with a view to their empire,’ i.e. for imperial
purposes, extension of power.

εὐπρεπείᾳ λόγον, cf. 82 ὃ 8, ‘speciousness of diplomacy,’ ‘plausibility
of representation.’

γνώμης μᾶλλον ἐφόδῳ, ‘by diplomatic approach, rather than by

xn 3] MOTE. 117

armed aggression.’ The tact of a Machiavelli rather than the iron
hand of an Alva. ἔφοδος in weaker sense, ‘aditus,’ with γνώμης ; in
stronger, ‘impetus,’ with ἰσχύς. The genitives are objective, ‘such
opening, access, as tact (or policy) afforded’ ; cf. 83 § 4 for antithesis.

τὰ πράγματα, cf. 1. 74 ὃ 1 ‘summa rerum,’ i.e. the hegemony
(Kriig.).

καταληπτά, ‘within their grasp’; cf. 30 ὃ 2.

8 8. ἅμα μέν...ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ δέ, in lieu of the ordinary sequence ἅμα
μέν.. «ἅμα δέ; cf. Iv. 73 § 2.

μὴ ἂν τούς ye ἰσοψήφους ἄκοντας, γε emphasises and restricts; those
at least whose vote had equal weight (i.e. with Athens), an implied
contrast of ξύμμαχοι with ὑπήκοοι.

μή, due to the protest contained in μαρτυρίῳ ἐχρῶντο. Cf. the use
of negative μή with verbs of swearing, promising &c. (Goodwin, M. T.
8 685). The whole weight of the sentence falls on ἄκοντας : hence an
implied conditional construction μαρτυρίῳ ἐχρῶντο μὴ ἂν τούς γε ἰσοψήφους
ξυστρατεύειν, ἄκοντας ξυστρατεύοντας, εἰ μή, or, to mark imperfect, ἐν ᾧ
ἄκοντες ξυνεστράτευον, εἰ μὴ ἠδίκουν κιτ.Ὰ. ‘that their equals would not
be taking part in these expeditions (as they were, without protest),
who would only have done so under protest, but for the goodness of
the Athenian cause.’ For similar instances, cf. Demosth. Conon § 32
οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἠθέλησαν μαρτυρεῖν ψευδῆ (sc. ἂν ὄντα) εἰ μή : cf. also Thue. Iv.
86 8 τ ἀσαφῆ εἰ δουλώσαιμι. Fact is contrasted with hypothesis: the
statement of the fact is made to imply negation of assumed case; hence
the negation of assumed case implies assertion of the fact. Stahl and
Hude (p. 92) have noted the brachylogy. Cf. Latin use, ‘montes
continui, ni dissocientur opaca valle,’ i.e. ‘qui continui sint ni disso-
cientur’: sometimes the ellipse is supplied, e.g. Theaetet. 170 E εἰ μηδὲ
αὐτὸς ero μηδὲ οἱ πολλοί, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾽ οἴονται, ap οὐχὶ ἀνάγκη μηδενὶ
δὴ εἶναι ταύτην τὴν ἀλήθειαν. For ἃ sentence which puzzled some few
generations of editors see Tac. Agricola, 6 ‘nisi quod in bona uxore
tanto maior laus quanto in mala plus culpae est.’

ἄκων, not only of unwillingness, but of moral revolt, or repulsion ,
cf. Arist. Eth. 11. 1.

τὰ κράτιστα, i.e. τοὺς κρατίστους, Schol. ἡμᾶς. For neuter, vid.
supra, 11 ὃ 1. The form κράτιστος is an isolated superlative, from
Hom. κρατύς.

ὑποδεεστέρους, deficient in παρασκευή, ‘ weaker.’

τοῦ ἄλλου (sc. ᾿Ελληνικοῦ), neut. sing. for plural again, perhaps
with more direct reference to νησιῶται ; cf. V. 97.

118 LAOCYDIDES LT. (x1. § 3—

τελευταῖα, so Kriig. and Stahl, treating τελευταῖα as predicative
to τὰ κράτιστα. Classen and Hude retain τὰ τελευταῖα of vulgate :
retaining the article, τὰ τελευταῖα will be substantival and proleptic,
‘leaving them for their last achievement.’ The phrase might be ad-
verbial, cf. τὰ ποθέσπερα (Theocr.): or the article may denote a second
object distinct from τὰ κράτιστα. The passage quoted by Cl. from
23 § 3 is no parallel; on the whole, it is safer to follow Kriig. and St.
‘leaving them (i.e. ‘us’) to the last.’ Note that the sequence is ξυνεπῆ-
γόν τε καὶ ἔμελλον : and mark καί... καί sequence: ἀσθενέστερα finds
its explanation in περιῃρημένου.

περιῃρημένου, lit. ‘stripped off’; cf. 11. 13 § 4, Aesch. Choeph. 695
φίλων ἀποψιλοῖς we. For Athenian policy see 1. 44.

ἀσθενέστερα, Lat. ‘debilis’ (crippled), a very old use; cf. Pind.
Pyth. 1. 55 ἀσθενεῖ χρωτὶ βαίνων. Tac. A. xl. 14 ‘debilis Burrus,
trunca scilicet manu.’ See Prof. Mayor’s Lat. Heptateuch, p. τος.

ἔμελλον ἕξειν, mark strong auxiliary, ‘would be sure to find’; cf. § τ.
It is interesting to note how verbs of originally strong meaning lapse
into mere auxiliaries, e.g. Homeric θέλω, μέλλω.

αὐτῶν, no need for αὑτῶν : not a possessive genitive, but in simple
apposition with subject of gen. absolute, ‘ipsi per se.’

πρὸς 6 TL χρὴ στῆναι, more expressive than στῆναι μετά, suggest-
ing not merely ‘stare cum’ but ‘stare ab,’ the idea being that of some
common rallying-point.

χρή, present; cf. I. ΟἹ § 1. ὁμοίως, ‘with like ease.’

ἐχειρώσαντο, note absence of object, as easily supplied from context.
The subject, under like conditions, admits the same ellipse.

8 4. τό τε ναυτικόν, τε resumes main argument, which has been
disturbed by εἰ δὲ ἀφ᾽ ἡμών... ἐχειρώσαντο.

Classen’s note is misleading. τὸ ναυτικόν is in itself the gram-
matical subject to παρεῖχε ; but the logic of the sentence requires the
supplement προσθέμενον. It was not the fleet of Mytilene in itself
which constituted a menace to Athens, but the danger of the com-
bination of that fleet with another. Cf. the like apprehension in the
case of Corcyra, Bk. I. 44. παράσχῃ, realistic for optative.

καθ᾽ ἕν γενόμενον, cf. ὁμοῦ γενόμενον, το ὃ 5. The one participial
clause explains the other, i.e. καθ᾽ ἕν γεν. finds its explanation in
προσθέμενον, vid. sup. 3 § 5. ἤ...ἤ, ‘sive, seu,’ ‘by combining, whether
by siding with you or some other power.’

$5. τὰ δέ, without clear suggestion of previous τὰ μέν {8}, ἃ
secondary reason.

xu. § 1] NOTES. 119

θεραπείας, ‘donis scilicet et muneribus’ (Herw. from Gilbert).
Miiller-Striibing sees a reference to venality of Athenian demagogues ;
cf. Ar. Vespae 576, Ach. 6. But the word appears used here in the
wider sense of Lat. ‘ observantia’; cf. Aristoph. Nub. 1147 ἐπιθαυμάζειν
τὸν διδάσκαλον.

περιεγιγνόμεθα, ‘we still held our own’; cf. 82 fin.

ἐπὶ πολύ ye, mark emphatic γε and position of ἄν : Goodw. M. T.
§ 220 ἐπὶ πολύ, temporal. SuvnOrvat, sc. περιγίγνεσθαι.

παραδείγμασι χρώμενοι. παραδείγμασι predicative ; cf. 10 § 6.

τοῖς ἐς ἄλλους, cf. V. 39 ὃ 3 τὰ és Βοιωτούς, for τοῖς πρὸς ἄλλ.

CHAPTER XII.

81. τίς, thrown into agreement, in lieu of τέ (cf. Plato, Theaet.
158 E) ‘in what form.’

πιστή. (which Cobet would expunge.) connected both with φιλία and
ἐλευθερία.

παρὰ γνώμην, not only ‘contra sententiam’ but ‘contra voluntatem’;
‘alienis animis ’ (Portus).

ὑπεδεχόμεϑα, Cobet’s suggestion ὑπηρχόμεθα is too poetical. The
correction ἀπεδεχόμεθα is obvious, but needless; the ordinary Thuc.
use ‘hospitio excipere’ will explain the context, in which, says Poppo,
there is an evident reference to ἐπιμιξία (intercourse): ‘we tolerated’
(received, but not with open arms).

δεδιότες, ‘from apprehension’ (not ‘ fear’).

ἐθεράπευον, cf. sup. 11 ἀπὸ θεραπείας.

6 τε, τε inferential, ‘thus.’ 6, if in construction with πίστιν βεβαιοῖ,
will be either accus. in apposition with sentence, or accus. of internal
object, quasi-cognate ; cf. VI. 33 ὅπερ ηὐξήθησαν. Kriiger’s explanation
that πίστιν βεβαιοῖ is an epexegetical apposition, 6 τε τοῖς ἄλλ. μάλ.
εὔνοια παρέχει. πίστιν βεβαιοῖ, is cumbrous (vid. Kr. G. G. 57. 10, 11).
The explanation that ὅ depends.on πίστιν βεβαιοῖ as a compound
expression (cf. λείαν ποιεῖσθαι) is untenable (vid. Goll.). The Platonic
use appears to distinguish 6 anticipative (cf. Rep. 583 E, Protag. 313 A)
from τὸ δέ as retrospective (cf. Theaet. 157 B with Heindorf’s note).
Hence it may either=‘id quod’ or ‘cum tamen’ (but see Schneider in
Neu. Jahrb. for 1883). τοῦτο is resumptive of 6; unless indeed we
accept the view that τοῦτο refers to πίστιν. ‘Thus, that which with
others is chiefly secured by good will—confidence—this in our case was
guaranteed by fear’: i.e. ‘that confidence, which’ &c. Cf. Plato, Prot.

120 THOCYDIDES L117. [Στ]. ὃ r—

313 A ὃ δὲ περὶ πλείονος ἡγεῖ τὴν ψυχήν...περὶ δὲ (apodotic) τούτου οὔτε
ἐπεκοινώσω κ.τ.λ.

Badham’s πιστόν (contra Mss.), which balances ἐχυρὸν παρεῖχε by
πιστὸν βεβαιοῖ, simplifies all, but lacks authority. Cl. and St. cut out
πίστιν on the plea that ‘reciprocity of apprehension does not produce
good faith’—true, but it makes either party extremely careful not to
disturb existing covenants. The alliance between Athens and Lesbos
was simply one ‘of convenience,’ maintained on mere grounds of ἀντί-
παλον δέος (cf. τι § 1). The dialectical argument is sufficiently justified
in the context, as well as by the plea of ton ἀνάγκη set forth in v. 89.

δέει, ‘apprehension’ (mistrust); cf. 10 ὃ 4 οὐκ ἀδεεῖς ἔτι juev.
κατεχόμενοι, ‘under restraint,’ with more direct reference to δέος. φιλίᾳ
would suggest ξυνεχόμενοι, ‘held together.’

ξύμμαχοι ἦμεν, ‘we continued allies.’

ὁποτέροις παράσχοι, optat. indefinite (iterative) dependent on
ὁποτέροις as=el ποτέροις : cf. parallel uses of ὅστις, ὅσοι, e.g. IV. 61 ὃ 6
ὅσοι δὲ μὴ προσκοποῦμεν μηδὲ τοῦτό τις ἥκει πρεσβύτατον κρίνας : cf. the
like interchange in Latin: ‘quod=si,’ ‘qui=si quis.’ Note imperfect
ἔμελλον as condensing the particulars implied in παράσχοι.

ἀσφάλεια, cf. 82 ἃ 7=ddea, ‘security,’ as=‘immunity.’ Bothe sug-
gests θράσος as better suiting the word παραβήσεσθαι, i.e. as ‘temeritas’
rather than ‘fiducia.’

kal παραβήσεσθαι, καί emphatic, some ‘actual,’ ‘direct,’ breach of
the treaty.

§ 2. ὥστε εἴ τῳ δοκοῦμεν, a passage of great difficulty: reading,
punctuation, and explanation are all alike in doubt. But on the whole
there seems no real ground for disturbing the received text. The main
points appear to be (1) the real meaning of μέλλησις, (2) the contrast of
a real with an assumed position: εἰ γὰρ ἦμεν...τί ἔδει, with ὄντος δέ... δεῖ.
To take the words in detail :—

ἀδικεῖν, ‘to be in the wrong’ (to be the ‘aggressors’); cf. 65 § 2.

προαποστάντες (--ὅτι προαπέστημεν); the προ- is all important,
‘rushing into rebellion,’ ‘precipitating secession.’

διά may mark the ground of ἀδικία or of ἀπόστασις: it is in the latter
connexion that I would explain it.

μέλλησιν, in strong sense (cf. IV. 126 ὃ 5; 1. 69 ὃ 7), ‘menace.’ The
Athenians ‘looked like mischief.’ Mark position of subst. between
subjective and objective genitive (cf. 1. 25 § 4).

τῶν ἐς ἡμᾶς δεινῶν, τὰ δεινά either in sense of ‘dangers’ or ‘means
of coercion’ (cf. 11. 77 ὃ 1). ἐς stronger than πρός, which pointed a¢ us

xu. § r] NOTES. 127

(not ‘to’ us): the verbal subst. suggests the verbal analogy, διὰ τὸ
μέλλειν αὐτοὺς τὰ és ἡμᾶς δεινὰ ἐποίσειν.

αὐτῶν, i.e. τῶν δεινῶν, unless αὐτά be loosely referable to context.

8 3. ἀντεπιβουλεῦσαι, cf. τι ὃ 3.

ἀντιμελλῆσαι, with evident reference to μέλλησις, ‘to menace in
return.’

τί ἔδει, a rhetorical apodosis:=ovx ἔδει or οὐκ ἂν ἔδει (for distinction
of these two uses vid. Goodw. Gr. M. T. p. 407). Note particularly the
contrast of an assumed case with the real position.

ἐκ Tov ὁμοίου, cf. 1. 143 ὃ 4, a mere equivalent for ὁμοίως (al. to
avoid repetition of τοῦ ἴσου), if in the stronger sense assumed by Stahl=
ἐκ τοῦ ou. ὄντας, ‘as holding a position of equality’ (ex hypothesi).

ἔπ᾽ ἐκείνοις, whether ἐπί or ὑπό (Cobet Var. L. 214) matters not: for
ἐπί cf. 11. 84 § 2 (for three consecutive ἐπί᾽β cf. II. go § 3).

σκοπεῖ, sc. Tis, from εἴ Tw δοκοῦμεν sup.

Render, ‘ Hence, if any one regards us as in the wrong in forestalling
Athens by revolt, because of the menace on their side of such coercion
as they could bring to bear on us (of dangers that threatened us), instead
of waiting on our part to see whether any of these apprehensions would
be realised, he takes a wrong view. For had we been in a position to
meet intrigues by intrigues and threats by threats, what need would
there have been for us to remain, as we did, at their mercy ?’

The key-note is struck in θᾶσσον and πρότεροι.Γ. The relation of
Lesbos to Athens was one of ὕπουλος αὐτονομία.

Athens, as the stronger, could afford to ‘watch and wait,’ in fact
could choose her opportunity: Lesbos, the weaker, had to seize the
opportunity when it offered. It was a mere question of who should
strike first. Lesbos struck first in self-defence (cf. v1. 18 § 2), τὸν yap
προύχοντα οὐ μόνον ἐπιόντα τις ἀμύνεται ἀλλὰ Kal... προκαταλαμβάνει.

(For discussion of Class. and Stahl’s views, see Appendix.)

CHAPTER Xai:

81. τοιαύτας, Poppo notes the asyndeton (cf. 11. 74 § 1).

καὶ αἰτίας, Cobet objects that αἰτία in Thuc. always has the
force of ‘crimen’ (had he forgotten Iv. 85 § τῇ): καί corrects and
strengthens προφάσεις, ‘such are the pleas, or rather motives, which we
have for revolting’: even if αἰτία -- ἔγκλημα, ‘allegation,’ ‘indictment,’ it
is still appropriate.

σαφεῖς, ‘distinct,’ ‘convincing.’ γνῶναι, epexegetic. εἰκότως, i.e. not
“temere’ (εἰκὴ) but almost εὐλόγως, ‘with good reason,’ ‘justifiably.’

122 LHUOCXDIDES 77. [xu. § r—

ἀσφάλειαν, cf. VI. 59 ὃ 2, ‘some means of safety.’

βουλομένους, sc. ἀφίστασθαι. Kal πάλαι, ‘iampridem.’

Βοιωτοί, i.e. as ξυγγενεῖς, cf. 2 § 3.

ὑπηκούσαμεν, mark aorist with imperfect; the action was prompted
by the ἕξις (formed habit); cf. 53 § 1.

ἐνομίζομεν, Class. interprets of ‘self-consciousness’: rather, I
think, of ‘self-justification’: they tested their action by the standard of
conventional morality. ἀπόστασις conveys the twofold meaning of
‘standing aloof’ from complicity, and of ‘severance’ from Athens. The
severance was to have a double effect, (1) avoiding, (2) escaping.

ἀπόστασιν, perhaps an adscript: cf. Hdt. 111. 119 ἔδησε σφέας τὴν
ἐπὶ θανάτῳ (sc. δέσιν), as also in common phrases, e.g. τύπτειν πολλάς.

qovety...Evvedevepovv, epexegetic infinitives.

ξὺν κακῶς ποιεῖν, Kriig. ξυγκακωσποιεῖν (cf. Att. ἀντευποιεῖν, ἀντευ-
πάσχειν). Bothe ξυγκακοποιεῖν (cf. ξυγκακοπαθεῖν). Of tmesis Attic
prose shews hardly any traces. (Plat. Phaedrus 237 A ξύμ μοι λάβεσθε
is dithyrambic affectation.) For collocation of ξύν with μετά cf. ΝΠ].
13. Cl. points out that the adverb does not coalesce with the verb. The
true order is μὴ ξυμποιεῖν αὐτοὺς κακῶς μετ᾽ ’AO., ‘not to take part in
doing them ill in common with Athens,’ ‘non cum Atheniensibus contra
eos consociare iniuriam.’ Does κακῶς here imply the κακία of the
traitor? We really need a word to form a marked antithesis to é\ev-
θεροῦν, e.g. συγκαταδουλοῦν.

προποιῆσαι, cf. supra 12 ὃ 1 τὸ αὐτὸ ἐποιοῦμεν. So here mpor. =
προδιαφθεῖραι.

8 2. θᾶσσον, sc. τοῦ δέοντος, adv. and adj. combined, asin 4 § 2 sup.

qj, ‘whereby,’ as representing ‘wherefore,’ i.e. ‘by cause of which’
)( ‘by reason of which.’ The dat. is adverbial rather than in agree-
ment with ἀπόστασις ἀπαράσκευος. Like the Lat. ‘qui’ it is found
even with plurals. Cf. Thuc. 11. 4 § 2 τῶν διόδων 7, Plato, Phaedr.
251D τὰ στόματα ἢ. For neuter cf. Plato Theaet. 179 Ὁ τῷ τοι μᾶλλον
σκεπτέον. τῷτ-ᾧ, i.e. δι’ 6. Cf. Lat. ‘quo magis,’ ‘quare,’ ‘quam-
obrem.’ The use of ἣ in logical limitation (qua) we may compare
with ws.

ξυμμάχους (sc. ἡμᾶς), predicative with δεξαμένους. Cf. 1. 43
§4- (CL)

διὰ ταχέων, plural for sing. in accordance with the common ten-
dency of Greek.

ἀμύνοντες, ‘ready to help,’ ‘willing to aid’: no need for future; vid,
infra ἣν δ᾽ ἐλευθεροῦντες φαίνησθε.

xu. § 6] NOTES. 123

ots δεῖ, sc. ἀμύνειν.

8 3. ἐφθάραται, see Curt. Gk. Verb, p. 64. The form is Doric,
ergo older than Ionic, but Curt. notes only two Doric forms. In Attic
the forms -ara:, -aro are found only after consonants, and are a
distinguishing mark of the old Attic writers. (Found in Inscrip. of
Methone, early in Pelop. war.)

χρημάτων δαπάνῃ, cf. 17. νῆςες.. αἱ pév...at δέ. Note partitive
apposition in lieu of dependent genitive; a common idiom. ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν,
i.e. as ἐφορμοῦσαι.

§ 4. ἔχειν, no need for Cob. σχεῖν. περιουσίαν is the emphatic
word: they have at this moment a naval force, which will be none too
large, if &c.

τῷ θέρει τῷδε, the temporal dative is found both with and without
ἐν in Thuc. Attic Gk. rarely uses ἐν καιρῷ, but és καιρόν or καιρῷ.
How far the Mytilenaeans, like others, were wrong in their calcula-
tions is evident from VII. 28 ὃ 3. Ἷ

ἐπεσβάλητε, éri=‘re,’ ‘again.’ τὸ δεύτερον, pleonastic. But Thuc.
is prone to pleonasms.

ἀποχωρήσονται, note middle form of future; the simple xwpéw
forms fut. χωρήσομαι.

ὃ δ. νομίσῃ τε μηδείς, notice position of μηδείς for emphasis.
Cf. παραστῇ δὲ μηδενί (IV. 95 ὃ 2). The subj. here recalls the old
Homeric use of ‘warning,’ μή σε κιχείω, a force which Attic renders
by οὐ μή. The quasi-imperative use of subj. will connect it with the
older use.

οἰκεῖον, Hude’s suggestion οὐκ οἰκεῖον will destroy the antithesis
with ἀλλοτρίας (cf. IV. 95 ὃ 2).

ᾧ γάρ-Ξ εἰ γάρ τινι. Cf. the negative use ᾧ μή.

τὴν ὠφελίαν, ‘suam utilitatem’; the article is possessive.

αὐτῷ, weak resumptive ; i.e. of τις implied in ᾧ.

ἐν τῇ ᾿Αττικῇ, ἐν not in local sense, as Cl. points out: cf. the
phrase εἶναι ἐν xpitm. ‘The issue will not depend on, turn on Attica,’
cf. 1. 74 § 1. Whether 6v ἧς or δ ἥν be read here matters little, the
means may mark the cause. Cf. χρήματα δι᾽ ἃ ὁ πόλεμος εὐπορεῖ.

ὥς τις, sc. τινές, sing. for plural as in the phrase 7 τις ἢ οὐδείς.

§ 6. πρόσοδος, cf. 11. 13 § 2.

οὔτε... τε...τε, notice the triple te. The first two of these three
clauses only are coordinate, as the change of mood shews; the negation
affects the first clause only; the 3rd τε clause is really supplementary.
The optative πάθοιμεν ἄν points to the contingency implied in εἰ κατα-

124 THOCYDIDES 77 [Χππὶ. 8 6—

στρέψονται: in 38 § 2 the order is inverted, ἀγωνίσαιτ᾽ ἄν... πειράσεται.
There is no indication here of any subjective use of the mood (of
which see a good instance in VIII. 50 § 1).

δεινότερα, ‘recentissima queeque servitus durissima est’ (P.).

οἱ πρὶν δουλεύοντες, imperf. participle. The reference is to the
ξύμμαχοι ὑποτελεῖς.

8 7. βοηθησάντων ὑμῶν, note use of genitive absolute as ex-
pressing subject of main verb; for nom. again in vill. 76 § 4; for dat.
(with repetition of subject) 1. 114 § 1; for acc. 11. 8 ὃ 4. See Goodw.
G. Syn. ὃ 850. The variation in construction is used to make the parti-
cipial clause more prominent, and to express its relation more em-
phatically. See also Popp. Prol. 1. 119. Such a use of the ablative
absolute is contrary to the spirit of the Latin language. (See Thompson,
G. Syn. § 152.) In the present instance it simply expresses the con-
ditional clause (εἰ βοηθήσετε) in a condensed form.

ὑφαιροῦντες, cf. 31 § 1, with subsidiary notion of ‘sapping’: cf. 11.
76 ὃ 2, ὑφεῖλκον.

αἰτίαν, ‘imputation,’ ‘blame,’ cf. 11. 60 § 7.

ἣν εἴχετε, note the imperfect, ‘quam per aliquod tempus usque ad
hoc sustinebatis’ (Popp.).

μὴ βοηθεῖν, epexegetic of αἰτίαν, accusative. Cf. 40 ὃ τ ξυγγνώμην
ἁμαρτεῖν ἀνθρωπίνως λήψονται.

CHAPTER. x<1ve

81. τὰς és ὑμᾶς, ‘that look to you.’ The prepositional construction
perhaps used only to save confusion with a second genitive (ὑμῶν).
Kriiger remarks upon the free use of és in Thuc. as contrasted with
later Attic. Poppo illustrates from later verbal usage ἐλπίζειν ἔς τινα:
cf. I. 41 § 2 ἡ és Σαμίους εὐεργεσία.

Ala τὸν ᾿Ολύμπιον, note the articular supplement, for emphasis,
‘Zeus the great Olympian god,’ the ‘Deus optumus maximus.’ This
appended article is constantly used by Thuc. epexegetically.

ἐν οὗ τῷ ἱερῷ, mark the order, and cf. I. 22 § 3. ἱερόν -- τέμενος,
‘precinct.’

toa καὶ ἱκεταί, this use of the neuter adjective is based on the
use of the neuter pronouns, e.g. πείθεσθαί τι, and is analogous to the
cognate use of acc., ‘a special form of the use of the accusative as a de-
fining or qualifying word.’ Such adverbial uses of the accus. were
probably, in the older language, of wider range, a range which has

xv. § 1] NOTES. 125

been encroached upon by the more specific senses expressed by other
cases (cf. Monro Hom. G. 8 132 sqq-). The use can be referred to the
so-called ‘limiting’ or ‘determinant’ accus., its use with intransitive
verbs being based on the use with transitive verbs. Thuc. himself
gives as variants ὁμοίως, ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου. Lat. presents a parallel : (1) in the
use of adverb for adjective, ‘sic est vita’ (sc. talis), (2) in the acc. use
‘quid tibi opus est?’ For the construction toa καί, ὅμοια καί, cf. VII. 29
§ 4. Lat. ‘zeque ac,’ ‘iuxta ac,’ ‘similis ac,’ ‘similis ac si’ (Cic. Fin. Iv.
12 § 31).

προῆσθε, ‘leave us to our fate,’ ‘betray us.” The word is used in
weaker sense of ‘risking,’ ‘venturing’ (e.g. money on bad security), as
in VIII. 32, or in stronger sense of ‘squandering.’ Cf. the προετικός
(ἄσωτος) of Aristotle’s Ethics.

παραβαλλομένους, ‘risking,’ ‘hazarding,’ a gambling term, ‘staking
the one against the other.’ Cf. 65 8 3.

ἴδιον μέν... κοινὴν δέ... ἔτι δέ, note the single μέν clause with
double δέ clause. The second δέ clause merely amplifies the notion of
κοινός suggested in the preceding sentence.

ἔτι, construe with κοινοτέραν (cf. ἔτι μᾶλλον, ἔτι μείζονα). Observe
also the predicative use of ἔδιον, κοινήν, κοινοτέραν, and the change of
tense from present to future participle.

εἰ μὴ πεισθέντων ὑμῶν, μή hypothetical, and in construction with gen.
absolute. The absolute construction replaces a clause of hypothesis,
as in 13 § g, to save tautology, εἰ... εἰ,

§ 2. βούλεται, sc. γίγνεσθαι ὑμᾶς.

CHAPTER XV.

$1. οἱ δὲ Λακεδαιμόνιοι καὶ of ξύμμαχοι, the Lacedaemonians in
common with their allies (for καί cf. vil. 23 ὃ 4). There is no need
for Cobet’s excision of καὶ οἱ ξύμμ. The joint subject Aak. καὶ οἱ ξύμμ.
affects the first verb only, ἐποιήσαντο: the subject of ἔφραζον is οἱ
Λακεδαιμ.

καὶ τὴν ἐς ᾿Αττικὴν ἐσβολήν... ἀφίκοντο, these words are variously
transposed or emended. Herwerden after first transposing ὡς ποιήσομενοι
has now excised them; he suggests κἀπὶ τὴν ἐσβολήν (Kriig. καὶ és);
Poppo (following Heilmann) accepts a trajection, arranging (but without
disturbance of text) the grammatical order as follows: καὶ τὴν és’Arr. ἐσβ.
ὡς ποιησόμενοι ἔφραζον κιτ.λ. Not only is such a trajection difficult, but
we might wish it were impossible. The scholiast saw the difficulty, and

126 LAO CYDIDES: 777 [xv. 8 1—

rightly treated ὡς ποιησόμ. as supplementary and parenthetical, supplying
ἐσβολήν. The accus. καὶ τὴν ἐσβολήν is the ‘ accusativus de quo’ of the
old grammarians; here practically in apposition with the sentence,
and standing first as the leading notion. Such positions are sometimes
only anticipatory, e.g. Soph. Elect. 1364, where note the resumptive
ταῦτα. Thuc. 11. 62 §1. Here ἐσβολή, as implying στρατεία, finds a
cognate structure with ἐέναι on analogy of ἐξιέναι στρατείαν (1. 1 5), ἰέναι
ὁδόν.

παροῦσι κατὰ τάχος, Cl. following Lupus (Jahrb. 1875) construes
these words with ἰέναι. But though παρεῖναι may -- παραγενέσθαι (for
one must consider the opponent’s case, χρὴ τὰ τοῦ Λύκου εἰπεῖν, Plat.
Phaedr. 372 D), would Thucydides write παρὼν ἰέναι for παριέναι or
παρελθεῖν Again, if part of the φραδή, the dat. would naturally be-
come accusative ; in VII. 20, where the variant occurs, it is clear that
ἀφικομένῳ is in temporal sense only, and no part of the instructions
given. mapodo.=‘cum adessent’ (i.e. at the Olympian games) should
be considered in connexion with φράζειν (cf. Plato Phileb. 66 a ὑπό
Te ἀγγέλων πέμπων καὶ παροῦσι φράζων) and in close agreement with
ξυμμάχοις : there was no need for the usual περιαγγελία. Tr. ‘ And,
for the proposed (τήν) invasion of Attica, they told their allies, being
on the spot (or, in temporal sense, ‘ while still there,’ i.e. ‘before they
left’) to repair with all speed to the Isthmus (of Corinth) with the
intention of invading with two-thirds of their forces.’

κατὰ τάχος, the summer was well advanced.

τοῖς δύο μέρεσιν, the remaining third left for home-defence, the
article, as always in such fractional expressions, denoting the numerator.

ὁλκοί, ‘machinae,’ rollers and other appliances, ‘ hauling gear.’

παρεσκεύαζον, the destination is reached in ἀφίκοντο, the imperfect
introduces a new phase.

ὑπεροίσοντες, P. cites Livy XLII. 16. This portion of the isthmus is
called by Strabo δίολκος : for Leucas cf. 81.

§2. ἀρρωστίᾳ, wrongly altered to ὀρρωδίᾳ: cf. vir. 83 82. It is
equivalent to ἀπροθυμίᾳ : cf. Lat. ‘senescere,’ ‘languescere.’ They had
“no stomach for the fight’ (Shaksp.), οὐ γὰρ φιληδῶ μάχαις (Pax 1130).
The periphrasis with ἦσαν has given rise to a zeugma; cf. 7983. (On
this figure see Cope, Ar. Rhet., Vol. 1. p. 61.)

XVI. ὃ 2] NOTES. 127

CHAPTER XVI.

81. διὰ κατάγνωσιν ἀσθενείας σφῶν, the constrn. is dictated by
verbal analogy=da τὸ καταγνῶναι σφῶν ἀσθένειαν, ‘passing sentence
of weakness against them’ (cf. 45 § 1), i.e. ‘imputation of weakness
against themselves.’ In ὙΠ]. 8 ἃ 3 καταφρόνησις.

ἐγνώκασι, realistic indicative, ‘that their judgment was at fault.’

οἷοί τέ εἰσι, mark the re: οἷος of character: οἷός τε of circumstance.
οἷος ‘disposition,’ οἷός τε ‘position,’ as Prof. Gildersleeve well states the
case in A. J. P. vil. 165.

μὴ κινοῦντες, cf. κινεῖν χρήματα, ‘without disturbing,’ ‘ without
drawing upon.’ μή hypothetical=‘si non moverent.’

ἐπί, cf. 13 § 4. καὶ τὸ ἀπὸ Πελοπ. Cobet by expunging καί de-
stroys all the nerve of the sentence: xai=‘as well,’ ‘to boot,’ 1.6. in
addition to maintaining the blockade of Lesbos.

τὸ ἐπιόν, collective neuter=Tovs ἐπιόντας : cf. 11 § 1, ‘the threatened
attack or invasion’; cf. v. 9 § 5.

ἔπλήρωσαν, ‘promptly manned.’ vats ἑκατόν, not the reserve fleet ;
cf. 11. 24. ἐσβάντες, circumstantial participle, of ‘means’; cf. Goodw.
G. Syn. § 834. αὐτοί τε kal οἱ μέτοικοι, i.e. with mixed crews of
citizens and metoecs. The two highest classes (ἱππῆς καὶ πεντακοσιομέ-
διμνοι) rarely served on ship-board: αὐτοί must therefore include θῆτες
and fevyira. For employment of μέτοικοι cf. 1. 143 § I.

παρὰ Tov ἰσθμόν (v. 1. περί), construe with ἐπίδειξιν ἐποιοῦντο, ‘made
ἃ demonstration in force.’ ἀναγαγόντες, active for more frequent middle
form; cf. VII. 52 ὃ 1.

ἡ δοκοίη, ‘ubicunque placeret’=e πῇ δυκοίη. For 7 as combining
particular with general statement cf. 11 ὃ 2 (note). For optat. -οίη
vid. Meisterh. p. 137. Πελοποννήσου, partitive with 7: though 1. 108
fin. would suggest construction with ἀποβάσεις (Bockh).

§ 2. τὸν παράλογον, mascul. form of subst.; cf. 1. 78 § 1.

τὰ ῥηθέντα, cf. 13 ὃ 3.

αὐτοῖς, ‘initial’ dative, in position, ‘subjective’ in construction, ‘when
they found that.’ apa, there was a lack of combined action (cf. 15
βραδέως ξυνελέγοντΤο) : mark a succession of four kal’s. ἡγοῦντό τε καὶ
ἄπορα νομίζοντες ws καὶ οἱ ξύμμ. οὐ map. Kal ἠγγέλλοντο Kal ai νῆες Toph.
ἀνεχώρησαν. The first καί in connexion with τε, the second and thirc
coordinating παρῆσαν and ἠγγέλλοντο of circumstantial ws clause, the
fourth emphatic. For personal construction, νῆες ἠγγέλλοντο, cf, VIII.

79 ὃ 6.

128 THUCYDIDES J11. [xv1. § 2—

ai τριάκοντα, Steup (followed by Class. and St.) rejects the state-
ment on the ground that the facts mentioned in the Mytilenaean speech
(13 ὃ 3) could not at a later period have come as news to the Lacedae-
monians. Again, in 7 § 3, Asopius is said to have sent back the main
portion of his fleet. He therefore holds that the new fleet (ἑκατόν) is
meant. But there may have been a division of this large fleet, partly
for raids on the Laconian coast, partly to watch the Isthmus of Corinth.

περιοικίδα, Didot, from Strabo x. 2 § 2, explains as comprising the
greater part of Laconia, and all Messenia.

§ 3. 6 τι πέμψουσιν, the old Ionic use of subjunctive in such final
clauses has now become a use of the past; cf. Hdt. use of és with subj.

κατὰ πόλεις, Greek periphrasis, in default of Lat. distributive ‘-¢im.’

ἐπήγγελλον, cf. ν. 47 § 5: so also περιαγγέλλειν 11. 85 ὃ 3.

ἐπιπλεύσεσθαι, ‘to sail in charge,’ 11, 66 § 2 (Cl.).

§ 4. ναυσίν, sociative. εἶδον, sc. ἀναχωρήσαντας: cf. 11. 86 § 4.

(For the difficulties involved in the narrative, see Appendix.)

CHAPTER XVII.

§ 1. ἐν τοῖς πλεῖσται δή, the phrase serves to restrict rather
than intensify the superlative, ‘one of the most numerous,’ not ‘the
most numerous of all.’ Herbst, Philol. xv1. 346, regards it as denoting
prominence ‘inter pares’ (cf. 1. 6 § 2, and vid. Kriig. Gr. Gr. § 49,
10). The form ἐν τοῖς is retained even with feminine.

τοῖς, demonstrative, cf. πρὸ τοῦ, τὸ δέ. δή emphatic.

ἅμα, adverbial. αὐτοῖς, construe with ἐγένοντο. ἐνεργοί, here =strictly
“ἐν ἔργῳ᾽ in opere occupatae, ‘on actual service,’ not merely available.
This number of ships had been raised (cf. Iv. 94 § 1) on actual service,
‘placed in commission’: cf. also Herodotus, Vill. 26.

παραπλήσιαι δέ, the presence or absence of δέ will not affect our
acceptance or rejection of Campe’s 7.

§ 2. περὶ Πελοπόννησον, cf. τό 88 1, 2.

χωρὶς δέ, sc. ἦσαν, cf. 1. 61 ὃ 2.

Ποτείδαιαν, presumably 70; cf. 1. 57 ὃ 6, I. 61 ὃ 4.

ἄλλοις χωρίοις, 40 at Lesbos, 12 αἱ Naupactus, cf. 7 § 3, if we
follow Stahl. (See Appendix.)

ἐν ἑνὶ θέρει, cf. 13 8 4.

8 3. τοῦτο, with reference to context, ‘the maintenance of all
these ships.’

μετὰ Ποτειδαίας, Naber reads accus., as the town had fallen: for
brachylogy cf. Cobet, Var. Lect. 180.

xvi. ὃ 1] NOTES. 129

ὑπανήλωσε, ‘gradually wasted,’ ‘sapped’ (note unaugmented form
of Mss.). See St., Qu. Gr. p. 60.

ἐφρούρουν, there was a περίβολος to guard. For the ἀποτείχισις
see I. 64 ὃ τ: they were now in actual possession. No need in
either case for περιεῴρ. (Herw.). δίδραχμοι, an excessive rate, as
compared with the later τριώβολον : cf. Poppo’s note.

αὑτῷ καὶ ὑπηρέτῃ, note omission of article, ‘for self and servant.’
Cf. the Spartan system of θεράποντες, IV. τό ὃ 1. (Poppo.)

ἐλάμβανε, the evolution of singular from plural Cl. notes as without
parallel in Thuc, Herw., Stud. p. 39, proposes tis. Cf. VI. 31 § 4.
But see Stein on Hdt. 1. 195; Bernhardy, Synt. 419; cf. Plat., Rep.
I. 347 A ὑπάρχειν τοῖς μέλλουσιν... ἐὰν μὴ ἀρχή.

διεπολιόρκησαν, ‘served throughout the siege.’ προαπῆλθον, i.e.
before the capitulation, cf. 1. 65 ὃ 3. No mention is made of the
forces of Hagnon or Cleopompus, who only made ineffectual attempts
to storm the place (cf. 11. 58).

τὸν αὐτὸν μισθόν, 1.6. ove drachma per diem.

ἔφερον, act. for middle, cf. vi. 24 ὃ 3, ‘received.’ Thuc. does not
use the middle in this sense.

τοσαῦται δή, emphatic δή, cf. 113 § 6.

(On the whole chapter see Appendix.)

CHAPTER XVIII;

81. περὶ τὸν ἰσθμόν, cf. 15 § 1.

Μήθυμναν, on northern coast of Lesbos, some 60 stadia from main-
land. This city refused to join the Lesbian revolt from Athens, but
fell into the hands of Sparta just before the battle of Arginusae. From
this time its importance seems to have diminished.

ὡς προδιδομένην, present participle with future reference, as ex-
pressing likelihood or intention (Goodw. M. T. § 32), ‘in expectation
of its betrayal,’ lit. ‘as on the point of betrayal.’

ἐπίκουροι, cf. sup. 2 ὃ 2, ‘mercenaries.’ προὐχώρει, impersonal,
Chl 74084

᾿Αντίσσης, cf. Ov. Met. xv. 287. From Livy, xLv. 31, we learn
that it was destroyed and its inhabitants removed to Methymna for
having sheltered and provisioned Antenor. Cf. also Pliny, N. H. 11.
8g. Antissa, Eresos, and Pyrrha were all dependencies of Mytilene.

καὶ καταστησάμενοι, i.e. ‘securing their hold,’ perhaps (as Classen
suggests) by leaving garrisons of mercenaries.

Saul. 9

130 THOUGYDIDES T7. [xvu. § 2—

8.2. ἐκβοήθεια, ‘a sally.’ Cf. 1. 105 § 5, ἐκβοηθήσαντες.

πληγέντες, μεγάλως νικηθέντες (schol.), ‘severely defeated.” For
paratactic construction of πολλοί and λοιποί with πληγέντες cf. supra
13 ὃ 3, al vijes...al μέν... αἱ δέ.

8 3. ταῦτα, τούς τε Μ. τῆς γῆς κρατοῦντας, for this participial
epexegesis, in lieu of infinitive, Kriig. well compares Aristoph. Nubes
380, ταυτί μ᾽ ἐλελήθη ὁ Leds οὐκ ὦν...α good instance of the interchange
of verbal adjective (part.) with verbal substantive (infin.). The partic.
constrn. is however suggested by the verb of perception πυνθανόμενοι :
note coordination of presents, πυνθανόμενοι, πέμπουσι. μ

εἴργειν, without object expressed.

Πάχης, cf. infra, 28, 33—36, 49, 50.

§ 4. οἱ ϑέ, demonstrative. avrepérat, cf. I. τὸ ὃ 6, ‘working their
own passage.’ ἐν κύκλῳ, Thuc. uses κύκλῳ or ἐν κύκλῳ indifferently.

ἁπλῷ τείχει, the usual practice, but here possibly specified because
of the double wall at Plataea.

ἐπὶ τῶν καρτερῶν, ‘upon commanding positions.’

ἐγκατῳκοδομήθη, Cl. retains the perfect and explains by reference
to previous historic present ἀφικνοῦνται. In regarding the erection of
these φρούρια as a preliminary he seems at fault. The perfect might
perhaps mean that the φρούρια were still standing at the time of Thuc.’s
writing: cf. v. 10 ἕστηκε τὸ τρόπαιον. In Dem., Call. p. 1275, we have
an ambiguous πεφύτευται (but see crit. note). These φρούρια were
perhaps mere quarters for φύλακες, as at Plataea. Arn. cites Caesar,
Bell. Civ. III. 37.

8 δ. κατὰ κράτος, ‘acriter.’

ἐκ γῆς καὶ ἐκ θαλάσσης, epexegetic of ἀμφοτέρωθεν, and so as-
similated to form of genitive, ‘both by sea and land,’ a variant on
κατὰ γῆν, but not to be construed on analogy of εἴργειν ἐκ.

ἤρχετο γίγνεσθαι, ‘began to set in’: the reading seems doubtful
to Herwerden.

CHAPTER XIX.

81. προσδεόμενοι, i.e. to supplement (πρός) their own contributions
or the ordinary sources of revenue.

καὶ αὐτοί, as compared with οἱ ξύμμαχοι.

τότε πρῶτον, the statement is ambiguous: the evidence of Antiphon
and Isaeus is against the assumption that this was the first occasion on
which such special contribution was levied. πρῶτον may imply (1) that

> oe NOTES. 1321

this was the first occasion on which so large a sum as 200 talents was

raised by εἰσῴφορά, (2) that this was the first occasion in this war, (3) that

the Athenians ‘started’ the subscription by this contribution, before

appealing to the allies. elogopd was a special war-tax, and distinct

from ordinary λειτουργίαι ; e.g. a trierarch was liable. Béckh regards

the sum here named as pointing to an assessment of 1 per cent.
διακόσια τάλαντα, appositional to εἰσφοράν.

ἀργυρολόγους, cf. IV. 50 § 1; such a method of collecting arrears of
tribute was sometimes employed (Jowett).

Λυσικλέα, the name is common in Inscriptions. The Lysicles
here mentioned is, however, possibly the same as the προβατοπώλης of
Aristophanes, Eq. 132. He married Aspasia after the death of Pericles.
He is also satirised by Aristoph. in the company of ἑταιρίδες and νευρορ-
pido. πέμπτον, the mention of 5 commanders to 12 ships suggests the
difficult nature of the commission.

§ 2. ἄλλα ἠργυρολόγει, cf. 11. 69 § 1 ταῦτα ἀργυρολογῶσι.

τῆς Καρίας, note the use of article with first subst. only; cf. v.
33 ὃ: τῆς ᾿Αρκαδίας és Tappactous (Kr.).

Mvovvrtos, on the Maeander, eventually ceded by Philip of Macedon
to the Magnesians. The smallest of the 12 Ionian cities, and even in
Strabo’s day so reduced as to be incorporated with Miletus, probably
on account of the frequent inundations to which the place was liable
(cf. Smith, Dict. Geo.).

Davdlos, this Sandis or Sandes was a son of the Persian Hercules.
For the Ionic genitive cf. ᾿Αφύτιος, Todéios. (Meinek. Herm. 3. 363;
Cobet N. L. 338.)

᾿Αναιιτῶν, Anaea (or Annaea) placed by Stephanus opposite
Samos: if so it must have been in Lydia. From Thuc. rt. 32, Iv. 75,
VIII. 10 it may have been on or near the coast, and in or near the valley
of the Maeander. At least it was near enough to annoy Samos. (Smith,
Dict. Geo.)

τῆς ἄλλης, the word ἄλλης is wanting in some of the better Mss.
Haack compares Tac. Hist. Iv. 56, ‘legatis interfectis ceterum vulgus
facile accessurum’; cf. Soph. Philoct. 38.

CHAPTER XxX.

§1. (For the account of the siege cf. Pseud.-Dem. Neaera § 103,
and Diodorus XII. 56. It is hard to reconcile Diodorus’ account of the
losses sustained in the assault with the Thucydidean narrative.)

Q— 2

132 ΤΟ. T77. [xx. 8 1—

ἔτι, cf. 11. 78. τῷ τε σίτῳ ἐπιλιπόντι : the equivalent of a verbal
substantive ἐπιλείψει τοῦ σίτου (Cl.). This position of re would prepare
us for some other sequence. Klotz (de part. 11. 748) holds that this τε
‘traiectum’ is due either to anacoluthon or to the use of compound for
simple expression. The aorist ἐπιλιπόντι calls for no change, although
Naber finds sufficient misery for the Plataeans in a present, ἐπιλείποντι.

τιμωρία, ‘help,’ the old Ionic use; cf. 1. 25 § 1, ‘as there was no
hope of succour or visible means of escape.’ For derivation cf. Curt.
Gk. Et. 1. 419, root ‘or,’ as in ὄρομαι, οὖρος. τιμωρός, ‘honour-guard’
(cf. θυρωρός, door-guard) = βοηθός, ‘champion.’

ἐπιβουλεύουσιν, frequent with verbal substantive, but only here in
Thuc. with infinitive (Cl.). ξυμπολιορκούμενοι, cf. 11. 78, there were
80 of them.

βιάσασθαι, ‘vi viam facere,’ used without direct object, unless
indeed we supply one by implication from context; cf. Iv. 20 § 3.

ἐσηγησαμένου, cf. VI. 90 81, =‘auctor erat,’ ‘suggested.’ For singular
cf. ν. 16 § τ ἐτεθνήκει Κλέων τε καὶ Βρασίδας.

ἀνδρός -- τινός. ὃς καὶ ἐστρατήγει, mark ἐστρατήγει, not ἡγεῖτο,
i.e. ‘praefectus,’ not ‘dux eruptionis.’

Kal=‘etiam,’ as well as ‘auctor consilii.’

§ 2. ἀπώκνησαν, construe with κίνδυνον (cf. 30 § 4). μέγαν
ἡγησάμενοι, sc. μέγαν τὸν κίνδυνον ἡγησάμενοι. πως, ‘nescio qui’?=
‘metu quodam.’

és διακοσίους... μάλιστα, pleonastic. ἐνέμειναν, ‘remained true to
their purpose.’ Sometimes inverted: e.g. “ἐνέμειναν omovdais,’ but
“ἐνέμειναν αἱ σπονδαί. τρόπῳ τοιῷδε, the curtness of expression has
not escaped Kriiger; ‘according to the following scheme,’ a logical
rather than syntactical connexion. Hude asks why ἐθελονταί ‘Volun-
teers for a forlorn hope’ is a phrase familiar enough in modern warfare
even. From Dem. Neaera ὃ 103, διακληρωσάμενοι, Hude finds occasion
for some ‘sortitio’ here. His proposal to place a full stop at ἐξόδῳ, and
to connect by ἐξῆλθον δέ, is ingenious but needless.

8 3. ἴσας, sc. τὸ μῆκος. ξυνεμετρήσαντο, mark the ξύν of com-
pound; cf. 11. 76 § 1 ξυντεκμηράμενοι. From Plato, Theaet. 154 A,
τὸ παραμετρούμενον, the addition of an accus, of object seems needless.
The Schol. supplies τὸ τεῖχος, edd., τὰς κλίμακας.

ἔπιβολαῖς, ‘layers,’ ‘courses,’ the δόμοι πλίνθου of Hat. 1. 179.

ἐξαληλιμμένον, Schol. κεχρισμένον, ‘thoroughly plastered.’ The face
of the wall had been left rough, thus shewing the courses of sun-baked
bricks. The so-called ‘bricks’ were probably mere lumps of clay.

XXI. § 2] NOTES. 133

Badham’s omission of οὐκ commits us to the trade vocabulary of Pollux
(cf. Duker’s note).

ἠριθμοῦντο, the middle is unusual (but see Plato, Phaedrus 270 a),
and suspicious side by side with ἀριθμοῦντες. Mark the parataxis,
ἠριθμοῦντο δὲ καὶ ἔμελλον (Cl.). ἔμελλον, cf. rr § τ.

ἀπέχοντες, Didot ἀπέχοντος, sc. τοῦ τείχους. But the change from
participle in agreement, ἀπέχοντες, to gen. absol. is more in accordance
with Thucydidean syntax.

és ὃ ἐβούλοντο, ‘ea muri pars in quam tendebant’ (St.), treating
τείχους as partitive genitive. és 8 need not=écoy, nor need the κατά
in καθορωμένου be pressed. Herw., from Ranae 1279, ‘és τὸ βαλανεῖον
βούλομαι," supplies ἰέναι. C. F. Smith (Am. J. Phil. x. 209) suggests
the explanation és ὃ ὁρᾶν ἐβούλοντο. The poetical use of és would favour
this interpretation, e.g. Aesch. Choeph. 224, Hom. 1]. 111. 268. The
Schol. explains és ὃ ἐβ. θεῖναι κλίμακας.

§ 4, οὕτως, ‘more supra dicto.’ τῆς πλίνθου, generic article.
Herw. explains as ἑκάστης, cf. VII. 65 § 2.

The parallel case of a Roman soldier discovering the height of the
Syracusan walls by the like means is familiar to all readers of Livy:
ef. Livy Xxv. 23. An imitation in Procopius B. G. I. 22 (Gottl.).

GEHAP TER, XOCr.

§ 1. οἰκοδομήσει, for more usual οἰκοδομίᾳ.

δύο τοὺς περιβόλους, the usual practice, when an attack in rear was
possible. Cf. Liv. v. 1 (Bl.). πρός, ‘on the side of,’ cf. Iv. 31 § 1.

εἴ τις.. ἔπίοι, coordination of adverbial with prepositional structure.

8 2. τὸ οὖν μεταξύ, either (1) with Stahl accept Cobet’s heroic
remedy oftexpunging the words οἱ ἑκκαίδεκα πόδες, as a gloss, regarding
τὸ μεταξύ as an accusative of limitation, ‘in this intervening space,’ or
(2) retaining them, make τὸ μεταξύ subject to @xoddunro, regarding
διανενεμημένα as attracted into agreement with οἰκήματα (οἰκήματα itself
being used predicatively with verb of distribution; cf. Thompson, G.
Syn. ὃ 87). For such false agreement cf.g8§ 3. ‘This space which had
been allotted to the sentries for quarters was covered with buildings
which were continuous.’ Classen, while regarding οἱ ἑκκαίδεκα πόδες as
suspicious, and making οἰκήματα the common subject of ὠκοδόμητο and
ἦν, leaves the nominative τὸ μεταξὺ τοῦτο anacoluthic. In the instance
which Arnold quotes from Hdt. 1. 180 τὸ δὲ ἀπὸ τούτου, αἱ ἐπικαμπαὶ

134 THO CYDIDES ΤῚΣ [xx1. §2—

mapa χεῖλος ἑκάτερον τοῦ ποταμοῦ, αἱμασιὴ παρατείνει, the verb assimi-
lates itself to the nearer substantive.

It is quite possible that the termination of the participle -éva has
left @xodéunro in our text in place of ἐνῳκοδόμητο.

ἣν ξυνεχῆ, sc. τὰ οἰκήματα.

8 3. διὰ δέκα ἐπάλξεων, ‘interiectis decem pinnis,’ ‘at distances
(intervals) of’; cf. 11. 29 § 2 διὰ τοσούτου.

τὸ ἔσω...τὸ ἔξω, the tendency of Latin would be to a double com-
parative (Poppo).

kal οἱ αὐτοί, καί expunged by Herbst and Classen, to give ol
αὐτοί predicative force (cf. 11. 36 § 2), ‘extending without a break.’
There was no room to pass on either side of the turrets, as the wall face
of the turret was a continuation of the outer face of the wall itself.

δι αὐτῶν μέσων, there was only one central gangway (or archway)
through the turret itself. Poppo comments on the contrast of πάροδος
with δίοδος.

ὃ 4. χειμὼν εἴη, optative of indefinite frequency.

νοτερός, not predicative, but in agreement with χειμών, ‘stormy
weather with rain,’ ‘dirty weather’ (Arn.).

στεγανῶν, ‘roofed in.’

τεῖχος, collective, as including the two περίβολοι.

περιεφρουροῦντο, ‘beleaguered,’ here only in Thuc.

CHARTER VXI

§ 1. παρεσκεύαστο, impersonal; a favourite Thuc. mannerism with
perf. and plup. of passive verb. αὐτοῖς, dative of agent (cf. Goodw.
G. G. § 188), but reducible to subjective explanation.

χειμέριον ὕδατι, causal dative, ‘by reason of,’ although it might re-
present a dative of circumstance; cf. infra 23 τοιούτῳ ἀνέμῳ ὑπονι-
φομένη. The rain (ὕδατι), snow, wind, and darkness, all favourable
‘ad furta belli’ (Wasse).

ἐξῇσαν, note the inceptive imperfect as contrasted with the com-
pleted action of aorists διέβησαν, προσέμιξαν.

οἵπερ, περ is emphatic. The éonynrat of 20 are meant.

τάφρον, the inner moat (nearer Plataea). προσέμιξαν, in weaker
sense, ‘approached,’ ‘came up to.’ ἀνὰ τὸ σκοτεινόν, ‘among,’ i.e.
‘amidst’ the darkness, ‘in the all-pervading darkness’ (Cl.).

ov προϊδόντων αὐτῶν, this use of genitive absolute, with reference

XXII. § 3] NOTES. 135

to object or subject of main sentence, is in distinct contrast to the
Latin use. Cf. 13 8 7, and see Thompson, G. Synt. § 152.

ψόφῳ, dependent on ἀντιπαταγοῦντος (ἅπαξ λεγόμενον in Thuc.),
lit. ‘blustering against,’ Lat. ‘obstrepere.’ Cf. Livy xxiv. 46 ‘imber
custodes suffugere in tecta coegit, sonituque primo largioris procellae
strepitum molientium portam exaudiri prohibuit’ : ‘in consequence of the
boisterous wind drowning the noise of their approach’ (lit. é«=resulting
from, consequent upon).

§ 2. ὅπως τὰ ὅπλα μή, the position of μή is due to the parti-
cipial expression xpovdueva, which has superseded a coordination of
two verbs, e.g. ὅπως μὴ κρούηται καὶ αἴσθησιν παρέχοι. Krug. cites
I. 12 § 1 ὥστε μὴ ἡσυχάσασα αὐξηθῆναι: no need for Cobet’s trans-
position.

αἴσθησιν παρέχοι, ‘occasion detection.’

εὐσταλεῖς τῇ ὁπλίσει, ‘armatura expediti,’ ‘lightly equipped in
point of accoutrement.’? The dative is a dative of limitation. Cf.
Madvig, Gk. Syn. § 40.

τὸν ἀριστερὸν πόδα, Schol. διὰ κουφότητα. Cf. Virg. Aen. VII.
689

‘vestigia nuda sinistri
Instituere pedis.’

(Duk. who also quotes from Macrob. Sat. v. 19; Sil. Ital. x11.
421.) Vegetius recommends that the left foot be left bare for the dis-
charge of missiles, the right for using the sword.

ἀσφαλείας ἕνεκα τῆς πρὸς τὸν πηλόν, ‘with a view to stability,
that is to say against the mud’: the articular clause appended in ex-
planation, i.e. to give them a safe foot-hold against the (slippery) clay.
ἀσφαλείας, ἀσφαλής suggests ἄπταιστος, a mere question of ‘firmitas
incessus.’ Cf. Sall. Jug. 94 (Poppo).

§ 3. μεταπύργιον (1.4. μεσοπύργιον), ‘a space between the turrets.’
The construction προσέμισγον κατά suggests the analogy of προσ-
βάλλειν κατά, κατά marking ‘point of attack.’

ἔρημοι, ‘propter hiemem’ (Haack). Cf. 21 § 3.

ἀνέβαινον... ἀνέβη, this contrast of imperf. with aor. is wisely re-
tained by Stahl, (For various readings and punctuation see crit.
note.)

οἱ ἑπόμενοι, i.e. the δώδεκα ψιλοί of context; their duty was to
make themselves masters of the dloda. ἕξ, supplementing the pre-
dication, ‘next came his followers, six making their way to either turret’

136 THUCYDIDES LIT. [xxu. § 3—

(1.6. to the turrets to right and left of the μεταπύργιον). ἐκεῖνοι, their
comrades, ‘the leading files.’

ἔμελλον δώσειν, not only ‘were intending,’ ‘but were intended.’
Cf. parallel use of ἔδει.

εἶναι πρός, cf. Soph. O. T. 1169 πρὸς αὐτῷ γ᾽ εἰμὶ τῷ δεινῷ.
εἶναι, not γίγνεσθαι, implying a nearness so immediate as to exclude
transition.

8 4. ἀντιλαμβανόμενος, without object; construe ἀπό with κατέ-
Bare. κεραμίϑα, for more usual κέραμος (Pollux). ψόφον, no actual
need for Cobet’s correction δοῦπον. ψόφος will represent any indistinct
sound.

8 δ. βοή, ‘an alarm.’ Cf. κηρύσσειν βοήν.

ἐπὶ τὸ τεῖχος, ἐπί -- “1π,᾿ not ‘versus’ (Haack). The sentries were
sheltering in the turrets. τεῖχος -- ἐπάλξεις, and will include both περί-
Bodo. Possibly ἐπί may=zapda (an Ionic confusion which lingers in
Thuc.) ‘in suam quisque stationem.’ (Popp.)

ὅ τι ἦν, mark the realisation; hence the mood of actual fact, in-
dicative.

χειμῶνος, cf. sup. ἀντιπαταγοῦντος τοῦ ἀνέμου.

προσέβαλον, aorist, probably the right reading. This feint had been
made ‘pari passu’ with the attempt at escalade.

ἐκ τοὔμπαλιν 7, cf. τοὐναντίον ἤ (Plato). Kr. quotes from Hdt. 1.
207 ἔμπαλιν 7. Cobet’s ἐκ τοὔμπαλιν ἢ ἡ is surely an error in judgment.
In such comparative structures the tendency of the language is to brachy-
logy; cf. Cicero ‘meliorem invenies quam reliquisti’ (not ‘quam quem’).
See Shilleto on Thuc. I. 60.

ὑπερέβαινον, ‘were engaged in crossing,’ ‘ trying to cross.’

ἥκιστα νοῦν ἔχοιεν, ‘to distract their attention as far as possible’ ;
a litotes.

§ 6. μὲν οὖν, continuative, and slightly inferential (οὐ yap ἤδει 6 τι
ἣν). Perhaps the μὲν οὖν may be separable, μέν finding its direct
answer in 66. ‘Thus, though bewildered, they kept their posts, but no
one ventured to quit his own particular station.’

ἐθορυβοῦντο, sc. ἀπορίᾳ τοῦ εἰκάσαι. κατὰ χώραν μένοντες, Sch.
ἡσυχάζοντες.

αὐτῶν, one of the many instances of that ἀγήρων πάθος λόγων ἐν ἡμῖν
(Plato Phil. 15 Ὁ) ; the confusion of the ‘one and many,’ the general and
particular. In Demosth. Pantaenet. § 55 the correction ἑαυτοῖς for
ἐμαυτῷ seems very doubtful.

φυλακή, point, or post, of observation; cf. προσβολή.

XXII. § 8] NOTES. 137

ἐν ἀπόρῳ ἦσαν -- ἠπόρουν, hence the infinitive εἰκάσαι, ‘were at their
wits’ end to conjecture what was happening.’

§ 7. ot τριακόσιοι, article, as expressing fraction of whole, or as
definitely anticipating relative, see Arnold’s note and cf. 3 § 4.

εἴ τι δέοι, ‘si forte necesse esset,’ ‘in case of emergency.’

ἔξω, i.e. on the side of the Peloponnesian lines nearer Athens. The
wall doubtless had its πυλίδες and ἐπεισαγωγαί (VIII. 92 § 1); cf. 21
§ 1.

φρυκτοὶ πολέμιοι, as contrasted with φίλιοι, which were given by
keeping the torches at rest (ἠρεμοῦντες) ; the signal of an enemy’s attack
was given by waving them (cetduevor). Arnold doubts whether the art
of signalling was quite as much in its infancy as Poppo implies: vid.
II. 94, VIII. 102. In Polybius we find a complete code.

8 8. παρανῖσχον, observe παρά, ‘contra.’

ὅπως ἀσαφῆ ἡ Kal μὴ βοηθοῖεν, for change of structure, from in-
transitive to transitive, cf. 51 § 2 ἐβούλετο φυλακὴν εἶναι... ὅπως μὴ
ποιῶνται: for change of mood cf. VII. 17 ὃ 4 ἀποπειράσωσι...κωλύοιεν.
Sometimes the optative precedes the subjunctive; cf. VI. 96 § 3 ὅπως
εἴησαν, kal ἤν τι δέῃ παραγίγνωνται.

As to the true relation of subj. to optat. ‘adhuc sub indice lis est.’
On the one hand we have the distinction of ‘will’ from ‘ wish,’ on the
other hand the discrimination of ‘ more immediate’ futurity from ‘less
immediate’ futurity. On the first assumption we have the mood of will
yielding to the mood of wish, on the second we have the distinction of a
primary and secondary object in view, or a πάρεργον subordinated to an
ἔργον. The distinction of wish and will fails, more or less, in ordinary
conditional sentences, in potential use of optative, and in ordinary causal
clauses. The distinction of nearer or remoter future, on the contrary, not
only derives support from Sanskrit, but also from Homeric usage.

In the present passage the object was to prevent relief by confusing
the signals, but the confusion of the signals was a necessary preliminary
to the prevention of relief. But whether these are regarded as two
distinct issues, or whether the second is an outcome of the first, appears
from comparison of passages extremely doubtful. In ὅπως with subj.
we see the expression of the actual form of thought of the agent (Goodw.
M. T. p. 115), in the optative we may perhaps find a reflexion of the
‘ideal condition,’ the wish being ‘father to the thought’; i.e. we have
an interchange of ἤν πως with εἴ πως. But the realisation may possibly
be analogous to the ‘representation of conditional structures,’ as protasis
may be realised at the expense of apodosis, or apodosis at the cost of

138 THOCYDIDES TH. [xxi1. ὃ 8—

protasis: so will may be made to give way to wish and wish to will, the
nearer to the remoter or the remoter to the nearer (see Goodwin, M. T.
Appendix I.; Gildersleeve in Am. Journal of Philol. 1v. 426).

πρὶν ἀντιλάβοιντο, ‘until they should have reached’ (=fut. perf.) ;
c Iv. 128 § 3.

πρίν, essentially negative in force, hence with strong affinity for the
aorist, the tense of simple occurrence (Am. J}. Phil. 11. 466). The use
of πρίν with optat. merely represents the use with subjunctive of direct
form of sentence (Goodw. M. T. § 643). The construction is restricted
to negative sentences (Goodw. § 635).

τοῦ ἀσφαλοῦς, one of the many instances of Thuc.’s use of neut. adj.
or participle for abstract noun.

CHAPTER XXIII.

§ 1. οἱ δ᾽ ὑπερβαίνοντες, observe the constrn. xa’ ὅλον καὶ μέρος :
the larger subject, οἱ ὑπερβαίνοντες, is eventually resolved into a οἱ μέν...
oi δέ clause, in apposition, the sentence from ws οἱ πρῶτοι... ἐκεκρατήκεσαν
being parenthetical. τε prepares us for the καί sequence; the first καί
connects εἶργον with ἐφύλασσον, the second καί coordinates ἐπαναβιβά-
σαντες with προσθέντες. The order is ἐφύλασσόν τε Tas διόδους Kal (κλί-
μακας προσθ. καὶ ἐπαναβ. ἄνδρας πλείους) οἱ μὲν εἶργον οἱ δὲ ὑπερέβαινον.
The two participles, προσθέντες καὶ ἐπαναβ., refer to main subject. ‘As
for the Plataeans who were meanwhile engaged in crossing (now that
their leading files had already mounted and, after cutting down the
sentries, had made themselves masters of either turret), they were
watching the passages through the towers, in which they had them-
selves taken their stand, to prevent any attempt at rescue through the
archways, and by dint of planting ladders from the wall against the
turret, and mounting thereon several men, were some of them holding
in check by missiles both from above and beneath those who attempted
a rescue, while others, the main body, were meanwhile making their
way across.’

The difficulty lies in (1) re...kal sequence, which might suggest a co-
ordination of ἐκεκρατήκεσαν (plup.) with ἐφύλασσον (imp.), an arrangement
which suggested itself to Poppo, but leaves us in difficulties with the two
participles προσθέντες and ἐπαναβιβάσαντες: (2) the reference of προσθέντες
and ἐπαναβ. to the main clause, thus postponing the separation of the
main subject into the μέν...δέ clauses.

XxuL § 4] NOTES. 139

For a simple instance of the like construction cf. 13 § 4; for a
more complex case see IV. 73. Even Cicero does not disdain the use;
cf. de Fin. 111. § 21 ‘honesta facta, ipsumque honestum, quo omnia re-
ferenda sunt...tamen id solum expetendum est.’

On the prevalence of the participial element, cf. Am. Journ. Phil.
ἘΣ LAS

ὡς ot, either temporal or circumstantial, probably the former.

ἑκατέρου, at either end of the μεταπύργιον.

αὐτοί, in place of the original φύλακες. μηδένα ἐπιβοηθεῖν, a strained
epexegetical infin. suggestive of τοῦ μή of purpose: cf. 11. 69 § I.

ἀπὸ τοῦ τείχους, i.e. from the roof of the οἰκήματα : the τεῖχος was
practically one level between the two turrets: the βραχὺ τεῖχος by con-
trast with the πύργοι. κάτωθεν.. ἄνωθεν, construe with εἶργον βάλλοντες,
1.6. from the roof of the turrets as well as from the δίοδοι: observe
throughout the passage the aorists as preliminary to imperfects.

οἱ δέ... οἱ πλείους, articular clause in explanation, ‘alii, qui plures
erant.’

§ 2. ὁ δὲ διακομιζόμενος ἀεί. Cobet holds that the AEI dropped
out from AI syllable, was replaced in margin, and so transposed ; but
cf. IV. 39 ὃ 2, Tots ἐσπλέουσι λάθρα.

χείλους, 1.6. ‘labrum fossae’; cf. Dobree Ady. 1. 33 ‘puto fuisse inter
murum et fossam,’ ‘the brink of the outer trench’ (moat).

εἴ τις κωλυτὴς γίγνοιτο-- κωλύοι τὴν διάβασιν. An instance, says
Dion. Hal., of Thuc.’s σχηματισμός, "τὸ ῥηματικὸν ὀνομαστικῶς ἐκφέρειν.
For such resolution of the simple verbal expression, cf. 2 § 3 μηνυταὶ
γίγνονται. The optative here is iterative, and the εἰ almost temporal
in signification.

παρὰ τὸ τεῖχος, with reference to the τριακόσιοι ἔξω (22 § 7), along
the lines, parallel with the external περίβολος : the holders of the turrets
were dealing with those on the higher level.

8 3. οἱ τελευταῖοι, the οἱ must not be disturbed. Kriiger rightly
treats it as appositional. The Plataeans holding the δίοδοι and πύργοι
could cover the descent of their comrades, but would have none to cover
their own.

§ 4. ἐκ τοῦ σκότους, Herw. calls attention to the later neuter
form σκότους. Kriig. quotes from Xen. Anab. vir. 4 § 18. paddov=
σαφέστερον (the comparison is suppressed, ἑώρων μᾶλλον ἢ ἑωρῶντο).

τὰ γυμνά, ‘the unprotected (unshielded) side’; cf. v. τὸ § 4, Livy
XXII. 50, ‘dextrum latus, quod patebat’: see Thuc.’s comment on the
effect of such γύμνωσις, V. 71 § 1.

140 THUCYDIDES J17. [xxi § 5—

8 δ. ὥστε φθάνουσι, indicative of actual result, although the infini-
tive need not exclude such actual result: note historic present.

kal οἱ ὕστατοι, καί intensive, ‘even the very last’ (rearmost of all).

βιαίως, ‘under pressure,’ ‘hard pressed’; cf. 11. 33 § 3.

ἐν αὐτῇ, sc. TH τάφρῳ. ἐπελθεῖν, Schol. διαδραμεῖν, ἐπάνω διελθεῖν:
the addition of wore only makes the epexegesis more specific, ‘not
strong enough to bear.’ The order of the words suggests that οὐ βέβαιος
is used for ἀβέβαιος.

ἀπηλιώτου, the genitive is explained by Kriig. from Lobeck, Ajax
805, on temporal analogy. But the nakedness of the structure, and the
absence of substantival participle (a rare feature in Gk. absolute construc-
tions) makes one suspect the omission of a preposition, e.g. ὑπό in constr.
with ἐπεπήγει.

ἢ βορέου, mark the Schol. 6 ἢ σύνδεσμος ἀντὶ τοῦ ἤπερ κεῖται : see crit.
note. I quite agree with Classen that the text shews signs of some
disturbance or omission.

τοιούτῳ ἀνέμῳ, not sociative, but causal dative, ‘by reason of the
wind from that quarter.’

ὃ μόλις ὑπερέχοντες ἐπεραιώθησαν, the stress of the sentence falls on
the participle, ‘of which they could only just keep their heads clear in
crossing.’ μόλις, ‘vix et ne vix quidem.’

ἐγένετο καὶ ἡ διάφευξις, not (as Cl. notes) a mere periphrasis for
διέφυγον. ἐγένετο is here used in the old Ionic sense ‘proved successful’
(cf. EvvéBy=‘bene cessit’). This substantival formation suggests a later
period of Greek: it is a form in -σις consisting mainly of nouns of action,
and pointing to some aoristic formation, e.g. λεῖψις, δεῖξις, ξεῦξις (cf. Vict.
Henry, Compar. Gr. p. 130). Perhaps some inceptive force lurks in this
termination, ‘even their attempt at escape proved successful, mainly
because of the severity of the weather’ (violence of the storm).

μᾶλλον, ‘more directly,’ ‘more immediately.’

CHAPTER XXIV.

§ 1. ἁθρόοι, ‘agmine facto,’ ‘conglobati’ (ξυστραφέντες as opposed to
διεσπαρμένοι).

᾿Ανδροκράτους, cf. Hdt. ΙΧ. 25; Plut. Arist. ΧΙ. (p. 326) where he is
mentioned as ἀρχηγέτης τῶν Πλαταιέων. The ἡρῷον was a τέμενος,
thickly planted.

νομίζοντες ὑποτοπῆσαι, the presence of ἄν is not inevitable, although
its omission is more than probable (A), but such cases are exceptional

xxiv. § 3] NOTES. 14τ

(cf. Goodw. M. T. 127); cf. Thuc. 11. 3 ἐνόμισαν κρατῆσαι, but see
Stahl, Quaest. Gramm. c. 1. For the double infinitive cf. Plato, Rep.
381 BE, ποιοῦσι δοκεῖν... φαίνεσθαι. (Kriig.)

σφᾶς, Plataeans. αὐτούς, Peloponnesians; cf. 31 § I.

Δρυὸς κεφαλάς, the τρεῖς κεφαλαί of Hdt. 1x. 39: a road led through
the pass in a S.E. direction, by way of Eleutherae and the Thriasian
plain. There are two roads passing over Cithaeron and converging on
Plataea; one from Eleusis and Athens, passing Oenoe, Eleutherae,
and Panactum, and debouching on the Plataean plain near Hysiae : the
other was the direct route from the Isthmus to Thebes. It led from
Megara, and crossed the ridge of Cithaeron about 1 mile to the west of
the former, descending thence obliquely, along the flanks of the moun-
tain, upon Plataea. (Leake, N. Greece 11. 334.)

διώκοντας, without direct object, but with cognate accus. τὴν φέρουσαν
(sc. ὁδόν).

8 2. ὑποστρέψαντες, ἅπ. Ney. in Thuc., but cf. ἐπιστρέψαντες, 11. go
§ 4, Soph. O. T. 728 ὑποστραφείς, ‘divertentes.’

*Epv@pas, some 30 stades from Plataea: note the accent, “Epv@pac in
Boeotia, "Epv@pai in Asia (Schol. ad 1]. 11. 499).

*Youds, a Boeotian deme, but not within Plataean territory (Schol.):
it was some 26 or 27 stades E. of Plataea.

λαβόμενοι, cf. 22 sub fin. ἀντιλάβοιντο, ‘assequi,’ ‘having reached.’

πλειόνων, i.e. 220; cf. 20 ὃ 2: τινες, 7 men.

εἰσὶ γάρ, a stereotyped phrase, and so retaining present form even
with historical tenses (cf. Lat. ‘nescio qui’).

ὑπερβαίνειν, i.e. ‘before attempting to cross.’

τοξότης, appositional to εἷς, ‘one, an archer.’

§ 3. κατὰ χώραν ἐγένοντο, ‘resumed their stations,’ ‘returned to
quarters.’ βοηθείας. Cf. 22 ὃ 7.

εἰδότες οὐδέν...τῶν δέ.. ἀπαγγειλάντων, observe the free coordina-
tion of participle in agreement with subject with genitive absolute. For
the like structure cf. 53 § 2.

τοῖς νεκροῖς, a strained ‘dativus commodi.’ The dead are re-
garded as interested in the agreement. ἐσπένδοντο is inchoative: ‘in
animo habebant pacisci,’ ‘iam paciscebantur,’ ‘they were on the point
of arranging burial for their dead.’ The text is unsatisfactory: the
word ἀναίρεσις, ‘gathering,’ ‘collecting,’ ‘picking up,’ is only used in
four other instances in all Thuc.: without substantive, in dependence,
cf. 11. 34, V- 11, or with genitive, 111. 113, or with preposition περί, VII.
§72. The ‘butcher’s bill’ of the siege was not a heavy one. From 11.

142 THOCYDIDES, TH. [xxiv. 8 3—

78 we know that 480 was the total number of the garrison. In III. 20
we find 220 taking part in the sally, of whom 212 escaped to Athens,
one being taken prisoner, 7 finding ‘discretion the better part of
valour.’ In 68 § 3 we read that 200 Plataeans and 25 Athenians were
executed. The siege then cost in all some 43 or 44 lives. Naber
doubts the credibility of the narrative, e.g. ‘who, amidst the darkness
and confusion, would note the capture of a single τοξότης Again,
‘how shall we reconcile the statement ws οὐδεὶς περίεστι with the fact
that all escaped?’ Surely such criticism is as inconsistent as it is in-
conclusive.

CHAPTER XXV.

§ 1. ὁ Λακεδαιμόνιος, cf. 111. 100 ὃ 2. The use of article with
ethnic names appears more or less arbitrary in Thuc.

Πύρρα, west of Lesbos, on the so-called Euripus of Pyrrha, some
80 stades from Mytilene, 100 from Cape Malea. Pliny, Vv. 39, says that
the town was swallowed up by the sea. In Strabo’s time it had
ceased to exist, although the port and suburbs still remained.

χαράδρα, a torrent bed, interrupting the line of the Athenian
works (Arn.).

προέδροις, probably the ἄρχοντες of 27 ὃ 3. Cf. also viII. 67 ὃ 3,
the mpoeornxéres or chief oligarchs of Mytilene.

ἃς ἔδει βοηθῆσαι, ‘which were to come to their aid.’ Cf. the use of
ἔμελλον, 22 § 4.

προαποπεμφθῆναι, notice the change to infinitive with the supple-
mentary τε clause. The tendency in these ὅτι structures is to lapse
into the less formal accus. and infinitive. (Cf. vil. 76.)

τούτων ἕνεκα καὶ ἐπιμελησόμενος, for coordination of prepositional
construction with participial cf. 11. 89 ὃ 2 οὐ δι’ ἄλλο τι θαρσοῦσιν ἢ
κατορθοῦντες, IV. 24 ὃ 5 διὰ στενότητα καὶ εἰσπίπτουσα ἡ θάλασσα.

8 2. καὶ πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους ἧσσον εἶχον τὴν γνώμην, cf. v.
1382. The Schol. explains γγώμη by προαίρεσις, but it more nearly=
διάνοια. ὥστε ξυμβαίνειν, epexegetic, ‘they turned their attention less
to the Athenians, in the way of seeking terms.’ For ξυμβαίνειν used
absolutely cf. rv. 81 § 1: for epexegesis, cf. VII. 86 § 3.

ξυνέγραψεν, sc. ἐστὶν ὁ ξυγγράψας, ‘is the historian’ (a complexive
aorist). Cf, 1.1 § 1

XXVI. § 4] NOTES. 143

CHAPTER XXVI.

§ 1. (The text of the opening sentence, though possibly tampered
with, admits of explanation. In the absence of Ms. authority to dis-
prove it I have kept the usual text.)

oi ἸΤελοποννήσιοι, cf. τ ὃ τ.

τὰς ἐς Μυτιλήνην, ‘the ships intended for Mytilene.’

δύο Kal τεσσαράκοντα, vid. sup. chap. 16 and 20, 40 sail only.
Poppo suggests around number. The text appears correct. No mention
has been made so far of the return of the two triremes sent with ambas-
sadors from Mytilene (cf. chap. 4 and 5). In all probability they waited
for the safe convoy afforded by this fleet of 40 sail. Diod. Sic. XII. 55
mentions 45.

ναύαρχος, an official of the highest rank in Sparta. Cf. Arist. Pol.
11. 9 ὃ 33 ἡ vavapxla σχεδὸν ἑτέρα βασιλεία καθέστηκεν. The ofticer
in charge was not always intended to retain command: cf. VIII. 26 § 1
(P. St.). Did Arist. exaggerate his powers?

προστάξαντες. Campe sees a lacuna, e.g. διὰ ταχέων περαιωθῆναι
(cf. 28 8 1). It is evident that the dispatch of this fleet to Mytilene
was intended to be synchronous with the invasion of Attica.

ἀμφοτέρωθεν, i.e. both in Attica and Mytilene.

καταπλεούσαις, compound for simple (Class.). Cf. 11. 103 § 1.

ἐπιβοηθήσωσιν, the ἐπί of the compound is aggressive, ‘send a
force against.’ The change of subjunctive to future indicative in final
clauses is one which demands stronger proof.

§ 2. Cleomenes and Pleistoanax were both sons of Pausanias, the
hero of the great battle of Plataea. For Pleistoanax cf. 11. 21 ὃ 1, v. 16.
He was still in exile. In 111. 89 § 1 we find that Agis, the son of
Archidamus, is the king in command. Cleomenes was probably dead
by that time (cf. Class.). :

νεωτέρου, οἴ. 1. 107 8 1. πατρὸς δέ, this use of δέ in supplementary
predication iscommon. Cf. Aesch. Choeph. 182 ἐμὴ δὲ μήτηρ, and 826
μόρον δ᾽ ᾿᾽Ορέστου.

8 8. ἐβεβλαστήκει, ‘repullulare’ (Dobree). Buttmann notes the
rarity of reduplication before BX: but cf. βλασφημεῖν. The law of re-
duplication appears most capricious, e.g. in the case of Doric present
dedolkw.

τὴν δευτέραν, cf. 11. 57 ὃ 2, a 40 days’ invasion.

8 4. πεύσεσθαι, the future in epexegesis is somewhat rare. The
tense is due to sense of expectation lurking in ἐπιμένοντες.

144 LILO CY DIDES “LLL. [xxv1. § 4—-

ὡς πεπεραιωμένων, ‘tanquam traiecissent.’ For ὡς in absolute
sequence, cf. 4 § 4.

ἐπεξῆλθον, Schol. ἐπέδραμον, ‘they extended their ravages.’ τὰ
πολλά, construe with τέμνοντες.

ἀπέβαινεν.. .ἐπελελοίπει, coordination of imp. and plup. Cf. 23 § τ.

CHAPTER XXVII.

81. at νῆες, promised by Salaethus; cf. 25 § 1. {Kov=pluperfect.

évexpovilov, am. Ney. in Thuc.=évdiarpiBew. ἐν, sc. ἐν τῷ TAG,
‘were wasting time upon the voyage’ (or perhaps= χρόνου διατριβὴν
ἐνεποίουν)ῦ. Mark the interruption by parenthetical ἀλλά of the τε καί
sequence, and cf. VIII. 76.

§ 2. καὶ αὐτὸς οὐ -- οὐδ᾽ αὐτός (cf. Dem. Nicostrat. § 12 οὐδ᾽ ἔχω
οὐδ᾽ αὐτός), ‘not even himself.’

ὁπλίζει, cf. VIII. 25 § 1, ‘gravi armatura instruit,’ i.e. with shield,
spear and cuirass. ὄντα, as participle of historic ἣν.

ὡς ἐπεξιών, cf. 4 ὃ 4.

8 8. οὔτε...τε, vid. Thuc. passim. The ov affects the first clause
only. Cf. Lat. neque...et (Roby, Lat. Gr. § 2241).

κατὰ ξυλλόγους, cf. 11. 21 § 2 κατὰ ξυστάσεις, ‘coetus rather than
concilia’; such meetings were purely informal.

τοὺς δυνατούς, 1.6. the ὀλίγοι. ἐς TO φανερόν -- ἐς τὸ μέσον (Hat.
ἀναφανδόν). τὸν σῖτον, collective, ‘the stock of provisions,’ according
to Herbst, imported, before the revolt, from Pontus and elsewhere.

ἤ...ἤ probably point to a zeugma with ἐκέλευον.

αὐτοί, ‘ipsi per se,’ ‘of themselves.’ They would make terms of
their own (independently of the oligarchs).

ξυγχωρήσεσθαι, the midd. future is not only a feature of the
compound, but of the simple verb. Cf. 11. 20 § 4.

CHAPTER XXVIII.

§ 1. οἱ ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν, not a unique instance. Cf. Demosth.
p- 126 (Herw.); and 72 § 2 of ἔχοντες τὰ mpdywara—the δυνατοί of cap.
27.

γνόντες... κινδυνεύσοντες, for such participial attraction see Goodw.
M. T. § 904. Note also the transition from present to future.

κοινῇ, 1.6. in common with the leaders of the democrats.

XXVIII. § 2] NOLES, 145

πρὸς IIdxyta, subject, of course, to ratification of Athenian
ἐκκλησία.

ὥστε, ‘ea lege ut,’ ‘on the condition that.’ Cf. the parallel uses
of ἐφ᾽ ᾧ re with infin. and ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἄν with optat.

