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

---

---

οἱ δὲ Ἕλληνες. This sentence appears to give credit to ‘the Hellenes’ for repulsing the cavalry, i.e. to interpret τὸ πλῆθος, ὁ πεζὸς ἅπας in c. 23 supra as meaning the whole army. Even if that were the intention of Hdt. the fact would still be disputable: the idea that the whole forces available upon the Greek side were deployed and brought into action before the cavalry skirmish round the body of Masistios was terminated in favour of the Greeks is on the face of it improbable; nor is it easy to understand how sueh forces could have operated in the given position and locality. But (i.) quod facit per alium facit per se; (ii.) the advantage benefited the Greek side as a whole; (iii.) the Greeks had repulsed the Persian cavalry, even if only the Athenians, the Megarians, and possibly the Lakedaimonian πρόδρομοι were actually engaged in what was an affair of Vorposten, or, at most, of the head of the column, debouching through the pass.

---

πρῶτα μὲν ... παρὰ τὰς τάξις ἐκόμιζον. This proceeding seems to imply (1) that there was a road along whieh the wagon was drawn by horses (oxen, or mules); (2) that the Greek army was posted in tactical array of some kind. Only one of two roads can well be in question: (a) the road from Erythrai past Hysiai to Plataia; (b) the road up the Pass to Eleutherai, etc. If the Greek army was already in extended formation, in lines running east and west, as is apparently assumed by Plutarch, Aristeid. 11 ad init., and universally assumed for ‘the first position’ by modern authorities, the Megarians and Athenians would apparently occupy the extreme right wing, and the rest of the army would be to the left of them towards Hysiai and Plataia; or else the Athenians are already on the left wing, the rest of the forees having debouehed to the right of them. Two considerations appear to me to favour the former supposition:—(i.) Had the Athenians already been in oecupation of the left wing, the question so hotly disputed in the next chapter could hardly have arisen at that point. (ii.) Strategieally and tactieally the debouchure of the army towards the west is the natural one. If Erythrai was at the foot, or near the foot of the pass, the Greek van would seize on that position, and hold it, while the rest of the army moved from behind out of the pass. There is hardly room for such a development towards the east side, where the pass is flanked by the great mass of rock named by Dr. Grundy ‘The High Bastions’; moreover, such a movement would have thrown the Greek front away to the east of the Persian encampment, down stream, exposing them to be outflanked (on their left) by the Persian cavalry. Again, the development of the Greek first position westwards accords with the subsequent movement reported in this chapter, and also places the rear of the column, when developed, in front of the two other roads, or passes, crossing Kithairon (to Eleutherai and to Megara). Finally, as, upon the above supposition, the Lakedaimonians in the first position come to stand on the extreme left, and the Athenians ou the right, not only is there some excuse for the coutroversy in the next chapter, when the army moves down-hill to ‘the second position,’ but also a clue is perhaps found to the real or recorded exchange of positions between the Athenians aud the Lakedaimonians in the second position (cc. 46, 47 infra), though for that exchange, or supposed exchange, other fair explanations may also be forthcoming. It is possible, then, that the body of Masistios was conveyed upon a wagon along the road running from Erythrai towards Plataia, no doubt mostly behind the Greek lines, as finally developed in ‘the first position.’ It is also, however, possible that the wagon was taken simply up the road through the pass to the rear, the sight of it mightily encouraging the rear ranks of the column, which had not yet fully emerged on to the ὑπωρέη. What the ultimate destination of the wagon, or what became of the corpse, Hdt. unfortunately does not inform us; presumably he did not know. The θώρηξ found its way to Athens; cp. c. 22 supra.

---

ὁ δὲ νεκρὸς ἦν θέης ἄξιος. Hdt. writes as though he had seen it; but of course he had not. Tall and comely as the corpse was, Masistios does not seem to have been ‘heroized’ like Artachaies at Akanthos, 7. 117, or Philip of Kroton at Segesta, 5. 47. Cp. c. 20 supra. Hdt. also omits to specify what became of his noble Nesaian charger: was he led to his master's grave, and perhaps sacrificed thereon? Or did he escape with the squadron, after his master's fall? Or die of his wound on the field?

---

ταῦτα ἐποίευν. The difficulty may be surmounted (a) by deleting ταῦτα ἐποίευν with Krüger; (b) by bracketing ἐκλείποντες ... Μασίστιον as a gloss; (c) by understanding, with Stein, ταῦτα = τάδε. Cp. οὕτω = ὧδε c. 22 supra.

