Humanitext Reader

Herodotus · Histories §1.73.1-1.73.6

Croesus's Motives and the Flight of the Scythians

Passage 73 of 1577 · Greek

Summary

Croesus' motivations for marching against Cappadocia are explained, focusing on avenging his brother-in-law Astyages; this leads to the story of the Scythians' offense against Cyaxares and their flight to Lydia.

§1.73.1ἐστρατεύετο δὲ ὁ Κροῖσος ἐπὶ τὴν Καππαδοκίην τῶνδε εἵνεκα, καὶ γῆς ἱμέρῳ προσκτήσασθαι πρὸς τὴν ἑωυτοῦ μοῖραν βουλόμενος, καὶ μάλιστα τῷ χρηστηρίῳ πίσυνος ἐὼν καὶ τίσασθαι θέλων ὑπὲρ Ἀστυάγεος Κῦρον.
Croesus marched against Cappadocia for the following reasons: both because he desired to acquire more land and add it to his own portion, and most of all because he trusted in the oracle and wished to punish Cyrus on behalf of Astyages.
§1.73.2Ἀστυάγεα γὰρ τὸν Κυαξάρεω, ἐόντα Κροίσου μὲν γαμβρὸν Μήδων δὲ βασιλέα, Κῦρος ὁ Καμβύσεω καταστρεψάμενος εἶχε, γενόμενον γαμβρὸν Κροίσῳ ὧδε.
For Astyages son of Cyaxares, who was Croesus' brother-in-law and king of the Medes, had been conquered and held by Cyrus son of Cambyses; and he had become Croesus' brother-in-law in the following way.
§1.73.3Σκυθέων τῶν νομάδων εἴλῃ ἀνδρῶν στασιάσασα ὑπεξῆλθε ἐς γῆν τὴν Μηδικήν·
A band of nomadic Scythians, having fallen into mutiny, withdrew secretly into the Median land.
ἐτυράννευε δὲ τὸν χρόνον τοῦτον Μήδων Κυαξάρης ὁ Φραόρτεω τοῦ Δηιόκεω, ὃς τοὺς Σκύθας τούτους τὸ μὲν πρῶτον περιεῖπε εὖ ὡς ἐόντας ἱκέτας·
At this time Cyaxares, son of Phraortes, son of Deioces, was ruling over the Medes, and at first he treated these Scythians well as being suppliants.
ὥστε δὲ περὶ πολλοῦ ποιεόμενος αὐτούς, παῖδάς σφι παρέδωκε τὴν γλῶσσάν τε ἐκμαθεῖν καὶ τὴν τέχνην τῶν τόξων.
Holding them in high esteem, he entrusted boys to them to learn their language and the art of archery.
§1.73.4χρόνου δὲ γενομένου, καὶ αἰεὶ φοιτεόντων τῶν Σκυθέων ἐπʼ ἄγρην καὶ αἰεί τι φερόντων, καὶ κοτε συνήνεικε ἑλεῖν σφεας μηδέν·
As time went on, and the Scythians kept going out to the hunt and always bringing something back, it happened once that they caught nothing.
νοστήσαντας δὲ αὐτοὺς κεινῇσι χερσὶ ὁ Κυαξάρης (ἦν γάρ, ὡς διέδεξε, ὀργὴν ἄκρος) τρηχέως κάρτα περιέσπε ἀεικείῃ.
When they returned with empty hands, Cyaxares (for he was, as he clearly showed, extremely quick-tempered) treated them very harshly and with great insult.
§1.73.5οἳ δὲ ταῦτα πρὸς Κυαξάρεω παθόντες, ὥστε ἀνάξια σφέων αὐτῶν πεπονθότες, ἐβούλευσαν τῶν παρὰ σφίσι διδασκομένων παίδων ἕνα κατακόψαι, σκευάσαντες δὲ αὐτὸν ὥσπερ ἐώθεσαν καὶ τὰ θηρία σκευάζειν, Κυαξάρῃ δοῦναι φέροντες ὡς ἄγρην δῆθεν, δόντες δὲ τὴν ταχίστην κομίζεσθαι παρὰ Ἀλυάττεα τὸν Σαδυάττεω ἐς Σάρδις.
Having suffered this treatment from Cyaxares, and feeling they had suffered what was unworthy of them, they planned to cut up one of the boys who were being taught by them, prepare him just as they were accustomed to prepare wild beasts, bring and give him to Cyaxares as though he were game, and having given him, to flee as quickly as possible to Alyattes son of Sadyattes at Sardis.
§1.73.6ταῦτα καὶ ἐγένετο.
And this is indeed what happened.
καὶ γὰρ Κυαξάρης καὶ οἱ παρεόντες δαιτυμόνες τῶν κρεῶν τούτων ἐπάσαντο, καὶ οἱ Σκύθαι ταῦτα ποιήσαντες Ἀλυάττεω ἱκέται ἐγένοντο.
For Cyaxares and the guests present tasted of this meat, and the Scythians, having done this, became suppliants of Alyattes.

Notes

  1. 1.73.1προσκτήσασθαι — The infinitive `προσκτήσασθαι` is a complementary infinitive depending on `βουλόμενος`. In the sentence structure, three participial clauses (`βουλόμενος`, `ἐὼν`, and `θέλων`) are coordinated by `καὶ... καὶ... καὶ...` to explain the reasons introduced by `τῶνδε εἵνεκα` (for the following reasons).
  2. 1.73.2καταστρεψάμενος εἶχε — A periphrastic construction combining an aorist participle with `ἔχω`, similar in meaning to a perfect. It expresses not just the past action of conquering, but the continuation of the state (having conquered and still holding captive). This is a characteristic feature of Ionic prose, especially in Herodotus.
  3. 1.73.3ὥστε δὲ περὶ πολλοῦ ποιεόμενος — The participle `ποιεόμενος` (uncontracted Ionic form corresponding to Attic `ποιούμενος`) follows the conjunction `ὥστε` introducing a result, instead of the usual indicative or infinitive. This construction is highly frequent in Herodotus, closely linking the result or attendant circumstance to the main verb (`παρέδωκε`).
  4. 1.73.4συνήνεικε — Used impersonally to mean 'it happened that...' (an Ionic form equivalent to Attic `συνέβη`). The logical subject is the accusative-and-infinitive clause `ἑλεῖν σφεας μηδέν` (that they caught nothing).
  5. 1.73.5κομίζεσθαι — The third infinitive depending on the main verb `ἐβούλευσαν` (they planned). The first is `κατακόψαι` (to cut up) and the second is `δοῦναι` (to give), both in the aorist (single acts), followed by the present infinitive `κομίζεσθαι` (to make their escape/journey). In the middle voice, `κομίζω` means 'to convey oneself,' hence used intransitively to mean 'to withdraw, escape.'

Cite this passage

Herodotus, Histories §1.73.1-1.73.6. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0016.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:1.73.1-1.73.6

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.