Humanitext Reader

Polybius · The Histories §2.63.1-2.63.6

Phylarchus's Inconsistency on Cleomenes' Finances

Passage 151 of 1311 · Greek

Summary

Polybius points out a logical inconsistency in the historian Phylarchus's account of Cleomenes' finances and spoils. According to him, Phylarchus claims that Cleomenes was desperately short of funds just before the battle due to the suspension of Ptolemy's aid, which contradicts his other claim that Cleomenes had acquired an enormous sum of money.

§2.63.1τὸ δὲ συνεχὲς τούτῳ τίς οὐκ ἂν ἔτι μᾶλλον θαυμάσειε;
And who would not marvel still more at what follows this?
ταῦτα γὰρ ἀποφαινόμενος λέγει πρὸ τῆς παρατάξεως δέχʼ ἡμέραις μάλιστα τὸν παρὰ Πτολεμαίου πρεσβευτὴν ἐλθεῖν ἀγγέλλοντα πρὸς τὸν Κλεομένη διότι Πτολεμαῖος τὸ μὲν χορηγεῖν ἀπολέγει, διαλύεσθαι δὲ παρακαλεῖ πρὸς τὸν Ἀντίγονον.
For while asserting these things, he says that about ten days before the battle, the envoy from Ptolemy arrived announcing to Cleomenes that Ptolemy was refusing to provide financial support and was urging him to come to terms with Antigonus.
§2.63.2τὸν δʼ ἀκούσαντά φησι κρῖναι διότι δεῖ τὴν ταχίστην ἐκκυβεύειν τοῖς ὅλοις πρὸ τοῦ συνεῖναι τὰ προσπεπτωκότα τὰς δυνάμεις, διὰ τὸ μηδεμίαν ὑπάρχειν ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις πράγμασιν ἐλπίδα τοῦ δύνασθαι μισθοδοτεῖν.
And he says that upon hearing this, he decided that he must stake everything on a battle as quickly as possible before his troops found out what had happened, because there was no hope in his own resources of being able to pay them.
§2.63.3ἀλλʼ εἴπερ ἑξακισχιλίων ἐγκρατὴς ἐγεγόνει ταλάντων κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοὺς καιρούς, τὸν Πτολεμαῖον αὐτὸν ἠδύνατο ταῖς χορηγίαις ὑπερθέσθαι.
But if indeed he had become master of six thousand talents at those same times, he would have been able to surpass Ptolemy himself in financial resources.
§2.63.4πρὸς δὲ τὸν Ἀντίγονον, εἰ μόνον τριακοσίων ὑπῆρχε κύριος, καὶ λίαν ἱκανὸς ἦν ἀσφαλῶς ὑπομένων τρίβειν τὸν πόλεμον.
And as against Antigonus, if he had been master of only three hundred talents, he would have been more than able to drag out the war by remaining safely on the defensive.
§2.63.5τὸ δʼ ἅμα μὲν πάσας ἀποφαίνειν τῷ Κλεομένει τὰς ἐλπίδας ἐν Πτολεμαίῳ διὰ τὰς χορηγίας, ἅμα δὲ τοσούτων χρημάτων αὐτὸν φάναι κύριον γεγονέναι κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοὺς καιρούς, πῶς οὐ τῆς μεγίστης ἀλογίας, ἔτι δʼ ἀσκεψίας ἐστὶ σημεῖον;
And on the one hand to declare that all Cleomenes' hopes rested on Ptolemy because of the financial support, and on the other hand to say that he had become master of so much money at the same times—how is this not a sign of the greatest inconsistency and indeed thoughtlessness?
§2.63.6πολλὰ δὲ καὶ ἕτερα τῷ συγγραφεῖ τοιαῦτα καὶ κατὰ τοὺς ὑποκειμένους καιροὺς καὶ παρʼ ὅλην τὴν πραγματείαν κατατέτακται, περὶ ὧν ἀρκεῖν ὑπολαμβάνω κατὰ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς πρόθεσιν καὶ τὰ νῦν εἰρημένα.
And many other such inconsistencies have been set down by this writer both during the times under discussion and throughout his whole work, concerning which I think that what has now been said is sufficient in accordance with my original purpose.

Notes

  1. §2.63.1τὸ δὲ συνεχὲς τούτῳ — The cohesive adjective συνεχές (continuous with, following) governs the dative τούτῳ (this). With the article τό, the phrase functions as a substantivized noun phrase "what follows this," acting as the direct object of the main verb θαυμάσειε.
  2. §2.63.2πρὸ τοῦ συνεῖναι τὰ προσπεπτωκότα τὰς δυνάμεις — An infinitive phrase with the preposition πρὸ and the genitive article τοῦ. The word συνεῖναι is the aorist infinitive of συνίημι (to perceive, understand). The accusative τὰς δυνάμεις (the forces/troops) is the subject of the infinitive, while the accusative τὰ προσπεπτωκότα (the events that occurred) is its object.
  3. §2.63.3εἴπερ ἑξακισχιλίων ἐγκρατὴς ἐγεγόνει ... ἠδύνατο — A past counterfactual conditional sentence. The protasis uses the pluperfect indicative ἐγεγόνει, while the apodosis uses the imperfect indicative of a verb of ability, ἠδύνατο. Verbs expressing ability, obligation, or necessity (such as δύναμαι, χρή, δεῖ) regularly omit the particle ἄν in the apodosis of counterfactual conditionals.
  4. §2.63.5τὸ δʼ ἅμα μὲν πάσας ἀποφαίνειν ... ἅμα δὲ ... φάναι — The article τὸ substantivizes the two entire infinitive phrases (ἀποφαίνειν... and φάναι...) contrasted by ἅμα μὲν ... ἅμα δέ... (on the one hand... on the other hand...). This entire long substantivized phrase acts as the subject of the copula ἐστί in the main clause, with σημεῖον as the predicate nominative and the genitives τῆς μεγίστης ἀλογίας... qualifying it.

Cite this passage

Polybius, The Histories §2.63.1-2.63.6. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0543.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:2.63.1-2.63.6

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.