Trupēmatōn

CZRQihgWEAIxygg

Οὔκουν δεινόν; πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ἀστυγείτονας καὶ ὁμολογουμένως ἀρίστους τῶν Ἑλλήνων εἰς τὴν πόλιν γεγενημένους οὕτω καλῶς καὶ ἀκριβῶς διωρίσασθε περὶ ἑκάστου, ἐφ’ οἷς δεῖ ἔχειν τὴν δωρεάν, τὴν δὲ περιφανῶς ἐν ἁπάσῃ τῇ Ἑλλάδι πεπορνευμένην οὕτως αἰσχρῶς καὶ ὀλιγώρως ἐάσετε ὑβρίζουσαν εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ ἀσεβοῦσαν εἰς τοὺς θεοὺς ἀτιμώρητον, ἣν οὔτε οἱ πρόγονοι ἀστὴν κατέλιπον οὔθ᾽ ὁ δῆμος πολῖτιν ἐποιήσατο; ποῦ γὰρ αὕτη οὐκ εἴργασται τῷ σώματι, ἢ ποῖ οὐκ ἐλήλυθεν ἐπὶ τῷ καθ’ ἡμέραν μισθῷ; οὐκ ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ μὲν πάσῃ, ἐν Θετταλίᾳ δὲ καὶ Μαγνησίᾳ μετὰ Σίμου τοῦ Λαρισαίου καὶ Εὐρυδάμαντος τοῦ Μηδείου, ἐν Χίῳ δὲ καὶ ἐν Ἰωνίᾳ τῇ πλείστῃ μετὰ Σωτάδου τοῦ Κρητὸς ἀκολουθοῦσα, μισθωθεῖσα ὑπὸ τῆς Νικαρέτης, ὅτε ἔτι ἐκείνης ἦν; τὴν δὴ ὑφ’ ἑτέροις οὖσαν καὶ ἀκολουθοῦσαν τῷ διδόντι τί οἴεσθε ποιεῖν; ἆρ’ οὐχ ὑπηρετεῖν τοῖς χρωμένοις εἰς ἁπάσας ἡδονάς; εἶτα τὴν τοιαύτην καὶ περιφανῶς ἐγνωσμένην ὑπὸ πάντων [ἀπὸ τριῶν τρυπημάτων] γῆς περίοδον εἰργασμένην ψηφιεῖσθε ἀστὴν εἶναι;
(Demosthens, Or. 59.107-108)

Isn’t it shocking? On the one hand, when it comes to our neighbors, men acknowledged to be the best of all the Greeks in their dealings with our city, you have legislated with such precise care the conditions under which each individual may enjoy the gift of citizenship; while on the other, you will allow this woman, a whore known to all Greece, to treat our city with disgrace and contempt and get away with profaning the gods, this woman who is not Athenian by her birth and not a citizen by act of the dēmos. Is there a place she has not sold her body? Is there a place she has not gone to earn her daily living? She’s been all over the Peloponnese, in Thessaly, and in Magnesia with Simus from Larissa and Eurydamas the son of Medeius; in Chios and in most of Ionia she followed Sotades from Crete around, rented out by Nicarete, who still owned her. What do you suppose a woman will do when under the thumb of different men, traipsing after any man who pays her? Isn’t she going to serve up every sort of pleasure to the men who use her? And then, will you vote citizenship for a woman of this character, notorious to all for making her living from three holes,* street-walking the world?

* Hermogenes, a second-century ad writer on rhetoric, reports that the words “making her living from three (drilled) holes” appeared in some texts of this speech. They are not to be found in any surviving manuscript, and most scholars believe that the expression is too crude for Attic oratory. But since the entire passage passes the normal limits of decorum, Apollodorus probably did venture this gibe.

