cameron - thucydides book i- students' grammatical commentary

THUCYDIDES BOOK I

�

THUCYDIDES BOOK I�

A STUDENTS’

GRAMMATICAL

COMMENTARY

H. D. Cameron

The University of Michigan PressAnn Arbor

Copyright � by the University of Michigan 2003All rights reservedPublished in the United States of America byThe University of Michigan PressManufactured in the United States of America�� Printed on acid-free paper

2006 2005 2004 2003 4 3 2 1

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in aretrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,electronic, mechanical, or otherwise, without thewritten permission of the publisher.

A CIP catalog record for this book is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Cameron, H. D. (Howard Donald), 1943–Thucydides Book 1 : a students’ grammatical commentary / H.D. Cameron.

p. cm.Includes bibliographical references.ISBN 0-472-09847-0 (cloth : alk. paper) — ISBN 0-472-06847-4 (pbk. : alk. paper)1. Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War. Book 1. 2. Thucydides—Language.

3. Greek language—Grammar. I. Title: Thucydides Book one. II. Title.

PA4461.C28 2003938�.05—dc22 2003055997

PREFACE

�

or the first-time reader of Thucydides, considerable detailed guidanceFis needed, as I discovered some years ago when teaching Book I toseniors and graduate students. The older school commentaries, as my stu-dents found, were distressingly stingy with grammatical help. It was neces-sary to provide them with grammatical notes, which over the years eventu-ally evolved into the present commentary. It reflects the practical needs ofAmerican advanced students of Greek.

My understanding of Thucydides springs from a four-by-six-inch indexcard scribbled out for me many years ago by W. R. Connor. At the time, wewere both young instructors at the University of Michigan, and I sought hisadvice on how to teach Thucydides. Just as in a Picasso drawing, it was allthere in a few deft strokes.

I thank my students over the years, especially Daniel Berman, AntonisKaldellis, Amanda Kraus, Dmitri Nakassis, William Short, Josh Ward, andTimothy Allison, who have corrected typos, spotted false accents, and toldme to clear up muddled explanations. I am grateful to John Lobur for hiscareful eye and wise critiques. My thanks also go to colleagues who haveused drafts of this commentary in their own classes: Kathryn Morgan (Uni-versity of California, Los Angeles), Robert Ketterer (University of Iowa),and Sara Forsdyke (University of Michigan). Further, I thank the anony-mous readers of the University of Michigan Press for their excellent sugges-tions and corrections, and I especially thank Collin Ganio of the Press forhis encouragement and professional expertise. Thanks also to MarilynScott for her keen eye, and to Mary Hashman my editor at the Press.

CONTENTS

�

Conventionsand Abbreviations

ix

Introduction1

Observations onGrammar and Style

13

Outline of Book I16

Commentary18

Selected Bibliography141

Map145

CONVENTIONS

AND ABBREVIATIONS

�

his commentary is meant to be used with the Oxford Classical TextTof Thucydides, edited by Henry Stuart Jones, and with Smyth’s GreekGrammar, which almost never fails to illuminate Thucydidean syntax. Itis also meant to be used with the abridged edition of Liddell and Scott’sGreek–English Lexicon, which reliably contains nearly all of the vocabu-lary of book I of Thucydides. My commentary regularly refers to theunabridged lexicon of Liddell, Scott, and Jones to authenticate lexicalusage.

I make no claim of elegance for the translations in my commentary.They are meant to illuminate the Greek syntax, and I have not hesitatedto use clumsy “translationese” if that would best suit the purpose. Oncethe grammatical labyrinth is understood, the student should be urged toretranslate into smoother English prose. For elegance, I recommend the1998 translation by Steven Lattimore.

I have employed the standard chapter numbers used by all moderneditions of Thucydides. The origin of this numbering is the 1696 Oxfordedition by John Hudson (1662–1719).

The following abbreviations are used for citations in this book.

x C O N V E N T I O N S A N D A B B R E V I A T I O N S

Buck, Comp. Gr. C. D. Buck. Comparative Grammar ofGreek and Latin. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1933.

Classen and Steup J. Classen and J. Steup. Thukydides erklartvan J. Classen. 5th ed. revised by J. Steup.Vol. 1, Einleitung: Erstes Buch. Berlin:Weimannsche Buchhandlung, 1919.

Crawley Richard Crawley, trans. The PeloponnesianWar, by Thucydides. Revised by T. E.Wick. New York: Modern Library, 1982.

Denniston, Gr. Part.2 J. D. Denniston. The Greek Particles. 2ded. Oxford: Clarendon, 1954.

Gomme A. W. Gomme. A Historical Commentaryon Thucydides. Vol. 1, Introduction andCommentary on Book I. Oxford:Clarendon, 1956.

Goodwin-Gulick W. W. Goodwin. Greek Grammar. Revisedby C. B. Gulick. New York: n.p., 1930.

Goodwin, Moods and W. W. Goodwin. Syntax of the Moods andTenses Tenses of the Greek Verb. Boston: n.p.,

1890.Kuhner-Gerth R. Kuhner. Ausfuhrliche Grammatik der

Griechischen Sprache. Part 2, Satzlehre. 2vols. Bernhard Gerth. Hannover andLeipzig: n.p., 1898.

Lattimore Stephen Lattimore, trans. ThePeloponnesian War, by Thucydides.Indianapolis: Hacket, 1998.

LSJ H. G. Liddell and Robert Scott. A Greek–English Lexicon. Revised by Sir HenryStuart Jones with the assistance ofRoderick McKenzie, with a supplement.Oxford: Clarendon, 1968.

Marchant E. C. Marchant. Thucydides Book I. 1905.Reprint, with a new introduction andbibliography by Thomas Wiedemann.Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 1982.

OCT H. Stuart Jones. Thucydidis Historiae.Edited by Henry Stuart Jones, revised by

Conventions and Abbreviations xi

J. E. Powell. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon,1942.

Schwyzer Eduard Schwyzer. Griechische Grammatik.Vol. 1, Allgemeine Teil, Lautlehre,Wortbildung, Flexion. 3d ed. Munich: C. H.Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1959.

Schwyzer-Debrunner Eduard Schwyzer. Griechische Grammatik.Vol. 2, Syntax und Syntaktische Stilistik. 2ded. completed and edited by AlbertDebrunner. Munich: C. H. Beck’scheVerlagsbuchhandlung, 1959.

Sm. Herbert Weir Smyth. Greek Grammar.Revised by Gordon Messing. Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1956.

Warner Rex Warner, trans. History of thePeloponnesian War, by Thucydides. Withintroductions and notes by M. I. Finley.Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1954.Reprint, 1972.

INTRODUCTION

�

he first book of Thucydides is a compact masterpiece. Here he sets upTthe conditions that led to the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War in431 B .C. With great economy, he gives the reader an analysis of the originsof large-scale wars; integrates a sketch of the historical background intothe larger thematic threads of his narrative; presents a brief statement ofhis methods and goals; outlines a hierarchy of causation; develops a theoryof character and human nature; presents a theory of leadership, chance,and foresight; sets up the contrast between a land power and a sea power;and does so within a narrative structure that perfectly focuses these ele-ments. His general theme is the universal and enduring character of lawsof international power.

A B R I E F H I S T O R I C A L I N T R O D U C T I O N

Colonization

From prehistoric times, the Greeks were on the move. In successivewaves, the branches of the Hellenic people—the Aeolians, the Ionians,and the Dorians—migrated, united by religion and a common languagebut different in cult and dialect. From mainland Greece, the Aeolians andIonians settled the western coast of Asia Minor. Athens and their rela-tives in Ionia maintained a loose connection based on a common dialect,the worship of the Delian Apollo, and the tradition of descent from his

2 T H U C Y D I D E S B O O K I

son Ion. About 1000 B .C., the Dorians spread through the Peloponnese andthe southern Aegean Islands, a movement mythologized as the “Return ofthe Heraclidae.” From roughly the middle of the eighth century to themiddle of the seventh, the cities of mainland Greece sent out settlementsand founded colonies from the Crimea in the Black Sea to Marseilles inwhat is now France. They settled southern Italy and Sicily, with Ioniancolonies, such as Leontini, in the north of Sicily and with Dorian cities,such as Syracuse, in the east and south. The opposition and rivalry be-tween Dorians and Ionians is a major theme in Thucydides’ narrative. Acolony maintained informal and formal connection with its mother city(µητρ ��π�λις). For instance, the annual magistrates of the Corinthiancolony Potidaea, on the westernmost prong of the three-pronged Chalci-dice peninsula at the northern end of the Aegean Sea, were sent out eachyear from the mother city Corinth.

The Ionian Revolt

Their ancestral connection with the Ionians led the Athenians to come tothe aid of their relatives in the Ionian Revolt of 499 B .C. The Ionian citiesof Asia Minor had become subject to the Lydian Empire of Croesus, andwith his defeat, they became subject in turn to the Persian Empire. TheAthenians had aided in the burning of the Persian provincial capital,Sardis, and after the revolt was suppressed, the Persians mounted a puni-tive expedition against Athens, which was repulsed in the famous battleof Marathon in 490 B .C.

The Persian Invasion

Ten years later, when Xerxes was king of Persia, he mounted a massiveinvasion of Greece in retribution, crossed the Hellespont on a bridge ofships, drank dry the rivers of Thrace, was delayed temporarily by threehundred Spartans under Leonidas at the bottleneck pass of Thermopylae,and marched overwhelmingly into Attica, destroying Athens and disman-tling its walls. But during the previous ten-year interval, Themistocles hadcome to preeminence. He had convinced the Athenians to use the wind-fall of a newly discovered vein of silver in the mines at Laurium to buildships. He convinced the Athenians to abandon the land to the Persiansand evacuate the population by sea to the safety of adjacent islands. By

Introduction 3

diplomacy, threats, and trickery, Themistocles managed to bring togetherin a fragile and shaky alliance all the navies of Greece, to defeat thePersian navy in the narrow sea room of Salamis. Xerxes retreated backacross the bridge of ships over the Hellespont, leaving his ambitiouskinsman Mardonius behind with a residue of the army, and Mardoniuswas defeated in the final land battle at Plataea in 479 B .C. by an allied armyunder the command of the Spartan Pausanias.

After the Persian Retreat

Over the objections of the Spartans and Corinthians and following theingenious policy of Themistocles (Thuc. I.89–93), the Athenians quicklyrebuilt their walls, including the fortifications of the harbor, the Piraeus(the Long Walls, connecting the city with the Piraeus, were built later).

Exercising the traditional Spartan right to command, Pausanias led ajoint Peloponnesian and Athenian naval expedition, which wrested By-zantium, a Greek colony, from Persian control. But as Thucydides relates(I.94–95), Pausanias was soon discredited, and the Spartans, weary withthe burden of the war, withdrew from operations in the Aegean, leavinghegemony to the Athenians, who were only too happy to accept. Underthe leadership of Cimon, they, with the aid of their Ionian allies, pro-ceeded to sweep the Persian navy out of the Aegean.

The Delian League

With Athenian leadership, the cities and islands around the Aegean Seaformally organized to counter the Persian threat. The cooperative burdenof defense was to be shared, and to the common effort, the members ofthis league contributed ships or, if more agreeable to them, money. Theassessments, whether in ships or money, made for all members of thealliance by the Athenian Aristides were so equitable that he ever after-ward enjoyed the nickname “the Just.” The money was kept in the shrineof Apollo on the sacred island of Delos. This Delian League, conceived asan alliance for mutual defense against Persia, gradually evolved into theAthenian Empire, in which the members were no longer independentallies but subjects. The studied Athenian policy was to encourage thosemembers who contributed ships to substitute a monetary contribution,until only Lesbos, Samos, and Chios were left with a navy.


As the Persian threat diminished, some members tried to withdrawfrom the league but were forced to become tributaries. Naxos, for ex-ample, left the league but was besieged and forced back into allegiance in470–469 B .C. Thucydides (I.98) observes that for the first time, a memberstate lost its independence, contrary to the initial compact of the league,and that the Athenians continued to pursue this policy of reducing mem-bers of the league to subjects of Athens.

The Rise and Fall of Cimon

Themistocles, meanwhile, had been ostracized and then condemned inabsentia, probably because he was involved somehow in the suspect busi-ness of Pausanias. Cimon then became the preeminent political and mili-tary leader in Athens. His decisive victory over the Persian navy at theEurymedon River (467 B .C.) finally eliminated Persian presence in theAegean.

In 464 B .C., Sparta faced two serious crises: an earthquake and the revoltof the helots, Sparta’s large population of slaves, who had retreated to thefastness of Mount Ithome. Cimon’s conservative, oligarchical policy wasfriendly to the Spartans, and he offered to bring an Athenian force to helpthem. When his offer was rebuffed, he was discredited in Athens and, in461 B .C., ostracized.

The Rise of Pericles

This was a turning point in Athenian policy. The fall of Cimon wasengineered by the democrats under the leadership of Ephialtes and Peri-cles, and Athens turned anti-Spartan and expansionist. The helots onIthome held out for years, frustrating Spartan efforts to dislodge them.Finally, in answer to an oracle, the Spartans agreed to allow them to leavethe Peloponnesus safely with their wives and children, on the conditionthat they never return. Pericles cleverly settled them as Athenian colo-nists at Naupactus, near the mouth of the Corinthian Gulf. Here, then,was an Athenian colony athwart the lucrative trade route to Italy andSicily.

When Ephialtes and Pericles came to power, it marked a shift fromconservative oligarchical policies to democratic policies. One of their firstsymbolic and practical moves was to reduce the function of the conserva-tive Areopagus from general oversight of the government to their ances-

Introduction 5

tral function as a homicide court. Aeschylus’s Oresteia was an element inpopularizing the move. But it was not approved by all, and Ephialtes wasmurdered (461 B .C.). Pericles then emerged as the preeminent leader.

Pericles’ Constitutional Position

Pericles’ formal constitutional position was as a member of the annuallyelected Board of Ten Generals. Cleisthenes had reformed the Athenianconstitution in 508–507 B .C. To break up the old political factions—calledthe Hill, the Coast, and the Plain—he created ten new political units(tribes, φ �υλαι) composed of one-third from each faction, so compromiseand cooperation within the tribe became necessary. Each tribe annuallychose by lot fifty of its members to serve on the �υλ �η, a kind of execu-tive committee, which saw to the day-to-day operation of the city-stateand prepared the agenda for the legislative assembly (ε�κκλησ�ια), thebody of all voting citizens. Each tribe annually elected one of its membersto the Board of Ten Generals, the military establishment of the city.While the magistrates and other officials came to be chosen by lot, thegenerals were elected on the basis of competence and thus could bereelected any number of times. While this office was Pericles’ constitu-tional base, his practical political effectiveness came from his forcefulpersonality, his persuasiveness, his admitted foresight, his strategic talent,his recognized integrity, and the general respect that he commanded. AsThucydides puts it, “It was a democracy in word but the rule of its firstcitizen in fact” (II.65).

From League to Empire

It is something of an oversimplification to say that Athenian policychanged from pro-Spartan to anti-Spartan, but that was effectively whathappened. In 454 B .C., the Athenians transferred the treasury of the DelianLeague from the sacred island of Delos to Athens, claiming that as longas they provided defense against the barbarians, they owed no accountingof the money to the allies (Plut. Per. 12 [158]). This is a crucial mark ofthe transformation from the voluntary alliance for mutual protection, theDelian League, to the Athenian Empire. Thucydides (II.63) has Periclessay to the Athenians in his last speech, “Your empire is now like atyranny: if you think it was wrong to acquire it, to give it up is outrightdangerous.”


Athenian Expansion on Land

The period from 461 B .C. to 446 B .C. is sometimes called the First Peloponne-sian War, as Athens began effectively to surround Corinth by conquestsand alliances, developing something of a land empire. It was short-lived,the advances were lost, and Athenian land expansion came to an endwith the Thirty Years’ Truce of 446 B .C.

This expansion had begun in 461 B .C. with an alliance with Argos, atraditional enemy of Sparta. Then Megara, the Doric city on the Aegeanside of the Isthmus of Corinth, joined the Athenian alliance (459 B .C.).Thucydides (I.103) explains that this was the principal cause of the in-tense Corinthian hatred (µι

�σ�ς) of the Athenians. In 457 B .C., the Athe-

nians won the battle of Oenophyta and conquered their northern neigh-bors Boeotia and Phocis. Next, the island of Aegina was added to theAthenian Empire (457–456 B .C.), as was Achaea, the territory flanking thesouth shore of the Corinthian Gulf. At Naupactus, where Pericles hadsettled the helots, the Athenians established a naval base commandingthe mouth of the gulf on its north shore. A glance at the map concludingthis book will show how completely Corinth was being surrounded.

The Thirty Years’ Truce

The reversal came when the Athenians were defeated in the battle ofCoronea in 447 B .C., whereby Athens lost Boeotia. Megara then revolted.The long island of Euboea, which stretches along the flanks of Attica andBoeotia in the Aegean, revolted under the influence of Boeotian intrigue.Euboea, says Thucydides (VIII.96), was, as a base of supply and a refuge,more important than Attica itself, and consequently, its defection wasserious enough for the Athenians to seek peace.

By the provisions of the Thirty Years’ Truce (446 B .C.), Athens yieldedup the territory and alliances it had recently acquired: Nisaea, Pegae,Troezen, and Achaea (Thuc. I.115). Neither side was to attack the other,and neither side was to interfere with the allies of the other. It is arguedthat a list of the allies of each was appended and that unlisted states werenot covered by this provision (cf. Thuc. I.35.2, 40.2). This is a majorpoint at issue between Corinth and Athens in the matter of Corcyratreated by Thucydides in book I.

Thucydides (I.23.5–6) makes a distinction between the unexpressed( �αφανεστα� την λ ��γω� ), truest cause ( �αληθεστα� την πρ ��φασιν) and theexpressed causes (ε�ς τ �� φανερ ��ν) that led to the breaking of the Thirty

Introduction 7

Years’ Truce: respectively, namely, Spartan fear of Athenian expansionand the affairs of Epidamnus and Potidaea.

The Affair of Epidamnus and Corcyra

Epidamnus, on the eastern coast of the Adriatic in the vicinity of modernDurazzo, was a colony of the island of Corcyra. It had suffered a series ofcivil disturbances between the democrats (�� δη

�µ�ς) and the oligarchs (��ι

δ �υνατ�ι), until finally the former expelled the latter. The oligarchs, inturn, with external help from neighboring barbarians, besieged Epidamnus.The besieged democrats sent for help to their mother city, Corcyra, butwere rebuffed. On the advice of the oracle at Delphi, the Epidamniandemocrats next appealed to Corinth—their grandmother city, as it were,since Corcyra itself had been founded by Corinth. This time, their appealwas successful, because there was bad blood between Corinth and theirundutiful colony Corcyra. This led to an odd situation in which Corinth,an oligarchical state, was supporting the democrats in Epidamnus, whileCorcyra was supporting the oligarchs. With help from her allies, Corinthput together a navy of seventy vessels to oppose the Corcyrean navy ofeighty (Thuc. I.29.4).

The Corcyreans sought arbitration, but the Corinthians refused, whichled to the first naval battle between them, off the islands of Sybota in 435B .C., won by the Corcyreans (Thuc. I.29.5). As the Corcyreans learned thatthe Corinthians were putting together a Peloponnesian alliance and build-ing ships for a second encounter, they began to be concerned that theythemselves were without allies. They had been listed on neither theAthenian nor the Lacedaemonian side in the Thirty Years’ Truce. So theysent an embassy to the Athenians seeking such an alliance. The Corinthi-ans, in turn, sent an embassy to persuade the Athenians to refuse, fearingthat the Athenian navy would be added to the Corcyrean. The Atheniansheard both sides in the assembly and decided for the Corcyreans. This ledto a second naval battle off the islands of Sybota (433 B .C.), in which theAthenians played an ambiguous, but active, role. Did this constitute abreach of the Thirty Years’ Truce?

The Affair of Potidaea

The affair of Potidaea began with a cautionary measure taken by theAthenians after the naval battle of Sybota (Thuc. I.57.1). On the onehand, Potidaea was a Corinthian colony, situated on the isthumus of


Pallene, the westernmost prong of the three-pronged Chalcidice penin-sula, and its chief magistrates were sent out annually from the mother cityCorinth. On the other hand, Potidaea was an ally of Athens of thetribute-paying class, a Dorian city in the Delian League, and thereforesuspect. When the Athenians demanded that they send away the Corin-thian magistrates, tear down the walls on the southern side of the city, andsend hostages to Athens to guarantee their loyalty, the Potidaeans re-volted. The Corinthians sent a contingent of volunteers to their aid byland, and the Athenians sent a naval force and a strong force of hoplites,heavy-armed troops. Eventually the Athenians succeeded in investing thecity by land and sea. The incidents of Corcyra and Potidaea, then, led tothe outbreak of the war.

The Megarian Decree

A third incident, the Megarian Decree, gets less attention from Thucydi-des. Megara had turned from a traditional relationship with Corinth, andin 459 B .C., it became an Athenian ally (Thuc. I.103). The Athenians cameto Megara’s defense when Corinth attacked them in 458 B .C. But whenAthenian fortunes were reversed in 446 B .C. with the revolt in Euboea,Megara defected and returned to its alliance with Corinth and the Pelopon-nesians. By the articles of the Thirty Years’ Truce, Athens gave up all theterritorial advances it had achieved in the period of expansion. But thedefection of Megara stuck in Athens’s craw, and Pericles issued the Megar-ian Decree, which interdicted Megara from all the ports of the AthenianEmpire and from the Athenian marketplace itself (Thuc. I.139). Megara’scommercial outlet was toward the Aegean and the East, so this decreeeffectively destroyed the Megarian economy.

P R I N C I P A L T H E M E S

Money, Ships, and Walls

The first book of Thucydides’ history is about money, ships, and walls.These three subjects weave their way through the text like counterpoint,resurfacing again and again. They are the necessary elements that makelarge-scale wars possible, according to Thucydides, and they are the secretof Athenian preeminence and endurance.

The section called the Archaeology (I.2–19), which treats the earlydevelopment of the political and military organization of Greece, empha-

Introduction 9

sizes these three things: the need for walled cities for protection againstpirates; the safety of the seas guaranteed by the ships of Minos; and theresulting commercial wealth from seaborne trade, which made possiblethe accumulation of surplus capital. These are precisely the elementsnecessary for large-scale wars.

The section called the Pentecontaetia (I.89–117), a historical precis ofthe roughly fifty years between the final retreat of the Persians in 479 B .C.and the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War in 431 B .C., begins with thestory of how Themistocles, Thucydides’ model of ideal leadership, suc-ceeded by ingenuity, trickery, and alacrity in rebuilding the walls of Ath-ens in the face of Spartan opposition. It was the sagacity of Themistoclesthat had earlier convinced the Athenians to use the profits from the new-found silver lode at Laurium to build ships in anticipation of the Persianthreat. This made it possible for the Athenians in 480 B .C. to take the boldstep of taking to the ships, abandoning the land of Attica to the invadingPersians.

Finally, in a later day, Pericles, a leader in the Themistoclean mold,adopted the strategy of encapsulating Athens within the Long Walls,abandoning the countryside to the ineffectual Spartan incursions andrelying on the sea routes to supply Athens with Crimean wheat. Thissupply route passed through the narrows of the Hellespont, a geopoliticalchoke point for Athens. When the Spartans destroyed the Athenian navyat Aegospotami and finally controlled the Hellespont in 404 B .C., cuttingoff the vital trade route, the Athenians surrendered and the war came toan end. For Themistocles, the money came from the silver mines; forPericles, the money came from the tribute paid to Athens by the subjectcities and islands of the empire.

Causation

Polybius, the later historian of the Punic Wars of Rome, would eventuallydistinguish three different types of historical causation (3.6–7): pretext(πρ ��φασις), occasion ( �αρ� �η), and true cause (α�ιτ�ια). These categoriesare anticipated in Thucydides, although his terms are not as precise asthose of Polybius. In Thucydides’ account, the Spartans demand that theAthenians drive out the curse of Cylon (I.126), and the Athenians coun-ter with a demand that the Spartans drive out the curse of Taenarus(I.128). These are the pretexts, and Thucydides calls them πρ�φα� σεις.The disputes over Corcyra (I.31–55) and Potidaea (I.56–65) and the


Theban attack on Plataea (II.1–7) are the immediate occasions (α�ιλεγ ��µεναι α�ιτ�ιαι) for the outbreak of the war. But according to Thucydi-des, the true cause ( �η �αληθεστα� τη πρ ��φασις) is Spartan fear of Athenianexpansion (I.23).

The True Cause—Corinthians

An argument can be made that Thucydides got this wrong. It was notSparta’s interests that were threatened, nor was Sparta eager for war.Rather, the Corinthians bullied, cajoled, and pleaded with the reluctantSpartans to lead a joint Peloponnesian campaign against Athens, becauseCorinthian interests were being threatened. There is archaeological evi-dence that in the mid–fifth century, the distinctive Corinthian pottery wasbeing replaced by Athenian pottery in southern Italy, indicating successfulAthenian commercial rivalry in the western Mediterranean, traditionallythe economic sphere of Corinth. If Corcyra, which lies athwart the searoute from the Corinthian Gulf to Magna Graecia and Sicily, was alliedwith Athens, the threat to Corinth was severe. The Megarian Decree,by which Corinth’s Dorian commercial partner on the Aegean side ofthe Isthmus of Corinth was interdicted from all trade with the cities of theAthenian Empire, destroyed the economy of Megara. The plight of theMegarians is memorably represented by Aristophanes in the Acharnians(524–39, 729–835; cf. Peace 605–11).

Spartan and Athenian Character

In Thucydides’ account, when the Corinthians speak before the delegatesof the Peloponnesian League at Sparta to urge resistance to Athens (I.68–71), they lay out the thematic contrast between Spartan and Atheniancharacter ( �η

�θ�ς). The Spartans, they say, are naive in foreign affairs, pas-

sive, wedded to the status quo, hesitant, lacking in originality. But theAthenians, they say, are always innovators, quick in decision and resolve,risk takers, aggressive, always eager for more (πλε�νε��ια).

The Speeches

In the forward of his 1629 translation of The Peloponnesian War, ThomasHobbes says Thucydides is “one who, though, he never digress to read aLecture, Moral or Political, upon his own Text, nor enter into men’s

Introduction 11

hearts, further than the Actions themselves evidently guide him . . . fil-leth his Narrations with that choice of matter, and ordereth them withthat Judgement, and with such perspicuity and efficacy expresseth himselfthat (as Plutarch saith [Mor. 347A]) he maketh his Auditor a Spectator.”Hobbes continues, “For he setteth his Reader in the Assemblies of thePeople, and in their Senates, at their debating; in the Streets, at theirSeditions; and in the Field at their Battels.”

Thucydides is regarded as the objective historian par excellence. Onlyrarely does he intrude with an opinion of his own (e.g., at I.23). Butdespite this objective manner, his own interpretation emerges from thespeeches and the studied juxtapositions of his narrative. His analysis liesin the speeches, whether they are reports of speeches actually heard oronly inventions of Thucydides—as he says (I.22), “what was appropriateto the situation” [περ�ι τω

�ν α�ιε�ι παρ ��ντων τ �α δ �ε�ντα]. M. I. Finley says,

“to lay bare what stood behind the narrative, the moral and politicalissues, the debates and disagreement over policy, the possibilities, themistakes, the fears and the motives, his main device was the speech”(introduction to Penguin translation, 25).

Justice, Self-interest, and Gratitude

The assembly debates recorded by Thucydides in book I tend to rest on twothematic pillars of argument: justice (δ�ικη) and self-interest (τ �α �υµφ �ε-ρ�ντα). In the debate at Athens over Corcyra (I.32–43), the Corinthiansargue, as a matter of justice, that an Athenian alliance with the Corcyreanswould break the Thirty Years’ Truce. The Corcyreans, while denying thatargument, point out that it is in Athens’s interest to have the Corcyreannavy on their side. There is also a variety of the argument from justice,which we may call the argument from gratitude (�α� ρις), as when theCorinthians remind the Athenians that they once gave them twenty war-ships with which to conquer Aegina (I.41) and that Athens is thus underobligation to them.

πρ ��ν�ια, �� ργ �η, and τυ� �η

According to Thucydides’ account (I.66–78), at the meeting of the Pelo-ponnesian League at Sparta, the Corinthians urge action against Athens,and the Athenians answer with a justification of their empire and a thinlyveiled warning about the unpredictable and the accidental in war (τ ��


παρα� λ�γ�ν, τυ�α�ι). Then, the Spartan king Archidamus, a man of pru-dent understanding (�υνετ ��ς δ�κω

�ν ε�ι

�ναι κα�ι σ �ωφρων), with caution

and foresight lays out for the Spartans in executive session (κατ �α σφα�ς

α �υτ� �υς) his assessment of the circumstances (I.79–86). As if confirmingthe Corinthian picture of Spartan character, he urges delay. However, thisis not the usual cautious sluggishness (τ �� ραδ �υ κα�ι µ �ελλ�ν) that theCorinthians complained about, but the sensible prudence (σωφρ�σ �υνη�εµφρων) that takes time to become realistically prepared. Archidamusargues that the Athenians have wealth and a navy and that it will bestrategically futile to invade and devastate Attic land.

By way of contrast with Archidamus’s virtue of foresight (πρ ��ν�ια),Thucydides introduces the hotheaded jingoist ephor Sthenilaidas (I.86),who dismisses speech making and diplomacy and puts the question byplaying on the passions of the assembly. They vote for war. The pronoia ofArchidamus is trumped by the rashness (��ργ �η, I.140) of Sthenilaidas.

Justice versus self-interest; Spartan character versus Athenian character;true cause, pretense, and occasion; foresight versus rashness; the unex-pected and the accidental; money, ships, and walls—these are some of thestructural themes that Thucydides sets up in book I, and he will ring thechanges on them, sometimes ironically, throughout his history.

Thucydides has caught—in the test tube, as it were, of this little war—the fundamental laws of international power. As long as human natureremains the same (κατ �α τ �� ανθρ �ωπιν�ν), these patterns will occur againand again. The future statesman who, like a physician, recognizes thesymptoms can with foresight ease his city through the crisis. Thucydidesjustifiably expects us to find his book useful ( �ωφ �ελιµα) and a possessionfor all time (κτη

�µα ε�ς α�ιε�ι).

OBSERVATIONS ON

GRAMMAR AND STYLE

�

S P E L L I N G S F A V O R E D B Y T H U C Y D I D E S

�ην instead of ε�α� ν� �υν instead of σ �υν, both as preposition and as preverbε� ς instead of ε�ις¯σσ¯ instead of Attic ¯ττ¯ (e.g., θα� λασσα instead of θα� λαττα)¯ρσ¯ instead of Attic ¯ρρ¯ (e.g., θα� ρσ�ς instead of θα� ρρ�ς)α�ιε�ι instead of �αε�ι

S O M E F E A T U R E S O F S T Y L E

Schema Thucydideum. Thucydides often likes to use a neuter participle or aneuter adjective instead of the corresponding abstract noun. E.g., τ ��δεδι ��ς [fear] and τ �� θαρσ�υ

�ν [boldness] (I.36.1; Sm. §1025); τ �� πιστ ��ν

[confidence] (I.68.1). Such an expression may be modified by a genitive.E.g., τη

�ς π ��λεως τ �� τιµ �ωµεν�ν [the dignity of the state] (II.63; Sm.

§2051); τ �� σαφ �ες τω�ν τε γεν�µ �ενων κα�ι τω

�ν µελλ ��ντων [the clear truth

of what has happened and what will happen in the future] (I.22.4).

Constructio ad sensum. A seeming violation of strict syntax, especiallyconcord, can occur to serve the meaning. E.g., �η γν �ωµη τ�υ

��Αρ�ιστεως τ ��

13


µ �εν µεθ� ε�αυτ�υ�στρατ ��πεδ�ν �ε��ντι ε�ν τω�

��ισθµω� ε�πιτηρειν

�τ� �υς

�Αθηνα�ι�υς [The plan of Aristeus was to keep his army with him on theisthmus and keep an eye on the Athenians] (I.62.3). Here, the genitiveτ�υ

��Αρ�ιστεως is modified by the dative participle �ε��ντι as though �η

γν �ωµη τ�υ��Αρ�ιστεως was equivalent to �εδ��ε τω�

��Αρ�ιστει. The construc-

tion may also occur with possessive pronouns and adjectives, as in τ �α�ηµ �ετερ� α �υτω

�ν [our own resources] (I.82.1). The α �υτω

�ν modifies the τ �α

�ηµ �ετερα by a construction according to sense.

The “lilies-of-the-field construction,” or prolepsis. “The subject of the depen-dent clause is often anticipated and made the object of the verb of theprincipal clause” (Sm. §2182), as in the biblical verse “Consider the liliesof the field, how they grow” [καταµα� θετε τ �α κρ�ινα τ�υ

��αγρ�υ πω

�ς

α�υ��υσιν] (Matt. 6.28) instead of “Consider how the lilies of the fieldgrow.” E.g., �

�Ηλθε δ �ε κα�ι τ�ι

�ς �Αθηνα�ι�ις ε �υθ �υς �η �αγγελ�ια τω

�ν π ��λεων

��τι �αφεστα�σι [and immediately there came to the Athenians news of the

cities, that they were in revolt] (I.61.1).

Avoidance of parallelism. Logically parallel ideas, which we might expectThucydides to express in grammatically parallel constructions, are oftenshifted off target with grammatical variation. For instance, in a µ �εν . . . δ �εconstruction, the element introduced by δ �ε may be of a different typefrom that in the µ �εν part. E.g., Κα�ι τ �� αλλ� �Ελληνικ ��ν ��ρω

�ν �υνι-

στα� µεν�ν πρ ��ς ε�κατ �ερ�υς τ �� µ �εν ε �υθ �υς, τ �� δ �ε κα�ι διαν�� υµεν�ν [[I,Thucydides,] seeing the rest of Greece taking one side or the other, someimmediately and some thinking about it] (I.1.1): the adverb ε �υθ �υς isbalanced by the participle διαν�� υµεν�ν; [��ι Κ�ρ�ινθι�ι] � �υ� �ησ �υ�α"�ν�ανδρω

�ν τε σφισ�ιν ε�ν ��ντων κα�ι �αµα περ�ι τω�

��ωρ�ιω� δεδι ��τες [[The Corin-

thians] did not refrain from action since they had citizens inside [Potidaea]and also out of fear for the territory] (I.67.1): The two elements joined bythe τε . . . κα�ι are a genitive absolute and a nominative participle;(κελε �υω) α�ιτια

�σθαι µ �ητε π ��λεµ�ν �αγαν δηλ�υ

�ντας µ �ηθ� �ως ε�πιτρ �εψ�µεν

[I advise you] to make our complaints known without either openly threat-ening war or [suggesting] that we will let them [do as they please]] (I.82.1)and (δ �υναµις) φ �ερ�υσα ε�ς µ �εν τ� �υς π�λλ� �υς �αρ �ετην, �

��ις δ �ε ε�παµυνει

�τε

�α� ριν, �υµι�ν δ� α �υτ�ι

�ς �ισ�υν [[A power] bringing [to you a reputation for]

virtue in the eyes of the world, thanks from those you will defend, and foryourselves strength] (I.33.2): the three grammatically nonparallel, butbalanced, constructions are a prepositional phrase, a relative clause, and adative.

Observations on Grammar and Style 15

Historical present. The present tense can be used with past meaning. E.g., ��δ �ε Θεµιστ�κλη

�ς πρ�αισθ ��µεν�ς φε �υγει ε�κ Πελ�π�νν �ησ�υ ε�ς Κ �ερκυραν

[Themistocles, getting wind [of this], fled from the Peloponnese to Corcyra](I.136.1).

Qualification of nouns by adverbs or phrases. E.g., �η πρ ��τερ�ν �απραγµ�σ �υνη[our earlier noninvolvement] (I.32.5); τω�

�α �υτ�ικα φανερω�

�[by something

apparent at the moment] (I.42.4); τ �ην �αφ� �ηµω�ν �α��ιωσιν [the claim we

are making] (I.37.1).

Substantives formed by the neuter article. These are often translated by anabstract noun. E.g., τ �� ε�φ� ε�αυτω

�ν [their own interests] (I.17.1); τ ��

λ�ηστικ ��ν [piracy] (I.4.1).

Hyperbaton. Words that logically belong together may be displaced (Sm.§3028).

For emphasis. E.g., �αρ�αι ��τρ�πα �υµω�ν τ �α ε�πιτηδε �υµατα πρ ��ς α �υ-

τ� �υς [Old-fashioned are your policies toward them] (I.71.2).Inserted explanation. E.g., �ανα� γκη δ �ε �ωσπερ τ �ε�νης α�ιε�ι τ �α ε�πιγι-γν ��µενα κρατει

�ν [It is necessary, as in the case of any craft, for

innovations always to win out] (I.71.3).For rhythmical reasons. E.g., ε�ν τ� �υτω� δ �ε ε�πρεσ ε �υ�ντ� τω�

��ρ ��νω�

[And during this time they sent embassies] (I.126.1).

Switching prepositions. Thucydides will use two different balanced preposi-tions for the same meaning. E.g., �αλλ� ��υτε πρ ��ς τ� �υς �αλλ�υς ��υτε ε� ς�ηµα

�ς τ�ι��ιδε ε�ισ�ιν [Neither toward the others nor toward us are they like

that [honorable]] (I.38.1). Here, πρ ��ς and ε�ς mean the same.

OUTLINE OF BOOK I

�

I. Chapter 1—PreliminaryII. Chapters 2–19—Archaeology: Development of the political

and military organization of GreeceIII. Chapters 20–23—Discussion of his methods and assessment

of the importance and the causes of the warIV. Chapters 24–65—The immediate causes of the war

A. Corcyra: 24–551. Speeches at Athens

(a) Corcyreans: 32–36(b) Corinthians: 37–43

B. Potidaea: 56–65V. Chapters 66–88—First debate at Sparta (four speeches)

A. Corinthians: 68–71B. Athenians: 73–78C. Archidamus: 80–85D. Sthenilaidas: 86

VI. Chapters 89–117—Pentecontaetia: History of the years 479–432, from the retreat of the Persians to the outbreak of the war

VII. Chapters 118–25—Second congress at SpartaA. Second speech of the Corinthians: 119–24

VIII. Chapters 126–38—Stories of Pausanias and ThemistoclesA. Affair of Cylon: 126–27

16

Outline of Book I 17

B. Curse of Taenarus and the Brazen House (Pausanias):128–36

C. Themistocles: 136–38IX. Chapters 139–46—Speech of Pericles

COMMENTARY

�

1.1. �ως ε�π�λ �εµησαν. Instead of using the accusative relative pronoun &�νreferring to τ ��ν π ��λεµ�ν, Thucydides uses an indirect question with adisplaced object, literally, “He wrote the war, how they fought.” Thisfigure is called prolepsis (literally, “anticipation”) or the “lilies-of-the-fieldconstruction” (from the biblical verse Matt. 6:28, “Consider the lilies ofthe field, how they grow” [καταµα� θετε τ �α κρ�ινα τ�υ

��αγρ�υ

�πω

�ς α �υ�α� ν�-

υσιν]). “The subject of the dependent clause is often anticipated andmade the object of the verb of the principal clause” (Sm. §2182).

ε �υθ �υς καθισταµ �εν�υ. Genitive absolute expressing time. Notice that inGreek, unlike the Latin ablative absolute, a participle may stand alonewithout a noun in the genitive when it is obvious what such a noun wouldbe. Sm. §2072. The full expression would be ε �υθ �υς καθισταµ �εν�υ τ�υ

�

π�λ �εµ�υ, “the moment the war broke out.”

ε�λπ�ισας. “expecting.” Verbs meaning hope, expect, promise, threaten,swear, etc. take the future infinitive in indirect discourse. Sm. §1868.

τεκµα�ιρ�µαι. After Homer—i.e., in classical Greek—this verb means“judge from signs or tokens.” But here, Thucydides has used it in a specialsense, “taking as evidence for this judgment [that it was going to be thegreatest war ever] the fact that . . .”

18

Commentary 19

�υνιστα� µεν�ν. Indirect discourse with accusative plus participle after averb of perception (��ρω

�ν). Sm. §2110–12.

τ �� µ �εν . . . τ �� δ �ε. When used with µ �εν and δ �ε without a following noun,the article behaves like a demonstrative. Sm. §1106–7. The combination�� µ �εν . . . �� δ �ε means “the one . . . the other,” and ��ι µ �εν . . . ��ι δ �ε means“some . . . and some . . .” Here, it takes up from τ �� αλλ� �Ελληνικ ��ν [therest of Greece], to mean “part of the rest of Greece doing so straightaway,and part thinking about it.” We probably should imagine that afterδιαν�� υµεν�ν could be supplied �υν�ιστασθαι, “considering to join theleague.”

1.2. �ως δ �ε ε�ιπει�ν. “so to speak.” “Certain idiomatic infinitives are used

absolutely in parenthetical phrases to limit the application of a singleexpression or of the entire sentence” (Sm. §2012, the absolute infinitive).E.g., �ως �επ�ς ε�ιπει

�ν, “so to say”; ε�κ �ων ε�ι

�ναι, “willingly”; �ως ε�µ��ι δ�κει

�ν,

“as it seems to me.”

ε�π�ι πλει�στ�ν. Here, ε�π�ι with the accusative expresses quantity or mea-

sure (Sm. §1689.3c)—as in ε�π�ι µικρ ��ν, “a little,” and ε�π�ι πλ �ε�ν, “stillmore”—hence, “the most.” Here, “of the majority of mankind.”

1.3. ε �υρει�ν. Epexegetical (explanatory) infinitive—i.e., an accusative of

respect that happens to be an infinitive. An accusative of respect (Sm.§1600—1601) is an accusative in the vicinity of an adjective expressingin what respect that adjective is true, as in δειν��ι µα� �ην, “terrible withrespect to battle.” Hence, here, “things impossible with respect to discov-ery.” Note that the infinitive limiting the meaning of an adjective—i.e.,an epexegetical infinitive—is commonly active (or middle) where En-glish often expects a passive (Sm. §2006). So one can here translate“impossible to discover” or “impossible to be discovered.”

ε�κ δ �ε τεκµηρ�ιων �ω�ν. In Greek, a relative pronoun whose antecedent is

either genitive or dative can take its case from its antecedent rather thanfrom its use in its own clause. Logically, one would expect this relative tobe accusative plural &α, since it is the object of the participle σκ�π�υ

�ντι

and, at the same time, the object of πιστευ�σαι, but it is attracted to the

case of its antecedent, τεκµηρ�ιων. Sm. §2522.

µ�ι πιστευ�σαι �υµ α�ινει. Literally, “to believe happens to me”—i.e., to

retranslate, “I happen to believe.”


κατα� . . . ε�ς. Both mean “concerning.” LSJ s.v. κατα� B.IV.2, s.v. ε�ςA.IV.1. Thucydides avoids repeating the preposition κατα� and characteris-tically avoids strict parallelism.

2.2. φα�ινεται takes the participles καλ�υµ �ενη, ��ικ�υµ �ενη, � �υ�σαι, �απ�-

λε�ιπ�ντες, and ια" ��µεν�ι. Sm. §§2106, 2143.

νεµ ��µεν�ι. In the middle, ν �εµω means “possess, enjoy, or inhabit.” LSJs.v. A.II. Crawley translates, “cultivate.”

��σ�ν �απ�"η�ν. “as much as [necessary] to live off.”

�αδηλ�ν ��ν. Accusative absolute. “A participle stands in the accusativeabsolute, instead of the genitive, when it is impersonal, or has an infini-tive as its subject. When impersonal, such participles have no apparentgrammatical connection with the rest of the sentence” (Sm. §2076–78).Hence, “it being unclear when . . .”

