Thucydides · History of the Peloponnesian War §3.12.1-3.12.3

Alliance Based on Fear and Justification of Preemptive Revolt

Passage 261 of 917 · Greek

Summary

The speaker explains that their alliance was based on mutual fear rather than friendship, and justifies their preemptive revolt as a necessary measure of self-defense.

§3.12.1τίς οὖν αὕτη ἢ φιλία ἐγίγνετο ἢ ἐλευθερία πιστή, ἐν ᾗ παρὰ γνώμην ἀλλήλους ὑπεδεχόμεθα, καὶ οἱ μὲν ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ δεδιότες ἐθεράπευον, ἡμεῖς δὲ ἐκείνους ἐν τῇ ἡσυχίᾳ τὸ αὐτὸ ἐποιοῦμεν·

'What kind of friendship, then, or reliable freedom was this, in which we received one another contrary to our real feelings, and they courted us in war out of fear, while we did the same to them in time of peace?

ὅ τε τοῖς ἄλλοις μάλιστα εὔνοια πίστιν βεβαιοῖ, ἡμῖν τοῦτο ὁ φόβος ἐχυρὸν παρεῖχε, δέει τε τὸ πλέον ἢ φιλίᾳ κατεχόμενοι ξύμμαχοι ἦμεν· καὶ ὁποτέροις θᾶσσον παράσχοι ἀσφάλεια θάρσος,οὗτοι πρότεροί τι καὶ παραβήσεσθαι ἔμελλον.

And whereas goodwill is what most secures trust in others, in our case fear made this security firm, and we were allies bound more by fear than by friendship; and whichever of the two security should first inspire with confidence, these were likely to be the first to commit some breach.

§3.12.2ὥστε εἴ τῳ δοκοῦμεν ἀδικεῖν προαποστάντες διὰ τὴν ἐκείνων μέλλησιν τῶν ἐς ἡμᾶς δεινῶν, αὐτοὶ οὐκ ἀνταναμείναντες σαφῶς εἰδέναι εἴ τι αὐτῶν ἔσται, οὐκ ὀρθῶς σκοπεῖ.

Therefore, if anyone thinks we do wrong in revolting beforehand because of their delay of inflicting terrible things upon us, without ourselves waiting in turn to know clearly whether any of them will happen, he does not view the matter correctly.

§3.12.3εἰ γὰρ δυνατοὶ ἦμεν ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου καὶ ἀντεπιβουλεῦσαι καὶ ἀντιμελλῆσαι, τί ἔδει ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίου ἐπ’ ἐκείνοις εἶναι;

For if we were able on equal terms both to plot against them in return and to delay in return, why did we need to be at their mercy on the same terms?

ἐπ’ ἐκείνοις δὲ ὄντος αἰεὶ τοῦ ἐπιχειρεῖν καὶ ἐφ’ ἡμῖν εἶναι δεῖ τὸ προαμύνασθαι.

But since the power of attacking is always in their hands, the power of defending ourselves beforehand ought to be in ours as well.'

Notes

3.12.1ὁποτέροις θᾶσσον παράσχοι ἀσφάλεια θάρσος — The optative παράσχοι without ἄν expresses an indefinite or conditional generality ('whichever of the two security should first inspire with confidence'). The subject of the clause is ἀσφάλεια (security) and the object is θάρσος (confidence/boldness).
3.12.2αὐτοὶ οὐκ ἀνταναμείναντες — The nominative plural pronoun αὐτοὶ and participle ἀνταναμείναντες agree grammatically with the subject of the subordinate verb δοκοῦμεν ('we seem'), referring to the Mytilenaeans, even though the main subject of the sentence is εἴ τῳ ('if to anyone') with the singular verb σκοπεῖ ('he considers'). This is an anacoluthon (change of construction) based on the logical subject.
3.12.3ἐπ’ ἐκείνοις δὲ ὄντος αἰεὶ τοῦ ἐπιχειρεῖν — The preposition ἐπί with the dative means 'in the power of' or 'dependent on'. In this genitive absolute construction, the subject is the substantivized infinitive τὸ ἐπιχειρεῖν ('the power of attacking'). This corresponds directly to ἐφ’ ἡμῖν ('in our power') in the following main clause.

Cite this passage

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War §3.12.1-3.12.3. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0003.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:3.12.1-3.12.3

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.