(tr. Victor Bers, with one of his notes)

Alektruonas

Wikia-Visualization-Add-7

καὶ ἡμῖν συνέβαινεν ἀναστρέφουσιν ἀπὸ τοῦ Φερρεφαττίου καὶ περιπατοῦσιν πάλιν κατ’ αὐτό πως τὸ Λεωκόριον εἶναι, καὶ τούτοις περιτυγχάνομεν. ὡς δ’ ἀνεμείχθημεν, εἷς μὲν αὐτῶν, ἀγνώς τις, Φανοστράτῳ προσπίπτει καὶ κατεῖχεν ἐκεῖνον, Κόνων δ’ οὑτοσὶ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ ὁ Ἀνδρομένους υἱὸς ἐμοὶ προσπεσόντες τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἐξέδυσαν, εἶθ’ ὑποσκελίσαντες καὶ ῥάξαντες εἰς τὸν βόρβορον οὕτω διέθηκαν ἐναλλόμενοι καὶ παίοντες, ὥστε τὸ μὲν χεῖλος διακόψαι, τοὺς δ’ ὀφθαλμοὺς συγκλεῖσαι· οὕτω δὲ κακῶς ἔχοντα κατέλιπον, ὥστε μήτ’ ἀναστῆναι μήτε φθέγξασθαι δύνασθαι. κείμενος δ’ αὐτῶν ἤκουον πολλὰ καὶ δεινὰ λεγόντων. καὶ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα καὶ βλασφημίαν ἔχει τινὰ καὶ λέγειν ὀκνήσαιμ’ ἂν ἐν ὑμῖν ἔνια, ὃ δὲ τῆς ὕβρεώς ἐστι τῆς τούτου σημεῖον καὶ τεκμήριον τοῦ πᾶν τὸ πρᾶγμ’ ὑπὸ τούτου γεγενῆσθαι, τοῦθ’ ὑμῖν ἐρῶ· ᾖδε γὰρ τοὺς ἀλεκτρυόνας μιμούμενος τοὺς νενικηκότας, οἱ δὲ κροτεῖν τοῖς ἀγκῶσιν αὐτὸν ἠξίουν ἀντὶ πτερύγων τὰς πλευράς. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτ’ ἐγὼ μὲν ἀπεκομίσθην ὑπὸ τῶν παρατυχόντων γυμνός, οὗτοι δ’ ᾤχοντο θοἰμάτιον λαβόντες μου. ὡς δ’ ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν ἦλθον, κραυγὴ καὶ βοὴ τῆς μητρὸς καὶ τῶν θεραπαινίδων ἦν, καὶ μόγις ποτ’ εἰς βαλανεῖον ἐνεγκόντες με καὶ περιπλύναντες ἔδειξαν τοῖς ἰατροῖς. ὡς οὖν ταῦτ᾽ ἀληθῆ λέγω, τούτων ὑμῖν τοὺς μάρτυρας παρέξομαι.
(Demosthenes, Or. 54.8-9)

It happened that we encountered these men as we were turning away from the temple of Persephone and were walking back, just about at the Leocorion. In the mêlée, one of them, a man I didn’t know, rushed Phanostratus and pinned him down, and Conon here and his son and the son of Andromenes fell on me. First they pulled off my cloak, then tripped me and threw me down in the mud, jumped on me and hit me so hard they split my lip and made my eyes swell shut. They left me in such a state that I could not get up or speak. And as I lay there, I heard them saying many shocking things. Generally it was filthy stuff, and I hesitate to repeat some of it before you, but I will tell you something that is evidence of Conon’s insolence and indicates that the whole business came about at his instigation. You see, he sang out, imitating victorious fighting cocks, and his cronies urged him to flap his elbows against his sides, like wings. Afterward, passersby took me home, naked, and these men went off with my cloak. When I got to my door, my mother and the serving women cried and shrieked and only with difficulty got me into a bath, washed me off all around, and showed me to the doctors. I will present witnesses of these events to show that I am telling the truth. (tr. Victor Bers)