��π�τε. Indirect form of the interrogative adverb, used for indirect ques-tions. The direct form would be π ��τε. See the chart in Sm. §346; cf.§2664.

τις . . . �αλλ�ς. “somebody else.” Thucydides often separates words thatordinarily go together.

�αφαιρ �ησεται. This is the verb of the indirect question introduced by��π�τε. In the middle, it means “take for oneself/themselves” and wouldordinarily have an accusative of the thing and a genitive of the person, as inThuc. III.58.5: τ �ας πατρ�ι�υς τω

�ν ε�σσαµ �ενων κα�ι κτισα� ντων �αφαιρ �η-

σεσθε [you will take the ancestral practices away from those who estab-lished and founded them]. There is no accusative object of �αφαιρ �ησεταιbecause it can be inferred from what precedes—sc., γη

�ν (brachylogy, Sm.

§3018k). After primary tenses, the mood of the original direct question isretained, but after secondary tenses, the mood may change to optative. Sm.§2677. Here, after the secondary leading verb �απαν�ισταντ�, Thucydideschooses to retain the indicative. �ατει��ιστων �αµα ��ντων can be taken eitheras a genitive absolute or as the genitive after �αφαιρ �ησεται. Classen andSteup (ad loc.) prefer the latter.

Notice the connectives in the first independent clause of this sentence.The main verb is �απαν�ισταντ�, and dependent on it are five nominativeplural participles connected by various coordinate conjunctions, somepositive and some negative.

Commentary 21

� �υδ� ε�πιµειγν �υντεςνεµ ��µεν��ι τεκα�ι . . . � �υκ �ε��ντες� �υδ �ε . . . φυτε �υ�ντες(τη

�ς) τε . . . �ηγ� �υµεν�ι

'αν �ηγ� �υµεν�ι ε�πικρατει�ν. �ηγ� �υµεν�ι introduces indirect discourse with

accusative and infinitive, but when the accusative subject of the infinitiveis the same as that of the leading verb, the accusative is omitted. Sm.§§937, 1972. Hence, “thinking that they . . .” �αν goes with ε�πικρατει

�ν,

indicating that in direct discourse, it was a potential optative: ε�πικρα-τ�ι

�µεν �αν, “we would obtain . . .” Sm. §§1846, 2023. ε�πικρατ �εω takes

the genitive.

2.3. τη�ς γη

�ς �η �αρ�ιστη. Normally, we would expect �η �αρ�ιστη γη

�ς, but this

is a characteristic mode of expression for Thucydides.

2.4. δυναµει�ς τισ�ι. Thucydides, who does not want to talk about cities

yet, for that is the point of the discussion, uses such indefinite expressionsto mean either territories or persons or both. Hence, “some powers be-came greater than some [others]” or “some people became greater thanother people.”

τε . . . ε�νεπ��ι�υν . . . κα�ι ε�πι �υλε �υ�ντ�. The τε . . . κα�ι combinationconnects the two finite verbs.

ε�µπ�ι �εω. When used of circumstances and conditions, this verb means“cause, produce.” LSJ s.v. II.3.

ε�πι �υλε �υωmeans “plot against someone (dat.),” and the middle transfor-mation makes the dative the subject, so ε�πι �υλε �υ�µαι means “I getplotted against.”

2.5. γ�υ�ν. Combination of γε and �υ

�ν, usually translated, “at any rate.”

“γ�υ�ν commonly confirms a previous general assertion by giving a special

instance of its truth” (Sm. §2830).

ε�κ τ�υ�ε�π�ι πλει

�στ�ν. An adverb or a prepositional phrase can be made to

serve as a noun by placing it in attributive position after an article. E.g., ��ινυ

�ν, “the now (men)” (i.e., contemporaries); ��ι ε�ν τ �ελει, “those in office.”

ε�π�ι πλει�στ�ν means “over the greatest distance” or “over the longest


period of time.” LSJ s.v. πλει�στ�ς IV.3. ε�κ πλε�ιστ�υ means “from the

longest time ago.” LSJ s.v. ε�κ III.1. This expression seems to be a con-flation of the two. Some editors have believed there is a textual problemhere and want to read something like ε�κ παλαι�τα� τ�υ.

2.6. δι �α τ �ας µετ�ικ�ιας ε�ς τ �α �αλλα µ �η ��µ��ιως α �υ�ηθη�ναι. ε� ς τ �α �αλλα

means “in other parts of Greece.” α �υ�ηθη�ναι is the infinitive of indirect

discourse after λ ��γ�υ—hence, “of the theory that there was not the sameincrease in other parts of Greece due to immigration [as there was inAttica].” µετ�ικ�ια means “settlement in Attica” by this interpretation.This reading argues that Attica increased its population by immigration,i.e., by the acquisition of metics. Other editors read µετ�ικ �ησεις, “migra-tions from the original land,” instead, arguing that because populationswere shifting constantly, other cities in Greece could not grow, whereasAthens, being secure, did not lose population. Gomme translates, “Hereis a very good example to prove my point that, owing to the continualshifting of population, the rest of Greece did not advance (in security) asmuch as Attica.”

�ως �ε αι�ν ��ν. Accusative absolute introduced with �ως. Sm. §§2076–78.Usually, only participles of personal verbs in the accusative absolute have�ως. Here, �ως with the absolute construction marks the ground of belief onwhich the agent acts. Sm. §2086d. Hence, “[on the grounds that] it wassecure.”

µε�ι"ω. Predicate accusative. “Verbs meaning to appoint, call, choose, con-sider, make, name, show, and the like may take a second accusative aspredicate to the direct object” (Sm. §1613).

�ωστε introduces an expression of result. The two result constructionsare �ωστε plus the infinitive and �ωστε plus the indicative. Sm. §§2249–78.�ωστε plus the infinitive is general, marking a possible result, but not anactual one (“so that as a general rule, most of the time, . . .”), as in “hebehaved in such a manner as to please his friends.” �ωστε plus the indica-tive is specific, marking a result that actually happened, as in “so as amatter of fact, he actually . . .”

3.1. τ ��δε. “the following, namely, . . .” τ ��δε, the subject of δηλ�ι�, stands

as a pronoun representing the next sentence.

Commentary 23

3.2. δ�κει�δ �ε µ�ι takes the following infinitives ε�ι

�ναι, παρ �ε�εσθαι, καλει

�-

σθαι, and ε�κνικη�σαι. The clause � �υδ �ε τ��υν�µα . . . ε�ι

��εν is parenthetical.

κα�ι πα� νυ. “actually.” LSJ s.v. πα� νυ 2.

�αλλα τε κα�ι. “especially.” �αλλα is neuter plural to agree with �εθνη. Greekdoes this in a reverse fashion from English, which would have “Pelasgiansand others” where Greek would have “others and Pelasgians.” The combi-nation here is kindred to the adverbial expression �αλλως τε κα�ι, “espe-cially.” Sm. §2980.

καθ� ε�κα� στ�υς. “one by one.” LSJ s.v. κατα� B.II.3.

3.3. � �υ µ �ην � �υδ �ε. “nor again [and to add to this negative example] . . .” Sm.§§2921, 2768. The following µηδ �ε negates the infinitive �απ�κεκρ�ισθαι, asis regular.

�αντ�ιπαλ�ς was originally used to indicate an opponent in wrestling, thento designate one member of a balanced pair, and then, as here, to mean“corresponding.” Here, it is a neuter adjective modifying ��ν�µα. “Theword order, unusual for Attic prose, seems to be caused by the intention toemphasize �αντ�ιπαλ�ν” (Classen and Steup, ad loc.).

δ� � �υ�ν. “Thucydides frequently uses this combination of particles when he

returns to the main subject of his discourse, after a digression or somesubordinate discussion” (Classen and Steup, ad loc.).

3.4. �ως �εκαστ�ι. “each by themselves.”

τε . . . κα�ι connects the prepositional phrase κατ �α π ��λεις [city by city]and the adjective � �υµπαντες, with Thucydides’ characteristic avoidanceof strict grammatical parallelism. Both serve to explain �ως �εκαστ�ι [sever-ally]. Hence, “The Greeks, both severally city by city . . . and later as awhole . . .”

��σ�ι �αλλ �ηλων �υν�ιεσαν. �υν¯�ιε¯σαν. The present stem of �ιηµι has twoforms, the long-vowel form �ιη¯ and the short-vowel form �ιε¯. The long-vowel form is used only in the present active singular; the short-vowel isused in all other forms based on the present stem. This is the imperfectthird plural active. The verb in this meaning (i.e., “understand”) takes the


genitive. LSJ s.v. II.3; Sm. §1361. The point is that they had a commonlanguage.

πλε�ιω. Neuter plural accusative of the comparative used as an adverb. Sm.§345.

�υνε�η�λθ�ν ought to be intransitive, but it seems to have στρατε�ιαν as its

object. LSJ (s.v. συν �ερ��µαι II.4) explains στρατε�ιαν as a cognate accusa-tive—hence, “united for this expedition.” Notice that the MSS read�υνη

�λθ�ν, and �υνε�η

�λθ�ν is a conjecture by Carolus Gabriel Cobet

(1813–89), a Dutch scholar.

4.1. �ω�ν. This relative incorporates its antecedent (Sm. §2536); i.e., there

is no antecedent present in the main clause, but if it were there explicitly,it would have been genitive plural, a partitive genitive after the superla-tive adjective. Sm. §1315. So the genitive plural seems to serve as theobject of the verb �ισµεν. If this construction were artificially spread out, itwould be παλαι ��τατ�ς τ� �υτων �&υς �ακ��η

��ισµεν.

τ�υ�

. . . �ι �εναι. Articular infinitive in the genitive, signifying purpose. Sm.§2032e.

5.1 αρ α� ρων. Partitive genitive with the two relative clauses. Hence,“and of the barbarians, those who . . .”

ε� τρα� π�ντ�. The active τρ �επω is the transitive, meaning “to turn some-thing,” but the middle τρ �επ�µαι is intransitive, meaning “to turn around.”

σφετ �ερ�υ α �υτω�ν. Constructio ad sensum. σφετ �ερ�υ, though a possessive

adjective agreeing with the singular genitive κ �ερδ�υς, in meaning has aplural referent—hence, “belonging to them.” The intensive adjectiveα �υτω

�ν agrees with it in the genitive, by strict grammar, but is plural because

of the meaning, even though, by strict logic, it ought to be singular since itmodifies adjectively a singular form. Sm. §§926a, 1202.2b, 1203b.

�ενεκα κα�ι τ�ι�ς �ασθεν �εσι τρ�φη

�ς. “for the sake of food for the weak

[among their dependents].” Smyth does not discuss the true dative withsubstantives, here τρ�φη

�ς, but see Schwyzer-Debrunner, 153.

τι κα�ι δ ��ης. “even carrying some glory [literally, “something of glory”]rather.” Cf., e.g., τι δυνα� µεως at Thuc. II.49.6 and ε�λπ�ιδ�ς τι at II.51.6.

Commentary 25

5.2. δηλ�υ�σι . . . ��νειδι� ��ντων. A tricky sentence, but characteristic of

many of Thucydides’ syntactic habits.

1. δηλ�υ�σι has no object, when we would normally expect one. Its

“object” is the fact in the previous sentence, sc., that piracybrings no shame.

2. The subjects of δηλ�υ�σι are τιν �ες and παλαι��ι, which are con-

nected by the τε before �ηπειρ �ωτων and the κα�ι that precedesπαλαι��ι. They make clear the fact (that piracy brings no shame).

3. τιν �ες is modified by (a) a partitive genitive, τω�ν �ηπειρωτω

�ν,

and (b) the relative clause ��ις κ ��σµ�ς τ�υ

�τ� δρα

�ν (ε�στ�ι).

4. ��ι παλαι��ι is modified by (a) a partitive genitive, τω�ν π�ιητω

�ν,

and (b) the present participle ε�ρωτω�ντες.

5. ε�ρωτω�ντες takes the accusative of what one asks (τ �ας π �υστεις)

and the genitive of the person asked (τω�ν καταπλε ��ντων), and

ε�ρωτω�ντες τ �ας π �υστεις is followed by the indirect question ε�ι

λ�ηστα�ι ε�ισιν, which defines what the inquiries were. The indi-rect form of a yes-no question is introduced by ε�ι, “whether”—not to be confused with conditional ε�ι, “if” (Sm. §2671)—and,after a leading verb in a primary tense, keeps the same mood asthe direct question would have had. After a secondary tense, itmay change to optative. Sm. §2677.

6. The rest of the sentence consists of two genitive absolutesmarked by the two parallel participles �απα�ι� �υντων and ��νει-δι� ��ντων, which are connected by ��υτε and the τε that follows�

��ις.

7. These genitive absolutes are introduced by �ως, which signifiesthat the substance of the absolutes is the opinion of the poetswho question whether they are pirates. Sm. §2086d. In suchcircumstances, �ως may be given the preliminary translation “onthe grounds that.”

8. The genitive noun “subjects” of these genitive absolutes are infact not genitive nouns but whole relative clauses, sc., �ω

�ν

πυνθα� ν�νται [those whom they ask not disclaiming the fact]and �

��ις ε�πιµελ �ες ε�ιη [those, to whom it was a concern to know,

not reproaching].9. �ω

�ν πυνθα� ν�νται has an incorporated antecedent (Sm. §2536).

πυνθα� ν�µαι takes the accusative of what is learned and thegenitive of the person from whom it is learned. Here, the relative


is the genitive of the person from whom it is learned. Hence,“those from whom they learn not disclaiming the fact.”

10. ��ις, with an incorporated antecedent, is dative with ε�πιµελ �ες.

Why is ε�ιη optative? The rest of the sentence appears to be inprimary sequence, but the past time implied in παλαι��ι seems tohave taken over this clause, which is optative because it is arelative clause in indirect discourse after ε�ρωτ �ωντες. Sm. §2619.Hence, “and those, to whom it was a concern to know, notreproaching.”

A recapitulation of the sentence follows.

And some of the mainlanders make [this] clear even now, for whomit is a source of pride to do this [piracy] well, as do the old ones of thepoets (make it clear) by asking for information [τ �ας π �υστεις]—whether they are pirates the same way everywhere—from those whoput into shore, since those from whom they inquire do not deny thebusiness as unworthy, and those, to whom it is a concern to know,do not reproach [them].

5.3. ν �εµεται. ν �εµω means in the active “distribute” and in the middle“possess as one’s portion,” i.e., “have distributed to one.” It came to mean“live, dwell in a place.” Then, the middle in an absolute construction,with a country or land as subject, came to mean “be constituted, bemaintained.” Hence, “many parts of Hellas live according to the old way.”

6.2. σηµει��ν κτλ. “These parts of Hellas still living thus are a sign of the

once similar ways of life in all parts.”

6.3. ε�ν τ�ι�ς πρω

�τ�ι. “ε�ν τ�ι

�ς is used before the superlative in all genders

and numbers (esp. in Hdt., Thuc., Plato)” (Sm. §1089); i.e., the fixedphrase ε�ν τ�ι

�ς simply intensifies the superlative. Hence, “the very first . . .”

Notice that the words ε�ν τ�ι�ς πρω

�τ�ι count almost as one word, since the

postpositive δ �ε, which should be second in any clause, here comes after theπρω

�τ�ι.

�ανειµ �εν�η. Perfect middle participle of �αν�ιηµι, “let go,” here meaning“relaxed.”

µετ �εστησαν. Third plural intransitive root aorist of µεθ�ιστηµι, here mean-ing “changed, shifted.” It is inconvenient that the third plural transitivesigmatic aorist accidentally has the same form.

Commentary 27

��ι πρεσ� �υτερ�ι is the subject of ε�πα �υσαντ�, but the flow of the sentence(from the standpoint of the English speaker) is interrupted by � �υ π�λ �υς�ρ ��ν�ς ε�πε�ιδη. We would feel more comfortable if the order were � �υπ�λ �υς �ρ ��ν�ς ε�πε�ιδη ��ι πρεσ� �υτερ�ι . . . ε�πα �υσαντ�.

α �υτ�ι�ς. This dative is hard to categorize. We would expect a genitive (i.e.,

“the older of them”). This dative seems to be Thucydides’ stylistic deviceto avoid two contiguous genitives. In poetry, a plural personal dative canstand alone to mean “among.” E.g., Τρ �ωεσσιν [among the Trojans] (Hom.Il. 6.477) Sm. §1531.

ε�πα �υσαντ�. This intransitive middle, meaning “cease [doing something]”takes the supplementary participle φ�ρ�υ

�ντες. Sm. §2098.

�αφ� � �υ�. “because of which, from which cause.” Note that �αφ� � �υ

�more

commonly stands for �αφ� � �υ��ρ ��ν�υ and means “since, after.”

�αφ� � �υ�

. . . κατ �εσ�εν. “for which reason this fashion prevailed among [LSJs.v. κατ �ε�ω II.6b] the older Ionians for a long time in accordance withtheir kinship [with the Athenians].”

6.4. ε� ς τ ��ν νυ�ν τρ ��π�ν is parallel with µετρ�ια� , so that it virtually serves

as another modifier of ε�σθη�τι.

ε� ς τ �α �αλλα πρ ��ς τ� �υς π ��λλ�υς. “in other matters with respect to themany [or toward the many].”

κατ �εστησαν. This third plural of the intransitive root aorist κατ �εστην isinconveniently identical to the third plural of the transitive sigmaticaorist κατ �εστησα. The transitive aorist means “appoint, ordain, estab-lish.” The intransitive aorist means “be or come to be in a certain state.”

6.5. λ�ιπα. “with olive oil.” This adverb is used by Homer in the phrase�αλε�ιψασθαι λ�ιπ� ε�λα�ιω� [anoint oneself richly with oil] (e.g., Il. 10.577).It is an adverb in ¯α (like σα� φα), related to the neuter s-stem noun λ�ιπ�ς,“fat, grease.”

�εστιν ��ις νυ

�ν. Sm. §§2513–14. From the original nominative phrases

�εστιν ��στις, “there is someone who . . . ,” and ε�ισ�ιν ��ι, “there are thosewho . . . ,” there developed “oblique cases”— �εστιν �ω

�ν, �εστιν �

��ις, �εστιν

��υς—which function as fixed phrases, as though they were simple geni-tive, dative, and accusative adjectives meaning “some.” Hence, “amongsome barbarians now” or “among some contemporary barbarians.”


π�λλ �α . . . κα�ι �αλλα. Internal accusatives after διαιτ �ωµεν�ν, modified by��µ�ι ��τρ�πα. Sm. §§1554a, 1573. This gives the translation “one woulddemonstrate that ancient Greece adopted many other customs similar tothe barbarians.” But ��µ�ι ��τρ�πα is sometimes interpreted as a neuter pluralused as an adverb (LSJ s.v.), giving “one would demonstrate in many otherways that ancient Greece lives similarly to the present barbarian.”

7.1. νε �ωτατα. The superlative degree of the adverb is represented by theneuter plural accusative of the superlative adjective. Sm. §345.

πλωιµωτ �ερων ��ντων. Genitive absolute. πλωιµωτ �ερων is the genitive ofthe neuter plural πλωιµ �ωτερα, used as an impersonal expression, as Thu-cydides does frequently. Cf. Thuc. I.8.2, where πλωιµ �ωτερα ε�γ �ενετ�means “things became more seafaring” or, more elegantly, “sea communica-tions improved” (Warner). Thus, the genitive absolute means “when oncesea communications were better.”

�ηδη corresponds to Latin iam and has three possible meanings: (1) “al-ready, by this time”; (2) in contrast to something in the future, “immedi-ately forthwith”; (3) after something has occurred first, “henceforth.” Likeiam, it can refer to the past, the future, or the immediate present. Here,“seafaring being easier by this time.”

πρ ��ς τ� �υς πρ�σ��ικ�υς. “against the neighbors.” Sm. §1695.3c.

�εκαστ�ι. Masculine plural. Without warning, Thucydides has switchedfrom the cities (feminine) to the inhabitants of the cities with the mascu-line �εκαστ�ι.

�αντ�ισ��υσαν. Intransitive feminine singular active present participle,meaning “rising up, emerging.”

�εφερ�ν. Here, this verb has the special meaning “rob, plunder.” LSJ s.v.φ �ερω A.VI.2.

τω�ν �αλλων. Partitive genitive with the ��σ�ι clause.

κα� τω. In the context of dry land, �ανω means “inland, away from theshore,” and κα� τω means “toward the shore.” But in the context of the sea,�ανω means “seaward,” and κα� τω means “toward land.” Hence, �ανω� κι-σµ �εν�ι (perfect middle participle) means “built inland.” Some editors(e.g., Classen) would read a feminine participle to agree with α�ι δ �ε

Commentary 29

παλαια�ι (π ��λεις). If we keep the masculine, it agrees with ��σ�ι andmeans “migrate upcountry, shift one’s dwelling inland.”

8.1. ∆ �ηλ�υ. The island name ∆ �ηλ�ς is feminine. Sm. §232a.

8.2. Μ�ινω. Genitive singular of a noun stem originally in ¯ωυ¯ (like�ηρως). Sm. §267, 267a. In Attic, the genitive is shifted to the o-stemsecond declension. Hence, *Μ�ιν¯ωυ¯�υ � Μ�ινω.

�αν �εστησαν. Intransitive root aorist third plural of �αν�ιστηµι. The transi-tive �αν�ιστηµι means “make people emigrate.” LSJ s.v. III.A.2. Thus, theintransitive aorist means “be forced to emigrate.” LSJ s.v. B.II.2.

��τεπερ. “when in fact.” The intensifying suffix ¯περ, “indeed,” is there tomake clear that Thucydides is referring back to an earlier point (I.4.1)—that Minos was the πρω

�τ�ς ��ικ�ιστης.

8.3. �ηδη. “by now.”

�ως πλ�υσι �ωτερ�ι ε�αυτω�ν γιγν ��µεν�ι. “as is natural with those who be-

come richer than themselves,” i.e., richer than they were before.

ε�φι �εµεν�ι. Present active middle participle of ε�φ�ιηµι, which, in themiddle, means “desire” and takes a genitive. LSJ s.v. B.II.2.

9.2. The indirect discourse introduced by λ �εγ�υσι consists of five infini-tive phrases.

Π�ελ�πα . . . τ �ην ε�πωνυµ�ιαν σ�ει�ν

�υνενε�θη�ναι (impersonal)

τυγ�α� νειν (parenthetical)παραλα�ει

�ν

καταστη�ναι

Π �ελ�πα . . . τ �ην ε�πωνυµ�ιαν . . . σ�ει�ν. “[they say] that Pelops had the

naming of the country”; i.e., the country was said to be named after him.

δ �υναµιν περιπ�ιησα� µεν�ν. “having acquired power for himself.” LSJ s.v.περιπ�ι �εω II.1.

��µως goes with the participle ��ντα. Sm. §2082. Hence, “even though stillbeing.”


�υνενε�θη�ναι. Aorist passive infinitive of �υµφ �ερω, used impersonally

with the meaning “to fall out well, come to pass” (for someone [dat.]) LSJs.v. συµφ �ερω B.III. The accusative neuter subject of this infinitive isµε�ι�ω. The dative of advantage is ε�κγ ��ν�ις.

�υπ �� Ηρακλειδω�ν. We would expect an article ( �υπ �� τω

�ν �Ηρακλειδω

�ν),

but Thucydides often makes this omission. Cf. �υπ �� Θεσσαλω�ν at Thuc.

I.12.3. Sm. §1136.

ε�κγ ��ν�ις, the dative after the impersonal �υνενε�θη�ναι, is by anacoluthon

picked up by the two genitives Ε�υρυσθ �εως and �Ατρ �εως, who are the two�εκγ�ν�ι in question, paired by µ �εν . . . δ �ε in the two genitive absolutes. κα�ιε�πιτρ �εψαντ�ς begins a third, nonparallel genitive absolute.

µητρ ��ς �αδ �ελφ�υ α �υτω��

��ντ�ς. “being mother’s brother to him.” Atreus’ssister Nikippe was the mother of Eurystheus.

κατ �α τ �� ικει��ν. “in accordance with his relationship.” Thucydides often

prefers a neuter singular adjective used substantively (Sm. §§1021–29) toan abstract noun like ��ικει ��τητα. �Ατρει

�is the dative indirect object after

ε�πιτρ �εψαντ�ς.

τυγ�α� νειν . . . θα� νατ�ν. Although this is printed as a parenthesis, it is stillgoverned by λ �εγ�υσι.

(ρυσ�ιππ�υ. Chrysippus was the son of Pelops and Astyoche (a Danaid)and half brother of Atreus and Thyestes. Their mother, Hippodameia,urged them to kill her stepson Chrysippus, but they refused, so she did itherself.

��υλ�µ �ενων . . . �Ηρακλε�ιδων is a genitive absolute. Hence, “the Myce-neans being willing out of their fear of the Heraclidae.”

�Ατρ �εα παραλα�ει�ν is introduced by λ �εγ�υσι (I.9.2), and the accusative

subject �Ατρ �εα is then modified by two participial phrases: (1) δ �υνατ�νδ�κ�υ

�ντα ε�ι

�ναι and (2) τ �� πλη

�θ�ς τεθεραπευκ ��τα. The neuter singular

object of the participle, τ �� πλη�θ�ς, is then modified by two defining geni-

tives (Sm. §1310), one a plain genitive (τω�ν Μυκηνα�ιων) and the other a

parallel relative clause ( ��σων Ε�υρυσθε �υς). The relative adjective ��σ�ς,which is the relative used to emphasize number, is attracted to the case of itsantecedent (Sm. §2532)—which would be something like ε�κε�ινων if itwere there, but it has been incorporated (Sm. §§2536, 2538). It is alsogenitive because it is the object of �αρ�ω, which takes the genitive.

Commentary 31

τ� �υς Πελ�π�ιδας µε�ι��υς καταστη�ναι. This infinitive phrase is an indi-

rect statement after λ �εγ�υσι (I.9.2).

A recapitulation in clumsy, but syntactically transparent, English follows.

Those of the Peloponnesians who have received the clearest evidenceby tradition from their ancestors say that Pelops was the first, byreason of accumulation of wealth, which he brought with him fromAsia into a land of poor men, once he had achieved power for himself,[and that he] had the naming of the country, although still an immi-grant; and [they say] that matters fell out later even better [greater] forhis descendants, Eurystheus, on the one hand, having died in Atticaat the hands of the Heracleidae, and Atreus, on the other hand, beingbrother to Eurystheus’s mother; and Eurystheus, when he used to goon military expeditions, having entrusted Mycenae and the rule [of it]to Atreus because of his family connection—[they say] Atreus fledfrom his father over the murder of Chrysippus—and when Eurystheusdid not return again, with the acquiescence of the Myceneans out oftheir fear of the Heracleidae, [they say] Atreus, both seeming to bepowerful and also having flattered the common people of the Myce-neans and those whom Eurystheus used to rule, assumed the kingship;and [they say] that the Pelopidae ended up being greater than thePersidae.

9.3. τ �� πλ �ε�ν. Thucydides sometimes uses τ �� πλ �ε�ν instead of µα�λλ�ν.

Sm. §1068.

9.4. πρ�σπαρασ� �ων. “furnishing in addition.”

ε�ι τω� �ικαν ��ς τεκµηριω�σαι. Sm. §2354. ε�ι does not really introduce a

condition here but means “in case, on the chance that, supposing.”Hence, “supposing he is sufficient to provide evidence to anybody.”

ε�ν τ�υ�σκηπτρ�υ

��αµα τ�η

�παραδ ��σει. I.e., Hom. Il. 2.101–8. �αµα [be-

sides] interrupts the phrase and connects it with the preceding argument.One could translate it “furthermore.”

� �υκ )αν κτλ. Present contrary-to-fact condition with ε�ι µ �η plus the imper-fect (ε�ι

��εν) in the protasis and the imperfect (ε�κρα� τει) plus �αν in the

apodosis. Sm. §2302 ff. Here, we would expect a past contrary-to-factcondition (with aorist indicative in both clauses). However, the imperfect


can sometimes refer to continual or habitual past action (Sm. §§2304,2309b), and it then emphasizes the action’s continuity. Since Agamem-non was continuing to rule, the imperfect, rather than the aorist, is usedhere. Classen and Steup (ad loc.) explain this use of the imperfect differ-ently, arguing that the statement is expressed from the standpoint ofHomer, who was narrating it as present.

ε�ικα� �ειν δ �ε �ρ �η κα�ι τα �υτ�η τ�η�στρατε�ια� �

��ια �η

�ν τ �α πρ �� α �υτη

�ς. “one can

conjecture from this expedition what kind they were before this.” Al-though �ρ �η usually means “it is necessary,” it is sometimes used in a “lessstrong sense” amounting to “one can” (LSJ s.v. III). cf. Thuc.II.51.2.

10.1. ��τι µ �εν Μυκη�ναι µικρ ��ν �η

�ν, )η ε�ι κτλ. The ��τι (“because”) clause

and the ε�ι clause are parallel, both giving reasons for doubt. ε�ι can betranslated “given the fact that . . .” The ε�ι clause is causal, expressingThucydides’ real opinion, sc., the real reason one may doubt. Sm. §2246;Kuhner-Gerth 2:487, §577.1.

�απιστ��ιη µ �η γεν �εσθαι. “Verbs and expressions of negative meaning, suchas deny, refuse, hinder, forbid, avoid, [doubt], often take the infinitive with aredundant µ �η to confirm the negative idea of the leading verb” (Sm.§§2739–40).

� �υκ negates only the �ακρι�ει�.

10.2. ��ι�µαι governs a potential condition in indirect discourse, with a

double protasis. The direct form of the condition would be ε�ι ε�ρηµ-ωθε�ιη . . . λειφθε�ιη δ �ε . . . �απιστ�ια ε�ιη �αν (the so-called future less vivid).When it is downgraded to an infinitive phrase of indirect discourse afterthe leading verb ��ι

�µαι, the �απιστ�ια ε�ιη �αν becomes �απιστ�ιαν ε�ι

�ναι �αν,

and the protases remain the same.

τ�ι�ς �επειτα. Adverb in attributive position after the article, which makes

it into a noun, meaning “to those people then,” i.e., “to future genera-tions.” Sm. §1153e.

�Αθηνα�ιων δ �ε . . . )αν . . . ε�ικα� �εσθαι. Second potential condition depen-dent on ��ι

�µαι. Here, the protasis is represented by the genitive absolute,

the apodosis by the infinitive plus �αν.

Commentary 33

10.3. ε�ικ ��ς. This picks up the idea of the beginning of the chapter—thatis what the resumptive � �υ

�ν of ��υκ�υν is for (Sm. §2953)—sc., that there

would likely be doubt. Here, Thucydides argues that there should be nodoubt. � �υκ ε�ικ ��ς here means “it is not reasonable, not fair” (LSJ s.v. II)and takes three infinitives, sc., �απιστει

�ν, σκ�πει

�ν, and ν�µ�ι�ειν. The

negatives ��υκ�υν and � �υδ �ε do not negate the infinitives, for that wouldrequire µ �η (Sm. §2726), but they negate ε�ικ ��ς, then the ν�µ�ι�ειν δ �ε shiftsgears into a positive ε�ικ ��ς. Hence, “therefore it is not reasonable todisbelieve . . . or to consider . . . , but it is reasonable to think that . . .”

λειπ�µ �ενην δ �ε τω�ν νυ

�ν. “but falling short of those now.” LSJ s.v. λε�ιπω

B.II.3.

*ην ε�ικ ��ς κτλ. Here, ε�ικ ��ς means “it is probable.” Hence, “which [sc., thearmy] it is probable that Homer, being a poet, enhanced toward thegreater [i.e., exaggerated].”

ε�νδεεστ �ερα. Understand τω�ν νυ

�ν.

10.4. τ �ας µ �εν . . . τ �ας δ �ε. The article plus µ �εν . . . δ �ε means “the one . . .the other,” “some . . . some,” or “the ones . . . the others.” Here, thearticle serves as a pronoun. Sm. §1107. The partitive genitive �ιλ�ιων κα�ιδιακ�σ�ιων defines the group selected by the τ �ας µ �εν . . . τ �ας δ �ε. Hence,“[Homer] makes some of the twelve hundred ships (those of the Boeo-tians) 120 men and others (those of Philoctetes) 50.”

α �υτερ �εται indicates men who are both rowers and fighters at the sametime. We get this definition from the lexicographer Pollux (1.95). Cf.Thuc. III.18.4, VI.91.4.

περ�ινεως. Accusative plural of an o-stem noun of the Attic declension.Sm. §§237–39. Nouns of the Attic declension originally had a long vowelbefore the stem-formative -�-, e.g., *περ�ινη¯�¯ς, which then underwentmetathesis of quantity (Sm. §34) to become περ�ινεως. Note that theaccent remains on the antepenult, as in the ancestral form. The accusa-tive results from the development *περ�ινη¯�¯νς � *περ�ινε¯ω¯νς �περ�ινεως. The word means “a supernumerary or passenger.”

��ι ε�ν τ �ελει. Technical term meaning “those in office.” LSJ s.v. τ �ελ�ς I.3.

�αλλως τε κα�ι. “especially, particularly.” Sm. §2980.


10.5. τ �� µ �εσ�ν σκ�π�υ�ντι. “to someone taking the average.” The dative

goes with φα�ινεται.

�ως. Here, “seeing that, given that” with the participle. Smyth does notseem to treat this use of �ως. Cf. Thuc. II.65.11.

11.1. �απ�ρ�ια� . Dative of cause or motive. Sm. §1517.

��σ�ν refers to the army and is the object of �ι�τε �υσειν. π�λεµ�υ�ντα also

modifies the army (not the leaders, in the plural) and means “while it isfighting.”

� �η�. Feminine dative relative pronoun used as a relative adverb meaning

“for which reason, wherefore.” It refers to the fact that the Greeks did notemploy their whole force in battle. LSJ s.v. � �η

�II.2. This usage derives from

the locative meanings of the dative. The combination � �η�κα�ι is used

especially with a comparative (µα�λλ�ν) to mark the beginning of a clause

emphasizing the consequences of what has just been said. Cf., e.g., Thuc.I.25.4, II.2.3, III.13.2, IV.1.3.

τ�ι�ς α�ιε�ι �υπ�λειπ�µ �εν�ις �αντ�ιπαλ�ι ��ντες. “being a match for [the

Greeks] who were left behind at any given time.” α�ιε�ι modifies �υπ�λει-π�µ �εν�ις, a present participle with imperfect force indicating repeated orcustomary action. Sm. §§1872a3, 1893.

11.2. ε��ιλ�ν appears to lack an object (although it can easily be supplied),

but the expectation of an object is maintained until it finally appears (τ �ηνΤρ��ιαν) with the repetition of ε

��ιλ�ν at the end of the sentence.

δι �εφερ�ν. Why is this not aorist in a past contrary-to-fact protasis parallelto �η

�λθ�ν? Because the imperfect in a contrary-to-fact protasis is contrary

not only to a present reality but also to a continuous (�υν �ε�ως) reality inthe past. Sm. §§2304, 2309b.

�αντ �ε�ω. “hold out.” In the active, this verb is generally intransitive, eitherabsolute (i.e., without any complement) or with a dative of the partyagainst which one holds out.

α �υτα� γε δ �η ταυ�τα. The combination γε δ �η means “a fortiori, particularly.”

Denniston Gr. Part.2, 246 (5). Hence, “since all expeditions are weakenedby lack of money, this very one especially [a fortiori] was so weakened.”

Commentary 35

δι �α τ� �υς π�ιητα� ς. “through the influence of the poets” (Warner); “underthe tuition of the poets” (Crawley). Sm. §1685.2d. The preposition δια�

with the genitive expresses direct agency (“by”) and with the accusativeexpresses indirect agency (fault, merit), i.e., “thanks to, by the aid of.” LSJs.v. B.III.1.

κατεσ�ηκ ��τ�ς. Genitive singular masculine perfect active participle ofκατ �ε�ω. LSJ s.v. B.III. Here, it is intransitive, meaning “prevailing.”

12.1. ε�πε�ι κα�ι. Thucydides often uses this combination to introduce re-marks that add to what has been said before and that can therefore seemobvious or natural. The punctuation in the Oxford text takes this clause asdependent on the preceding independent δηλ�υ

�ται clause. Other editors

(e.g., Classen and Steup) take the ε�πε�ι κα�ι as introducing an independentclause. Cf. Kuhner-Gerth 2:461, §569a.1 Anmerkung 1: “The Greeks veryfrequently use ε�πε�ι where the causal clause does not form a subordinate partof the main clause, but rather ε�πε�ι has the force of γα� ρ in a main clause.”

12.2. �ρ�ν�ι–α. Feminine adjective modifying �ανα� �ωρησις, meaning “tardy,late, after a long time.”

�ωστε µ �η �ησυ�α� σασαν α �υ�ηθη�ναι. The negative µ �η applies to both the

participle and the infinitive, doing double duty to negate each.

ε�νε ��µωσε. “made political innovations.” This denominative omicron-contract verb based on the adjective νε��µ ��ς, “new,” usually occurs witha neuter plural noun or an adjective complement (π�λλα� ). Chantraine(Formation des noms, §114) explains the adjective as νε�¯ plus the “popu-lar” expressive suffix ¯� ¯ plus the adjectival stem-formative ¯µ�¯.

�ως ε�π�ι π�λ �υ. “for the most part.” Cf. Thuc. II.13, �ως ε�π�ι τ �� π�λ �υ.

�αφ� �ω�ν ε�κπ�ιπτ�ντες τ �ας π ��λεις �εκτι��ν. “the exiles [those falling out]

from which [sc., the cities] founded [new] cities.” ε�κπ�ιπτω is the voxpropria for “be banished.” LSJ s.v. 3.

12.3. �απ�δασµ ��ς . . . �αφ� �ω�ν . . . “there was a portion [of the Boeotians]

earlier in this land [Boeotia], part of whom also went on the expedition toTroy.” �αφ� �ω

�ν refers to the collective �απ�δασµ ��ς, so the relative pronoun

is plural. For �απ �� meaning “part of,” see Sm. §1684. N and LSJ s.v. I.6.


12.4. �εστιν *α. Fixed phrase meaning “some.” Sm. §§2513–14.

13.1. τ �α π�λλα� . Adverbial, meaning “generally.”

ε�π�ι �ρητ�ι�ς γ �ερασι πατρικα�ι �ασιλει

�αι. ε�π�ι with the dative expressing a

condition, i.e., “on the basis of . . .” Sm. §1689.2c; LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι III.3, ands.v. �ρητ ��ς. Hence, “hereditary kingships with stated prerogatives.”

ε��ηρτ �υετ�. ε��αρτ �υω means in the active “fit out” and in the transitivemiddle “fit out for oneself.”

�αντε�ι��ντ�. In the active, the verb �αντ �ε�ω is generally intransitive andmeans “hold out.” In the middle, it takes the genitive and means “holdonto, cling to.”

13.4. �ω�ν �ισµεν. Cf. 4.1.

13.5. α�ιε�ι δ �η π�τε. “already from the earliest times, from of old.”

τω�ν �Ελλ �ηνων . . . ε�πιµισγ ��ντων is the kernel of the genitive absolute,

then τω�ν �Ελλ �ηνων is modified with the appositives τω

�ν τε �εντ�ς . . . κα�ι

τω�ν �ε�ω. δι �α τη

�ς ε�κε�ινων [γη

�ς] is usually interpreted to mean “through

their territory,” i.e., through Corinthian territory. For the omission of γη�ς,

cf. Sm. §§1027b, 1302.

τ�ι�ς παλαι�ι

�ς π�ιηται

�ς. Dative of agent with the perfect middle used in a

passive sense (δεδ �ηλωται). Sm. §1488–90. The dative of agent (insteadof �υπ �� plus the genitive) is used with the perfect and pluperfect middle,with the verbal in ¯τ �ε�ς, and with verbal adjectives in ¯τ ��ς.

κτησα� µεν�ι refers to the Greeks, and παρ �ε��ντες refers to the Corinthi-ans. For this reason, some editors regard the κτησα� µεν�ι phrase as a gloss,i.e., a marginal note that has worked its way into the text.

�αµφ ��τερα. Neuter plural (as the accent shows—the feminine would be�αµφ�τ �ερα with a long ultima) referring to ε�µπ ��ρι�ν in a constructio adsensum. Sm. §926a. Hence, “providing a market, both kinds—sc., (1) byland through their isthmus between the Peloponnesus and the rest ofGreece and (2) across their isthmus between the Corinthian Gulf and theSaronic Gulf. This is the natural interpretation, but Gomme (ad loc.) saysthat it means they had harbors on both gulfs. He notes, “Thucydides saysnothing of Corinth being on an ‘isthmic’ route between the two seas—of

Commentary 37

sea traffic passing through her harbors between east and west.” So, by hisinterpretation, “both kinds” mean “by land and by sea.”

14.1. ε��ηρτυµ �ενα. Perfect middle participle of ε��αρτ �υω. Cf. 13.1.

�ωσπερ ε�κει�να. I.e., navies before the Trojan War.

14.3. �αφ� � �υ�. “since.” LSJ s.v. �απ �� II. Sm. §1684b.

δι �α πα� σης [νε �ως]. “over the whole ship, completely.”

15.1. περιπ�ι �ησαντ�. “acquire, gain possession of” (plus the accusative).

��µως. “nevertheless, still”; i.e., “despite what I have said, navies still . . .”

πρ�σσ� ��ντες. Intransitive thematic aorist of πρ�σ �ε�ω. This verb is usu-ally transitive, meaning “turn something toward something else” (e.g.,πρ�σ �ε�ω τ �ην ναυ

�ν [bring a ship to port] or πρ�σ �ε�ω τ ��ν ν�υ

�ν [apply the

mind]). But as an intransitive taking the dative, it means “devote oneselfto, cultivate.” LSJ s.v. 4b.

α �υτ�ι�ς. Sc., τ�ι

�ς ναυτικ�ι

�ς.

��σ�ι µ �η. A relative clause in the indicative may be definite or indefinite.Sm. §§2505, 2509. If it is definite, it refers to some particular person, event,matter, etc. that is explicit. When it is indefinite, it refers to the sort ofperson, event, matter in general. Here, the relative clause is indefinite—referring to any and all who conquered islands, i.e., to the unexpressedsubject of κατεστρ �εφ�ντ�—and therefore takes the negative µ �η. Sm.§2506. If it had been definite, it would have taken the negative � �υ.

διαρκη�. Accusative singular feminine of a two-ending s-stem adjective

like �αληθ �ης. Sm. §292.

15.2. ��θεν. Adverb in -θεν that serves as a substitute for ε�� υ�, the

genitive of the relative, with π ��λεµ�ς as its antecedent. Sm. §§342, 2499.

�υν �εστη. Root aorist active used in a passive sense when referring tobattle, meaning “was joined.” LSJ s.v. συν�ιστηµι II.1.

�απ �� τη�ς ε�κε�ινων [γη

�ς]. Sm. §§1027b, 1302.

ε�π�ι καταστρ�φ�η�. “for the purpose of subjection.”


π�λ �υ. “[not] much away from their own territory.”

στρατε�ιας ε��η�σαν. Imperfect of �ε�ειµι, “go out,” which ought to be

intransitive but here seems to take an accusative object. It is usuallyexplained as a cognate accusative or an internal object. Sm. §§1563, 1567.Cf. ε��η

�λθ�ν �αλλας ��δ� �υς [They went forth on other journeys] (Xen. Hell.

1.2.17). Hence, here, “they did not go out on foreign expeditions.”

� �υ γ �αρ �υνειστ �ηκεσαν πρ ��ς τ �ας µεγ�ιστας π ��λεις �υπ �ηκ��ι. “for they hadnot joined as subjects to the largest cities,” i.e., in such alliances as theDelian League was to be. Crawley translates, “There was no union ofsubject cities around a great state.”

