How Brasidas Was Honoured at Skione (Thucydides 4.121.1)

Konstantine Panegyres

doi:10.1163/1568525x-bja10083

Abstract

Abstract The crux at Thucydides 4.121.1 has recently come under renewed scrutiny from scholars, but decisive conclusions were not reached. This article argues that commentators have not yet taken into account all relevant considerations, and that as a result the passage still remains incompletely understood. The verb προσήρχοντο is derived from προσέρχομαι, not προσάρχομαι. The unusual imperfect form προσήρχοντο (instead of expected Attic προσῇσαν) can perhaps be regarded as an instance of poetic verbal inflection (compare Pi. O. 9.93 διήρχετο), a type of diction suitable in the context of Thucydides’ heroic-poetic depiction of Brasidas. Modern scholars’ focus on the textual criticism of this one word has in general caused them to neglect matters of verbal interpretation. As a consequence, some important aspects of Thucydides’ language and the cultural context of the scene remain underappreciated.

Highlights

In the summer of 423 bc the city of Skione, in Pallene, revolted from the Athenians, and its citizens came over to the side of the Spartan general Brasidas
The crux at Thucydides 4.121.1 has recently come under renewed scrutiny from scholars, but decisive conclusions were not reached
On the night of the revolt, Brasidas crossed from Torone to Skione in a little rowboat, protected by a friendly trireme sailing ahead of him

Summary

Introduction

In the summer of 423 bc the city of Skione, in Pallene, revolted from the Athenians, and its citizens came over to the side of the Spartan general Brasidas. Taking the same view as Elmsley, some later scholars thought that the verb transmitted indirectly in Pollux, προσῄεσαν (προσῇσαν), which is the expected and correct Attic form, should be treated as the true ancient reading. At 1.82.2, for instance, the correct Attic form πεφαργμένοι was displaced by non-Attic πεφραγμένοι.[15] This evidence related to the Attic formation of the imperfect of προσέρχομαι ought to be taken into account, and would strongly permit a future editor to reject προσήρχοντο and print προσῇσαν.[16] An editor who still wished to keep προσήρχοντο would have to give a valid reason for printing an unusual form, when a safe alternative is already handed down by the indirect tradition in Pollux

A New Explanation of the Manuscript Reading

10 Conclusion