e)gkaqezo/menoi—the form serves as an aorist as well as a present.

w(/sper ei)w/qesan—sc. gi/gnesqai, in the two previous invasions. The plan had been started by Pericles.

o(/ph| parei/koi—impers., though strictly o( qeo/s is the subject implied.

to\n plei=ston o(/milon—cf. II. 31 o( a)/llos o(/milos yilw=n, ‘the main body.’ Outside Thuc. o(/milos is found only in Herod., in tragedy, and in late authors.—The wasting of the country was a tedious task that would devolve naturally on the light-armed troops.

ei)=rgon to\ mh/—for the constr., which is common with verbs and phrases signifying prevention (Aesch. PV. 252 e)celusa/mhn brotou\s | to\ mh\ . . molei=n, and often in Aesch.) cf. VI. 1 diei/rgetai to\ mh\ h)/peiros ei)=nai (where the MS. ou)=sa is shown by many imitations of the sentence by later authors to be a mistake).

tw=n o(/plwn = tou= stratope/dou, strictly the space in front of the quarters where the arms were stacked; here the word marks the fact that the light-armed could not with safety be withdrawn from the hoplites. 10. ta\ e)ggu\s th=s po/lews—i.e. houses, trees, vineyards: we are not to suppose that the Athenians cropped their lands annually for the benefit of the Peloponnesian invaders.

ou(=—the gen. as in misqo\s triw=n mhnw=n. The enemy remained in Attica about thirty days: the longest invasion, that of 430 B.C., lasted forty days, the shortest, in 425 B.C., fifteen days.

tw=n . . th/n serve for all three pairs of nouns.

xw=sin—the harbours were to be turned into lime/nes klh|stoi/ (II. 94, 4): walls were carried across the mouth on artificial moles, and the narrow opening left could be closed with a chain.

e)pe/menon—showing why they had put off the revolt. The constr. with e)pime/nein is here double: (1) th\n . . poi/hsin telesqh=nai, as in VII. 20 perie/mene to\n *xarikle/a . . paralabei=n: (2) o(/sa . . e)/dei a)fike/sqai, an accusative clause. (It is objected that Thuc. elsewhere uses e)pime/nein only as intrans., but he uses e.g. me/nw and u(po- in both ways; and why not e)pi-?)

toco/tas—as mercenaries.

metapempo/menoi h)=san—cf. I. 99 h)=san . . a)/rxontes, II. 80 h)=san . . cumproqumou/menoi. Of course, the periphrasis with pres partic. is much less common than with perf., but it is not different in principle. Passages like II. 67 ou(= h)=n stra/teuma poliorkou=n ‘where there was a blockading army’ are quite different, the partic. not belonging to the verb. In yet another case, like I. 38 toi=s plei/osin a/re/skonte/s e)smen, the partic. is a predicative adj.

i)di/a|—in contrast with what the government was doing koinh=|.

kata/—often of the motive or reason, e.g. II. 87 cumparagenome/nwn kata\ fili/an.

pro/cenoi—the fact that there were more representatives of Athens than one at Mytilene might show that the office was hereditary in a family, but more probably the title of pro/cenos kai\ eu)erge/ths had been granted by Athens to members of different Mytilenean families. Aristotle in Pol. 1304 a says that Dexander h)=rce th=s sta/sews kai\ tou\s *)aqhnai/ous parw/cune pro/cenos w)/n: he had a private quarrel with a member of the aristocratic party; from this small matter pollw=n e)ge/neto a)rxh\ kakw=n. In any case it would have been the duty of the Proxenus to inform Athens of movements in Mytilene unfavourable to her interests even before the war; but doubtless the quarrel was now an exasperating motive to him, and led directly to the outbreak of stasis, for it was a dispute about property and intermarriage between families of the opposed parties.

cunoiki/zousi—i.e. attempting to make the island into a single po/lis under one government, and in this case, an oligarchy.

cuggenw=n — Lesbos being of Boeotian (Aeolic) origin. To intervene on behalf of kinsmen was under all circumstances deemed justifiable among Greek states.

ei) mh/ tis—‘unless they mean to,’ the fut. indic. marking the urgency; cf. VIII. 91 ei) mh/ tis h)/dh fula/cetai.

e)capinai/ws—like e)capi/nhs, found only in Thuc. and Xen. among Attic prose writers (for e)cai/fnhs or ai)fnidi/ws).

peri\ *pelopo/nnhson plei=n—both in 431 and 430 B.C. when the Pel. invaded Attica (II. 23, 56), a fleet had been sent out to make descents on the coast of the Peloponnese, as a counter-move. For the operations of this year see c. 16, 1; for those of 426 B.C. see cc. 91, 94.

*malo/eis was a local name of Apollo in Lesbos; its origin is unknown.

pandhmei/—the whole people together, not by families or clans.

e)lpi/da ei)=nai like ei)ko/s e)sti, is commonly followed by pres. or aor. infin.

e)peixqe/ntas is conditional.

h)\n me\n cumbh=| . . ei) de\ mh/—a common idiom, found already in Homer; cf. e.g. Plato, Prot. 325B e)a\n me\n e(kw\n pei/qhtai: ei) de\ mh/.

ei)pei=n—this depends on the sense of ‘order’ implied in the passage; cf. Andoc. de Myst. 20 o( ga\r no/mos ou(/tws ei(=xen: ei) me\n ta)lhqh= mhnu/seie/ tis, ei)=nai th\n a)/deian, ei) de\ ta\ yeudh=, teqna/nai. Of course ei)pei=n = keleu=sai. (This passage is brief and peremptory in tone: its dramatic manner is quite characteristic, and there is no ground for suspecting the text.)

para\ sfa=s—put briefly for para\ sfa=s parageno/menai kai\ parou=sai: similarly parei=nai is often found with ei)s or e)pi/ with accus.; but there is no precise parallel to the present case.

e)s fulakh\n e)poih/santo—so VIII. 1 e)s a/sfa/leian poiei=sqai. Cf. Andoc. de Myst. 117 qugate/res ai(\ e)gi/gnonto e)/s te e)me/ kai\ *le/agron.

diaba/s.—the sentence, containing five participles, is an example of what Dionysius calls to\ pukno/n of Thucydides; Cicero speaks of him as pressus, Quintilian as densus. The participles that denote closely connected parts of the same action are joined by kai/.

e)pituxw/n = w(s e)pe/tuxe.

plw=| xrhsa/menos—‘after a good passage.’ plw=| = eu)ploi/a|, as in I. 137. (Some make plw=| xrhsa/menos merely = pleu/sas, but Antiphon V. 24 plou=s h(mi=n e)gi/gneto kai\ a)nh/geto ploi=a a)/panta seems decisive.)

ou)/te . . te—a common idiom (cf. neque . . que or et), by which emphasis is thrown on the second clause.

ta/ te a)/lla . . e)fu/lasson—‘and besides (ta\ a)/lla, adverbial) having protected with rapidly constructed defences all round the half-finished (works) of the walls and docks they guarded them.’ This is the best way of taking this puzzling sentence. None of the changes in the text that have been proposed is an improvement.

peri/ is an adverb = pe/ric, as in Homer (Wilamowitz on Eur. HF. 1035).

a)para/skeuoi qualifies polemei=n, and is therefore co-ordinate with e)cai/fnhs: cf. e.g. I. 39 prou/xonta kai\ e)k tou= a)sfalou=s, and c. 13, 2 qa=sson gege/nhtai kai\ a)para/skeuos.

e)/kploun tina—for the use of tis cf. II. 22 i(ppomaxi/a tis bra/xeia e)ge/neto.

naumaxi/an—both dat. and accus. seem to occur with w(s e)pi/ of intention; but the MSS. often vary, as here.

pro\ tou= lime/nos—i.e. that harbour which was used by the fleet (cc. 3, 6; 6, 1), in which their ships had lam. (Steup's suggestion that tou= e(te/rou l. should be read is unnecessary.) Presently they were driven back into this same harbour. The northern harbour is meant. See Introd. P. xiv.

o)li/gon is accus. of space (cf. 104, 2); of time II. 8 o)li/gon pro\ tou/twn.

to\ parauti/ka . . a)pope/myasqai—‘get the ships withdrawn for the time being,’ i.e. in order to gain time.

kai/ ‘accordingly.’

tw=n diaballo/ntwn—see c. 2, 3. The partic. becomes a subst, as in oi( e)pago/menoi II. 2, oi( prodido/ntes II. 5.

ta\s nau=s is not object of pei/seian, but only subject of a)pelqei=n, ta\s nau=s a)pelqei=n being an exact citation of the proposal they would make in the Ecclesia, which was to be for a permanent withdrawal. The constr. is strange, however, and poih/seian has been proposed.

e)n th=| *male/a| pro\s b. ph=s po/lews—the Malea that is known is the SE. point of Lesbos, 70 stadia from the city. A solution of the difficulty has been found, Introd. p. XV. (Those who suppose that the SE. point of the island is meant, take pro\s b. th=s po/lews with a)poste/llousi. But from the narrative that follows, it is clear the A. were lying to the north of the city (esp. c. 6, 1); and it is not likely they were so far distant as 70 stades. Some are driven to suspect that e)n th=| *male/a| may be corrupt or spurious.)

toi=s is neut., and

proxwrh/sein is epexegetic.

dia\ tou= pela/gous—crossing the Aegean directly instead of sailing down the coast of Asia Minor, between Chios and Erythrae, before crossing among the islands. The alternative routes are clearly explained in Odyssey III. 170 f. and the risks of that across the me/son pe/lagos are indicated. (Cf. Tozer, Islands of the Aegean, p. 170.)

au)toi=s prob. = the Lesbians, and is dat. commodi with e)/prasson, as in V. 76, where those acting for Sparta at Argos are called oi( toi=s *lakedaimoni/ois pra/ssontes. (Others take au)toi=s with h(/cei, or refer it to the Lacedaemonians.)

pandhmei/—equivalent to panstratia=| in this connexion, as II. 31, 1 clearly shows.

strato/pedon—north of the city, where the fleet was lying.

ou)k e)/lasson e)/xontes describes a state of things, like krapou=ntes, vikw=ntes.

e)phuli/santo—‘did not encamp on the field,’ which was necessary to maintain a disputed victory (Bloomfield). What they did and what they felt are here balanced by ou)/te . . ou)/te.

e)k *peloponnh/sou kai\ met' a)/llhs—this appears to stand for ei) pr. ti (paraskeuh=s) e)k *p. kai\ a)/lloqen, ‘to try their fortune with remforcements from the Pel. and elsewhere, if any should come.’ Bloomfield and others have supposed that kai/ is intensive here, ‘again with fresh preparations’; but with the order of the text, the sense would necessarily be that some reinforcement had already come from Peloponnese. As for met' a)/llhs, they might hope for ships from Megara, Leucas or Ambracia: Thebes had none.

au)toi=s . . a)fiknei=tai—the dat. with verbs of motion—which is strictly a dat. of mterest rather than of motion—is common in poetry, but does not occur in Attic prose outside Thuc.; cf. e.g. Aesch. PV. 35 d' a)ll' h)=lqen au)tw=| *zhno\s a)/grupnon be/los.

meta\ th\n ma/xhn u(/steron—i.e. they did not get there immediately after the arrival of the A. fleet (c. 4, 1), but only after the battle (§ 2).

mh\ xrh=sqai—epexegetic.

nau/staqmon—the roadstead where the supply-ships lay.

ma=llon means rather than the new strato/pedon south of the town.

a)gora/ is Kruger's probable alteration for a)gora=s, on the analogy of such phrases as a)gora\n pare/xein, VII. 39 th\n a)gora\n tw=n pwloume/nwn . . e)pi\ th\n qa/lassan komi/sai. The idea of a site seems always present, and a)gora/ is not a synonym of ta\ w)/nia or ta\ pwlou/mena.

ta/ is probably subject, not adverbial accus., so that we have the pass. of to\n peri\ *m. po/lemon e)pole/moun: cf. VIII. 18 to\n po/lemon koinh=? polemou/ntwn (imper.). The act. of polemw= does not seem to occur with an adverbial accus.

*lakwnikh=s depends on xwri/a.

a)nasth/sas—the verb occurs in a similar connexion in II. 68 and 96; in IV. 90 a/nasth/sas *)aqhnai/ous pandhmei/.

kata\ to\n *)axelw=|on—‘by way of the A.’; not the technical use of kata/ meaning ‘down’ a stream (cf. Aeschines II. 124 ei)splei=n kata\ to\n *ludi/an potamo/n); Oeniadae was an important town on a hill in marshy ground near the SW. coast of Acarnania W. of the mouth of the Achelous. Cobet conjectured a/na/ for kata/.

frourw=n—the contrast with au)to/qen suggests that these were not Leucadians.

a)popleu/santes—i.e. the ships withdrew to Acarnania, and from there the negotiation was carried on.

ou)k a)/dikos . . e)stin, ei) tu/xoien—like I. 120 a)ndrw=n swfro/nwn e)sti/n, ei) mh\ a)dikoi=nto, h(suxa/zein. Here ou)k a)/. . . . e)stin=di/kaio/n e)sti xei/rous h(gei=sqai, and in such cases (see Goodwin, MT. § 555) the opt. is not seldom found. The idiom should certainly not be regarded as abnormal. Cf. e.g. Plato, Gorg, 482 B e)/gwge oi)=mai krei=tton ei)=nai . . diafwnei=n xoro\n w(=| xorhgoi/hn. Bayfield on Antig. 666 collects passages from Soph. Presently

diakri/nointo is by assimilation to tu/xoien.

gnw/mh|—‘feeling,’ ‘sentiment’;

eu)noi/a| ‘loyalty’ to each other. These words, so frequent in Thuc. and orators, have various shades of meaning; and of gnw/mh it would be rash to say that we can always be sure of its precise significance— Classen has discussed gnw/mh at length in his Intr.—but here the parallel paraskeuh\ kai\ du/namis show that the two are closely similar in sense (eu)/noia is the intellectual aspect of gnw/mh); and c. 10 e)n tw=| diala/ssonti th=s gnw/mhs kai\ ai( diaforai\ tw=n e)/rgwn, where the meaning of gnw/mh is fixed by met' a)reth=s dokou/shs and o(moio/tropoi, bears this out. (eu)/noia of course implies ‘between equals’ here, not loyalty to a superior.) Cf. also c. 12, 1.

mhde/ tw|—here and again at c. 67, 2 there should undoubtedly be only a comma before mhde/. Thuc. never uses ou)de/, mhde/=‘and not,’ unless a neg. clause precedes; and it is quite plain from what precedes—ou)k a)/dikos au)/th h( a)ci/wsis, viz. xei/rous h(gei=sqai, ei) tu/xoien—that o(\ . . ou)k h)=n and mhde/ tw| xei/rous do/cwmen ei)=nai adhere closely together.

e)n toi=s deinoi=s—for Athens; often used of the troubles of war.

cummaxi/a e)ge/neto—referring to the transference of the hegemony of the allies from Sparta to Athens in 476 B.C. (I. 95). In reality this transference was an a)po/stasis from the Spartan alliance (Ath. Pol. c. 23); and the anxiety of Sparta to be quit of the war against Persia (a)pallacei/ontes tou= *mhdikou= pole/mou I. 95) was not shown until after the transference took place. Samos, Chios and Lesbos were at the head of the movement in favour of Athens (Plut. Arist. c. 23). (This passage well illustrates the freedom with which Greek orators habitually manipulate history when they refer to the past.)

a)polipo/ntwn e)k—this use of a/polei/pein seems to result from such phrases as a)polei/pein th\n cummaxi/an (c 9), so that the full sense is a)polipo/ntwn (h(ma=s kai\ a)pelqo/ntwn).

*)aqhnai/ois and

toi=s *(/ellhsi depend on cu/mmaxoi egeno/meqa: toi=s *(/ellhsi is the exaggeration of rhetoric; for in reality they entered the Delian confederacy.

me/xri—‘so long as,’ a very rare use, not noted in L. & S.; Xen. Hell. I. 1, 6.

e)pagome/nous—this word, very common in Thuc., regularly means ‘to invite,’ ‘call in.’ But here, in contrast with a)nie/ntas, it is slightly different, ‘procure for themselves,’ as in e)pagwgh\ tw=n e)pithdei/wn (Herbst).

a)deei=s—‘free from anxiety.’

dia\ poluyhfi/an—with a)du/natoi o)/ntes. Each constituent state had a vote in the synod of the League, but the allies were unable to combine against Athens through their disagreements.

e)doulw/qhsan—i.e. became subject allies. Cf. I. 98 prw/th au(/th po/lis cummaxi\s (Naxos) para\ to\ kaqesthko\s e)doulw/qh.

paradei/gmasi toi=s progignome/nois x.—‘drawing our proofs (that they were no longer pistoi/) from what was previously happening,’ i.e. ‘taking warning from the line of action that they had adopted.’ para/deigma is an example by which a conclusion may be supported. toi=s progignome/nois=‘the line of conduct that they were pursuing previously, and had not ceased to pursue.’ (The aor. or perf. partic. is conjectured here as in I. 23 tou\s *)aqhnai/ous h(gou=mai mega/gous gignome/nous . . a)nagka/sai e)s to\ polemei=n, which alludes to the conduct of Athens during the same period—between the formation of the Confederacv to the beginning of the war—from a different point of view. In both places the pres. partic., describing something still in progress, seems better.)

ou) ga\r ei)ko\s h)=n . . . mh\ dra=sai tou=to—to understand this sentence, it is necessary to realize that dra=sai refers, not to the future, but to the past, as in c. 40, 5 e)nqumhqe/ntes a)\ ei/ko\s h)=n au)tou\s poih=sai krath/santas u(mw=n. The sense is ‘it was not likely that they . . would not have treated those who were left in this way, if only they had found any opportunity.’ We should have been ‘enslaved’ had circumstances been favourable to Athens: cf. I. 98 (e)doulw/qhsan) kai\ tw=n a)/llwn w(s e(ka/sth| cune/bh. (Dobree's dunhqei=en makes the ref. to the future.)

to\ de\ a)nti/palon de/os—‘it is reciprocity of apprehension alone,’ as distinct from one-sided de/os. There is no objection to de/os, and no inconsistency with the opening words of c. 12, if the emphasis be put on a)nti/palon, as on prou/xwn in the next sentence, and if mo/non be taken as qualifying a)nti/palon rather than pisto/n.

ga/r—‘for in that case.’

o(/son—quatenus, ‘so far as.’

e)s th\n a)rxh/n ‘with a view to their empire.’ (I see no reason whatever for rejecting these words, as Kruger and Steup do. They give the true object of the Athenian policy, and the mention of a)rxh/ is appropriate enough in the presence of those who so strongly disliked it; cf. I. 75, with II. 8.）

gnw/mhs ma=llon e)fo/dw| h)\ i)sxu/os—‘by means of policy and not of force.’

ta\ pra/gmata . . katalhpta/—‘they might make themselves masters of the situation.’

a(/ma me/n.—this is the lo/gos eu)preph/s that they used as evidence that they were upright. The allies whom we attacked, they eould say, must have been in the wrong; otherwise those who have a vote in the confederacy equal to ours would never have been found at our side. The

mh/ is due to the protest implied in m. e\xrw=nto. If a)/kontas is right, it must be put briefly for a)/kontas a)\n o)/ntas, ‘but would have been unwilling, unless’ etc. But this, even if possible, is extremely awkward, whereas e(ko/ntas, read in a good scholium on this passage, gives the natural constr. and sense.

e)n tw=| au)tw=|=a(/ma: so IV. 73.

ta\ kra/tista—for tou\s krati/stous.

[ta\] teleutai=a—it is clear that ta\ kra/tista is object of lipo/ntes, and teleutai_a is predicative; so that as there is no parallel for the article, it should be omitted.

tou= a)/llou—neut. collective, and gen. abs.

au)tw=n—in contrast with pro\s o(/ ti xrh\ sth=nai (aid from others): pro\s o(/ ti xrh\ sth=nai = h(ma=s tou\s duname/nous h(gh/sasqai au)tw=n (schol.). For the simple i(/stasqai ‘rally’ with pro/s cf. IV. 56 pro\s th\n e)kei/nwn gnw/mhn e(/stasan.

e)xeirw/santo—sc. tou\s cumma/xous.

to/ te nautiko/n—“a third reason is here given for the policy of the Athenians, of leaving the M. still independent,— namely, the apprehension of danger from driving them to unite their navy with that of the Peloponnesians” (Bloomfield).

kaq' e(\n geno/menon—standing alone this phrase would certainly mean ‘concentrating,’ ‘becoming united,’ as is proved by such passages as Xen. Hell. V. 2, 16 pw=s ei/ko\s u(ma=s th=s me\n *boiwti/as e)pimelhqh=nai o(/pws mh\ kaq' e(\n ei)/h, polu\ de\ mei/zonos a(qroizome/nhs duna/mews a(melh=sai; This would give no point here, since the whole fleet is of course meant by to\ nautiko/n. The accepted meaning ‘uniting with others’ is only to be got through the addition, h)\ . . prosqe/menon, which must be regarded as an explanation. (Steup suggests that prosqe/menon should be removed, so that kaq' e(\n g. can be taken with the datives. I do not think it a likely note—in fact there is a scholium, e)s tau)to\ cunelqo/n, here—but I do think there is a difficulty, and possibly the first h/ should be removed.)

ta\ de\ kai/—‘to some degree also’; a fourth and minor reason why the M. retained their independence. The schol. divides qerapei/a into flattery of the Athenian people and gifts to the leaders of the demos; no doubt these are included.

ou) . . a)\n e)dokou=men dunhqh=nai=ou)k a)\n e)dunh/qhmen, w(s e)do/kei. dokou=men, read by Kruger (e)/ti dokou=men Steup) is simpler, but the imperf., referring to the time of the revolt, does not exclude the pres., and cf. c. 13 e)nomi/zomen a)posth/sesqai.

toi=s—‘what had happened.’

dia\ . . me/llhsin refers to dokou=men a)dikei=n: this might be a reason for objecting that they should have waited till some wrong was inflicted on them.

ta\ deina/=‘methods of coercion’; for the whole cf. I. 25 kata\ th\n *faia/kwn proenoi/khsin th=s *kerku/ras.

ei) ga\r dunatoi/.—with the text before us, which (except for a)ntimellh=sai) follows the MSS., we must render, ‘had we been in a position both to intrigue like them and to delay like them (i.e. to put off our attack, but at the same time to have our plan of attack ready), what need was there for us to remain, nevertheless, at their mercy?’ The M. might of course defer the attack, but if they waited for the Athenians to attack they were lost. This is fairly satisfactory, the only difficulty being that e)k tou= i)/sou and e)k tou= o(moi/ou (‘just as we were,’ aeque atque fuimus) have no correspondence. It is in connexion with the next sentence that doubts arise. (1) e)pixeirei=n clearly corresponds to a)ntepibouleu=sai, and proamu/nasqai to a)ntimellh=sai (or a)ntepimellh=sai); (2) the statement ‘we need not have remained in their power’ is hardly equivalent to ‘we need not have revolted because we should have retained our independence’; (3) e)p' e)kei/nois ei)=nai looks suspicious before e/p' e)kei/nois o)/ntas. A great many changes have been proposed, and those of Heilmann and Kruger indicated in the crit. note and adopted by Classen give a much better correspondence and an improved sense. Yet I do not feel that the objections to the MS. reading are decisive. The general sense is: we cannot be blamed for taking the first move merely because they delayed to take action against us.

xrh/—sc. u(ma=s.

h(=| kai\ ma=llon i.e. in addition to the di/kaion and a)reth/ (c. 10, 1) or doing so.

boh/qeian a)poste/llein—the M. really suggest two plans, both of which were adopted (c. 15, 1; 16, 3; cf. 25, 1), viz. (1) that a fleet shall be sent to Lesbos, and (2) that there shall be another invasion of Attica, though there had already been one this year. But the second proposal is put forward only as according with the interest of Sparta (either the enemy will not resist you, or—if they do—they must withdraw from the Peloponnese (cf. § 3) as well as from Lesbos, § 4). The second proposal only was at first carried out, but it did not have the desired effect (c. 16, 2). In the following year, accordingly, both schemes were to be carried out concurrently (c. 26), but even then the Pel. were slack about no. 1 (c. 27, 1). (I see no ground for thinking the text deficient here, as Steup supposes. The two courses are not proposed as alternatives, and, on the other hand, they are with good reason not announced as two parts of a scheme for helping Lesbos.)

