ἐν τῇ Εὐβοίῃ: the officers and men were mostly ashore, even if the ships were not actually beached.
ἐπείτε δὴ ἐς τὰς Ἀφέτας: referring back (δή) not so much to c. 4 supra, as to 7. 195, or 193.
περί: here of time, as just below of place.
δείλην πρωίην γινομένην, ‘the early afternoon’; cp. δείλην ὀψίην γινομένην τῆς ἡμέρης c. 9 infra. The present participle is more curious with the πρωίην than with the ὀψίην, as δείλη itself (whatever its derivation) means afternoon, in distinction from ἠώς and μέσον ἦμαρ. Cp Iliad 21. 111. At what o'clock exactly we are to place the arrival (ἀπίκατο 7. 193) is unfortunately not clear: before 3 P.M.?
πυθόμενοι μὲν ἔτι καὶ πρότερον: cp. 7. 208. The Persian advance has been conducted with all due foresight and circumspection: the number of the Greek fleet does not apparently exceed their anticipations.
The construction (and sense) of the words ἔτι καὶ πρότερον, especially of ἔτι, is disputable. Are they to be taken together? Do they, if so taken, qualify πυθόμενοι or ναυλοχέειν? Or are they to be taken separately, and, if so, do καὶ πρότερον cohere, or are ἔτι and πρότερον co-ordinate? Finally, what is the exact sense of ἔτι? Stein takes ἔτι = ἤδη (schon); cp 5. 62 ἐόντες ανδρες δόκιμοι ἀνέκαθεν ἔτι, 1. 65 τὸ δὲ ἔτι πρότερον τούτων καὶ κακονομώτατοι ἦσαν, 1. 92 τὴν δὲ οὐσἱην αὐτοῦ ἔτι πρότερον κατιρώσας κτλ., 1. 190 εξεπιστάμενοι ἔτι πρότερον τὸν Κῦρον οὐκ ἀτρεμίζοντα, 3. 64 τῷ δὲ ἔτι πρότερον ἐκέχρηστο, 6. 33 αὐτοὶ γὰρ Κυζικηνοὶ ἔτι πρότερον τοῦ Φοινίκων ἐσπλόου τούτου ἐγεγόν εσαν ὑπὸ βασιλέι. So also c. 69 infra νομίζων ἔτι πρότερον σπουδαίην εἶναι τότε πολλῷ μᾶλλον αἴνεε. But in no instance does ἔτι appear used with a verb simply as = ἤδη, but always as reinforcing a temporal adverb, generally πρότερον, and so in its normal (comparative) force of ‘still’—the point of departure being the latest date, and the point of arrival not ‘already’ but ‘still’ and ‘still’ earlier. In c. 62 infra ἐκ παλαιοῦ ἔτι, where there is no comparison, the ἔτι may have its true (temporal) force. In none of these eases does a καί separate, or connect, the ἔτι πρότερον. The very pecuhar ease in 9. 102 ἔτι καὶ δή is now abandoned by Stein (cp. note ad l. infra). The καί here therefore remains a problem, most simply resolved by understanding it as intensive ‘still even’ (or ‘even still’) earlier, and taking the phrase as quahfying πυθόμενοι (c. 69 infra, quoted above, favouring this, as well as the τότε δὲ αὐτοὶ ίδόντες). But if ἔτι καὶ πρότερον might be taken with ναυλοχέειν, then καί is disjunctive (‘still as before,’ referring to the reoccupation of the position); but the τότε δὲ αὐτοὶ ἰδόντες seems to forbid this.
τότε δέ: on their arrival at Aphetai, or on the way thither; in either case it appears here that the Greek fleet is already in position at Artemision (for the second time), before the arrival of the Persians at Aphetai; but if so, why did not the Greeks advance upon the Persians (especially if Aphetai should be placed within the entrance of the gulf of Pagasai)? The Persians do not advance at once for a frontal attack upon the Greeks (ἐκ τῆς ἀντίης προσπλέειν) for fear the Greeks should sail away and escape, through the Euripos, under cover of night; a squadron of 200 sail is detached to circumnavigate the island and take the Greeks in the rear, while the fleet from Aphetai will attack ἐξ ἐναντίης when the time arrives. The exposition of the plan ignores the bearing of the naval manœuvres upon the situation at Thermopylai had the Greek fleet desired, and been allowed, to ‘fly’ from Artemision, Leonidas and his men were at the mercy of the Persians. The squadron detached to circumnavigate Euboia may have been directed rather against Thermopylai than against Artemision.
εὐφρόνη καταλαμβάνῃ. The noun is a poetie word for ‘night,’ cp. 7. 12. The verb is used in a favourable, or at least a nentral sense, here; cp. 3. 139.
ἔμελλον δῆθεν φεύξεσθαι seems to be not the writer's own opinion, but an idea spread among the Persians; the tone of the passage, therefore, hardly accords with the account of the Greek panie in e. 4 supra. (ἐκφεύξεσθαι is of course barely sense, but would accord better with referring the utterance wholly to the author.)
ἔδει δὲ μηδὲ πυρφόρον τῷ ἐκείνων λόγῳ ἐκφυγόντα περιγενέσθαι: ἐκείνων must refer to the Persians, but τῷ ἐκείνων λόγῳ cannot be intended to ascribe to Persian origin the obviously Greek, or Lakonic, proverb. The Fire-bearer was a Spartan official, bnt not perhaps to be found only at Sparta; cp. Xenophon, Laced. resp. 13. 2 θύει μὲν γὰρ πρῶτον οἰκοι ὢν (sc. ὁ βασιλεὺς) καὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ: ἢν δὲ ἐνταῦθα καλλιερήσῃ, λαβὼν ὁ πυρφόρος πῦρ ἀπὸ τοῦ βωμοῦ προηγεῖται ἐπὶ τὰ ὅρια τῆς χώρας: ὁ δὲ βασιλεὐς ἐκεῖ αὖ θύεται Διὶ καὶ Ἀθηνᾷ. ὅταν δὲ άμφοῖν τούτοιν τοῖν θεοῖν καλλιερηθῇ, τότε διαβαίνει τὰ ὅρια τῆς χώρας: καὶ τὸ πῦρ μὲν ἀπὸ τούτων τῶν ἱερῶν προηγεῖται οὔποτε ἀποσβεννύμενον, σφάγια δὲ παντοῖα ἕπεται. Cp. Suidas sub v. who says, ἐν τοῖς οὖν πολέμοις εἰώθασι τῶν ἱερέων οἱ νενικηκότες φείδεσθαι. This might be true of Greeks, but would not hold good for ‘barbarians.’ Canon Blakesley, however, denies the sacrosanctity of the πυρφόρος, and supposes only that he would be more likely than the fighting men to escape.