The conditional element that we often find in ὥστε and ἐφ᾽ ᾧ
carries with it the original finality. The conditional (restrictive) ‘ita
—ut’ in Latin has not only ‘ut—non’ but ‘ne’ (Roby, 1650, 1704).
The condition is intended to bring about the result (Gildersleeve, Am.
Journ. Phil. vit. 161—175).

Mark the connexion of clauses: δέχεσθαι takes its constr. directly
from ὥστε, not from ἐξεῖναι: βουλεῦσαι and δέχεσθαι are however
coordinated as stipulations in favour of Athenians, indeed the καί
clause is supplementary to ἐξεῖναι βουλεῦσαι: with the δέ clause ἐξεῖναι
resumes its force: at περὶ ἑαυτῶν the subdivision of the main sentence
is so far complete: with the second δέ clause (ἐν ὅσῳ δέ) is introduced
a second concession in favour of Mytilene. But so loose is Thuc.
in coordination that it is quite possible that the sentence represents
a succession of independent infinitives, reflecting imperative of oratio
recta (cf. Iv. 50, πέμψαι); or even the infin. of original agreement:
i.e. (1) on the condition that Paches should not attempt to imprison;
(2) Paches must not imprison,

For contrast of aorist and present cf. 52 § 3.

ἐν ὅσῳ δ᾽ ἂν πάλιν ἔλθωσι, ‘pending their return,’ ie. ‘in the
interval between their going and coming back’; a good instance of
the notorious fondness of Greek for leaving an antithesis incomplete:
one only of the two things, between which a third lies, is specified.
Cf. 51 ὃ 3 és τὸ μεταξὺ τῆς νήσου. See Shilleto on Dem. Fals. Leg.
§ 182.

αὕτη, adjectival for adverbial predication=otrws, κατὰ ταῦτα. Cf.
supra 12 § 1.

§ 2. πράξαντες πρός, cf. 11.5§ 7. μάλιστα, with πράξαντες, ‘most
active in negotiating.’

ἠνέσχοντο, cf. v. 45 § 4, used absolutely, ‘non sustinuerunt’ (Poppo
cf. Caes. Bell. Gall. 11, 6). By some edd. construed with περιδεεῖς
ὄντες on analogy of II. 49 ὃ 5, ‘found their apprehension unbearable.’
ὅμως, 1.6. either (1) in spite of their excess of apprehension, or (2) in
spite of Paches’ assurance of protection. Thuc.’s use of ὅμως is
frequently suggestive of brachylogy, cf. 49 § 1.

καθίζουσι, sc. as ἱκέται. Cf. 70 § 5.

ἀναστήσας -- πείσας ἀναστῆναι, ‘inducing them to quit (their place

5. 1. Io

146 THUCYDIDES Jif. (xxvut. ὃ 2—

of sanctuary), cf. Soph. O. C. 175 σοὶ πιστεύσας καὶ μεταναστάς, Thuc.
I. 126 § 11.
κατατίθεται, Cl. suggests that the use of the middle implies self-
interest on Paches’ part in the safety of the hostages (cf. viiI. 3 ὃ 1).
μέχρι οὗ, the absence of ἄν is noticeable; but with ὅπου, ὅστις, the
poets frequently dispense with ἄν (vid. St., Quaest. Gr. p. 11). Cf.
I. 137 § 3 μέχρι γένηται. Custom wavers between μέχρι and μέχρις ov.
§3. Αντισσαν, cf. sup. 18§ 2. προσεκτήσατο, sc. αὐτήν.
τἄλλα, ‘quod reliqui erat.’ td περὶ τὸ στρατόπεδον, ‘quod ad
exercitum attinebat,’ or, better, Ξε τὰ τοῦ στρατοπέδου.

CHAPTER XXIX.

τεσσαράκοντα, cf. 16 § 3.

§ 1. ἐνδιέτρυψαν, practically=pluperfect, ‘had been loitering’:
contrast with λανθάνουσι, historic present as=imperfect. σχολαῖοι,
adjectival for adverbial ; cf. ἐπὶ σχολῆς, διὰ σχολῆς.

τοὺς ἐκ τῆς πόλεως: a bone of much contention. Kriig., Class.
and Hude explain by the 1oo ships of chap. 16, now on their way
back from Peloponnese. But that fleet returned in 428 (16 8 4), whereas
the present Pel. fleet was not sent out until 427. Von Velsen (Bonn,
1857) suggests a lacuna before πρὶν δή, e.g. “καὶ οὐδὲν τῶν γενομένων
ὑποπτεύουσι,᾽ but needlessly. The words must refer either to the
squadron reserved for defence of Attica and Salamis (cf. cap. 17) or
to the τριάκοντα νῆες of chap. τό (τὴν περιοικίδα πορθοῦσαι), of whose
return or recall we find no mention.

πρίν δή, δή, though emphasising πρίν, has in itself no temporal
significance. The structure πρὶν ἔσχον is due to latent negative in
λανθάνουσι. ἔσχον (from toxw), more freq. σχεῖν és OF προσσχεῖν,--
‘cursum inhibuerunt,’ ‘stopped at.’ Δήλῳ, locative.

Ἰκάρῳ καὶ Μυκόνῳ, the geographical order is reversed, as else-
where, cf. 111. 102 § 1, VIII. 108 § 1. Von Velsen suggests that there
is no notion of ‘touching at,’ but only of ‘approaching,’ in προσμίξαντες
(see however 22 § 4), 1.6. ‘it was in the offing of Icarus and Myconus
that they first heard the news.’ Classen’s explanation is probably
correct, viz. that Icarus, being the place at which the news first
reached them, claims priority of place in defiance of geography.

Icarus, an island in Aegean, W. of Samos, a colony of Miletus, but
in time of Strabo a possession of Samos, who used it for a sheep
pasture; perhaps the same as Callimachus’ Δολιχή and Pliny’s Macris.

ENS 2 NOTES. 147

Myconus, another island, E. of Delos, N. of Naxos, 40 stades from
RKheneia, mentioned in Hat. vi. 118.

ἑαλωκυίᾳ, predicative participle. ‘Mytilene was now numbering
seven days as a captured town,’ i.e. ‘the capture of Mytilene was now
seven days old.’ This expression of temporal relation by possessive
dative is a favourite device of poets; e. g. χρόνος δὲ τίς τῷ παιδὶ δια-
πεπραγμένῳ ; Ion 353.

Embatum, only known from Theopompus.

§ 2. τὸ σαφές. Why pregnant article? (Cl.). τὸ σαφές merely Ξε τὴν
σαφήνειαν, and comes under the common Thuc. use of neut. art. with
adjective as=substantive.

ἐκ τῶν παρόντων, ‘under present circumstances,’ i.e. in view of
the present emergency.

ἔλεξεν, the aorist suggests the brevity of the speech.

CHAPTER XXX.

§ 1. πάρεσμεν, ‘per κοίνωσιν᾽ (Goll.): he identifies himself with
them, as one of them. Cf. 1. 68 § 1, III. 113 § 2.

ἡμᾶς, expunged by Cobet, but retained by Class. on authority of
VI. 22 §1. The insertion of the subject is unusual.

ἐκπύστους γενέσθαι, a periphrasis with verbal adjective, borrowed
from the Ionic: cf. κατάγγελτος VII. 48, ἐξάγγελτος VIII. 11 ὃ 1 (Pop.).

ὥσπερ ἔχομεν, ‘ut sumus,’ ‘statim’ (cf. Soph. Phil. 808 Herm.),
‘at once,’ but in Vv. 32 ὃ 5 in totally different sense.

§ 2. ἀνδρῶν, the absence of article marks the genitive as possessive,
not absolute: practically, ἀνδρῶν Ξε τινῶν.

καὶ πάνυ, ‘vel maxime,’ II. 11 ὃ 6 (Pop.).

ἀνέλπιστοι.. ἐπιγενέσθαι ἄν, again the question arises whether a
realistic aorist without ἄν cannot replace the future with words ex-
pressing hope or expectation? For further discussion of the question
see Appendix.

ἡ ἀλκὴ τυγχάνει μάλιστα οὖσα, for various readings see crit.
note. Herbst, Philol. xvi. 305, would explain the construction by
repetition of ἀνέλπιστος, treating the word as active in first position,
passive in second, —an interpretation, which, says Herw. (Stud. p. 40),
‘bellum declarat grammaticae.’

Stahl expl. ‘nostrarum virium robur maxime locum habet’=where

LO=—2

148 THUCYDIDES S11. [xxx. ὃ 2—

we find the best field for our strength. Kriiger points out that the
Peloponnesian superiority cannot bear upon the Athenian want of
precaution.

Cobet is right, ‘qua parte nos valemus maxime.’ The Pelopon-
nesians had now a fleet of 40 or 42 sail. Athens had only sent a
squadron of 40 ships at first, although in c. 18 there is mention of a
reinforcement of 1000 hoplites. The point made by Teutiaplus is that
the unusually strong fleet of the Peloponnesians will find a reinforce-
ment in Athenian neglect. Note the re—xal connexion. For once
the relative construction is regular.

ἀλκή, cf. 1. 80 ὃ 3. Junghahn (N. Jahrb. ΟΧΙΧ. 358) explains as
“defence” ; οἵ» (ἘΠῚ Smith; Ac). Boe. 210;

κατ᾽ οἰκίας, ‘from house to house.’

ἀμελέστερον, not a merely qualified positive, but in connexion with
ὡς κεκρατηκότων, ‘all the more carelessly in the assurance of victory.’

διεσπάρθαι, more graphic than the usual aorist with εἰκός, ‘have
become scattered.’ Pop. compares Livy v1. 3 ὃ 5.

§ 3. εἴ τις dpa does not suggest doubt, but possibility (Cl.). ‘Qui-
cumque’ rather than ‘si qui’; assurance, not hesitation.

καταληφθῆναι dv τὰ πράγματα, ‘that we shall find ourselves masters
of the position.’ Note the qualified form of futurity, the ἄν of apodosis
clearly recalling the εἰ of protasis.

τὰ πράγματα, ‘res illas’ (Pp.), but would not this be ἐκεῖνα ἢ
rather, the equivalent of ‘rerum status.’

8 4. μὴ ἀποκνήσωμεν, really a first person of imperative, whether
we treat as hortative or deprecatory matters not: ‘let us not,’ or ‘we
must not.’ Cf. v. Ὁ § 9.

τὸ καινόν, cf. Tac. ‘subita belli,’ ‘surprise,’ “πολλὰ καινὰ τοῦ
πολέμου᾽ (St.). τὸ τοιοῦτον. Either with reference to preceding con-
text, ie. τὸ ἄφνω προσπεσεῖν, or anticipating 6 (more Thucydideo).
Stahl assumes a construction of 6 in common with each verb, φυλάσσοιτο
and ἐπιχειροίη, at the same time making it depend on ἐνορῶν. The
objection to this interpretation is that 6 will have (1) a verbal depend-
ency with φυλάσσοιτο, (2) a participial with ἐνορῶν, (3) a construction
ἀπὸ κοινοῦ with ἐνορῶν and ἐπιχειροίη. By treating 6 as dependent on
ἐνορῶν, and regarding φυλάσσοιτο and ἐπιχειροίη as used without object,
we should escape the difficulty. The order would then be 6, εἴ τις ἔν
τε αὑτῷ ἐνορῶν φυλάσσοιτο καὶ ἐν τοῖς πολεμίοις ἐνορῶν ἐπιχειροίη, πλεῖστ᾽
αν ὀρθοῖτο. But we need not supply the participle from the second of
the two clauses. The principle is clearly enough set forth in v. 9 ὃ 3,a

ΧΧΧΙ. ὃ 1] NOTES. 149

comparison of which passage would suggest a cognate construction of ὃ
with ὀρθοῖτο ἄν. (See Appendix.)

CHAPTER XXXI.

81. τοσαῦτα εἰπών, ‘by these few words’ (instead of τοιαῦτα), in
reference to shorter speeches; cf. 11. 72 § 1. οὐκ ἔπειθε, ‘made no
impression.’ For imp. see Curt. Eluc., p. 209.

ot Λέσβιοι, the πρέσβεις of chap. 4 and 5 (Β].).

παρήνουν, ‘suggested.’ Cf. VIII. 46 § 1.

Κύμην, north of the Hermus, once the largest of all Aetolian
cities. With the exception of its joining the revolt of Aristagoras, and
its recapture by Persia, little is known of the history of the place. In
Thuc. we find only the scantiest mention of it. (Cf. VIII. 31, 100.)

ἐκ πόλεως ὁρμώμενοι, ‘with a city for their base,’ the usual phrase.
The whole of the sentence from ὅπως to ξυμπολεμεῖν is beset with
difficulties ; text, punctuation, and interpretation are all so doubtful,
that a final settlement is impossible. The main points are,

(1) The limits of the parenthetical clause. Herw. places a colon at
ἀποστήσωσιν, regarding ἐλπίδα δ᾽ εἶναι as transition to orat. obliqua,
and making οὐδενί.. ἀφῖχθαι parenthetical. Stahl, Poppo, Cl. and
Herw. extend the parenthesis from ἐλπίδα to ἀφῖχθαι.

(2) The limits of the ὅπως clause, which St. extends to γίγνηται, with
intervening parenthesis ἢν ὑφέλωσι.. ἣν ἐφορμῶσι. To escape this Dobree
suggests wa ὑφέλωσι, but to make the stronger ἵνα follow the weaker
ὅπως is unadvisable; such interchange of ὅπως with ἵνα and ἵνα with
ὅπως is most rare in Thuc., but cf. vI. 87 § 2, VI. 22. In the absence
of any modal enallage (for of ἀποστήσουσιν we have no MS. evidence)
it would appear that Thuc. did not intend any distinction of primary or
secondary motive.

(3) The connexion of the two hypothetical ἤν clauses: Herw. and
Gerhard regard them as dependent on ἐλπίδα εἶναι: St., following
Kriig., treats as parenthetical, i.e. ὅπως ἀποστήσωσιν, καὶ ὅπως (ἢν
ἀφέλωσι kal ἣν ἐφορμῶσιν αὐτοῖς) σφίσι δαπάνη γίγνηται. Schémann
sees in ἤν the equivalent of ὅπως; Kistemaker identifies with εἰ as ex-
pressing wish: others suggest an aposiopesis (all three suggestions are
unsound ; the first would demand ἤν πως, the second εἰ γάρ, and, thirdly,
the figure aposiopesis is most rare in Thuc.).

(4) The construction of dua: does this mark a close connexion of the
two subjunctives? or does it denote some new departure? or a return
to the main construction? cf. VI. 18 § 4 ἵνα στορέσωμεν καὶ ἅμα ἄρξομεν.

150 THOCYDIDES TIT. [xxx1. ὃ 1—

(5) The retention or rejection of τε: it may be supplementary to
the two parallel καί clauses (a common Thuc. use) or inferential, but
not apodotic (see Arnold’s note). If, however, ἤν finds its construction
with γίγνηται, the ἤν clause must form a protasis to some new
apodosis, which will necessitate the exclusion of re, or we shall be
driven to accept Hermann’s view (vid. cap. 3).

Following Stahl we get the following version: ‘that, with a city for
their base (point d’appui) they might cause a revolt of Ionia—and
there was hope, for their coming had proved unwelcome to none—also
that, if they succeeded in sapping this, one of the chief resources of
Athens, and at the same time, if they sought to attack Athens, they
might secure funds for themselves.’ (The objection to this view will be
found discussed in Appendix.)

Following Herwerden, who cuts out ἦν before ὑφέλωσι, and reads
καὶ ἅμα, ἢν ἐφορμώσι σφίσιν, αὐτοῖς δαπάνη γίγνηται, render ‘that they
might cause a revolt of Ionia, and sap this, a main source of revenue to
Athens, and at the same time, in case of the Athenians blockading
them, the cost might fall on Athens alone’: that is to say, simul-
taneously with the stoppage of Ionian supplies, Athens would be thrown
upon her own unaided resources. To this view I incline.

ἀφῖχθαι, subject implied in context, Alcidas and his force.

ἀκουσίῳ, for personal agreement cf. Iv. 85 § 2. The distinction
ἄκων of agent, ἀκούσιος of act, is ignored by Thucydides. Stahl, re-
taining ἀκουσίως, treats the adverb as equivalent to a passive adjective
‘non optatus’; but the word conveys a stronger meaning, ‘their coming
had provoked no protest’ (cf. VIII. 3 § 1 ἀκόντων τῶν Θεσσαλῶν). The
dative is ethical.

μεγίστην, a strong statement, unless indeed we include Hellespont.
The Ionian tribute was at the time only 25 to 26 talents. ὑφέλωσι. Cf.
13 87. Lit. ‘reduce,’ ‘diminish,’ perhaps with implied covertness in ὑπό.

ἐφορμῶσι (fr. ἐφορμεῖν, ἐφορμᾶν not being Thucydidean), (1) block-
ade, (2) taking the aggressive, (3) watching opportunity (cf. Demosth.
Olynth. 111. § 7).

σφίσι, reflexive purely in Thuc. The old Ionic demonstrative use
has become a thing of the past. αὐτοῖς, sc. Athenians, here= ‘per se,’
‘soli,’ a well-known Attic use.

ϑαπάνη γίγνηται, on analogy of active periphrasis δαπάνην ποιεῖσθαι.
St. calls attention to twofold meaning of δαπάνη, (1) expense, ‘sumptus,’
(2) ‘means of meeting expense,’ ‘facultas,’ although in Latin sumptus
will bear either meaning. Cf. Ter. Haut. I. 2. 33; and Thuc. 1. 99 ὃ 3.

XXXII. § 3] NOTES. Thx

πείσειν τε οἴεσθαι, whether a resumption of the parenthetical con-
struction ἐλπίδα εἶναι, or a mere relapse into orat. obliq. suggested by
mapyvet, is immaterial. The future is due to expectation implied in
οἴεσθαι,

Πισσούθνην, cf. vill. 5 § 5, I. 115 § 5, succeeded by Tissaphernes
as στρατηγὸς τῶν κάτω, i.e. ‘satrap of lower Asia,’ or ‘the sea-board.’
(Cf. Arn. on VIII. 5.)

ὥστε, pleonastic, but explicit.

ὃ 2. οὐδὲ ταῦτα, no more than the first proposal to surprise
Mytilene.

τὸ πλεῖστον τῆς γνώμης, i.e. τὴν πλείστην γνώμην εἶχε (more rarely
τὴν πλείστην τῆς γνώμης), adapted from Ionic. Cf. Hdt. v. 126; cf.
also Thuc. VIII. 46 § 5 τὸ πλέον διενοεῖτο.

Μυτιλήνης ὑστερήκει, sc. ἁλώσεως (Cl.): no need of ellipse, ‘he
had been too late in the case of Myt.’ The genitive is a mere genitive
of connexion,

προσμῖξαι, ‘to make for’ (come in touch with). Cp. I. 46 § 3.
(For further discussion of this chapter see Appendix.)

CHAPTER XXXII.

§ 1. Ἔμβάτου, cf. c. 29. παρέπλει, 1.6. the Ionian coast, south-
wards (Haack). Μυοννήσῳ, a promontory between Teos and Samos
(cf. Livy XxXxviII. 27). κατὰ πλοῦν, no article, as usual in such
prepositional predications, e.g. ἐν πλῷ, καθ᾽ ὁδόν. Cf. VI. 31 § 3.
τοὺς πολλούς, articular apposition, in epexegesis.

§ 2. καθορμισαμένου és, cf. καταπλεῖν és, 29 ὃ 2.

᾿Αναίων, the place of refuge of the Samian exiles (cf. Iv. 75, VIII.
1g), apparently a naval station in valley of Maeander, and near enough
to Samos to cause much annoyance.

ἐλευθεροῦν, the usual claim of Sparta. Cf. 11. 8 § 4.

εἰ διέφθειρεν, probably a litotes for ὅτι : cf. θαυμάζω εἰ. Kriig. treats
εἰ as=émel. Cobet, from oratio recta, ‘el διαφθείρεις ᾿ reads εἰ δια-
φθείρει.

ἀνταιρομένους, cf. Hdt. vil. 209 86. ὑπ᾽ ἀνάγκης, more usually
ἐξ ἀνάγκης, or κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην (Cl.).

εἰ μὴ παύσεται .... προσάξεσθαι, otherwise expressible by present
infinitive with dv: vid. St. Quaest. Gr. p. 7. Cf. νἹ. 34 § 2.

8 3. οὐκ ἔφευγον, note the imperfect, ‘made no attempt at flight.’

152 TH OCYDIIES ΤῊΝ [xxx § 3—

ἐλπίδα, ‘suspicio’ (Popp.). Cf. προσδοκία, 11. 93 ὃ 3; cf. VII. 64
ὃ 2 ἐλπίδα τοῦ φόβου.

μὴ παραβαλεῖν, the infinitive here replaces the more usual subj. or
optat., as a clause of simple epexegesis. The negative is due to the
_ preceding negative. Goodw. M. T. 8 815.

παραβαλεῖν, not only in sense of ‘crossing’ (traicere), but also of
risking (rapaxwduvevew) ; the presence of a subject marks the infin. as a
future rather than a realistic aorist.

CHAPTER XXXIII.

8 1. «al φυγὴν ἐποιεῖτο, καί corrective, rather than copulative,
‘made sail, or rather fled’ (Jowett). Cf. Lat. ‘fugam facere.’

ὠφθη =pluperfect, as ἔτι attests, ‘he had been sighted while still
riding off Claros.’

Σαλαμινία καὶ IIdpados, the special service vessels (despatch
boats) of the Athenian navy, employed for collecting tribute, for con-
veyance of θεωροί, and sometimes prisoners. Their special mission in
the present case is a matter of free speculation.

Κλάρον. Poppo’s Icarus is refuted by Arnold: a place in Ionia,
near Colophon, between Ephesus and Myonnesus. It was the site of
a famous oracle, Tac. A. 11. 54. The ‘Zillé’ which was identified
with Claros is now believed to be Notium.

τὴν δίωξιν, not of the Paralus and Salaminia, but of the Attic fleet
(Cl.). Surely the article is possessive, ‘apprehensive of his being
pursued.’

πελάγους, ‘the open sea,’ ut passim. ἑκούσιος, cf. ἑκὼν εἶναι.

§ 2. Πάχητι καὶ τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις, for order see 28 ὃ 1. The
ἄρχων takes precedence, cf. VIII. 63 § 1. Class. finds a triple con-
nexion for the dative, ἦλθε, ἀφικνεῖτο, ἔφρασαν, placing colon at τὰς
πόλεις.

ἦλθε, of the first news, ἀφικνεῖτο, of the continued information.

καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς “EpvOpatas, ‘from the district of Erythrae itself’
(ipsa ab Erythraea), kal πανταχόθεν, ‘from all quarters, as well’ (prae-
terea). For μὲν καί---δὲ καί sequence cf. 1. 119. (Poppo.)

ἀτειχίστου, from time of rst Persian war (Gdll.), Hdt. vr. 32.
Instances of later fortification will be found in vir. 14, vit. 84 (Pop.).

καὶ ὥς, sc. καίπερ ἀτειχίστου οὔσης, ‘vel sic’: ‘even thus,’ ‘even
as it was,’ cf. VIII. 51 ὃ 2. ἅμα, cf. Iv. 2 § 3, TT. 7 § 2.

αὐτάγγελοι, cf. Soph. O. C. 333. αὐτύν, Alcidas.

SEKI. ὃ 1 NOTES. 153

ἔφρασαν, ‘gave warning.’ Cf. sup. 15 § 1.

ὑπὸ σπουδῆς, prepositional for adverbial expression, τε σπουδῇ, σπου-
δαίως, cf. ὑπ᾽ ἀνάγκης.

8 8. Πάτμου, one of the Sporades, in S.E. Aegean, to 5. of
Samos ; the scene of S. John’s banishment.

ἐπεδίωξεν, mark the ἐπί, ‘pressed the chase,’ ‘continued a hot
pursuit.’ ἐπί, of extension, continuation, rather than malevolence.

ἐν καταλήψει -- καταληπτός, cf. ἐν βλάβῃ εἶναι. Poppo wrongly sees
an impersonal construction (cf. VI. 60 § 2 καὶ οὐκ ἐν παύλῃ ἐφαίνετο).
ἐφαίνετο, i.e. Alcidas.

ἐπανεχώρει, SC. ὅθενπερ ὡρμήθη, ‘eo unde profectus erat redibat.’

κέρδος, cf. Il. 44 ὃ 4. μετεώροις ‘in the open sea.’ A ship as seen
against the sky-line suggested the notion of ‘elevation.’

ἐγκαταληφθεῖσαι, ‘nullo in loco (nusquam) deprehensae.’

ἠναγκάσθησαν ... ποιεῖσθαι καί... παρασχεῖν, a grammatical rather
than logical connexion. The construction is connected with the subor-
dinate, not the leading verb. ποιεῖσθαι with ref. to the Peloponnesians,
παρασχεῖν ἐφόρμησιν to Athenians, ‘and so compelled to entrench them-
selves and put the Athenians (Paches and his force) to the trouble of
blockading them.’ For coordination cf. 57 ὃ 1.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

§ 1. παραπλέων πάλιν, ‘on his way back, sc. along the coast of
Asia Minor. πάλι -ε ὀπίσω, cf. Aesch. Ag. 335.

Νότιον, the haven of Colophon, two miles from the upper city
(ἡ ἀπὸ θαλάσσης). Familiar to Platonic readers from the saying “Κολο-
φῶνα ἐπιθεῖναι, Theaetet. 153 6. The history of Colophon was one
of στάσις from early times.

κατῴκηντο, passive form with middle force: a common Thucyd.
use in the case of perf. and plupf., especially with perfect participle
in all Attic writers. τῆς ἄνω, the old town.

Ἰταμάνους, unknown: the very form of the name is doubtful.

κατά = διά, ‘in consequence of’; retrospective rather than pro-
spective (although the latter use, ‘with a view to,’ cannot be denied
in Thucydides).

στάσιν. From Arist. Pol. vit. 3 we learn that it was due to the
separation of the one city into two distinct townships, “στασιάζουσι δὲ
ἐνίοτε ὅταν μὴ εὐφυῶς ἔχῃ ἣ χώρα πρὸς τὸ μίαν εἶναι πόλιν. He cites
the parallel instance of Athens and Peiraeus.

154 THUCYDIDES I17, [xxxiv. §1—

ἡ Sevrépa, B.C. 430, cf. 11. 47. ἐγίγνετο, ‘was taking place’: note
the synchronous imperfect.

§ 2. οἱ καταφυγόντες, ‘those who had sought refuge there and
taken up their abode in the place.’ The sentence is another instance
of partitive apposition. The distribution of the main subject οἱ καταφ.
καὶ κατοικ. into οἱ μέν....οἱ δέ sentences is interrupted by the intermediate
and supplementary καί... ἐπολίτευον clause (cf. 11. 88 § 2).

ΠΙσσούθνου, cf. 31 § 1. ᾿Αρκάδων, a poor and adventurous race,
Cf. Hdt. vin. 26, Thuc. vit. 57 (Herw.).

διατειχίσματι (in ὃ 3, τείχισμα) : lit. ‘a walled-off portion, or place,’
i.e. a separate fortified part of the town, or ‘a detached fortified
position.’ Cf. the verbal use διοικοδομεῖν (VIII. go § 5), and Latin
‘intersaepire’ (Liv. XxI. 11).

ἐπολίτευον, ‘were admitted to rights of citizenship,’ lit. ‘were living
as citizens.’ ὑπεξελθόντες, with accus. on analogy of ἐκστῆναι, ὑπεκ-
τραπέσθαι.

The situation is correctly described by Amold. In consequence
of the establishment of an aristocratical Medising party in Colophon,
the bulk of the populace had left Colophon and settled in Notium.
Before long, an aristocratical party declared itself among the refugees
at Notium; these, with the aid of the Median party in Colophon,
backed by Persian aid, expelled the democrats a second time.

ὃ 3. προκαλεσάμενος, a ‘nominativus pendens,’ in early Greek no
unfamiliar use. The fact of the subject of the participle being the same
as that of one of the two finite verbs suggests the construction (GOll.).
Strictly speaking, it is due to that Ionic freedom of coordination which
Thuc. so frequently reflects: for a good instance cf. Iv. 80 § 4.

καταστήσειν, the future suggests a solemn promise (ἢ μήν) implied
in wore: at the same time the wore sequence admits of the alternative
ἐφ᾽ ᾧ with fut. indic., or ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἄν with optat.

φυλακὴ aderpos, ‘libera custodia,’ Tac. A. vi. 2, ‘on parole.’

ἐξαπιναίως καὶ οὐ προσδεχομένων, an adjectival (participial) form
replaces the adverbial:—note the use of absolute participle without
subject.

κατατοξεύει, this simple record of a barbarous act of treachery
without comment on the historian’s part need not have provoked
Grote’s astonishment (Gr. Hist. G. vi. 327). The incident may be
classed under the outrages of I. 23.

8.4. οἰκιστάς, cf. 92 ὃ 5, ‘duces coloniae,’ not ‘coloni’ (olkropes).
Whether sent from Athens itself we know not (Grote). The object

XXXVI. ὃ 2] NOTES. 155

was to counteract the restless proclivities of the native population (Cl.),
and at the same time to confer a right of Hellenic citizenship, without
which neither θεωρίαι nor admission to Olympian festivals would have
been possible (Grote).

κατὰ τοὺς ἑαυτῶν νόμους, the constant practice of the mother-city.

CHAPTER XXXV.

81. Πύρραν, cf. 18 ὃ τ.

παρεστήσατο, whether βίᾳ or ὁμολογίᾳ is not specified, ‘secured.’
Cf. 1. 29 § 5.

Σάλαιθον, cf. 25 ὃ 1. Τενέδου, 28 § 2, some 40 stades from main-
land, 56 from Lesbos, a tributary of Athens (VII. 57).

αἴτιος, ‘ringleader.’

8 2. τοῖς λοιποῖς, sociative, in construction with ὑπομένων, not
instrumental, with καθίστατο.

καθίστατο, ‘arranged,’ ‘settled,’ Lat. ‘componere.’ Cf. 28 § 3.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

§ 1. ἔστιν ἃ παρεχόμενον, ‘in spite of various representations,’
cf. 1. 39 § 2. No need for προισχόμενον.

τά τ᾽ ἄλλα, more commonly ἄλλα τε καί. The article Cl. explains
as used in more explicit reference; Popp. as possessive, ‘quae ab eo
prolata sunt’ (cf. v. 46 § 4).

ἀπάξειν, causative active. (Thomp. G. Syn. § 128.)

§ 2. γνώμας ἐποιοῦντο, ‘consultare,’ ‘proceeded to debate’: im-
perfect, initiatory to ἔδοξε, of final decision, or rapidity of decision.

ὅσοι ἡβῶσι, ‘all adults.’ The relative clause is one of mere defi-
nition: the indicative remains unchanged (as in Latin) in spite of
indirect discourse.

ἐπικαλοῦντες, a free coordination, ignoring change of personal
construction to impersonal. Cf. VI. 24 § 3.

τήν τε ἄλλην ἀπόστασιν, Classen’s insertion of καί is a mistake:
Grossmann (Neue Jahrb. 1884) rejects it, on the ground that the
emphasis falls on the resentment of Athens, not on the fault of Myti-
lene. Thuc. does not imply τά τε ἄλλα καὶ ὅτι: the two great provo-
cations are (1) an unprovoked revolt, an ἐπανάστασις rather than
ἀπόστασις, cf. 39 ὃ 2: (2) the violation of that ‘mare clausum’ the
Aegean.

156 LITOCY DIDES” ΤῊ [xxxvr. § 2—

The idiomatic ἄλλος precedes, instead of following. See Shill. on
Dem. Fals. Leg. § 94, who quotes from Eur. Med. 297:
χωρὶς yap ἄλλης ἧς ἔχουσιν ἀργίας
φθόνον πρὸς ἀστῶν ἀλφάνουσι δυσμενῆ.

There is no trajection of τε; the sequence implied is ἐπικαλοῦντες
τήν Te ἀπόστασιν καὶ τὸ τὰς ναῦς τολμῆσαι. With ὅτι sequences in Greek
there is a tendency to revert to direct construction, e.g. Theaetetus
169 D, ἐπιτιμῶντες τὸν λόγον... ὅτι ἐποίει, καὶ ἡμῖν ξυνεχώρησεν ὁ Πρω-
ταγόρας. For like irregularity of τέ... καί sequence cf. Thuc. v. 61 4
βουλόμενοι προσγενέσθαι... καὶ ὅμηροι ἦσαν.

ἀρχόμενοι, passive, ie. under pressure of Athenian rule. Cf. 39
§ 2, where Cleon lays stress on Mytilenaean avrovopia.

προσξυνεβάλετο, once only in Thuc.: a so-called ‘Schema Pin-
daricum’ (a phrase unjust to Pindar’s memory, when we analyse the
instances quoted) ; a construction by which a verb in the singular is con-
structed with a plural subject. Two other cases are quoted in Thuc.,
Iv. 26 ὃ 5, vill. 9 ὃ 3. As in such constructions the verb always
precedes, the old explanation that ‘a conception originally simple
becomes complex in process of expression’ holds good.

In our present passage the difficulty is due to the interchange of
verbal adjective (participle) with verbal substantive (infinitive), a trick
familiar to all readers of Tacitus or Livy, e.g. ‘pudor non lati auxilii
patres cepit.’

Hude (Comment. Crit. p. 96—g7) refers the use of this construction
with substantival verb, εἶναι, γίγνεσθαι, to assimilation, cf. IV. 26 § 5;
but, in my judgment, wrongly: the same principle applies whether to
substantival or other verbs. Haydon, in Am. J. Phil. ΧΙ. 190, wisely
distinguishes points of accidence (e.g. ἣν for ἦσαν, as in Pindar, Pyth.
IV. 57) from points of syntax: the whole article will well repay the
reader.

οὐκ ἐλάχιστον, accus. of object (Cl. and Popp.). Better to take
it as adverbial (from accus. of limitation) making ὁρμῆς depend as
partitive on προσξυνεβάλετο. For the use of ξυμβάλλεσθαι with genitive
(a use which Popp. denies) see Eur. Med. 284 ξυμβάλλεται δὲ πολλὰ
τοῦδε δείματος, and Thuc. Iv. 10 § 1 ξυναράμενοι τοῦδε τοῦ κινδύνου.
ὁρμῆς --΄ studium,’ ‘impetuosity.’

βοηθοί, proleptic. οὐκ ἀπὸ βραχείας διανοίας, ‘in pursuance of
no small design.’

ἐδόκουν, of the impression, suspicion; subject implied in context.

XXXVI. § 5] NOTES. 157

§ 3. ὡς Πάχητα, as equivalent of πρός, with persons only (Goodw.
G. Gr. § 191).

ἄγγελον, predicative, cf. VIII. 106 § 4.

διαχρήσασθαι, with accus., theoldIonicuse. Cf. Thue. 1. 126 § 11.

§ 4. μετάνοια, ‘paenitentia,’ ‘remorse.’ ἀναλογισμός, ‘reflection.’
Cf iv. 71S'2:

ὠμὸν καὶ μέγα, ‘inhuman and atrocious’ (μέγα -Ξ δεινόν).

μᾶλλον ἢ οὐ, an instance of the so-called pleonastic negative.
Shilleto notes that in most cases a negative precedes, or there is some
lurking negation (such a negation might be found in ὠμόν). Strictly
speaking, the οὐ is supplementary; it points to the fact of the rejection
of a possible alternative—‘rather than decide, as had το been de-
cided.’—od instead of μή, (1) as the negative of oratio obliqua; (2)
as denying the fact. A brachylogy is possible; ὠμὸν τὸ βούλ. ἐγνῶσθαι
πόλιν διαφθ. μᾶλλον ἢ ἐγνῶσθαι (6 οὐκ ἔγνωσται) τοὺς αἰτίους διαφθ. Cf.
Demosth. Timoth. rrg8 ὃ 47. Such a distinction Latin would mark
by antithetical subjunctive: e.g. Plautus, Aul. Prol. rr ‘inopem potius
voluit relinquere quam thensaurum commonstraret,’ Cic. de Fin. Iv.
§ 20. Poppo appeals to idiom of French, ‘il est plus grand qu’on ne
croit,’ Shilleto to vulgar English, ‘nor’—‘this is better nor that’ (=
‘this is the better and not that’), cf. Arist. Rhet. 1. 9 § 24. See also
_ Bast on Gregor. Corinth. 102, Hermann on Viger, 801.

ὃ 5. οἱ αὐτοῖς τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων ξυμπράσσοντες, for order cf. 22
§ 5, for ξυμπράσσειν cf. IV. 67 § 4, lit. ‘acting with,’ ‘abetting’: ‘in
their interest ’ (Jowett).

παρεσκεύασαν, ‘wrought upon them,’ cf. vil. 52 § 1, hardly=
Poppo’s ‘conciliaverant,’ which suggests a middle; although Demosth.
has active use for middle. τοὺς ἐν τέλει, Prytanes or Strategi, the
latter having the power of summoning the ἐκκλησία in time of war or
extraordinary emergencies (vid. Arnold).

γνώμας προθεῖναι, cf. I. 139 ὃ 3, ‘deliberandi potestatem facere’
(Popp.)=proponere, ‘to open a fresh debate.’ τὸ πλέον, cf. 35 ὃ 2:Ξ οἱ
πλείονες.

τινά, for singular cf. Soph. O. T. 107. τινές, ‘nonnulli,’ τις ‘ inde-
finitum est’ (Cob.). For plural Cl. cites Iv. 69 § 1.

βουλεύσασθαι, not a true accus. of direct object, which would de-
mand article, but due to secondary sense of ἀποδοῦναι as ἐᾶν, ‘permit,’
‘allow,’ cf. Dem. 638 κολάζειν ἀπέδωκεν ὁ νόμος. ἦν βουλόμενον, a
periphrasis only employed by Thuc. when the participle is used in
adjectival sense: cf. 1. 38 § 4, ἀρέσκοντές ἐσμεν.

158 THUCYDIDES TH, [xxxv1. § 6—

§ 6. καταστάσης, cf. I. 31, of specially convened (σύγκλητος) ἐκκλη-
gia. ‘Thuc. prefers intransitive to passive forms.

ἀφ᾽ ἑκάστων, ‘on the part of individuals’ (cf. Popp. 1. 17 ὃ 1). The
relation of ‘auctor’ rather than of ‘actor’ (ὑπό) is prominent. Cobet
would alter such instances, one and all, to ὑπό.

Κλέων ὁ Κἀλεαινέτου, see Grote’s estimate of the famous Πα-
φλαγών, ard comment on the rising demagogues of the new school
(Grote, Hist. Gr. vi. 659).

τὴν προτέραν, sc. γνώμην ; an extension of cognate accusative, νικᾶν
νίκην. mBaveiraros=‘gratiosissimus,’ most ‘influential.’ Cf. v1. 35

§ 2.
CHAPTER XXXVII.

(SPEECH OF CLEON.)

81. ἔγνων, ‘made up my mind,’ ‘come to the conclusion.’

ἀδύνατον, Cobet’s correction ἀδύνατος, though idiomatic, is need-
less. The construction is not impersonal: the neuter adjective replaces
the feminine concord, 1.6, ἔγνων ὅτι δημοκρατία ἀδύνατόν τί ἐστι: the
accusative δημοκρατίαν is due to antiptosis, ‘that democracy is inca-
pable (a thing incapable) of ruling others.’ For neuter predicate cf. § 3
ἀμαθία ὠφελιμώτερον. For estimate of democracy cf. VI. 39 § 1 with
Demosth. F. L. § 149. ᾿

ἐν TH... μεταμελείᾳ, ἐν quasi-instrumental, ‘through’; cf. 42 § 4
with Plato Gorg. 452E ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ δυνάμει. It marks the basis of
Cleon’s judgment. μεταμελείᾳ = ‘indecision,’ ‘ plebis inconstantia.’

Μυτιληναίων, no article, on the ground that there is no direct
antithesis, e.g. of Mytilene to Athens. Cf. Herbst, Philol. xt.
372 sqq.: possibly, also, a slight touch of contempt. Cf. 59 § 4
Θηβαίοις.

8 2. τὸ ἀδεές, ‘the security and freedom from intrigue, between
man andman.’ Cf. I. 37 ὃ 2 and 1. 68 § 1 τὸ πιστὸν τῆς πολιτείας.

ἐς.. -πρός, practically equivalents, but here to avoid tautology. The
interchange is common in Thuc., cf. 54 § I.

τὸ αὐτό, sc. τὸ ἀδεές (Schol.).

ὅ τι ἀν --ῆν τι.

οἴκτῳ, parallel with πεισθέντες as=olxrifovres: the dative is causal,
‘through pity,’ ‘by reason of pity’: ‘you do not reflect that you are
giving way with danger to yourselves, and without furthering the con-
ciliation of your allies.’

XXXVIL ὃ 2] NOTES. 159

kal οὐκ, the negative of the primary verb continues the construction ;
cf. a strong instance in 57 § 1.

és τὴν χάριν, balancing the adverbial ἐπικινδύνως by a stronger
form.

μαλακίζεσθαι, cf. 40 § 7.

τυραννίδα, cf. the words of Pericles 11. 62 with I. 122 § 3. ‘The
power you hold is a despotic one, and held over folk who are them-
selves conspirators and subjects under protest.’

ἐπιβουλεύοντας, with special reference to ἀνεπιβούλευτον, above.

ἄκοντας ἀρχομένους, at this point of the sentence Bohme and
Classen assume an asyndeton, a rare figure in Thucydides. Stahl cor-
rects to ἄκοντες ἀρχόμενοι ws (ws replacing original ὅτι); the words οὐ
σκοποῦντες ὅτι...καὶ πρὸς ἐπιβουλεύοντας he refers to οὐκ ἐπικ. ἡγεῖσθε
μαλακίζεσθαι, the words ὡς οὐκ ἀκροῶνται to οὐκ ἐς τὴν τῶν ξυμμάχων
χάριν. For ὡς... ὅτε change cf. I. 32 § 1-

Hude objects that the change is violent, and in the immediate
neighbourhood of ἐπιβουλεύοντας αὐτούς suspicious. In fine, he pro-
tests against the sacrifice of perspicuity to παρίσωσις.

The asyndeton appears condemned by the fact of its not being ex-
planatory or parenthetical. The insertion of οἵ (confused with οὐ) is at
least reasonable (cf. Iv. 10 § 2), and the simplest solution.

But without alteration or addition the text will construe, viz. by
making ὅτι the clue to the whole constrn., treating πρὸς ἐπιβουλεύοντας
αὐτούς as a complete predication in itself, and placing a comma after καί:
‘not reflecting that your power is despotic, and that, in the face of
treachery and disaffection on their part, they do not obey you in con-
sequence of your concessions,’ &c. &c. Such λέξις εἰρομένη is very
evident in the style of Cleon; cf. especially 38 sub fin.

The implicit good faith which exists between Athenians as fellow-
citizens causes the extension of the like good faith to their allies: such
concessions as they make either ἡδονῇ λόγων, or through pity, οἴκτῳ,
are at once dangerous and useless: they ignore two great principles:
(1) that a despotic power cannot relax the iron grip (cf. ν. 95), (2) that
no concession can secure the good-will of those who are radically dis-
affected. The words ἄκοντας ἀρχομένους I would refer rather to the
succeeding than to the preceding context.

βλαπτόμενοι, ‘to your own detriment.’

ἐξ ὧν ἂν περιγένησθε, from such (particular) superiority as you com-
mand.

ἰσχύϊ, the dative condenses the construction.

160 THUCYDIDES τὰ [xxxvu. § 3—

§ 3. πάντων δὲ δεινότατον, ‘most alarming of all is the prospect
of the utter absence of all finality in any one of our resolutions, and our
ignoring the fact that a state which enforces inferior laws inflexibly is
superior to one which makes good laws invalid, that a dull sobriety is
preferable to a clever incontinence, and that men of meaner wit, as
contrasted with the more subtle, administer their affairs more success-
fully.’

βέβαιον, predicative, lit. ‘if nothing is to be settled as a per-
manent thing.’ Cf. 83 § 1.

πέρι, ‘postpositum,’ as frequently in Thuc., especially when illus-
trative. Cf. 3 § 6.

χείροσι, cf. Alcibiades’s comment, VI. 18 sub fin.

νόμοις, St. objects that it was a question of ψήφισμα not of νόμος.
But in νόμοι Cleon merely takes the higher instead of the lower ground.

κρείσσων, ‘melius se habet’(Pp.). The ambiguities of κρείσσων are
discussed in Plato, Gorg. 489 C sqq.

ἀμαθία, cf. 82 § 7 ἀμαθεῖς, an antithesis to δεξιότης. The train of
thought points not to ‘ignorance,’ but ‘slowness’ as contrasted with
εὐμαθία, ‘quickness.’ Cf. Plato, Theaet. 144 B.

σωφροσύνῃ... ἀκολασία, in relation of ‘subordination’ to ‘insubordi-
nation.’

οἰκοῦσι, cf. VIII. 67 § 1, used absolutely in 11. 37 ὃ 1-

§ 4. οἱ péy...ot δέ, in inverted relation.

σοφώτεροι, cf. I. 84 ὃ 3.

φαίνεσθαι, ‘to shew themselves,’ ‘prove themselves.’

és τὸ κοινόν, cf. I. 91 ὃ 7, IV- 58, 59 § I.

περιγίγνεσθαι, ‘supersede,’ ‘ override’ all proposals made from time
to time for the common weal. Cf. Tac. Hist. 1. 26 (Arn.).

ὡς οὐκ ἂν δηλώσαντες, ‘as not likely to display.’ Cf. the Latin
future participle in -rus, ‘tanquam non ostentaturi.’ See Goodw. M. T.
§ 215.

ὡς, of conviction.

ἐκ τοῦ τοιούτου, ‘as the outcome (result) of such a policy.’

σφάλλουσι, cf. VI. 15 ὃ 4.

ot δέ, of φαυλότεροι.

τῇ ἐξ ἑαυτῶν, ἐκ pleonastic, a common poetic use, e.g.

ξεινήιον ἐκ Μουσῶν, δέρματα ἐκ δαμάλων (Theocr.).

τοῦ καλῶς εἰπόντος, genitive of comparison, ‘less capable than the
clever speaker of criticising a proposal.’

XXXVIII. ὃ 1] NOTES. 161

ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου, construe with κριταί, ‘impartial judges.’

ἀγωνισταί, ‘rivals,’ i.e. in a rhetorical competition, for a prize. Cf.
ἀγώνισμα, 1. 22 ὃ 5. ὀρθοῦνται, ‘are in the right’ (Jowett).

8 δ. ἐπαιρομένους, not merely ‘efferri,’ but ‘impelli’ (Cl.).

παρὰ δόξαν, at least one instance of δόξα in the sense of ‘opinion’;
cf. ν. 105 § 2. Hence Ullrich’s correction παρὰ τὸ δόξαν will be need-
less. παραινεῖν, ‘suadere,’ advise (suggest).

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

§1. ὁ αὐτός, cf. Soph. O. R. 557 αὑτὸς τῷ βουλεύματι : without
γνώμῃ 11. 61 § 2.

θαυμάζω τῶν προθέντων, the mention of the agent implies the action
which excites surprise.

λέγειν, not an accusative of direct object, but due to secondary
meaning of προθεῖναι, ‘propose’ (cf. 36 ὃ 5 ἀποδοῦναι βουλεύσασθαι).

ἐμποιησάντων, mark the ἐν, ‘imported,’ ‘introduced.’ Schol. ἐν τῷ
πράγματι.

πρός, ‘in favour of,’ ‘on the side of.’ Cf. 59 § 1.

μᾶλλον, sc. ἢ τῶν ἠδικημένων. Such implications of the opposite
are constantly recurring.

ἀμβλυτέρᾳ, ‘all the duller’ (1.6. for delay).

τῷ παθεῖν, dependent not on ἐγγυτάτω, but on the compound ex-
pression éyyur. κείμενον. (Cf. προσκεῖσθαι, ἐγκεῖσθαι.) Pp. compares
II. 89 § Io.

κείμενον, the usual substitute for τεθειμένον. ‘But when revenge
follows as closely as possible upon the wrong done, the satisfaction it
exacts proves most adequate.’ ἀναλαμβάνει, questioned by Stahl, may
yet stand: ‘it recovers’ (Hdt.).

Hude sees a difficulty unless ὁ παθών be taken as the subject of
ἀναλαμβάνει: he therefore proposes to treat κείμενον as accus. absol.,
reading τοῦ παθεῖν, ‘if it be enacted that retaliation follow at once
upon the being wronged.’ He thus accounts for absence of article with
ἀμύνασθαι (Cod. Laur.), (Cf. Hude, Comment. Crit., p. 97.)

θαυμάζω δὲ kal ὅστις, note the change of construction with δέ. ὅστις
on analogy of εἰ, ‘I wonder who the man will be who will oppose me
or presume to point out that...our own misfortunes result in injury to
our allies.’

Tas ἡμετέρας Evpcopds, a passage misunderstood by most of the
early editors, —-witness Dobree’s ‘non intelligo’—but rightly interpreted

Some ΤΊ

162 THUCYDIDES 15 [xxxvut. § 1—

by Arnold. In 56 the same doctrine is inculcated, viz. the im-
possibility of identifying the interests of a τύραννος πόλις with those of
ὑπήκοοι.

τὸ πάνυ δοκοῦν : (1) an undoubted resolution (i.e. in reference to
the ψήφισμα); (2) ‘that which has unquestioned approyal’ (i.e. as
ὁμολογούμενόν τι, “ἃ truism’), an axiom universally accepted (an appeal
to the ‘consensus hominum’). Poppo, Stahl and Kriiger all take the
second view, on the ground of the tense of the participle τὸ δοκοῦν, not
τὸ δόξαν. The tense of the participle is in itself no clue, the decision
not being as yet rescinded: hence τὸ δοκοῦν could stand. Again in 36
§ 4 ἐγνῶσθαι is the very word used. But, on the other hand, the
question of μεταμέλεια has already been dealt with in c. 37: in § 1 the
words θαυμάζω μὲν τῶν προθέντων are but a passing allusion to it; the
weight of the argument is concentrated on the twofold thesis of the
dé sentence, ἀδικίας and ξυμῴοράς. ‘My opponent,’ says Cleon, ‘must
either be relying on his powers of rhetoric for some brilliant effort of
casuistry, or bribed to mislead you by some elaborate trick of oratory.’

§ 2. τῷ λέγειν -- δύναμις τοῦ λέγειν, ‘his oratorical faculty.’

ἀγωνίσαιτ᾽ ἄν, cf. ἀγώνισμα, 1. 22 ὃ 4, i.e. ἐπίδειξις, ‘rhetorical
display.’

κέρδει ἐπαιρόμενος, cf. Diodotus’ reply, 42 § 3.

τὸ εὐπρεπές (a hit at Gorgias’ εὐέπεια), ‘specious,’ ‘attractive’ (VIII.
66 § 1).

ἐκπονήσας, ‘elaborating.’ Cf. vi. 31 § 3. The allusion is to the
oratorical arts of the school of Gorgias and Protagoras. The visit of
Gorgias to Athens is recorded in Diod. Sic. ΧΙ]. 53.

παράγειν -- ἀπατᾶν (Schol.).

πειράσεται, note the change from indirect future form ἀγωνίσαιτ᾽ ἄν
to direct, as indicating the view on which Cleon prefers to dwell.

§ 3. ἑτέροις, sc. τοῖς ῥήτορσιν (Schol.).

ἀναφέρει, 1.4. dvadéxerar= ‘suscipit,’ ‘bears the burden of,’ ‘takes
on her own shoulders.’

§ 4. αἴτιοι, ‘the blame lies with your own false notions of fair play.’
Contrast with this the neuter, VII. 9 ὃ 3 αἴτιον δ᾽ ἐγένετο οἱ πολλοί.

ἀγωνοθετοῦντες, the idea of the ἀγώνισμα is still prominent; cf.
ἀγωνοθέται, Hdt. vi. 126.

οἵτινες, see note on 57 § 3.

θεαταί, lit. ‘spectators of debates, but listeners in action,’ i.e. ‘you
keep your eyes for words, your ears for deeds.’

τὰ μὲν μέλλοντα, ‘future projects you regard as practicable from the

XXXVI. § 5] NOTES. 163

standpoint of clever speakers, but, when you come to actual results,
the accomplished fact you regard as no more credible for the seeing it
than that which you have heard upon the evidence of specious verbal
criticism’; cf. v1I. 48 § 3. Poppo aptly quotes Plaut. Truc. 11. 6. 8
‘qui audiunt audita dicunt, qui vident plane sciunt.’

τὸ δρασθέν, partitive apposition to πεπραγμένα. For the form
δρασθέν cf. 54 § τ.

ὄψει, causal, ‘by reason of.’ Cf. 37 § 2 ἰσχύι.

λαβόντες, cf. 56 § 3 note.

ἀπὸ τῶν ἐπιτιμησάντων, not to be construed with ἀκουσθέν, but as
forming complete prepositional predication in antithesis to ὄψει. λαβόν-
τες must be referred to each member of the sentence.

8 δ. Kal μετὰ καινότητος κ-.τ.λ., a notable instance of λέξις εἰρομένη.
The appositional construction is at once continuous and complicated,
the participial clauses, partly substantival partly active, resolving them-
selves into a threefold καὶ sequence. The analysis is this: καὶ μετὰ μὲν
καινότητος λόγου ἀπατᾶσθαι ἄριστοι, μετὰ δεδοκιμ. δὲ μὴ ξυνέπ. ἐθέλειν
(δοῦλοι ὄντες.. εἰωθότων). §6. καὶ μάλιστα μὲν βουλόμενος, εἰ δὲ μὴ,
ἀνταγωνιζόμενοι προεπαινέσαι, καὶ πρόθυμοι [εἶναι] προαισθέσθαι τε καὶ
προνοῆσαι" ζητοῦντές τε.. ἁπλῶς TE ἡσσώμενοι καί... ἐοικότες.

The first καί sequence, continuing the construction from the original
ἀγωνοθετοῦντες with distributive wév...6€ clause, finds an explanation in
δοῦλοι ὄντες... εἰωθότων.

The second καί sentence, like the first, is resolved into μέν...δέ, but
with supplementary δέ (ὀξέως δέ... προεπαινέσαι).

The third καί sentence is resolved into ἃ τε... καί sequence {(προαισ-
θέσθαι τε Kai προνοῆσαι), but resumes the original construction with sub-
stantival verb.

Then follows a supplementary sentence or corollary, marked by
Te...Kal.

‘Thus, when new-fangled tricks of rhetoric step in, you are adepts
in the art of self-deception, but experts in refusing to follow an argu-
ment backed by proof, slaves as you are of each new paradox, but
disdainful of all that is familiar,—your first and foremost aim each one
of you to make himself an orator, or, in default of this, vying with these
dealers in paradox in proving yourselves no dullards in following their
drift or in promptly anticipating by approval any point made, as keen
in anticipating proposals as you are slow in foreseeing the inevitable
results, seeking, if I may so say, something different from the con-
ditions of common life, though without clear perception of the facts

ΞΕ ΟΣ

164 THUCYDIDES TTT. ΓΈ 57: ---

before you; in brief, mere slaves of the delight of ear-tickling and more
like the circle of a professor’s admirers than a nation’s counsellors.’

ἄριστοι, ironical. Cf. λαλεῖν ἄριστος ; Hat. 111. 80 διαβολὰς ἄριστος
ἐνδέκεσθαι.

μετὰ δεδοκιμασμένου (sc. λόγου), for pleonasm in μετά... ξύν, 5 πὶ.
67 § 3 ξυμπέμψας μετά. Poppo explains as a reference to τὸ πάνυ
δοκοῦν, ‘a principle generally approved.’ L. and S. quote from Plato
Laws 695 ξυνέπεσθαι λόγῳ, ‘to follow,’ i.e. ‘to understand.’

τῶν del ἀτόπων, cf. sup. καινότητος λόγου.

ὑπερόπται, ‘contemptores,’ a rare word.

§ 6. βουλόμενος, partitive apposition.

τοῖς τοιαῦτα λέγουσι, sc. τὰ ἄτοπα (Kriig.).

δοκεῖν... προεπαινέσαι depend on ἀνταγωνιζόμενοι.

ὀξέως, construe with προεπαινέσαι.

τι λέγοντος, enclitic misplaced (cf. Platonic use of λέγειν τι, λέγειν
οὐδέν), ‘when any point is made.’

καὶ πρόθυμοι, sc. ὄντες, returning to original construction; the re-
tention of εἶναι involves some straining of the Greek.

8 7. ἵητοῦντες, ‘the fool’s paradise’ of the μετεωρόλογος σοφιστής.
Cf. Plato, Theaet. 174 A.

ἁπλῶς, ‘in brief,’ ‘in fine.’

ἡδονῇ ἡσσώμενοι, dative to avoid confusion of double genitive.

σοφιστῶν, ‘professors of rhetoric.’ On the history of the word
σοφιστής see Dr Jackson’s excellent article in Encycl. Britann.

καθημένοις, no need for Kriig.’s explanation ‘desidentes.’ The
Athenians debated sitting. Cf. Arist. σκληρᾶς ἐπὶ πέτρας καθήμενον
οὕτως. θεαταῖς, predicative, ‘sitting as admirers.’ (Hud.)

CHAPTER: XXXIX.

81. ὧν (Schol. ἐπιτηδευμάτων), without definite antecedent.

ἀποτρέπειν, by some restricted in Thuc. to the rhetorical limit of
‘dissuasion.’ (Cf. προτροπή )( ἀποτροπή.) Here= ‘discourage.’ Cf, 82
§ 4 ἀποτροπῆς πρόφασις.

ἀποφαίνω, ‘conative’ present, ‘am for proving,’ ‘am trying to
prove.’ St. explains as ‘contend’; cf. 11. 62 ὃ 2. Cl. sees a reference
to ἀνταποφαίνω in 38 § 2.

μάλιστα δή, δή with superlative in intensive force, ‘the very
gravest wrong.’ μίαν πόλιν. Cf. vill. 68 8 1 els ἀνήρ. Note the
emphatic apposition.

XXXIX. § 2] NOTES. 165

§ 2. οἵτινες μή, μή marks the general application of the principle;
direct personal allusion to Mytilenaeans is by implication only.

ἢ οὕτινες, the balance of the sentence οἵτινες μέν.. οἵτινες δέ is
really complete without the second οἵτινες. But Thuc. doubtlessly
intended to distinguish μὴ δυνατοὶ φέρειν... from ἀναγκασθέντες : the
anaphora is intentional.

ξυγγνώμην ἔχω-- ξυγγιγνώσκω, ‘can find excuse.’

νῆσον μετὰ τειχῶν, ‘an island, and a fortified one as well.’ A
double advantage, (1) isolation, secured by αὐτάρκης θέσις, cf. I. 37 § 3.
(2) means of defence—nature was backed by art. The words of vII. 57
§ 7 are a grim comment, κατὰ τὸ νησιωτικὸν μᾶλλον κατειργόμενοι.

ἐν ᾧ, not of necessity temporal as in § 3, but denoting conditions
or circumstances.

καὶ αὐτοί, independently of allies.

παρασκευῇ, collective, cf. 11. 9 § 6; the dative is causal.

αὐτόνομοί te, re resumes the original construction after its inter-
ruption by ἐν ᾧ.. ἦσαν parenthesis.

és τὰ πρῶτα, cf. 56 § 6. The és merely marks the limit more
distinctly than the accus. of limitation without preposition (cf. Hdt. 1x.
16§1. Κα):

τί ἄλλο ἤ, for ellipse cf. the analogous οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἤ II. 16 fin.;
cf. the Lat. use ‘nec plus quam solitum testificatur opus’ (Ov. Fast.
I. 170). Zumpt, Lat. Gr. ὃ 771, gives several instances.

For rhetorical form of question, cf. 66 § 2 πῶς οὐ δεινὰ εἴργασθε ;

ἐπεβούλευσαν, ‘conspired against us and rebelled against us’ rather
than ‘seceded from us.’ Note the aggressive ἐπί, and for παρονομασία
cf. I. 122 § 4 καταφρόνησις.. «ἀφροσύνη.

ἀπόστασις μέν ye, note the asyndeton, on which see 66 8 2, and
cf. I. 40 § 4 for similar parenthetical explanation.

γε, ‘quidem,’ reinforcing μέν, true to its habit of emphasizing the
word it follows. Cf. δέ γε... μήν γε.

μέν γεξΞ μήν, but without such strong adversative force, suggesting
rather a μέν ‘solitarium.’ Where ye precedes, δή follows, e.g. ye μὲν δή.

μετὰ τῶν πολεμιωτάτων, mark the prominence given to πολέμιοι in
emphatic antithesis side by side with ἡμᾶς (in accordance with the
Greek habit of placing in juxtaposition the things or persons compared,
in anticipation of construction).

τῆνον μετά, cf. VII. 61 § 3, ‘stare cum,’ στῆναι πρός τινα, IIL. 11 ὃ 3.

καθ᾽ αὑτούς, in opposition to μετὰ τῶν πολεμιωτάτων, and in direct
contrast to ἀναγκασθέντες.

166 THUCYDIDES 7 [ΧΧΧΙΧ. § 2-—

δύναμιν κτώμενοι, ‘by way of acquiring power,’ i.e. in the course
of acquiring, ‘for the acquisition of power.’ Better explained as parti-
ciple of incomplete effort (conative), than as temporal (imperfect) ἐν ᾧ
ἐκτῶντο.

8 3. παράδειγμα, ‘exemplum,’ ‘warning’; cf. 40 § 11. (No need for
παραδείγματα.) The position implies a predicative relation to two
distinct subjects ξυμῴοραί and εὐδαιμονία, the construction changing,
however, with the second member of the sentence. Once more we have
a typical Thucydidean construction, replacing οὔτε αἱ ξυμφοραὶ παράδειγμα
ἐγένοντο οὔτε ἡ εὐδαιμονία ὄκνον παρέχουσα κιτ.λ. But the position of
οὔτε is suspicious, and finds no confirmation from the two cases quoted
by Stahl, viz. v. 7 § 4 (where οὐδέ precedes), and 111. 96 § 3 (where the
text is doubtful). As in 1. 16 the dative suggests the connexion. But
may not Thuc. have treated παράδειγμα as appositional to sentence, and
given ἐγένοντο a pregnant sense? ‘By way of warning in their case
neither did the reverses of others serve, nor did their prosperity for the
moment occasion reluctance to face this venture.’

τῶν πέλας, ‘their fellows,’ i.e. ἕτεροι νησιῶται (ν. 97). An Ionic
use, cf. Hdt. 111. 44, but Attic also. Aeginetans or Euboeans could
hardly be called neighbours of Lesbos.

ἀποστάντες ἐχειρώθησαν, cf. ν. 96.

παρέσχεν ὄκνον μή, no need for Herwerden’s μὴ οὐ, or for any
supplement of rod with infinitive. The addition of οὐ is not inevitable,
and with these words of hindering the construction varies between τὸ
μή and τοῦ μή (cf. τ ὃ 2).

πρὸς τὸ μέλλον, not merely ‘in view of’ but also ‘on the strength
of,’—they had forestalled success. θρασεῖς, ‘reckless.’ 4

ἐλπίσαντες, the hope is here an ambition. Cf. the old poetic use
of ἐλπίς, Pind. Pyth. 11. 49: ‘their projects, though far beyond their
power, were all too little for their ambition.’

μακρότερα -- μείζω, ‘all too great for.’ See Pp. I. 14 § 3 note.

βουλήσεως. Cf. Vv. 105 § 1, ‘will’ as intention or purpose, i.e. mpoal-
ρεσις.

ἀξιώσαντες, ‘presuming.’ προθεῖναι, Schol. προτιμῆσαι.

ἐν ᾧ, temporal, ‘at a moment when,’ pointing to ἃ καιρός.

ἀδικούμενοι, present participial, either in technical sense, cf. 65 § 2
ἀδικοῦμεν, or of the ἀδίκημα still continuing.

8 4. εἴωθε δὲ τῶν πόλεων «.7.A. The transposition adopted by
Weil (Rev. de Philol. 11. go) is no relief. The Scholia give no real
clue. Gelzer places δι᾽ ἐλαχίστου before ἐς ὕβριν. The quotation from

XXXIX. $ 5] NOTES. 167

Philistus is a simple transcription from Thuc. Hude, while suggesting
that the Scholiast read μάλιστα ἀπροσδόκητος καὶ δι’ ἐλαχίστου, yet adds
‘durissime dici omnes consentiunt.’ Stahl explains ‘maxime et minimo
intervallo.’ μάλιστα I understand of the degree of prosperity, cf. Pind.
Pyth. 111. 105, ie. ‘the larger the measure of prosperity, the more
sudden its access, the more intoxicating its effect.’ The ἀπροσδόκητος
εὐπραξία finds its explanation in the exceptional weakness of Athens,
from pestilence and war expenditure. (Cf. 13 § 4.)

αἷς av ἔλθῃ, practically an object clause to τρέπειν, α5Ξε τὰς μάλιστα
εὐτυχούσας. Cf. VIII. 46 § 3.

ἔλθῃ, for this use of ἔρχεσθαι cf. Soph. O. C. 1421 κέρδος ἔρχεται.

τὰ δὲ πολλά.. εὐτυχοῦντα, the vulgate, explained by Kr. and Pp.
as a nominative, on the plea of absence of second article with εὐτυ-
χοῦντα. Hude’s εὐτυχοῦνται he justifies by reference to v. 26 ὃ 2, VIII.
10 §1. Badham’s εὐτυχοῦσι seems needless. On the ground that the
Scholiast appears to have had a second article in his text, as also on the
score that ἃ and τ are frequently confused, I have ventured to insert τά,
but with grave suspicion that εὐτυχοῦντα should be εὖ τυχόντα. ‘As a
rule, success is less dangerous when in accordance with man’s expecta-
tions (calculations) than when it takes him by surprise.’ The whole
passage is a comment on ἡ παροῦσα εὐδαιμονία of Mytilene.

For the sentiment cf. 1v. 17 § 4 and Demosth. Olynth. 1 8 23.

ἀσφαλέστερα, cf. 11. 43 § 1, ‘less perilous.’

ἀπωθοῦνται, ‘detrudunt,’ ‘stave off,’ ‘fend off,’ a naval word. Cf.
διωθεῖσθαι, 11. 84 ὃ 3. Note the change to personal construction.

διασώζονται, ‘preserve to the last,’ ‘keep intact’: middle of self-
interest. Cf. v. 16 ὃ τ διασώσασθαι τὴν εὐτυχίαν.

8 5. χρῆν, ‘the right plan was’ (i.e. would have been) : for position
cf. 46 86. Kal πάλαι, ‘long, long ago,’ 13 § I.

διαφέροντας, predicative with τετιμῆσθαι.

kal οὐκ dv ἐξύβρισαν, as the protasis is implied in the words
χρῆν μηδὲν τετιμῆσθαι, καί naturally continues the apodosis. (See
Goodw. M. T. § 416 sqq-)

és τόδε, ‘adeo’ (Classen). Cf. I. 75 § 3.

καὶ ἄλλως, ‘even under other conditions.’ Pp, ‘omnino.’ Kr, ‘in
the main ’—a generalising expression. Cf. VIII. 45 § I.

τὸ θεραπεῦον, ethnic=Tods θεραπεύοντας. Cf. τὸ Ἑλληνικόν, 82 § 1.

ὑπερφρονεῖν, with accusative, VI. 68 8 2.

θαυμάζειν, ‘respect.’

§ 6. κολασθέντων (see Stahl, Qu. Gr. 18). Kriiger contends that

168 THUCYDIDES f/f. [xxx1x. § 5—

the form κολασθήτωσαν was not unknown in older Attic: see his note
on I. 34 § 1.

καὶ νῦν, reflecting καὶ πάλαι sup., ‘late as it is.’

προστεθῇ... ἀπολύσητε, ‘you must not let the blame be laid upon
the few, but acquit the many.’ Cf. 56 § 7.

ἡμῖν ye, ‘quod ad nos quidem attinet,’ ‘there was no lack of
unanimity in attacking us.’

ots ye, ‘quippe quibus,’ plural including both δῆμος and ὀλίγοι.

νῦν πάλιν ἐν τῇ πόλει, Herwerden’s πάντα (cf. vill. 95 § 2) and
Cobet’s τὰ πρῶτα (Hdt. vi. roo) practically come to the same thing,
‘the leading power,’ except that Herw. (Stud. Th. p. 143) suggests a
forensic use of ἐν ‘in the estimation of’ (sc. Athens). No change is
needed. The words ἐν δυνάμει, 93 ὃ 2, give a clue to the construction, and
the expression οὐ στερισκόμενοι τῆς πόλεως (IV. 106 § 1) to the interpre-
tation, ‘reinstated in their city.’ In fact the phrase implies ἔχειν τὴν
πόλιν : cf. οἱ ἐν τοῖς πράγμασι--οἱ ἔχοντες τὰ πράγματα. Perhaps the
difficulty of plural inflexion in the form ἔμπολις suggested the periphrasis
ἐν πόλει εἶναι.

βεβαιότερον, ‘the safer game,’ 1.6. ἀσφαλέστερον.

8 7. τῶν ξυμμάχων, partitive, as much in connexion with τίνα
ὅντινα οὐ as with τοῖς Te ἀναγκασθεῖσιν and τοῖς ἑκοῦσιν (Kr. and St.).

προσθήσετε, probably the true reading : cf. rpoorpiBew.

τίνα ὅντινα ov, by attraction, for τίς ἐστιν ὅντιν᾽ οὐκ οἴεσθε. Cf.
οὐδενὸς γὰρ ὅτου οὐ πατὴρ av εἴην (Plat.). Cf. Goodw. Gr. Gr. § 153.
Such assimilation is very rare, except in the case of the object accusa-
tive.

βραχείᾳ προφάσει, dative of circumstance, ‘with but small pre-
text.’ πρόφασις in Thuc. is almost synonymous for αἰτία, cf. 13 § 1.
βραχείᾳ -- σμικρᾷ, cf. 36 § 2.

ἢ, the construction changes from substantive (ἐλευθέρωσις) to verbal
substantive, in form of non-articular infinitive (παθεῖν), Cf. Goodw.
Misi. 8..1.5; Καὰρ: Gr τ "0: 2:5.

8 8. ἡμῖν, in contrast to ξύμμαχοι. Classen sees a logical but not
grammatical connexion with σκέψασθε. But the sequence Te...6é is
not unfamiliar.

ἀποκεκινδυνεύσεται, these second future forms are not common in
Thuc., ‘shall have to risk to the uttermost.’

τυχόντες, hypothetical, ‘if successful.’ Cf. 82 § 9.

τῆς ἔπειτα.. τὸ λοιπόν, no mere tautology. τὸ λοιπόν implies ‘for
all time to come’ (in perpetuity).

me ἢ 3] NOTES. 169

στερήσεσθε, ‘you will sacrifice,’ ‘have to forego.’ The distinction
of στέρομαι from στερίσκομαι is one which must not be pressed too far.
For confusion of persons cf. v. 9 § 1: the speaker identifies himself
with his audience.

πολεμήσομεν, ‘we shall have to fight.’ All these futures are pro-
phetic, ‘ minatory or monitory’ (Gildersleeve).

CHAPTER XL.

§ 1. λόγῳ πιστήν, ‘relying on.’ Cf. Soph. O. Ὁ. 1031 ἔσθ᾽ ὅτῳ σὺ
πιστὸς ὧν, with active force. (Cf. Jebb’s note.)

ξυγγνώμην ἁμαρτεῖν, appositional construction, ‘they will find erring
humanity an excuse.’ ξυγγνώμην, ‘a plea of excuse,’ ‘ground for ex-
cuse.’ With Stahl’s suggestion of τοῦ omitted, ‘veniam peccandi,’ it is
hard to acquiesce. ἀνθρωπίνως, ‘humanitus.’? Construe with ἁμαρτεῖν,
not with λήψονται, in sense of ἀνθρωπείῳ λόγῳ (V. 80). ἄκοντες.
(Cobet’s ἑκόντες points to a misconception.) ‘This is not a question of
accidental damage, but of wilful conspiracy.’ The distinction is that
of βλάπτειν )( ἀδικεῖν, familiar to all readers of Aristotle’s Ethics. The
ἀδικία takes the form of ἐπιβουλή. The strong point is the ‘malice
prepense,’ the προαίρεσις (intention) implied in εἰδότες. The negative
ov is attracted to the verb, cf. 66 § 2 τὰ ὁμοῖα οὐκ ἀνταπέδοτε.

ξύγγνωμον (accent doubtful), in passive sense, ξυγγνώμης ἄξιον
(Sch.). Cf. Iv. 98 § 6.

§2. Kal τότε πρῶτον, i.e. ἐξ ἀρχῆς. Note the zeugma, καὶ τότε
(διεμαχεσάμην) καὶ νῦν διαμάχομαι (Schol.), ‘ut ab initio, ita nunc.’ Cf.
I. 86 § 2.

διαμάχομαι, did intensive, ‘fight to the end’ (through thick and
thin). μὴ μεταγνῶναι, epexegetic infin., ‘contend for your not changing,’
i.e. ‘protest to the last against your changing.’

προδεδογμένα, note the πρό ‘prae, prius.’ Cf. ‘praeiudicatum.’

τρισὶ τοῖς ἀξυμφ., dative of motive, on analogy of dative of in-
strument [a construction possible with substantive, e.g. ἅρματι νίκη
(Pind.), σώματι βοήθεια (Aristot.)].

ὃ 3. ἔλεος (cf. οἶκτος, ὃ 2). The personal replaces the impersonal
construction, οἶκτος δίκαιος ἀντιδίδοσθαι instead of δίκαιόν ἐστιν οἶκτον
ἀντιδίδοσθαι. (See Goodw. M. T. 8 762.) Cf. vill. 70 § 2 ἐπιτήδειοι

ὑπεζξαιρεθῆναι.

179 LTHOCYRIDES 77 [xL. § 3—

ὁμοίους, sc. γνώμῃ. ὁμόνοια or εὔνοια, being the one sure bond.

ἐξ ἀνάγκης, from force of circumstances (Jowett).

καθεστῶτας, not ‘who have taken up the attitude,’ but ‘who are
placed in the position’ (of inveterate foes).

ot τέρποντες, with reference to the second ἀξύμφορον of 8 3: cf.
ἡδονῇ ἀκοῆς (38 sub fin.).

ἐν ἐλάσσοσιν, cf. 37 ὃ 4.

ἀγῶνα, a ‘field’ or ‘sphere’ of action, ‘arena.’ Cf. the ‘competi-
tion’ of chap. 37 and 38.

καὶ μὴ ἐν ᾧ, the sequence καὶ μή must, I think, point to some
imperative force lurking in ἕξουσι, ‘they will have to find,’ i.e. ‘must
find,’ naturally followed by μή (of deprecation). See Goodw. M. T.
§§ 69 and 7o. Cf. Soph. O. C. 956. A trajection of the negative as
Ξε καὶ ἐν ᾧ μή is hardly possible (cf. 84 8 2).

The construction ἐν @ is loose, probably due to the adverbial
character of the expression, as=év@a: or the singular may serve to
emphasize the particular case in view.

βραχέα ἡσθεῖσα, cf. Arist. Ach. 2 ἥσθην δὲ βαιά (Kr.).

ζημιώσεται, for more usual ζημιωθήσεται (Kr.).

ἐκ Tov εὖ εἰπεῖν τὸ παθεῖν εὖ, Class. notes the chiasmus. The
reference in εὖ παθεῖν is to the θεραπεία τῶν προεστώτων of 11 § 5, and
of which Cleon himself was perhaps not without experience.

ἐπιείκεια, ‘consideration,’ ‘forbearance.’ In Ar. Eth. vi. τὸ 8 8 the
ἐπιεικής figures as the opposite of ἀκριβοδίκαιος.

δίδοται, Lat. ‘indulgere.’

ὁμοίους, sc. γνώμῃ (vid. sup. § 4), ‘consistent’ (i.e. unchanged) pre-
dicative with ὑπολειπομένους (Kriig.). Classen’s ὁμοίως is uncalled
for.

οὐδὲν ἧσσον, ‘none the less hostile’ (1.6. in spite of all forbearance).

8 4. ἕν δὲ ξυνελὼν λέγω, construe ὃν δέ with λέγω : ξυνελών, ‘in
brief.’ Cf. 1. 70 § 9 εἴ τις ξυνελὼν φαίη.

πειθόμενοι, ‘by following my advice,’ i.e. ‘if you follow.’ The par-
ticiple carries with it a presumption.

τὰ ξύμφορα, sc. ὑμῖν : cf. 47 sub fin. dpa, 1.6. τῷ δίκαια ποιεῖν.

δικαιώσεσθε, ‘stand self-condemned’ (cf. act. use δικαιοῦν). Not
here in Hdt. sense of ‘punishment,’ but of sentence preceding punish-
ment. The middle verb with ὑμᾶς αὐτούς constitutes a double re-
flection. οὐ χαριεῖσθε. Cf. 37 ὃ 2.

εἰ γὰρ ἀπέστησαν... ἄρχοιτε, not a combination of real with
unreal condition, but an aorist replacing a definite tense: an inter-

XL. § 6] NOTES. 171

change rendered possible by the fact of the aorist only marking
‘simple occurrence.’ (See Goodw. M. T. 54, 58.)

ἄρχοιτε ἄν, modified future. ‘If it be the case that these culprits
are justified in revolting, you must be ruling without right.’

οὐ χρεών, accus. absolute.

εἰ δὲ δή, δέ marking contrast or connexion, δή inferential, ‘but if,
in that case.’

οὐ προσῆκον, assuming the absence of right: hence οὐ, in spite of
εἰ preceding. The absolute accus. is complete in itself ; for purposes of
syntax = παρὰ τὸ προσῆκον.

τοῦτο δρᾷν (1.6. ἄρχειν), a common synonym in Thuc., cf. 1. 5 8 2.

παρὰ τὸ εἰκός, ‘in defiance of equity,’ reverting to topic of ἐπι-
εἰκεια.

τοί, ‘look you,’ a colloquial use, found three times only in Thuc.

καὶ τούσδε, καί includes Mytilene in the list of Athens’ legitimate
dependents.

Evpdopws, ‘in the interest of expediency.’ τοῦ ξυμφέροντος ἕνεκα τῇ
ἀρχῇ (Schol.). Cf. § 5.

κολάζεσθαι, middle, cf. Arist. Vesp. 406.

ἐκ τοῦ ἀκινδύνου, adverbial (-- ἀπραγμοσύνῃ, 11. 63 § 2).

ἀνδραγαθίζεσθαι, ‘play the honest man,’ i.e. affect the tone of that
high morality which shirks all dangers. Cleon’s bite goes deeper than
a mere policy of masterly non-intervention; ‘either,’ he says, ‘accept the
risks of empire or avoid those risks by sacrificing it.’ The whole
passage is a direct allusion to Pericles’ words in 1. 63. The risk im-
plied is ὧν ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ ἀπήχθεσθε (cf. ν. 91); the taunt is that they lack
the courage of their own opinions.

ὃ δ. τῇ Te αὐτῇ ζημίᾳ, ‘thus, by the self-same punishment de-
termine to avenge yourselves and to shew that you are no less keenly
alive to danger, you who are bent on escaping the plot, than those who
laid it’ τῇ αὐτῇ, the same which Mytilene could have inflicted on you.

ἀναλγητότεροι, i.e. ἀναισθητότεροι, a rare word in prose writers.
ἐνθυμηθέντες, cf. ἐν θυμῷ βαλεῖν, ‘laying to heart, reflecting seriously.’

ἃ εἰκὸς ἣν ποιῆσαι κρατήσαντας, i.e. ἃ εἰκότως ἂν ἐποίησαν εἰ ἐκρά-
τησαν. Note the juxtaposition of the two participles, κρατήσαντας, of
assumption, προυπάρξαντας, of fact.

ἦν, Stahl sees allusion ‘ad tempus defectionis.’ See the true ex-
planation in Goodw. M. T. § 415.

8 6. μάλιστα δέ «.7.X., ‘For those who without cause molest
another, press their malice to the utmost, even to their own undoing,

172 THUCYDIDES III. [xL. § 6—

in their suspicions of danger to be apprehended from one who is left to
be their enemy.’

μάλιστα (‘ante alios’) is too remote from ἐπεξέρχονται to be con-
strued with it.

προφάσει, cf. 40 8 6.

διόλλυνται, Hermann’s suggestion of construing ὑφορώμενοι with
διόλλ, finds confirmation from Plat. Phaedr. 254 E φόβῳ διόλλυται.
Revenge must be had at any price, even though it prove a Pyrrhic
victory. The principle involved is, of course, ‘odisse quem laeseris.’

ἐχθροῦ, predicative. Cf. 67 § 3 ol δὲ πρεσβῦται λελειμμένοι.

§ 7. ὁ γὰρ μὴ ξὺν ἀνάγκῃ, cf. Iv. 98 8 6 ἐπὶ τοῖς μὴ ἀνάγκῃ κακοῖς,
‘for he who has suffered a needless wrong (a wanton injury) is more im-
placable when the danger is past (when he has escaped the plot) than a
mere enemy on equal terms (i.e. who merely gets what he gives).’

μὴ ξὺν ἀνάγκῃ, the correctors of Mss. appear to have referred
this to a secondary use of ἀνάγκη (cf. Iv. 87 § 3), but the real allusion
is to the absence of all pressure of Athenian yoke or external compul-
sion (cf. 39 § 2 ὑπὸ τῶν πολεμίων ἀναγκασθέντες).

χαλεπώτερος, ‘harder to reckon with’: as sterner in his reprisals.

ἀπὸ τῆς ἴσης, cf. I. 15 ὃ 2, ‘qui aeque alterum laesit’ Pp., ‘a case
of six in the one and half a dozen in the other,’ in terms of the common
proverb. He merely ‘gives what he gets.’

διαφυγών, cf. 82 ὃ 5 for conditional participle. (Bauer’s allusion to
those who are ‘sui iuris’ (ἐσόψηφοι) limits the case too much.)

γενόμενοι δ᾽ ὅτι ἐγγύτατα, ‘realising as closely as possible your
feelings at the time.’ Cf. ἐγγύτατα διανοηθέντας, 1. 143 ὃ 5.

τοῦ πάσχειν, cf. Theaetet. 166 B μνήμην παρεῖναί τῳ ὧν ἔπαθε...
μηκέτι πάσχοντι.

καὶ ὡς, a change of construction, κατὰ ξύνεσιν, as γενόμενοι ὅτι ἐγγύτ.
τῇ γνώμῃ -εδιανοηθέντες ὅτι ἐγγύτ.

ἀνταπόδοτε, without object, but with suggestion of τὸ ἔσον (Cl.).

μὴ μαλακισθέντες, ‘without yielding to any weakness of the
moment.’

πρός, ambiguous, ‘on the score of’ the ‘lenocinium eloquentiae,’ or
‘in view of’ the present awful plight of Mytilene. The Schol. takes
the first view, Portus the second.

ἔπικρεμασθέντος, ‘imminent,’ ‘impending.’ Cf. 11. 53 § 4.

ὃ 8. τούτους τε καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις, the position of τε is due to the
close connexion between the two pronouns, marked by re...xal.

ξυμμάχοις, cf. 39 fin.

XLU. § 2] NOTES. iis

παράδειγμα καταστήσατε... ζημιωσόμενον, Meineke’s correction
ζημιωσόμενοι is based upon 67 § 6 παρ. ποιήσατε προθήσοντες. But his
appeal to analogy of rivoua is doubtful. Cf. Goodw. M. T. § go4.

ὃς ἂν ἀφιστῆται -- ἤν τις ἀφιστῆται, forming object clause.

θανάτῳ, cf. 11. 65 ὃ 3 χρήμασιν ἐζημίωσαν.

CHAPTER XI.

Διόδοτος. With the exception of the speech constructed for him by
Thucydides, nothing is known of him. Was his father Eucrates the
στυππειοπώλης (cf. Aristoph. Eq. 129), or the brother of Nicias? (cf.
Lysistrat. 103).

ἀντέλεγε μή, cf. ν. 49. 2 and διαμάχεται μή, 42 ὃ 2. Cf. Goodw.
M.T. § 807.