�ως �εκαστ�ι. “each by themselves.”

15.3. µα� λιστα. “at the most.” The only exception in this period was theLelantine War between the Chalcidians and the Eretrians ca. 700 B .C.(date quite uncertain).

16.1. ε�πιγ �ενετ� δ �ε �αλλ�ις τε �αλλ�θι κωλ �υµατα µ �η α �υ�ηθη�ναι. ε�πιγ�ιγν�-

µαι means “happen in addition,” with the implication of the unexpected ortroublesome. LSJ s.v. II.1. τε goes with the following κα�ι, making �αλλ�ιςand �Ιωσι quasi-parallel, but formally connecting ε�πιγ �ενετ� and ε�πεστρα� -τευσε . . . κα�ι . . . δ� �υλωσε. Hence, “it happened to others and to theIonians.” Cf. 3.2. Yet �Ιωσι is formally dative after ε�πεστρα� τευσε and, atthe same time, serves as a dative of interest with the genitive absoluteπρ��ωρησα� ντων κτλ. The adverb �αλλ�θι literally means “in anotherplace” but here means “for other reasons.” LSJ s.v. II. α �υ�ηθη

�ναι is an

infinitive occurring with µ �η after an expression of hindering (κωλ �υµατα).Sm. §§2038, 2744. Hence, “To several there occurred hindrances to in-crease, for various reasons, and to the Ionians [particularly] . . .”

17.1. τ �� ε�φ� ε�αυτω�ν. “their own interests.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι A.I.2c.

α�υ�ειν. Articular infinitive with object, τ ��ν �ιδι�ν ��ι�κ�ν.

δι� �ασφαλε�ιας. δια� with a noun in the genitive often serves as an adverb—hence, “safely.” LSJ s.v. δια� A.III.c. δι� �ασφαλε�ιας ��σ�ν ε�δ �υναντ� thenmeans “as safely as they were able.”

ε�ι µ �η ε�ι. Stuart Jones so reads. Many MSS (A, B, E, G, M) read only ε�ιµ �η, and nowhere else in Thucydides do we find ε�ι µ �η ε�ι, though it does

Commentary 39

occur, e.g., at Pl. Grg. 480b. In any case, it means “except.” LSJ s.v. ε�ιVII.2a.

ε�κα� στ�ις. Dative of agent with the unrepeated ε�πρα� �θη. Sm. §§1488,1490.

��υτω. This wraps up the arguments (τεκµ �ηρια) why there were no largecombined expeditions in the past.

κατε�ι�ετ�. “was prevented, was held back.” This verb takes the infinitivewith µ �η after verbs of hindering. Sm. §2739.

18.1. The backbone of the sentence is ε�πειδ �η . . . τ �υρανν�ι . . . κατελ �υ-θησαν, . . . µα� �η . . . ε�γ �ενετ�.

ε�π�ι πλει�στ�ν �ω

�ν �ισµεν �ρ ��ν�ν στασια� σασα. “although, for the longest

time of all the [states] that we know, [Lacedaemon] was afflicted withfaction . . .” The “faction” came to an end with the establishment of theSpartan constitution by Lycurgus, who brought ε �υν�µ�ια to Sparta, morethan four hundred years before the end of the Peloponnesian War.

δ�υλωσ ��µεν�ς. Future participle of purpose with verb of motion. Sm.§2065.

��ι τε �απ�στα� ντες . . . κα�ι ��ι �υµπ�λεµ �ησαντες refers to two categories ofGreeks: (1) those who were Persian subjects and subsequently revoltedand (2) those who were allied against the Persians.

18.3. διενε�θ �εντες. Aorist passive participle of διαφ �ερω, “be different,”here meaning “being at variance, quarreling.” LSJ s.v. διαφ �ερω IV.

ε�ι τιν �ες π�υ διασται�εν. This is not the protasis of a potential condition

but, rather, the so-called iterative optative (Sm. §2340a), which is atransform into secondary sequence of an eventual conditional protasis—ε�α� ν plus the subjunctive. The combination ε�ι . . . διασται

�εν, . . . ε�� ω-

ρ�υν forms a past general condition. δι �εστην, the intransitive root aoristof διιστηµι (LSJ s.v. II.2), here means “stand apart, be divided.” Does itmean that they were in dispute with one another (Warner) or that theyheld off at first from the alliance and remained neutral (Crawley)? �ηδηmeans “eventually, by this time.” LSJ s.v. So the sentence can mean “Ifany Greeks were ever at odds, by this time they were joining with one ofthe two sides” or “If ever any Greeks were holding off from the alliance, bythis time they were joining one of the two sides.”


�ωστε. “consequently.” While �ωστε usually introduces result clauses (withfinite verb) or result phrases (with infinitive), it sometimes introduces anindependent coordinate clause. Sm. §2255.

τ �α µ �εν . . . τ �α δ �ε. Here, the neuter plural articles used as demonstrativesare adverbial. Sm. §1111. Hence, “on the one hand . . . on the other . . .”

τ �ας µελ �ετας π�ι� �υµεν�ι. “getting practice.” LSJ s.v. µελ �ετη II.1b.

19.1. φ ��ρ�υ. Genitive with �υπ�τελει�ς, meaning “subject to tribute.”

��πως π�λιτε �υσ�υσι θεραπε �υ�ντες. θεραπε �υω, basically meaning “serve,treat,” here means “see to it that, take care that” (LSJ s.v. II.3) and istherefore a verb of effort that takes ��πως plus the future. Sm. §§2209–11.

�Αθηναι��ι δ �ε κτλ. The verb �ηγ�υ

�ντ�, used absolutely here, serves for both

subjects—sc., the Lacedaemonians and the Athenians—and the parti-ciples specify the manner in which each led their respective leagues.

τα� �αντες φ �ερειν. τα� σσω basically means “place in order” but here means“assess (a tribute or tax).” LSJ s.v. III.3. φ �ερειν, the vox propria for taxes,means “to pay” and is here most likely after τα� σσω analogously withinfinitives after verbs of will and desire. Sm. §§1991–94. Alternatively, itis an epexegetical infinitive, as in “money to pay.”

�ακραιφν�υ�ς is in predicative position, implying a temporal effect. Hence,

“with the alliance when it was intact.”

20.1. µ �εν � �υ�ν marks a transition in the argument from the narrative to

the discussion about the reliability of tradition. “Often the µ �εν clausesums up and rounds off the old topic, while the δ �ε clause introduces thenew one” (Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 472). But here, instead of the expectedδ �ε, the new topic is introduced by the �αλεπ �α ��ντα phrase and the γα� ρfollowing.

πιστευ�σαι. Epexegetical infinitive, i.e., an infinitive used as an accusative

of respect with the adjective �αλεπα� . Hence, “difficult with respect totrusting.”

ε��η�ς. Adverb in attributive position, here meaning “one by one.”

20.2. γ�υ�ν. “for example.” “γ�υ

�ν commonly confirms a previous general

assertion by giving a special instance of its truth” (Sm. §2830).

Commentary 41

τι. Subject of µεµηνυ�σθαι.

ε�κ τω�ν �υνειδ ��των. Rare use of ε�κ with genitive to mark the agent,

instead of the usual �υπ ��. Sm. §1688c.

�ως πρ�ειδ ��τ�ς. “This particle [ �ως] sets forth the ground of belief on whichthe agent acts, and denotes the thought, assertion, real or presumed inten-tion, in the mind of the subject of the principal verb or of some otherperson mentioned prominently in the sentence without implicating thespeaker or writer” (Sm. §2086).

20.3. µ�ια� ψ �ηφω� πρ�στ�ιθεσθαι ε�κα� τερ�ν. “each assent with one vote.”This is the true case, the erroneous belief being that they have two voteseach. LSJ s.v. πρ�στ�ιθηµι B.3.

�αταλα�ιπωρ�ς. “not painstaking.” This feminine adjective modifies � �η-τησις. Compound adjectives have two endings. Sm. §288.

21.1. ε�κ δ �ε τω�ν ε�ιρηµ �ενων . . . �απ��ρ �ωντως. The backbone of this sen-

tence follows.

� �υκ �αµαρτα� ν�ι �αν(1) τις ν�µ�ι�ων τ�ιαυ

�τα

*α διη�λθ�ν

(2) κα�ι ��υτε πιστε �υων�ως �υµν �ηκασι��υτε �ως �υν �εθησαν (α �υτ �α)

��ντα �ανε� �ελεγκτακα�ι ε�κνενικηκ ��τα

(3) �ηγησα� µεν�ς δ �ε ( *α διη�λθ�ν) η�υρη

�σθαι

τ�ιαυ�τα is predicative after ν�µ�ι�ων—hence, “thinking what I say to be

such.” It refers to what has gone before, sc., the result of patient researchfor the truth.

ε�π�ι τ �� πρ�αγωγ ��τερ�ν τ�η��ακρ�α� σει )η �αληθ �εστερ�ν. When two adjectives

are compared with one another (as in “more attractive to hear than true”),both are put into the comparative degree. Sm. §1080. ε�π�ι makes theexpression adverbial, as in ε�π�ι πλ �ε�ν, “mostly.” Kuhner-Gerth 1:505,§438.III.3b. Hence, “in a manner more attractive to hear than true.”

�ως παλαι �α ε�ι�ναι �απ��ρ �ωντως. Absolute infinitive. Sm. §2012c.


A translation of this difficult sentence (the difficulty of which can be seenby comparing how widely the translators differ) follows.

From the stated evidences, nevertheless, someone would not gowrong by considering what I have recounted to be very much of thatkind [i.e., reliable]; not, rather, believing as the poets have sung withdecorated exaggeration concerning these matters or as the chroni-clers, in a manner more attractive to hear than true, have composedthings that are incapable of being disproved and things that have—many of them in time—won their way into the fabulous in a way thatcannot be believed [ �απ�ιστως]; but (one would not go wrong) consider-ing [what I have recounted] to have been researched from the clearestevidences, given that the matters are sufficiently ancient.

21.2. κα�ιπερ τω�ν �ανθρ �ωπων κτλ. Concessive expression with the parti-

ciple in the genitive absolute. Sm. §2083. Hence, “although.”

�ως παλαι �α ε�ι�ναι. Absolute infinitive. Sm. §2012. Hence, “considering

their antiquity.”

παυσαµ �ενων . . . θαυµα� ��ντων. θαυµα� ��ντων is not, as one might think,a supplementary participle with πα �υ�µαι but a third genitive absoluteparticiple parallel to κριν ��ντων and παυσαµ �ενων. There is no con-nective to separate θαυµα� ��ντων, a case of asyndeton. How do we knowthis without an explicit signal? First, the logic of the argument makesit necessary, since the point is overestimating the importance of the past.Second, µα

�λλ�ν functions as a contrasting element, which serves to

indicate the parataxis. Hence, “while men always judge the currentwar in which they are fighting to be the greatest but have a great wonderfor the past when they have stopped [fighting], this war will standout . . .”

δηλ �ωσει . . . γεγενηµ �εν�ς is a species of indirect discourse. Like verbs ofperception (Sm. §2110 ff.), verbs of knowing and showing take the accusa-tive and an accusative participle. E.g., τ�υ

�τ� τ��ινυν τ �� γρα� µµα παντελω

�ς

δηλ�ι�ψευδη

�τ �ην διαθ �ηκην ��υσαν [This clause now shows completely

that the will was forged] (Dem. 45.34). (Sm. §2106) But when the subjectof the verb of showing is the same as the subject of the participle, it is notrepeated, and the participle is in the nominative. Hence, “Yet this war[itself] will stand out to anyone drawing conclusions from the facts them-selves as greater than those [that preceded it].”

Commentary 43

22.1. ��σα. The antecedent is the following λε�θ �εντων.

�ως δ� )αν ε�δ ��κ�υν . . . ε�ιπει�ν. �αν goes with ε�ιπει

�ν, which represents an

independent potential optative (Sm. §§1845, 1848) downgraded to aninfinitive phrase. Here, ε�δ ��κ�υν is personal rather than impersonal. Sm.§1983. Hence, “as it [literally, “they”] seemed to me they would have saidwhat is most appropriate under the current circumstances.”

ε��µ �ενω� . “[me] maintaining” (plus the genitive γν �ωµης) LSJ s.v. �ε�ωC.I.1.

��τι ε�γγ �υτατα. “as closely as possible.”

��υτως ε�ιρηται. This ��υτως in the main clause is the hook on which hangsthe �ως that introduces the subordinate clause at the beginning of thesentence.

22.2. ε�κ τ�υ�παρατυ� ��ντ�ς. “from any Tom, Dick, or Harry”—literally,

“one who chanced to be by.”

� �υ πυνθαν ��µεν�ς . . . �αλλ �α . . . ε�πε� �ελθων. ε�πε� �ερ��µαι means “discuss,relate, or examine accurately and fully.” LSJ s.v. II.3. Here, it refers not tothe narrative but to the investigation—hence, “examine.”

��ις. The referent of this relative is πρα�θ �εντων, but it is not the anteced-

ent. The relative clause is nominal, and the antecedent is omitted (Sm.§2509); i.e., the whole relative clause is the object of ε�πε� �ελθων. τε . . .κα�ι marks the parallel constructions �

��ις α �υτ ��ς παρη

�ν and ( *α) παρ �α τω

�ν

�αλλων ( �απηγγ �ελθη). παρ �α τω�ν �αλλων is elliptical, but the ideas can be

filled out by the parallelism with the discussion of τ �α λε�θ �εντα at thebeginning of the paragraph.

A translation of the sentence follows.

I deemed it worthy to write neither the facts of actions in the warthat I picked up from any old source nor even as it seemed to me, butby investigating both events at which I was present and eventsreported to me by others, with as much accuracy as possible.

22.3. �ως . . . �ε��ι. �ε�ω plus the genitive means “to be well off for some-thing, to excel at something.” LSJ s.v. B.II.2b. Hence, here, “according asanyone excelled at goodwill for one of the two sides or memory.” This is acomparative adverbial clause with the optative in secondary sequence


(after �ελεγ�ν) indicating undefined frequency, sometimes called the itera-tive optative. Kuhner-Gerth 2:491, §580.I.2. Cf. �υνετ�ιθεσαν . . . �ως �εκα-στ ��ν τι �υµ�α�ιν�ι [they arranged [the stones] according as each fit] (Thuc.IV.4.2). It is akin to general protases (present general and past general) andgeneral relative clauses. In primary sequence, the clause would have had �ως�αν plus the subjunctive.

22.4. τ �� µ �η µυθω�δες α �υτω

�ν. The negative µ �η is here generalizing mean-

ing “whatever is not romantic” (Sm. §2735), and α �υτω�ν is partitive,

referring to Thucydides’ history. Hence, “whatever of these pages is notromantic.”

��σ�ι δ �ε . . . �ε�ει. The backbone of this sentence follows.

�ε�ει [it will be possible](τ� �υτ�υς) κρ�ινειν α �υτ �α �ωφ �ελιµα��σ�ι ��υλ �ησ�νται σκ�πει

�ν

τ �� σαφ �εςτω

�ν τε γεν�µ �ενων

κα�ι τω�ν µελλ ��ντων

The ��σ�ι ��υλ �ησ�νται clause serves as the accusative subject of thecomplementary infinitive κρ�ινειν, which takes a double accusative. Sm.§1613.

α �υτα� refers to the history, as it does earlier in the sentence.

τω�ν µελλ ��ντων π�τ �ε α �υ

�θις κατ �α τ �� ανθρ �ωπιν�ν τ�ι� �υτων κα�ι παρα-

πλησ�ιων �εσεσθαι. “things that will someday be again like these or verynearly like these in accordance with what is human.”

�αρκ� �υντως �ε�ει. “it will be enough.” Sm. §1438.

�υγκει�ται serves as the passive of �υντ�ιθηµι, “compose.” LSJ s.v. συντ�ι-

θηµι II.3, s.v. συγκει�µαι II.2.

23.1. µη�κ�ς τε µ �εγα πρ� �υ�η. µ �εγα is predicative. Hence, “the length

went on [to become] long.”

�υνην �ε�θη. Aorist passive of συµφ �ερω, “happen.” LSJ s.v. B.III.2. Here, itis used impersonally, with παθ �ηµατα as the accusative subject of γεν �ε-σθαι. Hence, “It happened that there were sufferings . . .” Strictly speak-ing, the infinitive phrase is the subject of �υνην �ε�θη.

Commentary 45

��ια � �υ� �ετερα. Formula meaning “unprecedented.” Literally, “such asthere were not others.”

23.3. σπανι �ωτερ�ν. Neuter comparative of the adjective used as thecomparative of the adverb. Sm. §345.

� �υκ �απιστα κατ �εστη. “became credible.”

ε�π �εσ��ν. The accent of finite verbs never recedes beyond the augment.Sm. §426. Here, the verb is intransitive, meaning “prevail, predominate,spread.” LSJ s.v. ε�π �ε�ω VI.2.

�ισ�υρ ��τατ�ι is predicative. Hence, “and they were very strong.”

παρα� . “compared with” (plus the accusative). Sm. §1692.3c; LSJ s.v.C.I.7.

�εστι παρ� ��ις. “among some.” �εστιν �

��ις is the dative plural of the fixed

phrase ε�ισ�ιν ��ι, “some.” Sm. §2514. Whenever this fixed formula is usedwith a preposition, the preposition goes in the middle. Cf. Thuc. V.25.2,�εστιν ε�ν �

��ις.

�αµα �υνεπ �εθετ�. “joined in attacking all at once.” LSJ s.v. συνεπιτ�ιθηµιII.1.

23.4. α �υτ�υ�. Sc., τ�υ

�π�λ �εµ�υ; genitive after �αρ��µαι. Sm. §1348.

Smyth (Sm. §1734.5) says that the active �αρ�ω contrasts one beginner ofan action with another; i.e., it indicates that someone begins before some-one else. E.g., �αρ�ειν π�λ �εµ�υ would mean “strike the first blow of thewar.” But the middle �αρ��µαι means “make one’s own beginning,” con-trasting not with someone else but with the later stages of an action. LSJs.v. I.

23.5. δι ��τι �ελυσαν. Implied indirect question after “causes and differ-ences.” LSJ s.v. δι ��τι I.2.

τ�υ�µ �η τινα �ητη

�σα�ι π�τε. Genitive articular infinitive of purpose. Sm.

§§1408, 2032e. The verb �ητ �εω usually means “seek, ask” but may mean“feel the need to seek or ask,” as here. LSJ s.v. III. Cf. Hdt. 1.94.

23.6. α�ιδ�. I.e., “as follows.” The stated causes are those that Thucydideswill presently narrate, namely, the affair of Epidamnus and the affair of


Potidaea. In the historical writers, ��δε especially indicates what is immedi-ately to come in the narrative. LSJ s.v. II.2.

�αφ� �ω�ν. “as a result of which.” LSJ s.v. �απ �� III.6. Sm. §1684.1.c3.

24.5. To keep the subjects straight throughout this passage, bear in mindthat δ �ε serves to change from one subject to another. One party is theδη

�µ�ς, also called here ��ι ε�ν τ�η

�π ��λει, i.e., the democratic party. The

other party is ��ι δ �υνατ�ι, or the oligarchical party.

��ι δ �ε ε�πελθ ��ντες. ��ι δ �ε means the oligarchs, the δ �υνατ�ι.

24.6. ��ι δ �ε changes the subject to the democrats.

τ� �υς τε φε �υγ�ντας �υναλλα� �αι σφισ�ι. “to reconcile the exiles [the oustedoligarchs] to them [the democrats].”

25.1. ε�ν �απ ��ρω� ε�ι��ντ� θ �εσθαι τ �� παρ ��ν. “they were at a loss how tohandle the present [circumstance].” �ε��µαι is virtually a substitute for theverb “to be.” Cf. Thuc. III.22.6, ε�ν �απ ��ρω� ε�ι

�ναι. This meaning of �ε��µαι

was oddly left out of the first printing of LSJ, but it is in the supplement toLSJ s.v. �ε�ω C.V (“stand or be”). See LSJ s.v. τ�ιθηµι VII.1.Med.

ε�ι παραδ�ι�εν . . . κα�ι . . . πειρω�

�ντ�. Indirect yes-no question in secon-

dary sequence with optional optative. Sm. §§2638, 2671, 2677. The origi-nal direct question would have been a deliberative subjunctive: παρα-δω

�µεν . . . πειρ �ωµεθα Sm. §§1805–8, (“whether we should hand over the

city . . . and try . . .”).

τιµωρ�ιαν τιν �α . . . �απ� α �υτω�ν π�ιει

�σθαι. “to obtain some assistance from

them [the Corinthians].” LSJ s.v. τιµωρ�ια II (“succour”) s.v. π�ι �εωA.II.2.Med. (“procure for oneself, gain”).

�� δ� α �υτ�ι�ς �ανει

�λε. �� δ �ε is Apollo, and �αναιρ �εω is the vox propria for

giving an oracular response. LSJ s.v. III.

25.3. µ�ισει. Dative singular of the s-stem noun τ �� µι�σ�ς.

25.4. Κ�ρινθ�ιω� �ανδρ�ι πρ�καταρ� ��µεν�ι τω�ν �ιερω

�ν. “bestow the first

portion of the sacrifices on a Corinthian.”

��µ�ι�α. Neuter plural used as an adverb. LSJ s.v. ��µ�ι�ς (or ��µ�ι

��ς) C.I.

Commentary 47

πρ� �υ�ειν �εστιν ��τε ε�παιρ ��µεν�ι. “boasting sometimes that they ex-celled.” Sm. §2515 (�εστιν ��τε); LSJ s.v. ε�πα�ιρω II.1 ad fin.

κλ �ε�ς ε�� ντων τ �α περ�ι τ �ας ναυ�ς. The genitive participle modifies Φαια� -

κων. The Phaeacians “had naval affairs as their kleos or source of renown.”

� �η�κα�ι µα

�λλ�ν. The feminine dative relative pronoun � �η

�is here used as a

relative adverb meaning “for which reason, wherefore” and refers to theground of the Corcyrean claims. LSJ s.v. � �η

�II.2. This usage derives from

the locative meanings of the dative. The combination � �η�κα�ι is used

especially with a comparative (µα�λλ�ν) to mark the beginning of a clause

emphasizing the consequences of what has just been said. Cf. 11.1.

�υπη�ρ��ν. �υπα� ρ�ω often serves as a substitute for “to be.” LSJ s.v. B.4.

26.1. ��ικ �ητ�ρα� τε τ ��ν ��υλ ��µεν�ν �ι �εναι κελε �υ�ντες. “inviting anyonewho wishes to go as a settler.”

φρ�υρ� �υς is grammatically construed with κελε �υ�ντες �ι �εναι but semanti-cally more dependent on �επεµπ�ν.

26.2. δ �εει. Dative singular of τ �� δ �ε�ς followed by a clause of fearing.

26.3. κατ� ε�π �ηρειαν modifies ε�κ �ελευ�ν adverbially, meaning “brusquely,haughtily, threateningly.”

τ� �υς φε �υγ�ντας is the object of δ �ε�εσθαι and refers to the banishedaristocrats.

27.1. ε�π�ι τ�η��ισ�η κα�ι ��µ��ια� . I.e., on the condition of equal status with the

original colonists. The missing dative noun would be δ�ικ�η. LSJ s.v. �ισ�ςII.2.

27.2. ε�ι �αρα κωλ �υ�ιντ� is not really a condition but an “in case” clause(Sm. §2354) with optative in secondary sequence. The asking is notcausally dependent on the preventing, as in a true condition (e.g., “Ifthey prevent . . . , then they ask.”); rather, they ask in case there will beprevention.

28.1. �ως � �υ µετ ��ν α �υτ�ι�ς �Επιδα� µν�υ. µετ ��ν is an impersonal neuter

accusative absolute participle with �ως. Sm. §2076. �ως indicates that this iswhat the Corcyreans asserted. Sm. §2086.


28.2. δ�ικας δ�υ�ναι. This construction usually means “pay a penalty” but

here means “submit to arbitration.” LSJ s.v. δ�ικη IV.3.

τ� �υτ�υς κρατει�ν. The infinitive phrase goes with the earlier �ηθελ�ν, and

the τ� �υτ�υς refers to ��π�τ �ερων. Hence, “they were willing that thoseshould have control [of the colony].”

28.3. ε�ιων. The verb ε�α� ω usually means “allow,” but here, with a nega-tive � �υκ, it means “persuade not to, advise against” and takes the infini-tive. LSJ s.v. 2. Cf. Thuc. I.133.

28.4. ��υλε �υσεσθαι. In the middle, ��υλε �υω means “think about it.”

α �υτ� �υς. I.e., the Corinthians.

28.5. Κα�ι �ωστε. “under the condition that.” LSJ s.v. B.I.4.

29.1. πρ�ερ�υ�ντα. Future participle of purpose with verb of motion. Sm.

§2065.

�αραντες. Intransitive aorist participle of �αε�ιρω, “get under sail.” LSJ s.v.I.5.

29.3. �ε �υ�αντες τ �ας παλαια� ς. “having reinforced the older ships.” Thismeans either fitting crossbeams from one side of the ship to the other (asexplained by Gregory of Corinth, a grammarian of the twelfth century A.D.)or, possibly, fastening cables around the ship—or both.

29.5. α �υτ�ι�ς �υν �ε�η. “it happened to them,” i.e., the Corcyreans as a

whole, both those on sea and those besieging Epidamnus.

παραστ �ησασθαι. “caused it [Epidamnus] to come to terms.” LSJ s.v. C.II.1.The subject is τ� �υς π�λι�ρκ�υ

�ντας, i.e., the Corcyreans. �Επ�ιδαµν�ν is the

object of the participle π�λι�ρκ�υ�ντας and, by brachylogy (Sm. §3018k),

of παραστ �ησασθαι.

�ωστε. “under the condition that.” LSJ s.v. B.I.4.

ε�π �ηλυτδας �απ�δ ��σθαι. I.e., they would sell the foreigners as slaves. Inthe middle, �απ�δ�ιδωµι means “sell.” LSJ s.v. III.

Commentary 49

δ �ησαντας ε�ειν. “keep the Corinthians by binding them,” i.e., keep themprisoner. δ �ησαντας here agrees with the unexpressed subject of the infini-tive and does not refer to the Corinthians.

30.2. τη�ς γη

�ς. Partitive genitive with τ �εµνειν. Hence, “to waste parts of

the land.” LSJ s.v. IV.3; Sm. §1341.

τ �� ε�π�ινει�ν. “harbor.”

31.2. �ως τ� �υς �Αθηνα�ι�υς. Here, �ως is a preposition taking the accusa-tive. Sm. §1702.

31.3. κα�ι τ �� α �υτω�ν πρ�σγεν ��µεν�ν. α �υτω

�ν refers to the Athenians.

Hence, “lest the Athenian navy added to the Corcyrean be an impedi-ment.”

θ �εσθαι. After the noun ε�µπ ��δι�ν [impediment], which is analogous to averb of hindering (without redundant µ �η). Sm. §2744.7. Cf. � �υ κωλ �υειτ�υ

�τ� π�ιει

�ν, meaning “nothing hinders doing this.” Hence, “lest [the

combined navies] be an impediment to their managing [θ �εσθαι] the warin the way they want.”

32.1. πρ� �υφειλ�µ �ενης. Πρ��φε�ιλω generally means “owe beforehand”and here means “owed as a long-standing debt.”

� �υµφ�ρα δ �ε�νται. Usually, δ �ε�µαι takes a genitive, but if the object is aneuter adjective or pronoun, it will be accusative. LSJ s.v. II.2; Sm.§1398.

τ �ην �α� ριν � �ε�αι�ν �ε��υσι. “they will keep their gratitude firm.” Theposition of the article shows that � �ε�αι�ν is predicative. Sm. §1168. InThucydides and Plato, � �ε�αι�ς is always a two-ending adjective.

32.3. For τυγ�α� νω without a supplementary participle, see Sm. §2119.Construe �ηµι

�ν with τετυ ��ηκε—hence, “it has turned out for us [to

be] . . .”

τ �� α �υτ �� ε�πιτ �ηδευµα. “The same old policy” is at once (a) unreasonablefrom your standpoint and (b) not in our interest.

πρ ��ς and ε� ς mean the same thing, “regarding, with respect to.” Thucydi-des alternates these prepositions often (cf., e.g., I.38.1, III.37.2). πρ ��ς


�υµα�ς [with respect to you] and ε� ς τ �α �ηµ �ετερα [with respect to our inter-

ests] are parallel. ε�ς τ �ην �ρε�ιαν means “in the matter of [our] request.”

32.4. τ�η�τ�υ

�π �ελας γνωµ�η

�. Dative with the preverb �υν¯. Hence, “the

policy of a neighbor.”

32.5. τ �ην ναυµα��ιαν . . . Κ�ρινθ�ι�υς. The two accusatives can be ex-plained by analogy with such expressions as νικα

�ν τινα ναυµα��ιαν, which

means “beat somebody in a sea battle.” Cf. Thuc. VII.66.2.

The nouns κ�ινδυν�ς, �ανα� γκη, and συγγν �ωµη function without the ex-pected εσται or ε�στ�ι. Sm. §944.

ε�ι ε�σ ��µεθα �υπ� �αυτ�ι�ς. Real condition with future protasis. Sm. §2328.

The apodosis would be κ�ινδυν�ς εσται. This embodies a threat or warning(minatory-monitory condition). �υπ� �αυτ�ι

�ς means “under their power.”

ε�ι µ �η µετ �α . . . τ�λµω�µεν. µ �η negates only µετ �α κακ�ιας—not the whole

clause (cf. Thuc. I.37.1, III.14.1)—and generalizes the expression (hence,“not from any sinister motive”). Sm. §2735. τ�λµω

�µεν is indicative in a

causal “if” clause dependent on συγγν �ωµη. Sm. §2247. ε�να� ντια is theneuter plural object of τ�λµω

�µεν, which here has the meaning “venture

on a policy opposite.”

33.1. κατ �α π�λλα� . “in many respects”—specifically, the three reasonsintroduced respectively by πρω

�τ�ν, επειτα, and τε.

�ως !αν µα� λιστα. �ως µα� λιστα means “certainly.” Here, !αν stands in a fixedphrase without a verb (Sm. §1766b), which can be supplied from context(e.g., �ως !αν µ �αλιστα γ �εν�ιτ�).

33.2. Τ�ις ε �υπρα��ια . . . �ισ� �υν. The backbone of this sentence follows.

Τ�ις ε �υπρα��ια σπανιωτ �ερα (ε�στ�ιν)!η τ�ις τ�ι

�ς π�λεµ�ι�ις λυπηρ�τ �ερα

ε�ι δ �υναµις πα� ρεστιν#ην !αν �υµι

�ν πρ�σγεν �εσθαι ε�τιµ �ησασθε

δ�ιδ�υσα ε�αυτ �ηνκα�ι φ �ερ�υσα�αρ �ετην�α� ριν�ισ� �υν

Commentary 51

ε� ς τ� �υς π�λλ� �υς �αρ �ετην. “virtue in the eyes of the world” (the usualmeaning of this phrase).

��ις δ �ε ε�παµυνει

�τε �α� ριν. “gratitude of those whom you will defend.” If

this phrase were filled out, it would be �α� ριν τ� �υτων ��ις δ �ε ε�παµυνει

�τε.

κα�ι ��λ�ιγ�ι . . . παραγ�ιγν�νται. The backbone of this sentence follows.

��λ�ιγ�ι . . . παραγ�ιγν�νταιδε ��µεν�ι συµµα��ιαςδιδ ��ντες � �υ� �η

�σσ�ν �ασφαλε�ιαν . . .

!ηληψ ��µεν�ι(τ� �υτ�ις �#υς) � �

��ις ε�πικαλ�υ

�νται

The relative clause ��ις ε�πικαλ�υ

�νται is the indirect object of διδ ��ντες

with incorporated antecedent (Sm. §§2536, 2538). In the middle, ε�πικα-λ�υ

�µαι means “call someone to one’s aid.”

33.3. α�ισθα� νεται, being a verb of perception, takes an accusative plus aparticiple as the form of indirect discourse. Sm. §§2110–11.

φ ��ω� τω��υµετ �ερω� . For the use of the pronominal adjective for the objec-

tive genitive, see Sm. §§1331, 1334.

π�λεµησε�ι�ντας. The verb π�λεµησε�ιω is a desiderative of π�λεµ �εω. Sm.§868; Schwyzer, 798.

δυναµ �εν�υς παρ� α �υτ�ι�ς. “having powerful influence with them [the

Spartans].”

πρ�καταλαµ�α� ν�ντας �ηµα�ς νυ

�ν ε�ς τ �ην �υµετ �ερην ε�πι�ε�ιρησιν. “overpow-

ering us first in anticipation of an attempt on you.” The pronominaladjective is used for the objective genitive. Sm. §§1331, 1334.

µ �ηδε δυ�ι�ν φθα� σθαι �αµα� ρτωσιν. µ �ηδε continues the negative purpose

clause with the subjunctive �αµα� ρτωσιν. The verb �αµαρτα� νω, “miss, failto,” here takes the genitive δυ�ι

�ν (LSJ s.v. I.4)—hence, “fail at two

things.” Gomme (ad loc.) says the two things are (1) to harm the Cor-cyreans and (2) to increase Corinth’s own security. φθα� σθαι is the rootaorist middle infinitive of the verb φθα� νω, meaning “to get there first,anticipate, be quick.” Some would argue that δυ�ι

�ν is a dative of respect,

that �αµαρτα� νω takes the infinitive φθα� σθαι, and that the entire phrasemeans “lest they fail to be first with respect to two things.” Βυτ �αµαρτα� νωordinarily takes not an infinitive (as in “to fail to do something”) but,


rather, a participle. LSJ s.v. �αµαρτα� νω II.1. So φθα� σθαι is here an infini-tive functioning like an accusative of respect, and the phrase means “lestthey fail in two aims with respect to being first.” The editors have strivenmightily over this φθα� σθαι, and some argue that it is an inserted gloss andthus does not belong there.

33.4. �ηµ �ετερ ��ν (ε�στι). “It is our job to . . .” By a construction accordingto sense, the neuter possessive pronoun is picked up by the genitive pluralsδιδ ��ντων and δε�αµ �ενων.

34.1. µαθ ��ντων. Third plural aorist active imperative.

ε�π�ι τω��δ�υ

�λ�ι . . . ε�ι

�ναι. “on the condition of being slaves.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι

B.III.3; Sm. §1689.2c. The subject of the articular infinitive is nominativeinstead of accusative “when the infinitive, expressing some action or stateof the subject of the main verb, has the article in an oblique case” (Sm.§1973a).

34.2. µετελθει�ν. “prosecute, pursue” a matter. LSJ s.v. µετ �ερ��µαι IV.3.

34.3. δε�µ �εν�ις τε ε�κ τ�υ�ε �υθ �ε�ς µ �η �υπ�υργει

�ν. “nor render help [to the

Corinthians] when they ask directly.” Cf. LSJ s.v. ε �υθ �υς A2. ε�κ τ�υ�

ε �υθ �ε�ς could go adverbially with either δε�µ �εν�ις or �υπ�υργει�ν.

�� γ �αρ ε�λα��ιστας . . . διατελ��ιη. “That one who makes fewest his regretsfor doing a favor to enemies would turn out safest.” ε�λα��ιστας is inpredicative position, so λαµ�α� νων is factitive. Cf. Thuc. II.43.2.

35.1. µηδετ �ερων. Here we have “µηδετ �ερων instead of � �υδετ �ερων be-cause, although this relationship is actual, the hypothetical character ofthe participle δε� ��µεν�ι influences its object” (Classen and Steup, adloc.); i.e., δε� ��µεν�ι is here tantamount to a conditional clause, as if thetext were ε� �αν �ηµα

�ς δ �ε�ησθε, � �υ λ �υσετε, an eventual condition with

future apodosis, or future-more-vivid condition. This then influences anynegative dependent on the participle and requires the negative µ �η of an“if” clause. Sm. §2728.

35.3. κα�ι δειν ��ν ε�ι . . . Real condition with future indicative in theprotasis, indicating a threat or warning. This is Smyth’s “emotional future

Commentary 53

condition” (Sm. §§2297, 2328), sometimes called a minatory-monitorycondition.

θ �ησ�νται. “they will consider you in the wrong if you are persuaded.” The“if” must be understood from the genitive absolute, which substitutes for aconditional. An object, �υµα

�ς, is understood from the �υµω

�ν of the genitive

absolute. Cf. LSJ s.v. �αδ�ικηµα I.1, s.v. τ�ιθηµι B.II.3 (“consider”).

35.4. � �υκ ��πως . . . �αλλ �α κα�ι. “not only not [so far from] . . . but also.”Sm. §2763b. Hence, “you will not only fail to be preventers of yourenemies, but you will also allow them to increase their strength.” πε-ρι�ρα� ω means “overlook” and then “allow.” LSJ s.v. II.2.

#ην � �υ δ�ικαι�ν. The antecedent of #ην is δ �υναµιν in the preceding sen-tence, and another πρ�σλα�ει

�ν is to be understood. Hence, “to increase

which power is not just.” What is just follows. There is a reversal ofmeaning with �αλλ�, and δ�ικαι�ν is used positively for the rest of thesentence; its subjects are the infinitives κωλ �υειν, π �εµπειν, and ��ηθει

�ν,

things that are just.

κ �ακε�ινων κωλ �υειν τ� �υς ε�κ τη�ς �υµετ �ερας µισθ�φ ��ρ�υς. “prevent their

mercenaries [to be taken] from your strength.” ε�κε�ινων is possessive andrefers to the Corinthians. κωλ �υειν with accusative but no infinitive israre, and perhaps πρ�σλα� �εσθαι is to be understood. Classen and Steup(ad loc.) say this is an unusual variation for the expression κ �ακε�ιν�υςε�ρ �ετας µισθ�υ

�σθαι, meaning “prevent (them) from hiring oarsmen.”

With ε�κ τη�ς �υµετ �ερας, understand �αρ�η

�ς.

�απ �� τ�υ�πρ�φαν�υ

�ς is tantamount to an adverb, meaning “openly.”

35.5. κα�ι ναυτικη�ς . . . διδ�µ �ενης, � �υκ ��µ�ι

�α �η �αλλ�τρ�ιωσις. “Since the

alliance being offered is naval and not a land alliance, a rejection is notthe same [as it would be for merely a land alliance].”

ε�α�ν and ε�ειν must be understood as imperatives. This is rare in prose,

where it is supposed to have “a solemn or formal force” (Sm. §2013).

36.1. This is a lollapalooza of a sentence and will repay careful study.Although it is very complicated, it has only one main verb, the thirdsingular aorist active imperative γν �ωτω. The subjects of this imperativeare the ��τω� . . . λ �εγεσθαι clause and the ( ��ς) φ��ει

�ται clause (whose

relative is implied by the preceding ��τω� ).


The indirect statement constructions after γν �ωτω are participial after averb of knowing. Sm. §2106. Further, when the participle applies to thesubject of the verb of perceiving, as with ��υλευ ��µεν�ς and πρ�ν�ω

�ν, it

will be in the nominative instead of the accusative. Unfortunately, Smythdoes not make this point clear, but it can be gleaned from his examples inSm. §2106. Four constructions follow γν �ωτω.

1. τ �� δεδι ��ς . . . φ��η�σ�ν [that his fear frightens your enemies]

2. τ �� θαρσ�υ�ν . . . ε�σ ��µεν�ν [that your boldness will be weaker]

3. � �υ ��υλευ ��µεν�ς [that he is not making a decision about . . .]4. � �υ πρ�ν�ω

�ν [that he is not making provision for . . .]

The #�ταν clause follows upon � �υ πρ�ν�ω�ν—hence, “he is not making

provision . . . whenever he hesitates.” ε�νδ�ια� &�η takes the complementaryinfinitive πρ�σλα�ει

�ν—hence, “hesitates to attach a country to his side

that . . .”Next, consider the circumstantial participles �ισ� �υν ε��ν and �ασθεν �ες

�ν. Thucydides is playing with the ironic contrasts between strength andweakness: what is weak seems strong and what is strong seems weak. Thisis crossed with the contrast between fear and boldness. The participlesε��ν and �ν modify the two substantivized neuter participles τ �� δεδι ��ςand τ �� θαρσ�υ

�ν. Thucydides likes to use a neuter participle instead of the

corresponding abstract noun (e.g., τ �� δ �ε�ς and τ �� θα� ρσ�ς): this is knownas the schema Thucydideum. The circumstantial participles can be regardedas causal. Hence, “His fear, because it has power, frightens the enemiesmore. . . . But if he does not accept us as allies, boldness, because it isweak, will be more deficient in the eyes of enemies, who are growingstrong.”

µ �η δε�αµ �εν�υ ( �ηµα�ς). This is probably not a genitive absolute but a

possessive genitive parallel to α �υτ�υ�—hence, “the boldness of the man

who has not received us as allies”—but the implication is that his bold-ness is weak because he has not received the allies.

δι� α �υτ �α [sc., �υµφ �ερ�ντα] πειθ ��µεν�ς. “although persuaded by virtue ofthese advantages.” Sm. §1685.2b. The concessive force of the circumstan-tial participle (Sm. §2066) arises out of the logic of the sentence.

α �υται�ς refers to τω

�ν �Αθηνω

�ν [Athens]. Notice that it is not �Αθηνα�ιων.

��σ�ν � �υ παρ ��ντα. The fixed phrase #�σ�ν � �υ means “almost, all but,”referring to time. Sm. §2766; cf. Thuc. II.94.1.

Commentary 55

τ �� α �υτ�ικα περισκ�πω�ν. “restricting his vision to the immediate situa-

tion.” ε� ς . . . π ��λεµ�ν goes with πρ�σλα�ει�ν; hence, “restricting his vi-

sion to the immediate situation, he hesitates for the war that is to come—indeed, is almost here—to attach to his side a country . . .”

��ικει�υ�τα�ι τε κα�ι π�λεµ�υ

�ται. “be made a friend [��ικει

��ς] and an enemy

[i.e., or an enemy].” Whether Corcyra is a friend or an enemy, the conse-quences will be very great. For τε κα�ι used for alternatives, see Sm. §2976.

A more or less literal (and clumsy, but syntactically revealing) translationof the sentence follows.

To whomever it seems that these things are spoken as advantagesbut who fears lest, if he is persuaded by virtue of these advantages, hebreak the truce, let him understand that his fear, since it hasstrength, is more frightening to his enemies, but if he does notaccept us as allies, his boldness will be more deficient in the eyes ofhis strong enemies; and [let him understand further] that he is decid-ing, at the same time, not more now concerning Corcyra than[concerning] Athens; and that he is not looking toward the greatestadvantages for her [Athens] whenever, because he is looking only atthe immediate situation, he hesitates to attach to himself, for thewar that is going to come and is as good as present, a country that ismade a friend or an enemy with the greatest consequences.

36.2. τη�ς τε γ �αρ �Ιταλ�ιας κα�ι Σικελ�ιας καλω

�ς παραπλ�υ

�κει

�ται. “[Cor-

cyra] is beautifully situated for the sailing route to Italy and Sicily.” Theexpression καλω

�ς κει

�ται [is beautifully situated] is analogous to the use of

ε�ω with an adverb (Sm. §1438), and παραπλ�υ�

is a case of the genitivewith adverbs (Sm. §1441). The genitive is used with adverbs of quality ormanner (ε �υ

�, καλω

�ς, ��µ��ιως, and several others) in connection with

intransitive verbs (ε�ειν, ε�ι�ναι, and κει

�σθαι) to indicate what the adverb

applies to. Cf. Kuhner-Gerth 1:382, §419.1. Cf. Thuc. III.92.4: τ�υ�π�λ �ε-

µ�υ καλω�ς ε�δ ��κει �η π ��λις καθ�ιστασθαι . . . τη

�ς τε ε�π�ι Θρα�� κης παρ ��δ�υ

�ρησ�ιµως �ε�ειν [they thought that the city was well situated for the warand would prove useful for the march along Thrace] (Smyth’s translation,Sm. §1441).

