This text is part of:
ἐν δὲ τῷ ... αὐτίκα, ‘meanwhile, immediately after the occurrence of the disaster in Thermopylai’; i.e. before the transaetions nariated in cc. 23-26.
Θεσσαλοὶ ... ἐς Φωκέας. The χόλος between Thessalians and Phokians was even more deadly than the ἔχθρη between Athens and Aigina; cp. 7. 145, where nothing is said of any attempt to compose this quarrel at the Isthmus. (Hdt. does not co-ordinate his materials fully.) The word χόλος has a more physical and conerete ring in it than ἔχθρη. The antiquity of the feud between Thessalian and Phokian is exhibited in 7. 176 supra. That it is less in evidence during the fifth century is perhaps rather an aceident of our sourees than a proof of mutual good will, save that Phokians and Thessalians may have had, to some extent, a common friend in Athens. (In the fourth eentury the short-lived supremacy of Phokis was in great part maintained by the division of Thessaly against itself; cp. Bury, Hist. of Greece, ii. 281 ff.)
τρώματος: an awkward iteration after τρῶμα just above. καὶ τὸ κάρτα, ‘very speeially,’ 7. 16, 4. 181, etc.
γάρ explains and introduces an account of τὸ ὕστατον τρῶμα. The exact date of this affair is not to be extracted from the phrase οὐ πολλοῖσι ἔτεσι πρότερον ταύτης τῆς βασιλἐος στρατηλασίης. It would be interesting to know who the σύμμαχοι were, or whether that word points to anything more than τὸ κοινὸν τῶν Θεσσαλῶν. The account in Hdt. is neither quite complete nor perhaps quite accurate. He records two victories of the Phokians over the Thessalians, the more recent one apparently on Parnassos, a πεζομαχία, a νυχτομαχία, and apparently a sortie of a besieged force, resulting in a great victory, due to a ruse or stratagem devised by their Eleian diviner Tellias. This great victory is commemorated, according to Hdt., by splendid offerings at Delphi and at Abai. The other victory, in the pass by Hyampolis, and at a previous date, where they discomfit the Thessalian cavalry, also by a stratagem or ruse, the authorship of which is not specified (c. 28 infra), appears of less moment, and is not espeeially commemorated at Delphi, or even at Abai, in the immediate neighbourhood; otherwise, despite Hdt.'s assertion, we might have been tempted to conjecture that the anathema at Abai was in reality a commemoration of the victory at Hyampolis. Polyainos 6. 18 narrates the two Phokian stratagems against the Thessalians in the same order as Hdt., without adding any point, and even omitting the Eleian mantis. Pausanias in the Phokika (10. 1) gives a much fuller aceouut of these transactions. According to the Periegete there were four battles, the second and third of which are not represented by anything in Hdt., while the first and fourth correspond to the two engagements in Hdt., restored to their proper order. Pausanias reeords first (i.) the battle by Hyampolis, and the disaster to the Thessalian cavalry caused by the eoncealed jars (c. 28 infra). It appears, however, to be an indecisive affair, for (ii.) the Thessalians at onee prepare to invade Phokis on a far larger scale (συνελέχθησαν ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων πασῶν), a project which strikes terror into the Phokians, especially as the cavalry is chiefly in evidence. After eonsulting the Delphic oracle they despatch, under cover of night, 300 picked men, led by Gelon, to reconnoitre; but this force is trampled and cut to pieces by the Thessalian eavalry. (iii.) This disaster leads to a desperate resolve: the Phokians determine to conquer or to die, after devoting withal their wives, children, and all their properties to the flames. ἀντὶ τούτου μὲν ἅπαντα τὰ ἀνάλγητα βουλεύματα ἀπόνοια ὑπὸ Ἑλλήνων ὀνομάζεται Φωκική. The Phokians march out under two generals, an Ambrosian named Rhoios and Daiphantes of Hyampolis, the former in command of the infantry, the latter of the horse. This expedition is accompanied by Tellias of Elis, on whom the hopes of the Phokians were fixed. The result of their desperate courage was a brilliant victory, and the oracle was justified; but where exactly the battle took place, and what service on the occasion Tellias performed, is not specified. The same story is told, with some important additions, by Plutarch, Mor. 244; see notes to c. 29 infra. (iv.) Subsequently, when the two armies were laagered opposite each other, περὶ τὴν ἐς τὴν Φωκίδα ἐσβολήν, the stratagem of Tellias came off. Taking advantage of a full moon, 500 picked men, their arms and persons whitened with chalk, surprised the Thessalians, and slew an immense number. Pausanias describes two monuments at Delphi as records of these events. One he connects with the great but anonymous Phokian victory, (iii.) supra. ἀπὸ τούτου δὲ τοῦ ἔργου καὶ ἀναθήματα οἱ Φωκεῖς ἀπέστειλαν ἐς Δελφοὺς Ἀπόλλωνι Τελλίαν τε τὸν μάντιν καὶ ὅσοι μαχομένοις ἄλλοι σφίσιν ἐστρατήγησαν, σὺν δὲ αὐτοῖς καὶ ἥρωας τῶν ἐπιχωρίων: ἔργα δὲ αἱ εἰκόνες Ἀριστομέδοντός εἰσιν Ἀργείου (10. 