Reading Thucydides 2014

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
pster
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:05 am

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by pster » Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:54 pm

-Also, when they get to Sparta, H, backed by Astyochus, is found completely credible. And revenge is best served cold. :lol:

John W.
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by John W. » Mon Aug 12, 2013 8:25 am

pster wrote:I'm unmoved by the τὴν ἔχθραν repetition.

-T is trying to turn the tables. Best defense is a good offense: I don't hold a grudge against him, he holds one against me kind of thing.

-The οἱ is I guess called for by the grammar alone, but seems to make explicit this kind of turning of the tables.

-However that may be, neither man likes the other and ἔχθραν is an extremely general term that seems to apply to both. If it were a more specific passion, then this line would be much more persuasive.

-Until he is exiled (a pretty common thing in Sicilian politics--Syracuse had banishment like Athens did), H is basking in the glow of his victories in Sicily, standing up for better pay for his men. T, on the other hand, has already been described as irrascible and rage prone. That inclines me to think that the main ἔχθραν in play is in himself and his accusations.

I'm glad you brought this up again, as I forgot to mention it earlier just before. Not just playing devil's advocate. ;)
pster - many thanks for this, and my apologies for the delay in replying.

I note what you say, and the interpretation you suggest is certainly possible. At present, however, I'm still inclined (though my view may change!) to take τὴν ἔχθραν οἱ προθοῖτο as Tissaphernes' (disingenuous) explanation for the ἔχθρα which Hermocrates had displayed towards him - i.e. it wasn't really about pay for the troops, or wider concerns over Tissaphernes' undermining the Peloponnesian cause, but simply stemmed from personal frustration on the part of Hermocrates at Tissaphernes' refusal to give him money.

I guess (unless you, Qimmik or Nate have any further thoughts) we''ll have to leave it there for now. But I'm grateful to all of you for chipping in on this one. It's amazing how much interesting discussion can be generated by just a few words in Thucydides!

Best wishes,

John

User avatar
pster
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:05 am

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by pster » Mon Aug 12, 2013 10:32 am

John W. wrote:I'm still inclined (though my view may change!) to take τὴν ἔχθραν οἱ προθοῖτο as Tissaphernes' (disingenuous) explanation
I think that on this much we are in agreement.

I have moved onto the fourth century, so probably won't have more to say.

Although I did find a very choice quote about just how unbarbarian the Sicilians were that I may put up later today.

By the way, "Siciliot" was a proud self-designation of the those who lived in the costal cities.

And as for my original question that reopened the thread, I suspect that Th. had Ségeste (excuse my French spellings!) in mind: it was the biggest of the cities not founded by a Greek, it was the least Greek by virtue of location and continued use of the Elyme language (albeit written with Greek letters), it asserted itself the most (continually fighting with Sélinonte), made repeated appeals to Athens, and in the end tricked Athens into the war. Th. was probably aware of it and it's less Greek alloi nature because of the repeated appeals and could quite safely describe it as fighting that year because it was always fighting Sélinonte (hence the repeated appeals). (The biggest thing they seemed to have fought over was reciprocal marriage recognition! Reminds me of a quote in Peter Brown book about some tribes (possibly ancient): "they are our enemy, we marry them." So arguably once again, Venus called the shots.)

John W.
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by John W. » Tue Sep 10, 2013 8:43 am

With the help of all those on this forum who have taken the trouble to discuss knotty points with me, I'm now nearing the end of my reading of Thucydides (though I may have one more query on Book 8, on which I'll post separately).

For my current reading I've been using Alberti's edition, and I recall that someone else (Qimmik?) has also acquired a copy of this. At the end of volumes 2 and 3 there are lists of corrigenda, but even in volumes 1 and 2 I've spotted some typos that aren't listed there, and inevitably there are also a number in the final volume. In a couple of cases, I'm unsure whether what I've spotted is actually a typo in the normal sense, or simply a printing error in my copy. The two instances are:

(i) vol. 3, p. 80, l. 20 (6.85): should be ἄλογον, but in my copy this appears as ἄλογ ν (i.e. 2nd omicron missing, with just a space there);

(ii) vol. 3, p. 194, l. 17 (7.81): should be ξυνεταράχθησαν, but in my copy the ρ is missing (with the possible exception of a dot below the line which may be part of the tail), as is the start of the ά immediately following.