ε�κει�θεν. “from that place,” i.e., from Sicily to the Peloponnesians.

τ �� ε�νθ �ενδε ναυτικ ��ν with the adverb in attributive position means “thefleet from here,” i.e., from the Peloponnesus.


πρ ��ς τ �ακει�. “to the things [events] there [Sicily and Italy].”

ε�πελθει�ν and παραπ �εµψαι are dependent on � �υκ ε�α

�ν—hence, “to pre-

vent the reinforcing and the sending.” Sm. §2692. But � �υκ ε�α�ν becomes

µ �η ε�α�ν because of the �ωστε. Sm. §2759a.

36.3. The backbone of this sentence is µα� θ�ιτε !αν µ �η πρ� �εσθαι �ηµα�ς

τω��δε. The αν is repeated: the first αν lets the reader know a potential is

on its way, and the second marks the potential itself. Sm. §1765. τω��δε,

meaning “by means of this following thing,” stands for the whole of thenext sentence down to the end of the speech. τω�

�δε is defined by �ρα-

�υτα� τω� κεφαλα�ιω� —hence, “by means of the very brief summary thatfollows.” τ�ι

�ς τε � �υµπασι κα�ι καθ� �εκαστ�ν, a characteristic Thucydidean

pairing of the grammatically nonparallel, can be taken either as adverbialor as appositive to �ρα�υτα� τω� κεφαλα�ιω� .

τρ�ια µ �εν �ντα. Accusative absolute. Sm. §2076.

37.1. The backbone of this sentence is �Αναγκαι��ν . . . µνησθ �εντας �ηµα

�ς

περ�ι �αµφ�τ �ερων . . . κα�ι �ι �εναι ε�π�ι τ ��ν αλλ�ν λ ��γ�ν. �Αναγκαι��ν . . .

µνησθ �εντας is interrupted by a long genitive absolute, which entails twoclauses of indirect discourse following upon the word λ ��γ�ν [argument].The argument is specified by (a) περ�ι τ�υ

�δ �ε�ασθαι (hence, “the argu-

ment about receiving them”) and (b) the two clauses of indirect statementintroduced by �ως, which are in turn joined by κα�ι . . . κα�ι. This parallel-ism is marked by � �υ µ ��ν�ν . . . �αλλ�. A translation of the sentence follows.

Since these Corcyreans have made an argument not only aboutreceiving them but also that we are acting unjustly and that theythemselves are unreasonably treated as enemies [i.e., that it is unrea-sonable that they should be brought to fighting], it is necessary forus, having first commented on both things, to move to the rest ofthe argument, so that . . .

µνησθ �εντας περ�ι. “make mention concerning.” LSJ s.v. µιµν �ησκω B.II.

�α��ιωσιν and �ρε�ιαν are parallel and contrasting words meaning, roughly,“request.” An �α��ιωσις is a worthy request from “us,” and a �ρε�ια is adesperate needful request from “them.” An �α��ιωσις is a claim on thegrounds of merit, whereas a �ρε�ια is a claim on the grounds of necessity.

µ �η �αλ�γ�ιστως �απ �ωσησθε. µ �η here applies not to the subjunctive verb(i.e., this is not a negative purpose clause) but only to the adverb, as a

Commentary 57

litotes. Hence, “in order that you may reject not unreasonably [i.e., withgood reason].”

37.2. τ �� σω�φρ�ν. Neuter adjective instead of abstract noun (the schema

Thucydideum). Cf. 36.1.

� �υδεν ��ς goes with �υµµα��ιαν as a possessive.

�υτε παρακαλ�υ�ντες α�ισ� �υνεσθαι (��υλ ��µεν�ι). “nor wishing to be

ashamed when they ask for their support.”

37.3. α �υτα� ρκη θ �εσιν κειµ �ενη. “situated in an independent location.” Thepresent κει

�µαι serves as a substitute for the perfect middle (in passive

sense) of τ�ιθηµι (Sm. §791); i.e., κειµ �ενη is equivalent to the perfectmiddle τεθειµ �ενη (rare or even unknown in Attic). θ �εσιν is a cognateaccusative with τ�ιθηµι, except that τ�ιθηµι is represented by κειµ �ενη. Sm.§1569. So θ �εσιν κειµ �ενη means “situated in a situation.” α �υτα� ρκη is theaccusative singular feminine of the s-stem adjective α �υτα� ρκης, ¯ες (self-sufficient, independent), which modifies θ �εσιν.

�ω�ν � τ� �υτων �

��ις. The antecedent, which would be genitive with δικα-

στα� ς (i.e., “judges of [cases]”), is omitted, and the relative pronoun whosecase within its own clause ought to have been dative (i.e., “by means ofwhich”) is attracted to the case of its ghost antecedent. Sm. §2531a.Hence, “makes them judges of cases in which they . . .”

37.4. τ �� ασπ�νδ�ν is a neuter adjective used instead of an abstract nounto mean “neutrality” and is the object of πρ�� ε�ληνται.

The main verb πρ�� ε�ληνται [put forward as a pretense for themselves](LSJ s.v. B.III.2b) is followed by five purpose clauses.

� �υ� �ινα µ �η �υναδικω�σιν

�αλλ� ��πως . . . �αδικω�σι

κα�ι ��πως µ �εν �ια� &ωνται(δ �ε) ε�ωσιν(δ �ε) �αναισ�υντω

�σιν

� �υ�δ� !αν λα� θωσι πλ �ε�ν ε�ωσιν. “have more wherever they can get away

with it.” � �υ�

is the relative adverb meaning “where,” not a genitive relativepronoun.


37.5. This sentence is a present contrary-to-fact condition: ε�ι plus theimperfect indicative and the imperfect indicative plus αν. But there is noαν in the apodosis. “ αν may be omitted in the apodosis of an unrealcondition when the apodosis consists of an imperfect indicative denotingunfulfilled obligation, possibility, or propriety. Such are the impersonalexpressions εδει, �ρη

�ν, ε��η

�ν, ε�ικ ��ς �η

�ν, καλ ��ν �η

�ν etc. with the infinitive,

the action of which is (usually) not realized” (Sm. §2313).

δ�ιδ�υσι κα�ι δε��µ �εν�ις. Dative plural participles modifying α �υτ�ι�ς. The

Corcyreans could have demonstrated their uprightness by granting justjudgments to others and accepting just judgments themselves (but theydid not).

38.1. δι �α παντ ��ς. Sc., �ρ ��ν�υ. Hence, “always, through all time.”

38.2. τα� ε�ικ ��τα θαυµα� &εσθαι. “receive the customary marks of respect.”LSJ s.v. θαυµα� &ω 2b. The middle of θαυµα� &ω means “be respected,” andthe neuter accusative τ �α ε�ικ ��τα is most easily explained as adverbial,meaning “with respect to the proper customary things.”

38.4. ε�ι . . . ε�σµ �εν . . . !αν . . . �απαρ �εσκ�ιµεν. Mixed condition. The “if”clause is a real protasis (“if, as a matter of fact, . . .”), the first apodosis is apotential optative (“we would then . . .”), and the second apodosis returnswith a present indicative to a real statement (“we now, as a matter of fact,are fighting . . .”). All of this is subordinate to δη

�λ�ν ��τι.

µ �η . . . �αδικ� �υµεν�ι. “without being unjustly treated.” The negative ofthe circumstantial participle is µ �η because it is tantamount to an “if”clause, which would take negative µ �η. Sm. §2728.

38.5. This sentence is a present contrary-to-fact condition, where theapodosis without αν consists of an imperfect indicative denoting an unful-filled propriety. Cf. 37.5; Sm. §2313. The two apodoses without αν areκαλ ��ν �η

�ν τ�ι

�σδε and α�ισ�ρ ��ν �η

�ν �ηµι

�ν, and this contrast is marked by

µ �εν . . . δ �ε. Each of the two neuter adjectives in the impersonal construc-tion is defined by an infinitive, ε�ι

��αι and �ια� σασθαι. Strictly speaking,

the infinitives are the subjects of �η�ν, and the neuter adjectives are predi-

cate adjectives.

κακ�υµ �ενην. “being in distress, when it was in distress.”

Commentary 59

� �υ πρ�σεπ�ι�υ�ντ�. “they did not try to lay claim to it.” The meaning

“try” comes from the verb’s imperfect tense, sc., the “conative imperfect”(Sm. §1895). Alternatively, it may be regarded as an imperfect of resis-tance or refusal (Sm. §1896)—hence, “they refused to lay claim to it.”The Corinthians are making a dog-in-the-manger argument here.

ε�λ ��ντες ��ια� ε��υσιν. Where English prefers two coordinate verbs (“theytook it by force and held it”), Greek usually prefers to put one of the verbsinto a participle—hence, “having taken it by force, they held it.”

39.1. The key to this sentence is δ�ικ�η, which here means “arbitration”and is the antecedent of the relative pronoun �ην, the hook on which therest of the sentence hangs. It is the object of πρ�σκαλ� �υµεν�ν, whichitself is one of the subjects of the infinitive δ�κει

�ν. The dependent clause

introduced by �ην has only one verb, δει�, and it is completed by the in-

finitive δ�κει�ν, which itself has a complementary infinitive, λ �εγειν τι. � �υ

negates δει�, but �αλλα� reverses the negation; i.e., “it is not proper for A

and B, but it is proper for C.” The infinitive δ�κει�ν has three accusative

subjects.

τ ��ν πρ� �υ��ντακα�ι ε�κ τ�υ

��ασφαλ�υ

�ς πρ�καλ� �υµεν�ν (δ�ικην)

�αλλ �α τ ��ν . . . καθ�ισταντα

It is virtually impossible to translate this sentence into English literallywith a relative clause in it, because of the peculiarly embedded position of�ην, so one must make two sentences out of it, repeating the word arbitration.

And indeed, they say that they were willing earlier to have thematter decided by arbitration. But it is not proper for the party inthe advantageous position and proposing arbitration from a positionof security to think he is saying something [meaningful], but, rather,it is proper for the party who puts his deeds and likewise his words onan equal basis [proposing arbitration] before entering into hostilities[to think he is saying something meaningful].

καθιστα� ναι ε�ς ισ�ν. “to bring into an equal state.” LSJ s.v. καθ�ιστηµιA.II.3. The present active of καθ�ιστηµι must be transitive, and its objectsare εργα and λ ��γ�υς. Thus, the Corcyreans are to put their deeds andwords on an equal state with those of their adversaries. But both Warnerand Crawley take καθιστα� ντα to be intransitive as if it were the aorist


participle καταστα� ντα, meaning “be in an equal position with respect towords and deeds.” LSJ s.v. B5.

39.2. �ηγ �ησαντ� �ηµα�ς � �υ περι ��ψεσθαι. “They realized that we were not

going to overlook [the fact that they were besieging the place].”

� �υ �υµµα�ει�ν. The negative � �υ is used because it really belongs to

�α�ιω�ντες rather than to the infinitive, and it is placed after �α�ιω

�ντες for

the sake of the contrast. Classen and Steup, ad loc.; Sm. §2738b.

39.3. The backbone of this sentence is �ρη�ν plus two infinitives, πρ�-

ι �εναι and ε�ειν. The accusative subject of the two infinitives is the Cor-cyreans, represented (a) by the accusative relative pronoun ��υς and (b) bythe accusative participle κ�ιν �ωσαντας. The first infinitive, πρ�σι �εναι, ismodified by a series of temporal expressions, and the second infinitive,ε�ειν, is modified by the parallel temporal adverb πα� λαι.

�απ�γεν ��µεν�ι. “keeping away from, have no part in” (plus the genitive).LSJ s.v. I.

τ �α �απ��α�ιν�ντα. “the consequences”—here, “consequences of policy,fortunes.”


They should have approached you then when they were most secure,not when we, on the one hand, are injured, and they, on the otherhand, are at risk or when you are about to give a share of help,having at that time not had a share of their power, and when you aregoing to have an equal share of the blame from us, having hithertokept yourselves aloof from their misdeeds; and only if they had longago shared their power with you, should they have common fortunes[with you].

40.2. ε�ι γ �αρ ειρηται. “granted the fact that it is specified.” This “if”clause is not really conditional but concessive. Sm. §2369 ff. Usually, suchclauses are introduced by ε�ι κα�ι.

��στις µ �η. When the antecedent of a relative clause is indefinite, thenegative is µ �η. Sm. §2506.

40.3. µ �η ανευ �υµω�ν � µεθ� �υµω

�ν. This is a meiosis (Sm. §3032). Hence,

“If you attack with them, it will be necessary [for us] to defend ourselves

Commentary 61

against them and against you as well.” In the middle, �αµ �υνω means “wardoff from oneself.” LSJ s.v. B.1b.

40.4. δι� �αν�κω�η�ς γ�ιγνεσθαι. “to be in a cease-fire with” (plus the

dative). The preposition δια� with genitive and stative verbs (e.g., ε�ι�ναι,

ε�ειν, γ�ιγνεσθαι) expresses a condition or state. LSJ s.v. A.IV.1a.

τ ��ν ν ��µ�ν µ �η καθιστα� ναι. “not to establish the precedent.” The prece-dent is defined by the result expression �ωστε plus the infinitive. Sm.§§2258, 2267.

40.5. ε�ι �ρ �η. Indirect question after δ�ι�α ε�ψηφισµ �ενων.

40.6. φανει�ται κα�ι #α τω

�ν �υµετ �ερων � �υκ ε�λα� σσω �ηµι

�ν πρ ��σεισι. “There

will be some of your allies who will come over no less to us.” The neuterplural relative �α with φανει

�ται acts like a future of the expression εστιν �α

(Sm. §2513) and is followed by the partitive genitive τω�ν �υµετ �ερων.

41.1. ε��µεν has two sets of objects connected by µ �εν . . . δ �ε: (a) δικαι-�ωµατα and (b) παρα�ινεσιν κα�ι �α��ιωσιν. Then �α��ιωσιν �α� ριτ�ς means “a

claim on your gratitude” and is further modified by the relative clauseintroduced by #ην— #ην . . . �αντιδ�θη

�ναι �ηµι

�ν . . . φαµ �εν �ρη

�ναι “[which

we say ought to be repaid to us].”

ε�πι�ρη�σθαι. “have dealings with one.” This rare word means “to have a

mutual give and take, have dealings that expect a return.” At Hdt. 3.99,the word suggests intimate friendship.

41.2. �υπ �ερ τ �α Μηδικα� . “before the Persian War.” LSJ s.v. �υπ �ερ B.IV.

��ις for ε�ν �

��ις. The preposition is not repeated. Sm. §1671.

41.3. τ �α ��ικει�α �ει

�ρ�ν τ�ιθενται. “they value their own interests less.”

LSJ s.v. τ�ιθηµι B.II.

42.1. This sentence has two subjects: “you all” and the young person. Thesingular verb agrees with the second subject but applies to both. We wouldlogically expect �α�ι�υ

�τε and µ �η ν�µ�ισητε. Sm. §§966, 968–69.

�α�ι� �υτω τ�ι�ς ��µ��ι�ις �ηµα

�ς �αµ �υνεσθαι. “let him consider it right for us to

be supported in a similar fashion [as we supported you in the affair ofAegina].”


42.2. The backbone of this sentence is a series of neuter adjectives.

τ �� υµφερ�ν . . . �επεταικα�ι τ �� µ �ελλ�ν . . . κει

�ται

κα�ι � �υκ α�ι�ν . . . κτ �ησασθαισω

�φρ�ν (δ �ε) �υφελει

�ν

µηδ� ε�φ �ελκεσθαι

�επεται is absolute (without any object) and means “is found in some-thing,” and the “something” is expressed by the ε�ν �ω

�� clause, meaning

“where.” LSJ s.v. *�επω II.4. Hence, “Expediency is most found whereversomeone least makes a mistake.”

τ �� µ �ελλ�ν τ�υ�π�λ �εµ�υ. “the future possibility of the war.”

α �υτω��

. Sc., τ �� µ �ελλ�ν τ�υ�π�λ �εµ�υ.

�υφελει�ν. �υφαιρ �εω with a genitive means “take away part of something.”

LSJ s.v. II.2.

42.4. τ� �υς ��µ��ι�υς. I.e., powers as strong as yourselves, powers capable ofretaliation.

τω��α �υτ�ικα φανερω�

�. “by something apparent at the moment,” i.e., an

immediate advantage that turns out to be a long-range disadvantage.

δι �α κινδ �υνων τ �� πλ �ε�ν ε�ειν. δια� with the genitive noun expressingmanner, with the force of an adverb—hence, “riskily.” Sm. §1685.1d; LSJs.v. A.III.1c τ �� πλ �ε�ν ε�ειν is contrasted with the earlier τ �� αδικει

�ν.

Hence, it is better not to harm other powers than to gain an advantage. τ ��πλ �ε�ν ε�ειν or πλε�νε��ια (the active zeal to gain more and more power)is a thematic characteristic of the Athenians in Thucydides.

43.1. �ηµει�ς δ �ε περιπεπτωκ ��τες �

��ις ε�ν τ�η

�Λακεδα�ιµ�νι α �υτ��ι πρ�ε�ι-

π�µεν. The relative ��ις stands for τ� �υτ�ις �α. περιπ�ιπτω takes a dative of

the circumstances met (LSJ s.v. II.3), and the relative, which logicallyshould be accusative as the direct object of πρ�ε�ιπ�µεν, is here attractedto the case of its ghost antecedent. Sm. §§2522, 2529, 2531. ε�ν τ�η

�

Λακεδα�ιµ�νι refers to the meeting at Sparta in which the Corinthiansvoted in favor of the Athenians in the matter of the Samian revolt (Thuc.I.41.2). The main verb of the sentence is �α�ι�υ

�µεν. Hence, “having fallen

into the circumstances, . . . we think we deserve . . .”

Commentary 63

44.1. ε�πιµα��ιαν τ�η��αλλ �ηλων ��ηθει

�ν. An ε�πιµα��ια is a merely defen-

sive alliance, not a full-scale alliance; the latter would have included anobligation for the Athenians to join the Corcyreans in a directly offensivepolicy. ε�πιµα��ια is defined by an infinitive alone. Sm. §1987. τ�η

��αλλ �η-

λων is for τ�η��αλλ �ηλων γ�η

�(cf. I.15.2, �απ �� τη

�ς ε�αυτω

�ν), dative after

��ηθει�ν. A συµµα��ια is an alliance that is both offensive and defensive,

in which the parties swear to have the same friends and enemies; theDelian League is an example.

44.2. �υγκρ� �υειν. “cause [acc.] to wear out by collision with [dat.].”Hence, “they wanted to cause them to wear out by collision with eachother.”

ην τι δ �ε�η. “if ever it becomes necessary.” This is an eventual condition.Sm. §2337. The sequence is primary despite the past leading verbs ε�δ ��κειand ε�� υλ�ντ�.

καθιστω�νται. In II.75.1, Thucydides uses the transitive expression καθ-

�ι�τη ε�ς π ��λεµ�ν τ ��ν στρατ ��ν [sent his army into battle]; in I.23.6, he usesthe intransitive aorist κατ �εστησαν ε�ς π ��λεµ�ν [they went to war]. Here,the subjunctive middle intransitive καθιστω

�νται means “in order that

they may go to war [against those who are weaker].”

45.3. µ �η ναυµα�ει�ν . . . κωλ �υειν. Infinitives after a verb of will or desire.

Sm. §§1991, 1997.

46.1. α �υτ�ι�ς. Dative of agent with pluperfect middle with passive mean-

ing. Sm. §1488.

46.5. ��ρµ�ι&�νται. “came to anchor.” LSJ s.v. II.

47.1. ε�στρατ�πεδε �υσαντ�. In land contexts, στρατ�πεδε �υω means “toencamp,” but in sea contexts, it means “to take a position” or, in themiddle, “be stationed.” LSJ s.v.

Σ �υ��τα. The name is neuter plural.

48.1. µετε �ωρ�υς. This word usually means “in midair, aloft,” but whenapplied to ships, it means “on the open sea.” LSJ s.v. II.2.


48.3. τ �� δ� αλλ� α �υτ��ι ε�πει��ν τρ�ια τ �ελη π�ι �ησαντες. “[The Corcyreans]

themselves were extended along the other wing, having formed threesquadrons.” ε�πει

��ν means more than “hold,” because it implies that the

Corcyreans were extended. Cf. Thuc. III.107.4 for a parallel. The verb forthe Athenians would have been �η

�σαν if it were there. τρ�ια τ �ελη π�ι �ησα-

ντες means “having formed three squadrons.” The Corcyreans formed theleft, right, and middle of the battle line, with the Athenians in reservebeyond the Corcyrean right wing.

48.4. αριστα. Neuter plural accusative adjective used as an adverb. Sm.§1609.

49.1. �απειρ ��τερ�ν ετι. Adverb meaning “still in the inexperienced fash-ion” (in contrast to the modern fashion). The comparative adverb is usedbecause two adverbial expressions are being compared by implication, sc.,“in the modern way” and “in the old-fashioned, inexperienced way.” Sm.§1080.

49.2. �η�ν τε �η ναυµα��ια καρτ �ερα, τ�η

�µ �εν τ �ε�ν�η � �υ� ��µ��ιως (� �υ

�σα).

“The sea battle was fierce, [being] not so much [fierce] in technique, butbeing . . .”

49.3. δι �εκπλ�ι. The δι �εκπλ�υς was a special naval tactic much employedlater by the Athenians, which consisted in sailing through the enemy’s lineso as to ram their ships on the flank or in the rear (LSJ s.v.). Thucydides doesnot make the details of this maneuver very clear, but Polybius (1.51.9) de-scribes it: διεκπλει

�ν µ �εν � �υ

�ν δι �α τω

�ν π�λεµ�ιων νεω

�ν κα�ι κατ ��πιν ε�πιφα-

�ινεσθαι τ�ι�ς ηδη πρ ��ς ε�τ �ερ�υς διαµα��µ �εν�ις, ��περ ε�ν τω�

�ναυµα�ει

�ν ε�στι

πρακτικ �ωτατ�ν κτλ. [to sail through the enemy’s line and to appear frombehind, while they were already fighting others [in front], which is a mosteffective naval maneuver . . .]. See R. B. Strassler, ed., The Landmark Thu-cydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War (New York: FreePress, 1996), appendix G (“Trireme Warfare in Thucydides”).

49.4. ει π�η πι �ε&�ιντ�. Past general condition. Sm. §2340. Hence, “ifanywhere they were being pressed.”

49.5. τρεψα� µεν�ι. The middle of τρ �επω is usually intransitive but is heretransitive, meaning “having routed.” LSJ s.v. III. Cf. Xen. An. 5.4.16.

Commentary 65

49.7. εργ�υ πα�ς ει�ετ�. “everyone was taking a hand in the work [gen.].”

LSJ s.v. ε�ω C.I.1.

διεκ �εκριτ� � �υδ �εν ετι. “there was no longer any distinction, any separa-tion.”

50.1. �αναδ� �υµεν�ι. In the middle, �αναδ �εω means “take in tow.” LSJ s.v.III.

καταδ �υσειαν is optative because it is in a general relative clause in secon-dary sequence. Sm. §2568. καταδ �υω is usually intransitive (“go down, set,sink”), but the aorist can be causative (“cause to sink, disable”). LSJ s.v.II.1.

50.2. ε�π�ι π�λ �υ τη�ς θαλα� σσης ε�πε��υσω

�ν. “extending over much sea.”

LSJ s.v. ε�π �ε�ω V.

50.5. πρ �υµναν ε�κρ� �υ�ντ�. “backed water,” i.e., reversed direction notby turning around but simply by rowing backward, stern first. LSJ s.v.κρ� �υω 9.

51.2. πρ�ιν τινες �ιδ ��ντες ε�ι�π�ν ��τι . . . “until some people, upon seeing

them, said that . . .” Sm. §2434.

51.4. πρ�σκ�µισθει�σαι. Feminine plural aorist passive participle of πρ�σ-

κ�µ�ι&ω. Hence, “making their way [through the wrecks].”

51.5. �ωρµ�ισαντ�. “they anchored.”

52.1. �αναγαγ ��µεν�ι. In the middle, �ανα� γω, “lead up,” means “put tosea.” LSJ s.v. B.1.

52.2. αραντες. When applied to armies or fleets, αιρω, “lift,” means “getthem under way, set sail.” LSJ s.v. �αε�ιρω I.5.

α�ι�µαλ �ωτων τε περ�ι φυλακη�ς. There are two phrases in apposition to

απ�ρα that define what those απ�ρα are: the prepositional phrase α�ι�µα-λ �ωτων περ�ι φυλακη

�ς and the parallel participial phrase ε�πισκευ �ην � �υκ

� �υ�σαν. The parallelism is marked by τε . . . κα�ι.

ε�πισκευ �ην. “repair facilities.”


52.3. τ�υ�δ �ε ��ικα� δε πλ�υ

�. This genitive is proleptic, going logically with

the indirect adverb ��π�η in the next clause (“in what direction of sailinghome”), which introduces the indirect question. The genitive is used withadverbs (e.g., ��π�υ γη

�ς). Sm. §1439. In the middle, κ�µ�ι&ω, “get, give

heed to,” can mean “travel, journey, get somewhere.” LSJ s.v. II.4. In thepassive, it means “get back or return.” LSJ s.v. III. Hence, “They were moreconcerned with the question in what direction of sailing home they will getback.”

ε�ω�σι. Third plural subjunctive of an alpha-contract verb in a fearing

clause; identical in form to the indicative. For the negative µ �η . . . � �υ in anegative clause of fearing (i.e., “[fearing] that not”), see Sm. §2221.

54.1. τ �α κατ �α σφα�ς ε��ενε�θ �εντα. The bodies and the wrecks had been

carried back to the Corinthians by the current and the wind. The expres-sion is related to the verb καταφ �ερω, which means “drive back to land.”LSJ s.v. II.2. Cf. Thuc. IV.3.1. Cf. also I.54.2, τ �α κατ �α σφα

�ς α �υτ� �υς ναυα-

γ�ια [The shipwrecks [that had washed] back to shore where they were].

56.2. ��πως τιµωρ �ησ�νται α �υτ� �υς. ��πως with the future after a verb ofeffort (πρασσ ��ντων). Sm. §§2209–11. α �υτ� �υς refers to the Athenians.

ε�πιδηµι� �υργ�υς. “magistrates.” This term was used specifically for themagistrates that Doric cities sent out to their colonies. Potidaea was aCorinthian colony, with annual magistrates sent out by Corinth, but itwas also a member of the Delian League and a formal ally of Athens.

57.2. ε�πεπ�λ �εµωτ�. “had been made an enemy, had been treated as anenemy.” LSJ s.v. π�λεµ ��ω II. Gomme (ad loc.) says it means “was at war.”But cf. Thuc. I.37.1, where π�λεµ�υ

�ντ� cannot mean “be at war” for-

mally; there, it can only mean “treated as an enemy.”

επρασσεν . . . ��πως γ �ενηται. “Verbs of effort sometimes have the construc-tion of final clauses, and take, though less often, ��πως with the present orsecond [i.e., thematic] aorist subjunctive or optative. The subjunctive maybe used after secondary tenses” (Sm. §2214).

α �υτ�ι�ς. I.e., the Athenians.

57.5. ε�ι . . . ε��ι . . . !αν . . . π�ιει�σθαι. Potential condition in indirect

discourse after ν�µ�ι&ων. The secondary sequence is determined by the

Commentary 67

leading verb, the imperfect πρ�σ �εφερε λ ��γ�υς. The original direct formwould be ε�ι . . . ε��ι, π�ι�ι

�τ� αν. Smyth does not adequately treat condi-

tions in indirect discourse. In general, the apodosis becomes the corre-sponding infinitive (i.e., the infinitive of the same voice and aspect as thedirect verb), and original independent verbs with αν (i.e., potential opta-tives, imperfects, and aorists) retain the αν when transformed to theinfinitive. The protasis retains its original form, but general protases intro-duced by ε�α� ν may change from subjunctive to optative after secondaryleading verbs (the optative option), losing their αν.

57.6. α �υτ�υ�. I.e., Perdiccas.

†δ �εκα†. The daggers mean that the editor has despaired of fixing the texthere. It is a locus desperatus. The issue is that this would mean elevencommanders on the same expedition, which the editor deems impossible.In I.116.1, Thucydides says that Pericles had nine colleagues in commandin a sea battle off Tragia, which is reasonable because there were tengenerals on the Board of Generals. But where would we get eleven? Thefavorite emendation is τεσσα� ρων (Kruger), on the paleographical groundsthat the MS had δ, meaning “four,” which was then interpreted wrongly asδ( �εκα), “ten.” The objection to that is that∆ is the older form for “ten” andmay have been used by Thucydides himself. But see I.61.2, where Kalliassails to Macedonia with four colleagues in command.

��πως µ �η �απ�στ �ησ�νται. ��πως µ �η with the future after a verb of effort.Sm. §§2209–11.

58.1. ει πως πε�ισειαν. “In case” clause with optative in secondary se-quence. Sm. §2354. This clause sets forth the motive for the embassy.

[επρασσ�ν] ��πως ε�τ�ιµα� σαιντ�. The editor has bracketed επρασσ�ν,indicating that he thinks it does not belong in the text. The main verb ofthe sentence is �αφ�ιστανται, and there is no room for another finite verbin this elegantly balanced sentence. The ��πως ε�τ�ιµα� σαιντ� followsneatly after ε�λθ ��ντες as a simple purpose clause in the optative in secon-dary sequence, and the επρασσ�ν is not needed.

The backbone of this sentence follows.

τ ��τε �αφ�ιστανταιπ �εµψαντεςει πως πε�ισειαν


ε�λθ ��ντες��πως ε�τ�ιµα� σαιντ�!ην δ �ε�η

ε�πειδ �η� �υδ �εν [τε] η�υρ�ντ��αλλ�επλε�νκα�ι �υπ �εσ�ετ�ε�σ�αλει

�ν

!ην ιωσιν

It is in primary sequence, but the aorist participles intervene and shiftthe clause ει πως πε�ισειαν and the clause ��πως ε�τ�ιµα� σαιντ� to secon-dary sequence, because the aorist participles indicate a time before themain verb (“having sent, having gone”). Sm. §2176. The grammars do notmake this principle clear.

ε�κ π�λλ�υ�πρα� σσ�ντες. “negotiating for a long time.”

τ �α τ �ελη. “the authorities.”

59.2. µετ �α Φιλ�ιππ�υ κτλ. “in cooperation with Philip.”

61.1. τω�ν π ��λεων. Objective genitive—hence, “news about the cities.”

Sm. §1332. The news is explained by the following ��τι clause.

61.3. � �υµ�ασιν π�ιησα� µεν�ι. “having made an agreement.” The point isthat they came to a convenient accommodation with Perdiccas and madethe best deal they could, because the matter of Potidaea was more pressing.

61.4. �ωρ�ις δ �ε τω�ν �υµµα� �ων π�λλ�ι

�ς. Here, �ωρ�ις is not an improper

preposition taking the genitive but a simple adverb, and τω�ν �υµµα� �ων is

a partitive genitive with π�λλ�ι�ς, which is parallel to τρισ�ιλ�ι�ις. Hence,

“with many of the allies besides.” τρισ�ιλ�ι�ις and π�λλ�ι�ς are what

Smyth calls, with picturesque precision, “datives of military accompani-ment” (Sm. §1526).

61.5. κατ� ��λ�ιγ�ν δ �ε πρ�ι0 ��ντες. “advancing by short marches.”

Commentary 69

62.3. �η γνωµ �η τ�υ��Αριστ �εως . . . ε��ντι. Constructio ad sensum. ε��ντι is

dative even though it modifies τ�υ��Αριστ �εως, because the expression �η

γνωµ �η τ�υ��Αριστ �εως is equivalent to εδ��ε τω�

��Αριστει

�.

διακ�σ�ιαν �ιππ�ν. When �ιππ�ς is used as a collective noun meaning“cavalry,” it is feminine. LSJ s.v. II.

62.4. ��πως ειργωσι τ� �υς ε�κει�θεν ε�πι��ηθει

�ν. τ� �υς ε�κει

�θεν, meaning

“the people from there [sc., Olynthus]” (Sm. §1153e), is the subject of theinfinitive ε�πι��ηθει

�ν, meaning “bring aid.” ε�πι��ηθει

�ν is used abso-

lutely, i.e., with no expressed object. Cf. Thuc. III.69.2. The whole infini-tive phrase is the object of ειργωσι. Hence, “in order to prevent thepeople from there from bringing aid.” Sm. §2744.2.

62.6. λ�γα� δες. “picked troops.”

63.1. διακινδυνε �υσ�η. Deliberative subjunctive in indirect discourse after�ηπ ��ρησε. Hence, “He was at a loss [concerning] which of the two risks heshould take.”

�ως ε�ς ε�λα� �ιστ�ν �ωρ�ι�ν. “over the shortest distance possible.” Here, �ωςgoes with the superlative. Sm. §1086.

παρ �α τ �ην �ηλ �ην. “along the breakwater.” LSJ s.v. II. The scholiast heresays: �ηλ �η καλει

�ται ��ι εµπρ�σθεν τ�υ

�πρ ��ς θα� λασσαν τε�ι��υς πρ��ε-

�ληµ �εν�ι λ�ιθ�ι δι �α τ �ην τω�ν κυµα� των ��ιαν, µ �η τ �� τει

��ς �λα� πτ�ιτ� [The

stones built out in front of the sea wall, so the wall is not damaged by theforce of the waves, is called the chele].

�αλλ ��µεν�ς. “under fire, being shot at.”

64.1. τ �� ε�κ τ�υ��ισθµ�υ

�[τει

��ς] . . . �απ�τει��ισαντες. �απ�τει��ι&ω means

simply “fortify,” “blockade,” or, possibly, “build a counter wall.” ε�κ τ�υ�

�ισθµ�υ�

means “on the north side,” i.e., toward the neck of the isthmus. Itis contrasted with the following ε� ς τ �ην Παλλ �ηνην, meaning “towardPallene,” i.e., toward the south. Pallene is the widened part of the penin-sula, contrasted with the narrow neck in the north. Heerwerden bracketedτει

��ς because it seemed superfluous, and the parallel phrase τ �� δ� ε�ς τ �ην

Παλλ �ηνην does not have it. Thus, the phrase means simply “the northside of the city,” not “the north wall.” It is not altogether clear whatThucydides means here. Gomme (p. 18) implies that the Athenians built


a defensive wall around their camp on the north side of the city, i.e., not acircumvallation or a blockading wall. Crawley’s translation reads, “Thewall [of the city] on the side of the isthmus had now works at once raisedagainst it.” Warner’s translation reads “The Athenians at once built andmanned a counter wall to the north of the wall across the isthmus.” Butthere is no wall “across the isthmus,” and Warner seems to have misinter-preted ε�κ τ�υ

��ισθµ�υ

�. Classen and Steup (ad loc.) say, “The blockading

of Potidaea by a besieging wall was accomplished in the following fashion:first the north and later also the south city wall were invested by acircumvallation; in the west and east where the city extended to the sea,blockade was only possible with ships.” Whether Thucydides is talkingabout the city wall or the counter wall, whether the wall is no more thanthe defensive wall of the Athenian camp, and whether the wall extendedacross the isthmus are all unclear. But the following passage where theAthenians do not think they are strong enough to invest the south side ofthe city suggests a blockading wall, not merely the wall of the Atheniancamp.

��ι ε�ν τ�η�π ��λει �Αθηναι

��ι. I.e., the Athenians back home in Athens.

65.1. �υµ�� υλευε . . . τηρ �ησασι τ�ι�ς αλλ�ις ε�κπλευ

�σαι. “He counseled

the others [except for five hundred defenders] to be on the lookout for afavorable wind and sail away.”

τ �α ε�π�ι τ� �υτ�ις. “what was necessary under these circumstances.” LSJ s.v.ε�π�ι B.III.3; Sm. §1689.2c.

��πως . . . �ε�ει. ��πως with the future after a verb of effort (παρασκευα� -&ειν). Sm. §2209–11.

65.2. ες τε Πελ�π ��ννησ�ν επρασσεν ��π�η . . . γεν �ησεται. πρα� σσειν εςτινα means “to operate secretly.” LSJ s.v. πρα� σσω I.6b. ��π�η plus thefuture is not strictly a clause of effort here, because it is not introduced by��πως. It behaves rather like an indirect question: “He intrigued how thehelp was going to come.” But ��πως and ��π�η are often linked in a fixedphrase, as in ��π�η ε�ει κα�ι ��πως (Pl. Resp. 612a), and it might be possiblefor an effort clause to be introduced by ��π�η.

66.1. �υνερρ �ωγει. Third singular pluperfect active intransitive of συρρ �η-γνυµι, “break, dash together.” Hence, “had broken out.”

Commentary 71

�αν�κω� �η. “armistice, cease-fire.”

�ιδ�ια� . “privately”—hence, “because the Corinthians had done these thingson a private basis rather than as a matter of state policy.” Officially,Aristaeus and his men were “volunteers” coming to the aid of the Chal-cidians, rather than a formal expedition from Corinth in consequence of aformal alliance with the Chalcidians. Gomme, ad loc.

67.2. � �υκ ε�ι�ναι α �υτ ��ν�µ�ι κατ �α τ �ας σπ�νδα� ς. The Thirty Years’ Truce

(445 B .C.), which brought to an end the so-called First Peloponnesian War,in which Pericles attempted to create a land empire and which culmi-nated in the revolt of Euboea, specified among other things that thesovereignty and independence of Aegina be guaranteed. Alternatively,there may have been a separate treaty between Athens and Aegina, bywhich Aegina agreed to become a member of the Delian League.

67.3. � �υλλ�γ�ν σφω�ν α �υτω

�ν . . . τ ��ν ε�ιωθ ��τα. The ordinary Spartan as-

sembly to which all citizens over thirty years of age were admitted.

68.1. τ �� πιστ ��ν. Neuter adjective instead of abstract noun (the schemaThucydideum). Hence, “confidence.”

π�λιτε�ια κα�ι ��µιλ�ια. “constitution and way of life.”

�απ� α �υτ�υ�. Sc., τ�υ

�πιστ�υ

�.

68.2. � �υ πρ�ιν πα� σ�ειν. Sc., �ηµα�ς.

68.3. �ω�ν is here a complicated relative pronoun. It is genitive plural

because it is partitive with the selecting phrases τ� �υς µ �εν and τ�ι�ς δ �ε.

Hence, “some of whom you see already enslaved . . . against others ofwhom you see them [Athenians] plotting . . .” etc. Its antecedent is usu-ally taken to be τ �ην �Ελλα� δα by a constructio ad sensum—i.e., as meaningτ� �υς �Ελληνας. But there is an element of causality in the clause: it isequivalent to ε�πε�ι τω

�ν �Ελλ �ηνων . . . “since, you see that of the Greeks

some . . .” Sm. §2555.

ει π�τε αρα π�λεµ �ησ�νται. “In case” clause (which Smyth calls an “ifhaply” clause)—hence, “in case they will someday go to war.” Sm. §2354.The combination ε�ι αρα is used if the outcome is undesirable. Sm. §2796.Hence, “in case, heaven forbid, they will someday go to war.”


68.4. γα� ρ generally means that the preceding sentence requires explana-tion and that the sentence that follows will clear up the meaning. Hence,“What do we mean by saying that the Athenians are preparing in advancefor war? Unless they are preparing for war, they would not . . .”

� �υ γ �αρ !αν . . . ε�ι��ν . . . ε�π�λι ��ρκ�υν. Potential imperfects, the indepen-

dent part of a present contrary-to-fact condition. It is as if the protasis—i.e., the phrase “Unless they were preparing for war”—were suppressed.Sm. §§1784, 1786.

69.1. δ�υλωσα� µεν�ς. Here, this verb does not have passive meaning butmeans “make subject to oneself.” Cf. Thuc. I.18.2, V.29.3, VII.68.2.

α �υτ ��. I.e., depriving the Greeks of liberty.

ειπερ κα�ι . . . φ �ερεται. Real conditional clause with indicative, meaning“even if in fact.” In the middle, φ �ερωmeans “carry off as a prize, win.” LSJs.v. A.VI.3. The prize is the reputation for virtue.

69.2. ε�π�ι φανερ�ι�ς. “on explicit terms, for clear purpose.”

ε�ι �αδικ� �υµεθα. Indirect question. Sm. §2671.

��ι γ �αρ δρω�ντες . . . ε�π �ερ��νται. “for efficient people, who have already

made plans against those who are in a state of indecision, move withoutdelay.” ηδη is to be taken with �ε��υλευµ �εν�ι. κα�ι connects �ε��υλε-υµ �εν�ι and µ �ελλ�ντες, literally, “those who have made plans already anddo not delay move.”

69.3. κατ� ��λ�ιγ�ν. “little by little.”

δι �α τ �� αναισθητ ��ν. Neuter adjective for abstract noun (the schema Thu-cydideum). Hence, “on account of your lack of perception.”

γν ��ντες δ �ε ε�ιδ ��τας περι�ρα�ν. Both participles are conditional. Sm. §2067.

Hence, “but if they recognize that if you do know, you overlook . . .” Thepoint is that if the Athenians think that they are getting away with theiraggression because the Spartans do not notice, the former will move care-fully, so as not to awaken the latter, but it will be even worse if theAthenians conclude that the Spartans do not even care and, thus, that nocaution or hesitancy is necessary.

69.4. �ησυ�α� &ετε picks up the idea in the preceding ε�ιδ ��τας περι�ρα�ν.

Hence, “you do nothing.”

Commentary 73

τινα� . Object of �αµυν ��µεν�ι. In the middle, �αµ �υνω means “defend oneselfagainst” and takes an accusative of the person. LSJ s.v. B.I.b.

τ�η�

µελλ �ησει. “by being about to do something.” The noun is related to theverb µ �ελλω, “to be about to, to delay.”

69.5. κα�ιτ�ι . . . ε�κρα� τει. “and yet you used to be called reliable, whosereputation [it turns out] exceeded your action.” The relative clause marksa surprising conclusion because of �αρα. “ �αρα is often used to indicate anew perception, or surprise genuine or affected; as when the truth is justrealized after a previous erroneous opinion” (Sm. §2795).

τ ��ν τε γ �αρ Μη�δ�ν κτλ. This sentence has three coordinate independent

clauses connected by κα�ι.

�ισµενκα�ι . . . περι�ρα

�τε

κα�ι . . . �� υλεσθε

All the rest is dependent on one of these. The �ισµεν clause takes anaccusative and participle in indirect discourse after a verb of perception.Sm. §2106.

�ισµεν . . . τ ��ν Μη�δ�ν . . . ε�λθ ��ντα πρ ��τερ�ν

�η τ �α παρ� �υµω�ν . . . πρ�απαντη

�σαι.

πρ ��τερ�ν here acts like πρ�ιν with the infinitive. Sm. §§2383c, 2458.τ �α παρ� �υµω

�ν means “your defense forces” and is the subject of the infini-

tive πρ�απαντη�σαι.

�αντ�ι τ�υ�

ε�πελθει�ν α �υτ��ι. “instead of attacking yourselves.” α �υτ�ι is the

subject of the articular infinitive and is nominative because it refers to thesubject of the main verb. Sm. §1973a.

Β� �υλεσθε has two complementary infinitives, �αµ �υνεσθαι and καταστη�-

ναι, and the subject is modified by two circumstantial participles, �αγωνι-� ��µεν�ι and ε�πιστα� µεν�ι. The latter is followed by two participles inindirect discourse after a verb of knowing with accusative subject (Sm.§2106), σφαλ �εντα and περιγεγενηµ �εν�υς.


