3. τὴν μὲν γὰρ κτλ
—apparently τὴν ... λόγῳ
is attributive predicate to τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ... ἀναγκάσαι
, as Classen explains, lit. As for the truest motive ... I think that the A... . forced
etc. The assumption of a ‘confnsion of construction’ (Kiuger) seems unnecessary. Chambry explains τὴν ἀ. πρόφασιν τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἡγοῦμαι ... καὶ（ἡγοῦμαι
) ... ἀναγκάσαι
, so that ἡγοῦμαι
has two objects differently expressed, but γιγνομένους
can scarcely be separated.
—of the actual
motive, as in 6.6
, and now and then in other authors. When so used it seems to denote the motive as it appears to the mind of the writer
as distinct from the motive as put forward by the doer.
5. μεγάλους γιγνομένους
—in c. 118
Thuc. says that the Athenians during the period between the foundation of the Delian Confederacy and the war (the Pentecontaetia
) ἐπὶ μέγα ἐχώρησαν δυνάμεως
. We might, therefore, look for μείζους ἀεί
in place of μεγάλους
, but, as this is the first mention of Atheman power, the pos. is quite natural. This growing greatness of A. is described in cc. 88-118
; αι: ... λ. αἰτίαι
occupy cc. 24-87
11. Ἐ. ἐστι πόλις
—there is a city named E.