kai\ e)n tw=| au)tw=|—this point is explained in what follows: so far it has not been touched upon. To this

kairo\s . . pro/teron refers.

e)fqa/ratai—the old plur. terminations in -atai, -ato, are rarely found in Attic prose, as Xen. An. IV. 8, 5: Thuc. varies.

ai( me/n—see c. 7.

periousi/an new=n e)/xein—a number large enough to protect the harbours and coast of Attica without recalling those that were out. This forecast was entirely falsified by the event; but it might very well be entertained because (1) in spite of the fall of Potidaea (in 429 B.C.), no Athenian fleet had been sent out to the Peloponnese in 429; (2) only thirty ships had been sent out this year in answer to the Spartan invasion of Attica, whereas in 431 and 430 the number had been 100; (3) late in 429 a Peloponnesian fleet had made an abortive attempt to seize the Piraeus: reflexion on the result of this mismanaged affair may have led them, with good reason, to underrate the naval resources of Athens.

e)pesba/lhte—‘make an additional invasion’: to\ deu/teron emphasizes the e)p-.

w(=| ga\r dokei= . . pare/cei—‘if anyone is thinking that L. is far away, the advantage will be given to him close at hand’; that will come home to him.

e)n th=| *)attikh=| e)/stai—‘will turn on Attica, but (on the country) through which . . ,’ i.e. e)n th=| cummaxikh=|; the issue depends on the action of the cu/mmaxoi The need is to transfer the resources (cf. w)feli/an . . w)felei=tai) of the cu/mmaxoi from the Athenian to the Spartan side. Cf. Tac. Hist. II. 28 sin victoriae columen in Italia verteretur.

oi( pri\n douleu/ontes—i.e. those who were made u)potelei=s before us.

bohqhsa/ntwn—a remarkable ex of the gen. abs. where the subject of the verb is the same; cf. c. 112, 6.

ei)/xete—‘have up till now’ is the meaning given by Poppo; but ‘had’ before the war is more natural, and more in accordance with the action of Sparta.

e)leuqerou=ntes—a good point: at the outbreak of the war the Lac. had claimed to be ‘the liberators of Greece.’

oi( de\ a)/lloi cu/mmaxoi—the ‘exclusive’ use of a)/llos.

e)n karpou= cugkomidh=| like e)n paraskeuh=| ei)=nai: (e)n)

a)rrwsti/a| like e)n a)qumi/a| ei)=nai.

a)/pora nomi/zontes—‘thinking (the situation) difficult,’ a characteristic use of the neut. plur. without subst., as in I. 8 plwimw/tera e)ge/neto.

kai\ ai( peri\ th\n *p. tria/konta nh=es ‘the thirty ships that were about (off the W. coast) the Pel. as well.’ If the text is sound, the thirty ships of c. 7 must surely be meant: it is true that c. 7, 3 shows that the majority of these ships, at any rate, were no longer ravaging the coasts; but the Lac. are misled by an inaccurate report. Chambry, however, suggests that the eighteen ships referred to in c. 7, 3 had subsequently rejoined the other twelve; if so, it is strange that Thuc. has omitted to mention this.—The edd. who delete tria/konta point out that from c. 13, 3 it is clear the Lac. knew already about the doings of this earlier fleet. But (1), the Lesbian speaker does not say that the fleet was actually ravaging the coasts; and (2) in any case, if c. 13, 3 is in point here, so is c. 13, 4, and there the expectation is that the fleet will be withdrawn. Why should not the Lac. have fresh information—inaccurate—that the expectation had been falsified? The second

kai/=‘also,’ i.e. as well as the new fleet which was making a)poba/seis (§ 2). Those who omit tria/konta understand the fleet of 100 ships mentioned just before. This is of course possible, but the passage admits of a simple explanation as it stands; and it is hardly likely that the 100 ships could so soon be reported as ravaging the coasts.

th\n perioiki/da—land belonging to the peri/oikoi in Messenia seems to be meant.

u(/steron—it was not sent at once, c. 25. o(/ ti pe/myousin—o(/stis because of the purpose.

e)ph/ggellon—a technical word for sending out a formal notice, which may amount to a command. Cf. periagge)llw.

nau/arxon—an office held for a year. The admiral in war was almost as important as the kings, who eommanded the land-forces. His power increased when the Spartan navy became greater.

ei)=don—sc. a)naxwrh/santas: cf. e.g. II. 11 dh|ou=n ma=llon h)\ th\n e(autw=n dra=n, sc. dh|oume/nhn.

l 1.

kata\ to\n xro/non tou=ton o(/n—i.e. kaq' o)/n, according to a common idiom; cf. Soph. OC. 748 e)s tosou=ton ai/ki/as pesei=n | e)/doc', o(/son pe/ptwken h(/de.

e)n toi=s plei=stai dh/—for the fem. cf. c. 82, 1 (sta/sis) e)n toi=s prw/th e)ge/neto. Pre-eminence is not necessarily implied in any of the examples of this idiom, and Herbst is perhaps right in saying that prominence only is meant. The latter must be the point here, because of paraplh/siai de\ kai\ e)/ti plei/ous.

dh/ heightening the superlative is not elsewhere added to this idiom.

au)toi=s—with e)ge/nonto.

e)nergoi\ †ka/llei makes no sense. e)nergo/s, though not elsewhere applied to ships, is well suited to them, ‘on active service,’ ‘in commission’; and it may be that the note in Hesychius ai( mh\ a)rgai/ alludes to this passage. But ka/llei must be corrupt, for the rendering ‘effective by their fine condition’ is not possible. Herbst's conjecture s/ kai\ l/, i.e. 230, is plausible; but in order to make up so great a total, he assumes a fleet of sixty ships for guarding the eoast of Attica. Were this so, we should surely have heard of it at c. 16, 2 among the reasons that caused the Pel. to abandon the invasion; and even though we are left to collect the number of ships at sea in 428 B.C., this large item in the total must have been mentioned somewhere. Still, the interpolator may have reckoned the total at 230 by the same proeess, whatever it was, that led him to 250 for 431 B.C. below. The number, however, does not come in naturally after e)n toi=s plei=stai. A very good sense would be got by mia=| po/lei (Widmann).

th/n te ga\r *)attikh/n—referring to the first year of the war; but there is no mention of such a fleet in the account of that year.

peri\ *pelopo/nnhson—this fleet had been sent out by Pericles as a counter-stroke to the invasion of Attica.

xwri\s de/—‘besides,’ sc. h)=san, which is implied in the context.

tou=to—i.e. the sending out of these armaments. In a somewhat similarly vague way

meta\ *poteidai/as is used for meta\ th=s *poteidai/as poliorki/as, with which should be compared II. 13 e)s *potei/daian a)panhlw/qh, ‘money was spent on the siege of P.’ It is strange that the expenses of the army at Potidaea, as distinct from the expenses of the fleet there, should be brought in so vaguely.

di/draxmoi—half a drachma a day was the ordinary pay for a hoplite: here it is one drachma for the hoplite and one for his servant.

e)la/mbane—we should expect e(/kastos e)la/mbanon or e)la/mbanen. It is the omission of a singular subject to which the verb is attracted that is remarkable: edd. note that this omission is frequent in Herod.

w(=n ou)k e)la/ssous—when Potidaea revolted in 432 B.C., 3000 Athenian hoplites had been sent to besiege it. It seems that the permanent force was maintained at this number throughout the siege.

oi(\ proaph=lqon—these 1600 had been sent to blockade Potidaea from the south (I. 64) soon after the revolt. They were withdrawn from Chalcidice before the place fell.

to\n au)to\n misqo/n—viz. one drachma per man, or double the ordinary wage (VI. 31).

tosau=tai dh/—referring still to the paraplhsi/ai kai\ e)/ti plei/ous (§ 1); so that the digression extends to the end of the chapter.

plhge/ntes—in an old poetical meaning, found several times in Thuc.

tau=ta . . kratou=ntas . . i(kanou\s o)/ntas—the partic. phrase in apposition to tau=ta, as in Soph. Antig. 17

ou)de\n oi)=d' u(pe/rteron | ou)/t' eu)tuxou=sa ma=llon ou)/t' a)twme/nh, Philoc. 1355 pw=s tau=t' e/canasxh/sesqe, toi=sin *)/atrews | e/me\ cuno/nta paisi/n;

ei)/rgein—‘isolate.’

au)tere/tai—it was unusual in Thuc.'s day for fighting men to serve as rowers: in Homeric times it was usual; cf. Il. 2.719 e)re/tai d' e)n e(kasth| penth/konta e)pemba/san, to/cwn eu)= ei)do/tes i)=fi ma/xesqai.

e)gkatw|kodo/mhtai—see crit. note. The verb means to build into a wall. Clearly the forts were built at the same time as the wall at the points strong by natnre. If the perf. is right, we must take it as historic, like the presents, and render ‘there are forts built in at various points,’ so that the perf. points to the condition of the wall and forts when completed. But as no parallel to such a use of the perf. is known, the plup. should probably be read (I do not think h(=? for oi(= necessary; but these forms are often confused in MSS.).

a)mfote/rwqen is explained by kai\ e)k gh=s kai\ e)k qala/tths.

*anaiitw=n—cf. c. 32.

a)/llhs—‘as well.’

a)pw/knhsan . . to\n ki/ndunon—cf. c. 30, 4.

e)s de\ . . . ma/lista—the phrase with prep. stands as subject of the verb. In Andoc. I. 37 ei)s triakosi/ous is presently repeated in the form ma/lista triakosi/ous. For e)s and ma/lista often used together cf. e.g. c. 90, 3 peri/ and ma/lista, Dem. XXI. 154, peri/ and i)/sws, Herod. III. 159 ma/lista e)s.

e)ne/meinan—as in e)mme/nein toi=s o(/rkois etc.

tro/pw| toiw|de is added kata\ su/nesin.

l 18.

cunemetrh/santo—it is possible to supply to\ tei=xos or ta\s kli/makas, but § 4 strongly favours the latter.

e)calhlimme/non—‘whitewashed.’ The e)c- probably denotes completion: the whitewashing had not been finished at one part of the wall.

h)riqmou=nto . . a)riqmou=ntes—for the rapid passage from mid. to act. ef. II. 9 nautiko\n parei/xonto . . pezo\n parei=xon.

e)s o(\ e)bou/lonto tou= tei/xous—sc. kaqora=n, or perhaps rather o(ra=n: tou= tei/xous agrees with kaqorwme/nou, and e)s o(\ e/boulonto=‘as far as they wanted to see it,’ i.e. a sufficiently wide piece was visible. The objection to this is that e)s o(/ for o(son or e)s o(/son does not oecur elsewhere. In Herod. e/s o(/ means ‘until’ with aorist or hist. pres. or iterative imperf.; but in Thuc. V. 66 e)s o(\ e)me/mnhnto=so far as (of time), a use not found elsewhere; and it is possible by Gk. usage of a prep. and neuter adj. or pron., that the phrase should denote time or place: e.g. e)c o)li/gou of time II. 11, of place II. 91, and so with e)k pollou=. Two other views of this passage, not involving change of the text, must be noticed: (a) taking tou= tei/xous as agreeing with kaqorwme)nou ‘as the wall was completely visible to the desired point’ i e. to the foot of the wall, viewed from above; but we should expect this meaning to be expressed directly and clearly. (b) Taking tou= tei/xous as depending on e)s o(/, ‘as they easily looked down upon the part of the wall that they wished to see,’ i e. kaqorwme/nou (tou/tou) e)s o(\ tou= tei/xous e(bou/lonto (o(ra=n). This is very awkward and we should expect kaqorw=ntes. The alterations proposed are (a) o(/son for e)s o(/, Stahl, or (b) to insert an infin., as a)nabh=nai after e)bou/lonto (Stein).

th\n cumme/trhsin . . e)/labon—for the periphrasis with labei=n cf. e.g. Soph. Phil. 1078 fro/nhsin labei=n. Presumably the height arrived at by the majority was accepted as correet.

th=s pli/nqou—collective; so in II. 9, 4 li/qois kai\ kera/mw|, cf. e. 74, 1, II. 76 ka/lamos. The meaning is that, having counted the layers, they found the height of the wall by multiplication.

to\ ou)=n metacu\ tou=to—‘this intervening space was oceupied with buildings assigned as quarters to the sentries.’ So Stahl, who views to\ metacu/ as subjeet, and oi)kh/mata as internal accus., as in to\ e)nanti/on o)/noma metwno/mastai I. 122. Steup agrees with this rendering, but he is inelined to retain oi( e(kkai/deka po/des and he regards oi)kh/mata as pred. nom. Another view, which is to be rejected, is that to\ metacu\ tou=to is adverbial accus., ‘in this space,’ and oi)kh/mata subject of w)|kodo/mhto: the constr. is then very strained, and the perf. partic. dianenemhme/na unnatural, implying that the quarters were distributed before they were built.

h)=n cunexh=—I agree with Steup in rendering ‘it was (all) continuous,’ without any definite subject, as in I. 8 plwimw/tera e)ge/neto, and cf. II. 3 a(ma/cas . . e)s tou\s o(dou\s kaqi/stasan, i(/n' a)nti\ tei/xous h)=|, for it was not only the guards' quarters, but the two parallel walls as well that ‘looked like one thick wall.’

dia\ de/ka de\ e)pa/lcewn—‘at an interval of ten,’ i.e. with the plur., ‘at intervals of ten,’ as in Isoer. IV. 46 ai( panhgu/reis dia\ pollou= xro/nou sullegei=sai.

i)soplatei=s—cf. i)somhkh/s, i)sopaxh/s, i)soplhqh/s.

kai\ to\ e)/cw—for kai\ e)s to\ e)/cw, cf. c. 44 peri( tou= me/llontos ma=llon . . h)\ tou= paro/ntos. The first kai/, ‘and,’ is deleted by Herbst, but the predicative oi( au)toi/ can eome in the second clause.

para\ pu/rgon—Thuc. might have written para\ tou\s pu/rgous, but the art. is omitted and the sing used collectively as in II. 13 par' e)/palcin, for which we might have para\ ta\s e)pa/lceis. (This is better than ‘past a tower,’ because of di' au)tw=n.)

mh/ belongs to both partic. and verb.

ai)/sqhsin pare/xoi—cf. II. 4 ai)/sqhsis taxei=a e)pege/neto.

to\n a)ristero\n mo/non po/da—instead of both feet, as would normally have been the case. The plain statement of Thuc. therefore is that by leaving off the right sandal the men expected to get a firmer footing in the mud. (The schol. says u(pede/dento to\n me\n e(/na tw=n podw=n di' a)sfa/leian, to\n de\ e(/teron gumno\n ei)=xon dia\ koufo/thta, and many edd. follow this view; but this is eertainly not what Thuc. says, and it is not a question of what we might think to be the effeet of sandals or no sandals. Thuc. took it that the right foot was meant to get the firmer hold.)

prose/misgon pro\s ta\s e)pa/lceis—I should prefer a comma at prose/misgon, because pro\s ta\s e)pa/lceis does not go closely with the verb, but is added to make kata\ metapu/rgion clear. (As Steup says, the towers had no battlements, so that pro\s ta\s e)pa/lceis does not refer to the wall as a whole. But there is no need to alter the text with him.)

meta\ de\ au)to\n . . a)ne/bainon—this still refers to the yiloi\ dw/deka, and merely repeats the previous a)ne/bainon with the addition of the intention of this party: on reaching the top they were to turn to left and right. The awkward repetition is due to the breaking of the thread of the previous sentence by the words kai\ prw=tos a)ne/bh.

l 29.

a)ntilambano/menos is absolute.

dou=pon—as the rarer word this may be right, but yo/fon is an early variant.

boh/—‘an alarm.’

e)pi\ to\ tei=xos—the garrison troops came out and made for their posts at the wall. See Introd. p. xviii.

o(/ ti h)=n—contrast v. 54 h|dei de\ ou)dei\s o(/poi strateu/ousin. Goodwin, MT. § 674 3

kai\ a(/ma . . prose/balon—this gives another reason why they did not know o)/ ti h)=n to\ deino/n: hence strictly we should have kai\ o(/ti oi( ktl.: cf I. 110 tou=ton de\ dia\ me/geqo/s te tou= e(/lous ou)k e)du/nanto e(lei=n, kai\ a(/ma maximw/tatoi/ ei)si tw=n *ai)gupti/wn oi( e(/leioi.

tw=n *plataiw=n—partitive gen., which Thuc., differing from other authors, often puts between an art. and partic., as I. 9 oi( ta\ safe/stata *peloponnhsi/wn dedegme/noi, ib. 48 tai=s a)/rista tw=n new=n pleou/sais, and below, c. 36, 5.

e)k tou)/mpalin h)/—cf. tou)nanti/on h)/, which generally shows a variant reading h)=|. In Xen. Anab. III. 5, 13 ei)s tou)/mpalin h)\ pro\s *babulw=na is probably incorrect, but the text shows the idiom.

e)qorubou=nto me\n ou)=n—‘thus, remaining at their post (on the wall), they were in a state of excitement. yet not one dared to move from his own station, but they were at a loss to make out what was happening.’ e(autw=n goes back to the subject of e)qorubou=nto. e(autw=n here is to be preferred to au)tw=n: but in c. 91, 2 tou\s *mhli/ous ou)k e)qe/lontas e)s to\ au)tw=n cummaxiko\n i)e/nai e)bou/lonto prosagage/sqai, the pers. pron. may be right, since ipsorum, not suum may be meant.

l. 43

e)xw/roun e)/cw tou= tei/xous—i.e. they descended from the wall on the outer side, supposing that the alarm meant that some force was approaching from Athens. In the darkness and excitement these 300 had not communicated with the men in the towers who had raised the alarm. 44 fruktoi\ pole/mioi—lampa/des polemi/ous dhlou=sai schol.

o(/pws a)safh= . . h)=| kai\ mh\ bohqoi=en—the timehonoured example of interchange of subj and opt after a past tense. Cf. VI. 96 e)ce/krinan o(/pws ei)/hsan fu/lakes kai\ . . . paragi/gnwntai, where no difference of meaning can be detected. See M.T. § 321. Analogous is the interchange of moods in c. 113, 2.

ai)ei/—as Kruger says, this belongs to the partic, and the verb alike.

th=s ta/frou—for this outer trench see c. 24, 2.

para\ to\ tei=xos—‘by the wall,’ on the outside.

kwluth\s gi/gnoito—a favourite periphrasis with Thuc., especially with nouns in -ths; examples occur in ec. 2, 40, 58, 59; with dida/skalos c. 42; with h(gemw/n c. 105.

pa/ntes—meaning oi( plei/ous of § 1.

oi( teleutai=oi—best taken by itself, between commas, i.e. ‘as they were the last,’ like oi( d' . . oi( plei/ous above. But Steup makes oi( teleutai=oi partitive apposition to oi( . . pu/rgwn and joins xalepw=s oi( teleutai=oi k. The men on the towers waited till the rest were safely across.

ta\ gumna/—the unprotected side.

biai/ws—like biaio/teron a)nagago/menoi II. 33, ‘hard pressed.’

oi(=os a)phliw/tou—sc. o)/ntos, as in Soph. OC. 83 w(s e)mou= mo/nhs pe/las, se. ou)/shs. It is very rarely that the partic. is omitted in gen. abs where the noun does not itself suggest a partie. as in Soph. OT. 966 w(=n u(fhghtw=n, sc. o)/ntwn: but the omission is softened in this case by the analogy of the gen. of time, as in nukto/s.

h)\ bore/ou—perhaps a marginal note, intended to fill up the sense of ma=llon. (It has been suggested (1) that bore/ou should be ehanged to eu)/rou, or (2) that ma=llon should be transposed before h)/.) But possibly two propositions are eompressed into one; and the full sense is ‘as it is when the wind is east: it is, in fact, more watery then than when the wind is north.’ (So Chambry, Rév. de phil. '97.)

u(poneifome/nh—ef. Herod II. 13 u(/etai h( xw/rh, Xen. Hell. II. 4, 13 neifo/menoi a)ph=lqon: for u(. is properly ‘being thinly besnowed.’

e)ge/neto . . h( dia/feucis—cf. VII. 41 th\n kata/feucin e)poiou=nto ‘were seeking refuge.’ The idea of success is contained in dia-. (I eannot agree with Classen that e)ge/neto here means ‘proved suceessful’: that sense is confined in Attic to old phrases like e)ge/neto ta\ i(era/, cf. e). ta\ diabath/ria V. 55. In VI. 74 and VIII. 57 gi/gnesqai=merely ‘take place.’ kai\ h( dia/feucis=‘the means of suecessful escape too (as well as the difficult crossing)’ was mainly owed to (i.e. more than to any other cause: meaning that it was a narrow thing).

dia\ tou= xeimw=nos to\ m.—the order as in Herod.; cf. e.g. I. 32 meta\ th=s cummaxi/as th=s ai)th/sews.

th\n pro\s to\ o)/ros—they turned SE. and crossed Cithaeron at a point E. of the road taken by the enemy. It is not meant that they actually touched— *(usia/s t' *)eruqra/s q' ai(\ *kiqairw=nos le/pas ne/rqen katw|kh/kasin. (Eur. Bacchae, 751.)

pleio/nwn—c. 20, 2.

kata\ xw/ran e)ge/nonto—‘went to their station.’ kata\ xw/ran usually with me/nein (certa sede manet); with e)a=n Demosth. XXVII. 60. For gene/sqai kata/ ef. kaq' e(\n g. ‘to concentrate’; th\n xa/lazan eu)xo/menoi mh\ kaq' e(autou\s g. Demosth. IX. 33.

e)spe/ndonto—sponda\s e)zh/toun poiei=sqai schol. With the internal accus. a)nai/resin cf. c. 109 a)naxwrhsin e)spei/santo a)/pasi.

pro\s tou\s *)aqhnai/ous—from passages like V. 44 pro\s tou\s *)a. ma=llon ei)=xon th\n gnw/mhn it is clear that w(/ste cumbai/nein does not govern these words, but is an epexegesis.

Cleomenes and Pleistoanax were sons of the famous Pausanias. In 445 B.C., when Euboea and Megara revolted from Athens, Pleistoanax had invaded Attica, but had retreated when Pericles returned from Euboea: he was exiled for this, and his young son Pausanias reigned in his stead.

newte/rou ‘too young.’ The

de/ after patro/s is not justified by the constr., since no description of Cleomenes has preceded; hence Krüger suggests that e)pi/tropos has fallen out after e)/ti. There may, however, be a slight anacoluthon.