Β� �υλεσθε�αµ �υνεσθαι ε�πι ��νταςκα�ι ε� ς τυ� �ας καταστη

�ναι


�αγωνι� ��µεν�ι πρ ��ς δυνατωτ �ερ�υςκα�ι ε�πιστα� µεν�ι

τ ��ν �α �ρ�αρ�ν σφαλ �εντακα�ι �ηµα

�ς περιγεγενηµ �εν�υς

ε�πε�ι . . . �εφθειραν.

�αµ �υνεσθαι ε�πι ��ντας. “to defend yourselves against the attackers.”

ε� ς τυ� �ας . . . καταστη�ναι. The intransitive aorist καταστη

�ναι means “to

be in a certain state or position” and often occurs with the preposition ε�ς,as in ε�ς φ ��ν, ε� ς δ �ε�ς, ε�ς τ� �υς κινδ �υν�υς—hence, “to be in fear, to beat risk.” LSJ s.v. καθ�ιστηµι B.V. �αγωνι� ��µεν�ι explains the risk. Hence,here, “to stand the risk of fighting people more powerful by far.”

α�ι �υµ �ετεραι ε�λπ�ιδες. �υµ �ετεραι stands for an objective ε� ς �υµα�ς, and the

phrase means “hope placed in you.” Sm. §1197.

69.6. µηδε�ις . . . ν�µ�ισ�η. Prohibitive subjunctive. Sm. §1800.

α�ιτ�ια. “expostulation”—i.e., a friendly remonstrance rather than an accusa-tion. LSJ s.v. I.4. Classen and Steup translate, “Our suggestions are noκατηγ�ρ�ια but an α�ιτ�ια: for we are treating you as erring friends [φ�ιλ�ι�αµαρτα� ν�ντες], not as enemies who have done wrong [ε��θρ��ι �αδικ �η-σαντες]; therefore regard our intention not as hostile, but as friendly.”

70.1. ε�ιπερ τιν �ες κα�ι �αλλ�ι. “if any others [are worthy—i.e., have aright—we certainly are]”; i.e., “if anybody has a right, we do.”

�αλλως τε κα�ι. “especially.”

ε�κλ�γ�ισασθαι . . . �εσται. The indirect question after ε�κλ�γ�ι�εσθαι isintroduced by the question words � ι�υς and �σ�ν. Classen and Steupparaphrase the indirect question as �

��ι��ι ε�ισιν �Αθηναι

��ι, πρ ��ς �"υς �υµι

�ν ��

�αγ �ων �εσται, κα�ι �σ�ν κα�ι "ως πα�ν �υµω

�ν διαφ �ερ�υσιν. But it is somewhat

collapsed because the question word � ι�υς is the object of the prepositionπρ ��ς, as is the participle διαφ �ερ�ντας. Hence, “You do not seem ever tohave considered what kind of men these Athenians are with whom youwill have a fight or how much and how completely they are different fromyou.”

70.2. ��#ει�ς. This adjective (meaning “quick, sharp, eager”) and the epex-

egetical infinitives ε�πιν�η�σαι and ε�πιτελ �εσαι, which apply to the Athe-

Commentary 75

nians, make logical sense. But the infinitives that apply to the Spartanshang in midair. They cannot logically be dependent on ��#ει

�ς, since that

would mean the Spartans were quick to do nothing. Maybe the Corinthi-ans are being sarcastic and are really saying, “You are quick to keep whatyou have, thus initiate nothing, and quick to fail to bring to completion inactuality what is necessary.”

�εργω� . . . τ �αναγκαι�α ε�#ικ �εσθαι. “to bring necessary things into action, to

accomplish what is necessary.” ε�#ικν �ε�µαι is ordinarily intransitive buthere has transitive force. LSJ s.v. II.2.

70.3. παρα� . “beyond.” LSJ s.v. C.III.3.

τ �� δ �ε �υµ �ετερ�ν “It is your thing [characteristic, habit] to . . .” (plus theinfinitives πρα

�#αι, πιστευ

�σαι, and ��ιεσθαι).

70.4. κα�ι µη�ν κα�ι. “and in truth also.” Sm. §2921.

��ι�νται . . . �αν τι κτα�σθαι . . . τ �α ε�τ�ι

�µα �αν �λα� ψαι. The infinitives

represent potential optatives in indirect discourse after ��ι�νται. The di-rect form would be, e.g., κτ �ω� µεθα �αν τι. Sm. §1845.

70.6. �αλλ�τριωτα� τ�ις, meaning “completely belonging to another (here,to the city), expendable,” is contrasted with ��ικει�τα� τ�η, meaning “com-pletely one’s own.” The point is that the Athenians treat their bodies as ifthey belonged to the state and were expendable, whereas their ingenuity,intelligence, thought, and opinions belong to themselves but are used forthe benefit of the city.

70.7. "α µ �εν . . . µ �η ε�πε# �ελθωσιν and "α δ� �αν . . . κτ �ησωνται are generalrelative clauses in primary sequence with �αν plus the subjunctive (“what-ever” clauses). Sm. §2567.

�ηγ�υ�νται governs two infinitives of indirect discourse, στ �ερεσθαι (with

no accusative subject, since its subject is the same as that of the leadingverb) and τυ�ει

�ν.

��λ�ιγα πρ ��ς τ �α µ �ελλ�ντα. “little in comparison to future things.” LSJ s.v.πρ ��ς C.III.4.

τυ�ει�ν πρα� #αντες is the familiar use of τυγ�α� νω with the participle to

mean “to happen to do something,” here used in indirect discourse after


�ηγ�υ�νται. Hence, “they think they happen to have achieved little . . .”

The participle is nominative because it refers to the subject of the leadingverb. But τυγ�α� νω with the participle can express a coincidence in time“just now.” LSJ s.v. II.1. So we may translate, “they think they haveachieved little just then in comparison with things to come.”

�αντελπ�ισαντες. “hoping instead”—i.e., as a substitute for the failedenterprise.

ε�πλ �ηρωσαν τ �ην �ρε�ιαν. ε�πλ �ηρωσαν is an “empiric” aorist. “With adverbssignifying often, always, sometimes, already, not yet, never, etc., the aoristexpressly denotes a fact of experience” (Sm. §1930). There is no suchadverb here, but the eventual conditional protasis and the presence of theword πε�ιρα� are sufficient. �ρε�ια here means “lack, loss.” Hence, “theyalways make up the loss.” Note that this “empiric” aorist does not causethe conditional clause to change to secondary sequence.

70.8. This sentence has two independent clauses, with the verbs µ ��-θ�υσι and �απ�λα �υ�υσι. Dependent on the latter is the preposition δια� ,followed by two articular infinitives, κτα

�σθαι and �ηγει

�σθαι. After �ηγει

�-

σθαι is a predicative construction without ε�ι�ναι, consisting of two accusa-

tives (“to think A is B”).

�ηγει�σθαι

ε��ρτ �ην � µ �ητε �αλλ��η τ �α δ �ε�ντα πρα

�#αι

�ησυ��ιαν τε � � �υ� �η�σσ�ν #υµφ�ρ �αν

�η �ασ��λ�ιαν.

Hence, “because they consider a holiday nothing else than to do whatis necessary, and [because they consider] leisurely peace and quiet no less atrouble than [is] laborious activity.”

70.9. #υνελ �ων. “summarizing, speaking concisely, in a word.” LSJ s.v.συναιρ �εω I.2b.

71.1. The backbone of this sentence follows.

διαµ �ελλετεκα�ι ��ιεσθε

τ �ην �ησυ��ιαν �αρκει�ν

� �υ τ� �υτ�ις

Commentary 77

��ι �αν . . . πρα� σσωσικα�ι ��ι [ �αν] δη

�λ�ι �ω

�σι

�αλλ� . . . ν �εµετε . . . τ �� ισ�νε�π�ι

τω��

µ �η λυπει�ν

κα�ι µ �η �λα� πτεσθαι

� �υ τ� �υτ�ις τω�ν �ανθρ �ωπων. Partitive genitive with pronoun. Sm. §1317.

The negative applies only to τ� �υτ�ις. Hence, “not to those who . . . , butyou . . .”

�αρκει�ν. From the meaning “be sufficient,” this verb came to mean “last,

endure.” LSJ s.v. III.4.

�"ι �αν τ�η�

µ �εν πρασκευ�η�

δ�ικαια πρα� σσωσι. “whoever act justly in theirpreparation for war.”

µ �η ε�πιτρ �εψ�ντες. This construction is absolute (i.e., without object) andmeans “not submitting, not giving in.” The negative is µ �η because theparticiple is embedded in the conditional clause �ην �αδικω

�νται.

The parallelism is between τ�η�

µ �εν παρασκευ�η�

[preparations] and τ�η�

δ �εγν �ωµ�η [will/determination], i.e., between acting justly in whatever prepa-rations for war there are and being firm in their resolve if they are harmed.These are the positive attitudes the Corinthians would like to see in theSpartans.

ε�π�ι τω��

µ �η λυπει�ν . . . τ �� ισ�ν ν �εµετε. “You exercise fairness on the basis of

not injuring . . . and not being injured.” Crawley translates, “Your ideal offair dealing is based on the principle that . . .” τ �� ισ�ν is a neuter adjectiveused instead of an abstract noun (the schema Thucydideum). The verb ν �εµωbasically means “distribute, dispense” and came to mean “manage, inhabit,possess, etc.” Its meaning here, “exercise, practice,” is unusual—and, in-deed, is omitted from LSJ—but τ �� ισ�ν ν �εµετε is parallel to the earlierδ�ικαια πρα� σσωσι and is similar to Thucydides’ usage in I.120.1: τ �α �ιδια ε�#�ισ�υ ν �εµ�ντας [administering private interests equitably].

α �υτ��ι �αµυν ��µεν�ι. The subject of the infinitive is nominative because itrefers to the subject of the leading verb ν �εµετε. Sm. §1973.

71.2. µ ��λις δ� �αν π ��λει ��µ��ια� παρ�ικ�υ�ντες ε� τυγ�α� νετε τ� �υτ�υ. Poten-

tial imperfect. Sm. §1784. Hence, “You would acquire this [i.e., to harmnone and not to be harmed] with difficulty [even if] you lived next to acity like [yours; i.e., with the same nonaggressive policy].”


ωσπερ τ �ε�νης. “as of an art or craft, [so in politics].”

τ �α ε�πιγιγν ��µενα κρατει�ν. “The emerging new facts [of a craft] prevail

[over the old-fashioned].” τ �α ε�πιγιγν ��µενα has to be the subject ofκρατει

�ν, because any object would have been genitive. Here, κρατει

�ν is

used absolutely.

π�λλη�ς κα�ι τη

�ς ε�πιτε�ν �ησεως δει

�. π�λλη

�ς is in predicate position. Sm.

§1169. Hence, “there is need for innovation to be abundant.”

71.4. �ωρ�ισθω. Third singular perfect middle imperative of ��ρ�ι�ω, “put aboundary to.” The omega results from the lengthening of the initial vowelof ��ρ�ι�ω to form the perfect stem, an analogue to reduplication in verbsbeginning with a single consonant. (It must not be called an augment.Augments have a different origin and signal past tense.) Hence, “let yourslowness be put an end to.” (An archaic English construction frequent inJane Austen is useful here for illustrating the Greek syntax. Jane saidsomewhere, e.g., “What shall he be done to?” In such a transformation,the object of an English preposition becomes the subject of the sentence.)

πρ�η�σθε. Second plural aorist middle subjunctive of πρ��ιηµι. The aorist

stem of ιηµι is ε� ¯ (from *ye-), and the subjunctive morpheme is ¯η/ω¯, so*y �ε¯η¯σθε becomes ¯ �η

�σθε (it occurs only in compounds).

71.5. δι� ε�ρηµ�ιαν. “from being left alone.”

72.1. παριτητ �εα. Neuter plural verbal adjective in ¯τ �ε�ς expressing neces-sity. Sm. §§471, 473. The use of the neuter plural is peculiar to Thucydides.It is formed from the verb πα� ρειµι, a compound of ε�ι

�µι, “go.” This construc-

tion usually acts like the impersonal passive periphrastic in Latin (e.g.,eundum est mihi, “I must go”) and ordinarily has a dative of agent. Sm.§1488. But here, the participle �απ�λ�γησ�µ �εν�υς has drifted over into theaccusative. Schwyzer-Debrunner, 410. (α �υτ�ι

�ς goes with �εδ�#εν.) The

normal verbal of ε�ι�µι is �ιτ �ε�ν, but this is from the secondary formation

* �ιτητ �εω (Schwyzer, 705). Cf. Ar. Nub. 131. Either the neuter plural or theneuter singular of the verbal may be used in the impersonal construction,with no difference of meaning. Goodwin-Gulick §§1596–99 (here morehelpful than Sm.).

κα�ι αµα τη�ν σφετ �εραν π ��λιν ε�� υλ�ντ� σηµη�ναι �ση ε�ιη δ �υναµιν.

“Lilies-of-the-field” construction.

Commentary 79

�ω�ν �η�δεσαν and �ω

�ν �απειρ�ι �η

�σαν follow �υπ ��µνησιν. Hence, “to remind the

elders of what they knew and to give indication to the young of what theyhave not experienced.” The first relative takes its genitive case from theghost antecedent. The filled-out expression would be �υπ ��µνησιν ε�κε�ινων "ακτλ. The second relative is genitive (a) from the ghost antecedent and (b)because �απειρ�ς takes a genitive. LSJ s.v.

ν�µ�ι��ντες . . . �αν . . . τρα� πεσθαι. Potential optative in indirect dis-course. Sm. §1845.

72.2. ε�ι τι µ �η �απ�κωλ �υ�ι. Real condition in indirect discourse in secon-dary sequence after past leading verb. The direct form would be ��υλ ��-µεθα . . . ε�ι τι µ �η �απ�κωλ �υει, “If there is no objection, we want to speak.”This indirect form then means “They said that if there was no objection,they wanted to speak.” Smyth’s treatment of conditional clauses in indi-rect discourse leaves much to be desired, but see Sm. §2619.

73.1. �ηµω�ν with κατα�� ην. “against us.”

παρ �ηλθ�µεν . . . � �υ . . . �ανερ�υ�ντες. This future participle signifies pur-

pose after a verb of motion (Sm. §2065) and is parallel with the negativepurpose clause "�πως µ �η . . . ��υλε �υσησθε.

73.2. �ω�ν �ακ�α�ι µα

�λλ�ν λ ��γων µα� ρτυρες �η ��ψις τω

�ν �ακ�υσ�µ �ενων. The

contrast is between the direct experience of the audience (a better argu-ment) and the ancient tales (not so convincing). Here, too, is a grammati-cal play of singulars and plurals, which may seem confusing. �ακ�α�ι [hear-say] is plural because its modifying genitive, λ ��γων, is plural. Hence, “ofwhich stories hearsay is the witness, rather than the direct observation ofthose who are going to listen [to us].” �ω

�ν is a relative adjective modifying

λ ��γων, which is the incorporated antecedent. Sm. §2536. �ακ� �υω is depo-nent in the future.

ε�ι κα�ι δι� ��λ�υ µα�λλ�ν �εσται. δι� ��λ�υ ε�ι

�ναι means “be or become

troublesome.” LSJ s.v. ��λ�ς II. The entire phrase is a kind of real con-dition with future indicative, which Smyth classifies (on the basis of itstranslation) as a “concessive clause” (Sm. §2375). This is not the so-calledemotional future condition (Sm. §2328) but simply a real condition mean-ing “Even if it is going to be troublesome . . . ,” “Granted that it will betroublesome . . . ,” or “Although it will be troublesome . . .” The combina-tion ε�ι κα�ι makes it “concessive.”


πρ��αλλ�µ �εν�ις. Sc., �ηµι�ν. Hence, “Although it will be rather trouble-

some [tiresome] for us referring constantly to things that . . .” LSJ s.v.πρ��α� λλω B.III.2. Some editors argue for the translation “tiresome toyou,” but the middle seems to argue against it.

�τε ε�δρω�µεν. Definite past temporal clause with indicative denoting the

same time as the principal verb (ε�κινδυνε �υετ�). Hence, “When we wereactually doing this . . . , the risk was being taken . . .” Sm. §2395A.

ε�π� �ωφελ�ια� . “for a [certain] advantage.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι B.III.2 (of an end orpurpose). The rest of the sentence is dependent on the word �ωφελ�ια� , theantecedent of the relative pronoun �η

�ς, which is followed by two other

dependent genitives linked by µ �εν and δ �ε, τ�υ�

µ �εν �εργ�υ and τ�υ�

δ �ελ ��γ�υ. τ�υ

�µ �εν �εργ�υ is a defining genitive of the neuter noun µ �ερ�ς, and

τ�υ�

δ �ε λ ��γ�υ is the genitive complement of the verb στερισκ �ωµεθα, averb in ¯ �ισκω derived from στερ �εω. Sm. §§526–28. Hence, “a part of theactual outcome of which [i.e., the good] you share in, but let us not bedeprived of all of the credit.” In Thucydides, the word �εργ�ν tends to referto actualities, facts, realities, brass tacks, material advantage, action—asopposed to λ ��γ�ς, which refers to words, promises, theories, pretenses,reputation, talk. LSJ s.v. λ ��γ�ς VI.2d.

ε�ι τι �ωφελει�. Real condition with present indicative. Hence, “if [in fact]

reputation is an advantage.”

73.3. µ �η ε �υ�

��υλευ�µ �εν�ις. The negative µ �η is used because the parti-ciple is equivalent to a conditional clause. Sm. §2728.

73.4. �εσ�ε µ �η . . . α �υτ ��ν . . . π�ρθει�ν. “prevented him from sacking.” LSJ

s.v. �ε�ω A.II.10. For a summary of constructions after verbs of hindering,see Sm. §2744.

�αδυνα� των �αν ��ντων. Although this looks like a simple genitive absolute, itis only an attributive genitive, modifying the implied τω

�ν Πελ�π�ννησ�ιων

in the word τ �ην Πελ�π ��ννησ�ν. �αν indicates that the original form was apotential optative or contrary-to-fact condition. Sm. §1845. The contextindicates a contrary-to-fact condition, i.e., �αδ �υνατ�ι �αν �η

�σαν. Hence, “in

which case [i.e., if he had sacked the cities of the Peloponnesus] they [thePeloponnesians] would have been unable to come to each others’ aidagainst so many ships.” The imperfect is used in a past contrary-to-factcondition (where we expect the aorist) if the action was continuous orhabitual. Sm. §2304. “Being unable” is such a continuous state.

Commentary 81

73.5. �ως . . . � �υκ �ετι . . . ��υσης. Genitive absolute with �ως, indicating thatthis was the opinion or ground of action of the barbarian. Sm. §2086.

74.1. α�ιτι �ωτατ�ς. “most responsible, most to be credited with, most in-strumental in causing.”

�περ. Sc., τ �� ναυµα�η�σαι.

74.2. τω�ν �αλλων �ηδη µ �ε�ρι �ηµω

�ν δ�υλευ ��ντων. “the others as far as

Attica [literally, “up to us”] being already slaves [to the Persians].”

�η#ι �ωσαµεν [we resolved] is followed by four infinitives.

µηδ� . . . πρ�λιπει�ν

µηδ �ε . . . γεν �εσθαι�αλλ� . . . κινδυνευ

�σαι

κα�ι µ �η ��ργισθη�ναι

µηδ� "ως . . . πρ�λιπει�ν. “not even under those circumstances [when no-

body came to our aid and all were enslaved] to abandon the alliance.”Notice the accentuation of ως, the demonstrative adverb. Sm. §2988.

� �υ πρ�υτιµωρ �ησατε. “You did not come to our aid earlier.”

74.3. ωστε φαµ �εν � �υ� �η�σσ�ν α �υτ��ι �ωφελη

�σαι �υµα

�ς �η τυ�ει

�ν τ� �υτ�υ.

“Consequently, we claim that we ourselves helped you no less than wegained this [help from you]”—i.e., “We gave as much help as we re-ceived.” The appearance of ωστε at the beginning of a sentence marks astrong conclusion. LSJ s.v. B.II.2.

�απ �� τε τω�ν ��ικ�υµ �ενων τω

�ν π ��λεων κα�ι ε�π�ι τω�

�τ �� λ�ιπ ��ν ν �εµεσθαι.

“[You came to our aid] from inhabited cities and for the purpose of inhabit-ing [them] in the future.” For ε�π�ι plus the dative articular infinitive toexpress aim or purpose, see LSJ s.v. B.III.2; cf. Thuc. I.38.2. In the middle,ν �εµω means “inhabit.” LSJ s.v. A.III.1.

� �υ� �ηµω�ν τ �� πλ �ε�ν. Ironic—i.e., “You did not fear more for us than for

yourselves.”

�απ �� τη�ς � �υκ ��υσης �ετι. Understand π ��λεως.

τ �� µ �ερ�ς. Neuter accusative used as an adverb, meaning “partly.” Sm.§§1606, 1609. It is linked to the element of joint effort in #υνεσ �ωσαµενand implies, “we did our part in saving both you and ourselves.” Cf. Thuc.I.127.2.


�ως διεφθαρµ �εν�ι. �ως plus the participle to express the opinion of the sub-ject. Sm. §2086. διεφθαρµ �εν�ι is the nominative plural masculine perfectmiddle participle of διαφθε�ιρω. Hence, “in the belief that we were al-ready in the state of having been completely ruined.”

75.1. ��Αρ� marks a question. Sm. §2650. �

�Αρα µ �η marks a question

expecting the answer no. Hence, “We don’t deserve to be envied, do we?”Sm. §2651. However, Denniston (Gr. Part.2, 46–47) argues that �

�Αρα µ �η

does not expect the answer no but simply is used in rhetorical questionsand that it merely implies “that the suggestion made is difficult of accep-tance.” He interprets the present passage as expecting the answer yes, withµ �η negating only the infinitive. Hence, “Do we not deserve not to beenvied?” He also observes that this is the only example of �

�Αρα in

Thucydides.

γν �ωµης #υν �εσεως ενεκα. “because of the correct insight of our decisive-ness.”

�αρ�η�ς . . . τ�ι

�ς Ελλησι . . . ε�πιφθ ��νως διακει

�σθαι. The verb διακει

�µαι,

“to be in a certain state,” is frequently used with an adverb that defines thestate. Hence, “to be in a state of being envied.” The adjective ε�π�ιφθ�ν�ςmeans “liable or subject to envy.” The phrase ε�πιφθ ��νως διακει

�σθαι takes

a dative of the person who is envious and a genitive of the cause of the envy.Sm. §1405. Hence, “We do not deserve to be envied by the Greeks for ourhegemony, do we?” or, following Denniston (Gr. Part.2, p. 47), “Do we notdeserve to be free of envy for our hegemony?”

�αρ�η�ς γε. γε implies that while there may be other reasons for envy, the

Athenians’ hegemony, at least, should not be begrudged them. Sm.§2821.

75.3. πρ�αγαγει�ν α �υτ �ην ε�ς τ ��δε. “to advance [our hegemony] to this

degree.”

µα� λιστα �υπ �� δ �ε�υς, �επειτα κα�ι τιµη�ς, "υστερ�ν κα�ι �ωφελ�ιας. “mostly out

of fear [of Persia], then out of honor [of being head of the hegemony], andfinally out of self-interest [the material and political advantage gainedfrom such a position].”

75.4. Κα�ι � �υκ �ασφαλ �ες κτλ. The backbone of this sentence (without theembedded genitive absolutes) follows.

Commentary 83

� �υκ �ασφαλ �ες . . . �εδ�κει( �ηµα

�ς)

�απη�θηµ �εν�υς�αν �εντας

κινδυνε �υειν

�αν �εντας is the accusative plural aorist active participle of �αν�ιηµι. The twoparticiples in the sentence are not really parallel. The first, �απη�θηµ �εν�υς,is a circumstantial (causal) participle (“since we were . . .”) and is logicallyparallel to the genitive absolutes. The second, �αν �εντας, is a supplementaryparticiple linked with the infinitive κινδυνε �υειν; i.e., �αν �εντας κινδυνε �υεινmeans “to take the risk consisting of letting it go.” Sm. §§2094–2105. Themeaning is clearer if we transform the expression out of the infinitiveconstruction into a finite construction. It is like �αδικω

�ταυ

�τα π�ιω

�ν, “I am

guilty in doing this.” Sm. §2101. So κινδυνε �υω �ανε�ις means “I run the riskof letting go.” Thus, the whole construction means “It did not seem safe [forus] to run the risk of letting go.” Finally, �ανι �εναι is used absolutely; i.e., it isa transitive verb without its expected object “hegemony,” which can beeasily supplied from the course of the discussion.

κα�ι γ �αρ �αν κτλ. γα� ρ signals that this sentence will explain what wasmeant by κινδυνε �υειν. ε�γ�ιγν�ντ� is imperfect (where we expect aorist,for past potential) because it refers to repeated events. Sm. §2304.

75.5. πα�σι �ανεπ�ιφθ�ν�ν τ �α #υµφ �ερ�ντα τω

�ν µεγ�ιστων π �ερι κινδ �υνων

ε �υ�

τ�ιθεσθαι. In the middle, ε �υ�

τ�ιθεσθαι means “to administer somethingwell for oneself.” LSJ s.v. τ�ιθηµι A.VII.1. τ �α #υµφ �ερ�ντα means “advanta-geous, expedient things” but here has a whiff of the predicative—hence,“to manage things well for ourselves so that they turn out to be advanta-geous.” To do this is �ανεπ�ιφθ�ν�ν to everybody, i.e., “not a cause forreproach.” Hence, “Nobody can reproach us for managing to our bestadvantage affairs that concern the greatest risks.”

76.1. γ�υ�ν introduces an argument made with specific examples—hence,

“You Lacedemonians, for instance, . . .” Sm. §2830; Denniston Gr. Part.2,451 f. This usage of γ�υ

�ν has picked up the nickname “part proof,” because

it confirms a preceding statement not with full argument but with aspecific, telling example of its truth.

κα�ι ε�ι τ ��τε . . . κινδυνε �υειν. This is a mixed contrary-to-fact condition inindirect discourse after ε �υ

��ισµεν µ �η. The protasis, ε�ι �απ �η�θεσθε, is past


contrary-to-fact with aorist, and the apodoses are present contrary-to-factwith imperfects represented by infinitives with �αν.


ε �υ�

�ισµεν µ �η�υµα

�ς �η �αρ�ειν �αν

�η κινδυνε �υειν �ανε�ι �απ �η�θεσθε

The negative µ �η is unusual, since the negative of the infinitive inindirect discourse is regularly � �υ. But µ �η is often used after leading verbs ofstrong asseveration or belief, such as ε �υ

��ισµεν or µαρτυρ �εω, “bear wit-

ness.” Sm. §2725.

�απ �η�θεσθε is the second plural aorist middle of �απα�θα� ν�µαι, “be hated,incur hatred.” Some editors and many MSS read the pluperfect �απ �η-�θησθε, which would be parallel with the earlier perfect participle �απη�-θηµ �εν�υς. α �υτ� �υς [yourselves] emphasizes that the Lacedaemonians wouldthemselves have acted just as the Athenians did.


And if then you had remained in your position of leadership for thewhole time and had become detested, as we are, we are certain thatyou would have become no less severe to your allies and would becompelled either to rule harshly or to find yourselves at risk.

76.2. The main verb of this sentence is πεπ�ι �ηκαµεν, and everything isdependent on it. The Athenians are represented by the nominative parti-ciples and the “if” clauses, but after the “until” clause (µ �ε�ρι � �υ

�), the

subject switches to the Spartans. There is an embedded genitive absoluteand an embedded accusative absolute.


πεπ�ι �ηκαµεν � �υδ �εν θαυµαστ ��νε�ι ε�δε#α� µεθακα�ι µ �η �ανει

�µεν

�αλλ� ν�µ�ι��ντεςκα�ι δ�κ�υ

�ντες

µ �ε�ρι � �υ�

�ρη�σθε τω�

�λ ��γω�

( "�ν πρ�θε�ις) � �υδε�ις �απετρα� πετ�.

Commentary 85

καθεστω�τ�ς. Genitive singular neuter perfect active participle of καθ�ι-

στηµι in a genitive absolute consisting of the participle alone without anoun. Sm. §2072b. This is an impersonal construction followed by aninfinitive phrase. Hence, “it being an established rule for the weaker to behemmed in by the stronger.” LSJ s.v. καθ�ιστηµι B.6.

τω��

δικα�ιω� λ ��γω� νυ�ν �ρη

�σθε. “now you appeal to the argument from

justice.”

παρατυ� ��ν �ισ� �υι τι κτησασθαι. Accusative absolute. Sm. §2076. Hence,“there being a chance to acquire something by force.”

πρ�θε�ις. Nominative singular masculine aorist active participle of πρ�-τ�ιθηµι, “advance as a principle, propose.” LSJ s.v. II.4. Some editors preferthe meaning “put before, prefer to” (LSJ s.v. IV.3) and understand agenitive of comparison in τη

�ς �ισ� �υ�ς—hence, “no one preferring which

[i.e., to force].”

� �υδε�ις πω . . . �απετρα� πετ�. “Nobody who put forth the argument fromjustice was ever diverted from acquiring more” or, by the other interpreta-tion, “Nobody was ever diverted from acquiring more by preferring theargument from justice [to that of strength].”

76.3. � ιτινες �ρησα� µεν�ι . . . γ �ενωνται. If we accept the reading of someMSS and Stuart Jones, γ �ενωνται is an aorist subjunctive in a generalrelative clause without �αν—hence, “those who [are of such a kind as to]employ.” This construction, without �αν, is common in Homer and occursoccasionally in Attic prose. Cf. Thuc. III.43.5, IV.17.2, IV.18.4. Sm.§2567b. But other editors read with other MSS the perfect γεγ �ενηνται,making this a simple indicative relative clause (Sm. §§2553, 2562), mean-ing “those who, as a matter of fact, are in the present enduring state ofactually employing.”

76.4. �αλλ�υς γ� �αν � �υ�ν ��ι ��µεθα τ �α �ηµ �ετερα λα� ��ντας δει

�#αι �αν µα� λι-

στα ε�ι τι µετρια� ��µεν. The first �αν is anticipatory, preparing us for theupcoming �αν with δει

�#αι, which represents a potential optative. Sm.

§1765. λα� ��ντας is a conditional participle, meaning “if they took over.”Sm. §2067. ε�ι τι µετρια� ��µεν [whether we are at all moderate] is anindirect question after δει

�#αι and is equivalent to �σ�ν µετρια� ��µεν,

“how moderate we are.” � �υ�ν is inferential and “signifies that something

follows from what precedes” (Sm. §2964).


ε�κ τ�υ�

ε�πιεικ�υ�ς. Neuter adjective for abstract noun (the schema Thucyd-

ideum)—hence, “from moderation, fairness.”

περι �εστη. The intransitive root aorist of περι�ιστηµι, “surround,” usedhere metaphorically with the dative, i.e., “surrounded us, stood aroundus.” LSJ s.v. B.I.3. Hence, “resulted.”

77.1. ε�ν ται�ς #υµ��λα�ιαις πρ ��ς τ� �υς #υµµα� ��υς δ�ικαις. I.e., in lawsuits

conducted according to treaties between allied states.

παρ� �ηµι�ν α �υτ�ι

�ς ε�ν τ�ι

�ς ��µ�ι�ι

�ς ν ��µ�ις π�ι �ησαντες τ �ας κρ�ισεις. “estab-

lishing courts here [by us in Athens] according to the similar laws [as weourselves are judged].”

The speaker seems to be giving two instances of Athenian ε�πιεικε�ια(fairness): (1) they themselves lose occasionally in the treaty courts (show-ing fairness) and (2) when trials are held at Athens, the allies are judgedon the same basis as Athenians. The question is complicated both philo-logically and historically. One question is whether Thucydides, ratherthan indicating two instances of ε�πιεικε�ια, is saying that at one time,cases were tried in treaty courts, but now that they have been transferredto Athens, the allies still are treated fairly (one instance of ε�πιεικε�ια).Gomme’s long note on the matter (p. 243) should be consulted.

“Yet if we translate Thucydides’ sentence in what seemed to be themost natural way, we must assume that between Athens and many, atleast, of the subject states α�ι συµ��λα�ι had been abolished, thoughwe have no explicit evidence of this and the case of Mytilene—sosoon after her drastic punishment—would be a surprising exception.The other alternative is to suppose, with many scholars, that Thucydi-des is giving two examples of Athenian ε�πιεικε�ια—her submission to(unjust) verdicts in many δ�ικαι �απ �� συµ��λω

�ν where these take

place in allied courts, and her establishment of impartial courts (forother cases) at home.”

77.2. The backbone of this sentence includes an indirect question.

� �υδε�ις σκ�πει�

δι ��τι� �υκ ��νειδ�ι�εται.

Hence, “no one considers why the charge is not made.” δι ��τι is usuallya conjunction but here an indirect interrogative. LSJ s.v. I.2.

Commentary 87

τ�υ�τ� � �υκ ��νειδ�ι�ετα�ι (τινι). τ�υ

�τ� refers to φιλ�δικει

�ν. The construc-

tion with ��νειδ�ι�ω is an accusative of reproach and a dative of theaccused against whom the reproach is leveled. Here in the passive transfor-mation, the accusative charge τ�υ

�τ� becomes nominative and the datives

remain, namely, the participles �ε��υσι and � �υ�σι.

πρ ��ς �ηµα�ς �απ �� τ�υ

��ισ�υ ��µιλει

�ν. “have dealings with us on an equal

basis.” LSJ s.v. ��µιλ �εω A.III.1.

77.3. παρ �α τ �� µ �η ��ιεσθαι �ρη�ναι. There is much confusion about the

meaning of this phrase. Somehow it must be made to mean “contrary towhat they think is right,” but the µ �η is troublesome, and the παρα� isambiguous. The point is that the allies are so used to being treated on anequal basis that when they are overruled in the courts or by imperialpower, instead of being thankful they did not lose more, they resent theirsubject status. παρα� can mean “contrary to” (LSJ s.v. C.III.4) or “inaccordance with” (LSJ s.v. C.I.7), and µ �η could go with ��ιεσθαι or with�ρη

�ναι. I think it best to take παρα� as “in accordance with” and µ �η as the

simple negative with the articular infinitive ��ιεσθαι. Hence, “in accor-dance with the fact that they do not think it ought to be.”

�η γν �ωµ�η �η δυνα� µει τ�η�

δι �α τ �ην �αρ� �ην. “either by some legal decisionmade by us or by reason of the power we wield by virtue of our hegemony.”

� �υ τ�υ�

πλ �ε�ν�ς µ �η στερισκ ��µεν�ι �α� ριν �ε��υσιν. “They are not thankfulthat they are not deprived of more.” � �υ negates �α� ριν �ε��υσιν, and µ �ηnegates στερισκ ��µεν�ι, which is a supplementary participle giving thereason or cause for thanks. It is parallel to supplementary participles withverbs of rejoicing and grieving, which give the ground for the emotion.Sm. §2100. The negative is µ �η because the reason for the action isregarded as the condition under which it takes place. Sm. §2731.

τ�υ�

ε�νδε�υ�ς �αλεπ ��τερ�ν φ �ερ�υσιν. �αλεπω

�ς φ �ερειν means “take ill,

take amiss, get indignant at.” LSJ s.v. φ �ερω A.III.2. �αλεπ ��τερ�ν is thecomparative of the adverb �αλεπω

�ς. Sm. §345. The genitive τ�υ

�ε�νδε�υ

�ς

goes with the �αλεπ ��τερ�ν φ �ερ�υσιν—hence, “they are more indignantabout their loss.” It is a genitive of cause with expressions of emotion. Sm.§1405. For the genitive with the adverb, cf. Thuc. II.62.3. Thus, insteadof being thankful for the greater part that they have, they are moreindignant about the smaller part that has been taken away from them, the“part lacking,” and they are more concerned about that “than if we habitu-ally were . . .”


ε�ι . . . ε�πλε�νεκτ�υ�µεν. We would expect a past contrary-to-fact protasis

here with the aorist (“than if we had . . .”). But it is imperfect herebecause it is contrary not only to a present reality but also to a continuousreality in the past. Cf. Thuc. I.11.2. Hence, “if we had been in the customof . . .” Sm. §2304.

ε�κε�ινως. “under those conditions, in that case”—sc., if the Atheniansignored the law and openly aggrandized.

77.4. πλε�νεκτει�σθαι. In the active, πλε�νεκτ �εω means “gain some ad-

vantage, get a larger share, grasp for more.” In the middle, it means “betaken advantage of.” LSJ (s.v. II.2) explains this usage as impersonal (“tobe an act of πλε�νε#�ια”), but it is parallel to καταναγκα� �εσθαι, which ispersonal.

77.5. γ�υ�ν indicates that what follows explains what was meant by the

last general statement by giving a particular instance of its truth. Sm.§2830.

�ηνε�ι��ντ�. Third plural imperfect middle of �αν �ε�ω, “hold up, endure.” Inthe middle, it means “bear up with patience.” LSJ s.v. C.II.1. It has adouble augment, both the preverb �ανα¯ and the root ε�� ¯ being aug-mented. Sm. §451.

ε�ικ ��τως is added as an afterthought with the meaning “fairly understand-ably after all” and leads to the next explanatory generalization.

77.6. This sentence begins as a straightforward potential condition (theso-called future less vivid) with ε�ι plus the optative in the protasis and theoptative plus �αν in the apodosis. Sm. §2329. It considers the possibility ofan event, without expecting it to come true. But then there is anotherqualifying protasis, a real protasis with future indicative, introduced byε�ιπερ, meaning “if indeed, if in fact,” which signals that the condition isunfavorable or to be feared. Sm. §§2328, 2328a.


ε�ι �αρ#αιτεµετα�α� λ�ιτε �αν τ �ην ε �υν��ιαν

"ην ε�ιλ �ηφατε

Commentary 89

ε�ιπερ γν �ωσεσθε ��µ�ι�α

��ια �υπεδε�ι#ατε

�αν is repeated, as in Thuc. I.76.4. Sm. §1765.

τ �� ηµ �ετερ�ν δ �ε�ς. “fear of us.” The possessive pronominal adjectivestands for the objective genitive. Sm. §§1331, 1334.

The sentence may be translated,

So if you should destroy us and take over our empire, you wouldquickly lose the goodwill you have gained because we were feared . . .

πρ ��ς τ ��ν Μη�δ�ν δι� ��λ�ιγ�υ �ηγησα� µεν�ι. “when for a short time you were

in leadership against the Mede.”

γν �ωσεσθε. ��µ�ι�α γιγν �ωσκειν means “to have similar attitudes and princi-

ples of action.” The definition in LSJ (s.v. γιγν �ωσκω II.1), “form a judge-ment, think,” does not adequately treat this pregnant meaning. γν �ωσεσθεis middle merely because the future of γιγν �ωσκω is deponent γν �ωσ�µαι.Hence, “if, in fact, you are going to maintain a policy similar to thatwhich you demonstrated when for a time you led against the Mede.”

�αµεικτα. Neuter plural verbal adjective from µε�ιγνυµι, “mix”—hence,“unmixed.” LSJ spells the word �αµικτ�ς. It is used of cultural monsters—e.g., centaurs and Cyclopes—who are savage and socially incompatible.Here, it means that the Spartan customs are “incompatible, and inharmo-nious with the customs and manners of others, and therefore not condu-cive to sincere and candid intercourse” (Classen and Steup, ad loc.).

78.1. ��υλε �υεσθε is an imperative and is parallel with the aorist subjunc-tive πρ ��σθησθε with negative µ �η, which is a negative command or pro-hibitive subjunctive. Sm. §1800.

ως � �υ περ�ι �ρα� �εων. “since it does not concern trifles.” This is a litotesmeaning “since it concerns weighty matters.” LSJ s.v. �ρα� �υς 4.

78.2. φιλει�. Thucydides uses the verb φιλ �εω only in the meaning “be

used to, be accustomed to, customarily do” (LSJ s.v. II) and usually withan infinitive. The subject is �� π ��λεµ�ς.

τ �α π�λλα� . Adverbial.


περι�ιστασθαι. When used of events, περι�ιστηµι means “turn out, comearound to, depend on.” LSJ s.v. B.II.3 (middle).

�ω�ν �ισ�ν �απ �ε��µεν. The antecedent of �ω

�ν is τυ�α� ς. �ισ�ν is adverbial,

meaning “equally.” �απ �ε��µεν means “be away from” and takes the geni-tive of the place (or event). LSJ s.v. �απ �ε�ω III. Hence, “chances fromwhich we are equally removed.” The phrase means that neither side in awar has control over the accidents.

ε�ν �αδ �ηλω� κινδυνε �υεται. “The risk is taken in uncertainty [of the out-come].” LSJ s.v. �αδηλ�ς II.1b.

78.3. τω�ν �εργων πρ ��τερ�ν �ε��νται. “They grasp at actions first.” LSJ s.v.

�ε�ω C.I.2 (middle with genitive).

κακ�παθ�υ�ντες δ �ε �ηδη. “but once they are already in trouble.” �ηδη goes

with the participle. Sm. §2080.

78.4. εως �ετι with the indicative (here, the missing verb ε�στ�ι) means “solong as still.” Sm. §2422. Hence, “as long as we both still have [theopportunity of] sound and independent counsel.”

µ �η λ �υειν, µηδ �ε παρα�α�ινειν, and λ �υεσθαι are indirect imperatives afterthe leading verb λ �εγ�µεν. Smyth treats this construction under the usageof verbs of will and desire. Sm. §1997; see also §2633.

τα �υτ�η � �η�

�αν �υφηγη�σθε. “in this direction wherever you may lead.”

80.1. ε�ν τ�η�

α �υτ�η�

�ηλικ�ια� . “of the same age as myself.”

τινα. Masculine singular accusative of the indefinite pronoun, meaning“anyone [of you older men],” used as the subject of the infinitive.

τ�υ�

�εργ�υ. τ �� εργ�ν, here the genitive object of ε�πιθυµη�σαι, is frequently

used to refer to the deeds of war and fighting. LSJ s.v. I.1. Since this is acommon Homeric usage, perhaps Thucydides has lent something of anepic flavor to the speech of Archidamus.

80.3. παρ ��µ�ι�ς �ηµω�ν �η �αλκη. παρ ��µ�ι�ς is a feminine two-ending adjec-

tive because it is compound. Sm. §288. �αλκη is an epic and poetic wordmeaning “strength, prowess, courage, effectiveness of defense.” Hence,“our strength was comparable.”

Commentary 91

ε�φ� εκαστα. When used of military aims, this construction means “againsteach objective.”

π ��λεµ�ν �αρασθαι. Here, the aorist middle infinitive of �αε�ιρω is transitiveand means “undertake.” LSJ s.v. IV.4. The subject of the infinitive is anunderstood �ηµα

�ς, implied in the accusative plural participle πιστε �υσαντας.

ε�πει�θη�ναι. Aorist passive infinitive of ε�πε�ιγω, “press, drive, urge,” which

in the passive means “hasten, hurry, be in a hurry.” LSJ s.v. III.3.

80.4. π ��τερ�ν ται�ς ναυσ�ιν; This picks up the rhetorical question πω

�ς;

hence, “Is it by means of ships?” π ��τερ�ν introduces direct alternativequestions. Sm. §2656.

ε�ι µελετ �ησ�µεν . . . ε�ν �εσται. Real condition with futures, in which thesimple logical connection between the clauses is emphasized. This is notwhat Smyth calls the “emotional future” (Sm. §2328) but merely a real(or “logical”) condition in the future. Cf. Sm. §2301; Kuhner-Gerth2:466, §573. Hence, “if we really are going to prepare . . . , it will taketime.”

