This text is part of:
μετὰ δὲ τὴν ἄπιξιν: for ἄπιξος (arrival, advent) cp. c. 17 supra. Hdt. is very exact in dating the next episode, so as to emphasize the advent of the Mantineians as too late, ἐπ᾽ ἐξεργασμένοισι, cp. 8. 94, 4. 164. The Koan lady had reached the Lakedaimonians while they were still ἐν τῇσι φονῇσι. αὐτίκα μετὰ ταῦτα, a standing formula, cp. Index.
ἀπίκοντο Μαντινέες: this is their first appearance since Thermopylai, to which they sent a force equal to the Tegeatan, cp. 7. 202. They are not included in the army-list above, c. 28; the force here in question will have numbered probably 1000—1500 hoplites.
ὕστεροι τῆς συμβολῆς, ‘too late for the engagement’; ς., cp. c. 70 supra. If the Mantineians (and Eleians) arrive too late to take part in the great e<*> counter, were they on other service—fo<*> example, guarding the convoy from the Peloponnesos, cp. c. 51 supra, or perhaps engaged, and retarded, by the Persian cavalry? The name of the Mantineians is not on the τρικάρηνος ὄφις (cp. 8. 82, and c. 81 infra), though that of the Eleians is. συμφορὴν ποιέεσθαι: cp. 8. 10, 69. 2 supra, l. 9 infra.
ἄξιοί τε ἔφασαν εἶναι σφέας ζημιῶσαι: ἄξιοι is the idiomatic personal construction; cp. 8. 65. 11 (αὐτός). The sentence would be clearer perhaps without σφέας, leaving ζημιῶσαι as an epexegetical infinitive: as the object is expressed in σφέας, a subject must be understood, sc. τοὺς Ἕλληνας, τὸν στρατηγόν, or what not. τοὺς Μήδους: here used generally as = τοὺς βαρβάρους, and not in the specific sense of c. 31 supra.
ἐδίωκον, ‘they were for pursuing,’ they offered to pursue—a truly laughable offer on the part of these Mantiueiau hoplites. The iudefinite or even the distant pursuit of a fugitive enemy was against Spartan custom, cp. 8. 108, and Blakesley understands the next sentence as a parenthesis intended to record uot a particular prohibition on this occasiou, but that general rule: the imperfect οὐκ ἔων hardly supports that view. On the return of the Mantineians to their home τοὺς ἡγεμόνας τῆς στρατιῆς ἐδίωξαν ἐκ τῆς γῆς. The verb ἐδίωξαν (exiled) after the ἐδίωκον (pursued, or were for pursuiug) just before makes a very unfortunate puu, albeit the coutrast of the tenses is grammatically effective; perhaps it is only an “unconscious iteration.” τοὺς ἡγ. τῆς στ. as a periphrasis for τοὺς στρατηγούς—if that be its significance— is remarkable. Perhaps the ἡγεμονία is emphasized as the offence was one of omission, incurred by the way. Possibly, however, there was a political background to the prosecution. Arkadia, or single states in Arkadia, may have been divided on the question of ‘Medism,’ cp. 8. 26. In the immediate sequel Mantineia sides with Sparta, or at least preserves a benevolent neutrality, when all the rest of Arkadia rises against her; cp. c. 35 infra. Mantineia was early and uormally democratic; cp. 4. 161; but the discredit, which the ἡγεμόνες incurred in the Persiau war, aud the penalties meted out to them, may have brought about a temporary modification of the government of Mantineia (not without Lakonian approval). It does not follow that the leaders were really to blame. The injustice of the Athenian democracy (probably humaner than the Arkadian) towards unfortunate commanders is uotorious; and the comic story in Thuc. 5. 60 of the treatment of Thrasylos, Strategos of Argos, by the Argive democracy in 418 B.C., has much the same moral.
μετὰ δὲ Μαντινέας ἧκον Ἠλεῖοι: naturally, as they had further to come. The Eleiaus had uot eveu sent a contiugent to Thermopylai. Yet their uame appears upou the Delphiau tripod; I.G.A. 70; Hill's Sources, i. 1; Hicks2, No. 19 (5th Coil, No. 27). As the Eleiaus are not represented in the uavy-lists of Artemision and Salamis, uor in the army-list c. 28 supra, the occurreuce of their name on the monument is problematic (but they at least sent a contiugent to the army under Kleombrotos in 480 B.C.; cp. 8. 72). Steiu ascribes it to their influence with Sparta; but why then did not Sparta reward the Mantiueians also? cp. also notes iu Hicks l.c. and note to Παλέες in c. 28 supra. ὡσαύτως: 7. 86, etc.
συμφορὴν ποιησάμενοι: one of the chief grounds of this woe would be that they could have no lot in the Plataiau booty, but there was also the loss of honour. The Eleians had a way of being rather behindhand; cp. Thuc. 5. 75. 5. The subsequent exile of their ἡγεμόνες may have a political significauce, as in the case of the Mantineians above.
τὰ κατὰ Μαντινέας μὲν καὶ Ἠλείους: this story, or rather the brief note to the discredit of the two Pelopounesian democracies, might provoke the suspicion that there was some kiud of understanding between them and Argos, not favourable to Sparta, aud the recognition of the Spartan ἡγεμονία. But the service of the Mantiueians at Thermopylai, the service of the Eleians at the Isthmos, and the arrival of both, even if belated, on the field of Plataia, have to be put in the other scale. Plutarch, in the de malign. Hdti, takes no exception to this record; but has the whole truth been told in the case? The story does not come from Mantineian and Eleian sources, or we should have had more particulars, and perhaps something to the good credit of the States. What is related—καὶ φθόνῳ ἂν εἴποιεν.
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.