1. 10). Another notice of Phokian anathemata occurs in a different connexion, not free from ambiguity. εἰσὶ καὶ εἰκόνες χαλκαῖ Φωκέων ἀναθέντων, ἡνίκα δευτέρᾳ συμβολῇ τὸ ἱππικὸν ἐτρέψαντο τὸ ἐκ Θεσσαλίας ... Ἡρακλῆς δὲ καὶ Ἀπόλλων ἔχονται τοῦ τρίποδος καὶ ἐς μάχην περὶ αὐτοῦ καθίστανται: Λητὼ μὲν δὴ καὶ Ἄρτεμις Ἀπόλλωνα, Ἀθηνᾶ δὲ Ἡρακλέα ἐπέχουσι τοῦ θυμοῦ. Φωκέων καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀνάθημα, ὅτε σφίσιν ἐπὶ τοὺς Θεσσαλοὺς Τελλίας ἡγήσατο Ἠλεῖος. τὰ μὲν δὴ ἄλλα ἀγάλματα Δίυλλός τε ἐν κοινῷ καὶ Ἀμυκλαῖος, τὴν δὲ Ἀθηνᾶν καὶ Ἄρτεμιν Χίονίς ἐστι εἰργασμένος: Κορινθίους δὲ εἶναί φασιν αὐτούς (10. 13. 7). Assuming that the first group here mentioned was identical with the anathema previously described, there were, aceording to Pausanias, at Delphi only two groups commemorating Phokian victories over Thessalians. (a) There was the work of Aristomedon of Argos, which represented Tellias, Rhoïos, Daiphantes, and possibly other στρατηγοί (Gelon, for example?), together with certain local Phokian heroes. This eommemorated the great victory over the Thessalian cavaliers, numbered (iii.) above, but not recorded by Hdt. at all: these figures were apparently of bronze. (b) There was the group, various figures in which had been wrought by Diyllos, Amyklaios, and Chionis, all Korinthians, to commemorate apparently the success enumerated as (iv.) above, and identical with the πεζομαχία of Hdt. in which the ruse of Tellias the Eleian was brilliantly successful. This anathema represented a contest between Herakles and Apollon for possession of the divining stool or tripod, Leto and Artemis supporting Apollon, and Athena backing Herakles. To this group Hdt. apparently refers. Though Pausanias is more explicit than Hdt., it by no means follows that we are to adopt his account of the war simpliciter; nor is a partial harmony between the two out of compass. Hdt. records two Phokian victories over the Thessalians and but one Delphian monument, the work apparently of the Korinthian school, and commemorating the night battle, which, though he describes it first, he has previously introduced as τὸ ὕστατον τρῶμα. On this point, then, Hdt. and Pausanias are at one. For the victory which he records over the Thessalian cavalry Hdt. mentions no monument. Pausanias, however, also, on his own showing, is a monument short, for he records three Phokian vietories over the Thessalians, two of them victories over the cavalry, and has but two monuments to describe, the one commemorating a victory over the Thessalian cavalry ‘in a second engagement’—plainly the one numbered (iii.) above—a victory, the story of which is, on the face of it, as above indicated, full of improbabilities. The solution lies near, that Pausanias (or his source) has duplicated the vietory over the Thessalian cavalry. There was only one victory over the cavalry, as described by Hdt. and by Pausanias himself, (1.) supra; it was in honour of this victory that the group by Aristomedon of Argos was dedieated, and we may fairly conjecture that the stratagem by whieh the cavalry was discomfited was due to the ingenuity of Tellias. The error in Pausanias ean even be explained. As Hdt. had recorded this engagement without assigning a monument to it, a victory had to be invented in order to account for the presenee of a second monument at Delphi. The omission by Hdt. of any mention of the monument is no doubt a diffieulty; but a monument there was. The only crux remaining is the occurrence in Pausanias of the disaster to the Phokians under Gelon, omitted by Hdt. This episode has an air of verisimilitude, and need not be dismissed as merely a set-off to the victory of the ‘Six Hundred.’ Its omission by Hdt. is easily aceounted for by the eonsideration that he is merely describing the grievances of the Thessalians against the Phokians, a list from which Thessalian victories might fairly be omitted. A combination, then, gives a more complete and a more correct view of the war than either source taken alone. The war comprised three great episodes: (i.) A Phokian victory over the Thessalian cavalry, commemorated at Delphi by the group above described as the work of the Argive, Aristomedon. (ii.) A Thessalian victory over the Phokians, under Gelon; probably a much more extensive affair than the record suggests, (iii.) A second Phokian victory, due, like the first, chiefly to a stratagem devised by Tellias, and commemorated at Delphi in the group wrought by the Korinthian school.