Hōrisen

Statute-of-Limitations-image-5.3.18

Ὁ μὲν τοίνυν νόμος, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, σαφῶς οὑτωσὶ τὸν χρόνον ὥρισεν· Ἀπολλόδωρος δ’ οὑτοσὶ παρεληλυθότων ἐτῶν πλέον ἢ εἴκοσιν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ συκοφαντίαν ἀξιοῖ περὶ πλείονος ὑμᾶς ποιήσασθαι τῶν νόμων, καθ’ οὓς ὀμωμοκότες δικάζετε. καίτοι πᾶσι μὲν τοῖς νόμοις προσέχειν εἰκός ἐσθ’ ὑμᾶς, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ τούτῳ, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι. δοκεῖ γάρ μοι καὶ ὁ Σόλων οὐδενὸς ἄλλου ἕνεκα θεῖναι αὐτὸν ἢ τοῦ μὴ συκοφαντεῖσθαι ὑμᾶς. τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ἀδικουμένοις τὰ πέντ’ ἔτη ἱκανὸν ἡγήσατ’ εἶναι εἰσπράξασθαι· κατὰ δὲ τῶν ψευδομένων τὸν χρόνον ἐνόμισεν σαφέστατον ἔλεγχον ἔσεσθαι. καὶ ἅμ’ ἐπειδὴ ἀδύνατον ἔγνω ὂν τούς τε συμβάλλοντας καὶ τοὺς μάρτυρας ἀεὶ ζῆν, τὸν νόμον ἀντὶ τούτων ἔθηκεν, ὅπως μάρτυς εἴη τοῦ δικαίου τοῖς ἐρήμοις.
(Demosthenes, Or. 36.26-27)

So the law, men of Athens, defines the time quite clearly. But this man Apollodorus, after the passing of more than twenty years, is asking you to set his malicious accusation above the laws in accordance with which you are sitting as sworn judges. But you are expected to attend to all the laws, and not least to this one, men of Athens. It seems to me that Solon enacted it for no other purpose than to protect you from malicious accusations. He considered that the period of five years was sufficient for victims to obtain redress. He believed that time would provide the surest refutation of liars, but he also realized that it was impossible for contracting parties and witnesses to live forever, and so he enacted this law to replace them and to be a witness of justice for those who have no one to support them. (tr. Douglas M. MacDowell)

