This text is part of:
κατέλαβε: cp. cc. 60 supra, 104 infra, τὰ καταλαβόντα c. 49 supra.
ἱρὰ ἡλίου πρόβατα. ‘Phoibos’ himself was their founder (cp. Pausan. 5. 22. 3), the city bore the Apolline name, the fusion of Φοῖβος Ἀπόλλων with Ἤλιος is therefore a fait accompli in Apollonia; and this perhaps is the oldest evidence of the amalgamation, in cult and myth. The πρόβατα here are apparently sheep, or goats (cp. τὰ λεπτὰ τῶν προβάτων 8. 137 supra), as they are raided by wolves. The animals associated with Helios are chariot-horses (ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἄρσενες ἵπποι, Hom. Hymn. 31. 14), and, still earlier, oxen and sheep (Od. 12. 127 ff. Ἠελίοιο βόες καὶ ἴφια μῆλα, ἑπτὰ βοῶν ἀγέλαι, τόσα δ᾽ οἰῶν πώεα καλά, 50 in each herd, or flock, 350 in all, tended by the nymphs, Phaethusa and Lampetie, day and night?). Apollon is almost certainly in origin a truly pastoral deity (and, especially as Λύκιος, Λύκειος, Λυκόεργος, the guardian of the sheep; as also Κάρνειος, Νὀμιος, Ἀρισταῖος, etc.). βόσκεται: middle, pascuntur (the active 6. 39, also 1. 44, in quasi-metaphorical sense). Cp. Hom. Hymn. ad Apoll. 412 f. Ταίναρον ἔνθα τε μῆλα βαθύτριχα βόσκεται αἰεὶ Ἠελίοιο ἄνακτος. παρὰ [<Χῶνα>] ποταμόν “There can be no doubt that the river intended is the Aous, or Viosa, which flows from the central part of Pindus, called Lacmon by the ancients (Hecat. Fr. 72, Soph. ap. Strab. vi. 391), and empties itself into the Adriatic a little south of the site of Apollonia” (Rawlinson). Χῶνα is restored by Stein from the Canons of Theognostos 794 (cp. Cramer, Anecd. Oxon. ii. (135) p. 131 Χών, Χωνός, ὄνομα ποταμοῦ ἐξ οὗ καὶ ἡ Ἤπειρος Χωνία παρὰ Ἡροδότῳ). But it is Χωνία, not Χών, which this passage records for Hdt. The Epeirote ‘Chonia’ no doubt represents ‘Chaonia,’ which got its name from the Χάονες (cp. Thuc. 2. 68. 9, 80. 1, 5, 81. 3-6), and not from a river Χών, for whose real existence the Canons of Theognostos are not evidence. If such a river anywhere existed, it would perhaps be in South Italy, where the ‘Chaones’ reappear as ‘Chones,’ cp. note to 7. 170. 13 supra. The grammarian is wrong in citing Hdt. as authority for ‘Chonia’; and he has apparently invented ‘Chon’ to account for Chonia.
Λάκμονος ὄρεος: Steph. B. sub v. Λάκμων, ἄκρα τοῦ Πίνδου ὄρους, ἐξ ἧς ὁ Ἴναχος καὶ Αἴας ῥεῖ ποταμός: ὠς Ἑκαταῖος ἐν πρώτῳ. Strabo 271, 316 (quoting Hekataios) gives the form Λάκμος: τὸν δ᾽ Ἄωον Αἴαντα καλεῖ Ἑκαταῖος καί φησιν ἀπὸ τοῦ αὐτοῦ τόπου τοῦ περὶ Λάκμον, μᾶλλον δὲ τοῦ αὐτοῦ μυχοῦ, τόν τε Ἴναχον ῥεῖν εἰς Ἄργος πρὸς νότον καὶ τὸν Αἴαντα πρὸς ἑσπέραν καὶ πρὸς τὸν Ἀδρίαν. διὰ τῆς Ἀπολλωνίης: the name of the city for the country; cp. ἐς Ἀθήνας = ἐς Ἀττικήν c. 17 supra, ἐς Θήβας, ibid. etc.
