FIRST DRAFT OF MY ESSAY ON THIS SUBJECT:
The text for the last half of our course is Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 6. I found the first sentence of chapter 17 particularly interesting because I thought that I had puzzled it out correctly. Checking my work against two translations at hand, I found my translation to be different. I checked with our professor, with another professor of my acquaintance, and a couple of online correspondents (textkit.com), and again no agreement. Literally, no two among them (seven people, counting me) agree.
In this paper I intend to parse the 24 words in the target sentence and provide a “correct” translation. I start with a faint hope that my translation will prevail. Let us see.
Here is the sentence:
καὶ ταῦτα ἡ ἐμὴ νεότης καὶ ἄνοια παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων δύναμιν λόγοις τε πρέπουσιν ὡμίλησε καὶ ὀργῇ πίστιν παρασχομένη ἔπεισεν.
Here is my translation:
And these things, my youth and folly (which seemed to be contrary to nature [unnatural]), in combination with appropriate words [good arguments] and enthusiasm, persuaded the power in/of the Peloponnese [Sparta] to hand over their trust [to trust me].
The target sentence is within a speech of Alcibiades. He has, in the previous sentence, alluded to the fact that he persuaded the Spartans to participate in an important one-day fight in Mantinea in 418 B.C.E., from which fight, though victorious, the Spartans have not yet even now recovered, 3 years later [need citation for three years later].
The difficulty of translation begins with the first two words, καὶ ταῦτα. These words are a common opening pair, meaning sometimes, “and this too,” pointing to what follows. Other possibilities occur to me. My initial choice was to take ταῦτα [as neuter, plural, nominative] as the main subject of the sentence , followed in apposition by four things, my youth, my folly, good arguments, and my enthusiasm, then the main verb, “persuaded,” and a direct object, “the power in/of the Peloponnese.” Another choice is to take ταῦτα [as neuter, plural, accusative] as an accusative of respect, “with respect to these things,” looking back to the previous sentence and paragraph, to-wit: Alcibiades having persuaded the Spartans to “give their all.” My final thought [suggested by our professor] is to take ταῦτα [neuter, plural, accusative] adverbially meaning “for this reason,” “even,” “thus,” “in the same way,” “like,” “so,” “and so….”
In the present state of things (insufficient context), we cannot yet decide among our choices.
Let us look at the other nouns, with their modifiers, now.
ἡ ἐμὴ νεότης
ἄνοια παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι
ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων δύναμιν
λόγοις τε πρέπουσιν
καὶ ὀργῇ
πίστιν
ἡ ἐμὴ νεότης is a noun phrase, an article, a possessive pronoun, and a main noun, all three words are feminine singular, the article and the main noun are nominative. The possessive pronoun is genitive. All my correspondents agree that this phrase is among the subjects of the sentence. Νεότης means youth, youthfulness, youthful spirit, impetuosity, rashness according to CGL So, taking the first suggestion, let us translate this noun phrase as “my youth.” Alcibiades is referring to his own youth.
The next word is καὶ, a conjunction meaning here, “and.” It certainly joins a second noun phrase, likely to be part of a compound subject.
The next five words are ἄνοια παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι. A feminine, singular, nominative ἄνοια means folly, foolishness (“sometimes associated with youthfulness”), or thoughtlessness, according to CGL All of my correspondents and I agree on “folly,” except one who translates “ignorance.” The participial phrase, παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι, modifies its noun ἄνοια and can be translated as “seeming to be beyond nature.” A translator might take liberties with this participial phrase to bring it closer to the American idiom. Such liberties are to be expected in a translation for a general audience who are not students of Ancient Greek, who [the student] might be reading this text for an understanding of the Greek. I am not inclined to make much fuss of the variations on the translations of this participial phrase. I am more interested in the entire structure of the sentence. So, for example, I am not alarmed by “unnatural-seeming folly,” or “my alleged unnatural ignorance,” or “with this folly of mine which is supposed to be so prodigious,” or “so-called monstrous folly.” I hope, though, that I am correct in believing that my readers will agree that my translation captures the literal Ancient Greek better than these four flourishes, however lovely.
So, at this point we have as a subject, “my youth and my folly (that seems to be beyond nature).”