[kai\]—ei)/ ti e). is clearly added as an explanation to ta\ . . tetmhme/na.

meta\ th\n deute/ran—i.e. that of 430 B.C., see last n. on c. 1. The present invasion is the fourth.

e)pime/nontes—equivalent to prosdokw=ntes, hence fut. infin.: the aor. inf. in c. 2 expresses result, not expectation; cf. Soph. Trach. 1176 mh\ e)pimei=nai tou)mo\n o)cu=nai sto/ma.

e)pech=lqon with te/mnontes, ‘pressed forward with,’ not ‘over-ran.’

kata\ cullo/gous g.—these meetings were, of course, informal.

o(/mws—in spite of the guarantee; cf. c. 49, 1 n. (Vollgraff brackets as a dittography from bwmou/s.) kaqi/zein e)pi\ bwmo/n, a/nasth/sas (=a)nasth=nai pei/sas), and katati/qesqai e)s are technical in this connexion. With a)nasth/sas w)/ste mh\ a)dikh=sai cf. a)nasth/santes e)f' w)=| mhde\n kako\n poih/sousin I. 126.

me/xri ou(= without a)/n, as in Herod. (me/xri ou(= is not nsed in verse). M.T. § 620.

prosekth/sato—the common object, as usual, accommodated to the partic., pe/myas.

h(me/rai de\ . . e(alwkui/a|—lit. ‘M. now reekoned seven days’; cf. I. 13, 4, Herod. II. 145 *(hrakle/i+ o(/sa fasi\ e)=nai e)/tea e)s *)/amasin, Xen. Hell. II. 1, 27 h(me/ra h)=n pe/mpth e)piple/ousi toi=s *aqhnai/ois. The insertion of ma/lista even with small numbers is a mannerism of Thuc.

e)k tw=n paro/ntwn—‘under the circumstances.’

a)ndrw=n depends on to\ a)fu/lakton, equivalent to tw=n; the gen. with neut. adj. or partic. as noun is a common constr. with Thuc.

kai\ pa/nu—‘most certainly,’ ‘undoubtedly,’ as in II. 11 kai\ pa)nu e)lpi/zein: here in contrast with ei/ko\s de/ . .

kai\ h(mw=n h( a)lkh\ t. ma/lista ou)=sa—the version ‘where our strength chiefly lies’ is open to the objections (1) that the fleet was not stronger thau the Athenian fleet at Lesbos; that could not for a moment be maintained after Phormio's exploits; and (2) that the strength of the Pel. fleet, being unknown to A., could be no reason why there should be polu\ to\ a)fu/lakton on the part of the enemy. Another rendering is ‘where defence happens to be in the main our rôle,’ but I cannot find that a)lkh/ is ever used for ‘the defensive’ in opposition to ‘attack’; it means, on the contrary, ‘defence or resistance’ in opposition to ‘flight or submission’—something positive, not negative. In spite of the objections, the first rendering is prob. right; the reasoning that Thuc. puts into the mouth of speakers is not always exact: the strength of the Pel. is not intended to be compared with that of the A., and should have been referred to iu an independent sentence, but the love of antithesis has led to the connexion of e)kei=noi/ te . . kai\ h(mw=n. tugxa)nei ou)=sa marks the circumstance as unusual, and the real comparison is between the military aud naval strength of Alcidas.

w(s—‘conscious that.’

Reading

to\ kaino\n tou= pole/mou lit. ‘the strangeness of war is just this sort of thing’; i.e. the carelessness of the victor with the corollary of a sudden and wholly unexpected attack. In fula/ssoito and e)norw=n only the carelessness of the victor is kept in view, but that the corollary is included in to\ toiou=ton is proved (1) by the vague inclusive pron. in place of tou=to, (2) by to\ kaino/n, which could not mean to\ a)fu/lakton merely, but must include to\ a)prosdo/khton. (Steup conjectures to\ koino/n, ‘where war shows itself notoriously impartial’: this makes the sentence easier to understand, but I do not think kaino/n impossible Many edd. see in to\ kaino/n a reference only to sudden attack—to\ prospesei=n a)/fnw. I do not understand how kai\ toi=s polemi/ois e)norw=n can be explained on this view. to\ keno/n, ‘the vanity,’ is as tolerable as to\ kaino/n in itself, but is more likely to be a mistake for to\ kaino/n than vice versa.)

o(/—governed by fula/ssoito and e)norw=n, or perhaps—in strictness—au)to/ is supplied from it to e)norw=n, for the position of te does not make this impossible.

to\ plei=ston th=s gnw/mhs ei)=xe—‘strongly inclined to,’ ‘regarded it as decidedly best,’ like the Herodotean plei=stos gnw/mhn ei)mi/.

*mutilh/nhs u(sterh/kei—‘too late for’ means here ‘too late to help,’ as in Xen. Ages 2, 1 w(s u(sterh/seie th=s patri/dos.

e)s th\n *)/efeson—though part of the Athenian empire, E. could not hinder the fleet from entering the harbour.

*sami/wn—the Samian exiled oligarchs living on the coast opposite Samos; cf. c. 19.

ou) kalw=s th\n *(ella/da e)leuqerou=n—that she was the Liberator of Greece was the claim of Sparta in the war, her a)ci/wsis th=s a)reth=s (I. 69). The most striking comment on this claim comes in Xen. Hel, III. 5, 13, in the speech of a Theban at Athens thirty years after this time: ou(\s u(mw=n a)pe/sthsan faneroi/ ei)sin e/chpathko/tes: a)nti\ ga\r e)leuqeri/as diplh=n au)toi=s doulei/an paresxh/kasin.

ei) die/fqeiren—(1) ei) in the sense of o(/ti or e)pei/, (2) for die/fqeiren, where we expect diafqei/rei, see M. T. § 691.

xei=ras a)ntairome/nous—so Herod, VII. 209, Xen. Cyr. V. 4, 26 e)a)n tis o(/pla a)ntai/rhtai/ soi.

o(rw=ntes ga/r—showing how it came that Alcidas had so many prisoners. The connexion is a little loose.

mh\ . . parabalei=n—the inf. appears to be fut,; the mh/ is produced by the preceding neg. and might have been omitted; the constr. is unusual. paraba/llw intrans., as with dia-, e)s-, etc.

th=s *)eruqrai/as—see c. 29.

kai\ w(/s—although, by the defenceless condition of Ionia, it was easy to stay.

a(/ma with reference to paraple/ontes.

au)ta/ggeloi de/—it is better, with Classen, to regard a)teixi/stou . . po/leis as a parenthesis, and this sentence as a direct continuation from kai\ pantaxo/qen.

ou)ke/ti e)n katalh/yei e)fai/neto—sc. o( *)alki/das, ‘was clearly no longer to be caught’; cf. VI. 60 w(s ou)k e)n pau/lh| e)fai/neto (to\ pra=gma). (I do not venture to disturb this traditional explanation; but I think it possible that Paches is the subject of e)fai/neto, and that e)n k. e). means ‘was clearly likely to catch him’; cf. c. 15 e)n karpou= cugkomidh=| h)=san.)

metew/rois—sc. tai=s *)alki/dou nausi/n.

ou)damou= e)gkatalhfqei=sai . . parasxei=n—‘they were not caught any where and (so) compelled to entrench themselves and to cause the Athenians the trouble of guarding and blockading them.’ For pare/xein with words denoting trouble cf. VII. 70 e)/kplhci/n te kai\ a)poste/rhsin th=s a)koh=s pare/xein, and pra/gmata p.

oi( me\n . . oi( de/—partitive apposition.

e)pikou/rous *)arka/dwn—i.e. Arcadian misqofo/roi. They served as mercenaries already in the Persian wars, and are familiar as such in the expedition of the Ten Thousand. The mercenaries must have been in the service of Pissuthnes.

e)n diateixi/smati—a place divided by a wall from the rest of the town. diateixi/zein is ‘to separate by a wall.’ With the force from Pissuthnes came also the pro-Persian party from Colophon, which was now part of the citizen body cf Notium.

u(pecelqo/ntes tou/tous—for the accus. Kiuger quotes Eurip. frag. Alcmene o(/mws a)gw=na to/nde dei= m' u(pekdramei=n.

tw=n: the MS. to\n is a form of mistake that is frequent in similar passages in MSS. of Xenophon.

o( me/n after prokalesa/menos involves an anacoluthon, like that of Il. VI. 509 o( d' a)glai/hfi pepoiqw\s | r(i/mfa e) gou=na fe/rei; but it is not usual in Homer. Here we have a sing. nom. followed by two contrasted subjects. For the opposite form, a plur. nom. followed by only one subject, cf. Il. III. 211 a)/mfw d' e(zome/nw gerarw/teros h)=en *)odusseu/s.

prosdexome/nwn—the subst. to be supplied, as in I. 3 e)pagome/nwn au)tou/s, II. 52 e)napoqnh|sko/ntwn (sc. a)nqrw/pwn). Cf. c. 55, 1.

oi)kista/s—the ‘oecists’ or ‘founders’ settled the government and started the new colony, as was usual. Cf. VI. 5 oi)kisth\s geno/menos katw/|kise *kama/rinan.

toi=s de\ loipoi=s—the dat. of accompaniment, frequent with words like strato/s and nau=s.

gnw/mas e)poiou=nto—‘offered various opinions’ or ‘made proposals,’ in the Assembly, of course.

e)pikalou=ntes—anacoluthon, as though a personal constr. had preceded. Cf. II. 53 qew=n fo/bos ou)dei\s a)pei=rge, to\ me\n kri/nontes, VI. 24 e)/rws e/ne/pese . . eu)elpi/des o)/ntes, Eur. Hec. 971 ai)dw/s m' e)/xei . . tugxa/nousa.

th/n te a)/llhn . . kai\ proscunela/bonto—(1) they reproached them with revolting under specially grave circumstances, ou)k a)rxo/menoi; (2) their rage was largely due to the appearance of a Pel. fleet on the Ionian coast. As the sentence stands it is illogical, since th/n te a)/llhn should be followed by something like kai\ o(/ti ta\s nau=s e)phga)gonto. (As to Classen's insertion of kai/ after a)po/stasin—on whieh there has been some subtle argument—we may regard it as possible, but scarcely necessary.) For the change from partic. to finite verb cf. V. 61 boulo/menoi a)/llws te . . kai\ o(/mhroi h)=san. It is frequent in Herod.

proscunela/bonto—for this reading ef. IV. 47 cunela/bonto tou= toiou/tou ou)x h(/kista oi( strathgoi\ kata)dhloi o)/ntes. The emphasis is, of course, on the partic. (tolmh/sasai), as often.

ou)k e)la/xiston is adverbial. The other reading, proscuneba/leto, ‘contributed,’ to\ e). (sc. me/ros) th=s o(rmh=s being object,—cf. Ath. Pol. 19 suneba/lleto ou)k e/la/ttw moi=ran th=s o(rmh=s—is defended by IV. 25 ai)/tion de\ h)=n oi( *lakedaimo/nioi proeipo/ntes and VIII. 9 ai)/tion de\ e)ge)neto . . oi\ polloi\ ou)k ei)do/tes, but the present instance goes further.

ou) ga\r a)po\ braxei/as dianoi/as—‘it was no small design, they thought, that had led them to revolt,’ viz. the design of bringing about a revolt of Ionia with the aid of the Pel. fleet.

a)/ggelon—pred. to trih/rh.

meta/noia/ tis—tis is often added thus to words expressing feelings that rise half involuntarily, as with r(w/mh, o)/knos, kath/feia (‘dejection’), feidw/ (‘reluctance’).

w)mo\n . . ai)ti/ous—in the tragic style, and unusually rhythmical for Thuc. (pe/feuge to\ ei)=dos, says Hermogenes): the sentence breaks into two corresponding halves after po/lin, me/ga being elided and h)\ ou), of course, counting as one long. ma=llon h)\ ou)—h)/ implies a negative, and any sentence implying a neg. is apt to be strengthened by an expressed neg. (M.T. § 815): cf. II. 62 ou)d' ei)ko\s xalepw=s fe/rein ma=llon h)\ ou) . . o)ligwrh=sai.

pre/sbeis—c. 28.

tw=n *)aqhnai/wn—the order as in c. 22, 5.

pareskeu/asan — ‘got them to.’

oi( e)n te/lei are the ‘government,’ i.e., presumably, the Strategi, who, in time of war, could have a special meeting of the Ecclesia summoned.

au)=qis gnw/mas proqei=nai—‘allow a fresh debate’: to re-open a matter that had been settled in a recent meeting of the Ecclesia seems to have rendered the person responsible to impeachment; but the Ecclesia, as the sovereign power, could by a majority of course do anything, provided that the Prytanies and the president of the meeting consented to submit a proposal for discussion. (The evidence on the point is doubtful; but the account here given reconciles the various passages that bear on it.)

e)/ndhlon h)=n—the personal constr., esp. common with dh=los.

tinas—‘persons’: after tou\s e)n te/lei we should expect au)tou/s; but the speakers, rather than the officials, are referred to A special Assembly (su/gklhtos e)kklhsi/a) was summoned for the purpose. (G. Gilbert, B. zur innern Geschichte Athens, 142, assigns the debates on Mytilene to the end of the official year 428-7. It is probable that Cleon was in that year Strategus, having replaced Lysicles the probatopw/lhs, who had been killed in Caria in the winter. Busolt, however, places the debates in the first prytany of the following year, 427-6, wheu Cleon and those like him were replaced in the strategia by Nicias and Laches, men strongly opposed to Cleon. In either case, it is obvious that party-feeling must have run very high just at this time.

th\n prote/ran—sc. gnw/mhn, ‘proposal,’ from gnw=mai above:

nika=n is ‘to carry,’ as in nika=| e(/teron yh/fisma *filokra)ths, Aeschin, III. 63. (I do not think that the sense of gnw/mh shifts here from ‘views’ to ‘decree,’ and that consequently th=| prote/ra| ‘on the previous day’ should be read.)

biaio/tatos—this is the first time that Thuc. mentions Cleon, though he had been rising for some time. The views of him expressed by ancient authors, whether as politician or as orator, are almost uniformly unfavourable. As regards Thuc.'s opinion of him, and the following speech, see Introd. p. xxxvii.

a)dee\s kai\ a)nepibou/leuton give the same thing from two sides: you neither fear your neighbour nor cause him to fear you.

o(/ ti a)\n . . a(ma/rthte h)\ . . e)ndw=te—we know too little of the working of the Athenian empire to specify acts of clemency on the part of Athens. From what we do know we should say that Athens was severe enough; but we must remember that the standard of the times was very different from ours: any right that Athens did not take from her allies she regarded as a privilege granted to them.

oi)/ktw| is parallel to lo/gw| peisqe/ntes; supply au)toi=s to e)ndw=te.

e)pikindu/nws . . e)s u(ma=s—the emphasis is on this: hence the disloeation of the order. Tr. ‘you think that such weakness does not . . bring danger to you.’

ou)k e)s th\n . . xa/rin—‘without gaining the gratitude’; they take a concession as a sign of weakness.

turanni/da e)/xete th\n a)rxh/n—repeating words attributed to Pericles at II. 63.

kai\ pro\s . . a)rxome/nous—paralleI to turanni/da, the constr. with pro/s (after a)rxh/) like fili/a or po/lemos pro/s.

oi(/—very weakly supported by MS. evidence. There is a similar case at IV. 10, where the MSS. give to\ duse/mbaton h(me/teron nomi/zw: meno/ntwn me\n h(mw=n cu/mmaxon gi/gnetai, but Dionysius quotes the passage with o(\ meno/ntwn etc. Without the rel., we must assume an epexegesis of a)/kontas a)rxome/nous with asyndeton.

e)c w(=n . . perige/nhsqe—for e)c e)kei/nwn a)/, internal accus. to p., ‘as a consequence of the superiority you have established over them by strength (hinting at the successive reductions to the status of tributary subjects) and not by their willing obedience.’

eu)/noia as Arist. Eth. IX. 5, 3 says, di' a)reth\n kai\ e)piei/keia/n tina gi/netai, o(/tan tw| fanh=| kalo/s tis h)\ a)ndrei=os.

w(=n a)\n do/ch| pe/ri—for peri\ e)kei/nwn a(\ a(\n do/ch|, ‘as regards measures that we have passed.’ Thus the neut. nom. a(/ is here attracted as in VII. 67 bla/ptesqai a)f' w(=n h(mi=n pareskeu/astai. In (a(\) a)\n do/ch| the allusion is to yhfi/smata passed in the Ecclesia.

xei/rosi no/mois . . a)ku/rois—it has been thought that there is an allusion here to definite no/moi that forbade a psephism to be reconsidered, perhaps within some fixed period (cf. n. on c. 36, 5); but the reference seems more general. (The objection that Cleon would, if there were such an allnsion, definitely threaten a grafh\ parano/mwn has not much force, for (1) Thuc. does not deal in the technicalities of Attic legal procedure, which were not of sufficiently ‘universal’ interest for him, with his view of history; and (2) in VI. 14 sqq., where Nicias alludes to some rules about the re-discussion of a psephism, Alcibiades, in his rejoinder, makes no capital out of the rules at all—does not even allude to the point.) Arnold thought that the psephism under revision is itself meant under no/moi, and that the confusion is meant to be intentional on Cleon's part. It is best, I think, to consider the passage intentionally vague and rhetorical: revision of psephisms leads easily to revision of laws in a democracy. This general application is borne out by a)maqi/a te ktl., which would be an odd addition to a clause containing a precise reference.

krei/sswn e)sti/n—the personal constr.: ‘it is better for a state to have.’ (This explanation is strongly supported by w)felimw/teron (sc. po/lei) and a)/meinon oi)kou=si ta\s po/leis. Classen says ‘is stronger’; but the point is what is good for a state, not what a state can do.)

a)maqi/a meta\ swfrosu/nhs—‘ignorance when combined with self-restraint,’ no doubt a hit at the pepaideume/noi, and the sentiment so outrageous to an educated Athenian, that we must assume that it was really uttered by Cleon in substance. For the evil results of a)maqi/a note the following passage (Euripides, frag.): gnw/mais ga\r a)ndro\s eu)= me\n oi)kou=ntai po/leis eu)= d' oi)=kos, ei)/s t' au)= po/lemon i)sxu/ei me/ga: sofo\n ga\r e(\n bou/leuma ta\s polla\s xe/ras nika=| su\n o)/xlw| d' a)maqi/a plei=ston kako/n. swfrosu/nh and a)kolasi/a are often contrasted in the language of popular philosophy: eu(rh/sete th\n me\n a)kolasi/an . . tw=n kakw=n ai)ti/an gignome/nhn, th\n de\ swfrosu/nhn tw=n a)gaqw=n, Isocr. de pace § 119. In oi(/ te faulo/teroi ktl. we meet a sentiment that is frequent in Euripides.

pro/s—‘as compared with.’

tw=n te no/mwn sofw/teroi—hence they despise the laws: a reference back to mhde\ gnwso/meqa etc.

tw=n te ai)ei\ . . perigi/gnesqai—the te . . te puts the contempt for laws and the opposition to all counsel on the same footing as joint parts of their conduct. perigi/gnesqai, ‘to get the better’ of it, by opposing it.

w(s e)n a)/llois mei/zosin . . gnw/mhn—‘as though they could not find any greater subject on which to display their talent’; the subject in debate is just the one, they think, on which they are qualified to give an opinion. (Cf. VII. 64 ou)k a)\n e)n a)/llw| ma=llon kairw=| a)podeica)menos.)

a)dunatw/teroi de\ . . lo/gon—in form exactly parallel to the preceding clause; but tou= kalw=s ei)po/ntos is certainly possessive gen. to lo/gon, together with which it refers to tw=n ai)ei\ legome/nwn e)s to\ koino/n above. To a)dunatw/teroi supply h)\ oi( cunetw/teroi.

a)po\ tou= i)/sou—‘fair,’ free from personal bias, cf. c. 42; more often ‘on equal terms.’ For a)gwnisth/s as a ‘rhetorical prize-fighter,’ Bloomfield cites several exx. 34

o)rqou=ntai—‘have a prosperous course’; cf. particularly II. 60 po/lin o)rqoume/nhn )( sfallome/nhn. Here o)rqou=ntai ta\ plei/w corresponds to polla\ sfa/llousi ta\s po/leis above. There is an exactly similar passage in Soph. Antig. 673-6. (The rendering ‘judge rightly’ is certainly wrong.)

w(/s—for ou(/tws, usually only with kai/, ou)de/, mhde/, in prose.

para\ do/can—‘contrary to our opinion,’ not, as in the other cases in Thuc., ‘unexpectedly.’ (The conjecture para\ to\ do/can, ‘contrary to what has been decided,’ is plausible; but I agree with Bloomfield that this is not really in point here: it is not borne out by tw=n ai)ei\ legome/nwn . . perigi/gnesqai and tou= kalw=s ei\po/ntos me/myasqai lo/gon.)

to\ pa/nu dokou=n—‘the universal opinion of men’: he must try to prove a paradox. (According to another view, the allusion is to the psephism. But (1) to\ pa/nu dokou=n, ‘what is generally agreed upon,’ would hardly be a true description of the vote; and (2) to\ do/can would certainly be natural.)

ke/rdei—a suggestion of bribery: the charge was a common one against public men, and was often true. The contrast in

h)\ . . h)/ is between an opponent who wants to show his skill in oratory and one who is bribed to mislead.

e)kponh/: sas is co-ordinate with pisteu/sas, and e)pairo/menos gives the motive that prompts him e)kponei=n.

to\ eu)prepe\s tou= lo/gou—‘what is plausible in the words.’ The whole of this section is a hit at the bad side of the new rhetoric: it is piquant, because Cleon himself indulges in rhetoric freely; this elaborate comparison to an a)gw/n of rival rhetoricians is itself full of it.

qeatai\ me\n . . e)/rgwn—‘spectators of words and hearers of deeds’ is an artificial way of saying: you are content to take the facts from what the orators say, and look on at the debates, thus inverting the natural order of things at an a)gw/n, in which one would watch the athletes' deeds and listen to the literary men's words: so badly do you, who are at once the directors and the people attending, manage the a)gw=nes. (The explanations usually given of this passage do not seem to me to give an intelligible meaning to the whole: (a) kakw=s a)gwnoqetei=n does not mean ‘to be wrong in instituting a contest,’ but ‘to do so in the wrong way’; cf. the second and third failings—a)pata=sqai a)/ristoi and zhtou=ntes a)/llo te ktl.: all indicative of a topsy-turvy mind and (b) only with the latter meaning—which is a natural one—does oi(/tines ktl. given an intelligible reason.)

w(s dunata\ gi/gnesqai—‘as practicable’: sc. o)/nta, cf. VI. 40 tou\s lo/gous w(s e)/rga duname/nous krinei=.

ta\ de\ p. h)/dh—sc. skopou=ntes.

ou) to\ . . a)kousqe/n ‘not taking what has been done as more trustworthy through having seen it, than what you have heard (about it).’ (It has been objected to o)/yei that we need a)kroa/sei or a)koh=| to contrast with it; but the whole clause corresponds to w(s dunata\ gi/gnesqai, and = w(s to\ a)kousqe\n pisto/teron o)\n h)\ to\ o)fqe/n; to\ a)kousqe/n itself contains the contrast to o)/yei: instead of saying to\ o)fqe/n, Thuc. says to\ drasqe/n in order to introduce again the contrast between e)/rga and lo/goi —drasqe/n and a)kousqe/n.)

e)pitimhsa/ntwn—the readiness of speakers to criticize adversely the action of public men, if opponents, is often insisted on; but it is odd that Cleon, who was ever ready to censure, should talk so.

meta\ kaino/thtos—equivalent to a dat, of cause, as I. 32 mh\ meta\ kaki/as, do/chs de\ ma=llon a(marti/a|: cf. c. 42, 1.

a)pata=sqai a)/ristoi— sc. o)/ntes, co-ordinate with kakw=s a)gwnoqetou=ntes, the second way in which you are ai)/tioi: eu)para)gwgos ei)=, qwpeuo/meno/s te xai/reis ka)capatw/menos, Aristoph. Eq. 1115.

meta\ dedokimasme/nou—sc. lo/gou, ‘when an approved argument is stated’; cune/pesqai means ‘go with the speaker.’ (Another way is to take cune/pesqai meta/ closely together, ‘to follow the lead of’: I prefer the former.)

dou=loi o)/ntes—the whole down to a)pobhso/mena is epexegetic of a)/ristoi (o)/ntes).

kai\ ma/lista me/n—co-ordinate with dou=loi o)/ntes. boulo/menoi would have made the sentence more symmetrical, but cf. already Iliad IX. 656 oi( de\ e(/kastos e(lw\n . . i)/san.

a)ntagwnizo/menoi toi=s toiau=ta le/gousi—i.e. toi=s toiou/tois r(h/torsi, who applaud that one of their number who happens to be speaking; ‘vying with speakers who use such arguments,’ viz. a)/topa. (It is objected to toiau=ta that it cannot be referred to ta\ a)/topa only, after what has preceded. But it is to be noted that u(pero/ptai de\ tw=n ei)wqo/twn is merely parenthetical: had there been a me/n after dou=loi, the objection would have been serious.)

th=| gnw/mh|—not to lag behind the rest ‘in insight.’ To understand ‘plan’ or ‘purpose’ of the speaker (gnw/mh| governed by a)kolouqh=sai) is not so good, because it is the external form, not the meaning, that rivets their attention.

