Humanitext Reader

Polybius · The Histories §12.25f.1-12.25f.7

Criticism of Ephorus's Flawed Accounts of Land Battles

Passage 771 of 1311 · Greek

Summary

Polybius criticizes Ephorus's descriptions of land battles, such as Leuctra and Mantinea, as tactically and geographically absurd despite his understanding of naval warfare, noting that this defect is shared by Theopompus and Timaeus when they attempt detailed narratives.

§12.25f.1δῆλον δʼ ἔσται τὸ λεγόμενον ἔτι μᾶλλον ἐκ τῶν ἐπιφερομένων, οἷον εὐθέως ἐκ τῶν συμβεβηκότων Ἐφόρῳ κατὰ τόπους τινὰς τῆς ἱστορίας.
What is being said will be even clearer from what follows, for example immediately from what happened to Ephorus in certain parts of his history.
ἐκεῖνος γὰρ ἐν τοῖς πολεμικοῖς τῶν μὲν κατὰ θάλατταν ἔργων ἐπὶ ποσὸν ὑπόνοιαν ἐσχηκέναι μοι δοκεῖ, τῶν δὲ κατὰ γῆν ἀγώνων ἄπειρος εἶναι τελέως.
For he seems to me, in military matters, to have had some understanding of naval operations to a certain extent, but to be completely inexperienced in land battles.
§12.25f.2τοιγαροῦν ὅταν μὲν πρὸς τὰς περὶ Κύπρον ναυμαχίας καὶ τὰς περὶ Κνίδον ἀτενίσῃ τις, αἷς ἐχρήσανθʼ οἱ βασιλέως στρατηγοὶ πρὸς Εὐαγόραν τὸν Σαλαμίνιον καὶ πάλιν πρὸς Λακεδαιμονίους θαυμάζειν τὸν συγγραφέα καὶ κατὰ τὴν δύναμιν καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἐμπειρίαν εἰκὸς καὶ πολλὰ τῶν χρησίμων ἀπενέγκασθαι πρὸς τὰς ὁμοίας περιστάσεις·
Therefore, when one directs his attention to the naval battles around Cyprus and Knidos, which the King's generals engaged in against Evagoras of Salamis and again against the Lacedaemonians, it is natural to admire the historian both for his ability and for his experience, and to carry away many useful things for similar circumstances.
§12.25f.3ὅταν δὲ τὴν περὶ Λεῦκτρα μάχην ἐξηγῆται Θηβαίων καὶ Λακεδαιμονίων ἢ τὴν ἐν Μαντινείᾳ πάλιν τῶν αὐτῶν τούτων, ἐν ᾗ καὶ μετήλλαξε τὸν βίον Ἐπαμινώνδας, ἐν τούτοις ἐὰν ἐπὶ τὰ κατὰ μέρος ἐπιστήσας τις θεωρῇ τὰς ἐκτάξεις καὶ μετατάξεις τὰς κατʼ αὐτοὺς τοὺς κινδύνους, γελοῖος φαίνεται καὶ παντελῶς ἄπειρος καὶ ἀόρατος τῶν τοιούτων ὤν.
But when he explains the battle of Leuctra between the Thebans and Lacedaemonians, or again that of Mantinea between these same peoples, in which Epaminondas also ended his life, in these cases if someone, having directed his attention to the details, contemplates the deployments and redeployments during the actual battles, he appears ridiculous and completely inexperienced, being blind to such matters.
§12.25f.4ὁ μὲν οὖν ἐν τοῖς Λεύκτροις κίνδυνος ἁπλοῦς γεγονὼς καὶ καθʼ ἕν τι μέρος τῆς δυνάμεως οὐ λίαν ἐκφανῆ ποιεῖ τὴν τοῦ συγγραφέως ἀπειρίαν· ὁ δὲ περὶ τὴν Μαντίνειαν τὴν μὲν ἔμφασιν ἔχει ποικίλην καὶ στρατηγικήν, ἔστι δʼ ἀνυπόστατος καὶ τελέως ἀδιανόητος τῷ συγγραφεῖ.
Now the battle at Leuctra, having been simple and having taken place in only one part of the force, does not make the historian's inexperience too obvious; but that around Mantinea, while having a complex and strategic appearance, is untenable and completely incomprehensible to the writer.
τοῦτο δʼ ἔσται δῆλον, §12.25f.5ἐάν τις τοὺς τόπους ὑποθέμενος ἀληθινῶς ἐπιμετρῇ τὰς κινήσεις τὰς ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ δηλουμένας.
And this will be clear, if someone, assuming the topography truly, measures the movements described by him.
§12.25f.6τὸ δʼ αὐτὸ συμβαίνει καὶ Θεοπόμπῳ καὶ μάλιστα Τιμαίῳ, περὶ οὗ νῦν ὁ λόγος·
The same thing happens also to Theopompus and especially to Timaeus, who is the subject of our present discourse.
§12.25f.7οὗ μὲν γὰρ ἂν ὑπὲρ τῶν τοιούτων κεφαλαιώδη ποιήσωνται τὴν ὑπόθεσιν, διαλανθάνουσιν, οὗ δʼ ἂν βουληθῶσι διαθέσθαι καὶ συνυποδεῖξαί τι τῶν κατὰ μέρος, τοιοῦτοι φαίνονται καὶ πάντως οἷος Ἔφορος. —
For where they make their treatment of such matters summary, they escape notice, but where they wish to set forth and demonstrate any of the details, they appear to be in every way such as Ephorus is.

Notes

  1. §12.25f.1ἐπὶ ποσὸν ὑπόνοιαν ἐσχηκέναι — The adverbial phrase ἐπὶ ποσὸν (to a certain extent) modifies the perfect infinitive ὑπόνοιαν ἐσχηκέναι (to have possessed a notion/understanding). It indicates that Ephorus was not completely ignorant of naval warfare, but possessed some conceptual grasp of it.
  2. §12.25f.2θαυμάζειν ... εἰκὸς — An impersonal construction with the adjective εἰκός (it is natural/fitting), governing the infinitives θαυμάζειν and ἀπενέγκασθαι. The implied subject of these infinitives is a general observer or reader (τις).
  3. §12.25f.3ἐπιστήσας — An aorist active participle used intransitively (or with τὸν νοῦν "one's mind/attention" understood), meaning "having directed (one's attention)." It modifies the main subjunctive verb θεωρῇ within the conditional clause.
  4. §12.25f.3ἀόρατος τῶν τοιούτων ὤν — The adjective ἀόρατος, which usually has a passive sense ("invisible"), is here used in an active sense ("not seeing, blind"), governing the objective genitive τῶν τοιούτων ("blind to such matters").
  5. §12.25f.4ἀνυπόστατος — With reference to the historical and geographical descriptions, this adjective means "untenable" or "unsustainable." It indicates that Ephorus's account is impossible to reconcile with actual tactical reality.
  6. §12.25f.7διαλανθάνουσιν — The third-person plural of διαλανθάνω (to escape notice). Here it means that as long as the historians write in general terms, their tactical ignorance "escapes notice" and remains undetected by the readers.

Cite this passage

Polybius, The Histories §12.25f.1-12.25f.7. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0543.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:12.25f.1-12.25f.7

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.