Kal τότε, ‘once more.’

CHAPTER ΧΊΞΙΙΣ

The whole speech should be compared with Sall. Cat. 51 and the
opening words with 38 § 1.

81, διαγνώμην, cf. 1. 87 § 6, a word peculiar to Thucydides.

μεμφομένους, ‘protest against’: μή due to notion of reproach or
dispraise in μεμφομένους : a retort to 38 § 3.

δύο τὰ ἐναντιώτατα, Classen destroys comma at εἶναι, and treats
τάχος τε Kal ὀργήν as subject of εἶναι. For the order cf. 1. 74 ὃ τ and
sup. 40 ὃ 2. The joint enumeration τε... καί as contrasted with the
disjunct ἢ... ἢ in I. 122 ὃ 4 justifies Classen’s interpretation.

τὸ μέν... τὸ δέ, (1) τάχος, (2) ὀργή: no need to invert the relation
τὸ μέν---τὸ δέ, both are ‘pessimi consultores,’ 5411, Cat. 51. Note the
false balance of periods, the δέ sentence being enlarged by βραχύτητος
γνώμης. The moral is (1) ‘fools rush in,’ (2) ‘anger is madness of the
moment.’

ἄνοια, ‘unreason’: here almost ἀλογία.

ἀπαιδευσία, cf. 84 § τ-Ξ- ἀκολασία, ‘intemperantia,’ i.e. ‘intolerance,’
‘bigotry.’

βραχύτητος, ‘shallowness,’ but, perhaps on analogy of puxpds=
μικροψυχία. Cf. its opposite βάθος, Plato, Theaetet. 183 E. Thucydides
is probably noting τὰ ἐπιπολάζοντα πάθη.

§ 2. τούς te λόγους, for argument cf. 38 § 4, ‘that words (state-
ments) do not serve to explain matters.’ πράγματα, ‘affairs’ from the
statesman’s point of view, xo? ἔργα ‘exploits’ or ‘achievements.’

174 TAO CYDIDES Ti. [Χιπ|. § 2—

ἀξύνετος, ‘wanting in intelligence.’ Cf. ἀξυνήμων, Ag. 1060. For
ξύνεσις cf. Ar. Eth. VI. 11 ὃ 13 it is stronger than mere φρόνησις. The
ξυνετός is one who can appreciate the arguments of the speaker, who is
able διὰ πολλῶν συνορᾶν, to take in at a glance an argument of many
steps.

ἰδίᾳ τι αὐτῷ διαφέρει, ‘has some personal interest at stake.’

ἄλλῳ τινί, instrumental dative.

περὶ Tov μέλλοντος, not of necessity constructed with φράσαι,
although μεμνῆσθαι περί (V1ll. 47 ὃ 2) might suggest an analogy.

δυνατὸν εἶναι -- ἐνδέχεσθαι, impersonal; cf, ἀδύνατον, 37 § I.

φράσαι, ‘explain,’ cf. 1. 145 § 1.

αἰσχρόν, cognate accusative.

πεῖσαι, ‘to press,’ with suppression of person; cf. 59 § 2.

οὐκ dv ἡγεῖται, on analogy of οὐ φημί, the negative really belongs
to the infinitive, as also the ἄν; cf. Goodw. M. T. § 220.

el...00, οὐ is due to litotes, as εἰς ὅτι.

Tov μὴ καλοῦ, ‘res inhonesta,’ ‘discreditable.’ Note the παρονο-
μασία, εὖ εἵπειν... εὖ διαβαλών. Bauer explains the first εὖ as ‘decore,’
Reiske as ‘cum successu.’ Miiller translates ‘successfully’ in either
case.

Diodotus’ point is that, though he thinks he cannot well speak in a
bad cause, yet he may slander well (i.e. cleverly).

εὖ διαβαλών, ‘by dexterous insinuation’; cf. Παφλαγὼν διαβολώ-
τατος, Eq. 45. διαβάλλειν (1) of ‘aspersing,’ ‘prejudicing,’ by ‘throwing
out sops to Cerberus,’ (2) of ‘setting at variance’; cf. Arist. Rhet. 1.
1 § 4.

ἐκπλῆξαι, ‘disconcert’: the distinction between ἐκπλήσσειν and κατα-
πλήσσειν must not be pressed in Thucydides.

§ 3. χαλεπώτατοι, ‘most difficult to deal with’ (cf. sup. 40 § 6).

καί, in awkward position : hence Poppo’s proposed transposition and
the suggestion of Badham οἱ... ἐκεῖνοι. But see Kriig. G. ἃ. I. 95 § 4.
Jowett explains by confusion of χαλεποὶ καὶ of προσ. with χαλεπώτατοι
δὲ οἱ mp. ‘there is yet another class, and those most difficult to deal
with.’

ἐπὶ χρήμασι, whether ‘for a bribe received’ or ‘in the hope of
gain’ is most doubtful. There is, of course, direct allusion to Cleon’s
words in 38 § 2 κέρδει ἐπαιρόμενος. A brilliant speech might well afford
a ‘professional opening’ to a young and rising rhetorician.

προκατηγοροῦντες, ‘anticipate the speech of their adversary’ (St.).
Class. retains προσκατηγοροῦντες, ‘supplement the accusation.’

XL. 8 6] NOTES. 175

ἐπίδειξιν, a rhetorical display. Cf. Ar. Rhet. 1. 3 § 3. ‘Eius nominis
quod ab ostentatione ducitur proprium est’ (Quintil. 111. 7 § 1).

εἰ κατῃτιῶντο, real for unreal condition.

ἀδικώτερος, ‘dishonest’: for double comparative see Thompson, ἃ. 8.
§ 127.

ἀπεχώρει dv, schol. τοῦ βήματος.

ἀδικίας δὲ ἐπιφερομένης, on analogy οἵ ἐπιφέρειν ὅπλα ‘when a
charge of venality is brought to bear.’ The gen. absol. replaces the εἰ
clause, the participles πείσας... τυχών containing the protasis. τε.. καί,
‘sive,’ ‘sive.’

γίγνεται, ‘evadit,’ more expressive than φαίνεται.

τυχών, cf. 39 ὃ 8.

peta ἀξυνεσίας καὶ ἄδικος, for construction of prepositional clause
with adjectival cf. 1. 32 § 1, 11. 15 § 2.

§ 4. οὐκ ὠφελεῖται, ‘is the loser’: connect the negative closely with
the verb.

ἐν τῷ τοιῷδε, cf. 39 ὃ 2 note.

ξυμβούλων, ‘consultores.’ Thucydides is anticipating the later
technical use of the word: cf. συμβουλευτική )( δικανική, ‘deliberative )(
forensic.’ Elsewhere in Thuc. in official sense; cf. 69 § I.

πλεῖστα... ἐλάχιστα, with force of double comparative.

τοὺς τοιούτους, retrospective, = οἱ ἐπὶ χρήμασι προσκατ.

πεισθεῖεν, there is no real change of subject as πόλις includes
πολῖται. See Rep. 359 E, with Heindorf’s note on Gorgias 510 Cc.
Dobree’s πεισθείη ἄν avoids the difficulty. See crit. note.

§ δ. τὸν ἀγαθὸν πολίτην, ‘the honest patriot,’ the φιλόπολις. ‘The
right plan is for the honest patriot to prove his policy the better, not
by intimidation, but by fair argument,’ i.e. μὴ ἐκπλήσσοντα (cf. ὃ 2), but
ἀπὸ ἴσου, ‘by meeting his opponent on equal terms.’

σώφρονα, ‘moderate,’ ‘tolerant’ (i.e. μὴ ἀπαίδευτος, cf. § 1).

προστιθέναι = ‘accumulare.’

ἀλλὰ μηδ᾽ ἐλασσοῦν, the object is suppressed; the first ἀλλὰ μηδέ
= ‘but in no way,’ the second=‘but not even.’

οὐχ ὅπως, as a rule, contains the weaker of two contrasted notions,
‘so far from punishing him she should not even so much as disparage
him.’ Cf. Goodw. M. T. § 707.

ἀτιμάζειν, ‘slight,’ ‘reflect upon him.’

8 6. The relations of τε... καί, i.e. τῷ τε εὖ βουλεύοντι καὶ τὸν
μὴ τυχόντα, are slightly disturbed by the parenthesis ἀλλὰ μηδ᾽
ἐλασσοῦν.

176 THUCYDIDES 111. [xnit. § 6—

ἐπὶ τῷ ἀξιοῦσθαι, ‘with a view to.’ Cf. 1. 38 § 2 ἐπὶ τῴ ἡγεμόνες
εἶναι.

ἥκιστα dv, covers both clauses; Meyer connects with one clause
only, vid. Stahl.

παρὰ γνώμην, not only ‘contrary to judgment’ but ‘contrary to
conscience.’

πρὸς χάριν, 1.6. ‘ad captandum.’

ὁ μὴ ἐπιτυχών, cf. sup. μὴ τυχών, lit. ‘missed the mark.’

τῷ αὐτῷ, i.e. τῷ πρὸς χάριν λέγειν.

προσάγεσθαι, ‘sibi conciliare.’

CHAPTER XLIII.

§ 1. ὧν, at once adversative and connecting: cf. 39 § 1.

Hv τις ὑποπτεύηται, with the verb λέγειν the suspicion becomes an
impression ; the zeugma is by no means harsh.

ὅμως, in spite of our suspicions.

φθονήσαντες (sc. αὐτῷ) : the dative of object is suppressed: ‘by
resenting such unconfirmed impression of bribery, we deprive the state
of such an obvious advantage.’ Kriig. questions the construction φθονεῖν
δοκήσεως (in Hdt. vil. 236, φθονέουσι τοῦ εὐτυχέειν, the dative is
expressed in previous context). The difficulty may be met by treating
the genitive as a ‘genitivus unde,’ marking the source or origin of
φθόνος.

δόκησις, ‘impression,’ ‘conviction,’ not προσδοκία, ‘expectation.’

τῆς πόλεως depends on ἀφαιρούμεθα. For genitive in lieu of double
accus. with ἀφαιρεῖσθαι, cf. 58 § 5.

§ 2. καθέστηκε, ‘usu venit’ (Pp.), ‘it has come to this.’ For
dependent infinitive cf: I. 76 § 2.

ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐθέος, i.e. ‘straightforward.’

τὸν τὰ δεινότατα βουλόμενον, ‘bent on pressing the most atrocious
schemes.’ For construction cf. sup. 42 § 2, note.

ἀπατῇ, the dative is answered by the participle ψευσάμενον.

πιστὸν γενέσθαι, dependent upon δεῖν.

8 3. τε, inferential, ‘thus.’ πόλιν, without article. With Athenians
there could be no mistake as to the πόλις in view.

mepwvolas, schol. περιεργία. Cf. περιτέχνησις, 82 ὃ 3, ‘would-be
wisdom,’ ‘excess of conceit’ (Miiller); is it not rather ‘excess of
suspicion’ (over-circumspection) ? Cf. Arist. Ranae 958 περινοεῖν
ἅπαντα.

XLUI. § 5] NOTES. 177

ἐκ Tov προφανοῦς, either a mere equivalent for ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐθέος (sup.),
or implying ‘even when the benefit is obvious.’

διδούς, ‘proffers.’ ἀνθυποπτεύεται (Thuc. greatly affects these
compounds with ἀντί), ‘is in his turn suspected,’ i.e. incurs as his reward
the suspicion that he will in some covert manner be the gainer.

πλέον ἕξειν, in lieu of πλεονεκτήσειν. Cf. 1. 37 ὃ 4.

§ 4. πρός, ‘in the face of.’

ἀξιοῦν τι, the misplaced enclitic finds ample confirmation in
Thuc., but its connexion is doubtful. Pp. connects with περαιτέρω,
Kriig. with λέγειν, Reiske with προνοοῦντας. It will find its best con-
nexion with περαιτέρω.

δι᾿ ὀλίγου, either of space or time. Hude cites vir. 71 ὃ 3 δ
ὀλίγου οὔσης τῆς θέας.

ἀνεύθυνον, in lieu of ἀνυπεύθυνον : the shorter form is found in Hdt.
and Aristotle (Kriig.). ‘We are accountable (answerable) for the advice
we give, whereas you are not accountable for listening to it.’ The
adviser is responsible, the hearer irresponsible.

πρός, ‘by contrast with.’

8 δ. εἰ γὰρ ὅ τε πείσας κιτ.λ. ‘If both proposer and supporter
suffered alike, you would be more temperate in your decisions.’

viv δὲ πρὸς ὀργήν x.7-\. Hermann’s interpretation of this most
difficult passage is opposed by Poppo: ζημιοῦτε πρὸς ὀργὴν ἥντινα (ἂν)
τύχητε (ζημιοῦντες): the words ἔστιν ὅτε σφαλέντες thus find a con-
struction with ζημιοῦτε.

ἥντινα, in construction with πρός (Goll.), ‘in such temper of the
moment as may lead you to inflict punishment.’ But Thuc. may have
used the relative, as in I. 35 § 4, with assimilation in agreement to ὀργήν,
where a neuter sequence would be more natural: e.g. πρὸς ὀργὴν
(ὀργισθέντες) ὅ τι av τύχητε σφαλέντες, ‘in anger, in whatsoever you
may chance to find yourselves at fault.’ This somewhat strains the
cognate accus. (σφαλῆναι ὀργήν), to which, however, a parallel might
be found in ἣν πιστεύετε, V. 105 ὃ 3, and Plato Phaedr. 249 D ἦν...
αἰτίαν ἔχει.

πρὸς ὀργήν, ‘ad quemlibet animi motum’ (Pp. St.), rightly, ‘but,
as it is, in the caprice of the moment, when you find yourselves at fault,
you visit with punishment the single judgment of your adviser, instead
of your own judgments, for having all alike gone wrong, in spite of
numbers.’

εἰ ξυνεξήμαρτον, a litotes for ὅτι ξυνεξ, Cf. ο 8 2.

(On the whole sentence see Appendix.)

Sane 12

175 THUCYDIDES 111. [xLiv. § 1—

CHAPTER XLIV.

81, ἀντερῶν, sc. Κλέωνι. Cf. 38 § 1.

κατηγορήσων, ‘to play the part of an accuser’; no supplement of
the object is necessary.

ὁ ἀγών, ‘the issue.’ εἰ σωφρονοῦμεν, ‘if we regard the matter
calmly’ (i.e. from a sober, rational, point of view), ‘dispassionately.’
Cf. 1. 86 § 2.

§ 2. ἤν τε γὰρ ἀποφήνω κιτ.λ. The theory of a double protasis
with single apodosis, which found favour with past editors, stands
self-condemned by the fact of the apodosis being complete in the first
member of the sentence. Classen’s suggestion of aposiopesis with
colloquial elev is entirely at variance with the use and style of Thu-
cydides. ἤν with optative is of course utterly untenable, in spite of
Thomas Magister: again, ἔχοντες elev cannot be periphrastic for ἔχοιεν
in Thuc., as such periphrasis is only admissible (in Thuc.) when the
participle has an adjectival force: although ἔχοντές τι ξυγγνώμης might
constitute a compound adjectival expression.

The sentence is a complete conditional construction, disturbed only by
the two parentheses εἰ μὴ ξυμφέρον (φαίνοιτο), and εἰ μὴ τῇ πόλει ἀγαθὸν
φαίνοιτο. The apodosis οὐ κελεύσω must, of course, be mentally repeated
with the infinitive εἶναι ἐν τῇ πόλει: e.g. ἤν τε ἀποφήνω ἀδικοῦντας οὐ
διὰ τοῦτο κελεύσω ἀποκτεῖναι (εἰ μὴ ξυμφέρον φαίνοιτο) ἤν τε καὶ ἔχοντάς
τι ξυγγνώμης --ἀποφήνω-- οὐ διὰ τοῦτο κελεύσω εἶναι ἐν τῇ πόλει (εἰ μὴ
ἀγαθὸν φαίνοιτο).

The question, says Diodotus, is not one of justice but expediency.
Whether I prove them guilty without extenuating circumstances, I shail
not insist on their execution (contra utilitatem), or whether I find
extenuating circumstances I shall not recommend them to mercy (contra
honestum). But, to a despotic power, good and expediency are one
and the same. The change from transitive to intransitive construction
(ἀποκτεῖναι... εἶναι) can be amply justified on Thucydidean analogy,
even though it involves a change of subject.

The words εἶναι ἐν τῇ πόλει are, I believe, a direct reply to 39 § 6.

πάνυ ἀδικοῦντας, ‘vel maxime’ (Pp.), (Cl.).

§ 3. τοῦτο, not (with Pp.) the object of ἰσχυρίζεται, but, with Class.
and Stahl, appositional to sentence: ‘as for this point on which Cleon
most insists’ (lays special stress).

προθεῖσι (sc. ἡμῖν), hypothetical, ‘si proposuerimus,’ but in con-
struction with ξυμφέρον. Kriig. distinguishes προθεῖναι of the legislator

XLV. § 2] NOTES. 179

laying down the law from προσθεῖναι of the magistrate applying the law,
enforcing the penalty.

πρὸς TO ἧσσον ἀφίστασθαι, sc. τοὺς ξυμμάχους, ‘in checking
rebellion.’

§ 4. οὐκ ἀξιῶ, cf. οὐ φημί, and the like analogies.

τῷ εὐπρεπεῖ, causal dative, cf. 38 § 2, ‘because of that which is
attractive’ (specious).

ὁ λόγος, ‘his proposal’ (policy).

πρὸς τὴν ὀργήν, πρός of the standard of reference (Pp.).

ἐπισπάσαιτο, without object, ‘prove attractive.’ Cf. ν. 111 ὃ 3,

τῶν δικαίων, cf. δικαιώματα, I. 41 § 1; ‘iusta,’ Ter. Phorm. 11. 1. 50
(Pp. St.); ‘principles of justice’ 1.6. ‘justice.’

ὅπως, not final, but modal=xa@’ 6 τι, ‘as to the way in which,’
i.e. ‘how to make them useful.’ Arnold quotes Arist. Rhet. 1. 3 § 4.

CHAPTER XLV.

§ 1. οὖν, resumptive, stronger than dpa, = ‘igitur.’

θανάτου ζημία, genitive of definition. Cf. ξυμφορὰ διαφθορᾶς. Hude
upholds the reading of Cod. Laur. θανάτου ζημίαι πρόκεινται, on the plea
that the plural better covers the individual offences. But the singular
serves to mark the one death-penalty for all.

τῇ ἐλπίδι, the article is possessive.

μὴ περιέσεσθαι, epexegetic: ‘after passing sentence against himself
to the effect that,’ i.e. condemning his design to failure. περιέσεσθαι
is a negative rather than positive word, suggesting rather ‘escape from’
than ‘victory over’ (see Shilleto, on I. 55 § 3).

τῷ ἔπιβουλεύματι, not in direct dependence on περιέσεσθαι, ‘outlive
the attempt,’ ‘live to see his scheme successful,’ although in construction
with it, as limiting ; ‘succeed in his design’ (ἐπιβουλεύοντα).

§ 2. πόλις τε ἀφισταμένη, mark the order: ‘so too with a state
bent on revolt, what state ever yet ventured this?’

Class. notes that this position of the substantive gives (1) a character
of generality, (2) suggests a partitive genitive (vid. Class. on I. 1 § 1).

τε, marking transition from individual to state, from οὐδείς to πόλις.

tls, a rhetorical question, replacing definite assertion.

ἥσσω τῇ δοκήσει, the dative limits or restricts the application
of ἥσσω, ‘if possessing resources inferior in its own conviction, whether
in point of home forces or aid of others,’ i.e. ‘if impressed with the
conviction of its own inferiority.’

E2——2

180 LILO CY DIDES Ts. [xLv. § 3—

8 3. πεφύκασί re: re epexegetic: δέ would suggest contrast.

This doctrine of human depravity (‘original sin’), though recognised
by Stoics, was combated by Plato. See Cope’s Introd. to Plato’s
Gorgias, p. Ixiv. sqq.

ἔπεί, ‘whereas,’ ‘although.’

διεξεληλύθασί ye, ‘have positively (actually) exhausted the whole list
of penalties,’ ‘run the whole gamut.’

προστιθέντες, imperfect participle, expressing either continued at-
tempt or accumulation of penalties.

εἴ πως, in the vain effort (in the vague hope) to escape the iniquities
of evil-doers. εἴ πως conceals a purpose (Goodw. M. T. ὃ 490). The
optative is due either to ‘original intention’ (cf. Aristoph. Ran. 24) or
to the wish as ‘father to the thought.’

παραβαινομένων, impersonal gen, absol. (Kriig.). Possibly in agree-
ment with ζημιῶν, παραβαίνεσθαι being used as passive of παρέρχεσθαι:
contrast παρελθεῖν νόμον, ‘to neglect a law,’ with παραβαίνειν ‘to trans-
gress,’ 1.6. ‘as these come to be disregarded.’

ἀνήκουσι, on analogy of ἀναφέρειν, of reference to a standard,
θάνατος representing the ideal penalty: the only instance in Thuc. On
the growth of Law, see Tac. A. III. 26.

kal τοῦτο, sc. τὸ ἐς θάνατον τὰς πολλὰς ἀνήκειν (St.). Lupus
(N. Jahrb. 1875) would strike out καὶ τοῦτο. Hude suggests καὶ ταῦτα
(cf. VII. 79 § 3; VIII. 19 § 1), i.e. ‘talia facinora.’

§4. τούτου... τόδε, both refer to the death-penalty, τούτου having
reference to the previous context, τόδε to the present. Cf. Soph. Antig.
296.

δέος, as προσδοκία τοῦ κακοῦ (Protag. 358 D), is here pressed beyond
Thuc.’s use as ‘apprehension’ (cf. Shill. on 1. 36 § 1).

γε limits: ‘this’ (without anything more), ‘this in itself.’

ἡ μὲν πενία κ.τ.λ., ‘either poverty inspiring such audacity through
hardship, or license suggesting aggrandisement, through arrogance and
pride, or other conditions of fortune, according to men’s temper, each
being severally controlled by some fatal dominant passion, lead men
into such ventures.’

Of the ξυντυχίαι τοῦ βίου two only are specified, πενία and ἐξουσία
(cf. 1. 38). In the case of poverty the stimulus is ἀνάγκη, in that of
wealth it is ὕβρις, each condition of fortune being swayed by its own
particular passion. To the poor man hardship says ‘be bold’ (nothing
venture, nothing have); to the rich man arrogance suggests ‘help your-
self’; for those in other conditions the temptations of an overmastering

XLV. § 6] NOTES. 181

passion are reckless of consequences. The whole passage is a comment
on θρασύτης as defying law.

ἐξουσία, ‘opes’ (Vall.), rather ‘the license which wealth gives,’
Thuc. by specifying the two extremes only ‘poor? and ‘rich’ (cf. πένης
...evdaluwy, II. 53) somewhat narrows the γνώμη. Cf. with this passage
84$1. πλεονεξία defies law, I. 77 § 3-

Kal φρονήματι destroys the balance of the sentence.

τῶν ἀνθρώπων, perhaps in commiserating sense, ‘its victims,’ ‘mor-
tales aegri’; cf. Thuc. 11. 48§ 2. Classen, on the ground that an object
is needed to ἐξάγουσιν, reads τὸν ἄνθρωπον. See Crit. Note. For
ἐξάγειν, cf. Eur. Alc. 1080 (B1.).

ὑπ᾽ ἀνηκέστου τινός, Dobree’s τοῦ has much to commend it: cf.
Virg. Aen. Ix. 185 ‘sua cuique deus fit dira cupido.’ Hude refers ὀργῇ
alike to τόλμα and πλεονεξία, but ἀνηκέστου τινὸς κρείττονος to ἀνάγκη
and ὕβρις, therefore preferring to read ὀργήν (cf. Comm. Crit., p. ror).

8 δ. ἥ τε ἐλπὶς καὶ ὁ ἔρως, τε not correlative to καί, but intro-
ducing new idea (Class.). ἔρως, ‘desire,’ cf. Soph. O. T. 600.

For ἐλπίς and its fatal influence, cf. v. 103.

ἔπὶ παντί, ‘in every case’; but cf. ἐπὶ πᾶν (Vv. 68 § 3).

ὁ pév...7 δέ, in inverse relation.

ἐκφροντίζων, a rare word, ‘excogitans’ (Portus). Cf. Nubes 695
(Duk.).

“εὐπορίαν τῆς τύχης, (1) the betterment of their condition :
(2) abundant possibilities of chance. Whether objective or subjective
genitive is hard to determine. ὄντα ἀφανῆ, neuter, of inanimate
conceptions. ‘Hope also and desire, in every case, the one leading,
the other following, the one originating the enterprise, the other
suggesting the feasibility of success, are most harmful, and, though
invisible, outweigh the visible dangers.’

§ 6. καὶ ἡ τύχη, ‘fortune again.’ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς, sc. ἔρως καὶ ἐλπίς.

οὐδὲν ἔλασσον κ.τ.λ., ‘supplements in no less degree their intoxi-
cating influence.’

ξυμβάλλεται és, so also with genitive. Cf. Hdt. Iv. 50, of con-
tributing to a total.

παρισταμένη, i.e. παραστατοῦσα, not merely παραγιγνομένη : ‘for
sometimes, by her unlooked-for favour, she induces a man to face
danger even at a disadvantage, and more particularly states, inasmuch
as they play for the highest stakes, freedom or empire over others.’

οὐχ ἧσσον, a litotes. Classen explains as μάλιστα; ‘no less than
individuals’ (Kriig.).

182 ΘΟ, LET. [xiv. § 6—

ὅσῳ, dat. of measure=xaé’ ὅσον, 1. 68 ὃ 2, frequently found with
comparatives.

περὶ τῶν μεγίστων, sc. κινδυνεύουσιν.

ἐλευθερία, ‘freedom,’ not the ὕπουλος αὐτονομία of Athens’ proffering.

καὶ μετὰ πάντων, the words may either constitute a mere comment
on τὰς πόλεις, or refer with equal force to τις and πόλις alike.

(1) When backed by numbers each individual forms, unreasonably,
an opinion far in excess of his real strength.

αὑτῶν for αὑτοῦ, the unit being lost in the aggregate.

(2) Each and all alike (i.e. both individuals and states) unreason-
ably exaggerate their own strength.

Lit. ‘conceive opinions far greater than themselves.’

ἐπὶ πλέον τι, τι, intensive, extending the sphere of πλέον.

αὑτῶν, i.e. the actual strength of πάντες, ‘quam pro eo quod ipsi
valent,’ a confusion of general with particular.

The construction of δοξάζειν is either with cognate accus. or with
preposition, e.g. δοξάζειν περί: δοξάζειν τι is a very different conception
to δοξάζειν τινά, of which neither Cl. nor St. nor Bohme adduce
examples. The aorist is gnomic. The two phases of thought sug-
gested are (1) Providence is on the side of big battalions, (2) the
exciting influence of good fortune tells with equal effect on states and
individuals.

8 7. ἁπλώς τε, cf. 38 § 7. f

πολλῆς εὐηθείας (no need for Naber’s γέμον), ‘a mark of supreme
simplicity.’ Cf. 1. 142 § 9.

ὅστις -- εἴ τις, replacing inf. with article, ‘for anyone to think’: al.
εὐηθεστάτου ἐστὶ τὸ οἰηθῆναι. Cf. the use of ὅταν with subjunctive.
St. treats ὅστις οἴεται as parenthetical (‘if any there be who so imagines’),
making ἔχειν take its constrn. directly from ἀδύνατον, thus escaping the
difficulty of a mixed constrn. (Pp.). Cf. 11. 44 § 1.

ἀποτροπήν, sensu rhetorico, ‘means of dissuasion.’

ὁρμωμένης x.7.d., ‘is bent with all its energy upon the achievement
of some purpose,’ i.e. when all the energies of human nature are stirred
to the attainment of some end. Cf. πολλοὶ yap εἰς ἕν ξυμπίτνουσιν
ἵμεροι (Aesch. Choeph. 299).

ἄλλῳ Tw δεινῷ, cf. sup. δεινότερον τι, ὃ 4.

XLVI. § 2] NOTES. 183

CHAPTER’ XLVI.

§1. τοῦ θανάτου τῇ ζημίᾳ, for order cf. § 4.

ἐχεγγύῳ, ‘as full security’ (Pp. St.), ‘guarantee.’ Cf. φερεγγυώτατος,
VIII. 68 § 3.

χεῖρον βουλεύσασθαι, 1.6. θάνατον ψηφίσασθαι (Cl.): the speaker
returns once more to the point of εὐβουλία. Cf. 44 § τ.

ἀνέλπιστον, predicate to ὡς clause as object of καταστῆσαι.

οὐκ, pleonastic, but due to negative force of ἀνέλπιστον. The con-
struction is a variant on τοὺς ἀποστάντας ἐς ἀνέλπιστον καταστῆσαι ὡς
οὐκ ἔσται μεταγνῶναι, with ws clause epexegetic.

ἔσται-Ξ- ἔξεσται, i.e. there is to be no ‘locus poenitentiae.’

ὅτι ἐν βραχυτάτῳ--ἐν (τῴ) ὅτι βραχυτάτῳ (cf. 1. 63 § τ ὡς és
ἐλάχιστον, and inf. ὃ 6 ὅτι ἐπ᾽ ἐλάχιστον), ‘quantum potest,’ ‘ with all
speed.’

καταλῦσαι (ἀναλῦσαι in Dion. Hal.) : cf. λῦσαι, 1. 42 ὃ 3, and Arist.
Ran. 691; lit. ‘make an end of.’ The word in itself suggests ‘pacifi-
cation’; hence the notion of ‘adjustment.’ For the relation of λύσις
to ἄφεσις, cf. Demosth. Pantaen. § 58.

§ 2. kal ἀποστᾶσα, ‘etiam post defectionem’ (St.): ‘nullo sano
sensu’ is Hude’s comment. But Stahl is right, ‘even after actually
revolting’: the revolt is not merely meditated. Kriiger somewhat
awkwardly refers καί to ἦν.

μή, suggested by ἦν ; although the use of μή with verbs of this type
is sufficiently well-known, ‘if it be convinced that it cannot succeed.’

περιεσομένη, in stronger sense; but cf. 45 § 1, note.

ἔλθοι ἄν, qualified future in lieu of more explicit: but side by side
with definite fut. in I. 121 § 4 (Cl.).

ἀποδοῦναι, ‘refunding the outlay,’ aorist of single payment.

ὑποτελεῖν = ὑποτελῇ εἷναι, of continued contribution.

νῦν μέν... ἐκείνως δέ, to avoid ambiguity of viv δέ. Cf. 1. 77 § 3, with
reference to argument of ὃ 1.

τίνα οἴεσθε ἥν τινα, attraction. Cf. 39 § 7.

παρασκευάσεσθαι, whether with or without ἄν (the latter use
with verbs of expectation, cf. Soph. El. 443) the aorist of the Mss.
is harsh side by side with the future, especially as there appears no dis-
tinction of probability from certainty.

πολιορκίᾳ, circumstantial dative Ξε πολιορκουμένην.

παρατενεῖσθαι, ‘strain (its endurance) to the uttermost,’ a word from
the vocabulary of torture, ‘to rack.’ Cf. Arist. Nub. 213.

184 THUCYDIDES 77 [xLv1. § 2—

τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται, ‘idem valet,’ cf. 1. 141 ὃ 1. Note the non-articular
infinitive (Goodw. M. T. 790).

§ 3. ἡμῖν τε, re somewhat irregularly answering μέν (ἄμεινον μέν).
Class. cites I. 144 § 2, where the sequence is doubtful: otherwise we can
have recourse to μέν ‘solitarium’ with re supplementary or inferential.

βλάβη-Ξ- βλαβερόν, ‘damnosum,’ ‘ruinous.’

καθημένοις, with notion of ‘desidere,’ ‘sitting down before a town.’

ἐφθαρμένην, ‘ruined.’ στέρεσθαι, ‘forego,’ cf. Iv. 117 § 2.

τῷδε, with loose reference to πρόσοδος. Cf. 45 ὃ 3 καὶ τοῦτο. A
counter-blast to 39 § 8.

§ 4. ὥστε ov δεῖ, wore with indicative as a mere particle of con-
nexion: cf. Goodw. M. T. 582 544.

δικαστὰς ὄντας, note particularly the position of ἀκριβεῖς, ‘we are
not bound, in the capacity of judges, to injure ourselves by severity (i.e.
‘enforce the law to our own detriment’), so much as to consider &c.’
Diodotus disclaims throughout the judicial position.

és χρημάτων λόγον, Ionic for χρημάτων λόγῳ, cf. Hdt. mt. 39.
Cf. Demosth. Fal. Leg. § 156 with Shilleto’s note: ‘in point of money.’

φυλακὴν ποιεῖσθαι, ‘to found our precautions not on the basis of
legal terrorism, but on vigilance in administration.’ For emphatic
position of τῶν νόμων and τῶν ἔργων, cf. 1. 32 ὃ 2: practical precautions
must supplant theoretical intimidation.

ὃ δ. ἐλεύθερον, by contrast with ὑπήκοοι, a remark of general
application, but with special reference to Lesbos (Pp. 51.). Cf. 11.

βίᾳ ἀρχόμενον, cf. ἄκοντας ἀρχομένους 37 ὃ 2.

εἰκότως, ‘naturally,’ suggesting ξυγγνώμη.

πρὸς αὐτονομίαν, not the ὕπουλος αὐτονομία of 10 § 3 or of VIII.
64 ὃ 3. For the construction Stahl compares Antig. 299 ἵστασθαι
mpos, ‘to secede to the side of’ (cf. the ambiguity in 13 § 1), ‘range
themselves on the side of.’

§6. χρὴ δὲ οὐ κολαΐζειν, the negative of the leading verb transferred
to the subordinate.

ἀφισταμένους, ‘at the moment of revolt.’

σφόδρα.. σφόδρα, for the parisosis cf. 42 ὃ 2 εὖ... εὖ,

προκαταλαμβάνειν, ‘anticipate the mere possibility of their conceiving
such a design.’ τούτου -- τοῦ ἀποστῆναι.

κρατήσαντας, ‘when we have got the upper hand.’

ἐπ᾿ ἐλάχιστον, of space, ‘to the smallest extent possible.’

ἐπιφέρειν, cf. 42 § 3; 81 ἃ 4:

XLVIL. § 5] NOTES. 185

CHAPTER XLVII.

§ 1. καὶ τοῦτο, ‘in this again’; for accusative cf. 37 ὃ 2.

πειθόμενοι, no need for πιθόμενοι, as the tense of the participle
usually assimilates itself to the tense of the verb. Cf. 43 § 5.

§ 2. ὁ δῆμος εὔνους ἐστί, a reply to 39 ὃ 6.

βιασθῇ, ‘coerced’ (i.e. into rebellion).

τοῖς ἀποστήσασι, ‘those who have caused the rebellion,’ the ‘rerum
novarum auctores.’

ἀντικαθισταμένης, ‘arrayed against you.’ Cf. 1. 71 § 1.

τὸ πλῆθος, the mass, bulk, of the population.

és πόλεμον ἐπέρχεσθε, the construction (for which cf. Iv. 25 ὃ g and
Iv. 68 § 4, both passages being questioned by Cobet) loses much of its
harshness by assuming a dative of object with ἐπέρχεσθε, εἰς with accus.
denoting the end in view; cf. ἐπί with dative.

8 3. ὅπλων ἐκράτησε, from Salaethus, 27 ὃ 3.

ἀδικήσετε, without object, cf. 65 ὃ 2. εὐεργέτας, construe with
κτείνοντες.

ἔπειτα, usually in Thuc. without δέ.

καταστήσετε, ‘bring about,’ ‘effect.’

8 βούλονται, ‘their very heart’s desire’; object clause to κατα-
στήσετε.

ἀφιστάντες, ‘when intent on causing revolution.’ εὐθύς, ‘ab initio.’

προδειξάντων, mpo- temporal.

§ 4. ἠδίκησαν, sc. of πολλοί.

μὴ προσποιεῖσθαι, ‘dissimulare,’ ‘to take no notice,’ ‘pretend not
to see it.’ Kriig. finds an object in ἀδικῆσαι αὐτούς. The word might
imply προσποίησις ἐπὶ τὸ μεῖζον, ‘not to exaggerate it,’ ‘make too much
of it.’

6, in collective sense.

§ 5. τοῦτο, anticipating ἑκόντας ἀδικηθῆναι. Cobet’s supplement
of τι is needless. κάθεξις, ‘security,’ a Thucydidean word.

δικαίως, cf. 46 § 4 δικαστὰς ὄντας.

ods μή, cf. 58 § 1.

τὸ αὐτὸ δίκαιον x.7-A. The comparison of vi. 87 ὃ 3 and Iv. 17 § 1
compels us to treat these words as appositional (not, with Classen, as
predicative), ‘as for Cleon’s contention, the coincidence of justice with
expediency in such punishment, it is found to be impossible to combine
the two by such a course,’ i.e. the combination proves impossible.

186 THOCIDIDES Tf: [xLvi1. § 1—

CHAPTER XLVIII.

§1. γνόντες, ‘deciding,’ hence the infinitive, in preference to ὅτι
with indicative of bare fact. (See St. on Iv. 27 § 4.)

οἴκτῳ, cf. 40 § 2.

νείμαντες, the participle is balanced by ἀπὸ τῶν παραινουμένων. Cf.
3 § 1 with Eur. Hec. 868 τῷ τ᾽ ὄχλῳ πλέον νέμεις.

οὐδὲ ἐγώ, 1.6. no more than Cleon. προσάγεσθαι, a middle, cf. 42
§ 6.

ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν παραινουμένων, ‘on the mere strength of my sug-
gestions.’ For ἀπό cf. 38 § 4.

Ilaxys, cf. 35.

κρῖναι, ‘reos sistere.’ The infinitive is epexegetic of πείθεσθε.

Kad’ ἡσυχίαν, ‘at your leisure’ (Portus ‘per otium’), not ‘aequo
animo.’ The speaker returns to the topic of 42 ὃ 1, τάχος καὶ ὀργήν.

οἰκεῖν, sc. εἶναι ἐν τῇ πόλει. Cf. 39 § 6. Pregnant in sense, says
Classen, aS= ἀκινδύνως οἰκεῖν.

§ 2. πρὸς τοὺς ἐναντίους, sc. πολεμίους. Construe with βουλεύεται.

κρείσσων ἐστίν, cf. 38 ὃ 3.

ἢ μετ᾽ ἔργων ἰσχύος (ἐν τῇ δυνάμει τῶν ὅπλων Schol.). Meineke’s
proposed insertion of article (ὁ... ἐπιών) is needless. There is no change
of personality, the same individual may adopt either course. The
construction implies εἰ γάρ τις εὖ βουλεύεται κρείσσων ἐστὶν ἢ εἰ μετ᾽ ἔργων
ἰσχύος ἐπέρχεται. The reference may be either to the attitude of Athens
towards Mytilene or to the two different plans submitted to the con-
sideration of the Athenians.

CHAPTER XLIX.

8 1. ῥηθεισῶν δὲ τῶν γνωμῶν, μάλιστα intensive, ἀντιπάλων pre-
dicative with ῥηθεισῶν. πρὸς ἀλλήλας, ‘the one against the other’: i.e.
‘enforced by nearly equal weight of counter-arguments.’

ἀντιπάλων, ‘aequales’ rather than ‘contrariae.’

ἀγῶνα τῆς δόξης, ‘a conflict of opinion.’ Cf. ἀγῶνα λόγων, Plato,
Protag. 335 A.

ὅμως, ‘after all,’ i.e. in spite of the full discussion of the arguments
‘pro and con’ (Pp.), or in spite of their willingness to reconsider the
question from mere motives of humanity. Cf. 36§3. Hude suggests
ὁμοίως, in the sense of οὐχ ἧσσον, i.e. the difference of opinion on the
part of the voters was as marked as that on the part of the speakers.

XLIX. ὃ 4] NOTES. 187

ἀγχώμαλοι, ‘a harsh word,’ says Pollux, but common in later
Greek, and found elsewhere in Thuc.—cf. Iv. 134 ὃ 2—‘almost equal.’

§ 2. ἄλλην -- ἑτέραν. Cf. Shilleto on 1. 48 § 3, who comments on
the confusion of ἄλλος and ἕτερος in Greek. Note especially his exx.
from Theaetetus. ἀπέστελλον, imperfect. Cf. 1. 26 § 1 of prompt
action: ‘the activity of the sender goes with the person sent’ (Cl.).

φθασάσης τῆς προτέρας, ‘si prior illa praevenerit.’ The genitive
absolute is the equivalent of a hypothetical sentence ἢν φθάσῃ ἡ mpo-
τέρα. The absolute construction can express all relations to the main
sentence of which the dependent sentence is capable. ὅπως μὴ εὕρωσι,
realistic subj., as usual in Thuc.

προεῖχε (τοῦ πλοῦ Sch.), ‘had the start.’

ἡμέρᾳ καὶ νυκτί, sc. μιᾷ, a frequent ellipse. Cf. Dem. Fals. Leg.
§ 135, Soph. Phil. 83. The dative is a dative of measure.

Goller explains that the first ship left after the first day’s debate,
towards evening, the second in the late afternoon of the second day.

§ 3. τῶν πρέσβεων, cf. 28. οἴνῳ, in lieu of the usual water, i.e.
the οἰνοῦττα of Athenaeus as distinct from the μᾶζα (here ἄλφιτα) of
Aristoph. Ran. 1073. The editors remark upon the superior quality
of the rations. ἅμα ἐλαύνοντες, cf. Plato, Phaedo 608 καὶ τρίβων
ἅμα ἔφη. This construction of ἅμα and μεταξύ is found both with gen.
absol. and simple participle, Thompson, Syn. ὃ 151. πεφυραμένα,
‘kneaded with.’

κατὰ μέρος, ‘in turn,’ IV. 26 § 3. Similarly κατὰ διαδοχάς. They
did not even avail themselves of the ‘intervalla noctium.’

ὃ 4. κατὰ τύχην, ‘providentially.’ τύχη to the Greek represents
the αἰτία ἀόριστος, ‘the undefined cause.’ Cf. Arist. Rhet. I. 10 § 12.

ἐναντιωθέντος...πλεούσης, the aorist momentary, the present con-
tinuous. At no point of the voyage had they a foul wind, whereas the
slowness of the first vessel continued throughout.

ἀλλόκοτον, ‘distasteful.’ Cf. Lat. ‘alienum,’ Soph. Phil. rigt.

τοσοῦτον ὅσον ἀνεγνωκέναι, cf. the analogous construction of τοι-
obros οἷος, Plat. Gorg. 457D. Note also a variant in VIII. 72 ὃ 1 οὕτω
μέγα ἐν ᾧ ξυνελθεῖν : so also with ὅσον (Thuc. I. 2 § 2 ὅσον ἀποζῆν). The
infin. is one of limitation, and referable to epexegetic use. According
to Goodw., M. and T. § 759, the infinitive depends upon the idea of
fitness, ability, or sufficiency expressed in these combinations. ‘It came
enough in advance (of the other ship) for Paches to have already read
the decree.’ The fact that he had read it is inferred, but not expressed.
For the phrase compare Lat. ‘tantum quod,’ and note the interchange

188 LHAOCYDIDES. 177. [XLIx. § 4—

of accus. with dat. (in Gk.), and accus. with ablat. (Lat.) in expressions
of distance.

The account of Diodorus, x11. 55, differs slightly (Pp.).

ἐπικατάγεται, ‘postea appellit’ (St.), or =‘insuper,’ vitI. 28 § 1,
came into port, close on the heels of the first; or, at the critical
moment. Observe coordination of present with aorist διεκώλυσε. μή,
epexegetic of negative force of διακωλύω.

παρὰ τοσοῦτον κινδύνου, the same construction with infinitive in
VIII. 76 § 4 παρ᾽ ἐλάχιστον δὴ ἦλθε ἀφελέσθαι, and even with imper-
sonal verb, VIII. 33 ὃ 3 παρὰ τοσοῦτον ἐγένετο αὐτῷ μὴ περιπεσεῖν, i.e.
‘within such measurable distance of danger,’ or ‘up to such point of
danger.’ ‘The use of παρά may imply either that the line is followed to
its full extent, or that a stoppage is made at a certain point. Jelf’s
diagram (Gr. G. § 637) may help the student to understand the
apparently conflicting uses of παρά. See also Holden on vit. 2 § 4.

CHAPTER &

§ 1. In this chapter Paches is for the last time mentioned in
Thucydides. His end as chronicled by Plutarch was tragic, “εὐθύνας
διδοὺς τῆς στρατηγίας ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ δικαστηρίῳ σπασάμενος ξίφος ἀνεῖλεν
αὑτόν᾽ (Nic. 6). Plutarch adds the case of Paches to the list of τὰ
πλημμεληθέντα τῷ δήμῳ περὶ τοὺς στρατηγούς (Arist. 26). The story is
that he was brought to trial for the murder of the husbands of two
women of Mytilene of whom he had become enamoured. See Grote,
Vol. vi. 352. Agathias, Epigr. 57. (Anth. Pal. vil. 614.)

γνώμῃ, cf. 1. go ὃ 3, causal. Cf. Thomp. Synt. § 122 6.

χιλίων. This statement Miiller-Striibing suspects as the work of
some bloodthirsty grammarian. Schutz holds that A’ was corrupted
into ,A. The Athenian enforcement of the principle ‘vae victis’ was
notorious; yet, says Miiller-Striibing, such wholesale butchery lacks
confirmation by other historians. This theory, discussed by Holzapfel
(Rhein. Mus. XXXVII. 3), has called forth a reply from Stahl (Rh. Mus.
XXXVIII. 1), who argues that there is no need to suspect the text. The
very fact of the income derived from the land confiscated being so
small would tend to prove that the Athenian severity was not extreme.
Nearly all the land of Lesbos was the property of the δυνατοί: if Thuc.
had said that the lands of the δυνατοί were confiscated, it would have
tallied with our text. (But see Diod. x1. 30, who perhaps relied
on Ephorus.)

EDS 1|} NOTES. 189

τείχη, without article, as is usual in the case of familiar objects.
Cf. virl. 1 § 3.

παραλαβεῖν, the opposite of παραδοῦναι, cp. 1. 19 § 1. Lit. ‘took
over,’ ‘traditas acceperunt’ (Pp.), ‘ademerunt’ (Va.).

ὃ 2. φόρος, a term so odious as eventually to necessitate a ὑπο-
κορισμός in the form σύνταξις.

κλήρους, according to Clinton, 96 iugera apiece.

ἹΜηθυμναίων, they had remained faithful to Athens.

τριακοσίους, see Arnold’s note, and cf. ‘inter alia’ the case of Veii;
Livy v. 23. See also Arist. Pol. vil. ro.

κληρούχους, Arnold remarks that they could not have continued
to reside there (cf. Thuc. vi. 22, Xen. Hell. 1. 6, 1. 2). Bockh
suggests that they went there as a garrison. Grote points out that it
appears strange that Athens under such straitened circumstances as to
call for an εἰσφορά should sacrifice the large sum of 5400 minz (go
talents). Perhaps, however, Athens made Lesbos pay for its garrison in
this way. In the 8th year of the war (cf. Iv. 75) we find no mention of
κληροῦχοι, who would naturally have been employed to suppress the
Samian exiles. Grote further appeals to evidence of Antiphon (de
caede Herod. 14) as making no allusion to cleruchs whether resident or
absentees. But see Grote, Vol. vi. 347. Kirchhoff would contend that
Athenian colonists were in all cases exempt from state contributions.

τοὺς λαχόντας, ‘sorte ductos.’

ταξάμενοι, middle, as denoting mutual agreement.

ἑκάστου, construe with κλήρου.

8 3. παρέλαβον, ‘annexed.’ Cp. sup. § 2.

πολίσματα, the so-called ᾿Ακταῖαι πόλεις (Kirch.), Iv. 52 § 3, viz.
Coryphantis, Heracleia, Rhoeteum, Antandros.

ἐκράτουν, such possession of towns on the mainland was a common
feature of island powers, e.g. Chios, Samos, Thasos.

ὑπήκουον. Supply as subject πολῖται implied in πολίσματα.

CHAP EER Lit

The first mention in Thuc. of that τειχομάχης ἀνήρ, successful,
but dilatory, and superstitious commander, Nicias.

81. τὴν Λέσβου ἅλωσιν, for absence of article cf. 1. 12 § 3 μετὰ
Ἰλίου ἅλωσιν, with Poppo’s note.

πύργον, Meineke (Hermes 11. 364) insists on πύργωμα, on the plea
that πύργος is not used in collective sense.

190 LHOCYDIDES {72 [11. § 2—

8 2. ἐβούλετο δὲ Νικίας, a complicated sentence, found in simple
form in Il. 69 φυλακὴν εἶχε μήτε ἐκπλεῖν μηδένα μήτε ἐσπλεῖν. The
crux is the accusative, τοὺς Πελοποννησίους, of which the following
solutions are possible.

I. An anacoluthic accusative (1) by implied constrn. with φυλακὴν
εἶναι τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις as representing τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους φυλακὴν ἔχειν,
(2) by change in ὅπως clause; i.e. the sentence shifts from τοὺς Πελο-
ποννησίους μὴ ποιεῖσθαι to ὅπως μὴ ποιῶνται. For such anacoluthic
accusative cf. Hdt. v. 103 καὶ γὰρ τὴν Καῦνον, πρότερον οὐ βουλομένην
συμμαχέειν, ὡς ἐνέπρησαν τὰς Σάρδις τότε σφι καὶ αὕτη προσεγένετο.
Dem. Theoc. 1342 § 65 τοὺς δὲ τοιουτουσὶ συκοφάντας ποῖ χρὴ πορευθέντας
ἀδείας παρὰ τούτων τυχεῖν.

II. An ordinary antiptosis; i.e. rods TeX. represents the subject of
ὅπως μὴ ποιῶνται, the objections to which are that (1) ἐβούλετο has
already completed its construction with φυλακὴν εἶναι: (2) that it is not a
verb of the class which takes a double accusative, e.g. Arist. Nubes, 144
ἀνήρετο Χαιρεφῶντα ψύλλαν ὁπόσους ἅλλοιτο πόδας : (3) ὅπως cannot
well find its sequence from ἐβούλετο (except indeed on Ionic pre-
cedents, cf. Hdt. διενοεῖτο ὅπως), although it can from εἶναι.

III. The accusative de quo: cf. Aves 1259 δεινόν ye τὸν κήρυκα εἰ
μηδέποτε νοστήσει πάλιν.

IV. The verbal force retained in substantives suggests the accusa-
tive φυλακήν. But we have no Thue. parallel to hand. Cf. however
Dem. F. L. τεθνάναι φόβῳ τοὺς Θηβαίους (probably a false analogy),
Plato, Rep. 465 δέος τὸ βοηθεῖν (a doubtful reading).

V. An implied repetition of ἐβούλετο, a most clumsy shift, yet
suggested by Shilleto, 1. 36 § 3.

The two τε clauses are evidently parallel: but parallel in what
sense ? as coordinate with main sentence, or subordinate? Subordinate
in grammar, but expressing (logically) the main object in view. The
occupation of Minoa was to subserve the twofold purpose (1) of checking
Peloponnesian privateers, (2) of isolating Megara.

Stahl suggests the loss of σκοπῶν before ὅπως: this creates a new
difficulty by compelling the construction of ἐσπλεῖν to return to the εἶναι
sentence—hence a confusion of end with means.

Badham (followed by Herw.) suggests és τούς τε ΠΠελ., but of φυλακὴ
és I can find no instance in Thuc., though several of πρός: although
there is no disputing Thuc. confusion of és and πρός.

Hude reads τοῦ Πελοποννησίου, neuter singular in ethnic sense.

ΠΕ 8.53} NOTES. 101

Cf. v. 3 § 4, and VIII. 2 § 4, neither instance being conclusive, although
from 11. 69 τὸ λῃστικόν might give some clue.

Translate: ‘Now Nicias’ intention was to secure for the Athenians
a guard-post on the spot...both to prevent the Peloponnesians from
organising secret expeditions from that quarter, whether by dispatching
ships of war, as on the former occasion (cf. 11. 93), or sending out
privateers (II. 69), and also to prevent anything being brought in to
Megara by sea.’

αὐτόθεν, from the Megarid, or from its only harbour on this gulf,
Nisaea.

Βουδόρου, cf. 11. 94 ὃ 3.

οἷον καὶ τὸ πρίν, for constrn. cf. 11. 54 § 6 ταῦτα μὲν τὰ γενόμενα.
If one article only be read, connect it with the participle.

ἐσπλεῖν, neuter verb for passive, a common Thuc. use.

The σπινθὴρ Μεγαρικοῦ ψηφίσματος (Ar. Pax 609) was not dead
yet.

§ 3. ἀπὸ τῆς Νισαίας, either ‘on the side of Nisaea,’ or connect
with προέχοντε, i.e. the two towers were carried out on χηλαί. Megara
had long walls, cf. Iv. 73. For such πύργοι forming terminations of
walls see VIII. go § 4.

μηχαναῖς, ‘by escalade’? (for μηχαναὶ frequently in Th. -- κλίμακες)
or ‘battering engines ’?

μεταξὺ τῆς νήσου (καὶ τῆς ἠπείρου), an ellipse in accordance with
constant Attic use, cf. μέσος. Sometimes the phrase is found in full,
but rarely. See Shilleto on Dem. F.L. § 181.

ἐλευθερώσας, sc. ‘freeing,’ ‘opening’ (ἐν καθαρῷ ποιήσαϑ).

τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἠπείρου, Goller sees in these words an antithesis to ἀπὸ
τῆς Νισαίας, Stahl a useless repetition of ἀπὸ τῆς Nic. if allowed to
stand. For ἐκ cf. 1. 64 § 1 (so also πρός in Hdt.). It is doubtful
whether the accus. is one of direct object, ‘eam insulae partem’ (St.), or
whether it is quasi-adverbial, ‘at the point of junction with.’ For
topography see Arnold’s note, and Dict. of Geog. s.v. ‘Megara.’

τῇ νήσῳ, possessive dative with ἦν. ‘The island commanded re-
inforcement’=émiBonGeray εἶχεν. Cf. VIII. 92 § 1 τεῖχος ἐπεισαγωγὰς
ἔχον.

τεῖχος ἐγκαταλιπὼν καὶ φρουράν, Meineke, Herm. 3. 364, omits
both τεῖχος and καί. But the zeugma is not intolerable. τεῖχος in
collective sense, ‘fortress,’ cf. 65 § 3.

192 THUCYDIDES 777: [11|. § 1—

CHAPTER LII.

81. ὑπό--περί.

καὶ οἱ Πλαταιῆς, καί, in addition to Mytilene.

πολιορκεῖσθαι, οἵ. 109 § 1, VIII. 76 § 5 δυνατώτεροι εἴργειν 7 εἴρ-
γεσθαι, i.e. ‘powerless to remain blockaded’—better expressed in Il.
70 8 1 πολιορκούμενοι ἀντέχειν. But cf. 1. 120 ὃ 3 ἀδικεῖσθαι. For this
‘permissive use’ of the passive cf. Kriig. Gr. 52. 11 § 3.

ξυνέβησαν, more correctly παρέδωκαν τὴν πόλιν, Diod. ΧΙ. 56.

8 2. προσέβαλον, observe the triple omission, (1) of subject, (2) of
connecting particle, (3) of μέν.

βίᾳ μὲν οὐκ ἐβούλετο, answered by προσπέμπει δέ.

εἰρημένον γὰρ ἦν (sc. βίᾳ μὴ ἑλεῖν), Cobet reads εἰρημένον, accus.
absol. on analogy of δέον, παρόν, ἐξόν. Cf. VIL. 77 § 6.

The Scholiast, while explaining the use of accus. for genitive, seems
to have had ydp in his text. There is no middle course: either cut out
the words γὰρ ἦν or retain both, with Class., St., Boeckh, Kr.

ξυγχωροῖεν, not only of ‘concession’ but of ‘agreement’ also:
hence a doubt arises whether the subject is Λακεδαιμόνιοι, or Aaxed. καὶ
᾿Αθηναῖοι. ἀποδίδοσθαι, passive. ἔχουσιν, realistic indicative. The
passage forestalls the agreement of the peace of Nicias v. 17 § 2.

ἀνάδοτος, a rare word. τὸ μετὰ τὴν πρᾶσιν ἀποδοθέν (Pollux).

αὐτῶν ἑκόντων, perhaps an intentional pleonasm. Stahl regards
the expression as a strong contrast to fig, treating ἑκόντων as implying
ὁμολογία.

προσπέμπει δὲ κήρυκα, this short sentence abounds in difficulties.
Poppo connects κολάζειν with χρήσασθαι by τε, making both infinitives
dependent on βούλονται, but with change of subject at κολάζειν (borrowed
from ἐκείνοις) : so also Arnold.

Goller finds a construction for κολάζειν from χρήσασθαι, as epexegetic
infin.

Classen regards the sentence as an ordinary conditional constrn.,
the protasis extending to χρήσασθαι, the apodosis commencing with τούς
Te ἀδίκους, reading, however, κολάσειν (fut.) and taking Λακεδαιμονίοις as
subject. This entails an irregular re—dé sequence, for which, however,
see Shill. on 1. 25 ὃ 4.

λέγοντα, no need for λέξοντα. Cf. νι. 88 § 10 πρέσβεις πέμπειν
κωλύοντας. St. quotes Livy ΧΧΙ. 6 § 2, ‘legati missi auxilium
orantes.’

εἰ βούλονται, three solutions: (1) prefatory to formal offer of

Lu. ὃ 4] NOTES. 193

terms—a common Thuc. use: perhaps also conciliatory in tone; cf. the
colloquial use ‘pace tua’: e.g. Plato, Phil. 20 B τὸ yap εἰ βούλει ῥηθὲν
λύει πάντα φόβον : (2) interrogative use of εἰ: (3) hypothetical, as
marking protasis. But treat the infinitives παραδοῦναι and χρήσασθαι as
dependent on βούλονται.

τούς τε ἀδίκους, the re clause is supplementary, the δέ adversative.
Cf. Soph. Antig. 1690, with Jebb’s note: see also Klotz de Part. 741.
We cannot, with Classen, regard the re—éé sequence as a simple equiva-
lent for re—re. When so used in Thue. the δέ is usually emphasized
by ἔτι or dua. The word οὐδένα points to a continuation of the oratio
obliqua introduced by λέγοντα. ‘He sent a herald with this message,
Were they willing to hand over their city to the Lacedaemonians of
their own act and deed and abide by their verdict? adding that they
proposed to punish the guilty only....’

κολάζειν would thus represent κολάζομεν of orat. rect. ‘We are for
punishing.’ (Cf. 11. 44 8 τ ὀλοφύρομαι.)

Another possible solution is to treat the καί as corroborative or
corrective, and make the clause καί... χρήσασθαι parenthetical, coupling
τοὺς ἀδίκους with πόλιν and treating κολάζειν as epexegetic, ‘to hand
over the town to the Lacedaemonians—in fact to abide by their decision
—together with all offenders, for punishment.’

Yet other explanations are: (1) a continuous protasis, with apodosis
suppressed—a most questionable solution, (2) χρήσασθαι epexegetic, cf.
11. 4 ὃ 7, which however suggests an ellipse, (3) an independent infinitive
construction. Cf. Iv. 50 ὃ 2 ef βούλονται... πέμψαι, but this involves a
difficulty with ἑκόντες, although parenthetical constructions have much
to answer for.

Note Spartan irony in τοὺς ἀδίκους and παρὰ δίκην, to say nothing of
εἰ βούλονται.

τοσαῦτα, ‘thus much’ (and no more), Thuc. usual formula in citing
brief speeches.

ἐν τῷ ἀσθενεστάτῳ, ‘in the last stage of weakness’; a ‘fames
Perusina.’

ἐν ὅσῳ ἀφίκοντο, cf. 28 § 1 ἐν ὅσῳ δ᾽ dv ἔλθωσι, ‘pending the
arrival,’ Ξε μέχρι οὗ. Cf. Latin use of ‘dum.’ Of these commissioners
Aristomenides, the grandfather of Agesilaus, was one (Paus. III. 9
§ 1). (Pp.)

8 4. προετέθη, cp. 38 § 1, ‘was preferred,’ ‘brought forward.’

ἐπικαλεσάμενοι, Portus, ‘arcessitos,’ ‘summoned them before them.’

εἴ τι... ἀγαθόν τι, no intolerable pleonasm, ‘si qua (quid) boni quid.’

Sake 13

194 THUCYDIDES 171 [uu § 4—

Cf. the common use of εἴ 7t=si forte. For the question, see Livy
XXVI. 33.

§ δ. ἔλεγον... ἔλεγον, tie second verb refers to the actual speakers
only. .

σφῶν αὐτῶν, partitive genitive (Hude), ‘suae causae patronos’
(Portus). Hude’s appears the sounder explanation.

᾿Αειμνήστου, cf. Herod. 1x. 64. Plut. Aristid. 19 names him ‘ Arim-
nestus.’ The commander of the Plataean contingent at Marathon and
Plataea.

ἐπελθόντες, Sc. παρελθόντες, ‘came forward.’

CHAPTER’ LITT

§1. τὴν μὲν παράδοσιν, mark the parallelism (1) of the two
aorist participial clauses πιστεύσαντες καὶ δεξάμενοι (both in construction
with τὴν παράδοσιν ἐποιησάμεθα), (2) of the two present participles,
οἰόμενοι... ἡγούμενοι. The present participles express the fixed principle
which finds application in the aorists. The Plataean surrender was due
to two reasons : (1) a πίστις based on their belief in Spartan conservatism,
(2) a ὁμολογία, in reliance on Spartan ‘ bona fides.’ Classen holds
that the weight of the sentence falls on οὐκ οἰόμενοι ὑφέξειν, but, with St.
and Poppo, is clearly at fault in making δεξάμενοι -- εἰ δεχοίμεθα. ‘The
surrender of our city was made in reliance on you—our firm conviction
being that you would observe the ordinary forms of law—and upon our
own consent to place ourselves in your hands, as the best means of
obtaining fair play.’

τοιάνδε, i.e. a mere answer to an unanswerable question. Cf. 52
§ 3 and infra § 2. νομιμωτέραν, ‘more conventional.’

οὐκ ἐν δικασταῖς. ἐν, ‘sensu forensi.’ The repetition Herbst
defends from vi. 82 ὃ 4 ἐπὶ τὴν μητρόπολιν, ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς. Press the οὐ
closely with ἄλλοις, ‘as having consented to place ourselves in the hands
of no other judges.’

ἐσμέν, of result. τὸ ἴσον, ius aequum (Cl.). μάλιστ᾽ ἂν φέρεσθαι,
sc. εἰ ἐν ὑμῖν γενοίμεθα.

8 2. νῦν δέ, the usual contrast of ‘stern fact’ with ‘fools’ paradise.’

ἀμφοτέρων, i.e. both δίκη νόμιμος and τὸ ἴσον.

μὴ ἡμαρτήκαμεν, realistic indicative; a constrn. primarily referable
to simple interrogative parataxis, but see Goodw. M. and T. § 269sqq.

περὶ τῶν δεινοτάτων, ‘turns upon’ (i.e. involves) ‘the gravest issues.’
Cf. περί of the premisses of an argument. The older Greek would

Lu. ὃ 4] NOTES. 195

incline to dative, cf. μάρνασθαι περὶ vexpp. It is a δρόμος περὶ ψυχῆς
(θανάτου, says the scholiast).

μὴ οὐ κοινοὶ ἀποβῆτε, note change of construction from εἶναι, and
the emphasis laid on ἀγῶνα and juaés—‘the question of life and death in
the hands of no impartial judges.’

μὴ ov=‘ne non.’ Cf. I. οἱ § 3. ἀποβῆτε, unusual, says Kriiger,
for ‘evadere.’

τεκμαιρόμενοι προκατηγορίας, ‘drawing this inference from the fact
that no definite charge (impeachment) has first been made...and that
the question put is brief.’

The construction, though curt, is correct (pace Badham). The
absolute construction replaces a ws or ὅτι sequence, and Thuc.’s free
coordination allows of the collocation of gen. absol. with accus. absolute.
Cf. VIII. 96 § 2 αὐτῶν τε στασιαζόντων Kal ἄδηλον ὃν ὁπότε ξυρράξουσι.

προκατηγορίας...προγεγενημένης, the pleonasm is but slight. Cf.
I. 23 § 5.

ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοί, for parenthetical ἀλλά clause cf. vill. 76 8 6.

ᾧ τὰ μὲν ἀληθῆ, from Poppo and Classen’s point of view, forming
with infin. (non-articular) the subject to γίγνεται. Stahl, for clearness,
now reads ἐναντίον. I suspect an assimilation of the first article to
the second, τά for τό, the construction changing with the second
clause—‘to which to give a truthful answer must tell against us, while
falsehood must entail exposure.’

ἔλεγχον, ‘possibility of exposure’ (Kr.). e€xev=mapéxer, cf. 1. 97 § 2.

8 3. πανταχόθεν, cf. I. 124 § 1.

καὶ ἀσφαλέστερον δοκεῖ, a change from personal construction ἀναγ-
καζόμεθα to impersonal. We may however treat the καί clause as
parenthetical in sense, although grammatically determining the main
sentence; for note the accusative εἰπόντας.

εἰπόντας τι κινδυνεύειν, cf. I. 20 ὃ 2, with Shilleto’s note, ‘to
say something if we must risk our lives.” The stress falls on the
participle.

ὁ μὴ ῥηθεὶς λόγος, the phrase is practically the equivalent of τὸ μὴ
ῥηθῆναι λόγον. Cf. sup. 36 § 2, note.

τοῖς ὧδ᾽ ἔχουσιν, generic article. The particular instance of Plataea
is merged in the general application of the principle.

αἰτίαν, ‘occasio criminandi’ (Pp.), lit. ‘allegation.’

§ 4. πρὸς Tots ἄλλοις, ‘to add to our other difficulties.’

ἀγνῶτες, active, cf. vill. 66 § 3 (Kr.); but, according to Pp. and
Cl., as referring to both parties to the suit, is of wider range than the

is

196 THUCYDIDES TI. [π1π|. ὃ 4—

mere subject of ὠφελούμεθα : i.e. ‘had we both been strangers to each
other, we might have served our turn by producing evidence.’

ἐπεισενεγκάμενοι, ‘by adducing evidence upon evidence,’ i.e. ‘ac-
cumulating.’ ὠφελούμεθα, with special allusion to ἡ τοῦ νόμου βοήθεια.
Cf. v. go.

πρὸς εἰδότας, cf. ν. § 89 ἐπισταμένους πρὸς εἰδότας. ‘The recital would
be useless.

οὐχί, the more emphatic form: found in Thuc. six times only.

ἡμῶν, dependent on κατά of compound verb προκαταγνόντες, but
also from its position marking antithesis to τῶν ὑμετέρων.

Tas ἀρετάς, ‘our services.’ Cf, 11. 42 § 2, or, in wider sense, ‘ merits.’

αὐτό, with reference to preceding sentence προκαταγν. Tas ἀρετὰς
ἥσσους εἶναι (cf. 1. 68 ὃ 2), but hardly=av76 τοῦτο.

ἄλλοις, sc. Thebans (schol.).

χάριν φέροντες, one of the many instances in which logic and
syntax are at variance. The difficulty is due to three main causes:
(1) change from active to passive, (2) categorical confusion, i.e. of
volition with non-volition, (3) the great tendency to personal agreement.
The confusion of personality is explainable on the ground that the
action of the principal is identified with the use made of the agent.
The Plataeans are to be made unwilling agents for the gratification
of Thebes. Herwerden would correct φέροντες to φερόντων : Cobet
suspects a lacuna, For the expression χάριν φέροντες, ef. Eur.
Med. 509, and for a similar passage to the present cf. Ar. Eth. 1. 9 § 16
ἐνίων δὲ τητώμενοι ῥυπαίνουσι τὸ μακάριον.

καθιστώμεθα, cf. Lat. ‘reum sistere.’

CHAPTER LIV.

§1. παρεχόμενοι, cf. 36 ὃ τ.

δίκαια, ‘grounds of justification.’ mpds...és, hardly distinguishable
in Thue. (vid. Shill. on 1. 38 § 1). Cf. Dem. Ol. 111. § 1-

διάφορα, ‘differences’ = ‘feud’: rare in singular, 11. 27 § 2.

πείθειν πειρασόμεθα, cf. 53 § 4.

§ 2. τὸ βραχύ, mark the position, ‘that question (of yours), that
brief one,’ i.e. of the brevity of which we complain; to which we once
more call attention. Cf. sup. 53 § 2.

el τι, interrogative, ‘num quid?’ εἰ μέν, hypothetical.

μὴ εὖ παθόντας, equivalent to an indirect admission of Plataean
guilt; the μή begs the question.

Liv. ὃ 5] NOTES. 197

φίλους νομίζοντας -- εἰ δὲ φίλους νομίζετε: note the change in the
protasis, in spite of formal pév.,.dé: the form of the sentence is assimi-
lated to the nearer ὑμᾶς.

αὐτούς, emphatic ‘you yourselves are in the wrong.’

τοὺς ἐπιστρατεύσαντας, article for more exact definition, ‘you who
attacked us.’ Cf. Lat. ‘qui adorti estis’; the participle without article
would= Lat. subj. ‘ qui adorti sitis.’

§ 3. τὰ δ᾽ ἐν εἰρήνῃ, the article affects both prepositions ἐν and
πρός. τὰ ἐν, temporal; cf. I. 2§ 1. τὰ πρός, limiting (cf. Lat. ‘quod
ad,’ ‘quoad’).

ἀγαθοί, ‘good men and true,’ ‘honest.’

ξυνεπιθέμενοι, sc. ‘with you.’

és ἐλευθερίαν, ‘with a view to’ (cf. βλέπειν és), more usually ἐπ’
ἐλευθερίᾳ.

μόνοι, not ‘soli,’ but ‘inter primos’: for Thespiae and Haliartus
must be added to the list (cf. Herod. vir. 50). The hyperbole is
perhaps intentional.

ὃ 4. καὶ γάρ, ‘enimvero,’ perhaps with resumptive force, ‘for
remember.’

μάχῃ, temporal dative, cf. 11. 20 § 1, a rare use without ἐν in the
case of nouns not temporal in meaning.

The allusion is to the battle of Plataea. Cf. Pind. Pyth. 1. 76 τὴν
πρὸ Κιθαιρῶνος μάχην. Dem. (pseud.) Neaera 1377; Diod. x1. 32;
Hat. rx. 62 sqq. The double dative construction with the same verb is
not uncommon, especially when one dative represents a participle, e.g.
Soph. O. C. 1318 κατασκαφῇ...δῃώσειν πυρί.

πάντων, plural, as resumptive not merely of εἴ τι ἄλλο, but of ἡ ἐν
τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ μάχη as well.

παρὰ δύναμιν, not only ‘pro virili parte,’ but ‘ultra vires,’ ‘beyond
our strength.’

δ δ. ὅτεπερ δή, περ emphasizing ὅτε (‘amplificative,’ Hartung), δή
fixing the attention, ‘at the very time, remember’: although δή may be re-
garded as adding strength to περ, as in the collocation ye μὲν δή τε γε μήν.

περιέστη is used both with and without accus. of object; cf. 1v. 10
§ 1; VIII. 1 § 2.

τὸν σεισμόν, ‘the great earthquake.’ Cf. 1. ror § 2. For the ideas
of the ancients on the subject of earthquakes see Lecky, ‘ Hist. of
European Morals,’ vol. 1. 392.

τῶν ἐς ᾿Ιθώμην Εἰἱλώτων, an objective genitive, as the position of
the preposition shews ; for position of participle cf. 1. go § 1.

198 LH OCYPIDES TH. [uiv. ὃ 5—

τὸ τρίτον μέρος, cf. 15 § 1, note.

ἡμῶν αὐτῶν, i.e. ‘our native forces’ (cf. 11. 39 § 3), not ξένοι or
ἐπίκουροι. On the bravery of soldier-citizens, see Arist. Ethics 111. 8 § 9
τὰ δὲ πολιτικὰ μένοντα ἀποθνήσκει.

ὧν (i.e. τῶν εὖ δεδραμέν ων) : sometimes the reference is more precise,
e.g. I. 35 § 4 ἣν οὐ δίκαιον. The relative is really adversative, ‘sed is’
rather than ‘et is.’ Cf. Madvig, Lat. Gr. § 448.

CHAPTER LV,

81. τὰ παλαιά, cf. 54 § 3.

ἠξιώσαμεν, ‘resolved,’ ‘determined’ (i.e. as a point of honour),
Cl.

δεομένων, gen. absol. with subject implied; a frequent use in Thuc.
whether in relation to subject or object of main verb. Cf. 34 § 3.

ἐβιάσαντο, ‘had already brought force to bear.’ Cf. Hdt. vi. 108.

ὑμεῖς, emphatic,

ἀπεώσασθε, for the form, which is not Ionic, see Curt. Et. 11. 580.

ὡς ἐγγὺς ὄντας, ὑμῶν δὲ μακρὰν ἀποικούντων. Observe the false
balance of the sentence. The more usual sequence would be ὡς ἐγγὺς
ὄντων, but the construction becomes reflexive, as in 54 § 2 φίλους δὲ
νομίζοντας.

μακράν, οἷ. 15 ὃ 5 μακρὰν ἀπεῖναι. Soph. O. R. 997 ἡ Κόρινθος...
μακρὰν ἀπῳκεῖτο.

8 2. ἐκπρεπέστερον, cf. I. 38 § 4 (probably a litotes for the Ionic
ἀεικές), =‘abnormal,’ ‘unusual.’ Cf. the Attic ἀπὸ τρόπου, ‘contra
morem,’ Tac. A. III. 26.

ἐμελλήσατε, sc. παθεῖν, for ellipse cf. Demosth. Conon ὃ 40 μηδ᾽
ἂν μελλήσας, Plat. Theaet. 148 E ἀλλὰ yap οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς δύναμαι πεῖσαι
ἐμαυτὸν ὡς ἱκανῶς τι λέγω οὔτε ἄλλου ἀκοῦσαι λέγοντος...οὐ μὲν δὴ αὖ οὐδ᾽
ἀπαλλαγῆναι τοῦ μέλειν.

8 3. οὐκ ἠθελήσαμεν, οὐ denying fact. Cf. 40 § 4 εἰ δὲ δὴ καὶ
οὐ προσῆκον ὅμως ἀξιοῦτε. But ef may mark ἃ litotes for ὅτι, or the
negative may coalesce with the verb, as in stereotyped phrases, οὔ φημι,
οὐκ ἀξιῶ.

ὑμῶν κελευσάντων, cf. II. 72.

ἐναντία, adverbial adaptation of internal accus., cf. I. 29 § 1.

οὐκέτι, i.e. after such practical proof of Athenian good-will: the
allusion is to 429 B.C.

LvI. § 2] NOTES. 199

οὕς εὖ παθών τις, cf. the assertion of Pericles in 11. 40 ὃ 4. 866
also Shilleto’s regretful note on the loss of ‘man’ (A. S.) as equivalent
to τις.

The relative ots Poppo regards as causal.

πολιτείας μετέλαβεν, i.e. κατὰ ψήφισμα. See Arnold’s instructive
note on such ἰσοπολιτεία, the ‘ius Caeritum’ of Rome. For the omission
of αὐτῶν in second member of relative sentence, or the still more unusual
ὧν, cf. the tendency of Latin, ‘eamne rationem sequare, qua tecum
ipse et cum tuis utare, profiteri autem non audeas’ (Οἷς. Fin. 11. 23).
Cf. Madv. Lat. Synt. § 323.

παραγγελλόμενα, usually a military term. Cf. 1. 121 § 2; but here
the παραγγελία is more of a παρακέλευσις, ‘a party call.’ Cf. Dem.
F. L. § 1.

§4. ἃ δὲ ἐξηγεῖσθε, whether ἐξηγεῖσθαι is literal or metaphorical,
‘praeire’ or ‘praescribere,’ matters little. The accus. is cognate; cf. v.
66 § 2 ἕκαστα ἐξηγουμένους The relative clause is introductory: ‘as for
the lead that either of you gave your allies’ (1.6. in the exercise of your
hegemony).

εἴ τι μὴ καλῶς ἐδρᾶτο-- τῶν μὴ καλῶς δρωμένων, but more specific in
its present form.

For the sentiment cf. 65 § 2.

CHUAPTER Via:

§1. τὸ δὲ τελευταῖον, either the construction changes with δέ clause,
τὸ τελευταῖον (sc. ἀδίκημα) becoming direct object of ξύνιστε (cf. 1. 73 8 2),
or some word has dropped out of the text, e.g. οἷον or ὅ: πολλὰ μὲν
ἄλλα ἠδίκησαν τὸ δὲ τελ. (ἠδίκησαν) οἷον αὐτοὶ ξύνιστε. My reason for
thinking so is not merely the presumable loss of small words in many
cases, but also the practice of Greek in bringing these ἄλλα τε...καί
and μέν...δέ sequences under one common vinculum. To explain the
sentence by treating αὐτοὶ ξύνιστε as parenthetical, on analogy of οἶμαι,
δοκῶ, ἅς. is intolerable (cf. Popp. ed. mai.). ‘To the long list of
injuries done us by the Thebans is added this crowning one of all, one
within your own cognisance, which indeed is the cause of our being
brought to this very pass.’

§ 2. καταλαμβάνοντας, imperf. pres. ‘attempted to seize.’

ἱερομηνίᾳ, ‘a festal season’ (vid. Buttm. Meidias 175), practically =
‘die festo.’

ὀρθῶς, emphatic, ‘we were justified in taking reprisals.’ This

200 PTHOCYDIDES. 112 [τῦἱ. ὃ 2—

ancient doctrine of retaliation was first overthrown by Plato’s Gorgias
(cf. Cope’s Transl. Introd. xLv. Rep. 335 B, D).

ὅσιον, a higher moral stage (from point of view of context) than
ὀρθόν or δίκαιον, but for its true conception see Plato, Protag. 330 sqq.

ὃ 3. εἰ τῷ αὐτίκα χρησίμῳ, note the single article connecting
χρησίμῳ with πολεμίῳ. ‘If you intend to fix your estimate of justice
by that vindictiveness of theirs which tallies for the moment with your
own interests.’

χρησίμῳ, dat. of measure.

λήψεσθε, ig. ὑπολήψεσθε. Cf. λόγῳ λαμβάνειν (Plat.), and infr.
59 § 1 οἴκτῳ λαβόντας.

φανεῖσθε, cf. 42 ὃ 5, ‘shew yourselves,’ ‘prove yourselves.’ For
the whole argument cf. the identification of ξυμφέρον and δίκαιον in the
Melian discussion, V. go sqq.

$4. ot ἄλλοι “Ἑλληνες, excluding the ‘Medising’ Thebans.

μᾶλλον, sc. ἦμεν (P. and Cl.), cf. 1. 86 § 2. But here the ellipse is
intolerable. The supplement should be ἐδοκοῦμεν εἶναι, not merely ἦμεν:
and the juxtaposition of ré7e...ére is suspicious. Is a word missing
after τότεν

The historical reference is to the Persian war.

viv μὲν γὰρ ἑτέροις, the sequence of thought suggests an inversion
of the order of the μέν...δέ sentences: the connecting link is ἐν μείζονι
κινδύνῳ, ‘in greater danger; for then slavery impended, whereas now
you are free to menace others.’

ἐπέρχεσθε, ‘are the aggressors.’ |

δεινοί, i.e. with the terrors of war.

ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ, for the adverbial καιρίως the Attic equivalent
is és καιρόν or καιρῷ, rarely ἐν καιρῷ.

ἐπέφερεν, on analogy of ἐπιφέρειν ὅπλα, and, by adaptation, ἐπιφέρειν
ἐλευθερίαν (IV. 87 ὃ 2).

8 5. ἡμῶν, constructed with προθυμία as well as ἁμαρτία.

ἁμαρτίας, cf. 11. 85 ὃ 2: the genitive is due to the analogy of ἀντί
uncompounded.

ἡμάρτηται, impersonal (cf. 45 § 3 παραβαίνεται). For personal use
cf. Arist. Eth. 11. 6 § 20.

μείζω.. ἐλάσσω, in direct agreement with προθυμία and ἁμαρτία : by
Kriig. regarded (possibly rightly) as neuter.

ἐν καιροῖς, cf. the Demosthenic use of χρόνοι in plural.

σπάνιον ἦν, the Hellenic majority accepted Xerxes’ sway. Cf.
Hdt. vil. 132.

τι. § 7] NOTES. 201

οἱ μή, ‘all such as.’ πρός, ‘in view of,’ ‘in the face of.’ Cf. vi.
58 § 1.

ἀσφαλείᾳ -- ἀσφαλῶς. Cf. 82 § 4; Soph. O. R. 51 ἀλλ᾽ ἀσφαλείᾳ
τήνδ᾽ ἀνόρθωσον πόλιν.

ἐθέλοντες, cf. ν. 9 § 9: ‘those, who in the face of his attack,
instead of furthering in safety their own interests, were ready to brave
the nobler though more perilous course.’

§ 6. ὧν, partitive genitive.

és τὰ πρῶτα, for the facts cf. 11. 71; for the construction cf. 39 § 2.

κερδαλέως, ‘in a spirit of greed,’ ‘from motives of greed.’ Both
adverbs are somewhat strained. Cf. 65 § 3.

§ 7. καίτοι χρὴ ταὐτά, the sentence reflects the construction of
51 § 2, with strong suggestion of ἀντίπτωσις in τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς, the dative
suggesting an infinitive sequence, τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς βεβαιοῦσθαι τὴν χάριν:
by the resolution of infinitive into ὅταν clause the dative is left to take
an apparent construction from ξυμφέρον.

τῶν αὐτῶν, neuter. ὁμοίως, ‘consistently.’

πον, ‘aliquatenus’ (Pp.): rather ‘aliqua ex parte’ (usquam), ‘whether
your interest may, for the moment, point in the direction of this or that
state.’ Cf. v. gt § 1.

ἔχειν χάριν, used indifferently of giver or recipient. Cf. vit. 87
and sup. 39 ὃ 1 ξυγγνώμην ἔχω, with 44 § 2.

‘And yet you are bound to shew that you consistently hold the
same opinions on the same questions, and to hold that expediency,
in relation to good allies, implies conditions under which they invariably
command a sure recognition of their good services, while to yourselves
the possible interests of the moment are secured’; i.e. your standard
of expediency must not shift with the exigencies of the moment, but
be based on the fixed principle that good services demand a good
return.

ἡμῖν, misplaced, to enforce the antithesis of ἀεὶ βέβαιον with τὸ
παραυτίκα.

Pp. and Cl. reading ἔχουσιν, in agreement with ὑμῖν, make χάριν
ἔχειν =‘gratiam reddere’: but this involves a dependency of dative
upon dative.

Jowett treats the passage as a general γνώμη, finding a subject
for ἔχωσι in the implied subject to the infinitive, sc. τοὺς ἀνθρώπους (so
Portus).

202 LHOCNDIDES TIF. [Lvir. § r—

CHAPTER EVAL

81. προσκέψασθε, whether πρό (‘seriously reflect’) or πρός (‘further
reflect ’) is immaterial.

τοῖς πολλοῖς, excluding Athens, although (as Hobbes notes) the
Spartans had small claim to such estimation.

ἀνδραγαθίας -- ἐπιείκεια, not ἀνδρία, ‘manly honesty,’ ‘probity,’ ‘in-
tegrity’: but see the Melian estimate of this, v. 105 § 4.

μὴ τὰ εἰκότα, connect μή closely with τὰ εἰκότα, although μή is due
to εἰ preceding.

ἀφανῆ, ‘in secret’ (in a corner): predicative=év ἀφανεῖ.

περὶ οὐδ᾽ ἡμῶν μεμπτῶν, following natural order of direct construc-
tion οὐδ᾽ ἡμεῖς μεμπτοί ἐσμεν (Kr.), ‘deciding in our case the fate of
no despicable folk.’ οὐδέ, ‘no more than yourselves,’ ‘qui ne ipsi
quidem.’