o)ce/ws with le/gontos, because le/gonto/s ti cannot here mean ‘says something important or sensible.’ On the other hand, o)ce/ws, when taken with le/gontos, is rendered ‘shrewdly,’ ‘cleverly’; but (1) o)cu/, adj., would be natural, and (2) it seems that le/gein o)ce/ws means not ‘speak shrewdly’ but ‘speak rapidly’; it is only with words denoting mind that bradu/s, o)cu/s mean ‘slow,’ ‘quick’ of wit. I should prefer to render ‘when any one is speaking rapidly.’

proepaive/sai — sc. dokei=n, generally understood ‘to approve’ it before it is uttered, but perhaps ‘to be first with their approval.’

pro/qumoi ei)=nai—this may depend on a)ntaywnizo/menoi or, more probably, on dokei=n, but, in either ease, (ei)=nai) bradei=s does not give very good sense, and can hardly be excused on the ground that the main emphasis falls on pro/qumoi ei)=nai; for—to mention only one objection—proaisqe/sqai and pronoh=sai are plainly meant to be equal in importance. We require ei)wqo/tes to make sound sense. The best solution proposed is to consider kai/ before proaisqe/sqai and ei)=nai as spurious: the whole would then be closely connected with proepaine/sai.

zhtou=nte/s te—again going back to ai)/tioi d' u(mei=s, ‘seeking something different—one might almost say— from the world in which we live;’ dreamers.

a(plw=s te—a resumption of the substance of the whole sentence.

sofistw=n qeatai=s kaqhme/nois—‘men sitting as spectators at a display of sophists,’ as shown in the Protagoras, for example.

oi(/tines—the dat. antecedent omitted. Distinguish between oi(/tines mh/ and oi(/tines ou) below.

nh=son . . meta\ teixw=n—thus secure against enemies. The contrast to the previous sentence is stated in inverse order: subjection—compulsion; security—freedom. This is a common arrangement of clauses in Thuc.

e)n w|—of their condition.

kai\ au)toi/—independently of our help.

e)pane/sthsan ma=llon h)\ a)pe/sthsan—an armed rising contrasted with a secession; but the application of the contrast to the circumstances of Lesbos is not exact, since e)pana/stasis implies a dominant power, which Athens ex hypothesi was not.

me/n ge—‘secession anyhow,’ whatever be the truth about e)pana/stasis. For the suppression of the de/-clause after this combination cf. Aristoph. Ach. 154 tou=to me/n g' h)/dh safe/s. (Append. i., Neil, Aristoph. Equites).

bi/aio/n ti pasxo/ntwn—this is far-fetched; and the implied contrast about e)pana/stasis would too obviously not hold: hence the statement of it is suppressed.

kai/toi—‘surely.’

kaq' au(tou/s—‘by themselves,’ not meta\ tw=n polemiwta/twn sta/ntes.

ktw/menoi—probably conative.

para/deigma de\ au)toi=s—as para/deigma means example, both as a warning and as an encouragement, it might have been applied to both clauses with ou)/te; but the second has taken an independent form, cf. c. 96, 3.

tw=n pe/las—‘of others.’

ta\ deina/—often of the dangers of war.

to\ me/llon—‘the future’ )( parou=sa.

makro/tera . . boulh/sews—‘having come to hope for what was beyond their strength, but less than their ambition.’ Clearly what they hoped for was the destruction of Athenian power—e)zh/thsan h(ma=s diafqei=rai. But how was this ‘less than they wanted’? what more could they want? Probably we have here a sample of Cleon's exaggeration and abuse, and no definite meaning is to be looked for. It is enough for his purpose that the Lesbians had wanted to revolt sooner than they did (c. 2). (Herbst's explanation, Zu Thuk. p. 82, that makro/tera means the power of Mytilene, and e)la/ssw that of Athens, seems far-fetched, and his rendering of th=s boulh/sews is scarcely intelligible.)

e)n w)=|—‘the moment that.’

ga/r—justifying the charge that they put might before right. They had suffered no wrong, and they chose a time when Athens was in difficulties.

ai(=s a)\n . . e)/lqh|—the clause forms the object to tre/pein. ma/lista kai\ di' e)laxi/stou, ‘most fully and most suddenly,’ refers to the moment just alluded to in e)n w(=| w)|h/qhsan; it was kairo\s w(s ou)/pw pro/teron, c. 13, 3. The revolt was not really the unpremeditated thing that Cleon represents it to have been. The

a)prosdo/khtos eu)praci/a refers to the difficulties in which Athens was. (The objection to di' e)laxi/stou that the change of fortune on the part of the Mytilenaeans was not sudden, but was gradually brought about by the events of the war, rests on a confusion of facts and the rhetorical presentment of them.)

ta\ de\ polla\ . . eu)tuxou=nta a)sfale/stera—‘in most things prosperity according to calculation is safer than prosperity that is a surprise.’ It is an extraordinary explanation that makes ta\ polla/, after the schol., adverbial accus., and kata\ l. eu)tuxou=nta equivalent to ta\ . . eu)tuxou=nta. The constr. intended is clearly a)sfale/stera/ (e)sti) ta\ polla\ eu)tuxou=nta=ei) eu)tuxei=: cf. II. 13 (e)/fh) ta\ polla\ kratei=sqai. And there is no doubt about the reading being right: eu)tuxi/a, a stable condition, is in contrast with eu)praci/a. a single event (cf. I. 33); a calm life unmarred by misfortune constituted eu)tuxi/a (cf. II. 44). Of course para\ do/can (eu)tuxou=nta) gives a different and paradoxical meaning to eu)tuxi/a. This doctrine of Cleon seems to be based upon the philosophy of life professed by his opponent Nicias. Cf. V. 16, of Nicias, diasw/sasqai th\n eu)tuxi/an.

w(s ei)pei=n r(a=|on—‘almost more easily.’

xrh=n de/—they would never have gone so far in their indulgence in u(/bris had we long ago kept a tighter hand on them.

mhde\n diafero/ntws tw=n a)/llwn—the adverb (EM) is better than diafe/rontas, and has, at any rate, as much MS. support as xrh=n just before, and it has, in addition, the support of the text of the schol. and of Dio Cassins.

kai\ a)/llws — ‘in other cases as well,’ making the application general.

toi=s me\n o)li/gois . . to\n de\ dh=mon—the oligarchical government had caused the revolt.

oi(=s g' e)ch=n—as this sentence refers especially to the dh=mos, it would be better, perhaps, to put pa/ntes . . e)pe/qento in a parenthesis—unless, with Stahl, we understand pa/ntes (oi/ tou= dh/mou) and o(moi/ws (toi=s o)li/gois).

pa/lin e)n th=| po/lei ei)=nai—‘reinstated in their rights.’ For the sense of po/lis cf. IV. 106 po/lew/s te. sterisko/menoi.

bebaio/teron—sc. tou= meq' h(mw=n kindu/nou.

tw=n te cumma/xwn ske/yasqe . . ti/na oi)/esqe o(/ntina ou)—(1) the old explanation of this passage (given by Goller, for instance) was that ti/na oi)/esqe o(/ntina ou/ was equivalent to e(/kaston. c. 46, 2, where ti/na oi)/esqe h(/ntina ou) is independent, is strongly against this. Classen said that oi)/esqe merely repeats ske/yasqe owing to the length of the sentence; and this is accepted by subsequent edd. Classen's view involves also an anacoluthon, since ske/yasqe would be followed by ti/s o)/stis ou) with ind., not by ti/na o(/ntina ou). Against this view is to he urged (a) the complication of the constr. introduced by ske/yasqe, (b) the gen. tw=n te cumma/xwn, which, as Classen says, depends not only on toi=s . . a)posta=si, but also on ti/na oi)/esqe o(/ntina ou), so that Thuc. had a clear view of the constr. from the start. It is not unlikely that ske/yasqe is meant to be parenthetical. (2) ti/s o)/stis ou) is treated as a single word.

paqei/n—a second subject to h)=|.

a)pokekinduneu/setai—‘we shall find exposed to utmost peril.’

th=s e)/peita proso/dou, di' h(\n i)sxu/omen—the relative clause applies to th=s proso/dou only, the revenue generally, not to th=s e)/peita p., the future revenue; hence e)kei=qen or e)petei/ou has been conjectured for e)/peita, which the schol. already had in the text. Neither conjecture wholly removes the difficulty; and so di' h(\n isxu/omen is thought by some to have been brought in here from the very similar passage in c. 46, 3. It would be better to read i)sxu/somen, ‘through which we may support our power.’

to\ loipo/n is pleonastic after e)/peita, and perhaps belongs to di' h(\n i)sxu/somen.

sterh/sesqe—‘will have to go without.’

to/te—supply diemaxesa/mhn (the same idiom in I. 86 and VI. 60). But mh\ lu/ein ta\ p., which came into question only in the second meeting, causes some difficulty. We must assume either (1) that the sentence is developed as it proceeds, mh\ lu/ein ta\ p. not being supplied with to/te, or else, (2) that prw=ton (diemaxesa/mhn) means that Cleon had already in the previous meeting seen that there would be an agitation for revision. (I prefer the second solution. Brevity would excuse prodedogme/na as applied to a vote to be passed. The voting at the first meeting must have been close; and c. 36, 3 suggests anxiety about getting it carried out. Krüger had noticed that to/te prw=ton is unsatisfactory according to the usual explanation: I think there must be a point in prw=ton, as in Aristoph. Eq. 339 prw=ta diamaxou=mai.）

e)pieikei/a|—‘generosity,’ ‘consideration for others.’

tou\s o(moi/ous—variously rendered as ‘like minded,’ or ‘situated as we are,’ i.e. equals, not subjects. For the latter, it is claimed that e)c a)na/gkhs points to unwilling subjects; and sentiment so arrogant might well be attributed to Cleon.

e(/cousi . . a)gw=na—sarcastic, implying ‘if they must have their a)gw/n’; cf. c. 38, 4.

kai\ mh/ — there is implied prohibition, hence mh/ The choice of the constr. is no doubt influenced by the previous kai\ mh/.

to\ paqei=n eu)=—the excellent return they will get is a bribe from the Mytilenaeans. It appears that a few years later Cleon himself was said to have made something out of the troubles of Mytilene.

kai\ to\ loipo/n—‘in the future as in the past.’

o(moi/ws . . u(poleipome/nous—the conjecture o(moi/ws seems to be clearly right. Even when o(moi/ous is rendered ‘consistent’ and taken as pred, with u(poleipome/nous, it remains very awkward that e)pithdei/ous and polemi/ous imply h(mi=n, whereas o(moi/ous must imply e(autou/s. The previous o(moi/ous used in a quite different sense in this series of closely connected sentences is against the adj. o(moi/ws te kai\ ou)de\n h(=sson is a Thucydidean way of saying ‘just as must as before.’

peiqo/menoi me/n—the steps of the argument, which is difficult to follow to a)ndragaqi/zesqai and has given rise to much discussion, are as follows: (1) if you punish M., you will act as Justice and Interest alike demand; (2) it may be said that Justice is on their side and against you (ei) ga/r); (3) even if it is, you must follow the dictates of Interest (ei) de\ dh/).

ou) xariei=sqe—because they will still hate you.

dikaiw/sesqe—‘you will punish yourselves’ (instead of them) by proclaiming to all that you have no right to exert authority. ei) ga/r—ga/r does not introduce the reason for the preceding statement, but = ‘it is true that,’ as in c. 43, 5 (Stahl in Rhein. Mus. 1901). ou) xrew/n is acc. abs. On the form of condition (cf. I. 38, VI. 92) Goodwin points out that it is “a perfectly natural combination, each part having its proper force.” If they were justified, you must have no right to your empire: ei) de\ dh\ . . kola/zesqai (mid ) proceeds on this assumption. If you persist in ruling (tou=to dra=n), even though you have no right to do so, then your interests require that you punish them, as you have others. The only alternative (h)/=‘otherwise’) is, you must give up empire; you must run no risks (e)k tou= a)kindu/nou=a)kindu/nws) and play an honourable part.

pau/esqai . . a)ndragaqi/cesqai — Cleon echoes words attributed to Pericles at II. 63. a)ndragaqi/zomai was, it would seem, in use among the aristocrats who favoured a peace policy; cf. for the noun with ‘a political or social reference’ c. 57, 1, 64, 4 (Neil, Append. to Aristoph. Eq.).

th=| te au)th=| zhmi/a|—viz. as that by which ta/ te di/kaia . . kai\ ta\ cu/mfora poih/sete—the one I recommend. (a) This is usually explained, after the schol., ‘the same that they would have inflicted on you had they succeeded.’ But (1) it is unlikely that zhmi/a would be used without explanation, of the destruetion Mytilene had sought to bring on Athens: and (2) th=| au/th=| can only be so explained by the assumption that the sentence, simple in form, is strangely confused in thought. We need such an addition as in II. 67 toi=s au)toi=s a)mu/nesqai oi)=sper kai\ . . u(ph=rcan. (b) Steup explains ‘the same as you agreed to yesterday,’ but this seems a strange way of saying ‘uphold your decision.’ Also the reference in th=| au)th=| should be found in the context immediately preceding; c. 62 th=| me/ntoi au)th=| i)de/a|. VII 39, 1. The reference in the version given above is. it is true. a little remote. but ei) de\ dh\ . . a)ndragaqi/zesqai is practically parenthetical.

oi( diafeu/gontes—cf. oi( diaba/llontes c. 4, oi( e)pago/menoi II. 2, oi( prodido/ntes II. 5. The temporal force is lost, and the partic. becomes a substantive. But the plot is referred to in aorist, as having preceded the escape.

mh\ cu\n profa/sei=a)/neu profa/sews i(kanh=s Antiphon V. 22. 37

e)pece/rxontai kai\ diollu/nai—‘follow up (the wrong they inflict) even to the length of destroying their enemy utterly.’ The MSS. have dio/lluntai, which can only yield a very artificial sense. Their own utter destruction is not what they seek. The inf. is of purpose.

u(forw/menoi ‘eyeing with misgiving.’ All edd. refer to the famous ‘odisse quem laeseris’ of Tac. for the sentiment.

o( ga\r . . paqw/n—this applies to Athens, which has been attacked a)/neu profa/sews. ‘He who has been injured needlessly is more dangerous when he has escaped (the plot to destroy him), than an enemy on equal terms,’ i.e. where equal offence has been given on both sides. Mytilene knew Athens would be implacable if she escaped.

geno/menoi . . th=| gnw/mh|—‘place yourselves in thought as near (the moment of) the injury as possible, and (think) how.’ g. th=| gnw/mh|=dianohqe/ntes (I. 143). (Possibly to/t' is lost after panto/s.) 44

a)ntapo/dote ‘repay.’ Cf. “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord: I will repay.”

pro\s to\ paro\n au)ti/ka with malakisqe/ntes, ‘at their present plight,’ for to\ au)ti/ka paro/n: the position of the adv. is not very rare in tragedy, e.g. Aesch. PV. 1013 tw=| fronou=nti mh\ kalw=s (Jebb on Soph. OT. 1294). Here au)ti/ka gains emphasis in contrast with pote/ by its position. For the pleonasm edd. compare I. 95 e)n tw=| tu/te paro/nti, I. 123 tw=n e)/peita mello/ntwn. (parauti/ka has been conjectured for paro\n au)ti/ka, and to/te for pote/.) 48

para/deigma safe\s katasth/sate . . zhmiwso/menon—for the partic., as with dhlou=n, dh=lon or fanero\n poiei=n, cf. Soph. El. 24 safh= shmei=a fai/neis e)sqlo\s ei)s h(ma=s gegw/s. to/de—o(/de referring to what precedes, as often in speeches.

mh\ didaska/lous tw=n pragma/twn g.—‘are not to explain affairs,’ i.e. how they are to be conducted.

lo/goi personified, like peiqw/. diama/xomai as in c. 40.

i)di/a| ti au)tw=| diafe/rei—‘he has some private interest.’

fra/sai—‘give guidance.’

ti ai)sxro\n pei=sai—‘to carry a disgraceful proposal.’ Cf. c. 59, 2. ou)k . . h(gei=tai—ou) can appear after ei) . . me/n, provided the indic. is used, as in I. 121 ei) oi( me\n . . ou)k a)perou=sin, Xen. Anab. VII. 1, 29 ei) ba/rbaron me\n po/lin ou)demi/an h)qelh/samen katasxei=n.

eu)= de\ diabalw/n—Cleon got a name for skill in diabolh/, as several passages in Aristoph. Equites show.

xalepw/tatoi de\ . . e)pi/deici/n tina—‘most difficult to meet are those in particular (kai/) who by anticipation impute (to an opponent) a sort of rhetorical display to get money.’ xalepw/tatoi does not mean to exclude the eu)= diabalw/n, who also—as the kai/ shows—is xalepw/tatos as imputing to his opponent a desire to display his rhetorical skill; cf. c. 38, 2. But those who say that bribery is the motive are singled out. The emphasis is on e)pi\ xrh/masi, which accordingly is in an unusual order: it belongs to e)pi/deicin. The point of tina is that an e)pi/deicis proper was not delivered in the Ecclesia.

a)cunetw/teros . . a)dikw/teros—‘judged more of a fool than a knave.’ The double compar. as regularly where two qualities in the same ohject are contrasted: i)w\ strathgoi\ ple/ones h)\ belti/ones.

meta\ a)cunesi/as—‘besides his (seeming) folly,’ a characteristic substitute for meta\ tou= a)cu/netos gi/gnesqai.

a)\n peisqei=en—viz. the state. The change to plur. is made easy by the intervention of tw=n politw=n.

a)po\ tou= i)/sou ‘on equal terms,’ is parallel to e)kfobou=nta.

sw/frona—a very moderate criticism of the dangerous tendency now manifesting itself in Athenian public life, since the death of Pericles, to give too much weight to the piqanw/tatoi (c. 36, 6). sw/frwn was esp. associated with those opposed to extreme democracy; cf. c. 62, 4. For tw=| plei=sta eu)= bouleu/onti, ‘he whose connsel is generally good,’ we should expect, at first sight, something like tw=| pista\ cumbouleu/onti (conjectnred by Weil), ‘he whose counsel is followed,’ in contrast with to\n mh\ tuxo/nta gnw/mhs, in the sense, ‘he whose advice is rejected’; cf pei/sas and mh\ tuxw/n in § 3, katorqw=n and e)pituxw/n below. But in stating the principle that ought to be followed, the moderate Diodotus criticizes what the people professed to wish, viz. to reward good (not merely persuasive) counsellors. But in rewards the persuasive was mistaken for the good. And to\n mh\ tuxo/nta gnw/mhs is no doubt intentionally ambiguous, for, in contrast with pei/sas, it does mean ‘he who fails to carry his opinion’; but, in contrast with tw=| eu)= bouleu/onti, ‘not fortunate in his advice’ means ‘wrong’ ‘Who fails in counsel’ will keep up the two meanings. Cf. Aesch. PV. 204 ta\ lw=|sta bouleu/wn piqei=n . . ou)k h)dunh/qhn. (The intentional ambiguity of this passage has escaped notice.)

a)lla\ mhd' e)lassou=n—‘but not to curtail . . either,’ as might happen in the case of his being charged with corruption.

ou)x o(/pws . . a)lla\ mhde/—non modo (non) . . sed ne . . quidem. For the sentiment cf. Demosth. III. 18 ou) le/gei tis ta\ be/ltista; a/nasta\s a)/llos eipa/tw, mh\ tou=ton ai)tia/sqw.

pro\s xa/rin—‘to please’ the people.

o)re/goito—sc. h(/kista a)/n. tw=| au)tw=| is explained by xarizo/menos ktl.

kaqe/sthke de/—‘it has come to this, that.’

a)po\ tou= eu)qe/os is opposed to a)pa/th| below.

ta\ deino/tata . . pei=sai—‘to get the most atrocious proposals adopted.’

mo/nhn te po/lin—‘so we are the only state which it is impossible to benefit openly, without recourse to deception.’ It is disputed whether mo/nhn po/lin means (1) ‘a state alone,’ as distinct from the individual citizens, or (2) ‘(ours) is the only state which,’ as pred. to h(ma=s supplied. The latter is surely right, for (1) Athens is contrasted with h( sw/frwn po/lis in c. 42, 5, and this contrast is kept up through c. 43, 1, and (2) there is no suggestion in the context that the state is more suspicious than the individual.

dia\ ta\s perinoi/as—‘excessive shrewdness,’ by which it thinks it detects self-interest in the honest speaker. The word only here.

a)nq-upopteu/etai—‘is in return suspected.’

xrh\ de\ . . skopou/ntwn—‘but in dealing with the most important interests and in such a case as this it ought to be assumed that we speakers take a somewhat wider forecast than you whose view is circumscribed,’ i.e. whose judgment is formed in a short debate

ti with peraite/rw, as in ma=llo/n ti. e)n tw=| toiw=|de: its possible meanings are ‘at such a time,’ and ‘in such a case.’

u(peu/qunon—a speaker was liable to the grafh\ parano/mwn.

pro\s a)neu/qunon . . a)kro/asin—‘as opposed to your attention to it, which is irresponsible.’

swfrone/steron a)\n e)kri/nete—‘you would be more circumspect (cf. c. 42, 5) in your decisions’ (II. 40, 2).

pro\s o)rgh\n h(/ntin' a)\n tu/xhte—‘in the anger of the moment.’ Grammatieally zhmiou=ntes is supplied to tu/xhte, and pro/s, according to a common idiom, is repeated to h(/ntina; but no doubt the speaker would not be conscious of such ellipse. h(/ntina without a)/n is according to epic idiom; but it is very probable that h(/ntin' a)\n is the true reading. (No other emendation is to be thought of: h)/n ti a)tuxh=te is impossible, if only because a)tuxei=n in this context means ‘to fail in a request’ Nor must sfale/ntes be supplied to tu/xhte: for this would mean that punishment is inflieted in the same mood as that in which the error was committed. But that is not the point.)

ei)=o(/ti.

tou=to o(/ is rendered ‘as for this that.’ (1) There is no authority for this phrase used adverbially in this way: hence the conjecture tou/tou, governed by ta)nanti/a. Otherwise we must assume an anacoluthon. (2) But CG read tou=to w(=|, and quite possibly this is right. tou=to a)ntisxurizo/menos w(=| *kle/wn i)sxuri/zetai=‘while maintaining this in opposition to what C. maintains’ (cf. toi=s e)gklh/masi a)nterou=ntes I. 73). peri\ tou= . . e)/xontos is then epexegetic of tou=to, just as e)s to\ loipo\n . . e)/sesqai is of w)=| (=e)kei/nw| o(/). Both insist on the future, but one on to\ cumfe/ron, the other on to\ kalo/n.

proqei=si—depending on cumfe/ron (u(mi=n), eonditional.

pro/s—‘in view of.’

tw=n dikai/wn—‘arguments of justice,’ as in Demosth. de Cor. 6, 9. To

dei=n and

xrhsi/mws e(/cousin supply h(mi=n.

po/lis te a)fistame/nh—‘so in the case of a state.’

th=| dokh/sei—‘in its own opinion.’ An effective reply to Cleon's argument from the fact that M. had taken Athens at a disadvantage.

tou/tw|—revolt.

e)pei\ . . ge—not a common combination; Iliad IX. 425 e)pei\ ou)/ sfisin h(/de g' e(toi/mh, Pind. Ol. IX. 40 e)pei\ to/ ge loidorh=sai qeou\s e)xqra\ sofi/a. The ge merely emphasizes diecelhlu/qasi.

prostiqe/ntes—‘continually adding to them.’ For

ei)/ pws with a perf. preceding see M.T. § 489, esp. Aristoph. Av. 120.

parabainome/nwn—there are two tenable explanations of this: (1) impersonal gen. abs. as in I. 116 e)saggelqe/ntwn M. T. § 848, ‘transgressions being committed’; (2) sc. tw=n megi/stwn a)dikhma/twn, which would be internal accus. to parabai/nw in the act. form, as in a)dikw= a)di/khma. The matter is rendered impossible of certain solution by the perplexing kai\ tou=to para: bai/netai. We expect, of course, the sense ‘mild penalties being disregarded,’ and presently, ‘the death penalty is disregarded,’ but how this can be got out of the Gk. as it stands is not apparent, unless we take an etymological sense of parabai/nw, ‘pass by,’ which is found occasionally in the orators, and interpret tou=to below as put loosely for h( zhmi/a tou= qana/tou. Against this is not so much the fact that Thuc. does not elsewhere use parabai/nw thus, but much more that parabai/nw zhmi/an is stranger than any instance in the orators and that the proximity of a)dikhma/twn makes it unnatural.

