This text is part of:
τῆς Ἀκάνθου: cc. 116 f. supra. τοῖσι στρατηγοῖσι: c. 97 supra. Xerxes appears in this chapter (which contains some curiously belated information that might at least have been given in or before c. 108 supra) throughout as exercising the supreme command, and not as a mere figure-head.
ἀπ᾽ ἑωυτοῦ might seem to imply that hitherto the ships had been in touch with him, which was not strictly the case; see below. But they had been advancing in the same direction, whereas now the fleet takes a course of its own. Hdt.'s statement is, however, explieit that only at Akanthos, not for example at Argilos, fleet and army parted company (ep. c. 58 supra).
Θέρμῃ δὲ ... τὴν ἐπωνυμίην ἔχει: a geographical note somewhat loosely taeked on, after the main sentence, but thereby marked all the more clearly as no part of the king's orders but a pure deliveranee of the writer. Hekataios apparently mentioned both Therme and the gulf named after it; cp. Fr. 116 (= Steph. B. sub v. Χάλαστρα). Therme, originally perhaps a Greek eolony, but a Makedonian town at the date when Hdt. was writing, and doubtless in 480 B.C., was only in Athenian possession for a few months in 432-31 B.C. (cp. Thucyd. 1. 61. 2, 2. 29. 6). Its position and its harbour must have given it importance always, but only with the foundation of Thessalonike on the spot by Kassandros (Strabo 330. 21) were the possibilities of the place fully appreciated; and only with the Romans did Thessalonike, as the capital of one of the Makedonian regions, and at the very middle of the Via Egnatia, reach its full destiny, albeit thereafter to be supplanted by Constantinople. It was by no accident that a Christian church early flourished here (cp. the two Epp. ascribed to St. Paul), for the place was frequented of the Jews, and Saloniki, still the seat of an archimandrite, is largely in the hands of a Jewish population (cp. Tozer, Highlands of Turkey, i. 143 ff.).
ταύτῃ γὰρ ἐπυνθάνετο συντομώτατον εἶναι: one may suspect that a sentence has dropped out before these words, whieh appear to give the reason why Xerxes and the land-army here parted from the fleet. αὐτὸς δὲ διὰ (τῆς) μεσογαίης τὴν ὁδὸν ἔμελλε ποιέεσθαι (ἐποιέετο?), or words to that effect, are necessary to render the argument coherent. μέχρι Ἀκάνθου ... ἐκ Δορίσκου: the organization and separate advance of the three corps d'armée or columns (τρείς μοῖραι) probably did not cease at Akan thos (cp. τριτημορίς c. 131 infra), though Hdt. does not specify it clearly for any part of the march except that between Doriskos and Akanthos, and, indeed, only for this part here as a belated explanation of a new departure or development at Akanthos (if it was at Akanthos, and not at Argilos). But did the arrangement only date from Doriskos? The land-forces that marched from Sardes to Abydos, and from Sestos to Doriskos, must have had some good organization, and definite tactical dispositions; but it is possible that a new departure, a new devel <*>nt, was effected at Doriskos, espe<*> if (as I have ventured to suggest) at <*>east onethird of the forces reached Doriskos by sea, with probably the greater portion of the fleet; cp. notes to cc. 44, 59 supra. It may then have been at Doriskos that the full tripartition, or rather the triplication, of the land forces was effected; and from that point to Akanthos the army may have marched, on three approximately parallel routes—left, middle, and right—by coast-line, inland and between, the fleet remaining in touch at least with the left column. Hdt. leaves no doubt here as to his own conception of the order of march from Doriskos to Akanthos; but in his actual narrative of the march (cc. 108-117), though incidentally implying the existence of two distinct marching columns, he is nowhere betrayed into implying the existence of a third. Is it possible that after all there were only two actually on land, the third μοῖρα being conveyed by the transports and fleet? In that case Xerxes himself would probably have marched by the coast route, with a corps d'armée on his right, on the inland road (via Krenides, and north of Pangaion), and the fleet on his left (carrying a large number of soldiers, perhaps more than a mere third). Several points confirm this conjecture. (1) At Akanthos Xerxes ἀπῆκε ἀπ᾽ ἑωυτοῦ πορεύεσθαι τὰς νέας. (2) There are two routes plainly traceable from Doriskos to Akanthos, but a third is not indicated, nor easy to suggest. (3) The arrangement provides some work for the immense host of transports, which may have advanced to Therme. (4) At least a very large number of Persians and Medes and Sakai are supposed to be on the war-ships as Epibatai: these probably represent men taken from the πεζός, cp. c. 96 supra. (5) The arrangement appears reasonable in itself, and eases the difficulty of the advance of the huge forces. (6) If the right column crossed from Argilos to Therme direct (cp. c. 115 supra), and Xerxes with the middle column reached Akanthos, what becomes of the left column, unless we have shipped it somewhere en route?
ὁ Ξ. δασάμενος: cp. cc. 36, 119 supra; and on the article c. 45 supra. τὸν πεζὸν στ. must here include τὴν ἵππον: cp. c. 60 supra.
ἐστρατήγεον: on the generals see c. 82 supra, and on the whole question raised by this c. Appendix II. § 5.
τὸ μέσον: cp. cc. 108 supra, 129 infra.
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.