In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

11 Diodotus, Son of Eucrates* The title of this paper gives us one of the only two facts known about the man to whom Thucydides assigns one of the most profound and important speeches in his History. The other fact is that the speech reported by Thucydides was not Diodotus’ first on Cleon’s motion in the summer of 427 b.c., that all adult male Mytileneans be killed and their women and children be taken as slaves: he had been the most vociferous opponent of that motion already a day earlier when it had been successfully passed by the Athenian Assembly.1 To try to identify Diodotus by identifying his father is almost hopeless. Of the twenty-five men named Eucrates listed in the Prosopographia Attica, there are two possible candidates: one is the c̯̰½½̡̥̫½ҧ̧̣c mentioned in Aristophanes’ Knights as a predecessor of Cleon as a demagogue2 and the other was a general in 432/1 b.c.3 A third possible candidate is Nicias’ brother Eucrates,4 but arguments based on names alone cannot be very strong. Whether Diodotus was the son of any of these three can only be guessed, and *This paper originally appeared in Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 20 (1979): 5–13, reprinted by permission of Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies. I am pleased to acknowledge my gratitude to the J. S. Guggenheim Foundation for a fellowship and to Swarthmore College and the University of Pennsylvania for a leave of absence that gave me the leisure to write this paper. Cordial thanks go also to Russell Meiggs, Donald Lateiner, John K. Davies, Colin W. MacLeod, and Peter J. Rhodes for critical comments and suggestions generously given, which, however, do not imply agreement with or responsibility for the views here expressed. 1 For the motion, see Thuc. 3.36.2; for Cleon’s sponsorship in the first Assembly meeting, ibid. 36.6; for his advocacy of it in the second meeting, ibid. 37–40. For Diodotus’ opposition in the first Assembly meeting, see ibid. 41; in the second, ibid. 42–48. 2 Ar. Eq. 129 with schol.; cf. ibid. 254 with schol. and fr.696 (K). 3 IG I2 296.5 with C. W. Fornara, The Athenian Board of Generals from 501 to 404 (=Historia Einzelschrift 16, Wiesbaden, 1971) 52–53. 4 A. W. Gomme, A Historical Commentary on Thucydides II (Oxford, 1956) 313. 206 Chapter 11 even if we could guess accurately, it would tell us nothing significant about Diodotus, unless additional information on the various persons named Eucrates were also to come forth. The purpose of this paper is to seek a little more light on the identity of Diodotus from a much neglected passage in the much discussed speech which Thucydides puts into his mouth. In the course of his plea against Cleon that a renewed deliberation of the Mytilenean issue is beneficial rather than harmful to Athens, Diodotus states: ̲̬Ҟ ̠Ҝ ½̬Ңc ̯Қ ̨̙̟̥c̯̝ ̦̝Ҡ ц̩ ̯‫و‬ ̯̫̥‫̡̠و‬ ж̪̥̫̰ʮ̩ ̯̥ ѓ̨̝ʮc ½̴̡̬̝̥̯̙̬ ½̬̫̩̫̫̰ʮ̩̯̝c ̧̡̙̟̥̩ ѿ̨‫̩ه‬ ̯‫̩ه‬ ̠̥’ Ѳ̧̛̟̫̰ c̦̫½̫ҥ̴̩̯̩, к̴̧̧c ̡̯ ̦̝Ҡ ѿ½̡ҥ̤̰̩̫̩ ̯Ҟ̩ ½̝̬̝ҡ̡̩c̥̩ ъ̲̫̩̯̝c ½̬Ңc ж̡̩ҥ̤̰̩̫̩ ̯Ҟ̩ ѿ̨̡̯̙̬̝̩ ж̷̦̬̝c̥̩.5 Why does Thucydides feel constrained to include this sentence in his argument? Those who have commented on the peculiarity of this passage at all have brought the ̟̬̝̿Ҟ ½̷̴̨̝̬̝̩̩ into the discussion,6 but only rarely has the question been raised in what way Diodotus might envisage the possibility that his remarks could be construed as a violation against which this procedure, unattested before 415 b.c., could have been invoked.7 To the best of my knowledge, only G. Mathieu has something to say on that subject.8 He believes that Cleon might have invoked the ̟̬̝̿Ҟ ½̷̴̨̝̬̝̩̩ against Diodotus’ request for reopening an issue already voted upon by the Assembly, implying that the proposer of renewed discussion of a decision already made was subject to this procedure. But the parallel he cites is no true parallel. When Nicias encourages the prytanis not to be afraid of putting the decision to sail against Sicily to a vote again, since “he could not be charged 5 Thuc. 3.43.4: “Faced with matters of the greatest importance and in the kind of situation in which we are, we must be expected, as we make our speeches, to be thinking ahead rather further than you who give the issue but a moment’s attention, especially as the advice we give is subject to an accounting, whereas the hearing you give is subject to no accounting.” 6 E. F. Poppo, Thucydidis De Bello Peloponnesiaco II.12 (Leipzig, 1875) ad loc., seems to have been...

Share