οὐκ ἀποδέξωνται, ‘refuse to countenance’: for ἀποδέχεσθαι, ‘to
accept without demur,’ cf. Plato, Theaet. 160 Cc. On ὅπως μή with
subj. or indic. cf. Goodw. M. T. 271 sqq.

ἔπιγνῶναι, for ἐπί Hude cites I. 70 § 2, explaining as ‘additional’
(praeterea); but suggesting a dittography from ἐστι preceding. But ἐπί
may merely strengthen the simple form γνῶναι: if it has special force,
it can mean ‘to make up one’s mind to’ (to decide, when it comes
to the point) or, in offensive sense, ‘a gratuitous iniquity,’ the verdict
being regarded as an ἐπίδοσις to the Thebans.

οὐδέ finds its sequence from ὅπως μὴ οὐκ ἀποδέξωνται.

κοινοῖς, e.g. Olympia or Delphi, There is probably no reference to
the dedications commemorating the victory of Plataea.

ἀνατεθῆναι, not ἀνακεῖσθαι, the dedication is not yet an accomplished
fact.

§ 2. δεινόν, ‘monstrous,’ ‘atrocious.’ πορθῆσαι, anticipative and
causative.

ἀναγράψαι, on analogy of ἀνατεθῆναι. For the tripod cf. 1. 132 § 2,
Hdt. rx. 81. It was captured by the Phocians in the Sacred War: the
pedestal was removed to Byzantium by Constantine, and was brought
to light once more in 1856.

πανοικησίᾳ, in spite of the form πανοικεσία (Pollux), it is by no
means certain that the derivation may not be from οἴκησις just as much
as οἰκέτης, ‘as an entire settlement’ (cf. v1. 88 § 4) or ‘commune.’ The
point here is the utter obliteration of Plataea as a recognised πόλις, not
the destruction of a household with all its members.

Lv. § 4] NOTES. 203

Θηβαίους, without article, ‘Thebans’ contemptuously. Cf. next
sentence.

ἐξαλεῖψαι, ‘efface,’ i.e. the γραφή (cf. ἀναγράψαι).

ὃ 3. ἐς τοῦτο ξυμφορᾶς, cf. 1. 49 ὃ 7 ἐς τοῦτο ἀνάγκης, followed
by ὥστε. [On the interchange of ὥστε and ὅστις, though recognised in
Attic, see Goodw. M. and T. § 575: no Thue. instance is known to
me.] τοῦτο is retrospective.

οἵτινες merges the particular in the general, but without losing sight
of individuality, ‘as men who’ (not ‘we who’). Cf. Soph. O. T. 1184
ὅστις πέφασμαι. The border-line between ὅς ye and ὅς τις in such
sequences is easily crossed. Cf. the Latin ‘ut qui,’ ‘quippe qui.’

Μήδων κρατησάντων, temporal, ‘after the victory of the Persians,”
e.g. at Thermopylae (Poppo).

ἀπωλλύμεθα, ‘were on the verge of ruin,’ ‘cum Medi vicissent
peribamus’ (St.).

‘The facts of history are against a hypothetical explanation; Plataea
was actually burnt’ (Poppo).

ἐν ὑμῖν, in forensic sense, ‘in your court,’ ‘through your verdict,’ 53 § 1.

ἡσσώμεθα, cf. 53 § 1, ‘are being worsted’; the genitive Θηβαίων
is due to the notion of comparison in the verb.

ἀγῶνας, ‘trials,’ in wider sense of ‘discrimina,’ ‘angustiae.’

ὑπέστημεν, ‘have faced,’ or rather ‘been brought face to face with.’
Cf. IV. 59 § 2 ὁ ὑποστάς )( ὁ φυγών.

τότε μέν, no allusion to τὰ Μηδικά, but to the recent siege.

εἰ μὴ παρέδομεν, realised condition, as the ἀγών is decided. The
dependent sentence preserves the protasis of the independent, τότε μὲν
yap διεφθαρῆμεν ἂν εἰ μὴ παρέδομεν. On these conditional forms cf.
Goodw. M. T. § 411.

The infinitives διαφθαρῆναι and κρίνεσθαι are in apposition to, and
epexegetic of, ἀγῶνας.

θανάτου κρίνεσθαι, genitive of value, as fixing the penalty (τίμημα).
Cf. Kriig. G. G. 47, ὃ 22, note 1.

§ 4. περιεώσμεθα, ‘pushed to and fro,’ ‘bandied about,’ = ‘rejected.’

ἐκ πάντων, ‘on all sides,’ ‘at every hand,’=avrayédev.

πρόθυμοι.. ἐρῆμοι. Mark the contrast by simple apposition, ‘for all
our zeal,’ ‘zow so forsaken.’

Cf. ‘fictilibus crevere deis haec aurea templa’ (Prop. Iv. 1. 5).

ov βέβαιοι, ‘unsteadfast.’ Heilmann remarks upon the pathetic
despondency of this last sentence.

204 LAOCCYDIDES LTE [vin § 1—

CHAPTER LVITI.

§1. καίτοι, ‘though hoping against hope.’

kal θεῶν evexa...kal τῆς ἀρετῆς, ‘cum—tum,’ ‘qua—qua,’ the 3rd
καί connecting μεταγνῶναι with καμφθῆναι.

τῶν ξυμμαχικῶν, lit. ‘who served as gods of alliance,’ i.e. who
witnessed our oath of alliance.

τῆς ἀρετῆς és τοὺς “Εἰλληνας, ‘our good service towards Hellenes,’
i.e. in the cause of Hellas.

καμφθῆναι (1.4. ἐπικλασθῆναι), ‘flecti,’ ‘frangi.” Cf. ἄγναμπτοι
βουλαί (Pind.). For the γν form cf. Curt. Gk. Et. 536.

εἴ τι ἐπείσθητε, ‘si quid,’ ‘si forte,’ ‘if you have been in any way
actuated (influenced) by Thebans.’ The εἴ τι clause may be either the
object clause to μεταγνῶναι, or merely parenthetical, continuing the
construction, as in I. 44 § 1.

τήν τε δωρεάν, the article must be either possessive or deictic,
‘your boon’ or ‘such boon’ (i.e. as that implied in ef τι ἐπείσθητε).
To this accusative μὴ κτείνειν stands in epexegetic apposition (cf. 66 § 2
τὰ μὲν ὁμοῖα οὐκ ἀνταπέδοτε μήτε νεωτερίσαι λόγοις τε πείθειν), Kal μή
marking the alternative.

‘We call on you to relent, and, if indeed you have been in any way
influenced by Thebans, to alter your decision to asking of them, as a
concession due to you in return, not to have to slay those whose death
were your disgrace.’ The two τε clauses τήν Te δωρεάν and σώφρονά τε
are parallel.

ods μὴ πρέπει, sc. κτείνειν. The negative can be referred either to
the main verb or dependent, but the infinitive supplement is necessary.
In οὖς μή we have both a conditional and causal combination, one of
which only can be reproduced in English. Cf. Goodw. M. and T.
§ 581 for exx., and the Lat. use of ‘siquidem.’

σώφρονα, in strange antithesis to αἰσχρός (but see I. 84 8 3),
‘temperate’ v. ‘intemperate,’ ‘decorous’ v. ‘indecorous.’

ἡδονὴν Sdvras, cf. sup. χάριν φέροντες, 53 ὃ 4-

κακίαν, ‘infamy’ (i.e. of treachery).

§ 2. σώματα, ‘lives,’ the usual Greek idiom, cf. 11. 43 § 2 τὰ
σώματα διδόντες.

αὐτοῦ, sc. τοῦ τὰ σώματα διαφθεῖραι, cf. I. 68 8 2.

οὐκ ἐχθροὺς γάρ. γάρ ‘postpositum,’ as οὐ adheres closely to
ἐχθροί, although it applies with equal force to εἰκότως; with ἀλλά the

EVIE §'5\)' 1) = NOTES. 205

sentence becomes positive, ‘we are no enemies on whom you will be
taking vengeance justifiably, but good friends.’

Kar ἀνάγκην, by Spartan rejection (55 ὃ 1) and Theban aggression
(56 § 1).

§ 3. ἄδειαν ποιοῦντες, cf. VIII. 76 § 7, ‘granting immunity.’

καὶ ποιοῦντες... καὶ mpovoovrres, the first καί St. treats as ‘etiam,’
holding that καί... καί do not correspond in this passage. But is not
the point of the sentence ‘your verdict will be a righteous one, not
merely as guaranteeing the protection of our persons, but also as
recognising the claims of suppliants’ ?

ὅσια, sc, ‘righteous,’ ‘conscientious’—in the sight of the θεοὶ ξυμ-
μαχικοί.

προνοοῦντες, ‘nobis prospicientes’ (Pp.), ‘considering before you
decide’ (St.).

διὰ παντός, temporal, cf. 1. 38 § τ.

8 4. πατέρων θήκας, note omission of article, and position of
τῶν ὑμετέρων, cf. 56 § 2. For the history cf. Hdt. 1x. 85.

ἐσθήμασι, a needless bone of contention to editors. There is no
allusion to offerings of raiment asin Tac. A. 111. 2, ‘vestes—cremabant,’
or to the ‘velamina nota’ of Virgil, or to the extravagancies of a
Lucullus’ funeral pyre (Pliny N. H. xxxvi.). The story of Periander
in Hadt. v. 92 is wholly different. See Thirlw. ἃ. H. 11. 365. Plutarch’s
Aristides XxI. explains the difficulty τῶν Πλαταιέων ὁ dpywv...xirava
φοινικοῦν ἐνδεδυκώς.

τοῖς ἄλλοις νομίμοις, ‘aliaque funerum sollennia’ (Tac.).

ὡραῖα simply =‘fruges,’ produce. Cf. 1. 120 § 2.

ἐπιφέροντες, ‘offering,’ 11. 34 ὃ 2.

ὁμαίχμοις (Ionic), ‘brothers in arms’ (cf. 1. 18 § 3).

μὴ ὀρθῶς γνόντες -- εἰ μὴ ὀρθῶς γνοίητε. Goodw. M. T. ὃ 472.

8 δ. ἔθαπτεν, ‘quod mansurum erat sepulcrum’ (Poppo and (]455.};
but how far does the lasting result affect the choice of tense? The
imperfect is descriptive, ‘panoramic.’ It must not be forgotten that the
stress of the sentence frequently falls on the participle, so that the
tense of the verb assimilates itself to the participle.

τοιούτοις, sc. φίλοις, a useful synonym, frequent in Plato and
Aristotle. Cf. ὡσαύτως γενομένων (Ar. Eth. 11. 3 § 11).

τί ἄλλο ἤ, cf. 39 ὃ 2.

αὐθένταις, by siding with the Medes the Thebans were, in a
manner, guilty of the blood of the Spartans.

ἀτίμους, proleptic: the genitive specifies the form of loss or

206 LHOCYDIDES 11, [Luvin § 5—

privation, e.g. δωμάτων ἀτίμους, ‘without honour of a home,’ ‘denied a
home.’

ἴσχειν, stronger form of ἔχω.

πρὸς δέ, adverbial= ‘furthermore.’ The only ex. in Thuc. καί,
intensive.

ἠλευθερώθησαν, middle in force, ‘won their freedom.’

ἱερά, especially of Ζεὺς ἐλευθέριος. (Stahl.)

εὐξάμενοι, temporal, ‘to whom they prayed (made their vows)
before their victory.’

θυσίας τὰς πατρίους, sacrifices, ancestral (i.e. and those ancestral)
in point of institution and foundation, lit. ‘in connexion with those who
founded them.’ The genitive εἷσαμ. καὶ xrio. Stahl rightly regards as
objective. εἱσαμένων in connexion with ἱερά, cf. Pind. Pyth. tv.
204 τέμενος ἕσσαντο. See Jebb on Soph. O. Ὁ. 713.

κτισάντων, with θυσίας, cf. κτίζειν δαῖτα. Hude sees an allusion
to the ‘conditores et cultores,’ which disappears in the text of Her-
werden. The genitive could hardly depend on ἀφαιρήσεσθε, as the
Plataeans will all be dead. (See Appendix.)

CHAPTER LIX.

81. πρός, ‘on the side of,’ ‘in favour of.’ Cf. Eur. Alc. 52 πρὸς
τῶν ἐχόντων.

νόμιμα, Panhellenic usage, whether in the matter οἵ ἱερά or ὅσια.

ἁμαρτάνειν, ‘bent on sinning,’ ‘meditating an offence,’ present, as
the mere notion constitutes a moral offence (peccatum), which has not
yet found expression, but may at any moment; hence the aorist: cf.
Cic. de Fin. 111. § 32. The ἕξις is not yet an ἐνέργεια.

μὴ ἀδικηθέντας, cf. 58 § 5.

οἴκτῳ σώφρονι λαβόντας, ‘regarding (us) with rational compassion.’
σώφρων, as restraining the desire for revenge, ‘self-contained.’ λαβεῖν
as in 56 § 3. The phrase appears no more difficult of comprehension
(in spite of Herwerden’s objection) than Plato’s λόγῳ λαμβάνειν (Phaedr.
234C) or the ordinary δι᾽ οἴκτου. For λαβεῖν without object expressed
cf. vI. 61 ὃ 1: in the present instance ἡμᾶς is close at hand.

οἷοί re, detach re from οἷοι and connect with καί following.

πάθοιμεν ἄν, implied protasis.

ὡς ἀστάθμητον (sc. ἐστί), ‘no forecasting the possibility of mis-
fortune befalling at any moment even one who deserves it not.’ τὸ
ἀφανὲς τοῦ μέλλοντος is one of the few commonplaces of the Thucy-
didean rhetoric.

LIX. § 2| NOTES. 207

ᾧτινι, dependent on and explanatory of ἀστάθμητον : practically
the equivalent of an εἰ clause, cf. ἄδηλον εἰ.

ξυμπέσοι, more usual with dat. of thing, but such inversions are
common.

§ 2. τε, ‘thus.’ ὡς πρέπον, sc. ἐστί, cf. the like omission with
εἰκός, χρεών.

ὁμοβωμίους, ‘worshipped at common altars’ (Duk. St.). Others
explain with ref. to duwxéras (=cuvvdous), cf. IV. 97 § 4. κοινούς,
‘national.’ The idea of common privilege finds confirmation in the
word κυριώτατοι, cf. V. 53.

πεῖσαι τάδε, ‘to urge (press) this course ’—without accus. of person,
ci. 43 §) 2.

προφερόμενοί θ᾽ ὅρκους, Stahl divides the sentence into three heads,
(1) αἰτούμεθα, (2) ἱκέται γιγνόμεθα, (3) ἀναμιμνήσκομεν, combining in
one common conception ἱκέται γιγνόμεθα καὶ ἐπικαλούμεθα, and re-
ferring προφερόμενοι to the words ἱκέται γιγνόμεθα only.

Goller sees an asyndeton, construing μὴ ἀμνημονεῖν with αἰτούμεθα,
but omitting τε with προφερόμενοι.

Classen places colon after τάδε, leaving an asyndeton, and con-
struing μὴ ἀμνημονεῖν with ἱκέται γιγνόμεθα.

Herwerden detects a string of ἐμβλήματα, and simplifies the sentence
accordingly (see critical note).

‘And pleading (in defence) those oaths your fathers swore we sup-
plicate you by your fathers’ graves not to forget them.’

ἱκέται γιγνόμεθα (-- ἱκεσίαν ποιούμεθα), both genitives depend on
this. For such genitive construction with verbs of praying see Madv.
G. Synt. 61, 6, note 2. Cf. Aesch. Suppl. 321 τί φὴς ἱκνεῖσθαι τῶν δ᾽
ἀγωνίων θεῶν ; Hdt. VI. 68 ce μετέρχομαι τῶν θεῶν εἰπεῖν. The addition
of πρός simply makes the case-relation more explicit. At the same
time, in the passage from Aesch. at least, it is doubtful whether we
cannot get a construction from τί, ‘in what matter, connected with
these gods, comest thou (as a suppliant) ?’

γενέσθαι ὑπὸ Θηβαίοις, cf. vil. 64 § 1, ‘to the dead we appeal to
save us from falling into the hands of Thebans, or, for all our true
friendship (to you), from being left at the mercy of (our) deadliest foes.’
(Cf. Stahl.)

Greek love of antithesis places ἐχθίστοις side by side with φίλτατοι.
The tense of ὄντες need cause no difficulty, as the imperfect of etué can
represent a historic tense.

208 THOCYDIDES 771 (ux. § 2—

ἡμέρας, the ellipse of article is unusual. τε, introducing climax,
but cf. I. 1 § 2 (St.).

ἢ» temporal dative, although it may find a construction from pre-
position in second clause. Classen however regards ἐν as introduced to
fix the critical moment. Note particularly the opposition of relative to
demonstrative; the confusion is caused by the participle (due to Thucy-
didean condensation). When rewritten in the form ἐν ἣ μὲν τὰ δεινό-
Tata ἐπράξαμεν, viv δὲ κινδυνεύομεν, the relation becomes clear. From
a second point of view πράξαντες may suggest εἰ καὶ ἐπράξαμεν, ‘in spite
of our brilliant exploits.’

μετ᾽ αὐτῶν, sc. τῶν κεκμηκότων, as ὅμαιχμοι.

8 3. ὅπερ δέ, anticipative relative clause.

λόγου τελευτᾷν, sc. τελευτὴν ποιεῖσθαι λόγου. Cf. 104 ὃ 5-

διότι ἐγγύς, sc. ἐστί. καὶ τοῦ βίου, i.e. as well as of the λόγος.

μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, sc. τοῦ τελευτᾶν. Cf. 58 8 2 τὴν δύσκλειαν αὐτοῦ.

τῷ αἰσχίστῳ, Livy ΧΧΙ. 41 ‘ultimo supplicio humanorum fame’
(St.). Cf. Od. x11. 342 λιμῷ δ᾽ οἴκτιστον θανέειν.

ὑμῖν πιστεύσαντες, ὑμῖν, in emphatic contrast to Θηβαίοις.

προσήλθομεν, ‘approached (you’), used ‘of making advances’ rather
than ‘siding with’ (προσχωρεῖν).

εἰ μὴ πείθομεν... ἐᾶσαι, ‘if we are making no impression on you, to
suffer us at once,’ &c. &c.

ἐς τὰ αὐτὰ καταστήσαντας, ‘to reinstate us in our original position.’
Cf. 34 § 3-

τὸν ξυντυχόντα, the equivalent of a future perfect, ὃς ἂν ξυντύχῃ
(Kriig.). Hude suggests τὸν ξυντυχόντ᾽ ἄν, in order to obtain a future
meaning—but ἄν is needless. The words simply denote the risk in-
cident to (coincident with) the renewal of ‘in statu quo’ (καταστῆσαι
és τὰ αὐτά).

ἑλέσθαι, ‘accept,’ cf. Aesch. Ag. 1653 τὴν τύχην δ᾽ αἱρούμεθα.

84. ἐπισκήπτομεν, ‘obtestamur.’ Cf. 11. 73 ὃ 3.

τε, introducing peroration.

περὶ τοὺς “EAAnvas, περί marking the sphere or scope of such
προθυμία.

πίστεως, ‘fides,’ ‘protection.’

ἱκέται ὄντες, not, of necessity, restricted to πίστις, as=7v ἱκε-
τεύομεν ; better taken in apposition with sentence, ‘as suppliants.’ Cf.
supr. Πλαταιῆς ὄντες.

γενέσθαι σωτῆρας, the accusative is necessitated by change of person.

ἐλευθεροῦντας, the favourite profession of Sparta. Cf. Iv. 87 ὃ 2.

LXI. § 1] NOTES. 209

CHAPTER LX.

πρὸς τὸν λόγον, the position διὰ μέσου points to a construction ἀπὸ
κοινοῦ, i.e, with δείσαντες and ἐν δῶσι alike (Pp.).

πρός, of doubtful interpretation—(r) in view of, (2) in response to,
(3) on the ground of.

ἐδόθη, aorist as pluperfect.

CHAPTER LXI.

§ 1. καὶ οὕτοι, ‘et isti’ (St.).

τὸ ἐρωτηθὲν ἀπεκρίναντο, no need for πρός, cf. Plat. Phil. IQ A
ἀποκρινεῖται τὸ ἐρωτώμενον. Kr, G. 6. 46. 6 § 3.

kal pr, transition to opposite, cf. 58 § 1.

The order is complicated by the insertion of ἔξω τῶν mpox. καὶ ἅμα
οὐδὲ ἠτιαμένων. The connexion is εἰ ἀπεκρίναντο καὶ μὴ κατηγορίαν
ἐποιήσαντο καὶ περὶ αὑτῶν πολλὴν τὴν ἀπολογίαν.

περὶ αὑτῶν, by common Attic confusion of περί with ὑπέρ.

ἔξω τῶν προκειμένων, ‘outside the question’ (i.e. τὸ ἐρωτηθέν), and at
the same time without even so much as any charge against them.

καὶ ἅμα, cf. 82 ὃ τ. οὐδέ, in spite of εἰ preceding; cf. 40 § 4.

ἠτιαμένων, Classen rightly explains as referring to αὑτῶν (a view
condemned by Poppo). The combination of prepositional with parti-
cipial construction has already been observed; and we shall be within the
limits of Thucydidean syntax in taking ἠτιαμένων as an impersonal
genitive absolute if needful. For the passive form of deponent cf. vir.
68§ 2. Steup suggests ἠτιαμένοι.

πολλὴν τὴν ἀπολογίαν, the article to emphasize ἀπολογία (Cl.).
The presence of one article may denote either a common grammatical
vinculum (πολλήν referring to each substantive), or shew that καί
corrects ἀπολογία to ἔπαινος.

ὧν, the attraction is due to brachylogy, = τούτων d.

Render: ‘had they not turned upon us with denunciations and, in
their own behoof, in self-laudation, without reference to the point at
issue, and, at the same time, entirely without accusation, defended, or
rather panegyrised at length, actions which no one had discredited.’

If καί be treated as purely copulative, some suspicion arises of
tautology between ἠτιαμένων and ὧν ἐμέμψατο: treat as ‘corrective.’

πρὸς μὲν τά, for order cf. 82 § 7, VII. 12 8 1, with Plato Theaet.
167 E καὶ ἐν μὲν τῷ παίζῃ, ἐν δὲ τῷ διαλέγεσθαι σπουδάζῃ.

Sar; 14

210 THUCYDIDES 1171: ΠΣ a=

τὰ pév=Karnyopla. τὰ δέ-- ἀπολογίακ Arnold well quotes from
Arist. Rhet. 11. 25 § 1.

Kakla...8d£&a, εἰρωνικῶς, says the Scholiast. The ‘bad name’ of
Thebes is contrasted with the ‘good name’ claimed by Plataeans for
their services.

τούτων δόξα, ‘the reputation of those services.’ τούτων, neuter,
sc. τῶν ἐπαινουμένων.

τὸ δ᾽ ἀληθές, ‘that you may hear the truth on both sides before you
decide’; cf. 53 § 3, note.

§ 2. ἡμεῖς δέ, for δέ cf. 1. 37 § 2, ‘now’; no need for strongly
inferential form 67.

‘The original occasion of our feud with them was their refusal to
accept Theban hegemony.’ St. well explains that the point at issue
was the recognition of Thebes as head of the Boeotian confederation,
but not the reduction of Plataea to absolute dependency.

κτισάντων, for the settlement cf. I. 12 § 1.

ὕστερον, i.e. about 60 years after the Trojan war (Arn.).

ἄλλα χωρία, e.g. Orchomenus; but including the whole district from
Cithaeron to Euripus.

&, plural, to include Plataea.

ξυμμίκτους ἀνθρώπους (cf. ξυμμίκτοις ὄχλοις, VI. 17 ὃ 2), ‘a motley
population,’ e.g. Pelasgians, Thracians, Hyantians (Strabo Ix. 2 § 3).

οὐκ ἠξίουν, ‘disdained,’ ‘dedignabantur,’—mark the imperfect, they
‘persistently’ refused. Cf. Isocr. Plat. § 6.

ἡγεμονεύεσθαι, perhaps a litotes for ἄρχεσθαι (ἅπαξ dey. in Thu-
cydides).

ἔξω -- χωρίς, ‘apart from.’

παραβαίνοντες τὰ πάτρια, (1) in the matter of respect due to
founders (cf. 1. 25): (2) in the matter of national institutions (i.e. the
ancestral confederation of Boeotia).

προσηναγκάΐζοντο, for imperfect cf. 57 § 3 ἀπωλλύμεθα. Stahl would
supply τοῖς πατρίοις, but, from I. 106 § 1, no supplement is necessary
to the construction. The word is used of ‘pressing into service,’
‘requisitioning.’ Cf. Plat. Theaet. 153 C ἀναγκάζω προσβιβάζων.

ἔβλαπτον, by joining the Athenians ἄδικον ὁδὸν ἰόντων (64 ὃ 4): asa
border town, they were of special service to Athens; but the βλάβη is
most probably exaggerated.

kal ἀντέπασχον, ‘simply (merely) suffered reprisals.’

EXT, ὁ 19] NOTES. 211

CHAPTER ἘΧΤῚς

81. καὶ ὁ βάρβαρος, καὶ ‘depravat orationem’ (Pp.): it is intensive
here as dealing with the strongest point of their case (ἣ μάλιστα δοκεῖ
ἵστασθαι ὁ Nbyos)—it is not placed here for convenience of position (Cl.),
but for emphasis.

μόνοι, cf. 54 ὃ 3.

ἀγάλλονται, cf. 82 ὃ 7.

τούτῳ, in loose construction with λοιδοροῦσιν.

§ 2. διότι οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίους, φαμέν continues its force. ᾿Αθηναῖοι
would be equally correct, but once more Thucydides’ love of coordination
asserts itself; cf. v. 16 § 3. Poppo notes that in comparisons such
assimilations are frequent ; 64 § 1 resumes this argument.

ἰδέᾳ -- ἐπινοίᾳ, cf. vI. 76 8 3: more usual with genitive of de-
scription or specification (e.g. θανάτου, φυγῆς, πολέμου, I. τοῦ § 1),=
‘scheme,’ ‘design,’ ‘tactics’ (for which cf. Thuc. use of rpdzros),

αὖ = “6 contrario.’

8 3. εἴδει, the ‘external’ by contrast with the ‘internal’ relation
(Cl.), 1.6. ‘concrete’ with ‘abstract,’ a distinction familiar to all Plato-
nists. The contrast is well marked in Ar. Eth. 1. 6 § το ἢ οὐδ᾽ ἄλλο
οὐδὲν πλὴν τῆς ἰδέας; ὥστε μάταιον ἔσται τὸ εἶδος. (Cf. Campbell,
Theaet. App. C.)

εἴδει (πραγμάτων or πολιτείας), ‘under what form of polity’; a similar
implication in VIII. go ὃ 1.

ἔπραξαν, ‘took such action’; contrast the 3rd person with the 2nd
in 55 ὃ 4 ἑκάτεροι ἐξηγεῖσθε: the insertion of ἡμῶν makes ἑκάτεροι the
subject of the verb: in 56 § 5 it is appositional.

ὀλιγαρχία ἰσόνομος, ‘isonomous’ in what sense? not as assigning
equal power to each member of the oligarchic governing body, but as
acknowledging equality of laws for all (cf. 11. 37 ὃ 2 μέτεστι δὲ πᾶσι
πρὸς τὰ ἴδια διάφορα τὸ ἴσον). The allusion is not to a ‘timocracy,’ or
ἀριστοκρατία ἀπὸ yévous,—for the first would not apply to either Thebes
or Sparta—but rather to a ‘moderate aristocracy,’ regardful of the rights
of citizens (δᾶμον γεραίρων, Pind. Pyth. 1. 70): such ὀλίγοι would be
μέτριοι as law-abiding, ‘aequi iuris fautores.’ Cf. Arist. Pol. Iv. 5.

ὅπερ, anticipative and appositional; cf. ‘id quod.’

τῷ σωφρονεστάτῳ, ‘ideal moderation.’ St. translates ‘modestissimo
cuique’ (rei publicae statu). The double superlative is probably intended
to enforce the contrast: the greater its development the wider the de-

14—2

πῶ ΤΟΥ, 177: [Lx11. § 3—

parture from constitutional government: they are as opposite as the two
poles.

δυναστεία, ‘a cabal.’ From Aristotle’s point of view the worst form
of ὀλιγαρχία, cf. Pol. vi. 5. Poppo well compares Tac. A. VI. 42,
‘paucorum dominatio regiae libidini propior est.’ (Cf. Plato Polit.
291 for the subdivision of μοναρχία into τυραννική and βασιλική, and
of ὀλιγαρχία into aristocracy and plutocracy.) τυράννου, ‘persona
pro re.’

ὀλίγων ἀνδρῶν, e.g. Attaginus and Timagenides; cf. Hdt. 1x. 86.

§ 4. σχήσειν, ‘secure.’ εἰ κρατήσειε, as fut. perf. of oratio obliqua,
‘si vicissent.’

ἰσχύι τε “νἱ et manu’; cf. χειρί (82 8 8). For the facts see Plut.
Aristid. 18.

kal ἡ ξύμπασα, Classen destroys colon after αὐτόν, regarding καὶ...
ἔπραξεν as parallel with καὶ οὗτοι ἐπηγάγοντο. The sentence needs no
alteration: the argument is ‘thus the action taken was not the action
of the whole body of the Theban people—the many were in the hands
of the few.’ A law-abiding commonalty is not responsible for the acts
of a law-despising tyranny.

“Thus our state as a whole (at large) was not responsible for her
actions in so doing (i.e. ἐπάγεσθαι τὸν Μῆδον), nor is it fair to reproach
her with errors she committed when without a constitution.’

οὐκ αὐτοκράτωρ, cf. sup. δυναστεία εἶχε τὰ πράγματα.

ὧν μὴ μετὰ νόμων, the construction says Class.=é ᾧ μὴ μετὰ νόμων
ἥμαρτε: the words μὴ μετὰ -- ἄνευ (Pp.), but this does not explain μή,
which is partly hypothetical.

ὧν, genitive of cause; cf. Hdt. 1. 90 τῷ θεῴ τούτων ὀνειδίσαι, Dem.
Con. § 11 φοβεῖσθαι τῶν τραυμάτων.

§ 5. τοὺς νόμους, 1.6. the marpla πολιτεία. ἔλαβε-- ἀνέλαβε,
‘regained.’

ἐπιόντων, the motive of the attack is found in πειρωμένων ; from the
broader point of view the second participle explains the first. Mark the
order of the sentence, πειρωμένων ὑφ᾽ αὑτοῖς ποιεῖσθαι τήν τε ἄλλην
Ἑλλάδα καὶ τὴν ἡμετέραν.

κατὰ στάσιν -- διὰ στάσιν ; cf. 82 § 2 ‘in consequence of.’

ἐχόντων, after (ΕΠοΟρΗγία, 458 B.c.

ei, interrogative, ‘whether,’ here a litotes for ὅτι.

Kopwvetg, cf. 1. 113.

ἵππους, but ἱππέας in 11. 9 ὃ 3, hence Cobet’s ἵππον, ‘cavalry.’

Lxul. § 3] NOTES. 213

CHAPTER LXIII.

81, μᾶλλον, sc. ἢ ἡμεῖς.

ἀξιώτεροι, resolve into μᾶλλον ἄξιοι (Bauer), ‘that you, rather than
we, deserve any and every punishment.’

πάσης, explain in its twofold sense, ‘each and all,’ i.e. as διττῶς
λεγόμενον, Arist. Pol. 11. 3 § 2.

§ 2. ἐγένεσθε, note the abrupt introduction of the topic.

ἐπὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ, ‘for the purpose of protection against us’: the
agreement may represent either subjective or objective genitive, as
required.

ξύμμαχοι, cf. 55 § 4.

τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς, ‘quod ad nos attinebat,’ limiting accus. with adverbial
force.

ὑπάρχον ye, accus. absolute: cf. δέον, παρέχον, ἐξόν : the ellipse (μὴ
ξυνεπιέναι) is easily supplied, lit. ‘it being quite open to you’ (so to
do). For this use of ὑπάρχω cf. 1. 124 § 1. γε emphasizes ὑπάρχον,
Lat. ‘quidem’: in this collocation cf. ‘ siquidem.’

προσήγεσθε, the verb completes its construction either with 7 of limi-
tation or by supplement of ξυνεπιέναι. Duker, from VIII. 106 8 4, gives
it the meaning of ‘compulsion.’ ἐπί, ‘contra.’

ξυμμαχίας γεγενημένης, the genitive absolute is coordinate with the
accus. absolute ὑπάρχον : the second participial expression explains the
hrsta) Cf 5. Sin:

προβάλλεσθε, i.e. ‘your favourite subterfuge’: for προβάλλ. of using
a cloak or screen, cf. I. 37 § 4.

ikavn ye, the asyndeton offends editors; see crit. note.

ἀπστρέπειν, in milder sense (Cl.), ‘to deter us from (attacking)
you.’

τὸ μέγιστον, accus. in apposition with sentence, a use not so familiar
in Latin.

βουλεύεσθαι, for the infinitive as accus. of object cf. Monro, H. Gr.
§ 237.

οὐ βιαζόμενοι ἔτι, now that the Lacedaemonian alliance was open
to you, vid. 55 § 1.

μᾶλλον, ‘by preference.’ τὰ ᾿Αθηναίων, ‘partes Atheniensium.’

8 3. πολὺ δέ ye, ‘aye, but far more (dishonourable).’

καταπροδοῦναι, ‘to betray downright,’ ‘betray to ruin.’ Cf. 1.
86 ἃ 5.

τοὺς μέν.. τοὺς δέ, a chiasmus; for the assertion cf. I. 68 § 3.

214 THUCYDIDES Ti. [uxi. ὃ 4—

§ 4. οὐκ tony, ‘out of all proportion.’

αἰσχύνης ἀπηλλαγμένην, ‘acquitted of ’=‘free from’ disgrace,—an
Ionism. Cf. Hdt. 1. 60 εὐηθείης ἀπηλλαγμένον with Th. I. 122 ὃ 4.

καίτοι τὰς ὁμοίας x.7.d., Hude sees a difficulty in the contrast of
‘gratia non relata’ with ‘gratia cum iniuria non relata.’ But és ἀδικίαν
here is not the mere equivalent of ἀδικίᾳ. His suggestion, ἢ for ἤ,
making the construction μὴ ἢ ‘we suspect that,’ and translating ‘we
suspect that disgrace lies rather in repaying just obligations for unjust
purposes—than in declining to repay them,’ involves an independent
use of μή, not found in Thucydides: vid. Goodw. M. T. § 265.

Taking the text as it stands, we may translate: ‘And yet disgrace
lies rather in failing to render in return like services than in declining
to repay such obligations as, though honestly due, are in danger of being
repaid in the interests of injustice.’

The services of Athens to Plataea, in rescuing Plataea from Theban
oppression, called for a return in kind, i.e. in succouring Athens if
oppressed, but not for payment in the unlike coin of helping Athens to
oppress others.

τὰς ὁμοίας, cf. 66 § 2 τὰ ὅμοια.

μὴ ἀντιδιδόναι affects both members of the sentence: "αἰσχρὸν (ἦν)

μᾶλλον μὴ ἀντιδιδόναι τὰς Ou. χάριτας ἢ μὴ ἀντιδιδόναι τὰς μετὰ δικαι.
ὀφειληθ. κιτ.λ.᾽

αἰσχρόν, cf. ν. 111 ὃ 4.

μετὰ δικαιοσύνης, ‘sanctioned by justice’; cf. 82 § τι.

és ἀδικίαν, ‘pointing to,’ ‘tending to,’ almost=ém’ ἀδικίᾳ.

ἀποδιδομένας, press the present, ‘are (for) being repaid.’

Arnold’s explanation is perfectly sound, and finds confirmation from
his excellent parallel in Cic. de Off. 1. 15, ‘non reddere beneficium viro
bono non licet, modo id facere possit sine iniuria.’ On such return
of εὐεργεσία, cf. Aristot. Eth. vir. 13 ὃ 9 with Plato Rep. I. 3316
(in reference to παρακαταθήκη).

‘Mutatis mutandis,’ Iv. 61 ὃ 4 will illustrate the case: αὐτοὶ τὸ δίκαιον
μᾶλλον THs ξυνθήκης προθύμως παρέσχοντο.

CHAPTER LXIV.
8 1. τε, inferential. ὅτι οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, sc. ἐμήδισαν. Cf. VI.
18 ὃ 1.
ὑμεῖς δέ, St. and Cl. ἡμεῖς, supplying ἐμηδίσαμεν, a platitude. The
absence of μέν in first clause is no bar to this reading. Hude sees

LXIV. § 3] NOTES. 215

cause for retaining ὑμεῖς, lest ᾿Αθηναῖοι should suggest the attraction of
βουλόμενοι into agreement with it. But is Thucydides always so regard-
ful of his reader?

Without changing text, we can either (1) accept Hude’s view,
making βουλόμενοι dependent on ἐποιήσατε, ὑμεῖς being added for sake
of clearness, i.e. we may look on the construction as a mere participial
attraction, replacing ὑμεῖς δὲ ἐβούλεσθε: or (2) the sequence may be
δῆλόν τε érovjoare...kai viv ἀξιοῦτε, the sentence ὑμεῖς δέ being quasi-
parenthetical, a construction of which there is strong suspicion in 67 § 1:
or (3) repunctuate by putting colon at ᾿Αθηναῖοι, and destroying full
stop at τἀναντία, giving to καὶ νῦν a temporal force ‘once again,’ in
reference to the renewal of the claim urged in 11. 71 § 3. ‘Thus you
have made it plain that even then (in the Median war) it was not for
the sake of Hellas that you alone (of all Boeotians) refused to side with
Persia, but simply because the Athenians themselves refused; though
for your part, in spite of your intention to favour the one side (Athens)
but thwart the other (Thebes), you once more claim protection on the
ground of a bravery which was due to others.’

But to all these explanations there are objections: to (1) the intrusive
ὑμεῖς, (2) δέ, (3) want of sufficient antithetical force in the participle
βουλόμενοι.

The allegation is that the motives of Plataea were not motives of
Panhellenism, but of partiality. The mere choice of Athens instead
of Sparta disclosed their real intentions; cf. 56 § 6 and 62 sub fin.:
throughout the Peloponnesian war the isolation of Athens, even in
treaties, is noticeable.

τοῖς μέν, Athens. τοῖς δέ, Thebes (or Bowwrois). Hude, however,
sees a reference rather to the cause, than to its representatives.

8 2. δι᾽ ἑτέρους, ‘at the instance of others,’ i.e. Athenians, such
ἀρετή as Shewn οὐκ ἐκ προσηκόντων commanded no claim to consideration.
Plataea had flattered Athens by imitation.

τούτων, resumptive; Poppo remarks that we should expect ἃ ἐγένεσθε
or omit ἀπὸ τούτων : but see Kr. G. G. 51. 11 ὃ 2.

ὠφελεῖσθαι, not of necessity restricted to βοήθεια, but in wider sense
of ‘benefit,’ advantage.’

§ 3. οὐκ εἰκός, ‘unreasonable.’

ξυναγωνίζεσθε, cf. V. 109. St. lays stress on the present, ‘continue
to share their fortunes.” The ἀγών implies κίνδυνος, ‘peril.’

προφέρετε, ‘keep on pleading,’ middle in 59 82. Cf. προβάλλεσθε,

216 LAOCYDIDES Fi. [rvs § a

‘do not keep on pleading that past alliance as a plea for present pro-
tection.’ ὡς ὅτι. ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς, resumptive.

τότε, οἵ. 59 ὃ 2. ξυνωμοσίαν, ‘alliance’ (confederation).

παραβάντες, ‘by your breach of faith.’

Αἰγινήτας, cf. 1. 105, 108; 11. 27.

ἄλλους τινάς, no allusion (says Stahl) to the Thessalian expedition
(I. 111}, or Coroneia (1. 113), or Phocis or Opuntian Locris (1. 108 § 3),
who fought with Persia (Hdt. 1x. 31); but rather to Euboeans, who
sided with Pausanias (Hdt. 1x. 28), and for whose reduction the
Plataeans were personally employed by Pericles. Cf. Thirlw. G. H.
Chap. XVI.

ἢ SvekwAvere, Cobet’s comment is violent; all that Thuc. says is
‘you helped rather than hindered.’ Does a poet never enforce his case
by statement of the contrary? The question of ‘degree’ does not affect
this passage.

ἔχοντές τε... καὶ οὐδενὸς βιασαμένου, coordination once more of two
distinct participial constructions; cf. 53 § 2.

τοὺς νόμους, ‘that constitution,’ a distinct allusion to the ‘free
state’ of Plataea, and in direct contrast to 62 § 4 ὧν μὴ μετὰ νόμων
ἥμαρτεν. ;

περιτειχίζεσθαι, passive. ὥστε-- ἐφ᾽ ᾧ τε, ‘the consequence becomes
a limitation or condition’: cf. Goodw. M. T. 8 602 with § 610; for this
πρόκλησις cf. 11. 72 ὃ 2.

§ 4. τοῖς “EAAnot, dativus iudicantis, ‘detestable in the eyes of
Hellenes,’ subjective dative rather than dative of agent.

οἵτινες, directly answering τίνες, but with suggestion of causal force,
“qui quidem praetulistis’ passing into ‘quippe qui praetuleritis.’

προύθεσθε, cf. VIII. 85 § 3, Hdt. vi. 21.

ἅ ποτε χρηστοί, accus. of limitation. χρηστοί, ‘honesti’ rather
than ‘fortes.’

ὡς φατέ, with direct reference to χρηστοί, cf. 54 § 3.

οὐ TpoorkovTa, cf. § 2. The Persians in front, the Thebans behind,
they had been ‘kicked into courage.’

és τὸ ἀληθές, not a mere adverbial equivalent, but a pregnant construc-
tion, due to the ἐξ of compound verb.

ἄδικον ὁδόν, Ionic (Hdt. 1. 117), cf. Oed. T. 67.

ὃ δ. τοιαῦτα ἀποφαίνομεν, mark the predicative adjective without
participle. Is not the defence a flimsy one? The obvious duty of
the πλῆθος was to act as σωφρονισταὶ τῶν ὀλίγων : cf. VIII. 48 § 6.

LXV. § 3] NOTES. 217

CHAPTER LXV.

8 1. ἃ δὲ τελευταῖα, cf. τελευταῖον, 56§1. The Greek tendency
to pluralise has already been noted.

παρανόμως yap, γάρ explanatory, rather than logically continuative.

ἱερομηνίᾳ, cf. 56 § 2.

§ 2. αὐτοί, ‘ultro,’ without provocation; the emphatic point.

el ἐμαχόμεθα.. ἀδικοῦμεν, the sequence admits of two explanations,

(1) A technical use, on analogy of φεύγω (see esp. Heindorf on
Protagor. 310 Ὁ); cf. I. 67 § 1 ὅτι σπονδὰς λελυκότες elev καὶ ἀδικοῖεν.
For perfect present cf. Demosth. Call. § 12 βλάπτειν: see Goodw. M. T.
8 27.

(2) Irregular conditional sentence, the supposition being notoriously
contrary to fact (Goodw. M. T. § 404). Poppo cp. Ag. 840 τραυμάτων
el τόσων ἐτύγχανεν... .τέτρωται.

τῆς ἔξω ξυμμαχίας, ic. Athens. Cf. the exclusion of Athens in
V. 79 § 2.

παῦσαι, with genitive of deprivation, cf. Hdt. 1. 56.

τὰ κοινὰ πάτρια, cf. τὰ ἴδια διάφορα (11. 37 ὃ 2). κοινά ‘omitti
potuit’ (Pp.).

καταστῆσαι, 1.4. κατάγειν, ‘reinstate,’ cf. 59 § 3.

οἱ γὰρ ἄγοντες, a retort to 55 § 5.

8 3. GAN οὔτ᾽ ἐκεῖνοι, sc. παρανομοῦσι.

παραβαλλόμενοι, ‘risking,’ ‘staking’ (cf. 11. 44 § 3).

τεῖχος, in collective sense (fortress), cf. 34 ὃ 3.

φιλίως, οὐ πολεμίως, if the adverbs be sound, they can only refer
to the intentions of the Plataean oligarchs. They opened their gates to
the Theban force in ‘kindliness,’ not to the Thebans, but to their
political opponents. Their object, presumably, was to overawe the ἀντι-
στασιάζοντες by show of force.

κομίσαντες, ‘introducing’; for the facts cf. 11. 2 § 2.

xelpous, euphemistic? ‘improbi,’ ‘deteriores’ (Popp.).

μηκέτι μᾶλλον γενέσθαι, usually explained by the clumsy device of
supplying χείρους. Hude rightly questions the legitimacy of severing
ἔτι from μή (cf. Kriig. ‘noch mehr’), suspecting some stronger word
lurking in γενέσθαι, balancing τὰ ἄξια ἔχειν, and suggestive of ἰσχύειν.
The double comparative μᾶλλον χείρους we can parallel from Hat. 1.
138 μᾶλλον ἥδιον.

Perhaps an Ionism is at the bottom of the difficulty; cf. ἐπὶ μᾶλλον

218 THUCYDIDES III. [Lxv. § 3—

(Hdt. 111. 104): but this might demand a change of γενέσθαι, e.g.
νέμεσθαι, ‘encroach.’ With a dative, rots χείροσι, we could find an Attic
clue; cf. Aesch. Choeph. 371 παισὶ δὲ μᾶλλον γεγένηται. For this
pregnant force of γενέσθαι ‘bene cedere,’ cf. v. 55 ὃ 3.

σωφρονισταί κ.τ.λ. (cf. vill. 48 § 5), the difficulty of the passage
(already noted by Arnold and others) Weil’s ingenious suggestion (οὐ
τῶν σωμάτων) fails to remove entirely: still it appears so far the best,
in spite of the zeugma caused: ‘enforcing the lesson of moderation not
on your persons, but on your minds, not by estranging your state but
by making it at one with its own kith and kin, placing it on ill terms
with none, but on good relations with all alike.’

Kriig. well compares Plato Rep. 471 A σωφρονιοῦσιν οὐκ ἐπὶ δουλείᾳ
κολάζοντες οὐδ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀλέθρῳ, σωφρονισταὶ ὄντες οὐ πολέμιοι.

The political motive attributed to these πρῶτοι ἄνδρες is of a twofold
nature: (1) to check the ‘worser sort,’ (2) to secure to the better class
their due ; this end they proposed to gain by moral force, not by physical
violence (banishment, slavery, or death), but by the revival and consoli-
dation of the old Boeotian federation.

οἰκειοῦντες, ‘reconciling,’ and suggesting also the notion of οἰκί-
fovres: observe the pregnant és.

ἐνσπόνδους, i.e. so far as concerned federated Boeotia. It should
be noticed that the ordinary text construes σωμάτων with ἀλλοτριοῦντες,
a somewhat doubtful inversion, though analogous to Thuc.’s use of
ἀποστερεῖν. Cf. 1. 40 ὃ 4, and consult Shilleto on 1. 69 § 1.

CHAPTER LXVI.

81. τεκμήριον δέ «.7.X., in spite of Thucydides’ fondness for the
use of this appositional accusative, the γάρ sequence raises a difficulty.

προείπομεν, i.g. προὐκαλεσάμεθα, ‘we gave formal notice.’

τὸν βουλόμενον, generic article. The sentence is complete: τὸν
βουλ. ΞΞ εἴ τις βούλεται: ἰέναι we can treat either as dependent on προεί-
πομεν, or aS=imperative of oratio recta, ‘irw.’

πολιτεύειν, ‘to live as a free citizen,’ 1.6. under a πολιτεία, not a
δυναστεία or ὀλιγαρχία.

8 2. χωρήσαντες, 1.4. προσχωρήσαντες, the preposition possibly
unnecessary on account of nearness of πρός with ἐέναι.

ἀνεπιεικέστερον, lit. ‘inequitably,’ here ‘unjustifiably.’

ov μετά = ἄνευ, ‘without the consent of,’ cf. 1. 98 § 3.

LXVI. § 2] NOTES. 219

τὰ μὲν ὁμοῖα «.7.., a complicated sentence. The framework of
the sentence is καὶ tels...7d μὲν πρῶτον ἡσυχάζετε, ὕστερον δὲ τὰ μὲν
ὁμοῖα οὐκ ἀνταπέδοτε, ἐπιθέμενοι δὲ παρὰ τὴν ξύμβασιν. The construction
so far is complete: now an asyndeton intervenes, ods μὲν ἀπεκτείνατε
οὐκ ἀλγοῦμεν, ods δὲ χεῖρας προισχομένους διεφθείρατε, πῶς οὐ δεινὰ
εἴργασθε; with the words καὶ ταῦτα the clue of the sentence is re-
sumed.

There are no less than three μέν...δέ sentences, the second, τὰ μὲν
ὁμοῖα... ἐπιθέμενοι δέ, being subordinate to and explanatory of the first,
the third, οὖς μέν... οὖς δέ, an asyndeton; the words καὶ ταῦτα resume
the sentence, the particulars of the résumé being borrowed partly from
the main sentence, partly from the parenthetical.

‘Thereupon, you, who were only too glad to approach us and to
come to terms, at first kept the peace, but afterwards, although we
might have seemed to have acted somewhat unfairly in entering your
town without the sanction of your commons, instead of meeting us
fairly by refraining from actual violence, and inducing us by argument
to leave the town, retorted by attacking us in the very teeth of your
agreement: as for those indeed whom you slew hand to hand, their
fate we do not feel so much, for they suffered, we grant you, the penalty
of a rough justice—but in lawlessly butchering prisoners whose lives you
took in spite of their stretching forth their hands to you, after giving
quarter and pledging your word to us to spare them, how can your act
be other than atrocious ?’

The sentence is subject to a twofold interruption: (1) the sentence
εἰ dpa καὶ ἐδοκοῦμεν.. εἰσελθόντες : (2) a longer parenthesis οὖς μέν...
ols δέ, complete in itself, but with the suggestion of a rhetorical
climax in πῶς οὐ δεινὰ εἴργασθε; for such parenthetical interruption
cf. VIII. 76.

If ἐπιθέμενοι be left in construction with πῶς οὐ δεινὰ εἴργασθε, the
sentence ols δέ... διεφθείρατε has no construction except by repeating
ἀλγοῦμεν, or assuming a construction ἀπὸ xowod. The construction
of the parenthesis may cross the construction of the main sentence, but,
in such cases, the parenthetical construction determines the essential
form of the sentence. Strong grammatical teeth may find a tough nut
to crack in Plato Phaedr. 249 E.

The clue to our difficulty is the complete antithesis in τὰ ὁμοῖα...
ἐπιθέμενοι δέ, partly objective, partly subjective, in point of agreement.

μήτε νεωτερίσαι, appositional to τὰ ὁμοῖα, cf. 1. 32 § 4 ἡ δοκοῦσα
σωφροσύνη τὸ μὴ ξυγκινδυνεύειν.

220 THUCYDIDES 171. [Lxvi. § 2—

πείθειν ὥστε ἐξελθεῖν, ὥστε unnecessary, but inserted probably to
save the crudeness of two infinitives side by side.

ods μέν, abrupt, but probably intentional: the pathos of the incident
suggests a broken form of expression. Such asyndeton, though not
common with Thuc., may be traced to use of relative without definitely
expressed antecedent: for abrupt parenthesis cf. 1. 40 § 4 Κορινθίοις
μέν γε K.T.X.

ἐν χερσίν, ‘cominus’; cf. Iv. οὔ 8 3. κατὰ νόμον, cf. 56 § 2.

πῶς οὐ δεινά, rhetorical question supplanting direct statement.

ὃ 3. καὶ ταῦτα, with reference to previous context, but more fully
developed in τρεῖς ἀδικίας, ‘and herein’ (‘hereby’).

θάνατον -- θανάτωσιν, Vv. 9 ὃ 6. ἱ

μὴ κτείνειν, perhaps the true reading, the infin. present epexegetic
of substantive. Cf. 58 § τ; cf. St. Qu. Gr. p. 7.

τὰ ἐν Tots ἀγροῖς, not an accusative of direct object; cf. 11. 5 ὃ 5.

§ 4. οὔκ, cf. ν. 1o1, emphatic form of negative.

CHAPTER LXVII.

81. ἡμεῖς δέ.. τετιμωρημένοι, usually explained by repetition of
εἰδῶμεν or some verb of kindred meaning from εἰδῆτε. But no state-
ment in open court was necessary to convince the Thebans of the
goodness of their own cause. A confusion of persons seems hardly
possible in so simple a sentence. To me it appears one of Thucydides’
free coordinations, suggested by antithesis of ὑμεῖς to ἡμεῖς, but leaving
the words ἡμεῖς δὲ τετιμωρημένοι to find a constrn. from the main verb
ἐπεξήλθομεν. Cf. 64 ὃ τ ὑμεῖς δὲ βουλόμενοι κιτ.λ. The ἡμεῖς sentence
becomes parenthetical or held in suspense, without passing into a
nominative absolute, until it finds development in καὶ yap ἀνταποφαί-
vouwev. Meanwhile, the μέν clause is fully developed because of the
necessity of convincing the Spartan judges. With persons, and even
nouns, it is no uncommon thing to find the μέν ‘solitarium.’

‘On these points we have dwelt...that you may be assured that you
will be justified in passing sentence on them, though we ourselves have
been more than justified in demanding satisfaction.’

Kriiger’s reading ἡμᾶς.. .τετιμωρημένους cuts the knot.

καταγνωσόμενοι...τετιμωρημένοι, usually explained in the relation
of rst fut. to fut. perf.

I should suspect ὁσιώτερ᾽ dvy=though we should have been still
more justified in taking the law into our own hands (i.e. without appeal

Lxvil. ὃ 6] NOTES. 221

to δίκη), if an ex. of ἄν with pluperf. participle were forthcoming.
τετιμωρημένοι, middle.

§ 2. παλαιὰς ἀρετάς, no article; its addition might imply a personal
claim.

εἴ τις dpa kal ἐγένετο, ‘if any such indeed were ever actually
rendered.’

ζημίας, Meineke suggests a lost word αἰτίας, making ζημίας genitive
(cf. 1.86 8 1). But the plural lends itself naturally to the plural τοῖς
δρῶσι. {ynpla=‘ground of punishment,’ ‘cause of punishment.’ Cf.
ξυγγνώμη, 40§ 1. For the idea cf. 1. 86 § 1.

οὐκ ἐκ προσηκόντων, i.e. οὐ προσηκόντως, cf. 11. 65 §8. There is
no trajection of the negative (see Vahlen, Ar. Poet. c. 21).

ὠφελείσθων (ὠφελείσθωσαν MSS.): on the substitution of these
shortened forms of imperative for the longer, e.g. κολασθέντων for
κολασθήτωσαν, 39 § 6, μαθόντων for μαθέτωσαν 1. 34 § 1, see Herwerden,
Stud. Thue. p. 116, Stahl, Qu. Gr. 63.

ἐρημίαν, cf. 57 ὃ 4, ‘isolation.’

8 8. ἡλικίαν --νεότητα, 11. 8 8 τ; cf. 98§ 4. Lat. ‘iuventus.’

ἄγοντες, cf. VIII. 24 § 6, ‘bringing Boeotia to your side.’

Kopovelq, cf. 64 § 5.

πρεσβῦται, predicative, ‘those who still survive in their old age.’
No need for Stahl’s κατ᾽ οἰκίας, The καί is quite Thucydidean; cf. vii.
23 ὃ 4 τὴν Ἕρεσον ἀποστήσας καὶ ὁπλίσας καὶ τοὺς ὁπλίτας K.T.D.

ὑμῶν ἱκετείαν ποιοῦνται -- ὑμᾶς ἱκετεύουσιν, cf. 59 ὃ 2-

8 4. ἀπρεπές, cf. ἐκπρεπές, 55 § 2.

τὰ ἐναντία, more usual in singular.

ἐπίχαρτοι, cf. Demosth. Steph. § 85, a poetic word: for ἐπιχαιρε-
κακία, ‘malevolent joy,’ cf. Arist. Ethics 11. 6 § 18.

εἶναι, by implication of ἀξιοι.

8 5. πλέον ἤ-- μᾶλλον ἤ, cf. 11. 89 § 6. κρίναντες, without object.

οὐκ ἂν ἀνταποδόντες, Dobree’s addition of dy is necessary, unless
we accept Stahl’s ἀνταποδώσοντες, which, after all, no more forestalls
the issue than καταγνωσόμενοι.

The participial construction once more reverts to the main verb
παρενόμησαν.

χεῖρας προϊσχόμενοι, cf. 66 82. ἐκ μάχης, ‘upon a field of battle.

ἐς δίκην, ‘for trial.’ Contrast with the more direct dative construction.

§ 6. ἀμύνατε οὖν, ‘uphold,’ ‘maintain.’

τῷ νόμῳ, sc. to spare a suppliant. Cf. in 84 § 3 a comment on the
violation of such ‘iura gentium.’

>

222 THOCYDIDPES TIL [Lxvil. ὃ 6—

ἀνταποδόντες would make the construction smoother, especially in
relation to the καί sequence, e.g. ἀμύνατε καὶ τῷ νόμῳ καὶ ἡμῖν.

ὧν πρόθυμοι γεγενήμεθα -- τῆς προθυμίας, e.g. αἱ Coroneia,

περιωσθῶμεν, cf. 57 8 4.

ποιήσατε παράδειγμα, ‘shew by force of example’=émideltare:
hence the participial attraction.

ἀγῶνας, not only in forensic, but also in rhetorical sense: ‘trial’
)( ‘competition.’

λόγων, predicative. προθήσοντες, ‘establish a precedent that the
competitions you will institute will be of deeds not words.’

ἀγαθῶν ὄντων, conditional, ‘si bona sunt.’ βραχεῖα, predicative,
‘of which, when good, the recital, though brief, is sufficient.’

ἁμαρτανομένων, passive; cf. Thuc. 11. 65 § 11, Ar. Eth. 11. 6 § 20.

λόγοι κοσμηθέντες, cf. 1. 21 § 1 ἐπὶ τὸ μεῖζον κοσμοῦντες, ‘speeches
tricked out in fine phrases serve as veils.’

Bohme compares Plato Apol. 17 B κεκαλλιεπημένους λόγους.

§ 7. qv ποιήσησθε, ‘if you once adopt.’ The confusion in person
is caused grammatically by influence of parenthesis; logically, by the
application of the general principle to the particular case, i.e. if all in a
leading position, like yourselves at this moment.

κεφαλαιώσαντες, ‘summarily’; cf. 52 § 3.

πρὸς τοὺς ξύμπαντας, i.e. ‘in dealing with all alike.’

ἔπί, ‘under conditions of’; a dative of attendant circumstances:
ΠῚ 798 7

CHAPTER LXVIII.

§ 1. ‘The Lacedaemonian judges, thinking that they would be
justified in putting the question ‘‘whether their state had received any
service at their hands during the war’’—because, as they alleged, they
had all along requested them to keep the peace in accordance with the
original treaty of Pausanias after the Persian invasion, and again after-
wards, when, before investing the town, they made them the offer of
remaining neutral, in compliance with those very terms—holding (in
accordance with their own just intentions) that, on the strength of their
refusal, they were entirely relieved from all obligations and had sustained
an injury at their hands, had them brought forward one by one and
once more put to them the same question “‘whether they had done any
service to the Lacedaemonians or their allies during the war,” and, on
their owning that they had not, had them led out to instant execution,
sparing none.’

Lxvill. ὃ 1] NOTES. 223

The text appears, on the whole, sound, although emendations are
rife. The simplest mode of connecting the construction is to treat the
words from διότι to κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνα as parenthetical, and to regard the
participle νομίζοντες as finding its explanation in ἡγούμενοι.

The expedient of coordinating ἠξίουν with ἡγούμενοι (on analogy of
I. t ὃ 1) is rightly condemned by Stahl, although accepted in Valla’s
version.

The Spartan commissioners wanted, ‘dicis causa,’ to have an ἀκριβὴς
πρόφασις, i.e. to be within the letter of the law: hence they put a
question which they thought would be justified on these grounds:
(1) rejection of Spartan mediation: (2) refusal of special conditions:
the first would be an insult to the league at large, the second a direct
affront to the Spartans. At the same time the ‘imago iustitiae’ was
sufficiently transparent, as they held that all treaty obligations were
already at an end and that the Plataeans stood self-condemned.

ἐπερώτημα, Diodorus speaks of a twofold question (cf. Diod.
XII. 56), referring probably to 52 8 4.

εἴ τι πεπόνθασι, cf. 52 ὃ 4. τὸν ἄλλον χρόνον, i.e. from the battle
of Tanagra to the siege of Plataea.

ἠξίουν, sc. οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι. The state is identified with its repre-
sentatives (cf. v. 46 § 1).

δῆθεν, implying always either falsity of statement or falsity of thought
(cf. Shill. on 1. 92).

Παυσανίου, cf. 11. 71 § 4.

ἡσυχάζειν, 1.6. μηδὲν νεωτερίζειν, with special reference to Thebes.

προείχοντο, ‘held out,’ ‘proffered’; cf. προτείνειν.

κοινοὺς εἶναι, ‘to remain neutral’: with special allusion to Athens.

kat’ ἐκεῖνα, the reference, though lax in point of concord, is sufficiently
explicit for Thucydides.

ὡς οὐκ ἐδέξαντο, a causal ws sentence (Goodw. M. and T. § 712); for
ἐδέξαντο without object cf. 13 ὃ 1.

ἡγούμενοι, explanatory of νομίζοντες, cf. 3 8 3, note.

Another possible solution is that ἡγούμενοι represents an antithesis
to νομίζοντες, i.e. the real ‘animus’ of the Spartans is contrasted with the
‘externa species’ of a conventional justice.

τῇ ἑαυτῶν δικαίᾳ βουλήσει, perhaps a covert sarcasm on the part
of the historian. βουλήσει cannot=déiwoe, ‘request,’ nor can δικαίᾳ
βουλήσει represent δικαιώσει, whether in Attic or Ionic sense From
V. 105 we can explain βουλήσει as=mpoapéoe, ‘intention’: the sub-
stantive reflects the verb in its stronger sense (cf. 381 μεῖζον νέμοντες

224 THOCYDPIDES: TIT: (Lxvin. ὃ r—

τῷ μὴ βούλεσθαι ἀληθῆ elvac): the dative is causal (cf. 50§1). Practically
the expression replaces βουλόμενοι αὐτοὶ δίκαιοι εἶναι (cf. 11. τό § 1 τῇ
αὐτονόμῳ μετοικήσει).

ἔκσπονδοι, so far as any claim to βοήθεια was concerned.

mapayayovTes Kal ἐρωτῶντες, a σχῆμα διὰ μέσου: the first accu-
sative is referable to the remoter participle (see Shilleto’s note on 1. 39
8 3).

ὁπότε μὴ φαῖεν, iterative optative (cf. VIII. 53 § 3), answered as
usual by imperfect, ἀπέκτεινον.

ἀπάγοντες, there is no need for Cobet’s alteration to ἀπαγαγόντες,
as the construction merely τε ἀπῆγον καὶ ἀπέκτεινον, the participle assimila-
ting its tense to that of the finite verb.

ἐξαίρετον ἐποιήσαντο, the usual periphrasis for ἐξῃροῦντο.

§ 2. οὐκ ἐλάσσους, ‘no fewer than,’ i.e. ‘fully,’ shewing that this
number was reached but not exceeded. διακοσίων, for the actual
number of the besieged cf. 11. 78 § 3, III. 20 § 2, 24 § 2.

ξυνεπολιορκοῦντο, they had not taken part in the sortie: Meineke’s
proposed change to pluperfect is needless.

ἠνδραπόδισαν, compare the Athenian treatment of the Melians
(v. 116).

§3. ἐνιαυτόν τινα, ‘for about a year’; Meineke, on analogy of εἷς τις
proposes ἕνα τινά (cf. VI. 61 ὃ 2). This use of τις, though common with
plurals, is uncommon with singular. The analogous use of ἡμέρα (as
Ξε μία ἡμέρα) would justify ἐνιαυτός τις.

Θηβαῖοι, expunged by Stahl and Classen, on the ground that the
allotment rested with Sparta, as well as on the authority of Diodorus,
XII. 56.

Μεγαρέων, cf. Iv. 66. τὰ σφέτερα φρονοῦντες, i.e. who were ὁμο-
γνώμονες (VIII. 31 ὃ 2); for the phrase cf. ν. 84 § 1.

és ἔδαφος, ‘to the ground’; cf. Iv. 109 § 1.

ἐκ τῶν θεμελίων, construe with ὠκοδόμησαν (Meineke, Hermes 111.
365). Classen, however, regards the expression as the equivalent of
‘funditus.’ The passage quoted from Procopius points to a misconception
of Thucydides’ own construction.

τῷ ‘Hpalw, cf. Hdt. 1X. 52. καταγώγιον, ‘deversorium’: a necessary
precaution, after the destruction of all houses, for the protection of
those who visited the shrine (see Becker’s Charicles 1. 136).

πανταχῇ, ‘all ways,’ ‘quoquo versus’: i.e. it was 200 ft. square.
οἰκήματα, ‘chambers,’ ‘cubicula’; cf. 1. 134 § 1, Plato Phaed. 116 A.

κάτωθεν καὶ ἄνωθεν, i.e. of two stories.

Lxvull. § 4] NOTES. 225

τοῖς ἄλλοις, ‘ with the rest,’ an instrumental dative, though some-
what strained.

τῷ τείχει, in collective sense, ‘ within the fortress’; cf. 1. 62 § 6.

ἔπιπλα, ‘res moventes.’ χαλκὸς kal σίδηρος, in the nominative, by
attraction to the parenthetical relative clause, ἃ ἦν, in lieu of appositional
dative, wrongly explained by some editors as denoting the ‘cramps of
iron’ (retinacula) which held the masonry of the walls together.

κλίνας, possibly for the use of the worshippers, although suggestive
of a ‘lectisternium.’

γεών, as an act of propitiation to the gods of the captured land
(Arnold).

δημοσιώσαντες, ‘iuris publici fecerunt,’ ‘confiscated.’

§ 4. σχεδὸν δέ τι, cf. V. 66 § 4; VII. 33 § 2 (Bohme).

καὶ τὸ ξύμπαν, καί is intensive. περὶ Πλαταιῶν, the prepositional
construction is complete in itself, =‘ quod attinebat ad’ ; cf. Plato, Theaet.
177 Β περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων ἀποστῶμεν. Herwerden, by striking out
περί, apparently misunderstood the construction. ἀποτετραμμένοι,
‘aversi.’ ἐγένοντο, an unusual periphrasis in good prose (Kriig.).

ἄρτι καθιστάμενον, cf. 3 § 1: it was still in its first stage: for the
periods of the war cf. v. 26.

ὠφελίμους, the cession of Plataea to Thebes would bring Thebes
into immediate contact with Athens: at the same time the Spartans
sorely needed the services of the Boeotian cavalry.

τρίτῳ καὶ ἐνενηκοστῷ, i.e. from 519—427 B.C. Grote, placing the
treaty some 10 years later, would read ὀγδοηκοστῷς. See however
Curtius, Gk. Hist. 1. 318.

ἐπειδή, strengthened form of ἐπεί, strictly a form of addition =‘ post-
quam,’ in lieu of subtraction ‘ex quo.’ Cf. vil. 68 § 4.

The later history of the Plataeans is one of strange vicissitudes.
In 420 Scione was assigned them as a residence (cf. v. 32): ejected
at the close of the Peloponnesian war they were admitted to rights
(apparently) of ἰσοπολιτεία at Athens. In 387 they were reinstated by
the Spartans, but in B.C. 372 the city was once more surprised by the
Thebans and utterly destroyed. They then again returned to Athens
(cf. Grote x. 220). After the battle of Chaeroneia (338 B.C.), the
Plataeans were once more reinstated by Philip. From this time forth
the city continued to exist until comparatively late times (see Smith’s
Dict. Geogr. s.v. Plataea).

226 THOCYDIDES 71. [Lx1x. ὃ 1—

CHAPTER LXIX.
(The narrative is now resumed from Chap. ΧΧΧΙΠ.)

81. τεσσαράκοντα, for number of ships cf. 26 § 1; 29.

ὡς, cf. ν. 6 ὃ 1. τότε, cf. 23 8 1. φεύγουσαι, in a S.W. direction
from Ephesus ((!.). ἐκ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων, this use of ἐκ, although Ionic
and poetic, in spite of Poppo’s quotation from Antiphon 11. 8 § 1,
cannot rank as an Attic equivalent for ὑπό (see Shilleto on I. 21 § 2).
Of two other instances in Thuc., I. 20 § 2, vI. 36 8 2, neither are
satisfactory. Schomann’s explanation that the chase was only made by
a portion of the Attic fleet seems untenable. In the present instance it
appears we must accept the [onism.

ἐπιδιωχθεῖσαι, the pursuit was, at least, sustained; which will
account for ἐπί. σποράδες, treated by Bohme as the equivalent of
σποράδες γενόμεναι (cf. 11. 82 § 1, V. 64 § 4). To escape this difficulty,
Classen strikes out καί before ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς and construes σποράδες with
κατηνέχθησαν.

κατηνέχθησαν, ‘were driven there’ (by stress of weather).

καταλαμβάνουσιν, ‘offendunt.’ Κυλλήνῃ, the seaport of Elis and
naval station of Peloponnesian fleet (cf. 11. 84 § 5), opposite Zacynthus.
Βρασίδαν, the Spartan dderpiBavos, Ar. Pax 275, long destined to be a
thorn in the side of Athens. The hero of many a feat of arms until his
fall at Amphipolis 422 B.c. (cf. ν. 10).

ξύμβουλον, the usual expedient of the Spartan government in the
case of those whom they suspected; cf. 11. 85 § 1.

᾿Αλκίδᾳ, it is somewhat surprising to find this incapable officer still
in command; but, probably, the term of his ναυαρχία had not yet
expired. ἐπεληλυθότα, Classen remarks upon the graphic tense, ‘he
had just come’; ἐπί, either to join Alcidas, or, on analogy of ἐπιπλεῖν,
‘had come on board.’

§ 2. ἡμαρτήκέσαν, lit. ‘missed,’ failed in the case of Lesbos, i.e.
been too late to save Mytilene.

δώδεκα pév...mply δέ, note the false relation of the μέν and δέ clause
(see Kriig. G. G. 59. 2 § 3); Goller would find a connexion through
ἐβούλοντο, i.e. ἐβούλοντο μέν... ἐβούλοντο dé. Classen, more wisely,
gives each clause a construction with ὅπως προφθάσωσι. The difficulty
disappears if we give a temporal meaning to παρόντων: ‘while the
Athenians had only 12 ships available, and before reinforcements

Lxx § 4] NOTES. 227

could arrive.’ For the strength of the squadron at Naupactus, cf.
75 § 1.

παρεσκευάζοντο, inchoative imperfect, ‘proceeded to make pre-
parations.’

CHAPTER EXx.

ὃ 1. οἱ γὰρ Κερκυραῖοι, cf. Diod. Sic. x11. 57: γάρ recalls the
mention of Κέρκυρα in 69 § 2.

ἐστασίαζον ἐπειδή, i.e. the στάσις had commenced with the return
of the captives. ἐπειδή, temporal, as in 68 § 5.

αἰχμάλωτοι, 250 in number, cf. I. 55. αὐτοῖς, a ‘dativus incom-
modi’; for structure with ἦλθον, cf. 1. 13 ὃ 3.

περὶ ᾿Εἰπίδαμνον, i.e. Sybota, cf. I. 47 sqq.: a convenient central
locality for the purposes of Thucydides’ narrative.

ὀκτακοσίων, genitive of price. προξένοις, dative of agent: they
had acted as ‘intercessores’: there had been no lack of civility on the
part of their captors (ἐν θεραπείᾳ εἶχον πολλῇ). The largeness of the
sum demanded as ransom has provoked much comment; Classen re-
gards it as a merely nominal sum. It is true that they were persons of
note (πρῶτοι δυνάμει), but when in Hdt. vi. 79 we find the ransom
(of οἱ παχέες τῶν Χαλκιδέων) fixed at 2 minae, in Demosth. Nicostr. at
26 minae, and in Thue. vit. 83 at one talent, the sum here demanded
appears exorbitant, even for such ‘warm men’ as these Corcyreans (see
Boeckh Pol. Ec. 1. 100). Jowett wisely deprecates discussion of a
purely fictitious sum.

πεπεισμένοι, ‘bribed,’ i.e. by the promise of release.

μετιόντες, ‘soliciting’ (cf. vitI. 73 ὃ 5), Lat. ‘ambire.’

§ 2. ἀγουσώῶν, i.e. doth with ambassadors on board.

καταστάντων, sc. τῶν πρεσβέων τοῖς Kepxupators (Schol.); cf. iv. 58.

ξυγκείμενα, i.e. τὰς ξυνθήκας (Poppo). From 1. 44 8 1 we find that
an ἐπιμαχία only was concluded at the time.

§ 3. ἦν γάρ, ‘causa παρενθέτως praemissa’ (Poppo): but on the
practice of universally punctuating these γάρ sentences as parentheses,
see Shilleto’s stringent comments on Thue. I. 25 ὃ 2.

ἐθελοπρόξενος, i.e. without state authority or public recognition in
the capacity of πρόξενος. προειστήκει-- προστάτης ἦν, ‘a leader of the
popular party.’ ὑπάγουσιν, used sometimes without the supplement,
és δίκην (cf. Hdt. vi. 72). καταδουλοῦν, conative present.

8 4. ἀποφυγών, ‘absolutus,’ on being acquitted.

ἀνθυπάγει, ‘retorts by bringing to trial.’ ἄνδρας, -- τινάς, the old

I5—2

228 LE OCUDIDES 777: [Lxx § 4—

Ionic use. τέμνειν, the present marks the habitual practice, although
it may be used in technical sense (cf. ἀδικῶ). With the Athenians the
penalty for such an offence was death. Poppo quotes several instances
of the reverence in which sacred enclosures and groves were held by the
ancients.

χάρακας, ‘vine props,’ probably of greater value than ‘ vine-saplings,’
as Corcyra abounded in vineyards and orchards (παγκαλῶς πεφυτευμένη,
Xen. Hell. vi. 2 § 6).

᾿Αλκίνου, Corcyra was a reputed Phaeacian colony (cf. 1. 25 § 4):
the tradition is, however, disputed.

στατήρ, whether the Attic didrachma, the silver stater, or the Attic
gold stater of 20 drachmae, is doubtful.

ὃ δ. καθεζομένων, cf. 1. 126§1. πλῆθος -- μέγεθος.

ταξάμενοι ἀποδῶσιν, ‘that they might arrange for the payment,’
whether. by compromise (‘facta pactione,’ as Herwerden suggests), or
by instalments, is doubtful: the latter is probably correct: cf. 1. ror § 3.
βουλῆς ὦν, partitive genitive: flerwerden disputes the phrase, in spite
of Dio’s imitation. The assumption of a Corcyrean word βουλῆς (i.e.
βουλευτής) on analogy of τιμῆς (τιμηείς) is a pure fiction, especially
in close proximity to the orthodox βουλευτής. TlevOlas πείθει, the
paronomasia is purely accidental. Kr. quotes vil. 39 ὃ 2; Plato
Symp. 185 Ὁ.

ὥστε, marking result attained. χρήσασθαι, ‘to enforce’ (the law):
the legal penalty would probably be one of ἀτιμία.

§ 6. ἐξείργοντο, whether τῆς βουλῆς or τοῦ ταξάμενοι ἀποδοῦναι,
Poppo hesitates to decide. Arnold, who compares Hdt. 1. 31 § 3, is
probably right in rejecting all attempts at supplement.

νομίζειν, cf. I. 44 § 1, ‘recognise.’ This policy of Peithias’ would at
once convert the ἐπιμαχία into a ξυμμαχία.

ξυνίσταντο, ‘coniurare’ (cf. VIII. 65 ὃ 2).

ἐγχειρίδια, as easily concealed ; cf. VIII. 69 ὃ 4.

οἱ δέ τινες... ὀλίγοι, ‘but certain others, a few only’; for the order
cf. Il. 21 § 3. τῆς αὐτῆς γνώμης, the genitive is one of quality or
description: cf. I. 113 § 2 with VIII. 92 § 6.

CHAPTER LXXI.

81. ταῦτα, i.e. the action they had taken in getting rid of these
δημοτικοί.

καί... καί, ‘ut,’ ‘ita.’ εἴη, without ἄν, as conveying no notion of

futurity: convertible into realistic ἐστί, just as δουλωθεῖεν ἄν might be

LXXxII § 2] NOTES. 229

realised by direct future of indicative. The use of optative may, in
either case, be due to subjective statement of the case, from the
speaker’s point of view. δέχεσθαι, the infinitive is due either to
implied repetition of εἶπον in altered sense (‘censebant’), or to im-
perative lurking in infinitive, ie. ‘they submitted that what they had
done had been done for the best, and proposed that thenceforth they
should receive neither’; cf. a like ambiguity in 3 §3. For εἶπον in
stronger sense cf. II. 24 ὃ 1.

ἀλλ᾽ =‘nisi’; cf. VIII. 28§2. μιᾷ νηί, the like precaution had
been taken by Lacedaemonians, 11. 7 § 2. ἡσυχάζοντας, in agreement
with subject of infinitive, sc. τοὺς Κερκυραίους.

τὸ πλέον -- τοὺς πλείονας, ‘a larger number.’ On the necessity of
such precaution see Arnold’s note.

kal ἐπικυρῶσαι, καί marks the sequel (cf. 11. 93 § 4); a poet might
have used a twofold ὡς, e.g. ws ἔδον ws ἐμάνην.

ἠνάγκασαν, ‘induced’ (by pressure), ‘constrained’; cf. VIII. 41 § 3.

§ 2. ws Evvédepe, ‘as was expedient,’ ‘ut ipsis commodum erat’
(Poppo). ὡς is here the equivalent not of ὅτι but of ὅπως (Poppo).

τοὺς ἐκεῖ καταπεφευγότας, ἐκεῖ, not ἐκεῖσε, as the place of refuge is
already reached, cf. Iv. 14 § 1: some had escaped on board the trireme
(70 § 6). ἀνεπιτήδειον, lit. ‘untoward,’ i.e. ‘prejudicial’ (to Corcyra).
ἐπιστροφή, ‘animadversio’ (attention on the part of Athens, result-
ing in punitive measures), rather than ‘rerum conversio’ (reaction) :
—i.e. to avoid attracting the attention of Athens.—Cf. Soph. O. R. 134,
and see Jebb’s note. Connect ὅπως μή in point of structure with μηδὲν
πράσσειν.

CHAPTER LST

81, ἐλθόντων, sc. τῶν πρεσβέων ; for omission of subject, cf. 1. 2§ 2:
not ἐλθόντας, which would include καὶ ὅσους ἔπεισαν.

ὡς νεωτερίζοντας, ‘on a charge of sedition’: for use of ὡς with
circumstantial participle, cf. Goodw. M. T. 88 864, 865.

ὅσους ἔπεισαν, =Tods ἐκεῖ καταπεφευγότας (71 ὃ 2): the relative
structure relieves the monotony of a participial coordination.

ἔπεισαν, ‘had tampered with’: there is no indication in the aorist
that the intrigue had actually succeeded.

κατέθεντο és Αἴγιναν, cf. Paches’ treatment of Mytileneans (28 § 2).
Aegina was now an Athenian colony.

§ 2. ot ἔχοντες, cf. of ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν (28 ὃ τὴ Ξε οἱ ἐν τέλει. ‘those
in authority,’ the δημιουργοί of ν. 47 ὃ 9.

230 TEL OUCAITDES: 177: [Lxxi1 § 2—

ἐλθούσης τριήρους, for position, cf. 70 § 2 (Cl.). The concord in
such cases is capricious, e.g. VIII. 63 ὃ τ; cf. Thompson G. Syn.
§ 25.3. καὶ Λακεδαιμονίων, ‘with some Lacedaemonian ambassadors.’
ἐνίκησαν, the aorist points to the ease with which the victory was won
(cf. Curtius, Elucidations, c. xx.).

8 3. ἀφικομένης. Kriiger, on analogy of ἐπελθούσης, ἐπιγενομένης,
suggests ἐφικομένης.

τὰ μετέωρα-- τὰ καρτερά. The old acropolis was the long undulating
promontory to the south of the modern town (Smith, Dict. Geo.).

καταφεύγει... ἱδρύθη... εἶχον, this coordination of present, aorist,
and imperfect is noteworthy. The sentence=xaragetyer καὶ ἱδρυθέντες
εἶχον. The historic present may replace either imperfect or aorist:
the imperfect εἶχον being used on analogy of ἐνίκων, ‘were masters of.’
For change of number at εἶχον, cf. 1. 13 ὃ τ. The plural is more usually
evolved from the singular than the singular from the plural. ξυλλεγείς
Ξε ξυστραφείς, ‘rallied,’ Lat. ‘conglobati.’ “YAAaixéy, at the present
day known as Kaliokopulo or Peschiera; it has at its entrance an island
called Condilonisi, but is now choked with silt and mud. Scylax speaks
of three harbours: apparently there were only two, viz. ‘Portus Alcinoi’
and ‘Hyllaicus.” The site of the ancient town was on a peninsula a
little to the south of Corfu; on the one side is the gulf of Kaliokopulo,
on the other side a bay which separates the peninsula from the pro-
montory on which the modern citadel now stands (Smith, Dict. Geo.) ;
cf. Cic. ad Div. xvi. 8.

τὸν πρὸς αὐτῇ, 1.6. the ‘Portus Alcinoi.’

πρὸς τὴν ἤπειρον, ‘in connexion with’; cf. VIII. go § 4.

CHAPTER exocrir,

81. ἠκροβολίσαντο, used of ‘skirmishing,’ ‘out-fighting’; cf. rv.
34 §1; Ar. Eth. ΠΙ. τ § 17 ἀκροχειρίζεσθαι.

ὀλίγα, another instance of the Greek tendency to pluralise; cf.
μεγάλα (40 ὃ 3). ἐξ τοὺς ἀγρούς, known as ἡ χώρα or τὸ πεδίον, to the
west of the city in the direction of M. Istone. περιέπεμπον, inchoative,
‘after some slight skirmishing, they proceeded to send.’

παρακαλοῦντες, cf. 39 ὃ 2 κτώμενοι.

τὸ πλῆθος, -- οἱ πλείονες : cf. I. 106 § 2 (Cl.).

Tots ἑτέροις, i.e. τοῖς ἐναντίοις.

ἐπίκουροι, ‘mercenaries’; cf. τϑ 8 1, the ‘ proeliatores,’ ‘fighting men,’
of Plato’s Republic.

LXXIV § 3] NOTES. 231

CHAPTER LXXIV.

81. διαλιπούσης, ‘after a day’s interval,’ ‘die interiecto’; cf. 1.
112 § 1. χωρίων τε ἰσχύι καὶ πλήθει, both datives find their construction
with προέχων, as indeed the re καί sequence indicates. at τε γυναῖκες,
for the behaviour of the women cf. 11. 4 § 2. Classen places a comma
only at προέχων on the plea that the supplementary τε sentence adds an
additional reason for the superior force of the democrats. ξυνεπελά-
βοντο, cf. I. 165 ὃ 2, a strengthened form from ξυλλαμβάνεσθαι (cf. the
use of ξυναίρεσθαι) used without object.

κεράμῳ, in collective sense; cf. II. 4 ὃ 2.

παρὰ φύσιν, either ‘beyond their sex’ or ‘superhuman.’ Cf. vi. 17
§ 1 (which Weil would alter to παρά τισιν).

§ 2. περὶ δείλην ὀψίαν, ‘late in the afternoon’; cf. VIII. 26 § 1.

οἱ ὀλίγοι, i.e. of δυνατοί, the ‘ optimates.’

αὐτοβοεί, ‘with a sudden rush’ (Jowett), ‘primo impetu et clamore’
(Livy): the word is not found in Hdt. although described by Marcellinus
aS ἀρχαιότερον.

ἔπελθών, marking hypothetical protasis, Ξε εἰ ἐπέλθοι. Ὁ

διαφθείρειεν, ‘make an end of them’ (Jowett): perhaps it merely
represents ‘cut off their last chance’ (of escape).

τὰς οἰκίας, i.e. the detached houses, mansions (of the wealthy).

