21st Century Classical Greek -- a contrast between certainty and definiteness

Book I section 34.  The Kerkyraeans continue to put their case.

‘ἢν δὲ λέγωσιν ὡς οὐ δίκαιον τοὺς σφετέρους ἀποίκους ὑμᾶς δέχεσθαι, μαθόντων ὡς πᾶσα ἀποικία εὖ μὲν πάσχουσα τιμᾷ τὴν μητρόπολιν, ἀδικουμένη δὲ ἀλλοτριοῦται: οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ τῷ δοῦλοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῷ ὁμοῖοι τοῖς λειπομένοις εἶναι ἐκπέμπονται.

[2] ὡς δὲ ἠδίκουν σαφές ἐστιν: προκληθέντες γὰρ περὶ Ἐπιδάμνου ἐς κρίσιν πολέμῳ μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ ἴσῳ ἐβουλήθησαν τὰ ἐγκλήματα μετελθεῖν.

[3] καὶ ὑμῖν ἔστω τι τεκμήριον ἃ πρὸς ἡμᾶς τοὺς ξυγγενεῖς δρῶσιν, ὥστε ἀπάτῃ τε μὴ παράγεσθαι ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν δεομένοις τε ἐκ τοῦ εὐθέος μὴ ὑπουργεῖν: ὁ γὰρ ἐλαχίστας τὰς μεταμελείας ἐκ τοῦ χαρίζεσθαι τοῖς ἐναντίοις λαμβάνων ἀσφαλέστατος ἂν διατελοίη.

The first conjugated verb in this section is in oblique modality. Why? You should know by now.

The Kerkyraeans use a personal gerundive about a mitropolis treating a colony well. They’re not pointing to any specific colony that honors a mitropolis that treats it well. It’s an introduction to the contrast with how Korinth has treated Kerkyraea. The estrangement is expressed in a conjugated verb, than which it gets no more definite, no more certain, but it is not in executive voice, so the estrangement was not a deliberate act of Kerkyraea, and Korinth has no business punishing people if their acts are not deliberate. In fact, this situation being Korinth’s fault, Korinth cannot be justified for attacking Kerkyraea.

Jowett translates douloi as “servants” but the Kerkyraeans are actually claiming that the Korinthians are treating them like slaves, or at best like people who have contracted out their services exclusively to one employer. The latter is cognate to the concept of the eved in the Bible.

Subsection 2 comes out too wordy in Jowett; Thucydides is more elegant. “that injustice is patent: submitting the case about Epidamnus rather to war than to impartiality being willing to submit the claim.”

Jowett’s translation of the final statement is terrible. It’s “he who changes his purposes the least out of the habit of obliging others takes the steadiest [road] if he would habitually accomplish [his ends].”

Notice that final epistemic, conjugated in progressive conceptual.  On the one hand it’s definite; on the other it’s uncertain. The parallel of the two progressives is lost in both Jowett and Smith. But then they believed in tenses and knew nothing about aspect.

The Kerkyraeans have two more arguments to make, and then we will get to the Korinthians’ objections. It’s an interesting contrast in style and grammar.