�αλλ �α τ�ι�ς �ρ �ηµασιν; We would expect �η to mark the second of the direct

alternative questions. But we have here the figure called hypophora. Sm.§3029. Denniston (Gr. Part.2, 10–11) says, “The proferring and rejectingof successive suggestions may be done by a single speaker, who conducts,as it were, a dialogue with himself. This device, known as hypophora, isfreely used, for liveliness and variety by the Greek orators.” Cf. Thuc.VI.38.5.

�ε��µεν . . . φ �ερ�µεν. The direct object of these verbs, understood fromthe preceding, is �ρ �ηµατα.

α �υτω�ν is not a possessive with �πλ�ις but a genitive with �υπερφ �ερ�µεν—

hence, “we surpass them.”

81.3. ε�ι . . . πειρα� σ�µεθα . . . δε �ησει. Real condition with futures. Sm.§2301.

81.5. �αλλως τε κα�ι. “especially.” Sm. §2980.

81.6. ε�ικ�ς. “It is likely that . . .” (plus an infinitive). “ε�ικ�ς regularlytakes the aorist infinitive (never future), where the probability of the


occurrence of a future action is to be expressed” (Classen and Steup, adloc.). Sm. §1868b.

82.1. (�υ µ �ην � �υδ �ε κτλ. This complicated sentence has only two mainverbs, the indicative κελε �υω and the hortatory subjunctive ε�κπ�ρι� �ω-µεθα, both expressions of bidding and desire. They are connected by theκα�ι that introduces the ε�κπ�ρι� �ωµεθα clause. κελε �υω, meaning “bid,”introduces seven infinitives that represent indirect imperatives, ε�α

�ν, µ �η

καταφωρα�ν, µ �ηπω κινει

�ν, π �εµπειν, α�ιτια

�σθαι, ε�#αρτ �υεσθαι. Smyth

does not call them indirect imperatives but treats them under verbs of willand desire. Sm. §§1991–92. The understood subject accusative of theseinfinitives is �υµα

�ς, but it is omitted because it is already clear to whom

Archidamus is speaking. Sm. §1972.

(�υ µ �ην � �υδ �ε. “nor again surely not.” Sm. §§2768, 2921.

�αναισθ �ητως. “with indifference.”

α �υτ� �υς κελε �υω . . . καταφωρα�ν. α �υτ� �υς refers to the Athenians. A re-

arrangement of the sentence follows.

�υδ �ε κελε �υω ( �υµα�ς) ε�α

�ν α �υτ� �υς �λα� πτειν τ� �υς συµµα� ��υς �υδ �ε

κελε �υω ( �υµα�ς) µ �η καταφωρα

�ν (α �υτ� �υς) ε�πι��υλε �υ�ντας �αλλ �α . . .

µ �ηπω κινει�ν.

[I do not suggest you should allow them to injure the allies, nor do Isuggest you should not catch them red-handed when they are plot-ting intrigues, but I do suggest . . .”]

In my translation, English should is not potential but, rather, marks anindirect imperative. �αλλ �α neutralizes the negatives, and κελε �υω becomespositive.

α�ιτια�σθαι µ �ητε . . . δηλ�υ

�ντας µ �ηθ� �ως ε�πιτρ �εψ�µεν. α�ιτια

�σθαι is used

absolutely to mean “make your complaints.” δηλ�υ�ντας agrees with the

omitted subject �υµα�ς, and the negatives are µ �η because they are still under

the regimen of the indirect imperatives after κελε �υω. Hence, “withoutsuggesting [literally, “making clear”] war.” µ �ηθ� �ως ε�πιτρ �εψ�µεν is logi-cally, though not grammatically, parallel. Hence, “nor as if we are aboutto give in.”

κ �αν τ� �υτω� � κα�ι ε�ν τ� �υτω� . Temporal, meaning “and in this period oftime, in this interval.”

Commentary 93

τ �α �ηµ �ετερ� α �υτω�ν. “our own resources.” α �υτω

�ν modifies τ �α �ηµ �ετερα by a

constructio ad sensum. Sm. §§1200.2b, 1203b, 1203b.N.

ε�ι . . . πρ�σληψ ��µεθα is not really a condition but an “in case” clause, oraccording to Smyth’s categorization, an “on the chance that” clause. Sm.§2354.

�ανεπ�ιφθ�ν�ν . . . διασωθη�ναι. The infinitive διασωθη

�ναι is the subject,

and the neuter adjective �ανεπ�ιφθ�ν�ν is the predicate adjective. Theinfinitive has an accusative subject, πρ�σλα� ��ντας, which is modified bythe relative clause. Hence, “it is not invidious for those who are beingplotted against to find safety by enlisting the aid of both Greeks andbarbarians.”

ε�πι��υλευ ��µεθα. Instead of the expected third plural ε�πι��υε �υλ�νται,the verb is attracted to the first person by ωσπερ �ηµει

�ς.

τ �α α �υτω�ν � τ �α �ηµ �ετερα α �υτω

�ν. This is somewhat awkward, and some

editors have proposed τ �α α �υτ�υ�, “things here.”

82.2. �ην δ �ε µ �η . . . �ιµεν. Eventual condition with ε�α� ν plus the subjunc-tive (omitted—it would have been ε�σακ� �υωσι) in the protasis and afuture indicative (�ιµεν) in the apodosis (the so-called future more vivid).Sm. §§2323, 2326a. �ιµεν (ibimus) has future force.

82.3. τ� �υς λ ��γ�υς α �υτ�η�

��µ�ι�α �υπ�σηµα�ιν�ντας. α �υτ�η

�refers to παρα-

σκε �υην and is dative after ��µ�ι�α. Hence, “pronouncements hinting at

things corresponding to our preparation.”

82.4. µ �η . . . ν�µ�ισητε. Prohibitive subjunctive aorist. Sm. §1800.

�σω� �αµειν�ν ε�#ει �ργασται. “the better it is cultivated.”

�η�ς φε�ιδεσθαι �ρ �η. I.e., it is necessary for the Spartans to spare the Athe-

nian land, which they consider as a hostage.

�αληπτ�τ �ερ�υς �ε�ειν. “find them more difficult to deal with.” �αληπτ�-τ �ερ�υς is a comparative verbal adjective from λαµ�α� νω with alpha priva-tive. Cf. Thuc. I.37, 143.

82.5. ��ρα�τε �πως µ �η . . . πρα� #�µεν. �πως µ �η plus the future after a verb

of effort (��ρα�τε). Hence, “See to it that we do not do something worse.”


��ρα� ω serves as a verb of effort only with negative clauses. Sm. §§2209,2210b, 2211.

82.6. ��ι ��ν τε � �

��ι ��ν τ� ε�στι. “it is possible.” ε�στ�ι is often omitted in this

idiom.

καθ� �τι �ωρ �ησει. “how it will come out”—literally, “according to what itwill come out.” κατα� indicates manner. Sm. §1690.2c.

π ��λεµ�ν . . . θ �εσθαι. “to settle a war suitably.” LSJ s.v. τ�ιθηµι VII.1.Med.Cf. Thuc. I.25.1.

83.2. �πλων . . . δαπα� νης. “Pregnant genitives” dependent on ε�ι�ναι—

hence, “about weapons . . . money.” These are predicate genitives actinglike predicate adjectives. Smyth calls them “genitives of quality.” Sm.§1320. Here, the word δαπα� νη means “financial resources.”

τ �� πλ �ε�ν. Thucydides often uses τ �� πλ �ε�ν instead of µα�λλ�ν. Sm. §1068.

�ωφελει�

here means “be effective”—for someone, in the dative ( �ηπειρ �ω-ταις), against someone, in the accusative with πρ ��ς (πρ ��ς θαλασσ�ι�υς).

83.3. α �υτ �ην. I.e., δαπα� νην.

π�ρισ �ωµεθα . . . ε�παιρ �ωµεθα. Hortatory subjunctives. Sm. §1797. LSJs.v. ε�πα�ιρω II (“get excited, be carried away”).

τω�ν �απ��αιν ��ντων. “the consequences, things that follow.”

τ �� πλ �ε�ν is here the object of ε#�µεν with the genitive τη�ς α�ιτ�ιας. Hence,

“the greater part of the blame for the consequences.”

� �υ�τ�ι. � �υ

�τ�ς is used instead of �ς to avoid the repetition of the relative.

Sm. §2517.

ε�π� �αµφ ��τερα. “whichever way things turn out”—literally, “toward boththings.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι C.I.3 (“of the quarter or direction towards or in whicha thing takes place”).

84.1. σπε �υδ�ντ �ες τε is picked up by κα�ι . . . νεµ ��µεθα. σπε �υδ�ντ �ες is aconditional participle. Sm. §2067.

σ��λα�ιτερ�ν �αν πα �υσαισθε. “You would more slowly cease.” In the ac-tive, πα �υω is transitive and means “stop or hinder something.” In the

Commentary 95

middle, it is intransitive and means “stop doing something,” and it veryoften occurs with a supplementary participle (e.g., πα �υ�µαι λ �εγων, “I stopspeaking”). Sm. §2098. Without such a participle, it has the simple intran-sitive meaning “stop, cease, make an end.” LSJ s.v. I.3.

�απαρα� σκευ�ι. This subject of the articular infinitive is nominative(rather than accusative) because it refers to the subject of the leadingverb. Sm. §1973a.

84.2. ε �υπραγ�ιαις � �υκ ε�#υ�ρ�ι��µεν. “We do not get puffed up with suc-cesses.”

τω�ν ε�#�τρυν ��ντων is dependent on �ηδ ��ν�η

�. ε�π�ι τ �α δεινα� after ε�#�τρυν ��-

ντων �ηµα�ς means “toward risky enterprises.”

παρ �α τ �� δ�κ�υ�ν �ηµι

�ν. “contrary to our judgment”—literally, “contrary to

what seems good to us.” δ�κ�υ�ν is the neuter participle of δ�κ �εω.

�ανεπε�ισθηµεν. Aorist in the apodosis of a present general condition. Thegnomic aorist (Sm. §1931) is equivalent here to a present indicative. Sm.§§1931a, 2338.

84.3. π�λεµικ��ι . . . διαιρετα� ς. This complicated sentence has only onemain verb, γιγν ��µεθα, and the rest depends on nominative participles andadjectives, which govern further dependent constructions. The wholesentence explains what Archidamus means by π�λεµικ��ι, on the onehand, and ε�υ��υλ�ι, on the other; the first point is short, and the secondpoint is greatly expanded.

The backbone of this sentence and a rough preliminary translation follows.

γιγν ��µεθαπ�λεµικ��ι

τ �� τια�ιδ �ως µετ �ε�ει σωφρ�σ �υνης πλει

�στ�ν

ε �υψυ��ια δ �ε (µετ �ε�ει) α�ισ� �υνης (πλει�στ�ν)

ε�υ��υλ�ι ��

παιδευ ��µεν�ι�αµαθ �εστερ�ν (plus the genitive τη

�ς �υπερ�ψ�ιας)

κα�ι σωφρ�ν �εστερ�ν �η ωστε �ανηκ� �υστεινκα�ι . . . µ �η ε�πε#ι �εναιν�µ�ι�ειν δ �ε


[We are warlike because honor is the greatest part of prudence and[because] courage is the greatest part of honor; and we are wisebecause we are educated less learnedly than to disdain the laws,[educated] more wisely than to ignore them, [educated] not to at-tack, but [educated] to consider.]

α�ιδ �ως and α�ισ� �υνη are here synonymous; both mean something like “thesense of honor.” The participle παιδευ ��µεν�ι is causal and is parallel tothe two �τι clauses. The four parallel constructions after παιδευ ��µεν�ιneed further analysis.

�αµαθ �εστερ�ν τω�ν ν ��µων τη

�ς �υπερ�ψ�ιας παιδευ ��µεν�ι. The adverb is

ironic. Hence, “we are educated less learnedly than to disdain the laws,”i.e., “we are not so sophisticated as to despise the laws.” Archidamus,picking up on the charge that the Spartans are not elegantly educated,turns it around by making that a virtue.

κα�ι # �υν �αλεπ ��τητι σωφρ�ν �εστερ�ν �η ωστε α �υτω�ν �ανηκ�υστει

�ν (παι-

δευ ��µεν�ι). # �υν �αλεπ ��τητι means “with severe discipline.” LSJ s.v.�αλεπ ��της II. ωστε . . . �ανηκ�υστει

�ν expresses the anticipated or possible

result (not the actual result). Sm. §2260. Hence, “we are educated—withsevere discipline—with more self-control than to pay no heed to them[the laws].”

κα�ι µ �η τ �α �ακρει�α . . . ε�πε#ι �εναι (παιδευ ��µεν�ι). The basic construction

is παιδευ ��µεν�ι µ �η ε�πε#ι �εναι (τ�ι�ς π�λεµ�ι�ις) [educated not to go

against [the enemies]]. There is some dispute among commentators andtranslators about the construction of ε�πε#ι �εναι. Thucydides treats it asintransitive without complement at II.21 but with a dative at VI.97, andthe latter seems to be the construction here. The negative µ �η goes withthe infinitive, not the participles—hence, “we have learned not to . . .”

��ντες and µεµφ ��µεν�ι are two dependent participles connected by apposi-tion. The participle µεµφ ��µεν�ι gives an example of what is meant bybeing too clever. Sm. §2147g.

τ �α �α�ρει�α #υνετ��ι �αγαν ��ντες. “being too clever with respect to useless

things”—e.g., making a fine theoretical assessment of the enemy’s prepara-tions.

The contrast between λ ��γ�ς and �εργ�ν marks the connection betweenthe participle µεµφ ��µεν�ι and the infinitive ε�πε#ι �εναι. Hence, “while

Commentary 97

cleverly criticizing in talk the enemies’ plans, not to go after them in factin a manner inconsistent [with the words].”

ν�µ�ι�ειν δε . . . διαιρ �ετας. “but [we are educated] to think that the plansand calculations of others are comparable to our own and [to think] thataccidents that happen by chance cannot be determined by calculation.”��ι π �ελας literally means “those nearby,” but in Thucydides it usuallymeans simply “others.” Classen and Steup, at I.32.1.

85.1. µ �η παρω�µεν. Negative hortatory subjunctive with first plural aorist

active of παρ�ιηµι, “give up, abandon.” LSJ s.v. III.1.

�ηµι�ν µα

�λλ�ν ε�τ �ερων. “for us more than [for] others.”

85.2. ε�τ��ιµων ��ντων. I.e., the Athenians.

δ�ικας δ�υ�ναι. “submit to arbitration.”

86.2. ��ι δ� � �υκ �ετι µ �ελλ�υσι. I.e., the allies. Sthenelaidas seems to bemaking a witty remark: “We will not put off helping. They don’t put offsuffering!” For additional examples of Laconic humor, see Plutarch’s Apo-thegmata Laconica (Mor. 208B–236E).

86.3. παραδ�τ �εα. For the neuter plural, see Sm. §§1052, 1003a. Theimpersonal construction of the verbal in ¯τ �ε�ς takes an accusative object.Sm. §2152.

µ �η λ ��γω� α �υτ� �υς �λαπτ�µ �εν�υς. The accusative participle has the negativeµ �η because it is conditional. Sm. §§2067, 2728. It is the agent of the verbalδιακριτ �εα. “Since the impersonal construction is virtually active, andhence equivalent to δει

�with the accusative and infinitive . . . , the agent

sometimes stands in the accusative” (Sm. §2152a). �ηµα�ς is to be supplied.

The sentence may be translated, “Decision by means of arbitration andwords must not be made by us, if we ourselves are not being harmed bywords”—i.e., “if it is not by words that we are being harmed.”

87.2. �αναστ �ητω. Root aorist active third singular imperative.

87.6. πρ�κε�ωρηκυιω�ν. Genitive feminine plural perfect active parti-

ciple of πρ��ωρ �εω, “proceed, go well.” Hence, “[the truce] having gonewell, succeeded [until this fourteenth year].” LSJ s.v. II.1.


89.3. �Αθηνα�ιων τ �� κ�ιν ��ν. “the Athenian people.” This expressiontakes plural verbs by constructio ad sensum. Sm. §950.

διεκ�µ�ι��ντ� is transitive, with the objects παι�δας and γυναι

�κας. The

clause ��θεν �υπε� �εθεντ� is somewhat condensed for ε�ντευ�θεν �

��ι �υπε� �εθε-

ντ� α �υτ� �υς.

90.1. τ �� µ �ελλ�ν. Object of α�ισθαν ��µεν�ι—hence, “what was about tohappen.”

τ �α µ �εν . . . τ �� δ �ε πλ �ε�ν. Adverbial, meaning “on the one hand . . . , butmore . . .”

�ηδι�ν �αν ��ρω�ντες . . . µηδ �ενα . . . �ε��ντα. �ε��ντα is a participle in indi-

rect discourse after a verb of perceiving (��ρω�ντες). Sm. §§2110–12.

��ρω�ντες is a causal participle, giving one of the reasons for sending the

embassy. Sm. §2064. �αν indicates an original potential optative (Sm.§§1845–46), which would have been �ηδι�ν �αν ��ρω�

�µεν, “we would prefer

to see.” Hence, “on the grounds that they would prefer to see no onehaving . . .” The negatives µ �ητε . . . µ �ητε . . . µηδ �ενα are something of apuzzle. Ordinarily, the participle in indirect discourse after a verb of per-ceiving would take � �υ. Sm. §2608. But here, we have a case of a wish thatthe utterance would hold good. If this were a construction of verb ofsaying plus the infinitive involving the wish that the utterance wouldhold good, the negative of the infinitive in indirect discourse would be µ �η.Sm. §2723. By analogy, when the leading verb (here, ��ρα� ω) takes aparticiple, the negative will be µ �η. Sm. §2608.

��ρω�ντες . . . ε��τρυν ��ντων. By Thucydides’ usual stylistic habit of off-

target parallelism, the nominative participle is balanced by the genitiveabsolute to express the two causes.

90.2. �υγκαθελει�ν µετ �α σφω

�ν. “to join with them [the Spartans] in tear-

ing down the surrounding walls.”

τω�ν �ε�ω Πελ�π�νν �ησ�υ. “of the people outside the Peloponnese.”

��σ�ις ε�ιστ �ηκει (τ �α τε�ι�η). “whose [walls] were still standing.” The relative��σ�ς is used to emphasize the number (“however so many”). It is dative ofpossession. The pluperfect ε�ιστ �ηκει marks the past of a continuing condi-tion; i.e., �εστηκα, “stand,” is a perfect with present meaning (Sm. §1946),and its pluperfect, ε�ιστ �ηκει, has corresponding imperfect meaning.

Commentary 99

τ �� µ �εν ��υλ ��µεν�ν κα�ι �υπ�πτ�ν τη�ς γν �ωµης. Neuter adjective for ab-

stract noun (the schema Thucydideum). Hence, “the intention and suspi-cion [that lay behind] the opinion.”

�ως δ �ε τ�υ��αρ�α� ρ�υ . . . � �υκ �αν �ε��ντ�ς. �ως with the genitive absolute

indicating the ground of belief. Sm. §2086d. � �υκ �αν �ε��ντ�ς represents anoriginal potential optative. Sm. §§1845–46. It really represents the apo-dosis of a potential condition, whose protasis is the clause ε�ι ε�π �ελθ�ι.

90.3. �απ �ηλλα�αν. “got rid of, dismissed.” LSJ s.v. �απαλλα� σσω A.I.3.

90.4. �υπει�π�ν is an aorist that lacks a corresponding present. As a substi-

tute, the suppletive verb �υπαγ�ρε �υω is used for its present (instead of�υπ�λ �εγω, which does not occur until the Roman period). Here, it means“add, subjoin, say in addition.” LSJ s.v. 3.

90.5. ��π�τε . . . �ερ�ιτ�. General temporal clause (“whenever” clause) insecondary sequence. The primary form ��π ��ταν �ερωται loses its �αν andbecomes optative. Sm. §§2410, 2414. Smyth’s treatment of general tempo-ral clauses is confusing and unclear. They behave exactly like eventualconditions (“if ever” conditions) and general relative clauses (“whoever”clauses) with the subjunctive plus �αν in primary sequence and the opta-tive without �αν in secondary sequence.

91.1. � �υκ ε�ι��ν ��πως �ρ �η �απιστη

�σαι. Literally, “They had not how it

was necessary to disbelieve.” The nominal ��πως clause is the direct objectof ε�ι

��ν. � �υκ �ε�ω here means “be unable to, not know how to.” LSJ s.v.

�ε�ω A.III.2. Warner translates, “They did not see how they could rejectsuch information.”

91.3. ε�φ��ει�τ� . . . µ �η . . . � �υκ �ετι �αφω

�σιν. Clause of fearing. Sm. §§2221,

2225. The negative µ �η . . . � �υ is used to express fear that something may nothappen. The sequence is secondary after ε�φ��ει

�τ�, and the eventual

“whenever” clause �π ��τε . . . �ακ� �υσειαν is optative for that reason. Butwhy is �αφω

�σιν, the third plural aorist active subjunctive of �αφ�ιηµι, not

changed to the optative? “After secondary tenses, the subjunctive presentsthe fear vividly, i.e. as it was conceived by the subject. . . . The vivid use ofsubjunctive is common in the historians, especially Thucydides” (Sm.§2226).


91.4. �ι �εναι. Indirect imperative. Hence, “He said that they should go . . .”Sm. §§2633c, 1997.

91.5. ��σα . . . ��υλε �υεσθαι. The verb in the relative clause is attractedinto the infinitive by the running indirect discourse. Sm. §2631. Thisrelative clause serves as an accusative of respect with � �υδ �εν�ς �υστερ�ι.Hence, “With respect to whatever they had deliberated with them, they[the Athenians] appeared second to none in judgment.”

91.6. �ιδ�ια� . Adverb. LSJ s.v. �ιδι�ς VI.2. Hence, “in particular, privately.”

91.7. �εφη �ρη�ναι . . . �η κα�ι τα� δε ν�µ�ι�ειν ��ρθω

�ς �ε�ειν. “he said it was

necessary . . . to consider that these things [i.e., building the walls] wereright.”

92.1. � �υδ �ε γ �αρ ε�π�ι κωλ �υµ�η, �αλλ �α γν �ωµης παραιν �εσει. “not for the pur-pose of prevention, but for the purpose of recommending a policy.” LSJs.v. ε�π�ι B.III.2.

�ανεπικλ �ητως. “without preferring any charge, without complaint.”

93.2. � �υ �υνειργασµ �ενων �εστιν � �η�. The fixed phrase �εστιν � �η

�is adverbial

and acts like a single adverb meaning “in some way, somehow, anyhow.”Sm. §2515. Hence, “not fitted together in any way.”

πα� ντα ��µ��ιως κιν�υ�ντες �ηπε�ιγ�ντ�. ε�πε�ιγω means “hasten, hurry.” LSJ

s.v. III.3. Because the simple verb (*ε�ιγω) does not occur, ε�πε�ιγω is nottreated as a compound, and the augment goes onto the preverb. Sm. §450.κιν �εω means “remove a thing from its place, disturb” and can be used ofmeddling with things that should be left alone. LSJ s.v. I.2. Hence, “theydisturbed everything indiscriminately in their haste.”

93.4. �ανθεκτ �εα. Neuter plural nominative verbal adjective from �αντ �ε�ω,which takes the genitive when it means “hold on to.” LSJ s.v. III.2. Thefull-grade root of this verb is *segh- �*σε�¯ �ε�� ¯. Hence, in the verbal,the initial rough breathing shows up, as it does in the verbal adjective in*-tos—e.g., in the compound καθεκτ ��ς, “checked, held back.” Becausethe � is assimilated to the τ, giving κ, Grassmann’s Law (dissimilation ofaspirates) does not operate. The neuter plural of the verbal is often used in

Commentary 101

the impersonal construction. Sm. §2152; cf. §1052. Hence, “that the seamust be held on to.”

93.5. δ �υ� �αµα�αι. There is some argument about what this means. Thissentence must somehow pertain to the width of the wall. Gomme (adloc.) sees no difficulty: “There is no difficulty here either in the meaningor in the expression of it: two wagons, going in opposite directions,brought the stones up on to the wall (and, of course, passed each other;the wall would have had to be yet wider, if they were compelled to turn).”

93.6. �αφιστα�ναι τ �ας . . . ε�πι��υλα� ς. “fend off the attacks.”

�αρκ �εσειν. “will be enough, suffice” (intransitive). LSJ s.v. �αρκ �εω III.4.

93.7. πρ�σ �εκειτ�. “be devoted to, concentrate on” (plus the dative). LSJs.v. πρ�σκει

�µαι II.2.

94.1. ε�ν τ�η�δε τ�η

��ηγεµ�ν�ια� . Temporal, meaning “during this period of

command.”

95.1. The adjective ��ιαι�ς, referring to Pausanias, means “arrogant, dicta-torial, violent.” In the middle, the verb �ια� ��µαι means “act violently ordictatorially.”

95.2. πρ�σει��ν τ �ην γν �ωµην is like the expression πρ�σ �ε�ειν τ ��ν ν�υ

�ν,

“pay attention, give heed to.” LSJ s.v. πρ�σ �ε�ω I.3. With the objectγν �ωµην, the phrase means “be determined.”

�ως � �υ περι�ψ ��µεν�ι τ �α�λλα� τε καταστησ ��µεν�ι. �ως plus the future parti-

ciple giving the ground of Athenian determination. Sm. §2086. Since thereis a future participle, there is also an element of purpose here. Sm. §2065. � �υπερι�ψ ��µεν�ι is for � �υ περι�ψ ��µεν�ι �ην �ια� �ηται and is a future-more-vivid condition downgraded to a participle. Originally, it would be �ην�ια� �ηται, � �υ περι�ψ ��µεθα, “If ever he gets rough, we will not overlook it.”τε makes clear that τ �α

�λλα is the object of καταστησ ��µεν�ι.

95.4. �υν �ε�η takes two infinitive phrases connected by τε . . . τε: “Ithappened to him to be recalled” [α �υτω�

�καλει

�σθαι] and, at the same time,

“it happened that the allies changed sides [µετατα� �ασθαι].”


95.5. τω�ν �αδικηµα� των. Genitive of the charge—Smyth’s genitive of

crime and accountability. Sm. §1375.

τ �α µ �εγιστα. Internal accusative object of �αδικει�ν.

µ �η �αδικει�ν. A verb of negative meaning (here, �απ�λ �υω, “acquit”) can

take the infinitive with µ �η. Sm. §§2739–40.

95.7. ��ι δ �ε α�ισθαν ��µεν�ι. δ �ε changes the subject, now the Spartans.α�ισθαν ��µεν�ι has no explicit object but refers to what has just been said.

�απαλλα�ε�ι�ντες. �απαλλα�ε�ιω is the desiderative of �απαλλα� σσω. Sm.§868.

ε�πιτηδε�ι�υς. “friendly.” LSJ s.v. II.2.

�ετα�αν �ας τε �εδει παρ �ε�ειν τω�ν π ��λεων �ρ �ηµατα πρ ��ς τ ��ν �α� ρ�αρ�ν

κα�ι #ας ναυ�ς. The relative pronouns serve here as indirect interrogatives.

Sm. §§339f, 2668. Hence, “They settled which cities were obliged . . .”

96.2. �Ελλην�ταµ�ιαι . . . �αρ� �η. “The office of Hellenotamiai was set up.”�αρ� �η is appositive to �Ελλην�ταµ�ιαι. On the assessment of the tribute byAristides, see [Arist.] Ath. Pol. 23.4–5 and Thuc. V.18.5.

97.1. τ�σα� δε ε�πη�λθ�ν. τ�σα� δε means “the several points to follow.”

τ ��σ�ς is the demonstrative that emphasizes quantity or number. Sm.§340. Hence, “they turned to the following series of enterprises.” ε�π-�ερ��µαι means “accomplish.” LSJ s.v. III.3. The datives π�λ �εµω� and δια-�ειρ�ισει are datives of means (Sm. §1506 ff.)—hence, “by means of war-fare and the energetic management of affairs.”

#α ε�γ �ενετ� α �υτ�ι�ς. The antecedent of the relative is τ�σα� δε. The dative

α �υτ�ι�ς is a remnant of the idiom π ��λεµ�ς ε�γ �ενετ� πρ ��ς τ� �υτ�υς α �υτ�ι

�ς.

Cf. Thuc. I.98.

πρ�στυγ�α� ν�ντας ε�ν ε�κα� στω� . “those who in each case came in contactwith them.”

97.2. τ �ην ε�κ��λ �ην τ�υ�λ ��γ�υ. “the digression from the narrative,” i.e.,

the Pentecontaetia.

τ �� ωρ�ι�ν. “subject area.” LSJ s.v. 6b. Others translate, “period of time,part or circumstance.” Crawley translates, “passage of history.” Warnertranslates, “period.”

Commentary 103

�Αττικ �η Συγγραφ �η is the title of Hellanicus’s work.

�ε�ει � παρ �ε�ει. “provides, supplies.” The missing subject is �η ε�κ� ��λη.

98.4. παρ �α τ �� καθεστηκ ��ς. “contrary to the established [constitution ofthe Delian League].”

�ως ε�κα� στ�η is feminine because it refers to �υµµα��ις, which is here dativewith �υν �ε�η. The �ως is a problem. Classen and Steup (ad loc.) expandthis brachylogy (Sm. §3017) as κα�ι τω

�ν �αλλων ε�κα� στη ε�δ�υλ �ωθη �ως

ε�κα� στ�η �υν �ε�η δ�υλωθη�ναι [and each of the others was enslaved as it

happened to each one to be enslaved]. They explain that this refers to thefact that differing circumstances led to enslavement in each case. Hence,“then the others were enslaved for various reasons.” Warner translates,“and the process was continued in the cases of the other allies as variouscircumstances arose.”

99.1. �εκδειαι. “defaults in tribute and contributions of ships.”

λιπ�στρατ�ι�ν. Gomme (ad loc.) explains, “λιπ�στρατ�ι�ν here must meansomething distinct from νεω

�ν �εκδειαι, and implies therefore ‘return home

in the middle of a campaign’; not on the part of individual men or regimentsor crews, but of whole contingents, recalled by their authorities.”

ε�ι τω� ε�γ �ενετ�. Real condition in the past, with a hint of generality. Smythcalls this “the indicative form of general conditions” (Sm. §2342). Itsgenerality is signaled by the indefinite pronoun. Cf. ε�ι τ�ις τι ε�πηρ �ωτα� ,�απεκρ�ιναντ� [If ever anybody asked anything, they answered] (Thuc.7.10). Hence, here, “if ever it happened to anyone.” It refers to λιπ�-στρατ�ι�ν alone, and Gomme translates, “occasional desertion.”

πρ�σα� γ�ντες τ �ας �ανα� γκας. “by applying coercive measures.” Crawleytranslates, “by applying the screw of necessity.” Warner translates, “bybringing the severest pressure to bear.”

99.2. πως κα�ι �αλλως. “in some other respects, in other ways.”

πρ�σα� γεσθαι . . . α �υτ�ι�ς τ� �υς �αφισταµ �εν�υς. “reduce to subjection to

them any who revolted.”

99.3. τ �ην �απ ��κνησιν τω�ν στρατειω

�ν. “the shrinking from military expe-

ditions.”


�ινα . . . �ω�σι. Purpose clause that did not change to optative after a past

verb. Sm. §2197. Thucydides prefers this “vivid subjunctive.”

#ην ε�κει�ν�ι �υµφ �ερ�ιεν. General relative clause in secondary sequence.

The primary form would be #ην �αν ε�κει�ν�ι �υµφ �ερωσι. Sm. §§2567–68.

��π ��τε �απ�σται�εν. General temporal clause in secondary sequence. The

primary form would be ��π ��ταν �απ�στω�σι. Sm. §§2409, 2414.

π�λ �εµι�ν �η�ν τ �� ωρ�ι�ν κτι� ��µεν�ν. “The settlement of the place was

regarded with hostility.” This construction, by which the attributive parti-ciple and its noun correspond to a verbal abstract noun plus a genitive(Sm. §2053), is traditionally known by its designation in Latin grammaras the ab urbe condita construction. Cf. Thuc. III.29.2: �ηµ �εραι µα� λιστα�η�σαν τ�η

�Μιτυλ �ην�η ε�αλωκυι

�α� ε�πτα� [It was about seven days since the

capture of Mitylene].

102.2. τ�ι�ς δ �ε . . . τ� �υτ�υ ε�νδεα

�ε�φα�ινετ�. τ�ι

�ς δ �ε refers to the Spartans

and serves both as the dative after ε�φα�ινετ� and as a dative with ε�νδεα�,

which is a neuter plural adjective taking the genitive of what is lackingand the dative of the person(s) to whom it is lacking, used in place of theabstract noun �ενδεια. Hence, “It seemed to the Spartans that they lackedthis [i.e., τει��µα� �ειν].” Some editors argue that τ�ι

�ς δ �ε refers to the

Athenians and means that the Athenians fell short of their reputation.

102.3. �αµα �αµφ�τ �ερ�ις. “with both parties”; i.e., both the Athenians andthe Argives made an alliance with the Thessalians.

103.1. ε�φ� �ω�� . “on the condition that.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι B.III.3. This is a clause

of proviso with future indicative (favored by Thucydides), which takesnegative µ �η. Sm. §2279. The verb ε�ι

�µι has future force. Sm. §1880.

ε�ι�ναι. The direct form of this condition would be �ην �αλ�ισκηται . . . �εστω

δ�υ�λ�ς; i.e., it is an eventual condition downgraded to an infinitive

phrase. There are two possible explanations for the infinitive construc-tion. It may continue the proviso, but changing the construction from ε�φ��ω�� with the future to ε�φ� �ω

�� with the infinitive. Sm. §2279. Hence, “on the

condition that if anyone is caught, he is to be a slave.” Or the infinitivemay be dependent on �υν �ε�ησαν (Classen-Steup). Hence, “They agreedthat if . . .”

Commentary 105

103.2. τ�υ��Ιθωµ �ητα. �Ιθωµ �ητα is the genitive of a masculine a-stem

noun (like µαθ �ητης). Masculine a-stem nouns have taken on the genitiveending of o-stem nouns by analogy. In Attic, the ending is framed torhyme with the o-stem nouns (e.g., µαθ �ητ�υ). But in other dialects, suchas Doric, the genitive ending ¯� (from ¯�ι�) is added to the stem-formative¯α¯, yielding *�Ιθωµ �ητα¯�, which becomes by vowel contraction �Ιθωµ-�ητ–α. Buck, Comp. Gr., §236.3. Thucydides uses the Doric form.

104.1. ε�πηγα� γετ�. “brought in as allies.” LSJ s.v. ε�πα� γω II.2.

105.3. �ην δ �ε κα�ι ��ητω�σιν . . . �αναστ �ησεσθαι. Eventual condition with

future apodosis (future more vivid) in indirect discourse after ν�µ�ι��ντες.The leading verb is κατ �ε�ησαν, but the conditional clause does notchange to secondary sequence. Sm. §2599, 2619.

106.2. γν ��ντες. I.e., the Athenians were familiar with the place.

κατ �α πρ ��σωπ ��ν τε ε�ι�ργ�ν (α �υτ� �υς) τ�ι

�ς ��πλ�ιταις. “hemmed them in in

front by means of the hoplites.” LSJ s.v. πρ ��σωπ�ν I.1. The hoplites arein the dative because, despite the fact that they are persons, they are hereregarded as instruments. Sm. §1507b.

τ� �υς ψιλ� �υς is the object of the transitive sigmatic aorist περιστ �ησαντες.

107.3. ε�ι �� υλ�ιντ� . . . �εµελλ�ν κωλ �υσειν. In primary sequence, thiscondition would have the form ε� �αν �� υλωνται . . . µ �ελλ�υσι κωλ �υσειν,“If ever they want to . . . , the Athenians are going to prevent . . .” It is aneventual condition with future apodosis (future more vivid), with thepeculiarity that the apodosis has µ �ελλω plus a future infinitive, ratherthan simple future. The future is put into the past by the use of theimperfect µ �ελλω—hence, “they were going to.” Then, with the past lead-ing verb, the “if” clause goes into the optative and loses its �αν. Hence, “Ifever they wanted to . . . , the Athenians were going to prevent . . .”Smyth calls such constructions “past general conditions” (Sm. §2340) butdoes not treat the special case with µ �ελλω. He treats the imperfect ofµ �ελλω only as a substitute for the potential aorist. Sm. §§1960, 2328.

107.4. τ �� δ �ε τι is a fixed phrase functioning as an adverb meaning“partly.” The point is that there were some Athenians, a party within the


city, who were secretly trying to encourage the Spartans. LSJ s.v. ε�πα� γω.I.4. ε�πη

�γ�ν is a conative imperfect. Sm. §1895.

107.5. �ως �εκαστ�ι. “each for himself.” Sm. §2997.

107.6. �απ�ρει�ν. The subject of this infinitive would be the Spartans.

“When the subject of the infinitive is the same as the object (in thegenitive or dative [here, α �υτ�ι

�ς]) of the governing verb [here, ε�πεστρα� -

τευσαν], it is often omitted” (Sm. §1978). Hence, “[The Athenians] think-ing that [the Spartans] were at a loss in what direction to make theirescape, [the Athenians] attacked them [the Spartans].” δι �ελθωσιν is sub-junctive because it represents a deliberative subjunctive embedded in anindirect question.

κα�ι τι κα�ι. The first κα�ι is copulative, the second adverbial. The first κα�ιmarks an addition to the preceding, the second the fact that the additionis surprising. Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 294. Hence, “and even somewhatbecause of the suspicion . . .”

108.5. ε�ν �απ��α� σει τη�ς γη

�ς. “in an amphibious landing”—i.e., landing

from ships.

109.1. �ιδ �εαι. “kinds, forms, sorts.” LSJ s.v. I.3.

109.2. ��πως . . . �απαγα� γ�ι. Purpose clause in secondary sequence withoptative. Sm. §2196.

109.3. α �υτω��

. The king—i.e., Artaxerxes, not Megabazus.

�αλλως. “in vain.” LSJ s.v. �αλλως II.3.

111.1. ��σα µ �η πρ�ι( ��ντες. An elliptical expression to limit the previousstatement. If it were filled out, it would be ��σα κρατει

�ν ε�δ �υναντ� µ �η

πρ�ι( ��ντες, “as much as they were able to control without advancing . . .”

π�λ �υ ε�κ τω�ν ��πλων. “far from the space in camp where the arms were

stacked.” LSJ s.v. ��πλ�ν II.5.

112.1. �Ελληνικ�υ�π�λ �εµ�υ �εσ��ν. “They refrained from war with [other]

Greeks.” LSJ s.v. �ε�ω B.I.3.

Commentary 107

112.4. �υπ �ερ Σαλαµι�ν�ς. “off Salamis.” LSJ s.v. �υπ �ερ I.1b. This is the

Salamis on the eastern end of Cyprus.

113.1. φευγ ��ντων. “After the battle of Oenophyta, the democratic partyin Boeotia had driven out the anti-Athenian oligarchs. But the exiles hadrecovered some of their lost power” (Marchant, ad loc.—after Classenand Steup). Cf. Arist. Pol. 8.2.6.

�αλλ� �αττα �ωρ�ια. “some other territory.” �αττα is sometimes used for theindefinite τινα� . Sm. §334a. It is not to be confused with �αττα (with roughbreathing), which is an alternative form for the indefinite relative neuterplural �ατινα. Sm. §339c.

�ως ε�κα� στ�ις is parallel with ε�αυτω�ν �ιλ�ι�ις ��πλ�ιταις. The formula #ως

�εκαστ�ς means “each for himself.” Sm. §2997. Hence, “with individualcontingents of the allies.”

113.3. ε�φ� �ω�� . . . κ�µι�υ

�νται. Clause of proviso with future indicative—

hence, “on condition that they will get their men back.” Sm. §2279.

116.1. α�ι δ �ε ε�π�ι )�ι�υ κα�ι Λ �εσ��υ περιαγγ �ελλ�υσαι ��ηθει�ν. “The

others happened [�ετυ��ν] to be carrying around instructions to Chios andLesbos to come to their aid.” Crawley translates, “carrying around ordersfor reinforcements.”

στρατι �ωτιδες�. I.e., troop transport ships, rather than ships equipped fornaval battles.

116.3. ε�σαγγελθ �εντων. Neuter plural impersonal participle in the geni-tive absolute without accompanying noun. Hence, “news having beenbrought.” This construction is used “when a subordinate clause with ��τιfollows upon the participle in the passive”; “The plural [of the participle]is used when the subject of the subordinate clause [here, Φ��ινισσαι νη

�ες]

is plural” (Sm. §2072c).

117.1. �αφα� ρκτω� τω��στρατ�π �εδω� . This is the camp on shore for the

crews of the fleet. It had not been fortified with a stockade. Gomme, adloc. and pp. 19–20.

118.2. ��ντες µ �εν κα�ι πρ �� τ�υ�µ �η τα�ει

�ς �ι �εναι ε� ς τ� �υς π�λ �εµ�υς. µ �η is

anomalous and has not been satisfactorily explained. Perhaps, because it is


bracketed by two µ �η expressions (ε�ι µ �η ε�π�ι �ρα� �υ and �ην µ �η �αναγκα� -�ωνται), it results from a kind of negative momentum. Or perhaps, asMarchant (ad loc.) suggests, µ �η gives a flavor of generality to the parti-ciple (Sm. §2045), as if to say the Spartans are generally the kind ofpeople slow in attacking enemies.

πρ �� τ�υ�. “before this time.” Here, the article is used as a demonstrative.

This happens rarely with prepositions, except with πρ ��. Sm. §1117.

�αραµ �εν�ις is dative after ε�δ ��κει and means “by starting, initiating, under-taking.” LSJ s.v. �αε�ιρω IV.4.

118.3. ε�ι π�λεµ�υ�σιν �αµειν�ν �εσται. Indirect yes-no question after

ε�πηρ �ωτων. Sm. §2671.

�υλλ �ηψεσθαι, meaning “assist,” is here used absolutely (i.e., without acomplement). LSJ s.v. συλλαµ�α� νω VI.1.

119.1. δεηθ �εντες µ �εν κα�ι κατ �α π ��λεις πρ ��τερ�ν ε�κα� στων �ιδ�ια� . “havingasked of each of them privately city by city even earlier.” In their concernfor Potidaea, the Corinthians had, already before the congress at Sparta,sent embassies to the individual cities on their own to ask them to vote forwar. ε�κα� στων is the genitive of the person after δ �ε�µαι. LSJ s.v. δ �εω II.2.

�ωστε ψηφ�ισασθαι is not a result expression. �ωστε plus the infinitive isoften used with verbs of will and desire instead of the more commonsimple infinitive. Sm. §2271. So this is equivalent to the simple infinitiveafter δεηθ �εντες.

120.1. �ως � �υ ε�ψηφισµ �εν�ι τ ��ν π ��λεµ ��ν ε�ισι . . . κα�ι (� �υ) . . . �υν �ηγαγ�ν.“on the grounds that they have not voted for war and that they did notconvene us . . .”; i.e., the Corinthians can no longer criticize the Spartanson those grounds, as they did in I.68.2, since they have now done just that.This is a noun clause expressing the substance of the charge that theCorinthians no longer wish to make. It can be regarded as either a causalclause (Sm. §2240) or a simple dependent substantive clause (Sm. §2577).

ε�κ πα� ντων. “before all others.” LSJ s.v. ε�κ I.4.

120.2. φυλα� �εσθαι α �υτ� �υς. “to be on guard against them.” LSJ s.v.φυλα� σσω C.II.1.

Commentary 109

τ� �υς δ �ε µεσ ��γειαν . . . ��υλε �υεσθαι. The backbone of this sentence follows.

