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

---

---

ἔστι δὲ ... ἐξεργασμένον. The position of ἔστι shows that it is not a mere auxiliary, nor is the form of construction merely equivalent to a perfect passive. The λαμπρὸν ἔργον, though wrought, and wrought out, in the past, is conceived of as existing in the present: it is for ever.

---

περικατημένων, ‘blockading’: perfect in form, but present, or imperfect, in sense. The verb is used here as in 8. 111 of an island-city, but the operations are in part at least on land.

---

Εὐρυβάτην τὸν Ἀργεῖον. The story is told, and that more fully, in 6. 92, though without cross-reference either here or there; the present is probably the elder passage. Had the other been composed first, the further notes on Sophanes would have been there added (unless it were supposed that the passage was composed before his death! Even so, a reference to his anchor might have been expected). Cp. Introduction, §§ 7, 8.

πεντάεθλον: cp. c. 33 supra.

ἐκ προκλήσιος ἐφόνευσε: cp. 5. 1; i.e. ‘he challenged (or answered a challenge) to single combat and slew . .’ The fuller story in 6. 92, from the Aiginetan war (487-483 B.C.), reports that Eurybates was Strategos of the 1000 Argive volunteers who fought for Aigina, and that he slew three Athenians in single combat before succumbing to Sophanes, a record which on the one hand enhances, on the other diminishes, the achievement of Sophanes; the Argive pentathlete may have been pretty well do<*>e-up before he reached his round with Sophanes.

---

χρόνῳ ὕστερον τούτων: i.e. subsequent to the Persian war; cp. c. 73 supra; the exact date is not so certain.

---

κατέλαβε is impersonal; cp. cc. 93, 104 infra.

Ἀθηναίων στρατηγέοντα ἅμα Λεάγρῳ τῷ Γλαύκωνος, ‘Leagros son of Glaukon’ was no doubt the father of ‘Glaukon son of Leagros’ (Thuc. 1. 51. 4; cp. C.I.A. i. 179, Hicks2 No. 53), who commauded at Sybota in 432 B.C., as he had previously done in the Samian war, Androtion Fr. 44 a. Nearly half a score Athenians of the name of Glaukon can be identified (cp. PapeBenseler sub v.), but nothing more is known of the eldest one here named.

---

ἀποθανεῖν ὑπὸ Ἠδώνων ἐν Δάτῳ, Stein identifies this disaster with the defeat recorded by Thucydides 1. 100. 3 (cp. 4. 102. 2) synchronously with the revolt and blockade of Thasos, and dated by Busolt, III. i. 202, very precisely to the late summer of 465 B.C. Thucydides, however, without mentioning Daton makes Drabeskos the scene of the disaster. Stein suggests that Hdt. has confounded the objective, or goal, of the expedition, viz. Daton, with the scene of the Athenian defeat, viz. Drabeskos, which is to be placed ou the road to Datos, or Daton. Drabeskos is, indeed, the less problematic spot geographically; its position is ascertained “on the road from Herakleia Sintica to Philippi” (Forbiger, Alt. Geogr. iii 1070), or at any rate to the north, and inland from Philippi (cp. mod. Drama). If the Athenians were defeated at Drabeskos on their way to Datos, or Daton, they were fetching a considerable compass from Amphipolis and the Strymou. Busolt (l.c., following Henzen) regards Daton, at least in Hdt.'s time, as the name not of a town but of a district (that too seems to be Stein's first idea); the reconciliation between Hdt. and Thuc. in this case being effected by the supposition that Hdt. names the region and Thuc. the exact scene, or the township nearest to the scene, of the disaster. Cp. Strabo 331 (7. fr. 36) παρὰ δὲ τὴν παραλίαν τοῦ Στρυμόνος καὶ Δατηνῶν πόλις Νεάπολις καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ Δάτον, εὔκαρπα πεδία καὶ λίμνην καὶ ποταμοὺς καὶ ναυπήγια καὶ χρυσεῖα λυσιτελῆ ἔχον, ἀφ᾽ οὗ καὶ παροιμιάζονται Δάτον άγαθῶν ὡς καὶ ἀγαθῶν άγαθῖδας. This passage places the town of Daton on the coast, hard by Neapolis; but though this Neapolis appears on the Attic tribute-lists of the fifth century (Νεάπολις ἐν Θράκῃ, Ν. παῤ Ἀντισάραν, Νεοπολῖται οἱ παρα Θάσον） Daton is never mentioned. Neapolis was, in fact, at that period the port for the district of Datos; the town of Daton was only founded c. 360 B.C. by the Thasians, when they took possession of Krenides, under the leadership of the exiled Athenian Kallistratos (Busolt, op. c. 197 note 5). The identification of Daton with Krenides, the later Philippi (Appian B. C. 4. 105 οἱ δὲ Φίλιπποι πόλις ἐστὶν ἣ Δάτος ὠνομάζετο πάλαι, καὶ Κρηνίδες ἔτι πρὸ Δάτου. So too Harpokration s. v. Δατός (sic) on the authority of Ephoros and Philochoros; cp. Diodor. 16. 3. 7), is hardly reconcilable with Strabo's statement above quoted; but Strabo must give way to Harpokration's authorities; least of all should Datos have been identified with Neapolis (as by Leake, N. G. iii. 224). On the Edonians cp. 7. 110.

ἀποθανεῖν ὑπό: cp. c. 37.

---

περὶ τῶν μετάλλων τῶν χρυσέων. The whole region was argentiferous and auriferous; cp. 7. 112. The mines at Krenides-Philippi were only fully exploited by Philip; cp. Diodor. 16. 8. 6 “τὰ δὲ κατὰ τὴν χώραν χρύσεια μέταλλα παντελῶς ὄντα λιτὰ καὶ ἄδοξα ταῖς κατασκευαῖς ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον ἠύξησεν ὥστε δύνασθαι φέρειν αὐτῷ πρόσοδον πλέον ἢ ταλάντων χιλίων”.