The reason I'm asking is that, in the footnotes to my translation, I'm recording typos not picked up in the corrigenda to Alberti's edition, such as στατηγὸν for στρατηγὸν at vol. 1, p. 90, l. 10 (1.74), but if the two instances I've queried above are merely inking problems in my copy alone, I won't bother to record them in this way. The faulty ξυνεταράχθησαν looks as if it is probably an inking issue, but I'm less sure about the ἄλογ ν. If, therefore, Qimmik (or anyone else with a copy of Alberti) can advise as to how these two words appear in their own copy, I'd be most grateful.

With thanks and best wishes,

John

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by Qimmik » Tue Sep 10, 2013 12:00 pm

John, my edition has the same two errors in volume 3. In the second instance, I too have the same small vertical stroke below the line but the rest of the rho, as well as part of the following alpha, is missing.

Bill

John W.
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by John W. » Tue Sep 10, 2013 7:16 pm

Qimmik wrote:John, my edition has the same two errors in volume 3. In the second instance, I too have the same small vertical stroke below the line but the rest of the rho, as well as part of the following alpha, is missing.

Bill
Many thanks, Bill. I've rectified both errors in footnotes to my translation for the sake of clarity; that makes some twenty typos I've found in Alberti over and above those identified in the corrigenda to volumes 1 and 2.

Best wishes,

John

User avatar
pster
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:05 am

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by pster » Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:19 pm

John, believe it or not--and I don't blame you if you don't!--I have finally, twenty plus months after beginning this thread, started reading Thucydides in earnest. Vocabulary cards have been made, Polybius project has been completed, and I have blocked out 1hr per day for however many years it takes to get to the end of Book VIII. I am happy for you that you are finishing up your translation, but I do hope you will be around to answer some of my random questions.

I noticed a remark of Hornblower's to the effect that Hobbes very rarely makes mistakes. Did you find that to be true? And is that new Cambridge translation something I must have?

John W.
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by John W. » Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:53 pm

pster wrote:John, believe it or not--and I don't blame you if you don't!--I have finally, twenty plus months after beginning this thread, started reading Thucydides in earnest. Vocabulary cards have been made, Polybius project has been completed, and I have blocked out 1hr per day for however many years it takes to get to the end of Book VIII. I am happy for you that you are finishing up your translation, but I do hope you will be around to answer some of my random questions.

I noticed a remark of Hornblower's to the effect that Hobbes very rarely makes mistakes. Did you find that to be true? And is that new Cambridge translation something I must have?
pster - good to hear from you. That's great news! Reading (and rereading) Thucydides has been one of the most challenging, but also most rewarding, things I've ever done, and I hope (despite the inevitable frustrations) it proves the same for you.

I'm currently copy-editing my translation (for consistency etc.) but will still be around on here, and will be very happy to discuss any points you may wish to raise.

Hobbes' translation is vigorous and often very insightful. He does sometimes make mistakes - often due to the state of the text in his day - but is always worth consulting.

The new Cambridge translation (by Mynott) appeared only towards the end of my own labours, and I've only dipped into it, but it seems pretty good from what I've seen, and would I think be worth having on hand as a resource. There's also a fairly recent Oxford translation (by Hammond), but I haven't consulted that. Lattimore's translation (published by Hackett) is fairly literal, but is marred by the omission of quite a few passages, ranging from a few words to a few lines.

Anyway, all the very best with your reading; I look forward to many more Thucydidean discussions with you (and others).

Best wishes,

John

User avatar
pster
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1071
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:05 am

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by pster » Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:28 pm

Th. 1.3.1:

πρὸ γὰρ τῶν Τρωικῶν οὐδὲν φαίνεται πρότερον κοινῇ ἐργασαμένη ἡ Ἑλλάς

How can φαίνεται just take a participle?

Or are we to understand it thus:

Before the Trojan war, Greece doing nothing in common is visible

?

Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Reading Thucydides 2013

Post by Qimmik » Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:39 pm

Before the Trojan War Greece does not appear to have done anything in common (or, as a common venture).

or

Before the Trojan War it does not appear that Greece did anything in common.

or

Before the Trojan War Greece apparently did nothing in common.

Smyth sec. 1965.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... thp%3D1965

This is a very frequent idiomatic use of φαίνομαι. With a present participle, it can sometimes be translated as "clearly" or "obviously".

Maybe "accomplished" would be better than "did" here.

Post Reply