Reginald Walter Macan, Herodotus, The Seventh, Eighth, & Ninth Books with Introduction and Commentary

---

---

ἦν δὲ τῶν τις Ἀθηναίων ἀνήρ: ἀνήρ is emphatic, predicative (cp. 1. 51 τῶν τις Δελφῶν).

---

ἐς πρώτους νεωστὶ παριών: the temporal adverb is relative to the date of the event, not of the record. In c. 148 infra νεωστί is used of an event which had taken place ten to fifteen years previously. This man had been Ἄρχων in 493 B.C., while the Archontate was still an elective office; cp. Thuc. 1. 93. 3, Ἀθ. π. 22. 5. ἐς πρώτους, ‘to the front rank’ (of citizens), a sense found in Homer: Il. 15. 643 “ἐν πρώτοισι Μυκηναίων”, Od. 6. 60 “μετὰ πρώτοισιν ἐόντα Βουλὰς βουλεύειν”.

τῷ οὔνομα μὲν ... ἐκαλέετο: there is no real antithesis intended between οὔνομα and ἐκαλέετο, much less between ἐκαλέετο and ἦν. The redundancy of style is perhaps designed to make the first introduction of Themistokles, son of Neokles, more elahorate and signal, and not to suggest a γραφὴ ξενίας. Themistokles was already gathered to his fathers, or rather buried as to his mortality in the market-place of Magnesia (Thuc. 1. 138. 4), when this passage was first written (aye, well before Hdt. began his literary career). Hdt. does not preserve the name of Themistokles' mother (as of Perikles', 6. 131), whether she was Thracian, or Halikarnassian (Plutarch, Them. 1), or, it may be, Athenian. Neither does Hdt. represent him as a novus homo. This passage is in no way to the discredit of Themistokles; on the contrary, he is introduced with a flourish of trumpets. Hdt. has but just entered on his account of the Greek preparations with a report of the Delphic responses to Athens, and brings Themistokles upon the scene as a brilliant and sagacious diviner (μάντις δ᾽ ἄριστος ὅστις εἰκάζει καλῶς Eurip. ap. Plutarch. Mor. 432=Frag. 963 Nauck), putting the experts to shame, and as author previously of the self-denying ordinance which gave the silver surplus for a patriotic experiment.

---

οὐκ ἔφη πᾶν. They were right about there being a ναυμαχίη, but wrong about its being a defeat (ἑσσωθῆναι).

---

συμβάλλεσθαι: not very different from λαμβάνειν supra and συλλαμβάνειν infra; cp c. 142 Il. 8, 16 supra.

---

ἐς Ἀθηναίους εἶχε τὸ ἔπος εἰρημένον ἐόντως. Stein takes εἶχε εἰρημένον as simply a periphrasis for εἴρητο (i.e εἶχε=ἦν), quoting in support 3. 48 ὔβρισμα ἐς τούτους εἶχε γενόμενον. The adverb perhaps enforces this rendering. Cp. App. Crit. But the order of the words here is noticeable (ἔχειν ἐς, cp. c. 130 supra), and the point would be clearer without the participle.

---

μιν cannot refer to Themistokles as subject of δοκέειν (Abicht), for that construction would require αὐτός. It must stand for τὸ ἔπος, however harsh the construction, which goes rather beyond 6. 82 (even if μιν there is right, and rightly referred to τὸ Ἄργος). But cp. App. Crit.

---

οἰκήτορες, ‘settlers,’ ‘occupants,’ cp. 2. 103, 4. 9, 35, Thuc. 1. 2. 3, 2. 27. 1, 3. 92. 5. The uses in Aischyl., Soph., Eurip. gain point from seeing that οἰκήτωρ means not ‘inhabitant’ in the ordinary sense, but ‘settler.’ The Athenians in Salamis were ‘kleruchs.’ (L. & S. does not understand this.)

---

ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῇ. The preposition, though primarily locative, may be taken (Stein points out) as causal too.

---

ὡς ναυμαχήσοντας, ‘at Salamis,’ a rather important supplement, for a battle off Euboia would not be ἀμφὶ Σαλαμῖνα or Σαλαμῖνι: a fresh proof that this response cannot have been procured before the evacuation of Artemision.

---

τὸ δὲ σύμπαν εἰπεῖν: cp. App. Crit. It is plain that there was a party in Athens, headed or supported by the χρησμολόγοι, in favour of following the precedent of Teos and Phokaia in 546 B C. (cp. 1. 164-8), abandoning their country (ἡ πατρίς c. 141 supra) and finding a new home beyond the seas. Such a project is practically inconceivable in 482 B.C. (where Stein dates the oracles), or even in 480 B.C. before the collapse of the defence at ArtemisionThermopylai. Themistokles himself kept that plan in reserve to force a battle in the Straits; cp. 8. 62 infra; and it may be that the idea had been formulated long before as a possibility, if the worst came to the worst. It might even be older than the days of Marathon. But that it was seriously proposed in Athens before blow had been struck in 480 B.C. is (me iudice） incredible.