Lesson 24 of Forty-Six Stories in Classical Greek

Greek Learning Greek
1

How do I translate these sentences?

ἥ τε γὰρ ἀρχὴ τοῦ ἐκείνων βίου δικαίᾱ, . . . . πρῶτοι δὲ καὶ μὀνοι ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ χρὀνῳ ἐκβαλόντες τᾱ̀ς παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῖς δυναστείᾱς δημοκρατίᾱν κατεστήσαντο, νομίζοντες τὴν πάντων ἐλευθερίᾱν ὁμόνοιαν εἶναι μεγίστγν, . . .

(δὲ correlates with τε)

This is my attempt:

For justice, being a beginning is their life, . . . . And they are the first and only people in their time to throw the ruling powers besides themselves and established democracy themselves, believing the freedom of all people to be the greatest concord.

I’m encountering these difficulties:

  1. Does ἥ refer to: ἀρχὴ or δικαίᾱ?
  2. Is πρῶτοι δὲ καὶ μὀνοι a substantive of “the first and only [people]”?
  3. Does ὁμόνοιαν belong to ἐλευθερίᾱν or a phrase “ὁμόνοιαν μεγίστγν”?
2
  1. ἥ refers to ἀρχὴ - you have to assume a verb here “is” or “was”
  2. seems right to me. Maybe its historic present?
  3. ὁμόνοιαν is taken with μεγίστγν

I think you need to look at “to throw the ruling powers besides themselves”. I think it’s more idiomatic and less confusing to say throw aside and not translate “ἑαυτοῖς”.

3

δικαίᾱ is an adjective, “just”, not “justice”. It seems to be predicative to ἀρχὴ, with a copula understood, as Seneca notes.

πρῶτοι δὲ καὶ μὀνοι ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ χρὀνῳ – "they were the first and only ones in that era to cast out/overthrow the regime [that had prevailed] among them (παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῖς) and establish a democracy . . . "

κατεστήσαντο shows that the tense is aorist, i.e., past.

πρῶτοι δὲ καὶ μὀνοι ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ χρὀνῳ . . . κατεστήσαντο – you translated this more or less correctly: the English idiom is "they were the first to . . . " but Greek expresses this slightly differently. But instead of “are”, the tense should be “were”, since κατεστήσαντο is aorist.

ἐκβαλόντες . . . κατεστήσαντο is best translated idiomatically as two coordinate English verbs, where Greek has an aorist participle subordinated to the main verb.

4

Thanks Bill I should have spotted “κατεστήσαντο shows that the tense is aorist, i.e., past.”

5

That ἑαυτοῖς, ugh.

6

αρχη might be translated here as “regimen,” or maybe “government,” depending on context. But “beginning” doesn’t seem right.

7

I think this passage might be adapted from Lysias 2 Funeral oration.

Πολλὰ μὲν οὖν ὑπῆρχε τοῖς ἡμετέροις προγόνοις μιᾷ γνώμῃ χρωμένοις περὶ τοῦ δικαίου διαμάχεσθαι· ἥ τε γὰρ ἀρχὴ τοῦ βίου δικαία·

The Loeb translates as “Now in many ways it was natural to our ancestors, moved by a single resolve, to fight the battles of justice: for the very beginning of their life was just.”

8

Even without the source, it has to govern βιου and balance the following δε for the pair, which makes beginning right. The rest of the Lysias passage explains where that awkward εαυτοις came from. Zombie change there from the editor who should have edited it to αυτοις instead, I think.

Seneca, that “thrown aside” earlier is not right, the παρα part is modifying the object, as Hylander has it.

9

What’s the problem with ἑαυτοῖς? The reflexive pronoun refers to the subject of the sentence.

The original (Lysias 2.18) has the alternative reflexive σφίσιν αὐτοῖς. And no variant αὐτοῖς alone is noted in Carey’s recent OCT. How would σφίσιν creep into the ms. tradition?

10

It seems perfect in Lysias. “Their own rulers”, contrasting the foreign rulers that they didn’t have to kick out (because they were natives). But once you’ve elided that justification for it, as the editor here does, that emphasis is hard to see. Just “their rulers”, I would think.

But maybe the elision is not present in this 46 stories text? I had assumed it’s as given in the original post.

11

Joel, I think you’re misunderstanding this passage.

The contrast with other polities in the sentence in Lysias 2.17 that follows ἥ τε γὰρ ἀρχὴ τοῦ ἐκείνων βίου δικαίᾱ and precedes the sentence in question doesn’t refer to changes of government or the expulsion of previous rulers in those other polities – it refers to ethnic cleansing: the Athenians are autochthonous, whereas in other polities, the populations had unjustly expelled the previous inhabitants.

πολλὰ μὲν ὑπῆρχε τοῖς ἡμετέροις προγόνοις μιᾷ γνώμῃ χρωμένοις περὶ τοῦ δικαίου διαμάχεσθαι: ἥ τε γὰρ ἀρχὴ τοῦ βίου δικαία: οὐ γάρ, ὥσπερ οἱ πολλοί, πανταχόθεν συνειλεγμένοι καὶ ἑτέρους ἐκβαλόντες τὴν ἀλλοτρίαν ᾤκησαν, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτόχθονες ὄντες τὴν αὐτὴν ἐκέκτηντο μητέρα καὶ πατρίδα.

