—there were no signs of magnificence about Sparta until after the triumphs of Lysander. Even then, its appearance, remote from the world and unfortified, must have been comparatively insignificant. It does not seem clear that Thuc. wrote this passage before 404 B.C.
11. κατασκευῆς —κ.
includes everything that makes a place habitable and usable. Here ‘buildings.’
—in comparison with.
14. τῶν πέντε τὰς δύο μ.
(‘Two of the five divisions’ is, as Mr. Forbes remarks, wrong.) Of course Messenia is included in Laconia. Notice the way in which fractions are expressed. The gen. is omitted when the denominator
is one higher than the numerator
—as τὰ τρία μέρη
15. τῆς ξυμπάσης
—roughly speaking. In 2.9
Thuc. expressly notes that Argos was not under the leadership of Sparta. But the omission here is of no importance, because we do not want an exact statement, but a general account of the power of Sparta.
16. τῶν ἔξω ξ.
—their allies beyond P., who are many.
—for τῆς πόλεως
, since the city was not compactly built.
For the omission of art. Steup compares 4.18.3
and 8.95. 2
. (Mr. Forbes's rendering ‘when a city is not built continuously’ is disproved by the fact that ἡ δύναμις Λακεδαιμονίων
—and not the
power of any
city—must be supplied to φαίνοιτ᾽ ἄν
. Herbst's view that πόλεως
—since it has not been brought together into a compact city
—is inconsistent with Λακεδαιμονίων ἡ πόλις
—the plur. in concrete sense, as in 2.65. 2
21. διπλασίαν ... ἤ
—these compounds are constructed as comparatives. πολλαπλάσιοι τῶν ἐναντίων 4. 94
; πολλαπλάσιοι ἢ ἦλθον 127
; διπλασια δοῦναι ἢ ἄλλῳ τινί Lysias 19.52
depends on οἶμαι
ἀπὸ τῆς φ. ὄψεως
‘from the notable or striking appearance’ (Forbes), but ‘from the mere
(external) appearance.’ φανερός
is, as usual, what is seen, and ὄψις
is the appearance in contrast with the reality
, as in 6.31 τῇ ὄψει ἀνεθάρσουν
(where my rendering ‘by the sight’ is also wrong).