[1.1] Although it is much against my will to indulge in the explanatory statements usually given in the prefaces to histories, yet I am obliged to prefix to this work some remarks concerning myself. In doing this it is neither my intention to dwell too long on my own praise, which I know would be distasteful to the reader, nor have I the purpose of censuring other historians, as Anaximenes and Theopompus did in the prefaces to their histories but I shall only show the reasons that induced me to undertake this work and give an accounting of the sources from which I gained the knowledge of the things that I am going to relate.
[2] ἐπείσθην γὰρ ὅτι δεῖ τοὺς προαιρουμένους μνημεῖα τῆς ἑαυτῶν ψυχῆς τοῖς ἐπιγιγνομένοις καταλιπεῖν, ἃ μὴ συναφανισθήσεται [p. 2] τοῖς σώμασιν αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ χρόνου, καὶ πάντων μάλιστα τοὺς ἀναγράφοντας ἱστορίας, ἐν αἷς καθιδρῦσθαι τὴν ἀλήθειαν πάντες ὑπολαμβάνομεν ἀρχὴν φρονήσεώς τε καὶ σοφίας οὖσαν, πρῶτον μὲν ὑποθέσεις προαιρεῖσθαι καλὰς καὶ μεγαλοπρεπεῖς καὶ πολλὴν ὠφέλειαν τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοις φερούσας, ἔπειτα παρασκευάζεσθαι τὰς ἐπιτηδείους εἰς τὴν ἀναγραφὴν τῆς ὑποθέσεως ἀφορμὰς μετὰ πολλῆς ἐπιμελείας τε καὶ φιλοπονίας.
[2] For I am convinced that all who propose to leave such monuments of their minds to posterity as time shall not involve in one common ruin with their bodies, and particularly those who write histories, in which we have the right to assume that Truth, the source of both prudence and wisdom, is enshrined, ought, first of all, to make choice of noble and lofty subjects and such as will be of great utility to their readers, and then, with great care and pains, to provide themselves with the proper equipment for the treatment of their subject.
[3] οἱ μὲν γὰρ ὑπὲρ ἀδόξων πραγμάτων ἢ πονηρῶν ἢ μηδεμιᾶς σπουδῆς ἀξίων ἱστορικὰς καταβαλόμενοι πραγματείας, εἴτε τοῦ προελθεῖν εἰς γνῶσιν ὀρεγόμενοι καὶ τυχεῖν ὁποιουδήποτε ὀνόματος, εἴτε περιουσίαν ἀποδείξασθαι τῆς περὶ λόγους δυνάμεως βουλόμενοι, οὔτε τῆς γνώσεως ζηλοῦνται παρὰ τοῖς ἐπιγιγνομένοις οὔτε τῆς δυνάμεως ἐπαινοῦνται, δόξαν ἐγκαταλιπόντες τοῖς ἀναλαμβάνουσιν αὐτῶν τὰς ἱστορίας, ὅτι τοιούτους ἐζήλωσαν αὐτοὶ βίους, οἵας ἐξέδωκαν τὰς γραφάς: ἐπιεικῶς γὰρ ἅπαντες νομίζουσιν εἰκόνας εἶναι τῆς ἑκάστου ψυχῆς τοὺς λόγους.
[3] For those who base historical works upon deeds inglorious or evil or unworthy of serious study, either because they crave to come to the knowledge of men and to get a name of some sort or other, or because they desire to display the wealth of their rhetoric, are neither admired by posterity for their fame nor praised for their eloquence; rather, they leave this opinion in the minds of all who take up their histories, that they themselves admired lives which were of a piece with the writings they published, since it is a just and a general opinion that a man’s words are the images of his mind.
[4] οἱ δὲ προαιρούμενοι μὲν τὰς κρατίστας ὑποθέσεις, εἰκῆ δὲ καὶ ῥᾳθύμως αὐτὰς συντιθέντες ἐκ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων ἀκουσμάτων, οὐδένα ὑπὲρ τῆς προαιρέσεως ἔπαινον κομίζονται: οὐ γὰρ ἀξιοῦμεν αὐτοσχεδίους οὐδὲ ῥᾳθύμους εἶναι τὰς περί τε πόλεων ἐνδόξων καὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐν δυναστείᾳ γεγονότων ἀναγραφομένας ἱστορίας.