Lamprotēs

oratoria

Μετὰ τὸν περὶ σεμνότητός τε καὶ τραχύτητος λόγον ἔτι τε σφοδρότητος ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν περὶ λαμπρότητος. τῶν γὰρ ποιουσῶν τὸ μέγεθός τε καὶ τὸ ἀξίωμα τῷ λόγῳ ἰδεῶν ἐν τοῖς μάλιστά ἐστιν ἡ λαμπρότης. τά τε ἄλλα γὰρ ἀναγκαία ἡ ἰδέα τῷ ἀξιωματικῷ λόγῳ καὶ ὅτι δεῖ τῷ σεμνῷ τε καὶ τραχεῖ καὶ σφοδρῷ προσεἰναί τι πάντως καὶ φαιδρότητος, ἵνα μὴ πάντῃ αὐστηρὸς ᾖ· φαιδρότητος δὲ οὐ τῆς ἐν ὡραισμῷ, ἣ δὴ γλυκύτητός τε καὶ ἀφελείας ἐστίν, οὐδὲ τῆς κατʼ ἐπιμέλειαν συνθήκης κάλλος ἐχούσης τι—καίπερ γὰρ ὄν κομμωτικὸν τὸ τοιοῦτο καὶ πλεονάζον παρὰ τῷ ῥήτορι ὅμως λεπτόν ἐστι καὶ οὐκ ἔχει δίαρμα οὐδὲ μέγεθος—, οὔκουν ταύτης δεῖ τῆς φαιδρότητος τῷ μεγέθει ὡς καθʼ αὐτό, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἀξιωματικῆς· ταύτην δὲ ποιεῖ ἡ λαμπρότης, περὶ ἧς ῥητέον. περὶ γὰρ τοῦ ἐναντίου εἴδους τῇ λαμπρότητι κἀν τῷ περὶ σφοδρότητος εἰρήκαμεν, ὅτι ἐστὶ τὸ κομματικὸν καὶ διαλεκτικὸν καὶ ὄντως ἀγωνιστικὸν εἶδος τοῦ λόγου καὶ ὅλως τὸ γοργόν. γίνεται τοίνυν λόγος λαμπρὸς κατὰ ἔννοιαν μέν, ὅταν πεποίθησιν ἔχῃ τινὰ ὁ λέγων, ἐφ’ οἷς ἄν λέγῃ, ἢ διὰ τὸ ἔνδοξα εἶναι ἢ διὰ τὸ καλῶς πεπρᾶχθαι αὐτῷ ἢ διὰ τὸ χαίρειν τοῖς λεγομένοις τούς ἀκούοντας ἢ καὶ διὰ πάντα ταῦτα· ὅλως τε ἐπὶ τοῖς διαπρεπέσι τῶν ἔργων καὶ ἐφ’ οἷς ἔστι λαμπρύνεσθαι ὡς ἀληθῶς, ὅπερ φησὶν Ἡρόδοτος ἐλλάμψασθαι, ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐστὶ καὶ ἡ λαμπρότης· γίνεται τοίνυν λόγος λαμπρὸς κατὰ ἔννοιαν μέν, ὅταν πεποίθησιν ἔχῃ τινὰ ὁ λέγων, ἐφ’ οἷς ἄν λέγῃ, ἢ διὰ τὸ ἔνδοξα εἶναι ἢ διὰ τὸ καλῶς πεπρᾶχθαι αὐτῷ ἢ διὰ τὸ χαίρειν τοῖς λεγομένοις τούς ἀκούοντας ἢ καὶ διὰ πάντα ταῦτα· ὅλως τε ἐπὶ τοῖς διαπρεπέσι τῶν ἔργων καὶ ἐφ’ οἷς ἔστι λαμπρύνεσθαι ὡς ἀληθῶς, ὅπερ φησὶν Ἡρόδοτος ἐλλάμψασθαι, ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐστὶ καὶ ἡ λαμπρότης· οἶον “οὐ λίθοις ἐτείχισα τὴν πόλιν οὐδὲ πλίνθοις ἐγώ, οὐδ’ ἐπὶ τούτοις μέγιστον τῶν ἐμαυτοῦ φρονῶ· ἀλλ’ ἐὰν βούλῃ τὸν ἐμὸν τειχισμόν” καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς, καὶ πάλιν “αὕτη τῶν περὶ Θήβας ἐγένετο πραγμάτων ἀρχὴ καὶ κατάστασις πρώτη, τὰ πρὸ τούτων εἰς ἔχθραν καὶ μῖσος καὶ ἀπιστίαν τῶν πόλεων ὑπηγμένων ὑπὸ τούτων. τοῦτο τὸ ψήφισμα τὸν τότε περιστάντα τῇ πόλει κίνδυνον παρελθεῖν ἐποίησεν ὥσπερ νέφος”, καὶ πάλιν “ταῦτα ἐποίουν οἱ ὑμέτεροι πρόγονοι, ταῦθ’ ὑμῶν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι, οἲ Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ τὰ ἐξῆς, καὶ πάλιν “ὑμεῖς τοίνυν, ὦ Ἀθηναῖοι, Λακεδαιμονίων γῆς καὶ θαλάττης ἀρχόντων καὶ τὰ κύκλῳ τῆς Ἀττικῆς κατεχόντων ἁρμοσταῖς καὶ φρουραῖς, Εὔβοιαν, Τάναγραν, τὴν Βοιωτίαν ἅπασαν” καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς μέχρι τοῦ “ἐξήλθετε εἰς Ἁλίαρτον”. πολλὰ δὲ καὶ τοῦ τοιούτου παραδείγματα ἐν τῶ Περὶ τοῦ στεφάνου διὰ τὸ φύσει ἀξιωματικὸν τοῦ λόγου καὶ λαμπρόν. Ἀλλʼ ἔννοιαι μὲν αὗται καὶ αἰ τοιαῦται λαμπραί.
(Hermogenes, Peri Ideōn 1.9)