kai\ tou=to o(/mws parabai/netai—the conjectures are (1) ka)n tou/tw| (Kruger) ‘and under these circumstances,’ with parabai/netai impers. But it should be e)n tou/tois (cf. Jebb on Soph. Ant. 39); e)n tou/tw|=‘meanwhile,’ or ‘in this point.’ (2) kai\ tau=ta, sc. ta\ a)dikh/mata (Hude; cf. 2 above). I should prefer kai\ tau)ta/ ‘and the same offences are committed.’

deino/teron . . de/os—‘a terror more terrible’; cf. VII 68 e)xqroi\ kai\ e)/xqistoi.

h)\ to/de ge—‘else this,’ with emphasis on the second alternative (Neil on Aristoph. Eq. 413). Notice to/de after tou/tou, not very rare; e.g. Soph. Ant. 296.

h( me\n peni/a—to peni/a is opposed the power—e)cousi/a —that results from wealth. A poor man is emboldened by necessity, as a rich man is made covetous by insolence and pride.

ai( d' a)/llai cuntuxi/ai . . kindu/nous—‘the other condi tions of life,’ as they arise—temporary rather than permanent: these fill men with a sudden passion (o)rgh=|), ‘as each (cuntuxi/a) is overpowered by some irrepressible power’—such e.g. as an overwhelming desire for independence. o)rgh=| tw=n a)nqrw/pwn coriesponds to th\n to/lman pare/xousa and th\n pleoneci/an p. of the other clauses, while a)nh/kesto/n ti corresponds to a)na/gkh and u(/bris kai\ fro/nhma. Of the many alterations proposed, only to\n a)/nqrwpon for tw=n a)nqrw/pwn needs notice. It is not an improvement; for there is a point in tw=n a)., ‘passion in those men’ whom they befall, always there, like pleoneci/a and to/lma, and ready to be called out by a favourable cuntuxi/a. (Not ‘mankind,’ which would here be a/nqrw/pwn, as o)rgh=| is without article. It has been proposed to refer e/ka/sth tis to o)rgh=?, but this would leave cuntuxi/ai too vague, and there would be little point in e(ka/sth tis.)

e)pi\ panti/—‘in every case’ of those just alluded to; cf. e)p' ou)deni\ tw=n toiou/twi Demosth. XXI. 65.

o( me/n—first comes Desire, next Hope—and then the attempt. Note the personification here.

th\n . . e)piboulh\n e)kfronti/zwn—‘thinking out the plot.’ The schol. has e)gxei/rhsin on this word, so that the writer of it must have found e)pibolh/n, ‘attempt,’ which most MSS. give, the only objection to which is that the subst. is not found elsewhere in this sense before Polybius.

th\n eu)pori/an th=s tu/xhs—‘suggesting the ready help of Chanee.’ Hope deludes them into a fancy that at the critical moment Chance will favour them. Though a subjective gen. does not occur with eu)pori/a elsewhere, th=s tu/xhs is plainly subjective here; cf. VII. 61 to\ th=s tu/xhs ka)\n meq' h(mw=n e)lpi/santes sth=nai, V. 113. (tu/xh cannot=‘success’ here, cf. § 7, nor ‘their fortunes.’）

o)/nta a)fanh=—i.e. e)/rws and e)lpi/s, ‘because (not though) unseen.’ Were they fanerai/, men would see that they could not be counted upon. As it is, plei=sta bla/ptousi by luring them on. Cf. v. 103 e)pi\ ta\s a)fanei=s (e)lpi/das) kaqi/stantai, and the next sentence.

e)p' au)toi=s—besides e)/rws and e)lpi/s.

kai\ e)k tw=n u(podeeste/rwn—‘even with insufficient means.’

ou)x h(=sson—i.e. even more than men.

peri\ tw=n megi/stwn te—sc. kinduneu/ousi. For the te, which, though found only in C, is probably right, cf. IV. 80 e(toi/mwn o)/ntwn tre/fein te kai\ e)pi\ a)posta/sei sfa=s e)pikaloume/nwn.

meta\ pa/ntwn . . e)do/casen—‘each individual acting with the whole community . . rates himself considerably above the reality,’ i.e. exaggerates his own strength. The reading of the best MSS. is au)tw=n for au(to/n. For doca/zw with personal obj. cf. Xen. Cyr. V. 5, 46 a)lkimw/tatos doca/zetai ei)=nai. e)pi\ ple/on ti together.

a(plw=s—c. 38, 7.

pollh=s eu)hqei/as, o(/stis—‘(it is a mark) of much simplicity, if anyone supposes.’ Cf. Xen. Hell. II. 3, 51 nomi/zw prosta/tou e)/rgon ei)=nai oi(/ou dei=, o(\s a)\n . . mh\ e)pitre/ph|. It would be more usual to have pollh\ eu)h/qeia/ (e)stin) o(/stis, or eu)hqe/staton o(/stis.

kai\ a)posta=sa—‘when revolt has actually taken place.’

th\n dapa/nhn a)podou=nai kai\ to\ loipo\n u(potelei=n—here, naturally, the least is made of the terms dealt out by Athens to revolted allies who submitted. Independent allies, when reduced after revolting, had also to pull down their walls and to hand over their ships to Athens. In I. 98 Thuc. gives a summary of the treatment dealt out to them much less favourable to Athens. By u(potelei=n is meant fo/rou u(potelei=s ei)=nai.

ti/na oi)/esqe h(/ntina—see on c. 39, 7.

paratenei=sqai—‘be strained to the utmost extremity.’

to\ au)to\ du/natai—cf. I. 141 th\n au)th\n dou/lwsin du/natai.

th=s proso/dou . . a)p' au)th=s—the art. not repeated with a verbal substantive (pro/sodos—prosie/nai). The words necessary to complete the sense of the subst. generally follow it, as in I. 18 th\n kata/lusin e)k th=s *(ella/dos, but occasionally precede, as in II. 18 kata\ th\n a)/llhn porei/an h( sxolaio/ths.

tw=|de—viz. th=| proso/dw|.

a)kribei=s—‘exacting’; so in I. 99 Thuc. says a)kribw=s e)/prasson of Athens in relation to her allies. e)s xrhma/twn lo/gon—e)s l. is ‘on the score of.’ The phrase occurs also in Lysias (XIX. 61), and ei)s xrh/mata is found.

a)po\ tw=n e)/rgwn th=s e)pimelei/as—‘by practical precautions.’ Some render ‘by taking care of our actions’; but the former seems more natural, and cf. VI. 40 e)/rgw| fulassome/nh.

e)leu/qeron by right;

bi/a| a)rxo/menon in fact. bi/a|= ‘in its despite’; cf. I. 43 mh\ cumma/xous de/xesqe bi/a| h(mw=n, 68. Diodotus alludes to the true position of Lesbos; cf. c. 10.

pro/s—‘to the side of.’

tou/tou—i.e. tou= a)fi/stasqai.

o(/ti e)p' e)la/xiston—viz. of the inhabitants.

a)posth/sasi—sc. th\n po/lin.

th=s a)ntikaqistame/nhs—‘which is ranging itself against us.’

e)s po/lemon e)pe/rxesqe—either e)/rxesqe e)s po/lemon or e)pe/rxesqe alone would be usual. Here we must supply au)th=|, and take e)s of the end in view.

ei) with fut. indic., ‘if you are going to.’

a)dikh/sete . . ktei/nontes—‘you will be guilty of the crime of’; a legal use.

katasth/sete—‘bring about,’ unusual without a predicative adj.; cf. (Classen) IV. 92 pollh\n a)/deian katesth/samen.

prodeica/ntwn—‘as you will have published abroad.’

kai\ ei) h)di/khsan, mh\ prospoiei=sqai—‘even if they did wrong, to pass it over.’ mh\ prospoiei=sqai, dissimulare, which occurs in several authors, is on the principle of ou)/ fhmi.

o(/—‘the element.’ Thuc. is partial to the neut. sing. collective for a masc. plur.

kai\ tou=to—tou=to antieipates e(ko/ntas h(ma=s a)dikhqh=nai: cf. VI. 85 kai\ h(mi=n tou=to w)felei=, ou)k h)\n . . . a)ll' h)/n . .

dikai/ws—i.e. as strict justiee allows.

dei= refers to interest, as in § 4.

to\ *kle/wnos.—made in c. 40, 4: ‘Cleon's claim, namely the identity of justice and expediency in the punishment, is found to be impossible of being realized at once in such a punishment,’ viz. e)n tw=| diafqei=rai. The sentence is illogical, for either to\ au)to/ or a(/ma should have been omitted.

toi=s polemi/ois—thinking of the Peloponnesians. That Athens should show wisdom (1) calmly judging the guilty, (2) acquitting the democratic party, would be more effective against her enemies than a hasty exercise of brute strength, of vis consili expers.

pro\s tou\s e)nanti/ous is to be taken with krei/sswn e)sti/.

e)piw/n—‘if he goes to work.’

prote/ras—the best MSS. have deute/ras, as the result, no doubt, of an unfortunate conjecture, based on ei) fqa/seian below.

oi)/nw| . . pefurame/na—‘barley-meal kneaded with wine . .,’ into cakes, ma=zai, of the kind called oi)nou=ttai. fura=n, not fu/rein, is the form of the word in this sense.

o(/son . . a)negnwke/nai—‘as for him to have read,’ like o(/son a)pozh=n in I. 2. o(/son practically=w)/ste.

u(ste/ra au)th=s—as this is predicative, the e)pi- in the verb is pleonastic, if, as elsewhere, the verb=‘is brought into port after.’ It is possible that e)pi- implies haste, as in e)pibohqei=n: we expect such an allusion here, and Steup suggests au)ti/k' for au)th=s.

para\ tosou=ton . . h)=lqe—this and similar phrases—para\ mikro\n e)lqei=n, par' ou)de\n e).—are followed either by gen. or, more often, infin.; e g. Herod. IX. 33 par' e(/n pa/laisma e)/drame nika=n. para\ tosou=ton=‘within, up to, so short a distance.’ ki/ndunos means the danger of destruction, and the gen. is the same as with e)ggu/s.

klh/rous . . poih/santes—i.e. the late owners became hereditary tenants and paid an annual sum to the Athenian ‘cleruchs.’ Thuc. (and Ephorus, as copied by Diodorus XII. 55) assume that all the land was thus divided, except that of Methymna: this would bring each klh=ros to about 96 acres (as Chuton says); but, of course, not the whole of the klh=ros would be under eultivation. Apparently all the land was owned by oligarchs. The new klh=roi would, of eourse, cut across the boundaries of former estates.

klhrou/xous—2700 poor citizens chosen by lot They doubtless served to form a garrison; but in 412 B.C. there cannot have been anything like this number of Athenians in Lesbos (VIII. 22); it is assumed that many of the cleruchs subsequently returned to Athens.

e(ka/stou with klh/rou. The mid. denotes a reciprocal arrangement.

a)rguri/on is prob. object of fe/rein, and

du/o mna=s with the gen. is in appos. to it.

ta\ e)n th=| h)pei/rw|—several places called *)aktai=ai po/leis—Antandros being one. These became tributary allies.

th\n fulakh\n . . ei)=nai—Athens had at least one frou/rion at Salamis, and a few ships there maintained a not very efficient blockade of the port of Megara.

tou/s te *peloponnhsi/ous—parallel to toi=s te *megareu=sin . . e)splei=n, and probably, like that clause, depending on toi=s *)aqhnai/ois fulakh\n ei)=nai=tou\s *)aqhnai/ous fula/ssesqai. This kata\ su/nesin constr. cannot be paralleled in prose, but it would be ordinary in tragedy: see Jebb on Soph. Antig. 216. Thus tou\s *p. is the anticipatory accus., for o(/pws oi) *peloponnh/sioi ktl.: the differing constr., first o(/pws, then infin., after a single verb, is not unusual. (Several emendations have been proposed, of which pro/s te *pel., depending on fulakh\n ei)=nai and tou/s te *pel. skopw=n are worth notice.)

mh\ poiw=ntai . . au)to/qen—viz. from Nisaea, the harbour of Megara. The allusion in au)to/qen is not quite the same as in the previous case.

to\ pri\n geno/menon—‘the previous incident’ occurred in the autumn of 429 B.C. The Pel. intended to surprise the Piraeus, but contented themselves with a descent on Salamis, which caused great alarm at Athens, and led at once to measures for the protection of the Athenian harbours (II. 93).

l. 13

e(lw\n ou)=n . . prou/xonte—when, as in the case of Megara (I. 103), a city had long walls running down to its harbour, it was usual to prolong the walls aeross the mouth, and to leave only a small passage between two towers, forming what was called a klh|sto\s limh/n. a)po\ th=s *nisai/as prou/xonte are to be taken together. The order is unusual, but (1) a)po\ th=s N. gains prominence by its position (cf. Jebb on Soph. Antig. 325), (2) it is certainly not stranger than II. 7 pro\s tai=s au)tou= u(parxou/sais e)c *)itali/as kai\ *sikeli/as toi=s ta)kei/nwn e(lome/nois, where e)c . . *sikeli/as goes with e(lome/nois. (If taken with e(lw/n, a)po\ th=s N. is rendered either (a) ‘on the side toward N.,’ or (b) ‘on the side away from N.’ But (1) in either case du/o pu/rgw then raises a difficulty, because they are then both on the island, and above, it was one tower: (2) neither meaning has really been proved possible: in the passages quoted for (b) a)po/=‘at a distance from’ with a verb of rest. If not taken with prou/xonte, a)po\ th=s N. would naturally=‘starting from N.,’ with N. for a base; (3) with (a) it is impossible to explain kai\ to\ e)k th=s h)pei/rou, which must denote a different place from a)po\ th=s N.)

e)s to\ metacu\ th=s nh/sou—supply kai\ th=s h)pei/rou, as in Dem. de Cor. 26 to\n metacu\ xro/nen tw=n o(/rkwn, ‘the interval between (that time, and) the oaths,’ Aristoph. Av. 187 e)n me/sw| dh/pouqen a)h/r e)sti gh=s, and often. Sometimes the other limit is expressed. (It might mean ‘to the part of the island lving between,’ as Isocr. IV. 70 e)n tw=| metacu\ th=s xw/ras, but on the whole this seems less likely.)

a)petei/xize kai\ to\ e)k th=s h).—‘he proceeded to build a wall on the side facing the mainland as well,’ apparently at the island end of the bridge. The kai/ refers to prw=ton.

kai\ e)n th=| nh/sw| tei=xos—the kai/ refers to a)petei/xize to\ e)k th=s h)pei/rou. (We cannot be confident about the interpretation of these operations at Mmoa, because (1) the account— as is often the case with Thuc. when he writes of topographical details—is not clear, and (2) the coastline has changed, and there is no longer an island at all.)

ei\rhme/non ga\r h)=n—sc. bi/a| mh\ e(lei=n. But this is just what the Pel. had tried to do in 429 B.C.: their views had changed.

o(/sa pole/mw| xwri/a e)/xousin—the original intention of Sparta had been to destroy the Athenian empire: since the failure at Lesbos they expect much less. That failure had evidently strengthened the peace party at Sparta.

le/gonta—as in VII. 3; contrast II. 85 pe/mpousi cumbou/lous keleu/ontes.

ei) bou/lontai . . ou)de/na—in this perplexing sentence, it is best (1) to make paradou=nai and xrh/sasqai depend on bou/lontai: (2) to make tous te . . ou)de/na the apodosis to this protasis. Then (1) te . . de/ eorrespond (I. 11, 1, 25, 3, VI. 83, 1, VII. 81, 3, and in other authors not very seldom); (2) kola/zein=‘they are ready to punish,’ unless we accept the conjeeture kola/sein. For the outline of the syntax cf. VII. 3 prope/mpei . . le/gonta, ei) bou/lontai e)cie/nai . . e(toi=mos ei)=nai spe/ndesqai. (It is impossible to render ei) ‘whether,’ as though le/gonta were e)rwtw=nta.)

e)n o(/sw|—cf. c. 28, 1.

a)gaqo/n ti—the second ti is not impossible, but, in view of 53, 2, 68, 1, it is improbable.

prota/cantes sfw=n au)tw=n is generally rendered ‘having appointed as their advocates,’ but, in view of VI. 100 triakosi/ous sfw=n au/tw=n . . prou/tacan (cf. c. 112 below), Hude is probably right in taking the gen. as partitive.

*ai)eimnh/stou—a eelebrated man, who had commanded the Plataeans at Marathon and Plataea.

a)mfote/rwn—to\ no/mimon and to\ i)/son.

h(marth/kamen—the subj. perf., of what may turn out afterwards to have been the case, might have been used.

lo/gon—i.e. makro/tera ei)pei=n, c. 52, 5.

to/ te e)perw/thma braxu\ o)/n—accus. abs. co-ordinated with the preceding gen. abs, both expressing cause.

ta\ me\n a)lhqh= is obj. of a)pokri/nasqai; the infin. clause is subj. to gi/gnetai. Hence

e)nanti/a sc. h/mi=n, is for e)nanti/on, which is awkward after ta\ a/lhqh=: some think e)nanti/on should be read. (The other view, that a)pokri/nasqai is epexegetic, a)lhqh\s a)pokri/nasqai, is most improbable, and w(=| is then grammatically impossible.)

ta\ de\ yeudh=—sc. a)pokri/nasqai.

e)/legxon e)/xei—‘can be confuted.’

l 18.

ei)po/ntas ti kinduneu/ein—‘to say something and take our chance’=here ‘to say something if we must risk our lives’; the emphasis, as often in Gk. and Lat., on the partic., as in I. 20 boulo/menoi dra/sante/s ti kai\ (‘then’) kinduneu=sai, Soph. OC. 1038 xwrw=n a)pei/lei ‘threaten, but go,’ Trach. 592 ei)de/nai xrh\ drw=san ‘you must act, if you would know.’

o( mh\ r(hqei\s lo/gos=to\ to\n lo/gon mh\ r(hqh=nai, a frequent constr. in Greek and Silver Latin; cf. c. 66, 3, Demosth. Olynth. III. 34 oi)/koi me)nwn belti/wn=to\ me)nein au)to\n be/ltio/n e)sti. See also c. 66, 3. The neg. in the phrase is regularly mh/, whether the partic. is in attributive, or—as much oftener —in predicative position.

ai)ti/an—‘grievance,’ meaning probably ‘self-reproach,’ as in I. 140.

a)gnw=tes . . e)pesenegka/menoi—the subject contracts, being first both parties, but then the Plataeans only: this freedom is characteristic of Thuc.

pro\s ei)do/tas pa/nta lele/cetai—‘you know all that can be said.’

h(mw=n with prokatagno/ntes as well as a)reta/s, ‘having formed the prejudice against us, that our merits’; cf. c. 45, 1.

au)to/—viz. to\ h(/ssous ei)=nai ktl.

a)/llois xa/rin fe/rontes—‘gratifying others,’ viz. the Thebans. The subject of fe/rontes would more naturally be the Lacedaemonians: if the text is sound—fero/ntwn has been conjectured—we recall the principle qui facit per alium facit per se.

fi/lous nomi/zontas=ei) fi/lous nomi/zete (h(ma=s).

ta\ d' e)n th=| ei)rh/nh|—adverbial. The art. covers pro/s.

kai\ ga/r—(1) this could be taken together,=etenim, or (2) a correlative for kai/ could be sought in what follows, or (3) kai/ could be supposed to emphasize the concessive force of h)peirw=tai o)/ntes: most probably (1) is right, though some deny this use for Thuc.

ma/xh|—temporal, without e)n; this dat. is used several times by Thuc. The Plataeans were always proud of the fact that the battle had been fought on their soil.

kai\ u(mi=n . . i)di/a|—as distinct from their services to the common cause.

o(/teper dh/—‘at the very time when,’ in 464 B.C.

tw=n . . a)posta/ntwn depends on fo/bos. For the position of the attrib. partic., not rare in Thuc. when other qualifying words are added, cf. II. 18 h( e)n *)isqmw=| e)pimo/nh genome)nh, c. 67, 3.

e)n . . tw=| pole/mw|—viz. ‘this war,’ as often in Thuc.

ou)k h)qelh/samen—ei)=o(/ti, hence ou).

u(mw=n keleusa/ntwn—this occurred in 429 B.C, when the Peloponnesians marched against Plataea. The demand was that Plataea should either join the Lacedaemonian alliance or remain neutral.

eu)= paqw/n—what services Plataea had received from Athens before she ‘won the alliance’ of 519 (or 509) B.C. is not known.

tis of course, means the Plataeans.

politei/as mete/laben—this passage and c. 63 clearly imply that Athenian citizenship in some form was granted to Plataeans settling at Athens since the original alliance; and Isocr. Piat. 51, Pan. 49, Lysias XXIII. 2, and [Dem.] c. Neaer. do not make this assumption impossible. But in II. Thuc. speaks only of a cummaxi/a between Plataea and Athens, and possibly Thuc. here anticipates. It is certain that citizenship was conferred on the Plataean refugees after the destruction of Plataea. For the w(=n omitted see c. 51, 1 n.

a(\ . . e)chgei=sqe—a)/ is internal accus., and e)chgei=sqe, which is used of the orders issued by the head of a confederacy is imperf.

katalamba/nontas—conative.

i(eromhni/a|—the attack occurred teleutw=ntos tou= mhno/s (II. 2), but whether the holiday was connected with the new moon is unknown. The attempt was made at about ten o'clock (peri\ prw=ton u(/pnon) on the night, probably, of April 4, 431.

ei) ga/r—‘if you are going to base your estimate of Justice on your present interest (which is, to favour Thebes) and their hostility.’ The repetition of the art. before e)kei/nwn would be more usual; but it is not necessary. The position of te is defended by the contrast between u(mw=n and e)kei/nwn. lamba/nein is here ‘to feel about’ a thing. (Stahl and Classen agree in this explanation, which is no doubt correct) For lamba/nein, ‘to feel about’ in a certain manner, cf. di' oi)/ktou l. (Eur. Suppl. 194), and c. 59, 1.

h)mei=s—sc. h)=men, as the sense shows.

mei/zoni—viz. than you now are, from the Athenians.

e)n kairoi=s oi(=s—i.e. e)n oi(=s, according to a common idiom, e.g. Dem. XIX. 342 e)pi\ th=s au)th=s (e)f') h)=sper nu=n e)cousi/as . . menei=. To e)n kairoi=s, as to mei/zw, the partic. must be supplied; cf. c. 30, 1: contrast c. 47, 5.

ma=llon—i.e. than now when their services are forgotten.

ta\ cu/mfora . . au(toi=s—（‘arrange terms) which were to their own advantage in view of the invasion.’ pro\s th\n e)/. belongs to cu/mfora rather than to pra/ssontes: cf. II. 3 h| e(/kaston e)fai/neto pro\s ta\ paro/nta cu/mforon e)/sesqai.

a)sfalei/a|—‘securely,’ as in c. 82 a)sfalei/a| de\ to\ e)pibouleu/esqai, ‘to make plans in security,’ Soph. OT. 51 a)ll' a)sfalei/a| th/nd' a)no/rqwson po/lin.

w(=n—partitive.

e)pi\ toi=s au)toi=s—i.e. because we have again chosen to\ a)gaqo/n (cf. dikai/ws presently) rather than to\ a)sfale/s (cf. kerdale)ws).

tw=n cumma/xwn toi=s a)gaqoi=s—lit. ‘when, while feeling (e)/xousi with u(mi=n) lasting gratitude towards brave allies, what is perhaps (pou) your interest at the moment is also secured.’ The chief emphasis is, of course, on the participial phrase, which states the permanent condition or test of the righteousness of pursuing one's own interest. (The conjecture e)/xousi for MSS. e)/xwsi, which cannot be satisfactorily explained, seems certain. For the dat. toi=s a)gaqoi=s depending on a dat. e)/xousi cf. [Xen.] de Rep. Ath. 1 6 toi=s o(moi/ois sfi/sin au)toi=s h)=n a)gaqa/ ‘for those like theniselves.’ It is impossible to find a subject for e)/xwsi, and Mr. Spratt's rendering of th\n xa/rin e)/xwsi ‘command a recognition’ is incorrect. That this passage, however, is completely restored by reading e)/xousi, it would be rash to assume.)