The next four words are ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων δύναμιν. Δύναμιν, a singular, feminine, accusative noun, means power or strength according to CGL. Since the case is accusative, not nominative, like the previous nouns, we no longer have a subject. One of the case functions of an accusative noun is direct object of some verb not yet seen in this analysis. To be fair, the CGL has 13 numbered entries for this word (δύναμιν). The prepositional phrase, ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων, modifies “power” and specifies that the power is that power “in the [land] of the Peloponnesians. ” Not one of my correspondents attempts to account for the fact that the article τὴν is singular, feminine, accusative and that the adjective Πελοποννησίων is plural, feminine, genitive. The genitive case function here is possession. The adjective τὴν modifies the ellipsed word γῆν, singular, feminine, accusative, meaning land . I find no note on this circumstance. Am I the first to comment?
The next three words are λόγοις τε πρέπουσιν. Λόγοις, a plural, masculine, dative noun, means argument or speech, according to CGL . The CGL has 27 numbered entries for this word, occupying one and one-quarter columns of the page. Πρέπουσιν could be a verb (πρέπω, 3rd plural present indicative active) meaning to be fitting, appropriate, or suitable according to CGL Πρέπουσιν could be a participle (πρέπω, plural, present, active, masculine, dative). I am going to take this word to be a participle acting as an adjective modifying λόγοις. Both the noun and its adjective are plural, masculine, dative. The meaning, I find, is “fitting arguments” or “fitting speeches.” Either translation is justified by the CGL and the sense of the sentence. The τε is a conjunction to be taken with its companion καὶ to follow three words later. Commonly, τε … καὶ means “both … and.”
We must skip a word (a verb) to arrive at our next noun, καὶ ὀργῇ. ὀργῇ, a singular, feminine, dative noun, means temper, temperament, disposition. We have two datives connected by “both … and.” I now translate these “good arguments and temperament.” I am changing my original translation where I translated the word as “enthusiasm.” The function of the dative case is not yet clear. I suspect we shall find that the dative function (dative object) will be related to a verb not yet discussed. But first, a final noun phrase remains.
The next word is πίστιν. Πίστιν, a singular, feminine, accusative noun, means trust, confidence, faith, belief, according to CGL. The case accusative is likely to be direct object. We shall see shortly.
That is all the nouns and noun phrases. Finite verbs next and there are only two.
ὡμίλησε
ἔπεισεν
I reprint the text below to refresh our memory of the position of these two verbs in the sentence.
καὶ ταῦτα ἡ ἐμὴ νεότης καὶ ἄνοια παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων δύναμιν λόγοις τε πρέπουσιν ὡμίλησε καὶ ὀργῇ πίστιν παρασχομένη ἔπεισεν.
The first verb is positioned between two dative nouns. The verb ὡμίλησε is third singular aorist indicative active. The first principal part is ὁμιλέω and it means join or be amongst. “He, she, it was joined or was amongst….” A neuter plural subject takes a third person singular verb. In this sentence there are only two nominative nouns, νεότης and ἄνοια. Nominative nouns, express or implied, are the only candidates for a subject for this verb. On my interpretation of the whole sentence, there is another nominative, the demonstrative pronoun, become substantive, ταῦτα, which I take to be neuter and plural. If ταῦτα is the subject of ὡμίλησε, then the meaning is “these things … were joined with (the verb takes dative objects) both good/suitable/appropriate arguments and temperament [Alcibiades temperament].”
The final verb and the last word in the sentence is ἔπεισεν. The verb ἔπεισεν is third singular aorist indicative active, just like the only other finite verb in this sentence. The first principal part is πείθω and it means to win over, prevail upon, persuade. The search for a subject follows the same pattern as the only other finite verb. The only candidate, it seems to me, is ταῦτα. If so, the meaning is “these things … won over/prevailed upon/persuaded …” some direct object in the accusative. There are two accusative nouns, one is πίστιν, meaning trust as discussed above. “Trust” does not fit the verb “prevail upon.” You do not prevail upon trust. You prevail upon a person or an institution. The other accusative noun is δύναμιν, power, the power ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων, “the power in the land of the Peloponnesians.” That is an institution, the institution of Sparta. So, I translate: “these things … prevailed upon the power in the land of the Peloponnesians …” to do what?
Upon my interpretation that “to do what” is the only word remaining and not yet discussed, παρασχομένη. Παρασχομένη is a participle, singular aorist middle feminine nominative. The first principal part is παρέχω and in the middle voice means display, offer, present, show. So the “to do what” is to “offer” something, that being the accusative noun, πίστιν, meaning trust. So I translate: “these things … prevailed upon the power in the land of the Peloponnesians to display/offer/present/show trust.”