Having treated Solemnity, Asperity, and Vehemence, we must now discuss Brilliance. Of those types that produce Grandeur and dignity Brilliance is especially important. This type is necessary in a dignified speech for several reasons, but especially because a speech that is solemn and harsh and vehement also needs an element of luster, so that it will not be overly severe. I do not mean by this the kind of luster that is produced by adornment. That is characteristic of Sweetness and Simplicity. Nor am I talking about the kind that produces a beautiful effect through the care taken with the arrangement of words in the sentences. The latter kind of style is decorative and is often found in Demosthenes. It is nevertheless slight and does not produce elevation and Grandeur. To make the passage really elevated, therefore, you do not need the kinds of luster just discussed, but the kind that is truly dignified. That is Brilliance, which I will discuss now. We have already mentioned the kind of style that is the opposite of Brilliance in the discussion of Vehemence, where we said that it is conversational and argumentative, composed of short phrases, and generally quick-paced. Therefore, a passage is brilliant with reference to the thought when the speaker has some confidence in what he is saying, either because what he is saying is generally approved or because he has acted honorably or because his audience is pleased with what he is saying or for all these reasons. In general Brilliance is inherent in those acts that are remarkable and in which one can gain luster, or, as Herodotus says (1.80), in which one can “shine.” This is the case in the following passages from Demosthenes’ speech On the Crown: “I did not fortify the city with stones and with bricks, nor do I consider that the greatest of my achievements reside in such things. But if you want to see the fortifications that I build you will find weapons and cities” etc. (299) or “This was the beginning of our dealings with Thebes and the first negotiation, since before this these men had reduced our attitude toward the Thebans to hostility and hatred and distrust. This decree caused the danger surrounding the city to disappear like a cloud” (188) or “Your ancestors did this, the elders among you did it when they saved the Spartans,” etc. (98) or “You, therefore, Athenians, when the Spartans ruled by land and sea and were holding with governors and garrisons all the frontiers of Attica, as well as Euboea, Tanagra, and all Boeotia,” etc. up to “you set out to Haliartus” (96). And there are many examples of such a style in the speech On the Crown because it is by nature dignified and brilliant. These thoughts, then, and those like them are characteristic of Brilliance. (tr. Cecil W. Wooten III)

Skorpios

Nicolas Poussin, Le Temps soustrait la Vérité aux attaques de l'Envie et de la Discorde, 1641
Nicolas Poussin, Le Temps soustrait la Vérité aux attaques de l’Envie et de la Discorde (1641)

Σκοπεῖτε γάρ. εἰσὶν ὁμοῦ δισμύριοι πάντες Ἀθηναῖοι. τούτων ἕκαστος ἕν γέ τι πράττων κατὰ τὴν ἀγορὰν περιέρχεται, ἤτοι νὴ τὸν Ἡρακλέα τῶν κοινῶν ἢ τῶν ἰδίων. ἀλλ’ οὐχ οὗτος οὐδέν, οὐδ’ ἂν ἔχοι δεῖξαι πρὸς ὅτῳ τὸν βίον ἐστὶ τῶν μετρίων ἢ καλῶν. οὐχὶ τῶν πολιτικῶν ἀγαθῶν ἐπ’ οὐδενὶ τῇ ψυχῇ διατρίβει· οὐ τέχνης, οὐ γεωργίας, οὐκ ἄλλης ἐργασίας οὐδεμιᾶς ἐπιμελεῖται· οὐ φιλανθρωπίας, οὐχ ὁμιλίας οὐδεμιᾶς οὐδενὶ κοινωνεῖ· ἀλλὰ πορεύεται διὰ τῆς ἀγορᾶς, ὥσπερ ἔχις ἢ σκορπίος ἠρκὼς τὸ κέντρον, ᾄττων δεῦρο κἀκεῖσε, σκοπῶν τίνι συμφορὰν ἢ βλασφημίαν ἢ κακόν τι προστριψάμενος καὶ καταστήσας εἰς φόβον ἀργύριον εἰσπράξεται. οὐδὲ προσφοιτᾷ πρός τι τούτων τῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει κουρείων ἢ μυροπωλίων ἢ τῶν ἄλλων ἐργαστηρίων οὐδὲ πρὸς ἕν· ἀλλ’ ἄσπειστος, ἀνίδρυτος, ἄμεικτος, οὐ χάριν, οὐ φιλίαν, οὐκ ἄλλ’ οὐδὲν ὧν ἄνθρωπος μέτριος γιγνώσκων· μεθ’ ὧν δ’ οἱ ζωγράφοι τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς ἐν Ἅϊδου γράφουσιν, μετὰ τούτων, μετ’ ἀρᾶς καὶ βλασφημίας καὶ φθόνου καὶ στάσεως καὶ νείκους, περιέρχεται.
(Demosthenes, Or. 25.51-52)