tou\s me\n pate/ras . . u(ma=s de/—‘if you, whose fathers . . ,’ the first clause being subord. to the second. Generally deino/n is followed by ei) in such cases.

to\n tri/poda—i.e. on the bronze pedestal of three intertwined serpents that supported the gold tripod set up at Delphi from the tithe of the Persian spoils dedicated to the Pythian god. It stood close to the altar before the temple. The pedestal was taken by Constantine to Byzantium, and still exists, with the names of the states inscribed on the lower part of the spiral. The tripod was appropriated by the Phocians. (Herod. IX. 81, with Stein's notes.)

panoikesi/a|—after po/lin and *pla/taian this means (as Steup points out) ‘with all its houses,’ not ‘household and all’ as in II. 16.

tou=to—referring to what precedes.

a)pwllu/meqa—Plataea was burnt by Xerxes. The rendering ‘we were all but destroyed’ is borne out by other passages; e.g. Andoc. de Myst. § 41.

e)n—as in kri/nesqai e/n

a)gw=nas—‘hazards.’

to/te—referring to the siege of Plataea, to/te being frequently used of a well-known occasion.

periew/smeqa ‘we are outcasts.’

ra/ntwn is probably masc.; cf. e)k panto\s tou= '*ellhnikou= above.

a)timw/rhtoi—‘unsuccoured.’

be/baioi—‘faithful.’

kat' a)na/gkhn—as explained in c. 55, 1.

w(/ste kai\ . . poiou=ntes . . kai\ pronoou=ntes—this is not clearly expressed, for the first participial clause states what follows from the previous sentence; but kai\ pronoou=ntes ktl. contains a new point (e(ko/ntas . . proisxome/nous), and should scarcely have been co-ordinated with a)/deian poiou=ntes.

poiou=ntes—supply h(mi=n: it is not clear whether h(mw=n is similarly to be supplied to pronoou=ntes.

no/mos the unwritten law; cf. cc. 66, 67. Prisoners who had not surrendered voluntarily were often killed. Appeals to the no/mos a)/grafos, pa/trios no/mos, no/mima pa/shs *)ella/dos are very frequent; and of course the Antigone is full of the a/grapta ka)sfalh= qew=n no/mima. In Xen. Mem. IV. 4, 19 Hippias defines the a)/grafoi no/moi as oi( e)n pa/sh| xw/ra| kata\ tau)ta\ nomizo/menoi.

e)sqh/masi—robes burned as offerings, probably, and not worn by the officials. The plur., joined with nomi/mois and a)parxa/s in this connexion, is surely mentioned as part of the e)nagi/smata. Plutarch in Aristides 21, giving an account of the ceremony as performed in his day, makes no mention of robes among the offerings; but the details may well have been modified by his time. On the contrary, he does say that the Provost wore a purple coat and carried a sword; but the present passage does not lead like a ref. to that. That clothes were burnt as offerings to the dead is well known, e.g. Eur. Hec. 573.

e)pife/rontes—specially used of offerings to the dead; II. 34.

cu/mmaxoi . . genome/nois—the object of the speaker is to emphasize the lasting effect of the old alliance and to say nothing of the alliance with Athens.

o(mai/xmois is an oldfashioned word, perhaps intended to recall the old times.

au)qe/ntais—as having sided with the Persians. Another old-fashioned word.

i(era/ te . . a)fairh/sesqe—there are three difficulties here:—(1) e)rhmou=te, present, among a series of futures. This can hardly be defended by passages in which a single pres, and fut. are combined, such as II. 44 ou)k o)lofu/romai ma=llon h)\ paramuqh/somai. StahI reads e)rhmou=ntes after Goller; Steup proposes to leave the word out If sound we must render ‘you are making desolate.’ (2) What is the constr. of tw=n . . ktisa/ntwn? The natural answer is that it depends on a)fairh/sesqe (‘you will take from’), not on qusi/as. The objection, that the Plataeans will ex hypothesi be dead, is hardly serious, for tw=n . . ktisa/ntwn includes the whole Plataean people of whom no small part was safe at Athens. Neither is there any need to render a)fairh/sesqe ‘you will deprive,’ a sense that a)fairou=mai no where has when the object is inanimate. (3) Is i(era/ or qusi/as the object of tw=n . . ktisa/ntwn? My reason for preferring qusi/as is that qusi/as ta\s patri/ous must refer to commemorative sacrifices to the gods founded after the victory of Plataea: otherwise the Lac. could have no interest in them, and the speaker could not seek to influence them by such an argument. These sacrifices are to the gods, and they were offered on behalf of Greece—u(pe\r th=s *(ella/dos (Plut. Arist. 20, 21): hence the last sentence duly accords with h)leuqerw/qhsan oi( *(/ellhnes and e)kra/thsan (oi\ *))ellhnes). (The no/mima tw=n *(ellh/nwn are not in question here.)

e(ssame/nwn—this archaic form in place of e(same/nwn has by far the best MS. authority, and perhaps is meant to accord with o(mai/xmois and au)qe/ntais.

pre/pon—sc. e)sti/.

o(mobwmi/ous; not found elsewhere; ‘having the same altars’ may mean either ‘worshipped at the same altar,’ of several gods worshipped together, or ‘having like altars’ throughout Greece; hardly ‘whose altars are common to all worshippers.’ The second suits the context best.

q'—this is a necessary addition, as the passage cannot make a fresh start at profero/menoi.

mh\ a)mnhmonei=n—Cobet pronounced these words spurious: the only constr. they can fairly bear is with profero/menoi o(/rkous, but, as h(mei=s is the subj. of the other infins., this is awkward. (w)/mosan would require fut. or aor. infin.: order and the addition of tw=n p. ta/fwn are against i(ke/tai gigno/meqa.) tw=n p. ta/fwn is rendcred ‘by . . tombs,’ but the gen. can hardly be so understood with i(ke/tai, on which it directly depends.

u(mw=n—emphatic.

toi=s e)xqi/stois—sc. to your dead (not to us). “The dead are implored to prevent the Pl., their best friends, being surrendered to the Theb., their worst enemies” (Widmann). h(=| . . e)n th=|de—e)n should not be made to apply to h(=|, as this kind of idiom (Aesch. Sept. 1032 mhtro\s talai/nhs ka)po\ dusth/nou patro/s) is confined to poetry (Wilamowitz on Eur. HF. 237).

pra/cantes . . kinduneu/omen—a compressed form of e)pra/camen, nu=n de/ ktl. For nu=n we might have expected the ei)=ta of inconsistency.

o(/per de/—the rel. clause qualifies pauo/menoi, for which we might have had poiou=ntes.

lo/gou teleuta=n—epexegetic of o(/per. The gen. with teleuta=n again in c. 104. If you ‘begin’ with a gen., you may naturally ‘end’ with one.

met' au)tou=—viz. tou= teleuta=n.

e)s ta\ au)ta\ katasth/santas—i.e. as we were before we capitulated.

to\n cuntuxo/nta—‘any that comes’; cf. o/ tuxw/n.

i(ke/tai o)/ntes—‘as suppliants.’ The likeness of this peroration to the poignant appeals in Euripides should be noticed.

l. 13

h(mw=n—the Boeotian migration from Thessaly.

cummei/ktous—Pelasgians, Thracians, Hyantians (Strabo).

h(gemoneu/esqai—i.e. to acknowledge the h(gemoni/a of Thebes in Boeotia.

proshnagka/zonto—an attempt to make them observe ta\ pa/tria. See c. 65, 2.

kai/toi . . ei)/dei—‘you must surely consider the conditions under which.’

e)tu/gxanen . . politeu/ousa—‘was in point of fact’: tugxa/nw, as often, not of a mere accident, but of the true state of things, as distinct from what might appear to be.

i)so/nomon—where all the nobles are equal, and their rights are fixed by laws. But in a dunastei/a the few rulers are a law to themselves.

tw=| swfronesta/tw|—‘the best order,’ i.e. an aristocracy or moderate democracy. No doubt this is said with reference to the constitution of Thebes, as existing in 427 B.C., with its two Boeotarchs and four assemblies confined to toi=s kekthme/nois plh=qo/s ti xrhma)twn, as Theopompus or Cratippus says. (Several conjj. have been made on this unusual expression, e.g. tw=| sw/froni pa)ntwn Herw.: tw=| swfroneste/rw| Hude.)

tura/nnou—for turanni/dos: so dh=mos for dhmokrati/a.

ou(=toi . . sxh/sein—‘these in the hope of winning power for themselves in yet greater degree.’

kai\ . . e)/pracen—‘so the city as a whole could not control her actions when she acted so, and it is not fair to blame her, for any crrors she fell into when she had no constitution.’

gou=n—‘thus for example’; illustrative of the previous statement.

e)pio/ntwn th/n te a)/llhn *(ella/da kai\ . . peirwme/nwn—as te cannot mean ‘and’ here, but must be correlative to kai/, it is clear that e)pio/ntwn governs th\n . . *(ella/da, and that the introduction of peirwme/nwn changes the constr.; cf. cc. 67, 6, 94, 3 (so Steup).

e)xo/ntwn—after the battle of Oenophyta, 458 B.C. The battle of Coronea in 446 forced the A. to abandon Boeotia.

h(mete/ra|—objective; II. 42 th\n tw=n e)nanti/wn timwri/an.

ta\ pro\s h(ma=s—adverbial, i(/na h(ma=s timwroi=sqe.

u(pa/rxon—sc. mh\ cunepie/nai. ge gives a causal sense to a partic.

proba/llesqe—as a defence; cf. I. 37 to\ eu)prepe\s a)/spondon probe/blhntai.

ge—not a common use of ge, where it serves to connect, and at the same time throws feeling into the sentence: ‘Ah, yes.’

pare/xein—sc. u)mi=n.

de/ ge or de\ . . ge is used to cap a previous statement or, while accepting it, to bring in a consideration on the other side; it is common in retort (Neil).

kata-prodou=nai—‘utterly to betray’; so prob. in katadouloume/nous.

toi=s de/=e)kei/nois de/.

kai/toi . . a)podidome/nas—‘surely failure to return favours with like favours (cf. i)/shn above) is dishonourable; and not failure to return debts of gratitude that were justly incurred (cf. u)mei=s . . a)dikou/menoi) but of which the payment leads to injustice’ (cf. toi=s de\ a)dikou=sin). You should have waited till they were a)dikou/menoi to return the service they had rendered to you.

a)po\ tou/twn—emphatic resumption of the attracted rel.

cunagwni/zesqe—‘continue their allies,’ in mockery.

*ai)ginh/tas—Aegina was reduced in 457 B.C. to the status of a tributary ally.

a)/llous tina/s—thought to be the Euboeans, who had fought at Plataea, and against whom Pericles may have employed the Plat. in 445 B.C.

diekwlu/ete—sc. a)/llous katadoulou=sqai.

periteixi/zesqai—‘before the siege was begun.’

h(mw=n—‘on our side.’ This demand had been made by K. Archidamus, but the Theb. adopt it.

toi=s *(/ellhsi—the dat. of agent with other parts than perf. of pass. is not uncommon in Thuc.

a)ndragaqi/an—in remaining true to Athens.

ou) . . e)pedei/cate—‘you have now shown not to belong to your nature.’ Thuc. does not use e)pideiknu/nai in this sense elsewhere, but other authors, e.g. the orators, do. It is prob. unnecessary to read a)pedei/cate or u)pedei/cate. Steup renders ‘you showed afterwards.’

e)chle/gxqh e)s to\ a)lhqe/s—‘has been conclusively demonstrated.’

plei/w paraballo/menoi—they were ou) tw=n a)dunatwta/twn (II. 3); cf. § 2. For the verb cf. c. 14, 1.

fili/ws, ou) polemi/ws komi/santes—cf. the au)toi/ and pole/mioi of § 2, and c. 66 ou) polemi/ws e)pra/ssomen which show that the adverbs cannot apply merely to the Plat. and mean ‘with friendly, and not hostile intent to their fellow-citizens’; but must refer to the Theb. For this reason, and because komi/santes lacks an obj., Steup reads fili/ous and polemi/ous. But ‘in a friendly manner’ implies here ‘us as friends of Plataea,’ and komi/zein is used like de/xesqai. It is not necessary to have an obj. expressed; cf. e)pekale/santo above. The rest of the sentence shows that there is an intentional vagueness in the terms chosen: it was ‘a friendly transaction.’

u(mw=n—partitive, in unusual position; cf. c. 22, 5. mhke/ti ma=llon gene/sqai—xei/rous and a)mei/nous have a political meaning here, and are scarcely felt as comparatives: hence ma=llon is natural; ‘should henceforth not get more so.’

swfronistai\ . . oi)keiou=ntes—adopting Weil's view that gnw/mhs and swma)twn must be under the same governance, and that there must he a real antithesis between a(llotriou=ntes and oi)keiou=ntes, tr. ‘seeking to regulate opinion and persons, not alienating their city (handing it over to strangers), but bringing it home to the union of their kinsmen’ (the Boeotian confederacy). It is usual to take tw=n swma)twn with th\n po/lin, ‘not depriving the city of your persons’: this is very strange for ta\ sw/mata th=s po/lews a)llotriou=ntes. swfronistai/ of the party opposed to extreme democracy; cf. c. 82, 8. (For the antithesis of sw=ma and gnw/mh, Andoc. de Red. 24.)

e)xqrou\s . . e)nspo/ndous—“sc. u(ma=s; not breaking your peaceful relations with any state, e.g. Athens, but putting you in them on a footing with every other state, i.e. Thebes. Plataea was still, as they sophistically say, to enjoy the spondai/, but not on conditions peculiar to herself. a(/pasi depends on o(moi/ws” (Prof. Lamberton).

plh/qous—often used of the majority.

mh/te . . e)celqei=n—explaining ta\ o(moi=a.

ou(\s me\n . . a)lgou=men—the sentence takes an unexpected turn: instead of tou\s me\n a)pektei/nate we get a comment on that action. The rel. in each case is causal, =o(/ti tou\s me/n: cf. I. 68 ti/ dei= makrhgorei=n, w(=n (=e)pei\ h(mw=n) tou\s me\n . . , IV. 26 a)qumi/an de\ plei/sthn o( xro/nos parei=xe, ou(\s (=o(/ti au)tou)s) w)/|onto e)kpoliorkh/sein.

parano/mws—see c. 58, 3.

ka)ntau=qa—this emendation of kai\ tau=ta seems necessary, since tau=ta trei=s a)diki/as for ‘these as three wrongs’ is unexanipled.

luqei=san—for the constr. see on c. 53, 3.

ktei/nein—the pres. depends on the subst.: but the verb (u(pisxnou=mai) always has the fut. au)tw=n—au)ta/ referring to what has been mentioned, as often.

a)kou/ontes—‘by the account of.’ a)kou/wn, like klu/wn, is often used where we expect an aor. partic.

diplasi/as zhmi/as—the influence of the rel. does not extend to this clause.

ou)k e)k proshko/ntwn—i.e. contrary to what was to be expected of them.

w(=n—see on c. 2, 1 l. 3.

oi( de\ . . leleimme/noi—‘others left behind in old age and their homes desolate.’ The emendation kat: oi)ki/as or kai\ ai( oi)ki/ai, is necessary. The latter is better, because oi)ki/ai e)rh=moi should certainly be co-ordinate with oi\ de/, so as to correspond with th\n sfete)ran e)rhmi/an.

ta\ e)nanti/a—adverbial.

e)pi/xartoi—sc. a)/cioi/ ei/si.

di/kh kri/nantes together correspond to ui/sei.

ou)k a)ntapodo/ntes—i.e. they will not have done so, because the penalty will be e)/nnoma: whereas our suffering was a)/noma (§ 6; cf. pareno/mhsan); the aor. partic. alluding to fut. perf. time as if the main verb were fut., cf. e)kstrateusa)menoi c. 102. (Various changes have been proposed: (1) to alter a)ntapodo/ntes to fut., pres., or a)\n a/ntapodo/ntes, or to read a)ntapodo/ntes e)s nu=n: (2) or, keeping a)ntapodo/ntes, to start a new sentence at kai\ ou)k, placing e)/nnoma ga)r in parenthesis. It does not seem possible to separate the latter from pei/sontai. It is best to suppose a slight break after kri/nantes, as though the rest were an afterthought.)

kai\ h(mi=n—instead of a second obj. corresponding to kai\ tw=| no/mw|, a new verb follows: cf. c. 71, 1.

w(=n pro/qumoi g.—see § 3.

toi=s lo/gois—dat. of cause.

w(=n . . o)/ntwn depends on a)paggeli/a.

e)/pesi—‘fine phrases,’ =r(h/masi.

kefalaiw/santes—for the point see c. 52, 4.

pro\s tou\s cu/mpantas—‘with referenee to all,’ i.e. (as Classen) ‘as a warning to all.’ A summary question followed by a decision will serve to check rhetorical defences. (Weil conjectures pro\s to\ cu/mpan.)

poih/shsqe—attraction to u\mei=s, as in I. 82 o(/soi w(/sper kai\ h(mei=s e)pibouleuo/meqa.

l 20.

h)ndrapo/disan—‘sold as slaves.’ From II. 78 we know that 110 women were among the besieged Plat. (all the others had found refuge at Athens) and that these were all slaves already.

*qhbai=oi—removed by Classen, who maintained that the true subj. of e)/dosan is the Lac.; but cf. c. 58, 5 ei/ . . xw/ran th\n *plataii/da *qhbai+/da poih/sete. ta\ sfe/tera certainly seems to refer to the Thebans (cf. II. 2). (Herbst and Busolt defend the MS. reading.)

kata\ sta/sin—the circumstances are unknown.

e)k tw=n qemeli/wn—take with w)|kodo/mhsan.

pro\s tw=| *(hrai/w|—the site of the Heraeum and remains of the new\s li/qinos have in all probability been discovered (Am. J. of Archacol. 1891). It is likely that the temple previously existing was pulled down and replaced by the new one mentioned here.

katagw/gion—for those who came to worship at the temple: otherwise they would have had no shelter after the destruction of the city.

pantaxh=| is put with diakosi/wn podw=n (200 ft. square) by some edd., but more prob. belongs to ku/klw|=‘all round,’ as in VII. 79.

oi)kh/mata—for sleeping: they were in two stories.

toi=s a)/llois—instrumental, with kataskeua/santes.

tei/xei—i.e. inside the city. The sacred precinct lay ‘before the city’ (Herod. IX. 61).

kai/—intensive.

a)/rti to/te kaqista/menon refers to the fall of Plat., not to the beginning of the siege. Cf. c. 3, 1.

tri/tw| kai\ e)nenhkostw=|—519-427 B.C. But Grote showed that 509 B C. was the probable year of the alliance; hence it has been suggested that e)nenhkostw=| is due to an early error in an uncial MS., and that Thuc. wrote the uncial signs for o)gdohkostw=|.

e)peidh/—cf. I. 6 ou) polla e)/th e)peidh\ pe/pautai.

peri\ *nau/pakton—see c. 7, 3.

pri\n . . profqa/swsi—the constr. is o(/pws de\ profqa/swsi (a second reason of the plan adopted), pri/n . . , but for the sake of the antithesis between dw/deka . . paro/ntwn and ple/on ti e)pi. the order is changed.

a)fikome/nhs . . a)gousw=n—edd. say a)gousw=n must be plur. because both ships had pre/sbeis on board. Yet we find pred. in sing. applying to several subjects; I. 42, 1, IV. 31, 2, VI. 31, 1, VII. 44, 6, 58, 4. For the attraction cf. e. 72, 2.

katasta/ntwn—sc. tw=n pre/sbewn.

cugkei/mena—it was a defensive alliance only.

pro/teron means before the convention with Athens, when Corcyra had been on good terms with the Pel., though not in alliance with any one.

h)=n ga\r . . u(pa/gousin—the reason stated in advance in parenthesis; cf. c. 107, 3.

e)qelopro/cenos—only mentioned here; it prob. means that P. had not been appointed by Athens; and hence he could be prosecuted for his Athenian sympathies.

proeisth/kei—unofficial leader.

xa/rakas—‘vine-poles,’ Corcyra having many vineyards. The sites of the teme/nh are unknown. Alcinous is the Homeric king.

stath/r—of silver, worth 2 1/2 Attic drachmas, the only form of stater coined in Corcyra.

taca/menoi a)podw=sin—‘pay by a mutual arrangement,’ prob. on the instalment system.

tw=| te no/mw| e)cei/rgonto—nothing is to be supplied; ‘the law forced them, allowed them no escape.’ Cf. Herod. IX. 111 u(po\ tou= no/mou e)cergo/menos.

tou\s au)tou\s . . nomi/zein—i.e. to substitute a cummaxi/a, offensive and defensive alliance, for the existing e)pimaxi/a.

th=s au)th=s gnw/mhs—sc. o)/ntes.

w(s—‘as.’ They were to put matters in a good light.

a)nepith/deion—to Corcyra.

e)pistrofh/—lest ‘notice’ should be taken by Athens, resulting in some action against Corcyra. The pre/sbeis must have completely won over part of the refugee friends of Peithias to their side, since it was thought necessary to intern them in Aegina (B. Schmidt).

The accompanying map will explain the situation of the contending parties.

dei/santes—ingressive, ‘becoming afraid.’

au)toboei/—said to be an archaie word.

newri/ou—in the Harbour of Alcinous.

cunoiki/as—situated between the Agora and the Acropolis. The gen. adjj. that follow refer to both oi)ki/as and cunoiki/as. No doubt some of the o)li/goi had invested money in the tenements, and let them out, like the plutocrat pork-butcher in the Knights of Aristophanes.

e)kindu/neuse . . diafqarh=nai—cf. c. 40, 5.

w(s e(ka/teroi—‘on either side,’ an idiomatic phrase, to be taken with h(suxa)santes, which is ingressive (A. G. Laird in Am. J. of Phil. 1906, p. 43).

oi( tou= dh/mou prosta/tai—a bronze plate found on the site of the Corcyrean Agora and now in the Brit. Mus. contains a decree of the Corcyrean Assembly (a(li/a) appointing an Athenian ‘proxenus’ of Corcyra. Among the Corcyrean authorities mentioned in the decree, which is assigned to the 4th cent. B.C., oceurs prosta/tas *gna/qios. The prosta/tai therefore appear to have been a board of magistrates in Corcyra (Anc. Gr. Inscr. in the Brit. Mus. Pl. ii. p. 50).

cumpe/myein—sc. e)/fasan, by an idiom to which Thuc. is partial.

to\ *diosko/rwn i(ero/n—the site is unknown.

th=| tou= mh\ cumplei=n a)pisti/a|—‘by their distrust in sailing (i.e. in the proposal that they should sail) with them.’ The mh/ is added because the whole result is neg., as often; cf. II. 49 h) a)pori/a tou= mh\ h(suxa/zein, Plato, Apol. 38 D a)pori/a tou= mh\ e)qe/lein.

oi( a)/lloi—oligarchs, not confined to those who had refused to go on board the five ships.

to\ *(/hraion—see the map, with notes. The removal from the shrine of Castor and Pollux to the Heraeum is to be accounted for by (1) supposing that the latter was the principal shrine of the city, and (2) the necessity of getting 400 men into the te/menos. (Bloomfield's view that the Heraeum was superior in sanctity is fanciful.)

gi/gnontai—of the sum-total, as often.

tw=n poioume/nwn—not very common. for tw=n gignome/nwn.

*salamini/a kai\ *pa/ralos—see c. 33, 2. They had been with Paches at Mytilene; but must have joined Nicostratus at Naupactus.

mh\ o(/per e)n *naupa/ktw| ge/noito—in 429 B.C. when the Athenian admiral Phormio with twenty ships gained a great suceess over forty-seven Peloponnesian ships by similar tactics. Then, too, the enemy had adopted a similar circular formation.

o(/ti ma/lista with prokatafugei=n, ‘as much as possible.’ It might be taken equally well with e)bou/lonto, but the general sense of the passage favours the former.

e(autw=n—cf. c. 13, 7.

toiau/th—cf. c. 97, 3. (Heitland's idea that there is some irony in toiau/th is quite groundless: h)=n de\ ou)dei\s ko/smos in c. 77 refers to only one incident in the battle.)

kratou=ntes—concessive.

o)/ntas—see on ee. 2, 2; 80, 1.