---

ἔδοξέ σφι ἐπικαταβῆναι ἐς Πλαταιάς: this is a formal decision of the council of war, cp. c. 51 infra, or of the commander-in-chief. That it was taken at this moment may not be strictly correct. Hdt. does not say for how long the Greeks occupied ‘the first position,’ whether for days, or only for hours. The process by which the advance was effected may have been as follows:—The Megarians (or perhaps οἱ ἀμφὶ Μεγαρέας κτλ., cp. c. 69) had seized and occupied Erythrai, until relieved by the Athenians, who in their turn have been supported by more and more of the forces, until ὁ πεζὸς ἅπας has gradually arrived on the scene. The Athenians and Megarians may have moved out of Erythrai, westwards towards Hysiai first, and then beyond, Erythrai being occupied in succession by the various contingents, without further fighting, and the position being constantly developed westwards, until finally the Athenians and Megarians have pushed along the ὑπωρέη far enough to the west to allow of the Lakedaimoniaus in the rear occupying Erythrai on the extreme right of the position. If this was the process, then the question of precedence between the Atheuians and Tegeatai was virtually settled beforehand. But it seems more probable that, as above suggested, the head of the column, composed of the Megarians (and the Spartan Chiliad?) supported by the Athenians continued to hold Erythrai, while the rest of the army deployed behind Erythrai to the west, along the high ground, in front of Hysiai and towards Plataia. This movement would be facilitated by the existence of the roads from Erythrai to Plataia, and from Dryoskephalai to Plataia.

---

ἐπικαταβῆναι gives two characteristics of the movement: (a) it was downhill, from higher to lower ground; (b） it was a forward, or offensive movement; cp. 8. 38. ἐς Πλαταιάς gives a third: (c) it was into Plataian territory (cp. c. 16 supra). This might involve not merely a northerly, but a north-westerly direction; that it was not due west, or on to Plataia itself, or its ruins, is abundantly clear both from the immediately ensuing topography, and from the subsequent narrative (cp. c. 52 infra).

ὁ γὰρ χῶρος κτλ. The reasons given for the move are admittedly incomplete (τά τε ἄλλα καί); the only one emphasized is the water supply, no doubt a reason of supreme importance, especially with a view to encampiug (ἐνστρατοπεδεύεσθαι), less important, however, with a view to pure fighting (ἐμμαχέσασθαι c. 7 supra) which must have been under consideration. If the Greeks did not want to provoke a battle they would have remained in their first position, or moved at once to the ‘Islaud’ (c. 51 infra). The fact that the battle was not finally fought exactly in the second position has, perhaps, led to the ‘offensive’ or at least provocative character of this forward movement being ignored. Any one could appreciate the reason given, which was manifest to the merest tiro (ἐφαίνετο ἐών). τὴν Γαργαφίην, see below.

---

διαταχθέντας στρατοπεδεύεσθαι: before the new position was occupied, before the Laager there was formed, and presumably either in the first position itself, or in the process of moving from the first position to the second, a διάταξις was to be effected, i.e. the existing arrangement and order of the τάξεις was to be modified, or at any rate the army was to be put in battle-array; it had not therefore previously been in battlearray, but in marching order, or at least not in the order of battle approved by the commanders. (Cp. 8. 70 παρεκρίθησαν διαταχθέντες, of the movement of the Persian fleet into line of battle; διέτασσε 6. 107, ὡς δέ σφι διετέτακτο 6. 112 acie ordinata; cp. also 1. 80 ὡς δέ οἱ πάντες διετετάχατο with the context.) But perhaps Hdt. is getting a little out of his depth here; the Greeks can hardly have intended to encamp for any leugth of time on the advanced position ‘on the Asopos.’

---

ἀναλαβόντες δὲ τὰ ὅπλα: cp. cc. 53, 57 infra. The heavy arms (shields, etc.) were piled for the halt, or in camp, and ‘taken up’ again before moving. The army had probably bivouacked at least one night in the position at Erythrai —though Hdt. does not actually say so.

ἤισαν διὰ τῆς ὑπωρέης τοῦ Κιθαιρῶνος: nothing in these words proves this a down-hill march; that idea must be borrowed from the ἐπικαταβῆναι above, and from the real topography or choriography; otherwise the words might describe the movement of a column direct on Plataia, or of a series of contingeuts extending themselves en échelon in that direction.

