This text is part of:
γενομένων, ‘that have ever been’ or ‘come into the world.’ Stein's emendation προγενομένων omits the living! ὅς, ‘inasmuch as thou.’
ἐπίκεο: rem acu tetigisti (Schweigh.); cp. ἐπικέσθαι, c. 35 infra.
Ἴωνας τ. ἐν τῇ Εὐρ. κ. need not be restricted to the Athenians, but may be taken as equivalent to Ἕλληνας just below, the triple division, Ἴωνές τε καὶ Αἰολέες καὶ Δωριέες, a little lower, notwithstanding. The Jews knew the Greeks at large as Javan, Javanim (<*>); Dareios denotes ‘the whole extent of his Greek dominions’ as Yuna (Babyl. Yavanu), e.g. Behistun Inscrip. col. i. § 6. Aischyl. Pers. 182 makes Atossa speak of Ἰαόνων γή= Hellas; Aristoph. Acharn. 104 makes Pseudartabas address an Athenian Greek Ἰαοναῦ, and so forth. Thus the phrase may here be regarded as ’characteristically Oriental,‘ and strictly appropriate.
ἀναξίους, sc. ἡμῖν καταγελάσαι. Schweigh. takes it abs., ‘men of naught’ (καταγ. ἡμῶν the usual Attic). δεινὸν ἂν εἴη ... εἰ ... οὐ τιμωρησόμεθα. Stein explains the οὐ on the ground that the εἰ=ὅτι (siquidem) and cps. c. 46 infra εἰ ... περίεσται, etc. In this case the construction may be facilitated by the coalescence of οὐ—τιμωρησόμεθα as a single idea (=ἐάσομεν), and also by the precedence of οὐδέν. Sitzler suggests that Ἕλληνας δέ may begin the fresh (interrogative) sentence. ἀλλά is rather anomalous. ἔχομεν is not a mere auxiliary (bis).
συστροφή: the Herodotean use of the verb συστρέφειν (conglobare), 9. 18 infra, 1. 101, 6. 6, may explain the substantive. χρημάτων δύναμιν (as in Thuc. 1. 25. 4), rather spoilt by the occurrence of δύναμις on each side of it in the immediate context. Unless ἐοῦσαν ἀσθενέα is taken with τὴν μάχην as well as with τὴν δύναμιν, ἐπιστάμεθα is not used in quite the same sense and coustruction each time. With the form of rhetoric in the passage Baehr cps. Aeschyl. Pers. 240. Cp. Introduction, § 11.
ἐπειρήθην, from the dep. πειράομαι (active πειρᾶν 6. 82, 84), retains a middle force; cp. 4. 80 and 9. 46 (πεπείρηται), c. 125 infra (ἐπεπειρέατο). Mardonios, as one of the dramatis personae, of course could not expressly refer to the story of his expedition as told Hdt. 6. 43-45, but he certainly presents a view of the event amounting to a flat contradiction. This result might be put down to the historian's humour; but it is more natural to see in it further evidence of the priority and independence of Bk. 7. Mardonios' account of his own exploit is, indeed, uot so far removed from the truth; but had the adventure been the miserable fiasco described in Bk. 6, there would have been a difficulty, or absurdity, in the reference to it here. The statemeut (bis) of the failure of the Greeks to oppose his passage conveys a criticism implicitly ou Hellenic policy (cp. Thuc. 1. 69. 5); but the criticism is (as Stein remarks) entirely beside the point, and undramatic. Mardonios is, in fact, merely the mouthpiece of Herodotus, who wishes to give his natiou a lesson. Stein suggests a direct reference to the circumstances of the Peloponnesian war; but the description of Greek warfare in this passage (ἐπεὰν γὰρ — ἐξώλεες γὰρ δὴ γίνονται) suits the antecedeuts and circumstances of the ten years' war (431-421 B.C.) extremely ill, and moreover this passage belongs (I take it) to the earlier composition of Hdt. There is no apparent reference to the destruction of Plataea. The wars here referied to are such as those between Argos and Sparta, Athens and Megara, Sybaris and Croton, and so forth. Hdt. may have had in view also the war between Eretria and Chalkis, which was falsely regarded by the Greek tradition iu the fourth century as having been waged περὶ τοῦ Ληλάντου πεδίου (Strabo, 465, cp. 448). A wellknown passage of Polybios puts a more generous construction upon the archaic Greek belli jura, as dictated by feelings of honour and a desire for a final decision: μόνην δὲ τὴν ἐκ χειρὸς καὶ συστάδην γιγνομένην μάχην ἀληθινὴν ϝ̔πελάμβανον εἶναι κρίσιν πραγμάτων: ᾗ καὶ τοὺς πολέμους ἀλλήλοις προὔλεγον καὶ τὰς μάχας, ὅτε προθοῖντο διακιν δυνεύειν, καὶ τοὺς τόπους, εἰς οὓς μέλλοιεν ἐξιέναι παραταξάμενοι <παραταξόμενοι> (13. 3. 3). With the potential elements of unity in Hellas here specified by Hdt. should be compared the fuller statement put into the mouth of the Athenian speaker 8. 144 infra.
καταλαμβάνειν τ. δ., “to quash their differences” (Blakesley), “to make up their differences” (Rawlinson), “diri mere” (Baehr), “cohibere” (Stein), “to take up ... and settle” (Macaulay), “to put an end to” (L. & S.); cp. 5. 21.
ἑκάτεροι: the plural of groups, cp. c. 1 l. 7 supra.
πλῆθος ... ἁπάσας. Stein points out that ἅπαν must be supplied with πλῆθος and ἐκ τῆς Ἀσίης with νέας.
ἀνθρώπων ἄριστοι: ἀνδρῶν would seem more natural, at least on the lips of a Greek.
ἀπείρητον pass., ‘untried,’ ‘unattempted.’ Mardonios concludes with a jejune Greek proverb, without much relation to his previous remarks. Cp. Theog. 571, Theokr. 15. 62. The gnomic touch is quite Herodotean; cp. Introduction, § 11.
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
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.