[4] Those, on the other hand, who, while making choice of the best subjects, are careless and indolent in compiling their narratives out of such reports as chance to come to their ears gain no praise by reason of that choice; for we do not deem it fitting that the histories of renowned cities and of men who have held supreme power should be written in an offhand or negligent manner.
[5] ταῦτα δὴ νομίσας ἀναγκαῖα [p. 3] καὶ πρῶτα θεωρήματα τοῖς ἱστορικοῖς εἶναι καὶ πολλὴν ποιησάμενος ἀμφοτέρων ἐπιμέλειαν οὔτε παρελθεῖν τὸν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν λόγον ἐβουλήθην, οὔτε ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ τόπῳ καταχωρίσαι μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ προοιμίῳ τῆς πραγματείας.
[5] As I believe these considerations to be necessary and of the first importance to historians and as I have taken great care to observe them both, I have felt unwilling either to omit mention of them or to give it any other place than in the preface to my work.
[1] τὴν μὲν οὖν ὑπόθεσιν ὅτι καλὴν εἴληφα καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ καὶ πολλοῖς ὠφέλιμον οὐ μακρῶν οἶμαι δεήσειν λόγων τοῖς γε δὴ μὴ παντάπασιν ἀπείρως ἔχουσι τῆς κοινῆς ἱστορίας. εἰ γάρ τις ἐπιστήσας τὴν διάνοιαν ἐπὶ τὰς παραδεδομένας ἐκ τοῦ παρεληλυθότος χρόνου πόλεών τε καὶ ἐθνῶν ἡγεμονίας, ἔπειτα χωρὶς ἑκάστην σκοπῶν καὶ παρ᾽ ἀλλήλας ἐξετάζων διαγνῶναι βουληθείη, τίς αὐτῶν ἀρχήν τε μεγίστην ἐκτήσατο καὶ πράξεις ἀπεδείξατο λαμπροτάτας ἐν εἰρήνῃ τε καὶ κατὰ πολέμους, μακρῷ δή τινι τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἡγεμονίαν ἁπάσας ὑπερβεβλημένην ὄψεται τὰς πρὸ αὐτῆς μνημονευομένας, οὐ μόνον κατὰ τὸ μέγεθος τῆς ἀρχῆς καὶ κατὰ τὸ κάλλος τῶν πράξεων, ἃς οὔπω κεκόσμηκε λόγος οὐδεὶς ἀξίως, ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τὸ μῆκος τοῦ περιειληφότος αὐτὴν χρόνου μέχρι τῆς καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἡλικίας.
[2.1] That I have indeed made choice of a subject noble, lofty and useful to many will not, I think, require any lengthy argument, at least for those who are not utterly unacquainted with universal history. For if anyone turns his attention to the successive supremacies both of cities and of nations, as accounts of them have been handed down from times past, and then, surveying them severally and comparing them together, wishes to determine which of them obtained the widest dominion and both in peace and war performed the most brilliant achievements, he will find that the supremacy of the Romans has far surpassed all those that are recorded from earlier times, not only in the extent of its dominion and in the splendor of its achievements — which no account has as yet worthily celebrated — but also in the length of time during which it has endured down to our day.