---

παρὰ Ὑσιάς. Strabo 404 ἔνιοι δὲ τὰς Ὑσιὰς Ὑρίην λέγεσθαί φασι, τῆς Παρασωπίας οὖσαν ὑπὸ τῷ Κιθαιρῶνι πλησίον Ἐρυθρῶν ἐν τῇ μεσογαίᾳ. It was ‘a little to the right’ of the road from Eleutherai to Plataiai; Pausan. 9. 2. 1. There was a road running from Thebes to Eleutherai via Hysiai (or rather via Erythrai?), Pausau. 9. 1. 6, by which the Thebans circumvented the Plataians in 373 B.C. The position of Hysiai was plainly west of Erythrai and east of Plataia; cp. c. 15 supra ad f.; but whether Hysiai was higher up hill, or on lower ground than Erythrai, is not s<*> evident. Tradition (cp. G. B. Grundy, G.P.W. p. 464) identifies the site with that of the existing village of Kriekouki: Dr. Grundy himself places it outside the area of the existing village, and higher up the hill to the south. I think it probable that just as Erythrai commanded the Dryoskephalai Pass, and the direct road from Thebes to EleutheraiEleusis - Athens, so Hysiai commanded the loop-road from Plataia which struck into the main road behind the ridge, by a second pass; while Plataia itself might be taken to command the third road and pass across the ridge of Kithairon, that leading direct to Megara. These three passes cross the ridge at intervals of about a mile (roughly); but Plataia lay somewhat further in advance (and to the west) of Pass III. than Hysiai and Erythrai of Passes II. and I. respectively.

ἐς τὴν Πλαταιίδα γῆν. The territory of Plataia extended northwards right down to the Asopos (cp. c. 15 supra); how far it extended eastwards is uot so clear. Hysiai (Strabo 404) and Erythrai (Strabo 409) were both in the Παρασωπία, and their territories (whether independent or not) reached down to the river - course. It may be conjectured that the whole water - system of the Oeroe (c. 51 infra) belonged to Plataia, while lower down, and to the north, stream A. 4 among the tributaries of the Asopos, descending from Kithairon, may have formed a boundary between the Πλαταιίς and the Ὑσιαιίς. This would place Gargaphia, on every theory, within the Plataiis, as also the Heroon of Androkrates; it would leave the Demetrion (c. 62 infra) and the ‘Long Ridge’ in the Hysiaiis. The boundary between the territory of Hysiai and that of Erythrai might perhaps be found in the considerable stream A. 6 which Dr. Grundy conjecturally identifies with the Moloeis (c. 57 infra) This identification would suit the position suggested above, on the Plataia-Athens pass, for the site of Hysiai very well, and would lead to the inclusion of the Argiopion (e. 57 infra) in the territory of Hysiai.

---

ἀπικόμενοι δὲ ἐτάσσοντο κατὰ ἔθνεα. This assertion generates two difficulties. (1) Were not the Greeks already τεταγμένοι κατ᾽ ἔθνεα? Most certainly, the various τάξεις, the various contingents in the first position, Megarians, Athenians, ete., were ‘ethnic.’ (2) Did the Greeks all arrive at the uew position and then proceed to the διάταξις? Such an operation is practically incredible. The order in which the ethnie τάξεις should stand, or laager, in the new (i.e. ‘second,’ or more strictly third) position must have been determined, in the main, before the position was occupied; the Greeks could neither have arrived there in a confused mass, with all the various ἔθνη indiscriminately mixed up, as though the proceeding were a pêle-mêle flight, not a forward movement in the face of the enemy; nor, again, could the various ethnie coutingents, each in itself compact, have advanced and taken up a station at random round the fouutaiu of Gargaphia. Whatever the order in which the Greeks had bivonacked iu the first position, by Erythrai (or in the second positiou, west thereof), the order of battle, and the order of the stations in the Asopos position, must have been decided before the forces moved forward to occupy it. But if, as above suggested, the Athenians, in the final development of the first position, occnpied the extreme right, at Erythrai, while the Tegeatai were ou the left, next the Spartans, there might be a question whether, when the Spartans moved forward to the right, the Tegeatai should follow them, or simply move forward into position so as to form the extreme left of the Greek line in ‘the secoud (i.e. third) position.’

πλησίον τῆς τε κρήνης τῆς Γαργαφίης: the position and ideutity of Gargaphia have been disputed.

(i.) It was identified by Squire (ap. Walpole, Memoirs, 338 ff.) aud by Clarke (Travels, ii. 3, p. 83) with the spring now called Vergutiani. Blakesley unfortunately acquiesced in this identification, which is quite hopeless, Vergutiani beiug high up on the ὑπωρέη, and belonging to the water-system of the Oeroe. (The apparent ‘second’ position of the Greeks is described below, e. 30, as ἐπὶ τῷ Ἀσωπῷ. Perhaps in the true second position Vergutiani was within, or just behind, their lines.)

(ii.) Leake (N.G. ii. 332, 343) and Vischer (Erinnerungen, p. 549) accept the traditional identification of Gargaphia with a spring now known as Apotripi, just north of and below the (ruined) Church of St. John on the ‘Asopos Ridge’: the head-waters in fact of stream A. 1 in G. B. Grundy's Maps. This identification is prima facie valid.

