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

---

---

ἔπεσι ἀκροβολισάμενοι: nach solchem Wortgefecht, Stein, who cps. λόγων ὠθισμός c. 78 infra. But there is a difference. ὠθισμός would be for the heavy-armed, ἀκροβολισμός would be for the light-armed orators. Moreover, an ἔπος is a ‘winged-word.’ The reference seems to be rather back to the bon-mots in cc. 59, 61 than to the weighty arguments of Themistokles in cc. 60, 61 f.

ἐπείτε Εὐρυβιάδῃ ἔδοξε: a decision by Eurybiades was all that was necessary; the Spartan navarch had absolute power in the matter, in virtue of the Spartan Hegemonia. He might consult a council of war, but he was not bound by a majority of votes, or even bound to put the question to the vote at all. Naturally, however, he could not give battle unless assured of the approval of the Athenians, who supplied two-thirds of the forces.

---

ἡμέρη τε ἐγίνετο καί: the parataxis is to be observed: not that the sunrise had of necessity anything to say to ‘the earthquake on land and sea.’ The earthquake is, however, surely portentous and Poseidonian. Seisms are unfortunately of no use chronologically; but the day in question is apparently the very day before the actual battle, the Persian fleet is all in sight, at Phaleron, albeit its arrival has still to be recorded in the story, cp. c. 66 infra. If the introduction of the anecdote in c. 65 as upon this day may be used for a chronological indication, conscious or unconscious, then the date would probably be Boedromion 20; cp. l.c.

---

ἔδοξε δέ σφι: the Council again? or the Athenians? or, vaguely, the whole armament of the Greeks? A regrettable obscurity.

εὔξασθαι τοῖσι θεοῖσι: the day before the battle is largely devoted to religious exercises; the earthquake having probably emphasized the natural instinct of piety at such a crisis. The Athenians will have felt an especial grief in their exclusion from Eleusis on this day; but their prayers to the goddess were destined to obtain a rich response within the year, cp. 9. 101 infra. None of the gods was omitted from the litany on this occasion.

---

ἐπικαλέσασθαι τοὺς Αἰακίδας συμμάχους: Aiakos was a son of Zeus (Il. 21. 189 etc., but in Homer Aiakos is not yet descended into hell, as Judge of the Underworld). The best known sons of Aiakos are Peleus, the father of Achilles, and Telamon the father of Aias. From Aias were further descended the Philaidai, and Eurysakidai—two great Attic clans—through their eponyms, his sons, Philaios, Eurysakes. But Aiakos had also a son Phokos (Pausanias 2. 29. 7), whose tomb was shown in Aigina, where he had been slain by his half-brother Telamon, who was in consequence banished the island. Hence the Greeks, or Athenians, could invoke Telamon and Aias in Salamis (where they had resided), but had to send to Aigina itself to invoke, or to fetch, Aiakos and the other Aiakidai. But what others? For Peleus and for Achilles they would surely have had to send to their tombs in Thessaly (?), in the Troad (Od. 24. 80 ff.; Arrian, Anab. 1. 11. 12; cp. 5. 94 supra). The descendants of Phokos, too, were to be sought in ‘Phokis,’ Pausau. 2. 29. 2. (It seems as if Aiakos and Phokos were the only ‘Aiakids’ to be found in Aigina.) In view of the story in 5. 80, 81 it may fairly be argued that this ship was sent to fetch actual idols (ξόανα), and not merely to perform an invocation in loco; cp. my notes to l.c. This ship would have to evade the Persian fleet and look-out, though that necessity has not yet transpired in the narrative of Hdt.; it may therefore be surmised that it was sent at night, not in daylight. But, again, if so, it can hardly have gone and come in one night, but was probably sent out on the night preceding, and returned as recorded in c. 83 infra.

ὡς ... καί . .: a parataxis, but not a synchronism, and even an incorrect parataxis, seeing that either ὡς or καί is de trop; cp. εἰ ... καί c. 62 supra. The difference in the tenses ἔδοξε, ἐποίευν should be marked.