ξυνοικίας, ‘insulae,’ ‘lodging-houses,’ ‘flats.’ συνοικία, 4 πολλοῖς
κατοικουμένη καὶ μισθουμένη (Ammonius); cf. Aeschines c. Timarch. 137.
The distinction is between the dwellings of the rich and poor.

ἔφοδος, access (i.e. to the νεώριον), ‘aditus’; cf. τι ὃ 3.

οἰκείας, genitive singular. χρήματα, ‘property, ‘money’s-worth,’
Lat. ‘merces’; cf. Demosth. c. Phormio. § 17.

πᾶσα διαφθαρῆναι, ‘was in imminent danger of being totally
destroyed, in the event of any wind springing up to waft the flame
towards it.’ In point of conditional relation, ἐκινδύνευσε διαφθαρῆναι
is merely a resolved form for διεφθάρη ἄν, but a more realistic form
of expression: cf. ‘deleri potuit exercitus si persecuti essent.’ The
absence of ἄν points to the imminence of the danger. κινδυνεύειν is
not used in Thucydides in the Platonic sense of ‘likelihood’ or ‘ proba-
bility,’ not even in IV. 117 § 2. ἐπίφορος, cf. 11. 77 § 5.

§ 3. οἱ μέν, the Corcyreans, the rival factions as distinct from
the ἐπίκουροι. παυσάμενου, temporal=pera τὴν μάχην. ὡς ἑκάτεροι,
‘utrique pro se’ (Poppo), cf. ὡς ἕκαστοι: the ὡς is at once limiting and
distributive.

232 THOCYDIDES TH, [πεῖν § 3—

ἡσυχάσαντες, i.e. οὐδὲν κινήσαντες, without further attempt at
hostilities. ἐν φυλακῇ ἦσαν, ‘remained on the alert.’

ἡ Κορινθία, cf. 70 § 2. ὑπεξανήγετο, ‘slipped out to sea’: note the
furtive ὑπό. τοῦ Sypov, Corinth was oligarchical; but the exclusive
oligarchy of the Bacchiadae had long been ‘in melius temperatum.’
διεκομίσθησαν, middle in force, though passive in form.

With regard to the threefold καί sequence, Shilleto, in a note on
I. 50 § 5, remarks on the obscurity occasionally resulting from the use
of this particle. In the present case, the 1st καί forms the link with
the preceding sentence, being, indeed, almost temporal in effect, the
and and 3rd are copulative, καί... καί suggesting community of action
on the part of the Corinthian vessel and the mercenaries.

CHAPTER LXXV.

81. τῇ δέ, continuing the narrative from οἱ μέν (74 ὃ 3).

Νικόστρατος, probably the Σκαμβωνίδης of Ar. Vesp. 81; cf. Thuc.
Iv.129§ 2. He fell at Mantineia: cf. v. 64, 71.

Διιτρέφους, Stahl from an inscription reads Διειτρέφης, not that in a
matter of itacism the evidence of an inscription carries much weight.
Are we to correct the spelling of Διιπέτης to Διειπέτης ἡ Again,
what of the Latin dative forms, e.g. -ei, -e? (cf. Quintilian 1. 7
§ 15 sqq.).

παραγίγνεται βοηθῶν -- παραβοηθεῖ, ‘came to their relief.’

Ναυπάκτου, cf. 69 ὃ 2. δώδεκα, the regular guard-force there.
ἔπρασσε, probably inchoative, ‘tried to effect’; by some explained of
the sustained effort. πείθει, historic present.

ὥστε, of result attained: he induced them to accept this arrangement.
κρῖναι, ‘bring to trial,’ ‘reos sistere.’

ἔμειναν Classen explains as pluperfect: they had promptly dis-
appeared, ‘had not waited further results.’

οἰκεῖν, without object, cf. 48 § 1. ποιησαμένους, not only pre-
liminary to οἰκεῖν but also conditional. ὥστεςε ἐφ᾽ ᾧ Te, cf. 1. 44 § 1.
τοὺς αὐτούς, i.e. τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις. For the formula, cf. 70 § 6.

§ 2. ἧσσόν τι, ‘aliquanto minus’ (Poppo).

ἐν κινήσει, the periphrasis reflects the adjectival expression, whether
active or passive, e.g. ἐν φυλακῇ εἶναι, ἐν καταλήψει εἶναι, but is more
graphic than the simple verb.

ξυμπέμψειν, loose in construction, suggestive of some verb of promise

Lxxv § 5] NOTES. 233

lurking in πείθουσιν, but, the oratio obliqua once introduced, or even
suggested, Greek freedom of construction will answer for the rest; cf.
94 ὃ 3:

ἐκ σφῶν αὐτῶν, ‘e numero suorum,’ ie. of their own fellow-
citizens.

§3. κατέλεγον és, pregnant construction, ‘told off into the vessels,’
‘eligebant ad naves complendas’; for κατέλεγον cf. VIII. 31 § 1.

ἀποπεμφθῶσι, ‘ne missi fuerint,’ fut. perfect.

Διοσκόρων, the old Attic form. There was a second temple on M.
Istone. Cf. Boeckh Corp. Inscr. No. 1874.

8.4. ἀνίστη, cf. 1. 137 ὃ τ. His attempt was a failure: hence the
imperfect. ὁπλισθείς, Cobet’s suggestion ὀργισθείς appears needless.
ἐπὶ ταύτῃ, cf. 42 ὃ 3. ὡς, διανοουμένων, a convenient brachylogy,
replacing ws or ὅτι with finite verb, e.g. ταῦτα προφασιζόμενοι ὅτι οὐδὲν
ὑγιὲς διανοοῦνται. But though ws can thus be used with participles,
ὅτι cannot (cf. 82 § τ). In such expressions ὡς suggests no idea of
unreality: see Goodw. M. T. § 865. Here it marks the ground on
which action is taken, ‘on the plea that they could be bent on no
wholesome scheme, in thus refusing to sail with Nicostratus.’

ὑγιές, frequently supplemented by ἁπλοῦν ; cf. Dem.

τοῦ μὴ ξυμπλεῖν, the negative is due to negative form of ἀπιστία,
the genitive is primarily a possessive genitive, ‘the mistrust implied in
the not sailing.’ These oblique forms of the articular infinitive are, of
course, necessitated by the absence of any gerund in Greek.

διέφθειραν, note the transition to plural, probably to escape confusion
with ἐκώλυσε,

8 δ. καθίζουσιν, cf. 1. 24 ὃ 7.

Ἡραῖον, i.e. the τέμενος, ‘ precinct’; it was near the Hyllaic harbour
(Goll.), and, from Bloomfield’s point of view, a more inviolable sanctuary
than the temple of the Dioscuri.

γίγνονται, present, somewhat awkwardly, by assimilation to καθί-
ζουσιν.

νεωτερίσωσιν, ‘attempt some violence,’ desperate act,—a suspicion
justified by their previous action in setting fire to the town.

νῆσον, which of the many small islands about Corcyra is meant?
would any one of them hold 400 persons? The choice of commentators
varies between Ptychia and Condilonisi.

διεπέμπετο, a sudden transition to passive.

234 LHOUCSOIDES TL. [Lxxvr § 1—

CHAPTER LXXVI.

§1. ἐφ᾽ ὅρμῳ οὖσαι, the existence of such an adjectival form as
ἔφορμοι (vid. Bekker’s text) is denied by Meineke.

Κυλλήνης, cf. 69 § 1. ἐκ, i.e. at Cyllene ; the construction is pro-
leptic: cf. 1. 8 § 2. τρεῖς καὶ πεντήκοντα, i.e. 40 sail of the original
Peloponnesian fleet under Alcidas, reinforced by 13 Ambraciot and
Leucadian ships: cf. 69 § 1.

ἐπέπλει, i.e. ‘was on board’: contrast this use with the hostile ἐπί
of ἐπέπλεον in next sentence.

Σύβοτα, cf. I. 50 ὃ 3, 1. 47 ὃ 1. τῆς ἠπείρου, to distinguish it from
the island (Poppo).

CHAPTER LXXVII.

§ 1. οἱ δέ, the democrats. θορύβῳ, dative of circumstance, cocr-
dinate with participle πεφοβημένοι. τὸν ἐπίπλουν, in collective sense.
Cf. κατάληψις. V. 72 § 4.

τὰς ἀεὶ πληρουμένας, such as were manned from time to time, i.e. as
fast as they were manned: cf. 23 § 2.

ἐξέπεμπον, ‘kept sending them out’; the imperfect necessitated by
iterative ἀεί (Cl.).

παραινούντων, ‘quamvis suaderent,’ ‘in spite of the Athenians
urging.’ πάσαις ἅμα, i.e. ἁθρόαις ταῖς ναυσί, ‘with all at once.’

ἐπιγενέσθαι, ‘come up afterwards’ (1.4. ἐπιβοηθῆσαι), dependent on
παραινούντων, not on ἐᾶσαι.

§ 2. αὐτοῖς, initial dative in position (cf. 1. 48 § 4), subjective in
point of meaning. ἦσαν πρός, cf. 22 ὃ 3.

ἐν ἑτέραις, ἐν in lieu of the more usual ἐπί is suggested simply by the
compound ἐμπλέοντες, i.e. the ἐπιβάται.

κόσμος, ‘discipline’: cf. 11. 11 ὃ 8. τῶν ποιουμένων, a rare use for
γιγνομένων : cf. VIII. 69 ὃ 2. Naber suggests τῶν ἐπίπλουν ποιουμένων.
The Scholiast had evidently the same reading as our text.

8 3. ἐτάξαντο, ‘took up their position’: cf. Iv. rr ὃ 1.

αἱ δύο, ‘the two well-known vessels.’ ai, deictic,=‘illae’; cf.
33 ὃ 1.

CHAPTER LXXVIII.

81. κακῶς, ‘clumsily,’ ‘awkwardly.’ τὸ καθ᾽ αὑτούς, 1.6. ‘sua ex
parte’ (St.): omitting the article, καθ᾽ αὑτούς would mean either ‘per
se’ (II. 99 § 2), or ‘inter se’ (11. 88 ὃ 1). Even if we admit the article,
it is doubtful whether we should give the phrase a local meaning.

LXxvill ὃ 3] NOTES. 235

τὴν περικύκλωσιν, ‘the danger of being outflanked.’ ἁθρόαις Dobree
interprets as instrumental (or sociative), on analogy of vill. 80 § 1,
‘with all their ships,’ ‘en masse.’ But ἁθρόαις must be predicative to
ταῖς ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς τεταγμέναις (sc. ναυσί), they did not venture to attack
the main body, ‘the solid formation,’ opposed to them.

The Peloponnesian fleet had divided into two squadrons, 20 to attack
the Corcyreans, 33 to fight the 12 Athenian ships. The Athenians,
consequently, did not venture to attack the solid central formation,
although their superior skill and speed emboldened them to attack the
wings. The centre was, presumably, the strongest portion of the line:
the danger of weakening it is well illustrated in VIII. 104, 105. The
crescent formation was much in vogue with the ancients, as in later
times with the Zulus. κατὰ κέρας stands in contrast to κατὰ μέσον, it
cannot represent ἐπὶ κέρως, ‘in column.’

In fine, the Athenians dared not risk their favourite device the
διέκπλους. προσβαλόντες κατά, cf. ν. 9 ὃ 4.

καταδύουσι, ‘disabled,’ ‘cut down to the water’s edge.’

κύκλον ταξαμένων, ‘casting themselves into roundels’; cf, 11.
83 ὃ 5.

περιέπλεον, sc. οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι. θορυβεῖν, cf. the tactics of 11. 84.

§ 2. πρὸς τοῖς Κερκυραίοις, ‘those opposed to the Corcyreans’ ;
for the dative (which Herw., Stud. Thuc. p. 46, would replace by
accusative) cf. 77 ὃ 2, 22 ὃ 3. ὅπερ, sc. ἐγένετο. Ναυπάκτῳ, cf.
II. 84.

γενόμενοι ἁθρόαι, the two divisions of the fleet had now com-
bined.

πρύμναν Kpovdpevot, ‘backing water’: cf. 1. 50§5. The Herodotean
phrase is πρύμνην ἀνακρούεσθαι or ἐπὶ πρύμνην dvaxp. The expression
probably arose from affinity of thought in ‘striking’ and ‘thrusting,’
e.g. Goat TH πληγῇ (Ar. Rhet. I. 5 88 12, 15) as well as from the use of
the simple verb for the compound (ἀνά), i.e. ‘to thrust (backward) the
stern by the strokes of the oar.’ The object of the manoeuvre was to
keep the ship μετωπηδόν, ‘stem on,’ to the enemy and so escape the
risk of being rammed amidships, whether in the act of retreating, or to
gather way for a charge. Whether in the execution of this manceuvre
the rowers ‘faced about’ (‘converso remigio’), is more than doubtful.
In Gronovius ‘Observationes’ Iv. c. 26, will be found a note of vast
erudition on the subject. Cicero (ad Att. XIII. 21) discusses the point
of distinction between ναῦν ἐπέχειν, ‘inhibere remos’ and πρύμναν
κρούεσθαι, ‘inhibere remis.’

236 THUCYDIDES f1f. (ixxvin'§ 3—

ὃ 3. ἅμα, i.e. a simultaneous, combined, attack.

ὅτι μάλιστα, rightly connected by Stah! with ἐβούλοντο προκατα-
φυγεῖν, ‘they wanted above all things to secure their escape’: cf. 47
§ 3. Classen, following the Vatican Ms., alters the order to ἑαυτῶν ὅτι
μάλιστα.

ἑαυτῶν ὑποχωρούντων, the parallelism of τεταγμένων (τετραμμένων ?)
accounts for the genitive in lieu of nominative (Pp.).

τεταγμένων, i.e. ‘keeping the enemy confronted with them-
selves.’

τοιαύτη, Sc. ταραχώδης: cf. 77 ἣν δὲ οὐδεὶς κόσμος. My friend
Mr Heitland of St John’s College has called my attention to this touch
of Thucydidean irony lurking in τοιαύτη.

ἐτελεύτα és, pregnant construction: cf. v. 1 § 1 διελέλυντο μέχρι
Πυθίων.

CHAPTER, LXXIX.

81. σφίσιν, dativus incommodi (Kriig.): really an ethic dative.
ὡς κρατοῦντες, ‘uti victores’ (Pop.), ‘in the flush of victory.’
ἀναλάβωσιν, ‘take on board’ (pick up): cf. 11. 25 ὃ 5.

νεωτερίσωσι, in general sense (Cl.), ‘cause some further trouble.’

νήσου, cf. 75 ὃ 5. Ἡραῖον, cf. 75 § 5. ἐφύλασσον, i.e. διὰ φυλακῆς
εἶχον.

8.2. ἐπὶ μὲν τὴν πόλιν, for order cf. 82 § 7.

κρατοῦντες τῇ ναυμαχίᾳ, the circumstantial participle expresses
reserve, ‘for all their victory,’ ‘although victorious.’ Kriiger would
expunge the words as a gloss, but Stahl cites in defence 1. 69 ὃ 5 ém-
στάμενοι.

ὅθενπερ, i.e. Sybota: cf. 76 fin.

§ 3. οὐδὲν μᾶλλον, cf. 11. 70 § 1: they were no more ready to
attack than on the day preceding. ὄντας, sc. τοὺς πολίτας, contained
in wé\w—once more the particulars are evolved from the general
expression.

ὄντας.. «παραινοῦντος, for coordination of two different forms of
construction cf. 53 § 2.

ὡς λέγεται, perhaps an apology of Thucydides for any imputation of
cowardice on the part of his favourite hero. Β

οὐκ ἰσοψήφου, as a mere ξύμβουλος, and consequently not holding
equal rank with the Lord High Admiral of Sparta. On the import-
ance of Alcidas’ office see Ar. Pol. 11. 9 ὃ 33 ἡ vavapxla σχεδὸν ἑτέρα

ΤΣ ΣΤ SM NOTES. 237

βασιλεία καθέστηκεν. But Aristotle’s statement is to be accepted with
reserve : see Goodhart on VIII. 6 ὃ 5.
Acvk(ppun, the south-eastern promontory of Corcyra (cf. 1. 30 8 1).

CHAPTER LXXX.

§ 1. ὁ δῆμος... ἦσαν, the plural is all the harsher on account of the
intervening singular περιδεὴς γενόμενος. Stahl well compares v. 82 § 2:
for further exx. see his note.

τοῖς ἄλλοις, ic. of the number of the ὀλίγοι (who had not taken
refuge in the Heraeum), cf. 74 ὃ 2 (Cl. and Goll.).

ὅπως, ‘quomodo’ rather than ‘quo’= ‘in what way,’ ‘how’; cf. VIII.
63 § 4 ὅτῳ τρόπῳ μὴ ἀνεθήσεται τὰ πράγματα.

ἔπεισαν, with better success this time (Cl.): but on what represen-
tations? the promise of a safe convoy, e.g. to Athens ?

ὅμως, ‘after all,’ 1.6. in spite of all difficulties (vid. 77 and 78): cf.
28 § 2. τριάκοντα, thirteen had been captured: how many disabled,
is not recorded. The cooling of Corcyraean courage, after their first
experience, may perhaps account for the smallness of the number.

§ 2. μέσου, neuter: a unique instance in Thuc.: Kruger compares
Xen. Anab. 1..8 § 8: cf. Lat. ‘medium diei.’ ὑπὸ νύκτα, ‘sub noctem.’
ἐφρυκτωρήθησαν, i.e. διὰ φρυκτωρῶν ἐσημάνθησαν (VIII. 102 ὃ 1). The
only instance of the verb in Thucydides.

ἑξήκοντα, no acknowledgment of any refinement in the art of
signalling; but, as Bohme suggests, an insertion of the historian’s own,
The signals given were the φρυκτοὶ πολέμιοι : cf. 23 and 11. 94 § 1. For
evidence of later expertness in the art of signalling, see Goller’s note.
προσπλέουσαι, cf. I. 50 ὃ 5.

ἀπὸ Λευκάδος, Didot rightly construes with ἐφρυκτωρήθησαν. Leucas
was a φιλία χώρα, and the distance from Leucas to Sybota was only
about 10 miles. ἅς, anaphoric and explanatory: cf. 1. 10§ 3. στάσιν
καὶ τὰς vats μελλούσας πλεῖν, a combination of substantival and adjec:
tival form of predication, ‘hearing of the revolution and of the intended
expedition against Corcyra.’

Εὐρυμέδοντα, probably the Eurymedon of VII. 52 ὃ 2.

CHAPTER LXXXI.

§ 1. τῆς νυκτός, Classen detects a sarcasm. The veil of darkness
hid the incompetency of Alcidas; but with 53 vessels only to fight 72,
‘discretion was the better part of valour.’

238 THUCYDIDES ΤΠ [Lxxx1 § r—

παρὰ τὴν γῆν, ‘they hugged the shore, to escape detection’ (cf.
VIII. 102 ὑπομίξαντες τῇ Χερρονήσῳ), nor did they ‘much affect’ the
open sea at any time.

ὑπερενεγκόντες, for the device cf. 15 § 1 and Iv. 8 8 2.

Tas vats, dependent on ἐνεγκόντες.

τὸν ἰσθμόν, governed by ὑπέρ of compound. This isthmus was the
ἀκτὴ ἠπείρου of Homer, the S. Maura of modern times; the neck of
land joining Leucas with the mainland, By hauling the ships across,
they escaped doubling Leucate. The isthmus was about 3 stades in
width (Pliny N. H. tv. τ 8 5) and had been cut through, Strabo
Ρ. 452 C: it was reopened by the Romans, Livy xxxulI. 17.

ἀποκομίζονται, 1.6. in the direction of Cyllene and Gythium. Thus
ended Peloponnesian naval operations for this year (Cl.).

§2. λαβόντες... ἤγαγον, pleonastic, cf. 11. 67 ὃ 3 (‘perhaps a gloss,’
Cl.). Stahl compares Ar. Vesp. 1379 (for the poetic use) ἄγειν ταύτην
λαβών, i.e. ‘they promptly brought into the town.’ Hude suggests
λαθόντες, Comm. Crit. p. 110.

Μεσσηνίους, cf. 75 § 1. Such mercenaries might perhaps revel in
some such feat of arms as that of the Thracians at Mycalessus: cf.
VIL. 29.

κελεύσαντες, i.e. ὁ δῆμος, implied in Kepxupato.

Ὑλλαϊκόν, cf. 72 § 3. The ships must have been manned in the
Portus Alcinoi, the site of the dockyard, adjoining the ἀγορά. While
the ships were making their way round the peninsula, the promontory
of S. Nicolas, the democrats (aided doubtless by the mercenaries) killed
all the aristocrats left in the city upon whom they could lay hands:
only a few had gone on board (cf. 80 § 1). The object of the democrats
was to divide the strength of the oligarchs, with a view to overpowering
them.

ἐκ τῶν νεῶν, construe with ἐκβιβάζοντες, i.e. as they put them ashore,
they cut them down.

ἀπεχρῶντο, for more usual διά compound, cf. 1. 126 § 11. The
explanation of the grammarian, ἀνήρουν, settles the question.

és τὸ ‘Hpaiov τε, for order cf. VII. 84 § 4.

δίκην ὑποσχεῖν, cf. 53 § 1.

ἔπεισαν καὶ κατέγνωσαν, ic. πείσαντες κατέγν. The more im-
portant of the two aorists is κατέγνωσαν, ‘they promptly condemned
them.’

Classen here comments on the recurrence of the graphic imperfect :
ἀπέκτεινον, ἀπεχρῶντο, ἀπήγχοντο, ἀνηλοῦντο, ἐφόνευον.

LXXXI 8 4] NOTES. 239

§ 3. ἐπείσθησαν, i.e. δίκην ὑποσχεῖν.

ὡς ἑώρων, their elevated position gave them a full view. The ὡς
sentence may be either temporal or circumstantial.

ἱερῷ, in the τέμενος. The words ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ some edd. treat as an
interpolation: Stahl, however, justifies the pleonasm.

ἀλλήλους, cf. Tac. A. 111. 46 ‘mutuis ictibus occidere.’

ἐκ τῶν δένδρων, in the fore-court of the temple (Poppo).

ὡς ἕκαστοι ἐδύναντο, a suspicious constrn. side by side with Vv. 1,
ὡς ἕκαστος ὥρμητο: see also Cobet Var. Lect. 113, Nov. Lect. 453.
In the present case there was no need for distinction of groups (ἕκαστοι).
But were the Greek writers so precise in their discrimination of ἕκαστος
and ἕκαστοι as their critics represent them to have been? A Latin,
after all, writes almost indifferently ‘maximus quisque,’ ‘maximi
quique.’

8 4. ναυσί, sociative.

σφῶν αὐτῶν, i.e. ‘suorum,’ ‘their fellow-citizens.’

δοκοῦντας, reputed, suspected: cf. the use of δόκησις, 43 § I,
v. 16 § 3.

ἐφόνευον, ‘butchered’; the word is essentially a bloodthirsty one.

τὴν μὲν αἰτίαν... τοῖς τὸν δῆμον καταλύουσιν, Duker suggests the
possibility of a ὡς sequence, ὡς καταλύουσιν (cf. 11. 50 § 2). But Stahl
points out that the μέν sentence distinguishes the political victims from
those who were massacred from private motives. Matthiae, G. 6. § 268,
treats τοῖς καταλύουσιν as appositional to an imaginary αὐτοῖς ; his
instances however are oddly selected and, for the most part, do not
affect our present passage. Classen paraphrases λόγῳ μὲν αἰτιώμενοι
τοὺς καταλύοντας, ἔργῳ δὲ ἀποκτείνοντες k.T.A. But if τὴν αἰτίαν be the
true reading, τήν demands explanation in the context, which a ὡς or
ὅτι clause or appositional accusative could supply. From I. 107 ὃ 6 we
should be justified in reading τὴν μὲν αἰτίαν ἐπιφέροντες τοῦ δήμου κατά-
Avew—when the alteration of κατάλυσιν to καταλύουσιν took place the
insertion of τοῖς became natural—otherwise τοῖς may represent the last
syllable of αὐτοῖς.

From Classen’s point of view we may explain that the charge of
‘ perduellio’ was extended to all alike, although they really fell victims
to private animosity or to the villainy of dishonest debtors. From
Stahl’s standpoint a distinction is made between the case of those who
were executed on a specific charge and that of those who were φονευό-
μενοι ὁθενδή (‘on any grounds or none’).

αἰτίαν ἐπιφέροντες, cf. 46 ὃ 6.

240 THOCYDIDES LH. [LXxx1 ὃ 4—

ἀπέθανον, for transition to passive structure, cf. 75 fin.

ὑπὸ τῶν λαβόντων, sc. τὰ χρήματα (Schol. δανεισαμένων), ‘their
debtors.’ Arnold quotes from Dem. Timoth. 1186, where ληφθέντα
appears as a banking term, and agrees with Stahl and Poppo in con-
struing with ἀπέθανον. Bohme, appealing to 81 § 2, εἴ τινα λάβοιεν,
construes with ὀφειλομένων, i.e. they were put to death because money
was owing to them by those into whose hands they fell.

8 5. τε, resumptive (says Cl.)=‘in brief’: why not inferential =
‘thus’?

ἰδέα θανάτου, cf. 83 § 1, Tac. Hist. 111. 28, Virg. Aen. 11. 369,
‘plurima mortis imago.’

κατέστη, ‘ was rife.’

οἷον φιλεῖ, why not accept Wasse’s suggestion οἵων ἢ To this I
incline for more than one reason; (1) the words οἷον φιλεῖ point to
a parenthetical use in Thuc.: cf. Iv. 28 § 3, VI. 63 ἃ 2. (2) οὐδὲν
6 τι ov, if appositional, suggests a partitive apposition, i.e. of singular
to plural (οἷα). (3) Thucydides evidently intends to state that all the
usual horrors of a revolution were realised: this appears best expressed
by a partitive genitive.

ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ, ‘in such a case’ (as I have described), ‘under such
conditions’: cf. 43 § 4.

καὶ ἔτι περαιτέρω, ‘and even worse’ (adverb for adjective). Bloom-
field cites Aristoph. Thesm. 705, Aesch. Prom, 225. Poppo compares
Sallust Jug. 44 ‘quaecunque dici aut fingi queunt...probra cuncta fuere,
et alia amplius.’

πρὸς αὐτοῖς, ‘close to them,’ beneath their very walls.

ot δέ τινες, cf. 70 § 6.

περιοικοδομηθέντες, a most rare word, unique in Thuc., although
ἀπῳκοδόμησαν occurs in I. 134 ὃ 2.

CHAPTER LXAXXII.

§ 1. ὠμή, proleptic, ‘to such savage extremes was party strife car-
ried.’ Classen and Stahl insert the article (ὠμὴ ordovs), an addition
which Shilleto regards as needless: cf. I. 23 § 1 μῆκος μέγα προὔβη.

ἔδοξε μᾶλλον (Schol. ἤπερ ἐγένετο), ie. ὠμὴ προχωρῆσαι, ‘it attracted
all the more attention.’

ἐν τοῖς πρώτη, cf. 17 ὃ 1, note.

ἐπεί, in contrast ‘although’: cf. Plato Prot. 333 Ὁ.

ὕστερόν ye, ‘ postea quidem’; γε is emphatic, ‘ eventually.’

LXXxuI § 1] NOTES. 241

καί, intensive.

ὡς εἰπεῖν, ‘ut ita dicam,’ in qualifying sense.

τὸ “Ἑλληνικόν, neuter in ethnic sense, cf. 83 8 1. The allusion is
to all the Hellenic-speaking portion of the human race: even the Ionian
cities were affected.

ἐκινήθη, ‘felt the shock’: cf. 1. τ § 2.

διαφορῶν (from διαφορά), ‘in consequence of the quarrels which
everywhere prevailed.’

ἐπάγεσθαι (cf. 65 ὃ 3), epexegetic infinitive; as though Thuc. had
written διαφερομένων τῶν προστατῶν ἐπάγεσθαι. Classen compares
I. 128 § 3.

ἐν μὲν εἰρήνῃ, the equivalent of εἰ εἰρήνη ἣν (Poppo).

οὐκ ἂν ἐχόντων, the subject (προστατῶν) is understood: cf. 72 § 1.
For this use of ἄν with participle, which practically replaces εἰ καί, see
Kriig. G. ἃ. 54. το. 3 and Goodwin M. T. § 213 sqq.

πρόφασιν, almost=airia, cf. 13 § τ.

ἑτοίμων (sc. ὄντων), ‘notissima ellipsis’ (says Poppo), but rare in
Thucydides, and contrary to the usual practice of Attic Greek. Bohme
quotes a doubtful case from 69 ὃ 1. In combination with a participle
the use is found in v. 64 ὃ 4 (unless indeed ἁθρόοις has supplanted
ἁθρόοις οὖσιν) : 11. 49 ὃ 5 supplies another doubtful instance, γυμνοὶ
ἀνέχεσθαι (C. F. Miiller’s suggestion of ἐτόλμων is quite uncalled
for).

πολεμουμένων (from πολεμοῦσθαι not πολεμεῖσθαι), ‘cum bello pre-
merentur’ (St.). The real meaning is, in my opinion, ‘as they became
embroiled’ (i.e. the one party with the other): for this antithesis of
πολεμοῦν with οἰκειοῦν, cf. 1. 36§1. Hude explains as neuter impersonal:
a doubtful interpretation.

Kal κατὰ ξυμμαχίας, for sequence of prepositional constrn. with
participle, cf. Iv. 24 § 5: lit. ‘in consequence of.’

ἅμα, ‘therewith’ (cf. 61 § 1).

ἑκατέροις, ie. Athens or Sparta: the dative finds its constrn. from
verbal substantive ξυμμαχίας (cf. 1. 92, παραινέσει τῷ κοινῷ). The
ordinary text καὶ ξυμμαχίας treats the genitive singular as dependent on
émaywyal: but this makes the connexion so remote that Herwerden
suggests οὔσης ἐπί, Snow προκειμένης. For ξυμμαχίας as plural, cf.
v. 2781, 48 81, 79 ὃ 1. Classen and Stahl agree in treating ἑκατέροις
as dependent on ἐπορίζοντο, τοῖς βουλομένοις being explained by partitive
apposition, i.e. ‘on either side, those who were bent on any disturbance
(of the πολιτικὴ κατάστασις) gladly found such appeals provided.’

Seen 16

242 THOCYDIDESTHIM, [Lxxx1I § 1—

κακώσει, dative of motive, or cause, replacing participle, ‘in the
desire (attempt) to harm their opponents’; cf. the use of the verb
κακῶσαι in I. 33 § 3.

σφίσιν αὐτοῖς, ‘their own party,’ dependent on verbal notion
lurking in προσποιήσει, for which cf. 1. 73 §1. The presence of one
article only shews that both datives κακώσει and προσποιήσει come
under one common grammatical ‘vinculum.’

ῥᾳδίως, ‘libenter’ (Dobree), ‘gladly,’ ‘readily,’ 1.6. with a light
heart: cf. vI. 17 § 2 ῥᾳδίας ἔχουσι Tas μεταβολάς.

éraywyat, ‘invitations,’ cf. VIII. 92 § 1, ἐπεισαγωγαί, and ἐπάγεσθαι
of context.

τοῖς βουλομένοις, dative of agent.

νεωτερίζειν, in broadest sense: ‘those who were bent on any new
departure.’

ἐπορίζοντο, lit. ‘were procured by’: a passive construction with
dative of subject replaces an active or middle verb with nominative of
subject. They made light of having recourse to such means as these
external alliances supplied.

The drift of the sentence appears to me this: The feuds which
everywhere prevailed between the party of progress and constitutionalists
cleared the way for appeals to either of the rival powers, Athens or
Sparta. In time of peace neither side would have countenanced such
a course, nor indeed have tolerated foreign interference.

But as these feuds ripened into war (as the στάσις became an οἰκεῖος
πόλεμος), and as it became necessary for either faction to strengthen
their hands by alliance with one or the other of the two leading powers,
the disturbers of the public peace found a ready plea for appeal to
external aid, of which they only too readily availed themselves.

§ 2. ἐπέπεσε, ‘ingressive aorist’ (Cl.).

κατὰ στάσιν, for κατά as=dud, cf. 68 § 3.

γιγνόμενα.. ἐσόμενα, a contrast of transient with permanent: ‘such
as are of constant occurrence and will always continue.’

ἕως ἂν ἡ αὐτὴ φύσις ἡ, cf. Tac. Hist. Iv. 74 ‘vitia erunt, donec
homines.’

μᾶλλον Classen explains by supplement of χαλεπά: but is any
supplement necessary ? cf. περαιτέρω 81 ὃ 5 and μάλιστα 39 § 4. Hude
suspects a flaw in text, and suggests from Dio. Hal. μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἧσσον,
while in -xalrepa he detects the presence of another adjective, e.g.
χαλεπά, or according to Gertz, drnpa, ἄγρια. Has Thucydides sup-
pressed, as he not unfrequently does, part of the comparative constrn.,

LXeKIIy § Ὁ} NOTES. 243

e.g. μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἧσσον, καὶ ἡσυχαίτερα καὶ σφοδρότερα, or does the
termination -xalrepa conceal καὶ ἕτερα ἢ In the latter case, gloss-hunters
will find fresh spoil in καί...διηλλαγμένα. The σφόδρα and ἠρέμα of
Plato Phil. 24 B, C is a mere παρονομασία prompted by Protarchus’
reply “καὶ σφόδρα. The text is, I believe, sound: translate, ‘though
in greater or less intensity and with variation in their features,’

διηλλαγμένα (ποικίλα gloss), unique in passive in Thue. (Cl.). 511]
we have ἀντηλλαγμένα in IV. 14 § 3. Herodotus and Thue. affect the
active forms.

ὡς dv, ‘prout,’ ‘quocunque modo’=‘in such way as,’ ‘according as’:
a direct relative sequence from implied antecedent (οὕτως), see Goodw.
M. T. § 519 5644.

ἕκασται (Kriig. ἑκάστοις, Hude ἑκάσταις, sc. ταῖς πόλεσιν), ‘in each
case,’ the adjective replaces the adverb: cf. sup. ὃ 1 ἑκασταχοῦ.

ξυντυχιῶν, ‘ coincidences,’ cf. 1. 33 § 1, III. 45 § 4.

ἐφιστῶνται, a stronger form of expression, perhaps, than παραστῶσιν
(Eur. Med. 331). Still in Soph. O. R. 777 ἐπέστη conveys no stronger
force than παρέστη. A comparison of Plato Theaet. 172 E might
suggest the notion of control. Lit.: ‘in such way as changes of co-
incidences may befall,’ i.e. varying with the various surroundings or
circumstances (περιστάσει).

ἐν yap εἰρήνῃ, not so much in explanation of διηλλαγμένα, as in
preparation for the introduction of πόλεμος and force of circumstances.

ἀγαθοῖς πράγμασιν, an unusual phrase, ‘res secundae’: cf. εὐεστώ,
eveTnpla.

γνώμας =‘ sententias,’ spirit (disposition), cf. 1. 140 § 1.

ἀκουσίους ἀνάγκας, ‘imperious necessities’ (Gail): the phrase is
copied by Dio. Hal. and paraphrased by Josephus, ἀβουλήτοις, but
feebly: the moral nature of man revolts.

πίπτειν, a rare substitute for ἐσπίπτειν (Poppo). és may have been
absorbed in -as, the last syllable of ἀνάγκας.

ὑφελών, ‘diminishing,’ ‘sapping.’

εὐπορίαν, ‘comfort,’ ‘ease,’

τοῦ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, Kriig. and Herw. add βίου, lost in βίαιος.

διδάσκαλος, Bloomfield cites Xen. Cyr. 11. 3 § 3.

πρὸς τὰ παρόντα, replacing more usual constrn. of ὁμοιοῦν with
dative: cf. Tac. Germ. 9, ‘assimulare in.’

ὀργάς, cf. 1. 130 § 2, VIII. 83 § 3 ‘moods’=‘ mores.’

8 3. τε, ‘thus’: detach from following καί (Cl.): Hude shrewdly
suspects δέ: for δὲ οὖν as=‘ceterum,’ ‘igitur’ (after digression, ἐν μὲν

16—-2

244 THUCYDIDES. ΤΙΣ [uxexir./§ 3—

γὰρ εἰρήνῃ k.7.d.), Kriig. compares VII. 59 § 2, where the peccant particle
has suffered correction.

τὰ τῶν πόλεων, the usual periphrasis, = ‘the states and all belonging
to them,’ the whole political world.

τὰ ἐφυστερίζοντα (Schol. al ὕστερον στασιάζουσαι), the neuter is due
merely to the periphrasis.

πύστει, Herwerden from a paraphrase of Dio. Hal. ‘oi ὑστερίζοντες
ἐπιπυνθανόμενοι᾽ reads ἐπιπύστει, which Stahl and Poppo accept: but
the value of this ‘testis antiquissimus ’ appears to me frequently of small
weight. The dative replaces a participle in temporal sense ‘on getting
to know.’

προγενομένων, the perf. pass. is the more common form.

πολύ, adverbial with ἐπέφερε : cf. Aesch. Choeph. 1052. πολλήν,
the reading of Dio. Hal., Herwerden accepts with gratitude. The Greek
is sound, though harsh: Hude wisely remarks that it is hard to see how
πολλήν became πολύ. The collocation with ἐπιφέρειν might suggest
ἐπὶ πολύ, cf. 46 sub fin.

τοῦ καινοῦσθαι, Stahl from Dio. Hal. edits és τό, a reading which
on Ionic analogy may be correct (cf. Vv. 75 ὃ 3). His quotation is not
a happy one, as αἰτίαν ἐπιφερομένην és μαλακίαν recalls the use of δια-
βάλλειν és (see Duker’s note on VIII. 88). In the present case τοῦ is
perfectly satisfactory.

διανοίας, ‘designs’ (cf. émwolas). ‘Those who came later, upon
hearing of that which had already preceded, largely extended their
extravagant inventiveness of design, whether in point of elaborate
ingenuity of attack or novelty of reprisal.’

ἐπιχειρήσεων, ‘attacks’ on political antagonists (Gail).

περιτεχνήσει, ‘causal dative’ says Stahl, and=éd. To me the
dative appears modal, or limiting, as shewing the particular form in
which such ‘originality of design’ evinced itself. Note the περί of
compound (cf. περίνοια) marking the ‘limata subtilitas,’ ‘the extreme
elaborateness’: cf. Arist. Ran. 957.

τυμωριῶν, ‘punishment’ (Poppo), better understood in sense of
‘ reprisals.’

Grong, ‘strangeness,’ suggesting ingenuity rather than ‘atrocity’:
τῷ ἀηθεῖ says the Scholiast.

§4. ἀξίωσιν, in objective sense as contrasted with subjective δικαί-
wots (Cl.). Schol. σημασία (aestimatio), ‘acceptation,’ ‘meaning’: a
rare word, says Kriiger.

és ta ἔργα, ‘to serve their ends’ (lit. with a view to the job in

LXXXII. § 4] NOTES. 245

hand): the τέλος was in this case an ἔργον (cf. Arist. Eth. 1. 1). Poppo
explains by reference to the constrn. of és τὸ καινοῦσθαι ὃ 3, and suggests
a structure ἀπὸ κοινοῦ both with ἀξίωσιν and ἀντήλλαξαν. For the contrast
of ὄνομα and ἔργον, cf. VI. 78 ὃ 3.

ἀντήλλαξαν, more common in middle, cf. Plato Theaet. 189 C,
‘ changed,’ ‘ reversed,’ i.e. the vice became a virtue.

δικαιώσει, ‘at their arbitrary pleasure’ (lit. ‘justification’): Lat.
‘arbitratu (arbitrio) suo.’ The following passage is rightly regarded
by most Thucydidean critics as an elaborate specimen of ὑποκορισμός
(cf. Ar. Rhet. 1. 9 § 29), or ‘interpretatio in melius.’ Poppo’s note
accumulates instances.

The relation of the μέν...δέ clauses is somewhat complicated and
difficult to analyse. The simplest course is to take τόλμα μέν as anti-
thetical to μέλλησις δέ, τὸ δὲ σῶφρον as continuative, καί replacing a third
δέ, and introducing the third enumeration of the topic of τὸ ἐναντίον
inaugurated by μέλλησις. At the same time, μέν, δέ, δέ, καί may be
simple modes of enumeration, 1, 2, 3, 4, as in the famous scholion
of Simonides, "ὑγιαίνειν μὲν ἄριστον᾽ (cf. Hartung 11. 410). In the
next sentence, τὸ δ᾽ ἐμπλήκτως, the first δέ is resumptive, the second
used in contrast. Then follows a third sentence introduced by καί,
‘and so,’ containing an antithesis of ὁ uév...6 δέ, with second antithesis
of 6é...6é. We have thus:

A. (ἢ) astrong contrast τόλμα μέν... μέλλησις δέ:

(2) a weaker contrast=kal τὸ μὲν σῶφρον....τὸ δὲ ξυνετόν :

B. ἃ sequence of two more δέ᾽5, recalling the topics of A:

C. a ‘finale’: χαλεπαίνων balancing ἐμπλήκτως ὀξύ, ἀσφαλείᾳ ἐπι-
βουλεύσασθαι balancing μέλλησις προμηθής, χαλεπαίνων answering to τὸ
σῶφρον, ἐπιβουλεύσας to ἀσφαλείᾳ.

τόλμα (the true form, in spite of Dionysius’ exception to its poetical
colouring) = θρασύτης of ethics, ‘reckless daring.’

φιλέταιρος (παρελκόντως κεῖται, i.e. ‘superfluous,’ Schol.), lit. ‘that
loved its comrades.’ The reference is to the ἑταιρίαι, the political clubs
(sodalitia), on which see Arnold’s note (VIII. 54): ‘bravery in the cause of
party,’ ‘self-sacrificing heroism,’—‘amicorum studiosa’ (Portus). Poppo
compares Sallust Cat., ‘malarum rerum audacia fortitudo vocatur.’

ἐνομίσθη (Herw. from Schol. προσηγόρευσαν and Dionysius’ ἐκάλουν
reads ὠνομάσθη: cf. Badham, Mnemosyne, N. 5. 11. 18, Herw. Stud.
p- 47), ‘came to be regarded’: the aorist marks result attained (P. St.).
Classen refers the aorist to the individual characteristics, the imperfect
to habitual practice.

246 THUCYDIDES τ {uxxxu.§ 4—

προμηθής (a poetical and Platonic word), ‘ cautious.’

εὐπρεπής, ‘specious,’ ‘fair-seeming’: cf. 1. 39 § 2, vill. 86 § 1.

τὸ δὲ σῶφρον, ‘self-containment’ (moderation). Kriiger well il-
lustrates from Plato Rep. 560 Ὁ σωφροσύνην ἀνανδρίαν καλοῦντες
ἐκβάλλουσιν. The recurrence of neuter adjective with article as re-
placing substantive demands attention (Pp.).

πρόσχημα (προκάλυμμα), ‘outer veil,’ ‘cloak’: cf. Latin ‘tectoria’:
here=mpépaots.

τὸ πρὸς ἅπαν Evverdv, the suggestion is that of extreme political
ἐποχή, suspension of judgment, such as Arnold well illustrates by the
example of Cicero. ‘To see the case in all its bearings was to commit
yourself to no one course of action.’ ξυνετός carries with it sarcasm,
cf. ἀχρεῖα ξυνετοί (1. 84 ὃ 3): for ἐπὶ πᾶν (ἐν πᾶσι Dion. Hal.), cf. 1.
51 § 2: such intelligence was too comprehensive to descend to par-
ticulars.

ἀργόν -- ἄπραγμον, used of simple ‘inaction.’

ἐμπλήκτως ὀξύ, ‘frantic precipitation.’ Classen quotes Soph. Aj.
1358, Kriiger Aeschin. F. L. 327 πολιτείας ἐμπληξίαν. The Scholiast
explains as μανιωδῶς: cf. ἐμβρόντητος. For ὀξύ in good sense of ‘ prompt-
ness,’ cf, Plato Theaet. 175 τορῶς καὶ ὀξέως διακονεῖν.

μοίρᾳ, an unusual use of the word, which in Thuc. is always em-
ployed in literal sense. Plato’s θεία μοῖρα is, however, ready to hand. ,

προσετέθη, ‘was set down on the side of,’ ‘ascribed to’: cf. Lat.
‘imputare’ (lit. ‘scored to’).

ἀσφαλείᾳ, Hude objects to the position of the dative; vid. Comm.
Crit. p. 112 544. The position is probably due to emphasis. Kriiger
suggests Tw (τινί), but ἐπιβουλεύσασθαι can hardly represent ‘ insidiari.’
Hude’s final acceptation of ἀσφάλεια τοῦ ἐπιβουλεύσασθαι still leaves us
in a difficulty for a verb, unless we adopt the awkward expedient of
returning to ἐνομίσθη. The scholia leave us in doubt as to text, but
the comment δι᾽ ἀσφάλειαν would point to the dative (which, indeed,
there is small reason to suspect) as=dogah@s. Can the substantival
verb ἦν have dropped out from the last syllable of ἀποτροπῆς" If so,
our context is clear.

ἐπιβουλεύσασθαι, Meineke, in Hermes Il. 352, explains as ‘re-
consider,’ on analogy of ἐπικτείνειν, ἐπιδιώκειν, suggesting at the same
time ἀσθένεια. A better explanation can be found from ἐπινοεῖν (1. 70
§ 2), ‘consilium ad tempus accommodare,’ to cautiously adapt one’s
plans to the moment.

ἀποτροπῆς, reflecting the middle verb ἀποτρέπεσθαι (see Stahl’s

LXXXIL § 5] NOTES. 247

note) =‘detrectatio periculi.’ The word is here used of ‘evasion,’
‘shirking,’ but not in the rhetorical sense of dissuasion or discourage-
ment. ‘Frantic precipitation was set down on the side of manliness,
whereas to cautiously mature one’s plans was but a plausible reason for
evasion.’

πρόφασις, apparently here used in weaker sense of ‘ plea’ or ‘excuse,’
contrary to the practice of Thucydides.

§5. χαλεπαίνων, ‘the violent man,’ ‘the advocate of strong measures,’
cf. VIII. 92 ὃ g, the ‘iracundus et acer’ of Horace. Rauchenstein’s πάντ᾽
ἐπαινῶν is utterly uncalled for.

πιστός, ‘trustworthy,’ i.e. as having given a pledge to his party, by
offence given to the opposition.

ὕποπτος, i.e. as playing a double game, ἐπαμφοτερίζων, or as seeking
an ἀποστροφὴ σωτηρίας; cf. Arnold’s note: once more, we must either
supply ἦν or go back to ἐνομίσθη.

ἐπιβουλεύσας -- ἐν τῷ ἐπιβουλεῦσαι, ‘in laying a plot’; the participle
may be either hypothetical or appositional: the τις structure replaces
6 with participle. Practically, it is only another form of generic
expression.

τυχών, ‘if successful’: the sentence, if rewritten, would run, ὁ δὲ
ἐπιβουλεύσας εἰ τύχοι (sc. κατορθώσειε) Evverds ἐνομίζετο, cf. 39 ὃ 8: cf.
Virg. Aen. vi. 624 ‘ausi omnes immane nefas, ausoque potiti.’

ὑπονοήσας, ‘si praesentiret,’ ‘if he detected one.’

δεινότερος, i.e. Euverwrepos, ‘the shrewder of the two.’

προβουλεύσας, ‘deliberately planned’: cf. the like force of πρό in
προμαθεῖν, προδιδάσκειν.

αὐτῶν, a loose reference to ἐπιβουλεύσας and ὑπονοήσας as implying
ἐπιβουλή and ὑπόνοια, or from Dionysius’ point of view φυλακή, lurking
in ὑπονοήσας.

δεήσει, realistic indicative.

τε, not δέ, in accordance with Thucydidean use: cf. 40 ὃ 5.

ἑταιρίας, ‘the league,’ cf. ξύνοδοι infra ὃ 6.

διαλυτής, a most rare word: why should Thuc. discard the analogy
of λυτήρ᾽ Here almost=d.adurixds, ‘bent on breaking up’: cf. supr.
δι § 4.

ἐκπεπληγμένος, i.g. καταπεπληγμένος, ‘in mortal dread of.’

ἁπλῶς, ‘in brief.’

ἐπικελεύσας, ‘egged on,’ sc. κακόν τι δρᾷν. Herwerden Stud. p. 47,
with Badham, suggests ἐπικωλύσας (cf. Thuc. vi. 17 ὃ 6), Campe ἐπικο-
λούσας : no emendation is needed.

248 THUCYDIDES fff. [|ixxxu. § 5—

τὸν μὴ διανοούμενον (sc. κακόν τι δρᾶν), cf. Dem. Conon ὃ 40
μηδ᾽ ἂν μελλήσας. Herwerden, possibly rightly, suggests τὸν μηδὲ
διανοούμενον.

8 6. τὸ ξυγγενές, Schol. οἱ ξυγγενεῖς.

τοῦ ἑταιρικοῦ, cf. VIII. 48 § 3.

ἑτοιμότερον, the Scholiast refers to τὸ ἑταιρικόν, and rightly; Badham
and Herwerden suggest ἀνετοιμότερον, with remoter reference to τὸ
évyyevés. Cf. Hesiod’s dictum γείτονες ἄζωστοι ἔκιον ζώσαντο δὲ πηοί.

ἀπροφασίστως, ‘without demur,’ cf. 1. 49 § 6.

οὐ γὰρ μετὰ τῶν κειμένων, both text and interpretation are most
doubtful. Vollgraff (Stud. Pal. 50), from Dionysius and Isocrates Phil.
§ 40, suggests the nominative, ὠφελείαι, πλεονεξίαι : he is followed by
Herwerden (Stud. Thue. 48), who cites 111. 95 μεγάλη ὠφέλεια ἐδόκουν
εἶναι, but at p. 145 he recants and returns to the dative reading, on
analogy of I. 123 § 1. Poppo and Stahl retain the dative; Badham
condemns the whole sentence. Bekker retains the genitive ὠφελίας,
which could find a constrn. with pera (cf. 1. 32 § 5): but this would
destroy the balance of the sentence, as it is clear that μετὰ τῶν κειμένων
νόμων directly answers παρὰ τοὺς καθεστῶτας (‘ad amussim respondent’).
A genitive of definition or description, though rare in Greek, might
solve the difficulty, while the change to dative πλεονεξίᾳ ‘ Thucydidem
sapit.’ From VI. 33 § 2 the sequence of two datives is justified: but
the pressing need of the sentence is a verb. To give the causal dative
a construction with the substantival verb implied only is a somewhat
desperate device; but a construction κατὰ σύνεσιν can either raise or
remove mountains for the grammarian. On the assumption that ξύνοδοι
noav = ξυνῇσαν, we may explain the dative. The paraphrase of Dionysius
is worth reference, as also the opposite assertion in Isocr. Pence 56
(cf. Arnold’s note).

ὠφελία, ‘the benefit of the commonwealth’ (Poppo). Is it not
rather the ‘ benefit of the law,’ i.e. ‘protection,’ which is meant? cf. 84
§ 3 and ν. go.

πλεονεξίᾳ, ‘greed’ (e.g. τὰ τοῦ πέλας ἔχειν, cf. 84 ὃ 1), or better,
‘aggrandisement,’ resulting from ἐξουσία (cf. 45 8 4), ‘such cabals
were not due to protection, under sanction of established laws, but to
aggrandisement, in defiance of existing institutions,’ i.e. they were not
constitutional or defensive, but unconstitutional and aggressive.

σφᾶς αὐτούς, cf. 81 § 4.

πίστεις, by the interpretation ὅρκους διδόντες the Scholiast limits the
sense, viz. ‘pledges of good faith.’

ΤΣ ΧΙ § 7] NOTES. 249

θείῳ νόμῳ, cf. Vv. 105 § 1 τῶν és Td θεῖον vouloews. Dobree, from a
criticism of Dionysius, whose text is however in doubt, reads ὁσίῳ καὶ
voulu@, but needlessly. This confusion of θεῖον with ὅσιον is a favourite
plaything of Cobet’s (cf. Var. Lect. 357)"

ἐκρατύνοντο, ‘found secured.’

κοινῇ παρανομῆσαι, ‘complicity in some deed of wrong.’

§7. ἀπὸ τῶν ἐναντίων, for ἀπό cf. 36 ὃ 6.

λεγόμενα, ‘proposals’: cf. the use of λόγος in the phrase λόγους
προσφέρει.

ἐνεδέχοντο, an Ionism for Attic προσεδέχοντο.

ἔργων φυλακῇ, what ἔργα or whose ἔργα, ask the editors? Hude
explains by contrasting ‘diligentia in actionibus’ with ‘speciosi sermones.’
The allusion is to the ἔργα of those who made the proposals; cf. Iv.
87 § 1 τὰ ἔργα ἐκ τῶν λόγων ἀναθρούμενα with 11. 72 ὃ 1. ἔργων φυλακῇ
may, however, equally well, on analogy of τὰ ἔργα sup. § 4, mean
‘vigilance in action.’

εἰ προύχοιεν, sc. of ἐναντίο. ude, however, suggests that the
subject is of ἐνδεχόμενοι, and reads πρόσχοιεν, ‘animo secum cogitantes
si superiores ipsi fieri possent.’ But in the two instances he quotes, Iv. 58,
V. 37 ὃ 2, the reading is εἴ πως, not εἰ.

γενναιότητι (Schol. χρηστότης, ἁπλότης), cf τὸ γενναῖον 83 § 1,
=‘ generosity,’ ‘frankness.’ They could not realise the possibility of
generous concession on the part of a superior (cf. 1. 77 § 3 ἐλασσούμενοι).
‘Fair proposals on the part of their antagonists they met in no spirit of
generosity, but, if they had the upper hand, by watching their actions,’
i.e. generous proposals merely provoked suspicion,

ἀντιτιμωρήσασθαι, the non-articular infinitive offends the purist:
Chom τὲ

περὶ πλείονος. Badham injudiciously inserts ov; ‘revenge took pre-
cedence of self-protection.’

ὅρκοι ξυναλλαγῆς -- ὅρκοι ξυναλλακτικοί, ‘oaths of agreement’: a
genitive of connexion (whose use is very loose) or perhaps of definition
(see Thompson G. Syn. § 111), ‘agreement sworn to by either party’
(Jowett).

εἴ που, suggesting the infrequency of such a course of action: for el
dpa cf. 56 § 5.

γένοιντο, iterative optative, or rather distributive, ‘in the rare in-
stances in which they were contracted’: when given, if given at all.

πρὸς τὸ ἄπορον, ‘to meet the emergency’ (Classen compares

I. 136 § 2).

250 THUCYDIDES Tif. [LxxxiL. § 7—

ἑκατέρῳ, dative of agent (Reiske’s suggestion ἑκατέρων is needless).

διδόμενον (no need for Kriiger’s δεδομένοι), cf. παρέχειν ὅρκον
(Poppo).

ἐχόντων, genitive absolute with indefinite subject (cf. § 1), either
‘temporal,’ ‘quamdiu’ (Valla), or circumstantial, ‘ quia’ (Poppo): the
plural number is suggested by ἑκατέρῳ.

ἄλλοθεν, e.g. from external allies, cf. § 1: so long as each side was
dependent on its own resources: lit. ‘could not command strength from
elsewhere’ (cf. 45 ὃ 2 ἄλλων ξυμμαχίᾳ).

τῷ παρατυχόντι, ‘when an opening offered’: cf. 1. 122 § 1, V.
38 § 1.

φθάσαι θαρσήσας, ‘had the courage to be first,’ i.e. to strike first.
This is Herwerden’s correction of the vulgate φθάσας θαρσῆσαι, which
although found in Ar. Nub. 1384, Eq. 935, he condemns as a soloecism.
Shilleto suggests θαρσήσει, cf. v. 72 § 1.

ἄφρακτον, ‘unsecured,’ ‘unprotected,’ rather than ‘unguarded’:
ΠΤ 7 5:

ἥδιον διὰ τὴν πίστιν...ἤ, for the brachylogy and contrast of a real
with an assumed case, cf. 11 ὃ 3. But to our context ἄν appears
essential: it may have dropped out after the last syllable of ἥδιον (ἥδιον
ἄν), which would, however, involve the difficulty of ἄν iterative in the
one case but potential in the other; more probably, if lost at all, its
loss is due to confusion of H with K (Bast. p. 987, Index), and of A
with A (AN).

| κἂν ἀπὸ τοῦ προφανοῦς, ‘he took revenge with a zest all the
keener on the score of his pledge (broken) than (he would have felt)
in open action,’ i.e. his breach of faith ‘lent an added savour’ to his
revenge. But Thuc. does not much affect the ἢ καί sequence, cf. VIII.
27 § 3, and the assumption of a potential meaning may be gratuitous,
Thucydides is not, after all, so precise in his logical categories, and the
inference of the received text is plain.

τὸ ἀσφαλές --τὸ ἀκίνδυνον, ‘the absence of all risk,’ his opponent
being unprotected.

ἐλογίζετο (lit. ‘reckoned up’), ‘took into account.’

kal ὅτι, a parallelism of ὅτε clause with clause of direct object, ‘as
well as the fact that by fraudulently overreaching he was also gaining
the prize of superior ability’ (Jowett).

ἀγώνισμα, more substantial than δόξα ; cf. VIII. 12 ὃ 2.

προσελάμβανε, πρός implying an addition to mere τιμωρία.

ῥᾷον δ᾽ οἱ πολλοί, ‘it is easier in most cases for men when rogues

LXxx1I. ὃ 8] ; NOTES. 251

to gain the name of shrewd, than for a simple-minded man to gain the
name of honest’: such is Poppo’s explanation, confirmed by an imitation
of Procopius.

ῥᾷον κέκληνται, ‘more easily find themselves called’: Badham
explains ῥᾷον as ἥδιον, so also Kriiger: Hude agrees, but objects to
κακοῦργοι ὄντες expressing a condition: he suggests a repetition of
κακοῦργοι, rendering ‘libentius autem homines, si nefarii sunt, nefarii
callidi quam imperiti boni audiunt’: i.e. men less resent the name of
‘clever rogue’ than that of ‘honest fool.’ The comment of Dionysius
(vid. Popp. ed. ma. 11. 814) is justly flouted by Reiske. On the perfect
κέκληνται, cf. 11. 37 ὃ 1, and on the whole passage see Arnold’s note.

τῷ μέν, SC. τῇ ἀμαθίᾳ.

ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ, for position of τῷ, cf. ὅτ § 1: for chiasmus in μέν ...δέ see
Kriig. G. G. 50. 1, 2. The preposition ἐπί is reserved for the second
member of the sentence—a common poetic device, not unknown in
Thuc.

ἀγάλλονται, ‘they pride themselves,’ ‘glory in their shame’ (cf. II.
44 ὃ 2).

§ 8. πάντων δ᾽ αὐτῶν αἴτιον ἀρχὴ ἡ. The main difficulty of the
text is the retention or rejection of ἀρχή, which the Scholiast explains
as ἐπιθυμία ἀρχῆς, and for which Classen compares the Latin use of
‘gloria’=‘gloriae cupiditas.’ Madvig, Adv. I. 317, condemns αἴτιον
as a gloss, treating ἀρχή as ‘initium.’ Weil (Rev. de Philolog. 11.)
suggests ἡ λίαν πλεονεξία : Hude suggests a διττογραφία of ἡ (ἀρχὴ ἡ)
with ellipse of ἦν. Dionysius, however, appears to have had ἀρχή in
his text. διά is in itself ambiguous; cf. 1. 77 § 3, and see Rutherford’s
introduction to Thuc. Iv. p. xxxix. On the article appended consult a
note of Vahlen’s on Arist. Poet. 1459b 21. Render, with Madvig,
‘and of all this the origin is due to avarice and ambition.’

ἐκ δ᾽ αὐτῶν, ‘as the outcome of these’: sc. πλεονεξίας καὶ φιλο-
τιμίας.

καθισταμένων (indefinite subject; cf. sup. ἐχόντων), ‘engaged in,’
‘committed to.’

φιλονεικεῖν (Herw. and St. φιλονικεῖν), ‘contention’: cf. VIII.
76 § 1.

τὸ πρόθυμον, ‘party spirit,’ ‘studium contentionis.’

ὀνόματος, ‘honesta nomina praetendebant’ (Tac.).

ἰσονομίας πολιτικῆς, ‘constitutional equality of rights,’ implying far
more than the remoyal of legal disabilities: cf. Byron, Marino Faliero,
‘no rash equality but equal rights’: vid. 11. 37 § 1.

252 THUCYDIDES f/f. [iLxxxu. § 8—

σώφρονος, ‘moderate’: the name of aristocracy would veil the
intended oligarchy.

προτιμήσει, ‘preferring,’ ‘advocating.’

τὰ κοινὰ θεραπεύοντες, ‘studying the common weal.’

ἄθλα ἐποιοῦντο, the constrn. is not the direct equivalent of the
analogous λείαν ποιεῖσθαι, ἄθλα being predicative to τὰ κοινά. The
interests of the state became the prize of a political competition: from
the point of view of Alcibiades, v1. 17 ὃ 3, and of Cleon, 111. 38 § 3, the
state ‘had to pay.’

Tas τιμωρίας, accusative quasi-cognate with ἐπεξῇσαν, cf. 1. 3 ὃ 5.
Dobree adds a strong instance from Antiphon 127 τὸ μίασμα ἐπεξερχό-
μεθα. Inaywvilopevor, the figure of the ‘competition’ is still maintained:
cf. 38 § 2.

ἔτι μείζους, cf. 81 § 4. Kriiger suspects ἐπὶ μεῖζον. Poppo supplies
the ellipse suggested by the comparative as ἢ οἱ ἐναντίοι πτροέθεσαν.

μέχρι, ‘intra fines’ (Bauer).

προτιθέντες (the reading of Dionysius), cf. 45 ὃ 3, see also Cobet,
Mnemosyne I. 83.

és δὲ τό, practically the equivalent of μέχρι, ‘secundum’ (Kriig.),
rather, ‘usque ad’ (cf. Iv. 92 ὃ 4, V. 111 ὃ 5). The vulgate προτιθέντες
appears justified by poetic and Ionic use: ‘not enforcing them within
the limits of justice or state expediency, but regulating them by the
momentary caprice of either party’ (lit. ‘that which for the moment
chanced to afford pleasure to either side’).

καταγνώσεως, Herwerden expunges, so also Hude, on the plea that
ψῆφον καταγιγνώσκειν is not Greek, and that in 16 ὃ 1, Thuc. has used
the word κατάγνωσις in a different sense. The first objection is met by
treating καταγνώσεως as a genitive of definition, the second needs no
refutation.

χειρί, ‘vi et manu ’—no suggestion whatever of χειροτονία in con-
nexion with ψῆφος. Cf. Antiph. Herod. § 92.

κτώμενοι, ‘in the attempt to win’ (the upper hand), a conative
present.

τὴν αὐτίκα φιλονεικίαν ἐκπιμπλάναι, ‘to satiate the animosity of
the moment’: for ἐκπιμπλάναι cf. ἀποπιμπλάναι, VII. 68 § τ.

εὐσεβείᾳ, the dative is an Ionism, cf. 1. 77 ὃ 4, 11. 38 § τ.

εὐπρεπείᾳ λόγον, ‘speciousness of representation,’ cf. vill. 66 § 1.
Construe with διαπράξασθαι, for which cf. v. 80.

ots ξυμβαίη, for the postponement of the relative clause Poppo cites
39 § 2.

LXXXIl. ὃ 1] NOTES. 253

ἐπιφθόνως, ‘invidiously,’ 1.6. to their own discredit: Badham reads
(from a schol. γενναῖόν τι) ἀνεπιφθόνως.

ἄμεινον ἤκονον, ‘had the better reputation,’ ‘melius audiebant.’

τὰ μέσα, ‘the neutrals,’ or perhaps ‘the moderate party’: cf. VIII.
78 §1-

φθόνῳ, causal dative, coordinate with ὅτι sentence, ‘because they
resented their immunity.’

διεφθείροντο, ‘fell a prey to both’ (Jowett). The plural serves not
only to assert the personality of the neutrals, but also to mark the
existence of independent bodies of such neutrals ἑκασταχοῦ.

CHAPTER LXXXIII.

81, οὕτω, in reference to previous narrative,

πᾶσα ἰδέα κακοτροπίας, ‘iniquity in every form’: κακοτροπία --
‘pravi mores,’ ‘pravitas.’ ἰδέα in literal sense, more usually represented
by εἶδος : cf. 1. 109 § 1 ἰδέαι πολέμων, with Hor. Od. 11. 1. 2 ‘belli
modos’: cf. also 11. 19 § I.

κατέστη, ‘was rife,’ ‘was rampant’ (lit. ‘became established’): cf.
Il. 51 § 2 of a recognised specific.

τῷ ᾿Ἑιλληνικῴ, cf. 82 § 1.

τὸ εὔηθες, in good sense of ‘credulitas,’ as ‘fides,’ ‘simple good faith,’
‘simplicity’ (not the ὑπόμωρος of later Greek), ‘the simple, innocent,
artless, candid, turn of mind which thinketh no evil, and puts a favour-
able interpretation on any doubtful act or expression’ (Cope, on Ar.
Rhet. 11. 12 § 9).

οὗ τὸ yevvatov...peréxer, ‘the main feature of a generous nature.’
Hude renders ‘quae maxime e generositate constat,’ on the plea that
the ordinary version ‘ex qua generositas maxime constat’ supplies a
definition of τὸ γενναῖον rather than of τὸ εὔηθες. Poppo’s ‘proxime
cohaeret’ avoids the difficulty. Compare the like ambiguity in 1. 84 § 3
(Arnold): for τὸ γενναῖον cf. Soph. Oed. Col. 8.

καταγελασθὲν ἠφανίσθη, ‘became contemptuously ignored’ (lit. ‘dis-
appeared under ridicule’), i.e. ‘vanished before the contempt of public
opinion.’

ἀντιτετάχθαι, ‘confronting,’ really a military phrase (‘e diverso
instructi’), cf. v. 111 § 2, ‘an attitude of perfidious (incredulous ?)
antagonism’ (Jowett).

τῇ γνώμῃ ἀπίστως, for combination of dative and adverb with
one verb, cf. Soph. O. C. 1318 sq., where we have two datives πυρί
(instrument) and κατασκαφῇ (modal), both in construction with δῃώσειν.

254 THUCYDIDES Tif. [ixxxiu. § 1—

ἐπὶ πολύ, of space, or extent, ‘far and near’ (‘longe lateque’).

διήνεγκεν, the Scholiast rightly explains κρεῖσσον ἐγένετο, ‘gained the
upper hand,’ ‘over-rode 411. Poppo rightly corrects Géller’s ‘invaluit’
by Portus’ ‘ praestitit.’

§2. ὁ διαλύσων (i.e. ξυναλλάξων), for the ‘noun-making’ participle
see Thompson ἃ. Syn. § 150.

λόγος ἐχυρός, epexegetic of ὁ διαλύσων, as the οὔτε... οὔτε sequence
shews. ‘For means of reconciliation there were none, whether bond
of word, or fear of oath.’ éxupds, ig. éxéyyvos, pepéyyvos (VIII.
68 § 3).

ὅρκος, cf. 82 § 7.

κρείσσους δὲ ὄντες, a much vexed sentence. Stahl’s explanation
that τοῦ βεβαίου -- ἢ τῷ βεβαίῳ, though accepted by Classen, receives
no confirmation from either of the passages quoted (vr. 1 § 1, Xen. An.
Il. 5 § 13). Dobree’s translation ‘steeled against’ (i.e. either λόγος or
ὅρκος) demands a far-fetched ellipse. The true construction of rod
βεβαίου (for which cf. 37 ὃ 3) is, in my belief, with ἀνέλπιστον : the
words κρείσσους ὄντες apparently recall the words εἰ προύχοιεν of 82
§ 7, of which sentence, indeed, the present passage seems an echo.

λογισμῷ, either causal with κρείσσους, or perhaps modal, as limiting,
‘stronger in point of calculation.’ From Iv. 108 § 4, we may perhaps
trace an allusion to the αὐτοκράτωρ λογισμός of mankind. (But did
Thuc. write λογισμοῦ i.e. ‘they were superior to sober reasoning.’)

és τὸ ἀνέλπιστον, ἐς for πρός as IV. 17 § 1, ‘in view of.’

παθεῖν, cf. προπαθεῖν 82 ὃ 7 and 38 § 1.

ἐδύναντο, suggesting ‘intolerance’: cf. 1. 130§1. Translate: ‘but
each and all alike, while they reckoned themselves the stronger, in their
hopelessness of stability (security) formed their plans to save themselves
rather than condescend to trust another.’ At the same time, I am fain
to confess that Thuc., by the words κρείσσους ὄντες λογισμῷ, may have
simply meant a contrast to οἱ φαυλότεροι, and that the real distinction is
between the diplomatic strategy of those ‘superior in point of reasoning
power,’ and the rough and ready measures of the less ‘intelligent.’

§ 3. φαυλότεροι, i.e. ἀξυνετώτεροι, cf. 37 ὃ 3-

γνώμην, limiting, determinant, accusative.

περιεγίγνοντο, cf. 82 fin.

τῷ γὰρ δεδιέναι, causal dative, = διὰ τὸ δεδιέναι.

τὸ ξυνετόν, almost=70 περισσόν by contrast with τὸ ἐνδεές.

, μὴ λόγοις ἥσσους ὦσι, the μή clause is epexegetic simply.
ἐκ τοῦ πολυτρόπον, ‘as the result of such subtlety of judgment

LXXXIV. § 1] NOTES. 255

(diplomacy)’: there is no need to connect ἐκ closely with προεπιβου-
λευόμενοι : once more the prepositional predication is complete in itself.
ἐκ, in ‘causal sense,’ says Classen (cf. I. 2 § 4). τοῦ πολυτρόπου for
πολυτροπίας, ΗΠ αἰ. 11. 121 ὃ 5 (Kriig.).

φθάσωσι προεπιβουλενόμενοι, ἃ pleonasm. Gildersleeve, Am. J.
Ph. x11. 76, suggests φθάνωσι on the ground that the constant use of
φθάνω admits of no variation in the tense; i.e. in contra-distinction to
the auxiliary τυγχάνω. ‘In φθάνω, the action of the verb must coincide
with that of its participle: to use a homely phrase, neither can get
through the door before the other.’

§ 4. οἱ δέ, sc. of Evveroi.

καταφρονοῦντες, i.e. ἐν καταφρονήματι ὄντες (cf. Hat. 1. 66), ‘thinking
in their contempt.’

Kav προαισθέσθαι, emphatic καί, ‘that they must surely find them
out beforehand.’

λαμβάνειν, simple for compound (καταλαμβάνειν), =‘ occupare,’
‘secure.’

ἄφρακτοι, sc. ὄντες (Schol.).

μᾶλλον, ‘on a larger scale’ (Cl.).

CHAPTER LXXXIV.

This chapter, although found in all mss., the majority of critics
concur in condemning either wholly or in part on the ground (1) of
paucity of scholia, (2) reticence of grammarians, (3) absence of allusion
to it by Dionysius, in spite of his elaborate criticism of the eighty-second
chapter as far as the words ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ ἀγάλλονται. The paucity of scholia
is certainly remarkable, none being found in F, and three only in the
Leyden ms. G brackets the whole as spurious. Poppo, Stahl, Kriiger,
Goller, Classen, Cobet, Herwerden, and Arnold, reject it in toto.
Badham recognises the hand of Thucydides so far only as the words
ἀπαραιτήτως ἐπέλθοιεν. Haack, while detecting no internal evidence
against it, rejects it on the ground of its non-recognition by scholiasts :
οὐδενὶ τῶν ἐξηγητῶν ἔδοξε Θουκυδίδου εἶναι. Jowett, on the contrary,
argues in its favour (1) that its condemnation by the Scholiast is founded
on a tradition of its spuriousness, (2) that the grammarians quote but
sparsely from Thucydides. Cobet assumes it to have been the com-
position of the ‘pusillus Thucydides’ Philistus, and to have found its
way into our text from the margin of some ancient Ms. Naber, while

256 THUCYDIDES 17. [ixxxiv. § 1—

treating the question with indifference, declines to father it on Philistus,
who was not only, according to Quintilian (x. 1) ‘Thucydide lucidior,’
but also, on the authority of Dionysius, no imitator of Thucydides’
finished style or affectation of strange words (τὸ γλωττηματικὸν καὶ
περίεργον οὐκ ἐζήλωκε Θουκυδίδου). Quotations from Dio Cassius would
point to the early presence in the text of this disputed passage. Gdller’s
own prejudices have apparently led him to mistake or ignore Thucy-
dides’ meaning. The notion of a Christian writer, e.g. a Byzantine
of the 6th or 7th century, as suggested by Arnold, found but small
favour with that consummate critic of Thucydidean style, Richard
Shilleto: long familiarity with the chapter has only strengthened my
own conviction that Chap. 84 is just as much the work of Thucydides
as either of its two predecessors.

§1. ἐν δ᾽ οὖν τῇ Κερκύρᾳ, ‘ But, to resume, it was in Corcyra that most
of these deeds were for the first time ventured, whether indeed all such
acts as men bent upon reprisal would commit when governed with more
arrogance than moderation by those who now placed vengeance within
their reach, or such iniquitous resolutions as men would form, either in
their desire to escape penury, their normal condition, or most of all amidst
a reign of terror through longing to possess the goods of their fellows,
or such savage and pitiless excesses as men would perpetrate, not for the
sake of gain so much as in a struggle man against man, when carried
to the greatest lengths by bigotry of passion.’

Three motives are suggested: (1) vengeance upon oppressors, (2)
greed of gain, prompted either by sheer poverty or by the opportunities
afforded by such social disorder of appropriating the possessions of the
wealthier, (3) the savage vindictiveness of a struggle in which each man’s
hand was against his fellow.

δ᾽ οὖν, resumptive, as 82 and 83 have dealt with τὸ “Ἑλληνικόν at
large. Poppo connects with 82 ὃ 1.

αὐτῶν, a loose reference, but not without Thucydidean parallel:
Oy 1G 1S) OF

προετολμήθη, 1.6. prior to the general disturbance of the Hellenic
world: cf. 82 § 1 ἐν τοῖς πρώτη ἐγένετο.

καί, epexegetic of τὰ πολλὰ αὐτῶν.

ὁπόσα finds a construction with all three optatives, δράσειαν, γιγνώ-
σκοιεν, ἐπέλθοιεν.

σωφροσύνῃ, ‘moderation,’ cf. VII. 64 § 5: both datives are modal.

τιμωρίαν παρασχόντων, ‘afforded (occasion of) revenge,’ 1.6. laid
themselves open to reprisals: cf. 22 § 2.

EXKKIV. 1S 2] NOTES. 257

δράσειαν, Poppo and Stahl both feel the want of ἄν, which indeed
is needed just as much in the first clause as in the second, although in
the latter position Kriiger can hardly be justified in construing it with
ἐπιθυμοῦντες.

διὰ πάθους, lit. ‘under suffering,’ in the midst of misery, or even
calamity, for in this sense of ‘clades’ or ‘calamitas’ πάθος is constantly
used by Thucydides: such a political convulsion was only too favourable
to the development of such ἐπιθυμία. On this topic of πενία see 45 ὃ 4
and 11.53 81. In the later sense of ‘emotion’ πάθος is not found in
Thucydides. On this use of διά see Appendix.

ἀπαλλαξείοντες, cf. 1. 95 ὃ 6. Desiderative forms are rare in Thu-
cydides.

ot τε. Madvig, who sees here an allusion to two different classes of
crimes (1) prompted by greed of gain on the part of inferiors against
superiors, (2) on the part of superiors against inferiors, suggests ἅ Te, to
connect with ὁπόσα (vid. Adv. Crit. I. 317).

μὴ ἐπὶ πλεονεξίᾳ, Goller wrongly takes exception to μή as a soloe-
cism, a piece of hyper-criticism which provokes Poppo’s censure.

ἀπὸ ἴσου, ‘ex aequo,’ ‘as man against man,’ i.e. ignoring all dis-
tinctions: cf. I. 77 § 3.

ἀπαιδευσίᾳ, ‘bigotry,’ cf. 42 § 1: the word need not be restricted
to the mere sense of ἀκολασία. Could Thuc. have written ὀργῆς ἐπὶ
πλεῖστον ὃ

ἐκφερόμενοι, ‘carried away’: the allusion is to a δρόμος ἔκδρομος : cf.
Soph. Elect. 628.

§ 2. ξυνταραχθέντος.. καὶ κρατήσασα, for the false coordination,
Gis ΘΕ 81:

ἐς τὸν καιρὸν τοῦτον, for ἐς in temporal relation οἵ. Iv. 80 ὃ τ. Stahl
explains ‘in hunc modum,’ ‘usque adeo,’ ‘to such an extent.’ But is
not this use of καιρός for μέτρον Platonic ?

τοῦ βίου, ‘vitae disciplina’ (Portus).

ἀνθρωπεία φύσις -- ἄνθρωποι. Bauer compares Cicero’s use ‘pecudum
natura’ as= ‘pecudes.’

Kal παρὰ τοὺς νόμους, the allusion is to the violation of even the
ἄγραφα νόμιμα of morality: law was now not only defied but discarded.

ἀκρατής, ‘impotent.’

κρείσσων, ‘superior to,’ ‘regardless of.’

τοῦ προύχοντος, neuter, ‘quidquid emineret’ (Tac.), not masculine,
as Haack suggests, in sense of ‘optimates’: see Arnold’s illustration
from Hdt. vil. 236 § 3.

Sea 17

258 THOCYDIDES ΠΡ [ixxxiv. § 2—

προυτίθεσαν, ‘preferred,’ cf. 39 § 3.

ἐν ᾧ μὴ βλάπτουσαν, ‘sine sensu est’ (Madvig Adv. I. 317). Madv.
suggests βλάπτουσιν, ‘in quo adversus eos qui nihil nocebant valebat
invidia.’ The analogy of ἵνα μή must not be too closely pressed here.
ἐν ᾧ μή carries with it in the present case a hypothetical sense (=el μὴ
ἐν τούτῳ) rather than a temporal. In Thucydides ἐν @ fluctuates between
temporal and realistic use. Cf. the like use of ὡς, Soph. O. T. 1392.

8 3. τοὺς κοινούς, i.e. the ‘iura gentium,’ the common principles of
humanity; in a narrower sense the words imply Vergil’s ‘commercia
belli”; cf Aten x. 532:

περὶ τῶν τοιούτων, ‘applying to such matters,’ i.e. such party
quarrels: but the words may mean ‘in striving for such ends.’

ὑπόκειται, οἵ, VI. 87 § 4.

σφαλεῖσι, ‘ periclitantibus,’ ‘when endangered.’

αὑτούς, for accus. cf. 1. 31 § 2.

προκαταλύειν, ‘to be the first to break.’

ὑπολείπεσθαι, middle, cf. 1. 140 ὃ 5.

εἴ ποτέ τις, the singular is evolved from the preceding plural.

CHAPTER LXXXV.

81. μὲν οὖν, continuing the narrative.

ot κατὰ τὴν πόλιν, as distinct from οἱ φεύγοντες.

τοιαύταις, predicative and recalling the description given in Chap.
82 and 83.

ταῖς πρώταις, as contrasted with the subsequent narrative of Iv. 46.
Herwerden needlessly suggests ἐν τοῖς πρῶτοι, cf. 82 § 1. Stahl rightly
renders, treating ταῖς πρώταις as attributive, ‘primae libidines, quibus
inter se utebantur, tales erant.’

ἀπέπλευσαν, after a seven days’ stay, cf. 81 ὃ 4. In this curt
mention some detect a condemnation of Eurymedon’s conduct. Grote
contrasts the inaction of Eurymedon with the more successful attempts
of Nicostratus, and that with an inferior force at his disposal (Gr.
VI. 373):

8 2. διεσώθησαν, to the mainland (apparently in ships of their
own).

τῆς πέραν, ‘the territory belonging to Corcyra on the opposite
coast’ (i.e. facing the island ‘e regione sitae’): cf. the action of the
Mytilenean exiles, 91. The possession of cities and forts upon the

LXXXVI. ὃ 1] NOTES. 259

mainland was not an uncommon feature of these island powers, e.g.
Samos, Chios, Rhodes, Lesbos.

ἐλήζοντο, the retention of the active form Poppo justifies on the
analogy of mdwitew, πολιτεύειν, ξυνεπιλαμβάνειν, as well as on the
authority of the best Mss. The middle is perhaps due to repetition of
ro from τούς. Haack’s suggestion re Poppo condemns: only one other
instance of the active is found in Thucydides, Iv. 41 § 2.

ἔβλαπτον, imperfect of continued damage.

πόλει, Corcyra.

§ 3. περὶ καθόδου, ‘to treat for (their) restoration,’ cf. VIII. 47 § I-

αὐτοῖς ἐπράσσετο, the imperfect marks the protracted nature of the
negotiations: for the dative, cf. 11. 101 § 5.

ὕστερον χρόνῳ, ‘some time afterwards,’ cf. 1. 8 § 4: the expression
denotes some considerable lapse of time, probably from the autumn of
427 to 425 B.C.

ot πάντες, ‘in all,’ cf. I. 60 ὃ 1.

§ 4. τὰ πλοῖα ἐμπρήσαντες, Agathocles had recourse to the like
expedient: cf. Diod. Sic. xx. 7.

ἀπόγνοια 4, = ἀπογνῶσιν, ‘abandon,’ ‘give up.’

τοῦ ἄλλο τι ἤ, for the ellipse, cf. 11. 16 § 2 and note on 39 § 2.

ἐνοικοδομησάμενοι, it was built for their own occupation: hence the
middle.

ἔφθειρον, for the end of these raids see Iv. 46—48. The position
of Mt. Istone is still a matter of conjecture; some identify it with
S. Salvadore, others with Mt. Falario. Xenophon, Hell. vi. 2 § 7,
speaks of a hill some five stadia from the city (vid. Dict. Geo. s.v.
Corcyra). See Appendix.

CHAPTER LXXXVI.

This chapter records the first attempt on the part of Athens at inter-
fering in the affairs of Sicily, under pretext of aiding the Ionian states
of Sicily against Syracuse and its Dorian allies.

§ 1. εἴκοσι, according to Diodorus, the fleet consisted of roo ships,
but in 88 § 1 the combined fleet only numbers 30 sail.

Σικελίαν, cf. Xen. Hell. vi., Arist. Ach. 606.

Λάχητα, the cur who pilfered the Sicilian cheese, the Labes of
Vespae 838, 240. He was the hero of the Platonic dialogue which
bears his name and which deals with the question of courage. In
115 § 5 we find him superseded in his command by Pythodorus, who,
like Eurymedon and Sophocles, proved venal (cf. Iv. 65 8 3). In

17—2

260 THUCYDIDES T[1f/. [txxxvi. § 1—

Iv. 118 we find him mentioned as proposing the ratification of the
twelve months’ armistice, and again, in Vv. 19, 24, 43, he is a prominent
figure in the negotiations with Sparta; indeed the peace of Nicias was
mainly due to his intervention. He commanded a force sent to Argos
(v. ὅτ § 1), and finally fell at Mantineia (v. 74 § 3). The particulars of
this expedition are given in Diodorus XII. 53.

στρατηγόν, the use of this word in lieu of ἄρχοντα may perhaps point
to the fact of his being one of the 10 στρατηγοί, but, on the other hand,
στρατηγεῖν is nO uncommon verb in Thucydides.

“Χαροιάδην, al. Χαριάδην, but the present form is found in inscriptions.
He fell in the campaign, cf. go § 2.

§2. καθέστασαν, pluperfect, cf. VIII. 76 8 τ.

Awpldes, cf. vI. 3, 4,5. For their attitude at the commencement
of the Peloponnesian war see 11. 7 § 2: on the strength of the Spartan
alliance in Sicily see Miiller’s Dorians 1. 195.

érdx Onoav...Evverrohéunoay, both are practically pluperfects. Arnold
remarks that the context clearly shews that as yet the Sicilian states had
not obeyed the Spartan instructions to send ships to their aid.

“Λεοντίνοις, cf. VI. 3 § 3.

ai Χαλκιδικαὶ πόλεις, Naxos, Catana, and part of Himera.