[2] ἡ μὲν γὰρ Ἀσσυρίων ἀρχὴ παλαιά τις οὖσα καὶ εἰς τοὺς μυθικοὺς ἀναγομένη χρόνους ὀλίγου τινὸς ἐκράτησε τῆς Ἀσίας μέρους. ἡ δὲ Μηδικὴ καθελοῦσα τὴν Ἀσσυρίων καὶ μείζονα δυναστείαν περιβαλομένη χρόνον οὐ πολὺν κατέσχεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῆς τετάρτης κατελύθη γενεᾶς. Πέρσαι δὲ οἱ [p. 4] Μήδους καταγωνισάμενοι τῆς μὲν Ἀσίας ὀλίγου δεῖν πάσης τελευτῶντες ἐκράτησαν, ἐπιχειρήσαντες δὲ καὶ τοῖς Εὐρωπαίοις ἔθνεσιν οὐ πολλὰ ὑπηγάγοντο, χρόνον τε
οὐ πολλῷ πλείονα διακοσίων ἐτῶν ἔμειναν ἐπὶ
[2] For the empire of the Assyrians, ancient as it was and running back to legendary times, held sway over only a small part of Asia. That of the Medes, after overthrowing the Assyrian empire and obtaining a still wider dominion, did not hold it long, but was overthrown in the fourth generation. The Persians, who conquered the Medes, did, indeed, finally become masters of almost all Asia; but when they attacked the nations of Europe also, they did not reduce many of them to submission, and they continued in power not much above two hundred years.
[3] τῆς ἀρχῆς. ἡ δὲ Μακεδονικὴ δυναστεία τὴν Περσῶν καθελοῦσα ἰσχὺν μεγέθει μὲν ἀρχῆς ἁπάσας ὑπερεβάλετο τὰς πρὸ αὐτῆς, χρόνον δὲ οὐδὲ αὕτη πολὺν ἤνθησεν, ἀλλὰ μετὰ τὴν Ἀλεξάνδρου τελευτὴν ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖρον ἤρξατο φέρεσθαι. διασπασθεῖσα γὰρ εἰς πολλοὺς ἡγεμόνας εὐθὺς ἀπὸ τῶν διαδόχων καὶ μετ᾽ ἐκείνους ἄχρι τῆς δευτέρας ἢ τρίτης ἰσχύσασα προελθεῖν γενεᾶς, ἀσθενὴς αὐτὴ δι᾽ ἑαυτῆς ἐγένετο καὶ τελευτῶσα ὑπὸ Ῥωμαίων ἠφανίσθη.
[3] The Macedonian dominion, which overthrew the might of the Persians, did, in the extent of its sway, exceed all its predecessors, yet even it did not flourish long, but after Alexander’s death began to decline; for it was immediately partitioned among many commanders from the time of the Diadochi, and although after their time it was able to go on to the second or third generation, yet it was weakened by its own dissensions and at the last destroyed by the Romans.
[4] καὶ οὐδὲ αὕτη μέντοι πᾶσαν ἐποιήσατο γῆν τε καὶ θάλασσαν ὑπήκοον: οὔτε γὰρ Λιβύης ὅτι μὴ τῆς πρὸς Αἰγύπτῳ οὐ πολλῆς οὔσης ἐκράτησεν, οὔτε τὴν Εὐρώπην ὅλην ὑπηγάγετο, ἀλλὰ τῶν μὲν βορείων αὐτῆς μερῶν μέχρι Θρᾴκης προῆλθε, τῶν δ᾽ ἑσπερίων μέχρι τῆς Ἀδριανῆς κατέβη θαλάσσης.
[4] But even the Macedonian power did not subjugate every country and every sea; for it neither conquered Libya, with the exception of the small portion bordering on Egypt, nor subdued all Europe, but in the North advanced only as far as Thrace and in the West down to the Adriatic Sea.
[1] αἱ μὲν οὖν ἐπιφανέσταται τῶν πρόσθεν ἡγεμονιῶν, ἃς παρειλήφαμεν ἐκ τῆς ἱστορίας, τοσαύτην ἀκμήν τε καὶ ἰσχὺν λαβοῦσαι κατελύθησαν: τὰς γὰρ Ἑλληνικὰς δυνάμεις οὐκ ἄξιον αὐταῖς ἀντιπαρεξετάζειν, οὔτε μέγεθος ἀρχῆς οὔτε χρόνον ἐπιφανείας [p. 5]
[3.1] Thus we see that the most famous of the earlier supremacies of which history has given us any account, after attaining to so great vigour and might, were overthrown. As for the Greek powers, it is not fitting to compare them to those just mentioned, since they gained neither magnitude of empire nor duration of eminence equal to theirs.
