previous next

διαλύσων—‘there was nothing to . . neither.’ The fut. partic. as in Aesch. PV. 27 λωφήσων γὰρ οὐ πέφυκέ πω. (Steup is mistaken in supposing that ἦν must be the copula in our sentenee, if διαλύσων is taken as above.)

κρείσσους . . βεβαίου—the best way of taking this is as follows: (1) all men when they had the upper hand, by reflecting on the hopelessness of security took precaution rather against attack than were capable of trust in others.’ Thus λογισμῷ . . βεβαίου is to be taken together and refers to προεσκόπουν. But two other versions must be noticed: (2) ‘finding more strength in calculation against the unexpected than in pledges.’ Then τοῦ βεβαίου= τῷ βεβαίῳ. (3) ‘Being more inclined in their calculations to despair of security’ (or ‘than to security’). The last seems an impossible version of κρείσσους ὄντες. The passage prob. repeats the thought of c. 82, 7.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: