Humanitext Reader

Herodotus · Histories §2.120.1-2.120.5

Herodotus on Helen's Absence and the Fall of Troy

Passage 336 of 1577 · Greek

Summary

Herodotus argues that if Helen had actually been in Troy, Priam and Hector would have surely returned her to avoid destruction. He expresses his view that the Trojans could not return her because she was not there, leading to their divinely ordained ruin.

§2.120.1ταῦτα μὲν Αἰγυπτίων οἱ ἱρέες ἔλεγον· ἐγὼ δὲ τῷ λόγῳ τῷ περὶ Ἑλένης λεχθέντι καὶ αὐτὸς προστίθεμαι, τάδε ἐπιλεγόμενος, εἰ ἦν Ἑλένη ἐν Ἰλίῳ, ἀποδοθῆναι ἂν αὐτὴν τοῖσι Ἕλλησι ἤτοι ἑκόντος γε ἢ ἀέκοντος Ἀλεξάνδρου.
These things indeed the priests of the Egyptians said; and I myself also agree with the account told about Helen, considering the following: if Helen had been in Ilium, she would have been given back to the Greeks, whether Alexandros wished it or not.
§2.120.2οὐ γὰρ δὴ οὕτω γε φρενοβλαβὴς ἦν ὁ Πρίαμος οὐδὲ οἱ ἄλλοι οἱ προσήκοντες αὐτῷ, ὥστε τοῖσι σφετέροισι σώμασι καὶ τοῖσι τέκνοισι καὶ τῇ πόλι κινδυνεύειν ἐβούλοντο, ὅκως Ἀλέξανδρος Ἑλένῃ συνοικέῃ.
For Priam was surely not so mad, nor the others related to him, as to wish to risk their own lives, their children, and their city, so that Alexandros might live with Helen.
§2.120.3εἰ δέ τοι καὶ ἐν τοῖσι πρώτοισι χρόνοισι ταῦτα ἐγίνωσκον, ἐπεὶ πολλοὶ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων Τρώων, ὁκότε συμμίσγοιεν τοῖσι Ἕλλησι, ἀπώλλυντο, αὐτοῦ δὲ Πριάμου οὐκ ἔστι ὅτε οὐ δύο ἢ τρεῖς ἢ καὶ ἔτι πλέους τῶν παίδων μάχης γινομένης ἀπέθνησκον, εἰ χρή τι τοῖσι ἐποποιοῖσι χρεώμενον λέγειν, τούτων δὲ τοιούτων συμβαινόντων ἐγὼ μὲν ἔλπομαι, εἰ καὶ αὐτὸς Πρίαμος συνοίκεε Ἑλένῃ, ἀποδοῦναι ἂν αὐτὴν τοῖσι Ἀχαιοῖσι, μέλλοντά γε δὴ τῶν παρεόντων κακῶν ἀπαλλαγήσεσθαι.
Even if they did think so in the first days, yet when many of the other Trojans were perishing whenever they joined battle with the Greeks, and of Priam himself, there was never a time when two or three or even more of his sons did not die when a battle took place—if one must say anything relying on the epic poets—under such circumstances as these, I for my part believe that, even if Priam himself had been living with Helen, he would have given her back to the Achaeans, since he would surely have been about to be delivered from the present evils.
§2.120.4οὐ μὲν οὐδὲ ἡ βασιληίη ἐς Ἀλέξανδρον περιήιε, ὥστε γέροντος Πριάμου ἐόντος ἐπʼ ἐκείνῳ τὰ πρήγματα εἶναι, ἀλλὰ Ἕκτωρ καὶ πρεσβύτερος καὶ ἀνὴρ ἐκείνου μᾶλλον ἐὼν ἔμελλε αὐτὴν Πριάμου ἀποθανόντος παραλάμψεσθαι, τὸν οὐ προσῆκε ἀδικέοντι τῷ ἀδελφεῷ ἐπιτρέπειν, καὶ ταῦτα μεγάλων κακῶν διʼ αὐτὸν συμβαινόντων ἰδίῃ τε αὐτῷ καὶ τοῖσι ἄλλοισι πᾶσι Τρωσί.
Moreover, the kingship was not going to pass to Alexandros, so that, Priam being old, the government was in his hands; but Hector, who was both older and more of a man than he, was bound to receive it upon the death of Priam, whom it was not fitting to yield to his wrongdoing brother, especially when great evils were happening because of him both to Hector himself individually and to all the other Trojans.
§2.120.5ἀλλʼ οὐ γὰρ εἶχον Ἑλένην ἀποδοῦναι, οὐδὲ λέγουσι αὐτοῖσι τὴν ἀληθείην ἐπίστευον οἱ Ἕλληνες, ὡς μὲν ἐγὼ γνώμην ἀποφαίνομαι, τοῦ δαιμονίου παρασκευάζοντος, ὅκως πανωλεθρίῃ ἀπολόμενοι καταφανὲς τοῦτο τοῖσι ἀνθρώποισι ποιήσωσι, ὡς τῶν μεγάλων ἀδικημάτων μεγάλαι εἰσὶ καὶ αἱ τιμωρίαι παρὰ τῶν θεῶν.
But the truth was that they did not have Helen to give back, nor did the Greeks believe them when they spoke the truth, as I declare my opinion, because the divine power so ordained, so that by perishing in utter destruction they might make this clear to mankind, that for great wrongdoings, great also are the punishments from the gods.
καὶ ταῦτα μὲν τῇ ἐμοὶ δοκέει εἴρηται.
And these things have been said in the way that seems best to me.

Notes

  1. §2.120.1ἀποδοθῆναι ἂν — An apodosis of a past contrary-to-fact condition with the protasis 'εἰ ἦν Ἑλένη...'. The past indicative with ἄν is converted into the infinitive 'ἀποδοθῆναι' with 'ἄν' in indirect discourse depending on 'ἐπιλεγόμενος'. It expresses that if Helen had been in Ilium, she would have been returned, though she actually was not.
  2. §2.120.2ὥστε τοῖσι σφετέροισι σώμασι ... ἐβούλοντο — The conjunction 'ὥστε' introduces a result clause with the indicative ('ἐβούλοντο'), which emphasizes an actual fact or state (i.e., that they actually did not wish to risk themselves, rather than a mere hypothetical result).
  3. §2.120.3χρεώμενον — An accusative present middle-passive participle agreeing with an implied accusative subject (such as a general person or the speaker himself) of the impersonal verb 'χρή'. It indicates an attendant circumstance of speaking by relying on the authority of the epic poets.
  4. §2.120.4τὸν οὐ προσῆκε ἀδικέοντι τῷ ἀδελφεῷ ἐπιτρέπειν — The relative pronoun 'τὸν' (referring to Hector) serves as the accusative subject of the infinitive 'ἐπιτρέπειν' which depends on the impersonal verb 'προσῆκε'. The verb 'ἐπιτρέπειν' here means 'to yield to' or 'to permit' and takes the dative 'ἀδικέοντι τῷ ἀδελφεῷ' as its object.

Cite this passage

Herodotus, Histories §2.120.1-2.120.5. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0016.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:2.120.1-2.120.5

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.