�ρ �ητ� �υς . . . κατ�ικ�υµ �εν�υς ε�ιδ �εναι

��τι . . . �ε��υσι�ην µ �η �αµ �υνωσι

κα�ι (τ� �υς . . . κατ�ικ�υµ �εν�υς) µ �η κριτ �ας τω�ν νυ

�ν λεγ�µ �ενων ε�ι

�ναι

δ �ε (τ� �υς . . . κατ�ικ�υµ �εν�υς) πρ�σδ �ε�εσθαικα�ι �αν πρ�ελθει

�ν

ε�ι πρ ��ιντ�κα�ι (τ� �υς . . . κατ�ικ�υµ �εν�υς) ��υλε �υεσθαι

The contrast is between those living inland (��ι τ �ην µεσ ��γειαν κατω� -κηµ �εν�ι) and those living near the sea (��ι κατ �ω κατω� κηµ �εν�ι).

�ρ �η takes four infinitives: ε�ιδ �εναι, ε�ι�ναι, πρ�σδ �ε�εσθαι, and ��υλε �υ-

εσθαι.

κατακ�µ�ιδην . . . κα�ι . . . �αντ�ιληψιν. “export and exchange [trade].”

�ω�ν � τ� �υτων �α. The relative pronoun, the direct object of δ�ιδωσι, is

attracted to the case of its ghost antecedent, which would have been agenitive defining �αντ�ιληψιν. “A demonstrative pronoun to whose casethe relative is attracted, is usually omitted if unemphatic” (Sm. §2522).

�ως µ �η πρ�σηκ ��ντων. �ως means “on the grounds that.” Sm. §2086. Thenegative is µ �η because it is influenced by the prohibition “Do not be ineptjudges.” Sm. §2737c.

ε�ι . . . πρ ��ιντ�. Third plural aorist optative middle of πρ��ιηµι. Thecanonical form would be πρ�ει

�ντ� (� πρ�¯ ε� ¯ ι ¯ντ�), but this irregular

form is confected on the analogy of the thematic optatives. Sm. §§777,746c. Forms of ¯µι verbs often drift over into the thematic conjugation.This is the protasis of a potential (“should-would”) condition in indirectdiscourse after πρ�σδ �ε�εσθαι. The apodosis is represented by the infini-tive πρ�ελθει

�ν with �αν. Usually, πρ�σδ �ε�εσθαι takes a future infinitive,

but that would have obscured the indirect form of the potential condition.


It is necessary for those who dwell inland and not on a sea route tounderstand that unless they come to the defense of those living bythe sea [τ�ι

�ς κα� τω], they will find that the export of their produce

and reciprocal exchange of things that the sea grants to the land will


be more difficult; and [it is necessary] for them not to be inept criticsof the things now said on the grounds that they do not apply [tothem]; and [it is necessary for them] to expect someday, if theyshould abandon the interests of the maritime cities, danger wouldfinally reach them; and [it is necessary for them] to make decisionsnow affecting themselves no less [than they affect us].

120.3. α �νδρω�ν σωφρ ��νων. . . . �αγαθω

�ν δ �ε. Predicate genitives, denoting

the person whose nature, duty, custom, etc. is to do what is set forth in theinfinitive. Sm. §1304. Hence, “It is the custom of wise men to remainquiet . . .”

ε �υ�δ �ε παρασ� ��ν ε�κ π�λ �εµ�υ πα� λιν �υµ�η

�ναι. παρασ� ��ν is the neuter

singular aorist active participle of παρ �ε�ω in an accusative absolute. Sm.§2076. Hence, “it being in their power to come to terms again out of astate of war.” LSJ s.v. παρ �ε�ω A.III.2.

µ �ητε τ�η�κατ �α π ��λεµ�ν ε �υτυ��ια� ε�πα�ιρεσθαι. “not to be elated by their

success in war.”

µ �ητε �ηδ ��µεν�ν �αδικει�σθαι. “nor gladly to suffer injustice.” The usual expla-

nation for the fact that �ηδ ��µεν�ν is not plural like the preceding �αδικ�-υµ �εν�υς is that it is singular as if τινα had preceded it—i.e., “It is thecharacteristic of brave men for anyone not to suffer injustice gladly.” Thisexplanation has never seemed very convincing to me. I think, rather, thatthis anacoluthon is introduced in anticipation of the following sentence,where �� κνω

�ν is singular.

120.4. �αφαιρεθε�ιη. In the active, the verb �αφαιρ �εω takes the accusativeof the thing and the dative of the person, i.e., “take something (acc.) awayfrom someone (dat.).” In the passive construction here, the dative be-comes the subject, and the accusative object, τ �� τερπν ��ν, remains, i.e.,�αφ�ηρ �εθη τι, “he got deprived of something.” It is a potential optativehere.

τ �� τερπν ��ν. Neuter adjective for abstract noun (the schema Thucydideum).

� �υκ ε�ντεθυµ �ηται θρα� σει �απ�ιστω� ε�παιρ ��µεν�ς. The participle ε�παιρ ��µε-ν�ς is in indirect discourse after a verb of perception. Sm. §2110. It isnominative because it refers to the subject of the leading verb. Hence, “Heis not in the present enduring state of being aware that he is elated overunfounded self-confidence.” LSJ s.v. ε�νθυµ �ε�µαι I.1d.

Commentary 111

120.5. τυ� ��ντα. With this reading, τυ� ��ντα agrees with π�λλ �α γνωσθ �ε-ντα and takes the genitive �α��υλ�τ �ερων τω

�ν ε�ναντ�ιων. Further, �α��υλ�-

τ �ερων is predicative. Sm. §§1168–69. Hence, “Many things that have beenbadly planned succeed by finding enemies more unprepared.” But someMSS and some editors read τυ� ��ντων, giving a genitive absolute—hence,“Plans succeed when the enemy happens to be more unprepared.” Forτυγ�α� νω without a supplementary participle, see Sm. §2119; cf. Thuc.I.32.3.

κατωρθ �ωθη. Empiric aorist. “With adverbs signifying often, always, some-times, already, not yet, never, etc., the aorist expressly denotes a fact ofexperience” (Sm. §1930). The adjective π�λλα� is tantamount to such anadverb.

ε�νθυµει�ται γ �αρ � �υδε�ις ��µ�ι

�α τ�η

�π�ιστει κα�ι �εργω� ε�πε� �ερ�εται. Gomme

(ad loc.) says: “‘what a man plans in his confident belief in the future isvery unlike what he carries out in practice.’ This is a satisfactory enoughrendering of the MSS reading ��µ�ι

�α (Forbes, Widmann, Stuart Jones

alone of modern editors).” According to this rendering, τ�η�π�ιστει is a

dative of means, ��µ�ι�α is the direct object of ε �νθυµει

�ται, and the particle

of comparison is κα�ι. Sm. §§1501a, 2875. Hence, literally, “no one plansin confidence things similar to what he accomplishes in fact.” But JohannJacob Reiske (1716–74), one of the heroes of classical scholarship, sug-gested the reading ��µ��ια� here—in his five volumes of Animadversiones(1757–66), in which he proposed many corrections in the texts of Greekauthors. Gomme continues: “if we read ��µ��ια� with Reiske and mostothers, we translate: ‘no one plans and carries out his plan in action withthe same confidence.’ The essential point is that ��µ�ι

�α or ��µ��ια� τ�η

�π�ιστει

goes with both verbs.”

δ��α� ��µεν, meaning “imagine, speculate, make plans,” is used absolutely.

ε�λλε�ιπ�µεν. “fall short.” LSJ s.v. ε�λλε�ιπω I.3.

121.1. �αµυν �ωµεθα. Aorist subjunctive.

α �υτ ��ν. Sc., τ ��ν π ��λεµ�ν.

121.2. κατ �α π�λλα� . “on many grounds.” LSJ s.v. κατα� IV.1.


��µ��ιως πα� ντας ε�ς τ �α παραγγελλ ��µενα �ι ��ντας. “[because] we will all obeyorders together.” For the expression �ι �εναι ε� ς τ �α παραγγελλ ��µενα, cf.Thuc. III.55.3.

121.4. �αλισκ ��νται. Present for future. Hence, “They [the Athenians] willbe defeated.” LSJ s.v. I.2. “The present is used instead of the future instatements of what is immediate, likely, certain, or threatening” (Sm.§1879).

ε�ι δ� �αντ�ισ��ιεν. Potential conditional clause, emphasizing the possibility,but not the likelihood, of the condition. It is followed by an apodosis inthe future (not the optative plus �αν of a “should-would” condition) andtherefore counts as a “mixed condition.” Sm. §2361. Hence, “If theyshould hold out [possible but not likely], we will [certainly] have moretime to train our navy.”

��ταν . . . καταστ �ησωµεν . . . περιεσ ��µεθα. Here, the eventual temporalclause— ��ταν plus the subjunctive (Sm. §2399)—emphasizes the Corin-thians’ expectation that they will put their skill on an equal basis with theAthenians when necessary and will consequently prevail.

#� . . . πρ� �υ��υσι. The editors disagree on the interpretation of the syntaxhere. πρ� �ε�ω, “surpass, excel,” is intransitive; therefore, the relative pro-noun should be not a direct object but an adverbial accusative, functioninglike such words as π�λ �υ, µ �εγα, and ��σ�ν. Smyth categorizes these asaccusatives of measure and degree. Sm. §1609. This is Marchant’s interpre-tation. But because its antecedent is a missing τ�υ

�τ� in the main clause

(which is the subject of καθαιρετ ��ν ε�στι) and because it is parallel to thepreceding sentences with a neuter relative clause, it should be treated as atrue direct object after πρ� �ε�ω. There is a disputed parallel at Soph. Ant.208, where the MSS read τιµ �ην πρ� �ε��υσ�. This is the explanation ofClassen and Steup, (ad loc.). The meaning, at any rate, is clear: “Wherethey excel in skill, that [advantage] can be removed by us through train-ing.” It is best, I think, to regard this as a mild anacoluthon driven by theparallelism of the preceding sentence. καθαιρετ ��ν is not the verbal in¯τ �ε�ς, signaling obligation or necessity, but the simple passive verbal adjec-tive in ¯τ�ς (cognate with the Latin perfect passive participles), signalingpossibility. Sm. §§425c, 472. It takes the dative of agent. Sm. §1488.

Commentary 113

121.5. �ωστε �ε�ειν . . . ��ισ�µεν. Despite its appearance, �ωστε �ε�ειν is not aresult phrase. It is an infinitive after a verb of will and desire (Sm. §§1991–92), strengthened with �ωστε, and has the flavor of a purpose clause.Kuhner-Gerth 2:8, §473A6. ��ισ�µεν �ρ �ηµατα [we will pay money] thenhas the force of “We will make contributions to have money for thispurpose,” and the verb ��ισ�µεν slips over into the category of verbs of willand desire. �ρ �ηµατα is used twice: as the object of ��ισ�µεν and as the objectof �ε�ειν. Cf. Thuc. V.17, ψηφισαµ �ενων �ωστε καταλ �υεσθαι [having votedto make peace]; IV.132.3; VII.86.3. Cf. also 119.1.

�η is used here in the sense of ε�ι δ �ε µ �η, “otherwise.” Sm. §2859.

δειν ��ν �αν ε�ιη . . . πα� σ�ειν. Mixed condition with two protases. Theapodosis is δειν ��ν �αν ε�ιη, a potential optative—hence, “It would beterrible.” The protases are real conditions with future indicatives (� �υκ�απερ�υ

�σιν and � �υκ �αρα δαπαν �ησ�µεν) indicating a threat or warning.

“The protasis commonly suggests something undesired, or feared” (Sm.§2328). Hence, “It would be terrible if they will not grow weary . . . and[if] we will not pay.” δειν ��ν �αν ε�ιη takes an ε�ι clause rather than an ��τιclause because it is tantamount to a verb of emotion. Sm. §2247.

φ �ερ�ντες � �υκ �απερ�υ�σιν. The lexicons list this verb under �απει

�π�ν

because there is no present in fifth-century Attic. Here, it means “fail,grow weary, sink from exhaustion.” LSJ s.v. IV.3. It takes a supplemen-tary participle. Sm. §2098. Hence, “they will not grow weary of makingcontributions.”

ε�π�ι δ�υλε�ια� . “for the purpose of [their own] slavery.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι B.III.2.

� �υκ �απερ�υ�σιν and � �υκ �αρα δαπαν �ησ�µεν. Despite the fact that these

are protases and should have the negative µ �η, they have � �υ instead.“When a single ε�ι introduces a bimembered protasis as a whole, the µ �ενclause and the δ �ε clause of that protasis may have � �υ. Such bimemberedprotases often depend upon a preceding apodosis introduced by α�ισ�ρ ��ν,�ατ�π�ν, δειν ��ν, or θαυµαστ ��ν ε�στι ( �αν ε�ιη)” (Sm. §2698e).

κα�ι ε�π�ι τω��µ �η �υπ� ε�κε�ινων α �υτ �α �αφαιρεθ �εντες α �υτ�ι

�ς τ� �υτ�ις κακω

�ς

πα� σ�ειν. The basic construction is the articular infinitive in the dativeafter the preposition, ε�π�ι τω�

�µ �η . . . κακω

�ς πα� σ�ειν [for the purpose of

not suffering ill]. The participle �αφαιρεθ �εντες is nominative because itrefers to the subject of the “if” clause, �ηµει

�ς. In the active, the verb

�αφαιρ �εω takes the accusative of the thing and the dative of the person,


i.e., “take something (acc.) away from someone (dat.)”. In the passiveconstruction here, the dative becomes the subject, and the accusativeobject remains, i.e., �αφ�ηρ �εθη τι, “he got deprived of something.” Hence,“for the purpose of not suffering ill by our having been deprived of it[α �υτα� —sc., τ �α �ρ �ηµατα] by them [the Athenians].” α �υτ�ι

�ς τ� �υτ�ις refers

again to the money and is a dative of means modifying κακω�ς πα� σ�ειν—

hence, “to suffer ill by means of this very money.”

The upshot follows.Otherwise, it would be terrible if their allies will not grow weary ofpaying tribute to support their own slavery, and [it would be terrible]if we also will fail to spend money for the purpose of punishing ourenemies and likewise for our own safety, and to avoid suffering harmby means of the very money we have been deprived of at theirhands.

At I.120.2, the Corinthians complained that the Athenians deprived thePeloponnesians of money by siphoning off the profits of trade (τ �ην κ�µ�ιδηντω

�ν ��ρα�ιων). The profits transferred to the Athenians would then be used

to finance the Athenian war effort.

122.1. � �υ�σα. The participle equates �απ ��στασις with παρα�ιρεσις; i.e.,

the defection of the Athenian allies means the withdrawal of tribute.

ε�π�ι �ρητ�ι�ς. “on set terms, on specified conditions, by definite rules.”

�� µ �εν ε �υ�ργ �ητως α �υτω��πρ�σ�µιλ �ησας. “the one who meets it [war] with

emotions under control.”

122.2. ε�νθυµω�µαι. Hortatory subjunctive. Sm. §1797. Hence, “Let us

consider that [ ��τι] . . .” LSJ s.v. I.1c.

��ιστ ��ν �αν �η�ν. “it would be bearable.” ��ιστ ��ς is the verbal adjective of

φ �ερω.

�Αθηναι��ι �ικαν��ι κα�ι . . . δυνατ �ωτερ�ι. This is the main clause, with the

copula missing. Sm. §944.

�ωστε ε�ι µ �η . . . �αµυν� �υµεθα . . . �ειρ �ωσ�νται. Real condition with fu-tures in both protasis and apodosis—a minatory-monitory condition (Sm.§2328) embedded in a result clause.

�η�σσαν. Accusative of the short a-stem feminine noun �η

�σσα, “defeat.”

φ �ερ�υσαν. Participle in indirect discourse agreeing with �η�σσαν after verb

of perception.

�αντικρ �υς δ�υλε�ιαν. “undisguised slavery.” The adverb �αντικρ �υς, “openly,”serves as an adjective, despite the lack of an article to put it in attributiveposition (we would expect τ �ην �αντικρ �υς δ�υλε�ιαν). Sm. §1132.

Commentary 115

122.3. #� κα�ι λ ��γω� ε�νδ�ιασθη�ναι α�ισ�ρ ��ν (ε�στι). The antecedent of the

neuter relative �� is the preceding sentence about slavery, and the infini-tive κακ�παθει

�ν is parallel to the infinitive ε�νδ�ιασθη

�ναι. Hence,

“about which [slavery] it is shameful for there to be doubtful discussion, asit is shameful for so many cities to suffer under the rule of one.”

ε�ν �ω�

. “in which case.”

α �υτ ��. Sc., τ �� ε�λευθερ��ι ε�ι�ναι, implied by the preceding sentence.

τ �υρανν�ν δ �ε ε�ω�µεν ε�γκαθεστα� ναι π ��λιν. “but we allow a tyrant city to

be established [in Greece].” ε�γκαθεστα� ναι is a perfect active infinitiveintransitive (LSJ s.v. ε�γκαθ�ιστηµι II), and “in Greece” is easily suppliedfrom the preverb ε�ν.

τ� �υς δ� ε�ν µ�ια� µ�να� ρ��υς �α�ι�υ�µεν καταλ �υειν. “We think it right to

suppress autocrats in any given single [city].”

��πως . . . �απηλλα� κται. Indirect question after �ισµεν. The subject, τα� δε,refers to the Corinthians’ conduct—namely, failure to establish freedomand allowing a tyrant city to flourish—i.e., to what has just been said. ��δεusually refers to what is to follow (Sm. §1245) but occasionally refers towhat precedes, if it has just been mentioned. Sm. §1247. Cf. Thuc. I.41.1.In the active, the verb �απαλλα� σσω means “deliver someone (acc.) fromsomething (gen.).” In the middle, it means “be released from something(gen.).” Here the meaning of the perfect middle is “be free from theimputation of” (plus the genitive). LSJ s.v. B.II.6. Hence, “we do notknow how this conduct is free from the imputation of the three greatestfailings.”

� �υ γ �αρ πεφευγ ��τες . . . µετων�µα� σται. The negative � �υ goes with theparticiple because it states a fact. Sm. §2728. “For you have not in factavoided them [the failings], and you have moved to that contempt [of anenemy] that destroys most people and that from the fact that it trips up somany, gets its name changed to the opposite meaning, namely, stupidity.”Marchant’s translation is helpful: “For it is not the case that you are freefrom these errors in assuming that contempt which has proved ruinous toso many, . . . and which from its tendency to trip men up, has receivedinstead (sc. from prudent men) the opposite name of folly.”

καταφρ ��νησις basically means “contempt, disdain for others” but heremodulates into the arrogance that underestimates an opponent’s strength.


The jingle in the opposition καταφρ ��νησις/ �αφρ�σ �υνη gives something ofan apothegmatic flavor to the sentiment.

123.1. τ�ι δει�µακρ ��τερ�ν . . . α�ιτια

�σθαι. “What need [is there] to com-

plain further about the past?”

ε� ς ��σ�ν τ�ι�ς νυ

�ν �υµφ �ερει. “so far as it helps the present.”

περ�ι δ �ε τω�ν �επειτα µελλ ��ντων. “concerning the future”—literally, “con-

cerning things that are going to be then.”

τ�ι�ς παρ�υ

�σι ��ηθ�υ

�ντας �ρ �η ε�πιταλαιπωρει

�ν. “It is necessary [for us]

to labor yet more concerning the future by preserving present resources.”��ηθ �εω here means “preserve, protect, maintain,” and the dative neuterplural participle means “what we have now.”

ε�ι �αρα πλ� �υτω� κτλ. Real condition with present, signaling an admittedfact. Hence, “given the fact that you now excel a little in . . .” Smythcategorizes such clauses as “concessive clauses.” Sm. §§2369–82. Usually,clauses that “indicate that the condition which they introduce may begranted without destroying the conclusion” are introduced by ε�ι κα�ι (Sm.§2370). Here, ε�ι �αρα is the equivalent. “ �αρα in a conditional protasisdenotes that the hypothesis is one of which the possibility has just beenrealized” (Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 37). We can translate, “notwithstandingthe fact that.” πρ�φ �ερω here means “surpass, excel” (LSJ s.v. IV.2),indicating that the Spartans have surpassed their old situation, when theirvirtue was the product of labor. Presumably, the Corinthians are referringto the fact—stated by Thucydides in I.19—that the Spartans were now atthe height of their power.

κατ �α π�λλα� goes with θαρσ�υ�ντας. Hence, “with many reasons for bold-

ness.” Sm. §1690.2c.

τ �α µ �εν φ ��ω� , τ �α δ �ε �ωφελ�ια� . I.e., on the one hand, some Greeks will joinin the struggle out of fear of Athens, whereas, on the other hand, otherswill do so out of a desire for advantage.

�ηδικηµ �εναις is feminine because of an understood σπ�νδαι�ς.

124.1. �ωστε here simply introduces the main sentence, not a subordinateresult clause. Sm. §2255. The main verb is the following imperative µ �ηµ �ελλετε—hence, “so don’t delay . . .”

Commentary 117

�υπα� ρ��ν. Neuter participle in accusative absolute, parallel with the fol-lowing genitive absolute. Sm. §2076. The participle is in the accusativeabsolute because it is impersonal with an infinitive subject. The followinggenitive absolute is personal.

ε�ιπερ �ε�αι ��τατ�ν τ �� τα �υτ �α �υµφ �ερ�ντα κα�ι π ��λεσι κα�ι �ιδι �ωταις ε�ι�ναι.

Real condition with present indicative (the missing copula ε�στ�ι) indicat-ing an admitted fact. “Given the fact that it is most secure for there to bethe same interests for both cities and individuals [i.e., for cities and indi-viduals to have the same interests].” Smyth treats this construction rathertoo briefly under “Causal Clauses.” Sm. §2246. Cf. Thuc. I.77.6. Theapodosis of this real condition is the negative imperative µ �η µ �ελλετε.

� �υ�πρ ��τερ�ν �η

�ν τ� �υναντ�ι�ν. “the opposite of which was formerly true.” In

earlier conflicts, the Dorians usually had the upper hand.

�ως � �υκ �ετι ε�νδ �ε�εται κτλ. The rest of the sentence is dependent onε�νδ �ε�εται, the verb of this causal clause, which means “since it is nolonger possible” (LSJ s.v. II.2) and is followed by two infinitive phrases assubjects.

( �ηµα�ς) περιµ �εν�νταςτ� �υς µ �εν �λα� πτεσθαιτ� �υς δ �ε µ �η πα� σ�ειν.

Hence, since “it is no longer possible, if we [all] wait around, for someof us [i.e., “us Corinthians”] to be already harmed and for others [sc., “youSpartans”] not to suffer the same soon after.” The negative µ �η with theinfinitive πα� σ�ειν presents a problem. Usually, after a negative leadingverb, a negative infinitive will have µ �η � �υ. Thus, we would expect � �υκ �ετιε�νδ �ε�εται µ �η � �υ πα� σ�ειν. Sm. §§2745–46. Occasionally, it may havesimple µ �η. Sm. §2749. But then the π�λ �υ �υστερ�ν needs a negative too.The sentence means “since it is no longer possible to avoid suffering thesame thing, and that not much later.” By a kind of anacoluthon, we mustassume that the µ �η serves both the infinitive and the adverbial phrase.Alternatively, if we had µ �η � �υ � �υ π�λ �υ �υστερ�ν, the two � �υ’s wouldcancel each other out. In any case, it seems that Thucydides is trying toavoid a train wreck of accumulated negatives here.

The second infinitive phrase has an embedded conditional clause, areal condition with future protasis, signaling something unpleasant orregrettable. Sm. §2328. Its verb, γνωσ ��µεθα, is a verb of perceptiontaking a participle in indirect discourse, which is nominative because it


refers to the subject of the leading verb. Sm. §2106. Hence, “if it comes tobe known that we have met together, on the one hand, but that we do notdare to defend ourselves, on the other hand.”

124.2. �απ� α �υτ�υ�. Understand π�λ �εµ�υ.

δι �α πλε�ι�ν�ς. “lasting a long time.” This temporal construction in attribu-tive position modifies τη

�ς . . . ε�ιρ �ηνης peace.

�αφ� �ησυ��ιας δ �ε µ �η π�λεµη�σαι � �υ� ��µ��ιως �ακ�ινδυν�ν. “But failure to shift

to war out of a desire to avoid trouble is, by the same token, not withoutrisk.” �αφ� �ησυ��ιας is not easy to translate. It is contrasted with ε�κπ�λ �εµ�υ [by reason of war], and Classen and Steup (ad loc.) suggest that�απ �� means the same as ε�κ by Thucydides’ frequent habit of variation withprepositions. But there also seems to be some flavor of reluctance to shiftfrom inactivity to action. ��µ��ιως does not really mark a direct parallelism,because Thucydides reverses field. He has the Corinthians say, “Keep youreye on eventual peace [strengthened by war], but do not let that preventyou from entering upon this necessary war. Inaction to avoid trouble is asrisky [��µ��ιως] as going to war.”

124.3. παραστησ �ωµεθα ε�πελθ ��ντες. The object of both the finite verband the participle is π ��λιν. παρ�ιστηµι here means “bring to terms, subjectto force.” LSJ s.v. C.II.1. παραστησ �ωµεθα is the sigmatic transitive aoristsubjunctive.

125.2. δεδ�γµ �εν�ν α �υτ�ι�ς. Accusative absolute. Sm. §2076B. Hence,

“the decision having been made by them.” As the postpositive µ �εν indi-cates, ε �υθ �υς goes with the next constituent, i.e., �αδ �υνατα �η

�ν.

�αδ �υνατα �η�ν ε�πι�ειρει

�ν. Thucydides often uses the neuter plural adjective

(here, �αδ �υνατα) instead of the singular in impersonal constructions, i.e.,those where an infinitive is the grammatical subject. Sm. §1052. Cf. 7.1.

καθισταµ �εν�ις �ω�ν �εδει. “to them putting in order what was necessary.”

καθισταµ �εν�ις is a dative of possession. Hence, “Their delay was . . .” Thepresent middle of καθ�ιστηµι can be transitive. LSJ s.v. A.II.2b.

ε�νιαυτ ��ς µ �εν � �υ διατρι� �η. Two nouns in a copulative sentence: “Thedelay [LSJ s.v. διατρι� �η II] was not a year.” �ελασσ�ν is neuter, rather thanfeminine to agree with διατρι� �η, because it is in fact an adverb, “more

Commentary 119

quickly [they prepared].” LSJ s.v. ε�λα� σσων V. Cf. Thuc. IV.67.2; Hdt.7.39.2. Hence, “Their delay was not a year—indeed, [they prepared] morequickly.” This has caused some puzzlement, and Gomme (ad loc.) asks, “IsThucydides stressing the delay or the comparative rapidity?” Gomme be-lieves he is stressing the delay: “in spite of their resolution that there wasto be no delay, nearly a year passed before the invasion.”

126.1. ��πως . . . ε�ιη . . . �ην µ �η τι ε�σακ� �υωσιν. Eventual condition embed-ded in a purpose clause. The original form would be �ην µ �η τι ε�σακ� �υωσιν,πρ ��φασις �εσται, (in Smyth’s terms, a future more vivid), “If ever they failto heed, there will be a pretext.” When this is embedded in a purposeclause in secondary sequence, the main verb, the future, becomes presentoptative (Sm. §2196; it would become future optative only in indirectdiscourse or after verbs of effort [Sm. §1862b]), and the subordinate “if”clause may remain unchanged. Sm. §2610 (this section refers to indirectdiscourse, but the principle applies here).

126.5. ε�αυτω��τι πρ�σ �ηκειν �,λ �υµπια νενικηκ ��τι. “that the festival of

Olympian Zeus was somehow appropriate to him because he was an Olym-pic victor.” Joined with verbs, the neuter unaccented τι means “some-what, any degree at all.” LSJ s.v. τις A.II.11c.

126.6. ε�ι δ �ε . . . “but whether . . .” This is not a condition but an indirectyes-no question after κατεν ��ησε and ε�δ �ηλ�υ.

θ �υ�υσι π�λλ �α � �υ� �ιερει�α, �αλλ� � �αγν �α� θ �υµατα ε�πι� �ωρια. “They sacrifice

many offerings, not animal victims, but bloodless cakes peculiar to thecountry.” The lexicographer Pollux, of the second century A.D ., says (1.26),“Thucydides calls them �αγν �α θ �υµατα in contrast with τ �α α�ιµα� σσ�ντα κα�ισφαττ ��µενα,” that is, “holy (bloodless) cakes in contrast with bloodyslaughtered victims.” On the evidence of Pollux, editors supply �αγν �α andinterpret it to mean “bloodless.” The scholiast to Thucydides says, “θ �υµαταε�πι� �ωρια, τιν �α π �εµµατα ε�ις � �ωων µ�ρφ �ας τετυπωµ �ενα [cakes shaped intothe forms of animals]. Editors have accepted the conjecture π�λλα� of C. F.Hermann, instead of the π�λλ��ι of the MSS, because “many people” wouldnot be consistent with πανδηµε�ι [with the whole people]. Carl (or Karl)Friedrich Hermann (1804–55), professor at Marburg and Gottingen, is tobe distinguished from the far greater Gottfried Hermann (1772–1848),professor at Leipzig.


126.8. α �υτ�κρα� τ�ρσι modifies τ�ι�ς ε�νν �εα �αρ��υσι. Thus, the nine

archons had a free hand to do whatever they chose.

φλαυρω�ς ε�ι

��ν. “were in bad shape.” This is a common idiom, �ε�ω plus

an adverb being equivalent to ε�ιµ�ι plus a predicate adjective. Sm. §1438.

κα�ι τινες κα�ι. The first κα�ι is connective, the second κα�ι an adverb intensi-fying �απ �εθν�ησκ�ν. Sm. §2881. Hence, “and some even were dying.”

126.11. ε�φ� �ω�� µηδ �εν κακ ��ν π�ι �ησ�υσιν. This clause is dependent on

�αναστ �ησαντες. ε�φ� �ω�� introduces a clause of proviso (Sm. §2279) and

means “on the condition that.” It takes future indicative (cf. Thuc.I.103.1). The negative of a clause of proviso is µ �η. Hence, “[The archons]raised them up [from their suppliant position] with the promise [proviso]that they [the archons] would do them no harm.”

ε�πιτετραµµ �εν�ι τ �ην φυλα� κην. “those entrusted with guarding [them].”ε�πιτρ �επω takes an accusative of the thing entrusted and a dative of theperson to whom it is entrusted. The middle transformation makes theoriginal dative the subject and leaves the accusative as it was.

127.1. τ�υ�τ� δ �η τ �� αγ�ς κτλ. The particle δ �η resumes the argument after

a long digression. Sm. §2846. Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 225 (13).

δη�θεν. “Expressing, not incredulity, but contempt or indignation: ‘for-

sooth’” (Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 265 f.); “commonly used of apparent orpretended truth, and mostly with an ironical tone” (Sm. §2849). Theforce of the particle makes it clear that the Spartans are only hypocriti-cally pretending to be concerned for the honor of the gods. Their realmotive is exposed in the next participial phrases.

πρ�σε� ��µεν�ν α �υτω��

. α �υτω��

refers to �αγ�ς.

τ �α �απ �� τω�ν �Αθηνα�ιων. “what they wanted from the Athenians.”

127.2. παθει�ν �αν . . . ��ισειν. The switch to the future from potential

optative (represented by the infinitive plus �αν in indirect discourse) marksthe difference between the remote possibility, which is not expected, andthe future certainty, which is expected.

τ �� µ �ερ�ς. Neuter accusative used as an adverb—hence, “partly.” Sm.§§1606, 1609.

Commentary 121

128.2. �αλκι��ικ�υ refers to a temple and statue of Athena on the Spar-tan citadel, which were made of bronze. Pausanias (the second-century A.D.author of a guidebook to Greece—not to be confused with the Spartanregent who is the subject of this story) says (3.17.2), τ ��ν τε να ��ν � µ��ιωςκα�ι τ �� αγαλµα ε�π�ι �ησαντ� �Αθηνα

�ς �αλκ�υ

�ν.

128.3. Ερµι�ν�ιδα. “from the town of Hermione”—in Argolis at thesouthern tip of the peninsula called Acte.

πρα� σσειν. Infinitive of purpose after a verb of motion ( �αφικνει�ται).

Kuhner-Gerth 2:16–17, §472A7. Sm. §2009. This construction is rare inprose, where the future participle is more usual. Sm. §2065.

128.4. �απ �� τ�υ�δε. I.e., from what is to follow in the next sentence,

introduced by γα� ρ.

128.5. α �υτ �� refers to Byzantium.

ε α� λωσαν. Third plural aorist active indicative of αλ�ισκ�µαι, “fall into anenemy’s hands, be captured.” The citation form is ε α� λων, conjugated like�εγνων. Sm. §682.

128.6. �Ερετριω�ς. Genitive singular of �Ερετριε �υς. The noun is declined

like �ασιλε �υς (Sm. §275), but in the genitive, the expected ¯ ι �εως con-tracts to ¯ ιω

�ς. For this process, see Schwyzer, 252.

129.1. �απαλλα� �αντα. “having replaced.”

ε�πιστ�λ �ην �αντεπιτ�ιθει α �υτω��

is a pregnant construction, or brachylogy.Sm. §3017. Hence, “Xerxes in response gave a letter to Artabazus [α �υτω�

�]

[with orders] to send it on [διαπ �εµψαι] to Pausanias [παρ �α Παυσαν�ιαν].”

129.3. µ �η ε�πισ� �ετω "ωστε �ανει�ναι πρα� σσειν. Although ε�πισ� �ετω might

at first seem to be a verb of hindering, it does not take the construction ofa verb of hindering, which would be a simple infinitive without "ωστε. Sm.§2038. Thus, "ωστε �ανει

�ναι is an ordinary result expression. �ανει

�ναι is the

aorist infinitive of �αν�ιηµι, “neglect.” LSJ s.v. II.7b. Hence, “let neitherday nor night hold you back, with the result [if they did] that you [would]neglect to accomplish any of the promises you made to me.” For �αν�ιηµιwith the infinitive, cf. the near parallel µεθια

�σι τ �α δ �ε�ντα πρα� ττειν at

Xen. Mem. 2.1.33.


κεκωλ �υσθω. Perfect middle imperative. The verb is used absolutely.Hence, “Let there be no hindrance due to . . .” Some would argue that thesubject of κεκωλ �υσθω is an unexpressed ταυ

�τα—hence, “Let these things

not be hindered.” It may be that the subject of κεκωλ �υσθω is the relativeclause ω

�ν ε�µ��ι υπισ�ν�η

�.

130.1. �η�ρτ�. Third singular middle indicative pluperfect of �αε�ιρω, “lift.”

Hence, “he was in a continuous state of being lifted up”; i.e., he becamepuffed up with self-regard. This precise usage is omitted from LSJ (al-though it may be implied by entry II). Cf. LSJ s.v. ε�πα�ιρω II.2 (“to beelated”).

130.2. δυσπρ ��σ�δ�ν. “unapproachable, isolated from others.”

µετ �εστη. Third singular intransitive root aorist meaning “changed itsallegiance”—to the Athenians. LSJ s.v. µεθ�ιστηµι B.I.4.

131.1. πρα� σσων τε ε�σηγγ �ελλετ� α �υτ�ι�ς. Personal construction. Hence,

“He was reported to them [the Spartans] to be scheming with the barbari-ans.” For the idiom πρα� σσειν �ες τινα, cf. LSJ s.v. πρα� σσω I.6. Some MSSread πρ ��ς τ� �υς �αρ�α� ρ�υς.

ε�ι�π�ν τ�υ

�κ �ηρυκ�ς µ �η λε�ιπεσθαι. “They ordered [him] not to lag behind

the herald.” LSJ s.v. λε�ιπω B.II.2. This means he should accompany theherald back to Sparta.

ε�ι δ �ε µ �η. “otherwise.” Sm. §2346d.

π��λεµ�ν α �υτω��Σπαρτια� τας πρ�αγ�ρε �υειν. Indirect discourse dependent

on ε�ι�π�ν. Hence, “[They said] that the Spartiates declare war on him.”

131.2. διαπρα�α� µεν�ς. “by intrigue.” LSJ s.v. IV.

132.1. $αν . . . ε� τιµωρ�υ�ντ�. Potential imperfect. Sm. §1784. Hence, “[by

trusting to which] they could have punished [such a man].” �ε�α�ιως goeswith πιστε �υ�ντες.

132.2. υπ�ψ�ιας . . . µ �η �ισ�ς �� υλεσθαι ε�ι�ναι τ�ι

�ς παρ�υ

�σι. “reasons for

suspicion, namely, to be unwilling to be equal to the current [ways ofdoing things].” Warner translates, “unwilling to abide by normal stan-dards.” The suspicion is defined by the infinitive phrase, which has a

Commentary 123

nominative predicate adjective because it refers to the subject of the mainverb (παρει

��ε). Sm. §1973. The infinitive phrase (not in indirect dis-

course, for then the negative would have been � �υ) is in apposition to thenoun υπ�ψ�ιας. Sm. §1987.

ε�ι τ�ι π�υ ε��εδεδι�η� τητ� τω�ν καθεστ �ωτων ν�µ�ιµων. “whether he had in

any way at all departed from the customary mode of life.” ε��εδεδι�η� τητ� isthe pluperfect middle of ε�κδιαιτα� ω, a denominative alpha-contract verbbased on the noun δ�ιαιτα, “way of living, mode of life.” ε�κδιαιτα� ω meansto “change one’s habits from something (gen.).” The clause is an indirectquestion after �ανεσκ ��π�υν.

κα�ι "�τι . . . �η��ιωσεν κτλ. This noun clause also follows on �ανεσκ ��π�υν.Hence, “They were examining to see whether . . . and [they were examin-ing] the fact that he had presumed . . .”

132.3. ε�δ ��κει. The subject of ε�δ ��κει is the preceding action, i.e., ε�πιγρα� -ψασθαι. �αδ�ικηµα is a predicate noun.

ε�πε�ι γε δ �η ε�ν τ� �υτω� καθειστ �ηκει. Denniston (Gr. Part.2, 245) calls thecombination ε�πε�ι γε δ �η “emphatic limitative.” By “limitative,” he meansthe “predominating use of γε” (Gr. Part.2, 140), i.e., “at least.” Hence, “atleast when he indeed got himself into this situation.” The pluperfect ofκαθ�ιστηµι, “come into a certain state, be” (LSJ s.v. B.V), has simpleimperfect meaning.

παρ ��µ�ι�ν . . . τ�η�παρ� �υσ�η διαν��ια� . “in accordance with his present

scheme.” Thus, the offense of setting up the inscription is very similar tothe arrogance of his scheming with the Persians.


However, [the action] of Pausanias seemed even then [i.e., when heset up the inscription] a crime, and once he got himself into thistrouble [Medism] at any rate, it [the inscription] appeared muchmore to have been done [then] in accord with his present attitude[of Medism].

132.5. �η��ιωσαν. The subject is the Spartans.

µ �η τα�ει�ς ε�ι

�ναι. The infinitive is in apposition to the noun τρ ��πω� . Sm.

§1987. ��υλευ�σαι is an epexegetical infinitive, functioning like an accusa-

tive of respect, qualifying the adjective τα�ει�ς. Sm. §2001.


πρ�ιν γε δ �η . . . γ�ιγνεται. “at least until, indeed.” After a negative clause,πρ�ιν means “until.” When it takes the indicative, a definite time is ex-pressed. Sm. §2432. Hence, “until [the messenger] in fact and indeedactually became an informant.”

κατ �α ε�νθ �υµησ�ιν τινα "�τι. Literally, “in accordance with some noticethat . . .” LSJ s.v. κατα� B.IV. Thucydides might have said simply ε�νθυ-µηθε�ις, “having noticed,” but this way he avoids the clash of participleswith δε�ισας.

"ινα, $ην ψευσθ�η�τη�ς δ��η

�ς $η κα�ι ε�κει

�ν ��ς τι µεταγρα� ψαι α�ιτ �ησ�η, µ �η

ε�πιγνω��

. The outermost clause here is the negative purpose clause "ινα . . .µ �η ε�π�ιγνω� [so he [Pausanias] might not find out]. Embedded in the pur-pose clause are two protases connected by the coordinating conjunction �η.$ην ψευσθ�η

�τη�ς δ��η

�ς means “if he [Argilos] ever be mistaken in his

opinion.” It is an eventual condition. Cf. LSJ s.v. ψε �υδω A.I.3 (passivewith gen.). The second protasis, $ην . . . ε�κει

�ν ��ς τι µεταγρα� ψαι α�ιτ �ησ�η,

means “if ever he [Pausanias] asked for it back to change something.”Notice that this narration is in the historical present tense. Sm. §1883.

α υτ ��ν η υ�ρεν ε�γγεγραµµ �εν�ν κτε�ινειν. “He found it written to kill him.”

The infinitive phrase α υτ ��ν κτε�ινειν is the object of the verb, and theperfect middle participle ε�γγεγραµµ �εν�ν is predicative. The infinitivephrase can also be understood as an indirect imperative, correspondingto an active construction, Παυσαν�ιαν ε�γγεγραφ ��τα α υτ ��ν κτε�ινειν—hence, “[he found that] Pausanias had written that [they] kill him.”Presumably, what stood in the letter was a direct imperative, κτε�ινετετ�υ

�τ�ν.

133.1. �απ �� παρασκευη�ς. “by arrangement.”

σκηνησαµ �εν�υ διπλη�ν διαφρα� γµατι καλ �υ�ην. “having taken up quarters

in a hut double by virtue of a partition.”

ως α �υτ ��ν. Here, ως is an “improper” preposition, i.e., a preposition that isnot used as a preverb. ως plus the accusative is used “of persons only, . . .after verbs expressing or implying motion” (Sm. §1702). Hence, “[Pausa-nias having come] to him.”

τα� τε περ�ι α �υτ�υ�. This is a misprint in the OCT. It should read α υτ�υ

�,

with a rough breathing (otherwise, it would refer to Pausanias).

Commentary 125

ως . . . παρα�α� λ�ιτ�. In the middle, παρα�α� λλω is a gambling termmeaning “throw one’s money on the table” and, hence, “put at risk,endanger.” Gomme, ad loc. LSJ (s.v. A.II.1b) cites only one late instanceof the gambling term. But cf. Thuc. II.44.3, III.14.1, III.65.3, V.113.παρα�α� λ�ιτ� and the ironic πρ�τιµηθε�ιη are optatives in indirect dis-course in secondary sequence after the leading verb �η�σθ�ντ�, through theparticiple �απ�φα�ιν�ντ�ς, which governs the ως clauses.

( ως) πρ�τιµηθε�ιη δ �ε. Ironic. By its position after παρα�α� λ�ιτ�, thisphrase marks the contrast between his service and his reward. Hence,“that he was rewarded by being chosen . . .” πρ�τιµα� ω means “to behonored before others, to be selected.” LSJ s.v. I.2. �απ�θανει

�ν is thus an

infinitive of purpose after a verb of choosing. Sm. §2009.

� �υκ ε�ω�ντ�ς ��ργ�ι%εσθαι. � �υκ ε�α� ω (with � �υ adherescent) means “forbid.”

Sm. §2692a. Hence, “told him not to be angry.”

�ανα� στασις. “safe removal from the temple.”

�α�ι�υ�ντ�ς. “begging him.”

τ �α πρασσ ��µενα. Sc., πρ ��ς �ασιλ �εα. Hence, “the business with the king.”

