C.E. Graves, Commentary on Thucydides: Book 5

ἐν Κρανίοις—one of the four cities of Cephallenia, ii. 31 fin. ἔφοδοι—of mutual intercourse; i. 6, 1, διὰ τὰς οὐκ ἀσφαλεῖς παρ᾽ ἀλλήλους ἐφόδους: cf. ἐπιμιξία, ἐπιμίγνυμι: and see Barton and Chavasse on ἐπήρχοντο, iv. 120, 1.

σπονδαῖς—speaking generally. Some manuscripts have ταῖς σπονδαῖς, which is read by Classen. ξυμμαχίδος—ch. 110 fin.: i. 110, 4, ἐκ τῶν Ἀθηνῶν καὶ τῆς ἄλλης ξυμμαχίδος. Also as fem. adj. i. 98, 2, etc. Ἀθηναίων κ.τ.λ.—the Athenians were newly allied with Sparta. The Corinthians, though the prime movers of the intrigues against Sparta, were not in open hostility.

οὐδέν—Kruger compares ii. 5, 4, ἤν τι ξυμβαίνωσι: so iv. 41, 1, μέχρι οὗ τι ξυμβῶσι. We have similar neuter accusatives with πείθω and such words. οὗτοι οἵπερ—so Hdt. viii. 124: vii. 170, οὗτος όσπερ. ταὐτά—sc. ἀλλήλοις, ‘to act in close concert with each other, instead of disputing as they had done: see ch. 32 fin.’ (Arnold). This is better than rendering ‘to maintain the same policy as heretofore’, i.e. to hold aloof still from alliance with Athens.

λόγους ποιοῦνται ἰδίους—‘confer privately’ or ‘separately’; cf. ch. 37, 8, ἐς λόγους ἦλθον.

Βοιωτούς—subject of πειρᾶσθαι. After the appositional clause with αὐτούς, μετὰ Βοιωτῶν is written instead of μεθ̓ ἑαυτῶν to avoid any possible misunderstanding. The sentence is thus made laboured and clumsy, as in ch. 32 § 4. Jowett compares the repetition of Ἀθηναίοις in ch. 18, 34. Ullrich suggests μετὰ Κορινθίων for μετὰ Βοιωτῶν.

ἥκιστ᾽ ἄν—this reading, instead of ἥκιστα, is adopted by all modern editors. They also assume that the force of ἄν extends to the following ἑλέσθαι. Kuhner gives examples of similar construction from Xenophon in his note on Anab. i. 6, 2. In the present passage it seems simpler to take ἑλέσθαι as a positive statement, ‘the Lacedaemonians chose’. 18 πρὀ τῆς—there is a confusion of thought, or rather of expression, in this sentence. The meaning is that the Spartans attached more importance to gaining the friendship of Argos than to incurring the enmity of Athens. The two contingencies are put as it were in opposite scales. So πρό, ‘in preference to’, is really equivalent to ‘at the price of’. Again we may say that, as in Greek a negative is repeated in a negative clause, so here Ἀθηναίων ἔχθρας is written, instead of φιλίας, with a proleptic force. Two somewhat similar instances of άντί, implying exchange, are quoted from Aristotle: Rhet. ii. 23, 19, ὅτε μὲν γὰρ τὸ μένειν ἀντὶ τοῦ μάχεσθαι ᾑροῦντο, ὅτε δὲ τὸ μὴ μάχεσθαι ἀντὶ τοῦ μὴ μένειν, ‘at one time they preferred staying at the price of fighting, at another not fighting at the expense of not staying’ (Cope): Eth. Nic. iii. 1, 7, ὅταν αἰσχρόν τι ἢ λυπηρὸν ὑπομένωσι ἁντὶ μεγάλων καὶ καλῶν, where ἀντί means ‘when weighed against the prospect of’. See also Liddell and Scott ἀντί, ii. 2. Classen takes πρό to mean ‘before they became openly hostile to Athens’, comparing iii. 59, 3, εἱλόμεθα γὰρ ἂν πρό γε τούτου: but there too preference of choice seems implied rather than priority of time.

καλῶς—‘on fair and bonourable terms’, or, according to Stahl,=opportune, ‘under favourable conditions’, as in ch. 65, 28: i. 124, 1; cf. πάντως, ch. 41, 22. κἄλλως and καὶ ἀλλως, ‘at all events’, are suggested emendations. ἡγούμενοι —Classen adopts the alteration into ὴγουμένους: otherwise either (1) the Ephors are identified with the government generally; see ch. 37, 9, σφίσι: or (2) the actual construction is disregarded, and ἡγούμενοι written as if ἐπεθύμουν οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι had gone before. The latter view seems too harsh to be possible; and cannot be supported on the analogy of such passages as iv. 52, 3, ἦν αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια...κρατυνάμενοι: for there the subject of the sentence is the same in sense though not in actual construction. ῥᾴω ῥᾷον—cf. ch. 37, 11, ῥᾳδιως.