Today's Passage
This passage describes Brasidas's famous march through Thessaly in 424 BCE, a crucial moment in his campaign to undermine Athenian influence in northern Greece.
Crawley Translation (1910)
About the same time in the summer, Brasidas set out on his march for the Thracian places with seventeen hundred heavy infantry, and arriving at Heraclea in Trachis, from thence sent on a messenger to his friends at Pharsalus, to ask them to conduct himself and his army through the country. Accordingly there came to Melitia in Achaia Panaerus, Dorus, Hippolochidas, Torylaus, and Strophacus, the Chalcidian proxenus, under whose escort he resumed his march, being accompanied also by other Thessalians, among whom was Niconidas from Larissa, a friend of Perdiccas. It was never very easy to traverse Thessaly without an escort; and throughout all Hellas for an armed force to pass without leave through a neighbour’s country was a delicate step to take. Besides this the Thessalian people had always sympathized with the Athenians. Indeed if instead of the customary close oligarchy there had been a constitutional government in Thessaly, he would never have been able to proceed; since even as it was, he was met on his march at the river Enipeus by certain of the opposite party who forbade his further progress, and complained of his making the attempt without the consent of the nation. To this his escort answered that they had no intention of taking him through against their will; they were only friends in attendance on an unexpected visitor. Brasidas himself added that he came as a friend to Thessaly and its inhabitants, his arms not being directed against them but against the Athenians, with whom he was at war, and that although he knew of no quarrel between the Thessalians and Lacedaemonians to prevent the two nations having access to each other’s territory, he neither would nor could proceed against their wishes; he could only beg them not to stop him. With this answer they went away, and he took the advice of his escort, and pushed on without halting, before a greater force might gather to prevent him. Thus in the day that he set out from Melitia he performed the whole distance to Pharsalus, and encamped on the river Apidanus; and so to Phacium and from thence to Perrhaebia. Here his Thessalian escort went back, and the Perrhaebians, who are subjects of Thessaly, set him down at Dium in the dominions of Perdiccas, a Macedonian town under Mount Olympus, looking towards Thessaly.
Modern Translation
Around the same time that summer, Brasidas began his march toward the Thracian territories with seventeen hundred hoplites. When he reached Heraclea in Trachis, he sent ahead a messenger to his allies in Pharsalus, requesting that they guide him and his army through their territory. In response, several men came to meet him at Melitia in Achaea: Panaerus, Dorus, Hippolochidas, Torylaus, and Strophacus, who served as the Chalcidian proxenos. Under their protection, he continued his march, joined by additional Thessalians, including Niconidas from Larissa, who was a friend of Perdiccas. Crossing Thessaly without an escort had never been easy, and throughout Greece, marching an armed force through another state's territory without permission was considered a provocative act. Moreover, the Thessalian people had traditionally favored Athens. Indeed, if Thessaly had been governed by a democracy rather than its traditional narrow oligarchy, Brasidas could never have proceeded. Even under the existing circumstances, when he reached the river Enipeus, he was confronted by members of the pro-Athenian faction who ordered him to halt and protested that he was attempting to cross without the nation's consent. His escorts replied that they had no intention of forcing passage against Thessalian wishes; they were merely accompanying an unexpected guest as friends. Brasidas himself declared that he came as a friend to Thessaly and its people, that his weapons were aimed at the Athenians with whom he was at war, not at them. He added that while he knew of no dispute between Thessalians and Spartans that would prevent mutual access to each other's territories, he neither wished nor was able to proceed against their will. He could only request that they not obstruct him. After hearing this response, the objectors withdrew, and following his escorts' advice, he pressed forward without stopping, fearing that a larger force might assemble to block him. Thus, on the same day he left Melitia, he covered the entire distance to Pharsalus and made camp by the river Apidanus. From there he proceeded to Phacium and then to Perrhaebia. At this point his Thessalian escorts turned back, and the Perrhaebians, who were subjects of Thessaly, conducted him to Dium, a Macedonian town belonging to Perdiccas, situated at the foot of Mount Olympus facing Thessaly.
Historical Context
This passage describes Brasidas's famous march through Thessaly in 424 BCE, a crucial moment in his campaign to undermine Athenian influence in northern Greece. The Spartan general is leading 1,700 hoplites northward to support revolts against Athens in Thrace and Chalcidice. His journey through Thessaly was particularly delicate because Thessaly traditionally supported Athens, and moving an armed force through another state's territory without permission violated Greek diplomatic norms. Brasidas's success depended on his personal connections and diplomatic skills, using proxenoi (official guest-friends) and local allies to navigate the complex political landscape. His rapid march through Thessaly in a single day demonstrates both the urgency of his mission and his awareness that delay might allow opposition to mobilize against him.
Key Themes
Annotations & References
Proxenia System
The proxenos was an official representative who looked after the interests of a foreign state in his own city. This institution facilitated diplomacy and safe passage throughout Greece. Strophacus serving as Chalcidian proxenos exemplifies how these networks operated.
Learn more →Thessalian Politics
Thessaly was governed by a narrow oligarchy dominated by powerful aristocratic families. Despite this pro-Spartan leadership, the general population favored Athens, creating the political tension Brasidas encountered. This split between rulers and ruled was common in Greek states.
Learn more →Greek Interstate Relations
The principle of territorial sovereignty meant that armed forces required permission to cross another state's territory. Violation could be considered an act of war. Brasidas's diplomatic approach shows his understanding of these conventions.
Learn more →Mount Olympus Region
Dium, located at the foot of Mount Olympus, marked the boundary between Thessaly and Macedonia. This sacred site dedicated to Zeus was strategically important as a gateway between central and northern Greece.
Learn more →Parallel Ancient Sources
Diodorus Siculus: Library of History (12.67-68)
Diodorus provides a compressed account of Brasidas's northern campaign, emphasizing his persuasive abilities and the speed of his march through potentially hostile territory.
Read passage →Plutarch: Life of Nicias (9.1-3)
Plutarch mentions Brasidas's campaign as a turning point that exposed Athenian vulnerability in the north, contributing to Nicias's desire for peace negotiations.
Read passage →Xenophon: Hellenica (5.2.12-19)
Xenophon describes a later Spartan expedition through Thessaly that faced similar diplomatic challenges, showing the persistent difficulty of traversing this region.
Read passage →Discussion Questions
- How does Brasidas's diplomatic approach in Thessaly demonstrate the importance of personal relationships and informal networks in Greek interstate relations?
- What does this passage reveal about the tension between oligarchic governments and popular sentiment in Greek city-states?
- Why might Thucydides have included such detailed information about Brasidas's route and the names of his escorts? What does this tell us about his historical method?
- How does Brasidas's claim to be a 'friend' to Thessaly while leading an army through their territory illustrate the gap between diplomatic rhetoric and political reality?