παρ᾽ Ὤρικον λιμένα. Steph. Byz. sub v. Ἑκαταῖος λιμένα καλεῖ τῆς Ἠπείρου τὴν (sic) Ὠρικόν, ἐν τῇ Εὐρώπῃ: μετὰ δὲ Βουθρωτὸς πόλις, μετὰ δὲ Ὠρικὸς λιμήν. Orikos, or Oricum (so with the Latins, e.g. Caesar B. C. 3 passim), now is Ericho; no stream rising on Lakmon flows out anywhere near it. The geography of Hdt. is at fault, and probably at second hand; this passage, though it deals with the West, is probably not a result of his own western voyage, but belongs to the first draft of the Book.
ἀραιρημένοι ἄνδρες: cp. 7. 118 supra. οἱ πλούτῳ τε καὶ γένεϊ δοκιμώτατοι: cp. Aristot. Pol. 6 (4). 4. 5 = 1290 B ἐν Ἀπολλωνίᾳ τῇ ἐν τῷ Ἰονίῳ . . ἐν ταῖς τιμαῖς ἦσαν οἱ διαφἐροντες κατ᾽ εὐγένειαν καὶ πρῶτοι κατασχόντες <τὴν ἀποικίαν> ὀλίγοι ὄντες πολλῶν.
περὶ πολλοῦ ... ποιεῦνται: cp. 6. 104, 7. 181, 8. 40 supra.
ἐκ θεοπροπίου τινός, ‘in consequence of a certain prophetic (or divine) utterance’—ἐκ is here rather causal than temporal. θεοπρόπιον is an Homeric word, much used by Hdt. for an oracular response; so θεοπρόπος is with him always used for ‘consultants’ of an oracle. Just below the Apolloniates are found consulting both at Dodona and at Delphi. ἀπὸ ... ἑκάς: cp. 3. 41 ὡς δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς νήσου ἑκὰς ἐγένετο . .
τότε: the time above referred to in κατέλαβε πρῆγμα τοιόνδε.
κατακοιμήσαντος φυλακήν: the accusative may be of temporal duration, or, more generally, of limitation; the verb is used in a transitive sense 8. 134 supra. παρελθόντες λύκοι ἐς τὸ ἄντρον. Evenios was asleep outside, and the wolves got past him into the cave; cp. 3. 72 ὑμεῖς δὲ ἴστε φυλακὰς τὰς κατεστεώσας ἐούσας οὐδὲν χαλεπὰς παρελθεῖν: cp. 3. 77. Here one might have expected παρεσελθόντες.
ὡς ἐπήισε, ‘when he perceived (it).’ The verb occurs in a still more generalized sense in 3. 29 ἐπαΐοντες σιδηρίων, ‘sensible of steel.’ εἶχε σιγῇ, ‘kept quiet,’ silent, rather than rem clam tenebat or tacuit (the normal construction of ἔχειν with adverb, cp. Index). σιγῇ, as 8. 66, 74, still more 7. 237 (cp. also 2. 140). σιγὴν ἔχειν 1. 86, literally. ἐν νόῳ ἔχων, ‘intending . .’
ταῦτα γενόμενα, ‘what had happened.’ ὑπαγαγόντες μιν ὑπὸ δικαστήριον: cp. 6. 104 ὑπὸ δ. αὐτὸν ἀγαγόντες, 6. 136 θανάτου ὑπαγαγὼν ὑπὸ τὸν δῆμον Μιλτιάδεα, 6. 72 ὑπὸ δικαστήριον ὑπαχθείς.
τῆς ὄψιος στερηθῆναι: on the principle that the punishment should fit the crime. ὄψις = ὄμματα, as in Aristot. Hist. An. 8. 19. 7 λευκὴν ἔχοντες τὴν ὄψιν. Polybins goes further: 3. 79. 12 ἐστερήθη τῆς μιᾶς ὄψεως. ὄψις is also used for the chose vue (as we say, a ‘sight’), cp. 7. 15, 8. 54 supra, 3. 65. The two extremely concrete meanings correspond to the two primary and more abstract meanings of ὄψις, viz. the faculty of seeing, 4. 81, and the aspect or appearance, 7. 47.
ἐξετύφλωσαν is logically a pluperfect of time. αὐτίκα μετὰ ταῦτα, ‘immediately thereupon.’ οὔτε πρόβατα κτλ.: cp. 6. 139 οὔτε γῆ καρπὸν ἔφερε οὔτε γυναῖκές τε καὶ ποῖμναι ὁμοίως ἔτικτον καὶ πρὸ τοῦ. This was, of course, the result of a curse (cp. 3. 65, the blessing and the curse of Kambyses on the Persians). Here the γυναῖκες are not included. (Economically this might only make things worse —though the Greek god, or historian, was hardly thinking of that.)