*leuki/mmhn—at SE. of the island, still called Leokimo.

me/xri me/sou h(me/ras—Thuc. generally uses me/sos as an adj., but Xen. often has me/son as a noun.

a)pe/pleusan—to Sybota.

prosple/ousai a)po\ *leuka/dos—no doubt the fleet was not yet past Leucas when the signal was given. It appears presently (c. 81, 1) that Aleidas feared to sail round the island lest he should be seen by the Athenians. (It is not necessary to construe a)po\ *leuka)dos with e)fruktwrh/qhsan, as many do. Aleidas could not know how far on its way from Leucas the Athenian fleet had got; and his fear was not wholly groundless.) This is the first mention of Eurymedon, who afterwards served in Sicily and was killed during the siege of Syracuse.

punqano/menoi—‘on hearing of the strife and of the intention.’ Notice that the verb has a double constr. here. Commentators point out (1) that the Athenian fleet doubtless consisted to a large extent of ships returned from Lesbos: (2) that the news of the sta/sis was carried to Athens by the ship mentioned in c. 70.

labo/ntes—if genuine, best considered pleonastic (with Stahl), as we say ‘took and brought.’ Some think it a gloss on ei)/ tina la/boien below. To supply th\n po/lin (with L. Herbst) is forced, and involves an artificial, and highly improbable, explanation of the meaning. See crit. note.

tou\s *messhni/ous—see c. 75, 1.

peripleu=sai—from the harbour of Alcinous. The oligarchs who had been induced to embark would now be separated from their comrades in the Heraeum and the agora.

e)plh/rwsan—c. 80, 1.

a)pexrw=nto—very rare in this sense; cf. diaxrh=sqai in c. 36.

ta\ gigno/mena—i.e. from the Heraeum on high ground they saw their comrades being led off to execution.

w(s e(/kastoi e)du/nanto—the sing. might be expected, as in pa/ntes e)/fugon o(/ph? e)du/nato e(/kastos (Xen.), but the distinction is not always kept up.

pare/meine—it seems from this that Nicostratus had left by now. Thuc. has neglected to give his movements after his Messenians had been taken into the city.

sfw=n au)tw=n—partitive.

e)fo/neuon—rare word outside Herod., tragedy, and late writers.

th\n me\n ai)ti/an . . katalu/ousin—‘bringing the charge on the subverters of the democracy,’ i e. openly it was the oligarchs who were the object of their attack (th/n does not need explanation in the context after di/khn u(posxei=n above. Only oligarchs—and they not in all cases—were put on their trial.)

a)pe/qanon de/—transition from partic. to finite constr., as often; II. 47 lego/menon me\n . . e)mnhmoneu/eto de/, VII. 13 tw=n nautw=n me\n a)pollume/nwn, oi( de\ qera/pontes . . au)tomolou=si, sc. ta\ xrh/mata. Frequent throughout Gk.

u(po\ tw=n labo/ntwn—‘by their debtors,’ with a)pe/qanon. The Gk. justifies another way (Bohme), viz with o)feilome/nwn, ‘by those who caught them,’ but the point is not so good.

pa=sa) te i)de)a kate/sth qana/tou—Virgil's et plurima mortis imago (Aen. II. 369); cf. Tac. H. III. 28 varia pereuntium forma et omni imagine mortium.

kai\ e)/ti peraite/rw—sc. ou)deno\s o(/tou ou), i.e. panto/s, but the gen. is habitually omitted. Demosth. XLV. 73 has deino/n, w)= gh= kai\ qeoi/, kai\ pe/ra deinou=.

gigno/mena refers to time absolutely present, not contemporary with the main verb. MT'. § 141.

ma=llon . . dihllagme/na—i.e. varying in intensity and in form: ma=llon de\ kai\ h(suxai/tera form the first idea, adv. and adj. being combined, as either is possible separately with gi/gnetai. ma=llon kai\ h(suxai/tera gi/gnetai might also mean ‘it rises and falls in intensity’ on any given occasion, but the emphatic position of gigno/mena shows that it corresponds in sense to the emphatic e)/sti, not to the mere copula e)sti/.

w(s a)/n—‘according as.’

e)fistw=ntai—‘impose themselves,’ like a doom: kh=res e)festa=sin Il. XII. 326, Soph. OT. 776, Eur. Hipp. 819.

tou= kaq' h(me/ran—some think that bi/ou has fallen out before biai/ou, and certainly to\ kaq' h(me/ran is odd; but cf. to\ paro/n and ta\ paro/nta.

o)rga/s—‘dispositions.’

e)stasi/aze/ te—this passage down to the end of c. 83 is severely criticized by Dionysius Hal. de Thuc. iud. cc 29 f. for its artificial and far-fetched expressions

ta\ e)fusteri/zonta/ pou—‘the later cases,’ the cities that followed the example of discord set by others; a strange expression, as Dionysius says, but occasioned by ta\ tw=n po/lewn. Notice that pou=e)/n tini po/lei.

polu\ e)pe/fere—‘brought on much,’ i.e. carried much further.

dianoi/as—‘plans.’

tw=n . . a)topi/a|—lit. ‘through extreme ingenuity in their enterprises and strangeness in their revenges.’

a)ci/wsin belongs to e)s ta\ e)/rga, ‘in relation to facts,’ as well as to o)noma/twn. It is not necessary to repeat the art. before e)s because a)ci/wsis has another qualifying word.

th=| dikaiw/sei—by the arbitrary construction they put on them.

to\ d' e)mplh/ktws o)cu/—‘impulsive rashness’: cf. Plutarch, Eum. 3 e)/mplhkton kai\ fora=s mesto\n o)cei/as.

a)ndro\s moi/ra| prosete/qh—‘was ascribed, or set down, to the part of a man.’

a)sfalei/a| de\ . . eu)/logos—this appears to have been obscure already to Dionysius, who, while commenting on what precedes and what follows, discreetly leaves this alone. The usual explanation is as follows: (1) a)sfalei/a| is dat. of manner, in contrast with e)mplh/ktws; (2) to\ e)pibouleu/sasqai= ‘reconsideration,’ or ‘further reflexion’; (3) the verb to be supplied is e)nomi/sqh. Each of these suppositions is surprising a)potroph/=‘evasion.’ It has been proposed to supply prosete/qh (with Herbst and Fr. Müller) and to take a)potroph=s p. eu)/logos as apposition to to\ e)pibouleu/sasqai. We should then transl. ‘to form a hostile design was regarded as a measure of selfdefence, (being) the specious pretence of fending off enmity.’

l. 37

o( me\n xalepai/nwn—viz. about the political situation.

e)pibouleu/sas . . tuxw/n—‘if one had succeeded in a plot.’

deino/teros—of ability.

au)tw=n—viz. tou= e)pibouleu/ein kai\ u(ponoei=n.

e)pikeleu/sas—sc. kako/n ti dra=n. e)pikeleu/w ‘to encourage,’ of an authority, has dat; here keleu/w sets the constr. and e)pi/ is intensive.

kai\ mh/n introduces a new and important point (it never means ‘and yet’).

tou= e(tairikou=—‘the tie of party.’ To this e(toimo/teron refers.

w)feli/a|—‘to render help’ cf. the principle suggnw/mh a)delfw=| bohqei=n. This seems more likely than the usual explanation ‘for the public advantage.’

cu/nodoi—of political meetings, a word of sinister meaning in the political life of Gk. states, suggesting intrigue and treason. The verb is e)ge/nonto and had Thuc. written w)feli/as e(/neka and pleoneci/as above, all would have been clear.

e)s sfa=s au)tou/s=e)s a)llh/lous, a common use.

tw=| qei/w| no/mw|—i.e. it was not the oaths witnessed by the gods—qew=n o(/rkoi—that bound them when they exchanged pledges. Cf., for example, Eur. Med. 21 boa=| me\n o(/rkous, a)nakalei= de\ decia/s, | pi/stin megi/sthn, kai\ qeou\s martu/retai, and the celebrated passage in the same play, 439 be/bake d' o(/rkwn xa/ris, ou)d' e)/t' ai)dw\s *(ella/di ta=| mega/la| me/nei, with Verrall's notes.

ta/ te a)po\ tw=n e)nanti/wn—the sense (says Prof. Lamberton) is, ‘when fair proposals were made by the adversary, the other party, when they had the advantage of superiority, would receive them not in a spirit of generosity, but only with practical precautions’ Thus oi( e)ndexo/menoi, not oi( e)nanti/oi, is the subject of prou/xoien. This is surely correct, though the passage is usually taken as if oi( e)nanti/oi denoted the stronger party, and the subject of e)nede/xonto were ‘the weaker.’ The right version is given by Herbst, who says “How can it be supposed that from the party that had the upper hand at the moment proposals should emanate that were generous to the weaker side, and how can any one conceive that generosity (gennaio/ths) should lead the weaker side to accept them?” For e)/rgwn fulakh=| cf c. 46, 4.

o(/rkoi . . cunallagh=s—‘oaths to confirm a reconciliation’; cf. Andocides, de Myst. 103 dihlla/ghte kai\ o(/rkous w)mo/sate.

pro\s to\ a)/poron e(. dido/menoi—‘as they were administered to either side only to meet an emergency.’ It is surely unnecessary to regard e(kate/rw| as dat of agent, as is usually done.

ou)k e)xo/ntwn applies to those who took the oaths tendered—i.e. it applies by sense to e(kate/rw|—and explains pro\s to\ a)/poron. o(/rkon di/dwmi generally means ‘I administer an oath,’ but in Eur. Hipp. 735 ‘I take an oath.’ The ordinary meaning gives an equallv good sense here.

e)n de\ tw=| paratuxo/nti—‘when a chance occurred.’

o( fqa/sas qarsh=sai—see MT. 903. 8, where grave doubts are raised as to the possibility of the infin. with fqa/nw in place of the ordinary partic. As fqa/sas qarsh/sas is intolerable, it is best to give the text as it stands, leaving the point undecided. The paraphrase of Dionysius is worth notice: ei) de/ pou paratu/xoi tini\ kairo\s kai\ ma/qoi to\n e)xqro\n a)fu/lakton, h(/dion e)timwrei=to o(/ti pisteu/santi ma=llon e)pe/qeto h)\ fulattome/nw|. dia\ th\n pi/stin applies to the enemy, as having confidence in the oath.

h)\ a)po\ tou= profanou=s=‘than when he attacked openly,’ giving the other side a fair chance.

r(a=|on d' oi( polloi\ . . a)gaqoi/—‘most men are more readily called elever if they are knaves than good if they are ignorant’ Another way of taking this is: ‘most men prefer to be called clever knaves rather than honest fools.’ The Gk favours the first. the connexion with the previous sentence the second. To make the latter way easier Steup brackets o)/ntes.

pa/ntwn d' au)tw=n ai)/tion—‘the cause of all that was office (i.e. the desire of office), resting on covetousness and ambition.’

e)k d' au)tw=n—viz. pleoneci/as kai\ filotimi/as.

kaqistame/nwn—masc., ‘when men were settling down to.’ The kai/ belongs, not merely to e)s to\ filonikei=n, but to the whole phrase to pro/qumon.

plh/qous . . sw/fronos—these are the fine names that were used for dhmokrati/a and o)ligarxi/a. i)sonomi/a was a catchword with democrats, swfrosu/nh with aristocrats.

a)=qla—this suggests several of the words that follow— a)gwnizo/menoi, perigene/sqai, e)pech=|san (the last unusual with object)—the general idea being that of a desperate struggle between enemies. (Very like is Xen Cyr. II. 2, 18-19.)

e)/ti mei/zous—as compared with the tolmh/mata.

prostiqe/ntes—from Dionysins, in place of protiqe/ntes of the MSS., for ‘to threaten’ hardly suits with what precedes.

yh/fou a)di/kou—best taken as subjective gen. depending on katagnw/sews.

xeiri/—the contrast is between force and the forms of law.

e)no/mizon—with dat., as xrh=sqai.

eu)prepei/a| de\ lo/gou—since eu)se/beia and lo/gou eu)pre/peia are not a proper contrast, many suppose that the contrast to the former is to be found in e)pifqo/nws ti, and consequently attach eu)prepei/a| de\ lo/gou to the rel. sentence, ‘those who managed to hide some malicious act under fair words.’ But the me\n . . de/ contrast is not between single words, but between the two sentences as a whole: eu)se/beia is ‘a name for piety,’ as e.g. in Soph. Ant. 924 th\n dusse/beian (‘reputation of being dussebh/s’) eu)sebou=s' e)kthsa/mhn, ‘on this pretence, covering an odious act, earned a better reputation.’ Thuc not seldom puts two similar words (eu)se/beia—eu)pre/peia) in contrast that do not really form an antithesis.

ta\ de\ me/sa tw=n politw=n—for the moderate element and the preference given to it by so many thinking men cf. Eur. Suppl. 244 triw=n de\ moirw=n h( 'n me/sw| sw/|zei po/leis.

o( dialu/swn—‘there was nothing to . . neither.’ The fut. partic. as in Aesch. PV. 27 o) lwfh/swn ga\r ou) pe/fuke/ pw. (Steup is mistaken in supposing that h)=n must be the copula in our sentenee, if o( dialu/swn is taken as above.)

krei/ssous . . bebai/ou—the best way of taking this is as follows: (1) all men when they had the upper hand, by reflecting on the hopelessness of security took precaution rather against attack than were capable of trust in others.’ Thus logismw=| . . bebai/ou is to be taken together and refers to proesko/poun. But two other versions must be noticed: (2) ‘finding more strength in calculation against the unexpected than in pledges.’ Then tou= bebai/ou=h)\ tw=| bebai/w|. (3) ‘Being more inclined in their calculations to despair of security’ (or ‘than to security’). The last seems an impossible version of krei/ssous o)/ntes. The passage prob. repeats the thought of c. 82, 7.

gnw/mhn—‘understanding.’

e)k tou= polutro/pou—‘in consequence of their’—resemblance to Odysseus.

fqa/nwsi proepibouleuo/menoi—Gildersleeve is surely right in reading fqa/nwsi here, in accordance with the law that fqa/nw poiw=n and e)/fqasa poih/sas are the correct forms.

katafronou=ntes—causal. For the constr. cf. Xen. Hell. IV. 5, 12 katefronou=n mhde/na a)\n e)pixeirh=sai.

au)tw=n—vaguely referring to the ill deeds previously described. proutolmh/qh—pro- denotes before the rest of Greece.

kai\ o(po/sa—the kai/ is probably answered by oi)/ te mh/ ktl. below. The first clause requires a)/n, which has perhaps fallen out either after o(po/sa or dra/seian.

u(po\ tw=n . . parasxo/ntwn with a)rxo/menoi. Hitherto they have been ruled oppressively by those who now give opportunity for revenge. Instead of parasxo/ntwn something like h)/dh parexo/ntwn seems required. The oligarchs are meant.

dia\ pa/qous . . e)/xein—there has been much discussion of these words. tines and ma/lista d' seem to show that dia\ pa/qous must be intended as a contrast to peni/as . . a)pallacei/ontes, passion versus sheer poverty. But pa/qos=‘emotion’ or ‘passion’ occurs nowhere else before Aristotle: in Thuc. it=‘a disaster.’ (To take ta\ tw=n pe/las as equivalent to tou\s pe/las, and dia\ pa/qous e)/xein like di' o)rgh=s e)/xein does not get over the difficulty, and does not yield a proper contrast.)

e)pi\ pleoneci/a|—i.e prompted by oppression, poverty or downright passion

a)po\ i)/sou—‘on equal terms’ with their adversaries already. Only here in Thuc. in place of a)po\ tou= i)/sou.

e)pe/lqoien—sc. a)/n from the previous sentences. The omission is rather awkward and unusual in so long a sentence.

w)mw=s and

a)paraith/tws only here in Thuc.

e)s to\n kairo\n tou=ton—‘at this crisis,’ like e)s mi/an h(me/ran in VI. 16, Aristoph. Pax 366 ei)s ti/n' h(me/ran;

kai\ para\ tou\s no/mous a)dikei=n—cf. c. 82, 6 para\ tou\s kaqestw=tas (no/mous). As Stahl says, we expect krath/sasa after tou\s no/mous, ‘even when the laws are generally respected.’ Steup suggests the loss of pri/n after kai/ but Dio Cass. knew the passage as it stands.

e)dh/lwsen . . ou)=sa—obj. of dhlw= replaced by the partic., as often; cf. I 21 o( po/lemos dhlw/sei mei/zwn gegenhme/nos.

tou= prou/xontos—neut.

e)n w(=|—lit. ‘in a case in which,’ amounting to ei). Cf. II. 35 xalepo\n to\ metri/ws ei)pei=n e)n w(=| mo/lis kai\ h( do/khsis th=s a)lhqei/as bebaiou=tai.

a)ciou=si/ te—the sense is clearly given by Arnold thus: Men in their violence set the example of doing away with those common laws of humanity which all parties alike might have appealed to in their adversity, and by their own previous conduct put themselves out of the pale of those laws, when they themselves might have occasion to solicit their protection. By the koinoi\ no/moi the koino\s no/mos o( kata\ fu/sin, as Aristotle (Rhet. I. 13) calls it, is of course meant. See n. on c. 58, 3. Plato in the Laws (p. 793) says these observances are the desmoi\ pa/shs politei/as.

u(polei/pesqai—middle.

diesw/qhsan—aor. as plup., a common idiom in parenthesis.

tei/xh—built by Corcyra to protect its territory on the mainland against the neighbouring tribes, Chaones and Thesprotians.

e)lh/zonto—viz. the fertile central part of the island, e)ceirgasme/nh pagka/lws kai\ pefuteume/nh xw/ra, as Xenophon calls it (Hell. VI 2, 6).

u(/steron xro/nw|—always of a considerable interval. It is most probable that the crossing occurred in the spring of 426 B.C.

th\n *)istw/nhn—in IV. 46 we have e)n tw=| o)/rei th=s *)istw/nhs. It has been made highly probable (by B. Schmidt) that Istone is the whole mountain-range in the NE. of Corcyra. It is possible that the name belonged also to a particular height in the range.

kaqe/stasan—when the war had broken out is not known.

plh\n *kamarinai/wn—Camarina, founded circa 600 B.C. from Syracuse, was dependent on the mother-city, revolted in 553 B.C. and was destroyed. In 492 B.C. it was restored by Hippocrates, tyrant of Gela, but shortly afterwards was again involved in war with Syracuse, and was again destroyed. Its third building occurred circa 460 B.C.

to\ prw=ton emphasizes a)rxome/nou.

*xalkidikai/—Naxos, Catana, Himera. They are so called because their origin was Chalcis in Euboea.

*)itali/as in the confined sense that it bears in Greek authors, the modern Calabria, the peninsula reaching to the Laus on W. and to Metapontum on E.: a)po\ a)/kras *)iapugi/as me/xm porqmou= *sikelikou= is the definition of Dionysius.

kata\ to\ cuggene/s—Rhegium, too, was Chalcidian.

pe/myantes—this is the famous embassy that was headed by Gorgias of Leontini. The reticence of Thuc. on the matter is characteristic.

palaia\n cummaxi/an—the only alliance we know of is that of 433 B.C., but six years seems too short a time to be denoted by palaio/s. Hence it is assumed that an earlier alliance existed. But some have thought that Thuc. wished to obscure the fact that Pericles was responsible for the alliance with Leontini, in order to make it appear that Pericles was in no sense responsible for the intervention in Sicily.

boulo/menoi de\ mh/te . . pro/peira/n te poiou/menoi— to make the sentence quite symmetrical, poiei=sqai should have been written in place of poiou/menoi.

dunata\ ei)/h—personal constr.

katasta/ntes—i.e. they chose Rhegium as their base.

ma=llon e)ka/kwse—no doubt this passage was written before the disastrous Sicilian Expedition of 415 B.C.

e)k tw=n ta/cewn—i.e. e)k katalo/gou, from those liable to serve as hoplites, those of the three higher (Solonian) elasses who wcre on the lists. Men were liable to ordinary service between the ages of 20 and 50. The fourth class—qh=tes— served only in the fleet; these with me/toikoi and dou=loi are included in o( a)/llos o)/xlos. The number of the hoplites on the lists at the beginning of the war was about 15,500. The cavalry numbered 1000.

oi(—as being well-known.

*boiwti/w|—the other was in Arcadia.

ne/montai—the word is used of enjoyment of profits derived, which may or may not be combined with occupation.

e)n th=| *(iera=|—still called Vulcano The coins of Lipara show Hephaestus seated, with a hammer. The group of islands, seven in all, is still called Liparian or Aeolian. The full name seems to have been *(iera\ *(hfai/stou—Vulcani nomine sacra it is called in the Aetna.

*stroggu/lh now Stromboli, is there described as cui nomen facies dedit ipsa Rotunda.

w(s—very unusual constr. with nomi/zw.

ai)/tion in apposition to the sentence, ‘as for the cause of such an oceurrence.’ Cf. I. 23 th\n a)lhqesta/thn pro/fasin tou\s *)aqhnai/ous h(gou=mai . . a)nagka/sai (au)tou\s) e)s to\n po/lemon. The great earthquake at Messina has afforded a striking illustration of this chapter.

a)poste/llein—the subject of this and of poiei=n is to\n seismo/n. The MSS. give e)pispwme/nhn, but either epispwme/nwn (mid.) or e)pispwme/nhs (pass., sc. th=s qala/sshs) seems necessary. biaio/teron is best regarded as fem., as in dusesbolw/tatos h( *lwkri/s c. 103, unless, indeed, in a confnsed passage, biaiote/ran should be read.

a)/n with cumbh=nai.

e)ru/mati=frouri/w|.

oi( *messh/nioi—strangely placed in the middle of the gen. abs., but the order is not without parallel. Messena commands the strait between Sicily and Italy, and was therefore a valuable acquisition.

pista\ parasxo/menoi—‘giving trustworthy assurances.’ pista/ is to be taken as pred., not as substantive.

*mhli/ous—Melos, like Thera, had, as a Lacedaemouian colony, held aloof from the Athenian alliance. But they had taken no part in the war. It is known that Thera now submitted.

au)tw=n—it is hardly necessary to read au(tw=n here. Cf. Xen. Cyr. I. 1, 5 e)duna/sqh e)piqumi/an e)mbalei=n tou= au)tw=| xari/zesqai.

e)s *)wrwpo\n th=s *grai+kh=s—on the horders of Attica and Boeotia. It belonged to Athens. For th=s *graikh=s cf. II. 23 th\n gh=n th\n *graikh\n kaloume/nhn. The name belonged to the coast opposite Eretria. In II. 23 it is corrupted into *peirai+kh/n.

oi( o(pli=tai a)po\ tw=n new=n—prob. to be taken together in spite of the absence of art. before a)po/. In II. 80 we have to\ nautiko\n e)k . . , and in II. 18 kata\ th\n a)/llhn porei/an h( sxolaio/ths.

pandhmei/—i.e. with the whole available army. 16

*(ipponi/kou tou= *kalli/ou—son of that Callias who negotiated peace with Persia in 470 B.C. The family was reputed the richest in Greece. The younger Callias, son of Hipponicus, was a very well-known man. Hipponicus was proxenus of Sparta. He fell at the battle of Delium, 424 B.C.

e)n th=| *tana/gra|—i.e. in the neighbourhood of Tanagra.

th=| u(sterai/a| ma/xh|—to be taken separately, th=| u(sterai/a| having h(me/ra| supplied. Herbst, who investigated the use of the phrase, came finally to the conclusion that alone it means ‘on the next day,’ but that sometimes a subst. is supplied from what precedes, in I. 44 e)kklhsi/a|, in VII. 11 ma/xh|.

prosqei=nai—the verb is used of bringing into permanent relationship, whether as friend or foe or dependent: so pro/skeimai.

mhtro/polis—from this region the Dorians were sprung. A fragment of Tyrtaeus says of them: prolipo/ntes *erineo\n h)nemo/enta | eu)rei=an *pe/lopos nh=son a)fiko/meqa.

kaqi/stasqai—notice the pres. and contrast I. 36 kalw=s kei=tai (of Corcyra) tou= para/plou (the voyage to Sicily). quod fit non est, sed erit, says Stahl. The gen. tou= pole/mou depends on the phrase, on the analogy of xrhsi/mws, kalw=s e)/xei, w(s e)/xei etc. h( po/lis is, of course, the colony to be.

th=s e)pi\ *qra/|khs paro/dou—it was from Heraclea that Brasidas started on his dash through Thessaly, to the great injury of Athens in Chalcidice (ta\ e)pi\ *qra)|khs).

to/ te cu/mpan—summing up.

to\n qeo\n e)ph/ronto—the usual custom before sending out a colony.

perioi/kwn—the descendants of the old Achaean stock, without political rights, living mainly by trade. They were largely drawn upon for military service outside Peloponnese.