περιέφθησαν τρηχέως: c. 18 supra.
κατειλήθησαν ἐς τὸν Παρνησόν: cp. 9. 31 περὶ τὸν Παρνησσὸν (sic) κατειλημένοι. Parnassos appears below, c. 32, as the natural refuge of the Phokians (from the east and north sides); its position is further defined in c. 35 infra, and in c. 36 it appears as the natural refuge for the Delphians (from the south and west sides), rising indeed immediately over the Holy Place (cp. c. 39). μάντιν Τελλίην τὸν Ἠλεῖον. Eleans are in great demand as seers and diviners; cp. 9. 37, where a member of the same clan appears. This divine is a ‘sophist’ in a way; with σοφίζεται cp. σοφίζεσθαι 3. 111.
γυψώσας: a treatment accorded in Aithiopia to corpses and warriors, 3. 24; cp. 7. 69. ἑξακοσίους: Pausanias l.c. cuts them down to 500.
νυκτός. Pausanias l.c. supplies the moon, whieh is necessary for the due effect. The whitening of the hoplites had a double purpose: it enabled them to diseriminate friend and foe (often a difficult matter in night-attacks, cp. Thucyd. 7. 43); and it struck terror into the Thessalians, who mistook them for ghosts.
τέρας is either exegetical, as though we read καὶ δὴ καὶ τέρας (cp. 4. 179 ἄλλην τε ἑκατόμβην καὶ δὴ καὶ τρίποδα), or else supurious.
τετρακισχιλίων: this item is probably authentic, but suggests that the attack was not confined to the 500-600 λευκανθίζοντες, but supplemented by the Phokians en masse. Perhaps there were many more shields than corpses; it is not likely that the numbers were identical: τῶν, indeed, refers only to ἀσπίδων.
ἡ δὲ δεκάτη: a tithe of the spoil to Delphi, or the gods, was a matter of course—hence the article; cp. 7. 132 δεκατεῦσαι. τῶν χρημάτων: the shields not included apparently.
οἱ μεγάλοι ἀνδριάντες οἱ περὶ τὸν τρίποδα συνεστεῶτες: these words are translated by Rawlinson (iv.s 280) “the gigantie figures which stand round the tripod”—and so the older commentators, and L. & S. The accusative with περί favours this rendering, but on the other hand the meaning given to συνεστεῶτες is highly objectionable: συνεστάναι, συστῆναι meaning with Hdt. constantly stare cum aliquo, sed non ab eadem parte verum a parte opposita, pugnare, contendere cum aliquo (Schweighaeuser, Lexicon). So c. 79 infra, 6. 108; ep. 7. 142; and with more metaphorical sense, 7. 142, 170, c. 74 infra, 9. 89. Further, the description of the work here in question makes it clear that the subjeet of this group of statuary was a contest between Herakles and Apollon for ‘the tripod,’ which further proves that the tripod here mentioned is not, for example, the tripod which stood on the τρικάρηνος ὄφις 9. 81 (cp. c. 82 infra), but the Delphian divining stool, represented in the bronze. This mention of the monument suggests the probable source of Hdt.'s digression on the Thessalo-Phokian war, which is apparently an addition to the first draft of his history, made after his visit to Delphi; cp. Introduction, § 9.
ἕτεροι τοιοῦτοι ἐν Ἄβῃσι ἀνακέαται. If this statement is correct, they must have been restorations, or dedications later than the Persian war, for Abai was sacked and destroyed by fire, c. 33 infra.
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.