134.1. λ �εγεται . . . πρ�καταφυγει�ν. The backbone of this sentence is

λ �εγεται (impersonal) α �υτ ��ν γνω�ναι . . . �ωρη

�σαι . . . κα�ι πρ�καταφυγει

�ν

[The story goes that he recognized . . . and ran . . . and escaped]. α �υτ ��νµ �ελλ�ντα is the accusative subject of γνω

�ναι. The ως ε�ι

�δε clause (“as he

saw”) is dependent on the infinitive of indirect discourse, γνω�ναι. λ �εγεται

can take either a personal construction (Sm. §1982) or, as here, an imper-sonal construction (Sm. §2017b).

ε ν ��ς µ �εν τω�ν ε�φ ��ρων τ �� πρ ��σωπ�ν πρ�σ�ι�ντ�ς ως ε�ι

�δε. “as he saw the

face of one of the ephors who was approaching.”

ε �υν��ια� . “out of goodwill [toward Pausanias].”

134.2. υστ �ερησαν τ�η�δι �ω�ει. “They were too late in their pursuit.”

τ �ας θ �υρας . . . �απω� κ�δ ��µησαν. “They walled up the doors.”

�απ�λα� ��ντες. Here �απ�λαµ�α� νω has the meaning “lock in.” LSJ s.v. IV.

134.3. "ωσπερ ε�ι��εν. “just as he was.”


134.4. ως �αγ�ς . . . ��ν. Accusative absolute. Sm. §§2076, 2078. Thucydi-des uses ως with the accusative absolute many times (e.g., I.28.1). Here, itmarks that this is the judgment of the goddess. Sm. §2086d.

ως �αντ�ι Παυσαν�ι�υ. Literally, “as instead of Pausanias,” i.e., “as a substi-tute for Pausanias.”

135.1. ως . . . κρ�ιναντ�ς. Genitive absolute with ως indicating the opin-ion or pretense of the Athenians. Sm. §2086d.

135.2. �υνεπ�ητιω�ντ�. συνεπαιτια� �µαι, “accuse also in addition,” takes

the accusative of the person and the genitive of the charge. Sm. §1375.

135.3. �� ις ε�ιρητ� �αγειν "�π�υ $αν περιτ �υ�ωσιν. “to whom it had been

commanded to [take him] and bring [him to Athens] wherever they en-countered [him].” The omission of an explicit object (brachylogy) is fre-quent when it can easily be supplied from the context. Sm. §3018k. �αγειν,the pregnant construction, supposes λα�ει

�ν κα�ι �αγειν. Sm. §3044.

136.2. κατ �α π �υστιν � η��ωρ��ιη. “in accordance with inquiry where he

went.” � η��ωρ��ιη is an indirect question in secondary sequence (Sm.

§2677) after the noun π �υστιν. It is in secondary sequence because theformally present tenses of the main verbs are semantically historical. Sm.§§1883, 1858.

καταλυ�σαι. καταλ �υω παρα� τινα means “seek hospitality from someone,

go and lodge with someone.” LSJ s.v. II.2.

136.4. � �υκ �α�ι�ι�

. . . φε �υγ�ντα τιµωρει�σθαι. �α�ι ��ω (with � �υ adher-

escent) means “he [Themistocles] regards it as unworthy.” Sm. §§2691,2692a. Some prefer to translate, “begged him not to.” In the middle,τιµωρ �εω means “take vengeance on someone (acc.).” LSJ s.v. I.3.

ε�ι τι �αρα α �υτ ��ς �αντει�πεν α �υτω�

��Αθηνα�ιων δε�µ �ενω� . Real condition in

the past tense, signaling an actuality. Hence, “given the fact, after all, thathe himself [Themistocles] had denied him [Admetus] something when he[Admetus] made a request of the Athenians.” �αρα marks the protasis assomething only just realized (“if after all”). Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 37 f.The scholiast reports that Admetus had asked for an alliance with theAthenians and that Themistocles was instrumental in turning him down.

Commentary 127

κα�ι γ �αρ $αν υπ� ε�κε�ιν�υ π�λλω��ασθενεστ �ερ�υ ε�ν τω�

�παρ ��ντι κακω

�ς

πα� σ�ειν is indirect discourse, even though there is no explicit verb ofsaying. Sm. §2630. It is a potential optative in indirect discourse with �ανand the infinitive. Sm. §1845. ε�κε�ιν�υ is a genitive of comparison after�ασθενεστ �ερ�υ, the object of υπ ��. The meaning as the OCT has it is “he[Themistocles] might be the victim of one far weaker than he [Admetus]”;i.e., Themistocles was at anyone’s mercy (Gomme, ad loc.). Some editors(Stahl and Hude) conjecture �ασθεν �εστερ�ς, which would give the mean-ing “he [Themistocles], being weaker [than Admetus], would be treatedbadly by him [Admetus]”; i.e., Admetus would be treating a weaker manbadly. This then leads logically to the next sentiment, that it is ignoble totake vengeance on those weaker than you are.

α �υτ ��ς � Themistocles; ε�κε�ινω� � Admetus.

�ρε�ιας τιν ��ς . . . κα�ι � �υκ ε�ς τ �� σω�µα σ �ω� %εσθαι ε�ναντιωθη

�ναι. ε�ναντι ��-

µαι is a passive deponent in the aorist and takes a dative of the personopposed (ε�κε�ινω� ) and a genitive of the matter opposed (�ρε�ιας τιν ��ς).The construction with ε�ναντιωθη

�ναι changes from a genitive to the

logically parallel prepositional phrase plus the articular infinitive. Withthe accusative, ε� ς means “in regard to.” LSJ s.v. IV.2. Hence, “that he[Themistocles] opposed him [Admetus] in regard to some request of his[Admetus], but not in regard to saving his life [body].”

ε�ιπω�ν υφ� ω

�ν κα�ι ε�φ� ω

�� δι �ωκεται is parenthetical and not part of the

indirect discourse. ε�ιπω�ν is nominative because it agrees with the subject

of the preceding δηλ�ι�

(i.e., Themistocles).

σωτηρ�ιας $αν τη�ς ψυ�η

�ς. The �αν after ε�κει

�ν�ν δ �ε, which marks the

infinitive ( �απ�στερη�σαι) representing a potential optative, is repeated

after the parenthesis. σωτηρ�ιας τη�ς ψυ�η

�ς [saving of his life] is synony-

mous with τ �� σω�µα σ �ω� %εσθαι. It is genitive after �απ�στερ �εω, which

should take both a genitive of the object and an accusative of the person;but by brachylogy (Sm. §3018k), the accusative is omitted, since it is clearfrom the object in the protasis, ε�ι ε�κδ��ιη α �υτ ��ν. LSJ s.v. �απ�στερ �εω; Sm.§1630.

137.1. � δ �ε. The δ �ε changes the subject to Admetus.

��υλ ��µεν�ν. I.e., Themistocles, since he wanted to make his way to theking. This is a causal participle. Sm. §2064.


τ �ην ε τ �εραν θα� λασσαν. I.e., the Aegean. The Molossi lived near theAdriatic coast, around Dodona.

137.2. ε�ι µ �η σ �ωσει . . . ε�ρει�ν. Real condition with futures in both

halves—i.e., a minatory-monitory condition in indirect discourse, embody-ing a threat, which is embedded in indirect discourse after �εφη. Sm. §2328.

τ �ην δ �ε �ασφαλε�ιαν . . . γ �ενηται. The whole sentence is in implied indirectdiscourse. �ασφαλε�ιαν is the subject of the copulative infinitive ε�ι

�ναι, and

the infinitive phrase µηδ �εν ε�κ�η�ναι serves as the predicate noun. Hence,

“[He said] that [his] safety consisted in no one disembarking from the shipuntil such time as the voyage is resumed.”

πειθ�µ �ενω� . Conditional participle. Hence, “if he obeyed.” Sm. §2067.

�απ�σαλε �υσας. “lying at anchor in the roadstead.” The simple verbσαλε �υω means “to be tossed about”—hence, “ride at anchor.”

υπε �ρ τ�υ�στατ�π �εδ�υ. “some distance from the Athenian squadron.”

When used of ships, υπ �ερ means “off a place.” LSJ s.v. A.I.1b. στατ ��-πεδ�ν here means a naval squadron. LSJ s.v. II.

137.3. ε�θερα� πευσε. “conciliated.” LSJ s.v. II.2.

κα� τω . . . �ανω. In the context of dry land, κα� τω means “toward thecoast,” and �ανω means “inland.” Hence, “one of the coastal Persians.”

137.4. "�τι may introduce direct discourse and function like quotationmarks. Sm. §2590a.

"�σ�ν . . . �αµυν ��µην. “for so long as I defended myself out of necessityagainst your father when he attacked me.”

ε�µ��ι . . . ε�κε�ινω� . Datives of advantage and disadvantage after ε�γ �ενετ�.Sm. §1481. Hence, “the retreat happened safely for me and dangerouslyfor him.” LSJ s.v. γ�ιγν�µαι I.3. ε�ν τω�

��ασφα� λει and ε�ν ε�πικινδ �υνω� are

adverbial phrases.

πα� λιν goes with �απ�κ�µιδ �η. Hence, “the retreat back [to Persia].”

γρα� ψας . . . δια� λυσιν. This parenthesis is a comment of Thucydides anddoes not form part of the letter. The participle is loosely connected toε�δηλ�υ

� η γραφ �η by a slight anacoluthon. Cf. Thuc. I.87.2.

Commentary 129

138.2. α �υτω��

. I.e., Artaxerxes.

πρ� &υπα� ρ��υσαν �α��ιωσιν. “his previously existing reputation.”

�απ �� τ�υ�πει

�ραν διδ� �υς �υνετ ��ς φα�ινεσθαι. “from the fact that he ap-

peared intelligent and capable as he [regularly] gave proof.” He gave proofconstantly of his capacity, and from the resulting appearance of intelli-gence, he became great among the Persians. διδ� �υς and �υνετ ��ς arenominative because they refer to the omitted subject of the infinitive,which is the same as the subject of the main verb, γ�ιγνεται. Sm. §1973.

138.3. διαφερ ��ντως τι. “rather preeminently, rather specially.” The in-definite τι with adverbs (e.g., �αγαν τι, πα� νυ τι) “may strengthen orweaken an assertion, apologize for a comparison, and in general qualify astatement” (Sm. §1268). Stahl argued that the expression went with theµα

�λλ�ν ε τ �ερ�υ—hence, “rather markedly more than anyone else.” Oth-

ers take it with θαυµα� σαι.

ε� ς α �υτ �� refers to the preceding, namely, his appearing to be intelligent.

θαυµα� σαι. An epexegetical infinitive (accusative of respect) with theadjective �α�ι�ς, specifying in what respect the adjective is true. Greekuses an active infinitive where English expects a passive. Hence, “worthywith respect to admiring” (the English parallel would be “worthy of beingadmired”). Sm. §§1712, 2006.

ε� ς α �υτ �ην. “with respect to it [� �υνεσιν].” Hence, “without advance study tobenefit his native understanding, nor with subsequent second thoughts.”Marchant (ad loc.) explains it thus: “his opinion was not based on previ-ous knowledge, nor, after giving it, had he to modify it because he foundhe was wrong.” Some argue that these participles refer specifically to thetime before he entered politics (πρ�µαθ �ων) and to the time once he hadentered politics (ε�πιµαθ �ων)—hence, “without previous education beforehe entered politics and without having to take advice from others once hehad entered politics.”

γν �ωµων γν �ωµ�ν�ς. “a judge, interpreter.”

ε�ικα� στης. “a guesser, diviner.”

κρι�ναι ικανω

�ς � �υκ �απ �ηλλακτ�. “he was not removed from judging compe-

tently.” In this litotes, �απ �ηλλακτ� is the pluperfect middle of �απαλλα� σω,


signifying a continuous state in the past. Sm. §1952. LSJ s.v. B.II.6.Lattimore translates, “he was not incapacitated from judging accurately.”

α �υτ�σ�εδια� %ειν. “speak offhand, extemporaneously, improvise.”

138.6. ως ε�π�ι πρ�δ�σ�ια� φε �υγ�ντ�ς. “on the grounds that he was exiledon a charge of treason.” φε �υγ�ντ�ς is a genitive of possession with ��στα

�,

and the participle is introduced by ως to indicate that this is the ground ofbelief of the Athenians. Sm. §2086. Cf. LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι B.III.1.

139.1. πρ� �υλεγ�ν . . . καθελ�υ�σι µ �η $αν γ�ιγνεσθαι π ��λεµ�ν. µ �η $αν γ�ιγνε-

σθαι is a potential optative in indirect discourse. καθελ�υ�σι, a condi-

tional participle, refers to the Athenians and is a dative with γ�ιγνεσθαι,meaning “to happen to someone.” καθαιρ �εω here means “repeal, re-scind.” LSJ s.v. II.4. In direct discourse, this would have been a potentialcondition: ε�ι καθ �ελ�ιτε, � �υκ $αν γ �εν�ιτ� υµι

�ν π ��λεµ�ς. The usual explana-

tion for the fact that the negative of the infinitive is here µ �η (instead ofthe expected � �υ) is that πρ� �υλεγ�ν has the flavor of a command: theindirect command would be πρ� �υλεγ�ν µ �η γ�ιγνεσθαι. The two meanings,potential and imperative, seem to have become mixed. Cf. Thuc. I.140.4,V.49.5, VI.102.4; Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, §685.

139.2. ε�πικαλ�υ�ντες. ε�πικαλ �εω means “bring an accusation of some

transgression (acc.) against someone (dat.).” LSJ s.v. IV.1.

ε�περγασ�ιαν. “encroachment.” “The ‘sacred land’ was on the borders ofthe Megarid and Attica and sacred to the Goddesses of Eleusis. The‘undefined land,’ not further specified here, was apparently some stripbetween the two territories which it had been agreed to leave neutral”(Gomme, ad loc.).

139.3. �αφει�τε. Second plural root aorist optative of �αφ�ιηµι.

γν �ωµας σφ�ισιν α �υτ�ι�ς πρ�υτ�ιθεσαν. Literally, “they proposed opinions

to themselves.” LSJ s.v. πρ�τ�ιθηµι II.4. πρ�τιθ �εναι γν �ωµας became atechnical term meaning “hold a debate.” Cf. Thuc. III.36.5.

139.4. ε�π� �αµφ ��τερα [on both sides] is explained by the three ως �ρ �ηclauses meaning “to go to war or not to let the Megarian Decree be animpediment to peace but to rescind it.” The �ρ �η is omitted in the secondand third clauses by brachylogy. Sm. §3017.

Commentary 131

140.1. τη�ς µ �εν γν �ωµης . . . �ε��µαι. In the middle and with the genitive,

�ε�ω means “cling to, hold to.” LSJ s.v. C.I.2.

τ �ας γν �ωµας τρεπ�µ �εν�υς. Participle in indirect discourse after a verb ofknowing. Sm. §2106. Strictly, “being changed with respect to theiropinions”—hence, “change their opinion.”

δικαι ��ω. “call on, urge, demand as a right.” This verb, somewhat strongerthan the usual �α�ι ��ω, takes an infinitive of will and desire (which is reallyan indirect imperative)—here, ��ηθει

�ν. Sm. §1992a. Hence, “I call on

those of you who are persuaded to support the common decisions.” Thedirect form would be ��ηθει

�τε.

$ην �αρα τι κα�ι σφαλλ �ωµεθα. Eventual condition embedded within the δικα-ιω�

clause. �αρα τι marks what is undesirable. Sm. §2796. κα�ι means “even.”Hence, “Even if in some way [which I hope will not happen] we fail.”

µ �ηδε κατ�ρθ�υν�τας τη

�ς �υν �εσεως µεταπ�ιει

�σθαι is parallel to ��ηθει

�ν

after δικαιω�

and means “or otherwise not to claim some share of thecredit for wisdom if we succeed.” LSJ s.v. µεταπ�ι �εω II (middle withgenitive). Logically, κατ�ρθ�υν

�τας is parallel with the $ην σφαλλ �ωµεθα

clause; but grammatically, there is an anacoluthon. It cannot be theaccusative subject of µεταπ�ιει

�σθαι, which is implied from the �αναπειθ�-

µ �εν�υς. Classen and Steup (ad loc.) say there is an unmarked change ofsubject. Perhaps it can be regarded as an accusative absolute. Sm. §2078a.


And I call on those of you who are persuaded [by me] to support thedecisions made in common, even if [god forbid] we fail, or otherwise[I call on you] not to claim a share of the credit for intelligence whenwe succeed.

ε�νδ �ε�εται. “it is possible” (impersonal). Hence, “for it is possible for thecontingency of events to proceed no less irrationally than even humanplans.”

140.2. ε�ιρηµ �εν�ν. I.e., stipulated in the Thirty Years’ Truce.

δ�ικας . . . διδ ��ναι κα�ι δ �ε�εσθαι. “to make an offer of arbitration and toaccept an offer of arbitration.”

ε�πιτα� σσ�ντες �ηδη κα�ι � �υκ �ετι α�ιτι �ωµεν�ι. “giving orders now [like su-periors] and no longer making requests [like equals].” The temporal


expressions �ηδη and � �υκ �ετι mark a change in the Spartan attitude.Crawley translates, “dropping the tone of expostulation and adoptingthat of command.”

140.4. $αν π�λεµει�ν . . . ε�ι . . . µ �η καθ �ελ�ιµεν. Potential condition in

indirect discourse after ν�µ�ι%ω.

"�περ µα� λιστα πρ� �υ��νται, ε�ι καθαιρεθε�ιη, µ �η $αν γ�ιγνεσθαι τ ��ν π ��λε-µ�ν. The antecedent of "�περ is ψ�ηφισµα, and the relative is the subject ofκαθαιρεθε�ιη, which is the verb of the protasis of an embedded potentialcondition in indirect discourse after πρ� �υ��νται. Hence (somewhat clum-sily for English), “if which should be repealed, they claim particularly thatthere would be no war.” µ �η �αν instead of � �υκ �αν is peculiar. See 139.1.

µ �ηδε . . . υπ�λ�ιπησθε. Prohibitive subjunctive (Sm. §1840) parallel to thepreceding µ �η ν�µ�ισ�η. Hence, “Do not have any lingering thought ofregret.”

ως δι �α µικρ ��ν ε�π�λεµ �ησατε. This clause gives the putative reason forregret. Sm. §§2240–41. δι �α µικρ ��ν [over a trivial matter] refers to theMegarian Decree.

140.5. τ �� γ �αρ �ρα� �υ τι τ�υ�τ� [for this little something] picks up the δι �α

µικρ ��ν from the previous sentence. Thus, the little matter of the Megar-ian Decree is the testing ground of the Athenians’ resolve.

�� ις refers to the Spartans.

ε�ι �υγ�ωρ �ησετε . . . ε�πιτα�θ �ησεσθε. Minatory-monitory condition (or“emotional future”). Sm. §2328.

ως . . . υπακ� �υσαντες. Here, ως occurs with the participle to give theground of belief—i.e., what the Spartans believe were the Athenians’reasons. Sm. §2086.

πρ�σφ �ερεσθαι. “behave toward” (plus the dative). LSJ, s.v. πρ�σφ �ερωB.I.4. Here, the infinitive phrase acts as a noun, the object of κατα-στ �ησαιτε. Hence, “By standing firm, you would establish the clear prin-ciple of [their] behaving toward you on an equal basis.” Sm. §1990.

141.1. διαν� �ηθητε. διαν� �ε�µαι (always present middle deponent in earlywriters) is passive deponent in the aorist. Here, the aorist passive impera-tive has the meaning “decide, make a decision to.”

Commentary 133

δ �υναται. When applied to words, the verb δ �υναµαι is translated “means,signifies” and takes the accusative. LSJ s.v. II.3.

δικα�ιωσις. “demand based on a claim of right.”

πρ �� δ�ικης. “instead of negotiation or arbitration.”

τ �ην γα �ρ α �υτ �ην . . . ε�πιτασσ�µ �ενη. “A demand from equals imposed onothers instead of arbitration, whether very great or very small, means thesame slavery”; i.e., slavery is the result whether the demand is trivial orimportant. For τ�ι

�ς π �ελας, cf. 32.4.

141.2. γνω�τε has two objects, τ �α δ �ε τ�υ

�π�λ �εµ�υ and the ως clause.

Hence, “Listen in detail and know our war resources and that we willpossess [resources] no weaker than what belongs to the other side.” Gram-matically, τ �α δ �ε τ�υ

�π�λ �εµ�υ is the object of γνω

�τε, but because it kicks

off the sentence, it has the flavor of an accusative of respect—hence,“Regarding the matters of the war . . .”

141.4. �απ �� τω�ν �ιδ�ιων τε "αµα �απ ��ντες κα�ι �απ �� τω

�ν α υτω

�ν δαπανω

�ντες

κα�ι πρ�σ �ετι κα�ι θαλα� σσης ε�ιργ ��µεν�ι. Causal participles. Sm. §2064.Hence, “since to mount naval or land campaigns takes them away fromtheir farms and costs their own money and [since] they are barred from thesea [by Athenian naval power].”

141.5. α ι δ �ε περι�υσ�ιαι τ� �υς π�λ �εµ�υς µα�λλ�ν $η α ι ��ιαι�ι ε�σφ�ρα�ι

�αν �ε��υσιν. “Surpluses [of money], rather than forced taxation, sustainwars.” The Athenians have accumulated a war chest, whereas the Spar-tans will be forced to raise money by special assessments.

τ �� µ �εν πιστ ��ν . . . πρ�αναλ �ωσειν. Τ�� µ �εν refers to σω�µα, τ �� δ �ε to �ρη

�µα.

The adjectives πιστ ��ν and � �ε�αι�ν are predicative. Hence, “having intheir bodies something that is reliable, but having in their money some-thing that is insecure.” The infinitives are accusatives of respect, specifyingin what respect bodies are reliable and in what respect money is not. ε�κ τω

�ν

κινδ �υνων κ $αν περιγεν �εσθαι means “[reliable] in the fact that it wouldsurvive [from out of] the dangers.” �ανmarks this infinitive as a transformedpotential optative. The infinitive phrase µ �η � �υ πρ�αναλ �ωσειν has µ �η � �υbecause of the preceding negative in � �υ � �ε�αι�ν. Sm. §§2745–47. Hence,“[not secure] with respect to its not going to be spent before [the war isover]”; i.e., it is not sure that it will not be spent.


141.6. µ �η πρ ��ς � µ��ιαν �αντιπαρασκευ �ην. The negative µ �η has the forceof ε�ι µ �η, “except.” Sm. §2346a. It negates the πρ ��ς � µ��ιαν �αντιπαρα-σκευ �ην—hence, “except against similar counterpreparations,” i.e., exceptagainst an enemy with the same resources as themselves.

"�ταν. “so long as.” "�ταν usually introduces a general temporal clause, butit seems to have causal meaning here; i.e., the Peloponnesians are inca-pable so long as they do not meet emergencies by means of using a singleunified council and so long as each contingent consults its own interest.But “so long as” drifts over into “since.” µ �ητε goes with ε�πιτελω

�σι (not

with the participle) and is matched in the positive by πα� ντες τε. By aconstructio ad sensum, “all” becomes “each,” and the verb is singular with"εκαστ�ς σπε �υδ�η.

φιλει�µηδ �εν. The verb is impersonal—in the sense “it usually happens”—

with γ�ιγνεσθαι. LSJ s.v. φιλ �εω II.2. The infinitive phrase µηδ �εν ε�πιτελ �εςγ�ιγνεσθαι, then, is the grammatical subject of φιλει

�, and the regular

negative for an infinitive not in indirect discourse is µ �η. Sm. §2711.

141.7. �ρ ��νι�ι. “at infrequent intervals, rarely.”

ε�ν �ρα�ει�µ �εν µ�ρ�ιω� . “a small portion [of the time of any meeting

together].” The preposition ε�ν serves also for τω��δ �ε πλε�ι�νι (µ�ρ�ιω� ).

παρ �α τ �ην ε αυτ�υ��αµ �ελειαν. παρα� here means “resulting from, owing to,” a

sense used specifically of the margin by which an event occurs, i.e., the suffi-cient cause. LSJ s.v. C.III.7. Hence, “Each one does not think that therewill be harm owing to his own negligence.” �λα� ψειν is used absolutely.

µ �ελειν δ �ε τινι κα�ι �αλλω� υπ �ερ ε αυτ�υ�τι πρ�ι&δει

�ν continues the indirect

discourse. Still after ��ιεται. “but [thinks] that it is the concern of someoneelse, in his stead, to look after anything.” υπ �ερ means “except for, insteadof.” LSJ s.v. A.II.2. For the position of κα�ι, cf. Thuc. I.70.1.

τω��α �υτω�

� υπ �� απα� ντων �ιδ�ια� δ��α� σµατι. “by means of the same opinion

[being held] on a private basis by everybody.” �ιδ�ια� is adverbial. The “sameopinion” is the notion that just preceded, namely, that it is somebodyelse’s responsibility to be concerned with the common purpose.

"ωστε . . . λανθα� νειν τ �� κ�ιν ��ν αθρ ��ν φθειρ ��µεν�ν. λανθα� νειν takes thesupplementary participle φθειρ ��µεν�ν (it behaves like τυγ�α� νω with theparticiple). Sm. §2096. Hence, “with the result that it escapes [their]

Commentary 135

notice that the common purpose is being corrupted as a whole.” αθρ ��ν ispredicative.

142.1. (�ταν here has causal meaning. Cf. 141.6.

σ��λ�η�

is the opposite of τα� �υ. Hence, “so long as they delay by providingit slowly.”

µενετ��ι. Verbal adjective built on µ �ενω. Such adjectives in ¯τ�¯ areusually passive, but this one is active. Sm. §472c. Hence, “Opportunitiesdo not wait around.”

142.2. ε�πιτε�ι�εσις. This noun and the verb ε�πιτει��ι%ω refer to buildinga fortified position within the enemy’s boundaries (as the Spartans eventu-ally did at Decelea). The adjective �α�ι�ν agrees with the nearer of the twoelements. Sm. §1030.

142.3. τ �ην µ �εν γ �αρ . . . �αντεπιτετει�ισµ �ενων. τ �ην should refer to ε�πιτε-�ι�εσις; then, π ��λιν �αντ�ιπαλ�ν would be in apposition to it, and thesentence would read “it is difficult to prepare a fortification in enemyterritory—that is, an opponent city—even in peacetime.” �αντ�ιπαλ�ςmeans “equal to an opponent” and here seems to mean something like “acity to balance in opposition.” But it makes no sense that such a “city”should be constructed in peacetime, so we must take the term “city” to bea kind of exaggeration. The �η

�of �η

�π�υ δ �η is asseverative, and the combina-

tion, meaning “indeed, forsooth,” is used to mark an a fortiori argument.Denniston, Gr. Part.2, 281. Hence, “indeed far more difficult in wartime.”The a fortiori argument has, then, a further emphasis, � �υ� η

�σσ�ν ε�κε�ι-

ν�ις—hence, “and no less [difficult] for them [the Spartans] when wehave established fortified positions in their territory in return.” Gomme(ad loc.) takes τ �ην as standing for ε�πιτε�ι�εσις and as the object ofπαρασκευα� σασθαι (which he reads), and he proposes the emendation�πρ ��ς� π ��λιν �αντ�ιπαλ�ν. He translates, “it is a difficult matter to carry outan ε�πιτε�ι�εσις against a city of equal strength even in peacetime, letalone in war.” The interpretation of this passage remains obscure.

142.4. ε�ι π�ι �ησ�νται . . . �λα� πτ�ιεν �αν. Mixed condition. The protasis isa real condition with future, and the apodosis is a potential optative.Hence, “If they really intend to establish a garrison, they would harm[only] some part of the land.”


καταδρ�µαι�ς κα�ι α �υτ�µ�λ�ιαις. “by incursions and by [encouraging] deser-

tions.” α �υτ�µ�λ�ια refers here to the desertions of runaway slaves.

� �υ� ικαν ��ν �εσται ε�πιτει��ι%ειν τε κωλ �υειν. The basic construction is � �υ� ικαν ��ν �εσται κωλ �υειν ηµα

�ς, and κωλ �υειν is followed by the two infini-

tives ε�πιτει��ι%ειν and �αµ �υνεσθαι, which are connected by τε . . . κα�ι.Sm. §1993. πλε �υσαντας modifies ηµα

�ς. Hence, “it [i.e., the Spartan garri-

son] is not enough to prevent us from sailing to their territory, buildingfortifications [there], and attacking with our navy, which is our strength.”�αµ �υνεσθαι here means not just “defend ourselves” but, rather, “retaliate.”LSJ s.v. B.II.

142.5. πλ �ε�ν γ �αρ ηµει�ς �ε��µεν κτλ. It is necessary to sort out the geni-

tives. ε�µπειρ�ιας goes with πλ �ε�ν to mean “more experience.” Sm. §1314.The brachylogy τ�υ

�κατ �α γη

�ν (π�λ �εµ�υ) defines ε�µπειρ�ια. Hence, “we

have more of experience of [warfare] on land out of naval [warfare]than . . .” Then, by change of construction, ε�µπειρ�ια . . . ε� ς τ �α ναυτικ �αmeans “experience toward naval matters.” Hence, “we have more experi-ence of land warfare as a result of [our experience] in naval [warfare] thanthey have experience of naval [warfare] from their [experience] of land[warfare].”

142.7. ε��ε�ιργασθε. Second plural perfect middle of ε��εργα� %�µαι. Hence,“you have not reached a state of complete accomplishment.”

πρ�σ �ετι � �υδ �ε µελετη�σαι ε�ασ ��µεν�ι. “and in addition not even being

allowed to practice.”

142.8. πλ �ηθει �αµαθ�ιαν θρασ �υν�ντες. “making their ignorance bold bymeans of their [momentarily superior] number.” The argument is thatagainst a small squadron, the Spartans might risk an encounter.

πρ ��ς ��λ�ιγας ε�φ�ρµ� �υσας. Supply ναυ�ς. Sm. §1027b. ε�φ�ρµ �εω means

“lie at anchor, blockade”—not to be confused with ε�φ�ρµα� ω, “attack.”

ε�ν τω��µ �η µελετω

�ντι. Neuter participle with article serving as an abstract

noun. Hence, “in their lack of practice.” Sm. §1153b.N2.

142.9. τ �ε�νης ε�στ�ιν. “is a matter of skill.” τ �ε�νης is a so-called pregnantgenitive. Cf. 83.2. Smyth calls such a construction a “genitive of quality.”Sm. §1320.

Commentary 137

��ταν τ �υ�η. “whenever it chances, casually.”

ε�κ παρ �εργ�υ. “in spare time.”

µηδ �εν ε�κε�ινω πα� ρεργ�ν �αλλ� γ�ιγνεσθαι is the subject of ε�νδ �ε�εται.µηδ �εν is a redundant negative. Sm. §2739 ff. Hence, “It is not possible forthere to be any other spare-time activity with it [naval expertise].” Thus,learning naval warfare is a full-time job, which cannot be practiced as ahobby, and indeed, when practiced full-time, it leaves no time for any-thing else.

143.1. ε�ι τε κα�ι. τε links this condition with those that have gone before.κα�ι here means “also.” Hence, “And if they also . . .” Denniston, Gr.Part.2, 305.

κιν �ησαντες τω�ν . . . �ρηµα� των. Κιν �εω plus the genitive means “apply

something (here, the money) to an alien purpose.” LSJ s.v. I.2. Cf. Thuc.II.24.1, VI.70.4. τω

�ν α �υτω

�ν �ρηµα� των is a partitive genitive.

µ �η ��ντων . . . µετ��ικων. Genitive absolute with negative µ �η serving as asecond protasis. Hence, “If they should try . . . and if we were notequal . . . it would be terrible.” The first protasis, ε�ι with optative, ispotential; the second is in the form of a genitive absolute representing acontrary-to-fact protasis; and the apodosis, imperfect plus �αν, is contrary-to-fact. Embedded in the µ �η ��ντων genitive absolute is the circumstantialparticiple ε�σ�α� ντων, signifying means. Sm. §2063. Hence, “if we werenot equal by means of going aboard ourselves and our metics goingaboard.” Thus, the Athenians argue that without the foreign mercenaries(τ� �υς � �εν�υς), they have enough among themselves and their metics todo the job. The α �υτω

�ν stands for �ηµω

�ν α �υτω

�ν.

τ ��δε τε �υπα� ρ�ει. I.e., the fact that the Athenians are equal ( �αντ�ιπαλ�ι).��δε usually looks forward (meaning “the following”) but can occasionallyrefer backward to something just mentioned. Sm. §1247.

143.2. ε�π�ι τω�κινδ �υνω . “on condition of the risk.” LSJ s.v. ε�π�ι B.III.3.

δ �ε�αιτ�. δ �ε��µαι, occurring here with the infinitives φε �υγειν and �υνα-γων�ι�εσθαι, means “accept the offer to, decide to, prefer to.” LSJ s.v. I.1.

τ �ην . . . α�υτ�υ�

[π ��λιν] φε �υγειν. “be exiled from his own city.” Sm.§1027b.


��λ�ιγων �ηµ �ερων . . . δ ��σεως. δ ��σεως is the object of the preposition�ενεκα. µεγα� λ�υ µισθ�υ

�is an objective genitive dependent on δ ��σις—

hence, “a gift of a large wage.” ��λ�ιγων �ηµ �ερων is a genitive of measure(Sm. §1325) dependent on µισθ�υ

�—hence, “a gift of a large wage of a few

days.” It is unusual for �ενεκα to precede its object (Sm. §1665a), but seeThuc. I.57.4.

143.3. τ �α δ �ε �ηµ �ετερα . . . �απηλλα� �θαι (δ�κει�). �απηλλα� �θαι is the mid-

dle perfect infinitive of �απαλλα� σσω, which here means “escape, avoid, befree of a charge.” LSJ s.v. B.II.6. Hence, “Our situation seems to be free ofthe [difficulties] with which I have charged them.”

� �υκ �απ �� τ�υ��ισ�υ. “not equally [but far better].” This litotes refers here to

the superior Athenian navy.

143.4. κα�ι � �υκ �ετι ε�κ τ�υ��µ��ι�υ �εσται . . . κα�ι. “will turn out to be more

serious . . . than.” The argument is that if the Spartans invade the Athe-nians’ land, the Athenians will attack by sea, and the devastation of partof the Peloponnesus will be more serious to the Spartans strategically thanthe devastation of all of Attica would be to Athens. For κα�ι as a compara-tive particle, see Sm. §2875.

�αντιλα�ει�ν. “take as a substitute.” �αλλην stands for �αλλην γη

�ν. Sm.

§1027b.

143.5. ��τι ε�γγ �υτατα τ� �υτ�υ διαν�ηθ �εντας. “putting ourselves in a frameof mind as close as possible to this [idea]”—sc., that the Athenians wereislanders. Sm. §§345, 1086.

�αφει�ναι. Aorist active infinitive of �αφ�ιηµι.

�ρ �η . . . ��ργισθ �εντας . . . µ �η διαµα� �εσθαι. “It is necessary that you notfight out of anger.”

π�λλω�πλει ��σι modifies Πελ�π�ννησ�ι�ις and means “who are more nu-

merous by far.”

κρατ �ησαντες . . . πρ�απ ��λλυται. κρατ �ησαντες is a conditional participle.Sm. §2067. Hence, “For if we win, we will fight again against undimin-ished numbers [because fighting the Peloponnesians on land gives theman inexhaustible advantage of numbers].” κα�ι !ην σφαλω

�µεν is parallel

with the conditional participle—hence, “And if we lose . . .” τ �α τω�ν

Commentary 139

�υµµα� �ων . . . πρ�σαπ ��λλυται means “our allies will be lost in addition.”πρ�σαπ ��λλυται, though present, is parallel with the future µα��υ

�µεθα

and has future force. “The present is used instead of the future in state-ments of what is immediate, likely, certain, or threatening” (Sm. §1879).τ �α τω

�ν �υµµα� �ων refers back to �αλλα � �υκ �απ �� τ�υ

��ισ�υ µεγα� λα in

I.143.3—hence, “the great advantages of [having] allies.”

τ �ην τε ��λ ��φυρσιν µ �η . . . π�ιει�σθαι (�ρ �η). This negative infinitive is

dependent on the preceding �ρ �η. Hence, “It is necessary to make lamenta-tion not over houses and land but, rather, over [the loss of] men.”

α �υτα� . I.e., fields and houses.

144.1. �αρ� �ην τε µ �η ε�πικτα�σθαι �αµα π�λεµ�υ

�ντες. “not to add to the

empire during the war.” Sm. §2081.

α �υθαιρ �ετ�υς. “self-chosen, self-incurred, brought on oneself.”

144.2. ε�ν �αλλω λ ��γω �αµα τ�ι�ς �εργ�ις. “in another speech when events

warrant”—literally, “at the time of the events.” Sm. §1701.

�ενηλασ�ιας. Curiously, this is mentioned here for the first time. TheSpartans expelled non-Spartans from Lacedaemon from time to time. Cf.Xen. Lac. 14.4; Ar. Av. 1013–16.

��υτε γ �αρ ε�κει�ν� κωλ �υει ε�ν ται

�ς σπ�νδαι

�ς ��υτε τ ��δε. � �υ κωλ �υει is equiva-

lent to � �υδ �εν κωλ �υει. Hence, “nothing in the truce forbids either this orthat.” τ ��δε refers to the Megarian Decree, ε�κει

�ν� to �ενηλασ�ια. Ordi-

narily, ε�κει�ν� refers to the more remote matter mentioned (Sm. §1261),

which would here be the Megarian Decree, mentioned first. But in thisinstance, ε�κει

�ν� seems to refer to the policy of the more remote state,

namely, Sparta, while τ ��δε refers to the policy of the nearer Athenians.

ε�ι κα�ι α �υτ�ν ��µ�υς �ε��ντες ε�σπεισα� µεθα. Real condition (not contrary-to-fact) in the past. Hence, “if [in fact] we made the truce while havingthem autonomous.” English would prefer to reverse the emphasis and say,“if in fact they were autonomous at the time we made the truce.” Thepoint is, of course, ironic.

µ �η σφ�ισι ε�πιτηδε�ιως α �υτ�ν�µει�σθαι. “to be autonomous not in a manner

convenient to themselves”—i.e., ironically, whenever the Spartans lettheir cities become democratic instead of oligarchical. The scholiast argues


that the τ�ι�ς Λακεδαιµ�ν�ι�ις of the MSS is no more than a gloss on σφ�ισι

that has crept from the margin into the text.

�αλλ� α �υτ�ι�ς ε�κα� στ�ις �ως �� υλ�νται. “but [conveniently] to themselves

each, as they wish.”

144.3. ε�ιδ �εναι δ �ε �ρ �η takes three ��τι clauses.

��τι �ανα� γκη (ε�στ�ι) π�λεµει�ν

( ��τι) . . . �ε��µεν��τι . . . περιγ�ιγν�νται

The !ην δε� �ωµεθα clause is dependent on �ε��µεν. It is an eventualcondition with future apodosis (future-more-vivid condition) embeddedin a ��τι clause after ε�ιδ �εναι. The object of δε� �ωµεθα is the implied π�-λεµει

�ν. �η

�σσ�ν ε�γκεισ�µ �εν�υς means “about to press less hard.” LSJ s.v.

�εγκειµαι II. Hence, “we will find them less eager to fight.”

� �υκ �απ �� τ�σω�νδε. “not from so great resources.”

�ω�ν. Sc., πατ �ερων. In the middle, λε�ιπεσθαι means “fall short of, be

inferior to” and takes the genitive. LSJ s.v. λε�ιπω B.II.3. For � �υ �ρ �ηinstead of �ρ �η µ �η, see Sm. §2714. �ρ �η takes either � �υ or µ �η.

145. � �υδ �εν κελευ ��µεν�ι π�ι �ησειν. Indirect discourse after �απεκρ�ιναντ�.Hence, “that they would do nothing on demand.”

146. ε�ν α �υται�ς. Understand σπ�νδαι

�ς.

�ακηρ �υκτως. “without heralds.” If the war had actually broken out, theycould only communicate by means of heralds, so this is an indication thatthe war had not yet commenced.

σπ�νδω�ν γ �αρ κτλ. This γα� ρ clause explains why there was suspicion—

because such events (τ �α γιγν ��µενα) were tantamount to a breaking of thetruce and a reason for war.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

�

G E N E R A L I N T R O D U C T I O N S T O T H U C Y D I D E S

Cawkwell, G. Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War. London and New York:Routledge, 1997.

Connor, W. R. Thucydides. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.Cornford, F. M. Thucydides Mythistoricus. London: Arnold, 1907.de Ste. Croix, G. E. M. The Origins of the Peloponnesian War. London: Duckworth,

1972.Finley, John H., Jr. Thucydides. 2d ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

1947.Kagan, D. The Archidamian War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1974.Luce, T. J. The Greek Historians. London and New York: Routledge, 1997.Rawlings, H. R. The Structure of Thucydides’ History. Princeton: Princeton Univer-

sity Press, 1981.Stadter, Philip, ed. The Speeches of Thucydides. Chapel Hill: University of North

Carolina Press, 1973.Strassler, R. B., ed. The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the

Peloponnesian War. With translation by Richard Crawley. New York: FreePress, 1996.

C O M M E N T A R I E S

Classen, J., and J. Steup. Thukydides erklart von J. Classen. 5th ed. revised by J.Steup. Vol. 1, Einleitung. Erstes Buch. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung,1919.

141

142 S E L E C T E D B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Gomme, A. W. A Historical Commentary on Thucydides. Vol. 1, Introduction andCommentary on Book I. Oxford: Clarendon, 1956.

Hornblower, Simon. A Commentary on Thucydides. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon,1991.

Marchant, E. C. Thucydides Book I. 1905. Reprint, with a new introduction andbibliography by Thomas Wiedemann, Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 1982.

G R E E K G R A M M A R S A N D G R A M M A T I C A L W O R K S

Buck, C. D. Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1933.

Chantraine, P. La formation des noms en grec ancien. Paris: Klincksieck, 1933,reprinted 1979.

Denniston, J. D. The Greek Particles. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1954.Goodwin, W. W. Greek Grammar. Revised by C. B. Gulick. New York: Ginn and

Company, 1930.———. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb. Boston: Ginn and

Company, 1890.Kuhner, R. Ausfurliche Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache. Part 2, Satzlehre. 2

vols. revised by Bernhard Gerth. Hannover and Leipzig: Hahnsche Buchhand-lung, 1898. Reprinted Munich: Max Huebner Verlag, 1963.

Schwyzer, Eduard. Griechische Grammatik. Vol. 1, Allgemeine Teil, Lautlehre, Wort-bildung, Flexion. 3d ed. Munich: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1959.Vol. 2, Syntax und Syntaktische Stilistik, 2d ed. completed and edited by AlbertDebrunner. Munich: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1959.

Smyth, Herbert Weir. Greek Grammar. Revised by Gordon Messing. Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1956.

L E X I C A

Liddell, H. G., and Robert Scott. A Greek–English Lexicon. Revised by Sir HenryStuart Jones with the assistance of Roderick McKenzie, with a supplement.Oxford: Clarendon, 1968.

———. A Lexicon Abridged from Liddell and Scott’s Greek–English Lexicon. Oxford:Clarendon, 1891.

T E X T S

Stuart Jones, H. Thucydidis Historiae. Edited by Henry Stuart Jones, revised byJ. E. Powell. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1942.

Selected Bibliography 143

T R A N S L A T I O N S

Crawley, Richard, trans. The Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides. Revised by T. E.Wick. New York: Modern Library, 1982.

Lattimore, Stephen, trans. The Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides. Indianapolis:Hacket, 1998.

Warner, Rex, trans. History of the Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides. With intro-ductions and notes by M. I. Finley. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1954.Reprint, 1972.

050

100

km

cameron - thucydides book i- students' grammatical commentary

Documents

graduate students

present commentary

grammatical notes

years eventually

grammatical help

press forhis encouragement

british library

hiscareful eye