CUP (2025) p/b 293pp £26.99 (ISBN 978-1-009-265850)
This exceptional historical commentary by H.—the first of its kind, says CUP—of course goes far beyond the traditional instructions to a would-be author of a commentary: establish, explain, illustrate (and introduce) the text. In the first place, commentary on the history being examined must meld as seamlessly as possible with the examination of the author’s language; and secondly, in this case, where acquaintance with the historian, his work and language, cannot be assumed, it will be necessary to remedy the deficiencies (which H. does in full measure). Book 8 is covered in the third volume of the Loeb edition by Walbank and Habicht (2011). Walbank’s own Commentary (1957-9) concentrates on the history.
The (fragmentary) book 8 of Polybius’ massive Histories (sc. of the Punic Wars and Rome’s increasing mastery of the Mediterranean) covers only a few years towards the end of the 3rd century BC. These years were far from inactive, with Rome’s (initial) failure to besiege and capture Syracuse, thanks to the engineering ingenuity of the septuagenarian Archimedes, the capture of Lissus in Illyria by Philip V of Macedon (214-3), and the squalid story (in the same period) of the capture by trickery (from the acropolis of Sardis) and brutal murder of the probably self-styled King Achaeus (rival of the Seleucid king Antiochus III. who had gifted Achaeus the western half of Asia Minor.) Hannibal also captured Tarentum (213-12), more thanks to Roman incompetence than his own brilliance.
H.’s Introduction is 52 pages long: it is compulsory reading, especially for those whose knowledge of Polybius is limited. In Part 1, H. concentrates on Polybius himself, covering eight aspects, including his birthplace (Megalopolis in Arcadia, circa 200 BC) , literary context (historiography, style—e.g. he avoids hiatus) and methodology (rivals’ failures, literary sources, inscriptions), rhetoric (playing a critical part in Polybius’ work), technical writing (cf. the detailed account of the engineering skills of Archimedes at Syracuse) , and use of other texts (e.g. the whole twelfth book is devoted to Timaeus, the author whose work he continues). Polybius’ writing adheres largely to Attic (but he may not have spoken in Attic Greek).
In Part 2, H. provides a summary of military actions (as briefly described above; he indicates, and understandably so, that he would have welcomed permission to include more maps than the three permitted by CUP’s policy). Pages 38-40 are especially relevant, since it is here that we can gain a synoptic view of the complicated comings-and-goings in Asia, especially those of Antiochus and Achaeus. P. here shows himself a practical thinker: thus he describes his emphasis on structuring his work into books (with, e.g., Books 7 and 8 forming a pair). His approach to constitutions is far from dogmatic: thus he smiles on monarchy—but both it and oligarchy are liable to decline into worse forms of the same; and while democracy is the form of government most associated with freedom, it can, at its worst, conceal rule by the mob.
H. lists a number of words found in P. which are likely to be unfamiliar, e.g. διάληψις (view) περίσταλσις (crisis), διατροπή (dismay), ἐπιβολή (endeavour), προκόπη (progress) and the rather pleasing ἰδιοπραγεῖν (paddle one’s own canoe), but in general P. is not a difficult author He is not slow to criticize the work of others: in numerous clashes he takes issue with other historians of the same events over evaluation and practicalities —Timaeus and Ephorus are named and shamed; not that P limits his disfavour to other historians, as Women and Barbarians are other targets. H. adds that P. is isolated chronologically … so we cannot properly see P. in the context of contemporary historians, but all the same, P. organizes the words that contemporary language gives him into expressive and forceful structures.
Transmission and reception. The transmission of P.’s text is, to put it bluntly, a mess. Only Books 1-5 (out of 40) survive intact; our biggest source for book 8 is the Excerpta Antiqua (uncertain date, but certainly by early 11th century), and the list of sigla (pp.53-54) mentions numerous MSS. There are four relevant papyri; Athenaeus, Stephanus of Byzantium, the Suda, and the Excerpta Constantiniana also contribute. Plutarch naturally uses P. as a source. Cicero and Livy both held P. in high regard: in the text, P.’s papyri confirm that the mediaeval extracts are full of corruptions. Of others, we may note that P. was an important and respected predecessor of Strabo; that Leonardo Bruni produced his own version of some wars from P., and even that Machiavelli (detested by Casaubon) had knowledge of the complete books, though he did not know Greek.
Of the Text itself, the generous apparatus criticus may perhaps remind us that H. himself has now embarked on producing an Oxford Classical Text of Polybius; indeed, H.’s name is frequently to be found in the apparatus (actually, on all but two of the text’s 29 pages) often correcting a simple scribal error (such corrections not needing further consideration in the Commentary.)
The Commentary naturally occupies nearly half of the book: but, admirable as it is, it calls for relatively little comment, for it is strictly a historical commentary, which fully describes and explains the actions as they take place. Literary matters play a very minor role: P. still uses the optative mood, though it is in gradual decline; as noted, he avoids hiatus, and he displays a fondness for hyperbaton; an index item for interrogative delayed does not exist (presumably one of the book’s tiny number of typos); rare words are explained. As previously noted, P.’s text is not difficult. The 19 entries in the Index for Polybius himself show him under a number of headings, e.g. dryness, extravagance, subtlety, detailed local knowledge—and contrast with Theopompus. The great merit of the Commentary, for this reviewer, lies in its clarity and completeness.
The full set of Indexes (etc.) includes a long bibliography, Passages cited (Livy scoring very heavily), Greek words, and General. I do not think that Entwicklung needs an e inserted before the l (p.265). This is a wholly admirable addition to CUP’s Green and White series and, what is more, its relatively modest price should put it in the range of any serious student: unreservedly recommended.
Colin Leach