Think about it. There are about twenty thousand Athenians in all. Each of them does some private or public business, by Heracles, as he walks around the Agora. But this man does not do any such business, nor could he point to any moderate or respectable activity he has spent his life pursuing. He does not spend his time thinking about what is good for the state. He practices no skill, neither farming or any other occupation; he shares no kindness, no company with anyone. But he moves through the Agora like a viper or a scorpion with his sting erect, leaping here and there, looking for someone on whom to inflict disaster or slander or some disaster or to extort money by terrifying him. He does not frequent any of the barbershops or perfume shops or any other workshops in the city, not even one. Pitiless, without a fixed residence, antisocial, he knows nothing of gratitude, friendship, or any of the other qualities a decent man knows. Joined by those whom the painters depict in the company of the impious in Hades, he walks around with Curse, Slander, Envy, Discord, and Quarrel. (tr. Edward M. Harris)

Apērtēmenoi

Demosthenes (klein)

Πότ’ οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι, πόθ’ ἃ χρὴ πράξετε; ἐπειδὰν τί γένηται; ἐπειδὰν νὴ Δί’ ἀνάγκη τις ᾖ; νῦν δὲ τί χρὴ τὰ γιγνόμεν’ ἡγεῖσθαι; ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οἴομαι τοῖς ἐλευθέροις μεγίστην ἀνάγκην τὴν ὑπὲρ τῶν πραγμάτων αἰσχύνην εἶναι. ἢ βούλεσθ’, εἰπέ μοι, περιιόντες αὑτῶν πυνθάνεσθαι, “λέγεταί τι καινόν;” γένοιτο γὰρ ἄν τι καινότερον ἢ Μακεδὼν ἀνὴρ Ἀθηναίους καταπολεμῶν καὶ τὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων διοικῶν; “τέθνηκε Φίλιππος;”—”οὐ μὰ Δί’, ἀλλ’ ἀσθενεῖ.” τί δ’ ὑμῖν διαφέρει; καὶ γὰρ ἂν οὗτός τι πάθῃ, ταχέως ὑμεῖς ἕτερον Φίλιππον ποιήσετε, ἄνπερ οὕτω προσέχητε τοῖς πράγμασι τὸν νοῦν· οὐδὲ γὰρ οὗτος παρὰ τὴν αὑτοῦ ῥώμην τοσοῦτον ἐπηύξηται ὅσον παρὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἀμέλειαν. καίτοι καὶ τοῦτο· εἴ τι πάθοι καὶ τὰ τῆς τύχης ἡμῖν, ἥπερ ἀεὶ βέλτιον ἢ ἡμεῖς ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιμελούμεθα, καὶ τοῦτ’ ἐξεργάσαιτο, ἴσθ’ ὅτι πλησίον μὲν ὄντες, ἅπασιν ἂν τοῖς πράγμασιν τεταραγμένοις ἐπιστάντες ὅπως βούλεσθε διοικήσαισθε, ὡς δὲ νῦν ἔχετε, οὐδὲ διδόντων τῶν καιρῶν Ἀμφίπολιν δέξασθαι δύναισθ’ ἄν, ἀπηρτημένοι καὶ ταῖς παρασκευαῖς καὶ ταῖς γνώμαις.
(Demosthenes, Or. 4.10-12)

When, men of Athens, when will you do what is needed? What are you waiting for? For some necessity to arise, by Zeus? What, then, should we call the present developments? For, I believe, the strongest necessity for free men is shame at their situation. Or, tell me, do you wish to go around asking each other, “Is there any news?” What could be graver news than that a Macedonian is waging war on Athens and is in control of the affairs of Greece? “Is Philip dead?” “No, by Zeus, but he is sick.” What difference does it make to you? Even if something were to happen to him, you would soon create another Philip, if this is how you apply yourselves to the situation, since even he has not prospered by reason of his own strength as much as because of our neglect. Moreover, if Fortune, which always takes better care of us than we do of ourselves, should arrange for something to happen to him, you know that if you were on the scene, you might step in and in the general state of confusion arrange matters as you wish. But as you are now, even if the opportunity were to present itself, you would be unable to take Amphipolis, since you are disunited in your preparations and in your resolve. (tr. Jeremy Trevett)