This text is part of:
μέχρι ... Θερμοπυλέων: SepiasThermopylai rightly marked here, and again in c. 186 ad fin., as a great station in the Persian war: not perhaps merely, or so much on account of the havoc wrought by the storm (c. 188), as because now the hostile forces. Persian and Greek, have touch of each other. ἀπαθής τε κακῶν ἦν ὁ στρατός, both army and navy: άπ. κ. 5. 19. All had gone well so far, commissariat, ambulance, fighting forces. This in itself speaks well for the Persian organization. Hdt. does not reckon such trifles as the loss of the first bridges (c. 34), the accident to Pharnoukes (c. 88), the death of Artachaies (c. 117) as κακά, affecting the στρατός.
ὡσἐγὼ συμβαλλόμενος εὑρίσκω: cp. c. 24 supra (where figures are not in evidence). Hdt. lays stress on his calculations and conclusions in the following passage, and stands to win or forfeit, by them, his character, not as arithmetician merely, but as historian. His arithmetic stands the test and comes ont triumphantly, and the fact that in the numerous additions and subtractions, here recorded, items and totals invariably agree, speaks well for the traditional text. But in regard to the material aspects of the passage, Hdt. seems to have flung all Sachkritik to the winds. His computation of the Persian forces in this passage is his mortal sin as an historical authority, and justifies almost the wildest flights of sceptics such as Delbruck and Welzhofer; for it is deliberate, it is elaborate, it is assured and reasoned, and it is incredible and absurd. There is a grammatical inconsequence (anacoluthon) in the passage: πλῆθος ἦν should be followed by the figures in the nominative; the interposition of this sentence, though parenthetical, has thrown them into the accusative.
ἀρχαῖον, ‘original’: i.e. before the addition of the Perso-Medo-Sakan epibatai —a good instance of the proper meaning of the word; cp. c. 176 supra.
ὡς ἀνὰ διηκοσίους ... νηί: cp. 8. 17, where this figure is given for an Athenian trireme, possibly including the Epibatai; as here also the ‘native’ Epibatai must be ineluded, otherwise they are omitted altogether in Hdt.'s calculations. ἀνά, distributive.
ἐπεβάτευον ... τριήκοντα ἄνδρες. Hdt. treats these ‘Persian’ Epibatai as a constant integral of the fleet: is it not more probable that they were soldiers from the πεζός embarked at Phaleron for the battle of Salamis, and possibly at Aphetai too, for the engagements off Artemision?
προσθήσω ... ποιήσας, purely ideal or mental processes of addition and ‘making’; cp. 11. 20, 22, and c. 186 1. 5 infra.
ὡς καὶ πρότερον εἰρἑθη: the reference is back to c. 97 ad fin.
ἐγένοντο, in the objective order? or in the historian's account? The γίνεται just below, and the general colour of the passage (προσθήσω ... ποιήσας bis） makes for the latter; in which case there is a reference back to c. 60 supra.
τὰς καμήλους ... τὰ ἅρματα: cp. c. 86. The order of words here is observable.
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.