Παρασχομένη is a participle, a verbal adjective, in search of a noun to modify. In the preceding paragraph, I stated that my choice for this verbal adjective’s noun is δύναμιν, power, the power in the land of the Peloponnesians. There is a problem though. The adjective and the noun should agree in gender, number, and case. As I have said, παρασχομένη is singular aorist middle feminine nominative. Δύναμιν is singular feminine accusative. These two do not agree in case, one is nominative, the other is accusative. Are there other singular feminine nominative nouns that might be candidates for the noun that παρασχομένη modifies? The first two nouns discussed are νεότης (youth) and ἄνοια (folly). Both are singular, feminine, nominative. Παρασχομένη, the participle, is in the position of a circumstantial participle, not being in the attributive position, and not being a supplemental participle in this context. A circumstantial participle has an adverbal relation to the sentence that is temporal, concessive, causal, purposeful, conditional, or “any attendant circumstance .” The verb in question, ἔπεισεν, immediately follows this participle. So, we have something(s) “persuaded” “the power in the land of the Peloponnesians” “to offer trust,” this circumstantial participle is in the “any attendant circumstance” category. The participle explains in what way “the power” “was persuaded,” i.e., “to offer trust.” A similar analysis cannot be made with the other nouns, “youth” and “folly.”
Therefore, I propose to emend the text and change παρασχομένη [nominative] to παρασχομένην [accusative]. [see Dover’s emendation]
Given all that I have said, my final translation is this:
And these things, my youth and folly (which seemed to be contrary to nature [unnatural]), in combination with appropriate words [good arguments] and enthusiasm, persuaded the power in the land of the Peloponnesians [Sparta] to offer their trust [to trust me].
Finally, I would like to look at the two published translations at hand and comment on them. The first is the Penguin Classics translation:
So, in my youth and with this folly of mine which is supposed to be so prodigious, I found the right arguments for dealing with the power of the Peloponnesians, and the energy which I displayed made them trust me and follow my advice.
Again here is the Ancient Greek text:
καὶ ταῦτα ἡ ἐμὴ νεότης καὶ ἄνοια παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων δύναμιν λόγοις τε πρέπουσιν ὡμίλησε καὶ ὀργῇ πίστιν παρασχομένη ἔπεισεν.
We see straightaway that the ταῦτα is used adverbially, “so.” There is little justification for the initial nouns being turned into prepositional phrases, “in my youth” and “with this folly.” There is no Ancient Greek verb “found” in the text. There is no Ancient Greek verb “displayed.” This “translation” has used some of the nouns and verbs and arranged them is such a way as to “wave” at the meaning and communicate some of the sense of the passage to an English reader. This is not a translation of the Ancient Greek text, in my opinion.
Here is the Landmake Thucidydes p. 371:
Thus did my youth and so-called monstrous folly find fitting arguments to deal with the power of the Peloponnesians, and by its ardour win their confidence and prevail.
Again here is the Ancient Greek text:
καὶ ταῦτα ἡ ἐμὴ νεότης καὶ ἄνοια παρὰ φύσιν δοκοῦσα εἶναι ἐς τὴν Πελοποννησίων δύναμιν λόγοις τε πρέπουσιν ὡμίλησε καὶ ὀργῇ πίστιν παρασχομένη ἔπεισεν.
We see straightaway that the ταῦτα is used adverbially, “thus.” There is no Ancient Greek verb “find” in the text. The translator is rendering ὀργῇ, ardour. I rendered it “temperament.” No powerful objection from me, though it fails to account for the dative case function which, in my opinion, is as dative object of the verb ὡμίλησε. The translator is translating it as a dative of means. There is no Ancient Greek verb “win” or “prevail,” though these words are gesturing at ἔπεισεν, persuaded.
This “translation” has used some of the nouns and verbs and arranged them is such a way as to “wave” at the meaning and communicate some of the sense of the passage to an English reader. This is not a translation of the Ancient Greek text, in my opinion.
Wow! Only twenty-four words. So many variations.
Students of Ancient Greek might be encouraged by this exercise and realize that translation is more an art than a science. We might take some consolation from our own dismal failures at translation by seeing these two public “translations” varying so far from the Ancient Greek text that we are studying.