Hi Fellow Grecophiles,
I have doubts about ἐϕ᾿ ᾧτε in this sentence:
ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ πρὸς ἅπαντας τοὺς μετὰ Δημοσθένους ὁμολογία γίγνεται, ἐϕ᾿ ᾧτε μὴ ἀποθανεῖν μηδένα, μήτε βιαίως, μήτε δεσμοῖς, μήτε σίτου ἐνδείᾳ.
Betts, Gavin; Henry, Alan. Complete Ancient Greek: A Comprehensive Guide to Reading and Understanding Ancient Greek, with Original Texts (Complete Language Courses) (p. 275). John Murray Press. Kindle Edition.
Here’s the online translation I found:
Then an agreement was made (lit. comes into being (vivid pres.)) with respect to all those
with Demosthenes as well, on condition that no one would die either through violence (lit.
violently) or imprisonment (lit. bonds) or lack of food.
“They made agreement to the effect that no one [who was with Demosthenes] would die…” seems a lot more intuitive (but not necessarily correct) than “an agreement was made regarding all those with Demosthenes…on condition that no one would die”.
I’m not even sure what the last sentence would mean: If and only if nobody dies…, then we will make an agreement??? I suppose that’s possible but it’s really bizarre and vague (what kind of agreement?).
I just found another quote on the same page that makes things clearer:
Tιρίβαζος εἶπεν ὅτι σπείσασθαι βούλοιτο ἐϕ᾿ ᾧ μήτε αὐτὸς τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἀδικεῖν, μήτ᾿ ἐκείνους καίειν τὰς οἰκίας, λαμβάνειν τε τὰ ἐπιτήδεια ὧν δέοιντο. ἔδοξε ταῦτα τοῖς στρατηγοῖς καὶ ἐσπείσαντο ἐπὶ τούτοις.
Again, I’m not wild about “on condition that” in the online translation:
“Tiribazus said that he wished to make a treaty on condition that neither he himself
would harm the Greeks nor would they burn the houses but (lit. and) would take the
provisions that they needed. These [terms] were accepted by (lit. seemed good to) the
generals and they made a treaty on these terms.”
Does anybody like this? Tiribizus proposed a truce on the following terms: he himself would not harm the Greeks, nor would the Greeks burn the houses but could take whatever provisions they needed.