πρόφαντα δέ σφι ἔν τε Δωδώνῃ καὶ ἐν Δελφοῖσι ἐγίνετο, ‘it was foreshown to them at Dodona and at Delphi.’ πρόφαντος occurs also 5. 63 (and twice in Sophokl. Trach. 1159, 1163). The city had doubtless been founded under Delphic anspices, cp. c. 93 supra Dodona fills a larger place in the earliet Books of Herodotos, esp. 2. 52, a passage which proves a personal visit by the historian to the place. It is here mentioned purely en passant, and no doubt taken over from the source, whatever it was, of the story of Evenios; and there is nothing in the notice to suggest that this passage was penned after Hdt.'s visit — rather the reverse; nothing in fact to lead us to date the composition of this passage other than early in the genesis of the work. Strabo 327-8 treats at length of Dodona; Steph. Byz. devotes his longest article thereto. The Dodona in question here is, of course, the Thesprotian (cp. 4. 33), or oldest Greek oracle, which had seemingly been eclipsed by Delphi, though the tribes and cities of the neighbourhood naturally resorted thereto. It was destined to something like a revival at a later time, when Delphi was in difficulties, and during the Roman period, when all this district rose in importance. The method, or methods, of divination practised at Dodona are obscure; upon the whole subject cp. Carapanos, Dodone et ses ruines, Paris, 1878.
τὸ αἴτιον, ‘the cause’; this use of the word is observable. Cp. 7. 125. τοὺς προφήτας is inconsistent with 2. 55 and with 8. 36. Stein suggests that the eorrector misunderstood αὐτοί and followed the lead of πρόφαντα. But see below.
φύλακον: the form is constant in Hdt. (φύλαξ is found 1. 41, in a somewhat different sense.)
αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἐπορμῆσαι τοὺς λύκους: the plural (αὐτοί) is remarkable, as associating Zeus and Apollon in the joint action, Dodona and Delphi in a common utterance; a curious collaboration, an improbable coincidence, is suggested by these Responses, which is not much eased by remembering that there was a Ζεὺς Λυκαῖος as well as an Ἀπόλλων Λύκειος in the Greek Pantheon. Even Kroisos was not favoured to this extent (1. 46-49) unless indeed we are to infer that Apollon and Amphiaraos exactly coincided on that occasion. Are we to suppose collusion, genuine inspiration, or false report, as the source of this coincidence? Or is the record an inexact one; did the one oracle merely confirm the other, as if, for example, the Apolloniates might have inquired first at Dodona, and then, dissatisfied with the reply, have gone to Delphi only to get it reaffirmed there? (Cp. the action of Agesipolis at Olympia and Delphi in 388 B.C. (390?) Xenoph. Hell. 4. 7. 2.) αὐτοί must, of eourse, refer to the gods, whether we keep τοὺς προφήτας above or not. The proposal to cut out τοὺς προφήτας on the ground that it is ineonsistent with 2. 55 (of Dodona) and with 8. 36 (of Delphi) is vitiated by the assumption that Hdt. is a careful and self-consistent writer. But further, a προφήτης is mentioned for Delphi in 8. 37, and in 2. 55 we have to reckon not merely with the three female προμάντιες or ἱρεῖαι, but with οἱ ἄλλοι Δωδωναῖοι (cp. 4. 33); while Homer shows that originally men (the Σελλοί) were the prophets, or priests, of the god in Dodona, and Strabo 402 declares that to the end Βοιωτοῖς μόνοις ἄνδρας προθεσπίζειν ἐν Δωδώνῃ. The ἱρεῖαι anyway had not everything their own way. Possibly if Hdt. had been in Dodona before writing this passage he would have expressed himself differently: the failure to specify the Πυθίη for Delphi might in any case be merely a bit of careless composition.
τιμωρέοντες ἐκείνῳ. The verb is used of bringing aid to the living 7. 169, or vengeance to the dead 7. 144, etc. This long prose Response badly wants reducing to verse!
ταύτας: the pronoun seems to refer to the future, the compensation still to be specified.
δώσειν δόσιν, eognate accus.
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.