Keen, 'Thucydides: History Bk III', Bryn Mawr Classical Review 9508
URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/bmcr/bmcr-9508-keen-thucydides
@@@@95.8.5, Rhodes, ed./trans., Thucydides III
P.J. Rhodes (ed., trans.), Thucydides: History Bk III.
Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd, 1994. Pp. xiv + 273. #35/$49.95. ISBN
0-85668-539-9 (hb).
Reviewed by Antony G. Keen -- The Queen's University of Belfast
akeen@clio.arts.qub.ac.uk
This translation and commentary of Book III of T(hucydides)'
Histories follows the edition by Professor R(hodes) of Book II in
the same publisher's series[[1]] (though R. reveals that originally this
new volume was to have been treated by the late Ian Scott-Kilvert [p.
v]), and now forms the centre of a trilogy of commentaries; a third
volume on IV.1-V.24 will take R.to the end of the Archidamian War. Those
familiar with R.'s commentary on Book II will find that, not
surprisingly, little has changed in approach beyond the adoption of a
rather more attractive typeface (though behind a less attractive cover).
Indeed, the introduction to T., his work, and the Peloponnesian War (pp.
1-29) is repeated largely, though not entirely, verbatim from the
previous volume; hence R.'s tendency in this introduction to use examples
from Book II rather than III (much of the new material is the
presentation of examples from Book III). This, however, cannot seriously
be held up as a criticism; as R. himself notes (p.v), he must assume that
the readers of this volume have not necessarily used the previous text,
and so his introductory material must be presented anew.
The main text of the commentary follows the format by now
familiar in the Aris & Phillips series. A Greek text is presented (R.'s
own), together with a facing translation; notes then follow, tied to the
translation (though occasionally seemingly tied to a slightly earlier
version of the translation than that upon which R. has finally
settled[[2]]). The notes divided into sections according to the division
of the work laid out by R. at p. 30, thus allowing the reader, if he
wishes, easily to follow the revolt of Mytilene or the siege of Plataia
through the work. The notes are thoroughly cross-referenced, to such a
degree that it the repetition actually gets slightly annoying for anyone
reading the whole text cover-to-cover. Such readers, however, will form
a very minor section of R.'s readership (essentially, only reviewers will
do this), and it is probably much better that the reader dipping into the
volume to see what R. has to say about, for example, chapter 115.5 be
referred back to the note on the Athenian general Eurymedon ad 80.2.
These notes are largely historical in nature; where R. does deal
with a textual matter (where, for instance, there are variant manuscript
traditions) he often (though by no means always) seems most interested in
how this would affect the historical meaning of the text. One suspects
that R., probably with considerable justification, has decided that the
principal users of his volume will be those whose chief interest is in
Thucydides as a historian, not as a literary artist. Hence R.'s
translation often departs from a rigorous adherence to the original text
of T. (something for which R. is clearly unapologetic; see p. v). Not
only is the common practice followed of breaking T.'s long sentences down
into smaller English sentences, but often R., for the sake of clarity,
changes the structure--the replacement of a Thucydidean active voice with
an English passive is common. At no point does R. change the basic
meaning of what T. says, but his free translating does mean that any
novice reader of T. encouraged by the facing text and translation layout
to use this book as a crib will have to use the volume with care.
The cover blurb, proclaiming the volume "useful not only to
specialists but also to readers who know little or no Greek", must
therefore be qualified with the above caveat. Most readers, however,
will find the volume very useful. The thorough background notes and
biographies of important individuals such as Kleon or Demosthenes will be
of considerable use to the undergraduate, whilst professional Greek
historians will want to see R.'s views on such matters as the excursus on
stasis at 82-83.[[3]]
It is clear that little in the past half-decade of Thucydidean
scholarship has caused R.to shift his ground on any major issues since
the publication of his commentary on Book II, but equally clear that he
has kept abreast of what has been written since 1988. The most important
contribution on this score, of course, is the appearance of S.
Hornblower's commentary on Books I-III,[[4]] and it is to R.'s benefit,
and that of the reader, that he has been able to take account of
Hornblower's work; note e.g. p. 202 ad 34.2 and pp. 248-249
ad 92.4.
A few other comments:
P. 176 ad 2.2. the note on ring-composition warrants a reference
to the recent work of J.R. Ellis (e.g. "The Structure and Argument of
Thucydides' Archaeology", Classical Antiquity 10.2 [1991],
344-380), at least on general principles.[[5]]
P. 218-219 ad 55.3. When dealing with the background to
the grant of Athenian citizenship to the refugees from Plataia, Badian's
views on the relationship between Plataia and Athens ("Plataea between
Athens and Sparta", in H. Beister & J. Buckler [eds.], Boiotika
[Munich, 1989], pp. 95-111, reprinted in E. Badian, From Plataea to
Potidaea [Baltimore, 1993], pp. 109-123) may be radical, but they
certainly deserve notice (to be fair, this work is also passed over by
Hornblower ad loc.).
P. 230 ad 70.6. It is worth noting that the formula "to
recognise the same friends and enemies as Athens" is very similar to that
used at the formation of the Delian League ([Aristotle], Athenaion
Politeia 23.5). Was Peithias then trying to make Corcyra a tributary
ally of Athens? It is surprising that R., whose authoritative work on
the Ath. Pol. is well-known, does not comment on this.
There are also production niggles. This reviewer personally has
always disliked the aspect of the Aris & Phillips house style by which no
indication of a note is given in the text of the translation;
occasionally the printing is such that edges of lines are lost (note e.g.
p. 205); and somewhere in the course of production the last part of the
index (after "Sparta") has been lost.
This is certainly not a radical treatment of T.--R. tends to
agree with Gomme more than with Hornblower (no radical himself), and
still maintains e.g. a disbelief in the Peace of Kallias (pp. 183-184
ad 10.4) and a 458/7 date for the Egesta treaty (p. 240 ad
86.1) in the face of a slight trend away from the three-barred sigma
orthodoxy--but a radical approach is not what is required in a work of
this nature; what is needed is a good thorough scholarly treatment of the
work, usable by students (and scholars) of history and literature alike.
Books VI and VII received such a treatment in the 1960s from Sir Kenneth
Dover, and we now have from R.'s pen complementary works for Books II and
III. The final part of the trilogy is eagerly anticipated.
NOTES
[[1]] P.J. Rhodes (ed., trans.), Thucydides: History II
(Warminster, 1988).
[[2]] Most surprisingly R. changes from "persuaded" in the notes to
"induced" for A)NAPEI/SEIN at 70.6, thus losing the point of Thucydides'
pun with the name Peithias on which R. comments (p. 230).
[[3]] To the bibliography on which must now be added A.W. Lintott,
"Civil Strife and Human Nature in Thucydides", in J.H. Molyneux (ed.),
Literary Responses to Civil Discord (Nottingham, 1993), pp. 25-32,
with a response by R.I. Winton at pp. 33-35.
[[4]] S. Hornblower, A Commentary on Thucydides, Volume I: Books
I-III (Oxford 1991), reviewed in BMCR 3.6.9 (1992).
[[5]] Ellis has dealt with Book III in "The Structure of Thucydides'
Dissertation on Stasis and the Authenticity of 3.84" in Electronic
Antiquity 1.2 (July 1993), which appeared too late for R.to take note
of it.