18. ὥσπερ καί
marks the connexion of the two acts, ἀνίστησι—ἑκαθέζετο ἔχων αὐτόν
. Notice the extreme solemnity of supplication by the life of the child.
19. καὶ μέγιστον ἦν ἱ. τοῦτο
24. τὴν Ἀ.
. This Alexander was father of Perdiccas (see c. 57
). Thuc. calls the town ‘Alexander's’ because it lay south of Macedon proper. Its status caused difficulty at various times, for it never fully acquiesced in Macedonian rule till conquered by Philip the Great.
—the wind was north,
and unless the captain tacked would carry the ship right into Naxos.
27. ὃ ἐπολιόρκει Νάξον
—the accession of Artaxerxes, who had lately ascended the throne when Them. arrived (see 137.4
) took place in 465 B.C. Hence, to make the dates suit, the siege of Naxos was assigned by Schafer to 466 B.C.; but, judging from the narrative of cc. 89-90
, this leaves too short an interval between the siege of Naxos and the death of Xerxes; for Eurymedon was fought before the latter event, and yet, apparently, some time after the revolt of Naxos. Hence other modern authorities assign the siege of Naxos to 468, 470 or even 473 B.C. But then the narrative here cannot be correct. In Plut. Them. 25
, where this passage is used, some MSS. have Θάσον
: and this would suit here better (see c. 100. 2
); but there may be a mistake on Thuc.'s part.
4. τὴν δὲ ἀσφάλειαν εἶναι
—i.e. ‘his safety depended on.’
—with μέχρι, μέχρι οὗ
Thuc. occasionally uses subj. without ἄν
according to the older idiom; but ἕως
with plain subj. does not occur.
—until fair weather came,
in contrast with χειμών
above: this and not ‘until he sailed’ seems to be the sense; πλοῦς
, as also in 3.3 πλῷ χρησάμενος καὶ τριταῖος ἀφικόμενος
—the ordinary fut. in Attic is μνησθήσομαι
, but Herod. uses μνήσομαι
—for the poetical use of dat. after ἦλθε
cf. c. 13. 3
. The aor. is plupert. in sense, and ὔστερον
means after his flight. At Athens his goods were confiscated so far as they were found, because he was a traitor.
13. κάτω ... ἄνω
—as in ἀνά-βασις
15. νεωστὶ βασιλεύοντα
with imperf. partic. cf. 3.20 ἀνδρῶν νξωστὶ πόλιν ἐχοντων
—this convenient form of quasi-oblique speech, where the speaker's actual words follow ὅτι
, oceurs only in prose.
—referring of course to the royal family.
18. ἐπιόντα ἐμοί
—a fine touch due to self-confidence.
20 ἐν τῷ ἀσφαλεῖ μὲν κτλ.
—when he retreated (πάλιν belongs to ἀποκομιδή) himself in danger, while I was in safety.
; cf. c. 87. 2
, but here the constn. is κατὰ σύνεσιν
after ἐδήλου ἡ γραφή
τὴν ἐκ Σ. προάγγελσιν τῆς ἀναχωρήσεως
relates that Themistocles sent a inessage to Xerxes saying that he had persuaded the Greeks not to break down the bridges over the Hellespont, and consequently the king might retreat at leisure. The story agrees with Thuc. here, except that Herod, says the message was sent from Audios, not Salamis. The true object of Them. was to cause Xerxes to retreat rapidly, since Xerxes had been once taken in by a false message from Them. (viz. that the Greeks were about to retreat from Salamis, Herod. 8.33
) and would be sure to assuine this one also was false. Them. now misrepresents the object he had had in sending the message. (Haacke and others refer τὴν ... ἀναχωρήσεως
to the earlier
message of Them., viz., that the Greeks
were about to withdraw from Salamis. By this
message Them. caused the defeat of the king; by the later
one he rescued the king. This explanation seems simpler; but it looks as if the parenthesis γράψας ... διάλυσιν
refers only to what Them. pretends to have done to serve
24. ἣν ψευδῶς προσεποιήσατο
—Herod. says Them. urged the Gk. fleet to break down the bridges, but he was opposed by the Peloponnesians The Athenian fleet was then willing to go alone, but this Them. successfully opposed. It looks as if Thuc. did not believe in this last part of the story. (Croiset understands ‘which he misrepresented,’ others avoid the appearance of an mconsistency with Herod.)
25. οὐ διάλυσιν
—cf. e.g. iii. 95. 2 τὴν οὐ περιτείχισιν
: vii. 34 τὴν τῶν Κορινθίων οὐκέτι ἐπαναγωγήν
27. τὴν σὴν φιλίαν
—my friendship for you.