[2] τοσοῦτον ὅσον ἐκεῖναι λαβούσας. Ἀθηναῖοι μέν γε αὐτῆς μόνον ἦρξαν τῆς παραλίου δυεῖν δέοντα ἑβδομήκοντα ἔτη καὶ οὐδὲ ταύτης ἁπάσης, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐντὸς Εὐξείνου τε πόντου καὶ τοῦ Παμφυλίου πελάγους, ὅτε μάλιστα ἐθαλασσοκράτουν. Λακεδαιμόνιοι δὲ Πελοποννήσου καὶ τῆς ἄλλης κρατοῦντες Ἑλλάδος ἕως Μακεδονίας τὴν ἀρχὴν προὐβίβασαν, ἐπαύσθησαν δὲ ὑπὸ Θηβαίων οὐδὲ ὅλα τριάκοντα ἔτη τὴν ἀρχὴν κατασχόντες.
[2] For the Athenians ruled only the sea coast, during the space of sixty-eight years, nor did their sway extend even over all that, but only to the part between the Euxine and the Pamphylian seas, when their naval supremacy was at its height. The Lacedaemonians, when masters of the Peloponnesus and the rest of Greece, advanced their rule as far as Macedonia, but were checked by the Thebans before they had held it quite thirty years.
[3] ἡ δὲ Ῥωμαίων πόλις ἁπάσης μὲν ἄρχει γῆς ὅση μὴ ἀνέμβατός ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἀνθρώπων κατοικεῖται, πάσης δὲ κρατεῖ θαλάσσης, οὐ μόνον τῆς ἐντὸς Ἡρακλείων στηλῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς Ὠκεανίτιδος ὅση πλεῖσθαι μὴ ἀδύνατός ἐστι, πρώτη καὶ μόνη τῶν ἐκ τοῦ παντὸς αἰῶνος μνημονευομένων ἀνατολὰς καὶ δύσεις ὅρους ποιησαμένη τῆς δυναστείας: χρόνος τε αὐτῇ τοῦ κράτους οὐ βραχύς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσος οὐδεμιᾷ τῶν ἄλλων οὔτε πόλεων οὔτε βασιλειῶν.
[3] But Rome rules every country that is not inaccessible or uninhabited, and she is mistress of every sea, not only of that which lies inside the Pillars of Hercules but also of the Ocean, except that part of it which is not navigable; she is the first and the only State recorded in all time that ever made the risings and the settings of the sun the boundaries of her dominion. Nor has her supremacy been of short duration, but more lasting than that of any other commonwealth or kingdom.
[4] εὐθὺς μὲν γὰρ ἐξ ἀρχῆς μετὰ τὸν οἰκισμὸν τὰ πλησίον ἔθην πολλὰ καὶ μάχιμα ὄντα προσήγετο καὶ προὔβαινεν ἀεὶ πᾶν δουλουμένη τὸ ἀντίπαλον: ταῦτα δὲ πέντε καὶ τετταράκοντα ἤδη πρὸς τοῖς ἑπτακοσίοις ἔτεσίν ἐστιν εἰς ὑπάτους Κλαύδιον Νέρωνα τὸ δεύτερον ὑπατεύοντα καὶ Πείσωνα Καλπούρνιον, οἳ κατὰ τὴν τρίτην ἐπὶ ταῖς ἐνενήκοντα καὶ ἑκατὸν ὀλυμπιάσιν ἀπεδείχθησαν. [p. 6] ἐξ οὗ δὲ ὅλης ἐκράτησεν Ἰταλίας καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν ἁπάντων ἐθάρρησεν ἀρχὴν προελθεῖν, ἐκβαλοῦσα μὲν ἐκ τῆς θαλάττης Καρχηδονίους, οἳ πλείστην ἔσχον ναυτικὴν δύναμιν, ὑποχείριον δὲ λαβοῦσα Μακεδονίαν, ἣ
[4] For from the very beginning, immediately after her founding, she began to draw to herself the neighbouring nations, which were both numerous and warlike, and continually advanced, subjugating every rival. And it is now seven hundred and forty-five years from her foundation down to the consulship of Claudius Nero, consul for the second time, and of Calpurnius Piso, who were chosen in the one hundred and ninety-third Olympiad.
