Critias fr. 44 D.-K.
m = reading of part of the MS tradition
P = reading on a papyrus
αἰτιᾶται Κριτίας Ἀρχίλοχον ὅτι κάκιστα ἑαυτὸν εἶπεν. ῾εἰ γὰρ μἢ’ φησὶν ῾ἐκεῖνος τοιαύτην δόξαν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ τοιαύτην δόξαν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ m: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ τοιαύτην δόξαν m ἐς τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἐξήνεγκεν, οὐκ ἂν ἐπυθόμεθα ἡμεῖς οὔτε om. m ὅτι Ἐνιποῦς υἱὸς ἦν τῆς δούλης, οὔθ᾽ οὔθ᾽ m: οὐχ m ὅτι καταλιπὼν Πάρον διὰ πενίαν καὶ ἀπορίαν ἦλθεν ἐς Θάσον, οὔθ᾽ ὅτι ἐλθὼν τοῖς ἐνταῦθα ἐχθρὸς ἐγένετο, οὔτε οὔτε Hercher: οὐδὲ Μ μὴν ὅτι ὁμοίως τοὺς φίλους καὶ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς κακῶς ἔλεγε. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις’ ἦ δ᾽ ὃς ῾οὔτε ὅτι μοιχὸς ἦν ἤιδειμεν ἂν εἰ μὴ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ μαθόντες, οὔτε ὅτι λάγνος καὶ ὑβριστής, καὶ τὸ ἔτι τούτων αἴσχιον, ὅτι τὴν ἀσπίδα ἀπέβαλεν. οὐκ ἀγαθὸς ἄρα ἦν ὁ Ἀρχίλοχος μάρτυς ἑαυτῶι, τοιοῦτον κλέος ἀπολιπὼν καὶ τοιαύτην ἑαυτῶι φήμην.᾿ ταῦτα οὐκ ἐγὼ Ἀρχίλοχον αἰτιῶμαι, ἀλλὰ Κριτίας.
Critias condemned Archilochus for saying the most shameful things about himself. ‘For if he had not propagated such a reputation about himself to all the Greeks’, Critias said, ‘we would not have learned that he was the son of the slave woman Enipo, nor that he left Paros because of poverty and helplessness for Thasos, nor that when he arrived he became an enemy to the native inhabitants, and lastly that he slandered friends and enemies alike’. In addition to these things, Critias says: ‘We would not have known Archilochus as an adulterer if we had not learned it from him, nor that he was a glutton and a criminal, and what is even more shameful than these things, that he threw away his shield. Archilochus was not a good witness for himself, and he left behind such fame and such a reputation for himself’. I do not blame Archilochus for these things, but Critias did.