Καμάρινα, cf. vi. 5 § 3. Founded 599 B.c.; the only Dorian state
which in this struggle took part with the Chalcidians. The subsequent
invasion of the Carthaginians (405 B.C.) greatly crippled its resources;
in the wars between Agathocles and Carthage it was captured and
looted by the Mamertines. In 258 it was betrayed to Carthage, and in
255 was the scene of a terrible disaster to the Roman fleet, which
was so completely destroyed by storm that out of 364 vessels 80 only
escaped.

“Λοκροί, i.e. ᾿Ἐπιζεφύριοι, cf. vil. 1: a colony of the Ozolian Locri,
founded, probably, about 710 B.C., famous for the legislation of Zaleucus,
and celebrated in Pindar (Ol. x. 18, ΧΙ. 19) for devotion to poetry as
well as for skill and courage in war.

Ῥηγῖνοι, cf. vi. 44: founded, apparently, in the 8th century B.c.,
famous as the head-quarters of the Pythagorean sect after the death of
its founder. Its position as commanding the passage of the straits
secured it from the state of decay into which most of the cities of
southern Italy eventually fell. As the terminus of the great Italian
highway we find it figuring as a town of importance even to the end of
the Roman empire. In 1783 it was almost destroyed by earthquakes
and suffered severely once more in 1841.

LXXXVI. § 5] NOTES. 261

Συρακοσίων, probably depends on ἦσαν as possessive genitive, with-
out ellipse of ξύμμαχοι, cf. ν. 84 ὃ 2 (Poppo).

κατὰ τὸ Evyyevés, as Chalcidians.

§ 3. πέμψαντες, the embassy was headed by Gorgias, who amazed
the Athenian audience by his rhetorical skill: cf. (Plato) Hipp. Ma.
282 B. If Diodorus is to be credited, his καμπαί and κατασκευαί told
with no less effect upon his hearers than those of Cicero upon his ‘novus
auditor,’ Pompey (Cic. ad Att. I. 14 ὃ 4).

οἱ τῶν Λεοντίνων ξύμμαχοι, Poppo explains with reference to an
alliance of Rhegium only with Athens: Bloomfield suggests a league
or confederation. Poppo objects that Gorgias clearly acted as the
representative of the Leontini independently.

κατά te...kal ὅτι, for the false coordination see Kriig. G. Gr.
59- 25 3:

παλαιὰν ξυμμαχίαν, cf. Kirch. Inscript. I. 33: the treaty was renewed
in the archonship of Apseudes, Ol. 86, 4.

Ἴωνες, cf. Iv. 61 § 2.

τῆς γῆς εἴργοντο, cf. 6 § 2.

§ 4. οἰκειότητος προφάσει, cf. IV. 61 ὃ 2, VI. 6, 76: once more we
have a dative coordinated with a participle (βουλόμενοι). An appositional
accusative might replace the dative, e.g. VI. 33 § 2, or even be coordinated
with it.

βουλόμενοι δέ, Stahl observes that δέ here forms but a weak contrast
of the real intention to the alleged cause, indeed 6é=76 δ᾽ ἀληθές. He
compares Tacitus’ use of ‘ceterum’ (Ann. I. 44).

μήτε, the negative affects the first clause only.

ἄγεσθαι, replacing the more usual ἐσπλεῖν of Thuc.

πρόπειραν, a rare word, but cf. Hdt. 1x. 48, ‘by way of trying,’
‘throwing out a feeler.’

ποιούμενοι, in lieu of ποιεῖσθαι: the confusion is caused by the
transfer of the negative to the dependent infinitive, i.e. οὔτε βουλόμενοι
οὐ ποιούμενοί Te appears in the form βουλόμενοί τε μὴ ἄγεσθαι... .ποιούμενοί
τε. The change to μήτε is due to Thuc.’s desire to avoid a δέ τε collo-
cation; the μήτε...τε sequence suggests the participial coordination.

εἰ, interrogative, ‘ whether.’

σφίσι, dependent on ὑποχείρια.

δυνατά, in agreement with τὰ πράγματα, cf. VIII. 106 § 5: for the
passive construction γενέσθαι cf. 51 § 2.

8 δ. καταστάντες és, ‘after establishing themselves,’ ‘taking up a
position at Rhegium.’ Poppo is at fault in rendering ‘cum pervenissent.’

262 ‘' DLHOUCYDIDES f/f. [_xxxvu. § 1—

CHAPTER LXXXVII.
Athens experiences a second visitation of the plague.

§ 1. ἡ νόσος, ‘morbus ille,’ cf. 11. 47 § 3. Diodorus (x11. 58)
ascribes the original outbreak to the malarious influence of the stagnant
pools left by the heavy rains of a winter which was followed by a
summer of tropical heat, and absence of ‘ etesian’ winds.

ἐκλιποῦσα μέν.. ἐγένετο δέ, for the irregular sequence cf. I. 57 ὃ 4,
Il. 47 § 3, VII. 13 § 2. ἐκλιποῦσα is here used in a primary rather than
secondary sense (deficere), as Classen suggests: ‘it had never entirely
quitted the city.’

τὸ παντάπασιν, explained on the analogy of τὸ παράπαν, but still a
unique instance. Thuc. may perhaps have intended an epexegetic use,
which his brachylogy has left obscure: i.e. ἐκλιποῦσα μὲν οὐδένα χρόνον
τὸ (=WorTe) παντάπασιν ἐκλιπεῖν.

διοκωχή, for orthography see Stahl, Qu. Gr. 14, Herw. Stud. 124:
‘an intermission,’ another rare word.

ὃ 2. παρέμεινε, this unwelcome visitor ‘stayed with them’ a full
year.’

καί, intensive, ‘no less than.’

ὥστε Αθηναίων, the variants presented by Cod. Laur. lead Hude to
doubt whether the insertion of ἐπίεσε may not restore the original text :
ὥστε ᾿Αθηναίους γε μὴ εἶναι ὅ τι μᾶλλον τούτου (Laur. τούτους) ἐπίεσε καὶ
ἐκάκωσε τὴν δύναμιν «-- αὐτῶν ᾽--. The omission of ἐπίεσε would at once
suggest the correction ᾿Αθηναίων, and the excision of the unintelligible
τούτους (vid. Hude, Comm. Crit. p. 115).

᾿Αθηναίων ye, ‘reliquorum non item’ (Poppo): this ye of limitation
rivets the attention on Athens.

ἐκάκωσε, ‘crippled.’

δύναμιν, ‘vires,’ ‘fighting strength,’ capacity for war, excluding
χρήματα.

8 8. τάξεων, Ξε καταλόγου (GOll.) rather ‘brigades’ or ‘battalions.’
Arnold (on Iv. 4) identifies τάξις with the λόχος of the Peloponnesians,
as representing the principal division of the army, probably roo men.
The κατάλογος includes (as Classen remarks) θῆτες and μέτοικοι.

ὄχλου, ‘the populace’ (1.6. the non-combatants, as distinct from
οἱ ἐκ τῶν τάξεων) : Diodorus says that of the populace 10,000 died.
From Il. 13 we may estimate the loss of 4,700 men here recorded as
roughly representing a mortality of about one in six amongst the
military.

LXXXVUI. ὃ 2] NOTES. , 263

avegevperos, ‘is past finding out,’ 1.6. it cannot be accurately estimated
(cf. ηὑρίσκετο I. 22 § 3).

§ 4. οἱ πολλοί, the article is demonstrative, ‘those frequent.’

τότε, Poppo, Stahl, and Hude all refer to ἐγένοντο: Cod. Laur. has
however σεισμοὶ τότε.

τῆς γῆς; rejected, as a gloss, by Herwerden.

ἐν EvBolq, the preposition should probably be retained (on the
authority of Laur. and Vat.): its loss is easily accounted for by
absorption in the Ev- of Εὐβοίᾳ.

*Opxopeva, (in inscriptions ’Epxouevos) the Minyan Orchomenus of
Hom. 1]. 2. 511: the other Orchomenus was in Arcadia, cf. Thuc. Iv.

76 § 3.
CHAPTER LXXXVIII.

§ 1. τριάκοντα ναυσί, twenty only came from Athens, cf. 86 ὃ 1.

Αἰόλου, cf. Strabo VI. 275 al Λιπαραίων νῆσοι, Pliny N. H. 111. 8. 92
‘Aeoliae, appellatae eaedem Liparaeorum, Hephaestiades a Graecis, a
nostris Volcaniae.’ Diodorus (v. 7) says that they are connected with
Aetna by ὑπόνομοι, which accounts for the alternate eruptions. The
name Liparaean is traditionally derived from Liparus a son of Auson,
who first peopled them, the name of Aeolides from one Aeolus who
married a daughter of king Liparus.

καλουμένας, ‘so called’: for the position of the participle Classen
compares I. 11 ὃ 3.

ἀδύνατα, impersonal, cf. 1. 59 ὃ 2.

§ 2. νέμονται, used of possession or occupation in any form, but
distinct from οἰκοῦσι, ‘their possessors are the Liparaeans.’

Κνιδίων ἄποικοι, from Pausanias X. 11 ὃ 3 and Diod. Sic. v. 9, we
gather that they were a mixed colony of Cnidians and Rhodians who,
under Pentathlus, an Olympian victor, first landed at Lilybaeum, but,
being beaten in a battle in which they helped the Segestans (Selinun-
tines ?), returned homewards once more, but on touching at Lipara were
induced by the inhabitants to stay.

ov μεγάλῃ, about 25 miles in circumference, 150 stadia according to
Pliny.

καλεῖται δέ, for this use of δέ replacing a relative clause, Poppo
compares IV. 53 § 2. The name Λιπάρα is said to be due to its
fertility.

τὰς ἄλλας, eleven or twelve in number at the present day.

Διδύμη, Salini.

264 THUCYDIDES 11. [txxxvii. § 2—

Στρογγύλην, Stromboli.

“Tepa (sc. ἱερὰ ᾿Ηφαίστου), its identity is questionable.

§ 3. νομίζουσι δ᾽ of ἐκείνῃ, Valcknaer condemns the whole sentence
as ‘una litura delendum,’ adding, ‘si Thucydidis sunt, legendum χαλ-
κεύειν.᾽ νομίζουσι apparently follows the analogy of φημί, ‘have the
tradition.’ For an equally harsh sequence of ws compare ΓΝ. 9 ὃ 3 ἐλπί-
ζοντας ws ἄν.

ἐκείνῃ, can well be paralleled by ταύτῃ: Cobet’s ἐκεῖ is needless.

ἀναδιδοῦσα, cf. 58 § 4, ‘summittens.’

κατά, ‘opposite to,’ cf. 11. 30 ὃ 2.

Μεσσηνίων, one of the original Siceliot tribes, as distinguished from
the Sicels (cf. VI. 2, 111. 115, with Poppo’s notes).

§ 4. προσεχώρουν, i.e. of Λιπαραῖοι, cf. 7 ὃ 5.

ἐτελεύτα, in the repetition of ἐτελεύτα some critics detect an adscript ;
it is, perhaps, only a reflection of the Ionic pév...6é construction.
Cwilinski (Hermes x11. 76) suspects the whole sentence.

CHAPTER LXXXIX.
The sixth year of the war now commences.

8 1. ᾿Αρχιδάμον, the commander of the first three invasions of
Attica; the last mention of him is found in Chap. 1, but in 26 Cleo-
menes is in command. Kriiger (Hist. Stud. 1. 151) and Clinton (Fasti
Hell.) agree in placing his death shortly before the intended invasion
here mentioned.

σεισμῶν, for the disturbing influence of such natural phenomena,
which appear to have not been altogether without effect on Thucydides
himself, cf. Vv. 45, VI. 95, VIII. 6.

ἀπετράποντο, in purely physical sense ‘turned back’; cf. Shilleto’s
note on I. 76 § 2.

8 2. κατεχόντων, ‘were prevalent,’ cf. I. τὸ § 1: a somewhat rare
use of the word, in lieu of which we find in 1. 23 ὃ 3 ἐπέχει. Cf. the
Lat. ‘obtinere,’ ‘praevalere,’ with the old English ‘ obtain.’

τῆς EvBolas, for position cf. 19 ὃ 2 (Cl.).

’OpoBlats, in the north-west, ‘hodie Rosias’ (Herw.).

ἀπελθοῦσα, the vulgate ἐπελθοῦσα is sufficiently condemned by the
ἐπῆλθε of the context: of ἐπῆλθε Herwerden finds corroboration in
Pliny Ep. vi. 20 § 9, but why not ἀπελθοῦσα ὃ the retirement of the sea
must precede the return. Diodorus’ account grossly exaggerates the
effect of these earthquake shocks.

LXXXIX. § 5] NOTES. 265

κυματωθεῖσα, ‘rising in a wave.’

μέρος τι, ‘bona pars,’ ‘a considerable part.’

τὸ μέν...τὸ δέ, both are nominatives and subjects to their respective
verbs.

κατέκλυσε, without accus. of object, =KataxAvow ἐποιήσατο, ‘caused
an inundation.’

ὑπενόστησε, ‘retired.’ The word is used of the subsidence of a
flood (Hdt. 1. 191), or of the settlement of a heavy body (Hdt. rv. 62)
(Arnold).

θάλασσα νῦν ἐστί, ‘what was once land is now sea.’ Bohme notes
the assimilation of the participle to the predicate. Goller adds ‘exspec-
taverim forsitan 7.’

διέφθειρεν, sc. ἡ θάλασσα.

φθῆναι, cf. VIII. 19 ὃ 3 ἐς γῆν φθασάντων.

8 3. ᾿Αταλάντην, Seneca alludes to this occurrence, Quaest. Nat.
VI. 24. Diodorus (XII. 59) says that the island was formed by the
earthquake; but in 11. 32 § 1 we read that the Athenians had already
planted a fort upon it.

«Λοκροῖς, cf. II. 32.

φρουρίου, partitive genitive with παρεῖλε. Kriiger quotes Eur.
Heracl. 908 παραιρῶν φρονήματος.

ἀνειλκυσμένων, the usual practice when vessels were not needed for
immediate service.

§ 4. Πεπαρήθῳ, by some identified with Pelagisi, Piperi; by
Leake with Chiliodromia (North. Gr. 111. 112). N.E. of Euboea, says
Classen, in the same group with Halonessus and Sciathus. Does the
name point to any connexion with πεπαρεῖν, as an ‘insula conspicua’ ?

ἐπαναχώρησις, ‘return.’

ἄλλας, ‘as well,’ the idiomatic ἄλλος: for a πρυτανεῖον would not
rank as an οἰκία.

§5. αἴτιον δ᾽ ἔγωγε νομίζω, a much disputed sentence. Meineke
(Herm. 111. 353) takes exception to the accus. and infin. in lieu of the
ὅτι constrn. Stahl proposes to treat αἴτιον as masculine, in agreement
with σεισμός : Hude objects that in this case we should not find ὁ σεισμός
in the relative sentence. In all other instances of αἴτιον in Thuc. the
word is neuter (cf. Bétant, Lex. Thuc.). Kriiger regards the infin.
ἀποστέλλειν as epexegetic of a suppressed εἶναι with αἴτιον. Hude’s
suggestion (Comm. Crit. p. 115) is by far the best and simplest, viz.
to treat the infin. ἀποστέλλειν as dependent on νομίζω, regarding αἴτιον
as appositional to the sentence: ‘as for the cause of such an occurrence,

266 LTHOCYDIDES 171. luxe si =

I hold that at that particular point where the shock is most severely
felt it (i.e. the earthquake) causes the sea to retire, which rushing back
again instantly makes the inundation all the more violent.’

κατὰ τοῦτο-- ταύτῃ, ‘at that point.’

ἀποστέλλειν, transitive=‘repellere’ (Cobet ἀναστέλλειν).

ἐπισπομένην, cf. 43 § 5, V. 3§2. This correction of F gives us
the sense which the passage demands, viz. the violent inrush of the sea
after this phenomenal ebb: ἐπισπωμένην, on the other hand, suggests
the weaker notion of ‘resorberi,’ the ἐπαναχώρησις of our context,
‘reductus’ rather than ‘refusus.’ The present interpretation demands,
of course, a change of subject with ποιεῖν, which we can only escape
by treating ἀποστέλλειν as intransitive (though of such a use we lack
instances), or by accepting Herwerden’s suggestion ἐπισπωμένης : the
use of the active ποιεῖν would naturally point to the retention of σεισμόν
as the subject of the second verb.

βιαιότερον, the comparative retains the inflexion of the positive,
cf. rot ὃ 2 (Cl.): we may however, as Kriiger suggests, regard it as
adverbial.

οὐκ ἄν μοι δοκεῖ, ἄν, which belongs to the infin. ξυμβῆναι, marks
the implied condition expressed in ἄνευ τούτου, as though the sentence
ran εἰ μὴ σεισμὸς γένοιτο οὐκ ἂν ξυμβαίη τὸ τοιοῦτο. For such substitution
in protasis, cf. Goodwin, Μ. T. 8 472.

ξυμβῆναι γενέσθαι, for the pleonasm cf. 1. 56 § 1.

Such gigantic waves are not infrequent features of serious earthquake
shocks. The great earthquake at Lisbon in 1755 supplies a memorable
instance. In the earthquake shock which visited East Anglia some few
years ago, the level of water in ponds even was sensibly affected.

CHAPTER XC

81. ἐπολέμουν μέν, answered by ἃ δὲ λόγου ἄξια, which has led
Meineke (Hermes Π|. 354) to suggest ἄλλα, a reading followed by
Poppo and Stahl. Kriiger, while retaining ἄλλοι, applies it to the
Sicels: to this Hude objects that they would scarcely be included
in the list of Athenian allies (ξὺν τοῖς σφετέροις ξυμμάχοι5) as it is not
until 103 § τ that Thuc. makes explicit mention of the allies. At the
same time, it must be remembered that Thuc.’s order of narrative is
not always implicitly to be relied upon. The historian’s intention was
manifestly to call attention to those operations of war which concerned
the Athenians only—an intention which was not fulfilled.

xcl. § 1] NOTES. 267

The difficulty of explaining ἄλλοι---τιη] 655 indeed the original text
was ἄλλοι dAors—leads me to accept Poppo’s reading, for which cf. 1.
65 § 2, and to explain ‘there was desultory warfare both on the part
of Siceliots (without Athenian aid) and of Athenians in concert with
their allies; I will however confine myself to the mention of the most
noteworthy successes or reverses of the Athenian arms.’

ὡς ἑκάστοις ξυνέβαινεν, sc. πολεμεῖν.

καὶ αὐτοί... καὶ οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι, =‘ut ipsi...ita Athenienses.’

ἀντιπολέμιοι, for the formation cf. ἀντιστρατηγοί, VII. 86 82. Her-
werden, from Dio Cassius, accepts the form ἀντιπόλεμοι (οἴ. Pollux 1, 150)
which is apparently the Ionic form.

§ 2. ξυμμάχων, cf 86 § 5.

MvaAds, Milazzo, on N. coast: cf. Diod. Sic. XII. 54.

φυλαί, here the equivalent of τάξις (Poppo): the members of the
various tribes formed separate battalions, cf. VI. 98 ὃ 4-

ἐνέδραν τινά, cf. 4 § 2 ἔκπλουν τινά. The enclitic is used in
a depreciatory sense, ‘some sort of ambuscade,’ ‘an attempt at an
ambuscade.’

τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν, the distinction between ἐπί and ἀπό in such a
case is but slight: cf. Iv. 10 § 3. Here ἀπό calls attention to the fact
of their disembarking.

8 3. ἐρύματι, -Ξ- φρουρίῳ, cf. ν. 4 § 4.

ὁμολογίᾳ, ‘capitulation,’ 4 ὃ 2.

τῶν te ᾿Αθηναίων καὶ τῶν ξυμμάχων, these words Herwerden
strikes out as ‘manifestum emblema’ (Stud. p. 48) on the ground that
(1) the genitive absolute needs no subject, least of all at the expense of
a trajection: (2) that they are repeated from § 1. For the disturbed
order Poppo compares IV. 134 ὃ 1, V- 47 ὃ 1-

καὶ αὐτοί, they followed the example of Mylae.

τἄλλα πιστά, ‘and otherwise giving pledges of good faith.’ πιστά
is predicative, cf. 1. 32 § 3. Poppo, however, treats it as a substantive
(cf. Popp. ed. mai. 11. 851) : see Arnold’s note.

CHAPTER XCI.

$1. ἔστειλαν περί, a commonplace of the Thucydidean vocabulary,
as Classen notes, cf. 11. 23 § 2. Really Demosthenes received a ‘roving
commission,’ they sent him to ‘cruise off, or round, the Peloponnesian
coast.’

Δημοσθένης, the first mention of that active and able commander,

268 LH OUCYOIDES IIL [xcL. § 1—

the victor of Pylos, a central figure in the Knights of Aristophanes, and
by his great namesake classed with Aristides, Pericles, and Nicias.

Προκλῆς, killed in the retreat from Aetolia, cf. 98 § 4.

δισχιλίους, Diodorus (X11. 65), confounding both number and
occasion, writes 3000.

§ 2. νησιώτας, over whom Athens claimed control: cf. ν. 97, 99;
VII. 57 ὃ ἢ:

οὐκ ἐθέλοντας, cf. v. 84 § 2, and III. 37 § 2 ἄκοντας ἀρχομένους.

és τὸ αὐτῶν, Kriiger reads αὑτῶν.

τὸ ξυμμαχικόν, cf. VIII. 9 § 2: this neuter form is not infrequent in
Thucydides.

ἰέναι, cf. vI. 80 § 1: although Kriiger would prefer ἐσιέναι: for
synonymous forms of expression see Stahl’s note. The Melians were
colonists of Sparta (Diod. Sic. x11. 65).

§ 3. δῃουμένης, imperfect participle, as the ravages continued.
From Kirchhoff, Inscr. Att. 1. 38, we find that the acceptance of the
᾿Αττικαὶ σπονδαί was urged on Thera and Melos.

αὐτοί, in contradistinction to the other force from Athens, οἱ ἐκ τῆς
πόλεως. But, if needful, αὐτοί could=‘en masse’: cf. VIII. 39 ὃ 2,
Arist. Pax 18.

*Qpemdv, a town on the borders of Attica and Boeotia, and a
frequent bone of contention between the two countries. After the
battle of Chaeroneia Philip handed it over to Athens.

τῆς Γραϊκῆς, the expression of the vulgate τῆς πέραν γῆς Goller
regards asacommon term. Kriiger, from Cramer, would read Ietpatxjs,
Stahl Τραικῆς, from Τραῖα, apparently the ancient name of the place.
The expression τὴν περαίην (Hdt. vill. 44) Poppo regards as not
affecting the present question.

σχόντες --προσσχόντες, found in construction with preposition or
with dative: cf. I. 111 ὃ 4, VII. 1 § 2.

ot ὁπλῖται ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν, Attic Greek would require of ἀπὸ τῶν
νεῶν ὁπλῖται or of ὁπλῖται οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν. But Thucydides is credited
with more than one instance of such false position. Why should not
ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν be complete per se, as meaning ‘leaving the ships’? If
necessary we can find a construction with ἐπορεύοντο.

Τάναγραν, about 130 stadia from Oropus, on the left bank of the
Asopus, and the scene of more than one battle: Oenophyta lies within
the district.

§ 4. οἱ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως πανδημεί, i.e. the force from Athens raised
by a general levy: a draft had been levied from all the φυλαί, to the

xc. ὃ 2] NOTES. 269

extent, indeed, according to Classen, of all the available strength of
Athens after the despatch of the two expeditions under Demosthenes
and Nicias.

‘Immovikov, the father-in-law of Alcibiades. His father was the
Callias who negotiated the peace of Cimon with the Persian king, after
the victory on the Eurymedon in 470 B.C.: cf. Dem. F. L. p. 428,
Diod. Sic. XII. 4.

ἀπὸ σημείου, cf. II. go § 4.

és τὸ αὐτό, ‘at the same point,’ cf. v. 55 ὃ 2.

8 δ. Τανάγρᾳ, Meineke would read Tavaypala, cf. τν. 76 ὃ 4: but
the πόλις may include the χώρα. This district, from the richness of its
pastures, was known as ποιμαν δρία, ‘the milk pail.’

τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ, sc. ἡμέρᾳ, Classen (from 1. 44 ὃ 1), wrongly in my
judgment, throws into agreement with μάχῃ, which, however, finds a
natural construction with κρατήσαντες, ‘on the next day, in an engage-
ment (which took place) they defeated them.’

κρατήσαντες, found with accusative again in I. 108 ὃ 5. In the
case of verbs of this type, which take either accus. or genitive, Curtius
endeavours to shew that the contrast is between ‘complete mastery’
expressed by accus. and ‘partial mastery’ expressed by genitive. The
distinction is an exceedingly questionable one.

ὅπλα, whether of the slain or of the ῥιψάσπιδες.

§ 6. ταῖς ἑξήκοντα, the article may be either possessive or demon-
strative ; i.e. either ‘suis’ or ‘quas supra diximus.’

«Λοκρίδος, i.e. Opuntian Locris.

ἔτεμε, the aorist records the mere fact without reference to either
time or exertion. Indeed, Thuc. might equally well have written ταμὼν
ἀνεχώρησεν.

CHAPTER XCII.

81. Τραχινίᾳ, readings vary between Τραχῖνι (the constant Thu-
cydidean use elsewhere), Τραχινίδι (Pausanias), Τραχινίοις and Tpaxuwiars
(sc. mérpas) Cl.: from the last Benedict conjectures Tpaxwig és
ἀποικίαν καθίσταντο: cf. VIII. 29 ὃ 1, where the reading is probably
false.

καθίσταντο, inceptive imperfect, ‘proceeded to found.’

ἀπό, causal, cf. Curt. Gk. Gr. § 452.

§ 2. εἰσὶ μέν, a false position, the true order being ξύμπαντες μέν.
‘The Malians, as a nation, consist of three tribes.’

ἸΠαράλιοι, the equivalent, as Arnold suggests, of the Athenian

270 THUCYDIDES 1/1. [xcr. § 2—

πάραλοι, the people who grew up around the original ἱερῆς, or priest-
nobles, Eupatridae, the Trachinians representing the ὑπεράκριοι of
Athens: cf. Callimachus, Delos 287 δεύτερον ‘Ipéwy ἄστυ (vid. Meineke
ad loc.), ‘the land of the lepjs.’ ‘

πολέμῳ ἐφθαρμένοι, ‘weakened (exhausted) by war’: according to
Diodorus the long wars with the Oetaei had depopulated the town: it
lay at the foot of Mt. Oeta. Livy xxxvi. 21 describes it thus, ‘sita in
radicibus Oetaei montis, ipsa in campo, arcem imminentem loco alto et
undique praecipiti habet’: in chap. 22 he describes its siege.

Οἰταίων, an independent highland tribe: cf. vim. 3 § 1, Hat.
VII. 217: see Hermes VII. 380 sqq.

προσθεῖναι, the Thucydidean use of μέλλω with either future or
present is so constant that Herwerden would read προστιθέναι, although
Arist. Av. 366 causes him to hesitate before accepting Cobet’s con-
demnation of the aorist asa soloecism. Poppo quotes three instances
from Thuc., v. 30 § 1, v.98 (where Herw. sees a confusion between
μέλλοντες γενήσεσθαι and μελλήσοντας γενέσθαι), and VI. 31 §1: cf. Herw.
Stud. 146. For the phrase προσθεῖναι σφᾶς αὐτούς, cf. VIII. 50 § 3:
it is explained by the editors δϑ -ε προσάγεσθαι, but the reflexive force
is strong: more strictly, it represents ‘to attach themselves to,’ ‘ place
themselves on the side of Athens.’

μὴ οὐ, the second negative due to the lurking negative in δείσαντες.

πιστοί, i.e. in point of αὐτονομία, of which, as proffered by Athens,
the allies had grave suspicion.

§ 3. ἡ μητρόπολις τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων, these words Cobet ex-
punges as an adscript from I. 107 § 2: cf. also I. 12 § 3, with Arnold’s
note. For the Dorian legend in its Laconian form see Abbott, Hist.
(Ci ἘΠῚ Ms τ|1- 5.

8 4. γνώμην εἶχον -Ξ διενοοῦντο, cf. 11. 86 § 5, lit. ‘were minded to.’

τὴν ἀποικίαν, the article is deictic as recalling § 1.

τιμωρεῖν, i.e. βοηθεῖν.

τοῦ πολέμου, for the genitive of connexion cf. I. 22 § 3, 36 § 2.

καθίστασθαι, Herwerden, feeling the need of ἀν, suggests καλῶς ἂν
αὐτοῖς : ‘male,’ says Poppo, ‘quod fit non est, sed erit.’ The present
may either be a ‘praesens propheticum’ or represent a mere passive
inversion of the active καθιστάναι, ‘that they were establishing the
settlement.’ Stahl quotes similar uses of γίγνεσθαι and εἶναι, e.g. 11.
84 ὃ 2, IV. 9 ὃ 3.

ἐπί (xara τῆς Εὐβοίας, sch.), ‘against Euboea,’ i.e. to threaten, or
attack Euboea, cf. 13 § 3.

xc. § 5] NOTES. 271

ναυτικόν, the district was well timbered; ‘frequens arboribus’ (Livy
XXXVI. 21).

παρασκευασθῆναι ἄν, the ἀν is really potential, ‘might be equipped,’
at the same time it recalls the condition εἰ κατασταίη ἡ πόλις.

ὥστε, pointing to the conditions under which the fleet would be
built: cf. the Latin ‘ita...ut’: lit. ‘so as to make their passage at a
short distance’ (from a point near at hand). The sequence is strongly
suggestive of the Herodotean use of οὕτως ὥστε, cf. Goodw. M. T. 8 593.
For the merging of condition in result see Gildersleeve, Am. J. Phil.
VII. 167 5646.

ἐπὶ Θράκης παρόδου, ‘an advance Thrace-wards.’ τὰ ἐπὶ Θράκης is
more frequent in Thuc., that is to say, the Chalcidians. For the Spartan
designs cf. Iv. 78.

χρησίμως ἕξειν, ‘would stand them in good stead,’ ‘prove useful’:
for genitive with ἔχειν cf. 1.22 § 3. The contrast of certainty (future)
with contingency (aorist with dv) deserves notice.

ve, inferential, ‘thus.’

ὥρμηντο, ‘were eager,’ cf. VIII. 40 § 3.

8 δ. ἐν Δελφοῖς, Cobet (Mnemos. VIII. 143) suggests a transposition,
τὸν ἐν Δελφοῖς θεόν. The usual practice on such occasions was to consult
the oracle: Jowett here remarks that the sanction of the god was given
to an enterprise destined to result in utter failure.

κελεύοντος, for omission of subject in singular number, cf. 38 § 6:
with the plural the ellipse is frequent.

περιοίκων, the old inhabitants of the country who had been reduced
by the Dorians not to slavery but dependency (cf. Miiller, Dorians 11.
τό sqq.). In respect of political rights they probably stood on a level
with the plebeians in the early days of Rome, but with the additional
advantage of a monopoly of trade and commerce (cf. Smith, Dict. Antiq.
S.V. mepiotxos). They were originally of Achaean stock.

τῶν ἄλλων, ὄοοο says Diodorus (XII. 59), from whom Naber would
read τετρακισχιλίους. The exclusion of Achaeans, here related, clashes,
as Poppo remarks, with the evidence of Xenophon, Hell. 1. 2 § 18: see
however Thirlwall, G. Hist. Iv. 95.

ἐθνῶν, the smaller πόλεις (Classen). The selection was not made
on purely political grounds: it was largely influenced by such Spartan
exclusiveness as found its highest expression in ξενηλασίαι.

οἰκισταί, ‘triumviri coloniae deducendae,’ not always three in
number, although this was a favourite Spartan number: sometimes
two or even one sufficed; cf. VI. 3, 4.

272 LHO CV PIPES LTT,” [xcu. § 5—

᾿Αλκίδας, presumably the unsuccessful commander of chap. 16, 26,
31, 76. His appointment would serve the twofold purpose of getting
rid of an inefficient person, and lending to the new colony the prestige
of the presence of an ex-admiral.

§6. καταστάντες, cf. 86 § 2.

ἐκ καινῆς, a corresponding form of expression is found even with
the plural, e.g. κατὰ μόνας, 1. 32 ὃ 5, κατὰ πρώτας, Plato Polit. 292 B.
The ellipse is uncertain, but is apparently suggested by the context, 6.5.
τειχίσεως.

ἣ νῦν, the old name was Trachis, cf. Hdt. vir. 199.

σταδίους τεσσαράκοντα, modern geography verifies the statement
of Thucydides; although, as Arnold suggests, the altered course of the
river Spercheius renders identification difficult.

παρεσκευάζοντο, the second step—‘they proceeded to construct
dockyards.’ The defences are already complete in the aorist ἐτεί-
χισαν.

εἴρξαν τό, the reading of all Mss. except E, ἤρξαντο appears incom-
plete without some infinitive, e.g. κλῆσαι. Classen, from E, reads elptav
τό (comparing 51 ὃ 3 τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἠπείρου), i.e. ‘in the direction of Ther-
mopylae, they cut off all access.’ The Phocians had in past times
built a wall across the pass, cf. Hdt. vir. 176. Herwerden, Stud.
p- 48, expunges κατὰ Θερμοπύλας, but leaves ἤρξαντο, which Kriiger
also retains. Portus’ version connects ἤρξαντο with παρεσκευάζοντο.

εὐφύλακτα, whether in agreement with νεώρια, or an impersonal
construction, matters little: cf. 1. 8 § 2, 11. 98 § 1, VIlt..55 § 1.

CHAPTER "XCIil.

§1. ξυνοικιζομένης, the preposition ξύν points to the mixed nation-
ality of the settlers (Class.): cf. Port. ‘colonis undique coactis.? To
me it only represents a more expressive form of συγκαθισταμένης.

ἐπὶ τῇ Εὐβοίᾳ, ‘they thought it was a direct menace to Euboea.’
For the sequence of the two aorists cf. g1 sub fin. ἔτεμε καὶ ἀνεχώρησε.

Κήναιον, the north-west promontory of Euboea, opposite to Ther-
mopylae, i.e. the mouth of the Malian gulf, the Lithada of modern
times: cf. Leake 11. 617. It was the site of a temple of Zeus: cf.
Soph. Trach. 238. The place is mentioned by Livy xxxvI. 20 § 5.

ἀπέβη, a solitary instance of this verb used impersonally in Thu-
cydides (Cl.).

§ 2. αἴτιον δὲ ἦν, this form of expression is followed in Thue. either

XCIIL. ὃ 2| NOTES. ong

by a substantive (cf. 82 § 8), or by a participle in personal agreement
(Iv. 26 § 5), or by ὅτι (11. 65 ὃ 8): our present construction may reflect
the analogy of τεκμήριον δέ, σημεῖον δέ (cf. 1. 8 § 1, I. 50 § 2). But in
Thuc. (with one exception only, 11. 50 ὃ 2), γάρ is the invariable
sequence. Cobet, N. Lect. 419, 718, insists on its insertion in all
such sequences: against this Shilleto protests: see his note on 11. 50
§ 2: the instance which S. quotes from Theaetetus 150 C is redeemed
from curtness by the prefatory τόδε---τὸ δὲ αἴτιον τούτου τόδε" μαιεύεσθαί
με ὁ θεὸς ἀναγκάζει. Classen’s rejection of Cobet’s γάρ, which Her-
werden accepts, is hardly justified by an appeal to parallel passages,
in Thucydides at least, although Kriiger quotes one or two strong
cases, e.g. Dem. 8. 32 αἴτιον δὲ τούτων, παρεσκευάκασιν ὑμᾶς. The
reason may, of course, be stated as an independent fact; but, can we
justify the asyndeton on any one of the four grounds which Hermann
assigns for the use of this figure, viz.: (1) mental excitement, (2) the
introduction of some new and grave topic, (3) ‘oratio graviter finita,’
(4) explanation of some obscure statement? The topic is already
introduced by αἴτιον δέ. So far as concerns the participial construction,
e.g. IV. 26 § 5 αἴτιον δὲ ἦν οἱ προειπόντες, it is merely a question of the
substitution of participle for infinitive, 1.6. of an adjectival for a sub-
stantival form of expression. A Latin would, ‘pro re nata,’ write either
‘urbis incendium’ or ‘ urbs incensa.’

Matthiae’s solution (Gr. Syn. § 309), that the distance of the principal
verbs ἔφθειρον καὶ ἐπολέμουν from their nominative, owing to the inter-
vention of participles, led Thucydides to treat the latter part of the
sentence as an independent construction, only throws us back into the
ambiguities which so long obscured Greek grammar: equally unsound,
in my estimation, is his criticism that yap could not follow (οἵ re yap Θ.),
because οἱ Θεσσαλοὶ should be the subject to αἴτιον ἦν. Thuc. uses
αἴτιον as a predicative substantive regardless of gender or number, with
this limitation only, that where αἴτιος precedes the neuter singular is
used, where it follows, it is thrown into strict agreement. So far as
the mere expansion of the form of expression is concerned, we may well
refer it to the ‘Schema Pindaricum’ so called.

If any confusion in the text exists, it is due to some ‘homo acutus,’
who out of an original ὅτε evolved of τε for the sake of instituting a
correlation between τε. καί. My own belief is that Thuc. wrote either
αἴτιον δὲ ἦν ὅτι Θεσσαλοί (for of the article we have no need, cf. Iv.
108 § 1 Θεσσαλῶν διαγόντων) or αἴτιον δὲ ἣν οἵ τε Θεσσαλοὶ καὶ wy ἐπὶ τῇ
γῇ ἐκτίζετο <ol> φοβούμενοι ἔφθειρον,

Sar 18

274 LHOCYDIDES 777: [Χο § 2—

ἐν δυνάμει ὄντες, i.e. ἐν κράτει ὄντες, δυνατοὶ ὄντες. Herwerden
compares Plato Rep. 328 C ἐν δυνάμει τοῦ πορεύεσθαι. The Thessalians
were dominant in these parts, vid. 11. ror ὃ 2.

ταύτῃ, cf. 88 § 3.

kal ὧν, a brachylogy=xal ἐκεῖνοι ὧν, ‘and those whose territory
was menaced by the settlement,’ i.e. the Oenians, Dolopians and
Malians.

ἐκτίζετο, sc. ἡ πόλις. Classen would destroy the connexion between
τε and καί, and follows Poppo in assuming a τε... δέ form of sequence,
ot τε Θεσσαλοί... οὐχ ἥκιστα δέ, making οὐ μέντοι the equivalent of δέ.
But this succession of τε... δέ points to a climax, of which the context
has no trace.

νεοκαταστάτοις, a solitary instance in Thuc.: but cf. νεόκτιστος,
100 § 2.

ἐξετρύχωσαν, ‘wore them out,’ cf. vil. 48 § 2: the simple form is
common in Thucydides.

Kal πάνυ πολλούς, Diodorus speaks of 4000 Peloponnesians, 6000
others; the Malians possibly helped to swell the number of the ad-
venturers.

βέβαιον, cf. 1. 32 § 1, ‘secure.’

§ 3. οὐ μέντοι ἥκιστα, practically=od μὴν ἥκιστα, as rou (‘look
you’) simply reinforces μέν. In the combination μέντοι we find a
blending of concession with reservation; the preponderance of either
the context must determine. Here it expresses ‘sane,’ ‘I grant you,’
rather than ‘tamen’: cf. v. 43 § 2 οὐ μέντοι ἀλλά, Plato Phaedo
62 B.

αὐτῶν, Kriig. suggests αὐτοί.

οἱ ἀφικνούμενοι, 1.6. ‘who came from time to time,’ whether year
by year or in other rotation is not specified, cf. 1.91 § 1. The allusion
is to the ἁρμοσταί of Sparta, cf. VIII. 5 ὃ 2, the ἐπιδημιουργοί, 1. 56 ὃ 2,
‘ officers of supervision ’ of the Dorian states. For the malversations of
such officials see Grote, Hist., chap. LXXXII.

ἐκφοβήσαντες, Classen presses the ἐκ of the compound, ‘frightened
them out of the place,’ cf. vi1I. 44 § 2, a doubtful instance: in 42 § 5 it
is used in the sense of ‘intimidating.’

χαλεπῶς, ‘harshly,’ severely.’

ov καλῶς, ‘unfairly,’ cf. VIII. 43 § 3.

ἐξηγούμενοι, without object, cf. 1. 76 § 1, ‘domineering,’ ‘lording
it over them.’ There is a twofold suggestion of ‘ ruling’ and ‘dictating’
(ie. laying down the law). The Boeotians on their own authority

xcIv § 2] NOTES. 275

expelled Hegesippides, cf. v. 52 ὃ 1. Polyaenus 11. 21 records an
iniquitous device of Herippidas (? Hegesippidas).

πρόσοικοι, cf. ν. 51 § 2.

ἐπεκράτουν, cf. 1. 49 ὃ 6.

CHAPTER XCIV.

The narrative (for which cf. Diod. x1I. 60) is now resumed from
chap. 91, after the episode of Trachis, cc. 92, 93.

81. κατείχοντο, ‘were detained,’ cf. 11. 86 ὃ 1.

οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν τριάκοντα, the ships of οι ὃ 1.

᾿Ελλομένῳ, identified by Leake, N. G. ΠΙ. 23, with Klimino, a
port sheltered by four or five islands lying before it, and connected
by a narrow opening with a long interior bay. Forchhammer suggests
Κλυμένῳ.

τῆς Λευκαδίας, sc. γῆς, οἵ. ἡ Σαμία, ἡ ‘Podla. ‘Velim constanter
ΔΛευκάς,᾽ says Herwerden, misled by the form. Cobet points out that
Aevxadia denotes ‘ager Leucadiorum et in peninsula et in continente
situs.’ Classen explains the passage by an unsuccessful attempt at
landing (xp@rov)—which appears scarcely consistent with the notion
of λόχος or diapPopa—followed by an attempt in force upon the capital
itself.

ἔπειτα marks order or sequence, ὕστερον, time (Kriig.).

Οἰνιαδῶν, cf. 11. 102 § 2. Leake notes that the name of the place
always occurs in history under that of the people. ‘Placed on the
right flank of the great line of defence which the Achelous afforded to
the Acarnanes against their powerful neighbours of Aetolia, Oeniadae
was of immense importance to the Acarnanian confederacy, although
its situation at the extremity of that province, in an angle of the
maritime plain, the greater part of which belonged to Aetolia, and
possibly the influence of some possessions on the Aetolian side of the
river, caused it sometimes to be politically dissevered from Acarnania,
or even in alliance with the Aetolians’ (Leake, N. G. 111. 564).

Ζακυνθίοις, Diodorus substitutes Μεσσηνίους τοὺς ἐν Ναυπάκτῳ,
ΘΕ. 5:

8. 2. ἔξω, construe with τοῦ ἰσθμοῦ. The Leucadians held part of
the territory of Acarnania proper.

ΔΛευκάς, the ἀκτὴ ἠπείροιο of Homer. Scylax relates that (in the
7th century) the Acarnanians of Leucas being in a state of insurrection
called in 1000 Corinthian colonists, who eventually occupied the

18—z2

276 THUCYDIDES JIT. [xciv ὃ 2—

isthmus, and, by cutting through it, converted it into an island.
According to Pliny, the canal was about 3 stades in length: it had
become useless before the Peloponnesian war, as is evident from the
constant allusions to hauling ships across the isthmus. Its restoration
was probably a work of the Romans after the Macedonian conquest, and
was still existing in the time of Augustus. Livy’s account (XXXII. 17)
is probably borrowed from Polybius, and contains, like Strabo’s, one or
two inaccuracies, for which see Leake III. 20: cf. also Arnold’s note
and map.

πλήθει, ‘superior numbers.’ πλῆθος simply denotes an aggregate
not determined by number.

ἡσύχαζον, cf. Iv. 73 § 4, they made no attempt at resistance.

ἠξίουν, ‘urged.’

ἀποτειχίζειν, 1.6. to cut them off from their point of junction with
the mainland: yet, in 95 ὃ 2, we find περιτείχισις.

dy extends its force to ἀπαλλαγῆναι.

ἐκπολιορκῦσαι, i.e, compel them to surrender.

8 3. ἀναπείθεται, the ἀνά of the compound points, says Classen,
to an almost violent reaction: cf. 1. 84 82. Demosthenes was persuaded
in spite of himself, ‘convinced against his will.’

ὡς καλόν, Classen explains on analogy of neuter impersonals, e.g.
δέον, ἐξόν (cf. Goodw. ὃ 875) as=ws καλὸν ὄν, cf. 11.358 1. But it is
by no means certain that the ellipse is not ἐστί, ws standing for ὅτι, cf.
VIII. 2 § 1 οὗ μετασχεῖν καλὸν εἶναι.

Ναυπάκτῳ te...kal προσποιήσειν, in such sequences of τε, καί,
there is always the possibility of either sentence asserting its gram-
matical individuality; i.e. the tendency is to a change of construction in
the καί clause: cf. v. 61 ὃ 4, IV. 3 ὃ 3: on the latter of these two
passages Barton remarks that ‘the particle τε is locally affixed to the
leading notion of the sentence’: so in the present instance the two
leading notions are (1) Naupactus, (2) τὸ ἄλλο ἠπειρωτικόν. The return
from the subordinate to the primary construction, a well-known feature
of Greek, is amply illustrated by Shilleto in his note on I. 58§ 1. On
such a principle of resumption (cf. Iv. 3 § 3) the structure will be ἀναπεί-
θεται ἐπιθέσθαι, ws καλὸν ὃν (sc. ἐπιθέσθαι) καὶ ῥᾳδίως προσποιήσειν. On
the other hand, the Greek tendency to lapse from ὡς ΟΥ̓ὅτι constrn.
into the accusative with infinitive is so common that the analysis may
be ἀναπείθεται ws καλόν (ἐστι) ἐπιθέσθαι, καὶ ὡς προσποιήσει (changing
into προσποιήσειν). In any case the change is noteworthy, as the τε...
καί clauses supply the motives for the attempt. The meaning is clear,

xcv § 1] NOTES. 277

‘that it was a good opportunity for him, with so large a force collected,
to attack the Aetolians, not only as enemies of Naupactus, but with the
further prospect of easily winning to the Athenian interest the other
tribes of the mainland.’

τὸ ἠπειρωτικόν, an ethnic neuter; they were, like Leucas and
Oeniadae, allies of Sparta.

§ 4. εἶναι, the infinitive is either a natural continuation of the oratio
obliqua, or may find its structure from ἀπέφαινον.

κατὰ κώμας, as in the case of ancient Attica, centralisation was
unknown, cf. I. 5 § 1, 10 § 2.

διὰ πολλοῦ, ‘far apart,’ at some distance from each other, cf. 11.
29 ὃ 3:

σκευῇ, for the feminine form cf. 1. 2 ὃ 2: cf. also πάθη for πάθος.
They were εὐσταλεῖς τῇ ὁπλίσει, ‘levi armatura instructi.’

ξυμβοηθῆσαι, ‘collect their forces,’ cf. Lat. ‘conglobari.’

καταστραφῆναι, epexegetic of χαλεπόν, cf. I. 20 § 1, II. 36 § 4.

8 δ. ᾿Αποδώτοις, Herwerden has corrected the accent from Steph.
Byzant.: cf. Livy ΧΧΧΙΙ. 34. They were inhabitants of AlrwNa ἐπί-
κτητος, ‘acquired Aetolia,’ and bordered upon Locris. Ancient Aetolia
comprehended only the district from the Achelous to the Euenus together
with the fertile inland plain (Leake 11. 623).

ὅπερ μέρος, for attraction to predicate, see Kriig. G. G. § 61, 7, ἢ. 8.
For Latin use, cf. Livy xLtI. 44, ‘Thebae, quod Boeotiae caput est’:
see also Madvy. Lat. Synt. § 316.

ἀγνωστότατοι, ‘most unintelligible.’ They were semi-barbarians,
cf. Polybius Xv1l. 5 τῶν Αἰτωλῶν οὐκ eioiv"EXAnves οἱ πλείους.

ὠμοφάγοι, i.e. eaters of raw flesh—but no more ‘cannibals’ than the
φθειροτραγέοντες of Herodotus Iv. 109 were ‘eaters of lice.’

προσχωρήσειν finds its grammatical clue from ἐκέλευον, though logic

will suggest ἔλεγον.

GHAP PER: XCV.

§ 1. χάριτι πεισθείς, Demosthenes was actuated not merely by
goodwill, but by actual gratitude: the Messenians had done much to
save Phormio from disaster: cf. 11. 90. Herwerden, on analogy of
50 § 1, Κλέωνος γνώμῃ, expunges πεισθείς. The sentence, which is
interrupted by a lengthy parenthesis καὶ νομίσας... Βοιωτία ἐστίν, is held
in suspense until it resumes its construction at ἄρας οὖν.

τοῖς ἠπειρώταις, not, as Stahl points out, the actual but the possible
allies of Athens, cf. 94 § 3.

278 THUCYDIDES 777: [xcv § 1—

μετὰ τῶν Αἰτωλῶν. These words, which Stahl rejects, Classen wisely
retains, comparing Vv. 36 § 1. The absence of Aetolian opposition
would be essential to their advance by land; indeed, the words pera
τῶν Αἰτωλῶν may be taken in close connexion with κατὰ γῆν ἐλθεῖν, as
representing διαγόντων τῶν Αἰτωλῶν.

Κυτίνιον, cf. 1. 107, Hdt. vill. 43: one of the four great Dorian
cities, by Leake identified with Gravia, situated at the northern
entrance of the pass leading from the valley of Doris to the plain of
Amphissa. It was a position of vast strategical importance, as is clear
from its selection (1) by Eurylochus το ὃ 1, (2) by Philip of Macedon
before the battle of Chaeroneia.

ἐν δεξιᾷ, a vague but sufficient indication as marking the point of
the compass: cf. 11. 98 § 2, VIII. 108 § 1. He was committed to this
more circuitous route by the hostility of Delphi (BI.).

ἕως καταβαίη, ‘donec descenderet’(Cl.). The optative suggests the
purely subjective statement of the case, reflecting the plan of campaign
as submitted to Demosthenes’ own mind.

del ποτε, cf. I. 13 ὃ 3.

φιλίαν, the alliance of Phocis with Sparta, inspired merely by fear
of Boeotia, was always a precarious one.

ξυστρατεύσειν. Herwerden, Stud. p. 48, suggests this reading, which
Stahl, Quaest. Gramm. p. 8, demands as necessary. The present is
defended by Classen on analogy of § 3 ὠφελία ἐδόκουν εἶναι. Madvig
and Cobet agree in holding that, except in the case of such verbs as
necessarily suggest the notion of expectation, the aorist without dy is
inadmissible (see Cob. Nov. Lect. 245).

ἢ kav βίᾳ προσαχθῆναι, marking a possible alternative.

ἤδη, ‘from this point,’ cf. 11. 96 ὃ 3.

οὖν, resumptive, and essential to the continuity of the sentence: cf.
Lat. ‘igitur.’

ἀκόντων, cf. Iv. 78 § 4.

Σόλλιον, Stravolimiona (Leake, N. G. tv. 18), a Corinthian colony,
captured by Athens in the first year of the war, and handed over by
them to the people of Palaerus (11. 30 ὃ 1). Its position was midway
between Leucas and Oeniadae. Simcox holds that Demosthenes had
not yet decided to approach Aetolia from the south rather than from
the west, but that the dissent of the Acarnanians finally settled the
question.

ὃ 2. οὐ προσεδέξαντο, ‘refused to entertain’ (the project, τὴν
ἐπίνοιαν) : for use without object cf, 11. 70 ὃ 2,

XCVI § 1] NOTES. 279

τὴν ov περιτείχισιν, cf. V. 50 ὃ 4, I. 137 § 4, with Poppo’s note.

Κεφαλλῆσι, cf. 94 ὃ τ:

τριακοσίοις, this would give the usual proportion of 10 ἐπιβάται to
each ship. The larger proportion of 40 to each vessel belongs to the
earlier days of naval tactics, when victory was determined rather by
weight of numbers than by skill of seamen: see Arnold’s note, and cf.
vil. 62, 67.

πεντεκαίδεκα, cf. 79 § 2. Kriiger places the number at 13.

ἀπῆλθον, presumably ἀρρωστίᾳ τοῦ στρατεύειν, as well as through
sheer indifference, not having any personal interests at stake.

8 3. Οἰνεῶνος, according to Leake, close to Naupactus (N. G. II.
616), apparently a harbour (98 § 3) two days’ march from Potidania
(96 § 2), east of Naupactus, and separated from it by the river Morno.

ξύμμαχοι, in II. 9 ὃ 2 the Locrians are stated to be allies of Sparta.
Thucydides may here be distinguishing the attitude of this particular
section of the Locrians from that of the main body of the nation.
Simcox.

ἔδει, cf. 11. 5 ὃ τ with Goodw. M. T. 8 415.

ὁμόσκευοι, i.e. as light-armed, cf. 94 ὃ 4:

μάχης, ‘warfare’ (‘militia’), cf Iv. 34 § 2, Hdt. vil. 9 ὃ 2.

χωρίων, sc. τῶν ἐκείνων, the second article omitted by brachylogy.

CHAPTER XCVI.

81. αὐλισάμενος, ‘bivouacking’ for the night, after his first day’s
march. He takes care to keep on the Locrian side of the Aetolian border.

Nepelov (al. Νεμεαίου, Νεμέου), cf. the case of Delium, Iv. go § 1.
The small respect shewn for sacred precincts is scarcely consistent with
the professions of Iv. 98 § 2.

τῷ ἱερῷ, i.e. ‘the precinct’ (réuevos).

“Ἡσίοδος, the legend is that he was killed by the two sons of a
Locrian host in revenge for an attempt upon their sister’s chastity. The
place of burial was kept secret: cf. Pausanias 1X. 31, Plut. Symp. 10.
Pausanias however says πρὸς (not ἐν) τῷ Νεμείῳ.

ὑπὸ τῶν ταύτῃ, Construe with ἀποθανεῖν, cf. I. g ὃ 2.

χρησθέν, accusative absolute.

παθεῖν, the aorist is oracular; the answer of the priestess was always
given either in present or aorist, cf. Pindar, Pyth.1v. 7. Poppo. Stahl
refers the aorist to the notion ‘ praecipiendi’ contained in χρησθέν : ‘Est
enim fato constituere ut aliquid fiat’? (Mady. Adv. I. 176). Curtius,
however (G. Et. 11. 236), refers χράω to ‘ghar’ (Greek xep). Fick,

280 THUCYDIDES ΤΙ: [xcvi § 1—

explaining the active as ‘to take,’ the middle ‘to take to,’ interprets
ἔχρησε as ἀνεῖλε, with reference to the grasping of the ‘sortes.’ Thu-
cydides, as in 11. 17 ὃ 2 and 54 § 3, makes mere passing allusion to the
oracle in connexion with the legend. Its fulfilment he would treat as
a mere coincidence.

§ 2. Ποτιδανίαν, cf. Livy xxviul. 8, Leake, N. G. 613, 618: some
little way inland from Oeneon, about 5 miles to the north-west, not far
from Eupalium and Apollonia.

ἹΚροκύλειον, cf. Leake 11. 618. Both this place and Teichium were
probably inland fortresses in the valley of the Morno: the sites cannot
be accurately determined.

Εὐπάλιον, probably some little distance inland from Erythrae, its
harbour, and facing the island Trisonia or Trazonia.

τὴν γνώμην εἶχε, cf. 92 ὃ 4.

οὕτως, ‘in that case,’ almost=7ére, used resumptively after parti-
ciple, the part. in itself implying a condition, εἰ καταστρέψειε: cf. Iv.
88 8 1, VI. 61 8 4.

’Odrovéas, cf. g4 ὃ 5.

§ 3. οὐκ ἐλάνθανεν ἡ παρασκευὴ οὔτε ὅτε.. ἔπειδή τε, Poppo re-
marks that Thuc. begins the sentence without conceiving the addition
πολλῇ χειρὶ ἐπεβοήθουν. Kriiger explains the position of οὔτε as intended
to bring into close connexion the temporal clauses ὅτε.. ἐπειδή Te.
Classen explains as an adaptation of the familiar οὔτε... τε sequence.
But all instances quoted are sequences of οὔτε... οὔτε, cf. VI. 17 ὃ 5,
v. 7 § 4: indeed with an introductory negative, it is hard to see how it
could be otherwise. Thuc. may have written οὔτε ἐλάνθανεν, ἐπειδή τε,
or οὐκ ἐλάνθανεν οὐδὲ ὅτε, or in οὔτε ὅτε we may have a dittography.
In any case, the sense demands that the negation should terminate with
the first temporal clause—for which reason οὐδέ commends itself, i.e.
‘this design was no secret even in its first conception.’

ἐπεβουλεύετο, sc. ἡ παρασκευή. There is no need to treat the construc-
tion as impersonal. For the transitive use cf. 20 § r.

πολλῇ χειρί, ‘in strong force,’ an Ionism, cf. Hdt. 11. 137: the only
instance in Thuc., although in 11. 77 § 3 we find πολυχειρία.

πρός, ‘towards,’ in the direction of: ‘versus’ non ‘ad’ (Poppo).

Βωμιῆς, so called from βωμοί, a name given to some hills near the
source of the Euenus (Leake 11. 623).

Καλλιῆς, Pausanias speaks of a city called Callium. It was appa-
rently situated not far S.W. of Hypate (in the territory of the Aenianes),
the Callipolis of Livy ΧΧΧΥῚ. 30.

xcvil § 3] NOTES. 281
CHAPTER XCVII.

$1. τοιόνδε τι, the enclitic suggests no uncertainty, but supplies
the place of a corresponding verbal substantive: cf. VIII. 50 81:

τὸ πρῶτον, cf. 94 § 3. Steup destroys the colon after πρῶτον.

ἀναδιδάσκοντες, Kriiger and Poppo both note the absence of any
connecting particle, cf. 92 ὃ 3. The use of the imperfect participle is
suggestive of Aetolian persistency.

ἕως ἄν, see Goodw. M. T. § 613.

τὴν ἐν ποσίν (sc. κώμην), an Ionism: cf. Hdt. 11. 79 ὃ figs ΤΠ
promptu,’ ‘the first to hand,’ ‘first in his way.’

8.2. τύχῃ ἐλπίσας, a causal dative ‘rendered sanguine by success’ :
cf. similar dative construction with θαυμάζειν, πιστεύειν, φοβεῖσθαι, e.g.
11. 80 ὃ 6, 111. 89 ὃ 5 (Cl.).

«Λοκρούς, cf. 95 ὃ 3-

ψιλῶν ἀκοντιστῶν, 1.6. ψιλῶν ἀκοντιστῶν ὄντων, other light-armed
troops he had, cf. 98 § τ (St.).

Αἰγιτίου, the capital of the Apodoti: its site is a matter of specu-
lation (Leake 11. 617).

κατὰ κράτος, connect with αἱρεῖ, ‘carried it by storm.’

ἐπιών, ‘upon attacking it,’ 1.6. at the first assault (Cl.).

χωρίων, rejected by Kriiger as a gloss, but retained by Poppo:
Classen explains from 94 ὃ 4, οἰκοῦν κατὰ κώμας: for plural, cf. Iv.
oy, Slo

8. 3. βεβοηθηκότες ἦσαν, ‘The perfect points to the existence of a
result. For the presentation of such a conception periphrasis is exactly
fitted. The substantival verb (elvac or γίγνεσθαι) may either follow
the participle as a mere copula, or precede, either as an emphatic
assertion, or as containing a predicate within itself. The difference
between the adjective and participle in such periphrasis is that whereas
the adjective merely points to the existence of the quality, the perfect
participle has regard to its genesis’ (Alexander, Am. J. Phils iv.
291—308). For the expression βοηθεῖν ἐπί, cf. v. 65 § 4, 1. 107 § 5.

ἀπό, Herwerden suggests κατά.

ἐπίοι, for optative cf. 68 § 1: cf. the tactics followed at Pylos (Iv.
32 § 4) with Tac. A. 111. 21, ‘ubi instaretur cedens ac rursus in terga
remeans.’

τοιαύτη, i.e. of alternate advance and retreat, cf. 78 ὃ 4.

ἐν οἷς, neuter, in spite of two feminine substantives, cf. VI. 72 § 4.
Poppo quotes Sallust, Cat. 5, ‘inopia et conscientia scelerum, gzae uira-
gue his artibus auxerat.’

282 THO CYDIDES TLE [xcvill ὃ 1—

CHAPTER XCVIII.

8 1. μέχρι, with imperfect, ‘so long as’ (cf. 10 § 4), with aorist
indic. ‘until,’ Iv. 4 § 1: for μέχρι and μέχρι οὗ see Goodw. M. T.
§ 619.

μὲν οὖν, continuative.

τοξόται, i.e. the Cephallenians and Messenians.

τὰ βέλη, the article is possessive.

αὐτοῖς (sc. ᾿Αθηναίοι5), ‘on their side.’ But is not the position of the
dative unnatural? It may however be an adaptation from colloquial
use: cf. Plato Theaet. 143 D.

οἷοί τε, ‘in a condition to,’ i.e. ‘had strength to use them’ (C1.).

ot δέ, resumptive, δέ being apodotic, not iterative—an Ionic use,
Cfo T-ent Sin.

ἄνθρωποι ψιλοί, an adscript from § 2 (Ierw.).

ἀνεστέλλοντο, ‘were held in check,’ cf. VI. 70 8 3.

οὗτοι, the archers.

αὐτοί, the Athenians, the ‘main-body,’ cf. g1 § 3.

καὶ ἐπὶ πολύ, καί is intensive, if genuine; cf. καὶ πάνυ, καὶ πάλαι.
It may however have crept in from repetition of last syllable of ἐκεκμή-
κεσαν. For ἐπὶ πολύ, temporal, cf. 97 ὃ 3-

τῷ αὐτῷ πόνῳ-- τῷ ξυνεχεῖ πόνῳ, ‘the continuous, incessant, strain,’
ΓΟ ΠῚ LOSI

ξυνεχόμενοι, stronger than ξυνόντες, cf. II. 49 ὃ 5: according to
Heindorf (Plat. Soph. 236 E), found sometimes in construction with ἐν ;
but the instances quoted in his note are hardly trustworthy.

οὕτω δή, Thucydides’ usual mode of resuming the thread of a lengthy
sentence, cf. I. 49 § 6.

ἐσπίπτοντες, ‘irruentes,’ ‘plunging into,’ with further notion of
entanglement.

χαράδρας, ‘ water-courses,’ ‘ravines,’ the dry beds of winter torrents,
cf. 112 § 6.

ἐτύγχανε τεθνηκώς, for the auxiliary cf. 3 § 2: the imperfect is at
once more graphic and explicit than the aorist: on the absence of tense
assimilation, see note on 83 § 3.

§ 2. αὐτοῦ, ‘ilico,’ ‘there and then,’ cf. 81 § 3, 112 ὃ 5.

ἐν τῇ τροπῇ; ‘in the act of flight.’

κατὰ πόδας (Schol. ξυντόμως), ‘e vestigio,’ ‘at their heels,’ i.e. in
hot pursuit.

ποδώκεις, poetical.

xcIx § 1] NOTES. 283

ἁμαρτάνοντας, present participle, as the error was repeated, ‘as
they kept missing the way.’

ἐσφερομένους (Bekker éxpepouévous), which Cobet approves, ‘qui
enim a via aberrant dicuntur ἐκφέρεσθαι," ‘flocking into,’ ‘drifting into’:
Ch lVenlars 1

διέξοδοι, a Platonic word, in sense of ‘thoroughfare,’ but questioned
here by Herwerden (Stud. Thuc. p. 48) on the ground of the frequent
confusion in Mss, of διά and ἐκ.

περιεπίμπρασαν, to the περί of this compound is due the accusative
τοὺς πλείους : cf. 81 ὃ 1 ὑπερενεγκόντες τὸν ἰσθμὸν Tas ναῦς. The imperfect
is preparatory to the culminating aorist κατέστη.

8 3. πᾶσα ἰδέα, cf. 81 § 5.

ὅθεν περ, περ emphasizes ὅθεν, ‘the very place from which,’ cf. I.
74§ 1.

8.4. περί... μάλιστα, a slight pleonasm, ‘about 120, at most.’

τοσοῦτοι μέν, the repunctuation is due to Haase (Luc. 7): Her
werden, rejecting οὗτοι, reads τοσοῦτοι μὲν τὸ πλῆθος καὶ ἡλικίᾳ οἱ αὐτοί
βέλτιστοι δή κιτιλ. Hude, while explaining ἡλικία ἡ αὐτή as ὁμήλικες,
doubts whether Classen has not forced the meaning too far: from Iv.
95 ὃ 3, he proposes πρώτη, ‘aetatis praestantissimae.’ The text will
construe: ‘in these men, so many in point of number (as I have stated)
and at the same time stalwart fellows, was sacrificed the very finest
body of men (drawn) from the city of Athens lost within the present
war.’

ἡλικία, in collective sense=vedrys, cf. VI. 26 § 2.

ἡ αὐτή, sc. οἱ αὐτοί, ‘idem’ not ‘pares’: for the attraction in agree-
ment (i.e. of subject with predicate), cf. Iv. 102 § 3. Arnold suggests
that the popularity of Demosthenes may have attracted an unusually
large number of young men of rank and position, the ἐπιβάται being
usually drawn from the class of Thetes. The destruction of the full stop
at διεφθάρησαν will restore μέν to the companionship of δέ.

ἹΠροκλῆς, cf. gt § τ.

§ 5. ὑπελείφθη, he remained in this neighbourhood until the out-
break of the war with the Ambraciots, c. 105.

τοῖς πεπραγμένοις, for the dative cf. 97 ὃ 2.

CHAPTER XCIX.

81. περὶ Σικελίαν, this fleet had been despatched in the year before,
cf. 86 88. 4, 5: their head-quarters were at Rhegium, 88 8 4.

“Λοκρίδα, cf. 86 ὃ 2,

284 THUCYDIDES LT. [xcrx § 1—

τινί may either particularise or depreciate, e.g. ‘in one particular
descent upon the coast,’ which proved successful, or ‘in one unimportant
descent,’ cf. ἔκπλους τις, βοήθειά τις.

ἐκράτησαν. ‘Thuc.’s practice is to use κρατεῖν with accusative when
combined with μάχῃ or μαχόμενοι (less frequently with such implication
in context, cf. 11. 39 § 2), but otherwise with genitive (Class. on 1.
108 § 5).

περιπόλιον, not a φρούριον περιπόλων, but a mere ‘castellum,’ a
fortress for the protection of the open country (Cl.): cf. our own erection
of ‘Martello towers.’

“Αληκι, according to Strabo the boundary between Rhegium and
Locris, cf. 103 § 3.

CHAPTER Ὁ:

81. προπέμψαντες πρότερον, for the pleonasm cf. 1. 23§ 5. The
feud between Aetolia and Naupactus was one of old date; indeed
one of the chief objects of the present expedition was to protect the
Messenians, old and faithful allies of Athens, from an enemy already
soliciting Peloponnesian aid against them (see Arnold’s note, and cf.
94 ὃ 3).

Βοριάδην, Βοιάδην (Herw.).

πείθουσιν ὥστε, cf. 70 ὃ 5.

ἔπαγωγήν, 1.6. the appeal already made to Athens by Naupactus,
cf. 82 § 1.

§ 2. τῶν ξυμμάχων, with a wise economy of Spartan life and limb
(Poppo). The military despotism of Sparta retained in its own hands
the disposal of even a purely allied force.

νεοκτίστου in reference to the πόλις: νεοκατάστατος in allusion to
πολῖται, cf. 93 § 2.

ξυνηκολούθουν, i.e. as ἐφῃρημένοι ἄρχειν, ‘to succeed him in com-
mand,’ εἴ τι αὐτὸς πάσχοι (IV. 38 ὃ 1). The event proved the wisdom
of the precaution, cf. 108 ὃ 1. Three was a favourite number with the
Spartans, cf. 92 § 5.

Μενεδάιος, Doric for Μενεδήιος, ‘ foe-withstander.’

οἱ Σπαρτιᾶται, for articular apposition, cf. 25 § 1-

CHAPTER GI.

81. ξυλλεγέντος és, a pregnant constrn.: on the relation of ἐν to
évs (els), see Gildersleeve on Pindar, Pyth. 11. 11.

ci ὃ 2] NOTES. 285

Δελφούς, friendly to Sparta, cf. I. 112 § 5.

ἐπεκηρυκεύετο, ‘made overtures to,’ cf. 11. 64 § 4.

᾿Αθηναίων, cf. 95 ὃ 3.

§ 2. ᾿Αμφισσῆς, the town itself, according to Pausanias, was 120
stades from Delphi, though really only half that distance. The Salona
of modern times, the nearest harbour being Larnaki. Strabo’s state-
ment that it was destroyed in the second sacred war is incorrect (Leake,
N. G, 11. 590).

διὰ τὸ τῶν Φωκέων ἔχθος, ‘obscure in its brevity’ (Poppo). The
feud between Locris and Phocis dated from before the Persian war
even: the apprehensions of the Amphissians were probably aroused by
the suspicion that the Phocians would avail themselves of Athenian
aid to clear off old scores. The Locrian encroachment, after the sacred
war, upon the territory of Cirrha, caused Philip’s intervention, and
ultimately led to the campaign of Chaeroneia.

πρῶτον. Poppo defends the vulgate: see his note on vI. 3 ὃ 1.
Later editors excise it, or correct to πρῶτοι. The close proximity
of the second πρῶτον excites suspicion: but is correction necessary ?
Does not Plato write indifferently ὁ πρότερος εἰπών and ὁ πρότερον
eir@v? Steup insists upon an antithesis of persons.

μὲν οὖν, the particles are not composite but disjunct, cf. Soph. O. T.
483, Antig. 65: οὖν is resumptive, μέν finding an answer in ἔπειτα
(=6é): see Jebb’s note on Ant. 65, where we find no answering δέ,
and cf. the Aeschylean use of ὥσπερ οὖν. For a similar collocation, cf.
IV. 104 § 4.

Mvovéas, near the head of the valley of Amphissa, so that any force
on the march from Amphissa to Naupactus must pass through their
territory.

δυσεσβολώτατος, the superlative retains the inflection of the positive:
cf. a like use of the comparative, 89 § 5.

ἔπειτα, the equivalent of δέ, as frequently in Thucydides, though
sometimes reinforced by it.

*Imvéas, more or less unknown.

Μεσσαπίους, not connected with the Messapii of vil. 33 ὃ 4.
F. Niese, in Hermes XIV. (1879) rewrites in the form Merazious from
Μέταπα: but the Aetolian Metapa lay on the banks of the great lake of
Trichonium, see Leake I. 127.

Τριταιέας, an ethnic form Τριτεύς is found in Hdt. vill. 33: the
name occurs in Phocis as well as Locris.

Xadatovs, Pliny, N. H. Iv. 3 ὃ 7, speaks of a harbour Chalaeon

286 PHOCVDIDES I17. [cr § 2—

7 miles from the free town of Delphi: from Ptolemy the town is
identified as Χαλεύς.

Todopwvlovs, Tolophon, next to Eupalium the most important city
on the Locrian coast, probably occupied the valley of Kiseli (Leake,
N. 6. 11. 620).

σσίους, the name of the town was ‘Hoods, but its site remains a
matter of conjecture.

Οἰανθέας, perhaps the modern Galaxidi.

᾽Ολπαῖοι, not the Olpae or Olpa of 105: the name was given toa
pass or commanding height, possibly Pendornia.

“Ὑαῖοι, unknown.

Πόλιν perhaps occupied the site of Karites, and commanded
the pass leading from Amphissa to the supposed site of Hyle (Leake
11, 620).

πρὶν εἷλον, for this use of πρίν with historic tenses preceding and
nearly invariably with negative, see Goodw. M. T. §§ 634, 635.

CHAPTER, Cit,

81. κατέθετο, cf. 28 § 2.

Kurtvoy, cf. 95 ὃ 1.

Οἰνεῶνα, cf. 95 ὃ 3.

EuimdaAvov, cf. οὐ ὃ 2. Oeneon and Eupalium should in point of
order change places: a similar inversion occurs in 29 ὃ 1, Vil. 88 and
108 § 1.

§ 2. γενόμενοι δ᾽ ἐν τῇ Ναυπακτίᾳ, ‘upon arriving in the territory
of Naupactus, they together with the Locrians who had already come
to their aid’: cf. Poppo on 68 84. Kriiger rightly explains γενόμενοι
with reference to of μετὰ Εὐρυλόχου. The καί sequence is harsh, but
may be illustrated from VIII. 23 ὃ 4. Steup, Qu. Th. 50, suggests αὐτοὶ
καὶ οἱ.

ἐδήουν, imperfect of process.

εἷλον, aorist of result.

Μολύκρειον (Diod. Μολυκρίαν), cf. 11. 84 ὃ 4, really a Locrian town,
although assigned to Aetolia by Stephanus Byz.

αἱροῦσι, cf. Diod. XII. 60: his details are inaccurate.

§ 3. 6 ’AOnvatos, Kriiger suggests ὁ ᾿Αλκισθένους (cf. gt ὃ 1), or the
loss of στρατηγός or ἄρχων.

τὰ ἐκ τῆς Αἰτωλίας, ἐκ suggests at once the scene and source of his
disaster, cf. Iv. 81 § 2.

Ναύπακτον, cf. 98 § 5.

cit § 7] NOTES. 287

περὶ αὐτῆς, Bekker suggests περὶ αὐτῇ (cf. 1. 60 § 1), but Thucydides
uses either structure.

χαλεπῶς, the abruptness of the sentence suggests to Herwerden the
loss of δέ (St. Thuc. p. 147), but cf. 23 ὃ 3 χαλεπῶς οἱ τελευταῖοι.

ἀναχώρησιν, cf. 94 ὃ 2, 95 § 1.

8 4. ἐπὶ τῶν νεῶν, supplied by the Acarnanians: Demosthenes’
own fleet had returned to Athens (98 § 5): the ships mentioned in 105
did not come up until later. Steup suggests ἐπὶ τινῶν νεῶν.

περιεποίησαν, ‘secured (saved) the place’: an Ionic use: οἵ, 11.
25 § 2.

δεινὸν γάρ, the danger was that the place might fall before help
came, cf. Iv. 75 § I.

8 δ. τὴν στρατιὰν ἐσεληλυθυῖαν καὶ ἀδύνατον oy. Mark the
coordination of participle in agreement with impersonal use.

Αἰολίδα, cf. Strabo x. 3 § 6 τὴν Πλευρωνίαν ὑπὸ Κουρήτων οἰκουμένην
Αἰολεῖς ἐπελθόντες ἀφείλοντο. Calydon, according to Pliny N. H. tv. 2,
was some 7 miles from the sea, close to the river Euenus: Pleuron,
according to Dicaearchus, lay between the Achelous and Calydon, near
Mesolonghi (cf. Leake, N. G. I. 109, 117, III. 536).

Πρόσχιον, on the western part of the ridge of M. Zygos (Leake 1.
110), the Pylene of Homer, 1]. 11. 639.

8 6. πείθουσιν ὥστε, cf. 100 ὃ τ.

ἠπειρωτικόν, cf. 94 ὃ 3, 95 8 1.

ξύμμαχον καθεστήξει, i.e. would be secured to the Lacedaemonian
alliance: a frequent use of καθίστασθαι with predicative adjective, cf.
39 § 8.

§ 7. ἀφείς, ‘dismissed,’ cf. vill. 87 § 3.

χώρους, another word from the Ionic vocabulary.

ἕως δέοι, ‘until the time came to go to the aid of the Ambraciots in
the neighbourhood of Argos, upon their taking the field.’ The point
of time, as Classen justly remarks, is marked by the aorist: for the
facts cf. 105 § 1. ‘The optative with ἕως is rare’ (says Gildersleeve),
‘and usually found with aorist only.’ Apparently no instance of éws
in the sense of ‘while,’ ‘so long as,’ can be found with the present
optative after an historic tense. In Plato, Theaet. 155 A, the present
optative is required by general rules of dependence. In the Attic éws
ἄν with optative, ἄν appears retained from the original subjunctive
construction (cf. Am. J. P. Iv. 418).

περὶ to” Apyos, to be construed with βοηθεῖν ; although Poppo leaves
the question open.

288 LTEHOC VDIDES 7.72 [cnr § 1—

CHAPTER CHT

81. ot ἐν τῇ Σικελίᾳ, cf. go, 99-

ἐπελθόντες, Kriiger and Classen, to avoid the difficulty of connecting
προσέβαλλον ἐπί, take ἐπελθόντες with ἐπ᾿ Ἴνησσαν; Hude, on the
plea of remoteness,—a sound objection,—suggests ἐξελθόντες (cf. v.
54 ὃ 3):

“EdAjvav, i.e. Siceliots, cf. 86 § 2. See Rutherford, New Phryn.
p- 21. 7

Kal ὅσοι, i.e. Kal μετὰ τούτων (τῶν Σικελῶν) ὅσοι.

κατὰ κράτος, ‘harshly,’ ‘with a high hand’; cf. χαλεπῶς, 93 § 3;
ὕβρει, 84 § τ.

ἀρχόμενοι Kal ὄντες, either we have an ‘ordo praeposterus,’ in lieu
of ξύμμαχοι ὄντες καὶ κατὰ κράτος ἀρχόμενοι, or ξύμμαχοι ὄντες Expresses
limitation (cf. Goodw. M. T. 842), ‘who being harshly ruled and having,
although allies, revolted, were now fighting on the side of Athens.’ The
objection to this interpretation is that we lose the coordination of the
two imperfect participles ἀρχόμενοι, ὄντες. See VI. 88.

ἀπὸ Συρακοσίων Herwerden, possibly with justification, cuts out
of the text. But what if Thuc. wrote ἀποστάντες és αὐτούς ὃ cf. VIII.
go § 1.

Ἴνησσαν, cf. Diod. ΧΙ. 76 τὴν viv οὖσαν Αἴτνην ἐκτήσαντο, πρὸ
τούτου καλουμένην Ἴνησσαν. According to Strabo, its site was close to
Catana: it remained faithful to Syracuse, and for its fidelity suffered
much at the hands of Athens (vI. 96). For the foundation of the new
city (Aetna), cf. Pindar Pyth. 1. 31.

τὸ Σικελικόν, i.e. ‘the stronghold of the Sicels so-called’: on this
practice of the Syracusans occupying the citadels of Sicel towns, Arnold
compares VI. 88 § 5.

§ 2. ᾿Αθηναίων depends on ὑστέροις, cf. 49 ὃ 4.

τειχίσματος, i.e. the Acropolis.

μέρος τι, ‘bona pars.’

§ 3. Λάχης, cf. go § 2.

τινάς, ‘some few,’ ‘several.’

κατά, marking the point of landing on this particular occasion, ‘at
the mouth of ’—at the point where the river joins the sea. The words
κατὰ τὸν Καικῖνον we must connect with ἐκράτησαν. Several descents
were made, but one only is particularised. The river itself, the very
name of which is in doubt, e.g. Καρκῖνος (Herw.), Καικῖνος, is by some
identified with Halex: if so, it may have been a tributary of the

eiv § 3] NOTES. 289

Halex. It is probably a separate stream some 5 miles east of the
Halex. None of the rivers in this region are navigable, and probably
never were (in spite of Pliny’s statement to the contrary), being mere
mountain torrents.

CHAPTER .Chy.

In Philologus for 1846, G. Hermann proposes to make important
excisions in this chapter. The description of the ἀγών and the lengthy
quotations he holds to be foreign to the style of Thucydides. Again,
the very variants in text from the received version of Homeric hymns
would suggest the hand of the annotator, and may be due to some such
improving criticism as inspired the writer of chap. 84. The quotations
may, however, be from memory. See also Baumeister’s retort (Hom.
Hymn 113), and Nitzsch (Sagenpoesie des Gr. 309).

§ 1. ἐκάθηραν, according to Diod. XII. 58, in gratitude to the
healing god for staying the plague; the suggestion was probably due to
Nicias (cf. VII. 50 § 4).

δή, not ironical, but explanatory.

Πεισίστρατος, cf. Hdt. 1. 64, Thuc. 1. 8 ὃ τ.

ἐφεωρᾶτο, cf. Hdt. ἐπ᾽ ὅσον ἔποψις τοῦ ἱροῦ εἶχε.

τῆς νήσου, partitive with ὅσον.

8.2. θῆκαι, ‘coffins,’ cf. 1. 8 8 1: no connecting particle is needed,
τοιῷδε having already made sufficient preparation for the explanation:
cf. 1. 89 ὃ 1, Ill. 20§ 3. For the attraction, cf. Thompson, Gr. Syn. § 75.

προεῖπον, of public or formal notice: cf. 1. 45 ὃ 3. A similar law
was in force at Epidaurus.

ἐντίκτειν, cf. Aristoph. Lys. 743, Ranae τοϑο, and especially the
well-known Pythagorean fragment of Euripides 476.

“Ῥήνειαν, at the present day larger than Delos, distant some goo
yards; according to Strabo, 4 stades.

Πολυκράτης, cf. 1. 13 § 6.

ἰσχύσας, not the ingressive use, which is almost confined to the first
aorist (Class. on I. 3 § 2), ‘he had for a time a powerful fleet.’

ἁλύσει, symbolical of a bond inviolable (Curtius).

πεντετηρίδα, Boeckh (11. 82) fixes the date on the 6th or 7th of
Thargelion, the birthdays of Apollo and Artemis. But can this be
reconciled with Thucydides’ account ?

ta Δήλια, Herwerden excises: ‘Byzantinis utile additamentum,
Graecis non item.’

ὃ 3. καὶ τὸ πάλαι, inserted, says Cobet, from § 6.

Sah 19

290 THUCYDIDES 777: [civ § 3—

ξύνοδος ἦν és, cf. 1. οὐ § 2.

περικτιόνων, i.e. the inhabitants of the neighbouring Cyclades.
Curtius, ἃ. Et. vol. 1. 79, derives the word from root κτι, cf. κτίζειν,
κτίσις, κτάομαι.

ἐθεώρουν, here simply=‘spectatum veniebant,’ but elsewhere in
Thuc. = θεωροὺς πέμπειν, cf. πρεσβεύειν : see Aristoph. Vesp. 1187.
At Athens a θεωρία was an expensive matter, the cost being greater
even than that of a τριηραρχία: see Arist. Eth. tv. 2§ 11. In some
states the θεωροί were a permanent body, e.g. at Aegina, Messene,
Thasos: compare the Spartan Pythii (Miiller, Dorians 1. 15).

τὰ ᾿Εἰφέσια, cf. Dion. Hal. Ant. Iv. 25, and see Rawlinson’s note
on Hdt. 11. 148.

ἀγὼν μουσικός, in spite of Pollux, who alleges μουσικῆς ἀγών to
be the Attic formula, Aristoph. Plut. 1163 has ἀγῶνας μουσικοὺς καὶ
γυμνικούς.

ἀνῆγον, like ἀναθεῖναι, always suggests the notion of elevation: cf.
the words of the Psalmist ‘for thither the tribes go up’: is the idea that
of a raised θυμέλη ?

$4. προοιμίου (Schol. τοὺς ὕμνους προοίμια ἐκάλουν). The question
has been raised whether the hymn was a prelude to the ῥαψῳδίαι, or
whether the hymn was in itself a rhapsody: cf. the technical use of
ἀναβολή, Arist. Rhet. 111. 9 ὃ 6, Aristoph. Pax 831. The hymn here
quoted is traditionally ascribed to Cynaethus of Chios. The reputed
author of the ancient hymn in praise of Arge and Opis, in whose name
the Delian women sought contributions, was, according to Herodotus,
one Olen, a Lycian. Pausanias also says that the hymns of Olen were
more ancient than even those of Pamphos and Orpheus. They were
written in hexameters (see Rawlinson on Hdt. Iv. 35).

The middle portion of the chapter, from §§ 4—6, Hermann cuts out
entirely, resuming the narrative again with the words ὕστερον δέ.

ἐτέρφθης, a gnomic aorist.

ἠγερέθονται, Curtius compares the form ἠερέθονται, appealing to
analogy of deipw, ἀγείρω (cf. Curt. G. Et. § 504).

dyvidv, here in collective sense as ‘urbs’: cf. ἀγυιεύς, ἀγυιᾶτις, of the
god of ways (Pind. Pyth. x1. τ, Aesch. Ag. 1047).