[5] τέως ἐδόκει μέγιστον ἰσχύειν κατὰ γῆν, οὐδὲν ἔτι ἀντίπαλον ἔχουσα οὔτε βάρβαρον φῦλον οὔτε Ἑλληνικὸν γενεὰν ἑβδόμην ἤδη τὴν ἐπ᾽ ἐμοῦ διαμένει παντὸς ἄρχουσα τόπου: ἔθνος δὲ οὐδὲν ὡς εἰπεῖν ἐστιν, ὃ περὶ τῆς κοινῆς ἡγεμονίας ἢ τοῦ μὴ
[5] From the time that she mastered the whole of Italy she was emboldened to aspire to govern all mankind, and after driving from off the sea the Carthaginians, whose maritime strength was superior to that of all others, and subduing Macedonia, which until then was reputed to be the most powerful nation on land, she no longer had as rival any nation either barbarian or Greek; and it is now in my day already the seventh generation that she has continued to hold sway over every region of the world, and there is no nation, as I may saw, that disputes her universal dominion
or protests against being ruled by her.
[6] ἄρχεσθαι πρὸς αὐτὴν διαφέρεται. ἀλλὰ γὰρ ὅτι μὲν οὔτε τὴν ἐλαχίστην τῶν ὑποθέσεων προῄρημαι, καθάπερ ἔφην, οὔτε περὶ φαύλας καὶ ἀσήμους πράξεις ἔγνωκα διατρίβειν, ἀλλὰ περί τε πόλεως γράφω τῆς περιφανεστάτης καὶ περὶ πράξεων ὧν οὐκ ἂν ἔχοι τις ἑτέρας ἐπιδείξασθαι λαμπροτέρας, οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅ,τι δεῖ πλείω λέγειν.
[6] However, to prove my statement that I have neither made choice of the most trivial of subjects nor proposed to treat of mean and insignificant deeds, but am undertaking to write not only about the most illustrious city but also about brilliant achievements to whose like no man could point, I know not what more I need say.
[1] ὅτι δ᾽ οὐκ ἄνευ λογισμοῦ καὶ προνοίας ἔμφρονος ἐπὶ τὰ παλαιὰ τῶν ἱστορουμένων περὶ αὐτῆς ἐτραπόμην, ἀλλ᾽ ἔχων εὐλογίστους ἀποδοῦναι τῆς προαιρέσεως αἰτίας, ὀλίγα βούλομαι προειπεῖν, ἵνα μή τινες ἐπιτιμήσωσί μοι τῶν πρὸς ἅπαντα φιλαιτίων, οὐδέν πω τῶν μελλόντων δηλοῦσθαι προακηκοότες, ὅτι τῆς ἀοιδίμου γενομένης καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς πόλεως ἀδόξους καὶ πάνυ ταπεινὰς τὰς πρώτας ἀφορμὰς λαβούσης καὶ οὐκ ἀξίας ἱστορικῆς ἀναγραφῆς, οὐ πολλαῖς δὲ γενεαῖς πρότερον εἰς ἐπιφάνειαν καὶ δόξαν ἀφιγμένης, [p. 7] ἐξ οὗ τάς τε Μακεδονικὰς καθεῖλε δυναστείας καὶ τοὺς Φοινικικοὺς κατώρθωσε πολέμους, ἐξόν μοι τῶν ἐνδόξων τινὰ λαβεῖν αὐτῆς ὑποθέσεων, ἐπὶ τὴν οὐδὲν ἔχουσαν ἐπιφανὲς ἀρχαιολογίαν ἀπέκλινα.
Delphi Complete Works of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Illustrated) (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 79) Page 419