*)axaiw=n—some Achaeans afterwards settled there notwithstanding.

*)alki/das—c. 16, etc.

e)k kainh=s—adverbial, like a)po\ th=s i)/shs I. 15, a)po\ (th=s) prw/ths etc.; di' o)rqh=s, ‘aright,’ Soph. Ant. 994.

ei)=rcan to\ kata\ *q—‘barred the (approach) on the side towards Th.,’ i.e. built a barrier across the pass (steno/n), to protect harbour and arsenal from the Thessalians.

ai)/tion de\ h)=n oi(/ te—the other passages in Thuc. which are introduced by ai)/tion, show the following constrs.:— (1) ai)/tion d' h)=n o(/ti II. 65. (2) ai)/tion h)=n oi( with nom partic. IV. 26. Here we have a third variety. Compare tekmh/rion de/, usually followed by ga/r. (It does not seem necessary to alier the text here. If anything is wrong, it is most prob. that h)=n should be bracketed, and a comma paced at de/, as in the constr to\ d' ai)/tion, e)n toi=s pe/nhsin h)=n to\ lh|tourgei=n, Demosth. de Cor. 108.）

oi(/ te *qe/ssaloi . . kai\ w(=n—i.e. both the Th. and (those others, besides the Th.) whose land was threatened by the new colony, viz. the Dolopes, Oetaeans, and other tribes. This is decidedly simpler than making w)=n apply still to the Thessalians and taking te as co-ordinate with ou) me/ntoi below.

pa/nu pollou/s—we do not know the number: Diodorus' figures, amounting to 10,000, are untrustworthy.

ou) me/ntoi—the combination ou) de/ being avoided.

oi( a)fiknou/menoi—perhaps annually.

a(/—internal accus., e)chgou/menoi being here absolute.

e)/cw—sc. tou= i)sqmou=, the land they had in *lcarnania. For the isthmus see c. 81, 1.

to\ i(ero/n—at the southernmost corner of the island.

oi( de\ *)akarna=nes—Leucas and Anactorium (c. 114, 3) Corinthian colonies, controlled the entrance to the Ambracian gulf.

a)poteixi/zein—‘to cut them off from the mainland.’ In c. 95, 2 this projected wall is referred to as peritei/xisis, i.e. wall from sea to sea.

u(po\ *messhni/wn—the Messenians of Naupactus (see c. 75) probably had Aetolians for immediate neighbours (Woodhouse, Aetolia p. 336).

w(s kalo/n—se. e)sti/.

*naupa/ktw| te . . kai\ h)/n —the second cause is expressed in an independent form—infin. with verb of saying supplied. A good parallel is IV. 3 lime/nos te proso/ntos, kai\ tou(s *messhni/ous . . plei=st' a)\n bla/ptein.

dia\ pollou=—‘far apart.’

*)apodwtoi=s—this tribe is to the NE. of Naupactus.

*)ofioneu=si—N. of the Apodoti.

*eu)ruta=sin—N. and E. of the Ophioneis. All three tribes belong to New Aetolia, *ai)twli/a e)pi/kthtos, as distinct from Old Aetolia, h( a)rxai/a, of the Iliad. (All that can be known about the tribes will be found in Woodhouse, Aetolia.）

kai\ ta)=lla prosxwrh/sein “refers back to the expression to\ a)/llo h)peirwtiko\n to\ tau/th|—by which we must understand the Messenians (or Thucydides) to mean that the Athenian ‘sphere of influence’ in Western Hellas would be enormously extended if the three Aetolian tribes were subjugated. It would be diffienlt, however, to state precisely what tribes were in the historian's mind” (Woodhouse).

triakosi/ois—ten to a trireme, as usual at this period.

e)stra/teusen—most probably he sailed up the gulf to Naupactus and thence to Oeneon in Locri where he landed (cf. c. 89, 3). (The site of the latter is fully discussed by Woodhouse, l.c.）

ou(=toi—as distinet from the Opuntian and Epicnemidian Locrians who were allies of Sparta.

e)/dei—‘were to.’ The Locrians showed no alacrity, and seem to have done nothing to help Demosthenes in the expedition. They were not keen allies of Athens (Woodhouse, Aetolia, p. 351).

*potidani/an—“situated exactly opposite to the only ford of the river Mórnos” (Woodhouse). The ancient name of the river was probably Daphnos. The town is at the extreme SW. of Apodotia, just over the border.

*kroku/leion . . *tei/xion—Demosthenes marched to the NE. from Potidania into Apodotia, attacking the towns in succession. Both places have been identified (by Bazin and Woodhouse). Teichium is close to the border of Ophioneia.

*eu)pa/lion—now Sulés, near Potidania.

ta\ a)/lla katastreya/menos—i.e. the rest of Apodotia, before advancing into Ophionea. The Locrian light-armed troops had not yet turned up, and Demosthenes had gone only a very short way when he found it desirable to modify his plan considerably.

e)s *nau/pakton—as the best base for operating against Ophionea.

ou)k e)la/nqanen . . ou)/te o(/te . . e)peidh/ te—“ou)/te,” says Prof. Lamberton, “is before o(/te, because the contrast connects itself most closely and naturally with the different points of time.” The sequence is irregular, but the sentence is quite clear.

oi( e)/sxatoi . . *kallih=s—these tribes, then, must be the easternmost of the Ophioneis. kaqh/kontes is not to be understood to mean that they extended right down to the Malian Gulf, but rather marks the direction. (It is possible that oi( . . kaqh/kontes is an addition to the text, a note made after Heraclea became part of Aetolia, which happened in 280 B.C.)

th=| tu/xh| e)lpi/sas—causal dat., ‘rendered sanguine by his fortune.’ His confidence is amazing.

e)xw/rei e)pi\ *ai)giti/ou—recent authorities have made it highly probable that Aegitium is Velúchovos, which, Woodhouse says, is the strongest fortress in Aetolia. It is in Ophionea. If this is so, notice (1) that Demosthenes has completely accepted the original plan of the Messenians, (2) that he has crossed the river Daphnos since advancing from Teichium. It is likely that Thuc. did not know of this river.

o)gdoh/konta—the distance is really a little over a hundred stades—thirteen miles The difference can scarcely be regarded as a serious argument against the identification of the site. (Possibly H, i.e. e(kato/n, in an early uncial MS. reappeared as *p' by a copyist's error.)

bebohqhko/tes ga\r . . h)=san—viz. the relief force; see c. 96, 3. The delay at Teichium had given them the opportunity.

o(po/te—this, and not o)/te, is prob. correct, as elsewhere Thuc. uses o)/te only with indic.—The country through which the Athenians retreated on Oeneon was exceedingly wild and difficult.

kata\ po/das—‘promptly,’ ‘rapidly.’

h(liki/a h( au)th/—‘and men of the same efficiency.’ The phrase is so compressed that it has become obscure. Thuc. means ou(=toi (oi(\) tosou=toi (h)=san) to\ plh=qos kai\ h(liki/a h( au)th\ (h)=san); and h(liki/a is collective. It is impossible to render ‘in the prime of life too,’ because it is obvious that all who were serving must be part of the h(liki/a, or those of military age.

fobou/menos—doubtless he feared impeachment (ei)saggeli/a), possibly on a grafh\ prodosi/as. As soon as Demosthenes should return, he would be a private citizen, since he had not been elected Strategus for the official year 426 (summer)-425 (summer).

pentako/sioi—these 500 adventurous Heracleots are not mentioned again. The reason why they are mentioned at all is their surprisingly large number.

cunhkolou/qoun—according to the Spartan custom, in case anything happened to Eurylochus.

*)amfissh=s—extreme E. of Loeri, near to Phocis. As for the Phocians see n. on c. 95, 1. Locri and Phocis were on opposite sides.

ou)=n—‘to be sure,’ or ‘indeed,’ as in ga\r ou)=n. It has nothing to do with me/n here.

*muone/as—i.e. Myonia lay on the natural route through Locri. The names of the places that follow need not be considered.

dusesbolw/tatos—for the fem. form cf. c. 89, 5.

geno/menoi—viz. the force under Eurylochus.

ta\ e)k th=s *ai)twli/as—e)k of the source of the cumfora/.

e)pi\ tw=n new=n—for ‘on board their (Acarnanian) ships’ we should expect e)pi\ tw=n sfete/rwn new=n. If the text is right, it is probable (as Widmann says) that some of the thirty Athenian ships had not returned home and that c. 98, 5 is therefore inaccurate.

e)s th\n . . *kaludw=na . . *pleurw=na—‘to the Aeolis that is now (so) called, Calydon and Pleuron,’ i.e. to New Aeolis. We know that the name Aeolis was once confined to the territory of Calydon; but Pleuron had been added to it. Calydon and Pleuron are two of the five cities of Old Aetolia mentioned in the Iliad (The usual rendering ‘to Aeolis which is now called Calydon and Pleuron’ really makes no sense, for Thuc. could not refer so to two cities far more famous in the heroic days than in his own.)

e)s ta\ tau/th| xwri/a—other parts of Old Aetolia. *ai)twlw=n d' h(gei=to *qo/as oi(\ *pleurw=n' e/ne/monto kai\ *)/wlenon h)de\ *pulh/nhn *xalki/da t' a)gxi/alon *kaludw=na/ te petrh/essan (Il. II. 638-640). Proschium is Pylene.

*)amprakiw=tai—Amphilochian Argos now belonged to Amphilochians and Acarnanians. But the Ambraciots, who had once possessed it, and had been turned out by the help of Athens, in 437 B.C., wanted to recover it. They had made a vain attempt to do so in 430 B.C. The Ambraciots were in alliance with Sparta.

pa=n to\ h)peirwtiko/n—cf. c. 94, 3. In 429 B.C. the Ambraciots had held out hopes to Sparta of acquiring (1) Acarnania (2) Zacynthus and Cephallenia, (3) Naupactus. It is noteworthy that nothing is said this time about the islands, doubtless because the crushing naval defeats the Peloponnesians had sustained from Phormio in 429 and their rough experiences again during the troubles in Corcyra made any project for the acquisition of these islands hopeless. Since the latter events, it is hardly surprising that Athens did not trouble to acquire Leucas (see c. 94, 2).

e)kstrateusame/nois—‘when they (should) have taken the field.’

peri\ to\ *)/argos—with bohqei=n.

*kai+ki=non—unknown. Take kata\ to\n *k. with e)kra/thsan.

qh=kai—‘coffins.’ Notice the not very common attraction of the antecedent into the case of the rel., though the antecedent is not placed in the rel. clause. Thompson2 § 50 D. In Latin this eonstr., familiar from urbem quam statuo vestra est, is an old colloquialism.

*polukra/ths—he ruled 532-521 B.C. According to Herod. III. 164 Samos was poli/wn pase/wn prw/th in his time.

*nh/swn—the Cyclades.

a)/rcas is ‘making himself master of,’ ingressive.

tw=| *)apo/llwni—Apollo was worshipped much earlier than the time of Polycrates in the rocky island of Rhenea; Hymn to Apollo 44—see on § 4—written not later than 600 B.C. Cf. Theocritus XVII. 70 i)=son kai\ *(rh/naian a)/nac e)fi/lhsen *)apo/llwn.

th\n pentethri/da—the first celebration probably took place in March (Anthesterion) 425 B.C.

ta\ *dh/lia—‘(namely) the Delia.’ The words are bracketed by some edd., but Diodorus, whose account is derived from Thuc. (through Ephorus), says e(poi/hsan panh/gurin th\n tw=n *dhli/wn.

cu/nodos—in celebration of the god's birth.

e)qew/roun—‘attended the festival.’

e)s ta\ *)efe/sia—in honour of Artemis (h( *)efesi/a qeo/s).

xorou/s te a)nh=gon—from the meaning ‘lift up’ a cry, etc, a)na/gw comes to mean ‘set going,’ ‘start’; Eur. Tro. 325 a)/nag' a)/nage xoro/n. Notice the metrical xorou/s t' a)nh=gon ai( po/leis.

*(/omhros—the blind bard “of Chios,” who wrote this prize poem, was, according to a scholiast on Pindar, Cynaethus of Chios.

e)k prooimi/ou—the quotations are from the famous “Homeric hymn” to Apollo; it was actually sung at the festival, where it received a prize.

a)ll' o(/te. = Hymn to Apollo 146-150, with important variations from the version of the hymn as found in the extant MSS. ‘But when your heart rejoices most in Delos.’

e(lkexi/twnes—alluding to the long robes of the Ionians in early times, almost obsolete in the days of Thuc.

sh\n e)s a)guia/n—meaning uncertain; the square before the temple of Apollo, where the a)gw/n was held, is the suggestion of Sikes ad loc. The I. in the MSS. of the hymn stands au)toi=s su\n pai/dessi kai\ ai)doi/h|s a)lo/xoisin.

kaqe/swsin a)gw=na—‘have made the assembly sit down,’ to start the contests. a)gw/n is ‘an assembly at games’. see Leaf on Iliad XV. 428. The MSS. of the hymn have sth/swntai a)gw=na.

to\n ga\r *dhliako\n xoro\n tw=n gunaikw=n—the enlogy of the kou=rai *dhlia/des, Delian women who sang the chorus, immediately precedes the passage about to be quoted.

tou= e)pai/nou—viz. of the Delian women. For the gen. cf. c. 59, 4.

a)ll' a)/geq'.=H. to Apollo 165-172.

u(pokri/nasqai a)fh/mws—‘answer with one accord,’ i.e. o(mofh/mws. The scholiast gives a(qro/ws. The reading a)fh/mws is supported by that of the MSS. of the hymn, a)f' h(me/wn (or similar). Inferior MSS. of Thuc. give eu)fh/mws.

tuflo\s a)nh/r—“this line,” says Sikes, “was at least partly the origin of the tradition that Homer was blind, and lived in Chios.”

kai\ ta\ plei=sta—‘and most parts’ of the cu/nodos.

u(po\ cumforw=n—when Persia set her heel on the necks of the Ionians.

pri\n dh/—see on c. 29, 1.

pe/mpousi—to Naupactus. Demostheues was not, strictly speaking, Strategus now, but he still had charge of the defence of Naupactus, and therefore continued to hold an official position until he should be relieved by the arrival at Naupactus of the twenty ships here referred to.

po/lin—Ambracia.

h( ma)xh ge/nhtai—the expected battle. The phrase is passive of th\n ma/xhn poiei=sqai.

au)=qis—‘then,’ or ‘afterwards.’ It is usual to make *medew=nos depend on par' e)/sxata; but Herbst seems right in taking *medew=nos with dia/, and making par' e)/sxata modify the namc of both districts; i.e. they went along the border of Phytia and also of Medionia.

*)agrai+ko/n for a)groi=kon of the MSS., which is not used of districts, is a certain emendation.

to\n lo/fon if genuine, is in apposition to ta\s *)/olpas, but the description does not seem likely or necessary after c. 105, 1.

*)amfilo/xwn—i.e. those of Amphilochia generally; for the reason why the majority were restrained from taking part in the fighting see c. 114, 3.

meta/—Demosthenes was to be Commander-in-chief.

xara/dra . . mega/lh—this has been recognized in a brook, the banks of which are overshadowed with plane-trees; cf. the o\do\s koi/lh kai\ loxmw/dhs.

kata\ to\ u(pere/xon—where the enemy's line (the left wing, c. 108, 1) outflanked them.

o)li/gwn—a strange way of referring to the sixty Athenian archers: we should expect simply meta\ tw=n *)aq. Possibly o)li/gwn is an addition to the text.

e)pei=xon governs to\ de\ a)/llo. The Acarnanians were in separate contingents, each under its own commander.

a)nami/c—on the right wing the Ambraciots evidently were the principal troops; cf. e. 108, 2.

w(s . . nenikhme/non—this is what they found on returning from the pursuit of the enemy's left. The inference is clearly that to\ ple(on also retreated to Olpae; cf. e)s fugh\n . . katasth=sai above. With a colon instead of the usual comma after *)/olpas, the difficulty that has been found in making au)tw=n presently refer—as it must do—to the whole army, disappears.

au)tw=n—‘of the armv.’ It cannot mean ‘of the right wing’ only, since the Mantineans were posted almost on the left wing.

prospi/ptontes—‘while rushing to the fortress of Olpae.’

w(/sper u(ph=rxe—‘as well as circumstances allowed.’

oi(=s e)de/doto—sc. e)kei=noi.

proloxiou=ntas—referring to the collective me/ros.

ta\ kartera/—strong positions in the hills.

oi( a)/lloi—i.e. the Peloponnesians who were not included in the secret agreement.

o(/soi . . cunecelqo/ntes—‘as many, that is, who had chanced to go out (from Olpac) in a body fortuitously with the others.’ This is the best interpretation of a passage that has been very much discussed. Notice (1) me/n. with no corresponding de/, implies a contrast: part remained behind in Olpae; (2) ou(/tws=w(s ei)=xon, ‘just by chance’; (3) the aorist partic. with e)tu/gxanon is unusual, the rule being e)tu/gxanon+ pres. or perf. partic. e)/tuxon+aor. partic.; (4) cunelqo/ntes, the other reading, would mean, ‘to have met together in Olpae.’ A great number of emendations have been proposed, but the reading of the MSS. gives a satisfactory sense. If (3) is a fatal objection, then (a) a comma must be placed at ou(/tws, and the latter must be considered to point forward to cunecelqo/ntes— then e)tu/gxanon ou(/tws without a partic. is strange; or (b) me/n must be altered to memonwme/noi or me/nontes; or (c) a comma must be placed at a(qro/oi, so that e)tu/gxanon ou)/tws a(qro/oi sc. o)/ntes=‘happened by chanee to be together.’ Such an omission of a partic. with tugxa/nw is not impossible where an adj. is added.

oi( de\ *)akarna=nes—only their leaders knew of the secret compact.

tis—often explained as collective for tines: this is doubtful, because of the sing. nomi/sas following. § 4 l. 22.

e)s th\n *)agrai/da—the Agraei were independent and friendly to the Pcloponnesians. Woodhouse thinks that they were not Aetolians.

e)pi\ th=s e)sbolh=s—to the pass that led to Ambracia.

dia\ tw=n *)amfiloxikw=n o)rw=n—i.e. inland, among the hills, in order to stop up the roads.

a(/ma o)/rqrw|—the time between first cock-crow and the dawn: o)/rqros e)sti\n h( w(/ra th=s nukto\s kaq' h)\n a)lektruo/nes a)/|dousin. a)/rxetai de\ e(na/ths w(/ras (circa 2 A.M.) kai\ teleuta=| ei)s diagelw=san h(me)ran (Phrynichus).

*dwri/da te glw=ssan—it was only thirty years since the Naupactian Messenians had left the Peloponnese. The Ambraciots spoke Doric.

th=| o)/yei—‘with the eyes,’ pointing the contrast with what they heard. Here as in other passages (e.g. VII. 75, 2) it is disputed whether the phrase means this or ‘by their appearance.’

tw=n de\ . . a)nepisthmo/nwn—for the gen. abs. though it refers to the subj. of the verb see c. 13, 7, 55. 1.

parapleou/sas . . cuntuxi/a|—‘sailing along the coast from Olpae) just at the time when the action (the fighting) occurred.’

skuleu/santes—the Athenians themselves were not above this on occasions

to\ pa/qos—‘the catastrophe’ of Idomene.

tw=n meta\ sfw=n—i.e. that they had belonged to those who had fought with his own comrades—i.e. with the body that escaped over the border.

qauma/zoi . . teqna=sin—the change of mood from opt. to indic. has nothing to do with the sense: it is purely styhstic Cf. c. 22, 8.

au)=—‘for his part.’

tw=n e)n *)idomenai=s—edd. compare II. 34 tou\s e)n *maraqw=ni where, however, e)n should prob. be omitted (see Neil on Aristoph. Eq. 785). In most cases a partic. is expressed; but ‘those of Idomenae’ is, of course, sufficient.

ta\ o(/pla tauti/—the omission of the nnmber—diakosi/wn—here appears to be impossible: ‘these are not the arms, then,’ would be natural, were it not for the contrast following. The schol. already did not find diakosi/wn in the text.

maxome/nwn—imperf.; cf. c. 62, 5.

ei)/per ge—‘yes if,’ taking up tw=n . . e)sti/n, exactly as in dramatic dialogue the retort is apt to catch up the question. (I have put a note of interrogation at e)sti/n in place of the usual full stop, because the remark seems to be a query as well as a denial: ‘then they are not . . ?’）

a)ll' h(mei=s ge—‘nay, but we.’

kai\ me\n dh\ . . ge—‘why I assure you it was with these’; for the particles cf. Plato, Symp. 197 *a kai\ me\n dh\ th/n ge tw=n zw|wn poi/hsin.

pa/qos—‘this disaster was the worst that . . ’ The number of days is three. The qualifications are very precise, and suggest that Thuc. is conscious that other events might be suggested.

kata\ to\n to/lemon to/nde—many think that only the Ten Years' (Archidamian) war is meant. It is impossible to attain certainty on the question. If Thuc. wrote this soon after the event, the expression is quite natural.

a)/piston—pred. not to gene/sqai, but to le/getai gene/sqai together, i.e. ‘the total that it is said to have amounted to is incredible.’

a)naxw/rhsin . . e)c *oi)niadw=n—i.e. by sea, the ships obtained from Oeniadae, which was friendly. These Ambraciots had prob. got to Oeniadae from Agraeis by crossing the Achelous and marching right across Aetolia. They could hardly have got safely home to Ambracia by sea without leave from the Acarnanians. (oi)=per for oi(/per and *salunqi/ou for *salu/nqion are certain corrections.)

e)pi\ toi=sde—no attempt is made to modify the cummaxi/ai of Acarnania with Athens, or of Ambracia with Sparta.

bohqei=n of defensive, strateu/ein of offensive, operations.

e)pi\ *)anakto/rion—the Corinthians had added fresh colonists to this important place in 433 B.C. A year after this agreement (autumn 425 B.C.) the Acarnanians, supported by the Athenians at Naupactus, took Anactorium. § 4 l. 27.

die/lusan to\n po/lemon—Ambracia never recovered from its effects.

e)pi\ ta\s nau=s dia/doxon—it is hardly necessary to supply a partic.: dia/doxon in itself implies taxqe/nta. It appears that Laches, on retorning to Athens, was prosecuted for embezzlement of public money.

cu/mmaxoi—the Siceliots.

e)/peisan—plup. in sense.

w(s ou) perioyo/menoi—with pareskeua/zonto.

kataluqh/sesqai—by establishing themselves in Sicily.

mele/thn . . poiei=sqai—it has been pointed out that this is prob. intentional irony on the part of Thuc., who repeats the statements of the war-party of the day. There was an unlimited field for Athenian naval activity round the coasts of Peloponnese without sending fleets to Sicily.

*puqo/dwron—the three commanders are mocked at by Aristoph. Acharn. 598.

frou/rion—see c. 99.

penthkostw=| e)/tei—if the number is exact, the previous eruption would be in 475 or 474 B.C. There is a magnificent description of an eruption of Etna in Pindar's first Pythian (474 B.C.), and in Aeschylus, Prometheus Vinctus (circa 468 B.C.). An eruption is recorded as occurring at the time of the battle of Plataea, 479 B.C.

le/getai shows that Thuc. was not quite sure as to the exact date.

tri\s gegenh=sqai—the ‘first’ eruption is legendary. A fourth is recorded in 396 B.C.