Humanitext Reader

Polybius · The Histories §28.9.1-28.9.8

Perseus's Parsimony toward Genthius and Missed Opportunity

Passage 1101 of 1311 · Greek

Summary

Upon hearing of Genthius's demand for money from his envoys, Perseus ignored it and ordered renegotiations without offering funds. The author criticizes Perseus's stinginess despite his abundant resources as a divine infatuation, noting that this failure ultimately saved most Greeks from being compromised by his ruin.

§28.9.1ὅτι κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν τοῦτον ἧκον οἱ πρὸς τὸν Γένθιον ἀποσταλέντες πρέσβεις οὔτʼ ᾠκονομηκότες πλεῖον οὐδὲν τῶν πρότερον οὔτʼ ἀναγγέλλοντες, §28.9.2διὰ τὸ τὸν Γένθιον μένειν ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς αἱρέσεως, ὄντα μὲν ἕτοιμον τῷ Περσεῖ κοινωνεῖν τῶν αὐτῶν πραγμάτων, χρημάτων δὲ φάσκοντα χρείαν ἔχειν.
At this time, the envoys who had been sent to Genthius returned, having neither settled anything further than before nor bringing back any new report, because Genthius remained in the same purpose, being ready indeed to share the same fortune with Perseus, but claiming that he stood in need of money.
§28.9.3ὧν ὁ Περσεὺς παρακούσας πάλιν ἔπεμπε τοὺς περὶ τὸν Ἱππίαν βεβαιωσομένους ὑπὲρ τῶν ὁμολογιῶν, τὸ συνέχον παραλιπών, φάσκων ἐξιγμένον εὐνοοῦντα ποιήσειν τὸν Γένθιον· §28.9.4ὥστε διαπορεῖν πότερα δεῖ λέγειν ἐπὶ τῶν τοιούτων ἀλογιστίαν ἢ δαιμονοβλάβειαν.
Disregarding these reports, Perseus sent back Hippias and his party to confirm the agreement, neglecting the essential point and asserting that on their arrival he would make Genthius well-disposed; so that one is at a loss whether to call such conduct in these matters infatuation or madness sent by a deity.
δοκῶ μὲν ὅτι δαιμονοβλάβειαν, οἵτινες ἐφίενται μὲν τοῦ μεγάλα τολμᾶν καὶ παραβάλλονται τῇ ψυχῇ, παριᾶσιν δὲ τὸ συνέχον ἐν ταῖς ἐπιβολαῖς, βλέποντες αὐτὸ καὶ δυνάμενοι πράττειν
I indeed think it is madness sent by a deity, since men who long to venture on great enterprises and hazard their lives, neglect the essential point in their undertakings, though they see it and have the power to perform it.
§28.9.5ὅτι γάρ, εἰ Περσεὺς κατʼ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν ἠβουλήθη προέσθαι χρήματα καὶ κοινῇ τοῖς πολιτεύμασι καὶ κατʼ ἰδίαν τοῖς βασιλεῦσι καὶ τοῖς πολιτευομένοις, οὐ λέγω μεγαλομερῶς, καθάπερ ἐξῆν αὐτῷ χορηγιῶν ἕνεκεν, ἀλλὰ μετρίως μόνον, πάντας ἂν συνέβη καὶ τοὺς Ἕλληνας καὶ τοὺς βασιλεῖς, §28.9.6εἰ δὲ μή γε, τοὺς πλείστους ἐξελεγχθῆναι, δοκῶ μηδένα τῶν νοῦν ἐχόντων πρός με διαμφισβητῆσαι περὶ τούτων.
For if Perseus at that time had been willing to expend money, both publicly to the states and privately to the kings and politicians—I do not say lavishly, as it was in his power to do owing to his resources, but even moderately—all the Greeks and the kings, or if not all, at least most of them, would have been compromised, a fact about which I think no one of sound mind would dispute with me.
§28.9.7νῦν δὲ καλῶς ποιῶν οὐκ ἦλθε ταύτην τὴν ὁδόν, διʼ ἧς ἢ κρατήσας τῶν ὅλων ἐξουσίαν ἂν ὑπερήφανον ἔσχεν ἢ σφαλεὶς πολλοὺς ἂν ἐποίησε τῆς αὐτῆς τύχης πεῖραν αὑτῷ λαβεῖν, §28.9.8ἀλλὰ τὴν ἐναντίαν, διʼ ἧς ὀλίγοι τελέως ἠλογήθησαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων ὑπὸ τὸν τῆς πράξεως καιρόν. —
But as it was, fortunately for them, he did not take this path, by which, had he conquered, he would have acquired an overbearing power over all, or had he failed, he would have made many share the experience of his own fortune; but he took the opposite path, thanks to which very few of the Greeks were completely compromised at the time of the crisis. —

Notes

  1. §28.9.3ὧν ὁ Περσεὺς παρακούσας — The genitive neuter plural relative pronoun ὧν acts transitionally to refer back to Genthius's reply reported in the previous sentence, serving as the object of the participle παρακούσας (from παρακούω, 'to turn a deaf ear to, disregard'), which governs the genitive case.
  2. §28.9.3ἐξιγμένον — An accusative neuter singular perfect passive participle of the verb ἐξικνέομαι ('to arrive, reach'). Here it functions within the accusative-and-infinitive clause εὐνοοῦντα ποιήσειν as an impersonal accusative absolute ('upon arrival/when they had arrived'), expressing Perseus's presumption that the mere arrival of his envoys would suffice to make Genthius friendly.
  3. §28.9.5ὅτι γάρ, εἰ Περσεὺς κατʼ ἐκεῖνον τὸν καιρὸν ἠβουλήθη ... ἂν συνέβη — The main grammatical skeleton of this long sentence. The conjunction ὅτι introduces the noun clause that functions with the main verb δοκῶ (governing the accusative-and-infinitive construction in §28.9.6). Inside this structure, a past counterfactual conditional is embedded: 'εἰ + past indicative (ἠβουλήθη) ... apodosis ἂν + past indicative (συνέβη) + infinitive (ἐξελεγχθῆναι)'.
  4. §28.9.6ἐξελεγχθῆναι — The passive infinitive of the verb ἐξελέγχω ('to expose, convict, put to the test'). It functions as the subject (in the form of an infinitive) of the impersonal verb συνέβη ἂν ('it would have resulted that...'). In this context, it means that the Greeks and the kings would have been 'exposed' or 'compromised' by being lured by his money.
  5. §28.9.7καλῶς ποιῶν — An idiomatic expression using the participle ποιῶν. Although literally meaning 'doing well,' it modifies the main verb οὐκ ἦλθε to convey an adverbial sense of evaluation, meaning 'fortunately' or 'luckily' (i.e., 'fortunately, he did not take this path').

Cite this passage

Polybius, The Histories §28.9.1-28.9.8. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0543.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:28.9.1-28.9.8

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.