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

---

---

τῇ δὲ ἐτύγχανε αὐτὸς ἐὼν Μαρδόνιος: a more explicit local definition of the exact position of Mardonios in the battle would be worth a good deal for the reconstruction of the piece. Was he παρ᾽ αὐτῷ τῷ Δημητρίῳ, and, if so, which Demetrion? Was he really at the head of his troops, and himself leading the assault (cp. c. 59 supra)? Or was he, where he should have been, in a position to co-ordinate and direct his whole forces?

ἀπ᾽ ἵππου τε μαχόμενος λευκοῦ: the specific mention, and memory, of the fact that Mardonios was mounted on a white horse might seem to imply that those about him were unmounted, or at least not mounted on white horses. (His mount was perhaps a Nesaian; cp. 8. 40.)

---

λογάδας Περσέων τοὺς ἀρίστους χιλίους: the reference to 8. 113 is not quite direct or obvious, but is generally taken to signify τὴν ἵππον τὴν χιλίην there specified, though not described as λογάδας. In 7. 40 ἱππόται χίλιοι ἐκ Περσέων πάντων ἀπολελεγμένοι form the head of the marching column; and a second chiliad of cavalry, similarly described, precedes the Immortals (apparently); besides thesc two chiliads of select cavalry there are two chiliads of select infantry, αἰχμοφόροι. The chiliad here mentioned might be any one of these four chiliads, and the mere fact that Mardonios himself is mounted hardly decides the question.

---

ταύτῃ δὲ καὶ μάλιστα τοὺς ἐναντίους ἐπίεσαν: sc. οἱ Πέρσαι. The statement is astonishing for two reasons: (a) the aorist ἑπἱεσαν instead of the imp. ἐπίεζον, especially after the number of antecedent imperfects, is a puzzle; (b） the statement describes the action of an advancing, an attacking party, not the action of a retreating party, and the Persians were already in retreat in the previous chapter But the sequence of events in the narrative may be inaccurately chronologized. This sentence (τῇ δὲ ἐτύγχανε ... ἐπίεσαν) eniphasizes the rôle of Mardonios in the battle, and may hark back to a point already passed by the general narrative in the previous chapter. This suggestion might account, perhaps, for the occurrence of the anomalous aorist: it is virtually equivalent to a pluperfect in time.

---

ὅσον μέν νυν χρόνον Μ. περιῆν: the actual time may be synchronous with the χρόνον ἐπὶ πολλόν of c. 62, during which ἐγίνετο ἡ μάχη ἰσχυρὴ παῤ αὐτὸ τὸ Δημήτριον. The corresponding sentence begins ὡς δὲ Μαρδόνιος ἀπέθανε (when Mardonios had been killed). οἳ δὲ ἀντεῖχον is the apodosis with δέ; the action described is that of men subject themselves to assault rather than attacking. The difficulty may be solved by the supposition above, that there was a temporary rally of the Persians παῤ αὐτὸ τὸ Δημήτριον, where Mardonios himself sat on horseback, surrounded doubtless by his staff and bodyguard, which is here distinctly acting on the defensive (ἀντεῖχον, ἀμυνόμενοι).

---

τὸ περὶ ἐκεῖνον τεταγμένον: neut. abst. for concrete = οἱ περὶ αὐτὸν τεταγμένοι, cp. c. 61 supra. There is nothing to suggest that this body is cavalry, rather the reverse. ἔπεσε, was cut to pieces, or fell mortally wounded each in his place; cp. ἔπιπτον c. 61 supra.

---

οὕτω δή: the narrative, having started afresh with Mardonios, now arrives again at the point previously reached, in general terms, in c. 62 ad f. The τροπή here (ἐτράποντο) mnst be in immediate sequence to the ὠθισμός there, and the observation on the Persians' ἐσθής here is exactly parallel to the reflexion there upon their inferiority in arms and skill.

---

ἐδηλέετο, ‘contributed to their destruction’; the effect is, however, not positive, but negative, privative. γυμνῆτες, ‘light-armed foot-soldiers,’ a word not elsewhere used by Hdt., but cp. Tyrtaios, 11. 35, quoted c. 48 supra.