previous next


προελήλατο: impersonal = nocte multum provecta; cf. ii. 121. δ 6 ὡς πρόσω ἦν τῆς νυκτός. There seems no reason to doubt that the Macedonians were opposite the Athenians on the Greek left (ch. 31. 5), or to disbelieve in the phil-Hellenism of Alexander (cf. v. 22. 1) or in his friendship for Athens (viii. 136. 140 β). Yet this story of his midnight visit is open to suspicion. Woodhouse (J. H. S. xviii. 43) asks how he could have eluded the Persian sentinels, or, if he was believed to be the bearer of dispatches, where was the alleged risk. More serious objections are the improbability of his assertion that supplies were running short, and the falsification of his warning that Mardonius would fight the decisive battle next day. Macan (ii. 373) points out that Alexander has already given one friendly warning to the Greeks (vii. 173), and notes the tendency to justify the conduct of the Macedonian, yet he rightly holds that there was probably some communication and collusion between Alexander and the Athenians (ii. 384).

τοῖσι στρατηγοῖσι. The majority of the ten strategi (vi. 103. 1) would be with the army, though Xanthippus at least was with the fleet at Mycale (ch. 114). Plutarch (Aristid. 20) names Leocrates and Myronides besides Aristides, to whom he makes Alexander appeal (Aristid. 15).

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: