T. G. Tucker, Commentary on Thucydides: Book 8

---

---

ὧν ἦσαν κ.τ.λ. ‘among which were included some Italian ships from Tarentum and Locri and some Sicilian vessels.’ Tarentum was a colony of Sparta. During the Sicilian expedition its attitude had been merely negative, though naturally it was unfriendly to Athens (vi. 44, 104). Λοκροὶ Ἐπιζεφύριοι was a Locrian colony with a Lacedaemonian element. Its previous relations with Athens had been hostile (iii. 99, vi. 44, vii. 1, etc.).

ἐπὶ Λᾷ Las, though called by Livy (xxxviii. 30) vicus maritimus, was ten stadia from the sea according to Pausan. iii. 24, 5. Hence ἐπὶ rather than ἐν. The town was about five miles S W. of Gythium.

διαφθαρέντας The nominative might have been looked for. On the objective construction see c. 48, § 5, ὑπεσχῆσθαι σφᾶς. The present instance is easier, inasmuch as the subject to λήσειν is gathered from the impersonal τις: ‘they, the said negligent persons, etc.’

---

ᾖν δέ τι καὶ τοιοῦτον κ.τ.λ. ‘now there really was something of the kind on the part of those who were accused, and it was not altogether (or ‘by no means’ οὐ πάνυ) a mere calumny for the sake of making a point.’

κατηγορίαν ἐχόντων is the passive of κατηγορούντων, the personal use of the passive κατηγορεῖσθαι being very rare. Cf. κακὸν ἔχουσι, c. 86, § 3; αἰτίαν ἔχειν (iv. 114), etc.

μάλιστα μὲν . . . εἰ δὲ μὴ . . . ἐξειργόμενοι δὲ καὶ τούτου The alternatives should be clearly distinguished. ἐβούλοντο ὀλιγαρχούμενοι runs throughout: ‘preserving their oligarchy they desired (1) μάλιστα μὲν καὶ τῶν ξυμμάχων ἄρχειν, ‘if possible, to rule not only Athens but also the allies’; (2) εἰ δὲ μὴ, αὐτονομεῖσθαι τὰς ναῦς . . . ἔχοντες, ‘or, as the second best terms, to be left in possession of the fleet and walls of Athens in independence of the Lacedaemonians’; (3) ἐξειργόμενοι κ.τ.λ., ‘if they were debarred from this too, to admit the enemy, and give up the fleet and walls, if only they might secure their personal safety.’

μὴ οὖν ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου γε κ.τ.λ. ‘at any rate not to be themselves the first to meet with destruction at the hands of the restored democracy.’ γε of one MS. and the scholiast is certainly right. For οὖν . . . γε cf. Soph. Ant. 84, ἀλλ᾽ οὖν προμηνύσῃς γε τοῦτο μηδενί; El. 233; Hdt. iii. 140, εἰ καὶ σμικρά, ἀλλ᾽ ὦν ἴση γε ἡ χάρις.

καὶ ὁπωσοῦν ‘in any way whatever,’ cf. c. 90, § 2. Most editors prefer to make καὶ connective, and construe ξυμβῆναι ἔχειν τὰ τῆς πόλεως ἄνευ τειχῶν καὶ νεῶν καὶ ὁπωσοῦν. Render ‘actually to introduce the enemy, and, giving up ships and walls, make any manner of terms as to the fate of the country.’ τὰ τῆς πόλεως ἔχειν is apparently always taken in the sense of τὰ πράγματα ἔχειν, i.e. make terms enabling them to hold the government. But in the last resource all that the oligarchs will seek is their personal safety, and the government may go to the Lacedaemonians. τὰ τῆς πόλεως can hardly be used for ‘the government,’ unless e.g. πράσσειν stands in place of ἔχειν. The more natural rendering surely is ξυμβῆναι (ὥστε) τὰ τῆς πόλεως (‘the condition of the state’) ἔχειν καὶ ὁπωσοῦν.