This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
παραδοῦναι . . . ξυμπλέων; rather a harsh instance of the infinitive of purpose. Yet cf. i. 128, ἀφικνεῖται τῷ μὲν λόγῳ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἑλληνικὸν πόλεμον, τῷ δὲ ἔργῳ τὰ πρὸς βασιλέα πράγματα πράσσειν, where Shilleto comments on the looseness; i. 50, πρὸς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἐτράποντο φονεύειν μᾶλλον ἢ ζωγρεῖν; Soph. O. C. 12, μανθάνειν γὰρ ἥκομεν. ὅμως δὲ. δὲ is resumptive after the parenthesis, as in vii. 33, σχεδὸν γάρ τι ἤδη πᾶσα ἡ Σικελία πλὴν Ἀκραγαντίνων — οὗτοι δ᾽ οὐδὲ μεθ᾽ ἑτέρων ἦσαν — οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι κ.τ.λ. παρὰ πέντε μνᾶς . . . ἐδίδου τοῦ μηνός A very vexed passage. The MSS. give παρὰ πέντε ναῦς and ἐς γὰρ πέντε ναῦς καὶ πεντήκοντα τρία (om. Vat.) τάλαντα ἐδίδου τοῦ μηνός. Taking the MS. reading, Jowett renders ‘for every five ships,’ and supposes a disarrangement of expression, due to a lack of clear distinction in Thucydides' mind, the words παρὰ πέντε ναῦς properly belonging to the next sentence. Before arriving at this view it should have been asked whether παρὰ πέντε ναῦς can mean ‘for every five ships.’ There is no authority for παρὰ = ἀνὰ or κατὰ in this sense. παρὰ πέντε ναῦς must mean either (1) ‘in alternate sets of five ships’ (which makes no manner of sense), or (2) ‘within five ships,’ i.e. within five ships more or less of a given number. Madvig, taking the second view, altered τρία to τριάκοντα. This would mean, as Jowett puts it, ‘nevertheless it was agreed that more than three obols, by five ships, should be given to eaeh man. For fifty-five ships, thirty talents a month were given,’ i.e. a count of five ships was thrown in, and the payment of three obols per man was calculated on sixty ships instead of fifty-five, and the whole divided between the fifty-five crews. Thus each man would receive, by a remarkably unbusinesslike arrangement, the remarkably unmanageable sum of 33/11 obols. It is elear that, if τρία is not altered to τριάκοντα, πέντε must be read without καὶ πεντήκοντα. Next it should be noted that the position of the words requires us to render simply ‘more than three obols was agreed upon.’ How mueh more? A little more? or somewhat more? I venture to write, in the first sentence, μνᾶς for ναῦς, and in the second ἐς γὰρ πέντε ναῦς πέντε μνῶν δέοντα τρία τάλαντα κ.τ.λ. Translate ‘yet an agreement was made for an increase on three obols (a head) to the extent of five minae (per ship). For to five ships he offered per month three talents minus five minae,’ i.e. he gave per ship 21,000 obols = 3 obols x 200 (the crew) x 30 (the days) + 5 minae (= 3000 obols). ‘The basis of his arrangement,’ says Thucydides, ‘was two talents fifty-five minae (= 105,000 obols) per five ships.’ According to this arrangement eaeh man gets just three and a half obols instead of three, and each five ships could be paid in the very handy sum (to a Persian) of exactly 875 Daric staters. παρὰ πέντε μνᾶς thus gives the measure of πλέον and stands in the right position for so doing. The sense ‘by the extent of five minae for each ship’ is implied in the previous διέδωκε πάσαις ταῖς ναυσί, and by natural procedure. ὡμολογήθησαν The plural is determined by the neighbouring τρεῖς ὀβολοὶ, though the true subject is πλέον ἢ τρεῖς ὀβολοί. The expression is not equivalent to ὀβολοὶ πλεῖν: ἢ τρεῖς, inasmuch as the excess is only a fraction. The plurality of the obols rather than the singular of the aggregate sum determines the number of the verb.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.