μνησάμενοι, ‘making mention,’ ‘speaking thy praise,’ a common
poetic use: cf. Pind. Nem. vil. 80, not unknown in Thuc., cf. VIII. 47 § 2.
Kriiger explains as ‘memores,’ sc. ‘tui cultus.’

καθέσωσιν, from aorist form εἶσα (cf. 58 § 5, Soph. O. C. 712),
‘to institute,’ ‘appoint’: cf. the like idea in χορὸν ἱστάναι.

cv § 1] NOTES. 201

ἀγῶνα, ‘festival,’ lit. ‘gathering’: cf. Hom. Il. xvii. 376. Hermann
regards καθέσωσιν as a mere gloss on στήσωνται.

ὃ δ. ἐτελεύτα (why not τελευτᾷ ?), for construction with genitive
cf. 59 § 4, for és 51 § 3.

ἱλήκοι, from ἱλήκω, a form usually found in optative only: cf. Od.
ΧΧΙ. 365.

τίς δέ, δέ postpositum, according to poetic usage: cf. Aesch. Prom.
Whe tc ‘

ὕμμιν, dativus iudicantis.

τέῳ, cf. Hom. gen. plur. τέων, and Attic dat. τῴ.

ὑμεῖς δέ, apodotic δέ.

ἐὐφήμως, ‘graciously,’ cf. Aesch. Suppl. 512.

τυφλος, confirming the tradition.

8 6. τοσαῦτα, adverbial, ‘at such length’: in connexion with
μάλιστα (ὃ 4) this constitutes a more or less confident appeal to Homeric
testimony, but from Thucydidean usage it can equally well represent
‘so far, and so far only.’

χορούς, cf. Xen. Mem. Ill. 3 § 12.

τὰ περί, ic. the ‘surroundings’: the solemnities with which the
festival was invested.

καί, either intensive ‘by far the greater part,’ or to distinguish the
competitive element from the ceremonial itself.

ὑπό, ‘prae,’ ‘ob,’ not of direct agency: cf. Thompson, G. 8. § 278.

τότε, it was a revival of the old festival of the Delian amphictyony.

6, with reference to preceding clause, and including both ἀγών and
ἱπποδρομίαι.

ΘΗ ΕΝ ΝΕ

For the narrative, cf. Diod. XII. 6ο.

81. ὥσπερ ὑποσχόμενοι. The stress of the sentence falls on the par-
ticiple: lit. ‘as they had detained his force on the strength of a promise,’
1.6. in accordance with their promise to Eurylochus, on the strength of
which they had induced him to stay. For this promise cf. 102 § 5.

᾿Αμφιλοχικόν, cf. 11. 68 ὃ τ. The object of the Peloponnesians was
to secure direct communication with Sicily (Marchant).

τρισχιλίοις, 1000 only, says Diodorus.

”Odras, the name is found both in singular and plural form. Its
site was probably on the Ambracian Gulf, about 3 miles N.W. of
Amphilochian Argos, which is situated in a hilly country some 20 miles
S.E. of the town of Ambracia. The Peloponnesians marched from

19—2

292 THUCYDIDES III. [ον 8 1—

Proschium about 35 miles nearly in a straight line northwards. They
found the country almost deserted, as the inhabitants had gone to the
relief of Argos. On approaching Argos, they struck into the range of
Thyamus, and descending by night into the plain between the two
positions of the enemy at Argos and Crenae, effected a junction with
the Ambraciots at Olpae on the other side of Argos (cf. Leake, N. G.
IV. 244, and Jowett 11. 221).

ὃ τειχισάμενοι ἐχρῶντο, in such combinations of participle and finite
verb with one object only expressed, the participle usually determines
the agreement.

ποτέ, before the Peloponnesian war, cf. 11. 68.

κοινῷ, ‘common,’ in what sense? to the petty states of Acarnania
or to Acarnania and Amphilochia? Classen holds the latter view:
Stahl agrees with Schomann in holding that the site of the δικαστήριον
had now been transferred. Xenophon speaks of τὸ κοινὸν τῶν ᾿Ακαρ-
νάνων, but it is strange (says St.) to find their national court of justice
in Argive territory. Niese (Hermes xiv.) from Steph. Byz. proposes
᾿Ακαρνᾶνες καὶ ᾿Αμφίλοχοι ἐχρῶντο.

ἐπιθαλασσίας, either from its nearness to the great marsh or lagoon
(Leake), or from the neighbourhood of the Ambracian Gulf.

§ 2. οἱ pév...ot δέ, partitive apposition.

ξυνεβοήθουν és, ‘were throwing all their forces into Argos.’ The
reinforcement was made πανδημεί.

τῆς ᾿Αμφιλοχίας, the name of the country precedes, unless the town
be the principal subject, when the name of the country is appended, e.g.
I. 108 § τ (Arnold).

ἸΚρῆναι, it commanded the southern approach: the παλαιὸ Αὐλί of
modern times (Herw.).

φυλάσσοντες τοὺς Πελοποννησίους, for the antiptosis cf. 11. 21 81,
an instance the more remarkable from the fact of the accusative super-
seding a genitive, cf. v. 36 § 2.

8 3. ἐπὶ Δημοσθένην (not μετά), = ‘to fetch,’ not ‘to find,’ as they
knew that he was there.

στρατηγήσαντα, no allusion to the expiration of the term of his
command (Droysen), but to the incidents of the preceding summer.

ὅπως, ‘with a view to’: the message (πέμπουσι) suggests a request
(δέονται).

εἴκοσι ναῦς, the 30 ships originally sent had returned (cf. 98): was
this some new squadron sent out ?

᾿Αριστοτέλης, father of Charmides, one of the mutilators of the

cv1 § 2] NOTES. 293

Hermae (VI. 27), in after years one of the thirty (cf. Xen. Hell.
biG 1 8. 3)-

ὃ 4. ἀπέστειλαν δέ, resumptive of πέμπουσι (cf. 18 § 2).

πόλιν, Ambracia.

πανδημεί, cf. gt § 4.

ἡ μάχη γένηται, ‘they might have to fight’ (lit. ‘their fighting
might be done’). The usual passive periphrasis for μάχην ποιεῖσθαι:
the article is possessive : no other force is necessary in the two instances
quoted by Kriiger, cf. Iv. οἱ § 2, Vv. 59 § 4.

CHAPTER ECVE

§ 1. ἤσθοντο will apply either to signal or message.

τοὺς ἐν "Ολπαις, ‘when they found that the Ambraciot force at
Olpae had arrived.’

ἹΠροσχίου, cf. 102 ὃ 5.

᾿Αχελῴον, the boundary between Aetolia and Acarnania (Strabo):
for its course cf. II. 102 § 2.

ἐρήμου, i.e. ‘nudae militibus,’ cf. 11. 81 § r: used as either of two or
three terminations by Thucydides.

Στρατίων, cf. 11. 80 § 8. On the right bank of the Achelous, in the
plain of the lake Trichonis, 200 stades by river from the sea. Livy
XLII. 21 gives an account of Perseus’ attempt upon the place, B.c. 170
—16g. It is the modern Sourovigli, now a mere village (cf. Leake,
INI (Ce, Lis: TY)

τὴν φρουράν, lying close to the Aetolian border they could not
venture to leave it without a garrison.

§ 2. Φυτίας, according to Steph. Byz. Φοιτίας, so called from
Φοίτιος, a reputed son of Alcmaeon: the gentile name is Φοιτιάν, cf.
᾿Ακαρνάν (cf. Leake, N. G. ΠΙ. 575). Classen regards the v as a
modification of the Acarnanian -o. Kiepert places it west of Stratus,
and near Porta.

αὖθις, ‘deinde.’

Μεδεῶνος, north of Phytia; according to Leake (111. 575) near
Katuna. By Livy written Medion: cf. Liv. xxxvi. 11, not the Medeon
of Liv. XLIV. 23. It was besieged by the Aetolians in 231 B.c. and
surprised by Antiochus in 191 B.C.

map ἔσχατα, ‘skirting the border.’

Auvatas, in 11. 80 ὃ 8 described as ἀτείχιστος : placed by Kruse
on the southern side of M. Thyamus: not to be confounded with the
Thessalian town of the same name.

204 THUCYDIDES 12 [evr § 2—

᾿Αγραίων, cf. 11. 102 § 2, separated from Limnaea by the range of
Thyamus, now Σπαρτοβοῦνι (cf. Leake, N. G. Iv. 251).

οὐκέτι, in local sense: cf. the like use in 11. οὔ § 3 αὐτονόμους ἤδη.
Kriiger explains ἢ οὐκέτι ἦν ᾿Ακαρνανίας : see Kr. G. Gr. 47. 6, 9: with
οὐκέτι we may in Thuc. expect brachylogy: e.g. VIII. 70 § 2.

φιλίας δέ, no preceding μέν, as δέ simply enlarges the predication.

8 3. λαβόμενοι, cf. 24 ὃ 2.

᾿Αγραϊκόν, Miiller’s correction for ἀγροῖκον of Mss., which must be a
mistake, as ἄγροικος cannot = ἄγριος.

νυκτὸς ἤδη, cf. 1. 30§ 4, V- 59 § 1, the genitive of time ‘within which,’
Thompson, G. Sy. ὃ 99.
“προσέμιξαν, ‘joined,’ cf. v. 58 § 1.

CHAPTER .GVit,

§ 1. γενόμενοι ἁθρόοι, i.e. ἅμα γενόμενοι, ‘upon effecting a junction’
of Ambraciot and Peloponnesian forces.

Μητρόπολιν, which Leake identifies with Lygovitzi, was probably
only a detached fortress near Olpae.

ταῖς εἴκοσι, cf. 105 ὃ 3.

és τὸν ᾿Αμπρακικόν. Hude argues for the retention of κόλπον on
the ground that Thuc. only omits the substantive in the case of τὸν
Ἰόνιον, and even in this case not invariably: it is also retained in three
of the best Mss. ACG. Whether és finds its construction with βοηθοῦντες
(cf. 105 ὃ 2), or with παραγίγνονται (an Ionism, cf. Hdt. 1. 185), or with
both (as=apafonOoic.), is most doubtful: order would point to the
second explanation.

᾿Αθηναίων, drawn, in all probability, from the garrison of Nau-
pactus.

§ 2. τὸν λόφον is the explanation added because of the hill and
the fortress bearing the same name: or shall we explain with Classen as
Ξε τὸ τεῖχος ἐπὶ τοῦ λόφου, ‘the hill-fortress ’?

ἐφώρμουν, without object.

βίᾳ κατείχοντο, ‘were forcibly detained,’ i.e. prevented from stirring :
Schol. ἐκωλύοντο (cf. 114 sub fin.).

μετὰ τῶν σφετέρων, the various divisions of the native force were
to remain under the command of of ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων ἄρχοντες. The
position of Demosthenes has been compared to that of Montrose or
Charles Edward amongst the Highland clans: his superiority was
recognised, but he had no force to back it (Simcox).

evi § 1] NOTES. 205

§ 3. προσαγαγών, without object, cf. vil. 37 § 2 (the only two
instances in Thuc.): cf. also v. 7 § 2 ἀναλαβὼν ἦγε.

ὡς ἐς μάχην, ὡς limits, and thus emphasizes, the purpose expressed
in és μάχην : see also Classen on I. 48 § 1.

καί, μεῖζον γάρ, the parenthetical interpunctuation is necessitated by
the form of the construction, cf. 70 § 3: see Class. on I. 31 § 2.

περιέσχε, ‘overlapped’ (ὑπερφαλαγγεῖν, Polyaenus), cf. ν. 71 ὃ 2.

κατά, marking the point—‘ ex θα parte qua’ (Poppo).

αὐτῇ, ‘at the moment of the actual collision’: cf. ἐν τροπῇ, 98 ὃ 2.

ἐξαναστάντες, ‘arise’ (from their place of ambush).

κατὰ νώτου, the invariable Thucydidean formula, never κατὰ
νῶτον.

οὗτοι, resumptive: Hude suggests οὕτω, cf. 96 ὃ 2.

§ 4. παρεσκεύαστο, impersonal, cf. 1. 46 § 1.

ὀλίγων, the sixty archers of ὃ τ.

τὸ ἄλλο, the centre and the left.

ὡς ἕκαστοι, i.e. καθ᾽ ἑκάστους. Each κώμη or πόλις had its own
separate place in the line of battle: they were arranged in their several
contingents.

ἐπεῖχον (might, with Vatican, be omitted: but cf. I. 48 § 3),
‘occupied,’ ‘extended over.’

ἀναμίξ, the Ambraciots, as Corinthian colonists, and disciplined
troops, would naturally serve the purpose of a wholesome leaven to
these rude soldiers.

Μαντινέων, not mercenaries, as might be inferred from VII. 57 § 9:
cf. 109 § 2.

οὗτοι δέ, epexegetic, cf. I. 26 § 5.

ἄκρον, predicative, ‘not holding the wing at the end,’ i.e. ‘ the ex-
treme point of the wing,’ cf. infr. ἔσχατον τὸ εὐώνυμον.

οἱ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, i.e. of ἐξ HpaxXelas, cf. 100 ὃ 2.

κατά, ‘facing.’

CHAPTER CVIII.

81. ἐν χερσίν, cf. 66 § 2.

τῷ κέρᾳ, instrumental dative.

ἐκυκλοῦντο, ‘were on the point of outflanking.’

ἔπιγενόμενοι, cf. 30 ὃ 2.

ὥστε, i.e. ‘with such effect that.’

és ἀλκὴν ὑπομεῖναι, ‘for resistance they made no stand,’ cf. 11. 84
§ 3, V. 72 $4. ἀλκή-Ξ ‘defence,’ cf. Diener, de Serm. Thue. p. 12.

296 THOCYDIDES. 777: [evi § 1—

καὶ τὸ πλέον, 1.6. as well as Eurylochus’ division.

τὸ κατ᾽ Evpvdoxov, usually explained as representing ol περὶ Εὐρύ-
Aoxov (IV. 33 ὃ 1), or of μετὰ Εὐρυλόχου. But κατά is not μετά (although
Bast states that in 13th century Mss. the confusion of » with κ is
frequent), nor is any Thucydidean parallel adduced. The words may
signify ‘Eurylochus’ portion of the line,’ leaving κατά to bear its usual
local signification, as in 107 § 3.

καὶ ὃ κράτιστον, Hude suggests ὃ καὶ κράτιστον, cf. 42 § 3. But we
need not press the copulative force of καί.

διαφθειρόμενον, imperfect participle, ‘demoralised,’ in military
sense.

ταύτῃ, on the right, cf. 107 § 4.

τὸ πολὺ ἐξῆλθον, ‘bore the brunt of the battle’: the case quoted
from I. 70 § 7 is not a good one, as the participle probably determines
the structure: for ἐξῆλθον with accus. cf. Soph. Trach. 506.

§ 2. τὸ καθ᾽ ἑαυτούς, ‘the force opposed to them’: an accus. of
direct object appears necessary with ἐπεδίωξαν. So scanty is the evi-
dence in favour of dmediwtay (even in VI. 102 § 3), that Haase’s
correction ἐπεδίωξαν commends itself. See, however, Ar. Nub. 1296.

8 3. ὡς ἑώρων, ws covers both clauses.

σφίσι recalls the subject of the first clause, cf. I. 44 § 1.

ἀτάκτως, for the combination κόσμῳ καὶ τάξει, cf. IV. 126 § 6.

προσπίπτοντες, ‘rushing upon’ (sc. ταῖς "Ολπαι5), not as in VI. 97 ὃ 4,
VIII. 84 ὃ 2, with meaning of attacking.

és ὀψέ, apart from the difficulty of the vulgate ἕως, the recurrence of
the phrase in VIII. 23 § 2 would suggest the present reading, cf. 78 § 4
and I. 51 § 3: the battle lasted until the evening.

CHAPTER CLX.

$1. αὐτὸς παρειληφώς, ‘having now succeeded to the sole com-
mand,’ αὐτός suggesting μόνος, cf. I. 139 § 3: παρειληφώς, in strictly
temporal sense.

ἀπορῶν, ‘being at his wit’s end how to face a siege or save himself
by retreat.’

πολιορκήσεται, a ‘deliberative future’ (Classen), i.e. a realised form
of dependent question: for the passive cf. 52 § 1.

ἀποκεκλῃμένος, ‘hemmed in as he was both by land and sea,’ i.e.
cut off from all communications.

προσφέρει λόγον, ‘makes a proposal’ (cf. VIII. 32 ὃ 3): usually with
plural, λόγους.

ΟΙΣ ὃ 3] NOTES. 297

§ 2. τοὺς ἑαυτῶν, two different explanations are suggested: (1) to
treat τοὺς ἑαυτῶν as a complete substantival expression in itself, followed
by participial epexegesis, ‘their own (slain), about three hundred of
whom had fallen’: or (2) to treat τοὺς ἀποθανόντας as the equivalent
of a substantive: cf. the Homeric use. 300 appears a heavy loss for a
victorious army, with the advantages of ambush in their favour.

ἀναχώρησιν, for construction cf. 24 ὃ 3. Thuc. uses almost indiffer-
ently σπένδεσθαι τινί and πρός τινα.

ἐκ τοῦ προφανοῦς, cf. 43 ὃ 2.

σπένδονται, historic present as imperfect. The plural is suggested
by the compound subject Δημοσθένης μετὰ τῶν ξυστρατήγων, for which
cf. the Latin use with ‘cum,’ e.g. ‘ipse dux cum principibus capiuntur’:
see Mady. Lat. Syn. 215 c. So rare is this construction in Greek that,
with the exception of Xen. Hell. 1. 1 § 10, the instances quoted are all
from later writers; with the participle βουλόμενος the personality of
Demosthenes once more asserts itself.

ἄρχουσι, the chief officers.

ὅσοι αὐτῶν, for the relative clause as representing object, cf. VIII.
46 § 3.

ἀξιολογώτατοι, the most important, noteworthy, 1.6. the leading
personages, cf. II. ro § 3.

ἀποχωρεῖν, epexegetic of σπένδονται.

ψιλῶσαι (sc. μονῶσαι), ‘to isolate.’

μισθοφόρον.. «ξενικόν, the like combination is found in VIII. 25 ὃ 2,
although Meineke (Herm. 3. 366) finds a gloss in μισθοφόρον, Cobet
and Herwerden in ἕενικόν : which, however, will serve to distinguish the
non-Peloponnesians.

ὄχλον, a word applicable to any mixed or motley collection: here,
‘the food for powder’ of modern strategy, including the light-armed and
baggage train; they were probably Epirotes.

διαβαλεῖν és, ‘to bring into discredit with,’ a confusion of és and
πρός. The constrn. must not be confounded with the use of és with
λοιδορεῖν, διαβάλλειν, as marking the ground on which the aspersion is
made, cf. VIII. 88.

χρήζων, the only instance of its use in Thuc., perhaps an adscript.

καταπροδόντες, the supplement of αὐτούς is not necessary (cigar
80 ὃ 4). Steup places the comma after χρήζων.

προυργιαίτερον, for the comparative formation cf. πλησιαίτερον.

8 8. ὥσπερ ὑπῆρχε, -- ὡς ἐκ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων, ‘as means allowed,’
‘as best they could.’

298 THUCYDIDES 717 [erx § 3—

οἷς ἐδέδοτο (sc. ἡ ἀναχώρησις), the antecedent is absorbed in the
relative.

ἐπεβουλεύον, with an accus.: again in VII. 51 § 1, VIII. 60 § 1.

CHAPTER (GX

8 1. ἀγγέλλεται, historic present: for parataxis with πέμπει, cf.
τ Ὅτ 81:

τῆς πόλεως, the capital (Ambracia).

κατά, ‘in accordance with,’ i.e. ‘in response to,’ cf. 105 § 4.

ξυμμῖξαι, ‘join’; cf. προσέμιξαν, 106 § 3.

§ 2. καί, marking the sequel, ‘thereupon.’

προλοχιοῦντας, ‘to post ambuscades in advance,’ cf. 11. 81 § 5: note
the distributive agreement with collective noun.

τὰ καρτερά, ‘the strong, commanding, positions,’ cf. II. 100 § I.

βοηθεῖν ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς, ‘to take the field against them,’ i.e. to dispute
their advance: cf. βοηθεῖν és, 105 ὃ 2; βοηθεῖν περί, 102 ὃ 5.

CHAPTER CAT

81. ols ἔσπειστο, ‘those with whom terms had been made’: the
verb is an impersonal passive, not from σπένδω, but σπένδομαι, a
‘reciprocal’ middle (see Thompson, G. Syn. 129 6): for the dative
cf. 10g § 2.

πρόφασιν, accusative in apposition with sentence; cf. VI. 33 ὃ 2.

λαχανισμόν, the practice, alluded to by Aristophanes, Thesmoph.
463, is still common with the Greek and Albanian soldiery (Leake,
N. G. Iv. 248). The country abounds in edible herbs and roots,
especially wild cabbage.

φρυγάνων ξυλλογήν, by Herwerden regarded as a mere gloss on the
more common term φρυγανισμός : but would not Thucydides’ character-
istic love of change have led him to avoid the close proximity of two
identical terminations ?

ὑπαπῇσαν, ‘were stealing away.’

κατ᾽ ὀλίγους, ‘in small groups’; in contrast, possibly, to the ἁθρόοι
of § 2.

ἅμα ξυλλέγοντες, ie. ξυλλέγοντες dua τῷ ὑπαπιέναι. The adverb,
though connected with the temporal participle, grammatically qualifies
the verb of the sentence (Goodw. M. T. § 858).

δῆθεν, ‘professedly,’ cf. 68 ὃ τ.

cx1 § 2] NOTES. 299

ἀπεχώρουν, an inceptive imperfect, ‘began to quicken their pace.’

§ 2. οἱ ἄλλοι, the ξενικὸς ὄχλος Of 109 § 2.

ὅσοι μὲν ἐτύγχανον οὕτως ἁθρόοι ξυνελθόντες, these few words
constitute a ‘locus vexatissimus.’ (1) The solitary μέν (to which we
can scarcely, with Herbst, find an answer in οἱ δὲ ᾿Ακαρνᾶν ε5) offends
most critics, so much so that Campe, Stahl, and others, believe it to
conceal some participial form, e.g. μένοντες, μονούμενοι, μεμονωμένοι,
though Campe’s μονωθέντες violates Thucydidean usage: on the other
hand μέν without δέ, for purposes of emphasis, is by no means so
uncommon. (2) οὕτως (for which Poppo proposes ὄντες) leaves much
doubt as to its true meaning: does it refer to the previous context
(‘uti supra memoravimus’), does it directly correspond to ὡς, or is it
idiomatic? (cf. Latin ‘sic,’ and see Thompson on Plato, Gorgias 494 E).
(3) Can ἁθρόοι be constructed with ἐτύγχανον as constituting a complete
predication without the addition of évres? on the possibility of such
omission of the substantival participle with τυγχάνω, see Thompson on
Plato, Phaedrus 263 c, Stallbaum on Rep. 369 B, Jebb on Soph. Elect.
46, Rutherford, New Phrynichus 342. The use, which first occurs in
Homer, is established beyond doubt by poetic usage, e.g. Soph. El. 46,
313, 1457, Aristoph. Eccl. 1141. In pure Attic it is quite exceptional.
In Plato, Ast has collected some ten instances, in most of which the
participle is easily supplied: but one at least, Hipp. Ma. 300 a ἡ ἡδονὴ
...TUYXavEL καλή, resists correction. (4) ξυνελθόντες (Laur. ξυνεξελθόντες,
which Cobet approves), if construed with ἐτύγχανον, violates the Thu-
cydidean canon: although in Thuc. we regularly find present or perfect
participle with the imperfect of τυγχάνω, one instance alone is forth-
coming where the aorist is used, and even then the perfect precedes
(VIII. 105 § 3 ἐτύγχανον ἐνδεδωκότες Kal dpurjoavtes). Goodwin,
M. T. § 146, appealing to Prof. Wheeler’s statistics (discussed by
Prof. Gildersleeve with his usual acuteness in A. J. Phil. x1. 76),
calls attention to this neglect of tense-identity between the finite verb
and participle. But may it not be that the aorist here is ‘shorthand for
the perfect’ (to quote Prof. Gildersleeve’s own words), and that ‘the
appropriateness of the aorist suggested the violation of a somewhat
wooden rule’? The imperfect naturally lends itself to the imperfects
of the context, ὑπαπῇσαν, ἀπεχώρουν, but if the difficulty really lies
in the imperfect, why not at once correct the imperfect to aorist ?
After all, in the case of minuscules, what does the distinction between av
and ov count for? Correction, if made at all, will have to be made
‘contra fidem codicum.’ The clause, with its restriction ὅσοι μέν, will

300 THUCYDIDES LI. [οχι § 2—

thus either point to the survivors of the hard-fought ἀναχώρησις of
108 § 3, or to the case of those Ambraciots and mercenaries who had
joined the Mantineans and Eurylochus’ command in their quest for
fuel and forage. In the one case we shall translate ‘those who had
succeeded, as I have said, in making their way into Olpae together
(with the Ambraciots)’; in the other, ‘those who chanced to have
taken part (with the Peloponnesians and Mantineans) in thus going out.’
ξυνελθόντες may just as well conceal ξυνεσελθόντες as ξυνεξελθόντες.

The scanty details make it hard to see in what way the secret
arrangement was carried out. To ensure its success, the isolation of
the Mantinean$’ and Eurylochus’ troops from the Ambraciots and
mercenaries was essential. But does Thuc. mean us to understand
that the Peloponnesians left the Ambraciots and mercenaries within
the town, while they themselves went out upon this subterfuge? or did
the Mantineans pretend to act as a covering party, while the Ambraciots
and others gathered fuel and pot-herbs? The historian plainly says
that the Mantineans did the foraging, but does this preclude a certain
number of Ambraciots and ξένοι from taking part? ‘The subsequent
narrative points to a butchery of almost defenceless men: how was
it that these μαχιμώτατοι, who had actually cut their way through in
the face of odds (108 § 3), now made so feeble a resistance? On the
treachery of Eurylochus to his brother Dorians, see Grote, Part 11.
Chap. 51.

Emendations are rife: Poppo proposes ὄντες for οὕτως, connecting
ξυνελθόντες with ὥρμησαν : Madvig (Adv. I. 318) suggests ὅσοι ἐνετύγχανον
αὐτοῖς (a very rough and ready solution): Classen sees a lacuna after
μέν, and hints at the possibility of ἐτύγχανον concealing some passive or
neuter verb of other meaning: or of some lost participle, μονούμενοι or
μεμονωμένοι, lurking in μέν. Stahl suggests μένοντες, which he connects
with ἐτύγχανον : Hude sees a reference te those left in the fortress
rather than to those who had gone out, suggesting ὅσοι μή, and τούτοις
(so also Herwerden), while in ἁθρόοι he detects a suggestion of some
word implying secrecy, and therefore proposes ἄθροοι (= ἄνευ Opod), ‘sine
tumultu’: but the word is a mere. figment of the grammarians. The
agreement of MSS. may perhaps point to the perpetuation of some
ancient mis-reading. Does the -τως in οὕτως conceal τέως, ov- being a
mere repetition of the previous τον, or has an és been lost in -ws, e.g.
οὕτως ἐς ἄθροισιν svveNOdvres?—for ἄθροισις cf. VI. 26 ὃ 2:—or have
we in ἁθρόοι some other word disguised? For further discussion see
Appendix.

cx § 1] NOTES. 301

ἔγνωσαν, ‘realised.’

ἔθεον δρόμῳ, cf. Plautus, ‘curriculo currere,’ cf. Iv. 67 § 4.

§ 3. ᾿Ακαρνᾶνες, Demosthenes had let them into the secret (Cl.).

αὐτῶν τῶν στρατηγῶν, ‘of the generals even,’ marking, as Classen
suggests, the high pitch of excitement ; the authority of a brigadier even
could hardly restrain the rank and file.

τις, singular for plural, as in the phrase ἤ τις ἢ οὐδείς ; here,
probably to avoid collision with τινάς. The enclitic is explained by
grammarians as used in a collective sense, as implying a plural (cf.
Hadley, G. G. § 609 A), by Curtius, G. G. § 475. 4 A, referred to the
German ‘man’: ‘here and there one’ ((].). The use of ἀκοντίζειν with
accusative of external object is without parallel in Thuc.

νομίσας, the singular emphasizes the want of combined action.

σφᾶς, the individual is lost in the aggregate.

ἔκτεινον, ‘fell to slaying’; the imperfect prepares us for the result
attained in aorist ἀπέκτειναν.

8 4. τινάς, cf. 68 § 3, Diod. ΧΙ. 60, σχεδὸν πάντας (a gross
exaggeration).

᾿Αγραΐδα, cf. 106 § 2, Leake, N. G. Iv. 352.

CHAPTER CXII.

81. ἐκ τῆς πόλεως, the capital, Ambracia, ΟΣ απο ϑ i.

᾿Ιϑδομένην, the site cannot be determined with accuracy: see, how-
ever, Arnold’s note, and Leake, N. G. Iv. 249, 250. By securing the
southern summit, Demosthenes obtained a post which both protected
his advance and secured the retreat, in case of ill success, as well of the
division which he led through Makrinoro as of that which marched
through the mountains to the right.

ἐστόν, in agreement with predicate, cf. Iv. 102 ὃ 3.

προαποσταλέντες, cf. 110 ὃ 2: for the pleonasm with ἀπό, cf. I.
23 ὃ 5.

τοῦ στρατοπέδου, ‘the main body.’

ἔλαθόν τε καὶ ἔφθασαν, Cobet proposes λαθόντες ἔφθασαν προκατα-
λαβόντες, ‘they had forestalled (the enemy) in occupying without
detection,’ cf. Iv. 127 § 2.

τὸν δ᾽ ἐλάσσω, the construction of ἀναβαίνειν with accusative is not
recognised by Thucydides: Poppo would correct to és τὸν δ᾽ ἐλάσσω,
assuming the loss of és from final syllable of καταλαβόντες. Kriiger
quotes one instance from Plato, Phaed. 113 D.

302 LHOCYDIDES L427. [cxir § 2—

§ 2. δειπνήσας, after the evening meal.

Δημοσθένης καὶ τὸ ἄλλο στράτευμα.. ἐχώρει, for the prominence
given to the commander, cf. vill. 03 § 1. For the Latin use, see Madv.
Synt. § 214.

τὸ ἄλλο, i.e. his own force, which he had kept in reserve, consisting
of 200 Messenians and the Amphilochians: the Acarnanians were en-

gaged in pursuing the Ambraciots (110 § 2, 111 ὃ 3).
ἀπὸ ἑσπέρας, ‘at fall of night,’ cf. vil. 29 § 2.

τῆς ἐσβολῆς, the pass of Makrinoro (Leake), but see Arnold.

§ 3. ὄρθρῳ, ‘break of day,’ the Latin ‘quartae vigiliae,’ according
to Phrynichus τελευτᾷ els διαγελῶσαν ἡμέραν. Demosthenes made his
attack at the first glimpse of dawn, cf. IV. 110 ὃ 1.

ἔτι (sc. οὖσιν).

ἐν ταῖς εὐναῖς, ‘while still in their bivouacs’; cf. Tac. A. I. 50,
and note the coordination of prepositional and participial forms of
predication.

kal οὐ.. ἀλλὰ πολὺ μᾶλλον, of this familiar Platonic sequence Vahlen
has collected instances in his note on Arist. Poet. 1450 a 30: cf. Plato,
Apol. 30 D.

τοὺς ἑαυτῶν εἶναι, sc. τοὺς ἐπιπίπτοντας.

8 4. ἐπίτηδες (Sch. ἐσκεμμένως), ‘purposely.’

προσαγορεύειν, ‘challenge,’ Lat. ‘compellare.’

γλῶσσαν, elsewhere φωνήν : cf. VI. 5 § 1, Aesch. Choeph. 563.

προφύλαξι, ‘pickets,’ ‘outposts,’ cf. IV. 30 § 2.

πίστιν παρεχομένους, ‘inspiring confidence,’ i.e. by the Dorian
dialect.

τῇ ὄψει, ‘not distinguishable by sight,’ a suppressed contrast to τῇ
ἀκοῇ, cf. 38 8 4.

8 δ. τῷ στρατεύματι, ‘the main body,’ cf. supra τοῦ στρατοπέδου.

τρέπουσι, a rapid transition to the plural (Cl.) : for change of number
see Kriig. G. G. 58. 43.

avTov=‘ilico,’ ‘there and then.? See 98 § 2, n.

κατὰ τὰ ὄρη, ‘scattering over the mountains.’

§ 6. προκατειλημμένων, the perfect marks the recent character of
the occupation, cf. rro § 2.

πρὸς ὁπλίτας, ‘encountering heavy-armed troops.’ πρός is primarily
here used of contrast.

ἀπείρων (sc. τῆς yijs), cf. 11. 4 ὃ 2.

ὅπῃ τράπωνται, an adaptation of the deliberative subjunctive, in
109 ὃ 1 still more strongly realised by future indicative.

Cx § 2] NOTES. 303

ἐσπίπτοντες, cf. 98 § 1: for this combination of participle in agree-
ment with a subject expressed in genitive absolute, cf. 55 § 1.

§7. πᾶσαν ἰδέαν, cf. 98 ὃ 3.

ἅμα τοῦ ἔργου τῇ ξυντυχίᾳ, ‘in ipso huius rei articulo’ (Poppo),
lit. ‘at the time of the occurrence of this engagement’: for ξυντυχίᾳ
(coincidence), cf. 1. 33 § 1; for ἔργον in sense of ‘battle,’ cf. 1. 105 ὃ 5,
III. 108 § 1.

τινές constitutes a partitive apposition with χωρήσαντες, cf. I. 49
§ 4: unless indeed we prefer to treat χωρήσαντες as a nominative
absolute, cf. Iv. 108 § 4, VIII. 104 § 4: for the order of the sentence
cf. ν. 10 § Io.

εἰ δεῖ, ‘if needs must,’ i.e. if inevitable, cf. 11. 74 § 1.

βαρβάρων, here in agreement with ᾿Αμφιλόχων. The Amphilochians
were a mixed race, probably Pelasgian (Arnold), cf. 11. 68 § 5.

8 8. κακωθέντες, ‘roughly handled’ (κακῷς περιεφθέντες, Hadt.).

ὀλίγοι ἀπὸ πολλῶν, ‘a handful of a host’ (few out of many), cf.
τ Tate Sie

Diodorus, XII. 60, confirms the narrative, μεγάλῃ συμφορᾷ περι-
πεπτωκότες.

CHAPTER, ἜΧΤΗΙ:

81. αὐτοῖς, for the dative cf. I. 13 ὃ 3, Plato, Protag. 321 Ὁ,

ἐς ᾿Αγραίους, cf. 111 § 4.

ἐκ τῆς “Odmns, following instead of preceding the attributive parti-
ciple, καταφυγόντων : cf. Classen on 1. 11 § 3.

τῶν νεκρῶν ols ἀπέκτειναν, ‘the bodies of those whom they had
slain’ (i.e. ἐκείνων ots): as in I. 50 § 1, there is no assimilation by
attraction. Herwerden remarks “νεκροὺς ἀποκτείνειν nemo potest,’
suggesting either the excision of νεκρῶν, reading τῶν ods ἀπέκτειναν
(a desperate remedy), or simply ὧν ἀπέκτειναν, omitting τῶν νεκρῶν
absolutely (Stud. Th. 49).

πρώτης, not προτέρας, as there had been three encounters (Cl.).

ὑποσπόνδων, i.e. ols ἔσπειστο, 111 ὃ I. Kriiger explains καὶ τῶν
ὑποσπόνδων as the equivalent of τῶν ἄλλων τῶν ὑποσπόνδων (ἃ. G.
69. 32. 2).

ξυνεξῇσαν, ‘tried to escape with.’

§ 2. ἐθαύμαζε, ‘expressed his surprise at’: cf. the Lat. use of
‘mirari.’

τὸ πάθος, i.e. the disastrous affair at Idomene.

σφῶν, the κῆρυξ identifies himself with his comrades, as one of a

304 THUCYDIDES ΤΠ [cx § 2—

number only; cf. infra ὃ 4, τῶν μεθ’ ἡμών (sc. τῶν és ᾿Αγραίους κατα-
φυγόντων).

εἶναι, sc. τὰ ὅπλα.

8 8. θαυμαζοι... τεθνᾶσιν, for the modal enallage there appears no
need whatever, although the optative we can explain as subjective,
the indicative as the mood of fact: for change from subj. to optative
cf. 22 § 8. Naber, on the analogy of 38 § 1, would read 6 τι θαυμάζοι
ὁπόσοι αὐτῶν τεθνᾶσιν (eliminating καί).

οἰόμενος αὖ ὃ ἐρωτῶν, the addition of the article, for the sake of
more exact specification, lends to a mere apposition almost the force of
an absolute construction ; lit. ‘thinking on his part, he the questioner’:
the article is practically resumptive, see Monro, H. G. § 261.

τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιδομέναις, a brachylogy for τῶν ἐν 716. μαχομένων, cf. 11.
34 § 5 τοὺς ἐν Μαραθώνι.

μάλιστα, cf. rog § 2.

8 4. οὔκουν τὰ ὅπλα ταυτί, some word appears necessary to the
completion of the sentence, more especially in contrast to the ἀλλά
clause. Kriiger suggests σ'-Ξ διακοσίων : may not ἐκείνων have dropt
out after οὔκουν ἢ ‘then, those arms here are evidently not theirs.’

πλέον (not πλεῖν as Herwerden suggests), see Meisterhans, p. 120,
Stahl, Qu. Gr. 16.

μαχομένων, imperfect participle.

εἴπερ ye, ‘yes, if indeed.’

dAAd.,..dAAd, the first ἀλλά in reply to the words of the previous
speaker, the second introducing the antithesis; in both cases the particle
is adversative, but adversative in different relations.

πρῴην, ‘nudius tertius’ (cf. the familiar χθὲς καὶ πρῴην), see Plato,
Protag. 310 B, and cf. with 309 D τρίτην ye ἤδη ἡμέραν.

καὶ μὲν δή, lit. ‘and indeed then.’ δή strengthens μέν, thus giving
the combination the force of καὶ μήν, ‘all I can tell you is that’: cf. the
Aeschylean use of γε μὲν δή as=ye μήν (i.e. ὅμως), see Kriig. G. G. 69.
35-1. The combination is frequent as representing καὶ μήν in all its
various meanings, vid. Klotz de Part. 11. 401.

8 5. βοήθεια, collective.

διέφθαρται, the indicative realises the hopeless certainty of the
case (Cl.).

τῷ μεγέθει, cf. Tac. A. ΠΙ. 3, ‘magnitudinem mali perferre non
toleravit.’

τῶν παρόντων, i.e. with which he was confronted, brought face to
face.

cx 6] NOTES. 305

ἄπρακτος, ‘without doing his errand’ (Jowett), lit. ‘unsped.’

οὐκέτι ἀπήτει, cf. VII. 72 § 2, ‘without further thought of asking
for the dead.’

§ 6. πάθος γὰρ τοῦτο, the order of the words is noticeable, ‘as a
disaster’ (i.e. in point of disaster), ‘this, as the experience of any one
state within the like number of days, was the very direst of all that
occurred in the course of the present war.’

μιᾷ πόλει, the dative is not only a dative of relation (incommodi),
but of restriction also.

τὸν πόλεμον τόνδε, Herbst (Phil. XxXVIII. 521) would, unnecessarily,
restrict to the Io years’ war only.

ἴσαις, three days.

μέγιστον δή, for δή cf. vil. 41 § 2, μέγιστός ye δή. For similar
comments, see VII. 29 ὃ 5, 30 § 4.

ἀριθμόν, Kriiger quotes Eur. Heracl. 669, πολλούς" ἀριθμὸν ἄλλον
οὐκ ἔχω φράσαι.

ἄπιστον τὸ πλῆθος, the predicative position of the adjective suggests
a compressed relative sentence, e.g. ἄπιστον τὸ πλῆθός ἐστιν ὃ λέγεται
ἀπολέσθαι: cf. 63 ὃ 4 ((].). ‘Hinc aestimari potest fides Thucydidea’
(Herw.). Grote estimates the total loss at 6000, but his calculation is
based on simply arbitrary assumptions, e.g. that the proportion of suits
of armour allotted to Demosthenes was one-sixth only of that allotted
to the state of Athens (cf. Grote, chap. 51). The fact remains, how-
ever, that the denuded state of Ambracia called for the prompt despatch
of 300 Corinthian hoplites for its protection (cf. 114).

ὡς πρός, ‘as compared with,’ i.e. in proportion to.

᾿Αμπρακίαν, the country for the people: cf. Tac. A. 11. 25, ‘exscindit
non ausum congredi hostem’ (see Shill. on Th. 1. 107 ὃ 2).

ἐξελεῖν, ‘expugnare,’ ‘destroy,’ cf. VIII. 46 § 3.

νῦν δέ, the usual mode of contrasting fact with assumption: cf.
43 § 5.

χαλεπώτεροι, ‘difficiliores,’ more troublesome, difficult to deal with,
cle 4 256.

πάροικοι ὦσι, the one instance in Thuc. of this adjectival form
πάροικος. 93 ὃ 2 gives the true reading παροικῶσι.

Diodorus, X11. 60, confirms the account here given of the crushing
losses experienced by the Ambraciots, and the suspicions entertained of
the Athenians.

306 THUCYDIDES 11. [cxiv § τ--

CHAPTER ΟΣ

81. κατὰ tds πόλεις, Cobet would cut out the article on the analogy
of adverbial phrases.

πλέοντα, ‘on the voyage’: for this use of πλεῖν in connexion with
inanimate things, cf. 51 § 2.

ἑάλω, in what way Thuc. does not record: the episode he probably
regarded as unimportant (Cl.).

ἀνακείμενα, the usual perfect passive of ἀνατίθημι.

ἐξῃρέθησαν, ‘were specially assigned’: the plural is explained by
Stahl and Classen by accommodation to the apposition (τριακόσιαι πανο-
πλίαι), just as in 112 § r we have an adaptation to the predicate: but
Thuc. has some few instances of plural verb with neuter plural subject.
To me it seems that the notion of selection, picking out one by one,
suggests the distributive plural, and that τριακόσιαι πανοπλίαι represents
an apposition pure and simple.

κατέπλευσε, ‘returned’; cf. the κάθοδος of an exile, e.g. VIII. 50 ὃ 1.
Demosthenes was left in voluntary exile in 98 § 5.

ἅμα, somewhat otiose at first sight, but really calling attention to an
addition of special importance: cf. 61 § 1, and see Classen on 1. 2 ὃ 2,
who compares its effect to that of ἄλλως τε καί: but this explanation
applies more particularly to its use with participles.

τὴν τῆς Αἰτωλίας, the genitive may be explained as a genitive of
definition, the position giving it the force of an adjective, sc. τὴν Αἰτω-
λικήν. But the Mss. at least (Laur. Pal.) have τὴν ἐξ Αἰτωλίας (cf. 102
§ 3), which appears confirmed by the substitution of ἐν for ἐκ in the
inferior Mss. (Hude, Com. Crit. p. 118).

ἀπό, causal as in 64 § 2.

πράξις, ‘success’ (cf. εὐπραξία, 39 ὃ 4), found only in one other
passage, VI. 88 § g, and in different sense. The word is here used in
the poetic sense of ‘result’ or ‘issue,’ usually qualified by adjectives,
e.g. ovpla, Aesch. Choeph. 814; εὐτυχής, Soph. Trach. 294: it may
however serve as a substitute for κακοπραγία, cf. Hdt. 1. 65.

ἀδεεστέρα, ‘with less misgiving,’ 1.6. less than he would otherwise
have felt, but for the trophies in his charge.

§ 2. εἴκοσι, cf. 105 ὃ 3, 107 ὃ 1.

Σαλύνθιον, cf. ται ὃ 4.

ἀναχώρησιν, cf. 109 ὃ 2. The absence of ships left them at the
mercy of Athens (Poppo).

καὶ μετανέστησαν, ‘to which place they had eventually withdrawn’;

cxv § 2] NOTES. 307

for καί, cf. I. 14 § 2. The correction οἷπερ (for οἵπερ) Σαλυνθίου (for
Davy Gov) is due to Hermann.

ὃ 3. ξυμμαχίαν, really an ἐπιμαχία, ‘defensive alliance.’

ἑκατὸν ἔτη, accusative of duration of time; the expression is really
figurative, representing ‘in perpetuity,’ cf. v. 47 § 1.

ὥστε-Ξ- ἐφ᾽ ᾧ τε, as expressing the conditions: cf. 28 § 1 with Goodw.
M. T. 587 § 2.

᾿Ανακτόριον, a little S. of Actium.

μὴ βοηθεῖν, i.e. μὴ βοήθειαν πέμπειν ἐπί. ---βοήθεια must here be taken
in the friendly sense.

ὃ 4. διέλυσαν, the middle would be more acceptable (cf. Karas
λύεσθαι) in reference to the two parties to the contract. In vIil.
46 ὃ 1, the active διαλῦσαι appears suggested by the isolated attitude of
Tissaphernes.

Κορίνθιοι, Ambracia was a Corinthian colony, cf. 11. 80 ὃ 3.

ἑαυτῶν, ‘native troops,’ soldier-citizens. Diodorus’ account (XII. 60)
of an appeal to Lacedaemon is untrue.

Ἐενοκλείδαν, the commander of I. 46 § 2 (Cl.).

κομιζόμενοι χαλεπῶς, ‘making their way with difficulty’; the im-
perfect participle marks the sustained effort.

τὰ μὲν κατά, for the like formula, cf. 50§ 3, 68§5. For grammatical
purposes, the clause would be better placed in the next chapter.

CHAPTER Gx

This chapter resumes the narrative from 103 § 3.

81. τοῦ αὐτοῦ χειμῶνος, after January, 425 (Goll.).

“Ipepatay, sc. χώραν, cf. 111 ὃ 4’Aypatoa.

Σικελῶν, they held the mainland, cf. vr. 88 § 4.

ἄνωθεν, cf. IV. 25 ὃ 9 ὑπὲρ τῶν ἄκρων.

ἔσχατα, i.e. furthest from the coast.

Αἰόλου νῆσοι, cf. 88.

§ 2. Πυθόδωρον, archon at the time of the outbreak of the war
(11. 2 8 1), banished on suspicion of malversation (Iv. 65), one of the
signatories of the peace of v. 19, 24, and one of the first to break it
(VI. 105).

διάδοχον, predicative with καταλαμβάνουσιν, says Classen: but is
the constrn. complete? cf. 69 ὃ 1 καταλαμβάνουσι ξύμβουλον ἐπελη-
λυθότα. Meineke (Hermes I. 48) suggests ἥκοντα, but the prepositional
constrn. may be complete in itself. ‘They found Isolochus (come) to

20—2

308 THUCYDIDES: 770: [cxv § 2—

take charge of the fleet, to supersede (as a successor to) Laches in his
command.’

Λάχης, cf. 86 § 1, for his recall cf. Ar. Vesp. 240.

§3. ξύμμαχοι, cf. 86 ὃ 3.

πλεύσαντες, ‘nescio an πέμψαντες, cf, 86 ὃ 3, VI. 62 ὃ « (Hude,
Comm. Crit. p. 118).

θαλάσσης εἰργόμενοι, ‘shut out from the sea,’ cf. 1. 141 § 4: for the
supplement μὴ χρῆσθαι, cf. 6 ὃ 2.

ὡς ov περιοψόμενοι, construe with παρεσκευάζοντο, cf. Iv. 8 § a
the circumstantial participle Evvayelpovres denotes the means employed
(cf. Goodw. M. T. § 835), ‘they made preparations for preventing this
by collecting a naval force’: the words οὐ περιοψόμενοι (-- οὐκ ἐπιτρέ-
Yovres) constitute a litotes: the leading notion is that of overlooking,
treating with indifference, with a suggestion of wounded pride at being
thus hemmed in by a few ships. For the phrase itself cf. 1. 95 § 2: for
ws of intention or determination, see Goodw. M. T. § 864.

§ 4. μελέτην ποιεῖσθαι, the usual periphrasis for μελετᾶν, to
‘exercise,’ ‘practise,’ in view of a serious engagement, says Classen.
For three years now, since Phormio’s successes (429), the navy had
grown rusty for lack of occupation on a serious scale.

§5. Σοφοκλέα, there is a tradition of his having been eventually one
of the thirty. Thuc. records his banishment together with Eurymedon,
in Iv. 65. See Grote Hist. Gr. c. Ixi. ; Xen. Hell. 11. 3 § 2.

Εὐρυμέδοντα, eventually killed in a sea-fight, cf. vil. 52 § 2.

ἐπὶ τῶν πλειόνων, lit. ‘on board of,’ cf. ἐφ᾽ ἵππου.

86. τοῦ Λάχητος τῶν νεῶν, for double genitive cf. Kriig. G. 6.
47-9. 6. -

φρούριον, on the Halex, cf. 90.

CHAPTER CXVI.

§ 1. ἐρρύη, a poetical and Platonic form, cf. the irregular ἐρρίφη
from ῥίπτω.

περί, ‘circa,’ ‘sub.’

ῥύαξ, cf. Plato, Phaedo 111 Ε, Pliny’s ‘rivus ignis’: the article
denotes a familiar phenomenon of the mountain. For a description see
Pindar’s first Pythian ode.

ἐπί, by Meineke altered to ὑπό from C and G: Stahl objects that the
change precludes all allusion to the city.

“exvi § 3] NOTES. 309

τῷ ὄρει, expunged by Herwerden: Badham suggests the elimination
of the whole clause from ὅπερ to Σικελίᾳ.

§ 2. πεντηκοστῷ, if Thucydides’ calculation be correct, it will take
us back to 475 B.C., 16 years before Hiero’s famous victory. The Parian
inscription places the date of the eruption in 479; Bockh explains the
discrepancy by suggesting either that Thuc. set down a round number,
or that the eruptions continued for some few years. To avoid the
difficulty, Kriiger suggests that Thuc. really wrote ve’ ἔτει, not ν΄.

τρὶς γεγενῆσθαι, the earliest of these three eruptions will take us
back to 396 or 400 B.C., cf. Diod. XIV. 59.

ἀφ᾽ οὗ οἰκεῖται, i.e. from the middle of the 8th century B.c. to 425,
cf. VI. 3 § I.

8 8. κατά, ‘in the course of.’

ξυνέγραψεν, cf. 88 ὃ 4.

Jal Mel Oh OD

Chap. iii. ἄρτι καθισταμένου. Steup, from a comparison of 68 ὃ 4
with II. 36 § 3, explains this expression as denoting the middle period of
the war, i.e. of the ro years’ war. But from the analogy of καθίστασθαι
és πόλεμον ‘to settle down to war,’ it would seem undesirable to limit
the meaning of the phrase. The war was now ‘fairly afoot’ (Prof.
Smith), indeed, just at its height. For ἄρτι as combining the notion of
‘right’ with that of ‘success’ see Curtius Gk. Et. 71, 339, and Ruther-
ford (New Phrynichus p. 70), who limits it as the direct equivalent of
our English ‘just.’

τριταῖος ἀφικόμενος. The distance from Athens to Geraestus would
be, as the crow flies, about 46 miles, from Geraestus to Malea about
137. Assuming that the ship could lay a fairly straight course, and
taking the speed of the ordinary ὁλκάς at 1300 stadia (141% miles)
in 24 hours, the possibility of covering the distance within the time
specified, even making allowance for a certain amount of inevitable
deviation, becomes obvious. Cf. Hdt. 1v. 86 with Arnold’s note on
Thue. Il. 97 § 1.

Chap. iv. αὐτοῖς ἔπρασσον, the interpretation that this phrase is
the equivalent of ἔπρασσον πρὸς αὐτούς is quite untenable. αὐτοῖς is
here, in all probability, a ‘dativus commodi,’ its emphatic position being
due to the fact that the Lesbians were the persons in whose behalf the
appeal was made, and for whose benefit relief would be sent, if sent
at all. Thucydides may have purposely placed αὐτοῖς in this position
for the sake of a construction ἀπὸ κοινοῦ, i.e. with ἔπρασσον and ἥξει.
But (the confusion of C with € is very common) did Thuc. write airol?

Chap. x. 81. Herwerden’s suggestion δοκήσεως (Stud. Th. p. 38)
is no great help to the solution of the difficulty. Did Thue. really
intend any distinction of εἶεν from ylyvowro? Failing to find any satis-
factory reason for such an antithesis, and feeling extremely doubtful of
Classen and Steup’s interpretation of γίγνοιντο, and suspicious of the

212 ΤΟΥ. TL.

awkward change of subject, I have had recourse to the heroic remedy of
excising elev, which appears due to dittography; hence the intensive καί
was mistaken for a copulative. In 44 ὃ 2 elev is probably due to the
like cause. The Thucydidean mannerism of combining a prepositional
form of expression with an adjective is almost too familiar to need illus-
tration: see however 42 § 2 μετὰ ἀξυνεσίας καὶ ἄδικος. For the senti-
ment cf. Plato Gorg. 507 ὅτῳ δὲ μὴ κοινωνία, φιλία οὐκ ἂν εἴη, and for
a practical illustration cf. Thuc. I. 77 fin. ἄμικτα γὰρ τὰ νόμιμα ἔχετε.

The point is that neither friendship between individuals nor union
between states can prove permanent, unless there be (1) a mutual con-
viction of good faith, (2) similarity of national character and political
institutions. In Thuc.’s own words, ‘unless, in combination with a con-
viction of mutual honesty, they also prove to be of the like character.’
In ὁμοιότροποι, which he explains with reference to political ‘mores,’
Herbst sees an allusion to the oligarchic traditions of Mytilene. és
ἀλλήλους may easily find a construction from ὁμοιότροποι, as replacing
the more commonplace dative.

§ 2. ἀπολιπόντων ἐκ, to this collocation the only Thucydidean
parallel is v. 4 § 4. Plato, Phaedo 78 B, suggests the like in ὅθεν ἀπελί-
mouev: see, however, Soph. Elect. 514

οὔ τι πω
ἔλειπεν ἐκ τοῦδ᾽ οἴκου πολύπονος αἰκία.

Chap. xii. ὃ 2. The objections to Stahl’s explanation appear to lie
(1) in the weak argument of ‘delay,’ (2) in ignoring the rhetorical question,
(3) in refusing to recognise the parallelism of ἀντεπιβουλεῦσαι with ἀντι-
μελλῆσαι. Still, ἀντιμελλῆσαι is in itself a very doubtful word, and
may possibly combine the weaker sense of μέλλησις with the stronger.

Lesbos was under no moral obligation to delay, simply because
Athens delayed. The charge of ἀδικία was based on the fact of the
revolt constituting an act of aggression. The difficulty is to see whether
the words ὥστε εἴ τῳ δοκοῦμεν x.7.. contain a simple impeachment, or
whether the διὰ τὴν ἐκείνων μέλλησιν is not an apology for the Lesbian
haste. The allies might, of course, have regarded the Lesbians as
ἄδικοι in having revolted upon mere suspicion of what might be. There
is evidently a consciousness of ‘mala fides’ implied on the part of Lesbos,
coupled with the suggestion that as aggressors by revolting (προαπο-
στάντες) they had put themselves out of court.

Chap. xvi. § 2. at περὶ τὴν Πελοπόννησον νῆες. Steup brackets
τριάκοντα on the plea that its retention involves a contradiction of

APPENDIX. gre

the narrative of 7 §2 and 13 § 3. The operations described in 7 ὃ 3
can hardly have occupied so brief a space of time as to make it
possible for the 12 ships retained by Asopius to be once more on the
Laconian coast, at the time when the Spartans were at the Isthmus.
On the contrary, expunging τριάκοντα, we can easily refer the statement
to the fleet of 100 sail mentioned in § 1. But the time actually occupied
in these raids, as well as the precise date of the return of Asopius’ 18
vessels, must remain a matter of pure conjecture.

Against Steup’s view Herbst (Phil. x11. 680) contends that ai περὶ
τὴν Ile. νῆες implies the ships ‘beyond (west of) the Peloponnese,’ in
contradistinction to the fleet of 100 sail which had remained on this side
of the Peloponnese. His contention is, however, refuted by the very
instances he quotes. Miiller-Striibing (Thuk. Forsch. 109 sqq.) joins
with Herbst in controverting Steup’s explanation.

Chap. xvii. This chapter, condemned ‘in toto’ by Steup (Rhein.
Mus. XXIV. 350) has been defended by Herbst (Philol. xL11. 681) and
Stahl (Rhein. Mus. ΧΧΥ ΤΙ. 622), although from different points of view,
Herbst holding that the allusion is to the first year of the war, Stahl
detecting a reference to the events of the fourth year. Stahl, while
contenting himself with partial excision, finds it necessary to emend;
e.g. by striking out δέ after παραπλήσιαι, (2) inserting 7 before ἀρχομένου,
(3) excising περὶ Ποτείδαιαν καί. But even by this process we do not
escape the difficulties besetting this chapter.

The critics who affix the ‘mortiferum theta’ do so not only on the
score of linguistic difficulties, obscurity of expression, and suspicion of
interpolation, but on the more serious charge that the statements
of the chapter cannot be made to tally with the account elsewhere
given by Thucydides.

Amongst difficulties of expression, the following have attracted
special notice: (1) the restrictive use of ἐν τοῖς πλεῖσται, (2) the phrase
ἐνεργοὶ κάλλει, (3) the use of χωρίς, (4) the loose reference in τοῦτο ὃ 3,
(5) ὑπανήλωσε, (6) ἐλάμβανε without subject, thus involving the evolu-
tion of singular from plural—a use unparalleled in Thuc. (Classen).

But, with regard to (1) grammarians now agree in giving to the
phrase a restrictive or intensive meaning, ‘pro re nata.’ (2) Both ἐνεργοί
and κάλλει are ἅπαξ λεγόμενα in Thuc.: this gives us all the more reason
for rejecting that old suspect κάλλει, in spite of the κάλλιστον στρατόπεδον
of Vv. 60, and the καλλονή of Hdt. vir. 36. Indeed, it is impossible to
retain κάλλει without depriving évepyol of its true meaning, cf. Hdt. vit.
25. The retention of évepyoi appears all-important when regarded in

314 ΠΟΘ... LLL.

connexion with the concluding words τοσαῦται δὴ νῆες... ἐπληρώθησαν.
(3) admits of sufficient illustration from Thucydides’ own usage.
(4) Such looseness of reference is of common occurrence in Thucydides.
(5) The word recurs in passive form in this very chapter: ὑπὸ will well
express the gradual or the ‘initial’ sapping of Athenian resources (cf. the
compounds ὑπειπεῖν ‘to say by way of preface,’ ὑπογράφειν, κ.τ.λ.).
Those who quarrel with ὑπό can find a ready substitute in ἀπό.
(6) ἐλάμβανε. When we find τιν confused with τήν, what is more
probable than that τις is lost in trys?

The main questions after all appear to be whether (1) the enumera-
tion of vessels in ὃ 2 includes the reserve fleet, (2) whether the allusion
is to the year 431 or 428 B.C., (3) whether this section (§ 2) contains the
enumeration of all évepyol νῆες, or merely of those évepyol καὶ addy.

Now, assuming that the words ᾿Αττικὴν καὶ Εὔβοιαν καὶ Σαλαμῖνα
ἑκατὸν ἐφύλασσον exclude the fleet reserved for home-defence (cf. 11. 24)
we shall have a flat contradiction of the concluding words of § 1, καὶ ἔτι
πλείους ἀρχομένου τοῦ πολέμου, and shall be driven to accept, with
Stahl, Campe’s insertion of 4. But to reserve 200 ships for home
defence, out of a total of 250 only, would be a measure not much in
keeping with the θαλασσοκρατία of Athens, or the principles or practice
of these ὀξεῖς καὶ δραστήριοι ᾿Αθηναῖοι. That a special guard-force
of 100 ships, in addition to the reserve squadron of 100, is absurdly
large for the protection of Attica, Euboea, and Salamis appears suffi-
ciently proved from the fact that on the occasion of the Peloponnesian
dash on Salamis (11. 93) only 3 ships were on duty at that station: again,
in II. 26, 30 vessels were sufficient for the twofold purpose of raiding
the Laconian coast and guarding Salamis. Further, the display in
force of 100 ships of war upon the coast of the Isthmus (111. 16) would
render the presence of a strong force at Salamis less necessary than ever.
In 11. 94 Thucydides makes no mention of any great addition to the
Salaminian guard-force, but lays stress on the precautions taken for the
protection of the Piraeus, λιμένων κλήσει τῇ τε ἄλλῃ ἐπιμελείᾳ. It is not
until Ψ1Π. 15 that we find any proposal to employ the χίλια τάλαντα of
11. 24, side by side with which the νῆες ἑκατὸν βέλτισται were held in
reserve. This, I think, tells against the notion of any draft made upon
the home reserve for the βοήθεια és Λέσβον. Still, the defence of those
important positions, Euboea and Salamis, might be held to come
within the province of these ἐξαίρετοι νῆες. The omission of the words

1 But cf, Hdt. 1. 195 ἐσθῆτι χρέωνται.. καὶ ἐπενδύνει,

APPENDIX. 415

καὶ περὶ Ποτείδαιαν k.7.d. raises a further difficulty: no definite mention
is made of the return of the two fleets, of 30 and 4o sail respectively, sent
to Potidaea: these could hardly be omitted from our present calculation,
although Stahl suggests that the omission of the article in I. 64, § 3
points to the recall of some of the ships. But would a diminution of
numbers be consistent with the maintenance of a πολιορκία κατὰ κράτος Ὁ
Further, the statements made with regard to the number of hoplites
who served throughout the siege, and the excessive rate of pay allowed
both soldiers and seamen, require either explanation or confirmation.
Holzapfel indeed founds upon the basis of the rate of pay a calculation
of the length of the siege, holding that the data are due, if not to
Thucydides himself, at least to some well-informed authority !
Excluding the home fleet of 100, one may hazard the following
calculation : 100 παρὰ τὸν Ἰσθμόν.
30 περὶ Πελοπόννησον.
40 at Lesbos.
70 at Potidaea.
3 at Salamis?
2 at Atalante?

This (including the τὸ Mytilenean triremes detained by Athens, 3
§ 4) would give a total of 255, a suspicious number when viewed side by
side with vill. 39 ὃ 21. But are we justified in including in the list of
ἐνεργοὶ νῆες these ro triremes of Mytilene? Again have we any data
for determining the strength of the squadron still at Potidaea, or reason
for assuming the return of the 18 vessels sent back by Asopius to have
taken place before the ἐπίδειξις and ἀποβάσεις of τό ὃ 1?

Much depends on the interpretation of évepyol, but, regarding the
word in connexion with ἐπληρώθησαν, I cannot help thinking that the
writer intended to direct special attention to the number of vessels on
actual service, i.e. to the number of those actually manned as distinct
from the number of those available (πλώιμοι).

The passing comment on the naval strength of Athens, at a period
of such exhaustion, seems no more out of place in the narrative of
Thucydides than the estimate of Athenian resources 11. 13, or the
statement of the mortality incident upon the plague. Of interpolation
and dislocation strong suspicion exists, but of the spuriousness of the
chapter no actual proof is forthcoming.

Chap. xviii. ὃ 4. ἐγκατῳκοδομήθη. Steup, on the ground that

1 So far as concerns the difference between numbers,

316 LAOCY DIDES: 117.

these φρούρια were constructed at the same time as the τεῖχος, indeed
‘built into the wall’ (cf. the πύργοι of 21 ὃ 3), rejects the perfect, regard-
ing the imperfect or aorist as necessary.

Chap. xx. § 3. ῥᾳδίως καθορωμένου és ὃ ἐβούλοντο τοῦ τείχους.
Whether we treat τοῦ τείχους as the subject of καθορωμένου, or as parti-
tive dependent on és 6, neither explanation is satisfactory. Hude’s
explanation (Comm. Crit. 94) that és ὅτε ἐς ὅσον, ‘so far as,’ lacks
Thucydidean analogy, while to treat és ὃ ἐβούλοντο as meaning ‘for the
purpose they had in view,’ is a very doubtful interpretation. Steup,
accordingly, proposes to omit és 6 ἐβούλοντο. Stahl’s conjecture ὅσον is
no help. See Rhein. Mus. XXIII. 250.

Chap. xxii. § 3. προσέμισγον πρὸς τὰς ἐπάλξεις. Steup proposes to
strike out πρός, treating τὰς ἐπάλξεις as an antiptosis with εἰδότες (in
A the preposition is added by a later hand). Only one other instance
of the like construction occurs in Thuc., VII. 22 § 1, where it means
to ‘join.’ Steup also finds a practical objection to ‘approaching the
battlements,’ i.e. the top of the wall instead of the wall itself. But,
after all, the notion involved is merely that of ‘coming within reach of,’
‘coming in touch with,’ and προσμῖξαι πρός need only be a variant for
the more usual dative. The consensus of the better Mss. does not
necessarily tell against Steup’s emendation.

The clause pera δὲ αὐτόν... ἀνέβαινον Steup marks as a paren-
thesis, as subordinate in point of importance. Stahl follows Classen in
transposing ἀνέβαινον after τῶν πύργων with ἐχώρουν. Weil (Rey. de
Phil. 11. 89) objects that, though only 12 ψιλοί are mentioned, Ammeas
makes a thirteenth, and, though Thuc. states that he was the first to
ascend, he apparently indicates only a distinction from his companions.
Weil therefore proposes to place a comma after ἑπόμενοι and to cut out the
second ἀνέβαινον. Such a correction would be more hindrance than help.
But Herwerden’s excision of ἀνέβαινον in each case solves the difficulty.
Ammeas led the way and was the first to reach the top; close on his
heels came his companions ; this party of twelve then, divided inte com-
panies of six each, made for the δίοδοι τῶν πύργων at either end of the
μεταπύργιον.

Chap. xx.—xxiv. The engineering difficulties connected with the
siege of Plataea and the escape of the besieged have, like the doubts
cast upon the credibility of the narrative itself, been almost entirely
dispelled by the minute investigation of American archaeologists and
the searching examination of Mr B. ἃ. Grundy. The decision of the
question, complicated as it is by the architectural remains of different

APPENDIX. 317

periods, turns chiefly on two points; (1) the selection of a North-western
position, or Southern; (2) the larger or smaller area of the position
actually besieged. ‘The site itself,’ to quote Mr Grundy’s own account,
‘is the flat sloping top of a bastion of Cithaeron, which extends from the
foot of a steep rocky slope, at the base of the highest peak of that
mountain, northwards for about two-thirds to three-quarters of a mile, to
the flat alluvial plain extending from the head streams of the Oeroe to
the Asopus. Besides this slope from N. to S. there is also an inclina-
tion from W. to E. The East side is on the whole at a lower elevation
than the West side, the difference becoming more marked as the bastion
approaches the plain. At the North or lower end there is a valley, and
close by it a depression runs down towards the plain... The higher
portion of the site presents a rocky uneven surface, incapable of cultiva-
tion, the lower portion being covered with soil to a considerable depth,
and cultivated throughout.’ Exploration has brought to light :

(1) an enceinte wall, forming a rough isosceles triangle, with its base
on the North front of the bastion, its apex at the South or higher end;

(2) a higher cross-wall ;

(3) a lower cross-wall, forming, with the N.W. portion of the
enceinte wall, the defence-work of the N.W. quarter of the bastion,
which is strategically the strongest portion of the whole ground.

The town besieged was, according to Mr Grundy, coextensive with
the area included in the wall surrounding the N.W. portion of the
bastion,—in brief the acropolis.

Against this it is argued (1) that so small a space would not contain
10,000 people, (2) that all flocks, herds and implements would be left at
the mercy of an enemy.—But what evidence exists that 10,000 was the
actual number of the population? Secondly, on the plain there is
hardly any grazing ground, and very little on Cithaeron: why then raise
difficulties about flocks and herds which, in all probability, never
existed? Again, how could 480 men, it is asked, have defended a
περίβολος of 24 miles of wall? (cf. Miiller-Striibing in N. Jahrb., 1885).
But what proof is there of so large a circuit? Mr Grundy’s calculations
give us the following estimate :—

(1) Total περίβολος of Acropolis wall... τον νον" 1430 yards.

(2) Wall on N. and W. sides (the least assailable portion of the
position, as the foundation of any wall of enceinte must have been at
least from 60 to go feet above the plain) ... Ξοῦ νι YOO yards.

(3) Total length on S. and E. sides ... ἐδῶ .. 30 yards.

(4) Portion of E. wall on the edge of the depression... [150 yards.

318 THOCYDIDES {71

This would leave 730 yards of wall without natural difficulties of
position, or (accepting Mr G.’s view of the depression, as much deeper
in former times) 580 yards. Even this reduced estimate leaves a long,
but not impossible, stretch of wall for 480 men to defend.

To take the several points in detail:

(1) The number of the garrison: Plataea was of the first import-
ance to Athens as commanding the pass, and rendering communication
between the Northern allies of Lacedaemon and the Peloponnesians most
difficult, so long as it remained in the hands of Athens. Evidently, the
Athenians regarded 480 men as sufficient for its defence, or they would
never have risked the sacrifice of their own reinforcements.

(2) The strength of the attacking force: what ground had Miiller-
Striibing for assuming that the Peloponnesian force was of the same
strenyth as in the case of invasions of Attica? Thucydides simply tells
us that it was a large force. The numbers 70,000, 80,000 (or even
100,000) are purely conjectural.

(3) The stockade: probably not more than one mile in circum-
ference; if it enclosed the N.W. portion of the site, the ground would
present no difficulties, and timber in abundance would be found on
Cithaeron.

(4) The mound: clay exists in abundance, and that of the very
stiffest kind.

(5) The ladders: no theatrical embellishment: it would be neces-
sary to find the exact length : if too short, the work of climbing the last
yard or so at the top would materially delay the passage ; if too long, the
defenders could have thrust them back.

(6) The escape: from 22 ὃ 2 there would seem to have been a
space left between the edge of the inner trench and the nearer face of
the Peloponnesian wall. No mention is made of any water in the inner
trench, but the depth of water in the outer trench can be accounted for
by the natural slope of the ground. Water does not so readily filter
through stiff clay, but it is more than probable that the Peloponnesians
took precautions, by some simple means, against accumulation of water
in the inner trench and the consequent flooding of their quarters.

So far from Thucydides having drawn upon his imagination for his
facts, his allusion to the prevailing wind of the district (ie. the South, cf.
11. 77 ὃ 5), the soil of the neighbourhood, the plentiful supply of wood,
the small losses sustained by the besieged, and even the trivial details of
the escape, are a sufficient proof that his object was not to construct an

APPENDIX. 319

ideal picture of a siege or to impart instruction in the art of successful
defence.

His information was, in all likelihood, derived from eyewitnesses,
and his account, although confusing in point of topography, contains no
actual or obvious misstatements. No one, as Mr Forbes suggests (Pref.
to Thue. I., p. xcviii.), would ever infer from Thucydides’ narrative that
the city stood not on a level plain, but on a plateau fifty or sixty feet
above the surrounding ground.

But no one rightly appreciating Thucydides could ever conceive that
this most truthful and accurate of historians ever lent himself to the
composition of a ‘military-didactic epic,’ or that he mistook the city
wall for the siege wall !

For further discussion see Paley in Journ. of Phil., Vol. x.; Am.
Journ. of Archaeology for 1890, Vol. vi., No. 4; G. B. Grundy’s Battle
of Plataea (Murray); Evelyn Abbott in Class. Rev. Iv. 1; Forbes’ Pref.
to Thuc. I. pp. xcvil.—xcix.

Chap. xxvi. ὃ 1. ταῖς ναυσὶν és τὴν Μυτιλήνην καταπλεούσαις.
The instrumental construction of the dative Steup rightly takes objection
to, on the score that the κατάπλους of the ships is unnecessary and that
ἐπιβοηθήσωσιν is left without an object. He therefore proposes to strike
out καταπλεούσαις as an adscript, but to retain ταῖς ναυσί as instrumental,
‘with their ships.’ But cannot ταῖς ναυσί refer to the fleet of the Pelo-
ponnesians, and may not ἐπιβοηθεῖν be regarded in a hostile sense if
necessary? (Cf. 69 § 2.)

Chap. xxix. ὃ 1. τοὺς ἐκ τῆς πόλεως. These words Steup and
Miiller-Striibing agree in referring to the ships περὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικήν, as
distinct from those despatched to Lesbos. Herbst, on the contrary,
refers them to the fleet of roo ships mentioned in τό ὃ 1. But his own
quotations tell against him, e.g. II. 31 § I, 1. 105 ὃ 4.

Steup proposes to bracket ἐνδιέτριψαν or to alter to ἐνδιατρίψαντες,
on the plea that (1) the vulgate presents a harsh anacoluthon, (2) that _
the Peloponnesians’ waste of time on the first part of the voyage led to
the fall of Mytilene no less than their dilatoriness in accomplishing the
second stage.

Chap. xxx. § 2. Goodwin’s rule (M. T. §§ 100, 136) that verbs of
hoping, expecting, promising, swearing, when they refer to a future
object, naturally take the future infinitive, but may also have the present
or aorist of the infinitive (not in indirect discourse), needs at least some
limitation or supplement. This is supplied by Rutherford, in a note on
Babrius Ix. 2, and by Lendrum, Classical Review Iv. 100. ‘The limita-

320 _ . THUCVDIDES-FI.

tion laid down by the latter that ‘when the infinitive has no subject
expressed, either form may stand, but when the infinitive has a subject
expressed, the future only is admissible’ has been criticised by Harrison
(Classical Review IV. 381), who adds (1) that every infinitive, if only as
an abstract, by definition involves a subject; (2) in these combinations
the leading verb implies futurity; (3) the infinitive as an abstract is
always future, and in this sense may be called timeless, i.e. omni-
temporal.

The whole of Mr Lendrum’s article will well repay the reader. Cf.
also Monro, Hom. Gr. 235; Roby, L. G. § 1345.

8 3. τὰ πράγματα. The article, I think, can hardly carry with it
the strong demonstrative force assigned it by Poppo. Literally the
meaning is ‘that the position (situation) will be within our grasp.’

8 4. τὸ καινὸν Tod πολέμου. Steup reads τὸ κοινόν, arguing that
(1) for τὸ καινόν no certain equivalent is found, (2) τὸ τοιοῦτον must refer
to τὸ ἀφύλακτον, which cannot be referred to the new or surprising
(καινόν), or the vain or deceptive (κενόν). On the other hand, τὸ κοινόν
(the ‘communis Mars belli’), that which is common, impartial, in war
may well be represented by τὸ ἀφύλακτον, ‘lack of precaution.” The
moral is simple—the art of surprise consists not less in exercising due
precaution yourself than in promptly availing yourself of neglect of
precaution on the part of an adversary.

Chap. xxxi. § 1. ἢν ὑφέλωσι kal dpa, ἢν ἐφορμῶσιν αὐτοῖς,
δαπάνη σφίσι γίγνηται. Such is the reading of Stahl and Kriiger.
Kriiger, however, in common with Bohme would bracket σφίσι : to this
Steup objects on the ground that the retention of σφίσι renders the context
easier, and relieves the harshness of a change of subject with ἐφορμῶσι.
Class. and Bohme bracket the first ἤν and change ὑφέλωσι to ἀφέλωσι.
The first ἤν may be due to some archetypal confusion (for confusion of
N with H see Bast. 428, 715, 726), the second ἤν being due to the first.
The presence of the one would suggest the other: but it is more than
possible that the first ἤν is an interpolation, arising from a mistaken
notion of the ὅπως sequence. Hude, regarding the sentence as ex-
pressing motive rather than condition, objects to the feebleness of ἦν,
and approves Dobree’s ἵνα. But the interchange of ὅπως with ἵνα is
found only twice in Thuc. (VI. 22, vI. 87, ὃ 2) and that the stronger final
particle should follow the weaker is undesirable. (See Goodw. M. T.
§ 114; Gildersleeve, in Am. J. Phil. Iv. 426 544.)

Steup, following the Scholiast, separates σφίσιν from αὐτοῖς, refer-
ring σφίσι to the Peloponnesians and Ionians, ἐφορμῶσι to the Athenians.

APPENDIX. 321

But if ᾿Αθηναῖοι be the subject of ἐφορμῶσι and σφίσι refers to the Pelo-
ponnesians, then σφίσιν αὐτοῖς must be construed together. A like
difficulty of combination or separation arises in I. 77 ὃ 1, ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς.
Lindau’s suggestion of a lost ἄν, e.g. "ἐφορμοῦσιν ἂν αὐτοῖς δαπάνην
γίγνεσθαι, deserved possibly more consideration than it received at
Poppo’s hands: not that ἄν is necessary, as γίγνεσθαι could represent the
orat. obliq. form of an indicative present. Steup’s arrangement of the
sentence leaves the following order: é7ws.,.dmoorjawow (ἐλπίδα δ᾽ εἶναι"
οὐδενὶ yap ἀκ. ἀφῖχθαι) καὶ τὴν mp....qv ὑφέλωσι, Kal ἅμα, ἢν ἐφορμῶσι
σφίσιν, αὐτοῖς δαπάνη γίγνηται. (See Poppo, Ed. Mai. ΠΙ. 561—573.
Hude, Comm. Crit. 96. Class. 111. 197, and Dobree’s and Madvig’s
Adversaria. )

In dealing with this passage it must be borne in mind that

(1) The Ionian cities would object to paying tribute to a Pelopon-
nesian treasury no less than to Athens; unless indeed convinced of some
direct personal advantage to accrue.

(2) A collection of φόρος would be dead against the stipulations of
any such treaty as that of VIII. 37, nor would it accord with the réle of
Spartans as ἐλενθεροῦντες.

(3) The tribute of Ionia, 25 talents and 31 minae, would be quite
insufficient for any serious operations of war—indeed would only maintain
50 ships for one month. But πρόσοδος might, as the Scholiast suggests,
include other παρασκευή, especially food. If we include the Hellespont,
we get the substantial addition of 80 talents: i.e. the combined taxes
of Ionia and the Hellespont make up about one-sixth of the entire
revenue of Athens.

The exhaustion of Athens by drainage of supplies and casting in-
creased charges of ἐφόρμησις upon a diminished and diminishing income
might suggest to the Persian satrap the policy urged by Alcibiades in
Book vill., and induce him ‘impellere bellum,’ to give the last thrust
to an exhausted combatant.

Inability on the part of the Peloponnesian alliance to bear the cost
of ἐφόρμησις might induce Pissuthnes to help, either in memory of the
old friendly relations between Sparta and Persia, or on the principle of
maintaining the balance of power between the rival States of Sparta
and Athens. The readiness of the Peloponnesians to maintain a ‘squac-
ron of observation’ in Ionian waters might serve as a proof of προθυμία
which would appeal to Pissuthnes, more especially if, as we are told in
Bk vIiil., the presence of the Athenian fleet proved an obstacle to the
collection of the tribute due to the Persian king. The suggestion of the

5. T. 21

222 LHOCYDIDES 117.

φυγάδες may be an appeal to Spartan pride—érdxew in lieu of διώκεσθαι---
to risk outlay to avoid humiliation.

But the real motive, the true οὗ ἕνεκα, was the destruction of the
Athenian power: to this end the seizure of a city, the subsequent revolt
of Ionia, and drainage of Athenian supplies, would be only means. To
Pissuthnes the real issue would be the restoration to the Persian king of
the κράτος θαλάσσης. ‘The cession of Ionia and even of the adjacent
islands is seriously contemplated by Athens in Book vitr., but the one
great difficulty is the sovereignty of the Aegean. Much of the argument
is of course mere φυγαδικὴ προθυμία.

Haase (Luc. Th. 4 544.) holds that if the choice is to be between ἤν
and ὅπως, ἤν is less definite, ὅπως more certain: ergo, Bekker’s proposed
change would spoil all. Why should Thuc. write ὅπως followed
by a double 7v? It was a matter of prime importance to effect
the cession of Ionia, but of this there was small hope without first
securing some Ionian city, or Cyme; on the other hand, the sapping of
Athenian supplies, and compelling Athens to maintain a blockading
squadron in Ionian waters, was quite within the limits of expectation,
independently of an Ionian revolt. Haase therefore proposes two clauses
dependent on ἐλπίδα δ᾽ εἶναι, unequally balanced (more Thucydideo),
the first connected by γάρ (οὐδενὶ γὰρ ἀκουσίῳ ἀφῖχθαι), the perfect
marking the accomplished fact, the second, divided into two δέ clauses,
referring to that which was yet in prospect. For such a construction cf.
IV. 85 θαυμάζω τῇ τε ἀποκλήσει.. καὶ el, and V. 30 τήν τε ἐσήγησιν καὶ εἰ
ἔσονται. This elucidation, Haase contends, deals with the conditions
rather than the results. The prospect held out to the Ionians would, of
course, be relief from tribute. But on this point of tribute comes the
difficulty: Athens once got rid of, Persia would demand her dues,
cf. Thuc. vill. 5, 46. Still, for the time being, Sparta’s profession of
disinterestedness might lure the unwary (cf. Thuc. I. 81, 122, VI. 91,
vill. 18).

Chap. xxxii. § 3. ὁρῶντες γάρ... παραβαλεῖν. Classen’s proposal to
insert this sentence after τοὺς πολλούς in ὃ 2 has been rejected by Steup
on the ground that instead of αὐτοῦ in ὃ 2 τοῦ ᾿Αλκίδου would be neces-
sary; again, Rauchenstein suggests that in the next chapter (33 § 1) 6
᾿Αλκίδας would be unnecessary after the ὁ μέν immediately preceding. ©
Prof. Smith wisely comments that it is difficult to explain how the
traditional order originated, but contents himself with the suggestion
that the whole passage is one of those which point to a lack of final
revision.

APPENDIX. 323

Chap. xxxvi. § 2. τήν τε ἄλλην ἀπόστασιν... Classen’s insertion
of καί before ὅτι (contra Mss.), condemned by Stahl (N. Jahrb. ΧΟΥ ΤΙ.
108), is supported by Steup (1) on the score that the vulgate would con-
vey the notion that rebellion was not in all cases reprehensible in the
eyes of Athens, (2) on the strength of Classen’s own reply to Stahl’s
criticism; viz. (a) the revolt of a practically free allied state (αὐτόνομος,
οὐκ ἀρχομένη) calls for emphatic notice, which can only be expressed by
contrasting οὐκ ἀρχόμενοι with ἀπόστασις in general: καί will therefore
be indispensable: but if the ὅτι clause be merely epexegetical, then the
fault conveyed in τὴν ἄλλην must find explanation in the context;
(6) even if we omit καί, the words ἐπικαλοῦντες τήν τε ἄλλην ἀπόστασιν
point to some graver offence of the Mytileneans which cannot, even
admitting Stahl’s anacoluthon, find explanation in the mere presence of
a Peloponnesian fleet upon the sea-board of Ionia.

Classen’s view has the merit of simplifying the sentence; but Gross-
mann’s explanation commends itself to me. See Notes p. 155.

§ 6. τὴν προτέραν ἐνενικήκει. Steup proposes τῇ προτέρᾳ (cf. VII.
51, ὃ 2) ‘onthe previous day,’ or ‘at the former meeting,’ for two reasons:
(1) that with τὴν προτέραν it would be necessary to supply γνώμην from
ἄλλαι γνῶμαι, (2) that the change will better accord with the words of
41, ὅσπερ καὶ ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἀντέλεγε.

Chap. xxxviii. ὃ 4. θεαταὶ τῶν λόγων. Cf. Ar. Rhet. 1. 3 § 2
ἀνάγκη δὲ τὸν ἀκροατὴν ἢ θεωρὸν εἶναι ἢ κριτήν, again § 3 ὁ δὲ περὶ τῆς
δυνάμεως -«: κρίνων :- ὁ θεωρός, ‘you go to the public assembly as you go
to the theatre, merely in quest of intellectual excitement: that is, merely
for your amusement, not as κριταί (except so far as the mere skill of the
speaker is concerned), as carefully weighing the matter of what is said,
in order to adopt it in your practice or reject it’ (Arnold).