“Unlike the majority [of populations], who had been gathered together from all over, and who expelled other people [who were living there] and settled land that was not their own [τὴν ἀλλοτρίαν], [our ancestors] were authochthonous and [continuously] possessed the same motherland/fatherland.”

Leaving this out (if that’s what 46 Stories did) does leave the sense of ἥ τε γὰρ ἀρχὴ τοῦ βίου δικαία somewhat puzzling, but it seems to mean that Athenian life did not begin with the injustice of ethnic cleansing. That really has no bearing on what follows in 2.18 – the point of pride that the Athenians expelled their previous rulers and chose a democratic form of government.

Thus, in 2.18, Lysias is not contrasting “their own rulers” vs. “rulers of foreign polities” in using the reflexive pronoun σφίσιν αὐτοῖς. Both in Lysias and in the simplified version, the reflexive pronoun, either σφίσιν αὐτοῖς or the alternative ἑαυτοῖς, merely refers to the subject of the sentence. That’s the essential function of reflexive pronouns. See Smyth 1218:

  1. Direct Reflexives.—The reflexive pronouns are used directly when they refer to the chief word (usually the subject) of the sentence or clause in which they stand.

““γνῶθι σεαυτόν” learn to know thyself” P. Charm. 164e, ““σφάττει ἑαυτήν” she kills herself” X. C. 7.3.14, καθ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς βουλευσάμενοι τὰ ὅπλα παρέδοσαν καὶ σφᾶς αὐτούς after deliberating apart by themselves they surrendered their arms and themselves (their persons) T. 4.38. Less commonly the reference is to the object, which often stands in a prominent place: ““τοὺς δὲ περιοίκους ἀφῆκεν ἐπὶ τὰ_ς ἑαυτῶν πόλεις” but the perioeci he dismissed to their own cities” X. H. 6.5.21.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Smyth+grammar+1218&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007

See also CGCG 29.16, 29.17.

12

And indeed, that’s exactly how I understood it. I think you have misunderstood me somehow. I don’t really know how though. Reviewing what I wrote, I can’t guess.

But you may wish to read past 1218 to 1219. The direct reflexives are “regular in prose when they refer emphatically…” though they can surrender that differentiating force (1220). Which is why I did not say impossible Greek. They can still be found in the non-emphatic sense, just awkward.

13

Smyth 1219 doesn’t say that the reflexive pronouns are not regularly used where not “emphatic”: it says that even when emphatic the non-reflexive personal pronouns are sometimes used reflexively, especially in poetry.

  1. The direct reflexives are regular in prose if, in the same clause, the pronoun refers emphatically to the subject and is the direct object of the main verb: ἐμαυτὸν (not ἐμὲ) ἐπαινῶ I praise myself. The usage of poetry is freer: ““στένω σὲ μᾶλλον ἢ ᾿μέ” I mourn thee rather than myself” E. Hipp. 1409.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Smyth+grammar+1219&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007

Reflexive pronouns aren’t necessarily contrastive. Here ἐκβαλόντες τᾱ̀ς παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῖς δυναστείᾱς – “they expelled their own ruling powers” – seems perfectly natural to me without contrasting τᾱ̀ς παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῖς δυναστείᾱς with ruling powers in some other polities that may or may not have been foreign. The contrast is with other polities that Lysias draws in 2.18 is between the early and unique adoption of democracy in Athens and other polities where this didn’t happen, not with the native vs. non-native origin of the regimes.

This is what led me to think you were misunderstanding this passage:

It seems perfect in Lysias. “Their own rulers”, contrasting the foreign rulers that they didn’t have to kick out (because they were natives).

14

Reflexive pronouns aren’t necessarily contrastive.

Yes, as I said.

Here ἐκβαλόντες τᾱ̀ς παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῖς δυναστείᾱς – “they expelled their own ruling powers” – seems perfectly natural to me without contrasting τᾱ̀ς παρ᾿ ἑαυτοῖς δυναστείᾱς with ruling powers in some other polities that may or may not have been foreign.

I disagree with you here. I don’t know whether we can take it farther, but I suspect that good translations, if we were to look, would do something to show the emphasis here (like “their own” or similar). But if we don’t find that, I don’t mind disagreeing with them too, and even if they do agree with me, it’s hardly proof of anything.

This is what led me to think you were misunderstanding this passage:

It seems perfect in Lysias. “Their own rulers”, contrasting the foreign rulers that they didn’t have to kick out (because they were natives).

One of the two of us is having trouble with humor. I am sorry for the failed joke, if it’s me, which is certainly possible. The foreign rulers that they didn’t have to kick out are, of course, non-existent. The above made me laugh as I was writing it, anyway, and I thought it was obvious enough to anyone reading.

15

Thanks everyone for the enlightening comments. I just want to follow up one more point: ὁμόνοιαν εἶναι μεγίστγν

Was εἶναι inserted in the middle of the phrase ὁμόνοιαν μεγίστγν (the greatest concord)? I’ve never seen such construct before.