Charles F. Smith, Commentary on Thucydides Book 7

---

The confidence of the Syracusans, on the other hand, rises now to the point of hoping completely to destroy the Athenian army, and thus win great glory and a conspicuous position among the Greeks.

2. παρέπλεον: i.e. they sailed along the shore of the harbour, even past the Athenian ship-station, in a demonstrative and threatening manner.—διενοοῦντο: with fut. inf. as in iv.115.7; 121. 3.

4. αὐτοί: from Vat., for αὐτοῦ, alone admissible as opp. to ἐκείνους.

κωλύσωσι : the reading of all the Mss. After verba curandi with ὅπως, Thuc.'s usage varies between the fut. indic. and aor. subjv. GMT. 45; H. 885 b. See on i.19.3 and St. Qu. Gr. p. 11. With κωλύσωσι understand μὴ σωθῆναι. Cf. vi.88.28; 102. 8.—ἀπὸ τῶν παρόντων: on account of (in consequence of) the present state of affairs, stronger than ἐκ τῶν παρόντων. Cf. ii.77.3.— 7. καθυπέρτερα: as in v.14.8.

ἐς τοὺς Ἕλληνας: the prep. ἐς with reference to the lit. meaning of φανεῖσθαι, as it were, shine into. Quite similar is δηλοῦν ἐς τοὺς Ἀθηναίους, i.90.10. Cf. i.72.13; vi.31.32.—καλόν: glorious, with ἀγώνισμα also in c. 59. 2.

τοὺς μέν, τοὺς δέ: part. appos. to τοὺς . . . Ἕλληνας, as in c. 45. 8.—ἐλευθεροῦσθαι, ἀπολύεσθαι: these infs. are evidently used in fut. sense. St., following v. H., has inserted ἄν before ἐλευθεροῦσθαι, but unnecessarily; for whether Cl.'s idea that in the older Att. writers some presents of pure and contract verbs are used in the sense of the fut. (see on iii.58.29) be right or not, certainly the pres. with εὐθύς here expresses much more forcibly the instantancous result. The Schol., as St. observes, seems to have read ἀπολύς εσθαι, since he explains it by ῥύσεσθαι.

καὶ αὐτοί : opp. to τούς τε ἄλλους Ἕλληνας in 10. —δόξαντες αἳτιοι αὐτῶν εἶναι: having the reputation of being the causes of these things. For αὐτῶν, see on c. 55. 11. The Schol. correctly explains, τῆς τε ἐλευθερίας τῶν Ἑλλήνων καὶ τοῦ ἀπαλλαγῆναι τοῦ φόβον.

16. καὶ ἦν δὲ...ἀγών : and the decisive combat was indeed an important one. καί is not copulative, and δέ is epexegetical. See on i.132.22.— 17. ὅτι...περιεγίγνοντο : the impf. of anticipation, because they were conquering.—μόνον,...μόνον : Cl. and St. write μόνων, μόνοι, the former explaining: “As μόνοι in 18 is necessary as opp. to μετὰ τῶν ξυμβοηθησάντων, so in 17 also, for the sake of symmetry at least, μόνων is necessary. Besides, μόνων is, if not indispensable, at least much more expressive, and αὖ before μόνοι refers to a preceding μόνων. Kr. unnecessarily objects to the words καὶ οὐδ᾽ αὐτοὶ αὖ μόνον, because that would diminish the glory of the Syracusans. That the Syracusans in this struggle appeared as leaders, even by the side of Corinthians and Lacedaemonians, and that the contest took place in their territory, gave them great importance for all Hellas.” But the change seems unnecessary: see App.— 21. ἐμπαρασχόντες: cf. vi.12.13. ἐν- has adv. force, as if τῷ ἀγῶνι were expressed. Cf. ii.20.9, ὁ χῶρος ἐπιτήδειος ἐφαίνετο ἐνστρατοπεδεῦσαι; ii.44.5, ἐνευδαιμονῆσαι ὁ βίος . . . ξυνεμετρήθη. The sense of the passage is, “having put forward their own city in the contest to take the post of danger.”—τε: as if καὶ προκόψαι followed. There is a slight change of const., since προκόψαντες is conformed rather to ἐμπαρασχόντες.

τοῦ ναυτικοῦ...προκόψαντες : having made great progress in naval affairs, lit. having opened the way for the navy in large measure. Cf. iv.60.12, καὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς ἅμα προκοπτόντων ἐκείνοις. Kühn. 416, note 2. Thuc. sometimes uses μέρος (adv. here) in other places also in an unusual way, e.g. in iii.3.6; v.32.9.

ἔθνη γὰρ πλεῖστα δὴ κτἑ.: cf. i.1.8. γάρ refers to τῶν ἄλλων πολλῶν ξυμμάχων and μετὰ τῶν ξυμβοηθησάντων σφίσι above.

ἐπὶμίαν πόλιν: not against but to the city, since not only the enemy but also the allies are meant. —τοῦ ξύμπαντος ὄχλου: the Mss. read λόγου, which the Schol. explains by ἀριθμοῦ. Kr. proposed ὄχλου, which Cl. and St. adopt. It is supported by c. 75. 26, μυριάδες τοῦ ξύμπαντος ὄχλου οὐκ ἐλάσσους τεσσάρων ἅμα ἐπορεύοντο. Besides, only with the reading ὄχλου is it admissible with τοῦ . . . πρὸς τὴν Ἀθηναίων τε πόλιν καὶ Λακεδαιμονίων to supply ξυνελθόντος from ξυνῆλθε, and thereby to put the prep. πρός in a prop. light. Instead of this, St. would supply or insert ξυστάντος. Heilmann and Madvig propose ξυλλόγου for λόγου.