(iii.) Grote (followed by Rawlinson and Stein) regarded Gargaphia as nonexistent at the present day, or, what comes to the same thing, unidentifiable. Grote unfortunately never visited the scenes with which his great work is concerned. No one who has actually seen the battle field of Plataia, or considered its problems in loco, will easily acqniesce in this non possumus.

(iv.) Dr. G. B. Gruudy identifies the spring of Gargaphia with an extant spring some three-quarters of a mile, or less, east (slightly by north) of Apotripi, and virtually in the same hollow ground, or trough, as Apotripi, surrounding the Asopos Ridge. This spring is one of the head - waters of the stream A. 4 forming the east boundary of the Asopos Ridge, and possibly, as above suggested, the frontier between the Plataiis and the Hysiaiis. Not much is gained by this shift of Gargaphia one-half to threequarters of a mile eastward: as a matter of fact both springs in question will have been within the Greek lines; but Dr. Grundy's suggestion tends to put the spring on the extreme right of the Greek army, which might appear an advantage, especially to those who take Gargaphia and the Androkrateion as making two termini; see next note.

Hdt. himself makes Gargaphia 10 stades from the Island, c. 51 infra, and 20 stades from the Heraion, c. 52 infra. These measurements are obviously mere round numbers, and of very little value except as making (i.) supra more than ever impossible. The distance to the ‘Island’ (as identified by Dr. Grundy) would suit either spring; the distance to the Heraion (whatever its exact site) is in either case an over-estimate. If the Island had been where Leake and Vischer put it, the distance would have suited Apotripi better than the alternative.

(v.) Goettling, Gesam. Abh. p. 136, identified Gargaphia with a spring near Plataia: the same objections are fatal to this proposal as to (i.). The name Gargaphia = Platanisti, ‘Poplar-well.’ γάργα = αἴγειρος, Hesych. γάρκα, ‘Macedonian,’ a rod, ib. We may suppose the wellhead shaded with a grove of poplars, or plane trees.

---

τοῦ τεμένεος τοῦ Ἀνδροκράτεος τοῦ ἥρωος. Thuc. 3. 24. 1 places τὸ τοῦ Ἀνδροκράτους ἡρῷον on the right of the direct road from Plataia to Thebes; cp. Plutarch, Aristeid. 11 αὐτοῦ δ᾽ ἦν καὶ τὸ τοῦ Ἀνδροκράτους ἡρῷον ἐγγὺς ἄλσει πυκνῶν καὶ συσκίων δένδρων περιεχόμενον. These, with Hdt., are the only authorities on the exact site, and they leave much to be desired. αὐτοῦ in Plutarch does not mean (pace Rawliuson) ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ but simply ἐν τῇ Πλαταιίδι. As far as Thucydides goes, the Heroon is anywhere, within reach, on the right of the road from Plataia to Thebes. There is no evideuce that Thucydides himself ever visited Plataia, and the ‘5 or 6 stades’ mentioned in the context need not be used to prejudice the position of the Hero's house. Little is known of Androkrates, but he was plainly the greatest of the local Heroes of Plataia, of the ἀρχηγέται Πλαταιέων, seven in number, mentioned in the ‘oracle’ ap. Plutarch, Aristeid. 11; cp. Rohde, Psyche (1890) p. 161. A conspicuous site may be posited for his Heroon. If such a site is forthcoming, and fits in well with ‘the second (i.e. third) position’ of the Greeks before Plataia in 479 B C., it cannot be sacrificed to an obiter dictum in Thucydides. I have therefore no hesitation in accepting the Church of St. John (first proposed by W. J. Woodhouse, J.H.S. xviii. (1898) 38 ff.) as marking the Androkrateion as surely as the Church of St. Demetrion on the neighbouring ridge to the east marks one of the temples of Eleusinian Demeter (as proposed by Dr. Grundy; cp. c. 57 infra).

There is nothing to show that Hdt. in this passage conceived Gargaphia as marking the extreme right of the Greek position, and the Androkrateion as marking the extreme left, a point on which Rawlinson rightly demurs to Grote. The Church of St. John occupies the lower of two summits (300 and 360 ft. respectively above the Asopos Bridge) which are both alike comprised in the ‘Asopos Ridge.’ The Greeks, now offering battle, will have occupied both these summits, directly in advance of the two springs, or well-heads, (ii.) and (iv.) above, whieh dispute the uame Gargaphia, and both sources will have been used by the troops: Dr. Grundy's Gargaphia by the right wing, Apotripi by the centre, while the Athenians and left wing may have had to draw from the stream A. 1 (not wholly dependent on Apotripi for its water). This position suits the description διὰ ὅχθων τε οὐκ ὑψηλῶν καὶ ἀπέδου χώρου. It was an ἄπεδος χῶρος though not a πεδίον. Dr. Grundy places the Greeks to the south, just above the trough betweeu streams A. 1 and A. 4 and with the wells in frout of them.