E.C. Marchant, Commentary on Thucydides: Book 6

ἁλισκομένου—Classen makes this historic pres.; but it cannot be shown that the historic pres. is used in any mood but the indic. Stahl takes it with διαφυγόντες—‘escaped at the time of the capture.’ This is possible; but Goodwin (M.T. § 27) classes ἁλίσκομαι with ἀδικῶ, φεύγω, νικῶ, etc., so that the pres. may here resemble a perf.: but observe (1) when the pres. indic. of ἁλ. refers to the past, it appears to he historic pres.; (2) ἁλισκόμενος is either (a) coincident in time with the main verb, or (b) approaches to the perf., like άδικῶ. (An imperf. partic. in gen. abs. joined to a historic pres. sometimes gives the cause of the verb; as I. 136 δεδιέναι φασκόντων Κερκυραίων ἔχειν αὐτόν, διακομίζεται ἐς τὴν ἤπειρον.)

ἀφικνοῦνται—verbs of ‘going’ and ‘sending’ are especially common in the hist. pres.

ξύμπαντες μέν—Jowett renders ‘they settled near the Sicanians, and both took the name of Elymi’; but Freeman says ‘I certainly always understood this simply to mean that the whole people were called E. . . . but that there were two separate Elymian cities.’ Freeman is clearly right. The Sicanians had given their name to the island, and they remained quite distinct from the Elymi. Also, is J.'s rendering of ξύμπαντες possible? ξ. is often contrasted with κατὰ πόλεις, whereas it never means in Thuc. ‘they with the others.’ And Thuc. is clearly giving the name and the cities of the new settlers.

Ἔρυξ—the story of the Trojan origin of Eryx is accepted and elaborated by Virgil m Aeneid V.; but Freeman shows that the older legend did not assign to it a Trojan origin.

Ἔγεστα—this is the Greek name; but the native name, retained by the Romans, was Segesta. It is the Acesta of Aen. v. 718. To the Romans is due the tradition that it was founded by Aeneas, who named it after Acestes.

προσξυνῴκησαν δὲ . . καί—a characteristic anaphora of ὅμοροι . . οἰκήσαντες. Thuc. does not in narrative balance the clauses exactly by anaphora, whereas in Xenophon such balance is very frequent. Cp. c. 20, 4.

Φωκέων—the statement that Phocians settled in Sicily receives no support except from a single passage in Pausanias. And this testimony is really of slight value, as P. is enumerating the Greek settlers in Sicily, as distinct from the barbarians, among whom he places the Elymi (Phrygians, i.e Trojans). The correction Φρυγῶν is not really supported, because when later writers speak of Phrygians in Sicily they mean Trojans. It looks as if in τῶν Τρώων τινές above Thue. refers to that arrival which appears under a much-developed form in Dion. Hal. as the return of Acestes. Whether in Φωκέων τινές we have an early form of the legend that reappears in the story of Aeneas, is much more doubtful. Dion. Hal. assigns an Areadian origin to Aeneas: and it should be borne in mind that the Trojans are barbarians in Thuc. and Pausanias, but Hellenes in Dion. Hal. and Virgil. Dion. Hal. speaks of the Trojans under Aeneas as τὰς πόλεις συνοικίζοντες τοῖς Ἐλύμοις έν Σικελίᾳ. These faets only show how great was the confusion in the stories concerning the settlement of the Elymi, and how impossible it is to correct Φωκέων with any confidenee.

τότε—refers back to διαφυγόντες (Stahl).

ἐς Λιβύην—it is not impossible that this suggested to Virgil the bringing of Aeneas to Carthage. πρῶτον, ἔπειτα—πρῶτον without μέν is always followed by ἔπειτα without δἐ, unless καί follows ἔπειτα, when δέ is always added, as in VII. 23 τὸ μέγιστον πρῶτον, ἔπειτα δὲ καί κτλ.

ἀπ̓ αὐτῆς—this pronoun, referring to a preceding noun or pronoun, corresponds to is in Lat There is in Thuc. a use of αὐτά which corresponds to haec omnia, ‘our empire,’ as in Cic. pro Sul. § 28.

κατενεχθέντες—cf. IV. 120 πλέοντας δ᾽ άπὸ Τροίας σφῶν τοὺς πρώτους κατενεχθῆναι ἐς τὸ χωρίον τοῦτο τῷ χειμῶνι ᾧ ἐχρήσαντο Ἀχαιοί.