8 6. τοῖς τοιαῦτα λέγουσι. The word τοιαῦτα, bracketed by Her-
werden and described by Poppo as ‘ obscurius dictum,’ Steup regards as
unintelligible. All three words he looks upon as an awkward attempt
at explaining that which is already clear, ἀνταγωνιζύμενοι τοῖς λέγουσι.
Further, he holds that the excision of these three words (τοῖς τοιαῦτα
λέγουσι) will obviate the harshness of the transition from τοῖς λέγουσι to
ὀξέως λέγοντος.

καὶ προαισθέσθαι τε πρόθυμοι εἶναι.... Steup follows Haacke in
retaining εἶναι as dependent upon δοκεῖν, adding that, if elvac be bracketed,
καί before προαισθέσθαι must also be cut out. In reply to Poppo’s com-
ment, that in the present passage the infinitive presents depend directly

ΦΙ--Ὦὦ

324 THOCTVDIDES ITE

only on participles and adjectives, the aorist following all that is
secondary, he cites ἄριστοι μὴ ξυνέπεσθαι ἐθέλειν.

Chap. xxxix. § 4. αἷς ἀν μάλιστα καὶ δι’ ἐλαχίστου... Gelzer’s
transposition (see Notes p. 167) though attractive is not regarded by
Classen as necessary. Steup sees a difficulty in any reference to a sud-
den change of fortune as affecting Mytilene, and therefore accepts
Gelzer’s suggestion. But it must not be forgotten that the moment of
Athens’ weakness would be the moment of Mytilene’s opportunity.

8 8. τῆς ἔπειτα προσόδου... τὸ λοιπόν... Steup finds a double
difficulty, (1) the pleonasm, which Classen defends by referring τῆς ἔπειτα
προσόδου proleptically to στερήσεσθε, (2) the loose connexion of τῆς ἔπ.
προσ. with δι ἣν ἰσχύομεν. But (1) may be escaped by reading with
Ullrich ἐκεῖθεν, or with Weil ἐπετείου, although neither suggestion
destroys the difficulty of δι᾽ ἣν ἰσχύομεν. St. therefore holds that the
words δι’ ἣν ἰσχύομεν τὸ λοιπόν are interpolated in explanation of τῆς
évreira...oTepnoetbe. Cf. 46 ὃ 3.

Chap. x1. §3. τοὺς ὁμοίους... ὑπολειπομένους. Classen’s acceptance
of Thiersch’s proposal ὁμοίως is really no advantage to the text. When
we find Antiphon v. ὃ 76 writing ὅμοιος τὴν γνώμην as the equivalent
of Thuc.’s ὁ αὐτὸς τῇ γνώμῃ (38 ὃ 1), what need is there of alteration?
The combination of the negative and affirmative forms of expression
is equally explicit whether adverb or adjective be read. All that Thuc.
means is ‘they are left on hand (as foes to be reckoned with) unchanged
in feeling, and without abatement of their animosity’: and surely the
vulgate conveys his meaning clearly enough.

§ 4. εἰ δὲ δή.. ἀνδραγαθίζεσθαι. Steup argues that (1) the necessary
logical supplement to the context is far from obvious, (2) the # clause
of the apodosis does not accord with the protasis.

But the train of thought is clear enough, to those at least who do not
insist upon logical precision of expression in the days of an unformulated
logic. We must not lose sight of the inferential δή or of the alternative
ἤ, suggesting an ἀντικείμενον to the εἰ δέ protasis. 7, like the Latin
‘aut’ or ‘vel,’ is used in adding the consequence of denying a former
proposition, in the sense of ‘or else,’ ‘otherwise’ (cf. Roby, Lat. Gr.
ὃ 2216; Hartung, de Partic. 11. 57). Indeed, as in Thue. 1. 121 § 5,
ἢ is the equivalent of a second protasis with εἰ δὲ μή. The argument is
‘Justice must yield to expediency. So far as justice is concerned:
if the revolt of Mytilene be justifiable, the Athenian claim to dominion
is without justification: but if, in that case (1.6. in the face of an
acknowledged truism), the Athenians still insist upon enforcing a claim

APPENDIX. 325

which is no claim, justice must be ignored ; or otherwise (i.e. if justice
be recognised) justice must assert her right, and Athens must relinquish
the rule of the strong hand.’

Junghahn’s contention of false substantiation by means of a yap clause
(N. Jahrb. cx1. 662)—one which depends entirely upon the connexion
in which γάρ is taken—is sufficiently refuted by Junge, who finds a
connexion with ὑμᾶς δὲ αὐτοὺς μᾶλλον δικαιώσεσθε.

Chap. xliii. § δ. πρὸς ὀργὴν ἥντινα τύχητε ἔστιν ὅτε σφαλέντες.
The elliptical use of τυγχάνειν, although admissible in the case of a
substantival participle omitted, e.g. 11. 87 $5, or where the supplement is
obvious, e.g. IV. 26 ὁπόθεν τύχοιεν (καταπλέοντες), can hardly justify the
assumption of such a construction as τυγχάνειν ὀργὴν ὄντες. We may,
it is true, assume a construction κατὰ ξύνεσιν, by explaining πρὸς ὀργήν
as ὀργισθέντες, which would give us the sequence ἥντινα (ὀργὴν) τύχητε
ὀργισθέντες. But the phrase πρὸς ὀργήν is merely adverbial, as in 11. 65
§ 8; the agreement in ἥντινα is purely accidental (or, more correctly,
due to position): cf. 1. 35 ὃ 4 δύναμιν προσλαβεῖν περιόψεσθε...ἣν οὐ
δίκαιον. May not the πολύνους βραχυλογία of Thucydides have originated
the expression σφαλῆναι ὀργήν as ‘writ short’ for σφαλῆναι σφάλμα
épyns? or if we follow the clue of the direct agreement, feminine,
replacing the neuter ὅτι, we shall still preserve the natural connexion
of the sentence with σφαλέντες. The point which Diodotus emphasizes
is not that the Athenians are led into errors of judgment through heat
of temper, but that in the heat of passion they visit on the proposer
those errors of judgment to which they find that they have already been
committed.

Chap. xliv. §2. ἤν τε γὰρ ἀποφήνω.... Classen’s retention of the
colloquial εἶεν, which is open to two objections, (1) the absence of any
Thucydidean parallel, (2) that it is the first sentence which is left in-
complete and not the second, e.g. Thuc. 111. 3 § 3, Aristoph. Plut. 468,
he considers justified by the argument (an aesthetic one) that the painful
consequence of the alternative should be passed over as lightly as
possible; he accordingly regards elev as expressive of resignation, ‘very
well, 1 say no more.’ The proposed emendations he rejects one and
all on the plea that they necessitate the supplement of οὐ κελεύσω,
which, after ἤν τε καί, he holds will be scarcely compatible with the
context.

Chap. xlv. §3. Kal τοῦτο ὅμως παραβαίνεται. Kriiger’s suggestion
κἀν τούτῳ for καὶ τοῦτο, in spite of I. 37 ὃ 4, does not commend itself.
The objections raised by Steup and Lupus (N. Jahrb. ΟΧΙ. 166) to

326 THUCYDIDES 111

Stahl’s explanation are suggestive of hypercriticism. Is there so much
difference after all between ‘treating with indifference the law itself, and
the penalty imposed by the law’?

There is no need to ignore ὅμως ‘after all’ (in spite of such stringency).
Hude, reading καὶ ταῦτα, would render ‘nevertheless such transgressions
still continue.’

Against Lupus’ proposed excision of καὶ τοῦτο it may fairly be held
(with Prof. Smith) that it is hard to account for the presence of such an
interpolation.

8. 4. ἡ μὲν mevia...e&dyourw ἐς τοὺς κινδύνους. In this passage
Classen holds that we have a distinction of the impelling passions from
the external circumstances. The first two clauses deal with certain
definite conditions both external and internal; the third clause deals
generally with all other possible cases. The ἄλλαι ξυντυχίαι of the third
clause correspond to the πενία and ἐξουσία of the first two, κρεῖσσόν τι
answers to ἀνάγκη and ὕβρις (although ἀνάγκη is external, ὕβρις internal),
and, lastly, ὀργή to ὕβρις and φρόνημα.

τῶν ἀνθρώπων would suggest ἕκαστός τις rather than ἑκάστη τις, and,
whether taken with ξυντυχίαι or ὀργῇ, appears equally objectionable.
Hence the change to τὸν ἄνθρωπον, which has the further merit of
supplying ἐξάγουσιν with an object.

ὃ δ. ἐπιβολὴν ἐκφροντίζων. To the v.1. ἐπιβολήν both Classen
and Steup take exception, as not used in the sense of ‘attack’ before
Polybius.

Chap. 1. ὃ 1. ὀλίγῳ πλείους χιλίων. The impossibility of this
numerical estimate has been fully discussed by Miiller-Striibing (Thuk.
Forsch. 154 sqq.): the most important point made by him is the
absence of all confirmatory evidence. To Schutz’s alteration of χιλίων
to τριάκοντα, M.-S, objects that in a number less than roo Thuc. would
have given the exact figures. Prof. Smith (Appendix 291) lays stress
on the incompatibility of this chapter with the previous narrative: cf.
2§ 1,5 § 4,13§ 1, 2881, 35 § 1. See, however, Stahl, Rhein. Mus.
XXXVIII. 1, Holzapfel (Rhein. Mus. xxxvil. 3, p- 448), Herbst (Philol.
XLII. p. 107).

§ 2. κλήρους δὲ ποιήσαντες τῆς γῆς. Miiller-Striibing’s objections
(Thuk. Forsch. 218), though approved by Holzapfel, are refuted by
Stahl (Rh. Mus. xxxviil. 143). Cf. also Diodorus x1. 55, Antiphon
Vv. § 77.

With regard to the smallness of the rental, Prof. Smith remarks that
it may easily be explained, if we assume the object of the Athenians to

APPENDIX. 327

have been to supply a considerable number of the poorer citizens with a
livelihood at the expense of the δυνατοί; for the original owners we may
safely assume to have been oligarchs, hence the δῆμος, whom Athens had
most reason to conciliate, would be but little affected.

Chap. li. 88. ἑλὼν οὖν ἀπὸ τῆς Νισαίας. To the usual interpre-
tation of ἀπὸ τῆς Νισαίας, ‘ab ea parte quae Nisaeam spectat,’ Steup
objects (1) that there is no proof that this is the actual meaning of the
words, (2) that the reference must be to another side of the island than
that towards Nisaea, (3) that Nicias would not have ventured to attack
the hostile mainland. Ullrich explains as ‘away from Nisaea.’ Classen
retorts that, in that case, ἐκ θαλάσσης would render the addition ἀπὸ τῆς
Νισαίας superfluous; but all depends on the sense in which we take
ἐκ θαλάσσης, whether ‘on the sea-side’ or ‘from the sea.’ C. F. Miiller
suggests a dislocation (see crit. note, p. 43). Classen would bracket
the three offending words.

Chap. lviii. ὃ 3. ὥστε kal τῶν σωμάτων ἄδειαν ποιοῦντες. ...Steup
takes exception to the coordination of καὶ ποιοῦντες with καὶ προνοοῦντες
as dependent on δικάζοιτε, on the ground of a tautology between the
sentence ὁ δὲ νόμος... μὴ κτείνειν τούτους and τῶν σωμάτων ἄδειαν ποι-
οὔντες. But his argument depends largely upon taking προνοοῦντες as
equivalent to προκηδόμενοι, ‘caring for us.’ A suspicion that the words
ὅτι ἑκόντας ἐλάβετε refer to something not previously mentioned leads
him to conjecture that the text originally ran in some such form as this,
ὥστε καὶ τῶνδε ἕνεκα τῶν σωμάτων ἄδειαν ποιοῦντες K.T-A. Such a read-
ing would convey an impression of contrasted motives and correspond
with 38 § 6, 46 § τ.

Against Stahl’s explanation he contends that καί cannot represent
‘etiam,’ as τῶν σωμάτων ἄδειαν ποιοῦντες is simply the antithesis to
σώματα διαφθεῖραι. From 52 ὃ 2 it would be left to the Spartans to
spare or slay the Plataeans, whose lives would be secure in case of the
Spartans declining to execute them: ergo καί as the equivalent of
‘etiam’ cannot stand.

§5. ἐρημοῦτε. The intrusion of an apparent present form between
two futures has induced Stahl to correct to ἐρημοῦντες. Classen, retain-
ing the vulgate, treats the form as a contracted future, but the instances
quoted are certainly presents. Steup would avoid the difficulty by cutting
out ἐρημοῦτε as an adscript, and construing ἱερά and θυσίας as objects of
ἀφαιρήσεσθε, understanding ἱερά with εἱσαμένων (ἑσσαμένων) and θυσίας
with κτισάντων.

328 PHOCYDIDES, TIL.

Chap. Ixvii. § δ. καὶ οὐκ dv ἀνταποδόντες τὴν ἴσην τιμωρίαν.
With Steup’s contention that these words cannot be connected with the
preceding context, as also with his explanation of τὴν ἴσην τιμωρίαν, ‘the
equivalent punishment,’ i.e. a punishment contrary to all law or right, I
find it hard to agree. The case as stated against the Plataeans is that
the offence they have committed—a breach of the law of nations, with-
out even the justification of provocation on the part of Thebes (οὐ προ-
maOovres)—is one for which no adequate atonement can be made, even
by the extremest penalty of the law. ἴση I would understand in the
sense of ἰσομέτρητος, i.e. of the adjustment of the punishment to the
offence. As for the participial construction, does it present any greater
difficulty than τετιμωρημένοι in ὃ 1? The text, in my opinion, requires
no change, whether by altering ἀνταποδόντες to a finite verb or assuming
a lacuna before the participle, e.g. δόξουσιν. Goller’s proposal to treat
ἔννομα yap as a complete parenthesis is intolerably harsh.

Chap. 1xx. 81. ot αἰχμάλωτοι ἀφεθέντες. The date of the return
of these fugitives Steup, from arguments based on the narrative of
Thuc., would place at earliest in the winter of 428—427 B.c. See also
B. Schmidt, Kork. Stud. g.

Chap. Ixxx. ὃ 2. ἑξήκοντα νῆες προσπλέουσαι ἀπὸ Λευκάδος. In
this passage Steup detects a collision with the text of 81 § 1 ὑπερενεγ-
κόντες τὸν Λευκαδίων ἰσθμὸν Tas vais, ὅπως μὴ ὀφθῶσιν. Would Thue.
have called attention to mere cowardly apprehension on the part of
Alcidas? If the text be sound, he holds that the historian’s intention is to
mark the fact that when Alcidas was in the offing of Leucas, the Athenian
fleet had not as yet passed the peninsula. The real aim of such trans-
port of a fleet would be to shorten the voyage; hence he argues that the
words ὅπως μὴ ὀφθῶσιν are interpolated. The signalling was probably
effected by a chain of ¢puxrol. Cf. VIII. 102.

Chap. Ixxxiv. §1. διὰ πάθους ἐπιθυμοῦντες. The phrase requires
no assumption of a non-Thucydidean use of πάθος in the sense of
‘passion’ or ‘emotion.’ A solution will be found in the analogous use
of ὑπό with intransitive verbs, a common Thucydidean use, e.g. ἀνα-
στῆναι ὑπό, πάσχειν ὑπό, ἡσυχάζειν ὑπό. For a similar use of διά cf.
VI. 10 § 2 ἡ ξύμβασις διὰ ξυμφορῶν....κατ᾽ ἀνάγκην ἐγένετο, ‘the
agreement was forced upon them through reverses,’ Aesch. Ag. 434 ἐν
φοναῖς καλῶς πεσόντ᾽ ἀλλοτρίας διαὶ γυναικός, ‘brought to his death
through a woman.’ So here I would understand the words to mean
that ‘men are brought through hardship to desire their neighbours’
goods.’

APPENDIX. 329

Chap. Ixxxv. § 4. τὸ ὄρος τὴν Ἰστώνην. Schmidt (Kork. Stud.
p- 97, N. Jahrb. 1892, p. 317) raises the question whether Istone repre-
sents a mountain or a district. The words ἔφθειρον τοὺς ἐν τῇ πόλει he
holds to afford no sufficient argument for placing the τεῖχος near the
city, and proposes to fix its position on Pantokrator, a mountain in the
N.E. of Corfu, the loftiest in the island. From Iv. 46 § 1 he proposes
to rewrite τῆς ᾿Ιστώνης, on the ground (1) that the whole of the moun-
tain range in the North of Corcyra was called Istone, (2) that the
accusative is the mere correction of some grammarian.

Chap. cii. ὃ 5. τὴν Αἰολίδα τὴν viv καλουμένην. Steup would
correct the sentence (1) by omitting τήν before viv, (2) by suppressing
és before τὰ ταύτῃ χωρία. His contention is that Thuc. intended to
give the place both an ancient and modern name; the words Καλυδῶνα
καὶ Πλευρῶνα καὶ τὰ ταύτῃ χωρία will thus represent an epexegetical
apposition, Καλυδῶνα καὶ Πλευρῶνα denoting the territory belonging to
the cities of this name, and χωρία referring to the neighbouring region:
cf. 98 sub fin. ταῦτα τὰ χωρία. Herwerden also would excise és before
τὰ ταύτῃ On the ground of close connexion with the preceding context.

Chap. exi. § 2. ὅσοι μὲν ἐτύγχανον ξυνελθόντες. Classen contends
that ξυνελθόντες cannot = ξυνεξελθόντες, as from 113 ὃ 1, ξυνεξῇσαν
ἄσπονδοι, it is clear that an attempt only was made, and that the addi-
tion of the aorist participle to the imperfect of the indicative could not
convert an attempt into success. Further, both οὕτως and ἁθρόοι present
difficulties: if the Ambraciots withdrew in a body with the Mantineans
and others, with whom terms had been made, not only would the whole
scheme be frustrated, but we have also to account for their admission to
a secret agreement. With this view both Stahl and Widmann agree,
with this difference however, that Stahl, from 1. 65 § I ἤθελε τῶν
μενόντων εἶναι, prefers μένοντες to μονούμενοι or μεμονωμένοι. Steup, on
the contrary, holds that μονούμενοι renders οὕτως more intelligible, as
representing κατὰ τὴν ξύμβασιν. Classen’s argument is, however, some-
what suggestive of ὁ σοφίζεσθαι βουλόμενος. The Ambraciots at least
succeeded in getting outside the walls of Olpae. The participial diffi-
culty may be easily overcome, and that without violence to the text.
Hude’s suggestion of correcting μέν to μή commends itself strongly, not
only for paleeographical reasons (as μέν and μή are frequently confused
by scribes) but also as distinguishing the ἄσπονδοι from the ἔνσπονδοι.
But for his proposed alteration of οὕτως to τούτοις (with Herwerden) there
appears no necessity.

330 THUCYDIDES 11.

The ellipse of ὄντες with ἐτύγχανον finds a parallel in 1. 32 ὃ 3 and
1. 87 ὃ 5 ἀπαράσκευοι τότε τυχεῖν: compare the like omission with
ἀνέχεσθαι 11. 49 ὃ 5, and διατελεῖν 1. 34 ὃ 3, VI. 89 ὃ 2: but these
instances are justly suspected.

INDEX. GreEeEx.

A.

ἀ- : ἀγνώς 53§ 4
ἄγνωστος 94 § 5
ἄδεια 58 ὃ 3
ἀκούσιος 31 § 1, 82 ὃ 2
ἀκρατής 84 § 2
ἄκων τι ὃ 3
ἀνάλγητος 40 ὃ 5
ἀνεξεύρετος 87 ὃ 3
ἀνεπιεικής 66 ὃ 2
ἀνεπιτήδειος 71 ὃ 2
ἀνεύθυνος 43 ὃ 4
ἀξύνετος 42 ὃ 2
ἄπρακτος 113 ὃ 5
ἀπρεπής 67 αὶ 4
ἀπροφασίστως 82 ὃ 6
ἀρρωστία 15 ὃ 2
ἀσθενής p. 118
ἀστάθμητος 59 § I
ἀσφάλεια 82 ὃ 4
ἀτοπία 82 § 3

eee § 3,49 ὃ 1, 57 § 3, 67

ἀγὼν μουσικός 104 ὃ 3
ἀγώνισμα 82 ὃ 7

ἀγωνιστής 37 ὃ 4
ἀγωνοθετεῖν 58 ὃ 2

ἀδικεῖν 65 81

ἀεί with article 22 § 2, 77 $1
ἄθλον 82 ὃ 8

ἁθρόος 24 § 1, 78 81, 107 81
αἰτία 13 §1

αἴτιον 89 ὃ 5, 93 §2
ἀκμάζειν 1 § 1
ἀκροβολίζεσθαι 7381

ἀλκή 320 ὃ 2, 108 § 1

ἀλλά 27 § 1, 5382
ἀλλά... ἀλλά 113 ὃ 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἤ τι 81

ἘΝ ΤΕ 49 8 4
ἄλλος p. 156; for ἕτερος 49 § 2
ἄλλο τι ἤ 85 ὃ 3
ἄλλως 30 ὃ 5
ἅμα with partic. 40 § 3, 111 § 1
,, adding important fact 114 81
ἀμαθία 37 § 3
ἁμαρτάνεσθαι 67 ὃ 6, 56 ὃ 5
ἄν potential 92 ὃ 4
position of 89 ὃ 5
ἀνά in compounds 94 § 3
ἀναβαίνειν 112 8
ἀνάγειν 104 ὃ 3
ἀνάδοτος 52 § 1
ἀνακεῖσθαι 114 ὃ
ἀνακρούεσθαι 8 ὃ 3
ἀναλαμβάνειν 3881
ἀναμίξ 107 § 4
ἀναστέλλειν 98 § 1, 89 ὃ 5
ἀναφέρειν 38 § 2
ἀνέλκειν 89 § 3
ἀνιστάναι of raising forces
784
of supplant 28
8.2, 75 84
ἀνάγκη 57 81
ἀνδραγαθία 57 ὃ τ
ἀνδραγαθίζεσθαι 40 84
ἀνήκειν 45 § 3
ἀνήρ Ionic for τις 20 § 1
ἀνοκωχή 4 ὃ 4
avri-: ἀνταγωνίζεσθαι 38
ἀνταναμένειν 152 ὃ 2

332

ἀντιμέλλειν 12 ὃ 3
ἀντίπαλος 49 § τ
ἀντιπολέμιος 00 § I
ἀντιτάσσεσθαι 838 1
ἀξιοῦν 55 § 1
ἀξίωσις 82 ὃ 4
ἀπαιδευσία 42 § 1
ἀπό causal 114 § I
distinct from ὑπό 36 8 6
or él? go ὃ 2
in ady. phrases ἀπὸ τῆς tons
40 86
temporal 112 § 2
ἀπό- : ἀπαλλάσσεσθαι 63 ὃ 3
ἀπηλιώτης 23 ὃ 5
ἀποβαίνειν (impersonal, u-
nique) 93 § I
ἀπόγνοια 85 ὃ 3
ἀποδέχεσθαι 57 § 1, 381
ἀποκινδυνεύειν 39 ὃ 8
ἀποκρίνεσθαι 61 § 1
ἀπολείπειν ἐκ 10 ὃ 3
ἀποτειχίζειν 04 ὃ 2
ἀποτρέπειν τι § 1, 3981
ἀποτροπή 85 ὃ 4
ἀποχρῆσθαι 81 ὃ 2
ἀπωθεῖσθαι 5581, 30 ὃ 4
ἀφαιρεῖσθαι 43 ὃ τ
ἀργυρολόγοι 19 § I
ἀρετή 10§ 1, 53 ὃ 4
ἀριθμεῖσθαι 20 ὃ 3
ἄρτι 3§1
ἄτιμος 58 § 5
αὐλίζεσθαι 96 § 1
αὐθέντης 58 ὃ 5
αὐτάγγελος 33 ὃ 2
αὐτός in loose reference 82 § 5
strangely placed 98 § 1
αὐτοὶ αὑτῶν τι § 1
=‘ultro’ 65 § 1
ὁ αὐτός 98 § 1, 21 ὃ 3
αὐτοβοεί 74 ὃ 2
αὐτοῦ ‘ilico’ 98 § 2, 112 § 5

B.
βοηθεῖν (ἐπί) 68 § 1, 110 ὃ 2
βούλησις 68 § x
βραχύς (-Ξ- σμικρός) 39 ὃ 7, 36 ὃ 2
βραχύτης 4181

THUCYDIDES AU

ink
γάρ explanatory 65 § 1
misplaced 58 § 2
=‘namlich’ g § 1
parenthetical 107 § 3
γε limiting 45 8 4
γενναῖος 83 8 1
γενναιότης 82 § 7
γίγνεσθαι periphrasis with 105 § 3
γίγνεσθαι ὑπό 59 ὃ 2
γίγν. ἐν 102 § 1
γνούς with infin. 48 § 1
γνώμη 9 § 2
γνώμας προθεῖναι 36 ὃ 5

Δ,

δαπάνη ‘sumptus’ or ‘facultas’
31 §1
δέ apodotic 98 ὃ 1
doubled 11 § τ
epexegetical 107 § 4
postpositum ro4 ὃ 5
δὲ οὖν resumptive 84 § 1
supplementary 26 § 2
without μέν p. 118, 106 § 2
δέος 45 § 4, 11 § 6
δή explanatory τος § 1
emphatic, with sup. 39 ὃ 5,
113 §6
δῆθεν 68 ὃ 1, 111 81
διά: δι’ ὀλίγου 43 ὃ 4
διὰ πάθους 84 ὃ 1, and ap-
pendix p. 328
διὰ παντός 58 ὃ 3
δια-: διαβάλλειν 42 § 2, 82 ὃ 3,
10g ὃ 2
διαγνώμη 42 §1
διαλύειν 83 8 1
διαλείπειν 748 1
διαλυτής 82 ὃ 5
διαλλάσσειν 82 ὃ 2
διαμάχεσθαι 40 § 2
διάνοια 82 ὃ 3
διασώζεσθαι 30 ὃ 4. 8581
διατείχισμα 34 ὃ 2
διαφέρειν 838 1
διάφορον 54 § 1
διάφευξις 23 ὃ 5
διαχρήσασθαι 36 ὃ 3

INDEX.

διέξοδος 98 ὃ 2
διοκωχή 87 ὃ 3
δίκαιον 56 ὃ 3, 5481
δικαιοῦσθαι 40 Ψ 4
δικαίωσις 82 ὃ 4
δόκησις 4381
δοκοῦν 38 ὃ 2
δόξα 37 ὃ 4
δοξάζειν 45 ὃ 6
δύναμις 87 § 2; ἐν δυνάμει 93 ὃ 2
δύνασθαι 46 ὃ 2
δυναστεία 62 ὃ 5
es ea ΙΟΙ § 2

Ε.

ἔδαφος 68 ὃ 3
ἐθελοπρόξενος 70 ὃ 2
ἔθνη 9285
εἴργειν μή 6 § 2; with genit. 86
§ 4
el: interrogative 54 § 1
el βούλει 52 ὃ 3
εἰ οὐ 5581
εἴ πως 4583
εἴ τις 30 § 3
εἰ μή τις 2 § 3
εἰκός with aorist 10 § 6
εἱσαμένων (ἑσσαμένων) 58 ὃ 5
εἰσὶν οἵ 24 § 2
ἐκ : pleonastic 37 ὃ 3
different from ὑπό 69 § 1
suggesting source 102 ὃ 2
ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου (Ξ- ὁμοίως) p. 121
οἱ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως 29 § I
ἐκ- : ἐκπλήσσειν 42 ὃ 2
ἐκπρεπής 5582
ἐκτρυχοῦν 93 ὃ 2
ἐκφέρεσθαι 84 § 1
ἐκφοβεῖν 93 ὃ 3
ἐξαλείφειν 20 ὃ 2
ἐξηγεῖσθαι 55 ὃ 5, 93 ὃ 3
ἐκείνως d€=viv δέ 46 ὃ 2
ἔλεγχος 53 ὃ 2
ἐλθεῖν 30 § 4
ἐλπίς ‘ambition’ 39 ὃ 3
‘suspicion’ 32 5: 3
ἐν : forensic 39 § 6, 57 ὃ 3
not local 13 § 5
periphrasis with 75 § 2

GREEK. 333

ἐν δυνάμει 93
ἐν ὅσῳ 28 § τ
ἐν ποσίν 97 § 1
ἐν τοῖς πλεῖσται 17 δ I
ἐν τοῖς πράγμασι 28 § 1
ἐν ᾧ μή 84 § 2
ἐν- : ἐνδέχεσθαι 82 ὃ 7
ἐνέδρα go ὃ 2
ἐνεργοί 17 § 1
ἐμμένειν 20 ὃ 2
ἐνοικοδομεῖσθαι 85 ὃ 3
ἐμπλήκτως 82 ὃ 4
ἔνσπονδοι 65 ὃ 3
ἐντίκτειν 104 ὃ 3
ἕξις v. ἐνέργεια 59 § 1
ἐξουσία 45 ὃ 4
ἐπεί in contrast 45 § 3, 82:81
ἐπειδή 68 ὃ 5
ἔπειτα in Thuc. without δέ 47 § 3,
or as=6€ ΙΟΙ ὃ 2, of order 94 § 1
ἐπί aggressive 39 ὃ 2
ambiguous 42 § 2
with dat. 92 ὃ 4
distinct from μετά 105 ὃ 2
for παρά 22 ὃ 3
Cig? ja), 1S
ἐπι-: ἐπαγωγή 100 § 1
ἐπαίρεσθαι 37 ὃ 4
ἐπαυλίζεσθαι 5 § 2
ἐπεισφέρειν 53 ὃ 4
ἐπεξελθεῖν w. accus. 108 ὃ 2
ἐπεξιέναι w. accus. 82 ὃ 8
ἐπέρχεσθαι ἐς 47 § 1
ἐπέχειν 107 ὃ 4
ἐπιβάται 95 ὃ 2
ἐπιβοηθεῖν 26 § 1
ἐπιβολαί 20 ὃ 2
ἐπιβουλεύειν with infin. once
only 20§ 1
ἐπιβουλεύεσθαι 82 ὃ 4
ἐπιγνῶναι 57 § 1
ἐπίδειξις 42 ὃ 3
ἐπιεικής Pp. 107, 9 ὃ 2
ἐπιθαλάσσιος 105 § I
ἐπικελεύειν 82 ὃ 5
ἐπικατάγεσθαι 40 ὃ 4
ἐπικηρυκεύεσθαι τοι ὃ1
ἐπίκουρος 73 § 1
ἔπιπλα 68 § 3
ἐπισκήπτειν 09 ὃ 4

334

ἐπισπομένην
80 ὃ 8
ἐπιστροφή 71 ὃ 2
ἐπιτηδές 112 ὃ 4
ἐπιφέρειν 81 ὃ 4, 42 § 3
ἐπίφορος 74 ὃ 2
ἐπίχαρτος 67 § 4
ἐφίστασθαι 82 ὃ 2
ἐφορμᾶν not in Thue. p. 150
ἔφορμος a false form 76 § 1
ἔργα 828 4, 87
ἔρημος of 2 or 3 terms. in Thuc.
106 § 1
ἔρυμα go ὃ 3
ἔρως 45 8 5
és marking limit (és τὰ πρῶτα) 39
§2
Ξε μέχρι 82 ὃ 8
=mpos 54 $1, 3782
(Ξ-Ξ ἐπί) of purpose 54 § 3, 1182
temporal 84 § 2
és ὀψέ 108 ὃ 3
ἐσακούειν p. 106
ἐσηγεῖσθαι 20 ὃ 1
ἔσθημα 58 4
ἐσπίπτειν 98 § 1
ἐσφέρεσθαι 98 ὃ 2
ἐσῴφορά 19 § 1
ἑταιρία 82 ὃ 5
ἑταιρικός 82 ὃ 6
εὐηθής 838 1
εὐνή 112 ὃ 3
εὔνοια 9 § 2
εὐπορία 45 ὃ 5
εὐσέβεια 8: ὃ 8
εὐσταλεῖς 22 ὃ 2
εὐφήμως 134 ὃ 5
ἔχειν (παρέχειν) 53 § 2
ἐχέγγυος 46 § 1
ἐχυρός 83 § 1
ἕως ἄν 97 § 1
ἕως with optat. rare 102 ὃ 7

Z

(ἐπισπωμένην)

ζημία 67 ὃ 2
ζημιοῦσθαι 40 ὃ 2

Η

(=el δὲ μή) 40§ 4

i
ἢ Ρ. 122

ΖΕ ΟΣ ΖΘ. Ζ77:

ἡγεμονεύεσθαι 61 ὃ 2
ἠγερέθονται 104 ὃ 4

ἤδη with genitive 106 § 3
ἡλικία 67 ὃ 3

ἠπειρωτικόν 102 § 6
ἡσυχάζειν 68 ὃ 1, 94 ὃ 2
ἡσυχία 4881

Θ
θαυμάζειν 113 § 1; with genitive 38

I
θεαταί 38 ὃ 2,38 86 and Appendix

P- 323
θεῖος (νόμος) 8: ὃ 6
θεμέλια 68 ὃ 3
θεραπεία τι ὃ 5
θεωρεῖν ἐς 104 ὃ 3
Onkn 104 § 2

I

ἰδέα 62 ὃ 2, 81 ὃ 4, 83 § 1, 98 ὃ 3,

112§2
iepounvia 56 ὃ 2
ἱερόν G6§ 1 ᾿
ἱκετεία 67 ὃ 3
ἱκέτης 59 ὃ 2
ἱλήκοι 104 ὃ 5
toa καί 14 § τ
ἴσος (ἀπὸ ἴσου 84 ὃ 1)
ἰσονομία 62 ὃ 3, 82 ὃ 8
ἰσόψηφος 79 ὃ 3

K

καί continuative 5 § 4
corrective 3381
intensive (καὶ πάνυ) 98§ 1, 2§1
obscure in connexion 74 § 3
καὶ... «καί, “ute Kan 71 81
καὶ γάρ 54§ 4
καὶ οὐ...«ἀλλά 112 ὃ 3
καὶ ws ‘vel sic’ 33 ὃ 2
κάλλος 17 § 1
κακοτροπία 82 § 1
κακοῦσθαι 112 ὃ 7
κατά distributive (Lat. ‘-tim’) p.
128
=‘iuxta’ 110§ 1;=did 62 ὃ 5
82§2
‘point at which’ τοῦ § 3
κατὰ νώτου 107 ὃ 3

INDEX.

κατὰ πόδας 98 ὃ 2
κατὰ χώραν 24 § 3

Kara-: καταγελᾶσθαι 82 § 1
καταγιγνώσκειν 4581
κατάγνωσις 16§ 1, 82 ὃ 8
καταγώγιον 68 ὃ 3
καταδύειν 77 ὃ 1
κατακλύζειν 89 ὃ 2
κάθεξις 47 ὃ 5
καθίζειν 104 ὃ 4
κάθημαι 38 ὃ 7, 468 3
καθιστάναι ‘sistere’ 53 ὃ 4
καταστῆναι 8281
καταστῆναι ἐς 86 § 4
καταλύειν 46 ὃ 2
κάθοδος 85 ὃ 3

καταπροδοῦναι 63 ὃ 3, τοῦ ὃ 2

καταφρονεῖν 83 § 3

κατέχειν 80 ὃ 2

καινός (ἐκ καινῆς) 92 ὃ 6

καιρός 56 ὃ 4

κεῖσθαι 388 1

κέρας 77 § 1

κεφαλαιοῦν 67 ὃ 6

κινδυνεύειν 74 ὃ 2

KAnpovxos 50 § 2

κλίνη 68 § 5

κοινοὶ νόμοι 84 ὃ 3

κοινοὶ εἶναι 68 ὃ 1

κοινός 59 § 1; doubtful ros § 1

κοινωνία 10 § 1

κολασθέντων 39 ὃ 6

κρατεῖν ο1 ὃ 5, 99

κράτος (κατὰ κράτος) 97 § 2, 103 81

κρείσσων 83 ὃ 2; doubtful 37 ὃ 3

κρούεσθαι 77 ὃ 3

κτίζειν 58 ὃ 5, 93 82

κυματοῦσθαι 80 ὃ 2

A.

λαμβάνειν 56 ὃ 3, 5081
λαβεῖν χρήματα 8ι1ι ὃ 4
λαβέσθαι with gen. 24 ὃ 2
λαβών pleonastic? 81 ὃ 2

λανθάνειν constrn. inverted 51 ὃ 2,

748 3

λαχανισμός ἐπ §1

λέγειν τι 38 § 6

λέξις εἰρομένη ex. of 38 ὃ 5

λήζεσθαι 8382

GREEK. 335

λογισμός 83 ὃ 2
λόγος, ἐς λόγον 46 ὃ 4
M.
μακράν 5581
μᾶλλον (ἐπὶ μᾶλλον) 65 ὃ 2
οὐδὲν μᾶλλον 70 ὃ 3
comparison suppressed 23

§ 4
μέγα (-ε δεινόν) 36 § 4
μέγεθος 113 ὃ 5
μέλλω constrn. of 92 ὃ 2
interchanged with δεῖν 22
Sua
strong auxiliary p. 118
μέλλησις in strong sense 12 § 2
μέν irregular sequence with δέ 87
§ 1
single μέν clause with double
δέ clause p. 125
with δέ in chiastic order 45

5
with 6é in irregular sequence
87 § 1
μέν ye in asyndeton 39 § 2
μὲν δήτεμήν 113 ὃ 4
μὲν οὖν disjunct ΤΟΙ § 2
in Thue. continuative not cor-
rective 98 ὃ Ἢ
μέρος (μέρος τι) ‘bona pars’ 103
§2
μέσος, Ta μέσα ‘neutrals’ 82 § 8
μέσον σχῆμα 68 § 1
μετά pleonastic 38 ὃ 5
μετα-: μεταμέλεια 37 $1
μεταξύ 21 §1
μεταπύργιον 22 ὃ 3
μετέωρος 33 ὃ 3, 72 ὃ 3
μετιέναι 70 §1
μέτοικοι 16 § τ
μέχρι 28 8.2, 98§1
μή a misplaced 22 § 1,

‘

hypotheneal Ρ- 125
μὴ οὐ Ρ. 107, 53 §3
μή with indic. 53 § 2
μηχαναί 51 § 3
μνήσασθαι 104 § 3
μοῖρα 8:2 ὃ 4
μόνοι not ‘soli? 54 § 3, 62§1

336

N.

ναύαρχος 26 § 1
ναύσταθμον 6 ὃ 2
νεκρός 113 §1
νέμεσθαι 88 § x
νεοκατάστατος 93 ὃ 2
νεόκτιστος 100
νεωτερίζειν 66 ὃ 2
νικᾶν p. 112
νομίζειν with dat. 82 § 8
with ws construction, con-
demned by Valck. 88

3
viv δέ of fact v. assumption 113

86

μ᾿
Ὁ

ξύν : ξὺν ἀνάγκῃ 40 § 6

ξὺν κακῶς ποιεῖν (?) 13 § 1
ξὺν ξιφιδίῳ 22 ὃ 3

: ξύγκλητος 56 ὃ 6
ξυμβάλλεσθαι 45 § 6
ξυμβοηθεῖν 94 ὃ 4
ξύμβουλος 45 ὃ 4
ξύμμικτος ὄχλος 61 § 2
ξυμμῖξαι T10 § 1
ξυμπράσσειν 56 ὃ 5
ξυμφέρον 56 § 3
ξυναλλαγή 82 ὃ 7
ξυνεπιλαμβάνεσθαι 74 § 1
ξυνετός 82 ὃ 4
ξυνέχεσθαι 98 § 1
ξύνοδοι 82 ὃ 6
ξυνοικία 74 ὃ 2
ξυνοικίζειν 2 § 3, 0381
ξυντυχία 112 § 7
ξυνωμοσία 64 ὃ 2

O.

οἰκεῖν in pregnant sense 48 § 1
without object 75 § 1

οἰκειοῦν 65 ὃ 3
οἰκιστής 34 ὃ 4, 92§ 5
οἰκοδόμησις (for οἰκοδομία) 21 § 1
olds τε OS § 1
᾿Ολυμπίαζε p. 112
ὅμαιχμος 58 ὃ 4
ὅμιλος τ § 2
ὁμοβώμιος 59 § 2

LHUCYDIDES J.

ὁμοῖα 66 ὃ 2
ὁμοιότροπος 10 § 1
ὅμως 49§ 1, 8081
ὅπλα = ‘castra’ 1 § 2
ὅπως 105 § 2
final p. 111
modal 44 § 4, 80 81
οὐχ ὅπως 45 ὃ 5
ὁρμᾶσθαι 92 ὃ 5
ὁρμᾶσθαι ἐκ 31 § 1
ὅς adversative 54 § 5
ὅ in apposition 12 § 1
ὅς causal 55 § 3; as el τις p. 123
collective 47 § 4
ds μή 62§ 4, 58§1, 5685
ὅσιον 56§ 3
ὅσον 11 ὃ 2
ὅστις Ξ- εἴ τις 458 7
ὅστις μή 39 § 2
doris=8s ye 57 ὃ 3, 64 § 4; for
ὥστε 57 ὃ 3
ὅτε περ δή 54 ὃ 5
ὅτι coordinate with clause of direct
object 37 § 2
construction lapsing into infin.
2581
ὅτι ἄν-- ἣν τι 37 ὃ 2
ov coalescing with subst. 95 § 2
in εἰ clause 40 ὃ 4, 42 § 2, 55
§2
pleonastic 46 81
οὐ μέντοι 93 ὃ 3
οὐκέτι without temporal mean-
ing 106 § 2
οὔτε...τε 27§ 2
difficult ex. of 96 § 3
οὗτος resumptive 107 ὃ 3
οὕτως Ξετότε οὔ ὃ 2
οὕτως δή 98 § 1
οὐχί rare in Thuc. 53 § 4
ὄχλος 87 ὃ 3, 109 ὃ 2

IN

πάθος 113 § 13 for διὰ πάθους 84,81
see App. p. 328

πανδημεί οἵ ὃ 4, 5.82

πανοικησίᾳ (πανοικεσίᾳ) 57 ὃ 2

παντάπασιν (τὸ παντ. unique) 87
81

πανταχῇ ‘quoquo versus’ 68 § 3

INDEX.

παρά in phrases
Tapa γνώμην 1281
παρὰ δόξαν 37
παρὰ δύναμιν 54 ὃ 4
παρὰ πολύ 36 ὃ 6
παρὰ τοσοῦτον 40 ὃ 4
παρά in compounds
παραβαίνειν 45 § 3
παραβάλλεσθαι 65 ὃ 2
παραγγελλόμενα 55 § 3
παράδειγμα 39 ὃ 3
παραλαβεῖν 50 ὃ 2
παρανίσχειν 22 ὃ 8
παρασκευάζειν 306 ὃ 4
παρατενεῖσθαι 46 ὃ 5
παρατυχόν 82 ὃ 7
παρεστήσατο 35 § 1
παρεχόμενος 36 § i
παρισταμένη 45 § 6
πάροικοι (unique) 113 § 6
παρεῖναι for παραγενέσθαι 6 § 1
mas collective or distributive 63
81
παῦσαι with gen. 65 8 2
πείθειν with ὥστε 100 § I
πέλαγος 4 ὃ 5
πέλας (ὁ πέλας) 30 ὃ 3
πεντετηρίς 104 ὃ 2
περ 548 5, 98 § 3
πέραν (ἡ πέραν) 85 § 1, 91 ὃ 3
πέρι anastrophic, e.g. 3 86, 37 § 3
περί with genitive or dat. 102 ὃ 3
in compounds
περιαιρεῖσθαι τι ὃ 3
περιγίγνεσθαι 83 ὃ 2
περιέχειν τοῦ ὃ 3
περικτίονες 104 ὃ 3
περικύκλωσις 78 § 1
περίνοια 43 ὃ 3
περίοικοι 92 ὃ 5
περιοικίς τό § 2
περιοικοδομεῖν 81 ὃ 5
περιορμίζεσθαι 6 ὃ 1
περιπιμπρῆσαι 98 § 2
περιπόλιον 09 § 1
περιστῆναι 54 ὃ 5
περιτειχίζεσθαι 64 ὃ 5
περιτέχνησις 82 ὃ 3
περιφρουρεῖν 21 ὃ 3
περιωθεῖσθαι 67 ὃ 6

5. T.

GREEK. 337

πιστά Poppo, on go ὃ 4

πιστός 40 § 1

πλεῖν intrans. for passive 114 § 1

πλέον, not πλεῖν, Thuc. form of
comparative 113 § 4

πλεονεξία 45 ὃ 4

πλῆθος 94 § 2

πολιτεία 55 § 3

πολιτεύειν 34 § 2, 66 8 1

ποιουμένων rare for γιγνομένων 77

§ 2

πορίζεσθαι 82 § 1

πρᾶξις 114 § I

πράσσειν with dat. 85 § 3

πρίν with historic tenses ror § 2;

force of, 22 § 8

πρό- in compounds
προάγειν 107 ὃ 3
προβάλλεσθαι 63 ὃ 2
προβουλεύειν 82 ὃ 5
πρόεδροι 25 § 1
προειπεῖν 104 ὃ 2
προέχειν 82 § 7
προκαταλύειν 84 § 3
προλοχίζειν ττο ὃ 2
προμηθής 82 ὃ 4
προοίμιον 104 § 3
πρόπειρα 86 ὃ 4
πρόσχημα 82 ὃ 4
προτίθημι 67 § 6
προτίμησις 82 ὃ 8
προυργιαίτερον τοῦ ὃ 2
πρόφασις 82 ὃ 4
προφέρειν 64 § 2

πρός adverbial once only in Thuc.
58 8 5

‘against’ 43 ὃ 4, 82 § 7

ambiguous 40 § 7

of contrast 112 § 6

with accus.= ‘in view of’ 56

§5

‘versus’ 96 § 3

στῆναι πρός ττ §3

with genitive 59 § 1, 77 § 2

in adverbial expressions
πρὸς ὀργήν 43 ὃ 5
πρὸς χάριν 42 ὃ 6

in compounds
προσαγορεύειν 112 ὃ 4
προσαναγκάζειν 61 ὃ τ

22

338

προσδέχεσθαι 95 ὃ 2
προσήκειν 66 ὃ 2
προσμῖξαι 31 § 2, 22 § 1,
106 § 3

πρόσοικοι 93 ὃ 3
προσπίπτειν τοῦ ὃ 3
προσποιεῖσθαι 47 ὃ 4
προστιθέναι 82 ὃ 4

πρῴην τι3 ὃ 4

πρῶτος, ἐν τοῖς πρῶτος 8:81

πύργος δι §

πύστις 828 3

πῶς οὐ 66 § 2

Re
ῥᾳδίως 82 81
ῥᾷον = ‘libenter’ 82 ὃ 7
ῥύαξ τιό ὃ8τ

>>
as

σκευή fem. 94 ὃ 4
σοφιστής 38 § 6
σποράδες 69 § 1

στάσις due to site p. 153
στέρεσθαι 46 ὃ 3, 39 ὃ 8
στράτευμα 112 ὃ 4
opareis 84 ὃ 3

σφεῖς reflexive only in Thuc. (p.

150)
σχεῖν gt ὃ 3
σῶμα 58§ 2
σωφρονιστής 65 § 3
σώφρων 58§ 1, 628 5

Ath
τάξις 87 ὃ 3
τε inferential p. 119
‘trajective’ p. 132
Te...Kal 94 § 3
τεκμήριον appositional 66 § 1
τελευτᾶν with gen. 59 ὃ 3, 104 § 5
τέλος 36 ὃ 5
τιμωρεῖν 92 ὃ 4
τιμωρεῖσθαι 67 ὃ τ
τιμωρία Ionic 20 § 1
Attic 82 ὃ 3
τίς collective 111 ὃ 3
distinct from τινές 36 ὃ 5
for εἷς τις 68 ὃ 3
idiomatic τοιόνδέ Te 07 § I

THOCYDIDES ΖΗ

intensive 75 § 1, 45§ 6

particularising 99

τί ἄλλο ἤ 39 ὃ 2

τέῳ 104 ὃ 5
τοί rare in Thue. 40 § 4
τοιοῦτος synonymous 58 § 5
τοσοῦτος 31 § I, 52 § 3, 104 § 6 -
τοσοῦτον ὅσον 40 ὃ 4
τοὔμπαλιν ἢ 23 ὃ 5
τυγχάνω constr. of 111 § 2
τυραννίς 37 ὃ 2
τύχη (as ἀόριστος αἰτία) 49 ὃ 4

ΤΙΣ

ὑγιές 75 8 4

ὑδατώδης 23 ὃ 5

ὑπερόπτης 38 ὃ 5

ὑπερφρονεῖν 30 ὃ 5

ὑπό- in compounds
ὑπαγωγή 97 ὃ 3
ὑπαναλίσκειν 17 ὃ 3
ὑποδεδέσθαι 22 ὃ 2
ὑποδέχεσθαι 12 § 1
ὑπονίφεσθαι 23 ὃ 5
ὑφαιρεῖν 13 ὃ 7

with subst. 32 ὃ 2, 33 ὃ 3
ὑστερεῖν 31 § 2
ὕστερον χρόνῳ 85 ὃ 3

Φ.

φαυλότερος 37 ὃ 3, 8382
φθάνειν with infin. (?) 82 ὃ 7
φθῆναι 80 ὃ 2

φθονεῖν 43 § 1

φιλέταιρος 82 § 4

φιλονεικεῖν (φιλονικεῖν) 82 ὃ ὃ
φόρος 50 § 2

φράζω 33 ὃ 2

φράσαι 42 ὃ 2

φρύγανα 111 ὃ1

φρυκτοί 22 § 7

φρυκτωρεῖν 80 ὃ 2

φυλαί go ὃ 2

φυλακή 22 § 6

x

χαλεπαίνων 82 ὃ 5
χαράδρα οϑ $1
χάραξ 70§ 4

INDEX.

χάρις 56 ὃ 7
χείρ in phrases
ἐν χερσί 66 ὃ 2
πολλῇ χειρί 96 §3
xetpl = βίᾳ 82 ὃ 8
χείρους 113 ὃ 9, 65 ὃ 3
χρήζων once poner in Thuc. 109 ὃ 2
χρησθέν 96 § 1
χρησίμως 92 ὃ 4
χρόνῳ 85 § 3
χώρα in phrase
κατὰ χώραν 22 § 6

χωρίς 17 § 2
χῶσις 1§ 2
Ψ,
ψιλῶσαι 109 § 2
Q,

ὠμοφάγοι 94 ὃ 5

NGI:

A

Abruptness of constrn.
Acarnanians 11 ὃ 3
Accusative :

absolute, e.g. χρεών 40§4,96 81

adverbial 55 § 3

appositional ΓΠῚ § 1

‘de quo’ 51 § 2

limiting 63 § 1
Achelous 7 § 4, 106 § 1
Adjective for adverb 29 81
Admiral, Spartan 79 § 3
Adyerb for adjective 81 ὃ 5
Aegina 7281
Aegitium 97 § 2
Aeimnestus 52 ὃ 4
Aeolus, islands of 88 81
Agreement :

loose 68 ὃ τ κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνα

of subj. with predicate irregular

10g ὃ 2
of verb with prominent subject
112 §2
strained 12 § 1

102 § 3

GREEK. 339

ὡραῖα 58 § 4
ὡς circumstantial 72 § 1
‘postpositum’ § § 1
limiting 74 ὃ 3, 107 $3, 113 § 6
with gen. absol. 4 § 4
with participle 75 § 4
Ξεὅπως ‘quomodo’ 71 ὃ 2
for πρός (p- 157)
ὡς ἄν ‘prout’ 82 ὃ 2
ὥστε of condition (ἐφ᾽ ᾧ τε) 64

§ 3
with indic. 46 § 4, 23 § 5
pleonastic 31 § 1
of result 75 § 1
whether synonymous with
ὅστις ἡ 57 § 3
ὠφελεῖσθαι 64 § 2
ὠφελείσθων 67 ὃ 2
ὠφελία 82 ὃ 6

ENGLISH.

Agraea 106 § 2
Agraeans 113 8 1
Alcidas 16, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33; 69;
76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 92
Alcinous 70 § 4
Amphilochia 1o5 § I
Amphisseans ΙΟῚ ὃ 2
Anaea 20 § 2, 32 § 1
Androcrates 24 § 1
Antecedent absorbed in relative
109 § 3
Antiptosis 105 § 2
Antessa 18 8 1
Aorist:
complexive 25 § 2
diff. from me eee 82 § 4
sible, perf. 59 $3
ingressive, limited almost en-
‘tirely to Ist aor. 104 § 2
of mere event οἱ § 6
oracular 96 § 1
with verbs of expectation, with
or without ἄν 30 ὃ 2, 24 § 1,
46§ 2

340

Apodosis, rhetorical p. 121
Apodoti 94 § 5
Aposiopesis p. 104
Apposition w. article 100, 113 § 3
Arcadians p. 154
Archidamus 1 § r
Aristoteles 105 § 3
Article:
demonstrative 87 § 4
epexegetic 22 § 2
in fractional expressions p. 126
second article omitted for brevity
95 § 3
with preposition τὰ περί 104 § 6
Assimilation :
in comparisons 62 § 1
of tense neglected 98 § 2
Asyndeton, rare in Thuc. 37 § 2,
66 ὃ 2
Atalante 89 § 3
Athens, excluded from alliances
65 §2
Attraction in agreement 98 § 3

B

Balance of sentence, false 55 § 1
Bomienses 96 § 3

Boriades roo § 1

Brasidas 69, 76, 77, 79
Budorum 51 § 2

Cc

Callienses 96 § 3

Calydon 102 ὃ 5

Camarina 86 § 2

Caria 19 § 2

Causative active 36 § 1

Cenaeum 93 § 1

Cephallenians 95 § 2

Chalaei ror § 2

Charoeades 86 § 1

Chiasmus 63 ὃ 3, 40 § 3, 82 § 7
Citizen-soldiers, bravery of 54 § 5
Claros 33 § 1

Cleomenes 26 81

Cleon 36 ὃ 6, 50 § 1, speech 37—

40
Cnidus 88 § 1
Comparative :

double 42 § 3

LHUCYDIDES 11,

with implied θᾶσσον, μᾶλλον
pp. 110, III
Condition :
realised 57 § 3
real for unreal 42 § 3
Connecting particle omitted 97 § 1
Contrast of real and unreal 82 § 7
fact and assumption 63 § 2
Coordination :
adverb with adjective 84 8 2
adverb with participle 34 § 3,
102 ὃ 5
adverb with preposition 21 § 4
dative with participle (Lat. abl.
and gerund) 86 § 4
gen. absol. with accus. absol.
5382
gen. absolute, with part. in
agreement 24 § 3, 79 § 3
ὅτι clause with infinitive 25 § 1
ὅτι with dative 82 § 8
ὅτι with preposition, κατά τε καὶ
ὅτι 86 § 3
participle with preposition 64

3
personal with impersonal 53 § 3
substantive with participle 80
8.2
Corcyra 69, γο--84
Coroneia 62 § 5, 67 § 3
Crocyleium 96 § 2
Custodia libera 34 § 3
Cyllene 69 § 1, 76§1
Cyme 31 § 1
Cynaethus (of Chios) τος ὃ 3
Cytinium 95 ὃ 1, 102 81

D
Dative:
=adverb 56§ 5
agent 22 $1
causal 38 ὃ 4, 82 § 8, 97 § 2
causal or modal 82 § 3
of circumstance 39 § 7, 46 § 3,

WO am
combined with adverb 83 § 1
combining two meanings 113

coordinated with participle 37

§2

INDEX. ENGLISH.

double dat. 54 § 4
initial 113 § 1
of motive 82 § 1
of instrument 42 § 4, 108 81
iudicantis 11 ὃ 1, 64 ὃ 4, 104
$5
limitation 22 § 2, 45 § 2
measure 45 ὃ 6, 49 ὃ 2, 56 ὃ 3
of purpose 1 ὃ 2
strained constr. 68 § 3
sociative 35 ὃ 2,81 § 4
temporal 13 ὃ 4, 54 ὃ 4
with verbs of motion 5 ὃ 4
Delphi ror § 1, oracle of 96 § 1
Demosthenes 91, 94, 95, 96; 97;
98, 102, 105, 107, 108, 109, 110,
112, 114
Desiderative (rare) 84 § 1
Diitrephes 75 § 1
Diodotus 41 (speech of 42—48)
Dioscuri 75 § 3
Dorians 86 § 2
Doric form 13 § 3
Dorieus 8 § 1
Dryos Cephalae 24 § 1

E

Earthquakes, account of 89
Ellipse 55 § 2
Ellomenus 94 § 1
Embatum 29 ὃ 1, 3281
Epexegesis :

by article (see article)

by infinitive 32 § 3

with future infin., rare 66 § 2
Ephesian games 104 ὃ 3
Erythrae 24 ὃ 2, 33 § 2
Eupalium 96 ὃ 2, 102 § 1
Eurylochus 100 § 3, IOI, 102,

106, 107, 108, 109
Eurymedon 108 § 1, 115

F

Fact contrasted with hypothesis
[o> Lee)

Future deliberative 109 ὃ t
epexegetic, rare 26 ὃ 4

341

infin. or pres. of infin, with ἄν
jb LBL
monitory 39 ὃ 8

G

General confounded with particu-
lar 22 § 6
Generic expression by τις 82 ὃ 5
Genitive:
absolute as subject or object of
main verb 13 § 7
absolute without subject 55 § 1,
72§1
cause 62 § 4
definition 45 § 1
partitive with ξυμβάλλεσθαι 36 § 2
position, follows, instead of pre-
cedes 113 § 1
precedes with force almost of
adjective 114 § 1
rare without subst. participle
82 § 1
time within which τ § 1
of value (penalty) 57 ὃ 3
with compounds of ἀντί 56 ὃ 5
with verbs of praying 59 § 2
Geraestus 3 ὃ 5
Gorgias p. 162
Grammar v. Logic (p. 153), 33 ὃ 3

H

Halex 99

Haydon (quoted) p. 156
Hegemony, Theban 61 § 2
Hellenes (Siceliots) 103 § 1
Helots 54 ὃ 5

Hera 68 § 3

Heraeum 68 § 3, 75 ὃ 5
Hesiod 96 § 1

Hessii ror ὃ 2

Hipponicus οἱ § 4

Hyaei ror ὃ 2

Hyllaic harbour 72 ὃ 3, 81 81

I

Icarus 29 § 1

Ideal condition p. 109
Idomene 112§1
Imbros 5.81

342

imperative,
p- 168
Imperfect:
graphic 81 § 2
inceptive 111 § 1, 22 § 1, (p.
103)
Impersonal :
confused with personal 36 § 2
use of καλόν without bv? 94 ὃ 3
use of pluperfect pass. 22 § 1,
107 § 4
Implication of opposite p. 161
Indicative, strongly realistic 53 §
2, 113 § 5
Inessa 103 § I
Infinitive :
with article 1 § 2
without article 46 § 2
epexegetic 82 § 1, 94 § 4
for imperative 3 § 3
of limitation 49 § 4
non-articular 82 § 7
not accus. of direct object 36 §
5,38 81
pres. for future 66 § 3
with τοῦ μή 75 ὃ 4
τοῦ μή distinct from τὸ μή 1§1
Intransitive verb for passive p.
108
Ionians 86 § 3 and elsewhere
Ionisms:
᾿ παραγίγνεσθαι és 107 § 1
περικτίονες 104 ὃ 3
περιποιεῖν 102 ὃ 4
πολλῇ χειρί 96 ὃ 3
τὴν ἐν ποσίν 097 ὃ 1
χώρος 102 ὃ ἢ
Ipnaei ror ὃ 2
Isthmus of Corinth 15 § 1
of Leucas 81 § 1
Itamanes 34 § 1
Ithome 54 ὃ 5

314 plur. form of

L

Laches 86 § 1, 90, 99, 103, 115
Lecky (quoted) 54 ὃ 5

Lemnos 5 81

Leontini 86 ὃ 2

Lesbos 2, 5, 13, 35, 50, 51
Leucas 80 § 2, 94 § 1

THOCYDIDES 777,

Leucimme 79 § 3
Limnaea 106 § 1
Litotes 45 § 6
el for ὅτι 32 §2
ἥκιστα 22 ὃ 5
Locris 86 § 2, 89 § 3, ο78 2, 99 §1
Logic at variance with syntax 53
84
Lupus, von 15 § 1
Lysicles 19 § 1

M :

Malea (Lesbos) 4 ὃ 5,Ἅ6 ὃ 2
Maloeis 3 § 3—6
Mantineans 107 § 4
Medeon 68 § 3
Megara 51 ὃ 2
Melians 68 § 2
Menedaius 100
Messapium ror § 2
Messenians 81 § 2, 88 § 3
Methymna 18 § 1, 50$ 2
Metropolis 92 § 3, 107 § 1
Molycrium ro2 § 1
Moods interchanged 113 § 3
Myconus 29 § 1
Mylae go ὃ 2—4
Myoneans tor ὃ 2
Myonesus 32 § 1
Myus 19 ὃ 2
Mytilene 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, g—14,

15, 18, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,

35, 30—40, 4148, 49, 50

N
Naupactus 7 § 4, 85 § 1, 102 § 3
Negative :
coalescing with verb 42 § 4
pleonastic in comparisons 36
84
Nemea 96 § 1
Nericus 7 § 5
Neuter:
adj. with article or partic. for
abstract noun 22 ὃ 8
collective 16 § 1
ethnic, singular or plural p.
IL]
Nicias 51 § 1

INDEX.

Nominative absolute 34 § 3
Notium 34 §1

O

Oeantheans ror ὃ 2
Oeneon 95 ὃ 3, 102 § 1
Oeniadae 7 § 4, 94 § 1
Oetaei 92 ὃ 2
Olen 104 ὃ 3, 4
Olpae rot etc.
Ophioneans 96 § 2
Optative :
alternating with infin. p. 103
with dvy=qualified future 46 § 2
without ἄν 84 8 τ
in γνῶμαι p. 113
iterative p. roo, 12 §1
subjective 71 ὃ 1
Orchomenus (Minyan) 87 § 4
Order:
emphatic 113 § 6
inverted 103 § 1
Orobiae 80 ὃ 2
Oropus ΟἹ ὃ 3
Outrage 34 § 3

Ρ

Paches 18, 33—36, 48 § 1, 49,
50§1

Paralii 92 § 2

Parisosis 46 § 6

Paronomasia 70 ὃ 5

Particular combined with general
Ρ- 127

Participle:
absolute without subj. 34 § 3
accumulation of (Note p. 105)
attraction 28 81
different from adjective 97 § 3
emphatic word 23 § 5, 53 § 3,

105 ὃ1
epexegesis (for infin.) 18 § 3
explained by participle 11 ὃ 3
expressing condition 54 § 2
for infinitive 53 § 4
periphrasis 36§5 (Note p. 102,
Ρ- 157)

predicative 29 § 2
predicative, omitted 64 § 5

ENGLISH. 343

tense assimilation of 47 § 1, 68

I
with and without article 54 ὃ 2
with verb, one object only ex-
pressed 105 § 1
Particular combined with general
Ῥ- 127
Partitive apposition 13 ὃ 3, 22 8 1)
34 § 2, 38 ὃ 4, 38 § 6, 105 ὃ 2
Passive ‘permissive’ 52 § 1
with middle force 34 § 1
Patmos 33 § 2
Pausanias 68 § 1, p. 143
Peparethus 89 ὃ 4
Periphrasis with γίγνεσθαι (pass. of
ποιεῖσθαι) 23 ὃ 2
with verbal adjective 30 81
Person, 2nd contrasted with 3rd
62 § 3
Personal construction with infini-
tive 40 § 2
Phoceans [ΟῚ ὃ 2
Phormio 7 § 1
Phytia 106 § 1
Pindaric schema p. 156
Pisistratus τος § 1
Pissuthnes 31 81
Plague, second outbreak of 87 § 1
Plataea, battle of 54 § 4
history of 68 ὃ 5
sortie from 20—24 and App.
Pleistoanax 26 § 2
Pleonasm 53 § 2, 83 § 3, 98 § 2;
100 § 1, 112 § 1
Pleuron 102 ὃ 5
Pluperfect, in form only 1 § r
Pluperfect, impersonal ΠῚ § 1
Plural, change to 75 ὃ 4,112 ὃ 5
for singular 3 § 1, 13 ὃ 5
verb w. neuter plural 82 ὃ 8
Polis 101 §2
Polycrates τος ὃ 2
Potidania 96 § 2
Predicative position of adjective
suggesting relative sentence 113
6

Pregnant construction rot § 6

344

Preposition in 2nd clause 82 § 7

Prepositional construction with
81" eke

pce ῳ expression for adverb

Pp:
fat ἘΡΕΙ͂Ν 3383
construction 68 ὃ 4

Prepositional predication com-
plete in itself 83 § 2
Present :

by assimilation 75 § 5
conative 82 § 8
w. future reference 18 § 1
historic 72 ὃ 3, 109 § 2, 110
Procles ΟἹ § 1, 98 § 3
Pronoun, possessive, in agreement
63 §1
Proschium 106 § 1, 102 § 5
Pyrrha 25 ὃ 1, 35 §1
Pythodorus 115 § 5

R

Ransom 70 § 1
Reduplication, rare before BA. 26
38
Relative:
adversative 54 ὃ 5
neuter, recalling previous sen-
tence 104 § 6
omitted in 2nd clause 55 ὃ 3,
(55 § 2)
Retaliation, doctrine of 56 § 2
Rhegium 86 § 2
Rheneia ro4 ὃ 2

5

Salaminia 33 § 1

Salaethus 25 ὃ 1, 35 §1
Salynthius 114 § 1

Sandis 19 § 2

Sicily δύ § 1, 99 ὃ 1, 103 § 1

LPHOCVDIDES Ui;

Signals 80 § 2
Singular, evolved from
(unique) p. 129
Sollium 95 § 1
Sophocles 115 § 5
Spartan professions 32 § 1, 59 § 4
Spurious chapters 17, 84
Stratii 106 § 1
Subject implied :
w. gen. absol. 82 § 1
with verb 17 § 3
Subjunctive:
coordinated with opt. 22 § 8
deliberative, adaptation of 112

plural

Ionic use with relative p. 128
warning Ρ, 123

Superlative, double=double com-
parative 42 § 4

Sybota 76

Syracuse 86 ὃ 3, 103 § 1
siege of, allusion to Ὁ. 1

ἠδ
Tanagra gt § 3
Trachis 92 § 1
Tripod 57 § 1 (2)?
Tritaeans ror ὃ 2
Tolophonians ror § 2

ν
Verb in agreement with Predicate
112§1, 11481
Volcanic eruption 116
ΡῈ
Xenoclides 114

Z

Zacynthians 94 § 1
Zeugma 43 § 1

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY J. ἃ C. F. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

Cie? Pio ee NESS. SERIES,

COMPLETE “LIST,

Author
Aristophanes

Euripides

Herodotus

”
”
Homer
ΕΣ
”
Lucian
359
Plato
”

”

Plutarch

Sophocles
Thucydides

39
Xenophon

1. GREEK.
Work
Aves—Plutus—Ranae
Vespae
Heracleidae
Hercules Furens
Hippolytus
Iphigeneia in Aulis
Hecuba
Alcestis
Orestes
Book v

9 WAR AAS, TO
», VIII I—go, ΙΧ 1—89
Odyssey 1X, X
op XXI
Iliad VI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV
Somnium, Charon, etc.
Menippus and Timon
Apologia Socratis
Crito
Euthyphro
Protagoras
Demosthenes
Gracchi
Nicias
Sulla
Timoleon
Oedipus Tyrannus
Book ΠῚ
Book vit
Agesilaus
Anabasis Vol. I.
an Vol. II.
” I,
6 ΤΕ ΤΠ Liver nV;
" II, VI, VII
Cyropaedeia I, 11 (2 vols.)
III, IV, V
᾿Ξ VI, VII, VIII

I

Text.
Notes.

Editor Price
Green 3/6 cach
Grayes [6

3
Beck ἃ Headlam 3/6
Gray & Hutchinson 2/-

Hadley 2/-
Headlam 2/6
Hadley 2/6
ἜΣ Ln the Press
Wedd 4/6
Shuckburgh 3/-
6 4]- each
ae 2/6 each
Edwards 2/6 on
25 2/-
x 2/- each
Heitland 3/6
Mackie 3/6
Adam 3/6
a 2/6
” 2/6
J.& A.M. Adam = 4/6
Holden 4/6
” 6/-
” 5/-
” 6/-
” 6/-
Jebb 4/6
Spratt 5/-
Holden 5/-
Hailstone 2/6
Pretor 3/-
᾽» 4/6
” 4|-
ἧς 2|- each
53 2[6 each
Holden 6|-
” 5/-
3) 5/-

oe

Author
Caesar

Cornelius Nepos

”
Horace
Σ᾽

fe)
Livy
”

”

Lucan

Lucretius
Ovid
Plautus

23

Quintus Curtius
Tacitus
Terence

Vergil

LHE- PITT PRESS SERIES.

2. LATIN.
Work Editor Price
De Bello Gallico
Com. I, lI, VI, VIII Peskett 1/6 each
», {{:ὖ]||, and vir x 2|- each
» I-III ” 5 pee
he LANE ” 1/6
De Bello Civili. Com. 1 " 32|-
‘5 ἢ Com. III 6 Ln the Press
Actio Prima in C. Verrem Cowie 1/6
De Amicitia Reid 3/6
De Senectute 3/6
Div. in Q. Caec. et Actio
Prima in C. Verrem Heitland & Cowie 53|-
Philippica Secunda Peskett 3/6
Pro Archia Poeta Reid 2|-
» Balbo Be 1/6
x» Milone es 2/6
» Murena Heitland 3|-
», Plancio Holden 4/6
5, Sulla Reid 3/6
Somnium Scipionis Pearman 2|-
Miltiades, Themistocles, Aris-
tides, Pausanias, Cimon Shuckburgh 1/6
Hannibal, Cato, Atticus Bs 1/6
Epistles. Bk 1 55 2/6
Odes and Epodes Gow Ln the Press
Odes. Books 1, II A 2/- each
Book 11 ap 1/6
Books Iv, VI, IX, XXVII Stephenson 2/6 each
he iy Whibley 2/6
se | 2S SSM Dimsdale 2/6 each
Pharsalia. Bk 1 Heitland & Haskins 1/6
Pharsalia. Bk vit Postgate 71 the Press
Book v Duff 2|-
Fasti. Book vi Sidgwick 1/6
Metamorphoses, Bk 1. Dowdall 1/6
Epidicus Gray 3/-
Asinaria τ 3/6
Stichus Fennell 2/6
Alexander in India Heitland ἃ Raven 3/6
Agricola and Germania Stephenson 3/-
Hist. Bk I Davies Ln the Press
Hautontimorumenos Gray 3/-
Aeneid 1 to XII Sidgwick 1/6 each
Bucolics 3 1/6
Georgics I, II, and ΠῚ, Iv δ 2|- each
Complete Works, Vol. 1, Text ,, 3/6
a Ks Vol. 11, Notes ,, 4/6

2

THE PITT PRESS SERIES.

3. FRENCH.
Author Work Editor
Corneille La Suite du Menteur Masson
= Polyeucte Braunholtz
De Bonnechose Lazare Hoche Colbeck
ἐξ Bertrand du Guesclin Leathes
νι 5, Part πὶ (With Vocabulary) ,,
Delavigne Louis XI Eve
2 Les Enfants d’Edouard "Ἢ
D’Harleville Le Vieux Célibataire Masson
De Lamartine Jeanne d’Arc Clapin & Ropes
De Vigny La Canne de Jone Eve

Erckmann-Chatrian la Guerre

Guizot Discours str |’Histoire de la
Révolution d’ Angleterre
Lemercier Irrédégonde et Brunehaut

Le Directoire
Dix Années d’Exil

Mme de Stael

France (XIII—xxXIV)
Με Récits des Temps Mérovin-
giens, I—III

Villemain Lascaris ou les Grecs du xv° Siécle
Voltaire Histoire du Siécle de Louis
XIV, Pt 1, Ch. I—xIlI
> Pt 1, Ch. X1V—XxXIV
=p Pt m1, Ch. xxv—end
Xavier de La Jeune Sibérienne. Le
Maistre Lépreux de la Citéd’Aoste

3

Clapin

Eve
Masson
Masson & Prothero

᾽ν)

Merimée Colomba Ropes
Moliere Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme Clapin
a Sar es L’ Ecole des Femmes Saintsbury

4 Les Précieuses ridicules Braunholtz

ΒΞ » (Abridged Edition) "

5 Le Misanthrope a3
Piron La Métromanie Masson
Ponsard Charlotte Corday Ropes
Racine Les Plaideurs Braunholtz

oF » (Abridged Edition) A
Sainte-Beuve M. Daru. (Causeries du
Lundi, Vol. 1x) Masson
Saintine Picciola Clapin
Scribe & Legouvé Bataille de Dames Bull
Scribe Le Verre d’Eau Colbeck
Sédaine Le Philosophe sans le savoir Bull
Souvestre Un Philosophe sous les Toits Eve
3 Le Serf & Le Chevrier de Lorraine Ropes
6 Le Serf (With Vocabulary) =
Thierry Lettres sur lhistoire de

Masson & Prothero

Masson & Ropes
Masson

Masson & Prothero

Masson

Author

Benedix
Freytag

Goethe
Gutzkow
Hacklander
Hauff

Immermann
Klee
Kohlrausch
Lessing

THE PITT PRESS.SERIES.

4. GERMAN.

Work

Ballads on German History
Dr Wespe
Der Staat Friedrichs des

Grossen
German Dactylic Poetry
Knabenjahre (1749—1761)
Hermann und Dorothea
Zopf und Schwert
Der geheime Agent
Das Bild des Kaisers
Das Wirthshaus im Spessart

Die Karavane

Der Oberhof

Die deutschen Heldensagen
Das Jahr 1813

Minna von Barnhelm

Lessing & Gellert Selected Fables

Mendelssohn
Raumer
Riehl

>

Schiller

Selected Letters
Der erste Kreuzzug
Culturgeschichtliche
Novellen
Die Ganerben & Die Ge-
rechtigkeit Gottes
Wilhelm Tell
3 (Abridged Edition)
Geschichte des dreissigjih-
rigen Kriegs Book 111.
Maria Stuart
Wallenstein I. (Lager and

Piccolomini)

Wallenstein II. (Tod)

Editor Price
Wagner 2/-
Breul 3/-
Wagner 2/-

” 3/-
Wagner ἃ Cartmell 2/-
” ” 3/6
Wolstenholme 3/6
E. L. Milner Barry 3|-
Breul 3/-
Schlottmann
& Cartmell 3/-
Schlottmann 3/-
Wagner 3|-
Wolstenholme 3/-
” 2|-
Wolstenholme
Ln the Press
Breul 3]-
Sime 3|-
Wagner 2|-
Wolstenholme 3/-
” 3/-
Breul 2/6
~ 1/6
” 3/-
» 3/6
9 3/6
a5 Nearly Ready
3/6

Ernst, HerzogvonSchwaben Wolstenholme

THE PITT PRESS SERIES.

5. ENGLISH.

Author Work Editor Price
Mayor ASketchof Ancient Philoso-
phy from Thales to Cicero 3/6
Wallace Outlines of the Philosophy of Aristotle 4/6
Bacon History of the Reign of
King Henry VII Lumby 3/-
Cowley Essays 4/-
Gray Poems Tovey In Preparation
More History of King Richard III Lumby 3/6
δὰ Utopia ” 3/6
Milton Arcades and Comus Verity 3/-
on Ode on the Nativity, L’ Alle- [6
gro, I] Penseroso ἃ Lycidas 2?
“ Samson Agonistes a 2/6
3 Paradise Lost, Bks I, 11 3 2/-
iy 5 Bks 111, Iv a 2/-
3} 3} Bks ν, VI 2} 2|-
an ~ Bks vil, VIII 2/-
3 5 Bks Ix, X a WE: Preparation
Ee re Bks XI, XII 2|-
Pope Essay on Criticism West 2/-
Scott Marmion Masterman 2/6
he Lady of the Lake ΞΕ 2/6
Ἢ Lay of the last Minstrel Flather 2/-
τ Legend of Montrose Simpson 2/6
Shakespeare A Midsummer-Night’s Dream Verity 1/6
‘ Twelfth Night is 1/6
Julius Caesar 2 1/6
Shakespeare & Fletcher Two Noble Kinsmen Skeat 3/6
Sidney An Apologie for Poetrie Shuckburgh 3/-
West Elements of English Grammar 2/6
ἯΙ English Grammar for Beginners 1/-
Carlos Short History of British India 1/-
Mill Elementary Commercial Geography 1/6
Bartholomew Atlas of Commercial Geography 3/-
Robinson Church Catechism Explained 2|-

LHE PITT PRESS SERIES.

6. EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE.

Author Work Editor Price
Colbeck Lectures on the Teaching of Modern
Languages 2/-
Comenius Life and Educational Works Laurie 3/5
Three Lectures on the Practice of
Education
Eve I. On Marking
Sidgwick 11. On Stimulus aval ὟΣ
Abbott III. On the teaching of ann ἶ
Verse Composition
Farrar General Aims of the Teacher] Vol [6
Poole Form Management pce ,
Locke Thoughts on Education Quick 3/6
Milton Tractate on Education Browning 2/-
Sidgwick On Stimulus 1/-
Thring Theory and Practice of Teaching 4/6

7. MATHEMATICS.

Ball Elementary Algebra 4/6
Euclid Books I—VI, ΧΙ, XII Taylor 5/-
Books I—VvI Ἢ 4|-
nn Books I—Iv το 3/-
Also separately
ys Books 1, & 113 11, & IV; v, & v1; ΧΙ, & x11 1/6 each
ra Solutions to Bks I—1v W. W. Taylor 6/-
Hobson & Jessop Elementary Plane Trigonometry 4/6
Loney Elements of Statics and Dynamics 7/6
Part 1. Elements of Statics 4/6
» II. Elements of Dynamics 3/6
si Solutions of Examples, Statics and Dynamics 7/6
rr Mechanics and Hydrostatics 4/6
Smith, C. Arithmetic for Schools, with or without answers 53|6
53 Part 1. Chapters I—vi1l. Elementary, with
or without answers 2|-
An Part 11. Chapters 1x—xx, with or without
answers 2/-
Hale, G. Key to Smith’s Arithmetic 7/6

Lonpon: C. J. CLAY anp SONS,
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
AVE MARIA LANE,

GLASGOW : 263, ARGYLE STREET,

6

The Cambridge Bible for Schools
and Golleqes.

GENERAL EpDITors:
J. J. 5. PEROWNE, D.D., Brsuor or WorcrstTEr,
A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D., Rearus Proressor or Heprew,

---- ῳΦ----

Extra Feap. 8vo. cloth, with Maps when required.
Book of Joshua. Rey. ἃ. F. Mactear, D.D. 25. 6d.
Book of Judges. Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A. 85. 6d.
First Book of Samuel. Prof. Kirxparrick, D.D. 85, 6d.
Second Book of Samuel. Prof. Kirxparrick, D.D. 3s. 6d.
First ἃ Second Books of Kings. Prof. Lumby, D.D. 3s. 6d. each.
Books of Ezra & Nehemiah. Prof. Ryuze, D.D. 4s. 6d.
Book of Job. Prof. Davipson, D.D. 5s.
Psalms. Book I. Prof. Kirxparricx, D.D. 3s. θά.
Psalms. Books IIand 11. Prof. Kirxparrick, D.D. 3s. 6d.
Book of Ecclesiastes. Very Rev. EH. H. Puumerrr,D.D. 5s.
Book of Jeremiah. Rey. A. W. Srreann, D.D. 4s. 6d.
Book of Ezekiel. Prof. Davipson, D.D. 5s.
Book of Hosea. Rev. T. Κ᾿ Cuzyne, M.A., D.D. 3s.
Books of Obadiah and Jonah. Arch. PERowNE. 23. 6d.
Book of Micah. Rev. T. K. Coryne, M.A., D.D. 1s. θά.
Wahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah. Prof. Davipson, D.D.
In the Press
Books of Haggai, Zechariah ἃ Malachi. Arch. PERowne.3s.6d.
Book of Malachi. Archdeacon Prrowne. 1s.
Gospel according to St Matthew. Rev. A. Carr, M.A. 2s. 6d.
Gospel according to St Mark. Rev.G.F.Macuerar, D.D. 2s.6d.
Gospel acc. to St Luke. Very Rev. I’. W. Farrar, D.D. 4s. θά.
Gospel according to St John. Rey. A. Phummer, D.D. 4s. 6d.
Acts of the Apostles. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 4s. 6d.
Epistle to the Romans. Rev. H. C.G. Mounz,D.D. 3s. 6d.
First and Second Corinthians. Rey. J. J. Liss, M.A. 2s. each.
Epistle to the Galatians. Rey. E. H. Perowne, D.D. 1s. 6d.
Epistle to the Ephesians. Rey. H.C. G.Mouvnsz,D.D. 2s. 6d.
Epistle to the Philippians. Rey. H.C.G. Moutr, D.D. 2s. 6d.
Colossians and Philemon. Rey. H. C. G. Moutr, D.D. 2s.
Epistles to the Thessalonians. Rey. G. G. Frnpuay, B.A. 2s.
Epistles to Timothy & Titus. Rev. A.E. Humpureys, M.A. 3s.
Epistle to the Hebrews. Very Rey. F. W. Farrar, D.D. 3s. θά.
Epistle of St James. Very Rev. Εἰ. H. Puumerre, D.D. 1s. θά.
St Peter and St Jude. Very Rev. H. H. Puumerre, D.D. 2s. 6d.
Epistles of St John. Rey. A. Purummer, D.D. 3s. 6d,
Book of Revelation. Rey. W. H. Simcox, M.A. 3s,

Other Volumes Preparing.

LONDON: Ο J. CLAY anp SONS,
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,
AVE MARIA LANE.

Che Smaller
Cambridge Bible for Schools,

Now Ready. With Maps. Price 1s, each volume.

Book of Joshua. 709. 5. Brack, M.A.

Book of Judges. 70. 5. Buacxk, M.A.

First Book of Samuel. Prof. Krrxparricrx, D.D.

Second Book of Samuel. Prof. Krrxparrick, D.D.

First Book of Kings. Prof. Lumpy, D.D.

Second Book of Kings. Prof. Lumpy, D.D.

Gospel according to St Matthew. Rev. A. Carr, M.A.
Gospel according to St Mark. Rev. G. F. Macuear, D.D.
Gospel according to St Luke. Very Rey. F. W. Farrar, D.D.
Gospel according to St John. Rev. A. PLummer, D,D.
Acts of the Apostles. Prof. Lumpy, D.D.

Che Cambridge Greek Testament

for Schools and Colleaes
GENERAL Epitor: J. J. 5. PEROWNE, D.D.

Gospel according to St Matthew. Key. A. Carr, M.A.
With 4 Maps. 4s. 6d.

Gospel according to St Mark. Rey. G. F. Macurar, D.D.
With 3 Maps. 4s. 6d.

Gospel according to St Luke. Very Rey. F. W. Farrar.
With 4 Maps. 6s.

Gospel according to St John. Rev. A. Pxuummer, D.D.
With 4 Maps. 6s.

Acts of the Apostles. Prof. Lumpy, D.D. 4 Maps. 6s.

First Epistle to the Corinthians. Rey. J.J. Lias, M.A. 3s.

Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Rev. J.J. Liss, M.A. 3s.

Epistle to the Hebrews. Very Rey.F. W. Farrar, D.D. 3s. 6d.

Epistles of St John. Rev. A. Puummer, D.D. 4s.

GENERAL Epitror: Prof. J. A. ROBINSON, B.D.

Epistle to the Philippians. Rey. H. C. G. Mourns, D.D.

[In the Press.
Epistle of St James. Rey. A. Carr, M.A. 2s. 6d.
Pastoral Epistles. Rey. J. H. Bernarp. [In Preparation.
Book of Revelation. Rey. W. H. Srucox, M.A. 5s.

Zondon: C. J. CLAY anv SONS,
CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE.

Glasgow: 263, ARGYLE STREET.
Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS.
few Work: MACMILLAN AND CO.

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY J. ἃ 6. F. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

Ys ow. - 7 as, A he
κ᾿, eal eer Ect
beasts tad

PA Thucydides
4452 Book III
A33

1896

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY

we

~

ἮΝ